首 页  |  中国禅学  |  禅学三书  |  慈辉论坛  |  佛学论文  |  最新上传  |  文学频道  |  佛缘论坛  |  留言簿   |

 管理登陆        吴言生 创办              图片中心    关于本网     佛教研究所 主办


  • 晋宋时代的禅经译出与禅法传播[114]

  • 有四样东西,可以带给一个家庭[100]

  • 佛教如何看待“爱情”与“欲望[124]

  • 云门宗在舒州地区传承与发展研[100]

  • 为什么说“ 一失人身,万劫不复[112]

  • 心不要随着境界而动[103]

  • 论唐代的讲经仪轨[711]

  • 出家人眼里的爱和情什么样?两[140]

  • 佛学公案:谁是知音?[135]

  • 生命的最高境界[129]

  • 业障重时,念佛有多困难,你知[140]

  • 为什么要对出家师父的法名尊称[133]



  • 本站推荐

    恭迎佛吉祥日·卫塞

    禅理:任何人的苦乐

    一禅一世界,一叶一


       您现在的位置: 佛学研究网 >> E3英文佛教 >> [专题]e3英文佛教 >> 正文


    Zen And Taoism Common And Uncommon Grounds
     
    [ 作者: Kenneth Inada   来自:期刊原文   已阅:9476   时间:2007-1-16   录入:douyuebo


    ·期刊原文


    Zen And Taoism Common And Uncommon Grounds of Discourse

    Kenneth Inada

    Journal of Chinese Philosophy

    Vol.15 1988   P.51-65

    Copyright @ 1988 by Dialogue Publishing Company, Honolulu

    Hawaii, U.S.A.


    P.51

        This  ambitious   paper   should   be  taken   as  merely
    preliminary and exploratory in nature.  I cannot obviously do
    justice to such a multi- faceted subject in a single essay. I
    should therefore like to present in basic outline a framework
    in which Zen and Taoism  can be seen under a better  light so
    as to foster  proper perspectives  on each and thereby  their
    ultimate relationship. Though scholars in the field recognize
    basic  differences  in the two  systems, still, in discussing
    either one or both, the analysis  invariably  concludes  with
    certain common elements  that give rise to a false impression
    that the two are identical or nearly so. On the surface, both
    layman  and expert  may not see any differences  at all.  But
    beneath it there are certain differences that must be
    perceived  and acknowledged, i.e., the format  of the systems
    in terms of the quest for reality may manifest an illusion of
    sameness.  We must always be on guard against being misled by
    the  unique   forms   that   adduce   similar   contents   of
    experience.(1)
        D. T.   Suzuki  tells  us  that  there  are  eight  chief
    characteristics  of  satori  or enlightenment: irrationality,
    intuitive  insight,  authoritarianism, affirmation, sense  of
    the  beyond,  impersonal  tone,  feeling  of  exaltation  and
    momentariness.(2) The Taoist  would be very much at home with
    all  of them, each  amplifying  in great  detail  the  Taoist
    experience  without stirring  up any controversy  between the
    two systems.  Yet  the  differences  are there  for both  the
    Taoist and the Zennist, although not in clearly definable and
    analyzable   terms.   Still,  there  are  common  grounds  of
    discourse that point at "something universal,"  the "finality
    of existence, " a "suprarelative  or transcendental aspect, "
    the "infinite  expansion of the individual"  and "a new vista
    of existence."(3)
        Our initial  mission  then is to seek  a common  focus, a
    common ground upon which we may treat the two systems. I will
    employ Suzuki s

    P.52                          

    eighth characteristic, momentariness, to show us the way.  In
    both systems, the momentary nature of our experience is taken
    to  be the  basis  of all  existential  modes  as well  as of
    valuation.  It is the fountainhead  of everything  human  and
    humanly  possible;  to ignore it and to regard experience  as
    static  is not only naive but to indulge  in a falsehood  and
    abstraction  that veers away from reality  itself.  The great
    non-Asiatic metaphysician Alfred N.  Whitehead, in one of his
    rare  insightful  moments  concerning  religion, stated  that
    "that-religion will conquer which can render clear to popular
    understanding some eternal greatness incarnate in the passage
    of temporal  fact."(4) Both Zen and Taoism have already  con-
    quered  the minds  of Asians  (and  many non-Asians, too, for
    that  matter)  by  simply   rendering   clear  "some  eternal
    greatness  incarnate  in the passage  of temporal  fact." Had
    Whitehead  fully known the message of both Zen and Taoism, he
    most  certainly  would  have  attached  a  footnote  to  that
    statement.  We today  can  stand  witness  to his  propriety,
    albeit from a purely Western point of view.
        In Buddhism, Zen being a crystallized version of Buddhist
    thought, the point of departure  in understanding  the nature
    of the experiencing self is its impermanent character
    (anitya).  Thus  understood, the self  no longer  assumes  an
    abstract   static  nature  but,  paradoxically   enough,  the
    non-substantive, non-self  (anaatman) nature.  The  foregoing
    statement, to be sure, is extremely  difficult for the layman
    to accept, much less grasp, because his understanding  begins
    and ends  within  the self-created  prison  walls  of alleged
    entities, such entities  as the logical  entities  which have
    nothing  to  do with  realities,as Wittgenstein  has  rightly
    stated(5) Not only does the layman live in a Certesian  world
    but he also does  not know  that  that  world  owes  its very
    existence  to the initial  impulse  to grasp or frame  every-
    thing within the substantive nature of things. Dichotomies of
    all  kinds  abound, but  they  are  non-existent  in the real
    world;  they are strictly  manmade, as the Zennist and Taoist
    will aver.  In this regard, we may even state  further  that,
    strictly  speaking, the  correspondence  theory  that  we  so
    heavily  rely on in our daily activities  is really  impotent
    and non-existent as well.
        Reality  or experiential  reality, for  in the  strictest
    sense  no reality  is divorced  from experience, is a moving,
    phenomenon. We have never-

