釋摩訶衍論 2.38

2.38

The treatise states: There are five kinds of speech. What are the five? The first is speech based on characteristics; the second is speech based on dreams; the third is speech based on false grasping; the fourth is speech based on beginninglessness; the fifth is speech in accord with reality. It is said in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: “Mahāmati! Speech based on characteristics arises from attachment to various characteristics such as form. Mahāmati! Speech based on dreams arises from recollecting one's past experience of unreal sense-objects, relying on the dream of sense-objects, and after awakening, knowing and relying on the unreality of unreal sense-objects. Mahāmati! Speech based on attachment arises from recollecting deeds done and things heard in the past. Mahāmati! Speech based on beginninglessness arises from the habituation of the seeds of defilement through attachment to prapañca from beginningless time.” In the Vajrasamādhi-sūtra it is said: Śāriputra said, “All myriad dharmas are words and texts; the characteristics of words and texts are not their reality, and the real reality cannot be spoken. How then does the Tathāgata preach the Dharma now?” The Buddha said, “My preaching of the Dharma is because you sentient beings abide in birth and speak; I speak of the unspeakable, and for this reason I speak it. What I speak is speech of meaning, not text. What sentient beings speak is speech of text, not meaning. Speech that is not of meaning is entirely empty and non-existent; empty and non-existent speech has no speech concerning meaning, and what does not speak of meaning is all false speech. Speech in accord with meaning is truly empty and not empty, empty and real and not real; it is free from the two characteristics, and in the middle it does not abide in the middle. Dharma that is not in the middle is free from the three characteristics; it perceives no location, for it speaks of suchness as it truly is.” Among these five, because the first four kinds of speech are false speech, they cannot discourse upon truth; because the latter one kind of speech is speech in accord with reality, it can discourse upon the true principle. Bodhisattva Aśvaghoṣa, relying on the first four, spoke in this way. As for being free from the characteristics of words, names are of two kinds. What are the two? The first is the name of syllable by syllable; the second is the name of the reflection of syllables. It is said in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: “Mahāmati! Furthermore, the collection of names (nāmakāya) refers to various syllables differentiated by names, from the letter A up to the letter Ha; these are called the collection of names.” It is said in the Bodhipakṣa-sūtra: “Speaking together within a mirror is called a reflected name.” Syllables are of two kinds. What are the two? The first is syllables dependent on sound; the second is syllables dependent on space. It is said in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: “Mahāmati! Furthermore, the collection of syllables (vyañjanakāya) refers to the length of sound and the pitch of the tone; this is called the collection of syllables.” In the Mahāsamudra-sūtra it is said: The Buddha told Mañjuśrī, “As to what you asked before, what is meant by the syllables of the wheel of space: for example, when a flying bird in space surpasses the blazing light, it emits ten kinds of harmonious sounds; the syllables of the wheel of space should be viewed in this way.” Among these two [pairs], each former one cannot express the profound true principle, while each latter one can express the true principle. Now, relying on the former gate, it is spoken in this way. Being free from the characteristics of mental objects: mental measures are ten. What are the ten? The first is the mind of eye-consciousness; the second is the mind of ear-consciousness; the third is the mind of nose-consciousness; the fourth is the mind of tongue-consciousness; the fifth is the mind of body-consciousness; the sixth is the mind of mental consciousness; the seventh is the mind of manas-consciousness; the eighth is the mind of ālayavijñāna; the ninth is the mind of the consciousness of the many-as-one; the tenth is the mind of the consciousness of one-by-one. Among these ten, the first nine kinds of mind do not cognize the true principle as an object; the latter one kind of mind is able to cognize the true principle as its objective realm. Now, relying on the first nine, it is spoken in this way. Being free from the characteristics of mental objects: it is said in the Mūla-bhūta-sūtra: “The profound true principle is not an objective realm of anything else; it only takes that on which it relies as its objective realm.” As for “ultimately equal, without alteration, and indestructible,” this is to show the merits of the three freedoms: namely, all differentiations revolve with the four kinds of false speech as their root; all nine kinds of altered doctrines and ten kinds of divergent attachments of non-Buddhists revolve solely with names as their root; and all breaking obstructions of affliction and all destroying obstructions of the cognizable revolve solely in reliance on the categories of mind. Yet within the true essence, being free from the three characteristics, the three virtues are fully perfected. As for “it is solely the one mind, therefore it is called tathatā,” this concludes the essence of tathatā. As for “because all speech is conventional names and without reality, merely following false thoughts, it cannot be apprehended,” this shows the causes and conditions of the three freedoms: namely, because all speech is without reality, all conventional names are without reality, and all conscious minds merely follow false thoughts and cannot be apprehended, within the ineffable real principle they are not apart from the three characteristics, for unreal characteristics and the Dharma as it is are extremely contrary to each other. As for “what is called tathatā also has no characteristics,” this is the second turn of phrase to dispel the error of attachment: namely, foolish sentient beings form such an attachment that the principle of the essence of tathatā—far removed from the three characteristics and replete with the three virtues—although having no provisional characteristics, has real characteristics, naturally permanent and definitely real. Due to such reckoning, they fall into the extreme of permanence with no time of escape. Therefore, in order to dispel such a view, it is said that what is called tathatā also has no characteristics. As for “the ultimate limit of speech dispels speech by means of speech,” this directly demonstrates the causes and conditions of the characterlessness of tathatā: namely, all speech culminates in tathatā and cannot go beyond it. Since it cuts off speech, how could it have characteristics without words? Hence, it only dispels speech by means of speech. In this way, that which can dispel is speech as suchness as it truly is; that which is dispelled is the four kinds of false speech. It is said in the Great Text of the Vimalakīrti-sūtra: At that time, Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva said to Guṇa-avadata: “All of us in the great assembly have each spoken, according to our own inclination, of the eight thousand and one ways toward the gate of non-duality. As appropriate, let Vimalakīrti, for the sake of our great assembly, speak the speech that is free from speech, non-non-dual non-duality, and remove the defilement of provisional speech.” Thereupon Vimalakīrti was silent and said nothing. At that time Mañjuśrī praised Vimalakīrti, saying: “Excellent, excellent, O householder! Speak of suchness as suchness; listen to suchness as the ear. Excellent, excellent! This is truly the Dharma gate of non-duality. This is truly the Dharma body of non-duality.” Having explained the gate that directly expresses the true essence, next is to explain the gate that explains the names. As for “within this essence of tathatā there is nothing to be dispelled, because all dharmas are completely true,” this explains the name with respect to “true”; as for “neither is there anything to be established, because all dharmas are equally such,” this explains the name with respect to “suchness.” What meaning is this text intended to clarify? It shows that there is no wisdom of severance and realization. What does this mean? It means that the arising of the path of severance must be caused by remedying obstructions; it cannot arise on its own. Yet within the true essence, there are no defiled dharmas that could be dispelled; therefore, there is no path of severance that can remedy them. Why is this? Because there is not a single dharma that is not the true essence. Furthermore, if there were obstructions and wisdom that varied with the high and low of the mind, one could establish all stages and grounds. But within the essence of suchness there are no distinct stages that can be established; therefore, there is no expedient means that can establish them. Why is this? Because there is not a single dharma that is not the essence of suchness. As for “one should know that because all dharmas cannot be spoken and cannot be thought, they are named tathatā,” this concludes what was said above.