Questions and Answers on Chan Buddhism
by Rev. Jiejing
translated by Yinhong
Q1: What is the meaning of the four statements in Chan Buddhism: “Not relying on words, teaching outside the scriptures, directly pointing to the human mind, seeing one’s nature and becoming a Buddha”?
A1: These four statements are traditionally associated with Bodhidharma, the first patriarch of Chan Buddhism, and they express the basic principles of Chan practice and realization. They may be said to summarize the central teaching of Chan. To understand these four statements is to understand the spirit of Chan.
Because Chan emphasizes “not relying on words,” it does not take intellectual constructions or logical reasoning as its ultimate basis. So when asked, “What is Chan?” one may say that Chan cannot be fully captured by logic or language. Any attempt to define it too rigidly misses its essence. Chan is realized through personal awakening; without awakening, there is no Chan. In that sense, Chan must be experienced directly.
Because Chan is said to be “a teaching outside the scriptures,” it does not rest on fixed canonical texts or rigid doctrines. Chan is not a religion defined by worship, ritual observance, or belief in souls and heaven. If one still asks what Chan is, it may be understood as a transmission of mind essence, an intuitive communication from mind to mind. Chan refers to the integrated whole of mind, including wisdom. Only with prajñā, or insight-wisdom, can awakening arise; and with awakening, there is Chan.
Chan “directly points to the human mind” in order to reveal its defiled aspect and to enable one to see the Buddha-nature that is originally pure. This is the path to Buddhahood. When we speak of a “defiled mind,” we are referring to its functional aspect; from the standpoint of essence, however, mind and nature are not two. Thus, the “mind” referred to in “directly pointing to the human mind” also carries the meaning of “nature” or “true suchness.” When we see the mind, we see its nature; when we awaken to its nature, we awaken to the mind. Mind and nature are one.
The Chan principle of “not relying on words, teaching outside the scriptures, directly pointing to the human mind, and seeing one’s nature to become a Buddha” means guiding practitioners to grasp the essence of mind and realize the true suchness of self-nature without seeking something mysterious outside themselves. On this basis, Chan also speaks of “mind-to-mind transmission,” a silent understanding between master and disciple. In teaching practitioners, Chan uses skillful and appropriate methods to free them from attachments and lead them to directly realize their true nature and confirm true suchness. Chan is not about clinging to any fixed concept of truth.
This kind of Chan can only be understood through direct personal experience. That is why it is described as “not relying on words” and “a teaching outside the scriptures.” This does not mean that scriptures are unimportant. Rather, Chan places its emphasis on practicing the teaching of “directly pointing to the human mind and seeing one’s nature to become a Buddha.”
Q2: Should practitioners of Chan meditation study scriptures?
A2: Yes, Chan practitioners should study the scriptures. This is called “illuminating the mind through the teachings” or “realizing the essence through the teachings,” meaning that one uses the ideas in the scriptures to compare them with one’s own experience and confirm whether one’s understanding is correct. When Bodhidharma, the First Patriarch of Chan, transmitted the four fascicles of the Lankavatara Sutra to his successor Huike, he did so with this intention. Therefore, “not relying on words” does not mean rejecting words altogether.
However, Chan Buddhism approaches the scriptures differently from other schools. It uses them flexibly—taking what is useful and setting aside what is not—without becoming bound by them. This reflects Chan’s principle of having no fixed or dogmatic teaching. For this reason, the Japanese Zen master Eisai, founder of the Rinzai school in Japan, wrote in his Treatise on Promoting Zen for the Protection of the Nation:
“The entire Tripitaka serves as the scriptures on which Zen relies; yet at the same time, there is not a single word in the Tripitaka on which Zen depends.”
This removes any apparent conflict between Zen/Chan and the scriptures, and it is consistent with the Buddha’s original intent in the story of the Flower Sermon, when he held up a flower to transmit the teaching to the assembly.
Q3: How can we understand that Chan has no dogmatic teachings and is freely applied without constraint?
A3: When it is said that Chan has no scriptures, it means that Chan has no fixed or dogmatic doctrines. In truth, the entire Tripitaka serves as the scriptures on which Chan relies. However, because Chan emphasizes direct personal experience, it does not bind practitioners to language, concepts, or symbolic forms. Hence, it is also said that there is not a single word in the Tripitaka on which Chan depends.
In fact, Chan koans may be regarded as the scripture-like material of Chan. Practicing Chan through koans frees practitioners from the constraints of theory. Koans are concise and pointed, often consisting of only a few exchanges—sometimes just a single question and answer. For example, consider this Chan koan:
Wuzhuo asked Manjushri, “How should one uphold the Dharma?”
Manjushri replied, “The first three, three; the last three, three.”
An outsider might think that the reply does not answer the question, but in fact it does. Here, “three, three” signifies abundance, while “first” and “last” refer to the past and the future. Time cannot be separated from the three periods of past, present, and future. The meaning is that many people have upheld the Dharma in the past, and many will continue to do so in the future. As for the present, the answer might be to follow conditions or simply keep things as they are.
When one asks “how” to uphold the Dharma, the mind is already constrained by the very idea of Dharma. Such a person is no longer living in the Chan way. And if one cannot live in the Chan way, how can one truly uphold the Dharma?
Q4: In Chan Buddhism, what does “clarifying the mind and perceiving the nature” mean? What “mind” is clarified, and what “nature” is perceived?
A4: In Chan Buddhism, “clarifying the mind and perceiving the nature” can be understood in two ways. From the standpoint of function, it means clarifying the defiled mind and perceiving the pure original nature, in which mind and nature are seen as two distinct aspects. From the standpoint of essence, it means clarifying the true-suchness mind and perceiving the pure original nature, in which mind and nature are understood as one and the same. This is consistent with the earlier explanation of the phrases “directly pointing to the human mind” and “seeing one’s nature to become a Buddha.”
Q5: What is a “koan (gong’an)”?
A5: The term gong’an originally referred to official documents or judicial rulings issued by a government office. It carried an air of seriousness and authority, and it was not to be violated. It could serve as a basis for establishing rules and for judging right and wrong.
In Chinese Buddhism, especially in the Chan tradition, gong’an refers to the recorded sayings and deeds of Chan masters from different periods, which were later summarized and compiled as exemplary cases. In most instances, a gong’an takes the form of a Chan dialogue or a question-and-answer exchange.
By the early Song dynasty, these gong’an were compiled into a collection known as The Jingde Record of the Transmission of the Lamp, which contains about 1,700 cases. Originally meaning “official documents,” gong’an in the Chan context are regarded as the Buddha’s guiding instructions and as authoritative teachings of the Chan school. They serve as a means of assessing whether a practitioner is awakened or deluded, and they carry a certain authoritative force within the Chan tradition. For this reason, Chan masters refer to such texts as gong’an.
