User:Javierfv1212/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dharma transmission[edit]

An important feature of traditional Zen institutions is the use of dharma transmission from master to disciple to pass on Zen lineages to the next generation. The procedure of dharma transmission, particularly the act of "authorization" or "confirmation" (印可, Ch: yìn kě, Jp: inka, K: inga), is considered to establish a Zen teacher as a direct successor of their master and to link them to a lineage which is traditionally believed to go back to the ancient Chinese patriarchs and to the Buddha himself.[1][2][3] These transmissions are sometimes seen esoterically as the "mind to mind" transmission of the light of awakening from master to disciple.[4]

Zen lineages often maintain Zen lineage charts which list all the teachers in their transmission lineage, establishing a direct link from the Buddha to the present and establish institutional legitimacy.[5][6] Indeed, according to Michel Mohr, the traditional view is that "it is through the transmission process that the identity and integrity of the lineage is preserved."[7] Zen lineage narratives were further supported by "transmission of the lamp" texts (e.g. Jǐngdé Chuándēnglù), which contained stories of the past masters and legitimized Zen lineages. These texts could often be sectarian, favoring a specific lineage or school and they sometimes even led to conflict among the Zen schools.[7] Furthermore, these Zen transmission narratives were often not historically accurate and contain mythological material developed over centuries in China. Their historicity have been recently critiqued by modern scholars.[8][9][6]

The formal practice of dharma transmission is generally is understood in two main ways by Zen traditions. It can be seen as a formal recognition of a disciple's deep spiritual realization, which is separate from clerical ordination.[10] It could also be understood as an institutional procedure which ensures the transmission of a temple lineage.[10][11][7]

The institutions of Dharma transmission have come under criticism in various times throughout Zen history. Zen masters like Linji and Ikkyū "were said to have refused to receive transmission certificates", seeing the procedure as corrupt and institutionalized.[12] During the Ming dynasty, important masters like Hanshan Deqing and Yunqi Zhuhong did not belong to any formal lineage. According to Jiang Wu, for these eminent Ming Chan monks, "training through self-cultivation was encouraged, and nominal and formulaic instructions from pretentious masters were despised. Eminent monks, who practiced meditation and asceticism but without proper dharma transmission, were acclaimed as acquiring 'wisdom without teachers' (wushizhi)."[13] Hanshan's writings indicate that he seriously questioned the value of dharma transmission, seeing personal enlightenment as what truly mattered in Zen.[13] In a similar fashion, several important Japanese masters in the Tokugawa period eschewed formal transmission, and were considered "self-enlightened and self-certified" (jigo jishō). They include Suzuki Shōsan and Myōshin-ji figures like Daigu, Ungo and Isshi.[14] Modern Chinese Buddhists like Tanxu, Taixu and Yinshun also criticized dharma transmission (chuan fa), seeing it as a Chinese invention that was not taught by the Buddha. Taixu held that the practice led to sectarianism, and Tanxu wrote that it contributed to the decline of Zen.[15] Yinshun believed that the Dharma was not something that could belong to anyone and thus it could not be "transmitted" in a lineage.[15]



Zen ranks and hierarchy

Ghanavyuha chapters[edit]

Chapter 1

Zen Transmission[edit]

According to Borup the emphasis on 'mind to mind transmission' is a form of esoteric transmission, in which "the tradition and the enlightened mind is transmitted face to face".[16] Metaphorically this can be described as the transmission from a flame from one candle to another candle,[16] or the transmission from one vein to another.[17] In exoteric transmission requires "direct access to the teaching through a personal discovery of one's self. This type of transmission and identification is symbolized by the discovery of a shining lantern, or a mirror."[16]


Sources[edit]

Printed sources[edit]

Web sources[edit]

Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanādasūtra[edit]

https://buddhanature.tsadra.org/index.php/Texts/%C5%9Ar%C4%ABm%C4%81l%C4%81dev%C4%ABs%C5%ABtra

file:///C:/Users/javier.fernandez/Downloads/Jonathan%20A.%20Silk%20-%20Brill's%20Encyclopedia%20of%20Buddhism.%201-Brill%20(2015).pdf

https://terebess.hu/english/vim2.pdf

https://www.jstor.org/stable/602656

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3270277

file:///C:/Users/javier.fernandez/Downloads/(Buddhist%20Traditions)%20Alex%20Wayman,%20Hideko%20Wayman%20-%20The%20Lion's%20Roar%20of%20Queen%20%C5%9Ar%C4%ABm%C4%81l%C4%81_%20A%20Buddhist%20Scripture%20on%20the%20Tath%C4%81gatagarbha%20Theory%20(1990).pdf

Part of a series on
Mahāyāna Buddhism
A Lotus, one of the eight auspicious symbols in Mahāyāna
Teachings
Buddhas and Bodhisattvas
Mahayana sutras
Major schools
Key figures
Regional traditions

The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra[18] (traditional Chinese: 勝鬘師子吼一乘大方便方廣經, Lion’s Roar [zh] of Queen Śrīmālā) is one of the main early Mahāyāna Buddhist texts belonging to the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras that teaches the doctrines of Buddha-nature and "One Vehicle" through the words of the Indian queen Śrīmālā.[19] After its composition, this text became the primary scriptural advocate in India for the universal potentiality of Buddhahood.[20]

History[edit]

Relief image of the Great Stupa at Amaravati in Andhra Pradesh, India

Brian Edward Brown, a specialist in Buddha-nature doctrines, writes that the composition of the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra occurred during the Īkṣvāku Dynasty in the 3rd century CE as a product of the Caitika schools of the Mahāsāṃghikas.[20] Alex Wayman has outlined eleven points of complete agreement between the Mahāsāṃghikas and the Śrīmālā, along with four major arguments for this association.[21] Anthony Barber also associates the earlier development of the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra with the Mahāsāṃghikas, and concludes that the Mahāsāṃghikas of the Āndhra region were responsible for the inception of the Buddha-nature doctrine.[22] In the 6th century CE, Paramārtha wrote that the Mahāsāṃghikas revere the sūtras that teach the Buddha-nature doctrine.[23]

Translations[edit]

The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra was translated to Chinese in 436 CE by Guṇabhadra (394-468) and later by Bodhiruci (672-727).[19] A complete Sanskrit original is no longer extant,[24] but extensive quotations are found in the Sanskrit text of the Ratnagotravibhāga as well as some recently discovered fragments conserved in the Schøyen Collection. It was later translated into English by Alex and Hideko Wayman as The Lion's Roar of Queen Srimala.

