宗鏡錄 67.11

67.11

答。今言無我者。謂破凡夫外道迷唯識理。妄執心外實有我法。如外道所執。略有三等。一僧佉等。執我體常。周遍。量同虛空。隨處造業。受苦樂等。二尼乾子。執我其體雖常。而量不定。隨身大小。有卷舒故。三遍出。執我體常。至細。如一極微。潛轉身中。作事業故。餘九十種所計我等。不異此三故。此等妄執。俱無道理。唯成五見之邪思。豈同四德之真我。如涅槃經云。外道言。如瞿曇說。無我我所。何緣復說常樂我淨。佛言。善男子。我亦不說內外六入。及六識意。常樂我淨。我乃宣說。滅內外入。所生六識。名之為常。以常故。名之為我。有常我故。名之為樂。常我樂故。名之為淨。夫真我者。是佛性義。常恒不變。非生因之所生。具足圓成。唯了因之所了。又如經云。爾時世尊。讚諸比丘。善哉善哉。汝等善能修無我想。時諸比丘。即白佛言。世尊。我等不但修無我想。亦更修習其餘諸想。所謂苦想。無常。無我想。世尊。譬如人醉。其心愐眩。見諸山河。石壁草木。宮殿屋舍。日月星辰。皆悉迴轉。世尊。若有不修苦無常想。無我等想。如是之人。不名為聖。多諸放逸。流轉生死。世尊。以是因緣。我等善修如是諸想。爾時佛告諸比丘言。諦聽諦聽。汝向所引醉人喻者。但知文字。未達其義。何等為義。如彼醉人。見上日月。實非迴轉。生迴轉想。眾生亦爾。為諸煩惱無明所覆。生顛倒心。我計無我。常計無常。淨計不淨。樂計為苦。以為煩惱之所覆故。雖生此想。不達其義。如彼醉人。於非轉處。而生轉想。我者。即是佛義。常者。是法身義。樂者。是涅槃義。淨者。是法義。汝等比丘。云何而言有我想者。憍慢貢高。流轉生死。汝等若言。我亦修集無常苦無我等想。是三種修。無有實義。我今當說勝三修法。苦者計樂。樂者計苦。是顛倒法。無常計常。常計無常。是顛倒法。無我計我。我計無我。是顛倒法。不淨計淨。淨計不淨。是顛倒法。有如是等四顛倒法。是人不知正修諸法。汝諸比丘。於苦法中。生於樂想。於無常中。生於常想。於無我中。生於我想。於不淨中。生於淨想。世間亦有常樂我淨。出世亦有常樂我淨。世間法者。有字無義。出世間者。有字有義。何以故。世間之法。有四顛倒。故不知義。所以者何。有想倒。心倒。見倒。以三倒故。世間之人。樂中見苦。常見無常。我見無我。淨見不淨。是名顛倒。以顛倒故。世間知字而不知義。何等為義。無我者。名為生死。我者。名為如來。無常者。聲聞緣覺。常者。如來法身。苦者。一切外道。樂者。即是涅槃。不淨者。即有為法。淨者。諸佛菩薩所有正法。是名不顛倒。以不倒故。知字知義。若欲遠離四顛倒者。應知如是常樂我淨。釋曰。夫迷四真實起八顛倒者。無非人法二我之見。為生死之樞穴。作煩惱之基坰。成九結之樊籠。開十使之業道。二乘雖斷人我。常被無我之所漂流。外道謬認識神。恒為妄我所之輪轉。所以上云。無我者。名為生死者。以昧一真我之門。無大自在之力。我者名為如來者。達佛性之妙理。承如實之道來。無常者聲聞緣覺者。修生滅之妄因。證灰斷之小果。常者如來法身者。入不動之真宗。契圓常之妙體。苦者一切外道者。運無益之苦行。墮生滅之邪輪。樂者即是涅槃者。斷二死之妄原。入四德之祕藏。不淨者即有為法者。積雜染之情塵。成夢幻之虛事。淨者諸佛菩薩所有正法者。乃究竟之圓詮。履無為之至道。是以外道執有我見。如蒸砂作飯。認妄為真。二乘證無我門。似捉石為珠。以常為斷。俱不達無我之中。而有真我。又常樂我淨者。但是一法。以心性不變異故常。常故樂。樂故我。我故淨。以不了心性常住故。心外別求妄有所作。作故無常。無常故無樂。無樂故無我。無我故無淨。何者。以無常遷變。純受其苦。寧有樂乎。既不得樂。恒俱繫縛。不得自在。豈成我乎。既不見真我佛性。長隨染緣。豈得淨耶。如上剖析。皆屬一期教門。不可於此定執有無。迷於方便。如廣百論云。為止邪見。撥無涅槃故。說真有常樂我淨。此方便言。不應定執。既不執有。亦不撥無。如是乃名正智解脫。

Answer: What is now called selflessness is spoken to destroy the erroneous grasping by ordinary beings and non-Buddhists who, confused about the principle of consciousness-only, falsely grasp that there are actual selves and dharmas outside the mind. As for what non-Buddhists grasp, there are roughly three classes: First, the Sāṃkhyas and others, who grasp that the substance of the self is permanent, pervasive, and equal in measure to space, creating karma and experiencing suffering, pleasure, and so on anywhere. Second, the Nirgranthas, who grasp that although the substance of the self is permanent, its measure is indeterminate, contracting and expanding according to the size of the body. Third, the Vāśīputrīyas [or wanderers], who grasp that the substance of the self is permanent and extremely subtle, like a single subtle atom, covertly moving within the body to perform activities. Because the remaining ninety kinds of imagined selves are not different from these three, all such false graspings are devoid of principle; they merely constitute the perverse thoughts of the five views. How could they be the same as the true self of the four virtues? As the Nirvāṇasūtra says: 'A non-Buddhist said: "As Gautama says that there is no self and nothing belonging to a self, for what reason do you also speak of permanence, bliss, self, and purity?" The Buddha said: "Good man, I do not say that the internal and external six sense bases, the six consciousnesses, and the manas are permanent, blissful, self, and pure. Rather, I proclaim that the cessation of the six consciousnesses produced by the internal and external bases is named permanent. Because it is permanent, it is named self. Because there is a permanent self, it is named bliss. Because it is permanent, self, and blissful, it is named pure." Now, the true self is the meaning of buddha-nature: eternally constant and unchanging, not produced by producing causes, complete and perfectly fulfilled, revealed only by revealing causes. Furthermore, as the sūtra says: 'At that time, the World-Honoured One praised the bhikṣus: "Excellent, excellent! You are well able to cultivate the perception of selflessness." Then the bhikṣus