宗鏡錄 30.3.3

30.3.3

是真同行。 是真法王子孫。 紹三寶種。 使不斷絕。 若不能觀於一念自生心。 一一答此問者。 即是天魔外道眷屬。 為彼之所驅馳。 方處三界牢獄。 未有出離之期。 若心不愜。 欲求挽出者。 必墮二乘三惡道坑。 自斷法身慧命。 誅滅菩提眷屬。 是破佛法國土大乘家。 哀哉哀哉。 知奈何也。 若觀自生心。 得失如此。 觀他生。 共生。 無因生。 心亦然也。 釋曰。 此觀心三十六問。 上等十方諸佛之慈心。 無恩不報。 下及法界群生之悲仰。 有感皆從。 乃至修行妙門。 度生儀軌。 教觀融攝。 理事圓通。 徹果該因。 自他兼利。 十身遍應。 四土包含。 但觀自一心。 無不悉備。 如論偈云。 烏鵶不施食。 豈報白鵶恩。 非但田不良。 無平等種子。 法雨若不降。 法種必燋枯。 各無來世糧。 失。 三利致苦者。 釋云。 此偈明。 不修念處之觀。 即是無平等種子。 不依木叉而住。 即非良田。 何者。 夫觀大乘念處者。 觀生死五陰之身。 非枯非榮。 即大寂定。 涅槃經云。 色解脫涅槃。 乃至識解脫涅槃。 若修此念處觀。 即是觀一切六道眾生。 即是常樂我淨大涅槃。 具足佛之知見。 如常不輕圓信成就。 經云。 施城中最下乞人。 與難勝如來等。 是則豈可分別是田非田。 可施不可施耶。 故念處觀。 即平等種子。 若不修。 則見生死涅槃有異。 凡聖有殊。 聖是敬田。 則崇仰而施。 凡是悲田。 則厭賤而不捨。 故言無平等種子。 今取王為喻者。 喻無平等種子也。 昔有王。 但借白鵶以喻聖人。 烏鵶以喻凡人。 王喻眾生不修念處。 不修念處平等種子之人也。 故簡悲敬兩田。 然內無平等種子圓觀之道。 外則不能弘宣化大乘。 豈能報佛恩。 又破如來禁戒。 則無良田。 是故偈云。 法雨若不降。 法種則燋枯。 此兩句。 明四眾無戒慧之機。 聖則不應。 何者。 涅槃經云。 純陀自云。 我今身有良田。 無諸荒穢。 唯希如來甘露法雨。 雨我身田。 令生法芽。 而今四眾不依念處修道。 則無慧種。 不依木叉而住。 則無良田。 既無種。 則眾生無感聖之機。 豈能招聖法雨之應。 眾生佛性之芽。 何得不枯也。 乃至內無善機。 外無聖應。 法種之芽又枯。 是則失現在未來涅槃。 三利之樂。 乃更招三塗之苦。 又偈云。 能報白鵶恩。 普施烏鵶食者。 釋云。 此偈明有平等種子。 復有良田。 能施烏鵶食。 能報白鵶恩。 何者。 然佛聖人能覺悟眾生。 不令為三毒諸煩惱蛇毒所傷。 即是聖人於眾生有恩。 如白鵶覺悟於王。 不為毒蛇所害。 經云。 依教修行。 名報佛恩。 而今行者。 依念處觀慧。 依木叉而住。 即是依教修行。 名報佛恩。 復能以己之行。 化導一切眾生。 即是普施一切烏鵶食。 能報白鵶之恩。 又偈云。 守鼻隅安般。 及修不淨觀。 安般得四禪。 不免泥犁苦。 不淨謂無學。 覆鉢受女飯。 設得隨禪生。 墮長壽天難。 為是因緣故。 須造觀心論者。 釋云。 此明事相修禪之倒也。 鼻隅安般一句。 標修有漏四禪章門。 及修不淨觀一句。 標修無漏事禪章門。 守鼻隅者。 安心在鼻也。 安般者。 數息也。 以數息故。 能得四禪八定。 昔有比丘。 得四禪。 謂阿羅漢。 臨命謗佛。 墮於地獄也。 昔有比丘。 學不淨觀。 少時伏心。 欲想不起。 自謂聖人。 後出聚落乞食。 見女送飯。 欲心即發。 情迷心醉。 覆鉢受於女飯。 然數息得禪。 設不起謗。 及不墮地獄。 而隨禪受生。 墮長壽天難。 故知若於一心四念處修道。 不忘慈父囑。 真孝順之子孫。 但入宗鏡中。 無恩而不報。 是以心若正。 萬法皆正。 心若邪。 萬法亦邪。 若離自心外。

[such a person] is a true fellow-practitioner, a true scion of the Dharma King, continuing the lineage of the Three Jewels and keeping it from interruption. If one cannot contemplate the mind born of itself in a single thought and answer these questions one by one, one is a retinue member of heavenly Māras and non-Buddhists, driven by them, precisely situated in the prison of the three realms without any prospect of escape. If in one's citta one is not content and seeks to be pulled out, one will inevitably fall into the pit of the two vehicles and the three evil destinies, severing for oneself the dharmakāya and the life of wisdom, and exterminating the retinue of bodhi. Such a person ruins the house of the Great Vehicle in the Buddha's Dharma-realm. How lamentable, how lamentable! What can be done? If contemplating the mind born of itself involves such gain and loss, contemplating the mind born of other, born of both, or born without cause is likewise so. Explanation: These thirty-six questions on contemplating the mind ascend to match the compassionate mind of all Buddhas of the ten directions, leaving no kindness unrequited, and descend to meet the sorrowful supplications of the multitude of living beings in the dharmadhātu, responding to every resonance. Up to the wondrous gate of practice, the protocols for delivering beings, the mutual containment of teaching and contemplation, and the complete interpenetration of principle and phenomena: it reaches to the fruit and embraces the cause, benefiting both oneself and others; the ten bodies respond everywhere, and the four lands are encompassed. Merely contemplating one's own one mind, nothing is not fully provided. As the verses of the treatise say: 'If one does not cast food to the black crows, / how could one repay the kindness of the white crow? / Not only is the field poor, / but there is no seed of equanimity. / If the rain of Dharma does not fall, / the Dharma-seeds will surely wither. / Each will lack provisions for future lives; / forfeiting the three benefits leads to suffering.' The commentary explains: This verse clarifies that failing to cultivate the contemplation of the stations of mindfulness means lacking the seed of equanimity; failing to abide in reliance on the prātimokṣa means not having a fertile field. Why so? Now, contemplating the stations of mindfulness of the Great Vehicle means contemplating the body of the five aggregates of birth-and-death as neither withered nor luxuriant, which is itself the great quiescent absorption. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Form is liberation, nirvāṇa,' and so forth up to 'consciousness is liberation, nirvāṇa.' If one cultivates this contemplation of the stations of mindfulness, this is contemplating all living beings of the six destinies as being themselves the great nirvāṇa of permanence, bliss, self, and purity, fully endowed with the knowledge and vision of the Buddha, like Sadāparibhūta's consummation of complete faith. A sūtra says: 'Giving to the lowliest beggar in the city is equal to [giving to] the Tathāgata Duḥprasaha.' If so, how could one distinguish between what is a field and what is not a field, what may be given to and what may not be given to? Therefore, the contemplation of the stations of mindfulness is itself the seed of equanimity. If one does not cultivate it, one sees a difference between birth-and-death and nirvāṇa, and a disparity between ordinary beings and sages. Taking sages as the field of reverence, one reveres them and gives; taking ordinary beings as the field of compassion, one loathes them as lowly and does not renounce [wealth for them]. Hence it is said: 'there is no seed of equanimity.' Now, taking a king as an analogy is an analogy for lacking the seed of equanimity. Long ago there was a king; [the story] merely borrows the white crow to symbolize the sage and the black crows to symbolize ordinary beings. The king symbolizes living beings who do not cultivate the stations of mindfulness—persons who do not cultivate the seed of equanimity of the stations of mindfulness. Thus he discriminates between the two fields of compassion and reverence. However, when internally one lacks the way of the round contemplation of the seed of equanimity, externally one cannot broadly propagate and convert [beings to] the Great Vehicle. How could one repay the Buddha's kindness? Furthermore, breaking the Tathāgata's prohibitive precepts leaves one without a fertile field. Therefore the verse says: 'If the rain of Dharma does not fall, / the Dharma-seeds will surely wither.' These two lines clarify that when the four assemblies lack the capacity for precepts and wisdom, the sages do not respond. Why so? The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says that Cunda himself said: 'In my body now there is a fertile field, free from all weeds and waste. I hope only for the Tathāgata's rain of nectar-Dharma to water my bodily field and cause the sprouts of Dharma to grow.' Yet now the four assemblies do not cultivate the way in reliance on the stations of mindfulness, so they lack the seed of wisdom; they do not abide in reliance on the prātimokṣa, so they lack a fertile field. Since there is no seed, living beings have no capacity to move the sages; how could they attract the response of the sages' rain of Dharma? How could the sprout of living beings' Buddha-nature not wither? Thus, internally lacking good capacity and externally lacking the sages' response, the sprouts of the Dharma-seeds wither as well. This forfeits the bliss of the three