Q6: What is considered the first “koan (Gong ‘an)”in Chinese ChanBuddhism, and what is its content?
A6: Bodhidharma, the first patriarch of Chinese Chan Buddhism, produced the first gong’an through his dialogue with Emperor Wu of Liang. He arrived in Guangzhou on September 21, 520 CE. Shortly afterward, Emperor Wu invited him to court, and their conversation on November 1 of that year became the gong’an known as "Vast and without holiness."
The content, as recorded in The Jingde Record of the Transmission of the Lamp, volume 3, is as follows:
The Emperor asked, "Since I ascended the throne, I have built temples, copied sutras, and ordained countless monks. What merit have I gained?"
The Master replied, "There is no merit."
The Emperor asked, "Why no merit?"
The Master replied, "These are merely minor fruits of human and heavenly realms, samsaric causes. Like shadows following a form—they exist but are not real."
The Emperor asked, "What, then, is true merit?"
The Master replied, "Pure wisdom, wondrously complete—its essence by nature empty and still. Such merit cannot be sought through worldly means."
The Emperor then asked, "What is the supreme meaning of the holy truth?"
The Master replied, "Vast and without holiness."
The Emperor asked, "Who, then, is facing me?"
The Master replied, "Don't know."
The Emperor did not understand.
This dialogue was later recorded as a gong’an. As it was Bodhidharma's first exchange in China, it is regarded as the first gong’an of Chinese Chan Buddhism.
Q7: Why are gong'an (like eyes) and seated meditation (zazen, like feet) called servants of Chan?
A7: Chan masters say, "A gong'an is no more than a door-knocking brick or a finger pointing at the moon." The question "What is your original face before your parents were born?" is not Chan's ultimate goal, nor are zazen or dhyāna. Chan's aim is awakening; once attained, these practices are no longer needed.
Consider Master Hakuin of Japan, who would raise one hand and challenge students to hear its sound. That sound already pervades all realms. When challenged, students enter meditative concentration. Dhyāna means both introspection and one-pointed focus. Some find joy in this teaching; others react with aversion. Yet Chan transcends logic entirely.
A novice once asked:
Q: "I clash with my in-laws and my husband mistreats me. Can dhyāna help?"
A: Dhyāna cultivates introspection—"reflect on your own faults, not others'." This resolves conflicts. This is Chan. But without effort, don't blame dhyāna.
Q: "Can gong'an match dhyāna?"
A: "Does Hakuin's one hand make a sound?" No—sound requires two hands clapping. This is dualistic thinking. Chan uses non-discriminative wisdom. "Hear" the one-hand sound with wisdom's eye, not the ear. Understood thus, gong'an resolve all dualities.
When in-laws teach, listen intently. When they scold, reflect deeply. Resistance breeds conflict, conflict breeds contention, contention brings victory or defeat—neither brings peace. Grasp this, and what problem remains unsolved?
Thus, gong'an (like eyes) and zazen (like feet) serve Chan.
Q8: Can you share a Chan gong'an to illustrate how to deal with anger?
A8: When Monk Huiming asked the Sixth Patriarch Huineng, "What is the Buddha-dharma?", the master replied, "Not thinking of good, not thinking of evil—what then is Huiming's original face right now?"
To understand this gong'an is to awaken. An awakened person may still have habitual tendencies but knows how to deal with them. When anger arises, one recognizes it as anger. Through constant awareness and correction, the habit gradually fades and eventually disappears altogether. This is Chan.
One who realizes Chan is like someone who has drunk directly from the spring of true suchness—no further guidance is needed. As the saying goes, "The Buddha taught all dharmas to guide all minds. Without mind, what need is there for all these dharmas?" A mind free from anger is a pure mind, which is one's original face.
When Huiming heard this teaching, he immediately recognized his original face and awakened. From that time forward, Chan practitioners have used the question "What was your original face before your parents were born?" as a method of inquiry. This directs one to the source of mind and dissolves dualistic conflicts, including anger.
Q9: What exactly is Chan?
A9: Even the Buddha cannot fully answer "What is Chan?" If it could be captured in words, there would have been no silent transmission at Vulture Peak's Flower Sermon, nor the teaching of "a separate transmission outside the scriptures."
Yet Chan can be taught as expedient means. Words belong to conventional truth; ultimate truth transcends language. When Emperor Wu of Liang asked Bodhidharma, "What is the ultimate meaning of the holy truth?", Bodhidharma replied, "Vast and without holiness." The emperor could not understand, grasping only conceptual truth, not the directly realized state beyond sacred and profane, self and other, past and present. This is Chan's foundation.
From the teaching's perspective, Chan is mind—originally free and boundless, like thunder with boundless power, spring flowers with boundless beauty.
Chan is emptiness (śūnyatā), true suchness, dharma-realm, self-nature—different names, same reality. Ultimately, Chan is the Way: dressing, eating, working, resting, thinking. Thus we live in Chan always.
So what is Chan? Simply ordinary mind.
Q10: Does "Not thinking of good, not thinking of evil" mean Chan practitioners cannot distinguish good from evil?
A10: This instruction describes the practitioner's focus during Chan practice—the principle of no-thought (wunian), remaining unattached amid all circumstances. It does not mean confusing good and evil. If one cannot distinguish right from wrong, how could that be Chan?
The Platform Sutra states: "When self-nature is upright, it gives rise to the eighteen wholesome dharmas; when crooked, the eighteen unwholesome dharmas." Human experience arises from the six sense faculties interacting with the six sense objects, producing the six consciousnesses—the eighteen dhātus.
For example, when in-laws scold you, the ear consciousness hears sound. If self-nature is upright, wholesome action arises—this is Buddha-action. A Buddha's mind is free of attachment and duality. Hearing sound, no resentment or preference arises. In Yogācāra terms, this transforms manas into equality wisdom.
If self-nature is crooked, unwholesome action arises—this is ordinary being-action. With attachment and duality, hearing sound produces resentment or preference, inequality, and anger toward in-laws. Thus family harmony becomes impossible.
Chan practice does not suppress emotions or deny good and evil but transcends attachment and duality, responding with clarity and wisdom.
Q11: "Having no mind in all situations"—what situations does this mean?
A11: This returns to the teaching that Chan is ordinary mind. Daily life requires dressing, eating, sleeping—the six sense faculties meeting the six sense objects.
Chan teaches non-attachment amid these encounters. Attachment to "good" creates "bad." Consider eating: the tongue meets taste. A Chan practitioner remains unattached to delicious or distasteful, eating appropriately—neither overeating nor undereating.
Without Chan, one discriminates: overeating pleasant tastes, rejecting unpleasant ones—perhaps smashing bowls or scolding others. This principle applies to all six senses.
