John Tan
What master Hong Wen Liang is saying is,
from the dependent arising on parts using the scientific explanations, in each of the parts (conditions), there is no such said "image as seen“ so how does movement of coming and going arise? From the lights to the nerves system to the brain and even to the retaina, the image is inverted and not the same as the "seen image that is moving", so what and which "movement of image" are we referring to? Therefore mind's attachment of coming and going to these images are false.
• 
  
• Reply
• 3m

Chinese Original: https://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_e2c0f730010301ib.html

English Translation:

Selected Analyses from the Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Hongzhi Zhengjue

Seeking through forms and sounds misses the true path

A talk by Teacher Hong Wen-liang

Date: December 31, 2000

Venue: Main Hall, Enpo Buddhist Charity Association, Singapore

The Diamond Sūtra says, “If one seeks me by form, or seeks me by sound, that person practices a deviant path and cannot see the Tathāgata.” Think about it: many friends who cultivate now take this as a fine and beautiful state. The Diamond Sūtra clearly says so, yet when we practice we forget it. Many people while sitting, reciting the Buddha’s name, or counting breaths, hear something by the ear—mantras or the Buddha’s name resounding there—and at that moment feel it is very special and are certainly delighted. Apart from the body, the nose smells fragrance; entering a Buddha hall, sitting, reciting, chanting scriptures, before long one seems to sense the whole room filling with fragrance—the scent of sandalwood—how marvelous, and one is pleased. But is this not exactly what the Diamond Sūtra calls “seeking me by form, seeking me by sound”? To use form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects to seek the Buddha is to be unable to see the Tathāgata; it says such a person travels a deviant path—this is the way of Māra.

Yet in actual cultivation we fail to attend to this; we forget and set it aside. This must be examined. Today’s theme—seeking through form and sound, the path is not yet correct—comes from a line in Chan Master Hongzhi’s “Inscription for the Pure Joy Room.” It has the same intent as what the Diamond Sūtra just stated.

“Seeking through form” means seeing buddhas and bodhisattvas; “seeking through sound” means hearing mantra tones—as if only then one has skill in practice. In that case the path is not yet correct; practice in this way is untenable. “Not yet correct” is like walking a deviant path; it is not right. Such a simple matter, yet we insist on not believing it.

Neither going nor coming depends on appearances

If seeking through form and sound leaves the path not yet correct, how then should we seek? In practice, should it not be good for buddhas and bodhisattvas to appear? It is indeed good—but do not make a fuss over it. Do not take it as a fine sign of progress—do not! Why is “seeking through form and sound” incorrect? “Motion and stillness do not depend on mind; going and coming do not depend on appearances.” (In the original text, the character for “appearance” lacks the “human” radical.) Let me explain why this is so, adding a little brain physiology with simpler language.

First, “going and coming do not depend on appearances.” Suppose someone walks in; we say he has come in. After a while he leaves; we say he has gone out. Do we not base his appearing and disappearing, his entering and leaving, on his visible appearance? “Going and coming do not depend on appearances” means: do not rely on the bodily appearance to determine going and coming. How then do we know that he has come and gone? Even for someone of great attainment, or a truly awakened practitioner—what Chan calls “illumining the mind and seeing one’s nature,” truly discovering right awakening—if a person comes and goes, does such a one refrain from relying on the person’s appearance to say he has come and gone, and instead rely on what—his mind? his feelings? his thoughts? If the awakened one knows what the person is thinking, then when the thought comes, he knows he has come; when the thought leaves, he knows he has gone. Because the awakened one is awakened, he knows what is in that person’s mind. If this were so, then indeed he would not depend on appearance; he would know the other’s mind. “Ah, without looking at him, I look elsewhere; he has come in. I did not look at his appearance, but I have the ability to know his mind. As his thinking draws nearer, I know he has come.” Is this the meaning? If not, then what does “going and coming do not depend on appearances” mean?

Since we cannot rely on the bodily appearance, how do we know another’s coming and going? The Buddha said, “If one sees me through form, seeks me through sound, that person walks a deviant path and cannot see the Tathāgata.” We all think: “To see the Buddha, I must not see through his body.” For example, Avalokiteśvara is one figure, Mahākāla is another, Vajra Ḍākinīs another—we distinguish which deity it is by bodily form, or we think chanting a mantra indicates which bodhisattva has arrived. It says we may not do this; actually this is not the meaning of the Diamond Sūtra. If a dog runs in or a cockroach crawls in, that is neither a bodhisattva nor a human being. If you have truly awakened and seen the nature, you will not take the dog’s or cockroach’s appearance as the fact of coming and going. Then what? Do we rely on the nature of the Tathāgata? “The Tathāgata’s nature has neither coming nor going.” How do you know it has neither? Because the books say so. We must inquire: why is it said thus? The Śūraṅgama Sūtra also says: nothing truly comes or goes. Fine—what truly exists? Movement or stillness arises due to conditions.

What is this “existence” in fact? Practically speaking, when we say a person or a dog has come in, we see an appearance arriving and leaving. Speaking thus is expedient speech. In daily talk we may say, “So-and-so has gone out; so-and-so has come in”—that is permissible. But in ultimate truth, in its true scope, there is no coming or going. This does not mean erasing appearances, nor that one who has attained becomes blind, saying, “Though he clearly comes in, I cannot see.” That would make you a blind person from over-cultivation. It is not like this! One who has attained sees him come and sees him go—dogs, cats, birds, even fish in the pond—all fine—there is coming and going. It is not that high attainment annihilates appearances. The true meaning of appearances coming and going is like appearances in a dream: there is coming and going in the dream, but when awakened the dream’s comings and goings are gone—provided one truly awakens. Before awakening, one does not know; in a dream there truly seems to be coming and going. This is an analogy. Śākyamuni Buddha also knew that people do not dream in the daytime, yet the daytime realm shares the same nature as a dream. We have difficulty fully accepting this. Obviously it is daytime; I have not slept. You want me to regard this as dreamlike—I cannot. Dreaming is one thing at night; meeting together in the day is another. To forcibly regard the day as a dream is hard to accept, is it not? Yet using the dream analogy helps to clarify: the comings and goings we see now are like dream appearances. It is easier to understand this way, though still not easy to actually take daytime as dreamlike, because the two seem utterly different. Thus when we read sutras or hear Dharma explanations that phenomena are like dreams and illusions, inwardly we may nod yet feel it strange; it is hard to do.

How appearances arise

Let me use modern science for explanation, which meets less resistance. For example, how do I see him? Not by the ear or the nose, but by the eye. How does the eye see him? There must be light and distance. If he is too close—no space between his face and my eye—I cannot see him. There must be distance and light; the light must be on; the eye must be healthy—a blind person cannot see; the brain must be healthy—a person in a vegetative state cannot see, because there is no visual cognition; one who has just died still has intact eyes but there is no picture, no response. (All dharmas arise from causes and conditions, therefore they are without self-nature.)

Ordinarily we say someone has arrived. How do we know? The person’s appearance—his look—passes through the eye with the help of light. The eye is like a camera; the camera does not know what it has captured. Our eye is the same. The appearance falls, inverted, upon the retina; the inverted image lands there. That alone we do not yet know—because the eye, like a camera, merely receives. The image on the retina is transformed into another kind of signal—speaking simply—this message is sent to the brain region specifically for vision. The brain has many cooperating divisions—some for seeing, some for hearing, smelling, tasting, thinking. When someone comes in, an appearance—just like a camera—the eye moves and this stimulus or message is sent along nerves to the visual cortex. It receives the message, like a television receives a broadcast. That area of the brain changes—the neurons change. Note this neuronal change is not “the person’s appearance.” Do not suppose the dog is the dog’s shape, the cat the cat’s shape, the fish the fish’s shape, directly entering the brain. No! The appearance reaches only as far as the retina, and that retinal image is inverted—head down, feet up. Then this message is relayed to the visual cortex, which “uprights” it into a normal orientation. Beyond the retina there is no longer the shape or existence of that appearance.

To simplify: when I see him, what actually happens is this: owing to light, an alteration occurs upon my retinal cells; the retina converts “this message,” not “this image,” into another message and sends it to the visual center, where neuronal changes occur. (When I rap on a table, vibrations through the air change; sound arises.) When I see him, because of various conditions, the neurons responsible for seeing alter; but in the brain there is no “his image.” These are correlated changes: red makes one pattern, white another, green another—different patterns move there.

How can such changes “command” the brain to produce an image? Suppose seeing red moves like this; white like that; green like another; yellow like yet another. How could you possibly transform that into an image appearing before your eyes? Because we ourselves have this capacity—not something we think up. We cannot willfully turn these changes into an image before us. It is not our fabrication. There are such changes here, and naturally an image seems present before our eyes. A flower appears as the image of a flower before us; yet in fact the flower’s image is not manifest “over there.” Without the entire chain of light, retina, and visual pathways to neuronal changes, we would not know an image of a flower “here.” The image does not directly enter the brain. Recognizing this is crucial! It is here, in me—within a brain area for vision—that changes arise because there is a flower before me. It is not that the image enters the brain. From this place—these brain changes—we, with our inherent capacity, convert these changes into an apparent image before us. Got it? The neuronal change is simply: when seeing you it moves thus; seeing him it moves so. Is that “movement” your image? Does that neuronal change equal your image? No. It is merely differing neural change. Red, white, long, short, round—the scale and scope of change differ—and we have the astonishing capacity to let such neural motion appear as dog, cat, fish, blue sky, white clouds before our eyes. Remarkable! It is only neuronal alteration—not an image projected into the brain. These are two utterly different things. We must be clear: do not “seek through form and sound.” All of this is only cellular change within the brain; and the visual neurons are extraordinarily steady in their response.

