Zhenzhou Linji Huizhao chanshi yulu · early witnesses such as the Zutang ji and Jingde chuandeng lu
Zhenzhou Linji Huizhao chanshi yulu · early witnesses such as the Zutang ji and Jingde chuandeng lu
The four core-text marks on the front page all follow the specific wording of the current Linji lu; the motifs of the “true person of no rank” and “true and correct insight” are visible in the earlier lamp records, but in different wording. No line is used to extrapolate, from its source grade, word-for-word certainty that the author himself said it.
One-sentence placement: Linji repeatedly takes names such as Buddha, patriarch and the three bodies back into “the person listening to the Dharma right before you” and the mind-dharma that depends on nothing; present functioning covers seeing and hearing, speech and everyday action, lacks nothing from the beginning, and is not obtained through contrived cultivation. At the same time, the earlier sermon materials link freedom of going and staying, and saṃsāra, to “obtaining true and correct insight / not meeting [it]”. The overall placement is ② “Direct Seeing of the Ground” (B), but this cannot be proved by hortatory sentence forms, vocabulary of clear awareness, or the number of lines from a common source alone; the final load rests on the conditional relation, across the whole record, concerning how the student’s freedom is completed. (B; competing reading local C)
Most distinctive feature: Linji systematically dismantles the three bodies as something to rely on (E-11), the contrivance of obtaining the Buddhadharma through cultivation (E-24), the names of buddhas and patriarchs (E-27) and his own speech (E-18, E-36); even the name “true person of no rank” is rebuked (E-06). But at the same time he affirms “the person listening to the Dharma right before you” and the present functions of seeing, hearing, speaking and moving (E-12, E-13, E-28, E-35).
This broad functioning of the six faculties must not be compressed directly into a narrow cognitive act; what really needs the deletion test is the function that “correct seeing / recognizing” bears in the completion of freedom. (B)
The last load-bearing point has three layers. (1) The ground and present functioning: the formless mind-dharma and the person listening to the Dharma are originally endowed and presently in use; seeing, hearing, speaking, acting and clear illumination cannot be reduced to a single act of “knowing” in the narrow sense (E-12, E-13, E-20). (2) Teaching and path: Linji breaks down cultivation and realization understood as obtaining something external, while using the responsive language of self-trust, ceasing to seek outward, and recognizing (E-08, E-17, E-21, E-24). (3) The completion of freedom: the earlier continuous sermons link “obtaining true and correct insight / not meeting / if one can see it thus” with freedom, saṃsāra and the person with nothing to do (E-07, E-09, E-10); the later-attested materials E-15, E-19 and E-34 are contextual expansions in the same direction and are not counted as additional independent witnesses. The B-grade inference to ② depends on whether the third layer is truly non-deletable.
The most delicate point: E-17 “in the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort”, E-18 “no cultivation, no realization;
no gain, no loss” and E-29 “bodhi has no dwelling place, therefore there is no one who attains” are all positive structural statements and cannot be compressed into “valid only after seeing it”; but none of the three declares word for word that “the relation between seeing / not meeting and the consequence of liberation is no longer valid”. The same passage as E-17 also has “only wisdom knows it”; E-18 still says “the one who attains simply attains”; the passage of E-29 distinguishes “able to cease / unable to cease” and the consequence of the six destinies. Both groups of material must be put back into the whole book for judgment. (B; conflicting reading local C)
Note on texts: Linji left no contemporary writings of his thought in his own hand. The Zutang ji (952) and Jingde chuandeng lu (1004) are relatively early visible witnesses to the material, and several of their parallel passages may be excerpts from common sources; the Zongjing lu (tenth century) also appears in the early chain of quotation discussed by modern studies of how the text formed. T1 refers only to the relatively early transmission layer among the surviving materials on this figure; it does not mean independent, contemporary, or verbatim record. The current Linji lu and the Tiansheng guangdeng lu have their own chains of versions and editing; the strength of the placement cannot rest on counting evidence from a common source repeatedly.
It has been checked that fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu does quote Linji’s long passage on “the divine light of the six paths”, and that its early phrasing is “if one can be thus” (若能如是), which differs from the current text’s “if one can see it thus” (若能如是見得); the variant difference must be retained (E-42).
Version collation: The same sentence reads in fascicle 28 of the Jingde chuandeng lu (1004) “若能如此見。是一生無事人” (“if one can see thus, this is a person with nothing to do all one’s life”; T51, 446c20–21), and from the Tiansheng guangdeng lu (1036) onward “若能如是見得”. The three readings in the Zongjing lu (961), the Chuandeng lu and the Guangdeng lu all differ; they must be set side by side and must not be merged into any one reading. The earliest witness of both “if one obtains true and correct insight — not stained by birth and death” (E-07) and “not meeting it at this time — revolving in the three realms” (E-09) is the single passage in fascicle 28 of the Jingde chuandeng lu; neither is found in the Zutang ji or in fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu.
This archive distinguishes two sets of grades, which are never mixed:
Direction marks: Supports = supports the current six-position judgment; Limits = shows that some entity, name or practice has been dismantled; Disputed = the direction of the text is not unique; Neutral = the text exists but does not form part of the core argument.
In this archive T1 and T2 are “relative layers among Linji’s extant transmission materials”, not the level of a direct manuscript left by the author himself; the existence of parallel texts and “independent witness” are two different propositions. Even where the original excerpt on a card can itself be verified as A, its final structural classification is not automatically raised to A.
Textual levels in this archive:
Version collation: Using the CBETA transcriptions of the Zutang ji (B25 no.144), the full hundred fascicles of the Zongjing lu (T48 no.2016), the Jingde chuandeng lu (T51 no.2076), the Wanshan tonggui ji (T48 no.2017), the Zhu xin fu (X63 no.1231) and the Record of Chan Master Wude of Fenyang (T47 no.1992), the original excerpts and context passages of E-14–E-38 were searched by machine (after normalizing common variant characters, comparing runs of 7–8 consecutive characters); no continuous corresponding quotation earlier than the Tiansheng guangdeng lu was detected. This is a machine-search result: quotations that are rewritten, paraphrased or differ greatly in wording may have been missed; early manuscripts and printed editions outside the Tiansheng guangdeng lu have not been checked either. E-14–E-38 therefore remain T2, and “first seen 1036” refers only to the range of materials searched.
Method: apply the same v1.3 standard to test for a remaining non-deletable functional mediator. First retain “no cultivation, no realization / originally nothing to do” as positive evidence of the complete structure, then retain “seeing / not meeting — freedom / saṃsāra” as positive evidence of the completion relation; neither is automatically upgraded because of the form of a descriptive or imperative sentence. The deletion test must ask: if correct recognition is deleted while the ground remains and non-contrivance is still true, is the record’s ultimate account of “why a student is free / why a student revolves in saṃsāra” still complete? Source level, interpretation level, teaching layer and structural layer are each recorded independently;
repetition from a common source is not counted as independent external evidence.
Citations: primary texts follow the CBETA transcriptions (T47 no.1985, T51 no.2076, T50 no.2061, B25 no.144, X78 no.1553), marked to page, register and line; original excerpts keep the characters of the original book.
Linji’s core question is: why do those who study the Way fail to attain freedom? His answer is extremely simple: the illness lies not in lacking anything, but in not trusting oneself and seeking outward (E-08). The structural chain unfolding from this is:
The direction of this chain is consistent: once every name, practice and support has been dismantled, what remains is “the person listening to the Dharma right before you”, together with recognizing it and trusting oneself.
(E-01–E-05 are textual sources and early witnesses; E-06–E-37 are sayings from hall sermons and instructions to the assembly; E-38–E-39 are methods of guiding students; E-40–E-41 are encounters from the Record of Pilgrimages;
E-42 is the early excerpt in fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu and its variants.)
Original excerpt: 住三聖嗣法小師慧然集Compiled by Huiran, junior master and Dharma heir, residing at Sansheng.
Context passage: 鎮州臨濟慧照禪師語錄住三聖嗣法小師慧然集
What the passage does: The current Linji lu (T47 no.1985) opens with the title line “Compiled by Huiran, junior master and Dharma heir, residing at Sansheng” and closes with “Collated by Cunjiang, junior master and Dharma heir, residing at Xinghua in Damingfu”. The record is the disciples’ recording and arrangement of Linji’s hall sermons, instructions to the assembly, critical examinations and deeds, not a work written by Linji himself.
What it does not prove: The title lines show the identity of the compilers; they cannot prove that every passage of the current text had already taken shape in the Tang; the title lines themselves were handed down with the Song printed editions.
Original excerpt: 圓覺老演，今為流通，點撿將來，故無差舛Old Yan of Yuanjue has now, for its circulation, checked it through and brought it forward, so that it is without error.
Context passage: 面壁未幾，密付將終，正法誰傳？瞎驢邊滅。圓覺老演，今為流通，點撿將來，故無差舛，唯餘一喝，尚要商量，具眼禪流，冀無賺舉。宣和庚子中秋日謹序。
What the passage does: Ma Fang’s preface is dated “Xuanhe gengzi” (1120), showing that by the end of the Northern Song there was a printing stage in which Yuanjue Zongyan “checked it through” for circulation.
At the head of the volume there are also various Yuan prefaces (second year of Yuanzhen, second year of Dade, etc.), belonging to a later printing history. The arrangement and wording of the current Linji lu went through at least the editing at the end of the Northern Song.
What it does not prove: “So that it is without error” is the printer’s own statement and cannot replace a sentence-by-sentence comparison with early transmitted texts; this archive therefore grades separately the passages paralleled in the Jingde chuandeng lu (1004) and the passages seen only in later transmission systems.
Original excerpt: 罷唱經論之徒，皆親堂室，示人心要，頗與德山相類。Those who had stopped chanting sūtras and treatises all came close to his hall and chamber; he showed people the essentials of mind, rather like Deshan.
Context passage: 釋義玄，俗姓邢，曹州南華人也。參學諸方，不憚艱苦。因見黃檗山運禪師，鳴啄同時，了然通徹。乃北歸鄉土，俯徇趙人之請，住于城南臨濟焉。罷唱經論之徒，皆親堂室，示人心要，頗與德山相類。以咸通七年丙戌歲四月十日示滅。勅諡慧照大師，塔號澄虛。言教頗行于世，今恒陽號臨濟禪宗焉。
What the passage does: The biography in fascicle 12 of the Song gaoseng zhuan (988) records that Yixuan studied with Huangbo and “understood clearly and penetrated thoroughly”, resided at Linji in Zhenzhou, “showed people the essentials of mind”, died in the seventh year of Xiantong (866), and that “his verbal teachings circulated quite widely in the world”. This shows that Linji’s teachings were circulating by the end of the tenth century, but the biography records none of his sayings. The stūpa inscription at the end of the current Linji lu gives “the eighth year of Xiantong”, one year different.
