Zen Buddhism Can Often Be

Zen Buddhism can often be misinterpreted and, if that happens, it is because, to think of it as a religious concept, it's very easy when, in fact, Zen, at its origins, is something derived from action and not from words. What we mean to say is that Zen's self-perception is of a path, as in the way for someone to experience what will eventually lead to an understanding of the meaning of life. However, Zen understanding is said to come not from the mind, that is to say, from logical thinking and philosophy, but rather that it is derived from insight. Moreover, a Zen perspective is to acknowledge that language itself is poor in describing the ways of life and reality, and thus, insufficient enough for an individual to determine its purpose. That is why Zen is setting itself apart from other religions with promoting practice instead of individuals having to adhere strictly to a set of scriptures from which they need to learn. That is not to say that such scriptures are disregarded completely be Zen followers, but that their focus is less directed towards intellectual teachings and more orientated towards actual practices. Because of this, it is considered that the pupil should be introduced to Zen through the intermediary of a master.

Zen is originated in traditional Buddhist teachings, but as it was, it flourished distinctively in China before being introduced to Japan. Of the five Zen schools in China, three had reached Japan: Soto, Rinzai and Obaku, although the last is said to be merely derived from Rinzai and, as such, we will be focusing here on the first two. To look at what separates one from the other is to understand that Rinzai is much more connected to Zen practices of mind liberation while Soto focuses primordially on Buddha's way of life. However, in both of these cases, enlightenment is to come as the result of an individual's own efforts. To understand the process, we must take a look at some of the practices or efforts that the individual was supposed to follow in order to achieve enlightenment and return to his original nature. We feel the need to clarify one aspect though and it has to do with the reason we might be referring to these practices in past tense. Perception of religion and, subsequently Buddhism, has changed in Japan during the last few centuries. Moreover, Japanese people nowadays are less and less willing to recognise adherence to any particular religion and its practices. Because of that, and because we are looking to discuss also what Zen Buddhism has meant for Japanese culture and considering that the transformations occurred in times past, we will continue to address the issue in the past, when its power grew sufficient enough to cause these changes.

Thus, Zen Buddhism aims at perfection of one's self through practice. Practice is meditating because, through meditation, Zen Buddhists believe the mind can be controlled and let go of, finally reaching enlightenment. However, how the practice of meditation was employed within Soto and Rinzai traditions differ. As we shall see later, other factors as well separated these two schools. In regards to meditation, Soto school employed the method of "just sitting." But let us consider that the mind is an instrument designed almost never to rest and, as such, being able to "just sit" implies one would have to "dethink thinking," that is to say, "for a sitting to be "just sitting," there are many complex levels of thought that have to be dethought, many subtle presuppositions that have to be dismantled." (Robinson and Johnson 252) However, we will not go through the whole process of what Soto school perceived as "sitting" mainly because it implies further knowledge and understanding of other concepts and pondering on such issues would not only send us off rails more than necessary, but are not that relevant here.

Comparatively, Rinzai was focused on achieving enlightenment more abruptly, with the master using certain techniques to accelerate the pace of his disciple's process. The word to describe Rinzai practice is k -- an and it included a method constructed like a puzzle and aimed at pushing the disciple to break his ego-consciousness in attaining the statutory of a Zen person. Separating itself from Soto, Rinzai saw the path to enlightenment, moreover, the practice of meditation as the means to reach it. but, since individuals were already enlightened beings by nature (Dharma -- nature), then, in Soto tradition, meditation "is not a technique by which to achieve enlightenment; it is enlightenment itself" (Kasulis 1981), thus the practice of "just sitting." Rinzai tradition often used puzzling questions to work the mind of the disciple and although Soto school did acknowledge the presence of these questions as something one can work with, it advised that it should not be expected to receive any conclusive answers, but that these questions should merely be understood as a tool to develop "beyond thinking" "that enables one to do the questioning of dethinking thinking here and now in the first place." (Robinson and Johnson 252) Rinzai school used, aside from meditation, such practices as striking and shouting, both of which were meant to caution the disciple on the whereabouts of his mind and the course of his thoughts. As can be observed, no fundamental philosophies regarding aim separate the two shools, rather it is how they implement their practices to achieve enlightenment that makes the difference. However, we cannot help but think at Earhart's question regarding the ideals of Zen Buddhism. And so, "if these ideals exist then why have they not been actualized" (Earhart 11) suggests that actual practices of Zen Buddhism either are not efficient or few people engage in such practices.

