宗鏡錄 37.29

37.29

答。夫入此宗。不可以有無求。不可以能所辯。若以有念析歸無念。此念還成有。若以無心作空無會者。即成斷滅。皆落意地。不出見知。又若逆之。則不合事理。若順之。又成能所。只可以妙會。不可以事求。所以華嚴會意云。並須除念會意。無間相續。順法修行。若動念起心。即入魔網。以法不動念故。順法即念除。我見是妄心。違法故生死。是知法無動念。不可以有念求。又非無念。不可以無心得。應可玄會取其意耳。如說有不有。無不無等。但動心即寂。是彼法。故名順法也。若以心順於法。即有能所。非順法也。故維摩經云。法離一切觀行。肇師云。法本無相。非觀行之所能見。見之者。其唯無觀乎。如赤水求於玄珠。罔象而得之。故云藏於身。不藏於川。在於心。不在乎水。故莊子云。黃帝遊於赤水之北。登崑崙之丘。南望。遺其玄珠。使智索之。而不得。使离婁索之。而不得。乃因罔象得之。黃帝曰。異哉。罔象。乃可得之。夫真不可以定求。故無心以得之。如弄珠吟云。罔象無心却得珠。能見能聞是虛偽。然雖不落見聞。又非無知覺。如融大師信心銘云。惺惺了知。見網轉彌。寂寂無見。闇室不移。惺惺無妄。寂寂寥亮。寶印真宗。森羅一相。所以無念者。即念而無念。以念無自性。緣起即空。又緣起者。皆是真性中緣起。豈屬有無。乃至即生無生。即滅無滅。亦復如是。故寶藏論云。若言其生。無狀無形。若言其滅。今古常靈。又云。是以斬首灰形。其無以損生。金丹玉屑。其無以養生。故真生不滅。真滅不生。可謂常滅。可謂常生。其有愛生惡滅者。斯不悟常滅。愛滅惡生者。斯不悟常生。永嘉集云。故知妙道無形。萬像不乖其致。真如寂滅。眾響靡異其原。迷之則見倒惑生。悟之則順違無地。閴寂非有。緣會而能生。峨嶷非無。緣散而能滅。滅既非滅。以何滅滅。生既非生。以何生生。生滅既虛。實相常住矣。華嚴疏云。生之無生。真性湛然。無生之生。業果宛然。是知若即念存有念。即是常見。離生求無生。即是斷見。皆不達實相無生無滅之理。若正了無生。則無生無不生。豈定執有生無生之二見乎。所以云。誰無念。誰無生。若實無生無不生。喚取機關木人問。求佛施功早晚成。若以息念歸無念。如同寒木死灰。與木人何別。豈有成佛之期耶。斯乃尚未知即念而無念。寧知一念。頓圓乎。

Answer: To enter this source, one cannot seek it through existence or non-existence, nor can one distinguish it through subject and object. If one analyzes existence of thought to return to no-thought, this thought still becomes existence. If one takes no-mind to understand it as empty nothingness, that then becomes annihilationism; both fall into the mental ground and do not transcend views and knowledge. Furthermore, if one opposes it, it does not accord with phenomenon and principle; if one complies with it, that again constitutes subject and object. It can only be subtly understood; it cannot be sought through phenomenal affairs. Therefore the Huayan Huiyi says: "One must completely remove thoughts and understand the intention, continuing without interruption and cultivating in accordance with the Dharma. If one moves a thought and arouses mind, one enters the net of Māra. Because the Dharma does not move thoughts, according with the Dharma means thoughts are removed. Self-view is the deluded mind; opposing the Dharma brings saṃsāra." Thus we know that the Dharma has no moving thoughts and cannot be sought through having thoughts. Nor is it no-thought, so it cannot be obtained through no-mind. One should profoundly comprehend and grasp its meaning. As it is said, "existence is not existence, non-existence is not non-existence," and so forth. Only when the moving mind is immediately tranquil is it that Dharma, which is termed "according with the Dharma." If one uses the mind to accord with the Dharma, there is subject and object, which is not according with the Dharma. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "The Dharma is free from all contemplative practice." Master Zhao says: "The Dharma is originally formless; it is not something that contemplative practice can see. If someone sees it, is it not only through no-contemplation?" It is like seeking the dark pearl in the Red Waters, where Wangxiang obtained it. Hence it is said: "It is hidden in the body, not hidden in the river; it is in the mind, not in the water." Therefore Zhuangzi says: "The Yellow Emperor roamed north of the Red Waters and ascended the hill of Kunlun. Looking south, he lost his dark pearl. He sent Knowledge to seek it, but did not find it; he sent Li Lou to seek it, but did not find it. Then, due to Wangxiang, he found it. The Yellow Emperor said: 'How strange! It was indeed Wangxiang who could find it.'" Now, the truth cannot be sought with determination; hence, it is obtained with no-mind. As the Chant of Playing with the Pearl says: "Wangxiang with no-mind nevertheless obtained the pearl; seeing and hearing are false and illusory." However, although it does not fall into seeing and hearing, neither is it without awareness. As Master Rong's Inscription on Faith in Mind says: "Clearly awake and knowing, the net of views spreads further; silent and without seeing, the dark room does not move. Clearly awake without delusion, silent and vast and bright. The precious seal of the true source: myriad forms are of one characteristic." Therefore, what is called no-thought is non-thought right within thought, because thought has no intrinsic nature and, arising through conditions, is immediately empty. Furthermore, that which arises through conditions is completely conditioned arising within the true nature; how could it pertain to existence or non-existence? Down to: right within arising there is no arising, and right within cessation there is no cessation—it is also like this. Therefore the Precious Treasury Treatise says: "If you speak of its arising, it has no shape and no form; if you speak of its cessation, past and present it is eternally luminous." It also says: "Therefore, severing the head and ashing the body cannot diminish life; golden elixirs and jade powder cannot nourish life. Hence true arising does not cease, and true cessation does not arise. It can be called constant cessation; it can be called constant arising. Those who love arising and loathe cessation do not understand constant cessation; those who love cessation and loathe arising do not understand constant arising." The Collection of Yongjia says: "Therefore we know that the marvelous Way has no form, yet the ten thousand images do not contravene its principle; tathatā is quiescent and extinguished, yet the myriad sounds are not different from its source. In delusion, inverted views and confusion arise; in awakening, compliance and opposition find no ground. Quiet and solitary, it is not existence, yet when conditions meet it can arise; towering and prominent, it is not non-existence, yet when conditions disperse it can cease. Since cessation is not cessation, by what cessation can there be cessation? Since arising is not arising, by what arising can there be arising? Since arising and cessation are empty, the true mark is constantly abiding." The Huayan Commentary says: "The non-arising of arising: the true nature is clear and tranquil. The arising of non-arising: karmic fruit is distinct and evident." From this we know that if one clings to having thoughts right within thought, that is the view of permanence; if one abandons arising to seek non-arising, that is the view of annihilation. Both fail to comprehend the principle of the real mark being without arising and without cessation. If one correctly understands non-arising, then without arising there is nothing that does not arise. How could one cling determinately to the two views of arising and non-arising? Therefore it is said: "Who is without thought? Who is without arising? If truly there is no arising and nothing that does not arise, call upon a mechanical wooden puppet and ask it: in seeking Buddhahood and applying effort, sooner or later will it succeed?" If one halts thoughts to return to no-thought, it is like cold wood and dead ashes—how does it differ from a wooden puppet? How could there ever be a time of attaining Buddhahood? This is still not knowing non-thought right within thought; how could one know that a single thought is suddenly complete?