[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › 59.3 # 宗鏡錄 59.3 宗鏡錄 59.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [59.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59.3) 答。非一非異。非泯非存。何者。若是一者。仁王經不應云。諸菩薩等。有為功德無為功德。悉皆成就。又維摩經云。菩薩不盡有為。不住無為等。二義雙明。豈是一耶。若是異者。般若經。佛告善現。不得離有為說無為。不得離無為說有為。豈成異耶。若云俱泯者。華嚴經云。於有為界示無為之理。不滅有為之相。於無為界示有為之法。不壞無為之性。則有無性相。無礙俱存。若言俱存者。如前論云。二依法性假施設有。謂空無我所顯真如。有無俱非。心言路絕。則百非莫能惑。四句不能詮。非。可以情謂有無。唯應智超言像。方達有為無為唯識之真性矣。如大智度論。復次夫生滅法者。若先有心。後有生。則心不待生。何以故。先已有心故。若先有生。則生無所生。又生滅性相違。生則不應有滅。滅時不應有生。以是故。一時不可得。異亦不可得。是則無生。若無生。則無住滅。若無生住滅。則無心數法。無心數法。則無心不相應諸行色法。色法無故。無為法亦無故。何以故。因有為。故有無為。若無有為。則亦無無為。是故不應言諸法有。又勝思惟梵天所問經云。有為無為之法。文字言說有差別耳。持世經云。有為法如實相。即是無為。 > Answer: They are neither one nor different, neither obliterated nor persisting. Why so? If they were one, the Benevolent King Sūtra would not say: "All bodhisattvas fully accomplish both conditioned merits and unconditioned merits." Furthermore, the Vimalakīrti Sūtra says: "A bodhisattva does not exhaust the conditioned, nor does he dwell in the unconditioned," and so forth. Both senses are clearly illuminated—how could they be one? If they were different, in the Prajñā Sūtra the Buddha tells Subhūti: "One cannot speak of the unconditioned apart from the conditioned, nor can one speak of the conditioned apart from the unconditioned." How could they be different? If one says both are obliterated, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "In the conditioned realm, one demonstrates the principle of the unconditioned without annihilating the characteristics of the conditioned; in the unconditioned realm, one demonstrates the phenomena of the conditioned without destroying the nature of the unconditioned." Thus existence and non-existence, nature and characteristics, mutually persist without obstruction. If one says both persist, as the preceding treatise says, the two are nominally designated based on the nature of phenomena, referring to the tathatā revealed by emptiness and selflessness; both existence and non-existence are negated, and the path of mind and speech is cut off. Thus none of the hundred negations can confuse it, and the four propositions cannot express it. It is not something to be grasped by ordinary sentiment as existing or non-existing; only when wisdom transcends words and images can one reach the true nature of the conditioned and unconditioned as vijñapti-mātra. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: "Furthermore, regarding arising and ceasing phenomena: if mind exists first and arising exists later, then mind does not depend on arising. Why? Because the mind already exists beforehand. If arising exists first, then arising has nothing that arises. Moreover, the natures of arising and ceasing contradict each other: where there is arising, there should not be ceasing; at the time of ceasing, there should not be arising. Therefore, \[arising and ceasing\] at one time cannot be found, nor can they be found as distinct. This, then, is non-arising. If there is no arising, then there is neither abiding nor ceasing. If there is no arising, abiding, or ceasing, then there are no mental factors (caitta). If there are no mental factors, then there are no formations non-associated with mind (cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra) or material phenomena (rūpa). Because material phenomena do not exist, unconditioned phenomena also do not exist. Why? Because of the conditioned, there is the unconditioned. If there is no conditioned, then there is also no unconditioned. Therefore, one should not say that all phenomena exist." Furthermore, the Viśeṣacintabrahmaparipṛcchāsūtra says: "Regarding conditioned and unconditioned phenomena, the difference exists merely in written words and verbal explanations." The Lokadhāraparipṛcchāsūtra says: "The real characteristic of conditioned phenomena is itself the unconditioned." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 59.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59.2) - [Next: 59.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59.4) - [Up: 59](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.59.3) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.59.3) · Pramāṇa