宗鏡錄 33.7.4

33.7.4

以動為境。 則顛倒行事。 性心失真。 境實不遷。 唯心妄動。 可謂雲駛月運。 舟行岸移矣。 故論云。 是以言往不必往。 古今常存。 以其不動。 稱去不必去。 謂不從今至古。 以其不來。 不來。 故不馳騁於古今。 不動。 故各性住於一世。 此乃是法法各住真如之位。 無有一物往來。 亦未曾一念暫住。 皆不相待。 豈非不遷乎。 若能如是通達。 己眼圓明。 何似有之幻塵。 一期之異說。 而能惑我哉。 又古釋云。 百家異說。 豈文言之能惑者。 此明於三教不惑。 各立其宗。 儒有二十七家。 若契五常之理。 即無惑也。 黃老有二十五家。 若契虛無。 亦無惑也。 釋有十二分教。 若了本心。 亦無惑也。 然則三教雖殊。 若法界收之。 則無別原矣。 若孔老二教。 百氏九流。 總而言之。 不離法界。 其猶百川歸於大海。 若佛教圓宗。 一乘妙旨。 別而言之。 百家猶若螢光。 寧齊巨照。 如大海不歸百川也。 然則四像風馳。 旋機電卷。 得意毫微。 雖速而不轉者。 四像。 則四時也。 旋機者。 北斗七星也。 雖寒來暑往。 斗轉星移。 電轉風馳。 剎那不住。 若得意者。 了於一心毫微之密旨。 則見性而不動也。 果不俱因。 因因而果者。 譬如為高山。 初覆一簣之土為因。 直至壘土成山。 此初一簣土。 雖未成山。 初不至後。 而亦不滅。 又終因此一簣土成山。 故云果不俱因。 因因而果。 因因而果。 因不昔滅。 果不俱因。 因不來今。 不滅不來。 則不遷之致明矣。 又如千里之程。 起於初步。 雖未即到。 果不俱因。 然全因初步之功。 能達千里之路。 則因因而果。 故云成山假就於始簣。 修途託至於初步。 又如初發一念菩提善心之因。 究竟成就無上妙覺之果。 即最初一念不亡。 若初一念已滅。 則不能成佛果。 故云是以如來功流萬世而常存。 道通百劫而彌固。 以其不滅不來。 成功成業。 因不虛棄。 事不唐捐。 則知萬法俱不遷矣。 豈更猶豫於動靜之間哉。 若能觸境而明宗。 契神於即物。 假使天翻地覆。 海沸山崩。 尚不見動靜之兆眹。 況其餘之幻化影響乎。

and takes movement to be the environment, one conducts affairs in an inverted manner, and the nature of one's mind loses truth. The environment actually does not move; it is only the mind that falsely moves. This may be called 'the clouds rush and the moon appears to travel; the boat moves and the shore appears to shift.' Therefore the treatise says: 'Therefore, to speak of the past does not necessarily mean passing away; past and present ever abide because they do not move. To refer to going does not necessarily mean departing; it means not proceeding from the present to the past, because it does not come. Because it does not come, it does not race between past and present; because it does not move, each nature abides in a single age.' This means that each and every phenomenon abides in its position of tathatā: not a single thing comes or goes, nor has it ever stayed for a single thought-moment; none depend on one another. How is this not non-movement? If one can penetrate thus, one's own eye will be completely clear; how could illusory dust that merely seems to exist or divergent doctrines of a single era mislead me? Furthermore, an ancient commentary says: 'The divergent doctrines of the hundred schools—how could words and phrases mislead?' This clarifies being unconfused regarding the three teachings, each of which establishes its own source. Confucianism has twenty-seven schools; if one accords with the principle of the five constants, one will be unconfused. Huang-Lao has twenty-five schools; if one accords with emptiness and non-being, one will also be unconfused. The Buddha has the twelve divisions of teaching; if one realizes the fundamental mind, one will also be unconfused. However, though the three teachings differ, if subsumed under the dharmadhātu, they have no separate source. As for the two teachings of Confucius and Laozi and the hundred philosophers and nine currents of thought, spoken of generally, they do not depart from the dharmadhātu, just like the hundred rivers returning to the great sea. As for the Buddha's complete school and the wondrous purport of the ekayāna, spoken of specifically, the hundred schools are like firefly light—how could they equal the great illumination?—just as the great sea does not return to the hundred rivers. 'This being so, though the four images race like the wind and the revolving mechanism turns like lightning, if one grasps the meaning of the infinitesimal, though swift, there is no turning.' 'The four images' are the four seasons. 'The revolving mechanism' is the seven stars of the Northern Dipper. Though cold comes and heat goes, the dipper turns and stars shift, lightning flashes and winds gallop, not abiding for a kṣaṇa; if one grasps the meaning and understands the infinitesimal, secret purport of the one mind, one sees the nature and is unmoving. As for 'the fruit does not coexist with the cause; due to the cause, there is the fruit': for example, in making a high mountain, initially overturning one basket of earth serves as the cause, until piling earth completes the mountain. This initial single basket of earth, though it has not yet formed the mountain and the beginning does not arrive at the end, is also not annihilated; and ultimately, because of this single basket of earth, the mountain is completed. Therefore it is said: 'The fruit does not coexist with the cause; due to the cause, there is the fruit. Due to the cause, there is the fruit: the cause is not destroyed in the past. The fruit does not coexist with the cause: the cause does not come into the present. Not destroyed and not coming, the principle of non-movement is thereby clear.' Furthermore, just as a journey of a thousand li begins with the first step, though one does not arrive immediately and the fruit does not coexist with the cause, yet entirely due to the merit of the first step one is able to reach the road of a thousand li; thus, due to the cause, there is the fruit. Therefore it is said: 'Completing a mountain relies on its inception from the initial basket; undertaking a long journey is entrusted to arriving at the first step.' Furthermore, just as the cause of initially giving rise to a single wholesome thought of bodhicitta ultimately accomplishes the fruit of unexcelled wondrous awakening, that initial single thought is not lost; if the initial single thought had already ceased, one would not be able to accomplish the fruit of Buddhahood. Therefore it is said: 'Therefore, the Tathāgata's merit flows down ten thousand generations and ever persists; the Way penetrates a hundred kalpas and becomes all the firmer.' Because it neither ceases nor comes, accomplishments are achieved and karma is completed; causes are not vainly abandoned, and actions are not in vain. Thus we know that the ten thousand phenomena are entirely unmoving. How could one hesitate any further between movement and stillness? If one can clarify the source when contacting circumstances and accord in spirit directly with things, then even if heaven overturns and earth inverts, or the seas boil and mountains collapse, one still does not see the omens of movement and stillness, how much less so for the rest of illusory transformations, shadows, and echoes?