宗鏡錄 65.25

65.25

答。五蘊之法。約眾生界說。情有邊事。以智推檢。五蘊俱空。經云。是身如聚沫。不可撮摩。即色蘊空。是身如泡。不得久立。即受蘊空。是身如焰從渴愛生。即想蘊空。是身如芭蕉。中無有堅。即行蘊空。是身如幻。從顛倒起。即識蘊空。五蘊既空。誰為主宰。所有分別。是妄識攀緣。言語去來。唯風力所轉。離情執外。中間唯有空性。故知我但有名。名亦無性。名體俱空。我法何有。唯識論云。又諸所執。實有。我體。為有作用。為無作用。若有作用。如手足等。應是無常。若無作用。如兔角等。應非實我。故所執我。二俱不成。又憶識等事。皆從本識熏習之力而得成就。乃至所執實我。既常無變。後應如前。是事非有。前應如後。是事非無。以後與前。體無別故。若謂我用。前後變易。非我體者。理亦不然。用不離體。應常有故。體不離用。應非常故。然諸有情。各有本識。一類相續任持種子。與一切法更互為因。熏習力故。得有如是憶識等事。故寶積經偈云。法同草木無覺知。若離於心不可得。眾生自性無所有。一切諸法亦如是。若現在陰入界。是念念不住。何以故。世法無有一念住者。若有一念。是一念中住。亦有生住滅。是生住滅。亦復不住。如生住滅中。有內外陰界入。是內外陰界入。亦有生住滅。若如是不住者。即是非我。非我所。又佛言。從本已來。無我無人。無有丈夫。但是內心見有我人。內心起時。彼已害我。即名為害。乃至是中。無有一法。和合聚集。決定成就。得名為佛。名法。名僧。名父。名母。名阿羅漢。定可取者。又頌云。俯仰屈申立去來。瞻視言語中無實。風依識故有所作。是識滅相念念無。彼此男女有我心。無智慧故妄見有。骨鎖相連皮肉覆。機關動作如木人。內雖無實外似人。譬如熱金投水中。亦如野火焚竹林。因緣和合有聲出。華嚴經頌云。菩薩一切業果報。悉為無盡智所印。如是無盡自性盡。是故無盡方便滅。菩薩觀心不在外。亦復不得在於內。知其心性無所有。我法皆離永寂滅。彼諸佛子如是知。一切法性常空寂。無有一法能造作。同於諸佛悟無我。大集經云。若復有言。眼色因緣。故有我者。是義不然。何以故。眼中無我。色亦如是。而和合中。亦復無我。和合因緣。生於眼識。如是識中。亦復無我。風中空中。悉亦無我。如是推尋。竟不可得。此識但是十二因緣。猶環流轉。離十二因緣。識不可見。但因識生名色。乃至則有衰老。及以病死。如是等法。因眼識。生。而是眼識。非東方來。南西北方。四維上下。亦復如是。所因之念。生根識者。是念亦滅。眼識不住。第二念中。亦不語念。汝住我滅。而是滅法。亦非復去至十方面。亦復不專一處住止。是故諸法。因緣故生。若離因緣。則不得生。因因緣生。因因緣滅。如是因緣。名相續法。是故當知。實無有我。而是因緣。亦無作者。無有受者。無有起者。無他起者。是故無我。若無我者。我既是空。我所亦空。何以故。然體性爾故。是故眼性無我我所。無有積聚。非合非散。即生滅故。一切諸法。亦復如是。是風因緣。亦入根中。左旋右轉。清淨照了。彼風如幻。亦不可捉。又雖似有能作所作。二事相成。但從緣生。俱無自性。不知唯識之人。盡執為實我。如大涅槃經云。佛言。比丘。譬如二手相拍。聲出其中。我亦如是。

