宗鏡錄 10.17

10.17

答。但不動一心。不住諸法。無能所之證。亡智解之心。則是無信之信。不入之入。人法二空。心境雙寂。如大般若經。文殊師利云。繫緣法界。一念法界。不動法界。知真法界。不應動搖。謂若言我入法界。已動法界。能所兩亡。入相斯寂。故不動法界。是入法界。大乘千鉢大教王經云。云何方便。而得證入無性觀者。菩薩先須當心觀照。本性靜寂。悟入滅盡定。得心識性。證見清淨。唯清唯淨。證見聖性。自性如如。一道寂靜。悟達本原。返照見淨。唯照唯瑩。唯瑩唯淨。唯寂唯聖。則是名為菩薩得入無動涅槃無性觀。故知若有能證。則為有人。若有所證。則為有法。以唯一真法界故。則心外無法。不可以法界更證法界。如無生義云。如經言。舍利弗讚比丘言。汝等今者。住於福田。諸比丘言。大師。世尊猶尚不能消供養。何況我等。大師解言。此是佛不住。佛則無有佛。亦無福田。能消供養者。此正是真福田人。佛若住佛。即是有佛。亦是有福田。能消供養者。此即非是真福田也。類此住神通智慧。則有智慧。此則非真智慧。若無所住。乃是真有智慧。又思益經論釋云。離於法界。更無有人受供養者故。以彼法界。本來清淨故。是以此錄。削去浮華。唯談真實。不依名字。直顯心宗。如普賢觀經云。昔在靈山。演於一實之道。又究竟一乘寶性論偈云。雖無善巧言。但有真實義。彼法應受持。如取金捨石。妙義如真金。巧語如瓦石。依名不依義。彼人無明盲。若親見性。入宗鏡中。乃是自信法門。決定無惑。則日可使冷。月可使熱。縱千途異說。終不能易。如大法炬陀羅尼經云。佛言。憍尸迦。如來弟子。見諸世間。猶如幻化。無有疑網。所以者何。彼信如來。即自見法。是故自信。不唯信他。何以故。若世間人。既自見已。彼人終不更取他言。憍尸迦。如人裸露。在道而行。設有一人。語眾人言。此人希有。錦衣覆身。憍尸迦。於意云何。彼雖有言。自餘眾人。信此言不。不也世尊。何以故。眼親見故。佛言。如是如是。憍尸迦。諸佛如來諸有弟子。自見法故。不取他言。其義亦爾。釋曰。若見自法。何法非自。或凡或聖。若是若非。凡有指陳。皆不出自心之際。如是信者。方到法原。如入法界體性經云。佛復告文殊師利。汝知實際乎。文殊師利言。如是。世尊。我知實際。佛言。文殊師利。何謂實際。文殊師利言。世尊。有我所際。彼即實際。所有凡夫際。彼即實際。若業若果報。一切諸法。悉是實際。世尊。若如是信者。即是實信。世尊。若顛倒信者。即是正信。若行非行。彼即正行。所以者何。正不正者。但有言說不可得也。是知若信唯心實義者。則不為言語所轉。聞深而不怖。聞淺而不疑。聞非深非淺而不癡。如清涼演義云。聞深不怖者。即大分深義。所謂空也。聞說於空。謂同斷滅。故令人怖。故大品云。既非先有。後亦非無。自性常空。勿生驚怖。聞淺不疑者。淺謂涉事。方便多門。則令疑惑。今知隨宜。何所疑耶。聞非深非淺。謂無所據。使身心湛然。知非深為妙有。非淺為真空。離身心相。方為勇猛。可造斯境。又此三句。亦即三觀。初空。次假。後中道。三句齊聞。一念皆會。則三觀一心。何疑不遣。

