THE ETHICS OF DOGEN: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

[Triyana2009]

Namo Buddhaya,

THE ETHICS OF DOGEN: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

                  Gary L. Ray
                  Institute of Buddhist Studies
                  Berkeley, CA 94709


     Do-gen Zenji, the great 13th Century Zen Master, could play an
important role in shaping a modern Zen ethic.  While Do-gen aspired
to enlightenment, his fellow Japanese monks were morally spiralling
downward during one of Japan's most hedonistic periods of Buddhism.
Do-gen brought Buddhism out of this decline with his teachings of
enlightenment and morality.  Buddhism and society in Japan as well
as in the Western world are in decline again and the teachings of
Do-gen can be revived once more to reform Buddhism. 

     To demonstrate how this is possible, we need to look closer at
Do-gen's life, his revolutionary teachings of the nature of
enlightenment, how his view of enlightenment and practice results
in an ethical life, and how his teachings have started to shape
Buddhism today, especially in America.  Before we do that, we need
to look at what Zen has to offer, in they way of ethics, besides
the teachings of Do-gen.

     There is no organized Zen ethic.  There are many reasons why,
but the biggest is that there was never a need.  Confucianism
always played the role of upholding ethical standards in Chinese
and Japanese society.   As for a modern development, according to

James Whitehill, there are three additional reasons why a moral
philosophy has not been produced. 

     The first reason is that Zen, until recently, has been
interpreted only by Japanese philosophers.  The lack of an interest
in ethics by these philosophers is a direct result of their
methodology -- coming from the German model which has little
interest in ethics.  Instead, emphasis is put on metaphysical
issues of enlightenment and self-transformation.

     The second reason is that Zen's Western audience has been more
concerned with other issues, such as enlightenment, aesthetics,
psychology, and theology.  It has not been until recently that
questions were asked about ethics.  American Buddhist groups
started with enlightenment as a motivation for practice, but as
these organizations have grown and matured, they have needed
guidelines for action, similar to Christian ethics.

     The final reason, and the most telling of Western society, is
the apprehension of Japanese philosophers towards bringing what
there is of Zen ethics to the West due to fear that it would be
viewed as "...subversive of the official truisms and moral
performance of Western societies."   Apparently Japanese
philosophers felt that Buddhist ethics were not compatible with
Western society, or that Western society was so "immoral," from a
Buddhist standpoint, that Zen ethics and possibly Zen itself would
be rejected completely.  So how can Zen ethics play a role in the
West, and what type of ethic would be used?

     Whitehill hints at Do-gen as a possibility for a Zen ethic, but
quickly dismisses him because of Do-gen's emphasis on the monastic
community and Whitehill's own misunderstanding of Do-gen's
teachings.   However, Do-gen's life and teaching, when interpreted
correctly, contains a full ethical guideline that can be adapted to
the modern "lay" Buddhist community as well as the monastic
community.  This "guideline for action" comes from an "enlightened"
perspective from a teacher with a remarkable life.

     Do-gen was born in 1200 C.E. to an aristocratic family living
in Kyoto.  His father was the most influential government minister
in court.   His mother was a daughter of the ex-regent, an
important member of the aristocracy.   At the age of two, his
father died and his mother moved to the suburbs of Kyoto.  Do-gen
lived a sad and lonely childhood in Kyoto, and at age seven
(eight?), his mother also died, profoundly impacting his view of
life.

     At age thirteen, Do-gen left his uncle, who he had been living
with, and became a monk at Enryakuji temple on Mount Hiei, a center
for Tendai Buddhist scholarship.   He was ordained as a monk April
9, 1213, by his teacher, Abbot Ko-en, and given the name Do-gen
(Foundation of the Way)  Do-gen trained with Ko-en for a while,
exhaustively studying tantric esoteric and exoteric Tendai
scriptures, but a question still remained unanswered for Do-gen:

           Both exoteric and esoteric teachings explain that a
           person in essence has true dharma nature and is
           originally a body of "buddha nature."  If so, why do all
           buddhas in the past, present, and future arouse the wish
           for and seek enlightenment?

