Talk on the Shobogenzo

Transcription

1 Talk on the Shobogenzo given by Eido Mike Luetchford Talk number 12 of Chapter 22 - Bussho. So Bussho, page 24 paragraph 71. I read the preaching of Zen Master Daichi Hyakujo, but I didn t get onto the commentary. Let s just go through the story again. We re talking about the famous Master Hyakujo who was the successor of Master Do-itsu. Zen Master Daichi of Hyakujo-zan mountain preaches to the assembly, Buddha is the supreme vehicle. It is the highest wisdom. The truth of this [state of] buddha establishes the person. This buddha has the Buddha-nature. It is a guiding teacher. It has command of the style of behaviour which is free of hindrances. It is unhindered wisdom. Hence it is able to utilise cause-and-effect, and it is free in happiness and wisdom. It becomes the carriage that carries cause-and-effect. In life it is not subject to detention by life. In death it is not subject to detention by death. In the five aggregates it is like a gate opening: unhindered by the five aggregates, it departs and stays freely, and leaves and enters without difficulty. If the state can be like this - regardless of relative rank, superiority or inferiority, for even the body of an ant can be like this - then this is totally the pure and fine land, and is the unthinkable. And with that preaching, Master Hyakujo is describing buddha - what a buddha is. And if we read it and imagine it in our minds it sounds like something very wonderful. But he s talking about our own state when we practice Zazen. At the same time he talks about being free from hindrances and so on. If we practice Zazen regularly throughout our lives, slowly, very slowly we solve all the problems in our life. So when we re very small children, we don t have any problems usually, if we have a reasonably balanced childhood. But when we ve become young adults, problems emerge. Most of the problems are normal kind of problems that everybody has, relationship problems, work problems, how to balance what we want to do with what we ve got to do and so on. And all these problems that we have in our lives will slowly be solved if we practice Zazen every day. We can say that s a kind of promise - Gautama Buddha s promise. It certainly is Master Dogen s promise. So Master Hyakujo in describing what a buddha is, says it is unhindered, it is free in happiness and wisdom. However, even being free and having solved our problems doesn t mean we re free from cause and effect. So he says it becomes the carriage that carries cause and effect. So we have the peculiar is dichotomy the right word, of a free something in the present moment, carrying something which is not free. So we could say that we re free and not free, free and yet bound. We re bound by cause and effect, but we re free in the state of buddha. And that contradiction is the human condition, is reality when we talk about it. And in life it is not subject to detention by life. In death it is not subject to detention by death, means that we don t worry about life, we don t worry about death in the sense of if we think about life as a process then we worry about our life. But life itself is just at the moment of the present. So in life itself in the moment of the present, we don t worry about the life which we create in society and in our consciousness. And the same with death. At the moment that we die, we die. So to worry about death in the future is not something that happens in the state of buddha. And so on. And he ends the paragraph by saying it s the unthinkable, in other words, the state of buddha is not an intellectual state, not a state we can capture with our intellect. And that may be sad, because we want to. Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 1

2 These then are the words of Hyakujo. The five aggregates are the immortal body of the present. The moment of the present is a gate opening. It is beyond being hindered by the five aggregates. Master Dogen is saying that although Master Hyakujo talks about the five aggregates, the five aggregates are only a way of describing the physical aspects of the present moment. Master Hyakujo says that in the five aggregates it is like a gate opening. And Master Dogen explains that a gate opening means the moment of the present - a gate opens into the present where we have freedom. When we utilise life, we are not detained by life. When we utilise death, we are not hindered by death. Do not be unduly in love with life, and do not be unreasonably afraid of death. So he s supporting what Master Hyakujo says, that our actual life doesn t need to be detained, hindered or caused to worry by our image of life. And we can see quite clearly that when we re happy in the present moment, thoughts of what our life is or where we re going actually don t appear. When they do appear they may worry us, sometimes they make us feel happy, if we think about something in the future that we re going to do that will make us happy. But our life is at the present moment and thinking about our life doesn t limit us in the present moment. Life and death: They are just the place where the Buddha-nature exists, and those who are disturbed or offended [at this] are non-buddhists. So Master Dogen says that if you think that a life or a death is anything other than something in the present moment, you re not a Buddhist. To affirm the [Buddha-nature] as the miscellaneous circumstances manifest before us is to command the style of behaviour which is free of hindrances. So to affirm the [Buddha-nature] as the miscellaneous circumstances manifest before us, is putting together Buddha-nature and the real world. So many people said and say that Buddhanature is something secret, hidden, abstract or spiritual. But Master Dogen says we should affirm it as the world in front of us. Miscellaneous circumstances manifest before us, and if we do that, we command the style of behaviour which is free of hindrance. So the meeting of us and the miscellaneous circumstances in front of us or the world, in that meeting of the two, the subject, which is me, and the object which is the world, is something which is ineffable, which we can call Buddha-nature. Such is this buddha, which is the supreme vehicle. The place where this this buddha exists is the pure and fine land itself. So Master Dogen is explaining the meanings of these traditional terms which Master Hyakujo used in his story. The pure and fine land itself means the state of buddha, the state of buddha means the supreme vehicle, the supreme vehicle means this buddha, not an abstract buddha but this buddha. So again he s using all the terminology which appears in the story to point to one ineffable something in the present moment. Not defining as separate, then somehow fitting them together, but saying they re all pointing to one thing, but the one thing they re pointing at is outside of our intellectual area, outside of the area of philosophy and exists here and now - this buddha. That s the end of that little story, then we get another little story. J: I can t say I ve really understood the last bit but I shall have to just go with it and get it into my mind. Which last bit? Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 2

3 J: Well I m reading the words but my mind is boggling as it were. This bit: To affirm the [Buddha-nature] as the miscellaneous circumstances manifest before us is to command the style of behaviour which is free of hindrances. If we affirm that, if you remember this chapter is about Buddha-nature, if we affirm that Buddhanature means is no different from the world we re in, from that which is present in front of us, then we can be free from hindrances. We affirm this world at this moment here, which includes ourselves and the world in something unbroken. And to affirm it doesn t mean to think I affirm it, it means to act, or to practice Zazen. So what he means is if we act, we notice that we experience that Buddha-nature and the circumstances in front of us are all something in one which is free from hindrance. To know that it s free from hindrance is impossible in a way, because once we think about it we see problems, we even see problems with the sentence once we think about it. So without thinking about it we can be free from hindrance. Being in the present, we can be free from hindrance, and being in the present doesn t mean thinking, it means acting, as we do in Zazen. Yoko: So from the time you get up to the time you go to bed, you carry on your day to day life and any disturbance goes, that s the best way of living. There s something missing in that. J: I couldn t quite catch what you said. Yoko: Disturbance is worrying about.without doing other than what you have to do in everyday life. So acting in our normal everyday life, without worrying about things, is Buddha-nature. Yoko: So disturbance means, I don t mean breaking plates and so on, disturbance comes from our thoughts. Our thinking, so I suppose if we do something, washing up, cleaning everything, we are free. So to train ourselves just to do simply what we re doing, that is Buddhist training. And if we train ourselves simply to do what we re doing, then we don t have any hindrance. And without any hindrance, we exist in the pure and fine land itself, a rather simple land, a simple land of doing something. Yoko: I suppose hindrance is always caused by thinking isn t it? Hindrances? Well it depends what.. Yoko: (spills some tea or something) I m talking.. That s exactly what you re doing (laughter) Yoko: Yes, that s right, that s right. So to concentrate on what we re doing, just what we re doing, is to be free of hindrance. The next story: Obaku is sitting in Nansen s tea room. Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 3

