西方合論 5.8

5.8

Furthermore, the Shiyi lun says: “Now, as for neither arising nor ceasing: within conditions of arising, all phenomena combine and do not abide by their own svabhāva; seeking an essence of arising is also impossible. When this arising arises, it comes from nowhere; therefore it is called non-arising. When all phenomena disperse, they do not abide by their own svabhāva; when this dispersal ceases, it goes nowhere; therefore it is said to be unceasing. It is not that apart from arising and ceasing through causes and conditions there is another non-arising and non-ceasing, nor is it that not seeking rebirth in the Pure Land is called anutpāda. A verse says: ‘Phenomena that arise from causes and conditions, / I declare to be emptiness itself; / they are also conventional designations, / and are also the meaning of the Middle Way.’ It also says: ‘Phenomena do not arise from themselves, / nor do they arise from another, / nor from both, nor without a cause; / therefore they are declared to be unarisen.’ It also says: ‘Just as when someone builds a palace or a chamber, / if he relies on empty ground, he proceeds at will without hindrance; / but if he relies on empty space, he can never accomplish it.’ When the Buddhas teach the Dharma, they always rely on the two truths, expounding the true mark of all phenomena without destroying conventional designations. The wise person ardently seeks rebirth in the Pure Land while realizing that the essence of arising cannot be found—this is true anutpāda; this is what is meant by ‘because the mind is pure, the Buddha-land is pure.’ The foolish are bound by ‘arising’: hearing of arising, they understand it as arising; hearing of anutpāda, they understand it as non-arising. They do not know that arising is itself non-arising, and non-arising is itself arising. Not comprehending this principle, they randomly imagine right and wrong, becoming angry at others who seek rebirth in the Pure Land—what great slander!” Changlu said: “Taking arising to be arising is the error of the eternalist view; taking non-arising to be non-arising is the confusion of the annihilationist view. That which arises yet is unarisen, and is unarisen yet arises, is the ultimate truth.” Yongming said: “The nature that is identical to marks: function does not depart from essence. The marks that are identical to the nature: essence does not depart from function. If you wish to praise the nature, that is just praising the marks; if you wish to disparage the marks, that is merely disparaging the nature.” Tianru said: “The nature can manifest marks: non-arising is itself arising. Marks are manifested by the nature: arising is itself non-arising.” Thus, amid the soundless sound, wind rustles the branches and water murmurs; within formless form, there are jewelled trees and balustrades. How could this be the same as the inert emptiness of flying ash and extinguished smoke, or the demonic hordes who reject cause and effect!