What it does not prove: The biography provides no original text of his thought and serves only as side evidence for his life and the circulation of his teachings; the two death dates stand side by side, and this archive does not decide between them.
Original excerpt: 山僧分明向你道，五陰身田內，有無位真人，堂堂露現，無毫髮許間隔，何不識取！This mountain monk tells you plainly: within the field of the body of the five aggregates there is a true person of no rank, openly and majestically revealed, without a hair’s breadth of separation. Why do you not recognize it!
Context passage: 師有時謂眾云：「山僧分明向你道，五陰身田內，有無位真人，堂堂露現，無毫髮許間隔，何不識取！」時有僧問：「如何是無位真人？」師便打之，云：「無位真人是什摩不淨之物！」
What the passage does: Fascicle 19 of the Zutang ji is the earliest record of Linji’s sayings seen so far; in it the location of the “true person of no rank” and the wording that dismisses the name differ from the current text. Its existence proves that the motif was circulating before 952, not that every character of the current Linji lu came from the mouth of the ninth-century Linji.
What it does not prove: Although the Zutang ji is earlier, it does not automatically form two independent sources with the Jingde chuandeng lu; its note “his other responses to occasions are widely displayed in a separate record” supports the judgment that other records of sayings were circulating at the time, but cannot confirm the original form of each passage of that separate record.
Original excerpt: 五蘊身田內有無位真人。堂堂顯露無絲髮許間隔。何不識取。Within the field of the body of the five aggregates there is a true person of no rank, openly and majestically revealed, without a silk-thread’s breadth of separation. Why do you not recognize it?
Context passage: 鎮州臨濟義玄和尚示眾曰。今時學人且要明取自己真正見解。若得自己見解。即不被生死染去住自由。……大德。四大身不解說法聽法。虛空不解說法聽法。是汝目前歷歷孤明。勿形段者解說法聽法。所以山僧向汝道。五蘊身田內有無位真人。堂堂顯露無絲髮許間隔。何不識取。
心法無形通貫十方。在眼曰見。在耳曰聞。在手執捉。在足運奔。心若不在隨處解脫。
What the passage does: The Jingde chuandeng lu of 1004 provides an earlier witness of a continuous sermon, preserving neighbouring materials such as “insight — freedom”, “originally present”, “the mind-dharma” and “the true person of no rank”; it has variant readings that can be compared with the Zutang ji of 952. The two books may share an earlier basis of sayings with the material later seen in the Tiansheng guangdeng lu, so the parallels are used to raise the credibility of “this was already said early on”, not to prove directly that there were two mutually independent records.
What it does not prove: There are substantive variants among the three texts: the Zutang ji has “心若不生，隨處解脫” (“if the mind does not arise, one is liberated everywhere”), the Chuandeng lu has “心若不在隨處解脫” (“if the mind is not present, one is liberated everywhere”), and the current Linji lu has “一心既無，隨處解脫” (“since the one mind is nonexistent, one is liberated everywhere”) (E-13);
in the “true person of no rank” passage, the Zutang ji and the Chuandeng lu have “within the field of the body of the five aggregates” (五陰（蘊）身田內), while the hall sermon in the Linji lu has “upon the lump of red flesh” (赤肉團上) (E-06). This archive does not reach a conclusion on the basis of any single text.
Original excerpt: 赤肉團上有一無位真人，常從汝等諸人面門出入，未證據者看看。Upon the lump of red flesh there is a true person of no rank, always going in and out through the gates of your faces. Those who have not yet confirmed it, look! look!
Context passage: 上堂云：「赤肉團上有一無位真人，常從汝等諸人面門出入，未證據者看看。」時有僧出問：「如何是無位真人？」師下禪床把住，云：「道道。」其僧擬議，師托開，云：「無位真人是什麼乾屎橛？」便歸方丈。
What the passage does: Linji’s most famous hall sermon: in each person’s body there is a “true person” who falls into no rank, going in and out through the gates of the face; he demands, “those who have not yet confirmed it, look! look!”. As soon as a monk asks “What is the true person of no rank?”, Linji presses him to say it himself, and then with “dried shit-stick” knocks away the very name “true person of no rank”.
What it does not prove: The current text’s “those who have not yet confirmed it, look! look!” cannot be projected word for word back onto the Zutang ji; the early text has “why do you not recognize it”, which suffices to prove that the motif of recognition is early, but whether its function in speech is a teaching prompt or an ultimately necessary condition must still be read together with the continuous sermons.
Version collation: Readings of the various texts: (1) Zutang ji (952): “五陰身田內，有無位真人，堂堂露現，無毫髮許間隔，何不識取！”, with the name knocked away as “無位真人是什摩不淨之物” (“what kind of impure thing is the true person of no rank”) (B25, 660b14–661a03).
(2) Zongjing lu, fasc. 98 (961): “向五陰身田內。有無位真人。堂堂顯露。無絲髮許間隔。何不識取。” (T48, 943c19–20; no monk’s question and no knocking away of the name). (3) Main text of fascicle 12 of the Jingde chuandeng lu (1004): “汝等諸人。赤肉團上有一無位真人。常向諸人面門出入。汝若不識但問老僧。時有僧問。如何是無位真人。師便打云。無位真人是什麼乾屎橛” (T51, 290c18–21). (4) The Taishō edition appends after fascicle 12 a separate recension (from 299b12, annotated “cf. P. 290a”), which reads “未證據者看看……師下禪床把住云。道道……乾屎橛” (300a25–29), the same as the Tiansheng guangdeng lu (X78, 686a17) and the current text. Conclusion: “upon the lump of red flesh” and “dried shit-stick” can be traced back to 1004; the demanding form “those who have not yet confirmed it, look! look!” appears only in the appended recension and from 1036 onward; another early system has “why do you not recognize it” (a rhetorical question) or “if you do not recognize it, just ask this old monk”. The philosophical interpretation of this card is unchanged.
Original excerpt: 今時學佛法者，且要求真正見解。若得真正見解，生死不染、去住自由，不要求殊勝，殊勝自至。Those who study the Buddhadharma today must above all seek true and correct insight. If you obtain true and correct insight, you are not stained by birth and death and are free to go or stay; you need not seek the extraordinary — the extraordinary comes of itself.
Context passage: 師乃云：「今時學佛法者，且要求真正見解。
若得真正見解，生死不染、去住自由，不要求殊勝，殊勝自至。道流！秖如自古先德，皆有出人底路。如山僧指示人處，秖要爾不受人惑，要用便用，更莫遲疑。
What the passage does: The sermon states its theme at the outset: what the study of the Buddhadharma requires is only “true and correct insight”; having obtained it, birth and death cannot stain one, and one is free to go or stay. The conditional sentences of Linji’s whole teaching begin here: liberation (not stained by birth and death, free to go or stay) is conditioned on “obtaining true and correct insight”.
What it does not prove: “True and correct insight” is not a body of doctrinal knowledge; Linji goes on to define it as not being deluded by others, trusting oneself, and recognizing the person listening to the Dharma right before you. It cannot be read as a “correct proposition” in the epistemological sense.
Version collation: The earliest witness is fascicle 28 of the Jingde chuandeng lu (1004): “今時學人且要明取自己真正見解。若得自己見解。即不被生死染去住自由。不要求他殊勝殊勝自備。” (“Students today must above all clarify their own true and correct insight. If they obtain their own insight, they are not stained by birth and death and are free to go or stay; they need not seek another’s excellence — excellence is complete of itself”; T51, 446c09–11). The Tiansheng guangdeng lu (X78, 690b13–15) agrees with the current text in reading “今時學佛法者，且要求真正見解。若得真正見解，生死不染，去住自由”. Neither fascicle 19 of the Zutang ji nor fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu has this sentence (the Zongjing lu quotation begins with “如今諸人與古聖何別”, “how do all of you now differ from the ancient sages”). The T1 of this card therefore has only one early witness, and the early text reads “自己真正見解／自己見解” (“one’s own true and correct insight / one’s own insight”) and “不被生死染” (“not stained by birth and death”); the conditional structure (if one obtains … then one is not stained by birth and death, free to go or stay) is fully preserved in the early text.
Original excerpt: 病在不自信處。爾若自信不及，即便忙忙地徇一切境轉，被他萬境回換，不得自由。爾若能歇得念念馳求心，便與祖佛不別。The illness lies where you do not trust yourselves. If your self-trust is not enough, you hurry and bustle, turning along with every circumstance, swapped around by the ten thousand circumstances, and cannot be free. If you can cease the mind that runs seeking from thought to thought, you do not differ from buddhas and patriarchs.
Context passage: 如今學者不得，病在甚處？病在不自信處。爾若自信不及，即便忙忙地徇一切境轉，被他萬境回換，不得自由。爾若能歇得念念馳求心，便與祖佛不別。爾欲得識祖佛麼？秖爾面前聽法底。是學人信不及，便向外馳求。
What the passage does: This is a diagnosis of “not trusting oneself” and “seeking outward”, putting forward “if you can cease … then you do not differ from buddhas and patriarchs”. The condition addresses a real transformation in the student, but it cannot be inferred from grammar alone that the ground was formerly absent; as evidence of ultimate completion it must be judged together with the freedom of going and staying and the boundary of saṃsāra in E-07, E-09 and E-10.
What it does not prove: “Not differing from buddhas and patriarchs” can be read as originally so (① direction), or as a completion valid only after ceasing (② direction); the sentence appears in the conditional form “if you can … then …”.
Version collation: Fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu (1004) reads: “病在不自信處。自信不及即便忙忙徇一切境。脫大德若能歇得念念馳求心。便與祖師不別。汝欲識祖師麼。即汝目前聽法底是。” (T51, 446c13–16). The early text has “祖師” (“patriarchs”), while the current text and the Tiansheng guangdeng lu (X78, 691a01–02) have “祖佛” (“patriarchs and buddhas”). Fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu lacks the sentence “病在不自信處”; instead it has “欲得與祖佛不別。但莫向外馳求” (“if you wish not to differ from patriarchs and buddhas, just do not seek outward”; T48, 943c10–11), which corresponds to the current text’s 497b16–17 “爾要與祖佛不別，但莫外求”, not to this card’s excerpt.
Original excerpt: 莫錯諸禪德，此時不遇，萬劫千生輪回三界，徇好境掇去，驢牛肚裏生。Make no mistake, Chan worthies: if you do not meet it at this time, for ten thousand kalpas and a thousand lives you will revolve in the three realms, chasing after pleasant circumstances and carried off to be born in the bellies of donkeys and oxen.
