p. 467

Although Ch'an Buddhism has a long history, the name
of the Ch'an School (ch'an-men(a) or
ch'an-tsung(b))(1) was a relatively late development.
It was Tsung-mi(c) (780-841),(2) the great Master of
Kuei-fung who, for the first time, adopted the term
in the ninth century A.D. It is interesting to note
that it was the same monk-scholar who used the School
of Mind (hsin-tsung(d))(3) as a synonym of the Ch'an
school. Tsung-mi was a scholar of buddhist thought
who had personal experience in the broad-ranging
knowledge of Ch'an traditions. He collected relevant
materials and wrote extensively in an effort to
analyze the doctrine and practices of the traditon.
His identification of the Mind with the Ch'an
indicates that, in his opinion, the Mind was the
central focus of the school. Although Tsung-mi
contributed a good deal to the understanding of Ch'an
Buddhism, his contributions remained almost unknown
for a thousand years; it is only during the last two
decades that scholars have gradually come to
recognize his contribution, with considerable
astonishment and admiration. This article is an
attempt to describe, analyze and assess Tsung-mi's
thesis that the doctrine of Mind is the central focus
of Ch'an Buddhism and that the Mind itself is the
absolute.

THE BACKGROUND

Although the early development of Ch'an in China is
still not entirely known, its general outline is
relatively clear. Initially there were a limited
number of practitioners who followed the teachings of
Bodhidharma and who often added new elements to the
tradition. However, from the early days of the eighth
century A.D., the tradition suddenly began to
flourish. Various teachers developed a following and
achieved some eminence, all of them claiming that
they were the true authorities of the Ch'an school.
In spite of their identical claims, their doctrines
and methods for cultivation were partly in agreement
and partly in conflict. Taking the doctrine of Mind
as an example, most of these teachers agreed that the
Mind in its essence is quiet, pure and absolute,
while a few others remained ambiguous on the subject.
Apart from this theoretical difference, there was
also a controversy with respect to cultivation,
namely, if the Mind is pure, all mental functions
would be pure and that being the case, control of the
mind would be unnecessary. On the other hand, if the
mind is not entirely pure, then in spiritual efforts
some control becomes essential.

Those who spoke of the mind with a pan-realistic
tone can be represented by Ma-tsu or Tao-i(e)
(709-788) and his disciples. They were known at the
time as the Hung-chou(f) school of Ch'an Buddhism.
The teaching of Tao-i is well known for its dictum
"This Mind is the Buddha." He advised his disciples:
"All of you should realize that your own Mind is
Buddha, that is, this mind is

p. 468

Buddha's mind."(4) Monk P'u-yuan(g) (748-834) of
Nan-ch'uan stated that the "Tao is nothing but the
ordinary mind."(5) "Pang Yun(h), a lay disciple of
Matsu also claimed that "with the three times
non-existent, Mind is the same as Buddha-mind."(6)
Monk Hui-hai(i), the favorite "great pearl" of this
same master often told his audiences: "Your mind is
the Buddha, it is unnecessary to use the Buddha to
search for another Buddha; your mind is the Law, it
is, unnecessary to use the Law to search for another
Law."(7)

If this claim that the Mind is the Buddha is
difficult for scholars to understand without any
explanation, the concept itself is even more
difficult. This is inevitable since the Ch'an school
as a whole and the Hung-chou school in particular
were fond of drastic methods in striving to attain
enlightenment. Taking a conversation as an
illustration of such difficulties, let us recall the
story of Fa-ch'ang(j) (752-839), another member of
the school. When this monk became the abbot of a
monastery, he was asked by a colleague:

"What have you learnt from the great Master that
qualified you to become the abbot of this monastery?"

"The abbot replied, "The great Master has told me
that this very mind is the Buddha."

"The Great Master has lately changed his way of
teaching," the questioner said, "he is now saying
that this very mind is neither the Mind nor the
Buddha".

"The abbot said, "This old fellow has confused
people ceaselessly without an end. I do not care that
he has said that it is neither the Mind nor the
Buddha; I still hold that this very mind is the
Buddha."(8)

When the great Master heard the conversation, he said
that the abbot had now become mature.

