For History Wonks Only: Shikantaza and the Sixth Ancestor

[Jundo]

Dear All,

This post is only for folks interested in obscure Zen history.

I have long insisted that the roots of Shikantaza, Just Sitting, "letting thoughts go without getting entangled," are echoed way back, even in the Platform Sutra said to be the teachings of the 6th Zen Ancestor in China, Huineng, in the 7th century AD.

It is nice when an historian finds much the same. In his article (LINK), "Reification and Deconstruction of Buddha Nature in Chinese Chan," Prof. Youru Wang comments on the difference between letting thought go, and the emphasis in other corners of Buddhism on being rid of all thought (as advocated by others, such as Shenxiu). Wang says ...

... Huineng did not simply fall back on the opposite of Shenxiu's abandonment of all thoughts, such as an emphasis on the importance of thoughts. Rather, Huineng proposed something that is neither Shenxiu's nor its opposite. Huineng's endeavor is a typical deconstructive one. He interpreted wunian ["no" or "mu" thought] as follows:
.

No-thought means not to be carried away by thought in the process of thought ....
Successive thoughts do not stop; prior thoughts, present thoughts, and future
thoughts follow one after the other without cessation . . . . If one instant of
thought clings, then successive thoughts cling; this is known as being fettered. If
in all things successive thoughts do not cling, then you are unfettered. Therefore,
we consider this non-abiding essential. (Yampolsky: 138; minor change in translation
made)

But do not stop thinking about everything and eliminate all thoughts. As soon as
thought stops, one dies and is reborn elsewhere. (Chan: 51)

What is no-thought? The [dharma] of no-thought means: even though you see all
things, you do not attach to them . . . . Even though you are in the midst of six
dusts, you do not stand apart from them, yet are not stained by them, and are free
to come and go. (Yampolsky: 153)

If you do not think of anything in order to stop all thoughts, that is bondage by
[dharmas]. That is called a one-sided view. (Chan: 83; minor change in translation made)

Huineng did several things to dismantle Shenxiu's misleading ideas. First, Huineng appealed to the causal chain of thoughts and things. All thoughts and things are interrelated and one causes another. We all live with this flow of thoughts and things, and no one can stop it. Huineng regarded this unceasing flow, this non-abiding, as the essential condition for human existence or human nature (weiren benxing l~,KTg~) (Chan: 50). Both freedom from thoughts (here referring to Shenxiu's idea) and attachment to thoughts (a common illness addressed by Buddhist soteriological discourses) are, for Huineng, two extremities that run counter to this essential condition or nature.

For this reason, they are a hindrance to the way of liberation. Huineng's solution to this problem is to maintain the Middle Way. Though difficult, his advice is not to stop something that you will never be able to stop, but to detach yourself from it. This is none other than flowing together with thoughts and things. To some extent, to practice this (as a soteriological expedient) is to return to your own nature.

The paper also focuses on the fact that Huineng of the Platform Sutra finds enlightenment right in life, not escaping it ...

Huineng's use of "self nature" is actually unique, for it tends to emphasize more plainly the possibility of existential awakening within the living body and mind of every sentient being. It underlines the point that every human being can actualize this possibility or this goal through the practice of non-attachment in all everyday circumstances. As we have indicated, it does not stress the need to establish a Buddha nature or true mind dearly distinguishable from the living mind of every sentient being, namely, the mind in samsara. Attaining Buddhahood is but the existential transformation of the same mind of the human being in everyday life.

What is thus discovered is the most profound Liberation of the Buddha. These are, of course, foundational aspects of Shikantaza.

Gassho, J
stlah

[Antonio]

Thank you sensei for this Post. The history of the things is a fascinating matter. Please do more posts like this.

Gassho!
SatLah

Antonio

[ZenJay]

Thank you Jundo! Do you recommend any certain translation of the Platform Sutra? I have a copy of Red Pine’s translation, and didn’t know if that is a good one? I am fascinated by Hui-neng and his story. The way he became the 6th dharma heir is quite a tale, and the story of his awakening while listening to the diamond sutra I believe? (It’s been awhile since I studied my Hui-neng)

Gassho,
Jay

Sat/Lah today

[Alina]

I don't think I am one of the "folks interested in obscure Zen history", but in the years that I've been reading about Zen I have felt many times that not knowing obscure Zen history was preventing me from fully grasping what the book/article/blog/etc was really trying to say.

