Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Khalil Bodhi » Thu May 31, 2012 12:15 pm

I have been reading the book Opening the Hand of Thought and found myself wondering how Soto Zen envisions the factors of the Eightfold Path with an especial regard to Right Effort. In brief, it is understood in the Pali Canon as follows:

The nature of the mental process effects a division of right effort into four "great endeavours":

(1) to prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states;

(2) to abandon unwholesome states that have already arisen;

(3) to arouse wholesome states that have not yet arisen;

(4) to maintain and perfect wholesome states already arisen.

Source: http://www.vipassana.com/resources/8fp5.php

Does Zen use the same understanding, if not is there another formulation of the 8FP and Right Effort?

Gassho,

Mike
Khalil Bodhi
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 10:09 am

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Astus » Thu May 31, 2012 1:07 pm

First of all, in Mahayana the eightfold path is generally forgotten, and usually reduced to the threefold training of morality, meditation and wisdom. In stead, there are the six paramitas, what has the virya paramita (paramita of vigour/effort/diligence). And then if we go to Chan, such gradual and detailed practices are mostly left behind and focus is on realising the buddha-mind, and that is mostly equivalent to prajna paramita. So we arrive to Dogen - who is, however, not the only source of Soto Zen - who transforms Zen into shikantaza, just sitting, and in that the primary thing is non-thinking (hishiryo). When there is non-thinking, it is pointless to talk about effort or no effort. What we may interpret, if we really want to, as right effort, is keeping non-thinking.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

"Neither cultivation nor seated meditation — this is the pure Chan of Tathagata."
(Mazu Daoyi, X1321p3b23; tr. Jinhua Jia)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T2076p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4238
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Khalil Bodhi » Thu May 31, 2012 1:21 pm

Astus wrote:First of all, in Mahayana the eightfold path is generally forgotten, and usually reduced to the threefold training of morality, meditation and wisdom. In stead, there are the six paramitas, what has the virya paramita (paramita of vigour/effort/diligence). And then if we go to Chan, such gradual and detailed practices are mostly left behind and focus is on realising the buddha-mind, and that is mostly equivalent to prajna paramita. So we arrive to Dogen - who is, however, not the only source of Soto Zen - who transforms Zen into shikantaza, just sitting, and in that the primary thing is non-thinking (hishiryo). When there is non-thinking, it is pointless to talk about effort or no effort. What we may interpret, if we really want to, as right effort, is keeping non-thinking.


Thanks Astus! I figured as much. I wonder if contemporary teachers still adhere to this approach.
Khalil Bodhi
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 10:09 am

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Wesley1982 » Thu May 31, 2012 4:28 pm

Generally what Astus explained - plus the "right effort" to purify oneself in course of the virtues.
User avatar
Wesley1982
 
Posts: 739
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:45 pm
Location: Magga ~ Path to Liberation.

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Thu May 31, 2012 6:33 pm

Astus wrote:First of all, in Mahayana the eightfold path is generally forgotten, and usually reduced to the threefold training of morality, meditation and wisdom. In stead, there are the six paramitas, what has the virya paramita (paramita of vigour/effort/diligence). And then if we go to Chan, such gradual and detailed practices are mostly left behind and focus is on realising the buddha-mind, and that is mostly equivalent to prajna paramita. So we arrive to Dogen - who is, however, not the only source of Soto Zen - who transforms Zen into shikantaza, just sitting, and in that the primary thing is non-thinking (hishiryo). When there is non-thinking, it is pointless to talk about effort or no effort. What we may interpret, if we really want to, as right effort, is keeping non-thinking.


Threefold training sila, samadhi and prajna, is 8fold path, which is also divided like this in detailed teachings on the 8fold path... in Japanese zen it is taught by some teachers, for example one can see at teachings of Asahina Sogen Roshi, where he exclusively was teaching on it by name. And in commentaries one can read how the 3 are presented in its essence as one. division is handy for disciples to understand different points, which again could be unfolded as 8 fold path. There are presentations of 8fp even in the context of shikan taza if it is helpful.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Thu May 31, 2012 6:37 pm

In Dogen's Shobogenzo the chapter Ippyaku hachi Homyo mon 8fold path is listed very clearly and actually opens the list of 108 gates to liberation.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Astus » Thu May 31, 2012 11:27 pm

In "Sanjuushichihon bodai bunpou" (Thirty-seven Elements of Bodhi) Dogen does give some explanation for right effort. Here it is quoted from the Nishijima translation.

