Alone eternal

Sitting on the shore
The endless ocean roars
Alone eternal

Like stepping on earth and falling into space

Like stepping on earth and falling into space
It cannot be grasped
Words cannot define it
Thoughts cannot capture it
A songbird without a tongue
A bell without a striker
A frog without a mouth
The old man tries to clap with just one hand
Listen

Dogen's Fukanzazengi: Section Three

For sanzen (zazen), a quiet room is suitable. Eat and drink moderately. Cast aside all involvements and cease all affairs. Do not think good or bad. Do not administer pros and cons. Cease all the movements of the conscious mind, the gauging of all thoughts and views. Have no designs on becoming a Buddha. Sanzen has nothing whatever to do with sitting or lying down.

At the site of your regular sitting, spread out thick matting and place a cushion above it. Sit either in the full-lotus or half-lotus position. In the full-lotus position, you first place your right foot on your left thigh and your left foot on your right thigh. In the half-lotus, you simply press your left foot against your right thigh. You should have your robes and belt loosely bound and arranged in order. Then place your right hand on your left leg and your left palm (facing upwards) on your right palm, thumb-tips touching. Thus sit upright in correct bodily posture, neither inclining to the left nor to the right, neither leaning forward nor backward. Be sure your ears are on a plane with your shoulders and your nose in line with your navel. Place your tongue against the front roof of your mouth, with teeth and lips both shut. Your eyes should always remain open, and you should breathe gently through your nose.

Cast aside all involvements and cease all affairs.
This just means that when we are preparing to do zazen, we should deliberately set aside our concerns and thinking about the past and future. A Theravadan monk I sit with sometimes says that we carry around two heavy bags - one called 'past' and one called 'future'. When we prepare to meditate we put these down.

Do not think good or bad. Do not administer pros and cons. Cease all the movements of the conscious mind, the gauging of all thoughts and views.
What this means is that we should not judge our experience. This is easier said than done of course, especially when language like 'do not...' is used, as this might easily lead one to react to one's judgement as 'bad' and idealise non-judging as 'good'.

Learning to be patient, compassionate and non-judgmental is fundamental to any kind of 'mindfulness'-type meditation, including Shikantaza. The mind is always 'doing', always trying to acheive something, get something or get away from something else. In zazen we are finding a way to enter a different mode, a mode of 'being' where we are just open to our experiences as they are. If something we don't like happens we just notice it, if a judgement occurs, we just notice that - rather than adding fuel to the fire by judging our judgement. This way, the mind gradually settles down by itself.

Sometimes the metaphor of muddy water is used to describe the mind in meditation. We can't get the mud to go to the bottom by forcing it down, that would just stir up more mud. Instead we stop trying to make it subject to our will. We leave it alone and in the light of awareness it settles down by itself.

Have no designs on becoming a Buddha.
There is a tendency in modern commentary on Soto Zen, that Zen practice is about not having goals. People even seem to set up abandoning goals as a sort of goal or become quite judgemental about the idea of any sort of intention or to deny the existence of their own motivations. And they cite Dogen in support of this idea. I suspect that this is a misunderstanding.

We would not take up and remain on the Zen path if it was not our intention to abandon delusion, craving and aversion. Is that not having 'designs on becoming a Buddha'? Did not Dogen himself take up the Zen path to become free from the realm of birth, death and suffering? Did he not voyage to Korea and China and visit the wisest masters he could find in order to clear his doubt and confusion? I don't think that he is suggesting here that we shouldn't seek the way with equal vigour.

It is interesting to note here that his instruction to not seek enlightenment is not a general statement, but is in reference specifically to zazen instruction. It is indeed true that for Shikantaza or any kind of mindfulness-type meditation, simply being present with one's experience rather than striving to have a different kind of experience is essential. On the other hand we still need to have the intention to sit with our experiences, to remain in the present moment and to return our attention to the present moment when it wanders.

Sanzen has nothing whatever to do with sitting or lying down.
Another preoccupation of some Soto commentators is posture. Some even go so far as to suggest that posture is the whole of Zen, that correct posture is itself enlightenment. Again I think this is a misunderstanding.

Good posture is important. And Dogen follows with the details of what good posture is from the perspective of traditional Zen. But posture is not the only thing. I could sit daydreaming in a perfect lotus posture for hours, but that would not be 'good zazen'.

It is true that Zazen is not a 'mind-only' practice. We practice with the body; we practice with the mind; we practice with the universe. It is the body-mind-universe that practices. Practicing with the body does mean having a posture that helps us to be awake. But even more importantly it means not separating the mind from the body in whatever we are doing - whether we are driving, cooking, lying down or doing zazen. It means keeping the attention on the body and our activity rather than cutting it off and getting lost in abstractions. The Buddha taught meditation in four postures: sitting, standing, walking and lying down.

There is little that the body can do to keep the mind from separating itself off into a world of delusion. The body is always the body. It is the mind that becomes deluded. And it is the mind that has the opportunity to return to body-mind samadhi.

Personally speaking, I usually sit in the lotus position, however I've also sat in half-lotus, seiza and on a chair. Any differences in these postures with regards to zazen must be very subtle as I don't really notice a difference. The only posture I really have trouble with is lying down as I tend to fall asleep.

There is another meaning which may apply to Sanzen has nothing whatever to do with sitting or lying down. The mind of Zen moves freely without getting attached anywhere. It doesn't get stuck on postures or zazen and not-zazen; it doesn't exclude anything. In the Platform Sutra, the Sixth Patriarch, Master Eno says:

One Practice Samadhi means at all times, whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down, always practicing with a straightforward mind. The Vimalakirti Sutra says, 'A straightforward mind is the place of enlightenment,' and 'a straightforward mind is the pure land.' ...Deluded people who cling to the external attributes of a dharma get hold of One Practice Samadhi and just say that sitting motionless, eliminating delusions, and not thinking thoughts are One Practice Samadhi. But if that were true, a dharma like that would be the same as lifelessness and would constitute an obstruction of the Way instead. The Way has to flow freely. Why block it up? The Way flows freely when the mind doesn't dwell on any dharma. Once it dwells on something, it becomes bound. If sitting motionless were right, Vimalakirti wouldn't have criticized Shariputra for meditating in the forest.

Good friends, I know there are people who tell others to devote themselves to sitting and contemplating their minds or purity and not to move or to think. Deluded people are unaware, so they turn things upside down with their attachments. There are hundreds of such people who teach the Way like this. But they are, you should know, greatly mistaken.

