Zen Buddhism Dogen and the Shobogenzo

Deconstructive and Reconstructive aspects of Emptiness

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:26:00 +0000

Deconstructive and Reconstructive aspects of Emptiness

Characteristic of Dogen’s unrelenting commitment to “right-views” or the “true-eye” is his frequent, unequivocal insistence that “authenticity” of practice-enlightenment is the only criteria for gauging the Buddha-Dharma.

Dogen’s own adherence to this maxim is clearly demonstrated by his refusal to avoid complex challenges, sidestep unpleasant aspects, or water-down unpopular implications of Buddhist truths. If the Buddhist doctrine of emptiness is authentic, as Dogen contends, it must be applied universally (i.e. to all dharmas), which means, for one thing, that it must be applied to the doctrine of emptiness itself. And, while an intellectual understanding of emptiness is “not enough” – even this necessary first step cannot be considered complete prior to the “experiential verification of emptiness” which is itself only the beginning of the authentic wisdom of emptiness according to Dogen’s standards.

It would be no stretch to suggest that Dogen would view total ignorance of emptiness as preferable to wrong or partial (biased) notions of emptiness. As the works of Hee-Jin Kim demonstrate, for Dogen the liberating potential of emptiness is only actualized with the transcendence of the “deconstructive” experience of emptiness and advance into the “reconstructive” experience of emptiness – and even this actualizes only the potential of liberation. Thus it is that the reconstructive aspect of emptiness – which itself is continuously “cast-off” and “totally exerted” – as the only aspect of emptiness with practical liberating potential, is what Dogen directed his energy to transmitting.

The terms “deconstructive” and “reconstructive” (aspects of emptiness) designate two foci (focal points) of a single experiential process. This process can be envisioned as beginning from the common (unawakened) perspective wherein the self and the other are misperceived as separate entities, from here it proceeds to the initial experience of emptiness (i.e. the deconstructive mode) -often referred to in Zen as the “great death” - wherein self and other “drop away,” then, advancing through the “great death,” proceeding to the enlightened (awakened) perspective wherein self and other are experienced as they are (thusness): nondual (not two).

Here, then, one experientially realizes the truth that self and other are not different realities, but rather distinct foci of one (nondual) reality (i.e. nonduality/duality). From the enlightened (reconstructive) perspective one perceives the same reality that is perceived from the common perspective - but now in context of the insight actualized through the (deconstructive) experience of emptiness.

Peace,

Ted

Koans, Zen Cosmology, and Practice-Enlightenment Here and Now

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 08:13:00 +0000

Koans, Zen Cosmology, and Practice-Enlightenment Here and Now

To be adequate for authentic practice-enlightenment in our everyday world here and now our vision of Dogen’s cosmology requires us to bring his vision forward (and westward) by seeing it through the accumulated insights of the “grand discussion” (and seeing them through it). So too our vision must extend backward (and eastward) through Dogen’s predecessors within the various Buddhist traditions, as well as those among the great eastern traditions of Hinduism, Shinto, Taoism, Confucianism and others.

Most importantly our vision through Dogen’s predecessors must be inclusive of the Zen Buddhist tradition as presented in the classic records of the Zen ancestors from the prehistoric “seven Buddhas” through the historical Shakyamuni Buddha and his Indian successors, beginning with Mahakashapa and continuing through Bodhidharma, then to Bodhidharma’s Chinese successors, beginning with Huike, then down through the sixth Chinese ancestor, Huineng and his successors, then on through the five major ancestral lines. From among the voluminous literary production of the Zen tradition, the “koan” related literature, the most distinctive element of Zen as an independent tradition, is far and away Dogen’s greatest influence, thus is of particular importance to our understanding of his Zen cosmology.

The special significance of the koan literature is its powerful capacity to cut through barriers of conceptualization and make bodhi-prajna (enlightened wisdom) an immediate, intimate experience, rather than conveying a teaching that must then be verified or worked out practically – resolving a koan, in contrast to learning through study and cultivation, begins with the true nature of things and works out the implications from there, whereas conventional learning begins with implications and works toward the true nature of things. This does not mean that koan training can replace ordinary conventional study, both are essential to authentic practice-enlightenment, and in fact since koan training is an exacting method requiring accurate understanding and skill, conventional study and cultivation must necessarily precede successful koan training – as well as supplement that training in the past, present, and future that is only and always here and now.

Peace,

Ted

The Dharma-Eye: Buddhas and Ordinary Beings

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:34:00 +0000

The Dharma-Eye: Buddhas and Ordinary Beings

According to Dogen, "Buddhas" and "ordinary beings" are distinct insofar as the former are "enlightened about delusion" while the later are "deluded about enlightenment." This distinction recognizes the real differences between awakened and unawakened beings; it does not, however, imply a real separation between Buddhas and ordinary beings.

To see reality with the Dharma-Eye is to see through it (by means of it). Dogen quoted the Buddha and commented as follows:

Shakyamuni Buddha once said in verse:

If any people give voice to this Discourse

Then they will surely be able to see Me.

But to express It for the sake of even one person

Is indeed something difficult for them to do.

So it follows from this that to be able to express the Dharma is to see Shakyamuni Buddha because, when 'such a one' comes to see 'Me', he is Shakyamuni Buddha.

~Shobogenzo, Gyobutsu Iigi, Hubert Nearman

From the unawakened perspective, Buddhas and ordinary beings are separate entities, from the awakened perspective, Buddhas and ordinary beings are nondual (not two). According to Dogen the apparent gap between the reality experienced by Buddhas and the reality experienced by humans is but a misperception of reality.

Even if we misunderstand that it might be beyond the triple world, that is completely impossible. Inside, outside, and middle, beginning, middle, and end; all are the triple world. The triple world is as the triple world is seen, and a view of something other than the triple world is a mistaken view of the triple world. While in the triple world, we see views of the triple world as old nests and see views of the triple world as new twigs. The old nests were visions of the triple world, and a new twig is also a vision of the triple world.

~Shobogenzo Sangai-yuishin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

In contrast to some contemporary Zen teachers, Dogen says the (triple) world (the world we inhabit) is as it is seen. He does not say that the real universe is not as it is seen, or that it is "as it is" regardless of how it is seen - the real universe is as it is seen. If a being sees a body of water, the real universe is a body of water; if another being sees the same aspect of the material world as a palace, the real universe is a palace.

To speak in general, what people see as a mountain or as water differs in various ways. There are those who, upon catching sight of what I am calling 'the Water', see It as a string of pearls, but they fail to see such a necklace as the Water. They undoubtedly consider the form in which we humans perceive something as what the Water is. What they see as a pearl necklace, I see as the Water. And there are those who see the Water as a wondrous flower, but this does not mean that they are using an actual flower for the Water. Hungry ghosts, upon encountering the Water, may see It as a raging inferno, or as thick, congealing blood. Dragons and other denizens of the deep may see It as a palace or as a stately mansion. Some may see It as the Seven Treasures or as the Wish-fulfilling Jewel, and others as various sorts of trees, or as fences and walls, and others as the immaculate, liberated Dharma Nature, and others as someone's True Body, and others as someone's physical appearance along with that person's mental nature. When humans see the Water via any of these means, this can be the cause of their liberation from commonplace 'life'.

~Shobogenzo,Sansuikyo, Hubert Nearman

The reality of the universe is not something inherent in "what is seen," the reality of the universe is "as it is seen.” There is no reality of the universe existing behind what is experienced by us.

Therefore, to see something as "other than" the real universe (the triple world) is to see a real mistaken view of the world; that is, to see the real universe as a "mistaken view" of the real universe as it is. If a being mistakenly sees Buddha, for example, as "other than" their self, the real universe is truly seen as a mistaken view of Buddha (as well as self). A Buddha ancestor is "enlightened about delusion" because she "clearly sees" the real universe as the real universe, the unawakened being is "deluded about enlightenment" because she "mistakenly sees" the real universe as something other than the real universe.

The distinction between awakened beings and unawakened beings is the distinction between the "normal (healthy) mind" and the “abnormal (deluded) mind.” The mind of the Buddha is normal because it harmonizes with the true nature of reality. When Zen masters say the Buddha cannot be found outside our minds, they are transmitting the truth that Buddhas and demonstrate (or exemplify) the liberating potential inherent in all beings – as Buddha can only be realized within ourselves, so only through the demonstration of Buddhas can we see how Buddha is realized.

A person who has got the Dharma is one individual true eternal buddha here and now, and as such should not be met as someone from the past... As regards attainment of the truth, both [men and women] attain the truth, and we should just profoundly revere every single person who has attained the Dharma. Do not discuss man and woman. This is one of Buddhism's finest Dharma standards.

~Shobogenzo, Raihai-tokuzui, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

According to Dogen, Buddha-nature is the totality of existence-time, it is each dharma and all dharmas; no element, experience, or being lacks Buddha nature. Thus, attempting to stifle, dampen, cut out, or eradicate specific aspects, elements, or qualities of the world or the self is not only a denial of humanity, but a denial of Buddha-nature. Such denial can only be achieved by an avoidance of reality – much better, according to the Zen masters, to achieve “normality” by activating the Dharma-Eye that sees, experiences, expresses, and actualizes the wisdom and compassion of Buddhahood.

Peace, Ted

Encouraging Words from Dogen

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 06:55:00 +0000

Encouraging Words from Dogen

Realization in practice like this is just “mind here and now is buddha” picking itself up and authentically transmitting itself to “mind here and now is buddha.” Authentically transmitted like this, it has arrived at the present day. “The mind that has been authentically transmitted” means one mind as all dharmas, and all dharmas as one mind.

