The metaphysics of Buddhism is essentially anti life, boils down to calling sentience illusory and claiming that all phenomenon that “One Mind” gives rise to is no different than make believe. Zen does not have a particular metaphysics, which is to say, zen does not refer to models, maps, of the world except as a convenient handle on language for pointing. People who obsess over definitions are missing the point that definitions do not contain the act of pointing, or that any language can be adapted for zen pointing.
Yes, China did have its own native cosmologies, philosophies, metaphysics, and concepts prior to the introduction of Buddhism in China several centuries before Bodhidharma. But there was an inherent friction between the home grown down to earth mistrust of man made descriptions of reality in China compared to the literal truths advocated by the Indian belief that Sanskrit was a sacred language whose vocalization had powers over nature. In China, the poetic descriptions were not deemed to be causative over nature, but instead, nature was impossible to contain in description. Nature was not something that was inherently alien, but rather its unfolding was our own unfolding. Confucian and Taoist influences continued to assert themselves against the world rejecting aspects of Indian philosophy, gradually eroding or modifying Buddhist concepts in China to where eventually, it came to be that the zen characters were installed as saints of the Song period orthodox Buddhist form of Chan that was officially adopted and sanctioned by state officials. However, zen figures like Dahui, Yuanwu, Wansong, Mumon, Foyan and the other key zen players during the Song, even though they lived within the culture of this Chan orthodoxy, continued the zen that we still find today in the sayings of the Tang period zen characters that comprise the vast majority of the zen cases, Mazu, Dongshan and their descendants.
Zen thus departs from the Buddhist metaphysics, and exposes those who fell into literati Chan or sutra dominated sects. However, the zen of Mazu and Dongshan had no political standing or even a separate institutional presence, just as it does not today. Instead, those who do establish authoritative doctrines become an object lesson for the real students of zen. So, the earliest frictions immortalized in the stories of Bodhidharma’s irreverent approach to Emperor Wu, continued with Dongshan questioning the Buddhist monk to death, and culminating in the criticisms of Foyan, Yuanwu, Dahui and others of the orthodox Chan of the Song dynasty continue today with students of zen having fun at the expense of Buddhist academics and other Buddhist apologists. Sometimes the killing was metaphorical, sometimes literal, but Joshu himself said he liked to kill.
And nor was there shame in shouting out when being killed by others. Who remembers the story of the monks who heard their teacher shouting out while being slaughtered by bandits on the other side of a crest of a hill?
If wooden Buddhas and sutras can be burned, even Yuanwu’s blue cliff printing blocks can be burned. Zen arises out of thin air at every turn. Its not about building a nest in a tower of babel. Its not about establishing a manifesto. Those who take Linji, Foyan, or Huangbo and try to defend a doctrine they have constructed from selected quotes are transparently feeding a ghost.
Submitted August 16, 2020 at 11:01PM by rockytimber https://ift.tt/3as3NjB
No comments:
Post a Comment