Skillful Means - Is "The Raft" Truly Disposable?

Skillful Means - Is "The Raft" Truly Disposable?

(Excerpted and revised from the 2010 December issue of The Flatbed Sutra Zen Newsletter)

...

A Buddha’s discourse is beyond the sentient and the non-sentient; it is beyond the relative and the absolute. Even so, when He became aware of bodhisattvas, of ordinary humans, of the Real Form of things, and of this discourse, He opened the Gate of Skillful Means. The Gate of Skillful Means is the unsurpassed meritorious functioning of the fruits of Buddhahood. It is the Dharma that resides in the place of Dharma and It is the form of the world as it constantly manifests. The Gate of Skillful Means does not refer to some momentary skill.
Shobogenzo, Shoho Jisso, Hubert Nearman

The Zen perspective of the Buddhist teaching of “skillful means” has been discussed in numerous Zen books. Not without some justification, both traditional and scholarly accounts tend to stress the expedient or provisional aspect of skillful means, that is, are portrayed as temporary doctrines or momentary skills used to direct students to something else, something other than themselves. In short, skillful means are truly depicted as means, not ends. This view is often illustrated with the analogy of a raft; having reached the other shore (the ends), the raft (the means) should be discarded.

Dogen’s view is not so simple (nor is the view of the classic literature, but our focus is Dogen). In fact, the popular view is nearly diametrically opposed to Dogen’s own. When Dogen says a Buddha’s discourse is “beyond the relative and the absolute” his meaning is inclusive of all dualistic views, including “means and ends.”

To separate “the raft” from “reaching the other shore,” can only be done by violating the Buddhist principles of nonduality. According to these principles, any two constituents in a nondual relationship are interdependent – that is, they are coessential. The inference is clear; if “the means” are provisional or momentary, “the ends” must also be provisional or momentary. For a raft to be an effective "means" for crossing a river, it must be a real raft. All real forms (dharmas), according to Dogen’s teachings on existence and time (existence-time; uji), are in and of real time; thus they cannot change into unreal things, disappear, or be eliminated from time (and existence). A raft that is truly “a means for crossing a river” is, and will always be an intrinsic aspect of “arriving at the other shore.” Likewise, if a verbal or written teaching is an effective means it must be a real dharma, not a provisional one.

When Dogen speaks of “this discourse” as being a “real form” he is highlighting the fact that “a Buddha’s discourse” is a real dharma; thus, he says, “The gate of skillful means does not refer to some momentary skill.”

Therefore, by his own definition, Dogen’s Shobogenzo (a Buddha’s discourse) is not a provisional or momentary device, but a real form (dharma) in and of space and time (existence-time; uji); it is an expression of Buddha nature.

Attempting to find the “reality” of a Mozart symphony independent of the actual music would not only be delusional, it would be ridiculous. This applies equally to the “reality” of a Buddha’s discourse. Some of the most colorful expressions in Shobogenzo are those directed at views that the “words and letters” of sutras and Zen records are mere means pointing to ends apart from themselves.

Therefore, when he describes a Buddha’s discourse as “the gate of skillful means” saying that it is “the Dharma that resides in the place of Dharma” and “the form of the world as it constantly manifests,” Dogen is not only emphasizing the physical-temporal (existence-time) reality of the words and letters (of a Buddha’s discourse), but also its accessibility. The significance of this is often underscored in Shobogenzo with an allusion to one of Dogen’s favorite koans, “nothing in the whole universe is concealed.” The main point of the koan concerns the principle of nonduality; more specifically, the teaching that the “form” of something and its “nature” are not separate.

Buddhism teaches that the emptiness of things (dharmas), that is to say, their essence, is the true nature, or reality of all things – without exception. The most common formulation of this teaching states, “Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.” To simplify, “form is emptiness” means the true nature of “forms” is their emptiness of self nature; in other words, the reality of forms is their lack of independence. “Emptiness is form” means that the true nature of emptiness is its appearance as forms. The practical sense is that the “outward form” of a thing (dharma) and the “essential nature” of that thing are a unity. Thus, a “form” and its “emptiness” are coessential, neither exists independently – no form, no emptiness; no emptiness, no form. Like all simplifications, this is an over-simplification, but it suffices for our purpose here.

The importance of being aware of the nature of this unity for understanding Shobogenzo cannot be overstated; it is a principle that is explicitly and implicitly central throughout the whole of Shobogenzo. Other than Dogen’s teaching of “nothing concealed,” just mentioned, this unity is key to his doctrines of “existence-time,” “practice-realization,” “appearance-reality,” “enlightenment-delusion,” “experience-existence,” and others.

While this is a fundamental doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, its practical application has often been neglected, resulting in biased views privileging “form is emptiness” over “emptiness is form.” The consequences have been diverse and numerous, but our interest here is its effect on the notion of language in Zen; specifically, on how this bias contributed to the widespread acceptance of distorted views on the role of verbal and written expressions in Zen Buddhism.

As we just observed, according to the doctrine of emptiness, a form and its essence are a unity; but according to the biased view in question, a form is inferior to its essence. The level of this inferiority varies according to the particular advocates and other specifics. For example, some may suggest that all forms are unreal or illusory and emptiness is the only reality; others might say forms are provisionally or temporarily real, or that some are real and others are not, etc.

Regardless of the particulars, all such views share a common presupposition that is inherent to the bias in question: a dualistic view that the reality of the Buddha Dharma exists independently of the expression of the Buddha Dharma. As should be clear by now, this would violate the principle of nonduality (not to mention common sense) as it inherently presupposes that forms (dharmas), in this case; words, scriptures, and utterances, can exist independently of emptiness (reality, true nature).

Obviously, to privilege “form is emptiness” over “emptiness is form” is to see the former as superior and the latter as inferior. Now, in the absence of two or more things, “superiority” and “inferiority” are meaningless, they simply cannot be applied to one thing (or none). Therefore, to view the “meaning” of a Buddha’s words as superior to their “form” necessarily presupposes a division between the “form” and the “essence” of the Buddha Dharma. Obviously, any such view is inherently dualistic (i.e. non-Buddhist).

If the essence of an expression and the form of that expression are a unity, as Dogen contends, truly understanding an expression cannot even begin until one recognizes that the essence (i.e. reality, meaning, etc.) of an expression exists in the form of the expression before one – and nowhere else. This is why Dogen so adamantly insists, “A thing and its nature are not two different things.” It is also why we can rejoice, as Dogen does, as he underscores the implication, “Nothing in the whole universe is concealed.”
...

Peace,

Ted

Dogen's Three Essential Aspects of the Buddha Dharma

Dogen's Three Essential Aspects of the Buddha Dharma...

...

In accord with what I have been saying, the process of succession of Buddha after Buddha is something that is extraordinarily profound. It is completely resolute, neither retreating nor deviating: it is unbroken in its continuity and has never died out.
Shobogenzo, Shisho, Hubert Nearman

Notions of superior or inferior aspects of the Buddha Dharma are consistently refuted throughout Shobogenzo. For Dogen, the Dharma is a single wholeness; each aspect is an essential and intrinsic constituent of it. If an aspect of the Dharma were nonessential, it would be superfluous. For this reason the superiority and inferiority of doctrines or methods are never raised by Dogen, there can be no superiority or inferiority between essential elements; as the constituents of water, neither hydrogen nor oxygen occupy a superior position; in the absence of either there is no water. Thus, in Shobogenzo all constituents of the authentic Buddha Dharma are essential elements of it; the absence one element of the Dharma would mean the absence of the whole Dharma.

The question, therefore, is not what aspects of the authentic Dharma are essential – they all are – but simply, what are the essential aspects of the authentic Dharma. According to Dogen, there are three essential aspects of the Buddha Dharma.

Before considering these three aspects, we should mention something else implied by the wholeness of the Dharma; the perspective of Shobogenzo – from that perspective, the Buddha Dharma is simply the Buddha Dharma. This means Shobogenzo not only shuns arguments of superiority and inferiority, it dispenses with notions about relative levels of Dharma. The expressions of Dharma that are directed to novices are no less authentic or significant than expressions addressed to seasoned veterans. In Dogen’s Zen, the Dharma is either authentic or it is not; the truth cannot be watered-down – if it is true for the beginner, it is true for the fully enlightened Buddha. Unlike philosophers, scholars, or scientists, Zen masters do not express themselves from the perspective of theory or speculation; their expressions are asserted from the perspective of their personal verification of the authentic Buddha Dharma.

All the Buddhas and all the Ancestors express what They have realized.
Shobogenzo, Dotoku, Hubert Nearman

Now, the three essential aspects of the Buddha Dharma, according to Shobogenzo, are scriptural teachings, training and practice, and personal verification.

By “scriptural teachings,” Dogen means the expressions of Buddhas and ancestors; “training and practice” means endeavoring to study, understand, and apply these teachings; “personal experience” means achieving personal verification of their truth.

As the Dharma is a single wholeness, these three aspects constitute a unity, and thus, are not divided by time or space. The “treasure” of Shobogenzo is the “True Dharma-Eye.” In the present context we can say that the experience of perceiving via the Dharma-Eye is what is here called “personal verification.” Now, some argue that this is inconsistent. If the Dharma is a single wholeness and the three essential aspects are united in time and space, as Dogen contends, how can we speak of three distinct aspects? In other words, if the three essential aspects of the Dharma – teachings, practice, and experience – are undivided by time or space, where is “personal experience” during “teaching” or “practice,” and where are teaching and practice at the moment of experience? The only inconsistency here is this question; it reveals a fallacious presupposition inherent to a dualistic view of existence and time.

In Shobogenzo, not only are existence and time nondual, existence and existence are nondual, time and time are nondual. That is, each particular thing (dharma) contains and is contained by all other things in all existence; each instant of time contains and is contained by all instants of time in the past, present and future. The three essentials of the Dharma – teaching, practice, and experience – are therefore mutually interdependent and non-obstructive.

This principle is succinctly stated in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, as, “When one side is revealed, the other side is concealed.” Like the light and dark sides of the moon, the revealed aspect testifies to the presence of the concealed aspect. When the teachings are revealed, practice, and experience are concealed (present); when the Dharma-Eye is functioning, the teachings, and practice are concealed.

