Notes Beside the Bamboo Window — Second Collection, Part 3
Continuing the Second Collection (二筆) in the source text's own order. This section closes with a three-part meditation on famous rebirth legends — Su Dongpo, Qin Hui, and others said to be reincarnated monks — arguing that even a favorable rebirth is no substitute for rebirth in the Pure Land itself.
61. 辯融 — Master Bianrong
A memory of a visit to the elder monk Bianrong, whose teaching struck Zhuhong's younger companions as disappointingly plain — and Zhuhong's defense of exactly that plainness as the mark of real integrity.
予入京師,與同行二十餘輩,詣辯融師參禮請益。融教以無貪利、無求名、無攀援貴要之門,唯一心辦道。既出,數年少笑曰:「吾以為有異聞,惡用是寬泛語為!」予謂不然,此老可敬處正在此耳。渠縱吶言,豈不能掇拾先德問答機緣一二,以遮門蓋戶;而不爾者,其所言是其所實踐,舉自行以教人,正真實禪和,不可輕也。
When I entered the capital, I went together with more than twenty fellow travelers to pay respects to Master Bianrong and ask for instruction. Master Bianrong taught us: be without greed for profit, without seeking after fame, without currying favor at the gates of the powerful and eminent — attend single-mindedly to practicing the Way alone. Once we had left, several of the younger men laughed and said: "I thought he would have something extraordinary to teach us — why did he only offer such broad, ordinary words!" I did not agree. This is exactly what makes this elder worthy of respect. Had he wished, could he not easily have gathered up a phrase or two from the ancient masters' own recorded exchanges, simply to dress up his own front door? And yet he did not do this — because what he said was exactly what he himself had actually practiced, teaching others through his own conduct. This is a truly genuine Chan practitioner, not someone to be taken lightly.
Bianrong (真圓, style name Dafang) was a real Ming-dynasty monk who entered the capital four times over his life to teach; historical accounts record that he was once falsely imprisoned and abused by jailers demanding money he did not have, and won them over instead through his own conduct in captivity — a documented episode that gives real weight to Zhuhong's insistence here that Bianrong's plain teaching matched his plain practice.
62. 禪講律 — Chan, Doctrinal Study, and Vinaya
A firsthand observation that the historic "three schools" — distinguished once by separate monasteries and separate robe colors — have collapsed within Zhuhong's own lifetime into a single undifferentiated practice.
禪、講、律,古號三宗,學者所居之寺、所服之衣,亦各區別。如吾郡,則淨慈、虎跑、鐵佛等,禪寺也;三天竺、靈隱、普福等,講寺也;昭慶、靈芝、菩提、六通等,律寺也。衣則禪者褐色,講者藍色,律者黑色。予初出家,猶見三色衣,今則均成黑色矣;諸禪律寺均作講所矣。嗟乎!吾不知其所終矣!
Chan, doctrinal study, and vinaya were called the "three schools" in ancient times, and the monasteries their practitioners lived in, and the robes they wore, were each distinct. Take my own home region, for instance: Jingci, Hupao, and Tiefo are Chan monasteries; the Three Tianzhu temples, Lingyin, and Pufu are doctrinal-study monasteries; Zhaoqing, Lingzhi, Puti, and Liutong are vinaya monasteries. As for robes: Chan practitioners wear brown, doctrinal-study practitioners wear blue, and vinaya practitioners wear black. When I first left the household life, I could still see these three distinct robe colors — now they have all become simply black, and every Chan and vinaya monastery alike has turned into a place for lecturing on doctrine. Alas! I do not know where this will finally end!
All eleven named monasteries were real, working institutions in Zhuhong's own Hangzhou — the entry reads as direct, firsthand testimony to institutional change he witnessed within his own lifetime, not received history; his closing sigh ("I do not know where this will finally end") is unusually undefended for this collection, offering no argument or consolation, only plain regret.
63. 古玩入吾手 — An Antique Falls into My Own Hands
The satisfaction of finally acquiring a long-coveted antique becomes an image for the far greater, and already-possessed, treasure of one's own buddha-nature.
今人於一彝一罌、一書一畫,其遠在上古者,出自名家者,平生歆慕而不能致者,一旦得之,則大喜過望,忻然慰曰:「此某某所遞互珍藏者,今幸入吾手矣!」曾不思曠劫以來無酬價之至寶,何時入吾手也?況世玩在外,求未必獲;至寶在我,求則得之,亦弗思而已矣!
