[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › 12.3 # 宗鏡錄 12.3 宗鏡錄 12.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [12.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12.3) 答。如來名號。十方不同。般若一法。說種種名。解脫亦爾。多諸名字。故大般若經云。如一切法名。唯客所攝。於十方三世。無所從來。無所至去。亦無所住。一切法中無名。名中無一切法。非合非散。但假施設。所以者何。以一切法與名。俱自性空。大方等大集經云。爾時佛告陀羅尼自在王菩薩。善男子。第一義者。謂無有諸法。若無諸法。云何說空。無名字法。說為名字。如是名字。亦無住處。名下之法。亦復如是。是以法從心生。名因法立。所生之心無處。能生之法亦然。則心境皆空。俱無處所。論云。心能為一切法作名。若無心。則無一切名字。當知世出世名字。皆從心起。以心隨緣。應物立號。略有五義。而立假名。一從義故。二隨緣故。三依俗故。四因時故。五約用故。云何從義。無量義經云。無量義者。從一法生。故知因義立名。因名顯義。云何隨緣。涅槃經云。其味真正。停留雪山。隨其流處。得種種名。隨其流處者。即是隨染淨之緣。得凡聖之號。云何依俗。經云。一法有多名。實法中即無。不失法性故。流布於世間。云何因時。涅槃經云。佛性因時節有異。說淨不淨。何者。在垢染時稱眾生。處清淨時名諸佛。云何約用。如因心立法。隨法得名。處聖稱真。居凡號俗。似金作器。隨器得名。在指曰鐶。飾臂名釧。則一心不動。執別號而萬法成差。真金匪移。認異名而千器不等。若知法法全心作。器器盡金成。名相不能干。是非焉能惑。又如圓器與方器。名字不同。若生金與熟金。言說有異。推原究體。萬法皆空。但有意言。名義差別。動即八識。凝為一心。得旨忘緣。觸途無寄。如大涅槃經云。佛言。善男子。如來所有一切善行。悉為調伏諸眾生故。譬如醫王。所有醫方。悉為療治一切病苦。善男子。如來世尊。為國土故。為時節故。為他語故。為人故。為眾根故。於一法中。作二種說。於一名法。說無量名。於一義中。說無量名。於無量義。說無量名。云何一名說無量名。猶如涅槃。亦名涅槃。亦名無生。亦名無出。亦名無作。亦名無為。亦名歸依。亦名窟宅。亦名解脫。亦名光明。亦名燈明。亦名彼岸。亦名無畏。亦名無退。亦名安處。亦名寂靜。亦名無相。亦名無二。亦名一行。亦名清涼。亦名無暗。亦名無礙。亦名無諍。亦名無濁。亦名廣大。亦名甘露。亦名吉祥。是名一名作無量名。云何一義說無量名。猶如帝釋。亦名帝釋。亦名憍尸迦。亦名婆蹉婆。亦名富蘭陀。亦名摩佉婆。亦名因陀羅。亦名千眼。亦名舍脂夫。亦名金剛。亦名寶頂。亦名寶幢。是名一義說無量名。云何於無量義說無量名。如佛名為如來。義異名異。亦名阿羅訶。義異名異。亦名三藐三佛陀。義異名異。亦名船師。亦名導師。亦名正覺。亦名明行足。亦名大師子王。亦名沙門。亦名婆羅門。亦名寂靜。亦名施主。亦名到彼岸。亦名大醫王。亦名大象。亦名大龍王。亦名施眼。亦名大力士。亦名大無畏。亦名寶聚。亦名商主。亦名得脫。亦名大丈夫。亦名天人師。亦名大分陀利。亦名獨無等侶。亦名大福田。亦名大智慧海。亦名無相。亦名具足八智。如是一切義異名異。善男子。是名無量義。中說無量名。復有一義說無量名。所謂如陰。亦名為陰。亦名顛倒。亦名為諦。亦名四念處。亦名四食。亦名四識住處。亦名為有。亦名為道。亦名為時。亦名眾生。亦名為世。亦名第一義。亦名三修。謂身戒心。亦名因果。亦名煩惱。亦名解脫。亦名十二因緣。亦名聲聞辟支佛。亦名地獄餓鬼畜生人天。亦名過去現在未來。是名一義說無量名。善男子。如來世尊。為眾生故。廣中說略。略中說廣。第一義諦。說為世諦。說世諦法。為第一義諦。云何名為廣中說略。如告比丘。我今宣說十二因緣。云何名為十二因緣。所謂因果。云何名為略中說廣。如告比丘。我今宣說苦集滅道。苦者。所謂無量諸苦。集者。所謂無量煩惱。滅者。所謂無量解脫。道者。所謂無量方便。云何名為第一義諦。說為世諦。如告比丘。吾今此身。有老病死。云何名為說世諦。為第一義諦。如告憍陳如。汝得法故。名阿若憍陳如。是故隨人隨意隨時。故名如來知諸根力。善男子。我若當於如是等義。作定說者。則不得稱我為如來具知根力。善男子。有智之人。當知香象所負。非驢所勝。一切眾生。所行無量。是故如來。種種為說。無量之法。何以故。眾生多有諸煩惱故。若使如來說於一行。不名如來具足成就。知諸根力。故知。法本無名。因心建立。是以大聖隨順世諦。曲徇機宜。廣略不同。一多無定。將有說攝歸無說。用有名引入無名。究竟咸令到於本心寂滅之地。故經云。佛告舍利弗。汝慎勿為利根之人。廣說法語。鈍根之人。略說法也。又名因體立。體逐名生。體空而名無所施。名虛而體無所起。名體互寂。萬法無生。唯一真心。更無所有。永嘉集云。是以體非名而不辯。名非體而不施。言體必假其名。語名必藉其體。今之體外施名者。此但名。其無體耳。豈有體當其名耶。譬夫兔無角而施名。此則名其無角耳。豈有角當其名耶。無體而施名。則名無實名也。名無實名。則所名無所名。所名既無。則能名不有也。何者。設名本以名其體。無體何以當其名。言體本以當其名。無名何以當其體。當無當而非體。名無名而非名。此則何獨體而元虛。亦乃名而本寂也。然而無體當名。由來若此。名之有當。何所云為。夫體不自名。假他名而名我體。名非自設。假他體以施我名。若體之未形。則名何所名。若名之未設。則體何所明。然而明體。雖假其名。不為不名而無體耳。設名要因其體。無體則名之本無。如是則體不名生。名生於體耳。今之體在名前。名從體後。辯者。此則設名以名其體。故知體。是名原矣。則名之所由緣起於體。體之元緒。何所因依。夫體不我形。假緣會而成體。緣非我會。因會體而成緣。若體之未形。則緣何所會。若緣之未會。則體何所形。體形則緣會而形。緣會則體形而會。體形而會。則明形無別會。形無別會。則會本無也。緣會而形。則明會無別形。會無別形。即形本無也。是以萬法從緣。無自體耳。體而無自。故名性空。性之既空。雖緣會而非有。緣之既會。雖性空而不無。是以緣會之有。有而非有。性空之無。無而不無。何者。會則性空。故言非有。空則緣會。故曰非無。今言不有不無者。非是離有別有一無也。亦非離無別有一有也。如是則明法非有無故。以非有非無名耳。不是非有非無。既非有無。又非非有非非無也。如是則何獨言語道斷。亦乃心行處滅也。如是則名體既空。言思自絕。可謂萬機泯跡。獨朗真心矣。 > Answer: The designations of the Tathāgata differ across the ten directions. The single dharma of prajñā is spoken of under diverse names, and liberation is likewise given many names. Therefore, the \*Mahāprajñāpāramitāsūtra\* states: 'The names of all dharmas are merely subsumed as guests. In the ten directions and the three times, they come from nowhere, go nowhere, and abide nowhere. Within all dharmas there are no names, and within names there are no dharmas. They are neither joined nor dispersed, but are merely provisional designations. Why is this? Because all dharmas and their names are both empty of intrinsic nature.' > > The \*Mahāvaipulya Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra\* states: 'At that time the Buddha addressed the Bodhisattva Dhāraṇīśvararāja: "Good son, the ultimate truth means that there are no dharmas. If there are no dharmas, how can one speak of emptiness? Dharmas without names are spoken of by means of names. Such names also have no abiding place, and the dharmas under those names are likewise so."' Hence, dharmas are born from the mind, and names are established based on dharmas. The mind that produces them has no location, and the dharmas produced are also like this. Thus mind and objects are both empty, neither possessing a location. > > A treatise states: 'The mind is able to make names for all dharmas. If there were no mind, there would be no names whatsoever.' One should know that mundane and supramundane names all arise from the mind. Because the mind accords with conditions, it establishes designations in response to things. In brief, there are five meanings by which provisional names are established: first, based on meaning; second, according with conditions; third, relying on the conventional; fourth, caused by time; fifth, determined by function. > > What is 'based on meaning'? The \*Anantanirdeśasūtra\* states: 'The immeasurable meanings are born from a single dharma.' Thus we know names are established due to meaning, and meaning is revealed through names. > > What is 'according with conditions'? The \*Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra\* states: 'Its taste is pure and authentic, resting on the Snow Mountains; according to where it flows, it acquires various names.' 'According to where it flows' means that according to defiled or pure conditions, it acquires the titles of ordinary being or noble one. > > What is 'relying on the conventional'? A sūtra says: 'A single dharma has many names, yet in the real dharma there are none; because it does not forfeit the nature of dharmas, it is circulated in the world.' > > What is 'caused by time'? The \*Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra\* states: 'Buddha-nature differs according to the seasons and periods, being described as pure or impure.' How so? When amid defilements it is called a sentient being; when dwelling in purity it is named the Buddhas. > > What is 'determined by function'? Just as dharmas are established through the mind and receive names according to the dharmas, so when residing in the noble it is termed real, and when dwelling in the ordinary it is called conventional. It is like crafting vessels from gold: they receive names according to the vessel; on the finger it is called a ring, and adorning the arm it is named a bracelet. Thus the one mind remains unmoved, yet grasping at different titles causes the ten thousand dharmas to appear disparate; true gold does not change, yet acknowledging different names makes a thousand vessels seem unequal. If one knows that every dharma is entirely crafted by mind, and every vessel is completely formed of gold, then names and characteristics cannot interfere, and how could 'right' and 'wrong' bewilder? > > Furthermore, just as a round vessel and a square vessel have different names, and raw gold and refined gold have different designations, when one traces back to the source and investigates the substance, the ten thousand dharmas are all empty; there are merely intentional words with differences of name and meaning. In movement, they are the eight consciousnesses; when congealed, they are the one mind. Grasping the purport and forgetting the conditions, wherever one encounters anything there is no place to alight. > > As the \*Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra\* states: 'The Buddha said: "Good son, all the good deeds of the Tathāgata are entirely for the sake of taming sentient beings. It is just like a king of physicians whose medicinal formulas are all for curing the suffering of all illnesses. Good son, for the sake of lands, for the sake of seasons and times, for