    P.53

    theless  been  distracted  from  this  moving  phenomenon  by
    deliberately  seeking and justifying  a causal connection  or
    relationship in the passage of events. The strict empiricist,
    David  Hume,  was  not  fooled  by  the  feigned  concept  of
    causality working in our experience, but even he could not in
    the end hit upon  its solution;being  a child  of the Western
    tradition,  he had to solace himself in the end with the game
    of backgammon.
        A different  picture  is  seen  in Taoism, especially  in
    Chuang  Tzu's  brilliant   analysis.   The  ordinary  person,
    according  to Chuang Tzu, waits to observe  the scales of the
    snake  or the wings  of the  cicada  but perceives  only  the
    molted snake or the demised  cicada.(6) He is unable to be in
    tune with the lives of the snake and the cicada, indeed  with
    his own life process, for he spends countless  hours catching
    up with thore entities  which are already distanced  from the
    reality of things.  He seeks for certainty of perception  and
    understanding, but they  are not forthcoming  for the  simple
    reason that certainty  can never be realized by following the
    entities or elements involved in them. He has, in short, done
    a   disservice    to   himself   by   demanding   a   steady,
    one-dimensional perception of things.  This is the great hoax
    or ontological  fraud  that  man wantonly  perpetuates.  Both
    Taoism  and Zen recognize  the inanity  of this  pursuit  and
    vehemently condemn it.
        In  several   passages   in  the  Chuang-tzu(a)  we  find
    statements to the effect that experiential  reality cannot be
    expressed  at all  except  in terms  of bits  or pieces.  For
    example, due to man's  obsession  with  routine  and  mundane
    matters, he has only a few days  in a month, if any, in which
    he may be able  to have  a good  laugh  at himself, the laugh
    being an expression  of a genuine encounter  with the reality
    of things, an instant perception  of the incongruity  between
    what is and what is not the truth  of existence.  A laugh is,
    of course, spontaneous, and  lasts  but for  a split  second;
    beyond  that it turns into amusement, and then reality  is no
    longer the central focus: The experience of reality is of the
    same   dimension   as  the  laugh.   Or,  put  another   way,
    experiential  reality is seen "as quickly as the passing of a
    swift  horse  glimpsed  through  a  crack  in  the  wall."(7)
    Extending  the metaphor further, it can be said that although
    the galloping horse is seen through the crack in many bits or
    fragments, the  whole  horse  is  actually  seen.  It is  not
    truncated or left dangling through the crack. The upshot