Thus no-thought (wunian) and "ordinary mind is the Way" are Chan's vital principles. Without direct experience, there is no Chan. But through experience, Chan appears everywhere. A Chan life is truly free and at ease.
Q12: "Having no mind everywhere, no mind means no-thought"—from what source? Did the Buddha teach this? How is it explained?
A12: This teaching comes from Chan master Dazhu Huihai's Treatise on the Essentials of Sudden Awakening and Entering the Way. It derives from the Diamond Sutra:
"Do not abide in form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharmas—give rise to a mind that abides nowhere."
Here "abide" means attachment. Non-abiding produces pure mind—true-suchness mind. The Sixth Patriarch's "self-nature" sometimes means this mind, sometimes storehouse consciousness (ālayavijñāna). Ordinary thoughts are discriminative—entering birth-and-death. Buddha-mind is non-discriminative—non-arising, true suchness.
Thus the Buddha teaches pure-mind engagement with sense objects. This is Chan life—free and unbound. Attached engagement lacks Chan—bound by suffering. The world is impermanent, thus painful. Chan confronts rather than flees this reality through non-abiding mind.
"Non-abiding" is nirvāṇa itself, as the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā states:
"Nirvāṇa is called free from feeling" (nirvāṇaṃ nāma vedanātīraskṛtiḥ).
Cultivating this constantly realizes no-thought (wunian)—Chan's essence and the Buddha's true teaching, making one a true disciple of the Buddha.
Q13: These teachings seem easy to understand—why can't people practice them?
A13: Don't speak of mere "understanding"—even those achieving sudden awakening still have habitual tendencies. How can one with lingering habits fully realize the teaching?
So-called "understanding" is usually intellectual comprehension (liwu)—mere conceptual knowledge, the second stage of faith → understanding → practice → realization. Without faith and understanding, one hasn't even begun.
Faith without understanding becomes blind faith. Our current knowledge is borrowed, not personally realized—thus useless.
Practice without realization yields no practice-awakening (xingwu). Only perfect integration of understanding and practice manifests complete Buddha-character.
Q14: Doesn't sudden awakening (dunwu) make one equal to the Buddha? Why say those who awaken still have habitual tendencies?
A14: Sudden awakening (dunwu) elevates one to buddhahood—this is intellectual awakening (liwu). But in practice-awakening (xingwu), full equality with the Buddha awaits. Deeply rooted habits from beginningless time cannot be eradicated instantly. Constant mindfulness and gradual cultivation are required.
Prince Siddhartha attained enlightenment at 35, but had achieved buddhahood in past lives, merely manifesting here to demonstrate the path. Likewise, acknowledging residual habits in the newly awakened is entirely reasonable.
Ancient masters with awakening still showed habits—this is "gradual cultivation after awakening" (wuhou jianxiu). As the ancients said:
Though sudden awakening makes one like the Buddha,
Habitual tendencies from countless lifetimes run deep.
The wind may cease, but waves still ripple;
The principle manifests, yet thoughts still intrude.
Q15: What does "observing the huatou" mean? What are some examples of huatou?
A15: Observing the huatou means observing the mind. The "original face before your parents were born" refers to the mind. To observe it is therefore to observe the mind.
Generally speaking, past ignorance symbolizes the "father," and present craving or attachment symbolizes the "mother." The phrase "the original face before your parents were born" refers to the state before ignorance and craving arise.
Here are some examples of huatou for contemplation:
Who is reciting the Buddha's name?
Who is putting on clothes?
Who is walking?
Who is eating?
Who is sleeping?
Who is chanting scriptures?
Who is reciting mantras?
Who is bowing to the Buddha?
All of these are essentially the same. The "who" in each question points to the mind. Speech arises from the mind; the mind is the source of speech. Similarly, thoughts arise from the mind; the mind is the source of thoughts. Therefore, huatou refers to the point before a thought arises.
In summary, observing the huatou means observing the mind.
Q16: Why is "sleeping when tired, eating when hungry" called ordinary mind? How is this the highest Buddhist teaching?
A16: First, we must admit we have never truly possessed ordinary mind. Why? Because ordinary mind is true-suchness mind—the mind that sees all things precisely as they are, without distortion. Some call this "self-knowing, self-seeing," equivalent to śūnyatā (emptiness). This emptiness is Buddhism's highest teaching, the ultimate path.
This path is Chan. Thus Chan is emptiness, is mind, is true suchness. The "way of Chan" is the way of life—ordinary mind itself.
When tired, one truly knows tiredness and rests. When sleeping, one simply sleeps, neither regretting the past nor fretting the future—this is ordinary mind. Such a mind accords with conditions: favorable or adverse, it neither resists nor grasps. To live thus is freedom, the life of Chan.
Q17: How can we transcend dualistic discrimination to realize non-dual true-suchness mind?
A17: Life and death appear opposite: life is living, death is not—this dualistic view arises from discriminative mind, causing attachment to life and fear of death. Life seems favorable, death unfavorable.
How to realize beyond this duality? Each morning upon waking, approach every action mindfully. Consider shaving: your beard grows daily. Growth is life, yet this growth is constant change—thus also death. Living is dying; dying begins new life.
Thus life is death's life, death is life's death. Life and death are not two but one. Life is not different from death, death not different from life—this is seeing things as they truly are, self-knowing and self-seeing. This is true-suchness mind, realized through emptiness (śūnyatā) and non-duality.
Q18: Ordinary people face endless daily troubles—how to be free of them?
A18: Consider this exchange with Chan master Muzhou (late 9th century):
A practitioner asked, "We must wear clothes and eat daily—how to escape this?"
Muzhou replied, "We wear clothes and eat."
"I don't understand," said the practitioner.
"Then wear clothes and eat," said Muzhou.
The practitioner sought escape from the external world. Yet subjective and objective are one reality. Rejecting the objective splits reality into opposing halves.
Ordinary people err by opposing what is essentially non-dual, dividing the indivisible. Knowing clothes and food are needed yet rejecting them is self-destruction. Would you destroy life for liberation?
If not, then wear clothes, eat rice—and seek liberation precisely therein.
Since the practitioner still didn't understand, Muzhou continued: Whether you understand or not, you live through daily necessities. No one escapes cause and effect—not enlightened masters, not ordinary beings.
Enlightened masters eat when hungry, sleep when tired, add clothes in winter snow. Reject necessities and you starve.
No matter how desperately you seek escape from troubles, liberation lies within those very troubles. Without troubles, what liberation would there be to seek?
Q19: How to seek liberation precisely within wearing clothes and eating?
A19: Liberation requires recognizing awakening opportunities (bodhi). What are they? Life's greatest troubles—setbacks and failures—are prime awakening opportunities.
Facing setbacks without confronting them loses self-knowledge. No self-knowledge, no awakening. No awakening, no liberation. Facing failure without reflection loses self-understanding. No self-understanding, no freedom.
"Great setbacks yield great awakening"—or conversely, "Great awakening dissolves great setbacks."
The awakened don't seek "liberation"—they live freely: "Follow conditions without changing; remain unchanging amid conditions" (suiyuan bu bian, bianyuan bu bian).
Every act is awakening opportunity: wearing clothes, eating, moving, thinking—we simply fail to notice. Those with Chan accept daily reality as-is, attaining no-mind therein.
With Chan, adversity doesn't turn the mind—the mind turns adversity. Toward good or bad, attachment and aversion don't arise. This is no-mind (wuxin), no-thought (wunian).
When slandered publicly, the Buddha sat calmly on the teaching platform, anger-free. Only complete awakening enables this.
Even worldly success needs opportunity and capital. Wealth requires starting capital; without it, mere fantasy. Awakening requires discipline, concentration, wisdom (śīla, samādhi, prajñā)—without these, mere dreaming.
Opportunities abound, but we miss them: self-clinging, view-attachment, criticism-resistance, arrogance, complacency. Persisting thus, when will awakening dawn?
Q20: Are afflictions (klesa) and awakening (bodhi) one or two?
A20: In essence, afflictions and awakening are one. From the phenomenal perspective, delusion and awakening differ—they appear as two.
Q21: The Platform Sutra says, "The present-moment mind is both delusion and truth." How is this explained?
A21: "Mind" here refers to self-nature mind (zixing xin)—specifically storehouse consciousness (ālayavijñāna). The Platform Sutra states: "Self-nature encompasses all dharmas; it is called storehouse consciousness (chantang shi)."
This ālayavijñāna holds all seeds of good and evil, manifesting body and world. When discriminative thought arises toward external objects, it becomes deluded mind (wang xin)—the seventh consciousness (manas), entering birth-and-death (shengmie men).
Without discrimination, wisdom arises—pure mind (true-suchness mind, rulai zang)—intrinsic to all beings, free of defilement. Thus present-moment mind is delusion or awakening depending on whether it falls into discrimination (birth-and-death, affliction) or abides in purity (true-suchness, non-arising bodhi).
Q22: Are deluded mind (wang xin) and true mind (zhen xin) one or two?
A22: In essence, deluded and true are one. In function, they differ as two. True mind is like water; deluded mind like ice. Though ice and water differ in form, ultimately they are not two—same nature.
Q23: The Platform Sutra's "Non-dual Verse" states: "Bodhi belongs to self-nature; arising mind is delusion. Pure mind resides within delusion, but true alignment has no three obstructions." How to understand?
A23: "Bodhi belongs to self-nature"—self-nature (zixing) is eighth consciousness (ālayavijñāna), inherently containing awakening nature.
"Arising mind is delusion"—conceptual discriminative mind belongs to birth-and-death. Good or bad thoughts are alike delusion. Thus the Sixth Patriarch says: "Arising diligence is delusion, not diligence. Mind free of delusion—diligence boundless."
Pure mind is true-suchness mind; delusion is birth-and-death mind. Where is true-suchness mind? Right within deluded mind. Hence Chan says "right now."
"Pure mind within delusion, true alignment—no three obstructions." "True alignment" (zheng) means no thought arises, unattached to opposites—the state before conceptual mind. This zheng is no-thought (wunian), no-mind (wuxin).
"Mind with anger misses alignment; fear misses alignment; desire misses alignment; sorrow misses alignment."
Three obstructions:
1. Affliction-obstruction (fannao zhang): greed, hatred, delusion
2. Karma-obstruction (ye zhang): five heinous acts, ten unwholesome deeds
3. Retribution-obstruction (bao zhang): hells, hungry ghosts, animals
Sixth Patriarch teaches: mind truly aligned—no three obstructions. Master Zhigong said: "Afflictions arise from mind; mind empty—where do afflictions dwell?"
No-mind toward all phenomena is true alignment (zheng). Chan's "no-thought as core principle" means exactly this.
Q24: What is the relationship between no-thought (wunian) and no-mind (wuxin)? Where does no-mind apply?
A24: Thought (nian) is mental activity, so no-thought is no-mind. Master Huihai's Treatise on the Essentials of Sudden Awakening states: "No-mind in all situations is called no-thought."
This means no-mind toward the six sense spheres: form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharmas. Free of grasping or discrimination toward these, one abides in no-mind.
Q25: What "thought" (nian) does no-thought (wunian) negate? What "mind" (xin) does no-mind (wuxin) negate?
A25: No-thought negates deluded thoughts (wang nian)—wrongful, wandering thoughts. No-mind negates deluded mind (wang xin)—the seventh consciousness (manas).
Thus no-mind means pure mind, also called true-suchness mind (zhenshi xin) or Buddha-mind (fo xin).
Q26: How to be truly no-mind (wuxin)? Is no-mind truly free?
A26: Consider this: You're young, sitting on the subway. An elder boards, no seat. That instant—mind or no-mind? Mind brings affliction; no-mind, liberation.
Not about "intentional" vs "unintentional" yielding. Does action pass through seventh consciousness (manas) deliberation—or arise directly from sixth consciousness?
Eye meets elder, recognition arises. Immediate yielding, only other's benefit in mind—no self-concern—delusion unarisen. This is no-mind.
Hesitation? "Should I? Still many stops... won't have seat later. But embarrassing not to... fine, yield." Seventh consciousness clings to "me"—affliction arises. Yielding feels reluctant, standing miserable.
Bypassing seventh consciousness, elder and self become one. Yielding natural, standing effortless—true freedom. This manifests "boundless compassion" (wuyuan daci), "shared-body great compassion" (tongti dabei).
Such action is no-mind, the bodhisattva path.
Q27: How should we understand the verse from the Platform Sutra's "Non-dual Verse" (Wuxiang Song):
In affliction's dark house, constantly generate wisdom-sun.
Delusion comes, affliction arises; truth comes, affliction ceases.
Delusion and truth both abandoned—purity without remainder.
A27: The phrase "affliction's dark house" refers to the six fundamental afflictions: greed (tan), hatred (chen), delusion (chi), arrogance (man), doubt (yi), and wrong views (buzhengjian).
Wrong views (evil views, xiejian) further subdivide into five types:
1. Body-view (shenjian): attachment to the body as "self," leading to selfishness
2. Extreme views (bianjian): either annihilationism (existence ends like a lamp) or eternalism
3. Wrong views (xiejian): denial of causality and karma
4. View-clinging (qujian): attachment to one supreme view (e.g., creator-god worship)
5. Precept-clinging (jiejiang): adherence to misguided precepts, such as ascetics abstaining from beef or dog meat
Among these six fundamental afflictions, the first five arise even in dull-witted beings and are called the five dull fetters (wudun shi). The five types of wrong views arise in sharp, intellectually gifted individuals and are called the five sharp fetters (wuli shi). Together they comprise the ten fetters (shi shi), binding beings to samsara.
