|
[84] Reliance is a gate of Dharma illumination; for [with it] we do not incline toward Small Vehicles. 依倚是法明門、不樂小乘故。 The subject of this gate isn’t reliance in the sense of taking refuge in the three treasures and then having faith or relying on them; reliance here is pointing to the law of causality, or cause and effect. We could also say dependent arising or dependent origination. Cause and effect is one of the most foundational teachings in the Buddhist tradition. In a nutshell, it means that everything arises from something else. Certain karmic elements come together—there’s a seed or cause, and it encounters the right conditions—and from that, something arises: a thought, a cloud, a loaf of bread, a person with a sense of self. We might not see or understand this very complicated coming together of causes and conditions, but when things arise, it’s not random. Cause and effect is closely tied to interconnectedness, impermanence and emptiness. Those are also extremely important teachings, so we can see why cause and effect is so central to our understanding. Buddha taught that all conditioned things, things that arise because of a combination of karmic causes and conditions, are constantly arising and falling away. They’re constantly changing in big ways that might be easy to see and in subtle ways that aren’t. That’s because the causes and conditions that bring them together are also impermanent. If the basis for something is changing, then it makes sense that the thing itself has to be changing, because it depends on those causes and conditions for its own existence. We can see why cause and effect and impermanence are so closely linked, and why they affect everything. All things are impermanent. That leads us to the connection with emptiness. Emptiness doesn’t mean things don’t really exist. It means that conditioned things don’t have a fixed and permanent self-nature. There’s nothing about them that’s separate from anything else because they’ve arisen from a cause. They’re connected to some cause and conditions. Also, there’s nothing about them that is unchanging. We’ve just seen why everything is impermanent and without any fixed characteristics or identity. All things are dependant on causes and conditions, and therefore all things are impermament, and all things are empty. These three teachings are closely intertwined. According to the gate statement, if we understand the law of causality as well as impermanency and emptiness, then we’re not drawn to small vehicles. Small vehicles refers to “Hinayana” practice, literally small vehicle, as opposed to Mahayana, or great vehicle. These days we say Theravada practice or tradition, since Hinayana is sort of a demeaning term (we’re the great vehicle, but you’re the lesser one). It’s important to understand that the Theravada tradition also teaches about emptiness, as well as impermanence and no-self, and that what emptiness means, conditioned things being without a fixed self nature, is the same. However, the role of emptiness is different. Theravada practice considers emptiness an important door to liberation, but it’s not talked about so much. First someone learns about the functioning of the mind and how to work with the mind in sitting practice, and then maybe teacher introduces emptiness as a means to liberation. In that practice, emptiness is understood as a way of looking at raw experience without adding anything or taking anything away. You experience sense data or mental events without writing a story about them and trying to explain and make sense of them. Those things are distractions from seeing what the mind is really doing, how we cling to self and how suffering arises. When something comes up, the practice is to not act on it or indulge a reaction to it, but to watch what’s happening as a series of events and to see that it’s empty of anything you can grasp or identify with as “I.” The more you do this practice, the better you’re able to see how not only big wild thoughts and emotions are empty but also more subtle things. If there’s nothing about anything you experience that points back to a self, then you can start letting go of clinging to it, because that clinging to self is at the root of suffering. When you’re not clinging to self and creating suffering, that’s liberation. Theravadin practitioners prepare for this kind of emptiness practice by studying and training in prajna, sila and samadhi, because without this kind of preparation, the mind just keeps creating stories, views and opinions, and emptiness becomes just another idea, subject to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Folks can get caught up in trying to understand emptiness itself through another set of ideas and philosophies rather than focusing on the quality of what’s actually happening in the mind moment by moment and then using the teachings about emptiness to help them break their attachment to habituated thinking and cut off the arising of the three poisons and all the suffering that goes with that. Here’s what Uchiyama Roshi has to say about what we’re doing in the Mahayana: The Buddhist approach from a Mahayana perspective might be described this way: By accepting and properly understanding the true nature of both accidental and undeniable realities, and by living in accord with this understanding, the matter of living and dying will cease to be such a terrible problem. (1) When he says "accidental and undeniable realities," he’s talking about karmic circumstances that come about because of causes and conditions (accidental), and what are sometimes called marks of existence, things like impermanence, suffering and emptiness (undeniable realities). If we understand both form and emptiness and live based on that understanding, then we’re no longer held captive by birth and death, suffering and samsara. In this case, emptiness is not a meditative technique aimed at moving us toward the goal of liberation. It’s an undeniable