(The following is a response to various blog posts by Dosho Port on Soto Zen history):
In a recent blog and facebook post entitled “Punning, Toileting, and Purifying: the Awakening of Rújìng” (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...of-rujing.html), the Rev. Dosho Port raises a few old quotes and passages regarding Masters Rujing, Dogen, Ejo and Keizan. Respectfully, I hope that I might challenge his claims a bit, and demonstrate that they contain certain undeserved “strawmen” and "false flags.” As I do so, allow me to emphasize at the outset that nothing I write here is meant in any way as a criticism of “Kōan Introspection Zazen” itself, which I personally celebrate as a powerful and honored path suited to those who find their practice there. Dosho seems to now find his practice there, which is wonderful. My only concern is that Dosho, because he now finds his practice there, seems to be mischaracterizing key aspects of modern Soto teachings and parts of the historical record.
Dosho begins by stating his purpose as being his desire:
I believe that, for several reasons, Dosho here sets up a strawman and false categorization of modern Soto practice. Why? To begin, anyone picking up almost any of Dogen’s writings, and especially Shobogenzo and Eihei Koroku, will find page after page, wall-to-wall riffing by Dogen on the classic kōans, which Dogen let’s flower and explores in his wondrous way. Any Soto teacher who has read Dogen (all of us) knows this. What is more, the same honoring and exploring of the kōans is true for most modern Soto Zen teachers one encounters: The kōans are not merely for “intellectual off gassing,” but to be embodied, jumped into and danced with, embraced, nurtured, truly gotten, “grocked.” They are not meaningless or “illogical” as some present, but are vessels which bring to life teachings that leap through our normal logic and language, thus requiring creative expression. I have never met (that does not mean that there are none, only that they are rare) a Soto teacher who says otherwise or fails to express such fact.
As we Soto teachers know, because it is obvious, Dogen encouraged his monks to grapple with the kōans, chew on them, get the juice, truly pierce what they are on about. So many of his Eihei Koroku talks were poetic, creative and often non-verbal, demonstrative presentations (banging his stick, holding up a fist) meant to express what is hard to express with words. Certainly, in their private conversations about kōans, he and his students would “converse” about kōans in such traditional, Zenny ways, talking and acting out meaning between themselves, following the styles and examples which they had read of what the old masters had done during the Tang.
In fact, this last point may be one reason that the traditional kōans are not quite as emphasized in Soto Zen today as in ages past: Zen has come out of the monastery, out of the Tang Dynasty, into daily life and modern times. In a highly regimented and traditional environment, such as Rujing’s Tiantong monastery or Eiheiji, traditional teaching was conducted by traditional teachers with traditional teaching stories and methods, namely, the classic kōans. However, these days, Soto Zen for modern Zen practitioners out in the world, with ordinary lives, has blossomed in focus toward realizing these very same insights and openings of the traditional kōans, but as the Genjo Kōan (the kōans always manifesting) throughout this world and in our daily lives. In other words, same teachings, same liberation, but in new times through new kōans suited to today’s life (after all, Song dynasty poems and puns as found in the old kōans were suited to what was then the “modern times” of Song people! Now we need new lingo for our current “modern times.”) Soto Zen folks awaken now, through Zazen and dedicated practice amid the duties and rituals of daily life, today just as they always have done.
Furthermore, all Soto teachers know that Dogen was all about awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment, although he disfavored the term “kensho” as setting up a goal. Dosho is correct that Dogen (and Rujing and all Zen teachers I know) celebrate such moments of awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment, some of which can be most profound and self-shattering. On the other hand, what Dosho seems to miss is that awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment can also be more subtle (although no less profound), creeping into the marrow of the bones, and found in big and small ways in countless settings beyond the “classic kōans.” In fact, Dogen does not seem ever, in any of his writings, to have emphasized the aggressive achievement of passing “kensho” experiences in any way resembling masters such as Tahui and Hakuin who now seem to captivate Dosho’s imagination. Simply, if he had valued such experiences, Dogen would have described and celebrated the content of such experiences more, much as did Hakuin who described:
Of course, such experiences have never been called unimportant in Soto Zen, at least, not by any teacher I know. We just tend not to say that they are the only or main thing. What Dosho ignores is that Dogen seems to have had a wider, more immediate, moment by timeless moment, nothing left out in daily life, definition of awakening and realization. Such experiences are wonderful, but Dogen emphasized that all our daily actions, from waking, to eating, to defecating to sitting Zazen, can be the embodiment of a Buddha’s poise and a pivot point for liberation. In doing so, realization can come to slip into the psyche over time, in each instant, in both subtle and profoundly experienced ways, beyond any passing, one off experiences no matter how “smashed sheet of ice, fallen Jade tower” stunning. After all, ice melts slowly too, and towers can simply vanish. In doing so, rather than raising up "kensho" amid all events and experiences of life, Dogen raised up all the events and experiences of life as sacred and opportunities to bring to life awakening.
Dosho seems to want to say that Dogen (and Rujing, Ejo and Keizan ... more about them in a moment) taught what the great Rinzai Master Dahui taught as “Kōan Introspection Zazen,” in which one sits focused on a phrase or “head word” from a Kōan, pouring oneself into the Kōan until a Kensho experience results. Despite the fact that Dogen repeatedly and strongly criticized Dahui in Shobogenzo and elsewhere, we are to believe that Dogen was secretly practicing much the same as Dahui. (In fact, Dosho may be a little right about Keizan, who may have had some leanings that way, but I will leave discussion of him for another time as Dosho has promised to write about him more in the near future. Keizan is often recognized as someone who brought many esoteric, Rinzai and other influences into Soto Zen that were not found in Master Dogen’s original expression of Soto practice.)
