LONG POST
A few excerpts for some tips and hints I've posted from time to time for those who want to dip into a bit of Shobogenzo ...
----
In my own "in a nutshell" description of how to approach Shobogenzo ... I often describe Dogen as a Jazzman, bending and re-livening the "standard tunes" of Zen Buddhist philosophy. He is the Coltrane or Miles Davis of the Dharma ... Sometimes, with Dogen, it is not the "point" he is trying to make through reasoned words, but "the sound, man, the feeling of the music" ...
Thus, a good grounding in traditional Buddhist, especially Mahayana and Zen, philosophy and perspectives is important, as those were the "standard tunes" that Dogen was note-bending and syncopating in his "Shobo-jazz". We might also say that Dogen did to "standard teachings" what Picasso did to a picture of a table (helping us really 'get' its tableness).
There are a couple of other things to keep in mind about Dogen too. One is from the last point above: Like any Jazz musician lost in following just riffing, I think there are many passage where even Dogen did not know where the "sound" had carried him, what it "meant". For some reason, we assume that every word has to "mean" something, as opposed to merely expressing a feeling of Truth. I think Dogen really lost himself in a musical corner from time to time.
So, for that reason, it is important to approach Dogen, sometimes, as one would approach T.S. Eliot's The Waste land or James Joyce's Ulysses . Here is what some professor wrote of understanding The Waste Land ...
T.S. Elliot was sometimes quoted as saying that he himself did not know exactly what he "meant" by various passages of that poem.
That does not mean that diving into Shobogenzo ... like developing an ear for John Coltrane or Eliot or eye for Picasso ... ain't worth every minute! (we sometimes say in the Zen world ... hear with the eyes, see with the ears! :shock: ) I am rereading Shobogenzo cover to cover right now (my third time, not including bits and pieces readings). 8)
I do usually recommend a couple of things for folks who want to dive headlong into the thick and thorny maze which is Shobogenzo (not to be confused with Dogen's Shobogenzo-Zuimonki, which we recently read in the bookclub)
Before reading and really 'digging Dogen', the best intro is to read Okumura Roshi's look at Genjo Koan ...
Much denser, but worth the effort, are the two Dr. Kim books (He wrote them a few years apart, and changed interpretation slightly over the years just a drop ) ... Each can be rather heavy going at points, but worth it.
Also ... I VERY strongly recommend... Visions of Awakening Space and Time: Dogen and the Lotus Sutra (Paperback) by Taigen Dan Leighton (Author) ... about how Dogen wild-ed and bent the already wild and bent Lotus Sutra into something even more bent and wild ...
You probably want to read a good translation of the Lotus Sutra first, to see the "tune" that Dogen was working with. This by Reeves is very readable and a fantastic tale, right up there with "Alice in Wonderland" and such ...
In fact, you might start with Taigen and the Lotus Sutra --before-- reading Dr. Kim, as Taigen is short and easier going to read.
Here is an essay available online, a part of Taigen's book. It will give you a taste ...
Nishijima Roshi also has a helpful short booklet on "Understanding the Shobogenzo", although in his later years he has been too too enthusiastic (in my view) about trying to place each sentence of Shobogenzo, in a nearly one to one correspondence, into each of the four categories of view that Nishijima Roshi suggests. It is not a comfortable fit (I feel that Nishijima Roshi went overboard with his very helpful, very insightful perspective on 3 Philosophies and 1 Reality, by his trying to stuff Dogen into that almost line by line and overlooking anything that does not fit. It is much like trying to stuff all of Coltrane into 4 chords or all Picasso into 4 types of brushstroke) .
There is a "logic" to Dogen ... although a kind of "Buddhist-Mahayana-Dogen" logic. So, was Dogen "logical"?
Here is a little taste of some Dogen passages, which an analysis of how he played his "jazz" variations on the standard tunes ...
Gassho, Jundo
A few excerpts for some tips and hints I've posted from time to time for those who want to dip into a bit of Shobogenzo ...
----
In my own "in a nutshell" description of how to approach Shobogenzo ... I often describe Dogen as a Jazzman, bending and re-livening the "standard tunes" of Zen Buddhist philosophy. He is the Coltrane or Miles Davis of the Dharma ... Sometimes, with Dogen, it is not the "point" he is trying to make through reasoned words, but "the sound, man, the feeling of the music" ...
I often describe Dogen as a rule bending, transgressing Jazz musician, a Dharmic Miles Davis who was working with the basic "standard" tunes of Hongzhi, the Five Ranks and the rest of the Soto tradition of his day. Miles (like Dogen) syncopates time, merges and splits notes, bends phrasing, makes harmonious what was disharmony and disharmonious where there was harmony (and that's the Miles' Harmony!). But the thing about appreciating Miles is that (1) by doing so, Miles makes his own musical expression the same but different from the standards it is based upon (he captures truths in ways that nobody could before ... and makes new "truths" in the process ... but you also should not forget that that "standard" tune is in there too, and keeps popping up as the theme); (2) you can't analyze it too much in words, and just need to listen or play along.
Hongzhi was like a "square" Irving Berlin who wrote a lovely standard melody like "Blue Skies", and Mile Davis the mad genius who bent that into something the same but all new ...
The Shobogenzo, for example, is a rather thick and thorny maze. But once Dogen's basic ways of expression and thinking (and "non-thinking") are understood, one can read the entirety with a bit more ease (though never easy ... between you and me, as Dogen, the wild Jazz musician, may even have sometimes let the notes and feeling lead him where they would, and may not have been always quite sure where the music was taking him -- or what he himself "meant" -- each and every moment in his writing/playing! 8) But, like Miles or Coltrane ... all great stuff, man. ).
A video talk by Jundo on this same theme is here:
SIT-A-LONG with JUNDO: Dogen - A Love Supreme
Hongzhi was like a "square" Irving Berlin who wrote a lovely standard melody like "Blue Skies", and Mile Davis the mad genius who bent that into something the same but all new ...
The Shobogenzo, for example, is a rather thick and thorny maze. But once Dogen's basic ways of expression and thinking (and "non-thinking") are understood, one can read the entirety with a bit more ease (though never easy ... between you and me, as Dogen, the wild Jazz musician, may even have sometimes let the notes and feeling lead him where they would, and may not have been always quite sure where the music was taking him -- or what he himself "meant" -- each and every moment in his writing/playing! 8) But, like Miles or Coltrane ... all great stuff, man. ).
A video talk by Jundo on this same theme is here:
SIT-A-LONG with JUNDO: Dogen - A Love Supreme
There are a couple of other things to keep in mind about Dogen too. One is from the last point above: Like any Jazz musician lost in following just riffing, I think there are many passage where even Dogen did not know where the "sound" had carried him, what it "meant". For some reason, we assume that every word has to "mean" something, as opposed to merely expressing a feeling of Truth. I think Dogen really lost himself in a musical corner from time to time.
So, for that reason, it is important to approach Dogen, sometimes, as one would approach T.S. Eliot's The Waste land or James Joyce's Ulysses . Here is what some professor wrote of understanding The Waste Land ...
We cannot understand the poem without knowing what it meant to its author, but we must also assume that what the poem meant to its author will not be its meaning. The notes to The Waste Land are, by the logic of Eliot's philosophical critique of interpretation, simply another riddle--and not a separate one to be solved. They are, we might say, the poem's way of treating itself as a reflex, a "something not intended as a sign," a gesture whose full significance it is impossible, by virtue of the nature of gestures, for the gesturer to explain."... The Waste Land appears to be a poem designed to make trouble for the conceptual mechanics not just of ordinary reading (for what poem does not try to disrupt those mechanics?) but of literary reading. For insofar as reading a piece of writing as literature is understood to mean reading it for its style, Eliot's poem eludes a literary grasp.
From Discovering Modernism: T.S. Eliot and His Context. Oxford University Press, 1987
From Discovering Modernism: T.S. Eliot and His Context. Oxford University Press, 1987
That does not mean that diving into Shobogenzo ... like developing an ear for John Coltrane or Eliot or eye for Picasso ... ain't worth every minute! (we sometimes say in the Zen world ... hear with the eyes, see with the ears! :shock: ) I am rereading Shobogenzo cover to cover right now (my third time, not including bits and pieces readings). 8)
I do usually recommend a couple of things for folks who want to dive headlong into the thick and thorny maze which is Shobogenzo (not to be confused with Dogen's Shobogenzo-Zuimonki, which we recently read in the bookclub)
Before reading and really 'digging Dogen', the best intro is to read Okumura Roshi's look at Genjo Koan ...
Much denser, but worth the effort, are the two Dr. Kim books (He wrote them a few years apart, and changed interpretation slightly over the years just a drop ) ... Each can be rather heavy going at points, but worth it.
Also ... I VERY strongly recommend... Visions of Awakening Space and Time: Dogen and the Lotus Sutra (Paperback) by Taigen Dan Leighton (Author) ... about how Dogen wild-ed and bent the already wild and bent Lotus Sutra into something even more bent and wild ...
You probably want to read a good translation of the Lotus Sutra first, to see the "tune" that Dogen was working with. This by Reeves is very readable and a fantastic tale, right up there with "Alice in Wonderland" and such ...
