Some Prollems in Interpretation

·期刊原文
SOME PROBLEMS IN INTERPRETATION: THE EARLY AND LATE WRITINGS OF DOGEN

By David Putney
Philosophy East and West
Volume 46, Number 4
October 1996
P.497-531
(C) by University of Hawaii Press

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.497

Inconsistencies in Dogen's Writings

The Problem of Inconsistency. One of the major
difficulties for interpreters of Dogen's thought is
the apparent inconsistency of some of Dogen's
teachings when comparing his early and late
writings.(1) Some of the key changes that we find in
the later writings include: (1) his severe critique
of the Rinzai (Lin-chi) tradition and especially the
subtradition stemming from Ta-hui, as contrasted to
his more ecumenical approach found in his early
writings, (2) his escalating critique of Chinese
Ch'an Buddhism in general, (3) the emphasis on his
own exclusive "transmission" of the Buddha Dharma,
and (4) Dogen's apparent "rejection" of lay
Buddhism--all of which seem to contradict both his
early writings and his teaching activities. It is
argued by some that there is a shifting in Dogen's
position on important doctrinal or philosophical
issues as well. Did Dogen come to reject totally the
doctrine of "Original Enlightenment" (hongaku), and
if so, what were his late views on the doctrine of
"Buddha Nature" (bussho)? Did Dogen change his views
on the nature of Buddhist causality, and how does
this relate to Dogen's views on the nature of time?
The purpose of this essay will be to concentrate
primarily on two key hermeneutical problems: (1) the
problem of the textual relationship between Dogen's
late versus his early writings, and (2) the problem
of Dogen's method of expression in his early and
mid-period writings, what I call koan expression. The
results of this inquiry may furnish a groundwork for
addressing-the philosophical questions regarding
Dogen's early, middle, and late views on Original
Enlightenment, "Buddha Nature," and Causality.(2)

The Different Versions of the Shobogenzo. Dogen's
major work is his collection of essays called the
Shobogenzo.(3) Within a few generations after
Dogen's death, however, the Shobogenzo was virtually
unknown in Japan, except to a small group associated
with the Eihei-ji.(4) A ninety-five -fascicle edition
of the Shobogenzo was finally published in 1690, but
this version included miscellaneous writings which
had never been designated as part of the Shobogenzo
itself by Dogen or his immediate disciples.(5) This
edition was clearly not a reproduction of Dogen's
Shobogenzo, but simply a collection of Dogen's
writings, in part reflecting the agenda of its
editor, Kozen (1627-1693).(6) This edition includes
a version of the original seventy-five-fascicle
edition, edited by Ejo during Dogen's lifetime, the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo (Dogen's latest
"Shobogenzo" writings), and other works. This text
was reissued in 1811 by

P.498

Gento and again in 1906 as the official Soto sect
edition, known as the Daihonzan Ejhei-ji edition.(7)

The oldest version of "Dogen's Shobogenzo is the
seventy-five-fascicle edition, compiled and edited
by Koun Ejo.(8) Most of the fascicles, as Steven
Heine points out, appear to have started out as
lecture notes, then were recorded by Ejo, and then
were edited at least once in turn by Dogen, Ejo, and
other disciples such as Gien.(9) It is not
conclusive, however, that Dogen approved the
seventy-five-fascicle version as the final
Shobogenzo.

Furuta Shokin, on the one hand, argues that the
fascicle "Genjo koan," originally composed in 1223
at the Kosho-ji in Kyoto, was revised in 1252, the
year before Dogen's death, and that the postscript
to the revision indicates Dogen's approval of Ejo's
collection at that time. The traditional argument
runs that since the "Genjo koan" fascicle was
revised in the year before Dogen's death, and placed
first in the seventy-five-fascicle edition, this
indicates that Dogen, at that time, approved the
whole edition.(10) The standard postscript for this
fascicle, found in the seventy-five-fascicle
edition, reads: "This was written in the first year
of the Tempuku Era [1223] in mid-autumn and given to
my lay disciple Yo Koshuu of Chinzei [Kyushu]."(11)
The same edition includes the following
post-postscript (for the revised version): "Kencho
jinsu shuukin" ("Revised" in the fourth year of the
Kencho Era [1252]).(12)

Most, but not all, contemporary scholars agree
with this view. The twelve-fascicle edition would
then include additions to the Shobogenzo composed by
Dogen during his later years. The debate as to the
significance of the twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo and
related problems has arisen because of (1) questions
regarding the apparent changes in Dogen's teachings,
(2) intensive research regarding the textual
formation of the Shobogenzo--especially the
monumental work of Kawamura Kodo, Shobogenzo no
seiritsushi-teki kenkyuu--and (3) research on pre-Zen
Japanese Buddhism, as well as Chinese, Indian, and
Tibetan Buddhism, based on the critiques of Dogen
himself and then extending to the independent
question, "What is the True Dharma anyway"?(13)

Some scholars want to treat both editions
equally, thus acknowledging a Shobogenzo of
eighty-seven fascicles, plus miscellaneous writings
such as the "Bendowa." This is basically the
position of the Soto Zen sect.(14) Among
contemporary scholars who focus on Dogen's
seventy-five-and twelve-fascicle editions,
Kagamishima Genryuu and Kawamura Kodo represent a
more traditionalist position that seeks to value
both editions equally, and while recognizing some of
the points of the "Critical Buddhist,"(15) Kawamura
argues, however, that Dogen maintained the.same
critical distance from heretical views throughout
his career and that it is important not to misread
and overstate Dogen's criticisms.(16) Some
commentators, including Tenkei Denson (1648-1735),
have ranked

P.499

the seventy-five-fascicle edition as primary and the
twelve-fascicle edition as secondary or provisional.
Kagamishima Genryuu has listed Sugio Gen'yuu, Ishii
Shuudo, and Kiyomizu Hideo, as giving greater weight
to the twelve-fascicle edition.(17) This group,
however, is not so easily classified. Sugio
Gen'yuu's essay, "Kaze to tsuki to Butsu" (The Wind,
the Moon, and Buddha), seems rather to weigh the
seventy-five-fascicle edition as primary, arguing
that the twelve-fascicle edition is important for
clarifying Dogen's relationship with his disciples,
especially Ejo, during the last period of his
life.(18) Ishii Shuudo's position, however, is
weighted not so much on the side of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo itself, but rather toward
the larger context of Dogen's later years.
Especially important is material from the collection
of Dogen's formal-style (jodo) sermons known as the
Eihei koroku, most of which were composed from 1247
to 1253, and the Hokyoki, a collection of
conversations Dogen had in China with his teacher
Ju-ching.(19) Hakamaya Norikai and Matsumoto Shiro,
on the other hand, view the twelve-fascicle edition
as a replacement for the seventy-five-fascicle
edition and indicate a fundamental change in Dogen's
thought.(20)

These interpretations are all attempts to
determine Dogen's intention for his Shobogenzo
during the last period of his life, and, in so
doing, to determine the nature of Dogen's views
during these last years. The last fascicle of the
Shobogenzo, "Hachi dainin-gaku" (Eight Precepts of
the Great Man), composed in 1253, the year of
Dogen's death, contains a postscript, which may show
Dogen's final intentions with regard to the
Shobogenzo. The primary source for the
twelve-fascicle edition, the Yokoji edition, made
public in 1931, however, only includes the
postscript "Written the fifth year of Kencho [1243],
on the sixth day of the first month." The versions
of the "Hachi dainin-gaku" found in the Himitsu
Shobogenzo and the biographical Kenzei-ki, (21)
however, include an additional postscript attributed
to Ejo:

I [Ejo], in this the seventh year of Kencho
[1255], on the day prior to the summer retreat,
(22) finished transcribing Gien's(23) notes into
a final draft, [taking care to] compare my draft
with Gien's notes.

The above ["Hachi dainin-gaku"] fascicle was
composed by my former master [Dogen] during his
last illness.(24) He stated that he intended to
revise all of his "kana"(25) Shobohenzo, and
along with his "New Version" [Shinso], to
compile a one-hundred-fascicle edition [of the
Shobogenzo]. He had completed twelve fascicles
of the "New Version," when his illness worsened,
and he was unable to complete the planned [one
hundred fascicles]. For this reason, this
["Hachi dainin-gaku"] fascicle was his final
teaching. To my deep regret, I will never be
able to see the full one-hundred-fascicle
version. This is my greatest sorrow. If there be
any who love, honor, and treasure our former
master, they should copy these twelve fascicles
and keep and protect them. These are the final
teaching of the Buddha, as well as the legacy of
the final days of our master. I, Ejo, record
this.(26)

P.500

Both the authenticity and the interpretation of
this passage, however, are controversial. The
traditional interpretation, according to Ishii
Shuudo, would be: "I have completed revising the Old
Version (seventy-five-fascicle) Shobogenzo. In
addition, I have started the New (twelve-fascicle)
version."(27) Many commentators, however, also note
that the original Japanese is ambiguous, and the
passage may just as well mean that his disciples
should honor and treasure the "twelfth fascicle"
rather than the "twelve fascicles." Ishii points out
that Ejo had already edited and provisionally
compiled forty fascicles of the Shobogenzo dating
from Dogen's Kyoto period (1233-1243) . Ejo
subsequently compiled a seventy-five-fascicle
version, which included the Kyoto period writings
and the Echizen (1243-1246) period writings, these
later being arranged according to the order of their
delivery as sermons. This was the "Old Version."
Dogen found it necessary, however, to make some
revisions, as in the "Genjo koan" fascicle. Some
fascicles needed extensive revision, some only
partial revision, and some no revision at all. Ishii
argues that after Dogen's trip to Kamakura, he
developed a new design for the Shobogenzo, but was
able to finish only twelve fascicles of this new
project.(28)

The twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo has a number of
characteristics that set it apart from the
seventy-five-fascicle edition. Many commentators
have noted that Dogen's textual sources differ for
the two editions in question. For one thing,
quotations from the AAgama (Agon) suutras,(29) the
Jaataka literature,(30) the Perfection of Wisdom
(Praj~naa-paaramitaa) literature, and the
Ta-chi-ching (Daishuu-kyo) collection, (31) though
rare in the seventy-five-fascicle edition, abound in
the twelve-fascicle edition. The twelve-fascicle
edition includes two quotations from the Agamas,
thirteen quotations from the Jaataka literature; two
quotes from the Perfection of Wisdom literature, and
five quotes from the Ta-chi-ching collection.(32) We
find over twenty citations from Chinese T'ien-T'ai
sources(33) in the "Shizen biku" fascicle of the
twelve-fascicle edition. Traditional Ch'an sources,
on the other hand, are relatively rare. Quotations
from the Hung-chih-lu, (34) Yuan-wu-lu, (35) and
Ta-hui-lu, (36) moreover, are used only for
refutation purposes. We also find ten quotations
from the Ta-chi-tu-lun
(Mahaapraj~naapaaramitopade`sa) (37) attributed to
Naagaarjuna, (38) twelve from the Sarvaastivaadin
Abhidharma-Mahaavibaa.saa-`Saastra,(39) two from the
Abhidharma-ko`sa(40) of Vasubandhu, and three from
the Lotus Suutra.(41) The preponderance of the
twelve-fascicle edition is clearly weighted in favor
of Indian Buddhism over Chinese Buddhism, with the
exception of Chinese T'ien-T'ai, and generally
speaking stresses (1) early and Abhidharma Buddhism,
Jaataka (birth stories), and (2) the Lotus Suutra.

The twelve-fascicle version consists of the
following fascicles(42) and topics, which might be
interpreted to represent a stage in the process of
realization.(43) (1) The "Shukke kudoku" (Merit of
Leaving the House-

P.501

holder's Life)(44) is a rewrite of "Shukke," the
last fascicle in the seventy-five-fascicle edition.
It shifts emphasis from taking the precepts in order
to enter the monastic order to the merits (kudoku)
of entering the monastic order as part of the
Bodhisattva vow to save all beings before
oneself.(45) We might consider the
seventy-five-fascicle "Shukke" to be divided between
the first and second fascicles of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo. (2) "Jukai"
(Precepts) (46) is a fuller treatment of the
discussion of the precepts in the older "Shukke." We
may argue therefore that fascicles (1) and (2) of
the twelve-fascicle edition represent a further
development of Dogen's thought about the importance
of entering the monastic life but do not necessarily
represent a change in his position regarding
Buddhist monasticism.

(3) "Kesa kudoku" (Merit of Wearing Buddhist
Robes) (1240) is a rewrite of number 32 of the
seventy-five-fascicle edition, "Den'e" (Transmission
of the Robes) (1240). "Den'e" appears to be a draft
for "Kesa kudoku," but the dates of composition are
both 1240, while Dogen was at the Kosho-ji in Kyoto,
the same year he composed the fascicles "Sansui-kyo"
and "Uji,"(47) a scenario that does not fit into the
philosophical anti-"original enlightenment"
(hongaku) position that the critical Buddhists,
Matsumoto and Hakamaya, ascribe to the
twelve-fascicle edition. This fascicle deals
primarily with the lines of transmission and with
Dogen's claim to being the sole heir of this
tradition. The position is typical of Dogen's later
writings--but note that the argument begins while
Dogen was still in Kyoto.(48)

(4) "Hotsu bodaishin" (Giving Rise to the
Bodhi-mind) (1244) is an alternate version of "Hotsu
mujoshin" (Giving Rise to the Unsurpassable Mind)
(1244) , number 63 of the seventy-five-fascicle
edition. In some editions, both fascicles are called
"Hotsu bodaishin." Some scholars consider the "Hotsu
bodaishin" a rewrite of "Hotsu mujoshin," but both
versions were delivered on the same winter evening
at Yoshimine-dera, prior to Dogen's trip to
Kamakura.(49) This fascicle emphasizes again the
Bodhisattva vow to save all beings before oneself
and includes a sophisticated discussion of the
meaning of the term "bodaishin" (bodhi mind).(50) In
this fascicle Dogen also discuses the doctrine of
"transference of merit" and the theory of moments
(k.sa.na-vada/setsuna) .(51)

(5) "Kuyo shobutsu" (Venerating the Buddhas)(52)
is a discussion of the merits of venerating the
Buddhas, basically paralleling the emphasis of the
Lotus Suutra. (6) "Kie Bupposoho" (Taking Refuge in
the Three Treasures of the Buddha, Dharma, and
Community of Monks and Nuns [Sa^mgha]) (53)
reiterates one of the basic teachings of Buddhism,
quoting from Buddhist texts of all types. Dogen,
however takes special care to elevate the Lotus
Suutra to the highest rank, calling all other
suutras "expedient means" (hoben).(54)

(7) "Jinshin inga" (Deep Faith in Causality)(55)
is one of the most

P.502

important fascicles in the twelve-fascicle edition.
It is a "rewriting" or "rethinking" of the earlier
"Daishugyo" (Great Practice) fascicle, number 68 of
the seventy-five-fascicle edition (composed in 1244
after the move to Echizen). The main theme of
"Jinshin inga" is the rejection of the notion that
enlightenment leads to a transcendence of good and
evil and karmic retribution. Those who now argue
that a fundamental change occurred in Dogen's
philosophical position use this fascicle as a key
example. The interpretation of this fascicle,
however, is highly controversial and will be
addressed in the second major part of this essay.

(8) "Sanji-go" (Karmic Retribution in the Three
Stages of Time)(56) continues the discussion of the
effects of karmic action in the contexts of the
"three periods of time": past, present, and future
lives. This consists largely of mythical stories
from Jaataka tales and other sources. Interestingly,
however, as will be discussed in the last portion of
this essay, the notion of a rigid and deterministic
notion of karma is refuted.

(9) "Shime" (Four Horses) is a short fascicle
dealing with the differing abilities and levels of
understandings of disciples.(57) This chapter is a
good resource for those who argue that Dogen's
sermons were composed with a specific audience,
situation, and context in mind.

(10) "Shizen biku" (The Monk in the Fourth
[Stage] of Meditation)(58) is another key fascicle
in the twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo. Here he discusses
the dangers of practicing without a master and
mistakenly thinking that the attainment of the
fourth stage of meditation (dhyaana) is the
attainment of arhatship. There follows a sharp
critique of Taoism.(59) There is also an important
criticism of the notion of "seeing one's own nature"
(kensho) and an assertion that the Platform Suutra,
which contains this teaching, is a forgery.
"Critical Buddhists" point to this chapter as an
example of Dogen's "rejection" of the "original
enlightenment" (hongaku) doctrine, an implication of
Dogen's rejection of "seeing one's own original
nature." A close reading of the entire scope of
Dogen's work, however (including his earliest
writing, the "Bendowa," as well as "Bussho" and this
fascicle, "Shizen biku"), shows numerous critiques
of the `Srenika Heresy and the notion of any kind of
ontological or transcendental essential
"nature."(60) There is little, if any, Ch'an or Zen
in this fascicle.

(11) "Ippyakuhachi homyo-mon" (One Hundred and
Eight Ways to Enlightenment)(61) is a compendium of
108 types of practice or ways to enlightenment both
Early Buddhist and Mahaayaana.(62) (12) "Hachi
dainingaku" (Eight Key Elements of Buddhist
Practice) is the last writing of Dogen,(63) and
consists of eight Buddhist virtues to be cultivated
by the practitioner.(64) These, he says, are the
"storehouse of wisdom of the True Dharma"(65)
(shobogenzo). These two fascicles seem to confirm
that Dogen saw himself as teaching the Buddha Dharma
and not any particular sect of Buddhism. Both of
these fascicles, and indeed all of the

P.503

twelve fascicles, lack any reference to the typical
Kamakura appeal to one single practice, including
Dogen's own shikan taza.(66) It seems clear that
from Dogen's middle period onward, shikan taza was
one among a complex of practices, especially in the
context of the monastic life, which Dogen
emphasized.

The Problem of Audience and Authorship. Ishii Shodo
has conducted an intensive inquiry into the dates of
the composition of the twelve-fascicle edition.(67)
He suggests that Dogen first began to conceive of
the necessity for these fascicles (as a separate
entity) sometime after his trip to Kamakura in
1247-1248,(68) but began to put his plan into action
from about the year 1249. In a sermon given the day
after his return from Kamakura,(69) Dogen stressed
that he had "always taught that those who practice
good will rise [in accumulated karmic merit] and
those who do evil will fall," and that this was an
example of experiencing the fruit of the practice as
cause (shu-in-kan-ga)."(70) This same phrase occurs
in the "Jinshin inga" fascicle of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo.(71)

The dating of most of the twelve fascicles is
highly problematic. The "Kesa kudoku" fascicle
appears to have been composed in 1240, while Dogen
was still in Kyoto, and the "Hotsu bodaishin"
fascicle in 1244, prior to Dogen's trip to Kamakura.
"Jukai" and "Ippyaku homyomon" are undated, and of
the remainder we only know that Ejo compiled them
from either his or Dogen's notes in 1255, after
Dogen's death.(72) Steven Heine notes that Ishii
admits that there are numerous problems with
understanding the twelve-fascicle edition including
problems with dating, the role of the
twelve-fascicle edition in relation to the so-called
one-hundred-fascicle project mentioned in Ejo's
colophon, and the degree to which Ejo and other
disciples may have contributed to these
fascicles.(73)

A considerable portion of the twelve-fascicle
edition is taken up with quotations, usually
followed with only a short paraphrase and
interpretation by Dogen. Dogen tends to stake out a
dogmatic doctrinal stance with little justifying
argument. For authority, Dogen draws to a
considerable degree on mythological Buddhist
literature, especially the Jaataka tales, and to his
own authority as a master and transmitter of the
Shobogenzo. Epistemological issues relating to his
own authority or to the materials used are not
considered.(74) Nearly absent, except in parts of
fascicles such as "Hotsu bodaishin," is Dogen's
"koan" style of expression, which characterizes his
earlier writings. Only rarely do we find the
awareness shown in much of the seventy-five-fascicle
edition of the multiple interpretations possible for
the variety of Buddhist doctrines and technical
terms. There is, in other words, little in the
twelve-fascicle edition of precisely that material
and style for which Dogen has become famous.
Yanagida Seizan's quip that Dogen's writings, after
the begin-

P.504

ning of his severe attack on Lin-chi/Rinzai Zen
(around 1241), (75) were an "indication of the
decline in Dogen's thinking and the onset of
'senility' (rosui) "(76) can possibly best be
explained in this light.

A key problem with the twelve-fascicle edition
is that the majority of the fascicles appear to have
been compiled by Ejo from notes, either by Dogen,
Ejo, or other disciples, with little, if any,
additional editing on the part of Dogen. The
fascicles are thus not the finished, polished
products we find in the seventy-five-fascicle
edition. We may also consider how the
twelve-fascicle edition might compare to Ejo's
Shobogenzo zuimonki (1234), which records Ejo's
recollection of Dogen's teachings. The
twelve-fascicle edition, thus, may be even more
"provisional" than the seventy-five-fascicle
edition. It is quite possible that the version we
have of the twelve fascicles consists of preliminary
notes and comments that Dogen hoped some day to
develop fully later, or even of notes compiled by
Dogen's disciples and edited by Ejo. They may also
have been meant as easily read and understood
outlines for Dogen's disciples at the Eihei-ji,
focusing on issues specific to those monks at that
time. It certainly seems that the
seventy-five-fascicle edition had a wider audience
in mind.

Dogen, especially in his later years, maintained
that he was Juching's sole heir and the sole
patriarch of the Shobogenzo in Japan as well as
China.(77) Although Koun Ejo (1198-1280) was Dogen's
closest disciple, his friend, his heir, and second
abbot of the Eihei-ji,(78) neither Ejo nor his
immediate successors ever attained the status and
authority of Dogen. Sugio Gen'yuu has argued that
Ejo and his contemporaries and successors were never
able to match Dogen's attainment, (79) and the
difficulties Ejo had in leading the community after
Dogen's death are well documented.(80) The
Shobogenzo, for Sugio, is a testament written by
Dogen for later generations, in part precisely
because Ejo and the other disciples could not live
up to Dogen's expectations. This highly speculative
suggestion, however, even if true, raises severe
problems for the modern reader. One implication of
Sugio's thesis is that only someone of an attainment
equivalent to that of Dogen himself would be able to
comprehend Dogen's intention. Secondly, such a
person, like Dogen, would likely be more concerned
with teaching the Dharma to present generations than
with the historical interpretation of a previous
master's writings. On the other hand the earlier
portions of the Shobogenzo were composed at the
Kasho-ji while Dogen's popularity was growing, when
he would have had good reason for confidence in his
project. These writings project a feeling of
confidence and considerable skill in composition. It
is his later writings that become increasingly
didactic and dogmatic, and this may indicate a
tendency to "overcompensate" for problems that Dogen
was experiencing with his trainees.

The change in Dogen's position with regard to
his attitude toward

P.505

the necessity of teaching the laity, his evaluation
of other Zen masters, and his idea of what
constituted correct practice may have helped to fuel
the conflict between the "purist" group of Gien (d.
1314) and the syncretic group of Gikai (1219-1309).
Dogen's own writings reflect a definite emphasis on
taking up the monastic life. But this must not be
understood to mean that Dogen was no longer
concerned with his lay followers. Although his later
writings seem to be focused on the needs of his
disciples, he continued to teach by deed to the
wider local community. Villagers and local officials
were regular participants in the precept-recitation
ceremonies, among others, conducted at the Eihei-ji.
One of the major areas of conflict between these
groups, however, was the status of mikkyo (esoteric
tantric) Buddhist practices within the
community.(81) Significantly, in the compendium of
Buddhist practices listed in the "Ippyakuhachi
homyo-mon" and the "Hachi dainin-gaku, " mikkyo
teachings and practices are conspicuously absent, as
in all of Dogen's writings, from which we must
conclude that Dogen would not have approved of their
introduction, regardless of how pragmatic they might
have been in terms of gaining support from the laity
in the ensuing period of the collapse of the
Kamakura shogunate and the "dark ages" that
followed.(82)

The picture of the latter years of Dogen emerges
as that of a man struggling with disciples who had
come to him already trained in doctrines of Original
Enlightenment, Japanese esoteric Buddhism (mikkyo),
and the naturalism of the Daruma school, whose
understanding of Buddhism was swayed by these
traditions in ways of which Dogen did not approve
and that Dogen was unable to counter conclusively.
Significantly, this was also a time in which the
growing Pure Land tradition was questioning the
value of the monastic vinaya. This context would
explain the evolution in his writing from his early
dynamic engagement with contemporary Buddhist issues
to a dogmatic condemnation of doctrines, practices,
and teachers during his later years. His late
emphasis on the training of his disciples at the
Eihei-ji may be evidence of a kind of desperation to
leave behind at least something of his original
vision. In this sense Professor Sugio may be right
in seeing Dogen's final intention for the Shobogenzo
as a legacy to future generations. But, as we have
seen, this is a highly ambiguous and controversial
legacy, in light of the problem of which part of the
Shobogenzo represents the "true" Dogen.

It is my thesis that Dogen never intended to
abandon the seventy-five-fascicle edition, which
remains the primary locus for our understanding of
Dogen's thought. The twelve-fascicle edition was
meant, I argue, as an appendix (never completed) to
the seventy-five-fascicle edition. Whether or not
Dogen ever intended to compose a final total of one
hundred fascicles is problematic. If the
twelve-fascicle edition is

P.506

taken as a kind of appendix, it can give us valuable
insights into Dogen's thought and, most importantly,
act as a corrective to certain misunderstandings
(especially with regard to the understanding of the
Buddha Nature / Original Enlightenment doctrines and
their relationship to practice, as well as
misunderstandings concerning the role of causality,
or karmic action and effect in Buddhist theory and
practice), many of which Dogen likely found current
among his disciples. Problems of interpretation in
comparing Dogen's seventy-five-fascicle Shobogenzo
and the twelve-fascicle version will be examined in
the second part of this essay.

The Role of the Koan in Dogen's Writings

We have addressed the problem of the purpose of
the Shobogenzo and suggested that this purpose may
have changed during the course of Dogen's career.
The Shobogenzo may have begun as a collection meant
for wide dissemination among the Japanese Buddhist
community, and it ended as an almost esoteric legacy
to a few chosen disciples and their descendants. In
any case, was the Shobogenzo a philosophical
treatise where Dogen attempted to take a stand on
some metaphysical positions regarding the nature of
the world, Buddha Nature, causality, time, and so
on? Was it a form of psychotherapy designed to help
his disciples overcome psychological roadblocks? Was
it a soteriological device, or expedient means,
designed to help his disciples (and readers) attain
full realization? Undoubtedly, these and other
elements are present in Dogen's writings, but the
soteriological intention was clearly primary. If any
teaching became an obstacle to realization, Dogen,
like many of his Buddhist predecessors, did not
hesitate to a bandon it. The project of Buddhist
salvation has always been to "see" the world as it
is, in its own suchness (tathataa) , without
preconceived views, habits of thought, and doctrines
learned only through tradition. The masters of the
Zen tradition were very much aware that their
teachings, or "words and letters," could themselves
become obstacles, and thus the term katto (Chin.
ke-tung), or the metaphor of attachment as a tangle
of vines.(83)

By the late T'ang (618-922) and the Sung dynasty
(960-1279), the Zen (Ch'an) tradition had begun to
define its teaching methodology in terms of the koan
(Chin. kung-an) tradition. Koan, as used in the Zen
tradition, refers to "enlightenment" conversations
between Zen masters and their disciples. A few
generations before Dogen traveled to China, some Zen
(Chin. Ch'an) masters such as Ta-hui Tsung-kao (Dale
Soko) (1089-1163) used koans as "objects" of
meditation for students.(84) Steven Heine defines
the koan, during this period, as "a form of
abbreviated, paradoxical communication harboring an
underlying silence and rejection of language and
leading to a personal transformation from conscious
to unconscious, or from a state of diffusion to
unification with the sacred."(85) For Dogen,
however, the "expression" of the Buddhas and

P.507

Patriarchs (dotoku), whether through the language of
the Buddhist suutras, the teachings of the masters,
koans, or through silence, was already a full
expression of the Buddha Dharma.(86)

Heine argues that koans, for Dogen, became a
continuing hermeneutic. Dale Wright has pointed out
that "Far from being a transcendence of language,
this process [the koan] would consist in a
fundamental reorientation within language... [that]
require[s] training to a level of fluency in
distinctive, nonobjectifying, rhetorical
practices." (87)
Heine points out that the
Shobogenzo(88) itself shows a structural similarity
to the Mumonkan (Wu-men-kuan) and the Hekigan-roku
(Pi-yen-lu), which are collections of koans with
commentaries. Yet the Shobogenzo also exhibits some
fundamental differences. Like these koan-roku texts,
Dogen's Shobogenzo gives an interlinear exegesis on
key words or phrases of the traditional koans. Each
of the fascicles of the Shobogenzo, on the other
hand, focuses on a specific doctrinal issue, citing
koan cases as well as passages from other Buddhist
texts, including (non-Zen) Mahaayaana texts(89) as
well as "Nikaaya" (non-Mahaayaana) Buddhist texts.
This is most markedly the case for the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo.

It is not just that Dogen uses koans in his
writings and comments on them. His own writing
style, especially in his earlier and middle-period
works, is fundamentally informed by the koan mode of
expression. Dogen not only combines koans in unique
koan-like relationships, but his own "analysis" is
koan-like in nature. As Heine argues, the "[kana or
Japanese] Shobogenzo is notable in that its
commentaries attempt to genuinely recreate or to
essentially become koans," and that "this represents
an erasure of difference between source and
interpretation."(90)

In his important article "'The Reason of Words
and Letters': Dogen and Koan Language," Hee-jin Kim
has pointed out several devices used by Dogen for
his purpose.(91) These devices were variations of
the traditional koan of Chinese Ch'an:

[Dogen's] serious interest in the koan is
evidenced by the prevalence in the Shobogenzo of
extensive exegeses and interpretations of
carefully selected koans.... It may be that
Dogen's originality lies in his radical
transformation of the language of the
old-paradigm koan within the living context of
the realization-koan [genjo koan].(92)

Koans are notorious for not lending themselves
to precise interpretation. They are by nature
open-ended, and precisely for this reason they
invite participation by the reader. Our attempts to
interpret them must necessarily include a
consideration of the context, in terms of both the
textual context and the historical occasion for
their use, as well as our own intellectual context
and environment. For Heine, "Koans are instructive,
or heuristic, in that they are activated only
relative to a fixation and delusion, and
provisional, or catalytic, in that they cease to

P.508

function and leave no trace of hypostatization once
liberation has been attained."(93)

Matsumoto Shiro takes a more critical view of
Dogen's use of language in his early writings, in
the context of learning and wisdom, arguing that the
early Dogen was anti-learning or anti-intellect.
Matsumoto points to a passage in Dogen's
"Bendowa"(94) discourse number 4. When Dogen
responds to a question on the relationship between
his practice of shikan taza, "just sitting," in
Zazen(95) as compared to the Hokke, Kegon, and
Shingon schools, Dogen responds: "You should know
that as a Buddhist, you should not contest the
teachings [of the various sects] as superior or
inferior, or their dharmas as shallow or deep. You
need only know whether the practice is
authentic."(96)

Matsumoto also points to a passage from Dogen's
"Fukan Zazen-gi" (A Universal Recommendation for
Zazen) where Dogen instructs students in the art of
Zen meditation, saying: "Do not think of good and
evil, nor regulate 'this or that'. Stop piloting the
conscious mind. Stop analyzing mindfulness,
perception, and discerning (nen-so-kan) ."(97)

Matsumoto comments that Dogen here is clearly
mounting a critique on the intellect (chisel) or
"[rational] thought" (shiko).(98) Matsumoto contrasts
this to Dogen's "Sanji-go" fascicle of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo, which states: "The
practitioner must never engage in 'wrong view'
(jaken). He should study and practice (gakushuu)
until he has mastered all forms of 'right view'."(99)
Matsumoto takes this to mean that the late Dogen
stressed the "intellect" (chisei), which includes
"study" (gaku) and "teachings" (kyo) rather than the
exclusive practice of Zazen,(100) and this, according
to mastumoto, was Dogen's final intent: the study of
true Buddhism, devoid of the corrupting influence of
the Chinese and Japanese original-enlightenment bog.

Matsumoto, however, seems to be taking these
statements out of context. In the case of the
"Bendowa," Dogen is clearly opposed to a purely
intellectual approach to Buddhist practice. His was
a day when Buddhism tended to be either (a) a
scholastic and intellectual endeavor, (b) a mystical
(tantric) practice, (c) a devotional practice, (d) a
funeral rite, or (e) a social and political channel
for the aristocracy. Since Dogen is interested in
emphasizing another kind of Buddhism, he naturally
steers the question away from a distracting
direction. Note that earlier in the "Bendowa," Dogen
criticizes the practice of suutra and nembutsu
recitation, where people are just wagging their
tongues and raising their voices without
understanding. They also waste their time engaged in
useless (metaphysical) speculations, imagining that
this is the Buddha's path. "Reading words while
failing to comprehend practice is like taking
medicine but failing to mix the compounds."(101)

In the case of the passage from the "Fukan
Zazen-gi," it is clear that Dogen is here talking
about the practice of meditation. Dogen advises

P.509

his students to refrain from trying to introduce
preconceived goals and metaphysical speculations
into this practice. The opening paragraph of this
tract, where the reader is bombarded by logical
paradoxes arising from current misunderstandings of
"original enlightenment" (hongaku), makes this very
clear. Furthermore, the very paradoxes that we find
in the opening passages of the "Fukan Zazen-gi" are
precisely the problems that occupy Dogen in much of
the seventy-five-fascicle Shobogenzo, a work whose
purpose appears to challenge the intellect rather
than to shut it off.

As applied to Dogen's use of koan-style writing,
Heine argues that "Truth does not pertain to one
specific signified, but evolves (or `devolves') out
of the open decentric play of signifiers devoid of
an objective referent of signification."(102)

Dogen sees a resolution between the
hypostatization of Buddhist teachings, traditionally
described in the Ch'an tradition as an
"entanglement" (katto), as an opportunity for direct
transmission between Buddha and Buddha and between
the Buddha Dharma and student/master. But Dogen's
conception of katto need not be limited to cases of
"transmission." All forms of entanglement, whether
they are teachings, sayings, or even the traditional
psychological attachments, can be opportunities for
realization. As we read in the opening passages of
his early work "Genjo koan":

The Way of the buddhas
Springs forth(103) from abundance and privation;(104)
Consequently, there is generation,
As well as extinction,
Delusion and enlightenment,
Sentient beings and buddhas.
Nevertheless,
Flowers fall among attachments.
And weeds flourish amidst annoyance.(105)

It is precisely because of the fact that flowers
fall among our attachments and that weeds flourish
amid our annoyance that these become the occasion
for realization. Dogen's conclusion here is
pragmatic rather than metaphysical.

We have already noted the relationship between
"Jinshin inga" (Deep Faith in Causality) in the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo and "Daishugyo" (Great
Practice) in the seventy-five-fascicle edition. Both
versions focus on the famous koan of Pai-chang
Huai-hai (Hyakujo Ekai) (106) and the "wild
fox."(107) In this story a Ch'an master is reborn as
a fox for five hundred lifetimes because he believes
that a person of "great cultivation" (Daishugyo)
does not "fall into [the grip of] causality"(108)
(furaku inga), and he is saved when he is told by
Pai-chang of "not obscuring

P.510

causality" (or that causality is perfectly clear)
(fumai inga).(109) In the older "Daishugyo" fascicle
we read:

When we thoroughly investigate the "great
cultivation" (Daishugyo), we find that it is
already "Great Cause and Effect" (dai
inga).(110) This "Great Cause and Effect" is the
completeness of cause and completeness of
effect. Therefore, it is not a question of
falling or not falling, or of obscuring or not
obscuring. If he were to err in saying "... not
falling into causality," he would also be in
error in saying "not obscuring causality." But,
nevertheless, even though he errs, there is
falling into rebirth as a fox, and there is
release from rebirth as a fox.(111)

In the "Jinshin inga" fascicle of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo, Dogen comments on this
same koan, saying:

Trainees in the Way of the Buddha do not
comprehend the teaching of the law of cause and
effect (inga) , and they err in foolishly
discarding cause and effect.... In the winds of
this latter age of the Buddha Dharma, the Way of
the Patriarchs is on the decline. The teaching
of "[He] will not fall into the grips of cause
and effect (furaku inga)" is to discard the law
of cause and effect and will lead to a fall into
the Three Evil Worlds. [The teaching of] "not
obscuring the cause and effect (fumai inga)" is
clearly "deep faith in the cause and effect"
(shinjin inga).... A great many of those who are
called students of the Way, in these times, have
discarded the law of cause and effect. If we
inquire as to why this is so, it is because they
equate not falling (furaku) [into the effects of
karmic action] with not obscuring (fumai) [the
effects of karmic action].(112)

The primary focus of the "Daishugyo" fascicle is
a sophisticated analysis of the fox koan in terms of
meaning and even authenticity.(113) It is a
contemplation on the nature of causality, utilizing
Dogen's dialectical (koan) style of focusing on what
karma is not and only obliquely hinting at what it
"is."(114) Heine argues that in this fascicle Dogen
is equating causality and the transcendence of
causality.(115) Dogen, however, makes no such
equation. To the contrary, he argues that both "not
falling" (furaku) and "not obscuring" (fumai) are
pivotal Zen koan phrases (ittengo) and are not to be
taken at face value.(116) We must also be very
careful how we use the term "transcendence" for
Dogen. In fascicles such as "Bussho" (Buddha
Nature), Dogen is careful to include metaphysical
transcendence among rejected views. After refuting
the standard metaphysical conceptions of Buddha
Nature, which some take to imply a form of
transcendence, Dogen turns on this position to note:
"The Buddha has said: 'If you wish to know the
meaning of Buddha Nature, watch temporal relations
(kan jisetsu) .'"(117) Dogen comments: "This
teaching, practice, illumination, forgetting, and
even mistaking and not mistaking, and so on are all
temporal relations. Watching temporal relations is
to watch through temporal relations."(118)

P.511

This clearly counters any metaphysical notion of
transcendence. On the contrary, transcendence may
only apply in a linguistic sense: to transcend the
ordinary limitations of our conceptualized,
rigidified views, or what has been traditionally
known in Buddhism as sa^mv.rti.(119) It is not
language itself that is to be transcended, but
rather the views that we attach to words and
phrases.

In the "Daishugyo" fascicle, Dogen finds a
number of problems with the fox story. We are not
told, for example, what happened to the old man
after his liberation from the body of the fox. Dogen
also questions the probability of a Zen master being
reborn as a fox for such a cryptic answer since
traditional Zen koans are replete with such cryptic
phrases.(120) Dogen goes so far as to say in one
place that he doubts the veracity of the fox story
itself(121) and later asserts that Pai-chang was not
telling the full story.(122) The crux of the
"Daishugyo fascicle is Dogen's argument against
fundamental misunderstandings of the fox story:

All of those who have not yet seen and heard the
Buddha Dharma say that after the end of his
rebirths as a fox the "old master" [or whatever
he was] attained supreme enlightenment (daigo)
and that the fox body was completely absorbed
into the ocean nature of original enlightenment
(hongaku no shogai). This meaning implies the
erroneous notion of "returning to an original
self" (honga ni kaeru). This has never been a
Buddhist teaching. Moreover, if we say that the
fox had no original nature (honsho), that the
fox was not originally enlightened (hongaku
nashi) : this [also] is not the Buddha
Dharma.(123)

We see here Dogen's traditional affirmation of
Original Nature and Buddha Nature, but a rejection
of any substantialist or transcendental
interpretation. Dogen continues to argue that it is
not the intent of the story to say that "not falling
into cause and effect" is to "negate cause and
effect" (hatsumu inga).(124) Dogen is here affirming
the traditional Buddhist teaching of cause and
effect, but calling into question our understanding
of cause and effect (karma) and its relation to
liberation.(125)
The position of the "Critical Buddhists" such as
Hakamaya and Matsumoto is that in the "Jinshin inga"
fascicle and other fascicles of the twelve-fascicle
Shobogenzo, Dogen abandons the hongaku position
still evident in the "Daishugyo" fascicle, which, as
Heine summarizes, is a transformation
... from a metaphysical view that draws
unwittingly from animism or naturalism and seeks
a single source of reality (dhaatu) beyond
causality to a literal, strict karmic
determinism that emphasizes a moral imperative
based on the fundamental condition that karmic
retribution is active in each impermanent
moment.(126)

But is karma for Dogen really a kind of strict
determinism, such that if cause "a" occurs then
effect "b" must necessarily occur regardless of

P.512

whatever other factors may come into play? The
"Daishugyo" fascicle challenges our preconceived
notion of karma and cause and effect (inga), but the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo seems to take a more
simplistic stance. As Heine has pointed out, in the
twelve-fascicle text, Dogen refers to miracles and
magical deeds to illustrate the meaning of
karma.(127) Yet, if we read beyond the mythical
element of these tales to his conclusions, we find a
clear rejection of a deterministic understanding of
karma.

Consider, for example, Dogen's "Hotsu
bodaishin," in the twelve-fascicle edition, where he
emphasizes the "arising of the "Bodhi-mind"
(bodaishin),(128) which entails the vow to save all
others before oneself" (ji mitokudo sendota).(129)
If causality is nothing other than "if 'a' then
necessarily 'b'," then "Hotsu bodaishin" becomes
nonsensical, since no other causal agency other than
the self can then have anything to do with
salvation. This would clearly imply a kind of
personal atomic causality where the self is isolated
from all "external" influences--precisely the kind
of position that Dogen is anxious to avoid.(130)

We must remember that positive acts also produce
positive karma, and positive karma interacts with
negative karma. In Dogen's "Kuyo shobutsu," in the
twelve-fascicle edition, we read that "There is
great fruit from small causes, and great benefit
from small acts."(131) The implication here is that
soteriological karma is more powerful than negative
karma.(132) In "Sanji-go," in the twelve-fascicle
edition, we read a story from the
Abhidharma-mahaavibhaasaa-`saastra (sec. 69) that
tells of a good man (throughout this life), who,
upon dying, finds that he is to be reborn in a hell.
At first he is resentful, believing himself destined
for a heavenly rebirth. But he then realizes that
the hellish rebirth was for evil that he had done in
a previous life. This realization (wisdom) changed
his karma such that he was in fact reborn in a
heavenly realm.(133)

These passages show that Dogen by no means had a
simplistic and deterministic view of karma. For
Dogen, karma is not a static, substantial, linear
series of causes and effects. There is always the
possibility of change, especially through the
attainment of wisdom. Thus Dogen, without denying
the causal structure of life and practice, rejects a
rigid interpretation of karma in favor of a fluid,
karmic, interdependent universe that depends upon
our actions and understanding as part of its causal
structure. As Kagamishima has argued, Dogen was
approaching the problem of causality from different
standpoints in the "Daishugyo" and the
twelve-fascicle texts.(134) I have worked to show
that the younger Dogen tended toward the dialectical
(or koan) mode of expression, whereas the late Dogen
tended more toward a didactic and mythic mode. In
the twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo, we must look to the
larger context of the combined texts of "Kuyo
shobutsu," "Jinshin inga," and "Sanji-go," and so on
to find the positions already suggested in "Dai-

P.513

shugyo." For the Dogen of the twelve-fascicle texts,
"not falling into [the grip] of causality" was
clearly being misinterpreted by many Chinese masters
and students and, more importantly, by a significant
number of Dogen's own students, to mean
"transcending karma." Although Dogen never suggests
such a notion of transcendence in "Daishugyo," he
apparently thought that the explicit rejection of
such transcendence had by that time become
necessary.

Dogen does not attempt in either the
seventy-five-fascicle edition or the twelve-fascicle
edition of the Shobogenzo to construct a concrete
metaphysical explanation of the nature and structure
of karma or cause and effect (inga). It is, however,
a mistake to look for a concrete philosophical
system in Dogen's writings. His purpose was always
soteriological. His texts tend to operate from a
philosophical point of view in a "deconstructive"
fashion, attempting to eliminate one-sided, or
"extreme" views that get in the way of practice and
enlightenment, in a fashion structurally consistent
with the Ch'an/Zen tradition, and ultimately with
the Indian Maadhyamika position. Dogen's "koans"
have no fixed or single possible response. Dogen,
from the beginning, demonstrated an ambivalent
attitude toward the difficult doctrines of Original
Enlightenment (hongaku) and Buddha Nature (bussho).
Yet, in some sense, Dogen continued to find these
doctrines valuable throughout the
seventy-five-fascicle edition. And, although he does
not mention them in the twelve-fascicle, neither
does he explicitly reject them. It is not
traditional Buddhist teachings that are rejected,
but misunderstandings (wrong views). Doctrines are
valuable only insofar as they aid praxis, and are
destructive in proportion to the degree that they
hinder praxis by students using them to formulate
reality rigidly according to an a priori conceptual
structure. Dogen's method is neither
anti-intellectual nor pro-intellectual. Rather, his
method is more of a creative process between master
and disciple, text and reader.(135)

Conclusion

The interpreter of Dogen, as we have seen, is
faced with the problem of inconsistencies in Dogen's
writings over the progress of his career and with
the paradoxical nature of Dogen's method. I suggest
that these are related yet distinct problems. The
koan character as well as the content of his early
and many middle-period writings should be dealt with
partially in the historical context of the texts as
well as in the interactive mode of praxis between
Dogen and the reader, with special attention to
Dogen's warnings of conceptual traps associated with
traditional Buddhist teachings and to a holistic
consideration of Dogen's program for Buddhist
practice.

Possible inconsistencies between early and late
writings should, on the one hand, be considered in
the historical context of (1) Dogen's

P.514

rather unsatisfactory relationship with the Tendai
establishment and the Kamakura government, (2)
competition with the increasingly popular Japanese
Rinzai sect, (3) problems within the order of monks
at the Eihei-ji, (4) errors or misunderstandings, as
perceived by Dogen, within his community of monks,
many of whom had their early training in the Tendai,
Tantric (mikkyo), and Daruma schools, (5) Dogen's
increasing weakness due to illness toward the end of
his life, (6) the possible realization on the part
of Dogen that he might not have fulfilled his
mission in passing the transmission to a fully
qualified successor, and (7) problems of authorship
and dating. On the other hand, we should take care
not to jump to the conclusion that any particular
proposition in the twelve-fascicle edition is
necessarily at odds with his position in the earlier
writings, because the differing modes of expression
in the seventy-five fascicles and the twelve
fascicles make such comparisons problematic.
Finally, we may conclude that the twelve-fascicle
edition can act as a corrective to what Dogen may
have seen as misunderstandings of his earlier work,
especially with regard to the major themes of
Dogen's later writings: the affirmation of Buddhist
causality (karma, pratiityasamutpaada) ,
impermanence, the Bodhisattva vow, the value of the
monastic life, and the vow of the Bodhisattva as
expressed in the Lotus Suutra.

NOTES

Abbreviations are used in the notes below as follows:

12-SBGZ-SMD Juunikanbon Shobogenzo no shomondai, ed.
Kagamishima Genryuu and Suzuki Kakuzen
(Tokyo: Daizo Shuppansha, 1991).

DZZS Dogen Zenji zenshuu, 2d edition, 2
vols., ed. Okubo Dosen (Tokyo: Rinsen
Shoten, 1969-1970).

DZZS-SJS Dogen Zenji zenshuu, 7 vols. (Tokyo:
Shunjuusha, 1989-1983).

SBGZ-M Shobogenzo 4 vols., ed. and annot.
Mizuno Yaoko (Tokyo: Iwanami Bunko,
1990-1993).

1 - Carl Bielefeldt has discussed this issue in his
"Recarving the Dragon: History and Dogma in the
Study of Dogen," in Dogen Studies, ed. William
R. LaFleur, Studies in East Asian Buddhism, no.
2 (Honolulu: The Kuroda Institute / University
of Hawai'i Press, 1985), pp. 21-53.

2 - These are some of the most critical issues for
Dogen studies, and to address his views on these
issues from the standpoint of his

P.515

life's work is a project much larger than can be
approached here. This essay is the first step in
researching a book precisely on this issue.

3 - The term shobogenzo is taken from the
Ta-fan-t'ien-wang wen-fo chueh-i-ching
(Daibonteno monbutsu ketsugi-kyo [Zokuzokyo,
vol. 87, author unnamed]), a scripture telling
the story of the direct transmission of the
Buddha Dharma to Kaa`syapa by the `Saakyamuni
Buddha. There is also a work of the same name,
Cheng-fa-yen-tsang, by Ta-hui Tsung-kao (Daie
Soko) (1089-1163), consisting of 661 "koan"
cases, along with notes and commentary. It is
likely that Dogen titled his own work Shobogenzo
as a counterpoint to that of Ta-hui. Also note
that Dogen compiled his own collection of koans,
which are variously called Shobogenzo
sambyaku-soku (The three-hundred-case Sobogenzo)
or the Shinji Shobogenzo (alternately pronounced
Mana Shobogenzo) (The true [Chinese-] character
Shobogenzo. See DZZS-SJS.

4 - The English reader is referred to a detailed
discussion of the variety of Shobogenzo texts in
the article by Steven Heine, "'Critical
Buddhism' (Hihan Bukkyo) and the Debate
Concerning the 75-fascicle and 12-fascicle
Shobogenzo Texts," Japanese Journal of Religious
Studies 21 (1) (1994): 46ff., and Hee-Jin Kim's
brief discussion of the textual history of the
Shobogenzo in his Dogen Kigen--Mystical Realist
(Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona Press,
1980), pp. 3-5. The basic reference in Japanese
is Kawamura Kodo, Shobogenzo no seiritsushi-teki
kenkyuu (Formative and historical studies of the
Shobogenzo) (Tokyo: Shunjuusha, 1986) . The
reader is also referred to the recently
published new Japanese edition of the Complete
Works of Dogen, Dogen Zenji zenshuu (DZZS-SJS),
esp. vol. 2, pp. 699-711, where Kawamura Kodo
gives a brief and updated summary of these
issues. Note esp. pp. 706-711, where a graph is
presented comparing the seventy-five-fascicle
edition, the sixty-fascicle edition, the
twelve-fascicle edition, and the
twenty-eight-fascicle "Secret" edition. There is
also a helpful graph in Steven Heine's article
that gives Hakama Noriaki's theory of
development (ibid., p. 49).

5 - According to Heine, Kozen's collection was the
result of "years of confusion about the exact
nature of the founder's writings" (Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism'," p. 47).

6 - Kawamura Kodo, "Shobogenzo no seiritsu" (The
composition [and arrangement] of the
Shobogenzo), in DZZS-SJS, 2:699.

7 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 47.

8 - There also exists a sixty-fascicle edition,
compiled in 1329, tradi-

P.516

tionally said to have been edited by Giun, but
Kawamura Kodo argues that the sixty-fascicle
edition was edited in memory of Dogen by Koun
Ejo. Ejo may have been trying to reconstruct
what he thought might have been Dogen's final
intention. See Kawamura, Shobogenzo no seiritsu,
Appendix, p. 6. For a detailed treatment see pp.
449-482. On pp. 471 ff., he makes a detailed
comparison between the seventy-five-fascicle,
the sixty-fascicle, and the twelve-fascicle
editions. Also see Kawamura Kodo, in DZZS-SJS,
pp. 706-711, comparing the three editions above
with the twenty-eight-fascicle "Himitsu
Shobogenzo" (Secret Shobogenzo). We may remark
that this project must have remained incomplete
since the sixty-fascicle omits key fascicles
from the twelve-fascicle edition, including the
"Shizen biku, " "Shinjin inga, " "Ippyaku
homyo-mon," and Dogen's last writing, "Hachi
dainin-gaku."

Donsei's eighty-four-fascicle edition
(1419), according to Kawamura, is a derivative
of the seventy-five-fascicle edition (Shobogenzo
no seiritsu, p. 13). The Himitsu Shobogenzo,
kept by the Eihei-ji, is a^n abridged collection
according to Kawamura(ibid.).

There is a considerable number of
manuscripts of the Shobogenzo, but Kawamura Kodo
arranges them all according to the number of
fascicles in the collection.

1. The seventy-five-fascicle edition and
derivatives.
2. The sixty-fascicle edition and its
derivatives.
3. The twelve-fascicle edition.
4. The twenty-eight-fascicle edition
(Himitsu Shobogenzo).
5. The eighty-nine-fascicle edition and its
derivative ninety-five-fascicle edition.
6. The ninety-five-fascicle edition,
including the Kozen (1627-1693) edition
published in 1690 and the Gento
(1729-1807) edition, finally published
in 1811. The two ninety-five-fascicle
editions draw on the seventy-five- and
sixty-fascicle editions for source
material (Kawamura, ibid., p. 13).

Three contemporary Japanese Shobogenzo
collections are (1) Mizuno Yaoko's recent
annotated edition, Shobogenzo (SBGZM), which
includes the seventy-five-fascicle version, the
twelve-fascicle version, and the "Bendowa"
listed separately; (2) a two-volume collection
more ambiguously titled Dogen, ed. and annot.
Terada Toru and Mizuno Yaoko, Nippon shiso
daikei 12 (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1970, 1982)
--which includes the "Bendowa, " the
seventy-five-fascicle edition, and the
twelve-fascicle edition, but not other
miscellaneous writings; and (3) vols. 1 and 2 of
the new Complete Works: Dogen Zenji zenshuu,
published by Shun-

P.517

juusha (DZZS-SJS) , which includes the
seventy-five-fascicle and the twelve-fascicle
versions, plus nine additional writings
including the "Bendowa." Thus, the term
"Shobogenzo" as currently used implies two
meanings: (1) the writings chosen by Dogen as
part of his Shobogenzo and (2) writings by Dogen
traditionally associated with the Shobogenzo by
the Soto tradition.

9 - Steven Heine, Dogen and the Koan Tradition: A
Tale of Two Shobogenzo Texts (Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1994), p. 24.

10 - Furuta Shokin, Shobogenzo no kenkyuu (Tokyo:
Sobunsha, 1966), p. 21. Cited by Kagamishima
Genryuu, "juunikanbon Shobogenzo no ichizuke"
(Determining the status of the twelve-fascicle
Shobogenzo)," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p. 4.

11 - DZZS-SJS, 1:7, and SBGZ-M, 1:61. Note that this
postscript is not found in the sixty-fascicle
edition.

12 - The word/phrase shuukin, according to Kawamura,
literally says "gathered together widely and
put into [final] order." Kawamura raises the
question, "Does this mean that the
seventy-five-fascicle edition was definitively
collected?" (DZZS-SJS, notes to the text, 1:7).
Also see Sugio Gen'yuu, "'Kaze to tsuki to
Butsu'--Juunikanbon Shobogenzo wa doko e iku
ka?" ("The Wind, the Moon, and Buddha"-The
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo: Where is it
headed?), in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 71-72.

13 - One of the earliest scholars working in this
area was Yamaguchi Zuiho; see his article
"Chibetto Bukkyo no kenkyuu" (Tibetan studies
and Buddhism), Komazawa Daigaku Bukkyo ronshuu,
no. 15 (1984) . More recently, Professor
Yamaguchi has published the article "Daijo
Bukkyo kyori no yuurai--Shojo hibussetsu" (The
origins of Mahaayaana Buddhist doctrine: The
contra-Buddhist teaching of the Hiinayaana),
Shiso (Iwanami Shoten), no. 828 (June 1993):
61-87, in which he challenges some of the
preconceptions of standard Mahaayaana ideology.

Professor Ishii Shuudo gives a general
summary of this debate and its origins in his
article, published in English, "Recent Trends in
Dogen Studies," trans. Albert Welter, Komazawa
Daigaku Kenkyuusho nenpo, no. 1 (March 1990). He
gives a summary and discussion of Professor
Yamaguchi's article on pp. 233-234 (30-31).

Professors Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto
Shiro have continued this line of inquiry.
Professor Hakamaya has published two collections
of essays, Hongaku shiso hihan (A critique of
original enlightenment ideology) (Tokyo: Daizo
Shuppan, 1989,

P.518

1991) , and Hihan Bukkyo--Critical Buddhism
(Tokyo: Daizo Shuppan, 1990) . Professor
Matsumoto has published Engi to kuu-Nyoraizo
shiso hihan (Causality and emptiness: A
critique of Tathaagata-garbha ideology) (Tokyo:
Daizo Shuppan, 1989 and 1990).

Paul Swanson gives a summary of these three
books by Professors Hakamaya and Matsumoto and
a brief discussion of some other scholars at
Komazawa University such as Ishii Shuudo and
Yoshizu Yoshihide, in his article with the
provocative title "'Zen Is Not Buddhism':
Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature,"
Numen 40 (1993): 115-149. The positions of both
Hakamaya and Matsumoto may best be summarized
by the title of the first article in
Matsumoto's collection Engi to Kuu: Nyoraizo
shiso wa Bukkyo ni arazu (Tathaagata-garbha
ideology is not Buddhism) (Swanson, "'Zen Is
Not Buddhism'," pp. 1-10). Also see Steven
Heine's extensive discussion, in "'Critical
Buddhism'," of the movement as sociated with
Matsumoto and Hakamaya.

Also, Professor Ishii Shuudo has done
important detailed studies on Dogen's critique
of Chinese Ch'an. See Sodai Zenshuu-shi no
kenkyuu (Studies in the history of Sung dynasty
Ch'an) (Tokyo: Daito Shuppansha, 1987) ;
Dogen-Zen no seiritsushi-teki kenkyuu (Studies
in the historical foundation of Dogen Zen)
(Tokyo: Daizo Shuppan, 1991); and Chuugoku
Zenshuushi-wa: Shinji Shobogenzo ni manabu
(Discussions of the history of Chinese Ch'an:
Studies in the true [Chinese-]character
Shobogenzo (Tokyo: Zen Bunka Kenkyuujo, 1988).
The latter is a study of Dogen's
three-hundred-fascicle collection of Chinese
koans, also known as Shobogenzo sambyaku-soku,
composed in Chinese.

Swanson has pointed out that all of these
studies have an older stratum of research as
their foundation (Swanson, "'Zen Is Not
Buddhism'," p. 138). In 1939, Hazama Jiko
published his Nihon Bukkyo no kaiten to sono
kicho (The development and characteristics of
Japanese Buddhism) (Tokyo: Sanseido, 1939), in
which he identified "original enlightenment
ideology" (hongaku shiso) as the dominant ethos
in Japanese Buddhism. This work was continued
by Tamura Yoshiro in his Kamakura Bukkyo shiso
no kenkyuu (Studies on the thought of the new
Kamakura schools) (Kyoto: Keiraku-ji Shoten,
1965), and in "Tendai hongaku shiso gairon"
(Outline of the Tendai theory of original
enlightenment), in Tendai hongaku-ron, ed. Tada
Koryuu et al., Nihon shiso taikei series, no. 9
(Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1973) , and more
recently, just before his death in 1989,
"Critique of Original Awakening Thought in
Shoshin and Dogen," trans. Jan Van Bragt,
Japanese journal of Religious Studies 11 (2)-3
(1984): 243-266.

P.519

14 - As previously noted, the official Soto
collection is the ninety-five-fascicle edition,
known as the Daihonzan Eihei-ji edition (Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism'," p. 47).

15 - See the following discussion of Matsumoto Shiro
and Hakamaya Noriaki. For a brief discussion of
the positions of Kagamishima and Kawamura, see
Kagamishima Genryuu, "Juunikanbon Shobogenzo no
ichizuke" (Determining the status of the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo," in 12-SBGZ-SMD,
pp. 3-30, and Kawamura Kodo, "Juunikanbon
Shobogenzo ni tsuite" (Regarding the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo, in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp.
405-426.

16 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," pp. 57-58.

17 - Kagamishima, "Juunikanbon," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp.
7 ff.

18 - 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 57-109 (esp. pp. 75-80). This
position has been confirmed in private
interviews.

19 - See, e.g., Ishii Shuudo, "Saigo no Doogen:
Juunikanbon Shobogenzo to HoKyoki" (The late
Dogen: The twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo and the
Hokyoki), in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 319-374). See
esp. the graph of the dates of the Eihei koroku
sermons on pp. 328-330. Also see Heine,
"Critical Buddhism'," for an extended study of
Ishii Shudo's position (pp. 56, 59 ff).

20 - See Kagamishima Genryuu, "Juunikanbon," sec. 3,
in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 15ff., and Hakamaya
Noriaki, "Juunikanbon Shobogenzo to zange no
mondai" (The twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo and the
problem of repentance), in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp.
133-174, and Matsumoto Shiro, "Shinjin Inga ni
tsuite" (Regarding deep faith in causality), in
12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 199-298. For full-length works
by Hakamaya and Matsumoto, see note 13 above.

21 - Compiled by Kenzei, the fourteenth abbot of the
Eihei-ji. The oldest extant version dates to
1589; although Kenzei lived about a century
before that. See Heinrich Dumoulin, Zen
Buddhism: A History, vol. 2, Japan, trans.
James W. Heisig and Paul Knitter (New York:
Macmillan Publishing Company, 1990), p. 106 n.
5. Also, for a more detailed discussion, see
James Kodera, Dogen's Formative Years in China:
An Historical Study and Annotated Translation
of the Hokyo-ki (London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul, 1980), p. 8.

22 - Mizuno notes that this would be on the
fourteenth day of the seventh month (SBGZ-M,
4:415 n. 8).

23 - Fourth abbot of the Eihei-ji (d. 1314).

24 - This fascicle was composed at the Eihei-ji in
the first month

P.520

of 1253. Dogen transferred the abbotship of the
Eihei-ji to Ejo in the seventh month, and in
the eighth month moved to Kyoto for treatment
and rest. On the twenty-eighth day of that
month, he died (Kawamura Kodo, in DZZS-SJS,
2:660).

25 - Kana refers to the Japanese syllabary writing
system, and thus to the Japanese writings. This
is in contrast to mana or shinji
("true-character") works, written in kanji
(Chinese characters).

26 - DZZS-SJS, 2: 458; SBGZ-M, 4:415-416.

27 - Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p.
321. See Okubo Dosen, Dogen Zenji zenshuu (The
complete works of Zen Master Dogen), 1st rev.
edition (Chikuma Shooboo, 1969); 2d rev. edition
(Rinsen Shoten, 1969-1970); and 1st (original)
edition (Tokyo: Shunjuusha, 1935) . Sugio
Gen'yuu also agrees with this view ("'Kaze to
tsuki to Butsu'," in DZZS-SJS, pp. 57-120).

28 - Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp.
322-333. Also see Ishii, "Recent Trends in
Dogen Studies," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 220-221
(44-45).
If Dogen intended further revisions of the
seventy-five fascicles, we can only guess at
his plan. The last fascicle in the
seventy-five-fascicle Shobogenzo for example,
which is titled "Shukke" (Leaving the
householder's life), was composed in 1246. The
Himitsu Shobogenzo (Secret Shobogenzo) version
of this fascicle includes a postscript that
states, "Following the old version of 'Shukke',
[there exists a new version] by the master.
Accordingly, this version should be discarded"
(DZZS-SJS, 2:264; SBGZ-M, 4:51. Also see Ishii,
"Recent Trends in Dogen Studies, " pp. 229-230
[35-36]).

The twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo begins with
the fascicle "Shukke kudoku" (The merit of
leaving the householder's life) . Professor
Ishii has shown that the seventy-five-fascicle
version of "Shukke" includes discussion of both
leaving the householder's life and receiving
the precepts. The "Shukke kudoku" fascicle of
the "New Version" discusses only the former,
and the second fascicle of the twelve-fascicle
version, "Jukai" (Receiving the precepts), only
the latter. It would seem logical to conclude,
as does Sugio Gen'yuu, that this is an example
of a revision mentioned by Dogen in the "Hachi
dainin-gaku" fascicle (Sugio Gen'yuu, "Dogen no
Tetsugaku," pt. 1, "The Philosophy of Dogen,"
Yamaguchi Daigaku Kyoiku-bu kenkyuuron-shiuu,
March 1990). Ishii points out that even among
those who do not recognize the validity of the
postscript to the "Shukke" fascicle, there are
those who nevertheless think that the
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo has

P.521

an intention distinct from the "Old Version"
seventy-five-fascicle Shobogenzo. See, e.g.,
Kagamishima Genryuu, "Juunikanbon Shobogenzo ni
tsuite" (Regarding the twelve-fascicle
Shobogenzo) , Komazawa Daigaku Bukkyogaku-bu
ronshuu, no. 19 (October 1988). See the note by
Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p. 370
n. 3.

29 - The Chinese translations of Early Buddhist
writings from the northern Indian
Sarvastivaadin tradition, generally
corresponding to the Paali Nikaayas.

30 - Stories about the previous lives of the Buddha.

31 - Sixty fascicles, Taisho vol. 13.

32 - Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p.
327. See also (1) Kagamishima Genryu, Dogen
Zenji no inyo kyoten, goroku no kenkyuu
(Studies in the scriptural and Zen-sayings
collection sources of Zen Master Dogen) (Tokyo:
Mokujisha, 1965), esp. the chart beginning on
p. 216 with the entries listed according to
source, and (2) Kawamura Kodo, Shobogenzo no
seiritsu, p. 537, with the quotations listed
according to fascicle.

33 - E.g., eighteen quotations from the
Chih-kuan-fu-hsing-ch'uan-hung-chueh (Shikan
fugyoden koketsu, in Taisho, 46:141 ff., by
Chan-jan (Tannen [717-782], the ninth patriarch
of the Chinese T'ien-T'ai sect), and four
quotations from T'ien-T'ai Chih-i's (538-597)
Mo-ho-chih-kuan (Maka shikan) (Ishii, "Saigo no
Dogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD).

34 - Wanshi-roku, the sayings of Hung-chin
Cheng-chueh (1091-1157).

35 - Engo-roku, the sayings of Yuan-wu K'o-ch'in
(1063-1135), a Lin-chi (Rinzai) master, and
editor of the Hekigan-roku (Pi-yen-lu), or Blue
Cliff Records, one of the main collections of
koans of the Rinzai sect.

36 - Daie-roku, a collection of sayings of Ta-hui
Tsung-kao (Daie Soko) (1089-1163), the major
target of Doogen's critique of Chinese Ch'an. It
was Ta-hui who began the practice of
"meditating on" koans in order to attain
enlightenment.

37 - Daichido-ron: a one-hundred-fascicle commentary
on the Mahaapraj~naapaaramitaa-Suutra, and
based in part on Naagaarjuna's
Muulamaadhyamika-kaarikaa. It is rich in
information on the various philosophical
systems in India, but is almost certainly of
much later origin than Naagaarjuna, to whom it
is attributed (Taisho, vol. 25).

38 - It should be noted that Doogen often mentions
Naagaarjuna through-

P.522

out his career, but his sources are primarily
nonprimary ones such as the Ta-chih-tu-lun and
various Ch'an collections.

39 - Ta-p'i-p'o-sha-lun (Daibibasha-ron) , a huge
commentary on the J~naanaprasthaana-`Saastra by
Kaatyaayaniiputra of the Sarvaastivaadin
School.

40 - A-p'i-ta-mo-chuu-she-lun (Abidatsuma kusha-ron,
usually referred to in Japanese as the
Kusha-ron).

41 - Sabdharma-pu.n.dariika-Suutra (Hokekyo/Myohorenge-kyo).

42 - A very preliminary translation of these can be
found in Yuuho Yokoi's Zen Master Dogen (New
York, Tokyo: Weatherhill, 1976). The reader is
cautioned, however, that Yokoi does not address
any of the issues raised in this essay, and
thus the assumptions used in choosing his
translations for philosophical terminology are
highly problematic and controversial.

43 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 50.

44 - Compiled or edited by Ejo in 1255.

45 - Ishii also notes that the earlier "Shukke"
draws from five traditional Buddhist texts,
whereas the later "Shukke kudoku" draws on
eighteen. See Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in
12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 324 f.

46 - Date of compilation unclear.

47 - Kawamura, in DZZS-SJS, 2:657. Also see Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism'," p. 51. Heine notes the
proximity in time of the two versions, but not
the problem of the period of composition.

48 - It is interesting to note that these fascicles
were written after Ejo had joined Dogen's group
in 1234, but before the Daruma-shuu monks Ekan,
Gikai, et al. joined Doogen in 1241.

49 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 51.

50 - See the discussion of the fascicle in part 2 of
this essay. See note 128 below.

51 - Quoting from the Daibibasha-ron
(Ta-p'i-p'o-sha-lun), a huge commentary on the
J~naanaprasthaana-`Saastra by Kaatyaayaniiputra
of the Sarvaastivaadin School. Mention of the
"Theory of Moments" can also be found in
"Shukke kudoku."

Interestingly, in this latter discussion,
Doogen's technique is didactic, depending on the
authority of Sarvaastivaadin writings, and does
not apply the well-known critique that
Naagaarjuna directed against this very
doctrine. (It is beyond the scope of this essay
to examine how this fascicle in some ways helps
and yet in other ways confuses our
understanding of Doogen's conception of time.)

P.523

52 - Date of composition unknown; the postscript
lists the date of editing as summer 1255, two
years after Dogen's death.

53 - Again, date of original composition unknown,
but compiled or edited by Ejo, in 1255.

54 - Dogen states: "Among the suutras the great
teacher `Saakyamuni has taught, the Lotus
Suutra (Saddharma-pu.n.dariika-Suutra) is the
Great King, the Great Teacher. All other
suutras, all other dharmas, are its ministers,
its servants. The doctrines taught in the Lotus
are true, those of the other suutras are merely
'expedient means' (hoben/ upaaaya): they do not
represent the true intent of the Buddha"
(SBGZ-M, 4:260-261).

55 - Date of composition unknown, but compiled by
Ejo in 1255.

56 - Date of composition unknown, but edited by Ejo
in 1255.

57 - Compiled/edited by Ejo in 1255.

58 - Date of composition unknown; compiled/edited by
Ejoo in 1255.

59 - Focusing on Dogen's contention that Taoism does
not teach the critical doctrine of causality
and Dogen's critique of the popular notion that
the "complete teaching" was a combination of
Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism.

60 - This fascicle draws its source material from
the T'ien-t'ai Mo-ho-chih-kuan and from works
associated with India. It distinctly condemns
those who deny the existence of the Three
Treasures (Buddha, Dharma, and Sa^mgha), the
Four Noble Truths, and the four stages to
Arhathood, which he later says will necessarily
lead to the path of the Bodhisathra and thus to
Buddhahood. The chapter as a whole seems to
value Indian Buddhism, both early Buddhism and
the Mahaayaana forms, higher than Chinese
forms, with the exception of T'ien-t'ai.

61 - No date for composition or compilation
included.

62 - The whole text appears to be a quotation from
the Chinese T'ien-sheng Kuang-teng-lu (Yokoi,
"Zen Master Doogen," p. 197 n. 1).

63 - It was composed on 6 January 1253, about eight
months before his death.

64 - (1) Minimizing greed, (2) satisfaction (along
the lines of equanimity [upekha]?), (3) restful
quietude, (4) diligence, (5) not forgetting
mindfulness, (6) the practice of samaadhi, (7)
the practice of wisdom (chief), and (8) not
wasting time on pointless discussion.

65 - More literally translated as "true dharma eye
storehouse."

66 - In the "Ippyakuhachi hbmyo-mon, " in
particular, Dogen's mem-

P.524

tion of mindfulness and a wide variety of
contemplations, and his failure to identify his
frequent references to the merits of samaadhi
with his own shikan taza may suggest that the
present procedure of Japanese Soto Zen training
centers, which continues the "one practice"
meditation of shikan taza, may possibly be a
stance that Dogen himself had abandoned. I do
not mean to say that Dogen weakened in any way
his emphasis on meditative practice, but rather
that it is possible that his early insistence
on one practice shikan taza may have been an
expedient means of appealing to the new
converts during h is early years, many of whom
were among the aristocratic and samurai
classes. Also see note 95 below.

67 - In his article "Saigo no Dogen," Ishii compares
the twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo with the record
of Dogen's sermons, "Eihei koroku" (DZZS-SJS,
vols. 3-4), as well as other documents.

68 - In his first address to the congregation on the
tenth day of the ninth month of 1239, the day
after his return from Kamakura, he stated that
he would never again leave the monastery upon
the request or command of the ruler (kokuo),
and that he heretofore intended to devote
himself with full vigor to his practice and the
accumulation of merit, to be used to save all
beings, by enabling them to see the Buddha and
hear his Dharma (Ishii, "Saigo no Dogen," in
12-SBGZ-SMD, pp. 331-332).

69 - This is not to be confused with Dogen's first
address to the congregation on the same day.
See note 68 above.

70 - "Eihei koroku, " no. 251, quoted by Ishii,
"Saigo no Doogen," in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p. 333.

71 - DZZS-SJS, 2:394; SBGZ-M, 4:297. Ishii implies
that the sermon in the Eihei koroku would
likely indicate the date of composition of the
"Jinshin inga" since most of the Shobogenzo
fascicles arose out of notes for sermons.
However, the Eihei koroku are recordings by
Dogen's disciples of his "formal" (jodo) style
sermons. It is not at all impossible that the
"Jinshin inga" may be of an earlier origin.

72 - Also see Kawamura, in DZZS-SJS, 2:677-697, and
the postscripts for each fascicle. Kawamura
notes that some "preliminary" version of (3)
"Kesa kudoku" may have been delivered as early
as 1240. Kawamura thinks it possible that
Sanji-go" was probably copied by Ejo in 1253
(ibid., p. 412).

73 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 60.

74 - Contrast Dogen's critical analysis of the fox
koan in "Daishugyo" as discussed in part 2 of
this essay.

P.525

75 - Bielefeldt, "Recarving the Dragon," p. 32.

76 - Cited by Bielefeldt, ibid., p. 40. See Yanagida
Seizan, "Dogen to Rinzai," Riso 513 (February
1976): 74-89, esp. pp. 81-83.

77 - Dogen claims in his Shobogenzo fascicle
"Menju," compiled after his move to Echizen in
the tenth month of 1243, that the seven Buddhas
correctly transmitted (shoden) the "Treasury of
the Eye of the True Dharma" (Shobogenzo) (see
note 3 above) face to face (menju) through the
patriarchs to Dogen's teacher, T'ien-t'ung
lu-ching (Tendo Nyojo) (1163-1228) ("Menju," in
DZZS-SJS, 2:54. See, Bielefeldt, "Recarving the
Dragon," pp. 32-33, and Ishii, "Recent Trends
in Dogen Studies," p. 252 [131], and then to
Dbgen. According to Dogen, Ju-ching said to
Dogen that the "face-to-face transmission of
the Buddhas and Patriarchs" is to be found
"only in my chambers. Others have not seen or
heard of it even in their dreams" (DZZS-SJS,
2:54-55; SBGZ-M, 3:143. Also see Bielefeldt,
"Recarving the Dragon," p. 39).

78 - Ejo, according to tradition, became Dogen's
heir after Dogen confirmed his enlightenment,
probably in mid-November 1236. This is
according to the Denkoroku (Taisho, vol. 82,
no. 2585) , compiled by Keizan Jokin
(1264/8-1325), probably around 1300 (Dumoulin,
Zen Buddhism: A History, 2:105 n. 2, and pp.
127-128). Heinrich Dumoulin points out that the
original manuscript of the Denkoroku has been
lost and that the oldest extant copy dates from
the year 1430. Since this history was compiled
by Keizan, who would have had his own agenda,
and was possibly modified by later additions,
it is "historically reliable only in a
restricted sense" (ibid., p. 105). For a more
extended discussion on this and other Soto
biographies see Takashi James Kodera, Dogen's
Formative Years in China, pp. 7-13.

79 - Sugio Gen'yuu, "Kaze to tsuki to
Butsu"--Juunikanbon Shobogenzo wa doko e iku
ka?" (The Wind, the Moon, and Buddha--The
twelve-fascicle Shobogenzo: Where is it
headed?) (12-SBGZ-SMD), pp. 57-109, esp. pp.
90ff. Also see Sugio Gen'yuu, "Shobogenzo to
Zuimonki--Bonkotsu to shinryuu no ningengaku,"
in Iwanami Koza: Nihon bungaku to Bukkyo vol. 1
(Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1993), pp. 77-101, esp.
pp. 81 ff.

80 - See, e.g., Dumoulin, Zen Buddhism: A History,
pp. 130 ff. For further discussion on the
careers of Dogen in Echizen and of his
successors and their relationship to the
Daruma-shuu, see William M. Bodiford, "Soto Zen
in Medieval Japan (Honolulu: University of
Hawai'i Press / Kuroda Institute, 1993).

81 - Bodiford, Soto Zen, p. 32. With regard to the
issue of lay involve-

P.526

ment, it should be remembered that Dogen's lay
following in Kyoto would have consisted of
highly educated aristocrats and Samurai,
including powerful figures such as Konoe lezane
(1179-1243) and Konoe Kanetsune (1210-1259) at
court and the Samurai lord Hatano Yoshishige
(d. 1258), who was later to become his major
patron (ibid., p. 27). In Echizen, his lay
following would naturally have been severely
diminished, but would still have included the
family of his Samurai patron Hatano and local
villagers and officials, most of whom would
have lacked the education to read and
comprehend much of Dogen's more complex
writings.

82 - It should be noted that Eisai (a.k.a. Yosai)
was successful in gaining recognition for his
introduction of the Rinzai Zen movement by
joining it with Tendai mikkyo practices, which
were very popular among the laity.

83 - The most basic meaning of katto is "vines" or
"useless rubbish" (Nakamura Soichi, in
Shobogenzo yogo jiten, p. 51). Also see Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism'," pp. 5-6.

84 - Prior to its adoption by the Ch'an school, the
term koan (Chin. kung-an) originally meant a
public case in court. The ko of koan means
"public, " "common to all, " and "equally
accessible." The basic meaning of an is "to
investigate" (shiraberu) , or "think." The
Chinese character originally used by Dogen and
his disciple Koun Ejo (1198-1280) for this
syllable also means to "hold down," "stop,"
"think, " or "investigate." Kyogo, in his
commentary, interprets Dogen's an to mean
"maintain the parts" (Gosho, p. 21). Kamatani
Senryuu explains koan as "holding on to that
which is common to all and not letting go...
(or) not losing it" (Kamatani Senryuu,
Shobogenzo roseikon-shuu: Shobogenzo genjo koan
(Tokyo: Bukkyd Joohoo Sentaa, 1984), p. 23.

85 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 18.

86 - See, e.g., his fascicles "Bukkyo, " "Jisho
sammai," "Dotoku," "Bendowa," "Nyorai Zenshin,"
etc. For an extended discussion of the issue,
see Hee-Jin Kim, Dogen Kigen--Mystical Realist,
pp. 96 ff.

87 - Dale S. Wright, "Rethinking Transcendence: The
Role of Language in Zen Experience," Philosophy
East and West 42 (1) (1992): 113-138.

88 - The kana, or Japanese, version as opposed to
Dogen's collection of some three hundred koans,
also called the Shobogenzo.

89 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 28.

90 - Ibid., p. 29.