Here is the main flaw in Dosho’s argument about Dogen: While Dogen loved and encouraged his students to pour themselves into Kōans (again, nobody who has read Dogen could possibly disagree), there is not any time in any of his writings in which Dogen offered instructions on “how to” sit Zazen which mentions, for example, picking up a “head word” (a hua tou 話頭, a phrase or word from a Kōan) when sitting, thus to bring about some kensho experience. Dogen only describes in the writings we have by him (e.g., in Zazengi) sitting in a Shikantaza manner, “letting go of all relations, setting all affairs at rest, not thinking of good, not thinking of bad,” untangled from “intellect and will, memory and contemplation.” Quite simply: If Dogen had wanted folks to sit Zazen while picking up a head word from a kōan, pouring oneself into a kōan phrase while sitting, he would have told folks to cross the legs and pick up a head word phrase from a kōan during Zazen. Dogen spoke repeatedly, and in great detail, of the mind and body in sitting: all about how to place the legs, how to breathe, how to be untangled in thoughts, how to dress, what to sit on, how to think neither “good or bad,” how to drop goals, but (are we to believe) he simply forget to mention the part about picking up a kōan?
Dogen never discounted the importance of an awakening experience. Nor do I know any Soto teacher who does. However, what Dogen never said anywhere is that such an awakening experience is the ONLY form of awakening, or irreplaceable, or the most important kind of awakening, let alone that awakening is something that is only to be brought about through the Head Word method, or even only by work with the "classic kōans." Dogen spoke of awakening around the timeless clock, in all things, all activities, all moments as themselves the present kōans of life. Furthermore, Dogen spoke of “Just Sitting” Zazen as also the ticket and manifestation of enlightenment realized:
Master Dahui, the primary developer and promoter of Koan Introspection Zazen, was criticized by Dogen quite frequently and strongly, especially in Dogen’s later years when a large contingent of former “Daruma-shu” Rinzai practitioners joined Dogen’s monastery and Dogen wished to turn them toward Dogen’s ways instead. Dahui is noted for having given instructions for sitting Zazen like the following. Is anything even close to the following found in any of Dogen’s instructions for Zazen?
No, nothing like that is found anywhere in Dogen’s writings, for Dogen taught Shikantaza while sitting Zazen. Had he intended otherwise, he would have said otherwise.
Now, let us look at some of the historical points which Dosho pulls up. Dosho writes
Huh? How does his honoring the “buddhas and ancestors” say anything about Dogen’s views on Shikantaza? In fact, au contraire, Dogen stated time and time again that (as here in Zanmai-O-Zanmai), “to be greatly honored within the quarters of the buddhas and ancestors—this is sitting with legs crossed.” As historian Morten Schlütter has pointed out in his masterful “How Zen Became Zen,” Silent Illumination, the source of Dogen’s Shikantaza style, was a much, MUCH older and traditional way of sitting in the Zen lineages (including the early Rinzai lineage before Dahui and later Rinzai innovators) compared to “Kōan Introspection,” which had basically developed only in much later times. So, to be faithful to the Ancestors, one would be faithful to Silent Illumination (p. 172-174):
Turning now to another head scratching historical observation, Dosho asserts, “[Rujing] didn’t reveal his lineage publicly until close to his death. … Presumably, then, the young Dōgen also would not have known the lineage in which he was undergoing training.”
That is just not true and there is simply no evidence for such an assertion. Not only would Rujing’s lineage have been revealed at any recitation of Ancestors or in any document calling for proof of Lineage in the heavily Lineage conscious procedures of someone’s becoming an Abbot of a major monastery, it was written no less in the Dharma Transmission documents which Dogen would have received from Rujing. Although Dogen sometimes professed that there was really no “Zen,” and even the name “Soto” is mistaken, what Dogen seems to have meant at such times was precisely that his Lineage, Rujing’s Lineage, encompassed the essence of Buddhism, and was not merely a branch. In fact, at other times, Dogen was very conscious of his, and Rujing’s, Lineage. In the Colophon to Rujing’s Continuing Record of Sayings, which Dosho cites in another blog post (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...rma-heirs.html), Dogen shows that he is very conscious of his teacher’s lineage:
Again, as Dosho points out, Dogen used kōans in back and forth Mondo (question and answer) between teacher and student. There is no doubt about that fact. So did Rujing. Dosho is correct that Dogen and most other Zen folks engaged in kōan give and takes, and he is correct that there were moments of realization which happened in 'grocking' Kōans while engaging in koany conversing. HOWEVER, that simply does not mean that koan play was the ONLY opportunity for awakening, which could happen anywhere (if we are to believe the old koan stories themselves!) while hearing a sound, seeing a flower, stubbing one’s toe, while sitting Zazen or even while cleaning toilets! There need not be a practice of 'koan introspection' during Zazen (in fact, none of the early teachers described in the koans would have themselves engaged in koan introspection for the simple reason that the koans in which they are characters did not yet exist until they supposedly lived them!), or even a requirement that enlightenment must occur with formal study of the "classic koans." There is just no evidence for that. For example, the above record contains this back and forth between Rujing and Dogen, :
That is not a “classic koan,” but merely a teaching between teacher and student in the way we Zen folks sometimes speak, with reference ("the Dharma of the Dharma King") to a standard, dramatic expression for "what the Buddha taught and knew."
In the Hokyoki, Dogen’s diary of his private talks with Rujing, there is nothing about holding a kōan or phrase in mind during Zazen. In fact, Rujing recommends resting the mind in the palm of the hand while sitting in the Zazen mudra:
No mention there about a kōan phrase as the place he encourages for placing the mind.
Dosho points to Keizan’s short biography of Jujing in the Denkoroku (Transmission of the Light) as evidence for Kōan Introspection. While the biography is clear that Jujing sat assiduously, the biography not only makes no mention of Kōan Instrospection during Zazen, in fact it says directly “all he did was sit Shikantaza” (只管打坐するのみなり). Keizan then goes on to repeat the old injunction to “just sit” (只打坐):
Dosho also quotes a historian about a much later text (“Chan Master Changweng Rujing of Tiantong in Mingzhou”), a quote from Prof. Bodiford that makes it sound as if Keizan stated that Rujing engaged in Kanhua (看話), “looking at the phrase.” However, Keizan never mentions “Kanhua” in Rujing’s biography. Even in the other text, the English rendition by Prof, Bodiford is “contemplating the words,” not “Koan Introspection.”
