宗鏡錄 45.14

45.14

答曰。有坐禪人。憶想分別。見是心如清淨珠中縷。觀白骨人。中見心次第相續生。或時見心在身。或見在緣。如無邊識處。但見識無量無邊。破如是等虛妄故。佛言。如實知眾生心。眾生心自相空。故無相相。復次佛以五眼觀此心不可得。肉眼天眼緣色。故不見。慧眼緣涅槃。故不見。初學法眼。分別。知諸法善不善有漏無漏等。是法眼入實相中。則無所分別。如先說。一切法。無知者無見者。是故不應見。佛眼觀寂滅相。故不應見。乃至不如凡夫人憶想分別見。復次五眼。因緣和合生。皆是作相。虛誑不實。佛不信不用。是故言不以五眼見。又問曰。舍利弗知心相常淨。何以故問。答曰。以菩薩發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。深入深著故。雖聞心畢竟空。常清淨。猶憶想分別。取是無心相。以是故問是無心相心。為有為無。若有。云何言無心相。若無。何以讚歎是無等等心。當成佛道。須菩提答。是無心相中。畢竟清淨。有無不可得。不應難。舍利弗復問。何等是無心相。須菩提答。畢竟空一切諸法無分別。是名無心相。此無心相。是即心無心。非待斷滅。如經云。若有眾生。能觀一切妄念無相。則為證得如來智慧。又且無心者。不得作有無情見之解。若將心作無。此即成有。若一切處無心。如土木瓦礫。此成斷滅。皆屬意根強。知妄識邊事。是以稱不思議定者。以有無情見不及故。又澄湛是事。當體是理。事有顯理之功。亦有覆理之義。理有成事之力。亦有奪事之能。各取則兩傷。並觀則俱是。何謂顯理。若妙性未發。須假事行助顯莊嚴。如水澄清。魚石自現。何謂成事。若功行未圓。必仗理觀引發開導。何謂覆理。若一向執事坐禪。反迷己眼。未識玄旨。徒勞念靜。何謂奪事。若天真頓朗。如日消氷。何須調心收攝伏𭡠。故經偈云。若學諸三昧。是動非是禪。心隨境界流。云何名為定。是以不可執一執二定是定非。但臨時隨用。圓融得力。自諳深淺。若也歸宗順旨。則理事雙消。心境俱亡。定慧齊泯。如永嘉集云。以奢摩他故。雖寂而常照。以毘婆舍那故。雖照而常寂。以優畢叉故。非照而非寂。照而常寂故。說俗而即真。寂而常照故。說真而即俗。非寂而非照故。杜口於毘耶。斯則不唯言語道斷。亦乃心行處滅。所以圓覺經云。有作思惟。從有心起。皆是六塵。妄想緣氣。非實心體。已如空華。用此思。惟辯於佛境。猶如空華。復結空果。展轉妄想。無有是處。

