From: chan@lpf.umd.edu (Stephen Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Well, well... (last)
Date: 9 Jan 93 05:31:08 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park


     Peter is indeed a friend of mine, and there is no bad feeling in our
discussion.

     Mikel covered much of the territory which I wanted to cover w.r.t.
Christian mysticism. Michael Hirsch also pointed out that Pinyin is a
Romanization, not an Americanization of spoken Chinese. I just wanted to
add that Pinyin does *NOT* provide the meaning of a word, just it's
sound: bei4 has 10 different characters associated with it in my concise
dictionary of Mandarin.

     So...I'll just toss in a few notes on scholarship and Eastern
philosophies:
     1. I would be wary of anybody who claimed to represent THE authentic
Eastern method of englightenment. Great Zen masters recognized the differences
between individuals, and used whatever methods were appropriate to the person -
this was known as "skill in means". According to Blofeld's "Taoism - The Road
To Immortality", the masters which he met knew of many programs, each of which
was more suited to some people than others.
     2. The corpus of Taoist and Buddhist sutras is a pretty self-evident proof
of the importance of scholarship in the pursuit of liberation. According to
Blofeld, the Taoist temples on Hua Mountain had large libraries. According to
the biography put forth in The Wandering Taoist, Kwan Saihung's study involved
studying and practicing material from many books.
     3. Excerpt from "Zen and Western Thought" by Masao Abe, contemporary Zen
guy:
    "It is clear that Zen is not a philosophy. It is beyond words and intellect
and is not, as in the case of philosophy, a study of the processes governing
thought and conduct, nor a theory of principles or laws that regulate people
and the universe. For the realization of Zen, _practice_is_absolutely_
_necessary_. Nevertheless, Zen is neither a mere anti-intellectualism nor is it
an encouragement to animal-like spontaneity. Rather, it embraces a profound
philosophy. Although intellectual understanding cannot be a substitute for
Zen's awakening, practice without a proper and legitimate form of intellectual
understanding is often misleading. An intellectual understanding without
practice is certainly powerless, but practice without learning is apt to be
blind. Therefore, I would like to clarify as much as possible the philosophy
which Zen embraces." - pg 4
    4. Excerpt from intro to a translation of the Diamond Sutra by Thich Nhat
Hanh, Vietnamese Zen Master:
    "Brothers and sisters, please read The Diamond that Cuts through Illusion
with a serene mind, a mind free from views...
    ...Try to understand the sutra from your own experiences and your own
suffering...
    Studying and practicing this sutra can help us cut through ignorance and
wrong views and transcend them, transporting us to the shores of liberation."
    5. From "Zibo - The Last Great Zen Master of China", by Thomas Cleary,
page 36:
    "Like Zen men before him, Zibo knew and taught the many sutras: the Huayan,
the Lotus, the Surangama, the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment and the Perfect-
ion of Wisdom Sutras...
    ...Zibo pointed out the that the sutras use symbols to convey the meaning:
one must get the meaning, not stick to the symbols."
page 97: Zibo's sermon on "Blind views of Buddhism"
    "Recently Buddhism has been greatly troubled. The trouble is due not to
demons or outsiders: the trouble lies in seven major faults of blind teachers
and disciples.
    The first fault: The opinion that enlightenment is only possible by means
of the enlightenment stories of the ancient worthies of the Zen family, that
enlightenment has nothing to do with the scriptural vehicle.
    I ask you: What about Zen master An, who was enlightened while reading the
refutations in the Surangama Sutra? What about Yongjia who was enlightened
when he read the Vimalakirti Sutra? What about Zen master Su of Pu An and
Ying Zhaowu, who were enlightened from reading the Hua Yan treatises? If you
think that you can only be enlightened by the enlightenment stories of Zen, but
not by the scriptures, isn't this a great error?
    The second fault: The opinion that because knowledge and reason block the
gate of spontaneous awakening, and the path is not entered via the eyes and
ears, it is necessary to shut everything off...
    ...I ask you: In today's world, among monks and laypeople, who even
possesses knowledge and reason? If you can certainly point out one or a half
of one, I would surely cherish him whether he was enlightened or not. I'm
afraid though, that there wouldn't be many (who are really knowledgeable and
reasonable}.
    One day Wang Anshi asked Zen Master Yuan of Jiangshan, "Could I hear the
special transmission outside the verbal teachings?" Yuan said "You have
something blocking you. For now, rely on the rich spiritual roots of the
ocean of the scriptures. In one or two more births, you will be qualified [for
what you ask}."
    People these days are far from being equal to Wang Anshi, yet before they
can even crawl, they study running. Isn't this a great error?"
 
    6. As someone pointed out, Confucius was the most famous proponent of
education as a means of personal development. He was all for enlightenment.
But his philosophy ended up being turned into dead, stale "book learning"
by folks eager to popularize aspects of his teachings.
    
    7. And what about the I-Ching [Yi-Jing] Chinese philosophers are CONSTANTLY
babbling about how profound it it, and how one should devote one's life to
exploring it's depths. Taoists, Confucianists ... I'll bet that Chinese
Buddhists study it too.