Reality (1) Reason, which pervades through the Universe

At the end of the last research of Buddhism, we have arrived at the problem what Reality is in Buddhism. And about such a problem Buddhism usually insists that it is difficult for us to explain Reality with words. Because Reality is so inclusive, so wide, so complicated, so direct, and so forth. Therfore in Shobogenzo we find a Chapter, which entitled "INMO, or It," (29) which suggests something difficult to describe with words. The word "INMO" is a Chinese colloquial word, which means "it" or "that" implying something ineffable.
But in Buddhism the meaning of word "ineffable" does never suggest some kind of mysticism, or vagueness, but it suggests Reality itself in front of us, which includes so holy, so miscellaneous, so complicated, and so direct things and phenomena in front of us. Therefore I think that it is also very addiquate for us to explain Reality relying upon the meathod of the Four Philosophies.
And about such a problem we can find a very excellent book, which explains the true meaning of Buddhist philosophy, in the Ancient India, called Mulamadhyamakakarika (from here I would like to call it MMK) by Nagarjuna. MMK is constructed from 27 chapters, and in the 1st Chapter, we can find the 1st Verse, as follows.

"Not Subjectivity, never Objectivity, not the both, but never unreasonable.
The phenomena are just recognized, and (the concept) "existences" do never exist anywhere, they are completely nothing."

This suggests that the Subjectivity, or what is considered in our brain, does not exist as Reality, and the Objectivity, or what is perceived through our sense organs, also does not exist as Reality. In other words what we think in our brain is not Reality, and what we perceive through our sense organs is never Reality. And those two sentences insist that the Idealistic Philosophy is not true, and the Materialistic Philosophy is not true. But Reality is never unreasonable.

And in the second Verse MMK said.

"The Four Reliable Facts are Reason, the External World, the Present Moment,
And just Reality like God. And the Fifth Reliable Fact does never exist at all."

Reading this Verse, I noticed Nagarjuna's so strong confidence in his Buddhist Philosophy, and I have accepted his Buddhist Belief so strongly. Nagarjuna insisted that the Reliable Facts, or Reality, are just four, that is, Reason, the External World, the Present Moment, and Reality itself. And he never confirmed the existence of the fifth one.
I think that his first viewpoint of Reality, which is considered on the Basis of the Four philosophies, may be the Reason, which pervades throughout the Universe. For example, a person A thinks about 1 + 1, it might be 2, and a person B thinks about 1 + 1, it might be also 2. And so we have to think the existence of the facts that 1 + 1 = 2 always exist everywhere in the Universe, and it is completely impossible for us to deny the existence of such a simple fact in the Universe at all. In such meaning, it is completely impossible for me to deny the Real Existence of Reason through the Universe at all first.

Philosophy of act (4) Zazen

At the ultinate phase of philosophy of act, we have arrived at Zazen, which is the central point of Buddhism. However, in this situation, the most important point is that the explanations of Zazen can never be the practice of Zazen itself. Zazen itself is just that we fold our legs, we fold our arms, we streach our each spine straight virtically, and so forth. I would like to ask you to remember that it is absolutely different for us to read the explanation of Zazen, or to look at others's posture of Zazen than to practice Zazen really.
After finishing this Dogen Sangha Blog, I am planning to write my explanation of actual method for practicing Zazen after finishing this blog, and so I would like to ask you to wait for a while.
Actually speaking, Buddhism is a very unique practical philosophy, which is very rare in another civilization. Buddhism is a civilization, which can open just relying upon the practice of Zazen. Therefore Buddhism is just the real world, which can open just relying upon the practice. Without practicing Zazen there is no Buddhism.
At the same time, however, if there were the practice of Zazen, we can easily open the the World of Buddhism at once, and this is the benevolence of Gautama Buddha. Therefore Master Dogen proclaimed that in "Shobogenzo Bendowa" as follows.
"This Rule of the Universe is abundantly present in each human being, but if we do not practice it, it does not manifest, and if we do not experience it, it cannot be realized. When we let go, it has already filled the hands; how could it be defined as one or many? When we speak, it fills the mouth; it has no restriction in any direction."

Philosophy of act (3) Instantaneousness of the Universe

In Shobogenzo we can find the Chapter, entitled "UJI." "U" means existence, and "JI" means time. Therefore the words "UJI" suggest that, in the real world, existence of something always occurs at the same time as occurance of a real time. In other words, when something exists, time inevitably exists, and when time exists, something inevitably exists. That suggests the general identity between existence and time in the real world. Therefore in the Chapter of "UJI", it says that " Time is already just existence, and all Existence is Time." And this insistence suggests that time and existence inevitably exist together at once, and it is impossible for time and exitence separately to exist at all.
And this idea does not belong only to Buddhism today. In fact, a German philosopher called Martin Heidegger wrote a book entitled "ZEIN UND ZEIT, or BEING AND TIME," and he also suggested the identity of existence and time.
The real Time in Buddhism is never time, which is arranged as past, present, and future like a line, but the real Time in Buddhism is just a very short moment, which is called an instant. Therefore in the Chapter of Shobogenzo entitled "HOTSU-BODAISHIN, or Establishment of the Bodhi-mind," Master Dogen said, "In general, establishment of the mind and attainment of the truth rely upon the instantaneous arising and vanishing of all things. If [all things] did not arise and vanish instantaneously, bad done in the previous instant could not depart. If bad done in the previous instant had not yet departed, good in the next instant could not be realized in the present." And this is just the Buddhist Realism, which places the basis of the present instantaneousness in it.
Therefore Master Dogen describes at the several lines later in the same Chapter that "but no common man has ever sensed it or known it." And further "Those who do not know the Buddha-Dharma do not believe the principle of instantaneous arising and vanishing. One who clarifies the Tathagatha's right-Dharma-eye treasury and fine mind of nirvania inevitably believes this principle of instantaneous arising and vanishing."
The Real World does not exists as a long line of past, present, and future, but it exists as a real present moment, which is separated into a so short moment of instant.
Furthermore, the instantaneousness of the present moment, or the Universe, gives a very clear solution to the contradictory relations between human freedom and human determinim. For more than thousands of years, human beings have been keeping the very seriously difficult philosophical problem, which seem to be absolutely impossible to solve, that is
the contradictory situations of the human freedom and human determinism.
On the basis of idealism, or materialism, it is completely impossible for human beings to solve the contradictory situations between human freedom and human determinism. But utilizing the principle of instantaneousness of the present moment and the whole Universe in Buddhism, we can interpret that our human act at the present moment is like a piece of pearl on the edge of the razor, because the length of the real present moment is so short. And Buddhism insists that a human act at the present moment has so much flexible situations like the pearl on the razor edge, I think that we can solve the contradictory situations of human freedom and human determinism for the first time in human history.

Philosophy of act (2) The time is now, the place is here

When we think at what time the real act appears in our daily life, it always appears just at the present moment. Of course when we think the same problem on the basis of intellectual consideration, we can think that we did something in the past, or we will do something in future, or we are doing something at the present moment. But such kinds of considerations can never be the real act, and when we think at what time we are doing something really, it is always just at the present moment. And this fact is very important in our daily life. Even though we can think that we did act in the past, or we will do something in future, or we can recognize that we are just doing some thing now, but those considerations can never be the real act itself. The real act at the present moment is dimentionally different from the three kinds of considerations. Therefore we should always notice that the real act in the real world is alway done just at the real present moment, and it is completely impossible for us to act a real act at an different time other than the real present moment at all. Therefore we should say that our real act in the real world is always done just at the real present moment. In other words we should say that our real act in the real world is always done just at the real present moment.
And at the same time almost the similar fact exists at the real place, where we do something in our daily life. When we think a place, where we live in our consideration, we can think for us to be in a countryside, in a town, in a city, in a mountain, and so forth. But those kinds of possibility to live everywhere is just a kind of consideration, and when we think the same problem on the basis of the real fact in the real world, it is inevitable for us to say that I am just living at this place actuallyl. Therfore in the realistic Buddhist philopsophy we should always say that we are just at this place.
So we should say that we live always just at the present moment, and we always exist at this place. In other words when we really think everything on the basis of realistic Buddhism, the real time is always now, and the real place exists always here. Therefore the Chinese Buddhist Master Tozan Gohon says " I am always so sincere just at this place."

Philosophy of act (1) Dimentional difference between theory and act

One of the most important characteristic of Buddhist Philosophy is just the dimentional difference between theory and act. When we think about a philosophical problem, we usually think the problem on the basis of concepts and we think about the problem on the basis of intellectual consideration. And even though the intellectual considerations are divided into the two bases, that is, the one is based on a mental consideration, and the other is based on a sense perception, those two kinds of considerations belong to the intellectual consideration.
But in Buddhism, we have two kinds of consideration, the one is the intellectual consideration, and the other is the practical consideration. And the existence of those two kinds of philosophies are very unique in Buddhism, and the existence of those two kinds of philosopies might be the main cause of Buddhist difficulty.
Therefore in Shobogenzo, the Chapter, entitled "SHOAKU-MAKUSA, or Not Doing Wrongs," includes a very skillful story, which describes the difference between consideration and practice so well.

Haku Kyo-i of Tang China is a lay disciple of Zen Master Bukko Nyoman, and a second-generation disciple of Zen Master Kozei Daijaku. When he was the governor of Hangzhou district he practiced in the order of Zen Master Choka Dorin. In the story, Kyo-i asks, "What is the Great Intention of Master Boddhi Dharma from the West?
Dorin said, "Not to commit wrongs. To practice the many kinds of right."
Kyo-i says, "If it is so, even a child of three can express it!"
Dorin says, "A child of three can speak the truth, but an old man of eighty cannot practice it."
Thus informed, Kyo-i makes at once a prostration of thanks, and then leaves.

The Rule of Cause and Effect (4) Great Practice

Even in the Rule of Cause and Effect the ultimate state of the Four Philosophies comes back to the Real Phase, and so the ulitimate phase of Cause and Effect are also combined into one at the present moment. Therefore in the case of Shobogenzo the ultimate phase of the Rule of Cause and Effect, that is, "Great Practice," (76) is different from "Deep Belief in Cause and Effect." Both Chapters "Deep Belief in Cause and Effect" and "Great Practice" quote completely the same stories of Master Hyakujo Ekai and an old monk, who has changed into a wild fox.
In "Deep Belief in Cause and Effect" Master Dogen clearly explained the difference between "FURAKU INGA" and "FUMAI INGA".
"FURAKU INGA" means "They do not fall into cause and effect," and so the words suggest the denial of Cause and Effect, but in the case of "FUMAI INGA" the words means "Do not be unclear about cause and effect," and so the words suggest that "Even the practice of Zazen, we can not get rid of Cause and effect."
But in the case of the Chapter "Great Practice", Master Dogen thought that in the ultimate phase, or in the case of reality, even the cause and the effect occur just at the present moment, and in such situations cause and effect are combined at the present moment, and so even in the case of cause and effect the both are also combined into one reality, and then there is no difference between cause and effect, which are combined into only one reality at the present moment.
Therefore we should think that in the case of intellectual consideration, we can never accept the ilogical insistence of cause and effect at all, but at the basis of reality, we should transcend the theoretical area, and we should think about the situations of reality on the basis of just the present moment.

The Rule of Cause and Effect (3) Karma in Three Times

In the Buddhist World, it is said that every thing in the world, without exception, is governed by the Rule of Cause and Effect. But at the same time we ordinary people sometimes doubt whether such a kind of belief in cause and effect is true or not. Just such a kind of doubt is discussed in the Shobogenzo Chapter entitled "Karma in Three Times." (84)
Gayata, a student of the 19th Patriarch Kumaralabdha, asked the Master the following:
"My parents believe in Gautama Buddha's Teachings sufficiently, but they are sickly. However, a man who works for the butchery next door, is healthy and balanced in his behavior." Therefore the student Gayata asks his Master the reason why the man who works for the butchery is happy, while his parents, who believe in Buddhism, are unhappy.
The Master replies, "How is it necessary for you to doubt such a problem? The length of the times between Cause and Effect are of three kinds. The first one is immediate between Cause and Effect, the second one is a little while between Cause and Effect, and the third one is much longer between Cause and Effect. Because of such differences in time between Cause and Effect, it seems that a kind person dies early, or a violent person lives longer, or a wrong person seemes to be happy, or a right person seems to be unhappy. Therefore people usually think that there is no Rule of Cause and Effect, or there is no relation between Sin and Happiness, but they do not know that the relation between Cause and Effect is just the same as the relation between a thing and the shade, or sound and the vibration." Listening to the Master's teachings, Gayata solved his doubt at once.
This teaching presents that, for meaningfully grasping the real existence of Cause and Effect in its 100% exactness, it is very important for us to know the various time differences that exist between Causes and Effects.

The Rule of Cause and Effect (2) Concrete examples of Bad Causes

I remember that when I attended the Conference of Religious Research at Komazawa University in 1984, I gave a talk on the total divisions of all the Chapters in the Shobogenzo following the criteria of the philosophies of pain, accumulation, self-regulation, and morals. And at that time I distributed the Four Philosophies of pain, accumulation, self-regulation, and morals to the four Chapters, "Shinjin-Inga, or Deep Belief in Cause and Effect" (89), "Shizenbiku, or The Bhiksu in the Fourth Dhyana" (90), "Sanji no Go, or Karma in Three Times" (84) and "Daishugyo, or Great Practice." (76). In the last blog I described the Chapter "Deep Belief in Cause and Effect", today I would like to describe "The Bhiksu in the Four Dhyna". In this Chapter, Master Dogen enumerated several concrete bad causes, which are as follows:

(The numbers inside the parentheses indicate the ordinal number of each Chapter)
1) A monk had experienced only the four phases in the practice of Zazen, but he misunderstood that he experienced the four phases of Buddhist lives. But when he was going to die, he was not in the proper situation to go to the happy life. And so he thought that we was cheated by Gautama Buddha.
2) A student of Master Upagupta, even though he experienced only the four processes of experiences in Zazen, misunderstood that he had experienced the four processes of his Buddist life totally. But when he was traveling in his trip, he was going to commit a sin with a woman, and he recognized that the woman was his own Master himself.
3) When we want to study Gautama Buddha's teachings, it is very important for us to know the orders of the studies.
4) We should know that Gautana Buddha's Teachings are completely different from the teachings of Confucianism, or Taoism.
5) We should know that Gautama Buddha's teachings are just the Truth, which transcends both the problems of existence and non-existence.

From this we can clearly notice that Master Dogen's Buddhist view, as well as Gautama Buddha's Buddhist view, are concentrated on the problems of the true Buddhist viewpoints.

The Rule of Cause and Effect (1) Profound Belief in Cause and Effect

In the last blog, I discussed about the Four Philosophies. And the Four Philosophies are the fundamental principle of the Buddhist thoughts, and so we should think that the Theory of the Four Philosophies pervades throughout the whole Buddhism. Therefore in such a meaning the next theme have to belong to the Philosophy of accumulation. When we think that the external world as an accumulation of materialistic molecules relying upon our scientific knowledge, we can think that the external world is completely governed by Materialistic cause and effect. But in the case of Buddhism, we have idea that the world, where just we are living now, is a fusion of mind and matter, and so if we accept the idea of cause and effect on the basis of Buddhism, we should think that the Buddhist theory of cause and effects, should pervade the fusion of mind and matter together. Therefore we should think that the Rule of Cause and Effect in Buddhism have to work in the fusion of mind and matter, and this point is rather important for us to think about the Rule of Cause and Effect in Buddhism.
And the belief in the Rule of the Cause and Effect in Buddhism is very strong. For example, in the Chapter entitled "SHINJIN-INGA," or "Deep Belief in Cause and Effect", Master Dogen writes as follows.
"In learning in the practice the Buddha Dharma, the first priority is to clarify cause and effect. Those, who negate cause and effect are likely to beget the false view that craves profit, and to become a cutter of good. In general, the truth of cause and effect is vividly apparent and is not personal matter: those who commit evil fall down, and those who practice good rise up, without a thousandth or a hundredth of a discrepancy."
Therefore Master Dogen said, "Generally speaking, when we study Buddhism, the most important matter for us is to clarify the situations of cause and effect. People, who negate cause and effect, are prone to get a wrong idea to crave profit, and to cut good roots. Generally speaking, the truth of cause and effect is very clearly apparent, and it does not belong to a pesonal decision: those who comit evil fall down, and those who practice good rise up, without a thouzandth or a hundredth of a discrepancy." Therefore in the world of Buddhism on the relation of cause and effect, not only matter like in natural science, but the Rule of the Cause and Effect in Buddhim pervade in the both of mind and matter of the Universe. And in the accuracy of cause and effect Buddhism does never recognize even a thousandth or a hundredth discrepancy.

The Four Philosophies (4) The intellectual philosophies and the Four Philosophies

I revere the value of intellectual philosophies so much, because the intellectual philosophies are our common philosophies, and it has developed so excellently in the World History. Therefore when we think about a philosophy, it usually suggests the intellectual philosophy. But in the case of Buddhism it insists the existence of a practical philosophy, which is different from the intellectual philosophy. When we use the word of the practical philosophy, in the case of the intellectual philosophies, we usually use the words of the practical philosophy as the word, which suggests the practical philosophy, which is thought in the area of intellectual philosophy. But in the case of Buddhism, we usually use the word of the practical philosophy as the philosophy, which does not belong the intellectual philosophy, but which belongs to the practical philosophy. Therefore in the case of Buddhism we have to think that there are two kinds of philosophies, the one is the usual interectual philosophy, and the other is the practical philosophy, which is different dimensionally from the intellectual philsophies.
Therefore it is necessary for us to interpret that the philosophy of pain, or idealistic philosophy, and the philosophy of accumulation, or materialistic philosophy, belong to the intellectual philosophies in the Four Philosophies, and the philosophy of self-regulation, or the philosophy of act, and the philosophy of morals, or the philosophy of Reality, belong to the practical philosophies in the Four Philosophies. In other words we should think that the group of the philosophy of pain, and the philosophy of accumulation, belong to the intellectual philosophies, but the philosophy of self-regulation, or the philosophy of act, and the philosophy of morals, or philosophy of Reality, belong to the philosophy of practice. Even in the Four Philosophies, the former two belong to the intellectual philosophy and the latter two belong to the practical philosophies.
The philosophy of intellect and the philosophy of practice are combined into one in the Four Philosophies. And we can think that the two former philosophies, which are the representative of the Western Civilization and the latter philosophies, which are the representative of Buddhism Civilization, and both have combined into one in the Four Philosophies. And as I said before, the recent Euro-Amerian Civilization, for example Existentialism, Philosophy of life, Phenomenology, Pragmatism, and so forth, have begun to show the strong tendency of Realism. Therefore I expect that the Euro-American Civilization, which has been based on Idealism and Materialism, which recently have been aproaching to Realism enormously, have possibility to meet together, and to establish the Age of Realism. In such a meaning, I expect that the theory of the Four Philosophies will become a very big bridge, which can connect the very great intellectual Western Philosophies with the Buddhist Realism.
Thinking like this, I think that relying upon the theory of the Four Philosophies, we, human beings, will be able to combine the gorgeous Western Intellectual Civilization with Realistic Buddhist Civilizations. But at the same time, if we, human beings, refuse the utilizing the Four philosophies, it might become very difficult for us to combine the Western Civilization with the Buddhist Realism. Without utilizing the Four Philosophies it might be very difficult for us to combine the Western Intellectual Civilization with Buddhist Realizm. But relying upon the theory of the Four Philosophies it might be possible for human beings to combine the Western Intellectual Civilization with the Buddhist Realism. Then relying upon the Four Philosophies we can understand the Total Structure of Buddhist Philosophical System for the first time.
It is said that when Gautama Buddha wanted to have his first lecture of Buddhism, he hesitated so much to have the lecture of the Four Philosophies, because the Theory of the Four Philosophies seemed to be too difficult for usual audience to understand at that time. And we can think that it is very natural for ordinary audience to be so difficult to understand the true meaning of the Four Philosophies, because even in the 21st Century, it is not so easy for the people today to understand them. But we should think that how it is important for us to understand the Theory of the Four Philosophies for understanding the Buddhist Truth.

The Four Philosophies (3) The Four Philosophies as facts

The teachings of the Four Philosophies are not only the philosophical theory, which belong to Buddhism, but they are also realistic facts in our daily life. Therefore for describing such realistic facts, which can be identified with the Four Philosophies, I would like to explain a realistic process of industrial enterprise.
(An idealistic Plan) At the beginning of the industrial enterprise, the enterpriser has to think about a profitable situation in his job. Because generally all enterprises have to work for getting profit, but it is not so easy for every enterprise to get profit. The industrial societies are very competitive, and technical progresses are incredibly fast. Therefore it is very difficult for us to meet a good chance to establish a new enterprise.
(Material Conditions) But if some one begins his optimistic job without the checking the Meterial conditions, it might be very dangerous for him to continue the job. Because he is not living only in the romantic dream, but he is always living in a very competitive human societies. Therefore he has to check miscellaneous materialistic conditions actually. How much money is he possible to collect so far as the capital for his investment? Is it possible for him to get buildings, or lands, which are necessary for him to begin the business? How is it convenient for them in utilizing traffic facilities for their comuting? Is it easy for the enterprisers to get sufficient laborers in their vicinity? Is it easy for them to get water and eleftricity there? Those questions will appear again and again, and if it is impossible for the enterprisers to solve the problems, it is completely impossible for them to begin the job at all. Becahse only good planning and good checking material conditions are sufficient for them to begin the job. What are they lacking for? It is just doing it.
(Just do it) The intelletual planning and the checking material conditions can never be the main job of enterprise. Then what is the beginning an enterprise? In Buddhist philosophy, we, Buddhists, revere our working, or act itself. Of course the mental fanctions are also important, but without our daily acts in the industry there is nothing, which can be called production. And the production comes from the cooperative efforts of directors and employees at every moment. And those efforts are continued every day other than holidays, and if their efforts have profitability, the enterprise can be usefull for human societies. Therefore we can think that in our daily life, the most important factors are to work, or to act, and the reverence of works or acts are main parts of our daily life.
(Reverence of morals) We, Buddhists, originary believe in the real existence of the Rule of the Universe, and so we have idea to identify our act at the present moment with the Rule of the Universe. Therefore Master Dogen wrote in the Chapter of Shobogenzo entitled "Bodaisatta-Shishobo" that "Earning a living and doing productive work are originally nothing other than free giving." Therefore we can think that our efforts for working for some kind of industy also have a kind of value as Morals.

The Four Philosophies (2) The First Paragraph of "Genjo Koan"

The first paragraph of "Genjo Koan" in Shobogenzo, is as follows.
"When all dharmas are [seen as] the Buddha Dharma, then there is delusion and realization, there are practice and act, there is life and death, and there are buddhas and ordinary people. (1)
When the myriad dharmas are each not of the self, there is no delusion and no realization, no buddhas and no ordinary people, and no life and no death. (2)
The Buddha's truth is originally transcendent over abundance and scarcity, and so there is life and death, there is delusion and realization, and there are ordinary people and buddhas. (3)
And though it is like this, it is only that flowers, while loved, fall; and weeds while hated, flourish. (4)
And by reading them, we can notice that those four stentences are manifesting the four kinds of different thinking methods separately. For example, in the case of (1), it proclaims that when all things and phenomena (all dharma) are considered on the basis of idealistic Buddhist thinking method (Buddha Dharma), there can be the distinctions between delusion and realization, between practice and act, between life and death, and between buddhas and ordinary people.
But in the second case of (2), when we perceive everything on the basis of a perfectly materialistic viewopint ("each are not of the self), there is no distinction between delusion and realization, buddhas and ordinary people, or life and death at all. In other words when we do not have any subjective criteria of meaning, delusion and realization, buddhas and ordinary people, or life and death can not have any difference between them on the basis of material substance alone.
Cases (1) and (2) are representative of Idealistic philosophies and Materialistic philosophies, both belonging to the category of intellectual philosophies, and such, they are very common types of philosophies which are meant to be understood by words. But at the same time, the intellectual philosophy of (1) and (2) are completely, and dimentionally, different from the practical philosophies of (3) and (4).
I think that when we research the many kinds of philosophies in the world, perhaps Buddhism is the only philosophy that includes the two kinds of dimentionally different basis, might be only Buddhism. And I think that only such a kind of philosophy, which includes dimensionally different bases, has been successful at hitting the target of the Truth. In other words, if Buddhism did not have the theory of the four philosophies, not even Buddhism could ever have the power to hit the target of the Truth for the first time in human history. And Gautama Buddha found the Truth in the 5th or 4th Century BC. Someone might insist that the theory of the four philosophies were found by Master Dogen. But thinking about the historical situations, it is impossible for us to think of the existence of Nagarjuna without Gautama Buddha, and it is impossible for us to think about the existence of Master Dogen without the prior existence of Gautama Buddha.
Therefore Master Dogen proclaimed that "The Buddha's truth is originally transcendent over abundance and scarcity," which suggests that the Buddhist Truth transcends the relative comparison of mental strength or material volume, and the expression of (3) belongs to the area of act, or reality. In such situations Master Dogen could proclaim that the real existence can exists really, the real extinction can exist really, the real delusion can exist really, the real enlightenment can exist really, the real common people can exsist really, and the real Buddhas, who has got the Truth, can exist really. And this is the basis of Buddhist Realism.
Therefore in the phase of (4), leaving from the phase of philosophy, the Reality itself is described directly. That is the description of "And though it is like this, it is only that flowers, while loved, fall; and weeds while hated, flourish." This sentence suggests that Reality is just Reality. Furthermore, Master Dogen used the structure of the Four Philosophies in the four nouns, which are arranged by the Four Philosophies, and he arrainged four sentences in the order of the Four Philosophies. And even paragraghs are arranged following the order of Four Philosophies in Shobogenzo. Therefore we have to think that the system of the Four Philosophies is just the structure of the Universe, and it is completely impossible for us to think about the Rule of the Universe without the Four Philosophies.
At the same time even in the Euro-American Civilization, there is a special method of consideration, called Dialectic, in the Modern Age, called the Dialectic. The Dialectic is relevant to the structure of the Four Philosophies, and I think that this historical fact in the Euro-American suggests that even in the Euro-American Civilization, the Age of Realism has already begun.
It is said that when Gautama Buddha wanted to have his first Buddhist lecture, he first planned to have the lecture of the Four Philosophies. But at the same time, he hesitated so much to give the lecture of the Four Philosophies, because the Four Philosophies in Buddhism seemed to be too difficult to understand even to Gautama Buddha himself.
Therefore we, the people in the 21 st Century, having begun to understand the meaning of the Four Philosophies by relying upon the benevolence of Gautama Buddha's benevolence, and relying upon the existence of the Four Philosophies, may experience the very happy condition of the excellent Euro-American Civilization meeting with Buddhism.

The Four Philosophies (1) Philosophies of Pain, Accumulation, Self-Regulation, and Morals

I have explained before that Gautama Buddha's Teachings are fundamentally based on the Realism that the Truth of the Universe is the fusion between our real act at the present moment and the real existence of the Universe at the present moment. This is the fundamental basis of Gautama Buddha's Teachings, but at the same time Gautama Buddha taught us four very important Buddhist Principles. They are (1) The Four Philosophies, (2) The Rule of Cause and Effect, (3) The Instataneousness of the Universe, and (4) The Real Existence of Morals.
Among the various Teachings of Gautama Buddha, one of the most important is the Principle of the Four Philosophies. The Four Philosophies are (1) the Philosophy of Pain (duhkha satya), (2) the Philosophy of Accumulation (samdaya satya), (3) the Philosophy of Self-Regulation (niroda satya), and (4) the Philosophy of Morals (margha satya). The Teaching of Gautama Buddha were not put in writing for at least 100 years afer his death. Thus, concerning the Four Philosophies there came to be vulgar interpretations in the Age of Hinayana Buddhism. Such vulgar interpretations have been written in the Hinayana Buddhist Sutras (the Agama Sutra being one example).These sutras present the Four Philosophies of Gautama Buddha as (1) the philosophy of pain, suggesting that the world is painful without exception, (2) The cause of pain is simply desire, (3)
if we stop desiring, (4) A happy life will come. Upon reading such interpretations, I found that I could never accept such rough explanations. First of all, I wondered whether this world is always painful or not. I thought that the world is sometimes painful, but sometimes the world is not so unhappy. Since life and the world are not always painful, the second theme could not be always true. As for the third theme, I doubted whether it is possible for us to stop desire and with the fourth theme, I wondered Four Philosophy, after about a hundred year later than Gautama Buddha's death, there was a valgar interpretations in the Age of Hinayana Buddhism, and such a valgar interpretations have been written in the Hynayana Buddhist Sutras. And they say that (1) the philosophy of pain suggests that the world is painful without exception. (2) The cause of pain is just desire. (3) If we stop desire, (4) A happy life will come. But reading those interpretations, I could never accept such a ruff explanations. First of all I wondered whether this world was always so painful, or not. I thought that the world is sometimes painfl, but some times the world is not so unhappy. And so the second theme was not always true. And the (3) theem made me doubtfull whether it is possible for us to stop desire, and so in the (4) I wonder whether it was so easy for us to establish morals. Because of these situations I could never comfirm the interpretations, which was used in the Age of Hinatana Buddhism. But when I have begun reading the Shobogenzo, an excellent collection of Buddhist Books written in the 12th century by a Japanese Buddhist monk named Master Eihei Dogen, I found a very excellent Chapter titled, "Genjo Ko-an." In the 75 voluems edition, "Genjo Ko-an" it was placed at the beginning of all the Chapters. In the 95 volumes edition, it was placed as the 3rd of all the Chapters. Such placement of "Genjo Ko-an" in both editions of the Shobogenzo suggests this Chapter's great importance as a introductory chapter among the rest of the Chapters. I would like to explain the meanjng of the Chapter "Genjo Ko-an" in the next blog.

Pursuing the Truth (5) The kind of Enlightenment

Related to Enlightenment, there has been an age old big fighting between TONGO and ZENGO. TONGO means that when we have been continuing zazen for a rather long time, one day Enlightenment suddenly appears. TON means fast, and GO means Enlightenment. But in the case of ZENGO, ZEN means gradually, and GO means Enlightenment. Thus ZENGO is gradual, not sudden, Enlightenment. However, in the case of Master Dogen, we can notice that he affirmed both TONGO and ZENGO. Because in Shobogenzo he insists on an idea that is called SHUSHOU-ITSUTO. And SHU means the practice of Zazen, and SHOU means Enlightenment. And ITSU means one, which suggests to be perfect. TO means equal, therefore ITSUTO means perfectly the same. This idea of oneness between just comes from his Buddhist thoughts, that is, the philosophy of action. Master Dogen insists that, generally speaking, in act, there is no separation between the act and experience. This suggests that in the philosophy of act, there is no separation between practice and experience, and this idea is a very important to understand the whole of Buddhist philosophy. Therefore Master Dogen insisted that there is no separation between act and experience, and there should not be any separation between the two. In short, to practice is Enlightenment, and Enlightenment is just to practice Zazen itself. However, thinking like this, it seems that the idea of ZENGO can not be thought and affirmed in Master Dogen's idea of Zazen. But he described that, for example, Master Joshu Jushin, and Master Rei-un Shigon, experienced another kind of Enlightenment in their life. Although they were great Master`s, They each needed to pass more than 30 years of practice before meeting with the Enlightenment. Therefore we can notice clearly that Master Dogen had two kinds of different thoughts related to Enlightenment.