Twenty secondary afflictions (sui fannao) accompany these: anger, resentment, irritation, deceit, flattery, harmfulness, jealousy, stinginess, shamelessness, remorselessness, faithlessness, laziness, carelessness, drowsiness, restlessness, losing mindfulness, improper attention, and distraction. The final ten—from shamelessness to distraction—are called the ten bonds (shi chan).
Ordinary beings dwell perpetually in this darkness of ignorance. Thus the Sixth Patriarch teaches: "Constantly generate wisdom-sun" to dispel afflictive darkness.
"Delusion comes" means deluded mind active, bringing afflictions. "Truth comes" means prajñā discernment—not following conditions. When true-suchness mind manifests, afflictions dissolve.
Chan ancestors teach: "Don't fear thoughts arising—fear awakening late."
"Delusion and truth both abandoned"—all opposites are relative: delusion vs truth, false vs true, evil vs good. Ordinary people err by eliminating one to preserve the other, not realizing this creates grasping. Chan teaches "not thinking good, not thinking evil"—abandon both sides entirely.
Mind thus unobstructed becomes perfectly luminous and pure: nirvana without remainder.
Q28: What does "not thinking of good or evil" mean?
A28: Good and evil represent the two poles of dualistic thinking. The very act of thinking about good or evil gives rise to discrimination, which is the function of the seventh consciousness (manas), the defiled mind. This confines one to the realm of arising and ceasing—ordinary conceptual knowledge—and bars entry to the patriarchs' hall of direct realization.
As Chan Master Zhichang taught:
Self-nature's essence, awareness's source—
If perception follows, it drifts astray.
Failing the patriarchs' hall,
One wanders lost toward extremes.
"Wandering toward extremes" means fixation on either existence or emptiness. Thinking good or evil already embodies this mistaken clinging. Even "abandoning evil to preserve good" binds one to goodness. Only transcending both allows the mind to settle into singular focus.
In every moment, every activity, remain aligned with the dharma-nature body (faxing shen). Thus one returns to the originally pure mind. When conditions ripen, seeing true nature becomes possible.
Q29: If one cannot remain aligned with the dharma-nature body at all times and in all circumstances, can one still realize true nature?
A29: Chan practitioners unable to maintain alignment with the dharma-nature body (faxing shen) in every moment and situation cannot see their original nature (jian zi benxing).
Such individuals rely on consciousness, not wisdom (yi shi bu yi zhi). They seek answers within superficial appearances, language, and concepts, using the manas consciousness to deliberate: "Is it thus? Or thus?" (zenme zenme).
After merely studying Buddhist terminology for days, they fancy themselves eloquently insightful. Yet this "knowledge" bears no connection to the great matter of life and death beneath their very feet. At best, they become disciples of intellectual understanding—gaining partial, superficial comprehension, never touching realization's core.
Q30: Isn't "seeking Buddha's knowledge and views" precisely the great matter of life and death beneath one's feet?
A30: "The Buddha has no knowledge or views; knowledge and views belong to the demon realm." (The Jingde Record of the Transmission of the Lamp, vol. 14)
Hui Lang of Zhaoti (738–824) sought Chan from Master Mazu:
Mazu: "What do you seek?"
Hui Lang: "Buddha's knowledge and views."
Mazu: "Buddha has no knowledge or views—knowledge and views belong to demons."
Unable to grasp this, Mazu sent him to Master Shitou Xiqian:
Hui Lang: "What is Buddha?"
Shitou: "You have no Buddha-nature."
Hui Lang: "Do animals have Buddha-nature?"
Shitou: "Yes."
Hui Lang: "Why not me?"
Shitou: "You refuse to bear it."
Hui Lang awakened under both masters. What to "bear"? Direct encounter with true suchness—personally experiencing the great matter of life and death beneath one's feet.
The Diamond Sutra teaches:
"Past mind unattainable, present mind unattainable, future mind unattainable."
This is "three moments ungraspable" (san shi bu ke de), "three minds ungraspable" (san xin bu ke de).
Thus "one thought" is called no-thought (wunian). No-thought doesn't mean consciousness ceases—it arises simultaneously with consciousness, present yet ungraspable. For this, the Sixth Patriarch calls it true-suchness thought (zhenru nian).
The Platform Sutra states: "Present thought is delusion or truth."
Fallen into delusion, it spins samsara with afflictions arising and ceasing.
Aligned with true-suchness thought, afflictions neither arise nor cease—this is Chan life.
Experiencing Chan reveals: emptiness (śūnyatā), true suchness, dharma-nature, dharma-realm, prajñā. Names differ, reality one.
Q32: Can illiterate people chanting sutras and mantras still be effective?
A32: Effectiveness depends entirely on the practitioner's heart—not literacy or pronunciation. "Spiritual power" means complete sincerity, mind free of distractions, wholly focused on the recitation. Such a heart fulfills all aspirations.
Conversely, "mouth recites Amitabha, heart dwells in samsara" yields nothing. Why? Heart lacks sincerity.
When heart is sincere, even incorrect pronunciation works. Why? All dharmas arise from mind.
A true story: An illiterate servant in a wealthy Buddhist household observed her mistress's daily recitation. Thinking, "Her fortune comes from devotion—I'll cultivate for future lives," she begged to learn.
Servant: "Madam, I can't read. I only know 'Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva.' Teach me something?"
Mistress (amused): "How can you recite without reading?"
Servant: "Just a few lines, please!"
Seeing lychees and longans, the mistress playfully altered Great Compassion Mantra's opening: "Namo lychee longan kernels" (Namo lizhi longyan he).
Mistress: "Add this after 'Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva.'"
The servant chanted daily with utter sincerity: "Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva, Namo lychee longan kernels."
Her sailor son survived shipwreck by clinging to a floating mound of lychee and longan kernels—rescued days later.
Heart sincerity trumps literacy or accuracy. "Heart spiritual, Buddha responds" (xin ling ze fo ling).
Q33: Can someone untaught with deeply flawed character attain enlightenment?
A33: The Buddha declared: "All sentient beings possess Buddha-nature"—including virtuous and vicious alike. Enlightenment depends on whether inherent Buddha-nature (bodhi) emerges, not merely its existence. Every ordinary being has Buddha-nature, yet every ordinary being also bears ignorance (avidyā).
Mahayana scriptures repeatedly affirm: "Affliction is bodhi." Same essence, divergent function—when affliction rises, bodhi sinks; when bodhi rises, affliction sinks.