4 Master Obaku was a successor of Master Hyakujo who was in the previous story. And Master Nansen Fugan was Master Baso s disciple. So there s a complicated connection between these people in these stories which we can work out with a bit of paper and a pencil. They all know each other, they re all either masters or disciples or they re practicing together or whatever. But Obaku is sitting in Nansen s tea room, and we can assume that Nansen is the senior as it were, in studying Buddhism. So Obaku has come into his tea room to sit and talk. And: Nansen asks Obaku, If we equally practice balance and wisdom, we clearly realise the Buddha-nature: How about this theory? So the way it s written, we can think that it s not necessarily Master Nansen s opinion, but he s kind of saying what do you think of this theory? And Obaku replies: Through the twelve hours, without relying on a single thing, we have got it already. Through the twelve hours, there were only twelve hours in the day in China. They ve managed to make it longer since then, no actually, each twelve hour period was two hours. So through the whole of the day, without relying on a single thing, we have got it already. What Master Obaku is suggesting is that being in a state that doesn t rely on anything, we are the Buddha-nature, or being independent in ourselves, or acting freely. Nansen says, That is not the patriarch s own viewpoint is it? This is a rhetorical question, Nansen saying is that your own answer? Did you get that from someone else?, because it s a very good answer. Obaku says, I would not be so bold [as to say so]. I would not be so bold as to say so in medieval Chinese means yes it is. It s a polite way of affirming. Then Nansen says: For the present, I will waive the cost of your soy and water, but what person can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals? This is a slightly ironic reply, he s actually affirming what Master Obaku said in reply to the first question. And he s saying something which is opposite of what he means, He says it doesn t matter how much I ve spent on feeding you, but what about the sandals I ve given you to trudge off to other temples with, to study? How will I get the cost of those back? So in a kind of amusing and friendly way he s affirming Obaku. Soy and water suggests basic food. And straw sandals, monks wore them when they walked outside the temple buildings, and it usually means making a journey to other masters to study. So Master Nansen is kind of joking, saying your answer is so good that I don t know what to say, but oh boy I ve spent all this money trying to educate you and you give an answer like that. But he means that s a very good answer. Obaku then desists. So Obaku doesn t continue the conversation, he shuts up. So we ve got a simple story here where Master Nansen asks Obaku, who may either be studying with him or just come to ask some questions about something which is theoretical - equal practice of balance and wisdom, we clearly realise the Buddha-nature. So it s a kind of theory or hypothesis, if we equally practice balance, which is something abstract, and wisdom which is something abstract, then we can get what the Buddha-nature is. But Master Obaku replies, if we don t rely on a single thing, if we re free in the present moment as an individual human being, that is the Buddha-nature. So it s nothing to do with the equal balance of this and this, just to be not relying on a single thing, just to be in the present moment - we ve got it. And Nansen says to him, that s such a good answer, I can t believe it s your own. And Obaku says, well I don t like to say so but. So Nansen says well Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 4

5 I ve spent all this money on your food, but what about you paying me back for all the sandals you ve worn. It s a kind of joking conversation, in which Nansen is affirming Obaku. And at that Obaku shuts up. The we have quite a long paragraph, Master Dogen s commentary on this little story. The point of this equal practice of balance and wisdom is not that as long as the practice of balance does not hinder the practice of wisdom there is clear realisation of the Buddhanature in their equal practice. Now what he s saying in that sentence is that there s not something separate called practice of balance, and something separate called practice of wisdom, and those two things we should practice together equally, then we get the Buddha-nature. It s not like that. And presumably the practice of balance refers to Zazen, and the practice of wisdom refers to the wisdom we gain from Buddhist life. I don t know how you practice wisdom - prajna. So anyway it s a kind of theoretical description - if you want to get Buddha-nature do this and this in equal parts. And Master Dogen says it s not like that. It s not two equal things separately which we put together. [The point is that] in the state of clearly realising the Buddha-nature there is practice, which is the equal practice of balance and wisdom. So what Master Dogen is saying is that there is a practice which is Zazen, which includes this equal practice of balance and wisdom in one. So although we use the words equal practice of balance and wisdom to theoretically try and describe something, in the actual practice there s not two things. But he s always saying that. He always saying there s only one, and it s not a thing, it s ineffable, there s only one. And then he returns to commenting on the story: [Nansen] says How about this theory? So Nansen is asking Obaku what do you think about this theory? This may be the same as saying, for example, Clearly realising the Buddha-nature is the action of Who? This is a rather strange sentence, but in Japanese or Chinese, the character for who which is inmo, can be a statement or a question. And it also means who or it or something indefinable or ineffable. So the character itself has a wide meaning, because it describes something that can t be grasped. So clearly realising the Buddha-nature is the action of. a person who is ineffable, or something which is indescribable. So when we re acting, in the moment of acting, or when we re going about our daily actions, in being fully involved in those daily actions, we re not aware of a person or a thing that we re doing - there s just something going on. And that something going on is described as the ineffable, or who. There s no clear person doing a clear thing, there s just something - who. So in that state clearly realising the Buddha-nature is that action of who. Again he s going into the words of Master Hyakujo, the phrases bit by bit and turning them round and commenting on them. To say The Buddha-nature s practice of equality clearly realises the Buddha-nature: How about this theory? would also be an expression of the truth. Now this is Master Dogen s own slightly different reply instead of Master Nansen. So Master Nansen said how about this theory?, and Master Dogen is saying that how about this theory is the same as saying clearly realising the Buddha-nature is somebody ineffable doing something. Or the Buddha-nature s practice of equality clearly realises the Buddha-nature. This suggests that the person who is practicing equality who is ineffable clearly realises the state that is ineffable. So he s trying to get out of putting a subject in the sentence if you like. So the Buddhanature s practicing of Zazen clearly realises the Buddha-nature. Not I practice Zazen and I get Buddha-nature, but Buddha-nature which is ungraspable practices Zazen and gets Buddha- Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 5

6 nature which is ungraspable. "How about this theory? would also be an expression of the truth. So there is something sitting on the cushion, or me sitting on the cushion in the room is something, and that something attains the state which is called something. And it s called something because we can t catch it exactly in words. Obaku says. The twelve hours do not rely on a single thing. This means that in every moment, we are independent. So in theories of early Buddhism, there s the theory of dependent origination, which suggests that everything is dependent on everything else, so the whole world is a complicated interdependency. And this also makes quite a lot of sense in terms of modern chaos theory. However, Buddhism goes beyond that and says no, it s not just that there are many things which are interdependent, in the present moment, everything is one wholeness. So it s not a question of dependency, just to be in one wholeness is to be independent, and independent means free. So the twelve hours do not rely on a single thing means to be as we are in the present moment, throughout the day. Through the twelve hours, without relying on a single thing we have got it already. So throughout the whole day being in the present moment. Being what we re doing, we are Buddha-nature, or Buddha-nature is there. The point here is that although the reality of the twelve hours is located in the reality of the twelve hours, it is beyond reliance. That s a difficult sentence. Although the reality of the twelve hours is located in the reality of the twelve hours, it is beyond reliance. I didn t spot that sentence, I m not sure where the quotations come from, beyond reliance is not quoted from the story. Often Master Dogen says that something is something, or something is in something to indicate that something existing as it is in the present moment. So a cup is a cup means a cup as it is. The reality of the twelve hours, in the reality of the twelve hours means the twelve hours are just the day itself. But I don t understand where beyond reliance comes from, I didn t spot that before so I ll look at it later. Top of page 26, second line: the point here is that although the reality of the twelve hours is located in the reality of the twelve hours, it is beyond reliance. So beyond reliance we have italics which suggests that it s part of the story, but there s no part of the story which says beyond reliance. Yoko: It s a different word, or not the words where. Anyway let s leave that for the time being. Because the state of not relying on a single thing is the reality of the twelve hours, the Buddha-nature is clearly realised. So because the state of being independent in the present moment (not relying on a single thing) is just reality throughout the day, we realise what Buddha-nature is. So throughout the real day we re not relying on a single thing, we are independent as we are in the present moment, fully involved in what we re doing. We clearly experience, or make real, the Buddha-nature. As the arrival of what moment, and as the existence of what national land, should we see this reality of the twelve hours? So he s now commenting on what this phrase reality of the twelve hours means. So reality of the twelve hours suggests some period of time, but what moment does it indicate? What place, what country ( national land means country), are we in when we say the reality of the twelve hours? Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 6

