The unity and differentiation of consciousness

The unity and differentiation of consciousness

 

Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one. This is a virtual certainty because even in the vacuum matter is one; and if we don't see this, it's because we are blinding ourselves to it.

David Bohm, Statement of 1986, as quoted in Towards a Theory of Transpersonal Decision-Making in Human-Systems (2007) by Joseph Riggio, p. 66

 

Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.

Erwin Schrödinger,  As quoted in The Observer (11 January 1931); also in Psychic Research (1931), Vol. 25, p. 91

 

Consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular. Not only has none of us ever experienced more than one consciousness, but there is also no trace of circumstantial evidence of this ever happening anywhere in the world. If I say that there cannot be more than one consciousness in the same mind, this seems a blunt tautology — we are quite unable to imagine the contrary...

Erwin Schrödinger,  "The Oneness of Mind", as translated in Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's Great Physicists (1984) edited by Ken Wilber

 

It is generally understood that all knowledge or experience (epistemology) of the world arrives through the sense organs. This is accurate, even obvious, as far as it goes. But, like all generalizations, it is only useful as a starting point for inquiring into particular knowledge; in this case particular knowledge concerning the true nature of knowledge. Some of the particular knowledge about knowledge that Zen regards as significant, is that the sense organs – eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind – are components of consciousness. Thus, while experience or knowledge of the world arrives through the sense organs, it is realized (made real) by and as consciousness. In this, then, we come to see; the known/experienced world is – exists as – consciousness itself.

 

The nondual perspective presupposes both a subject and an object are present in/as all instances of consciousness; in the absence of either, consciousness cannot exist. All knowledge/experience is the realization of a sentient being (subject; conscious existent) and a being of sentience (object; existent of consciousness). One thing this illumines is Zen’s recognition of the Buddha nature or wisdom of the human capacities for reasoning (dori) and discrimination – that is, Zen’s affirmation of the essential nature and role of the discriminating mind.

 

Contrary to the views commonly asserted in certain contemporary Zen circles, discrimination is an essential element of authentic Zen practice-enlightenment. Based on superficial notions of nonduality – notions confuse ‘nonduality’ with ‘oneness’ and/or ‘duality’ with ‘dualism’ – the negative or delusional nature of discrimination is commonly suggested, even explicitly asserted in popular accounts of Zen. Naturally, if one misunderstands ‘nonduality’ as meaning ‘oneness,’ one can only regard distinctions to be unreal or illusory. Similarly, to confuse ‘duality’ with ‘dualism’ can only lead to distorted views of plurality and variety. ‘Nondual’ means ‘not two,’ it does not mean ‘one.’ That ‘subjects’ and ‘objects’ are nondual means they are interdependent, not that they are inter-changeable, much less indistinguishable.

 

Zen distinguishes between subjects and objects because subjects are not objects, and objects are not subjects. In the context of knowledge, subject and object are coessential, coextensive foci; two distinct, mutually dependent elements of consciousness. The subject of an object has its place (dharma-position) in the universe which is not the same as the place as the object of the subject – consciousness, knowledge, or experience is a subject realizing an object and an object realized by a subject. In other words, the normality of subjects and objects is for subjects to be subjects and objects to be objects; objects exist as ‘what is realized’ by subjects, and subjects exist as ‘what realizes’ objects.

Look Deeply Into Your Own Mind

Once, before a talk, Charles asked, “Which spiritual tradition is the closest to the truth?”
.

Louie Wing said, “The spiritual guides and awakened teachers of all the great traditions did not preach and demonstrate the reality of awakening because they had something they could give you. They simply directed you to look deeply into your own mind and perceive its true nature. How could there be any difference of superiority or inferiority among the awakened teachers within the various styles? All that is important is to awaken to the one true reality of your own mind.”

 
The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing

Can Zen Sectarianism Continue To Be Taken Seriously?

Can Zen Sectarianism Continue To Be Taken Seriously?

Despite the enormous advances in Zen and Buddhist scholarship of recent decades, many in the actual community of Zen practitioners continue to be largely guided by the vision of Zen fashioned by pre-modern and modern Japanese institutions, rather than the vision presented by the classic masters. Certain stereotypes about Zen are so entrenched in many contemporary Zen communities that even the most incontrovertible revelations of scholarship continue to be largely dismissed or ignored.