To clarify this, consider this, for instance: in the actualization of practice, practice is present in the present, teachings are present in the past, and experience is present in the future. Thus, Dogen’s expression in Shobogenzo, Shoaku Makusa:

[This is] not a onetime eye; it is vigorous eyes at many times. Because [those times] are moments in which the eye is present as vigorous eyes, they make the buddhas and the patriarchs practice, make them listen to the teachings, and make them experience the fruit. The buddhas and the patriarchs have never made the teachings, practice, and experience tainted, and so the teachings, practice, and experience have never hindered the buddhas and the patriarchs. For this reason, when [teachings, practice, and experience] compel the Buddhist patriarchs to practice, there are no buddhas or patriarchs who flee, before the moment or after the moment, in the past, present, or future.
Shobogenzo, Shoaku Makusa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

We have said Shobogenzo is itself a unified expression and that it is presented from the perspective that the Buddha Dharma is a unified whole that can be described as consisting of three essential aspects: scriptural teachings, training and practice, and personal verification. Now, we’ll consider two of these aspects further; “personal verification” and “scriptural teachings” (training and practice will be taken up later).

To begin with “personal verification,” we first need to clarify Dogen’s meaning above about the eye as not being a “onetime eye.”

The “eye” is, of course, the Dharma-Eye. That it is not a onetime eye means that, like all real forms (dharmas; things, beings, events, etc.), this eye is intrinsic to all times, that is, to the whole of existence-time (uji). On a more superficial level it can also be seen as a caution against views of enlightenment as an “ultimate” experience or “one time” attainment. Such views are based on abstract concepts derived from speculations about “personal verification,” and thus, can only obscure truth.

The role of personal verification, a key tenet in most Buddhist schools, is a hallmark characteristic of Zen. The initial occasion of the personal experience of enlightenment is central to the story of every major figure in Zen history. Moreover, the necessity of personal awakening is one principle that is inherent to all the classic Zen literature; it is perhaps the most consistent principle of Zen literature.

Despite the tendency of many within the Soto sect to minimize the significance of the story of Dogen’s own initial experience of enlightenment, it is well known to Zen students. Said to have been attained at a moment when he initially “dropped off the body-mind of self and other,” Dogen described it as “accomplishing the task of a lifetime” (in Bendowa). Thus, it is no surprise that the perspective of Shobogenzo harmonizes with the classic literature and insists on the necessity of the experience; for example:

Clearly remember: in the Buddhist patriarchs’ learning of the truth, to awaken the bodhi-mind is inevitably seen as foremost. This is the eternal rule of the Buddhist patriarchs.
Shobogenzo, Hotsu-bodaishin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

As with the story of Dogen’s awakening, many within the Soto sect attempt to gloss passages like this one from Shobogenzo with “interpretations” suggesting Dogen minimized or even denied the necessity of initial awakenings (a central doctrine of Soto’s chief rival; the Rinzai sect). Upon scrutiny however, even the more creative of such interpretations reveal the tell-tale signs of sectarian invention. Strangely, however, these efforts have not only failed to undermine the authenticity of the teaching on “personal verification,” they have failed to counter the over-emphasis on the teaching that is prevalent in much contemporary Zen literature. But the focus here is how this experience is envisioned by Shobogenzo.

As with all aspects of the Buddha Dharma, the teachings of Shobogenzo on the significance of “personal verification” are concerned only with authenticity (or the lack of it). In Dogen’s Zen, authentic aspects of the Dharma are essential aspects; as essential aspects, it would be meaningless to discuss them in terms of superiority and inferiority.

In sum, being an authentic aspect of the Dharma, the experience of opening the Dharma-Eye is simply an essential aspect of authentic Zen practice. Thus, discussing it in terms of superiority and inferiority is senseless; no essential aspect of the Dharma can be more or less important than any other essential aspect. Blood is not more important than a heart, air is not superior to lungs; each is equally essential to authentic human life. Study is not more important than practice, opening the Dharma-Eye is not superior to accurate understanding; each is essential to authentic Zen practice and enlightenment.

Now, if personal verification means verifying the authenticity of the Dharma in direct personal experience, what is it that constitutes the “Dharma” that is to be verified?

Peace,
Ted

Thinking, Not-thinking, Nonthinking

Our body-mind is the universe arraying itself as our direct immediate experience here and now. Illuminating and clarifying this experience is one aspect of Zen practice and enlightenment, the aspect of thinking. Thinking is the analytic activity of immediate experience. Analytic consideration involves discrimination; contrasting and comparing various components of the unity of reality. As each instance of immediate experience is one with the totality of existence-time (uji), discrimination itself, as well as each of the various components are the true nature of immediate experience.

The reality that Dogen underscores with one of his favorite sayings, “nothing is hidden in the whole universe” constantly advances in and as each instance of immediate experience, whether it is verified in study and practice or not. Out thinking, communicating, and activity arises in harmony with our own actual state of enlightenment/delusion, which is, in a sense, our own unique form of systematic knowledge and understanding.

The structure or form of this systematic knowledge and understanding defines our characteristic attitude toward and response to the world. The accuracy of our understanding and the skillfulness of our speech, thoughts, and actions are exactly proportionate to our own self-awareness or lack thereof. The authenticity of our Zen practice is dependent on the degree to which “Zen” has become “our Zen,” this “our” is, of course, not the “our” of ego, but that of our true self. Any systematic knowledge and understanding that is not ours in this sense is only an idol.

Any system that does not arise from our true self is only an object of attachment that leads to bondage, stagnation, and ignorance. For Zen students, systems often become objects of attachment due to inadequate intellectual effort encouraged by dogmatic zealots and sectarian idolatry; any system that asserts its doctrines, truths, laws, or methods in “absolute” terms usurps the true self (Buddha) by halting the ceaseless advance into novelty.

Through my body, I have manifested the look of the Full Moon,
Thereby displaying the physical presence of all Buddhas.
My voicing of the Dharma has no fixed form,
For Its real functioning is beyond what is said, or how.

You need to realize that the genuine functioning of the Dharma is beyond any immediate display of what is said or how It is put. A genuine voicing of the Dharma has no set form.
Shobogenzo, Bussho, Hubert Nearman

If systems are dogmatized they become immune to logic, creativity, and common sense. Authentic Zen practice is always open-ended and fluid, never fixed and rigid. Zen realization, expression, and activity flows with and as the never-ceasing advance of the universe into novelty, Zen flows from the pivot-point of the true body-mind here and now; refusing to affirm the absolute significance of even the most revered doctrine or method. The true Zen system of actualizing enlightened wisdom is not a doctrine or a method, it is realized by thinking, not thinking, and nonthinking.

.

Peace,

Ted Biringer

Zen: To Philosophize or Not to Philosphize

For those brought up with notions about Zen as something incommunicable, ineffable, or transcendent of thought and intellectual endeavors it was certainly a shock to discover that for Dogen, as Hee-Jin Kim pointed out, “The issue was not so much whether or not to philosophize as it was how to philosophize…” (Mystical Realist, p.98)

In 1975, when Hee-Jin Kim’s landmark book came on the scene, the popular view that the great Zen masters not only abstained from philosophizing but actively disparaged it was deeply entrenched. Some of the most open-minded Zen practitioners had difficulty accepting Kim’s revelation that for Dogen, the “philosophic enterprise was as much the practice of the bodhisattva way as was zazen.” (Mystical Realist, p.98) A certain amount of skepticism regarding this notion is definitely understandable. However, for the better part of 40 years Kim’s assertion has not met one serious challenge; indeed, his argument has been repeatedly validated and reinforced by evidence and studies in every related field—yet popular delusions persist.

The lines of Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, “To realize the buddha-dharma is to realize your self. To realize your self is to forget your self” is often cited out of context as if it presents a complete view of Zen practice—to forget the self. As we shall see, this is just one example of how Dogen is frequently a victim of “anthologies.” For now, we will just point out that one thing “forgetting the self” implies in this context is taking up, or embracing, and being taken up by, or being embraced by all the many things of the world:

To realize the buddha-dharma is to realize your self. To realize your self is to forget your self. To forget your self is to be actualized by the many things. To be actualized by the many things is to allow the body-and-mind of your self and the body-and-mind of other than your self to fall away. All traces of enlightenment fall away, and the falling away of all traces of enlightenment is continuous.
Ted Biringer

To be “actualized by the many things” is a totally inclusive statement. Nothing is to be disregarded or cut off; not specific activities, certain kinds of desires, or particular thoughts, and certainly not emotional involvement, systematic study, or critical and intellectual endeavors. In the condition that Dogen calls, forgetting the self, spiritual practices like zazen (sitting meditation), formal teaching, and ceremonial participation, simply cannot be singled out, or divided from “the many things.” To divide spiritual practice from mundane activity is to instantly “re-member” the self; to revere meditation above philosophizing is not possible in the condition in which “all traces of enlightenment” have “fallen away.”

It is in the context of what Dogen here describes as being “actualized by the many things” that Hee-Jin Kim’s assertion that the “philosophic enterprise was as much the practice of the bodhisattva way as was zazen” applies. According to Dogen, practice and enlightenment is either authentic, or it is not; in the former nothing is excluded, in the latter nothing is included.

Zazen is only true zazen when performed in and as authentic practice and enlightenment, so too philosophizing. Hence, it is clear that the authenticity of “philosophizing” is not inherently concerned with a particular system or philosophy, but with the quality or conditions of the philosophic process itself. This means, for one thing, that Dogen should never be considered as expressing himself from within a particular theoretical system of thought or applying any kind of conceptual formula.

[Moments] when the truth is realized that the arising of mind is the arising of miscellaneous real dharmas and the truth is realized that the passing of mind is the passing of miscellaneous real dharmas, are all moments when the mind is expounding and moments when the nature is expounding.
Shobogenzo, Sesshin-sessho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

In short, “action” according to Dogen, is not different from thought and perception, but identical with them. Again, forcing Shobogenzo (or any literary work) into a formula necessitates cutting out elements that effectively ruin its integrity, just as cutting out a single piece of the Mona Lisa would ruin it. As Dogen goes on to explain, people make this mistake by speculating about what the “truth of Buddhist patriarchs should not include,” and failing to “think critically about whether or not they have penetrated the great truth.”