People today, when they finally acquire some ancient bronze vessel or ceramic jar, some painting or piece of calligraphy — something from remote antiquity, or from a famous master's own hand, something they have longed for their whole lives without ever being able to obtain — feel overjoyed beyond all expectation, and say to themselves with real satisfaction: "This is something that generation after generation has treasured and handed down — and now, by good fortune, it has finally fallen into my own hands!" They never once stop to consider: there exists a priceless treasure beyond all price, present since beginningless kalpas — when will that treasure finally fall into my own hands? And besides, worldly curiosities lie outside oneself, and seeking them does not guarantee obtaining them; while this priceless treasure lies within — seek it, and it is obtained. People simply fail to reflect on this, that is all.
An unusually compact entry, built entirely on a single symmetry: the collector's excitement at recovering something "handed down generation after generation" (遞互珍藏) is structurally identical to — and infinitely smaller than — recognizing a treasure one has, in fact, never been without.
64. 悟道難,為善易 — Awakening to the Way Is Difficult; Doing Good Is Easy
A short embedded note distinguishing genuinely difficult attainments — full awakening, settled meditative concentration — from the comparatively easy discipline of simply avoiding evil, which people nonetheless still fail at.
當此五濁末世,兼以多生積習,而欲斷無明惑,悟自本心,則千萬人中希得一二,亦無足怪。至於不為惡而為善,此亦易事,而甘為不善,吾不知其何心?又復身口意三,欲令攝意不動,而出入無時,起滅無形,定力之難成,亦無足怪。至於制身不為惡事,制口不發惡言,此亦易事,而甘為身口之惡,吾不知其何心?
In this age of the five turbidities and the Final Dharma, compounded further by habits accumulated across many past lives, wishing to cut off ignorance and delusion and awaken to one's own original mind — among a thousand or ten thousand people, scarcely one or two ever succeed, and this is no cause for surprise. But refraining from evil and doing good instead — this, by contrast, is an easy matter, and yet there are those who willingly choose evil regardless. I do not know what could possibly be in their minds.
And again: body, speech, and mind — everyone wishes to gather the mind so that it no longer moves, and yet thoughts arise and depart at no fixed hour, appearing and vanishing without any visible form, so that concentration is difficult to accomplish — and this, too, is no cause for surprise. But restraining the body from evil deeds, restraining the mouth from evil speech — this, by contrast, is an easy matter, and yet there are those who willingly choose evil of body and speech regardless. I do not know what could possibly be in their minds.
The "five turbidities" (五濁) — turbidity of lifespan, of sentient beings, of afflictions, of views, and of the kalpa itself — are a standard Mahāyāna description of a degenerate age, already invoked elsewhere in this collection's repeated arguments about the rarity of genuine practitioners (compare entries 38–39 above); the entry's twin refrain, "I do not know what could possibly be in their minds," directly echoes the closing line of entry 39's monks'-hall discussion in tone if not in wording.
65. 重許可 — Weighing Approval Seriously
A survey of famous, centuries-old titles of praise for great Chinese Buddhist teachers, contrasted with the hollow flattery of Zhuhong's own day.
古人不輕許可,必研真覈實而後措之乎辭。如贊圓覺疏者曰:「其四依之一乎?或淨土之親聞乎?何盡其義味如此也。」乃至贊遠公者曰「東方護法菩薩」,贊南泉、趙州者曰「古佛」,贊仰山者曰「小釋迦」,贊清涼者曰「文殊後身」,千載而下,無議之者,何也?真實語也;非今人諂壽諛墓、賀遷秩,壯行色之套子話也。夫著之簡編,勒之金石,將俾信當時而傳後世,而虛譽浪褒,齊佛齊祖,噫!慧日雖自難瞞,蒙學未必無誤矣!
