Clear Demonstration of Buddha-Nature...

The Clear Demonstration of Buddha-Nature...

The fourteenth patriarch, the Venerable Ryuju, called Nagarjuna in Sanskrit, and called either Ryuju, Ryusho, or Ryumo in Chinese, is a man from western India, and he goes to southern India. Most people of that nation believe in karma for happiness. The Venerable One preaches for them the subtle Dharma. Those who hear him say to each other, “The most important thing in the human world is that people possess karma for happiness. Yet he talks idly of the buddha-nature. Who can see such a thing?”

The Venerable One says, “If you want to realize the buddha-nature, you must first get rid of selfish pride.”

The people say, “Is the buddha-nature big or is it small?”

The Venerable One says, “The buddha-nature is not big and not small, it is not wide and not narrow, it is without happiness and without rewards, it does not die and it is not born.”

When they hear these excellent principles, they all turn from their original mind. Then the Venerable One, from his seat, manifests his free body, which seems like the perfect circle of a full moon. All those gathered only hear the sound of Dharma; they do not see the master’s form. In that assembly is a rich man’s son, Kanadeva. He says to the assembly, “Do you know what this form is or not?”

Those in the assembly say, “The present [form] is something our eyes have never before seen, our ears have never before heard, our minds have never before known, and our bodies have never before experienced.”

Kanadeva says, “Here the Venerable One is manifesting the form of the buddha-nature to show it to us. How do we know this? It may be presumed that the formless state of samadhi in shape resembles the full moon. The meaning of the buddha-nature is evident and it is transparently clear.”

After these words, the circle disappears at once, and [the master] is sitting on his seat. Then he preaches the following verse:

[My] body manifests the roundness of the moon,

By this means demonstrating the physique of the buddhas.
The preaching of Dharma has no set form.
The real function is beyond sounds and sights.

(Quoted from Shobogenzo, Bussho, translated by Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross)

This is a wonderfully rich Buddhist story. Anyone that takes the time to memorize it and carry it around with them probably find many subtle layers here… Let us simply consider one of these for now.

The great Buddhist ancestor Nagarjuna, the story goes, preaches the “subtle Dharma.” Those that hear him are surprised that his preaching fails to support their own presuppositions about the Dharma. According to the “common” view (in that place and time) the “most important thing” in the world was assumed to be good karma. Then, along comes Nagarjuna preaching about something as insignificant (in their view) as Buddha-nature.

Presuppositions – in a certain sense, the whole nature and function of authentic Buddhist practice-enlightenment is the undoing of presuppositions.

It is sometimes easy to dismiss or ignore words, thoughts, and deeds that fail to agree with our own presuppositions. Fortunately, “the people” in this story did not simply dismiss Nagarjuna and go home or back to their own temples; they questioned themselves (“What does he mean about Buddha-nature?”), and they questioned the master. What’s he saying? Is our own view about what is of greatest importance mistaken? Excellent Zen practice!

Nagarjuna said, ““If you want to realize the buddha-nature, you must first get rid of selfish pride.”

To get at the reality of “Buddha-nature” requires one to “first get rid of selfish pride.” That selfish pride can be very stubborn (and subtle) – the fact that “the people” did not simply dismiss Nagarjuna in the first place, but instead were willing to seriously inquire into his teaching (and thus their own views) seems to suggest that they were a little less attached to “selfish pride” than many of us are today.

What else can you reveal Nagarjuna? Let’s say that we are willing and able to rid ourselves of selfish pride and “realize” this “Buddha-nature” you speak of, what exactly will we be “realizing”? What is the Buddha-nature?

Nagarjuna said, “The buddha-nature is not big and not small, it is not wide and not narrow, it is without happiness and without rewards, it does not die and it is not born.”

Interesting, at first glance the Buddha-nature seems to NOT be a lot of things, and to be WITHOUT many qualities, and also does NOT DO various things – in short, it is NOT big and NOT small, NOT wide and NOT narrow, it is WITHOUT happiness and WITHOUT rewards, it does NOT die and it is NOT born.

Is this the same as “neti, neti” (not-this, not-this)? Certainly, some would argue thus. Just as the Buddhist teachings of emptiness are often used to support certain presuppositions about uniformity and non-differentiation, about non-existence and void oneness…

But does that account for the whole of Nagarjuna’s statement? Can we also read it like this:

“THE BUDDHA-NATURE IS not big AND not small, IT IS not wide AND not narrow, IT IS without happiness AND without rewards, IT DOES not die AND IT IS not born.”

If we can realize it like this the wisdom of this story may shine through and be as clear and present as a piece of fruit held in the palm of our hand. And why wouldn’t it be? The Buddhas and ancestors reveal and express the Dharma – they never conceal or begrudge. To realize what the Buddha-nature IS, and DOES we must first be rid of selfish pride – and then we realize, as Dogen says, “the buddha-nature is ‘transparently clear’ and is ‘evident.’”

The ancestral master does not begrudge them [the teaching], but their eyes and ears are shut and so they cannot see or hear it. Never having established body-knowing, they cannot make out [the teaching]. As they watch from afar “the formless state of samadhi” whose “shape resembles the full moon,” and as they do prostrations to it, it is “something their eyes have never before seen.” “The meaning of the buddha-nature is evident and it is transparently clear.” So the state in which the body manifesting itself preaches the buddha-nature is “transparently clear” and is “evident.” And the state in which the preaching of the buddha-nature is a body manifesting itself is “demonstration, by concrete means,” of “the physique of the buddhas.” Where could there be one buddha or two buddhas who failed to realize as “the buddha-physique” this “demonstration by concrete means”?

~Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

It seems as if this was the reason that only Kanadeva (Nagarjuna’s successor) was able to see the Buddha’s body (physique of Buddha) at that time. Fortunately, this event was recorded and there have certainly been many beings that have been able to meet with Kanadeva and Nagarjuna since. This story is exerted by the liberating potential of the whole Buddha Dharma – carry it around and see if you don’t find the bare fact of the Buddha-nature shining right before you. Check in with Dogen’s commentary on the story from time to time (in Shobogenzo, Bussho) for a little help clearing your vision; there you will find many clues, like this gem for example:

Remember, at this time the Venerable One is simply seated upon his high seat. The manner in which his body manifests itself is just the same as in the case of any person seated here now.

~Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
 

Peace,

Ted

In Loving Memory – Jade Alexendria Biringer – April 27, 1993 – July 13, 1993

In Loving Memory – Jade Alexendria Biringer – April 27, 1993 – July 13, 1993

In Grateful Thanks to Bodhisattva Mahasattva

Jade Alexandria Biringer

April 27, 1993 – July 13, 1993

Parent and Child - Stones and Flowers

In response to the interesting comment by David H-T, I thought it might be appropriate to post a couple of creatively expressive Dogen quotes that I think offer a remarkably clear vision of nonduality. See what you think:

The monk Dokai of Mount Daiyo, in instructing his assembly, said, “The verdant mountains are constantly moving on, and the Stone Maiden, in the dark of night, gives birth to Her Child.” The mountains are never lacking in the spiritual merits with which they are undoubtedly endowed. This is why they constantly reside at ease and are constantly moving on. By all means, you must examine in great detail the spiritual merits of their moving on. The moving on of a mountain will be just like the moving on of those who wander through life in ignorance, so, even though you may think that it seems the same as the human activity of walking, nevertheless, do not doubt ‘the moving on’ of mountains.
...
The statement “The Stone Maiden, in the dark of night, gives birth to Her Child” refers to the time when the Stone Maiden gives birth to Her Child as ‘in the dark of night’. Generally speaking, there are stones that are male and stones that are female, as well as stones that are neither male nor female, and all of these quite nicely fill up the heavens and fill up the earth. And there are heavenly stones and there are earthly stones, which those who wander without a preconceived goal speak of, though persons who really know them are rare indeed. One needs to understand the principle of Her ‘giving birth to a Child’.

At the time of Her giving birth to the Child, are Parent and Child made separate? You must devote yourself to exploring through your training not only that ‘the Child becoming the Parent’ is the full manifestation of ‘giving birth to the Child’, but also that ‘the time when the Parent becomes the Child’ is the full manifestation of ‘giving birth to the Child’. You must thoroughly penetrate what is being said here.
Shobogenzo, Sansuikyo, Hubert Nearman

Generally speaking, the time of the Dharma’s flowering is inevitably one in which, as the Lotus Scripture puts it, “The parent is young and the child is old.” This does not mean that the child is not a child, nor does it mean that the parent is not a parent: you should simply explore this as “The child is the one who is old and the parent is the one who is young.” Do not follow worldly disbeliefs and thereby be disconcerted, and that which is a worldly disbelief is also a time of the Dharma’s flowering. On account of this, we should make our turning of the Dharma Flower be ‘that singular time when the Buddha was dwelling in the world’. We come pouring forth from the earth when we are aroused by opening up to, manifesting, awakening to, and entering It, and we come pouring forth from the earth when we are aroused by what a Buddha knows through direct experience. At this time of turning the Flower of the Dharma, there is the mind’s awakening due to the Flower of the Dharma, and there is the flowering of the Dharma due to the mind’s awakening.
Shobogenzo, Hokke Ten Hokke, Hubert Nearman

 

Peace,

Ted

Perceiving the Buddhas Expressions of Truth

Perceiving the Buddhas Expressions of Truth

If we can manage to see through and beyond our own presuppositions (or those espoused by popular Zen books and teachers) about the nature of Zen and the significance of the Buddha Dharma, the Mahayana sutras and shastras (treatises, or commentaries) as well as the classic records of Zen can be seen in the clarity with which they are expressed. When Shakyamuni Buddha saw the morning star (which he had seen many, many times before) and realized enlightenment he said, “How wonderful, all beings are the Tathagata (Buddha), it is only their delusions and preoccupations that keep them from testifying to the fact.” The moment before, the moment of, and the moment after his enlightenment, the human being Shakyamuni was the human being Shakyamuni, and the morning star was the morning star; yet each of these three moments present some vastly distinct differences. How was Shakyamuni’s experience of the morning star on this instance so different from all his many previous experiences?