There seem to be a number of various reasons for this, but it seems significant that the probability for a discovery to be dismissed increases in proportion to the extent it is sectarian specific.

For instance, the "less sectarian" disclosure that Zen’s claim of being transmitted through “an unbroken succession from master-to-master” was historically untenable met greater acceptance than the "more sectarian" discovery that Dogen regarded koans to be as essential to Zen as sitting meditation.

In fact, propaganda portraying Dogen as someone that regarded “just sitting” as the only essential element of Zen practice was so effective his actual stance continues to be denied by many in the Soto sect to this day.

Let's consider this further in context of the well documented competition for “superiority” between the two major Zen institutions in Japan (Soto and Rinzai), which largely centered on the role of koans. Briefly, the Soto sect advocated “just sitting” and criticized the Rinzai sect for its “preoccupation” with koans.

Now notice that when it was discovered that the “Soto founder” (Dogen) took the Rinzai sect’s side in regarding koans as essential to Zen practice it not only exposed fallacies of Soto dogma, it revealed a necessity to doubt the credibility of everything the Soto sect asserted concerning Zen; if they were ignorant of Dogen’s actual teachings about koans and zazen, how can we seriously attach any authority to their claim of Dogen as being their “founder”?

...

Until next time, try not to drown in all the blood...

Ted

Dogen: Existence-Time and Dharma-Transmission

Existence-Time and Dharma-Transmission

To fully appreciate of Dogen’s view of Dharma-transmission it needs to be understood within the context of the nonduality of the temporal and the eternal as presented by the essential doctrine of “existence-time” (uji). “Uji” or “existence-time” is Dogen’s uniquely dynamic vision of the nondual nature of existence (ontology, being, place [space, location]) and time (temporality, chronology, temporology).1

Many, if not most Zen students are familiar with the Dogen’s unique teaching about existence-time due to the fact that the Shobogenzo fascicle of the same name – “Uji” – was one of the earliest, and has proven to be one of the most numerous, translations made available.2 “Knowing of” Dogen’s teaching on existence-time, however, is not the same as accurately understanding it, much less verifying it in experience and incorporating it in practice-enlightenment.3

Briefly then, the significance of “existence-time” (uji) is given a central position in Dogen’s vision of Zen cosmology. This means, for one thing, that all of the implications of Dogen’s view of existence-time are presupposed as intrinsic to all his teachings.

Now, the point we want to get at is this; Dogen’s teaching on “Dharma-transmission” – when seen from within his view of existence-time – presents a remarkably dynamic vision of the universe as an ever-present activity of becoming Buddha. In short “becoming Buddha” is not something limited to the present time, not something that will cease in the future, nor something that will vanish in the past – becoming Buddha now (i.e. in the present) is not independent of becoming Buddha then (i.e. in the past or future). For Dogen then, “Dharma-transmission” describes the coordinating activity of becoming Buddha as the inherent “virtue of ascending and descending” (the up and down, or forward and back flow of “time”) of each and all things, beings, and events (dharmas) exist.

In short, the Dharma is not merely something that Buddhas and ancestors “pass on” from the past, to the present, and into the future; Dharma is also transmitted from the present to the past, and from the future to the present and the past. Thus Dogen is able to express this astonishing vision for instance:

The succession of the Dharma by ancestral patriarchs is forty patriarchs from the Seven Buddhas to Sokei and forty buddhas from Sokei to the Seven Buddhas. Because each of the Seven Buddhas has the virtue of ascending and of descending, they extend to Sokei and extend to the Seven Buddhas. Because Sokei has the virtue of ascending and of descending, he receives the authentic transmission from the Seven Buddhas, he receives the authentic transmission from Sokei, and he passes the authentic transmission to later buddhas. But it is beyond only former and later. At the time of Sakyamuni Buddha, all the buddhas of the ten directions are present; at the time of Seigen, Nangaku is present; at the time of Nangaku, Seigen is present; and so on—at the time of Sekito, Kozei is present. Their not hindering each other may be different from having no connection. We should investigate the presence of such virtue. Each of the forty Buddhist patriarchs mentioned above is an eternal buddha. At the same time, each has a mind, a body, a state of brightness, and a national land. Each has passed away long ago and has never passed away at all. It may be that both never having passed away, and having passed away long ago, are equally the virtue of an eternal buddha. Those who learn in practice the truth of eternal buddhas realize in experience the truth of eternal buddhas; they are the eternal buddhas of each age. Although the “eternal” of “eternal buddhas” is exactly the same as the “old” in “new and old,” [eternal buddhas] have completely transcended past and present; they belong directly in eternity.