P.527

91 - Hee-Jin Kim, "'The Reason of Words and
Letters': Dogen and Koan Language," in Dogen
Studies. This article, slightly modified, also
appears as the introductory essay in Kim's
Flowers of Emptiness: Selections from Dogen's
Shobogenzo, Studies in Asian Thought and
Religion, vol. 2 (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press,
1985), pp. 1-50.

92 - Kim, "'The Reason of Words and Letters'," p.
56. Heine points out that the kana (Japanese)
Shobogenzo "draws extensively on the polysemous
wordplay, punning, and homophones used by the
literati in Japanese court poetry and other
Kamakura era religioaesthetic works" (Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism', " p. 30) . Dogen's
particular application of these techniques does
not, however, detract from the originality of
Dogen's work. The Shobogenzo stands unique in
Japanese religious literature.

93 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 89.

94 - Composed by Dogen in 1231 at the age of 32.
Waddell and Abe translate the title as
"Discourse on Negotiating the Way." See their
translation, "Dogen's Bendbwa, " Eastern
Buddhist 4 (1) (May 1971) : 129-157, and
Matsumoto Shiro, "Shinjin inga ni tsuite--Dogen
no shiso ni kansuru shiken" (Regarding "Deep
faith in causality": A personal view of Dogen's
thought), in Engi to kuu-Nyoraizo shiso hihan,
p. 217.

95 - I argue that Dogen never intended his style of
Zen meditation, shikan taza to exclude standard
Buddhist practice. Although Dogen criticizes
various contemporary "single practices," such
as nembutsu, his activities in the
establishment of his first temple, the
Kosho-ji, his numerous vinaya (temple and monk
rules), and his lifelong commitment to the way
of the sa^mgha clearly illustrate his
commitment to the full range of traditional
Buddhist practice. Indeed, it is also clear
that Dogen saw his work as a restoration of
original Buddhism. Thus, shikan taza is not
"just sitting in meditation to the exclusion of
other Buddhist practice," but rather "when
meditating throw your whole 'self,' body and
mind, into Zazen." Also see note 66 above.

96 - DZZS-SJS, 2: 467; SBGZ-M, 1:23. Kagamishima
Genryu has stated that "There is no clearer
critique of 'kyogaku' Buddhism" (Kagamishima
Genryuu, "Honsho myooshu oboegaki," in Komazawa
Daigaku Bukkyo gaku ronshuu, no. 18 [1987]:
70). There is a question, however, as to
whether we should translate kyogaku literally
as "the study of the scriptures or teachings"
or as "scholasticism."

97 - DZZS-SJS, 5:4-5 (1233 version). Also see p. 10,
for Dogen's

P.528

earlier colophon version of 1227. With regard
to the passage in question, there is no
difference between the two versions. The 1227
version would be Dogen's first writing, with
the possible and controversial exception of his
"diary" of his travels in China, the "Hokyo-ki"
(these may also be memoirs written later in
life).

98 - Matsumoto, "Shinjin inga ni tsuite," p. 218.

99 - 12-SBGZ, no. 8, "Sanji-goo," in DZZS-SJS, 2:408;
SBGZ-M, 4:323.

100 - Matsumoto, "Shinjin inga ni tsuite," p. 217.

101 - Dialogue no. 3 (DZZS-SJS, 2: 466; SBCZ-M,
1:21-22). Note that this passage precedes the
passage introduced by Matsumoto, suggesting
that the hypothetical questioner still did not
get the message.

102 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 51.

103 - Japanese text: "Butsudo motoyori hoken yori
chushutsu seru...." This phrase has been
variously interpreted as "transcends abundance
or lack" (Nishiyama Koosen and John Stevens,
trans., Shobogenzo vol. 1 [Tokyo: Nakayama
Shobo, 1975], p. 1) and as "sprang forth from
abundance and paucity" (Thomas Cleary,
Shobogenzo; Zen Essays by Dogen [Honolulu:
University of Hawai'i Press, 1986], p. 32).
The notions of "going beyond" and of
"springing forth" are both possible readings
here. Dogen may have had both meanings in
mind.

104 - This verse appears in the Hung-chih kuang-lu
(Wanshi Koroku), no. 2. "Abundance" is a
simile for "existence" and corresponds to the
first verses saying "there is" (ari), and
"privation" is a simile for "nonexistence,"
corresponding to "emptiness" (naku).

105 - DZZS, 1:7: hana wa aijaku ni chiri, kusa wa
kiken ni ofuru nomi nari. Thus the phrase may
be translated as: (1) "Flowers fall among
regrets, " or "Flowers fall in spite of
regrets, " or "Flowers fall because of
regrets." The simile of the flowers and weeds
appears in Dogen's Eihei koroku with the more
specific connecting phrase ni yorite (because
of...) ." That passage reads as follows:
"Flowers fall because of our regrets; weeds
come to life following upon our annoyance and
attempts to get rid of them" (Dogen, Eihei
koroku, "Daiichi koshoji goroku no. 51"). I
think that Dogen here has used the more
ambiguous, unqualified ni in order to allow
all three of these meanings to come into play.
All of them are consistent with the general
movement of the opening verses of the "Genjo
koan" and with his later thought as expressed
in the Eihei koroku.

P.529

106 - Pai-chang Huai-hai (720-814) was a disciple of
Ma-tzu Tao-i (Baso Doitsu) (709-788).

107 - "Daishugyo" (DZZS-SJS, 2:185-186). This story
is also found in Dogen's koan collection, the
Shinji Shobogenzo, and in several passages of
Dogen's Eihei koroku, esp. a verse commentary
in the ninth volume. It also appears in Ejo's
recordings of some of Dogen's sayings, the
Zuimonki. It had previously appeared in
Chinese transmission-of-the-lamp histories
such as the Tensho kotoroku and the Shuumon
rentoeyo, koan commentaries, the Mumonkan
(case no. 2), the Shoyoroku (case no. 8), and
in dozens of Sung era recorded-sayings texts
(Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 52).

108 - This phrase furaku inga may have a number of
interpretations, e.g. "not regressing back to
causality once one has transcended it through
enlightenment" and "being immune to causality
since one has transcended it through
enlightenment." These meanings would apply to
the "Jinshin inga" fascicle, but not
necessarily, as we shall see, to the
"Daishugyo" fascicle.

109 - This latter interpretation was suggested to me
by Ishii Shuudo in personal conversation.
Another translation might be: "not being
ignorant (avidya) of causality."

110 - Karmic cause and effect or, more generally,
causality.

111 - DZZ-SJS, 2:186; DZZS, 1:545 (my italics).

112 - SBGZ-SJS, 2:388-389; DZZS, 1:676-677.

113 - Heine has stated that the "Daishugyo" fascicle
is primarily concerned with the burial of
monks. This discussion, however, functions
only as a minor footnote to the fascicle
(Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 65).

114 - We must be careful to take even Dogen's
"positive" statements in context, since he
often composes "meta"-koans by asserting both
sides of a position only to deny both sides.

115 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 65.

116 - The fascicle also includes a hermeneutical
discussion on the use and application of such
"pivotal Zen phrases" (ittengo) as fumai inga
and furaku inga.

117 - Pai-chang, quoting from the
Mahaa-parinirvaa.na Suutra, chap. 28 (SBGZ-M,
1:77 n. 12, and p. 441-442, notes for p. 77).

118 - DZZS-SJS, 1:17; SBGZ-M, 2:77; DZZS, 1:16. For
a fuller discussion, see my article "Dogen:
Enlightenment and Entanglement," pts. 2 and 3
(in prep.).

P.530

119 - This, however, should not be misunderstood as
a denial by Dogen of the value of language.

120 - Dogen also speculates that if this were
possible, all the masters of the last two or
three hundred years must be transmigrating as
foxes, which, Dogen argues, we would surely be
aware of. The fox may also even have been
lying when he said that he had previously been
a Zen master. Furthermore, it is absurd to say
that a fox would be aware of how many years he
had been reborn as a fox, and we cannot even
be sure of the meaning of the term "years" in
the story.

121 - DZZS-SJS, 2:189.

122 - Ibid., 2:195.

123 - Ibid., 2:189; SBGZ-M 3:373.

124 - SBGZ-SJS, 2:190.

125 - DZZS-SJS, 2:190.

126 - Heine, "'Critical Buddhism', " p. 54 (my
italics).

127 - Dogen draws from Jaataka birth stories and the
Abhidharmamahaavibhaasaa (Taisho 27.592a-93b)
for tales such as that of a eunuch whose
sexual status is reversed, a prostitute whose
life dramatically changes because she briefly
wears a Buddhist robe, and the power of animal
transformations involving a fox and deer
(Heine, "'Critical Buddhism'," p. 65).

128 - He argues: "This [Bodhi]-Mind is not
[something] that has existed from the
beginning, nor [something] that has just now
arisen. It is neither 'one' nor 'many';
neither spontaneous (jinen) nor fixed
(gyonen). It is not [to be found] within our
body, nor is it the case that our body is [to
be found] within the mind. This mind does not
pervade the Dharma-dhaatu (hokai) . It is
neither 'before' nor 'after.' Nor is it
'nonexistent.' It is not 'self-nature' (jisho)
or 'other nature' (tasho) or 'common nature'
(guusho) , nor is it 'uncaused nature'
(muinsho) . Even so, it is through the
'interaction of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and
sentient beings' (kanno doko) that the
bodaishin arises. [But] it is not bestowed by
the myriad buddhas and bodhisattvas, nor does
it become attainable through our own personal
efforts. Because it is through the
`interaction of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and
sentient beings' (kanno doko it [cannot be
called] 'spontaneous' (jinen) " (SBGZ-M,
4:177-178).

129 - "Even though we have acquired sufficient merit
to realize Buddhahood, we should nevertheless
reflect it back to sentient beings

P.531

in order that they may realize the Way"
("Hotsu bodaishin," in SBGZ-M, 4:181).

130 - This fascicle, we should note, includes some
highly sophisticated koan-style discussions of
what the Bodhi-Mind is not and a critique of
dichotomies such as "self" and "other".
"Although this mind is neither Self (ware ne
arazu) nor Other (ta ni arazu), nor is it
something that comes, even so, with the
arousal of the mind, this great earth has
become golden" (SBGZ-M, 4:181).

131 - SBGZ-M, 4:227.

132 - We also find an affirmation of the `suunyataa
doctrine that "they [all dharmas including
karma] are neither produced nor annihilated;
also they are not not produced and not not
annihilated" (SBGZ-M, 4:227). Doogen, it must
be noted, proceeds also to show the errors in
asserting that "karmic hindrance" (gosho) is
"originally empty" (honrai-kuu). (This passage
is not found in Okubo, but is found in the
Eiko-ji text used by Mizuno in SBGZ-M,
4:325f.)

133 - SBGZ-M, 4:320-321; DZZS-SJS, 2:406-407.

134 - Kagamishima Genryuu, in 12-SBGZ-SMD, p. 13.

135 - As Heine points out: "A text is not a fixed
and finite entity, nor is the author an
independent, discrete subject with a clear-cut
agenda based on personal intentionality.
Rather the text is the product of a fluid and
flexible continuing process of creativity in
which the relativity and mutuality of author
and reader contribute to the 'mosaic of
citations' " (Heine, Dogen and the Koan
Tradition, p. 62). As Mark C. Taylor has
stated: "The meaning of a text... is never
fully present. Meaning is always in the
process of forming, deforming, and reforming"
(Mark C. Taylor, Erring: A Postmodern
A-Theology [Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1984], p. 179; cited by Heine,
"'Critical Buddhism'," pp. 62-63).