Product Code Database
In Chan Buddhism and Zen Buddhism, dharma transmission is a custom in which a person is established as a "successor in an unbroken lineage of teachers and disciples, a spiritual 'bloodline' ( kechimyaku) theoretically traced back to the Gautama Buddha himself." The dharma lineage reflects the importance of family-structures in ancient China, and forms a symbolic and ritual recreation of this system for the monastical "family".
In Rinzai school, inka shōmei (印可証明) is ideally "the formal recognition of Zen's deepest realisation", but practically it is being used for the transmission of the "true lineage" of the masters ( shike) of the training halls. There are only about fifty to eighty of such inka shōmei-bearers in Japan.
In Sōtō-Zen, dharma transmission is referred to as shiho, and further training is required to become an oshō.
One of the inventions of this Canonical Buddhism were transmission lists, a literary device to establish a lineage. Both Tiantai and Chan took over this literary device, to lend authority to those developing traditions, and guarantee its authenticity:
The concept of dharma transmission took shape during the Tang period, when establishing the right teachings became important, to safeguard the authority of specific schools. The emerging Zen-tradition developed the Transmission of the Lamp-genre, in which lineages from Shakyamuni Buddha up to their own times were described.
Another literary device for establishing those traditions was given by the Kao-seng-chuan (Biographies of Eminent Monks), compiled around 530. The Chan-tradition developed its own corpus in this genre, with works such as Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall (952) and the Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp (published 1004). McRae considers Dumoulin's A History of Zen to be a modern example of this genre, disguised as scientific history.
According to McRae, it is not clear that the practitioners surrounding Bodhidharma and his disciple Huike considered themselves as belonging to a unified movement or group, such as a "Chan school," nor did they have any sense of sharing any continuity with the later tradition. He says even the name "proto-Chan" is not really reflective of their activities. McRae also points out that no known lineage theory existed in Proto-Chan, and the connection between it and the Early Chan tradition (consisting of the Northern, Heze School, and Oxhead school factions) is unclear.
However, certain questions remain. Regarding the connection between the second and third patriarchs, on the one hand, and the fourth patriarch, on the other, Whalen Lai points out that "Huike was a dhuta (extreme ascetic) who schooled others, and one of his disciples was Sengzan (d. 606). However, the link between this pair and Daoxin (580–651, now deemed the fourth Chan patriarch) is far from clear and remains tenuous."
According to Wendi Adamek:
There was no 'Chan school' in existence during the time of the six Chinese patriarchs—it cannot even be said to have begun with Shenhui, the one who yoked six names to a powerfully generative idea. However, once the imaginary line had been drawn in the sands of the past, it began to sprout real branches. It continues to put forth new shoots even today.
Modern scholarship, however, has questioned this narrative. Historic research reveals that this story was created around the middle of the 8th century, beginning in 731 by Shenhui, a successor to Huineng, to win influence at the Imperial Court. He claimed Huineng to be the successor of Hongren instead of the then publicly recognized successor Shenxiu. In 745 Shenhui was invited to take up residence in the Ho-tse temple in Luoyang. In 753 he fell out of grace and had to leave the capital to go into exile. The most prominent of the successors of his lineage was Guifeng Zongmi According to Guifeng Zongmi, Shenhui's approach was officially sanctioned in 796, when "an imperial commission determined that the Southern line of Chan represented the orthodox transmission and established Shen-hui as the seventh patriarch, placing an inscription to that effect in the Shen-lung temple".
Doctrinally the Southern School is associated with the teaching that Subitism, while the Northern School is associated with the teaching that enlightenment is gradual. This was a polemical exaggeration, since both schools were derived from the same tradition, and the so-called Southern School incorporated many teachings of the more influential Northern School. Eventually both schools died out, but the influence of Shenhui was so immense that all later Chan schools traced their origin to Huineng, and "sudden enlightenment" became a standard doctrine of Chan.
Epstein comments, "Thus Mahākāśyapa received the transmission of Dharma and became the first Buddhist patriarch."
The dharma lineage reflects the importance of family-structures in ancient China, and forms a symbolic and ritual recreation of this system for the monastical "family".
