[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) › 4.29 # 宗鏡錄 4.29 宗鏡錄 4.29 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4.29) 答。各有二義。且唯識性二義者。一者。虛妄唯識性。即遍計性。所遣清淨。二者。真實唯識性。即圓成實性。所證清淨。若言唯識者。有二義。一者。世俗唯識。即依他起所斷清淨。二者。勝義唯識。即圓成實。所得清淨。又言唯識性相不同。相是依他。唯是有為。通漏無漏。性即圓成。唯是真如。無為無漏。又云。唯言識者。是了別義。意云。五位一百法理之與事。不離識。今攝歸識。總言識名。以萬法由心起故。然即非唯一人之識。亦非唯一識。更無餘識等。出唯識體者。一所觀出體者。即取五位一百法為體。以通觀有為無為法故。即以識相識性。合為唯識體。皆不離識故。二能觀出體者。即唯取心心所為體。心所與識。常相應故。即唯能非所。若約唯識觀。即取於境中慧為體。於所觀境。觀察勝故。又明唯識差別。總攝諸緣及理。有其十種。一遣虛存實義者。遣為除遣。虛為虛妄。觀遍計所執。唯虛妄起。都無體用。應正除遣。為情有理無故。存者留義。實謂實有。即觀依圓法。體是實有。是本後二智境。應正存留。為理有情無故。良由一切異生小乘。無始時來。妄執我法為有。清辯菩薩等。妄撥理事為空。今於唯識觀中。遣虛者。空觀。對遣有執。存實者。有觀。對遣空執。非有非空。法無分別。離言詮故。二者。捨濫留純義。捨為捨離。濫即相濫。留謂存留。純為無雜。雖觀事理。有境有心。為心不孤起。仗境方生。境不自生。識變方起。由境有濫。捨之不稱。唯。心體既純。留說唯識。故唯識論云。我唯內有。境亦通外。恐濫外境。但言唯識。非為內境。如外都無。華嚴經云。三界唯心故。三攝末歸本義。攝謂綰攝。末即見相二分。歸即向。本。謂識自證分。是所依體故。今攝末見相分。歸本自證分體。故言唯識。故解深密經云。諸識所緣。唯識所現。四隱劣顯勝義。謂王所俱能示現。心所即劣。依他起故。隱劣不取。心王即勝。所依體故。故言唯識。即名顯勝故。莊嚴論云。許心似二現。如是似貪等。五遣相證性義。識言所表。具有事理。事謂相用。遣而不取。理為體性。應求作證。故攝論偈云。依繩起蛇解。見繩知是無。證見彼分明。方知明性亂。六境義。境謂所觀境。識即能觀心。此所觀境。由識變現。境不離識。立境唯識義。阿毘達磨經云。鬼人天等。所見各異。七教義。即能詮教。說有唯識義故。楞伽經偈云。由自心執著。心似外境轉。彼所見非有。是故說唯心。八理義。道理唯識。唯識頌云。是諸識轉變。分別所分別。由此彼皆無。故一切唯識。九行義。行謂觀行。即菩薩在定位。作四尋伺觀等。即觀行及定。俱不離識故。瑜伽論偈云。菩薩於定位。觀境唯是心等。十果義。謂佛果四智。菩薩所有功德。皆不離識。故莊嚴論云。真如無境識。是淨無漏界等。如上十義。性相境智教理行果等。皆唯是識。無有一法而非所標。故稱群經了義中王。諸聖所依之父。若有遇者。頓息希望。無一法而可求。無一事而不足。全獲如來無上之珍寶。寧同荊岫璞中。已探教海祕密之靈珠。豈比驪龍頷下。遂得盡眾生之苦際。斷煩惱之病原。一念功全。千途自正。是以法華經云。如清涼池。能滿一切諸渴乏者。如寒者得火。如裸者得衣。如商人得主。如子得母。如渡得船。如病得醫。如闇得燈。如貧得寶。如民得王。如賈客得海。如炬除闇。此法華經。亦復如是。能令眾生離一切苦。一切病痛。能解一切生死之縛。故知唯此真實。萬法皆空。以此標宗。更無等等。如觀法經云。彼有菩薩。名曰上首。作一乞士。入城乞食。時有比丘。名曰恒伽。謂乞士言。汝從何來。答。我從真實中來。又問。何謂真實。答曰。寂滅故名為真實。又問。寂滅相中。有所求無所求耶。答曰。無所求。又問。無所求者。何用求耶。答言。無所求中。吾故求之。又問。無所求中。何用求耶。答。有所求者。一切皆空。得者亦空。著者亦空。實者亦空。來者亦空。語者亦空。問者亦空。寂滅涅槃。一切虛空分界。亦復皆空。吾為如是次第空法。而求真實。故知若能於法法上求空。則於門門中解脫。若人法問答言語往來。如宗鏡中像。若般若智照。寂滅涅槃。如宗鏡中明。所以若像若明。一切皆空。唯有鏡體。恒常披露。遍一切處。未甞出沒。故云。吾為如是次第空法。而求真實。即知一切法。皆真實故。無所求中。吾故求之矣。亦是夫求法者。於一切法。應無所求。故融大師云。若有一法可得。即是非時求也。所以淨名經云。空當於何求。答曰。當於六十二見中求。又問。六十二見。當於何求。答曰。當於諸佛解脫中求。又問。諸佛解脫。當於何求。答曰。當於一切眾生心行中求。古釋云。空智因於見生。則空智無性。無性故智空。故名空智。邪見因諸佛解脫而有。邪因正生。邪見亦空矣。諸佛解脫。因悟眾生。心行。則解脫空矣。即約其空體無二。所以互求理無不遍。釋曰。邪正既體本同。空理。又未曾暫隱。若於此平等性中。即不須求。為未知者說求耳。如無生義云。如經云。願求諸佛慧。亦不著願求。求佛慧尚不令貪著。何況其餘善法。又菩薩以離願求。但眾生不知求佛道。菩薩故發願。只云我願求佛道。眾生因此。方知發心而求佛道。得意自知無所求也。如上所解。則念念與實相相應。更無餘念也。所以楞伽經云。一一相相應。遠離諸見過。是知若於諸相。常與實相相應。自然遠離諸過。會第一義。清淨真心。朗然明徹。而無念著。即事即如。唯心直進。即佛之所許。自覺之境矣。故論偈云。自知不隨他。寂滅無戲論。無異無分別。是則名實相。 > Answer: Each has two meanings. First, the two meanings of the nature of consciousness-only: 1. the false nature of consciousness-only, which is the nature of conceptual construction (parikalpita-svabhāva), purified through elimination; 2. the real nature of consciousness-only, which is the fully perfected nature (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva), purified through realization. When speaking of consciousness-only, there are also two meanings: 1. conventional consciousness-only, which is the other-dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva), purified through severance; 2. ultimate consciousness-only, which is the fully perfected nature, purified through attainment. Furthermore, it is said that the nature and the characteristics of consciousness-only are different: characteristics are the other-dependent, which is purely conditioned, encompassing both the tainted and the untainted; the nature is the fully perfected, which is purely tathatā, unconditioned and untainted. Furthermore, it is said: speaking only of 'consciousness' conveys the meaning of cognitive distinction; the intention is that the principle and phenomena of the five categories and one hundred dharmas are not separate from consciousness. Now, subsuming them under consciousness, they are collectively designated by the name 'consciousness', because the ten thousand dharmas arise from the mind. Yet this is not the consciousness of only one person, nor is it only a single consciousness with no other consciousnesses remaining. Regarding identifying the substance of consciousness-only: 1. Identifying the substance through what is observed: one takes the five categories and one hundred dharmas as the substance, because it comprehensively observes conditioned and unconditioned dharmas; thus the characteristics of consciousness and the nature of consciousness are combined to form the substance of consciousness-only, since neither is separate from consciousness. 