By Victor M Fontane
Tibetan Buddhism and Zen Buddhism are the two most popular schools of Buddhism in the West, particularly after being taught by teachers such as D. T. Suzuki or Chögyam Trungpa, great ambassadors of these schools. And it is undoubtedly due to this popularity that people often wonder about the differences between one school and another, particularly those neophytes who want to approach certain communities to start a practice. This article aims to point out some of the outstanding characteristics of Tibetan Buddhism and Zen Buddhism, briefly and not exhaustively, it is possible to say that both are authentic and complex Buddhist traditions.
The first thing to mention in this regard is that both Zen and Tibetan Buddhism are part of Mahayana Buddhism, that is, Buddhism that arises more or less between the second and first centuries before our era and that takes a social component, embracing the bodhisattva ideal, the adept dedicated to freeing others motivated by compassion. This especially sets them apart from Theravada Buddhism, which is found mostly in countries in South Asia. The difference between Mahayana and Theravada arises fundamentally with the diffusion of the Prajñaparamita sutra and their doctrine of the emptiness of all phenomena (or dharmas) and not only of the emptiness of the self. From this body of texts, among which is the famous Heart Sutra (and its famous phrase: "emptiness is form; form is emptiness"), develops the philosophy of the middle path (Madhyamaka), whose main exponent is Nagarjuna and whose central idea is emptiness (sunyata). This philosophy is the consequent development of the doctrine of dependent origination or the notion that all phenomena are interdependent and, even more, implicitly imply the notion of non-duality, which will be central to both Zen and Tibetan Buddhism.
The emptiness that the Prajñaparamita sutras expose is known as the second round of the dharma wheel. The first round of the dharma wheel happened when Prince Siddhārttha Gautama achieved Nirvana and became a Buddha. The third round of the dharma wheel is a new understanding of the Buddha's doctrine, which this time emphasizes the buddhic nature of all beings, that is, the potential or seed that exists in all beings that have cognitive ability to become a Buddha or, in other words, update your own nature. This third turn of the wheel is associated with the philosophical school known as Yogacara or Vijñanavada, which holds that all phenomena only exist as consciousness. Again, both Zen and Tibetan Buddhism accept these doctrines, although in some cases with certain qualifications. Particularly within Tibetan Buddhism (which in the background can be understood as a set of Buddhist schools with certain similar characteristics), the geluk-pa schools (the Dalái Lama school) and sakhya-pa school place more emphasis on the aspect of emptiness and on the other hand, the Nyingma-Pa and Kagyu-Pa schools often combine both but with a certain inclination to emphasize the radiant nature of the mind or its inherent "Buddhahood."
With this background we can begin to differentiate these two forms of Buddhism. Zen traces its origin to Bodhidharma, who would have brought this form of Buddhism to China approximately in the sixth century of our era. Originally, in China the name of this school was Chan, which in turn derives from the Sanskrit dhyana, a term that refers to meditative absorption; In Japan, that word became Zen. We can then perceive the great emphasis that this school makes on meditation.
As is known, Zen Buddhism focuses largely on meditation, as sitting quietly to observe the breath or the practice of analytical meditation, for example: trying to locate the mind (if it is possible), or approaching riddles that seek to penetrate beyond the conceptual mind and produce a sudden understanding of the nature of reality. In fact Zen also goes in this direction. The story of Patriarch Mahakashyapa, a disciple of the Buddha who attained enlightenment when on one occasion the Buddha, instead of teaching with a sermon, kept silent and gave him a flower; at that moment Mahakashyapa understood the ineffable nature of reality and smiled. That state of silent and non-dual gnosis is transmitted by a lineage that traces its origin to Mahakashyapa, as is the case of Soto, the school imported from China by the great master Dogen.
In the case of Zen Buddhism it is important to note that, by passing through China, this school received an important influence from Taoism, the indigenous philosophy of the country that emphasizes in emptiness, the abundance of the unlimited. Likewise, Zen has absorbed from Taoism notions that have to do with following the rhythm of nature and practicing non-doing, or effortless concentration (which, however, does not prevent Zen from being at the same time one of the forms of Buddhism that place greater emphasis on discipline).
By focusing on meditation and a non-conceptual experience of the mind, Zen, consequently, does not give so much importance to the scriptures and rituals, but rather seeks the direct experience of reality, which is raised as a result of the teacher-student relationship. Thus, much of the practice has to do with seeking an experience of awakening, a sublime intuition of Buddhahood or emptiness. What is called in Zen a "beginner's mind", a mind empty of concepts but open to the luminosity of the experience. A dictum attributed to Bodhidharma summarizes the above:
A transmission outside the scriptures.
Not depending on the words and the letters.
Aiming directly at the human mind.
Penetrating nature itself and obtaining Buddhahood.
Let us now see other similarities that we can appreciate between Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. Zen is what is called a school of illumination or sudden awakening. While this is not the norm in Tibetan Buddhism, it is the case of certain "vehicles" within this school, as is the case of Dzogchen, a set of teachings that also emphasize the teacher's instructions that point to the nature of the mind so that, in a moment of non-conceptual meditation, the disciple can free himself and obtain the status of a Buddha or a vidyadhara. Also, in general terms Tibetan Buddhism takes "the base" (that is, Buddha nature) as the fruit, arguing that in reality the practitioner is already enlightened, only that he must recognize it: the path is about eliminating the obstructions that prevent seeing the reality of the base as fruit. In Zen, as Dogen teaches, for example, meditation is also considered to be the recognition of the state of awakening that already exists. And meditating is already that illumination, for this is the pure reality of the mind.
Perhaps the most notable difference between Tibetan Buddhism and Zen Buddhism has to do with the importance of rituals in the specific case of Tibetan Buddhism. In this regard it could be said that if Zen is minimalist, Tibetan Buddhism is then Baroque; If Zen tends more to the apophatic, Tibetan Buddhism in some sense tends more to the cataphatic and devotion as purification. This is mainly explained because Buddhism arrived in Tibet, from India, when the tantric schools of Buddhism that lived with the Mahayana had already emerged. Tibetan Buddhism is essentially Tantric or Vajrayana Buddhism, "the path of the diamond", which alludes both to the speed with which the awakening can be achieved and to the idea of an indestructible lineage, a diamond body of unbroken wisdom.
Reference is sometimes made to another turn of the dharma wheel or esoteric teachings that the Buddha, always pragmatic, had prepared especially for a king (or for those who remain and act in the world). Tantra relies heavily on initiations and empowerments that reproduce the ritual pomp of the coronation of a monarch, where the kingdom or palace is replaced by a mandala. Buddhism that reaches Tibet in approximately the 8th century (thanks to the missionary journeys of Shantarakshita and Padmasambhava) is a Buddhism already influenced by Tantrism (which originates primarily among practitioners of Shivaism) and its courtship of deities, mandalas and mantras . If tantra already tended to use magic and alchemy in itself, to this was added the fact that in Tibet there was an indigenous shamanic religion (Bön) which it ended up dismissing, although, naturally, not without receiving certain influence.
Thus, some people feel confused when they see that Tibetan Buddhism uses a series of deities and protectors in their practice, some of which have fierce aspects (manifestations of compassion that destroys all attachments), because they believe that Buddhism is an atheist or that lacks deities. In reality, Buddhism has never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of superhuman spirits and deities influencing reality (the Buddha himself speaks of gods like Brahma and Indra); however, it is distinguished from other religions by the fact that it denies that the universe has a creative god or that the gods have an inherent existence (although neither do humans!).
Tibetan Buddhism emphasizes in practice a path that seeks the purification of impurities, afflictions and obstacles, as well as the accumulation of merit for the experience of emptiness or "tality" (Sanskrit tathata, that can be translated as "reality as it is"). For this, different techniques or different forms of yoga are used. Fundamentally the "yoga of the deity" is practiced, the visualization of the individual as identical to a deity with which there is a special bond, in order to inhabit a mandala (that is, a palace, a pure, divine and luminous universe in whose luminous emptiness the ego dissolves). Tantra traces a series of stages ranging from preliminary practices such as taking refuge in the three jewels and renouncing samsara, to a stage of generation of the deity and one of completion of it. Some traditions recognize the Dzogchen (the great perfection) and the Mahamudra (the great seal) as pinnacle of this path, esoteric practices oriented towards a type of non-dual meditation closer to Zen.
As you can see, Tibetan Buddhism is conceptually complex, much more than Zen, and there are important disputes between its different schools, so it is difficult to establish an accurate picture of what it is in a strict sense. However, in summary we could say that Tibetan Buddhism is more inclined to practices linked to magic (the use of protectors and spirits), devotion (to the teacher and to deities and bodhisattvas) and to the rite in general (the practice being central of a sadhana). Although it is true that there may be a lot of superstition among practitioners, it is important to note that all these techniques are recognized only as skillful means to achieve a transformation in consciousness and not as dogmas or substantial realities (generation of compassion or bodhicitta is an important method for purify the mind, particularly in Tibetan Buddhism).
In sum, both types of Buddhism, Tibetan and Zen, seek the same goal (the awakening or the total elimination of suffering that is only possible when the mind has recognized its own nature and is free of attachment and cognitive errors), but they are distinguished in the tools or styles that they use to obtain it.
Comments