When Do-gen asked his master for the answer, Ko-en was unable to give
a reply that satisfied Do-gen.  At that time, Tendai Buddhism was
very concerned with hongaku, or original enlightenment and much
less concerned with shikaku, or acquired enlightenment, so it is
not too surprising that Do-gen was unable to find a response that
adequately consolidate the two.   Upset and disappointed, Do-gen
left Mount Hiei to find the answer to his question.

     First, Do-gen went to Miidera where the Onjoji temple was
located.   He spoke with a famous Tendai scholar, abbot Ko-in, who
had left the Tendai school for the teachings of Pure Land
Buddhism.   Abbot Ko-in was also unable to held Do-gen, referring
him to a Zen teacher named Eisai who taught at Kennin-ji.

     Do-gen left Ko-in and travelled to Kennin-ji, in Kyoto, the
center for Zen studies in Japan, as well as Tendai, Shingon and
other schools.  Do-gen asked Rinzai Zen Master Eisai the same
question he asked his Tendai teacher, Ko-en.  Eisai replied:  "All
the Buddhas in the three stages of time are unaware that they are
endowed with the Buddha-nature, but cats and oxen are well aware of
it indeed!"  This meant that only the ignorant, the animal-like,
think in terms of enlightenment and non-enlightenment.  The
Buddhas, having Buddha-nature, no longer concern themselves with
these concepts. 

     Hearing this, Do-gen had an experience of enlightenment and
decided to study under Eisai's guidance.  Do-gen became Eisai's
student, but unfortunately, the following year Eisai died.  Eisai's
successor, Myo-zen, became Do-gen's new teacher, eventually giving
him dharma transmission.

     Even after nine years of training under Myo-zen, Do-gen still
felt that something was missing.  So, Do-gen made the decision to
leave Japan for study in China.   Not only did Myo-zen give Do-gen
his permission to go, but Myo-zen joined him.   While in China,
Do-gen eventually ran across Ju-ching, who was considered "...one of
China's finest Zen masters."   Shortly after Do-gen met Ju-ching,
Myo-zen died.

     From Ju-ching, Do-gen developed his extremely disciplined,
intensive style of Zen training.  Training under Ju-ching was
extremely rigorous, with the meditation schedule lasting twenty or
more hours each day.  Ju-ching gave Do-gen formal Dharma
transmission and Do-gen soon left for Japan.

     On returning to Japan, Do-gen stayed at Kennin-ji once more.
Unfortunately, he found it in a worse state of moral and spiritual
decay than when he left.  Monks spent their time making money,
wearing fancy clothes and furnishing their rooms with expensive
lacquered furniture.   After spending several years at Kennin-ji,
Do-gen wrote in the Sho-bo-genzo- Zuimonki: "It is an obvious fact that
Buddhism is now on the decline."   Some scholars believe that at
this point Do-gen started work on what was later known as the Sho-bo-
genzo- (The Eye and Treasury of the True Law).   His first
fascicle, Bendo-wa, or "The Practice of the Way," is a book intended
to instruct his growing number of students with questions about
proper practice and ethics. 

     Do-gen spent the rest of his life teaching his students with
his unique approach to Zen practice.   His teaching later became
known as the Soto school of Zen, although Do-gen never intended to
create a separate Zen school.  The teaching that practice (zazen
and mindfulness) was enlightenment itself, as well as a dedication
to intellectual inquiry, was the key to Do-gen's teachings, out of
which everything else flowed. 

     The concept that practice and enlightenment were identical was
not Do-gen's original idea.  Chinese Buddhists had long claimed
this, basing their concepts on the meditation writings on the 4th
Century Indian teachers Buddhaghosa and Patanjali.  In fact, this
concept is also one of the key points to a "sudden enlightenment"
position, which will be discussed in detail later.   This
position is also affirmed in the Platform Sutra, which Do-gen and
other Chinese Zen masters had access to.  In one section, the Sutra
reads:

           Good friends, how then are meditation and wisdom alike?
           They are like the lamp and the light it gives forth.  If
           there is a lamp there is light; if there is no lamp there
           is no light.  The lamp is the substance of light; the
           light is the function of the lamp.  Thus, although they
           have two names, in substance they are not two.
           Meditation and wisdom are also like this.