This polarity is recognizable in the emphasis that the Zen-tradition puts on maintaining the correct Dharma transmission, while simultaneously stressing seeing into one's nature:
Nevertheless, while the Zen tradition has always stressed the importance of formal Dharma transmission, there are well known examples of Mushi dokugo, such as Nōnin, Jinul and Suzuki Shōsan who attained awakening on their own, though all of them were familiar with the Zen-teachings.
Bodiford distinguishes seven dimensions which are discernible in both family relationships and in dharma lineages:
The family-model is easier recognized when East Asian languages are being used, because the same terminology is used to describe both earthly and spiritual family relations.
Dharma transmission is both concrete and abstract:
This feature gives dharma transmission a great flexibility:
In the Chinese Buddhist tradition, there are 3 systems of transmission:
It is customary to refer to one's own tonsure Master as "Gracious Master", precept Master as "Root Master" and Dharma transmission Master as "Venerable Master". In Chinese Buddhism, these 3 systems are separate and are not performed by the same Masters. Moreover, due to the strong emphasis on the Dharma, when a person receives Dharma transmission, he or she is recognized as that Chán Master's Dharma son or daughter. Lay Buddhists may also receive this Dharma transmission, but this is very rare and with very few incidences. Most of the monks and nuns who received transmission have already been tonsured and ordained by other Masters.
All contemporary Rinzai-lineages stem formally from Inzan Ien (1751–1814) and Takuju Kosen (1760–1833), both students of Gasan Jito (1727–1797). Gasan is considered to be a dharma heir of Hakuin, though "he did not belong to the close circle of disciples and was probably not even one of Hakuin's dharma heirs".
Through Hakuin, all contemporary Japanese Rinzai-lineages relate themselves to the Ōtōkan lineage, brought to Japan in 1267 by Nanpo Jomyo, who received dharma transmission in China in 1265. Rinzai-Obaku Zen - What is Zen? - History
According to Mohr,
The most common form of transmission in Rinzai Zen is the acknowledgement that one has stayed in the monastery for a certain amount of time, and may later become a temple priest.
There are only about fifty to eighty such inka shōmei-bearers in Japan:
A qualified Zen master bestows inka only upon "those select few" who have successfully completed the entire Rinzai koan curriculum, and "are eligible to serve as sōdō roshi, that is, master of a training hall, in distinction from a common temple:
(''[[Korean|Korean language]]:'' '''Inga''') literally means "the legitimate seal of clearly furnished proof":
Though Dōgen emphasized the importance of the purity of the teachings, and highly valued lineage and dharma transmission, the Sōtō-school has its origins in various lineages and dharma transmissions. Dogen received dharma transmission from his Chinese teacher Rujing, with whom he studied two years, but in medieval Sōtō he was also considered to be a dharma heir of Myōzen, a Rinzai-teacher, with whom he studied eight years. And Tettsū Gikai, the dharma-grandson of Dogen, was also lineage-holder of Nōnin, the founder of the Dharuma-shu, also a Rinzai-school. Gikai passed this lineage over to Keizan, who thereby was also lineage-holder in at least two lineages.
To make the history of Sōtō even more complicated, the Caodong-lineage that Dogen inherited through Rujing was passed on previously from the Caodong-master Dayang Jingxuan to Touzi Yiqing via the Rinzai-master Fushan Fayuan. Fushan Fayuan had once studied under Dayang Jingxuan. When Jingxuan died Fayuan had received Jingxuan's "portrait, robe, and a verse that expressed his teaching", promising "to pass them on to a suitable successor". Fayuan chose his student Touzi Yiqing to inherit this lineage, a fact that was acknowledged in Keizan's Denkoroku, but "in the standard versions of Dogen's writings, however, all direct references to Yiqing's indirect succession have been eliminated".