The ancients did not lightly grant their approval — they always investigated the truth and verified the facts before ever putting it into words. Consider the praise given to the commentary on the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment: "Is this not one of the Four Reliances? Or has its author personally heard the teaching from the Pure Land itself? How else could he exhaust its meaning so completely?" Or consider the praise for Master Hui Yuan, called "the Bodhisattva Guardian of the Dharma from the East"; for Nanquan and Zhaozhou, called "living buddhas"; for Yangshan, called "the little Śākyamuni"; for Qingliang, called "the reincarnation of Mañjuśrī" — a thousand years later, no one has ever disputed any of these titles. Why? Because these were true words — nothing like the flattering, formulaic phrases people today use in birthday odes, grave inscriptions, and congratulations on a promotion, meant only to dress up the occasion.
To set such praise down in books, to carve it into bronze and stone, is meant to command belief at the time and to be handed down to later generations. But empty, careless praise — placing someone on the same level as the buddhas and patriarchs themselves — ah! Though this can hardly deceive one of truly great wisdom, it may well mislead a student whose own understanding is not yet awakened!
Every title cited here is independently documented: the "Four Reliances" praise for Guifeng Zongmi's commentary comes from Pei Xiu's own preface to it; Kumārajīva himself addressed Hui Yuan as "Guardian of the Dharma from the East" in a surviving letter; Nanquan, Zhaozhou, Yangshan, and Qingliang Chengguan's own epithets are all recorded in standard biographical sources — Zhuhong's point rests on the fact that each of these could be checked, and had been, for a thousand years before he wrote.
66. 放生池 — The Life-Release Pond
A reasoned defense of confining released fish to a dedicated pond rather than a lake or river, weighing safety against apparent freedom through several paired comparisons.
予作放生池,疑者謂魚局於池,攢聚紆鬱,而無活潑之趣,不若放之湖中,或護持官河一段,禁弗使漁,亦不放之放也。予謂此說亦佳,但池之與湖、與河,較其利害,亦略相當。池雖隘,網罟不入;湖雖寬,晝夜採捕。陋巷貧而樂,金谷富而憂,故利害均也。又官河之禁約有限,而諸魚之出入無恆,有從外入限中,有從中出限外者,出限則危矣,不若池居之永不出限也,故利害均也。又疑無活潑之趣,則有一喻:坐關僧住一室中,循環經行,隨意百千里而不窮,徜徉自得,安在其不活潑也?復有一喻:今幸處平世,城中之民,以城門之啟閉為礙;一旦寇兵壓境,有城者安乎?無城者安乎?漁喻寇,池喻城,人以城為衛,何局也?魚可知矣!
I built a life-release pond, and some who doubted the wisdom of it said: "Confining fish to a pond, crowded together in its narrow, winding corners, they lose all sense of natural vitality — better to release them into the lake instead, or to protect a stretch of the public canal and forbid fishing there, which amounts to release without literal releasing." I would say this suggestion has its own merit too, but weighing the pond against the lake or the canal, the advantages and disadvantages of each turn out to be roughly equal. The pond may be cramped, but no net ever enters it; the lake may be spacious, but it is fished day and night without pause. It is like the poor man living happily in a shabby lane, and the wealthy man living anxiously in his own lavish garden — so, too, the advantages and disadvantages here balance out. And the canal's protected zone has fixed limits, while fish come and go without any fixed pattern — some enter the protected zone from outside it, others leave the protected zone for waters beyond — and once outside it, danger awaits; better, then, to dwell permanently within the pond, which they never leave at all — so again, the advantages and disadvantages balance out.
And as for the worry that the pond lacks natural vitality — consider this comparison: a monk in solitary retreat, dwelling in a single room, paces back and forth within it, and yet may travel, in his own mind, a hundred or a thousand miles without exhausting the path, wandering there at ease and finding his own contentment — where, in that, is there any lack of vitality? Consider one more comparison: we are fortunate enough now to live in a time of peace, and the people within a walled city find the opening and closing of its gates an inconvenience — but should an invading army ever bear down upon that same city, would those within its walls be safe, or those without? The fisherman is like the invading army; the pond is like the city wall. People rely on the city wall for their own protection — how is that a limitation? The fish, I think, understand this exactly the same way.
This is a first-person account of an actual decision Zhuhong made in running his own monastery, structurally similar to his defense of a small monks' hall (entry 38 above) — in both cases he anticipates an obvious objection (too small, too confining) and answers it point by point with paired real-world comparisons, rather than simply asserting his own preference.
