Sunday, July 21, 1968
Tassajara
1— I don't think [laughs] we can reach a conclusion.
I was asked to talk about something like sectarianism. What is Soto and what is
Rinzai? Or, what is the attitude as a Soto priest to other schools of Buddhism?
This is the subject I was given to speak about. But this is not so simple a question.
It is a very big problem.
First of all, we should understand why we have so many schools of Buddhism. As
you know, various schools arose in Buddhism. Of the various schools which we
have now, almost all the schools are of Mahayana Buddhism. So-called Theravada
Buddhism is not just the Hinayana school or Theravada school. The scholars of
Hinayana Buddhism or Theravada Buddhism know what is Mahayana. Intellectually,
or so far as the teaching is concerned, there is not much difference between
all the Buddhists. I think most Buddhists understand not only the teaching of
their own school but also the teaching of various schools too.
So, so far as the understanding goes, actually there is no particular school.
But, Zen Buddhism is very different from the other schools of Buddhism. The
other schools of Buddhism put emphasis on understanding, but we Zen Buddhists
put emphasis on practice, actual practice.
So, Zen Buddhism is something different. And, why Zen Buddhism arrived in China
is something very important we should know. Before Bodhidharma came to China,
there were many schools of Buddhism already. There were Pure Land schools, and
Tendai schools, and San-lun, and some other schools of Zen. And almost all the
scriptures were translated. And Chinese people studied Buddhist philosophy very
hard and established a pretty well-organized understanding. And, according to
their way of understanding, there were many schools of Buddhism. And, they put
emphasis on some scriptures which were told by Buddha.
Those who thought the Kegon Sutra was the best of all the sutras, theirs was
the Kegon school. Those who thought the Lotus Sutra was best established the Tendai
school. And those who thought the three scriptures of Pure Land were the best
of all the teachings, they started the Pure Land school. But, all those schools
were based on the philosophy of Buddhism.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the teaching is not just teaching. It is something more
than that. But, they did not come to the turning point where they should switch
over from intellectual understanding to actual practice. Even the Pure Land
school was not completed like the Pure Land school in Japan established by
Shinran.2 I don't say they do not practice zazen, or they do not
practice various rituals, and they do not attain enlightenment by practice.
But, their practice is something different from our practice or from
Bodhidharma's practice. What is the difference is—as long as we expect
perfection or enlightenment, the practice is involved in dualistic
understanding. We are not perfect, but by practice or by believing in the
teaching of Buddhism, we will improve our understanding. And, eventually we
will attain perfection.
But according to even Mahayana schools, it is not so easy to attain perfection.
According to the Tendai school it is necessary to spend many, many kalpas of time. And, unless we continue our practice many, many kalpas of time,
for those of us who are not perfect, it is not possible to attain enlightenment.
That was their understanding. And, in some schools like Kegon, this kind of
many, many kalpas of time of practice was a kind of teaching, they
established, another version of practice as a teaching.
In the Shingon school, they understood many, many kalpas of time as our
evil desires. Not actually so long a time of practice. This is another
interpretation of our evil desires. Because our evil desires are so deep, it is
necessary for us to practice so many kalpas of time. So, instead of
emphasizing practice, they put emphasis on our evil desires [laughs]. And that
is rather dangerous, you know. So unless they are a good teacher, this kind of
understanding will create a big problem for a Buddhist. Instead of saying so
many kalpas of time of practice, they put emphasis on the deep and great
problem of evil desires. According to Buddhism or Buddha's teaching, evil
desire itself, if we understand it properly, is enlightenment itself, buddha-nature
itself.
So buddha-nature and evil desires is one. Originally it is one. So according to
Shingon, with this kind of interpretation, evil desires and enlightenment is
one. This is a kind of teaching. With this teaching, they replaced so many kalpas of practice into a kind of understanding of evil desires we have.
So, in this way, even our practice was replaced by a teaching. And this kind of
interpretation of so many kalpas of practice happened in the Kegon
school too, although they noticed that just intellectual understanding actually
does not help us. As long as we have the idea of buddha-nature as a goal of
practice, something to attain, our practice will be dualistic.
