CHAPTER 6

Zen and Its Roots

The Zen school is a combination of the mental reality of Shakyamuni Buddha's teaching with the spirit of Chinese culture, forming Chinese Buddhism, blending the most refined and purified schools of ancient Indian Buddhist philosophy. In Buddhist study, "Zen concentration" is a method of cultivating realization practiced by both Hinayana and Mahayana, the Small Vehicle and the Great Vehicle.

The original term for "Zen concentration" is dhyana. This is also translated in Chinese as "quiet meditation." Later, the sound of the Sanskrit word dhyana Zen was used in conjunction with "concentration" to translate the meaning, thus forming the term conventionally used in Chinese Buddhism, "Zen concentration" or "meditation concentration."

Although the Zen school is not other than the cultivation and realization of Zen concentration, it is not exactly the same thing as Zen concentration. Therefore, it is also called the Mind school, or the Prajna school. "Mind school" indicates that the Zen school is the transmission of the mental reality of Buddhist teachings. Prajna refers to the Zen schools from the T'ang dynasty on, which placed emphasis on the scriptures on prajna (wisdom) and on seeking realization of the liberation of wisdom. In recent times European scholars have also called it the Bodhidharma school, naming it after the great Indian teacher Bodhidharma, who was the first one to transmit the Zen school to China.

Speaking of the Zen school, ever since World War II, Japanese Buddhists, with the support of their government, have made an effort to disseminate Buddhist culture in Europe and America, with particular emphasis on the Zen sect. Because of this, studies dealing with the Zen sect have become a most fashionable and modish field of scholarship in present-day Europe and America, but the parent country of Zen, which is China, has been forgotten and even disdained. The formation of such phenomena truly causes a sinking heaviness in our feelings that is hard to express in words. Even though the momentum of the times makes it this way, yet is it not a human affair?

But the Zen school as talked about right now in China and elsewhere (including Japan) has been deviating on farther and farther tangents along with the trends of the times. Because of this, some people in foreign countries think movements such as the Hippies were inspired by Zen. From the standpoint of Chinese culture, this is really a very big misunderstanding. Strictly speaking, it is also a stain of dishonor that we Eastern cultures have called down upon ourselves.

In general, there are six large misunderstandings of what is presently called Zen. The first comes from the establishment of the terminology of Zen scholarship. Zen originally emphasizes genuine realization through the activities of body and mind, giving parallel weight to work and insight. Once it changes into Zen scholarship, Zen becomes a kind of learned way of thought and can lose its connection with true realization in action and work. At this point "mouth Zen," the fashion of talking about Zen, becomes popular, creating a regressive historical pattern much like the phenomenon of Occult Conversation (Hsuan-fan) in the Chin dynasty (265-419).

The overlooked facts are as follows. After the Zen school was established around the turn of the Sui and T'ang dynasties (ca. 600), it passed through its most flourishing era in the T'ang and Sung dynasties, then continued through the Yuan and Ming dynasties, ending in the Ch'ing. Over a period of more than a thousand years, in areas encompassing East Asia and the lands of Southeast Asia, the way of the Zen school was very popular. Yet we have information on no more than about two thousand people, and those whose practice of Zen was really complete numbered no more than three or four hundred people. And among these, the great adepts were so few you could count them. When was there ever "Zen at all times, Tao in all places"?

Furthermore, if we set aside the sense of the moment captured in stories of Zen living and Zen dialogue, we are left with the virtuous conduct and work of cultivating realization practiced by true Zennists, which are exemplary and honorable ways of upstanding people. So when were true Zen practitioners ever professional talkers who just spouted empty words, failing to reveal any actual accomplishment in their practice of daily living? But to talk about Zen learning is a little better than burying Zen altogether, so in that sense it's all right.

The second misunderstanding derives from the fondness of Oriental scholars for intellectualizing and philosophizing about the literature of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, due to which they perpetuate the myth that Zen has been influenced by the philosophy of these men, or, to put it another way, that Zen is just Taoistic Buddhism amalgamating the philosophy of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu. In reality, although Zen and Buddhism have borrowed many terms and expressions from the technical languages of Lao-Chuang (Taoism) and Confucianism, nevertheless they are just borrowings; the spirit of Zen itself is not by any means to be considered a remake or remodeled form of Lao-Chuang or Taoist thought just because it borrows some of their terms and expressions.

For example, if we were to translate Chinese or Buddhist literature, in any given area we would have to make use of terminology from the religious and philosophical languages of that area. But we could only say that similarities between them make communication possible. We cannot say that the result itself represents the ideas of such and such a religion or philosophy. To give another example, when we use Taiwanese money, in certain situations we represent the figures in terms of U.S. dollar equivalents, but it cannot be said that we use U.S. dollars as our national currency.

