宗鏡錄 2.11

2.11

答。此但唯集祖佛菩薩言教。故稱曰錄。設有問答解釋。皆依古德大意。傍讚勸修。述成至教。豈敢輒稱開示。妄有指陳。且夫祖佛正宗。則真唯識性。纔有信處。皆可為人。若論修證之門。諸方皆云。功未齊於諸聖。且教中所許。初心菩薩皆可比知。亦許約教而會。先以聞解信入。後以無思契同。若入信門。便登祖位。今集此宗鏡。證驗無邊。應念皆通。寓目咸是。今且現約世間之事。於眾生界中。第一比知。第二現知。第三約教而知。第一比知者。且如即今有漏之身。夜皆有夢。夢中所見好惡境界。憂喜宛然。覺來床上安眠。何曾是實。並是夢中意識思想所為。則可比知。覺時所見之事。皆如夢中無實。夫過去未來現在三世境界。元是第八阿賴耶識親相分。唯本識所變。若現在之境。是明了意識分別。若過去未來之境。是獨散暗意識思惟。夢覺之境雖殊。俱不出於意識。則唯心之旨。比況昭然。第二現知者。即是對事分明。不待立。況且如現見青白物時。物本自虛。不言我青我白。皆是眼識見分自性任運分別。與同時明了意識。計度分別為青為白。以意辯為色。以言說為青。皆是意言自妄安置。且如六塵鈍故。體不自立。名不自呼。一色既然。萬法咸爾。皆無自性。悉是意言。故云萬法本閑而人自鬧。是以若有心起時。萬境皆有。若空心起處。萬境皆空。則空不自空。因心故空。有不自有。因心故有。既非空非有。則唯識唯心。若無於心。萬法安寄。又如過去之境。何曾是有。隨念起處。忽然現前。若想不生。境終不現。此皆是眾生日用。可以現知。不待功成。豈假修得。凡有心者。並可證知。故先德云。如大根人。知唯識者。恒觀自心。意言為境。此初觀時。雖未成聖。分知意言。則是菩薩。第三約教而知者。經云。三界唯心。萬法唯識。此是所證本理。能詮正宗。廣在下文。誠證非一。如成實論云。佛說內外中間之言。遂即入定。時有五百羅漢。各釋此言。佛出定後。同問世尊。誰當佛意。佛言。並非我意。又白佛言。既不當佛意。將無得罪。佛言。雖非我意。各順正理。堪為聖教。有福無罪。且如說小乘自證法門。尚順正理。何況純引一乘。唯談佛旨乎。六行法云。諸大智人。欲學道者。莫問大小。皆依理教。若見權教。雖是佛說。知非實語。即不依從。若見凡人說有理者。雖非佛語。亦即依行。以有智人學佛法者。善解如來。教有權實。依佛實教。宣說道理。則過凡愚謬執權者。是以智人若有所說。人雖是凡。法則同佛。如瓶傳水。寫置餘瓶。瓶雖有異。所寫水一。是故凡夫結雖未盡。不妨有解。能說實義。但使解理心數。思量。此初觀理。則異餘凡。謂思人空。則是二乘。若觀法空。則是菩薩。故攝論云。初修觀則是凡夫菩薩。以此文證。初學觀者。雖未斷結。即是菩薩。以能解理同大聖故。說則合理。一一可依。寶篋經云。猶如迦陵頻伽鳥王卵中鳥子。其嘴未現。便出迦陵頻伽妙聲。佛法卵中諸菩薩等。未壞我見。未出三界。然能演出佛法妙音。謂空無相無作行音。迦陵頻伽。至孔雀群。終不鳴呼。還至迦陵頻伽鳥中。乃須鳴呼。菩薩若至一切聲聞緣覺眾中。終不演說不可思議諸佛之法。至菩薩眾。爾乃演說。以此文證。凡夫地中。過雖未盡。不妨深解。說有理者。皆可信受。但諸凡夫說有理者。皆是宿習。非今始學。若非宿習。今學至老。唯謂他語。自仍迷理。以迷理故。雖得多言。未解權實。說則乖理。若解理者。不揀尊幼。但求道不求事。依法不依人。如阿濕婆恃。因舍利弗見之求法。即偈答言。我年既幼稚。學日又初淺。豈能宣至真。廣說如來義。舍利弗言。可略說其要。便說偈言。諸法因緣生。是法說因緣。是法因緣盡。大師如是說。舍利弗一聞即獲初果。轉教目連。再說得道。以此證知。智人求法。唯重他德。不恥下就。不同凡愚我慢自高。雖知他勝。恥不肯學。凡夫無始不能入道。多皆由此不能求法。故諸愚人。迷實教者。未能自悟。唯應訪德。以迷理者。雖有世智。若無勝友。常迷道故。如勝天王般若經云。如生盲人不能見色。如是煩惱盲諸眾生。不能見法。如人有眼。無外光明。不能見色。行人如是。雖有智慧。無善知識。不能見法。以此證知。人雖有智。未能自悟。要須良友。故付法藏經云。善知識者。即是得道全分因緣。佛自勸人。逐善知識。不合守愚。一生虛過。是故諸佛有遺旨。但令依法不依人。依義不依語。菩薩尚變身作畜生。為人說法。顯此奇異。令聞者信受。皆令悟道。入平等法。豈令心生高下耶。故華嚴演義。難云。此旨微密。極位方知。何以凡情。輒窺大教。釋云。依憑教理。聖教許故。涅槃經云。具縛凡夫。能知如來祕密之藏。毘盧遮那品頌云。如因日光照。還見於日輪。以佛智慧光。見佛所行道。即因佛教能了教也。今宗鏡中。始終引佛智慧之教光。顯佛所行之道跡。若深信者。則是以眾生之心光。見眾生之行跡。若難云。凡夫不合知者。斯乃邪見不信人耳。故大集經云。若有人言。我異佛異。當知是人。即魔弟子。又云。了了見者。知一切法無二相也。又云。觀諸法等。名之為佛。所以學人問忠國師云。如來說般若。即非般若。是名般若。既盡是非。云何是般若。答。能見非名者是般若。問。佛亦如是說。答。古今不異。得則千佛等心。萬聖同轍。

Answer: This work merely collects the verbal teachings of the patriarchs, buddhas, and bodhisattvas; hence it is called a "record". Even when there are questions, answers, and explanations, they all rely on the general intention of past worthies to praise obliquely and encourage practice, elaborating the ultimate teaching. How could one presume to claim to "reveal and instruct" or falsely make assertions? Moreover, the orthodox source of the patriarchs and buddhas is the true nature of consciousness-only. As long as one has faith, one can teach others. If we speak of the path of cultivation and realization, all quarters say that one's accomplishment does not yet equal all the sages. However, that which is permitted in the teachings is that a bodhisattva at the initial stage can know it by inference, and it is also permitted to understand it according to the teachings: first entering through faith based on conceptual understanding through hearing, and later tallying with it thoughtlessly. If one enters the gate of faith, one immediately ascends to the patriarchal position. Now, this Mirror of the Source has been assembled, and its proofs are boundless; it penetrates according to every thought, and wherever the eye rests, all is it. Now, taking worldly affairs as an illustration within the realm of sentient beings: first, inferential knowledge; second, direct knowledge; third, knowledge based on the teachings. First, inferential knowledge: as with our present defiled body, every night there are dreams. The good and bad objects seen in dreams bring distinct grief and joy. Upon waking up, one is sleeping peacefully on the bed—how was any of it real? It was all the making of mental conception by the manovijñāna during the dream. Thus it can be known by inference that the things seen while awake are just like those in a dream, unreal. The objects of the three periods of past, future, and