In fact, you might start with Taigen and the Lotus Sutra --before-- reading Dr. Kim, as Taigen is short and easier going to read.
Here is an essay available online, a part of Taigen's book. It will give you a taste ...
Nishijima Roshi also has a helpful short booklet on "Understanding the Shobogenzo", although in his later years he has been too too enthusiastic (in my view) about trying to place each sentence of Shobogenzo, in a nearly one to one correspondence, into each of the four categories of view that Nishijima Roshi suggests. It is not a comfortable fit (I feel that Nishijima Roshi went overboard with his very helpful, very insightful perspective on 3 Philosophies and 1 Reality, by his trying to stuff Dogen into that almost line by line and overlooking anything that does not fit. It is much like trying to stuff all of Coltrane into 4 chords or all Picasso into 4 types of brushstroke) .
There is a "logic" to Dogen ... although a kind of "Buddhist-Mahayana-Dogen" logic. So, was Dogen "logical"?
Yes, that is so ... but not yes too. (Which is a kind of example of Dogenesque "Zen logic" right there!)
Even the great Jazz musicians I mentioned, like Miles and Coltrane, were usually following pretty "logical" forms and patterns of "getting where they were going", which most other good musicians can follow and which stayed within certain musical rules. Musicologists can follow it all with almost mathematical precision. (Only the radical "Free Jazz" guys like Ornette Coleman, who would stand on stage blowing wildly into the wrong end of the trumpet, really smashed the rules ... to the point of cacophony) ... Even Coltrane, when he went "free", usually was grounded in good musicianship and "chord progressions" and was working from that (sometimes by resisting the standard progressions).
There really are a lot of parallels to different "players" in the Zen world ... including the old "Free Jazz" Zen teachers who would just bang on the table or draw circles in the air (although even those guy tended to follow some fairly rigid rules for that ... a subject for another day).
MY POINT (BEFORE I LOSE MY MUSICAL TRAIN OF THOUGHT MYSELF) IS THAT Dogen was a very highly educated, intellectual, "head like a library of old Zen/Buddhist books", surprisingly conservative (as were most Zen teachers, in fact) guy who was highly trained and conversant in the "classics" and was working from them (the Shobogenzo is wall to wall references and quotes from Sutras, old Koans, obscure but important bits of Tendai Buddhist teachings, old poems, Confucian classics, and the like).
There --IS-- a logic to Dogen most of the time, although a Zenny "Anti-logic logic" ... Dogen-Think-Not Thinking, a kind of "Alice in Wonderland" logic sometimes. It is more than simple "sound for sound's sake" expression or trying to abandon "intellectual analysis" at every turn. Dogen wanted to be understood on all levels. Thus (as in listening to Jazz), it is --both-- a matter of letting the sound and feeling wash over one, --and-- having some musical understanding of where the musician was "coming from" what he was "trying to do" and how he "got there". (In a sense, Jazz was always music by musicians playing for other musicians who were familiar with the chords).
Here are just a few examples of "Dogen-logic", very different from ordinary logic while yet faithful to classic Mahayana perspectives ...
For that reason, the truth is that Dogen was not trying to defy "intellectual analysis" or "classical Buddhist/Zen philosophy", so much as find his own language and way to express it (in later years, represented by his Eihei Koroku, he actually seems to have abandoned much of the "musical experiment" that was the Shobogenzo, and gone back to being a pretty classical musician playing the "old Zen standards" in the usual way ... though never without his special touch). So, the book I recommended by Taigen Dan Leighton (coupled with a reading of the Lotus Sutra) ... and the Dr. Kim books (though themselves hard going in parts) should not be overlooked by someone really hoping to "Grok" where that Dogen cat was coming from. 8)
Even the great Jazz musicians I mentioned, like Miles and Coltrane, were usually following pretty "logical" forms and patterns of "getting where they were going", which most other good musicians can follow and which stayed within certain musical rules. Musicologists can follow it all with almost mathematical precision. (Only the radical "Free Jazz" guys like Ornette Coleman, who would stand on stage blowing wildly into the wrong end of the trumpet, really smashed the rules ... to the point of cacophony) ... Even Coltrane, when he went "free", usually was grounded in good musicianship and "chord progressions" and was working from that (sometimes by resisting the standard progressions).
There really are a lot of parallels to different "players" in the Zen world ... including the old "Free Jazz" Zen teachers who would just bang on the table or draw circles in the air (although even those guy tended to follow some fairly rigid rules for that ... a subject for another day).
MY POINT (BEFORE I LOSE MY MUSICAL TRAIN OF THOUGHT MYSELF) IS THAT Dogen was a very highly educated, intellectual, "head like a library of old Zen/Buddhist books", surprisingly conservative (as were most Zen teachers, in fact) guy who was highly trained and conversant in the "classics" and was working from them (the Shobogenzo is wall to wall references and quotes from Sutras, old Koans, obscure but important bits of Tendai Buddhist teachings, old poems, Confucian classics, and the like).
There --IS-- a logic to Dogen most of the time, although a Zenny "Anti-logic logic" ... Dogen-Think-Not Thinking, a kind of "Alice in Wonderland" logic sometimes. It is more than simple "sound for sound's sake" expression or trying to abandon "intellectual analysis" at every turn. Dogen wanted to be understood on all levels. Thus (as in listening to Jazz), it is --both-- a matter of letting the sound and feeling wash over one, --and-- having some musical understanding of where the musician was "coming from" what he was "trying to do" and how he "got there". (In a sense, Jazz was always music by musicians playing for other musicians who were familiar with the chords).
Here are just a few examples of "Dogen-logic", very different from ordinary logic while yet faithful to classic Mahayana perspectives ...
A = Buddha Enlightenment B = Flowers in the sky (a classic Zen reference to delusion)
A is A, B is B ... and A is not B. (Enlightenment is not delusion, an ancient Buddhist idea)
But A is B. A is also C. ... (a variation on the original theme, much as stodgy ol' Nagarjuna might play)
And, in fact, A is so much A that A is not A, and was merely B all along.
We might say that A is just ∀. B is merely
And that just makes A into Super-Aness at each turn, B into Be Bee BB "To be or not to be" "Be my love" "B is for Buddha" ... etc. etc.
Smell them luscious Flowers in the Sky! That's purely A through and through, though not.
A is A, B is B ... and A is not B. (Enlightenment is not delusion, an ancient Buddhist idea)
But A is B. A is also C. ... (a variation on the original theme, much as stodgy ol' Nagarjuna might play)
And, in fact, A is so much A that A is not A, and was merely B all along.
We might say that A is just ∀. B is merely
And that just makes A into Super-Aness at each turn, B into Be Bee BB "To be or not to be" "Be my love" "B is for Buddha" ... etc. etc.
Smell them luscious Flowers in the Sky! That's purely A through and through, though not.
I found a great, short example of this, of Dogen at his wildest and best. Thought to post it for folks who might not get what the fuss is about.
The great 'Dogenologist' translator and historian, Prof. Carl Bielefeldt, has just released his brand new translation of Shobogenzo Bussho (Buddha-Nature) for the Soto Zen Text Project.
I have been slowly reading it to compare with the Nishijima-Cross version (which, so far, seems to come out very well. The two versions are incredibly close, and I find Nishijima-Cross often captures the "feel of the music" a bit better).
Anyway ... here are a couple of paragraphs that are playing with the famous phrase "all living beings in their entirety have Buddha Nature". Dogen first plays with an ambiguity in the grammar to change that to "all living beings in their entirety are Buddha Nature". But he does not stop there ...
If you can hear the perspective that "Buddha Nature" is not a "thing" that we become or have or develop ... but is radical, existential being that leaves nothing out, whole beyond whole, the reality of reality (something like that
) ... you might get a feel for what Dogen is going for here ... It is everything leaving nothing out, yet beyond categories (something like that ) ...
The Professor's footnotes clear things up a bit ... (emphasis on 'a bit' :shock: )
“Essential point” (shūshi 宗旨): A common expression for the “purport,” or “message” of a statement.
“Turning the dharma wheel of the saying “what is it that comes like this?” (ze jūmo butsu inmo rai no dō ten bōrin 是什麼物恁麼來の道轉法輪): I.e., presumably, a Buddhist teaching equivalent to the famous question put to the Chan master Nanyue Huairang 南嶽懷讓 by the Sixth Ancestor, Huineng 慧能. The question is likely a play on the term “Thus Come One” (nyorai 如来; tathāgata), an epithet of the buddhas.
The Chan Master Dahui of Mt. Nanyue (descendant of Caoxi, named Huairang) visited the Sixth Ancestor. The Ancestor asked him, “Where do you come from?”
The Master said, “I come from the National Teacher An on Mt. Song.”
The Ancestor said, “What is it that comes like this?”
The Master was without means [to answer]. After attending [the Ancestor] for eight years, he finally understood the previous conversation. Thereupon, he announced to the Ancestor, “I've understood what the reverend put to me when I first came: ‘What is it that comes like this?’”
The Ancestor asked, “How do you understand it?”
The Master replied, “To say it's like anything wouldn't hit it.”
The Ancestor said, “Then is it contingent on practice and verification?”
The Master answered, “Practice and verification are not nonexistent; they cannot be defiled.”
