Talk:Dōgen

Untitled
What's with the image? - Nat Krause 18:06, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[Bob Myers]: Yes, I know about "Rio Grande River" and everything but I can't agree with "Eihei Temple" or "Soji Temple". It's Eiheiji and Sojiji, for goodness sake. Those are their names. And since people might not know that they're temples you might have to say "Eiheiji Temple", but that's not really necessary, especially if you describe it is a temple the first time you refer to it.

[NEN]: Please could someone make a comprehensive list of Dogens writings? Everyone knows about the Shobogenzo, but what about an explanation of the abbreviated version (ie discussion of whether its representative) which is what is generally available in translation? What about the Eihei Koroku and its abbreviation the Eihei Goroku?

I only recently heard of From the Zen Kitchen to Enlightenment/Instructions for the Zen Cook, which sounds like a fascinating accessable piece. Why is that not also included under the 'writings' section? If it had been already, I wouldn't have been looking for a copy already.

Thanks to anyone able to do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.47.169 (talk) 13:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added some of his better known writings but there is quite a bit more. Hee-jin Kim's "Eihei Dogen, Mystical Realist" has a list in Appendix B. I wasn't sure whether to add the whole list or just some of it so I opted for the latter.Thinman10 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC).

Relation to Modern Existentialism
I was hoping that this article would elaborate a bit on how Dogen compares to modern existential philosophers like Heidegger. In briefly parsing the internet, I found this book from the 80's on this topic specifically. http://www.sunypress.edu/p-237-existential-and-ontological-dim.aspx It's also available on Google Books for a large part. Maybe will look at researching this, but any help would be appreciated. Shaded0 (talk) 07:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Contradictions in Dogen
There are certain contradictions on the topic of life and death that are discussed in Dogen's Shoji that deny and acknowledge the existence of birth and death. Although there are only translations of the text, the text does discuss the idea freeing one's self from birth and death to attain nirvana. But Dogen also denies the existence of birth and death earlier in the passage, so was there some intention that was lost in translation?


 * If you can accept that birth and death don't truly exist, then surely you could see the value in detaching from such things?
 * Apparent contradictions in Zen are frequently intentional and nevertheless part of the package.
 * Deuceboise (talk) 01:53, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Dōgen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160102131613/http://www.wwzc.org/OnlinePubTrans.htm to http://www.wwzc.org/OnlinePubTrans.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dōgen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130509194339/http://www.bdkamerica.org/default.aspx?MPID=81 to https://www.bdkamerica.org/default.aspx?MPID=81
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303202429/http://www.mitene.or.jp/~katumin/eiheiji/sonota/daionki/message/top.htm to http://www.mitene.or.jp/~katumin/eiheiji/sonota/daionki/message/top.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:58, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dōgen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151216154448/http://stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/shobogenzo/translations/zazengi/pdf/Zazengi%20translation.pdf to http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/shobogenzo/translations/zazengi/pdf/Zazengi%20translation.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151212095654/http://www.mro.org/mr/archive/24-2/articles/dogenandkoansdaido.html to http://www.mro.org/mr/archive/24-2/articles/dogenandkoansdaido.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:16, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Metaphysical experiences
What's the relevance of this excessive section? And where are the sources and pagenumbers? The following works are inaccessible, and can't be verified: That leaves only three sources which are verifiable:
 * DeVisser (1923), The Arhats in China and Japan, Berlin: Oesterheld
 * MacPhillamy et al. (2007) - internal publication; also, WP:PRIMARY source
 * Dōshū, Ōkubo (1969–70), Dōgen Zenji zenshū (Japanese)
 * Kato, K (1994), The Life of Zen Master Dōgen (Illustrated), Zen Fountains, Taishōji Sōtō Mission, Hilo, Hawaii, by permission of the Sōtōshū Shūmuchō, Tokyo - also, WP:PRIMARY source
 * Eihei-ji Temple Staff (1994), Sanshō, the Magazine of Eihei-ji Temple, November, Fukui, Japan: Eihei-ji Temple Press - also, WP:PRIMARY source
 * - no mention of the term "metaphysical experience" or "spiritual experience;
 * Faure, Bernard (2000), Visions of Power. Imaging Medieval Japanese Buddhism, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press - no mention of the term "metaphysical experience" or "spiritual experience;
 * Bodiford, William M. (2008), Soto Zen in Medieval Japan (Studies in East Asian Buddhism), University of Hawaii Press - no mention of the term "metaphysical experience" or "spiritual experience; instead, Bodiford speaks of "miraculous experiences" (p.32)

