Observations on Zen’s vision
of existence-time (uji).
(Excerpts from
my [unpublished] book [tentatively titled, Zen Cosmology: Dogen’s Contribution
to the Search for a New Worldview]. Post inspired by Tommy Bonn).
Begin
Excerpts
…
In short, total existence is the Buddha-nature, and the
perfect totality of total existence is called ‘living beings.’
In Zen cosmology time and
existence are not two different things; time is always existence-and-time,
existence is always existence-and-time. This view is most clearly and
comprehensively demonstrated in Shobogenzo’s
development and use of the term ‘uji.’ Dogen fashioned this term by combining
two terms; ‘u’ (existence) and ‘ji’ (time) into the single term ‘uji’
(existence-time, or time-being).[ii] The significance of the unity of existence and
time will become clearer as this study progresses. The point I want to stress
here is that existence and time are never
separate from each other; each is an essential
element of the other – no dharmas exist independent of time, and there is
no time independent of dharmas. This notion of existence-time is central to
Zen’s vision of reality, thus is presupposed in all Zen expressions.
Hee-Jin Kim brings
the crucial significance of this notion to light in a comment from his
discussion of the aptly titled ‘Uji’
fascicle of Shobogenzo:
Dogen’s whole thesis in this regard was crystallized in the following:
“As we realize with the utmost effort that all times (jinji) are all existence (jin’u),
absolutely no additional dharma remains.” In other words, existence-time subsumed space and time
totally and exhaustively.
The most significant
implication of this point (i.e. the unified nature of existence and time) is
that each and every particular thing, being, and event (i.e. dharma) is an
intrinsic and essential element of total time, and each and every moment or
duration of time is an intrinsic and essential element of total existence –
hence each and every particular dharma is a manifestation of the whole
universe, and the whole universe is manifest in and as each and every
particular dharma. In Dogen’s words:
Let
us pause to reflect whether or not any of the whole of existence or any of the
whole universe has leaked away from the present moment of time.
…
Briefly,
Shobogenzo
reveals a universe wherein each and all things, beings, and events are clearly
recognized as
autochthonous spatial-temporal forms. The essence of all
such forms, which constitute the totality of reality, is seen as
interdependent – coessential and
coextensive – with the forms themselves. These forms, or
form/essence units, primarily referred to in this study as
‘dharmas,’ actualize existence-time (
uji)
in and as a ceaseless, dynamic ‘advance into novelty’, to borrow A. N.
Whitehead’s phrase.
[v]
This ‘advance’ is presented by
Shobogenzo
as an ever-ongoing self-generation
wherein each unique particularity and the
whole universe are simultaneously ever-realized and ever-transcended – at once
totally exerted and totally cast-off – in and as particular location-moments or
space-times manifest in and as here-now.
…
Shobogenzo’s
vision of dharmas as the fundamental elements of reality, the primary
and primordial constituents of
existence-time (
uji), which Hee-Jin
Kim has characterized as ‘radical phenomenalism,’
[vi]
follows from Dogen’s radical application of the Buddhist principles of
nonduality, thus the insistence on the
phenomenal
nature of (all) dharmas.
…
The reasoning for Zen’s rejection of dualism is
most comprehensively presented by the corollary Buddhist teachings of emptiness
(sunyata) and interdependence
(dependent origination; pratitiya-samutpada).
Briefly, the primary insight of these teachings is the nondual nature of
reality – that is the interdependence of all things, beings, and events in and
of space-and-time (existence-time; uji).
Of the many implications revealed by these teachings, I want to notice three
points of particular relevance here:
·
There is no independently existent objective
reality.
·
There is no independently existent subjective
reality.
·
The world (objective reality) and the self (subjective
reality) are coessential elements of a single unified reality.
…
1.
Dharmas are the
fundamental
constituents of reality, the ultimate/primordial fabric (ontology) of
existence-time (
uji),
the essence
and
form of self
and
not-self.
[vii]
2.
The experiential verification of reality
(enlightenment) is the experiential verification of dharmas.