As long as it is dualistic, it takes time until we attain perfection. But, actually
it is not possible [laughs]. But, even if we understand that it is possible, it
takes so many kalpas of time or else we cannot attain enlightenment.
That is the dead end of [laughs] Zen Buddhism—that was, actually.
But Bodhidharma's understanding of Zen is quite different. Let me put it this
way: The difference between Bodhidharma's practice and various Mahayana schools
of practice, even though they practiced Zen, the meaning of practice or way of
practice or content of practice, was quite different.
According to Bodhidharma, buddha-nature is not something to be attained by
practice. According to other schools of practice, or understandings of
practice, the practice is to attain enlightenment. That is why that practice
eventually comes to a dead end. And there is no way to go back, or to have
another version of practice, or to substitute actual practice for the
intellectual understanding or teaching of Buddhism.
For Bodhidharma, our practice is quite independent from the various teachings. Our
practice is independent from Buddha's teaching. Although we accept Buddha's
teaching, our practice is not something based on some teaching. Our practice is
based on our original nature—buddha-nature. Even if Buddha did not appear in
this world, we all have [laughs] nature, you know. And, we should start our
practice because of our true nature which Buddha found.
So, in this sense, Buddha is the founder of Buddhism, but we do not depend on
Buddha's teaching which was told by Buddha. Our practice does not depend on it—because
our practice depends on Buddha's true nature as long as there is no difference
between our buddha-nature and Buddha's buddha-nature. There is no need for us
to depend on his teaching, but directly we should practice as he did. That is the
starting point of Zen Buddhism. And that is Bodhidharma's Zen.
So, it is not, that after you practice so many kalpas of time, you attain
enlightenment, but that the practice is based on our true nature, which is
always within us. Because of our true nature, we practice zazen. The meaning of
practice is completely different from the practice of other schools. Do you
understand this point?
For other schools, the practice is the means of attaining enlightenment. To
attain enlightenment, we practice zazen. But a characteristic of Zen is that without
depending on teaching, because of our buddha-nature, starting from
buddha-nature, we practice zazen. It’s the opposite. Not to attain
enlightenment, but to experience the enlightenment—to have enlightenment experience.
To express our true nature, we practice zazen.
In this way you will have ten powers [laughs]. I explained what are the ten
powers [of a bodhisattva]. If the ten powers are the powers you will attain by
practice, I don't know when you will attain it [laughs]. Those ten powers are
to some extent the power you have already. If you understand what the ten
powers are, that is the power you have already. Because of your idle practice
you cannot [laughs] bring it about fully. But, it is not something which you
attain, but something which you have already. And this is, for the beginner, a
kind of belief. For some good students it is not just belief; actually you feel
it in its true sense. Something you have, and something you found, not as a
goal, but as an actual power you have. This is the difference.
So, for us there is no dead end. We say, even though there are innumerable
sentient beings, we vow to save them [laughs]. That is our vow. This vow is not
based on the possibility of attaining or saving all of them. But to make our
best effort to express our true nature, we vow to save them all. And, if it is
impossible—if there are innumerable people—our effort will be endless. In this
way, we understand our practice and our vow. And, our evil desires are inexhaustible,
but we vow to put an end to them [laughs]. This is something which you should
do, which your buddha-nature asks you to do. Not something which you should
promise to do [laughs]. Something which you should do day by day, every day.
This is the main difference between the zazen practice of other schools of
Buddhism and Zen Buddhist practice. Before I talk about non-sectarianism [laughs],
I must take pride in my sectarianism first. And how my sectarianism is
non-sectarian [laughs, laughter]. It is the next thing I should try to explain.
But right now, we should establish ourselves in a firm foundation. And, we are
talking about the universal foundation to every school.
This kind of understanding is true with the Shin school in Japan too. Before
Shinran, to repeat Amida Buddha's name was a kind of practice, to be saved by
Amida Buddha. So, if we wanted to be saved by him, we should repeat it, many,
many times. That was the idea of repeating Amida Buddha's name. But, according
to Shinran, because we are originally saved by Amida Buddha, even if you say it
once, that is enough [laughs], according to him. If you are aware of your true
nature, that is enough.
