T1609 Three Short Treatises by Vasubandhu, Sengzhao, and Zongmi

IV. Prajñā without Knowing

153a

Essays of Sengzhao

obtaining the things. That things lack the reality corresponding to their names means they are not "things.

" That names lack the power of obtaining things means they are not "names.

" Thus, names do not correspond to actuality, and actuality does not correspond to names. Since names and actuality do not correspond to each another, where are the "myriad things"? Thus, it is said in the Middle Way Treatisethat there is in things no distinction between "this" and "that, " it is just that people take "this" as "this" and "that" as "that.

"31 "That" becomes "that" in relation to "this, " "this"

becomes "this" in relation to "that.

" Neither "this" nor "that" can be defined

independently of the other. Yet the deluded take the duality as self-evident. Thus, though the division between "this" and "that" originally does not exist, they think that it has never been absent. However, should they attain insight into the fact that "this" and "that" do not exist, will there be any thing left for them that could be called "being"? From this it is known that truly things are not substantially real, they are only made to appear so by conventional designations.

This is why the Complete Realizationdesribes the arbitrariness of names32 and why the master from Yuanlin Grove33 uses the metaphors of the finger and the horse. Such profound teachings are everywhere to be found. Thus again: the Sage rides the vehicle of the thousand transformations yet remains unchanged; he treads amid the myriad objects of delusion yet always penetrates them. This is because he has identified with the self-emptiness of things, instead of imputing vacuity to things through conventional concepts.

Thus it is said in the sutra,

"How marvelous, World-honored One!

Unmoved in the apex of reality, you establish all dharmas. "34 Dharmas are

not established outside of the ultimate, they are established as one with the ultimate.

Is the Dao beyond reach? Touch phenomena—they are the ultimate. Is sagacity beyond reach? Realize them—you will be a like a spirit. 76

IV. Prajñā without

Knowing

[Statement of Topic]

Prajñā: vacuous, tenebrous, the unifying principle of the three vehicles. Truly, it is ultimate unity, free from all distinctions. Yet contentious debates about it have raged on and on.

The Indian śramaṇaKumārajīva was still a youth when he trod into the Great Square35 and set about investigating this mystery. Alone he reached beyond words and images, and wondrously tallied [his mind] with the realm of the Invisible and Inaudible.

36 He subdued the non-Buddhist teachers in

Kapilavastu,

37 and with the wind of his virtue he filled the fans of the East. He would have carried his torch to yet other countries but he hid it in the land of the Liang;38 the Dao does not respond without cause, it responds only when the conditions are ripe.

Hence, in the third year of the Hongshi era (402 C.E.), with the year-star in the second position, the king of Qin took Liang's intent to submit to the [Qin] kingdom as an opportunity to send troops there to bring Kumārajīva. 39

Then I thought, the age of the Northern Sky40 has arrived. The Heavenly King of the Great Qin, whose Dao tallies with the source of the hundred kings of antiquity and whose virtue will nourish a thousand generations to come, he who plays with his blade freely amidst the myriad affairs of state while tirelessly spreading the Dao, he is truly like Heaven for the pitiful beings in this age of decline, like a pillar for the Dharma bequeathed by Śākyamuni. He assembled over five hundred learned monks at the Hall of Free-and-Easy Wandering, and held the Qin text, setting down the correct meaning of the universal [Mahayana] scriptures alongside lord Kumārajīva. Does the path he blazed benefit only his own day and age? It is a bridge [across samsara] for countless ages to come.

Ignorant though I am, I had the privilege of taking part in that august assembly. It was then that I heard for the first time this doctrine so unique and profound. Truly, sagely wisdom is abstruse, subtle, difficult to fathom. 77

153b

Essays of Sengzhao

Free from marks and names, it cannot be captured in images or words. I can do no more than to purge my mind of all images and try to fashion a likeness for it in these my untamed words.

41Yet let no one think that the sagely mind

can be captured in analysis!

It is said in the Radiance,

"Prajñā perceives no marks of existence, no

marks of arising or ceasing.

"42 And in the Dao Practice,

"Prajñā has no

objects of knowing, no objects of seeing.

"43These statements assert wisdom's

illuminative activity, even as they claim that there are in it no individuating marks and, accordingly, no knowledge. What do they mean? There must be a markless knowing, a knowledgeless illumination.

44

How is this so? For every thing that is known, there is a thing that is not known. But in the sagely mind, there is no thing that is known, thus there is nothing not known. This knowledgeless knowing is called "all-knowledge. "

Thus, the words of the sutra true are: "In the sagely mind there is nothing known, nothing not known.

"45

In this way, the sage empties his mind and makes full his illumination. He cognizes constantly yet is always without knowing. Thus he can dim his brightness and conceal his glow, while mirroring mysteriously with a vacuous mind. He can shut down his intellect and turn off his cleverness, while solitarily realizing the mystery of mysteries. In wisdom there is a mirroring that reaches the deepest depths, yet there is in it no knowledge . Spirit has the function of responding to and according [with events], yet it is free from deliberate effort. Since spirit is free from deliberate effort, it can reign sovereign beyond the world. Since wisdom is without knowledge, it can mysteriously illuminate beyond [conditioned] events. Yet, even though wisdom is beyond events it is never without them. Though the spirit is beyond the world it is always within its borders. Therefore, as [the sage] contemplates [the earth] below and [the heavens] above and follows their transformations, he accords with phenomena and responds to them with an inexhaustible acuity, there are no depths to which his vision cannot reach, yet his illumination shines forth with no deliberate effort. This is how not-knowing knows, how sagely spirit accords with phenomena. Now, as for prajñāin its objective aspect: it is actual yet not existent, vacuous yet not nonexistent, present yet beyond description. Is this not sagely wisdom itself? How so? You wish to claim that it is existent? Yet it lacks 78

IV. Prajñāwithout Knowing

form or name. You wish to claim that it is nonexistent? Yet the sage is numinous by its power. Since the sage is numinous by its power, even though it is vacuous it never forfeits its illuminative functioning. Since it lacks form or name, even though it is illuminating it never loses its vacuity. While illuminating it does not lose its vacuity; therefore it merges with things without being altered by them. Even though it is vacuous, it never ceases to illuminate; threfore its every movement meets gross phenomena. In this way the functioning of sagely wisdom never ceases, but seek for it among shapes and marks and you will never find it. Thus Ratnākara says,

"The Buddha acts without conscious intention, "46

while in the Radianceit is written,

"Unmoved in perfect awakening he establishes all dharmas. "47 Clearly, though the traces of the sage reach out in a myriad directions, what they all lead to is one. Hence, prajñācan illuminate while remaining vacuous; ultimate truth can be known despite not being there. The myriad movements can be met in stillness, sagely response can nonexist yet remain efficacious. Such is self-knowing without knowing, self-acting without action. "Action,

" "knowing"

—these

words simply miss the mark.

[Nine Arguments]

[1]

Objection: The sage, his ultimate mind uniquely brilliant, illuminates each and every thing. His responsiveness unlimited, with every movement he accords with phenomena. Since he illuminates each and every thing, nothing eludes his knowing. Since with every movement he accords with phenomena, his responsiveness is never amiss. It is never amiss: he unfailingly accords with all that is to be accorded with. Nothing eludes his knowing: he unfailingly cognizes all that is to be known.

Now, since the sage cognizes all that is to be known, his knowing is surely not without content. Since he accords with all that is to be accorded with, his responsiveness is likewise not empty of content. Since he thus both cognizes things and accords with them, why do you claim that he does neither? If by saying that the sage forgets knowledge and ceases to accord with things you mean only that his knowing and according are free from personal desires—and that for this very reason he is able to 79

153c

Essays of Sengzhao

fulfill his personal desires—then you can only say that the sage is not attached to his knowledge, but can you argue that he does not know at all? Answer: The feats of the sage surpass those of the Two Principles, 48 yet

he is not humane.

49 His brightness exceeds that of the sun and moon, yet this only deepens his darkness. Could one say that he is blind like stone or wood, that he lacks cognition altogether? Indeed, it is just that on account of what distinguishes him from a common person—his spiritual perspicacity—he is not defined by marks of conditioned events. You, sir, would like to argue that while it is not for his own satisfaction that the sage possesses his knowledge, he is never devoid of it. Does this not misrepresent the sagely mind and miss the purport of the scriptures? After all, it is said in a sutra,

"Ultimate prajñāis pure like empty space: not sullied by knowledge or perception, unproduced, unconditioned. "50 That is, this

knowledge is itself without knowledge. How could this knowledgelessness be said to result from a mere "turning back of the illumination"?51 If one were to call prajñā"pure" by arguing that while it does cognize, its objects are essentially empty, such a " prajñā"

would not be distinguishable

from conventional "wisdom.

" Indeed, under this premise the three poisons52 and the four inverted views53 would also have to be considered pure. Why then extol prajñāalone?

If you were to praise prajñābecause of [the properties of] the objects of its knowing, remember: if it has objects, it is not prajñā.Though the objects be perfectly pure, such "

prajñā"can never be considered pure and there is no reason to extol it as such.

Thus, when the sutras describe prajñā as pure, is it not because it is in essence ultimately pure, that is, fundamentally free from deluded grasping? Being fundamentally free from deluded grasping, it cannot be called knowledge at all. It is not only ordinary ignorance that can be called "not-knowing. "

Indeed, [in prajñā] knowledge itself is without knowing. Thus the sage with knowledgeless prajñāilluminates the markless ultimate truth. Ultimate truth is without limitations, like those of the "hare" and the "horse,

"54 prajñā's mirroring leaves nothing unfathomed. In this way, the sage accords [with individual things] without differentiating them, corresponds without affirming. Quiescent, bland, he does not know, yet there is nothing he does not know.

80

IV. Prajñāwithout Knowing

[2]

Objection: Things cannot communicate themselves; in order to render them communicable words are established. Even though things are distinct from names, in reality nameable things that correspond to names do exist. Therefore, for every given name it is possible to identify the thing to which it refers.

Yet you claim that "in the mind of the sage there is no knowing, " even as

you assert that "there is in it nothing that it doesn't know. "

Now, in my view, not-knowing can never be called "knowing, " and knowing can never be called "not-knowing.

" My objection is in line with the doctrine of names, with the fundamental rules of establishing words. You, however, insist that [knowing and not-knowing] are one in the sagely mind, and differentiated [only] in textual descriptions. When I try to follow your words to reach the reality they purport to describe, I do not see how they could correspond. How is this so? If "knowing" correctly describes the mind of the sage, then "not-knowing" cannot be correct. If "not-knowing" captures it, then "knowing" does not apply. If both miss the mark, it is pointless to continue the discussion.

Answer: It is said in scripture that prajñāis inexpressible, no name applies to it: neither existent nor nonexistent, neither full nor vacuous. Though vacuous it never ceases to illuminate; illuminating, it never loses its vacuity. 55

It is a nameless dharma—language cannot express it. However, if not for language, it could not be communicated. Thus, the sage speaks ceaselessly, never saying as much as a word.

Now listen on, as I shall attempt to intimate it for you in these, my untamed words.

The sagely mind is subtle, markless, and cannot be considered "existent. "

Vastly generative in its activity, it cannot be called "nonexistent. " As not

"nonexistent,

" sagely wisdom endures in it. As not "existent,

" the doctrine

of names does not apply to it.

Thus, when "knowledge" is asserted of it, this is not predicated literally but merely to point to its [function of] mirroring. When "not-knowing" is asserted of it, it is not predicated literally but solely to indicate the [absence of] marks therein. To signal its [freedom from] marks is not to assert that it is nonexistent; to indicate its mirroring is not to assert that it is existent. As 154a

81

Essays of Sengzhao

not "existent,

" it knows, and is yet without knowing. As not "nonexistent, "

it is without knowing, and yet it knows. Thus, not knowing is one with knowing. That the two are differentiated in words does not mean they are distinct in the sagely mind itself.

[3]

Question: Wisdom alone, profound and abstruse, can fathom ultimate truth. Thus is manifested the power of sagely wisdom. Accordingly it is said in the sutras,

"Without the attainment of prajñā,ultimate truth cannot be seen. "56

This means that ultimate truth is the condition of prajñā's knowing. If wisdom is defined by conditions, this "wisdom" must be [mere] knowledge. Answer: If we were to consider wisdom in terms of its conditions, we would see that wisdom is not [mere] knowledge. Why? In the Radianceit is said, "To

produce consciousness not conditioned by form, this is called 'to not see form'"57 and "As the five aggregates (skandhas) are pure, prajñāis pure. "

Now, prajñāis the faculty of knowing, the five skandhas are the known. The known is the condition [of knowing]: now, knowing and the known can either exist in mutual codependence, or mutually nonexist. When they mutually nonexist, there is no thing at all that is existent; when they mutually exist, there is no thing at all that is nonexistent. When no thing is nonexistent, [knowledge] arises in response to conditions. When no thing is existent, [knowledge does not] arise in response to conditions. When [knowledge does not] arise dependently on conditions, it only illuminates them and never becomes "knowledge.

" When it does arise dependently on conditions, knowledge and its conditions bring each other about. Thus, the distinction between knowing and non-knowing is defined by the [nature of the] object. How so? If "wisdom" is of the type that knows objects or grasps marks, it is [mere] knowledge. But ultimate truth is markless; could ultimate wisdom then be [mere] knowledge?

Here is why. What is known is not what is known [by and of itself]. Rather, the known arises dependently on the knowing, and since the known arises dependently on the knowing, the knowing likewise arises dependently on the known. Since the known and the knowing bring each other about, they are conditioned dharmas. Because they are conditioned, they are not ultimate. Not being ultimate, they are not ultimate reality.

58It is said in the Middle Way

82

IV. Prajñāwithout Knowing

Treatise,

"Things that exist dependently on conditions are not ultimate. If they existed without dependence on conditions they would be ultimate. "59 Now,

ultimate reality is called "ultimate" precisely because it is not dependent on conditions. Because it is ultimate and thus not dependent on conditions, there is in it no thing produced from conditions. Of this the sutra says, "No existent

dharma can be found that arose independently of conditions. "60

Hence, ultimate wisdom's contemplation of ultimate reality is never the grasping of an object. Since wisdom thus does not grasp objects, how could it be called "knowledge"? This is not to say that wisdom is altogether without knowledge; it is just that since ultimate reality is not an object, ultimate wisdom is not knowledge. Yet you claim, sir, that if we consider wisdom in terms of its conditions, it will prove to be mere knowledge. But since its conditions are itself not conditions, how could it be called "knowledge"? [4]

Question: When you claim that [the sage] does not grasp, do you mean that he is altogether devoid of knowledge? Or that even though he does know he does not consequently grasp [that which he has cognized]? If his not grasping means that he is altogether without knowledge, the sage is like a traveler lost in the dark of night, unable to tell black from white. If his not grasping means that even though he does cognize, does not grasp subsequently, then [the sage] does have knowledge and thus cannot be without grasping. Answer: Neither do I claim that [the sage] is altogether without knowledge and in this sense does not grasp, nor do I argue that, though cognizing at first, he does not grasp subsequently. Rather, his knowing is in itself a non-grasping, and thus he is able to know yet be without grasping. [5]

Objection: You argue that the sagely mind does not grasp, because indeed it is free from deluded grasping, in that it does not reify things. But "nongrasping" means lack of affirmation, and no affirmation means no corresponding [between the knowing and the known]. If so, what exactly is it that corresponds with the sagely mind so as to justify your description of it as all-knowing?

Answer: True, [the sagely mind] is without affirmation and without corresponding. But, as for this lack of affirmation and of corresponding: although 83

154b

Essays of Sengzhao

there is in it no corresponding, there is nothing with which it does not correspond. Though there is in it no affirmation, it leaves nothing unaffirmed. That it leaves nothing unaffirmed means that it affirms while not affirming; that there is nothing with which it does not correspond means that it corresponds while not corresponding. In the words of a sutra, "Seeing all dharmas,

he sees not a thing.

"61

[6]

Objection: It cannot be that the sagely mind does not affirm. Rather, it is precisely because it is devoid of affirmable things that even though devoid of them, it must be able to affirm that very absence of the affirmable. Accordingly, when it is said in scripture that "ultimate truth is without marks, prajñā is without knowledge,

"62 this is indeed because prajñā is free from markperceiving knowledge. How couldprajñā's ultimacy be in any way compromised if it were to know that marklessness as the markless? Answer: The sage does not have [knowledge of the] markless. If he were to take the markless as the markless, he would be turning the markless into a marked. To discard being and cling to nonbeing is like fleeing the mountain peak only to become trapped in a ravine: in neither situation is one safe. Accordingly, the Perfected Person establishes himself in existing while not existing, resides in nonbeing while not nonexisting. Not grasping either being or nonbeing, neither does he reject being or nonbeing. In this manner he can "harmonize his radiance with the dust and toil"63 and travel freely among the five realms of rebirth.

64 Silently he goes, soundlessly he comes; bland,

without deliberate action, there is nothing he does not accomplish. [7]

Objection: Sagely mind may be without knowledge, yet in according with and responding to conditions the sage is infallible. It responds to that which calls for its response, and abides with that which does not. Therefore we can say that the sagely mind now arises [in activity], and then perishes. Can this be so?

Answer: Arising and perishing is the mind of arising and perishing. Since the sage is without mind, how could there be for him any arising or perishing? Yet it is not that he is altogether devoid of mind; rather, non-mind is [the very nature of his] mind. Also, it is not that he does not respond; rather, non-responding 84

IV. Prajñāwithout Knowing

is [the very nature of his] response—that is all. Indeed, the pattern of sagely response is infallible, just like the cycle of the four seasons. [The sagely mind,] in essence vacuous and nonexistent, cannot be described either as arising or perishing.

[8]

Objection: Both the wisdom of the sage and the deluded [ordinary] "wisdom" you speak of in terms of "nonbeing" —of the absence of arising and

perishing. How should one distinguish [between the two]? Answer: When asserted of sagely wisdom,

"nonexistence" points to the

absence [therein] of knowledge. When asserted of deluded "wisdom, " it refers

to the fact that this knowledge knows "nonexistence.

" Though "nonexistence"

is asserted of both types of wisdom, it is used differently in each case. Let me explain. Sagely mind, empty and still, has no knowledge of which it could be said that it [knows] nonbeing; thus we can say that it is a nonbeing of cognition, not that it cognizes nonbeing. Deluded wisdom does possess knowledge: there is in it a knowledge of which it can be said that it [knows] nonbeing, [which is why] I say that it knows nonbeing, not that it is a nonbeing of knowledge.

Nonbeing of knowledge: this is the "nonbeing" predicated of prajñā. Knowledge of nonbeing: this is "nonbeing" [known as] ultimate truth. Now, as for the relation between prajñā and ultimate truth, under the aspect of function they are differentiated in their unity; under the aspect of stillness they are unified in their differentiation. When unified, the mind is not purposely directed to this and that, subject and object; when differentiated, nothing of prajñā's illuminative power is lost. Even though I may speak of their unity, it is unity within differentiation; even though I may assert their differentiation, it is differentiation within unity. Therefore, neither "differentiation" nor "unity" captures the nature of this relation. Allow me to explain further. Within is the light of solitary mirroring; without is the reality of myriad dharmas. Though dharmas are real, it is only through illumination that they can be reached. The power of illumination is activated just when the inner and the outer enter into mutual relation. This is the aspect of function: [under this aspect even] the sage cannot make them one. Knowledgeless illumination within, markless reality without, the inner 85

154c

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

Essays of Sengzhao

and the outer are unagitated, mutually nonexistent. This is the aspect of stillness: [under this aspect even] the sage cannot make them different. Thus when it is said in the sutra, "Dharmas are not differentiated, "65 could

this mean that in order to abolish distinctions one must "extend the duck's legs" or "shorten the crane's neck, " "level the hills and fill up the valleys"?66 No. Here distinctions are not substantialized as distinctions; hence even though they are distinct, dharmas are not differentiated. Thus a sutra says,

"How marvelous, World-honored One! From within the dharma of nondifferentiation you teach that dharmas are distinct"67 and also "Prajñāand dharmas are neither unified nor differentiated. "68 So it is.

[9]

Objection: You say "differentiated under the aspect of function, unified under the aspect of stillness. " Do you mean that in prajñāfunctioning and stillness are distinct?

Answer: Its functioning is one with its stillness, its stillness is one with its functioning; the two are of one body, "one in origin, different in name. "69

Truly, there is here no motionless stillness that could prevail over function. The darker the wisdom, the brighter its illumination; the quieter the spirit, the swifter its response. How could one claim that the bright and the dark, the active and the still, are here distinct? [Concluding Statement]

Thus it is said in the Complete Realization, "[The Buddha] does not act, yet his actions are supreme.

"70 And Ratnakāra says,

"Without discernment,

without knowledge, he has total comprehension. " Such words speak of the

perfect realization of spirit and the full activation of wisdom; they reach the apex beyond the realm of images. Follow these luminous words and knowledge of the sagely mind will be within your reach. 86

V. Correspondence

with Liu Yimin

Liu's Letter

[Preface]

From Yimin, with obeisance.

I have longed to meet you, sir, since I first tasted of your exquisite renown. How is your health now that at year's end the winter frost has arrived? With communication severed I grow ever more concerned about your well-being. Here, the humid countryside has taken away my health; illness is my constant companion.

71

Monk Huiming is setting off to the north, and so I have an opportunity to write you at length.

People of old never allowed mere physical distance to weaken their friendships; shared understanding always kept them close. Likewise, though we have never met, with endless rivers and vast mountain ranges between us, I have always cherished the edifying breeze of your virtue, and with your images and traces reflected in the mirror of my mind deep joy gathers up within me. Yet great distances still separate us and the conditions for us to meet never ripen. I gaze at the rosy-colored clouds and sigh in longing. Please take good care of yourself, in accordance with the seasons. I hope that travel may resume promptly so that I can write you more often. In the meantime I pray that your congregation thrives in harmony and that the foreign master is well.

Your insight and expert analysis, sir, fill this reservoir of wisdom; your exegesis allows one, in the words of the classic,

"to bring the understanding

past the midway point.

" Every time I reflect on the distances between us, my longing is all the more acute.

The mountain monks are pure and resolute in their practice. Single-minded in upholding the precepts, in addition to secluded meditation they devote themselves entirely to study and lecture. It brings me great joy to see them so faithful and dignified. I, too, guided by the promptings of my former lives, 87

155a

Essays of Sengzhao

have come along this noble path. For this I shall remain grateful as long as the sun and moon circle the skies.

Master Huiyuan is well.

72Ever refining his spiritual practice, he is "diligent night and day.

"73 Were it not for the deep undercurrent of the Dao coursing through him, and for the fact that his spirit is driven by the Principle, could he, at the advanced age of sixty, still possess a spirit so vast and indomitable? My gratitude to him deepens as I find here more and more peace and fulfillment. It was at the end of last summer that Master Daosheng74 introduced to me your essay,

"Prajñāwithout Knowing.

" It shows refined beauty of expression,

profound points of doctrine, as well as subtlety and acuity in the explication of sagely writings. I savored it, captivated, unable to put it down. Truly you have bathed your mind in the ocean of the universal teachings [of the Maha yana] and have attained insight into the hall of transcendent darkness. Whoever uses [your essay] as a guide to understanding will witness the diverse currents of prajñāconverge in wordless unity. What joy! Now, words may become treacherous when applied to so subtle a principle; few will respond to a song that is so unlike any other. One who has not transcended words and images will inevitably cling to them and end up in error. [Statement of Topic]

Your analysis of wisdom in terms of its conditions is exquisite, conclusive, superbly refined; its reasoning is without a single fissure. Yet, dull-witted as I am, I have difficulty comprehending it all at once and a handful of doubts still remain for me. I would like to lay them out for you, in the hope that you may respond at your leisure with a rough explanation. In your essay you say that prajñāis in essence "neither existent nor nonexistent, neither full nor vacuous. Though vacuous, it never ceases to illuminate; illuminating, it does not lose its vacuity. . . . [In the Radiance] it is said,

'Unmoved in perfect awakening, he establishes all dharmas. '" Further,

you assert,

"Indeed, it is just that on account of what distinguishes [the sage] from a common person—his spiritual perspicacity—he is not defined by marks of conditioned events.

" You also say that the functioning of the sagely mind "is one with its stillness, its stillness is one with its functioning . . . the quieter the spirit, the swifter its response. "

[You argue then that] the mind of the sage is quiescent, yet it reaches to the apex of Principle, which is one with nonbeing. 75It is "swift without swiftness,

88

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

slow without slowness.

"76 Its knowing does not conflict with its stillness; its stillness does not oppose its knowing. Never is its stillness lost; never does its knowing cease. Thus, the pattern of the sage's engaging with things, accomplishing his acts and transforming the world, is such that he remains within the realm of the nameable, all the while transcending it immensely, united with the nameless.

This mysterious doctrine, I confess, continues to elude me. [Question]

Presently I should like to address these doubts regarding your outstanding essay. Specifically, I would like to inquire what it is precisely that makes the sagely mind different [from the mind of the ordinary person]. Does this difference consist in the sage's thorough mastery of numen and his complete activation of the operations of mind, in wondrous comprehension and dark tallying? Or, rather, does it consist in the sagely mind being essentially self-so, self-enclosed, and self-sufficient, numinously silent in solitary self-apprehension?

If it is the former case, then the terms "stillness" and "illumination" [with which you describe the sage] must be equivalent to "concentration" and "wisdom. " If the latter is the case, the sagely mind has by and large ceased responding to conditions. 77

You say, however, that even though the mind's activities are obscured by the darkness of mystery, it remains extraordinarily active in its illuminating; and that even though the spirit dwells unsullied beyond the world of transformations, it shines the light of discernment with an unparalleled brilliance. To argue such a thesis you must have recourse to a deep realization indeed. In my view, a knowledge that perceives change, responds to occasions, and accords with and responds to beings cannot be considered "nonexistent. "

You write that the sagely mind is "fundamentally free" from falsely discriminating knowledge, but you do not demonstrate how the sagely mind can be without discrimination.

It may be advisable to first determine how exactly the sagely mind accords with and responds to things. Is it that it illuminates the markless alone? Or is it that it completely discerns the marked in all its transformations? If it perceives [nothing but the marked in] its transformations, then this differs from [a perception of] the markless. If it illuminates the markless and 89

155b

Essays of Sengzhao

only the markless, it must be powerless to respond to conditions. You say that there is no phenomenon to which it reaches out, and at the same time that it has the power of according with beings. I do not fully understand this and I beg you to elucidate further.

You write that "though there is in [the sagely mind] no corresponding, there is nothing with which it does not correspond; though there is in it no affirmation, it leaves nothing unaffirmed. That it leaves nothing unaffirmed means that it affirms while not affirming; that there is nothing with which it does not correspond means that it corresponds while not corresponding. "

Now, that there are no things with which it does not correspond, even while it does not correspond: this is perfect corresponding. That there are no things it does not affirm, even as it does not affirm: this is ultimate affirmation. But how could there be an ultimate affirmation that would at the same time not be affirmation at all, or a perfect corresponding that would at the same time not be a corresponding, such that it would allow you to speak of "corresponding without corresponding" and "affirming without affirming"? If what you mean is simply that perfect corresponding is not ordinary corresponding and that ultimate affirmation is not ordinary affirmation, then your words are just a way of referring to the fundamental distinction between insight and delusion, nothing more.

This is the point of your essay that I do not understand. I beg you to explain it once again and dispel my doubts.

The day your essay arrived, Master Huiyuan and I wasted no time in examining it closely. The Dharma master admired it just as I did. You and us lead each other in the pursuit of truth. It is just that our reasoning seems to be based on different principles, and so our understanding may not be identical to yours. Afterward your work was circulated among the community, and many pondered its crucial points. We only regret you cannot be with us now. Response to

Liu Yimin

[Preface]

"Never have we met"78 and long have I yearned for an encounter—in vain. When Monk Huiming arrived, he gave me your letter dated the twelfth month of last year, including your inquiry. As I savored its words, reading 90

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

it repeatedly, in my enjoyment of it I felt as though, if only ever so briefly, you were present here in front of me.

The season of cold winds has arrived; how has your health been since you wrote? As for me, poor in virtue as I am, I have been struggling with exhaustion and have rarely been well.

The messenger makes ready for his journey back south, so I must be brief. Fifteenth day of the eighth month. Sengzhao.

Though our garb differs, we are one in our pursuit of the wondrous truth. Separated by vast rivers and mountains, we are neighbors in a shared understanding. Thus, as I gaze off into the southbound road and my thoughts fly off toward you, a sense of homecoming fills the emptiness under my lapels. Sir, you have now fulfilled your aspiration for noble solitude, beautifully transcending the mundane, and you dwell in secluded tranquility beyond the realm of worldly affairs; the square inch of your heart79 is surely filled with joy.

"Whenever you gather for debate"80 we hear refined song not unlike that of the Bamboo Grove,

81 lofty as it is effortless.

You who are so pure and free, I do not know when at last we will meet! I only wish that you will take good care of your health, and that I may receive news from you whenever there is a messenger. I also hope that the monks on Lushan are in good health, and that the clergy and householders prosper in harmony.

News of Master Huiyuan's well-being comforted me greatly. While I have yet to receive his pure tutelage, I have long revered his superior virtue and hoped eagerly to meet him. How wonderful that the noble Huiyuan, though now over sixty, is still so full of vigor, as he guides his disciples on secluded cliffs and gives himself to contemplation, guarding the One in the empty valley, 82

while praises of his virtue are heard far and near. Often I extend my thoughts toward his corner of the earth, but they vanish on the hazy horizon. Unable to pay him my respects directly, I sigh deeply with regret. But you, sir, are always in his pure presence. Your insight thus deepening, you must be brimming with elation!

[Situation in Chang'an]

The community here is as usual. Master Kumārajīva is in good health. The Qin king is a natural conduit for the Dao, endowed by Heaven with 91

155c

Essays of Sengzhao

extraordinary faculties. He is like a wall and moat guarding the Three Jewels, his mind set on propagating the Dao.

This has attracted monks of great renown, specialists in the wonderful scriptures, to come here from afar, and the edifying winds of Vulture Peak have been gathering force in this country.

The noble Ling's83far-off journey will be a ferry for a thousand generations to come: he brought back from the Western Regions more than two hundred new texts of the universal [Mahayana] teaching.The king also invited a master of Mahayana meditation, a master of the Tripiṭaka, and two masters of the Vibhāṣā.

84

Master Kumārajīva is translating the newly acquired scriptures in Large Stone Temple. This treasury of the Dharma is deep and vast and daily yields new wonders. The dhyānamaster85 teaches meditation at Tilers' Temple, surrounded by hundreds of disciples, who exert themselves tirelessly day and night in dignified harmony. This delights me greatly. The master of the Tripiṭaka86 is translating the Rules of Disciplinein the Middle Monastery. His text is meticulous yet comprehensive, just as if it was the original text when first compiled.

The masters of the Vibhāṣāare working in Stone Ram Monastery on the Indian text of the Śāriputra-abhidharma.

87Though they have not yet begun

with the translation itself, whenever I inquire about their proceedings I hear new and remarkable things.

The greatest fortune in my insignificant life has been to take part in this splendid occasion, to encounter this magnificent transformative event. Regret, as I may, that I was not there in the Buddha's Jetavana assembly, my only other sorrow is that you, O sir of virtue and renown, cannot join us here in the present Dharma gathering.

Venerable [Dao]sheng was here with us for a number of years. Whenever we spoke he expressed deep admiration for you. Abruptly, he had to return south where you, sir, met him. I myself have not heard from him since, and this fills me with unspeakable worry.

When Monk Wei came from Mount Lu (Lushan), he brought with him your poems "In Praise of the Buddha-recollection Samādhi" along with Dharma master Huiyuan's own "In Praise of Samādhi" with preface. In both 92

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

content and form these compositions are exquisite; anyone with a taste for refined writing will recognize their beauty. So sings one who entered the door of sagacity, who knocked on the gate of mysteries. You, sir, and the master must have composed other writings. Why send so few? In the year Wu (406 C.E.) Master Kumārajīva translated the Teaching of Vimalakīrti.I listened with deference to the translation proceedings, and in between sessions I wrote down all of the master's definitive explanations and compiled them into a commentary. Though its form is far from refined, its content rests firmly on the master's authority. I will have the messenger take a copy to the south, in hope that you, sir, may peruse it at your leisure. The questions you send me are subtle and penetrating, and I feel like that man from Ying, perplexed and humbled.