SBGZ 60 [SZTP] /70 [Shasta] /73 [Nishijima] wrote:The Four Kinds of Right Restraint (Also called the four kinds of right exertion)

The first is to prevent bad that has not yet occurred.
The second is to cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred.
The third is to cause to occur good that has not yet occurred.
The fourth is to promote the good that has already occurred.

“To prevent bad that has not yet occurred”: What is called bad does not always have established forms and grades; the term has been established land by land and sphere by sphere. Nevertheless, prevention of that which has not yet occurred is called the Buddha-Dharma, and we have received its authentic transmission. They say that in the understanding of non-Buddhists the prime val self is seen as fundamental, but in the Buddha-Dharma we should not be like that. Now, let us inquire, at the time when “bad has not yet occurred,” where is it? To say that it will exist in the future is to be forever a non-Buddhist of nihilism. To say that the future becomes the present is not an insistence of the Buddha-Dharma: the three times would have to be confused. If the three times were confused, all dharmas would be confused. If all dharmas were confused, real form would be confused. If real form were confused, buddhas alone, together with buddhas, would be confused. For this reason, we do not say that the future will, in future, become the present. Let us inquire further: what thing does “bad that has not yet occurred” describe? Who has known it or seen it? For it to be known and seen, there must be a time of its nonoccurrence and a time of something other than its nonoccurrence. In that case, it could not be called something that had not yet occurred. It would have to be called something that has already vanished. Without studying under non-Buddhists or śrāvakas and others of the Small Vehicle, we should learn in practice “the prevention of bad that has not yet occurred.” All the bad in the universe is called “bad that has not yet occurred,” and it is bad that does not appear. Nonappearance means “yesterday preaching an established rule, today preaching an exception to the rule.”
“To cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred”: “Already occurring” means totally happening. Totally happening means half-happening. Half-hap pening means what is happening here and now. What is happening here and now is obstructed by happening itself; it has sprung free from the brains of happening. Causing this [bad] to be extinguished describes Devadatta’s living body entering hell, and Devadatta’s living body attaining affirmation; it describes a living body entering a donkey’s womb, and a living body becom ing buddha.31 Grasping this principle, we should learn in practice what “caus ing extinction” means. Extinction means springing free from extinction and getting clear of it.
“To cause to occur good that has not yet occurred” is satisfaction with the features we had before our parents were born, is clarification prior to the sprouting of creation, and is understanding preceding Majestic Sound.
“To promote the good that has already occurred”: Remember, this does not speak of causing to occur the good that has already occurred; it is about pro moting [good]. It is [the Buddha], having seen for himself the bright star, going on to make others see the bright star; it is eyes becoming the bright star; it is “confusion being followed by thirty years of not lacking for salt and vinegar.” For example: because we are promoting [good], [good] is already happening, and so “the ravine being deep, the dipper’s handle is long,” and “only because we had it did he come.”
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

"Neither cultivation nor seated meditation — this is the pure Chan of Tathagata."
(Mazu Daoyi, X1321p3b23; tr. Jinhua Jia)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T2076p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4238
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:47 am

Astus wrote:In "Sanjuushichihon bodai bunpou" (Thirty-seven Elements of Bodhi) Dogen does give some explanation for right effort. Here it is quoted from the Nishijima translation.

SBGZ 60 [SZTP] /70 [Shasta] /73 [Nishijima] wrote:The Four Kinds of Right Restraint (Also called the four kinds of right exertion)

The first is to prevent bad that has not yet occurred.
The second is to cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred.
The third is to cause to occur good that has not yet occurred.
The fourth is to promote the good that has already occurred.

