|
The Amazing "Fuke Zenji, Fuke Sect
& Fuke Shakuhachi" Legend Fabrication Hoax
It is, indeed, completely illogical and pretty incomprehensible how a 9th century alleged "madman" of a Chinese "Zen" Buddhist monk could ever have been made into the idol and inspirational source for 17th century unemployed samurai who had to turn to begging for their survival while they blew a variety of quite "simple" bamboo flutes in order to attract the attention of potential almsgivers.
There is so much to be explained and argued about in this regard - this introduction to the matter is only "the beginning".
Here follows, at first - for your general information - some
INDISPUTABLE KNOWLEDGE
1:
The Sōtō Sect of Japanese Zen Buddhism originated with and was transmitted in direct, unbroken line from the Chinese Ch'an/Zen monk Tung-shan Liang-chieh (Dongshan Liangjie) of the 9th century.
However, that "Zen sect" as such, the Sōtō, was first defined and organized quite some time later.
2:
The Rinzai Sect of Japanese Zen Buddhism originated with and was transmitted in direct, unbroken line from the Chinese Ch'an/Zen monk Lin-chi I-hsüan (Linji Yixuan) of the 9th century.
However, that "Zen sect" as well, the Rinzai, was first defined and organized quite some time afterwards, centuries later.
3:
The Ōbaku Sect of Japanese Zen Buddhism, however, was introduced and established in Japan by the Chinese Ch'an/Zen monk Yin-yüan Lung Ch'i (Yinyuan Longqi) of the Lin-chi/Rinzai line only during the middle decades of the 17th century.
Although the Ōbaku monks were granted shōgunal approval to establich a head temple of their own, the Manpuku-ji in Uji south of Kyōto, their school remained to be operating as but a sub branch of the Kyōto Rinzai Zen temple organization until the very end of the Edo Period - and even longer.
Then, entering the Meiji Period, only in 1876 was the Ōbaku branch eventually granted full independence as a
"genuine" Buddhist "sect" in its own right.
4:
Well now, as for the so called "Fuke Sect of Japanese Rinzai Zen Buddhism":
Fuke-shū, 普化宗???
That is indeed the pretty serious, rather controversial subject to be treated more on this web page:
The Chinese Ch'an Monk P'u-k'o, Ikkyū Sōjun, the Komosō
Beggars & the Imperialistic Catholic Christian Intruders
- the Rōnin Samurai, the Fuke-Komosō, the 1640 All Sects
Inspection Bureau, the Danka Seido System, the Komusō,
the Kyōto Myōan Temple - and: the 'Kyotaku denki' ... !
- The Non-False Narrative
FUKE-SHŪ
普化宗
The so called "Fuke Sect" of the shakuhachi playing Komusō
Fuke Zenji sculpture, Matsudo City Museum, Chiba, Japan.
Artist & dating unknown. Photo by Ron Nelson, 2015.
Fuke Zenji, in Chinese: P'u-k'o Ch'an-shi, was a contemporary of Rinzai Zenji,
in Chinese: Lin-chi Ch'an-shi, both of whom lived and practiced in China
during the first half of the 9th century CE.
For that reason, quite logically so, Fuke could never, in any way, be termed as a "Rinzai Zen monk".
That school/branch/lineage & transmission of Ch'an/Zen Buddhist philosophy thought only formulated and eventually established itself
after the death of Master Lin-chi/Rinzai - and of Fuke, too, for that matter.
Was the so called "Fuke Sect" of the Komusō ever properly, officially - and in actual preserved legal writing - recognized and approved by the supreme Japanese shōgunal authorities, locally or nationally?
The answer is, definitely so: "No"!
Read more on this particular web page:
The Chinese Ch'an Monk P'u-k'o, the Komosō Beggars
& the Imperialistic Catholic Christian Intruders
- the Rōnin Samurai, the Fuke-Komosō, the Komusō
& the Kyōto Myōan Temple - an Unbiased Narrative
Do remember, by the way, "You can never prove a lie to be true, you know ... " ☺
Update of Some Rather Serious Significance ☺
You are here welcome to study a full English translation of the mysterious komusō document commonly referred to as the "Enpō 5 Edict", dated January 11, 1678 - certainly not 1677-12-18!
Click in the picture to enlarge.
A reproduction of the 1678-1-11 Enpō 5 Oboe memorandum on display in the Komusō Collection, Matsudo City Museum, NW Chiba, Japan.
Photo by Ron Nelson, President of The International Shakuhachi Society, Summer, 2015.
Direct link to the webpage in question: 1678, January 11: The Komusō-ha Oboe Memorandum
Fabrication, Falsification, or Forgery?
Left: The 1678-1-11 Enpō 5 Oboe document reprinted in the monumental source collection Koji Ruien, 1880 edition.
Right: The 1678-1-11 Enpō 5 Oboe document reprinted in the Koji Ruien, 1938 edition.
To the very left in the original, handwritten document above you read these characters: 虚無僧諸派,
Komusō shoha, "(To) All Komusō Factions [or, Branches]".
In both of the two Koji ruien reprints we see these characters: 普化宗門諸派,
Fuke shūmon shoha, "(To) All "Fuke Sect" Factions [or, Branches]".
Obviously, both of the Koji ruien reprints of the Oboe must be rejected as "falsifications" compared with the handwritten version of the memorandum shown above them.
We can only conclude and respect that there was in fact so far no "Fuke Sect" in existence at the time the document was originally issued/dated, namely: January 11, 1678.
Moreover, oboe, 覚, is nothing but a "memorandum", a minor "regulation".
It is not a okite-gaki, 掟書, meaning "law", "regulation", "rule", "code", "law", "agreement", "arrangement".
Neither is it a hatto, 法度, meaning "law", "ban", "prohibition", "ordinance" .
And, it is certainly not a so called kō-nin, 公認, meaning "official recognition", "authorization", "license", "accreditation".
Direct link to the webpage in question: 1678, January 11: The Komusō-ha Oboe Memorandum
'普化尺八' - "FUKE SHAKUHACHI"
That Fundamentally Fantastic, Fairytale-like Flute - with the Forged Faith and that Funnily Falsified "Filosophy" ...
☺
To be continued and further elaborated ...
|
|
