Ox Herding

Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:05 pm

While the images and sequence are similar, the meanings is dissimilar. In the Tibetan tradition, this is merely an illustration of perfect shamatha.
You mean the picture of the elephant and the monkey? Why I ask, because you are responding to my previous message, where I mention the name of the Zen book, the book of the Zen mentor.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Malcolm »

Russian wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:25 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:05 pm

While the images and sequence are similar, the meanings is dissimilar. In the Tibetan tradition, this is merely an illustration of perfect shamatha.
You mean the picture of the elephant and the monkey? Why I ask, because you are responding to my previous message, where I mention the name of the Zen book, the book of the Zen mentor.
I mean the entire depiction, the final stages at the top represent the miraculous powers that arise from samadhi, but not insight.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:01 pm

I mean the entire depiction, the final stages at the top represent the miraculous powers that arise from samadhi, but not insight.
And in your opinion, does Zen Buddhism lead to liberation, or not? Does this tradition of Buddhism lead to a goal, does it fulfill a soteriological function, or not?
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Malcolm »

Russian wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:06 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:01 pm

I mean the entire depiction, the final stages at the top represent the miraculous powers that arise from samadhi, but not insight.
And in your opinion, does Zen Buddhism lead to liberation, or not? Does this tradition of Buddhism lead to a goal, does it fulfill a soteriological function, or not?
I wasn’t commenting on the respective merits of this or that tradition, per se, merely pointing out the manner in which the two depictions are explained are not commensurate with one another.

One assumes from the outset that all Buddhist traditions lead to awakening since they are all based on the same insights into reality.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:24 pm

I wasn’t commenting on the respective merits of this or that tradition, per se, merely pointing out the manner in which the two depictions are explained are not commensurate with one another.

One assumes from the outset that all Buddhist traditions lead to awakening since they are all based on the same insights into reality.
It is clear that you have voiced the opinions of the traditions, and what is your personal opinion? How do you rate Zen yourself? What do you think of Zen?
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Malcolm »

Russian wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:35 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:24 pm

I wasn’t commenting on the respective merits of this or that tradition, per se, merely pointing out the manner in which the two depictions are explained are not commensurate with one another.

One assumes from the outset that all Buddhist traditions lead to awakening since they are all based on the same insights into reality.
It is clear that you have voiced the opinions of the traditions, and what is your personal opinion? How do you rate Zen yourself? What do you think of Zen?
I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Ox Herding

Post by LastLegend »

Based on literature, Chan started with Mahakaysapa. Then it evolved to more explanation with Lankavatara and Diamond Sutra (sixth Patriarch). Chan was explained via Mahaprajna with Sixth Patriarch. The authentic Chan would have to start with direct pointing with a teacher to be considered a legitimate lineage...maybe I don’t know but that’s what people feel comfortable with. Personally I’d say it’s rare to meet a teacher that is able to talk about using power of dharma realm (this is not common siddhis). This is important for continuing towards Buddhahood...I’ll leave it at this.

How Samatha is different Chan is insight of Mahaprajna. They both might experience calm biding direct state of experience, but Chan is with the direct subtle recognition of Mahaprajna in the same state. Also hindrance of aggregates should be recognized. That might not be strictly Chan to know aggregates it should be. It’s like onion layers.
It’s eye blinking.
reiun
Posts: 971
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2020 4:08 pm
Location: Florida USA

Re: Ox Herding

Post by reiun »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:16 pm I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
I am not familiar at all with how Zen is presented in Tibetan sources. I did come across several reviews of van Schaik's book Tibetan Zen, including this quote:

Interestingly, Tibetan Zen covers practices, texts, and ideas that are in some cases dramatically unlike what we often associate with either Zen or Tibet. The most surprising of these are combinations of Zen and tantra. Both Tibetan and Chinese Chan Buddhist teachers at Dunhuang show up in the manuscripts teaching a range of methods explicitly linking Zen meditation to tantric sadhana practice. For instance, the Zen meditation techniques known as “observing the mind” (techniques that were very popular at Dunhuang) were apparently used as part of tantric practice. In a related vein, some of the texts van Schaik translates here suggest that “the ordination platform used in Zen rituals could be regarded as a physical representation of the tantric mandala.” Perhaps not coincidentally, van Schaik points to frequent exhortations to secrecy for Zen found in these materials.

https://www.lionsroar.com/forgotten-enc ... betan-zen/

I have a reading list of several books, so this will have to wait, but it sounds interesting to me, in context of discussions here in general. If anyone is familiar with this book or any other references comparing Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, comments would be welcome.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

LastLegend wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 7:19 pm Based on literature, Chan started with Mahakaysapa. Then it evolved to more explanation with Lankavatara and Diamond Sutra (sixth Patriarch). Chan was explained via Mahaprajna with Sixth Patriarch. The authentic Chan would have to start with direct pointing with a teacher to be considered a legitimate lineage...maybe I don’t know but that’s what people feel comfortable with. Personally I’d say it’s rare to meet a teacher that is able to talk about using power of dharma realm (this is not common siddhis). This is important for continuing towards Buddhahood...I’ll leave it at this.

How Samatha is different Chan is insight of Mahaprajna. They both might experience calm biding direct state of experience, but Chan is with the direct subtle recognition of Mahaprajna in the same state. Also hindrance of aggregates should be recognized. That might not be strictly Chan to know aggregates it should be. It’s like onion layers.
And yet, Chan was divided into gradual and instantaneous schools of enlightenment. And yet, someone relied on madhyamika, and someone on yogachara.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Ox Herding

Post by LastLegend »

Instantaneous is for Sixth Patriarch we cannot say be instantaneous because of karma, namely defiled karma.
Last edited by LastLegend on Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
It’s eye blinking.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:16 pm
I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
In addition to the Gelugpisk version of the dispute in Samya, there is also the Chinese version, in which the dispute is presented differently than by the opponents ' side. The Gelugpins distort the dispute in Samya, misrepresent the opponent's side. And in Dzogchen, the persecution of the new schools continued for many centuries. One of the main arguments was just non-stepness, in connection with which Dzogchen was considered a continuation of the tradition of Heshan, which in Tibet was called tonmun (a distorted Chinese dun-men, that is, "instant gate" or "non-step path"). The Heshana tradition is completely authentic and is based on the teachings of Bodhidharma. This tradition did not disappear immediately and continued for some time not only in Tibet, but also in Dunhuang and Qinghai Province. In Tibet, there were also persecutions of anuttara-yoga-tantra, the essence of which is the non-step mahamudra. Also, the Jonang School betrays the Samye dispute. The version of the dispute in Samya, which is transmitted by the Jonang school, also differs from the version of the Gelug school. The version presented by the Jonang school on the side says that Heshan won, and the transcript of the dispute itself differs from the version presented by Gelug.
Last edited by Russian on Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:16 pm I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
And by the way, Nubchen Sangye Yeshe, the great mahasiddha who made the Anuyoga texts appear in Tibet and who forced King Langdarma to stop the persecution of lay yogis, wrote that the tonmun Heshana is a higher teaching than the Kamalashila system. Moreover, he calls tonmun "a complete teaching", and Kamalashila's teaching " incomplete".
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

reiun wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 9:15 pm
Between Dzogchen and Zen, they see kinship, parallels. In Russia, there is even a monograph by Igor Garry, called: "Dzogchen and Chan in Tibet".
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

Zen is positively evaluated by Theravadins, and the teacher of the Theravada tradition, Ajahn Cha, spoke very highly of the Altar Sutra (Platform Sutra).
Master, have you read the Altar Sutra of the sixth Patriarch Huineng?

Ajahn Cha responds:

Huineng is incredibly wise and insightful. His teaching is very deep, and it is not easy for beginners to understand it. But if you practice patiently and with discipline, if you practice without clinging, then eventually you will understand.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

reiun wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 9:15 pm I am not familiar at all with how Zen is presented in Tibetan sources. I did come across several reviews of van Schaik's book Tibetan Zen, including this quote:

