1.
The
Nonduality of Enlightenment and Delusion
1.
Enlightenment and delusion are nondual, thus
equal in actuality, significance, and value.
2.
Enlightenment is only and always realized within and through delusion;
delusion is only and always realized within
and through
enlightenment.
2.
The Nature
and Dynamics of Enlightenment and Delusion
1.
Enlightenment is the experiential verification
of reality, the normal sentient capacity that is genjokoan (‘the actualization of the universe’).
2.
Delusion is the experientially verifiable
existential quality of reality that enables experiential verification (i.e. genjokoan).
3.
With the experiential verification of reality (enlightenment)
sentient beings see (experience, know) their true nature (their
unborn/imperishable identity in/as the universe).
4.
In seeing their identity in/as the universe,
sentient beings see enlightenment/delusion is infinite and eternal.
Great Delusion and Great
Enlightenment
Insofar as the terms ‘delusion’ and ‘enlightenment’
are used to designate the nondual foci ‘enlightenment’ and ‘delusion’
(enlightenment/delusion), delusion is ‘great delusion’ (daimei) and enlightenment is ‘great enlightenment’ (daigo). The point here is that, while
the term ‘delusion’ is commonly used to designate ‘wrong’ or ‘distorted’ views,
and the term ‘enlightenment’ to designate ‘right’ or ‘accurate’ views, the
terms are not limited to those meanings.
For example, Dogen says that ‘Buddhas are
enlightened about delusion’ (Shobogenzo,
Genjokoan) which means, for one thing, that Buddhas do not exist independent of delusion – delusion and
enlightenment are nondual, hence,
coessential and coextensive. The recognition of delusion as ‘great delusion’ is
one of the key insights informing Zen expressions on the unlimited potential
for the expansion or advancement of realization (practice-enlightenment). It is
also an insight that resolves an apparent
paradox; that of the capacity of dharmas to simultaneously ‘expand’ and
‘contract.’
To clarify, the significance of ‘great delusion’
can be generally understood in light of the truth of how dharmas are experienced. The (only) way dharmas are experienced
is by distinguishing them from what they are not – this dharma is this dharma by virtue of the
fact that it is not anything else
in the universe. Thus, the reality
(existence/experience) of any dharma always consists
of ‘what is that particular
dharma’ and ‘what is not that particular dharma.’ To think
of, speak about, or act upon any dharma requires (is dependent on) distinguishing what is that dharma from what is not that dharma – requires the existence of what is and the existence of what is not that
dharma. The reason (dori) of ‘great
delusion’ can thus be seen as inherent to the reason of experience/existence
itself; experiencing something (i.e.
a dharma) intrinsically-involves not
experiencing everything. In sum,
‘great delusion’ designates the truth that seeing
anything depends on (thus is
inclusive of) not-seeing everything –
in short, seeing (enlightenment) is
blindness (delusion).
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.
Finally, delusion is inherent to reality whether
beings are aware of it or not. At the same time, the distinction between being aware of it and not being aware of it is of the utmost
significance in Zen; it is the distinction between ‘Buddhas’ and ‘ordinary
beings.’ In the Genjokoan fascicle of Shobogenzo, Dogen
underscores this distinction by asserting that to see dharmas as they are is to
‘sense something is lacking.’ To ‘sense
something is lacking’ is to experience ‘the presence’ of ‘a lack.’
The ‘presence of this lack’ is most comprehensively treated by the Buddhist
doctrine of emptiness which we explore later. For now it suffices to notice
that being aware of this ‘presence’
in/as (all) dharmas is being Buddha ‘enlightened about delusion,’ which also
means being ‘enlightened about enlightenment’ – being unaware of this ‘presence’ is being an ordinary being
‘deluded about enlightenment,’ which, of course, also means being ‘deluded
about delusion.’
With
these points in mind consider Dogen’s commentary on the following koan:
Great Master Hochi of Kegon-ji temple
in Keicho (succeeded Tozan; his monk's name was Kyujo) on one occasion is asked by
a monk: "What is it like at the time when a person in the
state of great realization returns to delusion?" The
Master says, "A broken mirror
does not again reflect. Fallen blossoms
cannot climb back onto the trees."