The pan-realistic tone of the school was
accurately noted by Tsung-mi when he wrote his
typologies of Ch'an Buddhism. He described the school
as follows:

[The school taught that all actions such as] the
arising of mind, the movements of thought, a snapping
of fingers, a sigh or a cough, or to raise the
eyebrows, all the functions of the whole substance of
Buddha-nature... All coveting, hatred and delusion,
all acts of good and evil with their fruit of
suffering and pleasure are nothing but
Buddha-nature....(9)

In contrast with the aforementioned pan-realistic
philosophy, there was another influential but shadowy
branch of Ch'an Buddhism which is known as the
Ox-head school, It was influential inasmuch as recent
research has determined that many basic doctrines as
well as documents attributed to Bodhidharma are
actually the works of this school.(10) It was shadowy
inasmuch as recent research has disproved the claim
that the founder of this school was a disciple of the
fourth patriarch of Ch'an school.(11) Whatever the
history might be, one fact is clear. By the eighth
century A.D., Fa-jung(k) (594-657) had already been
accepted by Ch'an Buddhists as the founder of the
Ox-head school and the school was regarded as a
branch of the Ch'an

p. 469

tradition. What was the principal doctrine of the
school? The verses attributed to Fa-jung summarizes
it as follows:

When no-mind, there is instantly nothing.
When nothing, one confronts instantly the reality of
Heaven.
This reality is the Tao which is great.
Mind and Nature are never born,
What is the use of views and knowledge?
Even not a single dharma ever existed,
Why care about perfuming and refinement?(12)

At the time Tsung-mi composed his treatises on the
typology of Ch'an Buddhism, he described the doctrine
of the Ox-head school as follows:

The sect has taught the absolute negation without
anything to rely on. This is to say that everything,
both profane and sacred are dreamlike illusions and
entirely nonexistent. The nonexistent does not begin
from the present but is originally so. Even the
knowledge which leads one to attain to nothingness is
unobtainable. There are no buddhas nor sentient
beings as all are identical in dharmadhaatu; and even
the dharmadhaatu itself is merely a borrowed name. If
the mind is nonexistent, who will talk about
dharmadhaatu? As the cultivation itself is
nonexistent, one should not cultivate; and as buddhas
are nonexistent, so their worship is unnecessary. If
one claims that there is a dharma which is better
than nirvaa.na, I would still say that it is a
dreamlike illusion. There is no Law to follow, nor a
buddhahood to attain. Whatever the effort, all are
deluding and false.(13)

Apart from the theoretical difference between the
Ox-head and Hung-chou schools, there was also a
controversy regarding religious cultivation.
According to the pan-realistic school of Hung-chou,
since the Mind is the Buddha, thoughts and actions
are manifestations of the Mind. One should not
restrain the Mind nor cultivate the Mind by the Mind
itself. Cultivation means doing nothing and letting
the Mind be completely free. The Ox-head School of
Negation agrees with the teaching of doing nothing as
the way for cultivation, but it supports this
teaching on different grounds. Considering that
everything is dreamlike and entirely nonexistent, any
cultivation is unnecessary. One would be a fool if he
wasted time and effort for nothing. In contrast with
the teaching of doing nothing, there were other
schools of Ch'an which strongly opposed this radical
attitude. Of these opponents, the Northern school is
representative. According to this school, although
the mind is originally pure, it is often polluted by
defilement due to ignorance and cravings. One has to
control the Mind so that it will not be further
polluted; and one has to study and to live a pure
life so that the past pollutions will be gradually
removed.

When these conflicting views and practical
teachings are compared, the controversy is clear and
dramatic. Tsung-mi recognized this situation as a
problem when he commented that "the doctrines
preached by these established sects are contradictory
and obstructive to each other."(14) He further
pointed out that "some claimed that from morning to
evening all actions arising from the views of
discrimination are false; some say all discriminate

p. 470

doings are real...."(15) At a practical level, he
noted that "Some give free course to their will; some
restrain their mind."(16)

How could this confusion be cleared up and those
who seek enlightenment from bewilderment be set free?
First, Tsung-mi collected all available documents of
the Ch'an schools. Then, compared and analyzed them
according to Buddhist doctrines. His detachment from
personal involvement gave him a degree of
independence and objectivity, and his analysis of
Ch'an experiences in the light of Buddhist philosophy
made his presentation more systematic. As far as the
Ch'an concept of the Mind is concerned, he found that
the same controversy also existed in Buddhist
scriptures. He states: "In some suutras, the Mind has
been blamed as a thief, hence it must be cut off;
whereas in others, the Mind has been praised as the
Buddha, hence it is urged to cultivate it. Some say
it is good; while others say it is evil...."(17)