An illustrative story from ancient India:
A notorious bandit, successful in countless robberies, suddenly realized his crimes caused others suffering and left himself guilt-ridden. Seeking atonement, he approached a practitioner:
Bandit: "Venerable one, what teaching frees me from suffering?"
Practitioner: "What is your specialty?"
Bandit: "I have none."
Practitioner: "You do have one."
Bandit (confessing): "Robbery."
Practitioner: "Excellent. Rob the stars from the sky. Place them in your empty nature (xing kong) until they dissolve."
Contemplating this for twenty-one days, the bandit awakened.
Surface simplicity belies profundity: both practitioner (discerning capacity) and bandit (sincere seeking) were extraordinary. Bandit's ignorance drove robbery; emerging Buddha-nature brought remorse. The teaching—"stars into empty nature"—skillfully shattered dualistic fixation. Innumerable stars cannot fit a small stomach, except in emptiness (śūnyatā). Transforming discriminative mind into insight wisdom, he attained true liberation.
From beginningless time, Buddha-nature lies dormant beneath afflictions. Yet when setbacks or awakening conditions arise, grasping opportunity yields sudden enlightenment.
Enlightenment differs from receiving teachings: teachings belong to conventional truth (conventional expressions); enlightenment to ultimate truth (beyond words). Thus even those with vile habits, if sincerely repentant and meeting a great teacher, can awaken.
Q34: Can one attain true liberation without realizing śūnyatā-prajñā wisdom?
A34: "Not realizing" means "not yet realizing." Buddhas and advanced bodhisattvas have realized it; ordinary beings and Two Vehicle practitioners have not.
Ordinary beings, obstructed by karma, cannot cultivate śūnyatā-prajñā—no wisdom, no freedom. Two Vehicle practitioners may possess deep samādhi and supernatural powers, yet lacking śūnyatā-prajñā, remain unbound.
From The Collective Sutra of the Bodhisattva's Past Deeds: During a manifested Buddha's time, a monk with profound concentration conversed with his lice. Disturbed during meditation, he made a pact: "Meditating, you rest; non-meditating, you feed." Lice complied; harmony prevailed.
A flea, envying plump lice, begged: "Sister, how so fat and white?"
Louse: "Follow monk's agreement—meditation rest, otherwise feed."
Flea: "Teach me!"
Louse: "Obey the pact."
Meditation began; ravenous flea bit. Monk startled, assumed louse's betrayal, ripped robe to punish—knocking it into fire. Louse and flea incinerated.
Lesson: Profound samādhi, conversing with insects—yet no prajñā wisdom. Mind entangled in attachments, fears, anger. Without prajñāpāramitā, delusions persist.
Only advanced Bodhisattvas and Buddhas attain "ultimate nirvāṇa" (jiujing niepan)—true liberation. Without realizing śūnyatā-prajñā, no ultimate freedom.
Q35: Is there benefit studying Buddhism without entering through "no-mind" (wuxin)?
A35: "No-mind" means absence of the defiled mind of the seventh consciousness (manas-vijñāna, Ch: 末那識, "thinking consciousness"—deliberation, measurement). Chinese Buddhism calls this the "defiled mind" (染污心). Buddhas and bodhisattvas lack this mind, hence "no-mind." "No-mind" is Buddha-mind and pure mind. Only pure mind does not follow conditions. Ordinary beings possess defiled mind and constantly "follow myriad conditions" (心隨萬境轉).
Now the answer becomes clear. If still unclear, ask: Does studying Buddhism benefit those without firm resolve? No resolve means "mind follows myriad conditions"—cannot attain Buddha-mind, cannot succeed even in worldly affairs.
Why? No steadfastness, no firm will—start projects, abandon midway. Hear others' words, immediately obey without own judgment.
Like this ancient fable:
Father and son lead horse on road. Passersby say:
"How foolish! One should ride!" Son lets father ride, leads horse.
Further along: "Poor son!" Father dismounts, son rides.
Soon: "Unfilial son!" Both ride together.
Not far: "Abusing the horse!" Both dismount, lead horse again.
This fable reveals the foolishness of lacking resolve. How can fools study Buddhism? Without resolve, mind constantly follows conditions, circling endlessly outside Buddhism's gate, never connecting with Buddha.
Diamond Sutra: "Should not generate mind toward form, sound...; should generate mind without abiding."
Applied to fable: Hearing sound, "do not generate defiled mind toward sound; generate pure mind without attachment." "Having mind" = defiled mind; "no-mind" = pure mind. Pure mind manifests true suchness, unmoved by conditions—father-son wouldn't change from "foolish" (父親不上馬) or "poor son" (父親不下馬).
All worldly things—good/bad, gain/loss—are dualistic. Passersby's criticisms are one-sided, missing reality. Father, son, horse walking together; both riding; father rides, son walks—none absolutely right/wrong. Right/wrong are subjective discriminations, not objective truth.
Examples:
Horse sick? Father-son should walk together.
Horse healthy? Both riding isn't "abuse"—horse can bear it.
Weak son, strong father? Son riding isn't "unfilial."
Everything follows actual conditions, not voices. Without resolve, cannot enter Buddha-gate.
Q36: Can one attain liberation without eliminating greed, hatred, and delusion?
A36: Regarding the term “kill” or “eliminate,” Buddhism upholds the precept against taking life. This prohibition specifically refers to refraining from killing sentient beings.
On this topic, last Thursday (May 4, 2000), a follower in Salt Lake City asked:
“In our laboratory, we kill living beings every day during experiments. Is this a non-virtuous action? Will it result in karmic consequences in future lives?”
Whether an act constitutes a non-virtuous action, and whether it gives rise to karmic consequences, depends upon the mental intention at the time of the act. If killing one, ten, or even a hundred beings can lead to results that ultimately save countless lives, then the act has significant value. Those smaller beings, through their sacrifice for the benefit of many, may accrue great merit and obtain rebirth in favorable realms. In such a case, the experimenter does not generate karmic retribution.
However, if one kills countless small beings in the laboratory without any real prospect of meaningful results—so that their deaths yield no benefit—then their sacrifice is without merit, and karmic consequences fall upon the one who killed them.
Another question arises:
“If venomous pests endanger human life, is it considered a non-virtuous action to eliminate them?”
In fact, this is not truly a question. Venomous pests threaten human life, and failing to eliminate them would constitute a serious problem. What must be safeguarded is human life, not the pests. While Buddhism teaches non-killing out of respect for all life, in circumstances where human life is directly threatened, human life takes precedence.
All forms of life exist within a single life-span, differing only in their manifestations. Yet when comparing human life with that of harmful creatures, human life must be prioritized. Buddhism is a teaching of wisdom. If one fears breaking the precept against killing and refrains from eliminating dangerous creatures, thus allowing them to cause human death, this would in fact constitute a far more serious violation. The Buddha criticized such behavior as ignorance.