Shobogenzo, Soku-shin-ze-butsu, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Let us quietly consider whether our own present life, and the miscellaneous real dharmas that are coexisting with this life, are part of life or not part of life. . . . There is nothing, not a single moment nor a single dharma, that is not part of life. There is nothing, not a single matter nor a single state of mind, that is not part of life.

…
So life is what I am making it, and I am what life is making me. While I am sailing in the boat, my body and mind and circumstances and self are all essential parts of the boat; and the whole earth and the whole of space are all essential parts of the boat. What has been described like this is that life is the self, and the self is life.

Shobogenzo, Zenki, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Peace,

Ted

Definite Mysteries and Particular Unknowns

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 10:18:00 +0000

Definite Mysteries and Particular Unknowns

In contrast to the assertions of some claiming to represent Zen, Dogen vehemently denied all notions of Buddha-nature (i.e. reality) as being something mysterious, ineffable, or inexpressible. When these terms do apply to Dogen’s Zen, they apply to definite mysteries, particular unknowns, and specific inexpressible experiences. For Dogen, definite, particular, and specific, applied to all dharmas, thus his constant refrain, “Nothing in the whole universe is concealed.”

Throughout Shobogenzo, Dogen constantly emphasizes that reality is only and always actual manifest particulars, real specific things or events, that is - “all dharmas are real form” - for example:

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

Shobogenzo, Shoho-Jisso, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Dogen frequently speaks of “walls, fences, tiles, and pebbles” in acknowledging the fact that Buddha (mind) exists nowhere but in the very miscellany of the things (dharmas) populating the here and now of every moment of our existence. In his best known meditation treatise, Fukanzazengi, Dogen cites some of the various forms (dharmas) of Buddha frequently mentioned in the classic Zen records as having awakened practitioners:

Moreover, the changing of the moment, through the means of a finger, a pole, a needle, or a wooden clapper; and the experience of the state, through the manifestation of a whisk, a fist, a staff, or a shout, can never be understood by thinking and discrimination.

~Dogen, Fukanzazengi

Many Zen students will recognize the “means of a finger” from the koan of Zen master Gutei, “a needle” from the story of Kanadeva meeting Nagarjuna, the “staff” of Teshan, and the “shout” of Rinzai. The specific particularity in which the Buddha is manifest (a finger, a pole, a whisk, etc.) is characteristic of Zen’s universal inclusivity and nondiscrimination – all dharmas are equal in status, value, significance, for each is an essential person of Buddha-nature, an integral form of Shakyamuni Buddha, an image of truth.

Peace,

Ted

Emptiness Sees Emptiness

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:40:00 +0000

Emptiness Sees Emptiness

(Article from the October, 2011 newsletter "Flatbed Sutra Zen News")

The Buddhist teaching of emptiness is most comprehensively treated in the scriptures known as the prajna paramita sutras, revered as primary sources of authority by all Mahayana traditions. "Prajna" is a rich term with many potential meanings and connotations depending on the context; in general, it refers to Buddhist wisdom. In the context of "prajna paramita" it refers specifically to "perfect" or "transcendent" wisdom, that is, the wisdom of "emptiness." From at least as early as the Sixth Ancestor of Zen in China, Huineng (638 - 713 C. E.), Zen has been more closely associated with the prajna paramita sutras than any other scriptures. According to Zen lore, the Sixth Ancestor realized enlightenment simply upon hearing a prajna paramita sutra, the Diamond Cutter Sutra, recited by a stranger on the street. Huineng's record, the "Platform Sutra," is the only text revered as a "sutra" (i.e. scripture) other than those attributed to the Buddha. The Platform Sutra expounds on the importance and significance of a number of sutras, but is particularly insistent on the supreme vision of the Diamond Sutra, not only promising enlightenment to those that practice it, but even to those that simply memorize it.

While the Diamond Sutra continues to be highly revered in Zen, which remains deeply steeped in its methodology, the marvelously concise Heart Sutra (Prajnaparamita-hrdya-sutra) came to occupy a position as the definitive statement on "emptiness" in Zen, as in many Mahayana traditions. As its title suggests, this succinct scripture presents a remarkably clear image of the profound wisdom at the heart of the vast corpus of prajna paramita literature. In Dogen's day, as in our own, this short scripture was known well enough that Buddhists hearing a single line would recognize it instantly. Dogen's own commentary on the Heart Sutra - the earliest writing included in Shobogenzo - opens by quoting the first line of the sutra. Dogen uses this quote (the only direct reference to the sutra in his commentary) to illumine a profound implication of emptiness by creatively altering the reading (thus significance) of the opening line of the Heart Sutra. The first line of the Heart Sutra actually reads:

Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva practicing deep prajna paramita clearly saw that all five skandhas are empty transcending anguish and distress.

(Note: "Avalokitesvara," is an enlightened being (bodhisattva) of Buddhist mythology; the hero of the Heart Sutra. "Transcending anguish and distress" is realizing the Buddhist goal, liberation from suffering; nirvana, enlightenment).

Dogen's creative alteration of the line is not achieved by eliminating or substituting words, nor by transposing or changing their order, but through the addition of a single word.

This move by Dogen should not be glossed over, dismissed as accidental, or understood as a simple attempt to clarify the original meaning by providing an interpretive element. The Heart Sutra was well known to his audience, and his alteration, while slight, would have been stark in their ears. Upon first sight, the additional word jumps out as if erroneous, but as the implications of it dawn, its intentional placement becomes clear. The added word is, "konshin," which roughly translates as "whole-body," or "complete body-mind." Thus:

Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva practicing deep prajna paramita whole body-mind clearly saw that all five skandhas are empty transcending anguish and distress.

Although only one word, an English rendering conveying the significance of the alteration asks for some interpretive suggestions, perhaps, "Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva practicing deep prajna paramita with his whole-body clearly saw that all five skandhas are empty transcending anguish and distress," or, "The whole-body-Avalokitesvara-Bodhisattva practicing deep prajna paramita clearly saw that all five skandhas are empty transcending anguish and distress."

To appreciate the implications of this we should understanding that the "five skandhas" are a traditional classification for the elements constituting the (whole) body-mind of a human being. In light of this we see that "five skandhas" is another way of saying "whole-body." Thus, the implication is clear; to say "The whole-body (of Avalokitesvara) sees that all five skandhas are empty," is equivalent to saying, "The whole-body sees that the whole-body is empty."

(Note: The five skandhas are form, feeling, sensation, mental formulation, and consciousness. In Buddhist literature the term "form" by itself serves as an abbreviation for all five skandhas).

Being a crucial element to every aspect of Buddhism, the teachings on emptiness (shunyata) are complex and multi-faceted. However, in order to grasp the main points of the present discussion it is enough to know that emptiness is regarded (at least by Mahayana Buddhists) as the reality, or true nature of all things, beings, and events (i.e. dharmas). This is the key point indicated by the pivotal statement of the Heart Sutra, "Form is emptiness; emptiness is form."

With this in mind we can see that Dogen's statement unequivocally identifies the subject (i.e. Avalokitesvara; whole-body) that clearly sees with the object (i.e. Avalokitesvara; all five skandhas) that is clearly seen. The overall effective result of Dogen's alteration, then, is to forceful manner of drawing attention to the actively dynamic, energetically animated nature of "emptiness." Here are two things we know about Avalokitesvara according to Dogen's statement:

The whole of Avalokitesvara clearly sees the whole of Avalokitesvara.

The whole of Avalokitesvara clearly seen is empty.

Two crucial points; emptiness can see, and emptiness can be seen. Thus we know that, whatever else it might be, "practicing prajna paramita" is emptiness clearly seeing (experiencing) its own true nature - in short, practicing prajna paramita is emptiness seeing emptiness.

Even after this short foray into his commentary we see that, from Dogen's view, emptiness should never be understood or described apophatically or in purely negative terms like non-existent, absent, undifferentiated, motionless, insentient, unknowable, or incommunicable. This point merits emphasis; the propensity to misunderstand and misrepresent emptiness negatively is pervasive. Judging by the Zen records, this propensity has plagued every era of Zen history. The meticulously detailed refutations of negativistic views of emptiness permeating Dogen's writings testify to the pervasiveness of such distortions in his own era. Dogen view that this issue merited the energy he put into it seems clear; the distorting power of negativistic views of emptiness can obstruct practitioners from accurately understanding every aspect of Buddhism, not to mention putting it into practice and actualizing it.

From Dogen's perspective, it is better to have no understanding of emptiness than to adopt a negative understanding. At this point, then, we want to stress that, whatever else might be included in Dogen's view of emptiness, it is inclusive of at least these positive qualities:

Emptiness is present in/as existence-time

Emptiness is differentiated

Emptiness is active

Emptiness is sentient

Emptiness is intelligible

Emptiness is communicable

After opening Shobogenzo, Maka-hannya-haramitsu, with the (altered) quote from the Heart Sutra, Dogen presents a series of affirmative expressions on the nature of the self, the world, and the myriad dharmas that reads like a crystallization of the reality illumined by the grand vision of Shobogenzo:

The five skandhas are form, sensation, perception, mental formulation, and consciousness; they are five instances of prajna. Clear seeing is prajna itself. To present this truth for realization it is expounded that "form is exactly emptiness, and emptiness is exactly form." Thus form is form, and emptiness is emptiness. They are the hundred particular things, the myriad dharmas.

