Case 74 in the Book of Equanimity reads:

 

A monk asked Hôgen, “I hear that a sutra says, ‘From the basis of non-abiding all dharmas are established.’ What is the basis of non-abiding?” 

Hôgen said, “Form arises from what has no substance yet; name comes from what has no name yet.”

What’s going on here? All this language requires some context and clarification! Luckily, the monk Yamada Koun breaks down the meaning here.

Basically, the monk is asking Hôgen, “In Buddhism, the claim is made that all things arise from nothing, wtf?!” This is an ontological issue: how can you have something (all dharmas, i.e. phenomena) from nothing (non-abiding)?

Hôgen’s response is that everything is empty in nature, even the forms themselves (remember that the Buddhist idea of emptiness is a combination of interdependence and impermanence.) In this sense, names are mis-nomers, or illusions of things that exist. Koun elaborates Hôgen’s response is better put as:

 

form is no other than no-substance, name is no other than no-name.

I take this to mean that Hôgen is avoiding an ontological issue by pointing out that everything can arise from nothing because everything is nothing.

If this doesn’t make sense, that’s fine! It is ok to grapple with ideas that take many years to understand, let alone believe.