Cha'n, Zen and Taoism?

[JohnC]

Hey guys,

 

What is the difference between chan, and zen?

 

Then further what is the difference between those two and taoism?

 

I'm just curious as it seems like chan is zen with energy work? Or at least more emphasis on energy in the body?

 

But both are focused on the mind, and taoism focuses more on the body?

 

John

[Ish]

Chan is the same thing as Zen, just chinese and japanese of the same word.

[Simple_Jack]

The main methods, in Chan/Zen as it's widely practiced today, are zazen/shikantaza and koan meditation. Although, as complimentary to these, this doesn't stop some people from studying works such as those attributed to the founder of Tiantai, Shramana Zhiyi.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[doc benway]

Hey guys,

 

What is the difference between chan, and zen?

 

Then further what is the difference between those two and taoism?

 

I'm just curious as it seems like chan is zen with energy work? Or at least more emphasis on energy in the body?

 

But both are focused on the mind, and taoism focuses more on the body?

 

John

Hi John,

Are you asking specifically about meditation and cultivation practices?

 

To start with, Chan and Zen are Chinese and Japanese takes on a particular form of "distilled" Buddhism.

They bear some similarity to Dzogchen of Tibetan Buddhism in that they basically refer to the inherent perfection of existence and suggest that we need do nothing more than be as we are [edited to add: and this can be seen to be very similar to the Daoist concept of Wu Wei]. Certainly there are a lot of things that can and are done to reach the point where we can recognize what that really means and stabilize in that experience. This includes, as Jack mentioned, koan practice as well as others. Neither Chan nor Zen does much in the way of formalized energetic work to my knowledge but I am not an authority in either.

 

Daoism has a bit of a different fundamental view than Buddhism although the common ground becomes more obvious as we have deeper experiences and knowledge of each. The Daoists are considerably more involved in energetic practices than the Chan and Zen. Again, there are parallels to Tibetan Buddhism where some of the breathing methods and energy methods (tsa lung and tummo) have close parallels to Qigong and Neigong practices in Daoism. The Daoist meditation methods that I have been taught are quite a bit different than Chan, Zen, and Tibetan meditation although there are similarities.

 

In Buddhist methods one can meditate by:

- focusing on an external object (candle, Tibetan letter A, etc...)

- focusing on an internal object (region of the body, image of a deity, breath, thoughts, mantra, prayer, ...)

- without specific focus

 

The Daoist methods I've learned use a combination of meditation on an internal object (orbits, points, meridians, etc..) and meditation without a focus (sitting and forgetting, dissolving). The Buddhists use a combination of all three depending on the sub-group but the Chan and Zen primarily use the second method (koans, breath) and the third method (classic zazen).

 

I haven't had any formal Chan instruction but I'm not aware of specific energy practices in Chan.That said, I would imagine that there are instructors that mix Chan with Qigong and Neigong and so on....

Edited March 14, 2014 by steve

[ChiDragon]

Chan is the same thing as Zen, just chinese and japanese of the same word.

 

Yes, Chan and Zen are just different phonetics(pinyin). This is an esoteric term used in Buddhism rather than Taoism.

 

 

The Enlightenment of the Truth

Edited March 18, 2014 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

禪修可以讓我們挖掘出我的智慧.
Cultivation of Zen may let us find our own wisdom

[Taiji Bum]

What Steve said.

[ChiDragon]

Chan = Zen = 禪

[Starjumper]

One of the Chinese Emperors took a disliking (who could possibly dislike freedom fighters?) to Taoists and started persecuting them. To avoid persecution some Taoists changed their religion by calling themselves Buddhists and wearing Buddhist robes and silly hats, and they called it Chan.

 

So, originally Chan was purely Taoist, but later, over time, it became infected with Buddhist dogma, got much more psychoanalytical, and they lost all their practice techniques except for like one or two. ROFL. Later the Japanese got wind of it and they called it Zen, and they did unspeakable things to it =) This completed the reaming of the original Taoist content of what is now the popular religion. ZEN.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Starjumper

[ChiDragon]

Sorry, never hear of it that way. Zen is strictly Buddhism.

[Creation]

The three have different characters. Chan and Zen are doctrinally identical, but there are practical differences and differences in the overall "feel". For example, in China, both Chan and Pure Land chanting are practiced by Chan monks, whereas in Japan Zen and the Pure Land schools were rivals and didn't mix practices. As for the differences with Taoism, I would sum up the major difference as being that in Taoism health, healing, longevity, magical prowess, sexual prowess, martial prowess, etc. are held to be valid pursuits for a person, whereas in Chan and Zen the goal of all practices is enlightenment, period.

 

A side note, my first contact with Chan was was the travel memoir "Bones of the Master", which I recommend highly.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Creation

[Jetsun]

As Buddhism went into different countries its flavour was influenced by the existing culture and religion. Chan and Zen are very similar because it was Chan masters who created Zen, but traditionally Chan Buddhists are known to wander around the country going from place and from master to master, while Zen monks tended to be more institutionalised and stay in the same place.

 

Taoism in its more pure form hardly exists any more, master Nan Huai Chin basically says that what most people consider Taoism is so influenced by Buddhism that it is more Buddhist than Taoist. My own personal take is that someone like Wang Liping probably represents a genuine Taoist lineage, the difference being that there is a lot of interaction with the energies of the environment and seasons and astrological alignments, while Chan and Zen are about liberation from the separate self right now.

[adept]

One of the Chinese Emperors took a disliking (who could possibly dislike freedom fighters?) to Taoists and started persecuting them. To avoid persecution some Taoists changed their religion by calling themselves Buddhists and wearing Buddhist robes and silly hats, and they called it Chan.

