Help
Sign In
awakening
November 2009 
Zen Master Dogen - The One and The Many
Ted Biringer
An Excerpt From The Commentary on Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, in The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing…
The Buddha’s truth includes and transcends the many and the one, and so there is life and death, there is delusion and enlightenment, there are ordinary beings and Buddhas.
The “the Buddha’s truth” (true nature) is not in reality divided into “the many” (the myriad dharmas) and “the one” but includes and transcends both. Since the Buddha-Dharma is all-inclusive, there is “life and death, there is delusion and enlightenment, there are ordinary beings and Buddhas.” There are people, animals, houses, stars, and all the other particular things.
The point Dogen makes in this short line, forms the topic of thousands of pages of Buddhist literature. It is also the subject of the most popular Mahayana Buddhist scripture, The Heart Sutra, which is the subject of the first commentary Dogen wrote for the Shobogenzo; Shobogenzo, Maka-Hannya-Haramitsu, probably his second or third writing after his return from China. Though commentaries on emptiness are myriad, the profound implications of this sublime doctrine are extremely subtle and difficult to penetrate. Dogen’s illumination on the topic of emptiness is extraordinarily clear.
Dogen’s expressions in the first three sections of Genjokoan are a succinct overview of the nature of the universe; first as perceived from the contrasting perspectives of the many and the one, then as transcending those perspectives. Transcending these opposing perspectives is sometimes referred to as the mutual interpenetrating and non-obstruction of the one and the many where each thing and event, and all things and events contain, and are contained by, each other. This is expressed in the Buddhist literature by the doctrines of form and emptiness, the particular and the absolute, the one and the many, and so on. This mutually inclusive aspect of the one and the many is often expressed in Zen in an intimate and direct manner; for instance, in the classic koan, Two Monks roll Up the Blinds:
Master Hogen Raised his hand and pointed to the blinds. Two monks went and rolled them up in the same way. Hogen said, “One gains, one loses.”
Upon resolution of this koan, you will intimately realize that master Hogen’s words, “One gains, one loses,” apply to each of the two monks. Indeed, his words apply to every thing and event in all of time and space.
Throughout his works, Dogen consistently affirms the vital position of verbal expression in the Buddha-Dharma, or the authentic teaching of Zen, and at the same time, clearly defines its limitations...
From The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing
by Ted Biringer
Access: Public
We each are a piece of God who has acquired a physical viewpoint to see the physical universe. We have attached to this viewpoint, over billions of years, ideas, opinions and judgements that we so closely identify with ourselves that we believe they are us. These can be pretty subtle but are not actualities, they are simply what we believe.
When peeling off these beliefs one can indeed feel “empty”. Because believing them had a value to us at the time they were acquired. And, they have a kind of likeness to the physical universe, an identity, that is not so easy to see. As one moves through this one becomes more godlike but also recognizes that others are god as well.
At first one is becoming more oneself as one realizes one’s own truth. Then one begins to see other truths. So in a sense one is on a path of becoming both more one and more all, since we are both a piece of god looking through a porthole into this place, and the being of god. You, as you, are god. The one you know as you, is god. You never lose you. You just see a bigger picture because you are willing to see it.
Hello Kevino,
Thank you for your comments.
You may be right, although I see it a little different (so-far).
I would say that each and every particular thing (including us) is–as it is–the whole (rather than a piece) universe, God, Buddha, or whatever term is preferred. Our awareness of this, on the other hand, can and does expand (as long as we don't get stuck at some point).
Thanks again!
Peace,
Ted
Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation.
As practice it may be useful to look at conscious vs. unconscious creation. Meaning, we are capable of the whole but not aware of it. This provides a mechanism for understanding how we got where we are and a means of looking further.
It has occured to me lately that as we drop out of what appears to be physical, call it the light speed universe, there remains the game of one to one exchange. This exchange and how one operates with it, determines awareness since this place is a viewpoint structure at basic. Every “thing” is viewpoint. Whether it appears to be physical is of no consequence.
So I agree with you but unless one see the choice available it may not be made. The “de facto” choice is to see realities that involve less space. Whether that has any importance is of course up to the individual.