觀心論疏 4.19

4.19

若妄情未息者，今更約三假四句撿責也。何者？外人云：世間現見，云何言無？論主破云：何得信汝牛羊眼所見，即謂之為有耶？何以須四句破撿？然心生藉於六塵而生，即因成假；貪心念念相續而起，即相續假；待不生得有今生，即相待假也。今問：思惑生，為從內心生？為從外六塵生？為內心外塵合生？為離內心外塵生耶？四句俱不可得。若內生即自生，如穀子不藉水土應能生；若外塵生即他生，如水土無穀子應能生；若內外合生即共生，上撿內外無生，合云何生？如合二沙俱無油也。若各有生，合則有兩生；若離內外生即無因生，有因生尚不可得，何況無因生？是則四句皆不可得也。然雖破因成假，情猶謂「心相續而生」，今問：為前心滅生？為不滅生？為亦滅亦不滅生？為非滅非不滅生？若前心不滅生後貪心者，即自生過；若前心滅後貪心生者，即他生過；若亦滅亦不滅生後貪心者，即共生過；若前心非滅非不滅後貪心生者，即無因生過。四句之過例前可知。是則四句窮撿，思惑生不可得也。然雖破相續，而情猶謂「心相待而生」，今問：謂待生心生？為待無生心生？為待亦生亦無生心生？為待非生非不生心生？若待生心生即自生，若待無生心生即他生，若待亦生亦無生心生即共生，若待非生非無生心生即無因生。四句之過例前可知，是則四句撿相待假亦究竟空無也。如是三假四句求心不可得，即悟心空、不生執計「定有六塵境界，色聲可存」。思惑被伏名為滅諦，能伏惑之智名為道諦。苦集滅故即無明滅，乃至老死滅。因緣滅故，即三道六弊四倒八苦皆滅。六弊滅故得牛車，苦集滅故得羊車，十二因緣滅故得鹿車，故經云「為聲聞說四諦，為辟支佛說十二因緣，為諸菩薩說六波羅蜜，乘此三乘出五陰之宅」。滅四倒八苦之火，名出火宅，即入化城，得一切智真諦一切法門也，是名從假入空觀也。約位者，三藏即羅漢位，通即已辦地，別即十住，圓即十信。約觀心者，從六道界入二乘界也。第二從空出假觀者，經云「未具佛法，不應滅受而取證」也。設身有苦，當念一切苦惱眾生，「我既調伏亦當調伏一切眾生」，此是明出假之意。然出假有五意：一慈悲心重，先人後己。二憶本誓願。初發心時誓拔一切眾苦、與一切樂。從假入空，既自拔四住苦已，今從空出假，宜拔眾生苦也。三智慧猛利。知住空有棄眾生之過，不能淨佛國土成就眾生，又未具足佛法教。四有善方便，雖即入假不為六塵所染。五有精進勇心，於生死意而有勇也。今取《淨名經》中五義配之，意同。經云「以己之疾愍於彼疾」，即慈悲同也。「當識宿世無數億苦」，豈非憶本誓願也？「當念饒益一切眾生」，豈非智慧知住空失利眾生之過同也？「念於淨命」，即善巧方便同也。「常起精進」，即是精進同也。此是經明五義與此五意同矣。然二乘無此五事，故不能出假。正出假有三事：一知病、二識藥、三授藥。一知病者，即知眾生見、思、世間、出世間種種苦集之病。經云「苦有無量相，我於彼經竟不說之，非聲聞之所能解」。集諦亦爾，遍知此無量苦集，故云知病也。二識藥者，諭如大醫師，善能了知一切眾生種種諸病、藥亦非一，知藥即是知世間出世間種種道滅之藥，遍學恒沙佛法。經云「道有無量相，我於彼經竟不說之，非諸聲聞緣覺所知」。滅亦如是，菩薩遍學此無量道滅法門，故云識藥也。三應病授藥者，經云「舍利弗教金師之子作不淨觀，教浣衣之子作數息觀，二俱不悟道，非但不悟而更增其邪見」，此是不解應病授藥之失也。佛為說法，即得悟道，此是應病授藥之相。今菩薩亦爾，學是應病授藥之法，隨應所堪、稱其所宜而授法藥，令無差機之失。為此三事而出假也。前從假入空遍破見思，慧眼照真名破法遍。今從空入假遍學恒沙佛法而破無知塵沙，而法眼照俗，應病授藥而無差機之過，名破法遍也。

If false sentiments have not yet ceased, we now further examine and interrogate them by means of the three provisionalities and the four propositions. How so? The outsider says: "They are visibly seen in the world, so how can you say they do not exist?" The author of the treatise refutes this, saying: "How can you trust what is seen by your ox-and-sheep eyes and immediately call it existent?" Why is it necessary to use the four propositions to refute and examine? Now, when a thought arises depending on the six dusts, that is provisionality through causes; when a greedy thought arises in thought-by-thought continuity, that is provisionality through continuity; when depending on non-arising there can be this present arising, that is provisionality through relativity. We now ask: Does the arising of delusions of inclination arise from the internal mind? Does it arise from the external six dusts? Does it arise from the combination of internal mind and external dusts? Or does it arise apart from internal mind and external dusts? In all four propositions, it cannot be found. If it arises from within, it would be self-arising, just as a grain seed should be able to sprout without depending on water and earth. If it arises from external dusts, it would be other-arising, just as water and earth should be able to produce sprouts without a grain seed. If it arises from the combination of internal and external, it would be joint arising; but our examination above found no arising from internal or external separately, so how could they arise in combination? It is like combining two piles of sand: neither has oil. If each had arising, their combination would have two arisings. If it arises apart from internal and external, it would be uncaused arising; when conditioned arising cannot even be found, how much less uncaused arising? Thus, none of the four propositions can be maintained. Yet although provisionality through causes has been refuted, the sentiment still supposes that "the mind arises in continuity." We now ask: Does it arise from the cessation of the previous mind? Does it arise from its non-cessation? Does it arise from both cessation and non-cessation? Or does it arise from neither cessation nor non-cessation? If the previous mind does not cease and produces the subsequent greedy mind, this incurs the fault of self-arising. If the previous mind ceases and the subsequent greedy mind arises, this incurs the fault of other-arising. If it arises from both cessation and non-cessation producing the subsequent greedy mind, this incurs the fault of joint arising. If