present are fundamentally the immediate nimittabhāga of the eighth, the ālayavijñāna, transformed solely by this fundamental consciousness. Present objects are discriminated by the distinct manovijñāna. Past and future objects are conceived by the isolated, scattered, dim manovijñāna. Although the realms of dream and waking are distinct, neither goes beyond the manovijñāna. Thus the principle of citta-only is illuminated by this analogy. Second, direct knowledge: this is clarity in confronting objects, not waiting for analogies to be set up. Furthermore, when seeing blue or white objects right now, the objects are fundamentally empty in themselves; they do not say, "I am blue; I am white." It is entirely the spontaneous discrimination of the intrinsic nature of the visual consciousness's darśanabhāga, which, together with the simultaneous distinct manovijñāna, conceptually discriminates them as blue or white. Conceiving them in the mind as form, and speaking of them in words as blue—all these are the false imputations of internal verbalization. Furthermore, because the six sense-objects are inert, their substances do not establish themselves, and their names do not call themselves. Since this is so for one form, it is the same for the ten thousand phenomena. All are devoid of intrinsic nature, and all are internal verbalization. Therefore it is said: "The ten thousand phenomena are fundamentally at peace, but people disturb themselves." Therefore, when the mind arises, the ten thousand objects all exist; where the empty mind arises, the ten thousand objects are all empty. Thus emptiness does not empty itself; it is empty because of the mind. Existence does not exist by itself; it exists because of the mind. Since they are neither empty nor existent, they are consciousness-only and citta-only. If not for the mind, where could the ten thousand phenomena lodge? Moreover, as for past objects, how were they ever existent? Where a thought arises, they suddenly appear before one. If the thought does not arise, the object never appears. These are all daily functions of sentient beings, which can be directly known without waiting for accomplishment; how could they require attainment through practice? Anyone with a mind can verify and know this. Therefore an earlier worthy said: "As for people of great faculties who know consciousness-only, they constantly observe their own mind, taking internal verbalization as the object. When they first begin this contemplation, although they have not yet become sages, to partially know internal verbalization is to be a bodhisattva." Third, knowledge based on the teachings: A sūtra says: "The three realms are citta-only; the ten thousand phenomena are consciousness-only." This is the fundamental principle realized and the authentic source that the teachings express. The details are in the text below, and sincere proofs are not just one. As the *Satyasiddhiśāstra* says, the Buddha spoke the words of the interior, exterior, and intermediate, and thereupon entered samādhi. At that time, five hundred arhats each explained these words. After the Buddha emerged from samādhi, they asked the World-Honoured One together, "Who hit upon the Buddha's intention?" The Buddha said, "None hit upon my intention." They further addressed the Buddha, "Since none hit upon the Buddha's intention, shall we not incur sin?" The Buddha said, "Although none hit upon my intention, each accords with the correct principle and is worthy of being sacred teaching; there is merit and no sin." If expounding the small vehicle's teaching of self-realization still accords with the correct principle, how much more so purely citing the One Vehicle and discussing only the Buddha's intention? The *Six Practices Dharma* says: "All people of great wisdom who wish to study the Way, without asking whether it is great or small, must rely on principle and teaching. If they see an expedient