Le Hoang Da
Buddhist Scholar
A meditating Buddha seated near a termite mound at dawn — evoking the imagery of the Vammika Sutta (MN 23), where dependently arisen structures are gradually dismantled through wisdom.
I. Sudden Awakening and the Misunderstanding of Immediacy
1. The Problem of Suddenness
In the history of Buddhist thought, “sudden awakening” has often been imagined as an unexpected moment: a falling leaf, a thunderclap, a direct glimpse into reality in which all veils dissolve at once. Particularly within the Chan/Zen tradition, this image has come to symbolize an illumination without warning, without sequence, and without accumulation. Sudden awakening is thus frequently contrasted with the model of “gradual cultivation,” a step-by-step process of practice that purifies defilements layer by layer and develops morality, concentration, and wisdom over time. In common polemics, the sudden is equated with immediacy and unconditionality, whereas the gradual is understood as slow, accumulative, and dependent upon prolonged effort.
Yet this framing may oversimplify what is in fact a far more complex issue. Does suddenness at the level of lived experience necessarily imply unconditionality at the structural level? And does gradual cultivation merely refer to temporal extension, or might it point instead to an inner process of maturation? The opposition between sudden and gradual may therefore rest on a confusion of analytical planes rather than on an irreconcilable doctrinal divide.
2. The Symbolism of the Sudden–Gradual Debate
The debate is often illustrated through the well-known verses attributed to Shenxiu and Huìnéng in the Chan tradition. Shenxiu’s verse compares the body to a bodhi tree and the mind to a bright mirror-stand that must be diligently polished so that no dust may settle upon it. Practice here appears as continuous cleansing—an ongoing effort to prevent defilements from obscuring clarity. Huìnéng’s verse, by contrast, denies the very premise of polishing. If originally there is not a single thing—no tree, no mirror—then what could dust adhere to? The entire metaphor of cleansing is overturned at its root.
If one remains at the level of imagery, the contrast appears stark: either one polishes diligently step by step, or one recognizes from the outset that there is nothing to polish. Yet this dichotomy may itself be misleading. What precisely is Huìnéng negating? Is he rejecting structured cultivation altogether, or is he undermining the reification implicit in the metaphor of polishing? More fundamentally, does sudden awakening truly exclude any form of structural maturation?
3. The Central Distinction: Phenomenology and Structure
This study proceeds from a fundamental question: is sudden awakening a wholly unconditioned event arising independently of any prior internal process, or is what appears as “sudden” merely the phenomenological surface of a maturation that has been unfolding silently within the structure of the mind? To address this question, it is necessary to distinguish two analytical planes. On the phenomenological plane, awakening may indeed manifest as an abrupt breakthrough, an experience that seems to occur in a single moment. On the structural plane, however, the dismantling of the conditions that sustain ignorance may have already reached a critical threshold.
Confusion between these two planes may lie at the heart of many misunderstandings surrounding the sudden–gradual debate. What is experienced as a rupture in consciousness may in fact be the culmination of a long process of structural transformation. Suddenness, in this sense, does not necessarily imply the absence of conditions; it may instead mark the point at which conditions have been exhausted.
4. Thesis and Approach
To explore this issue, the present article reexamines the Vammika Sutta (MN 23) of the Majjhima Nikāya as a distinctive model of awakening. Rather than portraying enlightenment as the accumulation of merit or as a purely mystical flash, the discourse describes a process of “digging,” in which successive layers of defilement are systematically uncovered and removed. The structure of the sutta suggests not the sudden appearance of a new metaphysical reality, but the progressive dismantling of a conditioned configuration.
The central thesis advanced here is that awakening in MN 23 is not the abrupt emergence of something previously absent, but the structural maturation of a process of dismantling defilements. What appears as “sudden” is the moment at which this structure collapses upon reaching its limit. From this perspective, sudden and gradual need not be mutually exclusive. Suddenness may belong to the plane of experience, whereas maturation belongs to the plane of structure. By maintaining this distinction, we may reread both the Nikāya and Chan traditions within a less antagonistic framework, avoiding the reduction of awakening either to mere accumulation or to an unconditioned negation devoid of process.
