ABSTRACT
Does the late-phase Derrida’s “impossible justice” cross Buddhist justice somehow? Does the so-called “iconoclastic ethic” of Hongzhou Chan Buddhism cross Derridean deconstruction (early-and late-phase) somehow? As a specialist in deconstruction who has published at the intersection of Derridean thought and Asian Buddhism for many years, I take my role here to be an exploration of some samenesses/differences between Derrida and Buddhism in terms of the above questions. On the Derridean side, I shall pay special attention to Derrida’s late phase, with its very Hebraic passion for justice (he names it “impossible justice” for reasons we shall shortly discern). On the Buddhist side, I shall focus most on Hongzhou Chan, because of its reputation for iconoclasm in the face of normative ethics. As a question(ing) of justice, the issue of uncanny repetition intervenes too, both in terms of classical Buddhism’s karma, and as a prevailing Derridean concern.