The Ancestor said, “Just this ‘not defiled’ is what the buddhas bear in mind. You're also like this, I'm also like this, and all the ancestors of the Western Heavens [i. e., India] are also like this.”
“Sentient beings” (ujō 有情); “the multitude of beings” (gunjō 群生); “multitude of types” (gunrui 群類): Terms regularly used as synonyms for “living beings.” The point here would seem to be that all these terms (as well as the synonymous “multitude of beings” [gun’u 群有] in the following sentence) may be referred to as the “entirety of being.”
“The term entirety of being” (shitsu’u no gon 悉有の言): Dōgen here creates a neologism from the adverb shitsu and the verb u in the phrase shitsu u busshō 悉有佛性, translated in the quotation as “in their entirety have the buddha nature.” The word play relies on the fact that the term u 有 means both “to have” and “to exist” and is regularly used in philosophical discourse as a noun for “being.” The resultant expression might also be rendered “all existents” or, more simply, “everything.”
“One entirety of the entirety of being” (shitsuu no isshitsu 悉有の一悉): Presumably the point is that “living beings” represent but one type within the “entirety of being” — with, perhaps, the added suggestion that any one type is in some sense one with the entire set.
“Skin, flesh, bones, and marrow” (hi niku kotsu zui 皮肉骨髄): An expression, very common in Dōgen’s writings for the essence or truth or entirety of something or someone, as handed down in the Chan tradition; from the famous story of Bodhidharma’s testing of four disciples, to whom he said of each in turn that he (or, in one case, she) had got his skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. For the story, see Supplemental Note 2.
“Singly transmitted” (tanden 單傳): A term commonly used in Chan to describe the passing down of the dharma from master to disciple; here, no doubt a reference to the transmission from Bodhidharma to Huike. Though the term suggests (and in some cases is used to indicate) a lineage in which there is only one representative in each generation (e.g., see below, Note 48. “Single transmission”), it regularly appears in contexts where the graph tan is better understand as “unique,” “pure”, or “simple” (e.g., see below, Note 29. “Singly transmit it”); closely related to the notion of direct transmission “from mind to mind” (ishin denshin 以心傳心).
“For you have got my skin, flesh, bones, and marrow” (nyo toku go hi niku kotsu zui naru ga yue ni 汝得吾皮肉骨髄なるがゆゑに): Quoting Bodhidharma’s statement, “you have got” to each of his four disciples (see above, Supplemental Note 2). Presumably, the implication here is that the statement concerns not just Bodhidharma’s “single transmission” to Huike but the affirmation of the buddha nature in all beings (as proposed, e.g., in Shōbōgenzō keiteki 正法眼藏啓迪 2:185).
---
“The being that is here made the entirety of being by the buddha nature” (ima busshō ni shitsuu seraruru u いま佛性に悉有せらるる有): An odd locution, presumably meaning something like, “the term ‘being’ in the expression ‘entirety of being’ that is here being identified with the buddha nature.”
“The tongue of the buddha” (butsuzetsu 佛舌): No doubt here used as a figure of speech for the speech of the buddha.
“The nose of the patch-robed monk” (nōsō bikū 衲僧鼻孔): The term “patch-robed monk” (nōsō 衲僧) is a playful self-reference used by Chan monks. The “nose” (or “nostril”; bikū 鼻孔) is often used in Chan texts to indicate (a) the person, especially (b) that which is essential to the person, or (c) the very essence or identity of someone or something; a term occuring frequently in the Shōbōgenzō.
“Initial being” (shi’u 始有); “original being” (hon’u 本有); “marvelous being” (myō’u 妙有); “conditioned being” (en’u 縁有); “deluded being” (mō’u 妄有): A series of terms expressing modes of existence discussed in Buddhist thought. The first, “initial being,” while not itself particularly common, is here contrasted with the familiar “original being,” a term used to express the fundamental reality from which the phenomenal world emerges. The expression “marvelous being” is probably best known in the phrase “true emptiness and marvelous being” (shinkū myō’u 眞空妙有), where it expresses the ultimate emptiness of phenomena. The term “conditioned being” suggests that which exists as a result of conditions — i.e., the conditioned dharmas of dependent origination (engi 縁起; pratīya-samutpāda); “deluded being” suggests that which exists as a result of deluded thoughts — i.e., the false objects of our misguided discrimination (funbetsu 分別; vikalpa).
“Mind and object, nature and attribute” (shin kyō shō sō 心境性相): Two standard pairs in Buddhist thought: the mind, or thought (citta), and the objects of thought or of the senses (viṣaya, ālambana); and the nature, or essence (svabhāva), of a thing, and its attributes, or characteristics (lakṣana).
“Circumstantial and primary recompense” (eshō 依正): A standard Buddhist term for the results of past karma reflected respectively in the circumstances into which one is born and the mental and physical makeup of the person; an abbreviation of ehō shōbō 依報正報. Here, perhaps to be understood as “the quality of the experience” of living beings as the “entirety of being.”
“The generative power of karma” (gō zōjō riki 業増上力): I.e., the power of karma to produce phenomena; adhipati.
“Deluded conditioned origination” (mō engi 妄縁起): An unusual expression, probably indicating phenomena that arise as a result of deluded thoughts. Given the apparent distinction, above, between “conditioned being” and “deluded being,” one is tempted to parse the expression “deluded or conditioned origination.”
“Of its own accord” (hōni 法爾): A loose translation of a term indicating what is true of itself or by necessity, what is naturally or inevitably so; used to translate Sanskrit niyati (“destiny”).
“Practice and verification of spiritual powers” (jintsū shushō 神通修證): I.e., mastery of the “supernormal knowledges” (jintsū 神通; abhijñā); here, presumably, the ability in particular to manifest oneself in diverse bodies and circumstances — one of the powers known as the “bases of spiritual power” (jinsoku 神足; ṛddhi-pāda).
“Verification of the way of the nobles” (shoshō no shōdō 諸聖の證道): I.e., the spiritual attainments of advanced adepts on the Buddhist path. The phrase “verification of the way” is a somewhat forced translation of shōdō 證道, a common expression for Buddhist spiritual awakening; here, as in many other contexts, the term dō 道 could be taken as a rendering of bodhi. The translation “nobles” takes shoshō 諸聖 in its Buddhist sense of ārya, those who have transcended the state of the “commoner” (bonbu 凡夫; pṛthagjana); the term could also be rendered in a more “Chinese” idiom as “the sages” or “holy ones.”
The great 'Dogenologist' translator and historian, Prof. Carl Bielefeldt, has just released his brand new translation of Shobogenzo Bussho (Buddha-Nature) for the Soto Zen Text Project.
I have been slowly reading it to compare with the Nishijima-Cross version (which, so far, seems to come out very well. The two versions are incredibly close, and I find Nishijima-Cross often captures the "feel of the music" a bit better).
Anyway ... here are a couple of paragraphs that are playing with the famous phrase "all living beings in their entirety have Buddha Nature". Dogen first plays with an ambiguity in the grammar to change that to "all living beings in their entirety are Buddha Nature". But he does not stop there ...
If you can hear the perspective that "Buddha Nature" is not a "thing" that we become or have or develop ... but is radical, existential being that leaves nothing out, whole beyond whole, the reality of reality (something like that
) ... you might get a feel for what Dogen is going for here ... It is everything leaving nothing out, yet beyond categories (something like that ) ...
What is the essential point of the World Honored One’s saying, “All living beings in their entirety have the buddha nature”? It is turning the dharma wheel of the saying, “what is it that comes like this?” One speaks of “living beings,” or “sentient beings,” or “the multitude of beings,” or “the multitude of types.” The term “entirety of being” refers to “living beings,” “the multitude of beings.” That is, the “entirety of being” is the buddha nature; “one entirety” of the “entirety of being” is called “living beings.” At this very moment, the interior and exterior of living beings is the “entirety of being” of the buddha nature. This is not only the “skin, flesh, bones, and marrow” singly transmitted; for “you have got my skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.”
We should realize that the “being” that is here made the “entirety of being” by the buddha nature is not the being of being and non-being. The “entirety of being” is the word of the buddha, the tongue of the buddha, the eyes of the buddhas and ancestors, the nose of the patch-robed monk. Furthermore, the term “entirety of being” is not initial being, not original being, not marvelous being; how much less is it conditioned being or deluded being. It has nothing to do with the likes of mind and object, nature and attribute. Therefore, the circumstantial and primary [recompense] of the “entirety of being” of living beings is not by any means the generative power of karma, not deluded conditioned origination, not of its own accord, not the practice and verification of spiritual powers. Were the “entirety of being” of living beings generated by karma, or conditioned origination, or of its own accord, then the verification of the way of the nobles as well as the bodhi of the buddhas and the eyes of the buddhas and ancestors would also be the generative power of karma, conditioned origination, and of its own accord. And this is not the case
We should realize that the “being” that is here made the “entirety of being” by the buddha nature is not the being of being and non-being. The “entirety of being” is the word of the buddha, the tongue of the buddha, the eyes of the buddhas and ancestors, the nose of the patch-robed monk. Furthermore, the term “entirety of being” is not initial being, not original being, not marvelous being; how much less is it conditioned being or deluded being. It has nothing to do with the likes of mind and object, nature and attribute. Therefore, the circumstantial and primary [recompense] of the “entirety of being” of living beings is not by any means the generative power of karma, not deluded conditioned origination, not of its own accord, not the practice and verification of spiritual powers. Were the “entirety of being” of living beings generated by karma, or conditioned origination, or of its own accord, then the verification of the way of the nobles as well as the bodhi of the buddhas and the eyes of the buddhas and ancestors would also be the generative power of karma, conditioned origination, and of its own accord. And this is not the case
“Essential point” (shūshi 宗旨): A common expression for the “purport,” or “message” of a statement.
