宗鏡錄 66.30

Answer: It is only that birth is empty birth, and death is empty death; ultimately there is no self or person to be found. As a sūtra says: 'All worldly dharmas are only causes and fruits without a person. It is merely that depending on empty dharmas, empty dharmas are produced again.' Thus we know that within the fruit of sentient beings, there are only names and enumerations. Since names and enumerations are fundamentally empty, how could the myriad dharmas exist? As the Dharmatāśāstra says: 'When enumerations are exhausted, all existents are empty; when names are discarded, the myriad images come to an end of themselves.' Contemplating on this basis, this is indeed the ferry and path of mutual comprehension, the mysterious road for returning the spirit. Therefore, objective realms are established dependent on names; when names are hollow, objective realms are empty. Existence arises from enumeration; when enumeration is hollow, existence is tranquil. The place where names and enumerations arise is entirely one's own citta. If citta does not arise, how could the myriad dharmas exist? Therefore, a verse in the Avataṃsakasūtra says: 'All worldly dharmas merely take citta as master; following understanding, they grasp various characteristics, inverted and not in accordance with reality.' If one can contemplate them in accordance with reality, one will see the nature of one's own citta; this may be called the ferry and path of mutual comprehension, the mysterious road for returning the spirit. Furthermore, in the Commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa, Zhiyi extensively explains that the nature of the six great elements is without self. As the sūtra says: 'This body has no self, being like the earth.' This precisely explains selflessness in terms of the earth element. Here, two explanations are routinely made: first, as an explanation refuting outsiders; second, clarifying the meaning in terms of internal contemplation. As for the first, refuting outsiders: the outsiders claim, 'If one says that the body has no conscious self, how could it carry light loads and bear heavy burdens?' The insider refutes them, saying, 'The earth can also bear mountains and peaks; can it have a conscious self?' Next, as for the explanation in terms of internal contemplation: the Abhidharma explains that sentient beings are provisional designations and the earth element is a real dharma; the Tattvasiddhi explains that the earth element is also a provisional designation and the four subtle atoms are real dharmas. Now it is explained that although there is this distinction between provisional and real, both are equally subsumed under the contemplative approach to the practice of selflessness under the truth of suffering. Just as earth is composed of the four subtle atoms: if one subtle atom were the master, the other three would also be masters; if one is not the master, the other three are also not masters. One should know that there is no master. If the internal earth composed of the four subtle atoms has no master, then the external earth composed of the four subtle atoms also has no master. If internal and external earth have no master, how could what is composed of these three things have a master? If there is no master, that is precisely selflessness; hence it says that this body has no master, being like the earth. Furthermore, the Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara says: 'The earth element: earth has no solid nature.' If earth were existent, would it exist through its own nature, through other-nature, through both natures, or through causeless nature? Clinging to any one nature among the four kinds is an existence-view. If one asserts that this matter is real and the rest is false speech, 'real' means hard, it means nature, and it means master. If one examines the four natures and cannot find them, and takes this seeing of earth as nonexistent to be real and the rest as false speech, 'real' means hard, it means nature, and it means master. If one sees earth as both existent and nonexistent, taking this to be real and the rest as false speech, 'real' means hard, it means nature, and it means master. If one sees earth as neither existent nor nonexistent, taking this to be real and the rest as false speech, 'real' means nature and it means master. If one has any clinging toward these four propositions, that is nature, reality, hardness, and master. The Diamond Prajñā Sūtra says: 'If the citta of these sentient beings grasps characteristics, it attaches to self, person, sentient being, and soul. If it grasps the characteristic of dharmas, it also attaches to self, person, sentient being, and soul. If it grasps the characteristic of non-dharmas, it also attaches to self, person, sentient being, and soul.' If one does not grasp the four propositions, that is contemplating that earth has no hard nature. If it has no hard reality, then it has no master and no self; hence it is said that this body has no master, just like the earth. The sūtra says: 'This body has no self, being like fire.' This also has two explanations. As for the first, the explanation refuting outsiders: outsiders claim there is a conscious self. How is this known? Seeing that the body can run east and west and produce sounds, they know there is a conscious self. The insider refutes them, saying: 'Relying on the single dharma of fire, we refute both of their claims. Why is that? When fire burns wild grass, it can also move east and west freely; is it also a self? Moreover, when it catches bamboo and wood, it produces various sounds; does it also have a conscious self?' Next, as for the explanation in terms of internal