大慧普覺禪師語錄 14.2.2

14.2.2

And he answered on his behalf, saying, 'Twins.' They also merely understand it as conforming to unconditioned non-arising through the words, saying, 'He himself asked about bullocks and heifers, and then answered for him, saying, "Twins." Nothing left over at all—even the Buddha's eye cannot catch sight of it.' They take such words as hitting the bullseye without exposing the blade's edge and without wasting energy. Furthermore, for instance, an ancient pointed to a stone and asked a student, 'Is this stone inside the mind or outside the mind?' The student replied, 'Inside the mind.' The ancient worthy said, 'What desperate rush are you in to put a stone inside your mind?' People in the assembly deliberate over this, saying, 'He should not have answered with inside or outside. If answered with inside or outside, then dharma would have something left over.' So they offer the remark, 'What a very fine stone!' Or they say, 'I deeply appreciate this question.' Or they say, 'What do you call a stone?' Or they say, 'Yes, yes.' Or they say, 'In front of the dharma hall.' Or they say, 'Thank you, Master, for the instruction.' Or they say, 'Does the reverend still know shame?' Or they say, 'You are making a fool of me!' Whenever answering such sayings, they merely wrap it up with a single phrase, calling it 'dense and seamless' and calling it 'not running astray.' Views like this are very numerous in the monasteries. Others say that all words have nothing at all to do with it; whenever they bring it up, they first glare wide-eyed, like a child suffering from infant convulsions who sees ghosts and spirits, grasping it only in the staring brows and glaring eyes, and they erroneously quote the words of ancients as evidence: 'If you bring it up without looking, you are mistaken; if you intend to deliberate, in what kalpa will you awaken?' When bringing it up, one must look with the eyes, merely bringing up the words of the ancients once to alert oneself, calling it 'not dwelling on words and phrases.' Such as the cypress tree, washing the bowl, the three pounds of hemp, and the like—if they can get past one of them, they brush aside the rest without wasting any more effort. This sort of thing, compared to flint-struck sparks or flashes of lightning, only adds glaring eyes and raised brows, yet each and every one claims to have grasped the Patriarch's nostril. It would be better not to slander those ancients! For example, when bringing up a monk asking Yunmen, 'What is the phrase that penetrates the dharmakāya?' Yunmen said, 'Hiding the body in the Northern Dipper. How do you understand it?' The student then glares wide-eyed and says, 'Hiding the body in the Northern Dipper!' If the teacher provisionally checks him, he shouts several times in succession, 'Hiding the body in the Northern Dipper! Hiding the body in the Northern Dipper!' thinking that he holds firm and is master of himself, not being swayed, and the teacher, unable to do anything, also calls him genuine. Only then does the teacher ask what his meaning is. Thereupon he offers the remark, 'Even the Buddha's eye cannot catch sight of it.' Or he says, 'Raise your head and look beyond the heavens.' Or when asked, 'What is the meaning of the Patriarch's coming from the West? The cypress tree in the courtyard,' he immediately offers the remark, 'One branch to the south, one branch to the north.' Or he says, 'Able to be master of all phenomena, not withering with the four seasons.' All the above reside in the glaring eyes and raised brows when bringing it to mind, and then delivering a matching phrase, considering it extraordinary. Blind fools! It is not that when glaring eyes and raising brows there is Chan, and when not glaring eyes and raising brows there is no Chan; it is not that when bringing it to mind there is Chan, and when not bringing it to mind there is no Chan. Others, seeing Yunmen speak like this, then mistakenly understand, saying, 'When bringing it to mind, it is so; when not bringing it to mind, it is also so—there are not two different kinds.' Those like this are even beyond rescue. Still others do not pay attention to anything at all; as soon as one mentions the buddhadharma or mentions awakening, they go mad, and they erroneously quote the words of ancients, saying, 'Originally there is no person of delusion or awakening; one only needs to settle it today.' All the ancient encounters they call 'establishing the provisional' and also call 'establishing what is genuine,' lying only in not deliberating over the buddhadharma. Whenever there is a question and answer, they respond based on the facts one by one, ordinary and without affairs: heaven is heaven and earth is earth, exposed pillars are wood, vajra-guardians are sculpted from clay, when hungry eating food and when weary sleeping—what else is there? Have you not seen what Reverend Zhenjing said: 'Do not understand it as having no affairs; having no affairs binds people's minds.' Often those poisoned by 'no affairs' actually consider these words to be wrong. Others, seeing that the ancients' gong'ans cannot be deliberated upon through rational paths, then produce an irrelevant phrase and answer it offhand, calling it 'mysterious and wondrous,' calling it 'not involving paths of meaning,' and calling it 'leaping free right at the dynamic moment.' For example, when a monk asked Zhaozhou, 'The myriad dharmas return to the one; where does the one return?' Zhaozhou said, 'When I was in Qingzhou, I made a cloth robe weighing seven catties.' Regarding things of this kind, how many people mistakenly deliberate, saying, 'This monk posed an extraordinary question; if Zhaozhou did not have an avenue of escape, he would have been at a loss.' They say, 'The myriad dharmas return to the one; the one has nowhere else to return. If it had somewhere to return, there would be a real dharma.' Therefore Zhaozhou saw through it, and with wondrous function at the dynamic moment, he brushed it off in reply, saying, 'When I was in Qingzhou, I made a cloth robe weighing seven catties.' How extraordinary! Others deliberate, saying, 'The myriad dharmas return to the one; where does the one return? If the one had nowhere to return, it would fall into emptiness. Therefore Zhaozhou said: "When I was in Qingzhou, I made a cloth robe weighing seven catties." This turning-word of Zhaozhou is truly extraordinary, falling neither into existence nor nonexistence; he answered it wonderfully.' Others say, 'Yunmen speaks like this only because he fears people will attach to things; if one does not attach, that is the Patriarch's essential mind. One only needs to realize this matter, unattached, free and at ease; not departing from reality where one stands, where one stands is reality—what else is there?' Or if asked, 'Before your parents were born, what was your original face?' they immediately say, 'No attendant responds to the reverend,' taking karmic consciousness as their vital essence. Followers like this are all madmen running outside. There is yet another sort who know that their own dharma eye is not bright, that their Chan does not win people's trust, and that they have no means to instruct students. They themselves have never listened to the teachings, so they make petty peddling at the lecturers' places, snatching a phrase or half a sentence to bewitch the deaf and vulgar. Master Linji said, 'There is a kind of blind bald soldiers who take ideas from the scriptural vehicles and deliberate them, turning them into phrasal meanings, just like holding a lump of dung in their mouths and spitting it out to others—they are truly unbearable!'