Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by kc2dpt »

Element wrote:Luangpor Sumedho is an example of this tradition, emphasising the here & now Nibbana and not emphasising periferal subjects such as rebirth.
I have never met or read of a Theravada teacher who emphasizes rebirth over the here & now. In fact, the only time I see rebirth being emphasized are by people who don't want to accept rebirth. They ask lots of questions about it, they argue about it, they try to reinterpret scriptures over it... meanwhile the other students are simply trying to learn to get some control over their minds. Honestly, if it weren't for people constantly trying to argue against rebirth I think I'd hardly ever have cause to talk about it.
Last edited by retrofuturist on Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Corrected attribution of quote from Anders to Element
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by mikenz66 »

Peter wrote: Honestly, if it weren't for people constantly trying to argue against rebirth I think I'd hardly ever have cause to talk about it.
:thumbsup:

Mike

PS, Peter, you were quoting Element, not Anders...
Element

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Element »

Peter wrote:In fact, the only time I see rebirth being emphasized are by people who don't want to accept rebirth. They ask lots of questions about it, they argue about it, they try to reinterpret scriptures over it... meanwhile the other students are simply trying to learn to get some control over their minds.
Peter,

I disagree. I notice those who wish the explain dependent origination so students can gain control over their minds & end dukkha.

Still not seen how self-view arises? Then still stuck without control.

Contact > feeling > craving > attachment > becoming > birth >dukka

This process is best to discern intimately and clearly.

With metta,

Element
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by christopher::: »

Individual wrote:
With some minor differences, I do not find hardly any lack of a correspondency between them and incorporate both into my practice. I attend a local zendo for Zen meditation and dharma talks by the Zen monk there, but I still don't consider this teacher above the authority of the Pali canon, and still read the Pali canon for insight.

I would say that Zen Buddhists resemble Theravadins simply because they are such great and disciplined meditators. "Shikantaza," for instance, while often considered a distinct form of Zen meditation seems to be the same as the "signless concentration," of the Pali canon. And many (but not all) of the Zen koans seem to be derived from stories in the Pali canon, but with some details changed a bit.

To understand how Zen and Theravada are the same, it may be good to see how Zen and the rest of Mahayana are very different. You can contrast the mainstream Mahayana Buddhist interpretation of Buddhas as being all-powerful celestial beings we devote ourselves to (through prayer and offerings) for salvation (much like the devas of Vedic Brahmanism), but then in Bodhidharma's Bloodstream sermon, he says:
Buddhas don't ferry Buddhas to the shore of liberation. If you use your mind to look for a Buddha, you won't see the Buddha. As long as you seek Buddhas outwards, you'll never see that your own Heart is the Buddha. Don't use a Buddha to worship a Buddha, and don't use the mind to invoke a Buddha. Buddhas don't recite sutras, Buddhas don't keep precepts, and Buddhas don't break precepts, Buddhas don't keep or break anything. Buddhas don't do good or evil.

To find a Buddha, you have to see your nature. Whoever sees his nature is a Buddha. If you don't see your nature, being mindful of Buddhas, reciting sutras, making offerings, and keeping precepts are not equal to it.
At the same time, this shouldn't be taken out of context, because he continues:
Being mindful of Buddhas results in good karma, reciting sutras results in a good intelligence; keeping precepts results in a good rebirth in heavens, and making offerings results in future blessings -- but no buddha. If you don't understand by yourself, you'll have to find a teacher to know the root of births and deaths.

...

If you don't find a teacher soon, you'll live this life in vain. It's true, you have the buddha-nature. But without the help of a teacher you'll never know it. Only one person in a million becomes enlightened without a teacher's help.

...

People who don't understand and think they can do so without study are no different from those deluded souls who can't tell white from black.
Now, Ven. Huifeng told me that Bodhidharma's Bloodstream sermon wasn't likely written by Bodhidharma, because of some historical something-or-other about the date it was allegedly composed being long after Bodhidharma's life. But then, you could apply the same skepticism to Mahayana sutras as a whole, being composed so long after Gautama, and without clear authorship. Regardless, they've been influential.

