but a task which  cannot  be glossed  over or neglected.  The
relatively  short Diamond Suutra, for example, expands on the
five  skandhas, 12 aayatanas  and  18 dhaatus  but, alas, few
scholars  take heart  in them, ignoring  or glossing  over
their  discussion  as being  inconsequential.  We must remind
ourselves that the 6th patriach, Hui-neng, was enlightened by
reading this Sutra. Even the formidable La^nkaavataara Suutra
and  the  Madhyamaka  'Saastra  of  Naagaarjuna  treat  these
psychological  foundations  of  man, reminding  us  of  their
import and continuous presence in Buddhism.  But what has all
this  to do with  our  quest  for  experiential  reality? The
answer is, very much!
　　 The purpose of demonstrating the psychological phenomena,
in  a  word, is  to  counter-demonstrate  that  something  is
lacking, something  is  peculiar  or irregular  in the  whole
affair, that a cul-de-sac  will be reached if people go on as
they  do.  When  the irregularity  is sensed, for example, it
will show that there  is more than the psychological  factors
involved  in ordinary  experience, although  this  is not  so
obvious  at the beginning, due  to our overdependence  on the
conventionally　　 empirical   orientation   taken   for   our
perceptions.  The effect  of counter-demonstration  will show
up  ?lements  of being  that  only hamper, restrict, and defile
the experiential  process (such as, the rise of and adherence
to certain biases which block the development of a truly free
and easy  nature  of the  being  in question).  Such  a being
becomes  a proper candidate  for the realization  of the real
nature  of things  (tattvam, yathaabhuutam, literally, "truth
of existence," "thatness of being..).  These conceptions are,
to be sure, quite esoteric  to the non-Buddhist, but Buddhism
is here, once again, exploring yet another rendition of "some
eternal greatness incarnate in the passage of temporal fact."
But Buddhism,this  time, goes  further  with  its  own unique
doctrine  for that "passage of temporal  fact," the so-called
dependent   or   relational   origination　　 (yuan-ch'i(h)  ,
pratiitya-samutpaada.
　　 I have written elsewhere(12) that the doctrine of relational
origination   issues  forth  in  two  strains,  one  with  an
empirical nature and the other

P.58　　

without.  In the former, the empirical, ordinary conventional
language  and conceptualization  function as usual and we are
at home with them except that, unfortunately, they are in the
realm of the unenlightened  because of the insatiable, though
unconscious, grasping  of and adherence  to the  elements  of
being  (an  activity   which  I  have  referred   to  as  the
ontological imperative).  In the latter,that without epirical
nature, there  is  no  action  prompted  by  the  ontological
imperative   and  thus  no  empirical  elements  at  play  to
implicate a vision of reality based on those element.  Again,
the former or empirical realm is referred to by the Buddhists
as belonging  to the sammsaaric  realm, whereas  the latter or
non-empirical, is nirvaannic. Now, the Zennist knows all about
this dual nature in the experiential process, but he is still
in a bind in that he does  not know how to extricate  himself
from  it.  He  has  been  told, ad  nauseam, of  the  dictum:
"Everyday-mindedness is the Way" (attributed to Pai-chang and
also to Matsu), but there is something paradoxical  about it.
That is, participation in everyday activities comes naturally
for all of us, fast and easy, and yet there  is no end to the
so-called self-feeding discriminative  process, the perpetual
turning  of  the  sammsaaric  wheel  due  to  the  ontological
imperative. How can the Zennist solve the paradox?
　　 The Zennist must, first of all, acknowledge the fact that
the  experiential   process   in  the  nature  of  relational
origination is all that he has got and that he must seriously