Comments on Zen Buddhism

Like all great religions on this backwards little planet we live on, Zen Buddhism is a mixed bag. Some of its practices and stories certainly would deserve a place of honor (albeit with caveats in some cases) in any really rational, effective system for human spiritual development for the whole earth. Perhaps the prayer Sean mentioned would fit there, or perhaps not; I don't know. 

But there are also things to watch out for, and even some false things propagated for the benefit of folks in power, as with all great world religions. 

For example, some bits of history. At least in China, they tell me that Zen Buddhism is a missionary development of Chan Buddhism (which fits everything I have seen), which was promulgated in the first place from the Shao Lin Monestary. In fact, I do remember American Zen guys talking about Bodhidharma who ... whatever. Shao Lin has pushed very hard for political support in China, arguing that this is the one branch of Buddhism which truly originated in China -- a national treasure. But others in China note how the leader has used it as a great cash cow, with lots of questionable ways to hype the money making. Great theatrics, but..? From an article in the great magazine Tricycle, I learned how the real origins were in a debate, from which the losing side emigrated in disgrace to China. (I have names and dates deep in my notes.) 

So far as I know, there are three really serious dominant strands of Buddhism to be found in China today -- Tibetan, Chan and "Vatican" (near Xian). The Tibetan has been a great embarrassment to the current government, which is why there seems to be more and more support for the "new Vatican of Buddhism" supported by the government (and various other vicissitudes I will spare you for now). I am grateful to have had a chance to experience all three. 

A couple of years ago, Tricycle reported a great structured debate between the leading teachers of the two main strands of Buddhism active in the US today -- Tibetan and Zen. The story was written by a Zen guy, who was delighted that "his guy" won the luck of the draw, to have the last word. By the rules, each debater got to summarize his position in one or two words in the end. The Tibetan summarized it as "mindfulness". The Zen summarized "no mind." The reporter conveyed a very self-satisfied clever chortle, but in my view this really clarified which one is sane and which is ultimately misguided nihilism. 

I also can't help thinking back to a quiet little tea ceremony in Nara, Japan, overlooking the ;place where Buddhism came to Japan. Our hostess said, "yes, here is where they came to us saying we should learn to be peaceful and give up our old Shinto ways. The monks with blue hats came, saying this, and the monks with yellow hats said the same thing. Then on that hill, we saw them killing each other in the most dishonorable bloody fight we ever saw." 

But Buddhist groups in Japan have since had some degree of peaceful combination, and there are esoteric groups in the high mountains which are not Zen but are well grounded.

I remember when a cousin of mine working for Paul Allen mentioned he was a Zen Buddhist, and asked me what Quakers do. "Well, there is no doctrine, really. The core foundation for traditional (FGC) Quakers is practice. The practice is a quiet group meditation every week, and and imperative that we all try to listen and listen to our own individual conscience." He had a wistful look and said "that's exactly what we say we are doing, but somehow not fighting over doctrine is hard..." 

Whatever.

Perhaps I should have mentioned instead what some of the specific treasures are from Zen, but not today. This is too long as is. Symptom of a day when I worry a lot about ways to get into trouble in other areas (like what the Chinese military acts on in quantum technology). 

Best of luck,

     Paul