Nevertheless, ordinary folk who do not penetrate the mind and do not master the nature, in their ignorance, not knowing “expounding the mind and expounding the nature” and not knowing discussion of the profound and discussion of the fine, say, and teach to others, that the truth of the Buddhist patriarchs should not include these things. Because they do not know “expounding the mind and expounding the nature” as “expounding the mind and expounding the nature,” they think of “expounding the mind and expounding the nature” as expounding about the mind and expounding about the nature. And this is mainly because they do not think critically about whether or not they have penetrated the great truth.
Shobogenzo, Sesshin-sessho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

For Dogen, then, to philosophize is as much the practice of Zen as zazen, but there are two types of philosophizing. One type professes to understand and explain the world as it is; the other endeavors to transform the world into what it could and should be. Abstract speculators and religious cults are those involved with the former. Calling them “scholars that count words,” Dogen portrays these as people that see their own reflections in the images of Buddhism, rather than reality through those images, thus leading them to characterize reality with their own puny qualities; vague, difficult, boring, mundane, insignificant, and inflexible. Confusing their own ego-creations for reality, they conceive a vast, mysterious world, unconcerned and impervious to human influence. The philosophic enterprise based on such a vision of reality naturally tends toward escape and oblivion; advocating conformity and resignation such philosophies preach the “wisdom” of accepting powerlessness and revere the “serenity” of emotional and intellectual detachment.

Dogen’s view of what constitutes an authentic Zen application of the philosophic process is best illustrated by his own example; the cosmological vision of Shobogenzo. Symbolized by the Lotus Sutra’s flower of Dharma “turning and being turned,” the universe of Dogen’s vision is not unconcerned, vague, or inflexible, but intimate, lucid, and compliant. In contrast to speculating on the hazy, ego-centric ideas and abstract notions of the conceptual theorist, the authentic philosophic process is an intimate engagement of the true person and the “clear-clear” forms of the immediate present in the dynamic coordination of actualizing the universe (genjokoan). Speculation pictures the world through shadows of what is past, Shobogenzo pictures through the world continuously advancing into novelty. The philosophic enterprise demonstrated by Shobogenzo, like all authentic philosophic enterprises, is expressed in the language of myth, the only language that is potent enough to reveal the nature and dynamics of what is of the truest concerns to human beings, that which Zen calls the great matter of life and death.

Peace,
Ted

Dogen On: As Our Eye Reveals Them

As Our Eye Reveals Them...

.

The Great Earth with all Its hills and streams is the appearance of things as our Eye reveals them.
Shobogenzo, Ganzei, Hubert Nearman

A perception, in Dogen’s writings, is a unification of perceiver and perceived. A concept, on the other hand, is an abstract notion, an idea derived through speculating about perceptions. Perceptions and concepts are both dharmas, real and useful aspects of the world. Perception is what unites us with the world; concepts are tools for acquiring general forms of knowledge and developing systems to organize information and activity. Throughout Shobogenzo, Dogen emphasizes the importance of understanding and remaining attentive to the differences between the two; by uniting perceiver and perceived, perceptions eliminate divisions between subject and object; concepts are produced by abstracting, thus dividing, qualities from dharmas. Concepts are derived from the components of perception (perceiver and perceived) and therefore cannot stand in as substitutes for perceptions.

To clarify, when we perceive a flower, for example, “perceiving the flower” is exactly “what” we are, and “the perceived flower” is exactly “what” it is. The flower here and now perceived is precisely what is perceived as a flower. “Here and now perceived” is our perceiving the flower as a flower; “perceiving the flower as a flower” is the flowers appearance before our eyes. Perceiving the flower is not our “present experience,” it is “what” we are; the perceived flower is not something “previously unperceived,” it is “what” it is. Perception unites subject and object, thus in perceiving a flower, both “we” and “the flower” are the “what” of perception; “present experience,” “previously unperceived,” and similar qualities are concepts – abstract notions speculatively derived from the actual “what” of experience.

What is looked at in this way is what the threefold world really is, and this threefold world is just as we perceive it to be. The threefold world is not one’s fundamental being, nor is it our present existence, nor is it something that newly arises, nor is it something born from causes and conditions, and it is beyond anything that has a beginning, a middle, or an end. There is the threefold world that is left behind and there is the threefold world of the here and now. This is the mutual meeting of a marionette with a marionette. It is the bringing forth and nurturing of kudzu and wisteria vines. The threefold world of the here and now is what we see as the threefold world. ‘What we see’ means our seeing the threefold world as a threefold world. ‘Seeing it as a threefold world’ refers to the threefold world as it manifests right before us, as we manifest it right before us, and as our spiritual question manifests right before our very eyes. We all innately have the ability to make the threefold world be the vehicle for the arising of our spiritual intention, our practice and training, our realizing enlightenment, and our experiencing nirvana.
Shobogenzo, Sangai Yuishin, Hubert Nearman

...

Peace,

Ted

Dogen and Huike on The Sole Ancestor

Dogen and Huike on The Sole Ancestor
-
If you completely comprehend the clear purity of the mind-source, then all vows are fulfilled, all practices are completed, all is accomplished. You are no longer subject to states of being. For those who find this body of reality [dharmakāya], the numberless sentient beings are just one good person: the one person who has been there in accord with This through a million billion aeons.
~Huike (Second Zen Ancestor in China) Zen Dawn, J.C. Cleary, p.39-40
-
It is not that there is a person inside, for the Ocean of one’s being is not some abode of a worldly person nor is it someplace beloved by a saintly person; it is one’s Self alone within the Ocean of one’s being. It is simply our constantly and openly giving expression to the Dharma.
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman
-
Also, you need to hear that the whole of the great earth is your own Dharma Body. That which seeks to know what we truly are is the resolute heart of someone who is truly alive. Even so, those who see what their True Self is are few. Only a Buddha alone knows this Self. Others who are off the Path, such as non-Buddhists, vainly take their unreal, false self to be their True Self. The Self that Buddhas speak of is synonymous with the whole of the great earth. Thus, whether we know or do not know our True Self, in either case, there is no ‘whole of the great earth’ that is other than our True Self.
Shobogenzo, Yui Butsu Yo Butsu, Hubert Nearman
-
Peace,
Ted

The Sole Purpose of Zen Buddhism

The Sole Purpose of Zen Buddhism
-
What was given to him was given solely for the purpose that he might master the wise perception of a Buddha. It was solely the wise perception of a Buddha which he was to master—and without being averse to contemplative meditation and diligence in practice.
Shobogenzo, Butsudo, Hubert Nearman
-
The fact that Dogen’s teaching is solely concerned with mastering the “wise perception of a Buddha” is a touchstone that keeps us grounded and centered in our study. Dogen’s elucidation of Buddhist doctrines and methods are given solely for the purpose that we might master the wise perception of a Buddha. He is not interested in our acquiring knowledge, learning correct ceremonial or ritualistic forms, or understanding the authentic truths or spiritual practices of Buddhism. Like all authentic Zen masters, Dogen’s task is not at all concerned with teaching people how to be Buddhists, but only with teaching them how to be Buddhas; to that end alone does Dogen make use of Buddhist doctrine and methodology.

-

Peace,

Ted

Maha Prajna Paramita

Greetings friends,

Dogen fans may be interested in the latest post on our sister blog (The Flatbed Sutra Zen Blog)

Zen, Emptiness, and Understandable Explanations

Peace,
Ted

Dogen, Shakyamuni, & Dualistic Views of Language, Thinking, & Reason

Our Highest Ancestor in India, Shakyamuni Buddha, once said, “The snowcapped Himalayas are a metaphor for the great nirvana.” You need to know that He is speaking metaphorically about something that can be metaphoric. ‘Something that can be metaphoric’ implies that the mountains and nirvana are somehow intimately connected and that they are connected in a straightforward manner. When He uses the term ‘snow-capped Himalayas’, He is using the actual snowcapped Himalayas as a metaphor, just as when He uses the term ‘great nirvana’, He is using the actual great nirvana as a metaphor.
Shobogenzo, Hotsu Mujo Shin, Hubert Nearman

Without seeing through the dualism of instrumentalist views of language, an accurate understanding of Zen remains impossibly out of reach. Any presuppositions (conscious or not) about words being mere signifiers, pointers, surrogates, or substitutes for “real things” (non-words) apart from themselves is inherently dualistic, thus prohibitive of the nondual experience of Zen practice-enlightenment.

The “blue sky” does not exist apart from the human mind. Even if we admit, for argument sake, that “waves” of certain lengths and frequencies exist independently of human beings, the actual experience (thus existence) of a “blue sky” could only arise if such waves interact with a human mind through a human eye. Thus, the reality of the blue sky and the words blue sky, are both produced by the exact same process with the exact same material: human experience. All “dharmas” (things, beings, events, etc.) are real particular things insofar as they are distinguished as particular things through human perception; the more distinctly they are perceived, the more real they are. We only perceive a blue sky insofar as we distinguish “blue sky” from “not-blue sky” (or “other than” blue sky). The words “blue sky” (and all their verbal and symbolic equivalents) are actualized simultaneously with the human perception of the “blue sky.”

Dogen says that Shakyamuni is speaking “about something that can be metaphoric” to emphasize that words are only significant insofar as they both contain, and are contained by (intimately connected) the real dharmas they describe (depict, portray, present). When Shakyamuni “uses the term” he is using “the actual snowcapped Himalayas” and “the actual great nirvana.” In the same way, we can only say “blue sky” meaningfully if we use the actual blue sky – the actual blue sky only becomes “actual” by being distinguished (thus, marked, or “named”) with the words “blue sky” (and their equivalents). Thus, the words (“blue sky,” “Himalayas,” and “nirvana”) are the actual dharmas (“blue sky,” “Himalayas,” and “nirvana”). For Dogen, any word that signifies or points to “something else” or “other than” is not an actual word (a real dharma); it is only a conceptual construct, an abstract notion. “A finger pointing to the moon” is not the same as “a finger pointing to something else,” nor is “the moon being pointed to by a finger” the same as “the moon not being pointed to by a finger.” The “actual moon” of “a finger pointing to the moon” is real insofar as it is “the moon” that is “pointed to by a finger.”