“To prevent bad that has not yet occurred”: What is called bad does not always have established forms and grades; the term has been established land by land and sphere by sphere. Nevertheless, prevention of that which has not yet occurred is called the Buddha-Dharma, and we have received its authentic transmission. They say that in the understanding of non-Buddhists the prime val self is seen as fundamental, but in the Buddha-Dharma we should not be like that. Now, let us inquire, at the time when “bad has not yet occurred,” where is it? To say that it will exist in the future is to be forever a non-Buddhist of nihilism. To say that the future becomes the present is not an insistence of the Buddha-Dharma: the three times would have to be confused. If the three times were confused, all dharmas would be confused. If all dharmas were confused, real form would be confused. If real form were confused, buddhas alone, together with buddhas, would be confused. For this reason, we do not say that the future will, in future, become the present. Let us inquire further: what thing does “bad that has not yet occurred” describe? Who has known it or seen it? For it to be known and seen, there must be a time of its nonoccurrence and a time of something other than its nonoccurrence. In that case, it could not be called something that had not yet occurred. It would have to be called something that has already vanished. Without studying under non-Buddhists or śrāvakas and others of the Small Vehicle, we should learn in practice “the prevention of bad that has not yet occurred.” All the bad in the universe is called “bad that has not yet occurred,” and it is bad that does not appear. Nonappearance means “yesterday preaching an established rule, today preaching an exception to the rule.”
“To cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred”: “Already occurring” means totally happening. Totally happening means half-happening. Half-hap pening means what is happening here and now. What is happening here and now is obstructed by happening itself; it has sprung free from the brains of happening. Causing this [bad] to be extinguished describes Devadatta’s living body entering hell, and Devadatta’s living body attaining affirmation; it describes a living body entering a donkey’s womb, and a living body becom ing buddha.31 Grasping this principle, we should learn in practice what “caus ing extinction” means. Extinction means springing free from extinction and getting clear of it.
“To cause to occur good that has not yet occurred” is satisfaction with the features we had before our parents were born, is clarification prior to the sprouting of creation, and is understanding preceding Majestic Sound.
“To promote the good that has already occurred”: Remember, this does not speak of causing to occur the good that has already occurred; it is about pro moting [good]. It is [the Buddha], having seen for himself the bright star, going on to make others see the bright star; it is eyes becoming the bright star; it is “confusion being followed by thirty years of not lacking for salt and vinegar.” For example: because we are promoting [good], [good] is already happening, and so “the ravine being deep, the dipper’s handle is long,” and “only because we had it did he come.”


“To prevent bad that has not yet occurred”: What is called bad does not always have established forms and grades; the term has been established land by land and sphere by sphere. Nevertheless, prevention of that which has not yet occurred is called the Buddha-Dharma, and we have received its authentic transmission.

it is a little bit dim text in English.
Japanese original says:
“To prevent bad which is not yet born”: What is called ''bad'' does not address fixed forms and grades; it appears according to place/land and in dependence on the world, however ''not yet born'', means un-born [fusho- which is prajnaparamita concept] what is properly transmitted buddhadharma.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Khalil Bodhi » Fri Jun 01, 2012 1:27 am

Astus wrote:In "Sanjuushichihon bodai bunpou" (Thirty-seven Elements of Bodhi) Dogen does give some explanation for right effort. Here it is quoted from the Nishijima translation.

SBGZ 60 [SZTP] /70 [Shasta] /73 [Nishijima] wrote:The Four Kinds of Right Restraint (Also called the four kinds of right exertion)

The first is to prevent bad that has not yet occurred.
The second is to cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred.
The third is to cause to occur good that has not yet occurred.
The fourth is to promote the good that has already occurred.

