Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Vietnamese vs Japanese vs Korean Zen
Takuan
Veteran
What exactly is the difference between the three? I've always thought that Zen was Zen, but lately I've been wondering if there are subtle differences.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
This is a good question, we don't get very many about zen. Looking forward to reading the answers.
I don't know the answer to your question. But I am looking forward to when someone in the know can answer.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Vietnam
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen (Includes description of "The Five Houses of Zen" , in the 5 countries where Zen in practiced)
You see, there is no separation of church and state in the Eastern cultures. Even in nations that are not officially Buddhist, the secular government can and does issue laws telling the temples how they will operate. In many cases, the governments also provide the land and funding for the temples, so it's not like the temples can ignore the interference.
An example. In Japan, the government decided in 1872 that all monks of every religion there are allowed to be married and raise families. It seems to have something to do with wanting the monks to support themselves. So eventually there were many married monks in Japan but the temples continued.
However, in Korea, Seon (Zen) temples, celebacy remained the rule and the general attitude was anti-Japanese anyway from past military conflicts. Enter WWII and the Japanese habit of invading Korea every century or so. The occupying Japanese government issued a law that now all Korean monks were allowed to marry. Some did, most did not. Eventually many monks had wives and children and tended their little shrines and temples and adjusted. When the Japanese left, the new Korean government ordered all married monks expelled from the temples and little houses where they maintained mountain shrines. Since that was their home and they and their families had no place else to go, it caused a revolt and huge power struggle between the traditionalist, some would say nationalist monks and the married ones and their followers. Monks fought each other, or hired thugs to drive the married monks from their homes. Eventually, the government stepped in and allowed the married monks to establish their own schools of Zen with their own temples. Thus Korea now has the more traditional Jogye with ordained celebate temple monks and the Taego Zen order that is built around a lay order of teaching monks similar to Christian denominations.
Fun fact. The lay population were disgusted with this civil war between monks, and Christian missionaries moved in and established some of the biggest, most popular churches in the East, with lots of help from a government what was now influenced by the religious right out of the United States during that whole Korean war thing. Korea became a majority Christian nation.
Now there are also Zen schools in the West, part of a missionary effort by the various temples over there. The Kwan Um Zen school, while founded by Jogye, has actually reintroduced the concept of the married monk and temples centered around a lay population instead of isolated monks. Taego has also established branches in the West, as has the Japanese schools, of course.
So...complicated.
Also, Seon has a lot of prostrating. I think for laypeople, 108/day is recommended.
They leave it to the monks to do the heavy meditating and koan work.
I think, Buddha teaching is above all the dominations and allows you the freedom to search for what is comfortable to you.
Belonging to a certain school deprives you of this freedom.
To fit – OK.
But is this not making us a bit narrow-minded?
In practice it makes sense..
Gassho
Abu
the limited is not that different to the limitless either..
I know that those are just words but how those opposite statements can come to the same meaning?
A phrase I used to like, "In practice (through practice) all contradictions can be resolved"
_/\_
I have tried both Japanese and Korean. I can certainly say that there is a difference. Meditation and dharma talks are the same, BUT Korean style is to make students interact with the master on a constant basis by doing koans interviews. Korean style is to work with koans as a basic teaching tool during interviews/ meetings with the master. Koreans are less attached to the rules--they are disciplined but do not obsess with rules. Japanese are very nice but quite strict. I do prefer Korean style. It is just a matter of what suits you.
There are many paths to the mtn top. We have a saying in Kung Fu, the Style does not make the man, the Man makes the style.
There is a branch of Japanese Zen that uses the Shakuhachi ( flute) instead of chanting, Chinese Chan does not hit you with a stick, nor face a wall. A Japanese Zen master ( Rinzai) I know and sit with sometimes, says he does not "sit" daily, and does not teach with Koans. " Different strokes for different folks"
One thing for me, as a Chan Stylist and "monk" I prefer the Chinese path of Zen, with it's strong ties to Taoism, Japanese Zen lacks that.
(Moderator note: Sequential posts combined.)
Thank you for your contributions, @Brownbuddha .
Please be sure to read the announcements in the different categories, before posting.
Many thanks.