宗鏡錄 46.3.4

46.3.4

若以著心。 著此四門。 則生邪見。 見四門異。 於修因時。 多起鬪諍。 譬如有人。 久住城門。 分別瓦木。 評薄精麁。 謂南是北非。 東巧西拙。 自作稽留。 不肯前進。 非門過也。 著者亦爾。 分別名相。 廣知煩惱。 多謂道品。 要名聚眾。 媒衒求達。 打自大鼓。 竪我慢幢。 誇耀於他。 互生鬪諍。 捉頭拔髮。 八十八使瞋愛浩然。 皆由著心。 於正法門而生邪見。 所起煩惱。 與外外道。 更無有異。 論所計法。 天地懸殊。 方等云。 種種問橋。 智者所訶。 人亦如是。 為學道故。 修此四門。 三十餘年分別一門。 尚未明了。 功夫纔著。 年已老矣。 無三種味。 空生空死。 唐棄一期。 如彼問橋。 有何利益。 此由著心。 著無著法而起邪見。 次通教四門。 體是正法。 近通化城。 前曲此直。 巧拙雖殊。 通處無別。 如天門直華。 餘門曲陋。 不住二門。 俱得通進。 若數瓦木。 二俱遲壅。 若不稽留法門。 若因若果。 俱無諍著。 是名無著心。 不著無著法。 不生邪見也。 復次以著心著此直門。 亦生邪見。 或為名為眾為勝為利。 分別門相。 瞋愛慢結。 因此得生。 譬如以毒內良藥中。 安得不死。 以見著毒入正法中。 增長苦集。 非如來咎。 利根外道。 以邪相入正相。 令著無著。 成佛弟子。 鈍根內道。 以正相入邪相。 令無著有著。 成邪弟子。 豈不悲哉。 別圓四門。 巧拙利鈍。 俱通究竟涅槃。 因不住著。 果無鬪諍。 若封門起見。 則生煩惱。 與漚樓佉等。 以此而觀。 如明眼人。 臨於涇渭。 豈容迷名而不識清濁也。 輔行記釋云。 金鐵二鎖者。 大智度論云。 譬在囹圄。 桎梏所拘。 雖復蒙赦。 更繫金鎖。 人為愛繫。 如在囹圄。 雖得出家。 更著禁戒。 如繫金鎖。 今借譬此內外生著。 在獄鐵鎖。 如外計。 逢赦。 金鎖。 如內計。 金鐵雖殊。 被縛義等。 佛法雖勝。 見繫無差。 玉鼠二璞者。 璞者。 玉也。 鄭重玉璞。 若有得者。 與其厚賜。 周人聞之。 規其厚賜。 周人風俗。 名死鼠為玉璞。 乃將詣鄭。 鄭人笑之。 其人悟已答鄭人曰。 楚人鳳凰其實山鷄。 以楚王重鳳。 有不識鳳者。 路有擔山鷄者。 問之曰。 此何鳥。 擔者知其不識。 乃戲曰鳳凰。 其人謂實。 便問擔者。 販耶。 答販。 問幾錢。 答萬錢。 用價買之。 擬欲上王。 得已便死。 楚王聞之。 愧而召問。 王亦謂實。 乃以十萬錢賜之。 故知周鄭之體。 淨穢永殊。 無著如鄭。 起見如周。 名同體異。 此之謂也。 有於三藏乃至圓教四門之名。 義如璞。 起於見愛。 其如死鼠。 牛驢二乳者。 又論云。 餘處或有好語。 亦從佛經中出。 若非佛法。 初聞以好。 久則不妙。 譬如驢乳。 其色雖同。 抨但成糞。 故佛法外道語。 同有不殺慈悲之言。 搜窮其實。 盡歸虛妄。 今此亦爾。 外計雖有有無等言。 研覈無實。 盡是虛妄。 佛法大小一十六門。 雖云有無。 但破執心。 自歸正轍。 故云有成不成。 於外起計。 如驢乳。 藏等起計。 如牛乳。 乳名雖同。 其體永別。 見名雖等。 所執各異。 外雖除執。 無理可成。 藏等離著。 自入正轍。 又大智度論云。 謂佛教。 如牛乳。 修得解脫。 如抨得酪生熟酥等。 外道教。 猶彼驢乳。 本非出酪之物。 外道之教。 無解脫味。 故抨驢乳。 但成屎尿。 依外道教行。 但招苦果。 無所成益。 迦羅鎮頭二果者。 大涅槃經云。 善男子。 如迦羅林。 其樹眾多。 唯有一株鎮頭迦樹。 二果相似。 是果熟時。 有一女人。 悉皆拾取。 鎮頭迦果。 唯有一分。 迦羅迦果。 乃有十分。 女人不識。

If with an attached mind one clings to these four gates, then wrong views arise. Seeing differences among the four gates, when cultivating the cause one largely gives rise to disputes. It is like a person who stays long at a city gate, discriminating among the tiles and timber, judging their quality and coarseness, asserting that the south is right and the north wrong, or that the east is skillful and the west clumsy, causing delay for himself and refusing to advance. This is not the fault of the gate. The attached person is also like this: discriminating names and characteristics, knowing kleśas extensively, taking much to be the factors of awakening, seeking fame and gathering followers, hawking himself to gain advancement, beating his own big drum, erecting the banner of conceit, boasting to others, and mutually giving rise to disputes. Grabbing heads and pulling hair, the eighty-eight proclivities of aversion and attachment surge immensely. All this is due to an attached mind giving rise to wrong views toward the gates of the true Dharma; the kleśas aroused are no different from those of external non-Buddhists. But regarding the doctrines held, they are as distant as heaven and earth. The Vaipulya sūtras say: "Constantly asking about the bridge is reproved by the wise." People are also like this: for the sake of studying the path they cultivate these four gates, yet spend more than thirty years distinguishing a single gate without clarifying it; just as effort is applied, one is already old. Lacking the three kinds of flavor, one lives in vain and dies in vain, wasting a lifetime. What benefit is there, like that person asking about the bridge? This is because an attached mind clings to non-attached dharmas and gives rise to wrong views. Next, the four gates of the shared teaching are in substance the true Dharma, closely leading to the conjured city; the