information:filtering, quality:correction
Dharma transmission

An important feature of traditional Zen institutions is the use of dharma transmission (Chinese: 傳法 chuán fǎ) from master to disciple to pass on Zen lineages to the next generation. The procedure of dharma transmission, particularly the act of "authorization" or "confirmation" (印可, Ch: yìn kě, Jp: inka, K: inga), is considered to establish a Zen teacher as a direct successor of their master and to link them to a lineage which is traditionally believed to go back to the ancient Chinese patriarchs and to the Buddha himself. These transmissions are sometimes seen esoterically as the "mind to mind" transmission of the light of awakening from master to disciple. Scholars like William Bodiford and John Jorgensen have argued that this "ancestral" dimension of Zen which sees the school as an extended family is influenced by Confucian values, and that it is part of what allowed Zen to become such an influential form of Buddhism in East Asia.

Zen lineages often maintain Zen lineage charts which list all the teachers in their transmission lineage, establishing institutional legitimacy by claiming a direct link from the Buddha to the present. Indeed, according to Michel Mohr, the traditional view is that "it is through the transmission process that the identity and integrity of the lineage is preserved." Zen lineage narratives were further supported by "transmission of the lamp" texts (e.g. Jǐngdé Chuándēnglù), which contained stories of the past masters and legitimized Zen lineages. These texts could often be sectarian, favoring a specific lineage or school and they sometimes even led to conflict among the Zen schools. Furthermore, these Zen transmission narratives were often not historically accurate and contain mythological material developed over centuries in China. Their historicity has been recently critiqued by modern scholars.

The formal practice of dharma transmission is generally understood in two main ways by Zen traditions. It can be seen as a formal recognition of a disciple's deep spiritual realization, which is separate from clerical ordination. It could also be understood as an institutional procedure which ensures the transmission of a temple lineage.

The institutions of Dharma transmission have come under criticism in various times throughout Zen history. Zen masters like Linji and Ikkyū "were said to have refused to receive transmission certificates", seeing the procedure as corrupt and institutionalized. During the Ming dynasty, important masters like Hanshan Deqing, Zibo Zhenke, and Yunqi Zhuhong did not belong to any formal lineage. According to Jiang Wu, these eminent Ming Chan monks emphasized self-cultivation while criticizing formulaic instructions and nominal recognition. Wu writes that at this time "eminent monks, who practiced meditation and asceticism but without proper dharma transmission, were acclaimed as acquiring 'wisdom without teachers' (wushizhi)." Hanshan's writings indicate that he seriously questioned the value of dharma transmission, seeing personal enlightenment as what truly mattered in Zen.

In a similar fashion, several important medieval Japanese masters like Takuan Sōhō eschewed formal transmission and did not believe it was necessary since the Dharma was always available to be discovered within. Some of these figures were even considered "self-enlightened and self-certified" (jigo jishō), since they claimed to have achieved " wisdom without a teacher " (無師智, pinyin: wúshīzhì; Japanese: 無師独悟, mushi-dokugo). They include Suzuki Shōsan, and Myōshin-ji figures like Daigu, Ungo and Isshi. Modern Chinese Buddhists like Tanxu, Taixu and Yinshun also criticized dharma transmission, seeing it as a Chinese invention that was not taught by the Buddha. Taixu held that the practice led to sectarianism, and Tanxu wrote that it contributed to the decline of Zen. Yinshun believed that the Dharma was not something that could belong to anyone and thus it could not be "transmitted" in a lineage.