Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Who told you that shikantaza means the passing away of greed, hate and ignorance?
Zen Master Dogen Zenji, The 6th zen patraric Dajian Huineng and other zen masters.
Shikantaza is no more than a method of meditation. If you want to give it various religious meanings that's your choice. We can also give religious meanings to sleeping...
It's not my choice. It Zen Master Dogen Zenji's choice. And nearly all other zen teachers too, for a thousand years.
"Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same." What does enlightenment mean to whoever said this???
It was Zen Master Dogen Zenji who said that and it means exactly what it says. This is zen teaching.
Who told you that shikantaza means the passing away of greed, hate and ignorance?
Zen Master Dogen Zenji, The 6th zen patraric Dajian Huineng and other zen masters.
What exactly did Dogen Zenji say? I ask because you may have misinterpreted him or got hold of a bad translation.
Shikantaza is no more than a method of meditation. If you want to give it various religious meanings that's your choice. We can also give religious meanings to sleeping...
It's not my choice. It Zen Master Dogen Zenji's choice. And nearly all other zen teachers too, for a thousand years.
Whether or not that's true, you still have a choice. The fact that you say "nearly all" indicates that some Zen teachers choose not to see it the way you suggest.
"Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same." What does enlightenment mean to whoever said this???
It was Zen Master Dogen Zenji who said that and it means exactly what it says. This is zen teaching.
I asked what enlightenment means to the author, not who the author is. If Dogen Zenji wrote somewhere that enlightenment means shikantaza then show us where he said that. Again, you may be misinterpreting what he wrote or it could be a bad translation.
On the contrary, Compassionate_warrior, it is you who are being evasive and mysterious. I directly asked you why it matters and you completely avoided the question. Now I ask you again why it matters, and I additionally ask why you avoided answering why it matters the first time I asked? Perhaps you don't know why you asked or why it matters to you. If that's the case I ask that you consider why you asked and post what you've concluded.
Who told you that shikantaza means the passing away of greed, hate and ignorance?
Zen Master Dogen Zenji, The 6th zen patraric Dajian Huineng and other zen masters.
What exactly did Dogen Zenji say? I ask because you may have misinterpreted him or got hold of a bad translation.
I already told you that. What I quoted is exactly what he said. "Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same."
It's not my choice. It Zen Master Dogen Zenji's choice. And nearly all other zen teachers too, for a thousand years.
Whether or not that's true, you still have a choice. The fact that you say "nearly all" indicates that some Zen teachers choose not to see it the way you suggest.
No it does not indicate that. It only indicates that I have not heard from ALL zen masters in the whole world from the beginning of time.
"Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same." What does enlightenment mean to whoever said this???
It was Zen Master Dogen Zenji who said that and it means exactly what it says. This is zen teaching.
I asked what enlightenment means to the author, not who the author is. If Dogen Zenji wrote somewhere that enlightenment means shikantaza then show us where he said that. Again, you may be misinterpreting what he wrote or it could be a bad translation.
What enlightenment means to the author? It says it right in the quote. Practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. It's not a bad translation.
The primary concept underlying Dōgen's Zen practice is "oneness of practice-enlightenment" (修證一如 shushō-ittō / shushō-ichinyo). In fact, this concept is considered so fundamental to Dōgen's variety of Zen—and, consequently, to the Sōtō school as a whole—that it formed the basis for the work Shushō-gi (修證儀), which was compiled in 1890 by Takiya Takushū (滝谷卓洲) of Eihei-ji and Azegami Baisen (畔上楳仙) of Sōji-ji as an introductory and prescriptive abstract of Dōgen's massive work, the Shōbōgenzō ("Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma").
For Dōgen, the practice of zazen and the experience of enlightenment were one and the same. This point was succinctly stressed by Dōgen in the Fukan Zazengi, the first text that he composed upon his return to Japan from China: "To practice the Way singleheartedly is, in itself, enlightenment. There is no gap between practice and enlightenment or zazen and daily life". Earlier in the same text, the basis of this identity is explained in more detail:
“Zazen is not "step-by-step meditation". Rather it is simply the easy and pleasant practice of a Buddha, the realization of the Buddha's Wisdom. The Truth appears, there being no delusion. If you understand this, you are completely free, like a dragon that has obtained water or a tiger that reclines on a mountain. The supreme Law will then appear of itself, and you will be free of weariness and confusion.”
The "oneness of practice-enlightenment" was also a point stressed in the Bendōwa (弁道話 "A Talk on the Endeavor of the Path") of 1231: “ Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same."
