[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) › 69.33.4 # 宗鏡錄 69.33.4 宗鏡錄 69.33.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [69.33.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.4) 用目循歷。 其目周視。 但如鏡中無別分析。 汝識於中。 次第標指。 此是文殊。 此富樓那。 此目犍連。 此須菩提。 此舍利弗。 此識了知。 為生於見。 為生於相。 為生虛空。 為無所因。 突然而出。 阿難。 若汝識性。 生於見中。 如無明暗。 及與色空。 四種必無。 元無汝見。 見性尚無。 從何發識。 若汝識性。 生於相中。 不從見生。 既不見明。 亦不見暗。 明暗不矚。 即無色空。 彼相尚無。 識何所發。 若生於空。 非相非見。 非見無辯。 自不能知明暗色空。 非相滅緣。 見聞覺知無處安立。 處此二非。 空則同無。 有非同物。 縱發汝識。 欲何分別。 若無所因突然而出。 何不日中別識明月。 汝更細詳。 微細詳審。 見託汝睛。 相推前境。 可狀成有。 不相成無。 如是識緣。 因何所出。 識動見澄。 非和非合。 聞聽覺知。 亦復如是。 不應識緣。 無從自出。 若此識心。 本無所從。 當知了別見聞覺知。 圓滿湛然。 性非從所。 兼彼地水火風。 均名七大。 性真圓融。 皆如來藏。 本無生滅。 阿難。 汝心麁浮不悟見聞。 發明。 了知。 本如來藏。 汝應觀此六處識心。 為同為異。 為空為有。 為非同異。 為非空有。 汝元不知。 如來藏中性識明知。 覺明真識。 妙覺湛然。 遍周法界。 含吐十虛寧有方所。 循業發現。 世間無知。 或為因緣。 及自然性。 皆是識心。 分別計度。 但有言說。 都無實義。 釋曰。 此破識大性也。 諦詳佛旨。 本契無生。 但以有情。 唯迷妄識。 以昏擾之性。 起遍計於覺原。 逐雜染之緣。 沈圓成於識海。 眠三界之夢宅。 一覺而塵劫不惺。 造四大之幻身。 生滅而恒沙莫算。 今推此識。 決定無體。 從緣所起。 悉順無生。 四句檢之。 自含妙理。 此識了知為生於見者。 如無明暗色空。 元無見性。 見性尚無。 從何發識。 此破自生也。 為生於相者。 不從見生。 則不見暗明。 明暗不矚。 即無色空。 彼相尚無。 識何所發。 此破他生也。 既不得自見之性。 又不得他相之觀。 自他既虛。 即無和合。 所以推云。 見託汝睛。 相推前境。 可狀成有。 不相成無。 如是識緣。 因何所出。 識動見澄。 非和非合。 聞聽覺知。 亦復如是。 以動靜相乖。 事非和合。 此破共生也。 為生虛空。 為無所因突然而出者。 若生於空。 非相非見。 縱發汝識。 欲何分別。 若無所因突然而出。 何不日中別識明月。 日屬朝陽。 月含陰魄。 時候晷刻。 今古不移。 各有所因。 無因非有。 此破無因生也。 四句纔空。 百非俱殄。 則妄計所執。 內因外緣。 心和境合。 無因自然等。 妄想情塵。 皆無實義。 狂華之影跡俱虛。 不真何待。 戲論之名言頓息。 意解全消。 虛空之性既融。 六大之體何有。 以地大無性。 四輪所成。 水大無性。 凝流不定。 火大無性。 寄於諸緣。 風大無性。 附物彰動。 空大無性。 對色得名。 見性從緣。 和合而有。 識性無體。 如幻即虛。 且如火大無性者。 如首楞嚴經云。 性火真空者。 古釋云。 性是本覺性。 火。 是本覺火。 皆是眾生心變。 如第六識心熱。 遍身即狹。 若第八識中變起。 即遍同法界。 悟法界性。 皆是我心中所變之火。 如西京崇慧法師。 於大曆四年。 在京與道士鬪。 能入火不燒。 是求觀音之力。 何況自證。 證。 得已後。 入地獄。 中皆不被燒。 今世間火。 隨。 處發現。 應眾生業力。 多少隨意。 如龍鬪。 亦起火燒林藪。 乃至雲中霹靂火。 如人欲心熾盛。 火燒天祠。 皆從心火起。 由心動搖。 故有火起。 但心不動。 即不被燒。 > \[When\] you look around with your eyes, their gaze encompasses everything, yet like reflections in a mirror, it makes no separate analysis. Your consciousness in their midst successively marks and designates: 'This is Mañjuśrī; this is Pūrṇa; this is Maudgalyāyana; this is Subhūti; this is Śāriputra.' Does this cognizing consciousness arise from seeing? Does it arise from appearances? Does it arise from empty space? Or does it emerge abruptly without any cause? Ānanda, if the nature of your consciousness were to arise from seeing: if there were no light or dark, nor form or void, these four definitely being absent, there would originally be no seeing of yours. When even the nature of seeing does not exist, from what could consciousness arise? If the nature of your consciousness were to arise from appearances and not from seeing, then since you would see neither light nor dark, and light and dark were not observed, there would be no form or void. When those appearances do not even exist, from what could consciousness arise? If it arose from empty space, it would be neither appearance nor seeing. Being not seeing, it would lack discernment and naturally could not know light, dark, form, or void; being not appearance, conditions would be extinguished, and seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing would have nowhere to be established. Placed between these two negatives, if it were void, it would be identical to nothingness; if it were existent, it would not be the same as physical things. Even if your consciousness were to arise, what would it seek to discern? If it emerged abruptly without any cause, why do you not distinguish the bright moon at midday? Examine this even more minutely; scrutinize it subtly and carefully. Seeing relies on your pupils; appearances are referred to the objective realm before you. What can be given shape becomes existent; what lacks shape becomes non-existent. From what do such conditions for consciousness arise? Consciousness is active while seeing is still; they are neither blended nor combined. Hearing, listening, feeling, and knowing are also like this. The conditions for consciousness cannot arise of themselves from nowhere. If this conscious mind originally comes from nowhere, you should know that the discriminating seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing are fully perfect and serene, their nature having no source of origin. Together with earth, water, fire, and wind, they are collectively called the seven elements. Their natures are truly harmonious and merged, all being the tathāgatagarbha, fundamentally without arising or ceasing. Ānanda, your mind is coarse and superficial, and fails to realize that the manifests and cognitions of seeing and hearing are fundamentally the tathāgatagarbha. You should observe this conscious mind of the six places: is it identical or different? Is it empty or existent? Is it neither identical nor different? Is it neither empty nor existent? Originally, you did not know that within the tathāgatagarbha, the nature of consciousness is luminous knowing, and the luminosity of awakening is the true consciousness, wonderfully awake, tranquil, and serene, completely pervading the dharmadhātu, containing and emitting the ten directions of emptiness—how could it have a fixed location? It manifests according to karma. Worldly people in their ignorance mistake it for causes and conditions or a spontaneous nature; these are all the discriminations and reckonings of the conscious mind. They are mere words, completely devoid of real meaning.' Explanation: This refutes the nature of the consciousness element. Carefully examining the Buddha's intent, it fundamentally accords with the unarisen. But because sentient beings are solely deluded by false consciousness, with their turbid and agitated nature they give rise to parikalpita (imaginative construction) within the source of awakening, follow defiled conditions, and submerge the pariniṣpanna (consummated nature) in the sea of consciousness. Asleep in the dream-house of the three realms, through a single awakening they still do not sober up through dust-eons. Forming phantom bodies of the four great elements, their arising and ceasing cannot be counted even by the sands of the Ganges. Now, examining this consciousness, it decidedly has no substance. Arising from conditions, all accords with the unarisen. When investigated through the four propositions, it naturally contains a subtle principle. 