67. 崔慎求子 — Cui Shen Seeks a Son
A cautionary tale about a Tang chancellor advised to lure a monk toward rebirth in his own household — condemned by Zhuhong as a trap set against the very purpose of monastic life.
昔崔慎無子,有僧教以盛飾內人,入寺設齋,伺歡喜迎納者,虔奉而厚供之,冀托胎其家。夫出家者,將超三界,成道度生,而乃為此籠檻以鉤致之;致彼無心出世者猶可,儻墮落一真實道人,其害可勝言哉?慎與僧俱得罪,而僧為甚。苦哉僧乎!胡不以求子之正道語人乎?
Long ago, Cui Shen had no son, and a certain monk taught him to dress his wife in her finest clothes and send her into a temple to offer a vegetarian feast, watching for whichever monk received it most joyfully, and then to reverently and lavishly support that monk, in the hope that he might be reborn into their own household. But one who has left the household life is meant to transcend the three realms entirely, accomplish the Way, and deliver sentient beings — and instead this scheme sets a cage and a trap to lure him back down! If the monk so lured had no genuine intention of transcending the world in the first place, that would be one thing — but should a truly genuine practitioner of the Way fall into this trap, how could the harm ever be fully expressed? Both Cui Shen and the monk who advised him incurred real fault by this, and the monk's fault is the greater of the two. What suffering that monk brought on himself! Why did he not simply teach the proper way of seeking a son instead?
Cui Shen (Cui Shenyou) was a genuine Tang chancellor under Emperor Xuanzong; the episode is recorded in several Tang-era miscellanies, which add that the elderly monk who was eventually "won over" by the couple's devoted offerings did in fact die shortly before their son's birth — the son grew up to become Cui Yin, himself chancellor four times over, a detail the historical record treats as confirming the scheme's apparent success, which makes Zhuhong's refusal to treat it as anything but a moral catastrophe a deliberate act of reading against the source.
68. 無子不足憂 — Having No Son Is Not Worth Grieving Over
A careful reading of the Confucian maxim on filial duty and childlessness, distinguishing genuine fault from simple misfortune, and naming the real causes of childlessness worth worrying about.
世人以無子為憂,而富貴者憂彌甚。或曰:「不孝莫大於無後,得無憂乎?」予曰然,古人語意自明,蓋謂不娶而無子者,非謂娶而無子者也。娶而無子,奚罪焉?且帝王統馭億兆,非無力置姬妾也,非無方士奇人進藥石也,而有終絕儲嗣者,命也,故不足憂也。乃若所憂則有之:多行不義,奪人之有,絕人之後,離人之骨肉,陵虐他人子女為己之婢僕者,種種陰險慘毒,皆無子因也,是則可憂也。不作是因而無子者,命也,非我之咎,故不足憂也。
Ordinary people grieve over having no son, and the wealthy and eminent grieve over it even more. Someone might say: "Of all forms of unfilial conduct, none is greater than leaving no descendants — how can this not be cause for grief?" I would say: quite right, but the ancients' own words are already clear enough on this point — they meant one who never marries and so has no son, not one who marries and still has no son. What fault could there possibly be in marrying and still having no son? Even an emperor, ruling over countless millions of subjects, certainly has no lack of means to take on concubines, nor any lack of alchemists and men of unusual skill offering him medicines — and yet there have still been emperors whose line of succession ended entirely. This is simply fate, and not worth grieving over.
What is genuinely worth grieving over is something else entirely: habitually acting unjustly, seizing what belongs to others, cutting off another family's line, tearing apart another family's flesh and blood, treating another person's children as one's own servants and abusing them — every kind of hidden cruelty of this sort is a real cause of having no son, and this is what deserves real grief. But whoever has done none of these things, and still has no son, has simply met with fate — it is no fault of his own, and so it is not worth grieving over.
The maxim Zhuhong is glossing — "of the three unfilial acts, having no descendants is the greatest" — comes from Mencius (4A.26); his reading, restricting the charge of fault to a man who never marries at all, is a deliberately narrow construction of a famously severe line, made specifically to relieve involuntary childlessness of the moral weight popular usage had piled onto it.
69. 後身一 — Later Rebirths, First Note
The first of three linked entries surveying famous legends of monks reborn as laypeople — some as celebrated statesmen, one, most darkly, as the reviled chancellor Qin Hui — arguing that even a favorable rebirth is a net loss next to rebirth in the Pure Land.
