Shobogenzo, Gabyo, Dogen (picture of a rice cake)

A commentary on Shobogenzo, Gabyo, (A Picture of a Rice Cake), Part 1Based on the translation by Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

[TEXT] Buddhas are the state of experience itself, and so things are the state of experience itself. But [buddhas and things] are beyond a single essence and beyond a single state of mind. Although [buddhas and things] are beyond a single essence and beyond a single state of mind, in the moment of experience the experience of each—without hindering the other—is realized. And in the moment of realization, the real manifestation of each—without impinging on the other—is realized. This is the very state of the ancestral founders. We must not confuse intellectual speculation about unity and diversity with their power of learning in practice. Therefore they say that “Barely to penetrate one dharma is to penetrate myriad dharmas.” “The penetration of one dharma” that they describe is not to rip away the features that one dharma has so far retained, is not to make one dharma relative to another, and is not to make one dharma absolute—to make [something] absolute is to hinder it and be hindered by it. When penetration is freed from the hindrance of “penetration,” one instance of penetration is myriad instances of penetration. One instance of penetration is one dharma, and penetration of one dharma is penetration of myriad dharmas.

[COMMENTARY] Dogen begins by first highlighting some familiar Zen axioms on the nature of nonduality in a creatively (very Dogen-like) way. The classic Zen masters assert that, "Buddhas" and "Buddhahood" (the state of experience itself) are nondual, and that, "things and Buddha" are nondual; therefore, Dogen infers, "things are the the state of experience itself" (Buddhahood).
He then clarifies for beginners (and reminds old-timers) that because of emptiness and interdependence, "nonduality" does not mean "one" or "oneness", it means "not-two." It is basic doctrine (common to all Mahayana schools) that, although two (or more) foci in a nondual relationship are co-extensive and co-eternal they are not "merged" together as a single thing, which would amount to annihlation (as Dogen indicates with his comments about "hindering"). Rather, the two foci go "beyond a single essence" by retaining their tension (and thus, their liberating potential) by maintaining their differing aspects--A snake's tail and a snake's head are not the same, yet not seperate. Therefore, "things", "Buddhas", and "the state of experience" are "beyond a single essence... beyond a single state of mind."

While every Buddhist can "understand" these fundamental teachings, Zen requires us to actually embody this state. That is to say, this is fairly straightforward, easy to "learn", and "intellectually" satisfying (in its rationality), but the authentic "power of learning in practice" goes beyond "intellectual speculation" to "the very state" itself, which is of course, "the very state of the ancestral founders."

In that state of "actualizing the fundamental point" (Genjokoan) beyond "a single essence", where "things, Buddhas, and the state of experience" are truly realized (made real) in nonduality, “to penetrate one dharma is to penetrate myriad dharmas.” Furthermore, because in nonduality "things" are not annhilated, "penetrating" them does not "rip away the features of that one dharma" (which maintains its differing aspects).

Dogen's sheer mastery of expression is nowhere more evident than in this amazingly illuminating paragraph. A Zen masters Zen master, he skillfully draws the inherent wisdom from the depths of our true nature and leads us to the inevitible truth summed up as, "When penetration is freed from the hindrance of “penetration,” one instance of penetration is myriad instances of penetration. One instance of penetration is one dharma, and penetration of one dharma is penetration of myriad dharmas."

[TEXT] An eternal buddha says, “A picture of a rice cake does not satisfy hunger.”
The patch-robed mountain monks from the present ten directions who study this expression do not form uniform ranks of bodhisattvas and sravakas. Beings with the heads of gods and faces of demons, from other [worlds in] ten directions, have skin and flesh that are [in some cases] thick and [in other cases] thin. This [expression] is past buddhas’ and present buddhas’ learning of the truth. At the same time, it is a vigorous livelihood under a tree or in a thatched hut. For this reason, in order to transmit the authentic traditions of practice, some say that the practice of studying sutras and commentaries does not instill true wisdom, and so [eternal buddhas] speak like this; and some have understood that [eternal buddhas] speak like this to assert that philosophical study of the three vehicles and the One Vehicle is never the way of saṃbodhi. In general, those who understand that an expression like this exists to assert that abstract teaching is utterly useless are making a great mistake. They have not received the authentic transmission of the ancestral founders’ virtuous conduct, and they are blind to the Buddhist patriarchs’ words. If they have not clarified this one saying, who could affirm that they have mastered the words of other buddhas? Saying “a picture of rice cake does not satisfy hunger” is like saying “the non-doing of wrong, the practice of the many kinds of right. . .” or like saying “This is something having come like this,” or like saying “I am always keen at this concrete place.” For the present, let us learn [the expression] in practice, like this. Few people have ever repeatedly looked at the words “a picture of a rice cake,” and no one at all has recognized their full extent. How do I know it? In the past, when I tested one or two stinking skinbags, they were incapable of doubt and incapable of close association. They simply seemed uninterested, as if refusing to lend an ear to a neighbor’s chatter.

[COMMENTARY] Here, Dogen brings up the saying about "a picture of a rice cake" which had long been used as a proverbial refrence to the fact that "learning the teachings" was not enough for Zen realization (Zen, of course does require one to "learn the teachings" but then it demands that the teachings be put into practice and actualized [made actual]).

He first emphasizes the perenial wisdom of this saying by indicating that it is such a fundamental expression of truth that practitioners of all ranks, in all directions "study this expression." This expression, Dogen insists, is itself "past Buddhas' and present Buddhas' learning of the truth", and simultaneously it is the actual practice of people here and now ("under a tree" and "in a thatched hut" are traditionally considered good places for Zazen). Thus, viewed in light of the previous paragraph, our present practice, the expression, the picture of a rice cake, past and present Buddhas' learning, are not-two, not one.

Dogen then lists two methods, or techniques for transmitting the "authentic traditions of practice." These authentic methods include, "the practice of studying sutras and commentaries", and "philosophical study of the three vehicles and the One Vehicle." Dogen not only advocates sutra study, and philosophical study, he goes further and says that anyone who asserts these methods are useless for teaching the "abstract teaching" (Zen) is "making a great mistake", and have not "received the authentic transmission."

Then he makes a very insightful comment, "If they have not clarified this one saying, who could affirm that they have mastered the words of other buddhas?"

Good question!

Next, Dogen gives us late-coming beginners a clue about where or how we might apply ourselves to resolving and assimilating the wisdom of this saying. Moreover, he offers us some encouraging words, "no one at all has recognized" the "full extent" of this expression! In other words, it is one of those Zen expressions that continues to yeild its treasure for a lifetime (or more).

What clues does he offer about this expression? He says it "is like" three other Zen expressions. How is it like them? Does he mean that they too are bottomless? Does he mean that all past and present Buddhas study them? Or does he mean something else? Perhaps he is suggesting that we look at all four of these sayings to see if they have anything in common...

Here are the cases Dogen refers to as, "the non-doing of wrong, the practice of the many kinds of right. . .” “This is something having come like this,” and, “I am always keen at this concrete place.”
--------
Rakuten once asked Dorin, “Just what is the major intention of the Buddha Dharma?”Dorin replied, “Refrain from all evil whatsoever; uphold and practice all that is good.”Rakuten remarked, “If that’s all there is to it, even a child of three knows how to say that!”Dorin replied, “Though a three-year-old child can say it, there are old men in their eighties who still cannot put it into practice.”Upon hearing the matter put this way, Rakuten then bowed in gratitude."Translated by Hubert Nearman
--------
Bhikkhu Huai Jang, a Dhyana Master, was born of a Tu family in Chin Chou. Upon his first visit to 'National Teacher' Hui An of Sung-Shan Mountain, he was directed by the latter to go to Ts'ao Ch'i to interview the Patriarch. Upon his arrival, and after the usual salutation, he was asked by the Patriarch whence he came. "From Sung Shan," replied he. "What thing is it (that comes)? How did it come?" asked the Patriarch."To say that it is similar to a certain thing is wrong," he retorted."Is it attainable by training?" asked the Patriarch. "It is not impossible to attain it by training; but it is quite impossible to pollute it," he replied. Thereupon, the Patriarch exclaimed, "It is exactly this unpolluted thing that all Buddhas take good care of. It is so for you, and it is so for me as well."The Sutra of the 6 th Patriarch, Hui Neng, (Translated by A.F.Price and Wong Mou-Lam)
-------------------------------------
Note: Although I am unfamiliar with the above translation, I think it is the same case that I know as:
A monk asked Tozan, "Among the three bodies [of Buddha] [1], what body does not degenerate into numbers?"Tozan said, "I am always most intimate with it." (Translated above as "I am always keen at this concrete place.")
---------
To Be Continued (I hope)...
Peace,Ted

Shobogenzo/Dogen Blog Article at MRI Tech's Blog

Hello everyone,

This blog: Buddhism Dogen and the Shobogenzo, Was included in a recent article on MRI Tech's Health Blog. (Although most of my own recent blogging has been restricted to The Flatbed Sutra Zen Blog)

Titled "50 Best Blogs for Zen-Like Living" the article is begins, "Whether you are a Zen Buddhist or just want to lead a Zen life, these 50 spiritual and simplifying blogs and community web sites will point you down the path of enlightenment..."

It goes on to include links to 50 "Zen like" blogs. Many of which are new to me.