Dosho concludes his essay with a statement that I believe gets the situation half right:
While it is true that Dogen never rejected kōans, nor certainly Zen as a special transmission, and that Dogen was no fan of “original awakening” as any excuse for libertine behavior, it is just incorrect for Dosho to claim that Dogen did not profess a special meditation technique in which sitting itself is awakening. Dogen said so (for example, in Eihei Koroku, Hogo 11),
In another blog post (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...e-emperor.html), Dosho cites “Keizan’s “Answers to Ten Questions from the Emperor.” Unfortunately, Dosho relegated to a footnote the caution by Soto historian, Prof. Bodiford (in his Sōtō Zen in Medieval Japan, p. 101), that the entire “Ten Questions” is likely a forgery made centuries after the time of Keizan:
Dosho also turns his attention to Dogen’s right hand man and successor, Ejo, in another recent blog posting, “The Luminous Koun Ejō Zenji: Background, Awakening, Legacy” (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...ng-legacy.html). Here again, Dosho’s presentation seems to blur the fact that dancing with “classic” Kōans (not denied by anyone), and attaining “awakening” (cherished by all us Zen folks) is simply not the same as an endorsement of “Kōan Introspection Zazen” in the way of Tahui, focused on certain intense Kensho experiences. In his essay, Dosho states his reason for writing as to save readers from being:
It is, once again, the same Soto strawman (granted, some modern Zen teachers are overly psychologizing Zen perhaps, I must agree with that point.)
One point to notice is that Dosho relates stories of profound insight into kōans as “Kensho” experiences. But, looking closely, what was the actual nature of the awakenings which the stories describe? There is nothing described in any of these stories resembling some intense, "walls drop away, ice cracks and jade towers fall" Kensho in the following story, for example, which merely relates that there did manifest some flavor of extremely profound insight into the kōan and a grateful bow …
In fact, the stories that Dosho sites, in both the Transmission of the Light and the Rujing Record, as examples of great “Kensho” openings seem generally much more subtle, profound yet ordinary, life shifting understandings that were yet each free of obvious fireworks, one of so many “ah hah” moments in our daily walk along Dogen’s path of constant “practice-realization.” Absent from the stories are descriptions of mind blowing “ice cracking, walls collapsing” Kensho experiences, and instead, story after story simply relates moments of awakening followed by a gentle recognition and bow, such as the above.
If anything, Ejo’s own Shōbōgenzō Kōmyō, which Dosho mentions, contains amazing descriptions of Shikantaza, Just Sitting:
Finally, in another recent essay ("How to Break Through Mu,” https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...hrough-mu.html), Dosho cites a passage from Rujing that surely does in fact encourage someone to take up a Kōan and hold it in mind. It is true, Dosho is correct:
The original is as follows:
However, there are a couple of things to note about this passage, beginning with the fact that the quote is not found as a central teaching of Rujing’s Record, not part of a long exposition, but only as a very short quote in a section advising on various miscellaneous matters, including what to do during a particularly troubling time in Zazen. The key phrase is at the start, “心念紛飛、如何借レ手。趙州狗子仏性無” which I might render as “When the mind is divided and flying away, what method can we borrow (借手) to deal with it?” In other words, this is advice for when Zazen is particularly troubled.
Master Keizan seems to have given much the same advice in his Zazen Yojinki which, although the entire work is clearly an instruction on Shikantaza, at the end has a section with various kinds of advice from Keizan for particularly troubling days:
In other words, these are teachings for especially difficult times, thus standing in contrast with our way of sitting when the mind is not so “divided and flying away.” If Rujing had meant the quote as a central teaching, it would likely have been more frequent and centrally located in his record. (In fact, I happen to have given similar advice to a woman recently who is particularly troubled by her husband’s illness, thus finding it difficult to sit Shikantaza right now. Although I am not usually a proponent of Zazen employing a mantra, I told her to find a mantra ... such as “peace” or “allow” ... for those very hard times when she needs an anchor, and to pour herself into that. Afterwards, when she settles a bit, she can return to “Just Sitting” for a few minutes.)
To conclude, none of the above is meant in any way as a criticism of “Kōan Introspection Zazen,” which I personally honor and respect, a powerful and honored path suited to those who find their own path there. Like so many other good Zen folks, Dosho seems now to find his path there (although his teacher, Katagiri Roshi seemingly did not, more about that another time.) My objections above are merely a historical comment: While Dogen and Rujing (and Ejo) celebrated, danced with and found moments of great opening and insight through the traditional kōans (nobody questions that), that is not the same as asserting that (1) Dogen and Rujing (or Ejo) were actually practitioners of Kōan Introspection Zazen, or (2) that they felt that a big boomin’ Kensho experience is the most important, indispensable or only form of realization, awakening, enlightenment and liberation that matters, or even very important or necessary.
In Master Dogen’s view of ongoing, moment by moment, “practice enlightenment” in all our daily activities, what is truly vital are the day to day insights, embodiments and realizations that get in the bones. Realization, awakening, liberation walks with our legs through 10,000 doors.
Gassho, Jundo
STLah
Sorry to run long
In a recent blog and facebook post entitled “Punning, Toileting, and Purifying: the Awakening of Rújìng” (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...of-rujing.html), the Rev. Dosho Port raises a few old quotes and passages regarding Masters Rujing, Dogen, Ejo and Keizan. Respectfully, I hope that I might challenge his claims a bit, and demonstrate that they contain certain undeserved “strawmen” and "false flags.” As I do so, allow me to emphasize at the outset that nothing I write here is meant in any way as a criticism of “Kōan Introspection Zazen” itself, which I personally celebrate as a powerful and honored path suited to those who find their practice there. Dosho seems to now find his practice there, which is wonderful. My only concern is that Dosho, because he now finds his practice there, seems to be mischaracterizing key aspects of modern Soto teachings and parts of the historical record.
Dosho begins by stating his purpose as being his desire:
to explode the myth about Dōgen, current in much of Sōtō Zen, that Dōgen and his crew were “just sitters” who weren’t into awakening and didn’t use kōans for anything but intellectual off gassing. The truth is au contraire. ... Denying the power of kōan and diminishing the significance of kenshō discourages people from doing the work necessary to awaken into one of the most wonderful and meaningful experiences of this human life. It also diminishes the power and possibility for practicing awakening, liberating living beings.
