The movement of Chan beyond China unfolded less as a single campaign and more as a web of pilgrimages, teacher–disciple relationships, and cultural exchanges. Monks traveled between regions, studied under renowned masters, and then returned home bearing teachings, texts, and monastic codes. This pattern allowed Chan to take root organically, adapting to local cultures while preserving a recognizable continuity of lineage and practice. Rather than relying on mass proselytizing, Chan spread through the quiet authority of lived example and the prestige of Chinese Buddhist culture.

In Korea, where the tradition came to be known as Seon, the transmission began when Korean monks journeyed to Chinese Chan centers and later founded distinctive schools upon their return. Over time, these lineages crystallized into influential monastic networks that shaped Korean Buddhist life. In Vietnam, Chan—there called Thiền—likewise arrived early through contact with Chinese monks and through Vietnamese practitioners who trained in China. The resulting forms of Thiền integrated Chan teachings with existing local and regional Buddhist currents, creating a character that was both recognizably Chan and distinctly Vietnamese.

Japan received Chan as Zen through several important waves of transmission, especially when Japanese monks traveled to Chinese monasteries and later established new schools at home. Figures such as Eisai and Dōgen, having trained in specific Chan lineages, introduced Rinzai and Sōtō Zen along with associated meditation methods, monastic regulations, and philosophical emphases. Their efforts were reinforced by the broader admiration for Chinese culture and by political support that enabled Zen institutions to flourish. In this way, Chan’s spirit was preserved while its expression was reshaped by Japanese religious and social conditions.

Beyond East Asia, Chan and its Zen and Seon counterparts eventually reached Western countries through immigration, missionary activity, and the efforts of teachers who presented these traditions to new audiences. Monasteries and meditation centers were established, and translations of key texts, along with interpretive writings, made Chan thought more accessible. Throughout these movements, the core mechanism of transmission remained the intimate bond between teacher and student, formal lineage recognition, and the sharing of scriptures, recorded sayings, and gong’an or kōan collections. The spread of Chan thus illustrates how a contemplative tradition can travel widely while remaining anchored in direct experiential practice and disciplined community life.