The Buddha never argued that the physical world does not exist, even if he acknowledged that all material constructs that come together are changeable and impermanent.
It is assumed a priori that although the worker obviously possesses the ability to manufacture advanced scientific equipment, he or she simultaneously does not possess the intellectual ability to ‘understand’ the bourgeois scientific method.
Inner science is a non-religious investigation of the science of perception. It has to be ‘non-religious’ because it follows the ‘no hypothesis’ methodology associated with
From 1931 to 1945, Master Xu Yun witnessed the barbaric behaviour of invading Japanese troops in China, and he associated this barbarism with Japan’s abandonment of the Vinaya Discipline.
Within the received chain of dependent origination (paticca-samuppāda), the Buddha uses the term ‘namo-rupa’ or ‘mind-body’ – to explain that these two otherwise distinctive entities are inherently ‘linked’ or ‘entwined’ at source, and within his schematic of interpreting reality, cannot be considered ‘separate’ in any manner.
Alan Watts, I suspect, is mixing Western notions of Japanese Zen with modern, Western concepts of science, and he does this very well, but the point he is missing is that from the perspective of Chinese Ch’an, there is a stage of development he does not know about and therefore is missing in his analysis.