Kanshu

but I agree with the need to ask that question

the Zen way seems to be uniquely different from other traditions, more a reflection of the Japanese "samurai" culture than the broad tradition of Mahayana Buddhism and its manifestations as Chan

I'm gonna have to echo Sunyata's general approach. I too have concerns about Japanese Zen, and have tended to go to the Chinese Ch'an masters rather than Japanese Zen masters for insight. But there are always going to be factors that make two separate cultural expressions different from each other. One is that Japan and China are really quite different places, with separate histories, language, topography, traditions, and ethnic religions. Another is simply time: Zen is the most recent Chinese form of Dharma to be transmitted to Japan, and by the birth of Dogen, the Sixth Patriarch had been dead for nearly 500 years. A lot changes in 500 years! So of course Zen and the old-school Ch'an which is popular in books in America are going to appear rather different.

One thing to think about is that the Chinese mindset basically looks for connections between things and tries to unify disparate traditions into a whole. The Japanese have demonstrated a far greater tendency toward sectarianism and essentialism, looking for the one exclusively right Buddhist practice, be it zazen, koan study, nembutsu, daimoku, precepts, or any of the other single solutions recommended by various Japanese sects. So Zen (at least, Soto and Rinzai, I wouldn't include Obaku which has retained a much more Chinese flavor), with a samurai spirit to boot, has thrown out massive amounts of the normal Ch'an program, such as Pure Land chants and koans, mastery of the Tripitaka, etc.

The samurai tradition in Japan is what I think has corrupted Chan more than anything else. Zen reeks of it. Here's what I see that is tolerated in traditional zen lineages:
-martial attitudes and actions (including that famous Yasutani Nazi stuff)
-partying like a Clingon: drinking, carousing, etc, without shame (look at Maezumi Roshi et al)
-meat eating
-bullying
-masochism

Okay, maybe I'm going a little too far, but maybe this will rouse a few sleeping tigers.

My understanding echos some of what Jeff said: Fundamental cultural differences are causal for the overarching differences in the religions in the two nations.

But, still, there are enormous differences within Ch'an and within Zen, so the disparities overall are big. Yet, viewed another way, everyone is talking about the same thing essentially. Rinzai and Soto Zen are probably more alike now than they have been. Hui-neng and whatshisname, his rival 6th Patriarch ended up appreciating and adapting somewhat each others views. So I think it is all a wild dance of separations and comings together: Sort of like the Charleston merging with the Froog merging with the Tango.

Ch'an (which is also pronounced "Jen") is most definately a Chinese mixture of Daoism, and Dhyaan Buddhism (Dhyaan being the meditation, which is what Buddha himself practiced, and taught, and was the basis for Zen).

Zen is NOT a product of Samurai Culture, though the Samurai Culture that we know of IS the product of Zen Practice, mixed with Shintoism, and Clansmanship.
Zen masters of Japan were not Samurai, they lived in temples, and loathed violence, unlike their Samurai students.

More often than not, Japanese Zen Masters were really Chinese Zen Masters, just with Japanese names.
As it stands, almost all of Japanese Culture was molded by Chinese influence... Vajramushti (an indian martial art, which actually originated from the greeks) became Taiji Quan, Gong Fu (rather generic name)then further became Aikido, Karate, Judo, and possibly every other asian martial arts we know of today.

I personally think that the original school of Ch'an (Dhyaan Buddhism) was less evolved.

~Dave.

I read somewhere that Buddha's last meal consisted of pork as one of the portions.

Oh, and many Chinese Ch'an Masters are known for being big drinkers also!

But now the practice--in exactly the same lineage--is radically different. So, no matter how we bracket it--(Chinese) Ch'an, (Japanese) Zen, (Yankee) Dharma ... whatever--it all comes down to the essence of the practice and finding our way to the Buddha's Truth.

Like the saying goes, there are 84,000 entryways to the Buddhadharma.

Bodhidharma looked surprised. "Why, none." he answered.

The Emperor grew indignant. "Then what," he demanded, "if not good works should I as a Buddhist have striven to accomplish?" "To be empty of yourself," answered Bodhidharma. It was not the sort of remark one generally made to Chinese emperors.

The emperor countered, "Just who do you think you are?" and Bodhidharma shrugged. "I have no idea," he said.

But the man with no ego was not a fool; The Blue Eyed Demon left town fast and headed for the sanctuary of Shao Lin Monastery.

At Shao Lin Ji, as legend has it, Zen's First Patriarch found the priests to be in such poor physical condition that, in addition to teaching them his new form of meditation Buddhism, he instructed them in the Tai Ji Quan/Vajramushti discipline known to us now as Gong (Kung) Fu.

However the Shao Lin priests managed to learn Gong Fu, one thing is certain: they learned it well within the context of Zen's Code of Conduct. The martial arts were practiced as a spiritual discipline, a devotional exercise, an expression of egoless action. There could be no swaggering, no aggressiveness, no emotional involvement of any kind... and never a thought of vengeance. An angry man or a proud man was unfit for such ritualized combat. If a student started to behave egoistically and didn't catch himself in the act, he'd get a lesson in humility when his master caught up with him.

Wow what a story. Does anyone in Ch'an buddhism practice such a technique of trying to hold on to something in the mind, as bodhidharma instructed?

Wise topic choice enables truth to be shared.

These teasers elicit debate of no value :)

You are right. I was going on the story which tathagath had related. It is quite impossible to hold on to anything in the mind as things, expecially mind 'objects' are impermanent.

Emperor Wu would have realized this and also the realization of No self which comes along with this. What was described above is typical vipassana practice. I'm wondering if it exists under a different name/form in Cha'n buddhism.

take care

all include what your discribing as no-self.

No-self is also used.

gassho,

Kanshu

Yes, again the problem with the BBs. Yes, you are right about no self. But I was actually refering to the technique of meditation which Bodidharma had asked Emperor Wu to try out. I was wondering if this system of meditation is practiced today in Ch'an. Any info, anyone?

take care

Bodhidharma's 'technique' was simply to force the Emperor into an existential corner in which he (the Emperor)--according to this tale--woke up a bit to his true nature. The MU koan, the Who is the master inquiry, Original Face, Sound of One Hand etc. can all accomplish the same thing. In actual practice, it is the 'nub' of the koan itself that becomes the focus of zazen--like MU!, or
Who!

Bodhidharma told the Emperor to look for his 'self'. The Emperor tossed and turned all night long, probably in great anxiety. No self to be found anywhere. And yet, he didn't just fall into a black hole either.

This is how a koan or a spiritual inquiry works. As someone said, first it shows you how trapped you are, and then it sets you free.

The meditation was first breath awareness followed by sound awareness. When the sound was no longer separate from "you", the focus was placed on the body sensations.

Then you tried to discover who or what was experiencing the sensations. Soon there was no difference between the experience and the experiencer.

If you can hit that state it is alot like those cyberoptic posters (3 d) when you are seeing you can not undestnd how you did not see it.

I vaguely remember an insight about how using words such as love, practice, anger, kindness as nouns rather than verbs were stumbling blocks as are rather processes as is a human being or even the universe. I remember that there was no sense of being there at all. There was just the action of breathing or digesting-like if you remove the processes you vanish. I am not saying this correctly or understandably probably as is very difficult to describe. But anyway the meditation above can be a map of sorts for that "no self type of experience.