The third misunderstanding is picking up situational actions and pivotal words found in the method of transmitting Zen teaching and turning them into a distorted lofty silence or parody, always speaking ambiguously and cryptically, while considering this to be the state of Zen. This misleads people quite a bit.

The fourth misunderstanding is to think that Zen is sitting quietly with a blank mind and closed eyes (what is commonly called just sitting), or that it is deep thought or silent reverie. This is the case of those who follow tangents and byways, and there are many such people who represent things like this as Zen. That is why advertisements for the transmission of various kinds of Zen or meditation work appear in the newspapers, and have become a popular business.

The fifth misunderstanding is found among American youth of recent times who employ hallucinogenic drugs such as LSD in conjunction with unrestrained behavior and various occult ideas, thinking that they are then doing Zen meditation and achieving the effects equivalent to Zen work. Although most countries have outlawed the sale of hallucinogens, they are still available and continue to be used in this fashion. These drugs were originally used in the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, but when they are diverted from that and associated with Zen, it is really a big joke.

The sixth misunderstanding comes from the popular dissemination of Indian yoga in Europe and America after World War II. The body-strengthening exercises of yoga also place great emphasis on the practice of quiet sitting. Thus, in some cases self-hypnosis has been combined with yogic exercises for cultivating life force energy and developing its circulation, with this being taken for Zen. Fish eyes are mixed with pearls, deer are called horses; thus people who do not understand the ultimate have a hard time making the appropriate distinctions.

Historical Traces of Zen

Within the context of Buddhism, Zen has always been called the teaching that is transmitted separately outside of doctrine. It is traditionally told that when Shakyamuni addressed a crowd of a million people and celestial beings at a meeting on Spiritual Mountain, he remained silent and did not speak a word; he just held up a flower and twirled it, showing it to everyone in the great assembly. No one could comprehend his meaning, except for Maha (Elder) Kasyapa, who smiled in understanding. Then Shakyamuni announced to the crowd, "I have the treasury of the eye of true teaching, the ineffable mind of nirvana. The form of reality is formless; the subtle teaching does not insist on written words, but is separately transmitted outside of doctrine. This I entrust to Maha Kasyapa."

This was the beginning of Zen. Later the reverend Kasyapa was considered the first patriarch of Zen in India, and Ananda was the second patriarch; the patriarchy was handed on through the generations, until it reached the twenty-eighth patriarch, Great Master Bodhidharma. At that time in China, it was the era of the Northern and Southern dynasties, and Indian Buddhism was in decline. Bodhidharma thought that China had the atmosphere of the Mahayana, so he crossed the sea to come East. Arriving in Canton province, he met with Emperor Wu of the Liang dynasty in southern China.

Emperor Wu was a devoted believer in religion; he not only believed in Buddhism but he honored Taoism as well. So when he saw the Great Master Bodhidharma, he immediately asked, "I have constructed so many temples and performed so many Buddhist services; how much merit do you think I have earned?"

Now it happened that Bodhidharma was transmitting the seal of the Buddha mind and was carrying out a mission to disseminate the mental teaching of true Buddhism, so he answered frankly, "No merit whatsoever. These are just minor effects on the human or celestial levels, with contaminated causes; like shadows following forms, though they exist, they are not real." He also said, "Pure knowledge is ineffably perfect, inherently empty, and silent; such merit is not sought through the world."

Because the conversation of the emperor and the Zen patriarch did not reach accord, the Great Master crossed over into northern China, where he stayed at Shao-lin temple on Mount Sung and sat facing a wall. Since he spent his days in silence, no one could fathom him. Later he transmitted the mind teaching, together with the robe and bowl symbolic of the succession, to the second Zen patriarch of China, Shen-kuang. This is the kung-an, or public record, of Great Master Bodhidharma coming East to become the first patriarch of Chinese Zen.

Ever since the T'ang and Sung dynasties, some scholars researching Buddhist doctrines and principles have verbosely criticized the Zen history of the raising of the flower and the smile and the special transmission outside of doctrine, without themselves having attained any understanding whatsoever of the Zen teachings on practice and realization, and in extreme cases having their own biased attitudes. Even down to the present day there are still people who do not believe this story, and who even entertain doubts about Great Master Bodhidharma's transmission of the teaching; they take these to be the fabrications of Chinese monks. They actually believe that the Zen school was a revolutionary party within Chinese Buddhism, and that it was single-handedly invented in the T'ang dynasty by Shen-hui (also called Ho-tse), a minor disciple of the sixth patriarch Hui-neng.