“Turning the dharma wheel of the saying “what is it that comes like this?” (ze jūmo butsu inmo rai no dō ten bōrin 是什麼物恁麼來の道轉法輪): I.e., presumably, a Buddhist teaching equivalent to the famous question put to the Chan master Nanyue Huairang 南嶽懷讓 by the Sixth Ancestor, Huineng 慧能. The question is likely a play on the term “Thus Come One” (nyorai 如来; tathāgata), an epithet of the buddhas.
The Chan Master Dahui of Mt. Nanyue (descendant of Caoxi, named Huairang) visited the Sixth Ancestor. The Ancestor asked him, “Where do you come from?”
The Master said, “I come from the National Teacher An on Mt. Song.”
The Ancestor said, “What is it that comes like this?”
The Master was without means [to answer]. After attending [the Ancestor] for eight years, he finally understood the previous conversation. Thereupon, he announced to the Ancestor, “I've understood what the reverend put to me when I first came: ‘What is it that comes like this?’”
The Ancestor asked, “How do you understand it?”
The Master replied, “To say it's like anything wouldn't hit it.”
The Ancestor said, “Then is it contingent on practice and verification?”
The Master answered, “Practice and verification are not nonexistent; they cannot be defiled.”
The Ancestor said, “Just this ‘not defiled’ is what the buddhas bear in mind. You're also like this, I'm also like this, and all the ancestors of the Western Heavens [i. e., India] are also like this.”
“Sentient beings” (ujō 有情); “the multitude of beings” (gunjō 群生); “multitude of types” (gunrui 群類): Terms regularly used as synonyms for “living beings.” The point here would seem to be that all these terms (as well as the synonymous “multitude of beings” [gun’u 群有] in the following sentence) may be referred to as the “entirety of being.”
“The term entirety of being” (shitsu’u no gon 悉有の言): Dōgen here creates a neologism from the adverb shitsu and the verb u in the phrase shitsu u busshō 悉有佛性, translated in the quotation as “in their entirety have the buddha nature.” The word play relies on the fact that the term u 有 means both “to have” and “to exist” and is regularly used in philosophical discourse as a noun for “being.” The resultant expression might also be rendered “all existents” or, more simply, “everything.”
“One entirety of the entirety of being” (shitsuu no isshitsu 悉有の一悉): Presumably the point is that “living beings” represent but one type within the “entirety of being” — with, perhaps, the added suggestion that any one type is in some sense one with the entire set.
“Skin, flesh, bones, and marrow” (hi niku kotsu zui 皮肉骨髄): An expression, very common in Dōgen’s writings for the essence or truth or entirety of something or someone, as handed down in the Chan tradition; from the famous story of Bodhidharma’s testing of four disciples, to whom he said of each in turn that he (or, in one case, she) had got his skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. For the story, see Supplemental Note 2.
“Singly transmitted” (tanden 單傳): A term commonly used in Chan to describe the passing down of the dharma from master to disciple; here, no doubt a reference to the transmission from Bodhidharma to Huike. Though the term suggests (and in some cases is used to indicate) a lineage in which there is only one representative in each generation (e.g., see below, Note 48. “Single transmission”), it regularly appears in contexts where the graph tan is better understand as “unique,” “pure”, or “simple” (e.g., see below, Note 29. “Singly transmit it”); closely related to the notion of direct transmission “from mind to mind” (ishin denshin 以心傳心).
“For you have got my skin, flesh, bones, and marrow” (nyo toku go hi niku kotsu zui naru ga yue ni 汝得吾皮肉骨髄なるがゆゑに): Quoting Bodhidharma’s statement, “you have got” to each of his four disciples (see above, Supplemental Note 2). Presumably, the implication here is that the statement concerns not just Bodhidharma’s “single transmission” to Huike but the affirmation of the buddha nature in all beings (as proposed, e.g., in Shōbōgenzō keiteki 正法眼藏啓迪 2:185).
---
“The being that is here made the entirety of being by the buddha nature” (ima busshō ni shitsuu seraruru u いま佛性に悉有せらるる有): An odd locution, presumably meaning something like, “the term ‘being’ in the expression ‘entirety of being’ that is here being identified with the buddha nature.”
“The tongue of the buddha” (butsuzetsu 佛舌): No doubt here used as a figure of speech for the speech of the buddha.
“The nose of the patch-robed monk” (nōsō bikū 衲僧鼻孔): The term “patch-robed monk” (nōsō 衲僧) is a playful self-reference used by Chan monks. The “nose” (or “nostril”; bikū 鼻孔) is often used in Chan texts to indicate (a) the person, especially (b) that which is essential to the person, or (c) the very essence or identity of someone or something; a term occuring frequently in the Shōbōgenzō.
“Initial being” (shi’u 始有); “original being” (hon’u 本有); “marvelous being” (myō’u 妙有); “conditioned being” (en’u 縁有); “deluded being” (mō’u 妄有): A series of terms expressing modes of existence discussed in Buddhist thought. The first, “initial being,” while not itself particularly common, is here contrasted with the familiar “original being,” a term used to express the fundamental reality from which the phenomenal world emerges. The expression “marvelous being” is probably best known in the phrase “true emptiness and marvelous being” (shinkū myō’u 眞空妙有), where it expresses the ultimate emptiness of phenomena. The term “conditioned being” suggests that which exists as a result of conditions — i.e., the conditioned dharmas of dependent origination (engi 縁起; pratīya-samutpāda); “deluded being” suggests that which exists as a result of deluded thoughts — i.e., the false objects of our misguided discrimination (funbetsu 分別; vikalpa).
“Mind and object, nature and attribute” (shin kyō shō sō 心境性相): Two standard pairs in Buddhist thought: the mind, or thought (citta), and the objects of thought or of the senses (viṣaya, ālambana); and the nature, or essence (svabhāva), of a thing, and its attributes, or characteristics (lakṣana).
“Circumstantial and primary recompense” (eshō 依正): A standard Buddhist term for the results of past karma reflected respectively in the circumstances into which one is born and the mental and physical makeup of the person; an abbreviation of ehō shōbō 依報正報. Here, perhaps to be understood as “the quality of the experience” of living beings as the “entirety of being.”
“The generative power of karma” (gō zōjō riki 業増上力): I.e., the power of karma to produce phenomena; adhipati.
“Deluded conditioned origination” (mō engi 妄縁起): An unusual expression, probably indicating phenomena that arise as a result of deluded thoughts. Given the apparent distinction, above, between “conditioned being” and “deluded being,” one is tempted to parse the expression “deluded or conditioned origination.”
“Of its own accord” (hōni 法爾): A loose translation of a term indicating what is true of itself or by necessity, what is naturally or inevitably so; used to translate Sanskrit niyati (“destiny”).
“Practice and verification of spiritual powers” (jintsū shushō 神通修證): I.e., mastery of the “supernormal knowledges” (jintsū 神通; abhijñā); here, presumably, the ability in particular to manifest oneself in diverse bodies and circumstances — one of the powers known as the “bases of spiritual power” (jinsoku 神足; ṛddhi-pāda).
“Verification of the way of the nobles” (shoshō no shōdō 諸聖の證道): I.e., the spiritual attainments of advanced adepts on the Buddhist path. The phrase “verification of the way” is a somewhat forced translation of shōdō 證道, a common expression for Buddhist spiritual awakening; here, as in many other contexts, the term dō 道 could be taken as a rendering of bodhi. The translation “nobles” takes shoshō 諸聖 in its Buddhist sense of ārya, those who have transcended the state of the “commoner” (bonbu 凡夫; pṛthagjana); the term could also be rendered in a more “Chinese” idiom as “the sages” or “holy ones.”
Originally posted by Jundo
Here is another section of Bussho that really shows that wonder of word-play and grammar bending in Dogen-jazz ...
Going back and forth with the footnotes will give a taste for that. As an entrance way into this portion, it might help to know that Dogen often used question words like "What" to refer to the ineffable, the wordless, the beyond expression whatever (i.e., the indescribable ultimateness that is 'emptiness' or 'buddha nature') ... and words such as "name" to refer to the true and ultimate identity of concrete things of this relative world ... and words such as 'this' to refer to what is right here before one's eyes and one's eyes too.
However, Dogen's way of expression, by twisting up all of it to capture various Truths, goes far beyond the simplistic formulaic description of the relationship of "what" "name" "this" etc. that I just wrote! His music expresses that what-name-thisness.
Dogen bases his word-play on this famous Koan ... For easier reading, Bussho sections are in BLUE, and footnotes in normal type ... After after getting a bit of what Dogen was doing with the puns and word twists and syncopated grammar ... forget all that, and just let the whole thing wash through you like listening to good music ...
Going back and forth with the footnotes will give a taste for that. As an entrance way into this portion, it might help to know that Dogen often used question words like "What" to refer to the ineffable, the wordless, the beyond expression whatever (i.e., the indescribable ultimateness that is 'emptiness' or 'buddha nature') ... and words such as "name" to refer to the true and ultimate identity of concrete things of this relative world ... and words such as 'this' to refer to what is right here before one's eyes and one's eyes too.
However, Dogen's way of expression, by twisting up all of it to capture various Truths, goes far beyond the simplistic formulaic description of the relationship of "what" "name" "this" etc. that I just wrote! His music expresses that what-name-thisness.
Dogen bases his word-play on this famous Koan ... For easier reading, Bussho sections are in BLUE, and footnotes in normal type ... After after getting a bit of what Dogen was doing with the puns and word twists and syncopated grammar ... forget all that, and just let the whole thing wash through you like listening to good music ...
As a boy of seven, [Chan Master Zhao Daman] met the Fourth Ancestor, the Chan Master Dayi, on the road in Huangmei. The ancestor saw that, although a child, the master’s build was remarkably fine, different from that of an ordinary child. Seeing this, the ancestor asked, “What’s your name?”
The master answered, “I have a name, but it’s not an ordinary name.”
The ancestor said, “What is this name?”
The master answered, “It’s the buddha nature.”
The ancestor said, “You have no buddha nature.”
The master replied, “It’s because the buddha nature is empty that you say I have none.”
The ancestor, recognizing that he was a vessel of the dharma, made him his attendant. Later, he transmitted the treasury of the eye of the true dharma. [The master] resided on Dongshan at Huangmei, where he greatly wielded the “dark style.”18
The master answered, “I have a name, but it’s not an ordinary name.”
The ancestor said, “What is this name?”
The master answered, “It’s the buddha nature.”
The ancestor said, “You have no buddha nature.”
The master replied, “It’s because the buddha nature is empty that you say I have none.”
The ancestor, recognizing that he was a vessel of the dharma, made him his attendant. Later, he transmitted the treasury of the eye of the true dharma. [The master] resided on Dongshan at Huangmei, where he greatly wielded the “dark style.”18
18.
“You have no buddha nature” (nyo mu busshō 汝無佛性): Or, more collquially, “you don’t have a buddha nature”; a fairly common retort in Chan texts. In scholastic Buddhism, the lack of buddha nature makes one an icchantika (yichanti 一闡提, someone without the potential to achieve the perfect awakening of a buddha.
“Dark style” (genpū 玄風): Or “mysterious style”; a common expression for deep teachings.
“You have no buddha nature” (nyo mu busshō 汝無佛性): Or, more collquially, “you don’t have a buddha nature”; a fairly common retort in Chan texts. In scholastic Buddhism, the lack of buddha nature makes one an icchantika (yichanti 一闡提, someone without the potential to achieve the perfect awakening of a buddha.
“Dark style” (genpū 玄風): Or “mysterious style”; a common expression for deep teachings.
しかあれはばすなはち、祖師の道取を參究するに、四祖いはく汝何姓は、その宗旨あり。むかしは何國人の人あ り、何姓の姓あり。なんぢは何姓と爲説するなり。たとへば吾亦如是、汝亦如是と道取するがごと し。
Therefore, when investigating these sayings of the ancestral masters, there is an essential point to the Fourth Ancestor’s saying, “What’s your name?” In ancient times, there was a person from the country of He [“what”], who had the He family name. He is saying to him, “You are of the “what” family.” It is like saying, “I’m also like this, you’re also like this.”19
Therefore, when investigating these sayings of the ancestral masters, there is an essential point to the Fourth Ancestor’s saying, “What’s your name?” In ancient times, there was a person from the country of He [“what”], who had the He family name. He is saying to him, “You are of the “what” family.” It is like saying, “I’m also like this, you’re also like this.”19
19.
“What’s your name?” (nyo ka shō 汝何姓): Dōgen begins here a play with the terms in the quotation. First up is a Chinese version of the old Abbott and Costello joke, “Who’s on first?” The game puns on the Chinese interrogative he 何 (“what”), also used as a family name.
For those who don't know the Abbot and Costello routine ...
“From the country of What” (gakokunin 何國人): Or “a citizen of the land of What.” Reference to a dialogue found in the Jingde chuandeng lu 景徳傳燈録 (T.51:433a9-10) and elsewhere; the version in the Liandeng huiyao 聯燈會要 (ZZ.79[1557]:257a21-22):
泗州大聖或問、師何姓。師云、姓何。或云、何國人。師云、何國人。
Dasheng of Sizhou would be asked, “Master, what is your name?”
The master would answer, “My name is He [‘what’].”
Or he would be asked, “What country are you from?”
The master answered, “I’m from the country of He [‘what’].”
“I’m also like this, you’re also like this” (go nyaku nyo ze nyo nyaku nyo ze 吾亦如是汝亦如是): From the words of the Sixth Ancestor, Huineng, in the dialogue with Nanyue Huairang::
The Chan Master Dahui of Mt. Nanyue (descendant of Caoxi, named Huairang) visited the Sixth Ancestor. The Ancestor asked him, “Where do you come from?”
The Master said, “I come from the National Teacher An on Mt. Song.”
The Ancestor said, “What is it that comes like this?”
The Master was without means [to answer]. After attending [the Ancestor] for eight years, he finally understood the previous conversation. Thereupon, he announced to the Ancestor, “I've understood what the reverend put to me when I first came: ‘What is it that comes like this?’”
The Ancestor asked, “How do you understand it?”
The Master replied, “To say it's like anything wouldn't hit it.”
The Ancestor said, “Then is it contingent on practice and verification?”
The Master answered, “Practice and verification are not nonexistent; they cannot be defiled.”
The Ancestor said, “Just this ‘not defiled’ is what the buddhas bear in mind. You're also like this, I'm also like this, and all the ancestors of the Western Heavens [i. e., India] are also like this.”
“What’s your name?” (nyo ka shō 汝何姓): Dōgen begins here a play with the terms in the quotation. First up is a Chinese version of the old Abbott and Costello joke, “Who’s on first?” The game puns on the Chinese interrogative he 何 (“what”), also used as a family name.
For those who don't know the Abbot and Costello routine ...
“From the country of What” (gakokunin 何國人): Or “a citizen of the land of What.” Reference to a dialogue found in the Jingde chuandeng lu 景徳傳燈録 (T.51:433a9-10) and elsewhere; the version in the Liandeng huiyao 聯燈會要 (ZZ.79[1557]:257a21-22):
泗州大聖或問、師何姓。師云、姓何。或云、何國人。師云、何國人。
Dasheng of Sizhou would be asked, “Master, what is your name?”
The master would answer, “My name is He [‘what’].”
Or he would be asked, “What country are you from?”
The master answered, “I’m from the country of He [‘what’].”
“I’m also like this, you’re also like this” (go nyaku nyo ze nyo nyaku nyo ze 吾亦如是汝亦如是): From the words of the Sixth Ancestor, Huineng, in the dialogue with Nanyue Huairang::
The Chan Master Dahui of Mt. Nanyue (descendant of Caoxi, named Huairang) visited the Sixth Ancestor. The Ancestor asked him, “Where do you come from?”
The Master said, “I come from the National Teacher An on Mt. Song.”
The Ancestor said, “What is it that comes like this?”
The Master was without means [to answer]. After attending [the Ancestor] for eight years, he finally understood the previous conversation. Thereupon, he announced to the Ancestor, “I've understood what the reverend put to me when I first came: ‘What is it that comes like this?’”
The Ancestor asked, “How do you understand it?”
The Master replied, “To say it's like anything wouldn't hit it.”
The Ancestor said, “Then is it contingent on practice and verification?”
The Master answered, “Practice and verification are not nonexistent; they cannot be defiled.”
The Ancestor said, “Just this ‘not defiled’ is what the buddhas bear in mind. You're also like this, I'm also like this, and all the ancestors of the Western Heavens [i. e., India] are also like this.”
五祖いはく、姓即有、不是常姓。いはゆるは、有即姓は常姓にあらず、常姓は即有に不是なり。
The Fifth Ancestor said, “I have a name, but it’s not an ordinary name.” That is, “being as itself a name” is not an ordinary name; an ordinary name “is not right” for “being as itself.”20
四祖いはく是何姓は、何は是なり、是を何しきたれり、これ姓なり。何ならしむるは是のゆゑなり、是ならしむ るは何の能なり。姓は是也何也なり。これを蒿湯にも點ず、茶湯にも點ず、家常の茶飯ともするな り。
The Fourth Ancestor’s saying, “What is this name?” means “what” is “this”; he has “what-ed” “this” — this is his “name.” For what makes it “what” is “this”; making it “this” is the function of “what.” His “name” is both “this” and “what.” We fix it as artemisia tea; we fix it as green tea; we make it our “everyday tea and rice.”21
The Fifth Ancestor said, “I have a name, but it’s not an ordinary name.” That is, “being as itself a name” is not an ordinary name; an ordinary name “is not right” for “being as itself.”20
四祖いはく是何姓は、何は是なり、是を何しきたれり、これ姓なり。何ならしむるは是のゆゑなり、是ならしむ るは何の能なり。姓は是也何也なり。これを蒿湯にも點ず、茶湯にも點ず、家常の茶飯ともするな り。
The Fourth Ancestor’s saying, “What is this name?” means “what” is “this”; he has “what-ed” “this” — this is his “name.” For what makes it “what” is “this”; making it “this” is the function of “what.” His “name” is both “this” and “what.” We fix it as artemisia tea; we fix it as green tea; we make it our “everyday tea and rice.”21
20.