And so, whereas Rinzai looks at meditation as the instrument by which realization is achieved, Soto sets apart this version and claims that an individual practicing meditation is nevertheless enlightened already. The practice of Rinzai was however favoured to that of Soto, perhaps because the latter refused any political attachments and, as it is known, Buddhism in Japan was first adopted by aristocrats. That Soto tended to disaffiliate itself from any political influence, considering that most aristocrats were involved one way or another in such matters, must have had a say in regards to people seeking Rinzai Zen. Nevertheless, Zen Buddhism in Japan, adopted as it was by the samurai class which was politically influential at the time of its entrance on scene, did not leave Japan unmarked by its presence. Perhaps we should always remind ourselves that it was not just Buddhist religion that the Chinese had introduced Japan to, but that they had brought along literature, philosophies, arts that influenced Japanese scholars, thinkers and artists to such an extend that many of them pursued travelling to enhance their studies. Subsequently, Rinzai Buddhism was later added as a major point of teaching in the "Way of the Warrior" and served as justifiable means for military actions. Religion has often been used as a defensive mechanism in the light of "the end justifies the means" philosophy. Such was the case in Medieval times when Christianity burned "witches" to allegedly deliver them from evil. Such is the case nowadays with some fundamentalist movements spanning around the world. but, when Japan was met with Christianity, the latter must have felt bewildered by the defective recognition on the former's behalf. This can be explained on the grounds of religion existing in Japan as already self-assertive by the time Christianity was introduced. Moreover, there was also a fix culture of institutionalized practices that prevented other ideological religious forces from altering the Japanese religious environment. Overall, the number of converted Japonese people is less significant than what exposure to Christianity meant for the societal standards of Japan and for Christianity's own perception of itself. Thus, the influences of Confucianism and Buddhism brought to Japan by the Chinese foregrounded both concepts of society and religion as the two blended into a system to serve political needs. Ultimately, let us not forget that Christendom, as a Monotheistic religion, requires one to commit himself completely to Christianity and such a perspective is likely to have interfered with how Japonese implemented their own religious practices.

When speaking of Christianity in Japan, we must consider just what form of "christianity" are we referring to. That being said, Japan was first introduced to Catholic Christianity in 1549 when a Jesuit priest arrived here. Following its attempt to convert as many Japonese people as possible, the Church incorporated some Buddhist and Shinto practices and tried to persuade feudalists to use their influence so that more and more individuals would eventually convert. There was also constant rivalry between Christian groups conducting their missionary work that dismantled the image of religion the Church had sought to portray. Ever since, "Christianity has generally been regarded as an intrusive force in Japonese society and often referred to as an evil religion." (Mullins 262) but such a perception only came later on because, when Christianity was first introduced, Japonese received it well. After all, it opened up trade, thus helping commerce and, subsequently Japan's economy. Not only that, but the exchange of information was useful to governmental practices that sought to establish themselves as powerful and influential.

"Jesuit" Christianity survived long enough to be "practiced" within temples, one such "Jesuit temple" being known to have existed in 1603 in the Japanese capital, Kyoto. Such temples served the Church to enact some of its speeches in trying to go against Buddhism and Confucianism theories and implement its own. In fact, such initiatives worked out in the Church's detriment in the end. Habian, who went on to become a most renown orator and advocated for Christianity, turned away from it when the persecution of Christians began and reinforced his public speeches to suppress the "new" religion. It is no wonder then that such occurrences led to an overall negative impression of Christianity. Surely, the context can be understood if we think that an individual, so vividly living and preaching his faith initially, ultimately turned to not only renouncing his faith, but worked to eliminate it completely. In Japan's own defence, this had been a people reluctant to embrace one religion as final, but was rather inclined to commit itself to a mixture of Buddhist, Shinto, and Confucian beliefs. Thus, changes of faith occurred, but with less controversy, most likely. To claim, however, the supremeness of one particular religion over any others, only to shake it off afterwards, without offering any substantial causes, nor logical determination, but a mere comparison to demonstrate why Christianity fails to be anything but "a perverse and cursed faith" and why Japanese religion is the "Great Holy True Law" could have had no other result but to strengthen the series of conflicts already emerging in Japan. As Paramore (2008) stated, Habian went on to become a symbol for what separated the East and the West in the matter of culture and the "highs and lows of "Eastern" and "Western" thought" (234).

