Ted Biringer:
[To research] this truth of
moment-by-moment utter entrustment, we must research the mind. In
the mountain-still state of such research, we discern and
understand that ten thousand efforts are [each] the mind being
evident, and the triple world is just that which is greatly removed
from the mind. This discernment and understanding, while also of
the myriad real dharmas, activate the homeland of the self. They
make immediate and concrete the vigorous state of the human being
in question.
Shobogenzo,
Gyobutsu-yuigi, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
In Dogen’s writings (and Buddhist literature generally) we
frequently encounter phrases that are “self-declarative.” Of these,
there two basic types; first are those expressions that refer
directly to themselves, for example, many sutras contain passages
like, “Those who keep and guard this sutra shall experience such
and such…” The second type are expressions that describe subjects
as objects of subjects and objects as the subject of objects; the
most common kind of these expressions are statements that attribute
the thoughts, words, or deeds (objects) of a particular subject as
being directed or applied to that same subject, such as, “self sees
self…”, “from the mind to the mind…”, “the self itself…”, and
“Buddha actualizes Buddha…”
If our experience of language has been limited to communications
expressed from the common dualistic perspective, such phrasing
sounds awkward when we first hear it. Once we become familiar with
the nondual perspective, however, such expressions not only sound
natural, they come to mind naturally in our own thinking and
speaking. From the nondual view of Buddhism, of course, such
expressions are perfectly normal. After all, if the (true) self is
all-inclusive, as Buddhism contends, it is only normal to use
self-declarative expressions – for then all expressions must
ultimately be self-declarative.
For this reason, when we study sutras or participate in koan
training we can only benefit from remembering that they are all
self-declarative expressions, even if such is not explicitly
apparent in the structure of the phrase. For example, when a Zen
masters says, “we must research the mind” her meaning will be
clearer and more intimately understood if we remember that “we,”
“the mind,” and the activity of “research” are not three different
things – how much more intimate when we remember that “we,” the
“Zen master,” and “the expression itself” are all nondual. As our
sutra or koan study advances along this course we gradually become
more aware of the “self-declarative” (nondual) nature of all our
experiences – thus, our experience of nondual intimacy with all
things gradually expands and becomes increasingly inclusive of the
myriad things we encounter in our everyday lives.
It is your mutually encountering
your true Master within the Buddha Hall. It is just like saying,
“When seeing one person reflected in two facing mirrors, there are
three figures.”
Shobogenzo, Sanjushichihon Bodai
Bumpo, Hubert Nearman
Thus it is, from the Buddhist perspective that every aspect and
moment of our experience is an experience of the self experienced
by the self – I see a flower, a flower sees me, the flower sees
itself, I see myself, the self sees itself, seeing sees seeing,
etc. Also, since in Buddhism “existence” (places, things,
locations, here, etc.) and “time” (durations, moments, past,
future, now) are nondual, every aspect and moment of our experience
is a manifest instance of the (true) self – an actual instance of
the totality of “existence-time” (uji). Therefore, my seeing a
flower “here” is my seeing all other myriad dharmas “there”,
Mahakashyapa seeing a flower “then” is Mahakashyapa seeing this
flower “now.” Thus, when the Zen masters say things like, “Huang
drinks wine and Chang gets drunk,” or “Children in Korea clap their
hands and children in China dance,” they are not being mysterious
or even ambiguous but clear and straightforward.
“The great round mirror” is just a
virtue of “the buddhas.” Saying that this mirror “has no blurs on
the inside or the outside” neither describes an inside that depends
on an outside, nor an outside blurred by an inside. There being no
face or back, “two individuals are able to see the same.” Minds,
and eyes, are alike. “Likeness” describes “a human being” meeting
“a human being.” In regard to images within, they have mind and
eyes, and they are able to see the same. In regard to images
without, they have mind and eyes, and they are able to see the
same. Object and subject which are manifest before us now are like
each other within and like each other without—they are neither I
nor anyone else. Such is the meeting of “two human beings,” and the
likeness of “two human beings.” That person is called “I,” and I am
that person. “ …Taking up his principle, we should experience in
practice the faces of buddhas and the faces of patriarchs in the
great round mirror, which is akin to the eternal mirror.
Shobogenzo, Kokyo, Gudo
Nishijima & Mike Cross
To clarify this, consider Dogen’s statement in Shobogenzo,
Genjokoan, “When one side is illumined, the other side is dark.”
The fact that the “other side” is dark, rather than absent,
stresses the nondual truth that the aspect of “existence-time” that
is dark (all the myriad things of “existence-time” that are not
here/now being illumined) informs and exerts its “presence” in what
is illumined – his here/now (existence-time) is nondual (not two,
not separate from) her there/then; his “here” is her “there,”
Bodhidharma’s “now” is Huineng’s “then.”
In light of this, “where” (existence) are you “now” (time), and
“when” (time) did the morning star appear (existence) to
Shakyamuni? Right here, right now – look, look! How old are you?
While an exact number cannot be given, it would be accurate to say,
“The same age as the universe.” Listen, listen – is that the wind
in the trees? Yes. Is it the sound of cars passing by on the road?
Yes. What else? Listen, this sound here/now contains and is
contained by all sounds there/then – can you hear the Buddhas first
sermon? Listen, Dogen is singing out through all
existence-time:
How joyful it is! From kalpa to
kalpa is the Flower of Dharma, and from noon to night is the Flower
of Dharma. Because the Flower of Dharma is from kalpa to kalpa, and
because the Flower of Dharma is from noon to night, even though our
own body and mind grows strong and grows weak, it is just the
Flower of Dharma itself. The reality that exists “as it is” is “a
treasure,” is “brightness,” is “a seat of truth,” is “wide, great,
profound, and eternal,” is “profound, great, and everlasting,” is
“mind in delusion, the Flower of Dharma turning,” and is “mind in
realization, turning the Flower of Dharma,” which is really just
the Flower of Dharma turning the Flower of Dharma.
Shobogenzo,
Hokke-ten-hokke, Gudo Nishijima & Mike
Cross
If the subject was experienced as an object the self would be seen
(thus treated) as “other,” and if an object was experienced as the
subject the other would be treated as “self.” Thus, from the
Buddhist perspective, treating the other as self and self as other
is normal – and doing otherwise is abnormal. As “other” does not
only refer to people but to all that is “other than self,” the
practical implications of verifying the Buddhist teaching would be
profound indeed. Immediately, greed and fear would be vastly
diminished; what would we covet in a realm where everything was
already our true self? What could we fear but our self? While we
would certainly be liberated from much anguish, the even greater
result would be the opening of an enormously expanded and enhanced
dimension of experience. To verify the truth of the universe
proclaimed by the Buddhist masters would be to find ourselves in a
realm inhabited by an infinite number of beings, all capable, even
desirous, of intimate fellowship.
In meeting Buddha, we meet
ourselves as buddha and others as buddha, and we meet great buddhas
and small buddhas.
Shobogenzo, Kenbutsu, Gudo
Nishijima & Mike Cross
Peace,
Ted