You should also consider the way that Huineng defines the "Trikaya" in the Platform Sutra. Whereas most Mahayana Buddhist (especially Vajrayana) have an esoteric explanation, of the Buddha having three bodies: the Nirmanakaya (i.e. Gautama's physical body), the Sambhogakaya (i.e. Gautama's celestial body -- what caused him to glow after his enlightenment), and the Dharmakaya (i.e. the Dharma, the Buddha, same thing, transcendent body). This kind of teaching, to me, seems like very useless, abstract speculatory nonsense.

But Zen takes a very different position than this. From Wikipedia:
The Three Bodies of the Buddha from the point of view of Zen Buddhist thought are not to be taken as absolute, literal, or materialistic; they are expedient means that "are merely names or props" and only the play of light and shadow of the mind.

"Do you wish to be not different from the Buddhas and patriarchs? Then just do not look for anything outside. The pure light of your own heart [i.e., 心, mind] at this instant is the Dharmakaya Buddha in your own house. The non-differentiating light of your heart at this instant is the Sambhogakaya Buddha in your own house. The non-discriminating light of your own heart at this instant is the Nirmanakaya Buddha in your own house. This trinity of the Buddha's body is none other than he here before your eyes, listening to my expounding the Dharma."
In other words, Huineng took what was becoming a ridiculous superstition and then tried to turn it into something useful. Gautama did the same thing with proto-Hindu beliefs... I see Bodhidharma and Huineng turning Chinese folk religion on its head as basically being the same thing Gautama did with proto-Hinduism. Rather than trying to work against the concepts through preaching beliefs people didn't agre with or understand, they took the wisdom of the Buddha and applied it contextually, working through the concepts and mindsets of the people there.

Oh, and Retrofuturist, I would add, based on the above, that "Zen Buddhism" shouldn't be merely associated with Japan, but rather, China (Chan) and it was exported to Japan. Bodhidharma, Huineng, the Zen classics from the Song Dynasty, these were all Chinese. What later became of Zen Buddhism (i.e. under the Samurai and the Zen Buddhist establishment during WW2), this was largely an embarrassment. As a result of it, and also as Chan died out in China, there have been many good Japanese Zen teachers, like D.T. Suzuki, Shunryu Suzuki, and Gudo Wafu Nishijima, but there was also Hsuan Hua from China and Thich Nhat Hanh from Vietnam. Some people also like Seung Sahn, but I'm pretty skeptical of him, given his proselytizing, sexual impropriety, and handing out monk robes like they were napkins. There are probably many very good but less well-known Zen monks from Asian countries besides Japan, in countries like China, Korea, and Vietnam.
Many excellent points there, Individual.

:namaste:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by christopher::: »

Element wrote:Hi Craig

I like the The Hsin Hsin Ming - Verses of the Faith Mind.

:namaste:
Me too. If we all spent more time considering these ideas, there would be little to debate about. Amazing how still the mind becomes as we learn to detach a bit from our most cherished opinions and views...

:heart:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
Dhammakid
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Santa Fe, NM USA
Contact:

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Dhammakid »

Hello all,
When I was practicing Zen, Bodhidharma's teachings, as well as The Gateless Gate, The Blue Cliff Record and Verses on the Faith Mind were among my favorites to read and contemplate. I found them to be so clear, and I still refer back to them when speaking of emptiness and mind.

Individual, can you please point me to information concerning Zen Master Seung Sahns sexual impropriety, proselytizing, and loose-ness of handing out of robes? As a former Korean Seon practitioner, I have a soft spot for the late great, so this information would be of use for me.

