.


This article compares and contrasts the ways that Chinese Taoism and Zen
Buddhism view the development of human potential with the ways that the
self-actualization theories of Rogers and Maslow describe the human
potential movement. Many similarities exist between the ways that Taoism,
Zen Buddhism, and the self-actualization theories of Rogers and Maslow
describe the characteristics of the optimafly functioning person.

FOR THE LAST 25 years, the self-actualization theories of Carl Rogers and
Abraham Maslow have profoundly influenced the humanistic psychology
movement in the United States. Although these theories may not be complete,
they tantalize us, nevertheless, with their visions of the individual's
potential within a synergistic society. Rogers and Maslow both emphasize
that self-actualization represents the optimal psychological condition for
all humankind; the goal of psychotherapy, then, is to help people to
develop their own potential for self-actualization. Many of the concepts of
self-actualization put forward by Rogers and Maslow are also those that,
coincidentally, have been considered elemental in Chinese Taoism and Zen
Buddhism.

The founder of Taoism, Lao Tzu (Ch'en, 1977), viewed human life as being an
integral part of the cosmos. His philosophy of the functioning of the
cosmos centered on his concept of the Tao. The Tao was defined as being the
creative processes present in Nature that were responsible for all creation
in life, and indeed for life itself. This concept, although intrinsically
metaphysical in nature, nevertheless also served as the backbone of Lao
Tzu's social and political ideas. Lao Tzu, in defining his philosophy of
the Tao, abstracted the processes he observed in the phenomenal and natural
worlds. Zen Buddhism developed in China after Taoism and was greatly
influenced by the philosophy of Taoism (Chan, 1963). Zen Buddhism (Coan,
1977) derived its antischolastic bias from Taoism, and Zen Buddhists,
subsequently, were inclined to refrain from elaborate philosophical
speculations.

Instead, Zen Buddhism emphasizes human naturalness and spontaneity and
acknowledges the illusory nature of the ego. Zen Buddhism stresses the
importance of participation in each moment of living and the potential
retained by each human being for achieving full independence in thought and
action. Japanese or Zen Buddhism in many ways offers a contrast to other
Chinese philosophies, such as Confucianism, that stress the importance of
the mutual interdependence of people and the importance of clearly defining
the roles people assume in society. Corresponding to the Zen idea of human
independence is the characteristically paradoxical notion that
individualism never places one in conflict with nature or with other
people. Thus, the goal in Zen is to open the way for people to see into the
"suchness" or "beingness" of things, thereby enabling them to know
themselves and to unite themselves with all of nature.

Thus, it appears that the sage in Taoism and the enlightened person in Zen
Buddhism bear similarities to the self-actualizing person of Western
psychological thought. Zen Buddhism and Taoism are both concerned with the
development of the full human potential. A cross-cultural comparison of
views on developing human potential can provide a broader perspective than
can an isolated consideration of either Western or Eastern disciplines.
Perhaps this common view of humanity, shared by philosophical and
psychological perspectives as diverse as Taoism, Zen Buddhism, and the
self-actualization theories of Rogers and Maslow, indicates a universality
in human experience.

                     THE DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN POTENTIAL

Maslow and Rogers

Both Maslow (1956, 1968, 1971) and Rogers (1961) assumed that all persons
have an intrinsic potential for self-actualization that can be stifled,
however, by extrapsychic determinants. According to Maslow (1968), people's
basic needs must be sufficiently gratified before they can pursue the
fulfillment of what he calls the higher, transcendent metaneeds related to
self-actualization. Maslow asserted that people's complete psychological
maturation occurs only when their potentialities are fully developed and
actualized.

Rogers (1977) stated that self-actualization is a process of
differentiating potentialities inherent in the makeup of the individual.
This process, which is forward-moving, constructive, and self-enhancing,
becomes possible only when people receive positive regard from others and
learn to think positively of themselves. Each individual, according to
Rogers, has the capacity to be self-aware and to label what occurs
accurately; when one's need for positive regard is met, then, one's
tendency toward self-actualization becomes manifested. When an individual's
self-concept is relatively congruent with his or her experience, the
actualizing tendency can operate without impediment. The individual can
develop, then, into a fully functioning person who is open to the richness
of experience, who has few defenses, and who is self-aware.

