JKMann wrote:As for the place of Zen in popular and scholarly writing, I think you're spot on. There is certainly a lot more about that tradition than any other. Jodo (i.e. Pure Land) is the largest school of Buddhism in Japan, and you will be hard pressed to find a book about it in most bookstores. And I think you're exactly right as to the reasons. So, while the extensive writing on Zen overshadows other important influences, we're still left with this tricky question of how prevalent and influential Zen was compared to other schools of thought.
Re. the link you posted, that was an interesting read. I regret that I don't have the grounding in neo-Confucianism that I wish I had. I did think it was a bit odd that "ease of learning" was associated with schools that speak of humanity having the Truth within them, as if the quality of our True Self is somehow related to the ease of uncovering it. But that's a bit off topic.
Oh yeah, that's maybe another reason for it being under-recognized--neo-Confucian thought can make one's head hurt! Plus the concepts and terms between Zen and neo-Conf can overlap while having important differences. And as Kate points out, knowledge of other schools of Buddhism is often restricted. Research into these histories is daunting even to Japanese scholars, so it's no wonder that Zen gets most of the attention.
The big question is what any of this means to us in practice. Not a lot, maybe...but...I myself have started to feel inclined to see my practice as less connected to any kind of individual development and more related to my role in society, which might be an influence of a particular strand of thought.
As for maintaining mental calmness, history makes more inclined to say there must be many ways--from religious practice to various forms of meditation to purely physical practice--that can help, and one can only choose what is best for oneself.
Aaron

