A Further Inquiry into the Heavenly Teachings

The Lost History of Jinchang

New An Dreamer Cheng Zhiyong Uses Nine Pu Commentary

Master Zhong wrote the *Initial Inquiry into Heavenly Studies*. A guest read it and laughed, saying: "How reckless you are! Upon first hearing the teachings about Heaven, without thorough examination, you immediately declare them nonsensical and write a critique. You should read *The Meaning of the Western Teaching*, *Record of Discussions on the Three Mountains*, and *Brief Words on the Sacred Doctrine*. Then you will see that it is you, not they, who fails to understand." Zhong took these texts and read them carefully, then wrote his critique as follows.

Their teaching says: "The heavens revolve from east to west, while the sun, moon, and stars move in the opposite direction, from west to east. Their measurements follow their own rules, and their positions each settle in their proper place. If there were no supreme master to oversee and direct this, how could there be no chaos? For example: when a ship crosses a river or sea, it braves wind and waves without fear of capsizing. Even if no person is visible, you know there must be a skilled helmsman aboard."

But we can ask: When ships cross a river or sea, each ship must have its own helmsman. We have never heard of a single helmsman steering all the ships at once. Moreover, the person steering is certainly not the same as the one who built the ship. So, can we honestly say that one single master created the heavens, and also directs their movement?

The argument goes: "Nothing can create itself; everything requires an external agent to bring it into being. Towers and houses cannot build themselves—they are built by craftsmen. The heavens and earth cannot create themselves—they were created by the Lord of Heaven." To this we reply: When a craftsman builds a house, there must be someone who commissions him to build it. So who commissioned the Lord of Heaven to create the heavens and earth? And if a craftsman builds a house, he cannot be the master of that house. Then how can the one who creates the heavens and earth be the master of them?

"The argument states: 'There are countless things in the world, vast and abundant. If there were no single supreme being to maintain and protect them, they would inevitably fall into chaos and decay. Thus, each family has one head, each country has one ruler, each person has one body, and each body has one head.'

My response: It is acceptable to say a body has only one head. It is not acceptable to claim that besides one body and one head, there are no other bodies or heads. It is acceptable to say a family has only one head. It is not acceptable to claim that besides one family and one head, there are no other families or heads. It is acceptable to say a country has only one ruler. It is not acceptable to claim that besides one country and one ruler, there are no other countries or rulers. It is acceptable to say one heaven has only one master. But can we claim that besides one heaven and one master, there are no other heavens and masters?

Furthermore, although the body has only one head, the head coexists with the four limbs and hundreds of bones from birth. The head does not give birth to the limbs and bones. Although a family has only one head, the head coexists with dependents and servants from the beginning. The head does not give birth to the dependents and servants. Although a country has only one ruler, the ruler coexists with ministers, officials, and common people from the start. The ruler does not give birth to the ministers, officials, and common people. Likewise, although one heaven has only one master, the master must also coexist with gods, ghosts, humans, and all beings. So can we claim the master gives birth to gods, ghosts, humans, and all beings?"

It says: "The Lord of Heaven is neither the sky nor the earth, yet is even higher, brighter, broader, and thicker than sky and earth. He is not a spirit or ghost, yet is more divine and spiritual than any spirit or ghost. He is not human, yet far surpasses the wisest and holiest—he is without beginning or end, nowhere can contain him, yet he fills all things completely."

Then Cheng questioned: "If he fills all things completely, then he resides not only in heaven, but also throughout hell. He pervades not only heaven and earth, but also spirits, ghosts, humans, animals, plants, trees, filth, and all other places. If it is said that he dwells high in heaven, supremely honored and unsurpassed, then the idea of 'filling all things' falls apart. If it is said that he pervades everywhere, then the concept of a supremely honored being cannot stand."

Some might try to defend this by saying: "The Lord of Heaven's supremacy is like the sun in the sky—its light shines everywhere. Although it shines everywhere, it does not lose its supremacy; although it is supreme, its light naturally pervades all."