Only when we reach this kind of understanding, Buddhism becomes a teaching for
everyone—to save every one of us. It is easy maybe to repeat Amida Buddha's
name by mouth. It is also for Pure Land students or the Pure Land school,
everyone can practice it. It is quite different from zazen. Everyone can do it.
And, religion should be for everyone—not just for men, or for someone who can
cross their legs in the lotus posture. What will they do if they cannot cross
their legs [laughs, laughter]? Because of this point, many people say Zen is
not for everyone [laughter], and Zen is just for [laughs] men and not for
ladies. Maybe the Pure Land school is better [laughs] because a religion should
be for everyone.
So if zazen were one of the means to attain enlightenment, only a few people would
be saved by Zen. But, according to Dogen Zenji, Zen is no such thing. Zen is
for everyone, whether you can cross your legs or not. Everyone is a Zen
Buddhist as long as they have buddha-nature. This is the difference.
Only when we understand zazen in this way, Zen is for everyone. And, if I say the
Rinzai school varies from our viewpoint, how do we understand the Rinzai school
from our viewpoint? In the time of the Sixth Patriarch, there [laughs] were no
koans. Koan study started in the Sung Dynasty. If koan study is the only way to
study Buddhism, the Sixth Patriarch or Bodhidharma was not a Zen master
[laughs, laughter].
I don't say koan study is not good, but if you think koan study is the only way
to study Zen, you cannot explain why Bodhidharma or the Sixth Patriarch did not
use koans [laughs]. So, Zen is not just koan study. Of course, there is some
weak point or blind angle, for every practice. The weak point of koan practice
is it is a substitute for the teaching. A koan is a kind of teaching, and koan
practice is the means to attain enlightenment. If it is a means to attain
enlightenment, there will be many steps. So that is why they say until you pass
so many numbers of koans, you cannot get inka.3 There would be many
stages like a stepladder. Let me put it this way: whether it is koan study or
shikantaza, if you practice it, you will make some improvement. So in this
sense there are many steps.
But in Soto—in shikantaza—there are no steps, because we are expressing
our true nature through practice. We already have innate nature. And, what we
should do is to express it. So there are no steps. As long as there are many
steps, then there will be some who can climb up so many steps, and some for
whom it will not be possible to climb even one step. If the practice is this
kind of practice, that is not for everyone. Because we have originally true
nature, our practice is based on a kind of experience for a good student. For a
beginner it is a kind of dream. Our understanding of practice is that it is the
expression of our true nature. Whether our practice is good or bad, as long as
we have true nature, every practice should be true practice. Even if you cannot
cross your legs, if you have this kind of understanding, your everyday life is
zazen practice. We understand zazen in this way. This is our understanding of koan
practice from our viewpoint.
Anyway, the nature of practice is completely different. Not the same thing.
Completely different. This is what I want to say first of all. And, what is our
attitude towards Rinzai? Or, what is their understanding of Soto? “Soto is
sleeping zazen” [laughs]. “They understand that they have originally
buddha-nature. So whether they practice hard or not, whether their practice is
good or bad, originally there is no difference [laughs].” So, “They are not so
sincere in their practice.” Maybe that is true. That is, what Rinzai students
may say about our practice.
For Rinzai students, it is necessary for them to continue practice forever—not
only aiming at enlightenment but also as an expression of their true nature, or
with gratitude for attaining enlightenment, or appreciating a former teachers'
effort to transmit Buddhism to us. They should continue their practice, and
they should transmit their practice to their descendants. In other words, their
practice also should be continued forever. There is no time to rest on the
black cushion, even if they attain enlightenment. And, I think many good Rinzai
teachers put emphasis on the practice after kensho, after enlightenment.
And, we Soto students should practice more sincerely, like the effort Rinzai
students make, even though they may practice hard because of the candy [laughs]
of enlightenment. Anyway, they are practicing very sincerely. So that is good
example for us. And Soto students like to talk about zazen. Rinzai students do
not talk so much about zazen. They give you a koan without any explanation, and
they ask you to give an answer to it. That is their way.