Since people have already raised these problems, we might as well provide some explanation. If such ideas are rooted in an attitude of love for the tradition of Chinese culture, recognizing fine scholarship as a product of Chinese people and thus denying the traditional explanation of the transmission of Zen, that is understandable. But if they are based on an attitude of opposition to tradition and custom, on a habitual fondness for going against the norm regardless, on any issue at all to give the appearance of lofty purism, that is out of harmony with the principle of "learning a lot, leaving aside the doubtful, and speaking carefully of the rest."

Actually, concerning doubts about the source material on the Zen history of the special transmission outside of doctrine, Wang An-shih of the Sung dynasty did present proof that there was such a thing; but the authentication has already been lost, and it was not very strong evidence anyway. Nevertheless, if you read through the Buddhist scriptures, you can find a number of indirect proofs; but since this would take too long and be too specialized, I will refrain from going into them here. In sum, whenever dealing with facts or doing scholarship, "see a lot, set aside the doubtful, and practice the rest with care." But the attitude of conscious doubt, bringing up questions to seek answers, is the most enlightened way of dealing with things, as long as it is not done too subjectively.

As for the spirit of the initial transmission of Zen to China, when Great Master Bodhidharma was sitting silently facing a wall at Shao-lin temple, someone asked him why he had come to China. His reply was that he was looking for someone who "was not influenced by the deceptions of others." The meaning of this statement is most profound; try to think of who can reach the point of being completely immune to being deceived by anyone of any time or place? Indeed, we are all sometimes involved in our own self-deception. If an individual can really reach the point of being immune to all deception, even if that person does not become a sage or a Buddha, he or she is still an extraordinary human being. Generally, only people who are immovable because they are either of the highest wisdom or the lowest ignorance can achieve this!

A certain young man from Lo-yang named Chi Kuang had read widely in the classics and was particularly well versed in Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu. But he used to say with regret that the teachings of Confucius and Lao-tzu only established human cultural rites and doctrines, and guides for worldly learning. Furthermore, he felt that the books of Chuang-tzu and the I Ching, although mysterious and profound, were still unable to exhaust thoroughly the marvelous principles of the universe and human life. Because of this he eventually gave up worldly learning and left home to become a monk, changing his name to Shen-kuang.

After this he made a thorough study of the Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhist doctrines. When he reached the age of thirty-three, he went to Mount Hsiang, where he sat quietly all day long for eight years. After that he went to Shao-lin temple to see the Great Master Bodhidharma in search of the Way. At this time, however, the Great Master was constantly sitting facing a wall, and did not give out any instructions at all.

Now Shen-kuang thought to himself, "When people of old sought the Way, they broke open their bones to take out the marrow and pierced their flesh to draw blood in order to feed the hungry, spread their hair over mud for others to walk on, and threw themselves over cliffs to feed tigers. They did this even in ancient times, when human hearts were pure and unspoiled; so what am I worth?" Now it happened to be a snowy winter, yet Shen-kuang stood all night in attendance by the side of Great Master Bodhidharma; by dawn the snow on the ground had piled up so high it passed his knees, yet he kept standing there with even greater reverence. (Later stories of standing in snow at the school of the Ch'engs, famous neo-Confucians of the Sung dynasty, are reproductions of this kind of spirit.)

Great Master Bodhidharma turned to him and asked, "You have been standing there in the snow all night; what are you seeking?" Weeping grievously, Shen-kuang pleaded, "I only hope that the Great Master will be so kind and compassionate as to open up the gate of the ambrosial teaching whereby to liberate sentient beings." But Bodhidharma retorted in a scolding tone, "The unexcelled sublime Way of the Buddhas requires countless eons of diligent practice, refining virtuous conduct through the ability to do what is hard to do and endure what is hard to endure. How can you, with so little virtue and wisdom, and with your casual and arrogant attitude, hope to seek and find the true realization of the Way? I am afraid your concern is in vain."

Hearing this upbraiding, Shen-kuang took out a sharp sword, cut off his own left forearm, and placed it before the Great Master, to show how earnestly determined he was in seeking the Way. Now the Great Master Bodhidharma recognized the young man's capacity to bear great responsibility, and changed his name to Hui-k'e.

Then Shen-kuang asked, "Would you explain to me the teaching of the seal of the mind of all Buddhas?" The Great Master replied, "The truth of the mind of Buddhas is not attained from another!" (Please note that this statement is the most important key of Zen.)

Hearing this, Shen-kuang asked, "My mind is not at ease; please teach me how to pacify the mind." The Great Master then told him, "Find your mind for me, and I will pacify it for you."