Although this passage is attributed more to Shen-hui than the
official Sixth Patriarch, Hui-neng, it demonstrates a trend that
ran throughout Chinese Ch'an well before Do-gen.

     Do-gen, however, was the first Japanese teacher to base his
philosophy and teachings on this important foundation.  For Do-gen,
practice equalled enlightenment also.  In his work "Sesshin Sessho"
(Explaining Mind, Explaining Nature) he writes:

           ...very foolish people think that when we study Buddhism
           we do not arrive at the Buddhist Way until our study is
           completed.  This occurs because such people do not know
           that proclaiming, practicing, and enlightening the
           Buddhist Way are all complete within themselves and
           contain all aspects of the Way.

     Do-gen's idea of practice means a continuous fostering of
mindfulness centered around zazen.  Practice becomes the
realization of Buddha-nature (Tathagata-garbha, or hongaku),
otherwise known as enlightenment.  Do-gen's original question that
eventually sent him on a spiritual quest to China, is answered in
this concept of practice.  This is not to say that everyone who
practices Zen is completely enlightened; the quality of zazen is
the equivalent of the quality of enlightenment, and there are an
infinite number of levels of maturation.  Do-gen scholar Francis
Cook explains that:

                Consequently, enlightenment exists with the
           commencement of zazen practice, at least to some degree.
           It is `to some degree' because zazen itself is probably
           weak and immature in the beginning, and so, consequently,
           the enlightenment that is expressed in practice may also
           be weak and immature.

As a Zen student's practice matures, so does enlightenment.
Therefore, no one is ever finished with practice.  Do-gen uses the
expression "One inch of zazen, one inch of Buddha" to communicate
this.   

[Triyana2009]

Mindfulness practice as well as zazen practice emphasize the
merging of subject and object, or "samadhi consciousness".  For
example, if a student were to wash the floor, they would do it with
a sense of unity.  There would not be a student and a floor -- just
the washing of the floor.  Do-gen refers to this practice as
shinjin-datsuraku, or "dropping off mind and body."  This
experience of samadhi is enlightenment for Do-gen, and thus a
student could be enlightened during one activity but not for
another.

     Do-gen is essentially "de-mythologizing" the enlightenment
experience.  Anyone can experience enlightenment, according to
Do-gen, even the most inexperienced of students.  This is not
limited to monastic students either, anyone can practice
enlightenment in Do-gen's system.  The idea that "lay" practice also
plays an important role in Do-gen's Zen is supported by scholars
such as Jee-Jin Kim and Francis Cook.  Francis Cook writes:  "Do-gen
believed that is was attainable by anyone, lay or monk, who made a
serious effort, and he presents it in a remarkably demystified and
demythologized [re-mythologized according to Kim] way."   This
is interpreting a modern view of Do-gen's ethics.

       Do-gen's view has some very important implications in how
actions are performed.  According to Do-gen, enlightenment is the
foundation for moral behavior.  In Do-gen's Shoakumakusa (Refrain
from all Evil) from the Sho-bo-genzo-, he describes how enlightenment
leads to moral behavior:

           Practice is accomplished through the law of karma.  That
           is, it is not moved by karma, nor does it create new
           karma.  When karma exists it causes us to practice.  When
           the original nature of karma is illuminated we see true
           refraining, impermanence, and the harm that ceases and
           never stops because there is only detachment.  If we
           study like this we will see that we are able to refrain
           from all evil.  When this understanding is actualized we
           can completely refrain from all evil and cut off all
           delusion through zazen. 

     Some scholars, such as James Whitehill, misunderstand what is
meant by enlightenment as the basis for morality.  For example, Dr.
Whitehill writes:

           Waiting for enlightenment so that one may do these things
           spontaneously and naturally, without effort or purpose or
           self, has never been the way of the Bodhisattva.