Shobogenzo, Kobusshin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Notes

1.      “Temporology” is the term applied to the “science of time” inspired by Dr Kozyrev and under active investigation at Moscow State Univeristy, which offers this brief definition on their website: “In our understanding, the ‘nature’ of time is the mechanism [that brings about] appearing changes and occurring newness in the world. To understand the ‘nature’ of time is to point to … a process, a phenomenon, a ‘carrier’ in the material world whose properties could be identified or corresponded with those of time.”

2.      The “Uji” fascicle of is probably second in popularity only to “Genjokoan” – the other popular Dogen work, “Bendowa” is not a Shobogenzo fascicle.

3.      Even the first step of incorporating the reality of existence-time (i.e. achieving an accurate understanding) cannot really be accomplished with the “Uji” fascicle alone – for “Uji” is but one chapter (fascicle, part, section) of a single, complex, literary expression consisting of (at least) seventy-four other chapters.

Peace,

Ted

Emptiness & Form, Attributes and Essence

Buddhist literature frequently details and praises the innumerable, marvelous attributes of Buddha. The majority of these attributes are described as greater, more powerful, or otherwise superior to those usually ascribed to human beings (e.g. abilities to communicate telepathically, be in many places at once, enjoy perfect knowledge and bliss, etc.). Those with a superficial understanding of such descriptions are often known to display astonishment at “irreverent” expressions that identify Buddha nature as identical to the nature of mere humans. Such astonishment often increases to incredulity or even disgust when Buddha nature is equated with animals, vegetables, or minerals — not to mention puddles of piss, the smell of farts, or dry pieces of shit as the classic Zen masters sometimes do. The Zen masters are not being irreverent, however, nor iconoclastic; such shocking expressions are aimed directly at the very forces that evoke such astonishment, shallow understanding and dualistic views.

Hearing of the marvelous attributes of Buddha, uncritical or speculative thinkers show a certain tendency to confuse or infuse “attributes” with the meaning of “essence.” The attributes of Buddha are the characteristics that distinguish Buddha as Buddha; the essence of Buddha is Buddha itself (or him/herself). When attributes are equated with essence it becomes (conceptually) possible to abstract attributes from real, particular dharmas (actual existent things) and thus conceive Buddha as “pure” awareness, goodness, wisdom, tranquility, etc. To conceive of any such “pure” attributes apart from real things that posses them is to dualistically grant them independent selfhood. Such abstract dualism inevitably leads to the effective annihilation of Buddha so far as human beings are concerned; Buddha becomes indescribable, mysterious, ineffable, incommunicable, and indefinable. According to Dogen’s perspective such a Buddha, if it existed, would be just as meaningless to human life as if it did not exist.

Existence, according to Dogen, is dependent on sentient experience; a thing (dharma) exists insofar, and to the extent that it is experienced. If we do not experience it, it does not exist; at the same time, if it exists it can be experienced, for nothing in the universe is concealed. Thus, according to Dogen’s Zen, a Buddha that is indescribable, mysterious, ineffable, incommunicable, and indefinable is not a Buddha. As human beings our ability to know or experience Buddha (or anything else) is, of course, necessarily limited to the human capacity; we cannot know, conceive, or experience anything beyond our capacity as humans (if we could, it would immediately be within the human capacity). Anything that we try to imagine that is greater than ourselves must be small enough to fit inside our own imagination, thus it would inevitably have to be smaller than ourselves. Therefore, any Buddha we could imagine would have to be smaller than ourselves also. Therefore, in Dogen’s Zen, no dharma (thing, being, instance) can be essentially superior or inferior to any other. All dharmas can be distinguished by their own particular attributes, characteristics, or features, but none differ essentially or substantively from us.