The present question, while it is a question, is like
preaching to the assembly—[preaching] not proclaimed except in the order of
Kegon, and not possible for anyone except a rightful successor of Tozan to
deliver. Truly this may be the squarely regulated order of a Buddhist patriarch
who experiences satisfaction. "A person in the state of great
realization" is not intrinsically in great realization and is not hoarding a great realization realized
externally. It is not that, in old age, [the person] meets with a great
realization [already] present in the public world. [People of great
realization] do not forcibly drag it out of themselves, but they unfailingly
realize great realization. We do not see "not being deluded" as great
realization. Neither should we aim, in order to plant the seed of great
realization, to become at the outset a deluded being. People of great
realization still realize great realization, and people of great delusion still
realize great realization. If there is a person in great realization,
accordingly there is buddha in great realization, there are earth, water, fire,
wind, and air in great realization, and there are outdoor pillars and stone
lanterns in great realization. Now we have inquired into a person in the state of
great realization. The question "What
is it like at the time when a person in the state of great
realization returns to delusion?"
truly asks a question that deserves to
be asked. And Kegon does not hate [the question]; he venerates the ancient ways
of the forest orders—[his conduct] may be the meritorious conduct of a Buddhist
patriarch. Let us consider for a while, is the return to delusion of a person
in the state of great realization completely the same as a person being in the
unenlightened state? At the moment when a person in the state of great
realization returns to delusion, is [that person] taking great realization and
making it into delusion? Does [the person] return to delusion by bringing
delusion from a distant place and covering great realization? Or does the
person in the state of great realization, while remaining a whole person and
not breaking great realization, nevertheless partake in a return to delusion?
Again, does "the return to delusion of a person in the state of great
realization" describe as "returning to delusion" the bringing
forth of a further instance of great realization? We must master
[these questions] one by one. Alternatively, is it that great realization is one hand, and returning to delusion
is one hand? In any case, we should know that the ultimate conclusion of our
study up to now is to hear that a person in the state of great realization
experiences returning to delusion. We should know that there is great
realization which makes returning to delusion a familiar experience. Thus,
recognizing a bandit as a child does not define returning to delusion, and
recognizing a child as a bandit does not define returning to delusion. Great
realization may be to recognize a bandit as a bandit, and returning to delusion
is to recognize a child as "a child." We see great realization as a bit being added in the state of abundance.
When a bit is taken away in the
state of scarcity, that is returning to delusion. In sum, when we grope
for and completely get a grip on someone who returns to delusion, we may
encounter a person in the state of great realization. Is the self now returning
to delusion? Is it beyond delusion? We must examine it in detail, bringing it
here. This is to meet in experience the Buddhist patriarchs. The Master
says, "A broken minor does not
again reflect. Fallen blossoms
cannot climb back onto the trees."
This preaching for the multitude
expresses the very moment of a mirror being broken. That being so, to concern
the mind with the time before the mirror is broken and thereupon to study the
words "broken mirror," is not right. [Some] might understand that the point of the words now spoken by Kegon, "A broken mirror does not again reflect, fallen blossoms cannot
climb back onto the trees," is to say that a person in the state of great realization does not again reflect, and to say that a person in the state of
great realization cannot climb back
onto the trees—to assert that
a person in the state of great realization will never again return to delusion.
But [Kegon's point] is beyond such study. If it were as people think, [the
monk's question] would be asking, for example, "How is the everyday life
of a person in the state of great realization?" And the reply to this
would be something like "There are times of returning to delusion."
The present episode is not like that. [The monk is asking] what it is like at the time when a person in the state
of great realization returns to delusion; therefore he is calling into question
the very moment itself of returning to delusion. The actualization of an
expression of the moment like this is: "A
broken minor does not
again reflect. Fallen blossoms cannot climb back
onto the trees." When fallen blossoms are just fallen blossoms, even
if they are rising to the top of a hundred-foot pole, they are still fallen
blossoms. Because a broken mirror is a broken mirror just here and now, however
many vivid situations it realizes, each similarly is a reflection that does not again reflect. Picking up the point that is expressed as a mirror being broken and
is expressed as blossoms being fallen,
we should grasp in experience the moment which is the time when a person in the state of great
realization returns to delusion. In
this [moment], great realization is akin to having become buddha, and returning
to delusion is akin to [the state of] ordinary beings. We should not study
[Kegon's words] as if they discussed such things as turning back into an ordinary being, or
traces depending o n an origin. Others talk about breaking the great state of enlightenment and becoming
an ordinary being. Here, we do not say that great realization is broken, do not
say that great realization is lost, and do not say that delusion comes. We
should never let ourselves be like those others. Truly, great realization is
limitless, and returning to delusion is limitless. There is no delusion that
hinders great realization, [but] having brought forth three instances of great
realization, we create half an instance of small delusion. In this situation,
there are [snow mountains] realizing great realization for the sake of snow
mountains; trees and stones are realizing great realization relying on trees
and stones; the great realization of buddhas is realizing great realization for
the sake of living beings; and the great realization of living beings is
greatly realizing the great realization of buddhas: it cannot be related to before and behind. Great realization now
is beyond self and beyond others. It does not come; at the same time, it fills in ditches and fills up valleys. It
does not go; at the same time, we
keenly hate pursuit that follows an
external object. Why is it
so? [Because] “we follow objects
perfectly.”
Shobogenzo,
Daigo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross