Ordinary Profundity: Suchness, Zen, and Sitting Still
By: Sasha Manu
Tags: Philosophy, Zen, Spirituality, Buddhism, Personal Development

Strikingly simple, yet endlessly profound, the concept of suchness (tathātā) is one of the most interesting teachings in the Mahāyāna canon. Finding its full expression in the writings of Sōtō Zen masters, proto-formulations of suchness stretch all the way back to the Nikāyas. On the topic, Dōgen writes that, “If you wish to attain suchness, you should practice suchness without delay” (Abe 2007, 3). Philosopher Aśvaghoṣa describes suchness as the “highest reality” and as the quintessence of the Mahāyāna (Suzuki 1900, 153). This paper will explore the genealogy of this concept, and its significance in the Sōtō Zen tradition. Exploration of suchness will start from the early suttas, and move to seminal Mahāyāna Sutras such as the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra, Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna sutra, and Prajñāpāramitā literature. I will then turn to the Caodong lineage, a Chinese Chan Sect, and analyze the appearance of suchness in the writings of Dongshan, one of the founders of this school. Finally, I will turn to Sōtō Zen, looking at Dōgen’s profound elucidation of suchness in the Shōbōgenzō.

Echoes of Emptiness

Before we broach the topic of suchness, it is apt to start with an overview of related Buddhist doctrines. The relationship between tathātā and Śūnyatā cannot be explored before we examine the relationship between emptiness (Śūnyatā), impermanence (anicca), and dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda). Phenomena arise and pass away, and the manner in which they do so is schematized by the twelve links of interdependent origination. These phenomena are understood not as solid and substantial entities, but as lacking inherent existence, and merely appearing due to requisite conditions being present. Suffering (dukkha) occurs when an ego identifies and clings to the ever-changing world — reifying it into something stable and independent. As such, the path to liberation consists of training to let go of ones attachment to the world — because such attachment is ultimately fueled by a delusion as to how things really are.

The doctrine of emptiness can be seen as an extension of the earlier notions of impermanence and dependent origination. While full articulation of emptiness is a distinctly Mahāyāna feature, we do find artefacts of Śūnyatā within the Nikāyas. The Cula-Suññatā Sutta is an important instance in which the Buddha uses emptiness not only as a predicate, but as a noun. He describes that monks should remain “in a dwelling of emptiness” and that monks can gain “entry into emptiness” (MN 121). In the Phena Sutta, the Buddha describes the five aggregates as being empty and void, without substance (SN 22.95). The world of Buddhism is that of flux. Phenomena are arising and passing away with great rapidity, and upon deep analysis, no stable, independent essences can be found.

The Bodhisattva Ideal

The developments of the Mahāyāna brought countless new doctrines. From bodhisattvas, upāya, to the pivotal axis of the vehicle: the Prajñāpāramitā. The liberative goal also got an update — changing from nirvāṇa, to what was now thought of as a higher realization: anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi. The nirvāṇa of the śrāvakas was seen as solitary and individualistic. The emergence of the bodhisattva ideal brought with it an emphasis on the outward expression of insight — compassion. In his introduction to the Vimalakīrti sutra, Robert Thurman plainly states that: “wisdom as a solitary possession, not integrated with liberative technique, is plainly declared to be bondage” (Thurman 2000, 7). The early Buddhist emphasis on clinging is now reframed with explicit mention of holding too tightly onto wisdom itself. Wisdom (of emptiness) without compassion is seen as lacking. As a final introductory remark on emptiness, we have a warning by Nāgārjuna.

“The victors have taught emptiness To definitely eliminate all views, Those who have a view of emptiness Are said to be incurable”. (Pettit 1999, 140)

Emptiness and Non-Duality

The notion that phenomena arise and pass away is placed firmly in the śrāvakayana. In many Mahāyāna writings, it is written that there is nothing that arises and nothing that passes away. As Jay Garfield writes in his exposition of Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: “from the standpoint of nirvāṇa, no characterization is possible since that involves the dualities and dichotomies introduced by language, including the positing of entities and characteristics, as well as their contraries and complements. They have only conventional and nominal existence, and no existence at all from the standpoint of nirvāṇa” (Garfield 1995, 325). We understand that emptiness here is not a voidness, but both a predicate and a precondition. It is a predicate in the strict sense that things are empty of inherent existence. It is a precondition because without such an emptiness, form could not manifest. This conceptual tension is fully revealed in the Heart Sutra, the jewel of the Prajñāpāramitā.

“O, Śāriputra, form does not differ from voidness, and voidness does not differ from form. Form is voidness and the void is form.” (Tsang 1995, 5)

This is the famous assertion of the interdependent equivalence of form and emptiness. There is a sameness/identity asserted between these seemingly disparate elements of reality. However, the asserted sameness still asserts too much. As to say things are the same is for them to still abide within duality, because sameness and difference are complementary concepts. To really go beyond, the difference between these conceptual designation must be seen as empty. There is nothing for form to be empty of in the first place. This is why it is often explained that teachings of Śūnyatā are provisional, in that they are taught as a means to eliminate all other views. One of the most apt and concise ways of preaching this subtle non-dual doctrine, is exemplified by Vimalakīrti.

Lion’s Roar

Vimalakirti the laymen

In the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra, the laymen Vimalakīrti expounds profound doctrines throughout the text. His eloquent elucidation brings us closer to our theme of suchness — in that his aim of reconciling dualities is evident in everything he says. In the chapter entitled “Entering the Gate of Non-Duality”, Vimalakīrti asks a group of Bodhisattvas to preach the doctrine of non-duality. Mañjuśrī, the embodiment of wisdom, says that initiation into the non-dual Dharma is when all things are no longer within the province of either word or speech (Luk 1972, 100). This is close to the mark, as it points to the notion that conceptual designations are insufficient as they reify phenomena. However, when Mañjuśrī asks Vimalakīrti to respond, he remains completely silent. This is one of the most thunderous silence’s in the entire Mahāyāna canon — as it is not a passive ignorance, but a bold declaration of undeniable truth. It is a silence full of exertion — both alluding to the inexplicability of non-duality, while simultaneously preaching the doctrine in its entirety. As we will turn to shortly, this style of pedagogy and embodiment is explored deeply by Dōgen. While staying silent can often be seen as a resignation and surrender, Dōgen describes it as an exertion. “If I exert myself totally, I am in some sense sustaining, enduring or perduring something going on in me that I did not and could not produce myself. My part in it is precisely to stand it, stick out, which is not active, not passive, but strenuous” (Stambaugh, 1990, 31). This is precisely what Vimalakīrti does — he stays firmly rooted in the present moment, actively pointing to the reality of the world going on as it is.

The Awakening of Suchness

It can be argued that emptiness emerged from the teachings of dependent origination, yet as said by Nāgārjuna himself, it is a provisional pointing. One must ultimately not cling to emptiness. This is where the writings of Aśvaghoṣa can play a unique role. His Discourse on the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna is a discourse on suchness, and he manages to toe the line between asserting too much, and denying too much. From the first few pages, it is declared in no uncertain terms that, “Suchness is the cosmic order of the world, the norm of existence” (Suzuki 1900, 5). The domain of suchness is contrasted to the realm of birth-and-death (saṃsāra). However, suchness “dominates the realm of birth and death, which latter therefore, in a certain sense, belongs to Suchness throughout in its entirety as well as in its details” (Suzuki 1900, VI). The continual struggle to both reinforce the reality of the conventional realm while also transcend it is here — yet Aśvaghoṣa does not waver. He says the suchness of man is name-and-form, not a concrete self (Suzuki 1900, VII). We seldom see this kind of positive assertion as to the nature of a human. Descriptions of the self and ego tend to be apophatic in nature, yet here we see active confirmation of the conventional in a way that is on equal terms with the ultimate. Describing the nature of man in this way is, as Aśvaghoṣa says, “perfumed with the cognition of Suchness” (Suzuki 1900, viii).

Twofold Presentation

Philosopher-Poet Aśvaghosa

Aśvaghoṣa’s explanation of suchness introduces its twofold aspects — that of negation and affirmation. In its negative sense, equated with Śūnyatā (Suzuki 1900, 58), it highlights that it cannot be understood through any mode of particularization. It is that truth that Vimalakīrti and Nāgārjuna allude to yet can never fully convey. The negation of all attributes and ascription of unreality on any attempt at reification. However, it is not as if this aspect of suchness is divorced or different than actual suchness — which is why there is a positive quality. The subjective consciousness that attempts to particularize is itself non-existent in the first place — and as such, neither the act of negating nor the thingbeing negated exist ultimately. The positive affirmation is that, “as soon as we understand subjectivity is empty and unreal, we perceive the pure soul manifesting itself as eternally permanent, immutable and completely comprising all things that are pure” (Suzuki 1900, 60). Suchness is able to give a full embrace to the actuality of phenomena — with no distinction between so-called ignorance and clarity, while simultaneously encompassing and respecting the difference without calling it such. “Because all objects in the world are of one and the same taste, are of one reality, have nothing to do with the modes of particularisation, and are not of dualistic character” (Suzuki 1900, 96). Entry into suchness is simply the understanding that your disturbed and ignorant mind is at the same time suchness. At this point, the gate of tathātā is entered, and the highest reality of existence perceived.

The Contingent and the Essential

On Dongshan

Before moving to the Sōtō Zen tradition, we will begin with its spiritual successor in the Chan sect, the Caodong lineage. Founded by Dongshan Liangjie (807–869) and Caoshan Benji (840–901), these masters laid some of the philosophical and practice groundwork that Eihei Dōgen would retrieve and transport back to Japan in the thirteenth century (Bolleter 2014, 30). Dongshan was an earnest student of Buddhism from a very young age, and it is said that after hearing the Heart Sutra as a child, he exclaimed with confusion that he did in fact have eyes, ears, a nose and so on (Leighton 2015, 55). This was the catalyst for his project of reconciling the duality of the contingent (conventional reality) and the essential (ultimate reality). The cornerstone of his teaching is known as the Five Ranks. This dialectical work consists of two sets of writing. The first cycle contains five verses centered around different conceptions of awakening, and the second cycles describes the experiential journey of a practitioner (Bolleter 2014, 33). The first text entitled Five Positions of Ruler and Minister describes the various relationships between the Contingent and the Essential. The titles of the verses allude to their content, and they are: the contingent within the essential, the essential within the contingent, arriving within the essential, approaching from the contingent, arriving at concurrence. Author Ross Bolleter notes: “[we] are pushed beyond the one-sided partiality of our little stories to realize the timeless immensity present in even the least of our experiences. When we awaken to the immensity, we live it in even the mundane moments of our lives” (Bolleter 2014, 33). Arriving at concurrence is about arriving to the present moment in all of its richness.

Leaving His Teacher

One of Dongshan’s most profound explications of suchness occurs as a consequence of an earlier teaching he received from master Yunyan. Before departing, Dongshan asks him how he should respond to questioners asking about the nature of reality. After some deliberation, Yunyan responds: “Just this is it” (Leighton 2015, 79). This shook Dongshan to the core, and once he ascertained the meaning of Yunyan’s comment — he wrote the following verse.

“Taking heed not to seek it elsewhere As if it were distant from myself I now go on alone Yet I meet him everywhere He is now exactly me But I am not now him You should meet in this way, for only then can you realize thus.” (Bolleter 2014, 343)

The last line is also translated as, “One must understand in this way to merge with suchness” by (Leighton 2015, 87). Captured in this short verse are many Buddhist motifs, which we will briefly examine. The first two lines point to the idea of Buddha Nature (tathāgatagarbha) — that the purity and liberation one seeks is ever-present within. When Dongshan writes that he is “going alone”, it implies a lack of dualism — and that when existing in such a way, the world is actualized immediately — since the boundaries of separation have dissolved. Importantly, Dongshan clarifies that “I am not now him”, as this would wrongly assert an identity relationship between self and ultimate, an error that imputes inherent existence to not only the “I”, but to ultimate reality as well. In summary, realizing suchness occurs when the person who realizes, and what is thought to be realized, vanish. The world is seen plainly for what it is, simply, it is as it is. So while duality is said to be the “primary hindrance to the apprehension of suchness”, dualistic appearances are still themselves contained in suchness (Leighton 2015, 88). In the final of Dongshan’s Five Ranks, titled “Arriving at Concurrence”, he states: “Everyone longs to leave the mundane stream, yet finally you return to sit in the charcoal heap” (Bolleter 2014, 25). This harkens to the fact that the ultimate realization is the dissolution of dichotomy, and a return to the immediate present moment. So while the spiritual journey may begin with a desire to attain the transcendental, it concludes with a return to what already was, the world as it exists in its dependently arisen condition — whether that be a beautiful palace, or a charcoal heap.

Treasury of the True Eye of Dharma

Travelling to China

Born to an aristocratic family, and having to endure the death of his parents at a young age, Eihei Dōgen soon turned to the monastic life (Kapleau 1965, 5). Enamored by the paradox of needing to strive for enlightenment, despite possessing inherent Buddha Nature, Dōgen, sought answers around the country and, unfulfilled, travelled to China, ending up at the T’ien-t’ung monastery (Kapleau 1965, 6). It is here where he attained awakening when his master uttered the phrase: “You must let fall body and mind” (Kapleau 1965, 6). He returned to Japan in 1227, and began writing the fascicles that would eventually be put together into his seminal text, the Shōbōgenzō. (Abe 2007, xi). Contained within the many volumes are kōans, parables, stories and explicit teachings. Most pertinent to this paper, is his discussion on suchness. His explanations shift away from the dialectical presentation of the concept, to a more intuitive discussion of the totality and entireness of the effort required to attain suchness (Stambaugh 1990, 32). In no uncertain terms, Dōgen says that in order to grasp suchness, practice is necessary (Stambaugh 1990, 32).

Suchness is Strenuous

I will now turn to Dōgen’s Shōbōgenzō, his magnum opus. Our study of it will culminate in looking at the Genjo Koan fascicle — but I first want to begin by looking at the Fukanzazengi and Bendōwa fascicles, as they help to outline Dōgen’s stance on suchness and practice. Soon after returning from China, Dōgen wrote Bendōwa, translated as “Negotiating the Way” (Abe 2007, 7). A roadmap of his soteriology is presented in this work, and he begins by plainly stating that the Dharma is present in every person. He says that, “complete liberation requires transcending realization as well and re-entering the realm of differentiation in order to work for the salvation of others” (Abe 2007, 9). Yet the movement of transcending and re-entering “does not disturb even a mote of dust” (Abe 2007, 13). Once again, he is highlighting the unreal difference between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa — and that to assume their duality is to fall into the trap of reifying too much. He goes on to boldly state that a practitioners initial sitting is in itself the entirety of original realization. (Abe 2007, 19). Yet, it is easy to fall into arrogance through overly intellectualizing this teaching. The natural question arises of: “what need is there to practice and negotiate the Way if you are lacking nothing here and now?” (Abe 2007, 26). Dōgen answers that such a question is “especially meaningless” (Abe 2007, 26) — as the most important thing to do is to practice removing views of self and other, not merely conceptualize it.

The merits and techniques of realizing the way are outlined in the Fukanzazengi fascicle — translated as “universal promotion of the principles of zazen” (Abe 2007, 1). Early on in the text it is written that the only way to attain suchness is to practice it, and one must do so without delay (Abe 2007, 3). The technique is described in this simplified (or perhaps perfectly succinct) verse:

“Once you have adjusted yourself into this posture, take a deep breath, inhale, exhale, rock your body to the right and left, and settle into a steady, unmoving sitting position. Think of not-thinking. How do you think of not-thinking? Nonthinking. This in itself is the essential art of zazen” (Abe 2007, 4).

