肇論疏 2.59

2.59

第二、辨聖心也。辨聖心即以釋前答也。文中有二：前離辨聖心離釋兩意，後合辨聖心合釋兩意。今先辨聖心，然後釋妙盡冥符不可以定慧為名也。玄心，謂心合玄理也。默照，謂潛照幽微也。理極同無，謂見空無之理即與無同，無同故為極也。既曰為同同無不極者，既與無同，即是極智，無有不極之義也。何有同無之極而有定慧之名者，既與虛無理同，名之為極，何得於此極智更有定慧兩名耶？定慧之名非同外之稱耶者，言此兩名是同無極智外名，不關極智體也。若稱生同內有稱非同者，若定慧二名生於同無極智之內者，有此二名，則非同無之智矣。若稱生同外稱非我也，若定慧兩名生於同無智外，此之二名不關於智。我，謂智也。又聖心虛微妙絕常境下，釋前虛泊獨感不可稱群數已息也。虛微，謂虛無微妙也。常境，謂常人境界。聖心不同，故云妙絕也。感無不應會無不通者，有感皆應，故無不應；有會必通，故無不通也。冥機潛運其用不勤者，冥機謂神心。神心潛用，不勤勞也。毛長《詩傳》云：勤，勞也。《爾雅》云：勤，病也。何為而息者，應化不息也。

Second, discerning the sage's mind. Discerning the sage's mind serves to explain the preceding answer. In this text there are two parts: first, discerning the sage's mind separately to explain the two meanings separately; second, discerning the sage's mind jointly to explain the two meanings jointly. Here he first discerns the sage's mind, and then explains why "marvelously reaching the end and darkly tallying cannot be named in terms of samādhi and prajñā." "Profound mind" means the mind accords with profound principle. "Silently illuminates" means it secretly illuminates the subtle and obscure. "Reaching the peak of principle and being identical with non-being" means seeing the principle of emptiness and non-being, it is identical with non-being; because it is identical with non-being, it is the peak. Regarding "since it is said to be identical, being identical with non-being, there is nothing it does not peak": since it is identical with non-being, it is the ultimate wisdom, and there is no sense in which it does not reach the peak. Regarding "how could there be the peak of being identical with non-being, and yet possess the designations of samādhi and prajñā?": since it accords with the principle of empty non-being and is called "the peak," how could there further be the two designations "samādhi" and "prajñā" in this ultimate wisdom? Regarding "are not the designations of samādhi and prajñā names outside of this identity?": this states that these two designations are names outside the ultimate wisdom that is identical with non-being, having no relation to the essence of the ultimate wisdom. Regarding "if the designation arises within the identity, then having a designation, it is not identical": if the two designations of samādhi and prajñā arose within the ultimate wisdom identical with non-being, then having these two designations, it would not be the wisdom identical with non-being. Regarding "if the designation arises outside the identity, the designation is not myself": if the two designations of samādhi and prajñā arose outside the wisdom identical with non-being, these two designations would have no relation to the wisdom. "Myself" refers to the wisdom. Furthermore, regarding "moreover, the sage's mind is open and subtle, marvelously transcending ordinary realms...": this explains the earlier "spiritually tranquil, responding singularly, it cannot be said to cease in correspondence to the multiplicity of things." "Open and subtle" means empty, non-being, subtle, and wondrous. "Ordinary realms" refers to the realms of ordinary people. The sage's mind is different, hence it is said to "marvelously transcend." Regarding "where there is a stimulus, there is nothing it does not respond to; where there is an encounter, there is nothing it does not penetrate": whatever stimulus there may be, it responds, so there is nothing it does not respond to; whatever encounter there may be, it penetrates, so there is nothing it does not penetrate. Regarding "its dark mechanism secretly operates, its functioning is not laborious": "dark mechanism" means the spiritual mind. The spiritual mind functions secretly, without toil or labor. Mao Chang's commentary on the Book of Odes states: "Qin (勤) means labor." The Erya states: "Qin means affliction." Regarding "why would it cease?": its responsive transformations do not cease.