If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
himalayanspirit
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:36 pm

If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby himalayanspirit » Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:43 pm

If Mahakashyapa was the first Chan/Zen patriarch, then isn't Chan/Zen a Sravakayana school considering that all the disciples of historical Buddha were Arhats?

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 5814
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Astus » Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:36 pm

Besides that the whole succession of patriarchs, especially the Indian part, is a fiction, one of the Mahayana interpretation of the major disciples of the Buddha is that they were actually bodhisattvas under cover.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

Jinzang
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:11 am

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Jinzang » Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:04 am

The point of the list of patriarchs was not that each patriarch in the list was a Zen Buddhist, but that there was an unbroken succession of enlightened teachers from the Zen teachers of China back to Buddha. This was important in Chinese culture, where filial respect for one's ancestors was so emphasized.
"It's as plain as the nose on your face!" Dottie Primrose

User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 2830
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby LastLegend » Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:41 am

Zen is Buddhism and Buddhism is Zen. You cannot meditate without understanding Buddhist teachings.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)

Bodhidharma [my translation]
―I come to the East to transmit this clear knowing mind without constructing any dharma―

User avatar
booker
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:08 pm
Location: UK

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby booker » Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:00 am

himalayanspirit wrote: then isn't Chan/Zen a Sravakayana school

Nope it's not. 1) Sravakas know no buddha nature concept 2) Sravakas do not meditate, method is to listen to teachings and reflect upon them and that creates conditions for sati to arise and with it, they can have an insigth into the reality directly.

In Zen 1) introduction to buddha nature 2) meditation / enquiry into it.
"Be Buddhist or be Buddha"

User avatar
Kare
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:48 pm
Location: Norway

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Kare » Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:24 pm

booker wrote:
himalayanspirit wrote: then isn't Chan/Zen a Sravakayana school

Nope it's not. 1) Sravakas know no buddha nature concept 2) Sravakas do not meditate, method is to listen to teachings and reflect upon them and that creates conditions for sati to arise and with it, they can have an insigth into the reality directly.

In Zen 1) introduction to buddha nature 2) meditation / enquiry into it.


Sravakas do not meditate?!!!!!
Kåre A. Lie

User avatar
Kare
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:48 pm
Location: Norway

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Kare » Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:25 pm

Astus wrote:Besides that the whole succession of patriarchs, especially the Indian part, is a fiction, one of the Mahayana interpretation of the major disciples of the Buddha is that they were actually bodhisattvas under cover.


I love this concept of the major disciples as undercover agents! :spy:
Kåre A. Lie

Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Kai » Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:26 pm

himalayanspirit wrote:If Mahakashyapa was the first Chan/Zen patriarch, then isn't Chan/Zen a Sravakayana school considering that all the disciples of historical Buddha were Arhats?


He was not...........really.....although many Chan and Zen practitioners prefer to think that He was so as to increase their personal faith in Zen methods. If anything, the founder of Chan or Zen was Bodhidharma, before Him, no such school or method existed......

User avatar
booker
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:08 pm
Location: UK

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby booker » Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:31 pm

Kare wrote:Sravakas do not meditate?!!!!!

Perhaps I was overgeneralising, there are streams where meditation is performed but is regarded as a method for a very advanced practitioners only.

If you read some modern interpretations, like from Sujin Boriharnwanaket clearly the base is on listening and reflecting only.
"Be Buddhist or be Buddha"

Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: If Mahakashyapa was first Zen/Chan patriarch..

Postby Kai » Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:38 pm

Kare wrote:Sravakas do not meditate?!!!!!


They do but the Zen methods differ a lot from the Thervadins' one........


Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Coëmgenu, Norwegian, Tao, Yahoo [Bot] and 15 guests