弘明集 6.38

6.38

Zhou's question says: Your treatise says, 'arriving at the root, they are identical.' May I ask, what principle is that which is called 'the root'? In speaking of Daoists, do they not take the Two Chapters [of Laozi] as primary? In speaking of Buddhist teachings, should they not take prajñā as the central principle? What the Two Chapters prize reaches the ultimate in emptiness and non-being; what prajñā contemplates illuminates the dharma-nature to its limit. Although emptiness/non-being and dharma-nature are identical in their tranquility, their methods of establishing tranquility and their purports are distinct. When your treatise speaks of 'reaching the ultimate without duality,' does it mean reaching the ultimate in emptiness and non-being, or being without duality in dharma-nature? Or is there another root outside of these two paths? Could it be that emptiness/non-being and dharma-nature do not differ in their tendency? If there is another root, I wish you would explain the nature of this other root; if they are not different, I would like to hear the explanation of their non-difference.