3.
Apart from dharmas nothing exists and nothing
is experienced.
4.
The myriad dharmas (i.e. all dharmas) constitute
the totality of reality.
5.
A dharma is a particular instance of reality.
6.
A dharma is a phenomenon in and of existence-time
(uji);
all dharmas possess/display spatial-temporal (phenomenal) form.
7.
The
appearance
of a dharma (i.e. the form in which it is experienced) and the
reality of a dharma (its existential
essence, or true nature) are nondual.
[viii]
8.
Dharmas are the
content (ontology)
and the
means of experience
(epistemology); dharmas are ‘what’ are experienced, and dharmas are ‘how’
experience occurs.
[ix]
9.
Dharmas are autochthonous; dharmas
originate/inhabit (appear/exist) at/as the location-time (uji) they are experienced; dharmas are identical to the
location-time (dharma-position) of their appearance (in/as experience).
10.
Dharmas are empty (sunya); void of independent existence; dharmas are empty (sunya), emptiness (sunyata) is dharmas, therefore,
dharmas are dharmas, emptiness is emptiness.
11.
Dharmas are
interdependent;[x] each dharma and
all dharmas exist at/as
each
location-time and
all location-times.
…
To recognize the truth of the
autochthonous
(i.e. originating in/at the location they are encountered) nature of dharmas is
to recognize the
fallacy
of nominalism;
[xi]no
dharma can be a mere
representative,
symbol,
or
signifier
of a reality
independent of itself.
All dharmas, including words, names, ideas, perceptions, signs, mental images,
and anything else that can be experienced, described, pointed to, or
particularly singled out in any way is – as it is – an essential element of the
universe, an integral instance of (total) existence-time (in Zen ‘an expression
of Buddha’). Being
autochthonous
by nature means dharmas are
their
own cause and effect,
their
own meaning and reason. Further, as the
essential, and
only,
constituents of the universe, each and all
dharmas are of intrinsically universal significance and value. The universal
significance and value of dharmas is discerned by seeing them through the
normal (i.e. enlightened) eye (in Zen, seeing them through ‘the eye to read
scriptures’ or ‘the True Dharma-Eye’).
…
In light of Shobogenzo’s (hence Zen’s) vision of existence-time
(uji),
existence (ontology; being) and time are not-two (nondual); dharmas are not
simply existents in
time, they are existents of
time, and (all) time is in
and of
existents (i.e. dharmas). In short, dharmas do not exist independent of time,
and time does not exist independent of dharmas.
On a corollary note, since (all) existence
demonstrates the quality of ‘impermanence,’ time too is impermanent. In Zen the
nonduality of impermanence and time is treated in terms of ‘ceaseless advance’
or ‘ever passing’ – ‘ceaseless’ and ‘ever’ connoting ‘permanence’ or
‘eternity,’ ‘advance’ and ‘passing’ indicating ‘impermanence’ or ‘temporal’
(temporary). Accordingly, ‘impermanence’ is ‘permanent’ and ‘change’ is ‘changeless’
– existence-time ever-always (eternally) advances (changes).
[xii]
Dogen’s vision of reality exploits the significance of this to the utmost,
unfolding its most profound implications with his notion of ‘the
self-obstruction of a single dharma’ or ‘the total exertion of a single dharma’
(ippo gujin). This notion
reveals a number of important implications concerning the nature of
existence-time; here I want to mention two:
·
Each and all dharmas reveal, disclose, or
present the whole universe (the totality of existence-time).
·
Each and all dharmas are inherently infinite and
eternal.
…
The wisdom (true knowledge) disclosed by the
recognition of ‘great delusion’ is that eternal omnipresence and infinite
complexity is inherent
to each and all dharmas. If, as we just saw, the existence
(existence/experience) of a dharma depends
on the existence of not that
dharma, then experiencing a dharma is (also) experiencing the ‘presence’ of ‘a
lack’ (everything that is not that
dharma). As experience is existence,
and the reality of a dharma is inclusive of what is and what is not that
dharma, the existence of any dharma
is the existence of every dharma. To
say the same thing from the other perspective, the whole of existence-time is each particular instance of
existence-time.
