[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) › 6.10 # 宗鏡錄 6.10 宗鏡錄 6.10 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.10) 答。今在生滅門中。約隨染義。形本不覺。說於始覺。而實始覺至心原時。染緣既盡。始本不殊。平等絕言。即真如門攝也。是故本覺之名。在生滅門中。非真如門也。第二始覺者。牒名。依本覺有不覺者。明起始覺之所由。謂即此心體。隨無明緣。動作妄念。而以本覺內熏習力故。漸有微覺厭求乃至究竟還同本覺。故云依本覺。是以依本覺有不覺。依不覺有始覺也。論云。本覺隨染。生智淨相者。即此始覺也。此中大意。明本覺成不覺。不覺成始覺。始覺同本覺。同本覺故。即無不覺。無不覺故。即無本覺。無本覺故。平等平等。離言絕慮。是故佛果圓融。蕭然無寄。尚無始本之殊。何有三身之異。但隨物心現。故說報化之用耳。又今約真如。則是本覺。無明則是不覺。真如有二義。一不變。二隨緣。無明亦二。一無體即空。二有用成事。此隨緣真如。及成事無明。各有二義。一違自順他。二違他順自。無明中。初違自順他。有二。一能返對詮示性功德。二能知名義而成淨用。違他順自亦二。一覆真理。二成妄心。真如中。違他順自有二。一翻對妄染顯自。德二內熏無明起淨用。違自順他亦二。一隱自真體。二顯現妄法。由無明中返對詮示義。及真如中翻妄顯德義。從此二義。得有本覺。又由無明中能知名義。及真如中內熏義。從此二義。得有始覺。又由無明中覆真義。真如中隱體義。得有根本不覺。又由無明中成妄義。及真如中現妄義。得有枝末不覺。覺與不覺。若鎔融總攝。唯在生滅一門也。真如門約體絕相說。本覺門約性德說。大智慧光明義等名覺。本者。性義。覺者。是智慧心。鈔釋云。真中不變。妄中體空。成真如門。真中隨緣。妄中成事。成生滅門。乃至一切淨緣分劑法相。屬於二覺。一切染緣分劑法相。屬二不覺。又於中淨法之體。屬於本覺。淨法之用。屬於始覺。又染法之體。屬根本不覺。染法之相。屬枝末不覺。又始覺是末。不離本覺之本。論云。始覺者。即同本覺。又云。而實無有始覺之異。乃至平等同一覺故。枝末不覺。不離根本不覺。論云。當知無明。能生一切染法。以一切染法。皆是不覺相故。然斯二覺。但是體用之異。本末二不覺。但是麁細之異。豈可離體有用。離細有麁者哉。又眾生根本迷有二。一迷法。謂無明住地。迷覆法體。所言法者。謂眾生心。名為蔽意。故此無明迷真之初。妄惑之本。二迷義。通四住惑。由前癡故。迷覆因緣無我之義。妄立諸法。所迷諸法。有內有外。謂憍慢邪見。此依迷內。妄立我法。自高陵物。愛念邪見。此依迷外。妄謂我所及外境界。而生貪愛。如渴鹿馳焰癡猿捉月。無而橫計。枉入苦輪。總自迷心。更非他咎。杜正倫云。心是如來之言。高推聖地。身即菩提之說。自隔凡倫。不悟夫功德無量。唯在方寸之中。相好宛然。不出陰界之外。又碑詞云。法性平等。實慧虛通。我同於異。人異於同。不壞於有。無取於空。道非心外。佛即心中。 > Answer: Here, within the aspect of arising and ceasing, in terms of the meaning of conforming to defilement and in contrast to original non-enlightenment, one speaks of initial enlightenment. Yet when initial enlightenment truly reaches the source of the mind, the conditions of defilement having already been exhausted, initial and original are not distinct; they are equal and beyond words—this is subsumed under the aspect of tathatā. Therefore, the designation of 'original enlightenment' is within the aspect of arising and ceasing, not the aspect of tathatā. > > As for the second, 'initial enlightenment,' this restates the name. The statement 'depending on original enlightenment, there is non-enlightenment' clarifies the origin from which initial enlightenment arises. That is to say, this substance of mind, following the condition of avidyā, moves and produces false thoughts; yet through the internal perfuming power of original enlightenment, there gradually comes to be subtle enlightenment, revulsion and seeking, culminating in ultimate realization, which returns to be identical with original enlightenment. Hence it is said: 'depending on original enlightenment.' Thus, depending on original enlightenment there is non-enlightenment, and depending on non-enlightenment there is initial enlightenment. > > The treatise states: 'When original enlightenment conforms to defilement, it produces the pure characteristic of wisdom'—this is precisely this initial enlightenment. > > The general import here clarifies: original enlightenment becomes non-enlightenment; non-enlightenment becomes initial enlightenment; initial enlightenment is identical to original enlightenment. Because it is identical to original enlightenment, there is no non-enlightenment. Because there is no non-enlightenment, there is no original enlightenment. Because there is no original enlightenment, it is utterly equal, transcending words and cutting off conceptual thought. Therefore, the Buddha-fruit is perfectly fused and clear of all dependence. When even the distinction between initial and original does not exist, how could there be the difference of the three kāyas? It is only appearing in accordance with the minds of beings that the functions of the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya are spoken of. > > Furthermore, now in terms of tathatā, it is original enlightenment; avidyā is non-enlightenment. Tathatā has two meanings: first, unchanging; second, according with conditions. Avidyā also has two meanings: first, having no substance, it is empty; second, having function, it accomplishes phenomena. This tathatā that accords with conditions and this avidyā that accomplishes phenomena each have two meanings: first, opposing oneself and conforming to the other; second, opposing the other and conforming to oneself. > > Within avidyā, first, opposing oneself and conforming to the other has two \[aspects\]: first, it can, by contrast, explicate and indicate the nature's virtues; second, it can know names and meanings and accomplish pure function. Opposing the other and conforming to oneself also has two \[aspects\]: first, it veils the true principle; second, it accomplishes the deluded mind. > > Within tathatā, opposing the other and conforming to oneself has two \[aspects\]: first, overturning and contrasting with false defilement to manifest its own virtues; second, internally perfuming avidyā to give rise to pure function. Opposing oneself and conforming to the other also has two \[aspects\]: first, concealing its own true substance; second, manifesting false dharmas. > > From the meaning of contrasting and indicating within avidyā and the meaning of overturning falsity and manifesting virtues