SHIKANTAZA

JUST SITTING
"Shikan" means nothing but, "Ta" means to hit, "Za" means to sit.
SHIKANTAZA

Presented by:
the Wanderling

SHIKANTAZA, or "just sitting," is alert nonselective attention which

neither pursues nor suppresses thoughts, sensations, etc., but,
rather, gives alert detached attention to whatever arises in and
vanishes from consciousness.

I. The meditation practices stressed by the Soto and Rinzai schools

are distinctively Zen versions of the two types of Buddhist
meditation:
1. Mindfulness Leading to Insight
2. Concentration Leading to Absorption .

Dogen's Shikantaza is a variation on (1) above.

The Koan exercise stressed by Rinzai is a variation

on (2).

II. Distinctive of Dogens account of Zazen as Shikantaza is that

Zazen is conceived not as a means to an end but as a practice of
the end itself.
A. Cultivation (shu) is not different from authentication
(sho), practice from Enlightenment.
B. If we are practicing Shikantaza correctly, then we are

practicing Enlightenment itself.

1. This is a central paradox of Zen.
a) But if were already Enlightened by
our very buddha-nature, why do we need
to practicefrequently for years?

Dogen struggled with the problem of

Original Awakening, that is, an
awakening fundemental or innate in
everyone, and Acquired Awakening, an
awakening attained or acquired through
practice. Dogen rejected both, breaking
through the relativity of original and
acquired, opening up a deeper ground.
He wrote: "The principle of the Buddhanature is that it is not endowed prior to
Enlightenment...the Buddha-nature is
unquestionably realized simultaneously
with Enlightenment." The Shobogenzo
eloaborates quite lucidly his concerns
with the matter, written by him in an
Enlightened state following his own
Realization under the guidance of
Chinese Zen Master Ju-ching (11631228).

Dogen does not maintain that there is

any ultimate difference between
cultivation (shu) and authentication (sho)
or between Original and Acquired
Enlightenment. Hence, Dogen would not
want to say that he is describing "Zen
consciousness" or "Enlightened
consciousness" to the exclusion of
"ordinary consciousness."
Fundamentally, our experience as

experienced is not different from the Zen

master's. Where we differ is that we
place a particular kind of conceptual
overlay onto that experience and then
proceed to make an emotional
investment in that overlay, taking it to be
"real" in and of itself rather than to be an
"expression" (dotoku) of the "occasion"
(jisetsu) in which we think or talk about
the given experience. In a sense, we
have a double layered description. First,
there is the prereflective, not yet
conceptualized, experience--what we all
share, Zen master and the rest of us
alike. Second, there is the expression or
characterization of any experience within
a particular situation or occasion. If the
speaker brings no personal, egotistic
delusions into this expression, the
occasion speaks for itself, the total
situation alone determines what is said
or done. Thus, in the case of the Zen
master, what-is-said is simply what-is. In
the case of the deluded person,
however, the "what-is" includes his
excess conceptual baggage with its
affective components, the deluded ideas
about the nature of "self," "thing," "time,"
and so on that constitute the person's
own particular distortion of what actually
is. (source)

III. Also distinctive of Dogen's account of Shikantaza is that it is the

practice of "without thinking" (hishiryo): which is also called no-mind
(mushin; wu-hsin), the essence of Zen Enlightenment. Here we shall
discuss "thinking," "not-thinking," and "without thinking."
A. THINKING (shiryo): This is our habitual tendency to stay
in the mode of conceptualizing thought.
1. About "thinking" a) Noetic Attitude: positional
(either affirming or negating); b) Noematic

Content: conceptualized objects.

a) Noetic Attitude is positional (either
affirming or negating): A subject is
adopting an intentional stance toward an
object and, specifically, thinking about it
in either a positive or negative way: "This
is an X" or "This is not an X," "Do X" or
"Do not do X."
(1) Consciousness is an
intentional vector proceeding
from a subject to an object. The
subject is a cognitive agent.

b) Noematic Content: X is an intentional

object pointed to and conceived through
our thoughts.

2. "Thinking" can be pictured as follows:

c) Aspects of "thinking":
(1) Subject-object division
present: an active subject
thinks an object.
(2) Non-immediacy: We do not
experience the object
immediately but only at a
distance, as removed subjects,
and only through the thoughts
we have of the object.
(3) Non-fullness: We do not
experience the object in its
fullness or "suchness" but,
rather, only as filtered through
our thinking about it.

B. NOT-THINKING (fushiryo): About "not-thinking,": (1)

noetic attitude: positional (only negating); (2) noematic

content: thinking (as objectified).
1. Noetic attitude is positional (only negating):
Subject is agent seeking to suppress its thinking.
2. Noematic content: The object is now the
"second-order" object "thinking about X."

"Not-thinking" can be pictured as follows:

3. Aspects of "not-thinking": Same as for
"thinking."
a) Consciousness is still an intentionalvector proceeding from a subject to the
object. The subject is still functioning as
agent, even if one trying to bring an end
to its own agency.

C. WITHOUT THINKING (hishiryo): This is no-thought

(munen; wu-nien) or no-mind (mushin; wu-hsin): pure
immediacy in the fullness of things as they are.
1. About "not-thinking,": (1) noetic attitude:
nonpositional (neither affirming nor negating); (2)
noematic content: pure presence of things as they
are (genjokoan).
a) Noetic attitude is nonpositional
(neither affirming nor negating):
Consciousness is no longer an
intentional vector proceeding from a
subject to an object but is, rather, an
open dynamic field in which objects
present themselves.
b) Noematic content: The object is no
longer an object that is the target of an
intentional act but is, rather, the object
itself as it presents itself within the open

dynamic field of consciousness.

c) Aspects of "without thinking":
(1) No subject-object
distinction: The subject has
disappearedthis being the
Zen interpretation of Buddhist
anatta or no-mind.
(2) Immediacy: Without a
subject standing back, the
experience is one of immediacy
within the dynamic field of
consciousness.
(3) Fullness: Because the
object is not filtered through an
intentional act, it presents itself
in its fullness.
(4) Such immediacy and
fullness are genjokoan, "pure
presence of things as they are."

It is a serious mistake in the understanding of Zen to refer

merely to the "denial" or "cessation" of "conceptual
thinking." Regardless of whether or not it can be proven
than the pre-Buddhist Sanskrit etymology of the term
Dhyana can be shown to have no-thought connotations,
the main concern here is the semantic development
undergone by the Chinese term ch'an in the course of the
production of the Ch'an texts in East Asia.
It is quite clear that in Ch'an Buddhism, no-mind, rather
than referring to an absence of thought, refers to the
condition of not being trapped in thoughts, not adhering to
a certain conceptual habit or position.
The error of interpretation made by many scholars (and by
Zen practitioners as well) lies precisely in taking the term
"no-thought" to refer to some kind of permanent, or
ongoing absence of thought. While this assumption is
routinely made, it is impossible to corroborate it in the

Ch'an canon. If we study the seminal texts carefully, we do

find a description of the experience of an instantaneous
severing of thought that occurs in the course of a
thoroughgoing pursuit of a Buddhist meditative exercise.
Nowhere in the Platform Sutra, Sutra of Perfect
Enlightenment, Diamond Sutra, or any other major Ch'an
text, is the term "no-mind" explained to be a permanent
incapacitation of the thinking faculty or the permanent
cessation of all conceptual activity.
The locus classicus for the concept of no-thought is the
Platform Sutra, and in regards to no-thought says in so
many words:

"No-thought" means "no-thought within

thought." Non-abiding is man's original nature.
Thoughts do not stop from moment to moment.
The prior thought is succeeded in each moment
by the subsequent thought, and thoughts
continue one after another without cease. If,
for one thought-moment, there is a break, the
dharma-body separates from the physical body,
and in the midst of successive thoughts there
will be no attachment to any kind of matter. If,
for one thought-moment, there is abiding, then
there will be abiding in all successive thoughts,
and this is called clinging. If, in regard to all
matters there is no abiding from thoughtmoment to thought-moment, then there is no
clinging. Non-abiding is the basis.

