The Buddha-nature in D o g e n5s

Shobogenzo

Takashi James K odera

It has come to be acknowledged in the present century that

Dogen is one of the most seminal thinkers of Japanese Buddhism.
For nearly seven centuries, however, he has been buried in obliv­
ion, except within the Soto School of Zen that reveres Dogen as
its founder. Even the Soto School contributed to the obscurity
•01 their founder by prohibiting the publication of Ddgen’s major
work, Shobogenzo^ until the end of the eighteenth century.
Watsuji Tetsur5 (1889-1960) brought Dogen out of this long
period of obscurity with his treatise Shamon Dogeny written be­
tween 1919 and 1921.1 Watsuji5s contribution, however, is not
limited to his introduction of Dogen to public attention. In ­
stead of treating Dogen as the founder of the S5to School, he
presents him as a human being，a person, a man (hito)：
...it may be justifiable to assert that I opened a gate to a new
interpretation of Dogen. He thereby becomes not the Dogen
of a sect but of mankind; not the founder Dogen but rather
our Dogen. The reason why I claim it so daringly is due to
my realization that his truth was killed by sheer sectarian
treatments (Watsuji 1925， p. 160).
This realization grew out of Watsuji’s effort to solve the prob­
lem of how a layman like himself could attempt to understand
D6gen， s “truth” without engaging in the rigorous training pre­
scribed by the Zen tradition (Watsuji 1925, p , 156). A sec­
tarian would claim that the “ truth” must be experienced
immediately and that any attempt to verbalize or conceptualize

1 . The treatise was originally contributed in parts to two scholarly journals, Shin
shosetsu and Shisd. They were later compiled and published as part of Watsuji ，
Nihon seishinshi kenkyu [A study of the spiritual history of Japan] (1925). The
references in this paper are from the book.

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 267

T akashi Jam e s K o d e ra

it constitutes falsification. I f the immediate experience is the

only gateway to the “ truth,” as the sectarian would claim, why
did Dogen himself write so much? Dogen believed that it was
through writing that his truth was to be transmitted to others.
For his own religious training, he singlemindedly concentrated
on sitting in meditation; yet he saw no intrinsic conflict between
sitting and w r i t i n g . 1 his is why Dogen started writing Shd-
bogenzo in 1231: so that he might be able to “ transmit the
Buddha’s authentic Dharma to those who are misguided by false
teachers” (Watsuji 1925, p. 157). Watsuji further quotes from
Dogen: “Although it {Shobogenzo) might appear to be a mere
‘theory， ，it still bears indispensable importance for the sake of
Dharma” （ 1925，p. 157). Thus Watsuji claims that his ap­
proach, which relies on words and concepts, is a valid alternative
to the monk’s subjective pursuit.
According to Dogen, enlightenment is possible only through
rigorous sitting in meditation (kufu zcizen) and through the study
of Dharma under a master [sanshi monpo). One can encounter
Dogen as a master through his writings, for he answers one’s ques­
tions in his works. But one still must practice sitting in medita­
tion. Watsuji insists that meditation can be done in an office
or a study as well as in a meditation hall; he even goes so far
as to say that perhaps a study may be a more congenial place for
this purpose than a meditation hall when many monasteries
are no longer concerned with the transmission of the truth but
are immersed in secular concerns (1925，p. 158). Therefore, for
Watsuji, meditation does not necessarily require the act of enter­
ing a monastery.
O f the two prerequisites for the realization of the truth, sitting
in meditation is left to the individual. But the other, the pursuit
of Dharma under a master, is Watsuji s principle concern.
Shamon Dogen is an account of Watsuji5s personal encounter with
the person of Dogen as he speaks in his writings, primarily Shd-
bogenzo and Shobogenzo zuimonki, the latter of which was compiled
by Ejo, DogenJs closest disciple. In Watsuji， s treatise, we en­

268 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977'

 The Buddha-Nature in D6genJs Shogobenzo

counter not only Watsuji as he faced D5gen but Dogen himself.

Watsuji’s new methodology considers it central to discover
and encounter the person [hito) of Dogen in his works.2 Many
people have followed Watsuji’s methodology. Professor Tamaki
K5shiro of the University of Tokyo, for instance, remarks that
not only was he first exposed to Dogen through Watsuji, but also
that he encountered the living D5gen in Watsuji’s treatise.3
This writer finds Watsuji， s methodology to be particularly
applicable to the study of Dogen. Dogen himself saw the truth
fully embodied in the personhood of his Chinese master, Ju-
ching. Dogen5s encounter with this individual was the single
most decisive experience in his life, as is abundantly attested in
his writings. Furthermore, Dogen 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 Dogen.
While this writer uses Watsuji’s methodology, the main body
of literature that is examined in this paper is the chapter of Do-
gen’s Shobogenzo devoted to the bussho or Buddha-nature. The
reasons for this choice are three. The question that tormented
the young monk Dogen concerned the Buddha-nature. D5gen， s
search for the answer to this question took him to the eminent

2. W atsuji5s emphasis on encountering a person stems from his study of M artin

Heidegger. W hile Heidegger stressed the “ temporality” of Dasein in a phenom­
enological and existential manner, Watsuji ingeniously detected the incom­
pleteness of Heidegger’s temporal treatment of man. Watsuji thus focused
on the spatial dimension of the phenomenological and existential “ analytic”
of man. The spatiality of m an was then further formulated info Watsuji s
own system, which first appeared in his Fudo，which was rendered into Eng­
lish by Geoffrey Bownas as Climate and culture (1961). W atsuji，s own system
is commonly referred to as ningengaku (“ the study of m an” ）
，in which he at­
tempted to elucidate hito to hito to no aidagara (“ the betweenness of persons” ）
.
It is apparent that W atsuji’s emphasis upon hito is traceable to his spatial cri­
tique of Heidegger's Sein und ^ eit [Being and time].
：
3. See “ DSgen no sekai” [Dogen5s world], a colloquium between Tamaki Koshiro
and Terai Toru, p. 2. This colloquium is printed in the form of a pamphlet
to accompany Dogen shii [Selected writings of Dogen], edited by Tamaki (1969).

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 2 69

Takashi James K odera

monks 01 his tim e: Koen of Mt. H ie i; Koin of Miidera temple f

Yosai of Kenninji temple; Myozen, who succeeded Yosai 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 Dogen5s-
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 Shobogenzo^ which may suggest Dogen's particular con­
cern for the subject matter. Lastly, the original manuscript of
this chapter, now preserved in Eiheiji temple, bears witness to
the fact that Dogen laboriously revised the chapter a number of
times. Study of the Buddha-nature chapter, therefore, can
reasonably be taken as central to understanding D6gen， s life and
thought.