Dogen’s writings are much more concerned with elucidating the nature and significance of “form” (unique, particular dharmas), than they are with “emptiness” (universal oneness). The usual reason given for this is that Dogen was countering his era’s excessive preoccupation with emptiness which had led to the widespread acceptance of extremely biased (one-sided) views. Another reason for Dogen’s emphasis on form, which I think may be more significant, is the fact that after the initial phases of Zen practice and enlightenment there is little value in discussing emptiness. The primary significance of the Buddhist doctrine of emptiness, which can only be truly grasped through experiential realization, is what it reveals about the true nature of the universe and our self. This truth is actualized (made actual) by journeying through emptiness, not by or as emptiness in itself; and definitely not by taking up a permanent abode in emptiness. To clarify, let’s consider the first three lines of Shobogenzo, Genjokoan:

When all things are seen as the buddha-dharma, then there is delusion and enlightenment, there is practice, there is life and there is death, there are buddhas and there are ordinary beings.

When all things are seen as empty of self, there is no delusion and no enlightenment, no buddhas and no ordinary beings, no life and no death.

Buddha’s truth includes and transcends the many and the one, and so there is life and death, delusion and enlightenment, ordinary beings and buddhas.
Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, (Ted Biringer)

A true appreciation of emptiness can only be achieved with the actual experience of “When all things are seen as empty of self.” When this is being actualized, as Dogen says, “there is no delusion and no enlightenment, no buddhas and no ordinary beings, no life and no death.” All those that have journeyed through this experience can testify to the fact that Dogen is making an understatement; not only are there none of the things (dharmas) he mentions – there are no things at all; no sounds, no tastes, no touches, no sights, no smells, and no cognitions of any kind whatsoever.

Those that can testify to this also share something else with Dogen; they, like he, have journeyed through emptiness. If they had continued to dwell in emptiness, rather than journeying through, they would not be doing anything, certainly not testifying to the emptiness of emptiness.

“Buddha’s truth includes and transcends the many and the one,” means that the Buddha Dharma is constitutive of, and goes beyond, both form and emptiness. It is through the process of transiting from only form (all things) to only emptiness (no things) to and beyond both form and emptiness (all things/no things) that a human being truly begins to actualize authentic practice-enlightenment. As we will take up later, even the realization “Buddha’s truth” alluded to in the third line is not a place to dwell but an experience to journey through; how much more so the one-sided experience of emptiness (no-self).

Peace,

Ted

Enlightenment Based On Enlightenment

Enlightenment Based On Enlightenment...