Context passage: 設求得者，皆是文字勝相，終不得他活祖意。莫錯諸禪德，此時不遇，萬劫千生輪回三界，徇好境掇去，驢牛肚裏生。
What the passage does: The consequence of missing recognition “at this time” is “revolving in the three realms for ten thousand kalpas and a thousand lives”.
Between not recognizing and recognizing lies the boundary between saṃsāra and liberation.
What it does not prove: This is in a hortatory tone, but what it stipulates is a relation of consequence; it cannot be read only as rhetoric.
Version collation: Fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu (1004) reads: “此時不遇萬劫千生輪迴三界。徇好惡境向驢牛肚裏去也。” (T51, 446c17–19). The Tiansheng guangdeng lu reads “禪德此時不遇，萬劫千生輪迴三界，徇好境掇去驢牛肚裏生” (X78, 691a04–05). Neither the Zutang ji nor fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu has this sentence. The relation of consequence “not meeting — revolving in the three realms” already exists in full in the early text of 1004, but there is only this one early witness, and it belongs to the same sermon in fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu as E-07, so the two cannot be counted separately.
Original excerpt: 今日多般用處，欠少什麼？六道神光未曾間歇，若能如是見得，秖是一生無事人。In all your many functions today, what is lacking? The divine light of the six paths has never ceased. If you can see it thus, you are simply a person with nothing to do all your life.
Context passage: 道流！約山僧見處，與釋迦不別。今日多般用處，欠少什麼？六道神光未曾間歇，若能如是見得，秖是一生無事人。
What the passage does: On one hand Linji says “in your many functions, what is lacking?” and “the divine light of the six paths has never ceased”; on the other he tells his listeners “if you can see it thus”, then “nothing to do all your life”. Neither statement cancels the other: original endowment and a change in the learner’s experience can stand together; whether the two belong to the same final layer must be inferred from the whole passage’s account of freedom.
What it does not prove: “Has never ceased” shows that the divine light exists without waiting to be seen; “if you can see it thus” shows that the attainment of the person with nothing to do is conditioned on seeing. The two must be read together.
Supplementary early variant: Linji’s line as quoted in fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu reads “六道神光，未曾間歇，若能如是，秖是箇一生無事人” (“the divine light of the six paths has never ceased; if one can be thus, one is simply a person with nothing to do all one’s life”), lacking the two characters “見得” (“see it”) of the current text (E-42).
The early quotation cannot be treated as a word-for-word repetition of the current text, nor can it be inferred directly that “if one can be thus” has already cancelled the learner’s transformation. This difference increases the local C of the interpretation at the completion layer; ② (B) must still rely independently on the early complete conditional sentence recorded in E-07 and on the structure of the whole book.
Version collation: Character-by-character comparison of four witnesses: (1) Zongjing lu, fasc. 98 (961): “六道神光。未曾間歇。若能如是。秖是箇一生無事人。” (T48, 943c09–10). (2) Jingde chuandeng lu, fasc. 28 (1004): “六道神光未曾間歇。若能如此見。是一生無事人。” (T51, 446c20–21). (3) Tiansheng guangdeng lu (1036): “若能如是見得，秖是一生無事人。” (X78, 691a07). (4) Current Linji lu: “若能如是見得，秖是一生無事人。” (T47, 497b13–14). Key points: the earliest quotation, in the Zongjing lu, has no character “見” (“see”) and reads only “若能如是” (“if one can be thus”); the Chuandeng lu of 1004 already has one “見” (“如此見”, “see thus”) but no “得”; the two characters “見得” first appear in 1036. The first two may share a source (the order of the two quoted passages is highly consistent;
see E-42), and cannot be counted as two votes confirming or refuting each other. This card’s original excerpt and title follow the current text in reading “若能如是見得” and must not be projected back as the early reading; when early witnesses are discussed, they must be quoted in the original characters of each text listed above.
Original excerpt: 此三種身是爾即今目前聽法底人，秖為不向外馳求，有此功用。These three kinds of body are you, the person listening to the Dharma right now before me; only because you do not run seeking outward do you have this function.
Context passage: 爾一念心上清淨光，是爾屋裏法身佛；爾一念心上無分別光，是爾屋裏報身佛；爾一念心上無差別光，是爾屋裏化身佛。此三種身是爾即今目前聽法底人，秖為不向外馳求，有此功用。據經論家取三種身為極則，約山僧見處不然，此三種身是名言、亦是三種依。
What the passage does: The three bodies — dharma, reward and transformation — are taken back as three kinds of light “upon a single thought-moment of mind”, and are just “the person listening to the Dharma right now before me”; the sūtras and treatises take the three bodies as the ultimate standard, while Linji says the three bodies are only “names and words”, “three kinds of dependence”.
The Buddha-body is de-substantialized, yet the landing point is “the person listening to the Dharma”, the presently listening and knowing one.
What it does not prove: “The three kinds of body are names and words” withdraws the status of the three bodies as independent entities; it does not withdraw “the person listening to the Dharma”. For “three kinds of dependence” (三種依), the Tiansheng guangdeng lu has “three kinds of clothing” (三種衣).
Version collation: Fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu (961) reads: “爾一念清淨光。是爾屋裏法身佛。爾一念無分別光。是爾屋裏報身佛。爾一念差別光。是爾屋裏化身佛。此三種身。即是今日目前聽法底人。此三種是名言。” (T48, 943c11–14) — the line on the transformation-body buddha reads “light of differentiation” (差別光), without the character “無”; it lacks “only because you do not run seeking outward do you have this function” and “also three kinds of dependence”. Fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu (1004) reads “一念無差別光是汝化身佛。此三身即是今日目前聽法底人。為不向外求有此三種功用。據教三種名為極則。
約山僧道三種是名言” (T51, 446c21–25). The Tiansheng guangdeng lu has “三種衣” (X78, 691a14). “Light of differentiation / light of non-differentiation” is a substantive variant, and this card does not build a structural argument on it.
Original excerpt: 爾且識取弄光影底人是諸佛之本源，一切處是道流歸舍處。Just recognize the person who plays with the light and shadow: this is the original source of all buddhas, and every place is the home to which followers of the Way return.
Context passage: 法性身、法性土，明知是光影。大德！爾且識取弄光影底人是諸佛之本源，一切處是道流歸舍處。是爾四大色身不解說法聽法、脾胃肝膽不解說法聽法、虛空不解說法聽法，是什麼解說法聽法？是爾目前歷歷底、勿一箇形段孤明，是這箇解說法聽法。
What the passage does: The dharma-nature body and the dharma-nature land are only “light and shadow”; “the person who plays with the light and shadow” is “the original source of all buddhas”.
This “person” is not the four elements, not the internal organs, not empty space, but “the one clearly present before you, without a single shape, solitarily bright” — one without form or shape, clearly and solitarily bright, able to expound and listen to the Dharma. The ground is placed directly within this lucid functioning.
What it does not prove: “Without a single shape” shows that it is not a substantialized subject; but it is described as “clear”, “solitarily bright”, and “understanding how to expound and listen to the Dharma”, which is a cognitive specification. (The Chuandeng lu text has corresponding wording; see E-05.)
Version collation: Fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu reads: “大德。且要識取弄光影底人。是諸佛本源。是一切道流歸舍處。爾四大六根。及虛空。不解聽法說法。是箇什麼物。歷歷地孤明。勿箇形段。是這箇解說法聽法。” (T48, 943c15–18). Fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu reads: “是汝目前歷歷孤明。勿形段者解說法聽法。” (T51, 446c27–447a01). The Tiansheng guangdeng lu reads: “是儞目前歷歷底物，一段孤明是者箇解說法聽法。” (X78, 691b01–02).
The core wording “clearly and solitarily bright / without form or shape” is already found in 961; the demand to recognize, “且要識取” (“you must recognize”), is also already found in the 961 quotation.
Original excerpt: 本是一精明，分為六和合。一心既無，隨處解脫。
Originally it is a single pure brightness, divided into six harmonized combinations. Since the one mind is nonexistent, wherever you are you are liberated.
Context passage: 道流！心法無形，通貫十方，在眼曰見、在耳曰聞、在鼻嗅香、在口談論、在手執捉、在足運奔。本是一精明，分為六和合。一心既無，隨處解脫。
What the passage does: The mind-dharma is formless, and seeing, hearing, smelling, speaking, grasping and running all become its manifestations; “a single pure brightness” too should not be compressed into a cognitive act alone. The current text also says “since the one mind is nonexistent”, showing that it opposes substantializing the mind; the early variants “if the mind does not arise / if the mind is not present” affect the conclusion of this passage and cannot be treated as the same sentence.
What it does not prove: “A single pure brightness” is language of clear knowing; “since the one mind is nonexistent” withdraws “the one mind” as something to be grasped.
The Chuandeng lu text reads here “心若不在隨處解脫” (“if the mind is not present, one is liberated everywhere”) (E-05); the difference between the two texts must be retained.
Version collation: Four groups of transmission materials, three kinds of closing sentence, set side by side: (1) Zutang ji (952): “本是一精明，分成六和合。心若不生，隨處解脫。” (B25, 662a14–b01). (2) Zongjing lu, fasc. 98 (961): “本是一精明。分成六和合。心若不生。隨處解脫。” (T48, 943c21–22). (3) Jingde chuandeng lu, fasc. 28 (1004): “心法無形通貫十方。在眼曰見。在耳曰聞。在手執捉。在足運奔。心若不在隨處解脫。” (T51, 447a03–05) — without the sentence “本是一精明，分成六和合”. (4) Tiansheng guangdeng lu (1036) and the current text: “本是一精明，分為六和合。一心既無，隨處解脫。” (X78, 691b06–07). Correction: “一心既無” (“since the one mind is nonexistent”) does not first appear in the edition of 1120; the reading already exists in 1036; that the Chuandeng lu text lacks the “single pure brightness” sentence was not recorded on any card before. The Zutang ji and the Zongjing lu read alike “心若不生” (“if the mind does not arise”) and may share a source; they are not treated as two independent votes.
Note on the collation layer: The closing sentence of this card reads “心若不生，隨處解脫” in the Zutang ji, “心若不在，隨處解脫” in the Jingde chuandeng lu, and “一心既無，隨處解脫” in the current Linji lu. The three wordings can be interpreted respectively in the direction of thought not arising, of nothing to depend on, or of the mind not being graspable, but such interpretation must first re-check the early original passages and their punctuation; it cannot be inferred directly from any one version that “correct seeing has been deleted from the completion of freedom”, nor can the one current version monopolize the overall reading. (Existence of variants: A; structural direction: C)
Original excerpt: 無事是貴人，但莫造作，秖是平常。Having nothing to do is the noble person; just do not contrive — be simply ordinary.