contemplation: fire is composed of two subtle atoms and has no fixed nature. Being without nature, there is no fire. Now, the body is composed of name-and-form; the body has no fixed nature. If the body has no fixed nature, then there is no self. Furthermore, the various warmth in this body is fire. If external fire has no self, internal fire also has no self. Furthermore, the Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara says: 'The fire element: the nature of fire is produced from causes and conditions.' If it is produced from conditions, it has no intrinsic nature. Having no reality, there is no self. Refuting its nature and the four propositions can be understood by analogy with the earth element. The sūtra says: 'This body has no life-span, being like the wind.' This is also explained by refuting outsiders and through internal contemplation. As for refuting outsiders: outsiders claim there is a soul with a life-span. How is this known? 'If there were no soul with a life-span, how could there be inhalation and exhalation, continuous and uninterrupted?' The insider refutes them, saying: 'Inhalation and exhalation are merely characteristics of wind. If external wind has no life-span, how could internal wind be a soul with a life-span?' Next, as for the explanation through internal contemplation: the characteristics of wind strike each other, and so it is light, vacuous, unhindered, moving through space without obstruction; what life-span does it have? The Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra says: 'Inhalation and exhalation are called life-span.' If one contemplates this inhalation and exhalation, entering there is no accumulation, exiting there is no dispersal, coming there is no journeying, going there is no stepping; like the wind in empty space, it cannot be found when sought. Since wind is not a life-span, how could breath be a life-span? Furthermore, the Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara says: 'The nature of wind is unobstructed.' Now, contemplating wind through the four propositions: if one says it has a nature and has birth, and the four propositions can be apprehended, that is an obstructed characteristic, and one cannot enter the Path. If one contemplates wind through the four propositions and wind cannot be apprehended, that is unobstructedness. Because of unobstructedness, one enters the limit of reality. Contemplating the three things of the body, breath is not life-span, just like wind; hence it is said that this body has no life-span, being like the wind. The sūtra says: 'This body has no person, being like water.' This refutes the person in terms of the water element.

[This] is also explained in terms of refuting outsiders and inner contemplation. First, explaining the refutation of outsiders: the outsiders hypothesize that there is a spirit, which is the person. How is this known? If there were no spirit within the body, how could it benevolently moisten what is below, or accommodate and follow the inclinations of things? The insider refutes them, saying: 'I see that water can moisten downward and conform to the square or round shape of vessels. If water has no spirit and no person, yet you can benevolently moisten and comply with things, [then you] likewise have no spirit and no person.' Now explaining it in terms of inner contemplation: water is composed of three subtle particles and has no fixed nature. Being without nature, there is no water. The three phenomena form the body, and it has no fixed nature. Being without nature, there is no body. Being without a body, there is no person. Therefore, it is said that this body has no person, being like water. Another explanation is: just like a small child seeing a reflection in water and claiming there is a person inside the water, [who] enters the water seeking the person and ultimately cannot find one; ordinary people give rise to the view of self within the three phenomena, claiming that the body is a person. When one deeply contemplates the three phenomena, one does not see any bodily characteristic, which means there is no person. Furthermore, as the *Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara* says, the nature of water does not abide; if it abides, it is because ponds and pools are square or round, and obstructing it causes it to abide—it is not that water has an abiding nature. Now examining the person, it is also like this: depending on various dharmas, one obtains the name 'person', but there is no fixed nature. If one examines water through the four tetralemmas, having a nature and having attachment constitutes the meaning of abiding; if one examines water through the four tetralemmas, having no nature and having no attachment constitutes non-abiding. Because it is non-abiding, one enters the true limit of suchness. The sūtra says: 'This body is not real; the four great elements are its home.' This is a general refutation of the self in terms of the four great elements, teaching the practice of non-self. If explained as refuting outsiders: the outsiders hypothesize that if there were no truly existent spiritual self within the body, now one presently sees the six sense organs abiding dependent on the body, so one knows that there is truly a spiritual self. The insider refutes them, saying: 'One presently sees the six sense organs abiding dependent on the four great elements; there is no separate self or spirit upon which they depend.' If explained in terms of inner contemplation: the name 'body' is one; a single body should not abide across four selves. If a single great element is the self's abode, the other three great elements should lack the nominally designated