Drawing from their definitions of self-actualization as well as from their
therapeutic experiences and observations, Maslow (1954) and Rogers (1961,
1977, 1980) defined certain unique characteristics of self-actualizing
people. Such a person, they maintained, has the following: an accurate
perception of reality, a high level of creativity, few defenses, a high
level of integration, personal autonomy, unconventional ethics, a need for
human kinship, compassion, humility, deep and harmonious interpersonal
relationships, a respect for others, a desire to establish new forms of
communications and intimacy, and an ongoing concern with personal growth.
In addition, Maslow (1954) highlighted these characteristics: spontaneity,
receptivity, a problem-centered approach to life, detachment, a fresh
appreciation of things, a democratic attitude, a unique value system, a
capacity to cope with circumstances, and a likelihood of having peak
experiences. Rogers (1961) added, moreover, these qualities: an openness to
nature and other people, an unconditional self-regard, an inner freedom,
authenticity, a yearning for a spiritual life, an indifference to material
comforts, a feeling of closeness to nature, and a skepticism of science and
technology.

Taoism and Zen Buddhism

The aim of human existence, from a Taoist standpoint, is to experience and
maintain harmony with the Tao. The Tao is metaphysical reality, a kind of
natural law, a principle or pattern for human life. Lao Tzu (Ch'en, 1977)
stated that people should return to the original condition of nature: the
complete emptiness and tranquility of all things. He believed that one can
cope with and, ultimately, resolve life's agitation, disorder, and strife
by attaining personal tranquility. Only when one intuitively understands a
problem can it be dealt with effectively. And, according to Lao Tzu, an
effective solution to such a problem is achieved by patiently waiting for
nature to present a solution, because nothing is accomplished by creating
nonexistent difficulties or by responding with overly elaborate measures.

Zen Buddhism, like Taoism, emphasizes that all people possess an inner
perfection, a Buddha-nature. The intent of Zen Buddhism is to help people
to attain satori, an inner state of perfection or tranquility. When one
becomes enlightened (or attains satori), one's entire personality merges
with nature or reality, and a state of perfect harmony is experienced
(Chan, 1963). To become free from negative feelings such as fear, anxiety,
insecurity, and frustration or from inhibiting ideas or imaginations, it is
necessary for people to experience themselves without division. When a
person becomes enlightened, his or her perception of self and surroundings
are changed. All the opposites and contradictions of the world are united
and harmonized into a consistent organic whole (Suzuki, 1949, 1962).

Both the sage of Taoism and the enlightened person of Zen Buddhism have
attained an inner state of perfection or, in Western terminology, have
developed their human potential to its maximum extent. Thus, the sage in
Taoism and the enlightened person in Zen Buddhism might serve as models of
what the self-actualized person is thought to be like in Eastern thought.
The sage and enlightened person are said to have the following
characteristics: an openness to life, tranquility, simplicity, genuineness,
and reserve. They also lack arrogance, have few or no wants, hold no
tendency to discriminate between opposites, have compassion for others and
maintain an indifference to worldly affairs while remaining involved with
them. Such people are also able to comply with nature and to transcend the
effects of karma (cause and effect and the relationship between the two
[Humphreys, 19511).

In addition to these qualities, the Taoist sage has the following
characteristics: receptivity, contentment, intellectual honesty, an
unassuming attitude, a sense of responsibility, a natural perspicacity, and
determination. The enlightened person of Zen Buddhism has the following
additional characteristics: no division between thought and action, an
absence of rigidity, a nonattachment to things, a perfect freedom, a
thoroughly purified mind, and an enjoyment of emptiness. The enlightened
one is also friendly toward all persons, maintains a unique life-style, is
natural and simple, and has the ability to live in the here and now (Chan,
1963; Ch'en, 1977; Suzuki, 1949, 1962, 1970; Wawrytko, 1981).

