宗鏡錄 100.11

100.11

釋道世云。四禪無像。三達皆空。千佛異迹。一智心同。澄觀和尚華嚴疏云。上來諸門。乃至無盡。不離一心。一心即法界。故起信云。所言法者。謂眾生心。心體即大。心之本智即方廣。觀心起行即華嚴。覺心性相即是佛。覺非外來。全同所覺。故理智不殊。理智形奪。雙亡寂照。則念念皆是華嚴性海。則物我皆如。泯同平等。為未了者。令了自心。若知觸物皆心。方了心性。故梵行品云。知一切法。即心自性。成就慧身。不由他悟。然今法學之者。多棄內而外求。習禪之者。好亡緣而內照。並為偏執。俱滯二邊。既心境如如。則平等無礙。昔曾瑩兩面鏡。鑑一盞燈。置一尊容。而重重交光。佛佛無盡。見夫心境互照。本智雙入。心中悟無盡之境。境上了難思之心。心境重重。智照斯在。又即心了境界之佛。即境見唯心如來。心佛重重。而本覺性一。皆取之不可得。則心境兩亡。照之不可窮。則理智交徹。心境既爾。境境相望。心心互研。萬化紛綸。皆一致也。唯證相應。名佛華嚴矣。釋云。今人只解即心即佛。是心作佛。不知即境即佛。是境作佛。今明以如為佛。心境皆如。心如即佛。境如焉非。又心有心性。心能作佛。境有心性。安不作佛。以心收境。則心中見佛。是境界之佛。以境收心。境中見佛。是唯心如來。華嚴錦冠云。觀心釋大方廣佛華嚴經者。若約教詮義。則有多門。若不攝歸一心。於我何預。夫言大者。即是心體。心體無邊。故名為大。方是心相。相具德相之法。故名方。廣。是心用。心。有稱體之用。佛是心果。心解脫處名佛。華是心因。心所引行。喻之以華。嚴是心功。心能善巧嚴飾。目之為嚴。經是心教。心起名言。詮顯此理。故名為經。然心之一字。雖非一切。能為一切。觀者。以三大中。具四法界。對彼四界。故成四觀。法本如是。故依法而觀。若依此悟解。念念即是華嚴法界。念念即是毘盧遮那法界也。

Shi Daoshi says: "The four dhyānas have no image; the three masteries are all empty. The thousand Buddhas leave different traces, but their one cognition and citta are the same." Upādhyāya Chengguan's Commentary on the Avataṃsaka says: "The preceding gates, extending even to the inexhaustible, do not depart from the one mind. The one mind is itself the dharmadhātu. Therefore the Awakening of Faith says: 'That which is called Dharma refers to the citta of sentient beings.' The substance of citta is itself 'Great'; the fundamental cognition of citta is itself 'Square and Vast' (vaipulya); contemplating citta to arouse practice is itself 'Flower Adornment' (avataṃsaka); awakening to the nature and characteristics of citta is itself 'Buddha.' Awakening does not come from without; it is entirely identical to that which is awakened. Therefore, principle and cognition are not distinct. When principle and cognition mutually depose and shape each other, and both are extinguished in quiescent illumination, then every thought is the ocean of nature of the Avataṃsaka; then thing and self are both tathatā, obliterated into equality. For those who have not yet understood, it causes them to understand their own citta. If one knows that contacting things is entirely citta, only then will one understand the nature of citta. Thus the Chapter on Pure Conduct says: 'Knowing that all dharmas are the intrinsic nature of citta itself, one accomplishes the body of wisdom without awakening by another.' However, practitioners of the Dharma today mostly abandon the internal to seek externally, while practitioners of Chan are fond of eliminating conditions to illuminate internally. Both are biased attachments, both lingering at the two extremes. Since citta and realm are suchness (tathatā), they are equal and unobstructed. In the past, someone polished two mirrors, lit a single lamp, and placed an image [between them]: the layers of light crisscrossed, and Buddhas were inexhaustible. One sees that citta and realm mutually illuminate, and fundamental cognition enters both: within citta one awakens to the inexhaustible realm; on the realm one understands the inconceivable citta. Citta and realm are manifold; cognitive illumination resides therein. Moreover, identifying with citta, one understands the Buddha of the objective realm; identifying with the realm, one sees the Tathāgata of mind-only. Citta and Buddha are manifold, yet the nature of fundamental awakening is one. When neither can be apprehended, citta and realm are both eliminated; when illumination cannot be exhausted, principle and cognition interpenetrate. Since citta and realm are like this, realm faces realm, and thought investigates thought: the myriad transformations in their profusion are all one consistent reality. Only corresponding with verification is termed the Buddha-Avataṃsaka." In explanation: "People today only understand that 'citta itself is Buddha' and 'this citta makes Buddha'; they do not know that 'the objective realm itself is Buddha' and 'this objective realm makes Buddha.' Now it is clarified that tathatā is taken as Buddha: citta and realm are both tathatā. If the tathatā of citta is Buddha, how could the tathatā of realm not be? Furthermore, citta has the nature of citta, and citta can make Buddha; realm has the nature of citta, so how could it not make Buddha? When citta subsumes the realm, one sees the Buddha within citta: this is the Buddha of the objective realm. When the realm subsumes citta, one sees the Buddha within the realm: this is the Tathāgata of mind-only. The Brocade Crown of the Avataṃsaka says: 'If one interprets the Great Vaipulya Buddha Avataṃsaka Sūtra through the contemplation of citta, in terms of the teachings explaining the meanings there are many gates; but if they are not subsumed into the one mind, what do they have to do with me? That which is called "Great" is itself the substance of citta; the substance of citta is boundless, hence it is called "Great." "Square" is the characteristic of citta; its characteristic is endowed with dharmas of virtuous characteristics, hence it is called "Square." "Vast" is the function of citta; citta possesses a function that accords with substance. "Buddha" is the fruit of citta; the place of citta's liberation is called "Buddha." "Flower" is the cause of citta; the practices elicited by citta are likened to a "Flower." "Adornment" is the merit of citta; citta's ability to skillfully adorn is termed "Adornment." "Sūtra" is the teaching of citta; citta gives rise to names and words to express and reveal this principle, hence it is called "Sūtra." Yet this single word citta, though not all things, can become all things.' Contemplation means that within the three greats the four dharmadhātus are contained; corresponding to those four dhātus, four contemplations are formed. Dharmas are fundamentally like this, therefore one contemplates according to the Dharma. If one awakens and understands according to this, thought after thought is itself the Avataṃsaka dharmadhātu; thought after thought is itself the Vairocana dharmadhātu."