Cheng then further questioned: "This still implies a location, a direction, and a form. The sun has a form. They say the Lord of Heaven created the sun. If the Lord of Heaven also has a form, then who created him?"

He said, "My Lord of Heaven is what the scriptures call the 'Supreme Being'." Then he cited the Odes, the Elegantiae, the Commentary on the Changes, and the *Doctrine of the Mean* to prove it. My response: How utterly ignorant he is of Confucian principles!

In our Confucian tradition, "Heaven" has three meanings: First, the blue sky we see stretching vast and endless above us. Second, the Heaven that governs the world, rewarding good and punishing evil - this is the "Supreme Being" mentioned in the *Odes*, *Book of Changes*, and *Doctrine of the Mean*. He only knows this meaning. But this "Lord of Heaven" governs the world without creating it, just as an emperor governs the people without giving them life. To mistakenly claim it as the creator of humans and all things is a grave error. Third, the inherent, luminous nature that has no beginning or end, no birth or death - this is called Heaven. It is the primal source of all things, and is also called "Destiny." Thus the *Doctrine of the Mean* says, "What Heaven imparts to humans is called their nature." This heaven is not the blue sky, nor is it a ruling deity. This "destiny" is not a spoken command nor a gift given.

Confucius said, "At fifty, I understood the Mandate of Heaven." This was his profound realization of this fundamental nature. It is also called "the Mean," as in: "Before the feelings of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy arise, it is called the Mean. The Mean is the great root of the world." It is also called "Change," as in: "The *Book of Changes* has no thought, no action. It is still and unmoving, yet when stimulated, it comprehends all things under heaven." It is also called "innate goodness," as in: "When knowledge is perfected, the will becomes sincere." It is also called "what is not seen or heard," and "the solitary self," as in: "Be watchful over what is not seen, and fearful over what is not heard. The noble person must be cautious in solitude." This is what Confucius meant by "fearing the Mandate of Heaven." It is also called "the mind," as in: "The path of learning is nothing other than seeking the lost mind." It is also called "the self," as in: "The noble person seeks in himself. To practice humanity depends on oneself - does it depend on others?" It is also called "the 'I'," as in: "All things are already complete within me." It is also called "sincerity," as in: "From sincerity to clarity, this is called the nature. Sincerity is the way of Heaven."

This is the true original source of heaven, earth, and all things. In reality, it has no joy or anger, no creation, no reward or punishment, no sound or smell. Yet within this natural, virtuous essence, principle and material force, substance and function are inherently complete. Thus it is said: "Change contains the Supreme Ultimate, which generates the two forces." However, although we say change contains the Supreme Ultimate, the Supreme Ultimate is entirely change itself - just as wetness is the nature of water, and water is entirely wetness. Although we say the Supreme Ultimate generates the two forces, the two forces are entirely the Supreme Ultimate. Although we say the two forces generate the four images, the four images are entirely the two forces. Although we say the four images generate the eight trigrams, the eight trigrams are entirely the four images. And when the eight trigrams intermingle to form sixty-four, and the sixty-four transform into 4,096, within those 4,096 hexagrams, if you pick any single hexagram or any single line, it is entirely the eight trigrams, entirely the four images, entirely the two forces, entirely the Supreme Ultimate, entirely the principle of change. This is like touching one wave in the vast ocean - the whole wave is entirely water, entirely wetness. Or like scattering beads of quicksilver - every single bead is perfectly round.

So wherever heaven, spirits, ghosts, or humans can see the Supreme Ultimate and the principle of change fully present in a single thing or event - in heaven, this is the supreme deity; in spirits, this is their luminous intelligence; in humans, this is the sage. And the power to govern, transform, and guide returns to this. If before heaven and earth were divided, there was already a most intelligent and most sacred being as the Great Lord, then there would only be order without chaos, only good without evil. Then why would there be later spirits, sages, and wise ones needed to assist and complete creation? And humans would never achieve harmony with heaven and earth, or act before heaven without it going against them. How could he possibly understand our Confucian true lineage of inheriting and establishing the ultimate standard of heaven?

