![]() |
| We can be contemplative wherever we go, not just in the church or temple |
These lines are traditionally attributed to Bodhidharma, perfectly capturing the essence of his teaching:
A special transmission outside the scripture
No dependence upon words or letter
Direct pointing to the soul (or "heart-mind") of man
Seeing into nature and attainment of Buddhahood.¹
The Taoist Marriage: Buddhism with Chinese Characteristics
While Bodhidharma provided the spark, Ch'an is a unique synthesis. When Indian Buddhist philosophy (specifically the "Emptiness" of the Madhyamaka school) met the native Chinese Taoist tradition, Ch'an was the result. It took abstract Indian metaphysics and grounded them in the Chinese love for nature, spontaneity, and "the Way" (the Tao). This explains why Ch'an feels less like a heavy religious system and more like a return to "Original Mind." It prioritizes Wu Wei (non-action or effortless action) over the rigid rituals often found in other sects.
Beyond the Intellect
It should be noted, however, that Ch'an doesn't scorn conceptual knowledge. Instead, it tries to avoid excessive intellectualization. This is an important distinction that many Buddhists and, perhaps, Gnostics seem to miss. There's nothing wrong with thinking and forming concepts, Ch'an says. As human beings we simply must do. And healthy thinking can even extend to trying to map out ultimate concerns—that is, to develop a cosmology. The problem, as Ch'an sees it, is when we cling to intellectual ideas without enough spiritual experience to justify doing so.
This tension between "thinking" and "experiencing" came to a head in the 7th century with Huineng, the Sixth Patriarch. He famously argued for Sudden Enlightenment, suggesting that our Buddha-nature isn't something we "build" through years of study, but something we "recognize" in a flash of insight. This shifted the focus from the library to the laundry room—finding the sacred in the mundane.
The Danger of "Sugar-Coated" Belief
We find this kind of excessive intellectualization not just in Asian religions, but in any immature fundamentalism where people "think" about what's right and what is, without any truly elevated experience behind their ideas. These people latch onto or proclaim a pet theory because doing so gives them social comfort and, perhaps, pays the bills (as in fundamentalist organizations that demand or pressure workers to believe in a particular interpretation of sacred scripture).²
Whether or not these workers actually believe in and privately follow what they outwardly display through their sugar-coated, squeaky clean work personas is another matter altogether. In Ch'an, this performative spirituality is seen as a "golden chain"—it's still a chain, even if it looks pretty.
Mindfulness in Motion: The Work Ethic
Another interesting feature of Ch'an is that its insights do not rely on seated meditation. Instead, a great deal of creative physical activity goes hand in hand with the inner quest. Unlike earlier Indian traditions where monks primarily relied on alms, Ch'an masters like Baizhang Huaihai pioneered a new monastic work ethic, famously declaring: "A day without work is a day without food."
As D. Howard Smith puts it:
The search for direct communication with the inner nature of things and the vision of a world beyond all opposites led to a great outpouring of creative art in China and Japan.³
So with Ch'an, we don't always find navel-gazing meditators who artificially try to remove themselves from all that the world has to offer. Instead, there seems to be more of a creative integration between the contemplative and creative aspects of the human self. This path arguably comes closer to the Hindu ideal of karma-yoga (the yoga of action). By chopping wood and carrying water with total presence, the Ch'an practitioner turns every mundane chore into a meditative act, effectively collapsing the wall between the "sacred" monastery and the "profane" world.
References
¹ Cited in S. G. F. Brandon, ed., Dictionary of Comparative Religion (1970), p. 186.
² Observations on institutional pressures and performative belief in modern structures.
³ D. Howard Smith in S. G. F. Brandon (1970), p. 187.

Comments