Continuous
Actualization of Sole-Sitting – The Keystone of Zen
To
clearly see is to use the Dharma-Eye, sometimes called the “eye to read
scriptures.” To use the Dharma-Eye it must first be opened, and thereafter it
must be skillfully developed and continuously actualized; this ongoing
development and actualization is the keystone of authentic Zen practice and
enlightenment, it is the art of Zen that Dogen calls sole-sitting (shikantaza, zazen-only). Once the Dharma-Eye is active, Zen practice (zazen-only) is actively developed and expanded to become inclusive
not only of meditation, studying sutras, training with koans,
etc., but every aspect of life. Going to work, taking out the
garbage, mowing the lawn, and eating meals is Zen practice (just sitting). Shobogenzo provides detailed examples on
the zazen of cooking, making robes, teeth cleaning, and even using the toilet. When
the True Dharma-Eye is open, these are not the mundane tasks of cooking and
cleaning, but the normal mind of the Tao, the authentic practice-enlightenment
of Zen.
Once
we find the Way that arrives at Buddha, we leave the area of the common person
immediately. The people that have mastered this Way are few.
Himitsu Shobogenzo, Bustu-kojo-no-ji,
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
From
the perspective of Zen, the opening of the Dharma-Eye is
simultaneous with the Zen student becoming a Zen practitioner. An authentic Zen practitioner,
by definition, solely practices Zen. In a very real sense, for the Zen
practitioner there is no “Zen
practice” (zazen; meditation) and therefore nothing other than “Zen practice.”
Regardless of what “shikantaza” or “just sitting” might have come to be defined or
interpreted as being by various groups and individuals following Dogen’s
existence-time, the nature of the “just sitting” presented by Shobogenzo has nothing to do with the
kind of sitting that is thought of, spoken about, or performed in the “area of
the common person.” Indeed, it is inevitable that the vast majority of ideas,
definitions, explanations, and interpretations of shikantaza are distortions and misrepresentations, for “The people
that have mastered this Way are few.”
There will be those who dote on
what has passed and try to mimic that, and there may even be demons who slander
those above them and refuse to learn from them. Do not be attracted to either
type or feel resentment towards either. Why do I say not to feel sorry for them
or resent them? Because it is said that people who recognize the three poisons
of greed, hatred, and delusion to be what they are, are rare enough, so there
is no need to feel resentment towards those who do not. Even more importantly,
you should not lose sight of the intention that arose when you first took
delight in seeking the Way of the Buddhas. It is said that when we first give
rise to this intention, we are not seeking the Dharma so that others will
praise us, but are discarding thoughts of fame and gain. Without seeking fame
or gain, we should simply be persons who hold to the true course of realizing
the Way, never concerning ourselves with expectations of recognition or support
from rulers or other officials.
Even though this is the ideal,
there are some people today who, alas, are devoid of any fundamental spiritual
aspirations, having no spiritual goal that they seek, and are not the least
concerned over their delusive entanglements with both ordinary people and those
in lofty positions.
Shobogenzo, Keisei Sanshoku,
Hubert Nearman
Leaving
pity and resentment aside, then, let us dive right into Shobogenzo’s own presentation of what “shikantaza”
or “just sitting” truly is. First, the term “shikan” (or shikantaza) that is often translated as “just” as in “just sitting”
(shikan; just, taza; sitting) does not denote “merely,” or “simply,” but rather,
“solely,” “totally,” “wholly.” Here we want to mention a point that is worth noticing;
“shikan” is a homophone of “chih kuan” (stopping and seeing, meditation and
prajna, samadhi and insight), a central notion of Tendai Buddhism, the actual
tradition into which Dogen was initially ordained and which remained a
central influence throughout his lifetime. The Tendai notion of “chih-kuan” presents “solely, wholly, etc.” in a specifically nondual
manner – Tendai expressions on “stopping and seeing” (chih-kuan) emphasize the unity of stopping-and-seeing so that stopping is
stopping/seeing and seeing is stopping/seeing. The notion that Dogen
intentionally employs the term “shikan” in some context of the significance of “chi-kuan” has been noticed
and discussed in the scholarly community (e.g. Kodera, Heine) but has
been largely dismissed as an interesting by unverifiable possibility. In view
of Dogen’s characteristic use of homophonic language, and the fact that he was
intimately familiar with the connotations of both terms it would seem that the intentional “double meaning” of “shikan”
should be regarded as “given” and the notion it was unintended considered unlikely.