Who told you that shikantaza means the passing away of greed, hate and ignorance?
Zen Master Dogen Zenji, The 6th zen patraric Dajian Huineng and other zen masters.
What exactly did Dogen Zenji say? I ask because you may have misinterpreted him or got hold of a bad translation.
I already told you that. What I quoted is exactly what he said. "Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same."
It's not my choice. It Zen Master Dogen Zenji's choice. And nearly all other zen teachers too, for a thousand years.
Whether or not that's true, you still have a choice. The fact that you say "nearly all" indicates that some Zen teachers choose not to see it the way you suggest.
No it does not indicate that. It only indicates that I have not heard from ALL zen masters in the whole world from the beginning of time.
The point has eluded you but I will try to show it more clearly. In the quotation that you provide you claim that Dogen wrote that thinking practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way, and in Buddhism practice and enlightenment are one and the same. Then you go on to say that you can't account for all Zen Masters and some of them may not hold the belief that shikantaza is enlightenment. If this view is "outside the Way," as you say Dogen writes, how can they be Zen Buddhist Masters? How can they even be Buddhists if in Buddhism shikantaza is held to be enlightenment?
Do you believe that it is necessary for a Buddhist to believe that shikantaza is enlightenment in order to be considered a Buddhist? If it is not necessary then it is a choice. Ya feel me???
In Zen Buddhism the Middle Way describes the realization of being free of the one-sidedness of perspective that takes the extremes of any polarity as objective reality.
@RichardH your reductionism of shikantaza as separate from other forms of sitting speaks of a fierce loyalty to a practice that contains tremendous meaning for you despite the inefficiency of our shared ontology. Could that be attachment? Perhaps - no matter. I think you are still a hard case, as you put it - but a welcome reflecting ruminator nonetheless.
In Japan, vipassana and shamatha are sometimes used in addition to shikantaza as complementary practices.
Oh, you have no idea what a hard case I am...or maybe you do. We suffer, we are hard cases. But we can also be bright and forgetful. . That's an ordinary miracle to me.. How is your case. You and your wife and daughter are good I hope. We used to talk. metta.
Then you go on to say that you can't account for all Zen Masters and some of them may not hold the belief that shikantaza is enlightenment. If this view is "outside the Way," as you say Dogen writes, how can they be Zen Buddhist Masters? How can they even be Buddhists if in Buddhism shikantaza is held to be enlightenment?
Sorry friend you are mistaken and putting words in my mouth. I have never said "some of them may not believe that shikantaza is enlightenment" or anything close to that. That is your statement, not mine.
Do you believe that it is necessary for a Buddhist to believe that shikantaza is enlightenment in order to be considered a Buddhist?
No, because this discussion isn't about what is "Buddhist" or "not Buddhist", It is about zen practice and teaching. "One minute sitting, one minute Buddha" is a very common zen teaching.
How to participate on a board like this, share practice and experience.... without loosing practice? If I try I can sound like I "have it all together", but I don't of course because this is, after all, Samsara. It's easy to be a Buddhist know-it-all, and if that was the measure of practice, the internet would be bursting with Buddhas. So, IMHO, it is possible to participate in a forum like this , share practice, share vulnerability and suffering and ordinariness..... mainly ordinariness. I'm an endless work in progress even as "Just Sitting" is nothing to attain.
But.. I think a basic respect for the teachings of different traditions is not an unreasonable expectation... even on the internet. With that respect we can share and learn from each other... otherwise the internet just drifts down to the lowest common denominator.
So, if I see someone slagging the legitimacy of a Buddhist tradition, any Buddhist tradition, and there is someone defending it... and I say "oh you guys are just carrying on".... as if the defender and the person doing the slagging are a couple of people in a fray that I am above....that just seems off to me, personally. There are some positions worth taking, meta-positions maybe, against sectarian bashing for instance. Not taking that position is perfectly fine, but not taking that position because of my supposed non-attachment is iffy, because I'll surely be taking a position on something, and be attached to some degree, soon enough. Personally, I'll be feisty in response to sectarian trolling.. it seems right. IMHO.
anyway .. a bit of a ramble....just got home from working late..tired.
I do find it ironic that more often than not Right Speech is not observed by many heavy handed debates and the tone turns caustic in a hurry. Right Intention? It seems like a lot of fighting words with very little effect. I have yet to see someone change his/her mind in such heated discussions.