Context passage: 師示眾云：「道流！切要求取真正見解，向天下橫行，免被這一般精魅惑亂。無事是貴人，但莫造作，秖是平常。爾擬向外傍家求過覓脚手，錯了也。
What the passage does: With “in the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort” and “ordinary, with nothing to do”, Linji negates deliberate contrivance; the same passage also requires true and correct insight. The two form a genuine interpretive tension: having nothing to do can be an originally endowed form of life, and insight can be the student’s recognition; it is not appropriate to presuppose that “having nothing to do exists only after insight”.
What it does not prove: “Having nothing to do” cannot be regarded directly as already proving “the state after insight is completed”, nor can “having nothing to do” be used to erase the requirement of insight in the same passage. What is supported here is reading the two layers together; the local judgment can retain C.
Original excerpt: 得法始了，未得依前輪回五道。
Only on obtaining the Dharma is it finished; not yet obtaining it, you revolve in the five paths as before.
Context passage: 三世十方佛祖出來也秖為求法，如今參學道流也秖為求法。得法始了，未得依前輪回五道。云何是法？法者是心法，心法無形，通貫十方，目前現用；人信不及，便乃認名認句，向文字中求意度佛法，天地懸殊。
What the passage does: One of the most direct conditional sentences of completion in this archive: “Only on obtaining the Dharma is it finished; not yet obtaining it, you revolve in the five paths as before.” The “Dharma” that is obtained is defined as “the mind-dharma”, “presently in use right before you”; if “people do not trust it enough”, heaven and earth are far apart.
What it does not prove: The object of “obtaining the Dharma” is the mind-dharma originally in present use, not something coming from outside; but the boundary between “obtained” and “not yet obtained” is explicitly retained, corresponding to “finished” and “saṃsāra”.
The Tiansheng guangdeng lu reads “未得依前輪迴” (“not yet obtaining it, one revolves as before”), without the two characters “五道” (“five paths”).
Original excerpt: 外不取凡聖、內不住根本，見徹更不疑謬。Outwardly not grasping ordinary and sage, inwardly not dwelling in the root, seeing through, with no further doubt or error.
Context passage: 老僧穩坐，更有道流來相見時，我盡辨了也。何以如此？秖為我見處別，外不取凡聖、內不住根本，見徹更不疑謬。
What the passage does: Linji says of himself that his “place of seeing” differs from others’: outwardly he does not cling to ordinary or sage, inwardly he does not dwell even in “the root” — not even the root is taken as a place to dwell; but all of this comes down to “seeing through”.
What it does not prove: “Inwardly not dwelling in the root” is a self-reflexive treatment of the root; it takes “seeing through” as the form of completion rather than withdrawing “seeing”.
Original excerpt: 佛法無用功處，秖是平常無事——屙屎、送尿、著衣、喫飯、困來即臥……。In the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort; it is just ordinary, with nothing to do — shitting, pissing, putting on clothes, eating rice, lying down when tired …
Context passage: 師示眾云：「道流！佛法無用功處，秖是平常無事——屙屎、送尿、著衣、喫飯、困來即臥……。愚人笑我，智乃知焉。古人云：『向外作工夫，總是癡頑漢。』爾且隨處作主，立處皆真，境來回換不得，縱有從來習氣、五無間業，自為解脫大海。
What the passage does: The Buddhadharma has no place for applying effort; it is only everyday dressing and eating;
“be master wherever you are, and wherever you stand is true”: when circumstances come they cannot swap you around, and even habitual tendencies and the five uninterrupted karmas of themselves become the great ocean of liberation. This is one of Linji’s statements closest to “no transformation of any kind is needed”.
What it does not prove: The same passage says “fools laugh at me, but the wise know it”: the truth of being ordinary with nothing to do is known only by the “wise”. “Being master” is also a specification of subjectivity.
Original excerpt: 得者便得，不歷時節，無修、無證，無得、無失，一切時中更無別法。The one who attains simply attains, without passing through stretches of time: no cultivation, no realization, no gain, no loss; at all times there is no other dharma.
Context passage: 然佛與魔是染、淨二境，約山僧見處，無佛、無眾生，無古、無今，得者便得，不歷時節，無修、無證，無得、無失，一切時中更無別法。設有一法過此者，我說如夢、如化。山僧所說皆是。
What the passage does: This group of sentences is direct evidence for “no need of cultivating or making”; at the same time it says “the one who attains simply attains”, and elsewhere the book stipulates the consequences of recognizing and not recognizing. The “attaining” here does not mean a long process, but neither can it be read, without argument, as necessarily passing through a cognitive event.
What it does not prove: “No cultivation, no realization” by itself cannot prove ①; but neither should “the one who attains simply attains” be interpreted directly as “still retaining the present occurrence of attaining” and used to infer an ultimate cognitive mediator; it may be precisely dismantling the logic of acquisition. The structural role of this passage must be read together with the early condition of insight / freedom.
Original excerpt: 若達真正見，解圓明方始了畢。If you reach true and correct seeing, understanding is perfectly bright, and only then is it finally done.
Context passage: 若是真正學道人，不求世間過，切急要求真正見解。若達真正見，解圓明方始了畢。
What the passage does: “Finally done” (completion) is explicitly stipulated as coming after “reaching true and correct seeing, understanding perfectly bright”. This is the most explicit conditional sentence of completion in Linji’s record.
What it does not prove: CBETA punctuates “若達真正見，解圓明方始了畢” (“if one reaches true and correct seeing, understanding is perfectly bright, and only then is it finally done”); the Tiansheng guangdeng lu punctuates “若達真正見解，圓明方始了畢” (“if one reaches true and correct insight, perfectly bright, only then is it finally done”). Both punctuations take “true and correct seeing (insight)” as the condition of completion.
Original excerpt: 唯有聽法無依道人，是諸佛之母，所以佛從無依生。若悟無依，佛亦無得。若如是見得者，是真正見解。Only the person of the Way who listens to the Dharma and depends on nothing is the mother of all buddhas; therefore buddhas are born from non-dependence. If you awaken to non-dependence, a buddha too is nothing to attain.
One who sees it thus has true and correct insight.
Context passage: 盡見諸法空相，皆無實法，唯有聽法無依道人，是諸佛之母，所以佛從無依生。若悟無依，佛亦無得。若如是見得者，是真正見解。
What the passage does: All dharmas have the mark of emptiness and none is a real dharma; only “the person of the Way who listens to the Dharma and depends on nothing” is called “the mother of all buddhas”, and buddhas are born from non-dependence. “If you awaken to non-dependence, a buddha too is nothing to attain” — having awakened to non-dependence, even a buddha is nothing to be attained; “seeing it thus” is true and correct insight.
What it does not prove: “A buddha too is nothing to attain” negates treating a buddha as something to be attained; it presupposes “if you awaken to non-dependence”, and names “seeing it thus” true and correct insight. After all dharmas are empty, “the person of the Way who listens to the Dharma and depends on nothing” is still retained as the sole item of original source.
Original excerpt: 即今識取聽法底人：無形、無相、無根、無本、無住處。活撥撥地，應是萬種施設，用處秖是無處，所以覓著轉遠、求之轉乖，號之為祕密。Right now recognize the person listening to the Dharma: without form, without mark, without root, without base, without dwelling place. Lively and vigorous, it responds with ten thousand kinds of devices, yet where it functions there is just no place;
therefore the more you search for it the farther away it is, the more you seek it the more you go astray — this is called the secret.
Context passage: 爾若欲得生死去住脫著自由，即今識取聽法底人：無形、無相、無根、無本、無住處。活撥撥地，應是萬種施設，用處秖是無處，所以覓著轉遠、求之轉乖，號之為祕密。
What the passage does: To be free in birth and death, going and staying, one must “right now recognize the person listening to the Dharma”; this person has no form or mark, no root or base, no dwelling place, lively and vigorous, responding with ten thousand kinds of devices, and the more one searches the farther away it is.
What it does not prove: The person of the Way who depends on nothing, as “the mother of all buddhas”, is given a non-objectified functional position; but a substantial subject cannot be inferred directly from the word “person”, nor can all seeing, hearing and bodily action be equated entirely with “cognitive functioning”.
② is argued from the completion relation between correct recognition and freedom.
Original excerpt: 境即萬般差別，人即不別，所以應物現形，如水中月。Circumstances differ in ten thousand ways, but the person does not differ;
therefore it responds to things and manifests forms, like the moon in water.
Context passage: 却見乘境底人是諸佛之玄旨，佛境不能自稱我是佛境，還是這箇無依道人乘境出來。若有人出來問我求佛，我即應清淨境出；有人問我菩薩，我即應慈悲境出；有人問我菩提，我即應淨妙境出；有人問我涅槃，我即應寂靜境出。境即萬般差別，人即不別，所以應物現形，如水中月。
What the passage does: Linji’s account of the differentiation of all that exists: circumstances differ in ten thousand ways, while the “person” does not differ; the realm of buddhas, the realm of bodhisattvas, the realm of bodhi and the realm of nirvāṇa are all “the person of the Way who depends on nothing riding upon circumstances and coming forth”. The differentiated world is placed within the responsive manifestation of the “person”, like the moon in water.
What it does not prove: Here the “person” is the bearer through which differences can appear; the text does not, conversely, place the “person” inside a more basic occurrence.
Original excerpt: 心外無法，內亦不可得，求什麼物？Outside the mind there is no dharma, and inside too nothing can be obtained — what thing are you seeking?
Context passage: 約經論家取法身為根本，報、化二身為用。山僧見處，法身即不解說法。
所以，古人云：『身依義立，土據體論。』法性身、法性土，明知是建立之法依通國土，空拳黃葉用誑小兒，蒺藜夌刺枯骨上覓什麼汁？心外無法，內亦不可得，求什麼物？
What the passage does: The sūtras and treatises take the dharma body as the ground; Linji says the dharma body “does not understand how to expound the Dharma”, and the dharma-nature body and land are only “established dharmas”, like an empty fist or yellow leaves used to coax a small child. Finally, “outside the mind there is no dharma, and inside too nothing can be obtained”: neither external dharmas nor the inner mind can be obtained.
What it does not prove: The dharma body is lowered to an established dharma; the one able to expound the Dharma is still “the person listening to the Dharma right before you” (E-12). “Inside too nothing can be obtained” negates treating the mind as something that can be obtained.
