Zen's Chinese Heritage: The Masters and Their Teachings Read Online Free PDF Page B

holy truth?”
    Bodhidharma said, “Across the vastness, nothing holy.”
    The emperor said, “Who is facing me?”
    Bodhidharma said, “I don’t know.”

    Bodhidharma’s answer to Emperor Wu’s questions clearly may be interpreted as saying that Zen values solitary meditation dedicated to observing the nature of the mind, as opposed to outward directed displays of religiosity. This is in line with the Buddha’s legendary sermon on Vulture Peak that described the Zen dharma as “signless.” Zen monks often famously rejected symbols otherwise embraced by Buddhism. Their iconoclastic acts often appeared to show disrespect toward things like statues of the Buddha, items that other Buddhists regarded as sacred symbols of the faith. But this interpretation, while valid, may only scratch the surface of why Bodhidharma and Emperor Wu were at loggerheads.
    Bodhidharma’s actions with regard to Emperor Wu may also be credited to an important paradox at the heart of Zen. One place the paradox may found is in understanding the role of “bodhisattvas,” exalted spiritual beings that are unique to Mahayana Buddhism. Emperor Wu was devoted to the study of sutras that honored bodhisattvas, as well as other doctrinal ideas spreading in Chinese Buddhism at that time. These ideas fell under the heading of the Chinese word yi xue , which means “doctrinal study.” Emperor Wu actively engaged in discussion of such ideas, inviting many prominent Buddhist teachers to his court to expound and debate them. The role of bodhisattvas, a concept central to Mahayana Buddhism and expounded in popular texts like the Lotus Sutra, opened the door for lay people, including emperors, to have high-ranking spiritual positions by virtue of their vows and actions. The bodhisattva vows, especially as set forth in a text called the Brahma Net Sutra, were recited by both home leaving monks and lay people. Also, teachings of the Nirvana Sutra spread the idea that all beings have “buddha nature” and could become buddhas. These developments blurred the distinction between traditional home-leaving monks and the rest of society.
    Bodhidharma, as he is presented in later historical accounts like the one cited above, is clearly credited with rejecting the doctrinal approach to Buddhism taken by Emperor Wu and instead uphelding the solitary practice of a home-leaving monk, a monk who meditates on the nature of the mind. The Continued Biographies offers various passages to support this difference in the religious practices of Emperor Wu and Bodhidharma. It indicates that Bodhidharma generally did not make use of scriptures in his teaching mission, the Lankavatara Sutra, a text emphasizing the nature of the mind, being the lone exception.
    In this light, the meeting between Bodhidharma and Emperor Wu represents not only a disagreement in how Buddhism should be practiced, but a political difference as well. To Emperor Wu, Buddhism was not simply a matter of personal religious insight as personified through Zen practice, but a political ideology, a means by which to guide the state. The Buddhist doctrines that invested the emperor with both spiritual and temporal authority were to him a matter of great interest.
    When Zen placed importance on the legendary meeting and failure of agreement between Bodhidharma and Emperor Wu, the tradition distanced itself from political and doctrinal issues that detracted from its central insight and practice, a practice that emphasized observing the nature of the mind.
    While some early Zen masters, particularly the Fourth Ancestor Daoxin, introduced scriptural and doctrinal terminology into the Zen tradition, the writings of certain other early Zen masters indicate that these developments were not meant to show approval of doctrinal study, much less acceptance of a metaphysical interpretation of reality that flowed naturally from such teachings.
    In the traditional story, after his encounter with Emperor Wu, Bodhidharma