88 Now, my thoughts are not at all

sophisticated and I am clumsy with the brush; moreover, the ultimate realm is beyond words, and any attempt to express it must fail. Endless, endless, is the flow of words, and in the end nothing is asserted. Nevertheless, I shall venture a reply to your letter in these, my untamed words. [Answer]: [Part 1]

In your letter you quoted me,

"The mind of the sage is quiescent, yet it

reaches to the apex of Principle, which is one with nonbeing. " You say that

I assert that [although the sage] remains within the realm of the nameable, he nevertheless far transcends it, united with the nameless. And you added, "This mysterious doctrine, I confess, continues to elude me. "

Now, to see things in this manner you must forget words and have inner realization, you must attain concentration in the square inch of the heart: the "uniqueness" of the sagely mind can never be understood in terms of any "uniqueness" that an ordinary person can reach.

You also wrote [that if the sage's "uniqueness" consists in his] "thorough mastery of numen and his complete activation of the operations of mind, in wondrous comprehension and dark tallying, . . . then the terms 'stillness' and 'illumination' [with which you describe the sage] must be equivalent to 'concentration' and 'wisdom. '" Conversely, if it means that the sagely mind is

"essentially self-so, self-enclosed, and self-sufficient, numinously silent in its solitary self-apprehension,

" then it "has by and large ceased responding

to conditions.

"89

93

156a

Essays of Sengzhao

To this I reply,

"wondrous comprehension and dark tallying" is not equivalent to "concentration and wisdom, " nor is "still numinosity in quiescent

self-apprehension" tantamount to the "ceasing of the power of response. "

The descriptions differ, but the wondrous function is always one. Where word-traces follow from the self, incongruence ensues, but in the sage there is no discrepancy.

Let me explain.

"The mind of the sage illumines silently, yet it reaches to the apex of Principle, which is one with nonbeing. " Now, in that unity all

things converge: once it is asserted that the sage has attained this apex-asone-with-nonbeing, why distinguish between "concentration" and "insight"? For do the terms "concentration" and "wisdom" not fall outside this unity? If these appellations were to emerge within the unity, their very presence would compromise the unity. But since they emerge outside of it, they have no bearing at all on the [sagely] self.

Furthermore, although the sagely mind is vacuous and sublime, it wondrously transcends all limited objects, responds to all stimuli, penetrates all that it encounters, its arcane mechanism operating mysteriously, its responsiveness inexhaustible—surely it cannot be said to have ceased responding to conditions.

Now, as for mind's "being": though one may substantialize being as being, being is not being in and of itself. Thus the sagely mind does not substantialize being. Since it does not substantialize being, [for the sage] being is without being. Since being is without being, it is also without nonbeing. Since it is also without nonbeing, there is for the sage neither "being" nor "nonbeing. "

With neither being nor nonbeing, his spirit is vacuous. How is this so? Being and nonbeing are but the mind's shadow and echo. Words and images are but mental objects produced by contact with these shadows and echoes. When being and nonbeing are discarded, the mind's shadows and echoes are no more. When shadows and echoes cease, words and symbols are nowhere to be found. When words and symbols are nowhere to be found, one will have transcended the world of limited things. When one has transcended, then, and only then, will one have attained "thorough mastery of numen and ultimate activation of the operations of mind. " This

is what I call "wondrous comprehension.

"

This "wondrous comprehension" rests on "the supportless. "

94

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

The "supportless" is in quiescence; when quiescence is attained, vacuity permeates all.

"Wondrous comprehension" is in reaching the apex of things; when the apex is reached, each thing is responded to. When each thing is responded to, [the sage] accords with each and every event. When vacuity permeates all, his Dao transcends the realm of the nameable. It is because it transcends the realm of the nameable that I call it "nonexistent, " and because

it accords with each and every event that I call it "existent. " To thus call it

"existent" may seem to imply substantial existence, but this is just forcing a name on it. Could it really be thus?

It is said in a sutra,

"Sagely wisdom is without knowing, yet there is

nothing it does not know; it is without purposeful activity, yet there is nothing it leaves undone.

"90

This wordless, markless Dao of quiescent cessation: can it be spoken of in terms of "being" as being or "nonbeing" as nonbeing, "motion" as opposed

to "stillness" or "stillness" that nullifies function? Yet today those who discuss it look to immobilize it in words—they seek corners in the Great Square,

91 they force erudition on mystery and cling to

their preconceptions as though they were the final truth. Thus, when they hear that "the sage knows" they think that the sagely mind is a deliberate one; when they hear that the sagely mind "has no knowledge" they imagine it as a vast hollow space. Such assertions of either being or nonbeing are the abode of one-sided views; surely they are not the middle path of nonduality. There is more. Even though things are individually unique, their nature is always fundamentally one: neither can they be seen as things, nor can their thingness be denied. When things are substantialized as things, names and marks arise in profusion. When thingness is not imputed to things, each is identical with the ultimate.

The sage does not impute thingness to things, nor does he deny the thingness of things. Since he does not impute thingness to things, for him things do not exist. Since neither does he deny the thingness of things, for him things do not nonexist. Since they do not exist, he does not cling to them; since they do not nonexist, he does not reject them. Since he does not reject them, things wondrously abide as one with the ultimate. Since he does not grasp them, names and forms no longer bring each other about. When there are no more names and forms, he cannot be 95

156b

156c

Essays of Sengzhao

said to have knowledge. When things wondrously abide as one with the ultimate, he cannot be said to be without knowing. A sutra speaks of this, "As

for prajñāand the dharmas: [the sagely mind] does not grasp them, nor does it reject them; it has no knowledge, nor is it without knowledge. "92This is a

realm beyond the cognition of objects, beyond the deliberate mind. Is it thus not preposterous to try to confine it to either "being" or "nonbeing"? Allow me to speak now of this "being and nonbeing. " [Ordinary] wisdom

arises completely within the realm of marks. Since dharmas are fundamentally markless, how could sagely wisdom be considered [mere] knowledge? Yet when people speak of "not knowing,

" they mean an insentient state,

like that of a piece of wood, a rock, or a mere hollow space. Can this "not knowing" accurately describe that numinous mirror, that candle in the dark, that which was shaped before the beginning and from which nothing, however miniscule, can hide?

Now, not knowing arises in relation to knowing; neither not knowing nor knowing can be asserted [of the sagely mind]. 93 Because there is in it no

knowing, I speak of it as "not being"; because there is in it no not knowing, I call it "not nonbeing.

"

Thus, even though vacuous, the sagely mind never ceases to illuminate; illuminating, it does not lose its vacuity. Nebulous, unperturbedly still, it is perfectly free from grasping and attachment. How could one claim that when active it is "existent" and when still it is "nonexistent"? Thus it is said in a sutra,

"Ultimate prajñāis neither being nor nonbeing, there is in it neither arising nor perishing; it cannot be communicated in words.

"94

Allow me to explain further. When I say it is not "being, " I merely reject

assertions of it as being—I do not affirm it as nonbeing. When I say it is not nonbeing, I merely reject assertions of it as nonbeing—I do not affirm it as not-nonbeing. It is neither existent, nor nonexistent; neither nonexistent, nor not nonexistent.

This explains why while Subhūti discoursed on prajñā incessantly, he claimed never to have said anything. How could one ever communicate this Dao beyond all words?

I wish that you, sir, attuned as you are to sublime things, will understand it. 96

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

[Part 2]

You also said,

"It may be advisable to first determine how exactly the sagely mind accords with and responds to things. Is it that it illuminates the markless alone? Or is it that it completely discerns the marked in all its transformations?" It seems that you assume that "the markless" and "transformations" refer to separate entities. You see "discernment of transformations" as distinct from the "markless,

" and "illumination of the markless" as at odds with reaching out to and responding to events. I fear that this obfuscates the truth of "identity [of emptiness] with the ultimate.

"

It is said in a sutra,

"Form is not different from emptiness; emptiness is not different from form; form is identical with emptiness, emptiness is identical with form.

"95

If what you wrote in your letter was true, then when apprehending form and emptiness, one would have to see form with one mind and emptiness with another. Viewing form with one mind, one would see only form as not emptiness. Viewing emptiness with one mind, one would see only emptiness as not form. As a result, emptiness and form would be torn asunder and their common root would remain beyond reach.

Thus when the sutras speak of "not form,

" they attribute non-formness

to form itself, not merely to that which is already not form. Were they merely attributing non-formness to that which is already not form, this would be like asserting that a vast hollow is in fact vast and hollow: doing so would not advance our understanding. Since, however, they assign non-formness to form itself, they mean that form is not other than non-form, and saying that form is not other than non-form is saying that form and non-form are one and the same.

Thus we know that transformations are one with the markless, and the markless is one with transformations. Yet, this is not the common person's perception of things—thus the conflicting doctrines. If one were to examine closely the abstruse scriptures and rest one's understanding on the original intent of the Sage, could one still insist that the ultimate and the relative require two separate minds, and that emptiness and being need different illuminations?

97

157a

Essays of Sengzhao

Thus as [the sagely mind] illuminates the markless, its power of reaching out to and according with phenomena does not diminish. As it observes the changing, it does not violate the principle of marklessness. When it encounters being, it does not contrast it with nonbeing. When it encounters nonbeing, it does not contrast it with being. Therefore it is said, "Unmoved in perfect

awakening, he establishes all dharmas.

"96

It follows that stillness and function do not obstruct each other. How could one claim that there is a discrepancy between change-perceiving knowledge and markless illumination? You argue, heedlessly I fear, that emptiness and being require two minds, and that stillness and agitation involve disparate functions, which leads you to assert that change-perceiving knowledge cannot be described as "not being.

"

However, if only you could give up your self-attachment within the realm of things and find the dark mechanism beyond the realm of conditioned events; if you could equalize all existents in one moment of vacuity and understand that this perfect vacuity is not [mere] nonbeing, then you would say that while the Perfected Person never ceases to accord with and respond to things, to move in harmony with them, to ride their movements in accord with their transformations, such a person is never confined to being. The sagely mind being like this, could there be in it any discrimination? Yet you claim that I "do not demonstrate how it is that the sagely mind is without discrimination.

"

You also say that the sagely mind "does not correspond: this is perfect corresponding. That there are no things it does not affirm: . . . this is ultimate affirmation.

" These words are quite apt. If you could only affirm without a deliberate mind, and thus affirm in nonaffirming; if you could only correspond with things without a deliberate mind, and thus correspond in noncorresponding! Then you would be able to affirm inexhaustibly while not obstructing nonaffirmation, and to correspond inexhaustibly without compromising noncorresponding. But beware of bringing substantial affirmation to nonaffirmation, and substantial corresponding to noncorresponding—this is the road to calamity. 97

Why? If your "ultimate affirmation" can affirm [in this way], and if your "ultimate corresponding" can correspond [in this way], names and marks will take shape, distinctions will arise between the beautiful and the ugly, 98

V. Correspondence with Liu Yimin

and you will have to struggle through the cycle of rebirth, life after life, without end.

98

Thus the sage empties his breast and rids himself of discernment and knowing. He resides in the domain of movement and function, yet rests in the realm of non-action. He establishes himself within the nameable, yet dwells in the village beyond words. Quiescent, vacuous, he cannot be captured in shapes or names. Such is the sage.

To say that ultimate affirmation can be affirmed and that ultimate corresponding can be corresponded with is to show a lack of comprehension of the noble purport. I fear that while such "affirmation" and "corresponding" may apply to things, it certainly does not apply to the [sagely mind itself]. How could it?

