Posts tagged ·

Dogen

·...

when a monk walks, he walks.

Greetings all,

haven’t posted for a few days due to travels and jet lag and relatives without a computer. Internet cafes are becoming a rarity. Everyone smokes here. But I know that my home is safe (house-sitter) and that it rains here as well as there: the garden is being taken care of. I plan to write whenever possible as I begin my walk along the Mosel (Moselle) River tomorrow. It’s part of the Camino network of trails that eventually lead to Santiago de Compostela in Spain. ‘Camino’ means  ‘way’ in Spanish – pilgrimage trails from all over Europe leading to the NW part of the Iberian peninsula. But that’s not my destination. In fact, I have no destination. I’ll simple walk, putting one foot in front off the other. In the words of 13th-century Master Dogen, “With every step I am at home.” Good practice.


Filed under: Buddhist practice, coming home, conscious living, travelling Tagged: camino, Dogen, Mosel, Moselle
Comments Off

simple ways of seeing

Near the end of Monday’s retreat we stepped outside for kinhin, walking meditation. Instead of walking in lock-step formation as is customary at Zen centres, we each went off in separate directions. “Aim for an object: a tree, a shrub, a clump of flowers, or the fountain over there,” I suggested. “Walk slowly, with attention on the sole of your feet. Inhale as you lift a foot, exhale as you place it. Take time. When you reach the object, stand still for a while and look at what’s before you.

See what is there! Standing upright, inspect and take in as much information as possible: shapes, colours, spaces in between, moisture, things that move and those that seem solid. All the while, notice your breath, in-breath and out-breath, again and again. Become aware – be mindful — of whatever arises inside and in front of you. After a little while, bow and turn to walk towards the next object.”

Once the bell announced the end of the exercise, we gathered on a bench and chairs barely dry from the first rain in weeks. “What did you see?” I invited. The leaves of the tree rustled in the wind above me, it felt as if a wave of energy washed over me, said one. 

I walked towards the flower bed, the scent of lavender drawing me there. I stood — couldn’t help to pinch a blossom and look at it very closely. Tiny bugs were crawling in and out of the little flowers, offered another.

I saw a raindrop suspended from the branch of the elm tree, someone said, I saw leaves and the sky magnified upside down, something to do with optics. I felt like a child making a discovery.

Enlightenment is like the moon reflected on the water.
The moon does not get wet, nor is the water broken.
Although its light is wide and great,
The moon is reflected even in a puddle an inch wide.
The whole moon and the entire sky
Are reflected in one dewdrop on the grass.

~Japanese Zen master Dogen Zenji (1200-1253)

Further reading on walking and meditating: Coleman, M. (2006). Awake in the wild: mindfulness in nature as a path to self-discovery. New World Library. image: www.estatevaults.com.


Filed under: conscious living, meditating, mindfulness, poetry, Zen practice, Zen teachers Tagged: Dogen, kinhin, nature, seeing, walking meditation
Comments Off

Because it is so very clear, it is hard to see

Now you know clearly: what is called ‘mind’ is the great earth with its mountains and rivers; it is the sun, the moon, and the stars.

Shobogenzo, Soku Shin Ze Butsu, Hubert Nearman

It really is that simple – the eyes are horizontal, the nose is vertical. There is nothing cryptic or esoteric about this, it is very easy to understand; if we read the Mahayana and Zen literature we will “know clearly” that Buddha is our mind, and this mind is the mountain, the wall, or whatever it is we are experiencing here and now. There is nothing hazy or obscure about the true Dharma; what could be less clear than the taste of this tea, or the sun before our eyes?

The mind that is sun, moon, and stars is simply sun, moon, and stars: there is no fog nor is there any mist to obscure its clarity.

Shobogenzo, Soku Shin Ze Butsu, Hubert Nearman

Peace,
Ted

Comments Off

Your very mind is Buddha – Reality, Existence & Experience

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

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


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

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

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

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

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


Peace,
Ted
Comments Off

Dogen and Generosity



Good old Dogen, Soto Zen founder, had a few words to say about generosity and giving. After Kevin's comment on the last post referring to the Tenzo Kyokun, I happened upon phrase hung in my bathroom (yes, Dogen graffiti) from Bodhisattva's Four Methods of Guidance.