Returning to the main point: in the Buddha’s teaching, greed, hatred, and delusion are the three poisons that obstruct the wisdom-life. So long as these afflictions remain, liberation cannot be attained.
During the Buddha’s lifetime, a celestial being named Māgha asked in verse:
“What should one kill to sleep peacefully?
What should one kill to experience joy?
What kind of killing is praised by the Buddha?”
The Buddha replied:
“By killing anger, one sleeps at ease;
By killing anger, one finds joy.
Anger is the root of poison—
Its destruction I praise.
Having slain anger,
One remains free from sorrow through the long night.”
From these words, it is clear that only by eliminating greed, hatred, and delusion can liberation be attained. Otherwise, all actions become karmically conditioned and lead to further bondage.
For example, consider a person who aspires to be a physician. If the motivation is solely to accumulate wealth rather than to save lives, then money is valued above human life. When a patient is brought in, such a person might first ask, “Has the fee been fully paid?” If the answer is, “Half is still unpaid; we are borrowing the rest,” the reply might be, “Then return after full payment is made.”
In contemporary American society, such behavior is relatively rare due to the prevalence of health insurance. However, in some parts of Asia, among private practitioners, it is not uncommon to demand payment before providing treatment. Such individuals are bound by greed, unable to sleep peacefully, and tormented by anxieties throughout the long night. How could they possibly attain liberation under such conditions？
Q37: Is it beneficial to study the Buddha's teachings without knowing one's own mind?*
A37: The purpose of studying the Buddha’s teachings is to understand one’s own mind. If one studies Buddhism without recognizing one’s mind, it brings no benefit in this life. This is because Buddhism is centered on the mind and provides methods to free sentient beings from mental suffering.
If one does not understand the mind, one cannot transcend suffering. To achieve liberation, where should one begin? The answer is: begin with the mind.
For example:
Chan (Zen) school emphasizes the “sudden awakening of the Way through the mind.”
Pure Land school (淨宗) teaches the “mind-only Pure Land” through the practice of reciting the Buddha’s name.
Esoteric (Vajrayana) school (密宗) practices the “Three Mysteries Yoga” to attain Buddhahood in this very body.
Discipline (Vinaya) school (律宗) cultivates the mind through “preventing wrong and restraining evil.”
Nature (Madhyamaka) school (性宗) teaches the “Middle Way Emptiness” to understand the nature of reality.
Phenomena (Yogācāra) school (相宗) emphasizes “all dharmas are consciousness-only.” (萬法唯識)
Tiantai school (天台宗) teaches “three thousand realms in a single thought” through meditative concentration and insight.
Huayan school (華嚴宗) emphasizes the “One True Dharma Realm” (一真法界) and the unobstructed interpenetration of all phenomena (無礙法門).
Although the schools differ, all aim at the same goal: to help practitioners recognize their own mind. Each teaches that “this very mind is the Buddha” or “this very mind is identical with the Buddha.”
A verse aptly expresses this:
“Do not seek the Buddha far away at Vulture Peak,
For Vulture Peak resides within your own mind.
Everyone has a stupa of Vulture Peak within their heart—
Beneath it, one can cultivate the Way.”
Our mind is like a stupa, storing the treasure of intrinsic purity. Yet due to ignorance, we fail to open this treasure and instead search outwardly. The Buddha calls this “abandoning the root to pursue the branches.”
The scriptures tell a story: a person’s mind once protested to its owner:
“Every day when you awaken, I open your eyes to perceive the manifold scenes of life. When you wish to dress, I help you put on clothes; when you wish to wash, I assist you in cleaning and bathing. Our relationship is as close as lips and teeth. But whenever you pursue the Way, you ignore me. You carry this foul body about, searching and clinging to external things, unaware that the Way you seek is right here—in your own mind.”
How many of us, studying Buddhism, possess faculties as sharp as the Sixth Patriarch Huineng, with a mind free from external attachments? If one seeks outwardly, Buddhist practice only plants the seed of a good bodhi root. Failing to recognize one’s own mind brings no benefit in this lifetime. The Sixth Patriarch taught that we must gain benefit in this very life by recognizing our mind, and thus he opened the path of sudden enlightenment.
The Platform Sutra contains several passages on sudden enlightenment:
“A prior deluded thought makes one an ordinary person; a subsequent awakened thought makes one a Buddha.
Clinging to the six sense objects gives rise to affliction; freedom from clinging allows bodhi to manifest.” (Prajñā, Chapter II)
“When not awakened, even a Buddha is just an ordinary being; in a single moment of awakening, even an ordinary being becomes a Buddha.” (Prajñā, Chapter II)
“When one’s true nature is deluded, a Buddha is no different from ordinary beings; when one’s true nature awakens, ordinary beings are no different from Buddhas.” (Questions and Answers, Chapter III)
“When no deluded or scattered thoughts arise, that is the true mind. When one perceives reality without interruption, that is being a Buddha.
The mind that produces all sensory objects is the mind of delusion; the mind that transcends all sensory objects is the inherently pure Buddha.” (Temperament and Circumstances, Chapter VII)
“If one’s own nature is awakened, ordinary beings are Buddhas; if one’s own nature is deluded, Buddhas are ordinary beings.
If one’s nature is impartial and equal, ordinary beings are Buddhas; if one’s nature is crooked and deceitful, Buddhas are ordinary beings.” (Entrustment – Transmission of Dharma, Chapter X)
In conclusion, recognizing and understanding one’s own mind is central to practicing Buddhism effectively. Without this recognition, Buddhist practice may not yield meaningful benefit in this life.
Q38: If one cannot recognize one’s own mind and thus effectively abandons oneself, what method can prevent one from becoming lost?
A38: An ancient Chan master once offered a method that may serve as a useful reference. In the past, a monk named Ruiyan Shiyan adopted a practice to prevent himself from losing awareness. Each morning upon waking, he would call out to himself:
“Master!”
He would then respond:
“Yes!”
He would further ask:
“Are you mindful?”
And reply:
“Yes, I remain mindful.”
At times he would also admonish himself:
“Remember—at all times, do not be deceived!”
And again reply:
“Yes.”
This method of self-questioning and self-response may appear simple, but in actual practice it is extremely difficult. It can only be sustained by those with firm resolve and diligent cultivation. In essence, this practice is a continual act of self-awakening.
Only when the mind remains clear and aware does one avoid becoming lost. To remain constantly awake is precisely what is meant by “recognizing and understanding oneself.”
Only in this way can one truly rely on oneself. If one fails to recognize and understand one’s own mind, it is equivalent to abandoning oneself. And if one has abandoned oneself, upon whom could one then rely?