    P.54

    is that experiential  reality, like the swift  horse, is felt
    (seen) entirely, but the bit by bit perception seems to belie
    it --due mainly  to our overriding  epistemological  emphasis
    and bias.  As we can see, the moving phenomena  of reality is
    nothing  but  the  glimpses  of  the  Whiteheadian   "eternal
    greatness  incarnate in the passage of temporal fact." To see
    it otherwise  is simply to ignore the presence  of reality in
    the making, a continuous  stream that flows and carries along
    even our blunted consciousness  in its wake.  Furthermore  as
    things  are  normally  perceived   in  chunks,  they  quickly
    sediment  into passive  entities  and become  fodder  for the
    manipulating  mind.  In this  way, the moving  phenomenon  of
    reality are lost, or take a backseat,and hopelessly hang on.
        This  fragmentary  perception  is precisely  the movement
    expressed  in the  yin-yang(b) where  the  yin and  the  yang
    alternate  and seem to exhibit themselves  independently.  In
    actuality, there  is  no  separation  between  the  two  into
    clearly defined roles or realms. Both require each other
    for.their respective so-called substance (ti(c)) and function
    (yung)(d). Yet to describe the phenomena of yin-yang movement
    into  substance  and function, as done  by Wang  Pi and other
    later  Taoists, is  a blatant  travesty  of  the  reality  of
    things,  a  deviation  which  merely  serves  our  insatiable
    epistemic desires.  This last statement is not to be taken as
    an outright rejection of epistemology  as such but a critique
    of the wrongly or falsely contrived epistemic  elements which
    go into  the ruminating  mill  without  due regard  for (heir
    originating natures.  Clearly then aspects of neither the yin
    nor the yang  are epistemic  elements, but are rather  moving
    shades of the reality  of things in inviolable  mutuality.  A
    shadow, afterall, does not wait  for the body to move, though
    its prominence is only accentuated  by the latter's movement.
    The whole second chapter  of the Chuang-tzu  (Ch'i-wu-lun(e),
    "On the Equality  of Things") is an exercise  in the grasp of
    the  moving  reality, and  perhaps  the  most  important  but
    puzzling chapter in the entire work.  It ends with the famous
    enigmatic dream of a butterfly  by Chuang Tzu himself.  There
    is clearly  an epistemic  distinction  between dreamer, dream
    and  dream-content.  But  no solution  is forthcoming  to the
    episode  (i.e., whether  it was  Chuang  Tzu dreaming  of the
    butterfly  or the butterfly  dreaming  of Chuang  Tzu) if the
    analysis is limited to epistemic distinctions. Scholars are
    quite correct in rejecting the

    P.55

    distinction  between  subject and object, between reality and
    unreality.(8) These  scholars, however, do not go far  enough
    in  examining  the  final  statement:  "This  is  called  the
    transformation  of things (tu hua)(f)"(9) The statement taxes
    our imagination, to be sure, but it is quite consistent  with
    the whole message of Chuang-tzu, i.e., that reality  can only
    be  grasped  in  the  swift  changes  ("galloping  horse") of
    things.  In both Chuang Tzu dreaming of the butterfly and the
    butterfly dreaming of Chuang Tzu himself, the distinction  of
    both phenomena  pales into indistinction  as one realizes the
    non-epistemic  content  of reality  on the move.  This is the
    transformation, the  non-epistemic  process, that  inexorably
    goes on regardless of the dream or dreamless state we are in.
    The  transformation  is  beckoning  us to realize  "something
    universal, "   "final, "   "suprarelative, "   an   "infinite
    expansion," a "new vista of existence," etc., but we are, for
    the most part, dulled into believing that we are awake are at
    all times  not dreaming, not knowing  that  we wallow  in the
    quicksands  of epistemology.(10) And so Chuang Tzu is able to
    say  cryptically: "After  ten  thousand  generations, a great
    sage  may appear  who will  know  their  meaning, and it will
    still be as though he appeared with astonishing speed."(11)
        On the Zen or Buddhist side, a different  analysis on the
    glimpse  of reality is found.  Since Zen practice  is usually
    characterized  by minimal scriptural  reliance, it gives rise
    to a false impression  that scriptures  are secondary or even
    unnecessary  in the pursuit  of enlightenment  (as noted, for
    example, in the Zen master's  seemingly  idolatrous  cries of
    "Burn the Sutras! Kill the Buddha!"). But these cries must be
    interpreted  within the context  of the disciple's  ready and
    ripe state of being for the eventual satori or wu(g), and not
    to be interpreted  in isolation or within the context of mere
    pedagogy.  Furthermore, there  must be a clear  understanding
    between  the  use  and  study  of  the  scriptures, including
    listening   to   lectures,   and   the   understanding    and
    concretization  of  the  ideas  thus  gained.   The  disciple
    naturally  is  expected  to accomplish  both  and  to prepare
    himself   diligently,  pliably   and  holistically,  for  the
    climatic hint that might come at any moment to open his mind.
    The crucial  hint  may come  in several  forms: the koan, the
    shout, the  kick, the  slap,  silence,  etc.,  of  which  Zen
    literature is replete.