Pre-existent morality, concentration, and wisdom

The same holds for hearing. Auditory neurons receive frequency patterns: on “ah” they move like this, on “ee” like that. Are they stable? Very! A given “A” tone always makes the same movement. If sometimes it moved this way, other times that way, we would be lost. This is what is meant by “originally pure”: profoundly steady—not that we first cultivate concentration and then it becomes steady. Regardless of moods, when “A” arrives it moves thus; when “B,” thus; when “C,” thus. Our faculties never mislead us. They keep precepts; they abide. Whether drunk or sober, they move as they should. It is not that when drunk, the “A” waveform shifts and we hear something else. If interpretation fails, that is the fault of the discriminating function. The auditory cells themselves do not waver: pleased or displeased, they move exactly according to the sound. They are faithful to their office—equally so. How do we come to hear A and E? There is wisdom here—an innate wisdom, not learned from books, Dharma talks, or empowerments. That our eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind bring in information that allows us to veridically experience “this kind of flower,” “this sort of sound”—if not wisdom, if not miraculous power, what is it? We already have it. Why then speak of seeking morality, concentration, and wisdom? That is a deception. Yet why do we emphasize it? Because we take what is not self to be self; thus we must cultivate morality, concentration, and wisdom. What is not you is troublesome, prone to evil and disorder; it must be trained and tamed. In truth, what we are—the functioning essence of the six faculties in operation—is our very self, our true self. The functioning-essence—six faculties with six kinds of functioning—has different modes but is one functioning, one essence, moving together as one with the great storms and earthquakes of the cosmos—thus there is no “self-appearance.” It is only because we posit an “I” that problems arise.

The meaning of “not relying on appearance” is this: the flower’s image does not rush into the brain for the brain to read and say, “Oh, this is a white flower!” It is not like that. No image runs into the brain. Borrowing light’s configuration—shape, size, spatial relations—the appearance is converted into another message and sent into the brain; the brain receives and changes accordingly. From this change, we have the capacity—we have wisdom—specifically non-discriminating wisdom. Why non-discriminating? Because no thinking is stirred. Therefore this change appears as “white flower.” Why not “Liu Miss”? Because there is no thought stirred. It is by this innate wisdom—this is the great miraculous power spoken of by the Buddha, possessed by everyone. Otherwise how would a change here appear as a white flower, and a different change there as a fish? Did we ever have to think or exert effort? Not at all. It is inborn. So, when you say an image comes and goes, what we actually have are physical relations—light, distance, and so on—inducing neural change here. There is change and then no change. Is there still “the image”? No. There is no image—only neuronal motion. Where is the “appearance”? Nowhere. “Going and coming do not depend on appearances.” We have always already been in this state—not because we perfected morality, recited, kept precepts, and visualized. Dogs and cats are the same; not just humans. Buddhas too: a Buddha’s step and our step are the same. When the Buddha hears “ah,” we hear “ah”; the same tone. The Buddha will not hear it as “ee.” If we hear “ee,” the Buddha—were he present—also hears “ee.” In this capacity there is no difference between ordinary beings and Buddhas: mind, Buddha, and beings are not two—this is said constantly. Yet we insist on cultivating to become some great master, on “awakening”—when in fact we are originally awake; not recognizing it is called delusion. Recognized, where is there delusion or awakening?

The coming and going of appearances are only the brain’s neurons changing. When there is such a change, it “moves thus”; when the appearance is absent, it no longer moves thus. It is only the difference between motion and no motion here. Where is “your appearance” in this? Nowhere. To take the coming and going of your appearance as coming and going—neurons would protest. This is what Buddhism calls inverted delusive thought. Understand this first; then sutras become intelligible. I am not speaking “my theory,” nor is the Buddha speaking “his.” This is simply how things truly move. He pointed it out. The Buddha did not propound an opinion or theory. Whether or not you grasp theories, we function this way. Ear, eye, nose, tongue, body sensations—alike. The hardest is that we fail to distinguish “mind” and “thought.”

A thought arises—the thought “flower.” Only when the mental faculty moves does the thought “flower” arise; it is not seen by the eye but arises in mind. The mental faculty lacks a concrete form like eye or ear by which we can discriminate; it is diffuse. For example, thinking “flower” is like ear hearing A, B, or C: the change for “white flower” is one pattern; the change for “dog” is another. When the ear receives a sound and the auditory cells move, will that alone let you hear? Movement alone is still only movement. We have another capacity—the sixth consciousness—that differentiates. “Ah—A; B; red; white”—it reads the change as distinct sounds and names. The same with the mental faculty: a thought of “white flower” enters; the mental base receives this visit and also changes. At that moment do you already know it is “white flower”? Not yet. Only when discriminating consciousness adds its function do you say, “Ah, I thought of a white flower, of a dog.” Do you understand me? It is not that as soon as the mental base moves you immediately know “dog.” A thought arises, but you do not yet know what thought it is. Without the discriminating function, it is merely a thought’s coming, like the ear receiving a waveform without yet distinguishing dog from cat. These are the same sort of situation.

The “speaking Dharma” of the insentient

Those who cultivate by the mental base are more common among Chan patriarchs. The Buddha saw the morning star—this was the eye faculty. Seeing peach blossoms, too—this is “going and coming do not depend on appearances,” originally not the appearance’s coming and going. A peach blossom falls from the tree; we see it fall (ordinarily this is our realm). But suddenly, that once, in the visual cells’ moving—in the difference between motion and no motion—there is a change of suchness, and “that change itself is knowing.” There is not an additional “knower” apart from it reading the change. This is the final move. Ordinarily we invert things by taking the change to be something for an “I,” with a separate capacity, to read—the visual or auditory change—and then calling that change “delusive thought.” This is wrong. Because the change itself is knowing; hence “knowing without striking against phenomena, illuminating without adopting an object,” therefore “seeking through form and sound leaves the path not yet correct.” If we do not investigate from here—if one seeks the Buddha by form or sound—even if one can recite the Diamond Sūtra fluently, does one understand its true meaning?

Now we borrow scientific knowledge to assist understanding: originally it moves like this, but we do not know and think there is an “I” that sees and hears. So we take coming and going to be appearances, whereas in fact here there is only change. One can even see clearly that the change itself is awareness—there is no additional faculty that looks at the change and reads it, projecting it as an external image. The change itself is knowing; do not fabricate another “knower” to read the change. Calling it this or that is mere expedience. In reality there is no “subject and object.” There is no positing of a “knower” that knows a “known.” Thus the flower—the image of the flower—arises as change here; and the change itself already includes knowing. There is no faculty that must know the brain’s change. This is the “Dharma-speaking” of the insentient: the flower, too, expounds Dharma. Do not take “Buddha-nature” to be a knowing spirit opposed to objects. If you reify the supreme, pure “knowing” of human discrimination as Buddha’s awareness, you are utterly mistaken. Then you will not understand “the insentient speak the Dharma.” What is that? This thing here changes. Without this thing, no change arises. The change is of the four great elements; the brain, composed of the four, has no master; the outer object of four elements has no master either. Inner and outer four are without owner and communicate—non-dual. It is the same one thing moving. “The movement itself” is knowing; there is no “knower” that looks at the movement. (Because there is no subject and object, this is called the insentient speaking Dharma.) Chan Master Zhaozhou said: What is Buddha-nature? A stone by the road; a cypress in the courtyard.

Motion and stillness do not depend on mind

“Motion and stillness do not depend on mind” is the same point. I lift my hand—I know there is motion; I place it down—there is stillness. Every inlet of appearance produces different light changes, so the brain changes correspondingly; receiving differing stimuli, it changes accordingly—this mutual responsiveness is correct. Inside and outside were never divided. We think we see and hear “outside” because we imagine it so; in truth our six faculties do not pass through any “outside.” They move together as one. Someone “scolds me”—what is that? It is only that sound moving here. The auditory cells do not say, “You are scolding me,” and thus move smaller so that it is not heard. Loudness moves larger; softness moves smaller. This is our original state. When you scold and I get angry, that is because we fabricate a fanciful “I.” Hearing something unpleasant, an “I” arises to interfere, and we are thrown into confusion.

The six faculties are originally pure; we then take their purity as “my function,” and further take the sixth consciousness’s discriminations as “myself,” and thus suffer myriad afflictions. Hence Chan patriarchs often say: do not talk Chan, do not talk Dharma, do not speak Buddha. How to practice? Truly recognize your own true look. Where does this look manifest? In our six faculties. The six faculties are the functioning-essence; what power is this functioning? It is the Buddha’s power; everyone has it. So simple—yet we endlessly chant mantras, recite names, seek empowerments and blessings. But is that not all the sixth consciousness’s demand? This fellow—this “I-appearance”—is troublesome; all day it demands. Today it wants this; tomorrow it wants that; this year one thing, next year another. We may think this teacher is no good and look for another, because we habitually listen to that fellow. The sixth consciousness is like Sun Wukong—never satisfied, always chasing novelty, thinking only the new is correct. Yet our six faculties are originally so pure and such; our Buddha-nature is originally evident in the six.

“Motion and stillness do not depend on mind”: taking hearing as example makes it clearer. When there is sound, there is movement; when there is no sound, stillness. Our usual habit is: when there is sound, a “mind” rises up—“I heard a dog, a cat, a bird.” But does such a thought arise inside the ear? No. Without any thought, it veridically produces the corresponding change—non-discriminating discrimination. This is our original mind-ground scenery, the clear, wondrous field made manifest.

Before waking from the dream there are countless anxieties: one must become a Buddha; where is the Western Pure Land—closer to the west or to the east? Ratnasaṃbhava in the south safeguards health; Akṣobhya in the north displays marvels; Amitābha is in the west—do not go astray to the east… All this fretting is thinking—everyone speaking at cross purposes. Now fond, now averse—how then are the eyes and ears to function? If liking made the eyes capture more vividly and dislike made them blur, that would be chaos; but our eyes do not heed such whims. Red is red, white is white, blue is blue; large is large, small is small. What is received is not judged beautiful or ugly. Only after reception does the discriminating consciousness, conditioned by culture and upbringing, add judgments of beauty and ugliness. That is all right; this discriminating function is also an operation of the dharma-body. Knowing this, we can use discrimination without being deceived by it—that deceiver is the “I.” As Zhaozhou said: before awakening I was used by the twenty-four hours; after awakening I use the twenty-four hours.