According to Manzan, even an unenlightened student could receive dharma transmission:
In Sōtō-zen, since Manzan Dokahu, two criteria are applied for dharma transmission:
To supervise the training of monks, further qualifications are necessary:
The duties which come with this full qualification were not always appreciated. In the medieval organisation of the Sōtō-shu, when rotation of abbotship was the norm. Dharma transmission at a branch temple obliged one to serve at least one term as abbot at the main temple. Abbotship gave severe duties, and financial burdens, for which reason many tried to avoid the responsibility of abbotship:
Dharma transmission is part of the maintenance of the Sōtō-institutions. Authority and temple-property are handed down, often from father to son. It is not a guarantee for spiritual attainment:
Muhō Noelke, the German-born former abbot of the temple Antai-ji, describes his understanding of shiho:
Shiho is done "one-to-one in the abbot's quarters (hojo)". Three handwritten documents certify the dharma transmission;
The procedure has to take place only once in one's life, and binds the student to the teacher forever:
If a students does not have the feeling he wants to be tied to this teacher for the rest of his life, he may refuse to take dharma transmission from this particular teacher. Since the time of Manzan Dōhaku (1636–1714), multiple dharma transmissions are impossible in Sōtō Zen.
After Dharma transmission one has become a member of the "blood line" of Zen, but is not yet qualified as an Oshō. After the ten-e and zuise ceremonies, one is qualified as an oshō. There-after one has to practice for some time, at least six months, in an sôdô-ango, an officially recognized Sōtō-shu training centre. Muho Noelke, Part 5: Sessa-takuma - ango as life in a rock grinder
After that one can start to work in a temple. The newly acquired status is confirmed in the kyoshi-honin ceremony. There-after follows the first practice-period in one's own temple, with the aid of a susho (head monk). This is followed by the Jushoku-himei ceremony, which confirms one's status as dai-oshō.
The Sanbo Kyodan has two levels of teaching authority, namely junshike ("associate zen master"), and shōshike ("authentic zen master"). Junshikes can give dokusan, authorize kensho, and supervise part of the koan-study. Shoshikes can supervise the advanced koan-study, and perform religious ceremonies, such as the precept-ceremony and wedding ceremonies.
The process toward gaining these titles has seen some variations within the Sanbo Kyodan. Hasansai may be preparatory to the junshike-title, but may also be the promotion to this title. And promotion to shoshike may be preparatory to dharma transmission, but may also be equivalent to it.
In dharma transmission, the student receives the sanmotsu, akin to the Sōtō shiho ceremony. This is coupled with the Rinzai notion on inka. In Rinzai, only students who have completed the complete Rinzai koan curriculum and "are eligible to serve as sōdō roshi, that is, master of a training hall, in distinction from a common temple, receive inka. In the Sanbo Kyodan, inka is derived from Harada's Rinzai master Dokutan Sōsan.
Both are considered equal in authority and "realization". A monk with either In'ga or the public "transmission" is qualified to hold the post of Seon Sa ( seonsa; 선사; 禪師), or "Zen Master" for a temple, and give transmission to their own students (either, In'ga or public "transmission"). The majority of Zen Masters in Korea have only received, and only give In'ga, with the formal transmission ceremony being far more rare.
In the Western Kwan Um School of Zen created by the Korean Zen Master Seung Sahn, "Inka" is granted to an individual who has completed their koan training and is granted the title Ji Do Poep Sa Nim ( jido beopsa-nim; 지도법사님; 指導法師님). Dharma transmission in the Kwan Um School of Zen comes after inka, denoting the individual is now a Seon Sa Nim. Seung Sahn himself is quoted saying in reference to the administration of his Western organization,
In the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta, which contains the Buddha's final teachings, he said:
It may be, Ananda, that to some among you the thought will come: 'Ended is the word of the Master; we have a Master no longer.' But it should not, Ananda, be so considered. For that which I have proclaimed and made known as the Dhamma and the Discipline, that shall be your Master when I am gone.Similarly, in the same sutta, Buddha tells his students, "be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge." The Mahāparinibbāna-sutta also denies any distinction between esoteric and exoteric doctrine and rejects the idea that the sangha should depend on a teacher who holds some things back with a "closed fist."
