[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) › 6.6 # 宗鏡錄 6.6 宗鏡錄 6.6 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.6) 答。只為因本覺真心。而起不覺。因不覺。故成始覺。如因地而倒。因方故迷。又因地而起。因方故悟。則覺時雖悟。悟處常空。不覺似迷。迷時本寂。是以迷悟一際。情想自分。為有虛妄之心。還施虛妄之藥。經云。佛言。我說三乘十二分教。如。空拳誑小兒。是事不知。號曰無明。祖師偈云。如來一切法。除我一切心。我無一切心。何須一切法。故知己眼若開。真明自發。所治之迷悟見病既亡。能治之權實法藥自廢。夫悟此法者。非假他智與異術也。或直見者。如開藏取寶。剖蚌得珠。光發襟懷。影含法界。如經頌云。如人獲寶藏。永離貧窮苦。菩薩得佛法。離垢心清淨。或不悟者。自生障礙。故通心論云。真常不易封生滅者。自移。至理圓通。執方規而致隔。此悉迷自性。但逐依通。應須己眼圓明。不隨他轉。如融大師頌云。瞎狗吠茅叢。盲人唱賊虎。循聲故致迷。良由目無覩。若得心開照理之時。諸見皆絕。不見佛法是。不見世法非。以自性中。言思道斷故。如云無所是是菩提。不應安佛菩提於有所是邊。如今但不用安置。體自虛玄。如瑠璃寶器。隨所在處不失其性。若識得此事。亦復如是。任是一切凡聖勝劣之色。影現其中。其性不動。不知此事之人。即隨前色變。分別好醜。而生忻慼。所以祖師云。隨流認得性。無喜復無憂。起信論云。心生滅門者。謂依如來藏。有生滅心轉。不生滅。與生滅和合。非一非異。名阿賴耶識。有二種義。謂能攝一切法。能生一切法。復有二種義。一者覺義。二者不覺義。言覺義者。謂心第一義性。離一切妄念相。離一切妄念相故。等虛空界。無所不遍。法界一相。即是一切如來平等法身。依此法身。說一切如來為本覺。以待始覺立為本覺。然始覺時即是本覺。無別覺起。立始覺者。謂依本覺有不覺。依不覺故。說有始覺。又以覺心原故。名究竟覺。不覺心原故。非究竟覺。乃至為有妄想心故。能知名義。為說真覺。若無不覺之心。則無真覺自相可說。疏釋云。若隨染隨流成於不覺。則攝世間法。若不變之本覺。及返流之始覺。則攝出世間法。鈔解云。於本始二覺中論攝法者。若本覺所攝。即是大智慧光明義。遍照法界義。真實識知義等。若始覺所攝。即是三明八解脫。五眼六神通。十力四無畏。十八不共法等。然此據實即同。義言且異。故疏云。於生滅門中。隨流不覺。返流始覺。於義用。則攝法不同。若真如門中。則鎔融含攝。染淨不殊。謂以一真如理融之。使染即非染。淨即非淨。即染即淨。深為一味。故不殊也。如論云。一切諸法從本已來。離言說相。離名字相。離心緣相。畢竟平等。無有變異。不可破壞。唯是一心。故名真如。是知隨覺不覺之緣。似生染淨。緣生無性。染淨俱虛。又云。離言說相。豈可以言談。離心緣相。豈可以心度。實謂心言路絕。唯證相應耳。且夫凡言說者。從覺觀生。是共相和合而起。分別者。因意識生。是計度比量而起。以要言之。皆因不覺。教觀隨生。若無不覺之心。一切諸法。悉無自相可說。除方便門而為開示。究竟指歸無言之道。故論云。若離不覺之心。則無真覺自相可說。以覺對不覺說。共相而轉。若無不覺。覺無自相。如獨掌不鳴。思之可見。乃至染淨諸法。悉亦如是。皆相待有。畢無自體可說。如離長何有短。離高何有低。若入宗鏡中。自然絕待。 > Answer: It is simply that because of the original enlightenment of the true citta, non-enlightenment arises; because of non-enlightenment, initial enlightenment is accomplished. It is like stumbling due to the ground and becoming lost due to direction, yet also rising due to the ground and becoming oriented due to direction. Thus, although one is awakened at the time of enlightenment, the locus of enlightenment is eternally empty; although non-enlightenment resembles delusion, at the time of delusion it is originally tranquil. Therefore, delusion and enlightenment are of one limit, while thoughts and conceptualizations divide themselves. Because there is a false and deluded mind, false and deluded medicine is in turn applied. A sūtra says: 'The Buddha said: "I preach the three vehicles and the twelve divisions of the teaching like an empty fist deceiving a small child. Not knowing this matter is called avidyā."' The Patriarch's verse says: 'All the Tathāgata's teachings / Are to eliminate all my mind. / Since I have no mind at all, / What need is there for any teachings?' Therefore we know that if one's own eyes are opened, true clarity spontaneously shines forth; the diseases of views concerning delusion and enlightenment that were to be cured having perished, the provisional and real medicinal teachings that can cure them are spontaneously discarded. Now, those who awaken to this Dharma do not rely on another's wisdom or strange techniques. Some see it directly, like opening a storehouse to take jewels or splitting open an oyster to obtain a pearl: the light radiates from their breast, and its reflection encompasses the dharmadhātu. As a sūtra verse says: 'Just as a person obtaining a treasure store / Forever leaves behind the suffering of poverty, / A bodhisattva obtaining the Buddha-Dharma / Leaves behind defilement, with a mind pure.' As for those who do not awaken, they produce obstacles for themselves. Therefore the Tongxin lun says: 'The true and constant does not change, yet those who fixate on arising and ceasing shift themselves. The ultimate principle is perfectly interfused, yet clinging to square forms and rules causes obstruction.' These all constitute being deluded about one's own nature and merely pursuing derivative comprehension. One must have one's own eyes completely clear, not being turned about by others. As Master Rong's verse says: 'A blind dog barks at a clump of reeds; / A blind man cries out: "Thief! Tiger!" / Following sounds brings about confusion, / Truly because the eyes cannot see.' When one attains the opening of the citta to illuminate the principle, all views are extinguished: one does not see Buddhist teachings as right, nor does one see worldly phenomena as wrong, because within one's own nature the path of speech and thought is cut off. As it is said, 'Having nothing that is right is bodhi; one should not place the Buddha's bodhi on the side of having that which is right.' Now, one need only not place it anywhere, and its substance is spontaneously empty and profound, like a lapis lazuli vessel which, wherever it may be, never loses its nature. If one recognizes this matter, it is also like this: whatever forms of ordinary or noble, superior or inferior, may be reflected within it, its nature does not move. Those who do not understand this matter change along with the forms before them, discriminating the fine and the ugly, and thus giving rise to joy and grief. Therefore the Patriarch said: 'Following the flow, recognize the nature: / There is neither joy nor sorrow.' The Awakening of Faith says: 'The gate of the arising and ceasing of the citta means that based on the tathāgatagarbha there is the activity of the arising and ceasing mind. The non-arising-and-ceasing and the arising-and-ceasing are combined, being neither one nor different; it is named the ālayavijñāna. It has two