According to various historical materials of Vietnam, the Emperor Nhn
Tng is recognized to be the founder of the Trc Lm Dhyāna School, which
flourished for a long time in the history of Vietnamese Buddhism. In spite
of this, it has been generally assumed, at least since the latter half of
the eighteenth century when Tnh Quảng and Hải Lượng could collect enough
materials for their compilation of the True Record of the Three
Patriarchs, that this school could survive only three generations and,
more particularly, that subsequent to the first three patriarchs of these
generations no one could be regarded as their outstanding
dharma-successor. As a consequence, it has again and again been claimed by
some historical researchers in Vietnam that a glorious period of Buddhism,
which naturally includes the Trc Lm school, came to an end altogether at
the passing away of the last of these patriarchs. In reality, after the
Third Patriarch Huyền Quangs death in 1334, Buddhism went on to develop
well with many prominent figures in this Dhyāna lineage as will be
discussed below. Accordingly, the question as to the Emperor Nhn Tngs
relation with the Trc Lm school would not need dealing with in the
present study. On account of some misunderstandings as just mentioned,
however, a rather brief elucidation of it should be presented here.
In one of the preceding chapters we have discussed some problems of Nhn
Tngs thought, particularly of what he has formulated in the Worldly
Life with Joy in the Way:
Achieved in the midst of worldly life,
That merit is increasingly admired.
Unfruitful cultivation in the mountains
Is nothing but a vain attempt.
And we have, too, considered it to be the central thought of the Trc Lm
Dhyāna doctrine. In this connection, is it truly satisfactory to maintain
that the Trc Lm school should be attributed to some Dhyāna masters
alone, especially the monastic ones, as has been claimed in most of the
studies on the history of Vietnamese Buddhism hitherto? In effect, a
history of this school was once compiled without any differentiation of
its being either monastic or lay lineage, as what Ng Thời Nhiệm advanced
in an introduction to his Trc Lm Tng Chỉ Nguyn Thanh (Fundamental
Principles of Trc Lm Doctrine). Unfortunately, the approach he applied
in his works has not been popularly adopted, let alone the fact that it is
sometimes regarded as not reflecting properly Buddhist tradition in
Vietnam or even as nothing other than some distortion.
In spite of this, Thời Nhiệms position in his study on this school should
not be considered quite groundless, especially when we have evidently seen
that the period in which the Emperor was leading a monastic life was not
devoid of various political and military activities. That is to say, as
being a Dhyāna master, he was enthusiastically engaged in receiving a
Chinese delegation, boosting the relationship between Vietnam and Champa
and the extension of the countrys territory in the south, and directly
commanding the campaign of putting down the Laotian Armys havoc in the
northwestern borderland. His monastic life, therefore, can by no means be
regarded as a secluded renunciation from the world as has been generally
viewed and described. On the contrary, it is a life fraught with earthly
affairs intimately related to the country as well as the people.
Accordingly, it is not quite unreasonable and groundless for any
presentation of the activities of the Three Patriarchs in the direction
Ng Thời Nhiệm has set forth.
Thus it may be said that this is a precise approach even though it has not
been popularly admitted and developed owing to some distorted views on the
part of the Buddhist clergy as well as of the circle of historical
researchers. They have usually maintained that to become a Buddhist monk
is to renounce the world altogether so as to concentrate all efforts,
physical and mental, on the practice of Buddhist teachings. If it were the
case, how could it occur that Princess Huyền Trn was married to the Cham
king and the two districts and L were annexed to the map of Đại Việt,
and that Nhn Tng could dissuade the Emperor Anh Tng from appointing so
many officials and bestowing so many titles in the latters court? Indeed,
at a glimpse of Nhn Tngs life as a Dhyāna master, we can see straightly
that he never desisted from national affairs or gave up his concern with
the activities of imperial court under the leadership of the Emperor Anh
Tng.
However, since those days it has been insisted in the Buddhist clergy that
after he had been formally ordained a Buddhist monk, Nhn Tng gave up
the throne to enter the monastery where, as a result of his earnest
devotion to the Way of Dhyāna, he could eventually penetrate into its
essentials, as is remarked by Diệu Trạm in a preface to the re-edition of
the True Record of the Three Patriarchs in Thnh Thi the Ninth (1897).
This remark has later been cited repeatedly in history books, according to
which the Emperor is assumed to have mustered up all his efforts for the
Way. Some say, Shortly after his victory over the enemy, Nhn Tng handed
over the throne to Anh Tng to seek a serene life in the practice [of
Buddhism] and became the First Patriarch of the Trc Lm school. He
breathed his last at the Ngọa Vn Temple on the quiet Yn Tử mountain when
he was just fifty-one years old. Not only do they think that Nhn Tng
could have renounced the world to seek a serene life, but they also say:
He wanted to get rid of daily troubles in society in order to seek after
the mysterious principle that controls human life. (Trần L Sng, Tm
hiểu văn ph thời kỳ Trần-Hồ in Tuyển Tập 40 năm tạp ch Văn Học,
1960-1999, Tập 2, Tp. Hồ Ch Minh: Nxb. Tp. Hồ Ch Minh, 1999, pp.231-232.
[LMT])
Such immature remarks are evidently neither satisfactory nor in accord
with historical facts related to the Emperors life as recorded in the
Complete History of Đại Việt and the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the
Saints. Furthermore, if analyzing his transmitting the patriarchal office
to Php Loa in terms of what is recorded on the latters memorial tablet
and later cited in the True Record of the Three Patriarchs, we can find a
startlingly remarkable incident that has never occurred in the history of
Buddhism in both China and Vietnam before. The inscription tells us in the
first place:
In the 5th month Điều Ngự (Skt., damya-sārathi, a guide of those who have
to be restrained.) moved to a temple on the peak of Mount Ngọa Vn. On the
15th day, having told all of his students to go out of the hall after the
poṣadha service, he transmitted a mind-gātha to the Master [Php Loa] and
handed down the robe and begging bowl to him, telling him to preserve them
carefully. On the 1st of the 1st month of Mậu Thn, Hưng Long the
Sixteenth (1308), the Master, following his instruction, undertook the
abbots office to succeed the dharma-lineage in the Cam Lộ Hall of the
Siu Loại Temple. In order to open the hall and perform the ceremony of
transmission [], the King had the preceding patriarchs name-tablets
placed [on the altar], greatly ritual music played, and incense burned.
Then, he personally led the Master to the patriarchal altar for
prostration. After eating gruel, he ordered ritual music to be played and
the dharma-drum to be beaten while all the people began to gather in the
dharma-hall. Anh Tng then came to the temple, too. After the positions
for visitors and hosts were formally divided, the King Anh Tng, as being
a great patron of Buddhism, took the visitors place inside the hall while
the Highest Minister and other courtiers stood in the yard. Then, Điều Ngự
sat down in the dharma-seat to deliver a sermon. After the sermon, he left
the seat and helped the Master into it. Keeping his hands folded, palm to
palm, Điều Ngự stood in front of the Master and interviewed him. The
Master bowed to Điều Ngự, received the dharma-robe and put it on. Điều Ngự
stood aside and then sat down on the cane bed to hear the Master
preaching. Thereafter, he appointed the Master to be the abbot of the Siu
Loại Temple on Mount Yn Tử, who would thus be [the patriarch] of the
second generation of the Trc Lm lineage. Besides, in order to encourage
the study of both Buddhist and non-Buddhist literature, he transferred [to
the Master] a hundred cases of non-Buddhist books and twenty cases of the
Chinese Buddhist Canon.
From what is narrated in the inscription above, we may be aware of the
following noteworthy points. First, in the 5th month of Hưng Long the
Fifteenth (1307) Php Loa was called to the Ngọa Vn Temple on Mount Kỳ
Đặc to receive the robe and begging bowl as well as a gātha. The gātha is
lost today so we cannot know what it conveys. However, seven months later,
that is, on the first day of the New Year Mậu Thn, Hưng Long the
Sixteenth (1308), Nhn Tng had his transmission of robe-and-bowl
formalized in the Cam Lộ Hall of the Siu Loại Temple in present-day Bắc
Ninh Province in the presence of the Emperor Anh Tng and the Highest
Minister Trần Quốc Trấn. Secondly, after the ceremony of transmission and
the discourse of Php Loa, Nhn Tng handed down to him twenty cases of
Buddhist texts in addition to one hundred cases of non-Buddhist books and
exhorted him to encourage the study of both Buddhist and non-Buddhist
literature.
