十不二門指要鈔 1.62

1.62

答：「實相觀者，即於識心體其本寂，三千宛然即空假中。唯識觀者，照於起心變造十界即空假中。故《義例》云，夫觀心法有理有事，從理則唯達法性更無餘途，從事則專照起心四性叵得，亦名本末相映事理不二。又應知，觀於內心二觀既爾，觀於外境二觀亦然，此皆《止觀》及《輔行》文意，非從臆說。他云，真心具三千法，乃指真如名不思議境，非指陰入也。《金錍》云『旁遮偏指清淨真如』，那得持偏指邪？又云，夫唯心之心豈唯真如心邪？須知煩惱心遍。第一記云，專緣理性而破九界，是別教義。那得句句唯於真心？又此標一念乃作一性真如釋之，後文多就剎那明具三千，亦作真如釋邪？」

Answer: "The contemplation of the true mark means directly realizing the fundamental stillness in the mind of consciousness, where the three thousand realms are distinctly present, identical with emptiness, provisionality, and the middle. The contemplation of representation-only means illuminating the arising mind transforming and creating the ten realms, which is identical with emptiness, provisionality, and the middle. Therefore the Yili says: 'Now, the method of contemplating the mind has principle and phenomena: following principle, one only penetrates dharma-nature and there is no other path; following phenomena, one exclusively illuminates the arising mind, where the four natures cannot be found; this is also called the mutual reflection of root and branch, and the nonduality of phenomena and principle.' It should also be known that just as both contemplations are thus with respect to the internal mind, both contemplations are also likewise with respect to external objects. These are all the textual meanings of the Zhiguan and the Fuxing, not spoken from personal speculation. He says that the true mind inherently includes the three thousand dharmas, directly pointing to true suchness as the inconceivable object, not pointing to the skandhas and sensory bases. The Jingangpi says: '[This would be] obliquely blocking [the truth] by exclusively pointing to pure true suchness'—how can one adhere to an exclusive pointing? It also says: 'Now, how could the mind of "mind only" be only the mind of true suchness? One must know that the mind of afflictions is all-pervasive.' The First Subcommentary says: 'Exclusively conditioning the rational nature to destroy the nine realms is the doctrine of the Distinct Teaching.' How can every phrase refer solely to the true mind? Furthermore, this topic of a single thought-moment is interpreted by him as the one nature of true suchness; yet later texts mostly explain the inherent inclusion of the three thousand realms in terms of a kṣaṇa—are they also to be interpreted as true suchness?"