consciousnesses aided by emptiness ('suunyataa) to block any
entrance  or acceptance  of those  unrealities.  This is why,
rather  than  mere correction  of conceptualization, the very
foundation of conceptualization  is turned upside down, so to
speak, to make one realize  the pure realm.  This process  is
known  as  the  ultimate  turning  over  (paraav.rtti) of the
turbulence  (prav.rtti) ;  the  result  of  turning  over  is
referred　　 to   as   consciousness-only　　 (wei   shih(P)  ,
vij~naptimaatra),  which  is  another  way  of  describing
perception  under  the aegis  of emptiness.  This is then the
basis upon which the Zennist will speak of the mind-only (wei
hsin(q),  citta-maatra) doctrine.  As  we  can  now  see, the
consciousness-only   or  mind-only  doctrine  lodges  in  the
natural  everyday  function  of  our  senses,  including  the
mind,but the whole experiential  process has been cleansed by
meditative discipline (yogaacaara).
　　 In this connection, it ought to be mentioned  that it was
Naagaarjuna  who  best  captured  the Buddh's  spirit  of the
existential  parity of samsaara  and nirvaanna  which gave the
Mahaayaana   tradition  the  necessary  ingredient   for  its
eventual　　 development　　 and　　 spread,　　 although　　 the
Praj~naapaaramitaa  literature that preceded Naagaarjuna  who
first  laid  the  foundation  of the  parity  concept  in his
formulation  of the Four-fold  Noble Truth which starts  with
suffering  (duhkha) and ends  with non-suffering  within  the
selfsame  ground  of existence.  Put  in a more  metaphorical
sense, the realization  of the rise  of suffering, its cause,
is at once  the  realization  of the  roots  of its  ultimate
cessation.  All  other  elements  or conceptions  toward  the
enlightened  realm  are nothing  but footnotes  to this great
insight  of the  total  parity  of existence.  Based  on this
insight,  where  nothing  extraneous  exists, I  have  always
referred to Buddhism as the most thorought going naturalistic
system.   Zen   or  the  Zennist   surely   exemplifies   the
crystallized version of this naturalism.
　　 In  sum, then, Naagaarjuna's  genius  permitts  us to see
clearly  that, shorn  of fragmentation  by the imposition  of
substantive  natures  or elements  (savbhaava),  the realm of
reality is before our very eyes! The relational origination
is always  the ground  of suffering  as well  as the selfsame
ground of non-suffering  or liberation, the connection of the
two can  only  be 'experienced'  by the  introduction  of the
concept of emptiness to hold

P.61

all  elements  in check  and simultaneously  permit  the  new
ground  to rear  itself.  If  emptiness  is  to  exhibit  the
dependent  nature  or mutual  reference  of elements  at play
(praj~napti  upaadaaya), then  it  is  also  the  concept  to
exhibit  the limits  of this dependency  or mutuality.  Being
ever  faithful  to the teachings  of the  Buddha, Naagaarjuna
concludes  that  relational  origination, as seen  under  the
aegis of emptiness, is also the middle  way.(15) We have thus
made a full  circle, as Naagaarjuna  has succinctly  stated-
but, ironically, the circle  of existence, i.e., roots of the
mannddala, has been  present  all along.  The middle  way which
avoids the extremes must be nascently present in our everyday
ways (activities) of existence;  to say otherwise  would  not
only complicate matters abstractly  but would introduce alien
elements into our very existence.
　　 Buddhist  reality,  then,  functions  in  a  total  sense
regardless  of the sammsaaric or nirvaannic realm.  It can only
be  realized   by  a  highly   disciplined   training   which