“Being as itself a name” (u soku shō 有即姓): The translation struggles in vain to capture this play with words. Dōgen has here reversed the order of the three graphs shō soku u 姓即有, translated as “I have a name,” in the process, once again shifting the meaning of u 有 from “have” to “be” (see above, Note 4. “The term entirety of being”) and redoing the function of soku 即 from the concessive (“as for a name, I may have one, but . . .”) to an emphatic copula (“is precisely”).
“An ordinary name is not right for being as itself” (jōshō wa sokuu ni fuze nari 常姓は即有に不是なり): Another rearrangement of the Chinese terms in the quotation. Here, Dōgen has taken the graphs soku u 即有 (“have”) as a binomial with a sense, presumably, of something like “precisely being,” “being itself,” etc.; and treated the negative copula fuze 不是 (“it’s not”) as the adjectival “not correct,” “not appropriate,” etc.
21.
“What is this” (ga wa ze nari 何は是なり): Or “what is right.” Continuing his play with the interrogative “what,” Dōgen here reads the question, “what is this [name]?” as a declarative sentence. The translation obscures the pun on the graph, ze 是, rendered here as “this” (from the Fourth Ancestor’s question, “What is this name?”) and as “right” in the preceding remark by Dōgen, “An ordinary name ‘is not right’ for ‘being as itself.’”
“He has what-ed this” (ze wo ga shikitareri 是を何しきたれり): Here, the interrogative “what” is treated as a transitive verb; presumably the meaning is “to make ‘what’ of ‘this,” “to take ‘this’ as ‘what.’” Most interpretation takes “what” to represent the ultimate mystery of things, and “this” to stand for the immediate presence of things; hence, to “what” “this” is to see the mystery in the presence.
“This is the name” (kore shō nari これ姓なり): The antecedent of “this” here is unclear; possibly the act of “what-ing” “this.”
“For what makes it what is this; making it this is the function of what” (ga narashimuru wa ze no yue nari ze narashimuru wa ga no nō nari 何ならしむるは是のゆゑなり是ならしむるは何の能なり): If we follow the common interpretation, the causatives here would convey the reciprocal relationship between the “what” of the ultimate mystery and the “this” of the immediate presence: it is the immediate realm of things that reveals the ultimate; it is the ultimate realm that expresses itself as things.
“We fix it as artemisia tea” (kore o kōtō ni mo tenzu これを蒿湯にも點ず): Likely a suffusion of mugwort (or wormwood) taken for medicinal purposes. The antecedent of “it” (kore これ) is unclear; presumably, his “name.”
“Everyday tea and rice” (kajō no sahan 家常の茶飯): A fairly common expression, in both Chan texts and Dōgen’s writings, for the “daily fare” of the home, what we might call “homestyle” cooking; well known in the saying, often cited by Dōgen, of Fuyung Daokai 芙蓉道楷 (1043-1118): “The words of the buddhas and ancestors are like everyday tea and rice” (fozu yenju ru jiachang chafan 佛祖言句如家常茶飯) (or, in some versions, “the intentions and words of the buddhas and ancestors” (fozu yiju 佛祖意句). See, e.g., Dōgen’s shingji Shōbōgenzō, case 143 (DZZ.5:202).
“Being as itself a name” (u soku shō 有即姓): The translation struggles in vain to capture this play with words. Dōgen has here reversed the order of the three graphs shō soku u 姓即有, translated as “I have a name,” in the process, once again shifting the meaning of u 有 from “have” to “be” (see above, Note 4. “The term entirety of being”) and redoing the function of soku 即 from the concessive (“as for a name, I may have one, but . . .”) to an emphatic copula (“is precisely”).
“An ordinary name is not right for being as itself” (jōshō wa sokuu ni fuze nari 常姓は即有に不是なり): Another rearrangement of the Chinese terms in the quotation. Here, Dōgen has taken the graphs soku u 即有 (“have”) as a binomial with a sense, presumably, of something like “precisely being,” “being itself,” etc.; and treated the negative copula fuze 不是 (“it’s not”) as the adjectival “not correct,” “not appropriate,” etc.
21.
“What is this” (ga wa ze nari 何は是なり): Or “what is right.” Continuing his play with the interrogative “what,” Dōgen here reads the question, “what is this [name]?” as a declarative sentence. The translation obscures the pun on the graph, ze 是, rendered here as “this” (from the Fourth Ancestor’s question, “What is this name?”) and as “right” in the preceding remark by Dōgen, “An ordinary name ‘is not right’ for ‘being as itself.’”
“He has what-ed this” (ze wo ga shikitareri 是を何しきたれり): Here, the interrogative “what” is treated as a transitive verb; presumably the meaning is “to make ‘what’ of ‘this,” “to take ‘this’ as ‘what.’” Most interpretation takes “what” to represent the ultimate mystery of things, and “this” to stand for the immediate presence of things; hence, to “what” “this” is to see the mystery in the presence.
“This is the name” (kore shō nari これ姓なり): The antecedent of “this” here is unclear; possibly the act of “what-ing” “this.”
“For what makes it what is this; making it this is the function of what” (ga narashimuru wa ze no yue nari ze narashimuru wa ga no nō nari 何ならしむるは是のゆゑなり是ならしむるは何の能なり): If we follow the common interpretation, the causatives here would convey the reciprocal relationship between the “what” of the ultimate mystery and the “this” of the immediate presence: it is the immediate realm of things that reveals the ultimate; it is the ultimate realm that expresses itself as things.
“We fix it as artemisia tea” (kore o kōtō ni mo tenzu これを蒿湯にも點ず): Likely a suffusion of mugwort (or wormwood) taken for medicinal purposes. The antecedent of “it” (kore これ) is unclear; presumably, his “name.”
“Everyday tea and rice” (kajō no sahan 家常の茶飯): A fairly common expression, in both Chan texts and Dōgen’s writings, for the “daily fare” of the home, what we might call “homestyle” cooking; well known in the saying, often cited by Dōgen, of Fuyung Daokai 芙蓉道楷 (1043-1118): “The words of the buddhas and ancestors are like everyday tea and rice” (fozu yenju ru jiachang chafan 佛祖言句如家常茶飯) (or, in some versions, “the intentions and words of the buddhas and ancestors” (fozu yiju 佛祖意句). See, e.g., Dōgen’s shingji Shōbōgenzō, case 143 (DZZ.5:202).
五祖いはく是佛性。いはくの宗旨は、是は佛性なりとなり。何のゆゑに佛なるなり。是は何姓のみに究取しきた らんや、是すでに不是のとき佛性なり。しかあればすなはち、是は何なり、佛なりといへども、脱落しきたり、 透脱しきたるに、かならず姓なり。その姓すなはち周なり。しかあれども、父にうけず、祖にうけず、母氏に相 似ならず、傍觀に齊肩ならんや。
The Fifth Ancestor said, “It’s the buddha nature.” The essential point of what he says is that “it’s” is “the buddha nature.” Because of “what,” it is the buddha. Has “it’s” been exhaustively investigated only in the name “what”? When “it’s” was [said to be] “it’s not,” it was “the buddha nature.” Therefore, while “it’s” is “what,” is the buddha, when they have been sloughed off, when they have been liberated, it is necessarily his “name.” That name is Zhou. Nevertheless, he does not get it from his father; he does not get it from his ancestors; it does not resemble his mother’s family name; how could it be of equal stature with onlookers?22
The Fifth Ancestor said, “It’s the buddha nature.” The essential point of what he says is that “it’s” is “the buddha nature.” Because of “what,” it is the buddha. Has “it’s” been exhaustively investigated only in the name “what”? When “it’s” was [said to be] “it’s not,” it was “the buddha nature.” Therefore, while “it’s” is “what,” is the buddha, when they have been sloughed off, when they have been liberated, it is necessarily his “name.” That name is Zhou. Nevertheless, he does not get it from his father; he does not get it from his ancestors; it does not resemble his mother’s family name; how could it be of equal stature with onlookers?22
22.
“It’s is the buddha nature” (ze wa busshō nari 是は佛性なり): Continuing the play with the graph ze, here translated as “it’s” in Hongren’s remark, “It’s the buddha nature.”
“Has it’s been exhaustively investigated only in the name what?” (ze wa nan shō nomi ni kyūshū shikitaranya 是は何姓のみに究取しきたらんや): I.e., is the term ze (“it is”) being treated in this conversation only as the name “what”?
When it’s was said to be it’s not, it was the buddha nature” (ze sude ni fuze no toki busshō nari 是すでに不是のとき佛性なり): I.e., when Hongren said, “it’s not [an ordinary name],” the negation of “it is” (ze 是), “it’s not” (fu ze 不是), also indicated the buddha nature.