As we can see, after the break in thought, successive

thoughts continue to flow, but one no longer abides in, or
clings to, these thoughts. Nowhere is there mention of any
kind of disappearance of, or absence of thought. "Nothought" refers to nothing other than an absence of abiding,
or clinging. Other seminal Ch'an texts, such as the Sutra of

Perfect Enlightenment, characterize no-thought in precisely

the same manner. (source)

Genjokoan is the title of the first chapter of the

Shobogenzo, and its foremost position in the text is
indicative of the importance of this concept in Dogen's
thought. The word is a conjunction of genjo ("presence
itself") and koan. Interpretations of this concept differ; my
own accords with the view that Dogen viewed genjo itself
to be a koan. In one sense, then, genjokoan can be
understood as the name of a koan which, when correctly
grasped, indicates "things as they really are." "Correctly
grasping" this koan proceeds from the prereflective
experience manifested by without-thinking. A famous
passage from the "Genjokoan" states:
To study the Way is to study the self. To study the
self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be
Enlightened by all things.

"Being Enlightened by all things" expresses the mental

activity of Without Thinking wherein the "Self" as well as
No-self (and also "other") is "forgotten," because
awareness of such distinctions is not present. No separate
Self is present to perceive "other" things. Rather, the
Self is all these things, and vice versa, in THIS moment.
From Without Thinking flows the only identifiable "reality, "
namely the unceasing, ever-changing, impermanent
unfolding of experience. From WithoutThinking/Enlightenment, therefore, we see things as they
really are (genjokoan).
For Dogen, genjokoan is none other than Prajna, or
"intuitive wisdom." Furthermore, Dogen is in accord with
the Mahayana tradition in arguing that Prajna and Karuna,
"compassion, the Golden Purifier" are "not-two." He also
holds to the traditional Mahayana conception of right moral
action as proceeding from Prajna/Karuna. Thus Dogen
sees right moral action as properly proceeding from seeing
things as they really are, which is manifest to us in
moments of without-thinking.

IV. How do we practice "without thinking" during zazen?

A. What does one do?
1. Answer: Nothing, because to do something is to
adopt an intentional or noetic stance as a subject.
In no way...am I suggesting that
practices should not be done, only
that there is no practitioner who is the
doer behind them. This is true of
every activity. ... Just because there is
no practitioner (and never has been))
does not mean that practice will not
take place. If it is obvious for a
particular spiritual practice to occur,
then it will.
SUZANNE SEGAL, A Collision with the
Infinite
B. But what if thoughts arise? Arent these part of
"thinking," and dont they, therefore, need to be
suppressed?
1. Answer: They ought not be suppressed, for that
would be "not-thinking."

C. But what other options are there?

1. Answer: Releasing, disengaging, suspending.
In releasing thinking, we let go of the stance of
inner thinking subjects and open ourselves to the
field of immediate experience.
2. And objects, no longer "rubber stamped" by
conceptualizing thought, stand forth in the field of
immediate experience, presenting themselves
fully and in their true natures.
3. We release ourselves from action-taking and
thereby release objects from conceptualization. In

thus releasing both subject and object, we

practice immediate presence in the fullness of
experience: genjokoan.
a) This being the Enlightenment that we
already are.
D. See also: Hua-T'ou, the state of mind before the mind is
disturbed by thought.
Interestingly enough, in a seeming contrast of
approach to Suzanne Segal's comments above,
Aziz Kristof, a non-traditional Advaita Zen master
and Enlightened in his own right, speaking of
Dogen writes:
"His (Dogen's) concept of Shikantaza
was very subtle and profound. Zazen
in his understanding was no longer a
tool to become the Buddha but an
expression of Truth. Zazen is Buddha!
I was very inspired by this teaching.
His teaching was for me a bridge
between Advaita's vision of
'Awakening Now' and seeing
Enlightenment as a future goal.
However, his concept of a neverending cultivation proves that he was
not fully Self-realized. (Dogen)
disliked strongly the idea that after
Enlightenment there is no need for
practice anymore."
Which leads us to the following:

V.SAIJOJO: Neither-nor Mindfulness Leading to Insight, neither-nor

Concentration Leading to Absorption
JISHU-ZAMMI
Before he became the Buddha, at the beginning
of his spiritual quest, Siddhartha Gautama studied
with two teachers. The first teacher taught him the
First Seven Jhanas; the other teacher taught him

the Eighth Jhana. Both teachers told him they

had taught him all there was to learn. But
Siddhattha still didn't know why there was
suffering, so he left each of these teachers and
wound up doing six years of austerity practises.
These too did not provide the answer to his
question and he abandoned these for what has
come to be known as the Middle Way. The suttas
indicate that on the night of his Enlightenment, he
sat down under the Bodhi Tree and began his
meditation by practising the Jhanas (for example,
see the Mahasaccaka Sutta - Majjhima Nikaya
#36). When his mind was "concentrated, purified,
bright, unblemished, rid of imperfection,
malleable, wieldy, steady and attained to
imperturbability" he direct it to the "true
knowledges" that gave rise to his incredible
breakthrough in consciousness known in the
sutras as Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi, beyond
the beyond of the Eighth Jhana. (source)
Duality, such as the fundamental distinction
between subject and object, is obliterated in deep
sleep and in Samadhi, as well as in other
conditions such as fainting, but duality is only
temporarily obliterated for it reappears when one
awakes from sleep or regains consciousness after
fainting, and it also reappears when the yoga
(meditator) arises from Samadhi. The reason why
duality persists is because false knowledge
(mithyajana) has not been removed. Since false
knowledge is the cause of bondage, Samadhi
cannot therefore be the cause of liberation.
(source)
There is a little known deep-meditation awakestate-continuum, beyond dharma-meghasamadhi and beyond the beyond of the Eighth
Jhana, based in part from Dogen's Shikantaza,
neither entering into nor rising out of, that
alleviates the above, entertained in essence by
the Wanderling and others that is neither
Mindfulness Leading to Insight nor not
Mindfulness Leading to Insight; it is as well neither
Concentration Leading to Absorption nor not

Concentration Leading to Absorption and called

by some as kaivalya, but, because in the end it is
NOT and has no name, in things-Zen it is simply
refered to if it must be mentioned as Jishu Zammi,
where Ji means "self," Shu means "mastery," and
Zammi means "Samadhi,"...Samadhi of Self
Mastery.
Zen master Tai-yung, passing by the
retreat of another Zen master named
Chih-huang, stopped and during his
visit respectfully asked, "I am told
that you frequently enter into
Samadhi. At the time of such
entrances, does your consciousness
continue or are you in a state of
unconsciousness? If your
consciousness continues, all sentient
beings are endowed with
consciousness and can enter into
Samadhi like yourself. If, on the other
hand, you are in a state of
unconsciousness, plants and rocks
can enter into Samadhi." Huang
replied, "When I enter into a Samadhi,
I am not conscious of either
condition." Yung said, "If you are not
conscious of either condition, this is
abiding in Eternal Samadhi, and there
can be neither entering into a
Samadhi nor rising out of it."(source)
KHANIKA SAMADHI
KHANIKA SAMADHI is called momentary
concentration (sequential momentary deep
concentration) because it occurs only at the
moment of noting and, in the case of Vipassana,
not on a fixed object as Samatha-Jhana
meditation but on changing objects or phenomena
that occur in the mind and body. But when the
Vipassana meditator develops strength and skill
in noting, his Khanika concentration occurs
uninterruptedly in a series without a break. This
concentration, when it occurs from moment to

moment without a break, becomes so powerful

that it can overcome The Five Hindrances, thus
bringing about purification of mind (citta visuddhi)
which can enable a meditator to attain all the
insight knowledges up to the level of Arahat.

