By Daniel Scharpenburg
This is a regular column where I answer questions that are sent to me. As a spiritual teacher, I am often asked many questions and I’d love to have an opportunity to answer them all.
So, if there is anything you wanted to know about Buddhism, send me some questions. You can email me here: zenteacher@thetattooedbuddha.com
Thanks.
Q. I’ve been practicing in the Shambhala lineage and I’ve heard a lot about Zen. I’ve always wondered what the difference are between Zen Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism. Can you explain?
A. People ask me this a lot.
Zen is my favorite Buddhist tradition and I think everyone knows that. But, I am part of a non-sectarian Tibetan Buddhist community, and I love this community very much. I volunteer there and I teach classes there.
But sometimes people—especially people who follow my writing—ask me questions about Zen.
An entire book could be written on the subject, I’m sure. But I will answer as briefly as I can so that it’s not so long that no one reads it.
Here in the West Zen and Tibetan style are the two most well known branches of Buddhism.
Tibetan Buddhism is really well known. This is largely due to the popularity of the Dalai Lama and the efforts of Chogyam Trungpa, and there are other factors as well. But worldwide, Tibetan Buddhism is actually not all that common. It’s usually considered the smallest branch of Buddhism, even with all of it’s different lineages. It only seems big here. There are branches of Buddhism like Pure Land that are really common in Asia, but have barely taken root here.
Zen, on the other hand, is common here and worldwide as well. It’s been here in the West longer (since the late 1800s at least) and it’s taken root in a lot of places.
So, here we go.
Zen really emerged as a distinct sect when Buddhism entered China and Buddhist ideas merged with some of the Taoist philosophy that was already there. Tibetan Buddhism emerged when Buddhism entered Tibet and Buddhist ideas merged with the religion that was already present—a shamanic religion called Bon—that included a lot of things like nature spirits and ancestor worship.
Because that’s what Buddhism does. It mingles with whatever cultures are there already. Buddhism adapts to local conditions in a way that other religions don’t always. It’s a very versatile spiritual path. Zen Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism both have several different lineages that emphasize different things, so I can only really write about this in broad strokes right now, although I may go deeper in a later article.
The really short answer is this: Zen Buddhism is minimalist and Tibetan Buddhism is much more elaborate.
Zen meditation is mainly about following the breath as well as emptying the mind. It also includes a few deeper things like meditative inquiry and riddles. Tibetan meditation often includes things like mantras and visualizations and concentrating on really complex thoughts.
Tibetan Buddhism is more what we would think of as religious. There are a number of divine beings and Bodhisattvas that are talked about, visualized, and even prayed to. There are also very complex rituals and prayers. Zen Buddhism has rituals too. Practitioners are expected to bow a certain way and enter the temple a certain way, but things are just a less complicated.
And how are they similar?
They both talk about lineage. Who your teacher was matters a great deal. They both emphasize Buddha nature—the teaching that we are Enlightened already—we just have to realize it.
I don’t think one is better than the other. They are both authentic forms of Buddhism. If you like elaborate ritual, then Tibetan style is probably right for you. If you don’t, then Zen might be a better choice.
Photo: kelledia/tumblr
Editor: Dana Gornall
Comments
He specializes in bringing meditation practice and Buddhism to people in a practical way that applies to real life.
Find out more about Daniel here and connect with him on Facebook
- Review of The Power of Mind: A Tibetan Monk’s Guide to Finding Freedom in Every Challenge {Book Review} - August 23, 2022
- The Path to Peace: A Buddhist Guide to Cultivating Loving Kindness by Ayya Khema {Book Review} - July 21, 2022
- That is Not Your Mind! Zen Reflections on the Surangama Sutra {Book Review} - July 16, 2022
“Zen really emerged as a distinct sect when Buddhism entered China and Buddhist ideas merged with some of the Taoist philosophy that was already there. Tibetan Buddhism emerged when Buddhism entered Tibet and Buddhist ideas merged with the religion that was already present—a shamanic religion called Bon—that included a lot of things like nature spirits and ancestor worship.”
This sounds as if there was nothing like nature spirits and ancestor worship in China at that time when in actual fact there has been a long and strong tradition of such things in China and it still continues in the Chinese diaspora in places such as Taiwan, Malaysia & Singapore. Zen actually developed alongside these other traditions so what happened in Tibet? Why did they take on so much religiosity while Zen didn’t?
Thanks for commenting, Bob.
There are a couple of historical differences. While it is true that China has long had a tradition of things like that, China also has had several competitive philosophies. Taoists see things one way, Confucians see things another way, etc. The Tibetans didn’t have those kinds of divisions.
But there’s something more that I didn’t go into because this was intended to be a short article.
The down to earth style of the early Zen tradition is only a part of the story of Buddhism in China. There were competing sects that arose in China; Huayan, Tiantai, Pure Land, and others.
While Zen has been the tradition that has been most successful at taking root in the west, there are actually more Pure Land Buddhists that any other sect of Buddhism in the world, even today. We don’t usually think about the Pure Land Buddhists because they’re barely here.
So, Zen really arose because it responded to one aspect of Chinese culture, not to Chinese culture as a whole.
Several Buddhist traditions spread into Tibet, but there was a point where the king decided to banish most of them and that’s really why only those that melded with Bon most seamlessly remained.
I hope this answers your question.
While there was definitely competition amongst the different philosophies in China many Chinese practised some aspects of the main ones. They applied Buddhism, Daoism & Confucianism for different objectives. They practised reciting Omituofo so they would have a good rebirth in Amitabha’s Pureland. They consulted Daoist priests for divination & practised the filial piety of Confucianism. Also the spirit worship practices of Shen Jiao, the folk religion, were popular. In 1983-84 I saw this in practice in Taiwan. There were even temple complexes where Daoist priests practised divination in one hall while Buddhist monks recited sutras in front of name plates of the dead in another hall, all of this for a fee or donation. But there was also a minority who strictly adhered to one or another and didn’t mix them.
I think Vajrayana had already developed a lot of ritual when Padmasambhava brought it to Tibet. There is so much Indian culture in the Tibetan rituals. We also should remember that under Trisong Detsen Tibet was under-going an expansionist period and aggressively invading neighbouring regions. This bought them into contact with many different religions. They were aware of the differences but still remained true to Vajrayana. I’m still not clear about why Vajrayana prevailed in Tibet. Was it due to political reasons or simply because the King favoured it over the others.
There’s a story they tell. It’s probably semi-fictional.
It’s said that the king really wanted to make sure that the best school of Buddhism was the one that they practiced in Tibet so he hosted a great debate between a Vajrayana teacher from India named Kamalashila and a Zen teacher from China named Moheyan. It just so happened that these were the two schools of Buddhism that had been showing up in Tibet the most.
We can only speculate on what would have happened if there had been Theravada teachers or Tiantai teachers or Pure Land teachers, etc.
They say that the Zen teacher lost the debate and the king declared that only Vajrayana Buddhism from India was authentic and all other Buddhism had to be cast out of Tibet. However, all of that being said…Moheyan had a lot of students and they didn’t all leave. They just became Vajrayana Buddhists and a little Zen influence did trickle into Tibetan Buddhism, especially in regards to teachings like Dzogchen.
There’s a wonderful book called “Tibetan Zen” by Sam van Schaik on the subject.
This is the best explanation of the difference I have ever read. You do an amazing job of clarifying things. Most people are unable to write that well.
I was introduced to Tibetan Buddhism years ago but only follow it as a philosophy. In actuality, I think my practice is a combination of Tibetan and Zen Buddhism. I’m a huge fan of the 14th Dalai Lama. Read many of his books as well as biographies on him. Mainly it is his philosophies that I learn from. With his own interest and curiosity in science, etc., he feels less out of touch than other religious leaders around the world. (Note that I’m agnostic. Again, practice Buddhism as a philosophy.)
Thich Nhat Hanh is another favorite. Books, audio recordings, and more. His teachings on mindfulness have been formative for me. I just discovered your blog, so I haven’t looked at your other posts yet. But have you done a blog post on the high-level difference between meditation and mindfulness? I find that Americans nearly always use these two words interchangably and seem to believe they are the same. My best way I explain the difference to them is mindfulness is being more aware of the world around you instead of being stuck in your head (which I know it isn’t totally, but I usually only have a few moments of their attention). And meditation is a when you spent at least a few minutes focusing your attention on something (like your breath). I try to explain that you can practice mindfulness while driving but can’t do the same with meditation.
I know, I know. There is much more and the above isn’t totally accurate. But, again, the attention span of us Americans is ridiculous.
I ask if you’ve blogged about this because I would be very interested on your take on the differences between the two.