by Youru Wang
However, the emergence of the rhetoric and focus on sudden enlightenment and its dominance among the followers of the Southern school had a broad context and was determined by multiple underlying social, cultural, and religious-practical factors, in addition to polemic-sectarian ones. Although many important ideas such as no-thought (wunian) and practices such as formless precepts (wuxiang jie) were identified with this Southern school, the notion of this Southern school was predicated on the existence of the Northern school. As the latter disappeared from the public arena, the former also gradually evolved into more different sects, such as the Hongzhou school, the Heze school, and finally the five houses and seven schools (wujia qizong), despite their declared common origin. The later Chan texts do not lack voices against the sectarian division of the Northern and Southern schools. With the Hongzhou school’s rise to prominence, a new ecumenism of Chan started to appear and took an inclusive attitude toward other Chan lineages, which eventually led to the acknowledgment of the masters of the Northern school as members of this extended Chan clan by the transmission of the lamp literature.
SPECIAL TRANSMISSION BEYOND TEACHINGS (Ch. jiaowai biechuan)
SPECIAL TRANSMISSION BEYOND TEACHINGS
This is an English translation of the Chinese phrase jiaowai biechuan, one of the most widely used slogans of Chan. However, the meaning and understanding of jiaowai biechuan has never been monolithic, and controversies over it have been noted in many Chan texts, not to mention those outside of Chan schools. “Special transmission” (biechuan) refers to the mind-to-mind transmission of Buddha-dharma. In some traditional interpretations, Buddha-dharma is not understood as objective knowledge or external truth, nor is it an internal, hidden essence. It is understood as being embodied in the Buddha-mind or enlightened mind that functions through ordinary activities. Buddha-dharma is equivalent to the realization of Buddha-nature, the one mind, or enlightenment in Chan contexts. The special transmission from mind to mind as such is devoid of any conventional sense of transmission. Only the mutual realization and verification of enlightenment in a practical context can be seen as a successful transmission from mind to mind. It requires and presupposes the existential-practical transformation of the human mind and the entire personhood. This transformation of the mind and personhood is the core of Buddha’s enlightenment experience. All Buddhist teachings, as expedient means, serve to help practitioners attain their own enlightenment. The role of these teachings is like the finger pointing at the moon. In this connection, the Chan transmission of enlightenment experience goes necessarily beyond what are inscribed, generalized, and sedimented in the written scriptures and doctrinal teachings (jiaowai). The point of this notion is obviously not groundless. It calls attention to the singularity of the “transmission” of enlightenment experience, to the limitations of scriptures and doctrines, and therefore to the necessity of non-attachment to them.
What is briefly described above can be called a moderate interpretation of jiaowai biechuan in its connection to another Chan slogan, buli wenzi (“non-establishment of words,” sometimes translated as “not-to-set-up-scriptures”). The more radical interpretation of jiaowai biechuan can be rendered in English as “separate transmission outside scriptures,” which denies any connection between the two. Radical views of this sort do support such a choice in translation. However, recent examination of the extant Chan texts of the Tang dynasty and those produced from the Song dynasty indicates that the more radical interpretation of jiaowai biechuan and buli wenzi was not fully developed and popularized until the Song dynasty. Among the Tang masters, not only did Zongmi elaborate on the underlying correspondence between scriptural teachings and the Chan transmission of mind (jiaochan yizhi), but the Hongzhou masters such as Mazu Daoyi, Baizhang Huaihai, and even Huangbo Xiyun also, in one way or another, acknowledged the necessity of studying scriptures, although their positions might not be as thorough, consistent, and clear as Zongmi’s. For example, Huangbo Xiyun noticeably advocated the notion of non-duality between Buddha-dharma and Buddha’s preaching—the basis of scriptures (fashuo bu’er). Baizhang advised his students on “penetrating three propositions” and “not being fettered by words (buju wenzi).” Although buju wenzi and buli wenzi differ by only one letter, the subtle difference could be significant.
