止觀輔行傳弘決 2.31

2.31

Next, among the [sections on] passing through various good [actions], first distinguishing the 'four phases': 'Phase' (yun) means movement; moving from 'not yet' to 'about to', from 'about to' to 'presently', and from 'presently' to 'already'—hence it is generally spoken of as movement. Furthermore, the Guoyu states: 'Conveyance on land is called yun; conveyance on water is called cao.' Conveyance: it is constantly conveyed by the four minds of the nine realms, hence it is named a 'phase' (yun). Now, one subsumes the nine phases and brings them into the Buddha-phase, yet still contemplates that the Buddha-phase does not go beyond the nine phases. The substance of the Buddha-phase is intrinsically devoid of self-nature; therefore, one must distinguish the four phases. This gate of distinguishing heads the subsequent 'acting' and 'experiencing'; if one does not first discern it, the contemplation of mind will have nothing to rely upon; hence it is said, 'Consciousness is formless; it is distinguished through the four marks.' Furthermore, because worldly people mostly regard the arising mind as delusive, one must contemplate that the ceased mind is not delusive. To not contemplate it at all, deeming it to be 'non-arising', is an extreme error. Worldly practitioners of dhyāna all contemplate non-arising, without knowing where non-arising is located. Does it exist beforehand? Or is it non-existent beforehand? If it exists beforehand, one has already realized non-arising; if it is non-existent beforehand, how can it be called contemplation? If one knows that the nine realms serve as the objects of contemplation, then even the already arisen and not-yet-arisen of the bodhisattva realm must still be observed, not to mention the rest! Now, speaking of 'already' and 'not yet' is according to the presence or absence of mind regarding internal and external conditions. The presence or absence of mind has always been contaminated; how could one judge arising or non-arising based on this? Just as someone guarding against fire guards against all of it: if one only guards against what has broken out and does not guard against what has not yet broken out, one will surely be burned by the fire that has not yet broken out. Contemplating the already arisen and not-yet-arisen minds is truly guarding against what is about to arise and presently arising. Practitioners of the contemplation of non-arising only know how to contemplate the presently arisen mind to make the mind not arise; they do not know how to contemplate the not-yet-arisen mind. The substance of mind is fundamentally non-existent; since non-existence is fundamentally non-existent, arising is also not an arising. This corresponds to the minds of arising and non-arising that arise and cease with regard to the worldly six dusts; failing even to know such a ceased mind oneself, how much less could one know the minds of desire, form, and formlessness, and how much less the analysis of substance and the one-sided small [vehicles], etc.! Even the mind of perfect non-arising must still be observed; how much more so the rest! Furthermore, contemplating the four phases is, within [the samādhi of] following one's own intention, cultivating contemplation by following what is not yet and following phenomena. Like the constantly sitting [samādhi] and so forth, which sometimes only contemplate principle, maintaining that all phenomena are nothing other than dharma-nature; therefore, one should know that cultivators of samādhi must not neglect either of these two paths. Thus the Zhancha jing states: 'There are two kinds of contemplation: first, consciousness-only, meaning that all is mind-only; second, the real contemplation, meaning contemplating thusness.' Consciousness-only passes through phenomena; thusness contemplates principle. In the present text, contemplating the four phases of the ten realms corresponds in meaning to 'all is mind-only' in the Zhancha jing. Hence the present text states: 'Being able to comprehend these four, one then enters the markless.' If one sequentially contemplates the fourteen phases, it is called a conceivable object. Being able to fathom that the nine realms are themselves the Buddha dharma-dhātu is called inconceivable. One must still arouse the aspiration for awakening and so on up to departing from craving; only then does one fulfill the characteristics of entering the path of our school. Therefore, Mahāsattva Fu's poem 'Solitary' says: 'Solitary, I ask myself: / What is attached within my mind? / Examining the four phases, all are non-arising; / How could a thousand threads and ten thousand strands bind me?' One should know that the Flawless Mahāsattva also took the four phases as the essential of mind. Although the Mahāsattva did not mention the ten realms, having spoken of 'ten thousand strands', the meaning also encompasses them. As in the sixty-four phrases below, which are investigated turn by turn, therefore the Mahāsattva also spoke of 'examining'. 