    P.56                         

        But let us return to the fundamental concepts of Buddhism
    since Zen history unmistakably  records the understanding  of
    these concepts in training and nourishment.  Belonging to the
    Mahayana tradition, Zen utilizes many scriptures  within that
    tradition,  such  as,  the  Diamond   Suutra,  La^nkaavataara
    Suutra,    Madhyamaka    'Saastra,    Trim'sikaa,   Mahaayaa-
    na'sraddhotpaada  'Saastra,  etc.,  but  any  Buddhist  would
    quickly  remind us that these works have, as their basis, the
    early  teachings  of the Buddha.  In this  sense, there  is a
    continuity  in the whole Buddhist tradition and some scholars
    have even stated that Zen is a rightful  return  to the early
    Buddhist practice of seeking enlightenment  as exemplified by
    the historical  Buddha.  Be that  as it may, it behooves  the
    devotee  to learn and understand  what is in store for him in
    the training  for enlightenment, such  training  entailing  a
    complete mastery of the psychological  foundations of man.  I
    will not go into the nature of man in any exhaustive way, but
    present it in the broadest of outlines.
        The psychological nature of man is comprised of the basic
    aggregates  of being  and the five skandhas  (ruupa, vedanaa,
    samjnnaa, samskaara, vijnnaana).  In brief, these skandhas,as
    the term itself reveals, are 'aggregating'  pheonomena, i.e.,
    they are 'groupings'  or 'heapings'  that spell  out what  we
    call individuality (pudgala) but, more specifically, are more
    like individualizing  phenomenon.  Or, looked  at from the
    other  side,  the  enlightened   side,  the  non-aggregating,
    non-grouping, non-grasping  nature reveal a totally different
    dimension  to a 'being'  where there is no hint of individua-
    lity,  hence  the  non-self(anaatman) .   Ordinary   life  is
    characterized always in terms of the aggregating pheomena due
    to the inherent  grasping  and  clinging  to the elements  of
    being.  The  nature  of being, as  we  normally  know  it, is
    essentially  involved  in  the  establishment   of  something
    permanent  and, coupled with this, there is the inability  to
    ride out the impermanent rhythm of life.
        The  five  skandhas  completely  describe  man  from  his
    corporeal  (ruupa) to the highly complex conscious (viijjanan)
    realm  of existence.  The description  is even analyzed  into
    realms  of being (12 aayatanas) which specify  the nature  of
    contact   between   the   inner   ('subjective')  and   outer
    ('objective') realsm  of  man  and, still  further, into  the
    finer complexes  of consciousness  (18 dhaatus) whereby  each
    contact of inner and outer realms

    P.57

    produces   what  we  normally   refer  to  as  awareness   or
    consciousness which becomes the basis of a full blown account
    of ordinary cognitive and intel- lectual activity. Thus, just
    to understand  the psychological  aspect  of man in the total
    sense is an extremely  difficult  task that intimidates  all,
    but a task which  cannot  be glossed  over or neglected.  The
    relatively  short Diamond Suutra, for example, expands on the
    five  skandhas, 12 aayatanas  and  18 dhaatus  but, alas, few
    scholars  take heart  in them, ignoring  or glossing  over
    their  discussion  as being  inconsequential.  We must remind
    ourselves that the 6th patriach, Hui-neng, was enlightened by
    reading this Sutra. Even the formidable La^nkaavataara Suutra
    and  the  Madhyamaka  'Saastra  of  Naagaarjuna  treat  these
    psychological  foundations  of  man, reminding  us  of  their
    import and continuous presence in Buddhism.  But what has all
    this  to do with  our  quest  for  experiential  reality? The
    answer is, very much!
        The purpose of demonstrating the psychological phenomena,
    in  a  word, is  to  counter-demonstrate  that  something  is
    lacking, something  is  peculiar  or irregular  in the  whole
    affair, that a cul-de-sac  will be reached if people go on as
    they  do.  When  the irregularity  is sensed, for example, it
    will show that there  is more than the psychological  factors
    involved  in ordinary  experience, although  this  is not  so
    obvious  at the beginning, due  to our overdependence  on the
    conventionally    empirical   orientation   taken   for   our
    perceptions.  The effect  of counter-demonstration  will show
    up  ?lements  of being  that  only hamper, restrict, and defile
    the experiential  process (such as, the rise of and adherence
    to certain biases which block the development of a truly free
    and easy  nature  of the  being  in question).  Such  a being
    becomes  a proper candidate  for the realization  of the real
    nature  of things  (tattvam, yathaabhuutam, literally, "truth
    of existence," "thatness of being..).  These conceptions are,
    to be sure, quite esoteric  to the non-Buddhist, but Buddhism
    is here, once again, exploring yet another rendition of "some
    eternal greatness incarnate in the passage of temporal fact."
    But Buddhism,this  time, goes  further  with  its  own unique
    doctrine  for that "passage of temporal  fact," the so-called
    dependent   or   relational   origination    (yuan-ch'i(h)  ,
    pratiitya-samutpaada.
        I have written elsewhere(12) that the doctrine of relational
    origination   issues  forth  in  two  strains,  one  with  an
    empirical nature and the other