“Motion and stillness do not depend on mind” does not mean there is a mind that knows the presence or absence of sound. There is no such mind. The outer sound and the movement here are one and the same. Without the condition of the outer sound, here there is no movement; and if there were no “here,” outer sound would be of no use. Thus the movement here and the sound there are one thing. Do not divide inside and outside; such language is only for convenience. In body and mind one easily discovers the non-dual state. This non-dual state is the Buddha’s state; it is the Pure Land. Where else will you seek the Pure Land? Right now we are moving within the Pure Land and do not know it. We clutch what is false and try to polish it to reach the Pure Land—how strange! We stand within the Pure Land and search outside for the Pure Land.

“Motion and stillness do not depend on mind; going and coming do not depend on appearances; seeking through form and sound leaves the path not yet correct”—all because we do not understand and keep seeking Buddha and Pure Land outside. “The path not yet correct” means one is walking deviant Dharma.

Everything is already present—your native scenery

Chan patriarchs do not gauge your learning or practices; they only ask whether you have seen your nature. What is “seeing nature”? Discovering who the true “I” is. It is not that by study, cultivation, or recitation one reaches that realm. Be clear: from beginningless time it is the six faculties that grant us great miraculous function and great use, and yet we do not thank them—we seize the false as the self. That which never was born will not die; yet we take this rank skin-bag as self and seek longevity and mastery over rebirth—madness! Because there is a false self, there is birth and death. When we recognize the great life of the universe itself—does it have birth and death? An earthquake: the condition comes, so there is shaking. Elsewhere, a great quake; on the Pacific, a typhoon—does a typhoon have birth and death? With dependent arising and empty nature: when conditions converge, there is arising; without conditions, it ceases. This very ground is the field of clear, wondrous luminosity. Say it “exists”—you cannot see it. Say it “does not”—appearances arise with conditions. Understand this and you have seen the nature, knowing you are not this stinking skin-bag. Whether deluded or awakened, drawn to tantra or vinaya—all the same: the great functioning moving as functioning-essence.

Chan Master Dizang had a disciple, Master Wenyì, learned and fond of the doctrine “the three realms are only mind; the myriad dharmas only cognition.” One day Dizang pointed to a large stone in the pavilion: “Wenyì, you say all dharmas are cognition; the three realms are only mind. I ask you: is this stone inside your mind or outside?” Wenyì could not answer. If he said “outside,” then “only mind” would fail; if he said it was not inside, “only mind” would be a lie. He replied, “It is inside my mind.” Dizang said, “Placing a big stone in your mind—won’t that be exhausting?” Exhausting indeed.

This question wore at Wenyì for a month and a half. Day after day he brought answers; Dizang knocked them down: “Buddhadharma is not like that. Inside is wrong; outside is wrong; the middle between inside and outside is wrong.” After a month and a half, out of answers and about to leave, Dizang took pity: “Wenyì! In fact, I tell you—everything is already present.” At that instant, Wenyì awakened.

Where are clouds? In the sky. Where is water? In the cup. Everything is already present—do not overthink.

We have not discovered the “birth-place” of “motion and stillness do not depend on mind; going and coming do not depend on appearances,” so each unawakened person’s individual mind and discourse becomes everyone talking past one another. Not having seen nature, we do not understand. Everything is already present!

Have you heard the sound of stone or bamboo? Have you seen a peach blossom fall? Everything is already present—not through thought. Do not imagine that intellectual understanding is awakening.

We do not understand our own fundamental nature; we have not touched our native scenery; we have not struck the wondrous source. It is not scholarship, thought, or emotion that can reach it. Yet we must pay attention: “Seeking through form and sound leaves the path not yet correct” has already pointed out the direction of practice. Apply effort here—this is true effort.

When Master Wenyì truly awakened and taught from the hall, someone asked, “Master, what is the true first meaning of the Buddhadharma? What did the Buddha intend to transmit? What is the supreme meaning?” Wenyì said, “If I were to tell you, it would already be the second meaning.” Once it is spoken, it is the second meaning—not the thing itself. To analyze things with scientific theory may sound impressive, but all of that is words and sound, unrelated to the functioning itself. Spoken, it is the second meaning—no longer it. Durian is delicious—no matter how well we describe it or even watch a video, that is not the durian itself. Unless you taste it personally, it is not durian. Can the first meaning be spoken? However one speaks, it is not it. So too with the Buddhadharma.

Patriarch Sengcan said: “The supreme Way is not difficult; it only dislikes choosing.” We are already on the Way; of course the supreme Way is not difficult. What more Way is there to seek? Do not aspire to become some great accomplished master. “Choosing” is to look outward—to seek outside. What suits me I take; what does not I reject; I make myself the lord. And who is this lord? The false “I.” The manifestation of the supreme Way—the Buddha-nature—already displays as our very body, yet we still seek outside. Thus “the supreme Way is not difficult; only do not love and hate.” The six faculties originally have no love and hate; it is the false “I” that loves and hates. Motion and stillness do not depend on mind.

“The three realms are only mind; the myriad dharmas only cognition.” All beings—sentient and insentient—are included. Hearing “mind,” we sometimes use “mind” in language to point to the whole native scenery; but this “mind” is not the grasping mind. Many misunderstand and think that apart from sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts there is some other thing, and that this “mind” “transforms” them. How does it “transform”? It is simply by changing here, thus and so. It is not that “it transforms them”; it itself is them—and yet not them. Not that it is “exactly identical,” yet nothing can appear apart from this great mind—the Buddha-mind, not the grasping mind. Apart from the Buddha-mind, nothing can exist. In Buddhist learning we abbreviate this as “neither identical nor separate”: not identical with it, and yet not separable from it. “Is the stone exactly it?” Not exactly. “Apart from it, could there be a stone?” Impossible. This is doctrine—mere theory; in truth it is not “it.” “Neither identical nor separate,” “neither existence nor non-existence”—such formulas are the simplest theoretical pointers to the Buddha’s realized realm. Is the stone exactly it? Not exactly. But apart from it, could there be a stone? Impossible. Therefore this is difficult to show forth. One cannot reach it by theorizing, nor by begging the Buddha to reveal it so we may enter the same realm. Not possible—not even for the Buddha! Hence it is called “wondrous.” Thorough penetration—the penetration to the root—is required: the stone’s root, earth’s root, space’s root, the root of the vast. This original root is what we call the native field of clear, wondrous luminosity.

Clinging to affairs is delusion; tallying with principle is not yet awakening. If we treat all this as doctrine and ask, “How does a stone manifest? Did it ‘originally’ exist?”—the more we paint, the further we stray. Therefore Dizang instructed Wenyì: “Everything is already present.” Do not pile on thoughts and debate. If you make it an object for research—this and that—you are already playing with it in the realm of theory. Hence: “Clinging to affairs is originally delusion.” Clinging to names and status—“I love white flowers; I hate red; remove them”—is clinging to affairs, which is delusion. After hearing Dharma one may say, “All is empty of self-nature; dependent arising; all is the display of Buddha-nature.” Then how exactly does the stone “turn”? Even if you explain so thoroughly that others concede, “tallying with principle is not yet awakening.” The logic is impeccable and you agree, but agreement with logic is not awakening. Beware of this path. Learning is for use—so that one day we see our own nature. If we become used by learning, we might as well become scholars of Buddhism.

The baffling “I.” Sitting meditation, recitation of the Buddha’s name, visualization—various methods—are not in themselves wrong. But if one is unclear at the root, one takes the means for the end. These methods are aids to reaching the summit; climbing gear is not the summit. Nor, having heard of the summit, should we dismiss the gear—that too is mishearing. But in using it, we must know the goal is the summit. Our fundamental nature—Buddha-nature—manifests as us; the stone as well. Yet is the stone Buddha-nature? No. But apart from Buddha-nature could it be? No. You say, “The pavilion’s stone is over there; I am here looking at it.” That is not the realm. Because we do not know our true self, we think the stone is “before me,” “in the courtyard.” In truth the stone and “I” are not two. Why? Because the false “I” is not posited. If we posit an “I,” then we will discuss the stone and “me” separately and try to fit the grand theory of “Buddha-nature’s display” onto it—how does Buddha-nature “turn into” a stone? We keep taking the stone as an external object of observation and spin theories. The Buddha tells us the stone and we are one. Why one? If the false “I” is not posited, then how could “you” still be set up? Saying “you” requires “not me.” Without positing “me,” how can “you” be posited?

When I look at you, it is not that a “Hong Wen-liang here” looks at a “Miss Liu there.” From beginningless time, in not seeing the nature, we have discussed and practiced the Dharma within this framework. You polish the false “I”—how long will that take? However you polish it, it will fall apart. I look at you—not that there is some separate “Hong Wen-liang” here who “looks at you” there. Rather, the very functioning of seeing is called “I look at you.” You are you; I am I; you are there; I am in Taiwan—such talk is possible only once “I” is posited. The Buddha asks you to look well: does the “I” you admit actually exist? Do not talk of practice or doctrine—first look for the one who is practicing, or who objects. If you are opposing Chan—who is that who opposes? What is that which asserts? Have you thought about it? We only oppose—ranting. Who asserts it? “I.” What is this “I”? A haphazard response. This is crucial. Whether approving or disapproving, it is the assumed false “I” making claims. Search it out: when a flower is seen, is it “outside”? Without you, could the flower be known? Without the flower, how could you say “I see a flower”? The seeing—the functioning—can “I” and “flower” be split apart? Seeing is only functioning. “I see a flower” is my own random speech. The Buddhadharma asks you to go directly and experience this. (This is the meaning of “do not seek Dharma outside the mind.”)