This is an understanding of the traditional, non-Chinese, view of
enlightenment, one in which enlightenment is an end result of
practice rather than identical with practice.  For Do-gen,
practicing true morality without Zen training is impossible since
ignorance is the basis for evil and only by acting from an
enlightened perspective can moral actions be accomplished, but the
training and moral action begin immediately in Zen instruction.
This is also a profound shift from the Western view of morality and
ethics.  For example, In Zen, acting selflessly with compassion is
not ethical altruism, it is a profound shift in behavior and an
individuals "way of being."   James Whitehill summarizes
enlightened versus non-enlightened moral behavior:

           By claiming that the enlightened act morally, but without
           calculation or hesitation, they seek to differentiate and
           separate morally responsible and worthy action from
           actions resulting from ethical reflection.  The intention
           is to claim that the enlightened act morally, but without
           the encumbrances or "thought-coverings" of doubt,
           reflection, or calculation.  Ethical judgement is viewed
           negatively as a more or less detached, rational activity
           that neglects the fullness, complexity, and subjectivity
           of human action.

     Of course this still goes under the false assumption that an
individual is always acting from an enlightened position, a concept
that Do-gen rejects.  This kind of reasoning also assumes that an
"enlightened perspective" is one that is removed from reason and
common sense.  It is a view that expresses enlightenment more as an
realization of some profound impractical truth rather than an
realization of reality as it truly is.   

     This traditional argument against enlightened morality is that
morality without thought can become distorted, as in the case of
many of the scandals involving confirmed "Zen masters".  Again,
this comes from a misunderstanding of "enlightenment" in Do-gen's
sense.  A Zen master who were to act immorally would not be acting
within an enlightened framework.   A Zen master then is fallible,
and capable of acting immorally if not actualizing enlightenment in
that moment.  However, for Do-gen, any moral judgements about such
an individual could only be made by his/her peers, whose level of
morality/enlightenment could adequately evaluate such actions.   
In fact, Do-gen made many such judgements about his peers in the
Sho-bo-genzo-.  This possibility for immoral actions is Do-gen's reason
for continual practice for life.  This leads us to a discussion of
the "Descending Path" of enlightenment.

     Compassionate action and morality from a base of enlightenment
is sometimes known as the "Descending Path".  Since those with
the strongest realization of enlightenment are empowered to act
morally, it is their job to empower those below them, not just in
the common perception of compassionate action, such as helping the
sick or poor, but in bringing them to increasing levels of
enlightenment by giving good advice and by being a proper example
of moral/enlightened behavior.  This is a significant change from
the traditional role of the Bodhisattva.  The model for the
"Descending Path" is:

           WISDOM -----> MEDITATION -----> PRECEPTS (morality)

     Wisdom, or praj¤a, involves actualizing the first five
paramitas of meditation, charity, patience, diligence and keeping
the precepts.  Rather than keeping the precepts in order to
realize praj¤a, one practices the precepts as an expression of
praj¤a.

     This is in direct opposition to the Theravadan path which
starts with precepts and results in wisdom:

           PRECEPTS (morality) -----> MEDITATION -----> WISDOM

This model is known as the "Ascending Path," or what I like to call
"Trickle Down Ethics."  Similar to "Trickle Down Economics",
trickle down ethical behavior flows from those with the most
enlightenment (those at the top) down to those with the least
enlightenment, less advanced students and non-students.  This is in
sharp contrast to the "Descending Path," in which everyone is
empowered, to some degree, to act morally, ethically and to bring
others to enlightenment.  Mahayana Buddhists reject "Trickle Down
Ethics" almost as much as modern economists reject "Trickle Down
Economics."  The key point is that everyone has something to offer
in the "Descending Path" model.