benefits of nirvāṇa in the present and the future, instead further inviting the suffering of the three paths. Again, the verse says: 'Being able to repay the kindness of the white crow, / one universally casts food to the black crows.' The commentary explains: This verse clarifies that having the seed of equanimity and also having a fertile field, one can cast food to the black crows and can repay the kindness of the white crow. Why so? The Buddha and the sages can awaken living beings so that they are not harmed by the snake poison of the three poisons and various kleśas; this is the sages' kindness toward living beings, just as the white crow awakened the king so that he was not harmed by poisonous snakes. A sūtra says: 'Practicing in accordance with the teaching is called repaying the Buddha's kindness.' Now practitioners, relying on the contemplative wisdom of the stations of mindfulness and abiding in reliance on the prātimokṣa, are practicing in accordance with the teaching, which is called repaying the Buddha's kindness. Furthermore, being able to guide and transform all living beings through their own practice is universally casting food to all the black crows, being able to repay the kindness of the white crow. Again, the verse says: 'Guarding the corner of the nose in ānāpāna, / and cultivating the contemplation of the impure: / by ānāpāna one attains the four dhyānas, / yet does not escape the suffering of naraka. / Through the impure [contemplation] one claims to be an aśaikṣa; / inverting one's bowl, one accepts food from a woman. / Even if one is reborn according to one's dhyāna, / one falls into the difficulty of the long-lived devas. / For such causes and conditions, / one must compose the Treatise on Contemplating the Mind.' The commentary explains: This clarifies the inversions of cultivating dhyāna in phenomenal characteristics. The line 'Guarding the corner of the nose in ānāpāna' indicates the chapter topic on cultivating the four dhyānas with outflow. The line 'and cultivating the contemplation of the impure' indicates the chapter topic on cultivating phenomenal dhyāna without outflow. 'Guarding the corner of the nose' means settling the citta on the nose. 'Ānāpāna' means counting breaths. Because of counting breaths, one can attain the four dhyānas and eight concentrations. Long ago there was a monk who attained the four dhyānas and considered himself an arhat; facing death, he slandered the Buddha and fell into hell. Long ago there was a monk who studied the contemplation of the impure; for a short while he subdued his citta and thoughts of desire did not arise, so he regarded himself as a sage. Later he went out to a village to beg for food; seeing a woman offering food, lustful thoughts immediately arose, and his emotions became confused and his citta intoxicated: inverting his bowl, he accepted food from the woman. Now, attaining dhyāna through counting breaths, even if one does not give rise to slander and does not fall into hell, one is reborn according to one's dhyāna and falls into the difficulty of the long-lived devas. Therefore we know that if one cultivates the way in the four stations of mindfulness of the one mind, not forgetting the compassionate father's instruction, one is a truly filial descendant; merely entering the mirror of the source, there is no kindness that is not repaid. Therefore, if the citta is correct, the ten thousand dharmas are all correct; if the citta is deviant, the ten thousand dharmas are also deviant. If, apart from one's own citta,