There has been some debate ongoing here regarding the meditation manual Fukanzazengi and Zuochan Yi. In case there are some who don’t know what these manuals are, here’s some info:
.
Zuochan Yi (aka as 坐禪儀, Tso-ch’an I, zazengi) is a meditation manual attributed to Changlu Zongze (aka Tsung-tse, 宗賾), a Chinese monk who compiled the Pure Rules of Zen Monastery in early Song Dynasty. Zuochan Yi is considered the earliest written guide to seated meditation in the Chan tradition (Zen School).
Zuochan Yi (坐禪儀) literally means ‘Manner/Conduct/Appearance of Seated Meditation’.
Fukanzazengi (普勸坐禪儀) is a meditation manual based on Zuochan Yi (坐禪儀) that’s written by Dogen, a Japanese monk who went to study in China around late Song Dynasty before returning to Japan.
Fukanzazengi (普勸坐禪儀) literally means ‘Universally Recommended Manner/Conduct/Appearance of Seated Meditation’.
.
In Fukanzazengi senjutsu yurai [Reason for Composing Fukanzazengi], Dogen explains why he wrote the work:
Since in Japan it has never been possible to learn about the “special trans-mission outside the scriptures” or the “treasure of the right Dharma eye” much less the principles of zazen, they are not transmitted here. So as soon as I returned home from the land of the Sung [China], and students began coming to me for instruction, I was obliged for their sakes to compile this work [Fukanzazengi] on the principles of zazen. Long ago, the Chinese Zen master Po-chang [Baizhang] constructed a monastery with a hall set aside especially for zazen practice. In so doing he effectively transmitted the true style of the First Zen patriarch Bodhidharma. This style was distinct from the briars and brambles of word-attachment [of the Buddhist schools] that had preceded him. This is something that students should know and not be confused about. There is a Tso-ch’an i [Zuochan Yi] by the priest Chang-lu Tsung–tse included in the Ch’an-yüan ch’ing-kuei [Pure Regulations for the Zen Gardens/Monasteries].
For the most part it follows Po-chang’s original intent, but it also contains some additions made by Tsung-tse himself. This has resulted in errors of various kinds, as well as an overall lack of clarity. No one who does not already know the meaning behind the words can fully understand what he is trying to say. For that reason, I have now gathered together and written down the true principles of zazen that I learned in hopes that they will transmit the inexpressible heart of the Buddha-patriarchs. (Ôkubo, vol. 2, 3–4).
.
Information on Po-chang (aka the Chinese zen teacher Baizhang) can be found in the book ‘Transmission of the Lamp’ (景德传灯录 Jingde Chuandeng Lu) published in early Song Dynasty. Mazu and Baizhang are the zen teachers attributed to have set up the conglin (丛林) system of zen monastery. Prior to that, zen practitioners supposedly resided in the so-called vinaya monastery. Until today, many Buddhist monasteries in China have a hall where a statue of Baizhang is placed for people to pay their respects to.
There’s a three-part structure in the writing of both Zuochan Yi and Fukanzazengi: introduction, main, conclusion. The introduction and conclusion are basically the sharing of what the authors understand of the manner/ceremony of seated meditation, which is shared in the main part of the manual. It is this main part describing the actual manner/conduct of seated meditation that is pretty much identical in the two manuals. Most of the differences between Zuochan Yi and Fukanzazengi are in the introduction and conclusion.
So the basis of seated meditation, in terms of the how to sit and meditate, is the same. The key difference is that Dogen understands this meditation differently from Zongze. Dogen feels that there are parts in the Zuochan Yi that are not congruent to the spirit of the Chan tradition (Zen School).
.