To leave flowers to the wind, to leave birds to the seasons, are also acts of giving.

I take this to mean leaving alone what doesn't need to be meddled with. It's a great reminder that sometimes the way to give free of attachment and desire for reward is to do nothing. To let be. How often do you miss seeing this kind of non-doing as giving?

Not only should you make an effort to give, but also be mindful of every opportunity to give.

Dogen is trying to get us to expand our view of life, to be open and receiving moment after moment, and to understand that even recognizing the opportunity to give in a situation is an act of a bodhisattva.

A king gave his beard as medicine to cure his retainer's disease; a child offered sand to Buddha and became King Ashoka in a later birth. They were not greedy for reward but only shared what they could.

You don't have to do anything more than you can. I sometimes forget this. I also sometimes have too narrow of a definition of "what I can." So, these words are both a call to pay attention to my thinking around giving, and also to learn my limits more clearly, so that I may more fluidly move between doing and non-doing, offering something and leaving things be.
Comments Off

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Peace,
Ted
Comments Off

The Skin, Flesh, Bones, & Marrow of Emptiness

The Skin, Flesh, Bones, & Marrow of Emptiness

Dogen goes to great lengths to show that nonduality is only meaningful and effective if it fully embraces duality as coessential in the nonduality of duality/nonduality. In his commentary following this “wrong view,” Dogen makes it clear that his main concern here is to expose the fallacy about language, thinking, and reason as inessential to authentic practice-enlightenment. Dogen claims that the above expression verifies an absence of enlightenment in Daie by his presumption that the “various functions” of mind (dualities, like talking and discriminative thinking) are separate from Buddha nature (true nature). The Buddhist teachings on nonduality, emptiness, and interdependence clearly deny the existence of separate entities (dharmas) of any kind; certainly the view that talking and discriminating are separate from Buddha nature is incompatible with these Buddhist tenets. In fact, as Dogen clearly explains, the very notion of “forgetting about dualities” is itself a form of dualism, or pseudo-nonduality.

These remarks of his show that he was still unaware of the silken thread that binds the Buddhas and Ancestors together, nor had he comprehended what the lifeline of the Buddhas and Ancestors is. Accordingly, he only understood ‘mind’ to refer to discriminative thinking and consciousness, so he spoke this way because he had not learned that the various functions, such as discriminative thinking and consciousness, are what the intellective mind is. He wrongly viewed ‘nature’ to mean something that is abundantly clear and peacefully inactive, and did not understand whether Buddha Nature and the nature of all thoughts and things existed or did not exist. And because he had not seen his True Nature as It is, not even in his dreams, he had a false view of what Buddha Dharma is. The ‘mind’ that the Buddhas and Ancestors spoke of is the very Skin and Flesh, Bones and Marrow. And the ‘nature’ that the Buddhas and Ancestors have preserved is a monk’s traveling staff and the shaft of a bamboo arrow. The Buddhas and Ancestors have profoundly realized the Buddhahood promised Them by the Buddha, and this is what is meant by being a pillar of the temple or a stone lantern. How wondrous it is that the Buddhas and Ancestors hold up and offer to us Their wise discernment and understanding!

Shobogenzo, Sesshin Sessh?, Hubert Nearman

With this forthright assertion, Dogen emphasizes that there is nothing vague about the Buddhist teaching of nonduality; the “mind” is not some invisible reality behind the appearance of things, the mind is the sum of the very things themselves, it is the totality of all the real, concrete things of the universe (Skin and Flesh, Bones and Marrow). Nor is the “nature” some pure, inactive, peaceful essence underlying all the various, distinctive myriad things; the nature is the particularity of the things themselves; it is a house, a bowl (a traveling staff and a bamboo arrow).

Peace,

Ted

Comments Off

Existence-Time & the Emptiness of What?

Existence, Time, and the Reality of Things
Throughout, his career Dogen maintained and reinforced the significance of the unity of existence and time, most extensively elucidated in the acclaimed Shobogenzo fascicle, “Uji” (existence/time). “Uji” offers an extremely lucid explanation on the nature of existence and time revealing that all dharmas, being real, particular forms – are and must be real specific moments of time.

