Verses on the
Faith in Mind (ebook) With my warmest thanks to Dusan Pajin and thezensite.com Terms and conditions according to thezensite.com Contents Introduction
Introduction Since Leng-chia Shzh-tzu Chi was discovered,[1] Seng-ts'an's authorship of the Hsin-hsin Ming has been doubted, because of the remark that Seng ts'an did not put any writings into circulation. Ui [2] proposed that Seng ts'an, perhaps, only recited the text, otherwise written by someone else. Nishitani and Yanagida[3] added some further arguments, considering that the text was written in the eighth century, two centuries after Seng-ts'an. This was accepted as valid by other authors.[4] Contributions of the Hsin-Hsin Ming
Actually, there is some resemblance
between the concepts of one mind (stanza 123, oneness (stanzas 5,6,7)
and one vehicle (stanza 19) in Hsin-hsin Ming, and equivalent concepts
developed in Hua-yen. However, the obviously common subjects of Hsin-hsin
Ming and Hua-yen are relativity and interpenetration of time and space
dimensions (in stanzas 32-33), equality of things (st. 33) and the
famous "one is all, all is one" principle (st. 35), which
are explained later in detail (in "Analysis of the text"
- related to sections VII and VIII of the Hsin-hsin Ming). On such
grounds we can conclude that this text should be - at least partly
- related also with the Hua-yen tradition (i.e., not exclusively with
Ch’an). We can outline two significant contributions of the Hsin-hsin ming to the overall tradition of Chinese Buddhism. a) The first is "faith in mind", which could be considered as a "Ch’anist" response to the Buddhism of faith (Pure Land), since the object of faith is not Amitabha, but mind as a means of awakening. b) The second contribution is the principle of oneness (i-chung). It is particularly mentioned in stanzas 5, 6 and 7. Otherwise, it is the running idea of the whole text, continually warning against various dualities: liking-disliking (stanzas 1, 19, 21), grasping-rejecting (st. 3), conditions/form-emptiness (qt. 5, 14), motion-rest (st. 6, 21, 26), truth-views (st. 10), right-wrong (st. It, 23), things/dharmas-mind (st. 123, subject-object (st. 133), coarse-fine (st. 15), strange-familiar (st. 18), sense-objects/awakeness (st. 19), things/dharmas-suchness (st. 24), profit-loss (st. 23) other-self (st. 25, 30), moment-eon (st. 32), here-there (st. 32), small-large (st. 33), one-all (st. 35). These dualities should be refuted or transcended with the perspective of one mind - in emptiness and real suchness. Broadly speaking, Hsin-hsin Ming is an elegant exposition of prajna (principles), and dhyana (practice). With approximation, we can say that sections I, V, and VI mostly deal with principles (oneness, one mind, emptiness, suchness), sections II. III, and IV mostly expose practice, while sections VII, and VIII describe the results of such practice, and applied principles. Problems of Translating In translating ancient religious and
philosophical texts, one of the major problems is to decide - in case
it is not a terminus technicus per se - whether a certain word (in
our case, a Chinese character) is used colloquially, or as a terminus
technicus. On such a decision sometimes depends not only the appropriate
translation of a particular word, but the proper understanding of
the whole passage, as well. To decide, we should know the tradition
of the text and have in mind the context, as well as previous commentaries,
if such exist (nevertheless, these can also be misleading, since in
many cases they are comments, not for the sake of interpreting, but
in order to give support and authority of the tradition to the thoughts
of their respective authors). Meaning is developed through use. For example, for "awakening" or "enlightenment" no one uses capitals; through lengthy use it is supposed that these will not be misunderstood (that they will be understood as technical terms in a Buddhist context, and not in colloquial meaning). But some terms (One, Way, Void, Suchness) are still written with capitals. For translations from Chinese it is still customary to use Sanskrit equivalents to pinpoint the meaning, or when the terms from European languages are not good enough. For example, Chinese fa is better translated with Sanskrit dharma, than with "things" (as was done in this translation - but, to use "dharma" supposes that the reader is more familiar with Sanskrit, than with the Chinese, which, for the average person is not the case). Wing-tsit Chan remarked that "Without adequate tools to help them, many translators have rendered technical terms in their popular meanings".[6] Fortunately, some sixty years ago, Soothill and Hodous,[7] filled the gap for Chinese Buddhist terms with their dictionary. However, their dictionary was possible thanks to the work done some 1500 years ago, by generations of Chinese Buddhists, who translated Sanskrit Buddhist texts into Chinese, using and standardizing certain Chinese characters as technical terms (equivalents) for Sanskrit terms. In order to proceed with the analysis of the Hsin-hsin Ming, and its general meaning in the context of Chinese Buddhism, particularly Ch’an, we propose a new translation[8] Originally, the text, as presented in Taisho [9] (Taisho shinshu daizokyo) No. 2010, was not divided in stanzas. The translators, excepting Suzuki, were faithful to this form. In the second version of his translation Suzuki has added numbers to the stanzas, in which he grouped the lines of the poem (his first translation, let it be remarked, omits four verses of stanza 6)[10] In order to make possible easy reference for the analysis we have also divided the poem in stanzas, but this "versification" differs from Suzuki's version. However, in the right hand row we have given the numbers of his stanzas in brackets (for those who want to compare the translations). For easy reference we also suggest a division of the text into eight (principal) parts, notated with Roman numerals (I-VIII).
