https://www.reddit.com/r/zenbuddhism/comments/1i92qpl/is_zazen_truly_zen/
created by DonumDei621 on 24/01/2025 at 18:46 UTC
0 upvotes, 12 top-level comments (showing 12)
Hello everyone,
The are some strong opinions held by some that zazen practice, namely the shinkantaza practice found in Dogens Soto Zen is his own invention and that the whole sect he established is really an offshoot that did not take into consideration any of the actual teachings of Caodong Buddhism from China?
To add to that some think he subverted the teachings and came up with new ones essentially conning people into his newly formed zazen based “cult”.
Finally, there are opinions that zazen, the way Dogen describes it in Fukanzazengi and his other writings is not present in any kind of Buddhism, especially not in the Caodong lineage which, according to some, he questionably hails from. (Also, what about rinzai? Is that a different zazen?)
How valid are these points?
Is zazen and more specifically Dogens way of applying it really a part of Zen?
Are there rebuttals to these arguments?
Thank you very much, I’m genuinely trying to find the truth, or it’s closest approximation.
Comment by SoundOfEars at 24/01/2025 at 19:30 UTC
24 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Ignore ewk and his nonsense, if you actually look into this - you will see that he is full of shit.
Comment by JundoCohen at 24/01/2025 at 23:19 UTC
21 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Oh, somebody has been over to r/zen! Ewk and company make things up. For example, Ewk likes to claim that Prof. Bielefeldt wrote that Dogen plagiarized a Chinese meditation manual AND Dogen invented his own thing (I am not sure how one can do both.) So, I wrote Prof. Bielefeldt, who answered that he did not say that, and I posted it to Ewk on r/zen. They promptly deleted the comment from Prof. Bielefeldt. So, that should answer your question about opinions expressed there. It is a strange place filled with all kinds of misinformation from that Ewk fellow and a handful of his followers.
Yes, Zazen is the centerpoint of our practice, although not the end, nor the beginning.
Comment by Qweniden at 24/01/2025 at 19:23 UTC*
19 upvotes, 2 direct replies
These are not widely held opinions. Out of hundreds of thousands of people interested in Zen, these are opinions held by like maybe 4 or 5 people on /r/zen (assuming they are not alt accounts). You won't find any scholars or serious practitioners who agree with these points.
Anyway, to address your questions:
Is zazen truly Zen?
There are many different practices that fall under the name "zazen". They are all "Zen" if they are recommended by an authorized Zen teacher. There is no official "Zen Orthodoxy" that defines what falls within our without the categories of authenticity. Specific schools or lineages will likely favor one approach over another, but none of them speak for the Zen community as a whole.
namely the shinkantaza practice found in Dogens Soto Zen is his own invention and that the whole sect he established is really an offshoot that did not take into consideration any of the actual teachings of Caodong Buddhism from China?
Well we don't really know what Dogen's full understanding of shinkantaza was because he did not really define it in writing that has made it down to us. He describes a meditation method at the of Fukanzazengi but he does not label it shinkantaza and its more koan-like than what most people would recognize as shinkantaza these days.
But even if he did create a new method, that would be fine. The Zen tradition has always been about trying new skillful means and seeing what works. Any authorized Zen teacher is free to experiment. For example, koan practice only came around hundreds of years after the start of the Zen tradition in China.
I like that the tradition keeps innovating. This is a feature, not a bug and I hope it continues. Things that work (like koans) will stick around and things that don't will not.
And lastly, even if we did know what Dogen's method was for shikanataza, I am not sure we have written descriptions of what the Chinese Silent Illumination practice was that we could compare it to. I am not sure we can take Dahaui's criticisms about it at face value.
We have quotes from Caodong teachers such "In complete silence words are forgotten / total clarity appears before you." but sounds to me more like the result of meditation as opposed to actual meditation instructions.
Even this detailed passage sounds more like a diagnostic test than instructions:
Completely silently be at ease. In true thusness, separate yourself from all causes and conditions. Brightly luminous without defilements, you directly penetrate and are liberated. You have from the beginning been in this place; it is not something that is new to you today. From the time before the vast eon when you dwelled in your old [original] home, everything is completely clear and unobscured and numinous and singularly bright. But although this is the case, it is necessary that you act on it. When you act on it in this way, you must not give rise to the smallest strand of hair and not conceal a speck of dust. Cold and like dry wood, [you should practice] the great rest with broad and penetrating comprehension [kuoche mingbai]. If your rest and cessation is not complete and you wish to go to the realm [of the Buddha] and to leave birth and death, then [you should know] there is no such place. Just as you are, you must break through, understanding without the defilement of discursive thinking, and be pure without any worries.
As an aside, I would argue "just sitting" is a result of meditation and not actual instructions, but perhaps that is too much of a digression.
To add to that some think he subverted the teachings and came up with new ones essentially conning people into his newly formed zazen based “cult”.
Well if that is true, it has been a very effective "cult". The collective teachings of Soto Zen that have made it down to our times are profound and life-changing.
Finally, there are opinions that zazen, the way Dogen describes it in Fukanzazengi and his other writings is not present in any kind of Buddhism, especially not in the Caodong lineage which, according to some, he questionably hails from.
The way he describes how to use awareness at the end of Fukanzazengi is rather koan-like. In fact, it is actually quoting a Chinese koan. Dogen's general approach to practice was inquiry-based and this was in line with that theme. It is also inline with the koan-like exhortations of his Caodong ancestors such as "How about your self before the empty eon?".
Also, what about rinzai? Is that a different zazen?
Rinzai has multiple types of zazen such as breath counting, following the breath, extended exhalation and koan introspection.
Comment by genjoconan at 24/01/2025 at 19:03 UTC*
16 upvotes, 2 direct replies
I don't have time to write a very lengthy post now, but a couple of points:
1. The Caodong teacher Hongzhi Zhengjue championed a form of practice that became known as Silent Illumination. Dogen was clearly inspired by Hongzhi and Silent Illumination, and quotes Hongzhi more often than any other Zen ancestor. Modern Chan teachers have described Dogen's practice as not exactly equivalent to Hongzhi's Silent Illumination, but not dissimilar either. We also have record evidence of other Chan teachers, predating Hongzhi, who taught seated meditation (including one--I can't remember his name off the top of my head--whose temple became known as the Dead Tree Stump temple because all of the monks just sat there like dead tree stumps). Somehow, though, when people say "Dogen just made this stuff up!", examples like that either get ignored or for some reason don't count.
2. Consider Occam's Razor: if the overwhelming majority of Zen practitioners and academic researchers believe that Dogen's practice was largely in line with that of his ancestors, and a couple of loud but anonymous voices on Reddit believe otherwise, what's more likely? Is it more likely that the overwhelming majority is wrong, and that the anonymous Redditors are right, or vice versa? Sure, it's *possible* that the Redditors are right and that everyone else to consider the question is wrong, but what's more likely?
Comment by Historical_Ad_2429 at 24/01/2025 at 18:53 UTC
13 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Have you been in r/ zen..?
Comment by gregorja at 24/01/2025 at 21:26 UTC
13 upvotes, 1 direct replies
That sub is a shitshow. Ewk and his minion’s lies about Dogen are the Buddhist equivalent of “they’re eating the cats.”
Please read this post from there, titled Uncovering ewk’s lies about Bielfeldt and Dogen Part 1[1](part two is linked at the bottom of Part 1.)
1: https://www.reddit.com/r/zen/s/i9FKyAgAbS
Take care, friend!
Comment by Concise_Pirate at 24/01/2025 at 18:57 UTC
9 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Of course it is. It's central to Zen. Countless accredited Zen Masters are very clear on this point.
Comment by KokemushitaShourin at 25/01/2025 at 09:31 UTC
8 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Some member of r/Zen show signs of “Critical Buddhism”. It’s something I’m not very familiar with really, but at a quick glance their views seem to fit the description
Comment by keisagu at 25/01/2025 at 15:47 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
There is no empirical tradition in zen, therefore anything written in Zen is a purely personal belief. All the stories that are being told about travelling monks and abbot’s oneliners are presentations of subjective thoughts, derived from personal experience, just as the teachings of Buddha himself.
Comment by Mental_Spinach_2409 at 25/01/2025 at 16:28 UTC
5 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The “some” people is about 5 people most likely.
Comment by loripittbull at 24/01/2025 at 18:50 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Thanks for this question! I have a similar as someone keeps posting this assertion.
Comment by 2bitmoment at 25/01/2025 at 16:11 UTC*
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Maybe relevant to all of this is that the characters for zazen are the same as sitting meditation, sitting zen or sitting dhayana 🙏🏽
I do think Dogen innovated a bit, but not on the scale some arzen people think he did.
I also think Dogen and people here seem to acknowledge no arguments against meditation, which are not that uncommon in the zen record, maybe as part of the antinomy of the tradition. For example:
I have no expedient techniques to give people, no doctrine, no method of peace and happiness. Why? If there is any “expedient technique,” it has the contrary effect of burying you and trapping you.