Of course, Rinzai has some shortcomings, as we have. And, at the same time,
they have good points as we have. But, Zen priests and Zen students should not
lose the key point of why Zen is an independent school of Buddhism. Why it is
necessary for us to have this kind of understanding of Buddhism. If we lose the
key point in understanding of Buddhism, it is not even Hinayana school
[laughter]. It is not even religion. It is a kind of exercise instead [laughs].
It is not religion. It doesn't help us in its true sense.
In China for a long, long time, 400 years or more, there were not so many
teachers who understood this point. That is why Dogen Zenji wanted to come back
to Japan, because he couldn't find any good teachers in China. But fortunately he
met with Nyojo Zenji,4 who had a perfect understanding of Buddhism.
So, Dogen Zenji became his disciple. Not as a disciple of the Soto school, but one
of the disciples of Buddha. For Dogen Zenji, his teacher Nyojo Zenji was the
only teacher who understood what Buddhism is in its true sense. What was the
mercy of Buddha in its true sense? He was the only one.
So he became his disciple. That is why Dogen Zenji did not like to use the name
of Soto. In China, the Soto school is one of the five schools of Zen. But
according to Dogen Zenji, this understanding should be the understanding of all
the schools of Zen as long as they are descendants of the Sixth Patriarch or
Bodhidharma.
Originally, there should not be so many schools of Zen. It should be one school
of Buddhism. Even though their way of practice is different, the key points
should be the same. That was Dogen Zenji's understanding of Nyojo Zenji. For
him, Nyojo Zenji was Buddha himself, or the Sixth Patriarch himself, or Bodhidharma
himself. So, for him there were no five schools. For him there was no Rinzai or
Soto.
He respects various teachers who belong to Rinzai's lineage. He doesn't mind
whether he belongs to Rinzai or Soto. If he is good, he is a descendant of
Bodhidharma, and the Sixth Patriarch, and Buddha. That is his non-sectarianism.
If people say, because we stick to this key point [laughs] that is Soto—that is
[laughs] maybe all right. For them to say, “He is Soto,” it is all right. But
we have no sectarianism. We believe in Buddha's religion that saves all
sentient beings—not just the selfless, good, good student [laughs]. That is our
understanding of Zen.
So, it is not a matter of Rinzai or Soto. Soto is a school which puts emphasis
on the transmitted buddha-mind and practices our way as the expression of our
transmitted mind, or to develop a buddha's mind. The way we practice may not be
the same, but whatever we do is the expression of our true nature. If I say
just “expression of true nature,” it is quite simple. How we express our true
nature is the thing I was explaining in my previous lecture.
In short, I think there must be various schools of Buddhism. There must be. But,
it is necessary to have mutual understanding. And, it is necessary to know the
positions of various schools. What position does one school have in the history
of Buddhism, or in the actual activity as a religion? What kind of good points
and bad points? And, what kind of responsibility every religion has?
The most concerning point for us is not teaching, but practice. We cannot
practice many things at the same time [laughs]. So we should stick to one
practice. And, with full understanding of our practice, as a Soto student it is
necessary to stick to shikantaza. Sometimes to practice a koan or to
understand a koan will be helpful. But, the key point should be shikantaza,
or Dogen's zazen, or Bodhidharma's zazen, or Buddha's zazen. This point is very
important, and all the practice or all the power you will have by zazen
practice should be based on this understanding, or else your practice will end
in a dead end. It will create more problems for you.
Our practice is like water. Water is necessary for everyone. Even though wine
or lemon juice tastes good, or ice cream is good [laughs], if you always take
ice cream or lemon juice, you cannot survive. So you should not forget water. Our
practice is like water. People are liable to forget [laughs] why water is so
important. [You can find it everywhere [laughs]. So you do not appreciate water
so much.5] But if you forget water, you will eventually get into
some trouble. You should not forget water.
This is my understanding of sectarianism and Dogen's non-sectarianism. Dogen's
sectarianism can be non-sectarian with Christianity or some other religions too.
If you have this kind of understanding, Christianity is all right. Soka Gakkai
[?] may be all right [laughs, laughter]. Maybe [laughs, laughter].