Original excerpt: 是爾如今與麼聽法底人作麼生擬修他、證他、莊嚴他？渠且不是修底物、不是莊嚴得底物。How would you, the person now listening to the Dharma like this, propose to cultivate it, realize it, adorn it? It is not a thing to be cultivated, not a thing that can be adorned.
Context passage: 爾諸方言：『道有修、有證。』
莫錯，設有修得者，皆是生死業。爾言六度萬行齊修，我見皆是造業。求佛、求法，即是造地獄業；求菩薩亦是造業；看經、看教亦是造業。佛與祖師是無事人，所以有漏有為、無漏無為，為清淨業。有一般瞎禿子飽喫飯了，便坐禪觀行，把捉念漏不令放起，厭喧求靜，是外道法。祖師云：『爾若住心看靜，舉心外照、攝心內澄、凝心入定，如是之流皆是造作。』是爾如今與麼聽法底人作麼生擬修他、證他、莊嚴他？渠且不是修底物、不是莊嚴得底物。
What the passage does: All cultivation and realization, the six perfections and ten thousand practices, seeking buddha and seeking Dharma, reading sūtras and studying the teachings, are judged to be the making of karma; “the person listening to the Dharma” is not something that can be cultivated, realized or adorned. This is Linji’s strongest text negating gradual cultivation.
What it does not prove: What it negates is treating the listener as an object of cultivation and realization; it does not negate “recognizing” or “seeing it”.
Cultivation and realization are negated, while the cognitive “recognizing” is precisely retained as the sole task.
Original excerpt: 現今目前聽法無依道人歷歷地分明，未曾欠少。爾若欲得與祖佛不別，但如是見，不用疑誤。The person of the Way now before you, listening to the Dharma and depending on nothing, is clearly distinct and has never lacked anything.
If you wish not to differ from patriarchs and buddhas, just see it thus, without doubt or error.
Context passage: 所以，古人云：『平常心是道。』大德！覓什麼物？現今目前聽法無依道人歷歷地分明，未曾欠少。爾若欲得與祖佛不別，但如是見，不用疑誤。
What the passage does: The ordinary mind is the Way; the person of the Way who listens to the Dharma and depends on nothing “is clearly distinct and has never lacked anything”. To not differ from patriarchs and buddhas, “just see it thus”.
What it does not prove: “Has never lacked anything” is how things originally are; “just see it thus” is a condition. The same structure appears again: what is originally endowed does not wait to be seen, while the attainment of not differing from patriarchs and buddhas is conditioned on “seeing it thus”. For “clearly distinct” (歷歷地分明), the Tiansheng guangdeng lu has “clearly discriminating” (歷歷地分別).
Original excerpt: 世、出世諸法，皆無自性、亦無生性，但有空名，名字亦空。Worldly and world-transcending dharmas all lack self-nature and lack an arising-nature; there are only empty names, and the names too are empty.
Context passage: 師云：「爾擬問早異了也，性相各分，道流莫錯。世、出世諸法，皆無自性、亦無生性，但有空名，名字亦空。爾秖麼認他閑名為實，大錯了也。
設有，皆是依變之境。
What the passage does: Worldly and world-transcending dharmas all lack self-nature and arising-nature; there are only empty names, and the names too are empty; bodhi, nirvāṇa, the three bodies, object and wisdom, buddha and so on are all “circumstances of dependent transformation”.
What it does not prove: This account treats the status of dharmas and names, not the status of the listener; the landing point of the same discourse is still “the person listening to the Dharma”.
Original excerpt: 向裏向外逢著便殺——逢佛殺佛、逢祖殺祖、逢羅漢殺羅漢、逢父母殺父母、逢親眷殺親眷——始得解脫。Inward or outward, whatever you meet, kill it — meeting a buddha, kill the buddha; meeting a patriarch, kill the patriarch; meeting an arhat, kill the arhat; meeting your parents, kill your parents; meeting your kin, kill your kin — only then do you attain liberation.
Context passage: 道流！爾欲得如法見解，但莫受人惑，向裏向外逢著便殺——逢佛殺佛、逢祖殺祖、逢羅漢殺羅漢、逢父母殺父母、逢親眷殺親眷——始得解脫。不與物拘，透脫自在，如諸方學道流未有不依物出來底。
What the passage does: In order to obtain “insight in accord with the Dharma”, every support met inwardly or outwardly — buddha, patriarch, arhat, parents, kin — must be “killed”; only then does one attain liberation and is not bound by things. This is Linji’s thorough dismantling of every attachment.
What it does not prove: The object of “killing” is supports and idols, not “insight”; the sentence opens by taking “if you wish to obtain insight in accord with the Dharma” as its aim.
Original excerpt: 三界不自道：『我是三界。』還是，道流！目前靈靈地照燭萬般酌度世界底人與三界安名。The three realms do not themselves say, “I am the three realms.” Rather, followers of the Way, it is the person right before you, numinously and spiritually illuminating the myriad things and weighing the world, who gives the three realms their name.
Context passage: 爾一念心貪是欲界、爾一念心瞋是色界、爾一念心癡是無色界，是爾屋裏家具子。三界不自道：『我是三界。』還是，道流！目前靈靈地照燭萬般酌度世界底人與三界安名。
What it does not prove: “Giving the three realms their name” shows that the classification of names and words is set up by the presently illuminating one;
it does not mean that mountains, rivers and the myriad things are ontologically created by human cognition, still less can it be inferred from “naming” that the occurrence of all differentiated existence is grounded in recognition.
What it does not prove: This runs opposite to the direction ① requires: it is not that cognition is placed within a more basic structure, but that the world (together with its names) is placed within the illuminating one.
Original excerpt: 爾一念心歇得處，喚作菩提樹；爾一念心不能歇得處，喚作無明樹。Where your single thought-moment of mind is able to cease is called the bodhi tree; where your single thought-moment of mind is unable to cease is called the tree of ignorance.
Context passage: 爾一念心歇得處，喚作菩提樹；爾一念心不能歇得處，喚作無明樹。無明無住處、無明無始終，爾若念念心歇不得，便上他無明樹，便入六道、四生、披毛、戴角；爾若歇得，便是清淨身界。爾一念不生，便是上菩提樹，三界神通變化意生化身，法喜禪悅身光自照，思衣羅綺千重、思食百味具足，更無橫病。菩提無住處，是故無得者。
What the passage does: A single thought-moment able to cease is bodhi; unable to cease is ignorance, and then one enters the six paths and the four kinds of birth;
finally it says “bodhi has no dwelling place, therefore there is no one who attains”. Ceasing and not ceasing decide between bodhi and saṃsāra; at the same time bodhi has no dwelling place and there is no one who attains.
What it does not prove: “No one who attains” negates an entity that possesses bodhi; the boundary of “able to cease / unable to cease” and the consequence of revolving in the six paths are explicitly retained.
Original excerpt: 動與不動是二種境，還是無依道人用動、用不動。Moving and not moving are two kinds of circumstance; it is the person of the Way who depends on nothing who uses moving and uses not moving.
Context passage: 爾若向動處捉他，他向不動處立；爾若向不動處捉他，他向動處立。譬如潛泉魚鼓波而自躍。大德！動與不動是二種境，還是無依道人用動、用不動。
What the passage does: Linji rejects at once taking unmoving purity as the Way (“if you take the unmoving, pure circumstance as right, you are acknowledging ignorance as your master”, 501a24–25) and taking movement as the Way; moving and not moving are both circumstances, and it is the person of the Way who depends on nothing who “uses” them.
What it does not prove: This passage dismantles the practice position of sitting quietly and guarding the mind; the person of the Way who depends on nothing is retained as the “user”.
Original excerpt: 求著即轉遠、不求還在目前。靈音屬耳，若人不信，徒勞百年。Seek it and it turns farther away; do not seek it and it is still right before you. The numinous sound is at your ear;
if people do not trust it, a hundred years are labour in vain.
Context passage: 即今與麼馳求底，爾還識渠麼？活撥撥地，秖是勿根株，擁不聚、撥不散，求著即轉遠、不求還在目前。靈音屬耳，若人不信，徒勞百年。
What the passage does: The very one now running in search is the “it” to be recognized: without root or stump, it cannot be gathered together or scattered apart; seek it and it is far, do not seek it and it is right before you. But the last sentence, “if people do not trust it, a hundred years are labour in vain”: what is right before you is of no use to those who do not trust it.
What it does not prove: “Do not seek it and it is still right before you” is original endowment; “if people do not trust it, a hundred years are labour in vain” is the boundary between trusting and not trusting.
Original excerpt: 大德！但有聲名文句，皆悉是衣變，從臍輪氣海中鼓激、牙齒敲磕成其句義，明知是幻化。Worthies! All sounds, names, words and phrases are transformations of clothing; drummed up from the sea of breath at the navel and clacked out by the teeth, they form their meanings — know clearly that they are illusory transformations.
Context passage: 大德！爾莫認衣，衣不能動，人能著衣，有箇清淨衣、有箇無生衣、菩提衣、涅槃衣、有祖衣、有佛衣。大德！但有聲名文句，皆悉是衣變，從臍輪氣海中鼓激、牙齒敲磕成其句義，明知是幻化。大德！外發聲語業、內表心所法，以思有念，皆悉是衣。
What the passage does: All sounds, names, words and phrases are “clothing”: drummed up from the sea of breath and clacked out by the teeth into meanings, they are illusory transformations; purity, non-arising, bodhi, nirvāṇa, patriarch and buddha are also all clothing. “A person can put on clothing” — the one who wears the clothing is not the clothing.
What it does not prove: Language is explained as produced by the body and by mental factors, which comes close to self-inclusion; but language is defined as “clothing” and separated from “the person who wears the clothing”, and the latter is not within language.
Original excerpt: 佛者，心清淨是；法者，心光明是；道者，處處無礙淨光是。三即一，皆是空名，而無寔有，Buddha is the mind’s purity; Dharma is the mind’s radiance; the Way is pure light unobstructed everywhere. The three are one; all are empty names and have no real existence,
Context passage: 問：「如何是真佛？真法？真道？乞垂開示。」師云：「佛者，心清淨是；法者，心光明是；道者，處處無礙淨光是。三即一，皆是空名，而無寔有，如真正學道人念念心不間斷。
What the passage does: Buddha, Dharma and the Way are defined as the mind’s purity, its radiance, and pure light unobstructed everywhere; the three are one, and they are also all empty names without real existence.
What it does not prove: All three are “empty names”, but the words used to define them are still words of clear illumination such as “radiance” and “pure light”.