the sake of foreign languages, for the sake of people, and for the sake of various faculties, the Tathāgata, the World-Honoured One, makes two kinds of explanations regarding a single dharma: for a single named dharma he speaks immeasurable names; for a single meaning he speaks immeasurable names; and for immeasurable meanings he speaks immeasurable names. > > "What is 'for a single name speaking immeasurable names'? It is like nirvāṇa: it is called nirvāṇa, it is also called non-arising, non-emergence, non-action, unconditioned, refuge, cave and dwelling, liberation, brightness, lamp-light, the other shore, fearlessness, non-regression, peaceful abode, tranquility, signlessness, non-duality, single practice, cool and refreshing, darkness-free, unhindered, non-contentious, unturbid, vast, nectar (amṛta), and auspicious. This is called making immeasurable names for a single name. > > "What is 'for a single meaning speaking immeasurable names'? It is like Śakra: he is called Śakra, he is also called Kauśika, Vāsava, Purandara, Maghavan, Indra, Thousand-Eyed, Husband of Śacī, Vajra, Jewel Crest, and Jewel Banner. This is called speaking immeasurable names for a single meaning. > > "What is 'for immeasurable meanings speaking immeasurable names'? For example, the Buddha is named Tathāgata, with distinct meaning and distinct name; he is also named Arhat, with distinct meaning and distinct name; he is also named Samyaksaṃbuddha, with distinct meaning and distinct name; he is also named Boatman, Guide, Fully Awakened One, One endowed with Knowledge and Conduct, Great Lion King, Śramaṇa, Brāhmaṇa, Tranquil One, Giver, One Arrived at the Other Shore, Great Physician King, Great Elephant, Great Dragon King, Bestower of Sight, Great Champion, Great Fearless One, Heap of Jewels, Caravan Leader, One Who Has Attained Liberation, Great Man, Teacher of Gods and Humans, Great Puṇḍarīka, Solitary and Incomparable One, Great Field of Merit, Ocean of Great Wisdom, Signless, and One Endowed with the Eight Knowledges. All such meanings are distinct and the names are distinct. Good son, this is called speaking immeasurable names for immeasurable meanings. > > "Furthermore, there is speaking immeasurable names for a single meaning: namely, as with the skandhas, they are called skandhas, they are also called inversions, they are also called truths, they are also called the four stations of mindfulness, they are also called the four nutriments, they are also called the four stations of consciousness, they are also called existence, they are also called path, they are also called time, they are also called sentient beings, they are also called world, they are also called ultimate truth, they are also called the three cultivations—namely body, precepts, and mind—they are also called cause and effect, they are also called kleśas, they are also called liberation, they are also called the twelve links of dependent origination (dvādaśāṅgapratītyasamutpāda), they are also called śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, they are also called hell-beings, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, and devas, and they are also called past, present, and future. This is called speaking immeasurable names for a single meaning. > > "Good son, for the sake of sentient beings, the Tathāgata, the World-Honoured One, speaks the brief within the extensive, and speaks the extensive within the brief; he speaks the ultimate truth as conventional truth, and speaks conventional truth as ultimate truth. > > "What is speaking the brief within the extensive? It is like telling the monks: 'I now expound the twelve links of dependent origination.' What are