2.2.3.5.4 yi1ng 應 (V.MOD.NEC)

The original meaning of yi4ng 應 (VT) is 'to respond to; to correspond to; resonate with';1164 as modal verb it appeared somewhat later than da1ng 當. There is one example in SHI1165 where yi1ng seems to function as modal verb but examples like this are extremely scarce in AC.

In ZTJ the usages as transitive and as intransitive verbs ('to answer; to give a response'; often in the compound yi4ng-nuo4 應喏) are very frequent. As modal verb yi1ng has the particular function to indicate that the preposition p is necessarily true ('it necessarily follows that...'). As such yi1ng is one of the few modal verbs which clearly indicate epistemic modality (necessity). Possibly this function of yi1ng was influenced by Indian Buddhist logic which was introduced to China through the translation of Sanskrit Buddhist sriptures. Logic (yi1nmi2ng 因明) was one of the five branches of learning in India. But also after the translation of Sanskrit texts on Buddhist logic, the number of Chinese Buddhist scholars dealing with logical problems was very limited and the system of logical markers never became standardized but was only loosely applied in debates on doctrical questions.1166

Below is a number of examples which illustrate the style of argumentation typical for vernacular Buddhist texts.

In the following example the proposition p is 'sages do not exist' The speaker's opinion that the proposition (or 'thesis' zo1ng 宗) must be true is marked by yi1ng and deducted from the 'reasons' (yi1n 因) stated in the first clause:

- sages are like hair of a turtoise

- sages are like horns of a hare

[- the hair of a turtoise and horns of a hare do not exist]

- ergo (ze2 則): sages necessarily do not exist.

946) ZTJ 1.105; WU: 63

”聖人若同龜毛兔角，

she4ng-re2n ruo4 to2ng gui1 ma2o tu4 jia3o

sage-person/SI.CONDif/be the same as/tortoise/hair/hare/horn

"If sages are like the hair of a turtoise or the horn of a hare,

則應是無。“

ze2 yi1ng shi4 wu2

CONJthen/V.MOD.NEC/COP.EMPHASIS/not exist

they necessarily do not exist."

The following example is noteworthy and the way of argumentation is quite complicated. It is a good example of modal verbs being used in complex rhetorical structures.

947) ZTJ 1.122; WU: 75

汝若定執無情無佛性者，

ru3 ruo4 di4ng-zhi2 wu2-qi2ng wu2 fo2-xi4ng zhe3

NPRO2SG/SI.CONDif/fix-hold on/non have-perception(feeling)/possess/TERMbuddha-nature/PART.CLAUSE.COND

"If you insist that non-sentient objects do not have Buddha-nature,

經不應言：

ji1ng bu4 yi1ng ya2n

scripture/NEG/V.MOD.NEC/say

then the s鋈ras would not state:

‘三界唯心,

san-jie4 we2i xi1n

TERMthree-world/be only/mind

'The Triple-world1167 is mind-only',

萬法為識’。

wa4n-fa3 we2i shi2

TERMten thousand-dharma/COP/consciousness

the countless dharmas (i.e. all constituents of existence) are consciousness [only].'"

In the example there are two opposing propositions:

A (the opponent) claims: 'Non-sentient objects do not have Buddha-nature' (proposition p).

B (the speaker) indirectly claims: 'Non-sentient objects do have Buddha-nature' (proposition q).

B deduces the truth of proposition q indirectly from proposition r:

'The Triple-world is mind-only; the countless constituents of existence are consciousness-only'.

The truth-value of proposition r is a priori established since it appears in the 'scriptures' (and as such has ultimate authority, accepted both by opponent A and B). It can therefore serve as 'reason' for the truth of the proposition q by means of a deduction (along the lines of consciousness-only philosophy and Buddha-nature theory, accepted both by opponent A and B):

- The Triple-world is mind-only/all constituents of existence are consciousness-only;

- non-sentient objects are part of the Triple-world (as everything is);

- since non-sentient objects are part of the Triple-world they are mind-only/consciousness-only;

- mind/consciouness possesses (is) Buddha-nature;

- since non-sentient objects are mind-only/consciousness-only they also possess (are) Buddha-nature.1168

Also in the next example yi1ng indicates necessity; however, it is not used as logical marker but expresses the speaker's conviction that an action (the coming of a master) will certainly take place in the future.1169

948) ZTJ 5.014; WU: 377

“如此瑞祥，

ru2 ci3 rui4 xia2ng

be like/NPRO.DEMthis/auspicious/auspicious sign

"Such an auspicious sign

實未曾有。

shi2 we4i-ze1ng yo3u

ADVtruly/ADVnot yet-ever>never/exist

has really never existed before,

應是禪師來，儀之兆也。”

yi1ng shi4 Cha2n-shi1 la2iyi4 zhi1 zha4o ye3

V.MOD.NEC/COP/NPR-master/come/correct behaviour/PART/omen/SF.COP

it certainly means that that a Cha2n-master is coming, an omen of [proper] behaviour." [?]