What Is Zen?

<What Is Zen?>

(Questioner) Good morning, Sunim.
This is my question.

I'm curious about what is Zen?

How is it different from
other schools of Buddhism?

What does it mean to say
that speaking the true words

will only miss the point
of Zen is trying to convey?

What does it mean to say that
Zen has nothing to say or teach at all?

And how can Zen help people
in today's modern society

who are being overly civilized,
overly self-conscious, and too anxious

and tend to thinking too much
about unnecessary things

that causes unnecessary problems
and suffering. Thank you.

(Interpreter translating the question
into Korean for Sunim)

(Sunim) You can classify Zen as Zen,
or Zen as a form of Buddhism.

The perspective of Zen supersedes Buddhism
in the actual taxonomy of religion.

At that point, Zen is not necessarily
classified as part of Buddhism.

Zen is in itself Zen.

On the other hand, there is Zen
which is a part of Buddhism.

It is another tradition of Buddhism.

Zen started in China.

It came out of a sense of repentance
of the state of Buddhism in China.

The time when Zen arose in China
was a state in which Buddhism

was a national religion of China.

That means the ruling monarch
used Buddhism

as the ruling ideology of his country.

He built a lot of temples and pagodas

and there was a lot of translation
and publication of original Indian sutras

into Chinese.

And there was also extensive education
and ordainment of Buddhist monks.

There was a perception that
this was the advancement of Buddhism.

But whether that was Buddhism,
it could have happened to be Islam,

it could happened to be Hinduism
or it could have been something else,

it just became another core principles,
a way of ruling his country.

People started questioning
"Is this really Buddhism?"

"Is studying the sutras,
the word on the sutra,

is that really Buddhism?"

"Isn't that just academic study?"

"Is Building temples really Buddhism?

"Isn't that just construction projects?"

"Is ordainment in graduation
of a lot of monks Buddhism?

or is it just producing more clergy?"

They said "This is not Buddhism"

If we want to say the core of Buddhism is
awaken the ignorance in our hearts

and liberate ourselves
from that ignorance.

Buddha is somebody who has
liberated himself from his own ignorance,

not somebody who sits far away
or far beyond.

So, I am Buddha as soon as I break through
and liberate myself from my own ignorance.

Reading all these sutras,
it's all about academic achievements.

But you are not liberating yourself
from your own ignorance.

You can't arrive at enlightenment
through intellectual pursuit.

Basically, they say truth cannot be
examined nor validated through words.

The only way to get to that truth is
to awaken your own mind.

Therefore, you don't need large temples,

you don't need to build pagodas,

you don't need to memorize its thousands
of sutras in study Buddhism.

The only thing you need to do is
awaken your own mind,

which means you can do this anywhere.

Anybody can do it and
you don't have to be ordained as a monk.

Those were the questions
in the perspective

that drove a new Buddhist movement.

At that time, the mainstream Buddhism
denied Zen as a Buddhism.

Because there was a certain discipline,
hierarchy and process

by which you became
an ordained monk.

But these new Zen people were saying that
if you awaken your own mind,

you can be a spiritual practitioner.

So, they were going against the order,
prevailing order of things.

You had to study
for 10, 20, 30 years reading the sutra

and disciplining yourself to get
to the enlightenment.

And even then it is very hard.

But these new people were saying
that they could be enlightened

by awakening just their own heart.

A spiritual practitioner should be
a monk living in temples,

not somebody who lives in their own house,
in the caves or in a forest.

So, we can't recognize them
as fellow spiritual practitioners.

So, they were prohibited
from the temples.

But the New Zen practitioners
did not need to live in temples.

They lived wherever in the forest,
in nature, in caves,

they just practiced their own self.

The methodology by which they taught
others was through a Q&A system

by engaging in dialogue and
in conversation with everyday people.

Sometimes they would ask
abstract questions like "Who are you?"

That is how actually they made
inroads into mainstream society.

Then, after a certain time has passed
many intellectuals started joining them.

Then what happened in China was
that a new dynasty came to power

and they were prosecuting Buddhist.

In this new country where mainstream
conventional Buddhism was persecuted,

they lost gradually a lot of their power.

