Although eulogised more or less the world over today – Master Xu Yun attracted his fair share of criticism. Although completely indifferent to worldly affairs he was accused of being a ‘rightest’ and a ‘leftist’ at different times in his existence. Those jealous of his spiritual power (and seniority) within the Chinese Buddhist System – accused Master Xu Yun of breaking the very Vinaya Discipline he fervently enforced upon his disciples. Quite often this involved the rules surrounding sexual self-control and celibacy – with Master Xu Yun accused of participating in relations with male acolytes. Of course, there was never any material evidence to substantiate these rumours. At one time a young woman took her clothes-off in front of a meditating Master Xu Yun on a boat packed with witnesses – and he never reacted. It is speculated that this woman was paid to do this in an attempt to secure material evidence regarding Master Xu Yun breaking the Vinaya Discipline. Part of the reason inspiring these baseless attacks involved the Imperial Japanese presence in China between 1931-1945 – which saw an attempt at manipulating the Chinese Sangha into adopting the Japanese Zen practice of NOT following the Vinaya Discipline and allowing Buddhist ‘monks’ to be married, eat meat and drink alcohol. There were some collaborative elements within a rapidly modernising Chinese culture that viewed Master Xu Yun’s attitude as being old fashioned and behind the times. Master Xu Yun, despite this pressure from without and within Chinese culture, nevertheless, refused to buckle and instead reacted with an ever-greater vigour in calling for the upholding of the Vinaya Discipline! When told what others were negatively saying about him, Master Xu Yun would laugh and brush the insult aside. What others said was viewed by Master Xu Yun as being a product of greed, hatred, and delusion – and the very ignorance that following of the Vinaya Discipline sought to uproot and dissolve into the three-dimensional emptiness of the empty mind-ground. Just as following the Vinaya Discipline represented the pure ‘host’ position – the impure ‘guest’ position represented the dirtiness of the ordinary, mundane world and its machinations. Why follow the latter when the former offered safety, sanctuary, and a relief from human suffering? Pretending to be a ‘monk’ when immersed in the filth of the ‘guest’ position of lay-existence is NOT correctly following the Buddha-Dharma as taught by Master Xu Yun. Master Xu Yun shuffled-off his mortal coil 64-years ago (in 1959) – on October 13th (when the Chinese Lunar Callender is converted into the Western Solar equivalent). He was in his 120th-year and had lived nearly two of the 60-years cycles that define the Chinese Zodiac. Although born in the Year of the Rat – and obviously a survivor – Master Xu Yun had no patience for superstition. Indeed, his biography is strewn with accidents, injuries, and the occasional monastic disciplining (involving corporal punishment). None of this bothered him psychologically (as he was ‘detached’ from his feelings) – even if the experience damaged him physically. The question is - how many Buddhist practitioners today are prepared to be like this?
0 Comments
The Ch’an method involves a number of techniques that ‘return’ the sense-data (received by the sense-organs regarding the material world) - ‘back’ to the empty essence of the mind ground. This is the realisation of the essence of both ‘perception’ and ‘non-perception’ and the transcendence of this base-duality that lies between these two extremes. Therefore, the multitudinous variation of reality is ‘penetrated’ through by a ‘piercing’ insight that never waivers, retreats or diminishes, and which ‘confirms’ and does not ‘negate’ the diversity which defines existence and drives the evolutionary process. Once the empty mind ground is realised – the once ‘inverted’ mind is turned the right way around (see the Lankavatara Sutra) and all exists as an expression of the Buddha-Nature! Whilst individuals are on the path toward enlightenment, the Vinaya Discipline explains, describes and establishes how a Buddhist must behave internally and externally. ALL beings are subject to the Vinaya Discipline regardless of their station in life. It makes no difference whether a practitioner is a monk or a lay-person. What we are talking about is the ‘degree’ to which the Vinaya Discipline is followed and adhered to. Generally speaking, a lay-person follows fewer of the rules whilst the monastics has to follow ALL the rules without exception. The mind and body purity of the monastic is the essence from which the strength of the entire Buddhist community flows! Corrupt monastics who do not follow the Vinaya Discipline (and become diverted into modes of behaviour that involve manifestations of greed, hatred and delusion), jeopardise the entire spiritual, psychological and physical health of the Buddhist community – which includes all human-beings (Buddhist or non-Buddhist), and all living creatures including insects, fish and other animals! The Buddhist community is strengthened if a lay-person follows a part of the Vinaya Discipline with vigour and determination, but this spiritual power is enhanced many thousands of times if the lay-person – without any of the advantages available to the monastic - ‘volunteers’ to follow the Vinaya Discipline entirely and submit to all its rules! The Vinaya Discipline receives its power from the enlightened mind of the Buddha himself - who advised how his committed disciples should ‘discipline’ (that is ‘limit’) the manner in which their minds and bodies function! Therefore, even before full enlightenment is reached, a true practitioner of Ch’an can behave in an ‘enlightened’ manner that brings a great and positive karmic strength not only to their own mind and body, but also toward the environment (and community) within which they live! Finally, the ‘Mind Precept’ is the acknowledgement that each of these hundreds of Vinaya rules emerge from the empty mind ground – and must return to it! The highest method for adhering to the Vinaya Discipline is not the enforced following of difficult to apply modes of behaviour modification (although the lesser stages may involve this), but it is rather to sit physically ‘still’, whilst the mind is ‘stilled’ of all thought (so that there is no longer any thoughts left to ‘return’) - and each ‘in’ and ‘out’ breath is directly understood to be nothing but a perfect manifestation of the empty mind ground functioning without hindrance in the physical world!
December 06, 2007 09:30 China’s Five Thousand Years of Culture Network - Editor: Xue Fei (薛斐)
The main contribution of (Western) Analytical Philosophy in the history of human thinking is: it believes that many problems that bother people are actually not problems at all, they are just "false problems." Some questions have not been answered satisfactorily for a long time, not because people have limited abilities, but because the way of asking questions is inherently problematic. Once you follow the train of thought of asking questions in this way, you will sooner or later lead people into a dilemma of infinite ‘no answer’. Therefore, analytical philosophy strives to drive all false questions out of the scope of human thinking, so that people can obtain peace of mind by simply ‘not thinking’ about certain topics. Similarly, Chinese Ch’an also states that there are many false problems, but its technique of dealing with these problems is different to that of analytical philosophy. Chinese Ch’an teaches that only by restoring the ‘genuine’ or ‘underlying’ questioner (or ‘perceiving the empty mind ground from which ALL questions arise’) can the problems these questions represent be avoided in the genuine sense. Therefore, just as the Western academic scholars might ‘give voice’ to these false questions - the Chinese Ch’an Master refuses to give a positive answer, but crucially, (and often a point not acknowledged in the West) the Ch’an Master does not give a negative answer. However, it should be pointed out that the distinction between true and false questions within analytical philosophy is also inherently problematic: if the boundary is meaningless (and lacks ‘substance’), then the true question, regardless of its scope, cannot be properly ‘fixed’, ‘located’ or even ‘asked’; on the other-hand, if the question is too meaningful - and possesses definite ‘boundaries’ of import, then it cannot represent the problem of inherent ‘falsity’ as it has ‘concretised’ into something ‘real’ and ‘limited’ in time and space. The recent developments in Western thinking are repeatedly attempting to explain this dialectical problem and double-bind, but in so doing, tend to favour the ‘negation’ of the question. This has led some Western scholars to mistakenly assume that they are implementing a ‘Chinese Ch’an solution’, but this is not the case. As far as Ch’an is concerned, all questions are unnecessary movements of the surface mind, nothing but habitual contrivances that manifest as ‘false questions’ mistakenly interpreted as being both ‘valid’ and structurally ‘three-dimensional’ in the material world! The tetrelemma of Nagarjuna explains the Ch’an position – 1) everything ‘is’, 2) Everything ‘is not’, 3) Everything both ‘is’ and ‘is not’ and 4) everything is neither ‘is’ and ‘is not’ - so what's the problem? Only the intrinsic realisation of the ‘self-nature’ (as the ‘empty mind ground’) denotes a "person who is not deceived by others", and ‘who understands the law perpetually at peace’. Once enlightened, the problems of defilement, true delusion, life and death - and many other conflicts - although not resolved in the conventional sense, have been completely eliminated in the delusional sense. In other words, all (deluded) questions disappear before they ‘arise’ - as the habitual (inner) conditions that formulate a ‘dualistic’ and ‘suffering-inducing’ question in the mind - have been perpetually ‘removed’. In contrast, the development of analytic philosophy is very incomplete. It merely attempts to persuades people not to pay attention to the various problems relating to ‘value’ and ‘freedom’ that are incapable of being subjected to ‘reason’, leading to these metaphysical issues still plaguing everyone who lives a serious life. Ch’an Buddhism is different. Its resolution of problems brings people a real "usefulness", which is the tranquillity and clarity of the whole (united) inner and outer being. The Ch’an method permeates the depths of people's hearts and breaks the source of delusion in one fell swoop. How can the complexity and difficulty the Ch’an method employs be conceived and inferred through the narrow experiences and thinking associated with everyday existence? In summary, what this article is trying to illustrate is just this: Ch’an Buddhism is a part of the entire Buddhist system, no matter how much Ch’an surpasses the Buddha and the ancestors. If you want to keep your understanding of Ch’an from deviating, you should also find a basis within the sutras and understand it from the entire Buddhist philosophical background. At present, there are no other thought systems that can properly interpret Ch’an. If you abandon the scriptures, rely on your own brains, and adhere to Ch’an with some kind of thinking that suits your taste, even if you don’t enter the cave of deluded ghosts, you will eventually fall into a ‘dead void’. These are the products of a lack of genuine knowledge with regard to Ch’an self-cultivation. The ‘Perfect Enlightenment’ Sutra (圆觉经 - Yuan Jue Jing) says ‘The Tathagata-Realm is infinite and an individual mind (and heart) cannot fathom its vastness through an egotistical self-effort – which is like a firefly trying to impossibly burn the infinite dimensions of Mount Sumeru!’ The Western mind needs to breakout of its own self-contained isolation and comprehend the limitations that this cultural programming entails. https://fo.ifeng.com/guandian/200712/1206_17_47728_1.shtml 禅宗西行——禅VS现代西方思潮 2007年12月06日 09:30中华五千年网 分析哲学在人类思想史上的主要贡献为:它认为许多困扰人的问题实际上根本不成其问题,它们只不过是些“假问题”。有些问题许久以来得不到满意的回答,不是因为人能力有限,而是提问的方式本身就有问题,一旦顺提问的思路走下去,迟早会将人引入两难的困境。因此,分析哲学力图将所有假问题赶出人类思考的范围,使人获得心灵的宁静。 与之相似,禅宗也认为存在许多虚假的问题,它处理这些问题的方法也是治疗的方法,认为只有使发问者恢复健全,才能避免这些问题的困扰。所以一旦参学者提出这些假问题,禅师不是给予正面回答,但也不给予否定,而直接一棒一喝,截断学人的攀缘妄想了事。 但应该指出的是,分析哲学对真问题、假问题的划分本身就很成问题:如果这个界限是无意义的,那么就不能对真问题的范围加以限定;如果这个问题是有意义的,它便不能陈述假问题。西方思想近来的发展也一再说明了这一划界的错误,但指出任何真问题都不可能存在的,却只有禅宗。 就禅宗的究极来说,但凡问题都是假问题。诸法实相离四句、绝百非、一尘不染,哪有什么问题呢?只有内证自性,便是“不受人惑的人”,明了法本如如、迷人自扰。一旦开悟,染净问题、真妄问题、生死问题……等诸多对立,虽然没解决,但却已被彻底消解掉了。也就是说,一切问题在被回答之前就消失了。 与此相比,分析哲学的消解便是很不彻底的。它只是在理智中劝说人们不要关注理智无能为力的价值问题、自由问题,但这些形而上问题仍困扰着每一个认真生活的人。禅宗却不同,它对问题的消解带给人以真实的“受用”,是整个心灵的宁静与澄明。它潜入到人内心的深处,一举打破妄念的源头,其中的复杂与艰难岂是靠狭隘经验与思量所能设想和推断的。 综上絮絮所言,本文试图说明的,不过是这样一点:禅宗再超佛越祖,它也是整个佛法大系的一部分。如要使对禅的理解不至于发生偏差,还应从经藏中找依据,从整个佛学背景来理解。在当前,还没有什么其余的思想可以恰当地诠释禅宗,如果舍弃经论,靠自家脑筋计度,以某种合自己口味的思想来附会禅宗,即便不入鬼窟,也终会两眼茫茫、不知所以。正如《圆觉经》所说:“以思维心测度如来境界,如萤火烧须弥山,终不能着。”以上对西方思潮的评判,只是两个浅近的例子而已。 Given that the prevailing subjective and objective conditions have not proven favourable for this otherwise interesting, groundbreaking and self-empowering opportunity, the International Ch'an Buddhist Institute (ICBI) is a) rescinding and abolishing the project of the 'Open Transmission' of the associated Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) lineage - effective immediately, b) Cancelling any subsequent lineage transmissions - either 'implied' or 'conformed' - through the use of this initiative, and c) clarify that the ICBI does not recognise, endorse or support any subsequent, assumed or further transmissions made by current ICBI Members using this agency to other (unknown) individuals outside the ICBI. Lineage transmission is a grave and serious undertaking and although much emphasis is placed in the West upon 'effort', 'determination' and 'respect' - this appears not to yet apply to matters of a non-material or non-acquisitioned nature. In this matter of realising the empty mind ground there will be no supporting of any type of greed, hatred or delusion. The 'Great Doubting mind' will be re-emphasised time and time again to keep the genuine Chinese Ch'an Lineage of Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) both 'pure' and free from 'corruption'. if you experience 'agitation' in your mind at this announcement - 'good' as you will not pass through this 'Gate' a second time in this lifetime whilst I guard it. Set your mind on realising genuine Enlightenment and all barriers will instantly melt away!
Although certain modern trends within Asian Buddhism appears to suggest that a Buddhist monastic follows a path that is ‘superior’ to that of the dedicated ‘lay’ Buddhist practitioner – a close and careful reading of the Pali Suttas (and their Sanskrit counter-parts) reveals a very different picture. Yes – obviously a Buddhist monastic leads an infinitely more ‘virtuous’ life than a lay-person who does not follow the Dharma and lives just for sensory stimulation and superficial emotional gratification. This the argument that the ‘morality’ of the monastic is more worthwhile than the ‘hedonism’ of the lay-person. Of course, people are free to reject this analysis and conclusion. The two alternative views are that the ‘hedonist’ is ‘equal’ or at least ‘superior’ to the ‘Monastic’ - but these different interpretations tenable? There is something ‘instinctive’ about the ‘hedonist’ - as if they have not yet evolved the ‘wisdom’ to a) ‘manage’, and b) ‘elevate’ the data received from their sensory-organs to a higher plane of existence! A ‘hedonist’ is someone who lives in the world of greed, hatred and delusion and see no problem with this natural arrangement. As this is the situation that the Buddha states generates all of humanity’s suffering – he rejects it out of hand. This is the world of the cess-pit of dirty sensationalism that the Buddhist monastic leaves behind and it is in this sense that the lifestyle of the Buddhist monastic is said to be morally and virtuously ‘superior’ to that of the uncontrolled, undisciplined, lazy and selfish ‘hedonist’. Although the human-beings within both categories make use of ‘sensory’ stimulus, the ‘hedonist’ is entrapped by what he or she ‘feels’ and cannot ‘breakout’ of the cycle of pointless repetition – whereas the ‘monastic’ takes exactly the same ‘sensory’ stimulus and uses this data to ‘uproot’ greed, hatred and delusion, and ‘break’ free of the cycle of pointless ‘sensory’ stimulation! This is why it is untenable to suggest that within this context, the ‘hedonist’ (as a lay-person) is the ‘equal’ or ‘superior’ to the Buddhist monastic! From this point of view, it is obvious that the ‘hedonist’ lives an ‘inferior’ lifestyle to that of the Buddhist monastic. Things are not so clear-cut when devout individuals follow the Dharma with determination and yet still live within the world of everyday concerns. This type of lay-person is very different to the ‘hedonist’ as they apply to their lives the very same Dharma that the Buddhist monastics make use of, with many such lay-people even choosing to voluntarily abide by the Vinaya Discipline to the best of their ability within the circumstances they live within. When Buddhist monastics give Dharma-Talks in China to audiences of robe-clad lay-people, he or she usually takes a humble position as within their ‘cloistered’ life, it far easier to apply the Dharma and to discipline their minds and bodies with the minimum of distractions or cares. For the devout lay-person, however, their life is full of distractions and cares that have nothing to do with the Dharma and often get in the way of its practice! Despite this, these dedicated lay-people persevere with the disciplining of their minds and bodies and apply the Ch’an method within all circumstance, good, bad and indifferent. Despite these hindrances inherent within everyday life, both male and female lay-practitioners of the Dharma realise full and complete enlightenment! This is even mentioned in the Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist texts, and was a well-known occurrence during the Buddha’s lifetime. Although the worldly use of the senses creates obscuring barriers between the surface mind and the empty mind ground – the lay-person applies the gong-an, hua tou or chanting practice too such a high degree of commitment that the surface mind of obstruction (klesa) is smashed to pieces forever! This suggests that the sheer practice of the committed lay-person became so full of inner potential that it drilled-through the klesic obscuration and achieved full and total comprehension of the empty mind ground! In the Pali Suttas the Buddha clearly states that when the enlightened mind is realised – there is no difference between a lay-person and a monastic. Although both may occupy very different stations in life that demand certain rules of interaction and polite communication, the essences of each individual’s understanding remain exactly the same! Both the ‘monastic’ and the ‘lay’ person are looking at and integrating with exactly the same empty mind ground so that the only differences in their lives is the social status each occupies. Vimalakirti was a very wealthy Indian who possessed a number of wives and countless children, and yet he ‘saw through’ the obscuring veil if the world and perceived the empty mind ground. Hui Neng – the Sixth Patriotic of Ch’an - was a lay-person when he inherited the Dharma (only ordaining at a later date). The Chinese Ch’an Records record a number of examples of how ordinary men, women and even children achieved full and total enlightenment! As Buddhist monasticism is premised upon humility – many such practitioners believe that the ‘lay’ path to enlightenment is by far the much harder path to take (as everything about it serves to turn away from, and obscure the empty mind ground). This is why many Chinese Buddhist monastics today, habitually place themselves ‘below’ the status of the laity. It may be that such humility contains the inherent power to encourage the ‘hedonist’ to change their lives for the better and follow the Dharma, whilst supporting, empower and ‘lifting-up’ those lay people who are already making good progress in their self-cultivation!