Shen-kuang was stupefied when he heard this. After a long while he finally said, "I have searched for where my mind is, but I cannot find it!" Then the Great Master said, "Right! This is how to pacify your mind!" He also taught him a method of practice: "You must set aside all external objects, and make your inner mind free from waves. Still the mind so that it is like a wall, stopping random movements inside and outside, exiting and entering, coming and going. Then you can enter the Way by this means." Later he also instructed him to use the Lankavatara sutra to authenticate his own practice and understanding. This is the course of events in the kung-an, or public record, of Great Master Bodhidharma first transmitting Zen in China, handing it on to the second patriarch Shen-kuang.

Now, based on these stories of the handing on of the initial transmission of Zen, we will address three separate issues to explain them.

The Special Transmission of Zen Outside of Buddhist Doctrine

The so-called "special transmission" of Zen "outside of doctrine" does not mean that there is a secret or arcane transmission that basically does not need the scriptural teachings of Buddhism. The whole body of principles of Buddhist scriptural teachings is for the purpose of explaining the theory and methods of how to cultivate practice and seek realization. Therefore, people who cling to the principles of the scriptural teachings often turn them into philosophical thought, thereby producing the countereffect of increasing intellectual barriers and divisions. Thus they cannot achieve unity of knowledge and action and realize the effect of practice and vision advancing together simultaneously.

So the special transmission outside of doctrine just represents a variance from the usual method of transmission of Buddhism; it does not refer to a special extraordinary teaching outside of the principles of the Buddhist teachings. Shen-kuang, for example, was a learned and talented young man before he became a monk; after he was ordained, he added to this a mastery of the principles of the teachings of Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism. As far as intellectual knowledge is concerned, clearly he was extraordinary in the depth, breadth, and fullness of his learning; yet he did not want anything but to find his own mind. So he understood that intellectual scholarship that is full of doubt and the genuine application to the matter of finding real spiritual peace and enlightenment are two different things. Therefore, he abandoned intellectual doctrine and just sought real enlightenment.

When one attains to real enlightenment and arrives at the actual truth, however, this naturally will merge with the basis of intellectual learning that one has, and one will clearly understand the ultimate principle. This is why the later Zen Master Kuei-shan Ling-yu said, "The noumenal ground of reality does not have a single atom in it, yet the avenues of myriad practices do not reject a single method."

So if we draw a general conceptual conclusion about the doctrines of Buddhist teaching and the source of the Zen specially transmitted outside of doctrine, doctrines teach you how to cultivate practice and realize the effects; the source is how we should cultivate practice to seek realization. The source and the doctrines are different only in terms of the method of guidance; they do not have different purposes.

The Work of Zen

The Zen of the Zen school is not "mouth Zen," laying emphasis on turns of phrase expressing thrusts of wit; Zen is not apart from the work of cultivating realization through meditation concentration to arrive at the ultimate result of attaining sagehood or Buddhahood through clarifying the mind and seeing its essence. In the example of Shen-kuang, before he had seen Great Master Bodhidharma he had already steeped his mind in the I Ching and the Taoist teachings of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, and he had also gone through strict training to cultivate the mind. Having sat quietly on Mount Hsiang for eight years, he already had a considerable grounding in the work of meticulous introspection to rectify his nature whenever his mind stirred.

When he saw Bodhidharma, not only did the Great Master not immediately give Shen-kuang guidance, instead he spurred him on with an unbearable attitude and extreme words. If Shen-kuang had been a man without real cultivation, even if he did not punch Bodhidharma out, at least he would have left at once; but instead he increased his sincerity and seriousness, even to the point where he cut off his arm to seek the Way. Based on this kind of spirit, we might well paraphrase the Confucian Hsia-tzu to say, "Even though it might be said that he had not yet entered the Way, I would call this the Way!" So when he asked Bodhidharma how to pacify the mind, the Great Master just told him, "Bring me your mind and I will pacify it for you." Then he was able to awaken to the Way with the understanding that "having looked for the mind, it cannot be found."

In later eras, people researching Zen have tended to talk about it as sudden enlightenment at a word, immediately attaining Buddhahood, as if it just required intellectual acuity, and as if the ability to utter one or two pretty phrases immediately counted as enlightenment. They have completely disregarded the important points of real learning and real work. Of course their behavior falls into the category of "wild fox Zen" that makes you wonder who they think they are fooling. Do they think they are fooling people? Do they think they are fooling Heaven?