“To prevent bad that has not yet occurred”: What is called bad does not always have established forms and grades; the term has been established land by land and sphere by sphere. Nevertheless, prevention of that which has not yet occurred is called the Buddha-Dharma, and we have received its authentic transmission. They say that in the understanding of non-Buddhists the prime val self is seen as fundamental, but in the Buddha-Dharma we should not be like that. Now, let us inquire, at the time when “bad has not yet occurred,” where is it? To say that it will exist in the future is to be forever a non-Buddhist of nihilism. To say that the future becomes the present is not an insistence of the Buddha-Dharma: the three times would have to be confused. If the three times were confused, all dharmas would be confused. If all dharmas were confused, real form would be confused. If real form were confused, buddhas alone, together with buddhas, would be confused. For this reason, we do not say that the future will, in future, become the present. Let us inquire further: what thing does “bad that has not yet occurred” describe? Who has known it or seen it? For it to be known and seen, there must be a time of its nonoccurrence and a time of something other than its nonoccurrence. In that case, it could not be called something that had not yet occurred. It would have to be called something that has already vanished. Without studying under non-Buddhists or śrāvakas and others of the Small Vehicle, we should learn in practice “the prevention of bad that has not yet occurred.” All the bad in the universe is called “bad that has not yet occurred,” and it is bad that does not appear. Nonappearance means “yesterday preaching an established rule, today preaching an exception to the rule.”
“To cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred”: “Already occurring” means totally happening. Totally happening means half-happening. Half-hap pening means what is happening here and now. What is happening here and now is obstructed by happening itself; it has sprung free from the brains of happening. Causing this [bad] to be extinguished describes Devadatta’s living body entering hell, and Devadatta’s living body attaining affirmation; it describes a living body entering a donkey’s womb, and a living body becom ing buddha.31 Grasping this principle, we should learn in practice what “caus ing extinction” means. Extinction means springing free from extinction and getting clear of it.
“To cause to occur good that has not yet occurred” is satisfaction with the features we had before our parents were born, is clarification prior to the sprouting of creation, and is understanding preceding Majestic Sound.
“To promote the good that has already occurred”: Remember, this does not speak of causing to occur the good that has already occurred; it is about pro moting [good]. It is [the Buddha], having seen for himself the bright star, going on to make others see the bright star; it is eyes becoming the bright star; it is “confusion being followed by thirty years of not lacking for salt and vinegar.” For example: because we are promoting [good], [good] is already happening, and so “the ravine being deep, the dipper’s handle is long,” and “only because we had it did he come.”


That is great to hear. The more I learn about Ven. Dogen the more impressed I am.
Khalil Bodhi
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 10:09 am

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby retrofuturist » Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:23 am

Greetings Khalil Bodhi,

I remember asking a similar question once at Zen Forum International and those who responded were largely horrified with the notion of trying to proactively improve one's mindstate in such a way.

If Dogen's words are anything to go by, what I saw at ZFI more represented some kind of American Internet Zen interpretation of the Dharma, than classical Zen.

Maitri,
Retro. :)
Live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes

Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum) * Here Comes Trouble
User avatar
retrofuturist
Founding Member
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:24 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Khalil Bodhi,

I remember asking a similar question once at Zen Forum International and those who responded were largely horrified with the notion of trying to proactively improve one's mindstate in such a way.

If Dogen's words are anything to go by, what I saw at ZFI more represented some kind of American Internet Zen interpretation of the Dharma, than classical Zen.

Maitri,
Retro. :)



Yes you are right.. when the old good e-sangha forum was still existent I made similar observation... however some of the teachers had very lofty remarks, dismissing completely, what one can call classical zen.

After e-sangha was gone I was invited later on to join ZFI, however after reading it for some time I gave up... It was nothing similar to what is zen in Japan, specially soto which I know pretty well was somehow astonishing.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby greentreee » Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:39 pm

hi,

i'm just curious as to the origination of the eightfold path. ie; textual references etc.
scratching thick hair'd head,
"if air can be conditioned,
like where's the shampoo?"

"greentreee"
User avatar
greentreee
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 12:43 am
Location: in the woods in northern ontario

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Astus » Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:46 pm

greentreee wrote:hi,

i'm just curious as to the origination of the eightfold path. ie; textual references etc.


