肇論 1.77

1.77

The Nameless said: Indeed, stopping here one is 'this', and going there one is 'that'. Therefore, 'He who identifies with attainment, attainment also attains him; he who identifies with loss, loss also loses him.' When I go to the asaṃskṛta, I am identical with the asaṃskṛta. Although the asaṃskṛta is one, how does it conflict with not being one? For example, like three birds escaping a net, they equally go to a realm free from affliction. Although freedom from affliction is identical, bird and bird are each different. One cannot, because bird and bird are each different, say that freedom from affliction is also different. Nor can one, because freedom from affliction is already one, make the many birds one. Thus the birds are identical with freedom from affliction, and freedom from affliction is identical with the birds. Could freedom from affliction be different? The difference is from the birds themselves. In this way, sentient beings of the triyāna all cross the cage of delusive conceptualization and equally go to the realm of the asaṃskṛta. Although the asaṃskṛta is identical, vehicle and vehicle are each different. One cannot, because vehicle and vehicle are each different, say that the asaṃskṛta is also different. Nor can one, because the asaṃskṛta is already one, make the triyāna one. Thus I am identical with the asaṃskṛta, and the asaṃskṛta is identical with me. Could the asaṃskṛta be different? The difference is from myself alone. Therefore, although freedom from affliction is identical, their ascending the void has far and near; although the asaṃskṛta is one, their profound insight has shallows and depths. The asaṃskṛta is identical with the vehicle, and the vehicle is identical with the asaṃskṛta. This is not that the self is different from the asaṃskṛta, but because they have not exhausted the asaṃskṛta, there are three.