Original excerpt: 儞言下便自回光返照，更不別求。知身心與祖佛不別，當下無事，方名得法。At these words, turn the light around and shine it back on yourselves, and seek nothing further. Knowing that body and mind do not differ from patriarchs and buddhas, and having nothing to do right here, is what is called obtaining the Dharma.
Context passage: 問：「如何是西來意？」師云：「若有意，自救不了。」云：「既無意，云何二祖得法？」師云：「得者是不得。」云：「既若不得，云何是不得底意？」師云：「為爾向一切處馳求，心不能歇。所以，祖師言：『咄哉，丈夫！將頭覓頭。』
儞言下便自回光返照，更不別求。知身心與祖佛不別，當下無事，方名得法。
What the passage does: “Attaining is not attaining”: there is no meaning coming from outside to be attained. But Linji goes straight on to explain what is called “obtaining the Dharma”: turning the light around at the words, seeking nothing further, “knowing that body and mind do not differ from patriarchs and buddhas”, having nothing to do right here — “this is called obtaining the Dharma”.
What it does not prove: “Attaining is not attaining” negates something attained; “knowing … is called obtaining the Dharma” retains the completing function of knowing. The two sentences must be read together.
Original excerpt: 且名句不自名句，還是爾目前昭昭靈靈鑒覺聞知照燭底，安一切名句。Moreover, names and phrases are not names and phrases of themselves; it is you, right before me, bright and numinous, discerning, perceiving, hearing, knowing and illuminating, who establish all names and phrases.
Context passage: 世與出世，無佛、無法，亦不現前、亦不曾失。設有者，皆是名言章句，接引小兒施設藥病，表顯名句。且名句不自名句，還是爾目前昭昭靈靈鑒覺聞知照燭底，安一切名句。
What the passage does: Buddha and Dharma are all names and phrases set up to guide small children; names and phrases do not become names and phrases by themselves; it is “the one right before you, bright and numinous, discerning, perceiving, hearing, knowing and illuminating” who establishes all names and phrases. The source of language is placed within the one who discerns, perceives, hears and knows.
What it does not prove: Linji places the establishment of names and phrases in “the one who discerns, perceives, hears, knows and illuminates”, showing that language itself also obtains a position in his account; this is genuine positive material for self-inclusion. But this passage alone cannot prove that the whole of thought and its function of correct seeing can be deleted from “discerning”. Complete self-inclusion stays at local C, rather than being written as entirely absent.
Original excerpt: 道流！莫取山僧說處。何故？說無憑據。一期間圖畫虛空，如彩畫像等喻。Followers of the Way! Do not grasp what this mountain monk says. Why? What I say has no ground to rely on. For a while I draw pictures on empty space, like the simile of painting images in colour.
Context passage: 道流！莫取山僧說處。何故？說無憑據。一期間圖畫虛空，如彩畫像等喻。道流！莫將佛為究竟，我見猶如廁孔。
What the passage does: Linji asks his listeners not to grasp his own teaching: what he says has no ground to rely on; it is only drawing pictures on empty space for a while.
What it does not prove: This is self-reflexivity toward his own speech; it does not explain the speaker’s position within the whole.
Original excerpt: 展則彌綸法界，收則絲髮不立，歷歷孤明未曾欠少。眼不見、耳不聞，喚作什麼物？Unfolded, it pervades the dharma realm; gathered in, not a hair stands; clearly and solitarily bright, it has never lacked anything. The eye does not see it, the ear does not hear it — what will you call it?
Context passage: 道流！爾欲得如法，但莫生疑，展則彌綸法界，收則絲髮不立，歷歷孤明未曾欠少。眼不見、耳不聞，喚作什麼物？古人云：『說似一物則不中。』爾但自家看，更有什麼。說亦無盡，各自著力。珍重。」
What the passage does: The close of the sermon: that “thing”, unfolded, fills the dharma realm, gathered in, not a hair stands; “clearly and solitarily bright, it has never lacked anything”; the eye cannot see it, the ear cannot hear it, and to say it is a thing is wrong. In the end it is still “just look for yourselves” and “each of you, exert yourselves”.
What it does not prove: “To say it is like a thing misses the mark” refuses to objectify it; “clearly and solitarily bright” and “look for yourselves” still retain clear knowing and looking for oneself.
Original excerpt: 有時奪人不奪境、有時奪境不奪人、有時人境俱奪、有時人境俱不奪。Sometimes I take away the person but not the circumstance; sometimes I take away the circumstance but not the person; sometimes I take away both person and circumstance; sometimes I take away neither person nor circumstance.
Context passage: 師晚參示眾云：「有時奪人不奪境、有時奪境不奪人、有時人境俱奪、有時人境俱不奪。」
What the passage does: Linji’s method of guiding students: according to the student’s capacity, he takes away the “person” (grasping at the subject), or the “circumstance” (grasping at the object), or both, or neither. Later in the text there is also the account, by superior, middling and inferior capacities, of “taking away the circumstance”, “taking away both circumstance and dharmas”, “taking away none of circumstance, dharmas and person”, and “functioning with the whole substance” (501b04–08).
What it does not prove: The four alternatives are a teaching method; “method of practice ≠ ultimate structure”. It shows that both person and circumstance can be taken away, but does not directly explain the ultimate structure.
Original excerpt: 一句語須具三玄門，一玄門須具三要，有權、有用。A single statement must contain three mysterious gates; a single mysterious gate must contain three essentials;
there is provisional means, there is function.
Context passage: 上堂，僧問：「如何是第一句？」師云：「三要印開朱點側，未容擬議主賓分。」問：「如何是第二句？」師云：「妙解豈容無著問，漚和爭負截流機。」問：「如何是第三句？」師云：「看取棚頭弄傀儡，抽牽都來裏有人。」師又云：「一句語須具三玄門，一玄門須具三要，有權、有用。
What the passage does: The three statements, three mysteries and three essentials are guiding formulas of the Linji school; the third statement, “the pulling and drawing all comes from someone inside”, uses the simile of puppets and the one pulling the strings. There is also “if you attain it in the first statement, you become a teacher of buddhas and patriarchs; if you attain it in the second statement, you become a teacher of humans and gods; if you attain it in the third statement, you cannot even save yourself” (502a05–07). (This passage is also found in fascicle 12 of the Jingde chuandeng lu.)
What it does not prove: The specific content of the three mysteries and three essentials is not unfolded in the original text, and later interpretations vary widely; this archive does not build a structural argument on those later interpretations.
Version collation: The passage on the three statements, three mysteries and three essentials appears in the main text of fascicle 12 of the Chuandeng lu (T51, 291a10–15), reading “抽牽全藉裏頭人” (“the pulling and drawing relies entirely on the person inside”); the current text reads “抽牽都來裏有人” (“the pulling and drawing all comes from someone inside”).
Original excerpt: 師於言下大悟，云：「元來黃蘗佛法無多子。」At these words the Master had a great awakening and said: “So there isn’t much to Huangbo’s Buddhadharma after all.”
Context passage: 大愚問：「什麼處來？」師云：「黃蘗處來。」大愚云：「黃蘗有何言句？」師云：「某甲三度問佛法的的大意，三度被打。不知某甲有過？無過？」大愚云：「黃蘗與麼老婆為汝得徹困，更來這裏問有過、無過？」師於言下大悟，云：「元來黃蘗佛法無多子。」
What the passage does: The circumstances of Linji’s awakening: he asked three times and was struck three times, then at Dayu’s place “had a great awakening at the words” and said, “So there isn’t much to Huangbo’s Buddhadharma after all.” Linji himself also says in his instructions to the assembly: “Later I met a great good friend, and only then was my eye of the Way clear” (500b19).
What it does not prove: The Record of Pilgrimages belongs to the encounter stories (T3), and is also found in fascicle 12 of the Jingde chuandeng lu; it serves only as biographical side evidence. It shows that Linji’s own transmitted image contains a clear turning point of “awakening”.
Version collation: The main text of fascicle 12 of the Chuandeng lu (1004) reads “師於是大悟云。佛法也無多子” (“thereupon the Master had a great awakening and said: there isn’t much to the Buddhadharma either”; T51, 290b01–02), without the four characters “元來黃檗” (“so … Huangbo’s … after all”); the separate recension of fascicle 12 appended in the Taishō edition reads “元來黃檗佛法無多子” (299b28–29), the same as the current text.
The Zutang ji records an entirely different encounter with Dayu (reading “於一棒下入佛境界”, “under a single blow he entered the realm of buddhas”; B25, 661b12). The encounter stories differ greatly between the texts; T3 is maintained.
Original excerpt: 誰知吾正法眼藏向這瞎驢邊滅却。Who would have known that my treasury of the true Dharma eye would be extinguished by this blind donkey!
Context passage: 師臨遷化時據坐云：「吾滅後不得滅却吾正法眼藏。」三聖出云：「爭敢滅却和尚正法眼藏？」師云：「已後有人問爾，向他道什麼？」三聖便喝。師云：「誰知吾正法眼藏向這瞎驢邊滅却。」言訖端然示寂。
What the passage does: The exchange at the end of his life: Sansheng answers with a shout, and Linji says that the “treasury of the true Dharma eye” will be extinguished by this blind donkey. Later readers mostly read this as ironic approval: the Dharma is not preserved as something that can be handed on.
What it does not prove: This passage is T3 (also found in fascicle 12 of the Jingde chuandeng lu); whether “extinguished” is ironic approval is a question of interpretation, and this archive uses it only to show that the “true Dharma eye” is not set up as something to be preserved.
Version collation: The death account in the main text of fascicle 12 of the Chuandeng lu (1004) has only the verse of Dharma transmission (“將示滅乃說傳法偈曰”, “when about to show extinction, he spoke a verse transmitting the Dharma”; T51, 291a16–17), without the exchange “正法眼藏向這瞎驢邊滅却”; that exchange appears in the separate recension of fascicle 12 appended in the Taishō edition (300b26–300c01) and in the Tiansheng guangdeng lu (X78, 690b02–03). The Zutang ji does not have it either. This card maintains T3, and its earliest reliable witness should be recorded as 1036.
Original excerpt: 六道神光。未曾間歇。若能如是。秖是箇一生無事人。The divine light of the six paths has never ceased. If one can be thus, one is simply a person with nothing to do all one’s life.
Summary of the context passage: Fascicle 98 begins with “Venerable Linji said”; it first says that all of you lack nothing and that the divine light of the six paths has never ceased, then says that only “if one can be thus” is one a person with nothing to do all one’s life;
next it says just do not seek outward, that the three kinds of light are the three bodies, the person listening to the Dharma right before you, and urges recognizing the person who plays with the light and shadow; then it cites the true person of no rank, the clear and solitary brightness, and “a single pure brightness divided into six harmonized combinations”; it closes with “心若不生，隨處解脫” (“if the mind does not arise, one is liberated everywhere”).