There are also those who think they do not need to work on introspection themselves, but must only find an enlightened teacher to transmit a secret way of opening, imagining that this is the work of Zen. People with this attitude have also forgotten the clear lesson of the Great Master Bodhidharma that "The seal of truth of the Buddhas is not gotten from another." Modern discussions of Zen either fall easily into the vanity of the former view or the occultism of the latter. This is really worth reflecting upon.

Using the Lankavatara Sutra to Seal One's Understanding of Penetrating Through to the Root Basis of Mind and the Universe

The Zen initially transmitted by Great Master Bodhidharma was communicated to several students besides the second patriarch Shen-kuang, who personally received the robe and bowl of Bodhidharma and inherited the enlightenment lineage of the Zen school. All of these students had mental attainment, but their talents, virtues, and spirits were somewhat inferior to those of Shen-kuang.

Besides transmitting the mind teaching, at the same time Great Master Bodhidharma still wanted Shen-kuang to seal the mind with the Lankavatara sutra. By this we can see that the Zen specially transmitted outside of doctrine is not separate from the principles of the teachings at all. The Lankavatara sutra was, after all, handed on to Shen-kuang by Great Master Bodhidharma to be a valuable reference book for sealing the mind. Yet in the Fa-hsiang (Dharmalakshana) or Wei-shih (Vijnaptimatra) school of Mahayana Buddhism, it is also recognized as one of the main classic scriptures of Only Consciousness studies.

The Lankavatara sutra presents the method for seeking realization represented by the expression "the door of nonbeing is the door to truth." It also explains how sudden enlightenment and gradual cultivation are both important. At the same time, it divides the substance and function of mental phenomena into eight functions, which consist of the five primary consciousnesses, which are the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body consciousnesses, plus the sixth or ideational consciousness, the seventh or mental consciousness, and the eighth or storehouse consciousness. This is what is called the analysis of one mind into eight consciousnesses.

Anciently it was noted that consciousness has the functions of discernment and discrimination and also includes the capacities of feeling, cognition, and spiritual activity. The sixth or ideational consciousness is also divided into two levels, a consciousness that comprehends and a consciousness of images alone (also called solitary ideational consciousness). The ideational consciousness of images alone corresponds to what modern psychology calls the phenomenon of the subconscious.

The seventh or mind consciousness is the faculty of the intellect, which is the consciousness of the original cognitive awareness and instinctive activity that come along with self and life. The eighth or storehouse consciousness is the monad that includes both mind and objects, the basis of the nature of mind, which is at the root of both the spiritual world and the material world.

Thus we can see that the clarification of mind and perception of its essence as spoken of in Zen does not simply mean psychological peace of mind. In reality it requires us to penetrate through the root basis of the universe, body, and mind. Only then can we really know the truth of the statement that "the three realms are only mind, myriad phenomena are only consciousness."

The overall gist of the Lankavatara sutra brings into play the general outline of Only Consciousness studies, which consists of the following: five phenomena (names, appearances, discrimination, accurate knowledge, suchness as is); three inherent natures (relative, merely conceptual, perfectly real); eight consciousnesses (as explained above); and two kinds of selflessness (of person, of things). In sum, the doctrinal principles of the Lankavatara sutra lay greatest emphasis on analytic observation and insight, entering minutely into where there is no gap, penetrating completely through the substance and function of the nature of mind.

The method of Zen is to absorb the principles and concentrate on single-minded cultivation of realization in harmony with the principles of the teachings. Therefore, in later Zen there was a famous proverb that said, "If you master the source but not the teachings, whenever you open your mouth you will speak at random; if you master the teachings but not the source, you will be like a one-eyed dragon." In reality, this idea is just a rephrasing of the expressions used in the Lankavatara sutra itself referring to mastery of the source and mastery of the explanation.

Recently some people have presented the Zen school before the sixth patriarch under the rubric of the Lankavatara school, and have thereby treated Zen after the sixth patriarch as a separate domain. Actually, this is a result of not understanding the real Zen mind teaching. They did not avoid adding legs to a drawing of a snake, making an unnecessary step.

When Great Master Bodhidharma was entrusting the transmission to the second patriarch Shen-kuang, he predicted, "Two hundred years after my death . . . those who understand the Way will be many, but those who travel the Way will be few. Those who talk about the principle will be many, but those who master the principle will be few."

The doctrine of the Lankavatara sutra has thus been turned into a subject of literary and formal scholarship, and has come to be known as nothing but theoretical ideology. This is most lamentable! What is more, some people cite the Lankavatara sutra's passage on gradual cultivation as a proof that what Great Master Bodhidharma transmitted was gradual practice Zen, paying no attention to a later passage on the equal importance of the sudden and the gradual. This is really the epitome of crudity and shallowness.