Thank you Jundo for this post, I really appreciate all the knowledge and resources available in Treeleaf.


Gassho
Alina
stlah

[Matt Johnson]

Dear All,

This post is only for folks interested in obscure Zen history.

I have long insisted that the root of Shikantaza, Just Sitting, "letting thoughts go without getting entangled," are echoed way back, even in the Platform Sutra said to be the teachings of the 6th Ancestory, Huineng, in the 7th century AD.

It is nice when an historian finds much the same. In his article, "Reification and Deconstruction of Buddha Nature in Chinese Chan," Prof. Youru Wang comments on the difference between letting thought go, and the emphasis in other corners of Buddhism on being rid of all thought (as advocated by others, such as Shenxiu). Wang says ...

He also found enlightenment right in life, not escaping it.

So in this case what is "thought"? Are we talking discursive thought? Because in my experience that can absolutely stop. Problem seems to be it starts right back up again.... But there is also a sense of seeing through thought...

It would seem the separation between sudden and gradual schools goes back quite a ways... But is this not just a case of different strokes for different folks?

_/\_

sat/ah

Matt

[Jundo]

Thank you Jundo! Do you recommend any certain translation of the Platform Sutra? I have a copy of Red Pine’s translation, and didn’t know if that is a good one? I am fascinated by Hui-neng and his story. The way he became the 6th dharma heir is quite a tale, and the story of his awakening while listening to the diamond sutra I believe? (It’s been awhile since I studied my Hui-neng)

Gassho,
Jay

Sat/Lah today

Hi Jay,

I would recommend the Yampolsky translation, for a few reasons. First, it is a translation of the oldest version we have, found in the Dunhuang caves. After that, the Platform Sutra went a series of revisions and elaborations, polishings and rewritings that made a quite different document. Many of the other translations of based on those later versions (which, by the way, Dogen is quoted as not caring for.) I am not sure which version Red Pine used for his, but I seem to recall it is also an early version (he probably mentions that in his Introduction.)

Also, the Yampolsky translation is still considered of very high quality, and the very long (I think about 50 pages?) Introduction by Yampolsky to his translation is not to be missed, and is still considered a very solid and accurate presentation of the history of the document, questions about its historicity and such, and should not be missed. The document may or may not reflect the actual words of Huineng, who most likely was not the person presented in the Platform Sutra (and the Sutra may have been written to put forward the teachings of certain Chan factions against others, in the Northern School, but in doing so may have mischaracterized much that we now know about the Northern School, and were likely not that different at all from the so-called Southern School folks in approach.) Nonetheless, the Platform Sutra is considered one of our main texts, setting forth the roots of the Zen tradition from there. Even the name Soto 曹洞 is now believe by many historians to be a combination of a name for Huineng beginning with "So" (曹溪) and the "To" of the Chinese name (洞山) of Soto Lineage founder Tozan/Dongshan.

After reading Yampolsky, I would certainly recommend Red Pine, whose translations and explanations are always high quality and informative too.

Gassho, Jundo
stlah

PS - If you search "Wonks" in our Forum, you will find lots of other obscure history discussions.

https://forum.treeleaf.org/search?q=wonks+only&searchJSON=%7B%22keywords%22%3A%22wonks+only%22%7D

[Jundo]

So in this case what is "thought"? Are we talking discursive thought? Because in my experience that can absolutely stop. Problem seems to be it starts right back up again.... But there is also a sense of seeing through thought...

It is possible that thoughts ... all the ideas, images, emotions, ear worms and what not ... that flutter through our heads morning to night (and at night too) will completely stop, or become very very still, at various times even during Shikantaza Zazen. It is also true that, at the other extreme, we do not want to be caught during Zazen in storms and tangles of raging thought and emotions (although that happens too sometimes during Shikantaza).