MRI Tech's Health Blog's self description states:

"The MRI Tech's Health Blog aims to be a collaborative forum which introduces new research, ideas, information, resources and technology from within the neuro-science, psychology, health and other related fields to a broader audience. It is our goal to highlight health developments and resources in a straightforward easy to understand way. So we hope you enjoy. "

MRI Tech's Health Blog contains a lot of easily searchable links and information.
Check it out at: MRI Tech's Blog

Peace,Ted

Dogen, Mu, and Ignorance

Follow this link for Dogen on the nature of ignorance and Joshu's Mu.

http://flatbedsutra.com/flatbedsutrazenblogger/?p=2086

Peace,

Ted

The condition of practice-and-enlightenment

“Buddha” describes a person in the activity or condition of practice-and-enlightenment, the deepest meaning of the term "zazen." The keystone of Zen practice is not “sitting meditation” (though that is where it is often first discovered), it is “mustering the whole body-and-mind” and perceiving the world directly.
Seeing and hearing (as well as smelling, tasting, feeling, and thinking) sights and sounds (smells, tastes, sensations, and thoughts) with the ‘whole body-and-mind’ means truly being intimate with them. When we are truly intimate with them, there is no sense of I see that or I hear that. Hence, Dogen tells us that in such a condition “buddhas do not know they are buddhas.” In Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, He says, “It is not like an image reflected in a mirror, and not like the reflection of the moon on water” -- there are not two things (e.g. moon and water).
When we are authentically engaged in practice-and-enlightenment we do not hear a bell, there is simply, booooonngg–boooooongg. The classic Zen koan about escaping heat and cold illustrates this point wonderfully:
A monk asked Tozan, “When cold and heat come, how can we avoid them?”
Tozan said, “Why don’t you go to the place where there is no cold or heat?”
The monk said, “What is the place where there is no cold or heat?”
Tozan said, “When it’s cold, the cold kills you; when it’s hot, the heat kills you.”

Read 19 more posts tagged "Dogen" at the Flatbed Sutra Website

Peace,
Ted Biringer

Dogen, Shobogenzo, and The Flatbed Sutra

Greetings friends,
As of late I have been very busy updating the Flatbed Sutra Website. Consequently, this blog has not received much attention. I hope to get back to regular Dogen/Shobogenzo posts here in the near future. In the meantime, here is a link to a New Dogen Post at Zen International Forum
(March 26th, 2009) called Why Did Dogen Come Back From China

Also, we would love to hear from you over at the Flatbed Sutra Website which includes a blog as well as a number of other online Zen/Buddhist resources. Come on over and visit.

In the pure and clear luminous awareness of your true mind, spiritual practice and ordinary activity are not separate. The vast and fathomless unnamable void meets you wherever you are. When perceptions, feelings, and thoughts arise, you respond harmoniously without ever moving away from the pure and clear luminous awareness of your own mind.
~From The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing
by Ted Biringer

Peace,
Ted

Zen Master Dogen on what to do after enlightinement

Students of the Way, even if you attain enlightenment, do not think that this is now the ultimate and thus abandon your practice of the Way. The Way is endless. Even if you are enlightened, you should still practice the Way.

Record of Things Heard, Classics of Buddism and Zen, Vol.4, p.840, Thomas Cleary

Robert Aitken Roshi has opened a new Blog

Great news for the online Zen community!
Robert Aitken Roshi, the elder statesman of Zen in the West, has opened a new blog.
To read, comment, and learn from this great teacher follow this link:
ROBERT AITKEN ROSHI’S BLOG
The blog site also offers a number of links to great Zen resources.
See you there!
Peace,
Ted Biringer

False teachers? If so, what responsibility?

In a number of places throughout his works, Dogen makes references to students that are "misled" or "led astray" by "false teachers." Such statements often seem to infer an obligation to intervene, or act in some manner in order to help "genuine students" to a correct understanding.

I wonder if some students are being misled today by 'false' or deluded teachers/teachings. If so, what is the responsibility of authentic Buddhist teachers (or of anyone who is aware of false teachers/teachings) to them? I have encountered some that seem to advocate a strict 'hands-off' approach, sometimes offering opinions that students with 'genuine aspiration' will eventually find their way out.

However, it occurred to me that there might be some who, by their very nature, were genuinely seeking to study the Way with no regard for fame and gain, as they tried to treat mindfulness as their prime goal, but perhaps they were unfortunately being led astray by some false teacher so that the correct understanding of the Truth was needlessly being kept from them.
Shobogenzo, Bendowa, Rev. Hubert Nearman, O.B.C

Yet if there were any true practitioners who put the will to the truth first, being naturally unconcerned with fame and profit, they might be fruitlessly misled by false teachers and might needlessly throw a veil over right understanding.
Shobogenzo, Bendowa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Any thoughts?

Peace,
Ted Biringer

Genjokoan - Dogen's bottomless Zen text

Dogen's Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, is one of those rare Zen texts that seem to be bottomless sources of wisdom and insight. One of the phrases in Dogen's wonderful Genjokoan that has been melting into my mind recently is this:

When a person is experiencing the practice and enlightenment of the buddha-dharma, each practice is complete practice, and meeting each thing is mastering it.

What do we make of such a bold statement? While I am sure that this line (like most of Dogen's work) is much wiser than I can discern, it has come to mean something to me. For me, it seems to be saying that when a person is “experiencing the practice and enlightenment of the buddha-dharma,” each particular practice (moment, thing, or event) is the complete practice of that particular practice. That is to say, when a human being stands up, the whole universe stands up as that particular human being.
Next, the Genjokoan states:

Here, the place exists and the way unfolds, and therefore the area of enlightenment is not conspicuous. For this enlightenment and the buddha-dharma manifest simultaneously and are experienced simultaneously.

This too seems to point out some marvelous implications. Would anyone like to share their ideas, insights, thoughts, etc. on their experience with it?

Peace!

Ted Biringer

What is it to Realize the Buddha-Dharma?

In Shobogenzo, Genjokoan reminds us of what “realizing the Buddha-Dharma” is:

To realize the Buddha-Dharma is to realize your self.

It is surprisingly easy to get caught up in the details of ‘practice and enlightenment’ and lose sight of the fundamental point of Zen. Buddhism is not about a teacher or holy man of long ago and far away, it is not about metaphysical doctrines, it has nothing to do with objective knowledge; it is about us; real live human beings here and now. Enlightenment, wisdom, true-nature, Buddhahood, Zen, etc. are provisional terms employed for directing us to the truth about ourselves. “Buddha” is a term for an awakened human being. If there is any one thing that all the great Zen masters do seem to agree on, it is that Buddha is not separate from us ordinary people. Here are a few of my favorite reminders from the classic Zen Records:

Through endless kalpas without beginning, whatever you do, wherever you are, that’s your real mind, that’s your real buddha. This mind is buddha says the same thing. Beyond this mind you’ll never find another buddha. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible. The reality of your own self-nature, the absence of cause and effect, is what’s meant by mind. Your mind is nirvana. You might think you can find a buddha or enlightenment somewhere beyond the mind, but such a place doesn’t exist.
Red Pine, The Zen Teaching of Bodhidharma

Learned Audience, the wisdom of enlightenment [bodhiprajna] is inherent in every one of us. It is because of the delusion under which our mind works that we fail to realize it ourselves, and that we have to seek the advice and the guidance of enlightened ones before we can know our own essence of mind. You should know that so far as buddha-nature is concerned, there is no difference between an enlightened man and an ignorant one. What makes the difference is that one realizes it, while the other is ignorant of it.
Sutra of Hui-Neng, Price, A.F. & Mou-lam, Wong,

Q: If our own Mind is the Buddha, how did Bodhidharma transmit his doctrine when he came from India?
A: When he came from India, he transmitted only Mind-Buddha. He just pointed to the truth that the minds of all of you have from the very first been identical with the Buddha, and in no way separate from each other. That is why we call him our Patriarch. Whoever has an instant understanding of this truth suddenly transcends the whole hierarchy of saints and adepts belonging to any of the Three Vehicles. You have always been one with the Buddha, so do not pretend you can ATTAIN to this oneness by various practices.
The Zen Teaching of Huang-Po, Bloefeld, John

If you want to be no different from the patriarchs and buddhas, then never look for something outside yourselves. The clean pure light in a moment of your mind—that is the Essence-body of the Buddha lodged in you. The undifferentiated light in a moment of your mind—that is the Bliss-body of the Buddha lodged in you. The undiscriminating light in a moment of your mind—that is the Transformation-body of the Buddha lodged in you. These three types of bodies are you, the person who stands before me now listening to this lecture on the Dharma! And simply because you do not rush around seeking anything outside yourselves, you can command these fine faculties.
The Zen Teachings of Master Lin-chi, Watson, Burton

The way of Zen began without the establishment of any sect. It is simply a religion which points to the one original mind of all Buddhas and ordinary people. This mind is nothing other than Buddha nature. To see this nature is what is meant by religious practice. When you realize your Buddha nature, wrong relationships will instantly disappear, words will be of no concern, the dust of the dharma will not stain you. This is what is called Zen. Attaining Zen is becoming a Buddha. This real Buddha is none other than the heart of all beings, the master of seeing, hearing, and perceiving.
Mud and Water, A Collection of Talks by the Zen Master Bassui, Braverman, Arthur

Peace all you Bodhisattvas!

Ted Biringer

It the Zazen of Zen, are all realms vertical?

In Shobogenzo, Sammai-O-Zammai, Master Dogen offers a suggestion on how to apply ourselves to meditation while sitting. He says:

We should investigate: at the very moment we are sitting, are all realms vertical? Are they horizontal? At the very moment we are sitting, what about that sitting? Is it a flip? Is it “brisk and lively”? Is it thinking? Is it not thinking? Is it making? Is it without making? Are we sitting within sitting? Are we sitting within body and mind? Are we sitting having sloughed off “within sitting,” “within body and mind,” and so on? We should investigate one thousand points, ten thousand points, such as these.
Translated by Carl Bielefeldt

Yes! This is exactly how practitioners with genuine aspiration apply themselves to Zen meditation. Looking deeply, examining exhaustively, not only our own perspective but that of "all realms."

Master Dogen is not alone; all of the outstanding figures of Zen history testify to the eternal quest that is the source of what, who, where, when, how, and why---the very essence and function of the vast unnamable fathomless void. Zen meditation (Zazen) illumines the wonder and mystery of being alive.

Even the non-dharma does not exist

The section in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan about how awakening to the truth that "the many things actualize awareness of the self" is the function of Zen practice (indicating that our true nature is the true nature of the universe). The text goes on to indicate the nature and function of enlightenment and delusion. Genjokoan states:

Those who are enlightened about delusion are buddhas.

So being "enlightened about delusion" means awakening to the reality of delusion. That is, realizing what delusion truly is. This could be likened to being shown the cause of a magician’s illusions: mirrors, wires, hidden compartments, etc., thus being able to grasp the reality of the illusion. The reality of the illusion (the mirrors, wires, hidden compartments) is existent, and the illusion is a real characteristic of its existence. Similarly, when realizing the cause of delusion: misperception or partial perception, of true nature, we realize the reality of delusion. The reality of delusion (misperception or partial perception of our own true nature) is existent, and delusion is a real characteristic of its existence. Those who are "enlightened about" this are called "buddhas."

Next, the Genjokoan says:

Those who are deluded about enlightenment are ordinary beings.

To be "deluded about enlightenment" is to view enlightenment as being something outside or apart from ourselves or the everyday world. Those who are aware of their true nature are called buddhas; those who are unaware of their true nature are called ordinary beings. Flowers fall, weeds flourish; cocks crow, dogs bark. The Genjokoan goes on:

There are people who continue to realize enlightenment based on enlightenment.

Dogen’s emphasis on post-kensho practice and enlightenment is rarely matched in Zen literature. In many places throughout his works he insists that the initial experience of enlightenment is just the beginning of genuine practice-enlightenment. Of course, enlightenment for Dogen is only authentic as practice and enlightenment. In his works, he often refers to realizing enlightenment based upon enlightenment (often using the Zen ancestors of the past as examples of how to approach the lifetime process of deepening and refining our realization). The Genjokoan continues:

There are people in the midst of delusion adding to delusion.

Dogen does not seem here to be simply repeating himself, but to be indicating something else. In Shobogenzo, Keisei-Sanshiki, Dogen uses the same phrase (as best as I can tell) in a manner that suggests a deeper implication:

When [a person] tells people who do not know the will to the truth about the will to the truth, the good advice offends their ears, and so they do not reflect upon themselves, but [only] bear resentment towards the other person. As a general rule concerning actions and vows, which are the bodhi-mind, we should not intend to let worldly people know whether or not we have established the bodhi-mind or whether or not we are practicing the truth; we should endeavor to be unknown. How much less could we boast about ourselves? Because people today rarely seek what is real, when the praises of others are available, they seem to want someone to say that their practice and understanding have become harmonized, even though there is no practice in their body, and no realization in their mind. "In delusion adding to delusion" describes exactly this.
Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross, Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Keisei-Sanshiki, Book 1, p. 91 (italics added)

In this passage, Dogen seems to define the condition of "increasing delusion in the midst of delusion" as the denial of delusion. That is to say, when people in delusion deny they are deluded (or assert they are enlightened) they are "in delusion adding to delusion." Looking at Case One of the Blue Cliff Record may shed some light on this particular condition. The koan reads:

Emperor Wu asked Bodhidharma, "What is the ultimate meaning of the holy truths?"
Bodhidharma said, "Vast emptiness, nothing holy."
The Emperor asked, "Who is facing me?"
Bodhidharma responded, "I don’t know."
The Emperor did not understand. After this Bodhidharma crossed the Yangtse River and traveled to the kingdom of Wei.
Later the Emperor asked Master Chih about it.
Master Chih asked, "Do you know who this man is?"
The Emperor said, "I don’t know."
Master Chih said, "He is the great bodhisattva, Avalokitesvara, transmitting the confirmation of the buddha-mind."
The Emperor was regretful and wanted to send an envoy to bring Bodhidharma back.
Master Chih said, "Don’t say you will send someone to bring him back. Even if everyone in China went after him, he would not return."

Commenting on the line "The Emperor did not understand," Engo (Yuanwu - the editor of the Blue Cliff Record) says, "Too bad! Still, he’s gotten somewhere." (Cleary & Cleary) Might the meaning of Engo’s comment, "Still, he’s gotten somewhere," illumine what Dogen means by "in delusion adding to delusion"? In following the reasoning here, Emperor Wu could be understood as "adding to delusion" when he thought he knew something (or asserted his enlightenment). However, (although he is still in delusion) after his meeting with Bodhidharma, he admits that he does "not understand," that is, he does not deny his own delusion. The Emperor is in delusion (i.e. not enlightened), but he is no longer adding to delusion (by asserting his enlightenment).

Clearly, recognizing and acknowledging the reality of our own delusion is a prerequisite to enlightenment. For how or why would one aspire to, or arouse the will for enlightenment if they failed to recognize and acknowledge their own delusion? Hence, Dogen’s words, "Those who are enlightened about delusion are buddhas" could be read as meaning that the recognition and acknowledgement of delusion is simultaneous with enlightenment. Throughout the Shobogenzo, Dogen continuously asserts the nondual nature of delusion and enlightenment; but he never says (to the best of my knowledge) that buddhas are free from delusion, as is often implied by much of the contemporary literature of Zen. Indeed, as Genjokoan goes on to say:

When buddhas are buddhas, they do not know they are buddhas.

This line reminds us that when buddhas are experiencing the condition of Buddhahood, there is nothing but Buddha in the whole universe. This condition is sometimes described in Buddhist literature as the state where the known and the knower (or actor and action) are one. Obviously, for a buddha to have the thought, "I am a buddha," they would have to perceive themselves as something (buddha) in opposition to something else (not buddha), hence; they would not be in the condition of Buddhahood. That does not mean there are no buddhas, as the Genjokoan points out next:

Nevertheless, buddhas are buddhas and continuously actualize Buddhahood.

The condition of Buddhahood is not something that is gained, but something that is discovered and activated; that is, the nature of delusion is illumined and our original Buddhahood is realized. Of course, this experience is only called Buddhahood to differentiate it from delusion. When speaking of a state beyond delusion we call it "Buddhahood." However, in the absolute sense, as in Dogen’s opening lines to Genjokoan, there is nothing to be grasped (no buddhas, no ordinary beings, etc.) and in the transcendent sense, buddhas and ordinary beings always contain and include each other.

The classic Zen records tell us that in the actual experience of Buddhahood all names and labels are meaningless; for from the perspective of oneness or emptiness, differentiation does not exist. Even "oneness" is a relative term–that is, oneness is relative and only valid in contrast to multiplicity. Therefore, when differentiation is truly dissolved so, too, is Buddhahood. One wonderful Zen expression of this principle is a verse attributed to Ananda, one of Buddha’s disciples and the traditional Second Ancestor of Zen in India:

When we are awake to the truth, even the non-dharma does not exist.
The Transmission of the Lamp, Sohaku Ogata, p. 10

Peace!

Ted Biringer

Giving Dogen - and Shobogenzo - their due respect

While many of Dogen’s writings are complex, subtle, and profound, they are not mysterious, mystical, or irrational. It is true that they demand sustained, active, intensive and extensive investigation and maybe some interpretation, but they do not require decoding. Like all great literature, Shobogenzo will only yield its treasure through genuine, rational, and sustained exploration.

As Shobogenzo is not only great literature, but also a soteriological device, genuine understanding also demands personal experimentation. As great literature, it must be read by employing a variety of reading skills. That is, it must be read from the various levels or dimensions of what the educator Mortimer J. Adler called "active reading." (Mortimer J. Adler, How To Read a Book). He delineated four general "levels" of reading: Elementary, Inspectional, Analytical, and Syntopical. These "levels" of reading correspond to a certain extent with the three basic "points" outlined in Dale S. Wright’s landmark book, Philosophical Meditations on Zen Buddhism. The reader that applies the "levels" of Adler, or the "points" of Wright (or both) to Shobogenzo will certainly attain a better understanding than many so-called Dogen specialists have demonstrated. This kind of reading is extremely effective because, as Professor Wright says:

In the Language of Zen, it calls forth "the one who is right now reading," and refuses to allow the reader to cling to his or her own invisibility."
(Dale S. Wright, Philosophical Meditations on Zen Buddhism)

When this kind of active reading is combined with a reliable method of spiritual practice/realization, it augments and enhances ones experience, understanding, and enjoyment of literature. In the case of Shobogenzo, following a regular practice of meditation is certainly necessary for achieving anything more than a superficial overview.

Anyone that would claim to understand, or be an adherent of Dogen’s teaching clearly needs to look very, very closely at what he said. In so doing, his work deserves the respect accorded to all great literary figures; that is, it must be evaluated from within its literary, cultural, and historical context. Any assertions about Dogen’s work short of at least this much would be vulgar, to say the least, especially by anyone identifying themselves as adherents of "Dogen’s Zen." Just as an understanding of Zen is meaningless without actual practice, the practice of Zen is meaningless without actual understanding. To assume an understanding of Dogen’s Zen based on a mere handful of his writings would be absurd, and an understanding based only on faith in the assertions of authorities is merely an imitation of understanding, which Dogen (and many Zen masters) considered as a mockery of genuine understanding.