The term, or name of a dharma is its nature, its life; a dharma becomes a dharma (is actualized) by its being distinctly perceived, distinguished (described, discerned, marked, named, etc.). This is one of the reasons that Shakyamuni is the expression of Buddha nature in Dogen’s works; Dharma (truth) is expression (e.g. understandable explanations). That Dharma is “expression” means that Dharma is, only and always, “intelligible” (knowable, or comprehendible to the mind); the Buddha or ancestor is the being that “enlightens delusion,” “forms, emptiness,” or “fashions intelligibility” from the chaotic stream of ceaseless experience. The Buddha ancestor utilizes enlightened vision to transform general randomness, to actualize this particular thing from “thusness,” that particular meaning from “suchness.”

The view that the significance or meaning of a word exists somewhere outside of the word itself is based on the same kind of dualism that divides emptiness from form, mind from body, existence form time, and appearance from reality. Like all the myriad dharmas, the true “form” and the true “essence” of a word are never construed as two different things in Dogen’s Zen. True words, like all expressions of truth, are only and always fashioned by the creative force of the true human being (Buddha nature). The significance of a word, then, does not, and cannot exist in some “external world” apart from itself. For Dogen, a word (form) and its meaning (essence) constitute one and the same dharma (thing, being, event, etc.) as nondualistically as body-mind, existence-time, and practice-enlightenment.

Advocates of “correspondence” theories conceive of words as mere artificial (or provisional) “representatives” or “surrogates” of “real dharmas” that exist in the outside world (e.g. things, beings, events, etc.) or in the mind (e.g. ideas, concepts, thoughts, etc.). For such theorists, a word can have only one definite meaning, the one meaning that “corresponds” to a reality that exists “objectively” apart from the word. Dogen (and Buddhism) denies the nondual basis of such theories; for him the meaning or significance of a word is totally unique to its dharma-position. That is to say, the meaning of a word is unique to each actual instance of its appearance, depending on its particular context as well as the particular hearer or reader.

The speculative theorist that fails to see that the “dictionary meaning” of a word is an abstraction, and therefore general, and approximate, will fail to perceive the significance of Dogen’s (hence, Zen’s) expressions. For Dogen, a real word is a real dharma, and like all dharmas, its reality (in existence-time), and thus its meaning, is unique to each and every actual instance of its occurrence. Also like all dharmas, each word is a particular manifestation of the totality of existence-time – when one word is illumined, the rest of existence-time is darkened (thus present, potent). Herein lies the reason for the centrality of language in Dogen’s Zen; to Buddha ancestors a word, as a dharma-position, is a focal point of existence-time to which all sounds, forms, voices, expressions, and meanings radiate out from and return to – in short, a true word encompasses and is encompassed by the infinite potential of Buddha nature, and is therefore charged with an infinite potential of meanings.

Words, then, like all real forms (dharmas), display the attributes of real existents (a temporal form, or body) insofar as they are actually perceived (experienced) by human beings. True “perception” being synonymous, in Dogen’s Zen, with true activity, expression, and understanding, to perceive a word is to actualize the koan (genjokoan) here and now – “I” make the word what it is, the word makes me what “I” am. Thus, we can sense the wonder and urgency of Hee-Jin Kim’s words in, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, as he forcefully reiterates one of the central principles resonating throughout his works; listen again to Kim’s refrain that so often goes unheeded:

Language, thinking, and reason constitute the key to both zazen and koan study within Dogen’s praxis-oriented Zen. The koan’s and zazen’s function is not excoriate and abandon the intellect and its words and letters, but rather to liberate and restore them in the Zen enterprise. In short, enlightenment is not brought about by direct intuition (or transcendent wisdom) supplanting the intellect and its tools, but in and through their collaboration and corroboration in search of the expressible in deeds, words, and thoughts for a given situation (religious and secular). Zazen and koan in this respect strive for the same salvific aspiration of Zen. The language of the old-paradigm koan (kosoku koan) becomes a living force in the workings of the koan realized in life (genjo koan). With their reclaimed legitimacy in Zen, language, thinking, and reason now enable practitioners to probe duality and nonduality, weigh emptiness, and negotiate the Way. Method and realization, rationality and spirituality, thinking and praxis, go hand-in-hand in Dogen’s Zen. Such is “the reason of words and letters” (monji no dori).
Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, p.78

Please note that Kim does not deny the significance of satori or kensho (direct intuition) or suggest it be replaced by the “intellect and its tools” (i.e. language, thinking, and reason), but that the two need to collaborate and corroborate. Indeed, one obvious inconsistency of views asserting the nonessential or provisional role of “words and letters” is that the very “reason” of such assertions, which implicitly posit the irrationality of Zen (hence Buddhism), deny the possibility of their own validity.

Now, it is the infinite potential of meaning inherent to words that necessitates, and makes possible, the “search” and “striving”, in Kim’s terms, for the expressible and salvific expressions (deeds, words, and thoughts) of Dogen’s “praxis-oriented Zen.” As long as words are confined to the general meanings of dictionaries, they remain abstract potentials, possibilities so broad (infinite) that any significance they may have could only be considered vague at best. This is exactly similar to the state of sense experience in the absence of any organization or arrangement. And, just as the Buddha ancestor “fashions a universe” and “fashions a self” with the selection and arrangement of “bits and pieces” of existence-time, so she fashions expressions of truth with the selection and arrangement of words. Just as “bits and pieces” of existence-time only become real, particular things (dharmas) when they are actually fashioned, formed, or pictured, so the infinite potential of words only achieve real, specific meaning when they are actually fashioned, formed, or expressed.

Dogen’s profound insight into the infinite potential of words and letters would also helps to account for his apparent disfavor of systematic or formulaic classifications and devices. As mentioned previously, Dogen’s lack of any explicit use of Zen devices (e.g. Five Ranks, Positions of Host and Guest, etc.) in his own works probably has less to do with his rejection of their validity as expressions of truth and more to do with his view of the infinite potential language, and the absolute uniqueness of every true expression of Buddha nature.

Peace,
Ted

Zazen, Shakyamuni & The Lotus Sutra in Dogen's Zen

The Lotus Sutra in Dogen's Zen

.

The Lotus Sutra, hailed by Dogen as the “Sutra of Sutras,” being the greatest (most complete) expression of truth (Dharma), forms the hub of his vision of existence-time (Buddha). The Lotus Sutra is thus qualified by Dogen because it presents (makes present) a lucid, definitive, and (most importantly) comprehensive picture (image, form, expression) of the whole Buddha Dharma, from “before the empty eon” to “after the kalpa ending conflagration.”

.

In its comprehensive treatment of Buddhas and Buddha realms, the nature and activities of Bodhisattvas, the significance of similes and parables, and graphic depictions of the meaning of expedient means, various vehicles and individual capacities, the Lotus Sutra achieves a vision that not only reconciles the many and various aspects of the Dharma, which otherwise might appear inconsistent, it reveals their interdependence. Being inclusive of the entire lifespan of Buddha (the totality of existence-time), the meaning, manner, and affirmation of “opening up, manifesting, awakening, and entering” into Buddhahood of all beings (i.e. the certain affirmation of universal salvation), the Lotus Sutra clearly and unequivocally illumines the eternal connection of “Buddhas” and “ordinary beings” that appears as a gap to the deluded eye, and is often depicted only vaguely in less complete expressions, thus making the connection seem hazy, obscure, or mysterious.

“The content of the buddha lands of the ten directions” is the “sole existence” of the “Flower of Dharma.” Herein, “all the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times,” and beings of anuttara samyaksaṃbodhi, have [times of] turning the Flower of Dharma, and have [times of] the Flower of Dharma turning. This is just the state in which “original practice of the bodhisattva way” neither regresses nor deviates. It is the “wisdom of the buddhas, profound and unfathomable.” It is the “calm and clear state of samadhi,” which is “difficult to understand and difficult to enter.” As Buddha Manjusrī, it has the “form as it is” of “buddhas alone, together with buddhas,” which is “the great ocean” or “the buddha land.” Or as Buddha Sakyamuni, it is “appearance in the world” in the state of “Only I know concrete form, and the buddhas of the ten directions are also like that.” It is the “one time” in which he “desires to cause living beings” to “disclose, to display, to realize, and to enter,” [saying] “I and buddhas of the ten directions are directly able to know these things.”
Shobogenzo, Hokke-ten-hokke, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

The inclusion in this passage of the symbolic images of the Lotus Sutra as “equivalents” with symbolic images common to the literature of Zen (most importantly Dogen’s own writings) is typical throughout the entire Shobogenzo. When he describes the Sutra’s symbolism as “form as it is,” “buddhas alone, together with buddhas,” “the great ocean,” “the buddha land,” etc. Dogen conveys a new significance to both symbols. For example, “as Buddha Shakyamuni, it is ‘appearance in the world,’” succeeds in expanding the connotations of both “Shakyamuni” and “appearance in the world.”

Here we want to stress two important points about Dogen’s use of the Lotus Sutra; first, all the fascicles of Dogen’s Shobogenzo are centered on a single myth (Buddhism); second, that single myth is most clearly portrayed (so far as Dogen is concerned) by the Lotus Sutra. The significance of this cannot be over emphasized; if we come to terms with Dogen’s understanding of the Lotus Sutra, that is, when we understand how he read it, the difficulty of the symbolism of Shobogenzo is enormously reduced.

Key to Dogen’s view is that, for him, the Lotus Sutra (hence, the Buddha Dharma) is a single unified vision; thus, is totally consistent. As the central and primary expression of the Buddha, it is the source of all the Buddhist sutras, shastras (treatises), Zen records, expressions of truth, and finally, all real dharmas (things, beings, events, instances, etc.).

While the Lotus Sutra is the “Sutra of Sutras” from which all arises, it would be a serious mistake to think that Dogen regarded the Lotus Sutra as a complete or even uniquely exclusive form of Buddha. Such an understanding would be as narrow and misguided as the vulgar interpretations of Zen as “a special transmission outside the sutras” that Dogen so vehemently criticized.

.

The Lotus Sutra is the hub of the total form of Shakyamuni Buddha, the axis mundi, the source of all true expression; it is not the totality of Buddha nature, and certainly not the totality of expressed truth.

The comprehensiveness of the Lotus Sutra means that it can and does accommodate the totality of Shakyamuni, the body or form of Buddha (the universe); the Lotus Sutra does not exhaust the form of Buddha. The significance of an expression of truth is experienced in its connection to the source of human existence. When we truly perceive (with the Dharma-eye) a real form (an expression of truth), subject and object are united; we make it what it is, it makes us what we are.