In Shikantaza, sometimes thoughts will stop or become very quiet, sometimes thoughts and emotions are present and drifting through ... but we are not attached to either case. In fact, one comes to know the Illumination and Clarity that is present in ... which -- IS -- ... the presence of thoughts or no thoughts. "No thought is thought," which is Master Dogen's "thinking-non-thinking." Thoughts stopping or being present is no problem, and no "problem starts." In fact, to the very wise, even the "storms and tangles" are also the Light and Clarity, although it takes a more discerning and experienced eye to see.

If you are here at Treeleaf, this is what we Practice.

Gassho, Jundo
stlah

[Onsho]

Pardon my french, but The Platform Sutra is a real banger. i had such a good time reading it. it gave me so much to think about. The concepts were all so simple but deeply impressive. i so very much would love to read it in The Zen Masters Dance format. im willing to help work shop the name even. The Dustless Mirror?

Gassho
Onsho
Satlah

[Jundo]

Pardon my french, but The Platform Sutra is a real banger. i had such a good time reading it. it gave me so much to think about. The concepts were all so simple but deeply impressive. i so very much would love to read it in The Zen Masters Dance format. im willing to help work shop the name even. The Dustless Mirror?

Gassho
Onsho
Satlah

Oh, something to consider. Hmmm.

Gassho, Jundo
stlah

[Matt Johnson]

It is possible that thoughts ... all the ideas, images, emotions, ear worms and what not ... that flutter through our heads morning to night (and at night too) will completely stop, or become very very still, at various times even during Shikantaza Zazen. It is also true that, at the other extreme, we do not want to be caught during Zazen in storms and tangles of raging thought and emotions (although that happens too sometimes during Shikantaza).

In Shikantaza, sometimes thoughts will stop or become very quiet, sometimes thoughts and emotions are present and drifting through ... but we are not attached to either case. In fact, one comes to know the Illumination and Clarity that is present in ... which -- IS -- ... the presence of thoughts or no thoughts. "No thought is thought," which is Master Dogen's "thinking-non-thinking." Thoughts stopping or being present is no problem, and no "problem starts." In fact, to the very wise, even the "storms and tangles" are also the Light and Clarity, although it takes a more discerning and experienced eye to see.

If you are here at Treeleaf, this is what we Practice.

Gassho, Jundo
stlah

How is it ultimately different to kill your thinking with "mu" until it stops or to think non-thinking (which actually doesn't sound that different to me) or replace the thinking with any number of things or to allow the thinking to stop by itself. Or to just allow the thoughts to continue because one can see through them anyway.

Functionally there is more brute force in some of these approaches. Daido used to say in the beginning of doing Shikantaza you should probably have sweat pouring down your face like you were exerting yourself physically.

_/\_

sat/ah

Matt

[Jundo]

How is it ultimately different to kill your thinking with "mu" until it stops or to think non-thinking (which actually doesn't sound that different to me) or replace the thinking with any number of things or to allow the thinking to stop by itself. Or to just allow the thoughts to continue because one can see through them anyway.

Functionally there is more brute force in some of these approaches. Daido used to say in the beginning of doing Shikantaza you should probably have sweat pouring down your face like you were exerting yourself physically.

_/\_

sat/ah

Matt

The Harada-Yasutani folks, from wence came Daido, were rather "Kensho or bust" folks who turned Shikantaza into some side or preliminary exercise to intense Koan Introspection (Daido actually softened up from that, but those were the roots.) They good never get away from the hustle for that gold ring, so please don't equate their interpretation of "Shikantaza" with what we practice here. Same name, very different approach.

There is absolutely no difference between killing or not killing. We non-kill by seeking nothing to kill.

From your description, I do not feel that you understand, so please review some of the essays and descriptions here. If the practice suits you, then you are more than welcome to sit with us. If not, then do find another approach which suits you more.

https://forum.treeleaf.org/forum/teacher-talks-tips/teacher-talks-tips-aa/vital-points-of-shikantaza-zazen

Gassho, J
stlah

[michaelw]

'To some extent, to practice this (as a soteriological expedient) is to return to your own nature.'