As one of the most influential figures in the history of Buddhism, Dogen deserves to be given his due. Regardless of our intentions, before we venerate or condemn his teachings, we must do our utmost to clarify our understanding, to get to the truth of what Dogen actually taught. A quote attributed to Herbert Spencer sums up the point nicely, "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

It seems to me that to honestly give Dogen his due we must first approach Shobogenzo as if it actually is what he said it is—The True Dharma-Eye Treasury, that is, the authentic truth of the Buddhism. This would mean that all the fascicles constituting Shobogenzo must, to the best of our ability, be read as Dogen intended them to be read; not as independent treatises, but as parts of a unity—the unity of Shobogenzo. Corollary to this is that each fascicle must, for the most part, be gauged by the same standard and granted equal authority concerning the genuine meaning of the whole Shobogenzo, or of any part of that whole. We would not expect to understand any one chapter of the Lotus Sutra outside its context in the whole, or the whole of the Sutra apart from its chapters, likewise with Shobogenzo.

The inference of this seems clear; the more unfamiliar, neglected fascicles of Shobogenzo, because they far outnumber the familiar, popularized fascicles, provide more than just the bulk of its content, they provide the bulk of its meaning. This does not mean that those teachings that have been revealed and propagated based on a relatively minor selection from Shobogenzo are widely off the mark—I believe they are not. Just as several chapters from the Lotus Sutra could reveal the genuine, if partial, message of that sutra, so too with Shobogenzo.

Fortunately, the language, reason, and methods of the fascicles constituting Shobogenzo are extraordinarily consistent, not only with each other, but also with Dogen’s other works and with those of Mahayana Buddhism (especially Ch’an [J. Zen]) generally. Yet, when all the fascicles of Shobogenzo are taken into account, not only is the scope of Dogen’s message expanded, many of the ambiguities concerning his teaching are resolved. In short, approaching Shobogenzo as a unified whole broadens and clarifies its genuine message.

In my view, Dogen’s records exemplify Zen’s characteristically freehanded approach to doctrines and systems of all kinds. This Zen characteristic is sometimes referred to in the classic records as, "Taking up with one hand, letting go with the other." The misunderstanding of this technique has evidently contributed to popular false notions of Zen as anti-doctrinal and iconoclastic. I have not seen any valid evidence that Zen in any way advocates the destruction of traditional teachings, forms of practice, systems of thought, or established institutions. To me it seems that Zen simply asserts that they should be employed, and applied in a useful manner.

It is not difficult to understand why there is such widespread misunderstanding about Zen’s use of language, doctrine, and methodology; many are profoundly subtle and difficult to grasp (much more so to employ). Indeed, it seems to me that many of the more subtle doctrines and techniques of Zen are concerned with the transmission and development of the skillful use of language and doctrine. Throughout the literature of Zen, one finds a great deal of emphasis on the necessity of developing the skill to use systems without being used by systems.

In my own view, it seems important to understand that Zen literature, including Dogen’s work does not merely acknowledge language as unavoidable; it embraces it as the dynamic, liberating vehicle of Buddha-Dharma itself. "Katto" translated into English as "entangling vines" or "entwining vines," is a term that is often used in Zen to indicate hindrances associated with attachment to, and/or conceptualization aroused by words, explanations, doctrines, etc. While many of the classic Zen records implicitly acknowledge the positive, even necessary role of language and doctrines (if only tacitly by the sheer fact of their existence), Dogen voices it clearly:

Generally speaking, the saintly all devise some method of training whereby they sever the roots of whatever vines are entangling them. But they might not explore how to cut off entangling vines by using the very vines themselves, for they may not have used these embracing vines as the means to understand their being entangled. (Shobogenzo, Katto, Hubert Nearman)

This seems to be precisely the same point indicated by that great visionary of western tradition, William Blake, where, in his Jerusalem, he has Los declare:

Striving with Systems to deliver Individuals from those System;
That whenever any Spectre began to devour the Dead,
He might feel the pain as if a man gnawd his own tender nerves. (William Blake, Jerusalem)

It is not language, doctrine, methodology, or conceptual constructs in themselves that are rejected by the Zen masters; it is their misuse. In his writings, Dogen insists that helping others reach liberation is best achieved by "giving voice" to the truth of Buddha nature, which should not be confused with giving voice to a rigid view, or formula; sometimes it is tall, sometimes it is short:

Those who can help others reach the Other Shore through manifesting their True Self will manifest It and give voice to the Dharma for that purpose: this is Buddha Nature. Further, sometimes they will display the Dharma Body as something tall and sometimes they will display It as something short. (Shobogenzo, Bussho, Hubert Nearman)

To use a Zen simile, a rabbit running into a stump may be a meal, but a meal is not a rabbit running into a stump. A meal is berries on a vine, cultivated radishes, steamed rice, and myriad other forms. While an expression is Buddha-Dharma, Buddha-Dharma is not an expression. As Dogen points out:

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)

Dogen consistently disparaged anything that even hinted at rigid adherence to systems of thought or attachment to methodologies or devices, even devices developed by the Zen ancestors. Far from being beneficial as an approach to Shobogenzo, reducing Dogen’s teaching to intellectually manageable patterns neutralizes its dynamic potential for pushing us beyond our limited view and actually expanding the horizons of our experience.

Reading Shobogenzo through any systematic screen is only possible if one imagines that the message of Shobogenzo is something to be explained. As students of literature tell us, the authentic message of any truly sacred text, like that of authentic poetry, inherently defies explanation. If the authentic message of a sacred text could truly be grasped through an explanation, it should have been written as an explanation to begin with. Obviously, if a sacred text conveyed nothing but what could be grasped by the ordinary human intellect, that text would hardly qualify as sacred. A literary work that does not speak to the heart as well as the mind and does nothing to actually expand our understanding, realization, and experience of life offers, at best, nothing more than a quantity of information, a mere number of trivial facts.

The tendency to categorize and systemize Dogen’s writings is not simply restricted to the sectarian factions of Soto Zen; traces of it appear in nearly every field of Dogen, and Japanese Zen studies. A veritable plethora of labels have been applied to Dogen and his works in a variety of attempts to systematically explain "Dogen’s Zen." Attaching significance to perceived connections between his writings and when he wrote them, many modern Dogen scholars subscribe to one or the other of the so-called "Renewal" and "Decline" theories. These categorizations are established by compartmentalizing Dogen’s work according to when he wrote them. When using this system, Dogen’s work is usually divided into the categories of "early and late" periods or "early, middle and late" periods. One prominent Dogen scholar suggests dividing these three periods into seven sub-divisions (Early Early, Late Early, Early Middle, Middle Middle, Late Middle, Early Late, and Late Late). (Steven Heine, Did Dogen Go to China?)

Because of its role, scholarship is more than justified in dividing, and categorizing the subject of its research, yet students and practitioners should be aware of the nature and function of those investigations. Scholarship can and does illumine important facets of Dogen’s life and work, but it is important to remember that, like a finely cut diamond, Shobogenzo is more than the sum of its facets. After all, the language of Shobogenzo, like that of all truly sacred literature, is mythological. For myth is the language of deliverance and liberation; a living dynamic expression with the potential of rendering transparent the interface of the temporal and the eternal, the finite and the infinite, all beings and Buddha, in Zen terms: the Gateless Barrier.

To read mythic expression as ordinary prose is to misread it.

Sacred text is inevitably addressed to the whole of our being and it is only through the whole of our being that we can receive it. Failing to respect the integrity of Shobogenzo by subjecting it to differentiation, discrimination, and conceptualization inevitably renders it opaque, nullifying its liberating potential.

Shobogenzo, like a necklace made of pearls, is at once ‘the many’ and ‘the one.’ Exploring Shobogenzo through divisions or systems of thought is like examining a necklace only after dividing and organizing the pearls into groups and patterns. There is no doubt that Dogen’s Shobogenzo is one of the most complex and multi-faceted works in all of the world’s literature, but aside from a few uncertain points its message is consistent, and its inherent design is exquisite.

Peace,
Ted Biringer

Learning by Master Dogen's example

Aside from the question of what Master Dogen actually meant, it is clear that he personally approached life with great zeal and intensity. Even setting aside the uncertainties concerning his biography, what little is known clearly testifies to the fact that he himself acted in accord with his repeated, energetic exhortations to “master in practice” and “examine sideways and upside down” and “apply yourselves as if your head was on fire” etc.
His own life was an eternal quest; committing to the path at 8 years old, running away at 13 to avoid the barriers of secular life, reading the entire Tripitaka twice by his early 20s, mastering Tendai, the exoteric and esoteric teachings. Not yet satisfied, he set about mastering Rinzai Zen under Myozan, then accompanied him on a journey to China. There, he traveled around and sought wise counsel wherever he could. Then, finding Tendo Nyojo, he intensified his practice and study, realized a profound awakening, then spent a couple more years “entering the room” deepening and refining his realization under the guidance of his teacher.
When he finally returned to Japan, he spent the rest of his life continuously exploring and developing all manner of methods, techniques, and activities to effectively transmit the Buddha-Dharma to his fellow countrymen. To this end he produced hundreds of fascicles which he continuously re-worked, edited, and refined many times, right up to his final illness, and he established Eihei-ji (still regarded as one of the great temples of the world), and he offered instruction to monks, nuns, and secular people from all classes. The energy that Dogen applied in those monumental efforts can still be felt on a visceral level through reading and (trying) to apply his teachings as outlined in some of the most creative expressions in Buddhist history.
Dogen’s life was clearly engaged in actively creating, exploring, and expressing the meaning, function, and experience of the Buddha-Dharma. When we see how vibrantly he speaks of discovering whole worlds in each moment, and in each drop of water, we come to understand his outspoken disdain for the distorted ‘nothing to realize’ and ‘everything is it’ notions of Zen that had taken root in his own time. We are (at least I am) inspired by Dogen’s constant earnestness on the necessity to focus our aspiration and effort that he asserts are essential to genuine practice and enlightenment. His repeated exhortations to “those who have already attained enlightenment” to continue to go ever-deeper attaining enlightenment upon enlightenment, are reinforced by his own example. His constant refrain reminds us that enlightenment without practice is not authentic enlightenment, and practice without enlightenment is not authentic practice.
We don’t need to prove Dogen’s meaning to understand that the necessity of wholehearted effort and focused, dedicated practice is a basic teaching of Buddhism, and a hallmark of Zen. And even those that have not researched much in the Zen records realize that the teachings of “practice and enlightenment” have always been susceptible to misunderstanding and misappropriation. Obvious to even the most casual of readers among Zen students is that some of the most pernicious divisions in the history of Buddhism have been caused by arguments around what this teaching means. The confusion between sudden realization (original enlightenment) and gradual cultivation (acquired enlightenment), has been the most visible and persistent manifestation of this argument in the Zen tradition.
According to his biographers, the apparent contradiction between original enlightenment and acquired enlightenment was the barrier to and eventually the catalyst of Dogen’s own great awakening. Resolving this conflict became the central focus of his spiritual quest. It was through his personal resolution of the seeming contradiction between the doctrine of original enlightenment and the need for spiritual practice that allowed him to—in his own words from Shobogenzo, Bendowa—“complete the task of a lifetime.”After such a powerful experience, it is only natural that the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment became such a central theme in Dogen’s teaching. By “non-dual” I mean, empty of duality, I do not mean that practice and enlightenment are one, as is propagated by some. Practice and enlightenment in Zen are two aspects of one reality. I think that Dogen is clear on the fact that though they always go together, they each maintain their distinctive aspects.This brings me to, what I think is one of the best passages in Shobogenzo that takes up question raised, “What constitutes practicing Dogen’s Zen?”
The very first paragraph of one of Dogen’s very first teachings, Fukanzazengi, is constructed of four lines—each variations expressing the fundamental point.

