宗鏡錄 43.9

43.9

答。近代相承。不看古教。唯專己見。不合圓詮。或稱悟而意解情傳。設得定而守愚闇證。所以後學訛謬。不稟師承。先聖教中。已一一推破。如云一切處無著者。是以阿難懸知末法。皆墮此愚。於楞嚴會中。示疑起執。無上覺王。以親訶破。首楞嚴經云。阿難白佛言。世尊。我昔見佛。與大目連。須菩提。富樓那。舍利弗。四大弟子。共轉法輪。常言。覺知分別心性。既不在內。亦不在外。不在中間。俱無所在。一切無著。名之為心。則我無著名為心不。佛告阿難。汝言覺知分別心性。俱無在者。世間虛空。水陸飛行。諸所物像。名為一切。汝不著者。為在為無。無則同於龜毛兔角。云何不著。有不著者。不可名無。無相則無。非無則相。相有則在。云何無著。是故應知。一切無著。名覺知心。無有是處。又所言放曠任緣者。於圓覺中。猶是四病之數。圓覺經云。善男子。彼善知識。所證妙法。應離四病。云何四病。一者作病。若復有人。作如是言。我於本心。作種種行。欲求圓覺。彼圓覺性。非作得故。說名為病。二者任病。若復有人。作如是言。我等今者。不斷生死。不求涅槃。涅槃生死。無起滅念。任彼一切。隨諸法性。欲求圓覺。彼圓覺性。非任有故。說名為病。三者止病。若復有人。作如是言。我今自心。永息諸念。得一切性。寂然平等。欲求圓覺。彼圓覺性。非止合故。說名為病。四者滅病。若復有人。作如是言。我今永斷一切煩惱。身心畢竟。空無所有。何況根塵虛妄境界。一切永寂。欲求圓覺。彼圓覺性。非寂相故。說名為病。離四病者。則知清淨。作是觀者。名為正觀。若他觀者。名為邪觀。如上所說。不唯作無著任緣之解。墮於邪觀。乃至起寂然冥合之心。皆存意地。

Answer: In recent times, those who succeed one another do not consult the ancient teachings; they rely exclusively on their own personal views and do not accord with the perfect explanations. Some claim awakening through conceptual understanding and emotional transmission; or if they obtain absorption, they cling to ignorance and have dark realization. Therefore later students make errors and do not receive the transmission from teachers. In the teachings of the former sages, each of these has already been analyzed and refuted. As for what was said about 'being unattached in all places': Ānanda knew far in advance that in the Dharma-ending age people would all fall into this foolishness; in the Śūraṅgama assembly, he manifested doubt and gave rise to attachment, and the unexcelled King of Awakening personally scolded and refuted it. The Śūraṅgamasūtra says: Ānanda addressed the Buddha, saying: 'World-Honoured One, formerly I saw the Buddha, together with the four great disciples Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Subhūti, Pūrṇa, and Śāriputra, turning the wheel of the Dharma together. You constantly said that the cognitive and discerning nature of mind is neither inside nor outside nor in between—it is nowhere at all; being unattached to anything is named mind. Then would my lack of attachment be named mind or not?' The Buddha told Ānanda: 'You say that the cognitive and discerning nature of mind is nowhere at all. The mundane world's empty space, water, land, flying creatures, and all forms of things are named everything. Does that to which you are unattached exist or not? If it does not exist, it is the same as tortoise hair or rabbit horns; how could there be non-attachment? If there is non-attachment, it cannot be called non-existent. Without characteristics it is non-existent; if it is not non-existent, it has characteristics. If characteristics exist, then it is present; how could there be non-attachment? Therefore you should know: to say that non-attachment to everything is named the cognitive mind is without basis.' Furthermore, what was spoken of as 'freely roaming and giving oneself over to conditions' is still counted among the four defects in the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment. The Sūtra of Complete Enlightenment says: 'Good sons, the wondrous Dharma realized by that good spiritual friend should be free from the four defects. What are the four defects? The first is the defect of action: if a person speaks like this: "In my fundamental mind I practice various actions, wishing to seek complete enlightenment"—because that nature of complete enlightenment cannot be attained by action, this is called a defect. The second is the defect of letting go: if a person speaks like this: "We now do not cut off saṃsāra, nor do we seek nirvāṇa; regarding nirvāṇa and saṃsāra, we have no thoughts of arising or ceasing; we let everything be and accord with the nature of various dharmas, wishing to seek complete enlightenment"—because that nature of complete enlightenment does not exist through letting go, this is called a defect. The third is the defect of stopping: if a person speaks like this: "My own mind now permanently stills all thoughts, attaining the tranquil equality of all natures, wishing to seek complete enlightenment"—because that nature of complete enlightenment does not tally with stopping, this is called a defect. The fourth is the defect of extinction: if a person speaks like this: "I now permanently cut off all kleśas, and body and mind are ultimately empty and non-existent; how much more so for the false realms of faculties and dusts, which are all permanently tranquil, wishing to seek complete enlightenment"—because that nature of complete enlightenment is not a characteristic of tranquility, this is called a defect. Those who are free from the four defects will know purity. To practice this contemplation is called right contemplation; if one practices another contemplation, it is called wrong contemplation.' As stated above, not only does forming an understanding of non-attachment and letting oneself be guided by conditions fall into wrong contemplation, but even giving rise to a mind of tranquil and hidden accord still abides in the conceptual domain.