The actual disagreement here is way over my head and feels just like bashing, to a point where it is very unpleasant and pointless. Most of all I don't understand such petty squabbling in a thread full of originally good intentions where the OP unexpectedly finds himself on the defensive. So what if one person practices one way and another a different way.... Is that really so important? He said/he said -- and what difference does it make? All this headiness seems to completely contradict mindfulness, metta, right speech, non attachment etc... so bizarre.
There's a difference on our board between "heated debate" (people do manage to be polite, even when preseting opposing views) and baiting, bashing, or deliberately provoking. One thing I like about our membership is we're usually able to discuss, even when we strongly disagree, and still be friends, and shake hands when it's over. It would be nice to keep it that way.
In Zen they have a practice which they call shikantaza. And of course, even to call it a practice is already misleading, because it actually means "doing nothing." The literal translation of it is "just sitting.
What does it mean? One way of approaching it is to realize that in everything else we do there is some kind of goal or activity. We meditate in order to become enlightened, or we go to work in order to make money, or we go out with friends to have fun. It pervades everything.
It can be very subtle, too. We may be meditating and just watching our breath or just repeating a mantra or even just witnessing our thought-stream, and yet there is still this smidgen of activity that will "get us somewhere." We'll accomplish something. We'll build an empire, or raise the children, or get the house built, or get past these legal problems or whatever it is.
The very definition of the "I," the self, the decider, the somebody who's living a personal life, is that there is some activity, some manipulation somewhere to accomplish something. And everything we do, no matter how subtle, reinforces this concept that we exist separately
That's where shikantaza comes in. In shikantaza we just sit down and rest in pure awareness. There's no technique whatever to support us, to keep the game going. No deliberate watching of the breath, no doing the mantra, not even investigating the koan or deliberately witnessing the mind. Just pure awareness, nothing else.
The most subtle goal of all that the self sets up is to become awakened or enlightened. Yet the very act of doing anything at all to become enlightened sets up a subtle duality which reinforces the self. I am here and enlightenment is over there. I am on this shore and I need to get to the "other shore" somehow, the one where I'll be self-realized, awakened, liberated.
In that "just sitting," we become aware of awareness itself, which needs no support anywhere, no technique of any kind to be itself—not even "just sitting," which the mind can try to make into a technique to get somewhere.
In pure awareness there is no idea of the "I," no concept of the personal doer, the separate decider-self who's always trying to get somewhere in the next minute or the next year. There's just awareness itself, manifesting as this ordinary moment, this ordinary life. There is no separation between that shore and this shore; that's just another duality set up by the mind, just one more goal.
"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
I see Shikantaza as the natural expression of realization and enlightenment.
But many people completely misunderstand this... they think that practice-enlightenment means there is no need for realization, since practicing is enlightenment. In other words, even a beginner is as realized as the Buddha when meditating.
This is plain wrong and thoughts of the foolish.
Rather, understand that practice-enlightenment is the natural expression of realization... and without realization, one will not discover the essence of practice-enlightenment.
As I told my friend/teacher 'Thusness', “I used to sit meditation with a goal and direction. Now, sitting itself is enlightenment. Sitting is just sitting. Sitting is just the activity of sitting, air con humming, breathing. Walking itself is enlightenment. Practice is not done for enlightenment but all activity is itself the perfect expression of enlightenment/buddha-nature. There is nowhere to go."
I see no possibility of directly experiencing this unless one has clear direct non-dual insight. Without realizing the primordial purity and spontaneous perfection of this instantaneous moment of manifestation as Buddha-nature itself, there will always be effort and attempt at 'doing', at achieving something... whether it be mundane states of calmness, absorption, or supramundane states of awakening or liberation... all are just due to the ignorance of the true nature of this instantaneous moment.
However, non-dual experience can still be separated into:
1) One Mind
- lately I have been noticing that majority of Buddhist practitioners and masters describe non-dual in terms of One Mind. That is, having realized that there is no subject-object/perceiver-perceived division or dichotomy, they subsume everything to be Mind only, mountans and rivers all are Me - the one undivided essence appearing as the many.
Though non-separate, the view is still of an inherent metaphysical essence. Hence non-dual but inherent.
2) No Mind
Where even the 'One Naked Awareness' or 'One Mind' or a Source is is totally forgotten and dissolved into simply scenery, sound, arising thoughts and passing scent. Only the flow of self-luminous transience.
....