Continued from the post: Buddha Mind - Fences, Walls, Tiles, and Pebbles

Now then, if our existence is fashioned by “bits and pieces” of unceasing experience that “cannot be held onto,” it would obviously be a total waste of time and energy to endeavor to diminish or eradicate anything. The more effective approach is simply to learn, activate, and apply ourselves to the essential art of Zen practice-enlightenment that Dogen calls “nonthinking.” The authentic practice of Zen, according to Dogen, is the actualization of the universe (genjokoan), it is the intentional activity of “fashioning” a universe (and a self) that is lucid, harmonious, and free.
.
The “non” of nonthinking should not be confused with the “not” of not-thinking; nonthinking is inclusive of and transcendent to both thinking and not-thinking. For now the gist of the matter is this: “thinking” is the deliberate utilization of cognitive faculties, “not-thinking” is the ceaseless stream of (random, or chaotic) experience, and “nonthinking” then, is to think not-thinking, that is, to express the ultimate truth of all particular things (dharmas) through the practice of thinking (managing, utilizing) not-thinking (ceaseless experience).
.
To experience without the deliberate utilization of thinking is to be (exist as) an animal (an ox, or a cat), to experience deliberate not-thinking is to be a non-sentient thing (a rock, or a dead tree). At the same time, to experience nonthinking passively (as in cultic practices to “seek no goal” or “let things be as they are”) is to exist as a puppet; in Dogen’s terms, to be used by time rather than to use time, or to be turned by the Dharma rather than to turn the Dharma.
.
According to Dogen, no one can even begin to experience Zen without an intense aspiration to experience truth and an unqualified willingness to experience reality—all of reality as it truly is. To imagine one could achieve truth by denying or avoiding any aspect of reality, intellectual, emotional, instinctual, or otherwise is, in Dogen’s terms, to “be in delusion adding to delusion.” Dogen lauded the Sixth Zen Ancestor’s decision to leave his mother in order to meet the Fifth Ancestor, acknowledging the courage it must have taken for one with such a powerful emotional attachment. Ridiculing traditions that restricted females from participation or attendance because they might cause practitioners to “stray from the path,” Dogen quipped that perhaps males should also be restricted since they too could be “objects of sexual attraction.” The ceaseless stream of experience is the only material beings have for fashioning a universe and fashioning a self; the greater and fuller our experience the greater and fuller our existence. Therefore, not only is the universe fashioned uniquely according to the perspectives of individuals, but also according to the skills and depth of wisdom of individuals. Each being experiences the one mind uniquely, and the awakened being experiences it more accurately and deeply than the unawakened.
.
Now, let us give ear to the verse that the Venerable One spoke, specifically his lines, “Through my body, I have manifested the look of the Full Moon, thereby displaying the physical presence of all Buddhas.” Because the display of the physical presence of all Buddhas is a manifestation of one’s Spiritual Body, it has the look of the Full Moon. Accordingly, you need to grasp that all manner of tallness and shortness, as well as of squareness and roundness, are manifestations of your Spiritual Body. Those who are ever so ignorant of what this Spiritual Body is and of what manifesting It means are not only in the dark about the look of the Full Moon, they are not displaying the physical presence of all Buddhas. Foolish people fancy that the Venerable One provisionally displayed his body in some altered form, which is described as ‘the look of a full moon’, but this is an arbitrary and false notion of those who have not had the Buddha’s Way Transmitted to them from Master to disciple, for where or when would It possibly manifest as something separate from and independent of one’s body? What is important for you to recognize is simply that, at the time, the Venerable One was seated on the raised platform of a Dharma teacher. His body showed itself in the same manner as the body of anyone sitting here now, for this body of ours is, in fact, a manifestation of the Moon at Its full. His manifestation of the Spiritual Body is beyond being something square or round, beyond something existing or not existing, beyond something hidden or revealed, beyond something consisting of eighty-four thousand components: it is simply the manifestation of his Spiritual Body. ‘The look of the Full Moon’ describes the Moon implied in Fuke’s remark, “Right here is where the What is, whether the matter is put clumsily or delicately.” Because this manifestation of his Spiritual Body is rid of any arrogant pride, It goes beyond his being Nāgārjuna; It is the physical presence of all Buddhas. Because he displayed It, his Spiritual Body passes through and beyond the physical presence of all Buddhas. Hence, It has no connection with whatever may be on the periphery of the Buddha’s Way.
.
Although there is the Unbounded Radiance which takes some form like ‘the Moon of Buddha Nature at Its Full’, It is beyond what is commonly construed as ‘the look of a full moon’. And what is more, Its real functioning is beyond what is said or how it is put, and the manifestation of this Spiritual Body is beyond the physical and the mental, beyond the realm of the skandhas. Although It completely resembles the realm of the skandhas, It displays Itself by means of them, for this realm is the physical presence of all Buddhas. The Buddhas are the skandhas which give expression to the Dharma; the Unbounded Radiance has no set form. Further, when Its not having any set form is evinced by the meditative state that has no attachments, this is a manifestation of one’s Spiritual Body. Even though our whole assembly may desire to see ‘the look of the Moon at Its full’, this is something one’s eyes have never seen before. It is the turning point for the skandhas, which will give voice to the Dharma, and it is the absence of any fixed way in how the Dharma is stated or what form It may take, while the Spiritual Body manifests freely as It will. Its very ‘being hidden from sight’ and Its very ‘being openly displayed’ is Its stepping forward and stepping back in a cyclic manner. At the very time when Nāgārjuna’s Spiritual Body was manifesting Itself freely as he sat upon his platform, the whole assembly merely heard the words of the Dharma and did not perceive the ‘look’ of their teacher.
.
The Venerable Kānadaiba, who was Nāgārjuna’s Dharma heir, clearly recognized the Full Moon, the perfection of that Full Moon, the manifestation of Nāgārjuna’s Spiritual Body, the look of all Buddhas, and the physical presence of all Buddhas. Although there were many within the assembly who had entered the Master’s private quarters and had had the Buddhist Teachings poured into them, none could stand head-and-shoulders with Kānadaiba. Kānadaiba was respected for his Master’s sharing the Dharma seat with him, and he functioned as a teacher and guide for the whole assembly, since his partial seat was the whole of the Dharma seat. In that he had had the great, unsurpassed Dharma of the Treasure House of the Eye of the True Teaching authentically Transmitted to him, it was just like the Venerable Makakashō occupying the chief Dharma seat on Vulture Peak.