Moreover, due to the quality of passage inherent
to the nature of dharmas, their ‘arrival’ and ‘departure’ are unceasing – as Shobogenzo says, ‘Before donkey business
is finished, horse business begins.’ With this we get a sense of what it means
to say dharmas are infinitely complex as well as eternally omnipresent. The
recognition of dharmas as infinitely complex is the reason informing the
refrain in Zen records urging us to strive on; to continuously apply ourselves,
to diligently refine our skill, and to sustain our effort. Eternal omnipresence
and infinite complexity means delusion is ever-present and unlimited (i.e.
‘great’) – just as enlightenment is ever-present and unlimited.
…
I want to notice also the reason Zen expressions
are not concerned with the existence or non-existence or the superiority or
inferiority of dharmas; all such issues are clearly verified as irrelevant by
the genuine Zen practitioner. Zen practice-enlightenment involves – thus can only begin with – discerning the true
nature (thus, actual significance) of reality. One thing this entails is the
experiential verification of the ceaseless
becoming of reality, that is, seeing that each and all the particular dharmas
ever-advancing here-now in a continuous stream of ever-novel experience
constitutes the very fabric of existence-time. This is, in Shobogenzo’s
terms, ‘actualizing the universe’ (genjokoan).
The process, pattern, or arrangement whereby this actualization is performed is
recognized in Zen cosmology as the normal
activity of the self (individual being/universal Buddha), and
therefore as exemplifying the normal
configurations, dynamics, and reason (dori)
of existence.
…
Experiencing
the world through the perspective presented by the Diamond Sutra, the
practitioner is made intimately aware of the fact that reality only and always
consists of particular (part-icular) instances of total existence-time
– apart from specific manifest phenomena (i.e. dharmas) there is no existence
or time.
Because [real existence] is only this exact moment, all moments
of existence-time are the whole of time, and all existent things and all
existent phenomena are time. The whole of existence, the whole universe, exists
in individual moments of time. Let us pause to reflect whether or not any of
the whole of existence or any of the whole universe has leaked away from the
present moment of time.
…
The
universe spoken of by Shobogenzo as ‘this mind,’ ‘Buddha,’ ‘one mind,’
or ‘all dharmas’ is not merely the sum
of all things or the totality of
everything throughout space and time; it is the
very things and events you are
experiencing right here-now (soku), it is the very you right here-now experiencing things
and events. The very things, events, and you that right here-now is ‘this mind’
are not arbitrary miscellany or various generalities; but the actual mountains,
rivers, and earth you see here-now, the sun, the moon, the stars
here-now.
…
…whether we know or do not know
ourselves, our ‘self’ is total existence-time, not one dharma of the myriad
dharmas is other than ourself.
To seek to know ourself is the inevitable will of the
living. But those with Eyes that see themselves are few: buddhas alone know
this state. Others, non-Buddhists and the like, vainly consider only what does
not exist to be their self. What buddhas call themselves is just the whole
earth. In sum, in all instances, whether we know or do not know ourselves,
there is no whole earth that is other than ourself.
Shōbōgenzō,
Yui-butsu-yo-butsu[xiv]
…
From the nondual
perspective it is obvious that the true nature of an object experienced and the
true nature of the subject experiencing it are not two different things. Thus
where the prevailing epistemology sees the sense organs as keyboards, conveyors, interpreters
or translators of objective reality
to subjective reality, Zen sees the
sense organs as bridges, channels, or joints connecting/separating objective reality to/from subjective
reality. The sense organs do not convey signals from an alien (independent) realm to the mind of an isolated self; the sense organs are integral
aspects of the ‘actualization of the universe’ (genjokoan) itself which is experienced/exists as the world/self unity a human being calls ‘myself.’ ‘What we
experience’ – dharmas – is ‘what we are.’ And since experience is ever active,
never static, ‘what we are’ is an ‘activity,’ a ‘doing.’ And this ‘doing’ that
‘we are’ is a continuous ‘ordering,’ ‘fashioning,’ or ‘arranging’ of dharmas –
the particularities or ‘bits and pieces’ we experience as ‘myself.’