THE FOUR ASPECTS OF MIND

After careful study and deep reflection, Tsung-mi
came out with a new interpretation of the Ch'an
concept of Mind. His interpretation of the Mind is
largely dependent on the framework of a well-known
and accepted text, the Awakening of Faith [Ta-ch'eng
ch'i-hsin-lun(l)] attributed to `Asvaghosa. Based on
this text, Tsung-mi considers that as a dharma, the
Mind has two aspects: the absolute and the
phenomenal.(18) The absolute aspect is the substance
(t'i(m)); and the phenomenal aspect is the appearance
(hsiang(n)). The absolute aspect is universal and
unchanging, yet it is capable of adapting itself to
particular and changing situations. He further argued
that the unchanging substance is the principal and
that the changeable adaptations are its meanings. The
central problem lies with a dialectic understanding
of the relationship between the two seemingly
incompatible aspects.

Though Tsung-mi follows the theoretical framework
of the Awakening of Faith by dividing the Mind into
two aspects, his interpretation is not a mechanical
transplantation or a simplistic compromise. Rather,
it is a carefully thought out interpretation based on
an assimilation of Buddhist philosophy as a whole.
First, it involved dividing the Mind into two primary
aspects, the absolute and the phenomenal. Second, he
further trifurcated the phenomenal into three
aspects. Finally, he synthesized all the aspects into
a unified system. Tsung-mi states that the Mind
should be discussed using four different terms. These
four terms originated in different Sanskrit words as
well as in their Chinese equivalents. Because of a
lack of clear understanding of these terms, confusion
and bewilderment have arisen. To remove this
confusion and bewilderment, it is necessary to have a
clear understanding of the different aspects of the
Mind. What are these aspects? Tsung-mi states that
the Mind can be understood in terms of physical,
mental, collective consciousness, and the absolute.
The first three aspects are phenomenal, and the last
one is

p. 471

entirely absolute. Now let us see how he analyzed the
Mind into these four aspects.

The first aspect of Mind in his analysis is the
physical heart. He states it is originally known in
India as h.rdaya, which is one of the five viscera.
Tsung-mi noted that the heart had been discussed in a
Taoist text, the Huang-t'ing ching(o) [Yellow Court
Canon(19)]. This may lead some scholars to suspect
that this concept may be a form borrowed wholesale
from the Taoist theory of the physical body. This
suspicion seems more plausible when one reads from
Reverend Nyanatiloka's statement on hadayavatthu. "In
the canonical texts, however, even in the
Abhidhamma-pi.taka, no such (physical) base is ever
localized, a fact which seems to have first been
discovered by Shwe Zan Oung."(20) As far as Chinese
Buddhist tradition is concerned, the physical base of
consciousness had already been mentioned in a
commentary to the Yogacaryaabhuumi-`saastra,
Yu-chia-lun chi(p) by Tun-lun(q) of the T'ang dynasty
(618-906).(21) This is not to suggest that Tsung-mi's
statement on the physical mind or heart owed nothing
to the Taoist text, which is fact Tsung-mi himself
had openly acknowledged in delineating this aspect of
mind.

The second aspect of mind named by Tsung-mi was
Yuan-lu hsin(r),(22) which may be rendered as "the
Thinking Mind." The word yuan is understood as an
abbreviation of p'an-yuan(s) which means "to cling on
to conditional objects"; and lu means "to consider."
The term indicates that the two important functions
of this mind are its grasp and its discrimination of
objects. Tsung-mi himself identified this aspect with
the eight kinds of consciousness found in Yogaacaarin
philosophy. This includes both the consciousness and
the mental properties (cetasikas). He further pointed
out that some of them are determinable and others
are not; some are good and some are evil. This aspect
of Mind has been discussed at length in various
scriptures.