.

This is the nature and function of zazen, the authentic practice-enlightenment of Dogen’s Zen that “re-links” (religion) us with our source, or true nature. The true nature (Buddha nature) of an expression of truth has nothing to do with biographical or historical accuracy, nor is it concerned with ontological, epistemological, cosmological, psychological, physiological, or any other “ological” fact or even possibility. One of the “miscellaneous koans” assigned to students early on in the lineage where I underwent koan training runs:

“A man raised a goose inside a bottle; set it free without breaking the glass or hurting the goose.”

After several responses to this koan were rejected over the course of a couple of weeks, I exclaimed, “It is impossible!” My teacher calmly replied, “In Zen, nothing is impossible.” While I eventually arrived at a point where the truth of the koan allowed me to free the goose, the truth of my teacher’s calm reply has been an even more treasured companion for the nearly two decades since.

Zen starts at the heart of reality and thus accommodates new horizons of truth without needing to be reformed or revised. While the circumference of enlightened vision is capable of infinite expansion, the hub of truth is not and cannot be disrupted. Authentic zazen is being seated (based, centered) within the hub of true nature which allows us to clearly perceive when, where, and how any particular form can be – in truth – accommodated, even freeing geese from bottles. The Lotus Sutra, as the axis mundi of Dogen’s Zen, is the central perspective, the pivot point from which the true nature of the whole universe expands spherically outward in the ten directions. It is the bodhi-seat, the immovable spot where Shakyamuni realizes enlightenment; it is the eternal center point from which existence-time expands infinitely outward, and to which all things return.

That is to say, from today it passes through a series of moments to tomorrow; from today it passes through a series of moments to yesterday; from yesterday it passes through a series of moments to today; from today it passes through a series of moments to today; and from tomorrow it passes through a series of moments to tomorrow.
Shobogenzo, Uji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

It is not the task of expressions of truth to convey knowledge or information, but to unite subject and object, to re-link us to our source. Expressions of truth do not instill wisdom, they evoke it. If we listen to a piece by Mozart with an ear to understand its meaning, we will not understand it nor truly hear it; we will fail just as surely if we attempt to not understand it. Only when we forget (cast off) our “self” as well as “Mozart” (the body-mind of self and other) will we truly hear and understand.

The true form (shape, body, appearance, sound) of a dharma (thing, being, event) and its true nature (essence, meaning, significance) are not two separate things. Expressions of truth are not signifiers of truths or realities apart from themselves; they are not simply “fingers pointing at the moon.” The meaning (nature, essence) of an expression of truth is not in its relation to the “real things” in the “external world” to which it “points.” Even in an actual instance of “a-finger-pointing-at-the-moon” the finger is as essential as the moon; the expression, “the-moon,” is an entirely different dharma (form, thing).

In fashioning expressions of truth, Buddhas and Buddha ancestors will readily use whatever “material” the world makes available, including philosophical concepts, historical facts, fictitious beings, and anything else they can appropriate; the final product however, may well have nothing to do with any of those materials. If it is an authentic expression of truth it will be a novel creation with intrinsic significance to the central truth of human life and death.

.

Peace,

Ted

Many know about zazen - Few know zazen

All Zen Buddhists know about zazen, but few actually know zazen.

Near the end of Himitsu-shōbōgenzō, Butsu-kōjō-no-ji, Dogen says:

In the house of the Buddha there is Bodhisattva Regarder of the Sounds of the World. Few people have not seen her but very few people know her.
Himitsu-shōbōgenzō (Secret Shōbōgenzō), Butsu-kōjō-no-ji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

This Bodhisattva is, of course, Avalokitesvara, one of the most important Bodhisattvas in Buddhism and the great hero of the Heart Sutra.

Clearly, as Dogen says, “Few people have not seen her.” However, what does Dogen mean by, “but very few people know her”? The reason that millions know about her but very few know her is the same reason that all Zen Buddhists know about zazen, but few actually know zazen.

[Note: This failure to “know” has nothing to do with what Zen calls “not knowing” or “don’t know mind” – if we don’t know Avalokitesvara or zazen we certainly don’t know “not knowing.”]

"Zazen" is a term that is often taken for granted, glossed over, and misconstrued. We all know that the literal translation of, “zazen” is “seated meditation,” but what is that? That is the same as saying “2+2” is “4” - which is only saying the same thing in two ways; both of which are generalizations. We may understand the terms, but apart from "knowing" what they actually stand for (e.g. “4 apples,” “2 dogs plus 2 cats,” etc.) the terms are meaningless. There is no such thing as a “general” 2+2, or a “general” 4, 5, or 6; there are only particular, actual things that posses such qualities.

A general “seated meditation” is as non-existent as a general “zazen.” Defining zazen as “non-thinking,” “casting off body-mind,” etc. is no more meaningful than defining 4 as 1+1+1+1, or 7-3 Only particular, actual instances of zazen have actual significance.

.

So how do we “know” Avalokitesvara or zazen? We know them by becoming aware of their reality in actual experience. We come to know 4 (or 2+2) by experiencing its reality within actual, particular things of the world that possesses its quality; our hands are 2, Mommy’s hands are 2, together there are 4 hands, and on it goes. We come to know zazen and Avalokitesvara by experiencing its reality within actual, particular things of the world that possesses its quality; looking at forms with the whole body-mind, and listening to sounds with the whole body-mind we experience them directly – this is knowing zazen, knowing Avalokitesvara.
.
Dogen describes this condition as that in which the “body-mind” of “self and other than self” is cast off. The Zen masters tell us that this experience first occurs (kensho, or kenbutsu) when we actually awaken to our own true nature. The significance of this kind of knowing is demonstrated by the fact that all the great Zen masters are in agreement that it is essential to authentic Zen practice-enlightenment. Such an awakening is, in Dogen's terms, “that one experience that we cannot omit.”
.
To clarify, consider Dogen’s criticism of Zen Master Soko (Daie). There is a widespread misunderstanding among Zen students, especially those identified with the “Soto” tradition, that Dogen’s refutation of Soko’s teaching was based on his association with Zen koans. This claim is based on a simplistic grasp of the issue at best, at worst it is a blatant falsehood designed to detract us from the real issues. Dogen’s rejection of Soko’s teaching was based on the criteria he always used to verify or deny expressions of truth: authentic practice-enlightenment.

.

Regardless of the “Urban Legend” surrounding his view of Soko, Dogen’s rejection was due to the fact that Soko had failed to realize that one vital experience. Dogen’s own words on the matter are clear and straightforward:
.
Even though time and time again Tandō aimed at opening Sōkō up, the latter ultimately kept missing that one experience, and there is no way of compensating for that, for one cannot omit that experience.
Shobogenzo, Jishō Zammai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

There are “certified Dharma heirs” that spend a lot of time and energy minimizing this experience, a few even suggest it might be “expendable” (some deny such an experience exists), but as we see, that is definitely not Dogen’s take. By why does Dogen (like the classic Zen masters) say that this is one experience that cannot be omitted? Because without it we can’t “know” zazen (and Avalokitesvara); zazen will simply be a general notion, a concept – and there is simply no way to practice a concept of zazen no matter how long we “just sit” in the lotus position.
.
In his criticism of Soko, Dogen not only criticizes his failure to experience kensho, he criticizes Soko’s failure to penetrate the sayings (koans) of the Buddha ancestors as well as the words and ways of Buddhas. Dogen was a Dharma-heir of both the Rinzai and Soto Zen traditions and his teachings demand authentic awakening as well as a thorough study of the sutras and koans. In his critique of Soko, he insists on the need to both, awaken or, “intuitively grasp what the Buddha Dharma is” and to study and learn, or, “to intellectually understand what the Buddha Dharma is.”

Sōkō did not thoroughly explore his own statement, “That is precisely what Sōkō is suspicious of,” nor did he drop it off, or break it open, or give rise to the Great Doubt, or break through that doubting.
…
It is so pitiful how he failed to understand what the Ancestors of the Buddha were saying to him in their talks and writings. He did not grasp that to study and train is to awaken to one’s True Self. He did not hear that to delve deeply into the writings of myriad generations is to come to realize what that Self truly is.

Without proper study, there are errors like these and there is self-deception like his.

Because this was the way ‘Meditation Master’ Sōkō was, in his assembly there was not a single disciple, or even half a one, who had a trustworthy nose ring, but there were many who were pretend monks.

Failure to intuitively grasp what the Buddha Dharma is and failure to intellectually understand what the Buddha Dharma is are both just like this. Beyond any question, novice trainees here and now should explore the Matter in detail with their Master. Do not be negligent out of pride.
Shobogenzo, Jishō Zammai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Until we actually manage to cast off the body-mind of “self and other,” we do not know zazen, which means we do not know the “state of Buddha.” If we do not know the state of Buddha, we can certainly not know the “ascendant state of Buddha.” Here we come to the only point in Dogen’s Zen where we can in any way say that the experience of kensho, or kenbutsu (the initial experience of enlightenment) is of “minor” significance; it is minor insofar as it is only the beginning of authentic Zen practice-enlightenment. In short, it is “major” in that if we omit it we cannot truly realize Zen, it is “minor” in that it is only the true start of Zen.

Thus we come to the real blood and guts of a lifetime of Zen practice-enlightenment: the ascendant state of Buddha.

Great Master Gohon of Tōzan said, “You should know that there is the matter of the ascendant state of buddha. When you know of the matter of the ascendant state of buddha, you will truly possess the means to speak.”

“The means to speak” is the means to turn the wheel of Dharma. In truth, if we do not know the matter of the ascendant state of buddha, we idly stagnate without penetrating to and getting free of the state beyond buddha. If we do not penetrate it and get free, we do not transcend the worlds of demons. Once we find the Way that arrives at buddha, we leave the area of the common person immediately. The people who have mastered this Way are few. Still, just because we are unable to know it, we should not, so saying, leave it at that. If, with a true will, we learn in practice under good counselors who have truly illuminated [the Way], we will be able to attain it without fail.
Himitsu-shōbōgenzō (Secret Shōbōgenzō), Butsu-kōjō-no-ji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

.

Peace,

Ted

If Zazen is the Medium, What is the Vehicle?

