[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) › 60.41 # 宗鏡錄 60.41 宗鏡錄 60.41 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [60.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60.41) 答。論頌云。即依此三性。立彼三無性。故佛密意說。一切法無性。初即相無性。次無自然性。後由遠離前。所執我法性。此諸法勝義。亦即是真如。常如其性故。即唯識實性。即依此前所說三性。立彼後說三種無性。謂即相。生。勝義。無性。故佛密意說。一切法皆無自性。非性全無。說密意言。顯非了義。謂後二性。雖體非無而有。愚夫於彼增益。妄執。實有我法自性。此即名為遍計所執。為除此執故。佛世尊。於有及無。總說無性。云何依此。而立彼三。謂依此初遍計所執。立相無性。由此體性畢竟無有。如空華故。次依他立生無性。此如幻事。託眾緣生。如妄執自然性故。假說無性。非性全無。依後圓成實。立勝義無性。謂即勝義。由遠離前遍計所執我法性故。假說無性。非性全無。如太虛空。雖遍眾色。而是眾色無性所顯。乃至契經中說無性言。非極了義。諸有智者。不應依之總撥諸法。都無自性。解深密經偈云。相生勝義無自性。如是我皆已顯示。若不知佛此密意。失壞正道不能往。相者。是遍計。生者。是依他。勝義。是圓成。無自性者。於此三性上。皆無妄執我法遍計自然之自性故。若人不知佛密意。於三性上說三無性。破外道小乘我執。便撥菩提涅槃依圓皆無者。即此人失壞正道。不能往至也。此言三性三無性。不是依圓體亦無。但無遍計妄執之我法。故名無性也。是以三性無際。隨一全收。真妄互融。性相無礙。如來一代時教。恒沙義門。密意。總在三性門中。真俗本末。一時收盡。以顯唯識正理。更無異轍。以依他性。是唯識體。從依他起分別。即是遍計。從依他悟真實。即是圓成。由分別故。一分成生死。由真實故。一分成涅槃。了分別性空。即生死成涅槃。迷真實性有。即涅槃成生死。都是一法隨情。顯義成三。三非三而一理圓。一非一而三性具。卷舒不失。隱顯常如。非一非三。泯性相於實地。而三而一。耀行布於義天。撮要所歸。莫先斯旨。 > Answer: The treatise says in verse: > 'Relying precisely on these three natures, > Those three naturelessnesses are established. > Therefore the Buddha, with esoteric intent, taught > That all phenomena are without nature. > > The first is the naturelessness of characteristics; > The next is the naturelessness of spontaneous arising; > The last is due to being far removed from the previously > Clung-to natures of self and phenomena. > > This ultimate truth of all phenomena > Is also none other than tathatā, > Because it is constantly as its nature is. > This is the real nature of consciousness-only.' > > That is to say, relying upon the three natures previously taught, those three kinds of naturelessness subsequently taught are established—namely, the naturelessness of characteristics, of arising, and of ultimate truth. Therefore, the Buddha with esoteric intent stated that all phenomena are without intrinsic nature; it is not that natures are entirely non-existent. Speaking with 'esoteric intent' reveals that this is not the definitive meaning. That is, although the substance of the latter two natures is not non-existent but exists, fools superimpose onto them, falsely clinging that there truly exist intrinsic natures of self and phenomena. This is called the 'parikalpita' \[nature\]. In order to eliminate this clinging, the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, collectively spoke of naturelessness with regard to both existence and non-existence. > > How, relying on this, are those three established? Relying on this first, parikalpita \[nature\], the naturelessness of characteristics is established, because its substance and nature are completely non-existent, like sky-flowers. Next, relying on the paratantra \[nature\], the naturelessness of arising is established; this is like an illusion, arising dependent on multiple conditions; because it is like the falsely clung-to spontaneous nature, it is provisionally said to lack nature, not that its nature is entirely non-existent. Relying on the last, pariniṣpanna \[nature\], the naturelessness of ultimate truth is established; that is, the ultimate truth itself, because it is far removed from the previously parikalpita-clung natures of self and phenomena, is provisionally said to lack nature, not that its nature is entirely non-existent. It is like the great sky: although it pervades all colors and forms, it is revealed by the absence of intrinsic nature in all colors and forms. > > So it continues, up to \[the point where it says that\] the statement of naturelessness in the sūtras is not of the ultimate definitive meaning. Those of wisdom should not, relying upon it, totally repudiate all phenomena as lacking any intrinsic nature whatsoever. A verse in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra states: > 'The naturelessnesses of characteristics, arising, and ultimate truth— > Such have I entirely revealed. > If one does not know this esoteric intent of the Buddha, > One corrupts the correct path and cannot proceed.' > > 'Characteristics' refers to parikalpita; 'arising' refers to paratantra; 'ultimate truth' refers to pariniṣpanna. 'Without intrinsic nature' means that upon these three natures, none possess the intrinsic nature of the falsely clung-to self and phenomena, parikalpita and spontaneous \[arising\]. If a person does not know the Buddha's esoteric intent and, when three naturelessnesses are spoken of upon the three natures to destroy the self-grasping of non-Buddhists and the Hīnayāna, proceeds to repudiate bodhi, nirvāṇa, paratantra, and pariniṣpanna as all non-existent, then this person corrupts the correct path and cannot reach \[the goal\]. This statement of the three natures and three naturelessnesses does not mean that the substances of paratantra and pariniṣpanna are also non-existent; it merely means they lack the parikalpita falsely clung-to self and phenomena, and hence are called 'naturelessness.' > > Therefore, the three natures are without bounds; following any one of them, all are completely gathered. Truth and delusion interpenetrate; nature and characteristics are unimpeded. The Tathāgata's teachings of an entire lifetime, with their sands-of-the-Ganges doctrinal gates and esoteric intent, are completely within the gate of the three natures. Truth and convention, root and branch, are all gathered at once, thereby revealing the correct principle of consciousness-only without any divergent track. Because the paratantra nature is the substance of consciousness-only: giving rise to discrimination from paratantra is precisely parikalpita; awakening to reality from paratantra is precisely pariniṣpanna. Due to discrimination, one portion becomes saṃsāra; due to reality, one portion becomes nirvāṇa. Understanding discrimination as empty of nature, saṃsāra becomes nirvāṇa; being deluded about the real nature as existent, nirvāṇa becomes saṃsāra. > > All of this is one single phenomenon according with sentiment, manifesting meaning to become three. Three is not three, yet the one principle is perfect; one is not one, yet the three natures are complete. Rolling up and unfolding are not lost; hidden and manifest are ever as they are. Neither one nor three, nature and characteristics are obliterated in the ground of reality; yet three and yet one, progressive practices shine in the sky of meaning. In summing up that to which all returns, nothing precedes this purport. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 60.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60.40) - [Next: 60.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60.42) - [Up: 60](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.60.41) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [注大乘入楞伽經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1791.3.146) — Classical Chinese - [唯識三十論頌](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.darsana.yogacara.trimsika*zh-xuanzang.1.36) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.60.41) · Pramāṇa