Tag Archives: Buddha nature

Eihei Dogen’s Dharma Hall Discourse #439

Dharma Hall Discourse on the Buddha Nature Beyond Conditions and a commentary by Rev. David Xi-Ken Astor, Sensei

BUDDHA NATURE BEYOND CONDITIONS

“All tathagatas are without Buddha nature, but at the same time, previously they have fully accomplished true awakening. Bodhisattvas studying the way should know how Buddha nature produces the conditions for Buddha nature.”

Commentary:

There is much said and written about “Buddha nature”. Maybe to much. In my experience it is one of the most misunderstood terms that has arisen from Buddhism moving to the West. I get the question often, especially when I ask for general questions from the Sangha. My answers very in approach depending on who is asking the question. The answer to this question needs to be influenced by the state of the questioners practice. Today I take another opportunity to speak about it. Dogen, in his effort to teach about Buddha nature, is pointing to the very essence of how the Universe expresses itself.

He begins by stating that all tathagatas are without Buddha nature although they have arrived in the state of reality. A tathagata is one that has achieved awakening as to the nature of the Universe, as did Siddhartha Gotama. Being in such a state of condition is coming to know one’s own nature as is expressed in our human form. In the second sentence Dogen is saying it is important for those that have vowed to work hard to become enlightened to how the Universe is, to also understand how could Buddha nature produce the conditions for Buddha nature.

We can go about interpreting this discourse by looking at how Dogen spoke about the topic in his other writings. In Shobogenzo’s essay “Buddha Nature,” he makes the reference as, “being Buddha nature and non-being Buddha nature.” I like the use of “being” in this reference. In the first sentence when referencing all tathagatas, he is putting forth the meaning of “non-being Buddha nature”. In the second sentence, he is making the other reference as “Buddha nature produces the conditions for Buddha nature”. Interesting enough he may be also making the case that there is no such thing as Buddha nature, since a thing cannot be its own cause. In other words, an object being the subject of its own self.

If we accept Dogen’s use of the term “being Buddha nature,” we might understand this lesson as indicating that Buddha nature is unconditioned. Consider that in this state of being an object can not exist beyond its own causal circumstances.

Consider that we go down to the ocean with a glass jar. We dip the jar into the water and fill it up. We then sit down and contemplate our glass jar’s contents. Is it the ocean? Well, not really. Why? Although it has some of the key natural elements of “ocean”, it lacks the ability to function as ocean. In many ways it has lost its original causal nature. We can say it is “empty” of ocean. It has no wave action, no sea life, no variance of salient content, no tidal interaction with the moon, so on. Yet, it has expressions of dharma nonetheless. While it doesn’t have the nature (Buddha nature) of ocean, it does have elements that still are expressing the interconnectiveness of Universe, (thus Buddha nature). Now let us walk back to the ocean and pour the contents from the jar back into the sea. Is it now “ocean?” Has it been restored to its original nature?

Our practice is like this, our awakening body-mind is like this. Our enlightened state can be like this. Buddha nature is not something to get, or lose. This Buddha nature Master Dogen is expressing is also the reality in zazen which is the same as the state of an awakened body-mind.   It is a state where the Universe looks into its own eyes.

Note: This dharma hall discourse comes from the Eihei Koroku, and was given in the Fall of the year 1249. Like many of Dogen’s discourses, this one also is very short put packed with meaning. It is # 439.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Buddha Is Not Dharma

By: David Xi-Ken Astor Sensei

“We take refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, the Sangha”.   If we follow Buddhist thought, and not accept a duel state of being, we may come to realize that while we make distinctions of the Three Jewels in practice, in reality they are not separate phenomena.  They are interdependent and connected as one reality, and are components of the principle of Inter-dependent Origination.  So, we come to ask the question, “how can ultimate reality be embodied in the form of a person (Buddha)?”   I would argue that if we strictly apply Buddhist logic, it isn’t.  It is a kind of paradox, and what is “ultimate reality” anyway?

We use the term “Buddha nature” rather freely sometimes without a clear notion of what we are talking about.  Yes, as human beings (and the historic Buddha was that) we are both Universal and unique expressions of the Universe at the same time.  Buddha nature is an expression that points to our inclusion in the Dharma; we manifest an image or reflection or intimation of that which can not be separate from all the other expression the Universe is.  Life as we know it can be considered as a large fabric woven of all the various expressions that in totality makes up what we know as reality.  Remember that science tells us that we have only identified about 8% of what makes up the Universe.  We have a long way to go yet in our exploration.  Dharma goes beyond this limited notion of reality to encompass both what we can know, and that which is unknown.

Continue reading

4 Comments

Filed under David Xi-Ken Astor

Considerations on the Monastic Vocation

By: David Xi-Ken Astor Sensei

“To be a person implies responsibility and freedom, and both these imply a certain interior solitude, a sense of personal integrity, a sense of one’s own reality and of one’s ability to give himself to society…”

Thomas Merton from Thoughts In Solitude

Living a traditional monastic life could be viewed as being very scandalous in that a monk, Buddhist or Christian for that matter, seems to have no specific task that could be considered a job in the secular sense of the word.  That can be a mistake if you think monks are free from work tasks in order to spend all their time in meditation and scholastic activities.  In reality though, the life in a monastic community has many tasks and organized routines so their world is very much similar to the social life like everyone else’s.  This is especially true when the monastic community is living outside the walls of the monastery.  This kind of social life can become complicated and overly active in a way.  Living as a monk does not shield you from all the life challenges of an ordinary life.  In reality it is filled with all the ordinary life tasks plus enhanced practice ones too.  A growing number of monks now work outside their houses in order to share in the support of their community.  The monk is not defined by his tasks, job or secondary profession, but by his commitment to his practice as shared with his dharma brothers under the guidance of his sensei.  In a certain sense the monk is supposed to live an unstructured life because his mission is to be ready to engaged the dharma in whatever form it is presented in the moment, with little family or social distractions.  This means that monasticism aims at the cultivation of a certain quality of life, a deeper level of awareness, an awakened consciousness which is not usually possible in an active secular world these days.  In this 21st century we have so many distractions to keep us from our practice.

I do not mean to imply that the secular lifestyle is somehow totally about self centered priorities, or that there can be no real understanding of the importance of developing an interior awareness.  But it does mean that more immersion and absorption in worldly business will take away from a contemplative mind state that is of utmost importance in gaining readiness for experiencing awakened moments.  There is much to be said about a sustained practice over one that experiences fits and starts.  Monks are not weekend warriors, but seek to be free from what William Faulkner called “The same frantic steeplechase toward nothing” which can be the essence of a Buddhist practice when engaged for a few hours a month.

As a monastic community lives together, either in groups or alone but connected, they do so with a sense that they are not separate from the lay community they live side by side with.  We should avoid any notion of “inside or outside.”  The concept of “separation from the world” that can arise in a monastic community is yet another illusion.  Even for those monks within the walls of a monastery/temple.  We must never forget we are social-selves and agents for change.  We do not take vows to become a different species of being.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized