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 historical (Indian) Buddha traversed through at least six different Brahmanical systems – each with its own ‘Guru’ standing at its pinnacle of practice and attainment! Although the Buddha was confirmed to have achieved ALL levels of attainment in these systems by the presiding Gurus themselves – he felt that these systems were ‘limited’ and stopped short of the ultimate truth! In other words, the Buddha perceived that there was a deeper level of attainment involved in his spiritual search that was not ‘realised’ in the Brahmanical systems he had studied, even though these paths were difficult to follow, and the highest levels of attainment were very rare! Therefore, the Buddha had to set out on his own without a teacher to penetrate reality to a greater degree, although it is true that he had been educated in Yoga, meditation, religious texts (such as the Vedas and the Upanishads, etc), martial arts and all kinds of arts suitable to his Kshatriya (Warrior and King) Caste! Interestingly, at this point in human social and cultural development, reading and writing was known but very rare, (practiced in India only by the ruling house, and only then to record and remember ‘laws’ - assisting in their functionality), and so the Buddha was illiterate despite achieving full and complete enlightenment! (This is similar to the story of Hui Neng – the Sixth Patriarch of the Chinese Ch’an tradition – was both a ‘layman’ and ‘illiterate’ when he inherited the ‘Dharma’).
Despite possessing a very good quality education in the spiritual knowledge of his time, the Buddha finally achieved full enlightenment without a teacher. No specific teacher ‘ordained’ the Buddha and other than sitting resolutely within the meditation posture – the Buddha did not follow any ‘Precepts’. The Buddha perfected the ‘Mind Precept’ whereby he cut-off ALL greed, hatred and delusion (breaking the ‘karmic-root’ of the mind) whilst simultaneously ‘returning’ all six senses to the empty mind ground! Overtime, he taught his ‘Dharma’ and supported and strengthened the practice of his disciples through the passing of hundreds of ‘Precepts’. This body of ‘Precepts’ became known as the Vinaya Discipline, and this is preserved within a number of different with slightly varying interpretations. A member of the Sangha, for instance, is any man or woman who has left society, shaved their heads, put on the robe and committed themselves to the hundreds of ‘Precepts’ the Buddha established – the Buddha also defined a member of the Sangha as any ‘lay’ person who has fully realised enlightenment! This is because the Buddha acknowledged that monastics and lay people are both able to realise enlightenment – but that the monastic path is straightforward with minimum distractions, whilst the lay path is thoroughly deluded and premised upon multiple barriers to the realisation of enlightenment (although such a feat is possible as the Buddha, Vimalakirti and Hui Neng, etc, attest). The term ‘Sangha’ has been extended within the Mahayana tradition to include ALL lay and monastic practitioners within a Buddhist community – whilst within the Theravada School lay Buddhists are definitely NOT included in the term ‘Sangha’ which is reserved only for monastics. The Ch’an tradition understands and recognises all these facts – but does not discriminate in anyway. Why? This is because the empty mind ground underlies all things equally and does not discriminate. If a practitioner can return the sense-data of all six senses back to the empty mind ground – then nothing else matters! This is why the Chinese Vinaya Discipline allows for the concept of ‘Emergency Ordination’ whereby a lay person can shave their heads, set-up a Buddha image and take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha (and the Triple Gem within us) - this is probably the original ‘Precepts’. Added to this can be any number of other Precepts if they are known! If not, assume a vegetarian diet and diligently practice seated meditation, Sutra reading and chanting if applicable. A new name can be chosen and applied at this point. The function of ‘Emergency Ordination’ may involve an individual who has realised full enlightenment and does not want to live within lay society. It might also refer to a lay individual who desperately wants to ‘leave’ the delusion of lay society and does not have access to a Buddhist Temple or qualified Master! Emergency Ordination is not a matter of material accumulation and the easy assumption of a new status in life. Such a monastic must remain entirely humble in mind, body (and within the environment they inhabit), and only consider themselves a committed lay person and nothing more! The primary purpose of ‘Emergency Ordination’ is that the world of desire and habit must be left behind and the Precepts fully upheld! All psychological tendency (and behavioural habit) emerges from (and returns to) the empty mind ground – mediated through the six senses! When the mind is impure, then all emanations are conditioned by greed, hatred and delusion. Applying the physical Precepts curtails deluded behaviour on the material plane – whilst returning the six senses to the empty mind ground uproots greed, hatred and delusion, and ‘cuts-off’ all aspects of delusion as they emerge from the deepest level of the mind! Then, there appears a ‘turning about’ in the deepest recesses of the mind so that the ‘inverted’ nature of the human mind (which causes ‘suffering’ by seizing upon thoughts in the mind and mistaking them for objects in the physical environment) is ended. This entire process begins, matures and prevails all due to the power of adhering to the Buddhist Precepts! Chinese Language References: http://bodhi.takungpao.com/sspt/sramana/2015-04/2963223.html https://www.chinabuddhism.com.cn/yj/2013-06-13/2931.html Translator’s Note: There is an all-important ‘Precept’ missing from this Chinese-language encyclopaedia page regarding Buddhist ordination – and that is the principle of the ‘Mind Precept’ (心戒 - Xin Jie). This is the central practice of ‘Caodong’ Ch’an and all genuine Buddhism. Furthermore, it makes no difference whether a practitioner is a ‘lay’ person or an ordained member of the Sangha – as ALL six senses are continuously ‘returned’ to the empty mind ground at all times during the time of day or night. Therefore, the hundreds of rules each monastic has to follow are immediately fulfilled every moment through this device and it is the method all mature monastics use. This is because the Buddhist rules are not upheld one after another as if in sequence – but are upheld simultaneously – all at once! Conversely, a lay person chopping wood and fetching water immediately ‘spiritualises’ these mundane activities by automatically ‘returning’ ALL six sense organs to the empty mind ground – thus upholding not only the ‘5’, ‘8’ or ‘10’ lay Precepts – but every Precept ever conceived (and none at all)! Obviously, if hundreds of Precepts are meticulously upheld - but the empty mind ground has not been realised - then what good are the hundreds of Precepts? Such a superficial practice merely becomes another example of ‘attachment’! Once the empty mind is realised then it is understood that there is no difference between ‘lay’ and ‘monastic’ - and there are no Precepts that can be upheld if they manifest ‘separate’ from the empty mind ground! ACW (26.6.2022)
Anyone who commits themselves to the Buddhist Path (Dharma) should voluntarily observe (or embrace and uphold) the Rules of Discipline (Precepts) in order to purify the mind, body and environment! In so doing, such a practitioner firmly establishes the purity of the Dharma in the world! These rules were first established by the Historical Buddha in ancient India as a means to support the central element of his teaching commonly known as the ‘Dharma’. The ‘Dharma’ is the ‘Word’ of the Buddha whilst the ‘Vinaya Discipline’ is a secondary vehicle of support and clarification of this ‘word’. Different sets of Precepts have arisen due to varying interpretations developing within the many different Schools of Buddhist Thought. As a consequence, the Rules of Discipline are divided into Five (5), Eight (8) and Ten (10) Precepts for the male and female ‘Laity’ - and Complete Systems of Hundreds of Precepts for the fully ‘Ordained’ male and female ‘Upholders of the Dharma’! Invariably, it is a general rule that ‘women’ are required to adhere to more ‘Precepts’ than men. Broadly speaking, these categories can be described as ‘Hinayana’, ‘Mahayana’, ‘Lay’, ‘Monk’ (Bhikshu) and ‘Nun’ (Bhikshuni), etc. With regards to monastic ordination, a practitioner is only considered a full Buddhist ‘monk’ or ‘nun’ AFTER all the Precepts have been transmitted by a competent and qualified Precept-Master, and accepted, upheld and established as a minute-by-minute (daily) practice by the recipient. Prior to this, however, a male or female ‘Novice’ must adhere to the ‘Ten Precepts’ of purity which include (1) Not to Kill, (2) Not to Steal, (3) Not to engage in Sexual Contact, (4) Not to Lie, (5) Not to drink Alcohol, (6) Not to Adorn the body with Perfume, (7) Not to listen to Music or watch or participate in Dancing, (8) Not to sit or lie upon High Beds, (9) Not to Eat Outside od Set Times, and (10) Not to amass (or handle) Silver and Gold! The Buddhist monks of the Theravada School Uphold 227 Precepts, whilst the nuns Uphold 331 precepts. The Buddhist monks in China Uphold 250 precepts, whilst the nuns Uphold 348 precepts – whilst Tibetan Buddhist Lamas Uphold 253 precepts. Chinese Buddhist monks and nuns (who Adhere to the Mahayana) are also required to Uphold the Bodhisattva Precepts. Those monastics who take the Precepts are not allowed to wantonly or casually ‘break’ these Precepts - but they are allowed to declare that they want to abandon these Precepts and return to the unrestrained Secular world. Those who break the Precepts – but who wish to remain a monk or nun - will be punished as a means to resolve the matter of ill-discipline (an action designed to ‘uproot’ the greed, hatred and delusion in the mind and body which led to the infraction). If there are special circumstances, however, and as a matter of both ‘Wisdom’ and ‘Compassion’ - a temporary exception can be applied that involves no punishment. With the Chinese Buddhist monastic tradition there is the convention of applying burning incense cones to specific areas on the ‘Forehead’ and ‘Wrist’ of the ordained Buddhist monk or nun. This is designed, through the resulting pain, to ‘burn’ the importance of the ‘Precepts’ deep into the mind and body of the Practitioner of the Dharma! The pain itself, as it is applied with a ‘Pure Intent’, assists in the uprooting of ‘greed’, ‘hatred’ and ‘delusion’ from the mind and body of the ‘Dharma Practitioner’! Invariably, the resulting ‘Black’ scars are burnt into the skin in rectangular groups of ‘3’, ‘6’, ‘9’ or ‘12’ dots! The ‘Black’ scars often fade to ‘White’ dots – and the more ‘dots’ a practitioner carries – the greater their strength is considered in Upholding the Precepts! When ‘Taking the Precepts’ period is over, the practitioner is issued with a ‘Certificate of Precept-Taking’ and a ‘List of Precepts’ taken, etc. Chinese Language Reference: https://baike.baidu.com/item/受戒/32136 佛教制度 凡皈依佛教的人都应受持戒律,以便更好修行。因不同教派对教义的不同理解,产生了不同的戒条。分为五戒、八戒、十戒、俱足戒等。或小乘戒、大乘戒、居士戒、比丘戒、比丘尼戒等。出家者受持戒法后即成为正式僧尼。 沙弥和沙弥尼必须受持十戒,即不杀生、不偷盗、不淫、不妄语、不饮酒、不涂饰香鬘,不视听歌舞,不坐高广大床、不非时食、不蓄金银财宝 。上座系佛教比丘有227戒,比丘尼有331戒,此传汉地比丘守250戒,比丘尼守348戒,藏传佛教喇嘛持253戒。 信奉大乘的汉地佛教僧尼还须受菩萨戒。凡受戒者不许破戒,但允许声明舍戒还俗。破戒者要受到惩罚。如果遇特殊情况,也可以暂时破例开戒。为表示笃信佛法、虔守佛规,需受戒,即用戒香炙烧头额或手腕,炙成3个、6个、9个或12个黑疤,越多表示越虔诚,戒期完毕,由传戒者发给“戒牒”及“同戒录”。 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!
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!
In China, some modern men and women – who have experienced a university education – decide to embrace the hard life of Buddhist monasticism. This is at the point in their lives when they could be embarking upon a ‘paid’ career, earning a salary, falling in-love and travelling the world! This is the time – much the same as in the West – where young people enjoy their lives and find their way through existence. Of course, although the language and culture are very different – modernity brings its own equivalents. Yes – the outer-layer of history, tradition and everyday culture is different in China to that found to the West – but there are certain underlying realities that prove that we are all human! Giving-up their modern clothes and shaving the styled-hair from their heads – these people are entering an entirely different world which is controlled by the strictures of the Vinaya Discipline. The following of the Vinaya Discipline is not a ‘choice’ (as it is in Japan), but is a ‘legal’ requirement in China. Yes – the Vinaya Discipline has been ‘written’ into China’s ‘Secular Law’ so that it is a ‘Criminal Offence’ for anyone who has left society and embarked upon the Buddhist monastic path – not to follow the Vinaya Discipline (this was decided by Master Xu Yun 1840-1959). From the day of full ordination, a Chinese Buddhist monastic ‘gives-up’ all rights to a paid livelihood, marriage, off-spring and normal social interaction. From this day onwards the desire mechanism is permanently ‘switched-off’ never to be re-activated at any time! (The recipient is only bound to these rules for as long as he or she