宗鏡錄 61.21

61.21

答。若了自心。則成佛慧。終不心外有法可說。有事可立。只為不迴光自省之人。一向但徇文詮。著其外境。以無名相中。假名相說。即彼虛妄。以顯真實。既不著文字。亦不離文字。所以天王般若經偈云。總持無文字。文字顯總持。大悲方便力。離言文字說。楞伽經云。佛告大慧。我等諸佛。及諸菩薩。不說一字。所以者何。法離文字故。非不饒益義。說。言說者。眾生妄想故。大慧。若不說一切法者。教法則壞。教法壞者。則無諸佛菩薩。緣覺聲聞。若無者。誰說為誰。是故大慧。菩薩摩訶薩。莫著言說。隨宜方便。廣說經法。淨名經云。夫說法者。當如法說。乃至法順空。隨無相。應無作。法離好醜。法無增損。法無生滅。法無所歸。法過眼耳鼻舌身心。法無高下。法常住不動。法離一切觀行。唯。大目連。法相如是。豈可說乎。夫說法者。無說無示。其聽法者。無聞無得。譬如幻士。為幻人說法。當建是意而為說法。當了眾生根有利鈍。善於知見。無所罣礙。以大悲心。讚于大乘。念報佛恩。不斷三寶。然後說法。故知非是不許說法。但說時無著。說即無咎。如思益經云。汝等比丘。當行二事。一聖說法。二聖默然。但正說時。了不可得。即是默然。不是杜口無說。故昔人云。幻人說法幻人聽。由來兩箇總無情。說時無說從君說。聽處無聽一任聽。又若以四實性。自得法。本住法。約真諦中。即不可說。若以四悉檀。隨他意語。斷深疑。生正信。有因緣故。則亦可得說。又不可說即可說。真理普遍故。可說即不可說。緣修無性故。如楞伽經云。大慧復白佛言。如世尊所說。我從某夜得最正覺。乃至某夜入般涅槃。於其中間不說一字。亦不已說。當說。不說是佛說。大慧白佛言。世尊。如來應正等覺。何因說言。不說是佛說。佛告大慧。我因二法。故作是說。云何二法。謂緣自得法。及本住法。是名二法。因此二法故。我作如是說。云何緣自得法。若彼如來所得。我亦得之。無增無減。緣自得法究竟境界。離言說妄想。離文字二趣。云何本住法。謂古先聖道。如金銀等性。法界常住。若如來出世。若不出世。法界常住。如趣彼城道。譬如士夫。行曠野中。見向古城。平坦正道。即隨入城。受如意樂。偈云。我某夜得道。至某夜涅槃。於此二中間。我都無所說。緣自本住故。我作如是說。彼佛及與我。悉無有差別。釋云。此有二因。一即緣自得法。自所得法。即是證道。證法在己。離過顯德。二即緣本住法。本住。即古先聖道。傳古非作。此上是據理約證云不說。若但是自心聞。則佛常不說。如寶性論偈云。譬如諸響聲。依地而得起。自然無分別。非內非外住。如來聲亦爾。依心地而起。自然無分別。非內非外住。是以既非內外所生。亦不從四句而起。此約實智。應須玄會。若約權門。亦不絕方便。如止觀云。若言智由心生。自能照。境諦智不相由藉。若言智不自智。由境故智。境不自境。由智故境。如長短相待。若言境智因緣故有。此是共合得名。若言皆不如上三種。但自然爾。即無因。皆有四取之過。皆不可說。隨四悉因緣。亦可得說。但有名字。名字無性。無性之字。是字不住。亦不不住。是為不可思議。經云。不可思議智境。不可思議智照。即此義也。若破四性境智。此名實慧。若四悉赴緣。說四境智。此名權慧。則權實雙行。自他兼利。方冥佛旨。免墮己愚。