Shobogenzo, Bussho, Hubert Nearman
.
For Dogen, seeing the full moon, like seeing a dust mote, is seeing the whole universe. To experience the “full moon” as “all manner of tallness and shortness, as well as of squareness and roundness” is to experience a realer, grander, and more accurate full moon than that of a round white disk in the sky. Its existence is realer and more accurate because the experience that goes into fashioning it is clearer and more abundant. The reason the assembly does “not perceive the ‘look’ of their teacher” is because the masses prefer to think the moon exists independently of their experience of it, and thus independent of their responsibility. The flat white disk in the sky is an isolated, abstract, impersonal thing. Zen masters, including Dogen, also see the disk, just as they see the mote of dust, but they see it completely. This kind of seeing requires us to see with all our capacities of experience. This kind of seeing is not done by thinking or by not-thinking, but by nonthinking which includes and transcends both. The masses see the full moon as an abstraction (which is always a subtraction) of reality, the Zen master sees the full moon as a demonstration of the infinite tangible aspects of reality.
.
For Dogen, and all the classic Zen masters, enlightened vision or wisdom (bodhi prajna) is the criterion of “normality” (the “ordinary mind). “Foolish people” are “in the dark about the moon” insofar as mediocrity, ambiguity, or generalization is seen as the standards of “normality.” The bonds of self-centeredness, sloth, and fear lead many, who are otherwise astute, reasonable, and intelligent, to accept simplistic “interpretations” that subvert the intention of Dogen’s (and Zen’s) teachings on the “normal mind” (ordinary mind, everyday mind). Rather than seeing that the “ordinary” is Buddha, they opt to see the “Buddha” as ordinary.
.
Why? If the ego-centric, indolent, and timid can subtract enough precision and definition from the real forms of the myriad dharmas they can reassure each other of the validity of their (common) views—and comfortably dismiss the assertions of the visionary (and the responsibilities such assertions imply).
.
Attempting to prune away all the aspects of the full moon so one’s views harmonize with the majority that sees only a “round disk” is only accomplished by blinding oneself. Once, when Dogen was in China, he saw a depiction of the Zen ancestors painted on the wall inside a temple. The panel that was supposed to represent Nagarjuna simply showed a circle. Dogen asked:
.
“Just what kind of transformation is this?” The guest supervisor says, “It is Nāgārjuna’s body manifesting the form of the round moon.” In saying this he has no nostrils in his complexion and no words in his voice. I say, “This really seems to be a picture of a rice cake!” At this the guest supervisor laughs loudly, but there is no sword in his laughter to break the painted cake.
Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross
.
The guest supervisor’s laugh reveals that he sensed Dogen saw the truth—but there was no sword in his laughter. In other words, the laugh attempted to hide his ignorance—and imply that his view agreed with Dogen’s (whatever it might be). Thus, even when faced with the possibility to discover truth, some would rather be “mistaken as wise” than actually get at truth—at the risk of revealing their “ignorance.” As observed earlier, Dogen lamented that “Zen” was often misconstrued as being anti-intellectual. According to Dogen, this misled some to believe that study and clear understanding was not a requirement for authentic Buddhist practice. Dogen’s refutation of such notions is presented with no uncertain terms in his discussion on Nagarjuna manifesting the form of the moon.
.
Other skinbags who hear our talk also have nothing to say. Former and recent heads of the dining table are not perplexed to see [the picture] and they do not correct it. They probably could not even paint it themselves… because [people] do not wake up from views and opinions that the buddha-nature is related with the thinking, sensing, mindfulness, and realization [described] now, they seem… to have lost the boundary of clear understanding. Few even learn that they should speak the words. Remember, this state of neglect comes from their having stopped making effort. Among heads of the table in many districts there are some who die without once in their life voicing the expression of the truth “the buddha-nature.” Some say that those who listen to teachings discuss the buddha-nature, but patch-robed monks who practice Zen should not speak of it. People like this really are animals. Who are the band of demons that seeks to infiltrate and to defile the truth of our buddha-tathāgata?
Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross
.
As we saw in our examination of the interaction between the experienced and the experiencer, in Dogen’s cosmology there can be no real distinction between voluntary and involuntary actions; our true self is as responsible for beating the heart as for smiling or going to the mailbox. However, in the worldview of cults that minimize or dismiss the role of intellectual effort in Zen, “experience” is regarded as something that “happens to us,” rather than something “we participate in.” To the “no goal” cults, seeing and hearing are not the activity of a true self transiting inward and outward, forward and backward fashioning a universe and a self. For them, seeing and hearing are simply inflicted on beings from somewhere “external” to or “other than” the being’s “self.” In such a view, “we” are nothing more than the hapless victim of our experience which is haphazardly thrust upon us by whatever environment we happen to be in. From such a worldview it is “normal” to see the “look of the full moon” as a white disk in the sky somewhat like a “rice-cake;” for such is the “normality” of general mediocrity.
.
To see the precise details and various characteristics of the full moon as Dogen, Kanadaiba, and all genuine Zen Buddhists do, demands focused, deliberate, enlightened effort—this is the normality of the Zen master (the ordinary mind of Zen). Such is not the focused, deliberate activity of the bean counter or the sniper, but the wholehearted attentive absorption of the child with a bin full of Lego’s, or the fly-fisherman at the mountain stream. The Zen practitioner that has genuinely cast off the body-mind (of self and other), that has genuinely glimpsed true nature (kensho), will not be satisfied to sit passively by allowing experience to simply “happen” as it will. The genuine practitioner has verified the truth expressed by Buddhas and ancestors—has awakened to the true nature of the universe and the self and personally experienced the true nature of freedom.
.
I am frequently questioned about the frequency with which my posts are involved with the consideration of "words." Here, in passing, let me be clear: the Buddha Dharma is words--and words are Buddha Dharma. The liberation of all beings always begins with words, moves on to meaning, then to experiential realization, which in turn is expressed as words. Thus, enlightenment is cast off, exerted, cast off, exerted as the continuous actualization of enlightenment based on enlightenment advances and actualizes the universe. With the certainty that experience is existence—is self creation—Zen practitioners can begin to develop the skillful means of experience, existence, creation—that is, the essential art of Zen.

