宗鏡錄 45.22

45.22

答。開菩薩自體法界緣集。即有四分。所以然者。取自體一實諦。即是貪愛。捨二邊生死。即是瞋斷。迷一實諦。無明未盡。故猶有癡也。三分等取。即是等分。此即是根本之三毒。故請觀音經云。淨於三毒根。成佛道無疑。何況業繫凡夫。分段生死之病。然今時多不就已子細推尋。及廣披聖典。教觀俱昧。理行全虧。唯尚隨語依通。一時遣蕩。拂迹而迹不泯。歸空而空不亡。以不出法塵。全為影事。殊不識心王心所。種現根隨。微細根塵。生滅起處。心心流注。念念現行。如醉如癡懵無知者。智燈既闇。定水全枯。未審何門能得清淨。但學成現高茆之語。名標眾聖之前。都無正念修行之門。跡陷群邪之後。今普使知病識藥。令得服行。淨三毒之根。見一心之性。且如馬鳴龍樹。皆是西天傳佛心印。祖師。馬鳴製大乘起信論。廣說阿賴耶等。三細識六麁相。一心真如生滅二門。龍樹製摩訶衍論。引一百本大乘經。證說八識心王。性相微細等義。云何末學。不紹先賢。可謂綆短而不勾深泉。翅弱而弗能高逝。又若不先論其事相之表。何以辯其體性之原。如世間法。未見其海。爭識其波。未見其山。寧諳其土。今欲總別雙辯。理事具陳。不達事而理非圓。不了理而事奚立。故云理隨事現。一多緣起之無邊。事得理融。千差涉入而無礙。又從總出別。因別成總。不得別而何成總。不因總而豈稱別。則理事總別。一際無差。只為今時。但唯執總滯理。見解不圓。法眼將明而不明。疑心欲斷而非斷。皆是理事成礙。總別不通。故四弘誓願云。法門無邊誓願學。佛道無上誓願成。何乃虛擲寸陰。頓違本願。守愚空坐。辜負四恩。若愚癡人。不分菽麥。似牛羊眼。罔辯方隅。現今對境。尚不圓明。臨終遇緣焉能甄別。直須達事通理。徹果窮因。無一法而不明。無一塵而不照。則見聞莫能惑。境界不能拘。故法華經云。佛所成就第一希有。難解之法。唯佛與佛。乃能究盡。諸法實相。所謂諸法。如是相。如是性。如是體。如是力。如是作。如是因。如是緣。如是果。如是報。如是本末究竟等。故知一心實相。悉是諸法。諸法所生。皆從現行善惡熏習。第八識含藏種子為因。發起染淨差別報應為果。若不微細剖析。問答決疑。則何由到一心總別之原。徹八識性相之際。古德云。提綱意在張網。不可去網存網。舉領意在著衣。不可棄衣取領。若秖集而不敘。如無綱之網。若秖敘而不集。如無網之綱。故知理事雙明。方通圓旨。教觀齊運。始達一乘。且如等覺菩薩。妙果將圓。却入幻網門。倒學凡夫事。習世間三昧。具工巧神通。今之所宗。且明大旨。須先立後破。以洗情塵。然即破立同時。而無所破。不同權教定執教相之有門。寧比小乘唯證析法之空理。今則以別成總。將偏顯圓。別成總而一際無差。偏顯圓而萬法齊旨。開合自在。隱顯無方。若執之成萬有之瘡疣。若定之為四魔之根蔕。此百法明門。大乘菩薩初地方了。乃至十方諸佛。本後二智。俱證俱緣。若不證唯識之性。不成根本智。無成佛之期。若不了唯識之相。百法明門。不成後得智。闕化他之行。此唯識百法者。乃是有為無為真俗一切法之性相根本。所以經云。若不證真如。焉能了諸行。若不證唯識真如之性。焉能了唯識百法之行相。故云根本智。證百法性。後得智。緣百法相。大乘起信論云。信成就發心。略說有三。一發正直心。如理正念真如法故。二發深重心。樂集一切諸善行故。三發大悲心。願拔一切眾生苦故。

Answer: Unfolding the conditioned collection of the bodhisattva's own substance as the dharmadhātu, there are precisely four parts. Why is this so? Grasping the one real truth of one's own substance is rāga. Abandoning the saṃsāra of the two extremes is the cessation of dveṣa. Being deluded about the one real truth, because avidyā is not yet exhausted, there is still moha. Grasping the three parts equally is the equal part. These are the three fundamental poisons. Therefore the Qing Guanyin jing says: 'Purifying the roots of the three poisons, one accomplishes the Buddha path without doubt.' How much more so for ordinary persons bound by karma, afflicted by the disease of portion-and-segment saṃsāra? Yet people nowadays mostly do not examine themselves closely or broadly open the sacred scriptures. They are darkened in both teaching and contemplation, and entirely deficient in principle and practice. They merely prize following words and relying on superficial understanding, sweeping everything away at once. Wiping away traces, the traces are not obliterated; returning to emptiness, emptiness is not extinguished. Because they do not transcend dharmas as cognitive objects, everything is mere shadow-play. They fail utterly to recognise the king of citta and the caitasikas, seeds and actualisations, roots and auxiliaries, subtle sense-bases and objects, and the arising place of production and cessation. Mind-moment after mind-moment flows along; thought-moment after thought-moment actualises. They are like drunkards, fools, ignorant and oblivious. Since the lamp of wisdom is already dark and the water of samādhi is completely parched, I do not know by what gate they could ever attain purity. They merely learn lofty, fabricated phrases, displaying their names before the multitude of sages, while having no gate of right-mindfulness practice at all, their steps falling behind the multitude of heretics. Now I cause them universally to know the disease and recognise the medicine, so that they may take it and practice it, purify the roots of the three poisons, and see the nature of the one mind. Take, for instance, Aśvaghoṣa and Nāgārjuna: both were ancestral masters in India who transmitted the Buddha's citta-seal. Aśvaghoṣa composed the Mahāyāna-śraddhotpāda-śāstra, extensively explaining the three