Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Wild Fox Zen

Home
Buddhist
Second (or Third) Enlightenment?

Second (or Third) Enlightenment?

Last updated on: November 2, 2008 at 11:28 am by Dosho Port

Second (or Third) Enlightenment? 2008-11-02T11:28:00-06:00 Dosho Port

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Here’s a comment from my last post that I’d like to post a comment about … so we’re already in the realm of two or three heads! Continue reading at your own peril.

Dosho,

In [“Valley Sounds, Mountain Colors”] Dogen talked of the ‘second enlightenment’ of Master Kyogen Chikan and Master Reiun Shigon.

Nishijima Roshi interprets this as those Masters’ attainment of understanding of the entire philosophical system of Buddhism. What do you think of this idea?

Is the ‘essential inquiry’ of which you speak a means to directly clarify Buddhist philosophy in this way?

Can you explain the method of enquiry in detail?

Regards,

Harry.

Harry and all who didn’t listen to the above warning,

First off, rather than concern yourself with second enlightenment, I encourage you to focus on first enlightenment! Nevertheless, I looked up “second enlightenment” with a link Harry provided to Nishijima Roshi’s blog and found this:

By reading Shobogenzo I recognize clearly that in the case of Master Dogen he insists that to practice Zazen itself is just enlightenment.

But at the same time in “Keisei-sanshiki” (9), Master Dogen describes another kind of enlightenments on Master Kyogen Chikan and Master Reiun Shigon.

Therefore I recognize the two kinds of enlightenment to exist, and so I indicate the practice of zazen as the first enlightenment, and the latter one as the second enlightenment.

The second enlightenment is the perfect understanding the whole Buddhist philosophical System completely.

Now, Nishijima Roshi is a venerable old priest whom I deeply appreciate for his translation of Shobogenzo, however, I respectfully disagree.

First, the notion that Dogen conflated practice and enlightenment only goes back to Menzan in the 18th century who reformulated Soto Zen to kick out koan elements and impose his idea of the oneness of practice and enlightenment – apparently to distinguish Soto from Rinzai and Obaku Zen so that Soto might survive.

And although “Bendowa” might be read with Dogen conflating practice and enlightenment, Shobogenzo in its entirety need not be read in that way at all. Dogen plays with many relationships between practice and enlightenment. That practice and enlightenment are not separate as people commonly believe does not mean that they’re one as people commonly believe.

This issue – the relationship between practice and enlightenment – is important for actual practice and that’s why I’m wandering into tall weeds here. If you believe in the mystical union of zazen and enlightenment, you aren’t really sitting or enlightened – just a dead horse confirming a theory. Your zazen might even become a fetish based on magical thinking.

My study and practice with Katagiri Roshi and since has convinced me that Dogen wasn’t a big theory guy. Dogen was a jazz man. He just wholeheartedly blew his horn, using and then going beyond the confines of any theoretical box. And it is in that sense that practice and enlightenment are one.

Hee-Jin Kim, in his book (click that and you’ll get a Google Book except but unfortunately not the part I’m dealing with below) about Dogen and meditation, finds the language Katagiri Roshi was always groping for. In Keep Me In Your Heart A While I paraphrase it like this (you gotta take your time with this or it’ll seem like jibberish):

The oneness of practice-enlightenment is not a merger in mystical union;
nor complementary sides of the same reality;
nor are they in the relationship of periphery and center;
nor like the surface and core; not a transformation of one into the other;
not like seed and fruit;
not like cause and effect;
not thinking and not- thinking;
not worldly and ultimate truth;
not antecedent and consequence;
not means and end;
and not nullification or denial of the differences between the two.
The oneness of practice and enlightenment is not “everything is Buddha, everything is practice.” It is not “original enlightenment” as it is usually understood with the concomitant denial of the importance of karma, lack of concern for other’s welfare, and enlightenment.

If practice and enlightenment are in none of the above relationships, how are they related? Like two foci in intimate conversation in actual practice.

Second, about enlightenment, experientially, it is described by Dogen as the 10,000 things advancing to confirm the self. Several hundred years earlier, Dongshan described it as “You are not it, but in truth it is you.”

Certainly there are moments of synthesis in practice when the Buddha’s teaching comes together and the matrix of mind and heart lights up. And that’s what those moments are – not enlightenment.

As for a perfect understanding of the complete Buddhist philosophical system – which one? There are a whole bunch of Buddhist philosophical systems, designed for various times and places and people. There are numerous points of apparent contradiction.

Anyway, Kyogen and Reiun don’t describe their experiences in that way – check it out in Kaz Tanahahi’s Enlighenment Unfolds, p. 59.

But if you have a theory about Dogen’s zazen and enlightenment that doesn’t fit with all the enlightenment stories Dogen relates and praises, then you might want to come up with a stretch theory to make sense out of that contradiction. It looks to me like a dog with three heads – you have to keep adding heads to cover the incongruencies in your theory.

And that seems like more than enough for one post. I’ll come back sometime to Harry’s questions about inquiry.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

November 1, 2008

108 Delusions and the Teacher - Student Relationship

Next Post

November 3, 2008 Steve Earle - Christmas In Washington

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 November 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 December 2016 October 2016 June 2016 April 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 August 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who is frequently described as "the fool" in Proverbs?

Select your answer to see how you score.

One who hates wisdom A king A foreigner One who is wealthy