If Zazen is the Medium, What is the Vehicle?

...

Because it furnishes effective, methodical training for the development and utilization of the Dharma-eye, zazen (and its synonyms) in Dogen’s writings, is the channel, or medium, through which religion (Dharma) is transmitted...

.

Because they contain and convey the “words and ways” of Buddhas and ancestors and have “carried” them “into nirvana” the Buddhist Sutras (scriptures) is the vehicle of religion (Dharma).

Practicing what the Buddha taught means making the words and ways of all the Buddhas manifest. Because this is what Buddhas and Ancestors have done for the sake of Buddhas and Ancestors, the Teachings have been accurately passed on for the sake of the Teachings. This is what the turning of the Wheel of the Dharma is. From within the Eye of this Wheel, these Teachings have caused all the Buddhas and Ancestors to manifest and to be carried into nirvana.
Shobogenzo, Bukkyo, Hubert Nearman

The Buddhist Sutras, for Dogen, are “the entire universe itself,” which of course, includes the records and koans of Zen. Revelatory of the nondual (unified) reality of human existence, the Buddhist Sutras are the vehicle of the Buddha Dharma, and are the key to the authentic practice-enlightenment of Zen. So, authentic zazen is the channel, or medium of religion, the Sutras are the vehicle of religion, therefore, religion (the Buddha Dharma, in Dogen’s terms) is equally zazen and sutras. As always in Dogen's writings, this unity does not mean “undifferentiated oneness,” but nondual interdependence; authentic zazen is always inclusive of the sutras, the sutras are always inclusive of zazen.

“Practicing” (authentic zazen) “what the Buddha taught” (the sutras) “means making the words and ways of all the Buddhas manifest” (actualizing the enlightened vision expressed in the Sutras). Making the words and ways (contained and conveyed by the sutras) manifest in the world here and now is to actualize the Dharma. It is then, through the words and letters, which are never apart from the whole of existence-time, that Zen practitioners may come to know the “one-taste” reality of Zen. Thus Dogen wrote:

The monastics of future generations will be able to understand one-taste Zen (ichimizen) based on words and letters, if they devote their efforts to spiritual practice by seeing the universe through words and letters, and words and letters through the universe.
Tenzo kyokan, trans. Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, p.60
.

For when we encounter the sutras we encounter the Buddhas and Ancestors.

.
The one who encounters the twelve divisions of the Scriptural Teachings encounters the Buddhas and Ancestors, and the one who speaks of the Buddhas and Ancestors speaks of the twelve divisions of the Scriptural Teachings.
Shobogenzo, Bukkyo, Hubert Nearman

.

Peace,

Ted

Zazen, Enlightenment, and the one "Religion" of Dogen

As a young prince, Shakyamuni perceived all the various dharmas as existing separately from the rest of the universe, himself, and from each other. Some innate capacity drew him to believe in the possibility that there was something much grander to the myriad diversity of the world than he could see. This possibility culminated in sincere aspiration to discover the truth. After much time and various approaches, his endeavors came to fruition and he experiential realized the integration of the infinite variety of dharmas into the one body-mind of Buddha nature.

According to one account, following this realization Shakyamuni exclaimed, “How wonderful, all beings are the Tathagata (“thus come one,” Buddha), only their delusions and preoccupations keep them from testifying to this truth.” Technically, such an exclamation does not “say” anything that had not been said many times to Shakyamuni (who was thoroughly versed in the Upanishads) before; its meaning, however, was vastly different for Shakyamuni – it was an expression of personal verification. This is not to say that the teachings of Hinduism or the Upanishads is the same as (or different from) Buddhism; the point is that learning truth and verifying truth are two totally different processes with two vastly different results. As the Zen tradition eventually came to epitomize, there are two distinct forms of religion or spiritual wisdom, one that is communicated from institutions to individuals, and one that is communicated from Buddha to Buddha.

In Dogen’s Zen, no religion or spiritual wisdom is or can be communicated from an institution to an individual. Religious institutions would be instantly eradicated but for the innate human capacity for self-doubt and self-hindrance. As such institutions are keenly, if tacitly, aware of, their very existence is dependent on men who are unable or unwilling to recognize their own identity with the one mind. If suffering (delusion) exists, such men reason (with much encouragement from institutions and their agents), it is due to some inherent flaw in humanity and cannot be ascribed to Buddha. For Dogen, of course, such reasoning is literally non-sense, as it amounts to the generalized notions of abstract speculation which has no basis in actual sense experience. Dogen does not so much refute the various systems and views that purport to classify the relative depths and types of “good and evil” as much as he avoids them altogether by refusing to grant validity to the abstractions they are based on. For Dogen, “pure light” (or “good”) is as nonexistent as “pure” awareness, consciousness, blueness, sharpness, or any other general, abstract quality.

The only true religion or spiritual wisdom is that transmitted from Buddha to Buddha; existence is experience and any religion or wisdom that is not experienced does not exist. In Buddhism such experience is referred to as enlightenment and is described as an awareness or awakening to true nature. In the Zen tradition this experience is often described in terms of death or dying.

When expressing this experience in terms of death and dying, Zen often calls it the “great” death. The “greatness” of this death lies in the fact that with this experience not only the individual Zen practitioner dies, but the entire universe itself. This total destruction of the universe is symbolized by the Buddhist version of the “apocalypse,” called the “Aeonic Ending Conflagration” in which the entirety of space and time is destroyed by fire.

As in western versions, the Buddhist apocalypse is followed by the actualization of a new world in which peace, joy, and liberation abound. The great death of Zen then, is the expression of a vision in which the individual’s experiential world of ceaselessly streaming chaotic confusion is utterly destroyed, thereby making way for a new world of ceaselessly advancing enlightenment of ongoing creativity, freedom, joy, and peace.

In this sense, the “great death” is synonymous with “great enlightenment.” Contrary to popular notions and seemingly reasonable assumptions however, great enlightenment does not imply an eradication of delusion, at least as far as Dogen is concerned:

“We do not see “not being deluded” as great realization.”
Shobogenzo, Daigo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

While one of the names for the realm in which Buddhas dwell is the “pure land,” it would be a serious error to equate the reality of this realm with the usual notions of purity:

A monk asked Joshu, “What is the Pure Land?”
Joshu said, “A puddle of piss.”
The monk said, “Can you show it to me?”
Joshu said, “Don’t tempt me.”
(James Green)

Far from some kind of empty, undifferentiated realm of bliss, detachment, or quietude, the world in which Buddhas or Buddha ancestors dwell has nothing to do with “pure” awareness or consciousness, at least insofar as that implies an absence of delusion. To be a Buddha does not mean to be separate from delusion, it means to be enlightened about delusion.

“Buddhas are enlightened about delusion; ordinary beings are deluded about enlightenment.”
Shobogenzo, Genjokoan

It is common to misunderstand enlightenment as an experience that eradicates, or at least transcends, delusion. Buddhism professes to offer a way to realize liberation from suffering. Asserting that the anguish of old age, sickness, and death is due to our deluded notions of “self,” Buddhism asserts that the experience of enlightenment, that is, awakening to our true nature, can liberate us from suffering. If enlightenment does not mean an eradication of delusion (which is the cause of suffering), how does the experience liberate us from suffering? This question, which should be an obvious one, often seems to go unexplored in Buddhist study, as well as on the cushion (in meditation) by Zen practitioners. Needless to say, Dogen exhorts us to carefully examine this important issue thoroughly. For instance, here is a passage from Shobogenzo, Daigo [Note: in the following translation, “mei” is rendered as “illusion” rather than “delusion,” as we are doing].

Let us consider this for a moment. Is a person of great enlightenment who still suffers from illusion the same as a person who is not yet enlightened? When a person of great enlightenment still suffers from illusion, is s/he making illusion by means of great enlightenment? …when we say “A person of great enlightenment still suffers from illusion,” are we to construe the addition of great enlightenment as “still suffering from illusion”? We must investigate these issues in various ways.

…we must realize that hearing the statement “A person of great enlightenment still suffers from illusion” is the ultimate penetration of our inquiry. Note that “great enlightenment” is ever joined with “still suffering from illusion.”
Shobogenzo, Daigo, Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.148

This is, undoubtedly, a complex issue, though it is not a complicated one; it demands serious investigation and consideration, but it is not paradoxical, esoteric, or enigmatic. Anyone that takes up the issue in serious study and meditation will find resolution without too much difficulty; anyone that does not take it up will not resolve it. We will meet with this issue again, for now the main point is that enlightenment and delusion are mutually interdependent and non-obstructive, that is, they are nondual, and as such are coessential and coextensive.

Before summarizing the main points of this discussion in Dogen’s terms let us briefly consider the etymology of the term “religion” which is the meaning applied to it here. “Religion” comes from the Latin; religio, which means “re-link” or “re-connect, to the source.” More specifically then, by “religion” we mean “re-linking to our source.” This should not, however, be read as implying a reconnection to some source of the past. Our source, in Buddhism, is not restricted to the past, present, or future but is inclusive of existence-time as a whole. In other words, our true source has always been, is now, and will always be our source.

Now then, for Dogen the one only true religion is communicated from Buddha to Buddha through practice-enlightenment which accompanies the casting-off (apocalypse, great death) of the body-mind of self and other (the world of chaos and confusion) which illuminates the true nature of the unity of the one mind (true self) with the myriad dharmas. Not a “stage” or “level,” but a dynamic, ongoing activity, enlightenment penetrates and illumines delusion in a continuously advancing creative process of actualization (becoming, manifestation). This “actualization” is the unified of practice-enlightenment wherein “practice” is enacted by and as “enlightenment” and “enlightenment” is realized in and through “practice.” Such is the transmission of wisdom to wisdom, of Buddhas alone together with Buddhas, face to face, mind to mind. This then, is the one and only religion recognized and advocated by Dogen, his favored term of which is, “genjokoan” (genjo; actualization, manifestation, expression, realization; koan; truth, public document or demonstration, the universe, yin-yang).

