Richard Hunn (Wen Shu) was NOT keen on any notion of ‘Transmitting’ the Ch’an Dharma. This coincided with his attitude of NOT wanting to be associated with any particular University, Publisher or Dharma Group, etc. I agree with this approach. Dogma, idealism and superstition has nothing to do with genuine Chinese Ch’an Buddhist practice. What an individual does with their mind (and body) regarding attitudes and opinions held concerning life, politics, culture or everyday activities – has absolutely NO interest for the genuine Chinese Ch’an Master! This attitude is encountered time and again throughout the Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties Ch’an writings of Imperial China – with Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) carrying-on this attitude into the post-1911 era of ‘modern’ China! Obviously, I have NOTHING to transmit. Teaching is simply taking the conditions that already exist – and turning the awareness of the enquirer back toward the ‘empty mind ground’ from which all perception arises (and ‘returns’ according to the Chinese Ch’an tradition) - this is a ‘transmission’ in a general sense – but such an interaction cannot be interpreted as an individual in the West being granted ‘Transmission’. Within Chinese culture, such ‘Transmission’ was Confucian in origin and often travelled within birth families and specific name clans – very seldom (if ever) was a ‘Transmission’ initiated ‘outside’ the family (as ‘outsiders’ could not be trusted to use the family secrets of spirituality, science and martial arts properly). Later, when the ‘Transmissions’ of (related) ‘Father to Son’ was adjusted to accommodate (non-related) ‘Masters to Disciples’ - outside ‘Transmissions’ (separate from the Confucian birth-process) was developed. This is the agency of continuation from generation to generation preserved within the Chinese Ch’an tradition. Birth-relationship is replaced with a ‘strict’ attitude of ‘respect’ and the maintaining of ‘good’, ‘correct’ and ‘appropriate’ decorum, behaviour and deportment. Even within ‘modern’ China – this is a difficult interaction to a) perform and b) achieve. The standards for keeping the mind and body permanently ‘clean’ night and day and is often viewed as being far too difficult for the average individual to meet. As ‘Transmission’ is NOT a game and given that ‘Transmission’ within the Chinese Ch’an tradition is NOT the same as ‘Transmission’ within the Japanese Zen tradition – it is obvious that when the Chinese Ch’an tradition ‘flows’ into the West – it is NOT the case that ‘Transmission’ can easily be applied. The empty mind ground must be ‘realised’ (not an easy task) and ‘maintained’ in every situation (an even more unlikely achievement). I have experimented with ‘Transmission’ in the West – but have found that as soon as the event unfolds – an IMMEDIATE ‘dropping away’ of all interactive effort, respect and continuation occurs. This means that the crucial and inherent energy is diminished, sullied and obscured - and the Ch’an lineage loses its clarity, understanding and ability to ‘free’ others. This explains ‘why’ I have eventually WITHDRAWN all so-called ‘Transmissions’ as a means to emphasis the recorded activities of the Chinese Ch’an Masters – written down in China and translated into English by Charles Luk [Lu Kuan Yu] (1898-1978). Granting Chinese language Dharma-Names and formally ‘Welcoming’ individuals into the ‘Lineage’ - does NOT constitute a ‘Transmission’. As helping others is a key element of the Bodhisattva Vow – I do NOT wish to inadvertently ‘damage’ the Chinese Ch’an tradition entrusted to me – by generating what amounts to a ‘dysfunction’ of transmission.
0 Comments
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!
|
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