                                COMPARISONS

It may be helpful here to describe the similarities and differences found
in descriptions of the self-actualized person according to Maslow, Rogers,
Lao Tzu, and the Zen Buddhists.

Personal Freedom. The ideas Maslow and Rogers had of human freedom contrast
with philosophies that emphasize human bondage or determinism. Both Maslow
and Rogers described the self-actualizing person as one who has personal
autonomy and who is free to make choices. The actions of the
self-actualizing person are not determined solely by the physical and
social environment, because such a person has access to personal resources
that are, in turn, growth promoting. According to Maslow (1968), the
self-actualizing person does not avoid facing or acting on feelings or
thoughts that are experienced. The extent to which this person is able to
be self-accepting allows for a high degree of freedom in interpersonal
interactions.

The self-actualized person of Taoism and Zen Buddhism is content because no
attempt is made to possess anything in life. These people do not obtain
personal meaning or pleasure by seeking material possessions and thus are
not affected by avarice, licentiousness, and extravagance. They are free
because they have nothing to gain or lose in life. It is when people live
without desires in this manner, said Lao Tzu (Ch'en, 1977), that they are
able to regain an original, genuine state of mind and are free to develop
their human potential.

Emphasis on Personal Authority. The self-actualizing person of Maslow
(1954, 1968) and Rogers (1980) remains detached from societal and cultural
influences and, in general, is antipathetic to highly structured,
inflexible, or bureaucratic institutions. Such a person is characterized in
large measure by a sense of personal autonomy and clear decision making,
even when the decisions may seem unconventional (Maslow, 1968; Rogers,
1980).

Both Rogers and Maslow and the Zen Buddhists and Taoists would not
emphasize the importance of accepting authority that comes from sources
external to the person. Nevertheless, the self-actualizing person of Rogers
and Maslow is not independent of society's influence to the extent that the
self-actualized Zen Buddhist or Taoist might be. The enlightened person of
Zen Buddhism has an independence that allows for an unconditioned response
to life's events. The enlightened one enjoys the here and now but does not
indulge in it, for he or she lives life detached from either past or future
concerns (Suzuki, 1970). The Taoist sage lives in a state of genuineness
and naturalness in harmony with the Tao (Stensrud, 1979). That is to say,
the sage's life is based on principles of a universal structure that he or
she intuits but does not seek to know (Ch'en, 1977).

Emphasis on Caring Interpersonal Relationships. The self-actualized person
of Maslow, Rogers, Zen Buddhism, and Lao Tzu feels a kinship with all human
beings. These people care about others with a caring that is gentle and not
moralistic. These people have a deep desire to help others and, thus,
establish interpersonal relationships that are harmonious and profound.

Zen Buddhism (Suzuki, 1970) indicates that because the enlightened person
is not disturbed by the differences that exist among people, everyone is
experienced openly and receptively. Even though Zen Buddhists might
sometimes use relatively harsh methods to help people become enlightened,
this is done because the master cares deeply about his or her pupil's
ultimate welfare. Lao Tzu (Ch'en, 1977) stated that the sage has no
individual will and desires, and forms no absolute standard of right or
wrong. The sage, then, acts in accordance with the principles of the Tao
and cares about others because all people have an underlying human nature
that is the same as the Tao.

Acceptance of Reality. Maslow (1954) indicated that the self-actualizing
person has more accurate and realistic perceptions than most people.
Because such people know themselves, they do not need to distort the ways
they see reality because they are defensive or anxious. They are able to
accept whatever happens and to respond to life's circumstances in a
realistic and effective manner.

Rogers (1959) indicated that to appreciate how a person perceives reality,
it is necessary to understand the phenomenal field, or the frame of
reference of this person. Reality, for Rogers, includes both the phenomenal
field of a person and the stimulating conditions of external reality. And,
the self-actualizing person, perceiving both elements accurately, can
experience reality with openness and receptivity.