Based upon the act of handing down non-Buddhist books alone, it may be
unequivocally stated that this represents an ideal Buddhist personality
that Nhn Tng implies in the Worldly Life with Joy in the Way:
Keeping mind-precepts pure, making form-precepts perfect,
That is an Adorning Bodhisattva, internally and externally.
Righteously serving ones lord, respectfully obeying ones father,
That is a Great Man of loyalty and filial piety.
In this connection it is evident that the personality of a Bodhisattva and
that of a Great Man must be combined with each other to produce a Buddhist
personality according to the tradition of the Trc Lm school. Thus, to
study Buddhism does not exclude non-Buddhist knowledge of all kinds; and
non-Buddhist subjects in turn embrace the studies of Buddhism. Naturally,
such a concept of education has existed in the history of Vietnamese
Buddhism since the old days, in the time of Mu Tử (160-220?) and Khương
Tăng Hội (?-280) at least. And even after the Emperor Nhn Tngs time, it
was continuously and mightily maintained by such outstanding figures as
Master Hương Chn Php Tnh (1470-1550?), Master Minh Chu Hương Hải
(1628-1715) and, particularly, Master Hải Lượng Ng Thời Nhiệm
(1746-1803), and so forth. The ideal Buddhist in the view of the Trc Lm
school is thus quite different from that of the Chan school of China.
Generally considered, before being handed down the robe and begging bowl,
Php Loa went through an interview, which is apparently likened to that of
any Chan monks in Chinese monasteries, as recorded in the inscription on
his memorial tablet and cited later in the True Record of the Three
Patriarchs:
One day, when the Master returned from the place of Tn Gic for an
interview, Điều Ngự, who then was preaching [on Dhyāna], set forth the
stanza Thi Dương K. (Lit., the Sun) [Upon hearing it,] the Master
seemed to be partly awakened. Being aware of this, Điều Ngự told him to
stay with him. One night, having presented to Điều Ngự a stanza of his
own, which was then crossed out on the spot with only a stroke by Điều
Ngự, the Master entreated his instructions four times. After being told
that he had to undertake [the quest for the truth] by himself, he retired
to his room, extremely puzzled. At midnight, seeing by chance the dropping
wick after burning, he got instantaneously awakened. Afterwards, he
presented the view of what he was awakened at to Điều Ngự and the latter
showed greatly pleased. Since then, the Master vowed to cultivate the
Twelve Ascetic Practices.
The process of seeking after enlightenment carried out by the Trc Lm
school thus appears in some aspects to be equivalent to that of a Chan
monk in China and even of a Dhyāna monk in Vietnam prior to Nhn Tngs
time. Furthermore, from his discourses at the Sng Nghim Temple in Hưng
Long the Seventh (1299) cited in the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the
Saints, and in the Kỳ Ln Hall of the same temple written down in the True
Record of the Three Patriarchs, it may be assumed that some features of
the manner of preaching on Dhyāna in Nhn Tngs time are seemingly
identical with those in the monasteries of China and of Vietnam in the
earlier times, which has been generally discussed above in the Cheng-te
chuan-teng-lu (Record of the Transmission of the Lamp in the Cheng-te
Period) or in the Thiền Uyển Tập Anh (Collected Prominent Figures of
Dhyāna Garden).
However, from the ceremony of transmission held on the 1st of the 1st
month of Mậu Thn (1308), we discover quite a different manner of
transmitting Buddhism. The fact that Nhn Tng handed down to Php Loa a
hundred cases of non-Buddhist works as well as twenty cases of Buddhist
texts copied in blood, accompanied with his exhortation for the latter to
encourage the study of both Buddhist and non-Buddhist literature does not
only reflect the educational standpoint of the Emperor and Buddhism in
Vietnam. It further demonstrates the view that the Buddhas teachings
should be handed down to the world by means of Confucianist
intellectuals, which was maintained by the Emperor Trần Thi Tng in a
preface to his Thiền Tng Chỉ Nam (A Manual of Dhyāna Teaching). And this
view was undoubtedly set forth by the Emperor L Thnh Tng when he gave
orders for the foundation of both the Thảo Đường Dhyāna school and the
first university of Đại Việt, which was represented through the building
of Văn Miếu (the Temple of [Confucianist] Literature) in 1070 and then of
Quốc Tử Gim (the Imperial Academy of Learning).
Such a type of ideal Buddhists must have possessed a good all-round
education in which no knowledge would be viewed as absolutely foreign to
Buddhist teachings. Indeed, it is quite absurd to claim that to study
Confucian doctrine is to refute Buddhism or even to place oneself in
opposition to Buddhism as has been groundlessly assumed hitherto.
Confucianism has never had a predominant position in the Vietnamese
history, much less an exclusively top position. It may be said that each
Confucianist intellectual was a Buddhist aspirant even though strict
criticisms, which mostly originated from those who had gone through
Confucianist examinations, were at times made as to a certain form of
Buddhism for several different reasons. And this incident has its own
reason; that is to say, Confucianism has existed in Vietnam within the
pattern of Buddhism.
When the Emperor Thi Tng stated that the Buddhas teaching should be
handed down to the world by means of Confucianist intellectuals, his
statement, which did not proceed by chance from a certain monk or
intellectual but from an emperor, a national leader, would undoubtedly be
taken as the guiding principle of the cultural and educational policy of
his government. Consequently, the imperial courts policy on Confucianism
in the Trần dynasty would be to make use of Confucianism as a device for
the sake of Buddhism. It is only with such a precise and comprehensive
vision that one can recognize that the period under the Early L dynasty
can by no means be regarded as of the exclusive predominance of
Confucianism. Why were there the đnh examinations held with such a
number of questions related to Buddhism, especially to the doctrine of
Trc Lm school, as those of the 1502 examination in which the highest
graduate was L ch Mộc (1459-?)? Fortunately, it is thanks to the
preservation of examination topics in question that we can today know
something of education and examination under the Early L dynasty and thus
reject some false ideas of the so-called exclusive predominance of
Confucianism.
The educational tradition of Vietnam has since then been that of general
education. That is to say, studying Confucianism is to serve the benefits
outside Confucianism, or rather, those of the people and Buddhism. This is
the point usually neglected in some writings on the history of education
and examination of Vietnam so far. Maybe their authors have forgotten that
the establishment of the Temple of Literature in 1069-1070 was actually
carried out by order of a Buddhist Emperor who was simultaneously the
founder of the Thảo Đường Dhyāna school, too. This fact alone is able to
show how the Emperor L Thnh Tng dealt with Confucianism in his time.
Accordingly, despite that not any document has been preserved as to the
Emperor L Thnh Tngs policy just mentioned, we are certainly convinced
that in so doing he must have initiated what was later proclaimed by the
Emperor Trần Thi Tng that the Buddhas teaching should be handed down
to the world by means of Confucianist intellectuals.
In this connection it is not surprising at all when the inscription cited
above reads that "Nhn Tng handed down a large number of books, Buddhist
and non-Buddhist, to Php Loa and exhorted him to encourage the study of
both traditions." This, however, does not mean that the former would be
somehow inclined to the growth of the Trc Lm school alone. As has been
said before, he did insist that mind-precepts and form-precepts were
of an Adorning Bodhisattva. Mind-precepts or nature-precepts is a
short form of the phrase the precepts of Bodhi-mind, or rather, the
precepts of Bodhisattva, which are of a characteristic type applied to
both monastic and lay Buddhist practitioners.
The stress on mind-precepts, therefore, represents the Emperors view of
non-differentiation between monastic and lay practice. Indeed, had he
maintained that to live a monastic life would be to renounce the world, he
might not have handed down to Php Loa so many books of non-Buddhist
history and literature. For, what is the use of handing down books of
secular history and literature if one is never concerned with worldly life
where everyone is always making their greatest efforts to seek some
position under the sun? And it then would be too strange for us to
understand why Php Loa, as being a monk, did receive them. Yet it should
be kept in mind that by the time Php Loa received the robe and begging
bowl to succeed the Trc Lm lineage, he was still very young, just at the
age of 24.
In his young age Php Loa may have received a rather basic education but
not acquired all the sciences of his time. Though there was then no such
an outbreak of information as in our modern age, various branches of
learning were certainly well developed and hence a rather rich amount of
knowledge. As a result of the popular technique of printing in woodblocks
in China and in our country several years earlier, for instance, a series
of publications was publicly produced. For that reason it is quite natural
for us to think that Nhn Tngs decision to transmit what has been
mentioned above to Php Loa would be aimed at demonstrating his own
ambition; that is to say, he expected Php Loa to have enough Buddhist and
non-Buddhist knowledge to fulfill his mission as an ideal Buddhist, but
not as a narrow-minded successor who would occupy himself only with
nothing but samādhi, preaching on sūtras or some other monastic affairs.
