宗鏡錄 44.5.1

44.5.1

答。 教觀難明。 須分四句。 如云。 一教門非理門。 教是能通。 理是所通。 能所異故。 二理門非教門。 吾聞解脫之中。 無有言說故。 三教門即理門。 文字即解脫故。 四理門即教門。 解脫即文字故。 又以門對教。 四句分別。 一得教不得門。 文字法師是。 二得門不得教。 觀慧禪師是。 三得門復得教。 聞慧法師是。 四門教俱不得。 假名阿練若是。 又或隨方便之詮。 則執權害實。 若達圓頓之教。 則了實開權。 執權則教觀兩分。 了實則人法一旨。 人法一旨。 則境智俱冥。 教觀兩分。 則信法雙現。 信法雙現。 則有觀有聞。 境智俱冥。 則無內無外。 斯乃隨根利鈍。 有此開遮。 若能就旨圓融。 自無取捨。 則塵塵合道。 信行同法行之機。 念念歸宗。 教門等觀門之旨。 如是則無一心可照。 誰執觀門。 無一法可聞。 孰論教道。 方入宗鏡。 與此相應。 未達斯門終成隔礙。 且教中具述。 有二種修行人。 一是信行。 二是法行。 薩婆多。 明。 此二人。 位在見道。 因聞入者。 是為信行。 因思入者。 是為法行。 曇無德云。 位在方便。 自見法少。 憑聞力多。 後時要須聞法得悟。 名為信行。 憑聞力少。 自見法多。 後時要須思惟得悟。 名為法行。 止觀云。 若論利鈍者。 法行利。 內自觀法故。 信行鈍。 藉他聞故。 又信行利。 一聞即悟故。 法行鈍。 歷法觀察故。 或俱利。 或俱鈍。 信行人聞慧利。 修慧鈍。 法行人修慧利。 聞慧鈍。 已上且約三師所說。 自然不可偏執。 觀心與教道。 定據聽學與坐禪。 今若得一心。 萬邪滅矣。 則何心而非教。 若一聞千悟。 獲大總持。 則何教而非心。 何教而非心。 則心外無法。 何心而非教。 則法外無心。 更約智者大師對法行二人。 以止觀安心。 隨四悉檀意。 以逗機宜。 俱令入道。 師即問言。 汝於定慧。 為志何等。 其人若言。 我聞佛說。 善知識者。 如月形光。 漸漸圓著。 又如梯隥漸漸增高。 巧說轉令心。 得道大因緣。 志欣渴飲。 如犢逐母。 當知是則信行人也。 若言。 我聞佛說。 明鏡若不動。 色像自分明。 淨水無波。 魚石自現。 欣捨惡覺。 如棄重擔。 當知是則法行人也。 既知根性。 於一人所。 八番安心。 咄。 善男子。 無量劫來。 飲狂散毒。 馳逐五塵。 昇沈三界。 猶如猛風。 吹兜羅毦。 大熱沸鑊。 煮豆昇沈。 從苦至惱。 從惱至苦。 何不息心達本。 以一其意。 意若一者。 何事不辦。 苦集得一則不輪迴。 無明得一不至於行。 乃至不至老死。 摧折大樹。 畢故不造新。 八弊得一則度彼岸。 唯此為快。 善巧方便。 種種因緣。 種種譬喻。 廣讚於止。 發悅其情。 是名隨樂欲以止安心也。 又善男子。 如天亢旱。 河池悉乾。 萬卉燋枯。 百穀零落。 娑伽羅王。 七日構雲。 四方霔雨。 大地霑洽。 一切種子皆萌芽。 一切根株皆開發。 一切枝葉皆欝茂。 一切華果皆敷榮。 人亦如是。 以散逸故。 應生。 善不復生。 已生善。 還退失。 禪定河乾。 道品樹滅。 萬善燋枯。 百福殘悴。 因華道果。 不復成熟。 若能閑林一意。 內不出。 外不入。 靜雲興也。 發諸禪定。 即是降雨也。 功德叢林煖頂方便。 眼智明覺。 信忍順忍無生寂滅忍。 乃至無上菩提。 悉皆剋獲。 善巧方便。 種種緣喻。 廣讚於止。 生其善根。 是名隨便宜以止安心也。 又善男子。 夫散心者。 惡中之惡。 如無鉤醉象。 蹋壞華池。 穴鼻駱駝。 翻倒負馱。 疾於掣電。 毒逾蛇舌。 重沓五翳。 埃藹曜靈。 睫近霄遠。 俱皆不見。 若能修定。 如密室中燈。 能破巨闇。 金鎞抉膜。

Answer: The teaching and contemplation are difficult to elucidate; one must distinguish four propositions. As it is said: First, the approach of teaching is not the approach of principle. The teaching is that which accesses; principle is that which is accessed. This is because the accessing and the accessed are distinct. Second, the approach of principle is not the approach of teaching. This is because I have heard that within liberation there is no verbal explanation. Third, the approach of teaching is identical to the approach of principle. This is because words are themselves liberation. Fourth, the approach of principle is identical to the approach of teaching. This is because liberation is itself words. Furthermore, pairing the approaches against the teaching, there is a fourfold distinction: First, obtaining the teaching without obtaining the approach—this is the Dharma-master of the letter. Second, obtaining the approach without obtaining the teaching—this is the dhyāna master of contemplative discernment. Third, obtaining the approach and also obtaining the teaching—this is the Dharma-master of wisdom born of hearing. Fourth, obtaining neither the approach nor the teaching—this is the nominal araṇya-dweller. Furthermore, if one follows the explanations of expedient means, one grasps the provisional and harms the real. If one arrives at the perfect and sudden teaching, one understands the real and opens the provisional. When one grasps the provisional, teaching and contemplation are bifurcated; when one understands the real, person and Dharma share a single intent. When person and Dharma share a single intent, object and consciousness are both stilled. When teaching and contemplation are bifurcated, faith[-follower] and Dharma[-follower] both manifest. When faith and Dharma both manifest, there are both contemplation and hearing. When object and consciousness are stilled, there is neither interior nor exterior. These openings and restrictions exist merely in accordance with the sharpness or dullness of faculties. If one can harmonize them according to the core intent, naturally there is neither grasping nor discarding. Then every dust-mote accords with the Way, and the capacity of the follower of faith is identical to that of the follower of Dharma; every thought returns to the source, and the import of the approach of teaching is equal to that of the approach of contemplation. In this way, there is not a single citta to be illuminated—who then grasps the approach of contemplation? There is not a single phenomenon to be heard—who then discusses the path of teaching? Only then does one enter the mirror of the source and accord with this. Not having arrived at this portal, one will ultimately encounter barriers and obstacles. Moreover, it is fully stated in the teaching that there are two kinds of practitioners: the first is the follower of faith, and the second is the follower of Dharma. The Sarvāstivāda explains that these two persons have their station in the path of seeing: one who enters by means of hearing is a follower of faith; one who enters by means of reflection is a follower of Dharma. The Dharmaguptaka says that their station is in the stage of expedients: one who perceives few dharmas oneself and relies greatly on the power of hearing, and later necessarily requires hearing the Dharma to attain awakening, is named a follower of faith; one who relies little on the power of hearing and perceives many dharmas oneself, and later necessarily requires reflection to attain awakening, is named a follower of Dharma. The [Mohe] zhiguan says: If one speaks of sharpness and dullness, the follower of Dharma is sharp because he internally contemplates dharmas for himself, while the follower of faith is dull because he relies on hearing from others. Furthermore, the follower of faith is sharp because he awakens immediately upon hearing, while the follower of Dharma is dull because he contemplates by proceeding through dharmas. Or both are sharp, or both are dull: the follower of faith is sharp in wisdom born of hearing and dull in wisdom born of cultivation; the follower of Dharma is sharp in wisdom born of cultivation and dull in wisdom born of hearing. The above is merely according to what the three masters have stated; naturally, one must not grasp one-sidedly. Contemplation of citta and the path of teaching are definitely not anchored exclusively in listening and study versus sitting in meditation. Now, if one attains the one mind, the myriad perversions are extinguished. Then what citta is not the teaching? If upon hearing once one awakens to a thousand things and attains the great dhāraṇī, then what teaching is not the citta? If there is no teaching that is not the citta, then outside the citta there is no dharma; if there is no citta that is not the teaching, then outside dharmas there is no citta. Furthermore, according to Great Master Zhizhe, for the two persons—the follower of Dharma [and the follower of faith]—he settled their minds by means of śamatha and vipaśyanā in accordance with the four siddhāntas, so as to suit their respective capacities and cause them both to enter the Way. The Master would ask them, saying: 'Regarding concentration and wisdom, where does your aspiration lie?' If the person said: 'I have heard the Buddha say: "A spiritual friend is like the form and light of the moon, gradually waxing to full; or like a flight of stairs, gradually climbing higher; skillfully teaching, they cause the mind to turn, being a great cause and condition for attaining the Way." My aspiration yearns like a thirsty man for drink, like