However, we must understand that even having the experience of No Mind is not yet the realization of Anatta. In the case of No Mind, it can remain a peak experience. In fact, it is a natural progression for a practitioner at One Mind to occassionally enter into the terroritory of No Mind... but because there is no breakthrough in terms of view, the latent tendency to sink back into a Source, a One Mind is very strong and the experience of No Mind will not be sustained stably. The practictitioner may then try his best to remain bare and non-conceptual and sustain the experience of No Mind through being naked in awareness, but no breakthrough can come unless a certain realization arises.
In particular, the important realization to breakthrough this view of inherent self is the realization that Always Already, never was/is there a self - in seeing always only just the seen, the scenery, shapes and colours, never a seer! In hearing only the audible tones, no hearer! Just activities, no agent! A process of dependent origination itself rolls and knows... no self, agent, perceiver, controller therein.
It is this realization that breaks down the view of 'seer-seeing-seen', or 'One Naked Awareness' permanently by realizing that there never was a 'One Awareness' - 'awareness', 'seeing', 'hearing' are only labels for the everchanging sensations and sights and sounds, like the word 'weather' don't point to an unchanging entity but the everchanging stream of rain, wind, clouds, forming and parting momentarily...
Then as the investigation and insights deepen, it is seen and experienced that there is only this process of dependent origination, all the causes and conditions coming together in this instantaneous moment of activity, such that when eating the apple it is like the universe eating the apple, the universe typing this message, the universe hearing the sound... or the universe is the sound. Just that... is Shikantaza. In seeing only the seen, in sitting only the sitting, and the whole universe is sitting... and it couldn't be otherwise when there is no self, no meditator apart from meditation. Every moment cannot 'help' but be practice-enlightenment... it is not even the result of concentration or any form of contrived effort... rather it is the natural authentication of the realization, experience and view in real-time.
Zen Master Dogen, the proponent of practice-enlightenment, is one of the rare and clear jewels of Zen Buddhism who have very deep experiential clarity about anatta and dependent origination. Without deep realization-experience of anatta and dependent origination in real time, we can never understand what Dogen is pointing to... his words may sound cryptic, mystical, or poetic, but actually they are simply pointing to this.
Someone 'complained' that Shikantaza is just some temporary suppressing of defilements instead of the permanent removal of it. However if one realizes anatta then it is the permanent ending of self-view, i.e. traditional stream-entry.
"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
Hi xabir. I really enjoyed reading your posts and the links. I do have one question... Who is the teacher going by the name of "Thusness"? I'm not doubting his/her cred or anything like that, just curious, because most teachers have a Dharma name (I as a student also a have a Dharma name, but go my my birth name here), and represent a lineage of Zen/Chan/Son. Usually there is not much mystery.
Could you indulge me and give a little background ? It would be interesting ... Thanks.
Hi xabir. I really enjoyed reading your posts and the links. I do have one question... Who is the teacher going by the name of "Thusness"? I'm not doubting his/her cred or anything like that, just curious, because most teachers have a Dharma name (I as a student also a have a Dharma name, but go my my birth name here), and represent a lineage of Zen/Chan/Son. Usually there is not much mystery.
Could you indulge me and give a little background ? It would be interesting ... Thanks.
Hmm... he does not want to be called teacher, but I call him my teacher because I learnt so much from him.
I wrote a little about him in my ebook,
"‘Thusness’ is the nickname of my spiritual friend (who I also consider as my teacher), John Tan. I first knew him online through the Galaxynet IRC channel #Buddhism in 2004. We were discussing about computer programming initially instead of spirituality (he used to be the CEO of an IT company and is very knowledgeable in IT, however he has since retired). It didn’t take a long time for me to realize that he had deep experiential insight of the teachings of Buddhism, and over the years, I had numerous conversations with him and learnt a lot about spirituality and Buddhism. I have met him a number of times since he lives in Singapore too. I am very grateful for his guidance without which I will not have the spiritual knowledge and insights I have today.
Thusness, who attained Self-Realization 25 years ago at the age of 17 through the practice of Self-Inquiry, was also the one who instructed me on the practice of Self-Inquiry (he does not teach this method to everyone and first observes the person’s conditions and inclinations – for example for many people he would instruct on Vipassana practice instead) since 2008 for my case because I am inclined towards the ‘Direct Path’ teachings, Advaita Vedanta, Zen, and so on. The practice of Self-Inquiry has resulted in some of the insights and realizations that I will be talking about in this document. Apart from self-inquiry, he provided me with many pointers along the path that allowed me to deepen my realization, allowing me to realize quickly after my I AM realization, the insight into non dual, anatta and shunyata.
