However, inherent  in  this  negation  is  a new

　　   differentiation,　　 an　　 ultimately　　 misguided

　　   polarization  between  differentiation  and lack  of

　　   differentiation. This is a

　　   ────────────

　　   (47) Abe, pp.6-7.

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.374

　　   crucial  and  necessary   transitional   phase  that

　　   represents  a two-edged Zen sword that may both kill

　　   and save.  On the one hand, it represents a solution

　　   to the fundamental  problematic of stage one, rooted

　　   in existential awareness, by uprooting the ego-self.

　　   The result  of this  obliteration  is detachment, an

　　   ebbing  of anxiety, and  tranquility.  On the  other

　　   hand it contains an implicit  danger of fixation  on

　　   no-self.  Paralleling  Pai chang's  warning  against

　　   " meditation  sickness, " it   includes   the   risk

　　   factor of  wallowing  in  non-attachment, leading to

　　   indifference  and lack  of compassion  as negativity

　　   predominates.  Latent  within  it Abe  identifies  a

　　   "hidden form of anxiety".

　　　　  Thus, it  also  represents  an obstacle  on  the

　　   enlightenment path, but a much more subtle obstacle,

　　   hiding is liabilities  by its transparency.  That is

　　   to say, unlike  the  opaque  wall  presented  by the

　　   ego-self  that must be broken through  in going from

　　   the first to the second stage, this wall deludes  us

　　   into   thinking   we  already   have  achieved   our

　　   objective, for we are allowed  to glimpse  the goal.

　　   The  danger   is  that   we  will   mistake   seeing

　　   enlightenment   for  being   enlightened,  just   as

　　   Hsiang-yen  mistakingly   assumed  his  poverty  was

　　   "real"  poverty,  unlike  his  original  error.  The

　　   common flaw in both the first and second stages is a

　　   lingering  objectification-first   in  terms  of  an

　　   ego-self and then as its denial, a no-self. Even the

　　   no-self　　 is　　 ascribed　　 the　　 properties　　 of

　　   unattainability  or emptiness  that  perpetuate  the

　　   myth   of   thing-ness.   Furthermore,  this   thing

　　   continues  to  be  perceived  as needing  to acquire

　　   enlightenment, creating  a gulf between  that  which

　　   experiences  realization  and  that  which  is to be