said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One, we do not only cultivate the perception of selflessness, but we also cultivate other perceptions—namely, the perception of suffering, impermanence, and the perception of selflessness. World-Honoured One, it is like an intoxicated person whose mind is dizzy and confused, seeing mountains, rivers, stone walls, vegetation, palaces, houses, the sun, moon, and stars all spinning around. World-Honoured One, if there is someone who does not cultivate the perception of suffering, impermanence, selflessness, and so on, such a person is not called a noble one; having much heedlessness, they transmigrate in birth and death. World-Honoured One, for this reason, we skillfully cultivate such perceptions." At that time, the Buddha told the bhikṣus: "Listen attentively, listen attentively! The analogy of the intoxicated person you just cited shows you only know the words, but have not grasped the meaning. What is the meaning? Just as that intoxicated person sees the sun and moon above as spinning when in fact they are not spinning, yet produces the perception of spinning, sentient beings are also like this: covered by afflictions and ignorance, they give rise to inverted minds, imagining self to be selfless, permanence to be impermanent, purity to be impure, and bliss to be suffering. Because they are covered by afflictions, although they give rise to these perceptions, they do not grasp their meaning, just as that intoxicated person generates the perception of spinning where there is no spinning. 'Self' is the meaning of the Buddha. 'Permanence' is the meaning of the dharmakāya. 'Bliss' is the meaning of nirvāṇa. 'Purity' is the meaning of the Dharma. You bhikṣus, why do you say that one who has the perception of a self is conceited and arrogant, transmigrating in birth and death? If you say, 'I also cultivate and accumulate perceptions such as impermanence, suffering, and selflessness,' these three kinds of cultivation have no actual meaning. I shall now explain the superior method of the three cultivations: Imagining bliss in suffering, or imagining suffering in bliss, is an inverted dharma. Imagining permanence in the impermanent, or imagining impermanence in the permanent, is an inverted dharma. Imagining self in the selfless, or imagining selflessness in the self, is an inverted dharma. Imagining purity in the impure, or imagining impurity in the pure, is an inverted dharma. When there are such four inverted dharmas, that person does not know the correct cultivation of dharmas. You bhikṣus, generate the perception of bliss within dharmas of suffering; generate the perception of permanence within the impermanent; generate the perception of self within the selfless; generate the perception of purity within the impure. The worldly also has permanence, bliss, self, and purity; the supramundane also has permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Worldly dharmas have the words but not the meaning; supramundane dharmas have the words and have the meaning. Why is this? Worldly dharmas have four inversions, and therefore do not know the meaning. Why is this? There is inversion of perception, inversion of mind, and inversion of view. Because of the three inversions, worldly people see suffering in bliss, see impermanence in permanence, see selflessness in self, and see impurity in purity; these are called inversions. Because of inversion, the world knows the words but does not know the meaning. What is the meaning? Selflessness is named birth and death; self is named the Tathāgata. Impermanence is the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; permanence is the Tathāgata's dharmakāya. Suffering is all non-Buddhists; bliss is nirvāṇa. Impurity is conditioned dharmas; purity is the