reality that influences our entire moment-by-moment existence and all the actions we take with body, speech and mind. When Uchiyama Roshi describes emptiness and sitting, he says: All of the thoughts and feelings that arise in my head simply arise haphazardly, by chance. And the conclusion we can derive from that is not to hold on to all that comes up in our head. That is what we are doing when we sit zazen. (2) Thoughts and feelings arise by chance—that means “accidentally,” as he used the word above. Arising by chance means dependant on causes and conditions, and therefore impermanent and empty. He also says: If I come to the conclusion that I am accidental, then naturally my thoughts are also accidental. (3) Thus we don’t need to try to hold on to all that stuff because we can’t anyway and there’s no permanent self that benefits from it. This is what we’re doing when we open hand of thought in zazen, sitting in emptiness and letting go of the accidental things that come up in our minds. At Gate 83 I talked about non-reliance as a key component of the Sanshin style of practice, and that it led us to ask two questions: on what am I relying to drive my practice, and what am I relying on my practice for? Ideally, our practice is driven only by our own bodhicitta and we’re not looking for any personal reward. This is non-reliance as applied quite specifically to practicing here, but of course this derives from a much broader teaching. Uchiyama Roshi wrote a section in Opening the Hand of Thought called “Depending on Others is Unstable.” That’s a phrase from the Sutta Nipata, one of the oldest Buddhist texts. In this section he makes the point that all too often we think of the self as something defined by external reference points: our relationships with others, whether or not we have certain characteristics like power or wealth, how well we compete against other people for stuff. That’s part of the story, but it’s not the true self or the universal self. He says: While we are always undoubtedly living out some “self” usually we are not, in fact, living out the reality of our naked self, our true self. (4) This naked self is not dependent or reliant on anything outside of itself or other than itself for its existence, so he says we can’t rely on others to really deeply understand self. If we see only the self that’s separated from all other selves and defined by those relationships or comparisons, definition isn’t reality. The reality is that the self and all other conditioned things are empty of a fixed and permanent self-nature. This is the reality that’s prior to definitions (or we might say prior to our ideas, stories and preconceptions). Uchiyama Roshi uses the example of fire—thinking about or reading or hearing the word itself can’t burn you; it’s only when you touch the fire that you get burned. Thus, we don’t use emptiness as a way to loosen the grip of delusion and clinging in order to reach Nirvana or enlightenment. For us it’s an undeniable reality that’s here whether we think so or not, or like it or want it or not. When our lives and actions reflect that, then we’re not creating and perpetuating suffering. Dogen was concerned with understanding this difference in styles of practice. He said: The practice of the buddhas and patriarchs is completely different from the way of Hinayana, and he warns us about using zazen to develop self control or try to get rid of desires because that project itself is based in desire and grasping, which is a real conundrum. It’s useful to be clear about what practice we’re doing, and how that may differ from the practice of others just so we don’t get mixed up and confused. However, we also have to talk here about the sixth of the ten major precepts: not speaking of the faults of others. In the early days of this precept, the concern was about criticizing someone whose practice was different from yours, and here we can turn to two texts about this precept for some context: the Bonmokyo and the Kyojukaimon. The Bonmokyo or Brahma Net Sutra is an older text describing the ten major precepts. The precepts we receive today in the Soto Zen tradition are derived from this text, written in China in the 5th century, almost 1500 years ago. The Bonmokyo says: The Sixth Major Precept prohibits discussing the faults of the four types of sangha members. A disciple of the Buddha must not discuss the faults of any sangha member, bodhisattva, layperson, bhikshu or bhikshuni, nor may oneself encourage others to do so or involve oneself in the causes, conditions, methods or karma of speaking of the faults of the four types of sangha members. Whenever a bodhisattva hears an evil-minded non-Buddhist or evil exponent of the small vehicles speak of practices which are not in accord with the dharma and not in accord with the precepts within Buddhism, he or she should always feel pity for such detractors, instruct them, and lead them to a wholesome belief in the Great Vehicle. If, instead, a bodhisattva discusses the faults of those within the Buddhadharma, the person thereby commits a bodhisattva parajika offense. In its simplest form, this precept is reminding us not to be overly critical of people. Folks make mistakes even with good intentions, and we all have limitations in our insight and experience. The Bonmokyo says it’s better to try to help people understand and turn things around than to just criticize and find fault. This we can do with compassion and wisdom rather than our attachment to way things “should” be according to our own ideas. This is how we avoid creating disorder in the way. However, when we hear phrases like “evil exponent of the small vehicles” and put that next to today’s gate statement, this can feel kind of disturbing. Any time we hear “small vehicles” we know something or someone is being disparaged. It might have been OK in fifth century China, but it isn’t today. We don’t need to attack the practices of our brothers and sisters