What the passage does: It confirms that the material to which E-10–E-13 belong already had a tradition of quotation before the Jingde chuandeng lu, but this witness may share a source with the later lamp records. Here the Zongjing lu explicitly sets “lacking nothing” side by side with “if one can be thus”; yet “if one can be thus” does not yet directly say “see it” (見得), so this sentence must not be mistakenly recorded as identical, character for character, with the current E-10. The closing “if the mind does not arise” runs in the same direction as the Zutang ji, and must be set side by side with the Jingde chuandeng lu’s “if the mind is not present” and the current text’s “since the one mind is nonexistent”.
What it does not prove: An early attestation cannot prove that the ninth-century Linji actually said these words verbatim; “if one can be thus” is not sufficient to prove independently that correct cognition is non-deletable, nor sufficient to prove that cognition has been deleted. It supports the circulation of early material and the two-way tension across versions; it cannot replace E-07’s conditional description of “true and correct insight — freedom”, nor does it exclude later editing.
Version collation: Content and order of the whole passage: how do all of you now differ from the ancient sages, what is lacking → the divine light of the six paths has never ceased, if one can be thus, a person with nothing to do all one’s life → if you wish not to differ from patriarchs and buddhas, just do not seek outward → the three kinds of light in a single thought-moment are the three bodies, are the person listening to the Dharma right before you today, these three are names and words, know clearly they are light and shadow → you must recognize the person who plays with the light and shadow, the original source of all buddhas →
the four elements, the six faculties and empty space do not understand how to listen to or expound the Dharma, clearly and solitarily bright, without any shape → within the field of the body of the five aggregates there is a true person of no rank, why do you not recognize it → the mind-dharma is formless, in the eye it is called seeing, in the ear hearing, originally a single pure brightness divided into six harmonized combinations, if the mind does not arise one is liberated everywhere. This order corresponds almost section by section to the middle part of the sermon in fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu, suggesting that the two may come from the same sermon text; but this passage lacks the opening “true and correct insight” (E-07) and “not meeting it at this time” (E-09) of the Chuandeng lu, and also lacks “the illness lies in not trusting oneself” (E-08). Yanshou is excerpting, and missing sentences cannot prove that the sermon text of the time lacked these words. For sentence-by-sentence variants between this passage and the other witnesses, see the verification notes on E-06, E-10, E-11, E-12 and E-13.
| Term | At least the layers that must be distinguished | Judgment that must not be overstepped |
|---|---|---|
| True person of no rank | The true person “within the field of the body of the five aggregates” in the early texts (E-04, E-05) / the one “upon the lump of red flesh”, going in and out through the gates of the face, in the current text (E-06) | The name is immediately knocked down as a “dried shit-stick / impure thing”; what is knocked away is the name, not the demand to “confirm it” |
| The person listening to the Dharma / the person of the Way who depends on nothing | Presently expounding and listening to the Dharma, extending to the six faculties and everyday action (E-12, E-13) / the mother of all buddhas, the original source of all buddhas (E-20) | Without form, mark, root or base (E-21) does not mean that functioning disappears; nor need all functioning be compressed into narrow cognition. |
| Term | At least the layers that must be distinguished | Judgment that must not be overstepped |
|---|---|---|
| True and correct insight | Not being deluded by others, trusting oneself, recognizing the person listening to the Dharma (E-07, E-20) | Not doctrinal knowledge; but it is the condition of freedom in birth and death, going and staying |
| Self-trust / not trusting enough | The source of the illness (E-08) / “if people do not trust it, a hundred years are labour in vain” (E-31) | Trust is a cognitive undertaking, not belief in some object |
| Nothing to do / ordinary | Not contriving, not seeking outward (E-14, E-17) | Originally endowed nothing-to-do and the requirement of insight for the student exist at the same time; it is not stipulated in advance that nothing-to-do is only a state that appears after insight. |
| Term | At least the layers that must be distinguished | Judgment that must not be overstepped |
|---|---|---|
| Ceasing | If you cease the mind that runs seeking, you do not differ from buddhas and patriarchs (E-08) / being able to cease is the bodhi tree (E-29) | Ceasing and not ceasing decide between bodhi and saṃsāra |
| A single pure brightness | The mind-dharma pervades the ten directions and divides into six harmonized combinations (E-13) | The early texts read “if the mind does not arise” and “if the mind is not present”; the current text reads “since the one mind is nonexistent” |
| The four alternatives / three statements, three mysteries, three essentials | Methods of guiding students (E-38, E-39) | Method is not ultimate structure |
Linji places the ground within the person listening to the Dharma right before you.
The text has three groups of direct statements:
Linji’s statements of the ground therefore include the formless mind-dharma, the activities of eye, ear, body and mouth, and present clear illumination, not only acts of knowledge in the narrow sense. E-12, E-13 and others support the presence of the ground, but cannot replace an independent proof that “correct seeing is the condition of ultimate completion”; the strongest inference to ② must arise from the whole record’s relations between birth and death, going and staying, trusting and not trusting, ceasing and not ceasing.
The differences of all that exists: the book says “circumstances differ in ten thousand ways, but the person does not differ; therefore it responds to things and manifests forms, like the moon in water” (E-22), and also that names such as the three realms are established by the illuminating one (E-28), and that all dharmas lack self-nature and the names too are empty (E-26). These sentences show a special relation between circumstances, naming and the present person, but “giving names” does not mean that the external world is manufactured by individual consciousness;
whether this amounts to an ontology in which the whole world is taken into the knower must still retain interpretive limits.
Deletion test: from the complete structure, delete the necessary function of “correct seeing / recognizing”, while retaining “no cultivation, no realization, originally nothing to do, no one who attains” and the original endowment of the ground. Check separately which layer breaks: the original texts’ descriptions of the ground, the self-sufficiency that needs no contrivance, the guidance of teaching, and the distinction between the student’s ultimate freedom and saṃsāra. A consequence sentence must not be taken as pure teaching because of its imperative tone, nor may the completion relation be declared cancelled because of a descriptive sentence form.
(1) The ground holds: the mind-dharma and “the divine light of the six paths” are originally present and do not begin with the student’s seeing (E-10, E-25, E-31). E-17 “in the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort”, E-18 “no cultivation, no realization;
no gain, no loss” and E-29 “bodhi has no dwelling place, therefore there is no one who attains” also do not become false when some one act of recognition is removed. The first layer of deletion passes, and these positive proofs in the ① direction are not described as existing only after awakening. (A: stated explicitly in the text; B: positioning across sentences)
(2) Path and student: E-17’s “no applied effort” negates making the Buddhadharma into an object that can be obtained by cultivation; E-18’s “the one who attains simply attains” negates producing something attained step by step, without cancelling the pragmatic use of “attaining”; E-29, in the same passage as “no one who attains”, still distinguishes “able to cease / unable to cease” and gives the latter the consequence of the six paths. What can be deleted here is outward seeking and possessive cultivation and realization; it is not appropriate, without argument, to delete every transformation of “recognizing / ceasing”. Whether all of this is teaching expedient must be examined together with the consequence sentences, not decided by grammatical form.
(3) Ultimate completion: the same chain of transmitted material in the earlier sermons repeatedly links “obtaining one’s own insight / not meeting / if one can see thus” (the original characters of fascicle 28 of the Chuandeng lu;
the Zongjing lu has “若能如是”, “if one can be thus”, and from the Tiansheng guangdeng lu onward “若能如是見得”, “if one can see it thus”) with “not stained by birth and death, free to go or stay / saṃsāra / a person with nothing to do all one’s life” (the early text recorded in E-05, E-07, E-09, E-10). This is one coherent relation of thought and cannot be added up as three independent historical sources. E-15, E-19 and E-34, in later-attested material, explain a similar completion respectively as obtaining the Dharma, being finally done, and turning the light around; they are not counted as three independent early proofs. Although all are set in sermons, the antecedent and consequent of the condition are themselves statements about freedom and saṃsāra, not merely commands to “please go and look”. The early quotation “若能如是” in fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu lacks the two characters “見得” (E-42); this is a key variant of the conditional sentence, and this early quotation cannot be treated as identical in wording with the current E-10.
Item-by-item counterfactuals for the strong proofs in the ① direction: E-17 “in the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort” can still hold as a characteristic of the Buddhadharma when there is no recognition; E-18 “no cultivation, no realization” still cancels external acquisition by cultivation when there is no recognition; E-29 “no one who attains” always excludes a subject who possesses bodhi. None of the three is withdrawn because recognition is absent — this is the part in which the ① direction passes. Conversely, E-29 itself divides the different consequences of being able to cease / unable to cease, and the early E-07 / E-09 connect seeing / not meeting with freedom and saṃsāra, so the complete relation of the student’s ultimate completion cannot yet be retained intact. Both sides belong to the original text, and neither may be silenced in favour of the other.
What has been withdrawn or de-substantialized: buddhas, patriarchs and the three bodies as independent entities (E-11, E-23, E-33);
the true person of no rank as a name that can be talked about (E-06); all practices of cultivation and realization (E-24); every support (E-27); the real existence of dharmas and names (E-26); the unmoving circumstance of sitting quietly and guarding the mind (E-30); his own teaching (E-18, E-36); “the root” as a place to dwell (E-16); the treasury of the true Dharma eye as something to be preserved (E-41, T3).
The last load-bearing point: not the words for nature and characteristics — “numinous awareness / pure brightness / solitary brightness” — themselves, nor the oft-repeated exhortations to look, but the conditional relation “seeing or not meeting — freedom or saṃsāra” in the present early material (B, synthetic inference). The ground, no applied effort and no one who attains are all originally endowed or can hold independently; yet in the record’s narrative the student’s ultimate freedom still has the boundary of recognizing / ceasing to run seeking. The competing reading at local C must be recorded faithfully and must not be flattened in the HTML.