    P.58   

    without.  In the former, the empirical, ordinary conventional
    language  and conceptualization  function as usual and we are
    at home with them except that, unfortunately, they are in the
    realm of the unenlightened  because of the insatiable, though
    unconscious, grasping  of and adherence  to the  elements  of
    being  (an  activity   which  I  have  referred   to  as  the
    ontological imperative).  In the latter,that without epirical
    nature, there  is  no  action  prompted  by  the  ontological
    imperative   and  thus  no  empirical  elements  at  play  to
    implicate a vision of reality based on those element.  Again,
    the former or empirical realm is referred to by the Buddhists
    as belonging  to the sammsaaric  realm, whereas  the latter or
    non-empirical, is nirvaannic. Now, the Zennist knows all about
    this dual nature in the experiential process, but he is still
    in a bind in that he does  not know how to extricate  himself
    from  it.  He  has  been  told, ad  nauseam, of  the  dictum:
    "Everyday-mindedness is the Way" (attributed to Pai-chang and
    also to Matsu), but there is something paradoxical  about it.
    That is, participation in everyday activities comes naturally
    for all of us, fast and easy, and yet there  is no end to the
    so-called self-feeding discriminative  process, the perpetual
    turning  of  the  sammsaaric  wheel  due  to  the  ontological
    imperative. How can the Zennist solve the paradox?
        The Zennist must, first of all, acknowledge the fact that
    the  experiential   process   in  the  nature  of  relational
    origination is all that he has got and that he must seriously
    address  himself  to its  understanding.  To ignore  it is to
    remain in the samsaaric  realm.  He must thus concentrate  on
    the rise of experiential  events  in terms of perceiving  the
    nature of experiential  events in terms of perceiving  the
    nature  of dependency  (yuan(i), pratyaya) and  relationality
    (yin-yuan(j)   ,    yuan-ch'i(h)   ,    pratiitya-samutpaada,
    pratiitya-samutpanna) of those events and attendant  elements
    in the  total  context  of being.  This  is where  meditation
    enters to pacify or calm down the grasping nature of the mind
    (chih-cho(k), upaadaana, abhinive'sa).  This grasping  nature
    belongs  to the unsettled  mind which has not as yet captured
    the  middle  ground  (way) of existence  by hovering  between
    substantive nature and non-substantive (the extremes of which
    are self- destruction and nihilism). But the middle ground of
    existence  is captured  only when one perceives  rightly  the
    rise  and fall  of experiential  events, or, more  precisely,
    when one is not attached to the elements of the process

    P.59

    of relational origination.  Naagaarjuna and Prajnnaapaaramita
    thinkers have introduced  the concept of emptiness (k'ung(l),
    'Suunyataa) to check  the grasping nature, the  ontological
    force, and thereby reveal at once the nongrasping nature that
    opens  up  a  new  vista  of  existence.  So  that  when  the
    enlightened  person (bodhisavttva) perceives things under the
    aegis  of emptiness, his  perception  is characterized  by an
    initial  epistemic  control, i.e., prevention  of the rise of
    ontological entities, which then discloses the wondrous realm
    of the thatness of being (chen-ju(m), yathaabhuutam). However
    tempting  it may be, the concept  of emptiness  must never be
    lifted to a metaphysical level or reduced to an ontology.  In
    the    statement,   "perception    under    the   aegis    of
    emptiness,"there is no metaphysicizing nor ontologizing for
    the aim is toward the sameness  or equality  of the nature of
    things (p'ing teng(n), samataa).(13) Hui-neng  captured  this
    undifferentiable  realm when, in his famous poem, he referred
    to   the    "non-ex-    istence    of   things    from    the
    beginning"(pen-lai-wu-i-wu(o)) and  set  the  stage  for  the
    rapid growth and dissemination of Zen thought in China.
        In the Yogaacaara-vij~naanavaada  tradition, the  concept
    of emptiness  is applied uniquely  to the Eight Consciousness
    (vij~naana) theory. This theory is yet another development in
    understanding  the psychological foundations of man, carrying
    over  much  from  the  early   Buddhist   knowledge   of  the
    psychological   elements   (skandhas,   aayatanas,   dhaatus)
    discussed earlier,but going further into the subtle nature of
    the discriminative  faculty (manas the 7th consciousness) and
    the all-containing  receptacle of the mind (aalaya-vij~naana,
    the 8th consciousness).  The Zennist, again, must be familiar
    with  all  of this  but, as  in the  case  of early  Buddhist
    psychology  he acknowledges  the samsaaric  nature  which now
    refers   to   all   activities    relative   to   the   eight
    consciousnesses and seeks a way out of it. This system
    premises  three aspects  of man's nature  of being, i.e., the
    imagined nature (parikalpita-svabhaava), the dependent nature
    (paratantra-sabhava)      and      the      pure       nature
    (parinisspanna-svabhaava), the first  two being  samsaric  and
    the last nirvaanic.(14) The samsaaric  nature goes on because
    the first two natures are characterized  by a perpetuation of
    the clinging to unrealities (i.e., things, objects, elements,
    etc.) which forces the turbulent  irning of the mind function
    (prav.rtti).  But the trubulence  will stop by the removal of
    all dichotomies, such as, the basic  division  into outer and
    inner realsm