body. If each has one, then there would be four bodies. Whether identical or separate, examining the body within the four great elements via the four tetralemmas, it cannot be found; therefore, one knows that the body has no reality. If one cannot find the reality of the body, then the view of the body is broken; when the view of the body is broken, the view of self and the sixteen views are all broken. The sūtra says: 'This body is empty, free from self and what belongs to self.' This is the second: refuting in terms of the space element, teaching the practice of non-self. If explained as refuting outsiders: the outsiders hypothesize that there is what belongs to the self. If there were no spiritual self, how could there be possessions? If lands and persons are real possessions, and one sees they are real, one should know that the self is also real. The insider refutes them, saying: 'If so, what belongs to the self is empty, and the self should also be empty. As with the space element within the body, the space element and all external space are what belongs to the self. Because what belongs to the self is empty, the self is also empty.' If explained in terms of inner contemplation: this directly refutes the view of the body in terms of the space element. Because the form derived from the four great elements encloses empty space, it is nominally designated as a body; apart from space, there is no body. If external and internal space are not called a body, now examining the body in terms of the space element, it cannot be found, and thus the view of the body is broken. When the view of the body is broken, one is free from self and what belongs to the self. The sūtra says: 'This body is devoid of sentience, like grass, trees, tiles, and gravel.' This is the third: examining the consciousness element to refute the self; thus it teaches the practice of non-self. If explained as refuting outsiders: the outsiders hypothesize, 'If there were no spirit within the body, how could one know the sequence of the four seasons and similar matters?' The insider refutes them, saying: 'Just as grass, trees, tiles, and gravel also shift and change over time in accordance with the climate of yin and yang, seeming to have knowing yet not possessing the knowing of a spirit, so too, though the body has knowing, like grass, trees, tiles, and gravel it has no knowing of a spirit.' Furthermore, the outsiders hypothesize that there is a spirit inside the body, and the spirit causes knowing to know it. The insider refutes them, saying: 'If the spirit causes knowing to know, who then causes the spirit? If knowing ultimately has no causer, why would the spirit need to be caused? If there is no causer of the spirit, then there is no knower; and if there is no knower, it is just like grass, trees, tiles, and gravel.' If in terms of inner contemplation, it directly contemplates the consciousness element. Why is this? The three phenomena form the body; life-faculty and warmth are devoid of knowing, and knowing is merely consciousness. If one claims that consciousness can know: past consciousness has already ceased, and because it has ceased, it cannot know; present consciousness does not abide for an instant, having no moment of pausing, and thus also cannot know; future consciousness does not yet exist, and how could a non-existent consciousness have knowing? Seeking consciousness across the three times, knowing cannot be found; apart from the three times, there is no separate knowing. Therefore, it is said that this body is devoid of sentience, like grass, trees, tiles, and gravel. The sūtra says: 'This body is without action, turned by the force of wind.' Next, in terms of the motion of wind, it assists in refuting that consciousness has action, teaching the practice of non-self. If explained as refuting outsiders: the outsiders hypothesize that because there is a spiritual self inside the body, it can undertake and execute actions and perform all deeds. The insider refutes them, saying: 'This is not done by a spirit; whatever the body does is all turned by the force of wind.' If explained in terms of inner contemplation of mind: when the deluded mental thought moves, inside the body, depending on wind, there are various actions performed. Therefore, the *Mahāsaṃnipātasūtra* says: 'There is wind that can go upward, and wind that can go downward. If the mind thinks upward, the wind pulls upward following the mind; if the mind thinks downward, the wind pulls downward following the mind. Movements and operations are all wind turning in accordance with the mind, performing all deeds.' If the wind channels do not flow freely, the hands and feet do not function properly; though the mind has thoughts, there is no way for movement to occur. For example, when a person pulls the mechanisms, the shadow puppet performs various movements; if the puppet strings snap, the hand has nothing to pull. One should know that all are actions depending on wind. Now, contemplating this wind-dependence: it does not arise from itself, nor does it arise from another. If it is without arising, it is empty. It cannot even exist on its own, making it impossible for the three phenomena to form a body. Who is the agent? Explanation: In general, outsiders who hypothesize and insiders who grasp at a self both give rise to attachment within the six elements of earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness, as well as within the three phenomena of consciousness, warmth, and breath inside the body. Now, contemplating within the six elements and three phenomena, it is solely the one element of consciousness that the world mostly clings to firmly as the real self.