He said: "The soul has three grades: the lowest is called the life-soul, which belongs to plants; the middle is called the awareness-soul, which belongs to animals and birds. These two are both perishable—they have a beginning and an end. The highest is called the spirit-soul, which is the human soul. This soul is imperishable—it has a beginning but no end."

I respond: If the spirit-soul and the awareness-soul are different, then the former would have a beginning but no end. But if the awareness-soul and the life-soul are also different, why do both of them have a beginning and an end? Moreover, you claim that animals have awareness but no spirit, and only humans have a spirit. Yet look at the foolish people in the world who only think about food, drink, and sexual desire, knowing nothing else—how are they different from animals? And we also see loyal dogs and righteous monkeys who sacrifice themselves for their masters or bring cases to court seeking justice—how are they different from humans? That is why Mencius said: "What distinguishes humans from animals is slight—common people lose it, while noble people preserve it." How then can you arbitrarily claim that one has an end and the other does not?

The text says: "Among the teachings of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius, which one ever dared to treat the supreme ruler as an equal? If an ordinary person claimed to share the same status as the emperor, could they escape punishment? Common people on earth dare not compare themselves to earthly rulers—how, then, could an earthly ruler compare himself to the Lord of Heaven?"

Wei Zheng replied: "Common people dare not compare themselves to emperors because of status and position; they dare not yield to emperors because of virtue and moral character. Therefore it is said: 'In the court, rank takes precedence; in guiding the world and leading the people, virtue takes precedence.' Again: 'When faced with benevolence, do not yield even to your teacher.' Again: 'From the emperor down to the common person, all must take self-cultivation as the foundation.'

Thus, King Wen was a ruler, yet his pure virtue was unceasing—therefore he could match Heaven. Confucius was a commoner, yet he transmitted and emulated the ancient ways—this was not considered usurpation.

Now, when a father has a child, who does not desire the child to resemble him? Since the Lord of Heaven is the Great Father who truly gives birth to humanity, why would He not wish humans to resemble Him?"

The argument states: "The enlightened mind contains heaven and earth, holds all things—but this does not mean it is the actual substance of heaven and earth or the physical things themselves. It is like still water or a bright mirror: they reflect all things. If we say that because the bright mirror or still water contains heaven and earth, it can therefore create them—is that possible? The Lord of Heaven is the origin of all things, capable of generating them. If a person were equal to Him, they too should be able to generate things."

In response, Zheng said: The still water and bright mirror reflect all things, but the mirror or water is here, and the things are there. They have boundaries and positions. Therefore, we know the reflections are images, not the actual substance. As for the mind containing heaven and earth and holding all things—can you point to the boundaries or positions of the mind, like you can for that mirror or water? If the mind has no form and cannot generate all things, then the Lord of Heaven also has no form—how can *He* generate all things? If the Lord of Heaven, without form, is able to give form to all forms, then why can the mind alone, also without form, not give form to forms?

The text states: "Some causes are within the object, such as yin and yang; others are external to the object, such as a craftsman. When the Lord of Heaven creates objects, He exists outside them." According to this view, the Lord of Heaven creates heaven, earth, and all things, so He must exist outside them, just as a craftsman creating a vessel must exist outside the vessel. This seems correct. But if so, then the Lord of Heaven has a location and limits; He does not pervade everything. Thus He would also have divisions and changes. How, then, could He be without beginning or end and be the eternal Lord of all ages?

A certain person said: "Form occupies space, therefore it can fill a space. Spirit has no form, so how can it fill a space? Within a single grain, ten thousand spirits can dwell. Not only past souls, but future souls can also be contained without obstruction."

Response: The claim that spirit has no form—well spoken indeed. Yet, if it has no form, then it has no coming or going, no counting or numbering, and no birth or death. But then to say that the soul is created by the Heavenly Lord—how can that be?

They say: "The one who creates heaven, earth, and all things is the Great Father of all. And the one who governs and nurtures them at all times is the Supreme Common Lord. If people do not revere or serve him, then they are without a father and without a lord—utterly unfilial and utterly disloyal."