Enlightenment means illumination, that is, to illumine and be illumined by; thus illumination is seeing and being seen. This seeing and seen are activity of what Dogen calls, the Dharma-eye. The result of such illumination is not “belief” in the Dharma, or “faith” in the reality of nirvana, liberation, or a pure land, it is seeing reality directly, it is, in Zen terms, “face to face transmission,” which Dogen describes as directly “meeting Shakyamuni Buddha” (kenbutsu). This illumination (which is of course not limited to the visual sense) is actualization of true religion, the re-linking with our source which is not a static state but a ceaselessly advancing process. Although not static or fixed, it is nevertheless, the ultimate end of religion – the ever advancing casting-off of the “old world,” or the “false self” in the continuous clarification of the Dharma-eye’s ceaseless actualization of universe here and now.

There may be no human being who clearly understands this state; “it keenly avoids verbal expression.” If we express it with words, horns will appear on the head. It is simply illumination of the mind in seeing forms, and realization of the truth in hearing sounds. The mind described as “the mind to be illuminated” may be the mind of Buddha. The truth to be illuminated may be the truth of Buddha. In the truth of Buddha and in the house of Buddha, we just illuminate the mind by seeing forms and realize the truth by hearing sounds; there is nothing else at all. A state that is like this, being already in the Buddha’s truth, should preach, “To those who must be saved through this body, I will manifest at once this body and preach the Dharma.” Truly, there is no preaching of Dharma without manifestation of the body, and there can be no salvation that is not the preaching of Dharma.
Himitsu-shōbōgenzō (Secret Shōbōgenzō), Butsu-kōjō-no-ji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

Dogen uses a number of terms synonymously in referring to the authentic practice-enlightenment (shusho) of the Buddha Dharma. These include sanzen (the practice of Zen), shiryo fu-shiryo (thinking not-thinking), hi-shiryo (nonthinking), shikan-taza (sole sitting), and of course, his favorite, zazen (seated meditation). As “terms” these posses various and unique connotations, but his use of these terms are in reference to a reality that he regards as the one and only authentic activity of Buddhas and ancestors. Until the reality of zazen, sanzen, etc. are practically actualized in the everyday world they remain, at best, in a state of potential. To be practically actualized, of course, means to be actualized authentically (accurately verified and understood); Dogen’s writings are sprinkled with cautions about confusing authenticity with formality. He relates in Zazenshin, for instance, that while “everyone from the abbot to the monks” (in many temples) practice zazen and regard “sitting in zazen as the main task,” very few truly know zazen.

If [people] are not able to be illuminated by the brightness, they lack this state of maintenance and reliance and they lack this belief and acceptance. This being so, even since ancient times, few people have know that zazen is zazen. On the mountains of the great kingdom of Song today, leaders of top-ranking temples who do not know zazen and who do not learn of it are many; there are some who know [zazen] clearly, but they are few. In many temples, of course, times for zazen are laid down, and everyone from the abbot to the monks regards sitting in zazen as the main task. When recruiting students, too, they urge them to sit in zazen. Even so, those abbots who know [zazen] are rare.
Shobogenzo, Zazenshin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

Obviously, simply performing the physical activity of Zen practice (zazen, shikantaza, etc.), even if it is regarded as “the main task,” is nothing more than an exercise in futility as far as Dogen is concerned. To sit in zazen, regard it as the essential practice, and accurately perform the physical aspects of it (e.g. correct environment, posture, breathing, application of consciousness, etc.) is certainly not what Dogen means by authentic practice-enlightenment. In short, “sitting in zazen” is not what Dogen means by “zazen.” When Dogen uses the term “zazen” he does not mean the zazen of those that do not “know zazen.” Authentic zazen is not “sitting in meditation,” it is the “state of maintenance and reliance” that is “illuminated by the brightness” of Buddhas and ancestors. This is worth insisting on because cultists and charlatans have long been proclaiming simplistic and superstitious views about “zazen” in Dogen’s name. To this day, popular “teachers” and “Zen” books advocate simplistic and superstitious “Zen practices” (citing Dogen as their authority) professing that even the “first sitting of a rank beginner” is the “complete and perfect” actualization of Buddha, or “just sitting is itself enlightenment.” It is no wonder that the followers of such “teachers” (and even the teachers themselves) often speak of zazen as something that is dull or boring. While such an expression is a clear demonstration of not knowing that “zazen is zazen,” one can only wonder how those that make such (honest?) expressions manage to attract large flocks – it seems that one could find “less boring” ways of being bored. As I heard one (authentic) teacher say, “If you are bored, it is because you are boring.” Again, boredom is a sure sign that one has not yet come to know that zazen is zazen, at least not the zazen that Dogen recommends.

When we use [this state] it is totally vigorous.
Shobogenzo, Zazenshin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

The standard state of real experience, when activated, allows no idle moment. Zazen, even if it is only one human being sitting for one moment, thus enters into mystical cooperation with all dharmas, and completely penetrates all times; and it therefore performs, within the limitless universe, the eternal work of the Buddha’s guiding influence in the past, future, and present.
Bendowa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

This sitting in zazen is not learning Zen concentration. It is simply the peaceful and joyful gate of Dharma. It is the practice-and-experience which perfectly realizes the state of bodhi. The universe is conspicuously realized, and restrictions and hindrances never reach it. To grasp this meaning is to be like a dragon that has found water, or like a tiger in its mountain stronghold.
Fukanzazngi, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross

Peace,
Ted

Essential Books for the Dogen Student

Essential Books for the student of Zen Master Dogen
(From the September edition of The Flatbed Sutra Newsletter)

By far, the best two books available in English on Dogen and his teachings

-Eihei Dogen: Mystical Realist, by Hee-Jin Kim
-Dogen: On Meditation and Thinking, by Hee-Jin Kim

Two complete translations of Shobogenzo essential for all Dogen students

-Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo (Complete translation in four volumes), by Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross
-Shobogenzo (Complete translation), by Rev. Hubert Nearman

Essential works with selected translations of Shobogenzo

-Flowers of Emptiness: Selections From Dogen’s Shobogenzo, by Hee-Jin Kim
-The Heart of Dogen’s Shobogenzo, by Norman Waddell and Masao Abe
-Rational Zen, by Thomas Cleary
-Minding Mind, by Thomas Cleary
-Shobogenzo, by Thomas Cleary
-Moon In A Dewdrop, by Kazuaki Tanahashi
-Enlightenment Unfolds, by Kazuaki Tanahashi
-How To Raise An Ox: Zen Practice as Taught in Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo, by Francis H. Cook
-Sounds of Valley Streams: Enlightenment in Dogen’s Zen, by Francis H. Cook
-Dogen’s Manuals of Zen Meditation, by Carl Bielefeldt
-Flowers Fall: A Commentary on Zen Master Dogen’s Genjokoan, by Hakuun Yasutani

Essential translations of some of Dogen’s works other than Shobogenzo

-The True Dharma Eye: Zen Master Dogen’s Three Hundred Koans, by Kazuaki Tanahashi (includes Dogen’s preface)
-Shobogenzo Shinji (Dogen’s Koan Collection), by Gudo Nishijima (does not include Dogen’s preface)
-Dogen’s Extensive Record: A Translation of the Eihei Koroku, by Taigen Dan Leighton and Shohaku Okumura
-Dogen’s Formative Years in China: An Historical Study and Annotated Translation of the ‘Hokyo-ki’ by James Kodera
-Record of Things Heard: The Shobogenzo Zuimonki, by Thomas Cleary
-The Zen Poetry of Dogen, by Steven Heine

Two Classic Zen Records related to Dogen’s Zen

-Cultivating the Empty Field: A Translation of the Record of Honzhi, by Taigen Dan Leighton (An influence on Dogen)
-Transmission of Light, by Thomas Cleary (Influenced by Dogen)

Essential scholarly studies on Dogen

-Dogen and the Koan Tradition, by Steven Heine
-Impermanence Is Buddha Nature: Dogen’s Understanding of Temporality, by Joan Stambaugh
-Did Dogen Go to China? What He Wrote and When He Wrote It, by Steven Heine
-A Study of Dogen: His Philosophy and Religion, Masao Abe

Essential scholarly studies related to Dogen

-Original Enlightenment and the Transformation of Medieval Japanese Buddhism, by Jacqueline I. Stone
-Soto Zen In Medieval Japan, by William Bodiford
-How Zen Became Zen: The Dispute Over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China, by Morten Schlutter
-The Other Side of Zen: A Social History of Soto Zen Buddhism in Tokugawa Japan, by Duncan Ryuken Williams

Other notable works related to Dogen

-Zen Classics, by Steven Heine and Dale Wright
-Zen Ritual, by Steven Heine and Dale Wright
-The Zen Canon, by Steven Heine and Dale Wright
-Zen Skin, Zen Marrow: Will the Real Zen Buddhism Please Stand Up?, by Steven Heine
-Rude Awakenings: Zen, the Kyoto School, & the Question of Nationalism, by James W. Heisig and John C. Maraldo

Peace,
Ted

The True Nature of Horror, Suffering, & Samsara?

The True Nature of Horror, Suffering, & Samsara?

Dogen’s era was a time of tremendous chaos and suffering. The whole of Japan was suffering from the instability caused by the ever shifting hierarchies that accompanied the rise of the warrior class. The fierce internal rivalry of both the nobility and the Samurai compounded the confusion and turmoil in their struggles against each other over the governing powers of Japan. Regardless of the accuracy of the evidence linking Dogen’s own familial lineage to both the warrior and noble classes, there is little doubt that many friends and family were deeply enmeshed on various sides of the struggle, some at the highest levels.

To “leave home” and live as a Buddhist monastic in 13th century Japan was much different than most of imagine today. Becoming a monk in any of the temples around Kyoto in those days certainly did not free anyone from the chaos of the secular and political worlds. All the major Buddhist temples controlled vast amounts of Japan’s wealth (mostly in the form of land grants) and were deeply entwined with the court which dictated temple leadership. At the same time, they depended on Samurai families for patronage as well as armed protection from rival sects. Moreover, Japanese Buddhist sectarianism was way beyond “bickering” or “competition” – it would be less than accurate to define the sectarian rivalry of the 12th and 13th centuries as anything less than out and out warfare. The major Buddhist institutions found it necessary to employ thousands of “warrior monks.” More “warrior” than “monk,” these monastic were trained in the martial arts and armed to the teeth. Ostensibly needed to defend the Dharma and the temple properties, they were often used as a threat to force secular decisions. And if opportunity arose they were used to kill the members of rival Buddhist sects. The “ordinary monks” often joined their brothers in the larger killing ventures that sometimes ended by burning the losing sect’s temple to the ground.