This is the expansive mind of Zen that doesn't cling to anything, not to sitting, lying down, zen nor worldly things. Rather it is a mind that is excludes nothing and is intimate with everything; the space that includes all phenomena and the phenomena themselves. Of course, we usually need to practice in order to realise it - which probably means sitting meditation.

Dogen's Fukanzazengi: Section Two

Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge? The influence of his six years of upright sitting is noticeable still. Or Bodhidharma's transmission of the mind-seal?--the fame of his nine years of wall-sitting is celebrated to this day. Since this was the case with the saints of old, how can we today dispense with negotiation of the Way?

You should therefore cease from practice based on intellectual understanding, pursuing words and following after speech, and learn the backward step that turns your light inwardly to illuminate your self. Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original face will be manifest. If you want to attain suchness, you should practice suchness without delay.

What Dogen is saying here is that even Shakyamuni Buddha and Bodhidharma with their incredible talent for the dharma and attainment needed to practice intensely in sitting meditation for years. Therefore the notion that such practice is unnecessary is absurd.

Dogen was a Buddhist reformer who wanted to restore true Buddhist practice in place of what he saw as the degenerated forms of Buddhism that had become prevalent in Japan. The time Dogen was writing was a period of transition for Buddhism. The traditional schools of Tendai (Mahayana) and Shingon (Vajrayana) were becoming overshadowed by new, populist, lay-dominated sects that placed no emphasis on meditation. These sects argued (as they still do) that they were in the degenerate final age according to Buddhist mythology and that realisation through individual effort ('self-power') had become impossible - only so called 'other-power' could bring sentient beings to salvation, so they put faith in chanting the Nembutsu - the name of the Bodhisattva of compassion, Amida Buddha - NAMU AMIDA BUTSU (in Pure Land Buddhism) or a line from the Lotus Sutra, NAM-MYOHO-RENGE-KYO 'the teaching of the lotus flower of the wonderful law' (in Nichiren Buddhism). I suspect Dogen's comments were made with this in mind.

This matter is explored in more detail in the Bendowa:

Questioner: Such reasons as correct transmission by the unexcelled method of the Tathagatas and following in the footsteps of the patriarchs are beyond common sense. To ordinary people, reading the sutra and saying the Nembutsu are the natural means to enlightenment. You just sit cross-legged and do nothing. How is this a means to enlightenment?

Dogen: You look on the meditation of the Buddhas and the supreme law as just sitting and doing nothing. You disparage Mahayana Buddhism. Your delusion is deep; you are like someone in the middle of the ocean crying out for water....What good are such actions as reading the sutras and saying the Nembutsu. How futile to think that Buddhist merits accrue from merely moving the tongue and raising the voice. If you think this covers Buddhism, you are far from the truth. Your only purpose in reading the sutras should be to learn thoroughly that the Buddha taught the rules of gradual and sudden training and that by practicing his teachings you can obtain enlightenment. You should not read the sutras merely to pretend to wisdom through vain intellections. To strive for the goal of Buddhism by reading many sutras is like pointing the hill to the north and heading south. It is like putting a square peg in a round hole. While you look at words and phrases, the path of your training remains dark. This is as worthless as a doctor who forgets his prescription. Constant repetition of the Nembutsu is also worthless-like a frog in a spring field croaking night and day.

Dogen is also criticising merely intellectual understandings of Buddhism and fixation with sutras and other inherited literature. For Dogen, the true meaning of Buddhism - realisation itself - is not something that we can truly grasp with the intellectual mind but is something to be realised directly, primarily through meditation. This is what he means when he says:

learn the backward step that turns your light inwardly to illuminate your self

From this expression it is clear that for Dogen, sitting meditation (zazen) is not just a matter of sitting immobile in a particular posture with the mind doing as it will as some have claimed. Zazen - even when called 'just sitting' - is not some kind of purely physical practice or stationary yoga. It is not as Dogen says "just sitting and doing nothing". It is learning the backward step and turning the mind inwardly. The backward step is an interesting expression which suggests to me the abandonment of the mind of 'doing' or 'achievement' or 'changing the ways things are', and being concerned rather with reality, just as it is. Turning your light inwardly in an expression that may derive from a teaching that Shakyamuni Buddha gave on his deathbed. In the Zen tradition this teaching is passed down in the Pali language in the form of the Atta Dipa:

Atta Dipa
Viharatha
Atta Sharana
Ananna Sharana
Dhamma Dipa
Dhamma Sharana
Ananna Sharana

Know!
You are the light itself
Rely on yourself
Do not rely on others
The Dharma is the light
Rely on the Dharma
Do not rely on anything
Other than the Dharma

I suspect that Dogen did not have direct access to the Nikayas of the Pali Canon (which are likely to be the most accurate renderings of the teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha). He probably relied on paraphrased versions which were passed on orally, in Mahayana Sutras or in gathas such as the Atta Dipa. A more full and accurate version of these words are found in the Maha-Parinibbana Sutra - they are a response to Ananda, his most senior disciple, who asks him how they should continue their practice after the Buddha's death.

"Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his body is more comfortable.

"Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.

"And how, Ananda, is a bhikkhu an island unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge?

"When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world; when he dwells contemplating feelings in feelings, the mind in the mind, and mental objects in mental objects, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world, then, truly, he is an island unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge; having the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge.

"Those bhikkhus of mine, Ananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no other refuge: it is they who will become the highest, if they have the desire to learn."

Maha-Parinibbana Sutta

The essential meaning is the same, although the absence of any reference to 'light' in the earlier Sutta implies that we shouldn't look too hard for any special significance of it in the Atta Dipa.

What does Dogen mean by turning your light inwardly and illuminate your self? It means to be aware and present in the here and now, recognising that the mental phenomena of one's own personal mind are empty, impermanent, and not-self. Only in the clarity of non-grasping awareness can we see what we are not and thus gain insight into true nature. In other words, he is describing a kind of meditation that is called vipassana or mindfulness in other traditions, perhaps more accurately 'objectless awareness' or 'themeless meditation', which in Soto Zen is called 'silent illumination' or 'just sitting'.

As in most schools of Buddhism, some, 'Zennists' like to set their practice apart from (and above) other schools, however understood correctly, all authentic schools of Zen are a transmission of a core of understanding and meditation practices from Shakyamuni Buddha through the Zen Patriarchs to today (although there have been some simplifications and some developments too). Shakyamuni Buddha practiced Vipassana or Mindfulness meditation as described in detail in the Pali Canon. Just before his enlightenment he was practicing the most advanced of these practices, referred to as 'themeless meditation'. I believe that this corresponds to Shikantaza and like all mindfulness meditation involves maintaining awareness of the present moment when it gets involved in thinking and dreaming. It does not allow the mind to do what it will without discipline.

The Fukanzazengi continues:

Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original face will be manifest.

This is a phrase that comes up again and again in Dogen and refers to his own awakening experience under the instruction of Master Nyōjo. For example, it is found in this famous passage from the Genjokoan:

To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

I think that body and mind dropping away refers to the total disappearance of the sense of oneself as a discrete being at both a physical and psychic level or the collapse of subject-object duality. In other words, it is deep Zen samadhi. This is seeing directly with one's own eyes the false nature of the constructed sense of self and that one's true identity is reality itself, this moment itself, the universe itself or expressed in another way, no identity. This is one's original face becoming manifest. Original face becoming manifest is a common expression for realisation, or seeing one's true nature in the Zen tradition, which has it's roots in the following koan:

Huìnéng asked Hui Ming, "Without thinking of good or evil, show me your original face before your mother and father were born."

The text continues:

If you want to attain suchness, you should practice suchness without delay.

Dogen is saying that if you wish to attain freedom from delusion, aversion and craving, rather than relying on intellectual knowledge or faith in the power of chanted phrases, we must practice the activity of being free from delusion, aversion and craving. The direct identification between the 'suchness' that is attained and the 'suchness' that is practiced can be seen as a reference to Dogen's doctrine of practice-enlightenment - that is, the non-separation of practice and attainment.

Dogen's Fukanzazengi: Section One

Dogen's Fukanzazengi is fundamental to Soto Zen, due to the emphasis this school places on practice (zazen) being not a means to attaining realisation, but as being realisation itself.

There are a number of translations of this fascicle of the Shobogenzo available - many of them are collected together on this page which I shall use as a reference for comparing the various translations. I shall be using the first of these, marked as 'English Translation 1', as my principle text - it's the most commonly commented translation I've come across. Unfortunately I've so far been unable to find the origin of the various translations.

There is a danger with taking a single statement or passage of Dogen out of context and using it to support a viewpoint because his writings often jump from one viewpoint to another - expressing a truth that goes beyond the limited scope of any single viewpoint. Most importantly, the relative and ultimate viewpoints are expressed together without contradiction, even if they appear to do so - they are both true in their own terms.

Section One

The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be contingent upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and untrammelled. What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means to brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is the use of going off here and there to practice?

And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates one's own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things, attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions about the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total emancipation.

Dogen leaps straight to the fundamental point. The doctrines of Buddhism as they had been taught to Dogen stated that nothing is hidden, that all beings are already Buddha and that we are in the midst of enlightenment. And this lead some to conclude that it was unnecessary to practice. Yet all the Ancestors including Shakyamuni Buddha practiced with great dedication. How do we make sense of this paradox? This is the 'Great Doubt' that drove Dogen to cross the dangerous Sea of Japan to China.

We can make sense of this apparent contradiction by using a principle sometimes known as the Doctrine of Two Truths - Conventional Truth and Ultimate Truth. From the perspective of Ultimate Truth, everything is already lacking inherent nature, nothing is separate, despite appearances nothing comes into being, nothing continues and nothing stops being, all is the Unconditioned, the Unborn. This is the perspective of Sunyata as expressed in the Heart Sutra. This is how things already are, whether we realise it or not. Nothing can obstruct or eliminate this reality as even an apparent ending or obscuration is 'it' too. So from this perspective, all things are Buddha irrespective of what we do. This perspective is sometimes called 'Primordial Buddha', 'Buddha Embryo', 'Buddha Nature' or 'Original Mind'. It also corresponds to the principle of 'Sudden Enlightenment' emphasised by Master Eno (Hui Neng) - all surviving Zen schools descended from him. This is the perspective that Dogen opens with.

The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be contingent upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and untrammelled. What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means to brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is the use of going off here and there to practice?

This also corresponds to the second statement of the Genjo Koan:

As myriad things are without an abiding self, there is no delusion, no realization, no buddha, no sentient being, no birth and death.

And yet, human beings simply do not see this reality clearly all the time. There is delusion, aversion and greed, which, even though (from the ultimate perspective) cannot obstruct 'Buddha', from the perspective of the mind afflicted by them they appear to do so. Being told that we are already in Nirvana is all very well, but to someone in the midst of hell this is little comfort - a merely intellectual or docrinal acceptance of this 'fact' is not enough to end suffering. We need to realise Buddha ourselves. We need to feel it. We need to experience suchness directly, to breathe it in and breathe it out, knowing in every cell that we are Buddha. This is why we practice. This relative or conventional perspective is the viewpoint of Dogen's second statement:

And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost in confusion.

This also corresponds to the principle of acquired or attained enlightenment, the progressive path emphasised in the Pali Canon and in the so-called Gradual School of Zen. It also corresponds to Dogen's opening statement in the Genjo Koan:

As all things are buddha-dharma, there are delusion, realization, practice, birth and death, buddhas and sentient beings.

Dogen then goes on to give an example of a mind that tastes awakening - realising primordial enlightenment and then, through clinging to this as an attainment, falls back into delusion, seeing awakening as something remote and limited, the world becoming fractured and dualistic once more.

Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates one's own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things, attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions about the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total emancipation.

Such a one has a partial attainment in Dogen's view, but is not yet fully awakened.

Note that Dogen does not deny attainment or the concept of enlightenment as some commentators occasionally suggest. To take this view would be to get stuck to an idea of ultimate reality, a rather nihilistic idea at that.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Eleven

Dogen finishes with a koan.

Mayu, Zen master Baoche, was fanning himself. A monk approached and said, “Master, the nature of wind is permanent and there is no place it does not reach. Why, then, do you fan yourself?”
“Although you understand that the nature of the wind is permanent,” Mayu replied, “you do not understand the meaning of its reaching everywhere.”
“What is the meaning of its reaching everywhere?” asked the monk again. Mayu just kept fanning himself. The monk bowed deeply.
The actualization of the buddha-dharma, the vital path of its correct transmission, is like this. If you say that you do not need to fan yourself because the nature of wind is permanent and you can have wind without fanning, you will understand neither permanence nor the nature of wind. The nature of wind is permanent. Because of that, the wind of the buddha's house brings forth the gold of the earth and makes fragrant the cream of the long river.