A C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N

Dogen (1200 ?-1253) may be described not as a man of many

answers, as perhaps was Nichiren, but as a man of many ques­
tions. He was a man whose life was an ongoing and indefatiga­
ble quest for the ultimate truth. He became a sramanaA at the
age of twelve and, as many of his predecessors and contem­
poraries had done, went to Mt. Hiei to seek traditional religious
training. Soon after he began the rigorous Tendai monastic
life and the study of the sacred writings, he encountered a tor­
menting and seemingly insoluble problem. He was then four­

4. ^ramana (Jps., shamon; Chin., sha-men) originally meant a non-brahmanic

ascetic in the general Indian religious context, as contrasted with the sannyasin
who was from either the brahman or ksatriya background, and also with the
brahmacdrin who came from the same background but who only temporarily
renounced the secular life. A sramana usually shaved his head and devoted
his whole life to the attainment of a particular religious objective. Later,,
the term assumed a narrower definition, referring primarily to Buddhists who*
renounced the secular life to engage in ascetic practices.

270 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Nature in DSgen’s ShdbdgenzO

teen years old. The problem concerned the interpretation of

the Buddha-nature:
Both the exoteric and the esoteric doctrines teach the primal
Buddha-nature of all sentient beings. If this is so, why then
do all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas arouse the longing for enlight­
enment and engage in ascetic practices? (Kenzeiki: Sotoshu
zenshof vol.17，p. 16a)
This “ Great Doubt” stems from the Mahayana ontological
presupposition that all beings in the universe have the Buddha-
nature and therefore possess the potential for enlightenment.
1 his assumption began in India and became systematized in
China. It can be asserted that Chinese and Japanese Buddhism
after the eighth century stand on this basic Mahayana tenet.
Dogen challenged this ontology as inherently problematic.
I f all sentient beings have the Buddha-nature, they are all poten­
tially Buddhas. This ontology logically leads to a form of pan­
theism, affirming everything in the world as it is and calling for
no discipline. Dogen, therefore, saw in this Mahayana tenet an
inherent contradiction between the pantheistic ontology of the
Buddha-nature and the discipline for buddhahood, or between
innate and acquired enlightenment. This question was not
resolved to Dogen's satisfaction by Koen, abbot of M t. Hiei, the
center of Buddhist learning in Japan, and D6gen， s long quest for
the ‘‘authentic teacher” (shoshi) was thus launched.
Dogen departed from M t. Hiei and sought instruction from
Koin of Miidera temple, another Tendai monastic establish­
ment. Though unable to answer the question, Koin immediate­
ly sensed the sincerity of this young inquirer and directed him to
Yosai. Whether Dogen actually met Yosai is historically un­
certain.5 It is certain, however, that Myozen, Y6sai， s immediate
successor at the first Rinzai Zen monastery in Japan, not only
suggested that Dogen go to China but also decided later to ac­

5. I t is commonly assumed that Dogen went to Y6sai (also known as Eisai) at

K enninji temple, but there is no extant record testifying to this common belief
among the biographers o f Dogen.

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 271

T akashi Jam e s K o dera

company the earnest religious aspirant on the journey. In

China, D6gen， s question remained unresolved and became
even more tormenting to him. After a period of searching at
T， ien-t，ung M ountain under Wu-chi Liao-pai，he was so disil­
lusioned at not having found the answer that he decided to
embark on the homeward journey to Japan. Just before his
departure, however, Dogen learned of the death of Wu-chi and
and that a new master, named Ju-ching, was to be W u-chi， s
successor. He promptly returned to T ， ien-t，
ung Mountain for
another attempt to find the authentic teacher.
D6gen， s encounter with Ju-ching became the most decisive
moment in his life. The encounter was later described by
Dogen himself as an event which “had not been possible even
in my dream s， ’ {Shobogenzo^ Menju: Okubo, ed. Dogen zenji
zensMy v o l . 1 , p. 446). He wrote, “ I saw the great master,
indeed. I finally came upon the person， ，{Shobogenzo^ Gjdji,
p. 157). Dogen experienced his enlightenment under Ju-ching,
and it was from him that Dogen transmitted the Ts， ao-tung
(Jps.，Soto) School of Zen to Japan. The personhood (hito)
in the Shobogenzo is the Dogen who encountered master Ju-ching
and who grew from that decisive encounter.
The third of the ninety-two chapters in the Shobogenzo con­
sists of fourteen well-known anecdotes6 concerning the meaning
of the Buddha-nature. D6gen’s motivation in referring to these
The original text of the Buddha- nature chapter is not divided into fourteen
sections. It is possible, however, to do so in terms of fourteen different topics
which Dogen extrapolates:
Sakyamuni on the Buddha-nature as recorded in the Mahdparinirvana
sutra: Okubo, ed., Dogen zenji zsnshu, v o l . 1 , pp. 14—16
Sakyamuni on “ tdkan” and “jisetsu nyakushi” • pp. 16—17
The twelfth Indian patriarch, Asvaghosa: p . 17
The fourth and fifth patriarchs: pp. 17-19
The fifth and sixth patriarchs: pp. 19-21
The sixth patriarch and Hsing_ch ，
ang: pp. 21-22
Nagarjuna and Aryadeva: pp. 22-26
Yen-kuan: p. 27
T a-wei: pp. 27-28

272 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Naturc in Dogen*s Shobdgenz6

fourteen stories, many of which are dialogues, is not to elucidate

what the stories say, but rather to provide them with his own
interpretations. He uses the fourteen stories to support his own
position on the Buddha-nature. W hat, then, is the understand­
ing of the Buddha-nature by which Dogen interprets the mas­
ters of antiquity in India and China? W hat is the answer to
the question the fourteen-year old Dogen asked on M t. Hiei, the
question which tormented him for many years and which mo­
tivated him to make the long journey across the China Sea?
W hat is the answer which had been veiled from Dogen until
he encountered his master, Ju-ching ?

W H A T T H E B U D D H A - N A T U R E IS : D 5 G E N ，
S O R IG IN A L IT Y

The basis for D6gen， s understanding of the Buddha-nature is

given in the first section of the Buddha-nature chapter that
starts with a question from the Chinese translation of the Maha-
parinirvana sutra, the original Sanskrit of which is now lost ( Ta-pen
nieh-p,an ching: Taisho shinshu daizokyd 12, no. 374，p. 522c; quoted
in Shobogenzo^ Busshd, p. 14). The passage was customarily read
as: “The sentient beings (一 切 衆 生 ）a l l (悉）possess (有 ）the
Buddha-nature (佛 性 ）；the Tathagata (如 來 ）abides constantly
(常 住 )，and is without changc (無 有 變 易 ） .，
’ This passage can
be paraphrased as: the Buddha-nature is the essence of all sen­
tient beings, and it is changeless. Dogen gave a crucial twist
to it, reading it as: ^A ll are (一 切 ）sentient beings (衆生)，all
things are (悉 有 ）the Buddha-nature (佛 性）；the Tathagata (如 来 )
abides constantly (常住)，is non-existent (無）jet existent (有） ，and
is change (變易).，，(The italics, supplied by this writer, indicate
the changes made by Dogen.)
By reading the Chinese passage differently, Dogen gives it a

Pai-chang: p. 29
Huang-p*i and Nan-ch*uan: pp. 29-30
Kuci-shan and Yang-shan: pp. 30-31
Chao-chou: pp. 31-33
Ghang-sha and Shang-shu: pp. 33-34

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 273

Takashi James K odera

new meaning. Whereas in the conventional reading the Bud­

dha-nature is understood as a permanent essence inherent in all
sentient beings, Dogen contends that all things are the Buddha-
nature. In the former reading，the Buddha-nature is a change­
less potential, but in the latter, it is the eternally arising and
perishing actuality of all things in the world. Although the
grammatical twist given by Dogen may be slight, the difference
in meaning thereby created is immense.
D6gen， s new reading of the passage in the Mahdparinirvana
sutra illustrates how D5gen resolved his “ Great Doubt.” If
monastic practice is directed toward bringing the potential
Buddha-nature to its full manifestation, then it constitutes a form
of dependency. The Buddha’s teaching was to the contrary,
for the Four Aryan Truths are directed toward the elimination
of all forms of dependency. D6gen， s ingenuity, therefore, ex­
tends beyond his new reading of the Mahdparinirvana sutra and
restores the fundamental principle of Buddhism.
It is important to notice D5gen， s interpretation of the last
four characters of the above passage. Whereas the conventional
reading was “ without change” or “ change exists not， ” Dogen
reads the characters to mean ‘‘[the Buddha-nature is] non­
existent yet existent, and is change.” He claims, further, that
the Buddha-nature itself is neither existent nor non-existent:

Bear it well in mind that the “existent” as in the Buddha-

nature existent in all things is not the either/or kind o f‘‘exist-
ent.” “All things， ’ is the word of the Buddha and the tongue
of the Buddha. It is the eye and the nose of all the buddhas-
and patriarchs. The word “all things” is neither the primor­
dial nor the original “existent” nor the miraculous “existent.”
How much less is it the “existent” that is caused by dependent
origination or blindness ? Neither is it restricted to the mind
or its object, to its original nature or its appearance. There­
fore, it is caused neither by past deeds, by confusion, by
spontaneity nor by supernatural acts. … In the entire
universe there is not even a speck of dust apart from the “all
things， ，[Shobogenzo^ Bussho, pp. 14-15).
274 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977'
 The Buddha-Nature in Dogen's Shobogenzo

This “ existent” and “ non-existent” do not make for an either/

or proposition. They do not constitute a polarity. They are
not relative to each other. “All things55 and the £tBuddha-
nature， ，belong to the realm of the absolute. The ^Buddha-
nature55 is "all things” and “ all things” are the “ Tathagata.”
These are three different names for that which is absolute.
Another characteristic of the Buddha-nature is that it is re­
stricted neither by dependent origination nor by time nor again
by the law of discrimination. It is unaffected by them. Fur­
thermore, it is restricted neither to the subject nor to the object.
It transcends that distinction. Therefore one cannot say, “ I
recognize sall things， ” or “ I experience the Buddha-nature.”
All these categories are mental constructs invented for the sake
of convenience，and they are all relative. The Buddha-nature
transcends all differentiations. “ All things， ，has nothing outside
of itself with which to be compared or contrasted, for “all things”
belongs to the absolute realm. Since “ all things” is the Buddha-
nature and is the Tathagata, Dogen states, “I f ‘all things，is
construed in such a way, [the realization of] ‘all things/ all by
itself, is the perfect nirvana^ {Shobogenzo^ Busshd^ p. 15).
Yet Yen-kuan said, “All things are sentient beings，and they
have the Buddha-nature， ，[Shobogenzo^ Busshd, p. 27). It seems
that Yen-kuan is contradicting Dogen. Dogen, however, dis­
cusses in the eighth section how Yen-kuan， s statement can be
read as consistent with his own position. Dogen interprets
Yen-kuan5s Buddha-nature as the “ m ind” which all sentient
beings possess:
...What “all things are sentient beings” means, according to
the Way of the Buddha, is that all things that possess the
“mind” are sentient beings; this is because the “mind” is the
mark of sentient beings. Those [said to be] without the
“mind” must also be sentient beings; this is because “all sen­
tient beings” are the “mind.” Therefore, all that possess
the “mind” are the sentient beings, and the sentient beings
all have the Buddha-nature. Grass，trees, land ... are all
“mind.” Since they are the “mind,” they are sentient beings；
Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 275
Takashi James K odera

since they are all sentient beings, they have the Buddha-nature.
This is what the National Master [Yen-kuan] means by the
existence of the Buddha-nature. If it were not meant in this
way, it would not be the Buddha-nature that is meant by the
Way of the Buddha {Shobogenzo^ p. 27).

Dogen chose Yen-kuan， s teaching as one of the fourteen

sections in the Buddha-nature chapter in order to reiterate that
the Buddha-nature is not something enduring that is to be con­
trasted with impermanent sentient beings. The affirmative
word, wu，as in “ have (wu) the Buddha-nature,55 does not imply
the existence of the Buddha-nature as a permanent substance of
something, a substance that is to be contrasted with its negation,
mu, as in “ not have (mu) the Buddha-nature•” Wu means,
instead, that all things are sentient beings in constant change,
dictated by the law of dependent origination. The “ m ind， ”
which is the mark of all sentient beings，is also subject to con­
stant change. Dogen5s contention is that the Buddha-nature
is none other than this “m ind.”

W H A T T H E B U D D H A - N A T U R E IS N O T

In the Buddha-nature chapter of the Shobogenzo^ Dogen warns

against two prevalent misunderstandings of the Buddha-nature.
First, the Buddha-nature must not be understood as the atman
or permanent self of the Upanishads• Dogen writes:
When people hear the word “Buddha-nature， ” many scholars
misunderstand it as akin to the atman of the heretics. It is be­
cause they do not meet the true person, nor do they see the
real nature of their own selves, and furthermore it is because
they do not encounter an authentic teacher. They unknow­
ingly identify the function of human mind with the conscious­
ness of the Buddha-nature {Shobogenzo, Bussho, p. 15).
Although Buddhism began as a radical denial of atman and
the whole Mahayana teaching is said to stand on that ground,
the atman idea was brought into Buddhist thought as time pro­
gressed. The storehouse consciousness (dlaya-vijndna) of the

276 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Nature in Dogen^ ShdbdgenzS

Vijnaptimatrata School，for example, could be criticized, as

it was by the Madhyamika School, for resembling the atman.
This tendency toward construing the Buddha-nature as atman
seems particularly pronounced in the Chinese transformation
of Mahayana.7 The tendency is latent in the conventional
reading of the Chinese translation of the Mahdparinirvana sutra.
D6gen， s reinterpretation may appear so unique as to distort
the meaning of the sutra, but his concern is with the restoration
of the authentic Buddhist teaching. For this purpose, Dogen felt
that he had to challenge even the Tendai Mahayana orthodoxy,
which insisted on a teaching that he regarded as erroneously
advocating the interpretation of the Buddha-nature as akin to
atman. The temptation to bring atman into Buddhism in a search
for the imperishable and the eternal is a violation of a funda­
mental tenet of Buddhism. Dogen contended that the Buddha-
nature is none other than the very perishability and the imper­
manence of “ all things.” Nothing eternal is hidden underneath
or within “ all things.’
， For Dogen, Buddhism stands in contrast
to the speculative Upanishads that affirm the enduring entity,
atman. In D6gen’s view，the following passage from the Maha-
parinirvana sutra is clearly mistaken:
In the milk, there is cream; in sentient beings，there is the
Buddha-nature--If you have a desire to seek，you will
find it，
’ [Ta-pan nieh-p，an ching: Taisho shinshu daizokyd 12，
no. 374，p. 531b).
The dialectical understanding of the Buddha-nature is the
second common misunderstanding. According to D5gen,
it is a mistake to think that the Buddha-nature is like a seed that
grows with tim e:
Some people say，£tThe Buddha-nature is like the seed of plants
and trees. When the rain of Dharma falls, a new bud comes

7. Because of the widespread practice of ko-yi (“ extension of [Taoist] meanings，

，），
the earliest Chinese Buddhists misconstrued the theory of transmigration as
involving an enduring self. See, for example, Derk Bodde’s footnote in Fung
Yu-lan (1953，p. 286).

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 277'

.Takashi James K odera

out, a stem next and branches, leaves, flowers and then even
fruits will follow. And a fruit contains another new seed in
it {Shobogenzo^ Busshd，
p. 16).
Dogen, on the other hand, says that seeds, stems, branches，
leaves, flowers, and all other things live to their fullest. Each
moment of their lives is an end in and of itself. Seeds do not
exist in order to transform themselves into stems, branches do
not exist for the sake of leaves, and so on.
The dialectical view which Dogen repudiates often involves
a teleological outlook which claims that all things point to a
particular end, this end being the reason for their existence.
Dogen rejects, as a form of escapism, the teleological view that
the now is for the future. The future of things is uncertain.
His emphasis is on the present moment. The existence of seeds,
flowers and all other things is not for the “future， ，，but just for
the now, and for Dogen the now is the absolute now. Things
are not means but ends, in and of themselves.
In order to illustrate his own response to these two common
misunderstandings of the Buddha-nature, in the second section
of the Buddha-nature chapter of his Shobogenzo Dogen supplies
a new reading of another passage in the Chinese translation of
the Mahdparinirvana sutra. The passage was conventionally
interpreted: “ I f you wish to know the meaning of the Buddha-
nature, observe properly the dependent origination in time.
When the time comes, the Buddha-nature will be fully mani­
fest.，，8 D6gen， s new reading is: “ I f you wish to know the
meaning of the Buddha-nature, proper observation is the dependent
origination in time. The time has already comぐ and the Buddha-
nature is fully manifest [Shobogenzo^ Busshd, p . 丄7; the italics, sup­
plied by the present writer, indicate D5gen， s new reading).
There are a number of significant innovations in D6gen， s

8. The passage quoted from Ta-pan nieh-p’an ching i s : 欲知佛性義，當觀時節因縁，

時節若至， 佛 性 現 前 [T d sh d shinshu daizokyd 12, no. 374, p. 532a).
9. Dogen claims that nyakushi ( 胃 D or “ if arrived53 is synonymous with kishi
( 既至 ) or “ already arrived•” Shdbogenzds Bussho, p . 17.

278 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Nature in Dogen，
s Shobogenzo

new reading which illumine his interpretation of the Buddha-

nature. In the imperative sentence of the conventional reading，
“ Observe properly the dependent origination in tim e， ” there
is an implicit differentiation between the observer and the
observed, mediated by the act of observing. In D5gen， s new
reading, there is only observation, where the duality between the
observer and the observed is transcended.10 Secondly, whereas
the conventional reading places the full manifestation of the
Buddha-nature in the future, for Dogen the Buddha-nature is
manifested in the present moment.
Jisetsu nyakushi is often interpreted by people of past and present
as “waiting for a time in the future when the Buddha-nature
will be fully manifest.， ， They say, furthermore, ‘‘During
the course of discipline, such a time will eventually come.
There is no use in studying Dharma under a master; until
the time comes, there is no manifestation of the Buddha-
nature55{Shobogenzo^ Busshoi p. 16).
The Buddha-nature is not hidden now to be manifest in the
future as part of the world of dependent origination. The
Buddha-nature is fully manifest at the present moment, at any
moment, and identical with the actuality of the dependent origi­
nation of all things. Therefore，the “ time” in “ the time has
already come” is, for Dogen, all time and absolute time, as the
Buddha-nature is absolute. Dogen asserts, “After all，there

10. This is consistent with Nishida Kitaro^s position. Though Husserl and Hei­
degger claimed the inseparability of noesis-noemay they are epistemologically
still distinct from each other. Nishida, however, not only claimed the insep­
arability of the two，but also emphasized that they constitute one “ act.”
Therefore, for Nishida, noesis-noema is not merely an aggregate of two insep­
arables, but two phases of a single act. The significance of NishidaJs position
is that the subject is transcended, whereas the subject still remains in the noesis
part of Husserls and Heidegger5s noesis-noema relationship. In other words,
Nishida， s act is without the underlying actor. I t seems that Nishida is con­
sistent with Dogen in that “ all things” is the Buddha-nature where “ all things”
is no longer the object for the self but the self is all things. “ Proper observa­
tion* * as distinguished from the act of observing, which necessarily presupposes
that which is observed, must be understood in such a manner.

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 279

Takashi James K odera

was no time when the time had not already come. There is no
Buddha-nature that does not fully manifest the Buddha-nature”
{Shobogenzo^ Busshd，p. 17).

O B JE C T IV E U N D E R S T A N D IN G VS. S U B JE C T IV E E X P E R IE N C E

In the chapter on “the concept of time and change” in his A

history of the development of Japanese thought, v o l.1，Professor Naka­
mura Hajime describes a uniquely Japanese way of thinking:
the “ acceptance of actuality in the phenomenal world as the
absolute” (1969, p. 92). For example, he shows how the inter­
pretation of a word in the Mahayana-sraddhotpada-sastra (Chin.,
Ta~cKeng cHi-hsin lun; Jps” Daijo kishinron) changed when Bud­
dhism took root in Japan. “ Original awakening， ， {hongaku)
in the shastra meant in India “the ultimate comprehension of
what is beyond the phenomenal world, whereas in Japan the
same word was brought down to refer to what is within the
phenomenal world” (Nakamura 1969，p. 94). This alteration
of meaning，Nakamura argues, was first introduced by the Japa­
nese Tendai School.
The same Japanization process took place，according to
Nakamura, in the interpretation of dharmata.11 The Chinese
translated this Sanskrit term as “ the real aspect [of all thin^sl
(shih-hsiang) .,5 The Chinese interpretation refers to “ the real
aspect of all kinds of phenomena in our experience, and is com­
posed of two distinct, contradictory elements, ‘al] things，and
‘the real aspect” ， (Nakamura 1969，p. 94). The Japanese
Tendai School interpreted it as “ all things are the real aspect”
and equated the phenomena with “ reality.” Dogen went even
further in the Japanization process, according to Nakamura，
when he said “the real aspect is all things” (Nakamura 1969，
p. 95). Dogen writes in the Shohojisso chapter of the Shobogenzo:
The real aspect is all things. All things are the aspect, this

1 1 . See Kum arajlva, transl. Chung-lun (Skt” Madhyamika kdrikds), c h . 18，7th

g atha; Saddharma-pundarika-sutra, ed. by Ogiwara U nrai, p. 251，I ，25; Asia-
sahasrika, ed. by Ogiwara U nrai, p. 5 1 ; p. 572，I I ，2-3; p. 666, I ，7; etc.

280 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Nature in D6gen’s Shdbdgenzo

character, this body, this mind, this wind and this rain，this
sequence of daily going, living, sitting, and lying down, this
series of melancholy, joy, action and inaction, this stick and
wand, this Buddha’s smile, this transmission and reception of
the doctrine, this study and practice, this evergreen pine and
ever unbreakable bamboo (p. 365).

The significance of Dogen5s Japanization of Buddhism lies in his

interpretation of the “ real aspect.” In the Tendai assertion
that “ all things are the real aspect， ，，the real aspect could be
something more than “ all things， ’，whereas, in D6gen， s “ the
real aspect is all things， ，’ the real aspect is exhaustively ex­
plained.
Nakamura thus suggests that the Japanization of Buddhism
was started by the Japanese Tendai School and culminated
in the thought of Dogen. Dogen's position is consistent with
what Nakamura regards as the characteristic Japanese tendency
to “ lay a greater emphasis upon sensible, concrete events, in­
tuitively apprehended, than upon universals” (Nakamura 1969，
p. 93). D6gen， s thought must not be interpreted, however，
only as a case of the Japanization of Buddhism. His mind was
firmly fixed on what he regarded as the authentic Buddhist
teaching, traceable directly to the historical Buddha through a
continuous line of patriarchs. Indeed, Dogen saw this authentic
teaching of the Buddha concretely embodied by his own Chinese
master, Ju-ching. After his return to Japan, Dogen endeavored
to transmit his Chinese master’s teaching to Japan and thereby
to promote true Buddhism in Japan. D5gen， s Japanization of
Buddhism must therefore be regarded as merely a concomitant
result of this endeavor.
The reason cross-cultural interpretations of D6gen’s thought
are limited is that they undermine the fundamental religious
dimension that can be apprehended only in one’s subjective ex­
perience. Any verbal discourse, of which this paper is one，
cannot avoid this fundamental limitation. Consider a conversa­
tion between the fifth and sixth patriarchs:
Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 19フ7 281
T akashi Jam e s K o d e ra

The fifth patriarch asked, “Where did you come from?”

“I came from Ling-nan, sir,” answered the sixth. The fifth
asked again, “What is the purpose of your coming here?， ，
The sixth, “ I wish to perfect my Buddha-nature.” Then
the fifth said to him, “A man from Ling-nan, no Buddha-
nature. How do you dare perfect the Buddha-nature?， ，
{Shobogenzo^ Busshd，p . 19; also see Yampolsky 196フ
，p p . 12フ
ー
128 ).
Dogen points out that the fifth patriarch’s words, “A man from
Ling-nan, no Buddha-nature,” must not be taken as a response
to the question: “ Is there or is there not a Buddha-nature?’ ，
Dogen asserts that the Buddha-nature is fundamentally a reli­
gious issue: “After all, there are no predecessors of ours who
clarified the logic of the Buddha-nature. It is not to be known
to the teachers of Hinayana and of scriptures” {Shobogenzo, Busshd,
pp. 19-20).1 he “logic” of the Buddha-nature is never clarified
prior to the enlightenment experience. The Buddha-nature is
grasped only by the enlightened mind of the “descendants’ ，
(jison) of Sakyamuni Buddha and it is transmitted only by them.
The precondition for the apprehension of the Buddha-nature
is, therefore, a rigorous religious discipline. Dogen writes ：
“ You must attentively discipline yourselves ；discipline for twenty,
thirty years!” {Shobogenzo, Busshd，p. 20).

A B S O L U T E N O T H IN G N E S S

In the rest of the Buddha-nature chapter，Dogen does not

point out what else the Buddha-nature is but elucidates it in a
different manner. In the thirteenth section, Dogen deals with
the well-known auestion posed by Chao-chou，“ Does a dog
have the Buddha-nature?’，which is traditionally answered in
the negative, mu {Shobogenzo, Busshd, p. 31). In this section,
however, Dogen is no longer concerned with the question of
whether the Buddha-nature exists, for this has already been
dealt with. According to Doeren, Chao-chou's question con­
cerns whether the Buddha-nature has a place or not. Since
“ all things” as in ceall things are the Buddha-nature，
，covers the

282 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977

 The Buddha-Nature in Ddgen，
s Shobogenzo

^entirety of the universe, they are everywhere. Similarly, the

Buddha-nature is everywhere, yet nowhere in particular.
Therefore, Chao-chou， s negative answer, mu，must be understood
as “ nowhere” in the sense of nowhere in particular. Yet “ no-
where“ is the same as everywhere, for the Buddha-nature is
absolute, transcending all specificity.12
Chao-chou， s mu is also to be understood as “ Nothingness•”
This Nothingness is not relative but absolute. The absolute
Nothingness is not negated by something other than itself. The
negating and the negated are both inherent in the absolute
Nothinmess. Dogen asserts that the Buddha-nature is this self-
negating absolute Nothingness; it is indeed the self-negation
itself. All particulars (kobutsu) are the products of the self­
negation of the absolute Nothingness. It is not that the partic­
ulars are separate from the absolute INothingness, but that the
absolute Nothingness negates itself into particulars. Because
the action is negation, it is called Notmngness; and because the
negating act of the Notmngness is done to itself, where the subject
(the negator) and the predicate (the negated) are one and the

12. This understanding of Chao-chouss mu is akin to the “ nothing that is not there
and the nothing that is9' in W allace Stevens’ poem, “ The Snow M a n ”：
O ne must have a m ind of winter
To regard the frost and the boughs
O f the pinetrees crusted with snow;
And have been cold a long time
To behold the junipers shagged with ice,
The spruces rough in the distant glitter
O f the January sun; and not to think
O f any misery in the sound of the wind,
In the sound of a few leaves,
W h ich is the sound of the land
Full of the same wind
That is blowing in the same bare place
For the listener, who listens in the snow,
A nd, nothing himself, beholds
Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.”
(Wallace Stevens, Poems, 1947，
p. 23).

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 283

T akashi Jam e s K o d e ra

same, it is called the absolute Nothingness.13 D5gen finds the

best expression of this absolute Nothingness in mujo or ^imperma­
nence.

IM P E R M A N E N C E

The sixth section begins with the sixth patriarch’s teaching,,

“ Impermanence is the Buddha-nature” [Shdbdgenzo^ Busshd,
p. 21). For Dogen, to experience the impermanence of all
things is to understand the Buddha-nature and to attain en­
lightenment. Not only are all objects in nature impermanent,
but so are the enlightened people:
It is not that the enlightened are always enlightened; neither
is it that the unenlightened are always unenlightened. If
such were possible, there would be no Buddha-nature (Shd~
bogenzo, Bussho, p. 21).

Just as the unenlightened ones are in constant change, imper­

manent, so are the enlightened ones，both of whom, together
with the rest of “all things， ” constitute the impermanence that
is the Buddha-nature.
D6gen’s “ impermanence” cannot be understood apart from
the law of dependent origination. Impermanence describes
‘‘all things” that are dependently originated, therefore imperma­
nence includes both the cause {sajnskara) and the caused {sayn-
skrta). There is nothing that is not one or the other. Yet the
cause and the caused are ultimately the same, for the caused
will eventually become the cause for the subsequent “ caused.”
It must be pointed out that, for Dogen, impermanence can
be apprehended, in the final analysis，only in religious experience.
As he did in the fifth section, Dogen emphasizes in the seventh
that only the enlightened can understand that the impermanence

13. M u ch of the insight in this paragraph was drawn from Bashoteki ronri to shu-
kyoteki sekaikan [The logic of topos and a religious world view] in Nishida
Kitaro zenshu [Complete works of Nishida Kitaro], 1932, v o l . 11，pp. 371-464.
In Nishida’s language, the self-negation of the absolute Nothingness is called
the “ self-identity of the absolute contradiction” (zettai mujun no jik o doitsu).

284 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977’

 The Buddha-Nature in D5gen，
s Shobogenzo

o f “ all things” is the Buddha-nature. The full realization of

the Buddha-nature came to Dogen at the moment of enlighten­
ment, which he recollected in the Hdkyokiu as “dropping the
body and m ind” (sninjin datsuraku) . For Dogen, to attain
enlightenment is to abandon the totality of the self. It is not
that the self drops the body and mind but rather that the self,
the agent of clinging, drops itself. The “ dropping the body
and m ind” is without the underlying self who performs the act
of dropping. When the body and mind are dropped off, the
self is totally immersed in the impermanence of “all things.”
Therefore, the ‘‘dropping the body and m ind， ，is to realize that
the totality of the self is a part of “all things” that are at once
impermanent and the Buddha-nature. In the sense that im ­
permanence is not simply an object to be realized by a bystander
who is outside the reality of impermanence but that the observing
self is also impermanent, the full realization of the Buddha-
nature lies in the subjective experience of the enlightened.
D5gen， s emphasis on all-inclusive impermanence differentiates
his “ dropping the body and mind” from the “ eliminating the
dust from the m ind， ” the latter of which is said to have been an
expression used by his Chinese master, Ju-ching.15 Because of
the identical Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese characters
used in these two expressions, it has even been suggested that
Dogen misunderstood his master’s instruction.16 It is，however,
highly improbable that such a vast difference in meaning was
caused by misunderstanding. One must see D5gen， s conscious
effort to diverge from his master in the interpretation of the
Buddha-nature. In “ eliminating the dust from the m ind， ”
14. The Hokyoki is the journal Dogen kept while studying under Ju-ching. It was
posthumously discovered by his disciple, Ejo, who subsequently edited it.
See Okubo, ed., Dogen zenji zenshu, v o l.2, pp. 371-388.
15. It appears once in Ju-ching ho-shangyii-lu: Taisho shinshu daizokyd 48，no 2002，
P. 1 3 0 c : 心塵脱落開岩洞， 自性圓通，儼紺容 .
16. T.akasaki and Umehara ^1969, po. 43-52). in Chinese, however, udropping
the body and m ind” is shen-hsin t'o-lo, while “ eliminating the dust from the
m ind” is hsin-ch，
en fo-lo.