I respond: In the laws of this world, nothing is all-powerful. Heaven and earth can shelter and support, but they cannot give light; the sun and moon can give light, but they cannot bring forth life; parents can bring forth life, but they cannot teach and guide; teachers and friends can teach and guide, but they cannot reward and punish; rulers can reward and punish, but they cannot ensure no one escapes the net; ghosts and spirits reward and punish without anyone escaping the net, yet they cannot shelter, support, or illuminate the world. If the Lord of Heaven were truly all-powerful, then it would be enough for him alone to shelter, support, illuminate, bring forth life, teach, reward, and punish all things. Why then would we need heaven, earth, sun, moon, rulers, parents, ghosts, and spirits? If he still relies on heaven to cover and earth to support, even on parents to give birth and rulers to govern, then where is his omnipotence?

Now, we see in our own lives that heaven covers us, earth supports us, the sun and moon shine upon us, our father gives us life, our mother nurtures us, the ruler of our country governs us, and ghosts and spirits illuminate our deeds and protect us. Yet people fail to feel gratitude for these kindnesses and instead attribute all grace to a Lord of Heaven they cannot see or hear, calling him the Great Father and Great Lord. If they call him the Great Father and Great Lord, then they must regard our own father and ruler as lesser father and lesser lord—is this not the height of being unfilial and disloyal?

Furthermore, if one claims that the Lord of Heaven’s omnipotence resides within heaven, earth, sun, moon, rulers, parents, ghosts, and spirits, like a ruler delegating his full authority to ministers, governors, and magistrates, then when commoners do good, the officials can reward them; when commoners do wrong, the officials can punish them. Why must every matter go through the ruler alone? And when commoners serve, serving the officials without disobedience is already serving the ruler. Why must they serve only one lord and be forbidden from serving the officials?

Now, it might be acceptable to say that immortals and Buddhas have usurped authority and should not be worshipped. But heaven, earth, sun, moon, ghosts, and spirits were created by the Lord of Heaven to shelter, support, and protect people—why forbid worshipping them as well? Is this not strange?

They say: "The human heart, nature, and life are originally bestowed by the Lord of Heaven." This alludes to the teaching: "What Heaven imparts is called nature." Zhu Xi's interpretation of this is greatly mistaken, and I have already explained the general meaning earlier. Now, if something can be "bestowed," it must have a physical form. What form or image do the heart and nature possess that can be bestowed? If they can still be bestowed without having form or image, then the spiritual radiance of the Lord of Heaven must also have a bestower. Moreover, if something can be bestowed, it can also be taken away—how can it be said to have a beginning but no end?

Someone said: "There must first be a thing, and then there is a principle. As the Book of Songs says, 'There are things, and there are rules.'"

Zheng replied: Principle runs through the entire existence of a thing, from beginning to end, and it is what makes a thing what it is. That is why it is said, "Sincerity is the beginning and end of things; without sincerity, there is no thing." When the Book of Songs speaks of "things and rules," it precisely means that principle creates things, and therefore, the thing itself is principle. It is like making a tool out of gold: the entire tool is gold. If you say there must first be a thing, and then principle arises, then does that mean before a thing exists there is no principle? If no thing means no principle, then before heaven and earth existed, there was certainly no principle. Yet God existed before heaven and earth — that would make God the most extreme case of being without principle.

"It is said: 'There must be an infinite origin before there can be a finite beginning; there must be a formless source before forms can give form. Before my body existed, my parents must have given birth to me. And before them, a Heavenly Lord must have instilled a soul in me.' An inquiry says: 'A formless and infinite origin—what an exhilarating theory! If the Heavenly Lord is infinite, then are my parents also infinite? If the Heavenly Lord is formless, then are my parents also formless?' Someone explains: 'Parents have form, so they have a beginning. The Heavenly Lord is formless, so he has no beginning.' The inquiry responds: 'My body has form, so it has a beginning. My mind and nature are formless—why then are they not also without beginning?'"

He said: "Heaven and earth are like a single palace. Palaces, towers, and pavilions must first have a master builder to construct them before they are complete. Can it be that heaven and earth, so vast, have no master and yet create themselves?"

Zheng replied: When a palace has not yet been built, the master and the craftsmen work on a plot of land, within a workshop. Before heaven and earth existed, on what did the Heavenly Lord rely? Furthermore, a palace is built using earth, wood, tiles, and stone—with what materials were heaven and earth built? Moreover, before heaven and earth existed, was there some material ready to form them? Was this material self-existent? Or was it brought into being by the Heavenly Lord? And where was it placed? Was it inside the Heavenly Lord’s being or outside? If it was outside, then the Heavenly Lord would not be omnipresent. If it was inside, would that not be like injuring his own body, turning it into heaven, earth, and all things?

The question states: "The theory of the Supreme Ultimate merely involves the two concepts of Principle and Material Force. It has never been said to possess spiritual awareness or intelligence. Since it lacks such awareness, how can it govern the myriad transformations?" In response, I say: Does Confucius not state that "the Yi (Book of Changes) has the Supreme Ultimate, which gives rise to the Two Modes"? Now, the Yi is precisely the fundamental nature of spiritual awareness and intelligence. Therefore, it is without thought, without action—silent and unmoving, yet it responds and penetrates all. However, it does not necessarily govern the myriad transformations in the way that the question suggests. If the myriad transformations truly had a single governing entity, then it would only produce goodness and not evil, only joy and not suffering. In that case, the sage's teachings on cultivating the Way would become utterly useless.

His words say: "Confucians claim, 'Every individual thing possesses a complete Supreme Ultimate.' This would mean the Supreme Ultimate shares the same substance as things, confined within them and thus unable to be the master of heaven and earth."

Swift observes: The wondrous principle of the Supreme Ultimate has no boundaries, no spatial limits. Therefore each thing fully receives it—the entire substance dwells within each thing, yet is not confined by it. Confucius said: "It encompasses the transformations of heaven and earth without exceeding them; it perfectly completes all things without omission; it penetrates the knowledge of day and night (light and darkness)." This is what it means.

You claim that the singular Heavenly Lord does not share substance with things. If so, He must dwell loftily above all things, having boundaries and spatial limitations. How, then, can He be described as "present everywhere"?

They say: "Human beings are created by God in Heaven, and all are guided toward goodness. Yet if some choose to do evil, it is of their own making." One asks: Since God is all-powerful, why does He love goodness, yet people are not good; why does He abhor evil, yet people instead turn to evil? Another defends this by saying: "When parents have children, they only wish for them to be good, not evil. If the children deliberately do evil, how are the parents to blame?" To which the questioner replies: Parents give birth to the child's body, but not to the child's mind and nature—thus they lack control. Since God creates both mind and nature, why does He not create only good minds and natures?

They claim: "God creates living beings to sustain humanity; God creates humanity to serve God." I ask: If God has no beginning, what need is there for humanity to serve God? Why would the thought suddenly arise for God to create humans to serve the divine? Furthermore, parents bear children to provide for themselves in old age and death. Since God has no end, what purpose is there in creating humans?

The text says: "Where does human life come from? Where does death go?" Zheng replied: This is a common topic in Buddhism, and also a deep, hidden principle in Confucianism. However, the way it is applied differs greatly. Confucius said: "Trace things back to their beginning and follow them to their end, and you understand the truth of life and death." Vital energy forms things, and the wandering soul brings change—through this, one knows the conditions of spirits and deities. When Ji Lu asked about serving spirits, Confucius replied: "If you cannot yet serve people, how can you serve spirits?" When asked about death, he said: "If you do not yet understand life, how can you understand death?" From this perspective, it is clear that life and death share no separate principle, and humans and spirits share no separate nature. "Hearing the Way in the morning and dying that evening is acceptable" means that in death, there is something that does not die. Since something remains undying after death, life must also have something that does not truly live. So how can it be said that God grants life at birth?