Thusness shuns public attention, using the nicknames ‘PasserBy’ or ‘ByPasser’ in forums and blog, and leaves the forum if he gets too much attention. He prefers the style of Taoist adepts whose footsteps leave no trace. He often tells me not to talk about him but talk about my experiences instead, so I will keep this section short.
A few quick facts about him from his short ‘biography’ in his profile (it was written by the request of dharma teacher Daniel M. Ingram who thought highly of his forum posts) in the Dharma Overground forum:
“I am in the finance and investment industries serving as independent/non-executive directors (sort of watchdog) for some listed companies in Singapore.
As for practice, I was initially under the guidance of a Taoist teacher (Gao Shang Tze) in Taiwan but later took my refuge under the Holiness Sakya Trizin. However in actual case, I am a lay practitioner and a non-sectarian. I had my experience of no-dog aka "I AM" at the age of 17 and after the next 25 years is just its unfolding from non-dual to spontaneous perfection.
Was introduced to the forum by xsurf. It is a wonderful site. ""
p.s. as non-sectarian, Thusness and I find inspiration from the Pali texts, Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana/Mahamudra/Dzogchen... we think that they all have much to offer. However I do also attend classes at a Mahayana dharma center who I and my mom frequent since I was very young.
Apart from self-inquiry, he provided me with many pointers along the path that allowed me to deepen my realization, allowing me to realize quickly after my I AM realization, the insight into non dual, anatta and shunyata.
.....brought to mind this description of Chan by Master Sheng Yen...
"Conveying oneself towards all things to carry out practice-enlightenment is delusion. All things coming and carrying out practice-enlightenment through the self is realization."
Not bad but I prefer this translation: To carry yourself forward and experience myriad things is delusion. That myriad things come forth and experience themselves is awakening.
"Having clear mind is easy. It's having clear mind always and in every situation that is hard!" (Master Sahn Seung)
Just sit. Just wash dishes. We say stuff like this a lot in Zen. What does it mean? Does it mean being mindful is all there is to it? Well, no. Does it mean doing something without thinking about it, the empty mind, is it? No, certainly not. @RichardH does a good job telling us what it means.
I chuckled over the phrase "The permanent extinguishing of the causes of Dukkha." That resides in the grave. Your mind causes Dukkha, and how can you permanently extinguish a thought? An emotion? A grasping desire? How can you kill an ability your mind will always have? Clear mind is as close as your next breath, and as far away as the horizon.
Just sit. Did you catch that piece of clear mind? Oh, there it went. Darn! Here comes another.
And so it goes. When typing empty words on a computer screen, just type.
So, in “Just Sitting”, there is no watching of thoughts and feelings arising and passing, no contemplation of impermanence, anatman, or Dukkha. There is no watching of any kind. There is “just sitting” as is, whole and complete, with no notion of it being whole and complete. There is no self, yet this no-self is forgotten, and the forgetting is forgotten. In forgetting forgetting, there is returning to ordinary just sitting, floor is floor, hands are hands, thoughts are thoughts, all ordinary, all “alone”, including ordinary self. Simple.
So in a nutshell, is it just resting in the present?
So, in “Just Sitting”, there is no watching of thoughts and feelings arising and passing, no contemplation of impermanence, anatman, or Dukkha. There is no watching of any kind. There is “just sitting” as is, whole and complete, with no notion of it being whole and complete. There is no self, yet this no-self is forgotten, and the forgetting is forgotten. In forgetting forgetting, there is returning to ordinary just sitting, floor is floor, hands are hands, thoughts are thoughts, all ordinary, all “alone”, including ordinary self. Simple.
So in a nutshell, is it just resting in the present?
Spiny
Hi Spiny. Maybe other Zen Buddhist folks can also speak to this.... because I am a student..speaking as a student, and not any kind of teacher....
I would say it is not dependent on resting or not resting. That sounds sphinxish but, it points to simple as-is, ..... not-two and at the same time not other than multiplicity and distinction .
In just sitting there is forgetting. forgetting is like this.....
On this spot where I am typing there used to be a farmhouse. For someone who saw that farmhouse before it was torn down, there is here the absence of a farmhouse. For someone who never saw that farmhouse, there is here no absence of a farmhouse.
Sitting and forgetting is like the person who sees no absence of a farmhouse.. That is just sitting, just bowing, just chanting, just walking etc..
also... at risk of rambling here...off the cushion... day to day. Sure, things do not have absolute or inherent existence, and are empty. But smoke is solid to smoke. By that I mean you and me and everything we see is without inherent existence, yet this empty show, without inherent existence, is the only existence we have, the only value we value. This show is the only show in town.
