Ch'an Dialogue Origin.
Sept 11, 2010 11:17:49 GMT 1
Post by Shi Da Dao on Sept 11, 2010 11:17:49 GMT 1
Dear Members
The Tang Dynasty Ch’an masters employed a use of language that is often viewed as unique within the confines of the boundaries that define Buddhist philosophy. A style of verbal communication that is often described as the use of ‘language of the uncreate’. This is the essence of the kung an (Jap: ‘koan’) expressions that abound in Ch’an and Zen literature. The masters always warn, however, that the sentences of such expressions should not be grasped, as they are only ‘dead words’. To enliven the words therefore, one has to instantaneously perceive ‘that which speaks’. Whatever a kung an (Chinese: ‘public record’) is, its deep meaning is not to be found in attachment to surface structure.
The Ch’an masters are often viewed as eccentric practitioners of Mahayana Buddhism, However, as they insist upon direct realisation of the Mind Ground, from the perspective of ideology and dogma, the Ch’an masters travel ‘light’. All that is not necessary for direct and instantaneous enlightenment is immediately dropped and discarded. The ego and the intellect are not engaged or encouraged. It is like the perfect movement, held in a quiet and still moment – such a balance manifests an utter tranquillity. The Ch’an masters preserve a tradition that knows that human language is dangerously one-sided. Indeed, the use of language in a specific manner dates back to th earliest times in Buddhist history, and is prevalent in the Pali Canon. It is believed that the Lord Buddha used verbal language is four distinct ways:
1) Patipucchavyakaraniya
The doubts of the enquirer are ascertained by suitable questions and removed by suitable replies.
2) Ekamsavyakaraniya
A direct reply is given to an enquirer without entering into a discussion.
3) Vibhajjavyakaraniya
Answers are made piecemeal i.e. taking one aspect of the question first and then another and so forth.
4) Thapaniya
The indeterminate nature of the problems put for solution are pointed out to avoid discussions that lead to no finality.
Of course, a possible ‘5th’ method of discussion might be defined as to respond with ‘silence’, as exampled by both the Lord Buddha on various occasions in His life, and of course the Bodhisattva Vimalakirti. From the above example it is clear that the Ch’an masters of China and the Zen masters of Japan are actually carrying-on a very old teaching tradition, one that emphasises ‘essence’ over ‘content’. Limited language structure is used perfectly to transcend the inadequacies of its boundaries.
With Loving Kindness.
(Reference: Early History of the Spread of Buddhism & The Buddhist Schools By N Dutt - Page 58.)
The Tang Dynasty Ch’an masters employed a use of language that is often viewed as unique within the confines of the boundaries that define Buddhist philosophy. A style of verbal communication that is often described as the use of ‘language of the uncreate’. This is the essence of the kung an (Jap: ‘koan’) expressions that abound in Ch’an and Zen literature. The masters always warn, however, that the sentences of such expressions should not be grasped, as they are only ‘dead words’. To enliven the words therefore, one has to instantaneously perceive ‘that which speaks’. Whatever a kung an (Chinese: ‘public record’) is, its deep meaning is not to be found in attachment to surface structure.
The Ch’an masters are often viewed as eccentric practitioners of Mahayana Buddhism, However, as they insist upon direct realisation of the Mind Ground, from the perspective of ideology and dogma, the Ch’an masters travel ‘light’. All that is not necessary for direct and instantaneous enlightenment is immediately dropped and discarded. The ego and the intellect are not engaged or encouraged. It is like the perfect movement, held in a quiet and still moment – such a balance manifests an utter tranquillity. The Ch’an masters preserve a tradition that knows that human language is dangerously one-sided. Indeed, the use of language in a specific manner dates back to th earliest times in Buddhist history, and is prevalent in the Pali Canon. It is believed that the Lord Buddha used verbal language is four distinct ways:
1) Patipucchavyakaraniya
The doubts of the enquirer are ascertained by suitable questions and removed by suitable replies.
2) Ekamsavyakaraniya
A direct reply is given to an enquirer without entering into a discussion.
3) Vibhajjavyakaraniya
Answers are made piecemeal i.e. taking one aspect of the question first and then another and so forth.
4) Thapaniya
The indeterminate nature of the problems put for solution are pointed out to avoid discussions that lead to no finality.
Of course, a possible ‘5th’ method of discussion might be defined as to respond with ‘silence’, as exampled by both the Lord Buddha on various occasions in His life, and of course the Bodhisattva Vimalakirti. From the above example it is clear that the Ch’an masters of China and the Zen masters of Japan are actually carrying-on a very old teaching tradition, one that emphasises ‘essence’ over ‘content’. Limited language structure is used perfectly to transcend the inadequacies of its boundaries.
With Loving Kindness.
(Reference: Early History of the Spread of Buddhism & The Buddhist Schools By N Dutt - Page 58.)