'Does this cognizing consciousness arise from seeing?' If there were no light, dark, form, or void, there would originally be no nature of seeing. When even the nature of seeing does not exist, from what could consciousness arise? This refutes arising from self. 'Does it arise from appearances?' If it did not arise from seeing, then it would not see dark or light. When light and dark are not observed, there is no form or void. When those appearances do not even exist, from what could consciousness arise? This refutes arising from other. Having obtained neither the nature of seeing oneself nor the contemplation of other appearances, self and other being unreal, there is no combination. Therefore it examines: 'Seeing relies on your pupils; appearances are referred to the objective realm before you. What can be given shape becomes existent; what lacks shape becomes non-existent. From what do such conditions for consciousness arise? Consciousness is active while seeing is still; they are neither blended nor combined. Hearing, listening, feeling, and knowing are also like this.' Because the active and the still conflict with each other, functionally they cannot combine. This refutes arising from both. 'Does it arise from empty space? Or does it emerge abruptly without any cause?' If it arose from empty space, it would be neither appearance nor seeing; even if your consciousness were to arise, what would it seek to discern? If it emerged abruptly without any cause, why do you not distinguish the bright moon at midday? The sun belongs to the morning light; the moon holds the yin spirit. Their times, hours, and moments have not shifted from past to present; each has its cause. Without a cause, nothing exists. This refutes uncaused arising. As soon as the four propositions are emptied, all hundred negations are completely eliminated. Then all clinging to false reckonings—internal causes and external conditions, the blending of mind and matching of realm, uncaused spontaneity, and so forth—these dust-like passions of delusion are all devoid of real meaning. The traces and shadows of mad flowers are entirely unreal; why wait for what is untrue? The words and expressions of conceptual proliferation suddenly cease, and intellectual understanding completely dissolves. Since the nature of empty space is merged, how could the substance of the six elements exist? For the earth element has no self-nature, being formed of the four disks; the water element has no self-nature, congealing and flowing without fixity; the fire element has no self-nature, lodging in various conditions; the wind element has no self-nature, displaying motion by adhering to things; the space element has no self-nature, deriving its name in contrast to form; the nature of seeing depends on conditions, existing through harmony and combination; and the nature of consciousness has no substance, being unreal just like a phantom. Furthermore, as for the fire element having no self-nature: as the Śūraṅgamasūtra says, 'The nature of fire is true emptiness.' An ancient commentary explains: 'Nature' is the nature of original awakening; 'fire' is the fire of original awakening. Both are transformations of sentient beings' minds. For example, when the mind of the sixth consciousness grows hot, the entire body becomes cramped; if it is transformed and arisen from within the eighth consciousness, it pervades and is identical to the dharmadhātu. Awakening to the nature of the dharmadhātu, all is fire transformed within my own mind. For instance, Dharma Master Chonghui of the Western Capital, during the fourth year of the Dali era, contended with Daoists in the capital and was able to enter fire without being burned; this was through seeking the power of Avalokiteśvara. How much more so for one's own realization! After attaining realization, entering even into the hells, one will not be burned. Present worldly fire manifests according to place, responding to the karma of sentient beings, greater or lesser as intended. For example, when dragons fight, they also generate fire that burns forests and marshes, down to the lightning-fire in the clouds. And when a person's lustful mind flares up, fire burns celestial shrines. All arise from the fire of the mind. Because the mind is agitated, fire arises; if only the mind does not move, one will not be burned. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 69.33.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.3) - [Next: 69.33.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.5) - [Up: 69.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.69.33.4) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.4) · Pramāṇa