“Subject” and “object” move together and cannot be split. To split them is meaningless. Originally there is no subject and object. What is called “root ignorance” in Buddhism is in fact our natural confusion—everyone is muddled here. But subject and object are originally absent; “both vanish” does not mean you annihilate them—it means you discover they were never there. Do not think practice produces a result across a gap. What the Buddha truly entrusted to Mahākāśyapa is precisely this: from the very outset of practice, one is already on the fruit ground; practice and enlightenment are one—not a sequence of first, second, third stages. The Avataṃsaka speaks of ten bhūmis as a skillful beginning, but what the Buddha truly gave to Kāśyapa is “practice and enlightenment are one.” Not that after years or kalpas one attains the Buddha’s fruit. From the start of practice, we are already Buddha. It is said: our original self-nature is Buddha. Therefore the nature cannot be defiled. In beings of hell, in animals, in hungry ghosts—the essence is undefilable. Do not suppose Buddha-nature cannot “enter hell” as beings; all hell-beings are constituted by Buddha-nature. Hence self-nature cannot be stained. Because Buddha-nature has no fixed appearance, old evil karma manifests as the six realms; yet all are displays of Buddha-nature, so the essence is unstainable.

If we are already on the fruit ground, should we not practice? In Japan, Dōgen traveled to China precisely to resolve this: “Since our nature is Buddha-nature and dharma-nature’s display, why should I still practice—why sit, why recite?” Master Rujing said, “Self-nature cannot be defiled; all is dharma-nature. Yet practice is not absent.” There is practice! We may not say there is no practice. “Originally thus,” we sleep, eat, dress—responding to conditions. Here, responding to conditions means following dharma-nature, not the false “I”: loud is loud, soft is soft, dog is dog, cat is cat—responding exactly to conditions. It is not to overlay this with “as I please”—to answer as I wish, to steal as I wish—that is the false “I” following conditions.

Knowing we are the display of dharma-nature, why not dispense with practice? The mistaken approach is to polish the shadow. “I have much karmic guilt, afflictions of view and desire; I must do good, chant mantras, gradually remove guilt, and step by step become a Buddha.” We habitually take the false as self; every day we polish a shadow and clothe it. Bodhidharma said, “Wrong!” The Buddha told us that the shadow is not you; you must discover the originally pure. But discovery is not easy; one must employ many methods until one day awakening happens—that is the result of practice. The true “I” is not slowly produced by sitting and mantra. The true “I” we dare not affirm; failing to affirm ourselves is the greatest sorrow.

When you sense something is amiss, you must practice—this is harder than polishing the shadow. Do not think, “Since it is originally so, there is nothing to practice”—this is a grave mistake. The false “I,” while quiet sitting and mantra calm the mood, may enjoy peace; favorable conditions gather and the shadow seems to change. But as conditions arise and cease, the shadow changes likewise. Add virtuous deeds, reduce anger and greed, and bodily and mental conditions improve step by step.

Yet the Chan patriarchs do not fuss with petty, timid views—whether slow or hasty. Petty view means cramped vision: when led by the shadow, the view is small. The true “I” is the vast life of the cosmos. How could the true “I” “know itself as ‘I’”? The essence cannot behold itself; the essence cannot cognize the essence. This is what is meant by “penetrate the wondrous root.” We cannot use dualistic knowing to grasp the great cosmos as an object; that would place ourselves outside it. The essence cannot see the essence; it must be realized thus—then one sits. As conditions are added, samādhi states change.

After awakening, Wenyì said: “You speak of the first meaning—‘the ten thousand dharmas return to the One.’ What is the One? Where does the One return? If you can cognize it, is that the One or not? To know the One, you would have to stand outside the One—but then it is already two.” Therefore do not use language, thought, or theory to interpret this. For the One to know itself as One requires wondrous penetration. Turning the body around here is endlessly difficult. Realizing emptiness—you are emptiness itself, dharma-nature itself. How can dharma-nature “know itself as dharma-nature”? Not by cognition—hence the turning-around is hard—hard even across an eon of emptiness. Master Touzi charged his student: “You must accomplish this for me. Do not travel at night; at daybreak you must arrive!” Do not walk by night—arrive at dawn. This speaks of practice and enlightenment as one: from the start of practice we are already on the fruit ground. The six faculties are originally liberated and at ease. In daily life we should constantly learn to appreciate our human life.

English Translation (Chinese Original at the bottom):

A teaching by Zen Master Hong Wen Liang.

Explanation of the Record of Chan Master Hongzhi: “Therefore it is said, the myriad dharmas are the radiance of mind; all conditions are clarified only by their nature.” If you can distinguish that this is a visual appearance, that is a sound, and that this is thought in the intangible domain of mind, all of this is due to that “nature,” which enables you to discern clearly—merely clarification by nature, not some real entity. Thus, in such a moment, naturally you need not speak of not being entangled by conditions—how could you be entangled by conditions? Who would ensnare you? What could be ensnared? The whole of it is the total field of the dharma-realm already complete as it is—this is the meaning. This is the “truly great person of wisdom.” This alone is genuine great wisdom—“perfect and equal awakening”; this is the Buddha’s seeing and knowing.

Your six sense faculties are originally just like this; the utmost Way manifests there. This is called “thus can self-know.” It is simple: you are originally like this. As long as you do not stain it, as long as you do not add in the delusive thought “this is mine,” you will then know your own genuine functioning. That movement is not some “you” who uses; that movement—moving—is best just called “moving.” “Thus self-illumined” does not mean some self deliberately knowing itself; it is because it is your own affair. Your teacher, your lama, even the Buddha cannot know exactly how your own ears and eyes, your six faculties, move. It is you who move—not the Buddha who moves. It is not someone else’s power that knows; even when you say “I know how I am thinking,” it is that very thinking of yours moving there. Therefore it is “self-illumined.” Only you are most clear about your own true situation. So long as you do not raise delusive thoughts, do not add “these are my ears moving, my eyes moving,” then—if your madness flares up, if you split your mind—you create subject and object; once there is subject and object, emotions are stirred and become emotional dusts. Originally the six sense-objects have no fault. How could the six dusts have any sin? Is this clear to everyone here?

Walking, standing, sitting, lying—daily life—doing business, being a doctor, a lawyer, a president, a warlord, a hooligan, a great villain—all is “borrowing the road to set the feet.” If your eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind were not functioning there, why would I speak of “pure and wondrous luminosity”? In everyday life, of course, when you fight with someone that too is “borrowing the road to set the feet,” and when you do many charitable deeds as well. Are you not using your six faculties? If you want to strike someone, without your eyes to see the target, how could you strike? “Spirit’s pivot, wondrously responsive”—the six faculties move. Because you have realized that the six faculties themselves are pure and wondrously luminous, it is not that there is a “me” needed in order to move. Move like this—self-forgotten, without the least bad intention of “that is mine,” cleanly shed. To move like this is “the spirit’s pivot, wondrously responsive.” As long as delusive thoughts are not added in, still you must move—how could you not move? “Whatever is encountered is true”—whatever you do is just right.

“Not even a hair’s breadth, not even a speck of dust, is something from outside.” Clap! A sound like this, or drinking water—the mind and circumstances are one. Your whole dharma-body is moving there—is this an external thing? We have always taken it to be something external; therefore you fundamentally do not know the pure, wondrous luminosity. Not knowing the wondrous luminosity, you do not know the pure field either. That field is originally pure and wondrously luminous. When you look at me, when you listen to me, it is your pure, wondrous luminosity moving there. It is not that “I go drink a cup of tea,” or “I go look at you—you are over there, I go look.” Not like this. If you experience this deeply, you will be wholly and truly “self-illumined,” “self-clarified,” “wisdom.” Thus, when you realize this, you will “not have even a hair or a speck” that is external. Now when you hear the sound of a car outside, it is not that outside there is a sound-dust; your dharma-body moves right here. Your pure, wondrous luminous field does not move; whatever horns they honk has nothing to do with you. You certainly have this—your pure, wondrous luminous field—so that sound is precisely that field moving thus. Therefore it is said that not even the least bit or the least mote is something from outside; it is the transformations revealed in your own inch-square of mind. Once this is clarified, you make no division into you, me, and others; thus it is not that you yourself are living, nor that there is some self of yours that dies. It is the whole dharma-realm. Your birth is the dharma-realm’s birth, the appearance of birth; when dying, it is the power of the dharma-realm—as when autumn arrives, it takes on the aspect of autumn. It is not that summer dies and becomes autumn—no! In accord with conditions, it appears accordingly. All of it is your own manifestation; it is not “some external thing.” There is no problem here. If you only infer by speculation, you can only think it out this far. But when you constantly are “moment by moment unconfused,” it is not that you force yourself to be unconfused; your six faculties are originally moving in an unconfused state. What clouds it is that we suddenly raise a strange thought, erecting the frame “hey, I am listening,” and the constant light is dimmed. But it is not truly dimmed; it is just that a very self-referential cloud covers it. It has not moved away; it is “pure by nature from the beginning.” The hardest thing to realize personally is precisely that not a hair or a speck is “from outside.”