This is the heart of the Genjo koan and directly addresses the 'Great Doubt' that he set off from Japan to China to resolve - if it is the case that we already have (or are) Buddha nature - why do we need to practice? Or, in the terms of the metaphor he uses here - if air is everywhere, why does Master Baoche bother to fan himself? There is a kind of nihilistic interpretation of Buddhism which implies that since eveything is already empty or already awakened, there is no need to practice - yet it is clear that practice is required. So is the teaching of universal Buddha nature wrong?

There are some slight variations in the the translation of this passage with permanent sometimes translated as 'stationary', 'constant' or 'never changing' and 'reaching everywhere' sometimes translated as 'universal action', 'universally present', 'principle of its omnipresence' or 'blowing everywhere'.

So what does it mean? The air represents the universal dharma or intrinsic Buddha Nature. Why isn't it enough just for the air to exist ? Why isn't it enough just for the air to be everywhere? Why do we need to practise fanning/Buddhism as well?

If you say that you do not need to fan yourself because the nature of wind is permanent and you can have wind without fanning, you will understand neither permanence nor the nature of wind.

Master Baoche clearly rejects the notion that practice is unnecessary or that there is any contradiction between the universality of Buddha and the need for practice. However, when it comes to explaining why we need to practice his words are not forthcoming. He responds with an action - fanning himself. Fanning here means Buddhist practice. So his response as to why we need to practise (when Buddha is universal) is the act of practicing itself.

I wonder if this satisfied the monk. To some it might appear as obscurantism or simply the revelation that there is no reason to make any effort to practise at all. If Master Baoche did not fan himself would the air not still be everywhere?

The nature of wind is permanent. Because of that, the wind of the buddha's house brings forth the gold of the earth and makes fragrant the cream of the long river.

Dogen makes it clear that there is indeed value in practice. The practice of the Buddha Dharma ('the wind of the buddha's house') brings forth or reveals the treasures of the earth (gold) and turns the river to cream, or rather to ghee as is found in some translations. Ghee is a liquid clarified butter that is produced traditionally in India. It is held to be sacred and is used in Vedic/Hindu rituals and is considered to be food for Devas. It's also a staple ingredient in cooking. Vedic philosophers believed that the ghee was the essence of milk (the cow being a sacred animal) and used it as a ritual representation of the Atman (soul). This sort of essentialist thinking is alien to the Buddha's teachings which indicate that nothing has an essence or unchanging self-nature. However, the Buddha himself used ghee as a metaphor for spiritual refinement.

From a cow comes milk; from milk, curd; from curd, butter; from butter, ghee; from ghee, the skimmings of ghee, and that is reckoned the best; even so, monks, among these four individuals the person who is engaged in promoting his own good and also the good of another is the foremost, the chief, the principal, the best and the supreme.
- Chavalata Sutta/ Anguttara Nikaya IV.95

So, Dogen is saying that although Buddha nature is always manifested, Buddhist practice is necessary to reveal it.

The air has to be known and to do that we have to fan it across our skin. Gold is always present in the earth, but it cannot be seen until 'the wind of buddha's house' reveals it. It also transforms the base substance of milk into purified ghee or reveals the ghee within it. These are metaphors for the transformation of samsara into nirvana. To experience Buddha Nature and it's universal nature we need to practice.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Ten

Accordingly, in the practice-enlightenment of the buddha way, to attain one thing is to penetrate one thing; to meet one practice is to sustain one practice.
Here is the place; here the way unfolds. The boundary of realization is not distinct, for the realization comes forth simultaneously with the mastery of buddha-dharma. Do not suppose that what you realize becomes your knowledge and is grasped by your intellect. Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be apparent. Its appearance is beyond your knowledge.

Accordingly, in the practice-enlightenment of the buddha way, to attain one thing is to penetrate one thing; to meet one practice is to sustain one practice.
In our practice, we don't seek enlightenment externally to this moment. We don't make divide this experienced life into 'appearance' and 'reality'. We don't imagine an objective reality behind appearance. Both the surface appearance and the deeper revelation are 'it'. Practice and enlightenment are not separate. We don't seek for special states of mind. Samsara and nirvana are not separate.

Here is the place; here the way unfolds. The boundary of realization is not distinct, for the realization comes forth simultaneously with the mastery of buddha-dharma.
Enlightenment can only be found here and now in this moment. It is not the case that there is an inherent Buddha Nature in all beings - it does not appear until the moment of awakening.

Do not suppose that what you realize becomes your knowledge and is grasped by your intellect. Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be apparent. Its appearance is beyond your knowledge.
Realisation is not intellectual understanding and it cannot be grasped intellectually. This is true in realisation as well as in non-realisation. A Buddha cannot grasp his or her realsation intellectually. Hence, it is possible to be realised without being self-conscious of realisation. And even though this realisation can be manifested in thoughts and words, those thoughts and words do not contain realisation.

Saving the world by sitting on our butts

My wife (who has a sensitive and anxious disposition) desperately wants her first child. She is in her mid-30s now. In the course of the last year she has miscarried three times and three times I have seen her heart break. There is no instruction manual given out for how best to support someone going through something like that and it has been a real learning curve for me. Even her normally-very-supportive best friend told her she could no longer support her and they are no longer firends. I know that I'm far from perfect but also know that I've been invaluable to someone who was dependent on me and whom I was in a position to genuinely support. I also know that my Buddhist and mindfulness practice has helped a great deal - allowing me to be calmer, more patient, more empathetic, less interfering and to have a better view of my own 'stuff' than I might otherwide have had.

Zen teachers I know have stated (quoting Dogen as saying that a person who does zazen unconsciously and automatically benefits all beings) that the best way to help others is not by supporting them or engaging with them in any way, but by practicing zazen. One explanation given was that without wisdom our attempts are useless or even harmful (which by itself I have some agreement with). And that zazen by itself (perhaps via the dedication ceremony) benefits all beings through some mysterious karmic processes.