At the risk of opening a can of worms is there such a thing as Soteriology in Zen?
I come from a Judeo Christian tradition so have a default definition of Soteriology but in a Zen context how does this apply especially given the Zen emphasis on the here and now as opposed to the hereafter? In case anyone else was lying awake worrying over this I went delving and found this piece by Carl Bielefeldt that covers both text and context.
"We are," Zen likes say of itself, "a special tradition apart from scripture that does not depend on the written word; we simply point directly at the person's mind, that he may see his own nature and become a buddha." The contrast between this self-definition and what we are used to in religion could hardly be starker, particularly when we consider what has been left out of it. There is no talk of God, of course, nor of a saviour by whom we are redeemed; no mortal sin from which we are delivered, nor better land to which we shall repair. There is no holy writ to be revered nor divine revelation before which to bow; no church dogma to be believed nor church ritual to be performed. Instead, we are to abandon our rituals and dogmas, simply examine directly our own minds and see into our own natures. "Just turn the light around," says Zen, "and shine it back."
Carl Bielefeldt https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/biel.pdf
That seems a very stark statement and personally I prefer to regard everything as sacred and we still have ritual.
Not as much as Sotoshu and Jundo has explained why many times.
In the light of the Uchiyama essay Kodo Sawaki Roshi’s Zazen perhaps Zen Soteriology could be said to be the self saving the self either for or from the self? (humour)

Gassho
MichaelW

satlah

[Jundo]

'

At the risk of opening a can of worms is there such a thing as Soteriology in Zen?

Hi Michael,

If you mean

Well, if you mean "Soteriology" as the promise of salvation, I would say that there definitely is, as all being are promised to ... someday ... become enlightened and Buddha (all sentient beings thus saved).

It is even clearer in the Pure Land sects, where Amida Buddha will come and take the faithful to a place where they can practice and become a Buddha more easily. However, I would say that in Zen, yes, there is a concept of salvation through realization.

Gassho, J
stlah

[Matt Johnson]

'To some extent, to practice this (as a soteriological expedient) is to return to your own nature.'

At the risk of opening a can of worms is there such a thing as Soteriology in Zen?
I come from a Judeo Christian tradition so have a default definition of Soteriology but in a Zen context how does this apply especially given the Zen emphasis on the here and now as opposed to the hereafter? In case anyone else was lying awake worrying over this I went delving and found this piece by Carl Bielefeldt that covers both text and context.
"We are," Zen likes say of itself, "a special tradition apart from scripture that does not depend on the written word; we simply point directly at the person's mind, that he may see his own nature and become a buddha." The contrast between this self-definition and what we are used to in religion could hardly be starker, particularly when we consider what has been left out of it. There is no talk of God, of course, nor of a saviour by whom we are redeemed; no mortal sin from which we are delivered, nor better land to which we shall repair. There is no holy writ to be revered nor divine revelation before which to bow; no church dogma to be believed nor church ritual to be performed. Instead, we are to abandon our rituals and dogmas, simply examine directly our own minds and see into our own natures. "Just turn the light around," says Zen, "and shine it back."
Carl Bielefeldt https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/biel.pdf
That seems a very stark statement and personally I prefer to regard everything as sacred and we still have ritual.
Not as much as Sotoshu and Jundo has explained why many times.
In the light of the Uchiyama essay Kodo Sawaki Roshi’s Zazen perhaps Zen Soteriology could be said to be the self saving the self either for or from the self? (humour)

Gassho
MichaelW

satlah

Hi Michael, I grew up Catholic but my Grandfather was Ashkenazi which obviously means nothing for me either religiously or culturally. But I'm judeo-christian AF. When I look back at them from the view of Buddhism I become aware of Mahayana Buddhism's very important sense of collective salvation. The way people use the concept of Amida is not so different from God. Japanese seem to be very at ease with the word God (though they are just as comfortable with gods). The mortal sin is suffering (the problem of suffering/evil or "theodicy"). Buddhism also has a tradition of revelation. I read stuff here all the time whose meaning is at once opaque and revealed. There also are many different ways to understand any religion. There are those who understand the commandments and then there are those who understand the reason for the commandments and there are those who seek union.

Your triggering some religious studies courses lol

Gassho, Matt

sat/ah

[michaelw]

Your triggering some religious studies courses lol

Matt
As an ex (mostly) theology nerd when you find yourself within some deep theological question always ask yourself this 'do you think God understands all this?'

Gassho
MichaelW
satlah