Now, merely investigate within the internal, external, and the three times, and naturally there will be no self and no consciousness. As for investigating internally and externally: suppose one grasps that consciousness truly exists within the body—what then is consciousness? If you say that bodily parts such as skin, flesh, sinews, and bones are consciousness, these are the earth element. If you say that semen, blood, urine, feces, and so forth are consciousness, these are the water element. If you say that the warm sensation in the body is consciousness, this is the fire element. If you say that bending, turning, bowing, looking up, talking, and responding are consciousness, these are the wind element. Setting aside the four great elements, there is only the space element. What is consciousness? Since each separately lacks it, how could it exist in their combination? Just as pressing a single grain of sand yields no oil, how could combining many grains of sand produce it? Just as a single dog is not a lion, gathering a pack of dogs likewise produces none. When these four great elements are currently investigated, they have no substantial entity; this is internal emptiness. After death, each returns to the external four great elements, each and every one returning to emptiness; this is external emptiness. Both internal and external are empty, and the nature of consciousness has no basis. Furthermore, since internal investigation reveals no consciousness, should it be external? What is external belongs to other bodies, which naturally lack a master [in oneself], and is identical to empty space—what discrimination could it possess? Since the internal and external are already empty, how could there be an intermediate? Because the intermediate is established on the basis of the internal and external, merely refute the internal and external and the intermediate is spontaneously void. If consciousness is empty internally and externally, should it reside in the times of the mind? Why? It is because of the three times that consciousness is discerned, and it is because of consciousness that the three times are established. If there were no consciousness, who would divide the three times? If there were no three times, how could consciousness be elucidated? With these three consciousnesses: if one is not thinking of the past, then one is imagining the future; when the past and future are not conditioned upon, one abides in the present. Apart from the three boundaries of time, there is no further consciousness. Therefore an ancestral master said: "When not a single thought arises, the anterior and posterior boundaries are severed." Now, thought after thought constitutes the three times; thought after thought, consciousness does not abide; thought after thought is merely wind; thought after thought lacks a master. Therefore the Vajracchedikā-sūtra says: "The past mind cannot be apprehended; the future mind cannot be apprehended; the present mind cannot be apprehended." Because the past is established on the basis of the present, and the future is established on the basis of the past. Since the present does not abide, the past and future are also unarisen. Inquiring into one another, both are absent; they are thoroughly empty and quiescent. Whatever slight arising there may be, all is born from consciousness. Now that it is investigated and found to be absent, discrimination spontaneously ceases. Once discrimination has ceased, the objective realm has nothing upon which to rely. Just as waves arise reliant on water and images appear reliant on a mirror: without water, waves do not arise; without a mirror, images are not produced. Therefore one knows that it does not pertain to phenomena existing or phenomena not existing; it is merely that consciousness arises and consciousness ceases. As a verse in the Vajrasamādhi-sūtra says: "Phenomena arise from discrimination / And also cease from discrimination. / Ceasing these various discriminations, / These phenomena are neither arising nor ceasing." Thoroughly penetrating in this way, the sense faculties and objects are completely opened up. One's own awakening being already illumined, one can further universally illuminate to benefit others. Therefore a sūtra verse says: "Ultimately free from falsity, / Unstained like empty