“Wondrously transcending the path of words”—by language, writing, thought, you may write and think for half a day, and none of it is it. It itself has this capacity; it itself wondrously surpasses. When we hear the sound of a frog, “ah—right, right,” yet in truth the real sound of the frog we have no way to reach: “the path of language is cut off; the domain of the mind’s activity ceases.” However you think it, it is not itself; however you say it, it is not itself. “Ah, so hot!”—is that “so hot” the heat itself? Then bring forth that heat—can you present it? “Wondrously transcending the path of words”—because through language and writing, through trained thought, we can express by language and script, yes? But language, writing, and discursive mind are false, illusory signs; they are not the real heat itself. The real is hot—or, how do you say it in Hakka? “ne”? You say “ne,” I say heat is “Ah-shui.” In the end is “Ah-shui” right or is “ne” right? The genuine heat itself does not care whether you call it “ne,” “Ah-shui,” or “hot”—it does not care. Because when we say “ne,” or “hot,” or “Ah-shui,” none of that is it. They are illusory and false. The real is only that very “Ah-shui” itself—by what thought, language, or writing could you truly reproduce it? There is no way. This is what is called the real. We cannot touch it, cannot grasp it, cannot conceive it. This is “wondrously transcending the path of words.” Who wondrously transcends the path of words? Clap!—this very “wondrously transcending the path of words.”

If you are constantly in this correct, original way—“the constant light right before you, moment by moment unconfused”—then of course you know that mountains, forests, grasses, and trees are all manifesting this affair. What you see and what you hear are your own dharma-body appearing in accord with conditions; thus, before your eyes there is radiance and earth-shaking movement. “The four great elements and the six faculties, inner and outer, are illusory”—the six faculties are not any real things. What are they in themselves? Unknown. Therefore the four great elements and the six faculties are thoroughly empty and quiescent; inner and outer are illusory. Illusory yet empty and quiescent—things without any self-nature gathering together—inner and outer are like this. Then how is it that they appear so distinctly before you? How is this? What indeed is it? Here you must apply your heart to investigate—thus he, upon seeing the morning star, had such an event.

Dharma-nature is without form and without appearance—how could you recognize some dharma-nature as “yours” and “mine”? One cannot even speak of “the same,” for to say “the same” requires appearances to compare; “not the same” also requires appearances to compare. Since it is “non-abiding,” that is, it has no appearance—you cannot locate it; if there is an appearance you can locate it, “ah, there.” Location. “Non-abiding” means formless and without appearance: neither great nor small, neither sound nor smell—nothing at all—beyond the range of your cognition. Therefore non-abiding is signless; signless is non-abiding. Non-abiding is emptiness. Emptiness is limitless capacity: whatever conditions are present, it becomes those conditions. What is the fundamental essence? Search yourself to death and even the Buddha would not know—because it belongs to the unknown. In educating people, we always teach people to know; thus modern education fails in this way. Genuine education should include “something not known.” Only when you know there is something not known is it true knowing.

Yet after hearing so much, in practice—when you stand up you say, “Huh, what was just said?” It sounded right while hearing it, but upon standing you cannot bring any strength to bear. Why? What you heard and thought were all matters within imagination, things at the level of conceptual understanding; without that event of “seeing the morning star,” all of it is but water and moon.

What is the best method of practice? So much doctrine and explanation—do not leave even a bit of it in your head. If you force yourself to remember, that is just remembering—it has no effect. The best method is: whatever you are doing, whatever you think, hear, feel—whenever any habit arises, whether an angry thought or greedy thought—immediately know whether there is an “I” moving there. Practice just this, and it is enough for your cultivation. You will certainly discover that the false “I” is moving there. Not only in bad things—also in good things; and even in what is neither good nor evil, still that “I” is moving. I cross my legs without noticing—and there is that “yo…” the “I” accomplishing so-and-so; that “I” is certainly there. This is because you have not thoroughly realized; that event of “seeing the morning star” has not occurred. Outside of this—outside what Buddhism, outside Chan—Buddhism’s generations of transmission certify nothing other than this; the rest are merely done at the level of scholarship and thought. When does this come? Just as I have said before: “A night’s rain of falling blossoms; the whole city is fragrant with flowing water.” “On Sumeru’s peak there is a rootless tree; without touching the spring wind, flowers bloom of themselves.” A tree without roots—why would its flowers open of themselves without spring? What is this? It is beyond thinking—at the moment you awaken. Upon seeing something—at such a moment—“ah!” Just that “ah”—“a night’s rain of falling blossoms”—there, it has come; whether you want fragrance or not, the “whole city is fragrant with flowing water.” Whether you want fragrance or not, you still get fragrance. If you strain to want fragrance, to want awakening—you will not get it. It is just like this. You cannot make it night; now it is night. What is “night”? Is there some “night” that comes from somewhere? It is the relation between earth and sun—I like to use a modern explanation people can grasp—when the relation changes, that is night. From where would some “night” fall down? Thus all the myriad phenomena of life and death are like this. But if you do not have your own fundamental nature, without the responsive function, then there would be no night—forever useless, nothing to do with you.

—— Extracted from “Explanation of the Record of Chan Master Hongzhi,” taught by Teacher Hong in Singapore and Malaysia.

Your field must certainly radiate light and shake the ground. How to radiate and shake the ground? In accord with conditions. Yet you do not dwell on conditions. Is this something produced by thinking? Something you arrive at by cultivating? Something gained by study? None of these. It is “of itself thus” from the outset. This “of itself thus” is not the “naturalness” of your views and understanding—that is something you think. When you personally realize this natural thing, it is not through thought. It is originally just like this—that is the thought of essence. “That is very hot”—if you have not touched heat, it is merely so said.

Mountains and rivers, the sound of frogs—none of these are separate; there is no division between me and what I see, between me and what I hear—only then is it “reflecting without a dualistic stance toward conditions, knowing without touching things.” Is this not “knowing without touching things”? This precisely is it. You say this is inanimate—why then does it have knowing? It is only that you do not understand the knowing that knows without touching things, and thus you persist in thinking that such knowing is impossible.

You stubbornly assume that cognition must be a mental operation that goes out to cognize, and you take that as knowing; therefore you do not understand its meaning, nor the Buddha’s “both together pacified and extinguished.” “Both together pacified and extinguished” does not mean there is no sound, no appearance, no pain, no itch—not like that. Pain is very painful; comfort is very comfortable. But is there an experiencer and a thing experienced? The subject and object you suppose are not there. Yet it does not belong to the exchange of the subject and object you hypothesize—this is “both together pacified and extinguished.” The illumining and the one who illumines—both together are quenched. Do you understand? Because this “illumining” and “illumined” are notions you have set up, a concept arises called “there is an illuminer and an illumined,” “there is a hearer and that which can be heard.” Such “illuminer and illumined” are conceptual.

“To settle the matter” means to settle one’s own matter of birth and death. How to settle it? You must know what you yourself are. Why is “knowing what you are” called “apprehending Mind”? We would not take hair, nose, feet, and hands to be ourselves, right? Because we all know they will grow old, die, rot, be burned or buried and become water, become earth—return to earth. We all know these things are given to us for temporary use. Yet we still invariably suppose there is a soul—we call it mind. Is this soul really there or not? If it exists, where is it hidden? It has no appearance. Without an appearance, how do you know there is a soul? You cannot see it or touch it—yet you say it exists. Ordinary people think like this. So those who study the Buddha-dharma continually call this their soul, their mind—therefore there can be rebirth. Otherwise, what is it that is reborn? Does the body come back? We invariably assume “my mind is precisely my mind,” and so it can be good or bad, go to hell or to the heavens—always “my mind” changing up and down. Is there not, then? The Buddha-dharma speaks of rebirth—everyone takes it like this—of wholesome and unwholesome karma. And where do wholesome and unwholesome karma adhere? They adhere to what you take as “mine,” not something else—absolutely “mine.”

What is it like? Unknown. The Buddha tells us it is formless, colorless, without appearance, untouchable, unseen. Yet the Buddha speaks of rebirth—so it exists, how could it not? But look—the mistake lies here. What the Buddha truly said is that even your “soul” does not exist—not even your “soul.” And as for the functioning of our mind—do we not take that as “mind”? A rainbow in the sky—does it not both exist and not exist? The moon’s reflection on water—is it present? It is present—you cannot say it isn't. But when you take your “soul” as truly existing, you are taking the moon’s reflection on water as real—you try again and again to scoop it up. Only after repeatedly trying to scoop it up do you know you cannot. Therefore practice—study, reading scriptures, sitting in meditation, bowing to the Buddha, doing good—these are not useless. You must pass through this (body-and-mind shed) or else you will never give up the fixation.

Repeatedly try to scoop—where do you try? In daily life, at the gates of the six faculties. Carefully observe it; carefully make offerings to it. To “make offerings to the person of no-mind” is like this. This practice is difficult—difficult to the extreme—because we immediately forget.

At the very moment, it is already past; you are within conditions but not on conditions. A wooden horse neighs in the wind; a clay ox emerges from the sea—everywhere is just so. This is the person of no-mind. Leap out of your thought and conjecture.

Without even stirring a thought, he points to this dharma-seat, representing that original position. Speaking in terms of essence and function, he uses “the portent has not yet arisen” to indicate it. Before it has begun to function, before its functioning is revealed, one must “borrow function to clarify position”—borrow the sounds, feelings, appearances, thoughts, tactile sensations, fragrances, and so on which issue forth from it—borrow the various functions that appear, the kinds of virtues, merits, and uses that are displayed. “Ah! So there is the one”—from that position, that is, from the fundamental essence, we “borrow function to clarify position.” That is one side. The other is: “as soon as an influence shows, one must also borrow position to clarify function.” When there is an influence, there is already a shadow, a sound, a thought moving, an emotion moving, qi moving. When qi moves there is influence; there is some appearance—whatever it may be, a thought or qi—so long as there is something perceptible. “As soon as an influence shows,” when there is just a hint of a message, “one must also borrow position to clarify function”—this sound, this appearance, this thought, this feeling, this qi—how did it come? You must borrow the fundamental essence to explain it—“borrow position to clarify function.” Both are needed: one is “borrowing position to clarify function,” the other is “borrowing function to clarify position.”