[1] Leng-chia Shih-tzu Chi is one of the Tun Huang manuscripts (Pelliot 3436, and Stein 2054). It was discovered in 1926, and later included in Taisho, 85. 1283-1290. Seizan Yanagida has published a critically edited version with a Japanese translation in Shoki no Zenshi I, Zen no Goroku, 2 (Tokyo, 1971) pp. 49-326. [2] H. Ui, Zenshushi Kenkyu, I (Tokyo, 1939), p. 71. [3] Keiji Nishitani and Seizan Yanagida, Zenke Goroku, II (Tokyo: Chikoma Shoba, 1974), pp. 105-112. [4] David W. Chappell, "The Teachings of the Fourth Ch'an Patriarch Tao hsin (580-651)", in Early Ch’an in China and Tibet ed. by W. Lai and L.R Lancaster (Berkeley: Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series, 1983), p. 89. [5] Heinrich Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism (London: Faber and Faber, 1963). p. 76. [6] Wing-tsit Chan, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972), p. XI. [7] William W. Soothill and Lewis Hodous, A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (Delhi: M. Banarsidass, 1977). First edition: London, 1937. [8] To our knowledge, there already exist five translations of the Hsin-hsin Ming in English. The first translator, D. T. Suzuki, has published two versions of his translation—one in D.T. Suzuki, Essays in Zen Buddhism, First series (London: Rider, 1970), pp. 196-201, and the other in Buddhist Scriptures, trans. and ed. by Edward Conze (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969), pp. 171-175. His first translation was published in 1949. The second translation was done by A. Waley, in Buddhist Texts Through the Ages (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1954), pp. 295-8. The third is by R. H. Blyth, Zen and Zen Classics, Vol. I, (Tokyo: The Hokuseido Press, 1960), pp. 5~99. The fourth is by Lu K'uan Yu, Practical Buddhism (London: Rider, 1971), pp. 34-8. The fifth, anonymous translation, can be found in a manual, Daily Chants (Rochester: Zen Center, 1985). At first it seemed that we could use one of these as the basis for a new analysis of the poem, but after closer scrutiny it was obvious that none of the existing translations were adequate for the purpose. The fifth translation is a rather free rendering made for immediate purposes in a Zen Center. Of the other four, some are inconsistent in translating Buddhist technical terms (translations by Blyth and Yu, while Suzuki's translation occasionally introduces terms which seem to be part of a technical vocabulary (Absolute Reason), but actually belong to Hegelian philosophy, rather than Chinese Buddhism. Waley’s translation is faithful except in technical terms. Perhaps he lacked the knowledge of Buddhist tradition and therefore translated technical terms as quasi-technical (in stanza 19, True Perception, instead of perfect awakeness; in stanza 21, Wisdom instead of awakening). [9] Buddhist Scriptures, pp. 171-5. [10] Essays in Zen Buddhism, r, p. 197.
1 Verses on the Faith in Mind l) The best way is not
difficult 2) Depart for a hairbreadth 3) To set longing against loathing 4) Complete it is like great vacuity 6) Rest to stop motion, 7) Not understanding oneness 8) The more words and thoughts 9) Return to the root and obtain the
purport. 10) Do not seek the true, 11) The slightest trace of right and
wrong 12) With one mind there is no arising, 13) The subject follows when the object
ceases 14) If you want to know these two 15) Do not differentiate coarse and
fine 17) Letting go leads to spontaneity, 18) Fettered thinking strays from
the real, 19) In following the One vehicle 20) The wise performs through non-action. 21) To use the mind to hold the mind 22) All opposite sides 23) Profit and loss, right and wrong 24) If the mind does not discriminate 25) When an things are beheld as even 26) Cease movement and no movement
arises. 27) Investigate to the end 28) All doubts are cleared 29) Vacuous, enlightened, self-illumined, 30) In the real suchness of the thing-realm 31) In non-duality all is equal, 32) This teaching is not urgent, or
extensive, 33) Very small and large are equal. 35) One is all, 36) Faith in mind is non-dual. |