Three places of mind-transmission: the polemical application of mind-transmission stories in korean son buddhism.

• Author: Kim, Seong-Uk

This article explores the Korean application of "mind-transmission" (K. chOnsim, C. chuanxin) episodes to the intra-Son (C. Chan) polemics. Korean Son masters, unlike Chinese counterparts, sought for the religious meaning of the existence of multiple transmission episodes that circulated in East Asia from the Son polemical perspective. In particular, Kagun and Paekp'a used the term "samch'o chonsim" to promote their own visions of Son within the situation in which different visions of Son competed for dominance.

in medieval China, Chan Buddhists established a unique image of their tradition to represent its difference from and superiority to other forms of Buddhism, particularly scholastic Buddhism. This image portrayed Chan as the vehicle by which the supreme mind-dharma had been transmitted separately from the scriptural vehicle. Chan Buddhists even attempted to legitimize that image by developing special episodes, episodes that attribute its origin to the Buddha Sakyamuni's transmission of the mind-dharma to his disciple Mahalagyapa. As previous scholarship has shown, these episodes came in for criticism not only from Chan's archrival, the doctrinal (C. Jiao; K. Kyo) school, but also from within the Chan school itself. (1) Nonetheless, they were believed to be historical or quasi-historical facts by most Chan adherents and even tacitly accepted by some doctrinal exegetes. These episodes thus succeeded in justifying the Chan claim to the legitimacy and authority of its own lineage and served as a basis for the privileges the Chan school enjoyed during the Song dynasty (960-1279). (2)

This article explores polemical aspects of the so-called "mind-transmission episodes," in particular, the Korean interpretation of those episodes within the context of the Son (C. Chan) internal rivalry. The episodes of mind-transmission involved issues of Chan/Mil self-definition in terms of the relationship between Chan/Son and doctrinal studies, including the questions of how Chan/Son followers looked at their own tradition and how they presented it to others, especially to the rival Jiao /Kyo doctrinal school. These episodes inevitably generated tension not only within the Chan/Son school but also between the Chan/ Min and doctrinal schools. With respect to Chan/SU internal conflict, the fact that several mind-transmission episodes were circulating in medieval East Asia deserves our attention. Textual records show that in China this fact did not receive much consideration in relation to the internal polemics of Chan. Instead, the evidence suggests that it was in Korea that those episodes were treated collectively through the introduction of the concept of samch'o chonsim, the concept that mind-transmission from the Buddha to Mahakagyapa occurred in three different places. This notion, which became widely known in Korea after it first appeared late in the Koryo era (918-1392), raised an important question that inevitably arose from accepting more than one transmission episode or theory: did the Buddha transmit in three different places (1) the same mind or (2) different minds or levels of the mind? This article explores the Korean application of mind-transmission episodes to intra-Son polemics by examining how important SU masters such as Kagun (fl. 13th century) and Paekp'a (1767-1852) answered this question. Thereby, it reveals a unique aspect of Korean Son development that was distinct from the Chinese Chan tradition.

DEVELOPMENT OF MIND-TRANSMISSION EPISODES IN CHINA

Mind-transmission episodes went through a long and complex process of development in medieval China. They appeared in various Chan texts to support the Chan claim that the supreme mind-dharma of the historical Buddha had been transmitted along the direct and unbroken line of the Chan lineage. The variety of Chan texts in which mind-transmission episodes were found included recorded sayings (yulu), such as the Chuanxin fayao of 857; genealogical histories (denglu). such as the imperially ratified Jingde chuandeng lu of 1009 and the Tiansheng guangdeng lu of 1036; and gong' an anthologies, such as the Zongmen tongyao ji of 1093, the Chanzong songgu lianzhutong ji of 175, and the Wumen guan RN of 1228. As Griffith Faulk points out, "viewed chronologically," the transmission episodes in these texts became "bolder and bolder in the claims they make concerning the separate transmission of the formless Chan dharma and the Buddha "alcyamuni's role in initiating it." (3) Some of the episodes in their final form explicitly stated that the Buddha had entrusted the "treasury of the true dharma eye" (C. zhengfayan zang) to Mahalasyapa and, depending on the episode in question, asked him to preserve it for future generations.

