Search Results (6)

The article addresses one of the central issues of Buddhist thought, the status of selfhood and individuality, as they are discussed in the work of the Japanese Zen thinker Dōgen (1200–1253). It discusses critically and rejects the widespread assumption that Dōgen postulates two levels of selfhood, that of the deluded individual and a transcendent True Self to the attainment of which one should aspire. On the basis of rigorous methodological principles, formulated at the outset, the article analyzes in detail the terminology Dōgen uses for selfhood and individuality and provides a comprehensive, coherent interpretational framework for the reading of a number of key passages that have usually been presented in support of the True Self theory. Full article

Sufism and Zen share a number of theories and practices, including a concern with lived experience. This article analyses the basis of their teachings, namely, the idea of the self, in texts by two important figures in the respective traditions, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn (“The Revival of the Religious Sciences”) by Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) for Sufism, and Shōbōgenzō 正法眼蔵 (“The Treasury of the True Dharma-Eye”) by Dōgen 道元 (d. 1253) for Zen. Al-Ghazālī emphasises the necessity of disciplining the self (nafs) in order for the heart to remember God only, while Dōgen famously asserts the importance of learning and forgetting the self (jiko 自己) in the way of the Buddha. This study first examines al-Ghazālī’s and Dōgen’s views of the self, and then compares their teachings. The juxtaposition of the two masterpieces reveals striking similarities as well as fundamental differences at both doctrinal and practical levels. Despite these similarities, although al-Ghazālī and Dōgen have been contrasted with thinkers outside their own tradition, they have yet to be compared directly. Without denying the philosophical depth of the thought of the two authors, this study also highlights the importance of faith in both the Iḥyāʾ and Shōbōgenzō. Full article

The central question of this paper is what kind of view Dōgen had about Mazu. At first glance, this may seem completely irrelevant to the theme of this issue. In fact, however, Dōgen’s view points to a subtle relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism in an interesting way. Dōgen seems to regard Mazu as an ambiguous figure, standing on the borderline between Buddhism and Hinduism. However, Dōgen’s intention was to save Mazu and keep him on the side of Buddhism. So how can Mazu be saved? To answer this question is to trace the fundamental boundary between Buddhism and Hinduism according to the outstanding Zen master. In this study we adopt the usual method of textual analysis. Our discussion proceeds in the following order. (The steps do not correspond exactly to the section breaks.) (1) First, the argument of a person called Senni is presented from Dōgen’s Bendōwa, where Dōgen severely criticizes him as a non-Buddhist heresy. At this step we will confirm that Senni is a Sāṅkhya theorist (hence, a Hinduist). (2) We take up a parallel to the above passage from Dōgen’s Shōbōgenzō, Chapter “Sokushinzebutsu”. It becomes clear that the true target of Dōgen’s criticism was Mazu, the great Chinese Chan master. (3) The above operation shows that Dōgen was trying to position Mazu as someone on the borderline between Hinduism and Buddhism. (4) We try to reconstruct from the text what in Senni angered Dōgen, or, in other words, from what he wanted to save Mazu. As a result, the borderline as seen by Dōgen will be visible to us. The main findings of this paper are as follows: (1) The mark that distinguishes Buddhism from Hinduism, according to Dōgen, is the presence of the never-ending Bodhi-mind. This is in fact what TSUNODA Tairyū suggested in his 1985 article. Dōgen implemented this idea as an endless loop of Bodhi-mind, which makes the goal unreachable. (2) The implicit object of Dōgen’s criticism is not the Japanese Tendai or the Darumashū, but Mazu, as HE Yansheng indicated in his 2000 book. The so-called Critical Buddhism movement began on the basis of a misunderstanding. The large amount of secondary literature that has resulted is also indirectly based on this error. Full article

The purpose of this paper is to holistically comprehend the concept of nen 念 in the Zen philosophy of Dōgen (道元 1200–1253), which is one of the origins of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction, in relation to his principal concepts. This article specifically investigates its usages in his masterpiece, Treasury of the True Dharma Eye (Shōbōgenzō 正法眼蔵), according to each step of the threefold wisdom (san-e 三慧); for mindfulness is a common thread among them and he presents the concept of “monshishū-shō 聞思修證”, of which shō 證 stands for “awakening”. It is revealed that Dōgen considers “study” (mon 聞) and “reflection” (shi 思) to be essential on the Buddhist path, as well as “practice” (shū 修), and that nen 念 in Dōgen’s philosophy is the self beyond the sense of body-mind or time, which can be attained after long cultivation. Also, the connections among nen 念 and his critical concepts such as “just sitting” (shikan taza 祇管打坐), “dropping off body-mind” (shinjin datsuraku 身心脱落), and “oneness of practice and awakening” (shūshō ittō 修證一等) are elucidated. Full article

The goal of this article is to show how Dōgen’s views of language, perhaps the most “mystical” part of his thought at first glance, can be interpreted in a framework that is wholly rational in the broader sense of the word. Dōgen belongs to a pansemioticist tradition and indeed maintains that being is tantamount to signification, but unlike previous pansemioticists, such as Kūkai, he does not posit a signifying subjective Other to whom the “message” of reality can be attributed. In Dōgen’s view, the meaningfulness of an event is a concomitant characteristic of its very reality, because the availability of reality for us to experience is already a linguistic phenomenon. The article argues that this is not a mystical thesis, but a view that can also be articulated in a more familiar and fully rational idiom, and that it bears similarities with many different Western thinkers and theorists, such as Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Gadamer, Peirce, Jakobson, and others. Full article

Dōgen’s gender-egalitarian stance on women to attain awakening in their zazen practice is well known. At the same time, a nagging suspicion lingers on among some scholars that he grew increasingly misogynistic in his old age. In this present study, which focuses on Dōgen’s sermons compiled in the Record of Eihei (Eihei kōroku), the Shōbōgenzō, and other writings related to women, we find that even after Dōgen moved to Eiheiji, his stance on women remained consistent. Not only did he readily respond to his female disciples’ requests to give special sermons in memory of their parents, but also positively saw women’s presence in the development of the Buddhist tradition. Through this study it also becomes clear that Dōgen came to embrace a more flexible view on filial piety in his later years, as he deepened his reflection on this matter—the sense of gratitude one feels for one’s parents is concomitant with nurturing one’s compassion. The aspect of compassion that sustained Dōgen’s life of teaching begins to loom large. It was his Chinese master Nyojō (Rujing) who emphasized compassion as the pillar of the zazen practice. Two sermons Dōgen delivered on the anniversary of his father’s death, moreover, have given the scholars new information concerning his parentage. The focus on the aspect of "feminine presence” in Dōgen inadvertently (or naturally?) leads to the heart of Dōgen’s own identity. Full article