Answer: If one understands one's own mind, one achieves the Buddha's wisdom; ultimately, outside the mind there is no dharma that can be spoken of, nor any phenomenon that can be established. It is only for those who do not turn the light back to introspect themselves, but exclusively follow textual explanations and cling to their external objects, that within that which is without names and marks, one speaks provisionally using names and marks, using that very falsehood to reveal reality. One neither clings to letters nor separates from letters. Therefore, a verse in the Devarājaprajñāpāramitāsūtra says: 'The dhāraṇī has no letters; letters reveal the dhāraṇī. By the power of great compassion and skillful means, through transcending speech, letters are spoken.' The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'The Buddha told Mahāmati: "We Buddhas and bodhisattvas do not utter a single word. Why is this? Because the Dharma transcends letters. It is not that speech is made without beneficial meaning. Speech is due to the delusive conceptualization of sentient beings. Mahāmati, if all dharmas were not spoken, the doctrinal teaching would be destroyed. If the doctrinal teaching were destroyed, there would be no Buddhas, bodhisattvas, pratyekabuddhas, or śrāvakas. If these did not exist, who would speak, and for whom? Therefore, Mahāmati, bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should not cling to speech, but in accord with what is appropriate and expedient, broadly explain the sūtras and teachings."' The Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra says: 'One who expounds the Dharma should expound it in accord with the Dharma... up to: The Dharma accords with emptiness; it follows signlessness; it corresponds with aimlessness. The Dharma transcends good and bad; the Dharma has neither increase nor decrease; the Dharma has neither arising nor ceasing; the Dharma has no place to which it returns. The Dharma transcends eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind; the Dharma has neither high nor low; the Dharma is eternally abiding and unmoving; the Dharma transcends all contemplative practice. Indeed, Mahāmaudgalyāyana! The characteristics of the Dharma are such; how could it be spoken? One who expounds the Dharma has nothing to expound and nothing to indicate; one who hears the Dharma has nothing to hear and nothing to attain. Just as an illusory conjurer expounds the Dharma to an illusory person, one should establish this intent and expound the Dharma. One should understand that the faculties of sentient beings are sharp or dull, be skilled in knowledge and vision without obstruction, praise the Great Vehicle with a mind of great compassion, be mindful of repaying the Buddha's benevolence without letting the Three Jewels be cut off, and only then expound the Dharma.' Therefore we know that it is not that expounding the Dharma is forbidden; only if one is without attachment when expounding, expounding is without fault. As the Viśeṣacintibrahmaparipṛcchāsūtra says: 'You bhikṣus should practice two things: first, noble expounding of the Dharma; second, noble silence.' But at the very time of expounding, completely realizing that nothing can be grasped is itself silence; it does not mean keeping one's mouth shut without speaking. Thus the ancients said: 'An illusory person speaks the Dharma, an illusory person hears; from the beginning, both have no sentiment. While speaking, there is no speaking—speak as you wish; at the place of hearing, there is no hearing—hear as you please.' Furthermore, if one takes the four self-natures, the personally attained dharma, and the fundamentally abiding dharma, from the standpoint of the ultimate truth, it cannot be spoken. If one takes the four siddhāntas, speaking according to the intentions of others, severing deep doubts, and generating correct faith, because there are causes and conditions, it can also be spoken. Moreover, what cannot be spoken is precisely what can be spoken, because the true principle is omnipresent; what can be spoken is precisely what cannot be spoken, because cultivation through conditions lacks self-nature. As the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'Mahāmati again addressed the Buddha, saying: "As the World-Honoured One has said: 'From the night I attained supreme correct awakening until the night I entered parinirvāṇa, in between I did not speak a single word, nor have I spoken, nor will I speak. Non-speaking is the Buddha's speaking.'" Mahāmati addressed the Buddha, saying: "World-Honoured One, for what reason does the Tathāgata, the Arhat, the Fully and Completely Awakened One say that non-speaking is the Buddha's speaking?" The Buddha told Mahāmati: "Because of two dharmas, I make this statement. What are the two dharmas? Namely, the personally attained dharma and the fundamentally abiding dharma. These are called the two dharmas. Because of these two dharmas, I make such a statement. What is the personally attained dharma? What that Tathāgata attained, I have also attained, without increase or decrease. The ultimate realm of the personally attained dharma transcends verbal delusive conceptualization, and transcends the two approaches of letters. What is the fundamentally abiding dharma? It refers to the ancient sages' path of old; like the natures of gold and silver, the dharmadhātu is eternally abiding. Whether a Tathāgata appears in the world or does not appear in the world, the dharmadhātu is eternally abiding. It is like the road leading to that city: for example, a man travelling in a wilderness sees an even, straight road leading to an ancient city, and thereupon follows it into the city, enjoying pleasures as he desires. The verse says: 'From the night I attained the Way, / Until the night of nirvāṇa, / Between these two, / I spoke nothing at all. / Because of the personal and the fundamentally abiding, / I make such a statement; / That Buddha and I / Are completely without difference.'" The commentary says: 'There are two causes here: first, the personally attained dharma—the dharma attained by oneself is the path of realization; when the realized dharma is in oneself, it transcends faults and manifests virtues. Second, the fundamentally abiding dharma—fundamentally abiding refers to the ancient sages' path of old; it is transmitted from the old and not created.' The above is stating that there is no speaking based on principle and realization. If it is only heard by one's own mind, then the Buddha is constantly not speaking. As a verse in the Ratnagotravibhāga says: 'Just as various echoes / Arise relying on the earth, / Spontaneously without discrimination, / Abiding neither within nor without; / The Tathāgata's voice is also like this: / Arising relying on the mind-ground, / Spontaneously without discrimination, / Abiding neither within nor without.' Therefore, since it is neither born from within nor without, nor does it arise from the four propositions, this is according to true wisdom, which should be profoundly comprehended. If according to the provisional gate, skillful means are also not cut off. As the Zhiguan says: 'If one says that wisdom is born of the mind and naturally can illuminate, then the objective realm, the truth, and wisdom do not depend on one another. If one says that wisdom is not wisdom of itself, but is wisdom because of the objective realm, and the objective realm is not the objective realm of itself, but is the objective realm because of wisdom, this is like long and short depending on each other. If one says that the objective realm and wisdom exist because of causes and conditions, this is an appellation derived from combination. If one says they are none of the above three kinds, but are just spontaneously so, then they are without cause. All of these have the fault of the four graspings, and none of them can be spoken. In accordance with the causes and conditions of the four siddhāntas, it can also be spoken. There are only names, and names have no self-nature. Words without self-nature: these words do not abide, nor do they not abide. This is the inconceivable.' The sūtra says: 'Inconceivable wisdom-realm, inconceivable wisdom-illumination'—this is precisely the meaning. If one refutes the four natures of realm and wisdom, this is called real wisdom. If one accords with conditions through the four siddhāntas to speak of the four realms and wisdoms, this is called provisional wisdom. Thus provisional and real operate together, benefiting both oneself and others; only then does one merge with the Buddha's intent and avoid falling into one's own ignorance.