teaching, even though it was spoken by the Buddha, knowing that it is not true speech, they do not follow it. If they see an ordinary person speak what has principle, even though it is not the Buddha's speech, they practice in accordance with it. Because wise people studying the Buddha-Dharma well understand that the Tathāgata's teachings have the provisional and the real, when they explain the principle relying on the Buddha's real teaching, they surpass ordinary fools who erroneously grasp onto the provisional." Therefore, if a wise person speaks, although the person is an ordinary mortal, the Dharma is identical to the Buddha's. Just as pouring water from a pitcher into another pitcher: although the pitchers are different, the poured water is one and the same. Therefore, although an ordinary mortal has not exhausted the saṃyojanas, this does not hinder them from having understanding and being able to explain the real meaning. So long as one causes the mental factors that understand the principle to contemplate, this initial contemplation of the principle is different from that of other ordinary people. If one contemplates the emptiness of persons, one is of the two vehicles; if one contemplates the emptiness of phenomena, one is a bodhisattva. Therefore the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* says: "One who first cultivates contemplation is an ordinary bodhisattva." Proven by this passage, a beginner studying contemplation, although they have not severed the saṃyojanas, is already a bodhisattva. Because they can understand the principle identical to the Great Sage, when they speak, it accords with the principle, and each and every [statement] can be relied upon. The *Ratnakaraṇḍakasūtra* says: "Just as the chick in the egg of the kalaviṅka bird king produces the exquisite sound of the kalaviṅka before its beak has appeared, so too the bodhisattvas in the egg of the Buddha-Dharma, though they have not destroyed the view of self or escaped the three realms, can still produce the exquisite sound of the Buddha-Dharma, namely, the sound of the practice of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness. When the kalaviṅka enters a flock of peacocks, it never calls out; only when it returns among kalaviṅka birds does it call out. If a bodhisattva enters among all the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, they never expound the inconceivable Dharma of all buddhas; only when they come among the assembly of bodhisattvas do they expound it." Proven by this passage, although faults are not yet exhausted on the stage of ordinary beings, this does not hinder profound understanding; whenever one speaks what has principle, it can all be accepted in faith. However, whenever ordinary beings speak what has principle, it is all due to past habituation, not begun in present study. If it were not for past habituation, even studying into old age, one would merely repeat others' words while oneself remaining confused about the principle. Because of confusion about the principle, although one possesses many words, not understanding the provisional and the real, whatever one speaks contradicts the principle. If one understands the principle, without discriminating between the venerable and the young, one simply seeks the Way, not worldly affairs; one relies on the Dharma, not on the person. For example, when Śāriputra saw Aśvajit and sought the Dharma from him, Aśvajit answered with a verse: "I am young in years, / and my study has just begun. / How could I proclaim the ultimate truth / and expound the Tathāgata's meaning at length?" Śāriputra said, "You may speak the essentials in brief." Thereupon he spoke the verse: "All phenomena arise from causes and conditions; / of these phenomena, [the Buddha] speaks the causes and conditions. / Of these phenomena, the causes and conditions cease; / the Great Master has spoken thus." Śāriputra attained the first fruit upon