Just as seeing through his delusions and preoccupations allowed Shakyamuni to experience the true nature of the morning star (and himself) for the first time, when we manage to see through our own conditioned views, beliefs, and presuppositions we will find his teachings (and those of his authentic heirs) to be clear, accessible reliable guides along the ancient Way. The nature, dynamics, and nondual interaction (inclusive of and transcendent to both nonduality and duality) of Buddha and human beings is profoundly and clearly elucidated by Dogen in many direct expressions of truth throughout Shobogenzo. Shakyamuni truly saw the morning star when he forgot everything he already “knew” about it; we will truly see his expressions of truth (the Buddha Dharma) only when we forget everything we know about Zen and Buddhism. Cast off all your pre-occupations and pre-conceptions and consider this passage from Shobogenzo, Sangai Yuishin:

The threefold world of the here and now is what we see as the threefold world. ‘What we see’ means our seeing the threefold world as a threefold world. ‘Seeing it as a threefold world’ refers to the threefold world as it manifests right before us, as we manifest it right before us, and as our spiritual question manifests right before our very eyes. We all innately have the ability to make the threefold world be the vehicle for the arising of our spiritual intention, our practice and training, our realizing enlightenment, and our experiencing nirvana. This is why our Great Master Shakyamuni once said in verse:

These three worlds, right now,
Are what we all innately have,
And all sentient beings within them,
Without exception, are My children.

Because these three worlds here and now are what the Tathagata innately had, the whole universe was His threefold world, because the threefold world is the whole universe. ‘Here and now’ encompasses the past, present, and future. The occurring of past, present, and future does not obstruct the here and now, but the occurring of the here and now does obstruct past, present, and future from arising.

That which ‘we innately have’ refers to the whole universe in all ten directions being our real, true Body. It refers to the whole universe in all ten directions being a mendicant monk’s Eye. ‘Sentient beings’ are real, true bodies of the whole universe in all ten directions. Because each and every sentient being is born sentient, they are called ‘sentient beings’.

‘Without exception, they are My children’ means that children are also manifestations of the ceaseless operation of Buddha Nature. Even so, of necessity, children receive their bodies, along with their hair and skin, all unharmed and unbroken, from a compassionate parent. Parents regard this as the child’s fully manifesting. Yet, at this present moment, since there is no parent who is before and no child who is after, nor a child who is before and a parent who is after, nor a parent and child being lined up beside each other, we call this the principle of ‘My children’. Although the body is not something that is given, we receive it; although it is not something that we snatch, we acquire it. It is beyond the characteristics of coming and going, beyond the measure of large and small, beyond discussions of old and young. We should hold to it like the ‘old’ and ‘young’ of the Buddhas and Ancestors. Sometimes there is a parent who is ‘young’ and a child who is ‘old’, or a parent who is ‘old’ and a child who is ‘young’, or a parent who is ‘old’ and a child who is ‘old’, or a parent who is ‘young’ and a child who is ‘young’. One who makes a study of his parent’s ‘agedness’ would not be a child; one who has not seen through the ‘youthfulness’ of his child would not be a parent. The ‘age’ and ‘youth’ of a child, as well as the ‘age’ and ‘youth’ of a parent, must be fully explored, in detail, and without haste.
Shobogenzo, Sangai Yuishin, Hubert Nearman

Zen or Buddhist teachings don’t get much more straightforward than this. The truth expressed here is as obvious as the morning star in the sky. The only confusion we might experience here would be that confusion concocted by our own efforts to try to force this teaching into our previously constructed conceptual notions. As soon as we try to make Dogen (or other Buddhas) say what we mean, rather than what they are expressing, we inevitably subvert truth to falsity. The unity of Buddha and human beings revealed in Dogen’s expressions on practice and enlightenment and Buddha nature and no-Buddha nature are as lucid and straightforward as the parent-child relationship is to parents and children. For those still unclear about his meaning, immediately following his elucidation Dogen breaks it down even further and expresses the truth in terms we cannot fail to understand (provided we drop our presuppositions).

There are parents and children for whom the parent-child relationship emerges at the same time, and there are those for whom the parent-child relationship disappears at the same time, and there are those for whom the parent child relationship emerges at different times, and there are those for whom the parent-child relationship disappears at different times. Without standing against the compassionate parent, one has brought forth ‘my child’, and without standing against ‘my child’, one has brought forth the compassionate parent. There are sentient beings who are mindful, and there are sentient beings who are not mindful; there is my child who is mindful, and there is my child who is not mindful. In this manner, my child and I —and I am also a child—are both the true heirs of our Compassionate Parent Shakyamuni. All beings of the past, present, and future in the whole universe—every last one of them—are the Buddhas of past, present, and future in the whole universe. The children of all Buddhas are sentient beings, and the Compassionate Parents of all sentient beings are Buddhas. Consequently, the flowering and fruiting of the hundreds of things that arise are what all Buddhas have as Their own, and the rocks and stones, large and small, are what all Buddhas have as Their own as well. Their peaceful places are the forests and fields, for They are already free of attachment to forests and fields. Be that as it may, the main point of what the Tathagata said was simply the phrase ‘My children’. You need to thoroughly explore that He never spoke of His being their parent.
Shobogenzo, Sangai Yuishin, Hubert Nearman

Finally, as Buddha is all existence everything we can possibly experience is Buddha. Moreover, the only possible experiencer must also be Buddha. And indeed, this exactly corresponds to Dogen’s teaching about Buddha nature, no-Buddha nature, and the unity of practice and enlightenment. These are only a few examples of the many ways that Dogen illumines that the significance of expressions of truth (the Buddha Dharma) are the significance of the dynamic interaction of Buddha and human beings. Every expression of truth is an expression of the one mind (Buddha, existence-time, the true self, etc.), while every instance of experience is a wholly unique, real, particular thing, being, or event (dharma). Buddha is the universal expression, the total existence of/as human beings; each individual human being is a real, particular instance of Buddha...

Peace,
Ted

Zen and the Perfection of "As It Is-ness" - Dogen's take

The Perfection of Zen's "As It Is-ness"...

---

To see and hear that the living are inevitably mortal is the small view. To be of the opinion that the dead are without thinking and perception is small knowledge. In learning the truth, do not learn such shallow knowledge and small views. There may be those among the living who are immortal, and there may be those among the dead who have thinking and perception.
Shobogenzo, Gyoji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

The timidity of those inflicted with self-doubt or attachment to dualistic views causes some to see teachings that refer of human “perfection” as irreverent. From the self-centered perspective perfection can only be envisioned as a kind of super-ego. In contrast, Buddhism views perfection as the authentic actualization of the whole body-mind rather than a particular aspect or specific quality of reality. A willow is perfect insofar as it is a willow “as it is” – that is the whole of space and time exerting itself as a particular willow here and now. Attempting to find the perfection of a willow by isolating and abstracting the “best,” “highest,” or “most essential” quality of willows only defiles the perfection of a willow “as it is.”

The same thing is true of trying to define the perfection of Buddha nature. From the ego-centric standpoint, reality is divided into "subject" and "object", "self" and "other than self." From such a dualistic perspective, perfection can only be envisioned in contrast to, and separate from imperfection, that is, as a conceptual abstraction.

As an abstract concept, perfection lacks reality - it cannot be pictured, experienced, or expressed (perceived, known, or communicated). Lacking real form (thus, real nature), perfection can only be discussed in negative terms such as “inconceivable,” “incommunicable,” “ineffable,” etc. Attempting to substantiate speculative notions theorists sometimes insinuate esoteric knowledge by substituting negative terms and obscure generalizations such as “undifferentiated-oneness,” “undefiled-goodness,” “pure-awareness,” etc. This kind of perfection only succeeds in eradicating the reality of particularity and differentiation – the “skull littered field” of Zen parlance. In contrast to this, Shobogenzo portrays perfection in a vision that harmonizes with the classic Zen records.

Thus it was that Shakyamuni Buddha once addressed His great assembly, saying, “I, on My own, have come to know how It appears, as every Buddha in the ten quarters has also done.” You need to know that the appearance referred to in His statement “I, on My own, have come to know how It appears” is the appearance of That which is fully perfected. The appearance of perfection is, as the saying goes, “This cane of bamboo is on the tall side whereas that cane of bamboo is on the short side.” The Way of the Buddhas in the ten quarters is synonymous with giving full expression to the saying, “I, on My own, have come to know how It appears, which was the same for Shakyamuni Buddha.” It is “I, on My own, have awakened to this appearance, and Buddhas in Their own domains are also like this.” It is the way ‘I’ appears, the way ‘knowing’ appears, the way ‘this’ appears, the way ‘all’ appears, the way ‘this ordinary worldly country of ours’ appears, the way ‘Shakyamuni Buddha’ appears.

