[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 # 宗鏡錄 69.33 宗鏡錄 69.33 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [69.33.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.1) 答。 上約世諦分別。 似有非真。 但立空名。 終無實體。 所以首楞嚴經。 微細推檢。 陰入界處。 一一皆空。 非因非緣。 非自然性。 非因。 即是不自生。 非緣。 即是不他生。 既無自他二法。 無法和合。 即是不共生。 非自然性。 即是非無因生。 四句無生。 陰從何有。 又當觀此一念心。 不從根塵離合而生。 若言合生者。 譬如鏡面。 各有像故。 合生應有兩像。 若各無像。 合不應生。 若鏡面合為一而生像者。 今實不合。 合則無像。 若鏡面離故生像者。 各在一方。 則應有像。 今實不爾。 根塵離合。 亦復如是。 當知即念無念。 自他起處俱空。 即生無生。 離合推之無體。 破五陰文云。 佛告阿難。 譬如有人。 取頻伽瓶。 塞其兩孔。 滿中擎空。 千里遠行。 用餉他國。 識陰當知。 亦復如是。 阿難。 如是虛空。 非彼方來。 非此方入。 如是阿難。 若彼方來。 則本瓶中。 既貯空去。 於本瓶地。 應少虛空。 若此方入。 開孔倒瓶。 應見空出。 是故當知。 識陰虛妄。 本非因緣。 非自然性。 釋曰。 此破識陰也。 瓶喻於身。 空喻於識。 若執有識隨身往來者。 此處識陰滅。 往彼處生時。 如將此方虛空遠餉他國。 若此陰實滅。 如於本瓶地應少虛空。 若彼陰復生。 如開孔倒瓶應見空出。 故知虛空不動。 識無去來。 一陰既虛。 四陰皆爾。 大涅槃經云。 若人捨命之時。 然心意識即生善道。 而是心法。 實無去來。 亦無所至。 直是前後。 相似相續。 相貌不異。 如是之言。 即是如來祕密之教。 又佛告阿闍世王。 如汝所言。 先王無辜。 橫加逆害者。 何者是父。 但於假名眾生五陰。 妄生父想。 於十二入十八界中。 何者是父。 若色是父。 四陰應非。 若四陰是父。 色亦應非。 若色非色合為父者。 無有是處。 何以故。 色與非色。 性無合故。 大王。 凡夫眾生。 於是色陰。 妄生父想。 如是色陰。 亦不可害。 乃至阿闍世王。 即白佛言。 世尊。 我今始知色是無常。 乃至識是無常。 我本若能如是知者。 則不作罪。 持世經云。 佛言。 是諸菩薩如實觀時。 知識陰虛妄不實。 從本已來。 常不生相。 知非陰是識陰。 像陰是識陰。 幻陰是識陰。 譬如幻所化人。 識不在內。 亦不在外。 不在中間。 識性亦如是。 如幻性虛妄緣生。 從憶想分別起。 無有實事。 如機關木人。 識亦如是。 從顛倒起。 虛妄因緣和合而有。 幻人豈有心識。 木像誰稱覺知。 比妄識而況同。 從幻緣而似有。 大智度論云。 日初出時。 見城門樓櫓宮殿。 行人出入。 日轉高轉滅。 但可眼見。 而無有實。 是名乾闥婆城。 有人初不見乾闥婆城。 晨朝東向見之。 意謂實樂。 疾行趣之。 轉近轉失。 日高轉滅。 飢渴悶極。 見熱氣如野馬。 謂之為水。 疾走趣之。 轉近轉滅。 疲極困厄。 至窮山狹谷中。 大喚啼哭。 聞有響應。 謂有居民。 求之疲極。 而無所見。 思惟自悟。 渴願心息。 無智人。 亦如是。 空陰界入中。 見吾我及諸法。 婬瞋心著。 四方狂走。 求樂自滿。 顛倒欺誑。 窮極懊惱。 若以智慧知無我無實法者。 是時顛倒願息。 故知色陰如勞目睛。 忽現空華之相。 受陰如手摩觸。 妄生冷熱之緣。 想陰如人說酸梅。 口中自然水出。 行陰如水上波浪。 觀之似有奔流。 識陰如瓶貯虛空。 持之用餉他國。 斯則非內非外。 不即不離。 和合既不成。 自然亦非有。 若此況是實。 則五陰不虛。 既並世相而非真。 審知陰入而無體。 唯是性空法界。 如來藏心。 無始無終。 平等顯現。 是以首楞嚴經云。 佛告阿難。 是故如來。 與汝發明。 > Answer: The above was an analysis made according to conventional truth; they seem to exist, yet are not real, merely establishing empty names, ultimately lacking actual substance. For this reason, the Śūraṅgamasūtra subtly investigates and examines them: the aggregates, sense fields, elements, and bases are each and every one empty, neither due to causes nor due to conditions, nor of a naturalistic nature (svabhāva). "Neither due to causes" means not arising from self. "Nor due to conditions" means not arising from other. Since there are no two phenomena of self and other, with no phenomena to combine, this is not arising from both. "Nor of a naturalistic nature" means not arising without cause. Since there is no arising according to the four lemmas, from where could the aggregates exist? Furthermore, one should observe that this one thought of mind does not arise from the separation or union of sense faculty and sense dust. If one says it arises from union: for example, the mirror and the face each having an image, their union in arising should produce two images. If each lacks an image, then in union none should arise. If the mirror and face unite into one to produce the image: now they do not actually unite, and if united there would be no image. If the image arises because mirror and face are separated: each being in a separate location, there should then be an image. Now in fact it is not so. The separation and union of sense faculties and sense dust are also like this. One should know that precisely in thought there is no thought, the places where self and other arise are both empty; precisely in arising there is no arising, and when investigated through separation and union, there is no substance. The passage refuting the five aggregates states: "The Buddha told Ānanda: 'Suppose a person takes a kalaviṅka jar, stops up its two holes, and holding space inside it walks a thousand li to present it to another country. One should know that the aggregate of consciousness is also like this. Ānanda, such