FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2048662012> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2048662012 endingPage "154" @default.
• W2048662012 startingPage "150" @default.
• W2048662012 abstract "Reviewed by: How Zen Became Zen. The Dispute over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China John Kieschnick Morten Schlütter. How Zen Became Zen. The Dispute over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press. 2008. Pp. x +289. $48 (cloth); $27 (paper). ISBN 978-0-8248-3255-1. In recent years Chan studies have flourished like no other area of Buddhist studies. Just the past few years have seen the publication of a half dozen original, carefully researched works on Chan.20 Although the emphasis has [End Page 150] been on the formation and development of Chan Buddhism in the Tang, most Chan scholars have long since abandoned the stereotype that Chan reached its apogee in the late Tang and fell into decline soon thereafter; on the contrary, even scholars who focus on early Tang Chan have called repeatedly for further research on the Song period when so many of the distinctive characteristics of Chan took shape, including its monastic ideal, its literary canon, its historiography and its most original forms of practice. How Zen Became Zen provides just such a study, contributing a powerful critique of the “widespread perception that Chan, together with all of Chinese Buddhism, lost its true spirit after the Tang dynasty” (p. 2); indeed, the perception of post-Tang decline is no longer so widespread among specialists in Buddhism, and owing to studies like these, it is fast fading in related fields as well. But more than a defense of the importance of Song Buddhism, Schlütter’s book tackles one of the key issues in Chan history: a debate in the twelfth century over how to achieve enlightenment, a problem particularly puzzling in Chan since perhaps the most fundamental and oft-repeated Chan doctrine is that we are all fundamentally enlightened to begin with. In the twelfth century, “silent illumination Chan” (mozhao chan 默照禪) emphasized the need to recognize that we are inherently enlightened through a form of nondualistic meditation in which one engages in “quiet sitting”—with eyes closed—and does not intentionally strive for enlightenment. On the other hand, kanhua Chan 看話禪 advocated the use of gong’an (Jap. kōan) to force a decisive, breakthrough event, signaling enlightenment. This split had important consequences for the subsequent development of Chan Buddhism, and perhaps even greater consequences in Japan, where similar rhetoric continues to this day. The basic contours of this twelfth-century split and the key figures involved— Hongzhi Zhengjue 宏智正覺 as the representative of silent illumination Chan, and Dahui Zonggao 大慧宗杲 as the representative of kanhua Chan—are well known. Schlütter reviews the evidence for who these monks were and what they wrote, but his main contribution is in reconstructing the social milieu in which they lived. Most of what we know about silent illumination Chan comes not from its proponent, but from the biting invective of its most prominent critic, Dahui. Dahui insisted that the practice of silent illumination was aberrant and dangerous, its proponents wasting their time in a futile exercise. They “sit immovable [End Page 151] in the ghostly cave under the black mountain until they get calluses on bones and buttocks, and saliva is dripping from their mouths” (p. 127). They “discard everything, and, having gobbled up their provided meals, they sit like mounds in the ghostly cave under the black mountain. They call this ‘being silent and constantly illuminating’ or call it ‘dying the great death’ or ‘the matter before your parents were born’ or ‘the matter before the empty eon’ or ‘the state of beyond the primordial Buddha’” (p. 131). For Dahui the chief problem of silent illumination Chan was that, whatever therapeutic value it might have, it did not lead to enlightenment. Instead, Dahui emphasized a focus on a key word or phrase (huatou 話頭) of an “old case,” that is, one of the famous Chan dialogs between master and disciple, the most prominent example being the word “no” in the exchange in which Zhaozhou responds to the question “Does a dog have the Buddha nature” with “no.” Dahui singled out the single word “no” in this dialog, insisting that concentration on this huatou..." @default.
• W2048662012 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2048662012 creator A5066026543 @default.
• W2048662012 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W2048662012 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2048662012 title "<i>How Zen Became Zen. The Dispute over Enlightenment and the Formation of Chan Buddhism in Song-Dynasty China</i> (review)" @default.
• W2048662012 cites W273674778 @default.
• W2048662012 cites W354425997 @default.
• W2048662012 cites W560889350 @default.
• W2048662012 cites W588955208 @default.
• W2048662012 cites W628411824 @default.
• W2048662012 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/sys.2011.0009" @default.
• W2048662012 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2048662012 type Work @default.
• W2048662012 sameAs 2048662012 @default.
• W2048662012 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2048662012 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2048662012 hasAuthorship W2048662012A5066026543 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C109167261 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C191935318 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C195244886 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C2780326160 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C2781291010 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C2910891963 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C29598333 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C58640448 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C75699723 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C107038049 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C109167261 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C124952713 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C138885662 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C142362112 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C166957645 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C191935318 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C195244886 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C205649164 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C27206212 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C2780326160 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C2781291010 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C2910891963 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C29598333 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C58640448 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C75699723 @default.
• W2048662012 hasConceptScore W2048662012C95457728 @default.
• W2048662012 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2048662012 hasLocation W20486620121 @default.
• W2048662012 hasOpenAccess W2048662012 @default.
• W2048662012 hasPrimaryLocation W20486620121 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W1563717517 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2085794934 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2170073719 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2244444090 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2343820084 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2368015253 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2383835525 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2494012829 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2048662012 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2048662012 hasVolume "40" @default.
• W2048662012 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2048662012 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2048662012 magId "2048662012" @default.
• W2048662012 workType "article" @default.