Dogen now very kindly uses a very modern-seeming device - Frequently Asked Questions.
Text
1: I have heard of the superior merits of zazen. But an ordinary person
will have doubts and say there are many gates in Buddhism. Why do you urge only
zazen?
A: Because it is the right gate to Buddhism - this is my answer to
him.
2: Why is it the only right gate?
A: The great teacher Sakyamuni
handed down this unexcelled method of enlightenment. And the Tathagatas of the
past, present, and future were similarly enlightened by zazen. They, too,
transmitted it as the right gate. The patriarchs in India and China were also
enlightened by zazen. For this reason, I now indicate the right gate for human
beings and heaven.
Interpretation
Dogen's claim that zazen is the only way to realise enlightenment is quite radical and controversial. The Pali Canon teaches that the path of Buddhism is an Eightfold Path:
Right View
Right Intention
Right Speech
Right Action
Right Livelihood
Right Effort
Right Mindfulness
Right Concentration
Zazen only covers the last two or maybe three of these. Why does Dogen emphasise a 'Onefold Path'? Also there were (and are) schools with similar claims about their own methods - in Rinzai Zen, satori by koan practice (but still supported by zazen) is the gate to Buddhism and in Pure Land Buddhism chanting the name of Amida Buddha is the gate. Dogen here validates zazen as the only method of realisation by invoking the authority of the lineage of patriarchs back to Shakyamuni Buddha, claiming that zazen was the method of realisation for them all. But it isn't that he says the other aspects of the path are not necessary, - elsewhere he talks of the importance of the precepts, and of following a disciplines monk's life, and he uses koans in his writings - it's just that he gives zazen paramount importance.
4 comments:
Perhaps paths and gates are different?
Zazen is the gate, and when you enter it (well) the eighfold path is the "symptom"
Nice to hear from you Lauren.
Well, I don't think so. The 8Fpath is always something to be practiced, followed - the result is nirvana. But, yes some teachers do emphasise the non-separation of practice and realisation - Dogen in particular. So sometimes, the journey and the destination are seen as one and the same. However, that doesn't give any evidence of a distinction in meaning between 'path' and 'gate'.
I think that Dogen is right to emphasise zazen. He is reacting against forms of Buddhism which have lost meditation as the core practice and which chant instead and depend upon the supposed mercy of Amida Buddha. Zazen is the gate that has been given to him. However, I think his stance is an over-reaction - he is a little dogmatic about zazen being the only gate. Buddha taught that there is more to the practice than this and he taught the importance of attention or mindfulness no matter what posture we are in. Also, even in the 'wordless' transmission of Zen, the method of transmission has not generally been a posture or through a posture - mostly they are gestures, words, sounds or other events - for example the first transmission of Zen was the transmission from Buddha to Mahakashyapa, but this was not a seated posture or through a seated posture, but through the action of holding up a flower.
We shouldn't develop a posture-fixation or even a Dogen-fixation, whether he is the principle teacher of Soto or not.
I think Dogen said onefold path because the the path is no path. The 3rd and 4th truths signify the desire to not suffer. Dogen critizes the other schools by saying this in no way is the way Buddha took. He ended suffering by just sitting(positioning himself) in the middle of the two pairs of truths, as if he were split in two, and watched them be enlightened. I believe Bendowa reads differently now this way. It's like reading it like a Greek instead of a Roman.
Also I think Dogen wants us to realize that really the only enlightened person we can ever know is ourselves. Again, this reads differently if the empty signifiers are changed.
It's kinda consistant with Dogen's writings being "lost" for many years after his death and them being co-opted into a school. Like St. Paul was many years after his death. Both were saying things different than what it looked like.
I have always placed meditation first, and not neccesarily in a Buddhist context. The result has been the natural and automatic development of the other elements of the 8Fpath, and this despite the fact that I do not follow the 8Fpath.
I have also found posture irrelevant, except that good posture assists the meditation process.
As to transmission by gestures, etc, I am convinced there is a much deeper element to this. The gestures and situations always appear to present a metaphor that reflects reality. Seeing the relationship between the two, the mind jumps the gap.
Post a Comment