space, / The pure, wondrous dharmakāya / Serenely responds to everything." Therefore, worldly people are coarse and superficial; they do not examine their own bodies closely. Not practicing the wondrous contemplation, their eye of wisdom is completely blind; grasping the false, they are confused about the real, taking emptiness to be existence. If one can contemplate well, one will equal all the sages. As the Sūtra of Complete Enlightenment says: "At that time the World-Honoured One said to Samantacakṣus Bodhisattva: 'Good man, you are able to ask the Tathāgata on behalf of the bodhisattvas and the sentient beings of the end time about the gradual stages of practice, the reflection and maintenance [of mind], and even the expedient means provisionally spoken in various ways. Listen attentively now; I shall speak for you.' Then Samantacakṣus Bodhisattva, delighted to receive the teaching, listened in silence along with the great assembly. 'Good man, if those newly learning bodhisattvas and sentient beings of the end time wish to seek the Tathāgata's pure mind of complete enlightenment, they should maintain right mindfulness and remain far from all illusions. They should first rely on the Tathāgata's practice of śamatha: firmly uphold the prohibitions and precepts, settle serenely among disciples, sit quietly in a pure chamber, and constantly produce this thought: "This body of mine is a combination of the four great elements. Namely, hair, nails, and teeth; skin, flesh, sinews, and bones; marrow, brain, and impure forms all return to earth. Spittle, snot, pus, and blood; saliva, moisture, phlegm, tears, semen, vital energy, urine, and feces all return to water. Warmth returns to fire. Movement returns to wind. When the four great elements have each separated, where will this present illusory body be?" One immediately knows that this body ultimately has no substance; its combination is merely a characteristic, truly identical to an illusion or transformation. In the provisional combination of the four conditions, the six sense faculties falsely exist. The six sense faculties and the four great elements combine internally and externally; conditioned energies falsely exist, accumulating therein, appearing to have conditioned characteristics, provisionally called "citta." Good man, if this false mind lacks the six sense dusts, it cannot exist. When the four great elements disperse and decompose, no dust can be apprehended. The conditioned dusts therein each return to dispersal and extinction; ultimately there is no conditioned mind to be seen. Good man, because the illusory body of that sentient being ceases, the illusory mind also ceases. Because the illusory mind ceases, the illusory dust also ceases. Because the illusory dust ceases, the illusory cessation also ceases. Because the illusory cessation ceases, that which is not illusory does not cease. It is like polishing a mirror: when the dirt is exhausted, the clarity appears. Good man, you should know that body and mind are both illusory dirt. When the marks of dirt are eternally extinguished, the ten directions are pure. Good man, it is like a pure maṇi jewel that reflects the five colours, appearing respectively according to the direction. Foolish people see that maṇi jewel as truly possessing the five colours. Good man, the pure nature of complete enlightenment appears in the body and mind, responding respectively according to the type [of being]. Those foolish people say that the pure complete enlightenment truly has such self-characteristics of body and mind; it is just like this. Due to this, they cannot be far from illusions and transformations. For this reason I say that body and mind are illusory dirt. In contrast to being free from illusory dirt, one is called a "bodhisattva." When the dirt is exhausted and the contrast is eliminated, then there is no contrasting dirt nor one who speaks the name.' Good man, because this bodhisattva and sentient beings of the end time realize the extinction of all illusory images, at that time they immediately attain boundaryless purity. Boundless empty space is manifested by enlightenment. Because enlightenment is completely bright, it manifests the purity of the mind. Because the mind is pure, the dust of seeing is pure. Because seeing is pure, the eye faculty is pure."