-

Peace,

Ted Biringer

Zen Doctrine and Methodology - Progression not Completion

Zen Doctrine and Methodology - Progression not Completion

-

The main objective of the criticism inherent to Shobogenzo (as with many literary works) is not concerned with revealing the relative merits of preceding works, teachings, or teachers; it is to establish and clarify its own presuppositions in regard to the nature and characteristics of the actual universe (i.e. the real world).

-

Dogen, being a master of language, was well aware of the fact that all propositions are made in reference to or about a universe which presupposes specific characteristics particular to it. In the absence of such presuppositions, the various actual dharmas (things, beings, events) which inform propositions, as well as the assertions themselves, will lack the definitive characteristics necessary for meaningful communication.

-

One Zen master was asked by a monk pointing at a lamp, “What is that?” The master retorted, “If three of us say it is a tortoise, it is a tortoise.” Every proposition, if it asserts anything meaningful, must take account of, and harmonize with the actual nature and dynamics of the universe in which it is applied. It is through the mutual awareness and agreement of the speaker (or writer) and the hearer (or reader) on the presuppositions involved that distinguish meaningful assertions from a mere series of sounds (or string of words). A monk that was aware of certain presuppositions could accurately respond to a master’s assertion that, “The tortoise is nearly out of fuel” by refilling the lamp with oil.
-
In sum, an assertion can only be regarded as “true” in the specific conditions of its usage, including the background of its presupposed universe.
-
Now, contemporary notions of Zen as being, in one way or another, “beyond words,” are not completely unwarranted. The teachings of Zen themselves are permeated with exhortations to be diligent about recognizing the inescapable limitations of expression as well as the dangers of unwise or careless use of language. However, as is evident in the fact that the literature of Zen is by far the most voluminous of any of the Mahayana schools of Buddhism, the classic masters of Zen were fully aware that language was the only vehicle with which Zen could be communicated.

