Buddhist schools, is this correct?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Greetings everyone,

I’ve been reading a textbook I have on the history of religion, as well as a number of Buddhist websites, and Wikipedia articles, trying to understand the historic relationships between the various Buddhist schools.

I made a chart and posted it on my blog. My hope is that more knowledgeable folks here could go to the page and please tell me if my chart is accurate or if it needs revision. Here is the link…

dtstrainphilosophyblog.blogspot. … neage.html

Many thanks for any assistance you could offer!

2

Did you make this? You’ve almost got it! Just some minor details…

In the 1960s the Theravadins and Mahayanists schools formed the very unique Vietnamese Buddhist School.

It’s important to note that Tibet converted from its native religion Bon (a type of Tibetan Ancestor/Demon Worship) to Buddhism about 800 AD. This is what makes Tibetan Buddhism so unique. According to legend the Tantric master Padmasam subdued the spirits and demons of Bon to the service of the Buddha.

I noticed you left out Pure Land Buddhism, which may or may not have been intentional. Indian merchants trading in China around the 4th to 5th century made Buddhism out to be an exotic religion filled with mystery. This is because the merchants didn’t fully understand the teaching of the Buddha so a lot of it was changed to make sense to the practicle sense of the Chinese people. After a while true Buddhists began to arrive in China and were forced to readapt their teachings to the already popular Pure Land ideas. This is why weird ideas like reciting a mantra over and over is all you need to do to get into one of the Buddhist Heavens.

Later with influences from Toaism and Chinese mysticism the Ch’an School was founded. In America its counterpart, Zen Buddhism, is far more famous. Of course Japanese Buddhism broke off into two schools known as Rinzai and Soto.

An interesting note, somewhere between the transfer of Ch’an to Zen a rebellion of ideas happened. This was a school with new ideas on truth, culture, and enlightenment this school was known as Wild Cat Buddhism. It is mislabeled by historians as a Neo-Confucian movement. Its founder Wang Yang-ming used Confucian concepts and methods of argument to deconstruct (yeah 1000 years before Derrida) Confucian text. Wildcats wrote “beatnik” poetry, refused notions of truth (including those of Wildcat Busshism), made anarchist claims about government, argued for the overthrow of all conventional moral precepts, had drunken orgies, and created art consisting of paint thrown on paper. In short the Wildcat Zen Buddhist tradition is very similar to the Dada movement of the 60’s. In my opinion this is the most interesting tradition in Buddhist history and like the only tradition with very little written about it. :frowning:

This image is neat:

Oh before I forget, maybe you should connect all of the schools together for modern American Buddhism. Which is really a mix of every freaking school ever. For example if I choose to call myself anything it is a Wildcat Zen Buddhist, but I meditate at a Unitarian Church every sunday evening with a Theravada teacher from Burma. When I am in Chicago I will visit the PureLand Temple in China Town which also happens to be somehow affiliated with the Chinese Church of Christ. See what I am getting at? America is a fucked up place for religions.

3

Thanks for all the helpful comments Someemofag! A few comments and questions…

Yes, I made that chart, thanks for posting it here (I wasn’t sure how).

I did intentionally leave off Pure Land, Ch’an, Zen, and others. It seemed to me that these were many subcategories of Mahayana, springing off from it. There were so many that I thought it best to leave it at Mahayana. I DID put in Vajrayana (Tantric) since it is so often considered one of the major three branches (along with Theravada and Mahayana) - at least according to my limited understanding. Perhaps I should add in Pure Land, Cha’an, and Zen at least though.

I have heard that Vietnamese Buddhism is a blend of Theravada and Mahayana, but didn’t realize its development was as recent as the 1960s! However, I thought that Vajrayana (Tantric) WAS that Vietnamese Buddhism. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood this.

Another thing that now confuses me is that, in the chart you provided, they follow Vajrayana with ‘Tibetan’ in parentheses. This is most confusing to me since, as you can see from my chart, I had thought the two were distinct.

So now I am left wondering: Between TIBETAN, TANTRIC, VAJRAYANA, and VIETNAMESE Buddhism, which ones are distinct and which are simply different terms for the same school? Where do each belong on my chart I wonder?

Your notes on the history of Tibetan Buddhism were most interesting as well. Sometimes, based on his books I’ve read, I wonder if the Dalai Lama secretly wishes he were a Theravada Buddhist, as he never writes of the mystery side of Tibetan Buddhism (at least in his popular books published in the west, from which I’ve read).

As for Rinzai, Soto, and Wild Cat, I wonder how major these schools are/were and if it would be disrpoportionate to represent them on the chart without the, undoubtedly, countless other smaller schools? Maybe I’m totally wrong and these are major branches - I’m still learning.

America is quite the religious melting pot, and I think it remains to be seen what major school might emerge from this turmultuous maelstrome over here. There are even groups of Zen Christians and so on. I myself favor a more secular form of Buddhism (minus the mythos, ritual, supernatural stuff, etc.). But that’s just my initial impression. I have yet to make my first temple visit.

Thanks again for the comments :slight_smile:

4

Thanks to this and other input, I’ve updated my chart. Hopefully this is closer to reality than the last version. But please feel free to critique further! :slight_smile:

dtstrainphilosophyblog.blogspot. … neage.html

5

Well done.

6

someemofag,
Hey, somebody else who recognized that Wangming is a freakin’ Chan Buddhist! Though, I’d be careful labeling him as such, since both he and his followers did self-identify as Confucians and got into many philosophical debates with those of the Zhu Xi school over who were the ‘real’ Confucians while using the label ‘Buddhist’ as an insult.

That said, his unity of knowledge and action was AWESOME. A pity he is not better known.

7

Xunzian,

Awesome! I didn’t know that Wangming used “buddhist” as an insult but that seems right up his ally. However I can’t really claim to know much about Wangming because I haven’t been able to find much information on the wildcat buddhists and his thought. I was wonding if you had any books you could direct me to. : )

It’s nice to talk about this sort of thing with others in the know about this sort of philosophy. I feel like those of us who are interested in non-western philosophy are a minority on ILP. Which causes much agony when trying to debate a analytic rationalist.

8

Wang Yang-Ming (I always call him Wangming, and I am always wrong . . .)
Hmmmm, see if your local university has this gem:

The Philosophy of Wang Yang-ming, translated by Frederick Goodrich Henke. Open Court Publishing Co., New York, 1916

If you want something more up to date, I believe P.J. Ivanhoe wrote a book on him. Anything by Ivanhoe is gonna be good, so I’d recommend that.
A qucik search on amazon later:

Ethics in the Confucian Tradition: The Thought of Mengzi and Wang Yangming by P. J. Ivanhoe and Philip J. Ivanhoe (Paperback - Mar 2002)

and the one right below it that was also in english:

To Acquire Wisdom: The Way of Wang Yang-Ming (Studies in Oriental Culture, No. 11) by Julia Ching and Yangming Wang (Hardcover - Feb 1976)

The Ivanhoe one is the only one I’ve read and I sorta skimmed it more than hardcore read it. The Goodrich translation is the only primary source I’ve found, but given how old it is, approach it knowing that the translation is probably gonna be shakey at parts.

And ditto about being able to talk about eastern philosophy! Even though I’m surrounded by Buddhists and Daoists . . . :wink: