禪源諸詮集都序 2.2.2

2.2.2

(If one says that the water, waves, clarity, turbidity, freezing, and flowing are water, how does that differ from the other's question?) The Buddhadharma is also like this. Suppose someone asks: "I frequently hear various sūtras say: 'Confused, it is defiled; awakened, it is pure. Let loose, it is ordinary; cultivated, it is noble. It can produce all worldly and transmundane dharmas.' What thing is this?" (This is asking by raising its functions, meanings, and operations.) The answer says: "It is the mind." (This answers by raising the name.) The foolish take the name and think they already know it. The wise should further ask: "What is the mind?" (This inquires into its substance.) The answer says: "Awareness is the mind." (This points directly to its substance. This word is the most precise; other words are not as good. If one says that being neither svabhāva nor lakṣaṇa, or being able to speak and move, is the mind, how does that differ from the words of the other's question?) Deducing from this, the name and substance of water are each only one single character; all the rest are meanings and functions. The name and substance of mind are also like this. The single character "wetness" pervades the myriad functions and meanings such as clarity and turbidity; the single character "awareness" likewise pervades the myriad functions and meanings such as greed, anger, compassion, patience, good, evil, suffering, and joy. Nowadays, many students of Chan doubt, saying: "Bodhidharma only spoke of mind; why did Heze speak of awareness?" Is not one who doubts like this similar to one who doubts, saying: "Formerly I only heard there is water in the well; why today do I suddenly perceive wetness in the well?" Reflect upon this, reflect upon this! One must directly awaken to the fact that "water" is the name, not wetness, and "wetness" is the water, not the name; then, regarding clarity, turbidity, water, waves, freezing, and flowing, there is no meaning that is not understood. Analogously, "mind" is the name, not awareness, and "awareness" is the mind, not the name; then, regarding the true, the false, defilement, purity, good, and evil, there is no meaning that is not understood. The Śūnyatā school and the Lakṣaṇa school are intended for beginners and those of shallow capacity; fearing that they might give rise to attachment following the words, they only mark the name and refute its errors, extensively using only meanings and functions to guide their understanding. The Tathāgatagarbha school is for long-practicing students and those of superior faculties, causing them to forget words and recognize the substance; therefore, it directly shows it in a single word. (Bodhidharma said: "Point to a single word to directly show it." Later people did not understand the meaning and searched, wondering what this single word was. If one says that "This very mind is Buddha" is the single word, this is four words; how could it be called one?) Once the substance is recognized, one only then contemplates its meanings and functions upon that substance; therefore, nothing is not understood. Eighth, the difference between two truths and three truths: All worldly and transmundane dharmas explained by the Śūnyatā school do not go beyond two truths. Practitioners all know this; there is no need to cite and explain it. The Tathāgatagarbha school, however, subsumes all nature, lakṣaṇas, and the substance itself altogether into three truths: It takes the dependently arisen form and other dharmas as the conventional truth; it takes the lack of svabhāva in conditions, so that all dharmas are empty, as the ultimate truth (this does not differ in meaning from the single truth of the Śūnyatā school and Lakṣaṇa school); and the single true mind's substance, which is neither empty nor form, yet capable of being empty and capable of being form, is the supreme ultimate truth of the middle way. It is just like a bright mirror, which also possesses three meanings: The reflection in the mirror cannot be called yellow when it is blue, and beautiful and ugly are distinct, which is like the conventional truth; the reflection has no svabhāva and is entirely empty, which is like the ultimate truth; its substance is constantly bright, neither empty nor blue or yellow, yet capable of being empty and capable of being blue or yellow, which is like the supreme truth. This is fully explained as in the Yingluo, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, the Benye, and other sūtras. Therefore, the Tiantai school relies on these three truths to cultivate the three cessations and three contemplations, accomplishing the three virtues. Ninth, the difference regarding the emptiness and existence of the three natures: The three natures refer to the