2. Identifying the substance through what observes: one takes only the mind and mental factors as the substance, because mental factors are always associated with consciousness; this refers only to the active observer and not the observed. If understood in terms of the contemplation of consciousness-only, one takes the wisdom directed toward the objective sphere as the substance, because its observation of the observed objective sphere is supreme. Furthermore, explaining the distinctions within consciousness-only, comprehensively subsuming all conditions and principle, there are ten kinds: 1. Eliminating the false and preserving the real: 'eliminating' means discarding; 'false' means unreal. One contemplates that what is conceptually constructed arises only falsely and lacks any substance or function, so it should properly be eliminated, because it exists in subjective sentiment but is absent in principle. 'Preserving' means retaining; 'real' means truly existent. One contemplates that the dharmas of the other-dependent and the fully perfected are truly existent in substance and are the objective spheres of the fundamental and subsequent wisdoms, so they should properly be retained, because they exist in principle but are absent in subjective sentiment. This is because all ordinary worldlings and the Hīnayāna have, from beginningless time, falsely grasped self and dharmas as existent, while Bodhisattva Bhāviveka and others falsely negated principle and phenomena as empty. Now, within the contemplation of consciousness-only: eliminating the false is the contemplation of emptiness, directly dispelling the grasp of existence; preserving the real is the contemplation of existence, directly dispelling the grasp of emptiness. Being neither existent nor empty, dharmas are without conceptual differentiation, because they are free from verbal designation. 2. Discarding the confusable and retaining the pure: 'discarding' means relinquishing; 'confusable' means easily confused with; 'retaining' means preserving; 'pure' means unmixed. Although one contemplates phenomena and principle, there are both the objective sphere and the mind; because mind does not arise in isolation, it is generated only by relying on the objective sphere; the objective sphere does not arise of itself, but appears only through the transformation of consciousness. Because the objective sphere has what is confusable, discarding it, one does not speak of 'only' \[objective sphere\]; since the substance of mind is pure, retaining it, one speaks of 'consciousness-only'. Therefore, the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra states: 'The self exists only internally, whereas the objective sphere is also common to the external; fearing confusion with external objective spheres, we speak only of consciousness-only, not that internal objective spheres are completely nonexistent like external ones.' And the Avataṃsakasūtra states: 'The three realms are mind-only.' 3. Subsuming the branches into the root: 'subsuming' means gathering; 'branches' refers to the two divisions of the darśanabhāga and the nimittabhāga; 'into' means returning toward; 'root' refers to the svasaṃvittibhāga of consciousness, because it is the fundamental substance. Now, subsuming the branch darśanabhāga and nimittabhāga into the root substance of the svasaṃvittibhāga, it is spoken of as consciousness-only. Therefore, the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra states: 'The objects cognized by the various consciousnesses are only what is manifested by consciousness.' 4. Concealing the inferior and revealing the superior: both the king \[of mind\] and mental factors can manifest, but mental factors are inferior because they are other-dependent; concealing the inferior, they are not taken; the mind-king is superior because it is the fundamental substance; therefore, one speaks of consciousness-only, which is named after revealing the superior. The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra states: 'It is accepted that mind manifests as two, and likewise manifests as greed and the like.' 5. Eliminating characteristics and realizing the nature: what is expressed by the word 'consciousness' possesses both phenomena and principle; phenomena refers to characteristics and functions, which are eliminated and not grasped; principle is the essential nature, which should be sought and realized. Therefore, a verse in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha states: 'Relying on a rope, the notion of a snake arises; seeing the rope, one knows it does not exist; when one clearly realizes and sees that \[rope\], one then knows the cognitive clarity was confused.' 6. The meaning of the objective sphere: 'objective sphere' refers to the observed sphere, and 'consciousness' is the observing mind; this observed sphere appears through the transformation of consciousness, and the objective sphere is not separate from consciousness; thus is established the meaning of consciousness-only as the objective sphere. The Abhidharmasūtra states: 'Ghosts, humans, and devas see differently.' 7. The meaning of teaching: the teaching that expounds it speaks of consciousness-only. A verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: 'Due to clinging by one's own mind, mind turns resembling external spheres; what is seen by it does not exist, therefore it is spoken of as mind-only.' 8. The meaning of principle: consciousness-only as doctrine. The Triṃśikā states: 'These various consciousnesses transform, discriminating what is discriminated; because of this, both are nonexistent, and therefore all is consciousness-only.' 9. The meaning of practice: 'practice' refers to contemplative practice; that is, a bodhisattva in a state of concentration performs the four investigations and searches, and so on; thus contemplative practice and concentration are both not separate from consciousness. A verse in the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra states: 'A bodhisattva in a state of concentration observes the objective sphere as being only mind,' and so forth. 10. The meaning of the fruit: the four wisdoms of the Buddha-fruit and all the virtues of a bodhisattva are not separate from consciousness. Therefore, the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra states: 'Tathatā without objective spheres or consciousness is the pure, untainted realm,' and so forth. As in the ten meanings above, nature, characteristics, objective sphere, wisdom, teaching, principle, practice, fruit, and so on are all consciousness-only; there is not a single dharma that is not indicated by it. Thus it is called the king among the definitive teachings of all sutras, the father relied upon by all the noble ones. If someone encounters it, their desires immediately cease; there is not a single dharma to be sought, nor a single matter that is not sufficient; one fully attains the unsurpassed precious treasure of the Tathāgata—how could it be compared to an unpolished gem in the mountains of Jing? One has already fetched the wondrous, secret pearl from the sea of teachings—how could it be compared to the pearl under the black dragon's chin? One is then able to reach the end of the sufferings of sentient beings and cut off the root of the illness of kleśas. In a single thought the merit is complete, and a thousand paths naturally become straight. Therefore, the Lotus Sūtra says: 'Just as a clear, cool pond can satisfy all who are thirsty; as one who is cold finds fire; as the naked find clothing; as merchants find a leader; as a child finds its mother; as a ferry passenger finds a boat; as the sick find a physician; as one in darkness finds a lamp; as the poor find treasure; as the people find a king; as traders reach the ocean; as a torch dispels darkness—this Lotus Sūtra is also like this, able to cause sentient beings to abandon all suffering and all illness, and able to unloose all bonds of birth and death.' Therefore, know that only this is real, and the ten thousand dharmas are all empty. Setting this as the source, there is nothing equal to it. As the Guanfa jing says: 'There was a bodhisattva named Śreṣṭha who acted as a mendicant and entered a city to beg for food. At that time there was a monk named Gaṅgā who said to the mendicant: "Where have you come from?" He answered: "I come from reality." Again he asked: "What is called reality?" He answered: "Extinction (śama) is called reality." Again he asked: "Within the characteristic of extinction, is there something sought or nothing sought?" He answered: "Nothing sought." Again he asked: "If there is nothing sought, what is the use of seeking?" He answered: "Within what is not sought, I therefore seek it." Again he asked: "Within what is not sought, what is the use of seeking?" He answered: "What is sought is all empty; the obtainer is also empty, the grasper is also empty, the real is also empty, the comer is also