Some Buddhist Responses to New-Confucianism

·期刊原文
SOME MING BUDDHIST RESPONSES TO NEO-CONFUCIANISM

Chun-Fang Yu
Journal of Chinese Philosophy

15 (1988)

371-413

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.