The underlying principle of this is what the Buddhist Scriptures give voice to. The Buddhas, along with Their Buddha lands, are beyond duality, beyond being sentient or nonsentient, beyond being deluded or enlightened, beyond being good, bad, or neutral, beyond being pure or sullied, beyond being something created and beyond being something permanently abiding, beyond yearning for things and beyond there being nothing to yearn for, beyond permanence and impermanence, beyond existence and non-existence, and beyond self. They are apart from the four phrases—there is existence, there is no existence, there is both existence and nonexistence, and there is neither existence nor non-existence—as well as apart from the one hundred ways of negating. They are simply nothing other than the ten quarters, nothing other than the Buddha lands. Thus, the ten quarters are nothing other than what they are, just as we humans are: we have heads but no tails.
Shobogenzo, Jippo, Hubert Nearman

As humans “we have heads but no tails,” stones have color but no leaves, bamboo has joints but no legs; each is perfect “as it is.” Clear seeing “as it is” is perfect clear seeing, which Dogen calls “prajna itself.” To exist “as is” is to “exist as experienced.”

In sum, “perfection” in Buddhism has less to do with the quality of a thing (dharma) and more to do with the whole actuality of a thing; perfection is the measure to which a dharma is “as it is.” Perfection is not “purity,” “uniformity,” “cleanliness,” etc., “it is beyond being pure or sullied, good or bad,” the perfection of a thing is the total exertion of the “as it isness” of that thing.

In grateful thanks to Master Dogen once again - Nine Full Bows

Peace,

Ted

The Homeland of the Self

There has never been any real division

Nic asked, “How do we cease conceptualization and become one with the unnamable void?”

Louie Wing said, “First of all, you do not ‘become one with the void’. You are the void. Awakening is just realizing the fact. The unnamable void is your own mind. When you conceptualize, you are abstracting partial aspects from the whole. That is, you are dividing the one true reality into this and that, self and other. This can be done skillfully only when you realize that in reality, there are no such divisions.

“When you cease conceptualizing, you realize that your own awareness is pure, clear, and luminescent, that it is the unnamable void. You then grasp the fact that all the myriad things are not separate from the void, but are in fact the void itself. All the myriad things are nothing other than your own miraculous awareness, which is infinitely vast and eternally present.

“Once you realize your own identity with the unnamable void, you realize that there has never been any real division between things and times, self and other-than-self. All such divisions are merely delusions based on conceptualization. Then, knowing your own unity with all things and events, you enter any environment and participate in any activity without ever leaving what Dogen called, ‘the homeland of the self’.”

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing Peace, Ted

Emptiness is Form; Self is Other

As Dogen students quickly realize, Dogen’s writings are brim full of references to a “state” or “condition” that he calls “the body and mind of ‘self’ and ‘other’ falling away.” In fact, this phrase is so frequently repeated one can become desensitized to its profound significance. For this reason I would like to suggest a few points that may be helpful to be attentive to when meeting this expression in Dogen’s works.

First, in Dogen’s usage, “the body and mind of ‘self’” is always inclusive of “the body and mind of ‘other’ than self” (i.e. the myriad dharmas). To hold a view that it would be possible to let our own body-mind fall away but not the body-mind of the external world would be inherently dualistic (it would be similarly dualistic to suppose the body-mind of the external world could fall away apart from the body mind of self). Being dualistic, such view are regarded by Dogen as being non-Buddhist.

We stated that Dogen’s allusions to the “falling away of body-mind” always implies the context of the self and the external world; we now want to underscore that point by extending this to include all his references to the body-mind of individuals, or the “self” of human beings. The reason this is significant is that it clarifies the important distinction between the ego-centric “self” (unawakened human beings commonly called “ordinary beings”), and the universal or true “self” (commonly called “Buddhas”).

When Dogen speaks of the personal “self” (shinjin; the individual body-mind), It is important to understand that this is the “self” of “self and other” (self and world). The personal body-mind “self” is only and always an inherent aspect of the nonduality of “self and other than self.”

As the two nondual “aspects”, or (to adopt Hee-Jin Kim’s suggestion) “foci,” self and other are coessential; if one is raised, both are raised, of one is eliminated, both are eliminated. At the same time, each maintains its own distinct characteristics; that is, although each always the other, neither of them alters or interferes with the particularity of the other – “self” and “other” are mutually inclusive and nonobstructive. Thus, the Shobogenzo, Shoaku-makusa fascicle, for example, tells us:

The many kinds of right are “good doing” but they are neither of the doer nor known by the doer, and they are neither of the other nor known by the other. As regards the knowing and the seeing of the self and of the other, in knowing there is the self and there is the other, and in seeing there is the self and there is the other, and thus individual vigorous eyes exist in the sun and in the moon. This state is “good doing” itself. At just this moment of “good doing” the realized universe exists but it is not “the creation of the universe,” and it is not “the eternal existence of the universe.”
Shobogenzo, Shoaku-makusa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

The point concern the present discussion is illustrated by the line, “As regards the knowing and the seeing of the self and of the other, in knowing there is the self and there is the other, and in seeing there is the self and there is the other…”

Thus, to experience (know or see) a “self” or an “other” – there must be both a “self” and an “other” experienced (seen or known). A “self” cannot be experienced alone, an “other” cannot exist independent of a self – therefore, when Dogen says “self” he means “self/other,” when he says “other” he also means “self/other.”

Peace,
Ted

Dogen's Zen: the Evil, Fear, and Boredom of Ignorance & Mystery

To realize the buddha-dharma is to realize your self. To realize your self is to forget your self. To forget your self is to be actualized by the many things. To be actualized by the many things is to allow the body-and-mind of your self and the body-and-mind of other than your self to fall away. All traces of enlightenment fall away, and the falling away of all traces of enlightenment is continuous.
Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Translation from The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing, by Ted Biringer

At the end of this section of Genjokoan, Dogen points out that the falling away of enlightenment is “continuous.” This is presented throughout Shobogenzo’s vision of practice-realization as a process in which the very instant enlightenment is realized, it is cast off to be refreshed in the total exertion of the next instance of enlightenment, which immediately falls away as the next instance is totally exerted – this casting off, exertion, casting off, exertion, is the ceaseless advance of Buddha nature, ever-advancing as the totality of existence-time (uji).

This reveals one reason for Dogen’s energetic refutation of all forms of dualism, fatalism, naturalism, and any other distortion that could lead to practices of detachment or antinomian behavior. Deluded interpretations of “causality,” “original enlightenment,” or “spontaneous manifestation” undermine, minimize, or obscure the necessity of spiritual practice; thus they are not only dismissed as ineffectual; they are disparaged as barriers to Buddhist liberation.

That the actualization of the universe (genjokoan) is “continuous” means that Buddha activity is ceaselessly advancing in and as the fashioning of the world (and the true self) – the means (actualizing) and the ends (actualization) are not two different things. The world and true self are never fixed, but are the ever-new reality continuously fashioning/fashioned.

The ego-centric individual that abstracts qualities from dharmas and abstracts time from existence lives in a realm of disparate, independent objects. For them, dharmas (things, beings, instances, etc.) are not Buddha nature (the true self), but (external) objects that exist prior to subjective experience and continue to exist after subjective experience. Experiencing nothing “new” the egoist is confined to a state vacillating between boredom and fear; two prolific sources of human evil.

Boredom, which is incompatible with authentic practice-realization, is inevitable in the ego-centric’s “fixed” world of “objective” reality; the only relief available consists of dissecting, rehashing, and rearranging the “same old, same old.” As horror novelists know, those realms in which things are chopped into pieces and arranged in piles and heaps are realms in which monsters – and the victims of monsters – dwell.

Egoistic fear serves as a source of evil insofar as it is preoccupied with mysteriousness. The inertia, constriction, or suppression (of right, or good conduct and action) results from a narcissistic fear that is more of a perverted fascination with the unknown than an aversion to it.

The ego or false-self is, by definition, dependent on remaining ignorant of its beginning and end (birth and death) – thus, it instinctively senses its own annihilation in illumination. In sympathy with its species the ego-self becomes transfixed by a sublime fascination with ignorance, and desperately clings to the comfort of justifications and rationalizations appealing to “mystery” (e.g. claims about reality as being inconceivable, ineffable, etc.). All evil is spawned by the incestuous relationship of ignorance and mystery. Socrates and Jesus were condemned to death for daring to challenge them; Galileo, Huineng, Dogen, Eisai, and many others suffered sustained hostilities by officials of orthodoxy fiercely dedicated to maintaining the only safeguards of authoritative power, the paralysis caused by fixation with ignorance and mystery.

Dogen tells us that the “illusion” of a “fixed self” can be seen through by “looking closely” until we see things as the really are.