But on the other hand, Zan Buddhists
did not have a lot of huge temples.

They weren't getting sponsored
by the government.

So their influence actually grew
in this new environment.

But as Zen Buddhism became bigger
and more mainstream,

they had felt the need to justify itself.

Because the most vulnerable question
they had to respond to is that

they weren't traditional Buddhists.

So, they created
their own vernacular.

They said Zen represents
the mind of the Buddha

and then Buddhism represents the teaching,
the words of the Buddha.

When you say that the mind becomes
more important than words.

In a way, they created this new word
called Zen Buddhism

with each one representing
different aspects of the Buddha,

and established that kind of hierarchy.

And then they started claiming that
this did not start indigenously in China,

but this was a longstanding tradition
that came over from India.

One of the claims they made is
that Zen actually started

with the Buddha in India

and was delivered from disciple
to disciple through the mind.

The venerable Bodhidharma
who actually reputed to have brought

from India to China.

The Zen tradition was the 28th patriarch
who actually brought it over from it.

Since this was the original mind
of the Buddha

who has been transitioned
this Zen started with the Buddha himself.

It was his mind that was transitioned and
handed it down to his closest disciple.

What is important is that,
according to legend,

this wasn't taught through words,
but was transitioned directly

from mind to mind,
without verbal instruction.

Basically, they created this concept
of teaching or transitioning

your own mind without words

in three different ways.

By creating this narrative,
Zen Buddhists were able to claim that

they are the true inheritors
of the original mind of the Buddha.

But since Zen Buddhism had the advantage
of a simple transmission of his teachings

through a specific Q & A method
of delivering,

and with declined due to persecution
of the conventional Buddhist traditions.

Now, we have Zen Buddhism as a mainstream
Buddhist tradition across East Asia.

This is basically when you see
high-ranking Buddhist monks

the monks as of teachers of the monarchs
living in luxury, residing in palaces,

and having a lot of influence
in the state of affairs.

People see them
not as spiritual practitioners,

but as just another powerful figure.

In comparison, when people saw
the Zen practitioners living simple lives,

eating meagre food,
but focused on spiritual practice,

they earned
deep public respect and support.

After several hundred years
of this phenomenon,

Zen has now become the mainstream
Buddhism in many countries in East Asia

or at least a huge part of a tradition
of the taxonomy of Buddhism.

It is mostly mainstream
in China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam.

As Zen evolved in Buddhism,
it started consuming other parts

of the traditional Buddhism,

eventually becoming a more inclusive
and comprehensive set of Buddhism.

In that sense, the original purity
of Zen tradition and thought

in the beginning of its journey
has largely disappeared in today's Zen.

(Questioner) So as follow-up question,
I want to ask,

why in today's society
like in Japan or Korea,

Zen Buddhism is not so popular
among the younger generation.

Why not so many people in Korea or Japan
showing interest in learning about Zen?

I noticed that many people,
especially in younger generation,

are developing depression
and mental health problem.

What might be the reason for this?
Thank you.

(Interpreter translating the question
into Korean for Sunim)

(Sunim) I think many young people
find it difficult to approach Zen because,

over the years,
it has become too rigid as a tradition.

As it has become mainstream,
authoritative and heavy tone.

Instead of using simple,
everyday language it once used,

now, it has been jargonized
and complex terminology.

So it really makes it difficult
for young people to approach it.

If we want to go back and draw
the interests of the young people,

I think Zen Buddhism really needs
to be made much easier and much simpler.

And try to approach them through
the suffering they are experiencing

by asking the question like,
"Why do you suffer?"

Let go of the dogmatic aspect
of Zen Buddhism,

but approach them through
everyday questions and problems.

For example, as a young people,
I'm more concerned about dating or school.

Then if someone tries to teach me by force
to meditate on the concept of emptiness,

it doesn't really touch me
and I get bored.

I think if Zen were
to go back to its original genesis,

which started as a simple and accessible
way of trying to liberate oneself,

and try to approach young people
by questioning and trying to resolve

their everyday issues,
it will be much more approachable.

(Questioner) Thank you for
the wonderful answers for my question.

I really appreciate it.
Thank you so much.