empty, the speaker is also empty, the questioner is also empty. Extinction and nirvāṇa, and all realms of empty space, are likewise all empty. For the sake of such sequentially empty dharmas, I seek reality." Therefore, know that if one can seek emptiness upon dharma after dharma, then one attains liberation in gate after gate. If human dharmas, questions, answers, words, and interactions are like images in the Mirror of the Source, then the cognitive illumination of prajñā, extinction, and nirvāṇa are like the brightness in the Mirror of the Source. Therefore, whether image or brightness, all are empty; only the substance of the mirror is ever openly revealed, pervasive everywhere, never having appeared or disappeared. Thus it is said: 'For the sake of such sequentially empty dharmas, I seek reality.' That is, knowing that all dharmas are real, 'Within what is not sought, I therefore seek it.' It is also that whoever seeks the Dharma should have nothing to seek in all dharmas. Thus Master Rong said: 'If there were a single dharma to be obtained, that would be seeking out of season.' Therefore, the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa states: '"Where should emptiness be sought?" The answer was: "It should be sought within the sixty-two views." Again he asked: "Where should the sixty-two views be sought?" The answer was: "They should be sought within the liberation of the Buddhas." Again he asked: "Where should the liberation of the Buddhas be sought?" The answer was: "It should be sought within the mental activities of all sentient beings."' An ancient commentary says: 'The wisdom of emptiness arises due to views, so the wisdom of emptiness has no intrinsic nature; having no intrinsic nature, the wisdom is empty, and therefore it is named the wisdom of emptiness. Wrong views exist due to the liberation of the Buddhas; since the wrong arises due to the right, wrong views are also empty. The liberation of the Buddhas arises due to awakening to sentient beings' mental activities, so liberation is empty.' That is, based on their empty substance being non-dual, their mutual seeking is such that the principle pervades everywhere. We explain: since wrong and right are originally identical in substance, and the principle of emptiness has never for a moment been hidden, within this nature of equality there is no need to seek; seeking is spoken of only for the sake of those who do not yet know. As stated in the Wusheng yi: 'As a sutra says: "One vows to seek the wisdom of the Buddhas, yet does not cling to the vow or the seeking." If even seeking the Buddha's wisdom is not allowed to be grasped with craving, how much less any other wholesome dharma!' Furthermore, a bodhisattva is free from vows and seeking; it is only because sentient beings do not know to seek the Buddha path that the bodhisattva makes a vow, merely saying: 'I vow to seek the Buddha path.' Sentient beings, because of this, only then know to arouse the mind to seek the Buddha path; grasping the meaning, they naturally know there is nothing to seek. As explained above, thought after thought is in accord with the real mark, and there are no other thoughts. Therefore, the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'In accord with each and every mark, one is far removed from the faults of views.' Hence we know that if, with regard to all marks, one is always in accord with the real mark, one naturally departs from all faults, conforms to the ultimate meaning, and the pure true mind becomes brightly and transparently clear without conceptual clinging. Phenomena are just tathatā; progressing straight ahead via mind-only is precisely the realm of self-realization praised by the Buddha. Therefore, a śāstra verse says: 'Knowing by oneself, not following others, extinguished and free from conceptual proliferation, without difference and without conceptual differentiation—this is called the real mark.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4.28) - [Next: 4.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4.30) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.4.29) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [維摩詰所說經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.vimalakirtinirdesa*zh-kumarajiva.2.24) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4.29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.4.29) · Pramāṇa