7 Must the twelve hours mentioned now be the twelve hours of the human world? Do the twelve hours exist in far distant places? Have the twelve hours of a world of white silver just come to us temporarily? Those three are saying that in real terms, twelve hours - do we mean in the human world? Do we mean in some other distant place? Do we mean in some imaginary world of white silver? - some perfect imaginary world. Whether they are of this land or whether they are of other worlds, they are beyond reliance. Now what he s creating is an image of the fact that when we are acting, in time, we are in this place at this time, but this place at this time has no identity in terms of being this country, or this place, or the human world or any other world, we re acting in the Universe. And I remember that s the very clear experience I got, remembering mountaineering, of acting, acting - the real world that we re in when we re acting doesn t fit in with being in this world - Bristol, or this place or another place or an imaginary place. So reality is located somewhere which we experience. But not the same as the places which we identify in our mind, this place, that place, Britain, Austria or whatever. They are the reality of the twelve hours already, and [so] they may be beyond reliance. So the reality if the twelve hours is existence at every moment, throughout the day. And existence at every moment throughout the day, we re in the world of reality. And the world of reality is beyond reliance. And the world of reality is located always here and always now. So it s not always the same as the world we have in our mind, or the world geographically, it s a different experience. The he goes on to comment on the next phrase, which is Nansen s reply to Obaku. Saying That is not the patriarch s own viewpoint, is it? is like saying You do not say that this is [your] viewpoint do you? Master Dogen is simply translating the Chinese phrase into Japanese, it doesn t come through in English. You do not say that this is your own viewpoint do you? is simple Japanese, translated from the original Chinese, because he s mixing classical Chinese and Japanese. Though [Nansen] says Is it the patriarch s own viewpoint? [Obaku] cannot turn his head [to Nansen] and say It is mine, because, while it is exactly befitting to himself, it is not Obaku s, Obaku is not always only himself, and the patriarch s viewpoint is the state of being disclosed in complete clarity. Well, Master Nansen asks Master Obaku is that your viewpoint? And Master Dogen says that because Master Obaku has spoken words of the truth, those words of the truth are spoken from a state which is neither person nor world. So in the state of action, we re something ineffable. So he says that Obaku can t say that the words are his because while those words exactly fit him, (Obaku) what he spoke is the truth, and so it doesn t belong to him. And Obaku is not always only himself, because his viewpoint is the state of being disclosed in complete clarity. And this being disclosed in complete clarity is a quote from another story by Master Enchi. But Obaku is in the state of balance, or he s a buddha, and when he speaks from the balanced state, what he says is the truth of the Universe. So the truth of the Universe is not his view, at the same time he said it. In any case: Obaku says, I would not be so bold. In the land of Sung when you are asked about an ability which you possess, you say these words I would not be so bold to suggest that the ability is [your own] ability. Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 7

8 So Master Dogen is explaining that in China people use this phrase I would not be so bold to actually mean yes. So the expression I would not be so bold is not a lack of confidence. We should not suppose that this expression means what it says. Again Master Dogen is explaining the Chinese phrase. Though the patriarch s viewpoint is the patriarch himself, though the patriarch s viewpoint is Obaku himself, in expressing himself he should not be so bold. The state may be a water buffalo coming up and mooing. Master Dogen is suggesting that in any case the phrase I would not be so bold contains some kind of suggestion that Master Obaku s words weren t spoke egotistically, that they were the words of the truth. And words of the truth some from the Universe. A water buffalo coming up and mooing is something very natural - moooo. So just the words came out of his mouth, so to claim them, to make them him, is to present something differently to the