Answer: . . . Of what use is it to read the scriptures and recite the
_nembutsu_? It is useless to imagine that the merits of Buddhism come
merely from using one's tongue or voice; if you think such things
embrace all of Buddhism, the Truth is a long way from you. You should
only read the scriptures so as to learn that the Buddha was teaching
the necessity of gradual and sudden training and that from this you can
realise enlightenment; do not read them so as to make a show of wisdom
with useless intellection. . . . Just to continually repeat the
_nembutsu_ is equally useless, for it is a frog who croaks both day and
night in some field. . . . They who do nothing . . . more than study
the scriptures . . . never understand this, so just stop it and thereby
cure your delusions and doubts. Just follow the teachings of a true
master and, through the power of _Zazen_, find the utterly joyful
enlightenment of Buddha.11
_
It is not surprising to find Dogen firm in the belief that meditation
is superior to the practices of two competing movements: the
traditional sutra veneration of the Tendai sect and the Pure Land
schools' chanting of the nembutsu to Amida Buddha. But what about the
Rinzai Zen teaching that enlightenment is sudden and cannot be induced
by gradual practice? He next attacks this position:
_Question: Both in India and China, from the beginning of time to the
present day, some Zen teachers have been enlightened by such things as
the sound of stones striking bamboos, whilst the color of plum blossoms
cleared the minds of others. The [Buddha] was enlightened at the sight
of the morning star, whilst [his follower] Ananda understood the Truth
through seeing a stick fall. As well as these, many Zen teachers of the
five schools after the Sixth Patriarch were enlightened by only so much
as a word. Did all of them practise _Zazen_?
Answer: From olden times down to the present day, all who were ever
enlightened, either by colors or sounds, practised _Zazen _without
_Zazen_ and became instantaneously enlightened.12_
What exactly is he saying here? It would seem that he is convoluting
the early teaching of the Southern sect, which proposed that
"meditation" is a mind process that might also be duplicated by other
means. Dogen seems to be arguing that zazen is efficacious since all
who became enlightened were really "meditating" in daily life, whether
they realized it or not. The Southern school claimed that _dhyana_
could be anything and therefore it seemed ancillary; Dogen claims it
could be anything and therefore it is essential.
Dogen also came back to his original doctrinal dilemma, the question
that had sent him wandering from teacher to teacher in Japan while
still a youth: Why strive for enlightenment if all creatures are
Buddhas to begin with? He finally felt qualified to address his own
quandary.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account