Whether from color, sound, fragrance, taste, touch, and dharmas—“Ah!”—you suddenly penetrate to the source; or from the source you suddenly understand the function—the six sense-objects as well—altogether are marvelous function. None of this can be done by thinking, right? Hence we call it “one-thought accord.” In that very instant, without analysis, without any emotional veneration—none of that—one-thought accord. How is that moment described? “The junctures of before and after are cut off.” The before and the after are cut. What does it mean? It means there is no time. We assume there is time past in front and time after behind, and thus we feel time is flowing. When the junctures before and after are cut, time stops. But it is not that there is some “time” that can stop—how could time stop? The junctures of before and after are cut—time is cut. Time is what we imagine. Within our ideation there is a flow we call “time”; our mind strings it together.

Inference—comparison—is the mind’s measure. It is a function of mind. What of the appearance itself? It is not something produced by mind. How would eyes present anything if there were no thing? Without something there, the eyes cannot present. The operation of eyes and things is together—this is the movement of the dharma-realm. It is not that your mind sees things coming and going, up and down—not like that. It is the functioning of the eyes’ own dharma-nature, the truly natural inherent power moving together with the outer circumstance—“mind and circumstance are one”—moving as it moves, moving as it truly moves. In moving, do not add comparison. Comparison is the mind’s analysis. To compare “this with the previous two,” you can then speak of this movement, of coming and going. But at the very moment the appearance itself manifests—at that moment—how could there be comparing with before and after? To compare with before, you must remember the prior appearance.

To remember is the mind moving. Without memory, how would you know movement? But the eyes—and the ears—when there is something, it appears; when there is not, it vanishes. Without this “comparison,” without that comparing faculty. Comparison means setting two things side by side. But the earlier has already passed—once a sound has passed, it is past. When you hear a later sound, by comparing you then say “this one sounds better, the former did not.” For the earlier you rely on imagination—on the power of mind. Delusive thought—what we call the discriminating power of mind—is added in so you can compare: pleasant or not, loud or soft. In that very instant, what “large or small” is there? None. This is my slight clarification of “borrowing function to clarify position” and “borrowing position to clarify function”—not using the head to contrive; it is originally like this. We simply had not noticed.

They say, “Bring me the daytime.” Impossible! “When the wind blows, the grass bends; when water arrives, the channel is formed.” When the earth and sun revolve to align with the equator, daytime naturally appears—I cannot hand it to you. When conditions mature, it is naturally thus. Chan Master Hongzhi’s reply—“the wind bends the grass; water arrives and the channel forms”—is not evasion; it truly is like this. If your conditions have not come together, then they have not; yet you hope to know the Chan meaning transmitted by the Buddhas generation to generation—there is nothing I myself could say.

Because of habit, the thought arises—and immediately “I see, I hear.” Whatever thought arises, it is that “I” presiding. The “I’s” opinion inevitably enters in. At the “first-thought juncture,” your “wondrous” cannot arise. “Wondrously surpassing the first-thought juncture”—that “wondrous” does not emerge. You understand in theory that the “I” is wrong—that it is an imagined “I.” You understand this. But in reality, in every lift of the hand and step of the foot, there is that “I” investigating and watching—that one taking the lead. The “wondrous” does not arise—this is the very point. Therefore “one must further turn the body along another path” right here. When “essence” can reveal “function,” do not let the dualistic “I do something, I see something”—this thought—be added. The ears, fundamentally without this thought, are hearing; the eyes, without the thought “I see,” are seeing. They themselves are originally just like this. But our fault is that we continually have the extra thought “I am seeing, I am hearing” spring up beforehand.

Therefore, at the “first-thought juncture,” if you can illumine that faint sign and its function—once illumined, it is originally like that; essence and function move thus—do not cut in line with that added thought.

Original Chinese:

Original Article in Chinese: https://bookgb.bfnn.org/books/0018.htm

Clean Copy — Part 1/4 (SegID S01–S06)

How to Eliminate Greed, Anger, Delusion, Conceit, and Doubt

Composed by Elder Yuanyin

Delivered in Hangzhou on June 17, 1995

A disciple asked, “How can one eliminate greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt?”

Greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt belong to the delusions of thought. Doctrine analyzes ignorance into four: the delusions of views, the delusions of thought, the dust-and-sand delusions, and the delusion of fundamental ignorance—ranging from coarse to subtle, to very subtle, to extremely subtle. View-delusion arises from losing sight of the truths of non-arising and non-self; it pertains to principle, hence is called the delusion of principle. It divides into five wrong views (self-view, extreme views, wrong views, attachment to views, and attachment to precepts and ascetic practices). For example, to cling to psychic powers without asking whether one has apprehended Mind and seen one’s nature is a common wrong view among practitioners. View-delusion is easy to remove: when we practice and awaken to see our fundamental nature, our view is rectified and view-delusion is ended. But thought-delusion is not easily eliminated at once; only after awakening and cutting off view-delusion must one, on the basis of seeing nature, cultivate the truth further to gradually sever this delusion. Thought-delusion arises from cogitating about the unreal things of the world; its nature is dull and obscuring, and it is divided into the five—greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt; therefore it is not easily cut off suddenly. If view-delusion and thought-delusion are not eradicated, birth-and-death in saṃsāra cannot be ended. Thus to eliminate the ten delusions—self-view, extreme views, wrong views, attachment to views, attachment to precepts, and greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, doubt—one must first understand the fundamental nature and open great awakening. Deeply realize that all phenomena are illusory and unobtainable; thoroughly see the very point at which a thought ceases, and the lucid, vividly clear numinous awareness there—this is our own fundamental nature. In the midst of situations, constantly protect and train it; polish away the habitual attachments of many lives; only then can greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt wither away.

Most important is to know that our true mind originally and fully possesses the three bodies—dharmakāya (body of essence), sambhogakāya (body of enjoyment), and nirmāṇakāya (body of transformation)—and there is no need to seek outwardly. Now, when the present thought has ceased and the next has not yet arisen, that lucid and distinctly clear numinous awareness is our dharmakāya; the wisdom-luminosity by which we see all things is our sambhogakāya; and the manifestations of all things, in their various forms and colors, are the transformations of our dharma-nature—our nirmāṇakāya. Dharmakāya and sambhogakāya are easy to understand. When we cut off thought, awareness remains lucid and distinctly clear; it is not without knowing—this lucid awareness at that moment is our dharmakāya; this can be experienced on the spot. The sambhogakāya is the wisdom-light by which we now can see all things: without the wisdom-light of the dharmakāya we could not see; without light one is like a blind person who cannot see. What can see is the light of our dharmakāya; when that light shines, it is the shining of wisdom. The nirmāṇakāya is not so easy to understand. All things—cups, fruit, houses—are my transformations, my emanation-body. How are these my emanation-body? Are they not insentient? The world of equipment is insentient; humans and animals are sentient—how can they be my emanations? Because these things would not exist apart from the wisdom of my dharma-nature. Consider a house: before building, one must first have a design. How does an engineer conceive that design in the mind? He takes in external forms, reflects and analyzes how to transform and develop them to suit human needs, and then drafts a new design. What function is this? Is it the function of the brain? It appears to be the brain’s function, yet the various neural pathways of the brain, like circuits laid out, do not work if no current flows. What is the current? It is the function of our dharmakāya. What is buddha-nature? “Nature” means capacity—function. It functions without any form to be seen. Electricity, for example: you cannot see its form; when it flows, the lamp lights and the machine turns. The brain’s nerves are like wires; the flowing current is the functioning of our buddha-nature. Thus whether drafting the design or later engaging craftsmen to build the house, all are functions of our buddha-nature; they are manifestations of buddha-nature—its emanation-body. Once you understand that the three bodies—Dharma, reward, and emanation—are all fully present in mind alone, you will, at all times, not dwell in appearances. Seeing that everything is but images revealed by the Great Mirror Wisdom of the dharmakāya, you do not let the mind be moved and do not grasp appearances, and you pray for nothing. Cultivating in this way, greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt gradually melt away.

If one does not understand this principle and instead dwells on psychic powers and clings to appearances, not only will greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt fail to be eliminated, they will increase. What do you want psychic powers for? Is it not for fame and gain—for praise, reputation, offerings? Then greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt only grow; there is not the least help in it. Hence, to eliminate greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt, one must see one’s nature—without seeing nature, it will not do. The root still lies in apprehending Mind and seeing nature. Therefore the foundation of the Buddha’s teaching is precisely apprehending Mind and seeing one’s nature.

Some people today have gone astray: they do not seek to apprehend Mind and see nature; they want psychic powers. As soon as they hear a method has powers, they rush to pursue it. They do not remove greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt; they increase the mind of greed to obtain. Thus, when we practice, we must set everything down. Do not even seek samādhi; if you seek samādhi, you will not enter it, for the very mind that seeks samādhi is a deluded mind; when the deluded mind moves, how can you enter concentration? To enter concentration, you must set everything down, seek nothing, keep everything ordinary and plain; only then can the mind be at ease, enter concentration with serenity, open to what is original, and personally realize buddha-nature. In truth, attaining the Way is not arcane; it is disarmingly simple and ordinary. Yet I have heard some Dharma friends in Hangzhou say, “None of us here has attained.” That is unfortunate—they must have mistaken the true meaning of attainment. What counts as attainment? Must one manifest psychic powers to count as attainment? Without powers one cannot apprehend Mind and see nature and thus cannot be said to attain? That is a grave error. Let us first discuss what attainment is—what is the goal of learning the Buddha-Dharma? It is to leave saṃsāra and end birth-and-death: this is our great aim. How can one end birth-and-death and leave saṃsāra? Can psychic powers do it? No. Non-Buddhist practitioners possess the five mundane superknowledges—the divine eye, divine ear, knowledge of others’ minds, psychic travel, and knowledge of former lives—yet they cannot end birth-and-death. They do not recognize their own fundamental nature; they cling to external conditions and pursue them; with grasping and attachment, birth-and-death cannot be ended. Therefore, to end birth-and-death and leave saṃsāra, the mind must be open and empty, dwelling nowhere. Knowing that every change is but a manifestation of one’s own buddha-nature, one seeks nothing, grasps nothing, and is carefree and at ease—this is great attainment—great freedom, the highest spiritual power. If there is chasing and praying, and the mind is still as afflicted as before, then even if all five powers arise together, it is not attainment. Learning the Buddha-Dharma is to learn carefree ease—to follow conditions in society, do one’s utmost to serve the many, able to rise high or descend low, seeking nothing, grasping nothing. When one is truly carefree and at ease, this is the true meaning of the Great Vehicle and may be called attainment. If, when we live, we can refrain from sticking to any situation—without love and hate, without grasping and rejecting—then when the thirtieth day of the twelfth month arrives, we will likewise not cling to conditions and will, free and at ease, have no birth-and-death to be ended.