Content[edit]

The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra teaches the reality of an ultimate, immaculate consciousness within each living being, which is the Buddhic "Dharmakāya" (essence of Truth), which is yet temporarily sheathed in obscuring defilement. This Dharmakāya, when viewed as intrinsically free from spiritual ignorance, is said to constitute eternity, bliss, the self, and purity in their perfect state. The use of the word "self" in this sutra is in a way unique to this class of sutra. The great Queen Śrīmālā, who according to this text is empowered by the Buddha to teach the Dharma, affirms:[25]

[T]he Dharmakāya of the Buddha has the perfection of permanence, the perfection of pleasure, the perfection of self, the perfection of purity. Whatever sentient beings see the Dharmakāya of the Tathagāta that way, see correctly. Whoever see correctly are called the sons of the Lord born from his heart, born from his mouth, born from the Dharma, who behave as manifestation of Dharma and as heirs of Dharma.

The scripture, which was extremely influential by way of clarification of the Tathagātagarbha view of Śūnyatā, insists that the ultimately correct understanding of emptiness is that the Tathāgatagarbha is empty of all knowledge that is not liberation, whereas, in contrast, the qualities which characterise a Buddha are not empty of inconceivable virtues. An alternative title offered by the Buddha for this sutra expresses this idea of an ultimate meaning to the emptiness doctrine: "The True Revelation of the Buddha's Intention when Teaching Emptiness."

The sūtra has, furthermore, significantly contributed to the Mahāyāna notion of the permanent, steadfast and eternal Tathagātagarbha, which is nothing less than the perfect Dharmakāya temporarily concealed by (ultimately unreal) mental contaminants:

“The tathāgatagarbha is without any prior limit, is nonarising, and is indestructible, accepting suffering, having revulsion toward suffering, and aspiring to nirvana. O Lord, the tathāgatagarbha is not a substantial self, nor a living being, nor ‘fate,’ nor a person. The tathāgatagarbha is not a realm for living beings who have degenerated into the belief of a substantially existent body or for those who have contrary views, or who have minds bewildered by emptiness.[26]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Haskel, Peter (2001). Letting Go: The Story of Zen Master Tōsui, p. 2. University of Hawaii Press. ISBN 0-8248-2440-7.
  2. ^ Bodiford, William M. (2008), Dharma Transmission in Theory and Practice. In: Zen Ritual: Studies of Zen Buddhist Theory in Practice (PDF), Oxford University Press.
  3. ^ Nguyen, T.T.D. (Re-)invented Chan Lineage, Unique Vietnamese Meditation School, or Both? Thích Thanh Từ’s “Revived” Trúc Lâm Tradition of Thiền Tông. Religions 2024, 15, 352. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030352
  4. ^ Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, p. 9. Brill, 2008.
  5. ^ Dumoulin 2005.
  6. ^ a b Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, p. 10. Brill, 2008.
  7. ^ a b c Mohr, Michel. “Zen Buddhism during the Tokugawa Period: The Challenge to Go beyond Sectarian Consciousness.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, vol. 21, no. 4, 1994, pp. 341–72. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30234140. Accessed 17 May 2024.
  8. ^ Yampolski, Philip (2003), Chan. A Historical Sketch. In: Buddhist Spirituality. Later China, Korea, Japan and the Modern World, pp. 5-6; edited by Takeuchi Yoshinori, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
  9. ^ McRae 2003, p. 4.
  10. ^ a b Ford, James Ishmael (2006). Zen Master Who?: A Guide to the People and Stories of Zen, pp. 53-56. Wisdom Publications. ISBN 0-86171-509-8.
  11. ^ Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, p. 12-13. Brill, 2008.
  12. ^ Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, p. 10. Brill, 2008.
  13. ^ a b Wu, Jiang. Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China, p, 41. Oxford University Press, 2008.
  14. ^ Haskel, Peter. Letting Go: The Story of Zen Master Tosui, pp. 20-21. University of Hawaii Press, May 1, 2001
  15. ^ a b Travagnin, Stefania. “The Madhyamika dimension of Yinshun : A restatement of the School of Nagarjuna in 20th century Chinese Buddhism,” pp. 220-223. (2009).
  16. ^ a b c Borup 2008, p. 9.
  17. ^ Faure 2000, p. 58.
  18. ^ The Teaching of Queen Śrīmālā of the Lion's Roar (PDF). Translated by Paul, Diana. BDK America. 2017. ISBN 978-1-886439-31-3. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-12-09.
  19. ^ a b McRae 2004, p. 5.
  20. ^ a b Brown 2010, p. 3.
  21. ^ Barber 2008, pp. 153–154.
  22. ^ Barber 2008, pp. 155–156.
  23. ^ Hodge 2006.
  24. ^ Tola 2004, p. xiii.
  25. ^ Wayman 1990, p. 102.
  26. ^ McRae 2004, p. 45-46.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Javierfv1212/sandbox&oldid=1224304190"