hearing it just once; when he transmitted it to Maudgalyāyana and spoke it again, [Maudgalyāyana] attained the Way. By this it is known that wise people seeking the Dharma only value another's virtue and are not ashamed to approach an inferior; they are not like ordinary fools whose arrogance makes them exalt themselves, who, though knowing another is superior, are too ashamed and unwilling to learn. That ordinary beings have been unable to enter the Way from beginningless time is mostly due to being unable to seek the Dharma because of this. Therefore, all foolish people who are confused about the real teaching and cannot awaken by themselves should solely seek out virtue. For those who are confused about the principle, although they possess worldly wisdom, if they lack superior friends, they are constantly confused about the Way. As the *Suvikrāntavikramiparipṛcchā-prajñāpāramitāsūtra* says: "Just as a person born blind cannot see colors, so sentient beings blinded by kleśas cannot see the Dharma. Just as a person with eyes cannot see colors without external light, so a practitioner, though possessing wisdom, cannot see the Dharma without a good friend." By this it is proven that although a person has wisdom, if they cannot awaken by themselves, they must have a good friend. Therefore the *Fu fazang jing* says: "A good friend is the complete cause and condition for attaining the Way." The Buddha himself encouraged people to pursue good friends, rather than clinging to foolishness and letting a lifetime pass in vain. For this reason, the buddhas left instructions merely commanding us to rely on the Dharma and not on the person, to rely on the meaning and not on the letter. Bodhisattvas even transformed their bodies into animals to expound the Dharma for people, displaying this wonder to make listeners accept it in faith and cause them all to awaken to the Way and enter the equal Dharma. How could they cause people to give rise to notions of superior and inferior in their minds? Therefore the *Exposition of the Meaning of the Huayan* raises the objection: "This principle is subtle and esoteric, known only at the ultimate stage. Why should ordinary sentiments presumptuously pry into the great teaching?" It explains: "Relying on the teachings and principles, the sacred teachings permit it. The *Nirvāṇasūtra* says: 'An ordinary mortal bound with saṃyojanas can know the secret treasury of the Tathāgata.' The verse in the 'Vairocana Chapter' says: 'Just as by relying on the sunlight / one can see the solar orb in turn, / so by the Buddha's light of wisdom / one sees the path traversed by the Buddha.' That is, relying on the Buddha's teachings, one can understand the teachings." Now in this Mirror of the Source, from beginning to end, the teaching-light of the Buddha's wisdom is cited to reveal the traces of the path traversed by the Buddha. If one believes deeply, then by means of the light of the mind of sentient beings, one sees the traces of the practice of sentient beings. If one objects that ordinary beings should not know this, this is simply the person of wrong views and lack of faith. Therefore the *Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra* says: "If someone says, 'I am different and the Buddha is different,' you should know that this person is a disciple of Māra." It also says: "One who sees clearly knows that all phenomena are devoid of dual signs." It also says: "Contemplating all phenomena as equal is called the Buddha." Therefore a student asked National Teacher Zhong: "'When the Tathāgata speaks of prajñā, it is not prajñā; this is named prajñā.' Since 'is' and 'is not' are both exhausted, what is prajñā?" He answered: "That which can see the non-name is prajñā." The student asked: "Did the Buddha also speak thus?" He answered: "Past and present do not differ; when attained, the thousand buddhas have an equal mind and the ten thousand sages share the same track."