[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) › 21.13 # 宗鏡錄 21.13 宗鏡錄 21.13 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [21.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21.13) 答。執色極微有質礙性。是小乘宗。非通大旨。人水鬼火。豈在異方。毛海芥山。誰論巨細。一塵一識。萬境萬心矣。若迷心而觀色。則通塞宛然。若了色而明心。乃是非絕矣。所以古德云。若知色即空。觀色非耶。若迷色不空。觀色是耶。若知空即色。觀空非耶。若觀空異色。觀空是耶。此乃解惑異途。自分妍醜。何關色空二境。以辯邪正耶。若曉此宗途。常色觀而恒正。若迷斯旨趣。雖空觀以恒邪。且夫眾生不了二空。皆為執心色實有。觀心不妙。照境無功。既不解即色明空。又不能微細剖析。罔知麁細色聚。焉窮真妄心原。今對深淺之機。略標性相之義。令圓頓之根不濫。使中下之智無遺。如先德云。如來出世。本為度生。有情迷執根深。妄計實有我法。佛即巧設方便。令除顛倒之心。於色聚中。遣其分析。顯彼二執我法皆空。觀心析時。有如刀用。顯所析者。色雖無量。不越兩般。一者俱礙。二者所礙。俱礙色者。謂五根五境。能造四大。此乃總體。於中別者。即青黃赤白。此四是實。長短方圓麁細高下。若正若不正。此十是假。依實有故。名為形色。能礙於他。亦被他礙。故名俱礙。依此分析。成極略色。極略色。即法處收。復有光影明暗。煙雲塵霧逈色表色。空一顯色等。皆是假有。由被他礙。不能礙他。名所礙色。依此假想分析之時。名極逈色。極逈色。即法處攝。三顯示行相及所依定者。謂瑜伽師作觀行時。依四靜慮根本定心。與慧俱時。託彼根境。及與外色為質。於自識上變影而緣。於一色聚之中。初析為二。觀此二分。色上。我法都無。了了分明。不沈不掉。復恐二分色裏。我法猶存。更以慧心。析為四別。如是乃至隣虛一相。更不可析。名色後邊。若更析之。便為非色。依斯假立。極略極逈二種極微。推覓我法。實體都無。達遍計空。悟依他假。便能引起。二空無漏根本智生。即證二空。所顯真理。又佛國者。如今一國之內。皆天子所握領。無不屬於國者。今亦爾。隨心一想一緣。有情無情。若色若心。皆是實。智所照之境。無不了其性相。故名佛國。天台淨名疏云。隨成就眾生。則佛土淨。隨佛土淨。則說法淨。隨說法淨。則智慧淨。隨智慧淨。則其心淨。隨其心淨。則一切功德淨。是故寶積菩薩。欲得淨土。當淨其心。隨其心淨。則佛土淨者。觀心性本淨。猶如虛空。即是性淨之境。境。即國也。觀智覺悟。此心。名之為佛。初觀名因。觀成名果。若論自行。即是心王無染。若論化他。即是心數解脫。智慧數為大臣。能排諸數上惑。以還心原清淨土也。故云。心淨即佛土淨也。又隨四教所明四心。此四種心淨。即四種佛國悉淨。此四種心。只是一自性清淨心。此心若淨。一切佛土皆悉淨也。如鏡明則照遠。鈴響則聲高。心淨則智行俱清。意虛則境界咸寂。凡曰垢淨。無有不由心者。乃一淨一切淨矣。或見成住壞空。皆是眾生善惡業現。如首楞嚴經云。思報招引惡果。此思業交。則臨終時。先見惡風。吹壞國土。亡者神識。被吹上空。旋落乘風。墮無間獄。古釋云。思者意也。國土不壞。由心分別。見國土壞。由意思影像。法塵生滅。報處還然。能受生滅之遷變。又生人見國土。死人則見壞。皆由意生法生。心滅境滅。十四科淨土義云。經有恒沙佛國者。皆是聖人接物之近迹。佛實無土。何以明之。夫未免形累者。故須託土以自居。八住已上。永脫色累。照體獨立。神無方所。用土何為。而言有者。以眾生解微惑重。未堪真化故。以人天福樂。引之。令行戒善。或以三乘四果。誘之。勸修道品。然涉善之功。自然冥歸菩提。因起貪報之惑。故流轉生死。實即土屬眾生。故無國而不穢。淨屬於佛。故無國而不淨。故經云。我淨土不毀。此之謂矣。 > Answer: Clinging to material paramāṇus as possessing an obstructive nature belongs to the Hīnayāna tenets; it does not penetrate the great purport. How could water for humans and fire for pretas be in different locations? And between a pore and an ocean, or a mustard seed and a mountain, who can speak of large and small? One dust mote is one consciousness; myriad realms are myriad minds. If one is deluded about the mind and observes matter, then obstruction and passage are clearly differentiated. If one comprehends matter and illuminates the mind, then affirmations and negations vanish. Therefore, an ancient master of virtue said: “If one knows that matter is empty, is the contemplation of matter erroneous? If one is deluded into thinking matter is not empty, is the contemplation of matter correct? If one knows that emptiness is matter, is the contemplation of emptiness erroneous? If one contemplates emptiness as distinct from matter, is the contemplation of emptiness correct?” These are different paths of understanding and delusion, naturally distinguished into fair and foul. What does this have to do with the two realms of matter and emptiness as the basis for judging right and wrong? If one is enlightened to this source-path, contemplation of matter is always correct; if one is deluded about this purport, even contemplation of emptiness is always heterodox. Furthermore, that sentient beings do not understand the two emptinesses is entirely because they cling to mind and matter as truly existent. Their contemplation of mind is not subtle, and their illumination of realms lacks efficacy. Not understanding that matter is immediately empty, nor being able to dissect it minutely, ignorant of coarse and subtle material aggregates—how could they fathom the true and false source of the mind? Now, addressing capacities of varying depths, I shall briefly indicate the principles of nature and characteristics, so that roots suited to the perfect and sudden will not be confounded, and the wisdom of medium and lesser \[capacities\] will not be left out. As a former master of virtue said: “The Tathāgata's advent in the world was originally to deliver sentient beings. Because sentient beings' deluded clingings have deep roots and they falsely impute a real self and real dharmas, the Buddha skillfully devised expedient means to cause them to eliminate inverted minds. Within the aggregates of matter, he had them analyze it, revealing that both clings to a self and dharmas are empty. When the contemplating mind performs analysis, it is like using a knife. In revealing what is analyzed, although matter is immeasurable, it does not exceed two kinds: first, that which is mutually obstructive; second, that which is obstructed. As for mutually obstructive matter, it refers to the five sense faculties and the five sense objects, as well as the four great elements that produce them. This is the general substance. The particulars within it are blue, yellow, red, and white; these four are real. Long, short, square, round, coarse, fine, high, low, straight, and crooked; these ten are provisional. Because they exist dependent on the real, they are termed ‘shape-matter’. They can obstruct others and are also obstructed by others; thus they are named ‘mutually obstructive’. Analyzing on the basis of this forms ‘matter of extreme reduction’. Matter of extreme reduction is subsumed under the sphere of dharmas (dharmāyatana). Furthermore, there are light, shadow, brightness, darkness, smoke, cloud, dust, fog, distant matter, manifest matter, empty-space visible matter, and so on; these are all provisionally existent. Because they are obstructed by others and cannot obstruct others, they are named ‘obstructed matter’. When one analyzes based on this mental imaging, it is named ‘matter of extreme distance’. Matter of extreme distance is subsumed under the sphere of dharmas. Third, revealing the operational aspect and the samādhi relied upon: when a yogācāra practitioner engages in contemplative practice, he relies on the fundamental samādhi mind of the four dhyānas concurrent with prajñā, takes those faculties, objects, and external matter as the physical basis, projects images on his own consciousness, and cognizes them. Within a single material aggregate, he first dissects it into two. Contemplating these two divisions, self and dharmas are entirely absent on this matter; it is lucid and distinct, neither sunk nor agitated. Fearing further that within the two divisions of matter, self and dharmas might still linger, he again uses the mind of wisdom to dissect it into four distinctions. Proceeding in this way down to the single characteristic adjacent to voidness (paramāṇu), which can no longer be dissected, it is called the ultimate boundary of matter. If one were to dissect it further, it would become non-matter. Dependent on this, the two kinds of paramāṇus—extreme reduction and extreme distance—are provisionally established. In searching for a self and dharmas, a real substance is entirely absent. Penetrating the emptiness of the imagined (parikalpita) and awakening to the provisional nature of the dependent (paratantra), one can give rise to the arising of the uncontaminated fundamental wisdom of the two emptinesses, immediately realizing the true reality revealed by the two emptinesses.” Furthermore, concerning the Buddha-land: just as within a single country today, everything is held and governed by the Son of Heaven and there is nothing that does not belong to the state, so it is here. In accord with a single thought and a single cognitive condition of the mind, sentient or insentient, whether matter or mind, all are the realm illuminated by real wisdom, and there are none whose nature and characteristics are not fully comprehended; hence it is called a ‘Buddha-land’. The Tiantai Commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: “In accord with the maturation of sentient beings, the Buddha-land is purified. In accord with the purity of the Buddha-land, the preaching of the Dharma is purified. In accord with the purity of the preaching of the Dharma, wisdom is purified. In accord with the purity of wisdom, their minds are purified. In accord with the purity of their minds, all merits are purified. Therefore, Bodhisattva Ratnakūṭa, if one wishes to attain a pure land, one should purify one's mind. In accord with the purity of one's mind, the Buddha-land is purified.” Contemplating the mind's nature as fundamentally pure, like empty space, this is the realm of natural purity. The realm is precisely the land. The contemplative wisdom that awakens to this mind is termed ‘Buddha’. The initial contemplation is called the cause; the completion of contemplation is called the fruit. If spoken of in terms of one's own practice, it is the untainted state of the mind-king. If spoken of in terms of transforming others, it is the liberation of the mental factors (caitasikas). The wisdom factor serves as the prime minister, capable of expelling delusions upon the various factors, thereby returning to the pure land of the mind-source. Therefore it is said: “When the mind is pure, the Buddha-land is pure.” Moreover, in accord with the four minds explained in the Four Teachings, when these four minds are pure, the four kinds of Buddha-lands are all pure. These four kinds of mind are just the one inherently pure mind. If this mind is pure, all Buddha-lands are completely pure. Just as when a mirror is bright it illuminates far, and when a bell chimes its sound carries high, so when the mind is pure, wisdom and practice are both clear; when the consciousness is empty, realms are completely tranquil. All that is called defiled or pure invariably stems from the mind; thus when the one is pure, all are pure. As for seeing formation, abiding, destruction, and emptiness, these are all manifestations of the good and bad karma of sentient beings. As the Śūraṅgama Sūtra says: “The retribution of thought invites evil fruits. When these karmas of thought intersect, then at the time of death, one first sees an evil wind blowing and destroying the land. The deceased's consciousness is blown high into the air, spins down riding the wind, and falls into the Avīci Hell.” An ancient commentary says: “Thought is the mind. That the land is not destroyed is due to mental discrimination; seeing the land destroyed is due to mental images and the arising and ceasing of mental objects (dharmāyatana). The place of retribution is likewise so, capable of undergoing the transitions of arising and ceasing. Furthermore, the living see the land, while the dead see it destroyed; this is all because when the mind arises, dharmas arise, and when the mind ceases, objects cease.” The Fourteen Topics on the Meaning of the Pure Land says: “That the sūtras speak of Buddha-lands numerous as the sands of the Ganges is all proximate traces by which the sages engage beings. The Buddha in reality has no land. How is this demonstrated? Those who have not escaped physical encumbrance must rely on a land to dwell. Above the eighth stage of abiding, they are forever freed from the encumbrance of matter; the illuminating substance stands independent, and the spirit has no fixed location. What use would they have for a land? As for saying they exist, it is because sentient beings have slight understanding and heavy delusions, unable to bear the true transformation. Hence, through the blissful rewards of humans and devas, \[the Buddha\] guides them, causing them to practice the precepts and goodness; or through the three vehicles and four fruits, he entices them, encouraging them to cultivate the factors of awakening. Yet the merit of engaging in goodness naturally and secretly accords with bodhi; but because of the delusion of giving rise to craving for retribution, they transmigrate in birth and death. In truth, lands belong to sentient beings, hence no land is not defiled; purity belongs to the Buddha, hence no land is not pure. Therefore the sūtra says: ‘My pure land is never destroyed.’ This is the meaning.” > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 21.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21.12) - [Next: 21.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21.14) - [Up: 21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.21.13) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.21.13) · Pramāṇa