former were crooked while these are straight. Although the skillful and clumsy differ, there is no difference in the place to which they lead. It is like the celestial gate being straight and magnificent while the other gates are crooked and mean: by not staying in either gate, one can enter through both. If one counts the tiles and timber, both become delayed and obstructed. If one does not linger in the Dharma gates, whether in cause or in fruit, there is neither dispute nor attachment. This is called the non-attached mind not clinging to non-attached dharmas, so that wrong views do not arise. Furthermore, if with an attached mind one clings to this straight gate, wrong views also arise; or for the sake of fame, followers, supremacy, or profit, one discriminates the characteristics of the gates, so that the fetters of aversion, craving, and conceit arise because of it. It is like putting poison into good medicine: how could one not die? Because the poison of viewing and attachment enters the true Dharma, suffering and its origin increase; this is not the Tathāgata's fault. External non-Buddhists of sharp faculties enter the true characteristics by means of false characteristics, transforming attachment into non-attachment and becoming disciples of the Buddha. Those within the Buddhist teaching of dull faculties enter false characteristics by means of true characteristics, turning non-attachment into attachment and becoming disciples of falsehood. How lamentable! The four gates of the distinct and perfect teachings, whether skillful or clumsy, sharp or dull, all lead to ultimate nirvāṇa: because the cause is not clung to, the fruit has no disputes. If one fixes upon a gate and raises views, kleśas will arise, just as with Ulūka and the others. When viewed from this perspective, it is like a clear-sighted person standing by the Jing and Wei rivers: how could he be confused by names and fail to distinguish the clear from the turbid? The Fuxing ji explains: As for the two fetters of gold and iron, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "It is like being in prison, bound by shackles; even though pardoned, one is bound again with gold fetters. A person bound by craving is like being in prison; even though renouncing household life, he becomes attached to the monastic precepts, which is like being bound by gold fetters." Here this metaphor is borrowed for attachments arising within and without: the iron fetters in prison are like external doctrines; the gold fetters received after pardon are like internal doctrines. Although gold and iron differ, the meaning of being bound is equal; although the Buddha-Dharma is superior, being bound by views is no different. As for the two uncarved stones of jade and rat: a "pu" is an uncarved jade stone. The state of Zheng valued uncarved jade stones; if anyone obtained one, they gave him a generous reward. A man of Zhou heard of this and plotted for this generous reward. According to the customs of the people of Zhou, a dead rat was called an "uncarved jade stone" (pu). Thereupon he brought it to Zheng, and the people of Zheng laughed at him. Having realized his mistake, the man answered the people of Zheng: "The phoenix of the people of Chu was in fact a mountain pheasant. Because the King of Chu valued phoenixes, there was someone who did not recognize a phoenix. On the road was a man carrying a mountain