Clean Copy — Part 2/4 (SegID S12–S17)

That we now cling to birth-and-death is because we grasp at conditions. Today we have a body of form, a physical body, precisely because when our parents joined, we ourselves were stirred and went in. If you did not cling to conditions—if you did not go—there would be no such body; you would be carefree and at ease, able to wander freely. But now, having a body is a burden; it cannot be moved lightly—this is reaping what we ourselves have sown. In practice we must understand this principle: the three bodies—Dharma, reward, and emanation—are complete within the one mind; do not pursue anything; seek no psychic powers; set everything down—then you are carefree and at ease. When carefree and unbound, with no sticking anywhere, so in life and so in death, you go wherever you wish, entirely your own master. Is birth-and-death not thereby resolved?

Ultimately, there is no birth-and-death at all. Our fundamental nature is originally unborn and undying, neither coming nor going, neither increasing nor decreasing, neither defiled nor pure, unmoving and unshaken—there is fundamentally no birth-and-death. To cling to birth-and-death is just our deluded mind restlessly grasping at objects. If one sets everything down, is one not utterly at ease? This is great freedom. What then of greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt? They are but our failure to understand our fundamental nature and our chasing after external conditions—being deluded by forms and outer dusts. Once we understand what our fundamental nature is, and do not grasp the external, greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt naturally vanish. Likewise, if one truly can be carefree and at ease, seeking nothing and grasping nothing, the five superknowledges will naturally arrive—because they are inherent in our fundamental nature, originally present, not acquired by cultivation. Therefore we say realization pertains to awakening, not to fabricating. Awakening is sobering up, like waking from sleep and no longer dreaming. Ordinarily we dwell in a dream, chasing dream-scenes, unaware that they are dreams and pursuing them as real. Where there is seeking, there is greed; when greed is not satisfied, anger arises; to cling to greed and anger is delusion. Conceit is to look down on others—“you all are inferior to me; I am the best”—thus the marks of person and self. Doubt arises easily. For example, when I say that the lucid numinous awareness at the point where thought ceases is our true mind, you may think, “Is this really the true mind? If this is the fundamental nature, then having seen nature I should manifest great powers; why do I have none? Then this cannot be it.” Doubt arises—this is disastrous. Without true faith, you cannot wholeheartedly protect your fundamental nature; you get dragged about by conditions and go down another road. Perhaps you were almost home—your practice had reached this point; what remained was to maintain and protect. Because of doubt, you turn back and take another path; you drop this method for another; then again you change—so, with your mind unfocused, when the decisive moment arrives, you switch again. Thus nothing works. This is the fault of doubting and refusing to practice solidly. Many waste their efforts in this way and attain nothing. If we can, without the slightest doubt, recognize that the lucid awareness at the point where thought ceases is our fundamental nature, and protect it at all times—walking, standing, sitting, and lying down—never letting it be submerged by conditions, never running after them; no condition can pull us; knowing all is mere appearance and that only my present numinous awareness is real, and disregarding all else—if we truly practice like this, then within three to five years the great superknowledges will naturally flourish. Because you do not chase them, the powers that are already inherent naturally appear. They cannot manifest now because they are covered by your greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt—by your discursive thought, attachment, and grasping after powers—and so the powers do not come. Therefore powers are not obtained by cultivation or seeking; powers that are sought are false, not true, and are dependent attachments. Because you greedily seek, ghosts and spirits attach themselves, catering to your mind and entering your mind. Thus among those who practice qigong and claim special abilities, eighty to ninety percent have attached entities; the ability is not theirs—precisely because there is greed to obtain.

Learning the Buddha-Dharma is to open wisdom—to understand that our true mind is the numinous knowing present when a thought has ceased and no thought has arisen. Speaking of realization is very simple: one directly points it out; there is nothing arcane about it. It is not that, upon speaking of realization, all manner of arcana appear. In fact, Chinese Chan is the very best: cutting straight in, not establishing words, directly pointing to mind so that seeing nature is becoming Buddha—this is the highest esoteric method. The highest level of Esotericism is Chan. This is not my invention. A great accomplished master of Tibetan Buddhism, the Karmapa, once said: “In our Esotericism, Dzogchen is the most profound. Does China have Dzogchen? It does: that is Chan; the Chan school is Dzogchen.” We also studied Dzogchen with Lama Gongga. Dzogchen teaches “preliminaries” and “main practice.” The preliminaries set forth rituals—the practices with signs; the main practice directly reveals what buddha-nature is, an instruction in the view identical to Chan’s direct pointing—there is no difference. Chan points straight to seeing nature without detour. If asked, “What is Buddha?” it answers, “Speaking face-to-face—what is it if not Buddha?” Who is it that is speaking face-to-face with me? Who is it that hears and moves? Is this not our buddha-nature? With a simple, intimate, crucial phrase it directly indicates seeing nature. Or if asked, “What is Buddha?” the master calls to you; you answer; he seizes the moment and says, “This is Buddha!” How direct and joyous! Awakening is just this easy—there is nothing arcane. This is the most profound Chan—China’s Great Perfection. Unfortunately, later generations’ faculties were thin and doubt great; they would not accept it. “Is the point where a thought ceases truly the fundamental nature? So easy? Perhaps not!” Doubt—the most harmful of the five—makes one lose the true mind. Seeing that direct pointing did not work, the patriarchs ceased direct revelation and instead had students “investigate the head of a saying.” Ask, “What is Buddha?” The answer might be, “The eastern mountain walks upon the water,” or “Having cast off straw sandals, go barefoot.” A casual phrase, not telling you directly. Because you do not understand, doubt arises; through doubt, discursive thought is cut off; when time and conditions ripen, you personally realize what is original.

In Chan, after awakening to the principle, one then protects it with continuous subtlety, training amid situations, diligently removing delusive habits, until one piece is made of it and the three barriers are passed through transparently. Consider the Sixth Patriarch. Hearing the Fifth Patriarch’s instruction, “Let the mind arise without abiding anywhere,” he awakened and knew that all daily activities are the wondrous functioning of buddha-nature. As long as one does not abide, one is carefree and at ease; the fundamental nature, the bright true mind, naturally appears to the fore. Thus he protected it continuously in walking, standing, sitting, and lying; when the Way matured, he emerged to open the altar and teach. Speaking of maintaining, it is first “protect,” then “let be.” First protect: when thoughts arise, do not follow them; when conditions come, do not be turned. When this is mature, let go of protecting and proceed to letting be—let the mind roam in openness; act freely; neither constrained nor stuck. As Confucius said, “At seventy I could follow my heart’s desire without transgressing the norms”—able to do anything, to enter Buddhahood or Māra’s realm without hindrance. Later, the disciple Damei asked Mazu, “What is Buddha?” Mazu replied, “Mind itself is Buddha.” Damei immediately awakened. After he protected for three years, Mazu wished to test him and sent an attendant: “Elder brother, the Master’s Dharma is now different.” “How so?” “He now says: ‘Not mind, not Buddha.’” Damei said, “That old man confuses people without end. Let him say ‘not mind, not Buddha’; as for me, I only hold to ‘mind itself is Buddha.’” Hearing this, Mazu said, “The plum is ripe!” A true awakener stands firm and is not swayed by others’ words.

Clean Copy — Part 3/4 (SegID S18–S21)

In Chan, after awakening to the principle, one then protects it with continuous subtlety, training amid situations, diligently removing delusive habits, until one piece is made of it and the three barriers are passed through transparently. Consider the Sixth Patriarch. Hearing the Fifth Patriarch’s instruction, “Let the mind arise without abiding anywhere,” he awakened and knew that all daily activities are the wondrous functioning of buddha-nature. As long as one does not abide, one is carefree and at ease; the fundamental nature, the bright true mind, naturally appears to the fore. Thus he protected it continuously in walking, standing, sitting, and lying; when the Way matured, he emerged to open the altar and teach. Speaking of maintaining, it is first “protect,” then “let be.” First protect: when thoughts arise, do not follow them; when conditions come, do not be turned. When this is mature, let go of protecting and proceed to letting be—let the mind roam in openness; act freely; neither constrained nor stuck. As Confucius said, “At seventy I could follow my heart’s desire without transgressing the norms”—able to do anything, to enter Buddhahood or Māra’s realm without hindrance. Later, the disciple Damei asked Mazu, “What is Buddha?” Mazu replied, “Mind itself is Buddha.” Damei immediately awakened. After he protected for three years, Mazu wished to test him and sent an attendant: “Elder brother, the Master’s Dharma is now different.” “How so?” “He now says: ‘Not mind, not Buddha.’” Damei said, “That old man confuses people without end. Let him say ‘not mind, not Buddha’; as for me, I only hold to ‘mind itself is Buddha.’” Hearing this, Mazu said, “The plum is ripe!” A true awakener stands firm and is not swayed by others’ words.