As moments of time, rather than moments in time, each and every particular dharma is shown to be an “instance” of eternity/infinity. To clarify this, consider some of Dogen’s comments from Shobogenzo, Kai in zanmai. In this fascicle, Dogen cites the Buddha as follows:

Only of real dharmas is this body composed.
The moment of appearance is just the appearance of dharmas;
The moment of disappearance is just the disappearance of dharmas.
At the moment when these dharmas appear we do not speak of the appearance of self.
At the moment when these dharmas disappear we do not speak of the disappearance of self.
An instant before, an instant after: instant does not depend on instant;
A dharma before, a dharma after: dharma does not oppose dharma.
Just this is called samadhi, state like the sea.
~Shobogenzo, Kai in zanmai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


Immediately following these words of the Buddha quoted from the Avatamsaka sutra Dogen writes:

The concrete moment of this “sea-like samadhi” is just a concrete moment “only of real dharmas,” and it is expression of the truth of “sole reliance on real dharmas.” This moment is said to be “this composed body.” The integrated form that is “composed” of “real dharmas,” is “this body.” We do not see “this body” as “an integrated form”: real dharmas compose it. This composed body has been expressed as the truth as “this body.”
~Shobogenzo, Kai in zanmai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


Here Dogen first underscores that actual, specific instances of time (concrete moments) are nothing more or less than actual, specific things (only of real dharmas). Dogen then walks us through the reasoning (dori) of this expression and highlights its implication; actual, specific instances of time are, in themselves, real things (forms, bodies). Once again we meet with Dogen’s insistence on the unity of form and nature. An actual, specific thing (like “this body”) is not made out of stuff, matter, elements, or anything else apart from its form. All real things are real forms; a form is not the “appearance” of something, or things, other than itself (a body is not an “integrated form”).

In previous posts we saw how Dogen utilized the Buddhist tenet of “emptiness is exactly form” to reveal that "the true nature of things is exactly the appearance of things.” We also noted Dogen’s assertion that the universe, and the self, are “fashioned” from “instances” (moments of time) of our experience. Here we meet with one of the important implications of this viewpoint: the nature/appearance of things is exactly time. As things (dharmas) are only real insofar as they are experienced, all real things are forms of time, and all real times are times of form. In Shobogenzo, Uji, Dogen unequivocally sets out his view of existence-time (uji); time is existence, existence is time. And, as usual, Dogen is not "generalizing," he means specific things and definite times, for example:

… Seigen is time, Ōbaku is time, and Kōzei and Sekitō are time…
…subject-and-object already is time...
...practice-and-experience is moments of time…
Shobogenzo, Uji, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


It is important to understand that in Dogen’s view existence and time are not simply relative, they are unified: "existence-time." While the hyphenated “existence-time” is probably the best choice for English translation, it may imply a gap not present in the Japanese “uji.” Hee-Jin Kim observes that Dogen “transforms” the phrase “arutoki" (‘at a certain time,’ ‘sometimes,’ ‘once’) into "one of the most important notions in his Zen – uji (‘existence-time).”

This metamorphosis is executed by way of changing its two components the aru and the toki into u (“existence,” “being”) and ji (“time,” “occasion”), respectively, and recombining them as uji so that it unmistakably signals the nondual intimacy of existence and time.
~Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen on Meditation and Thinking, pp. 69-70