According to Clasquin-Johnson, early Buddhism's preference for abstract leadership (in the form of the Dharma) over human leadership differed from the normal method of routinization practiced by other Indian religious sects. Normally, founders of religious sects in India passed authority onto their chief disciples, and the sect's success or failure depended on the leader's charisma or lack thereof. Clasquin-Johnson observes that much of the Mahayana tradition has reverted to this pattern, in some variation or another, as exemplified by Zen patriarchal lineages (as well as the Tibetan tulku system).Michel Clasquin-Johnson, On the Death of the Charismatic Founder: Re-viewing some Buddhist Sources, in Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies, vol. 12, issue 34 (Spring 2013), page 5 Given the rejection of lineal-succession in early materials, Sharf points to the Brahmanicization of Buddhism as a likely contributing factor to Chan's preoccupation with an esoteric master-to-disciple transmission.Robert Sharf, Buddhist Veda and the Rise of Chan, in Chinese and Tibetan Esoteric Buddhism, edited by Yael Bentor and Meir Shahar, page 92, Brill, 2017
The Ming Caodong school master, Wuyi Yuanlai (1575–1630), believed that by his time all Chan lineages had already been broken. However, he felt that if one could realize one's own mind, and if this matched with their original understanding, the former Chan schools could still be considered present. On the other hand, he said giving dharma transmission just to keep Chan institutions alive was "adding water to dilute the milk." He felt having insight without formal transmission was preferable to having transmission without insight, as the former does no harm to the Dharma, while the latter deceives the Buddha, the world, and oneself.Stuart Lachs, Means of Authorization: Establishing Hierarchy in Ch'an/Zen Buddhism in America, page 16, Revised paper from presentation at the 1999 Meeting of the American Academy of Religion
Several important medieval Japanese masters like Takuan Sōhō eschewed formal transmission and did not believe it was necessary since the Dharma was always available to be discovered within. Some of these figures were even considered "self-enlightened and self-certified" (jigo jishō), since they claimed to have achieved "wisdom without a teacher" (無師智, pinyin: wúshīzhì; Japanese: 無師独悟, mushi-dokugo). They include Suzuki Shōsan, and Myōshin-ji figures like Daigu, Ungo and Isshi. The Tokugawa era Sōtō master Dokuan Genkō (1630–1698) was scathingly critical of the dharma transmission method which he called "paper Zen." According to Dokuan, "what is called Zen enlightenment is not dependent on another’s enlightenment. It is only what you realize for yourself, attain for yourself, just as you know when you’ve eaten enough rice to satisfy your hunger, or drunk enough water to slake your thirst." Dokuan's critique of the transmission system went as far as to claim that only those who were self-awakened actually had the wisdom of the Buddha:
In today’s Zen temples they transmit the robe and bowl i.e.,; but while the name continues, the reality of has long ceased to exist. Those who carry on the wisdom of the buddhas and patriarchs rely on themselves, being enlightened independently, without a teacher; so that even though the name has ceased, the reality itself continues.
Modern Chinese Buddhists like Tanxu, Taixu and Yin Shun also criticized dharma transmission, seeing it as a Chinese invention that was not taught by the Buddha. Taixu held that the practice led to sectarianism, and Tanxu wrote that it contributed to the decline of Zen. Yinshun believed that the Dharma was not something that could belong to anyone and thus it could not be "transmitted" in a lineage.