in the Way; we’re all coexisting even if we’re doing different things. We don’t see Theravadin practitioners as evil-minded, and we aren’t worried that if we make a slip or let down our guard we’re going to get sucked over to the dark side. We also don’t think we need to save them from themselves by feeling pity for them and trying to get them to practice like we do. If you come to our monthly ryaku fusatsu ceremony, you hear me reading Dogen’s Bussō shō den bosatsu dai kai kyojukaimon, which we just call the Kyojukaimon, because that’s a mouthful. In English it’s the Comments on teaching and conferring the bodhisattva precepts that have been authentically transmitted by Buddhas and ancestors. The Kyojukaimon says about the sixth precept: Within the Buddhadharma, we all [approach] the same way, [learn] the same Dharma, [realize] the same verification, and [carry out] the same practice. Do not discuss faults of others. Do not cause disorder in the way. We’re all really doing the same practice and engaging with the same dharma. Historically, there were practitioners from various streams of Buddhism all practicing in the same temple. They might become experts in a particular practice or text, and not everyone was necessarily doing the same thing. I think there’s a direct connection here between what the Kyojukaimon says and Dogen’s understanding of authentic transmission of the dharma. Dogen saw his teaching and practice as the one true Buddhism rather than as a distinct sect within a larger tradition. He wasn’t trying to create something to compete with other sects; he didn’t really like dividing up Buddhism into branches and schools. His feeling was that it’s not that your way is wrong because mine is more effective; it’s that my way is better because it’s more authentic to Buddha’s teachings. He would have been happy if everyone had joined in under the same big tent of authentic, legitimate Buddhism. He saw all incarnations or manifestations of Buddha, past, present and future, as Shakyamuni. We still preserve this teaching today in one of our morning ekos when we dedicate merit to Daion Kyoshu Honshi Shakamuni Butsu Daiosho (The great benefactor, the Founder of the Religion, Original Teacher, Sakyamuni Buddha the Great Monk). Shakyamuni is the historical Buddha, as opposed to Maitreya, Vairocana or Amida, so he’s not a figure that someone imagined or an idealized person. Dogen also sees himself as teaching Buddhism as it existed before division into Theravada and Mahayana, and of course Shakyamuni predates that kind of split, so uninterrupted transmission of the dharma starting from Shakyamuni is critically important. (5) For Dogen, there’s a very tight relationship between awakening and authenticity or verification. What’s being authentically transmitted is nothing other than the expression of awakening itself. When we practice, we verify awakening, and because of awakening, we practice and live in a certain way that has to do with emptiness. Awakening is what it is, so it doesn’t undergo historical development across space and time. True Buddhism just preserves Shakyamuni’s wisdom—his awakening—and hands it down through the lineage. Dogen thinks the dharma he received from his own teacher was the complete true treasury of the dharma eye, the real ancient ways of the Buddhas and ancestors, and since Rinzai (and other sects) no longer preserve these ancient ways, Dogen’s only link to Buddha’s awakening is his own teacher, Nyojo. He also puts the most store by Shakyamuni, Bodhidharma, Hui-neng and later ancestors in his own lineage. His emphasis on the supremacy of his own lineage gathers steam in the last dozen or so years of his life and it’s tied to the development of his training temples and his emphasis on deportment. Authenticity is what’s important, and authenticity is Buddha’s awakening, so we see sho 正 or “true” being used a lot, not only in Shobogenzo (Treasury of the True Dharma Eye), but also true vehicle, true gate, true awakening—those aren’t casual terms; it’s all about the authenticity. His famous phrase “to forget the self is to be verified or authenticated by the ten thousand things” means that the awakening that comes with dropping off body and mind is authentically Buddha’s awakening. In the Bendowa, Dogen says you don’t have to debate the relative merits of various teachings and doctrines, all you have to know is whether the practice is authentic or not. Again from the Kyojukaimon: Within the Buddhadharma, we all [approach] the same way, [learn] the same Dharma, [realize] the same verification, and [carry out] the same practice. This is not about effectiveness, it’s about legitimacy. Dogen says that the way to become a legitimate dharma heir is to study the actions and stories of one’s ancestors; this is how one receives the true dharma. Then one has a duty oneself to transmit the true dharma to others and future generations. That means keeping the precepts and embodying awakening and the dharma in your deportment. Thus the gate statement tells us that it’s important for us to understand the law of causality, and on that basis also to understand impermanence and emptiness so that, in the words of our dharma family, we also know that zazen is good for nothing and that we’re not using emptiness as a technique or clinging to it as a goal. However, as much as we may be committed and devoted to practice, we have to be careful about making comparisons and judgements about other traditions, because in the end we’re all children of Buddha and we’re all following Buddha’s way. Notes: (1) (6) Uchiyama, K. (2005). Opening the Hand of Thought: Foundations of Zen Buddhist Practice. Ukraine: Wisdom Publications, p. 11 (2) Ibid. (3) Opening the Hand, p. 10 (4) Opening the Hand, p. 26 (5) For more on the centrality of Shakyamuni in Soto Zen, see Two founders and two head temples on our Buddhist Essentials page. Questions for reflection and discussion:
Comments are closed.