empty space did not come from that place, nor did it enter here. So, Ānanda, if it came from that place, then since empty space was stored in the original jar and taken away, there should be less space at the location of the original jar. If it entered here, upon opening the holes and inverting the jar, one should see space coming out. Therefore, you should know that the aggregate of consciousness is false and illusory, originally neither due to causes and conditions nor of a naturalistic nature.'" Explanation: This refutes the aggregate of consciousness. The jar is a metaphor for the body; space is a metaphor for consciousness. If one clings to there being a consciousness that comes and goes along with the body: when the aggregate of consciousness here ceases and goes to be born in that place, it would be like carrying empty space from here to present it to another country. If this aggregate actually ceased, it would be like there being less empty space at the location of the original jar; if that aggregate were born again, it would be like opening the holes and inverting the jar where one should see space coming out. Hence we know that empty space is unmoving, and consciousness has no going or coming. Since one aggregate is unreal, the four aggregates are also like this. The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra states: "When a person is about to cast off life, yet their mind, manas, and consciousness immediately arise in a good destiny, this mental phenomenon actually has no going or coming, nor any place to which it arrives. It is simply that preceding and following resemble each other in succession, their appearances not differing. Such words are the secret teaching of the Tathāgata." Furthermore, the Buddha said to King Ajātaśatru: "As to what you have said, that you unjustly harmed your innocent former king: which one was your father? It was merely that regarding the five aggregates of conventionally designated sentient beings, you falsely generated the thought of 'father'. Among the twelve sense bases and eighteen elements, which one is the father? If form is the father, the four aggregates should not be; if the four aggregates are the father, form should also not be. If form and non-form combined are the father, this makes no sense. Why? Because the natures of form and non-form do not unite. Great King, ordinary sentient beings falsely generate the thought of 'father' with respect to this aggregate of form. Such an aggregate of form cannot be harmed either." Up to: King Ajātaśatru then addressed the Buddha, saying: "World-Honoured One, only now do I know that form is impermanent, up to consciousness is impermanent. If I had originally been able to know in this way, I would not have committed the crime." The Lokadharaparipṛcchāsūtra states: "The Buddha said: When these bodhisattvas observe in accordance with reality, they know that the aggregate of consciousness is false and unreal, from the beginningless past constantly having the mark of non-arising. They know that the non-aggregate is the aggregate of consciousness; the image aggregate is the aggregate of consciousness; the illusory aggregate is the aggregate of consciousness. For example, regarding an illusory conjured person, their consciousness is not within, nor without, nor in between; the nature of consciousness is also like this. Like the illusory nature, it is false and conditionally arisen, arising from conceptualisation and discrimination, lacking any actual reality. Like a mechanical wooden figure, consciousness is also like this: arising from inversion, it exists through the combination of false causes and conditions. How could an illusory person possess mental consciousness? Who