Nevertheless, contrary to how it has often been presented, the authorisation of teachers through dharma transmission does not mean that teachers are infallible, as is clear from the repeated appearance of scandals:
According to Stuart Lachs, such scandals have been possible because of the status given to roshis by dharma transmission, and "a desire for the master's aura, recognition, and approval." He says:
With the idealization of the teacher through ideas of lineage and dharma transmission comes the reification of the role and position of the student. Where the actions of a teacher, defined by the institutional role, are necessarily considered good and pure, critical thinking on the part of the student can be dismissed as ego-driven and self-centered. This creates an opening for all kinds of potential abuse. Consequently, students may become objectified as a means to achieve a teacher's ends, or fulfill their desires, whatever those may be.Stuart Lachs, Means of Authorization, Establishing Hierarchy in Ch'an/Zen Buddhism in America, pages 27-29, Revised paper from presentation at the 1999 Meeting of the American Academy of Religion
While teachers are socially defined in idealized terms, they may be simultaneously aware of their own human shortcomings. In this sense, the consciousness of such a teacher is split, with the idealization producing an internal otherness and alienation. Such a teacher may come to actually disdain the student who accepts their idealized status, looking upon the student with contempt as one who is easily fooled, seeing them as an object to be used.Stuart Lachs, Means of Authorization, Establishing Hierarchy in Ch'an/Zen Buddhism in America, pages 28-29, 34, Revised paper from presentation at the 1999 Meeting of the American Academy of Religion
As Bernard Faure observes, such terms acquire their definitions and significance within a particular discourse. Regarding the socially constructed nature of what is transmitted through master-disciple relationships in Zen Buddhism, Faure writes:
According to Alan Cole, the goal of Zen genealogical texts is to privatize enlightenment, which is presented as something no longer openly available to the general public, or to those lacking a lineage.Alan Cole, Fathering Your Father: The Zen of Fabrication in Tang Buddhism, page 25, University of California Press, 2009 Cole explains this as a kind of stealing of truth away from more public sources of enlightenment, which, among other things, include the Buddhist sutras.Alan Cole, Fathering Your Father: The Zen of Fabrication in Tang Buddhism, page 26, University of California Press, 2009 However, as Cole points out, this process requires the public's cooperation in an ideological exchange, acceptance of the lineage as a historical reality, and the desire of those outside the lineage to possess what the lineage has.Alan Cole, Fathering Your Father: The Zen of Fabrication in Tang Buddhism, pages 25-26, University of California Press, 2009 In return for its gift of belief, the public is promised a kind of "partial sharing" in the universal good which the lineage claims to be in possession of. However, as Cole points out, "the prior moment of exchange—when the public verified and legitimized the lineage—is left unspoken, making the gift from the lineage look sublimely disinterested and benevolent."Alan Cole, Fathering Your Father: The Zen of Fabrication in Tang Buddhism, page 27, University of California Press, 2009 This serves to cloak the basic dependence of the lineage on the public. According to Cole, the lineage's privatization of truth depends on an "Other" who, as an outside observer and reader of Zen genealogical texts, accepts the lineage's authority as something prior to and behind the narrative and not merely in it.
With the growth of Chan as a distinct tradition came concerns about origins and legitimacy, and Chan thus became preoccupied with "convoluted processes of lineage construction" in an attempt to fashion a unique Chan identity.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 44, Springer 2022 Sharf observes that the rise of Chan was closely associated with ideological tropes in which the authority of teachers was based on myths of lineal descent, and this involved "the production and manipulation of pseudo-historical lineages."Robert Sharf. Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise, page 59, University of Hawaii Press, 2002 Likewise, Foulk writes that lineages belong, either partly or wholly, to the realm of ideology and myths fabricated retrospectively to gain authority, political power, and patronage.T. Griffith Foulk. The Ch'an Tsung in Medieval China: School, Lineage, or What? The Pacific World, New Series, No. 8, 1992, page 18 For Poceski, at the heart of this was the image of the Chan master ( chanshi 禪師) whose identity was based on membership in a distinguished group of religious virtuosos.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 45, Springer 2022 As Poceski points out, well-known genealogical schemata were used to situate individual masters within illustrious spiritual ancestries, which served as sources of religious legitimacy and authority.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, pages 51-52, Springer 2022 According to Welter, historical accuracy was not the main motivating factor in the creative construction of lineal connections. Rather, transmission records were forged with an aim to elevate particular Chan factions, as well as their political supporters.Welter, Albert. Monks, Rulers, and Literati: The Political Ascendancy of Chan Buddhism, page 6. Oxford University Press, 2006.
The notion of lineage evolved over time, and by the Northern Song it had become increasingly institutionalized.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 51, Springer 2022 According to Poceski, preoccupation with lineage helped to create "an ahistorical sense of continuity" between the Chan of the Tang and Song dynasties, as it served to conceal certain paradigm shifts and ruptures that occurred during the Tang-Song transition.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 52, Springer 2022 This illusion of continuity "obfuscates the very real and consequential differences that separate the dissimilar Chan traditions that flourished during the Tang and Song eras." By the Song, Chan had become increasingly embedded in sociopolitical structures.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, pages 52-53, Springer 2022 With the establishment of religiopolitical networks and linkages to nexuses of imperial power came important ramifications for teachings, practices, and institutions. For example, Foulk points out that monastic institutions were so controlled by the state that they were nearly an extension of the national polity, with matters of doctrinal orthodoxy even being decided by imperial edict.Theodore Griffith Foulk. The "Ch'an School" And Its Place In The Buddhist Monastic Tradition, page 50, University of Michigan, 1987
As part of an effort to control and regulate Buddhism, Chan monasteries received official recognition by the imperial state, and government officials came to either influence or control the selection of abbots.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 53, Springer 2022 At the same time, as the position of abbot required official membership in a Chan lineage, ambitious monks sought to obtain inheritance certificates ( sishu 嗣書) to advance their careers, sometimes by dishonest means.Mario Poceski. Chan and the Routinization of Charisma in Chinese Buddhism, in The Theory and Practice of Zen Buddhism: A Festschrift in Honor of Steven Heine, Chinese Culture 6, edited by Charles S. Prebish and On-cho Ng, page 54, Springer 2022 Foulk observes the many abuses of this system recounted by Dōgen, and states that "inheritance certificates were routinely given to senior monastic officers, presumably so that their way to an abbacy would not be blocked."T. Griffith Foulk. Myth, Ritual, and Monastic Practice in Sung Ch'an Buddhism, in Religion and Society in T'ang and Sung China, Edited by Patricia Buckley Ebrey and Peter N. Gregory, page 160, University of Hawaii Press 1993 According to Poceski, inheritance certificates are a peculiar feature of Chan which were invented during the Song dynasty. Foulk observes that inheritance certificates were not merely religious symbols, but were rather actual legal documents recognized by civil authorities. Foulk states that the Chan lineage was essentially a mythological entity that nonetheless became an institutional reality when the government officially recognized dharma transmission, which he explains as a kind of ritual reenactment of mythology involving an inheritance certificate.T. Griffith Foulk. The Ch'an Tsung in Medieval China: School, Lineage, or What? The Pacific World, New Series, No. 8, 1992, page 28 Poceski observes the way in which this overall situation reflects a routinization of charisma:
A major stipulation for all Chan monasteries, which de facto meant most public monasteries, was that the new abbot had to be recognized as an official member of a Chan lineage. Consequently, the Chan master came to act as a sanctioned religious functionary, a prominent prelate endorsed by the state, rather than an independent spiritual virtuoso whose authority was to a large extent based on his personal charisma and unique vision.
Moreover, Poceski points out that abbots enjoyed opportunities for personal enrichment as well as control of the monastery's finances. With this situation came certain abuses such as the selling of abbotships and the acceptance of bribes by officials who controlled the process of abbot selection. Similarly, Jørn Borup observes that in Muromachi period Japan, " inka shōmei were said to shift hands whenever temples needed money or powerful individuals needed status or a religiously sanctioned 'passport.'"Borup, Jørn. Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism: Myōshinji, a Living Religion, page 10, note 8. Brill, 2008. Later in the Edo period period as well, Michel Mohr points out that "the misuse of Dharma-succession practices had become a plague that affected the credibility of the entire Zen Buddhist clergy."Michel Mohr. Zen Buddhism during the Tokugawa Period, The Challenge to Go beyond Sectarian Consciousness, page 358, in Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1994 21/4
According to Lachs, dharma transmission has not always been based on the spiritual qualities or realization of the recipient. It has been given at times for various other reasons, such as securing political benefits to a monastery, perpetuating a lineage (even if the recipient has not awakened), and to imbue missionaries with authority in hopes of spreading Dharma to other countries.Stuart Lachs. Means of Authorization: Establishing Hierarchy in Ch'an/Zen Buddhism in America, page 14, Revised paper from presentation at the 1999 Meeting of the American Academy of Religion Lachs also observes that in modern Sōtō, temples are often kept within families, with dharma transmission functioning as a formality for abbots to pass temple control to their eldest sons (thereby securing a comfortable place of retirement for themselves).Stuart Lachs. Means of Authorization: Establishing Hierarchy in Ch'an/Zen Buddhism in America, page 15, Revised paper from presentation at the 1999 Meeting of the American Academy of Religion
|
|