“When they have been sloughed off, when they have been liberated, it is necessarily his name” (datsuraku shikitari tōdatsu shikitaru ni kanarazu shō nari 脱落しきたり透脱しきたるにかならず姓なり): Usually taken to mean that, although “it’s” can be identified with “what” or “buddha,” when it is freed from these “higher” abstractions, it is Hongren’s actual name.
“That name is Zhou” (sono shō sunawachi shū nari その姓すなはち周なり): According to his biography (e.g., Jingde chuan deng lu 景徳傳燈録, T.51:222c6), Hongren’s family name was Zhou 周 (a common surname, with the meaning “all-embracing”).
“How could it be of equal stature with onlookers?” (bōkan ni seiken naranya 傍觀に齊肩ならんや): I.e., how could the Fifth Ancestor’s name be compared with the names of others?
“It’s is the buddha nature” (ze wa busshō nari 是は佛性なり): Continuing the play with the graph ze, here translated as “it’s” in Hongren’s remark, “It’s the buddha nature.”
“Has it’s been exhaustively investigated only in the name what?” (ze wa nan shō nomi ni kyūshū shikitaranya 是は何姓のみに究取しきたらんや): I.e., is the term ze (“it is”) being treated in this conversation only as the name “what”?
When it’s was said to be it’s not, it was the buddha nature” (ze sude ni fuze no toki busshō nari 是すでに不是のとき佛性なり): I.e., when Hongren said, “it’s not [an ordinary name],” the negation of “it is” (ze 是), “it’s not” (fu ze 不是), also indicated the buddha nature.
“When they have been sloughed off, when they have been liberated, it is necessarily his name” (datsuraku shikitari tōdatsu shikitaru ni kanarazu shō nari 脱落しきたり透脱しきたるにかならず姓なり): Usually taken to mean that, although “it’s” can be identified with “what” or “buddha,” when it is freed from these “higher” abstractions, it is Hongren’s actual name.
“That name is Zhou” (sono shō sunawachi shū nari その姓すなはち周なり): According to his biography (e.g., Jingde chuan deng lu 景徳傳燈録, T.51:222c6), Hongren’s family name was Zhou 周 (a common surname, with the meaning “all-embracing”).
“How could it be of equal stature with onlookers?” (bōkan ni seiken naranya 傍觀に齊肩ならんや): I.e., how could the Fifth Ancestor’s name be compared with the names of others?
四祖いはく汝無佛性。いはゆる道取は、汝はたれにあらず、汝に一任すれども、無佛性なりと開演するなり。し るべし、學すべし、いまはいかなる時節にして無佛性なるぞ。佛頭にして無佛性なるか、佛向上にして無佛性な るか。七通を逼塞することなかれ、八達を摸索することなかれ。無佛性は一時の三昧なりと修習することもあり 。佛性成佛のとき、無佛性なるか、佛性發心のとき、無佛性なるかと問取すべし、道取すべし。露柱をしても問 取せしむべし、露柱にも問取すべし、佛性をしても問取せしむべし。
The Fourth Ancestor said, “You have no buddha nature.” This saying proclaims, “Although I allow that ‘you’ are ‘you’ and not another, you are ‘no buddha nature.’” We should know, we should study, at what time now is it that he is “no buddha nature”? Is it at the head of the buddha that he is “no buddha nature”? Is it “beyond the buddha” that he is “no buddha nature”? Do not block up “the seven penetrations”; do not grope for “the eight masteries.” There are instances when “no buddha nature” is also studied as a momentary samādhi. When the buddha nature becomes a buddha, is this “no buddha nature”? When the buddha nature arouses the aspiration [to become a buddha], is this “no buddha nature”? We should ask this; we should say it. We should make the columns ask it; we should ask the columns. We should make the buddha nature ask it.23
The Fourth Ancestor said, “You have no buddha nature.” This saying proclaims, “Although I allow that ‘you’ are ‘you’ and not another, you are ‘no buddha nature.’” We should know, we should study, at what time now is it that he is “no buddha nature”? Is it at the head of the buddha that he is “no buddha nature”? Is it “beyond the buddha” that he is “no buddha nature”? Do not block up “the seven penetrations”; do not grope for “the eight masteries.” There are instances when “no buddha nature” is also studied as a momentary samādhi. When the buddha nature becomes a buddha, is this “no buddha nature”? When the buddha nature arouses the aspiration [to become a buddha], is this “no buddha nature”? We should ask this; we should say it. We should make the columns ask it; we should ask the columns. We should make the buddha nature ask it.23
23.
“Although I allow that you are you and not another” (nyo wa tare ni arazu nyo ni ichinin suredomo 汝はたれにあらず汝に一任すれども): A tentative translation of an odd locution, literally something like, “you are not someone; although entrusting [this] to you . . . ”); taken here to mean, “acknowledging your identity as ‘you,’” The verb ichinin su 一任 (translated here “allowing”) occurs often in Dōgen’s writings in the sense, common in Chan texts, “to leave entirely to . . . .”
“You are no buddha nature” (mu busshō nari 無佛性なり): Or “you lack a buddha nature.” Here and in the remainder of his discussion of this topic, Dōgen treats the phrase mu busshō 無佛性 (“having no buddha nature,” “lacking buddha nature”) as a single semantic unit.
“At what time now is it” (ima wa ikanaru jisetsu ni shite いまはいかなる時節にして): Perhaps recalling the earlier discussion of the phrase “if the time arrives.”
“The head of the buddha” (buttō 佛頭): An unusual expression, not occurring elsewhere in Dōgen’s writings; possibly a variant of the more common bucchō 佛頂 (“buddha’s ‘crown,’ or ‘topknot’”; buddhōṣṇīṣa), often used metaphorically as the very pinnacle of awakening; generally taken here to indicate the attainment of buddhahood.
“Beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō 佛向上): A common expression in Chan texts and Dōgen’s writings, as in the sayings “a person beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō nin 佛向上人) or “what lies beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō ji 佛向上事).
“Block up the seven penetrations” (shittsū o hissaku su 七通を逼塞す); “grope for the eight masteries” (hattatsu o mosaku su 八達を摸索す): The “seven penetrations and eight masteries” (shittsū hattatsu 七通八達), or “seven passes and eight arrivals,” is a common expression in Dōgen’s writings and earlier Chan texts for “thorough understanding,” or “complete mastery.”
“Studied as a momentary samādhi” (ichiji no zanmai nari to shushū su 一時の三昧なりと修習す): The term samādhi here should probably be understood in its common usage in reference to any spiritual practice or experience, rather than to a psychological state of extreme concentration. Some interpreters take ichiji no zanmai 一時の三昧 as indicating “samādhi in each moment”; the translation takes it simply as a temporary state, or experience (in contrast to a general condition”) of which the following two questions here would be examples.
“The buddha nature becomes a buddha” (busshō jōbutsu 佛性成佛); “the buddha nature arouses the aspiration” (busshō hosshin 佛性發心): I.e. at the end and at the beginning respectively of the bodhisattva path. The questions may presuppose the common notion that the “buddha nature” refers to the potential to undertake and complete quest for buddhahood.
“We should make the columns ask it; we should ask the columns” (rochū o shitemo monshu seshimubeshi rochū ni mo monshu subeshi 露柱をしても問取せしむべし露柱にも問取すべし): The term rochū 露柱 (“exposed column”) refers to the free-standing pillars of monastic buildings, appearing often in Chan conversations as symbols of the objective world. Dōgen here reflects a saying attributed to Shitou Xiqian; Allusion to a well-known saying of the famous Tang-dynasty Chan master Shitou Xiqian 石頭希遷 (700-790), found, e.g., in the Liandeng huiyao 聯燈會要 (ZZ.136:738a3-4) and recorded in Dōgen’s shinji Shōbōgenzō (DZZ.5:148, case 41):
石頭無際大師〈嗣青原諱希遷〉因僧問、如何是祖師西來意。師曰、問取露柱。僧曰、某甲不會。師曰、我更不會 也。
The Great Master Wuji of Shitou (succeeded Qingyuan, called Xiqian) was once asked by a monk, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
The master said, “Ask the columns.”
The monk said, “I don’t understand.”
The master said, “I don’t understand either.”
“Although I allow that you are you and not another” (nyo wa tare ni arazu nyo ni ichinin suredomo 汝はたれにあらず汝に一任すれども): A tentative translation of an odd locution, literally something like, “you are not someone; although entrusting [this] to you . . . ”); taken here to mean, “acknowledging your identity as ‘you,’” The verb ichinin su 一任 (translated here “allowing”) occurs often in Dōgen’s writings in the sense, common in Chan texts, “to leave entirely to . . . .”
“You are no buddha nature” (mu busshō nari 無佛性なり): Or “you lack a buddha nature.” Here and in the remainder of his discussion of this topic, Dōgen treats the phrase mu busshō 無佛性 (“having no buddha nature,” “lacking buddha nature”) as a single semantic unit.
“At what time now is it” (ima wa ikanaru jisetsu ni shite いまはいかなる時節にして): Perhaps recalling the earlier discussion of the phrase “if the time arrives.”