Shobogenzo, Maka-hannya-haramitsu, Ted Biringer

By enumerating each of the five skandhas and then affirming them as "five instances of prajna," Dogen immediately emphasizes the differentiated quality of emptiness. This serves to counter the reductionist propensity to misunderstand and misrepresent emptiness apophatically as just discussed. Notice also, that by citing each of the skandhas, Dogen compels us to dwell longer on what is being conveyed than we might if he simply used "form," the common abbreviation for the five skandhas. This reduces the likelihood of missing the point by too hastily moving on. The greatest effect of Dogen's enumeration, however, is its setup for the next phrase, the key point of the whole commentary; "Clear seeing is prajna itself." Each of the five skandhas constituting Avalokitesvara (thus of all human beings) plays a specific role in the "clear seeing" that "transcends anguish and distress." Form "distinguishes" it, sensation "conducts" it, perception "receives" it, mental formulation "fashions" it (produces an intelligible image), and consciousness "realizes" it (understands, or interprets it in its particularity, thus facilitating its manifestation) in context and contrast to what is not-it.

Thus, Dogen utilizes the opening line of the Heart Sutra to illumine the heart of Zen; "Clear seeing is prajna itself." In perfect harmony with his conception of knowledge, existence, and soteriology the activity of clearly seeing the form of prajna (perfect wisdom), the form of prajna that is clearly seen, and the liberation actualized by prajna are not three different things. This dynamic process and its implications are repeatedly brought into relief throughout the whole Shobogenzo. To clearly see (i.e. sense, know, perceive, experience, etc.) is to be (i.e. actually manifest, exist), thus to clearly see liberation is to actualize (make actual, cause to exist) liberation.

Not, "I think, therefore I am," but, "Wherefore I think, I am." Or, to put it in the terms of our present discussion, "I am what I clearly see (sights, sounds, flavors, odors, tactile sensations, and thoughts) therefore what I clearly see I am."

It should go without saying, but since it usually does not, I should clarify that "clear seeing" is not "mere seeing." "Clear seeing" should not be construed as "passively" perceiving via the sense organs (i.e. eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind) as advocated by some so-called Zen teachers. Clear seeing is a skill that must be intentionally developed through sustained effort in accurately directed study and cultivation. It is the "clear" of clear seeing that qualifies it as "prajna itself." Such clear seeing is, of course, inclusive of sense perception, but only if that sense perception is actualized by the healthy mind referred to in Zen as the "normal mind" or "Buddha mind." This distinction is succinctly elucidated by Dogen in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan by the line:

Those who are enlightened about delusion are Buddhas. Those who are deluded about enlightenment are ordinary beings.

Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Ted Biringer

(Note: "Ordinary beings" here refers to common or typical (unawakened) beings; thus "ordinary" should not be confused with the "normal" of the "normal mind" of Zen usage which is sometimes rendered into English as "ordinary mind." The "normal" in the Zen sense means "healthy," this normal mind is the awakened mind, also called the Buddha mind.)

Dogen affirms the authenticity of his comment by asserting its harmony with the heart of the Heart Sutra, "Form is exactly emptiness, emptiness is exactly form" - which he summarizes as, "form is form, emptiness is emptiness." What is going on here? At first glance, this seems to contradict the Heart Sutra's statement, not summarize it.

To clarify Dogen's point we can appeal to a method provided by the Diamond Sutra to illustrate that "form" only exists because of emptiness, and emptiness is only exists because of form. This basic method can be depicted like this (with "A" standing for (any particular) form, and "not" standing for emptiness): A = not-A, therefore A = A.

To explain, a dharma (i.e. any real, particular form) is only a dharma insofar as it is differentiated from everything "other than" that dharma. In other words, to experience a dharma is to distinguish something from everything else, everything that is not it. If there was nothing that was not it - it could not be distinguished as it (a particular dharma). From this we see that the existence of "a dharma" is dependent on the existence of something "other than" that dharma; and the existence of "other than" that dharma is dependent on the existence of "that dharma." Therefore, the existence of a dharma necessarily presupposes the existence of "other than" that dharma (and vice versa). In short, the real existence of "A" depends on the real existence of "A" and "not-A," the real existence of "not-A" also depends on the real existence of "A" and "not-A."

The Heart Sutra concisely portrays the nature of reality; A is exactly (equals, is coessential with, depends on) not-A, and not-A is exactly A. The Diamond Sutra illumines the dynamic process of reality; the existence of A is essential to, therefore inclusive of, the existence of "other than" A (and vice versa). The significance of this is; if A exists, not-A must also exist (and vice versa), and if A does not exist, not-A cannot exist (and vice versa). Thus, A is not-A, therefore A is A; not-A is A, therefore not-A is not-A. In Dogen's terms, form is form, emptiness is emptiness.

As already suggested, Dogen's "clear seeing" (as prajna itself) is inclusive of right-understanding and right-views as well as accurate sense perception. In harmony with all Zen masters, Dogen frequently reminds us that it is not enough to hear, or even to understand the teachings in order to realize Buddhist liberation. The "clear seeing" that is Zen practice-enlightenment is a process not a product, an activity not a resolution. The teachings must, of course, be learned, studied, and accurately understood, however, liberation or realization cannot be actualized unless these teachings are put into actual practice and personally verified (clearly seen). Avalokitesvara was able to accurately "practice prajna paramita" because s/he had come to accurately understand the Buddhist teaching on prajna - but only with the actual experience of clear seeing was liberation actualized.

Accurate understanding is not authentic realization. At the same time, authentic realization can hardly be expected to occur without accurate understanding. And while an absence of "right understanding" almost excludes the possibility of authentic realization, the presence of "wrong understanding" excludes even the slimmest hope of success. If we aspire to realize what Zen practice-enlightenment truly is, then, as Dogen says, "We should inquire into it, and we should experience it." To follow his guidance here we will need to understand his view of what "it" is that needs to be inquired into, and who the "we" is that is to do the inquiring.

(Note: The realization of this prajnāpāramitā is the realization of buddha-bhagavats. We should inquire into it, and we should experience it. Shobogenzo, Maka-hannya-haramitsu, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross).

We inquire into it through study and training; we experience it through sustained, wholehearted effort in practice (usually after much trial and error). The "it" we need to inquire into and experience is the true nature of ourselves. The process of inquiring into and experiencing the true nature of ourselves is succinctly expressed in a passage from Genjokoan, Shobogenzo.

To learn the Buddha's truth is to learn ourselves. To learn ourselves is to forget ourselves. To forget ourselves is to be experienced by the myriad dharmas. To be experienced by the myriad dharmas is to let our own body and mind, and the body and mind of the external world, fall away.

Shobogenzo, Genjo-koan, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

The actual experience of this learning begins with coming to an accurate understanding of it. To that end, we need to understand that here "the Buddha's truth" means enlightenment (liberation, nirvana, etc.), and "learning" means study, training, practice, and verification. Understanding this, we can begin to consider the significance of this from the Buddhist perspective of emptiness; hence, if "to learn the Buddha's truth is to learn ourselves" then "to learn ourselves is to learn the Buddha's truth." Similarly, the implications of emptiness apply to "forgetting," "experience," "our body and mind," "the myriad dharmas," etc.

In Dogen's Zen, "forms" (dharmas) are the fundamental units constituting reality; they are viewed as "empty" and "mental" in nature - when Avalokitesvara clearly saw all five skandhas were empty, emptiness clearly saw emptiness. With this we were able to see that emptiness is not ineffable, absent, or undifferentiated, but rather, emptiness is intelligible, present, and particularly distinct. Emptiness, being the true nature of all the myriad dharmas, is the very form of all the myriad dharmas.

This, then, brings us to the point of our present discussion; "To forget ourselves is to be experienced by the myriad dharmas" describes exactly "emptiness clearly seeing emptiness." Emptiness seeing emptiness is emptiness seeing the myriad dharmas, the myriad dharmas seeing emptiness, the myriad dharmas seeing the myriad dharmas, the myriad dharmas seeing seeing, and seeing seeing seeing.

"Seeing your nature is Zen. If you don't see your nature it's not Zen."

~Bodhidharma, Red Pine

Peace,

Ted

Shobogenzo, Genjokoan: Study and the Commentary

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 07:56:00 +0000

Shobogenzo, Genjokoan: Study and the Commentary from The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 7

[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5] [Part 6]

We concluded the last part of our study with the line from Genjokoan:

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

Thus, we open our continuing study with some comments on this line:

Dogen is not simply repeating his previous point but indicating something else. In Shobogenzo, Keisei-Sanshiki, Dogen uses the same phrase in a manner that suggests its 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.xxix

In this passage, Dogen defines 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 can 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 says, “Too bad! Still, he’s gotten somewhere.” The meaning of Engo’s comment, “Still, he’s gotten somewhere,” illumines what Dogen means by “in delusion adding to delusion.” In following the reasoning here, Emperor Wu was “adding to delusion” when he thought he knew something (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 (not enlightened), but he is no longer adding to delusion (by asserting his enlightenment).

Recognizing and acknowledging the reality of your own delusion is a prerequisite to enlightenment. For arousing the necessary will for enlightenment is only possible when you recognize and acknowledge your own delusion. For Dogen, recognition and acknowledgement of your delusion is simultaneous with enlightenment. Throughout the Shobogenzo, Dogen remains ever-aware of the nondual nature of delusion and enlightenment. For as we read above, buddhas are those “who are enlightened about delusion.” Dogen does not say that buddhas are free from delusion, as is sometimes proclaimed by people without a clear understanding of Zen.

The Genjokoan goes on to say:

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

This line points out that when buddhas are experiencing the condition of Buddhahood, there is nothing but Buddha in the whole universe. This is the condition that 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 your original Buddhahood is realized. Of course, this experience is only called Buddhahood to differentiate it from delusion. When you speak of a state beyond delusion you 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.

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 oneness or 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 nondharma does not exist.xxx

The simple fact that the Genjokoan goes to such lengths to describe the nature and actual experience of Buddhahood is enough to put Dogen in a very exclusive minority. When the experience of Buddhahood is described, it is usually simply described as “indescribable.” In Genjokoan, Dogen not only describes characteristics like “buddhas do not know they are buddhas” and that buddhas “continuously actualize Buddhahood,” he also describes why and how that is. The Genjokoan explains:

Mustering the whole body-and-mind to look at forms, and mustering the whole body-and-mind to listen to sounds, they perceive them directly; not like an image reflected in a mirror, and not like the reflection of the moon on water.

This is a description of the condition called Buddhahood. “Buddha” describes a person in the activity or condition of authentic practice and enlightenment, the deeper meaning of 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…

xxix Gudo Nishijima & Chodo Cross, Master Dogen’s Shobogenzo, Keisei-Sanshiki, Book 1, 91

xxx Ogata, Sohaku, The Transmission of the Lamp, 10

…To Be Continued…

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5] [Part 6]

Peace,

Ted

Thusness, Normality, and the Reason (dori) of Dharmas

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 07:54:00 +0000

Thusness, Normality, and the Reason (dori) of Dharmas

The notion of thusness is the Buddhist recognition and acknowledgement of the normality of all dharmas. The normality of things is the Buddha-nature of things; to see the normality of a thing is to see its thusness, that is, to see Buddha.

“I shall pursue the problem of reason… specifically with respect to dori (or kotowari), one of Dogen’s most favorite concepts, that connotes “truth,” “reason,” “reasonableness,” “justice,” “naturalness,” and so on. Broadly speaking, our concern has to do with reason and rationality in Dogen’s soteriology, which has been grossly neglected in Dogen studies. We may ask why we should bother with the subject in the first place when the issue is in such disrepute in this day and age of postmodernism? …whatever the merits and demerits of postmodernism may be, I am deeply convinced more than ever that no age in human history calls for the genuine understanding and re-vision of reason more urgently than ours.”

Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, pp.100-101

Because in reality all dharmas are Buddha, all dharmas possess intrinsic value, even ultimate value. The ultimate value intrinsic to dharmas (their thusness, or normality) is found in and treated by Dogen according to his notion of the reason, reasonableness, or rightness of dharmas – that is the intrinsic “dori” of dharmas. The term “dori” combines “do” (tao, way, path; also, to speak, to express) and “ri” (Chinese, li; principle, pattern, order; also, to arrange, to regulate).

As the works of David L. Hall, Helmut Wilhelm, Roger T. Ames, and others demonstrate, the significance of “dori” (reason) has a profoundly subtle and wide ranging capacity. In all his works, the preeminent scholar of Dogen studies, Hee-Jin Kim, has eloquently emphasized and illumined the profound significance of dori in Dogen’s Zen. Thus, to convey the primary significance of dori as it relates to Dogen’s Zen we can do no better than offer some quotes by the grand-master himself.

It is noteworthy that the notion of do in the East Asian traditions has a single common thread, namely, the meaning of walking, journeying, or movement along a path. The Way is never extricated from the processes of phenomena themselves.

Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, p.101

All things considered, the li constitutes those patterns, rhythms, and regularities which humans discern as meaningful in carrying out their day-to-day activities, by participating in the dynamics of the natural, and according to their personal, historical, and cultural conditions and forces. Rationality is never regarded as an immutable, self-contained truth or essence transcendentally existent in a hierarchical, teleological world order, but is grasped in an ever-shifting process of human affairs in relation to nature, history, and culture.

Considered in the Buddhist context, li, like tao, attains enormous complexity in its significance: The word is employed to denote siddhanta (fundamental principle/law) and, hence such Buddhist notions as thusness, emptiness, equality…”

Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, p.102

“…li is also used to signify, for example, pramaha (to arrange, to regulate, to rectify). It is particularly noteworthy that in Hua-yen thought li (“principle”) is paired with shih (“phenomena”), and their relationship is conceived in such a way that the non-obstruction of li and shih (li-shih wu ai; rigi muge) is further refined as “the nonobstruction of shih and shih” (shih-shih wu ai; jiji muge)—in other words, the interpenetration and harmony of all phenomena.

…Dori is broad and fexible enough in its capacity to embrace logos, mythos, ethos, and pathos; cognition, affection, and conation; nature and culture; fact and value; theoria and praxis; the self and the universe. …dori is practically oriented, enabling humans to participate in its countless configurations, rhythms, and regularities in life and the world as they discern meaningful …dori regulates, arranges, and manages, as much as it challenges, surmounts, and subverts.

Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, p.103

Peace,

Ted

Zen, Dogen, Hillman, and the Self

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:32:00 +0000

Zen, Dogen, Hillman, and the Self...

Who Pracitices?

Zen practice can only begin when we come to terms with the thorniest questions of all; “Who or what is the subject that practices?” What is this “self” whose “true nature” the Zen masters urge us to awaken to?”

The majority of contemporary books whose subject centers on the “self,” books on health, psychology, religion (including Zen), and even on so-called self-help, show a marked propensity to avoid defining what it is they mean by the “self” as if this was self-evident.

Self One, Self Two?

In Buddhist literature the term “self” is used in two distinct ways, to refer to the ordinary, personal, or ego self, and to refer to the original, great, or true self; which “self” is meant is determined by its context.

The “Ordinary” Self

The “ordinary” self is depicted as the subject of experience that is experienced as independent of the object of experience. That is, the content of conscious experience is experienced by the ordinary self (which we ordinarily identify as “myself” or “our self”) as something distinct from, or other than itself. One thing this means is that the consciousness of the ordinary self is always divided by a sense of “self” and “other than self.” As Dogen says:

When speaking of consciousness of self and other, there is a self and an other in what is known; there is a self and an other in what is seen.

Shobogenzo, Shoaku Makusa, Hubert Nearman

In sum, the “ordinary” self is the subject of experience as distinct from the object of experience.

The “True” Self

In contrast to the “ordinary” self, the “true” self is portrayed as being inclusive of both the subject and the object of experience. In the context of Dogen’s line above, the “ordinary” self is the self of “self and other,” while the true self corresponds to his “what is known” and “what is seen” (which Dogen says contains both a self and an other).

It should be noted that the perspective of the “true self” does not deny the reality or significance of the “ordinary self,” it is inclusive of it. In other words, the ordinary self is not illusory or provisional; it is a real aspect of the true self, is in fact totally constituted of the true self – thus, the ordinary self is wholly contained by the true self, but the true self is not contained by the ordinary self, far from it. This is complex and not essential to the point of this post; we mention it only to preclude hasty conclusions. We are all aware of the basic notion of the ordinary self, thus we’ll move on to the main topic; the true self.

As suggested by Dogen’s words on the constituents of “what is known” and “what is seen,” the self (“self” means “true self” hereafter) is the location or moment of experience. Thus, the self is a position or occurrence of space and time rather than a particular entity or capacity in space and time. Further, the self is inclusive of both the subject and the object of experience.

Seeing and Seen – One or Two?

Experience is always two-fold, that is, experience is always the experience of something experienced by someone. In experience there is “a self and an other.” For example, the experience of “seeing a mountain” can only be realized by the presence of “a mountain” and “a seer.” The self, then, is not the mountain or the seer, but the self is “seeing a mountain.” So it is with all experience; to see a mountain, hear a waterfall, or contemplate a thought, there must be both something experienced (mountain, waterfall, or thought) and someone that experiences it; the self is the location where or moment when experiencer and experienced are joined in the actualization of experience.

With this it should be clear that the self cannot be qualified as either an ontological or an epistemological element or entity; now we can move on to some more significant aspects of the self – some aspects that make the Zen goal of “seeing the true nature of the self” a worthy pursuit.

Dogen and Hillman: The Self – A Worthy Pursuit?

In Buddhism, the great significance of the self is demonstrated by the fact that the Buddha is said to be found within the self, and nowhere else. This accounts for Dogen’s (and other Zen masters) assertions that only the self contains anything worth getting; the self is the only place or moment value exists. In this aspect, the self portrayed by Dogen is not unlike the “soul” of “Archetypal Psychology” (James Hillman et. al). Consider these words from Hillman’s landmark book, Re-visioning Psychology:

However intangible and indefinable it is, soul carries highest importance in hierarchies of human values, frequently being identified with the principle of life and even of divinity.

Re-visioning Psychology, James Hillman, p.xvi

Dogen certainly seems to agree with James Hillman here; for example, consider this passage in which he identifies the “ascendant state” of Buddha” with the “vigorous activity of playing with the soul.”

We should know that “there are human beings in the ascendant state of buddha.” [The state] is, in other words, the vigorous activity of playing with the soul. That being so, we can know it by taking up [the study of] eternal buddhas, and we can know it by holding up a fist.

Shobogenzo, Butsu-kojo-no-ji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

In the same passage just cited, Hillman writes:

In another attempt upon the idea of soul I suggested that the word refers to that unknown component which makes meaning possible, turns events into experiences, is communicated in love, and has a religious concern.

Re-visioning Psychology, James Hillman, p.xvi

While he might prefer unconcealed in place of Hillman’s unknown, Dogen too finds the “religious concern” of the soul (letting the Buddha-Dharma play as our soul) as that which “makes meaning possible” – even implying that failing to engage the soul in this way is to live “in vain.” Moreover, Dogen frequently makes the same connection as Hillman in regard to communication or preaching for others (expression, transmission) in love (compassion); for example:

We should let the Buddha-Dharma play as our soul. This is called not passing any life in vain. Do not think, on the contrary, that because we are not yet clear we should not preach for other people.

Shobogenzo, Jishō-zanmai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

After re-stating his original views on the soul, Hillman goes on to say:

Now I am adding three necessary modifications. First, “soul” refers to the deepening of events into experiences; second, the significance of the soul makes possible, whether in love or religious concern, derives from its special relation with death. And third, by “soul” I mean the imaginative possibility in our natures, the experiencing through reflective speculation, dream, image, and fantasy—that mode which recognizes all realities as primarily symbolic or metaphorical.

Re-visioning Psychology, James Hillman, p.xvi

As we see in Shobogenzo, Dogen also affirms the soul’s (true self’s) role in “deepening” events into experiences, and even regards the soul (as does Hillman) as the source of the “events” that can be deepened into experiences. Also, Dogen’s frequent allusions to the notion that insight into impermanence is the beginning of authentic religious aspiration testifies to his agreement with Hillman’s notion that the soul’s capacity to fuel love and the religious concern is directly linked to its “special relation with death.”

Zazen and the Imaginative Capacity of the Self

It is Hillman’s third “modification” though, that is particularly significant in throwing some light on Dogen’s vision of the self. For Dogen, it is the “imaginative possibility in our (true) natures,” which he most commonly calls “shikantaza” (zazen-only), that is the keystone of Zen, the “art” of Zen practice-enlightenment. It is this “imaginative possibility” that “recognizes all realities as primarily symbolic or metaphorical” that facilitates (via authentic zazen) the human capacity to “fashion” a (ordinary) self and an other, that is, to actualize the universe (genjokoan).

In Shobogenzo, Udonge, Dogen describes (metaphorically of course) the “maintenance of ‘the right Dharma-eye treasury’” (Shobogenzo; authentic Buddhism) as changing “what I possess… into the transmission” (of the Buddha-Dharma from Buddha to Buddha). In the same passage Dogen metaphorically equates “The ancestral master’s coming from the west” (Bodhidharma’s coming to China) with “twirling flowers” (a triple metaphor; at once evoking and combining the “transmission” from Shakyamuni to Mahakasyapa, the story of Huineng and the “Lotus Sutra turning monk,” and the universe of the Lotus Sutra). Dogen then identifies “twirling flowers” as “playing with soul” which he further equates with “zazen-only” (sole sitting), “becoming a Buddha and becoming a Buddha ancestor,” “putting on clothes and eating meals,” and finally as “the matter which is the ultimate criteria of a Buddha ancestor.”

When we take what I possess and change it into the transmission, that is maintenance of “the right Dharma-eye treasury.” The ancestral master’s coming from the west was the coming of twirling flowers. Twirling flowers is called “playing with the soul.” “Playing with the soul” means just sitting and dropping off body and mind. Becoming a buddha and becoming a patriarch is called “playing with the soul.” Putting on clothes and eating meals is called “playing with the soul.” In sum, the matter which is the ultimate criteria of a Buddhist patriarch is, in every case, playing with the soul. While we are being met by the Buddha hall, or while we are meeting with the monks’ hall, variety in their flowers becomes more and more abundant, and light in their colors deepens layer upon layer.

Shobogenzo, Udonge, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Yes, yes…

Peace,

Ted

Some Straight Talk on Zen Practice-Enlightenment

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:37:00 +0000

Some Straight Talk on Zen Practice-Enlightenment

The spirit of Zen is at once as ancient as the origin of the universe and as fresh as the morning breeze just now starting up from the newborn Earth. It is informed by original wisdom and the wisdom accumulated since before the empty eon – it is inspired by the perennial impulse to novelty, and by questions and ideas beget in the ever-arriving moment of now. As the realized and realizable truth (Buddha-Dharma) Zen cannot be restricted to any fixed-form, thus enlightened vision and expression must be granted access to the widest possible field of human endeavor. Therefore, if Zen is to be “authentic” it cannot be confined to any defined field, division, or realm of human thought or habitation past, present, or future. If Zen is the pursuit of “truth for the sake of truth,” as Dogen (and other Zen masters) contends, it cannot be exclusive of anything, and indeed must be as inclusive of science and art as it is of religion and philosophy. For truth is as present in the realm of alcoholism, mass transit, and daydreams as it is in seated meditation, Haiku, and mountain monasteries. So while the terms and grammar of Zen, if they are to maintain their liberating potency, must remain firmly grounded in the history, tradition, and mythology of Zen Buddhist doctrine and methodology, as truth, Zen can only be enlivened, elaborated, increased, and intensified by the true insights, discoveries, and accomplishment of real culture in all the world’s civilizations.

The phrase, “Zen practice-enlightenment” here means the authentic actualization of Zen as portrayed by the classic Zen masters, particularly the Japanese master Eihei Dogen (1200-1253) The implication that human liberation consists not in a particular attainment, but in an ongoing process of realization was inherent in Buddhism from its beginnings, but it was Dogen that provided one of the most (if not the most) elaborately detailed and comprehensive account of the significance of this truth in written form; his extensive elucidation on the nature and dynamics of Zen practice-enlightenment, Shobogenzo (True Dharma-Eye Treasury). The vision of Zen revealed by Shobogenzo presents the “great matter of life and death” as a “pursuit of truth for the sake of truth” which is engaged through and as the deliberate actualization of the universe (genjo-koan).

"Genjo" means “actualizing,” “manifesting,” “fashioning,” “making,” “generating,” “realizing,” etc.; “koan” means “public case” (as in “unconcealed” or “self-evident”), “the universe,” “the issue at hand,” “the present existence-time” (here-now), “reality,” “fundamental point,” etc. “Koan” also denotes specific expressions particularly effective for conveying enlightened wisdom (bodhi-prajna); in this sense, koans can consist of situations, activities, gestures, or objects, but usually consist of words in the form of stories or sayings from traditional sources of wisdom and mythology including scripture and poetry, but most commonly the classic records of Zen. Genjokoan, then, means “manifesting the universe,” or “actualizing the fundamental point.”

The term, genjokoan, was not coined or redefined by Dogen, as are many of his favorite terms, but had been actively used with the same significance in Zen for centuries (for instance, by the Chinese master Yuanwu, architect of the Zen classic, Hekiganroku [Blue Cliff Record]). In Shobogenzo, however, the term (thus the significance) of “genjokoan” is emphasized by being given a central role as a kind of touchstone keeping our awareness from wandering too far from our real situation in the world here and now. Shobogenzo is also unique in the extent to which it elucidates the details of the dynamic process of the “actualization” in question. Briefly, this actualization is portrayed as being realized through the practice-enlightenment of seeing through and casting off narrow ego-centric restraints; thus allowing the many things (myriad dharmas) that constitute the universe to be continuously actualized as they are (to realize their true nature). Practice (experience) is the activity of enlightenment (existence), enlightenment is the nature of practice – thus practice-enlightenment is the actualization of the universe. For the true nature of our existence is experiential, and the true activity of our existence is experiencing – thus our own true nature is actualized (made actual) through the actualization of the true nature of the universe (genjokoan).

According to the vision of Shobogenzo, actualizing the reality of genjokoan requires exposure to a complete and accurate expression of truth (the verbal teaching of Buddhism encountered through the words of reliable teachers, texts, or a combination of these), sustained focused study, clear accurate understanding, sincere dedication to concentrated practice (shikantaza; zazen-only), personal experiential verification of true nature (kensho; seeing true nature; or Dogen’s preferred term, kenbutsu; meeting Buddha), and finally, ongoing enactment (praxis, or practical application) in the everyday world.

The task of Zen doctrine and methodology is to point directly to the true self (the true nature of each human being) and provide a path or way for the individual to awaken to their true nature and thereby activate authentic practice-enlightenment. Zen accomplishes this task partly by providing a number of fundamental viewpoints from which we can see (thus experience) certain truths necessary for achieving effective progress along this path. The fundamental viewpoints necessary to an accurate understanding (thus actualization) of true nature are in no way unique to Zen, Buddhism, or even to what is commonly understood as “eastern” religion. In fact, the principles insisted on as essential by Zen are essential to every school, tradition, or system of thought, east or west (or north and south for that matter) insofar as they are concerned with authentic truth; there are not two realities, and no one has a monopoly on the truth. That said, Buddhism, Zen, and certainly the vision provided by Shobogenzo, are charged with a potency for actualizing and transmitting the wisdom of liberation that may be more directly accessible than any other presently available source.

Everyone that has ever experienced genuine aspiration (bodhicitta) for the Buddha Way that has not yet done so, is wholeheartedly encouraged to give the teachings and practices of Zen as expressed by Dogen’s Shobogenzo – as they are (not as they are “interpreted” by others) – a sincere opportunity to be actualized through your own illumination by the myriad dharmas throughout space and time.

Peace,

Ted

Dogen vs. Dogen "interpreters"

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:36:00 +0000

Dogen vs. Dogen "interpreters"

I thought I would spend a little time seeing what kind of online sources concerning Dogen’s teachings were becoming available in recent years – I was disappointed, but not too surprised…

It seems all too common to find “Zen teachers” that claim to be “interpreters” of Dogen’s teachings, who seem rather to be saying things in direct contradiction to Dogen’s own writings. For example:

Michael Eido Luetchford, Soto Zen Teacher at Dogen Sangha Buddhist Group, from the online transcript http://www.dogensangha.org.uk/Talks/cz09_purposeofzazen.pdf

There were Japanese teachers in the Rinzai tradition (not including Rinzai himself), who taught that if you practise Zazen, you can get something very special which they called enlightenment. This creates in the person who is practising Zazen a kind of hope and eagerness to get something better, to become special, to get to some special state. But according to the teachings of Dogen, the thirteenth century monk whose teachings I follow, Zazen is giving up all those kinds of hopes and all those kinds of beliefs, and all hope of becoming a better person.

Michael Eido Luetchford [emphasis added]

What is this? All of the Zen masters taught that awakening the bodhi mind (which “they called enlightenment”) is the foremost task of Zen practitioners. To claim that Dogen did not consider enlightenment as essential is to deny Dogen’s own constant exhortations to the contrary. Here are a few random examples:

Clearly remember: in the Buddhist patriarchs’ learning of the truth, to awaken the bodhi-mind is inevitably seen as foremost. This is the eternal rule of the Buddhist patriarchs.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Hotsu-Bodaishin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross, [emphasis added]

The training that we undertake to directly experience supreme, fully perfected enlightenment sometimes makes use of our good spiritual friends and sometimes makes use of sutras.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Kankin, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

In order to ultimately realize the prediction of Buddhahood, just as ever so many Ancestors of the Buddha have done, one trains in order to manifest one’s genuine enlightenment.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Juki, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

Michael Eido Luetchford goes on to assert another typical sound-bit that simply seems to ignore Dogen’s own clear teachings to the contrary. Here is Michael Eido Luetchford on “Dogen”:

Then there are many other forms of meditation where people consciously have something in their mind or are consciously meditating on some kind of subject or some kind of image. But that kind of practice is completely different from Zazen.

Michael Eido Luetchford[emphasis added]

And here is Dogen on Dogen:

At the very time of your sitting, you should examine exhaustively whether the total world is vertical or horizontal. At that very time, what is the sitting itself? Is it wheeling about in perfect freedom? Is it like the spontaneous vigor of a leaping fish? Is it thinking? Or not thinking? Is it doing? Is it non-doing? Is it sitting within sitting? Is it sitting within body and mind? Or is it sitting that has cast off sitting within sitting, sitting within body and mind, and the like?

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Sammai-O-Zammai, Waddell & Abe [emphasis added]

[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.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Gyobutsu Yuigi, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

People who arouse a true and genuine aspiration and engross themselves in study to the full extent of their capacity, do not fail to attain. As for the description of the essential point to be mindful of, what thing must be concentrated upon, what practice is to be considered most urgent, that is as follows.

First is only that the aspiration of joyful longing be earnest.

…while travelling, abiding, sitting and reclining, in the midst of affairs as the pass, though various different events come up, he goes along seeking an opening, his mind occupied [with his quest]. With his mind so forcefully earnest, there can be no failure of attainment.

In this way, when the aspiration to seek the Way has become sincere, either during the period of sole concentration on sitting, or when dealing with illustrative example of the people of olden times, or when meeting the teacher, when one acts with true aspiration…

Unless you arouse a mind comparable to this, how will you accomplish the great task of the Buddha-Way, which cuts off the turning round of birth and death in a single instant of thought? If someone has such a mind … he will definitely attain enlightenment.

Dogen, Record of Things Heard (Shobogenzo-zuimonki), II:15, Thomas Cleary [emphasis added]

This Dharma is abundantly present in each human being, but if we do not practice it, it does not manifest itself, and if we do not experience it, it cannot be realized.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Bendowa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

Once you attain this state of suchness and attain the harmonious unity of activity and understanding possessed by the Buddha-patriarchs, you examine exhaustively all the thoughts and views of this attainment.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Sammai-O-Zammai, Waddell & Abe [emphasis added]

Again, here is Michael Eido Luetchford on “Dogen”:

Of course, in our minds we have lots of intentions all the time but in Buddhism our intention is to have no intention; my teacher often said “Our aim is no aim”.

Michael Eido Luetchford [emphasis added]

What kind of dreary Zen is this? Why would anyone pursue such a “practice”? The same thing could probably accomplished by sniffing glue… For those seeking something a bit more authentic, check out Dogen here:

You cannot realize the Buddha’s Way if you do not aim to practice the Way, and It will be ever more distant from you if you do not aim to study It. Meditation Master Nangaku Ejo once said, “It is not that your training and enlightenment are absent, but they must not be tainted with anything.”

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Shinjin Gakudo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

Mr. Luetchford is certainly not alone in making assertions suggesting that zazen is some kind of trance or detachment wherein thoughts and images are to be “stopped” somehow. For example, here is an excerpt from an online text claiming to teach Dogen’s method of zazen by Gudo Nishijima Roshi:

We avoid intentionally following a train of thought during Zazen by concentrating on maintaining the posture. Of course spontaneous thoughts and images arise in our consciousness during Zazen, but they are not important. When we notice that we are thinking about something, we should simply stop.

Gudo Nishijima Roshi http://www.dogensangha.org.uk/IBPZ/IBPZ-English.pdf

Here Dogen offers a plausible explanation for such discrepencies:

There are people who, upon hearing the phrase ‘cannot be grasped’, have simply assumed that there is nothing to be attained in either case, for these people lack the living pathway of practice. Further, there are those who say that It cannot be grasped because it is said that we already possess It from the first. How does that hit the mark?

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Shin Fukatoku, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross [emphasis added]

Whatever the case, contrast Nishijima's comment on the “unimportance” of the “thinking” mind in zazen with Dogen’s comments in this passage:

Generally speaking, there are three types of mind. “The first is the mind of chitta, which we call the discriminative mind. The second is the mind of hridaya, which we call the mind of grass and trees. The third is the mind of vriddha, which we call the True Mind.” Among these, we invariably employ the discriminative mind to arouse bodhichitta, the enlightened Mind. Bodhi is an Indian word which we call the Way, or what is True. Chitta is an Indian word which we call the discriminative mind. Without this discriminative mind we could not give rise to the enlightened Mind. I am not saying that this discriminative mind is the enlightened Mind; rather, we give rise to the enlightened Mind by means of the discriminative mind.

Dogen, Shobogenzo, Hotsu Bodai Shin, Hubert Nearman

It is truly a mystery – not really that there are people that ascribe such strange “interpretations” to Dogen’s Zen – but that there are people that find such interpretations acceptable…

Peace,

Ted

The True Nature of Mind Forms...

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:01:00 +0000

The True Nature of Mind Forms...

Remember, to receive and retain, to read and recite, and to think reasonably about [prajnā] are just to guard prajnā. And to want to guard it is to receive and retain it, to read and recite it, and so on.

~Shobogenzo, Maka-hannya-haramitsu, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

To think about prajna (the wisdom of enlightenment) is to experience a mental image of prajna and to experience a mental image of prajna is to think about prajna.

Now, where is prajna apart from the mental experience of prajna?

Investigate this and you will personally verify the truth that the very substance of prajna is mind as it is.

Prajna does not exist independent of the mind as if waiting to be discovered. Pursuing this in practice brings realization that the true nature of all things, beings, forms, etc. (dharmas) is mind.

All dharmas (things, beings, etc.) are expressions of Buddha nature, expressions of the one mind, outside of which nothing exists. Dogen calls these expressions of mind, “the real form of all dharmas.” Thus Dogen describes, illumines, and clarifies the significance and implications of their true nature as mind – mental images, pictures, visions, expressions, paintings and the like.

Peace,

Ted

Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, Eihei Dogen - Skeleton Key Part 6

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 07:08:00 +0000

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 6

[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5]

Continuing on, the Genjokoan states:

Those who are enlightened about delusion are buddhas.

In the Shobogenzo, being “enlightened about delusion” means awakening to the reality of delusion. That is, realizing what delusion truly is. It is like when, for example, a person is shown the cause of a magician’s illusions: mirrors, wires, hidden compartments, and so on. The person can then 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 you realize the cause of delusion: misperception or partial perception, of true nature, you 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 you or the everyday world. This is not a judgmental statement; it is a simple observation. When you are aware of your true nature, you are called buddhas; when you are unaware of your true nature, you 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. He insists that attaining enlightenment is just the beginning of genuine practice and enlightenment. In fact, enlightenment for Dogen is only authentic as practice and enlightenment. In all his works, he repeatedly urges you to realize 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 your realization. The Genjokoan continues:

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

Dogen is not simply repeating his previous point but indicating something else. In Shobogenzo, Keisei-Sanshiki, Dogen uses the same phrase in a manner that suggests its deeper implication…

…To Be Continued…

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

[Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5]

Peace,

Ted

The Paradoxical Nature of Reality

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 06:03:00 +0000

The Paradoxical Nature of Reality

“Exhaust lifetime after lifetime examining this saying (dharma),” is a hallmark characteristic of Dogen’s methodology – this because the dharma (koan, flower, breath, oak tree, etc.) is the primary datum of experience/existence. As each dharma is an “explicit” aspect of the wholeness “implicit” in its presence, its infinite potential bestows it with the quality of original ambiguity – the more it is illumined, the more it eclipses – thus the unlimited potential for refinement and expansion – and the “paradoxical” (metaphorical) nature of dharmas that, “to expand” them is “to narrow” them also.

Peace,

Ted

The Truth of Buddha-Nature

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 07:44:00 +0000

The Truth of Buddha-Nature..

The truth of the buddha-nature is that we are not equipped with the buddha-nature before we realize the state of buddha; we are equipped with it following realization of the state of buddha. The buddha-nature and realization of buddha inevitably experience the same state together. We should thoroughly investigate and consider this truth.

Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross

Peace,
Ted

Dogen’s Shobogenzo - Genjokoan

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 07:43:00 +0000

Dogen’s Shobogenzo - Genjokoan, Skeleton Key Part 5

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 5

[Click Here for Part 1] [Click Here for Part 2] [Click Here for Part 3] [Click Here for Part 4]

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.”

Next, the Genjokoan begins an examination of delusion and enlightenment:

That people drive the self to actualize awareness of the many things is delusion. That the many things actualize awareness of the self is enlightenment.

Here Dogen gives a precise definition of the important Buddhist concepts of delusion and enlightenment, outlining their most basic aspects with clear precision. Delusion or enlightenment is what distinguishes a “buddha” from an “ordinary being.” A buddha is someone who is enlightened about delusion, that is, to the reality of his or her own true nature. An ordinary being is someone who is deluded about enlightenment (the reality of his or her own true nature). Because delusion and enlightenment are nondual, meaning they are not two separate, independent entities, we come to the understanding that differences between them are differences of perspective only.

First Dogen says, “That people drive the self to actualize awareness of the many things is delusion.” The very idea that you can “drive the self” to enlightenment implies that you must be experiencing your self as separate from enlightenment. Because in reality you are both separate and not separate from the many things, experiencing your self as only separate is delusion.

Awakening to the truth that “the many things actualize awareness of the self” is the function of Zen practice; your true nature is the true nature of the universe. The Buddhist formula for salvation, liberation, enlightenment, or any of the other terms used to indicate the ultimate truth of religion consists of personally realizing that you are one with all things including both enlightenment and delusion. Continuing on, the Genjokoan states:

Those who are enlightened about delusion are buddhas.

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

...To be continued...

[Click Here for Part 1] [Click Here for Part 2] [Click Here for Part 3] [Click Here for Part 4]

Peace,

Ted

Zen: The Role of Intellectual Concepts According to Dogen

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:53:00 +0000

Dogen on the role of “intellectual concepts” in the authentic Dharma:

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.

Shobogenzo, Shoho-Jisso, Hubert Nearman

Peace,
Ted

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 09:22:00 +0000

The Enlightened Wisdom (Bodhi Prajna) of Zen: Maha Prajna Paramita

A New Series of Posts on The Four Prajnas of Buddhahood on our sister blog FLATBED ZEN BLOG

A Zen Commentary on Prajna (Great Perfect Wisdom) from The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing by Ted Biringer

Peace,
Ted

Genjokoan: Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo Part 4

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:39:00 +0000

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 4

[Click Here for Part 1] [Click Here for Part 2] [Click Here for Part 3]

Throughout his works, Dogen consistently affirms the vital position of verbal expression in the buddha-dharma (the authentic teaching of Buddhism), and at the same time, clearly defines its limitations. The next line of Genjokoan is one of the finest examples of this.

And though it is like this, it is simply 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 misunderstood. It is often interpreted as a simile, which completely misses, and even subverts the point Dogen is making. In fact, Dogen points out that the previous three points are similes with the words, “And though 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 teaching corresponds with the true 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 you to see into and through the words, while avoiding becoming attached to the words. You cannot “learn” Zen through reading and study, but you 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, 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.

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

To be continued...

[Click Here for Part 1] [Click Here for Part 2] [Click Here for Part 3]

Peace,

Ted

Zen Treasury: Subtle Clues To Dogen's Shobogenzo

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:57:00 +0000

To Dogen, mind was at once knowledge and reality, at once the knowing subject and the known object, yet it transcended them both at the same time. In this nondual conception of mind, what one knew was what one was—and ontology, epistemology, and soteriology were inseparably united. This was also his interpretation of the Hua-yen tenet “The triple world is mind-only.” From this vantage point, Dogen guarded himself against the inherent weaknesses of the two strands of Buddhist idealism: the advocacy of the functions of mind (shinso) by the school of consciousness-only and the advocacy of the essence of mind (shinsho) by the school of tathagata-garbha—both of which were vulnerable to a dualism between phenomena and essence. Thus, philosophically speaking, Dogen maneuvered between monistic pantheism and reductionistic phenomenalism.

Hee-Jin Kim, Eihei Dogen: Mystical Realist, p.117

The obvious (surface) meaning of this is clear enough; for Dogen, to exist is to know (to sense, feel, perceive, experience, etc.), to know is to exist, and to know Buddha (enlightenment, liberation, nirvana, etc.) is to exist as Buddha. While this is profound in its own right, I would like to suggest there may be some subtler clues we might come away with.

Consider closely the implications of Kim’s assertion about Dogen making no division between existence, knowledge, or the Buddha Way (ontology, epistemology, and soteriology). If Dogen does not regard ontology, epistemology, and soteriology, as being three different things, as Kim contends, then clearly, Dogen’s expressions on any one of these must also apply to the other two.

It is this, that I would like to suggest can serve as a kind of key in approaching Shobogenzo. That is, it serves as a key insofar as it neutralizes Dogen’s obligation to confine his expressions to the specific terms and doctrines appropriate to any one of these three, as would be necessary if the three were treated as different things. This means, for example, that if Dogen could not accurately transmit some Buddhist truth on knowledge within the terms and teachings of Buddhist epistemology he could appeal to the terms and teachings available within Buddhist ontology or soteriology – he could even combine terms and teachings from these “three” realms of Buddhist thought, thus vastly increase the degree of subtlety with which his expressions could be refined.

In other words, Dogen’s view of the inseparability of ontology, epistemology, and soteriology vastly increases Dogen’s capacity to transmit wisdom by increasing the terms and teaching available for so doing. The possibilities available to a painter limited to a single color are not simply doubled with the addition of one more color, but pushed to the brink of infinity – a third color and the brink is transcended; this same reasoning applies to musicians, poets, and Zen masters.

If you have followed the significance of this, you will also be able to appreciate that, just as Hee-Jin Kim provides these clues to Dogen’s teachings on “ontology, epistemology, and soteriology,” Kim points similarly to “language, thinking, and reason,” as well as “activity, expression, and understanding.”

By assimilating the significance of these clues, we rid ourselves of obstacles by dispensing with limitations imposed by arbitrary divisions, thus expanding our capacity for receiving Dogen’s transmission.

Please, dig into Dogen’s treasury and enjoy its profound richness…

Peace,

Ted

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:56:00 +0000

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 3

[Click Here for Part 1] [Click Here for Part 2]

The next lines of the Genjokoan read:

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

These lines acknowledge the truth of the universal or empty aspect of reality. “When all things are seen as empty of self” refers to another way of perceiving the buddha-dharma (reality). The experience of reality from this perspective is the experience of absolute oneness. In the experience of oneness, there are no separate individual things; the buddha-dharma is totally undifferentiated. From this perspective, all things (the myriad dharmas) cease to appear as distinct entities (empty of self) and are therefore not distinguishable as things. That is to say, oneness is truly oneness, without anything left over. When there is no-thing that can be distinguished from any other thing, “there is no delusion and no enlightenment, no buddhas and no ordinary beings, no life and no death.” There are no people, no animals, no houses, no stars, or any other particular things.

In the Shobogenzo, Dogen reveals the meaning of this aspect of reality in some startling and ingenious ways. Without resorting to innuendo or “mystical” language he exposes the truth of the universal nature of emptiness, or the void, excepting nothing, not even emptiness itself. Dogen, perhaps more than any other Zen master, makes rational the profound rationale of the truth of emptiness, making the emptiness of emptiness as self-evident as the emptiness of form.

The Genjokoan continues:

Buddha’s truth includes and transcends the many and the one, and so there is life and death, delusion and enlightenment, ordinary beings and buddhas.

The Buddha’s truth is not in reality divided into the many (the myriad dharmas) and the one but includes and transcends both. Since the Buddha’s truth (true nature of reality) is all-inclusive, there is “life and death, delusion and enlightenment, ordinary beings and buddhas.” There are people, animals, houses, stars, and all the other particular things.

The point Dogen makes in this short line, forms the topic of thousands of pages of Buddhist literature. It is also the subject of the most popular Mahayana Buddhist scripture, The Heart Sutra. The Heart Sutra was the subject of the very first commentary Dogen wrote for the Shobogenzo: Shobogenzo, Maka-Hannya-Haramitsu, the second or third thing he wrote upon his return from China. Though commentaries on emptiness are myriad, the profound implications of this sublime doctrine are extremely subtle and difficult to penetrate. Dogen’s illumination on the topic of emptiness is extraordinarily clear, provocative, and evocative.

Dogen’s expressions in the first three sections of Genjokoan are a succinct overview of the nature of the universe; first as perceived from the contrasting perspectives of the universal and the individual, then as transcending those perspectives. Transcending these opposing perspectives is sometimes referred to as the mutual interpenetrating and non-obstruction of the one and the many where each thing and event, and all things and events, contain, and are contained by, each other. This is expressed in the Buddhist literature by the doctrines of form and emptiness, the particular and the absolute, the universal and the individual, and so on. This mutually inclusive aspect of the one and the many is expressed in Zen koans in an intimate and direct manner; for instance, in the classic koan, Two Monks Roll Up the Blinds:

Master Hogen raised his hand and pointed to the blinds. Two monks went and rolled them up in the same way. Hogen said, “One gains, one loses.”

Upon resolution of this koan, you will intimately realize that master Hogen’s words “One gains, one loses” apply to each of the two monks. Indeed, his words apply to every thing and event in all of time and space.

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

To be continued...