parikalpita-svabhāva (deluded emotion comprehensively conceptualizes the self and all dharmas, grasping each as truly existent; just like a foolish child seeing a human face's reflection in a mirror and grasping it as having life, obstruction, bones, and flesh); the paratantra-svabhāva (these grasped dharmas arise dependently on various other conditions and have no svabhāva at all, being merely illusory appearances, like reflections in a mirror); and the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva (the inherently enlightened true mind revealed through initial awakening, completely accomplished, true, and constantly abiding, like the clarity of the mirror). The Śūnyatā school says: Whenever the sūtras speak of existence, it is in terms of the parikalpita and paratantra; whenever they speak of emptiness, it is the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva. All three dharmas lack svabhāva. The Tathāgatagarbha school holds that all three dharmas possess the meanings of both emptiness and existence: parikalpita exists in emotion but is absent in principle; paratantra exists in lakṣaṇa but is absent in svabhāva; pariniṣpanna is absent in emotion but exists in principle, absent in lakṣaṇa but existent in svabhāva. Tenth, the difference regarding the emptiness and existence of Buddha-virtues: The Śūnyatā school explains that the Buddha takes emptiness as virtue; having not the slightest dharma is called bodhi; seeking through form or sound is practicing a heterodox path. The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: "Neither identical to the aggregates nor separate from the aggregates; these do not reside in each other. The Tathāgata does not possess the aggregates; where is the Tathāgata?" Being free from all lakṣaṇas is called the Buddhas. In the Tathāgatagarbha school, however, the very substance of all Buddhas possesses eternity, bliss, self, and purity, the true merits of the ten bodies and ten knowledges; the major and minor marks, spiritual powers, and radiance are each inexhaustible; they are inherent in the svabhāva itself, not awaiting faculties and conditions. The ten differences are distinctly evident, and the two approaches shine brightly. Although the doctrinal marks are distinguished, do not remain attached in emotion. The three teachings and the three schools are a single-taste Dharma. Therefore, one must first rely on the three kinds of Buddhist teachings to verify the three schools of Chan mind, and afterward, both Chan and teaching are forgotten, and mind and Buddha are both quiescent. When both are quiescent, then every thought is the Buddha, and there is not a single thought that is not the Buddha-mind. When both are forgotten, then every phrase is Chan, and there is not a single phrase that is not Chan teaching. In this way, when one hears the exposition of absolute extinction and non-reliance, one naturally knows it is refuting one's grasping emotions; when one hears the words of pacifying delusion and cultivating the mind, one knows it is severing one's habit energies. When grasping emotions are broken, the true nature is revealed; thus absolute extinction is the school that reveals the nature. When habit energies are exhausted, the Buddha path is accomplished; thus cultivating the mind is the practice that accomplishes Buddhahood. Since sudden and gradual, emptiness and existence, do not contradict one another, how could Heze, Jiangxi, Shenxiu, and Huineng fail to accord with each other? If one can comprehend in this way, then explaining for others is nothing other than a wonderful prescription, and hearing others explain is nothing other than wonderful medicine. Medicine and illness lie solely in attachment and comprehension. Therefore, the virtuous of old said: "Attached, every character is a sore and a wart; comprehending, every phrase is a wonderful medicine." One who comprehends understands that the three schools do not contradict each other. Question: Previously you said that the Buddha taught the sudden teaching and the gradual teaching, and Chan opened the sudden gate and the gradual gate. I do not yet know among the three kinds of teachings, which is sudden and which is gradual? Answer: The depths of Dharma and meanings are already completely exhausted in the three kinds. It is only because the forms and manners when the World-Honoured One spoke were not the same: there was speaking suddenly in accord with the principle, and speaking gradually in accordance with faculties; therefore they are further called sudden teaching and gradual teaching. There are no sudden and gradual teachings apart from the three teachings. The gradual is for those of medium and lower faculties who cannot immediately believe in and awaken to the wonderful principle of complete enlightenment.