the twelve links of dependent origination? They are simply cause and effect. > > "What is speaking the extensive within the brief? It is like telling the monks: 'I now expound suffering, origin, cessation, and path. Suffering means immeasurable sufferings; origin means immeasurable kleśas; cessation means immeasurable liberations; path means immeasurable expedients.' > > "What is speaking the ultimate truth as conventional truth? It is like telling the monks: 'This body of mine now has aging, sickness, and death.' > > "What is speaking conventional truth as ultimate truth? It is like telling Kauṇḍinya: 'Because you have attained the Dharma, you are named Ājñātakauṇḍinya.' Therefore, it accords with persons, accords with intentions, and accords with times; hence the Tathāgata is said to know the power of the various faculties. > > "Good son, if I were to make fixed assertions regarding such meanings, I could not be called a Tathāgata who fully knows the power of faculties. Good son, a person of wisdom should know that what a fragrant elephant can bear is not what a donkey can sustain. The practices of all sentient beings are immeasurable; therefore the Tathāgata preaches immeasurable dharmas in diverse ways for them. Why is this? Because sentient beings have manifold kleśas. If the Tathāgata were to preach only a single practice, he would not be called a Tathāgata fully endowed with the achievement of knowing the power of the faculties." > > Therefore, we know that dharmas are fundamentally devoid of names and are established through mind. Thus the Great Sage accords with conventional truth, adaptively complying with what is appropriate to capacities; the extensive and the brief are not the same, and the one and the many are not fixed. He takes what has speech and brings it back to what is without speech; he uses what has names to lead into the nameless, ultimately causing all to arrive at the tranquil and extinct ground of the fundamental mind. Hence a sūtra says: 'The Buddha told Śāriputra: "Take care not to preach Dharma extensively to those of sharp faculties, nor preach Dharma briefly to those of dull faculties."' > > Furthermore, names are established based on substances, and substances are produced following names. If the substance is empty, the name has nowhere to apply; if the name is vacuous, the substance has nowhere to arise. Name and substance are mutually tranquil; the ten thousand dharmas are unproduced. There is only the one true mind, and nothing else exists. > > The \*Yongjia ji\* states: 'Therefore, the substance cannot be distinguished without the name, and the name cannot be applied without the substance. To speak of substance necessarily relies on its name; to talk of name necessarily depends on its substance. Now, applying a name outside of substance merely names its lack of substance; how could there be a substance corresponding to that name? It is like applying a name to a hare's lack of horns: this merely names its hornlessness; how could there be horns corresponding to that name? If a name is applied where there is no substance, the name has no real name. If the name has no real name, then that which is named has nothing to be named. Since that which is named does not exist, that which names also does not exist. Why is this? Setting up a name was originally to name its substance; without substance, what corresponds to its name? Stating a substance was originally to correspond to its name; without a name, what corresponds to its substance? When that which corresponds has nothing to correspond to, it is not a substance; when that which names has nothing to name, it is not a name. In this way, how is it