“Now, when we research it, the truth originally is all around: why should we rely upon practice and experience? The real vehicle exists naturally: why should we put forth great effort? Furthermore, the whole body far transcends dust and dirt: who could believe in the means of sweeping and polishing? In general, we do not stray from the right state: of what use, then, are the tip-toes of training?”Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross, Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Book 1, p. 279

Coming from Dogen we know this is not a simplistic series of rhetorical statements, but an expression of spiritual realization, urging us to deep contemplation. It seems clear that Dogen is not saying, “the truth is all around: we do not need to rely upon practice, put forth great effort, etc.” Rather, he is saying, “the truth is all around: why do we need to practice, who could believe in the means, of what use, and so on.” His statements are neither rhetorical, nor are they conventional questions wanting answers. Here he not only respond to the question posed, Dogen indicates, at once, the revelation of the truth of Zen and illustrates the appropriate attitude for Zen practitioners to employ.
While his expressions were unique, and may even transcend those of his predecessors, what Dogen actually taught was what all the true buddhas and Zen ancestors taught; enlightenment is the essence of authentic practice, practice is the function of authentic enlightenment. The duality of practice and enlightenment is actualized and transcended, not eradicated or annihilated. It seems obvious in this light, that Dogen frequently used the term zazen in reference to the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment, not just as a reference to ordinary sitting meditation. In Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Dogen outlines this fundamental teaching of Zen. Near the end of this essay, he uses a Zen koan to illustrate the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment.
The koan runs something like this: Zen Master Hotetsu, of Mount Mayu is using a fan. A monk comes up and says, “The nature of air is ever-present, and there is no place it does not reach. Why then does the Master use a fan?”
The master says, “You understand that the nature of air is ever-present, but you do not understand the truth that there is no place it does not reach.”
The monk says, “What is the truth of there being no place it does not reach?”
At this, the master just continues to use the fan.
The monk does prostrations. Dogen goes on to say, “The actualization of the buddha-dharma, the living way of authentic transmission, is like this.”

Peace,
Ted Biringer

Dogen's use of Criticism in Shobogenzo

Throughout the history of the Japanese Soto sect, much has been made of the influence of the Chinese Rinzai master, Daie Soko, on the teachings of Dogen. Traditionally, Dogen has been presented as being profoundly critical of Daie’s Zen teachings, especially his teachings regarding koans. Of course, Shobogenzo is not unique in its negative criticism of Zen ancestors. Scathing, colorful, and often humorous critiques are characteristic of a number of the classic records of Zen.
Claims about Dogen’s negative criticism of Daie have some basis in fact, but its significance has been exaggerated, and the reasoning underlying Dogen’s criticisms have often been skewed. In light of Daie’s importance to the Japanese Rinzai sect, specifically, his teachings regarding koans, some of the reasons for exaggerating and distorting Dogen’s criticism of Daie seem clear; to infer the inferiority, or even the illegitimacy of the Rinzai sect and posit the superiority of the Soto sect.

While an objective reading of Dogen’s treatment of Daie is enough to cast doubt on most sectarian claims, recent scholarship has decisively revealed a number of fallacies regarding many of these claims--and provided a great deal of clarity on the real issues. As others have lucidly presented the history and details concerning this issue *1, there is no need to dwell on it here. Suffice it to say that some of the distortions were probably legitimate attempts for sectarian survival, but many (if not most) were grounded in sectarian competition for spiritual superiority (and its corollary, the power associated with spiritual authority).

The negative criticism in Shobogenzo does offer some interesting possibilities. In Shobogenzo, Dogen is critical of Daie, but not only of Daie, nor is his criticism simply leveled at his use of koans. Other Zen ancestors, including Rinzai, Tokusan, and Ummon, are subjected to criticism just as harsh as any directed at Daie. These Zen masters are rebuked for the same reasons Daie is rebuked; inaccurate expressions of buddha-dharma (J. buppo).

In fact, in Shobogenzo Dogen does not hesitate to challenges even the most revered Zen ancestors including Hyakujo, Setcho, Joshu, and others. Furthermore, Dogen explicitly denigrates Vimalakirti, the hero of the sutra widely venerated in the records of Zen, and even denounces the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Ancestor, Eno (second in Zen reverence only to Bodhidharma), as a fraudulent text. Moreover, some of Dogen’s more creative ‘misreadings’ and ‘interpretations’ of the Buddhist sutras could easily be regarded as tacit (if gentle) criticisms of the Buddha himself.

(In fairness, two characteristics of the negative portrayal of Daie in Shobogenzo should be noted. The first is a lack of any corresponding positive treatment; most of the important masters upbraided in Shobogenzo are nevertheless acknowledged in other sections of it. Although Daie is tacitly acknowledged as a legitimate ancestor (by Dogen’s acceptance of some of Daie’s descendents, including Bussho Tokko), explicit acknowledgement is conspicuously lacking. The second characteristic unique to Dogen’s charge against Daie is his direct assertion that Daie’s (recorded) teachings disqualify him as a Zen ancestor.)

Dogen’s criticism of Zen ancestors can be viewed as justified based on the rationale of Shobogenzo, which consistently asserts the nonduality of realization and expression in the buddha-dharma. That is, in Shobogenzo, realization and expression are interdependent aspects of the authentic buddha-dharma; each contains and is contained by the other. Hence, in Dogen’s view one’s realization of buddha-dharma is evident in one’s expressions of buddha-dharma. In fact, according to Shobogenzo, evaluating the authenticity of a Zen master’s realization "invariably" includes examining their expressions:

All the Buddhas and all the Ancestors express what They have realized. This is why the Buddhas and Ancestors, when singling out an Ancestor of the Buddha, invariably ask, "Can that person express their realization or not?"
Shobogenzo, Dotoku, Herbert Nearman

While Dogen rebukes, and even hints at the lack of qualifications of Zen ancestors, he stops short of complete denunciation (except of Daiei), and often lavishes praise on them elsewhere in Shobogenzo. For instance, when Rinzai is denigrated as a ‘weak spirited newcomer’ in Shobogenzo, Bukkyō, Dogen does not dismiss his legitimacy. In fact, throughout Shobogenzo Rinzai is quoted as an authority, and in some fascicles of Shobogenzo, like Gyōji, and Hotsu Mujō Shin, Dogen praises Rinzai’s example, singling him out as an outstanding model for Zen practitioners.

One of the most illuminating examples of Dogen’s technique of challenging Zen ancestors based on their recorded sayings is in Shobogenzo, Shin Fukatoku, where he asserts the inaccuracy of five of the ‘giants’ of Zen tradition. In that fascicle Dogen exposes the ‘blindness’ of Joshu, Kyozan, Gensha, Kaie, and Setcho, taking them all to task for their ‘mistaken’ expressions concerning a koan. Significantly, there is no hint of their disqualification as Zen ancestors. To the contrary, Dogen asserts that although "it may be hard to believe" that people who do not understand one aspect of buddha-dharma are able to understand the rest of it, we should "realize that ancient Ancestors may also make mistakes":

In that the five worthy Masters did not at all understand the everyday practice of the National Teacher, they are, to that extent, similarly inaccurate. For this reason I have now let you hear about ‘the mind not being able to grasp It’ in the Way of the Buddhas. Although it may be hard for you to believe that people who are unable to thoroughly understand this one aspect of the Teaching are apt to understand all the rest of the Teaching, you need to realize that ancient Ancestors may also make mistakes and compound them, as in this case.
Shobogenzo, Shin Fukatoku (Written Version), Herbert Nearman

Dogen’s recognition of the reality of human limitations is indicative of the realism—highlighted in the title of Hee-Jin Kim’s landmark book, Eihei Dogen: Mystical Realist—which permeates his records. Dogen’s realistic acknowledgement that even ancestors "may also make mistakes" seems to be much more than a reluctant admission of human weakness, or fallibility; but more of a realistic assessment of the human condition, hence, of reality itself. In the Shobogenzo, Shizen Biku, fascicle, Dogen assures his listeners/readers that "having mistaken views" is not unique to time or circumstances by asserting it even happened when the Buddha himself was actively teaching:

In truth, even those who had left home life behind and received ordination when the World-honored One was in the world found it difficult to avoid having mistaken views and personal opinions, due to their not giving ear to His Teaching.
Shobogenzo, Shizen Biku, Herbert Nearman

To deny this characteristic of reality is, in Dogen’s teaching, to be ‘in delusion adding to delusion.’ Knowing the reality of buddha-dharma, on the other hand, is contingent on recognizing the reality of delusion. Herein lies the fundamental difference between ‘ordinary beings’ and ‘Buddhas’, as Dogen says in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan: "Ordinary beings are deluded about enlightenment, Buddhas are enlightened about delusion."

