This post became QUITE long. I swear the length is commensurate with the effort expended in researching - if anybody is interested in how a fool did a little research to answer his own question, then still pretended to have a question anyway, read on.
I noticed other users have recently posted excerpts from Korean Seon texts. I also happen to find Korean Seon interesting for personal reasons. So it raised the question: how does one decide whether an unfamiliar source is worth sharing here?
On the one hand, there's plenty of good stuff written by the members of the r/zen canonical lineage. Limiting the primary focus of discussion to that body of work makes it straightforward to keep the sub from devolving into boring, unstable whatever-you-want-ism. I haven't read it all (not even close), and freely acknowledge my dilettantism and novelty seeking.
On the other hand, it's fun seeing and evaluating something less familiar. I hope nobody would disagree that "fun" is a meaningful quantity in recreational study, if not necessarily a good guiding principle.
I came across some poetry by Muuija (aka Jin'gak Hyesim), and thought it might be worth sharing here, but thought I'd first better do some research into whether there was anything self-evidently "Not Zen" in his teachings.
Per T'bess's biography, he was a 10th century Korean master, and a great proponent of the "Critical Phrase" (Hua Tou) meditation that appears to be a major feature of Korean Seon Buddhism. He is the earliest Korean master to leave a collection of recorded sayings; I've found T'bess's biographies can sometimes put an emphasis on meditation that is not commensurate with their subject's actual verbiage, so I read through them.
His lectures are, in my very humble opinion, pretty good. His style of discourse is kind of like that of a less wordy Foyan. He also has a koan collection that includes a word-by-word defense of the translation into korean by his disciple, which is unique and interesting.The parts that suggest a "meditative practice" pop up in letters he wrote to people asking for advice:
I ask that you simply look at the words (of the huatou) “a dog has no Buddha nature.” Since it is not correct in this way and not correct in that way, you are prohibited the various kinds of prying and clever views, for all of these are vain and false, and merely add to the length of your rebirths and deaths. [...] As soon as you have that which is valuable, it becomes a rut, (so) simply withdraw (from the calculating mind), for the more you retreat the more you advance, and the more you do not understand (via discrimination) the more strength you will have. Do not worry (that the huatou) has no taste and nothing that can be groped for, just worry about there being taste and a place to grope.
The parenthetical statements appear to be the translator's (the translation was done by a Korean Buddhist organisation), and it wasn't clear to me whether they had been added appropriately. A footnote compares this statement to one made by Dahui, in a letter to Zhang:
Solely stimulate/guide and present (the huatou) with awareness, but it is not correct in this way and not correct in that way.
I didn't immediately identify a source without that parenthetical "huatou."
Every other statement about huatou I identified in the Collected Writings of Hyesim:
Simply investigate this story (huatou) and refrain from looking for it in the words.
[…] in every hour of the day […] be stimulated (by the huatou) and at all times raise awareness (of it).
Also, you must remain in empty calm for a long time and make your own study (of huatou), eliminating the falsities in everyday activities. Do not forget Zhaozhou’s single gong’an of “put it down,” and after a long time by yourself you will arrive at the stage of no doubt.
Parenthetical statements aside, there does seem to be a clear recommendation of a practice: to direct awareness to the koan at all times. Contrast with Foyan:
Just don't arouse the mind or stir thoughts 24 hours a day. Then you will understand comprehensive realization all at once.
and Wansong (Book of Serenity, Baizhang's Fox):
If you keep so much as the letter a in your mind, you'll go to hell like an arrow shot; one drop of wild fox slobber, when swallowed, cannot be spit out for thirty years.
The answer to the specific question of "does Hyesim ever recommend a 'not-zen' meditative practice" appears to be "yes."
That said, the bulk of his writing doesn't address huatou, and I don't think any here would find that material to be flawed unless they already knew about the huatou stuff.
More as an abstract, academic question then, because I don't post that much and don't feel the need to spam the forum with Seon (r/seon is invite only): is there any value in discussing the best bits of Zen lineage 'cousins,' here in r/zen?
Another question: the lineage of early Seon apparently can be followed unbroken back to the big dogs, but the teachings have clearly mutated. "Lineage" as a binary (rather than a matter of degree) doesn't appear to be a useful measure of a text's Zen-ness. How does one use it to evaluate the Zen-ness of a novel text?
Submitted February 11, 2020 at 08:58AM by in_dee_nile https://ift.tt/2OMtaD8
No comments:
Post a Comment