I believe that, for several reasons, Dosho here sets up a strawman and false categorization of modern Soto practice. Why? To begin, anyone picking up almost any of Dogen’s writings, and especially Shobogenzo and Eihei Koroku, will find page after page, wall-to-wall riffing by Dogen on the classic kōans, which Dogen let’s flower and explores in his wondrous way. Any Soto teacher who has read Dogen (all of us) knows this. What is more, the same honoring and exploring of the kōans is true for most modern Soto Zen teachers one encounters: The kōans are not merely for “intellectual off gassing,” but to be embodied, jumped into and danced with, embraced, nurtured, truly gotten, “grocked.” They are not meaningless or “illogical” as some present, but are vessels which bring to life teachings that leap through our normal logic and language, thus requiring creative expression. I have never met (that does not mean that there are none, only that they are rare) a Soto teacher who says otherwise or fails to express such fact.
As we Soto teachers know, because it is obvious, Dogen encouraged his monks to grapple with the kōans, chew on them, get the juice, truly pierce what they are on about. So many of his Eihei Koroku talks were poetic, creative and often non-verbal, demonstrative presentations (banging his stick, holding up a fist) meant to express what is hard to express with words. Certainly, in their private conversations about kōans, he and his students would “converse” about kōans in such traditional, Zenny ways, talking and acting out meaning between themselves, following the styles and examples which they had read of what the old masters had done during the Tang.
In fact, this last point may be one reason that the traditional kōans are not quite as emphasized in Soto Zen today as in ages past: Zen has come out of the monastery, out of the Tang Dynasty, into daily life and modern times. In a highly regimented and traditional environment, such as Rujing’s Tiantong monastery or Eiheiji, traditional teaching was conducted by traditional teachers with traditional teaching stories and methods, namely, the classic kōans. However, these days, Soto Zen for modern Zen practitioners out in the world, with ordinary lives, has blossomed in focus toward realizing these very same insights and openings of the traditional kōans, but as the Genjo Kōan (the kōans always manifesting) throughout this world and in our daily lives. In other words, same teachings, same liberation, but in new times through new kōans suited to today’s life (after all, Song dynasty poems and puns as found in the old kōans were suited to what was then the “modern times” of Song people! Now we need new lingo for our current “modern times.”) Soto Zen folks awaken now, through Zazen and dedicated practice amid the duties and rituals of daily life, today just as they always have done.
Furthermore, all Soto teachers know that Dogen was all about awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment, although he disfavored the term “kensho” as setting up a goal. Dosho is correct that Dogen (and Rujing and all Zen teachers I know) celebrate such moments of awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment, some of which can be most profound and self-shattering. On the other hand, what Dosho seems to miss is that awakening, realization, liberation, enlightenment can also be more subtle (although no less profound), creeping into the marrow of the bones, and found in big and small ways in countless settings beyond the “classic kōans.” In fact, Dogen does not seem ever, in any of his writings, to have emphasized the aggressive achievement of passing “kensho” experiences in any way resembling masters such as Tahui and Hakuin who now seem to captivate Dosho’s imagination. Simply, if he had valued such experiences, Dogen would have described and celebrated the content of such experiences more, much as did Hakuin who described:
Night and day I did not sleep; I forgot both to eat and rest. Suddenly a great doubt manifested itself before me. It was as though I were frozen solid in the midst of an ice sheet extending tens of thousands of miles. A purity filled my breast and I could neither go forward nor retreat. To all intents and purposes I was out of my mind and the Mu alone remained. Although I sat in the Lecture Hall and listened to the Master's lecture, it was as though I were hearing a discussion from the distance outside the hall. At times it felt as though I were floating through the air. This state lasted for several days. Then I chanced to hear the sound of the temple bell and I was suddenly transformed. It was as if a sheet of ice had been smashed or a jade tower had fallen with a crash. Suddenly I returned to my senses. ... All my former doubts vanished as though ice had melted away. In a loud voice I called: "Wonderful, wonderful. (from Yampolsky, The Zen Master Hakuin: Selected Writings)
Of course, such experiences have never been called unimportant in Soto Zen, at least, not by any teacher I know. We just tend not to say that they are the only or main thing. What Dosho ignores is that Dogen seems to have had a wider, more immediate, moment by timeless moment, nothing left out in daily life, definition of awakening and realization. Such experiences are wonderful, but Dogen emphasized that all our daily actions, from waking, to eating, to defecating to sitting Zazen, can be the embodiment of a Buddha’s poise and a pivot point for liberation. In doing so, realization can come to slip into the psyche over time, in each instant, in both subtle and profoundly experienced ways, beyond any passing, one off experiences no matter how “smashed sheet of ice, fallen Jade tower” stunning. After all, ice melts slowly too, and towers can simply vanish. In doing so, rather than raising up "kensho" amid all events and experiences of life, Dogen raised up all the events and experiences of life as sacred and opportunities to bring to life awakening.
Dosho seems to want to say that Dogen (and Rujing, Ejo and Keizan ... more about them in a moment) taught what the great Rinzai Master Dahui taught as “Kōan Introspection Zazen,” in which one sits focused on a phrase or “head word” from a Kōan, pouring oneself into the Kōan until a Kensho experience results. Despite the fact that Dogen repeatedly and strongly criticized Dahui in Shobogenzo and elsewhere, we are to believe that Dogen was secretly practicing much the same as Dahui. (In fact, Dosho may be a little right about Keizan, who may have had some leanings that way, but I will leave discussion of him for another time as Dosho has promised to write about him more in the near future. Keizan is often recognized as someone who brought many esoteric, Rinzai and other influences into Soto Zen that were not found in Master Dogen’s original expression of Soto practice.)