If Dogen is to be regarded as an authentic Zen master, then his teachings must be viewed as having the same goal as any authentic Buddhist master; the alleviation of suffering. Thus, all of Shobogenzo’s expressions, including those challenging Zen ancestors, must be understood as legitimate efforts to transmit the buddha-dharma. In light of this reasoning, it should be clear that Dogen’s criticism in Shobogenzo has more to do with instructing students then with admonishing long dead masters.

In summary, what can Dogen’s use of criticism teach us about applying ourselves to the Zen path of authentic practice-realization? Anything? Everything?

*1. For instance, see:

How Zen Became Zen: The Dispute over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China (Studies in East Asian Buddhism) by Morten Schlütter.

The Linji Lu and the Creation of Chan Orthodoxy: The Development of Chan's Records of Sayings Literature, by Albert Welter

Dogen and The Koan Tradition, and Did Dogen Go to China? What He Wrote and When He Wrote It, both by Steven Heine.

Dogen's Manuals of Zen Meditation, Carl Bielefeldt.

Awareness, Nonthinking, Zazen, the essential art of Zen?

A skier mustering whole body-and-mind, totally absorbed in the activity of skiing down a mountain, forgets his or her "self" and is actualized by the myriad dharmas (the many things). With no ideas of self and not self, there is simply swoosh, swoosh, chunk, swoosh, swoosh. There is no "snow" there is whiteness, coldness. There are no "sounds" there is shoo, shoo, tweet, weeee! There is no "thinking" there is left, right, straight, watch out. In Shobogenzo, Hossho, Dogen gives us a delightful expression of this experience:

In the Dharma-nature there is no "non-Buddhist" or "demon," but only "Come for breakfast! Come for lunch! And come for tea!"
Shobogenzo, Hossho, Gudo Nishijima & Chodo Cross

The Genjokoan tells us:

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.

This expression reveals the essence and function of the dynamic quality of awareness itself. When the body-and-mind of "our self" and the body-and-mind of "other than our self" both fall away, there is only, "Come for breakfast! Come for lunch! And come for tea!" All along our inherent awareness, that is, our buddha-nature or true-nature, has been functioning perfectly. Is this why people often laugh upon their initial enlightenment experience? There seem to be a number of wonderful gems about this in the Zen literature:

Q: What is implied by ‘seeing into the real Nature’?
A: That Nature and your perception of it are one. You cannot use it to see something over and above itself.
–Obaku
Bloefeld, John, The Zen Teaching of Huang-Po, 116

The nature of perception being eternal, we go on perceiving whether objects are present or not. Thereby we come to understand that, whereas objects naturally appear and disappear, the nature of perception does neither of those things; and, it is the same with all your other senses.
–Daibai
Bloefeld, John, The Zen Teaching of Instantaneous Awakening, 22

The Surangama Sutra, contains a passage that presents this point so directly that it is included as case ninety-four of the Blue Cliff Record:

The Surangama scripture says, "When I do not see, why do you not see my not seeing? If you see my not seeing, naturally that is not the characteristic of not seeing. If you do not see my not seeing, it is naturally not a thing–how could it not be you?"
–The Blue Cliff Record

The Rinzai Zen master, Hakuin, comments on this koan in part:

Because it is not a thing, it must be your own awakened mind. The realm that is not a thing is your true vision; true vision is your essential nature. That’s the message.
Cleary, Thomas, Secrets of The Blue Cliff Record, 328

The Soto Zen master, Tenkei, comments in part on the same case:

The point is that of all the myriad things, none is not you. You are you; I am I. One can only know oneself. That’s what this means.
ibid., 328

Dogen’s words "To be actualized by the many things" are an original and marvelous expression of the same truth that Master Tenkei makes here as "of all the myriad things, none is not you."
Significantly, the Genjokoan goes on to explain:

All traces of enlightenment fall away, and the falling away of all traces of enlightenment is continuous.

Dogen is here expanding on a point he alluded to earlier (in Genjokoan) with the words "There are people who continue to realize enlightenment based on enlightenment." Realization of enlightenment is not a static event but a vigorous, dynamic condition of continuous manifestation. On the authentic Zen path of practice-enlightenment, each moment is experienced as the continuous unfolding of the entire universe, perpetually fresh and new. Engo calls this "continuous awareness from mind-moment to mind-moment":

When there is continuous awareness from mind-moment to mind-moment that does not leave anything out, and mundane reality and enlightened reality are not separate, then you will naturally become pure and fully ripe and meet the Source on all sides.
–Engo
Cleary, Thomas, Zen Letters, 45

Compare these words with Dogen’s own wonderful expression in Shobogenzo, Gyobutsu Yuigi:

[To research] this truth of moment-by-moment utter entrustment, we must research the mind. In the mountain-still state of such research, we discern and understand that ten thousand efforts are [each] the mind being evident, and the triple world is just that which is greatly removed from the mind. This discernment and understanding, while also of the myriad real dharmas, activate the homeland of the self. They make immediate and concrete the vigorous state of the human being in question.
Shobogenzo, Gyobutsu Yuigi, Gudo Nishijima & Chodo Cross

No thing, time, or event can escape the momentary nature of existence. Dogen points out in Shobogenzo, Uji (being time) that one quality of time is its ever-changing flow. He says:

The entire world is not unchangeable, is not immovable. It flows.
Shobogenzo, Uji, Tanahashi & Aitken, Moon in a Dewdrop: Writings of Zen Master Dogen

Dogen expresses the ever-changing, ever-renewing aspect of reality throughout his works in startlingly provocative and creative ways. For example, in his essay, Shobogenzo, Tsuki, Dogen says you should master in practice the fact that tonight’s moon is not yesterday’s moon:

So although the moon was there last night, tonight’s moon is not yesterday’s moon. We should master in practice that the moon tonight, at the beginning, middle, and end, is the moon tonight. Because the moon succeeds the moon, the moon exists and yet is not new or old.
Shobogenzo, Tsuki, Gudo Nishijima & Chodo Cross

At the same time, Dogen reveals that the very fact of its momentary existence demonstrates its inevitability, that is to say, its inevitable existence as an aspect of the whole of time and space (being time):

Each moment is all being, is the entire world. Reflect now whether any being or any world is left out of the present moment.
Shobogenzo, Uji, Tanahashi & Aitken, Moon in a Dewdrop: Writings of Zen Master Dogen

With the body-and-mind of self and other cast off (in nonthinking or forgetting the self) each moment is experienced as all being, "the entire world with nothing left out of the present moment." Each moment, each thing, including even such things as worry, and surprise contain and are contained by the whole of time and space. According to Dogen, "there are myriads of forms and myriads of grasses throughout the entire earth, and yet each grass and each form itself is the entire earth.

"Even worry itself is just the matter which is it, and so it is beyond worry. Again, we should not be surprised that the matter which is it is present in such a state. Even if it is the object of surprise and wonderment, it is still just it. And there is it about which we should not be surprised."
Shobogenzo, Inmo, Gudo Nishijima & Chodo Cross

Peace,
Ted Biringer

Reading Shobogenzo, Ejo's words on Dogen's intentions

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

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

This present discourse, which was a first draft, was to be the twelfth of the new ones. After this our Master’s illness worsened. As a result, he stopped working on such things as the drafts. Therefore, this draft is our late Master’s final teaching for us. Unfortunately, we will never see His full draft of the hundred chapters, which is something to be greatly regretted. Those who love and miss our late Master should, by all means, make copies of this twelfth chapter, and take care to preserve it. It contains the final instructions of our Venerable Shakyamuni and is the final legacy of our late Master’s Teaching.
I, Ejō, have given this final account. (Translated by Hubert Nearman)

This statement by Ejo, supports and augments the evidence of two important aspects of Shobogenzo that are widely agreed upon by both scholars and the Zen orthodoxy. First, that Dogen intended Shobogenzo as a singular canon consisting of one hundred fascicles. Second, that Dogen died before completing all one hundred fascicles. What is not so widely agreed upon, and is in fact much debated, are how many of the fascicles Dogen did complete, and which ones were intended for Shobogenzo.

There are a number of versions of Shobogenzo, including 12, 28, 60, 75, 89, 92, and 95 fascicle versions that have had, and/or continue to have their proponents as representative of Dogen’s intent. Of these, the official 95-fascicle Shobogenzo of the Soto sect is the most well known edition. As the most inclusive version (other than those including obviously separate or spurious texts), it is an important version for understanding Dogen’s message. However, as this version was not created until 1690, more than four hundred years after Dogen’s death, few seriously consider it as an accurate representation of Dogen’s intention.

The version that is most widely acknowledged as best representing Dogen’s intention is the 75-fascicle version. Including extensive commentary by one of Dogen’s own disciples, this version was the earliest published edition of Shobogenzo. This fact, combined with a number of other factors (style, dates of composition, subject matter, etc.) seem to offer the most convincing argument for considering it as ‘Dogen’s’ Shobogenzo.