II. The Architecture of the Act of “Digging” in MN 23
If Section I addressed the issue on a conceptual level, the Vammika Sutta (MN 23) offers a concrete symbolic model through which the process of awakening can be examined. Notably, the discourse does not describe a sudden flash of illumination. Instead, it presents a sequence of repeated actions: “take up the sword and dig.” This recurring act of digging constitutes the key to understanding the inner structure of awakening as portrayed in the text.
1. The Anthill as a Conditioned Structure
The Buddha explains that the anthill represents the body: composed of the four great elements, born of mother and father, sustained by nutriment, impermanent, and subject to decay. From the outset, the object to be “dug” is not a metaphysical essence but a conditioned configuration. The anthill is not a neutral mass of matter; it is an aggregate formed through conditions and therefore capable of being dismantled.
This metaphor establishes the foundation for the entire process. Awakening is not depicted as the discovery of a new reality beyond the body–mind structure, but as the uncovering and dismantling of that very structure. What is at stake is not transcendence of conditions in the sense of escaping them, but insight into their constructed nature and the possibility of their cessation.
2. Smoke by Night, Fire by Day: The Dynamics of the Mind
The imagery of “smoke by night and flame by day” is interpreted by the Buddha in psychological terms. By night, there is pondering and reflection—this is “smoke.” By day, there is engagement through body, speech, and mind—this is “fire.” The mind is thus not presented as a static entity but as an ongoing process oscillating between thought and action. Smoke and fire are two expressions of the same dynamic structure.
This suggests that defilement is not confined to some hidden unconscious depth but manifests concretely in everyday behavior and reactivity. The act of digging, therefore, is not a metaphysical operation performed in abstraction. It is an intervention into the living dynamics of cognition and conduct. Awakening unfolds within the very processes through which mind and action continuously reinforce one another.
3. The Brahmin, the Wise Man, and the Sword: An Epistemological Model
Within the allegory, the Brahmin is identified with the Tathāgata; the wise man represents the trainee monk; the sword signifies noble wisdom; and digging corresponds to diligent effort. This establishes a clear structural model: deconstruction does not occur through inspiration alone but through guided wisdom and disciplined perseverance. Digging is not an impulsive act; it is methodical and intentional.
More importantly, the one who digs does not act according to instinct but under the direction of wisdom. The process is therefore epistemological in character. The structure of defilement is dismantled under the illumination of insight, not negated through a mere metaphysical assertion. Awakening emerges through knowing and seeing the conditioned structure as it is, rather than through a declaration that there is nothing to be removed.
4. The Sequential Dismantling: From Ignorance to Subtle Delight
The sequence of images in the discourse is not arbitrary. The door-bolt represents ignorance; the toad signifies anger and resentment; the forked path symbolizes doubt; the strainer corresponds to the five hindrances; the tortoise represents the five aggregates subject to clinging; the butcher’s knife stands for the five strands of sensual pleasure; the piece of meat signifies delight and attachment; and finally, the cobra symbolizes the monk who has destroyed the taints.
Each image marks a layer within a conditioned configuration. Crucially, the process is not accumulative. Nothing is added in order to reach awakening. Each step consists instead in removal: the abandonment of ignorance, the relinquishment of hatred, the overcoming of doubt, the letting go of hindrances, and the cessation even of subtle forms of attachment such as delight. The structure of defilement is dismantled from coarse layers to increasingly refined ones. When the “piece of meat”—symbolizing subtle attachment—is lifted, the configuration sustaining craving is nearly exhausted.
Awakening in this model is not the formation of a new ontological entity but the gradual exhaustion of the conditions that sustain ignorance. What remains is not something newly produced, but the absence of that which had been maintained through conditions.
5. The Inner Logic of Repetition
The core of the allegory lies in repetition: “take up the sword and dig.” After each discovery, the instruction is the same. There is no abrupt leap, no wholesale negation from the outset. The structure is dismantled layer by layer. Yet this should not be mistaken for gradualism in the purely temporal sense. The discourse does not specify how long the process lasts. What matters is not duration but systematicity.
Awakening in MN 23 is thus portrayed as a process of structural deconstruction—not the accumulation of purity, but the removal of the conditions that sustain defilement, until nothing remains to be removed. At this point, the question of suddenness can be reconsidered. If the structure has been fully dismantled, the final cessation may appear as an abrupt breakthrough. But that breakthrough is not a beginning; it is the culmination of structural maturation. Suddenness belongs to the experiential moment, whereas the groundwork has already been laid through the exhaustion of conditions.
