The Camaldolese Institute
for East-West Dialogue

Glistening Frost and Cooking Sand: Unalterable Aspects of Purity in Ch'an Buddhist Mediation

by Dr. Martin Verhoeven

I propose to map out briefly the commonality of approach to "knowledge "-derived-from-practice (especially contemplative) that undergirds a broadly shared spiritual worldview of East Asia and much of South Asia, one that is essentially orthopraxic and built upon certain common ideas about the nature of religious experience and ultimate goals.

I offer for consideration a translation (from the Chinese) of one section of the Shurangama Sutra called "the Four Unalterable Aspects of Purity" (from which the two phrases "glistening frost" and "cooking sand" in my title are taken).

I then refer specifically to two ch'an monks who, though widely divergent in time (Han Shan from the 16th c., Hsu Yun from the late 19th-early 20th.), demonstrate remarkable similarity in their understanding and practice of meditation. (This was also true of my own teachers: Wei Sung, Hsuan Hua, and Hai Deng). Both also allude to and take guidance from the same Shurangama Sutra which details the methods, purposes and pitfalls, and states associated with ch'an meditation.

In brief: the text and the interpreters of the text outline a precise and explicit formula for the proper cultivation of meditation; one that begins in four aspects of "purity," develops into deepening levels of concentration (samadhi), and culminates in wisdom (prajna, or insight). Without an exact and diligent adherence to this formula, both the text itself and the monks given as examples, warn of incomplete, unreliable, and even dangerous results.

The talk/paper is meant to be suggestive and exploratory. I would invite discussion on a number of possible implications of this text. Does the ch'an practice as outlined in the text and lives of these monks suggest essential aspects of meditation practice that endure despite differences in time, place, culture? Are there Christian parallels? Are these psychologically and spiritually rooted (rather than theologically or doctrinally-based) and thus cut across boundaries to unite serious contemplatives from disparate traditions along a common path? What are the inducements and caveats (if any) of borrowing particular meditation practices from other systems? In other words, while it is true that mediation can be (indeed, should be) practiced without creeds, doctrinal positions, or orthodoxies, can it be practiced with them?