Can Shikantaza be done "wrong", or is an attempt at it automatically successful?

[Matt J]

How would a Zen student find the proper teacher who can demonstrate the state in your mind?

It needs to be grasped under a teacher who can demonstrate that state.

[fckw]

A friend of mine has studied Shikantaza for a year in a Japanese Soto-Zen monastery. When he started he already had several years of meditation experience. He told how his teacher would introduce him gradually to the practice, making corrections here and there over the whole duration of his stay in the monastery. So, if Shikantaza were something that everyone could just do from the start, why would that Zen teacher even have made all the efforts of telling the student to do this and not do that? Obviously, the teacher believed that there was value in the instructions given, otherwise he would have remained silent.

[LastLegend]

It’s just karma that gives us problem.

[WuMing]

... it still seems paradoxical. Either everyone is Buddha nature, already enlightened, etc. Or they're not.

Broadly speaking, from the Mahayana perspective, we can have statements like this that are considered true:

... In Zen, enlightenment is instantaneous and innate. Per Shen Hui practice doesn't even make any sense (see the paper "The Problem of Practice in Shen Hui's Teaching of Sudden Enlightenment" by Hoyu Ishida). Since Shen Hui was articulating the Zen of Hui Neng, who all modern Zen traces their lineage to, and who was the true sixth patriarch and legitimate heir of Bodhidharma, this seems a relevant issue.

To say one must do a practice, and do it correctly no less, to see innate enlightenment appears counter intuitive and paradoxical.

In a non dual, all is Buddha, all is enlightened world, there truly would be nothing whatsoever to do, as articulated by many Zen masters. For example:

The master addressed the assembly, saying, “Followers of the Way, as to Buddhadharma, no effort is necessary. You have only to be ordinary, with nothing to do—defecating, urinating, wearing clothes, eating food, and lying down when tired.
-Linji

My advice to you is, take a rest and have nothing to do. Even if that little blue-eyed barbarian, Bodhidharma, should come back here and now, he could only teach you to do nothing. Put on your clothes, eat your food, and move your bowels. That's all. No life-and-death [cycle] to fear. No transmigration to dread. No nirvana to achieve, and no bodhi to acquire. Just try to be an ordinary human being, having nothing to do.
- Hsuan Chien

Now, of course many Zen masters also recommend some degree of practice. I'm merely illustrating the points that led to my question in the first place. It seemed to me that Dogen had answered this paradox of practicing to reach something you already have by delineating a Zazen that is not a practice at all. And if it's not a practice, but rather is simply our innate enlightenment, how can it be done wrong?

Please consider carefully from which position and what point of view the zen masters utter these words, and where these masters come from to be able to say such words of deep wisdom! I guess their view and your view or understanding is quite different. Don't think about these things too much, but rather be humble and practice on your cushion instead. Maybe this will bring you closer to an understanding of what they mean. No offense intended!

[Matylda]

The worldly passions are precisely enlightenment

Birth and death are precisely nirvana.

-Stone, Jacqueline (1 May 1995). "Medieval Tendai hongaku thought and the new Kamakura Buddhism: A reconsideration". Japanese Journal of Religious Studies

yes you will find in zen teachings same statements
but they are spoken from the point of realized

there is clear distinction

[Dgj]

yes you will find in zen teachings same statements
but they are spoken from the point of realized

there is clear distinction

Thanks.

Zen is highly variegated and so one master's teaching may be very different from another. Are there examples where the very masters who taught specifically that practice is pointless or unnecessary further explain that the opposite of their statements is the true situation? And where they specify which teaching is the correct one to avoid cancelling out both teachings?

[Johnny Dangerous]

IDK which of them say practice is unnecessary?

I mean if you read the Bloodstream Sermon (or something more recent) you might get this idea, but I think if you read between the lines (especially with Zen writing and it's seeming revelry in contradiction here and there) what they are really saying is that the best practice involves no practice, in that concerted effort only goes so far.

Like I if I told you "just try to relax", the trying actually precludes what I am asking you to do. but it doesn't mean you can just be liberated by apathy.