|
About the text The Ippyakuhachi Homyomon, or 108 Gates of Dharma Illumination, appears as the 11th fascicle of the 12 fascicle version of Dogen Zenji’s Shobogenzo. Dogen didn't compile the list himself; it's mostly a long quote from another text called the Sutra of Collected Past Deeds of the Buddha. Dogen wrote a final paragraph recommending that we investigate these gates thoroughly. Hoko has been talking about the gates one by one since 2016. She provides material here that can be used by weekly dharma discussion groups as well as for individual study. The 108 Gates of Dharma Illumination
[1] Right belief [2] Pure mind [3] Delight [4] Love and cheerfulness The three forms of behavior [5] Right conduct of the actions of the body [6] Pure conduct of the actions of the mouth [7] Pure conduct of the actions of the mind The six kinds of mindfulness [8] Mindfulness of Buddha [9] Mindfulness of Dharma [10] Mindfulness of Sangha [11] Mindfulness of generosity [12] Mindfulness of precepts [13] Mindfulness of the heavens The four Brahmaviharas [14] Benevolence [15] Compassion [16] Joy [17] Abandonment The four dharma seals [18] Reflection on inconstancy [19] Reflection on suffering [20] Reflection on there being no self [21] Reflection on stillness [22] Repentance [23] Humility [24] Veracity [25] Truth [26] Dharma conduct [27] The Three Devotions [28] Recognition of kindness [29] Repayment of kindness [30] No self-deception [31] To work for living beings [32] To work for the Dharma [33] Awareness of time [34] Inhibition of self-conceit [35] The nonarising of ill-will [36] Being without hindrances [37] Belief and understanding [38] Reflection on impurity [39] Not to quarrel [40] Not being foolish [41] Enjoyment of the meaning of the Dharma [42] Love of Dharma illumination [43] Pursuit of abundant knowledge [44] Right means [45] Knowledge of names and forms [46] The view to expiate causes [47] The mind without enmity and intimacy [48] Hidden expedient means [49] Equality of all elements [50] The sense organs [51] Realization of nonappearance The elements of bodhi: The four abodes of mindfulness [52] The body as an abode of mindfulness [53] Feeling as an abode of mindfulness [54] Mind as an abode of mindfulness [55] The Dharma as an abode of mindfulness [56] The four right exertions [57] The four bases of mystical power The five faculties [58] The faculty of belief [59] The faculty of effort [60] The faculty of mindfulness [61] The faculty of balance [62] The faculty of wisdom The five powers [63] The power of belief [64] The power of effort [65] The power of mindfulness [66] The power of balance [67] The power of wisdom [68] Mindfulness, as a part of the state of truth [69] Examination of Dharma, as a part of the state of truth [70] Effort, as a part of the state of truth [71] Enjoyment, as a part of the state of truth [72] Entrustment as a part of the state of truth [73] The balanced state, as a part of the state of truth [74] Abandonment, as a part of the state of truth The Eightfold Path [75] Right view [76] Right discrimination [77] Right speech [78] Right action [79] Right livelihood [80] Right practice [81] Right mindfulness [82] Right balanced state [83] The bodhi-mind [84] Reliance [85] Right belief [86] Development The six paramitas [87] The dāna pāramitā [88] The precepts pāramitā [89] The forbearance pāramitā. [90] The diligence pāramitā [91] The dhyāna pāramitā [92] The wisdom pāramitā [93] Expedient means [94] The four elements of sociability [95] To teach and guide living beings [96] Acceptance of the right Dharma [97] Accretion of happiness [98] The practice of the balanced state of dhyāna [99] Stillness [100] The wisdom view [101] Entry into the state of unrestricted speech [102] Entry into all conduct [103] Accomplishment of the state of dhāraṇī [104] Attainment of the state of unrestricted speech [105] Endurance of obedient following [106] Attainment of realization of the Dharma of nonappearance [107] The state beyond regressing and straying [108] The wisdom that leads us from one state to another state and, somehow, one more: [109] The state in which water is sprinkled on the head Archives
August 2025
|
RSS Feed