merely that substance is fundamentally vacuous? The name is also intrinsically tranquil. > > 'Yet, that an absent substance corresponds to a name has always been like this. How does a name have a corresponding substance? A substance does not name itself; it relies on another's name to name my substance. A name is not established by itself; it relies on another's substance to apply my name. If the substance has not yet taken shape, what does the name name? If the name has not yet been established, what clarifies the substance? Yet, although clarifying substance relies on its name, it is not that without being named there is no substance. Setting up a name must depend on its substance; without substance, the name fundamentally does not exist. Thus, substance is not produced from name; name is produced from substance. Now, when we explain that substance precedes name and name follows substance, this sets up a name to name its substance; hence we know substance is the source of the name. Thus, while the origin of a name conditionally arises from substance, upon what does the primal inception of substance depend? > > 'Substance does not shape itself; it relies on the confluence of conditions to form a substance. Conditions do not convene themselves; they convene through the substance to form conditions. If the substance has not yet taken shape, what do the conditions convene? If conditions have not yet convened, what shape does substance take? When substance takes shape, it takes shape through the convening of conditions; when conditions convene, they convene through substance taking shape. Since substance takes shape through convening, it is clear that taking shape has no separate convening; since taking shape has no separate convening, convening is fundamentally nonexistent. Since conditions convene to take shape, it is clear that convening has no separate taking shape; since convening has no separate taking shape, taking shape is fundamentally nonexistent. > > 'Therefore, the ten thousand dharmas arise from conditions and have no intrinsic substance. A substance devoid of an intrinsic self is therefore called empty of nature. Since its nature is empty, although conditions convene, it is not existent; since conditions have convened, although its nature is empty, it is not nonexistent. Therefore, the existence of converging conditions is an existence that is not existent; the nonexistence of an empty nature is a nonexistence that is not nonexistent. Why is this? Convening means emptiness of nature, hence it is said not to be existent; emptiness means convening of conditions, hence it is said not to be nonexistent. Now, saying "neither existent nor nonexistent" does not mean there is a separate nonexistence apart from existence, nor a separate existence apart from nonexistence. In this way, it is made clear that because dharmas are neither existent nor nonexistent, they are named "neither existent nor nonexistent"; it is not that "neither existent nor nonexistent" is itself non-existent or non-nonexistent. In this way, how is it merely that the path of speech is cut off? The place where the mind functions is also extinguished. Thus, since name and substance are both empty, words and thoughts naturally cease; this may be called the vanishing of all traces of mental workings, leaving the true mind alone luminously clear.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 12.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12.2) - [Next: 12.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12.4) - [Up: 12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.12.3) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.12.3) · Pramāṇa