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.
Killing the Buddha
One of the things that I love about Buddhism is the emphasis on personal responsibility, and the urging of practitioners to make up their own mind on issues.
“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”
― Siddhārtha Gautama
I have recently come across a saying about "killing the Buddha".
A teaching ascribed to the Chinese Ch'an master Lin-chi I-hsüan (d. 866). In full, his teaching reads, ‘If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha; if you meet the patriarchs, kill the patriarchs; if you meet an Arhat, kill the Arhat; if you meet your parents, kill your parents… in this way, you attain liberation.’ (Taishō, vol. 47, p. 500b). According to the Ch'an tradition, his intention was to shock students into realizing that they themselves were Buddhas, patriarchs, Arhats, and so on, and that they had no need to depend upon, mistakenly objectify, or inordinately revere figures external to themselves.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/kill-the-buddha#ixzz2AQGDst2Q
When I first heard the phrase "kill the Buddha", I was shocked that anyone would say that... but it came to make more sense to me after a person with zen leanings explained it, and I've used the phrase a few times in other internet discussions. I'm here asking the wise members of this internet Sangha their opinion on this Koan... and to ask if me using this phrase is unskillful. I recently received an e-mail that I was a white Buddhist hippie and slandering the dharma, among other things.
"We are now organizing a MASSIVE CAMPAIGN where every author and scholar who said "Kill the Buddha" may be persecuted for hate crimes".
"WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE LOWEST BUDDHISTS OF ALL AND INCAPABLE OF GRASPING TRUE DHARMA. THIS KILL THE BUDDHA NONSENSE HAS NOT ONE MENTION IN THE SUTRAS - NOT ONE. IT CANNOT BE TRACED TO A SINGLE SUTRA. YET STUPID WHITE RACIST HIPPY BUDDHISTS SAY IT ALL THE TIME...READ THE LOTUS SUTRA & REPENT ASAP"
Is a little shakabuku OK in this situation? I know I should look to myself, but if I'm not speaking truth or if I am slandering the dharma I do want to change my ways.
Gassho
“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”
― Siddhārtha Gautama
I have recently come across a saying about "killing the Buddha".
A teaching ascribed to the Chinese Ch'an master Lin-chi I-hsüan (d. 866). In full, his teaching reads, ‘If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha; if you meet the patriarchs, kill the patriarchs; if you meet an Arhat, kill the Arhat; if you meet your parents, kill your parents… in this way, you attain liberation.’ (Taishō, vol. 47, p. 500b). According to the Ch'an tradition, his intention was to shock students into realizing that they themselves were Buddhas, patriarchs, Arhats, and so on, and that they had no need to depend upon, mistakenly objectify, or inordinately revere figures external to themselves.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/kill-the-buddha#ixzz2AQGDst2Q
When I first heard the phrase "kill the Buddha", I was shocked that anyone would say that... but it came to make more sense to me after a person with zen leanings explained it, and I've used the phrase a few times in other internet discussions. I'm here asking the wise members of this internet Sangha their opinion on this Koan... and to ask if me using this phrase is unskillful. I recently received an e-mail that I was a white Buddhist hippie and slandering the dharma, among other things.
"We are now organizing a MASSIVE CAMPAIGN where every author and scholar who said "Kill the Buddha" may be persecuted for hate crimes".
"WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE LOWEST BUDDHISTS OF ALL AND INCAPABLE OF GRASPING TRUE DHARMA. THIS KILL THE BUDDHA NONSENSE HAS NOT ONE MENTION IN THE SUTRAS - NOT ONE. IT CANNOT BE TRACED TO A SINGLE SUTRA. YET STUPID WHITE RACIST HIPPY BUDDHISTS SAY IT ALL THE TIME...READ THE LOTUS SUTRA & REPENT ASAP"
Is a little shakabuku OK in this situation? I know I should look to myself, but if I'm not speaking truth or if I am slandering the dharma I do want to change my ways.
Gassho
1
Comments
However, a reasoned debate about the mythological stories that underpin all schools of Buddhism is different from the hate filled diatribe you copied. That is an email from a disturbed mind.
I don't agree with the entirety of Zen, but I think it's interesting and important none the less. In Nichiren-Shu my own order, our founder wrote that we should cut the heads off of Zen priests and do horrible things to the followers of Amida Buddha. Why would he say that? I think the reasoning in both these cases has less to do with literal will to do violence, than employing skillful? means. I try to understand where others are coming from, even those that are crazy and disturbed.
I wouldn't worry about those emails... seriously... some people can find offense in anything. I don't think you've done anything wrong but I am confused about where you wrote this to receive such emails. Are these just people on another message board?
If by shakubuku, you mean, explaining the actual meaning behind the phrase and why it can be relevant to all Buddhists... then I don't see anything wrong with that.
Ejou, your name seems familiar. Did you used to post on the Nichiren boards at E-Sangha? Maybe I'm just crazy... lol... at any rate, welcome.