Here is the main flaw in Dosho’s argument about Dogen: While Dogen loved and encouraged his students to pour themselves into Kōans (again, nobody who has read Dogen could possibly disagree), there is not any time in any of his writings in which Dogen offered instructions on “how to” sit Zazen which mentions, for example, picking up a “head word” (a hua tou 話頭, a phrase or word from a Kōan) when sitting, thus to bring about some kensho experience. Dogen only describes in the writings we have by him (e.g., in Zazengi) sitting in a Shikantaza manner, “letting go of all relations, setting all affairs at rest, not thinking of good, not thinking of bad,” untangled from “intellect and will, memory and contemplation.” Quite simply: If Dogen had wanted folks to sit Zazen while picking up a head word from a kōan, pouring oneself into a kōan phrase while sitting, he would have told folks to cross the legs and pick up a head word phrase from a kōan during Zazen. Dogen spoke repeatedly, and in great detail, of the mind and body in sitting: all about how to place the legs, how to breathe, how to be untangled in thoughts, how to dress, what to sit on, how to think neither “good or bad,” how to drop goals, but (are we to believe) he simply forget to mention the part about picking up a kōan?
Dogen never discounted the importance of an awakening experience. Nor do I know any Soto teacher who does. However, what Dogen never said anywhere is that such an awakening experience is the ONLY form of awakening, or irreplaceable, or the most important kind of awakening, let alone that awakening is something that is only to be brought about through the Head Word method, or even only by work with the "classic kōans." Dogen spoke of awakening around the timeless clock, in all things, all activities, all moments as themselves the present kōans of life. Furthermore, Dogen spoke of “Just Sitting” Zazen as also the ticket and manifestation of enlightenment realized:
The zazen I speak of is not learning meditation. It is simply the dharma-gate of repose and bliss, the practice-realization of totally culminated enlightenment. It is the manifestation of ultimate reality. Traps and snares can never reach it
Master Dahui, the primary developer and promoter of Koan Introspection Zazen, was criticized by Dogen quite frequently and strongly, especially in Dogen’s later years when a large contingent of former “Daruma-shu” Rinzai practitioners joined Dogen’s monastery and Dogen wished to turn them toward Dogen’s ways instead. Dahui is noted for having given instructions for sitting Zazen like the following. Is anything even close to the following found in any of Dogen’s instructions for Zazen?
“Here just observe the huatou. A monk asked Zhaozhou, ‘Does a dog have buddha-nature or does it lack it?’ Zhaozhou said, ‘It lacks it (wu).’ When you observe it, do not use extensive evaluation, do not try to explicate it, do not seek for understanding, do not take it up when you open your mouth, do not make meaning when you raise it, do not fall into vacuity, do not hold onto your mind waiting for enlightenment, do not catch a hold of it when your teacher speaks, and do not lodge in a shell of no concerns. But keep hold of it at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down. ‘Does a dog have buddha-nature or not?’ Hold onto this ‘lack’ until it gets ripe, where verbal discussion and mental evaluation cannot reach. The square inch of your mind will be in a muddle. When it is as if you have clamped your teeth around a tasteless piece of iron and your will does not retreat-when it is like this, then that is good news!
No, nothing like that is found anywhere in Dogen’s writings, for Dogen taught Shikantaza while sitting Zazen. Had he intended otherwise, he would have said otherwise.
Now, let us look at some of the historical points which Dosho pulls up. Dosho writes
Dōgen saw himself as teaching within the context of buddhas and ancestors, not as a rogue monk making shit up. How do we know this? For one thing, in his Shobogenzo and Eihei koroku Dōgen uses the phrase “buddhas and ancestors” about 150 times, often beginning Shobogenzo fascicles with some reference to buddhas and ancestors, setting what he’s about to say in the context of, yes, buddhas and ancestors. Oh, by the way, Dōgen uses shikantaza nine times in Shobogenzo and Eiheikoroku, but not as a technique – as a keyword. So at least by word count, buddhas and ancestors were 16.66 times more important to Dōgen than shikantaza.
Huh? How does his honoring the “buddhas and ancestors” say anything about Dogen’s views on Shikantaza? In fact, au contraire, Dogen stated time and time again that (as here in Zanmai-O-Zanmai), “to be greatly honored within the quarters of the buddhas and ancestors—this is sitting with legs crossed.” As historian Morten Schlütter has pointed out in his masterful “How Zen Became Zen,” Silent Illumination, the source of Dogen’s Shikantaza style, was a much, MUCH older and traditional way of sitting in the Zen lineages (including the early Rinzai lineage before Dahui and later Rinzai innovators) compared to “Kōan Introspection,” which had basically developed only in much later times. So, to be faithful to the Ancestors, one would be faithful to Silent Illumination (p. 172-174):
The new Caodong [Soto] tradition, then, seems to have simply adopted the type of meditation already common in Chan and elevated its importance. What made the silent illumination teachings of the Caodong tradition distinctive, therefore, was not the meditation technique or even its doctrinal underpinnings but its sustained, exhuberant celebration of inherent enlightenment and its persistent stress on stillness and de-emphasis on enlightenment as a breakthrough experience. In this way, the Caodong tradition did make meditation an end in itself: as long as meditation was approached correctly, nothing else was really needed. Thus, the silent illumination practice of the new Caodong tradition really did differentiate it from the rest of Chan ... . Even though the new Caodong tradition's teaching style was seen as distinctive, it did not entail, as I have argued above, a radical departure from earlier meditation techniques ...
The kanhua Chan advocated by Dahui was, on the other hand, truly an innovation and represented a new style of Chan. As I argued in Chapter 5, Dahui developed what was essentially a new type of meditation out of existing gongan practices. In spite of Dahui's accusations that the Caodong masters and other Chan teachers with whom he disagreed were teaching a heterodox doctrine, it was Dahui himself who was unorthodox in his unabashed de-emphasis of inherent enlightenment and his new mediation technique strongly focused on working toward a moment of breakthrough enlightenment.
The kanhua Chan advocated by Dahui was, on the other hand, truly an innovation and represented a new style of Chan. As I argued in Chapter 5, Dahui developed what was essentially a new type of meditation out of existing gongan practices. In spite of Dahui's accusations that the Caodong masters and other Chan teachers with whom he disagreed were teaching a heterodox doctrine, it was Dahui himself who was unorthodox in his unabashed de-emphasis of inherent enlightenment and his new mediation technique strongly focused on working toward a moment of breakthrough enlightenment.