In a similar manner, we are continually arranging bits and
pieces of what we experience in order to fashion them into what we call ‘a self
’, which we treat as ‘myself ’: this is the same as the principle of ‘we
ourselves are just for a time’.
The point here is that in Zen’s view, the actual existence of ‘objects’ is the actual experience of ‘subjects.’ In
other words, besides what appears
in/as consciousness, there is nothing that can or could have any influence on
us whatsoever.
…
As a tradition, activity, or institution of human
civilization, ‘Zen’ denotes a path, manner, or way of life, rather than a
particular structure or form. To revere a ‘Zen’ that consists of an authorized
version, exclusive sect, prescribed method, formal practice, dogmatic code, or
any other fixed form is to exalt a lifeless idol. In Zen’s vision, reality
itself consists of the expression of Dharma, an unceasing advance into novelty,
an ongoing creative activity. Zen practice-enlightenment (shusho) is genjokoan, ‘actualizing the fundamental point’ – not
the actualized, actual, or actualize of past, present, or
future, but a ceaseless actualization of existence-time here-now which
fully includes and transcends past, present, and future. More particularly,
practice-enlightenment consists of clearly seeing the true nature of reality
and, thereby, actualizing one’s thoughts, words, and deeds harmoniously with
that truth in and as the self/world here-now.
…
To
clarify, ‘essence’ means ‘reality as it is,’
‘the true nature of reality,’ or ‘thusness’ (i.e. ontology; what is the actual material or fabric of
existence-time). ‘Form’ means ‘reality as
it appears,’ ‘phenomena,’ or ‘dharmas’ (i.e. epistemology; what is known or encountered by sentient beings, i.e. sights, sounds, smells,
tastes, tactile sensations, and thoughts). ‘Essence and form are nondual’ means
all reality is dharmas and all
dharmas are real. Therefore, the
‘essence of existence’ is ‘knowing-dharmas’ (i.e. seeing, experiencing, or
understanding appearances, for example, appearances of ‘understandable
explanations’). Likewise, ‘knowing-dharmas’ is the ‘essence of existence’ (i.e.
the true nature, reality, or ‘fabric’ of appearances, for example, appearances
of ‘understandable explanations’).
In
sum, because essence and form are nondual, the ‘enlightened
perspective’ (i.e. the ‘essence’ of normal seeing; kensho, kenbutsu) can be activated by dharmas, for
example, ‘understandable explanations’ of techniques to focus consciousness on dharmas
here-now (i.e. Zen’s ‘skillful means’). For the place-time (reality, essence) dharmas
are known is the place-time dharmas exist, and the place-time dharmas exist is
the place-time dharmas are known. This place-time being only and always here-now,
nothing (i.e. no dhama) in the universe is concealed.
In the great truth of the
Buddha-Dharma, the sutras of the great-thousandfold [world] are present in an
atom, and countless buddhas are present in an atom. Each weed and each tree are
a body-mind. Because the myriad dharmas are beyond appearance, even the undivided mind is beyond
appearance. And because all dharmas are real form, every atom is real form. Thus, one undivided
mind is all dharmas, and all dharmas are one undivided mind, which
is the whole body. If building stupas were artificial, buddhahood, bodhi, reality as it is, and the
buddha-nature, would also be artificial. Because reality as it is and the
buddha-nature are not artificial, building images and erecting stupas are not artificial.
They are the natural establishment of the bodhi-mind: they are merit achieved without artificiality, without
anything superfluous.
Shobogenzo,
Hotsu-mujōshin[xvi]
…
To clarify, utilizing the Dharma-eye the self sees
its true nature – thus sees its all-inclusiveness and its fathomless infinity.