But, they will not understand [laughs], this point. If they could understand
our point, whatever the religion is, that would be very helpful. This is my
non-sectarianism. So my sectarianism is sectarianism and non-sectarianism
[laughs]. Both. Do you understand? You cannot say it is non-sectarian, because
I am a very proud sectarian [laughs].
You cannot change my understanding. No one can change it [laughs]. The only way
is to change their understanding [laughter]. But you only get frustrated
[laughs, laughter]. Even so, I do not reject any understanding. And, it does
not mean for me there is nothing to study [laughs]. I have to study a lot of
things, but there is no need for me to change my foundation of religion.
Because of this foundation, I feel free to study many things. If I lost this
foundation, I would be a very bad sectarian [laughs]. Because I feel some
easiness, I have no fear of losing my way. Whatever I study, it is all right.
Do you have some questions? Hai.
Student A: Do you and Yasutani Roshi6 and Soen Roshi7 have the same foundation?
SR: Oh yeah, Yasutani Roshi. We talked about this point, and he agreed with me.
He knows what is Soto and what is Rinzai. Hai.
Student B: You were talking about non-sectarianism in Sung China. What does it
mean in America?
SR: In China?
Student B: In America?
SR: First of all, you have no tradition of Buddhism—there is no Buddhism yet. We
are starting to establish some Buddhist activity here. And, intellectually you
study many things, and you have various understandings, and I think some of you
already studied under many teachers. So the situation is quite different. In Japan,
most Soto students study Soto only. Between Rinzai and Soto today, some Rinzai
students study Dogen Zenji, and we study Rinzai practice too. But, mostly a Rinzai
student is Rinzai, and Soto students from beginning to end are Soto students.
But here, the way you study is not the same as we do in Japan. And this
situation is something like the situation when Zen Buddhism started in China
after the Sixth Patriarch. They recommended their students to some other
teachers. Actually there was not much sectarianism, but there were various
kinds of practice or ways of giving instruction. I think we are in America in the
same situation as they had in China.
So, I think it is necessary for teachers to have closer relationships with each
other, and to help students, exchange students, or have discussions with each
other. Or else we cannot help students. If I say we should practice just Soto
or Rinzai [laughs], they don't know what to do. So, students should choose
their way. And, we should encourage students to find appropriate teachers. This
is, I think, absolutely necessary for us as teachers. Hai.
Student C: If we feel that it is just a matter of different students needing
different methods of instruction to understand the same foundation, then there
really isn't any cause at all for controversy, and it can be just as fluid as
possible. Am I correct?
SR: Yes, I understand in this way, and I think Nakagawa Roshi is also very much
like a Soto teacher. He understands Dogen Zenji very well, and Yasutani Roshi
originally was a Soto teacher. For some reason he became independent from Soto.
There was a good reason for that. That is just a matter of activity, not a
matter of understanding. So, I don't think there is any problem. Hai.
Student D: I have two short questions. The first one is, you said that it's
impossible to attain enlightenment, and that didn't sound too good. So I
thought [laughs, laughter], well, maybe you meant that it's possible to attain
enlightenment, but we couldn't say that we'll attain anything. Is that what you
meant? [Laughs, laughter.]
SR: No. In its usual sense, people think, “I attained enlightenment” [laughs]. That
doesn't make much sense. They feel that way. It is true that you reach a step.
This is what I'm always talking about [laughs]. Whatever it is, that is Buddha
himself. And, however it is complete, that is not Buddha himself. As long as
it is something which we can understand or which we can see because it has some
form or color, that cannot be absolute. We have this idea.
Usually you do not have this idea, so you stick to enlightenment. Even though
you think you attained enlightenment, that is not the absolute itself or
buddha-nature itself. It is something—some expression of buddha-nature.
I was talking with a guest, and she had very good understanding. I was amazed
[laughs, laughter]. We had been talking about maybe thirty-forty minutes,
standing under the trellis.
She said, we are an ornament of “it,” instead of saying buddha-nature. First of
all, she said, she was thinking about the word for buddha-nature. And she said
“it”—we are tools of it. That was what she said—tools of it. And I said, “Yeah,
maybe tools of it.” And, actually we say, “We are ornaments of it,” [laughs].