Turning now to another head scratching historical observation, Dosho asserts, “[Rujing] didn’t reveal his lineage publicly until close to his death. … Presumably, then, the young Dōgen also would not have known the lineage in which he was undergoing training.”
That is just not true and there is simply no evidence for such an assertion. Not only would Rujing’s lineage have been revealed at any recitation of Ancestors or in any document calling for proof of Lineage in the heavily Lineage conscious procedures of someone’s becoming an Abbot of a major monastery, it was written no less in the Dharma Transmission documents which Dogen would have received from Rujing. Although Dogen sometimes professed that there was really no “Zen,” and even the name “Soto” is mistaken, what Dogen seems to have meant at such times was precisely that his Lineage, Rujing’s Lineage, encompassed the essence of Buddhism, and was not merely a branch. In fact, at other times, Dogen was very conscious of his, and Rujing’s, Lineage. In the Colophon to Rujing’s Continuing Record of Sayings, which Dosho cites in another blog post (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...rma-heirs.html), Dogen shows that he is very conscious of his teacher’s lineage:
With clear intimate sayings, like fragrant flowing water, a white heron standing in the snow, the bright moon in the courtyard, green mountains upright and lofty, reed flowers outside, this is the Caodong (Sōtō) School's essence. Rujing handed down (Caodong Teacher) Taiyang's original school, as blue hawks fly to the nine heavens and an old crane perches on a parasol tree, while people push forward to look for the mysterious style. Relying on questions-and-answers (mondō) and Dharma talks (teishō), he established one generation of our school’s style, receiving (Caodong Teacher) Furong Daokai’s ancient ancestral patched Dharma robe while intimately abiding inside the room.
Again, as Dosho points out, Dogen used kōans in back and forth Mondo (question and answer) between teacher and student. There is no doubt about that fact. So did Rujing. Dosho is correct that Dogen and most other Zen folks engaged in kōan give and takes, and he is correct that there were moments of realization which happened in 'grocking' Kōans while engaging in koany conversing. HOWEVER, that simply does not mean that koan play was the ONLY opportunity for awakening, which could happen anywhere (if we are to believe the old koan stories themselves!) while hearing a sound, seeing a flower, stubbing one’s toe, while sitting Zazen or even while cleaning toilets! There need not be a practice of 'koan introspection' during Zazen (in fact, none of the early teachers described in the koans would have themselves engaged in koan introspection for the simple reason that the koans in which they are characters did not yet exist until they supposedly lived them!), or even a requirement that enlightenment must occur with formal study of the "classic koans." There is just no evidence for that. For example, the above record contains this back and forth between Rujing and Dogen, :
Rujing ascended the [teaching] hall on the first day of the year. I (Dōgen) asked, “What is the precious pearl in the mind?” Rujing said, “What do you have outside the mind to dislike?” I bowed. Rujing said, “Respect this, admire this.” I picked up my sitting cloth and stood. Rujing said, “Clearly observe the Dharma of the Dharma King; the Dharma of the Dharma King is thus.” I then returned to the assembly.
That is not a “classic koan,” but merely a teaching between teacher and student in the way we Zen folks sometimes speak, with reference ("the Dharma of the Dharma King") to a standard, dramatic expression for "what the Buddha taught and knew."
In the Hokyoki, Dogen’s diary of his private talks with Rujing, there is nothing about holding a kōan or phrase in mind during Zazen. In fact, Rujing recommends resting the mind in the palm of the hand while sitting in the Zazen mudra:
RUJING SAID, “In zazen it is possible to develop samādhi by placing the mind in various locations. However, I would say, during zazen set your mind on the palm of your left hand. This is the way correctly transmitted by buddha ancestors.” (堂頭和尚慈誨云、 M(大凡) 坐禪時、安心諸處、皆有定處。又 坐禪時、安心於左掌上、乃佛祖正傳之法也。)
No mention there about a kōan phrase as the place he encourages for placing the mind.
Dosho points to Keizan’s short biography of Jujing in the Denkoroku (Transmission of the Light) as evidence for Kōan Introspection. While the biography is clear that Jujing sat assiduously, the biography not only makes no mention of Kōan Instrospection during Zazen, in fact it says directly “all he did was sit Shikantaza” (只管打坐するのみなり). Keizan then goes on to repeat the old injunction to “just sit” (只打坐):
尋常只人をして打坐を勸む。常に云ふ、燒香禮拜念佛修懺看經を用ゐず、 祇管に打坐せよと示して、只打坐せしめしのみなり。Routinely, [Rujing] simply encouraged people to sit. He always said: “There is no need for burning incense, making prostrations, recollecting buddhas, practicing repentances, or reading sūtras. Just sit.” With this proclamation, he just had them sit; that is all.
Dosho also quotes a historian about a much later text (“Chan Master Changweng Rujing of Tiantong in Mingzhou”), a quote from Prof. Bodiford that makes it sound as if Keizan stated that Rujing engaged in Kanhua (看話), “looking at the phrase.” However, Keizan never mentions “Kanhua” in Rujing’s biography. Even in the other text, the English rendition by Prof, Bodiford is “contemplating the words,” not “Koan Introspection.”
Dosho concludes his essay with a statement that I believe gets the situation half right:
Finally, the story that Dōgen inherited a brand of Zen that used a special meditation technique, shikantaza, that sitting itself was awakening, that his lineage rejected kōan work, that this special transmission denied the importance of personal awakening, and instead stressed original awakening is one big myth.
While it is true that Dogen never rejected kōans, nor certainly Zen as a special transmission, and that Dogen was no fan of “original awakening” as any excuse for libertine behavior, it is just incorrect for Dosho to claim that Dogen did not profess a special meditation technique in which sitting itself is awakening. Dogen said so (for example, in Eihei Koroku, Hogo 11),
This zazen was transmitted from Buddha to Buddha, directly pointed out by ancestors, and only transmitted by legitimate successors. Even when others hear of its name, it is not the same as the zazen of buddha ancestors. This is because the principle of zazen in other schools is to wait for enlightenment.