Answer: Some meditators, conceptually constructing through recollection and discrimination, see this citta as like a thread inside a pure pearl; or, when contemplating white bones, they see the citta arising in continuous succession; or at times they see the citta in the body, or see it in the cognitive object; as in the sphere of infinite consciousness, they merely see consciousness as immeasurable and boundless. To destroy such falsehoods, the Buddha said: 'One knows the citta of sentient beings as it truly is.' The intrinsic characteristic of the citta of sentient beings is empty; therefore it has the characteristic of being signless. Furthermore, when the Buddha contemplates this citta with the five eyes, it is unobtainable. The fleshly eye and the divine eye take form as their object; therefore they do not see it. The wisdom eye takes nirvāṇa as its object; therefore it does not see it. The dharma eye of a beginner discriminates and knows whether phenomena are wholesome or unwholesome, with outflows or without outflows, and so forth; when this dharma eye enters into the real mark, it has no discrimination whatsoever, as was said before: 'Of all phenomena, there is none who knows and none who sees'; therefore it ought not to see it. The Buddha eye contemplates the characteristic of quiescence and cessation; therefore it ought not to see it. Still less does he see it through the recollection, conceptualization, and discrimination of ordinary persons! Furthermore, the five eyes are born from the concourse of causes and conditions; they are all fabricated characteristics, deceptive and unreal. The Buddha does not trust or use them; therefore it is said that he does not see with the five eyes. He asks again: 'Śāriputra knows that the characteristic of the citta is constantly pure; why does he ask?' Answer: 'Because when a bodhisattva produces the thought of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, they enter deeply and become deeply attached; therefore, although they hear that the citta is ultimately empty and constantly pure, they still recollect, conceptualize, and discriminate, grasping at this characteristic of having no citta. For this reason, he asks whether this citta with the characteristic of having no citta exists or does not exist. If it exists, why is it said to have the characteristic of having no citta? If it does not exist, why praise this unequalled citta that will attain the Buddha path?' Subhūti answered: 'In this characteristic of having no citta, it is ultimately pure; existence and non-existence are unobtainable. You should not object.' Śāriputra asked again: 'What is the characteristic of having no citta?' Subhūti answered: 'Being ultimately empty, without discrimination regarding all phenomena—this is named the characteristic of having no citta.' This characteristic of having no citta is that the immediate citta is without citta; it does not await annihilation. As a sūtra says: 'If there are sentient beings who can contemplate all deluded thoughts as signless, they thereby realize and attain the tathāgata's wisdom.' Moreover, regarding 'no citta', one must not form an understanding based on emotional views of existence and non-existence. If one treats the citta as non-existent, this immediately becomes existence. If there is no citta in all places, like earth, wood, tiles, and gravel, this becomes annihilation. Both belong to the clinging cognition of the mental faculty, the domain of false consciousness. Therefore, it is called the 'inconceivable samādhi' because it cannot be reached by emotional views of existence and non-existence. Furthermore, serenity is phenomenon (shi); the substance itself is principle (li). Phenomena have the efficacy of revealing principle, and also have the meaning of obscuring principle. Principle has the power of accomplishing phenomena, and also has the capacity of annulling phenomena. Grasping either one damages both; contemplating both, both are correct. What is meant by 'revealing principle'? If the wondrous nature has not yet emerged, one must rely on phenomenal practices to assist in revealing and adorning it, just as when water is clear, fish and stones naturally appear. What is meant by 'accomplishing phenomena'? If meritorious practice is not yet complete, one must rely on contemplation of principle to elicit and guide it. What is meant by 'obscuring principle'? If one clings exclusively to phenomena and sits in meditation, one conversely blinds one's own eyes; failing to recognize the profound purport, one's striving for quietude of thought is in vain. What is meant by 'annulling phenomena'? If the natural reality is suddenly radiant, like the sun melting ice, what need is there to regulate the citta, rein it in, and subdue it? Therefore a sūtra verse says: 'If one studies the various samādhis, this is movement and is not dhyāna; when the citta flows along with cognitive realms, how can it be called absorption?' Therefore, one must not cling to the one or cling to the other, definitively affirming or denying. One merely accords with function as occasions arise; when perfectly integrated, one attains efficacy and naturally knows depth and shallowness. If one returns to the source and accords with the purport, then principle and phenomena are both dissolved, citta and objects are both forgotten, and concentration and wisdom are equally extinguished. As the Yongjia ji says: 'By means of śamatha, although quiescent, it constantly illuminates. By means of vipaśyanā, although illuminating, it is constantly quiescent. By means of upekṣā, it is neither illuminating nor quiescent. Because it is illuminating yet constantly quiescent, speaking of the conventional is immediately the ultimate. Because it is quiescent yet constantly illuminates, speaking of the ultimate is immediately the conventional. Because it is neither quiescent nor illuminating, one keeps one's mouth closed at Vaiśālī.' This is not only that the path of language is cut off, but also that the place of mental activity is extinguished. Therefore the Sutra of Complete Enlightenment says: 'Thought involving contrivance, arising from a mind that exists, is entirely the defiled energy of false conceptualization from the six dusts; it is not the real substance of citta, being already like sky-flowers. Using this thinking to deliberate upon the realm of the Buddha is like sky-flowers bearing sky-fruit: an ever-spinning false conceptualization, completely without validity.'