Neither Zongmi’s nor Hongzhou’s moderate view, which saw the Chan transmission of the mind as “going beyond” the limitations of scriptures, became orthodox in Song Chan. The exact slogan jiaowai biechuan, instead of just “mind-to-mind transmission (yixin chuanxin),” appeared for the first time in the Zutang Ji (compiled in 952). With the compilation of such texts as Jingde Chuandeng Lu, Tiansheng Guangdeng Lu, and Liandeng Huiyao, the more radical view that saw the Chan transmission of the mind as separate/independent, essentially different from, and superior to scriptural teachings gradually evolved and rose to dominance. It was based mainly on the invention and use of the story without providing reliable historical evidence that the Buddha transmitted the secret, wordless dharma, by holding out a flower silently to a smiling and understanding disciple, Mahākāśyapa. By treating this story as a historically accurate truth, its proponents claimed the legitimacy of the origin and lineage of Chan transmission traceable back to the Buddha and Mahākāśyapa. Contemporary scholars have tended to think that the evolving process of this radical explanation of jiaowai biechuan, and its claim to the legitimacy of Chan lineage, has more to do with securing prestige, patronage, and special privileges within the Buddhist order in Song China than with practical matters or efforts of reform. Attention has also been called to the fact that, despite the dominating radical interpretation of jiaowai biechuan, Chan texts from both the Tang and Song dynasties do demonstrate a strong tendency to question and deconstruct the notion of “separate transmission” from the perspectives of non-duality, interdependence, and non-attachment.
See also ; ; ; .
SUDDEN ENLIGHTENMENT
English translation of the Chinese word dunwu. The teaching of sudden enlightenment is also called sudden teaching (dunjiao). This teaching is attributed to Huineng and recorded in the Platform Sūtra. All the later traditions that claimed to be followers of Huineng and his Southern school endorsed this teaching, although enthusiasm for emphasizing sudden enlightenment and its sectarian rhetoric gradually faded away after Shenhui. The Platform Sūtra acknowledges that the Buddhist dharma itself has no distinction between sudden and gradual. Ironically, the notion of sudden enlightenment is taught to oppose the teaching of gradual enlightenment, attributed to Shenxiu and his Northern school.
The notion of sudden enlightenment stresses the instantaneity or immediacy of enlightenment, the existential-experiential, holistic (not merely intellectual) “sudden opening” and awakening, as one realizes one’s own Buddha-nature. This immediacy transcends dualistic distinctions such as means and goal, cultivation and realization, practice and attainment, parts and whole, and so forth. For sudden teaching (dunjiao), there is no order or procedure of a gradual path that can directly lead to the final goal. It is a path of no-path. This paradox is inevitably involved and regarded as necessary, since the non-dualistic nature of enlightenment ultimately subverts all kinds of order or procedure that presupposes conceptual dualism. The teaching calls attention to the limitation of any generalized procedure and dualistic conceptualization, although the teachers of sudden enlightenment do not abolish all cultivations and means in practice.
While denying all conceptual dualisms and gradual paths, the teaching of sudden enlightenment embraced the idea that enlightenment can be immediately accessible through all ordinary activities in the everyday world. In other words, while some special methods or practices were being deprived of their privilege, it was acknowledged that all ordinary activities could inspire a sudden enlightenment. This idea was further developed in the classical Chan, and a more formally synthetic approach between sudden enlightenment and gradual cultivation was also adopted by various Chan figures.
> Contemporary scholars have shown a critical attitude toward the traditional Chan teaching of sudden enlightenment. Chan historians have questioned the reliability of the traditional accusations about Shenxiu and the Northern school’s gradualism. Others have examined the limitations of the traditional privileging of the sudden over the gradual, or immediacy over the mediated.
ŚŪRAṂGAMA SŪTRA AND CHAN
See .
ŚŪRAṂGAMASAMĀDHI SŪTRA
Sūtra on the Heroic-March Concentration, an early Indian Mahayana scripture on meditation, was first translated by Zhichen (d.u.) in the late Han dynasty, but six other translations were produced later in China. Most of these translations did not survive, except Kumārajīva’s (Ch. Jiumoluoshi) (344–409 or 413) early 5th-century translation, Shoulengyan Sanmei Jing or Xinchu Shoulengyan Jing, of two fascicles. An early 9th-century Tibetan translation and the fragments of a revised Sanskrit version of the Śūraṃgamasamādhi Sūtra are also extant. The scripture describes this śūraṃgamasamādhi (shoulengyan sanmei) as the highest state of concentration, in which bodhisattvas can “walk alone without fear, like a lion.” They can appear in nirvana without annihilation, wander on every place of all Buddha-land, take a variety of forms and actions, manifest all kinds of magic self-power, and skillfully use language to explain all teachings of dharma, and they are always in concentration yet present in helping sentient beings, without attaching themselves to any differences (fengbie). To achieve this samādhi, practitioners must practice 10 stages of bodhisattva and enter into the last stage. The scripture ought to be distinguished from the other Lengyan Jing (the Śūraṃgama Sūtra), which is seen by many as a Chinese apocryphon and teaches a different version of the śūraṃgamasamādhi.
