Astus wrote:The majority of Zen teachings is written in Chinese language. Does that mean Zen involves Chinese? No, Zen is not connected to the language that is used as its medium, and the language itself does not become Zen just because it is used to convey Zen teachings.
As for the concept of "Zen school", it is not an easy one to define. Traditionally speaking, there are only two schools of Zen since the Song dynasty, and that is the Linji and the Caodong. However, they exist in theory only.
So, if we changed the question, asking if there are Buddhist monastic/lay communities in East Asia where they practise qigong/gongfu/etc., the answer can be easily yes. And regarding their specific views on Buddhist doctrine and praxis one can find a large variety, while at the same time they all do qigong or other forms of body training. In fact, we can just say that there are often some form of body training involved, since even in qigong there are different styles.
that's basically what i asked. but it doesn't really matter. are there zen schools that "involve" qigong? that's all i wanted too know, and the answer is yes. i didn't ask or imply that there were schools that completely changed buddhism too be taoist in some way and involved qigong in this activity.
you are adamantly opposed too the idea that zen is taoist in any way. that's fine, i'm not saying that it is, nor was i in the op. all i'm saying is some zen schools practice qigong. i have no stake in the debate either way, i'm a theravada practitioner and i only study zen as a hobby and borrow a concept or two here and there.
there are books written about taoist influence on zen. are there many on refuting this idea? i'm not being sarcastic or anything, i'm legitimately curious.
perhaps this should move too a thread about specifically this. but i'm curious too know:
what would happen for you personally if the following happens next month:
scientists find bodhidharma's skeleton (preserved by some luck and natural forces or something such as being encased in amber somehow or whatever, we're pretending so who cares) and carbon dated it too find it definitely came from the right time period, and then found a little stone tablet with him that specifically says: "when i came too china, i integrated some taoist ideas into my teachings" and on the back of the tablet is a map.
they carbon date the stone and it's from the same period, and then they follow the map and find a cave where bodhidharma stored his writings in great detail, all of these carbon date perfectly as well and they talk about his history and teaching methods and how he involved taoist ideas in his teachings and these things are unanimously agreed upon by scientists, archaeologists and historians and there is corroborative evidence that it is definitely his writings. and this leads too discovering his family lineage in india and there they find records of who he was and his departure date for india and so on, thus totally confirming that bodhidharma did in fact come from india, establish chan, and that there are taoist elements in it put there by it's very founder.
obviously this little story is totally ridiculous, but if it were some how true, it would mean that there is taoism in zen. what would this mean for you?
i'm only asking because you came too this thread about zen schools that involve qigong and attempted too inform me that there are no zen schools that use qigong any more than simply chan monks that also know qigong. similar too a chan practitioner who is also an engineer. then you dodged my reply that there are schools that practice both (shaolin as a prime example) and turn it into a new thing about defining zen and the existence of the caodong and linji schools, instead of answering whether or not i could be right that somewhere in the last 1400 years there could have been zen schools that teach qigong as part of their curriculum. and then you went on further about how just because the chinese language is used in zen literature, does that make chinese zen? and so on. when that's nothing too do with this post really. so clearly you feel very strongly about it if you feel you need too inform people that zen is not taoist just because they mentioned zen practitioners and qigong together. so it's clearly very important too you and i'm trying too figure out why. and i'm talking with you about it just for fun and curiousity. again, i have no stake in either side of the debate, but i'm guessing i will not be able too talk about chan and taoism in the same post without hearing from you so i would like too know what's going on inside your head. i hope it's clear i have no ill intention or anger about the issue, just curiosity and interest from a side lines kind of perspective.