A person sailing along in a boat looking at the shore might have the illusion that the shore is moving. However, if they look closely at the boat they realize the boat is moving. Similarly, when they try to understand the many things based on deluded notions about body-and-mind they might have the illusion that their minds or nature are stationary. However, if they step back into fundamental awareness they realize nothing has a fixed self.
Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Translation from The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing, by Ted Biringer

Peace,
Ted

Dualism vs Duality - Dogen on the One and the Many

I have noticed a tendency among some in the Buddhist community to misunderstand “duality” as meaning “dualism” or “dualistic.” Confusing duality for dualism can, and does lead some to wrongly view “diversity” and “discrimination” as being somehow discouraged or contrary to the teachings of Buddhism.

To clarify the difference between dualism and duality, then, “dualism” (and dualistic views) refer to presuppositions of real divisions, or actual separations in reality; the existence of independent dharmas (things, beings, entities, instances, events, etc.). In contrast to this, “duality” is the complimentary aspect or “foci” of the nondual unity of “nonduality/duality” – it is the real aspect or quality of differentiation and diversity inherent to reality. In short, “dualism” is a delusional or erroneous view of reality, and “duality” is an intrinsic aspect of reality.

Duality is to nonduality as form is to emptiness; an inherent aspect of a coessential nondual reality (nonduality/duality).

In light of this, we should be wary of accepting (or using) unqualified generalizations about Buddhist doctrines on “oneness,” “equality,” “purity,” etc. For example, to say that the myriad things (dharmas) are all just “one mind” is a generalization that would best be avoided, or at least qualified. Such a statement could only be accurate (in harmony with Buddhism) in a context that clearly acknowledges that the “one mind” is intrinsically “many” (myriad dharmas) as well as “one.”

Failing to acknowledge and account for the duality inherent in “one mind,” “Buddha nature,” “the absolute,” “emptiness,” “prajna,” etc. leads to partial (biased) views privileging “one” as somehow superior to, or more essential than “many.”

The (one) “Buddha mind” that is the experiencer of (many) dharmas, is coessential with the (many) dharmas that are experienced by the (one) “Buddha mind.” In short, the one Buddha mind is the myriad dharmas and the myriad dharmas are the one Buddha mind; both are essential constituents of a nondual unity (nondual/dual) – each is dependent on the other, yet each maintains its characteristic differences.

In, Dogen: On Meditation and Thinking, Hee-Jin Kim provides an example that bring the implications of this to light. In a discussion on the various meaning of three related terms for “satori” (“enlightenment”) – go, kaku, and sho – summarizing the connotations of go (as stressing intuitive insight into true nature) and kaku (as stressing awakening or becoming aware of a previously unknown truth), Kim writes:

By contrast, sho (which means “to prove,” “to bear witness to,” “to verify”) signifies the direct, personal verification of salvific reality/truth through the body-mind (shinjin), one’s whole being. A crucially important point here is, namely, “that which verifies” and “that which is verified” are inseparably intertwined via the body-mind. In this context, sho is typically coupled with shu (“practice”) as in shusho (“practice and enlightenment”). Although go, kaku, and sho are used interchangeably in Zen Buddhism, as well as in Dogen, his most favored term is undoubtedly sho. Thus in speaking of enlightenment (sho), Dogen always presupposes the process of verification in which enlightenment entails practice, and vice versa. To put it differently, enlightenment (nonduality) makes it incumbent upon practitioners to put the unitive vision of all things into practice, in terms of duality of the revisioned world.
Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen: On Meditation and Thinking, pp.21-22

According to Dogen’s worldview, to exist as a dharma is to be experienced (verified) as a (mind) form, image, or picture in the mind of an individual being, and to be experienced as a form, image, or picture in the mind of an individual being is to exist as a real aspect of that individual being.

When “duality” is mistaken for “dualism,” thus leading to biased views that fail to account for the inherent reality of diversity and distinction, one simply cannot accurately understand Buddhist teachings.

When we accurately grasp this essential point, we can reach an accurate understanding of Buddhist teachings; we can then put them into practice; verify their true significance; and actualize them in the world.

To exist, a dharma (“that which is verified”) must be experienced by an experiencer (“that which verifies”); thus, to experience (verify) the real existence of a dharma, is to experience (verify) the real existence of an experiencer. In its nondual aspect the experienced/experiencer form a unity of mutual existence as it is; in its dual aspect the experienced/experiencer of each particular dharma is as it is experienced, and the existence of each particular experiencer is as it experiences.

Peace,
Ted

Dharma-Transmission Vs. Established Buddhism

There are two primary manifestations in this world that are identified as “Buddhism” – one that is “established” (instituted) and one that is “transmitted” (revealed). The established version portrays Buddha nature as it has been established and developed by the intellect of the common human being. The transmitted Buddha Dharma is the vision of Buddha nature that has been transmitted by enlightened Buddhas and ancestors. From Dogen’s perspective, the established version of Buddhism is, of course, not Buddhism at all. Because ordinary beings are unable or unwilling to trust, practice, and verify their own identity with Buddha nature as portrayed by the expressions of Buddhas and ancestors, the established form of Buddhism continues to endure.

Do you know where the disease lies which keeps you learners from reaching true understanding? It lies where you have no faith in your Self. When faith in your Self is lacking you find yourself hurried by others in every possible way. At every encounter you are no longer your master: you are driven about by others this way or that.

All that is required is all at once to cease leaving your Self in search of something external. When this is done you will find your Self no different from the Buddha or the patriarch. Do you want to know who the Buddha or patriarch is? He is no other than the one who is, at this moment, right in front of me, listening to my talk on the Dharma. You have no faith in him and therefore you are in quest of someone else somewhere outside. And what will you find? Nothing but words and names, however excellent. You will never reach the moving spirit in the Buddha or patriarch.
The Zen Teachings of Linchi, Burton Watson

Why do people find it so difficult to accept the revealed Dharma transmitted by Buddhas and ancestors? To ask it another way, why do people reject, out of hand, the very notion that they are, as they are, Buddha? In short, people deny their own Buddhahood because of their attachment to abstract conceptual views – (consciously or not) people are unwilling to trust immediate experience more than the conclusions of abstract speculation. When Dogen says, “Buddhas are enlightened about delusion; ordinary beings are deluded about enlightenment,” he means, in part, that ordinary beings are attached to false notions about enlightenment. Like everything else, apart from actual experience in a particular place at a specific time, “enlightenment” is merely a concept. The taste of a pineapple may be described, but until an individual actually experiences that taste at a specific place-time, the taste of a pineapple is a mere idea for that individual – not a real dharma. Likewise for the “taste” (experience) of enlightenment; and while the idea or concept about the taste of a pineapple may actually have some fairly accurate qualities about it (due to the individual’s experience with other fruits), concepts about enlightenment are never even in the same ballpark as the actual experience.

When we perfectly realize it, while still as we are, we would never have thought previously that realization would be like this. Even though we had imagined it, it is not a realization that is compatible with that imagining.
Shōbōgenzō, Yui-butsu-yo-butsu, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

This is hardly a new or radical teaching, Buddhist masters have been insistent on the need to grasp the true significance of this from the beginning of Zen history. For example, in an early Zen record attributed to Bodhidharma, the first ancestor of Zen in China, we read:

People who don’t see their nature and imagine they can practice thoughtlessness all the time are liars and fools. They fall into endless space. They’re like drunks. They can’t tell good from evil. If you intend to cultivate such a practice, you have to see your nature before you can put an end to rational thought. To attain enlightenment without seeing your nature is impossible.

Still others commit all sorts of evil deeds, claiming karma doesn’t exist. They erroneously maintain that since everything is empty, committing evil isn’t wrong. Such persons fall into a hell of endless darkness with no hope of release. Those who are wise hold no such conception.
The Zen Teaching of Bodhidharma, Red Pine

The Buddhas and ancestors advise beginning practitioners not to aim for “enlightenment” or aim “to become Buddha” in their pursuit of the Buddhist goal for good reason; those that have not yet experienced the reality of enlightenment cannot envision it – aiming for some conceptual notion of enlightenment can only lead in the wrong direction. Nevertheless, people have a tendency to ignore this constant refrain of Buddhist masters and aim for conceptions of enlightenment anyway. While not as ridiculous as “aiming” to have no goals at all – which is inane as well as futile – aiming for speculative concepts of “enlightenment” is ineffective and it can become a serious hindrance. Those that have yet to experience it typically concoct ideas about enlightenment as consisting of undifferentiated oneness, pure consciousness, undefiled goodness, and similar concepts equally impossible to envision or imagine.

Fellow believers, I tell you there is no Dharma to be found outside. But students don’t understand me and immediately start looking inward for some explanation, sitting by the wall in meditation, pressing their tongues against the roof of their mouths, absolutely still, never moving, supposing this to be the Dharma of the buddhas taught by the patriarchs. What a mistake! If you take this unmoving, clean, and pure environment to be the right way, then you will be making ignorance the lord and master. A man of old said, ‘Bottomless, inky black is the deep pit, truly a place to be feared!’ This is what he meant.
The Zen Teachings of Master Lin-chi, Burton Watson

Let go of emptiness and come back to the brambly forest.
Riding backward on the ox, drunken and singing,
Who could dislike the misty rain pattering on your bamboo raincoat and hat?
In the empty space you cannot stick a needle.
Cultivating the Empty Field, Dan Taigen Leighton

Intellectual conceptualization leads many to theorize that if there is any “bad,” “suffering,” “wrong,” etc. in human existence, it cannot have its source in Buddha nature, thus, it must arise from human weakness, imperfection, etc. Convinced of the “rationality” of such speculative theories, many practitioners unawares adopt dualistic presuppositions. If practitioners are ever to see beyond the ego-self, they must, at least tentatively, be willing to seriously consider the possible validity of the Buddhist teaching that all beings truly are, as they are, Buddha nature. As long as this is rejected, dismissed, minimized, or ignored there is no way to verify its truth in experiential realization. The need to see through deluded views that conceive of enlightenment in terms of abstract qualities like “goodness,” “purity,” etc., is one reason Zen masters sometimes utilize skillful means and turning words that appear to outsiders as shocking or irreverent.