T
TAIXU (1890–1947)
An eminent Chan monk of modern times, Taixu was a native of Haining in Zhejiang. His family name was Lu. He lost his parents in his youth and was raised by his grandmother and uncle. At the age of 16, he entered his monastic life under the master Shida (d.u.) in Suzhou, and he was ordained at Tiantong Temple in Ningbo by the master Jing’an. He then studied the kanhua Chan and Buddhist scriptures, such as the Lotus Sūtra and Śūraṃgamasamādhi Sūtra, with the master Qichang (1853–1923). He also went to Xifang Temple to concentrate on reading the Buddhist canon. The following year, he met the reformist monk, Huashan (d.u.), and the revolutionary monk, Qiyun (d.u.), and started to accept the influence of books from various modernist movements and to think about a broad reform of Buddhist thought and practice. In 1909, he went to Zhihuan Jingshe, which was operated by the modernist Buddhist scholar Yang Wenhui (1837–1911), to study Buddhist scriptures, English, and modern literature. In 1910, he lectured at Foxue Jingshe in Guangzhou and became abbot at Shuangxi Temple. The publication of his lectures marked the beginning of his scholarly writing. He was involved in the organization Association for the Advancement of Buddhism and the Chinese General Buddhist Association. He then proposed three necessary reforms (or revolutions)—organizational, economical, and intellectual—for the movement to revitalize Chinese Buddhism. These included sharing the ownership of Buddhist properties with the whole monastic community, installing democracy, developing an educational system, and increasing economical self-reliance to survive in and meet the needs of modern society.
In 1918, Taixu founded, with others, the Bodhi Society (Jue She) in Shanghai, and edited the magazine Jueshe Congshu, which was renamed Haichao Yin and became a famous Buddhist periodical. Starting in 1922, he founded a number of Buddhist colleges, including Wuchang Buddhist College, Minnan Buddhist College, and Hanzang College of Buddhist Doctrines. He was actively involved in Buddhist ecumenism and the promotion of global peace, visiting Japan, Europe, North America, and South Asia and lecturing globally. Because of his contribution to China’s war against the Japanese invasion, Taixu was awarded the Victory Medal by the nationalist government in 1946. He died at the age of 59. His numerous publications were collected into the Taixu Dashi Quanshu (Complete Works of Great Master Taixu) of 64 volumes. They addressed various doctrinal, institutional and social issues, including his famous idea of Buddhism for human life (rensheng fojiao) and his influential notion that the characteristics of Chinese Buddhism lie in the school of Chan.
TATHĀGATA CHAN
The Chinese term for this is rulai Chan. The use of the term rulai Chan was influenced by the Lengqie Jing (the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra), which analyzed four types of dhyāna. The last and highest dhyāna among the four was the dhyāna of the tathāgata (rulai Chan). The early Chinese Chan Buddhist understanding of tathāgata Chan was related to the notion of realizing “the pure mind of the self-nature of tathāgatagarbha (rulaizang zixing qingjingxin)” in the Lengqie Jing, which integrates the tathāgatagarbha theory of Buddha-nature as the pure origin and foundation of the universe with the Yogācāra theory of mind-only that explains the process of existence. Several early Chan texts demonstrate the use of rulai Chan. Zongmi, in his Chan Prolegomenon (Chanyuan Zhuquanji Duxu), defined the sudden awakening to one’s own original pure mind as the pure dhyāna of the tathāgata, which is also identical to the one-practice samādhi (yixing sanmei). For Zongmi, this tathāgata Chan was transmitted from Bodhidharma to Huieng and Shenhui. The Biography of Great Master Caoxi (Caoxi Dashi Zhuan), produced in 803, recorded that Heineng explained the pure dhyāna of the tathāgata as no-acquisition (wude) and no-verification (wuzheng), against just sitting, in terms of the Diamond Sūtra. Shenhui also interpreted the rulai Chan in terms of the Diamond Sūtra; associated the former with no-thought, the realization of self-nature, and no-acquisition; and contrasted it with Shenxiu and the Northern school’s Chan of contemplating the purity.