In light of its all-inclusiveness, total
existence-time (the myriad dharmas) is seen as a particular form – this
dharma here-now and no other. In light of its fathomless infinity, a particular form – this dharma here-now – is seen as
total existence-time. This capacity of the Dharma-eye to see ‘beyond the
many and the one’ is graphically presented in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan as,
‘When one side is illumined, the other side is darkened.’ Seeing total
existence-time as a particular form is
seeing what ‘is illumined’; seeing a particular form as total existence-time is
seeing what ‘is darkened.’
…
Every flowering
and fruiting has endured while they have waited for their opportunity, and
every opportunity has endured while it has waited for a flowering and a
fruiting. Thus, all the hundreds of things that sprout up have their time of
flowering and their fruiting, just as all manner of trees have their time of
flowering and their fruiting. All manner of trees—such as those of gold,
silver, copper, iron, coral, or crystal—have their flowering and their
fruiting. Trees of earth, water, fire, wind, and boundless space have their
flowering and fruiting. Human trees have their blossoming, human flowers have
their blossoming, and withered trees have their blossoming.
The measure of the normality of an individual’s
sentience or consciousness is the measure of that individual’s Buddhahood or
Buddha-nature. All sentient beings, by nature, possess some consciousness of
self and other (i.e. dharmas). An individual’s experience of reality (i.e.
consciousness) is only and always actualized at a particular place-time, and
only and always in one of two ways; as it
is, or as it is not. Insofar as
existence-time is discerned as it is
– seen through the Dharma-Eye – Buddha is actualized. Insofar as reality is
discerned as it is not – not seen through the Dharma-Eye – Buddha
is not actualized. The former describes the actualization of the universe
(genjokoan); the latter describes the lack, absence, or failure of the
actualization of the universe (genjokoan).
…
Each here-now of an individual’s experience in/of
the activity/expression of existence-time is inherently endowed with the
potential to realize (make real) Buddha (or enlightenment), or to not realize
Buddha. There are no other possibilities. If one realizes enlightenment
here-now, enlightenment is totally realized in/as this place-time (i.e. dharma
position). If one does not realize Buddha here-now, Buddha is not realized
in/as this place-time at all. Each moment of the ceaseless advance of
existence-time is an opportunity for enlightenment or not-enlightenment, the true Dharma or not-the-true Dharma, Buddhahood or ordinary being – one or
the other; never both or neither.
…
At the same time, at each
concrete place these three properties include innumerable kinds of dharmas.
In ‘wrongs,’ there are similarities and differences between wrong in this world
and wrong in other worlds. There are similarities and differences between
former times and latter times. There are similarities and differences between
wrong in the heavens above and wrong in the human world. How much greater is
the difference between moral wrong, moral right, and moral indifference in
Buddhism and in the secular world. Right and wrong are time; time is not right
or wrong. Right and wrong are the Dharma; the Dharma is not right or wrong.
[When] the Dharma is in balance, wrong is in balance. [When] the Dharma is in
balance, right is in balance. This being so, when we learn [the supreme state
of] anuttara samyaksambodhi, when
we hear the teachings, do training, and experience the fruit, it is profound,
it is distant, and it is fine.
Right and wrong
are time (hence, existence-time), are the Dharma (i.e. Buddha Way), time is not
right or wrong, Dharma is not good or evil.
…
To understand that we move from
birth to death is a mistake. Birth is a state at one moment; it already has a
past and will have a future. For this reason, it is said in the Buddha-Dharma
that appearance is just nonappearance. Extinction also is a state at one
moment; it too has a past and a future. This is why it is said that
disappearance is just non-disappearance. In the time called “life,” there is
nothing besides life. In the time called “death,” there is nothing besides
death. Thus, when life comes it is just life, and when death comes it is just death;
do not say, confronting them, that you will serve them, and do not wish for
them.
This life and death is just
the sacred life of buddha. If we hate it and want to get rid of it, that is
just wanting to lose the sacred life of buddha. If we stick in it, if we attach
to life and death, this also is to lose the sacred life of buddha.