This remarkably creative metamorphosis decisively establishes Dogen’s viewpoint on the nature and dynamics of existence-time from the enlightened perspective (i.e. The Buddha Way includes and transcends the many and the one).
.
In Mahayana Buddhism, emptiness (the one) reveals that "things" (dharmas) do not exist independently. Since the existence of a thing depends on things other than its “self” it is not an independent entity (self); it is empty of “self.” This universally applies to all things; all things (forms, beings, thoughts, etc.) are interdependent, therefore empty of an independent self. Thus each of the myriad things is empty (of a self), and all the myriad things together are emptiness.
.
What is “emptiness”? All the myriad things! Clearly, emptiness could not be a “thing” (dharma) that "informed" other things, nor could emptiness be a “thing” permeating all things; emptiness is no-thing. Obviously, without the myriad things emptiness would not only be non-existent, it would be utterly meaningless. As things are empty because they are dependent on things, emptiness is things because it is dependent on things.
.
If existence is time and time is existence, as Dogen proclaims, existence and time must be eternal and infinite. As discussed previously, in Dogen’s Zen “Buddha” (our true nature) is total existence; thus, in light of uji, Buddha is total existence-time. For total existence-time to really be “total,” it has to be inclusive of every bit of existence, absolutely all instances (moments) of existence (dharmas). If so, all instances of existence (dharmas) would have to be eternal. This is exactly Dogen’s view:

[Total existence] is beyond originally existing existence; for “it pervades the eternal past and pervades the eternal present.”
~Shobogenzo, Bussho, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


Moreover, total existence-time would mean all time, absolutely every single moment of time. Thus, existent instances (dharmas) would have to be infinite. This too is exactly Dogen’s view:

Truly, great realization is limitless, and returning to delusion is limitless.
~Shobogenzo, Daigo, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


Thus for Dogen, this life and death is an essential aspect of the eternally dynamic universe; every dharma, no matter how trivial, and every moment, no matter how fleeting, is charged with infinite potential. Far from being ineffable, mysterious, unknowable, or incommunicable, eternity and infinity are palpably present and immediately available. The infinity and eternity of existence-time has nothing to do with an unending expanse of space or a never-ending duration of time. Time and existence, in Dogen’s Zen, has definite shapes and precise weights.

“Appearance” is inevitably a concrete “moment” having arrived; for “the moment” is “appearance.” Just what is this “appearance”? It may be “appearance” itself. It is “appearance” that is itself already a “moment,” and it never fails to disclose the naked skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. Because appearance is “appearance” that is “composed,” appearance as “this body” and appearance as “appearance of the self” is “only of real dharmas.”

“The moment of appearance” is “these real dharmas” here and now: it is not of the twelve hours.
~Shobogenzo, Kai in zanmai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


For Dogen, a world or self conceived of as a pure, tranquil sea of uniform emptiness, or unvarying essential nature is neither a real world nor a true self, but mere existence in the absence of time. Similarly, a world or self of a ceaseless, invariable flow of time in which all dharmas are illusory appearances on the surface of reality would amount to an abstract conception of an ever advancing absence of existence.
.
Shackled under presuppositions of dualism, the essentialist and naturalist can only envision either existence or time, not existence-time. To see existence and time dualistically is to see neither infinity nor eternity but only the mystery and obscurity of abstraction. Abstraction is always subtraction, that is, negation. When teachers or teachings suggest a reality that is always and only indefinable, indescribable, incommunicable, inconceivable, unimaginable, etc. – all negative terms, be aware this is not Zen.
.
Zen Buddhism realizes and transcends "neti, neti" (not this, not this) to realize "immo, immo" (this, this). Thus one of Dogen’s favorite phrases from the Zen literature is, “You are like this, I am also like this.” Interdependence does not eradicate independence, it verifies it.

We recognize as sea not only that which is not the sea; we recognize as the sea that which is the sea.
~Shobogenzo, Kai in zanmai, Gudo Nishijima & Mike (Chodo) Cross


Yes, yes! It is important - even crucial - to recognize as dharmas (things, beings, teachings, events, thoughts, etc.) that which is not dharmas - but only if it is followed through by recognizing as dharmas that which is dharmas.
.
Peace,
Ted
Comments Off

Seeing Buddha’s Face with Shakyamuni’s Eyes – Face-To-Face Transmission

As in all the great spiritual and literary traditions, in Zen Buddhism the experience of awakening, realization of nirvana, Buddhahood, or satori (enlightenment) are described in terms of vision (rather than hearing). To hear the Buddha Dharma is to learn about it and to study it, to see the Buddha Dharma is to experience it directly; to see it face to face — to see Shakyamuni Buddha’s face with our eyes, to see our face with Shakyamuni Buddha’s eyes.