MacPhillamy et al (1997), YUME: Visionary Experience in the Lives of Great Masters Dōgen and Keizan, The Journal of the Order of Buddhist Contemplatives, Shasta Abbey Press, 12 (2) probably provides some insight: it's an OBC-narrative, probably to place Jiyu-Kennett's criticised visions into a context which validates them as authoritative.

Bodiford and Faure are also illuminating: miraculous events and auspicious signs helped to establish the power and legitimacy of Dogen as a teacher, and Eiheiji as a cultic center. Tht's the intro needed for such a section. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!  20:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC) / update  Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  04:44, 18


 * The relevance of the section is that it is part of the biography of his life, in a section on the biography of his life.
 * Please see guidelines for WP:PRIMARY
 * None of the sources above meet that qualification. Dogen lived 1,000 years ago. The only primary source of his are his own direct writings. Sotoshu has large libraries of records however no one involved in Sotoshu is in any way directly close to the source as he's long dead. If you were going to claim that, you'd have to claim that for every writing by every Soto Zen teacher on every Zen page, including Warner, and those you like. Additionally, the areas cited by the Kato and Eihei-ji Staff sources, are those that are discussing statements like there being "long history of documentation of such and such in Soto Literature" Citing such literature is completely relevant. You also need to be patient, and realize that people have lives outside of wikipedia. Just because I don't respond to you immediately, doesn't mean I will not get to reasonable concerns. Karma Dechen Lhamo (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * None of the sources above meet that qualification. Dogen lived 1,000 years ago. The only primary source of his are his own direct writings. Sotoshu has large libraries of records however no one involved in Sotoshu is in any way directly close to the source as he's long dead. If you were going to claim that, you'd have to claim that for every writing by every Soto Zen teacher on every Zen page, including Warner, and those you like. Additionally, the areas cited by the Kato and Eihei-ji Staff sources, are those that are discussing statements like there being "long history of documentation of such and such in Soto Literature" Citing such literature is completely relevant. You also need to be patient, and realize that people have lives outside of wikipedia. Just because I don't respond to you immediately, doesn't mean I will not get to reasonable concerns. Karma Dechen Lhamo (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Also, for that matter, there's nothing wrong per se, if a source is primary, so long as it's used appropriately. Wikipedia does not ban primary sources, it's just they have to be used in the correct way. See WP:PRIMARY:




 * None of those sources above are primary, however it would be perfectly valid to use primary sources in correct context. For example, if talking about something Dogen said, and then quoting a primary source of him actually saying said thing, is perfectly valid and reasonable and within Wikipedia guidelines and contexts. -Not that any of that matters for the above sources anyway as none of them are primary, but it's worth noting. Karma Dechen Lhamo (talk) 05:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The relevance is also made clear by Faure and Bodiford. It's not just part of his autobiography, it's part of his culure and context, and part of the narratives that lend authority to him and Eiheiji. Faure is an excellent source for that kind of context, of course (The Rhetorics of Immediacy is in my library).
 * You're right, primary sources can be used. Yet, secondary sources are to be preferred, especially when you're trying to build an argument that Jiyu-Kennett's visions are not without precedent. Faure or Bodiford stating so is quite different from a Shasta Abbey publication saying so. Nevertheless, if MacPhillamy et al. make this connection, that suffices, "According to ..." etc. But a quote would be welcome. Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  05:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * That's fine but that has nothing to do with this article. This article is not on Jiyu-Kennett(??) And none of the sources above are primary. Karma Dechen Lhamo (talk) 05:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)