The activity of Buddha is expressing truth, the
preaching of Dharma. When the here-now of saving all beings calls for
meditation, Buddha manifests the body of meditation; when the here now calls
for digging a ditch, Buddha manifests the body of digging a ditch. Whatever
existence-time calls for here-now, the authentic practitioner (i.e. Buddha)
ably responds (responsibility) with an expression of truth, a manifest body, a
preaching of Dharma.
…
Now, let us inquire, at the
time when ‘bad has not yet occurred,’ where is it? To say that it will exist in
the future is to be forever a non-Buddhist of nihilism. To say that the future
becomes the present is not an insistence of the Buddha-Dharma: the three times
would have to be confused. If the three times were confused, all dharmas
would be confused. If all dharmas
were confused, real form would be confused. If real form were confused, buddhas
alone, together with buddhas, would be confused. For this reason, we do not say
that the future will, in future, become the present. Let us inquire further:
what thing does ‘bad that has not yet occurred’ describe? Who has known it or
seen it? For it to be known and seen, there must be a time of its nonoccurrence
and a time of something other than its nonoccurrence. In that case, it could
not be called something that had not yet occurred. It would have to be called
something that has already vanished. Without studying under non-Buddhists or śrāvakas
and others of the Small Vehicle, we should learn in practice ‘the prevention of
bad that has not yet occurred.’ All the bad in the universe is called ‘bad that
has not yet occurred,’ and it is bad that does not appear. Nonappearance means ‘yesterday
preaching an established rule, today preaching an exception to the rule.’
…because all dharmas are particular
instances of existence-time that occur here-now, the actual form/essence of
‘extinguishing bad that has already occurred’ is, as it is, ‘extinguishing bad
that has already occurred’ – and since all actual instances of ‘bad’ are ‘bad
that has not yet occurred’ and ‘bad that does not appear’, extinguishing ‘bad
that has already occurred’ is
‘extinction’, which means ‘springing free from extinction and getting clear of
it’ (i.e. the truth of ‘extinction’ is liberation or ‘springing free’ from the
restraint or hindrance of [the false view of] extinction [the notion of
extinction as a ‘real nonentity’] and clearly seeing through it [getting clear of it]).
…
This is why the experiential encounter is the
standard in Zen; it is the only
standard that completely reliable. Theoretical knowledge, systems of thought,
concepts, generalizations, and so on can and should be effectively employed and
utilized – which means, in accordance with what they are; theories, systems,
concepts, generalizations, and so on. Seen as
they are, they are seen as (thus fashioned as) intrinsic qualities of
existence-time itself, reliable characteristics of existence that, when treated
in harmony with their normality, contribute to the normal human capacity for
the realization of universal liberation and fulfillment that Zen calls ‘genjokoan’ (i.e. the actualization of
the universe).
…
Clearly, if reality can be considered as constituted of any kind of ‘substance’
or ‘material,’ that material must first and foremost be identified as sentient experience. For the ‘material’ of the
self and the world is only and always encountered as particular instances of subjective experience; specific objects of consciousness actualized in and as definite place-times here-now. Just as
any and all actual instances of consciousness are only and always encountered
as particular forms at specific place-times of total existence-time.
…
As each instance of experience is a unique instance
of existence-time, every expression is a novel expression – including the
expression being recited from memory for the ten-thousandth time or read from an
ancient scripture for the ten-millionth time. The words presently being formed
in your mind, are neither entities that have endured from the past nor
representations; they are novel realities coming into being – becoming – particular instances of
existence illuminating your particular mind at this particular here-now;
instances of Buddha being born in and as your experience/existence here-now.
…
To experience sights, sounds, smells, tastes,
tactile sensations, and thoughts is to fashion sights, sounds, smells, tastes,
tactile sensations, and thoughts. Sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile
sensations, and thoughts exhaust the modes in which reality manifests. A Zen
practitioner is one that continuously strives to increase their capacities to
fashion these six ever-advancing streams of novel existence-time into a Buddha
within a Buddha realm.