subtle consciousnesses and six coarse characteristics of the ālayavijñāna and so forth, as well as the two gates of tathatā and production-and-cessation within the one mind. Nāgārjuna composed the Moheyan lun, citing one hundred Mahāyāna sūtras to corroborate and explain the eight consciousness kings of citta and the subtle meanings of nature and characteristics. Why do later students fail to succeed earlier sages? One might say their rope is too short to reach deep springs, their wings too weak to soar high. Furthermore, if one does not first discuss the manifestations of phenomenal phenomena, how can one discern the origin of their substantial nature? As in worldly matters, if one has not seen the ocean, how can one recognise its waves? If one has not seen the mountain, how can one be familiar with its soil? Now I intend to discern both the general and the particular, setting forth both principle and phenomena in full. If one does not penetrate phenomena, principle is not round; if one does not understand principle, how can phenomena stand? Therefore it is said: principle manifests in accordance with phenomena, and the dependent origination of the one and the many is boundless; phenomena are integrated by principle, and the thousands of differences interpenetrate without obstruction. Furthermore, the particular emerges from the general, and the general is completed through the particular. Without the particular, how could the general be completed? Without the general, how could it be called particular? Thus principle and phenomena, general and particular, are on a single plane without differentiation. It is only because people nowadays grasp solely at the general and remain stuck in principle that their views are not round: the Dharma-eye is about to brighten but does not brighten, and doubts are about to be severed but are not severed. This is all because principle and phenomena form obstructions, and the general and particular do not flow freely. Therefore the Four Universal Vows state: 'The Dharma gates are measureless, I vow to learn them; the Buddha path is supreme, I vow to accomplish it.' Why then waste the fleeting moments and abruptly violate one's original vow, clinging to ignorance, sitting in vain, and betraying the four obligations? Like foolish people who cannot distinguish beans from wheat, or like the eyes of cattle and sheep that cannot tell cardinal directions, even now, confronting objects, they are still not round and clear; when facing conditions at the end of life, how could they discriminate? One must directly penetrate phenomena and comprehend principle, thoroughly investigate fruit and exhaust causes, so that not a single dharma is unclarified and not a single dust-mote is unilluminated. Then seeing and hearing cannot deceive, and objective realms cannot bind. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: 'The foremost rare and difficult-to-understand dharma accomplished by the Buddhas can be fully fathomed only by a Buddha and a Buddha: the real mark of all dharmas, namely, all dharmas being such in characteristics, such in nature, such in substance, such in power, such in function, such in cause, such in condition, such in fruit, such in retribution, and such in ultimate equality from beginning to end.' Thus we know that the real mark of the one mind is entirely all dharmas. What is produced by all dharmas all comes from the perfuming of present good and evil, with the seeds contained in the eighth consciousness as cause, and giving rise to the fruits of defiled and pure differentiated retributions. If one does not dissect this with subtlety and resolve doubts through questions and