Answer: The dharmas of the five aggregates are explained in reference to the realm of sentient beings as matters on the side of affective existence. When investigated with wisdom, the five aggregates are all empty. A sūtra states: ‘This body is like a cluster of foam, which cannot be grasped’—this means that the aggregate of form is empty. ‘This body is like a bubble, which cannot last long’—this means that the aggregate of sensation is empty. ‘This body is like a mirage, arising from thirsty craving’—this means that the aggregate of perception is empty. ‘This body is like a plantain tree, with nothing solid inside’—this means that the aggregate of formations is empty. ‘This body is like an illusion, arising from inverted views’—this means that the aggregate of consciousness is empty. Since the five aggregates are empty, who is the master? All conceptual distinctions are the grasping of conditions by deluded consciousness; speech, going, and coming are turned solely by the power of the wind [element]. Apart from emotional attachment, in between there is only the nature of emptiness. Therefore, know that the ‘self’ has only a name, and the name also lacks intrinsic nature; both name and substance are empty, so how could there be a self or dharmas? The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra states: ‘Furthermore, regarding the substantial self-entity grasped [by opponents]: does it have functioning, or does it lack functioning? If it has functioning, like hands and feet, it must be impermanent; if it lacks functioning, like a rabbit's horns, it cannot be a real self. Therefore, the grasped self fails in both cases. Furthermore, matters such as memory and recognition are all accomplished through the power of perfuming from the basic consciousness. […] Furthermore, as for the grasped real self, since it would be permanent and unchanging, later should be like earlier, and this phenomenon [of change] would not exist; earlier should be like later, and this phenomenon [of non-cognition] would not be absent; for between later and earlier, there would be no distinction in its substance. If one claims that the functions of the self change before and after while its substance does not, this principle is also incorrect. Since function is not separate from substance, it should be permanent; and since substance is not separate from function, it should be non-permanent. However, sentient beings each have a basic consciousness, a single continuum that sustains seeds, mutually acting as causes with all dharmas. Due to the power of perfuming, there are such matters as memory and recognition.’ Thus a verse in the Ratnakūṭasūtra says: ‘Dharmas are like grasses and trees, devoid of sentience; / Apart from the mind, they cannot be found. / The intrinsic nature of sentient beings does not exist; / All dharmas are likewise thus.’ If one takes the present aggregates, sense-bases, and elements, they do not abide from moment to moment. Why is this? Among mundane dharmas, there is none that abides for even a single thought-moment. If there were a single thought-moment, its abiding within that single moment would also have arising, abiding, and cessation; and this arising, abiding, and cessation would likewise not abide. Just as within arising, abiding, and cessation there are internal and external aggregates, elements, and sense-bases, these internal and external aggregates, elements, and sense-bases likewise have arising, abiding, and cessation. If they are thus non-abiding, then they are neither the self nor what belongs to a self. Furthermore, the Buddha said: ‘From the beginning, there has been no self, no person, and no man; it is merely that the inner mind sees a self and a person. When the inner mind arises, it has already harmed the self, which is called “harm.” And so on, until: among these, there is not a single dharma that, by gathering and assembling, is definitively accomplished so as to be designated a Buddha, designated the Dharma, designated the Saṃgha, designated a father, designated a mother, or designated an arhat, as something definitively graspable.’ Furthermore, a verse states: ‘Bending down, looking up, flexing, extending, standing, going, and coming, / Looking and speaking have no reality within. / Because the wind relies on consciousness, there is activity; / The ceasing characteristic of this consciousness is absent from moment to moment. / The mind grasping a self in this or that, male or female, / Lacks wisdom and therefore falsely sees it as existing. / A chain of bones joined together, covered with skin and flesh, / Like a wooden puppet moving by mechanism. / Though inside there is no reality, outside it resembles a person. / Like hot gold plunged into water, / Or a wildfire burning a bamboo forest, / When causes and conditions combine, a sound comes forth.’ A verse in the Avataṃsakasūtra says: ‘All the karmic retributions of bodhisattvas / Are imprinted by inexhaustible wisdom. / Such inexhaustible self-nature is exhausted, / And therefore inexhaustibility ceases through expedient means. / The bodhisattva observes that the mind is not outside, / Nor can it be found inside. / Knowing that this mind's nature does not exist, / Both self and dharmas are abandoned, eternally quiescent. / Those sons of the Buddha know thus: / The nature of all dharmas is constantly empty and quiescent; / There is not a single dharma capable of acting; / United with all Buddhas, they awaken to selflessness.’ The Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra says: ‘If someone were to say that because of the causes and conditions of the eye and form, there is a self, this meaning is incorrect. Why? In the eye there is no self, and form is likewise thus; and within their combination, there is also no self. Causes and conditions in combination give rise to eye-consciousness; within such consciousness, there is also no self. Within wind and within space, all are likewise without self. Investigating thus, ultimately nothing can be found. This consciousness is merely the twelve links of dependent origination, turning like a ring; apart from the twelve links of dependent origination, consciousness cannot be seen. Merely depending on consciousness, name-and-form arises, and so on, until there is old age, sickness, and death. Such dharmas arise conditioned by eye-consciousness; and this eye-consciousness does not come from the east, nor from the south, west, north, the four intermediate directions, above, or below. The thought that conditions the arising of the sense-faculty and consciousness also ceases; eye-consciousness does not abide in a second thought-moment, nor does it tell the thought: “You abide, and I shall cease.” And this ceasing dharma does not go to the ten directions, nor does it abide exclusively in one place. Therefore, all dharmas arise because of causes and conditions; if apart from causes and conditions, they cannot arise. Arising through causes and conditions, they cease through causes and conditions; such causes and conditions are called dharmas of continuity. Therefore, you should know that there is truly no self; and these causes and conditions also have no agent, no experiencer, no initiator, and no other initiator. Therefore, there is no self. If there is no self, since the self is empty, what belongs to the self is also empty. Why? Because their substance and nature are so. Therefore, the nature of the eye lacks self and what belongs to self; it has no accumulation, neither joining nor separating, because it is instantly arising and ceasing. All dharmas are likewise thus. This condition of wind also enters into the sense-faculties, turning left and rotating right, pure and illuminating; that wind is like an illusion and cannot be grasped. Furthermore, although there seem to be an agent and what is acted upon, these two things completing each other, they merely arise from conditions and both lack intrinsic nature. People who do not understand consciousness-only cling entirely to them as a real self. As the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra states: “The Buddha said: ‘O monks, just as when two hands clap together, sound comes forth from between them, the self is likewise thus.’”’