    P.60

    of existence, the removal of which will happen with the right
    understanding   of   the   psychological   play   of  all
    consciousnesses aided by emptiness ('suunyataa) to block any
    entrance  or acceptance  of those  unrealities.  This is why,
    rather  than  mere correction  of conceptualization, the very
    foundation of conceptualization  is turned upside down, so to
    speak, to make one realize  the pure realm.  This process  is
    known  as  the  ultimate  turning  over  (paraav.rtti) of the
    turbulence  (prav.rtti) ;  the  result  of  turning  over  is
    referred    to   as   consciousness-only    (wei   shih(P)  ,
    vij~naptimaatra),  which  is  another  way  of  describing
    perception  under  the aegis  of emptiness.  This is then the
    basis upon which the Zennist will speak of the mind-only (wei
    hsin(q),  citta-maatra) doctrine.  As  we  can  now  see, the
    consciousness-only   or  mind-only  doctrine  lodges  in  the
    natural  everyday  function  of  our  senses,  including  the
    mind,but the whole experiential  process has been cleansed by
    meditative discipline (yogaacaara).
        In this connection, it ought to be mentioned  that it was
    Naagaarjuna  who  best  captured  the Buddh's  spirit  of the
    existential  parity of samsaara  and nirvaanna  which gave the
    Mahaayaana   tradition  the  necessary  ingredient   for  its
    eventual    development     and    spread,    although    the
    Praj~naapaaramitaa  literature that preceded Naagaarjuna  who
    first  laid  the  foundation  of the  parity  concept  in his
    formulation  of the Four-fold  Noble Truth which starts  with
    suffering  (duhkha) and ends  with non-suffering  within  the
    selfsame  ground  of existence.  Put  in a more  metaphorical
    sense, the realization  of the rise  of suffering, its cause,
    is at once  the  realization  of the  roots  of its  ultimate
    cessation.  All  other  elements  or conceptions  toward  the
    enlightened  realm  are nothing  but footnotes  to this great
    insight  of the  total  parity  of existence.  Based  on this
    insight,  where  nothing  extraneous  exists, I  have  always
    referred to Buddhism as the most thorought going naturalistic
    system.   Zen   or  the  Zennist   surely   exemplifies   the
    crystallized version of this naturalism.
        In  sum, then, Naagaarjuna's  genius  permitts  us to see
    clearly  that, shorn  of fragmentation  by the imposition  of
    substantive  natures  or elements  (savbhaava),  the realm of
    reality is before our very eyes! The relational origination
    is always  the ground  of suffering  as well  as the selfsame
    ground of non-suffering  or liberation, the connection of the
    two can  only  be 'experienced'  by the  introduction  of the
    concept of emptiness to hold

    P.61

    all  elements  in check  and simultaneously  permit  the  new
    ground  to rear  itself.  If  emptiness  is  to  exhibit  the
    dependent  nature  or mutual  reference  of elements  at play
    (praj~napti  upaadaaya), then  it  is  also  the  concept  to
    exhibit  the limits  of this dependency  or mutuality.  Being
    ever  faithful  to the teachings  of the  Buddha, Naagaarjuna
    concludes  that  relational  origination, as seen  under  the
    aegis of emptiness, is also the middle  way.(15) We have thus
    made a full  circle, as Naagaarjuna  has succinctly  stated-
    but, ironically, the circle  of existence, i.e., roots of the
    mannddala, has been  present  all along.  The middle  way which
    avoids the extremes must be nascently present in our everyday
    ways (activities) of existence;  to say otherwise  would  not
    only complicate matters abstractly  but would introduce alien
    elements into our very existence.
        Buddhist  reality,  then,  functions  in  a  total  sense
    regardless  of the sammsaaric or nirvaannic realm.  It can only
    be  realized   by  a  highly   disciplined   training   which
    consummates in enlightenment, the uprooting of suffering from
    its  very  basis.  Nothing  short  will  suffice  or succeed.
    Suffering, in other words, is a total ontologized  phenomenon
    in the sense that the basis of a single element  of suffering
    is related  to the whole  being  and that, when the uprooting
    occurs, the result  will be a total phenomenon.  In this way,
    we may say with  all Buddhists  that  ignorance  (wu-ming(r),
    avidyaa) and enlightenment(wu(g),bodhi) are two poles  of the
    selfsame  phenomenon, one  of-which  is bound  and the  other
    unbound, ontologically speaking.
        As  experiential  reality  is  taking  place  within  the
    context of impermanence,the grasp of it must necessarily come
    about   drastically   and   abruptly.   The  Zen  method   of
    enlightenment  carries  these drastic  and abrupt means which
    dare the devotee to act and respond in uncommon ways, all the
    while  keeping  his  senses, including  the mind, wide  open,
    resilient, total and full. He is unruffled by the paradoxical
    nature of
    sa.msaara  and  nirvaa.na, and  encouraged  and motivated  to
    explore  its  depth  by  avoiding  entanglement  with  things
    logical  and  conceptual.  The  Japanese  Zen  master,  Dogen
    (1200-53), gave a graphic description  of the sammsaaric bound
    life as katto(s) (vines), a life depicted  as wisteria  vines
    entwining among themselves  in which the condition gets worse
    and  worse.(l6) So beneath  all  the simplicity  and  artless
    antics  of  the  devotee, the  ground  is  prepared  for  the
    ultimate event. The method is gradual in the sense that