Dogen wrote:

By bowing down in respect to the Face of Shakyamuni Buddha and by transferring the Eye of Shakyamuni Buddha to our own eyes, we will have transferred our eyes to the Eye of Buddha. Ours will be the very Eye and Face of Buddha. Without even one generation’s break, that which has been conferred face-to-face right up to the present by the mutual Transmission of this Buddha Eye and Buddha Face is this very Face-to-Face Transmission. These successive heirs over some dozens of generations are instances of face after face being the Face of Buddha, for they have received the Face-to-Face Transmission from the original Buddha Face. Their bowing down in respect to this conferring of the Face as the genuine Transmission is their respectful bowing down to the Seven Buddhas, including Shakyamuni Buddha, and it is their bowing in respect and making venerative offerings to the twenty-eight Indian Ancestors of the Buddha from Makakasho on down. This is what the Face and Eye of an Ancestor of the Buddha is like. To encounter this Ancestor of the Buddha is to meet Shakyamuni Buddha along with the other Seven Buddhas. It is the very instant when an Ancestor of the Buddha personally confers the Face-to-Face Transmission upon himself: it is a Buddha of the Face-to-Face Transmission conferring the Face-to-Face Transmission upon a Buddha of the Face-to-Face Transmission.
Shobogenzo, Menju, Hubert Nearman

Peace,
Ted

Comments Off

Commentary on commentary on the Eido Shimano controversy

I, like so many others, have been following the reverberations of the Eido Shimano affair in the blogosphere.

I've been reading, inter alia, Barbara's Buddhism blog on About.com.  As you can see, I made comments on that post, to the effect of 1) Genjo Marinello's obviously been quite conflicted over this, and 2) there's a whole host of other things that happened here, and some of these are quite important.

Barbara's response to myself is somewhat telling:

BTW, I found Genjo Marinello’s dharma talk audio archive — the links work better in iTunes — and listened to the first teisho, on “Neither Mind Nor Buddha.” I thought it was a pretty good teisho on shunyata that also addressed the issue of why teachers screw up. However, what was missing was an admission of the severity of Eido Shimano’s “transgressions,” and there was no acknowledgment of the suffering he caused. I’ve talked to people with first-hand knowledge of the situation who said the young women were genuinely damaged. The sensei made it sound as if Eido Shimano had just stumbled over some quibbling technicality.
 First a bit of a qubbile: Genjo Marinello should at least be referenced as at least "Osho," although he has obtained inka.

Secondly, I mentioned two dharma podcasts from Cho Bo Ji, and to be honest the point of the dharma talk was the subject of the dharma talk, not a place where Cho Bo Ji would explain or ask forgiveness of Eido Shimano's transgressions and ethical lapses.

My point was that this was evidently so present in what Genjo Osho was doing that it evidently crept into his dharma talks!

Then, below an at-least-at-one-time monk Chana writes that a) there are difficulties in American Zen, and b) the Soto sect is in trouble, and c) it has to do with a metastasis of Zen from its original foundations.  Chana illustrates an example from Bankei, who (he says) taught that life provided its own koans and that's why Hui Neng could get enlightened in two shakes of a lamb's tail.  

Now I'd like to first comment on Chana's comment before I get to Barbara, since my comments on Barbara's comments are corollary to my comments on Chana's comment. Chana is partially correct and partially wrong: the emphasis in American Zen on seated meditation alone, is hardly what the masters taught.  That said, I would submit, having read both Bankei and Hakuin that Hakuin wins on points here:  Bankei's Zen is a lazy man's Zen compared to Hakuin's Zen which must be pursued.  Hui Neng might have been enlightened in the time it takes for lightening to flash, but if his life wasn't primed for it it would never have happened.  That is the experience of my life, and so many others.  Finally, Hakuin was a very strong emphasizer of making sure this practice, even as koan practice, carries over into every day life, is practiced moment by moment.

Now to Barbara: her reply misses Chana's point entirely.  Even Dogen I would submit would emphasize mindfulness in the midst of activity.  The stuff on a cushion is only one small part of the whole enchilada. 

And that's  why there's been ethical lapses in the first place! Duh!


Comments Off