The third aspect of Mind as listed by Tsung-mi is
citta. In Chinese this is called chi-ch'i hsin(t),
literally meaning the "accumulative and ensuing
mind."(23) This is identical with aalayavij~naana,
the eighth consciousness in the Yogaacaara system.
The descriptive term 'accumulative and ensuing'
denotes the principal functions of consciousness,
that is, the cosmic process of consciousness as the
Alaya "is the receptum of the impressions of past
vij~naanas, while in its own turn it gives rise to
further vij~naanas by maturing those
impressions."(24) Tsung-mi also contends that this
aspect of mind is what the Taoist school calls the
`spirit' (shen(u)) and what other religions in India
call the `Self' (aatman). His interpretation of
AAlayavij~naana as the spirit or the Self certainly
seems biased, as it implies that the Taoist and
Vedaantic concepts of absolute are, in his judgment,
really not the absolute at all. Rather, they are only
equal to the higher consciousness in the Buddhist
scheme. However, as this is only of marginal interest
here, we must leave the development of this
observation to some later discussion.

p. 472

The most important aspect of the Mind is the
fourth, which Tsung-mi calls h.rdaya or Chien-shih
hsin(v) , literally meaning the "firm and solid
Mind."(25) Tsung-mi claims that this actually "is the
real Mind." He further urges that "because the eighth
consciousness has no separate entity of its own apart
from the Real Mind,"(26) it is easy for scholars to
misunderstand the two as being the same. The Real
Mind has tow functions: associability and
dissociability with false thoughts. The associability
is determined by ignorance; when ignorance is removed
by wisdom, the associability will be transformed into
dissociability. Tsung-mi explains that "the word
`associability' refers to the inclusive power of Mind
in its relation to purity or Impurity. This is why
the mind has been termed as the Storehouse of
consciousness. The word `dissociability' refers to
the exclusive power of Mind in its relation to
phenomena, i.e., the unchanging Substance. This is
why the Mind is also termed as Suchness. Both of them
are jointly known as the Womb of Tathaagata."(27)

Tsung-mi quotes from three scriptures to support
his theory of absolute Mind and its phenomenal
aspects. The first quotation is from the
La^nkaavataara Suutra, which states that "The name of
nirvaa.na is One-mind. One-mind is the Womb of
Tathaagata."(28) On the basis of this quotation, he
justifies his identification of the One-mind with the
other two terms, nirvaa.na and Tathaagatagarbha. The
second quotation comes from the
`Sriimaalaadevii-suutra, which declares that "This
Dharmakaaya... when not free from the Store of
defilement is referred to as the
Tathaagatagarbha."(29) This justifies Tsung-mi's
contention that the four aspects of Mind, both pure
and impure are originally of the same substance. The
third quotation is from the Ghanavyuuha-suutra, which
is translated as follows:

The Womb of Tathaagata spoken by the Buddha means
aalayavij~naana; however, those of defective
knowledge do not understand that the Womb is the
aalayavij~naana. The relationship between the pure
Womb of Tathaagata and the worldly aalayavij~naana
resembles gold and its productions such as
finger-rings; the characteristics might be different,
yet [the substance] is not.(30)

With the support of the aforementioned scriptural
sources, Tsung-mi states that the "True Nature
(bhuutatathataa) of the original Enlightenment in all
sentient beings is also known as the Buddha-nature
(Buddlataa) or the Mind (hsin-ti(w)."(31) In his
opinion, this True Nature "is the Source of all
dharmas; this is why it has also been termed as the
dharmataa. It is the Source of both the deluded and
the enlighted; this is the reason why it is known as
the Storehouse Consciousness or the
Tathaagatagarbha."(32)

Although the four aspects of the Mind do not
differ in substance, this does not mean that they are
identical. In that event, there would be no dispute
between our author and the pan-realistic school of
Hung-chou. Tsung-mi explains that in substance there
is no difference between the deluded and the
enlightened, as all of them have the Mind or
Buddha-nature innately. Hence they are capable of
enlightenment. However, the absolute Mind is subject
to

p. 473

momentary delusion if it is obscured by ignorance,
thus differentiating itself into various views. Once
the Mind is differentiated and involved with views
and responds to worldly affairs, then "there are
differences between real and false, root and
branches."(33) When this difference is expressed in
terms of Mind, "the first three aspects of the Mind
are appearances (lak.sa.na) while the fourth is the
True Nature (tattva) ."(34) Because of cause and
conditions, appearances arise from the Nature, and
are differentiated as appearances. When the manifold
appearances are examined carefully, one finds that
they are seemingly real but are actually unreal.
Although the characteristic appearance is unreal, it
is not completely empty, because the momentary
appearances are the manifestations of the Mind
itself, which is absolute.