"Because the [eye] faculty is pure, the eye consciousness is pure. Because consciousness is pure, the dust of sound is pure. Because hearing is pure, the ear faculty is pure. Because the faculty is pure, the ear consciousness is pure. Because consciousness is pure, the dust of perception is pure. In this way, down to the nose, tongue, body, and mind, it is likewise so. Good sons, because the faculties are pure, the dust of form is pure. Because form is pure, the dust of sound is pure; scent, taste, tangibles, and dharmas are likewise so. Good sons, because the six dusts are pure, the earth element is pure. Because earth is pure, the water element is pure; the fire element and wind element are likewise so. Good sons, because the four great elements are pure, the twelve sense bases, the eighteen realms, and the twenty-five states of existence are pure. Because those are pure, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas of a Buddha, and the thirty-seven limbs of awakening are pure. In this way, down to the eighty-four thousand dhāraṇī-doors, all are pure. Good sons, because the nature of the true characteristic of all [things] is pure, one body is pure. Because one body is pure, many bodies are pure. Because many bodies are pure, in this way, down to the perfect awakening of sentient beings in the ten directions, [all] is pure. Good sons, because one world is pure, many worlds are pure. Because many worlds are pure, in this way, down to exhausting empty space and encompassing the three times, all is equal, pure, and unmoving. Good sons, empty space being thus equal and unmoving, you should know that the nature of awakening is equal and unmoving. Because the four great elements are unmoving, you should know that the nature of awakening is equal and unmoving. In this way, down to the eighty-four thousand dhāraṇī-doors being equal and unmoving, you should know that the nature of awakening is equal and unmoving. Good sons, because the nature of awakening is all-pervading, pure, unmoving, and boundlessly complete, you should know that the six faculties pervade the dharmadhātu. Because the faculties are all-pervading, you should know that the six dusts pervade the dharmadhātu. Because the dusts are all-pervading, you should know that the four great elements pervade the dharmadhātu. In this way, down to the dhāraṇī-doors, they pervade the dharmadhātu. Good sons, because that wondrous nature of awakening is all-pervading, the nature of the faculties and the nature of the dusts are without destruction and without confusion. Because the faculties and dusts are without destruction, in this way, down to the dhāraṇī-doors, they are without destruction and without confusion. Just as the light of a hundred thousand lamps illuminating a single room pervades completely without destruction and without confusion. Good sons, because awakening is perfected, you should know that bodhisattvas are not bound by dharmas and do not seek liberation from dharmas; they do not loathe birth-and-death and do not crave nirvāṇa; they do not venerate the observance of precepts and do not despise the violation of prohibitions; they do not prize long practice and do not belittle beginners. Why is this? Because all is awakening. It is like the light of the eye clearly perceiving the object before it: that light being complete, it has neither hatred nor love. Why is this? Because the substance of light is non-dual, having neither hatred nor love. Good sons, when these bodhisattvas and sentient beings of the final age cultivate this mind and attain its perfection, within this there is no cultivation and also no attainment. Perfect awakening universally illuminates, quiescent and non-dual. Within it, hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of ineffable asaṃkhyeyas of worlds of Buddhas, numerous as the sands of the Ganges, are like sky-flowers, chaotically arising and chaotically perishing, neither identical nor distinct, neither bound nor liberated. Only then does one know that sentient beings originally have accomplished Buddhahood, and that birth-and-death and nirvāṇa are like yesterday's dream. Good sons, being like yesterday's dream, you should know that birth-and-death and nirvāṇa have no arising and no perishing, no coming and no going. That which is realized has neither gain nor loss, neither taking nor abandoning. That which is capable of realizing has no action and no cessation, no letting go and no destruction. Within this realization, there is neither subject nor object; ultimately there is no realization and also no realizer. The nature of all dharmas is equal and indestructible. Good sons, those bodhisattvas who practice thus, advance gradually thus, contemplate thus, abide and maintain thus, use skillful means thus, and awaken thus, in seeking such a dharma, will also not be deluded or distraught." Therefore, ordinary persons, lost in delusion and dreaming, fear birth, old age, sickness, and death; those of the two vehicles, with biased views, loathe and shun formation, abiding, decay, and emptiness. When suddenly awakened, one neither loathes nor fears, and entirely uses the dharmas of birth-and-death to liberate all sentient beings, because the nature of birth-and-death is empty. Thus Śākyamuni Tathāgata was neither detached nor attached: regarding birth, he was born into the royal palace and expounded the text of solitary supremacy; regarding old age, he lived to eighty years, demonstrating the dharma of transformation and decay; regarding sickness, his back ached and he lay down, warning of the body that is like a bubble and a phantom; regarding death, he demonstrated extinction in the twin Śāla trees, revealing the suffering of impermanence. He caused those of lesser capacity to awaken to transformation and change, and enabled those of great capacity to suddenly comprehend the perfect and eternal. Hence we know that amidst birth, old age, sickness, and death, awakening can entirely be generated; within walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, truth can universally be realized. How could this be the same as the views of fear and loathing held by ordinary persons and those of lesser capacity?