(For an overview of the history and recent scholarship on the various versions of Shobogenzo, see Steven Heine’s, Did Dogen Go to China?: What He Wrote and When He Wrote It, esp. pp. 51-87)

Throughout his writings Dogen consistently asserted the interdependence of understanding and expression. While common sense reveals the fallacy of expression without understanding, Dogen points out that understanding without expression is just as fallacious. His writings are filled with exhortations to ‘express it in your own words’, and assertions that ‘if you cannot express it, you have not yet understood it.’ Moreover, his writings offer many evaluations of the depths of the understanding of ‘Zen ancestors’ based on their (recorded) expressions. Nor is his criticism restricted to ‘what’ an ancient expressed; just as often they are appraised by what they fail to express. Not even Joshu, who Dogen often highly reveres as ‘an eternal Buddha’ escapes being chastised by Dogen for an inadequate expression.

In light of this, if Shobogenzo was intended to form a definitive canon, as it evidently was, every fascicle that was admitted to it, regardless of its length, date, or subject must be read not only as part of a unified whole, but as inherently consistent with Dogen’s understanding. While exclusion can be regarded as intentional or unintentional, inclusion can only be regarded as an assertion of approval. There is convincing evidence that the fascicles of Shobogenzo were subjected to Dogen’s ongoing editorial refinement throughout his teaching career. Genjokoan, for instance, written in 1233 and included in every major version of Shobogenzo, was re-edited by Dogen shortly before his death in 1253.

This is not to imply that Shobogenzo is limited to a ‘singular message’, but that all of its various fascicles, by their very admission, must have been harmonious with Dogen’s understanding. Therefore, if fascicles of Shobogenzo seem to be at odds with each other we should attempt to reevaluate our own understanding of Dogen’s meaning rather than simply dismissing them as inconsistencies in Dogen’s teaching.

Thank you for your comments.
Peace,
Ted Biringer

Like and Dislike - The Blue Cliff Record Case 2

What Does the Blue Cliff Record teach us about Like and dislike, about Picking and Choosing?

Here is Joshu in Case 2

MAIN CASE

Chao Chou, teaching the assembly, said The Ultimate Path is without difficulty, it just avoids picking and choosing. As soon as there are words spoken ‘this’ is picking and choosing ‘that’ is clarity. This old monk does not abide within clarity "Do you still preserve anything or not?"

At that time a certain monk asked, "Since you do not abide within clarity, what do you preserve?"

Chao Chou replied, "I don’t know either."

The monk said, "Since you don’t know, Teacher, why do you nevertheless say that you do not abide within clarity?"

Chao Chou said, "It is enough to ask, make your bows and withdraw."

"Chao Chou, teaching the assembly, said." Yuan Wu comments, "What’s the old fellow doing?" Chao Chou did not start teaching until he was 80 years old. That is almost sixty years of polishing and deepening his realization after his initial awakening. Anyone interested in Zen ought to perk up like Yuan Wu, "Shhh, the old fellow is speaking…"

"‘The Ultimate Path is without difficulty.’" Yuan Wu comments, "Not hard, not easy."

Once the Layman P’ang was sitting in his cottage with his wife and daughter:
"Difficult, difficult, difficult," he suddenly exclaimed, "[like trying] to scatter ten measures of sesame seed all over a tree!"

"Easy, easy, easy," returned Mrs. P’ang, "just like touching your feet to the ground when you get out of bed."

Neither difficult nor easy," said Liang-chao. "On the hundred grass-tips, the Patriarchs’ meaning."
A Man of Zen, Sasaki, Iriya, Fraser

If Liang-chao and Yuan Wu are right, what about the layman and his wife? What about Chao Chou?

Leaving aside difficult and easy, what is the Ultimate Path, sometimes translated as the Great Way? Is it Buddha Dharma? Is it Tao? A monk asked Chao Chou about that:

The master said, "It’s just outside the fence."
The monk said, "I’m not asking about that."
The master said, "What ‘way’ are you asking about?"
The monk said, "The Great Way."
The master said, "The great way leads all the way to the capital."
The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu, James Green, p.108

He says outside the fence, what about inside the fence?

"It just avoids picking and choosing." In case 2 of the Mumonkan, we learn how old Pai Chang’s five hundred lifetimes as a fox became lives of grace when he was avoided picking and choosing.

One time Chao Chou revealed his own fox-nature while he was walking with an official in a garden and they saw a rabbit run away.
The official said, "you are a great and accomplished person, why did the rabbit run away when it saw you?"
The master said, "I like to kill."
The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu, p. 151

Chao Chou’s words seem incredible. However, if you can see the rabbit here, you will have mastered this case.

"As soon as there are words spoken." Chao Chou is setting out a pot of glue; it is hard to avoid being stuck here. What if words are not spoken?

Venerable Pi Mo Yen of Wu T’ai Shan Monastery used to carry a wooden pitchfork with him. Every time he saw a monk approaching him and bowing down for instruction, he pinned him by the neck with the fork and demanded, "What devil forced you to renounce the world (by becoming a monk)? What devil made you wander on pilgrimage? If you can say a word of Ch’an under the fork, you will die. If you can’t say a word of Ch’an under the fork, you will die. Now! Say something!"
There were few students who were able to respond to this demand.
The Transmission Of The Lamp, Sohaku Ogata, p.370

He does not say there were none who were able to respond, just that there were few. Have you seen Hsueh Tou’s comment on case 23?
"Today what is the purpose of travelling the mountains with these fellows" He also said, "Hundreds of thousands of years hence, I don’t say there are none, just that they will be few."

"This is picking and choosing." As soon as there are words spoken, "this" is picking and choosing. What is "this?" This is it. Does "it" go along with picking and choosing? Look at case 29.

A monk asked Ta Sui, "The conflagration at the end of the eon sweeps through and the universe is totally destroyed. I wonder, is this destroyed or not?"
Sui said, "It is destroyed."
The monk said, "If so, then this goes along with it."
Sui said, "It goes along with it."
Blue Cliff Record, Case 29

Is the "this" in this is picking and choosing "it?" The Ultimate Path is without difficulty; "it" just avoids picking and choosing. Could we re-phrase this, "The Ultimate Path avoids picking and choosing; it is just without difficulty"?

Dogen likes to remind us that nonduality is really nondual. Listen as he comments on the line, "In following worldly circumstances there are no hindrances", from a poem by the Layman Cho Setsu:
To turn one’s back on the Truth is wrong, and to approach the Truth is also wrong. The Truth is the approaching and the turning away, which, in each instance of approaching or turning away, are the Truth itself. Is there anyone who knows that this wrong is also the Truth?
Shobogenzo, Kuge, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Can we put this koan in the format of Dogen’s comment? Picking and choosing is wrong, and not being without difficulty is also wrong. The Ultimate Path is without difficulty and avoids picking and choosing, which, in each instance of without difficulty or avoiding picking and choosing is the Ultimate Path itself. Is there anyone who knows that this wrong is also the Ultimate Path?

"That is clarity." He said that "this" was picking and choosing; now he says "that" is clarity! What is going on here? Yuan Wu says, "People these days who practice meditation and ask about the Path, if they do not remain within picking and choosing, then they settle down within clarity." He means both remaining and settling down are wrong. How can we respond to the implicit challenge here?

What is not remaining? The Diamond Sutra says, "If Bodhisattvas practice giving charity with their minds not dwelling on things, they are like people with sight in the sunlight, seeing all sorts of shapes and colors." (T. Cleary)

What is not settling down? The Diamond Sutra says, "Dwell nowhere and bring forth that mind." (Misc. Koans)

"This old monk does not abide within clarity." He says he’s not settling down, and he demonstrates he’s not remaining.

"Do you still preserve anything or not?" This is Chao Chou’s reason for all his words; he is, after all, teaching the assembly. "Do you understand?" he asks. "My presentation about the third ancestors message is, this old monk does not abide within clarity. How would you say it?"

There is a dialogue where Tung Shan responds for a monk who was asked a similar question from an opposing point.
A monk asked, "What is the talk on no-talk?"
The Master {Pao Yun} asked, "Where is your mouth?"
The monk answered, "I have no mouth."
The Master said, "With what do you eat your food?"
The monk had no response. Tung Shan answered for him: "He does not get hungry, why should he eat food?"
The Transmission Of The Lamp, Sohaku Ogata, p.222

"At that time a certain monk asked." We should not skip over this line. At that time a certain monk is existence-time. Dogen reminds us, "Time does not pass."

The particular time of the deity [of yesterday] is also experienced precisely as my existence-time; though it appears to be far off, it is the realized now.
Shobogenzo, Uji, Hee-Jin Kim

"Since you do not abide within clarity, what do you preserve?" This monk shows his own non-preservation. He is saying, "As soon as Chao Chou’s words are spoken, ‘this old monk does not abide within clarity’, "this" is trailing mud and dripping water." This monk is like Pao Yun’s, "With what do you eat your food?"

"Chao Chou replied, ‘I don’t know either.’" Bodhidharma said, ‘I don’t know.’ They are not different, but they are not the same either. Yuan Wu says, "Many followers of Ch’an these days will also say when asked, ‘I don’t know either; I don’t understand.’ Nevertheless, though they are on the same road, they are not in the same groove." In case 51, Yen T’ou said, "Though Hseuh Feng is born on the same lineage as me, he doesn’t die in the same lineage."

The monk said, "Since you don’t know, Teacher, why do you nevertheless say that you do not abide within clarity?" This monk was sharp, but he did not know it had been settled. There was a similar exchange between the Layman P’ang and Ma Tsu:

Layman P’ang asked, "The unveiled original man asks you to look upward, please." The Patriarch looked straight down. The layman said, "Only the Master can play so wonderfully on a stringless lute. The Patriarch looked straight up. The layman bowed, and the Patriarch returned to his quarters. The layman followed him; when he entered the room, he said, "Just now bungled it trying to be wise."
Sun Face Buddha, Cheng Chien Bhikshu

Chao Chou said, "It is enough to ask, make your bows and withdraw."