Here’s what Bielefeldt has to say in his book ‘Dogen’s Manuals of Meditation’:
Here Tsung-tse, like Chih-i, seeks to emphasize at the very outset the Mahayana ethical context of his meditation practice: samadhi is to be cultivated against the background of the vow to win perfect enlightenment and bring about the salvation of all beings. Hence he addresses his treatise to "the bodhisattva who studies prajna." Tsung-tse does not pause to discuss the nature of this prajna or its bearing on meditation but proceeds directly to his description of the practice. Yet it is precisely here, in the interpretation of how the Mahayana wisdom teaching should inform the bodhisattva's understanding of meditation, that the early masters of Tsung-tse's Ch'an tradition established their characteristic approach to Buddhism; and it is with this approach that Dogen begins his own manual.
"Fundamentally speaking, the basis of the way is perfectly pervasive; how could it be contingent on practice and verification? The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted; why should we expend sustained effort? Surely the whole being is far beyond defilement; who could believe in a method to polish it? Never is it apart from this very place; what is the use of a pilgrimage to practice it? And yet, if a hair's breadth of distinction exists, the gap is like that between heaven and earth; once the slightest like and dislike arises, all is confused and the mind is lost."
Here, in both content and language, the Fukan zazen gi is clearly harking back to the original message of the Ch'an school: "fundamentally speaking," enlightenment is universal, not the result of individual religious endeavor; "and yet," as long as one clings to the objects of discrimination, he fails to recognize this fact. Like many of the early masters of Ch'an, Dogen does not seem to feel the need to emphasize here the altruistic aspiration of the bodhisattva (or the necessity of cultivating the various salvific techniques through which that aspiration is expressed); rather, taking advantage of the metaphysical notion that all the goals of the bodhisattva path are inherent to the mind, he can focus simply on the individual's quest for the recovery of that mind. Again, like the early masters, he goes on later in this introduction to single out discursive thoughtwhat he calls here "reflection" (gigi) and "deliberation'' (shoryo) as the most serious obstacle to the quest and to urge his reader to "reverse the intellectual practice of investigating words and chasing after talk.'' Rather than seek the mind in the objects of its understanding, one should "directly accede" (jikige joto) to inherent Buddhahood by taking "the backward step" (taiho) that illumines the original nature of the subject. When he does so, Dogen concludes here, all attachments to body and mind will drop away (shinjin datsuraku) of their own accord, and the "original face" (honrai menmoku) of primordial enlightenment will be manifest.
In all this there is little new: it could have been said by virtually any master from the mid-T'ang on. As a matter of fact, except for a turn of phrase here and there, almost all of it had been said; this entire introduction reads like a series of stock expressions from the Ch'an literature. It opens with an allusion to the dialogue, so treasured by Dogen, between the Sixth Patriarch and Huai-jang on the ultimate nature of practice and enlightenment; it goes on to recall the famous verse from the Platform Sutra on polishing the mirror of the mind; it draws passages from the verse of the Cheng tao ko and the Hsin hsin ming; it closes with the popular metaphor of the "original face" attributed to Hui-neng: and, throughout, it consistently borrows the standard vocabulary of the recorded sayings of the T'ang masters.
.
As we can see, what Dogen is basically trying to do in Fukanzazengi is to share with the Japanese the actual manner/conduct of seated meditation (based on Zuochan Yi) and an understanding of meditation that is in accordance to the Chan tradition (based on the sayings of Tang zen teachers).
Translations of both Zuochan Yi and Fukanzazengi can easily be found in the internet. Both are very short. Anyone can read them and see which zen (meditation) is closer to the spirit of the Zen School. The whole idea spun up to portray Dogen as both plagiarising and inventing seated meditation in Fukanzazengi just doesn’t fly at all in Bielefeldt’s book. Perhaps that is why ewk’s latest post (that claims scholarship on Fukanzazengi has damaged Dogen’s credibility) offers no source of any scholarship at all, unlike his previous reliance on Bielefeldt.
By the way, Bielefeldt’s book ‘Dogen’s Manuals of Zen Meditation’ is excellent. Very heavy language, heavy on the reader’s contextual knowledge of zen history too, but his analysis is careful and sharp. Highly recommended.
Submitted January 20, 2018 at 08:18AM by chintokkong http://ift.tt/2BfOrv2
No comments:
Post a Comment