In another blog post (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...e-emperor.html), Dosho cites “Keizan’s “Answers to Ten Questions from the Emperor.” Unfortunately, Dosho relegated to a footnote the caution by Soto historian, Prof. Bodiford (in his Sōtō Zen in Medieval Japan, p. 101), that the entire “Ten Questions” is likely a forgery made centuries after the time of Keizan:
Sōjiji possesses a list of ten questions that Godaigo supposedly submitted to Keizan at Sōjiji in 1322. Sōjiji tradition claims that in return for Keizan’s satisfactory responses Godaigo made Sōjiji the head temple of the Sōtō school later that same year. In opposition to Sōjiji, however, Yōkōji possesses its own version of Godaigo’s ten questions that (in their version) were sent to Keizan at Yōkōji in 1320—two years earlier than claimed by Sōjiji. Moreover, Yōkōji tradition claims that Godaigo responded to Keizan’s answers by making Yōkōji the head temple of the Sōtō school in 1321. Few other documents are as blatantly false as these ...
Dosho also turns his attention to Dogen’s right hand man and successor, Ejo, in another recent blog posting, “The Luminous Koun Ejō Zenji: Background, Awakening, Legacy” (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...ng-legacy.html). Here again, Dosho’s presentation seems to blur the fact that dancing with “classic” Kōans (not denied by anyone), and attaining “awakening” (cherished by all us Zen folks) is simply not the same as an endorsement of “Kōan Introspection Zazen” in the way of Tahui, focused on certain intense Kensho experiences. In his essay, Dosho states his reason for writing as to save readers from being:
... fooled by contemporary tendencies to dilute the milk of the buddhadharma with intoxicants, such as that our Zen Way is an easy-going path of faith, an intellectual entanglement, a psychological reframe, a dualistic mindfulness, or by fetishizing just sitting.
It is, once again, the same Soto strawman (granted, some modern Zen teachers are overly psychologizing Zen perhaps, I must agree with that point.)
One point to notice is that Dosho relates stories of profound insight into kōans as “Kensho” experiences. But, looking closely, what was the actual nature of the awakenings which the stories describe? There is nothing described in any of these stories resembling some intense, "walls drop away, ice cracks and jade towers fall" Kensho in the following story, for example, which merely relates that there did manifest some flavor of extremely profound insight into the kōan and a grateful bow …
“That night, bowing, [Ejō] asked, ‘Not asking about one hair, what is multiple holes?’
“Gen smiled and said, ‘Pierced!’
“The master bowed.”
“Gen smiled and said, ‘Pierced!’
“The master bowed.”
In fact, the stories that Dosho sites, in both the Transmission of the Light and the Rujing Record, as examples of great “Kensho” openings seem generally much more subtle, profound yet ordinary, life shifting understandings that were yet each free of obvious fireworks, one of so many “ah hah” moments in our daily walk along Dogen’s path of constant “practice-realization.” Absent from the stories are descriptions of mind blowing “ice cracking, walls collapsing” Kensho experiences, and instead, story after story simply relates moments of awakening followed by a gentle recognition and bow, such as the above.
If anything, Ejo’s own Shōbōgenzō Kōmyō, which Dosho mentions, contains amazing descriptions of Shikantaza, Just Sitting:
From the very beginning, seeking concentration states and viewing practice and realization as two different things is different from the realised-practice of the harmonies and vast activity of the Transmission of luminosity. ... Just aligning with the Luminosity of Awareness, dwelling at ease in it, is the supreme samadhi of shikantaza, just sitting.
…
I feel a great respect from the depths of my compassion for you who continue the practice of zazen in the state of mind that I will now describe: without grasping anything or having any goal, without being influenced by your personal understanding [or intellectual knowledge], without letting the experience that you have acquired in the dojo make you arrogant. Just with all the energy of your body and mind, throw them totally into Komyozo [the Great Treasury of Light] without looking back. Do not seek satori enlightenment. Do not try to hide or be rid of illusion. Do not hate the thoughts that arise, do not love them either and above all, do not nourish them. In every way, you must practice the great sitting, here and now
…
I feel a great respect from the depths of my compassion for you who continue the practice of zazen in the state of mind that I will now describe: without grasping anything or having any goal, without being influenced by your personal understanding [or intellectual knowledge], without letting the experience that you have acquired in the dojo make you arrogant. Just with all the energy of your body and mind, throw them totally into Komyozo [the Great Treasury of Light] without looking back. Do not seek satori enlightenment. Do not try to hide or be rid of illusion. Do not hate the thoughts that arise, do not love them either and above all, do not nourish them. In every way, you must practice the great sitting, here and now
Finally, in another recent essay ("How to Break Through Mu,” https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfo...hrough-mu.html), Dosho cites a passage from Rujing that surely does in fact encourage someone to take up a Kōan and hold it in mind. It is true, Dosho is correct:
"When the divided mind flies away, how will you deal with it? Zhàozhōu little dog buddhanature mu. This single word mu – an iron broom. Where you sweep, confusion swirls around, swirling around confusion where you sweep. More turning, sweeping, turning. In the place you cannot sweep, do your utmost to sweep. Day and night, backbone straight, continuously without stopping. Bold and powerful, do not let up. Suddenly, sweeping breaks open the great empty sky. Ten thousand distinctions, a thousand differences exhausted – completely opening."
The original is as follows:
上堂。心念紛飛、如何借レ手。趙州狗子仏性無。只箇無字鉄掃帚、掃処紛飛多、紛飛多処掃。転掃転多、掃不レ 得処侯レ命掃。 昼夜竪二起脊梁一、勇猛切莫二放倒一。忽然掃二破太虚空一、 万別千差尽豁通。
However, there are a couple of things to note about this passage, beginning with the fact that the quote is not found as a central teaching of Rujing’s Record, not part of a long exposition, but only as a very short quote in a section advising on various miscellaneous matters, including what to do during a particularly troubling time in Zazen. The key phrase is at the start, “心念紛飛、如何借レ手。趙州狗子仏性無” which I might render as “When the mind is divided and flying away, what method can we borrow (借手) to deal with it?” In other words, this is advice for when Zazen is particularly troubled.