…
In light of this reason, it is worth noticing why
those that describe the ‘great Bodhisattva vows’ or ‘annuttara-samyak-sambodhi’ as
‘ideals’ of Buddhism misrepresent the Buddha-Dharma. Expressions are phenomena,
instances of existence-time, not ideals, actualizations, not potentials. To
accurately express the Buddha-Dharma,
one must accurately see (understand, think) the
Buddha-Dharma, to accurately see the
Buddha-Dharma is to accurately fashion
the Buddha-Dharma.
This reasoning also harmonizes with the fact that
authentic aspiration for enlightenment (bodhicitta)
only manifests as particular instances
of genuine desire to deliver all beings from suffering, realize
liberation from all greed, hatred,
and ignorance, awaken to all truths,
and fully embody the Buddha Way. In
short, a person who genuinely aspires for enlightenment must ‘already be a person who is it.’
In failing to clearly see that our mythopoeic
capacity embodies our thinking mind or intellect, rather than being embodied (or produced) by our mind or
intellect, we thereby obstruct our genuine desire (bodhicitta) by subjecting it to the realm of abstract speculation
thus confining it to the limitations of literalism and generalization.
…
The myriad dharmas are not arbitrary occurrences,
but instances of existence-time – expressions of Buddha – to be ordered and
arranged actively by the enlightened mind or passively by the deluded mind. The
enlightened mind is the normal human capacity to intentionally discern and
distinguish, hence concentrate and unify, the ceaseless-stream of sights,
sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, and thoughts ever-advancing into
the novelty that has never been hidden:
Total Existence
is the Buddha's words, the Buddha's tongue, the Buddhist patriarchs' eyes, and
the nostrils of a patch-robed monk. The words "Total Existence" are
utterly beyond beginning existence, beyond original existence, beyond fine
existence, and so on. How much less could they describe conditioned existence
or illusory existence? They are not connected with "mind and
circumstances" or with "essence and form" and the like. This
being so, object-and-subject as living beings-and-Total Existence is completely
beyond ability based on karmic accumulation, beyond the random occurrence of
circumstances, beyond accordance with the Dharma, and beyond mystical powers
and practice and experience. If the Total Existence of living beings were
[ability] based on karmic accumulation, were the random occurrence of
circumstances, were accordance with the Dharma, and so on, then the saints'
experience of the truth, the buddhas' state of bodhi, and the Buddhist
patriarchs' eyes, would also be ability based on karmic accumulation, the occurrence
of circumstances, and accordance with the Dharma. That is not so. The whole
Universe is utterly without objective molecules: here and now there is no
second person at all. [At the same time] "No person has ever recognized
the direct cutting of the root"; for "When does the busy movement of
karmic consciousness ever cease? [Total Existence] is beyond existence that
arises through random circumstances; for "The entire Universe has never
been hidden."
This yellow flower, that melodious bird-song, this
particular doubt, that specific memory – this very life-and-death – as it is here-now is the sacred life of
Buddha; thus Shobogenzo presents and
elucidates the nondual nature of aspiration and realization, desire and
fulfillment. The conceptual division of aspiration and rationality is as
dualistic – hence, as untenable – as the independent existence of form and
essence, appearance and reality, self and not-self, and every other dualistic
notion exhibited by the hesitant, fearful, and repressed forms of passivity,
often in the guise of scientific rationalism or radical skepticism.
…
True nature
continuously rises and continuously sets here-and-now as here-and-now.
Here-and-now is the ceaseless advance of the universe into novelty, the
ever-becoming of self-and-other, enlightenment-and-delusion,
form-and-emptiness, existence-and-time. This is the infinite and eternal
actualization of the whole universe, the sentient-being that is the
ever-becoming Buddha. Total Existence, Buddha-nature, True Self, and
sentient-being are synonymous with the experience of existence here-and-now solely
becoming, the existence of experience here-and-now solely becoming.
End
excerpts……
Please
treasure yourself.
Ted
[i] Gudo
Nishijima & Mike Cross
[ii] Hee-Jin Kim explains Dogen’s coining of the
term thus:
He quoted the
statement of Yueh-shan Wei-yen (745-828), but modified it in such a way that “a
particular time” (arutoki), from
Yueh-shan’s original, was interpreted as “existence-time” (uji).
