Dōgen’s efforts unfolded in a landscape dominated by powerful Buddhist institutions, especially Tendai and Shingon, which were deeply enmeshed with political and aristocratic interests. His emphasis on “just sitting” (shikantaza), rigorous monastic discipline, and universal Buddha-nature stood in sharp contrast to ritual-centered, merit-oriented, and esoteric practices that had long held sway. This divergence generated resistance and suspicion, as his approach implicitly questioned the religious authority and established methods of these older schools. Competition with other emerging movements, including Rinzai-oriented Zen that enjoyed court and warrior patronage, further complicated his position and limited his access to influential supporters.

The social and political climate also posed significant obstacles. Established authorities were wary of new religious currents, and Zen itself, with its Chinese origins and distinctive style, could be perceived as foreign and potentially destabilizing. Dōgen’s refusal to align himself closely with courtly culture or powerful factions, together with his rejection of worldliness, curtailed the appeal of his teaching among elites who favored more elaborate ritual and esoteric forms. His attempts to found and maintain a stable community near Kyoto were undermined by political pressures and rival clerics, eventually driving him to accept samurai patronage in a remote province far from the cultural centers.

This geographical marginalization had a double edge. On one hand, founding Eiheiji in an isolated mountain region allowed the creation of a community more fully devoted to strict practice, relatively shielded from the entanglements of capital and court. On the other, the distance from major urban and political hubs made it more difficult for his teaching to shape mainstream religious life. The need to build institutional structures from the ground up in such a setting demanded considerable effort, while also limiting the number and diversity of those who could readily encounter his form of Zen.

A further challenge lay in the very nature of his teaching and its transmission. Dōgen’s writings, such as the Shōbōgenzō, are philosophically dense and linguistically complex, demanding a high level of commitment and subtle understanding even from trained monks. His insistence on continuous zazen, strict discipline, and the unity of practice and realization made the path demanding and less accessible to casual practitioners. Within the community, maintaining a unified vision and training capable successors who could preserve the integrity of his lineage proved difficult, and after his death, struggles over succession and interpretation complicated the continuity and wider spread of his original intent.