POJO CHINUL ]y‰° AND KANHWA SN ‡±Œ: RECONCILING THE LANGUAGE OF MODERATE AND RADICAL SUBITISM

ROBERT E. BUSWELL, JR.

Among the many contributions Pojo Chinul ] y ‰° (1158
1210) made to Korean Buddhism, perhaps none is more important to the subsequent history of the tradition than his role in introducing the new technique of meditation on the ‘critical phrase’ or ‘keyword’ (kanhwa Sn, Ch. kànhuà Chán ‡±Œ) into its practice (Buswell 1989:20
44). Chinul was the first Korean Buddhist teacher to write about the kanhwa technique and to actively promote its use. Even though kanhwa Sn was but one among a whole panoply of meditation styles that Chinul taught, his championing of the technique late in his life eventually led to its predominance in Korean Buddhist praxis. However, the approach to kanhwa Sn that Chinul outlines in his writings differs in some important respects from that which becomes normative within the Chinese Línjì/Imje u tradition. The most crucial of these differences is the accommodation Chinul achieves between his preferred soteriology of sudden awakening/gradual cultivation (tono chmsu, Ch. dùnwù jiànxi ËMs)—what I term a ‘moderate subitism’—and kanhwa practice.

The interpretation of kanhwa Sn that is generally accepted in the Línjì School views the technique as involving what I have elsewhere termed ‘radical subitism,’1 that is, the soteriological stratagem of sudden awakening/sudden cultivation (tono tonsu, Ch. dùnwù dùnxi ËMË). Where kanhwa Sn is viewed as radical subitism, the technique is claimed to focus exclusively on the enlightenment experience itself, the presumption being that a full and complete awakening would automatically perfect any and all forms of

1 I have examined the evolution of this meditation technique in Chinese Chán Buddhism in Buswell 1987:321
377; I include there references to relevant works in both Japanese and Western scholarship. For kanhwa practice in Korea, see Buswell 1986:199
242, and especially 216
226. I draw freely on these and other of my works in this chapter. 346 ROBERT E. BUSWELL, JR. cultivation, thus rendering both awakening and practice as ‘sudden.’ In order to reconcile this new system of kanhwa Sn with his preferred soteriology of moderate subitism, Chinul has to negotiate a quite considerable divide in the Chán use of language, between the more accommodative stance toward the scholastic argot found in the writings of Guf ng Zngmì .A8: (780
841) and the more radically iconoclastic Línjì use of language. It is this negotiation that will be the subject of this chapter.

Chinul’s Preferred Soteriology of Moderate Subitism

Chinul discusses the sudden/gradual issue in several of his writings, including his earliest work, Kwn su Chnghye kylsa mun !9Q ŠX (Encouragement to Practice: The Compact of the Samdhi and Prajñ Community), written in 1190, and, Susim kyl J¯ (Secrets on Cultivating the Mind), composed between 1203 and 1205 and arguably his most popular treatise. However, his most extensive examination of this question appears in his magnum opus, Ppchip pyrhaengnok chryo pyngip sagi mƧ© ® (Excerpts from the Dharma Collection and Special Practice Record with Personal Notes; hereafter Excerpts), completed in 1209, one year before his death. Excerpts was intended to present a comprehensive accounting of earlier analyses of Buddhist soteriology in Chinese sources. His treatment includes copious quotations from relevant sources on the subject, accompanied by an exposition (his ‘personal notes’) that sought to resolve the discrepancies in those variant interpretations. Chinul’s purpose in Excerpts was not solely theoretical, however. Fearing that an improper understanding of the regimen of praxis would hinder spiritual development, Chinul meant for his account of soteriology to serve as a vade mecum for students of meditation. Hence, his explication of this issue was always accompanied by an examination of the practical applications of the theory. Unlike many Chán and Sn masters, then, Chinul strongly advocated that even Sn practitioners required a firm grasp of Buddhist doctrine if their practice was to succeed.