Habian shaped his weapon against Christianity under the form of a treatise he entitled Ha Daiusu, in translation, Deus Destroyed. He attacked "the important points about the teachings of the Deus sect" (Fabian 260), but also sought to criticize the behaviour of Jesuits priests among whom he had lived. Habian explained himself in saying that he had taken up Christian religion "at an early age" and the fact that he had spent over twenty years studying and preaching it was because of no other reason other than his "stupidity" (Fabian 259). Seeking to counteract those "important points," Habian denied any utility of the Ten Commandments in Japan, "Land of the Gods." He came to realize that Christians "bide their time with the intent to make all of Japan into their own sectarians, to destroy the law of Buddha and the way of the Gods." (Fabian 283) This turn of faith can all too easily be understood in the context of Japan's politics and, that he uses Christianity's alleged attempt to destroy the imperial law as a weapon to justify his renunciation, might be why he had determined himself to write so auspiciously on Japanese religion(s) and so disappointingly regarding the former. To assume he had actually become all too disappointed in Christianity would be to deny the number of years he had waited before testifying his discontentment. Let us not forget that Habian had been a Zen Buddhist before embracing Christianity and following his neophytism, he had no trouble in practicing the latter for an extended period of time. However much pondering on the why's and the because does not change the fact that Habian represented one perfect tool the Tokugawa government could use to persecute Christians in the following years. In fact, the Japonese government had previously been concerned with Christians professing "a devilish law." Not only that, but accusations started to arise that the latter were inspiring individuals to attack Japonese sanctuaries and sought to interfere and control Japanese military forces and economy. Christianity had received an ultimatum to leave Japan as early as 1587, but circumstances favoured the former with transportation not being available for the next six months. However, Japan had become aware of the Church's tentacles spreading far off religious intentions and would be all too cautious thereon. The Church had proven efficient in converting Japonese people in the first few years perhaps on grounds of salvation of the soul but, we would rather think, access to "exotic" trade facilitated the initiatives. However, the power of the Church or whatever power the Church thought it had over people, was crushed eventually by Japan and Christinity would never set foot on Japonese soil in matter of religion for a good while. Although much of that was politics and battle for power, economy and restoration, the force Japan used to eradicate Christianity as natural as it had let it flourish in the first place demonstrates there was no place in a religiously pluralistic society for an exclusive one.

Today, religion is a controversial topic but, then again, when has it never been? Europeans and the Occident embrace Asian religions most often because of the liberties they offer and start regarding Christianity as "indoctrination." We are not left with any options when we are born but our parents choose the religion for us. Christianity teaches of its oneness as the true religion God has given unto man and preaches of the any other religions existing out there as derivates of confusion and "loss of way." Nevertheless, religious freedom has never been as strong as in these modern times. One can come out in the open and claim he/she is a devil worshiper and, so long as he or she does not represent a physical threat to society, no one can enforce any violence or laws on that person. If members of a group pertaining to a certain religious movement decide all of a sudden to take their religious belief further and enact some form of violence, then obviously measures would be taken to protect the rights of individuals and the very concept of what is righteous. However, such an event would come and go as fast as a rocket launched into space because of how common events like these have become nowadays. In the past decades, centuries even, religions have been springing up like mushrooms after rain with people inclined to believe that a flying saucer is to save them for an imminent catastrophe. The matter of religion is of actuality in Japan as well. Temples and sanctuaries do not only exist as tourist attractions but are there to testify for what religion has represented over the years. Also, a great variety of religious movements exist in Japan. Although Buddhism and Shinto have remained central, thousands of other minor religions strive for independence.