Q39: What is the state of a person after awakening?
A39: The state after awakening is something that can only be understood among those who are awakened. In other words, “only a Buddha can truly know a Buddha.” This is not something that can be fully explained by an ordinary person. Nevertheless, we may turn to the teachings of the ancient Chan masters for guidance.
Someone once asked:
“What is a Buddha made of?”
A Chan master replied:
“The bottom of the bucket has fallen out.”
If one attempts to explain what a Buddha is “made of,” one would be treating the Buddha as something composed of tangible form. Yet how could that which has form truly be the Buddha? Likewise, the state after awakening cannot be adequately expressed in words.
Some people experience certain meditative states and mistakenly take them to be realization, even leaving home to become monastics. However, such experiences are not genuine awakening. True realization cannot be described conceptually. For this reason, the master used the metaphor “the bottom of the bucket has fallen out” to indicate the state of awakening.
A “Buddha” is simply one who is awakened. Although the person before and after awakening is the same individual, their way of seeing the world is entirely transformed.
Before awakening, anger arises due to dualistic opposition; afflictions arise due to conflict and contradiction. After awakening, this is like the birth of a new person—one who no longer perceives reality through division and opposition, but in a unified way.
Awakening transforms the whole of one’s being. In other words, awakening is a re-creation of one’s life. It is a profound transformation arising from direct experiential realization, culminating in complete awakening—this is what is meant by “the bottom of the bucket falling out.”
From the state of an ordinary being to Buddhahood, if likened to a bucket, the “breakthrough” occurs in a single moment of thought. Thus, the Sixth Patriarch Huineng said:
“In the preceding thought, delusion—one is an ordinary being;
In the following thought, awakening—one is a Buddha.”
Q40: Why speak of Chan? Chan seems too profound and abstruse, and unrelated to everyday life. Can we instead discuss something more practical?
A40: It is acceptable to say that Chan is profound and subtle; however, to claim that it is unrelated to human life is a misunderstanding of Chan. Without Chan, one cannot realize awakening, and a life without awakening is a life of suffering. In fact, every person is constantly within Chan, though they are unaware of it.
If we do not begin by speaking of Chan directly, we may first consider examples from everyday life. That which constantly accompanies our lives is none other than favorable and adverse conditions. When encountering favorable conditions, people give rise to joy; when encountering adverse conditions, they give rise to aversion, anger, and distress.
If a person does not give rise to anger or agitation, that person would already be a sage. And if one were already a sage, there would be no need to come here to hear the Dharma.
Now let us consider how to deal with anger in daily life.
When you become angry, I may advise you in accordance with the Buddhist principle of karmic cause and effect: do not give rise to anger. Anger is the cause; harm to the body is the result. This is present-life karmic retribution.
When anger arises, it is the arising of hatred. If this occurs repeatedly, it gradually forms habitual tendencies. A person with strong habitual anger may, at the end of life, fall into the three lower realms. This is a future karmic consequence.
Furthermore, when someone provokes your anger in this life and you respond with anger, this too arises from causes planted in the past. In this way, causes and effects are linked in succession across past, present, and future—this is karmic causation across the three times.
However, although this is a true principle taught by the Buddha, the Dharma must be taught in accordance with the capacities of beings. If one prescribes the “medicine” of karmic retribution to someone whose affliction is anger, it may not be appropriate. Hearing such teaching may instead give rise to fear. In that case, what is true may fail to function beneficially and instead become a form of intimidation, causing one to withdraw from the Dharma.
Some non-Buddhist traditions employ fear-based teachings—for example, “If you do not believe in God, you will fall into hell.” There was once a family in which the mother attended a banquet organized by the Tzu Chi Foundation. After returning home, her daughter reproached her, saying that attending a Buddhist event was a betrayal of God and would lead to hell. The mother became frightened and sought clarification.
But since the Tzu Chi Foundation operates with compassion beyond distinctions of race, nationality, or religion, would a deity truly condemn someone for participating in such an activity? If so, would such a deity be worthy of reverence? Teachings based on intimidation are not definitive teachings.
Although karmic causation is true, it must be applied in accordance with the situation. If one speaks only of such doctrines, then the “Dharma-gate of non-duality,” as taught in the Vimalakirti Sutra, would never arise. This is precisely why Chan must be taught—using methods such as the kōan:
“Without thinking of good or evil, what is your original face?”
to resolve problems such as anger.
Let me offer an analogy. Suppose I enter your home and find it in disorder. I then say:
“Your way of living is too careless. How can you neglect your household in this way? This room is a mirror of your mind.”
You may agree that this is reasonable, but in fact this is merely criticism. Criticism cannot truly transform a person—just as scolding a child does not necessarily correct behavior.
Moreover, after hearing such criticism, whenever you see the disorder, you will recall those words and feel anxiety, tension, and unease. Thus, the statement “this room is a mirror of your mind” becomes a source of further disturbance.
So what is the path to liberation?
This is where Chan is to be applied. One should instead observe: before the disorder arose, what was the original state of the room? At once, one realizes that originally it was clean, pure, and at ease.
Having recognized this, one should maintain awareness. When disorder arises, address it immediately. While doing so, do not give rise to discriminations such as “good” or “bad,” “tidy” or “untidy.” These distinctions arise from the mind’s attachment—they are not inherent in the things themselves. If one feels at ease, that is sufficient; there is no need to be concerned with others’ judgments.
In this way, the environment remains orderly, and one is no longer disturbed by either disorder or criticism. Action arising naturally from the mind—this is the true path to liberation, and this is the essential meaning of Chan.
However, one who has truly entered the life of Chan is not concerned with whether the room is messy or orderly, nor with others’ criticism or praise. Such a person is free and unshaken by favorable or adverse conditions—this is true liberation. An example often cited is the monk Ji Gong.
If, upon seeing disorder, I immediately give rise to thoughts or make any form of criticism, then I am not living in Chan. That response arises from attachment and discriminating thought.
Only when the true mind functions without thinking in terms of good and evil does one’s original nature manifest. This original nature is the intrinsically pure mind; this mind itself is Buddha. This Buddha is one who is awakened—one who has transcended dualistic distinctions.
When anger arises, it is due to the activation of ignorance (avidyā), likened to the “father,” from past conditioning. This gives rise to craving (tṛṣṇā), the “mother,” in the present. When ignorance and craving arise, they obscure the true mind. Once obscured, all afflictions manifest, including the six root afflictions—greed, hatred, delusion, pride, doubt, and wrong views—as well as the twenty subsidiary afflictions, which arise in response to conditions.
For this reason, Chan frequently employs the inquiry:
“What was your original face before your parents were born?”
as a method of practice through investigating the “hua-tou” (critical phrase), enabling practitioners to awaken to the pure mind and return to the source of their true nature.