Return: Linji’s return is expressed by “be master wherever you are, and wherever you stand is true” (E-17) and “entering all circumstances …
travelling through all places, through the lands, teaching sentient beings, without ever leaving a single thought-moment” (498b12–13), and is carried out in teaching through responsive guidance such as the stick and the shout and the four alternatives. The return does not change the load-bearing point above. (A)
Self-reflexivity: it holds, and is among the strongest seen in this archive. Linji subjects his own speech and teaching to the same principle: “whatever this mountain monk says is all a temporary medicine matched to an illness, and there is no real dharma at all” (E-18); “do not grasp what this mountain monk says … it has no ground to rely on” (E-36); the true person of no rank is knocked away as soon as it is named (E-06); at the end of his life he says the treasury of the true Dharma eye will be extinguished by the blind donkey (E-41, T3). (A)
Positive candidates for self-inclusion: E-32 explains the connection between sounds, names, words and phrases and the speech of body and mind;
E-35 states explicitly that “names and phrases” are established by the present “one who discerns, perceives, hears, knows and illuminates”, acknowledging that speech itself has a position within the functioning under discussion. This direction places names, phrases and circumstances within present discernment; it does not amount to placing “seeing / discerning” within a more fundamental whole of occurrence that would also permit deleting correct recognition; but neither does it prove that self-inclusion is entirely absent. The positive part of self-inclusion and the full self-inclusion required by ① must be evaluated separately; whether it is complete remains local C, and this C cannot be used to replace the proof of the completion chain.
The question: are “the divine light of the six paths has never ceased” (E-10), “clearly distinct, it has never lacked anything” (E-25), “no cultivation, no realization; no gain, no loss” (E-18), “bodhi has no dwelling place, therefore there is no one who attains” (E-29) and “attaining is not attaining” (E-34) enough to show that, for Linji, seeing is only a matter on the person’s side and does not belong to the final structure?
Why it looks like ①: E-17 directly stipulates that the Buddhadharma involves no applied effort, ordinary with nothing to do; E-18 says no passing through stretches of time, no cultivation, no realization, no gain or loss; E-29 also negates one who attains and possesses bodhi. These are positive statements at the structural level, not three euphemisms for a “post-awakening state”. Together with E-10 and E-25 “has never lacked anything” and E-31 “do not seek it and it is right before you”, they form a chain of ①-direction interpretation that must be taken seriously.
Why it is still ②:
Grades: A is that the texts directly say sentences such as “originally nothing to do / no cultivation, no realization / seeing — freedom, not meeting — saṃsāra”; B is the judgment, running through the whole, that correct seeing is non-deletable in the completion of the student’s freedom. The competing reading holds that these consequence sentences may also be only temporary remedies; local C must be retained rather than treated as a groundless D; but it cannot be mechanically inferred that the complete structure has no function of recognition merely because a passage addresses students or three sentences share a source.
Conditions for reopening: if more reliable early texts or a new critical edition show that the relation “seeing — freedom / not meeting — saṃsāra” was reconstructed later, or if it can be positively proved from the whole system of the record that recognition is not a necessary condition of the student’s ultimate completion, the strength of ② and the ①/② boundary should be re-evaluated.
Readings different from the current main category can stand as objects of discussion, but should provide the context of the whole passage and comparable textual grounds.
Placement: ② “Direct Seeing of the Ground” (B)
Why it is placed at ②: the whole sermon system on one hand stipulates that the present formless mind-dharma is originally endowed, with no cultivation and no attaining, and on the other repeatedly connects obtaining insight / not meeting with freedom / saṃsāra, and able to cease / unable to cease with bodhi / the six paths. This archive does not count lines from a common source as several independent witnesses, nor does it equate pure brightness and the six functions with a single act of cognition; B is the structural inference required to explain its complete ultimate completion, and remains challenged by source variants and by the responsive function of the teaching.
Why it cannot yet be placed at ①: ① must positively explain a more complete structure of the ground that includes cognition and one’s own speech, such that the complete ultimate account suffers no loss when correct recognition is deleted.
E-32 and E-35 are positive candidates for self-inclusion, and E-17, E-18 and E-29 are strong positive proofs of “no cultivation, no realization, no one who attains”; but at present the completion relation “seeing / not meeting — freedom / saṃsāra” still cannot be deleted without loss. The local C of self-inclusion is neither an independent proof that ① has failed nor substitute evidence that ② holds.
Why it is not ③: Linji is not asking whether the ground exists or how it is possible; he points directly to the ground (“just the one listening to the Dharma before you”) and demands recognizing it here and now. His extensive negation of doctrine, sūtras and treatises belongs to dismantling, not to questioning.
Relation to traditional classification: historically Linji belongs to the Chan tradition, and the later Linji school honours him as its founding patriarch. This sectarian affiliation serves only to explain the historical background and plays no part in the scoring or the classificatory proof of the six-position structure of thought.
Reply: Agreed that the ground and the layer of no applied effort do not wait for recognition, and they are not interpreted as existing only after awakening. But the same passage as E-17 says “only wisdom knows it”; E-18’s “the one who attains simply attains” does not cancel the “attaining” it teaches the student; the passage of E-29 has “able to cease / unable to cease — bodhi / the six paths”. Taken together with the consequences of freedom / saṃsāra in the earlier E-07, E-09 and E-10, the deletion test for complete ultimate completion cannot yet be passed. This is a B-grade synthetic inference; the competing reading is local C.
Reply: Accepted. This layer explains the original endowment of the mind-dharma and its broad functioning; whether correct seeing is necessary must be proved separately from the completion relation in E-07, E-09, E-10, E-15, E-19 and E-34. “Not clinging to it as a thing” does not automatically erase the function of seeing, and “solitary brightness” does not automatically prove that seeing is non-deletable.
but the passage where “no one who attains” occurs also speaks of the consequences of being able to cease / unable to cease, and the second half of the passage where “attaining is not attaining” occurs still has turning the light around and “is called obtaining the Dharma”. Ultimate completion may not mean manufacturing something attained, while still retaining different accounts of delusion and freedom.
Objection: The parallels in the earlier lamp records may come from the same material, and later sermons may contain editorial strengthening.
Reply: The documentary limits are accepted: E-07, E-09 and E-10 belong to one chain of early sermon material; the later-attested E-15, E-19 and E-34 are not independent testimony of the Tang author.
The present structural B does not rely on adding up occurrences, but on the relation “original endowment — seeking outward / not trusting — seeing / ceasing — freedom / saṃsāra” running through different places of discussion. Kinugawa’s study proposes that the wording may have undergone reconstruction in transmission; this affects how cautious B must be, and B cannot be stated as a verbatim confirmation of Linji himself.
Objection: “The true person of no rank”, “the person listening to the Dharma” and “the mother of all buddhas” sound like a permanent soul or divine self.
Reply: Linji says explicitly that it is “without form, without mark, without root, without base, without dwelling place” (E-21), and once the name is set up it is knocked down as a “dried shit-stick” (E-06); he also says “the physical body of the four elements is impermanent”, while the listener is “without a single shape” (E-12).
This archive does not judge it to be an entity; by the unified standard, de-substantialization ≠ deletion of function, and this does not affect the judgment of ②. (B)
Objection: E-32 and E-35 explicitly discuss one’s own language and naming, supporting self-inclusion.
Reply: Agreed that the two passages contain positive evidence of building-in; but explaining language within discerning, perceiving, hearing and knowing is still not enough to prove that seeing itself is in turn placed within a more basic final structure that remains complete when seeing is deleted. Whether self-inclusion is sufficient is local C; this cannot replace the deletion test at the completion layer, nor, because its direction differs, can it erase the existing meaning of building-in.
Linji’s extant record says both that the mind-dharma before one’s eyes and its functioning through the six faculties originally lack nothing and need no cultivation to bring about, and that “in the Buddhadharma there is no place to apply effort”, “no cultivation, no realization”, “bodhi has no dwelling place, therefore there is no one who attains”; these provide positive textual grounds for the ① direction independent of the teaching demands. At the same time, the conditional relation between “true and correct insight, not meeting, ceasing” and “freedom, saṃsāra, bodhi” makes it impossible to describe the student’s ultimate completion simply as lacking any function of recognition.
It is placed at ② “Direct Seeing of the Ground” (B); its strength comes from a structural inference over the complete record, not from three lines of common-source material miscounted as independent witnesses, nor from mechanically turning words of clear awareness into narrow cognition. The ①-direction “no cultivation, no realization / no one who attains”, the positive building-in of speech, and the competing reading that “responsive words may be mere expedients” still retain local C; if early texts or stronger structural evidence from the whole book show that the completion condition is late or only a teaching remedy, ② must be re-evaluated (C), and even the ①/② boundary.
The existing transmission materials are not yet sufficient to decide the source relations of all versions; this archive retains the documentary and interpretive limits stated above.
Version collation: the colophon at the end of Taishō T47 no.1985 reads “永享九年八月十五日板在法性寺東經所” (“blocks of the fifteenth day of the eighth month of Eikyō 9, kept at the Eastern Sūtra Hall of Hosshōji”; 506c28), i.e. the Japanese Hosshōji edition of Eikyō 9 (1437); the head of the volume also has Yuan prefaces of the second year of Yuanzhen, the second year of Dade, and so on. Ma Fang’s preface of Xuanhe gengzi (1120) records Zongyan’s reprint, but the direct base text of the Taishō transcription is this later Japanese edition.
Version collation: the main text of the Linji chapter in fascicle 12 of the Chuandeng lu is at T51, 290a18–291a17; the Taishō also appends after fascicle 12 a separate recension (299b12–300c04, annotated “cf. P. 290a”), whose wording is mostly close to the current Linji lu (e.g. “未證據者看看”, “元來黃檗佛法無多子” and the exchange at the end of his life), which the main text lacks. The main text of fascicle 12 and the appended recension must not be used interchangeably: wherever “fascicle 12 of the Chuandeng lu” is cited without further note, the main text is meant.
The sermon of fascicle 28 is at 446c09–447a10.
Note on version studies: Kinugawa Kenji, “The Formation of the Linji lu” (Foxue yanjiu 22, 2013, 69–79), discusses the relation between the excerpts in the Zutang ji, Zongjing lu and Jingde chuandeng lu and the base material of the Tiansheng guangdeng lu; this is a study of transmission genealogy and does not mean that this archive has verified the precise first appearance of all of E-14–E-38 in the Zongjing lu. “Rinzairoku tekusuto no keifu” (Memoirs of the Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia 162) discusses other systems of transmitted texts.
See https://dlbs.liberal.ntu.edu.tw/search/search_detail.jsp?seq=593335 and https://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/record/26877/files/ioc162006.pdf . The quoted originals have also been compared with the Linji excerpt preserved in fascicle 98 of the Zongjing lu (E-42), but no claim is made to have exhausted other possible quotations in its hundred fascicles; the current witness editions may still have undergone later revision.
Version collation: Zongjing lu: the passage beginning “臨濟和尚云” (“Venerable Linji said”) in fascicle 98 (T48 no.2016, 943c08–22), compiled by Yanshou in the second year of Jianlong (961); it is the extant early quotation of Linji material second only to the Zutang ji; a machine search of all hundred fascicles by continuous strings found no other quotation of Linji (paraphrased and rewritten quotations may have been missed).