-

The fact that the ‘experience itself’ of Zen is ‘beyond words’ is true, but so is the ‘experience itself’ of a sunset, or the scent of freshly mown grass. “Experience itself,” of any kind, is confined to the realm of experience which cannot be ‘captured’ and held onto, much less passed on like a treasured heirloom.

-

Thus, the Zen masters, in efforts to undermine deluded notions that equated the “knowledge” of Buddhism with Buddhist “enlightenment,” stressed the incommunicability of experience. Ironically, the very teachings emphasizing the requirement to avoid idolizing knowledge came to be concretized into idols themselves.

-
The efforts of formulation and articulation carried out by the Zen masters are characterized by both authority and humility. The clear tone of authority that rings out from the records of Zen has its source in direct personal experience, rather than abstract speculation. That is to say, the speakers/writers of the Zen records, in their refusal to assert anything that they have not personally verified, demonstrate the singular trait essential to authority; authenticity. The sincere humility singing harmoniously with this authority springs from the clear perception of the true nature of the self and the world. Clearly perceiving the infinite, ineffable, limitless potential of the ever advancing universe inspires profound gratitude and even more profound humility.

-

Awakened to the infinite potential of the universe, the Zen master seeks to deepen and refine, to expand and clarify—never to finalize or conclude. Their efforts to formulate and articulate seek progression, not completion.

-

Peace,

Ted

The “Unity” of Shobogenzo

The “Unity” of Shobogenzo (Part One)

Dogen’s successor, Ejo, added the following explanation to Shobogenzo, Hachi Dainingaku:

This was our Master’s last discourse, drafted when he was already ill. Among other things, I heard him say that he wanted to rework all of the Shobogenzo that had previously been written in Japanese script and also to include some new manuscripts, so that he would be able to compile a work consisting altogether of one hundred discourses.
Shobogenzo, Hachi Dainingaku, translated by Hubert Nearman

This statement by Ejo, supported by research and widely accepted by scholars and Soto authorities, reveals a vastly important aspect of Shobogenzo that is too often ignored: Dogen intended Shobogenzo as a singular canon. Students of literature know why this is so vitally important; a written work that is intended as a ‘unity’ can only be understood if read as a ‘unity.’

One scene, or even one act in a play by Shakespeare cannot be accurately comprehended outside of its context within the whole play becuase even the last scene can and often does change the meaning of earlier scenes.

This potential is utilized in popular novels and films. The first 95% of the movie “The Sixth Sense” for instance, takes on a whole new significance in light of the final 5% of the film. Other obvious examples include the films of Quentin Tarantino, a master of applying the implications of ‘unity’ (e.g. “Pulp Fiction”, “Reservoir Dogs”).

The point is this; any particular scene, essay, chapter, book, or part of a ‘unity’ that is read apart from the ‘unity’ it belongs to cannot be accurately understood. This is true of any written unity, be it a massive sutra or a single poem. Each chapter of the Lotus Sutra, Moby Dick, or The Razor’s Edge depends on every other chapter for its true meaning.

Dogen wrote a vast number of texts that he did not include in Shobogenzo. If he had meant Shobogenzo to simply be a collection of miscellaneous texts, he could have easily included enough to reach his goal of 100. While the exclusion of a particular writing from a unity can be regarded as intentional or unintentional, inclusion can only be regarded as an assertion of approval.

In light of this, every fascicle admitted to Shobogenzo, regardless of its length, date, or subject must be read as part of a unified whole inherently consistent with Dogen’s intention.

Therefore, if any fascicles of Shobogenzo seem to be at odds with each other we need to reevaluate our own approach and understanding of Dogen’s meaning rather than simply ignoring them or dismissing them as inconsistencies in Dogen’s teaching.

NEXT: What reading ‘in context’ implies, and how it is done.