SOAS – IFCELS Pre-sessional Course 2019

Essay Submission

Bojin
Name

Student 675988
number
Comparing Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism in finding
Essay Title enlightenment

Number of 2111 words

words

Today’s world is developing very fast. People face competition and pressure in the workplace.
Finding inner peace and getting relief from these pressures is becoming increasingly important, and
people are trying to adjust their mind through Buddhism. There are many different ways to practice
Buddhism, since it has been divided into many schools throughout 2500 years. Finding
enlightenment is at the heart of Buddhism and this essay will investigate and compare two main
schools of teaching, Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism, investigating how each of them leads
to it. The first part of the essay will introduce some background information about Buddhism itself;
the second part of the essay will look at similarities in how these two schools practice finding
enlightenment; and the third part of the essay will focus on differences between their ways of
practice.

To begin with it, it is worth considering some key tenets of Buddhist faith. The basic principle of
Buddhism is to end suffering, and to this end Buddha provided a solution known as the Four Noble
Truths. The suffering refers to birth pain, old age, sickness, death, being separated from one’s loved
ones, being in close contact with one’s foes, and being disappointed when unable to achieve one’s
wish. The basis of the Enlightenment is stated in the Four Noble Truths. These are the prescription
to release all beings from their own sufferings. Buddha showed that when at first one bitter thought
comes to a person, they will start to gather more and more bitter thoughts after that first one. Then
that thought travels through a long journey which becomes that person’s suffering and finally it
terminates, at the point in which they will find their real peace again. To achieve enlightenment, a
person must eliminate all bitter thoughts before those thoughts start their journey, so that the person
does not suffer along the way. Each bitter thought will never be born and as a result will never need
to die. Then the individual can be very peaceful and very happy to stay in that enlightened state for
as long as they wish. All they need to do is constantly monitor their thoughts. When a bad one
comes along, they kill it, and this stops the accumulation of more and more bad thoughts. In that
way they do not need to suffer. Tolle (2001) states that when a person feels life’s every moment as a
joy of just being, then they are freed from the constraint of time. Tomorrow’s bills are not the
problem, loss of now is the problem. Those worries are the core delusion that turns a mere situation,
event, or emotion into a personal problem and on into suffering. Loss of now is loss of being.

The first similarity between Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism is that they are both based on
certain sutra to find enlightenment. Although Zen Buddhism is not encouraging their practitioners
to read many sutras, there are some sutras that are beneficial for both Zen and Pure Land Buddhist’s
enlightenment such as ‘the Diamond Sutra’, ‘The Sutra of Hui-neng’ and ‘The Surangama Sutra’.
These sutras are beneficial to both schools of thought, which is one similarity between them two.
For example, ‘The Surangama Sutra’ illustrates how our correct physical, mental and verbal acts
will result in our awakening and enlightenment. To take our visual awareness as an example, it is
unchanging. It does not come and go when an object appears into its line of sight. For instance,
blindness does not mean there is no visual experience at all, in fact the blind person sees darkness.
The same happens with awareness of thoughts as they come and go in our minds, the six senses
(sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch and cognition) are like barriers which keep us from our true
reality. Practicing meditation is to reverse our awareness’s direction, away from the world of
illusion and going toward our original mind.

Another similarity between Zen Buddhism and Pure Land Buddhism is that their meditation
practices can happen in everything that they are doing. Ingram (1973) states that the Zen’s “true
meditation” is in everything: walking, eating, being in motion, stillness, words, actions, the good
and the bad. The same is true for Pure Land Buddhism’s practitioners chant Amitabha Buddha’s
name whether they are doing some field work, walking or eating.

The final similarity of both schools of thought belong to the Mahāyāna type of school which is
known as ‘big vehicle’, where shih (1991) explains that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas sacrifice
themselves to serve all beings. They help them to have a good heart while insuring the development
of their Buddha-nature. As well as the goal of a truly enlightened Zen master is to serve others, and
they view it irrelevant whether they will be repaid or not.

There are a clear set of differences in finding enlightenment between the two main types of
Buddhism. Firstly, according to Ingram (1973) Pure Land is relying on an external force for
salvation, while Zen is about self-salvation, focusing on finding one’s true nature. In the Pure Land
Buddhism school of thought, Amitabha Buddha made 48 Vows, as mentioned in the scripture (“The
Infinite Life Sutra,” n.d.). In this sutra Shakyamuni Buddha told a story about Bodhisattva
Dharmakara, in which after he had seen all the sufferings of sentient beings, he made vows and
created the Western Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss. His 18th vow states that if a sentient being recites
his name a minimum of ten times, they will be reborn into his Pure Land. So, the Pure Land
practitioners are constantly chanting Amitabha Buddha’s name. However, for Zen, the practitioners
do not need to chant a Buddha’s name nor read much Buddhist text, they just have to let go of the
attachment to self, they just reflect on their mental movements and let go. They do not become
attached to any of the thoughts, but rather let them pass by being fully aware of them. In the end,
the Zen practitioner will attain a very calm state of mind and will not be disturbed by the coming
and going of their thoughts. Their aim is to take total control of their mind. According to Chang
(1957) people have more than one thought on most occasions. If they close down one thought, they
will quickly start another. But Zen masters drive themselves to the absolute ‘dead-end state’, where
‘they are devoid of things to grasp, cling to, or escape from’ (ibid).

Secondly, in contrast Pure Land Buddhism’s school of thought sees the Zen method as too hard for
one’s lifetime, one has to rely on Buddha’s power to not falling into the sea of life and death. They
would argue that if a person has impure karma left behind in this current life, they will need to take
another reincarnation to resolve this. By Amitabha Buddha’s vows the practitioner can achieve
certain enlightenment and escape the sufferings in three evil paths (hell, hungry ghost and animal).
For Zen, the practitioner’s only task in finding enlightenment is to “see into one’s own nature”. The
author Ingram (1973) goes on to argue that the limitation of Pure Land Buddhism is that this faith is
mainly trusting the God Amitabha Buddha, not about trusting the human effort in the salvation
process. In fact, the Zen Buddhist monks can only reach the goal of enlightenment with very strong
self-discipline in meditation.

Thirdly, In Pure Land Buddhism the enlightenment is hard to measure in one’s lifetime. Buddha
thinks in this life there is not enough time to learn everything, so it is best for practitioners to go to
Western Pure Land after this life to continue studying Buddhism. However, the criteria to be able to
go to the Pure Land is also high. Firstly, one has to believe in Buddha, make a vow and follow it up
by practicing Buddhism. This includes being filial to one’s parents, paying respect to one’s teacher,
preserving life and practicing ten good deeds (no killing, no stealing, no adultery, no lying, no
slandering, no harsh speech, no idle talk, no greed, no hatred and no illusion). Secondly, take refuge
in Triple-jewel (the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha), follow their precepts and do not do
wrong. Thirdly, initiate Bodhicitta (a wish that all sentient beings would be enlightened, the
compassion to help other people and staying away from the illusion of the self), deeply believing in
cause and effect, reading the Mahayana scriptures, and persuading others.

The fourth difference is that Pure Land rely on Buddha, whereas Zen is about a transfer from the
master to the student. Ingram (1973) argued that people might not be pursuing enlightenment in
their lifetime if they can rely on Buddha’s vow (effectively trying to take a shortcut) and wish to go
to the Pure Land after this current life. Then for these people, they would not be able to achieve
Buddhahood in their current life. He thinks Pure Land teaching is for people who have less
capability to achieve salvation themselves. Indeed, Pure Land teachings are not like Zen which
helps people to “see into their own nature”. For Zen, it is a direct transfer from the master’s mind to
the student’s mind, which does not necessarily involve words from the scriptures. One example can
be Suzuki (1982) where one day a disciple asked his master: “Would you tell me the real teaching
of the Buddha?” The Master replied, “If I tell you, it is my own, which will never be yours. What
you need comes out of your own inner being.” Zen thinks the human’s mind and Buddha’s mind are
the same. Everyone and everything have Buddha’s nature within them. That awareness could lead
to sudden enlightenment. However, the Zen way is difficult, the practitioner normally needs to have
very strong disciplines. Bodhidharma’s definition of Zen is “A special transmission outside the
scriptures; no dependence on words and letters; direct pointing to the mind of man; seeing into
one’s nature and attaining Buddhahood.” Suzuki (1938) states the ‘mind’ here is not our daily
functioning mind, but the mind which is underneath all our thoughts and feelings.

However, these days it is quite hard for people to achieve sudden enlightenment because the
foundation of the sentient beings are not very strong, and in the modern times people tend to have
complicated lifestyles compared to the old days. Therefore, people are finding it harder to achieve
enlightenment by the Zen method. Compared with Zen, chanting Buddha is easier. It can happen
whenever there is an emotional related thought coming through. People can rely on Buddha’s
blessing to overcome any difficult life situation, protecting the thoughts not going around like a
downward spiral. Perhaps after chanting Buddha’s name one thousand times, the original worries
would just pass away.

One interesting school of thought looks at combining these two main streams of Buddhism into one.
Shih (1992) emphasizes that after the Tang dynasty in China there was a movement of Zen and Pure
Land syncretism. He thinks that Zen and Buddha-recitation combined, along with other disciplines
such as Taoism and Confucius’ teaching, could achieve a final liberation. There should be no
barrier between Zen and Pure Land, or any other practices. All kinds of practices can be
synchronised entirely without any tensions.
In conclusion, having discussed the two schools of Buddhism and how they find enlightenment,
both Pure Land Buddhism and Zen Buddhism can help one reach the enlightenment state through
dedicated practicing and watching every thought. Looking at similarities, they are both based on
Buddhist sutras, they can be practiced while doing anything, and they are both Mahayana type
schools of Buddhism. Key differences are Pure Land Buddhism relies on external forces for
salvation while Zen Buddhism relies on self-salvation; Pure Land Buddhism thinks the Zen method
is too hard a way to achieve enlightenment in one’s lifetime while Zen thinks Pure Land way is too
hard to measure in one’s life time; Pure Land is relying on the Buddha whereas Zen is about a
transfer from Master to student. However, these days with a chaotic lifestyle and many practicing at
home, the Zen way is now quite hard to achieve. A final argument suggests that both Pure Land
Buddhism and Zen Buddhism could be combined into one practice to increase the chance of
achieving the goal. Buddha always says, he has 84000 ways to reach the enlightenment, they are
like a medicine to kill every different kind of disease. But it is entirely up to the practitioner to find
out which kind of practice is most suitable for them.
Bibliography

Chang, C.-C., (1957). The Nature of Ch’an (Zen) Buddhism. Philosophy East and West 6, 333–355.

Gautama Buddha (2015). The Infinite Life Sutra: The Larger Sukhavativyuha Sutra by Gautama
Buddha

Ingram, P.O., (1973). The Zen Critique of Pure Land Buddhism. Journal of the American Academy
of Religion 41, 184–200

Master Hsuan Hua, (2009). The Surangama Sutra - A New Translation with Excerpts from the
Commentary by the Venerable Master Hsuan Hua

Shih, H., (1992). The syncretism of ch’an and pure land Buddhism, Asian thought and culture.
Lang, New York Berlin

Suzuki, D.T., (1982). What is Zen? The Eastern Buddhist 15, 1–8.

Suzuki, D.T., (1938). Zen Buddhism. Monumenta Nipponica 1, 48–57.

Tolle, E., (2001). The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment, 92 edition. ed. Mobius.

ta-shih, H., (1991). The lion’s roar: actualising Buddhism in daily life and building the Pure Land
in our midst /, Asian thought and culture; Peter Lang, New York