answers, by what means could one reach the origin of the generality and particularity of the one mind, and penetrate the limit of the nature and characteristics of the eight consciousnesses? The ancients said: 'Lifting the head-rope aims at spreading the net; one cannot discard the net and keep the head-rope. Raising the collar aims at putting on the garment; one cannot throw away the garment and take the collar.' If one merely gathers without narrating, it is like a net without a head-rope; if one merely narrates without gathering, it is like a head-rope without a net. Thus we know that when principle and phenomena are both illuminated, only then does one penetrate the round intent; when teaching and contemplation are exercised together, only then does one reach the Ekayāna. Consider how an equal-enlightenment bodhisattva, about to bring the wondrous fruit to perfection, enters instead the gate of the net of illusion, training backwards in the affairs of ordinary persons, practicing worldly samādhis, and mastering technical skills and supernormal powers. What is taken as source here first clarifies the great intent; one must first establish and then demolish, so as to wash away emotional dust. Yet demolishing and establishing are simultaneous, and there is nothing demolished. This is unlike the provisional teachings that rigidly cling to the gate of existence among doctrinal marks, and how could it compare to the Hīnayāna, which only realizes the principle of emptiness by analyzing dharmas? Here we use the particular to complete the general, and bring forward the biased to manifest the round. The particular completing the general, they are on a single plane without differentiation; the biased manifesting the round, the ten thousand dharmas share a single intent. Opening and closing freely, hidden and manifest without fixed location. If one clings to it, it becomes a wart on the ten thousand existences; if one fixes upon it, it serves as the root-stalk of the four māras. As for these hundred dharmas of the clarifying gate, Mahāyāna bodhisattvas only fully understand them on the first bhūmi; up to the Buddhas of the ten directions, both their fundamental and subsequent wisdoms realise them and take them as objects. If one does not realise the nature of vijñaptimātra, one cannot accomplish fundamental wisdom, and there will be no time of accomplishing Buddhahood. If one does not understand the characteristics of vijñaptimātra, the hundred dharmas of the clarifying gate, one cannot accomplish subsequent wisdom, and one lacks the practices for transforming others. These hundred dharmas of vijñaptimātra are indeed the fundamental nature and characteristics of all conditioned and unconditioned, conventional and ultimate dharmas. Therefore the sūtra says: 'If one does not realise tathatā, how can one understand all active conditioned states?' If one does not realise the nature of the tathatā of vijñaptimātra, how can one understand the practicing characteristics of the hundred dharmas of vijñaptimātra? Therefore it is said: fundamental wisdom realises the nature of the hundred dharmas, and subsequent wisdom takes the characteristics of the hundred dharmas as objects. The Mahāyāna-śraddhotpāda-śāstra states: 'The arousal of citta upon the completion of faith is briefly explained as threefold: first, arousing the straightforward citta, because of rightly contemplating the dharma of tathatā in accordance with principle; second, arousing the profound citta, because of delighting in gathering all good practices; third, arousing the great compassionate citta, because of wishing to pull out the suffering of all sentient beings.'