A monk asked Joshu, “What is the pure land?”
Joshu said, “A puddle of piss.”
The monk asked, “Can you show it to me?”
Joshu said, “Don’t tempt me.”
...

Joshu and a city official were walking together. A rabbit they happened across instantly darted off when it saw them. The official said, “You are a greatly enlightened being, why did the rabbit run for its life?”
Joshu said, “I like to kill.”
...
A monk asked Yunmen, “What is Buddha?”
Yunmen said, “A dry turd.”
...

All this is simply a Buddha, when doing His practice, wriggling His toes in His straw sandals. There are times when His singular way of putting the Matter will be the sound from His breaking wind or the smell from His emptying His bowels. Those with Nostrils will get a whiff of It.
Shōbōgenzō, Gyōbutsu Iigi, Hubert Nearman
...

A monk said, “In the day there is sunlight, at night there is firelight. What is ‘divine light’?”
The master said, “Sunlight, firelight.”
The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu, James Green
...
The moment we actually succeed in ceasing such conceptualization the truth of “transmitted” (revealed) Buddhism and falsity of “established” (instituted) Buddhism becomes self-evident. The term “nirvana” literally means “extinction” and we can see by its etymology that one of its traditional meanings is “the end of the world.” Like the term “apocalypse” (Greek; “revelation”), the “end of the world” symbolized by the term nirvana informs us that along with “arising” and “abiding,” time possess the quality of “perishing.” Also like “apocalypse,” this sense of “nirvana” possesses the connotation of a “new beginning” or the actualization of a “new realm of reality” – a realm of perfection or eternal peace. This is the same image portrayed in the Zen expression about the “great death,” and the more usual term in Mahayana literature, “annutara samyak sambodhi” (full and perfect enlightenment). What all of these terms commonly convey is that the end (destruction, death, end, perishing, etc.) of the present world or life is simultaneously the beginning of a new world or life.

To experience an establishment or institution is to experience indirectly, to receive an interpretation or explanation; to experience a transmission or revelation is to experience directly, to perceive or sense immediately – establishments convey units of information (abstract ideas, concepts); transmissions reveal unified formations (dharmas; actual, particular instances of existence-time). The products of establishments are conveyed circuitously and discursively through hearing and learning; the products of transmission are revealed directly and wholly through seeing and perceiving. Transmission or revelation does not occur through faith or understanding, it does not require the acceptance of anything concealed or beyond human experience – to receive transmissions or revelations is to see “face to face.” This is the true significance of the Zen tradition of “mind to mind” or “face to face” transmission. The transmission of the Buddha Dharma is the transmission of enlightened wisdom (bodhi prajna) from the Buddha mind to the Buddha mind. Clear seeing is prajna itself; to see “face to face” is to see Shakyamuni face to face – not to see Shakyamuni face to face is not to see Shakyamuni at all.

By bowing down in respect to the Face of Shakyamuni Buddha and by transferring the Eye of Shakyamuni Buddha to our own eyes, we will have transferred our eyes to the Eye of Buddha. Ours will be the very Eye and Face of Buddha. Without even one generation’s break, that which has been conferred face-to-face right up to the present by the mutual Transmission of this Buddha Eye and Buddha Face is this very Face-to-Face Transmission.
…
Be very clear about it: when someone Transmits face-to-face the Treasure House of the Eye of the True Teaching by saying, “You have realized what my Marrow is,” this is plainly an instance of conferring the Face-to-Face Transmission. At that very moment when you let go of your everyday notions of what ‘bones and marrow’ means, there will be the Face-to-Face Transmission of the Buddhas and Ancestors. The Face-to-Face Transmission of the great Full Enlightenment and the Mind seal will involve a particular moment in a definite place.
Shobogenzo, Menju, Hubert Nearman

Clear seeing (prajna) is both the method (means) and goal (end) of Buddhist practice-realization. “Realization” (nirvana, full enlightenment) is the “great death,” the end of the present world, it is the transference of our ordinary, mundane eye, for the Dharma-Eye which sees clearly. “Practice” denotes the ceaseless, ongoing actualization of clear seeing which ever-advances the total exertion, casting off, total exertion, casting off that is the actualization of the universe (genjokoan). Zazen-only is the standard systematic skillful process through which the Buddha Dharma is accurately transmitted and revealed; Zazen-only is the function of “practice” and it is the essence of “realization.” The Buddhist sutras and ancestral records are the vehicle of Dharma Transmission, the body or form of the Buddhist expression of the unified vision of the “great matter of life and death.”

...

Peace,

Ted

Genuine Aspiration & the Fallacy of Goallessness

Genuine Aspiration & the Fallacy of Goallessness
...
According to the Buddhist teachings on nonduality (emptiness and interdependence), attempting to divine the significance of Buddha nature by investigating the natural world is futile; any such significance revealed in the world is placed there by the mind’s interaction with it. The material world exists as the fabric from which we fashion a universe and a self; it is not an entity existing independently of us nor is it an objective aspect of us.

Also Buddhism asserts that submission, obedience, or conformity to an “other,” whether an individual, an institution, or even worse, “things as they are,” can only be achieved through the denial or suppression of particular aspects of our own true nature. The vision of humanity’s place in the universe portrayed by the Buddhist masters asserts that true human liberation can only be realized through the actual fulfillment of genuine human desire; full complete enlightenment (annutara samyak sambodhi).

According to the Mahayana sutras and shastras, aspiration (bodhicitta) for universal liberation is the true source of all desire. These teachings emphasize (especially in the Zen tradition) that submission to or compliance with any authority other than that of personal verification serves as an impenetrable barrier to liberation. If that “authority” consists of dualist or naturalistic notions about “things as they are” or “matters of fact,” followers not only obstruct their own liberation, they exchange their human potential for the existence of a beast. Dogen’s most severe attacks were aimed at “naturalism” for good reason; to adopt naturalistic views and practices advocating “detachment,” “goallessness,” “letting things be,” etc. is to sacrifice human intelligence and wisdom for cunning and calculation, compassion and mercy for objectivity and indifference, love and intimacy for the mere instinctual drive for physical pleasure and reproduction, and liberation for bondage.

To ascribe to an “objective” view of nature is to adopt a vision of purposelessness, ferocity, pitilessness, and chaos. Killing and eating and reproducing merely to kill and eat and reproduce. Objective nature brings fire, ice, floods, and plagues as easily and with as little intention or concern as it brings food, clothing, shelter, and companionship. No view of an “objective” world where things (dharmas) are simply ‘as they are’ (regardless of our conscious intentions and efforts) can be reconciled with the wisdom and compassion that characterizes the vision of Buddhism.

Authentic practice-realization requires us to make accurately understood, precisely directed, concerted effort toward specific goals.

The first such specific goal is to expand our capacity of perception beyond the fallacy of the subject-object split and thereby personally verify the truth of the Buddhist teaching refuting the existence of “objective” reality. Those that choose instead to conceive of and follow an elemental or impersonal Buddha, only succeed at the cost of subverting the very significance of Buddhism. The former approach is to expand the human capacity to perceive reality as it is; the latter approach attempts to reduce reality as it is to the undeveloped capacity of perception of the average unawakened human being.

But, it may be argued, if the stupid drive for mere survival envisioned by the “objective” view of nature is mercilessly bloody, it is innocently so; the eagle does not devour the eyeball of the living rabbit from malice, the parasite does not burrow into the fox’s eardrum from a desire to cause pain. The capacity for evil demonstrated by man far surpasses anything that can be witnessed in nature – what possible reasoning can Buddha offer for suggesting human beings are superior to other forms of life? The Buddhist reasoning is grounded in the doctrine that all evil has its source in the human capacity for self-restriction (ignorance, avidya); evil does not arise from human actualization – evil arises from a failure of human actualization. It is in the failure to actualize the inherent human capacity to rise above “objective” nature that causes the creative potential of humanity to stagnate and putrefy into the greed, hatred, and ignorance. The eagle and the parasite are incapable of envisioning a better world – even if they could wish for “more,” it would only be for “more of the same.” According to the Buddhas and ancestors, however, human beings are inherently equipped with the capacity to envision and realize greater possibilities of existence – up to and including universal liberation from old age, sickness, and death.

It is impossible for us to know whether animals experience anything like human doubt, but it seems unlikely that even the more advanced animals wonder why things happen as they do or wish things could be different – much less commit themselves to bringing about the changes they desired. When so-called Zen teachers advise followers to be “goalless” and teach them to practice simply “being aware of the world as it is,” or “just sit and let things be as they are,” etc. they are advocating and fostering a doctrine with a very specific goal: the goal of giving up humanity and adopt the life of a mere beast.