讚西方者記,戒禪師後身為蘇子瞻,青草堂後身為曾魯公,遜長老後身為李侍郎,南庵主後身為陳忠肅,知藏某後身為張文定,嚴首座後身為王龜齡。其次,則乘禪師為韓氏子,敬寺僧為岐王子。又其次,善旻為董司戶女,海印為朱防禦女。又甚而鴈蕩僧為秦氏子檜,居權要,造諸惡業。此數公者,向使精求淨土,則焉有此?愚謂大願大力,如靈樹生生為僧,而雲門三作國王,遂失神通。百世而下,如雲門者能幾?況靈樹乎?為常人,為女人,為惡人,則展轉下劣矣。即為諸名臣,亦非計之得也。甚哉!西方之不可不生也。
Those who praise the western Pure Land record the following: that Master Jie was reborn as Su Zizhan; that Elder Qingcaotang was reborn as Lord Zeng Lugong; that Elder Xun was reborn as a certain Vice Minister Li; that the Abbot of Nan'an was reborn as Chen Zhongsu; that a certain sutra-librarian monk was reborn as Zhang Wending; that Head Seat Yan was reborn as Wang Guiling. Next in rank down: Master Cheng was reborn as a son of the Han family; a monk of Jingsi Temple was reborn as a son of the Prince of Qi. Further down still: Shanmin was reborn as the daughter of Registrar Dong; Haiyin was reborn as the daughter of Defender Zhu. And further down even than that: a monk of Yandang Mountain was reborn as none other than Qin Hui himself, who rose to wield great power and committed every kind of evil.
Had any of these men, in their former lives, applied themselves single-mindedly to seeking rebirth in the Pure Land, how could any of this have happened to them? I would say: only one of truly great vow and great power — like Master Lingshu, reborn again and again as a monk — can escape this downward drift; while Yunmen, though he became a king three times over, lost his spiritual powers each time as a result. Across a hundred generations, how many could ever match even Yunmen — let alone Lingshu? To be reborn as an ordinary person, as a woman, as an evil person — each is progressively worse than the last. Even to be reborn as some famous minister of state is no good outcome at all. How urgent it truly is — one must be reborn in the Western Pure Land!
Every case Zhuhong lists here was, by his own day, a well-established literary tradition rather than his own invention — Su Dongpo's own family reportedly connected his birth to a dream of a one-eyed monk, and the Song poet himself, on visiting a temple as an adult, recalled childhood dreams of an earlier life as an itinerant monk in Shaanxi; Qin Hui, the notorious chancellor blamed for engineering the judicial murder of the general Yue Fei, appears at the list's very bottom as its starkest cautionary case — a monk's decades of meditative discipline apparently squandered by rebirth into worldly power. The "Yunmen" case that follows draws on a separate and famous gōng'àn (recorded in the Blue Cliff Record) about a master who kept his spiritual powers across many lives as a monk, but lost them each of the three times he was instead reborn as a king.
70. 後身二 — Later Rebirths, Second Note
An imagined objection — if even a favorable rebirth degrades one's spiritual attainment, why practice at all? — answered by distinguishing "the power of merit" from "the power of the Way," and arguing only the second survives rebirth safely.
或謂:「諸師後身之為名臣,猶醍醐反而為酥也,猶可也;為常人則酪矣,為女人則乳矣,乃至為惡人則毒藥矣!平生所修,果不足憑仗乎?則何貴於修乎?」是大有說。凡修行人二力:一曰福力,堅持戒行,而作種種有為功德者是也;二曰道力,堅持正觀,而念念在般若中者是也。純乎道力如靈樹者,置弗論;道力勝福力,則處富貴而不迷;福力勝道力,則迷於富貴,固未可保也,於中貪欲重而為女人,貪瞋俱重而為惡人,則但修福力而道力轉輕之故也。為僧者,究心於道力,宜何如也?雖然,儻勤修道力,而更助之以願力,得從於諸上善人之後,豈惟惡人,將名臣亦所不為矣。甚哉!西方之不可不生也。
Someone might say: "For these masters to be reborn as famous ministers is rather like ghee turning back into butter — that, I suppose, one could still accept; but to be reborn as an ordinary person is like ghee turning into curdled milk, and to be reborn as a woman is like ghee turning into mere milk, and to be reborn as an evil person is like ghee turning into poison! Does all their lifetime of cultivation, then, count for nothing at all as a basis to rely on in the next life? What, then, is the value of practicing at all?" This calls for real explanation.