In this argument Tsung-mi contends that though
the appearances and the substance are seemingly
contradictory, they are actually neither in conflict
nor mutually obstructive. It is like a luminous pearl
which has no fixed color of its own, but is capable
of reflecting all colors that is encounters.(35) The
colors may be different and contradictory and the
luminosity of the pearl may seem to be incompatible
with the colors, yet they exist harmoniously among
themselves, with no conflict or obstacle. It is only
the viewer who might be correct or mistaken, and
misunderstand the situation. When deluded, one would
see these two categories as entirely different and
think it impossible for them to penetrate each other.
When enlightened, one would see that all these
aspects are related, without any difficulty.

Tsung-mi points out that enlightenment is a
religious experience, and harmony is one aspect of
this experience. It would be impossible for one to
achieve a higher and dialectical understanding of the
One Mind and its manifold aspects if he is interested
aimlessly in bookish research, or trusts only to his
personal experience, which is limited in scope and
individual in character.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE INTERPRETATION

Tsung-mi's interpretation of Mind is a very
interesting and significant contribution to the
history of Ch'an Buddhism. Philosophically, this
represents a new Mahaayaana absolutism which has
since dominated Chinese Buddhist thought.
Soteriologically, it brings each man directly into
confrontation with religious reality which is
innately within man himself. The buddhahood or
nirvaa.na is no longer a remote theory but an
imminent possibility, and may be attainable by every
man if he works at it. With respect to Buddhist
institutions, this philosophy has given qualified
recognition to monastic institutions, book learning,
and meditation. These institutions may not insure one
the attainment of the highest religious goal, yet
they are necessary is cultivation, especially at the
initial stages.

As far as philosophy is concerned, we may recall
the intellectual background of Tsung-mi. There were
two contending schools in Ch'an Buddhism, the first

p. 474

held that the Mind and its manifestations are all
real, no cultivation is necessary and everyday life
is religious in itself. In other words, there is no
difference between sacred and profane whatsoever. In
saying this, one may misunderstand this philosophy as
following Naagaarjuna's precept that there is not the
slightest difference whatsoever between nirvaa.na and
sa^msaara.(36) It is true that the sayings of these
two schools are very similar in tone but they have
actually started from two different points. For
Naagaarjuna the absolute and the phenomenal are not
different because both of them are empty (`suunya);
for the Hung-chou school of Ch'an the Absolute and
the phenomenal are the same, because both of them are
the Absolute. Once this position is accepted,
difficulties arise. Taking the concept of evil as an
example, it has to be maintained because evil does
not exist by itself, but as a presentation of the
Mind. As an ultimate, consequence, all religious
prescriptions become meaningless and unnecessary.
From its absolute point of view, it may argue for the
nonexistence of evil and the manifestation of the
Mind without much difficulty. Yet one has to remember
that in Buddhist philosophy, absolute knowledge has
to begin with phenomena. The main difficulty for the
Hung-chou school is that it holds to an absolute
theory and applies it to phenomena indiscriminately.
So doing, it no longer remains within the Middle
Path. To follow this doctrine is to be led into three
consequent errors, namely, confusing the sacred and
the profane at an empirical level, taking wrong as
right, and disputing with other schools of thought
that may hold a perfect view of truth, or simply view
the absolute truth from a different angle.

The second Ch'an doctrine of Mind represented by
the Ox-head school claims that nothing is existent,
neither the absolute nor the phenomenal. This also
has its difficulties. Although such as negative
dialectic may be an effective tool for determining
the truth, at the same time it often misleads readers
to regard its doctrine as nihilism. While it
skillfully demonstrates the fallacies of positive
philosophy, it is unable to provide a substitute. One
may claim that the absolute can only be known through
negative dialectic, and there is no other possible
substitute. But it should be remembered that Buddhism
has never existed simply as an academic philosophy
but as a complete religion. Philosophy is useful only
when it serves religious purposes, and it is,
therefore, only one of the various aspects of
religion, but not the whole of it.

When Tsung-mi's interpretation is placed in
context, his significant contribution is seen. His
analysis of Mind into four aspects is a creative
interpretation. It may be viewed as a new synthesis
as it includes both the absolute and the phenomenal
aspects of Mind. In this way, Tsung-mi also clearly
points out that though these aspects belong to one
scheme, they are not identical. It is this
dialectical relation between the nondifferentiation
at the absolute level and the differentiation at the
phenomenal level that enables him to overcome the
difficulties created by the positive and the negative
understanding of Buddhism represented by the
Hung-chou and Ox-head schools respectively. It is
also

p.475

through his interpretation of absolute Mind that
Tsung-mi is able to reunify Buddhism as one.

To view this philosophy in terms of its Indian
background, the scheme is largely influenced both by
Yogaacaara and Maadhyamika. The concept of storehouse
consciousness is accepted, but it is augmented with
the concept of absolute Mind. Some Maadhyamika ideas
of absolute are accepted, but the process and
negations are not followed with any conviction. Apart
from these theoretical differences the Ch'an Buddhist
never loses sight of practices. Unlike the Indian
Buddhists, the Ch'an Buddhist has never been
interested in purely logical arguments, but has
focused more on religious experiences.

The identification of the Mind as the absolute is
very important to Ch'an soteriology. Throughout the
history of Buddhism, mind has consistently surfaced
as one of the principal problems. With the exception
of the Yogaacaarins, no other Buddhist school ever
argued, as forcefully as did Tsung-mi, that the Mind
itself was the absolute. What was the reason for him
doing so? The answer is that according to Ch'an
tradition, the Mind is the key in religious life. A
Ch'an text states that according to Fo-ming ching
("The scripture of buddhas' names"), "Evils arise
from the Mind, so they have to be eliminated by the
Mind."(37) Since all evil and good begins from the
mind, most of the Ch'an Buddhists consider "the Mind
as the Foundation." If this is the case, "One has to
know the Foundation first in the search for the
liberation."(38) Another Ch'an text quotes a verse
attributed to Hui-ssu(x) (515-557), the founder of
the T'ien-t'ai school and an expert in meditation:
"In the discussion of learning, it is necessary to
penetrate the Mind first. If the Mind is penetrated,
all laws are penetrated simultaneously."(39) Tsung-mi
agrees with this view. He states, "The Mind is the
Source of all dharmas. What dharmas are not included
in this Source?"(40) This Mind becomes "impure when
deluded; pure when enlightened, sacred when
cultivated and profane when uncultivated, capable of
producing all the dharmas, both conditioned as well
as unconditioned."(41) The cultivation of Ch'an
Buddhism in this doctrine, therefore, is the
cultivation of Mind. Once the Mind is illuminated,
the teachings contained in the scriptures and the
experience from meditation and the moral life all
become meaningful and beneficial. Otherwise, these
efforts are not only fruitless but could even become
obstacles to enlightenment. The focus of Mind as the
absolute makes the salvation no longer an academic or
remote goal, but a personal and immediate one with
each of us. This is the soteriology of Ch'an
Buddhism, and this is the significance of Tsung-mi's
contribution to the tradition.

p. 476

ABBREVIATIONS

CYC Ch'an-yuan chu-ch'uan-chi Tu-hsu.(y) Chinese text
and Japanese translation by Shigeo Kamata(z)
under the title of Zen no goroku 9: Zengen
shosenshutojo (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo, 1971) .
Tsung-mi's other work, Ch'an-men shih-tzu
ch'eng-hsi t'u, is also included in this volume.
T Taisho shinshuu daizokyo. (Tokyo: Taisho Issaikyo
Kankokai, 1924-1932).
TP T'oung Pao.

NOTES

1. CYC pp. 13 and 17 for the term of ch'an-men; pp.
57, 86, 210 and 320 for ch'an-tsung. Compare
Sekiguchi Shindai(aa), "Zenshuu no hassei," Fukui
sensei shoju ki'nen Toyo shiso ronshuu (Tokyo,
1960), pp. 321-338.