    P.62 

    step  by step analysis, understanding  and concretion  of the
    facts  of  existence  are  brought  together, but  the  final
    enlightenment must come abruptly or suddenly.(17)
        In   contrast    to   the    Zen   abrupt    method    of
    enlightenment,there  is the  Taoist  quietistic  method.  But
    these two methods are not really contradictory since Zen, for
    example, incorporates the quietistic nature in its meditative
    process.  There  is  actually  no  difference  in the  Taoist
    "forgetting  himself"  and the Zennist concept  of losing his
    self.  Any devotee, eiher Taoist  or Zennist, may spend hours
    "honing  up" for the final grasp  of reality, but he must not
    waste  his  time  in futile  "brick  grinding"  to produce  a
    mirror, or in squeamish rituals upholding Confucian virtues.
        The leading philosophic doctrine in Taoist quietism is
    action-in-nonaction (wei wu-wei(t)).  Many interpretations
    have   been   offered   on  this  important   doctrine,  from
    laissez-faire  to do-nothing, but  its significance  will  be
    missed  if there is no focus  on the glimpses  of reality  as
    discussed  earlier.  Action  (wei) does  not take place  in a
    vacuum but requires  a 'filler'  to function  properly.  That
    'filler'  is provided  by the concept  of non-being  (wu(u)),
    which  is part  and  parcel  of  non-action  (wu-wei) or vice
    versa, and which is also the reality  glimpsed  in the manner
    of the galloping horse.  It(wu) is like the interstices  of a
    net and yet more, since it also inludes  the warp and woof of
    the net itself -  the whole reality.  Thus, wu or the Tao are
    primitives,the uncarved  block  (su p'o(v)), which  presences
    itself  in the actions  taken  by man but does not force  its
    manifestation.  Through  action  the nature of non-action  is
    known, but  non-action  is always  the  foundation  of action.
    There is a parity of process involved  here but not identical
    with the Buddhist  kind, though similar  strains  run through
    both.  Chapter  42 of the Tao Te Ching exhibits  how the Tao,
    One,Two, Three and Ten Thousand Things implicate one another.
    It is an affirmation  of the cosmological, atemporal analysis
    of the phenomena of existence.  Chapter 1 of the same work, a
    capsule presentation of Taoism, also spells out the nature of
    parity  in subtle  ways, where non-being  is in the realm  of
    heaven  and earth, and being  in the realm of all things.  In
    sum, both being  and non-being  are the cosmological  twins -
    always co-existent and co-functioning.
        Our discussion  of certain  common grounds  of discourse
    has also

    P.63

    touched  on  certain  uncommon  grounds, but  the  parity  of
    existence  demands the common and uncommon grounds be treated
    within  the selfsame  reality  in the quest  for the  dynamic
    truth  of  existence.   Metaphysically   and  cosmologically,
    similiar grounds are covered in both systems and they seem to
    collapse   at  some  points;   however,  real   and  alledged
    identities must be sifted and never pushed too far. It was no
    accident,  historically,  that  those  Chinese  who  took  up
    Buddhism  seriously, like Hui-yuan and Seng-chao, were former
    Taoists.  It is impossible to find out how much of Taoism was
    abandoned  and how much  of Buddhism  was incorporated  in to
    their final philosophies. It is enough for all of us today to
    embark on the road in search of "the true man of no-rank."


    STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO

                         NOTES

    1.  It is easy to speak in terms  of the form and content  of
        experience, but we must not lose  sight  of the fact that
        these are merely abstract  terms.  They describe  certain
        aspects of experience  but never experience-as-such, with
        which both Zen and Taoism  are profoundly  concerned.  As
        'subsequent discussion will attempt to show, both systems
        are  interested  in the  grasp  of the  true  reality  of
        experience and not its peripheral indirect elements which
        are only beclouding and disparaging.
    2.  William Barrett, ed., Zen Buddhism: Selected Writings of
        D.T. Suzuki. New York: Doubleday& Company, Inc., 1956. pp.
        103-108.
    3.  Ibid.
    4.  Alfred North Whitehead, Adventures  of Ideas.  New York:
        MacMillan Company, 1933. p.41.
    5.  Ludwig   Wittgenstein,  Tractatus   Logico-Philosophicus.
        London: Routledge  & Kegan  Paul  Ltd., 1949.  He saw the
        mission of philosophy  to be analysis  of thought and not
        about reality as such. The real world, so-called, is left
        to the sciences.
    6.  Burton Watson, tr., The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. New
        York: Columbia University Press, 1968. p. 49.