Reality in Zen Buddhism is viewed as a spatiotemporal unity in which
wholeness is beyond division into subjective and objective aspects and can
be contrasted with the philosophy of Plato, which stressed the importance
of ideas or universals in nature. In Zen Buddhism, the only way a person
can comprehend the nature of reality is to become enlightened. When a
person becomes enlightened, he or she experiences everything that exists in
the "here and now" encounter with nature or with other people. Satori is
experienced by intuitively embracing reality rather than by obtaining
objective knowledge about phenomena. The enlightened person is completely
aware of both internal and external reality but does not make a distinction
between the two and, thus, fully grasps the meaning of all things (Chan,
1963).

Taoism sees occurrences of the phenomenal world as an evolutionary process
initiated by the interaction of opposites. It is only when the apparent and
the potential are comprehended as complementary that the phenomenal world
can be fathomed and the constant changes of this world can be fully
accepted (Ch'en, 1977).

Capacity of Coping. The self-actualizing person of Maslow (1954) and Rogers
(1977) is resilient and flexible and thus has the capacity to cope with
changing circumstances. Having a sense of responsibility, duty, obligation,
and commitment, such people are likely to use their talents, capacities,
and potentialities to the utmost. Rogers (1977) pointed out that
self-actualizing people are confident enough to trust their perceptions as
being an appropriate guide for their actions.

In Zen Buddhism, the enlightened person responds fully to all that happens
in life without retreating from experience in the here and now. This person
responds to reality openly, without having preconceptions about things,
because every moment is experienced as being new and exciting.

The Taoist sage displays tolerance and inner strength when dealing with
others and when coping with problems. The sage can handle difficult
responsibilities and can also endure disgrace when necessary. The sage
takes life seriously and looks at all the possibilities for action inherent
in any particular situation. Sages develop and fulfill their innate human
potential without taking any one aspect of their potential to an unnatural
extreme (Ch'en, 1977).

The Transcendence of Birth and Death. The enlightened person of Zen
Buddhism intuitively understands the meaning of birth and death and is not
bothered by changes inherent in the life cycle. This person allows the law
of causation, moral and physical, to take its course, and free and
independent, this person continues on, unaffected by karma. This person
does not worry about dying because life and death are not perceived as
being contradictory occurrences.

Lao Tzu's sage is not bothered by the apparent contradictions of life such
as being and nonbeing, life and death, construction and destruction. This
sage is not attached to material things or concerns and, while able to
identify completely with reality, is yet entirely free from it (Wawrytko,
1981).

Maslow and Rogers, on the other hand, did not attempt to deal with
questions concerning the meaning of life and death, for their concerns were
those of secular psychology and psychotherapy. Unlike many Eastern
philosophies that deal with the paradox of life and death, Western
psychologists generally leave the consideration of the life and death cycle
to the more metaphysical thinkers.

Closeness to Elemental Nature. Rogers (1977), Lao Tzu (Ch'en, 1977), and
Zen Buddhism (Suzuki, 1962) agreed that the self-actualized person feels
close to nature and respects its processes. Zen Buddhism believes that
nature exists as an objective entity and that the unconscious mind of a
person and nature spring from the same life source or principle. Zen
Buddhists abstain, then, from making use of nature for selfish purposes and
advocate lives of simplicity, frugality, straightforwardness, and virility.

Lao Tzu recommended that people comply with nature by practicing the
principle of nonaction. All individuals should, on one hand, intuit and
strive to develop their own unique endowments, but, on the other hand,
nonaction is to be advocated in response to natural conflicts and
dichotomies. Only by nonaction can people see beyond nature's multifarious
subjectivities to find its inherent balance and harmony. The sage, by
experiencing rather than acting against nature, is able to grasp the truth
of the Tao and so is guided into effective behavior.

A Peaceful Mind. According to Rogers, the fully functioning person has a
peaceful mind, is free, and is well integrated. These people experience
psychological equilibrium because they act in a way that is harmonious with
an internal actualizing principle (Rogers, 1980). The enlightened person of
Zenves in a state of absolute quietness and calmness and is seemingly pure
and unattached. These people are unaffected by internal and external
delusions because they are unattached to conceptual ways of viewing life,
to people, and to things (Chan, 1963). The sage of Taoism, too, is said to
live in a state of tranquility, simplicity, genuineness, and reserve
(Ch'en, 1977).

                                IMPLICATIONS

Maslow, Rogers, Lao Tzu, and Zen Buddhism all assumed that every person has
an actualizing tendency that promotes growth, direction, and productivity.
Rogers believed that the ongoing actualizing tendency is the primary force
that counselors rely on to bring about positive changes in clients. Because
there appear to be certain simfiarities between American and Chinese
concepts of self-actualizafion, or the ways that human potential is
developed, therapists in Eastern and Western cultures might broaden their
perspectives by becoming familiar with alternative theories of human
potential.

It is significant that the central concept of the person elaborated by the
Taoists, the Zen Buddhists, Rogers, and Maslow has some common elements.
All of these theories, for instance, emphasize that the self-actualized
person feels close to nature, is independent in thought and deed, and
experiences reality openly without being overly controlled by thoughts. The
individual in all of these theories is involved in caring and responsible
interpersonal relationships.

Certain implications can be drawn from the fact that these four theories,
which were developed in two very different cultures, have some common
perspectives about how the potential of people is developed. Possibly, the
perspectives of Taoism, Zen Buddhism, Rogers, and Maslow have congruent
elements because these theories reflect something universal about human
experience. The ways that people fully develop their human potential may be
seen as a central concern for both Eastern and Western cultures. Taking
note of such commonalities may bridge the gap between helping theories of
the East and West and may provide a synthesis that can only broaden the
perspectives of both.

Because the self-actualization theories of Rogers and Maslow bear certain
similarities to concepts in Taoism and Zen Buddhism, the cultural contexts
in which the theories of Rogers and Maslow apply may be quite broad. It can
be hypothesized that the theories of Rogers and Maslow indicate a universal
movement toward human completion relevant to any human culture or society.
Patterson (1985), for instance, stated that self-actualization is a concept
that has universality because the drive for self-actualization is based in
the physiological nature of all living organisms. It may be that there
exists an inherent human tendency toward self-actualization that can be
expressed in a number of different ways, always within the context of a
particular culture. Other articles might compare and contrast the
self-actualization theories of the East and West with the ways that the
development of human potential is seen in vastly different cultures, such
as African or American Indian.

                                 REFERENCES

Chan, W. T. (Trans.). (1963). The platform scripture. New York: St. John's
University Press.

Ch'en, K. Y. (1977). Lao Tzu text, notes, and comments. R. Y. W. Young & R.
T. Ames (Trans.). San Francisco: Chinese Materials Center, Inc.

Coan, R. W. (1977). Hero, artist, sage, or saint? New York: Columbia
University Press.

Humphreys, C. (1951). Buddhism. Baltimore: Penguin Books.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). New York:
Harper & Row.

Maslow, A. H. (1956). Self-actualizing people: A study of psychological
health. In C. E. Moustakas (Ed.), The self: Explorations in personal growth
(pp. 161-162). New York: Harper & Row.

Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (2nd ed.). New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.

Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature (2nd ed.). New
York: The Viking Press.

Patterson, C. H. (1985). The therapeutic relationship: Foundations for an
eclectic psychotherapy. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal
relationships, as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch
(Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 3, pp. 184-256). New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Rogers, C. R. (1977). Carl Rogers on personal power. New York: Delacorte
Press.

Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Stensrud, R. (1979). Personal power: A Taoist perspective. Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 19(4), 31-41.

Suzuki, D. T. (1949). Essays in Zen Buddhism (First series, 8th ed.). New
York: Grove Press, Inc.

Suzuki, D. T. (1962). The essentials of Zen Buddhism. New York: E.P.
Dutton.

Suzuki, D. T. (1970). Essays in Zen Buddhism (Third series). New York:
Samuel Weiser Inc.

Wawrytko, S. A. (1981). The undercurrent of feminine philosophy in Eastern
and Western thought. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.