meanings: namely, being able to embrace all phenomena, and being able to produce all phenomena. Furthermore, it has two meanings: the first is the meaning of enlightenment, and the second is the meaning of non-enlightenment. As for the meaning of enlightenment, it refers to the nature of the mind's supreme truth being free from the characteristics of all false thoughts. Because it is free from the characteristics of all false thoughts, it is equal to the realm of empty space, with nowhere it does not pervade; the dharmadhātu is of one characteristic, which is the equal dharmakāya of all tathāgatas. Based on this dharmakāya, all tathāgatas are said to be original enlightenment. It is established as original enlightenment relative to initial enlightenment. However, at the time of initial enlightenment, it is precisely original enlightenment—no separate enlightenment arises. Establishing initial enlightenment means: based on original enlightenment there is non-enlightenment; based on non-enlightenment, initial enlightenment is said to exist. Furthermore, because one awakens to the source of the mind, it is called ultimate enlightenment; because one does not awaken to the source of the mind, it is not ultimate enlightenment... even up to: because there is a conceptualizing mind, one can know names and meanings, and true enlightenment is explained for its sake. If there were no mind of non-enlightenment, there would be no self-characteristic of true enlightenment that could be stated.' The commentary explains: 'If it follows defilement and follows the flow to become non-enlightenment, then it embraces worldly phenomena. If it is the unchanging original enlightenment and the initial enlightenment that turns back against the flow, then it embraces world-transcending phenomena.' The subcommentary explains: 'In discussing the embracing of phenomena within the two enlightenments of original and initial: what is embraced by original enlightenment is the meaning of the light of great wisdom, the meaning of universally illuminating the dharmadhātu, the meaning of true and real cognition, and so forth. What is embraced by initial enlightenment is the three clear knowledges and eight liberations, the five eyes and six supernormal knowledges, the ten powers and four fearlessnesses, the eighteen unique qualities of a Buddha, and so forth. Yet this is identical in reality, and different only when spoken of conceptually.' Therefore the commentary says: 'In the gate of arising and ceasing, following the flow is non-enlightenment and turning back against the flow is initial enlightenment; in terms of conceptual function, they differ in the phenomena they embrace. In the gate of tathatā, however, there is fusion and containment, and defilement and purity are not distinct. That is, fusing them with the single principle of tathatā makes defilement to be non-defilement and purity to be non-purity; defilement is precisely purity, profoundly of one taste; therefore they are not distinct.' As the treatise says: 'All phenomena from the beginningless past are free from the characteristic of speech, free from the characteristic of names, free from the characteristic of mental objects; they are ultimately equal, without alteration, and indestructible. They are solely the one mind, hence named tathatā.' Thus we know that following the conditions of enlightenment and non-enlightenment, defilement and purity seemingly arise; yet what arises from conditions has no nature, and defilement and purity are both empty. It also says: 'Free from the characteristic of speech—how could it be discussed in words? Free from the characteristic of mental objects—how could it be measured by the mind?' Truly it is said that the path of mind and speech is cut off, and it accords only with realization. Furthermore, all speech arises from vitarka and vicāra; it arises through the combination of common characteristics. Discrimination arises due to the manovijñāna; it arises through calculation and inference. In brief, teachings and contemplations arise in succession entirely because of non-enlightenment. If there were no mind of non-enlightenment, no self-characteristic of any phenomenon could be stated, except as an expedient gate to instruct and ultimately point to the wordless Way. Therefore the treatise says: 'If one is free from the mind of non-enlightenment, there is no self-characteristic of true enlightenment that could be stated.' Because enlightenment is stated in opposition to non-enlightenment, they operate as common characteristics; if there were no non-enlightenment, enlightenment would have no self-characteristic—just as a single palm does not clap. One can see this by reflecting on it. The same applies even to all defiled and pure phenomena: they all exist in mutual dependence, and ultimately have no self-substance that could be stated. Just as how could there be short apart from long, or how could there be low apart from high? If one enters the mirror of the source, they are naturally beyond all opposition. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.5) - [Next: 6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.7) - [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.6.6) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.6.6) · Pramāṇa