As human beings mature and come to realize they can imagine a reality better than the one they exist in, they cannot help but feel a sense of frustration.

The naturalist and the pseudo-Zen cultist advocate meeting such frustration with acceptance of and submission to the “facts of life.” They proscribe practices designed to cut out or eradicate those aspects of humanity that facilitate the power to envision and create, while fostering the diseases of self-doubt and fear that lead to compliance and conformity to the “way things are.”

Authentic Zen masters, like all true sages and visionaries, point in the opposite direction. Where the timid and servile attempt to escape the suffering of unfulfilled desire by eradicating, diminishing, or suppressing aspects of themselves (thus of Buddha), the sage overcomes suffering by clarifying and actualizing the genuine goal of that desire. Thus, the vision of Buddhism is centered on the truth verified by Shakyamuni Buddha; not only is it possible to envision and actualize a better world, it is possible to actualize a realer world. As all real dharmas are mind-forms (mental images) all mind-forms are real dharmas.

In Buddhism, “samsara” (the round living-and-dying) is the world of suffering in which beings are in bondage to old age, sickness and death. “Nirvana” is the world of liberation from suffering (the round living-and-dying) in which beings overcome old age, sickness, and death. The former is the realm of craving (unfulfilled desire), the latter the realm of satisfaction. For the dualist or pseudo-Zen cultist that sees some things (dharmas) as “real” and “unchanging” and other things as “illusory” or “provisional,” samsara is conceived as something ugly, delusory, temporary, etc.; samsara is something to be escaped, eradicated or overcome. Nirvana, on the other hand, is conceived of as pure, blissful, real and permanent; nirvana is something to be attained, achieved, or realized.

Now, of course, in the Buddhist doctrine of samsara and nirvana – samsara is truly as the Mahayana sutras say, the wheel of living and dying, the realm of suffering; nirvana is, as Buddhism asserts, liberation from the wheel of living and dying. However, this doctrine, like all Buddhist doctrines, is only genuine when samsara and nirvana are actualized as real dharmas through experiential realization. As real expressions of Buddha nature, samsara and nirvana are experienced in genuine practice-realization as nondual – samsara/nirvana.

Simply put, living and dying is what nirvana is, for there is nothing to despise in living and dying, nor anything to be wished for in nirvana.
…
This living and dying is precisely what the treasured life of a Buddha is. If we hate life and want to throw it away, that is just our attempt to throw away the treasured life of Buddha. And if we go no farther than this and clutch onto life and death, this too is our throwing away the treasured life of Buddha by limiting ourselves to the superficial appearance of Buddha. When there is nothing we hate and nothing we cling to, then, for the first time, we enter the Heart of Buddha.
Shoji, Hubert Nearman

By relying upon our physical body and spiritual abilities, we turn the mundane into the sacred, and by relying upon their effects and consequences, we surpass Buddha and transcend Ancestor. By relying on these causes and conditions, we take hold of dirt and transmute it into gold. By relying upon effects and consequences, we receive the Transmission of the Dharma along with the robe.
...
The Gate of Skillful Means is the unsurpassed meritorious functioning of the fruits of Buddhahood. It is the Dharma that resides in the place of Dharma and It is the form of the world as it constantly manifests. The Gate of Skillful Means does not refer to some momentary skill.
...
‘To open the Gate of Skillful Means’ means to point to the genuine Real Form of things. Even though we chop time up into moments of beginning, middle, and end, pointing to the genuine Real Form of things covers the whole of time. The underlying principle of momentarily opening the Gate of Skillful Means involves opening It by opening the whole universe. At the very moment when you catch sight of the opening of the whole universe, it will be something that you have never encountered before. By our grasping once or twice at an intellectual concept of what opening of whole universe is and then grasping at it for a third or fourth time as something real, we cause the Gate of Skillful Means to open. Accordingly, it may seem that the whole universe is identical with opening the Gate of Skillful Means, but it appears to me that an immeasurable number of whole universes have each taken a small piece from the opening of the Gate of Skillful Means and have made that small piece into the form that each universe displays. But their grandeur is due entirely to their being encompassed within the present discourse.
Shobogenzo, Shoho Jisso, Hubert Nearman

Peace,
Ted

Zazen: Polishing a Tile to Make a Mirror - Becoming Buddha

Zazen-Only - Polishing Tiles, Making Buddhas

...

The perfection of each person is unique; a particular human becomes a Buddha when that human wholly becomes that particular human. The Buddhahood of an individual being is the perfection of the “integral character” of that particular being “as it is.” Zazen-only is the perfection of the “normal mind,” that is, a particular body-mind that is fully seated in and as the wholeness of its particular existence ceaselessly advancing in harmony with the true nature of its own integral character. One of the clearest of Dogen’s numerous presentations of this aspect of the Buddha Dharma is revealed in one of his masterly commentaries on a classic Zen koan.

One day when Nangaku came to Baso’s hut, Baso stood up to receive him. Nangaku asked him, “What have you been doing recently?”

Baso replied, “Recently I have been doing the practice of seated meditation exclusively.”

Nangaku asked, “And what is the aim of your seated meditation?”

Baso replied, “The aim of my seated meditation is to achieve Buddhahood.”

Thereupon, Nangaku took a roof tile and began rubbing it on a rock near Baso’s hut.

Baso, upon seeing this, asked him, “Reverend monk, what are you doing?”

Nangaku replied, “I am polishing a roof tile.”

Baso then asked, “What are you going to make by polishing a roof tile?”

Nangaku replied, “I am polishing it to make a mirror.”

Baso said, “How can you possibly make a mirror by rubbing a tile?”

Nangaku replied, “How can you possibly make yourself into a Buddha by doing seated meditation?”

For hundreds of years now, many people have held the view that, in this story, Nangaku is earnestly endeavoring to encourage Baso in his practice. This is not necessarily so, for, quite simply, the daily activities of the great saintly teacher were far removed from the realm of ordinary people. If great saintly teachers did not have the Dharma of polishing a tile, how could they possibly have the skillful means to guide people? Having the strength to guide people is the Bones and Marrow of an Ancestor of the Buddha. Even though the tile was the thing that came to hand, still, it was just an everyday, household object. If it were not an everyday object or some household utensil, then it would not have been passed on by the Buddha’s family. What is more, its impact on Baso was immediate. Be very clear about it, the functioning of the True Transmission of Buddhas and Ancestors involves a direct pointing. We should truly comprehend that when the polished tile became a mirror, Baso became Buddha. And when Baso became Buddha, Baso immediately became the real Baso. And when Baso became the real Baso, his sitting in meditation immediately became real seated meditation. This is why the saying ‘polishing a tile to make a mirror’ has been preserved in the Bones and Marrow of former Buddhas.

Thus it is that the Ancient Mirror was made from a roof tile. Even though the mirror was being polished, it was already without blemish in its unpolished state. The tile was not something that was dirty; it was polished simply because it was a tile. On that occasion, the virtue of making a Mirror was made manifest, for it was the diligent effort of an Ancestor of the Buddha. If polishing a tile did not make a Mirror, then even polishing a mirror could not have made a Mirror. Who can surmise that in this act of making, there is the making of a Buddha and there is the making of a Mirror?

Further, some may wonder, “When the Ancient Mirror is polished, can It ever be polished into a tile?” Your state of being—your breathing in and breathing out—when you are engaged in polishing is not something that you can gauge at other times. And Nangaku’s words, to be sure, express what is expressible. As a result, in the final analysis, he was able to polish a tile and make a Mirror. Even we people of the present time should try to pick up today’s ‘tile’ and give it a polish, for ultimately it will become a Mirror. If a tile could not become a Mirror, people could not become Buddha. If we belittle tiles as being lumps of clay, we will also belittle people as being lumps of clay. If people have a Heart, then tiles too will have a Heart. Who can recognize that there is a Mirror in which, when a tile comes, the Tile appears? And who can recognize that there is a Mirror in which, when a mirror comes, the Mirror appears?
Shobogenzo, Kokyo, Hubert Nearman

The "ancient mirror" is the Buddha mind; more specifically, it is an aspect or quality of the Buddha mind that is traditionally referred to as the "universal mirror prajna." The “universal mirror prajna” is the first of the “four prajna's (or “cognitions”) of Buddhahood.” This prajna is described as the aspect of mind that, like a mirror, perfectly reflects the world as it is in the immediate present – the world in its ‘thusness.’ Unlike an ordinary mirror, this prajna is not only reflective, it is also luminescent. It is the initial realization of this “prajna” (or “cognition”) that is traditionally regarded as the practitioners entrance into awakening (often called "kensho" in Zen).

Dogen’s commentary on the koan illumines the same principle informing his teaching that “clear seeing is prajna itself” – here the principle is formulated as “when the polished tile became a mirror Baso became Buddha.”

A “tile” is only a tile by virtue of being experienced as a mind-form unity (dharma) as it is. In the koan, “Baso” is only Baso (his true self; Buddha) by virtue of experiencing mind-forms as they are. When “the tile became a mirror Baso became Baso” – Baso became Baso (his true self; Buddha) when the tile became a mirror (its true self; a mind-form). Moreover, because the mirror (that which verifies) is never separate from the tile (that which is verified), the mirror (Baso) was actualized as a real mirror (the real Baso) by virtue of experiencing the tile.