During the same period, Japan suffered a long and devastating series of catastrophes; homes, roads, and whole cities were laid waste by waves of unprecedentedly severe hurricanes and earthquakes, a succession of droughts caused a massive shortage of rice, and severe outbreaks of plague swept the entire region. In hindsight, we can all be grateful for the explosion of Buddhist creativity and reformation that directly resulted from this turbulent period of Japanese history, but for Dogen (as well as Eisai, Honen, Shinran, and Nichiren) things must have looked much different.

Even if his upbringing among the elite offered some insulation from the horror, it did nothing to shield Dogen from personal tragedy. Dogen’s lost his father at age 2 (possibly to assassination), his mother died when he was only 8, his first four Dharma teachers were dead by the time he was 17, his fifth teacher, Myozan (from whom he received transmission in Rinzai Zen), died when Dogen was 25, and his last teacher, Tendo Nyojo (from whom he received transmission in Soto Zen), died when Dogen was 28.

Any of these factors would have been enough to make Dogen intimate with the “cruel facts” of life-and-death (samsara) and the first noble truth (truth of anguish), all of them together must have seared it into his bones. And indeed, his massive corpus of writings testify to his profound intimacy with the realities of samsara and the truth of suffering – nevertheless, at first glance we may wonder how a world as full of tragedy and horror as Dogen’s could be described in the terms he used here, for example:

How could this fail to be the Land of Old Buddhas! What a joy it is that the Flower of the Dharma has existed for eon after eon! What a joy it is that there is a flowering of the Dharma day and night! Because the Flower of the Dharma continues from eon to eon and flowers throughout both day and night, even though our own bodies and minds wax and wane in strength, this very waxing and waning is also the flowering of the Dharma. Everything, just as it is, is a rare treasure, a luminous radiance, a place for training in the Way. Everything, just as it is, is great, vast, profound, and far-reaching in its influence; everything is the profound, vast, and far-reaching supreme, fully perfected enlightenment; everything is the mind’s wandering off into delusion at the turning of the Dharma Flower; everything is the mind’s awakening which turns the Flower of the Dharma; everything is truly the Flower of the Dharma setting in motion the Dharma’s flowering.

The mind’s wandering is its being turned by the Flower of the Dharma:
The mind’s awakening is its turning of the Flower of the Dharma.
If what we fully realize is like this,
It is the Flower of the Dharma setting in motion the flowering of the Dharma.

When we make offerings to It, bow in respect to It, honor It, and praise It, the Flower of the Dharma is the flowering of the Dharma.
Shobogenzo, Hokke Ten Hokke, Hubert Nearman

From the midst of ruthless, bloody political turmoil, from the midst of destruction, poverty, disease, crime, and starvation on unprecedented scales Dogen sings out, “How could this fail to be the Land of Old Buddhas! What a joy it is..!” He is not praising a “Buddha land” that is far away in space or time or a potential of the world we live in, nor is he speaking of a hidden realm behind or underlying the appearance of the very forms we see all around us. Anuttara samyaksambodhi (fully perfected enlightenment) is, Dogen unequivocally proclaims “everything, just as it is.” To clearly grasp what Dogen means, we need to honestly acknowledge what “everything, just as it is” signified in his particular circumstances. Part of that which Dogen describes as a “rare treasure” were politics of mass corruption, assassination, and execution (sometimes of entire clans, including the children); this “luminous radiance” was also inclusive of mass destruction, disease, and death. In short, what Dogen plainly said was that the very forms of war, poverty, brutality, starvation, and all the other evident evils are, just as they are, inclusive of “the profound and far-reaching supreme, fully perfected enlightenment” (anuttara samyaksambodhi).

Once we are clear about what he actually said, we can begin to discern what it means. One encouraging implication is that, if Dogen is correct, anuttara samyaksambodhi could be the “as it is” of our own era, which is certainly no more chaotic or evil-ridden to us than his was to those around him. The meaning that informs Dogen’s joy for the Buddha Land that is “everything, just as it is” is intimated in the terms, “a place for training in the Way,” and “far-reaching in its influence,” in his description from the above passage.

What “place” is Dogen referring to when he says, “a place for training in the Way”? This is certainly something worth taking up on the cushion. There is no doubt that this place has a specific coordinate in existence-time, for Dogen all places are specific places and all times are definite instances. When we find this place we will certainly be able to verify that it is truly “far-reaching in its influence.”

Peace,
Ted

Your very mind is Buddha - Reality, Existence & Experience

While we may have doubts about the fact that “our very mind is Buddha,” there is no reason for any Zen practitioner to be unaware, or unclear of the fact that this is exactly what Zen (and Mahayana) Buddhism teaches: your mind, here and now, is Buddha. Anyone can understand what this is asserting, and though we may doubt it, the Zen masters, including Dogen, tell us that having learned this, we can put it into practice and thereby verify the truth for ourselves. With this verification, Dogen assures us, we will realize that, “Your very mind is Buddha” means exactly what it says.

Since this is the way things are, “Your very mind is Buddha” means, pure and simply, that your very mind is Buddha; all Buddhas are, pure and simply, all Buddhas.
Shobogenzo, Soku Shin Ze Butsu, Hubert Nearman

The mind here and now is Buddha, is the myriad clear, clear real dharmas. In accord with the Mahayana scriptures, Dogen affirms that our “self” is nothing other than our “experience,” which is the nonduality of “experiencer/experienced.” Therefore our true self is exactly our experience here and now. While human experience is facilitated through the six sense-gates (i.e. eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind), human experience is singular (i.e. there is only one “experiencer” of all six senses). What is Buddha? Your very mind is Buddha. What is your very mind? Your very mind is your experience here and now. What is your experience here and now? Your experience consists of the sum of what you see, hear, smell, taste, feel, and think at each instance of existence-time.

Now let’s see if we can get at the significance of the Buddhist doctrine on the identity of “experience” and “existence,” and the reason for Dogen’s constant reminder of it. In Buddhism “existence” connotes “real form” (jisso) and “all dharmas” (shoho; all things, beings, events, etc.) are defined as “existent,” thus, “all dharmas are real forms” (shoho-jisso). So the significance of the teaching that existence is experience is in its illumination of the fact that anything and everything (shoho) we experience actually exists as a real form (jisso). In fact, “to really exist” is synonymous with “being experienced,” and “to experience” is synonymous with “real existence.”

One of Dogen’s classic elucidations of this is his interpretation of “sky-flowers” (kuge). Conventionally a metaphor for “unreal” or “illusory,” sky-flowers is a term for the “appearance of spots floating in the air” due to injured or diseased eyes. Dogen points out that insofar as a sentient being actually experiences these spots in the air, they are as real mountains, stones, walls, or any other dharma. To be experienced is to exist as a real form. To exist is to be an instance of existence-time (uji). To be an instance of existence-time is to be an instance of eternity – thus a “sky-flower” is as intrinsic to the real Buddha as a lotus-flower, the morning star, the Buddha ancestors, and every other real form.

The realization of the Buddhist patriarchs is perfectly realized real form. Real form is all dharmas. All dharmas are forms as they are, natures as they are, body as it is, the mind as it is, the world as it is, clouds and rain as they are, walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, as they are; sorrow and joy, movement and stillness, as they are; a staff and a whisk, as they are; a twirling flower and a smiling face, as they are; succession of the Dharma and affirmation, as they are; learning in practice and pursuing the truth, as they are; the constancy of pines and the integrity of bamboos, as they are.

Sakyamuni Buddha says, “Buddhas alone, together with buddhas, are directly able to perfectly realize that all dharmas are real form.
Shobogenzo, Shoho-jisso, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Peace,
Ted

Kensho & Kenbutsu - Dogen On Seeing True Nature (or Buddha)

Seeing True Nature (Kensho) - Seeing Buddha (Kenbutsu)

As previously noted, Dogen advocates two essential aspects of practice that he calls “study with body” and “study with mind.” Study with body, usually symbolized as “zazen,” is the aspect of practical verification (expressed and enacted in the world) and also the Dharma-gate through which practitioners initially awaken to true nature: kensho (seeing true nature), or Dogen’s preferred term, kenbutsu (seeing Buddha).

It is important for Zen practitioners to clearly understand that this awakening is essential, but should not thought of as an end in itself; truly, it is but a beginning. In contemporary Zen literature, this experience (when it is not avoided altogether) is often over-emphasized, under-emphasized, or simply presented in obscure terms. Because of the widespread confusion about the significance of this important aspect of Dogen’s teaching (and Zen generally) it may be worth making a few comments in an effort to help clarify the issue. First let’s consider these words from Shobogenzo:

Those who have not yet given rise to this enlightened Mind are not our Ancestral Masters.

Question 120 in the Procedures for Cleanliness in a Zen Temple states, “Have you awakened to enlightened Mind?” You clearly need to realize that what this is saying is that, in learning the Truth of the Buddhas and Ancestors, awakening to enlightened Mind is unquestionably foremost. This is the continual Teaching of the Buddhas and Ancestors. ‘To awaken’ means to have something fully dawn on you. ‘To awaken’ means to have something fully dawn on you. This does not refer to the great, ultimate awakening of a Buddha.
Shobogenzo, Hotsu Bodai Shin, Herbert Nearman

Here we can clearly see what this awakening “means” to Dogen, and see that he considers this experience as being both “essential” and only a “beginning.” It means to fully grasp, understand, or realize truth in that it means, “to have something fully dawn on you.” It is essential in that this awakening is “unquestionably foremost” in learning the truth. It is only an “initial” awakening in that this experience is not the “ultimate awakening of a Buddha.”

While definitely not an end in itself, this experience is essential insofar as it is an “initial opening” (of the Dharma-eye, or Buddha-eye) that marks the true beginning of authentic Zen practice-enlightenment. In a certain sense, this is where “practicing Zen practice” (attempting, trying, experimenting, etc.) becomes “Zen practicing Zen.” Its primary importance is due to the fact that until we have truly experienced at least a glimpse of true nature (or Buddha nature), we lack the experiential “body-knowing” that is necessary to truly “see” (in the metaphoric sense) what Buddhist teachings actually mean by “Buddha nature.”

Peace,
Ted