In
any case, zazen is presented by Shobogenzo as the archetype of authentic
practice-enlightenment itself. While Zen practice-enlightenment is only and
always portrayed by Shobogenzo as
something specific and particular – never as something vague or
general – it is definitely not presented as being limited or confined to a specific form or particular activity. True, the only actual instances of
practice-enlightenment that has or ever will manifest, is the
practice-enlightenment of particular Zen practitioners at specific
locations-times, but the form (hence, essence) of those instances are not in
any way restricted to particular structures or activities. Particular Zen
practitioners and actual instances of Zen practice-enlightenment are not two
(nondual); Zen practice-enlightenment is solely manifest by and as Zen
practitioners, Zen practitioners are solely manifest by and as Zen
practice-enlightenment. This truth is archetypally embodied and expressed in
Shobogenzo as “zazen,” described as “zazen-only” (shikantaza; solely sitting), and methodologically presented and
transmitted as “nonthinking.”
As
an archetypal image, zazen presents
(makes present) Shakyamuni Buddha’s enlightenment on the “immovable spot” or “Bodhi-Seat.”
The Bodhi-Seat is the instance of existence-time wherein the Buddha awakens;
the moment-event of Buddhism’s supreme of the supreme, archetypally presented by
the image of Buddha sitting upright in the lotus posture at the location-time
of his enlightenment beneath the Bodhi Tree.
Described and explained as zazen-only (shikantaza), zazen is revealed as the “axis mundi,” the still point
at the center of the Dharma-Wheel wherein the myriad dharmas ceaselessly rise
and set in and as the continuous advance of the universe into novelty.
Zazen-only demonstrates how the “three modes of conduct” (thoughts, words, and
deeds) are wholly grounded in, at, and as the immovable spot; each and all the myriad
dharmas are solely-seated in, at, and as this here-now of existence-time.
Methodologically
presented and transmitted as nonthinking,
zazen is made accessible for the liberation of all beings as the Buddha-Dharma
itself; the “Great Vehicle” or “One Vehicle” (Mahayana or Ekayana) that is the
essence of Zen. The “essence of Zen”
being nondual with the “form of Zen,”
is thus nothing more or less than Zen’s phenomenal expression in and as
existence-time. As a spatial-temporal essence/form, the Zen is accessed by
humans in the same manner and through the same capacities humans access any
other manifest reality; the normal capacities of language, thinking, and
reason. In Shobogenzo these
capacities are most comprehensively treated by the vision of “nonthinking,” creatively
presented as a unification and transcendence of “thinking” and “not-thinking.”
Thus,
in Shobogenzo to engage in zazen is
to be a Zen practitioner and to be a Zen practitioner is to engage in zazen. To
be a Zen practitioner or engage in zazen is to be solely seated here-now; fully
and totally enacting and being
enacted in and as the myriad dharmas, in and as every thought, word, and deed.
It is not difficult to see that this vision of zazen is nothing more or less
than the practical application of the
principles of nonduality. For one that has verified that form is emptiness, all
forms are empty; this cup is empty, this speech is empty, this boat race is empty – thus each particular dharma is solely-empty. Likewise, to
verify the Buddha-nature of self (thus, of self/other), is to verify the
Buddha-nature of all thoughts, words, and deeds; this memory is self, this utterance is self, this walking is self – each thought, word, and deed
is solely-self (or solely Buddha). As the archetypal image of Zen
practice-enlightenment, zazen is the embodiment of Zen practice-enlightenment,
thus to be a Zen practitioner is to solely embody to be solely embodied as
zazen.
In
this sense, to be a Zen practitioner is to actualize zazen – to actualize
anything other than zazen is not to be a Zen practitioner. Hence, a genuine
practitioner is “solely seated” in and as existence-time here-now. Zen
practice-enlightenment is, as it is, “solely sitting.”
From the Zen perspective
it would be dualistic to regard practice-enlightenment as a distinct, independent reality;
a Zen practitioner cannot “sit in zazen” and
“study sutras,” or “sit in zazen” and
“train with koans,” etc., for a Zen practitioner “solely sits” or “just sits.” As authentic
practice-enlightenment is just
sitting; any and all of a Zen practitioner’s thoughts, words, and deeds are just sitting. Zen practitioners do not
teach, work, eat, sleep, and solely sit – teaching, working, eating,
sleeping are solely sitting. All dharmas are solely emptiness; self and other are solely Buddha-nature; and the thoughts, words, and deeds of Zen
practitioners are solely sitting.
For
the Zen practitioner, then, there is sitting
that is solely sitting and there is walking that is solely sitting; sitting is not
walking and walking is not sitting,
but both sitting and walking are solely
sitting, solely zazen. The thinking of a Zen practitioner is not the
speaking or acting of a Zen practitioner, but the thinking, speaking, and
acting of a Zen practitioner is solely
sitting, zazen-only.