Although the interpretations of the rulai Chan are not unified, as some emphasize the Lengqie Jing and others the Diamond Sūtra, the positive meaning of the term is clear. However, as Chan movements evolved, the positive meaning of the term was changed to the negative. The rulai Chan was no longer the highest Chan, but was inferior to patriarch Chan (zushi Chan), a term invented and popularized in the late Tang dynasty and the Five Dynasties. The rulai Chan was no longer referred to as the orthodox transmission from Bodhidharma to Huineng, but instead designated the attachment to any gradual path of cultivation and realization, similar to Shenxiu and the Northern school. The new Chan movements seemed dissatisfied with the rulai Chan and used “patriarch Chan” as part of their iconoclastic rhetoric, emphasizing the transcendence of the Buddhas (chaofo) and scriptural teachings and promoting direct transmission from the patriarch’s mind to the disciple’s mind. There is still confusion among modern scholars about the differences between these two terms, and whom or which group each term targets. For example, should Huineng be subsumed under tathāgata Chan or patriarch Chan? Some believe the zushi Chan includes Huineng, since the later movements of Chan all claimed to be his successors. Others argued that the zushi Chan designated the more radical movements after Huineng, and that Huineng belonged to the rulai Chan. The interpretation depends on how the categories are defined, and their meanings are fluid in various Chan texts.
TEN OXHERDING PICTURES (Ch. Shiniu Tu or Shiniu Tu Song)
The pictures of oxherding are a series of pictures illustrating the relationship between a herdsman and an untamed ox in the process of oxherding. Chan teachers and practitioners historically used these pictures to symbolize the progressive relationship between a Chan student and his undisciplined mind in the process of Chan training, which could eventually help the student to realize and verify the enlightenment. There are two extant versions of the oxherding pictures. The Song Linji Chan master Guo’an Shiyuan (d.u.) created the earlier one. It included 10 pictures with the author’s poems: (1) searching for the ox, (2) seeing the traces, (3) discovering the ox, (4) taming the ox, (5) herding the ox, (6) riding the ox home, (7) forgetting the ox, (8) forgetting both the ox and the person, (9) returning to the origin and source, and (10) entering the world to bestow gifts. Also attached was the
author’s preface, which mentioned two earlier, different versions of the oxherding pictures. The other extant series of 10 oxherding pictures, which shared some similarities and differences with the earlier version, was made by Puming (d.u.), also distributed with his poems, and published in China in the 16th century.
THREE KINDS OF SENTENCE OF YUNMEN
See .
THREE MYSTERIES AND ESSENTIALS
This is an abridged English translation of the Chinese words sanxuan sanyao, a heuristic formula highly valued by the Linji school and attributed to Linji Yixuan in the Linji Lu and other Song texts. The complete statement referring to this formula in the Linji Lu reads as follows: “Each phrase must comprise the gates of three mysteries (sanxuan), and the gate of each mystery must comprise three essentials (sanyao).” However, the text itself does not provide any explanation of what the three mysteries and three essentials are. Later on, Song commentators wrote down their interpretations of the meanings of sanxuan sanyao. Three mysteries and three essentials have been made equivalent to the three bodies of Buddha; to the three concepts of principle (li), wisdom (zhi), and function (yong); or to other things. But the exact meanings have never been made clear, since the commentators either used allegorical expressions for their understandings, avoiding discussing them plainly (e.g., Fenyang Shanzhao), or used their comments as opportunities to elaborate on their own ideas (such as Jianfu Chenggu), which often made the meanings even more complicated. As one of the commentators, Juefan Huihong, suggested, the main emphasis of sanxuan sanyao was that in teaching the dharma of Chan, every phrase must point to its profound/inexplicable meanings (xuan) and convey their essentials (yao). It was not necessary to find out and count how many mysteries and essentials there were; that was not the original intent. Attention should be paid to the nature of all teachings as provisional expedients (quan) and to their functions (yong), as they are indicated in the text.