Not specifically a Zen related question, but here it is, the very first teaching of the Buddha in the early scriptures (Zen follows the East Asian view that the first teaching of the Buddha was the Avatamsaka Sutra): Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

"Neither cultivation nor seated meditation — this is the pure Chan of Tathagata."
(Mazu Daoyi, X1321p3b23; tr. Jinhua Jia)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T2076p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4238
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:51 pm

greentreee wrote:hi,

i'm just curious as to the origination of the eightfold path. ie; textual references etc.


http://www.buddhistelibrary.org/library ... ?adpath=94 there are tons of it just google :)
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:53 pm

Astus wrote:
greentreee wrote:hi,

i'm just curious as to the origination of the eightfold path. ie; textual references etc.


Not specifically a Zen related question, but here it is, the very first teaching of the Buddha in the early scriptures (Zen follows the East Asian view that the first teaching of the Buddha was the Avatamsaka Sutra): Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion


In Japanese zen it is followed according to Taisho Daizokyo in the part of Agon-kyo, or Agamas, which correspond to the suttas of Pali cannon.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby greentreee » Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:14 pm

Matylda wrote:
Astus wrote:
greentreee wrote:hi,

i'm just curious as to the origination of the eightfold path. ie; textual references etc.


Not specifically a Zen related question, but here it is, the very first teaching of the Buddha in the early scriptures (Zen follows the East Asian view that the first teaching of the Buddha was the Avatamsaka Sutra): Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion


In Japanese zen it is followed according to Taisho Daizokyo in the part of Agon-kyo, or Agamas, which correspond to the suttas of Pali cannon.


hey thanks for the link, i got my dial up fishing rod pulling in the file now @ 3.2 kb/s :D

most of my zen studies are from chinese sources, and have read some quotes from the Agamas.

again thanks
scratching thick hair'd head,
"if air can be conditioned,
like where's the shampoo?"

"greentreee"
User avatar
greentreee
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 12:43 am
Location: in the woods in northern ontario

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby plwk » Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:25 pm

The importance of the 4th Noble Truth/8FP from the Mahayana Srimaladevi Sutra...
http://www.mandala.hr/3/srimaladevi.html
10. The One Truth
"Lord, among those four Noble Truths, three Truths are impermanent and one Truth is permanent. Why so?
Because the three Truths belong to the characteristic of the constructed, and anything belonging to the characteristic of the constructed is impermanent. Anything impermanent has an illusory nature. Everything with illusory nature is untrue, impermanent, and not a refuge.

Therefore, the Noble Truths of Suffering, Source of Suffering, and Path leading to the Cessation of Suffering are actually untrue, impermanent, and not a refuge.

Lord, among those [four], the one Truth -- Cessation of Suffering -- excludes the realm with the characteristic of the constructed. Anything excluding the realm with the characteristic of the constructed is permanent. Whatever is permanent lacks an illusory nature. Anything that lacks an illusory nature is true, permanent, and a refuge.

Therefore, the Truth -- Cessation of Suffering -- is in reality true, permanent, and a refuge.

And this curious one from the Mahayana Angulimaliya Sutra...
http://www.webspawner.com/users/tathaga ... index.html
"What are the four ?
The words 'the four noble truths' are renowned in the Śrāvaka-yāna, but such features are absent from the Mahāyāna.
The following inherent natures and functions are the four truths:
to say that the Tathāgata is permanent is an absolute truth for Mahāyāna, but suffering (duḥkha) is not a truth;
to say that the Tathāgata is eternal is an absolute truth, but not origination (samudaya);
to say that the Tathāgata is supremely unchanging is an absolute truth, but cessation (nirodha) is not a truth; and
to say that the Tathāgata is peace is an absolute truth, but not the path (mārga).

These are the four noble truths for Mahāyāna.
The functioning of suffering is not a truth. If the functioning of suffering was a truth, the four aspects of suffering would be truths, for those sufferings of realm of the animals, the hungry ghosts, the asuras and Yama would become the four noble truths.
plwk
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:41 am

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Matylda » Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:52 pm

plwk wrote:The importance of the 4th Noble Truth/8FP from the Mahayana Srimaladevi Sutra...


