ewk's Preliminary Thoughts on Welter's Patriarch’s Hall Collection

https://terebess.hu/zen/Welter-Patriarch-Lamp.pdf

Since I'm reading the Patriarch's Hall Collection in an attempt to determine if an argument can be made for it's inclusion on the lineage texts page, I came across Welter's discussion of it in contrast with Transmission of the Lamp, which should not be included as it was People Magazine published by the government at the time, and not in any way a collection about Zen by Zen Masters.

Patriarch's Hall Collection appears to be an early collection of says like Dahui's Shobogenzo, but without commentary, collected under the direction of a Master named Sheng-yen.

In looking over Welter's preliminary analysis, which he warns is "early days" in Patriarch's Hall Collection, I've come across a number of assumptions that form the foundation of Welter's entire outlook on Zen which bear mention, as these assumptions are both unproven and highly controversial, but nevertheless inform everything about Welter's scholarship.

It is worth reminding ourselves that Welter's assumptions may have been informed by the religious apologetics he was no doubt exposed to his four year affiliation with Komazawa University, which has historically been a Dogen Buddhist college.

1. Reliance on Dunhuang and Transmission of the Lamp texts despite admitted weakness of doing so

   • "Yet, for all their importance, the Tun-huang manuscripts reveal almost nothing of Ch’an developments after the T’ang dynasty (618–906). "
   • "evidence suggests that both [Transmission and Patriarch's Hall] were subject to further editing

2. Clear double standard in examining historical records that is essential for religious apologetics

   • Treating Zen texts as fictional, other records as both fact and representative of Zen, in order to create an apologetics narrative that undermines Zen's assertion of lineage
   • "Because teng-lu were forged and shaped to assert revisionist claims regarding Ch’an orthodoxy, they are best treated as historical fi“ction rather than truly biographical records. Although they are constructed around historical circumstances, the records themselves are layered recollections of how the Ch’an tradition wished to re-member their own champions." (yet attributed texts and grave markers and government records are "true")
   • "The standardization of Chan also provided the pretext for the Chan Orthodoxy to no longer be the property of a distinct lineage (Huineng not responsible, it was Zen conspiracy)

3. Claiming that Mazu was separate from Zen lineage by ignoring earlier textual evidence and defining Zen through "attributed" texts

   • This is more than just a further example of #2 above, this is an attempt to rewrite history by deleting all the Zen that preceded Mazu, including Bodhidharma Anthology Masters and Mirror of the Mind
   • a style and interpretation of Ch’an attributed to the Ma-tsu lineage, including Ma-tsu and his more immediate descendants. More than any other Ch’an group, this contingent of masters is regarded in Ch’an lore as the instigators of the “classic” Ch’an style and per-spective, which becomes the common property of Ch’an masters in Ch’anteng-a style and interpretation of Ch’an attributed to the Ma-tsu lineage, including Ma-tsu and his more immediate descendants. More than any other Ch’an group, this contingent of masters is regarded in Ch’an lore as the instigators of the “classic” Ch’an style and per-spective, which becomes the common property of Ch’an masters in Ch’anteng

Submitted June 13, 2020 at 07:39PM by ewk https://ift.tt/2XY6ZPd