     This model is important in understanding the enlightenment
process.  The concept that enlightenment can only be realized after
a long purification period, including following the precepts, is
considered a "gradual" approach to enlightenment, and is usually
found in Indian Buddhism.  The Chinese position, which Do-gen
followed, is an "antinomian" position in which enlightenment can
happen suddenly without any purification or moral development.
The word "antimonian" means that one can realize liberation
regardless of moral status.

     The reason for this change of position is probably cultural.
Indian society, with its rigid caste system, had a strong sense of
class immobility.  Chinese society, in contrast, was one in which
anyone could rise to a higher station based entirely on effort.
The idea that you had to wait many years or lifetimes to realize
enlightenment was foreign and distasteful to Chinese sensibilities,
and was readily dropped for the "sudden" approach to practice.
However, it should be noted that both Chinese and Indian Buddhism
consider the actual experiences of enlightenment, or "satori", to
be a very sudden event that occurs in a flash.  The question then
is: what role does morality and precepts play in this model?           
With the Descending Path model, precepts are placed last.  We
should not make the mistake of assuming that actual precepts play
a subservient role in Do-gen's Zen.  In fact, Do-gen held the
precepts as an integral part of proper practice that begins with
the monks first day in the monastery.  According to Hee-Jin Kim, "A
prime characteristic of Do-gen's thought lies in his passionate
search for the translation of moral visions -- hence spiritual
visions -- into the daily activities of monastic life,"

     Kim goes on to describe Do-gen's use of precepts as the
"ritualization of morality" in which every action performed by a
monk is an expression of enlightenment and thus, morality.   
Every action does not mean every ritual performed by a monk, such
as various meditations and dedications -- it includes every single
act a monk is involved in.  If a monk were to tend a garden, he
would tend the garden mindfully, 100% in the moment, that would
make the act of tending the garden a moral and enlightened activity
based on the precepts.  Francis Cook writes: "Even the most
ordinary acts become compassionate when, as expressions of
enlightenment, they inspire and encourage others to seek the Buddha
Way."

     As for the actual precepts themselves, Do-gen believed that
they were essential to Zen:

                If one does not take the precepts and therefore
           guard against defilement, it is unthinkable that one
           could become a Buddha or Patriarch.... All the Buddhas
           and Patriarchs taught that receiving the precepts is the
           first step of the Way.  When we take the precepts we
           guard against doing wrong.  How then can someone who is
           not protected in this way be a disciple of the Buddha or
           a follower of the Patriarchs?

However, unlike the other teachers of his day, Do-gen believed in
using the Bodhisattva precepts only.  He rejected the "sravaka"
precepts, believing them to be inferior and even contradictory to
the Bodhisattva precepts.  In the Shoakumakusa, he writes: "Keeping
the precepts of the sravakas is the same as breaking the precepts
of the Bodhisattva."  Do-gen believed that the Theravadan precepts
were too rigid and inflexible and that a Tharavadan practitioner
was bound by the "letter of the law" rather than by compassion.

     This importance of precepts, known as "kairitsu-isen" in
Japanese, as well as the merging of precepts and meditation,
"zenkai-itchi" were common themes of Kamakura Zen.  Do-gen
differed from the Kamakura style only in his rejection of the
Theravadan precepts, although it is said that Do-gen himself
followed them during his lifetime.

[Triyana2009]

On top of the Bodhisattva precepts, Do-gen's quest for the
"ritualization of morality" led him to create a large collection of
rules called Eihei-Genzenshi-Shingi (Regulations for Monastic Life
by Eihei Do-gen-Zenji), with many ideas taken from Chinese sources
such as the famous two-volume Hyakujo-shingi (The Regulations of
Pai-chang).  This comprehensive set of rules ranged from not
talking about "the presence or absence of others" to "not going
pit-a-pat" with your slippers.   For example:

           When hot water or tea is given to the monks present the
           shuso-priest (head priest) of the monks' hall sits down
           on his seat and the manager of it burns some incense to
           the sacred statue.  While he is burning incense other
           monks must clasp their hands.  At that time the manager
           may burn incense with a kesa on or sometimes folded on
           his left arm, according to the master's directions or the
           traditional way of the temple.