Well it is completely different topic taken from the last dissemination of dharma, namely on buddhanature, where everything becomes upside down, compare to the initial teachings of dharma.
Matylda
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:32 pm

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby seeker242 » Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:32 pm

Astus wrote:In "Sanjuushichihon bodai bunpou" (Thirty-seven Elements of Bodhi) Dogen does give some explanation for right effort. Here it is quoted from the Nishijima translation.

SBGZ 60 [SZTP] /70 [Shasta] /73 [Nishijima] wrote:The Four Kinds of Right Restraint (Also called the four kinds of right exertion)

The first is to prevent bad that has not yet occurred.
The second is to cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred.
The third is to cause to occur good that has not yet occurred.
The fourth is to promote the good that has already occurred.

“To prevent bad that has not yet occurred”: What is called bad does not always have established forms and grades; the term has been established land by land and sphere by sphere. Nevertheless, prevention of that which has not yet occurred is called the Buddha-Dharma, and we have received its authentic transmission. They say that in the understanding of non-Buddhists the prime val self is seen as fundamental, but in the Buddha-Dharma we should not be like that. Now, let us inquire, at the time when “bad has not yet occurred,” where is it? To say that it will exist in the future is to be forever a non-Buddhist of nihilism. To say that the future becomes the present is not an insistence of the Buddha-Dharma: the three times would have to be confused. If the three times were confused, all dharmas would be confused. If all dharmas were confused, real form would be confused. If real form were confused, buddhas alone, together with buddhas, would be confused. For this reason, we do not say that the future will, in future, become the present. Let us inquire further: what thing does “bad that has not yet occurred” describe? Who has known it or seen it? For it to be known and seen, there must be a time of its nonoccurrence and a time of something other than its nonoccurrence. In that case, it could not be called something that had not yet occurred. It would have to be called something that has already vanished. Without studying under non-Buddhists or śrāvakas and others of the Small Vehicle, we should learn in practice “the prevention of bad that has not yet occurred.” All the bad in the universe is called “bad that has not yet occurred,” and it is bad that does not appear. Nonappearance means “yesterday preaching an established rule, today preaching an exception to the rule.”
“To cause to be extinguished bad that has already occurred”: “Already occurring” means totally happening. Totally happening means half-happening. Half-hap pening means what is happening here and now. What is happening here and now is obstructed by happening itself; it has sprung free from the brains of happening. Causing this [bad] to be extinguished describes Devadatta’s living body entering hell, and Devadatta’s living body attaining affirmation; it describes a living body entering a donkey’s womb, and a living body becom ing buddha.31 Grasping this principle, we should learn in practice what “caus ing extinction” means. Extinction means springing free from extinction and getting clear of it.
“To cause to occur good that has not yet occurred” is satisfaction with the features we had before our parents were born, is clarification prior to the sprouting of creation, and is understanding preceding Majestic Sound.
“To promote the good that has already occurred”: Remember, this does not speak of causing to occur the good that has already occurred; it is about pro moting [good]. It is [the Buddha], having seen for himself the bright star, going on to make others see the bright star; it is eyes becoming the bright star; it is “confusion being followed by thirty years of not lacking for salt and vinegar.” For example: because we are promoting [good], [good] is already happening, and so “the ravine being deep, the dipper’s handle is long,” and “only because we had it did he come.”


Do you have a link to this online somewhere please? :)

Found it :) https://www.bdkamerica.org/default.aspx?MPID=81
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
User avatar
seeker242
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Right Effort - How Is It Understood in Zen?

Postby Khalil Bodhi » Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:10 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Khalil Bodhi,

I remember asking a similar question once at Zen Forum International and those who responded were largely horrified with the notion of trying to proactively improve one's mindstate in such a way.

If Dogen's words are anything to go by, what I saw at ZFI more represented some kind of American Internet Zen interpretation of the Dharma, than classical Zen.

Maitri,
Retro. :)


Sadhu Retro! Thanks!
Khalil Bodhi
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 10:09 am


Return to Zen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

>