It has some spirit; some aliveness.
If the poster could see the irony in his own words I would bow to him.
Those with this point of view can get pretty nasty when the Zennies -- or even just their sayings -- roll into town.
As to using or parroting sayings or encouragements whose experience has not yet sunk in, well, I think most students have done that at one time or another. No harm, no foul ... unless of course you find yourself in unreceptive company or insist that Buddhism consists of nothing more than parroting the sayings of others.
As to the "kill the Buddha" encouragement, I hardly think it could be called a koan. Rinzai was a pretty tough customer, but like any other decent teacher, he merely spoke the truth ... and let others catch up with him. "Kill the Buddha" is no different from saying "cut the crap -- duality is a myth." I don't know any Buddhist who does not agree with this experiential point of view, though often they aren't quite as straightforward about it.
Zen sayings of this sort are not mere theological arguments that clean-scrubbed students argue about over tea or on Internet bulletin boards. They aren't some written-in-stone commandments that everyone must agree with if they don't want to go to hell or get burned at the stake. They are simply encouragements that individuals either choose or refuse to find out about. Everybody picks his or her Dharma door and then, with luck, actually walks through it. I like "kill the Buddha" but I can see where others might not, just as others may love anchovies and I find them ick-ick-ick.
All in all, it's not something anyone needs to get his knickers in a twist about.
In some places of training where folks practise seemed very compartmentalized, it was given lip service but it never really seemed to touch anyone's sacred cows.
And all this talks about the koan, but to penetrate it, you must meet your own Buddha on the mat and kill it.
I think Zen's shock & awe is actually owned by disciple collecters and who ever has the latest Zen book to sell. It's pretty uncommon in any circles I travelled in..
The only thing alive seems to be mind followers.
Q: Why did the Buddha cross the road?
A: To be killed
I think that buddha, perfect wisdom, unexcelled enlightenment, the Law, these things cannot die.. if you kill something on the path to enlightenment, then it was only an illusion.
I have read a lot of the Lin-Chi Lu, I think that he was a master, in a sublime state, his words, a profound manifestation of silence.
SO, personally I wouldnt put much stock in that email... im sure that most people here will agree. I think this little e-sangha is great, because people here are not extremists, they are mostly still just genuine seekers, from all walks of life, and if you say something that they do not agree with, almost always they will discuss it with you, instead of attacking wildly. Maybe the name of this site should be true buddhist instead of new buddhist
I actually first hear this while watching an interview with the director of the Assassination of Jesse James. I made the mistake of assuming it was OK and common because I hear a director use the phrase. I can't find the post that this girl was talking about... but I brought it up because I was confused by it and thought that it was stupid.There's a really nice zennie at Y!A and he explained it. Later I used it as an example in a comparison post about Christianity... something along the lines of you wouldn't be able to say the same thing about Jesus and have it (Christianity) make sense.
Zen is so popular here in the states, I had no idea that some find it to be heretical. I used to be that person you called to scream at when the cable wasn't working, so I can take a lot. I was more worried that I was out of line to use the statement at all and/or she was correct in saying that it had no basis in Buddhist doctrine. I'll be more careful about bringing it up again in the future.
Not exactly, that is a common misinterpretation of the kalama sutta. No where does it actually say to go by your own reasoning. It actually says to be wary of going by your own reasoning, because the reasoning of a deluded mind is prone to be specious, via conjecture, via inference, via probability, via axiom, etc. So it says also not to go by any of these things too.
As for the OP, the quote is more than just "kill the Buddha". The first part is very important IMO. You have to meet him first before you kill him. Hence "If you meet the Buddha, Kill the Buddha". To kill him before you actually meet him, is not that appropriate! Before you kill the patriarchs, you must first meet them, etc, etc.
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
I can see the subtle difference here between my interpretation and the one that you are suggesting. It makes sense that we can not trust our own minds 100%, but our own reasoning surely still has a solid place in the practice? I have never thought of this as a "do what you will" card. That seems to be traipsing off into satanist territory with the self as the center of everything. I have also used this quote to compare Buddhism with Christianity on the difference that is accorded to trust in yourself.
Ｐｒｏｖｅｒｂｓ 3:5-7
5 Lean on, trust in, and be confident in the Lord with all your heart and mind and do not rely on your own insight or understanding.
6 In all your ways know, recognize, and acknowledge Him, and He will direct and make straight and plain your paths.
7 Be not wise in your own eyes; reverently fear and worship the Lord and turn [entirely] away from evil.
The Buddha's true body is spiritual as is the Bodhisattva's body. A worldling (prithagjana) can't see it let alone kill it. If you envision a Buddha, yes, by all means kill that mental image. That's not the real Buddha.
The context of the KS is almost always forgotten.
Unusually he not addressing his own followers. He is addressing followers of another teacher and telling them not to believe things because they are received knowledge in that tradition etc.