[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) › 61.5 # 宗鏡錄 61.5 宗鏡錄 61.5 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [61.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61.5) 答。定有見分照前境故。有自證分。通照見分。亦有證自證分。照自證分故。相分者。佛地論云。如是所說四智相應心品。為有相分見分等耶。若無。應無所緣。應不名智。答。無漏心品。無障礙故。親照前境。無逐心變。似前境相。以無漏心。說名無相無分別故。又說緣境不思議故。有義。真實。無漏心品。亦有相分。諸心心法。法爾似境顯現名緣。非如鉗等動作取物。非如燈等舒光照物。如明鏡等。現影照物。由似境現。分明照了。名無障礙。不執不計。說名無相。亦無分明。妙用難測。名不思議。非不現影。若言無相。則無相分。言無分別。應無見分。覩無相見。應如虛空兔角等。應不名智。無執計故。言無能取所取等相。非無似境緣照義用。若無漏心。全無相分。諸佛不應現身土等。種種影像。乃至如是分別。但就世諦言說道理。若就勝義。離言絕慮。既無相見。不可言心及心法等。離諸戲論。不可思議。有義。無分別智。無分別故。所緣真如。不離體故。如照自體。無別相分。此無分別。若變相分。於真如境。便非親證。若後得智。有分別故。所緣境界。或離體故。如有漏心。似境相現。分明緣照。名緣前境。是故此後得智。定有相分。 > Answer: They definitely have a darśanabhāga, because it illuminates the object before it. There is a svasaṃvittibhāga, which thoroughly illuminates the darśanabhāga; and there is also a saṃvittisvasaṃvittibhāga, because it illuminates the svasaṃvittibhāga. Regarding the nimittabhāga, the Buddhabhūmisūtraśāstra states: 'Do the mental states associated with the four wisdoms spoken of in this way possess a nimittabhāga, a darśanabhāga, and so forth? If they lack them, they should lack an object of cognition (ālambana), and they should not be called wisdom.' It answers: 'Because the untainted mental states are unobstructed, they directly illuminate the object before them; there is no manifestation resembling the characteristics of the prior object that changes in accordance with the mind. This is because untainted mind is termed signless (animitta) and non-conceptual (nirvikalpa), and because its cognizing of objects is said to be inconceivable.' Some hold: Truly, untainted mental states also have a nimittabhāga. For all minds and mental factors (caitasika), that they by nature manifest resembling an object is called cognizing (ālambana); it is not like pincers or the like moving to grasp a thing, nor like a lamp or the like extending light to illuminate an object; rather, like a bright mirror or the like, they illuminate an object by reflecting an image. Because they appear resembling the object and clearly illuminate and understand it, this is called unobstructed. Because they do not cling or conceptualize, they are called signless. Also, because they have no distinct \[conceptual marks\] and their wondrous function is difficult to fathom, they are called inconceivable; it is not that they do not reflect images. If one says that they are signless and therefore lack a nimittabhāga, and says that they are non-conceptual and thus must lack a darśanabhāga, then beholding neither sign nor perception, they would be like empty space or a hare's horn, and should not be called wisdom. Because they lack clinging and conceptualization, it is said that they lack characteristics of grāhaka (apprehender) and grāhya (apprehended), not that they lack the functional capacity of cognizing and illuminating by resembling an object. If the untainted mind entirely lacked a nimittabhāga, the Buddhas should not manifest various reflected images such as bodies and lands. And so forth, such distinctions are made solely according to the principles of conventional truth (saṃvṛtisatya). If considered from ultimate truth (paramārtha), which transcends words and cuts off thought: since there are neither signs nor perceptions, one cannot speak of mind, mental factors, and so forth; they transcend all conceptual proliferation (prapañca) and are inconceivable. Some hold: Because non-conceptual wisdom (nirvikalpajñāna) is non-conceptual, and its object of cognition, tathatā, is not separate from its substance, it is like illuminating its own substance, having no separate nimittabhāga. If this non-conceptual \[wisdom\] were to transform a nimittabhāga, it would not directly realize the realm of tathatā. As for the subsequently attained wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdhajñāna), because it involves discrimination, its cognized realm is sometimes separate from its substance; like tainted minds, it appears resembling objective signs and clearly cognizes and illuminates them, which is called cognizing the object before it. Therefore, this subsequently attained wisdom definitely possesses a nimittabhāga. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 61.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61.4) - [Next: 61.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61.6) - [Up: 61](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.61.5) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.61.5) · Pramāṇa