In terms of the prajna paramita literature, tile and mirror (forms) is emptiness, Baso is Buddha, emptiness is tile and mirror, Buddha is Baso; therefore, emptiness is emptiness, tile is tile, mirror is mirror, Buddha is Buddha, Baso is Baso. When Baso is Baso the whole universe is solely Baso; when zazen is zazen, the whole universe is solely sitting.

In Dogen’s view, the only reality is reality that is actually experienced as particular things at specific times. There is no “tile nature” apart from actual “tile forms,” there is no “essential Baso” apart from actual instances of “Baso experience.” When Baso sits in zazen, “zazen” becomes zazen, and “Baso” becomes Baso. Real instances of Baso sitting in zazen is real instances of Baso and real instances of zazen – when Baso eats rice, Baso is really Baso and eating rice is really eating rice.

...

Peace,

Ted

Dogen: Who Hears? Getting to the Heart of the Matter

Dogen on Who Hears? Getting to the Heart of the Matter

...

Once you have arrived at the heart of the Matter, the time when you did not understand will not have impeded your arrival. Further, getting to the heart of the Matter has not changed the fact that, previously, you did not understand. Even so, in your getting to the heart of the Matter and in your previous non-understanding, there have been the times of spring and the sounds of autumn. The reason why you have not understood even these is because your ears have been wandering about within their voices, despite the fact that they have been giving expression to It ever so loudly. As a result, their voices have not entered your ears. Your getting to the heart of the Matter will occur when their voices have penetrated your ears and you have entered a meditative state. Do not fancy that your having arrived at the heart of the Matter is of little importance and that your non-understanding was something large. You need to realize that because you will be beyond what you conceived of as being ‘you’, you will not be different from the Lord of Dharma.
Shobogenzo, Yui Butsu Yo Butsu (Trans. Rev. Hubert Nearman)

Dogen: The Insentient Preaching Dharma, Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo Part 2

Dogen: The Insentient Preaching Dharma, Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo

Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo, Part 2
[Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo, Part 1]


The founding patriarch Great Master Tozan Gohon, while practicing under the ancestral patriarch Great Master Ungan, asks, “What people are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma?”

The ancestral patriarch Ungan says, “The non-emotional are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma.”

The founding patriarch says, “Does the master hear it or not?”

The ancestral patriarch says, “If I hear it, then you will not be able to hear my preaching of the Dharma.”

The founding patriarch says, “If that is so, I would [rather] not hear the master’s preaching of the Dharma.”

The ancestral patriarch says, “You do not even hear me preaching the Dharma; how much less [do you hear] the non-emotional preaching the Dharma.”

Then the founding patriarch sets forth the following verse and presents it to the ancestral patriarch:

How very wonderful! How very wonderful!
The non-emotional preaching the Dharma is a mystery.
If we listen with the ears, it is ultimately too difficult to understand.
If we hear the sound through the eyes, we are able to know it.

The truth expressed now in the founding patriarch’s words “What people are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma” should be painstakingly researched through the effort of one life and many lives. This question is also equipped with the virtue of an assertion. And this assertion has the skin, flesh, bones, and marrow; it is not only “the mind being transmitted by the mind.” Transmission of the mind by the mind is the pursuit of beginners and late learners, but there is a pivotal matter which has been authentically transmitted by means of the robe and authentically transmitted by means of the Dharma. How can people today expect to realize it as the ultimate in only three or four months of effort? The founding patriarch has already experienced the principle expressed in the past by the National Master that “The saints are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma,” and yet he now asks further: “What people are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma?” Should we see this as affirmation of the National Master’s words, or as non-affirmation of the National Master’s words? Should we see it as a question or as an assertion? If he does not completely affirm the National Master, how could he speak words like these? And if he completely affirms the National Master, how could he understand words like those?
Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Dogen’s commentary on this koan begins with his usual affirmation that it is the “words” of Buddhas and ancestors that constitute the “form” or “body” of the Buddha Dharma. Like practice/realization, delusion/enlightenment, self/other, etc., the expression and the truth of Buddhism are a nondual unity: expression/truth. In other words, just as form is emptiness, and emptiness is form (emptiness/form), Buddhist expressions (sutras, turning words, koans, etc.) are the truth of the Dharma, the truth of the Dharma is Buddhist expressions.

As Dogen sees the ancestors “words” as the very form of the ancestors “truth” he goes on to point out the necessity to apply due diligence of painstaking research – discerning the truth of Buddhas should not be done in haste.

Next, Dogen goes on to give us a clue on how to apply ourselves to this research; “This question is also equipped with the virtue of an assertion.” As Hee-Jin Kim has clearly highlighted in his works, Dogen makes much creative use of interrogatives. That this question is “equipped” with the “virtue of an assertion” means that “There are people who have the capacity to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma,” and that these people are known as “what people.” “What,” “how,” “who,” and similar interrogatives are utilized in Dogen’s Zen to indicate the reality of Buddha nature, that is, the “thusness” or “suchness” of reality – the “True person of no rank.”

Now Dogen says that the “transmission of mind by mind” is the activity of beginners and then says “but there is a pivotal matter which has been authentically transmitted by means of the robe and authentically transmitted by means of the Dharma.” Clearly, for Dogen, the “transmission of mind by mind” and the transmission of the “pivotal matter” are not one and the same thing. What is he revealing here?

He shows us where to apply ourselves in order to get to the point by saying, “The founding patriarch has already experienced the principle expressed in the past” (i.e. the principle of the National Master’s saying), then point out, “and yet he now asks further.” In other words, Dogen is pointing out that since Tozan already experienced the principle (verified its truth) in the past, his words are certainly not concerned with the same principle, even if they appear to say the same thing. In short, Dogen is saying that Tozan is not simply repeating himself.

When we consider the koan to this point in terms of this clue; the “principle in the past” and the question “now” things begin to fall together. Next, Dogen goes on to bring some of the implications of this into the light:

The ancestral patriarch Ungan says, “The non-emotional are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma.” Following the authentic transmission of this lifeblood, there can be learning in practice that is free of body and mind. Saying “The non-emotional are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma” may be, in essence and in form, [the same as saying] “the buddhas are able to hear the buddhas preaching the Dharma.” An assembly that listens to the non-emotional preaching the Dharma, whether of sentient beings or insentient beings, whether of common people or sages and saints, may just be the non-emotional itself. Relying upon its essence-and-form, we can tell the true from the false among [masters of] the past and present. Even if they have come from India in the west, if they are not true ancestral masters of the authentic transmission, we should not rely on them. Even if they have been learning continually for a thousand myriad years, if they have not received the transmission as rightful successor to rightful successor, we cannot succeed them. Now that the authentic transmission has already spread throughout the Eastern Lands, it may be easy to tell the true from the false. We might be able to receive the bones and marrow of the buddhas and the patriarchs even by listening to the expression “living beings are able to hear living beings preaching the Dharma.” When we hear the words of the ancestral patriarch Ungan and listen to the words of the National Master Daisho, if we truly evaluate them, “the saints” expressed in “The saints are able listen” may be the non-emotional, and “the non-emotional” expressed in “The non-emotional are able to hear” may be the saints. What the non-emotional preaches is the non-emotional—because the non-emotional preaching the Dharma is the non-emotional itself. Thus, the non-emotional is the preaching of Dharma and the preaching of Dharma is the non-emotional. The founding patriarch says, “If that is so, I would [rather] not hear the master’s preaching of the Dharma.” The words “If that is so,” which we now hear, take up the principle that “the non-emotional are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma.” It is in accordance with the truth of the non-emotional being able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma that “I do not hear the master’s preaching of the Dharma.” The founding patriarch at this time is not simply taking a back seat for the non-emotional preaching the Dharma; his own zeal to preach the Dharma to the non-emotional has shown itself and is piercing the sky. Not only does he physically realize that the non-emotional preaches the Dharma; in non-emotional preaching of the Dharma he has physically mastered [transcendence of] hearing and not hearing. Going further, in emotional preaching of the Dharma he has physically realized [transcendence of] preaching and not preaching—in preaching just past, preaching just now, and preaching just coming. And beyond that, in the preaching of the Dharma [that transcends] being heard and not being heard, he has completely clarified the truth [of knowing] that this is emotional and this is non-emotional.
Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

If this teaching by Dogen has not sent some sparks up and down your spine, go back over it; it is truly a remarkable passage.

First, notice his stress on what we mentioned earlier about the “form” and “meaning” of the Buddha Dharma as a unity; the “essence and in form” of the “saying” of Buddhas.

Next, when Dogen says “may be” (the “Saying ‘The non-emotional… [may be] the same…”) he means it “is” the same.

Next, Dogen makes one of the clearest statements of a teaching that is repeated throughout his works; that by relying on the “essence-and-form” (the words and their meaning) of the expressions of Buddha ancestors (masters of the past and present) “we can tell the true from the false.”

Wow! True or false teachers of the past and present are not discerned by “sect,” “school,” “lineage,” or even “transmission certificates” – but by the essence-and-form of their expressions.