correct Dharma possessed by all buddhas and bodhisattvas. These are called non-inversions. Because they are non-inverted, one knows the words and knows the meaning. If one wishes to stay far away from the four inversions, one should know such permanence, bliss, self, and purity." The explanation says: Now, being confused about the four realities and giving rise to the eight inversions is nothing other than the views of the two selves of persons and phenomena, which serve as the pivot of birth and death, act as the foundation of afflictions, form the cage of the nine entanglements, and open the karmic path of the ten proclivities. Although those of the two vehicles sever the personal self, they are constantly drifted about washed away by selflessness; non-Buddhists mistakenly recognize the conscious spirit and constantly transmigrate due to the false self. Therefore, the statement above that 'selflessness is named birth and death' is because they are ignorant of the gate of the one true self and lack the power of great mastery. 'Self is named the Tathāgata' because they have realized the wondrous principle of buddha-nature and arrived by following the path of suchness. 'Impermanence is the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas' because they cultivate the false causes of arising and ceasing and realize the lesser fruit of ashes and annihilation. 'Permanence is the Tathāgata's dharmakāya' because it enters the true source of immobility and accords with the wondrous substance of perfect permanence. 'Suffering is all non-Buddhists' because they employ useless austerities and fall into the perverse wheel of arising and ceasing. 'Bliss is nirvāṇa' because it severs the false source of the two kinds of death and enters the secret storehouse of the four virtues. 'Impurity is conditioned dharmas' because it accumulates the defiled dust of sentiment and forms the empty affairs of dreams and illusions. 'Purity is the correct Dharma possessed by all buddhas and bodhisattvas' because it is the ultimate, perfect explanation and treads the supreme path of the unconditioned. Therefore, non-Buddhists grasping the view of an existent self is like steaming sand to make rice, taking the false to be true. The two vehicles realizing the gate of selflessness is like grasping a stone as a pearl, taking permanence to be annihilation. Neither comprehends that within selflessness there is the true self. Furthermore, permanence, bliss, self, and purity are merely a single dharma: because the nature of mind is invariant, it is permanent; being permanent, it is blissful; being blissful, it is self; being self, it is pure. Because of not understanding that the nature of mind is permanently abiding, one falsely acts seeking separately outside the mind; because of acting, there is impermanence; because of impermanence, there is no bliss; because of no bliss, there is no self; because of no self, there is no purity. Why is this? Because with impermanence and flux, one purely experiences suffering—how could there be bliss? Since one does not attain bliss, one is constantly bound together and does not attain mastery—how could this constitute a self? Since one does not see the true self of buddha-nature and perpetually follows defiled conditions, how could one attain purity? The analysis above belongs entirely to a provisional phase of the teaching; one must not rigidly cling to existence or nonexistence here, becoming confused about expedient means. As the Guang baimen lun says: 'In order to halt perverse views that negate nirvāṇa, it is taught that there truly exist permanence, bliss, self, and purity. One should not rigidly grasp these expedient words. Neither grasping existence nor negating nonexistence—this alone is called liberation through correct wisdom.'