'One mark is markless' means that the four marks of the nine realms are all ungraspable, which is called the 'one mark'; the one mark being intrinsically non-existent is called 'markless'. Below 'Question', it analyzes the two minds of 'already' and 'not yet'. The intention of the question is precisely to reprove others who only contemplate what is presently arising; hence it first asks: 'These two are without mind; how can they be contemplated?' In the answer, there are two rounds: first answering the not-yet-thought, next answering the already-thought; both rounds contain dharma, metaphor, and application. First, regarding the dharma: it is merely called non-existent because it has not yet arisen; since it is not permanently non-existent, it must be contemplated. Below 'Like a person', regarding the metaphor: doing and not doing pertain to the preceding matter; although the matter may exist or not exist, the person cannot be annihilated. Below 'The mind also', regarding the application: thinking and not thinking pertain to the preceding conditions; although conditions may exist or not exist, the mind cannot be annihilated. Since the mind is not annihilated, because of this it can extensively give rise to all minds; therefore, one contemplates it without allowing it to condition delusion—delusion being the nine realms—and contemplates entering the Buddha-mind. The two characters zuo and zuo (作作) are both in the pronunciation zu'e (zuò); doing the work that is to be done is called 'doing the doing'. Next, below 'having thought', the second round of answers: in view of the matter having passed, the mind cannot be non-existent. Below 'Like a person', the metaphor. Below 'having thought', the application. Next, the question cites the Diamond Sūtra's statement that the mind of the three times is ungraspable: 'already' is the past, 'not yet' is the future, and even the present is non-existent; how then can one speak of contemplating the mind of the three times? In the answer, it first refutes this in general. Below 'If the past', answering specifically: first taking up the preceding objection, next below 'How can it be', answering directly. As in what you ask about not contemplating the three times, how could sages contemplate the mind of the three times? Below 'Ghosts and spirits', bringing up the inferior to manifest the superior. Below 'How can it be', refuting in reverse. If even inferior classes like ghosts and spirits know the three times, how could the Buddha-dharma bring about the non-existence of the three times? Question: How do ghosts and spirits know the three times? Answer: As in the Vibhāṣā, where a ghost entered a woman's body, and the spell-master asked: 'Why do you torment another?' It replied: 'This woman was my enemy across five hundred lifetimes, constantly ending my life. I also constantly ended her life (knowing the past). If she abandons her enmity, I will also abandon mine.' People at the time told the woman: 'You should abandon your enmity.' The woman said: 'I have already abandoned it.' The ghost observed the woman's mind: although her mouth spoke of abandoning, her heart did not abandon it, so it immediately ended the woman's life (knowing the present). Since it knew its own and the other's past, present, and future, one should infer from this that it killed in the present to guard against future enmity. Furthermore, the hells are even lower in class, yet they also know the past, as in the saying: 'Formerly I was a Brahman king; when the Dharma was preached to me, I refused to believe and accept it, leading to the experience of this suffering.' They also know that due to creating such sins, they entered hell, and so forth. If ghosts and hells still know cause and effect across lifetimes in the three times, how could a practitioner fail to recognize the momentary arising and ceasing of the three times? 'Views of turtle hair and rabbit horns' uses these two things as a metaphor for the view of annihilationism. You cite that the three times are all ungraspable, and immediately deem there to be no mind, just like those two things are entirely non-existent—this is called the view of annihilationism. Therefore, the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra states: 'Rabbit horns, turtle hair, salt fragrance, snake feet, and the color of wind, etc., are called non-existent.' This takes the running rabbit and water turtle as metaphors; if it were a flying rabbit or land turtle, there might possibly be hair or horns. Therefore, the Mahā[parinirvāṇa]-sūtra states: 'Like water turtle hair, like running rabbit horns.' Below 'One should know', it concludes. Taking this mind of the three times as the object of contemplation is neither annihilated nor permanent. Why? Because it is not permanent, it has no reality; because it is not annihilated, it can be contemplated. One does not say it is permanently non-existent because of its unreality; because it is unreal, it can serve as the object of contemplation. Therefore, citing the verse: everything taught by the Buddha is neither annihilated nor permanent; how could one give rise to the view of annihilation? Below 'If one gives rise to', concluding with a reproof. If one gives rise to the view of annihilation, there is no object of contemplation; when the object of contemplation is non-existent, all causes and effects and myriad practices are lost together; therefore, one must contemplate the two minds of 'already' and 'not yet'. Hence one knows that the sūtra you cite was misunderstood in its doctrinal intent; as for saying that the three times are ungraspable, it merely means they have no reality—who said they are permanently non-existent? Therefore, one should know that in the Buddha-dharma there are two truths: through the conventional truth they exist; through the ultimate truth they are non-existent; one cannot use non-existence to object to existence. Therefore, the Diamond [Sūtra] contemplates their conventional truth; the substance of the conventional is unreal, which is termed 'ungraspable'.