Throughout his writings, Do-gen stressed his rules existed to
cultivate mindfulness.  In mindfulness, Do-gen taught, the precepts
were complete, and through the precepts and rules, one was able to
practice mindfulness.  One was essential for the other, and in
fact, Do-gen identified them as being the same.  However, it still
appears that many of Do-gen's rules were created because of problems
that arose during monastic life, much life the Vinaya rules, and it
is hard not to think that Do-gen's rules were created as a Japanese
version of the Vinaya.

     Through the teachings of Do-gen, modern students can realize
that enlightenment is possible now, rather than at a future date
when one has mastered practice.  Ethically then, since
enlightenment and ethical actions are identical, one can act
correctly from an "enlightened" perspective, early in practice.
This is vastly different from the Theravadan approach, as well as
the concepts of the future transformation of society proposed by
liberation theologists and socialist models.  Christopher Ives,
in his Ph.D thesis Zen Awakening and Society describes the
importance of the unity of enlightenment and ethics:

           From the Zen perspective, only by eliminating entrapment
           in dualism and realizing Awakening can one truly overcome
           the fundamental cause of socio-political problems and
           work compassionately in the ethical and religious arena;
           if one is not grounded in subjectivity that realizes the
           interconnectedness of all things and can see the "other"
           as oneself, one's ethical efforts will ultimately
           fail.

     Do-gen has been a part of the Zen tradition for hundreds of
years, so why is "Engaged Buddhism" such a new thing?  The reason
is that Japanese culture, based on strong cultural "caste-like"
relationships, is not capable of incorporating Do-gen's ethic into
society.  The Chinese created the sudden enlightenment (without
moral development) approach for their own culture, in direct
contradiction to the Indian model, but, ironically, it may have
proved ineffective when it was adopted in Japan.  Robert Bellah
explains this: 

           For centuries nobody knew that Do-gen really blew
           everything sky high, so to speak.  The pattern of
           traditional relationships even within the religious life
           continued to predominate over the radical liberation.
           But I would suggest that this is the Japanese problem,
           and may still be the Japanese problem.... Our problem is:
           how can we reformulate or recreate some kind of viable
           intermediate structures that can put our society together
           again?

     This putting back together of society has already begun in the
West, led by such "Engaged Buddhism" movements as The Buddhist
Peace Fellowship, the International Network of Engaged Buddhists,
The Greyston Family Inn, the Maitri Hospice, and many other smaller
groups and movements that are sprouting up around the country to
re-construct our society with an enlightened perspective.   Many
of the founders and participants of these movements are
practitioners of the Soto Zen school, who often draw directly from
Do-gen's work as inspiration and justification of their actions.
Clearly then, Do-gen's teachings play an important role, not only in
the development of Zen thought, but as an active and living legacy
that Zen Buddhists can practice and aspire to today.