pheasant; the person asked him, 'What bird is this?' The carrier, knowing he did not recognize it, joked, 'A phoenix.' The person took it to be real and asked the carrier, 'Is it for sale?' The carrier replied, 'It is for sale.' He asked, 'How much money?' The carrier replied, 'Ten thousand cash.' He bought it at that price, intending to present it to the king. Having obtained it, it immediately died. The King of Chu heard of this, felt ashamed, and summoned him to inquire; the king also believed it was real and rewarded him with one hundred thousand cash." Thus we know that the substances of Zhou and Zheng are eternally distinct as pure and defiled: non-attachment is like Zheng, and generating views is like Zhou. The names are the same but the substances differ: this is what it means. Possessing the names of the four gates from the Tripiṭaka up to the perfect teaching, the meaning is like uncarved jade; yet giving rise to views and craving is like a dead rat. As for the two milks of cow and donkey, the treatise also says: "Elsewhere there may be good words, but they also derive from the Buddhist sūtras. If they are not the Buddha-Dharma, upon first hearing they are good, but after a long time they are not marvelous. For example, with donkey milk, though its color is the same, churning it produces only dung." Therefore, the words of the Buddha-Dharma and external non-Buddhists both contain statements of non-killing and compassion; yet when one investigates their reality thoroughly, they all turn out to be false. Now this is also the case here: although external doctrines have words such as existence and nonexistence, when examined they have no reality and are entirely false. Although the sixteen gates of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna of the Buddha-Dharma speak of existence and nonexistence, they merely break the clinging mind and naturally return to the correct track; therefore it is said that there are accomplishment and non-accomplishment. Holding views toward the external is like donkey milk; holding views toward the Tripiṭaka and so forth is like cow milk. Although the name "milk" is the same, their substances are eternally distinct; although the names of the views are equal, what they grasp differs. Even if external teachings eliminate attachment, there is no principle to be accomplished; when the Tripiṭaka and so forth are freed from attachment, they naturally enter the correct track. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The Buddha's teaching is like cow milk: cultivating it to attain liberation is like churning it to obtain curds, fresh butter, clarified butter, and so on. The teaching of external non-Buddhists is like that donkey milk, which originally is not something that yields curd. The teaching of external non-Buddhists lacks the flavor of liberation; thus churning donkey milk produces only feces and urine. Relying on the practice of external teachings brings only bitter fruits and yields no accomplishment or benefit." As for the two fruits of kāla and tinduka, the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: "Good son, it is like a kāla forest where there are many trees, and only one tinduka tree. The two fruits resemble each other. When these fruits ripened, a woman gathered them all. The tinduka fruit was only one part, while the kālaka fruit was ten parts; the woman did not recognize them."