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.
Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo and Zen
NamelessRiver
Veteran
Hello again people.
As far as Theravada go you have the Tripitaka as a guidance and the basis of the whole thing. I was wondering in the case of Zen what would be the importance of studying the Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo (which is apparently the version of the Canon used in Japan).
Sometimes the Zen approach, as I find in the books I have read so far about the subject, tend to drop the sutras and go straight into Zazen or delve into koan-like paradoxes (oh that makes me soooo mad
). That got me wondering what is the function of this classic compilation of texts in such a tradition.
I tried to look into the matter reading some parts of the Shobogenzo and after some research:
The guy that comments it says:
So that would mean that Zen doesn't have place for only paradoxes. The paradoxes relate directly into the pratice, but the theoric roots of Zen would be more direct, albeit not the main focus of this school.
I) Is this how Zen Buddhism is structured? Did I finally get it? x-D
II) Why did the focus change from the word of Buddha (sutras) to direct transmission when Buddhism went to China? Is there a sort of "root Mahayana text" on this?
III) If the words of a Buddha are of less relevance, why does Zen place so much focus on a teacher, considering even if he was a Buddha his speech wouldn't matter much?
As far as Theravada go you have the Tripitaka as a guidance and the basis of the whole thing. I was wondering in the case of Zen what would be the importance of studying the Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo (which is apparently the version of the Canon used in Japan).
Sometimes the Zen approach, as I find in the books I have read so far about the subject, tend to drop the sutras and go straight into Zazen or delve into koan-like paradoxes (oh that makes me soooo mad
). That got me wondering what is the function of this classic compilation of texts in such a tradition.I tried to look into the matter reading some parts of the Shobogenzo and after some research:
Gensha Shibi was once asked by a monk, “Granting that the
Three Vehicles and the twelve divisions of the Scriptural Teachings
are not essential, just what was the intent behind our Ancestral Master
Bodhidharma’s coming from the West?”
Master Shibi replied, “The Three Vehicles and the twelve
divisions of the Scriptural Teachings not being absolutely essential.”
The guy that comments it says:
The term ‘not absolutely essential’ refers to the middle way between asserting, on the one hand, that it is absolutely impossible for someone to realize the Truth without formally studying the Scriptures, and, on the other hand, asserting that because someone can realize the Truth independent of Scriptural study, the Scriptures are totally worthless and can be safely ignored by trainees.
So that would mean that Zen doesn't have place for only paradoxes. The paradoxes relate directly into the pratice, but the theoric roots of Zen would be more direct, albeit not the main focus of this school.
I) Is this how Zen Buddhism is structured? Did I finally get it? x-D
II) Why did the focus change from the word of Buddha (sutras) to direct transmission when Buddhism went to China? Is there a sort of "root Mahayana text" on this?
III) If the words of a Buddha are of less relevance, why does Zen place so much focus on a teacher, considering even if he was a Buddha his speech wouldn't matter much?
0
Comments
The Taisho is a complete, scholarly edition of the Chinese canon, published in Japan. It is written in Chinese, and a part has been translated into English in the past ten years. It has the same position in Chinese Buddhism studies that the Pali Text Society's editions have in Pali studies. However, most of the sutras are available in other editions, and since most Asian monasteries existed long before the Taisho was published, I would guess that their libraries probably contain other, earlier editions of the sutras. The entire Taisho (100 volumes) is pretty friggin expensive.
The Taisho canon includes the Chinese Agamas, which are early, pre-Mahayana sutras translated from Sanskrit to Chinese. The Agamas are roughly equivalent to the Pali Nikayas, with broad similarities, but are not the same in all details. When Mahayana Buddhists refer to Hinayana teaching, they are usually refering to the teachings found in the Agamas, not the Nikayas. We western Mahayanists tend to use the Nikayas because we can get English translations, but most Asian Mahayana monks use the Agamas. (The Tibetan kanjur includes a Tibetan translation of the Sarvastavada Agamas, if I recall correctly.)
The Taisho also includes later Mahayana sutras. It is the entire Chinese canon, not just the Agamas.
Sorry for going into so much detail, but I wanted to make sure that we're referring to the same thing when the Taisho is mentioned. And since I'm defining terms...
Zen has two meanings (aside from its original meaning of "meditation"). First, it's the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese word "Chan", and refers to a group of Japanese schools and lineages that trace their origins back to the Chan Buddhism practiced in Song era China. Secondly, it is used in English to refer to all the schools and lineages that trace their origins to Song era Chan. This includes modern Chinese Chan, Korean Son, and Japanese Zen, along with other similar schools in countries neighboring China. Since you refer to the Taisho, which consists mostly of Chinese texts, I'm going to assume that you mean Zen in the second meaning, covering all the various national schools and sub-schools.
In general, Mahayana monks begin their studies with the Agamas, and later move to Mahayana sutras. However, that's not universally true, and you can probably find cases where monks learn the Agama teachings in a less methodical way. However, all Zen monks use the Vinaya found in the Taisho, so they have to be familiar with that. In the case of Japan, modern Japanese Zen monks live under somewhat relaxed rules, so I'm not sure how much they study the Vinaya.
In any monastery, you will probably find monks who are quite scholarly and are very familiar with the Taisho, or with other editions of the sutras. Other monks will be more interested in meditation than sutras, and yet other monks will just want to go through the motions of daily life.
This capping verse comes from another commentary. By paradoxes, I assume you mean gongan (Jap. koan). Usually, gongan involve conversations between two or three people, and everyone understands what is being said. In other words, there's no paradox. Sometimes one person doesn't understand, but the point of the gongan is that there is something that they should have understood. So again, it's not a paradox.
As far as practice, gongan aren't puzzles to be solved. They are exercises to be lived. Why doesn't a dog have Buddha-nature? No teacher will accept an intellectual answer. One teacher said that the response he was looking for was inexpressible joy.
As far as theoretical roots, the Lankavara, Diamond, Flower Garland, Lotus, and Nirvana Sutras are all important. But no one is going to receive the transmission from their teacher just by studying these sutras.
It's really hard to answer without specifying a specific school in a specific country. Generally, Zen emphasizes meditation and direct transmission from teacher to student. Sutras provide a doctrinal basis, but are not the main part of training. However, I believe that most monks in Zen monasteries recite the Heart Sutra daily. So that's an important practice.
Buddhism had existed in China for several centuries before Bodhidharma came east and started what eventually became Chan. Other forms of Buddhism had existed before Chan and continued to exist alongside Chan.
There is no single sutra that is the source of the slogan "direct transmission outside of scriptures". But all of the sutras agree that enlightenment can't be expressed in words. In a sense, Zen is a response to this impossibility. It's an attempt to provide students with the experiences that will lead to enlightenment.
Zen is "direct transmission outside of scripture". The transmission is directly from teacher to student. All Zen teachers claim to be part of an unbroken chain of teacher-to-student direct transmission that goes back to Mahakasyapa, a disciple of the Buddha.
Since I'm assuming that you are asking about Zen in the most general sense, I'm making generalizations that ignore differences between schools and countries. Also, I'm not as familiar with Korean Son, and even less familiar with Vietnamese Thien. I'm sure that there are exceptions to most of the things that I've said.
Yes I was speaking in a general sense, I don't know much about its divisions, although I might look into it.