Most of the Zen in the West is what I shall call for now “Dogen Zen” which follows Dogen’s practice of “just sitting” (shikantaza) which Dogen believed is synonymous with enlightenment. In the West, there are variations of Dogen Zen from “Sanbokyodan” to the “Dogen Sangha”, to name just two.
Despite nominal differences found in Dogen Zen most Western Zennists, it is fair to say, follow the teachings of Dogen and much less the teachings of the Buddha and Mahayana Buddhism. One might even say, Dogen is their Buddha. Incidentally, Dogen had utter contempt for the Zen sect itself. He said of it that it “is a designation for Mara. Those who use the devil’s terminology are the accomplices of the devil and not followers of the Buddha and the patriarchs” (Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism [1963], p. 160).
Dogen began his Buddhist career as a Tendai monk as did Nichiren and other noteworthy Japanese Buddhists during the Kamakura period. He understood the basis of Zen to rest on the theory that everything, that is, all phenomena, is the Buddha-nature but then took one step further when he maintained that meditational practice (zazen, shikantaza) and enlightenment/realization are one. More precisely, while beings have Buddha-nature, innately, acquisition of the Buddha-nature can only be achieved by the physical act of cross-legged sitting (zazen). With the physical body in the cross-legged position, Dogen believed the mind is likewise in the state of the Buddha. It is only by means of seated meditation that innate enlightenment is manifested.
Dogen Zen, to be sure, is a simplification of Mahayana Buddhism. But Mahayana Buddhism makes no mention of seated meditation or that zazen is one with enlightenment. Nor is the physical practice of ‘just sitting’ (shikantaza) mentioned in the Mahayana canon or the Pali/Agama canon.
Comparing Dogen Zen with traditional Zen, the latter is about Mind’s endeavor to realize itself and by doing so to distinguish itself (prajñâ) from its illusory phenomena thus winning emancipation. In short, mind sets out to realize Buddha Mind which is not a phenomenon like our thoughts or, for that matter, anything like the Five Aggregate apparatus we call our body. To realize Mind, Zen doesn’t rely on physical cross-legged sitting. Rather, it is a process of awakening to one’s true spiritual nature which lies beyond the pale of the physical. In fact, it was never the intention of the first teachers who brought Zen or Ch’an to China to teach just sitting as if sitting is enlightenment. These teachers rightly taught Buddha Mind. They wanted us to directly experience this luminous substance for ourselves. Further, with such an awakening we shall see that all things are composed from it, being in this regard mere superimpositions like the snake superimposed on the rope.
It needs emphasizing that Dogen Zen is not about the importance of seeing Buddha Mind—it is about the practice of sitting. When Dogen Zen is measured against the Buddhist canon, especially the canon of Mahayana Buddhism, it comes up short. It is Mind that is the essence of Mahayana, according to the Mahayanasraddhotpadasastra (The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana attributed to Asvaghosha), not zazen. And this is acknowledged by all the Zen masters of the golden age of Zen.
My advice to beginners is be aware of what your Zen center teaches. If it teaches ‘Dogen Zen’ keep in mind its limitations and try to study other forms of Buddhism from Theravada to Tibetan Buddhism. Don’t limit yourself.
Your opposition between "real Zen" and "Dogen Zen" is, I believe, unfounded, and a little dishonest.
As I am sure you are well aware that there were disagreements in what you call "traditional Zen" already.
It is not that it was a monolithic whole, and Dogen came and invented something new, or deviated from a presupposed monolithic "traditional Zen".
You just seem to be voicing Dahui Zongao's claim that the Caodong silent illumination school is "heretical". That is how far back this dispute goes.
Dogen is a logical continuation of the Silent Illumination school of Zen, which is the philosophical grounds on which the Soto Zen school was founded.
It was Dogen's perspective that illumination is not your doing, as he wrote.
It is, as Kodo Sawaki later wrote, that satori pulls your practice, not that you practice in order to gain satori.
This dispute goes back even further and is at the very core of what is Mahayana Buddhism. The question how you interpret Buddha-Nature.
There is just nowhere that Dogen deviates by a millimeter from the doctrine of Mind. He writes perfectly that the mountains and rivers are the Mind.
As for your dualistic view of Mind having to emancipate itself from the "dirt" of "illusion, phenomena", that sounds like a "permanent soul" you say - "apart from physical reality", a doctrine which is alien to Buddhism.
The Mind is no other than the mountains and the rivers. Any Mind apart from mountains and rivers, is not the one mind.
You say those who brought Buddhism to China had no intention to teach zazen. I don't know who you're referring to, but certainly Bodhidharma taught Wall-gazing and sat himself for nine years without speaking to anyone.
Surely if the father of Zen spent so much time sitting, then Dogen's praise of sitting, just-sitting (which definitely means the same as wall-gazing), does not deviate from the "heart of Zen", to use your words.
Posted by: Yu Rei | May 22, 2011 at 04:22 PM
This is funny. People are eager to kill the Buddha and to clean their house from his remains, washing the Buddha's blood from the walls, shovelling the chunks of meat out of the room, plugging the dustbin with the bones - but still people cling to their tools and scriptures, long time after the Buddha is killed.
At least about the practise of silent illumination can be said, that this method involves giving up the method.
But which text is relevant for having a grasp of Dogen's zazen? It's zazenshin. That's all. As long as there is a steamy mind about just-sitting's limitation, "you aren't there". And as long as you become desperate about old, long dead farts' sayings, made in an ancient language, "you are still not there".
Posted by: qbrick | May 14, 2011 at 03:07 AM
Dogen was at best a spiritual disgrace. Choosing him before Hakuin or even Bankei is real proof one lacks merit in terms of encountering the right dharma teachers on ones path to awakening. Compare parts of his shobogenzo to korean Son teacher T`aego Bou, in "Master T'aego Addresses the Great Assembly of Dragons and Elephants" and see the profound difference in spiritual depth and skill. The non-reading generation can find a nice youtube presentation here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-unpFO88reI
Posted by: azanshi | May 13, 2011 at 03:23 PM
"But Mahayana Buddhism makes no mention of seated meditation or that zazen is one with enlightenment. Nor is the physical practice of ‘just sitting’ (shikantaza) mentioned in the Mahayana canon or the Pali/Agama canon." There are no mention of koans in it either.
Posted by: jinn | May 13, 2011 at 11:36 AM
hi zennist, what would you think about this study concerning dogen sangha: http://possibleway.blogspot.com/2011/05/historical-first-academic-study-about.html
clearly you're not a fan of those guys, hahhaa!
Posted by: danny greene | May 13, 2011 at 08:26 AM