Peace,

Ted Biringer

Shobogenzo, Genjokoan - Flowers Fall, Weeds Flourish

A line in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, says:

And though it is like this, it is plainly that flowers, while loved, fall and weeds while hated, flourish.

This line may be the most direct expression in the whole Shobogenzo. It may also be the most widely misunderstood. It is often interpreted as an analogy, which completely misses, and even subverts the point Dogen was making. In fact, Dogen points out that the previous three lines are analogical with the words, “it is like this.” In this line, he points out that reality is not like anything: it is simply reality; that is, “flowers fall…weeds flourish.”

This corresponds with the meaning of the often-quoted Zen dictum “a separate transmission outside the scriptures, not dependent on words and letters.” This does not mean that Zen disregards scriptures and texts, but that the reality the scriptures indicate is separate from the scriptures themselves, and not dependent on the words and letters that are used to indicate it.

Zen teachings require us to see into the words, while avoiding becoming attached to the words. We cannot “learn” Zen through reading and study, but we cannot disregard reading and study either. To use an analogy: reading a recipe for chocolate cake will not result in producing a chocolate cake—you must possess the ingredients and follow the instructions. At the same time, simply possessing the ingredients without the knowledge provided by the recipe will not do either.

In the first three statements of Genjokoan, Dogen illustrates what reality is like; in this line, he presents it more directly, “and though it is like this, it is only that flowers, while loved, fall; and weeds while hated, flourish.” This kind of expression, common in Zen literature, is meant to convey the truth that reality, or enlightenment is not produced by words, knowledge, or even spiritual practice; reality is reality, as it is here and now.

After laying the foundation in the first four lines of Genjokoan, Dogen methodically builds the structural framework upon which he spent the rest of his life fleshing out; the function and essence of “The rightly-transmitted Buddha-Dharma.”

Peace,

Ted Biringer

Delusion is easier on the knees

Aside from the question of what Dogen actually meant, it is clear that he personally approached life with great zeal and intensity. Even setting aside the uncertainties concerning his biography, what little is known clearly testifies to the fact that he himself acted in accord with his repeated, energetic exhortations to “master in practice” and “examine sideways and upside down” and “apply yourselves as if your head was on fire” etc.

His own life was an eternal quest; committing to the path at 8 years old, running away at 13 to avoid the barriers of secular life, reading the entire Tripitaka twice by his early 20s, mastering Tendai, the exoteric and esoteric teachings. Not yet satisfied, he set about mastering Rinzai Zen under Myozan, then accompanied him on a journey to China. There, he traveled around and sought wise counsel wherever he could.

Finding Tendo Nyojo, he intensified his practice and study, realized a profound awakening, then spent a couple more years “entering the room” deepening and refining his realization under the guidance of his teacher.

When he finally returned to Japan, he spent the rest of his life continuously exploring and developing all manner of methods, techniques, and activities to effectively transmit the Buddha-Dharma to his fellow countrymen. To this end he produced hundreds of fascicles which he continuously re-worked, edited, and refined many times, right up to his final illness, and he established Eihei-ji (still regarded as one of the great temples of the world), and he offered instruction to monks, nuns, and secular people from all classes.

The energy that Dogen applied in those monumental efforts can still be felt on a visceral level through reading and (trying) to apply his teachings as outlined in some of the most creative expressions in Buddhist history.

Dogen’s life was clearly engaged in actively creating, exploring, and expressing the meaning, function, and experience of the Buddha-Dharma. When we see how vibrantly he speaks of discovering whole worlds in each moment, and in each drop of water, we come to understand his outspoken disdain for the distorted ‘nothing to realize’ and ‘everything is it’ notions of Zen that had taken root in his own time. We are (at least I am) inspired by Dogen’s constant earnestness on the necessity to focus our aspiration and effort that he asserts are essential to genuine practice and enlightenment. His repeated exhortations to “those who have already attained enlightenment” to continue to go ever-deeper attaining enlightenment upon enlightenment, are reinforced by his own example. His constant refrain reminds us that enlightenment without practice is not authentic enlightenment, and practice without enlightenment is not authentic practice.

We don’t need to prove Dogen’s meaning to understand that the necessity of wholehearted effort and focused, dedicated practice is a basic teaching of Buddhism, and a hallmark of Zen. And even those that have not researched much in the Zen records realize that the teachings of “practice and enlightenment” have always been susceptible to misunderstanding and misappropriation.

Obvious to even the most casual of readers among Zen students is that some of the most pernicious divisions in the history of Buddhism have been caused by arguments around what this teaching means. The confusion between sudden realization (original enlightenment) and gradual cultivation (acquired enlightenment), has been the most visible and persistent manifestation of this argument in the Zen tradition.

According to his biographers, the apparent contradiction between original enlightenment and acquired enlightenment was the barrier to and eventually the catalyst of Dogen’s own great awakening. Resolving this conflict became the central focus of his spiritual quest. It was through his personal resolution of the seeming contradiction between the doctrine of original enlightenment and the need for spiritual practice that allowed him to—in his own words from Shobogenzo, Bendowa—“complete the task of a lifetime.”

After such a powerful experience, it is only natural that the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment became such a central theme in Dogen’s teaching. By “non-dual” I mean, empty of duality, I do not mean that practice and enlightenment are one, as is propagated by some. Practice and enlightenment in Zen are two aspects of one reality. I think that Dogen is clear on the fact that though they always go together, they each maintain their distinctive aspects.

This brings me to, what I think is one of the best passages in Shobogenzo that takes up question raised, “What constitutes practicing Dogen’s Zen?” The very first paragraph of Dogen’s very first teaching, Fukanzazengi, is constructed of four lines—each variations expressing the fundamental point.

“Now, when we research it, the truth originally is all around: why should we rely upon practice and experience? The real vehicle exists naturally: why should we put forth great effort? Furthermore, the whole body far transcends dust and dirt: who could believe in the means of sweeping and polishing? In general, we do not stray from the right state: of what use, then, are the tip-toes of training?”Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross, Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Book 1, p. 279

Coming from Dogen we know this is not a simplistic series of rhetorical statements, but an expression of spiritual realization, urging us to deep contemplation. It seems clear that Dogen is not saying, “the truth is all around: we do not need to rely upon practice, put forth great effort, etc.” Rather, he is saying, “the truth is all around: why do we need to practice, who could believe in the means, of what use, and so on.” His statements are neither rhetorical, nor are they conventional questions wanting answers. Here he not only respond to the question posed, Dogen indicates, at once, the revelation of the truth of Zen and illustrates the appropriate attitude for Zen practitioners to employ.

While his expressions were unique, and may even transcend those of his predecessors, what Dogen actually taught was what all the true buddhas and Zen ancestors taught; enlightenment is the essence of authentic practice, practice is the function of authentic enlightenment. The duality of practice and enlightenment is actualized and transcended, not eradicated or annihilated. It seems obvious in this light, that Dogen frequently used the term zazen in reference to the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment, not just as a reference to sitting meditation. In Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Dogen outlines this fundamental teaching of Zen. Near the end of this essay, he uses a Zen koan to illustrate the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment. The koan runs:

Zen Master Hotetsu, of Mount Mayu is using a fan. A monk comes up and says, “The nature of air is ever-present, and there is no place it does not reach. Why then does the Master use a fan?”The master says, “You understand that the nature of air is ever-present, but you do not understand the truth that there is no place it does not reach.”The monk says, “What is the truth of there being no place it does not reach?”At this, the master just continues to use the fan.The monk does prostra-tions.

Dogen goes on to say, “The actualization of the buddha-dharma, the living way of authentic transmission, is like this.”Because of the universal significance that is applied by all Dogen admirers to Genjokoan, combined with the widely held notion that all Dogen’s teaching can be summed up by “zazen”, it is worth noting that the word “zazen” does not appear even once in this vastly popular fascicle.

The term zazen, like dharma, buddha, bodhi, and the like, has different meanings depending on the speaker, audience, and context of its expression. Just as the most common use of the term “Buddha” is as a reference to the historical Shakyamuni Buddha, so the most common use of the term “zazen” is as a reference to sitting meditation. By developing a working knowledge of the records and koans of Zen, it becomes obvious when Dogen is using the term zazen strictly in reference to sitting meditation, and when he is using it in the sense of: the non-dual nature of practice and enlightenment.

It is truly regrettable that Dogen’s profound expressions on practice and enlightenment has often been twisted into shallow, naturalistic views. When this is allowed to occur, Dogen’s wonderful teaching that practice is practice-and-enlightenment, and enlightenment is practice-and-enlightenment, is reduced into practice is enlightenment, and enlightenment is practice.

In Dogen’s teaching on practice and enlightenment, he regarded any teaching that posited practice as a term indicating something other than the enactment of enlightenment, as in practice-and-enlightenment, or as a term synonymous with enlightenment, as false teaching. Perhaps this is why some contemporary “Zen” books avoid the word “enlightenment,” altogether—except as something to be challenged, and the word “practice,” is so profuse. Rambling on about Zen practice this and Zen practice that, it often seems as if practice has become totally divorced from enlightenment—diminished to a simple catchphrase, a kind of pseudo-Zen. Worse, when this misrepresentation of practice is married to a strictly literalist interpretation of zazen, it reduces great enlightenment to ordinary sitting meditation. If the true creed of Dogen’s teaching is; “there is no enlightenment to seek, have no goal except to only sit which is itself full and perfect enlightenment", then I would simply prefer delusion--it is much easier on the knees.

Gassho,

Ted Biringer