Practitioners possess two kinds of power: the first is the power of merit — steadfastly upholding the precepts and performing every kind of conditioned, virtuous deed; the second is the power of the Way — steadfastly maintaining right contemplation, with every thought abiding within prajñā-wisdom. Setting aside those whose power of the Way is entirely pure, like Master Lingshu — if the power of the Way exceeds the power of merit, then even dwelling amid wealth and rank in the next life, one will not be led astray by it; but if the power of merit exceeds the power of the Way, one is certain to be led astray by wealth and rank in the next life, and may not even keep hold of that wealth for long. Among such people, those whose craving runs deep are reborn as women; those whose craving and anger both run deep are reborn as evil people — all because they cultivated merit alone, while the power of the Way grew correspondingly thin.
For a monk, ought not the true focus of effort be exactly the power of the Way? And yet, if one diligently cultivates the power of the Way, and further supports it with the power of vow — aspiring to rebirth in the Pure Land — then one may follow after all the assembly of superior good people there; far from ever falling into the ranks of evil people, one would not even wish to become a famous minister of state! How urgent it truly is — one must be reborn in the Western Pure Land!
The five-grade hierarchy of dairy products — milk, curdled milk, fresh butter, refined butter, and ghee — is a standard image from the Nirvana Sutra for the increasing depth of the Buddha's teaching, borrowed here for a very different purpose: ranking rebirths by desirability rather than doctrines by profundity. Zhuhong's own qualification — a woman's rebirth results from deep craving, an evil person's from craving compounded with anger — reflects period-typical Buddhist psychology rather than a claim about women's spiritual capacity as such; the entry's actual argument is that karmic power, not gender or status, is the operative variable throughout.
71. 後身三 — Later Rebirths, Third Note
A general's boast about becoming King Yama in the afterlife, and a monk's narrow escape from the same fate, illustrated why even a favorable position within the six realms remains a poor prize compared to rebirth in the Pure Land.
韓擒虎云:「生為上柱國,死作閻羅王,榮之也。」不知閻王雖受王樂,而亦二時受苦;蓋罪福相兼者居之,非美事也。古有一僧,見鬼使至,問之,則曰迎取作閻王。僧懼,乃勵精正念,使遂不至。昔人謂:「行僧不明心地,多作水陸靈祇。」雖未必盡然,容有是理。下生猶勝天宮,天且弗為,況鬼神乎?甚哉!西方之不可不生也。
Han Qinhu once said: "To have lived as Grand Commandant, and to die and become King Yama, is glory indeed." What he did not realize is that although King Yama enjoys the pleasures proper to a king, he must still, morning and evening, endure suffering as well — for this is a post held only by one whose karma mixes both merit and offense together, hardly a truly desirable thing at all.
There was once a monk who, seeing the messengers of the underworld arrive, asked them their purpose, and they told him: "We have come to escort you to take up the post of King Yama." The monk was afraid, and roused himself to hold fast to right mindfulness with all his strength — and the messengers came for him no more.
A person of old once said: "A wandering monk who has not yet illuminated his own mind-ground often ends up, in his next life, as some minor local spirit presiding over rivers and mountains." This may not always be so, but there is real reason behind it. Even the lowest of the nine grades of rebirth in the Pure Land still surpasses a heavenly palace — we ought not even wish to become gods, let alone spirits and ghosts! How urgent it truly is — one must be reborn in the Western Pure Land!
Han Qinhu was a real Sui-dynasty general credited with capturing the last emperor of the Chen and completing Sui's reunification of China; the Book of Sui itself records the strange circumstances of his final illness — visions of a spectral honor guard and a dying stranger demanding to see "King Yama" — which Han is said to have met by declaring, essentially, that a general's death fit for a Grand Commandant becoming an underworld king. Zhuhong's essay reads Han's own proud deathbed line back against him: the very story meant to honor Han's memory is, on Zhuhong's account, a warning about mistaking a mixed, still-samsaric reward for a genuine liberation.