:namaste:
Dhammakid
Element

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Element »

christopher::: wrote: Me too. If we all spent more time considering these ideas, there would be little to debate about. Amazing how still the mind becomes as we learn to detach a bit from our most cherished opinions and views... :heart:
I disagree. Verses on faith in mind are insufficient for the whole path. It is useful for samadhi development however.
Last edited by Element on Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6490
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Dhammakid & Individual,
Dhammakid wrote:Individual, can you please point me to information concerning Zen Master Seung Sahns sexual impropriety, proselytizing, and loose-ness of handing out of robes? As a former Korean Seon practitioner, I have a soft spot for the late great, so this information would be of use for me.
Since allegations about this teacher aren't really relevant to the topic, discussion of them would be better continued by pm. Incidentally, the subject has been discussed at considerable length in a thread at E-sangha.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
Rūpehi bhikkhave arūpā santatarā.
Arūpehi nirodho santataro ti.


“Bhikkhus, the formless is more peaceful than the form realms.
Cessation is more peaceful than the formless realms.”
(Santatarasutta, Iti 73)
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by christopher::: »

Hello friends,
Element wrote:
christopher::: wrote:
Me too. If we all spent more time considering these ideas, there would be little to debate about. Amazing how still the mind becomes as we learn to detach a bit from our most cherished opinions and views... :heart:
I disagree. Verses on faith in mind are insufficient for the whole path. It is useful for samadhi development however.
I didn't mean to imply that it's sufficient for the whole path, just that it can help calm the mind and promote detachment, especially when expressing and encountering opposing views in these online discussion situations.

:group:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
Heavenstorm
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Heavenstorm »

However, since exposure to chat sites, I notice Zen adherents verge towards extremes of nothingness and are soft in moral foundation.
A further problem is that many of them believe in a sudden instance of Enlightenment rather than a gradual experience. Hence they see the non necessity of studying scriptures and enjoy mocking the learned. As a result, they are tend towards interpreting emptiness as voidness and don't see morality as a requirement for achieving deep states of calm (Jhanas).
Heavenstorm
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Heavenstorm »

Individual wrote:In other words, Huineng took what was becoming a ridiculous superstition and then tried to turn it into something useful. Gautama did the same thing with proto-Hindu beliefs... I see Bodhidharma and Huineng turning Chinese folk religion on its head as basically being the same thing Gautama did with proto-Hinduism. Rather than trying to work against the concepts through preaching beliefs people didn't agre with or understand, they took the wisdom of the Buddha and applied it contextually, working through the concepts and mindsets of the people there.
Except that Huineng accepted the validity of Pure Land schools (Who relying upon the trikaya doctrine more than other Mahayana schools) and not totally against it. The previous quoted statement is another way of saying that the trikaya is found within everyone (like Buddha nature) rather than locally externally, not rejecting it.

Huineng used criticisms as a means to induce people into seeing the nature of their mind but most people misunderstood that He is actually serious about it and trying to create a deviation from the mainstream system.
Oh, and Retrofuturist, I would add, based on the above, that "Zen Buddhism" shouldn't be merely associated with Japan, but rather, China (Chan) and it was exported to Japan. Bodhidharma, Huineng, the Zen classics from the Song Dynasty, these were all Chinese.
Bodhidharma was an Indian and before Him, the early patriarchs of Zen were Indians and Arahants. And Bodhidharma came to China in the Northern and Southern Dynasty period while Huineng was alive during the Tang dynasty.
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by christopher::: »

Heavenstorm wrote:
However, since exposure to chat sites, I notice Zen adherents verge towards extremes of nothingness and are soft in moral foundation.
A further problem is that many of them believe in a sudden instance of Enlightenment rather than a gradual experience. Hence they see the non necessity of studying scriptures and enjoy mocking the learned. As a result, they are tend towards interpreting emptiness as voidness and don't see morality as a requirement for achieving deep states of calm (Jhanas).
Zen adherents are as numerous and diverse as a room filled with Europeans or New Yorkers. This is probably true, actually, for any group on our planet. There are many kinds of Christians, Muslims and Jews as well. Everything you have said above is true for many who show an interest in Zen, more so probably for newcomers.

Once people go deeper though they discover that no school of Buddhism is simple or easy. The dharma doesn't work if we only implement a few select elements of it.

:smile:
Heavenstorm wrote:
Bodhidharma was an Indian and before Him, the early patriarchs of Zen were Indians and Arahants. And Bodhidharma came to China in the Northern and Southern Dynasty period while Huineng was alive during the Tang dynasty.
Clearly, the great rivers of Buddhism flow from the same initial sources. The farther back (and deeper) you go, the closer we get...

:group:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
Individual
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by Individual »

I just came across a sutta that seems relevant to this discussion:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ven. Maha Cunda said, "Friends, there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks1 disparage jhana monks, saying, 'These people are absorbed and besorbed in jhana, saying, "We are absorbed, we are absorbed." But why, indeed, are they absorbed? For what purpose are they absorbed? How are they absorbed?' In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks disparage Dhamma-devotee monks, saying, 'These people say, "We are Dhamma-devotees, we are Dhamma-devotees,' but they are excitable, boisterous, unsteady, mouthy, loose in their talk, muddled in their mindfulness, unalert, unconcentrated, their minds wandering, their senses uncontrolled. Why, indeed, are they Dhamma devotees? For what purpose are they Dhamma devotees? How are they Dhamma devotees?' In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks praise only Dhamma-devotee monks, and not jhana monks. In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks praise only jhana monks, and not Dhamma-devotee monks. In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being Dhamma-devotee monks, we will speak in praise of jhana monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who dwell touching the deathless element with the body.2

"And thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being jhana monks, we will speak in praise of Dhamma-devotee monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who penetrate with discernment statements of deep meaning."
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
User avatar
bodom
Posts: 7215
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by bodom »

Individual wrote:I just came across a sutta that seems relevant to this discussion:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ven. Maha Cunda said, "Friends, there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks1 disparage jhana monks, saying, 'These people are absorbed and besorbed in jhana, saying, "We are absorbed, we are absorbed." But why, indeed, are they absorbed? For what purpose are they absorbed? How are they absorbed?' In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks disparage Dhamma-devotee monks, saying, 'These people say, "We are Dhamma-devotees, we are Dhamma-devotees,' but they are excitable, boisterous, unsteady, mouthy, loose in their talk, muddled in their mindfulness, unalert, unconcentrated, their minds wandering, their senses uncontrolled. Why, indeed, are they Dhamma devotees? For what purpose are they Dhamma devotees? How are they Dhamma devotees?' In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.


"Then there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks praise only Dhamma-devotee monks, and not jhana monks. In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks praise only jhana monks, and not Dhamma-devotee monks. In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being Dhamma-devotee monks, we will speak in praise of jhana monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who dwell touching the deathless element with the body.2

"And thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being jhana monks, we will speak in praise of Dhamma-devotee monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who penetrate with discernment statements of deep meaning."
Nice find Individual! :twothumbsup:

:namaste:
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.

- BB
User avatar
dumb bonbu
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:37 pm
Location: Hull, East Yorkshire

Re: Theravada and Zen - a comparative analysis

Post by dumb bonbu »

i think any Mahayana tradition stands to learn a great deal from the Path of the Elders, that's why i'm here. i'll confess i don't know a great deal about Zen...other than having read Suzuki's The Zen Doctrine of No Mind when i was much younger (probably too young to pick up on a great deal of it if i'm being honest) but from the little i do know of it i can understand why often there might be a lot of...erm..interfaith dialogue (is that an appropriate phrase to use?) between the two. especially the Thai Forest tradition. the reason i became interested in the Path of the Elders is in the hope and belief that it will enrichen and strengthen not only my understanding of the path i practice but also my understanding of Dhamma full stop.

incidentally Ben, if you are struck by the poetic expression of Zen, i would highly recommend The Narrow Road to the Deep North by Bassho!
Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding.
MN 21
Post Reply