way it is. To speak in this state is speech. We should also try to express, in other speech that is speech, the principle that [Obaku] expresses. Well..it s impossible to express in other speech that is speech, the principle that Obaku expresses. So speaking words of the truth, speaking for the Universe, always expresses the same thing that Obaku says. So all words of the truth express the same thing. So Master Dozen s tying us up there, with asking us to try to express in other speech that is speech, the principle that Obaku expresses, all we can do, just by speaking words of the truth. And we can speak words of the truth just by saying my tea is cold. He then goes on to the next bit, which is Nansen s reply: Nansen says, For the present, I will waive the cost of your soy and water, but what person can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals? In other words, And again Master Dogen is putting it into Japanese for his audience. Let us set aside for a while the cost of your broth, but who can I get to return to me the cost of your straw sandals? That s just a simple translation from Chinese to Japanese, which Master Dogen is doing for the benefit of his audience or readers. We should exhaust life after life investigating the intention of these words. We should apply the mind and diligently research why he is not concerned for the present about the cost of soy and water. Why is he concerned about the cost of straw sandals, [as if to say,] In your years and months of wayfaring, how many straw sandals have you trod through? Now this is a little humourous. What Master Dogen is asking us to do is to see what Master Nansen s really saying. He s says see what he s really saying, he s really saying something which is quite humourous. So we should apply the mind and diligently research why he doesn t worry about paying for the broth, but he is concerned about the sandals. As if to say, in all the journeys and walking you ve been doing, how many straw sandals have you worn out? Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 8

9 Now [Obaku] might say I have never put on my sandals without repaying the cost! Or he might say, Two or three pairs. These could be his expressions of the truth, and these could be his intentions. So Master Dogen is saying that Obaku could make this reply or that reply, and these are quite natural replies. He could say well every time I put on my sandals, you ve got some value out of it, or he might say something more concrete like three pairs or four pairs I ve worn out. But he didn t. [But] Obaku then desists. This is desisting. It is neither to stop because of not being affirmed [oneself] nor to stop because of not affirming [the other]: So the fact that Master Obaku didn t carry on doesn t mean that he felt that he wasn t being affirmed, and it doesn t mean that he had some criticism of Master Nansen, just naturally, he didn t carry on with the conversation. So what Master Dogen is trying to describe is that the conversation is a natural one. So Master Nansen made his humourous reply which is an affirmation, then Master Obaku doesn t say any more. But in China and in Japan these stories were discussed again and again, and people were reading things into it, like this phrase means that Master Nansen was better than Master Obaku doesn t it? Or this phrase means that Master Obaku won that one doesn t it? Master Dogen is saying no, no, it s just a natural conversation, he could ve said this, he could have said that be he just stopped talking. a monk of true colours is not like that. A monk of true colours just acts naturally. So when you don t reply you don t reply, when the conversation s finished it s finished. Remember, there are words in desisting, as there are swords in laughter. That s quite an interesting phrase. In not saying anything more. J: It is a universal statement. It s a statement yes, exactly. [Obaku s state] is the Buddha-nature clearly realising satisfaction with morning gruel and satisfaction with midday rice. So this is an image of you ve just eaten so you feel satisfied. Obaku was completely satisfied with the conversation, he just had his meal and he was full, so quite naturally he didn t eat any more. Now that s all quite difficult again. It s a difficult chapter, and a lot of the intricate explanations of Master Dogen are quite difficult if we look at them very closely. And some, without going back to the Japanese it s difficult to see in analysis at the word level. But we can get a picture or a feeling from the whole story that Master Dogen explains. So Master Dogen wants to explain the ineffable state in the present moment, and he does it again and again and again from all different angles and different viewpoints, to try and free us from our idea of what it is, and to try and push us into our experience of what it is. So with words he tries to push us away from words. With the ideas he tries to push us out of the ideas, which is very unusual and breaks all the rules of idealistic or academic discussion. Thank you. Copyright 2000 by Eido Michael Luetchford 9