Master Keizan seems to have given much the same advice in his Zazen Yojinki which, although the entire work is clearly an instruction on Shikantaza, at the end has a section with various kinds of advice from Keizan for particularly troubling days:
坐中若し昏睡来たらば、常に応に身を揺かし或いは目を張り、又、心を頂上髪際眉間に安ずべし。猶、未だ醒め ざる時は、手を引いて応に目を拭い或いは身を摩すべし。猶、未だ醒めざる時は、座を起って経行すべし。正に 順行を要す。順行して若し一百許歩に及べば、昏睡必ず醒めん。而して経行の法は、一息恒に半歩なり。行くも 亦、行かざるが如く、寂静にして動かず。是の如く経行すれば猶、未だ醒めざる時、或いは目を濯い頂を冷やし 、或いは菩薩戒の序を誦し。種種に方便して、睡眠せしむること勿れ。...
心若し散乱する時は、心を鼻端丹田に安じ、出入の息を数えよ（しばしば、息を出入せよ）。猶、未だ休まざる 時は、須く一則の公案を提撕挙覚すべし。謂く、是れ何物か恁麼に来る、狗子無仏性、雲門の須弥山、趙州の栢 樹子等の没滋味の談、是、其の所応なり。猶、未だ休せざる時、一息截断、両眼永閉の端的に向かって、打坐工 夫し、或いは胞胎未生、不起一念已前に向かって、行履工夫せば、二空勿ち生じ、散心必ず歇まん 。
If dullness or sleepiness overcome your sitting, move the body and open the eyes wider, or place attention above the hairline or between your eyebrows. If you are still not fresh, rub the eyes or the body. If that still doesn’t wake you, stand up and walk, always clockwise. Once you’ve gone about a hundred steps you probably won’t be sleepy any longer. The way to walk is to take a half step with each breath. Walk without walking, silent and unmoving.
If you still don’t feel fresh after doing kinhin, wash your eyes and forehead with cold water. Or chant the “Three Pure Precepts of the Bodhisattvas”. Do something; don’t just fall asleep. …
If the mind wanders, place attention at the tip of the nose and tanden and count the inhalations and exhalations. If that doesn’t stop the scattering, bring up a phrase and keep it in awareness – for example: “What is it that comes thus?” or “When no thought arises, where is affliction? – Mount Sumeru!” or “What is the meaning of Bodhidharma’s coming from the West? – The cypress in the garden.” Sayings like this that you can’t draw any flavour out of are suitable.
If scattering continues, sit and look to that point where the breath ends and the eyes close forever and where the child is not yet conceived, where not a single concept can be produced. When a sense of the two-fold emptiness of self and things appears, scattering will surely rest.
心若し散乱する時は、心を鼻端丹田に安じ、出入の息を数えよ（しばしば、息を出入せよ）。猶、未だ休まざる 時は、須く一則の公案を提撕挙覚すべし。謂く、是れ何物か恁麼に来る、狗子無仏性、雲門の須弥山、趙州の栢 樹子等の没滋味の談、是、其の所応なり。猶、未だ休せざる時、一息截断、両眼永閉の端的に向かって、打坐工 夫し、或いは胞胎未生、不起一念已前に向かって、行履工夫せば、二空勿ち生じ、散心必ず歇まん 。
If dullness or sleepiness overcome your sitting, move the body and open the eyes wider, or place attention above the hairline or between your eyebrows. If you are still not fresh, rub the eyes or the body. If that still doesn’t wake you, stand up and walk, always clockwise. Once you’ve gone about a hundred steps you probably won’t be sleepy any longer. The way to walk is to take a half step with each breath. Walk without walking, silent and unmoving.
If you still don’t feel fresh after doing kinhin, wash your eyes and forehead with cold water. Or chant the “Three Pure Precepts of the Bodhisattvas”. Do something; don’t just fall asleep. …
If the mind wanders, place attention at the tip of the nose and tanden and count the inhalations and exhalations. If that doesn’t stop the scattering, bring up a phrase and keep it in awareness – for example: “What is it that comes thus?” or “When no thought arises, where is affliction? – Mount Sumeru!” or “What is the meaning of Bodhidharma’s coming from the West? – The cypress in the garden.” Sayings like this that you can’t draw any flavour out of are suitable.
If scattering continues, sit and look to that point where the breath ends and the eyes close forever and where the child is not yet conceived, where not a single concept can be produced. When a sense of the two-fold emptiness of self and things appears, scattering will surely rest.
In other words, these are teachings for especially difficult times, thus standing in contrast with our way of sitting when the mind is not so “divided and flying away.” If Rujing had meant the quote as a central teaching, it would likely have been more frequent and centrally located in his record. (In fact, I happen to have given similar advice to a woman recently who is particularly troubled by her husband’s illness, thus finding it difficult to sit Shikantaza right now. Although I am not usually a proponent of Zazen employing a mantra, I told her to find a mantra ... such as “peace” or “allow” ... for those very hard times when she needs an anchor, and to pour herself into that. Afterwards, when she settles a bit, she can return to “Just Sitting” for a few minutes.)
To conclude, none of the above is meant in any way as a criticism of “Kōan Introspection Zazen,” which I personally honor and respect, a powerful and honored path suited to those who find their own path there. Like so many other good Zen folks, Dosho seems now to find his path there (although his teacher, Katagiri Roshi seemingly did not, more about that another time.) My objections above are merely a historical comment: While Dogen and Rujing (and Ejo) celebrated, danced with and found moments of great opening and insight through the traditional kōans (nobody questions that), that is not the same as asserting that (1) Dogen and Rujing (or Ejo) were actually practitioners of Kōan Introspection Zazen, or (2) that they felt that a big boomin’ Kensho experience is the most important, indispensable or only form of realization, awakening, enlightenment and liberation that matters, or even very important or necessary.
In Master Dogen’s view of ongoing, moment by moment, “practice enlightenment” in all our daily activities, what is truly vital are the day to day insights, embodiments and realizations that get in the bones. Realization, awakening, liberation walks with our legs through 10,000 doors.
Gassho, Jundo
STLah
Sorry to run long
It was very interesting to read 
Comment