In other words, the Emperor wished his successor not to be set off the
track he had ever tread on enthusiastically and successfully. The years in
which he was leading a monastic life were fraught with activities for the
benefit of the country as well as Buddhism; and he hoped Php Loa would be
able to achieve an active way of living as such. Yet, during the remaining
twenty-two years of his life, Php Loa could devote his life to purely
Buddhist activities only. Today, no documentary evidence is found as to
his engagement in secular affairs. Is it due to his utterly one-sided
activities that more than thirty years after his death the stone tablet in
memory of him could be engraved and erected, i.e., in Nhm Dần, Đại Tr
the Fifth (1362)?
According to the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints and the True
Record of the Three Patriarchs, the relationship between Php Loa and the
Emperor Anh Tng is said to have been very friendly. The Complete History
of Đại Việt, however, says that in the last days of his life Anh Tng
refused to meet Php Loa. Concerning the latters death in 1330, the
Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints tells us that when Php Loa
was sick, the Emperor Anh Tng came and saw him; and when he died, the
Emperor conferred a dharma-title on him and wrote a funeral lament in
memory of him. In addition, at the Emperors request Huyền Quang
transcribed the discourses as well as the life story of Php Loa for
printing, to which the Emperor himself wrote the preface. This proves that
Php Loa exercised a great influence upon Anh Tng; yet we do not know why
his memorial tablet was not made until the latters death.
Whatever happened, the Trc Lm school founded by the Emperor Nhn Tng
eventually had its successor. Since the time when he was officially handed
down the robe and begging bowl until his death in 1330, Php Loa
concentrated all his efforts upon Buddhist affairs: instructing Buddhists,
monastic and lay, to take refuge in the Triple Gem and observe
precepts, establishing the Quỳnh Lm Temple, the Tư Phc Temple and more
than twenty other temples, and particularly conducting the task of copying
and printing the Buddhist Canon. He is the author of at least nine works:
Tham Thiền Kỷ Yếu, Kim Cương Trng Đ La Ni Kinh Khoa Ch, Niết Bn Đại
Kinh Khoa Sớ, Php Hoa Kinh Khoa Sớ, Lăng Gi Tứ Quyển Khoa Sớ, Bt Nh
Tm Kinh Khoa Sớ, Hưng Vương Hộ Quốc Nghi Quỹ, Php Sự Khoa Văn and Độ Mn
Trợ Thnh Tập. He also occupied himself with preaching the Buddhist
teaching, especially the Avataṃsaka-sūtra, in many different dharma-halls
of the country.
It may be said that the last point just mentioned of Php Loa's activities
is the most striking one with regard to the characteristics of the Trc
Lm school. For it points out, in the first place, that this school does
not maintain the transmission of Buddhism outside sūtras; nor does it
consist in making use of kung-an or hua-tou. On the contrary, the study
and interpretation of sūtras are centered on so as to be a pivotal factor
in the process of practicing Dhyāna Buddhism. In some aspects, this is
rather similar to Hui-nengs Chan doctrine, in which sūtra is still
emphasized and interpreted in the course of Chan Buddhism. However,
whereas Hui-neng was interested in the Lotus Sūtra or the Nirvāṇa-sūtra,
it is quite different in the case of the Trc Lm school where its First
Patriarch, the Emperor Nhn Tng, took the Avataṃsaka-sūtra to be the
guiding thought. Let us read the following gātha of the Emperor before his
death, the first four lines of which are extracted from the
Avataṃsaka-sūtra:
All dharmas do not arise.
All dharmas do not pass away.
If able to understand as such,
The Buddhas are always present.
What is the use of going and coming?
Secondly, the content of the Avataṃsaka deals with the truth-seeking
process of each human being, typified by the pilgrimage undertaken by
young Sudhana to visit fifty-three worthies, Buddhist and secular. These
visits are described to have taken place in various forms, from the most
secular one of love between boys and girls to the transcendent state of
perfect insight into the mutually unobstructed interpenetration of all
things. Thus, it is not by chance that this sūtra became so popular by the
time the Trc Lm school came into being in Vietnam. In reality, its
popularity genuinely made possible the manifestation of the thought in the
Worldly Life with Joy in the Way and helped develop it into a guiding
thought in the activities of Vietnamese Buddhism.
It must be said that the thought of the Avataṃsaka spread rather popularly
in the time of Master Thường Chiếu (?-1203), who maintained that Buddhism
should not be separated from the world. In the Collected Prominent Figures
of Dhyāna Garden, to answer the question What is the meaning of
Dharma-body is present everywhere? posed by a Dhyāna student, Thường
Chiếu cited two passages from the Chapter The Appearance of the
Tathāgata in the Avataṃsaka (80 volumes) translated into Chinese by
Sikṣānanda. ( L Mạnh Tht, Nghin cứu về Thiền Uyển Tập Anh, Nxb. Tp. Hồ
Ch Minh, 1999, pp.239, 481-482. [LMT]) It should be remembered that
Thường Chiếu is the master of Thng Thiền (?-1228). And the latter,
according to the Lược Dẫn Thiền Phi Đồ (Chart of Dhyāna Lineage) in the
Recorded Sayings of Thượng Sỹ, is the founder of the Trc Lm lineage,
which may be presented as follows:
Thng Thiền
↓
Tức Lự
↓
Ứng Thuận
↓
Tiu Dao
↓
Tuệ Trung
↓
the Emperor Nhn Tng
↓
Php Loa
↓
Huyền Quang
It may be said that the thought of the Avataṃsaka is of a doctrinal
system, according to which a thing can exist only through its correlation
with others. Otherwise stated, there may never be anything so called
'existence independent of others'. Consequently, it is natural that, under
the influence of such a doctrine, Thường Chiếu could do nothing but
putting all activities of his life, or rather, of Buddhism into a fixed
system on the historical background of his time. It is therefore not
surprising at all that Thường Chiếu set forth the view of not being
separated from the world in his reply to the question of Thần Nghi
(?-1216) Is your way of living the same as others'?. Just in the Php
Vn and Kiến Sơ Dhyāna lineages by the end of the L dynasty there
appeared some lay Dhyāna masters, particularly Thng Thiền of the Kiến Sơ
school. As has been cited above, according to the Chart of Dhyāna Lineage
Thng Thiền is considered to have founded the Trc Lm lineage of Yn Tử.
He himself was a layman. So was Ứng Thuận. And this is obviously the
result of strong impact exerted by the Avataṃsaka. Tuệ Trung Thượng Sỹ
also referred to this sūtra in his poems. In the Thị Chng, for example,
he dealt with the study and practice of Buddhism following Sudhanas
example in the latters encounters with his predecessors:
The world is attached to falsehood, not truth.
Yet either falsehood or truth is of worldly mind.
So as to go to the other side,
Study elaborately Sudhanas visits to his predecessors.
It is based upon the thought of the Avataṃsaka that such antithetic
categories of mankinds thought as being and non-being, false and true,
right and wrong, and so on, have been once for all solved. What is called
being or non-being can exist only in some relation. There is truly neither
absolute being nor non-being. In the light of the Avataṃsaka, being and
non-being are merely the two sides of the same reality. They do not
exclude each other. What is so called being may exist only in its
relation with what is so called non-being, and vice-versa. For that
reason, in his preaching at the Sng Nghim Temple in the 12th month of
Gip Thn (1304) the Emperor Nhn Tng states that, because of ones
ignorance of such a mutual relation between being and non-being, one can
see only the finger pointing to the moon but not the moon itself, just as
the one who sits under the tree to await a rabbit instead of chasing it or
the one who looks for his horse on a map instead of searching its traces
on the ground:
Non-being and being,
Neither is absolutely being or non-being,
Just like searching ones sword by marking on the boat;
Or searching ones horse on the map.
Being and non-being,
Neither exists apart from each other,
Just like making a hat of snow, shoes of flowers;
Or sitting under a tree to await the rabbit.
Being and non-being,
Today and in the old days alike,
If clinging to the finger so as not to see the moon,
That is to be drowned on the ground.