remains wearing a robe and being a monastic. Should they decide to leave this lifestyle – then they must follow the equally strict ‘disengagement’ rules so that they can ‘legally’ and ‘lawfully’ exit the Vinaya Discipline without fear of prosecution, and return to the condition of ‘lay’ life). A Buddhist monastic must also take the Bodhisattva Vows which can never be cancelled as they do not require celibacy or living as a monastic as pre-requisites. Bodhisattva Vows exist to include the entirety of a) humanity, and b) all other life, in an all-embracing attitude of wisdom, loving kindness and compassion in all circumstances! The Vinaya Discipline and Bodhisattva Vows do overlap in many of their requirements – particularly in ‘not killing’ or ‘causing to kill’. Perhaps the Vinaya Discipline can be referred to as ‘wisdom’ based leaning toward compassion – whilst the Bodhisattva Vows are premised upon ‘compassion’ leaning more toward wisdom. Within China, Buddhist monastics often undergo a ritual whereby one, two, three, six, nine, or twelve symmetrical dots are ‘burned’ onto the naked, shaven scalp (usually at different times and steady progressing in numbers as more Bodhisattva Vows are taken). This ritual is unique to Chinese Buddhism and is believed to have started in 1288 CE (during the Yuan Dynasty) – when Shi Zhide (释志德) [(1235-1322] introduced the practice whilst Head Monk of the ‘Tianxi’ (天禧) Temple in Jinling! As the recipient receives and recites the Bodhisattva Vows – burning incense cones are placed on top of the head forming a rectangle or square-shape. This is known as the practice of applying the 'Fragrant Scar' (香疤 - Xiang Ba). The recipient must be ‘detached’ from the pain of burning – whilst understanding that the ‘world is burning’ and that ‘humanity is suffering’! The Buddhist monastic path is dedicated to the permanent uprooting of greed, hatred and delusion from the mind and body of the of the monastic, from the minds and bodies of all living beings, and from the physical environment! As this is such an awesome responsibility – the Chinese Buddhist monastic forfeits all rights to an ordinary existence...
Polarity is a funny business. Life and death – health and illness, etc – all this often occupies the human mind (and body) above and beyond every other subject. Of course, we must also feed and house the body, but if one of these is missing, at the very least we must provide nourishment for the human-body. Many in the West fear homelessness as the weather in this part of the world is often cold, wet and difficult to endure for at least six months of the year! When I lived in Sri Lanka, poverty and good weather went hand-in-hand so that holy men and women – that is the truly committed to the realm beyond the senses – walked around in the flimsiest of attire – except the Jains who give-up even this modest association with the world! A naked body is not as much of a problem as is a naked ego... Of course, I have heard of a Western Zen monk living (voluntarily) homeless on the streets of New York, although this was at least fifteen years ago, and perhaps more. It is not just the weather that distinguishes East from West – but history and culture as well. There is a particular ‘coldness’ to the ‘individuality’ of the West which is lacking in the ‘collective’ cultures of the East. Even so, regardless of how humanity sets about organising the external aspect of its existence, there is always the thorny issue of how the ‘inner’ life is to be approached, reconciled and processed, etc. Is it possible to ‘give-up’ all desire for physical life – and yet continue to still ‘exist’ on this plane of reality? Can ‘we’ be both ‘here’ and ‘not-here’ simultaneously and in a manner that is not paradoxical or contradictory in any disconcerting or disruptive sense? Can there be ‘peace of mind’ and ‘health of body’ in a state that is ‘beyond all states’? I suspect that this all comes down to the balancing of what the Buddha defines as ‘perception’ and ‘non-perception’. A mind (and body) that is beyond the realms of the world still needs to be fed at least the minimum of food – hence the Buddhist monastic and the agency of ‘begging’ and/or growing their own food (with an emphasis upon vegetarianism). It is in this rarefied ‘space’ that all sophistry for the world is ‘not yet arisen’ and all is peace and tranquillity despite the nature of the external world (which ultimately must also include the ‘health’ of the physical body).