within tathatā, original enlightenment comes to be. Again, from the meaning of being able to know names and meanings within avidyā and the meaning of internal perfuming within tathatā, initial enlightenment comes to be. Again, from the meaning of veiling truth within avidyā and the meaning of concealing substance within tathatā, fundamental non-enlightenment comes to be. Again, from the meaning of accomplishing falsity within avidyā and the meaning of manifesting falsity within tathatā, branch non-enlightenment comes to be. If enlightenment and non-enlightenment are fused and totally subsumed, they reside solely in the single aspect of arising and ceasing. > > The aspect of tathatā is spoken of in terms of the substance cutting off characteristics. The aspect of original enlightenment is spoken of in terms of the virtues of the nature. The meaning of the great light of wisdom and so forth is called 'enlightenment.' 'Original' is the meaning of the nature. 'Enlightenment' is the mind of wisdom. > > The Commentary explains: 'Unchanging within the true, and substance-empty within the false, constitute the aspect of tathatā. According with conditions within the true, and accomplishing phenomena within the false, constitute the aspect of arising and ceasing.' Down to: all determinate dharmas and characteristics of pure conditions belong to the two enlightenments; all determinate dharmas and characteristics of defiled conditions belong to the two non-enlightenments. Furthermore, within them, the substance of pure dharmas belongs to original enlightenment, and the function of pure dharmas belongs to initial enlightenment. Furthermore, the substance of defiled dharmas belongs to fundamental non-enlightenment, and the characteristics of defiled dharmas belong to branch non-enlightenment. Furthermore, initial enlightenment is the branch and is not separate from the root of original enlightenment. The treatise states: 'Initial enlightenment is identical with original enlightenment.' It also states: 'Yet in truth there is no difference of initial enlightenment,' down to: 'because equally they are the same one enlightenment.' Branch non-enlightenment is not separate from fundamental non-enlightenment. The treatise states: 'One should know that avidyā can give rise to all defiled dharmas, because all defiled dharmas are characteristics of non-enlightenment.' > > However, these two enlightenments are merely the difference between substance and function; the two non-enlightenments of root and branch are merely the difference between coarse and subtle. How could there be function apart from substance, or coarse apart from subtle? > > Furthermore, sentient beings' fundamental delusion has two kinds: First, delusion regarding dharmas, meaning the ground of avidyā veils and covers the substance of dharma. What is called 'dharma' refers to the mind of sentient beings, which is termed the obstructed thought. Therefore, this avidyā is the beginning of delusion regarding the true, the root of false confusion. Second, delusion regarding principles, which pervades the defilements of the four abodes. Due to the aforementioned ignorance, it veils and covers the meaning of dependent origination and selflessness, falsely establishing dharmas. The dharmas about which one is deluded have internal and external: Arrogance and wrong views rely on internal delusion, falsely establishing self and dharmas, elevating oneself and looking down upon things. Attachment and wrong views rely on external delusion, falsely taking what is one's own and external realms, and thereby giving rise to greed and attachment. Like a thirsty deer chasing a mirage or a foolish monkey grasping at the moon, they arbitrarily conceptualize what does not exist and fruitlessly enter the wheel of suffering. All this stems from delusion of one's own mind; it is not the fault of another. > > Du Zhenglun said: 'The statement that the mind is the Tathāgata pushes the sacred ground too high; the saying that the body is bodhi separates one from the ordinary run of beings. They do not realize that measureless virtues exist only within the inch-square heart, and the auspicious marks, fully present, do not go beyond the aggregates and sense-realms.' > > Also, a stele inscription says: 'The dharmatā is equal; real wisdom is empty and open. I am identical to what is different; others are different from what is identical. Not destroying existence, not grasping emptiness. The Way is not outside the mind; the Buddha is within the mind.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.9) - [Next: 6.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.11) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.6.10) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [大乘起信論義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1846.2.108) — Classical Chinese - [大乘起信論內義略探記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1849.1.17) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.10) · Pramāṇa