Interestingly, Tibetan Zen covers practices, texts, and ideas that are in some cases dramatically unlike what we often associate with either Zen or Tibet. The most surprising of these are combinations of Zen and tantra. Both Tibetan and Chinese Chan Buddhist teachers at Dunhuang show up in the manuscripts teaching a range of methods explicitly linking Zen meditation to tantric sadhana practice. For instance, the Zen meditation techniques known as “observing the mind” (techniques that were very popular at Dunhuang) were apparently used as part of tantric practice. In a related vein, some of the texts van Schaik translates here suggest that “the ordination platform used in Zen rituals could be regarded as a physical representation of the tantric mandala.” Perhaps not coincidentally, van Schaik points to frequent exhortations to secrecy for Zen found in these materials.

https://www.lionsroar.com/forgotten-enc ... betan-zen/
In Japan, the Soto schools are influenced by the Shingon school. Apparently Shingon was the dominant school, so the Japanese Soto schools were infiltrated by tantric elements, or even practices. The video is linked to this time, to the time when tantra is shown in Soto - https://youtu.be/zpP8dZkacW8?t=1329

They talk about the tantric influence of the Shingon school on the Soto school. Please note that the main character is holding a vajra and a bell. The link is linked at this time.
PeterC
Posts: 5173
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Ox Herding

Post by PeterC »

reiun wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 9:15 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:16 pm I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
I am not familiar at all with how Zen is presented in Tibetan sources. I did come across several reviews of van Schaik's book Tibetan Zen, including this quote:

Interestingly, Tibetan Zen covers practices, texts, and ideas that are in some cases dramatically unlike what we often associate with either Zen or Tibet. The most surprising of these are combinations of Zen and tantra. Both Tibetan and Chinese Chan Buddhist teachers at Dunhuang show up in the manuscripts teaching a range of methods explicitly linking Zen meditation to tantric sadhana practice. For instance, the Zen meditation techniques known as “observing the mind” (techniques that were very popular at Dunhuang) were apparently used as part of tantric practice. In a related vein, some of the texts van Schaik translates here suggest that “the ordination platform used in Zen rituals could be regarded as a physical representation of the tantric mandala.” Perhaps not coincidentally, van Schaik points to frequent exhortations to secrecy for Zen found in these materials.

https://www.lionsroar.com/forgotten-enc ... betan-zen/

I have a reading list of several books, so this will have to wait, but it sounds interesting to me, in context of discussions here in general. If anyone is familiar with this book or any other references comparing Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, comments would be welcome.
Van Shaik approaches this from an academic perspective, not a practice perspective, but he does a very good job of identifying where things are more complex than we might thing.

One thing he said about comparing those two practice traditions, I think on his blog, was that they are in dialog with two different sets of texts, and as such, any comparison of their concepts, approaches, frameworks etc. is always going to be a stretch. He never says 'they're all basically the same', not because they are or are not, but because that's not something that really can be said.
PeterC
Posts: 5173
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Ox Herding

Post by PeterC »

Russian wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:54 am
Malcolm wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:16 pm
I don't have any basis to have an informed opinion about Zen, other than the way Chan is presented in Tibetan sources, some favorable, most not.
In addition to the Gelugpisk version of the dispute in Samya, there is also the Chinese version, in which the dispute is presented differently than by the opponents ' side. The Gelugpins distort the dispute in Samya, misrepresent the opponent's side. And in Dzogchen, the persecution of the new schools continued for many centuries. One of the main arguments was just non-stepness, in connection with which Dzogchen was considered a continuation of the tradition of Heshan, which in Tibet was called tonmun (a distorted Chinese dun-men, that is, "instant gate" or "non-step path"). The Heshana tradition is completely authentic and is based on the teachings of Bodhidharma. This tradition did not disappear immediately and continued for some time not only in Tibet, but also in Dunhuang and Qinghai Province. In Tibet, there were also persecutions of anuttara-yoga-tantra, the essence of which is the non-step mahamudra. Also, the Jonang School betrays the Samye dispute. The version of the dispute in Samya, which is transmitted by the Jonang school, also differs from the version of the Gelug school. The version presented by the Jonang school on the side says that Heshan won, and the transcript of the dispute itself differs from the version presented by Gelug.
Nobody really knows if this debate actually happened, if "the mahayana monk" (that's what he's basically referred to as) was a real person, a composite person or a strawman, or if the decision to affiliate with India was made on philosophical or political grounds. There are good arguments to think it was basically a realpolitik decision by Tibet dressed up as a fictional debate.

The harshest criticisms of the Chinese strawman in Tibet were made by sarma schools criticizing the kagyus. Forests have been wasted on books debating this issue. It was a bit of a waste of time then, as it still is now.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

PeterC wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:39 am
Nobody really knows if this debate actually happened, if "the mahayana monk" (that's what he's basically referred to as) was a real person, a composite person or a strawman, or if the decision to affiliate with India was made on philosophical or political grounds. There are good arguments to think it was basically a realpolitik decision by Tibet dressed up as a fictional debate.

The harshest criticisms of the Chinese strawman in Tibet were made by sarma schools criticizing the kagyus. Forests have been wasted on books debating this issue. It was a bit of a waste of time then, as it still is now.
I think that they did, because the debate is represented not only by the Tibetan side, but also by the Chinese side, it seems. In addition, in addition to the sources about the debate provided by the new Translation schools, there is a description of the debate by the Jonang School. Also, please note that the description of the debate in Samye differs between the sources ' descriptions of the new translation schools and between the Chinese version and the Jonang school. The last two sources present the dialogue differently, in a different way than it is presented in the Sarma schools. And the Chinese version and the Jonang school, they say that Heshan Mahayana won.
PeterC
Posts: 5173
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Ox Herding

Post by PeterC »

Russian wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:31 am
PeterC wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:39 am
Nobody really knows if this debate actually happened, if "the mahayana monk" (that's what he's basically referred to as) was a real person, a composite person or a strawman, or if the decision to affiliate with India was made on philosophical or political grounds. There are good arguments to think it was basically a realpolitik decision by Tibet dressed up as a fictional debate.

The harshest criticisms of the Chinese strawman in Tibet were made by sarma schools criticizing the kagyus. Forests have been wasted on books debating this issue. It was a bit of a waste of time then, as it still is now.
I think that they did, because the debate is represented not only by the Tibetan side, but also by the Chinese side, it seems. In addition, in addition to the sources about the debate provided by the new Translation schools, there is a description of the debate by the Jonang School. Also, please note that the description of the debate in Samye differs between the sources ' descriptions of the new translation schools and between the Chinese version and the Jonang school. The last two sources present the dialogue differently, in a different way than it is presented in the Sarma schools. And the Chinese version and the Jonang school, they say that Heshan Mahayana won.
Given the rather apocryphal way that texts were created in that period, the existence of different accounts doesn't really prove much. The existence of one account saying he lost makes it reasonably likely that someone would write another account saying "oh no he didn't!" just because they support the position that's being criticized. In any case, it's telling that nobody actually records his real name, at a time when that would be an unusual omission.

HHDL once commented that there were chinese scholars in Lhasa for over a century before the supposed debate - so how was it that the whole thing was suddenly decided by one event? He didn't elaborate too much, but was clearly skeptical about the historicity.
Russian
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:27 am

Re: Ox Herding

Post by Russian »

PeterC wrote: Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:39 am
Nobody really knows if this debate actually happened, if "the mahayana monk" (that's what he's basically referred to as) was a real person, a composite person or a strawman, or if the decision to affiliate with India was made on philosophical or political grounds. There are good arguments to think it was basically a realpolitik decision by Tibet dressed up as a fictional debate.

The harshest criticisms of the Chinese strawman in Tibet were made by sarma schools criticizing the kagyus. Forests have been wasted on books debating this issue. It was a bit of a waste of time then, as it still is now.
And here is what Professor Torchinov wrote: "It is clear from these three points that the real controversy was not at all between Indian and Chinese Buddhism (and not between the classical Mahayana and the teachings of the Chinese Chan school), as is usually believed. The scope of the Samya controversy goes far beyond this. This is a polemic between two trends in both Indian Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism in general, because the theses put forward by Heshan Mahayana reflected the positions held by many Buddhists in India itself (especially within the Tantric tradition; a little later, they will be fully represented in the teachings of the Mahasiddhas and the tradition known as the Maha Mudra). Its theoretical basis was undoubtedly the theory of the Tathagatagarbha (especially the position "our own Mind is the Buddha"), while Kamalashila followed his teacher to the teachings of the syncretic school of Madhyamaka swatantrika Yogacara, with its completely different understanding of both the structure of the path and the nature of the Buddha nature".
Post Reply

Return to “Zen”