VI The very foundation of Shikantaza is based on an unshakeable

faith that:
Sitting as the Buddha sat, with the mind void of all
conceptions, of all beliefs and points of view, is the
actualization or unfoldment of the inherently Enlightened
Bodhimind with which all are endowed.
At the same time this sitting is entered into in the faith that it
will one day culminate in the sudden and direct perception of
the true nature of this Mind-- in other words, Enlightenment.
Therefore to strive self-consciously for Satori or any other gain from
Zazen is as unnecessary as it is undesirable.
The conscious thought "I must get Enlightened" can
be as much of an impediment as any other which
hangs in the mind. (see)
In authentic Shikantaza neither of these two elements of faith can be
dispensed with. To exclude Satori from Shikantaza would
necessarily involve stigmatizing as meaningless and even
masochistic the Buddha's strenuous efforts toward Enlightenment,
and impugning the patriarchs' and Dogen's own painful struggles to
that end. This relation of Satori to Shikantaza is of the utmost
importance. Unfortunately it has often been misunderstood,
especially by those to whom Dogen's complete writings are
inaccessible. It thus not infrequently happens that Western students
will come to a Soto temple or monastery utilizing Koans in its
teaching and remonstrate with the roshi over his assignment of a
Koan, on the ground that Koans have as their aim Enlightenment;
since all are intrinsically Enlightened, they argue, there is no point in
seeking Satori. So what they ask to practice is Shikan-taza, which
they believe does not involve the experience of Enlightenment.
Such an attitude reveals not only a lack of faith in the judgment of
one's teacher but a fundamental misconception of both the nature
and the difficulty of Shikantaza, not to mention the teaching methods

employed in Soto temples and monasteries. A careful reading of the

encounters of Yasutani Hakuun Roshi with ten Westerners, for
example, will make it clear why genuine Shikantaza cannot be
successfully undertaken by the rank novice, who has yet to learn
how to sit with stability and equanimity, or whose ardor needs to be
regularly boosted by communal sitting or by the encouragement of a
teacher, or who, above all, lacks strong faith in his own Bodhimind
coupled with a dedicated resolve to experience its reality in his daily
life.
Because today, Zen masters claim, devotees are on the whole much
less zealous for truth, and because the obstacles to practice posed
by the complexities of modern life are more numerous, capable Soto
masters seldom assign Shikantaza to a beginner. They prefer to
have him first unify his mind through concentration on counting the
breaths; or where a burning desire for Enlightenment does exist, to
exhaust the discursive intellect through the imposition of a special
type of Zen problem called a Koan and thus prepare the way for
Kensho.
By no means, then, is the Koan system confined to the Rinzai sect
as many believe. Yasutani Hakuun Roshi is only one of a number of
Soto masters who use Koans in their teaching. Genshu
Watanaberoshi, the former abbot of Soji-ji, one of the two head
temples of the Soto sect in Japan, regularly employed Koans, and at
the Soto monastery of Hosshinji, of which the illustrious Haradaroshi was abbot during his lifetime, Koans are also widely used.
Even Dogen Zenji himself, as we have seen, disciplined himself in
Koan Zen for eight years before going to China and practicing
Shikantaza. And though upon his return to Japan Dogen wrote at
length about Shikantaza and recommended it for his inner band of
disciples, it must not be forgotten that these disciples were
dedicated truth-seekers for whom Koans were an unnecessary
encouragement to sustained practice. Notwithstanding this
emphasis on Shikantaza, Dogen made a compilation of three
hundred well- known Koans, to each of which he added his own
commentary. From this and the fact that his foremost work, the
Shobogenzo (A Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma), contains a
number of Koans, we may fairly conclude that he did utilize Koans in
his teaching.

Fundamentally, our experience as experienced is not different from the

Zen master's. Where

we differ is that we place a fog, a particular kind of conceptual overlay
onto that experience
and then make an emotional investment in that overlay, taking it to be
"real" in and of itself.