禪源諸詮集都序 1
English (machine translation) 1
- Language
- English
Contents
1.1
Preface to the Recarving of the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan
1.2
The Way cannot make its own voice heard; it relies on humans to sound forth. Though the voices differ, the Way has never differed. If it were different, it would not suffice to be the Way. Like Zhongni’s single thread, Lao Dan’s non-action, and the Śākya clan’s emptiness and quiescence—persons differ, but the Way is one; these serve as proof. How much more so for the two schools of Chan and doctrinal teaching, which both issue from the Buddha! Chan is the Buddha's mind; doctrinal teaching is the Buddha's mouth. How could mind and mouth be mutually contradictory? Yet as the era of the Sage grew remote, lineages of masters came to differ. Those of the doctrinal teachings pointed to Chan as dark, blind realization; those of Chan viewed the doctrinal teachings as gradual cultivation. Light and dark failed to obtain their fair due, and neither sudden nor gradual knew where to settle. They disparaged each other, becoming almost like bitter enemies. Not only did they bandy empty words, but they committed them to brush and bamboo slips. As the ways of the world daily decline, what will become of these evils? In former times, Chan Master Guifeng was distressed by this. Thereupon he gathered into one collection the writings, chapters, and verses of the various patriarchs of doctrinal teaching and Chan whose purports agreed, entitling it Collected Writings on the Source of Chan, so as to instruct the world. He aimed to let scholars of both traditions know that one Buddha has no dual Way, and the four rivers have no different tastes, returning to harmony and never breaking the covenant. How could the merit of the Source of Chan be easily measured? I often observe that in the South this evil is especially severe. How can we ensure people possess this book, completely washing away old habits and renewing themselves? Whenever my thoughts turn to this, I never fail to forget my meals and sigh. Now Master Xuetang, the Chief Administrative Director, having had an accord [with its message], specially donated his extra robes to carve new printing blocks, spreading it far and wide. He sent a letter from a thousand miles away, asking me to write a preface. Since Prime Minister Pei has already composed one previously, who am I to dare overstep and invite the ridicule of the discerning? Yet this book is what I have admired all my life, and what fortune it is to have my name affixed to it! Thus I do not decline. Preface written in the seventh month of the seventh year of the Dade era [1303 CE] by Wuwai Weida, residing at Jianyan Monastery in Kunshan.
1.3
Preface to the Recarving of the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan
1.4
The Collected Writings on the Source of Chan was composed by Chan Master Guifeng of the Tang. The Way of the Buddha pervades the dharmadhātu broadly and enters fine dust particles subtly; it is neither existent nor empty, neither internal nor external. Later students of Chan, seeking to exhaust dharmatā, treated words and language as burdensome trifles. Those establishing doctrinal teachings, striving to examine true explications, regarded emptiness and quiescence as wild and unrestrained. Severed into different gates, none understood their unity. How could this be the intrinsic nature of the Buddha's Way? Therefore, he verified the three schools of Chan through the three kinds of doctrinal teachings, stating that: relying on the nature to explain phenomenal marks corresponds to pacifying delusion and cultivating the mind; refuting phenomenal marks to reveal the nature corresponds to absolute extinction and non-reliance; explicitly revealing the true mind corresponds to directly revealing the nature of mind. The Yangzi and the Han rivers flow differently yet converge in the ocean of wisdom; sour and salty have different flavors yet share the taste of dhyāna. As for the distinction between the Śūnyatā school and the Tathāgatagarbha school, and the difference between sudden cultivation and gradual cultivation, there is none whose ultimate intent was not united to reveal right awakening. Yet, worrying that later students might be easily deluded and slow to awaken, he additionally produced a chart alongside, marked in red and black ink. From sudden awakening to the attainment of Buddhahood, ten levels constitute purity; from non-awakening to receiving retribution, ten levels constitute defilement. The source of purity and defilement arises from the sage and the ordinary person; the mind-dharma is fully endowed with both the true and the false, which is called the ālayavijñāna. In non-awakening, one is deluded about the true and pursues the false, undergoing transmigration through kalpas. In sudden awakening, one abandons the false and returns to the true, conforming to vimokṣa. Even so, learners must realize that when tathatā expounds the doctrinal teachings, it is like a finger pointing at the moon. If one sees the moon and clearly understands that what points is ultimately not the moon, then both the text and the chart are forgotten, foolishness and wisdom alike become prajñā, and defilement and purity are both realized as bodhi. Nanyue, Tiantai, Shen of the south, Xiu of the north—none have any difference from the ultimate purport of Bodhidharma's coming from the east. What distinction between Chan and doctrinal teaching could there still be? During the Dazhong era of the Tang, Prime Minister Pei Xiu composed a preface for it and copied the chart by hand, bestowing it upon Yanchang Monastery in Jinzhou. It was later transmitted to Master Weijin, and further transmitted to Master Xuanqi, circulating throughout Min, Xiang, Wu, and Yue. In the twelfth year of the Zhiyuan era of our dynasty, Shizu held court in the Guanghan Hall, wishing to inquire about the essential teachings of Chan and doctrine. The Imperial Preceptor and various elders replied using the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan. The Emperor was pleased and ordered the blocks carved for circulation in the world. Twenty-nine years later, in the guimao year of the Dade era, his Dharma heir, Chan Master Xuetang Ren, followed an imperial edict to Wutai. On his return journey passing through Datong, he obtained the chart transcribed by Chan Master Qian'an Jue of the Jin dynasty. He collated and verified it with greater care, producing a splendid compilation to transmit far and wide, ensuring that Chan Master Guifeng's intent to scrutinize truth, reveal correctness, and guide the deluded masses would never fall into decline. How could its benefits be measured? I, Wenyuan, have an otherworldly friendship with the master; thus, rejoicing and praising, I arranged these remarks in sequence and wrote them at the head of the volume. On the first day of the intercalary month of this year, written by Deng Wenyuan, Attendant of the Hanlin Academy, Gentleman of Accomplished Service, Assistant Drafter, and Concurrently Compiler in the Bureau of National History, native of Baxi.
1.5
Preface to the Recarving of the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan
1.6
Chan Master Xuetang was grand in wisdom and discernment, and fully penetrated both practice and understanding. He delighted in cultivation and rejoiced in giving. One day he told me: 'I have often been distressed that worldly students of Buddhism fail to investigate the Buddha’s reasons for establishing the doctrinal teachings. They falsely cling to emptiness or existence, and vie over distinguishing Great and Small vehicles, sudden and gradual, Chan and vinaya. For over a thousand years they have wrangled and disputed endlessly, just like guarding a father's foot only to make him suffer disease all over. Although I have met one or two like-minded persons who offered instruction, I regret that it cannot be made known to every house and every door. Fortunately, I obtained the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan composed by Guifeng. Its text is erudite and refined, its purport pertinent and precise; it fully explains the former predicaments and relates their underlying causes. Furthermore, it provides a chart showing that the one true reality of the mind contains the three great principles: ignorance conditions defilements, so marks arise falsely; relying on the methods of cultivation and cessation, one attains realization and enters the truth. It grasps the outlines and raises the essentials as clearly as pointing to one's palm. Formerly, in the first month of spring in the twelfth year of the Zhiyuan era, during a pause in his myriad affairs of state, Emperor Shizu held court on Qionghua Island and invited the Imperial Preceptor; the Grand Protector Duke Liu Wenzheng was also present. Thereupon he summoned senior masters residing in the capital to inquire into the mutually conflicting tenets of Chan and doctrine. My late teacher Duke Xi'an Yun and eight others answered using the text of Guifeng's Collected Writings on the Source of Chan. It fully satisfied the imperial mind. At that time, my late teacher entrusted his junior fellow Shuangquan Duke Tai to record it, and additionally ordered Xuetang to carve the printing blocks for circulation. Because I was traveling around inquiring at various quarters, I had no leisure to attend to this. Previously, in Yunzhong, I obtained one copy each at Pu'en and Xingguo monasteries. Later, in the abbot's quarters of Wanshou Monastery in the capital, I again obtained the authoritative edition printed and distributed throughout the empire in the eighth year of the Qingning era by the Grand Empress Dowager Chongtian of the Liao dynasty. Collating it with scholars, I intended to carve the printing blocks to transmit it perpetually. Please write a few words to express my late teacher's dying wish.' Hearing this, I rejoiced and said: 'Your present intention is precisely Master Guifeng's mind of concern for the world! Yet without this text, there would be no means to dispel their confusion; without perpetuating its transmission, there would be no means to benefit the multitude. If learners behold it without casting off sentiment and generating understanding, what benefit would there be? Among the four difficulties spoken of by the ancients, of the three difficulties today, not one is lacking. If those practicing and studying in all quarters can live up to the two masters' purpose of propagating the Dharma and benefiting humanity, reading and pondering it with all their hearts, sentiments will be dispelled and understanding generated. Just as Wang Liang gathered the six reins to race along the thoroughfare, or the venerable monk boarded the vessel of prajñā to reach the other shore, how could they fail to arrive?' Preface by Jia Ruzhou, Hanlin Waiting Official, Grand Master of Court Splendor, and Joint Compiler
1.7
of the National History.
1.8
Preface to the General Preface to the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan
1.9
Composed by Pei Xiu, Prefect of Mianzhou under the Tang
1.10
Dhyāna Master Guifeng compiled the various explanations of the source of dhyāna into a dhyāna canon and wrote a general preface for it. Pei Xiu of Hedong states: It is unprecedented! Ever since the Tathāgata appeared in the world and established teachings according to capacities, and bodhisattvas appeared at intervals pointing out medicines according to ailments, the teachings of his single lifetime opened three gateways of varying depth, and from the one true pure mind expounded distinct teachings of nature and phenomenal marks. The two masters Aśvaghoṣa and Nāgārjuna both propagated the teachings of the Tamer, yet their schools diverged into emptiness and the nature. The two masters Huineng and Shenxiu both transmitted Bodhidharma's mind, yet their endowments differed in sudden and gradual. Heze pointed directly to awareness and seeing; Jiangxi regarded everything as true; Tiantai relied exclusively on the threefold contemplation; Niutou held that not a single dharma exists. In other traditions, emptiness and existence refute one another, the true and the false include one another, directly overturning and gently accommodating, implicitly indicating and explicitly expounding; hence, in India and China, the lineages are truly numerous. Truly, because ailments have a thousand sources, medicines are produced in many kinds; matching the capacity and following the vessel, they cannot be identical. Although they are all gateways to realization and awakening, and are entirely the correct and true Path, among the various school traditions there are few that are universally comprehending and many that are limited. Consequently, over several decades the master-lineages have increasingly deteriorated: taking their own transmissions as their households, each establishing their own domains; taking the sūtras and treatises as weapons, mutually attacking one another; their sentiments shifting according to the armor-maker and the arrow-maker. (Mencius said: 'Is the maker of arrows really less benevolent than the maker of armor? The maker of armor only fears that men will be hurt; the maker of arrows only fears that men will not be hurt. This is because of the craft they have practiced.' Today's students merely follow their own school's adherents and mutually disparage one another. The character *han* [函], according to the *Tangyun*, is derived from metal [䤴]; it means armor. In the *Zhouli*: 'The *hanren* makes armor'—that is, the maker of armor. In ancient script it was often written simply; hence Mencius also wrote it simply.) Teachings rise and fall according to [the pride of] self and other; right and wrong are entangled in confusion, with none able to distinguish and analyze them. Thus the teachings and schools of the World-Honoured One, the bodhisattvas, and all directions of the past have merely served to give rise to disputes; causing later people to multiply their afflictive ailments, what benefit could there be? The Great Master Guifeng sighed for a long time and said: 'Having met with this time, I cannot remain silent!' (When Confucius edited the Odes and the Documents, and rectified the rites and music, it was all done out of necessity; therefore he transmitted rather than innovated. This means the sage values the Way and does not value mere traces. The idea is: 'I have long cultivated the Buddha-Dharma of our own school; if I now suddenly harmonize the various schools, could it be that I wish to establish traces? It is out of necessity.' *Ding* means to meet with; that is, precisely meeting the time when harmonization is needed.) Thereupon, using the three kinds of doctrinal teachings of the Tathāgata, he sealed the three kinds of methods of the Chan school. He melted down vases, plates, hairpins, and bracelets into a single gold; he churned sour milk, curd, and clarified butter into a single taste. Shaking the collar of a garment, all that is lifted falls into place; (Xunzi says: 'It is like shaking the collar of a fur robe; bending the five fingers and tugging it, those [hairs] that fall into place cannot be counted.') taking hold of the essential pivot, all who come converge in common purpose. (The character *qu* is pronounced in the level tone. The *Zhouyi lüeli* states: 'Taking hold of the essential pivot to observe the convergence of the directions, then the gathering of the six directions into the hub is not enough to be considered many.' The General Preface relies on the perfect teaching to seal all schools; even with a hundred lineages, there is nothing it does not subsume.) Still fearing that it would be difficult for students to understand, he further directly demonstrated the fundamental and the derivative of the source of the schools, the blending of the true and the false, the concealment and revelation of emptiness and nature, the differences in doctrine and principle, the similarities and differences between sudden and gradual, the mutual alternation of refutation and affirmation, the depth and shallowness of the provisional and real, and the right and wrong of the universal and the limited. (Below this, it praises the narrative as clear, bright, and painstaking, wishing to make people awaken.) There was nothing he did not tell by pulling them by the ear, (The *Mao Commentary to the Classic of Odes* says: 'Not merely instructing you to your face, but pulling you by the ear.' At that time, hating that the person did not cultivate virtue and was wildly disorganized, it says: 'Not only did I speak to you face to face, but I also pulled your ear and raised it, telling you right beside your ear; yet you still did not change.' The meaning is to speak with extreme pains.) and show them by pointing at his palm. (The *Analects* says: 'He who knew its meaning would deal with all under Heaven as easily as looking at this!' and he pointed to his palm. This means that after the Master spoke, he pointed to his own palm to show his disciples, saying that seeing this matter is distinct, as easy to understand as an object in the palm of one's hand.) He roared like a lion yawning to awaken them, and gently enticed them with affectionate softness. (Below this, it praises his compassion and anxious care, like nurturing an infant.) Nursing them and giving them medicine, he worried that the Buddha-seed would be cut short prematurely. (Having no small good roots and becoming an icchantika is to be cut short prematurely.) Embracing them to his bosom, (The *Mao Commentary to the Classic of Odes* says: 'Embraced me in her bosom and looked back at me.' This describes a compassionate mother caring for her young child, holding me to her bosom; when rising briefly to leave, she turns her head to look back at me, her loving affection being profound.) he was mindful of being swept away by water or consumed by fire. (Desires are water and fire.) Leading and guiding them, he feared they would be misled into delusion by heterodoxy and the Hinayāna. (Having both good roots and having separated from the five desires, he further feared they would not enter the Mahāyāna.) Waving his sleeves to disperse them, he grieved over the firmness of contention. The great illumination cannot break through the gloom of the long night; a compassionate mother cannot protect her child after her death. (Below this, it praises his compassion and wisdom as being identical to the Buddha's. Although the Buddha-sun is brilliant, only when obtaining our master does it turn its light to illuminate gently; although the Buddha's compassion is universal, only when obtaining our master are its vast benefits further multiplied.) As for our master, he held aloft the Buddha-sun and gently turned its light to illuminate, so that all doubts and obstructions were eliminated; he accorded with the Buddha-mind and stretched across with great compassion, so that throughout exhausted kalpas all receive benefit. Thus the World-Honoured One was the Lord who expounded the teachings, and our master was the person who harmonized the teachings; the fundamental and the derivative support one another, the distant and the near illuminate one another. It can be said that he completed the functions of the teachings of [the Buddha's] entire lifetime! (From when the World-Honoured One expounded the teachings down to the present day, by harmonizing and penetrating them, the functions have only now been completed.) Someone may say: 'Since the Tathāgata [himself] never comprehensively unified them, now suddenly disobeying the tenets of the schools and not preserving them, discarding the defenses and not holding them—is this not contrary to the way of the secret treasury and tacit transmission?' I reply: 'Within the assemblies of the *Lotus Sūtra* and the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra*, the Buddha also had already melted them into a single taste; it is only that the benighted do not perceive it. Therefore, in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra*, Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "All Buddhas have secret words, but no secret treasuries." The World-Honoured One praised him, saying: "The words of the Tathāgata open up and reveal, being pure and unobstructed. Foolish people do not understand them and consider them a secret treasury; the wise clearly comprehend them and do not call them a treasury." This is the proof. Therefore, when the Kingly Way flourishes, outer doors are not shut, and defenses reside at the borders; when the Buddha Way is complete, all dharmas are retained in dhāraṇī, and defenses reside against Māra and heterodoxy.' (The perfect teaching of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* harmonizes all dharmas, merely excluding the preachings of Māra and the heterodox schools of outsiders.) One should not continue to cling to sentiment and roll up one's sleeves [in anger] among them. Alas! Later students should place their trust in the Buddha, and not place their trust in men; they should seek confirmation in the fundamental Dharma, and not seek confirmation in derivative habits. (The General Preface uses the Buddha's words to seal the various schools, and uses the fundamental Dharma to illuminate biased teachings; hence it painstakingly urges them to have deep faith.) If one can be like this, then one will not fail the virtue of Guifeng's toil! (How sorrowful are mother and father, who bore me with toil! Our master's virtue surpasses even this. If later people view his Dharma without giving rise to grief and emotion, they are no different from wood and stone. One must take care of this!)
1.11
Narrated by the monk Zongmi of Mount Guifeng under the Tang
1.12.1
The Collection of Writings on the Source of Chan compiles what has been stated by the various masters to explain and express the fundamental source and principle of the Chan gate in words, phrases, and verses, collecting them into a single canon to bequeath to future generations. Therefore, this general title has been given to it. 'Chan' is an Indic word; in full it is called dhyāna. In China it is translated as 'cultivation of thought,' and is also called 'quiet contemplation.' Both are common designations for concentration and wisdom. 'Source' refers to the originally awakened true nature of all sentient beings; it is also called the buddhadhātu, and also called the mind-ground. To awaken to it is called wisdom; to cultivate it is called concentration. Concentration and wisdom are jointly designated as dhyāna. Because this nature is the fundamental source of Chan, it is called the 'source of Chan.' It is also called the 'principle and practice of dhyāna': this fundamental source is the principle of Chan; forgetting emotional attachments and tallying with it is the practice of Chan. Therefore it is called principle and practice. However, the writings of the various masters collected here for the most part discuss the principle of Chan and rarely discuss the practice of Chan, so for the present it is entitled 'The Source of Chan.' Nowadays there are those who simply designate the true nature as Chan; this is failing to grasp the import of principle and practice, and moreover failing to distinguish the sounds of China and India. However, it is not that there is a substance of Chan separate from the true nature. It is merely that when sentient beings are confused about the true and unite with dust, it is called distraction; when they turn away from dust and unite with the true, only then is it called dhyāna concentration. If one discusses the original nature directly, it is neither true nor false, with neither turning away nor uniting, neither concentration nor distraction—who can speak of Chan? Furthermore, this true nature is not only the source of the Chan gate, it is also the source of the myriad phenomena, hence it is named the dharmatā. It is also the source of the delusion and awakening of sentient beings, hence it is named the tathāgatagarbha and the ālayavijñāna (found in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra). It is also the source of the myriad virtues of the Buddhas, hence it is named the buddhadhātu (in sūtras such as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra). It is also the source of the myriad practices of the bodhisattvas, hence it is named the mind-ground (the chapter on the mind-ground Dharma-gate in the Brahma Net Sūtra says: 'It is the fundamental source of all Buddhas, the root of the bodhisattva path, and the root of the assembly of all Buddha-sons'). The myriad practices do not go beyond the six pāramitās, and the Chan gate is merely one among the six, standing as the fifth. How could one simply designate the true nature as a single practice of Chan? Yet the single practice of dhyāna concentration is the most divine and wondrous, able to arouse the anāsrava wisdom upon the nature. All wondrous functions, myriad virtues, and myriad practices, even down to supernatural powers and radiance, all arise from concentration. Therefore, students of the three vehicles who wish to seek the noble path must cultivate Chan; apart from this there is no gate, apart from this there is no path. Even as far as reciting the Buddha's name and seeking birth in the Pure Land, one must also cultivate the Chan of the sixteen contemplations, as well as the Buddha-remembrance samādhi and the pratyutpanna-samādhi. Furthermore, the true nature is neither defiled nor pure, with no difference between ordinary beings and sages; Chan, on the other hand, has the shallow and the deep, with distinct gradations and ranks. Cultivating with divergent views, admiring what is above and repressing what is below, is the Chan of non-Buddhists. Cultivating with correct faith in cause and effect, yet still with desire and aversion, is the Chan of ordinary beings. Cultivating with awakening to the principle of the emptiness of self and partial truth is the Chan of the Hīnayāna. Cultivating with awakening to the true principle revealed by the two emptinesses of self and phenomena is the Chan of the Mahāyāna (the above four categories all have the differences of the four forms and the four formless [absorptions]). If one suddenly awakens to one's own mind as originally pure, fundamentally without defilements, with the nature of anāsrava wisdom fundamentally complete in itself, this mind being the Buddha, ultimately without difference, and cultivates relying on this, it is the Chan of the Supreme Vehicle. It is also called the pure Chan of the Tathāgatas, also called the one-practice samādhi, and also called the tathatā-samādhi. This is the root of all samādhis. If one can cultivate it thought after thought, one will naturally and gradually attain hundreds of thousands of samādhis. What has been transmitted successively down the line of Bodhidharma is this Chan. Before Bodhidharma arrived, what the various masters of old understood were all the former four dhyānas and eight attainments; all eminent monks who cultivated them obtained efficacy. Nanyue and Tiantai caused people to rely on the principle of the three truths to cultivate the three cessations and three contemplations; although their doctrinal teaching is the most perfect and wondrous, nevertheless their entry gates and stages are still only the active forms of those former Chans. Only that which Bodhidharma transmitted is suddenly identical to the Buddha's substance, completely different from the various gates. Therefore, those who follow and practice it find it difficult to grasp its import: if they grasp it, they become sages and swiftly realize bodhi; if they lose it, they turn into heretics and swiftly fall into misery. The ancestral master transformed ignorance and guarded against error, so for a time it was transmitted person to person. Later generations already having something to rely upon, it was allowed to shine like a thousand lamps with a thousand illuminations. When the teaching had lasted long, flaws arose and errors were many, so among students of the sūtras and treatises, suspicions and slanders also became numerous. Originally, when the Buddha spoke the sudden teaching and the gradual teaching, Chan opened up the sudden gate and the gradual gate; the two teachings and the two gates tally with each other. Nowadays, lecturers exclusively display the gradual meaning, while Chan practitioners exclusively spread the sudden school. When Chan and the lecture tradition meet, they are as estranged as Hu and Yue. I, Zongmi, do not know what I did in past lives to perfume and obtain this mind: before being liberated myself, wishing to untie the bonds of others; forgetting body and life for the sake of the Dharma; pitying others more keenly than my own vital spirit (as it is said in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: 'If one is bound oneself, to be able to untie the bonds of others is without basis.' Yet desiring to desist, I cannot, which proves that it is difficult to alter from past lifetimes). I constantly lament that people differ from the Dharma, and the Dharma has become a sickness for people. Therefore I have separately composed commentaries on the sūtras, vinaya, and treatises, greatly opening the gates of morality, concentration, and wisdom, revealing that sudden awakening assists gradual cultivation, and verifying that the masters' sayings accord with the Buddha's intent. The intent having been thoroughly shown from root to branch, the texts became so vast and extensive as to be difficult to search through. Although there are many who study casually, few hold firm to the purpose. Furthermore, when traces involve names and marks, who can distinguish gold from brass? In vain I exhausted myself without seeing any resonant response in capacities. Although the Buddha said that the increase of compassion is [bodhisattva] practice, I personally worried that attachments and views would be difficult to guard against. Thereupon, I left the assembly and entered the mountains to practice concentration and balance wisdom, resting contemplation in all for a calculated total of ten years (saying 'in all' because in the interim I was summoned by imperial decree into the palace and stayed in the capital for three years, after which I submitted a memorial requesting to return to the mountains). Subtle habitual sentiments: their arising and ceasing were revealed in quiet wisdom. Differentiated principles of the Dharma: their array was seen in the empty mind. Just as in a hollow gap the sunlight reveals fine dust tossing about, or at the bottom of a clear pool reflections appear lucid and clear—how could this be compared to the foolish Chan of emptily guarding silence, or the wild wisdom of merely searching the text? However, it was originally because of understanding one's own mind that I distinguished the various teachings, and thus had earnest feeling for the mind school; and it was also because of distinguishing the various teachings that I understood the cultivation of the mind, and thus was reverent toward the doctrinal teachings. Doctrinal teaching is the sūtras and treatises left behind by the Buddhas and bodhisattvas; Chan is the phrases and verses stated by the various kalyāṇamitras. But the Buddha's sūtras unfold broadly, gathering the assembly of the great thousand [worlds] and the eight classes of beings; Chan verses are summarized and concise, approaching the capacity of this single region. Gathering the vast assembly makes it drifting and hard to rely upon; approaching the capacity points directly and is easy to apply.
1.12.2
The intention behind this present compilation lies precisely in this. Question: Now, as for 'summarising', the text must be concise and the meaning must be complete; in principle, many meanings should be gathered into few words. Furthermore, when the Buddhas speak sūtras, they are all complete with the Dharma (the substance of the Dharma), the meaning (the doctrinal meaning), the cause (the three grades of sages, the ten bhūmis, the thirty-seven auxiliaries to bodhi, and the ten pāramitās), the fruit (the marvelous function of the Buddha), faith (faith in the Dharma), understanding (understanding the meaning), cultivation (cultivating the causes through the stages), and realization (realizing the fruit). Although the worlds are diverse and the modes of conversion differ, the doctrinal teachings established by them never lack these. Therefore, at each assembly and each stage in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, it is concluded that all the worlds of the ten directions speak in this same way. Now, viewing the gathered writings of the various Chan masters, most of them merely respond to questions by questioning back, establishing something only to demolish it immediately; there is no such thread of continuity, and one sees neither beginning nor end. How can this be called a summary of the Buddhist teaching? Answer: The Buddha's appearance in the world to establish the doctrinal teaching and a master's saving people wherever he is are distinct in substance. The Buddhist teaching is a reliance for ten thousand generations; its principle must be explained in detail. A master's instruction aims at immediate liberation; its intent is to bring about profound penetration. Profound penetration necessarily depends on forgetting words; therefore, no trace is left behind in the words. When traces are ended in the realm of intention, the principle appears in the source of the mind. Then faith, understanding, cultivation, and realization are naturally accomplished without effort; the sūtras, vinaya, commentaries, and treatises are naturally penetrated in secret without study. Thus, if one asks about cultivating the Way, he replies that there is no cultivation. If one seeks vimokṣa, he questions back, 'Who binds you?' If one asks about the path to Buddhahood, he says that originally there are no ordinary beings. If one asks about calming the mind at the time of death, he says that fundamentally there is nothing the matter. Or he also says, 'This is delusion, this is truth; use the mind in this way, cease karma in this way.' To state the essential: it is merely responding to the circumstances of that moment and adapting to the capacity of that moment. How could there be a fixed dharma called anuttarā bodhi? How could there be a fixed practice called mahāprajñā? As long as passions have nothing they contemplate, intention has nothing it does, the mind has nothing it generates, and prajñā has nowhere it abides, that is true faith, true understanding, true cultivation, and true realization. If one does not understand one's own mind but merely clings to nominal teachings to seek the Buddha Way, do we not visibly see that those who recognize words and read sūtras fundamentally do not realize awakening, and that in parsing the text and explaining the meaning they only inflame greed and anger? Moreover, although Ānanda had great learning and dhāraṇī, he did not attain the noble fruit for many years; yet when he stilled external conditions and reflected inward, in a brief moment he realized non-arising. Thus we know that the benefit of the vehicles and teachings and the methods of saving people each have their reasons; one should not blame them for their words. Question: Since you value grasping the meaning and do not prize exclusive focus on texts, why is it necessary to compile these verses and lines? Answer: The compilation has two intentions. First, there are those who, although they received instruction from a master, have not settled their awakening with certainty, nor have they met various kalyāṇamitras to examine and verify it in various places; now, by reading this, they will everywhere see the words and meanings of the various masters, thereby opening their minds and cutting off remaining thoughts. Second, for those whose awakening and understanding are clear and who wish to be masters to others, it causes their knowledge and experience to be broad and increases their skillfulness, so that they may gather the assemblies and answer questions and instruct them in accordance with their understanding. This is what was said above: 'To spread across a thousand realms is vast and difficult to rely upon; to settle on one direction makes it precise and easy to apply.' Furthermore, it does not only assist the gate of forgetting words, but also bestows the benefit of Chan and the doctrinal teachings together. It not only makes the intention accord with the Buddha, but also seeks to make the text harmonize with the sūtras. Since the texts appear to conflict, making them harmonize is truly not easy. One must classify the whole canon of sūtras into the provisional and real principles of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, the definitive meaning and the non-definitive meaning; only then can one verify and determine that the various Chan gates each have their purport and do not contradict the Buddha's intent. That is to say, the whole canon of sūtras and treatises is unified into only three kinds, and the spoken teachings of the Chan gates are also unified into only three schools (each explained separately below); when they are paired and correspond to each other, only then is a complete view accomplished. Question: Now, when studying the writings of Chan, what does that have to do with the sūtras and treatises? Answer: There are ten reasons. One must know the provisional and real in the sūtras and treatises before one can distinguish the right and wrong of the various Chans; also, one must recognize the nature and phenomenal marks of the mind in Chan before one can understand the principle and phenomena in the sūtras and treatises. First, masters have the root and the branches, because one relies on the root to verify the branches. Second, Chan has various schools, because they conflict with and obstruct one another. Third, the sūtras are like the carpenter's line, because they set the standard for the correct and the deviant. Fourth, the sūtras have the provisional and the real, because one must rely on the definitive meaning. Fifth, pramāṇas are of three kinds, because verification must be identical. Sixth, doubts are of many kinds, because one must thoroughly resolve them all. Seventh, the Dharma and its meaning are distinct, because one must skillfully distinguish them. Eighth, the mind penetrates nature and phenomenal marks, because the names are identical but the meanings differ. Ninth, awakening and cultivation have the sudden and the gradual, because their words seem to contradict each other. Tenth, the instructions and upāya of masters must recognize the medicine and the illness. First, that masters have the root and the branches means that the primary ancestor of all schools is Śākyamuni. Sūtras are the Buddha's words; Chan is the Buddha's intent. The mind and mouth of the Buddhas certainly do not conflict with each other. The root inherited by the successive patriarchs was directly transmitted by the Buddha himself. The treatises composed by bodhisattvas from beginning to end only propagate the Buddha's sūtras. Moreover, from Kāśyapa down to Upagupta, their transmission all encompassed the Tripiṭaka. From Dhitika onward, due to monastic disputes, the vinaya and teachings were transmitted separately. From the realm of Jibin onward, due to royal persecution, the sūtras and treatises diverged in their conversions. In between, Aśvaghoṣa and Nāgārjuna were both patriarchs; they composed treatises to explain the sūtras amounting to tens of millions of verses. Observing the customs to convert beings, their practices and forms were not fixed. Never was there a lecturer who reviled Chan, nor a Chan practitioner who reviled lecturing. Bodhidharma received the Dharma in India and personally came to China. Seeing that the students of this land mostly had not attained the Dharma, and only took names and numbers as understanding and external practices as cultivation, he wished to make them know that the moon is not the finger and that the Dharma is one's own mind. Therefore, he only transmitted mind with mind without establishing texts. To reveal the school and break attachment, he spoke these words; it was not that he taught vimokṣa apart from words. Therefore, when instructing those who grasped the meaning, he repeatedly praised the Diamond and Laṅkāvatāra Sūtras, saying, 'These two sūtras are the essentials of my mind.' Nowadays, disciples on both sides are confused about the source: those who cultivate the mind take the sūtras and treatises to be a separate school, and those who lecture take the Chan gate to be a separate dharma. Hearing talk of cause, fruit, cultivation, and realization, they relegate it to the house of sūtras and treatises, not knowing that cultivation and realization are precisely the primary business of the Chan gate. Hearing talk of 'this mind is the Buddha', they relegate it to the Chan of private opinion, not knowing that mind and Buddha are precisely the original intent of the sūtras and treatises. (Previously in the preface someone raised the objection, 'How can a Chan master deliver lectures?' I now answer with this.) If one does not now pair the provisional and real sūtras and treatises with the shallow and deep Chan schools, how can one illuminate the mind with the doctrinal teachings and understand the doctrinal teachings with the mind? Second, that Chan has various schools that conflict with one another means that the writings collected in this present compilation encompass nearly a hundred houses, and those whose sectarian principles differ are still nearly ten traditions: namely, Jiangxi, Heze, Northern Xiu, Southern Shen, Niutou, Shitou, Baotang, Xuanshi, and also Chou, Tian, Tiantai, and others. Establishing schools and transmitting the Dharma, they conflict with and obstruct one another: some take emptiness as the root, some take awareness as the source; some say that silence alone is true, some say that walking and sitting are both it.
1.12.3
Some say: "From morning to night, discriminating and acting are completely delusory." Some say: "Discriminating and acting are completely true." Some maintain all the ten thousand practices; some eliminate even the Buddha. Some give free rein to their intent; some restrain their minds. Some take the sūtras and vinaya as their support; some take the sūtras and vinaya as obstacles to the path. These are not merely casual remarks, but adamantly asserted words. Adamantly promoting their own lineages and adamantly disparaging other types—how could they be reconciled?
Question: "Those that are right should be accepted, and those that are wrong should be excluded. Why is an elaborate reconciliation necessary?"
Answer: "Whether emptiness or existence, whether the nature or phenomenal marks, none of them are heterodox. It is only because each sides with their own as right and denounces the other as wrong, with each firmly entrenched, that reconciliation is required."
Question: "Since none are heterodox, let each be left to its firm stance. Why must they be reconciled?"
Answer: "The ultimate path returns to unity, and the subtle principle is without duality—the two cannot both be preserved [as opposites]. The ultimate path is not an extreme, and the definitive meaning is not one-sided—one cannot take merely a single side. Therefore, they must be reconciled into one so that all become completely subtle."
Question: "If ice is mixed with fire, their forces cannot both remain intact; if one strikes a shield with a spear, neither can simultaneously triumph. Since what the various lineages grasp at mutually contradicts, if one is right then the other is wrong. How can they be reconciled so that all are subtle?"
Answer: "By preserving their Dharma and expelling their defects, all become subtle. That is to say: to accommodate the Dharma to people is difficult; to accommodate people to the Dharma is easy. People mostly cling to their mutual views according to emotional attachment; once they cling, contradiction arises. It is truly like ice and fire coming together, or spear and shield opposing each other—hence it is difficult. The Dharma originally accords with principle and interpenetrates; when it penetrates, mutual harmony is natural. Frozen or flowing, all is water; rings or bracelets, all are gold—hence it is easy. To state the essential: if restricted, all are wrong; if reconciled, all are right. If one does not use the Buddha's words to demonstrate each of their intents and gather each of their merits, uniting them into three lineages corresponding to the three teachings, how could they be reconciled as the skillful means of an entire lifetime, together becoming essential, subtle Dharma-gates, each forgetting their attachments and jointly returning to the ocean of wisdom? (Only what the Buddha spoke is identical in its differences; therefore, based on the Buddhist sūtras, the three are reconciled into one.)
Third, the sūtras are like the carpenter's line, determining what is heterodox and what is orthodox. The carpenter's line is not the skill itself, yet the skilled artisan must rely upon it. The sūtras and treatises are not dhyāna, yet those who transmit dhyāna must take the sūtras and treatises as their standard. People of medium and lower capacities may simply rely on a master; the master observes their faculties and instructs them accordingly. Those of superior capacity must achieve an all-pervading awakening; if they have not investigated the Buddha's words, how could they share the Buddha's vision?
Question: "Buddhist sūtras exist everywhere, left to scholars to recite, examine, and harmonize. In compiling these essentials of Chan now, why must you distinguish the sūtras?"
Answer: "The meaning of this is found in the passage that follows, which specifically answers this question.
Fourth, the sūtras have the provisional and the real, and one must rely on the definitive meaning. That is, among the various sūtras spoken by the Buddha, there are words spoken according to his own intent, words spoken according to the intent of others, words according with the ultimate principle, words adapting to the capacity of the moment, words explaining the nature or phenomenal marks, words of sudden or gradual, Great or Small [Vehicles], and words of definitive or non-definitive meaning. The texts may diametrically oppose each other, but the meaning is necessarily all-pervading and unimpeded. The Dragon Canon is vast and boundless—how could one see its ultimate drift? Therefore, now with merely a dozen or so sheets [of paper], I decisively resolve them altogether, enabling one to see the Buddha's intent completely all at once. After seeing the Buddha's intent, one may thoroughly explore the entire canon and understand the lineage's tenets in every phrase.
Fifth, there are three kinds of pramāṇa, and verification must align them. The Dharma principles understood by the worthy and noble sages of the Western Regions are all determined by the three pramāṇas: first, inference (anumāna); second, direct perception (pratyakṣa); and third, the authoritative testimony of the Buddha's words (āptāgama). A pramāṇa is like a measuring rule, peck, or bushel, which measures an object to know its definite quantity. Inference means inferring by means of reasons and similes. For instance, seeing smoke in the distance, one definitely knows there is fire; although one does not see the fire, it is not false. Direct perception means seeing directly in person without relying on deduction; it is naturally settled. The authoritative testimony of the Buddha's words means taking the various sūtras as the standard. As for verification needing to align them: if one merely relies on the Buddha's words and does not infer for oneself to awaken to and realize one's own mind, it is only superficial faith, of no benefit to oneself. If one merely adopts direct perception and takes one's own vision as definitive without verifying it against the Buddha's words, how can one know whether it is heterodox or orthodox? The six heterodox teachers directly saw the principles they held; practicing them, they also achieved functional effects and considered themselves orthodox—how could they know it was heterodox? If one uses only inference, lacking both the noble teaching and what is directly seen by oneself, on what basis would one infer, and what Dharma would one infer? Therefore, the three pramāṇas must align in verification before there is certainty. The Chan school already possesses an abundance of direct perception and inference; now, by further sealing them with the sūtras and treatises, the three pramāṇas are complete.
Sixth, doubts are manifold and must be fully resolved. Over several decades, venerable masters of the sūtras and treatises frequently asked me: "The four dhyānas and eight samāpattis all belong to the higher realms; there is no dhyāna in this realm. Anyone cultivating dhyāna must rely on the sūtras and treatises to draw upon the dhyāna-samādhi of the higher realms and cultivate it in this realm. Those whose cultivation succeeds all attain that dhyāna. All doctrinal teachings explain this clearly, and none go beyond it. How can you set aside this and preach a separate Chan gate? Since it does not rely on the sūtras, it is a heterodox path." Another asked: "The sūtras say that one must cultivate gradually for kalpas like grains of sand before realizing bodhi, whereas Chan claims that sudden awakening attains right awakening in a single instant. The sūtras are the words of the Buddha; Chan is the words of monks. To go against the Buddha and follow monks—I privately doubt this is acceptable." Another asked: "The essential purport of the Chan gate has no right and no wrong; whether an enemy or kin applies sandalwood paste or cuts into [the flesh], it has neither anger nor joy. Why then is there hostility like water and fire between Nanneng and Beixiu, and estrangement like the stars Shen and Shang between Heze and Hongzhou?" Another asked: "When the master-disciple lines of the six generations of the Chan school transmitted the Chan Dharma, all said: 'Inwardly, transmit the secret words; outwardly, hand down the robe of faith. The robe and the Dharma support each other to serve as a tally and seal.' After Caoxi, one no longer hears of this matter. I do not know whether those transforming people nowadays speak secret words or not. If they do not, then what is transmitted is not the Dharma of Bodhidharma; if they do, then all who hear should receive the robe." Furthermore, a venerable Chan master asked: "Bodhidharma transmitted mind and did not establish written words. Why do you go against the ancestral master by lecturing on treatises and transmitting sūtras?" Recently, another asked: "Vimalakīrti already scolded quiet sitting; Heze continually rebuked fixing the mind; when Caoxi saw someone sitting cross-legged, he personally took a staff to beat them up. Now I ask: whenever you instruct, you encourage sitting in dhyāna; Chan hermitages stand in rows all across cliffs and valleys. This opposes the school and contradicts the ancestors; I privately doubt this." Although I have replied to each from time to time, those who doubt are thousands and tens of thousands. Pitying those who have not heard, and moreover, since all the objections raised are full of rigid attachments, with each holding to different views that mutually contradict, resolving one doubt only gave rise to another, further compounding their affliction. Therefore, it is necessary to open the meaning of the three gates and evaluate the entire canon."
First 14 of 28 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 禪源諸詮集都序 — Classical Chinese