The teaching of emptiness helps me not give absolute value to this show, but whatever value it is given, touch and go, is the only value there is.
"Zen Master Baoche of Mt. Magu was waving a fan. A monk approached him and asked, "The nature of wind is ever present and permeates everywhere. Why are you waving a fan?"
The master said, "You know only that the wind's nature is ever present-you don't know that it permeates everywhere."
The monk said, "How does wind permeate everywhere?"
"Zen Master Baoche of Mt. Magu was waving a fan. A monk approached him and asked, "The nature of wind is ever present and permeates everywhere. Why are you waving a fan?"
The master said, "You know only that the wind's nature is ever present-you don't know that it permeates everywhere."
The monk said, "How does wind permeate everywhere?"
The master just continued waving the fan.
The monk bowed deeply."
-Dogen
Beautiful!! =]
Truth is, I was always averse to koan study (hwadu)... and always hoped I would just be told to just shut up and "face the wall" . That turned out to be the case. :banghead:
Comments
No it does not indicate that. It only indicates that I have not heard from ALL zen masters in the whole world from the beginning of time.
What enlightenment means to the author? It says it right in the quote. Practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. It's not a bad translation.
The primary concept underlying Dōgen's Zen practice is "oneness of practice-enlightenment" (修證一如 shushō-ittō / shushō-ichinyo). In fact, this concept is considered so fundamental to Dōgen's variety of Zen—and, consequently, to the Sōtō school as a whole—that it formed the basis for the work Shushō-gi (修證儀), which was compiled in 1890 by Takiya Takushū (滝谷卓洲) of Eihei-ji and Azegami Baisen (畔上楳仙) of Sōji-ji as an introductory and prescriptive abstract of Dōgen's massive work, the Shōbōgenzō ("Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma").
For Dōgen, the practice of zazen and the experience of enlightenment were one and the same. This point was succinctly stressed by Dōgen in the Fukan Zazengi, the first text that he composed upon his return to Japan from China: "To practice the Way singleheartedly is, in itself, enlightenment. There is no gap between practice and enlightenment or zazen and daily life". Earlier in the same text, the basis of this identity is explained in more detail:
“Zazen is not "step-by-step meditation". Rather it is simply the easy and pleasant practice of a Buddha, the realization of the Buddha's Wisdom. The Truth appears, there being no delusion. If you understand this, you are completely free, like a dragon that has obtained water or a tiger that reclines on a mountain. The supreme Law will then appear of itself, and you will be free of weariness and confusion.”
The "oneness of practice-enlightenment" was also a point stressed in the Bendōwa (弁道話 "A Talk on the Endeavor of the Path") of 1231:
“ Thinking that practice and enlightenment are not one is no more than a view that is outside the Way. In buddha-dharma [i.e. Buddhism], practice and enlightenment are one and the same."
This is very common zen teaching.
Nice for you to drop in, @zenff.
But.. I think a basic respect for the teachings of different traditions is not an unreasonable expectation... even on the internet. With that respect we can share and learn from each other... otherwise the internet just drifts down to the lowest common denominator.
So, if I see someone slagging the legitimacy of a Buddhist tradition, any Buddhist tradition, and there is someone defending it... and I say "oh you guys are just carrying on".... as if the defender and the person doing the slagging are a couple of people in a fray that I am above....that just seems off to me, personally. There are some positions worth taking, meta-positions maybe, against sectarian bashing for instance. Not taking that position is perfectly fine, but not taking that position because of my supposed non-attachment is iffy, because I'll surely be taking a position on something, and be attached to some degree, soon enough. Personally, I'll be feisty in response to sectarian trolling.. it seems right. IMHO.
anyway .. a bit of a ramble....just got home from working late..tired.
The actual disagreement here is way over my head and feels just like bashing, to a point where it is very unpleasant and pointless. Most of all I don't understand such petty squabbling in a thread full of originally good intentions where the OP unexpectedly finds himself on the defensive.
So what if one person practices one way and another a different way.... Is that really so important? He said/he said -- and what difference does it make? All this headiness seems to completely contradict mindfulness, metta, right speech, non attachment etc... so bizarre.
Talk is cheap. Just sit on that.
"Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
Bahiya Sutta
But many people completely misunderstand this... they think that practice-enlightenment means there is no need for realization, since practicing is enlightenment. In other words, even a beginner is as realized as the Buddha when meditating.
This is plain wrong and thoughts of the foolish.
Rather, understand that practice-enlightenment is the natural expression of realization... and without realization, one will not discover the essence of practice-enlightenment.
As I told my friend/teacher 'Thusness', “I used to sit meditation with a goal and direction. Now, sitting itself is enlightenment. Sitting is just sitting. Sitting is just the activity of sitting, air con humming, breathing. Walking itself is enlightenment. Practice is not done for enlightenment but all activity is itself the perfect expression of enlightenment/buddha-nature. There is nowhere to go."
I see no possibility of directly experiencing this unless one has clear direct non-dual insight. Without realizing the primordial purity and spontaneous perfection of this instantaneous moment of manifestation as Buddha-nature itself, there will always be effort and attempt at 'doing', at achieving something... whether it be mundane states of calmness, absorption, or supramundane states of awakening or liberation... all are just due to the ignorance of the true nature of this instantaneous moment.
However, non-dual experience can still be separated into:
1) One Mind
- lately I have been noticing that majority of Buddhist practitioners and masters describe non-dual in terms of One Mind. That is, having realized that there is no subject-object/perceiver-perceived division or dichotomy, they subsume everything to be Mind only, mountans and rivers all are Me - the one undivided essence appearing as the many.
Though non-separate, the view is still of an inherent metaphysical essence. Hence non-dual but inherent.
2) No Mind
Where even the 'One Naked Awareness' or 'One Mind' or a Source is is totally forgotten and dissolved into simply scenery, sound, arising thoughts and passing scent. Only the flow of self-luminous transience.
....
However, we must understand that even having the experience of No Mind is not yet the realization of Anatta. In the case of No Mind, it can remain a peak experience. In fact, it is a natural progression for a practitioner at One Mind to occassionally enter into the terroritory of No Mind... but because there is no breakthrough in terms of view, the latent tendency to sink back into a Source, a One Mind is very strong and the experience of No Mind will not be sustained stably. The practictitioner may then try his best to remain bare and non-conceptual and sustain the experience of No Mind through being naked in awareness, but no breakthrough can come unless a certain realization arises.
In particular, the important realization to breakthrough this view of inherent self is the realization that Always Already, never was/is there a self - in seeing always only just the seen, the scenery, shapes and colours, never a seer! In hearing only the audible tones, no hearer! Just activities, no agent! A process of dependent origination itself rolls and knows... no self, agent, perceiver, controller therein.
It is this realization that breaks down the view of 'seer-seeing-seen', or 'One Naked Awareness' permanently by realizing that there never was a 'One Awareness' - 'awareness', 'seeing', 'hearing' are only labels for the everchanging sensations and sights and sounds, like the word 'weather' don't point to an unchanging entity but the everchanging stream of rain, wind, clouds, forming and parting momentarily...
Then as the investigation and insights deepen, it is seen and experienced that there is only this process of dependent origination, all the causes and conditions coming together in this instantaneous moment of activity, such that when eating the apple it is like the universe eating the apple, the universe typing this message, the universe hearing the sound... or the universe is the sound. Just that... is Shikantaza. In seeing only the seen, in sitting only the sitting, and the whole universe is sitting... and it couldn't be otherwise when there is no self, no meditator apart from meditation. Every moment cannot 'help' but be practice-enlightenment... it is not even the result of concentration or any form of contrived effort... rather it is the natural authentication of the realization, experience and view in real-time.
Zen Master Dogen, the proponent of practice-enlightenment, is one of the rare and clear jewels of Zen Buddhism who have very deep experiential clarity about anatta and dependent origination. Without deep realization-experience of anatta and dependent origination in real time, we can never understand what Dogen is pointing to... his words may sound cryptic, mystical, or poetic, but actually they are simply pointing to this.
Someone 'complained' that Shikantaza is just some temporary suppressing of defilements instead of the permanent removal of it. However if one realizes anatta then it is the permanent ending of self-view, i.e. traditional stream-entry.
p.s. discussed in more details at http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/12/experience-realization-view-practice.html
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html
Could you indulge me and give a little background ? It would be interesting ... Thanks.
I wrote a little about him in my ebook,
"‘Thusness’ is the nickname of my spiritual friend (who I also consider as my teacher), John Tan. I first knew him online through the Galaxynet IRC channel #Buddhism in 2004. We were discussing about computer programming initially instead of spirituality (he used to be the CEO of an IT company and is very knowledgeable in IT, however he has since retired). It didn’t take a long time for me to realize that he had deep experiential insight of the teachings of Buddhism, and over the years, I had numerous conversations with him and learnt a lot about spirituality and Buddhism. I have met him a number of times since he lives in Singapore too. I am very grateful for his guidance without which I will not have the spiritual knowledge and insights I have today.