[Click Here for Part 1][Click Here for Part 2]

Peace,

Ted

A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo: Genjokoan

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 08:15:00 +0000

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 2

[Click Here for Part 1]

The opening lines of Genjokoan outline the fundamental aspects of reality: the interdependence and interpenetrating aspects of the one and the many, the individual and the universal.

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

This line affirms the relative aspect of reality. Here, “the buddha-dharma” denotes all-inclusive reality. “When all things are seen as the buddha-dharma” indicates one way of perceiving the buddha-dharma (reality). In this way of perceiving the buddha-dharma, “all things” (the myriad dharmas) are seen. That is, reality appears as a multitude of separate individual things. From this perspective of reality, there is “delusion and enlightenment, there is practice, there is life and there is death, there are buddhas and there are ordinary beings.” There are people, animals, houses, stars, and all the other kinds of things.

Dogen, more than most Zen masters, delves deeply into the implications of this aspect of reality. While many Zen masters and Buddhist texts give short shrift to the relative aspect of experience, often simply dismissing it as the experience of delusion, Dogen methodically articulates how this aspect of reality affirms the ultimate significance of every particular thing. The Shobogenzo repeatedly directs us to this truth; because everything is the buddha-dharma, the buddha-dharma is every thing. For Dogen, every thing has ultimate significance as the buddha-dharma; including even such things as broken tiles, pebbles, dreams, illusions, and doubts.

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

To be continued...

[Click Here for Part 1]

Peace,

Ted

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:19:00 +0000

Genjokoan: A Skeleton Key to Dogen’s Shobogenzo

A Study of Genjokoan and the Commentary in The Flatbed Sutra of LouieWing by Ted Biringer

PART 1

The celebrated Genjokoan is one of the most widely known and highly praised essays of the thirteenth-century Japanese Zen master Dogen. There is a very good reason for this; Genjokoan, literally meaning “actualization of the fundamental point,” is a masterpiece of Zen expression.

One thing that places Dogen in the company of the greatest of Zen masters is his magnificent skill for Zen expression. Few masters before–and none since–have matched his skill for expressing the profound and subtle wisdom of the enlightened mind. Two of his early predecessors, Tozan and his disciple Sozan, earn their inclusion among these few through their elucidation of the classic Zen teaching of the Five Ranks.

The doctrine expressed as the Five Ranks is one of the most influential Zen expressions of all time. The subject of that doctrine–the function and essence of the enlightened mind–is, and has always been, the summum bonum of Buddhism. Every genuine Buddhist expression is grounded on this central principal. The presentation of this principal by Tozan, further refined by Sozan as the Five Ranks, marks one point where the expression of the central truth of Buddhism evolved.

Dogen’s Shobogenzo marks another such point.

Dogen’s genius for expression is displayed nowhere better than in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan. His views, on every major aspect of the buddha-dharma, are revealed, either explicitly or implicitly, in this extraordinary essay. Genjokoan is a skeleton key that can be used to unlock the Shobogenzo, literally “Treasury of the True Dharma-Eye.”

~The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing: The Second Ancestor of Zen in the West by Ted Biringer

…To be continued…

Peace,

Ted

Three Classic Zen Masters on Joshu’s Mu Koan: Rujing, Torei, & Mumon

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:30:00 +0000

Three Classic Zen Masters on Joshu’s Mu Koan

While contemporary sectarians continue to debate the distinctions between the “various” lineages, schools, sects, traditions, etc. of Zen, the classic masters continue to express the authentic Buddha-Dharma with the one-voice of Buddha.

A monk asked Joshu, "Does a dog have Buddha Nature?"

Joshu said, "Mu."

(Note: The literal meaning of the Japanese “mu” [Chinese “wu”] is “no,” “does not have,” “is without,” etc.)

Here is Tendo Nyojo (Dogen’s Chinese Teacher) on how to apply this koan in practice:

"When thoughts are flying around your mind in confusion, what do you do? 'A dog’s Buddha-nature? No (Mu).' This one word No (Mu) is an iron broom: Where you sweep there is a lot of flying around, and where there is a lot of flying around, you sweep. The more you sweep, the more there is. At this point where it is impossible to sweep, you throw your whole life into sweeping. Keep your spine straight day and night, and do not let your courage flag. All of a sudden you sweep away the totality of space, and all differentiations are clearly penetrated, so the source and its meanings become evident."
~Unlocking the Zen Koan, Thomas Cleary

Here is Master Torei (Hakuin’s Primary heir) on how to approach the “mu” koan:

If thoughts are flying around, consider this story: “Does a dog have buddha-nature? No.” Bring it to mind directly, and don’t interpret it logically. Don’t interpret it as flavorless, don’t interpret it as nothing. If you conceive any logical understanding, you’ll never complete the work. But don’t develop an illogical mind either. Logic and no logic are after all random ideas. Just bring it up and look at it. It has nothing to do with interpretations; it is the real way of practice of the Buddhas. Continue moment to moment, whether speaking or silent, active or quiet, walking, standing, sitting, and lying down—do not forget it! Or if you occasionally forget, don’t lose power.

This is like learning archery—it takes a long, long time to hit the bull’s-eye. Just develop the will to persevere; be careful not to flag and slack. If you give up this teaching, by what teaching will you attain liberation?

~The Undying Lamp of Zen, Thomas Cleary

Finally, here is Mumon (Compiler of the Zen classic “Mumonkan”) on this koan:

"In order to master Zen, you must pass the barrier of the patriarchs. To attain this subtle realization, you must completely cut off the way of thinking. If you do not pass the barrier, and do not cut off the way of thinking, then you will be like a ghost clinging to the bushes and weeds.

Now, I want to ask you, what is the barrier of the patriarchs? Why, it is this single word 'Mu.' That is the front gate to Zen. Therefore it is called the 'Mumonkan of Zen.' If you pass through it, you will not only see Joshu face to face, but you will also go hand in hand with the successive patriarchs, entangling your eyebrows with theirs, seeing with the same eyes, hearing with the same ears. Isn't that a delightful prospect? Wouldn't you like to pass this barrier?

Arouse your entire body with its three hundred and sixty bones and joints and its eighty-four thousand pores of the skin; summon up a spirit of great doubt and concentrate on this word 'Mu.' Carry it continuously day and night. Do not form a nihilistic conception of vacancy, or a relative conception of 'has' or 'has not.' It will be just as if you swallow a red-hot iron ball, which you cannot spit out even if you try. All the illusory ideas and delusive thoughts accumulated up to the present will be exterminated, and when the time comes, internal and external will be spontaneously united. You will know this, but for yourself only, like a dumb man who has had a dream.

Then all of a sudden an explosive conversion will occur, and you will astonish the heavens and shake the earth. It will be as if you snatch away the great sword of the valiant general Kan'u and hold it in your hand. When you meet the Buddha, you kill him; when you meet the patriarchs, you kill them. On the brink of life and death, you command perfect freedom; among the sixfold worlds and four modes of existence, you enjoy a merry and playful samadhi.

Now, I want to ask you again, 'How will you carry it out?' Employ every ounce of your energy to work on this 'Mu.' If you hold on without interruption, behold: a single spark, and the holy candle is lit!'
~Two Zen Classics, Katsuki Sekida

It seems there is only one Buddha Dharma after all…

Peace,

Ted

Three Enlightenment Stories: Dogen, Rujing, Ejo - Denkoroku

noreply@blogger.com (Ted Biringer) — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:41:00 +0000

Three Enlightenment Stories from the Denkoroku: Dogen, Rujing, Ejo

Rujing (Dogen’s Chinese teacher) studied with Zen master Zhijian. Zhijian asked him, “How can you purify what has never been defiled?” After more than a year Rujing was suddenly awakened and said, “I’ve hit upon that which is undefiled.”

…

One day Rujing was suddenly enlightened. He went to the abbot’s quarters and said, “I can say it.” Zhijian said, “This time say it.” Rujing said, “I’ve hit upon that which is undefiled.”

…

Although he was given a purple vestment of honor and a master’s title by the emperor of China, he formally declined them. Furthermore, he kept his succession a secret, not revealing it all his life; only at the end did he formally acknowledge the teacher from whom he had inherited the teaching. This was not only to put off worldly craving for fame, but also out of deference for the good name of Zen. Truly his virtue was unequaled in his time, his discipline peerless in ancient and modern times.

He used to declare of himself, “The Way of the Zen founders has died out this last century or two. Thus there has not appeared a teacher like me for the last hundred or two hundred years…” He used to say, “Since I made up my mind to go travelling at the age of nineteen, I have found no one imbued with the Way. Many of the monastery abbots just deal with visiting officials and pay no mind to the monks’ hall. They always say, “Each of you should understand on your own,” and so saying they do not develop the people. Even the abbots of great monasteries now are like this. They think having nothing on the mind is the Way, and don’t demand intensive Zen concentration in association with a teacher. Where is there any Buddhism in that? If it is as they say, why would there be old-timers persistently seeking the Way? What a laugh—they haven’t so much as dreamed of the Way of the Zen founders.”

Keizan (4^th generation successor of Dogen), Transmission of Light, Thomas Cleary, p.214-216

…

Once, during meditation sitting late at night Rujing said to the assembly, “Zen study is the shedding of mind and body.” Hearing this, suddenly Dogen was greatly enlightened.

Keizan (4^th generation successor of Dogen), Transmission of Light, Thomas Cleary, p.219

…

Ejo studied with Zen master Dogen. One day in the course of inquiries he heard the saying, “One hair goes through myriad holes,” and all of a sudden realized enlightenment.

Keizan (4^th generation successor of Dogen), Transmission of Light, Thomas Cleary, p.227

...

Peace,

Ted