The trouble lies in doubt. Pure Land practitioners doubt as well: “Can I be reborn in the Western Land by reciting like this? Perhaps not.” When doubt is heavy, recitation has no power and rebirth is difficult. One must have full faith: “In this way I will surely attain; I will surely be reborn in the Western Land—surely!” Then there is power; with whole heart there is power. For us, the most important is first the superknowledge of the exhaustion of the taints. Learning the Buddha-Dharma is to be carefree and at ease; if one remains worried and afflicted all day long, that is not the Buddha-Dharma and does not accord with it. “Whether clothing and food are abundant or frugal, let them follow conditions.” Let everything follow conditions: if good, then pass easily; if bad, then pass through that—no matter; all are false appearances. If, when things go well, you laugh, and when they go badly, you fret and grieve—what are you learning? Are all things not unobtainable? Is not everything a dream? Why then be moved? Someone asks, “Have I awakened?” Ask yourself: “Do I still cling to conditions? Do I still dwell in appearances?” If, upon encountering conditions, you still become enamored, you have not awakened. Awakening is sobering—no more dreaming. In dreams, you have everything: in good dream-conditions, incomparable joy; in bad, unbearable sorrow—some weep or cry out in their sleep. After waking, nothing remains. If, on meeting conditions, you still become afflicted, you have not awakened. Only when, in favorable conditions, you are not elated, and in adverse conditions you are not distressed nor angry—only then is it right, and only then can greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt truly be eliminated. Without apprehending Mind and seeing nature, there is no talking of eliminating them—not even a little. To eliminate them, seeing nature is indispensable.

After seeing nature, one must still temper and protect it amid circumstances. If strength is insufficient and the mind still moves before conditions, one should increase sitting. To be confused by conditions and have the mind stirred—that is thought-delusion. In working, first understand what the true mind is—this is the single most important stroke. Only then can you set to protecting it, knowing where to apply effort. Without understanding the true mind, you do not know where to exert yourself—how can you attain the Way? One must have self-knowledge. If concentration is insufficient, sit more; only by much sitting can concentration increase. I too was thus before: on Sundays, instead of going out, I sat at home the whole day. When I rose at night, the mind was utterly clear; no condition could move it; what I formerly liked, I now did not want at all—only serene joy in the Dharma, lightness and ease beyond compare. Therefore, if concentration is insufficient, sit more to protect continuously. When the mind is truly empty and pure—carefree and at ease—that is the penetration of the Way, the superknowledge of the exhaustion of the taints. Having this, the other five superknowledges need not be worried over; “grasp the root and you need not fear the branches.” The five are inherent in the fundamental nature; when it is opened, they naturally appear; if not opened, they are covered within. If the clinging things have not been removed and the mind constantly wavers, to seek powers is to go against the Way—piling attachment upon attachment, adding greed, anger, and delusion to greed, anger, and delusion—how could one obtain one’s wish? One must set everything down.

The Heart-of-Mind method is a great Dharma that fuses Chan, Pure Land, and Esoteric into one; at every moment it bids us see nature directly. In cultivation it is neither empty nor existent. Mudrā and mantra are “existent,” yet their meaning is beyond thought and consideration—having is as not-having; it is existent yet not existent—thus non-existent. Because there is mudrā and mantra, it is not “empty,” thus not-empty. Given a mantra to recite and a mudrā to form, it is empty yet not empty, neither empty nor existent—pushing you forward so that you realize the fundamental nature. Having realized, one returns to Chan. When the mind is truly empty and pure—bare and lucid, utterly unadorned, without a speck of dust—is this not the Pure Land? “Land” is mind and mind is land. Then, wherever you wish to be reborn—east, south, west, north—you may; all are Pure Lands. Following conditions with freedom, all is integrated. The true Pure Land is our eternally quiescent, luminous Pure Land—the Pure Land of the fundamental nature, originally pure and undefiled. It is because of our deluded mind’s clinging that this five-defiled evil world is fashioned. When our mind is pure, the five defilements and evils are transformed into a Pure Land. Therefore the Heart-of-Mind method is the heart-marrow of Esotericism—the view of Great Perfection.

Now, I have given you the instruction for seeing the principle: to know that the numinous, aware nature at the point where a thought ceases is our fundamental nature. This is a conceptual understanding. After understanding the concept, you must still protect it. In the midst of protecting it, watch your thoughts and do not follow them. When you become proficient, the mind that observes and the thought that is observed will suddenly fall away. This is the same as when, during our sitting meditation, the mind that is reciting and the mantra being recited suddenly fall away, and the body, mind, and world become unobtainable; this is to personally realize the fundamental nature. What is the difference between this conceptual understanding and personal realization? The essence-body that is realized is identical in both cases; there is no difference. What is realized in a single instant is completely the same in principle as what is realized after several years of practice, and it is the same as what is realized after thirty years of Chan investigation. But the strength is different. One who realizes it in a single instant has not done the work, and when situations arise, they often cannot withstand them, and the mind becomes disordered. This is the delusion of thought not being resolved; it means greed, anger, delusion, conceit, and doubt have not been eliminated. Now, when we practice on the cushion and the body, mind, and world melt away into emptiness, the strength of personal realization arises. When situations come, you can withstand them, and greed, anger, delusion, conceit, and doubt can be dissolved. Therefore, the strength is different. However, if we can truly plant our feet firmly, recognize that this point where a thought ceases is our fundamental nature, and protect it without any more doubt, that is also very good. Recognize that this one nature is the three bodies—dharmakāya, sambhogakāya, and nirmāṇakāya—and that everything is my transformation body. Do not doubt, do not take it as real, do not chase after it. Practicing like this for three to five years, things will slowly be resolved, which is an excellent thing. So, this is how you should practice; there is nothing arcane about it. The essential words are not complicated. When Master Linji became enlightened, he said, 'So, there isn't much to the Buddha-Dharma after all.' There's nothing to it; it is right here in the present moment, realized in the present moment. Therefore, we must practice without ever leaving the present, applying effort at all times.

Clean Copy — Part 4/4 (SegID S22–S25)

Attaining the Way may be divided into four steps. The first is “seeing the fundamental nature.” Now, to understand that the numinous awareness at the point where a thought ceases is the fundamental nature also counts. Next comes maintaining and protecting; within that, “experience of awakening grows”—this is the second step. “Awakening” means lucid awareness and illumination—not being deluded, not moved or turned by conditions. Truly awakened, one gains true benefit and will not be afflicted. Otherwise, in adverse conditions you will fret and rage; awakened, you know all is false, mere images; you do not cling or pursue; you are untroubled and receive true benefit—the joy of the Dharma fills you, lightness and delight all day long. Thus the First Stage is the Stage of Joy; as awakening-experience grows, one proves the stages step by step—first, second, third… one should constantly examine oneself.

The third step is “advancing in the illumination of the essence.” The essence is luminous; as it advances, great light appears, shining throughout the ten directions: the buddhas of the ten directions enter my body; my body enters the bodies of the buddhas; they mutually interpenetrate without obstruction—this is the realm of the Avataṃsaka. Here, owing to the growth of awakening-experience, greed, anger, delusion, Conceit, and doubt are utterly absent—none at all—yet still it is not ultimate. The fourth and final step is “the Dharma-realm brought to consummation”: all lights are unobtainable, all powers unobtainable; all are gathered back to the self-nature and no longer appear. In Great Perfection this is likened to “the moon on the thirtieth night of the twelfth month”—no longer visible. Gathered back into one’s own mind, there is nothing. Chan speaks the same at this point. As when a monk asked Caoshan, “What about when the bright moon is overhead?” He replied, “Still a fellow below the steps”—not yet home. “Please, Master, draw me up the steps.” “When the moon sets, we shall meet.”

Therefore, if you can plant your feet firmly and not be confused by what people say, you will realize the great Way. If, hearing that a “living Buddha” has come with great powers, you run after him, you will stray into byroads. There is no esoteric method higher than Chan; seeking powers leads to trouble and possession. A young woman from Guangzhou came here; practicing qigong and seeking special functions, two spirits entered her body. The first was tolerable—it told her things, seeming like a little power. The second came, and her body could not bear it; she suffered. This is the evil result of seeking powers. Therefore we must understand and walk the right road. Know that the most vital point in the Buddha-Dharma is not to manifest powers but to end birth-and-death. How is birth-and-death ended? By not clinging to conditions and not running after thoughts—without sticking to any condition—only then can birth-and-death be ended. Seeking powers is not ultimate and cannot end birth-and-death. Those who seek them cling to appearances and aim at fame and gain. I have heard that qigong teachers first give “empowered” public talks to sell tickets and profit, then treat illness for money, then sell “information objects.” All of it is irrelevant—plainly, just tricks for money. To follow them—what an injustice! We who learn the Buddha-Dharma must recognize the mind-ground Dharma-gate: “Only this one is true; the other two are not true.” To cultivate beyond the mind, seeking Dharma outside the mind, is the way of outsiders. Attainment is not manifesting powers, but mind empty and without abiding—broad, level, carefree, and at ease. To be unconstrained by favor or adversity and carefree and at ease—this is the greatest power. Apart from this, even if the five powers arise, the mind is not at ease. For example, with knowledge of former lives, upon learning what one did, one is dismayed: “I committed so many wrongs!” A certain arhat, having killed his father in a past life, gained this knowledge and was distraught—unable to sit still. The Buddha said to Mañjuśrī, “This arhat has gained knowledge of former lives and knows he killed his father; his mind is unstable. Let us put on a drama and teach the Dharma to save him.” Mañjuśrī drew a sword to kill the Buddha; all were terrified. Killing one’s father is grievous; to kill a Buddha is worse. The Buddha said, “Do not panic—Mañjuśrī has no intent to kill a Buddha.” All these are your deluded thoughts stirring—like scenes in a dream—unreal; truly there is nothing. So the deeds of past lives are like what is done in dreams; when awake, nothing remains; the mind settles. Thus the Buddha taught this arhat and calmed his mind.

Practitioners should, at every moment, work on the mind; do not vainly seek powers. Walk the right road; do not enter byways—only then will you truly end birth-and-death.

— End of Clean Copy —