parity  in subtle  ways, where non-being  is in the realm  of
heaven  and earth, and being  in the realm of all things.  In
sum, both being  and non-being  are the cosmological  twins -
always co-existent and co-functioning.
　　 Our discussion  of certain  common grounds  of discourse
has also

P.63

touched  on  certain  uncommon  grounds, but  the  parity  of
existence  demands the common and uncommon grounds be treated
within  the selfsame  reality  in the quest  for the  dynamic
truth  of  existence.   Metaphysically   and  cosmologically,
similiar grounds are covered in both systems and they seem to
collapse   at  some  points;   however,  real   and  alledged
identities must be sifted and never pushed too far. It was no
accident,  historically,  that  those  Chinese  who  took  up
Buddhism  seriously, like Hui-yuan and Seng-chao, were former
Taoists.  It is impossible to find out how much of Taoism was
abandoned  and how much  of Buddhism  was incorporated  in to
their final philosophies. It is enough for all of us today to
embark on the road in search of "the true man of no-rank."

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO

　　　　　　　　 NOTES

1.  It is easy to speak in terms  of the form and content  of
　　 experience, but we must not lose  sight  of the fact that
　　 these are merely abstract  terms.  They describe  certain
　　 aspects of experience  but never experience-as-such, with
　　 which both Zen and Taoism  are profoundly  concerned.  As
　　 'subsequent discussion will attempt to show, both systems
　　 are  interested  in the  grasp  of the  true  reality  of
　　 experience and not its peripheral indirect elements which
　　 are only beclouding and disparaging.
2.  William Barrett, ed., Zen Buddhism: Selected Writings of
　　 D.T. Suzuki. New York: Doubleday& Company, Inc., 1956. pp.
　　 103-108.
3.  Ibid.
4.  Alfred North Whitehead, Adventures  of Ideas.  New York:
　　 MacMillan Company, 1933. p.41.
5.  Ludwig   Wittgenstein,  Tractatus   Logico-Philosophicus.
　　 London: Routledge  & Kegan  Paul  Ltd., 1949.  He saw the
　　 mission of philosophy  to be analysis  of thought and not
　　 about reality as such. The real world, so-called, is left
　　 to the sciences.
6.  Burton Watson, tr., The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. New
　　 York: Columbia University Press, 1968. p. 49.

P64

7.  Ibid.;p.330.
8.  Wing-tsit Chan, tr. & compiled, A Source Book in Chinese
　　 Philosophy, Princton: Princeton University  Press, 1963.
　　 pp. 190-91, especially his comments. Also, A.C.  Graham,
　　 "Chuang-tzu's  Essay on Seeing Things  as Equal," in Hist
　　 -ory of of Religions, Vol. 9.  Nos.  2 & 5.  p.  149.
9.  The Complete  Works of Chuang   Tru,p.49.
10. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.  p.189. See also The
　　 Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. p. 47.
11. The Comp Works of Chuang  Tzu.  p.  48.  Italics  mine as
　　 mine.
12. "Two Strains in Buddhist  Causality, " Journal of Chinese
　　 Philosophy; Vol. 12, 1 (March 1985), 49-56.
13. The obvious  question  here is, how close is the Buddhist
　　 concept  of  sameness  (samataa,  p'ing-teng(n) ) to  the
　　 Taoist equality  of things (ch'i-wu(e))? This is surely a
　　 point of contact  between  the two systems.  The Buddhist
　　 concept refers  to the ultimate  nature of reality, i.e.,
　　 the enlightened  state  where  everything  is seen without
　　 a discriminating eye.  In this sense, it is relative to the
　　 Buddhas'  and Bodhisattvas'  way,of having regard for all
　　 creatures, hence the wisdom of sameness  (smataaj~naana).
　　 In  Taoism, the  monkeys  being  fed  3 or 4 nuts  in the