Jump to content

Talk:Chan Buddhism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 50.68.134.51 (talk) at 19:48, 21 January 2016 (→...Pure Land Buddhism?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

CSB-tag

The corenSearchBot noticed the copying; I removed it; see above. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 08:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specific Japanese Zen-information

Removed specific Japanese Zen information; added links to relevant subsections on other pages. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 09:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Differentiation

It is unclear whether or not (presumed not) 'Chan' is synonymous with 'Japanese Zen', and what differentiates the terms from just plain-ol' 'Zen', etc. It would be nice to clear up the distinction early in the article - for novices like me; who would rather not have to read the entire article along with all the associated articles to find out. ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 16:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese Zen is Chinese Chán imported to Japan and infused with Japanese culture. Chán developed from the 6th century onward. It's full-grown form was imported in Japan from the 13th century on. Zen is the Japanese name. The article on Zen is calles Zen because of the 'general' meaning of the term. Chinese Chán and Japanese Zen give specifics for these two countries. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you! (again). Sometimes these subjects can become a discombobulation. ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 16:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I follow this. Indeed, I'm puzzled by why this article is titled "Chinese Ch'an" rather than the more common title of Ch'an Buddhism. WP is the first place that I've see it referred to in this way. Ch'an Buddhism--to my understanding--started in China several centuries before it was introduced into Japan and called Zen. But Zen developed a unique identify. Would it not be more accurate to say that Zen grew out of Ch'an than Japanese Zen is Chinese Ch'an. And why then, "Chinese Ch'an" when there is no other Ch'an, which omits the more important descriptor "Buddhism"? Sorry, great work here but this is baffling--174.7.56.10 (talk) 02:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's been a discussion on this topic, namely splitting the Zen-article into a main article on "Zen", and "separate articles (as necessary) devoted to the specifics of Chinese Chán, Japanese Zen, and other relevant additional information". That's why this article is called "Chinese Chán", to make a distinction with the general article on "Zen". Which is, indeed, the Japanese name, but has become, inthe west, the generic name for the whole Chán/Zen-tradition. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image fit problem

An image has a problem with fitting in its section, and (at least in my browser: Firefox, currennt), instead of displaying in the section intended, it drops down to the next section and partially overlaps text. My attempts at fixing were non-productive.
Image: File:Mahakasyapa.jpg
Section: Kasyappa and the Flower Sermon
Note: it looks fine in 'Show Preview', but not when saved. If there are no objections, I'll remove it in a day or two. done. 74.60.29.141 (talk) 02:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC) ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There goes my nice picture... Anyway, he's still smiling at mu window-ledge :) Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:36, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My window-ledge, of course. What's in a typo... Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:38, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Mu window-ledge" sounds more intriguing: mu : 無; [5]: Pure human awareness, prior to experience or knowledge. This meaning is used especially by the Chan school. ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC) - Where can I get a mu window? ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right where you are it's already there. Close your eyes, place your hands on your head, realize that what you feel is a small part of concrete matter between your hands, and then realize that all that you're aware of, the hands, the hhad, and everything else, is somehow within that piece of concrete matter you're aware of. Now where's your head? Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the title Chán and not Chan?

Normally Chinese tone marks are omitted in English. Hvn0413 (talk) 00:23, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doctrinal background

Created Doctrinal background of Zen-page, in response to proposal at Talk:Zen#A Suggestion to shorten the Zen-article. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:07, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm going to move this to Chan Buddhism. It and Chan (Buddhism) got equal support, but "Buddhism" got stronger arguments than (Buddhism). Nyttend (talk) 17:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Chán → Chinese Chan – No pinyin tone diacritics in titles. Timmyshin (talk) 02:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The adjective "Chinese"was used to distinguish it from "Japanese Zen". But "Chan (Buddhism)" is fine too. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I support the move to Chan Buddhism, per WP standards for using the common name. "Chinese Chán" is not the usual name, and is redundant. Tengu800 05:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

...Pure Land Buddhism?

" After the Song, Chan more or less fused with Pure Land Buddhism." (first paragraph).

This is a factoid that I've never seen reported anywhere else and is not sourced here. It seems implausible: the two systems--Pure Land being perhaps a Christian influenced version of Buddhism and Chan lying, by some measures, almost at the other end of the philosophical spectrum. Can we get more...or less...on this? --174.7.10.39 (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. A little more research on the web has shown that some people--predominantly Pure Land Buddhists--see some similarities between the two systems of ideas and practices, and apparently there were some teachers in China who combined the two practices. But I still haven't found any other suggestion that Pure Land subsumed Chan. --174.7.56.10 (talk) 19:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pure Land is not Christian-influenced at all, it is an independent development that bears no resemblance to Christianity. By the Yuan and Ming, Chan in China and Pure Land Buddhism were being taught as a unified school. There are cites on the page. Incidentally I am trying to clean the page up because it's very messy. One sample cite from the article is Sharf, Robert H. (2002), On Pure Land Buddhism and Ch'an/Pure Land Syncretism in Mediaeval China, Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. BRILL is a top-notch respected academic publisher. Ogress smash! 20:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the article does not say that Pure Land subsumed Chan, but that they "more or less fused." That's kind of basic knowledge about Chinese Buddhism. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ogress: "...bears no resemblance to Christianity." Really? Admittedly there are obvious differences (the chanting of the name of Amitabha's name, and the impermanent nature of the Pure Land for example) but the devotional, religious nature of both as well as the central role of the afterlife/heaven makes it difficult to understand "no resemblance". There seems to be far greater resemblance between Pure Land and Christianity and none that I can discern between Ch'an and Pure Land. Martin Palmer, a British Historian and writer, is one of those who suggests that there is such a link but I have also seen opinions that Pure Land gave rise to the Christian ideas, so all of these ideas appear to have slender and thus unreliable support.
And on that score, thanks at least for addressing the point that I raised by pointing out the one cite. But the one cite is all there is for several scattered references to the same assertion: of a link between Ch'an and Pure Land. I searched the web--including a stop at EB--and still could find no other references to a link between Pure Land and Ch'an.
And my reason for raising the query was the bewildering lack of any obvious ties between the two sets of beliefs. Ch'an, if anything, seemed to distance itself from the Mahayana belief in the Buddha as divine (Lin Chi's "...kill the Buddha") and to return to a "down to earth" practice and focus. What do the two systems have in common?
It's just my feeling that the assertion of such an bizarre marriage of ideas could benefit from clarification and support.
@JJ: JJ really! Was that the core of the issue raised or are you nit-picking in the talk pages? The fact that Ch'an disappeared after the merger would suggest that 'subsumed' was a conversational approximation. And as for the last sentence, as an intelligent reader, in a forum such as this, I expect that if this is indeed the "basic knowledge" that you claim it should be easy to produce further citations.
--50.68.134.51 (talk) 01:18, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I confess that my lack of particular interest in Pure Land Buddhism until now has perhaps left me with incomplete information about how it would tie-in with Ch'an, but fortunately the WP article on Pure Land Buddhism provides both a much improved answer to my question here and to PLB generally, wisdom that could profitably be referenced at least here.

I quote from the WP article: "Upon encountering Japanese Pure Land traditions which emphasize faith, many westerners saw outward parallels between these traditions and Protestant Christianity. This has led many western authors to speculate about possible connections between these traditions.[39] However, the cosmology, internal assumptions, and underlying doctrines and practices are now known to have many differences.[39]". --50.68.134.51 (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chan_Buddhism&oldid=700981122"