We have various forms and colors, and by our body and mind we give various
ornaments to Buddha to eat. We are ornaments of it, and she completely
understood about it. And, she said we are not even a part of it [laughs]
because we change it [laughs]. We are just tentative ornaments of it [laughs].
I don't know how she keeps this kind of understanding. It is unusual. She was
German, and she has some difficulty in pronouncing English words like
philosophy [laughs]. And, she did not believe in so much philosophy. But, she
wanted to figure out what “it” is. And she said, “I am an ornament of it.”
And—oh—first of all she said, “I am not I. I am it,” [laughs], she said. “I am
it.” Not “me,” “it.” That was what she said, before we said much. “I am not I,
but it.” And she started to talk about the relationship between “I” and “it.” And,
“I am an ornament of it, a tool of it.” And, I said maybe we say ornament of
it. “Yeah, that's better,” she said [laughs].
And, the next question was, what is, then, karma? Karma. That was the second
question. And, I said karma is if you do something it will leave a result. And,
that result will cause some activity. In this way, our activity will continue.
And here we started to talk about the eternal. We didn't say “eternal present,”
but cause and effect, cause and effect, cause and effect. And it is karma, and
it is also the eternal expression of each being or actually an ornament of it.
In this way we are free from karma. And yet we cannot get out of karma.
[Laughs.] Fortunately, we could communicate this kind of [laughs] thing. I was
rather amazed. And, she is from Redwood City. I don't know what was her name.
She was the lady who was sitting right there. She is a very fat lady, wearing
something like this. Do you remember her?
Student E: Was that today, Roshi?
SR: Today.
Student E: Because I remember.
SR: Her blouse was trimmed like this.
Student E: White blouse with red—
SR: Red.
Student E: —An Indian kind of braid.
SR: Oh, yeah. No, white on white. And there was red or—[laughter]—not like
this, but like this [laughter]. That was a good design for her, I thought
[laughs], because it divided her big body in two [laughs, laughter] small
pieces [laughs, laughter]. More beautiful in that way. And, her friend was
waiting for her because they were leaving.
Student F: Roshi, she told me that she felt very awkward about doing zazen and
doing the services and bowing. She said she was a little bit frightened. Because
at every move of your hands or bowing or turning, she said she felt it meant
something, but she couldn't understand it. But, I think she was very interested
to know about it.
SR: I think she may come back [laughs]. Her understanding is very good. I
don't know. Yeah. Her practice is not so good [laughter]. And it may be very
difficult for her. And, if she starts some diet [laughter]. Some questions?
Student G: She just said she was very pleased to be able to talk to you and
somewhat surprised that she was able to.
SR: [Laughs.] Oh.
Student F: She also wanted to know how come so many people about 25 or 36 years
old are trying something like this?
SR: Oh yes! Yeah. Why do you have so many young students? What is it—oh yeah,
that was [2-3 words]. And then we started something about the teaching. How
come? And, she was very much interested to see so many young students here.
[Chant follows.]
_________________
1 Opening words were not recorded, but the remainder of the sentence
sounded like an aside to a student rather than the beginning of the lecture.
2 Shōnin Shinran (1173–1262). Student of Hōnen. Founder of
Jōdō-shin-shū.
3 inka (Jap.): seal of confirmation.
4 Tiantong Rujing (Tendō Nyojō): 1163-1228.
5 These two sentences are not on the currently available audio.
6 Yasutani Hakuun-rōshi:
1885-1973. Student of Nishiari Bokusan-zenji and dharma successor of Harada
Sōgaku-rōshi. He is known for his synthesis of Sōtō and Rinzai
practices—especially for using kōan practice with Sōtō students.
7 Nakagawa Sōen-rōshi (1908-1983): Rinzai master. Dharma successor of Yamamoto Genpō and abbot of Ryūtaku-ji monastery near Mishima. In the West,
he taught in the United States and Israel.
Source: City Center original tape. Verbatim transcript by Adam Tinkham and Bill
Redican (3/21/01). Lightly edited for readability by Wendy Pirsig and Peter
Ford (11/2020).
Audio & Other Files | Verbatim Transcript | Back to top of page