They say: "When the Heavenly Lord was born into the world, He joined His original divine nature to our human nature. It's like grafting a pear branch onto a peach tree—the pear grows by relying on the peach, but does the peach lose its own essence?" I respond: They claim that human souls are all created by the Heavenly Lord. Now, using the peach-and-pear metaphor, does that mean all pears in the world are born from peaches? If pears originally came from peaches, grafting wouldn't be necessary. If grafting is required for them to grow, then a peach tree by itself cannot produce pears.

They said: "Hundreds or even thousands of years before the Lord of Heaven was born, signs already foretold his coming. When he was about to be born, an angel came to announce it. Countless miracles and extraordinary events were recorded in books stacked to the rafters, just not yet translated." I say: How is this any different from what Buddhism describes about the miraculous signs at the Buddha's birth? If they claim that Shakyamuni, born of Maya, was merely a human, then is the Lord of Heaven, born of a virgin, not also human? If they insist that Jesus must be the incarnation of the Lord of Heaven, how can we be sure Shakyamuni is not also an incarnation? If they dismiss Buddhist scriptures as absurd and false, how can we be sure their scriptures are not equally absurd? If they claim their books are well-documented, don't Buddhist scriptures also claim to be well-documented? If they argue that the Buddha came from the Western Regions, unseen by anyone here, and thus dismiss it as false, then they come from the distant West where no one here has seen them—quite similar, utterly absurd! Buddhist scriptures came from India, and they dismiss them as mistaken. They claim to have come ninety-thousand miles—who can say it's not a lie? Since you came here alone, far from home and for many years, how is it that those who associate with you still receive gifts of foreign curios from your homeland? Is it because you are so strong that you brought all those items yourself? Or do you have supernatural powers to fetch them in a day? Or do you have strange arts to conjure them at will? I have also heard of your background. You were born in a small country near the Fragrant Hills in the far west. Clever and cunning, you set your sights on usurping the Central Plain’s sacred vessels (power), so you sailed secretly to Lingnan. First, you learned our language and letters, then stole and read the books of the Three Teachings (Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism), twisting and patching them together with Buddhism to create a false doctrine for deceiving the world and corrupting the nation’s foundation. You claim to be celibate and unmarried, using the absurd promise of holy water to lure foolish men and women into private, sordid acts. Yet the people of Fujian and Guangdong trade yearly with Luzon and other countries. Your followers ship treasures annually to supply you. Therefore, you ask nothing from those who associate with you and even give them exotic gifts. People then think you are pure and ask for nothing, surpassing Buddhism and Daoism that solicit donations. Even scholar-officials and wise men are deceived, thinking you are respectful, humble, incorruptible, and retiring, the very image of a Confucian gentleman. Alas! Who knew that Wang Mang's humility was the mask of a usurper, or that Wang Anshi's new policies were the ruin of the Song? Your mind and intentions are already too evil.

He said: "All things either have a beginning and an end, like grass, trees, birds, and animals; or they have a beginning but no end, like heaven, earth, spirits, ghosts, and the human soul. Only the Lord of Heaven has no beginning and no end, and is able to give beginning and end to all things. Without the Lord of Heaven, there would be no things."

Master Zheng replied: In our Confucian tradition, it is said that Sincerity (Cheng) is the beginning and end of all things; without Sincerity, there are no things. Next, one extends sincerity to the smaller details; in the details, one can have sincerity, and with sincerity comes a tangible presence. Only the utmost Sincerity in the world can bring about transformation. The way of utmost Sincerity can foreknow events. One with utmost Sincerity is like a spirit; one with utmost Sincerity can fully realize their own nature, and fully realize the nature of people and things, assisting in the transformation and nourishment of life and joining with Heaven and Earth. Therefore, we begin with two phrases to establish the core principle: "From Sincerity to clarity is called nature; from clarity to Sincerity is called teaching." And finally, we conclude with the idea that nature and cultivation are not two separate things, and that humanity and Heaven are one: "Sincerity then becomes clarity; clarity then becomes Sincerity."

This is the true root of the transformation of things—it is not what you call the "Lord of Heaven." If we must posit a Lord of Heaven who is supremely spiritual, supremely holy, all-powerful, and unparalleled in authority, then transformation and nourishment would need no assistance, and joining with Heaven and Earth would be impossible. How could that be reasonable?

Furthermore, the three categories you propose—those with a beginning and an end, those with a beginning but no end, and those with no beginning and no end—are particularly illogical. The Book of Changes says: "What is above form is called the Way; what is below form is called a vessel." Vessels have a beginning and therefore must have an end; the Way has no end and therefore must have no beginning. Since you allow "a beginning but no end," why not also have "no beginning but an end"? Moreover, grass and trees are vastly different from birds and animals, yet they all have a beginning and an end. What distinguishes humans from animals is but a little; why then do humans alone have a beginning but no end?

Again, consider the way of the world: fathers and sons must resemble each other; causes and effects must correspond. We see that humans always give birth to humans, birds always give birth to birds; melons do not produce beans, and beans do not produce melons. Since the Lord of Heaven created humans, and humans have a beginning but no end, the Lord of Heaven must also have a beginning but no end. If you say the Lord of Heaven is so spiritual and wondrous that he has no beginning, then the human mind is also spiritual and wondrous—why is it said to have a beginning only? If the human mind is spiritual and wondrous because the Lord of Heaven bestowed it, then the Lord of Heaven, being spiritual and wondrous, who knows? Might he not also have a bestower?

Furthermore, if the Lord of Heaven created humans, then he is called the great father of humanity. But if he created birds and animals, is he not their father as well? If he created grass and trees, is he not their father too? A father of birds, animals, grass, and trees—how could he be considered a supreme lord?

The text says: "For example, a tree's flowers, fruits, branches, leaves, and trunk all come from the root. Without the root, none of them would exist. Yet the tree's root itself does not come from any other root. The Lord on High is the root of all things. Does anything spawn Him?" He replied: "A tree's root must rely on the earth. Could the Lord on High alone exist without any support?"

It says: "In the beginning, the Lord of Heaven wished to create all things for the use of humans. So He first opened up the heavens and the earth, bringing forth all kinds of creatures, and then created a man and a woman." But we ask: When heaven and earth were not yet opened and humans did not yet exist, how could He wish to create all things for the use of humans?

They say: "Before death, whether one does good or evil, one's soul goes to the judgment of the Heavenly Lord after death." Wei Zheng asked: If the Heavenly Lord has no form, sound, or location, then where will the dead go? If they can go to hear the judgment, this resembles a worldly judge, or like what the Buddha's teachings call Yama. However, if you compare it to a worldly judge, that judge is also born of parents and cannot escape old age and death. If you compare it to Yama, Yama is also one among sentient beings and cannot escape reincarnation. How can such a being be called the beginningless and endless true Creator of all things?

He said: "The rewards of heaven and the punishments of hell are absolutely unavoidable. This proves that there must be an afterlife. But no one can remember their past lives, so this proves that there are no past lives." Zheng replied: "If you stopped a stranger on the street and asked them about the moment they were born, no one would remember that either. Does that mean that the event of their birth never happened? Although we don't remember being born, we cannot say that birth never occurred. Similarly, even if we don't remember our past lives, how can we be sure they never existed?"

Xu said: "The Daoist immortals, the Buddhas, and the Bodhisattvas instruct people to revere them and thus challenge the authority of the Lord of Heaven." In reply, it is noted: Although Daoist immortals, Buddhas, and Bodhisattvas are not venerated by us Confucians, the teachings still state that there are many immortals, many Buddhas, and many Bodhisattvas whom people should honor. They also say that Heaven, Earth, the sun, the moon, the stars, ghosts, and spirits should all be worshipped. Therefore, this is not about exclusively worshipping themselves. Jesus, on the other hand, commands people to worship only one Lord, forbidding them to bow down to Heaven, Earth, the sun, the moon, and so on. Is this not even more monopolistic and jealous?

A Further Inquiry into the Heavenly Teachings