“A man like this will not go where he has no will to go, will not do what he has no mind to do. Though the world might praise him and say he had really found something, he would look unconcerned and never turn his head; though the world might condemn him and say he had lost something, he would look serene and pay no heed. The praise and blame of the world are no loss or gain to him.” Daoist Immortal Zhuangzi Anyone who penetrates the empty mind ground instantly realises the ‘Dao’ (道) of reality. After-all, this perception of inner ‘void’ will always accompany the enlightened person as they traverse the materiality of the external world. One is neither ‘attached’ to the bliss-like nature of the inner void – and neither are they ‘hindered’ by the attractive nature of the external world! Perception, moment by moment, is a continuous ‘integration’ of form and void so that there is no contradiction or paradox present in everyday experience. This is why chopping wood and fetching water are prime examples of expressing the genuine and true ‘Dao’. Enlightenment within the Chinese Ch’an School is a living reality. It is not a dead teaching once known but now no longer understood. Chinese scholarship does not adhere to the various trends of interpretation extant in the West (or Japan) - as the Chinese people know their own culture. In my view it is the Cao Dong School that expresses the Chinese Ch’an School with the greatest scientific precision. The other four schools of Ch’an are all excellent in their own ways, and certainly contribute greatly to the reality of the living tradition of ancient Indian Buddhism (Dhyana) as it was transmitted into China. However, from the perspective of integrating the native Confucianism of China with the ‘foreign’ religion of Indian Buddhism – the ‘roundel’ system devised by Master Dong and Master Cao is nothing less than an Ingenious device for explaining the inner mind, the outer body and environment – and how both integrate and operate in the enlightened state! The Cao Dong School is the personal (and preferred) lineage of Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) - even though he agreed to ‘inherit’ ALL Five Schools of Chinese Ch’an (and did not discriminate in anyway). His root teaching was the Cao Dong School and this is what he passed-on to his personal students and disciples. This is known within China as Master Xu Yun had thousands of such descendants, but it is a reality he seldom discussed in public or talked about in his biography. A Ch’an monastic, for example, must be ‘lower’ than the lowest lay-person – so that he or she can act as a supportive foundation for all lay-Dharma practice! By following the Vinaya Discipline a Ch’an monastic learns to be like the broad earth found in the ‘Classic of Change’ (Yijing), so that the ‘divine sky’ of an expansive consciousness can be correctly cultivated in the sincere Dharma student. Charles Luk (1898-1978) inherited this Cao Dong teaching from Master Xu Yun and was tasked with transmitting it to the West. Charles Luk taught hundreds of people in the West, and I am sure he transmitted the Dharma to a number of discerning practitioners. However, Charles Luk taught my teacher - Richard Hunn (1949-2006) - who lived in the UK. One of the first instructions Richard Hunn gave me was that I was to spend at least ten years studying the ‘Book of Change’ (Yijing) - reading the profound text daily. I tended to read a single chapter ascribed to each of the 64 hexagrams and continued to repeat this cycle until the thinking (and symbolism) of the Yijing penetrated deep into my being! This is how I developed the inherent understanding of how the Five Ranks of Prince and Minister operates within the Cao Dong School. The understanding of these five roundels is either misunderstood in the West, or only superficially grasped. Most people simply ignore it due to the influence of the Japanese Soto Master – Dogen – and his emphasis on ‘just sitting’ - but he must have studied and understood this device as a Dharma-Inheritor! By looking into the empty foundation that is beyond perception and non-perception – a Cao Dong practitioner is literally looking into the profound essence of the single roundel that contains all roundels! After-all, what other possible explanation could there be? On top of this, the Cao Dong Masters drew the ‘thunderbolt’ as a means to explain this interconnectivity and how a genuine student tends to experience an unfolding mind as it develops. Some state that this ‘thunderbolt’ may be influenced by the imagery associated with Tibetan Buddhism. A Western (and Japanese) tendency is to view the five roundels as indicating five ‘ranks’ through which a practitioner traverses – from the lowest to the highest – as if each roundel represents a coloured belt in Judo. This is not the case at all. In the ‘Book of Changes’ there are 64 chapters – but no single chapter is considered ‘superior’ or ‘inferior’ to any other! Each of the 64 chapters exists as part of the other 63 chapters – perfect in its placement, situation and function. This is exactly how the Five Ranks interact with one another. All are contained within each – and there is never an implication that a practitioner moves from one self-contained level to another! Just as consciousness is infinite – the Cao Dong roundels represent an insight into the bottomless nature of human awareness. The Buddha, of course, stated that enlightenment is that conscious awareness which exists just beyond (and behind) the ability to ‘perceive’ (form) and ‘non-perceive’ (void). Chinese Ch’an does not go beyond this.
The Chinese Vinaya allows for the convention of ‘self-ordination’ should a man or woman find themselves in remote areas, or out of touch with Sangha. Later, when circumstances permit, the monk or nun should seek confirmation from a Master, although such a confirmation is not always available. Nevertheless, Chinese Ch’an Buddhism demands the strict observance of part of the Vinaya for the laity, and all the Vinaya for the monastics. On top of this commitment, everyone irrespective of status should take and keep the Bodhisattva Vow with the understanding that every monk or nun occupies a position in society less than that of the poorest lay-person. This observation (and attitude) sets the standard for the appropriate level of humility and strength of spirit. As the empty mind ground underlies the laity and the monastic community – it logically follows that outside of presumed social status – all manifestations are of the same essential foundation and value. To accept ‘transmission’ a person must have a mind free of greed, hatred and delusion – as a mind full of greed, hatred and delusion is not able to accept this task. Transmission is nothing less than the recognition of the empty mind ground recognised by the teacher in the mind of the student – the latter of whom ‘projects’ this understanding forward for the benefit of future generations! Greed, hatred and delusion must be given-up here and now in this exact moment. This is the essence of Dharma-Practice through the Guild of Hui Neng. Those who want to accept this transmission are invited to state that they have received a Cao Dong lineage through the Authority of the ICBI. ACW (4.10.2020)
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles (釋大道 - Shi Da Dao) is permitted to retain his Buddhist Monastic Dharma-Name within Lay-society by decree of the Government of the People’s Republic of China, and the Chinese Buddhist Association (1992). A Buddhist monastic (and devout lay-practitioner) upholds the highest levels of Vinaya Discipline and Bodhisattva Vows. A Genuine Buddhist ‘Venerates’ the ‘Dao’ (道) as he or she penetrates the ‘Empty Mind-Ground' through meditative insight. A genuine Buddhist is humble, wise and peace-loving – and he or she selflessly serves all in existence in the past, present and the future, and residing within the Ten Directions – whilst retaining a vegetarian- vegan diet. Please be kind to animals! Archives
November 2023
Categories
All
|
- Home
- ICBI Blog: Mind-Ground (心地)
- ICBI China Office (Beijing)
- Conference: Ch'an & Zen (2021)
- Master Xu Yun
- Degeneration of the Sangha in the Dharma-ending Age By Ch’an Master Xu Yun
- Ch’an Master Jing Hui - History of Master Xu Yun’s Complete Biographical Text
- Xu Yun’s Humanistic Spirit Transmitted into the Modern Era
- Master Xu Yun & Modern Chinese Politics
- On Why Ch’an Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) Rejected Japanese Zen
- Master Xu Yun Memorial Photographic Library
- Dharma Master Ji Qun (济群) Explains Profound (Dharmic) Happiness
- Chinese Buddhism & Vegetarianism
- Qianfeng Daoism (UK)
-
Ch'an Guild of Hui Neng (慧能禅宗协会)
- CGHN Membership Certificate
- Master Ti Guang – Karma
- Master Ti Guang – Mind That Does Not Deviate
- Meditation Instrument - Fragrant Board
- Ch’an Daily Work
- Horse Hair Dust-Whisk in Chinese Ch’an Buddhism
- Deconstructing the Concept of ‘Shikantaza’
- New Shaolin Temple in China
- Master Yuan Chun: Universal Dharma
- Modern Chinese Art and Ch’an Buddhism
- The Huatou and Pain Management
- Martial Virtue (武德–Wu De)
- Seated Transformation (坐化 – Zuo Hua)
- Guiding Principles
- ICBI Projects
- Membership
- Direction of the ICBI
- Journal of the ICBI
- Contact Us
©opyright: Site design, layout & content International Ch'an Buddhism Institute (ICBI). No part of this site (or information contained herein) unless otherwise stated, may be copied, reproduced, duplicated, or otherwise distributed without prior written permission from [email protected]
Proudly powered by Weebly