2. Jan Yun-hua, "Tsung-mi and his Analysis of Ch'an
Buddhism", TP 58 (1972): 1-54; for a detailed
study of Tsung-mi, see Shigeo Kamata, Shuumitsu
kyogaku no shisoshi teki kenkyuu (Tokyo:
Institute of Oriental Culture, University of
Tokyo, 1975).

3. CYC, pp. 30 and 254.

4. Chang Chung-yuan, Original Teachings of Ch'an
Buddhism (New York: Vintage Books, 1971), pp. 149
ff.

5. Wu, John C. H., The Golden Age of Zen (Taipei: The
National War College, 1967), p. 94.

6. Sasaki, Ruth Fuller, et al. trans. The Record of
Layman P'ang, a Ninth Century Zen Classic. (New
York: Weatherhill, 1971), p. 86.

7. Tsu-t'ang chi(ab) by Ching and Yun (Taipei:
Kuang-wen shu-chu, reprint of Korean woodblock
edition, 1972), p. 265b.

8. Wu, op. cit., pp. 95-96.

9. Jan, op. cit., "Tsung-mi," TP, 58, p. 46.

10. Sekiguchi Shindai, Daruma daishi no kenkyuu,
(Tokyo: Shunju sha, 1957), 82-185; Yin-shun(ac),
Chung-kuo ch'an-tsung shih (Taipei: Hui-jih
chiang t'ang, 1971), pp. 85-128.

11. Yin-shun, op. cit., pp. 96-98.

12. Translated from the Chueh-kuan lun(ad), T, 48, p.
564a.

13. Jan, "Tsung-mi," TP, 58, p. 38 with some minor
modifications.

14. Ibid., p.36.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid.

17. Ibid.

18. "This Mind includes in itself all states of being
of the phenomenal world and the transcendental
world...." From Yoshita S. Hakeda's translation
of The Awakening of Faith (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1967), p. 28.

19. For original text of Tsung-mi's description of
Mind, see CYC, pp. 70ff. For his reference to the
Taoist text, see the Huang-t'ing nei-ching
yu-ching chu, in the Cheng-t'ung Tao-tsang(ac)
(Popular Edition, Taipei: I-wen Yin-shu kuan,
1977). vol. 10, pp.8245-8246.

20. See Buddhist Dictionary (Colombo: Frewin,
1972), p. 62; compare Compendium of Philosophy
(London: Pali Text Society, 1967 reprint), pp.
277f.

21. As Kamata has pointed out, in the other work of
Tsung-mi, Tsung-mi has also referred to this
Taoist text. It is obvious that the statement
such as "Various paths converged at the same
point; essences returned to the One...." is
parallel to Tsung-mi's thought. See
Yuan-chueh-ching ta-shu ch'ao(af), chapt. I/A in
the Hsu Tsang-ching (Taipei: Chung kuo fo-chiao
hui reprint, 1967), vol. 14, p. 206a.

22. CYC, p. 70.

23. Ihid.

24. A.K. Chatterjee, The Yogaacaara Idealism
(Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University, 1962), pp.
115f.

p. 477

25. CYC, p. 70.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid.

28. Translated from Ju Leng-chia Ching(ag) chapt. 1,
T, vol. 16, p. 519a.

29. From the translation of A. Wayman, The Lion's
Roar of Queen Sriimaalaa (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1974), p. 98.

30. Translated from the Ta-ch'eng mi-yen ching(ah),
T, no. 681,vol. 16, p. 776a.

31. CYC, p. 13.

32. Ibid., l7.

33. Ibid., p.70.

34. Ibid.

35. See Jan, "Tsung-mi" 58, pp. 51 -53 under the
subtitle "A Metaphorical Description."

36. From Kenneth K. Inada's translation, Naagaarjuna,
A Translation of His Muula madhyamak-akaarikaa
(Tokyo: The Hokuseido Press, 1970), chapt. 25,
verse 20, p. 158.

37. This has been quoted by Hui-hai, a Ch'an monk in
his book, Tun-wu yao-men(ai), Chinese text with a
Japanese translation by Hirano Shuujo(aj), Zen no
goroku 6: Tongo Yomon (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo,
1970), p. 8.

38. Ibid.

39. From Tsung-ching lu(ak) , by Yen-shou (pp.
904-975), chapt. 97 (Hangchou, 1876, wood-block
edition), p. 13b.

40. CYC, p. 254.

41 Ibid., p. 170.