[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) › 32.7 # 宗鏡錄 32.7 宗鏡錄 32.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [32.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32.7) 答曰。此經既云。諸佛解脫。當於眾生心行中求。若不約觀行。豈稱斯文。若不以毘耶離菴羅樹園對諸法門。則不得約觀心解釋。何得於眾生心行中求諸佛解脫。若不於心行求解脫者。云何得住不思議解脫。若不住不思議解脫。云何於一毛孔見諸佛土變現自在。如不思議品所明也。復云何得如法華經。明。身根清淨。一切十方國土皆於身中現。又豈得如華嚴經頌。說。無量諸世界。悉從心緣起。無量諸佛國。皆於毛孔現也。如前問言。小乘不得約觀心解釋者。何故聲聞經中。佛為牧牛人說十一法。皆一一內合比丘觀心。如是等例。豈非方等及三藏經。對諸法門觀心明義也。故知了義教。不了義教。皆是了義。以唯一心故。所以云。圓機對教。無教不圓。理心涉事。無事非理。又云。根羸則法劣。器廣則道圓故。 > Answer: Since this sūtra says, 'The liberation of the buddhas should be sought within the mental actions of sentient beings,' if one did not treat it in terms of the practice of contemplation, how would it accord with this text? If one did not match the Āmrapālī grove in Vaiśālī with the various Dharma gates, then one could not explain it in terms of contemplating the mind; how then could one seek the liberation of the buddhas within the mental actions of sentient beings? If one does not seek liberation within mental actions, how can one abide in inconceivable liberation? If one does not abide in inconceivable liberation, how can one see the buddha-lands undergo transformative manifestations at will within a single pore, as explained in the Chapter on the Inconceivable? Furthermore, how could it be like what is explained in the Lotus Sūtra, that with the body faculty purified, all the lands of the ten directions appear within the body? And how could it be like what the verses of the Avataṃsakasūtra say: 'Immeasurable worlds all arise conditioned by mind; immeasurable buddha-lands all appear within a single pore'? As for the previous question stating that the Hīnayāna cannot be explained in terms of contemplating the mind: why, in the Śrāvaka sūtras, when the Buddha spoke eleven dharmas for the ox-herder, did each and every one inwardly correspond to the bhikṣu's contemplation of mind? Are such examples as these not cases of matching with various Dharma gates to explain the meaning through contemplating the mind in the Vaipulya and Tripiṭaka sūtras? Therefore, we know that both teachings of definitive meaning and teachings of provisional meaning are definitive meaning, because there is only the one mind. Hence it is said: 'When a rounded capacity faces the teaching, there is no teaching that is not rounded; when the mind of principle engages affairs, there is no affair that is not principle.' It is also said: 'When the faculties are feeble, the dharma is inferior; when the vessel is broad, the Path is rounded.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 32.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32.6) - [Next: 32.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32.8) - [Up: 32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.32.7) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.32.7) · Pramāṇa