Not only does Dogen say we can discern true and false teachers (of the past and present) by investigating their expressions – but he says it will “be easy to tell true from false” because the “authentic transmission” has “already spread.” Thus, having the “form” (sutras, sayings, etc.) of the Buddha Dharma, we can discern the truth of the Buddha Dharma.

Herein lies the significance of the “pivotal matter.” What is the pivotal matter? Dogen illumines it in detail in his following commentary:

In general, hearing the Dharma is not confined to the spheres of the ear as a sense organ or of auditory consciousness: we hear the Dharma with our whole energy, with the whole mind, with the whole body, and with the whole truth, from before the time our parents were born and from before the time of [King of] Majestic Voice until the limit of the future and into the limitless future. The Dharma is heard prior to the body and after the mind. There is benefit to be got in each of these cases of hearing the Dharma. Never say that there is no benefit in hearing the Dharma without the involvement of mind-consciousness. Those whose mind has ceased and whose body is spent are able to benefit from hearing the Dharma, and those who are without mind and without body are able to benefit from hearing the Dharma. The buddhas and the patriarchs, without exception, pass through series of such instants in becoming buddhas and becoming patriarchs. How can the common intellect be fully aware of the influence of the Dharma connecting with the body-mind? It is impossible for us fully to clarify the limits of the body-mind. The merit of hearing the Dharma, once sown as a seed in the fertile ground of the body-mind, has no moment of decay; sooner or later it will grow, and, with the passing of time, it is sure to bear fruit. Stupid people think: “Without progressing on the path of understanding, and unless our memory is good, even if we listen to the Dharma tirelessly there will be no benefit. The most important thing, whether in the human world or in the heavens above, is to devote one’s body and mind to the pursuit of wide knowledge. If we immediately forget, and leave the seat a blank, what benefit can there be? What educational merit can it have?” They say this because they have not met a true teacher and have not seen a person of the fact. One who does not possess the traditional face-to-face transmission is said not to be a true teacher. One who has received the authentic transmission from buddha to buddha is a true teacher. [The time] that stupid people describe as [preaching the Dharma] being temporarily remembered in the mind-consciousness is the time when the merit of hearing the Dharma is subtly covering the whole mind and covering the whole consciousness. In this very moment, virtue is present which covers the body, which covers the moment before the body, which covers the mind, which covers the moment before the mind, which covers the moment after the mind, which covers causes, conditions, results, actions, forms, natures, substance, and energy, which covers buddhas, which covers patriarchs, which covers self-and-others, and which covers skin, flesh, bones, marrow, and so on. Realized throughout speaking and preaching and throughout [daily actions] such as sitting and lying down, the virtue pervades the meridians and pervades the sky. Truly, it is not easy to recognize such virtue of hearing the Dharma; nevertheless, if we come upon the great order of the Buddhist Patriarch and investigate the skin, flesh, bones, and marrow, there will be no time when the good influence of preaching the Dharma does not lead us, and there will be no place where we do not spread the Dharma influence of hearing the Dharma. In this way, allowing moments and kalpas to be fleeting or slow, we will see results become real. We should not deliberately throw away wide knowledge; at the same time, we do not see it, in isolation, as the pivot. Practitioners should know this. The founding patriarch has realized it in physical experience.

The ancestral patriarch says, “You do not even hear me preaching the Dharma; how much less [do you hear] the non-emotional preaching the Dharma.” Here, [confronted] with the founding patriarch’s sudden manifestation of the state of continuing to experience, on the basis of real experience, the [Buddha’s] state of real experience, the ancestral patriarch loosens his collar, and seals and certifies the state as the bones and marrow of the forefathers. [He is saying,] “Even while I am preaching, you are beyond hearing!” He does not speak thus because [Tozan] is ordinary flotsam; he is certifying that the non-emotional preaching the Dharma, though multifarious, does not require the activation of the intellect. The succession that takes place at this time is truly a secret. Those in the states of the common and the sacred cannot easily arrive at it or glimpse it.

Then the founding patriarch composes and presents to the ancestral patriarch Ungan a verse which says that “the mystery of the non-emotional preaching the Dharma” is “How very wonderful! How very wonderful!” So the non-emotional, and the non-emotional preaching the Dharma, are each difficult “to consider intellectually.” How are we to see “the non-emotional” described here? We should learn in practice that it is beyond the common and the sacred, and beyond the sentient and the insentient. Common and sacred, sentient and insentient, are always, whether preached or not preached, within the orbit of intellectual consideration. The present “[non-emotional],” which may indeed be “a mystery,” and “very wonderful,” and again “very wonderful” is beyond the wisdom and the consciousness of common people and sages and saints, and is beyond the reckoning of gods and human beings.

“If we listen with the ears, it is ultimately too difficult to understand”: Even with supernatural ears, or even with universal ears that pervade the whole world and all of time, when we aim to listen with the ears, “it is ultimately too difficult to understand.” Even with an ear on a wall, or an ear on a stick, we cannot understand the non-emotional preaching the Dharma, because it is beyond sound as matter. It is not that there is no “possibility of listening with the ears,” but even if we exhaust hundreds of thousands of kalpas of effort, “it is ultimately too difficult to understand.” [The non-emotional preaching the Dharma] has the dignity of the undivided truth which is originally beyond sound and form; it does not reside in nests and dens near the common and the sacred.

“Hearing its sound through the eyes, we are able to know it.” Interpreting this expression, certain individuals think: “The activity of grass, trees, flowers, and birds being seen in the present by human eyes may be described as ‘hearing sound through the eyes.’” This point of view is completely mistaken and is not the Buddha-Dharma at all. The Buddha-Dharma has no such theory. When we learn in practice the founding patriarch’s words “hearing sound through the eyes,” the place where the sound of the non-emotional preaching the Dharma is heard, is the eyes themselves; and the place where the sound of the non-emotional preaching the Dharma is realized, is the eyes themselves. We must investigate the eyes still more widely. “Hearing sound” through the eyes must mean the same as “hearing sound” through the ears; and for this reason, “hearing sound through the eyes” can never be the same as “hearing sound” through the ears. We should not learn that “there are ears in the eyes,” we should not learn that “eyes and ears are one,” and we should not learn that “sound is realized inside eyes.” An ancient says, “The whole universe in the ten directions is a śramaṇa’s one eye.” We should not consider, by intellectual comparison, that to hear sound through this eye may be as in the founding patriarch’s words “hearing sound through the eyes.” Although we study the words of the ancient that “the whole universe in the ten directions is one eye,” the whole of the ten directions is just one eye, and furthermore, there are thousands of eyes on the tips of the fingers, there are thousands of eyes of right Dharma, there are thousands of eyes in the ears, there are thousands of eyes on the tip of the tongue, there are thousands of eyes on the tip of the mind, there are thousands of eyes of the thoroughly realized mind, there are thousands of eyes of the thoroughly realized body, there are thousands of eyes on top of a stick, there are thousands of eyes in the moment before the body, there are thousands of eyes in the moment before the mind, there are thousands of eyes of death in death, there are thousands of eyes of liveliness in liveliness, there are thousands of eyes of the self, there are thousands of eyes of the external world, there are thousands of eyes in the concrete place of eyes, there are thousands of eyes of learning in practice, there are thousands of eyes aligned vertically, and there are thousands of eyes aligned horizontally. Thus, we study that the totality of eyes is the whole universe, but still this is not physical mastery of “the eyes.” We should make it an urgent task to investigate, through the eyes, [the action of] just hearing the non-emotional preaching the Dharma. The point expressed now by the founding patriarch is that it is difficult for the ears to understand the non-emotional preaching the Dharma. It is the eyes which hear the sound. Going further, there are instances of the thoroughly realized body hearing the sound and instances of the whole body hearing the sound. Even if we fail physically to master hearing sound through the eyes, we must physically realize, and must get free from, [the truth that] “the non-emotional are able to hear the non-emotional preaching the Dharma,” for this is the truth that has been transmitted.

My late master Tendo, the eternal buddha, says, “A bottle gourd vine entwines with a bottle gourd.”

This is Dharma preaching of the non-emotional state, in which the ancestral patriarch’s right eyes have been transmitted and in which the bones and marrow have been transmitted. Relying upon the truth that all Dharma preaching is in the non-emotional state, the non-emotional preach the Dharma, which is the ancient standard, and the non-emotional preaches Dharma to the non-emotional. What do we call “the non-emotional”? Remember, those who listen to the non-emotional preaching the Dharma are just it. What do we call “preaching the Dharma”? Remember, not knowing oneself to be the non-emotional is just it.

Great Master Jisai of Tosuzan in Joshu (successor of Zen Master Suibi Mugaku, called Daido Myokaku in his lifetime, also called the eternal buddha Tosu), the story goes, is asked by a monk, “What is the non-emotional preaching the Dharma?” The master says, “No abusive language.”

What Tosu expresses here is the very Dharma plan of eternal buddhas and the ordinance of the patriarchs. Such [preaching] as the non-emotional preaching the Dharma, and Dharma preaching of the non-emotional is, in short, not to speak abusive language. Remember, the non-emotional preaching the Dharma is the whole charter of the Buddhist patriarchs. Followers of Rinzai and Tokusan cannot know it; only Buddhist patriarchs devote themselves to its investigation.
Shobogenzo, Mujo-seppo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Peace,
Ted