III. Structural Maturation and Its Distinction from Temporal Gradualism
If MN 23 is read as a model of structural deconstruction, then the central question is no longer “sudden or gradual” in its conventional sense. Rather, the issue becomes: on which plane are we speaking about awakening? The temporal plane or the structural one? Much of the intensity and simplification in the sudden–gradual debate may stem from a failure to distinguish these two dimensions.
1. The Gradual Is Not Identical with the Long
In common understanding, gradual cultivation is often equated with a process extended over time—years of practice, multiple stages of attainment, and progressive purification of the mind. In MN 23, however, what is emphasized is not duration but systematicity. The act of “digging” is repeated many times, yet the discourse does not specify how long the process lasts. What matters is the order of dismantling: ignorance first, then anger and resentment, doubt, the hindrances, the aggregates subject to clinging, the strands of sensual pleasure, and finally subtle delight. This is a structural sequence rather than a temporal measure.
“Gradual,” in this context, should therefore be understood as a structured progression rather than a prolonged duration. A dismantling may occur rapidly, yet still be gradual in the structural sense if it follows an intrinsic logic. Gradualism does not necessarily imply slowness; it indicates ordered transformation.
2. The Sudden Is Not Identical with the Unconditioned
Similarly, sudden awakening is often interpreted as an unconditioned event—requiring no preparation, no method, and no maturation. Yet a careful reading of MN 23 shows that the appearance of the cobra, symbolizing the arahant, occurs only after all prior layers of defilement have been uncovered and removed. The suddenness here does not bypass the process; rather, it marks the moment when the final condition has been dismantled and the entire structure collapses.
This collapse may be experienced as a leap, a phase transition, a radical shift in awareness. But structurally, it is not unconditioned. It is the consequence of the exhaustion of conditions. Suddenness in the phenomenological sense does not imply unconditionality in the structural sense.
3. Suddenness as Phenomenological Rupture
From a phenomenological perspective, awakening may indeed appear as a breakthrough. When the conditions sustaining ignorance no longer operate, one’s experience of self and world may change comprehensively and instantaneously. It resembles a system subjected to gradual pressure: once a critical threshold is reached, transformation occurs in a single moment. Yet that moment does not arise independently; it is the result of the preceding accumulation and dismantling.
Although MN 23 does not explicitly describe the moment of awakening, the instruction to “leave the cobra undisturbed, do not touch it, pay homage” indicates that there is a point beyond which the method no longer applies. That cessation of method marks the exhaustion of the structure. Suddenness, in this sense, is a rupture in experience—a phenomenological break—rather than an emergence from nothingness.
4. Structural Maturation as Conditional Culmination
If suddenness belongs to the plane of experience, maturation belongs to the plane of structure. Structural maturation does not mean the addition of something new, but the completion of the process of dismantling. MN 23 does not portray awakening as the formation of a new entity; it presents it as the cessation of the conditions sustaining ignorance. When ignorance, hatred, doubt, hindrances, clinging aggregates, sensuality, and subtle delight have all been relinquished, the configuration of defilement has no remaining foundation.
At that point, the “sudden” is not a mysterious intrusion into reality. It is the necessary manifestation of a structure that has matured to the point of self-exhaustion. Sudden awakening, therefore, is not the negation of structure, but the moment at which structure collapses upon reaching its limit of deconstruction.
IV. The Cobra and the Cessation of Method
If the preceding sections have shown the act of “digging” as a systematic model of structural deconstruction, the appearance of the cobra marks a decisive turning point. At this moment, the repeated instruction—“take up the sword and dig”—is interrupted. The command is no longer to continue dismantling, but instead: “Leave it undisturbed, do not touch it, pay homage.” This reversal is crucial for understanding awakening in MN 23.
1. The Cobra as a Symbol of the Arahant
According to the Buddha’s explanation, the cobra represents the monk who has destroyed the taints. Unlike the earlier layers—symbolizing ignorance, anger, doubt, hindrances, aggregates, sensual pleasures, and subtle delight—the cobra is not a defilement to be removed. It is not an obstacle. It signifies completion.
The metaphor is striking. A cobra evokes both danger and majesty. One cannot approach it casually, nor can one continue digging as before. At this point, the method that was effective in dismantling the structure of defilement becomes inappropriate. This suggests that method has validity only within the scope of ignorance’s structure. When that structure no longer operates, the method must cease of itself.
2. Why the Sword Must Stop
The sword is identified as noble wisdom. It functions to cut through ignorance and its supporting conditions. Yet when there is nothing left to cut, the continued use of the sword would not only be futile but potentially misguided. This is a crucial insight: wisdom is not an instrument for endless manipulation. It is a conditioned means directed toward a specific aim—the cessation of defilements.
Once that aim has been fulfilled, further analysis, dismantling, or “digging” loses its purpose. The stopping of the sword does not represent a failure of wisdom, but its consummation. Wisdom fulfills itself precisely by reaching a point at which it no longer needs to operate as a cutting instrument.
3. The Limit of Analysis
Throughout the process of digging, each layer is identified, separated, and removed. The act is analytical in character: it isolates, discerns, and relinquishes. Yet analysis remains meaningful only so long as there is a structure to be analyzed. When the configuration of ignorance has been fully dismantled, analysis finds no further object.
If analysis were to continue beyond this point, it risks reconstituting a new structure—transforming wisdom itself into a subtle form of attachment. The injunction to “leave it undisturbed, pay homage” therefore functions not merely as a gesture of reverence but as an epistemological marker. There is a limit beyond which analytical thought must cease. Awakening is not an object to be further dissected; it is a state in which no structure remains to be dismantled.
4. From Digging to Nothing Left to Dig
The entire allegory of MN 23 can thus be read as a movement: from continuous digging to the point where nothing remains to be dug. At this juncture, the distinction between gradual and sudden is reconfigured. Viewed from the sequence of actions, the process appears gradual. Viewed from the absolute cessation—where method is no longer applied—one may speak of an abrupt transition.
Yet this abruptness does not signify the emergence of a new metaphysical entity. It marks the complete exhaustion of the structure of ignorance. In this light, a dialogue with the Chan expression “originally not a single thing” becomes possible without collapsing into the simplistic opposition of gradual and sudden. When there is nothing left to dismantle and nothing left to purify, to say “originally not a single thing” is not to deny the process, but to describe the condition that obtains once the process has reached completion.
V. “Originally Not a Single Thing”: Emptiness and Dependent Origination in the Light of MN 23
After examining the act of “digging” as a model of dismantling the structure of defilement, a natural philosophical question arises. If, in the spirit of Chan, “originally not a single thing” (本來無一物) is affirmed, then what exactly is meant by “structure” in MN 23? And what meaning can “dismantling” retain if, ultimately, there is no entity to be destroyed?
To approach this issue carefully, it is necessary to distinguish two analytical dimensions: non-self-nature (lack of intrinsic essence) and dependent origination.
1. “Not a Single Thing” and the Negation of Intrinsic Nature
The statement “originally not a single thing” should not be read as a nihilistic denial of reality, but as a denial of intrinsic self-nature. No phenomenon exists as a self-sufficient, fixed entity independent of conditions. The bodhi tree, the mirror-stand, and the dust are conventional images; they do not possess an inherent essence to which attachment could ultimately cling.
Understood in this way, “not a single thing” does not deny the functioning of phenomena. Rather, it denies that phenomena possess immutable self-existence. This is the core spirit of emptiness: the negation of ontological reification without the negation of dependent origination. Emptiness undermines substantialism, not appearance; it rejects intrinsic being, not conditioned arising.
2. Structure as a Configuration of Dependent Origination
In MN 23, what is described as the “structure of defilement”—ignorance, anger, doubt, hindrances, the aggregates subject to clinging, sensual pleasure, and subtle delight—is never presented as a collection of self-standing entities. These elements arise as conditions and are dismantled as conditions.
To “dig” is not to destroy a substance but to render inoperative the conditions that sustain a psychological configuration. When the door-bolt, symbolizing ignorance, is lifted, ignorance is not annihilated as a metaphysical entity; it simply ceases to be sustained by its supporting conditions. When subtle delight is removed, nothing is crushed or obliterated; a particular mode of functioning comes to an end.
Accordingly, “structure” in this study should not be understood as a hidden object waiting to be shattered, but as a relational order—a configuration of interdependent conditions that mutually sustain one another.
3. Dismantling and the Absence of Self-Nature
Precisely because these configurations lack intrinsic nature, they can be dismantled. If ignorance possessed a fixed essence, it could never cease. If the aggregates were eternal substances, liberation would be impossible. The absence of intrinsic nature does not render the path meaningless; rather, it makes cessation intelligible.
Here, emptiness does not stand in opposition to dependent origination. The absence of self-nature is what makes dependent origination possible; and because phenomena arise dependently, the cessation of their dependent arising is likewise possible. In this light, the act of digging in MN 23 is not an operation performed upon a metaphysical substrate, but a process of exposing the dependent character of defilement-configurations until they no longer have the basis to continue functioning.
4. When Nothing Remains to Be Dug
When the cobra appears and the method ceases, this does not imply that an ultimate substance has been uncovered. It indicates only that the conditions sustaining the configuration of defilement have come to an end. From the perspective of dependent origination, this marks the cessation of a process. From the perspective of non-self-nature, no entity ever existed to be destroyed.
Thus, “originally not a single thing” does not negate the process of dismantling described in MN 23. Rather, it prevents us from interpreting that process in reified terms. What is dismantled is not a “thing,” but a network of conditions. When that network dissolves, nothing stands on the other side as a metaphysical remainder—only the cessation of clinging.
5. Emptiness and Structural Maturation
We may now reconnect this analysis with the central thesis of the article. If the configurations of defilement are dependently arisen and devoid of intrinsic nature, then “structural maturation” does not consist in filling or perfecting an entity. It consists in bringing the process of dependent origination to its terminal point of dismantling. When the final conditions cease, experience may manifest as a sudden rupture. Yet ontologically, nothing has been transformed into something else; a mechanism of dependent origination has simply ceased to operate.
In this light, “not a single thing” and “structural dismantling” are not opposed. The former negates intrinsic nature; the latter describes the cessation of conditioned functioning. Both converge at a single point: when clinging ceases, there is nothing left to grasp—and nothing left to remove.
VI. Dependent Origination as Deconstruction: From the Nikāyas to the Āgamas and the Spirit of Emptiness
After the entire course of analysis, the Vammika Sutta (MN 23) may be read not merely as a metaphor of practice, but as a dynamic model of dependent origination viewed from the perspective of its cessation. The repeated sequence—“take up the sword and dig”—does not aim at purifying a hidden essence. Rather, it dismantles, one by one, the conditions that sustain a configuration of defilement. Ignorance, anger, doubt, hindrances, clinging aggregates, sensual pleasures, and subtle delight are not destroyed as “things”; they are deprived of the conditions that allow them to persist.
When the final condition ceases, the method ceases of itself. The injunction to “leave it undisturbed, pay homage” marks the point at which nothing remains to be dug. From the perspective of dependent origination, this is the cessation of an operative mechanism. From the perspective of non-self-nature, no entity has been annihilated, for no intrinsic essence ever existed to be destroyed. Precisely because phenomena lack intrinsic nature, they can cease. And precisely because dependent origination operates, cessation is possible.
1. A Comparison with the Chinese Version 《佛說蟻喻經》 (T01, No. 95)
The Chinese version translated by Dānapāla (施護) during the Song dynasty presents a transmission whose symbolic structure differs in several respects from the Pāli MN 23. Placing the two versions side by side helps clarify what remains invariant at the doctrinal core and what remains flexible within the tradition.
(A) Differences in Narrative Structure
In MN 23 (Pāli):
- A deva appears and presents a riddle.
- The monk Kumāra Kassapa approaches the Buddha for clarification.
- The Buddha explains each symbol in sequence.
In T01 No. 95 (Chinese):
- The Buddha emits a radiant light before narrating the story.
- The intermediate narrative frame is simplified.
- The presentation is more direct and condensed.
These differences reflect variations in transmission style and literary shaping, yet they do not alter the central dynamic of the narrative.
(B) Differences in Symbolic Sequence
In MN 23 (Pāli), the sequence unfolds as follows:
- The door-bolt → ignorance
- The toad → anger and resentment
- The forked path → doubt
- The strainer → the five hindrances
- The tortoise → the five aggregates subject to clinging
- The butcher’s knife → the five strands of sensual pleasure
- The piece of meat → delight
- The cobra → the one who has destroyed the taints
In T01 No. 95 (Chinese), the sequence consists of successive creatures:
- A great tortoise (大龜)
- A jellyfish-like aquatic being (水母蟲)
- A leech (水蛭蟲)
- A transliterated Sanskrit-named insect (阿西蘇那蟲)
- A great snake (大蛇)
- Another transliterated insect (挼陀鉢他蟲)
- A further transliterated insect (哥嚩吒蟲)
- A great dragon (大龍)
Several observations follow. First, the Pāli version links its symbols explicitly to psychological and doctrinal categories. Second, the Chinese version presents a sequence of living creatures, many bearing transliterated Sanskrit names without explicit interpretive gloss. Third, the final image shifts from a cobra to a great dragon, intensifying the aura of majesty and symbolic power.
2. What Is Preserved: The Dynamic of Deconstruction
Despite these symbolic variations, several structural elements remain constant across both traditions:
- An initial formation (anthill / 蟻聚).
- The imagery of smoke and fire.
- A sequential dismantling of successive layers.
- A final point of cessation.
- A culminating image that is no longer dismantled.
What remains invariant is not the specific creature depicted, but the dynamic of removing layer after layer until nothing remains to be removed. The flexibility of imagery alongside the stability of structure suggests that the doctrinal core lies in the model of deconstructing dependent configurations. The images may shift according to transmission and cultural environment, but the structural logic endures.
3. Non-Self, Dependent Origination, and the Spirit of Emptiness
Both versions avoid positing a purified metaphysical essence discovered at the end of the process. No “pure mind-substance” emerges once the layers have been lifted. What remains is simply the cessation of the taints.
This directly reflects the doctrine of non-self: there is no independent subject standing behind psychological configurations. The elements dismantled are merely conditions linked together. When the conditions cease, no ultimate self is found beyond them.
Dependent origination in the discourse functions not only as a principle of arising but also as a principle of cessation. What arises through conditions ceases when those conditions cease. Precisely because configurations lack intrinsic nature, they can be dismantled. When the final condition ceases, experience may manifest as a sudden rupture; yet structurally, this rupture marks the culmination of a matured process.
From this perspective, the Chan expression “originally not a single thing” does not negate the dismantling process. Rather, it prevents the reification of that process. What is dismantled is not a “thing,” but a dependently arisen configuration devoid of intrinsic nature.
4. A Methodological Proposal
From the foregoing analysis, a methodological reading may be proposed:
- Dependent origination should be understood not only as a principle of arising, but as a configuration capable of deconstruction.
- Awakening should be read not as the accumulation of purity, but as the exhaustion of a dependent mechanism.
- Emptiness should function as a horizon that prevents any reification of the path itself.
Within this framework, sudden and gradual are no longer opposed positions. Suddenness belongs to experience; maturation belongs to conditions. Structure is not denied but brought to the point of self-cessation when the conditions sustaining it are no longer present.
Thus, the Vammika Sutta may be regarded as an early text that expresses the spirit of non-self and dependent origination in a profoundly dynamic manner. When placed within the perspective of non-self-nature, this model proves fully compatible with the spirit of early Mahāyāna emptiness, without requiring the assumption of any hidden metaphysical substrate.
Bibliography
Analayo, Bhikkhu. A Comparative Study of the Majjhima Nikāya. 2 vols. Taipei: Dharma Drum Publishing, 2011.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu, trans. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikāya. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1995.
Garfield, Jay L. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Gethin, Rupert. The Foundations of Buddhism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
McRae, John R. Seeing Through Zen: Encounter, Transformation, and Genealogy in Chinese Chan Buddhism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.
Williams, Paul. Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009.
Yampolsky, Philip B., trans. The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch. New York: Columbia University Press, 1967.
《佛說蟻喻經》, T01, no. 95. Translated by 施護 (Dānapāla), Song dynasty. In Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō, vol. 1. Tokyo: Taishō Issaikyō Kankōkai, 1924–1934.
《六祖壇經》, T48, no. 2008. In Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō, vol. 48. Tokyo: Taishō Issaikyō Kankōkai, 1924–1934.