    P64

    7.  Ibid.;p.330.
    8.  Wing-tsit Chan, tr. & compiled, A Source Book in Chinese
        Philosophy, Princton: Princeton University  Press, 1963.
        pp. 190-91, especially his comments. Also, A.C.  Graham,
        "Chuang-tzu's  Essay on Seeing Things  as Equal," in Hist
        -ory of of Religions, Vol. 9.  Nos.  2 & 5.  p.  149.
    9.  The Complete  Works of Chuang   Tru,p.49.
    10. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.  p.189. See also The
        Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. p. 47.
    11. The Comp Works of Chuang  Tzu.  p.  48.  Italics  mine as
        mine.
    12. "Two Strains in Buddhist  Causality, " Journal of Chinese
        Philosophy; Vol. 12, 1 (March 1985), 49-56.
    13. The obvious  question  here is, how close is the Buddhist
        concept  of  sameness  (samataa,  p'ing-teng(n) ) to  the
        Taoist equality  of things (ch'i-wu(e))? This is surely a
        point of contact  between  the two systems.  The Buddhist
        concept refers  to the ultimate  nature of reality, i.e.,
        the enlightened  state  where  everything  is seen without
        a discriminating eye.  In this sense, it is relative to the
        Buddhas'  and Bodhisattvas'  way,of having regard for all
        creatures, hence the wisdom of sameness  (smataaj~naana).
        In  Taoism, the  monkeys  being  fed  3 or 4 nuts  in the
        morning and 4 or 3 nuts in the afternoon certainly show a
        difference  in the feedings  but the nuts  in combination
        add up to the same  numerical  figure, seven.  Still, the
        numerical  figure must be transcended  in order to arrive
        at  the  ch'i-wu  conception   of  things.   It  is  more
        cosmological than temporal.
    14. Vasubandhu, Tri.m'slkaa, Verses  20-23;  see also  Source
        Book in Chinese Philosophy,pp 374-395.
    15. Naagaarjuna, Muulamadhyamakakaarikaa, XXIV, 18.
    16. Doogen Zenji,Shooboogenzoo,Chapter 38,Kattoo.
    17. For example, it would  be difficult  to speak of a person
        becoming  gradually  good  or  gradually  evil  for  that
        matter, although  on the surface  such descriptions of
        human traits  are always  quite attractive, welcomed, and
        easily believed in.  Goodness  and evilness, however, are
        more  apparent  than  real, and  there  are no shades  in
        either one.

    P.65

     【关闭窗口
    相关文章:
  • 修行不一定要打坐,可是打坐能帮助你修行[333]

  • 禅宗现代转型的发展路向及其启示[378]

  • 禅宗的特色、作略和风格[403]

  • 现代禅学顿渐关系的重构及其取径与概念[420]

  • 刘禹锡的诗与禅[345]

  • 禅宗与中国传统士人思想及其诗歌创作的互动[424]

  • 为什么在佛教的众多流派中,禅宗能一枝独秀?[632]

  • 从《坛经》看禅宗的智慧[871]

  • 禅宗最后立宗的法眼宗 它的教禅圆融观有何特点?[774]

  • 禅宗“打禅七”与净土宗“打佛七”的异同[993]

  • 王阳明的思想与禅宗有什么关系[1044]

  • 六祖惠能大师诞辰纪念日:一花开五叶,结果自然成[1175]

  • 禅宗“不立文字”的因缘探析[676]

  • 网络热词“呵呵”竟是佛教用语![1033]

  • 达摩祖师诞辰 一起学习祖师留下的最重要四句偈[990]

  • 以禅明道,亦道亦禅——李道纯道教思想的禅化倾向[993]

  • 一句话阐明禅宗要旨,这里面说了什么?[1078]

  • 从庄子到禅宗对中国人生哲学的建构[947]

  • 禅宗对佛教中国化的影响[1260]

  • 陕西古代的道教石刻[1176]

  •  
    设为首页 | 加入收藏 | 联系站长 | 友情链接 | 版权申明 | 管理登录 | 
    版权所有 Copyright© 2005 佛学研究        站长:wuys
    Powered by:Great Tang Hua Wei & XaWebs.com 2.0(2006)