This is how I learned Zazen personally, very little instruction, and that itself is sort of the primary instruction. I don't doubt this is non-standard.

[Astus]

To dial it back seems to create some problems and once we're there we may as well go back to the Theravada understanding where enlightenment must be reached through practice precisely because it is not innate.

The idea of buddha-nature doesn't necessarily change anything in terms of practice, and one can still see the twofold accumulation through immeasurable aeons as the way to perfect enlightenment.

In Zen, enlightenment is instantaneous and innate.

When there is talk of enlightenment it is important to look at the word used. For instance wu 悟 can simply mean understanding and puti 菩提 the initial awakening. They are the first steps on the bodhisattva path, and not buddhahood. So when there is a peculiar line from the teacher and the student suddenly understands, that is basically when something clicks and becomes clear. It's not that they're buddhas right there, or even arya bodhisattvas.

Per Shen Hui practice doesn't even make any sense

Not really. Guifeng Zongmi claimed to be an heir of Heze and he clearly taught the path of sudden enlightenment, gradual practice. Later Yongming Yanshou and Bojo Jinul followed the same interpretation. You may want to look into Buswell's introduction in Numinous Awareness Is Never Dark where he summarises the matter nicely. Also, if you want to find a more detailed explanation of Zen in more standard writing - and not just short koan-style anecdotes and phrases - you should look into this part of Zen that took a different route than the Hongzhou school what became popular in the Song era and was followed by the majority of Linji and Caodong teachers.

It seemed to me that Dogen had answered this paradox of practicing to reach something you already have by delineating a Zazen that is not a practice at all. And if it's not a practice, but rather is simply our innate enlightenment, how can it be done wrong?

As I take it, Dogen was more a subitist than those who advocated kanhua practice, as he followed more closely the view what one finds in the Platform Sutra where a moment of no-thought is a moment of buddhahood (see also: Enlightenment in Dōgen's Zen by Francis H. Cook ). Or we could say he was more optimist, believing that people can simply enter no-thought (or non-thinking). Then it is only a matter of familiarisation with dropping body and mind, or as they put it now: "The essential thing in doing zazen is to awaken (kakusoku) from distraction and dullness, and return to the right posture moment by moment."

[LastLegend]

It’s what clearly and without mistake that operates. Walking raising hands etc. It’s not a particular Dharma (to design). Call it unborn wisdom if you will. You don’t care what it is .

[LastLegend]

When just sitting, the point is to recognize this wisdom through six faculties. If you get caught up with views and interpretations on and on and on that’s karma. Karma is what repeats itself on and on non-stop. Very little Dharma other than that unborn wisdom (no dharma unborn wisdom has no such thing, no self because unborn wisdom has no such thing either). Completely empty (not quite because we are still stuck somewhere probably because of consciousness). But Linjii said ‘don’t remember any of my word’ because that’s where your teacher’s words will tie you. Then from here/unborn wisdom the real work begins and it depends on your teacher. Some teacher will instruct you to transform karma and nurture good thoughts for benefits of others. And when you are completely awakened with no mistake left then you can transform a storm from hitting or a wild fire. This is where you walk the path of Bodhisattva officially given you have made great vows such vows you don’t have to be witnessed by anyone like Amitabha’s vows make like that don’t have to tell anyone. But we don’t try to transform anything while still have mistake of self left it will create harm and such self will blow up you will become Mara.

[LastLegend]

All texts and mahaprajnaparamita sutras are nothing more than that unborn nature/wisdom. But it’s very ordinary nothing special about it that’s where people leave and don’t have instruction to move forward!

[LastLegend]

Views and interpretations are hindrance the house of Buddhas has many unlearned/stooges who know very little.

[Dgj]

IDK which of them say practice is unnecessary?

I mean if you read the Bloodstream Sermon (or something more recent) you might get this idea, but I think if you read between the lines (especially with Zen writing and it's seeming revelry in contradiction here and there) what they are really saying is that the best practice involves no practice, in that concerted effort only goes so far.

Like I if I told you "just try to relax", the trying actually precludes what I am asking you to do. but it doesn't mean you can just be liberated by apathy.

