Chun-Fang Yu

Journal of Chinese Philosophy

15 (1988)


1988 by Dialogue Publishing Company,Honolulu,Hawaii, U.S.A

. P.371 Neo - Confucianism was from its beginning highly critical of Buddhism. Buddhism was frequently criticized as being other-worldly,having no positive and concrete programs for social reform. The central Buddhist teaching of void [Kung(a) or sunyata] was often taken as negativism, or even worse, nihilism, by the unsympathetlc critic. Individual Chinese Buddhist monks and nuns were, moreover, faulted for their renunciation of familial ties and withdrawal from productive participation in the affairs of society. For example, Ch'eng I(b) (1033-1107), criticized" the Buddha and the Buddhists for their renunciation of human relationships. In deserting his father and leaving his family,the Buddha severed all human relationships. It was merely for himself that he lived alone in the forest. Such a person should not be allowed in any community...The Buddhists themselves will not abide by the principles of the relationship between the ruler and minister, between father and son, and between husband and wife, and criticize others for not doing as they do. They leave these human relationships to others and have relationships nothing to do with them. They set themselves apart as a special class. If this is the way to lead the people, it will be the end of the human race.(1) Ch'eng I therefore condemned the Buddhists for their selfishness. The Buddhists were selfish, moreover, for another reason. Ch'eng thought that the Buddhists tried to escape from life and its inherent problems instead of attempting to deal with them (2) . Chu Hsi(c) (l130-1200) attack- P.372 ed Buddhism from a philosophical angle, contrasting Buddhism with Confucianism: The Buddhists are characterized by vacuity, whereas we confucianists are characterized by concreteness. The Buddhists are characterized by duality [of Absolute Emptiness and the illusory world ], whereas we Confucianists are characterized by unity [one principle governing all].(3) Chu Hsi characterized Buddhism as empty and dualistic: the former because of its teaching of the void, the latter because of its supposed dichotomy between this world and absolute reality. Chu Hsi did not understand the meaning of void, but took it literally as "non- existent" or "nothingness." This is how he interpreted the famous statement, "matter itself is voidness, voidness itself is matter," found in the Heart sutra as well as other Mahayana scriptures: But according to the doctrines of the Buddhists, everything is 'non-existent.' What has gone by is non-existent, and what today lies beneath our eyes is also non-existent. Phenomenal matter is the same as 'emptiness' and 'emptiness' is the same as 'phenomenal matter'...One may eat rice the livelongday, and they [the Buddhists] will say that one has not chewed a single grain. One may wear clothes the livelong day, and they will say that one has not put on a single piece of fabric(4) Buddhists in the Ming (1368-1644) were well aware of these charges which had been traditionally directed against them. They tried on the one hand to defend Buddhism by showing that these charges arose out of misunderstanding. We may call this approach defensive. On the other hand, however, they argued that many of the cardinal teachings of Confucianism were similar,if not identical, to Buddhist teachings. Neo-Confucians, particularly the Neo-Confucians of the Ch'eng-Chu(e) school had failed to grasp the original true "method of mind" (hsin-fa) (f) of Confucius. These Neo-Confucians were not true Confucians, otherwise p.373 they would not have disapproved of Buddhism. We may then call this second response offensive. These two kinds of responses are found in the writings of Tzu-po Chen-k'og (1543-1603),(5) Han-shan Te-ch'ing (h) (1546-1623),(6) and Ou-i Chin-hsu(i) (1599-1655) , (7) who together with Yun-chi Chu-hung(j) (1535-1615),(8) have been called the four great Buddhist masters of the late Ming. Before taking up their defensive response, it may be useful to recall that one of the most important teachings of Mahayana Buddhism is the non-duality of the Absolute and phenomenal world. In the light of the Middle Way which expresses the insight of voidness, there is no dichotomy of the sacred and the profane, of Ultimate Reality and the illusory world ﹒ The dichotomy is created by man's habitual pattern of thought, and it is bom out of his ignorance. Enlightenment lies in the elimination and non-production of such dichotomizing. All major Chinese Buddhist schools such as the Hua-yen,(k) T'ien-t'ai(l) and Ch'an(m) would therefore object to Chu Hsi's characterization of Buddhism as maintaining a philosophy of duality. They would instead emphasize the exact opposite. The ultimate reality which can be called by different names ("One Mind," "True Suchness," "Dharmadhatu" or simply "Buddha nature") is non-dual. The non-duality of the noumenal and phenomenalis eloquently set forth in the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, a classic text popular in the Ming. In this work, Reality is called Ture Scuchness (chen-ju(n), tathataa), One Mind (i-hsing(o)) or the Womb of the Tathagata (Ju-lai-tsang(p), Tathaagata-garbha ). "The Mind includes in itself all states of being of the phenomenal world and the transcendental world."(9) This Mind has two aspects. One is the aspect of Mind in terms of the Absolute (tathata, Suchness) and the other is the aspect of Mind in terms of phenomena (samsara,birth and death ). Each of these two aspects embraces all states of existence. Why? Because these two aspects are mutually inclusive.(10) The Awakening of Faith uses three terms - t'i(q) (substance), hsiang(r) attributes) and yung(s) (function) - to explain the different aspects of the Mind.(11) Hui-ssu(t) (515-577), the great T'ien-t'ai patriarch, followed p.374 the usage. However, he only used t'i and yung to refer to the two aspects of the Mind. This mind embodies the functioning of the two natures, impure and pure, so that it is capable of generating both thisworldly and other-worldly things.... The storehouse in its substance (t'i) is everywhere the same, and in actual fact is undifferentiated. In this respect it is the 'empty' Tathaagatagarbha. In its functioning (yung), on the other hand, it is unimaginably diverse, and therefore embodies the natures of all things and is differentiated. In this respect, it is the 'nonempty' Tathaagatha-grabha.(12) While the t'i or essence of the Mind is void, original enlightenment, and ultimate truth (chen-ti,(u) paramartha satya). the yung or functioning aspect of the Mind can be regarded as the phenomenal world, non-elightenment, and relative truth (su-ti(v), samvrtti satya). The two aspects do not stand for two separate realms or two distinct realities. Rather, "Ignorance does not exist apart from enlightenment."(13) The Awakening of Faith uses the simile of the ocean and its waves to illustrate the relationship between the two aspects. This is like the relationship that exists between the water of the ocean [i.e., enlightenment] and its waves [i.e., modes of mind] stirred by the wind [i.e. ignorance]. Water and wind are inseparable, but water is not mobile by nature, and if the wind stops, the movement ceases. But the wet nature remains undestroyed. Likewise, man's Mind, pure in its own nature, is stirred by the wind of ignorance. But Mind and ignorance have no particular forms of their own and they are inseparable. Yet Mind is not mobile by nature, and if ignorance ceases, then the continuity of deluded activities ceases. But the essential nature of wisdom [i.e., the essence of Mind, like the wet nature of the water] remains undestroyed.(14) p.375 Ignorance and the agitation of the mind created by ignorance are the reasons why we see a worId of phenomena separate from Reality. Ming Buddhists,following this view, stressed the non-duality of the two and thereby gave a more positive value to the phenomenal world in relation to the Mind. In thie defense of Buddhism, Ming Buddhists concentrated on the issue of voidness. Voidness is not nothingness. Both Chen-k'o(w) and Tech'ing(x) felt that the label "door of emptiness" (k'ung-men(y)) attached to Buddhism was incorrect and objectionable. Chen-k'o said, "Our Saha world and the worlds of sentient beings in the ten directions are all rooted in emptiness (ken yu k'ung(z)). Emptiness, moreover is rooted in Mind." Sentient beings have long been attached to the view of existence (yu(aa)). That is why buddhas and bodhisattvas use the teaching of "void" to cure our illness of attaching ourselves to "existence." But, People in the world do not know the intention of buddhas and bodhisattvas. Since they read in the sutras and sastras many discussions of emptiness they then conclude that Buddhism takes emptiness as the way and, therefore, label Buddhism as the 'door of emptiness'. They fail to understand that if the sentient beings' illness of being stuck in 'existence' is cured, then buddhas and bodhisattvas will have no place to apply their medicine of emptiness. In fact, Chen-k'o went on to say, buddhas and bodhisattvas also warn us against our becoming attached to emptiness. To cure the latter illness, which is indeed as serious as the first kind of illness, buddhas and bodhisattvas apply the "wondrous medicine" (miao-yao(ab)). Buddhas and bodhisattvas teach the Dharma in the same manner a good physician prescribes medicine or a good general deploys soldiers. Are the medicines prescribed or soldiers employed always the same? One must observe the condition of the patient and the enemy.(15) p.376 Te-ch'ing expressed a similar view: The so-called emptiness is not the empliness of nothingness. This is just like the proverb,'[He acts] as if there was nobody near. Does it really mean that there is nobody near him? Rather it means that because of his pride he does not see anyone in front of him. The so-called illusion (huan(ac)) is not the illusion when one hallucinates; it simply means that even though something exists, it is not real. lt is Just like a magician creating the illusion of people inside a tube. There is originally not a thing in the tube, yet suddenly the images appear. But, even if they appear to be existent, they are not real. Since they are not real, we must say that they are fundamentally nonexistent. From fundamental non-existence, we speak of emptiness...Buddha spoke of 'emptiness' in order to break ordinary people's attachment to [the belief in] real existence. But, it is not nihilism or extinction. Because it was feared that people of the world would fall into the [heretical] view of extinction, so illusion was suggested to dispell the view of extinction...The emptiness is real emptiness (chen-k'ung(ad) ) when one views emptiness from the perspective of illusory existence (huan-y(ae) ). The so-called existence is called 'wondrous existence' (miao-yu(af) ) because the illusory existence is fundamentally non-existent.(16) Te-ch'ing blamed the "gentlemen of the world" and, interestingly, not fellow monks, for giving Buddhism the bad image of being the "door of emptiness." He said, They have lofty aspirations and want to study Buddhism. So they leave the secular life trying to imitate ascetics who are like dead wood. They consider this to be a wondrous deed ﹒ But our Buddha had long ago condemned this kind of people as withered sprouts (chiao-ya(ag)) and decayed seeds (paichung(ah)), for they could not mingle in the world to benefit p.377 sentient beings. What the earlier Confucians referred to as believers in emptiness and extinction were, therefore, long ago rejected by our Buddha. Buddhism only values the bodhisattvas who benefit themselves and others... Forsaking the world, a bodhisattva will have no deed by which he can cultivate himself. Forsaking the sentient beings, a bodhisattva will have no means to cut off his afflictions.(17) As if he intended it to be a direct response to Ch'eng I's charge that Buddhists were negligent in fulfilling human responsibilities, Te-ch'ing wrote an essay called "On the Foundation of Conduct" (Lun hisng-pen(ai)) He argued that Buddhism places utmost importance on the way of humanity (jen-tao(aj)). Only as a human being can a person become enlightened. That was why the Buddha chose to be born as a man and went through the experiences of a man. The way of humanity consists of the five cardinal relationships stressed by Confucianism. The Buddha forsook the world, according to Te-ch'ing, not because he negated the importance of the sovereign, father, husband or son, but because he wanted to teach people the danger of desire. The Buddha did so precisely because he wanted to perfect the way of humanity, as his behavior towards his parents after his enlightment clearly proved. This is a remarkably bold and ingenious way of defending Buddhism. Even though Buddhism has always emphasized the importance of the realm of humanity -- enlightment is only possible for a human being -- yet it is definitely unusual, if not unorthodox, to see Buddhism identified with the "Way of Humanity." The traditional view is that the Buddha preached the Dharma for all sentient beings (chung-sheng(ak)) and not just human beings. Therefore, Buddhism has relevance and saving power for all beings, and not just mankind. Te-ch'ing wrote: One Mind manifests into the images (hsiang(r)) of the ten realms. Therefore,the four saintly realms and the six realms of common beings are shadows and echoes of the One Mind. p.378 Cultivation, progress, stages and differences are established on the basis of the vehicle of men (jen-cheng(al)). Therefore , we know that humanity is the basis of both ordinary beings and sages.. If we forsake the way of humanity, there is no place to establish the Buddha Dharma. lf there were no Buddha Dharma, there would also be no way to exhaust the One Mind. Therefore, the Buddha Dharma takes the way of humanity as its basis. And the way of humanity relies upon the Buddha Dharma for its ultimate destination... The so-called 'Way of Humanity' is no other than the daily constant way between ruler and subject, father and son, husband and wife. If the ruler behaves as a ruler, subject behaves as a subject, father as father, son as son, then everyone will have no self-consciousness or knowledge, no greed or competition. Then this world would be a paradise and there would be no need for any sage. Unfortunately, humar beinngs are born out of sensuous desires and they die because of same. What are sensuous desires? They are money, lust, fame, food and sleep. Because of these five, there arises the mind of greed and lust and the calamity of competition and attack. In the end the ruler cannot act as ruler, nor the subject as subject, the father as father, the son as son. Even the reward and punishment of former, kings cannot inhibit their unruly minds. Because of one's insatiable desire, one creates limitless sufferings for the future. That is why the Buddha says with compassion that greed and desire are the basic causes of all kinds of suffering. If greed and desire are extinguished, then there is nowhere one can attach oneself. The Buddha appeared in the triple world and shared suffering together with the people and told them the essential way of departing from desire and sorrow. Moreover, he did not stay in heaven but was born in the human realm. This is to show that cause and effect in the ten realms are p.379 all built on the basis of the way of men. Since he was situated in the way of men he could not but know it. Therefore our sage, the Buddha, was not born from emptiness. He let Suddhodana be his father and Maayaa his mother, so that he showed the relationships of sovereign and parent. He took Yasodharaa as his wife to show the relationship of husband and wife. He had Rahula as his son to show the relationship of father and son. But he had to leave his parents to become a monk, not because he negated the importance of sovereign and parent, but in order to cut off the love for them. He forsook the glory of ruling a state in order to show that fame and profit were burdens. He separated from his wife and son in order to show the danger of greed and desire... But after he became the Buddha, he came back to the palace to carry the coffin of his father. He went up to Tushita Heaven to preach to his [dead] mother. This clearly shows that the Buddhist way does not ignore the way of filial piety. He preached the Dharma in the world of men in order to show that the way of humanity is the easiest to achieve enlightenment. He relied on kings and ministers to protect the Dharma in order to show that one should not transgress against the secular law when one lives in the world of men.(18) For Te-ch'ing, then, the goal of Buddhiam was not only not contrary to that of Confucianism, but totally compatible to it. Ch'an Buddhism speaks of becoming a Buddha right away. lt means that when one suddenly realizes one's self-nature, one becomes right away a sage... When the nature is thoroughly fulfilled you can use it to serve the ruler, and that is true loyalty. You can use it to serve your parents, and that is true filial piety. You can use it to treat your friends well, and that is true trust. You can use it to deal with your spouse, and that is true harmony. When you apply it to the world, then no p.380 matter what you do, each single deed will be an immortal accomplishment.(19) In a talk with his lay follower, Te-ch'iang urged him to observe the Confucian five constant virtues, (wu-ch'ang(am)) for they were similar to the Buddhist five precepts. Therefore, "if a person holds the precepts but ignores the five constant virtues, what is the use of these precepts?" Moreover, one can also find the Confucian equivalent of meditation and samadhi in Confucius' reply to Yen Hui about humanity. Confucius said that to master oneself and return to propriety is humanity. "To master oneself" is to break the attachment to self (wo-chih(an)) which, for Te-ch'ing, is the essence of Ch'an meditation. Therefore, Te-ch'ing sees the wonder of sudden elightenment in the next sentence. "If a man can for one day master himself and return to propriety, all under heaven will return to humanity." For the world (t'ien-hsia(ao)) comes to exist as a result of the opposition (tui-tai(ap)) and obstruction (chang-ai(aq)) between things and oneself. When the attachment to self is broken, then myriad things will become the same as oneself. Is not "returning to humanity, " then, the effect of sudden enlightenment? Te-ch'ing next turned his exegetical attention to the two expressions "the mind of Tao (tao-hsin(ar))" and "the mind of man (jen-hsin(as))" and found their equivalents in Buddhist reality (chen(ak)) and delusion (wang(as)). Tao-hsin is the nature which is neither confused nor deluded, but jen--hsin is the feeling which comes about when the nature becomes confused. People of the world only know how to use their feelings but not their nature. They only know waves but they do not know that waves are originally not different from water. Confucius says that we are similar in nature but become far apart through habit. The water which is originally waveless is our nature, but when we chase after the waves and forget about the water, we become far apart through habit...Yao and Shun are the same as ordinary people as far as nature is concerned. What sets them apart fr is our delusion.(20) p.381 Te-ch'ing applied Buddhist interpretation to three Confucian texts. In 1597 he wrote Chung-yung chin-chin(av) ("Direct Pointing [to the Mind in] the Doctrine of Mean "), in 1604, Ch'un-ch'iu Tso-shin hsin-fa(aw) ("The Method of Mind in the Spring and Autumn Annals with the Tso Commentary and in l611, Ta-hsueh chueh-i(ax) ("Resolution of Doubts in the Great Learning") .(21) Sun-peng Hsu(ay) discusses Te-ch'ing's commentary on the Chung-yung(az) and Ta-hsueh(ba) briefly in his book. For instance, the title of Chung-yung received the following explanation from Te-ch'ing. What is called chung(bb) is the whole essence (t'i(q)) of everyone's original nature (hsing(bc)). This nature is the basis on which heaven and earth are established and on which the ten thousand things are orderly transformed. It is the nature shared by the holy and the secular... What is called yung(bd) is the ordinary, namely, the functioning (yung(s)) of the original nature. Therefore, our daily activities are the manifestations of the great functioning of the whole essence of our nature (ch'uan-t'i ta-yung(be) ) ... Tzu-ssu(bf) obtained the transmission of the Mind from Confucius. So he wrote down what had been transmitted to him, and called it the Chung-yung.(22) Hsu correctly observed that "It is clear that Han-shan interprets chung and yung as the Confucian equivalents of the Buddhist hsing [nature] and hsiang [characeristics].(23) Te-ch'ing interpreted the opening words of Chung-yung, " t'ien-ming(bg) " (What heaven had endowed) , as our "spontaneous nature," for our nature intrinsically belongs to us and does not depend on anything else. Te-ch'ing showed the same disregard for traditional Confucian exegesis in commenting on the Great Learning. For him, the purpose of great learning was to become a great man who had realized the Mind. Commenting on the three items -- manifesting the bright character, loving the people and resting on our highest good -- Te-ch'ing explained that the first means the realization of the Mind, the second means helping others to realize their Mind, and the third means arriving at and abiding in the realm of the highest good, which isbeyond p. 382 good and evil. Te-ch'ing saw Confucian methods of cessation and contemplation in the next two sentences. Ting(bh) (calmness) refered to our true nature and ching(bi) (tranquility) refered to the mind when it was not disturbed by external stimulations. Te-ch'ing's interpretation of the two sentences in which ting and ching appear went like this. "Only after learning how to arrive at and abide in the highest good, by stopping all illusory thoughts, can one realize one's true nature. Only after having seen one's true nature can one be free from external conditions."(24) By reading Buddhist meanings into the Confucian texts, Te-ch'ing hoped to make them conform to the Buddhist teachings about mind cultivation. This approach was aggressive, for it tried to appropriate the time honored expressions long familiar to Confucian elites to serve the purpose of Buddhism. Confucian classics were made out to contain esoteric meanings which become instantly clear only when read with the hermeneutic of Buddhism. I call this kind of response offensive, for it differed from the traditional Buddhist apologetics which generally attempted to clear away presumed misunderstanding about Buddhism on the part of the critics. . Of the three late Ming Buddhist masters, Chih-hsu(bj) most systematically represented this kind of offensive response to Neo-Confucianism. He was a prolific writer on Buddhist sutras and vinaya. But he also wrote commentaries on the Book of Changes and the Four Books, the former was entitled Chou-i Ch'an-chien(bk) (Book of changes Explained in the Light of Ch'an Buddhism), the latter Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh(bl) (Ou-i's Explanation of the Four Books),(25) The following discussion of Chih-hsu's views on Confucianism and Neo-Confucianism draws from the commentaries and the collection of his writings called Tsung-lun(bm) (On Essentials) in ten chuan.(26) According to his autobiography,(27) Chih-hsu's parents were both Buddhists. They worshipped Kuan-yin(bn) and recited the "Mantra of Great Compassion" (Ta-pei chou(bo)) for ten years before his mother dreamed of Kuan-yin who presented her with the son.(28) When the child was seven he became a vegetarian. At twelve he began to study with a tutor and when he was told about the "learning of sages" (sheng-hsueh(bp)), he dedicated himself to its glorification. He vowed to exterminate Buddhism and Taoism. Giving up vegetarianism, he wrote Pi-Fo lun(bp) (On p. 383 Exposing Bnddha) consisting of several dozens of articles exposing Buddhism as heretical. He had dreams in which he held conversations with Confucius(br) and Yen Hui(bs) At seventeen, he read the preface of Chuhung's(bf) Record of Self-Knowledge as well as his collected essays, Jottings under a Bamboo Window (Chu-ch'uang sui-pi(bu)). This proved to be a turning point for Chih-hsu for he stopped his antigonism toward Buddhism and burned the Pi-Fo lun to signal his change of heart. At twenty, he wrote a commentary on the Analects(bv). But when he came to the sentence "All under Heaven return to humanity" (t'ien-hsia kueijen(bw)) he did not know what to do. For three days and nights he could lot eat or deep. Finally he emerged from this impasse with the declaration that he had become thoroughly enlightened about the system of mind-and-heart of Confucius and Yen Hui (ta-wu K'ung Yen hsin-fa(bx)). Many years later, in a letter written to a lay disciple, Chih-hsu compared his enlightenment to that of Wang Yang-ming.(by) After Yen Tzu died, the learning of sages disappeared. This is indeed sad..., Wang Yang-ming rose after two thousand years. Living among barbarians for three years he attained the sudden enlightenment about innate knowledge. He eliminated in one stroke the vulgar habit of Han and Sung Confucians and received directly from Confucius and Yen Hui the transmission of the learning of the mind-and-heart (hsin-hsueh(bz)). what I gained in enlightenment when I was twenty was similar to that of Yang-ming. However, because Yang-ming gained it through experiential effort its power was strong and its use was extensive, I gained it through intellectual understanding while reading books, therefore its power is weak and its use limited (29) Chih-hsu left the household life when he was twenty-four. The Surangama sutra seemed to have played a critical role, for he heard in the previous year a passage from the sutra, "The world is situated in emptiness and emptiness gives rise to great enlightenment (Shih-chieh tsai k'ung,, k'ung (ca))." He did not understand why there was this great enlightenment which served as the bads of the world. It was this "sense of p.384 great doubt" which eventually drove him to become a Buddhist practitioner. However, his interest in Confucian classics did not disappear. He wrote the Chou-i Ch'an-chieh in ten chuan when he was forty-seven and the Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh in one chuan when he was forty-nine. Chapter XII of Analects, which triggered Chih-hsu's enlightenment as a young man, received this explanation in the Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh. The k'o in k'o-chi fu-li(cb) means 'to capable' (neng(cc). So this phrase means To be capable of returning to li(cd) by oneself is called jen(ce), Once one realizes the essence of humanity (jen-t'i(cf)) the world immediately dissolves back to it, There is no world which can be had aside from humanity. This is the same as to say: The empty spece of the ten directions dissolves totally. The entire universe is myself. 'Yu-chi'(cg) and 'k'o-chi' mean the same thing. The Master here clearly sets forth the entirety of the essence of humanity. But this can only be grasped by a person of superior endowment, That is why Yen Tzu attained sudden enlightenment.(30) Like Te-ch'ing, Chih-hsu liked to use the term hsin-fa(ch) or hsin-hsueh for the teaching of Confucius who, according to tradition, had received it from Yao (ci) and Shun(cj) , and transmitted(ck) to Yen Hui. The teaching was further expounded in the Great Learning and The Doctrine of the Mean. As pointed out by Wm. Theodore de Bary in his recent study, this "System of Mind-and-Heart" or "Learning of the Mind-and-Heart" Was first put forward by Sung Neo-Confucians "as an alternative to Buddhism, and especially to Ch'an. From the beginning it had a political and orientation and was not derivative from Buddhist teachings and concerning the mind".(31) Ming Buddhist thinkers like Te-ch'ing and hsu used these terms, however in a way very different from their Neo-Confucian meanings. For them, the Confucian hsin-fa was not different from the Buddhist hsin-fa. It was in fact Buddhist truth expressed in Confucian language. Like the Sung Confucians, Chih-hsu saw special significance in the sentence about the jen-hsin (ck) and tao-hsin(cl) in the Shu ching(cm). He 385 p.385 regarded this as the essence of the Confucian hsin-fa. Just like Te-ch'ing, he used the discussion on mind to introduce the Buddhist view that Mind is the basis of everything. He also equated jen-hsin with delusion, and tao-hsin with awakening. When there is Mind, then there are heaven, earth and the myriad things. In the transmission of the sages, it is no more than certifying one mind by another mind (i hsin yin-hsin(cn)). That is why the Shu ching says 'The human mind is extremely precarious, and the moral mind is extremely subtle. Have absolute refinement and unity of mind so that you may hold fast the Mean. Is there in fact such a thing as a man having two minds? When one is deluded and forgets that their origin is one, this is the 'precariousness of the human mind." It is like when water is frozen into ice. When one is awakened and realizes that they are not dual, this is then the 'subtlety of the moral mind.' It is like when ice melts back to water, To return from delusion to awakening the nature of both delusion and awakening as equally empty is called to have of wetness. When one realizes that one's origin belongs neither to the two essence (t'i) of 'unity'. When one attains awakening from delusion and never reverts to delusion once awakened, this is called 'holding fast'. It is the effect (kung(co)) of 'unity'. Sage Yao established the highest standard with this 'Learning of the Mind-and-Heart'. Chih-hsu went on to claim that "Yao, Shun, Confucius and Yen Hui all umderstood that there was no dharma outside of the Mind (hsin wai wufa(cp)). " For this reason, he questioned the wisdom of emphasizing the "three items" and "eight steps" of the Great Learning as separate tasks for cultivation as suggested by the Cheng-Chu school, In that way, they simply served to confuse Confucius' teaching about the "single unity." Chih-hsu frequently lamented that the "Learning of the Sages" was lost after the death of Yen Hui. No one in the Han knew anytiing about the teaching of Confucius and Mencius. As for Neo-Confucians in 386 the Sung and Ming, he had a very high regard only for Chou Tun-yi(cq) (1017-73) and Wang Yang-ming (1472-1529). Chou Tun-yi of the Northern Sung said in his 'Ting-hsing shu(cr) (On Calming Human Nature) , 'Nature is that which is found amidst hardness, softness, good and evil.' He also said in his T'ai-chi t'u-shuo(cs) (Explanation on the Diagram of the Great Ultimate) 'The Great Ultimate is originally non-ultimate, These two sayings deserve our careful study, for they have really captured the System of Mind-and-Heart of Confucius and Yen Hui, Later Confucians offered various explanations, but they seldom understood Chou. Some even said that he should not have written the Ting-shing shu. How sad! Among his disciples, Ming-tao(ct) was like Tseng Tzu(cu) and Tzu-ssu, I-ch'uan(cr) was no better than a Tzu-hsia(cw). Lu Hsiang-shan(cx) of the Southern Sung obtained the System of Mind-and-Heart of Mencius(cy). However, he did not believe that the Great Ultimate was the Non-Ultimate, He repeatedly refuted Chou. Chu Hsi, on the other hand, repeatedly tried to defend Chou. I feel that neither man really understood Chou. Wang Yang-ming achieved great enlightemnent at Lung-ch'ang and singled out the three words 'Chih liang-chih(cz), ('the extension of the innate knowledge') as the magical formula for becoming a sage. It is not too much for us to regard him as Yen Tzu reborn.(33) Chih-hsu admired Chou and Wang because they expressed, for him Buddhist insights hi Confucian language. Commenting on Chou's Great Ultimate and Non-Ultimate, he wrote, The Great Ultimate is the Mind which is the origin of myraid dharmas. The Non-Ultimate means that when we search for this Mind, we cannot find it anywhere...Even though the Mind I cannot be found anywhere, it is not non-existent. Even though the Mind creates heaven, earth and the myraid thins, 387 p.387 it is nevertheless not existent. It is neither quiescent nor moving. Yet it can both move and be quescent.(34) Chih-hsu approved of Wang Yang-ming's teaching of "extending innate knowledge," for it restored Confucius' teaching about "single uninty." Wang surpassed Han and Sung Confucians and directly received the learning of mind-and-heart from Confucius and Yen Hui....The innate knowledge is the luminous essence of virtuous nature it is what the Great Learning calls 'illustrious virtue', or the 'self' (chi(da)) mentioned in the Analects.(35) Chih-hsu felt that the entire achievement of Yen Hui could be summarized by his not transferring anger (ch'ien-nu(db)) and not repreating the same mistake (erh-kuo(dc)). imitating Wang, Chih-hsu created his own four phrases. in the original substance of the mind there is neither anger nor mistake. When the will becomes active, there is then anger and mistake, The faculty of innate knowledge is to know anger and mistake. The investigation of things is not to transfer anger or to repeat the mistake.(36) But Chih-hsu, characteristically, did not forget to equate these famous remarks of Confucius with Buddhist concepts. In his commentary on the Amalects, he wrote "Neither anger nor mistake is the essence of original enlightenment (pen-chueh(dd)). Not to transfer anger or repeat the same mistake are the effect of the actualization of enlightenment (shih-chueh(de))."(37) On one level, we may regard what Chih-hsu did as a type of ko-i(df) ("matching of concepts") . The matching of Buddhist with Confucian or Taoist concepts had, of course, a very ancient history. During the Wei(dg) and Chih(dh) dynasties, Buddhist writers resorted to the practice of ko-i to facilitate their readers' understanding of Buddhism. In the case of p.388 Chih-hsu, this motive was also present. For instance, in explaining why he wrote a Ch'an commentary on the I-ching(di), he wrote in the preface to the Chou-i Ch 'an-chieh, "The only reason I wrote this commentary was in the hope that by entering Confucianism from Ch'an, I could entice (yu(dj)) Confucians to know Ch'an."(38) But more than helping his Confucian contemporaries to understand Buddhism, Chih-hsu wanted to prove that the real Confucian teaching could only be understood in the light of, Buddhism. He spoke of the "wonderful secrets" (miao-chi(dk) ) interspersed in the Confucian classics. These 'veiled' passages referred to the same truth revealed in Buddhist scriptures, But because the time was not ripe and the people's level of intellectual and spiritual growth was too low, Confucius and other Confucian sages could only use a skillful devise, and so stated their teaching in a language different from that of Buddhists, Unfortunately, ever since the time of Tseng Tzu, Confucians had failed to detect the "wonderful secrets" contained in the Confucian classics. 'They reached the door but could not see inside, They only knew traces, but not the origin, only the expedient/conventional expression, but not the reality."(39) Chih-hsu took upon himself the mission of pointing out these "wonderful secrets" to his contemporaries, In a sense, he was fulfilling his youthful dream of glorifying the learning of sages. The key to unlocking the wonderful secrets of the Confucian texts was invariably found in the Buddhist teaching of Mind. What, then, were some of the "wonderful secrets" which were discovered by Chih-shu? In a fascinating long essay eititled Hsing-hsueh k'aimeng ta-wen(dl) (A Primer to the Learning of Nature, with Answers to Questions), in which the last quotation appears, Chih-hsu gave us a systematic reinterpretation of some passages from a Confucian text with their true Buddhist meanings. He singled out the passage in the Hsi-tz'u(dk) (Appended Remarks) of the I-ching: "In the system of change there is the Great Ultimate. It generates the two Modes, These two Modes generate the four Forms. The four Forms generate the eight trigrams."(40) This is how Chih-hsu interpreted it: Since it is stated that 'in the I(dn) there is the Great Ultimate,' j it must mean that the Great Ultimate is possessed by the I. p.389 But what, after all, is this I which possesses the Great Ultimate? If we take it to mean the trigrams or the explanations, then it should have read, The Great Ultimate gave birth to myriad things. After that, Fu-hsi(do) drew the trigrams and King Wen(dp) of Chou wrote explanations.' Why, on the contrary, does it say, 'In the I there is the Great Ultimate'? In saying this the principle of change (I-li(dq)) must then exist before the Great Ultimate, Since this is the case, what else can this principle of change be but the Buddha nature which is the origin of all of us? Since the Buddha nature exists before the Great Ultimate, how can we carelessly say that Heaven bestows on us our nature?(41) If 'change' is the same as the Buddha nature, how is it that we cannot find expressions such as "Our self nature is this mind" as used by Ch'an Buddhists in the text? Chih-hsu knows the answer. That the I-ching uses the word I to denote the absolute reality which Buddhists call "Buddha nature or the 'Mind' is really a matter of expediency. Because ordinary people have clung to the erroneous belief that the four great elements make up their body and the six sense organs and sense data constitute their mind, they can never understand the truth if told plainly. But the fact is that the I is no different from True Suchness (chenju(n)). It contains the meaning of sui-yuan pu-pien(dr) ("while conforming to external conditions, it remains unchanging"), as well as pu-pien suiyuan(ds) ("while unchanging, it conforms to external conditions"), This profound truth is expressed secretly by the word I. True Suchness has only the virtue of nature (hsing-te(dt)), but does not have the virtue of cultivation (hsiu-te(du) ) . So if a person does not preserve his self-nature, when thoughts rise from unenlightenment, there is ignorance. This ignorance is beginningless and is the basis of samsara. When expressed secretly, it is the Great Ultimate. True Suchness is covertly expressed by I; when the True Suchness becomes covered by ignorance, it is then the Great Ultimate. The evolution of the phenomenal world from Suchness as outlined in the Awakening of Faith is thus superimposed on the Iching. Chih-hsu is equally fond of utilizing the Surangama Sutra in his 390 reinterpretative enterprise. He quotes passages from the second chuan of this sutra in which the Buddha describes the evolution of the world. Chih-hsu uses these passages to explain the sequences given in the Hsi-tz 'u section of the I-ching. "(The Great Ultimate through)= "Sustained confrontation of Movement generates yang(dv)" (subjective) awareness with (objective) dim voidness produced vibration and movement; hence the wheel of wind in constant motion in the universe." 'Through tranquility it = "Awareness so shaken by the void generates yin(dw) " was benumbed by it and hardened into the element of metal; hence the wheel of metal to preserve the earth." "The two forms give rise = 'When the movement caused by to the four emblems" awareness produced wind and hardened into metal, the friction between wind and metal flashed fire; the nature of which is transformative. Fire sprang up and melted metal; hence the wheel of water prevades all the worlds in the ten directions." "The four emblems give rise = "The meeting of rising fire to the eight trigrams" water formed wet oceans and dry continents... Excess of water over fire resulted in the (formation of) high mountains... An excess of earth over water resulted in the growth of vegetation."(42) Even though the words used in the Surangama and the I-ching are different, Chih-hsu understood their intent to be the same. Namely, p.391 we follow the trend of the evolution, this is the beginning of samsara. But if we reverse it, transmigration ceases,"(43) Chih-hsu saw special significance in these two sentences in the Hsi-tz'u as well: "[Change] is in the state of absolute quiet and inactivity; when acted on, it immediately penetrates all things, " and "As ch'ien(dx) and k'un(dy) take their respective positions, the system of Change is established in their midst."(44) According to Chih-hsu, the first sentence described the essence of our Buddha nature which is both quiet (chi(dz)) and illuminating (chao(ea)). The second sentence refered to the critical turning point in one's life when one decides to go to nirvana through selfcultivation and gives up the tendency to drift along samsara. He continued, Our nature is originally not concerned with cultivation. It cannot be called enlightened or deluded. Once deluded, however, illumination is dispersed, tranquility becomes dim. One will then turn away from the city of nirvana and follow the path of samsara. All of these issue from the two doors of movement and tranquility. Therefore it is called reversed cultivation (ni-hsiu(eb) ) or cultivation of evil (hsiu-e(ec)). On the other hand, enlightenment can use movement to awaken a person from confusion; this is called insight(kuan(ed)). It uses tranquility to gather the dispersion; this is called cessation (chih(ee)). Because of these same two doors of movement and tranquility, one can turn away from the stream of samsara and follow the ocean of nirvana. This is called orderly cultivation (shun-hsiu(ef)) and is also called cultivation of goodness (hsiu-shan(eg)). But even though we speak of orderly and inverted cultivation, nature neither increases nor decreases; Moreover, although both goodness and evil are originally contained in nature, the Way nevertheless can rise up or sink down in accordance with man's following good or evil. Such secret meaning does not differ from the Buddhist Perfect Teaching (i.e. the T'ien-t'ai(l) school). it is mainly the error of the latter day Confucianists that they failed to detect this secret meaning due to their habitual way of thinking.(45) p.392 The procedure Chih-hsu adopted in commenting on the Four Books (the commentary on the Mencius is now missing) was the same. In fact, we may say that he saw "wonderful secrets" in all of these Confucian classics. A few more examples from Chih-hsu's commentary on the Analects will illustrate his methodology. The very first chapter received a thorough Buddhist interpretation, As translated by W. T. Chan, it reads, Confucius said, 'Is it not a pleasure to learn and to repeat or practice from time to time what has been learned? Is it not delightful to have friends coming from afar? Is one not a superior man if he does not feel hurt even thongh he is not recognized?'(46) Chih-hsu's interpretation of this famous chapter goes like this: This chapter takes hsueh(eh) ('learning') as the main theme, shih-hsi(ei) ("to practice or repeat from time to time") as the goal, and yueh(ej) ('pleasure') as the pulse. 'Friends' and 'not recognized by others' both stand for the 'time' of "practicing or repeating from time to time." 'Delight' and 'not feeling hurt' both refer to the uninterrupted pulse of 'pleasure'? Everyone is originally endowed with the nature of spiritual enlightenment (ling-chuej (ek) ). We are fundamentally neither burdened by things (wu-lei(el)), nor is there anything which makes us happy. But because we are ignorant of this original essence, many fears and worries come about as a consequence, The 'learning' spoken of here is the wisdom of the actualization of enlightenment. If in every thought we are aware of the original enlightenment, then there is no time that we are not enlightened. That is why this is called 'shih-hsi'. Since one is always enlightened, he is also always happy. Moreover, since this enlightenment is originally possessed by everyone equally, one feels happy when one's friend comes. Because in this enlightenment there is originally no opposition between oneself and others, that is why one does not feel hurt even if 393 p.393 one is not recognized. If a person is always hsi and yueh during the times when friends come as well as during the times when one is not recognized, then he has really attained the learning of a superior man. If his mind becomes differentiated in accordance with recognition and non-recognition, how could that be the learning meant by Confucius?(47) In the Confucian tradition, learning is primarily the pursuit of knowledge which is gained through the study of texts. It is, of course, not merely an intellectual activity aiming at the acquisition of a body of objective facts (as learning is understood nowadays). Knowledge is always morally transformative in the Confucian context, A superior man is a man who loves learning. But even though Confucian learning can be regarded as spiritual, for it leads to self-knowledge, it is still intimately involved with the study of books. Chih-hsu, however, chose to identify learning with Buddhist enlightenment: the awakening to one's self-nature; it is a process in which book learning may not play any role at all. He consistantly glosses hsueh (learning'') as chueh(em) (enlightenment') throughout his commentary on the Analects. Another example of his Buddhicization of the Analects is the chapter where Confucius succinctly outlines the major milestones of his life. Confucius said, At fifteen my mind was set on learning. At thirty my character had been formed. At forty I had no more perplexities. At fifty I knew the Mandate of Heaven, At sixty I was at ease with whatever 1 heard. At seventy I could follow my heart's desire without transgressing moral principles. (2:4)(48) Chih-hsu's commentary follows. The one word 'learning' penetrates throughout this chapter, Learning is enlightenment. When every thought of mine is turned away from the world and is made to accord with enlightenment, this is called 'having my mind set on learning'. p.394 When the enlightenment is not shaken by delusory passions, this is called 'my character is formed: Enlightenment can cut through subtle webs of doubt, and this is called 'having no more perplexies'? Enlightenment can illumine the critical turning point between truth and delusion. That is why it is called 'knowing the Mandate of Heaven,' Realizing that the six sense organs are no different from the womb of the Tathagata, I become `at ease with whatever I heard.' Realizing that the six consciousnesses are no different from the womb of the Tathagata, I can 'follow my heart's desire without transgressing.' When Confucius reached this stage, he had attained the freedom of mind (hsin tzu-tsai(en)). If he wanted to attain the freedom with dharmas (fa tzu-tsai(eo)), he probably had to wait until he was eighty or ninety. That is why Confucius said that he did not due to aspire to be a sage or a man of humanity. Those words express Confucius' honest feeling. If we take them to be his polite self deprecations, we would have failed to grasp the true intention of a great sage.(49) Chih-hsu's commentaries on the Doctrine of the Mean and the Great Learning are both entitled "Direct pointing" (chih-chih(ep)), a term originating with Ch'an Buddhism which claims to point directly to the mind of men, the basis of our enlightenment. According to Chih-hsu, the title chung-yung(az) meant: "Chung is the essence of nature (hsingt`j(eq)) and yung is the efficacy of nature (hsing-te (dt)). Efficacy arises from essence. The total power is contained in the essence."(50) Expounding on the opening three sentences, Chih-hsu said that t'ien(er) is not the blue sky which we can see with our eyes. it is also not the Tushita Heaven or the Yamadeva (the third devaloka). Rather it is what the Nirvanaa sutra calls "heaven of the first principle" (ti-i-i t'ien(es)). Similarly, ming(et) does not mean 'command' but is in fact the alaya consciousness which combines birth and death (sheng-mieh(eu))with that which is neither. The consciousness is the nature which takes on life. Because with the entirety of truth, it gives rise to ignorance (ch 'uan-chen ch'i-wang(ev)), t'ien can be 395 p.395 called ming. But because with the entirety of ignorance, it can also give rise to truth (ch'uan-wang shih chen(ew), ming is also called t'ien. In the former case, it is what T'ien-t'ai Buddhism called "while unchanging, True Suchness conforms to causal conditions" (pu-pien sui-yuan(ds)),while the latter is equivalent to sui-yuan pu-pien(dr) ("while conforming to causal conditions, True Suchness remains unchanging"). T'ien and ming can also be explained as essence and function. Essence and function are neither the same nor different. It is just like the relationship between water and waves. As far as essence is concerned, there is neither good nor bad. But when it comes to function, there is both good and bad. This is like the case of a mirror, Even though the mirror itself is neither beautiful nor ugly, its luster can illumine both beauty and ugliness. Nature is the same, When one allows the good seeds which are stored in the alaya consciousness to grow and develop into good deeds, this is the way of the gentlemen (chun-tzu chih tao(ex)). But if one allows the bad seeds to grow and develop into evil deeds, this then is the way of inferior men (hsiao-jen chih tao(ey)). That is why it is said that there are only two ways: humanity and inhumanity. Moreover, when the good seeds become manifested, the entire nature is good, and when the bad seeds become manifested, the entire nature is bad. This is also just like the case of the mirror. When the mirror reveals beauty, the entire mirror is beautiful; when the mirror reveals ugliness, the entire mirror is ugly. Just as beauty and ugliness are not ultimately real, so too, good and evil are not ultimately real. When we understand the truth that the nature of good,and evil is in fact without any inherent nature (wu-hsing(ez) ) , this is enlightenment. Eliminating evil which has no nature, then no evil will fail to disappear, Accumulating the good which is also without nature, then all good become perfect. This is then cultivating the Way.(51) Commenting on Chapter 21 which discusses the relationship betwee tween ch'eng(fa) ('sincerity') and ming(fb),(`enlightenment`), Chih-hsu said, Chih-hsu said, 'Enlightenment results from sincerity' is the same as what is stated in the Suragama sutra, The enlightenment of nature is by necessity bright'. But this enlightenment only has the p.396 virtue of nature, but not the virtue of cultivation. It is equally possessed by the sage and the ordinary people; thereforer it therefore of is not very special. Only when we make our actualization of enlightenment confirm to our original enlightenment, then we can make sincerity result from enlightenment. It is a state when the virtue of cultivation is complete. This is the teaching about cultivating the way.(52) At the end of Ms commentary on the Mean, Chih-hsu summarized the work by returning to the three opening sentences. The first two sentences make dear the idea of pu-pien suiyuan. They open the door of phenomenal existence (shengmieh men(fe) ) from the door of Absolute Truth (chen-ju men(fd)). The last sentence is to teach people to understand the truth of immutability while conforming to the causal conditions. This is to return to the door of Absolute Truth from the door of phenomenal existence. The entire book of Chung-yung addresses itself to one question: how should we, while involved in the phenomenal world, cultivate ourselves so that we can turn away from delusion and come back to Reality.(53) Chih-hsu admitted freely that he was using T'ien-t'ai terminology in explaining the Mean. In commenting on the Great Learning, he drew upon not only T'ien-t'ai, but Wei-shih(fe) ideas as well, He explains the title "Ta-hsueh" first. Ta(ff) represents the original enlightenrnent which is our nature. It refers to the total essence which is eternal and universal. It is the mind which all of us have right now (hsien-ch'ien i-nien chih hsin(FG). There is nothing outside of this mind Nothing stands opposite this mind. That is why it is called the total essence. The mind has neither beginning nor end. It is neither born nor does it ever die. Therefore it is called eternal. The mind contains everything, including family, state p.397 and the world. It is found everywhere. It has no divisions, nor is there boundary. That is why it is called universal. Hsueh is enlightenment (chueh) . It refers to the accomplishment of the actualization of enlightenment. Actualization of enlightenment is cultivation. Ta-hsueh, together, represents self-enlightenment and enlightenment of others. It is called "great learning" because "enlightenment and conduct are both perfect. Nature and cultviation are non-dual." Chihhuu criticized treating the "three items" as separate steps; his own idea becomes clear in his comments on the ming ming-te(fh). The first ming refers to the cultivation of actualization of enlightenment, whereas ming-te(fi) refers to the nature of original enlightenment. Three meanings are possessed by nature and they are called te(fj). When the 'one thought immediately in front of us' is thoroughly spiritual and intelligent, yet it does not have any form, this is virtue of wisdom (pan-jo te(fk)). Although this one thought has no form, it is endowed with various wonderful functions. Family, state, and the universe are all the things manifested by the mind. Cultivating, regulating, ruling and pacifying are all the activities contained within the mind. This is the virtue of liberation (chieh-t'o te(fl)). Moreover, even though we do not know where this 'one thought immediately in front of us' is located, it is nevertheless not pen-existent. Even though it takes its position with heaven and nourishes the myraid creatures, it is nevertheless not existent. We cannot think of it as either existent or non-existent. It is not differentiated in accordance with sages or ordinary men. It is equal, neither increasing in one case nor decreasing in another; thus, it is the virtue of Dharmakaya (fa-shen te(fm)). My mind is like this, so are the minds of the people.. To help sentient beings who have the same nature as myself is to love the people (ch'in-min(fn)). To attain the way of the Buddha which is contained in my self-nature is 'to rest in the highest good' (chih chih-shan(fo)). Chin-min 398 and chih chih-shan are the ultimate extension of ming ming-te. To speak of the three separately is for clarity and for the fear that the ordinary people do not understand the true meaning. We should, however, not regard them as three separate items. In order to make sure that the three items are in fact understood as one, Chih-hsu suggested his reader view them in the following way. The three verbs - ming, ch'in and chih(fp) are the three ways of observing the mind (i-hsin san- kuan(fq)). The three nouns-summary ming ming-te represents enlightenment of oneself, which corresponds to the virtue of wisdom; chin-min represents enlightenment of others, which corresponds to the virtue of liberation; and chih chih-shan represents the completion of enlightenment, which corresponds to the virtue of Dharmakaya. The next sentence in the Great Learning contains the important words of chih, ting, ching, an, lu and te(ft). The accepted interpretation as rendered into English by Professor Chan reads, Only after knowing what to abide in can one be calm. Only after having been calm can one be tranquil. Only after having achieved tranquility can one have peaceful repose. Only after having peaceful repose can one begin to deliberate. Only after deliberation can the end be attained.(54) Chih-hsu felt that the central word in this paragraph is"knowing." "Knowing what to abide in" (chih-chih(fu) ) means for him the wonderful enlightenment (miao-wu(fv)). Calm, tranquility, peaceful repose, and deliberation refer to wonderful cultivation (miao-hsiu(fw) ), and attainment means wonderful realization (miao-cheng(fx)). He arrived at this understanding through the Buddhist sutras, quoting first The Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, "Knowing delusion one departs from it. Departing from delusion, one attains enlightenment. There are no stages or sequences." and then the Surangama sutra: 'The cause of original cultivation is that which is without birth or death. The last perfect stage of a bodhisattva's path is the proof of cultivation." Chih-hsu saw this sentence as the exact equivalent of "knowing what to abide in." p.399 Finally, note how Chih-hsu interpreted the "eight steps" of the Great Learning. He, like Wang Yang-ming, followed the sequence given in the old text. Ke-wu(fy) was taken to mean "to view everything as manifestation of the mind." To be specific: One should know that the universe, state, family, body and environment are all manifestations of the mind. There is nothing outside of the mind. Therefore in order to ke-wu we had better observe that upon which the phenomenal world is caused to exist (kuan so-yuan yuan(fz)), If one knows that the external world is not really existent, one begins to know that the internal mind is not non-existent. When this is known, only then can one do away with evil and carry out the good in the mind. This is called 'self-enjoyment' (tzu-ch'ien(ga)) and this is called 'watchfulness when one is alone' (shen-tu(gb)). The next item, chih-chih(ge), was taken to mean "the transformation of the sixth consciousness into the wisdom of wondrous observation (miao-kuanch'a chih(gd)). How is this done? When the two attachments to the self and to dharmas (wo-fa erh-chih(ge)) are broken, then things will naturally be corrected by themselves. This is the same as stated in the Surangama sutra, When you are not turned by things, you can then turn things' (pu-wei wu-chuan, pien neng chuan-wu(gf)). The uninterrupted wondrous observation of the two kinds of emptiness is the extension of knowledge." Under the third item ch'eng-i(gg), Chih-hsu tought, Because the sixth consciousness gains the insight of the two kinds of emptiness, the seventh consciousness will no longer attach itself to the noetic aspect (chien-fen(gh)) of the eighth consciousness and regard it as the self. It then becomes transformed into the wisdom of equality (ping-teng chih(gl)). p.400 For hsin-cheng(fj), the fourth item: Because the sixth and the seventh consciousnesses give up the attachment to the self, the eighth consciousness loses the name of alaya. Because the sixth and the seventh consciousnesses give up the attachment to dharmas, the eighth consciousness loses the name of consciousness that comes to maturation (i-shu shih(gk)). It now becomes the great mirror wisdom (ta-yuan-ching chih(gl)). The next item, hsiu-shen(gm), received a short explanation: Since the eighth consciousness becomes passionless and without any outflow (wu-lou(gh)), all the five skandhas, twelve ayatanas and eighteen dhatus also become the same. Finally, the last three items of chi-chia(go), chih-kuo(gp) and ping t'ien-hsia(gq) brought forth this comment from Chih-hsu: "When one person is pure, all persons become pure also. Finally the ten directions, three ages are all perfect and pure."(55) After reading these comments, one is perhaps justified in asking if what Chih-hsu wrote should be called commentaries at all. He certainly seemed to be primarily interested in teaching Buddhism. One might even accuse him of imposing Buddhist ideas on the tests and trying to co-opt them to serve the cause of Buddhism. If this indeed was the case, Chihhsu might have received his inspiration from Jesuit apologists. Many of the late Ming Jesuits quoted Confucian texts to bolster their theological claims and to attack Buddhism. Like Chih-hsu, they also felt that the Neo-Confucians had departed from the original teachings of Confucius.(56) Chih- hsu was a staunch anti-Christian polemicist. He wrote Pi-hsieh Iun(gr) (Exposing Heresy) in 1643 when he was forty-five years old, one year before he wrote the commentary on Change and four years before he wrote the commentary on the Four Books.(57) But can we say that he was just doing the same thing as the Jesuits? Did he simply use the Confucian texts as a pretext to preach Buddhism? Or did he really believe that the p.401 Confucian classics contain the same truth as Buddhism? Attempting to discover the underlying motives behind a person's action is always fraught with difficulties. It is especially so when, in this case, the person lived three hundred years ago. Yet historians have an obligation to venture a hypothesis, if not give a definite solution, to the question of motivation. We should try to decide, first of all, if Chih-hsu really meant what he wrote, and second, why he chose to write the way he did. In answer to the first question, it will be helpful to read Chih-hsu's preface to the Ou-i ssu-shu chieh. He began his preface by recalling his early struggles in trying to understand Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism. He called himself here Ou-i Tzu(gs). When Ou-i Tzu was twelve, he talked about Neo-Confucianism (li-hsueh(gt)) but did not understand the Principle. When he was twenty, he studied Taoism (hsuan-men(gu)) but without knowing about the Mystery. When he was twenty-three, he practiced Ch'an meditation but did not know what Ch'an was. When he was thirty-six he studied Buddhist doctrines but did not understand their meaning. Then he became critically ill and almost died. He came to Chiu-hua to nurse his illness. He drank bean curd dregs and ate rice chaff. He forgot about his body and cut himself off from all worldly ties. Myriad cares were all extinguished like ashes. His mind became centered and he did not feel any attachment.(58) It was when he reached this state of mental concentration that Chih-hsu attained a new insight. He wrote, I then knew that Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, Ch'an, Vinaya, Buddhist doctrines were all yellow leaves and empty fists. In accordance with what the child desires, parents placate them with different things. If the inducement (yu(gv)) is appropriate, the child laughs with glee, but if the inducemnt is inappropriate, he cries out aloud. Laughing and crying happens only to the child. They neither add to nor substract p.402 from the parents. However, the parents feel happy when they see the child laugh, but sad when they see the child cry. This is connected with their nature. They cannot help it even if they want to....Today we may be subject to others' inducements. And we will in turn induce others in the future. But if we laugh or cry on account of the empty fists and yellow leaves, then how could we be capable of inducing others! Empty fists and yellow leaves (leaves dyed yellow to resemble gold) are famous metaphors found in the Pao-chi ching(gw) (Maharatnakuta sutra) and the Nirvana sutra respectively. They are skillful devices used by the Buddha to entice ignorant people to enter the True Path. Chih-hsu regarded the three teachings as equally skillful devices. He therefore did not say that Buddhism was superior to Confucianism or Taoism. In this respect, he was different from early defenders of Buddhism such as Tsung-mi (780-841) who said that Confucianism and Taoism only contained provisional teaching and Buddhism contained both provisional and real teachings.(60) Was Chih-hsu then a syncretist who had no awareness of the differences among the three teachings? This was probably not the case. As seen earlier, Chih-hsu said that he wrote the commentary on the Change in order to induce his readers to become interested in Ch'an. His decision to write a commentary on the Four Books was similarly triggered by his desire to help a fellow monk to understand Buddhism better. Bhikshu Ch'e-in followed me during the difficult years of my travels and sufferings. He did not know the Vinaya and he also could not get anywhere in Ch'an meditation. I often encouraged him by talking to him, but it did not help too much. So I prayed to the Budha with utmost sincerity and cast lots several times for guidance. They all indicated that I should rely on the Four Books and let them help make clear the meaning of the First Principle.(61) In both cases, Confucian classics were made to serve the cause of p.403 Buddhism. It may not have been a totally novel idea when Chih-hsu said that the true "mind-seal" of the Buddha had to be discovered through a hermeneutical enterprise. Buddhas, sages and worthies do not entangle people with any True Dharma. They only liberate us from being stuck or release us from being bound. What I am doing now is merely to use a wedge to pull out wedges. I only want to help the mind-seal of sages and worthies to become known.(62) But it is highly significant that he felt that Buddhism could be better explained through the familiar and time-hallowed expressions of the Confucian texts. From the Mahayana perspective, Truth can be expressed in many ways. This justified the use of Confucian terminology in the discussion of ultimate reality. Another and more pressing reason for Chih-hsu to assume this task was because the "mind-seal" of Confucius, in the estimate of Chih-hsu, had been lost ever since the death of Yen Hui. If one understands the principle of opening and revealing of the Lotus teaching, then words which regulate the world, activities which benefit the livelihood, and even jesting jokes or angry scoldings, romantic poems or sentimental songs all accord with the correct teaching of true reality. Since this is the case, would the Confucian discussions on principle and nature be otherwise? Of course, this is Chih-hsu's view of the Mean, but not that of Tzu Ssu. If Tzu Ssu knew my view, Confucius would have promptly given him his seal of approval. Why then did he become so heart broken when Yen Yuan died and he lamented that "Heaven was destroying' him?(63) Chih-hsu claimed to be a true interpreter of Confucian hsin-fa(f). Did he honestly think so, or was he adopting this pose as a tactical device to coopt Confucianism? These become truly conflicting alternatives if we think Chih-hsu had to limit his loyalty to either Buddhism or Confucianism. But there may be another way of looking at the situation. Chih-hsu might sin- p.404 cerely have believed that the Confucian hsin--fa could be rediscovered by using Buddhism. In addition, the Confucian texts, after such a reinterpretation, could in turn help people to really understand Buddhism. Chihhsu, like Te-ch'ing and other Buddhist thinkers of the time, received a thorough Confucian education when he was young. The Confucian classics, like the Buddhist sutras, provided the scaffolding of his intellectual and spiritual universe. It seems safe to say that by the late Ming, Confucian classics were the inheritance of all educated Chinese and not the sole property of the Neo-Confucians. Chih-hsu's answer to NeoConfucians was that they had misunderstood the Confucian hsin--fa. It was perhaps up to the Buddhists to recover the obscured "tao-t'ung(gx), That people like Chih-hsu could entertain such a notion says something about Ming Buddhism. It, of course, also says a lot about the Chinese tradition. NOTES The first draft of this paper was discussed at the Regional Seminar of Neo-Confucian Studies at Columbia University and the Study Group in Chinese Social History at Princeton University. In revising the paper, I benefited from the many helpful criticisms and suggestions made by members of these groups. I would particularly like to acknowledge the help I received from W. T. Chan, Frederick Mote, Willard Peterson and Alan Sponberg. 1. A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, translated and compiled by Wing-tsit Chan, Princeton: (Princeton University Press, 1963), pp. 554-555. This is from The Complete Works of the Two Ch'engs (Erh-Ch'eng i.shu(gy)), 15:5b. 2. Ibid. p. 555. "In the world there cannot be birth without death or joy without. But wherever the Buddhists go, they always look for an opportunity to tell subtle falsehood and exercise deception, and to preach the elimination of birth and death and the neutralization of joy and sorrow. In the final analysis this is nothing but self-interest." (Erh-Ch'eng i-shu, 15:7b) 3. Ibid, p. 648. This is from Chu Hsi's Complete Works (Chu Tzu ch'uan-shu(gz), 60:14b). 4. Fung Yu-lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, translated by Derk Bodde (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953). Vol. II, p. 567. This is from (ha) Chu Hsi's Conversations (Chu Tzu yu-lei , 126:6). p.405 5. Dictionary of Ming Biographies. (NY: Columbia University Press, 1976) Vol. I, pp.140-144. Here after I will refer to this work as "DMB". 6. DMB, Vol. II, pp. 1272-1275. See also Sung-peng Hsu,A Buddhist Leader in Ming China (The Penn State University Press, 1979), pp. 59-104; Wu Peiyi, 'The Spiritual Autobiography of Te-ch'ing." In de Bary, The (Unfolding of Neo-Confucianism (Columbia, 1975), pp. 67-92. 7. DMB, Vol. I, pp. 244-246. See also Chang Sheng-yen, Minmatsu Chungoku Bukkyo no kenkyu. (Tokyo, 1975). 8. DMB, Vol. I. pp. 322-324. See also Yu Chun- fang, The Renewal of Buddhism in China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981). 9. The Awakening of Faith Attributed to Asvaghosha, translated with commentary by Yoshito S. Hakeda (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967), p. 28. 10. Ibid., p. 31. 11. This occurs in the section where the author explains that "Mahayana" is great in three ways: The "greatness" of the essence (or substance), of the attributes and finally of the influences (or function). Ibid., p. 29. 12. Fung Yu-lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, vol. II, pp. 363-364. This comes from Hui-ssu's Ta-ch'eng Chih-kuan fa-men(hb). 13. The Awakening of Faith, op. cit. p. 41. 14. Ibid., p. 41. 15. Tzu-po lao-jen chi(he), Chuan 1 "Fa-yu(hd)." In Wan-tzu Hsu Tzang ching(he) (Taipei, Hsin Wenfeng Publishing Co., 1977), Vol. 126, pp. 645-646. 16. Han-shen ta-shih meng-yu chi(hf), Chuan 12, "Fa yu." ZZ 2, 32, 2/183. 17. Ibid., Chuan 5, ZZ 2, 32 2/135. (hg) (Hong Kong, 1965), Chuan 45, pp. 2424-2427. 18. Meng-yu chi 19. Ibid., Chuan 39, pp. 2137-38. 20. Ibid., Chuan 5, ZZ, 2, 32, 2/137. 21. Chung-yung chih-chih is collected in the Chin-ling K'o- ching chu-ching(hh) (Scriptures printed by the Nanking Scripture Publisher) Case 43, Chuan 5, dated 1884. Ch'un-ch'iu Tso-shih hsin-fa is lost, but its preface is found in Han-shan lao-jen meng-yu chi(hi) 19/27-34. To-hsueh chueh-i is found in 44/ 49-76 of the same work. See Hsu, op, cit.,p. 9. 22. Hsu, op. cit., p. 156.. 23. Ibid., p. 157. 24. Ibid., p. 157. 25. Chou-i Ch'an-chieh(bk) was printed by Nanking Scriptural Publishing Press in 1915, and Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh(bl) came out in 1934, with the section on Mencius missing. Both books have been reprinted in Taiwan (Taipei, Hsien-chih Publishing Co., publication date unknown). It is this edition that I used for this paper. p.406 26. Chang Sheng-yen has one chapter in his book discussing the composition,content and dates of Tsung-lun (bm). Cf. Minnatsu Chugoku bukkyo no kenkyu, pp.315-352. 27. His autobiography is entitled "Pa-pu tao-jen ch'uan(hj)" (The Biography of the "Eight-No" Recluse). The eccentric title of "eight-no," as explained by Chih- hsu himself, comes about this way. "In ancient times there were Confucianism, Ch'an, Vinaya and Doctrinal Buddhism, but the Recluse was unworthy to follow them. Nowadays, there are also Confucianism, Ch'an, Vinaya and Doctrinal Buddhism, but the Recluse does not deign to follow them. That' is why I call myself 'Eight-No'." Ou-i ta-shih chuan-chi(hk) , (Taiwan, Fo-chiao chu-pan she, 1975), vol. 16, p. 10220. 28. The cult of Kuan-yin was associated with childbirth, especially with the attempt to conceive a son. The worship of the bodhisattva Kuan-yin (Avalokitesvara) for this purpose has scriptural basis. In the Lotus sutra, chapter 25,we find, "If there is a woman,and if. she is desirous and hopeful of having a son, making worshipful offerings to the Bodhisattva, He who observes the Sounds of the World, she shall straight-way bear a son of happiness,excellence and wisdom." Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, translated by Leon Hurvitz (NY Columbia University Press, 1976) p. 313. 29. Tsung-lun 2/4, in Ou-i ta-shih chuan-chi, Vol. 16, p. 10536, Chih-hsu was incorrect in attributing Wang's discovery of the doctrine of extending innate knowledge to his years of exile in Lung-ch'ang. Actually that happened much later, when he was 50 years old. While in exile, Wang achieved the insight of investigation of things and the extension of knowledge as well as the unity of knowledge and action. "One night in 1508, he suddenly understood the doctrine of the investigation of things and the extension of knowledge. A year later, he realized the unity of knowledge and action. ... It was in 1521,when he was fifty, that he arrived arrived at the doctrine of the extension of innate knowledge which culminated his philosophy." Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, pp. 657 -658. See also Tu Wei- ming, Neo-Confucian Thought in Action, Wang Yang-ming's Youth 11472-1509) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976), pp. 95-146. 30. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 129. 31. William Theodore de Bary, Neo-Confucian Orthodoxy and the Learning of the Mind-and-Heart (New York, Columbia University Press, 1981), p. 70. 32. Tsung-lun 2/5 in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16,pp. 10552-4. 33. Tsung-lun 5/3 in Oui-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 17, pp. 11030-1. As pointed out earlier, Wang did not arrive at his theory of "chih liang-chih" p.407 at Lung-chiang. Chih-hsu was also mistaken in regarding Chou Tun-yi as the author of Ting-hsing shu. This essay was written by Ch'eng Hao(cc) in reply to Chang Tsai's(hl) letter. The English translation is found in A Source Bock of Chinese Philosophy. op. cit., pp. 525 -526. 34. Tsung-lun 6/3,in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 17, pp. 11180-1. 35. Tsung-lun 4/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 17, pp. 10841-2. 36. Tsung-lun 2/5, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16, p. 10552. 37. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 80. 38. Tsung-lun 6/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 17, p. 11119. 39. Tsung-lun 3/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16, p. 10711. 40. Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, p. 267. 41. Tsung-lun 3/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16, p. 10711-2. 42. The Surangama sutra, translated by Lu K'uan Yu (London, Rider & Co. 1966),p.89. 43. Tsung-lung 3/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16,pp. 10713-4. 44. Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, p. 267. 45. Tsung-lun 3/2, in Ou-i ta-shih ch'uan-chi, Vol. 16, p. 10714. 46. Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, p. 18. 47. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 41. 48. Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, p. 22. 49. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 51. The terms hsin tzu-tsai and fa tzu-tsai occur in the Avatain-saka sutra. They are two of the ten kinds of freedom a bodhisattva achieves. Hsin tzu-tsai is the second of the ten. When a bodhisattva attains wisdom and masters skill-in-means, he calms his own mind and enters into the limitless great samadhi; he displays supernatural powers playfully and without obstruction. Ta tzu-tsai is the seventh freedom. A bodhisattva obtains great eloquence in debate. He can lecture extensively on limitless teachings and suffer no obstruction. Ting Fu-pao(hm) , Fo-hsueh ta tz'u-tien(hn) (Taipei, 1961 reprint) Vol. II, pp. 1032. 50. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 195. 51. Tsung-lun 3/2,in Ou-i ta-shih chuan-chi, Vol. 16,pp. 10714-5. 52. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, p. 196. 53. Ibid., p. 216. 54. Ibid., p. 232. 55. Chan, A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, p. 86. 56. Ssu-shu Ou-i chieh, pp. 7-12. Noetic aspect (chien- fen(gh), darsahabhaga) is opposed to the noematic aspect (hsiang-fen ; mimittabhaaga). 57. Chang Sheng-yen ,Minnatsu Chugoku bukkyoo no kenkyuu, pp. 37 -51. 58. The dates when Chih-hsu wrote the commentaries on the Change and the Four Books were provided by him in his autobiography Ou-i ta-shih chuan chi, Vol. 16, p. 10225. p.408 59. Ou-i ssu-shu chieh, p. 1. 60. Ibid. 61. The Buddhist Tradition, edited by William Theodore de Bary. (New York, Modern Library, 1969), p. 181. 62. On-i ssu-shu chieh, p. 1. 63. Tsung-lun 6/1 in Ou-i ta-shih chuan-chi, Vol. 17, p. 11101. 64. Tsung-lun 3/2, in Ou-i ta-shih chuan-chi, Vol. 16,p. 10716. p.409 a 空 y 空門 b 程頤 z 根于空 c 朱熹 aa 有 d 明〔朝〕 ab 妙藥 e 程朱 ac 幻 f 心法 ad 真空 g 紫柏真可 ae 幻有 h 憨山德清 af 妙有 i 藕益智旭 ag 焦芽 j 雲棲株宏 ah 敗種 k 華嚴 ai 論行本 l 天台 aj 人道 m 禪 ak 眾生 n 真如 al 人乘 o 一心 am 五常 p 如來藏 an 我執 q 體 ao 天下 r 像 ap 對待 s 用 aq 障礙 t 慧思 ar 道心 u 真諦 as 人心 v 俗諦 at 真 w 真可 au 忘 x 德清 av 中庸直指 p.410 aw 春秋左氏心法 bx 大悟孔顏心法 ax 大學決疑 by 王陽明 ay 徐松鵬 bz 心學 az 中庸 ca 世界在空,空生大覺 ba 大學 cb 克己復禮 bb 中 cc 能 bc 性 cd 禮 bd 庸 ce 仁 be 全體大用 cf 仁體 bf 子思 cg 由己 bg 天命 ch 心法 bh 定 ci 堯 bi 靜 cj 舜 bj 智旭 ck 人心 bk 周易禪解 cl 道心 bl 四書藕益解 cm 書經 bm 宗論 cn 以心即心 bn 觀音 co 功 bo 大悲咒 cp 心外無法 bp 聖學 cq 周敦頤 bq 闢佛論 cr 定性書 br 孔夫子 cs 太極圖說 bs 顏回 ct 明道(程顥) bt 株宏 cu 曾子 bu 竹窗隨 cv 伊川(程頤) bv 論語 cw 子夏 bw 天下歸仁 cx 陸象山 p.411 cy 孟子 dz 寂 cz 致良知 ea 照 da 己 eb 逆修 db 遷怒 ec 修惡 dc 二過 ed 觀 dd 本覺 ee 止 de 始覺 ef 順修 df 格義 eg 修善 dg 魏 eh 學 dh 晉 ei 時習 di 易經 ej 說 dj 誘 ek 靈覺 dk 妙機 el 物累 dl 性學開蒙答問 em 覺 dm 繫辭 en 心自在 dn 易 eo 法自在 do 伏羲 ep 直指 dp 周文王 eq 性體 dq 易理 er 天 dr 隨緣不變 es 第一義天 ds 不變隨緣 et 命 dt 性德 eu 生滅 du 修德 ev 全真起妄 dv 陽 ew 全妄是真 dw 陰 ex 君子之道 dx 乾 ey 小人之道 dy 坤 ez 無性 p.412 fa 誠 gb 慎獨 fb 明 gc 知至 fc 生滅門 gd 妙觀察智 fd 真如門 ge 我法二執 fe 唯識 gf 不為物轉,便能轉物 ff 大 gg 誠意 fg 現前一念之心 gh 見分 fh 明明德 gi 平等智 fi 明德 gj 心正 fj 德 gk 異熟識 fk 般若德 gl 大圓鏡智 fl 解脫德 gm 修身 fm 法身德 gn 旡漏 fn 親民 go 齊家 fo 止至善 gp 治國 fp 明,親,止 gq 平天下 fq 一心三觀 gr 闢邪論 fr 明德,民,善 gs 藕益子 fs 一境三諦 gt 理學 ft 止,定,靜,安慮 gu 玄門 fu 止至 gv 誘 fv 妙悟 gw 寶積經 fw 妙修 gx 道統 fx 妙證 gy 二程遺書 fy 格物 gz 朱子全書 fz 觀所緣緣 ha 朱子語類 ga 自遣 hb 大乘止觀法門 p.413 hc 紫柏老人集 hj 八不道人道 hd 法語 hk 蕅益大師全集 he 宛止續藏集 hl 張載 hf 憨山大師夢遊﹝全集﹞ hm 丁福保 hg 夢遊記 hn 佛學大辭典 hh 金陵刻經處 ho 相分 hi 憨山大師夢遊集