a calf following its mother'—you should know that this is a follower of faith. If he said: 'I have heard the Buddha say: "If a bright mirror does not move, forms and images are naturally distinct; when pure water is without waves, fish and stones naturally appear. Joyfully casting aside wicked thoughts is like throwing off a heavy burden"'—you should know that this is a follower of Dharma. Having thus known their dispositions, he settled the mind for each person in eight turns: 'Come, good son! For measureless eons, you have drunk the poison of wild distraction, chasing after the five sense-objects and rising and sinking through the three realms, like a fierce wind blowing a tuft of tūla cotton, or beans rising and sinking boiled in a cauldron of scalding water, going from suffering to anguish and from anguish to suffering. Why not still the mind and reach the root, so as to unify your thoughts? If the thought is unified, what task cannot be accomplished? If suffering and origination are unified, there is no transmigration. If ignorance is unified, one does not arrive at conditioned formations, up to not arriving at old age and death—felling the great tree, finishing the old and not creating the new. If the eight flaws are unified, one crosses to the other shore. Only this is delight!' With skillful expedients, diverse causes and conditions, and diverse parables, he extensively praised śamatha, bringing joy to their sentiments. This is named settling the mind through śamatha in accordance with their desires. 'Furthermore, good son! Suppose there is a severe drought in the world: rivers and ponds all dry up, the myriad plants wither, and the hundred grains perish. The King Sāgara gathers clouds for seven days and pours down rain in the four quarters, so that the great earth is saturated: all seeds sprout, all roots and stumps flourish, all branches and leaves grow luxuriant, and all flowers and fruits bloom and mature. A person is also like this: due to distraction and heedlessness, the good that should arise no longer arises, and the good that has already arisen regresses and is lost; the river of dhyāna-concentration dries up, the trees of the factors of the Way are destroyed, the myriad goods wither, the hundred merits are stunted and exhausted, and the flowers of causes and the fruits of the Way no longer mature. If one can stay in a quiet forest with unified thought, the internal not going out and the external not entering, this is the rising of peaceful clouds; when the various dhyāna-concentrations are generated, this is the falling of rain. The grove of merit, the expedients of heat and summit, the eye, knowledge, clarity, and awakening, faith-receptive tolerance, compliant tolerance, tolerance of non-arising, and quiescent-extinction tolerance, up to unsurpassed bodhi—all are attained.' With skillful expedients and diverse conditions and parables, he extensively praised śamatha, generating their good roots. This is named settling the mind through śamatha in accordance with appropriateness. 'Furthermore, good son! The distracted mind is the evil of evils, like a rutting elephant without a hook trampling a lotus pond, or a camel with a pierced nose overturning its load; it is swifter than a flash of lightning and more venomous than a serpent's tongue. The five cataracts pile up heavily, dust and mist veil the radiant sun, and near eyelashes and distant skies are alike unseen. If one can cultivate concentration, it is like a lamp in a closed room, able to dispel immense darkness, or a golden lancet removing a film.'