The Avataṃsaka and the thought therein thus have become not only the new
source of thought for Buddhism in the times of L and Trần but also a
popular theory for the leaders of Đại Việt in their view of their own
country and society in relation with others of the time, from which they
could reach their culminating point, that is, the birth of the Trc Lm
school, in building a peaceful and prosperous Đại Việt. Today, it is
generally agreed that in the history of our country there has never been
any dynasty that maintains the view of being close to the people as the
Trần dynasty, especially the Emperors Thi Tng, Thnh Tng and Nhn Tng.
We can see obviously that this view truly originates from the
philosophical system of the Avataṃsaka developed within the age-old
tradition of the country. Further, it may be said that never before in the
history of Vietnamese Buddhism has the Avataṃsaka been so fully and
effectively interpreted as in the time of the Emperor Nhn Tng and later
on, that is, since the Trc Lm school's appearance on the arena of the
nation.
In 1330 Php Loa died. In the last moments of his life there was the
presence of Huyền Quang, who was then already so old, nearly twice older
than Php Loa. Therefore, it is obvious that the Trc Lm school could not
be attributed to these three patriarchs alone in spite that they have been
generally known as the only three patriarchs of this school, especially
when Tnh Quảng and Ng Thời Nhiệm collected some fragmentary materials to
compile a book on the three patriarchs of the Trc Lm school under the
title True Record of the Three Patriarchs. For, besides Huyền Quang who
died in 1334, i.e., only four years later than the Second Patriarchs
death, there were other immediate disciples of the latter such as Cảnh
Huy, Cảnh Ngung, Huệ Chc and, most particularly, Kim Sơn.
Dhyāna Master Kim Sơn was not only considered by the Emperor Anh Tng to
be the master who possessed the bones and marrow of Phổ Huệ, as in the
words of the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints, but further
bestowed by him to be Trc Lm Tam Đại Thiền Tổ (The Dhyāna Patriarch of
the Third Generation of Trc Lm School) shortly before his death in 1358.
The Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints gives us the following
account:
When he was about to pass away, the King presented a gātha to Kim Sơn,
saying: Whatever serious sickness I am suffering, I, your disciple, would
like to send [this gātha] to Your Holiness the Dhyāna Patriarch of the
Third Generation of Trc Lm School. I have been sick for a week, lying by
night and taking medicine by day. I have not eaten a grain of rice but
chewed every grain. If being asked what taste it is like, I would reply
with no taste. Let me present my gātha:
Taking medicine for curing illness.
Without illness, no medicine is needed.
Now is rice without grain
That is all chewed by a person without mouth.
In addition, he wrote a letter to invite Kim Sơn to the Động Tin hall to
examine him.
Accordingly, the Third Patriarch of the Trc Lm school was Kim Sơn and
not Huyền Quang. Of the extant materials, with the exception of the True
Record of the Three Patriarchs, none describes the latter as The Dhyāna
Patriarch of the Third Generation but only as dharma-successor, that is,
succeeding the dharma-lineage of Php Loa. It should be noticed that the
chronicle of Php Loa's activities made in the True Record of the Three
Patriarchs designates him as Trc Lm Đệ Nhị Đại (of the Second Generation
of Trc Lm School). Consequently, that the Emperor Minh Tng called
Master Kim Sơn the Dhyāna Patriarch of the Third Generation of Trc Lm
School formally confirmed the latter to be the official successor of the
Trc Lm school, at least until 1358 when the Emperor died. In this
connection, after Huyền Quangs death in 1334 the Trc Lm school went on
with its strong development under the auspices of the Trần house.
The presentation of the historical development of the Trc Lm school
through the three Patriarchs Nhn Tng, Php Loa and Huyền Quang may be
considered a distinctive creation of Vietnamese Buddhism in the eighteenth
century, when Tnh Quảng and his pupil Ng Thời Nhiệm compiled the True
Record of the Three Patriarchs based on many different materials. Studying
this record, we see that the biography of Nhn Tng is originally cited
from the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints, except for an annex
at the end of the record extracted from the Quốc Sử (National History)
concerning the fact that Master Tr Thng burned his arm on Emperor Nhn
Tngs ordination and vowed to serve at the latters stūpa in Yn Tử, and
that the biography of Php Loa is a copy of his own one engraved on the
tablet of the Vin Thng stūpa in the year of Đại Trị, Nhm Dần (1362),
which remains today at the Thanh Mai Temple on Mount Tam Bản in what is
now Hong Hoa Thm Village, Ch Linh District, Hải Dương Province.
As to the biography of Huyền Quang, it is cited from the Tổ Gia Thực Lục
(True Record of the Patriarchal House). This record has a rather strange
history. When the Ming of China took control of our country in the years
1407-1428, they collected all of our countrys writings and brought them
to Chin-lng, among which is the True Record of the Patriarchal House.
This may be proved through a note at the end of the record:
This True Record of the Patriarchal House was brought to China by
Shang-shu Huang-fu around the year Hsuan-te (1426-1435). For many years
since then, [he] often dreamed a monk who asked him to return the record
to its native country. Since his descendants did not yet have the
opportunity to do so, they built a temple in their village for venerating
it. Whatever prayer they had in front of the altar on which the Record was
placed was effectively responded to; so they called the temple The Temple
of Annan Dhyāna Master Huyền Quang. Around the year Chia-hsin (1522-1558),
T Xuyn Hầu went to the Great Mings court as a messenger and did not
return until nineteen years later. At his departure on returning home, he
was seen off by Huang Chng-tsu, a fourth-generation descendant of
Huang-fu, who again dreamed the monk with his request for the returning of
the Record. Huang Chng-tsu then handed the Record to T Xuyn Hầu,
telling him about the worshiping of it in the Ming country. When Trnh
Tuyn Hầu welcomed the messenger's return, he brought the Record home.
Later, he composed a writing titled Giải Tro Văn about it.
Apart from the note just translated, at the end of the True Record of the
Three Patriarchs printed in Thnh Thi the Ninth, there is a comment by
Ng Th Sỹ under the title Huyền Quang Hạnh Giải and noted to be an
extract from the Ng Gia Văn Phi:
As to the same action undertaken by different people if somebody has done
it in a different manner, he would be doubted. Among many different words
about the same fact, if somebody could confirm his own one, he would be
trusted. Further, it is not quite scarce for people in the world to make
their statements in an unreasonable and groundless manner. Therefore, if
something has been written down, it must be elaborately examined.
Master Huyền Quang lived in the Trầns time. He cultivated the [Buddhas]
Path at the Hoa Yn Temple on Mount Yn Tử and was granted the title The
Third Patriarch of Trc Lm School. As far as his practice of śīla and
samādhi is concerned, there is no documentary evidence preserved today. It
has been rumored, however, by some discursive people that the Master had
been the Honors Graduate [in a đnh examination] before taking refuge in
Buddhism. One day, being doubtful of his monastic life [The King] Anh
Tng gave the order for a concubine to test his purity. The concubine then
could take [from the Master] the amount of pure gold granted [to him]
earlier by the King. At this, some verses and stories have been composed
to record this incident so that the Masters genuine practice of the Way
can by no means be definitively determined.
Recently, in a writing of the style hạnh [as to the Master], Mr. Nguyễn
of the Cổ Đ village (By "Mr Nguyễn of the Cổ Đ village," the author
refers to Nguyễn B Ln (1701-1785), a native of the Cổ Đ village, Tin
Phong district, former Sơn Ty province. He received the highest degree
(tiến sỹ) in the 1731 examination and worked as Thượng Thư with the title
Lễ Trạch Hầu.
Well-versed in verses in the Nm language, he was the author of Ng Ba Hạc
Ph, Giai Cảnh Hứng Tnh Ph, and Vịnh Sử Thi Quyển. His writing on Huyền
Quang has not yet been found. [LMT]) has omitted some unnecessary part [of
the biography of the Master] and pointed out the fact that the latter did
give up wealth altogether and could eventually attain enlightenment. As
for some alleged abuse on his violation of precepts, its authenticity has
not yet been satisfactorily clarified.
Conventionally considered, female beauty is generally of most interest
inside the Citadel. May it then be only because of some uncertainty that
one could devote that which one loves most to testing somebody one does
not trust? That a woman with her face beautified with pink powder appeared
lonely in the long range of green mountains must be unequivocally
considered to be something truly unreliable. Suppose [a certain woman had]
appeared [with some charming words toward the Master], the Master, who was
at the meditation seat in the midst of a serene temple late in the night,
would be ready to respond with some instructions of the appearance of
Buddha Maitreya in the future. For the chatter of a woman is not what a
Master needs to be concerned with. If the Master, as being a monk of pure
conduct, had been all of a sudden contaminated on his ears by some human
voice, would he not have been able to act as a man of the State of Lu?