Answer: Simply not moving the one mind and not abiding in phenomena, having no realization of subject and object and putting an end to the mind of intellectual understanding—this is the faith of no-faith, the entry of no-entry. The two emptynesses of person and phenomena [are realized]; citta and its object are both tranquil. As Mañjuśrī said in the Great Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra: 'Binding conditions to the dharmadhātu, one-mindfully focusing on the dharmadhātu, not moving the dharmadhātu. Knowing the true dharmadhātu, one should not waver.' This means that if one says 'I enter the dharmadhātu,' one has already moved the dharmadhātu. When subject and object are both extinguished, the characteristic of entering is thereby quieted. Therefore, not moving the dharmadhātu is entering the dharmadhātu. The Mahāyāna Thousand-Bowl Great King of Teachings Sūtra says: 'By what skillful means does one attain experiential entry into the contemplation of naturelessness? A bodhisattva must first contemplate and illuminate his own mind: its fundamental nature is serene and quiet. Awakened and entering into the concentration of cessation, he attains the nature of mind and consciousness and experientially sees purity—solely clear, solely pure. He experientially sees the noble nature: self-nature is suchness, a single path of serenity and quietude. Awakened to and penetrating the fundamental origin, turning the illumination back he sees purity—solely illuminating, solely lustrous; solely lustrous, solely pure; solely serene, solely noble. This is then called a bodhisattva's attainment of entry into unmoved nirvāṇa and the contemplation of naturelessness.' Therefore we know that if there is a subject of realization, then there is a person; if there is an object of realization, then there is a phenomenon. Because there is only the one true dharmadhātu, there are no phenomena outside the mind; one cannot use the dharmadhātu to further realize the dharmadhātu. As the Meaning of Non-Arising says: 'As a sūtra states, Śāriputra praised the monks, saying: "You now abide in the field of merit." The monks said: "Great Master, even the World-Honoured One cannot digest offerings, how much less could we?" The Great Master explained, saying: "This means that the Buddha does not abide in being a buddha; then there is no Buddha, nor is there a field of merit that can digest offerings. This is precisely a person who is a true field of merit. If a buddha abided in being a buddha, then there would be a buddha, and there would also be a field of merit that could digest offerings; this would not be a true field of merit." By analogy to this, if one abides in spiritual penetrations and wisdom, then there is wisdom, but this is not true wisdom. If there is nowhere one abides, only then is there truly wisdom.' Furthermore, the commentary on the Viśeṣacintibrahmaparipṛcchā Sūtra explains: 'Because apart from the dharmadhātu there is no other person who receives offerings, for that dharmadhātu is originally pure.' For this reason, this record cuts away superficial ornamentation and speaks only of the real and true; not relying on words and letters, it directly reveals the source of the mind. As the Samantabhadra Contemplation Sūtra says: 'Formerly on Vulture Peak, the path of the One Reality was expounded.' Also, a verse in the Ratnagotravibhāga says: 'Though devoid of skillful words, / if it only has the true meaning, / that Dharma should be received and maintained, / like taking gold and discarding stone. / The wondrous meaning is like true gold; / clever words are like tile and stone. / Relying on the name and not on the meaning, / that person is blind with avidyā.' If one personally sees the nature and enters into the mirror of the source, this is the Dharma-gate of self-confidence, decisively free of doubt. Then the sun could be made cold and the moon could be made hot, yet even through a thousand divergent paths of different teachings, it could never be altered. As the Great Lamp-Torch Dhāraṇī Sūtra says: 'The Buddha said: Kauśika, disciples of the Tathāgata see all the worlds as like illusions and apparitions, without any net of doubt. Why is that? Because they believe in the Tathāgata and personally see the Dharma themselves. Therefore they have confidence in themselves, not merely believing others. Why is that? If a person of the world has already seen for himself, that person will never again adopt another's words. Kauśika, suppose a person is naked, walking along the road. If someone were to say to the crowd: "This person is extraordinary, his body covered in brocade robes." Kauśika, what do you think? Though he has said so, would the rest of the people believe these words or not?' 'No, World-Honoured One. Why is that? Because they have seen it with their own eyes.' 'The Buddha said: Just so, just so, Kauśika. All disciples of the buddhas, the tathāgatas, because they have seen the Dharma for themselves, do not adopt others' words; its meaning is also like this.' Explanation: If one sees one's own Dharma, what Dharma is not one's own? Whether ordinary or noble, whether right or wrong, whatever can be pointed out and stated never goes beyond the boundary of one's own mind. Only one who has such faith reaches the origin of phenomena. As the Dharmadhātuprakṛty-asambhedanirdeśa Sūtra says: 'The Buddha further said to Mañjuśrī: "Do you know the limit of reality?" Mañjuśrī said: "Just so, World-Honoured One, I know the limit of reality." The Buddha said: "Mañjuśrī, what is called the limit of reality?" Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, where there is the limit of 'mine', that is the limit of reality. All limits of ordinary beings, that is the limit of reality. Both karma and retribution, all phenomena whatsoever, are all the limit of reality. World-Honoured One, if one believes like this, that is true faith. World-Honoured One, if one believes in inverted views, that is right faith. Whether practice or non-practice, that is right practice. Why is that? Because 'right' and 'not right' are merely conventional expressions and are unobtainable."' Hence we know that if one believes in the true meaning of mind-only, one is not turned by words. Hearing of the deep, one is not terrified; hearing of the shallow, one does not doubt; hearing of what is neither deep nor shallow, one is not confused. As the Qingliang Yanyi says: 'Hearing of the deep without terror: this is the great, profound meaning, namely emptiness. Hearing emptiness spoken of, one supposes it is identical to annihilation, which therefore causes people to be terrified. Hence the Pañcaviṃśati says: "Since it is neither previously existent nor subsequently non-existent, its self-nature is constantly empty; do not produce alarm and terror." Hearing of the shallow without doubting: the shallow refers to engagement with phenomenal affairs, where skillful means have many gates, which causes doubts. Now knowing that they accord with what is appropriate, what is there to doubt? Hearing of what is neither deep nor shallow: this means having no point of reliance, causing body and mind to be clear and still; knowing that not deep is wondrous existence, and not shallow is true emptiness. Detaching from the characteristics of body and mind, only then is one courageous and capable of reaching this realm.' Moreover, these three phrases are also the three contemplations: the first is emptiness, the next is the provisional, and the last is the middle way. When the three phrases are heard simultaneously and all understood in a single thought, then the three contemplations are in the one mind; what doubt could not be dispelled?