                              Works Cited
     Bellah, Robert N.  "The Meaning of Do-gen Today."  Do-gen
Studies.  Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985.             
     Cook, Francis H.  Sounds of Valley Streams.  Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press, 1989.
     Fox, Douglas A.  "Zen and Ethics: Do-gen's Synthesis"
Philosophy East and West.  January 1971.  pp 33-41.
     Heisig, James W. and Paul Knitter, Trans.  Heinrich Dumoulin.
Zen Buddhism: A History.  2 vols.  New York: Macmillan Publishing
Company, 1990. Vol 2.
     Heisig, James W. and Paul L. Swanson, Trans.  Akizuki Ryomin.
New Mahayana.  Berkeley, Asian Humanities Press, 1990.
     Ives, Christopher.  Zen Awakening and Society.  Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press, 1992.
     Kim, Hee-Jin.  Do-gen Kigen - Mystical Realist.  Tucson, AZ:
The University of Arizona Press, 1975.
     Nishiyama, Kosen and John Stevens.  Trans.  Do-gen Zenji.
Sho-bo-genzo-. 4 vols.  Tokyo: Daihokkaikaku Publishing Company, 1975.
Vol 1.
     Nishiyama, Kosen and John Stevens.  Trans.  Do-gen Zenji.
Sho-bo-genzo-. 4 vols.  Tokyo: Nakayama Shobo, 1977.  Vol 2.
     Nishiyama, Kosen with John Stevens, Steve Powell, Ian Reader
and Susan Wick, Trans.  Do-gen Zenji.  Sho-bo-genzo-.  4 vols.  Tokyo:
Nakayama Shobo, 1983. Vol 3.
     Tanahashi, Kazuaki.  Moon in a Dewdrop.  San Francisco: North
Point Press, 1985.
     Whitehill, James.  "Is There a Zen Ethic?"  The Eastern
Buddhist.  Spring, 1987.  pp. 9-33.
     Yampolsky, Philip B.  The Platform Sutra of the Sixth
Patriarch.  New York: Columbia University Press, 1967.
     Yokoi, Yuho.  Zen Master Do-gen.  New York: Weatherhill, 1987.
     Yokoi, Yuho, Trans.  Regulations for Monastic Life by Eihei
Do-gen -- Eihei-ganzenji-shingi.  (JAPAN: N.d., N.p., -- this
information may be included in this book, but it is probably
written in Japanese).



                            Works Consulted

     Abe, Masao.  A Study of Do-gen.  Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press, 1992.
     Abe, Masao.  "The Oneness of Practice and Attainment:
Implications for the Relation between Means and Ends."  William R.
LaFleur, Ed.  Do-gen Studies.  Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,
1985, pp 99-111.
     Aitken, Robert.  The Mind of Clover: Essays in Zen Buddhist
Ethics.  Berkeley: North Point Press, 1984.
     Alexandrin, Glen.  "Buddhist Economics."  The Eastern
Buddhist.  Autumn, 1988, pp 36-53.
     Bielefeldt, Carl.  "Recarving the Dragon: History and Dogma in
the Study of Do-gen."  William R. LaFleur, Ed.  Do-gen Studies.
Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985, pp 21-53.             
     Cleary, Thomas.  Sho-bo-genzo-, Zen Essays.  Honolulu: University
of Hawaii Press, 1986.
     Cook, Francis H.  "Do-gen's View of Authentic Selfhood and its
Socio-Ethical Implications."  William R. LaFleur, Ed.  Do-gen
Studies.  Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985, 131-149.         
     Cook, Francis H.  How to Raise An Ox.  Los Angeles: Center
Publications, 1978.
     Gokhale, Balkrishna Govind.  "Early Buddhism and the Urban
Revolution."  The Journal of the International Association of
Buddhist Studies. 5.2, 1982, pp 7-22.
     Iino, Norimoto.  "Do-gen's Zen View of Interdependence."
Philosophy East and West.  April, 1962, 51-57.
     Jacobson, Nolan Pliny.  "A Buddhist-Christian Probe of the
Endangered Future."  The Eastern Buddhist.  Spring, 1982, pp 38-55.
     Kapleau, Philip.  Zen: Merging of East and West.  New York:
Doubleday, 1989.
     Kasulis, Thomas P.  "The Incomparable Philosopher: Do-gen on
How to Read the Sho-bo-genzo-."  William R. LaFleur, Ed.  Do-gen
Studies.  Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985, pp 83-98.
     Keiji, Nishitani.  "Emptiness and history (III)."  The Eastern
Buddhist.  Spring, 1980, pp 9-30.
     King, Winston L.  "Buddhist Self-World Theory and Buddhist
Ethics."  The Eastern Buddhist.  Autumn, 1989, pp 14-26.
     Kodera, James Takashi.  Do-gen's Formative Years in China.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980.       
     Takahashi, Masanobu.  The Essence of Do-gen.  London: Kegan
Paul International, 1983.
     Thurman, Robert A.F.  "Guidelines for Buddhist Social Activism
Based on Nagarjuna's Jewel Garland of Royal Counsels."  The Eastern
Buddhist.  Spring, 1983, pp 19-51.