Would he not have been able to overwhelm it? Further, were there not a
place in the vast meditation forest for a woman to stay overnight? If the
graceful beauty of flowers early in the spring were not able to move the
heart of a man on his first entering [the garden], how could he take pains
to walk about in the corridor only to look at it, particularly as he had
made so many efforts to purify his mind? Would the Master not have been
able to follow Liu Hsia-hues good example even though he, whose heart has
been so cooled as ash, might have lost his precaution due to some
unmindfulness one morning? Naturally, the Master was not interested in
gold; ... Even though compassion is the very virtue of a monk, would he
have been willing to give up his honor to some groundless abuse?
Consequently, it might happen that, being charmed in the first place by
some graceful voice the Master allowed her to stay. Then, in face of such
a beauty he had some talk with her so that he, because of being joyful at
her cunning words, finally decided to entrust all the gold to her. Only
with such matters it would be hard for him to prove his untainted mind. As
a consequence, the more we try to protect the Master, the more he would be
misunderstood.
Nowadays, I am living in a time some hundreds of years later than his.
Yet, when thinking of unraveling some suspicions caused by false rumors of
the world, why is it not possible for me to come to an openly fair
judgment as to the Master in terms of his very biography and verses?
According to his biography, he was a native of the Vạn Tải village in Vũ
Ninh of Bắc Giang Water Route. His home was on the southeast of the Ngọc
Hong Temple. His first ancestor L n Hong was an official in the reign
of L Thần Tng. The descendant of the sixth generation named Quang Dụ
worked as a chuyển vận sứ under the Trần dynasty. Quang Dụ had four sons,
the youngest of whom was called Tuệ Tổ. The Master was the latters
grandson. His mother gave birth to him after bearing him nearly twelve
months. As a young baby, he appeared to be strangely intelligent and thus
named Tải Đạo. (Lit., "Conveying the Teaching.") At the age of nine, he
was already versed in literature. When he was twenty-one years old, he
passed the Đại Y examination. He had many achievements in receiving
foreign messengers. He used to accompany the King to the Vĩnh Nghim
Temple in Phượng Nhn District, where upon hearing Php Loas discourse
one day, he attained enlightenment. Thereafter, he submitted a memorial to
the King, asking to be ordained a Buddhist monk. He was granted the
monastic title Huyền Quang and appointed to be the abbot of the Hoa Yn
Temple on Mount Yn Tử, where he instructed more than a thousand
disciples. The Textbook with the annotation by him was commented by
Emperor Nhn Tng that if the book has been supervised by Huyền Quang,
not a word may be added to or omitted from it. In such high esteem was he
held by contemporaries.
His verses consist of the Ngọc Tin, the Trch Diễm, the Việt m, in which
there are the sentences like nhất lnh thuế y [kinh tuế hn] ([surviving
the cold of winter] only with a light fur coat), bn gian thạch thất
(half of the stone chamber), đức bạc thường tm kế tổ đăng (shame at
such little merit as to transmit the Patriarch's lamp), dĩ thị thnh
thiền tm nhất phiến; cung thanh tức tức vị thy đa (in meditation my
mind has become one-pointed; for whom are the crickets making such
laments?), and so on. The characteristics of mountain, forest, mist,
evening sunshine are manifest in his wording, through which it may be
assumed that he is a very plain and simple man. How would words of
nonsense as falsely rumored by the world be able to proceed form such a
man?
If it were asked by some that the Master should give up that pure way of
living, should he not?, let me answer with should not. As to a monk of
such highly pure conducts, it is hard to coin that he could not have led a
righteous life or he could not help thinking about such as marriage. As
his life has been so obviously known, the matter that a tray of garlic
might be turned into a tray of vegetarian food becomes nonsense at once.
If calmly and frankly considered, it may be said that though the Trần
king gave orders for testing the Master many times, the latter did not
break his pure precepts. How could he, as being the Third Patriarch of the
Trc Lm Dhyāna school, exchange his honor for an act as such?
This comment is made by Chnh Tiến Sỹ Đốc Trấn Ng Th Sỹ, with the title
Ngọ Phong Cng, in the Tả Thanh Oai village of Thanh Oai district in the
year of Tn Mi, Cảnh Hưng, under the L dynasty (1751).
From the two endnotes of the True Record of the Three Patriarchs, it is
clearly known that the True Record of the Patriarchal House Tnh Quảng and
Ng Thời Nhiệm copied in their True Record of the Three Patriarchs is the
text that was brought home from China by T Xuyn Hầu L Quang B in 1569,
and later read by Trnh Xuyn Hầu Nguyễn Bỉnh Khim (1491-1580) so that a
writing titled Giải Tro was written as to it by the latter. Thereafter,
it was copied and provided with an annex by Ng Thời Nhiệms father,
namely, Ng Th Sỹ. Based upon Sỹs comment, the compilation of the True
Record of the Three Patriarchs may be supposedly to have been carried out
as follows: First, Ng Thời Nhiệm might read his fathers copy of the True
Record of the Patriarchal House where Huyền Quang is recorded to have been
granted the posthumous title Trc Lm Thiền Sư Đệ Tam Đại, Đặc Phong Tự
Php Huyền Quang Tn Giả (Venerable Huyền Quang, Dhyāna Master of the
Trc Lm Third Generation, Specifically Bestowed to Be the
Dharma-Successor). From this, it might occur to Ng Thời Nhiệm that he
could compose a work named the True Record of the Three Patriarchs.
Thereafter, he would discuss it with Tnh Quảng, who might be the master
of and grant the monastic name Hải Lượng to him if their monastic names
were extracted from one and the same gātha representing the line of
transmission of the Chi-Pan T'u-k'ung school of the Lin-chi lineage:
Tr tuệ thanh tịnh
Đạo đức vin minh
Chn như tnh hải
Tịch chiếu phổ thng
Tm nguyn quảng tục
Bản gic xương long
Năng nhn thnh quả
Thường diễn khoan hoằng
Duy truyền php ấn
Chứng ngộ hội dung
Kin tr giới hạnh
Vĩnh thiệu tổ tng.
Then, following their discussion, a plan might be drawn up, that is, to
cite the biography of Nhn Tng in the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of
the Saints, that of Php Loa on his memorial tablet at the Thanh Mai
Temple and what concerns Huyền Quang in the True Record of the Patriarchal
House, to which some fragments of the three patriarchs writings preserved
somewhere in the temples under the title Thiền Đạo Yếu Học (Study of the
Essentials of Dhyana Doctrine) were added, to constitute the True Record
of the Three Patriarchs.
Since the True Record of the Three Patriarchs was published, these three
patriarchs lives and careers were widely known and further confirmed by
another work titled Fundamental Principles of Trc Lm Doctrine, whose
earliest edition was in Cảnh Thn the Third (1795). In the foreword of
this work, its author Ng Thời Nhiệm presented the biographies of the
first three patriarchs Nhn Tng, Php Loa and Huyền Quang of the Trc Lm
school. The rest was an autobiography of the author himself under the
heading Trc Lm Đệ Tứ Tn (The Trc Lms Fourth Honored-One). If
tracing from the Fundamental Principles of Trc Lm Doctrine back to the
year 1765, when the True Record of the Three Patriarchs was for the first
time published, we can see that such a hypothesis as to the compilation of
the True Record of the Three Patriarchs is not quite unreasonable and that
Ng Thời Nhiệms supposed participation in the compilation of the work is
not without any ground. Indeed, not only did he contribute to the
literature of Vietnamese Buddhism but also helped throw light on a number
of masters of the Trc Lm school such as Hải u Vũ Trinh (1726-1823), Hải
Ha Nguyễn Đăng Sở, Hải Huyền Ng Th Hnh, Hải Điền Nguyễn Hữu Đm, and
so on, who were the great intellectuals of the time, originating from the
noble class in the latter half of the eighteenth century. In reality,
owing to their influence and prestige that the notion of the Trc Lm
Three Patriarchs has become popularly admitted. However, it is the
popularity of this notion that has lent encouragement to some distorted
view of the historical development of this school.
In effect, with the exception of the True Record of the Three Patriarchs,
nowhere has Huyền Quang been considered the Dhyāna Patriarch of the Third
Generation of the Trc Lm School. As has been said above, this is the
reverend title that the Emperor Minh Tng, before his death, employed to
designate Master Kim Sơn. Accordingly, the Third Patriarch of the Trc Lm
school must be Kim Sơn and not Huyền Quang. Earlier, we have suggested and
proved in terms of documentary evidence that Kim Sơn may have composed the
Collected Prominent Figures of Dhyāna Garden, a history of Dhyāna Buddhism
in Vietnam, subsequent to the Chiếu Đối Bản of Thng Biền (?-1134), the
Chiếu Đối Lục of Biện Ti, and the Nam Tng Tự Php Đồ (Chart of
Dharma-Successors of the Southern School) of Thường Chiếu. As to the
Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints, its composer is not known
today; yet, from its content as well as style we may postulate that the
author is none other than Kim Sơn. In addition, the Cổ Chu Php Vn Phật
Bản Hạnh may have been composed by him, too.
Thus it may be said that in the middle of the fourteenth century a great
movement of studying the history of Vietnamese Buddhism broke out widely.
And Kim Sơn, as being an outstanding Dhyāna master under the reign of Minh
Tng, must have conducted the task of compiling the afore-said history
books. It is, however, unfortunate that we have not yet acquired any new
information on this master so far, except for what is preserved in the
Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints. Nevertheless, we may be sure
that the Trc Lm school continued to exercise its strong influence on the
court as well as the people until around the year 1358 at least. In all
probability, the inscription of the Chronicle on the memorial tablet in
front of the Vin Thng stūpa of Php Loa could be carried out by Kim Sơn
himself. The sole question posed here is why it could not be engraved and
erected at Php Loas stūpa until 1362. Was there probably something wrong
for the tablet to be made in memory of him during the Emperor Minh Tngs
lifetime?
Whatever happened, Kim Sơn must have lived on for some more years after
Minh Tngs death. However, due to the latters successors who were only
interested in sensual pleasures as Dụ Tng or who was so timid and
hesitant as Nghệ Tng, the magnificent energy of Đng A gradually died out
so that the lamps of transmission by various outstanding Dhyāna masters
were no longer recorded. This points out that such people of great
prestige and high reputation as Kim Sơn passed away under the reign of Dụ
Tng. Straightly stated, Master Kim Sơn might die between the years
1365-1370; and from this it may be speculated that he might be born at
some time around the year 1300 so that he could be an immediate disciple
of Php Loas before the latters death in 1330.
Subsequent to Kim Sơn's time, the Trc Lm school could certainly go on to
develop well. For, even at Mount Cn where Php Loa and Huyền Quang had
the Tư Phc Temple built, there were some poet-monks who often visited
Trần Nguyn Đn for the purpose of enriching their wording, as is
mentioned in a poem of his:
As a state official I have worked for ten years.
Reading poems while walking with a stick under the pines,
I see no visitor coming in the dust raised by horses;
Only poet-monks often knock the door for words.
As I can no longer take care of the people,
May it be time for me to retire home soon?
If waiting for the accomplishment of my career,
This old body then would rest under a burial-mound.
In addition, Phạm Nhn Khanh, who is recorded in the Recorded Sayings of
as the Lamps of the Saints to have brought the Emperor Minh Tngs letter
to Huyền Quang some time before 1334, spoke of the National Master Lm Sơn
in a poem composed after he saw the master off the capital:
After some days' absence from the mountain, he hurried back.
For he felt more peaceful in his lonely life there.
In the pine-house the tea smelled so sweet when prepared;
In the crane-stream the cups were cleaned with so much water.
The virtues of Dhyāna spread by him prevailed for thousands of years;
The values of poetry displayed by him overwhelmed everything else.
Retiring to the secluded peak covered in clouds,
He quietly gave dharma-rains to purify the world.
The most interesting event is that as the Cham Army under the command of
Chế Bồng Nga attacked the capital Thăng Long for many times, an army
composed of Buddhist monks was organized and commanded by Dhyāna Master
Đại Than, whose secular name and dharma-title are unknown. In the Complete
History of Đại Việt, it is said that in the 3rd month (of Tn Dậu, Xương
Ph the Fifth, 1381) the National Master Đại Than was ordered to collect
strong monks across the country, even those who were living in the
mountains and had no monkish certificates, so as to serve for a time in
the fighting expedition to Champa. On this occasion Phạm Nhn Khanh wrote
a poem to praise Master Đại Than and his Monastic Army:
Dhyāna General Đại Than was like a tiger in the Dhyāna forest.
His strength could conquer tens of thousands of soldiers.
Holding the sacred flag uprightly, he smoothed out the enemys rampart.
Driving the sword of wisdom lightly, he destroyed the brutal troops.
With the wind was his mantra recited for protection of the army.
In the air was his mandala drawn for destruction of the enemy.
Immediately submitted to the kings were his quick achievements,
Which truly constituted a picture of Lăng Yn by the National Teacher.
It may be said that this is the first and only time in the history of our
country Buddhist monks have served as soldiers in the battle-fields. No
doubt, this may be considered to be some echo or shadow of the voice or
image of the renowned lay masters in the battle-fields of the 1285 and
1288 wars, such as Tuệ Trung, who, together with his brother Trần Hưng
Đạo, commanded an army to liberate the capital Thăng Long in the spring of
1285. Thus, the fact that the number of monks in 1381 was large enough to
be organized into an army under the command of Master Đại Than points out
that the Trc Lm school was truly in its flourishing state by the end of
the fourteenth century.
In reality, besides Master Đại Thans monastic army, an uprising which
occurred in Quốc Oai was, too, led by a Dhyāna master, namely, Phạm Sư n,
as recorded in the Complete History of Đại Việt. This master must have
been of the Trc Lm school since, according to the Chart of Dhyāna
Lineage, the Dhyāna schools of Vietnam, with the exception of the Trc
Lm, declined early in the fourteenth century. By the end of this century,
as a result of many ceremonies of transmitting monastic precepts held by
Php Loa the Buddhist clergy, which numbered approximately fifteen
thousand by 1329, could supply all the temples throughout the country with
monks and nuns. Accordingly, it is rather easy to determine Phạm Sư n's
membership in the Trc Lm school. Yet, he has not been properly
recognized so far, let alone the fact that some have blamed him for
leading an uprising against the court. In effect, Pham Sư ns action was
simply a positive manifestation of Trc Lm Dhyāna Buddhism on the
principle of righteously serving ones lord, respectfully obeying ones
father. Just as Đại Than undertook the organization and command of the
Monks Army for the purpose of saving the country, so Pham Sư n took the
leadership of the uprising for the sake of the suffering people. This is a
characteristic of Buddhism in Vietnam. It has never been bound up
absolutely with any dynasty even though that dynasty might be by all means
supported or led by Buddhism. Instead, it is linked only with the welfare
of the nation and the masses. In the 1360s the Trần dynastys court led
by Dụ Tng got so badly corruptive that they did not only fail to take
care of the peoples living but also showed indifferent to their
sufferings. In face of that perilous situation of the country, a part of
Vietnamese Buddhists did not demonstrate their attitudes in such a
negative manner as of Chu Văn An, who did nothing but retiring home after
his suggestions for reforming the court had been refuted by the Emperor at
the time. Instead, they made a positive decision of taking weapons and
siding with the masses in their struggle for vital reforms within the
court and urgent improvements of the masses living condition. It must be
said that this is a typical attitude of Vietnamese Buddhists that the
spirit of the Worldly Life with Joy in the Way has helped to produce.
No doubt, a question may be raised by some as to whether such an attitude
would truly reflect the essentials of the Buddhist teaching. And, from
their own subjective reflections some then will make a reply on the spot
that there is nothing to do with Buddhism in such an action, just as what
was formerly stated recklessly by a Vietnamese writer: The sole fact that
[Buddhist] monks participated in politics or wrote verses is, in my
opinion, neither in accord with the essential teaching of Śākya[muni], nor
with such a doctrine of absolute nihilism. (Đặng Thi Mai, Mấy điều tm
đắc về một thời đại văn học in Thơ Văn L Trần I, H Nội: Nxb. KHXH, 1977,
p.42. [LMT]) From such a statement, we cannot know upon what sūtra its
authors opinion has been based or whether it is merely a deluded
reflection of his own ideas as to Buddhist monks that has been transformed
into groundless, nonsense statements. For the past hundred years a number
of critical studies on Buddhism have been made by prominent scholars in
the world where many problems have been put forward, among which is the
most important question as to what the Buddha taught. Many circles of
scholars on Buddhism have been founded to find out an answer to that
question, the most prominent of which are those of England and Germany,
France and Belgium, and Russia. In spite of this, there still remain some
who claim that they could grasp the essential teaching of the
Śākya[muni] so as to utter vague and groundless statements concerning
Buddhism as mentioned above. Consequently, it is not easy at all to speak
of the Buddhist teaching as many people have thought. Since the old days
the study on the Buddhist teaching has ever been formulated that if based
on sūtras literally, any interpretation of the Three-Period Buddhas
teaching will be misleading; on the other hand, if not based upon even a
single word of them, that will be identical with false doctrines.
Whatever it may be, there have been few cases in which the Buddhist clergy
had to be engaged in military actions with regard to imperial courts in
the history of Vietnamese Buddhism. If any, it was due to certain
extremely urgent situations where they could not do anything else for the
welfare of the people. Indeed, in the history of Vietnam Buddhism has
played a much more extensive role, that is, fulfilling its cultural
mission of assisting the masses to develop their good customs and abandon
their bad ones so as to gain better and better living, both spiritual and
material. It is with such a role that Buddhism has been able to make a
strong impression on the Vietnamese people throughout their history. Even
by the end of the fourteenth century that role of Buddhism went on to
manifest itself distinctively. This may be proved through some of Buddhist
devotees achievements.
First, Nguyễn Tri, a national hero of the Vietnamese people, ever
received his own education from a Dhyāna master for more than ten years,
that is, Master Đạo Khim. In a poem whose inspiration was drawn from his
reunion with the master the former said,
I remember being under your instruction for more than ten years;
Now this is the chance for us to spend overnight together.
Pleased that we are able to put aside secular affairs
So as to seek again the atmosphere of our former talks on the rock.
Tomorrow morning you will have to return to Linh Phố;
I know not when we can hear again the stream on Mount Cn.
Be not amazed at my crazy words when I am so old.
At your departure, I am still in the course of Supreme Dhyāna.
From it, it is obvious that Nguyễn Tri lived together with Master Đạo
Khim at the Tư Phc Temple on the Cn mountain and, under the latters
instruction, he studied many different subjects including Dhyāna Buddhism
of the most transcendent type, that is, Supreme Dhyāna doctrine. The poem
was written when Nguyễn Tri was already in his old age. At that time the
independence of the country was restored and L Lợi ascended the throne,
but Nguyễn Tri could not yet leave the court for his retirement on Mount
Cn between 1435-1442.
Nguyễn Tri was born in 1380. And he was already in his old age when he
saw his master again around 1345. Thereupon, it may be assumed that the
Dhyāna Master may have been born fifteen years at least earlier than
Nguyễn Tri so as to be old enough to instruct Nguyễn Tri for more than
ten years when the latter was living at his maternal grandfather Trần
Nguyn Đns on Mount Cn, that is, between 1386 and 1400. For prior to
the year 1400 Nguyễn Tri had attended and passed the first examination in
the reign of Hồ. In other words, Đạo Khim must have been born around 1370
and could have continued to settle on Mount Cn after the tragic law case
in 1442. His date, therefore, may fall between 1370-1445.
In the time of Đạo Khim, there was another Dhyāna master named Vin Thi,
who translated the Cổ Chu Php Vn Phật Bản Hạnh written in Chinese by
Master Kim Sơn into the Nm language. Though the date of this master has
not been determined so far, from his way of word-for-word translation as
well as his wording we may postulate that he could not live later than the
year 1550. Moreover, since the Cổ Chu Php Vn Phật Bản Hạnh was, too,
paraphrased in verse by Php Tnh, it has been assumed that as being
translated in prose Vin This translation certainly had to appear
earlier than the translation in verse supposedly made by Php Tnh, who
lived between 1470-1550. Otherwise stated, Master Vin Thi must have
lived before that date. (L Mạnh Tht, Vin Thi Thiền Sư Ton Tập, Si
gn: Tu Thư Vạn ạnh 77)
In addition, there is an extant Nm translation of the text Phật Thuyết
Đại Bo Phụ Mẫu n Trọng, which may be dated around the first half of the
fifteenth century in terms of an analysis of its following internal
evidences. The first is about its avoiding the use of a character after
which the Emperor L Thi Tổ was named owing to contemporary regulations
concerning the names of the Emperor and other members of his family. This
indicates that the translation could be put into circulation until this
regulation was no longer in effect in 1469. So the translation and
printing of its original had to be carried out between 1428-1469. The
second is that the Nm translation of the latter text is also worked on in
the method of word-for-word translation, and its style and wording are
somewhat similar to those of the translation of the former text. In this
connection, it may be assumed that these two translations could originate
from one and the same translator, that is, Vin Thi. Thereupon, the date
of this master must fall between 1400-1460.
Subsequent to Vin Thi is Master Hương Chn Php Tnh (1470-1550?). He is
the compiler of the most ancient Chinese-Nm dictionary known today as the
Chỉ Nam Học m Giải Nghĩa. Besides, he may possibly have paraphrased the
Cổ Chu Php Vn Phật Bản Hạnh Ngữ Lục in a specific Vietnamese style of
verse known as lục bt. Like most of Dhyāna masters of the Trc Lm
school, before leading a monastic life Php Tnh ever passed the national
examination and thus worked as an imperial official as in his own words:
In my prime youth I have passed the examination;
Now that I have been old, I decide to follow the Buddhas path.
Just like his First Patriarch Nhn Tng, Php Tnh, even though he already
lived a monastic life, did not abandon any of his services to the people.
In face of the masses difficulties in using the complex structure of the
Nm script at the time, he attempted to invent a much more simple way of
transcribing the national speech, which would be easier for the public to
read and write. Further, he strongly rejected the opinion that the Nm
script was nothing other than a vulgar language, not able to convey the
sages saying. In the words of Php Tnh:
The spoken Nm language may be allegedly considered vulgar;
Yet, as a written language, it can convey the sages sayings.
Now I have its script divided into major and secondary characters
And widely popularized so that illiterate people can master it.
Formerly so many compound characters were created
That people of little education found it hard to read them.
Today simplified characters should be introduced
So that the people can read and understand them easily.
As a consequence, a great movement of applying the Nm script to composing
and recording in various fields of study grew up and flourished well due
to Php Tnhs achievement in the field of linguistics. A great number of
Vietnamese authors began to employ the Nm language in place of the
Chinese language in their works, such as Thọ Tin Diễn Khnh (1550-1620?)
in his Nam Hải Quan m Phật Sự Tch Ca, Minh Chu Hương Hải in his more
than twenty works of which the four complete ones have been preserved,
Chn Nguyn, Như Trừng, Như Thị, Tnh Quảng, Hải Lượng, Hải u, Hải Ha,
Hải Huyền, An Thiền, and so on. Most particularly, Chn An Tuệ Tĩnh
(?-1711) did not only maintain the usage of traditional medicine for the
Vietnamese, which had been studied and applied by himself, but also
announced his scientific work in the Nm language. These authors professed
themselves to be members of the Trc Lm school in the sixteenth,
seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and actually made great
contributions not only to Vietnamese Buddhism but also to the Vietnamese
people in the common cause of building the country.
Thus, after Huyền Quangs death in 1334, the Trc Lm Dhyāna school, which
was continuously succeeded by the outstanding figures who contributed a
great deal to the country in many different fields, should not and cannot
be considered "to have flourished for a short time" as falsely assumed by
many people hitherto. Of course, such a mistake has taken its root deep in
the past when Tnh Quảng and Ng Thời Nhiệm accomplished their compilation
under the title True Record of the Three Patriarchs in 1765, and
particularly when Ng Thời Nhiệm introduced his writing Tam Tổ Hnh Trạng
(Activities of the Three Patriarchs), which was included in an edition of
his Fundamental Principles of Trc Lm Doctrine. Nevertheless, in the
middle of the nineteenth century An Thiền, in his Đại Nam Thiền Uyển Kế
Đăng Lược Lục printed around the year 1858, recorded a list of
twenty-three Dhyāna masters who consecutively undertook the patriarchal
office of the Trc Lm Monastery on Mount Yn tử:
1. Patriarch Hiện Quang
2. National Teacher Vin Chứng
3. National Teacher Đại Đăng
4. Patriarch Tiu Dao
5. Patriarch Huệ Tuệ
6. Patriarch Nhn Tng
7. Patriarch Php Loa
8. Patriarch Huyền Quang
9. National Teacher An Tm
10. National Teacher Ph Vn (with the title Tĩnh Lự)
11. National Teacher V Trước
12. National Teacher Quốc Nhất
13. Patriarch Vin Minh
14. Patriarch Đạo Huệ
15. Patriarch Vin Ngộ
16. National Teacher Tổng Tr
17. National Teacher Khu Thm
18. National Teacher Sơn Đằng
19. Great Master Hương Sơn
20. Great Master Tr Dung
21. Patriarch Tuệ Quang
22. Patriarch Chn Tr
23. Great Master V Phiền.
Later, some have adopted the list and named it Yn tử tradition ( Nguyễn
Lang, Việt Nam Phật Gio Sử Luận, Si gn: L Bối, 1974, pp.397-398.
[LMT]) but not studied whether it has any historical value. Thereafter,
some have cited it and claimed that its authenticity is doubtful and
the chronological order of the generations therein appears unreliable.
(Viện Triết Học, Lịch Sử Phật Gio Việt Nam, H nội: Nxb. KHXH, 1991,
p.224. [LMT]) In spite of this they all admit that the generations prior
to Nhn Tng are available for reference. For, in the Collected Prominent
Figures of Dhyāna Garden Master Huyền Quang (?-1221) is recorded to have
ever settled on Mount Yn tử. And in the preface to A Manual of Dhyāna
Teaching, the Emperor Trần Thi Tng said that, on his arrival at Mount
Yn Tử in 1236, he had met the National Teacher, a Great Śramaṇa of Trc
Lm, who is named National Teacher Ph Vn in the Complete History of Đại
Việt. Besides, the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the Saints, the Thiền
Tng Bản Hạnh and the Đại Nam Thiền Uyển Kế Đăng Lục, all record that the
Emepror Trần Thi Tng met National Teacher Vin Chứng. Furthermore, since
the Collected Prominent Figures of Dhyāna Garden mentions a disciple of
Dhyāna Master Hiện Quang known as Đạo Vin, the latter is generally
identified with Vin Chứng.
Suppose the names Vin Chứng and Đạo Vin would both refer to National
Teacher Ph Vn, we may be assured that Vin Chứng lived until around the
year 1278. For, according to the Recorded Sayings as the Lamps of the
Saints, when Trần Thi Tng was about to die, his son, the Emperor Trần
Thnh Tng, gave the order for the two National Masters Ph Vn and Đại
Đăng to expound the transcendental teaching to him but he did not allow.
For that reason, if Đại Đăng did succeed Ph Vn to be the abbot of the
Yn tử Monastery, the fact would be dated from the year 1278 on, if not
much later.
From the list above, subsequent to Đại Đăng is Patriarch Tiu Dao, who is
certainly not a disciple of the former. For, in the Chart of Dhyāna
Lineage of the Recorded Sayings of Thượng Sỹ Tiu Dao is recorded to have
been a pupil of Layman Ứng Thuận. And Tiu Dao must have died prior to the
year 1291 when Tuệ Trung died. For, among the remaining forty-nine poems
of Tuệ Trung there are four poems related to Tiu Dao, that is, "Vấn Phc
Đường Đại Sư Tật," "Thượng Phc Đường Tiu Dao Thiền Sư," "Phc Đường Cảnh
Vật," and "Điếu Tin Sư" ("A Funeral Lament to the Old Master").
Accordingly, the last poem points out evidently that Tiu Dao had to die
before the year 1291 so that Tuệ Trung could write the verse in memory of
his master on his death.
Succeeding Tiu Dao of the Yn tử Monastery is Patriarch Huệ Tuệ. But, who
is Huệ Tuệ? Among the disciples of Tiu Dao recorded in the Chart of
Dhyāna Lineage, no one was named as such. However, based upon the way of
identification of Đạo Vin with Vin Chứng, it is possible to identify Huệ
Tuệ with Tuệ Trung though the latter was himself the celebrated General
Hưng Ninh Vương Trần Quốc Tung. In addition, according to the list above
the successor of Huệ Tuệ is none other than Điều Ngự Trần Nhn Tng
himself. So, is it possible that Tuệ Trung ever took charge of the Yn tử
Monastery? The life story of Tuệ Trung written by Emperor Nhn Tng in the
Recorded Sayings of Thượng Sỹ tells us that the Emperor Trần Thnh Tng
honored Tuệ Trung to be his monastic brother. If so, it is obviously
possible that Tuệ Trung undertook the abbots office of the Yn tử
Monastery. And that the Emperor Nhn Tng succeeded Tuệ Trung to undertake
the same office is not surprising at all although the latter died four
years earlier than the ordination of the former. For the Emperor Nhn Tng
was actually confirmed by Tuệ Trung to have attained enlightenment ever
since 1278 as in his own words in the account just mentioned. Subsequent
to Nhn Tng were Php Loa and Huyền Quang.
Such is what about the first eight patriarchs as enumerated in the list
above, including Php Loa and Huyền Quang, whose dates and biographies are
quite definitely known. As far as the remaining fifteen ones are
concerned, the fact that some of them bore the same monastic names has
given rise to some doubt as to the authenticity of the whole list.
National Teacher Quốc Nhất, the Patriarch of the twelfth generation, for
instance, has the same name as a disciple of Master Ứng Thuận; and Great
Master Hương Sơn, the Nineteenth Patriarch, has the same name as a
disciple of Nhn Tng. Naturally, Hương Sơn as being a disciple of Nhn
Tngs could by no means be regarded as the nineteenth successor of the
Yn Tử tradition.
In reality, the fact that some masters bear the same names should not be
so surprising as to raise any doubts at all since it is quite ordinary in
the history of Buddhism of a country as well as between some countries. In
the history of Chinese Buddhism, for instance, a Buddhist master in the
Chin dynasty and another in the Wei dynasty, which came into being more
than one hundred years later than the former, are both named Hui-yuan. In
our country there are also many cases as such. For instance, Dhyāna Master
Mn Gic (1052-1096) in the L dynasty and a master of the same name in
the reign of L Trung Hưng, who transmitted monastic rules to Chn Nguyn
Tuệ Đăng (1647-1726); and Minh Chu Hương Hải of the seventeenth century
and another master no less well-known than him, who are even of the same
native locality, Nghệ An. For that reason, it is not necessary to have
doubts as to such cases, especially when those who have the same names do
not belong to the same period.
In addition, when the first eight patriarchs in the list above have been
proved to be reliable, we may attempt to study the last one. This is the
case of Dhyāna Master V Phiền, whose date has not been definitely
determined so far. Based upon the twenty-second patriarch who is known as
Chn Trụ, however, it may be assured that he was Master Minh Nguyệt Chn
Trụ, the first master of Master Chn Nguyn Tuệ Đăng. Though Chn Nguyn
did not record the date of Chn Trus death, we know that the former
entered the monastery at the age of 19, that is, in 1665. Thus Chn Trụ
must have lived until around the year 1665 at least. Further, according to
Chn Nguyn, soon after transmitting dharma to him, Chn Trụ passed away;
and the former then had to undertake Bhikṣu precepts under Minh Lương Mn
Gics transmission. In this connection, Chn Trụ must have lived between
1600-1670.
As a consequence, the presence of Chn Trụ may prove the authenticity of
the list above. And the Yn Tử tradition did flourish on from the time of
Hiện Quang up to V Phiền, that is, from 1200 to 1700. A question may be
raised here as to why An Thiền did not record any more Dhyāna masters
prior to himself, that is, the period between 1700 and 1850. The reason is
simple that he recorded their names in another place. To the Ngự Chế Thiền
Điển Thống Yếu Kế Đăng Lục by Như Sơn, An Thiền added the list of the
generations succeeding Chn Nguyn, including the Dhyāna Masters Như
Trừng, Tnh Huyền, Hải Qunh, Tịch Truyền, Chiếu Khoan and Phổ Tịnh though
they did not directly take charge of the Yn tử Monastery.
Accordingly, the Trc Lm lineage beginning with the Emperor Nhn Tng has
exercised great influence upon the history of country and of Buddhism and
it has been continuously succeeded just so far. This is a Dhyāna school
that is not only founded by a Vietnamese but also has many remarkable
achievements in doctrine and practice so that it has been capable of
fulfilling various requirements of development in the history of our
country. For that reason, in order to unravel many historical and
ideological problems in relation to this school, a certain study on it
should be made on a far larger scale. What we have taken up so far is only
an outline of it drawn up by chance in our discussion about the Emperor
Nhn Tngs contributions to the history of country and Buddhism. It is
unequivocally necessary to make a more intensive study in the future since
without it there will surely be no hope of correcting a great deal of
false views currently made as to the history and doctrine of this school.
Translation by Đạo Sinh
|
Huyền Thoại Duy Ma Cật