Lost in Details

The Lotus Sutra has a vital message to all Buddhists that nobody should ever forget. All the teachings are expedient means to bring everyone to liberation. When this cardinal doctrine is forgotten there is sectarianism (this is the best teaching), traditionalism (this is how it has been for 1000s of years), restorationism (returning to the Original Teachings), modernisationism (new age, new people, new teaching), etc. The important thing about the teaching of expedient means that one doesn't take a single position regarding what teaching is the only true. In fact, it shouldn't even be called "teaching" but rather method. Any method is good if it helps in developing wisdom-compassion (bodhicitta).

Let me rephrase it. When people argue for how something must be done and what attainments are the real ones as it is defined by their books/teachers they are not mindful of the meaning of the four noble truths. These four truths simply and directly explain the problem, its cause, the solution and the path. It is gradually eliminating suffering. It is like eating. The obvious point of eating is to end hunger. A slice of bread or a bowl of rice is OK just like exquisite gourmet meals are good too. One may study for years about a single cuisine and become a master chef, or learn enough to bake bread, it is meaningless to compete over what is the best food. That's because it is a personal thing to decide what one likes to eat. It is also a personal thing to reduce pain and sorrow. Judging others how peaceful and happy they are is very much like pursuing them to eat your food instead of somebody else's. However, we many not just judge others but even tell them that they actually need the right judge to tell them if they are fine or not.

In Zen they like to say that enlightenment is like drinking water when one instantly knows if it is cold or not. In Tibetan Buddhism they use the example of tasting sugar. At the same time they keep telling you that you must have somebody to confirm if it is indeed cold/sweet. The Buddha had a clear answer for this problem (SN 35.152) that one can personally tell if there are still the three poisons present or not. Mahayana sutras are also clear about bodhisattvas attaining insight into no birth. But then because of explanations originally made to assist understanding many get lost it details and fail to keep in mind the purpose of the teachings. On the other hand, if they are told not to rely on the teachings they immediately get attached to their own concepts or to teachers. That's why the four reliances were taught and it covers all the common misunderstandings.

Because their capacities, natures, and desires are immeasurable, Bodhisattvas pronounce immeasurable Dharmas. As the Dharmas pronounced are immeasurable, their meanings are also immeasurable. The immeasurable meanings are born from one dharma. This one dharma is no appearance, which is not apart from appearance. The truth that appearance and no appearance are not apart from each other is called true reality. As Bodhisattva-Mahāsattvas abide in this true reality, the lovingkindness and compassion they exude are genuine, not false. They can truly end sentient beings’ suffering. Having rescued them from suffering, Bodhisattvas pronounce the Dharma to them, enabling them to experience happiness.
(Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings)

Undisputed Lineages

I've been intrigued for a while now how Zibo Zhenke, a famous master of the Ming era also known for distancing himself from affiliating with any Chan lineage, ended up in Xuyun's Linji line. But then it was just now something even stranger appeared to me. According to the official lineage Puming Deyong (or Miaoyong, whose legitimacy was denied by the immediate ancestor of the founder of the Japanese Obaku school; see in the below mentioned book's page 213), who is three generations before Zibo, was only 16 (or 17) years old when Zibo died in 1603. Strange, isn't it?

But it's really nothing compared to Xuyun's Weiyang lineage what is a clear case of remote succession (yaosi 遙嗣) as we can see here.

However, it all becomes ironic when we read from Ven. Shengyan,

What is important to highlight here is that among all the expressions of Chinese Buddhism, Chan is the only tradition with an uninterrupted lineage, and a formal institutional foundation.

Let's just say that these fun facts were an appetiser for Jiang Wu's "Enlightenment in Dispute: the reinvention of Chan Buddhism in seventeenth-century China". It is worth reading, at least the conclusions at the end of each chapter and part 4.

And one more informative work I found today is Dr. Jimmy Yu's "A Tentative Exploration into the Development of Master Sheng Yen’s Chan Teachings" (PDF)