This doesn't accord with my experience. My experience is that to influence the world we need to engage with it. I certainly have no experience of this mysterious process and would have to believe in it through blind faith. I remember hearing about the belief among transcendental meditators that simply by doing TM they could influence social harmony in a positive way (by emanating harmony in some mysterious way). But, as I recall, the supposed evidence for this didn't withstand much scrutiny.

One of these teachers (not knowing the full background) suggested that I should not have cut short a week-long retreat to support my wife. This seems like a rather escapist view of life.

I have also heard of a monk in the same lineage declining to visit his own father on his deathbed in order to attend an extended retreat.

Buddhist ethics are indeed focussed on the intentionality behind our actions, but if my intention is sincerely to benefit all rather than just myself then my intention will be to actually act rather than merely to have 'good intentions'. My understanding of our dedication ceremonies and vows had always been that they are expressions of selflessness, ways to let go of selfish attachments, rather than seen as acts which by themselves help others and absolve us of any further responsibility to them. Is it really more selfless to dwell in private feelings of harmony than to actually help others? For me, to help others we have to actually engage with them. Meditation and self-awareness may help us in our relationships a great deal. Letting go of trying to change others may help a great deal, but we still have to engage, to be there, to care, and to act with wisdom and compassion. We need to 'return to the world' or 'return to the marketplace' rather than simply look after and dwell in our own feelings of cosmic harmony.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Nine

Now if a bird or a fish tries to reach the end of its element before moving in it, this bird or this fish will not find its way or or its place. When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point. When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point; for the place, the way, is neither large nor small, neither yours nor others'. The place, the way, has not carried over from the past, and it is not merely arising now.

The particular cannot be separated from the whole. To try to escape from your current situation is delusion. To realise your current situation is true practice. And yet 'finding your place where you are' goes beyond both the idea that reality is carried over from the past and the idea that there is no past and that only the present moment exists.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Eight

A fish swims in the ocean, and no matter how far it swims there is no end to the water. A bird flies in the sky, and no matter how far it flies there is no end to the air. However, the fish and the bird have never left their elements. When their activity is large their field is large. When their need is small their field is small. Thus, each of them totally covers its full range, and each of them totally experiences its realm. If the bird leaves the air it will die at once. If the fish leaves the water it will die at once.
Know that water is life and air is life. The bird is life and the fish is life. Life must be the bird and life must be the fish. You can go further. There is practice-enlightenment which encompasses limited and unlimited life.

There is a story of an old fish swimming past two young ones who says “The water’s nice today isn’t it?”. One of the younger fish turns to the other and says “What’s water?”.

We may go through much of our lives with our attention so preoccupied by our various goals that we may not notice, but one day we may suddenly wake up to the most fundamental of things - the reality of this moment-to-moment existence. We can call it mind, or being, or life, or Tao, or Buddha, or God, or emptiness, or the present moment, or reality - it doesn't matter much - none of these concepts really captures it.

It is easy to fall into treating this experienced reality as if it was a distinct thing and becoming attached to various metaphysical beliefs about it. At the time of Buddha, Bramins claimed the whole experience of our lives was experienced by an absolute, unchanging atman or metaphysical soul which was at the same time identical with Brahma, or God. Buddha denied this of course and so does Dogen.

This 'essence of being', Dogen calls 'life' - the fish is life and the water is life, the bird is life and the air is life. The fish is not separate from the water - wherever the fish goes, water is there - wherever the bird goes, air is there. The bird and fish are in harmony with the universe. This is their practice-enlightenment.

Beings are totally surrounded by and at one with this emptiness - breathing it in and breathing it our moment after moment, totally dependent on it and inseparable from it. Buddha is like this - it is always present and yet we may see it clearly or be blind to it.

Can Buddhism and Psychology Co-Exist?

"Meet a doctor who thinks you can better understand the self by destroying it"

After the confusion about 'annihilating the self' is cleared up this is a very interesting story.

Can Buddhism and Psychology Co-Exist?

A moment of commuter time

A moment of commuter time,
rush hour frozen,
drivers rage silently,
trapped in their cars,
rising sun illuminates,
this hazy world.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Seven

When dharma does not fill your whole body and mind, you think it is already sufficient. When dharma fills your body and mind, you understand that something is missing. For example, when you sail out in a boat to the middle of an ocean where no land is in sight, and view the four directions, the ocean looks circular, and does not look any other way. But the ocean is neither round nor square; its features are infinite in variety. It is like a palace. It is like a jewel. It only looks circular as far as you can see at that time. All things are like this.
Though there are many features in the dusty world and the world beyond conditions, you see and understand only what your eye of practice can reach. In order to learn the nature of the myriad things, you must know that although they may look round or square, the other features of oceans and mountains are infinite in variety; whole worlds are there. It is so not only around you, but also directly beneath your feet, or in a drop of water.

Here Dogen is talking about the relative or particular and it's relation to the absolute or universal.

There are many sayings from Patriarchs and Masters which appear to equate the particular with the universal.

For example:

A monk asked Joshu, "What is the meaning of Bodidharma's coming to China?" Joshu said, "The oak tree in the front garden."

And there are many Zen practitioners who see their own experienced reality as the whole of reality. However, according to Dogen this is an incomplete understanding. This is a self-centred or solipsistic position that takes one's relative, subjective perspective for the whole of reality. The full understanding of the dharma is that no one perspective is the whole picture. Even though object and subject are not divided, reality has an unlimited number of aspects or views depending on various viewpoints. All beings are the dharma.

Each entity in the world - his example is an ocean - has myriad appearances depending on the perspective - to a man in a boat it appears circular, to a sea-dwelling dragon it appears as a palace, to a deva in the heavens it appears as a small precious jewel. It has infinite appearances. No single perspective or appearance can be singled out as the real or objective entity. (This is not the same as the subjectivist theory that all opinions are equally valid or that believing something is the same as it being true.) Each appearance is according to the limitations of each viewpoint. All of our experiences are like this - we cannot see the whole of reality at any time. Reality includes all of these interdependent aspects of subject and object. And this is the case for everything we see and don't see.

To know the universal is to know the relativity and limitation of one's own perspective. Subject and object are not separate, yet the universe is not limited to a viewpoint of a single invidual, rather it is like a jewel with ever-changing facets or like Indra's net - a vast net with a shining, multi-faceted jewel at each vertex - each jewel reflecting every other.