This is how I learned Zazen personally, very little instruction, and that itself is sort of the primary instruction. I don't doubt this is non-standard.

Thanks. Both of these quotes seem pretty specific. They say to have nothing to do, but they also describe what this entails. No meditation or other seeking practices are mentioned. In the Hsuan Chien quote he even specifies why there's nothing to do by stating that the very issues usually seen as solved by practice do not exist.

So this would be like if you told me to relax and then specifically how to do so and implied what not to do.

Like if I was known to avoid walking under ladders to avoid bad luck and you said "relax, walk normally, there's no bad luck to avoid."

The master addressed the assembly, saying, “Followers of the Way, as to Buddhadharma, no effort is necessary. You have only to be ordinary, with nothing to do—defecating, urinating, wearing clothes, eating food, and lying down when tired.
-Linji

My advice to you is, take a rest and have nothing to do. Even if that little blue-eyed barbarian, Bodhidharma, should come back here and now, he could only teach you to do nothing. Put on your clothes, eat your food, and move your bowels. That's all. No life-and-death [cycle] to fear. No transmigration to dread. No nirvana to achieve, and no bodhi to acquire. Just try to be an ordinary human being, having nothing to do.
- Hsuan Chien

[kusulu]

For the most part, in Soto literature, a wandering and unfocussed sitting practice is discouraged. Calling it "wrong" or "not really zazen" or labeling it otherwise don't help in any way, so I won't call it "wrong" but "automatically successful" only applies if a sincere right effort is applied.

[friendly]

For the most part, in Soto literature, a wandering and unfocussed sitting practice is discouraged. Calling it "wrong" or "not really zazen" or labeling it otherwise don't help in any way, so I won't call it "wrong" but "automatically successful" only applies if a sincere right effort is applied.

Yes, and this is Koan of sitting practice Shikantaza. Yes. On the other hand, goal oriented in attaining by concentrating and focusing or posture and "doing perfect right" is also missing Shikantaza. That is not right. Shikantaza is sincere and settled sitting which is free of all goals and discriminating right-wrong.

[jimmi]

Shikantaza is sincere and settled sitting which is free of all goals and discriminating right-wrong.

What is sincerity in the absence of goals and discrimination. In a sense I agree with your statement but am wondering what sincere shikantaza is in practice. How can one recognize in oneself an absence of goals, discrimination?

[friendly]

Shikantaza is sincere and settled sitting which is free of all goals and discriminating right-wrong.

What is sincerity in the absence of goals and discrimination. In a sense I agree with your statement but am wondering what sincere shikantaza is in practice. How can one recognize in oneself an absence of goals, discrimination?

When one is action for sake of action with nothing in the world but this action, nothing more to attain but this action and nothing miss from this action. Action is complete. There is no before or after the action when acting the action. This action is the only action to act in the world when acting the action. The goal of the action is the action, and the attaining of goal of the action is just the acting the action without any other acttion required. Action is Buddha acting.

I feel it is experience, so when encountered, proof is in the pudding. Acction can be sitting, or walking, climbing mountain, cooking for Tenzo. They seem to all have goals, but that is not only way to awareness each action.

[kusulu]

Shikantaza is sincere and settled sitting which is free of all goals and discriminating right-wrong.

What is sincerity in the absence of goals and discrimination. In a sense I agree with your statement but am wondering what sincere shikantaza is in practice. How can one recognize in oneself an absence of goals, discrimination?

Even if someone told you, you would still have to discover the truth in it. Only you will know if it is sincere, without goal, or part of discrimination mind. "Proof is in the pudding" so to speak. There's lots of various reasons why some become attached to goals and agendas.

[Justmeagain]

Like I if I told you "just try to relax", the trying actually precludes what I am asking you to do. but it doesn't mean you can just be liberated by apathy.

[LastLegend]

Like I if I told you "just try to relax", the trying actually precludes what I am asking you to do. but it doesn't mean you can just be liberated by apathy.

Clear through six faculties. It’s not any thing in particular. It’s described as non-appearance and empty. What gives us problem is karmic habits of skandhas.