Hence, there is the mind’s just
sitting there, which is not the same as the body’s just sitting there. And
there is the body’s just sitting there, which is not the same as the mind’s
just sitting. There is ‘just sitting there with body and mind having dropped
off’, which is not the same as ‘just sitting in order to drop off body and
mind’. To have already realized such a state is the perfect oneness of practice
and understanding that the Buddhas and Ancestors have experienced. Maintain and
safeguard your mind’s functions of remembering, considering, and reflecting.
Thoroughly explore through your training what mind, intent, and consciousness
truly are.
Shobogenzo, Zammai-ō Zammai,
Hubert Nearman
Distorted,
superficial, and superstitious notions concerning Dogen’s teachings on zazen-only abound in the contemporary Zen community. The majority of these distortions can be remedied by simply learning to appreciate the difference between metaphorical or mythopoeic
language and the language of literal description, coupled with clear grasp of the basic principles of Buddhist nonduality. Many factors, including superficial views of emptiness
and imitators attempting to cash in on the success of genuine Zen,
have contributed to simplistic notions of seated meditation (zazen) over the course of Zen’s history.
The fallacious notions of zazen embraced today are
fundamentally the same as those that have dogged Zen throughout its history.
The most common fallacies combine elements of simplification and superstition; simplifications
portraying zazen literally, as “sitting” (the physical posture of sitting),
and superstitions about zazen (the simplistic literal sense) being the only
element necessary to realize Zen liberation. Not infrequently it is even suggested
that “just sitting” (in the literal sense) is enlightenment itself. Commonly dressed up in trite
slogans about “no goals,” “nothing special,” “just this,” etc., zazen - the very keystone of Zen practice-enlightenment - is pawned off as a simple
arrangement of the body-mind in a proscribed posture of physical sitting. Shobogenzo asserts what common sense already suggests
concerning such notions:
Even if some appear to
understand physical sitting to be what the Buddha taught, they have not yet
grasped that ‘sitting there’ means “Just sit there!”
Shobogenzo, Zammai-ō Zammai,
Hubert Nearman
Despite
Shobogenzo’s clear instructions, the
classical Zen teachings, and common sense however, such notions continue to be accepted
and applied by groups and individuals far and wide. Routinely arranging their
body-mind in an upright, cross-legged sitting posture for measured periods of
time, such groups and individuals honestly believe they are enacting “what the
Buddha taught.” This shallow mimicry of the Buddha’s enlightenment is, in their
view, the “just sitting” that Dogen taught.
Of
course, there is nothing wrong, or even unusual about erroneous understandings
and false views; everyone has them, and even sages are compelled to continuously
let go of old views in order to advance, expand, and clarify their understanding and skill.
Sages know enough about stagnation and petrifaction to avoid becoming attached
to any manner of fixed view; ego-centricity, spiritual pride, and sectarian allegiance
however, can be extremely powerful obstacles for even the sincerest of genuine aspirants.
As
noted, promoters of distorted versions of Dogen’s “zazen” commonly proceed as if
Zen expressions are meant to be understood in the literal sense of descriptive language rather than the mythopoeic language common to all sacred
literature (as well as true art). To support and
impress the notion that “just sitting” literally means to just sit in the ordinary physical sense, and that this “activity” is the only thing necessary for actualizing
authentic practice-realization, proponents commonly cite
cherry-picked phrases from Dogen’s voluminous writings.
Parenthetically speaking two points are worth mention; in direct contradiction to their insistence
on a “literal” reading of zazen, etc., these same advocates frequently insist
on the “metaphorical” reading of numerous expressions in
Dogen’s writings which they contend "actually mean" the literal performance of zazen. Second,
such advocates typically assume a very liberal tolerance for their own biases while imposing strict constraints on the contentions of others; if,
for example, one of their “supporting quotes" from Dogen is contested
by an apparently contradictory quote from a different passage in Dogen’s work, the
latter is likely to by dismissed as “out of context,” while the former is simply repeated as
if its context were self-evident.
In general, then, the
basic fallacy is that Dogen taught a unique style of Zen (i.e. Japanese
Soto Zen) advocating a single method practice (i.e. zazen-only) essentially consisting of
the literal performance of physically sitting still, commonly portrayed
as being accompanied with a particularly “detached” mental attitude. The
physical aspects described are technically equivalent to the basic meditation
techniques common to most Buddhist traditions; sitting upright in the
lotus (or half-lotus) position (a crossed-legged sitting posture). The mental
aspect or attitude advocated is often described (again, in literal terms) as a kind of intentionally “goalless,” “objectless,”
or “detached” state of mind. When pressed to elaborate, proponents of such
notions tend to explain “goalless” or “objectless” in negative or apophatic
terms; as meaning the abstention or avoidance of utilizing traditional Buddhist
techniques such as mindfulness of Buddha, the body, mind, breath, koans,
scriptures, etc. – zazen, they contend, is literally “just sitting” with no object in
mind, maintaining a detached but focused awareness wherein thoughts, words, and deeds, if noticed at all,
are simply to be noted and “let go of” without arousing questions or second thoughts.