Far away in the heavenly abode of the great god Indra, there is a wonderful net which has been hung by some cunning artificer in such a manner that it stretches out infintely in all directions. In accordance with the extravagant tastes of deities, the artificer has hung a single glittering jewel in each "eye" of the net, and since the net itself is infinite in dimension, the jewels are infinite in number. There hang the jewels, glittering like stars in the first magnitude, a wonderful sight to behold. If we now arbitrarily select one of these jewels for inspection and look closely at it, we will discover that in its polished surface there are reflected all the other jewels in the net, infinite in number. Not only that, but each of the jewels reflected in this one jewel is also reflecting all the other jewels, so that there is an infinite reflecting process occurring.

- Hua-Yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra, Francis Harold Cook

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Six

Enlightenment is like the moon reflected on the water. The moon does not get wet, nor is the water broken. Although its light is wide and great, the moon is reflected even in a puddle an inch wide. The whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in dewdrops on the grass, or even in one drop of water.

Enlightenment does not divide you, just as the moon does not break the water. You cannot hinder enlightenment, just as a drop of water does not hinder the moon in the sky. The depth of the drop is the height of the moon. Each reflection, however long or short its duration, manifests the vastness of the dewdrop, and realizes the limitlessness of the moonlight in the sky.

This section is about the relationship between relative and absolute or ordinary beings and enlightenment. Enlightenment is true nature, true reality and is here represented by the moon. The relative, finite, personal mind is represented by water, which reflects the absolute.

The moon does not get wet,

You cannot hinder enlightenment. The absolute is unborn and unconditioned, it isn't obstructed by our conditioning, our karma, our relative minds. It is always fully manifested. The particular cannot obstruct the whole, for it always is a manifestation of the whole. Being empty of self-nature, it is delusion to imagine that we can be anything other than Buddha.

nor is the water broken.

Enlightenment does not divide you. True realisation does not create a duality out of enlightenment and samsara. An ordinary being who does not know enlightenment creates a duality out of samsara and imagined enlightenment. An ordinary being who has glimpsed enlightenment may create a duality out of samsara and recalled enlightenment. True enlightenment is to see that there is no duality between samsara and enlightenment. Or as Dogen put it earlier 'no trace of realisation remains'.

Although its light is wide and great, the moon is reflected even in a puddle an inch wide. The whole moon and the entire sky are reflected in dewdrops on the grass, or even in one drop of water.

If we examine a particular thing carefully we cannot find it's essence, all we find is conditions produced by conditions produced by conditions which ultimately include the whole universe. Buddha nature is universal - it is perfectly expressed without hindrance through each particular thing no matter how small. Each particular is the entire vastness of the universal.

The depth of the drop is the height of the moon. Each reflection, however long or short its duration, manifests the vastness of the dewdrop, and realizes the limitlessness of the moonlight in the sky.

The mind is the universe and the universe is the mind. Buddha nature or enlightenment are not something separate or additional to the self and the world. They are the true self and the true world. They are the actual nature of things at all times.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Five

Firewood becomes ash, and it does not become firewood again. Yet, do not suppose that the ash is after and the firewood before. You should understand that firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood, which fully includes before and after and is independent of before and after. Ash abides in the phenomenal expression of ash, which fully includes before and after. Just as firewood does not become firewood again after it is ash, you do not return to birth after death.

This being so, it is an established way in buddha-dharma to deny that birth turns into death. Accordingly, birth is understood as no-birth. It is an unshakable teaching in the Buddha's discourse that death does not turn into birth. Accordingly, death is understood as no-death.

Birth is an expression complete this moment. Death is an expression complete this moment. They are like winter and spring. You do not call winter the beginning of spring, nor summer the end of spring.

This analogy about firewood and ash is really pointing to the nature of human existence. It's sometimes interpreted to mean that Dogen taught that there was no such thing as post-mortem rebirth and initially I interpreted it this way too. However, I don't think this is correct. However, having said that, there are other important Zen masters such as the 6th Patriarch who do point to rebirth in other realms in terms of states of being in this life - psychological interpretations of rebirth are not just a modern phenomenon. This section is an introduction to Dogen's theory of Uji, 'Being-Time'.

Firewood becomes ash, and it does not become firewood again.
Change occurs only in one direction. In modern physics we have a concept of the 'arrow of time' and this corresponds loosley with that. This is change from the conventional perspective.

Yet, do not suppose that the ash is after and the firewood before.
Having said that, since entities do not have a self or identity that is continuous or carried forward through time, it is incorrect to say that one state changes into another. Before it burns firewood is just firewood. By the time it is ash, the firewood is already gone. The 'firewood' nature or identity is not preserved and carried forward within the ash - it is always only exactly what it actually is at a given moment. One thing does not change state, because there is no 'one thing' that continues from the before to the after. Existence is momentary. This corresponds to an understanding that could be expressed as 'only the present moment exists - the past and future are illusions'.

...fully includes before and after and is independent of before and after.
Each moment or state includes its past and future - the universal laws of conditionality (causality) are what allow things to be what they are at any given moment - and there is no phenomena other than those laws of conditionality. And yet, simultaneously each moment or state is completely just itself, independent of it's past and future, because no self is carried forward through the change - from the before to the after.

Just as firewood does not become firewood again after it is ash, you do not return to birth after death.
This is the line that is perhaps most tempting to interpret as a denial of rebirth. But (as I recall, please correct me otherwise) Dogen makes reference to literal rebirth elsewhere in his writing, so this can be taken as a reiteration that there is no self which is carried forward from one life to another. As one state never returns to its previous state, death never turns into life. That is, no self is ever carried forward to be reborn.

it is an established way in buddha-dharma to deny that birth turns into death
Yet, in Buddhism it is taught that life does not change into death. Because there are no selves, nothing is ever born, nothing really comes into being. In this sense there is no birth. It is also taught that death does not turn into life. Nothing is carried forward through death into the next life. In this sense there is no death. Since there are never any substantial selves, nothing ever comes into being or is destroyed. What we commonly see as birth and death is ultimately no birth and no death, that is The Unborn.

Birth is an expression complete this moment. Death is an expression complete this moment.
The Unborn isn't something that exists in addition to phenomena, it is phenomena just as they are. Things are always just as they are, and without the continuity of a real self to unite them, each state or moment is just itself, one does not become the other.

Sickest Buddhist

Bit of an abrupt change of tone here. But I thought you guys might appreciate this video by Arj Barker of Flight of the Conchords fame.

Sickest Buddhist from GenerateLA on Vimeo.