[Concluding Comment]

When word-traces proliferate, conflicting doctrines thrive. But there is something that words cannot express, and something that traces cannot trace. Therefore, those who are skilled at speaking words seek that which words cannot express. Those skilled at tracing traces seek that which traces cannot trace. The highest principle is vacuous and mysterious. The moment you try to represent it in the mind you will have missed the target. How much more so when you attempt to express it in words! It will then, I fear, recede even further into the distance.

I hope, O seeker of the truth, that we shall one day meet beyond words. 99

VI. Nirvana is

Unnameable

Memorial to the Lord of Qin,

Yao Xing, by Sengzhao

I have heard it said that by attaining the One the heavens become clear, the earth peaceful, and the lords of the land bring order to the world. 99

Now I stand humbly before you, your Highness, you whose wisdom is profound and resplendent, you whose spirit accords with the Dao, you who are wondrously in line with the center of the wheel, 100 who encompasses all

principles, who effortlessly plays with the blade101amid the myriad affairs of state while tirelessly propagating the Dao; you whose charisma shields beings like a cloak, and whose every written word becomes a standard for them to follow. Truly, four are the greats in the universe—the king is one of them. 102

Nirvana is the final destination of the three vehicles, the treasury of the universal [Mahayana] sutras. Vast like the ocean, beyond the realm of the visible and audible, tenebrous mystery—it is, I fear, not something that ordinary people can fathom. Unworthy though I am, thanks to the boundless generosity of the king I was able to lead a tranquil scholarly life in the academy and to study under Master Kumārajīva for over a decade. While the myriad sutras vary in their subjects, each with its own central tenet, we inquired first and foremost about the problem of nirvana.

103

Yet my inferior intellect hampered my understanding, and though I was blessed with the finest instruction my mind remained shrouded in a thick fog of doubt. However, I worked tirelessly, exerting my meagre intellect, and at last, it seemed, I began to comprehend a little. However, without an authority to lead me in my understanding I dared not decide on my own. Alas, Master Kumārajīva had passed away and I had no one of whom to inquire. Therein was my boundless sorrow.

Yet, as it is said, O King,

Kumārajīva found spiritual kinship,

"Sagely virtue does not dwell alone.

" You and

"at first look you recognized the Dao"104

101

157b

Essays of Sengzhao

present in each other, and took great delight in this newfound intimacy. 105

You fanned the transformative wind of his profound teaching and so brought understanding to beings in this time of decline.

Your Highness, some time ago I had the honor of reading your response to a letter from Yao Song,

106 the Marquis of Ancheng, who inquired about

the final principle, the unconditioned. You wrote,

"The reason beings wander

on and on through the cycle of life and death is their attachment, their desires. If the desires in their minds were to stop, they would no longer be confined to life and death. No longer in life and death, their spirits would delve into recondite silence, their virtue would harmonize with the vacuous. This is nirvana. Nirvana being thus, how could it accept any name?" This, I say, is the quintessence of the subtle teachings, words that reach the apex beyond images. Who else [but you], whose understanding equals that of Mañjuśrī and whose virtue matches that of Maitreya, could thus propagate the mysterious Dao, be the wall and moat for the Dharma, and again unroll the scroll of the great teaching so as to make manifest its once-forgotten recondite purport?107Your letter, filled with insight and delight, arrested my attention as I studied it intently, unable to put it down. The superior course it charts out—is it fit for our present age alone? No! It is a bridge across samsara for countless eons to come. Yet, your sagely doctrine is abstruse, its principle subtle, its words precise, you are a master craftsman for the high monks, a conduit of liberation for erudite gentlemen—those who cling to verbal designations will, I fear, fail to fully comprehend it.

[For this reason,] and following the model of the "Ten Wings"108 of the Yijing,I have undertaken to compose this essay,

"Nirvana is Unnameable.

"

Mere proliferation of embellished words is not my intention; instead, my goal is to open up and propagate the profound purport of your teaching. The essay consists of nine critical passages and ten responses. I quote broadly from the scriptures for evidence and illustration. Your Highness, as I reverently take up for discussion your thesis of "namelessness,

" I dare not pretend that I have been admitted for an audience with your spirit-mind or mastered the profundities of your teaching. At best, I can attempt a distant intimation of this gate of mystery, in the hope that my words might be of use to fellow students of the Way. 102

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

In concluding your letter you wrote,

"When various exegetes speak of

supreme truth, they all call it 'vast, vacuous, and still, ' and claim 'therein is

no sage.

' Such views have always struck me as too extreme, too far removed from the aspirations of ordinary people. Moreover, if there was no sage, who would be there to know nothingness?" How true, how true are Your Majesty's words! Indeed, while this Dao is obscure and unfathomable, the "vital essence resides therein.

"109 If there were no sage, who would be there to wander in harmony with the Dao?

Previously scholars flocked outside the gate of this Dao, disoriented, distressed, ridden with doubt, unable to see correctly. How fortunate they are now! Your lofty instruction has arrived and the doctrine is all at once made clear. Those who stood outside the gate are now admitted into the mysterious chamber and find peace. Indeed, with your teaching the wheel of Dharma turns again in Jambudvīpa,

110 and the light of the Dao shines once more, as it will on a thousand generations to come. In the present essay I discuss in depth nirvana's nameless nature and put to rest the claim that, in its vastness, it is disengaged from the world. Your Highness, I humbly present to you the following passages. If my essay succeeds in expressing but a fraction of your sagely teaching, I beg that you order it placed in the records. Should it fail to do so, I implore you to provide your generous corrections.

Sengzhao

(Three readings [for the term "nirvana"] are in use: niyue, nihuan,and niepan. This is because [the term] was translated at different times, reflecting differences [in pronunciation] between the central kingdoms and the peripheries. Niepanis the standard reading.)111

Essay

1. Main Doctrine

Author: What is spoken of in the sutras as nirvana— "nirvana with remainder" and "nirvana without remainder" —in the idiom of the Qin is called "the unconditioned" or "cessation-passing across. " "The unconditioned" refers

to the vacuous silence that defines nirvana, that wondrous freedom from all conditioned things.

"Cessation-passing across" points to where "the great 103

157c

Essays of Sengzhao

tribulation has completely ceased" and where the four streams112 have been crossed over and left behind.

Indeed, [nirvana] is the place to which the images in the mirror all return, that recondite abode beyond words.

"With remainder" and "without remainder"

are mere conventional designations for the divergent modes in which the sage responds to things: reaching out to them and withdrawing from them. I would like to discuss this in more detail. Nirvana: silent, vacuous, it cannot be captured in forms or names; subtle, markless, it cannot be known with a deliberate mind. Beyond all existents, it rises mysteriously above them; vast like the great void, it abides forever. Follow it, you will not find its traces; approach it, you will not see its face. Its existence is not contained in the six realms of rebirth, its substance is impervious to [time], that strongarmed thief. 113Vast and nebulous, it seems to effulge in and out of presence. The five types of vision114 cannot see its shape; the two types of hearing115 cannot hear its sound. Dark, inscrutable—could it ever it be seen? Could it ever be known?

Nirvana is all-encompassing, omnipresent, yet it rises up solitarily beyond being and nonbeing. Therefore those who try to name it miss its reality; those who try to know it contradict its simplicity. They who say it exists oppose its nature, while those who say it does not exist violate its body. This is why Śākyamuni shut himself off in a room in Magadha, why Vimala kīrti refused to speak in Vaiśālī, why Subhūti preached without speaking and so made manifest the Dao, and why Indra and the gods rained down flowers [in gratitude for the Dharma] even though they had heard nothing. The sages remained silent; this was because their spirit was driven by the Principle. But did they not preach at all? They preached a sermon on the inexpressible. It is said in a sutra,

"Ultimate liberation is freedom from the realm of

nameable things. It is cessation, eternal peace, without beginning or end, neither dark nor bright, neither cold nor hot, deep like space, beyond description. "116And in a śāstra,

"In nirvana things are neither existent nor nonexistent; here words have no access, the mind's activity is extinguished. "117 If we consider their foundation, the sutras and śāstras are surely not mere idle talk. Indeed, under one aspect [nirvana] does not exist—it cannot be called simply existent; under another it is not nonexistent—it cannot be called simply nonexistent. How so? One may try to establish it in the realm of being 104

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

but [in nirvana] the five aggregates are forever extinguished. One may search for it in the village of nonbeing but [in nirvana] the recondite numen is never depleted of its power. With the recondite numen never depleted of its power, deep and still, [nirvana] embraces the One. With the five aggregates forever extinguished, the myriad afflictions are no more. With afflictions no more, it is merged through and through with the Dao. Deep and still, embracing the One, even though the spirit is active therein, it produces no karma. Active, yet producing no karma, perfect karmanabides in it forever. Merged through and through with the Dao, it permeates all and yet remains unchanged. Allpervading yet unchanging, it cannot be considered existent. Perfect karman abiding in it forever, it cannot be considered nonexistent. Thus it follows that considered from within, nirvana is neither existent nor nonexistent; viewed from without, language fails to approach it. Seeing and hearing do not reach it, and the four kinds of emptiness118 obscure it even further. It is tranquil yet awesome, plain yet grand. All nine classes of beings119 return to it, all sages mysteriously congregate in it. This is the realm of the Invisible and Inaudible and the village of great mystery. To try to discuss this spiritual Dao by labeling it as either "being" or "nonbeing, " by marking off its boundaries—is this not preposterous? 2. Analyzing the Essence

Opponent: Now, names do not arise in a vacuum, designations do not arise by themselves. The designations found in the sutras, "nirvana with

remainder" and "nirvana without remainder,

" must be, respectively, the true

name for the return to the root and the wondrous designation for the way of spirit. Allow me to speak of these in turn.

[Nirvana] with Remainder

When the Tathāgata attained great awakening and his Dharma body was established, he bathed in the pure waters of the eight kinds of liberation and found repose in the verdant grove of the seven members of awakening. 120

After cultivating wholesome deeds for innumerable eons, he at last shook off the dust accumulated over time immemorial. The three illuminations121mirrored within him, his spiritual glow illuminated without. Having at first armed himself with the bodhisattva's resolve,

122finally, in universal compassion, he

delved into the world of human distress.

105

158a

Essays of Sengzhao

Above, he held on to the root of mysteries; below, he reached out to lift the weak and the forlorn. He strode beyond the threefold world; he trod alone into the Great Square. He opened up the eightfold path, a road for the multitude, broad and gentle. He mounted the spirit-steed of the six supernatural powers123 and rode the royal carriage comprised of the five vehicles. 124At will he crossed

the border between life and death, joining with beings as they wandered [in samsara], his Dao harmonized with all, his virtue reaching everywhere. He plunged to where the mother of transformations gives origin to beings, and fully activated the wondrous function of the mysterious mechanism. He draped the firmament of vacuity beyond all borders, and stoked the fire of sarvajñatā125 to illumine the darkness. He was ready to erase his traces from the nine abodes of being126 and immerse himself forever in great vacuity, yet there remained in him a residue of karmic conditions, traces not yet effaced. This residue lingered on like a cloud-soul, and his sagely wisdom endured. This is nirvana with remainder.

In the words of scripture,

"Myriad afflictions are no more, as though transmuted into pure gold, yet his numinous cognition alone abides. "127

[Nirvana] without Remainder

When the Perfected Person (the Buddha) had taught what had to be taught, he extinguished forever his numinous illumination and vanished into the boundless and nonmanifest: this is nirvana without remainder. Of all forms of disease, none is greater than that of having a body—he extinguished the body and returned to nothingness. Of all forms of torment, none is more severe than that of having a calculating mind—he erased it and submerged in the vacuous.

128The mind is taxed by the body; the body is burdened by the intellect. The two pull each other, turning like a wheel on the endless road of misery. It is said in a sutra,

"The intellect is poison, the body

is shackles. Because of them the abysmal silence of liberation remains beyond reach; they are the cause of all tribulations.

"129

The Perfected Person turned his body into ashes and extinguished his intellect, he relinquished his form and discarded his reason. Within, he abandonedthe stirrings of illumination; without, he put to rest the basis of misery.

130 Transcendent, perfectly free from all existents; boundless, he merged with the great vacuous. Tranquil, inaudible, bland, non-manifest, 106

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

mysteriously gone forever into a destination unknown. When a lamp goes out its flame is extinguished, the oil and the flame gone all at once. This is nirvana without remainder. In the words of a sutra, "The five aggregates are no more, like a flame extinguished. "131

[Critique]

This being so, nirvana with remainder can indeed be called "the nameable, "

while nirvana without remainder may be called "the nameless. " With nonnameability asserted, partisans of emptiness will be gratified to find sanction for their belief in that all-pervading silence; with nameability affirmed, those concerned about virtue and morals will have the Sage's actions to look up to as their model. Such are the teachings imparted to us in the authoritative scriptures, the tracks laid down by the sages of old.

And yet you say,

"Considered from within, neither is it existent nor nonexistent; viewed from without, language fails to approach it. Seeing and hearing do not reach it, the four kinds of formlessness obscure it even further. "

When lovers of virtue hear this doctrine they will despair; when proponents of emptiness hear it they will be left without a refuge. You describe a state no different from that of someone who, even though his eyes and ears are as obtuse as when he was still in the womb, and for whom the heavenly bodies are obscured beyond the most distant clouds, nevertheless attempts to pronounce on fine distinctions in musical notation and to discuss the diverse appearances [of astral phenomena]. You, sir, know only to banish the Perfected Person outside of being and nonbeing, to sing lofty praises of what is beyond forms and names. Yet all the while your words lead nowhere and block the recondite path, instead of revealing it. Though I ponder on them intently, they do not bring me peace. Are they really the light in the dark chamber, the wondrous sound that restores hearing to the deaf?

3. Essence Established

Author: The terms "with remainder" and "without remainder" are only external appellations for nirvana, conventional designations for the divergent modes of [the sage's] responding to things. Those who cling to concepts will be bound by concepts; those who are attached to forms and images will be constrained by forms and images. Names reach no further than the definable; forms stop at the square and the round. But there are things that "square" and 107

158b

158c

Essays of Sengzhao

"round" cannot capture, and things that concepts cannot convey. How could names express the unnameable, how could forms truly capture the formless? You are correct to say that the terms "with remainder" and "without remainder" describe the two modes establishing the teaching, through skillful [action] and through quiescence, or the two modes of the Tathāgata's supreme activity, the manifest and the hidden. But they do not refer to, on the one hand, any dark mysteriously quiescent principle beyond words, or, on the other, to some wondrous workings of the Perfected Person in the center of the circle. Have you never heard of "correct contemplation"? Vimalakīrti said, "The way I

see the Buddha is as one with no beginning or end, one who has transcended the six senses, who has left the triple world behind, one who is neither somewhere nor nowhere, who neither acts nor does not act, one who can neither be cognized with consciousness nor known with knowledge, one beyond language, one whose mental operations are extinguished. To view in this manner is called to contemplate correctly; to view otherwise is to not see the Buddha.

"132 And the Radiancesays,

"The Buddha is like empty space. He

neither comes nor goes. He manifests in response to conditions, he dwells in no definite location.

"133

As for the sage's position in the world: silent, vacuous, he does not grasp, he does not contend, he leads without asserting himself, he responds to each stimulus without fail, like an echo in a dark valley or images in a clear mirror. Face him, no one knows from where he came; follow him, no one knows where he goes. He emerges suddenly into being, suddenly he disappears. The more active he is, the more quiescent; the more hidden, the more manifest. From the darkness he emerges, to the darkness he returns; his transformations follow no predefined pattern.

As for these appellations, they are established to indicate the various modes of [sagely] response. When [the sage] manifests traces, we call this "arising"; when he makes them vanish, we call this "cessation. " His "arising"

is referred to as nirvana "with remainder,

" his "cessation" as nirvana "without

remainder.

" All along both appellations—

"with" and "without remainder"

—

remain rooted in the nameless. Surely the nameless Dao will take any name? Thus, the Perfected Person becomes a square when he inhabits a square, a circle when he stops in a circle, a heavenly being when among devas (gods), a human being when among humans. To become a devaor a human being 108

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

in accordance with circumstance is surely not something that devas or humans could do. It is precisely because he is neither a devanor a human that he can become one or the other.

As for his transformative rule, he merely responds, he does not act deliberately; he follows the causes, he is not being charitable. Not being charitable, his charity is perfect; not acting deliberately, his action is unsurpassed. He is unsurpassed in his action, yet he goes back to ordinary accomplishments. He is perfect in his charity, yet in the end he returns to the nameless. It is said in scripture,

"The Dao of bodhicannot be measured; it has no

top, no bottom, it is expansive, and deep without limit. Great, it envelops Heaven and Earth; miniscule, it penetrates into that which has no openings. Thus it is called 'Dao.

'"134 Clearly "being" or "nonbeing" cannot capture the Dao of nirvana.

Yet when the deluded consider [the Buddha's] extraordinary feats135 in the world they assert his existence, and when they reflect on his passing into cessation they assert his nonexistence. Yet how could one, from within this realm of being and nonbeing, from this domain of delusive thought, adequately express his abstruse Dao and adjudicate on the sagely mind? I say that the Perfected Person is quiescent, imperceptible, without any external form. The hidden and the manifest aspects of his being originate in one source. Although present, he does not "exist"; gone, he does not "nonexist. "

How so? The Buddha said,

"There is no birth realm where I am not born,

but I am never born. There is no form that I do not take on, but even while embodied I do not have a body.

"136This means that though present, he does

not "exist.

" It is also said in a sutra,

"The Bodhisattva entered limitless samādhi and saw all the buddhas of the past who had passed into cessation. "137

Also,

"He entered nirvana, yet did not [enter] parinirvāṇa. "138 From this we

know that, while vanishing, the Tathāgata does not simply nonexist. Not nonexistent: while nonexistent, he exists. Not existent: while existing, he does not exist. Existing, he is nonexistent: therefore "being" cannot be attributed to him. Nonexistent, he exists: thus "nonbeing" likewise does not apply. Hence, we can conclude that nirvana transcends the domain of being and nonbeing, and leaves the path of names and images far behind. Yet you say that the Sage saw the body as the source of the greatest distress, so he extinguished the body and returned to nothingness. He saw the unawakened 109

159a

Essays of Sengzhao

mind as the source of the greatest torment, so he eradicated it to submerge in the vacuous. Is this not a violation of the Sage's spiritual perfection, an injustice to his profound teaching?

It is said in a sutra,

"The Dharma body is formless, in responding to things

it takes on particular shapes. Prajñāhas no knowledge, it just illuminates in response to objects.

"139

As [the Sage] hastens to engage the myriad events, his spirit stays unperturbed; as he responds to each of a thousand exigencies, his mind remains unruffled. In movement, he is like wandering clouds; in repose, he is like the valley spirit.

140 Would he tangle his mind in discriminations between "this" and "that,

" or his emotions in the distinction between "movement" and "repose"?

Since he does not bring a deliberate mind to his movement or stillness, he does not show discrete forms in his coming and going. Since he does not impute a discrete form to his coming and going, there are no shapes that he cannot assume. Since he does not bring a deliberate mind to his movement or stillness, there are no stimuli to which he fails to respond, What I mean is that [the Sage's] "mind" arises in response to the deliberate mind [of beings]; his "forms" emerge in response to the existing forms [in the world]. Since his forms do not emerge from his self, even if he were to tread on molten rock and metal he would not be burned. 141 Since his mind

arises not from his self, even though he delves into everyday affairs he remains unperturbed.

142 Could the tangles of [conventional distinctions like that between] self and other constrain his self?

Thus the Sage's wisdom embraces all things yet it is never belabored; his bodily form fills the eight directions but this brings him no distress. If you add to him, he will not overflow; if you subtract from him, he will not be lessened. 143How could anyone take literally the story that he contracted dysentery on the way [to Kuśinagara], that his life ended under the twin trees, that his spirit ceased in the regal casket, and that his body was cremated on a pyre?144 Yet all the while the deluded, investigating the traces of his extraordinary responsiveness, cling to the evidence of their eyes and ears. Carpenter's square and ruler in hand, they go about trying to measure the Great Square: they want to find the Perfected Person belabored by knowledge and distressed 110

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

by bodily form.

"He discarded being to delve into nonbeing, " they claim,

and then assign to him corresponding names. Surely what they do is not picking words of subtlety from the realm beyond speech, or pulling the root of mystery from the vacuous field. 4. [Question:] Examining Transcendence Opponent: As the Primordial Chaos began to differentiate, the myriad existents divided among the triad [of Heaven, Earth, and humanity]. Then, in the wake of being, nonbeing ineludibly followed. Nonbeing is not selfcaused; it depends on being, as is expressed in the saying, "High and low

fulfill each other.

"145 This is a universal law, the pinnacle of all laws. Thus, at the beginning, all that the mother of transformation gave birth to and nurtured, whether manifest or hidden, however strange or uncanny— all that was being. Subsequently, as beings began to transform out of existence, nonbeing ensued—all that was nonbeing. These two realms of being and nonbeing completely encompass all principles. It is said in scripture that the two dharmas of being and nonbeing subsume the entirety of dharmas.

146Also spoken of are the three unconditioned dharmas: empty space, extinguishing of afflictions by means of analytic meditation, and extinguishing without analytic meditation. The extinguishing of afflictions by means of analytic meditation is nirvana. 147

Yet you say,

"beyond being and nonbeing there is a wondrous Dao, more wondrous yet than either being or nonbeing—nirvana. " I should like to get

to the root of this "wondrous Dao. "

If it does exist, then, however wondrous, it cannot be called nonbeing; if, however wondrous, it cannot be called nonbeing, then it must belong to the realm of being. If it does not exist, then, as nonbeing, it is devoid of any distinctions; if, as nonbeing, it is devoid of any distinctions, then it belongs to the realm of nonbeing.

In sum, there cannot be anything that while other than being would not amount to nonbeing, or anything that while other than nonbeing would not amount to being.

Still you say,

"beyond being and nonbeing there is a wondrous Dao, neither being nor nonbeing—nirvana.

" Your words reach my ears but they do not enter my heart.

111

159b

Essays of Sengzhao

5. Above the Realm

Author: Indeed, the categories of being and nonbeing do encapsulate all dharmas, comprise all principles. However, that which they encompass is merely conventional truth. It is said in a sutra,

"What is ultimate truth? The

Dao of nirvana. What is conventional truth? The dharmas of being and nonbeing. "148 Let me elucidate.

Being is possible only in relation to nonbeing, nonbeing only in relation to being.

"Being" comes about by an assertion of nonbeing, and "nonbeing" by a negation of being. In this way, being is born of nonbeing and nonbeing is born of being: what is called "being" is the being of nonbeing, and what is called "nonbeing" is the nonbeing of being. Apart from being there is no nonbeing; apart from nonbeing there is no being. Being and nonbeing depend on each other, just as do high and low, for where there is high, there is low, and where there is low, there must be high.

149 Thus, even though being and

nonbeing are distinct, they never escape the domain of being. Out of this [duality] words and images emerge and affirmation and negation arise. Could they capture the recondite apex, represent the spiritual Dao? Accordingly, the reason I speak of nirvana as "transcendent" —beyond

the realm of being and nonbeing—is indeed that the dharmas of being and nonbeing are confined to the realm of the six sense objects, and the realm of the six sense objects is not the abode of nirvana.

150 With "transcendence" I

free nirvana from [these confines].

Seekers of the Dao, this subtle recondite path, should vest their minds in that transcendent domain, capture the meaning and discard the words, and realize its essence as neither being nor nonbeing. How could anyone claim that beyond being and nonbeing there exists yet another existent that could be named? When the sutras speak of the three unconditioned dharmas [it is for this reason]: the endless tangles that bind the multitude are all produced by severe affliction, and of all the types of affliction none is more severe than [attachment to] being. Since no concept is farther from "being" than that of "nonbeing, "

[the sutras] use it as an expedient to elucidate [nirvana's] not being a being. They merely indicate that [nirvana] is not a being, they do not assert that it is a nonbeing.

6. Inquiring into Mystery

Opponent: You yourself say that nirvana exists neither beyond the realm 112

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

of being and nonbeing, nor within it. If it does not exist within it, it cannot be found within. If it does not exist beyond it, neither can it be sought beyond. If there is thus nowhere that it can be found, there is altogether no such thing. Yet it cannot be that this Dao simply does not exist. Since it cannot be nonexistent, this recondite path can surely be found: the thousand sages followed it and did not return empty-handed. It must exist—yet you insist it is neither beyond the realm of being and nonbeing nor within it. Your assertion is extraordinary. I implore you to elucidate.

7. Wondrous Presence

Author: Now, speech is an expression of names, names arise in response to marks, marks depend on that which can be marked. The markless cannot be named. Without names there can be no speech, without speech there is nothing to hear. It is said in a sutra,

"Nirvana is neither a dharma nor a nondharma. Inaudible and inexpressible, it cannot be known by the [ordinary] mind.

"151 How could I dare speak of it? And you, sir, how could you desire to hear about it? Yet Subhūti once said,

"If the assembly can receive without

a deliberate mind and hear without hearing, I am ready to speak without words.

"152 Now you ask me to speak, so I will.

Vimalakīrti said,

"To attain nirvana without leaving the realm of afflictions: this is correct meditation.

"153 The goddess said,

"Enter the buddha field

without leaving the realm of Māra.

"154

This is because the mysterious Dao resides in wondrous insight. Wondrous insight is unification with the ultimate. To unite with the ultimate is to view being and nonbeing as equal. In this equalizing vision, self and other are no longer two. Of this it is said,

"I am of one root with Heaven and Earth, the

myriad things and I are one body.

" In this unity between self [and things]

there is no longer any [duality between] being and nonbeing, but as long as [things and] self are separate perfect comprehension is impossible. Thus, [nirvana] is neither beyond nor within the realm of being and nonbeing— the Dao resides in the spaces between.

155

The Perfected Person's illumination is dim, his mind vacuous, yet there is nothing he does not encompass. He takes into his breast the entire world in the six directions, yet his numinous mirroring is never depleted of its power. In the square inch of the heart he mirrors all existents, yet his spirit remains vacuous. Indeed, he plucks the root of mysteries from the time before all time; 113

159c

Essays of Sengzhao

he unites with all movement with an unmoving mind. Tranquil, bland, silent like an abyss, wondrously he tallies with the self-so nature of things. This is because even though he dwells in being, he is not of it; even though he resides in nonbeing, he is not of it. Not part of nonbeing, he does not substantialize it as nonbeing; not part of being, he does not substantialize it as being. In this way he can be not apart from the world, even as he is not a part of it. Further, just as dharmas have no marks of being and nonbeing, so does the sage have no knowledge of being and nonbeing. That he has no knowledge of being and nonbeing is because he has no deliberate mentation within. That dharmas have no marks of being and nonbeing is because there are no discrete phenomena without. No discrete phenomena without, no deliberate mentation within; "this" and "that" mutually quiescent, extinguished, things and "I" darkly unified, nebulous, without traces—this is nirvana. Nirvana being thus, all attempts to measure and define it must fail. How could you seek for it within the realm of being and nonbeing? How could you pursue it without?

8. Questioning the Distinctions

Opponent: You say that nirvana is not bound to the realm of the measurable and definable, hence it transcends the sphere of the six senses; it is neither within nor without, yet here the recondite Dao is singularly present. This is the ultimate Dao, the consummation of Principle and of Nature, wondrously unified, undivided. This may be true.

However, in the Radianceit is said,

"The three vehicles differ with regard

to the unconditioned.

"156Also, the Buddha said,

"In the past, when I was a

bodhisattva by the name of Sumedha, I entered nirvana in the presence of Dipaṃkara Buddha.

"157 Sumedha Bodhisattva first attained the forbearance in the face of the nonarising of dharmas on the seventh stage, and continued to practice into three more stages.

Now, if nirvana is one and undivided, it should not allow for three more stages. If it does allow for three stages, it cannot be the ultimate. An ultimate Dao that allows of gradations? The sutras disagree.

158 Where can we look

for a resolution?

9. Distinctions Defended

Author: You are correct, the ultimate Dao in principle is undivided. The 114

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

Lotus Sutra says,

"The supreme great Dao cannot be twofold, but for the benefit of the indolent, where there is One Vehicle I teach that there are three.

"159This is just as [in the parable of] the three carts [that the father uses to prompt his children] to leave the burning house. Since all [three vehicles] [get beings] out of life and death, in all cases can we speak of the "unconditioned. " It is just that what is used as the vehicle differs [among the three cases], so we use three distinct names.

160All the while the final destination

is certainly one and the same.

Further, in your question you say, [quoting scripture,] "The three vehicles differ with regard to the unconditioned.

" This only means that since beings

are of three types, there must be three ways of realizing the unconditioned, not that the unconditioned itself is of three different types. Accordingly, it is said in the Radiance,

"Is nirvana differentiated? It is

not. It is just that in the Tathāgata's case karmic defilements have all been extinguished, while in the śrāvakathey have not.

"161

Allow me to elucidate this abstruse point with an ordinary example. Suppose a man is cutting a log of wood. If he cuts off a foot-long piece, that foot-long piece is now no more. If he cuts off an inch, an inch [is no more]. The differences in the length [of the remaining material] are determined by how much has been cut off, not by the nonexistence [of the severed pieces] itself. Nirvana is like this. Beings, in their immense plurality of forms, differ in their spiritual potential, in the depth of their wisdom's mirroring, in their propensity for virtuous conduct. Thus, though they all arrive at the other shore, there are between them differences of level. Could the other shore itself be differentiated? It is only the seekers that differ. Thus, while the scriptures contain different doctrines, what they all lead to is one. 10. Scrutinizing the Difference

Opponent: Since all [the children] leave the burning house, the freedom from suffering [they attain] is [in all cases] one. Since all [beings] leave lifeand-death, the unconditioned they reach is [in all cases] one. Yet you say that the other shore is itself not differentiated and that differentiation pertains only to the "selves" of beings.

The "other shore" is the shore of the unconditioned. The "self" is that which realizes the unconditioned. Dare I ask, what is the relation between the "self" and the "other shore"? Are they one? Are they different? 115

160a

160b

Essays of Sengzhao

If the self is one with the unconditioned, the unconditioned is also identical with the self, and thus we cannot say that while the unconditioned is not differentiated, there is differentiation that pertains to selves. If the self is distinct from the unconditioned, then the self is simply not the unconditioned: the unconditioned always remains just the unconditioned, the self always remains just the conditioned, and the passage to their dark union is forever shut.

Therefore, if we see the self and the unconditioned as one, the doctrine of the three [vehicles] cannot hold. If we see them as distinct, the doctrine of the three [vehicles] cannot hold. Why speak of "three vehicles" at all? 11. Differences Unified

Author: If you stay on this side, you are of this side; once you reach the other side, you are of the other side.

"If you accord with gain, gain makes

you into gain; if you accord with loss, loss makes you into loss. "162 When

the self reaches the unconditioned it is one with the unconditioned. However, although the unconditioned is one, this is no reason to object to the diversity [of the selves].

For example, [imagine that] three birds escape from a net and fly off into a place free from suffering. The freedom they gain is the same for all, yet each bird is different. That the birds differ does not imply that the freedom itself is differentiated; neither does the freedom's sameness imply that the birds are the same. In short, the birds are one with freedom, freedom is one with the birds, but how could this mean that freedom itself is differentiated? Any differentiation pertains only to the birds.

By analogy, beings in the three vehicles all flee the cage of delusive thought, and they all reach the realm of the unconditioned. Although the unconditioned they reach is the same [for all], the vehicles [that brought them here] vary. That the vehicles vary does not mean that the unconditioned itself is differentiated; neither does the unity of the unconditioned mean a unity among the three vehicles. In short, the selves are one with the unconditioned, the unconditioned is one with the selves, but how could this mean that the unconditioned itself is differentiated? Any differentiation pertains only to the selves.

In sum, just as [the birds] differ in how far they fly into the open, even while the freedom [they attain] is the same, likewise, although the unconditioned is 116

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

one, the [three types of beings] differ in the depth of dark mirroring they attain. The unconditioned is one with the vehicles; the vehicles are one with the unconditioned. It is not that the selves are distinct from the unconditioned, only that not all realize it completely. Hence the doctrine of three vehicles. 12. Critique of Gradualism

Opponent: The tangles of affliction grow profusely163 from the root that is delusion. As soon as delusion is severed, afflictions cease. Beings of the two vehicles attain the wisdom of eradication.

164 Bodhisattvas attain the wisdom of nonarising. 165 In that moment, [in both cases] delusion is completely eliminated, afflictions are wholly uprooted. When afflictions cease, the mind reaches the unconditioned. As the mind attains the unconditioned, the principle of nirvana stands in full view, without any leftover obstructions. It is said in a sutra,

"The various forms of sagely wisdom do not conflict with each other: they all neither depart nor dwell in the world of being and nonbeing, and are all in reality empty.

"166Also,

"The great Dao of the unconditioned is even, equal, not two. "167

If it is indeed "without two,

" then [if beings realize it] they cannot have

different minds. If they do not realize it, let us stop the discussion here and now, but if you insist that beings can realize it, then they must all reach fully to the depths of that subtle wondrous Dao. Yet you say that even though they realize it, not all do so completely. I do not understand this. 13. Gradualism Demonstrated

Author: The unconditioned is without two, this much has been established. What has not been demonstrated is whether one can eliminate the afflictions, the accumulated karmic hindrances, suddenly and all at once. It is said in scripture,

"All three arrows hit the target; all three animals succeed in crossing the river.

"168 "Hitting the target" and "crossing the river" are in all cases the same, but there do remain differences of depth, resulting from the varying capacities [of those involved]. Likewise, beings in the three vehicles all cross the river of dependent origination, all attain insight into the "target" of the Four [Noble] Truths; they leave the relative behind, identify with the ultimate, and rise up into the unconditioned. And yet, all the while what is used as the vehicle differs, because the beings possess different capacities for understanding. 117

160c

Essays of Sengzhao

Many are the things in this world, but their number has a limit. Yet, even if one were as wise as Śāriputra or as eloquent as Maitrāyaṇīputra, 169 even

though one may fully exert one's skill and wit, one will not be able to behold that limit. How much more so with regard to that vacuous dharma, the domain of twofold mystery: it is limitless! Do you insist that one can eradicate all afflictions and so realize it completely in an instant? Is it not written in the book,

"To study is to daily accrue; to practice the

Dao is to daily diminish"?170 "Practice of the Dao" is practice toward the unconditioned. Since progress toward the unconditioned consists in "daily diminishing,

" how could it be called "sudden attainment"? Diminish diligently, diminish again, until you have reached what can no longer be diminished. The allegory of the firefly and the sun,

171 as found in scripture, captures well

the [different grades of] wisdom.

14. Against Movement

Opponent: The sutras teach that after [Sumedha] attained the Dharma body and entered the realm of the unconditioned, his mind became unknowable to ordinary knowledge, his form unfathomable through ordinary perception. His body was purged of the aggregates and sense fields, and his mental functions were extinguished. But it is also said that "He continued on to progress through three more stages, accumulating stores of merit. "172

Now, such further progress could only be the result of harboring aspirations, such accumulation of merit can only arise from the activation of desires. Aspirations cause clinging and aversion, desires trigger gain and loss. [The Bodhisattva's] mind was thus defined by clinging and aversion, his body shaped by gain and loss, yet it is also said that his body was purged of the aggregates and sense fields and his mental functions were extinguished. Two inconsistent descriptions, two conflicting ideas, all directed at one person. A wayward traveler asks for the road, you point to the south and call it the north!173

15. Movement and Stillness

Author: A sutra says,

"The sage does not act, yet he leaves nothing undone. "

He does not act: although in motion, he is constantly still. He leaves nothing undone: although quiescent, he is constantly in motion. Still yet constantly in 118

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

motion, he never perceives things as one. In motion yet constantly still, he never perceives them as dual. Nondual: the more active he is, the more still. Not one: the more quiescent he is, the more active. Thus [for the sage] activity is identical with non-action, and non-action is identical with activity. While movement and stillness are distinguished [in words], [in reality] they are not distinct. In the Dao Practiceit is written,

"His mind neither exists nor does it not

exist.

"174To say it does not exist means that it is not a deliberate mind. To say it does not nonexist means it is not simply a lack of mind. How so? The deliberate mind is [limited to] the manifold beings; a lack of mind is a vast hollow space. The realm of beings is confined by delusive thought; the vast hollow cancels out numinous mirroring. How can you speak of the spiritual Dao, of the sagely mind, as limited by delusive thought and canceling out numinous mirroring? Sagely mind does not exist, yet it cannot be called nonexistent. It does not nonexist, yet it cannot be called existent. As it does not exist, within it thought has completely ceased. As it does not nonexist, it tallies unfailingly with each individual principle. Since it tallies unfailingly with each principle, it greatly amplifies the power of myriad things. Since thought has completely ceased within it, even though it completes actions, they are not of the "I. " Thus [the

sage's] responsiveness to beings is unlimited, yet he never acts; he is still, motionless, though never without action. In the words of a sutra, "He engages

his mind in no deliberate activity, yet there is nothing he does not act upon. "175

Sumedha said,

"In the past, eon after eon, I gave away to innumerable people the wealth of my kingdom and my life. But since I gave with a mind marred by delusive thought, it was not true giving. Now I offer to the Buddha these five flowers in full comprehension of the birthlessness [of dharmas]. Only this can be truly called 'giving.

'"176Also, after entering the gate of liberation

through the realization of emptiness, Empty Practice Bodhisattva said, "My

practice continues, this is not final realization.

"177

Hence, the more vacuous the sagely mind, the more expansive his action; he acts constantly but this never obstructs his non-action. Therefore the Fortunate Eondescribes giving without there being anything to surrender, 178 the

Perfect Realization praises activity without action,

179 the Dhyāna Canon

extols objectless compassion;180 and the Viśeṣacintiexpounds on knowledgeless knowing. 181

119

161a

Essays of Sengzhao

Mysterious is the sagely teaching: its formulations are diverse, while the reality behind them is one. It is just that descriptions of the sage's "action" cannot be taken to mean that he engages in deliberate activity, nor can speaking of his "non-action" be taken to mean that he simply does not act. [As is said in scripture,] "the bodhisattva establishes himself in the universal non discriminating dharma gate of both eradication and noneradication of afflictions":182 neither does he eradicate activity, nor does he dwell in non-action. This explains our case. Your claim that [I confuse] north and south shows, I fear, that you do not quite understand.

16. Tracing the Source

Opponent: If not for beings, there would be no one to ride the three vehicles. Without the three vehicles, the attainment of nirvana would be impossible. It follows that beings must precede nirvana. This in turn means that nirvana must have a beginning in time—and whatever has a beginning must also have an end.

Yet a sutra says,

"Nirvana has no beginning, no end, it is peaceful, akin to empty space.

"183 If nirvana exists previously, then it cannot be something to be attained later, after a period of study. 17. The Perennial

Author: The Perfected Person is empty, devoid of all images, yet it is through his "self" that all things are established, and it is through his according with things that his own identity is perfected. Such is the Sage, none other. How so? Without the Principle sagacity is impossible; without sagacity the Principle cannot be. When through [insight into] Principle one has become a sage, the sage is no different from Principle. 184

Thus, when the Ruler of Gods asked,

"Where should one seek prajñā?"

,

Subhūti answered,

"One should not seek prajñāwithin form, nor should one seek it outside of form.

"185 Elsewhere it is said,

"To see dependent origination

is to see the Dharma; to see the Dharma is to see the Buddha. "186These passages confirm that [for the Sage] things and self are not distinct. So the Perfected Person collects the mysterious mechanism [of his mind] in what is prior to all manifestation, and vests its recondite workings among things already transformed. He gathers together all [things present in the] six directions, and reflects them in the mirror of his mind. He unifies past 120

VI. Nirvana is Unnameable

and future, thus establishing his body. Past and present interpenetrate, beginning and end are one. In perfect mastery of both root and branches, he never imputes any duality. Vast, expansive, perfectly equal—this is nirvana. It is said in a sutra,

"Attain nirvana without discarding dharmas.

"187And

"Dharmas being boundless, bodhiis boundless.

"188These passages show that

the way to nirvana leads through wondrous tallying; the gist of wondrous tallying is in recondite unity. Things are not distinct from the self, the self is not distinct from things; things and self mysteriously converge and together they return to the limitless. Seek its front, you will not find it; seek its back, it is not there. Ideas of "beginning" or "end" have no place here. The goddess said,

"How much time has elapsed since the Elder attained liberation?"189 18. Investigating Attainment

Opponent: It is said in scripture that the nature of sentient beings is defined entirely by the five aggregates.

190 It is also said that the attainment of nirvana

is the eradication of the five aggregates, like extinguishing a lamp. So [with the attainment of nirvana] the nature of beings is completely eradicated along with the five aggregates, the Dao of nirvana is established solitarily beyond the triple world of being. These two domains are separated by a chasm so vast that it should be impossible for beings to attain nirvana. If you do insist that such attainment is possible, this can only be if the nature of beings is not defined by the five aggregates. Or, if it is so defined, then the five aggregates cannot be completely eradicated, for if they were completely eradicated who would be present to attain nirvana? 19. Attainment in Mystery

Author: Now, the ultimate arises from detachment; the relative is born of attachment. Attachment leads to "something attained"; detachment opens up to the nameless. Thus, one who models himself after the ultimate will unite with the ultimate; one who follows the limited will end up defined by the limited. You, sir, take attachment as "something attained, " and so you seek

[for nirvana] among attainable things. I view attainment as "nothing attained" and so I speak of nirvana as attainable within nonattainment. When setting out an argument it is necessary to first establish its basic premise. If we want to speak of nirvana we need not do so from outside of it. 121

161b

Essays of Sengzhao

Yet if we were to try to speak of nirvana from within it, would there be any being left outside of nirvana wishing to attain it? How is this so? Nirvana wondrously stops all conventional calculation, it fuses the Two Principles,

191 it purges the myriad existents, it equalizes gods and humans, and it unifies the one and the many. Look within it and you will see no "self"; listen inwardly and you will hear no "me. " It is neither something attained nor something non-attained. It is said in scripture that nirvana is neither identical with nor distinct from beings.

192Vimalakīrti said,

"If Maitreya is able to attain liberation, all beings should also be able to attain it. Why? Because by nature all beings are always already in cessation, they do not need to attain cessation anew. "193This shows

that cessation is attained in the cessationless. Also, beings are not "beings,

" so who could be the attainer? Nirvana is not "nirvana,

" so what could be attained? The Radiance says, "'Is bodhi

attained from being?' 'No.

' 'Is it attained from nonbeing?' 'No. ' 'Is it attained

from both being an nonbeing?' 'No.

' 'Is it attained from neither being nor nonbeing?' 'No.

' 'So is it not attained at all?' 'Not true. How so? To be without anything attained is attainment; one attains being without anything attained.

"194 Since to be without anything attained is attainment, could there be anyone unable to attain nirvana?

The recondite Dao resides in the transcendent realm: it is attained in not attaining. Wondrous wisdom is present beyond things: it is known in not knowing. The Great Image is concealed in the shapeless: it is seen in not seeing. The Great Sound195 is hidden in the soundless: it is heard in not hearing. Thus nirvana embraces all eternity, guides beings from all directions, cures them of their poison, it is "loosely woven, yet nothing slips by, "196 vast,

expansive like the ocean, there is nothing that does not proceed from it. The brahmacārin said,

"I have heard that the Buddha's teaching is vast, deep, boundless like the ocean, not a single being is not perfected by it, and not a single being is not delivered by it. "197

With this, now, the roads of the three vehicles stand open, the ultimate and the relative are demarcated, the Dao of the sages is secured, and the unnameability of nirvana is demonstrated. 198

122