Nonthinking is presented as the quintessence of the Zazen artform. Author Joan Stambaugh writes that seated meditation is neither active nor passive. One is not meddling or altering a situation (so it is not active). Yet, there is an element of exertion as one is enduring the happenings of the moment — it is your duty to fully embody and “stand out” (Stambaugh 1990, 31). By standing out, you are balancing on the razors edge of nonthinking, attaining the immediacy of “things presencing as they are” (Stambaugh 1990, 13). A beautiful way of understanding the aforementioned quote is when we think about time. In one second, that second fully manifests itself — and upon arrival of the subsequent second, the previous one vanishes, as it was totally occurring during its time. To attain the immediacy of things, is to train in the art of zazen. When you sit, you aim to see that “no thing or being obstructs any other being, and every moment is a total manifesting of the entire world” (Stambaugh 1990, 32).

Actualizing the Fundamental Point

Shunryu Suzuki practicing zazen

Our study of these fascicles culminates in Genjo Koan, whose title varies in translation from meaning Manifesting Suchness (Abe 2007, 39), to Kosho Uchiyama’s liberal translation of Genjo Koan into: “the ordinary profundity of the present moment becoming the present moment” (Uchiyama 2011, 151). In its fourteen verses, we find echoes of Dongshan’s writings, and similar analogies used. Dōgen writers that: “To carry the self forward and illuminate myriad dharmas is delusion. That myriad dharmas come forth and illuminate the self is enlightenment” (Uchiyama 2011, 23).It is not the personality or ego that attains suchness, but the world reveals itself to itself. If you were to carry forward the self (assert your ego) this would be stepping into duality. Yet, the second line still affirms a self, as there is clearly a manifestation occurring at your particular instance of time and space. But it is not one of ego — but an uncontrived and spontaneous expression. The notion of the fabricated self dissolving is emphasized further in the eighth verse as Dōgen writes: “to study the Buddha Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things.” (Suzuki 2011, 24). You are no longer deriving your identity through self-clinging, but through the suchness of myriad things, your being is revealed.

Dōgen ends the Genjo Koan with a powerful story. A student asks his Master that since the wind is permanent, and there is no place it doesn’t reach, why does he fan himself? The Master responds that while the student understands permanence, he does not understand what is meant by the winds “reaching everywhere”. In response to the monks further questioning, the master just keeps fanning himself (Suzuki 2011, 27). This is the actualization of suchness. To penetrate that the world is empty and there is no inherent existence — yet things must still be done. The world of dependent origination is returned to in all of its fullness — seen with crystal clear understanding of its insubstantiality. Dōgen writes that “ firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood, which fully includes before and after and is independent of before and after” (Suzuki 2011, 24). To live in the world of suchness, you have a maximal understanding of conventional reality, which is only achievable through perfect understanding of emptiness. To see the firewood as a unique name-and-form that is standing out from the background — while understanding that its apparent essence is from myriad causeless causes, is to embody the wordless wisdom of suchness.

Concluding Remarks

The immensity of suchness spans across the Buddhist canon. From its proto-formulations in the Nikāyas, to its explicit and central role in Mahāyāna sutras, the breadth of suchness is rivalled only by its depth. We have explored the precise and technical definitions of tathātā given by Aśvaghoṣa, to its transcendent quality alluded to by Dongshan and Dōgen. Finally, we examined the methods through which one can realize suchness. Ultimately, it appears that the call to suchness is not to shrink away from your apparent particularity, but to see it as a full expression of everything. As Shunryu Suzuki says, once you forget entirely about the idea of “you possessing Buddha Nature” and simply say yes to the moment, that is abiding in suchness (Suzuki 2009, 19). Going beyond duality, and returning to the way things are, and understanding that however the world manifests in the present moment, just that is it. Suchness is a practice, a modality of the cosmos, and a way of seeing the world. Suchness is the way things are.