Impermanence and suffering: Our story

Can I share something with you all?

My wife suffers with anxiety. We've been trying for a child for about a year. She is afraid that she'll never be able to have one. She miscarried in January and again in April. Many people have no idea what miscarriage can be like, thinking of it as nothing more than a 'heavy period'. In fact, it can really be a bereavement. Now she's pregnant again, which is great in a sense, but in another means a great deal of stress and worry for her - especially during this early period.

My role, of course, is to give her whatever support I can. And mostly this means listening and being there for her. My own practice has helped me tremendously. As a Zen Buddhist and someone learning to teach MBCT of course I've suggested meditation, but she can't - the silence and doing nothing makes her feel anxious - perhaps she feels too strongly that she has to 'try to relax', I'm not sure. But anyway she's not inclined to keep trying and it's not beneficial for me to pressure her.

She is sympathetic to the 'Buddhist approach' and gets some benefit from listening to the wisdom of Edward Brown (SFZC), Pema Chodron and Ekhart Tolle. Yoga, pilates, the gym and having a dog also help.

After losing her pregnancy symptoms the second time, she had a scan but had to wait for another 12 days for a second scan to confirm it. That period was possibly the most difficult period of her life. Even though she has a great career, and a loving family and plans for the future, she found it so intensely distressing that she was contemplating suicide.

After we confirmed the second miscarriage, she had a breakthough. She realised that she couldn't go on like that and at some level she decided that things had to change. She simplified her life as much as possible and decided just to stop ruminating about the past and future so much and live more in the present. It was borne of sheer necessity but influenced by Buddhist thought, and Ekhart Tolle too.

My brother-in-law also found Eckhart Tolle helpful while he was splitting up with his wife (he now does Soto Zen practice). And he gave her some valuable 'spiritual' support at that time too. One of my Soto Zen teachers cited 'The Power of Now' as one of his favourite Zen books even though it's not technically Zen. I also quite like it myself, although there are parts about the evolution of consciousness that I'm happy to leave.

For me the fundamental principles of Buddhism are universal and different approaches suit different people. Something that occured to me was that perhaps 80%+ of the population would benefits from applying these principles to the way they live and yet 95% of the population are put-off by the trappings of traditional Buddhism. This is why I started to study Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy. And hearing face-to-face how MBCT is helping people with chronic depression and other problems - people who would never practice Zen - just reinforces this view.

I'm all for ways to make these principles accessible for people who wouldn't go near a traditional Zen dojo.

Thanks for listening.

_/\_ Justin

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Four

When you ride in a boat and watch the shore, you might assume that the shore is moving. But when you keep your eyes closely on the boat, you can see that the boat moves. Similarly, if you examine myriad things with a confused body and mind you might suppose that your mind and nature are permanent. When you practice intimately and return to where you are, it will be clear that nothing at all has unchanging self.

This part is a quite straightforward account of the relationship between delusion of self and the reality expressed by the Buddhist concepts of Anatta, Sunyata and Annica.

Although there are only ever impermanent phenomena arising and passing, without any constant component, the delusions of our subjective perspective give us the illusion that we have an absolute, continuous existence through time. Just as when you are onboard a boat it may appear that the boat is stationary, and everything else is moving, so it appears that the self is stationary or continuous while the phenomena it perceives are changing. But in fact, the boat is moving and the mind is constantly changing. The is the principle of Anatta (no-fixed-self) taught in Buddhism from earliest times.

The same principle applies to all entities - sentient and non-sentient - even though our minds attribute them continuous identity or existence, observed carefully, it can be seen that nothing at all has a continuous, separate existence. In this respect there are really no 'things' except as provisional ideas of identity and continuity. This is the principle of Sunyata (emptiness of self).

Because nothing has any constant part, or fixed identity, there is nothing to obstruct reality from changing. There is nothing that is not always changing. This is the principle of Annica (impermanence).

Buddhist practice allows us to see this original reality of change and inseparability clearly, and to bring ourselves into harmony with it, being free of deluded notions of continuous self.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Three

To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly. When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. At the moment when dharma is correctly transmitted, you are immediately your original self.

Buddhism is the investigation of self. This is not the investigation of one's own psychology primarily, but the investigation of existence. Who am I? What is this? What is my true nature? What is reality? Some forms of Zen or other types of Buddhism focus on questions like this in a concentrated way. This isn't a contemporary Soto Zen practice, yet we are confronted with existence, with the matter of reality, self, and other, at every turn. In zazen we are immersed in it.

From earliest times, Buddhism has taught the principle of Anatta, or 'no-self'. When we look for a self all we can find are various phenomena: the body, sensations, thoughts and so on, but nothing at all can be found that is fixed or continuous or distinct from phenomena. Even our perspective and personality changes. External and internal phenomena are in a state of constant change. Yet we tend to have an unexamined belief in our own distinctness and continuity. The sense of self is linked closely with memory and with the abstraction of reality into conceptual symbols to be used by thought and language. Yet no actual self can be found. We may come up with philosophical arguments as to why this may be so, but in the clear gaze of zazen we recognise this as just more thinking.

This no-self is not really a philosophical conclusion or a belief, but an experience. It is not oblivion or the destruction of the personality. It is seeing that this sense of being separate from the universe is manufactured by activities of the personal mind. This is not the gaining of a new belief but the abandonment of an old one.

When there is no separate self there is no separate other. The whole universe becomes something intimate. We share our being with the whole universe and with every being in it. It is not just our own self that drops away it is the selves of all beings and all things. All selves are manufactured by this mind rather than being intrinsic to the world. Everything and everybody interpenetrates everything else. And this is the case at all times. To see that this being is empty of self is to see that all phenomena are empty of self. And to see that is to be intimate with the impermanent, interdepent nature of all beings and phenomena. This is the mind in a state of freedom, clinging to nothing.

No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

It is easy after such experiences to make the mistake of becoming attached to them, to be constrained by them, to see this awakening as something final or fixed, something to be reproduced later, something distinct from ordinary consciousness. But to do this is to manufacture a self for the experience of self-less-ness. Real liberation doesn't get stuck anywhere, not even in liberation. Nothing leaves a trace because nothing has or is a fixed self. Real liberation moves freely without end.

