Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 2:33 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:36 pm
Posts: 58
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?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:36 pm 
Offline
Former staff member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Posts: 4203
Location: Budapest
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.

_________________
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

"Neither cultivation nor seated meditation — this is the pure Chan of Tathagata."
(Mazu Daoyi, X1321p3b23; tr. Jinhua Jia)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T2076p461b24-26)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:11 am
Posts: 383
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.

_________________
Lamrim, lojong, and mahamudra are the unmistaken path.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 3:41 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Posts: 2445
Location: Washington DC
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)

Linjii
―Listen! Those of you who devote yourselves to the Dharma
must not be afraid of losing your bodies and your lives―


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:08 pm
Posts: 106
Location: UK
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"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:26 pm 
Offline

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:08 pm
Posts: 106
Location: UK
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"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2011 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm
Posts: 155
Kare wrote:
Sravakas do not meditate?!!!!!


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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gad rgyangs, LastLegend and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group