“The head of the buddha” (buttō 佛頭): An unusual expression, not occurring elsewhere in Dōgen’s writings; possibly a variant of the more common bucchō 佛頂 (“buddha’s ‘crown,’ or ‘topknot’”; buddhōṣṇīṣa), often used metaphorically as the very pinnacle of awakening; generally taken here to indicate the attainment of buddhahood.
“Beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō 佛向上): A common expression in Chan texts and Dōgen’s writings, as in the sayings “a person beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō nin 佛向上人) or “what lies beyond the buddha” (butsu kōjō ji 佛向上事).
“Block up the seven penetrations” (shittsū o hissaku su 七通を逼塞す); “grope for the eight masteries” (hattatsu o mosaku su 八達を摸索す): The “seven penetrations and eight masteries” (shittsū hattatsu 七通八達), or “seven passes and eight arrivals,” is a common expression in Dōgen’s writings and earlier Chan texts for “thorough understanding,” or “complete mastery.”
“Studied as a momentary samādhi” (ichiji no zanmai nari to shushū su 一時の三昧なりと修習す): The term samādhi here should probably be understood in its common usage in reference to any spiritual practice or experience, rather than to a psychological state of extreme concentration. Some interpreters take ichiji no zanmai 一時の三昧 as indicating “samādhi in each moment”; the translation takes it simply as a temporary state, or experience (in contrast to a general condition”) of which the following two questions here would be examples.
“The buddha nature becomes a buddha” (busshō jōbutsu 佛性成佛); “the buddha nature arouses the aspiration” (busshō hosshin 佛性發心): I.e. at the end and at the beginning respectively of the bodhisattva path. The questions may presuppose the common notion that the “buddha nature” refers to the potential to undertake and complete quest for buddhahood.
“We should make the columns ask it; we should ask the columns” (rochū o shitemo monshu seshimubeshi rochū ni mo monshu subeshi 露柱をしても問取せしむべし露柱にも問取すべし): The term rochū 露柱 (“exposed column”) refers to the free-standing pillars of monastic buildings, appearing often in Chan conversations as symbols of the objective world. Dōgen here reflects a saying attributed to Shitou Xiqian; Allusion to a well-known saying of the famous Tang-dynasty Chan master Shitou Xiqian 石頭希遷 (700-790), found, e.g., in the Liandeng huiyao 聯燈會要 (ZZ.136:738a3-4) and recorded in Dōgen’s shinji Shōbōgenzō (DZZ.5:148, case 41):
石頭無際大師〈嗣青原諱希遷〉因僧問、如何是祖師西來意。師曰、問取露柱。僧曰、某甲不會。師曰、我更不會 也。
The Great Master Wuji of Shitou (succeeded Qingyuan, called Xiqian) was once asked by a monk, “What is the intention of the ancestral master’s coming from the west?”
The master said, “Ask the columns.”
The monk said, “I don’t understand.”
The master said, “I don’t understand either.”
しかあればすなはち、無佛性の道、はるかに四祖の祖室よりきこゆるものなり。黄梅に見聞し、趙州に流通し、 大潙に擧揚す。無佛性の道、かならず精進すべし、趑趄することなかれ。無佛性たどりぬべしといへども、何な る標準あり、汝なる時節あり、是なる投機あり、周なる同姓あり、直趣なり。
Therefore, the words “no buddha nature” are something heard far beyond the ancestral rooms of the Fourth Ancestor. They are seen in Huangmei; they circulate to Zhaozhou; they are raised by Dayi. The words “no buddha nature,” we should pursue with vigour; do not falter or hesitate. Though we may well have lost our bearings in “no buddha nature,” we have “what” as the standard, “you” as the time, “this” as the accord, Zhou as the same name; and we advance directly.24
Therefore, the words “no buddha nature” are something heard far beyond the ancestral rooms of the Fourth Ancestor. They are seen in Huangmei; they circulate to Zhaozhou; they are raised by Dayi. The words “no buddha nature,” we should pursue with vigour; do not falter or hesitate. Though we may well have lost our bearings in “no buddha nature,” we have “what” as the standard, “you” as the time, “this” as the accord, Zhou as the same name; and we advance directly.24
24.
“Ancestral rooms” (soshitsu 祖室): A common expression in Chan for the “inner recesses” of the tradition handed down from master to disciple.
“Huangmei” (ōbai 黄梅); “Zhaozhou” (jōshū 趙州); “Dayi” (daii 大潙): Reference to famous Chan masters who use the expression “no buddha nature.” “Huangmei” indicates the Fourth Ancestor, Daoxin himself; “Zhaozhou” and “Dayi” refer to Zhaozhou Congshen 趙州從諗 (778-897) and Guishan Lingyou 潙山靈祐 (771-853) respectively, both of whom will be quoted below.
“Pursue with vigour” (shōjin subeshi 精進すべし): I.e., make effort to understand. The term shōjin 精進, commonly used for the virtue of “zeal,” or “exertion,” does not typically occur as a transitive verb.
“Though we may well have lost our bearings in no buddha nature” (mu busshō tadorinubeshi to iedomo 無佛性たどりぬべしといへども): Most readers take the verb tadoru here in the sense tomadoi 戸惑 (“lose one’s way,” “grope about,” etc.).
“We have what as the standard” (ga naru hyōjun ari 何なる標準あり): The first in a list of four terms in Dōgen’s preceding discussion of the dialogue. The term hyōjun 標準 occurs fairly often in Dōgen’s writings in the sense of a “marker” or “norm”; akin to hyōkaku 標格.
“You as the time” (nyo naru jisetsu 汝なる時節): It is unclear what “time” is referred to here: the most likely candidate is the “time” in the question of the preceding section: “at what time now is it that he is ‘no buddha nature’?”
“This as the accord” (ze naru tōki 是なる投機): The term ze 是 (“this”) has also appeared above as “it’s” in Hongren’s statement, “it’s the buddha nature.” The word “accord” here translates tōki 投機, a term often indicating a perfect “fit,” or “match,” perhaps especially between master and disciple; here, perhaps the accord between “what” and “this.”
“Zhou as the same name” (shū naru dōshō 周なる同姓): Some manuscripts give the more familiar expression dōshō 同生 (“the same birth,” “born together”). “Zhou” (“all-embracing”) is Hongren’s family name (see, above, Note 22: “That name is Zhou”). It is not clear who (or what) here shares the name Zhou.
“We advance directly” (jikishu 直趣): The implication seems to be that, though “no buddha nature” may be confusing, given the guidance of the terms in the dialogue listed, we can immediately understand it. The expression, “advance directly” here may reflect the words, quoted elsewhere in Dōgen’s writings, “advance directly to supreme bodhi” (jikishu mujō bodai 直趣無上菩提).
“Ancestral rooms” (soshitsu 祖室): A common expression in Chan for the “inner recesses” of the tradition handed down from master to disciple.
“Huangmei” (ōbai 黄梅); “Zhaozhou” (jōshū 趙州); “Dayi” (daii 大潙): Reference to famous Chan masters who use the expression “no buddha nature.” “Huangmei” indicates the Fourth Ancestor, Daoxin himself; “Zhaozhou” and “Dayi” refer to Zhaozhou Congshen 趙州從諗 (778-897) and Guishan Lingyou 潙山靈祐 (771-853) respectively, both of whom will be quoted below.
“Pursue with vigour” (shōjin subeshi 精進すべし): I.e., make effort to understand. The term shōjin 精進, commonly used for the virtue of “zeal,” or “exertion,” does not typically occur as a transitive verb.
“Though we may well have lost our bearings in no buddha nature” (mu busshō tadorinubeshi to iedomo 無佛性たどりぬべしといへども): Most readers take the verb tadoru here in the sense tomadoi 戸惑 (“lose one’s way,” “grope about,” etc.).
“We have what as the standard” (ga naru hyōjun ari 何なる標準あり): The first in a list of four terms in Dōgen’s preceding discussion of the dialogue. The term hyōjun 標準 occurs fairly often in Dōgen’s writings in the sense of a “marker” or “norm”; akin to hyōkaku 標格.
“You as the time” (nyo naru jisetsu 汝なる時節): It is unclear what “time” is referred to here: the most likely candidate is the “time” in the question of the preceding section: “at what time now is it that he is ‘no buddha nature’?”
“This as the accord” (ze naru tōki 是なる投機): The term ze 是 (“this”) has also appeared above as “it’s” in Hongren’s statement, “it’s the buddha nature.” The word “accord” here translates tōki 投機, a term often indicating a perfect “fit,” or “match,” perhaps especially between master and disciple; here, perhaps the accord between “what” and “this.”
“Zhou as the same name” (shū naru dōshō 周なる同姓): Some manuscripts give the more familiar expression dōshō 同生 (“the same birth,” “born together”). “Zhou” (“all-embracing”) is Hongren’s family name (see, above, Note 22: “That name is Zhou”). It is not clear who (or what) here shares the name Zhou.
“We advance directly” (jikishu 直趣): The implication seems to be that, though “no buddha nature” may be confusing, given the guidance of the terms in the dialogue listed, we can immediately understand it. The expression, “advance directly” here may reflect the words, quoted elsewhere in Dōgen’s writings, “advance directly to supreme bodhi” (jikishu mujō bodai 直趣無上菩提).
Gassho, Jundo
Comment