This passage is a direct expression of Dogen's own initial enlightenment. Some contemporary Soto teachers would deny this and deny the significance of any enlightenment experiences, arguing that Dogen's realisation is nothing more than a description of the practice of shikantaza. This isn't false but it is more than a set of zazen instuctions, it is the description of a breakthough insight which resolved Dogen's 'geat doubt' - the apparent contradiction between original enlightenment and the need to practice - provoking him to offer incense in his master's room.

As Dogen practiced with Master Nyojo, the master said "The practice of zazen is the dropping off of body and mind.". At that moment Dogen had a great realisation. He went to see Master Nyojo and offered incense. The master asked him why he had come and Dogen said "body and mind have dropped off". Nyojo said "Body and mind have been dropped; you have dropped body and mind!". Dogen said "Please don't validate me so quickly.". Nyojo said "I am not validating you too quickly" then Dogen asked "What is not affirmed lightly?" and Nyojo said "Dropping has dropped off".

There are two aspects of awakening that are recognised by both the Rinzai and Soto schools, although they generally have a slightly different emphasis.

Firstly 'no attainment, nothing to attain' emphasises ultimate truth or sameness: Buddha or original enlightenment is something that is already completely manifested and at the same time is totally non-existent. Awakening to 'it' or not awakening to 'it' - both are equally 'it'.

Secondly 'there is realisation and a path to realisation' emphasises the relative truth or difference: this universality of Buddha nature has to be realised. The universality of Buddha nature by itself doesn't save anyone from delusion and suffering. Thus we need to make efforts, we need to practice in order to see our true, original nature and actualise the Way.

Sometimes Dogen talks about one side and sometimes he talks about the other. Being attached to one side or the other is to have a limited view.

Those who chase enlightenment, feeling themselves removed from it, suffer from a delusion of duality or idealism. This is the tendency to see enlightenment as a remote state of perfection far removed from our current imperfection and suffering. We conceptualise enlightenment as something outside of this moment, outside of ourselves. This is a common understanding of people who have not seen their own nature. Often those who have some preliminary glimpse of their true nature will cling to the glimpse as if enlightenment was restricted to it. This is the dualistic view of samsara and nirvana.

The other limited view is sameness or nihilism - sometimes referred to as 'emptiness sickness'. Many Prajnaparamita, Madhyamika and Zen texts talk of 'no attainment, nothing to attain', 'ordinary mind is buddha' or 'practice and attainment are one'. The Soto school in particular tends to emphasise this. Yet this is often understood only superficially as a denial of enlightenment, or the significance of insight. Some teachers even teach zazen as a purely postural, physical activity that only relaxes or balances the mind and treat insight experiences with contempt. Others talk of enlightenment as if it was only a realisation that there is nothing to realise. But this would be nothing more than a freedom from the idea of enlightenment and a resignment to one's current condition. If this was all there is to actualising enlightenment then a blind and deaf man who has never heard of the dharma is as liberated as a fully-actualised buddha. If we see no need to make effort or to have insight into the true nature of ourselves and things, then we are doomed to skate around on the surface with a superficial or merely intellectual understanding of 'nothing to attain'.

Sometimes this 'Body and mind have dropped off' is understood as an instruction or description of ordinary zazen, as letting go of thoughts and attachments. But it goes deeper than that. The body and mind dropping off is the dropping off of self and the selves of all beings. Dogen's physical self and mental self were revealed to be empty, non-separate from the being of the whole world. This was the moment when Dogen deeply 'forgot his self and was actualized by myriad things' and deeply realised 'suchness'.

Dogen did not get caught up in conceptualising and clinging to his experience. He did not manufacture a self for his enlightenment, or a dualism of enlightenment/not-enlightenment in other words. He did not carry it. His enlightenment left no trace. It left no trace of itself because Dogen did not manufacture a self for it. Master Nyojo recognised this and said that 'dropping has dropped off'. This no-trace continued endlessly. The realisation that there are no separate things did not get made into a false thing which was separate from other things.

Master Joshu had a lesson about this.

A monk once asked Joshu “If I have nothing in my mind, what should I do?”
“Throw it out.” Replied Joshu.
“But if there is nothing in my mind how can I throw it out?”
“Then,” said Joshu, “you will have to carry it out.”

When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. At the moment when dharma is correctly transmitted, you are immediately your original self.

An ordinary person who has not glimpsed their own Buddha nature, has a concept of enlightenment as something that is completely removed from their life, something entirely external. It is imagined that a great transformation would have to occur or that something would have to be added for enlightenment to be realised in their life. The enlightenment of all the Buddhas and Patriarchs has been the realisation of something utterly immediate, that which was always intimately present is suddenly or gradually seen clearly as Buddha nature. It is one's own immediate and intimate nature, one's true identity, right under one's nose at all times which is clearly seen as original enlightenment.

The line "At the moment when dharma is correctly transmitted, you are immediately your original self." shows the absolute and relative sides simultaneously. At the moment when dharma is correctly transmitted is the relative side (difference) revealing the necessity of actualisation, attainment, insight, transmission - the path of practice in other words....you are immediately your original self is the absolute side (non-difference) revealing that simultaneously with the need for practice and attainment is the reality that realisation is always fully manifested. Non-attainment is something that needs to be attained (and abandoned). True insight is seeing both sides simultanteously without contradiction.

Dogen's Genjo Koan: Section Two

To carry the self forward and illuminate myriad things is delusion. That myriad things come forth and illuminate the self is awakening.

Those who have great realization of delusion are buddhas; those who are greatly deluded about realization are sentient beings. Further, there are those who continue realizing beyond realization, who are in delusion throughout delusion. When buddhas are truly buddhas, they do not necessarily notice that they are buddhas. However, they are actualized buddhas, who go on actualizing buddha.

A practice based on the notion of a continuous self that through personal effort awakens to the multitude of phenomena is a delusion. A self-centred, egotistical practise is founded on the deluded, dualistic notion of a separate self. Awakening is seeing through the delusion of self. So, awakening then can be expressed as the multitude of phenomena lighting up the self. The realised perspective is that the whole universe awakens to us.

Those who shine light on or penetrate delusion are called 'buddhas'. Those who form deluded notions about enlightenment are called 'ordinary beings'. Realisation is not a static state but unfolds endlessly. Likewise delusion builds on delusion.

One who is enlightened is not self-conscious of being a Buddha. This doesn't mean that someone who knows they are enlightened (such as Shakyamuni Buddha) is in fact not enlightened, it means that manifesting Buddhahood is beyond limited concepts of Buddha and non-Buddha.