Hee-Jin Kim,
Eihei Dogen:
Mystical Realist, p.149
[iii]
Eihei Dogen:
Mystical Realist, p.150
[iv]
Gudo
Nishijima & Mike Cross
[v]
Process and Reality, Alfred North
Whitehead, p.28 (Simon & Schuster 1979)
[vi]From this
standpoint, Dogen deeply imbibed hongaku discourse
as radical phenomenalism, which became the crux of his soteriological vision.
In fact, his entire religion may be safely described as the exploration and
explication of this radical phenomenalism in terms of its linguistic, rational,
and temporal dimensions, as well as the endeavor to overcome its
ever-threatening religio-ethical perils.
Hee-Jin, Kim, Eihei Dogen: Mystical Realist, p.xx
Contrary to the conventional
view that language is no more than a means of communication, it is profoundly
internal to an individual’s life as well as to the collective life. Language
flows individually and collectively through the existential bloodstream, so
much so that it is the breath, blood and soul of human existence. Herein lies
the essence of Dogen’s radical phenomenalism.
Hee-Jin, Kim, Dogen on
Meditation and Thinking: A Reflection on His View of Zen, p.64
[vii]
While accounts of Zen
commonly portray emptiness (sunyata) as the fundamental essence of
reality, the notion of emptiness presupposes
a prior recognition of dharmas (i.e.
thus dharmas, not emptiness, are primary and primordial). Indeed, the very
reason and value of the notion of emptiness exists in/as its capacity to
adequately account for the experience/existence of dharmas. It is worth
noticing that the same reasoning applies to the Zen/Buddhist notion of
‘no-self’ or ‘anatman’;
the notion of no-self presupposes a prior recognition of self; the reason and value of no-self exists
in/as its capacity to adequately account for the experience/existence of self.
[viii] ‘Appearance’ and ‘form’ denote the ‘total appearance’
of dharmas experienced by sentient beings (i.e. the total influence of dharmas
on human experience), thus is not confined to visual experience,
but applies to every mode in which dharmas are present,
consciously and unconsciously, in/as/to human experience; sight, sound, taste,
smell, tactile sensation, thought – the reality [ontological
existence] of a dharma and the experience of a dharma
are nondual.
[ix]As phenomenal
forms, dharmas can generally be understood as appearing/manifesting as one or
more of the six ‘objects of consciousness’ – sights, sounds, tastes, smells,
tactile sensations, and thoughts – recognized in traditional Buddhist notions
of sensation, perception, mental formulation, and consciousness.
[x]
The existence of each
dharma is dependent on the existence of ‘all dharmas’ [the totality of all
dharmas] and the existence of ‘each other dharma’ [each particular dharma
‘other than’ it]; all dharmas are
dependent on each dharma).
[xi]
‘Nominalism’ is commonly used in one of two distinct ways, one in which the
existence of abstract objects is denied, and one in which the existence of
universals is denied. My usage conforms more with the latter than the former –
though not exactly (due to the difference between the dualistic world view in
which the term originates and the nondual world view being presented here).
More particularly, my usage closely coincides with its meaning in archetypal
psychology, for example, with James Hillman’s explanation here:
This is
nominalism which too has been instrumental in de-personifying our existence.
Nominalism empties out big words; nominalists consider universal laws and
general types to be only names (nomina). Words have no inherent substance of
their own.
Re-Visioning Psychology, James Hillman,
p.5
[xii]
In this, Zen’s vision of
existence-time is remarkably similar to Alfred North Whitehead’s notion of the
‘ceaseless advance into novelty’ (of the universe). See Process and Reality, Alfred North Whitehead
[xiii]
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
[xiv]
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
[xvi]
Gudo Nishijima &
Mike Cross
[xviii]
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
[xix]
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
[xx]
Gudo
Nishijima & Mike Cross
FREE Zen Newsletter!
Posts