 

So, originally Chan was purely Taoist, but later, over time, it became infected with Buddhist dogma, got much more psychoanalytical, and they lost all their practice techniques except for like one or two. ROFL. Later the Japanese got wind of it and they called it Zen, and they did unspeakable things to it =) This completed the reaming of the original Taoist content of what is now the popular religion. ZEN.

 

So wrong on all levels !

More keyboard spirituality nonsense.

[doc benway]

"Bones of the Master", which I recommend highly.

 

Ditto

[Gerard]

If people practiced a lot more using the correct tools and learning from a traditionally trained teacher, they'd clearly see what Buddhism and Taoism are all about.

 

To sum up, one clearly acknowledges an outer reality (Taoism), they other one does but bypasses its need to deal with the mind (Buddhism).

 

TRUTH: Mind creates reality.

 

Original Buddhism: Theravada...try to understand the original teachings in today's world...you won't go too far, unfortunately.

 

Modified Buddhism: Mahayana...various practices according to environmental and cultural differences (Tibet/various traditions here, China/Chan, Japan/Zen) were implemented in order to grasp the mind according to the original teachings of the Buddha.

 

Taoism places the utmost importance to yin & yang & 5 elements in order to cultivate the mind, which still has to be dealt with in order to return to the Source, you can't bypass the mind in the end, unfortunately.

 

If you refine your mind to a high degree, you will be able to understand this a lot more.

 

You can't just sit down and meditate for 28 days non-stop and reach enlightenment in a breeze (or in 7 days like his predecessor, Kassapa Buddha). This can't be done especially in our highly polluted world/mind that your own karma has caused to be reborn in this samsaric moment. Hence you need to 'manipulate' the outer reality as well in order to purify the mind.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Gerard

[Taiji Bum]

One of the Chinese Emperors took a disliking (who could possibly dislike freedom fighters?) to Taoists and started persecuting them. To avoid persecution some Taoists changed their religion by calling themselves Buddhists and wearing Buddhist robes and silly hats, and they called it Chan.

 

So, originally Chan was purely Taoist, but later, over time, it became infected with Buddhist dogma, got much more psychoanalytical, and they lost all their practice techniques except for like one or two. ROFL. Later the Japanese got wind of it and they called it Zen, and they did unspeakable things to it =) This completed the reaming of the original Taoist content of what is now the popular religion. ZEN.

Can you cite any sources for these ideas?

[ThisLife]

*

 

An Advaita teacher that I'm very drawn to, (Wayne Liquorman), was asked a similar question as the OP, with regard to his thoughts on these different Eastern religions. I found the point of view he expressed in his reply made a far stronger resonance with me than any other I have heard before or since :

 

*
*

 

 

In terms of established spiritual traditions Taoism is most to my tastes. The history of Taoism is unique in that a viable religion never developed around it. As a result, its non-dual essence remained intact. And it remains so to this day.

 

All the rest of them have turned into major corporations. They are concerned with perpetuating themselves, as is any corporate structure. So none of them do much for me, which is not to say that they aren’t useful for lots of people. Lots of people find great solace, great comfort and great value in them. I’m just not one of them.

[Simple_Jack]

*

 

An Advaita teacher that I'm very drawn to, (Wayne Liquorman), was asked a similar question as the OP, with regard to his thoughts on these different Eastern religions. I found the point of view he expressed in his reply made a far stronger resonance with me than any other I have heard before or since :

 

In terms of established spiritual traditions Taoism is most to my tastes. The history of Taoism is unique in that a viable religion never developed around it....

 

This is unequivocally false.

[GrandmasterP]

http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/HistoricalZen/ChangTzu_and_Chinese_Ancestry.html

 

Useful Taoism- to- Chan paper.

[Taiji Bum]

Taoism is a huge religion that looks on "philosophical Taoism" as a cultural theft.

[Simple_Jack]

Read Russell Kirkland's Taoism: The Enduring Tradition: http://books.google.com/books?id=o9Op-hy1-5QC&source=gbs_navlinks_s

[ThisLife]

This is unequivocally false.

 

This is unequivocally of a matter of opinion. It does happen to be the author's point of view, and there are undoubtedly others who also hold it to be true. Therefore, it is NOT false if there are any people who truly believe it.

 

I think you may be confusing strongly held beliefs that you hold, with the Truth.

[Simple_Jack]

"...In the early 500s in the south, a canon of Taoist scriptures was formulated, an imitation of Buddhist sutras which came close to plagiarism (Ofuchi, 1979 :267)". - http://books.google.com/books?id=2HS1DOZ35EgC&pg=PA280&dq=Taoism+copy+of+buddhism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=THYeUay1BLOt0AH2o4DoDQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=Taoism%20copy%20of%20buddhism&f=false

[GrandmasterP]

"Radical agnosticism and analysis of mind is what attracted Chinese intellectuals to the particular practice of Ch'an Buddhism, which in turn is distinctive because of its "recognition of the individual need."(49) In this respect, it is heir to a long line of mysticism shaped by individual literati who searched for spiritual guidance in Lao-Chuang and later in Buddhism."

Knaul (1986) in paper Linked to via my previous post.

 

That idea of 'heir to....'.

Things evolve and change as people adopt and adapt ideas.

Look at 'Western Buddhisms' since the mid 20th Century.

OK we have much faster communications than the Taoists/ Chan folks did back in the day but Tao-Chan-Tao-Zen etc engagements happened over centuries and are still happening ( here on TTB for one contemporary example).

No way can any of us claim that ' this is pure original Tao' or ' this is pure unmediated Chan'.

It's all a gumbo-like stew of many ingredients and none the worse for it.

Edited March 29, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[JohnC]

Awesome guys thanks for all the replies.... and please keep the discussion going. I'm finding it very interesting.