Probably two of the most famous transmission episodes are known as the "sharing the seat in front of the Stupa of Many Sons" (C. Duozi ta qian fenban zuo) and the "World-Honored One holding up a flower" (C. Shizun). The representative versions of these episodes are as follows:

The first episode, also known as "sharing the seat" (C. fenban zuo), originates from an avadana, which was translated into Chinese in 207 under the title Zhongben qijing. (6) The second episode, also called "holding up a flower and [making] a subtle smile" (C. nianhua weixiao) or "holding up a flower" (C. nianhua), first appears in the Tiansheng guangdeng lu. Although the origins of these two episodes were different, they took the form of a Chan transmission-episode by the eleventh century. About two centuries later in the thirteenth century, they became well known not only to Buddhist clerics in general but also to the literati class, since they were recorded in famous Chan gong'an texts such as the Zongmen tong yao ji and the Wurnen guan. (7)

Along with these two episodes, other transmission episodes or theories circulated in the Song period for the same purpose of establishing Chan as a separate transmission outside scriptural teaching. Those stories, however, do not seem to have been as popular as the "sharing the seat" or "holding up a flower" episodes; they are not found in full-fledged form in any Buddhist text. Some of them are never even alluded to in Chan texts, and in fact it was a Tiantai text that confirmed the existence of such episodes or theories. The Song Tiantai master Fadeng (fl. 1194) introduced them in the context of criticizing the Chan claim of separation from and superiority to the scriptural tradition in his Yuandunzong yan:

Some say, "At the assembly on Vulture Peak, the World-Honored One held up a flower and Kagyapa smiled subtly; that is the mark [of the dharma transmitted]." But that theory has no basis at all in Indian scriptures and must be considered merely a metaphor created by people of later times. Some say, "When [in the fourth of the five periods] the Buddha taught the Prajna sutras, that was the transmission of dharma." But that theory still does not specify the mark of that which is transmitted. Moreover, in the Prajna sutras it is Subhuti and Sariputra who are directly infused [with the Buddha's wisdom], not Kasyapa. Some say, "The Tathagata transmitted the dharma everywhere he went; how could it be restricted to a single time and single place?" But that theory is vague and unfocused in the extreme. According to some explanations, when the World-Honored One transmitted the robe, that was the transmission of dharma. Others say, "When the World-Honored One entered nirvana, Kasyapa arrived later and the Buddha displayed both his feet; that was the transmission of dharma." When we examine these two explanations, however, they only have to do with external signs. How could I these signs] possibly be the mark of the dharma that is transmitted? (8) In his critique, Fadeng demonstrated that the issues caused by these episodes revolved around the question of whether the Chan lineage had carried a special dharma that could distinguish Chan from the scriptural tradition. After this statement. Fadeng argued that the dharma transmitted along the Chan lineage was not different from the dharma recorded in the scriptures. (9) As a Tiantai scholar, he even went to say that this dharma was revealed in its entirety only in the teaching of the Saddharmapundarikasutra (Lotus Sutra), the central scripture of the Tiantai school. (10)

Myriads of followers rain [from the sky]. [They became] various adornments and offerings. This was indeed at the assembly on Vulture Peak. How could it be different from in front of Stapa of Many Sons ... Some praised and some complimented all wondrous functioning. (13) Huaishen here suggested that the Buddha had transmitted the same mind in front of the Stupa of Many Sons and on Vulture Peak--in other words, that the complete mind-transmission had taken place in both places. What Huaishen, along with many other Chan experts of the time, failed to address are the questions raised earlier: if the Buddha transmitted the same mind to Kasyapa in those different places, what reason or need would there be for the Buddha to do so? (14) If not, what different minds or different levels of the mind did the Buddha transmit to Kagyapa in each place?

A statement by Yuanwu Keqin (1063-1135) in his Xinyan is one of the rare references that seems to have recognized the significance of multiple transmission episodes:

By sharing his seat [with Kasyapa] in front of the Stupa of Many Sons, Sakyamuni already transmitted this seal secretly. Thereafter, he held up a flower. This is a second-level gong'an! (15) Yuanwu provided little explanation of this statement made in his letter to his student Faji (fl. 12th c.). The two mind-transmissions in this statement, however, do not seem qualitatively different. Although Yuanwu contributed to the spread of two different approaches to Chan in medieval China, i.e., the "dead word" (C. siju) and the "live word" (C. huoju), these two mind-transmissions in the statement do not correspond to the two...