請觀音經疏闡義鈔 2.18

2.18

In adapting to ailments and capacities, there are four intents: first, clinging to teachings and forgetting practice; second, grasping phenomena and losing principle; third, meanings being easy and contemplation being difficult; fourth, feelings being narrow and nature being pervasive. Revealing practice and revealing principle, proceeding from the difficult and proceeding from the pervasive, it briefly clarifies meaning in terms of principle. By way of example, our lineage's contemplation of mind does not exceed three kinds: namely, in terms of practice, appended to dharmas, and anchored in phenomena. In terms of practice, it resides in the Great Calming and Contemplation; phenomena and dharmas are pervasive across all texts. Yet one should deeply understand that the three thousand realms in the nature of mind discussed in the Great Calming and Contemplation entirely encompass all great and small principles, afflictions, wisdoms, practices, stages, and teachings; whether dependent or proper [reward], they do not depart from one's own mind. Only then does one comprehend that across various texts, corresponding expressions adapted to phenomena have their proper orientation. Thus we know that although there are three forms of contemplation, their intent is purely one: appending to dharmas and anchoring in phenomena merely support and accomplish contemplation in terms of practice. Now explaining the monastery of the Great Forest is contemplating the mind anchored in phenomena. Therefore the words 'ten thousand virtues' are all in terms of one's own mind, not pointing to another's fruition. If pointing to another's fruition, one will surely be confused about one's own sphere. If one comprehends the mind-sphere, self is other, and other is self; if one does not comprehend this sphere, self still becomes other, so how could one contemplate other? Question: The Vimalakīrti Commentary explains Vaiśālī and the rest all in terms of three meanings: first, phenomenal explanation; second, in terms of Dharma gates; third, in terms of mind contemplation. Direct symbolic correspondence is in terms of Dharma gates; subsuming phenomena with the three contemplations is properly called mind contemplation. Now the commentary says that because it encompasses the two truths it is called 'great', which is an explanation in terms of Dharma gates, and should not be contemplating the mind anchored in phenomena. Answer: Textual meaning adapts to convenience; it cannot be made uniform. Because in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra there are passages such as 'the joy of Dharma is the wife,' and the text says 'the liberation of all Buddhas should be sought within the mental activities of sentient beings.' Since there are two passages, it divides into two explanations. If various texts merely make symbolic correspondences with Dharma gates, that is itself mind contemplation; just as with Samantabhadra's white elephant in the Great Calming and Contemplation and the banner-altar in the Vaipulya [repentance], these are direct correspondences with Dharma gates, yet the Exemplary Meaning indicates them as contemplating the mind anchored in phenomena. Therefore one must follow the text's fullness or brevity, adapting as appropriate; thus what is represented here is indeed mind contemplation.