|
|
| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| |ArticleLayout=Academic Layout | | |ArticleLayout=Academic Layout |
| |ArticleTitle=The Buddha-nature in Dōgen's Shōbōgenzō | | |ArticleTitle=The Buddha-nature in Dōgen's Shōbōgenzō |
| |AuthorPage=Kodera, T. | | |AuthorPage=People/Kodera, T. |
| |PubDate=1977 | | |PubDate=1977 |
| |ArticleSummary=It has come to be acknowledged in the present century that Dōgen is one of the most seminal thinkers of Japanese Buddhism. For nearly seven centuries, however, he has been buried in oblivion, except within the Sōtō School of Zen that reveres Dōgen as its founder. Even the Sōtō School contributed to the obscurity of their founder by prohibiting the publication of Dōgen’s major work, ''Shōbōgenzō'' until the end of the eighteenth century.<br> Watsuji Tetsurō (1889-1960) brought Dōgen out of this long period of obscurity with his treatise ''Shamon Dōgen'' written between 1919 and 1921.<ref>The treatise was originally contributed in parts to two scholarly journals, ''Shin shōsetsu'' and ''Shisō''. They were later compiled and published as part of Watsuji, ''Nihon seishinshi kenkyū'' [A study of the spiritual history of Japan] (1925). The references in this paper are from the book.</ref> Watsuji's contribution, however, is not limited to his introduction of Dōgen to public attention. Instead of treating Dōgen as the founder of the Sōtō School, he presents him as a human being, a person, a man (''hito''):<br> | | |ArticleSummary=It has come to be acknowledged in the present century that Dōgen is one of the most seminal thinkers of Japanese Buddhism. For nearly seven centuries, however, he has been buried in oblivion, except within the Sōtō School of Zen that reveres Dōgen as its founder. Even the Sōtō School contributed to the obscurity of their founder by prohibiting the publication of Dōgen’s major work, ''Shōbōgenzō'' until the end of the eighteenth century.<br> Watsuji Tetsurō (1889-1960) brought Dōgen out of this long period of obscurity with his treatise ''Shamon Dōgen'' written between 1919 and 1921.<ref>The treatise was originally contributed in parts to two scholarly journals, ''Shin shōsetsu'' and ''Shisō''. They were later compiled and published as part of Watsuji, ''Nihon seishinshi kenkyū'' [A study of the spiritual history of Japan] (1925). The references in this paper are from the book.</ref> Watsuji's contribution, however, is not limited to his introduction of Dōgen to public attention. Instead of treating Dōgen as the founder of the Sōtō School, he presents him as a human being, a person, a man (''hito''):<br> |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
| of man. The spatiality of man was then further formulated into Watsuji's | | of man. The spatiality of man was then further formulated into Watsuji's |
| own system, which first appeared in his ''Fudo''，which was rendered into English by Geoffrey Bownas as ''Climate and culture'' (1961). Watsuji's own system is commonly referred to as ''ningengaku'' ("the study of man"), in which he attempted to elucidate ''hito to hito to no aidagara'' ("the betweenness of persons"). It is apparent that Watsuji’s emphasis upon ''hito'' is traceable to his spatial critique of Heidegger's ''Sein und Zeit'' [Being and time].</ref> Many people have followed Watsuji’s methodology. Professor Tamaki Kōshirō of the University of Tokyo, for instance, remarks that not only was he first exposed to Dōgen through Watsuji, but also that he encountered the living Dōgen in Watsuji’s treatise.<ref>See "Dōgen no sekai" [Dōgen's world], a colloquium between Tamaki Kōshirō and Terai Tōru, p. 2. This colloquium is printed in the form of a pamphlet to accompany ''Dōgen shū'' [Selected writings of Dōgen], edited by Tamaki (1969).</ref><br> This writer finds Watsuji's methodology to be particularly applicable to the study of Dōgen. Dōgen himself saw the truth fully embodied in the personhood of his Chinese master, Juching. Dōgen's encounter with this individual was the single | | own system, which first appeared in his ''Fudo''，which was rendered into English by Geoffrey Bownas as ''Climate and culture'' (1961). Watsuji's own system is commonly referred to as ''ningengaku'' ("the study of man"), in which he attempted to elucidate ''hito to hito to no aidagara'' ("the betweenness of persons"). It is apparent that Watsuji’s emphasis upon ''hito'' is traceable to his spatial critique of Heidegger's ''Sein und Zeit'' [Being and time].</ref> Many people have followed Watsuji’s methodology. Professor Tamaki Kōshirō of the University of Tokyo, for instance, remarks that not only was he first exposed to Dōgen through Watsuji, but also that he encountered the living Dōgen in Watsuji’s treatise.<ref>See "Dōgen no sekai" [Dōgen's world], a colloquium between Tamaki Kōshirō and Terai Tōru, p. 2. This colloquium is printed in the form of a pamphlet to accompany ''Dōgen shū'' [Selected writings of Dōgen], edited by Tamaki (1969).</ref><br> This writer finds Watsuji's methodology to be particularly applicable to the study of Dōgen. Dōgen himself saw the truth fully embodied in the personhood of his Chinese master, Juching. Dōgen's encounter with this individual was the single |
| most decisive experience in his life, as is abundantly attested in his writings. Furthermore, Dōgen repeatedly discouraged his disciples from associating with institutionalized Zen. This paper, therefore, is the result of the writer’s attempt to encounter the personhood of Dōgen.<br> While this writer uses Watsuji’s methodology, the main body of literature that is examined in this paper is the chapter of Dōgen’s ''Shōbōgenzō devoted to the ''busshō'' or Buddha-nature. The reasons for this choice are three. The question that tormented the young monk Dōgen concerned the Buddha-nature. Dōgen's search for the answer to this question took him to the eminent monks of his time: Kōen of Mt. Hiei; Kōin of Miidera temple; | | most decisive experience in his life, as is abundantly attested in his writings. Furthermore, Dōgen repeatedly discouraged his disciples from associating with institutionalized Zen. This paper, therefore, is the result of the writer’s attempt to encounter the personhood of Dōgen.<br> While this writer uses Watsuji’s methodology, the main body of literature that is examined in this paper is the chapter of Dōgen’s ''Shōbōgenzō'' devoted to the ''busshō'' or Buddha-nature. The reasons for this choice are three. The question that tormented the young monk Dōgen concerned the Buddha-nature. Dōgen's search for the answer to this question took him to the eminent monks of his time: Kōen of Mt. Hiei; Kōin of Miidera temple; |
| Yōsai of Kenninji temple; Myōzen, who succeeded Yōsai at this first Rinzai Zen monastery in Japan; Wu-chi Liao-pai and finally T'ien-t'ung Ju-ching in Southern Sung China. This pilgrimage spanned a period of over ten years ending in 1225 when he attained enlightenment under Ju-ching’s instruction and solved his question. Thus it is possible to look at Dōgen's formative years as a continuing struggle with the fundamental question he first raised on Mt. Hiei. Secondly, the Buddha-nature chapter is one of the longest of the ninety-two chapters, in the ''Shōbōgenzō'' which may suggest Dōgen's particular concern for the subject matter. Lastly, the original manuscript of this chapter, now preserved in Eiheiji temple, bears witness to the fact that Dōgen laboriously revised the chapter a number of times. Study of the Buddha-nature chapter, therefore, can | | Yōsai of Kenninji temple; Myōzen, who succeeded Yōsai at this first Rinzai Zen monastery in Japan; Wu-chi Liao-pai and finally T'ien-t'ung Ju-ching in Southern Sung China. This pilgrimage spanned a period of over ten years ending in 1225 when he attained enlightenment under Ju-ching’s instruction and solved his question. Thus it is possible to look at Dōgen's formative years as a continuing struggle with the fundamental question he first raised on Mt. Hiei. Secondly, the Buddha-nature chapter is one of the longest of the ninety-two chapters, in the ''Shōbōgenzō'' which may suggest Dōgen's particular concern for the subject matter. Lastly, the original manuscript of this chapter, now preserved in Eiheiji temple, bears witness to the fact that Dōgen laboriously revised the chapter a number of times. Study of the Buddha-nature chapter, therefore, can |
| reasonably be taken as central to understanding Dōgen's life and thought.<br><br> | | reasonably be taken as central to understanding Dōgen's life and thought.<br><br> |