the subsequent greedy mind arises when the previous mind is neither ceased nor non-ceased, this incurs the fault of uncaused arising. The faults of the four propositions are understood by analogy with the previous ones. Thus, upon exhaustive examination through the four propositions, the arising of delusions of inclination cannot be found. Yet although continuity has been refuted, sentiment still supposes that "the mind arises through relativity." We now ask: Does it arise relative to an arising mind? Does it arise relative to a non-arising mind? Does it arise relative to a mind that is both arising and non-arising? Or does it arise relative to a mind that is neither arising nor non-arising? If it arises relative to an arising mind, that is self-arising; if it arises relative to a non-arising mind, that is other-arising; if it arises relative to a mind that is both arising and non-arising, that is joint arising; if it arises relative to a mind that is neither arising nor non-arising, that is uncaused arising. The faults of the four propositions are understood by analogy with the previous ones; thus, examining provisionality through relativity with the four propositions also reveals it to be ultimately empty and non-existent. When one seeks the mind through the three provisionalities and the four propositions and cannot find it, one awakens to the emptiness of the mind and does not produce the attached presumption that "there definitely exist realms of the six dusts, and form and sound can abide." Delusions of inclination being subdued is called the truth of cessation; the wisdom able to subdue delusions is called the truth of the path. Because suffering and accumulation are extinguished, ignorance is extinguished, up to old age and death being extinguished. Because conditioned origination is extinguished, the three paths, six obscurations, four inversions, and eight sufferings are all extinguished. Because the six obscurations are extinguished, one obtains the ox cart; because suffering and accumulation are extinguished, one obtains the sheep cart; because the twelve links of dependent origination are extinguished, one obtains the deer cart. Therefore a sūtra states: "For the śrāvakas he expounded the four truths; for the pratyekabuddhas he expounded the twelve links of dependent origination; for the bodhisattvas he expounded the six pāramitās; riding these three vehicles they escape the house of the five skandhas." Extinguishing the fire of the four inversions and eight sufferings is called escaping the burning house; this is immediately entering the transformed city and attaining all-knowledge, the true truth, and all dharma-gateways. This is called the contemplation of entering emptiness from the provisional. In terms of stages, for the Tripiṭaka teaching it is the arhat stage; for the shared teaching it is the ground of having completed what was to be done; for the distinct teaching it is the ten abodes; for the complete teaching it is the ten faiths. In terms of contemplation of mind, it is entering the realm of the two vehicles from the realm of the six destinies. Second, regarding the contemplation of emerging from emptiness into the provisional: a sūtra states, "Not yet having perfected the Buddha-dharma, one should not extinguish feeling and realize [the fruit]." Even if one's body experiences suffering, one should be mindful of all afflicted sentient beings: "Since I have subdued myself, I should also subdue all sentient beings." This clarifies the intention of emerging into the provisional. Now, emerging into the provisional has five intentions: first, deep compassion, putting others before oneself. Second, recollecting the fundamental vows: when first generating the mind, one vowed to uproot all the sufferings of sentient beings and bestow all joys. Entering emptiness from the provisional, having already uprooted the sufferings of the four abidings for oneself, now emerging from emptiness into the provisional, one should uproot the suffering of sentient beings. Third, sharp and fierce wisdom: knowing that dwelling in emptiness has the fault of abandoning sentient beings, being unable to purify Buddha-lands or bring sentient beings to maturity, and not yet being complete in the Buddha-dharma's teachings. Fourth, possessing skillful means: though entering into the provisional, one is not defiled by the six dusts. Fifth, possessing an energetic and courageous mind: having courage regarding the notion of birth-and-death. Now we take the five meanings in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa to match these, and their sense is identical. The sūtra states: "Through one's own sickness, one sympathizes with their sickness"—this is identical with compassion. "One should recognize the countless hundreds of millions of sufferings of past lives"—how could this not be recollecting the fundamental vows? "One should be mindful of benefiting all sentient beings"—how could this not be identical with wisdom that recognizes the fault of dwelling in emptiness and failing to benefit sentient beings? "Being mindful of pure livelihood" is identical with skillful means. "Constantly giving rise to vigor" is identical with vigor. These are the five meanings clarified in the sūtra, which are identical with these five intentions. The two vehicles lack these five matters, and therefore cannot emerge into the provisional. The actual emergence into the provisional involves three matters: first, knowing the illness; second, recognizing the medicine; third, dispensing the medicine. First, knowing the illness means knowing sentient beings' illnesses of views, inclinations, and the various mundane and supramundane sufferings and accumulations. A sūtra states: "Suffering has immeasurable marks; I did not expound them in that sūtra after all, for they are not what śrāvakas can understand." The truth of accumulation is likewise; universally knowing these immeasurable sufferings and accumulations is therefore called knowing the illness. Second, recognizing the medicine is analogized to a great physician who is skilled in understanding all the various illnesses of sentient beings, for which the medicines are also not single; knowing the medicine means knowing the various mundane and supramundane medicines of path and cessation, universally studying Buddha-dharmas numerous as the sands of the Ganges. A sūtra states: "The path has immeasurable marks; I did not expound them in that sūtra after all, for they are not what śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas know." Cessation is likewise; a bodhisattva universally studies these immeasurable dharma-gateways of path and cessation, which is therefore called recognizing the medicine. Third, dispensing medicine according to the illness: a sūtra states, "Śāriputra taught the son of a goldsmith to practice the contemplation of impurity, and taught the son of a washerman to practice the contemplation of mindfulness of breathing; neither awakened to the Way, and not only did they not awaken, but their false views further increased." This is the fault of not understanding how to dispense medicine according to the illness. When the Buddha preached the Dharma for them, they immediately attained awakening to the Way; this is the mark of dispensing medicine according to the illness. Now the bodhisattva is likewise: studying this method of dispensing medicine according to the illness, dispensing the medicine of Dharma according to capacity and what is suitable, so that there is no error regarding their faculties. It is for these three matters that one emerges into the provisional. Previously, entering emptiness from the provisional universally refuted views and inclinations; the eye of wisdom illuminating the real was called the refutation of phenomena everywhere. Now, entering the provisional from emptiness, one universally studies the Buddha-dharmas numerous as the sands of the Ganges to refute the dust-and-sand ignorance; the eye of Dharma illuminates the conventional, dispensing medicine according to the illness without the fault of misjudging faculties, which is called the refutation of phenomena everywhere.