Thusness, who attained Self-Realization 25 years ago at the age of 17 through the practice of Self-Inquiry, was also the one who instructed me on the practice of Self-Inquiry (he does not teach this method to everyone and first observes the person’s conditions and inclinations – for example for many people he would instruct on Vipassana practice instead) since 2008 for my case because I am inclined towards the ‘Direct Path’ teachings, Advaita Vedanta, Zen, and so on. The practice of Self-Inquiry has resulted in some of the insights and realizations that I will be talking about in this document. Apart from self-inquiry, he provided me with many pointers along the path that allowed me to deepen my realization, allowing me to realize quickly after my I AM realization, the insight into non dual, anatta and shunyata.
Thusness shuns public attention, using the nicknames ‘PasserBy’ or ‘ByPasser’ in forums and blog, and leaves the forum if he gets too much attention. He prefers the style of Taoist adepts whose footsteps leave no trace. He often tells me not to talk about him but talk about my experiences instead, so I will keep this section short.
A few quick facts about him from his short ‘biography’ in his profile (it was written by the request of dharma teacher Daniel M. Ingram who thought highly of his forum posts) in the Dharma Overground forum:
“I am in the finance and investment industries serving as independent/non-executive directors (sort of watchdog) for some listed companies in Singapore.
As for practice, I was initially under the guidance of a Taoist teacher (Gao Shang Tze) in Taiwan but later took my refuge under the Holiness Sakya Trizin. However in actual case, I am a lay practitioner and a non-sectarian. I had my experience of no-dog aka "I AM" at the age of 17 and after the next 25 years is just its unfolding from non-dual to spontaneous perfection.
Was introduced to the forum by xsurf. It is a wonderful site.
( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html )
p.s. as non-sectarian, Thusness and I find inspiration from the Pali texts, Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana/Mahamudra/Dzogchen... we think that they all have much to offer. However I do also attend classes at a Mahayana dharma center who I and my mom frequent since I was very young.
This line in your post.....
.....brought to mind this description of Chan by Master Sheng Yen...
I read this and thought of your post.
"Conveying oneself towards all things to carry out practice-enlightenment is delusion. All things coming and carrying out practice-enlightenment through the self is realization."
-Dogen
Just sit. Just wash dishes. We say stuff like this a lot in Zen. What does it mean? Does it mean being mindful is all there is to it? Well, no. Does it mean doing something without thinking about it, the empty mind, is it? No, certainly not. @RichardH does a good job telling us what it means.
I chuckled over the phrase "The permanent extinguishing of the causes of Dukkha." That resides in the grave. Your mind causes Dukkha, and how can you permanently extinguish a thought? An emotion? A grasping desire? How can you kill an ability your mind will always have? Clear mind is as close as your next breath, and as far away as the horizon.
Just sit. Did you catch that piece of clear mind? Oh, there it went. Darn! Here comes another.
And so it goes. When typing empty words on a computer screen, just type.
Hope everyone has a good day today!
Spiny
I would say it is not dependent on resting or not resting. That sounds sphinxish but, it points to simple as-is, ..... not-two and at the same time not other than multiplicity and distinction .
In just sitting there is forgetting. forgetting is like this.....
On this spot where I am typing there used to be a farmhouse. For someone who saw that farmhouse before it was torn down, there is here the absence of a farmhouse. For someone who never saw that farmhouse, there is here no absence of a farmhouse.
Sitting and forgetting is like the person who sees no absence of a farmhouse.. That is just sitting, just bowing, just chanting, just walking etc..
also... at risk of rambling here...off the cushion... day to day. Sure, things do not have absolute or inherent existence, and are empty. But smoke is solid to smoke. By that I mean you and me and everything we see is without inherent existence, yet this empty show, without inherent existence, is the only existence we have, the only value we value. This show is the only show in town.
The teaching of emptiness helps me not give absolute value to this show, but whatever value it is given, touch and go, is the only value there is.
The master said, "You know only that the wind's nature is ever present-you don't know that it permeates everywhere."
The monk said, "How does wind permeate everywhere?"
The master just continued waving the fan.
The monk bowed deeply."
-Dogen
Beautiful!! =]
:banghead: