Groundless Self-Illumination: How ChatGPT Self-Corrected a Zen Translation's Footnote
Soh

It's interesting that ChatGPT (tested using o3-mini-high model) can reflect and self-correct correctly without much prompting.

While translating Silent Illumination 默照銘 - Zen Master Hong Wen Liang's Commentary on a Text by Song Dynasty Master Hongzhi Chan:


Soh: 

This footnote of yours is very bad and does not reflect the text. Do you know why? “Footnotes/Annotations: – The teacher stresses that the naturally self-illuminating “essence” (本体) is not an object located somewhere but is the very ground from which all phenomena arise. “


ChatGPT:

Assessing the footnote

I’m piecing together why the footnote doesn’t match the text, noting a discrepancy between the teacher's explanation of 本体 and our translation's interpretation.

Revisiting the footnote

The footnote seems off-target, amplifying the teacher's message and not quite capturing their intention, which might lead to a skewed understanding.

Reevaluating footnote errors

Analyzing the footnote, it misinterprets the teacher's teachings by suggesting a specific essential locus, while the essence is inseparable and inherently manifests as mountains, water, fish, and birds.

Clarifying manifestation

I’m refining the footnote to accurately reflect the teacher's point: the essence shines through phenomena like mountains, water, fish, and birds, without being confined to a specific location.


Below is an explanation of why the original footnote does not accurately reflect the text:

The footnote states that the teacher “stresses that the naturally self-illuminating ‘essence’ (本体) is not an object located somewhere but is the very ground from which all phenomena arise.” However, the text does not claim that the essence is the “ground” or source from which all phenomena arise. Rather, the teacher emphasizes that the essence is self-illuminating and is not confined to or located in any particular place. In the text, it is stated that the light emitted by the essence does not come from a “location” where the essence is stored; instead, phenomena like mountains, water, fish, and birds are themselves the direct expressions of that inherent luminous quality.

Thus, the original footnote overinterprets the text by suggesting a “ground” or substrate from which things emerge, when the text is really stressing the non-local, self-manifesting nature of the essence. A more accurate note would explain that the teacher insists the fundamental essence is not a separate, fixed entity that “produces” phenomena from a specific location but is the intrinsic, self-illuminating quality that is expressed directly in all manifestations.



——


Update: 


There is a nice post by Kyle Dixon recently:


Krodha/Kyle Dixon:


“In the system you mention, Dzogchen, "ground" is a chosen translation of the Tibetan term gzhi. The gzhi is not actually a "ground" of phenomena, or anything like that necessarily. The gzhi is more like the basis for the path and result, and we see the gzhi positioned in this triune framework of the basis (gzhi), path (lam) and result (bras bu).


The gzhi is just the nature of your mind (sems nyid), which is defined as inseparable clarity and emptiness (stong gsal dbyer med).


"Ground" as a translation for gzhi is actually fairly misleading and lends to some significant confusion. The gzhi is really just referring to something that is to be recognized about one's own mind.


Dzogchen teachings do not propose that there is a "ground of reality," the gzhi is also just pedagogical. The sgra thal gyur tantra, the key explanatory text for Dzogchen, states:


Since there is no basis or foundation, dwell in emptiness.”



Also see:

Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm


Labels: | edit post
0 Responses
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)