MAV BE XEROXED

which he pmvidea mnslalims of sdstimu from MaNyina Buddhist mu which nre
mnsidcrcd importpnt in Zen Buddhism. In Ihis manner, S d not only inha(uced a
mdaslood. Lmy A. Fds, in his uibute to Smki, 'D. T. SuzuWs Conuibulion m he
Wcst, writes:
With the publication of Manual of 2.911 Iluddhian, Suruld bcliev+d that he had
brought to the Wssta et of materiala ~crrnry for a well-- m&maadQ
of ZBI. 7%C Mmd was intended m mmplcmcnt his d y lnrrodvcrion to Zn
~ i n w h i c h t h e ~ t i a l ~ o f Z e n n r e d i ~ ~ d
l?~ Tmining @fa Zcn Monk in which moMstic dhuls and pmsim are
kribcd.'
S d slra i d d hadaton of ocher Mahirm texts rueh as Faul Cams and Dwight
Goddard.- Thus, mmwhat indinQly, Suruld's inkqmtatim of & ~ uddh~ was
Kpour ma when KuMlac mnmW on MPhiyina tau, mcb as the
Zdm8am Sam, and rcjccfed Zen Buddhism as me^:"
In pnsenting Zen Buddhinm to the Wcst, Suruld used paychologispl and
mythologid terms, &a than stresing the hislorid dmlopment of the digion.
ladcrd, Suruld claims that ZBI cannot k undFntODd in an historical mmt, writing:
a ~nny A. ~der, m. T. suzu~i's ~ muibh m the west,' in uasao ~ b(mi.), c
AZenl&D. T. Suo*1Rmmbend~Ynk: Wcsllurhill, 1986), p. 1W.
lbid., p. 99.
-Kpour. in Al Amnowio. ?he Yen for Zen.' Eummd.? MI. 6 (Ocl. 1%01.
# in k, S@ in ~&vn md: llllc~i& &i lack KC&, ~ i &
whie (d.), (New Yak: muman Books, 1990). p. 92.