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 285

Takashi James K odera

it is implied that enlightenment results from the removal o f

defilements17 from the mind. The soteriological objective is
the restoration of the undefiled mind which sees the Buddha-
nature. In Dogen's “ dropping the body and m ind， ” on the
other hand, it is the mind, together with the rest of the self， ，
that is removed, for it is not just the “ dust” that accumulates on
the originally pure mind but the totality of the self that causes
clinging and hinders enlightenment. While in the former there
remains a residual self, the undefiled original mind, in the latter
the self is exhaustively abandoned. “ Eliminating the dust from
the m ind,” therefore, corresponds to the misunderstanding o f
the Buddha-nature as akin to the Upanishadic atman against
which Dogen cautioned. “ Dropping the body and m ind， ”
on the other hand, emphasizes the utter impermanence of “ all
things” which is the Buddha-nature. For Dogen, there is no
enlightenment apart from impermanence. Enlightenment is
not an escape from impermanence; on the contrary, it is the
realization of all-inclusive impermanence.
For those who seek security in enlightenment by construing
a pure state of the mind as the Buddha-nature, Dogen said:
From the beginningless past，many foolish people identified
consciousness and spirituality as the Buddha-nature. How
laughable it is that they were called the enlightened people I
If I were to explain the Buddha-nature without getting too-
involved, [I would say that it is like] fences, walls，roof tiles,
and pebbles. If I were to explain it in another way3 the
Buddha-nature is a creature with three heads and eight arms!
{Shobogenzo, Busshd, p. 34).
In this passage, with which Dogen ends the Buddha-nature
chapter of the Shobogenzo^ he enumerates the least conceivable
items so that his listeners would stop looking for similes of the
Buddha-nature. He claims that the Buddha-nature is as mun­
dane as “fences, walls, roof tiles, and pebbles” and that it is as

17. Traditionally, there are six defilements (Skt, klesa) : desire, detestation, de­
lusion, pride, doubt, and evil views.

286 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 197ア

 The Buddha-Nature in D6gen*s Shobogenzo

unimaginable as a “ creature with three heads and eight arm s.， 5

Far from being identical with the enduring consciousness or
spirituality, the Buddha-nature is none other than the mundane
and ordinary “ all things” that are subject to dependent origina­
tion and are therefore impermanent. Only for those who aban­
don all attachments who drop away body and mind alike, are
“all things， ，impermanent, there remaining nothing that is not
impermanent. Apart from this impermanence, there is no
Buddha-nature.

BEHOLD THE M A N !

Dogen was consistent with one of the fundamental tenets of

Zen in his insistence that the enlightenment experience is pos­
sible only under the direction of an enlightened master. The
experiential nature of the full realization of the Buddha-nature
cannot be divorced from one’s encounter with a master. Dogen5s
doubt concerning the meaning of the Buddha-nature was not
resolved until he met Ju-ching in the fifth and final year of his
study in China, over a decade after he raised this doubt as a
young monk on M t. Hiei in Japan. Indeed, D6gen， s relentless
search for the answer to his question was synonymous with his
quest for the “ authentic teacher.” Dogen saw in the person­
hood, the enlightened personhood, of Ju-ching the concrete
embodiment of the Buddha-nature. D6gen， s realization of
the Buddha-nature in the experience of his “dropping the body
and m ind” was simultaneous with his encounter with the person­
hood ofju-ching.
In order to illustrate the personal embodiment of the Buddha-
nature, Dogen refers in the seventh section of the Buddha-nature
chapter to the following anecdote concerning Nagarjuna. One
day，the crowd asked Nagarjuna, ‘‘The accumulation of good
deeds is the most important in the world. You always talk about
the Buddha-nature, but who on earth can see it? ” Nagarjuna
replied, “ I f you wish to see the Buddha-nature, first you must
abandon your ego.” He proceeded to remark that “ the Buddha-

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 19フフ 287

Takashi James K odera

nature is neither large nor small，neither wide nor narrow; it has

neither good fortune nor bad retribution; it is subject neither to
death nor birth” [Shobogenzo, Busshd，p. 22). Another day，Na­
garjuna manifested himself as the full moon above his seat.
The crowd was so intent on listening to his sermon that it failed
to see this manifestation of Nagarjuna. Thereupon, Aryadeva,
who was among the crowd, said, “ Do you see this manifesta­
tion ?n The crowd responded, “We have never seen it with our
eyes，never heard it with our ears，never perceived it in our
mind, and never experienced it with our body.” Aryadeva
continued, “Now the Venerable One is manifesting himself as
the Buddha-nature to us. The reason I can see it is that the
formless samadhi is now like the full moon. The meaning of the
Buddha-nature is clear and lucid” [Shobogenzo^ Bussho、p. 22).
When Nagarjuna’s sermon was over, the full moon disappeared
and he was back in his seat. Then he delivered the following
verse: “The body manifested itself as the full moon. The bud­
dhas manifest their bodies without form and without voice”
[Shobogenzo^ Bussho, p. 22).
Dogen follows this story with his own commentary:
A fool would think, “The Venerable One arbitrarily metamor­
phosed himself as the full moon.” This is the heretical thought
of those who do not transmit the Way of the Buddha. When
and where could he have revealed himself as something other
than himself? You must understand that the Venerable One
was simply sitting at his seat. When he manifested his body,
he was sitting just like everyone else. His body was the full
moon itself. The manifestation of his body was neither square
nor round, neither existent nor non-existent; it neither appear­
ed nor disappeared. It did not have an infinite number of
metamorphoses apart from his own body. His body, as it
was，could have been seen as a narrow moon or as a full moon.
The body that manifested itself was originally devoid of ego.
Therefore it was not NagarjunaJs, but the body of the bud­
dhas. Because the buddhas are devoid of ego, they penetrate
the body and they are not confined to particular manifesta­
tions. Although the Buddha-nature is as clear and lucid
288 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977
 The Buddha-Nature in Dogen，
s Shdbdgenzo

as the full moon，it is not confined to the full moon [Shobogenzo^

Busshd, p. 23).
Although this is a rather free interpretation of the anecdote
associated with Nagarjuna and Aryadeva, Dogen5s intention
is readily evident. For Dogen, A ryadeva’s greatness lies in
his ability to see the Buddha-nature concretely embodied in the
egoless and therefore enlightened personhood of Nagarjuna.
It must not be thought that Dogen is equating the Buddha-
nature with the personhood of Nagarjuna in Aryadeva5s case
and that of Ju-ching in his own.18 Dogen is claiming，rather,
that through the act of abandoning the ego，or “ dropping the
body and m ind， ，in D5gen， s own words，the Buddha-nature
becomes concretely embodied in a person. Yet the self-empty­
ing person is not a mediator in the sense of one who stands be­
tween the Buddha-nature and one who seeks to experience it.
The seeker experiences “ all things” directly and immediately.
Nagarjuna did not stand between Aryadeva and the Buddha-
nature. O n the contrary, Nagarjuna removed himself by emp­
tying his ego，and thereby the Buddha-nature freely radiated
before Aryadeva.
When Dogen transcended simple affirmation and negation
of the Buddha-nature, or the Buddha-nature as existent and
non-existent, and characterized it as absolute Nothingness, he
was utilizing the language of the via negativa. Absolute No­
thingness defies all specificity. In his emphasis on the person­
hood of an enlightened master, however, he departs from via
negativa language and talks in the language of via positiva. An
enlightened personhood is not an exception to “ all things， ，that
are impermanent, but exemplifies the self-negation of the ab­
solute Nothingness which is the Buddha-nature. Therefore,
in the personhood of the self-emptying master is the concrete

18. Umehara criticises Watsuji for this equation at several places in the second
h a lf of Kobutsu no manebi by Takasaki and Umehara (1969). I t is most pro­
nounced on p. 259. U m ehara^ accusation cannot, however, be easily verified
in this writer’s own reading of W atsuji5s treatise on Dogen.

Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 289

T akashi Jam e s K o d e r a

presence of the Buddha-nature. As Watsuji asserts, such per­

sonhood (hito) is the “ direct point of contact” between the Bud­
dha-nature and the seeker (Watsuji 1925，p. 231). Just as
Nagarjuna was for A ryadeva and Ju-ching for Dogen (Dogen
recollected Ju-ching as the “old Buddha” or kobutsu)^ Dogen's
personhood can be the ‘‘direct point of contact” for those of us
who encounter him in his writings.

GLOSSARY

bashoteki ronri to shukydteki kobutsu (old Buddha) 古佛

sekaikan K o e n 公圓
場所的論理と宗教的世界觀 K o in 公胤
busshd佛性 ko-yi格義
Chang-sha 長沙 Kuei-shan 山
Chao-chou 趙州 kufu zazen工夫坐禪
Dogen道元 Ling-nan 嶺南
E ih e iji 永平寺 M e n ju 面授
E jo 懷笄 M iidera三井寺
G yoji行持 m u無
H ie i比數 mujo無常
hito 人 Myozen明全
hito to hito to no aidagara Nan-ch’uan 南泉
人と人との間柄 ningengaku 人間学
hongaku 本覺 Pai-chang 百丈
Huang-p5i 黃蘖 R in z a i臨濟
Hsing-ch， ang 行昌 sanshi monpo參師問法
jisetsu nyakushi 時節若至 Shang-shu 尚書
jison児孫 shih-hsiang 實相
Ju-ching 如浄 shinjin datsuraku (droooing the
K e n n in ji 建仁寺 body and mind) 身心脱落
kobutsu (particulars)ィ固物 shinjin datsuraku (eliminating the

19. Okubo, ed., Dogen zenji zenshu, v o l . 1，pp. 12, 271, 331, 342, etc. Kobutsu is an
honorific word usually reserved only for Sakyamuni Buddha. For Dogen, to
encounter the historical Buddha was to encounter Ju-ching, because Ju-ching
embodied the unbroken lineage of the teaching transmitted from Sakyamuni.

290 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977'

 The Buddha-Nature in D5gen，
s Shobogenzo

dust from the mind) 心塵脱落 wu ^

Shohojisso諸法實相 Wu-chi Liao-pai 無際了 派
shoshi IE® Yang-shan 仰山
Soto曹洞 Yen-kuan 鹽官
Sung 宋 Yosai (also Eisai) 榮西
Ta-wei大漁 Zen禪
T endai天台 zettai mujun nojiko doitsu
T， ung 天童
ien-t， 絶對矛盾の自己同一
tokan當觀

R EFEREN CES

Dogen道元
1231-53 Shobogenzo 正法眼蔵 [The treasury of the authentic
dharm a eye]. In Dogen zenji zenshu 道元禪師全集
[Collected works of Zen master Dogen], v o l . 丄
，
O kubo Doshu 大久保道舟，ed. Tokyo: Chikuma
Shobo, 1969.
1 2 3 5 - 3 7 见站せ饥W 正法眼蔵随聞記[O n the treasury
of the authentic dharma eye], Ejo 懷淀，ed. In
Dogen zenji zenshu 道元禪師全集[Collected works of
Zen master Dogen], v o l.2, O kubo Doshu 大久保道
舟，ed. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo, 1970.
1253 Hokyoki 寶 慶 記 [A record of the Hokyo era]. In
Dogen zenji zenshu 道元禪師全集[Collected works of
Zen master Dogen], v o l. 2, O kubo Doshu 大久保道
舟，ed. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo, 1970.
Fung Yu-lan 瑪友蘭
1953 A history of Chinese philosophy, v o l . 2: The period of
classical learning, Derk Bodde, transl. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Kenzei建撕
15th century
Kenzeiki 建 撕 記 [The record of Kenzei]. In Sotoshu
zensho 曹 洞 宗 全 書 [Collected works of the Soto
school], v o l.17:15-32. Tokyo: Sotoshu Zensho
Kankokai, 1938.
Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977 291.
'Takashi James K odera

N a k a m u r a H a jim e 中 村 元
1969 A history of the development of Japanese thought，v o l . 1.
Tokyo: Kokusai Bunka Shinkokai.
N is h id a K i t a r o 西田幾多郎
1965-66 Nishida Kitaro zenshu 西田幾多郎全集[Collected works
of Nishida K ita ro ] ,19 vols. Tokyo: iwanami
Shoten.
T a k a sa k i Jikido 高崎直道 an d U m e h a r a T a k e s h i 梅 原 猛
1969 Kobutsu no manebi 古仏のまねび[Learning from the
master]. Tokyo: Kadokawa Shoten.
T a m a k i Koshiro 玉城康四郎，ec^
1969 Dogen shu 道 元 集 [Selected writings of Dogen].
Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo. Accompanying pamphlet
by Tamaki Koshiro and T e ra i Toru 寺 井 透 ，Ddgen
no sekai 道元の世 界 [D6gen’s world].
T 5a n Wu-ch， a 曇無讖，transl.
Ta-pan nieh-p， an ching (Skt., Mahdparinirvana sutra)
大g 捏槃經. In Taisho shinshu daizokyd大正新修大_
經 [The Taisho edition of the Bjuddhist canon], vol.
12，no. 374.
W a t s u j i Tetsur5 和迁哲郎
1925 Shamon Dogen 沙 門 道 元 [The monk Dogen]. In
Nihon seishinshi kenkyu 曰本精神史研究[A study of the
spiritual history of Japan], lokyo: I wanami Shoten.
1935 Fudo 風土 [Climate], lo k y o : Iw anam i Shoten. Eng.
transl. by beoffrey Bownas, Climate and culture.
Tokyo: Hokuseido, 1961.
Wen-su 文素，ed.
1229 Ju-ching ho-shang yii-lu 如浄和 尚 語 録 [The collected
sayings of monk Ju-ching]. In Taisho shinshu daizokyd
大正新修大 蔵 經 [The Taisho edition of the Buddhist
canon], vol.48, no. 2002A.
Y am p o lsky , P h ilip B .，transl.
1967 The platform sutra of the sixth patriarch. New York and
London: Columbia University Press.

292 Japanese Journal o f Religious Studies 4/4 December 1977