This, then, or something similar, is supposed to by Dogen’s supreme method; so effective no other practice
is essential for authentic Zen actualization; there is literally no need to offer incense, bow, chant, confess, read
sutras, or perform any other traditional or nontraditional practice. To support
such notions, the most frequently quoted “authoritative” passage comes from an
early writing of Dogen titled, Bendowa:
After
the initial meeting with a [good] counselor we never again need to burn
incense, to do prostrations, to recite Buddha’s name, to practice confession,
or to read sutras. Just sit and get the state that is free of body and mind. If
a human being, even for a single moment, manifests the Buddha’s posture in the
three forms of conduct, while [that person] sits up straight in samādhi,
the entire world of Dharma assumes the
Buddha’s posture and the whole of space becomes the state of realization.
Bendowa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike
Cross
First,
how does one that takes Dogen’s expressions literally go about
manifesting “the three forms of conduct (thinking, speech, and action), while [that person] sits up straight in
samadhi…”? Fortunately, Dogen was a Zen master not a delusional
zealot, thus his language, like that of all the great sages, is mythical, not
historical, mythopoeic not biographic – Shobogenzo
is an expression of human truth, not an "objective" dissertation. If Dogen had
truly believed practice-enlightenment consisted in the performance of a
particular physical posture/mental attitude, he would not have
dedicated most of his time and energy writing and teaching otherwise.
Fortunately, Dogen understood, acknowledged, and taught that the real form of
zazen-only was the myriad dharmas:
You need to discern and affirm
for yourself the underlying meaning of his saying, “If you wish to see Buddha
Nature, you must first rid yourself of your arrogant pride.” It is not that one
lacks sight, but the seeing of which he spoke is based on ridding oneself of
one’s arrogant pride. The arrogance of self is not just of one kind, and pride
takes many forms. Methods for ridding oneself of these will also be diverse and
myriad. Even so, all of these methods will be ‘one’s seeing Buddha Nature’.
Thus, you need to learn both to look with your eyes and to see with your Eye.
Shobogenzo,
Bussho,
Hubert Nearman
Apparently
the expression conveying the true nature of zazen-only presented in Bendowa had already been misconstrued as
a literal description or formula of “Zen practice”
rather than a mythopoeic expression of truth in Dogen’s own day. For in the Bukkyo fascicle of Shobogenzo, written only about a decade after Bendowa, Dogen again brought the expression out - only this time he
did so in a manner that could never mistakenly be superficially misrepresented
as a merely formal description of practice.
My
late master constantly said, “In my order, we do not rely on burning incense,
doing prostrations, reciting names of buddhas, practicing confession, or
reading sutras. Just sit, direct your energy into pursuing the truth, and get
free of body and mind.”
Few
people clearly understand an expression like this. Why? Because to call
“reading sutras” “reading sutras” is to debase it, and not to call it “reading
sutras” is to be perverse. “You are not allowed to talk and not allowed to be
mute: say something at once! Say something at once!” We should learn this truth
in practice. Because this principle [of reading sutras] exists, a man of old
has said, “To read sutras we must be equipped with the eyes of reading sutras.”
Shobogenzo, Bukkyo,
Gudo Nishijima
& Mike Cross
Obviously,
if this expression was meant literally, more than a “Few people” would have
clearly understood it. Calling it “reading sutras” debases it because it reduces it to literalism, cutting
it out of the nondual reality of its existent form/essence; not calling it “reading sutras” is perverse because it fails to discern the
truth of its inherent uniqueness. For the “few” that clearly
understand, “reading sutras,” along with offering incense,
bowing, chanting, and confessing, is solely-sitting.
In any case, to clearly understand just sitting, reading
sutras, or any other aspect of the Buddha Dharma, we must activate the
Dharma-Eye. To read sutras, the ordinary eyes of literal description are simply
not the appropriate tools; we must be equipped with the eyes of reading sutras.
Whenever “zazen” (or just sitting etc.)
is treated or regarded as a separate activity or distinct action, as one activity among others (e.g. working, reading, eating, etc.), it is
not the zazen-only
illumined and presented by Shobogenzo.
As the formal practice of seated meditation, zazen is simply one form
of activity among many . As the actualization of the universe
(i.e. genjokoan), however, zazen is not only wholly inclusive of “the three
forms of human conduct” (thinking, speech, and action), it is Total Existence
itself, the myriad dharmas as they are.
In this way, you need to
thoroughly explore through your training the thousands of aspects, nay, the
hundreds of thousands of aspects of just sitting.
Shobogenzo, Zammai-ō Zammai,
Hubert Nearman
Enjoy the ride!
Ted
FREE Zen Newsletter!
Posts