The Sanskrit term ‘विनय’ (vinaya) carries the primary meanings of ‘courtesy’, ‘civility’ and ‘etiquette’, with the secondary meanings (depending upon context), of ‘humility’, ‘sincerity’ and the performing of an ‘act of courtesy’. Within the Chinese language, the Sanskrit term ‘vinaya’ is written using the Chinese ideogram of ‘律’ (lu4). This is comprised of a left-hand (semantic) particle ‘彳’ (chi4) - meaning ‘to walk slowly and carefully - along a path or a road’, and a right-hand (phonetic) particle of ‘聿’ (yu4) - which means to ‘use brush and paper’. When placed together as ‘律’ (lu4), the primary meanings are created of ‘regulation’ and ‘rules of the road’, and the secondary meanings of ‘statute’, ‘principle’ and ‘regulation’. As the ancient Chinese scholars were very careful to a) ‘record’ and b) ‘transmit’ the correct meanings of the then unfamiliar terms associated with Indian Buddhism into the Chinese language, and given that this translation (and understanding) is accepted by Indian scholars as ‘correct’, the Chinese definition of ‘vinaya’ may be taken as a clear indicator of the ‘original’ or ‘intended’ meaning as intended by the Buddha and his disciples. The ‘Vinaya Discipline’ is a set of rules and regulations within Buddhism, which advise upon the correct moral behaviour for the monastic (who must follow ALL the rules without exception), and the lay-practitioner (who must follow a small number of the rules whilst living within ordinary society). Whereas a monastic is ‘celibate’, the lay-person must practice ‘sexual restraint’ (and not ‘celibacy’), so that their behaviour does not cause ‘concern’ or ‘outrage’ within the lay-community. The point of the Vinaya Discipline is to effect ‘behaviour modification’ within the mind and body of the Buddhist practitioner, so that greed, hatred and delusion are permanently ‘uprooted’ from the thought patterns, and NEVER manifest again through ‘behaviour’. In this regard, the Vinaya Discipline is a ‘support’ to both monastic and lay Buddhist practice. Moreover, whereas a Buddhist monk or nun must spend months (and sometimes years) ‘preparing’ to take the Vinaya Vows (227 for men and 311 for women), a lay-Buddhist practitioner may decide to follow the entirety of the Vinaya Discipline on a voluntary basis within the context of his or her worldly life. Nothing is required for this but a firm ‘resolve’ to carry-out such an undertaking. Quite often, this leads to the situation of male and female ‘ascetics’ living in the wilderness throughout Asia, who are revered by the ordinary people for their ‘holiness’, despite never formally training as a Buddhist monastic or having entered a Buddhist monastic training facility! In many ways this reflects the Buddha’s own experiences, as no one ‘ordained’ him, and all his training was a product of self-discipline as an ascetic sat at the foot of a tree! The Vinaya Discipline acts as a ‘support’ for following the ‘Dharma’. The Dharma is the Buddha’s most important central teaching, whereas the Vinaya Discipline are a set of instructionary rules established over-time and designed to enable the following of the Dharma more efficiently. As the Vinaya Discipline is a set of rules that assist in the regulation of the mind and body, Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) was of the firm opinion that there can be no genuine Buddhism without the Vinaya Discipline being a) ‘present’, and b) ‘practiced’. This is why he rejected the Japanese convention of NOT following the Vinaya Discipline. Although anyone can choose to live in isolation as a Buddhist ‘hermit’ or ‘ascetic’, only a man or woman who has been through the official head-shaving ceremony (under a recognised Buddhist master), and who has taken the Vinaya Discipline and the Bodhisattva Vows, is considered a fully ordained ‘monk’ or ‘nun’ within the Chinese Buddhist tradition. This distinction was further enforced by Master Xu Yun in the early 1950s (at the time that he ‘rejected’ the Japanese tradition of NOT upholding the Vinaya Discipline), when he advised the government of China to make it a ‘legal’ requirement for ALL fully ordained Buddhist monks and nuns to follow the Vinaya Discipline properly – or face legal action (similar to ‘breaking a contract’). Master Xu Yun took this action due to the reality of a number of Buddhist monastic communities causing trouble within lay-society through ill-discipline, interference, greed and other forms of corrupt behaviour. A lay-person, however, remains free to ‘access’ or ‘leave’ the Vinaya Discipline at any time, with no criminality attached. A lay-person may follow ALL or only a part of the Vinaya Discipline, as he or she sees fit, or as the circumstances of their life allows. The Vinaya Discipline is a powerful device that if used correctly, can cure any number of psychological, emotional and physical ailments, as well as removing deficiencies, weaknesses and all kinds of barriers or hindrances to pursuing the Dharma! A lay-person may live like a monk (or a nun) without actually entering the establishment of a Buddhist monastery, or undergoing formal ordination. Indeed, within the Chinese Ch’an School, a lay-person is expected to achieve full enlightenment exactly where they are, with the status of a Buddhist monk or nun being lower than that of the poorest lay-person! The Vinaya Discipline belongs to humanity, but over-time certain conventions have become associated with it. When Charles Luk asked Master Xu Yun ‘What is the most important Precept to follow?’ Master Xu Yun replied ‘The ‘Mind’ Precept.’ In other words, simply following an external set of rules is useless if the empty mind-ground is not penetrated and realised here and now, and in all circumstances! The empty mind-ground is exactly the same for a Buddhist monastic as it is for a lay-person! Indeed, in many ways, the life of a lay-person possesses many advantages over that of a Buddhist monastic – the latter of which is merely a beggar in robes (who is not allowed even to ‘beg’ in China)!
|
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