would claim that a wooden statue has sentience? Compared to false consciousness, the analogy is identical: derived from illusory conditions, it seems to exist." The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: "When the sun first rises, one sees city gates, watchtowers, and palaces, with travellers going in and out. As the sun rises higher, they gradually vanish; they can only be seen with the eye, but have no reality. This is called a gandharvanagara. Suppose there is someone who has never seen a gandharvanagara before, and seeing it in the morning towards the east, thinks it to be a real pleasure and rushes towards it. As he gets closer it gradually disappears, and as the sun rises higher it vanishes. Parched with extreme thirst, he sees the shimmering heat-shimmer like wild horses and takes it to be water, running swiftly toward it. As he gets closer it vanishes. Exhausted and in dire distress, he reaches a remote mountain and narrow valley; shouting and weeping aloud, he hears an echo and thinks there are inhabitants. Seeking them to utter exhaustion, he sees nothing. Reflecting and awakening by himself, his thirsty and yearning mind ceases. A person without wisdom is also like this: in the empty aggregates, elements, and sense fields, he sees a self, 'mine', and various phenomena. Clinging with a mind of lust and anger, he runs wildly in the four directions, seeking pleasure to satisfy himself; deceived and bewildered by inverted views, he falls into extreme anguish. If by means of wisdom he knows that there is no self and no real phenomena, at that time his inverted yearnings cease." Therefore, one knows that the aggregate of form is like an eye strained by fatigue suddenly displaying the appearance of space flowers; the aggregate of sensation is like the rubbing of hands falsely producing the condition of cold or heat; the aggregate of perception is like someone mentioning sour plums and saliva naturally flowing in the mouth; the aggregate of conditioned factors is like waves upon the water which, when viewed, seem to rush along; the aggregate of consciousness is like a jar storing empty space, carried to present it to another country. These, then, are neither internal nor external, neither identical nor separate. Since combination is not established, neither does a naturalistic existence exist. If these analogies were real, then the five aggregates would not be unreal. Since both are worldly characteristics and not real, we clearly know that the aggregates and sense fields are without substance. They are merely the dharmadhātu of empty nature, the mind of the tathāgatagarbha, without beginning and without end, equally manifest. Hence the Śūraṅgamasūtra states: "The Buddha told Ānanda: 'Therefore the Tathāgata now explains it to you.'" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [69.33.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.2) 五陰本因。 同是妄想。 汝體先因父母想生。 汝心非想。 則不能來想中傳命。 如我先言。 心想酸味。 口中涎生。 心想登高。 足心酸起。 懸崖不有。 酸物未來。 汝體必非虛妄通倫。 口水如何因談酸出。 是故當知。 汝現色身。 名為堅固第一妄想。 即此所說。 臨高想心。 能令汝形。 真受酸澁。 由因受生。 能動色體。 汝今現前順益違損。 二現驅馳。 名為虛明。 第二妄想。 由汝念慮。 使汝色身。 身非念倫。 汝身何因。 隨念所使。 種種取像。 心生形取。 與念相應。 寤即想心。 寐為諸夢。 則汝想念。 搖動妄情。 名為融通。 第三妄想。 化理不住。 運運密移。 甲長髮生。 氣消容皺。 日夜相代。 曾無覺悟。 阿難。 此若非汝。 云何體遷。 如必是真。 汝何無覺。 則汝諸行。 念念不停。 名為幽隱。 第四妄想。 又汝精明。 湛不搖處。 名恒常者。 於身不出見聞覺知。 若實精真。 不容習。 妄。 何因汝等。 曾於昔年。 覩一奇物。 經歷年歲。 憶忘俱無。 於後忽然覆覩前異。 記憶宛然。 曾不遺失。 則此精了。 湛不搖中。 念念受熏。 有何籌算。 阿難當知。 此湛非真。 如急流水。 望如恬靜。 流急不見。 非是無流。 若非想元寧受想習。 非汝六根互用合開。 此之妄想無時得滅。 故汝現在見聞覺知。 中。 串習幾。 則湛了內。 罔象虛無。 第五顛倒。 細微精想。 阿難。 是五受陰。 五妄想成。 汝今欲知因界淺深。 唯色與空。 是色邊際。 唯觸及離。 是受邊際。 唯記與忘。 是想邊際。 唯滅與生。 是行邊際。 湛入合湛。 歸識邊際。 此五陰元。 重疊生起。 生因識有。 滅從色除。 理則頓悟。 承悟併消。 事非頓除非次第盡。 是以若見五陰有。 即眾生世間。 若了五陰空。 即真諦世間。 若達五陰實相。 即中道第一義正智世間。 難此五陰三世間外。 更無一法能建能立。 為。 俗為真。 一代時教所詮。 除此別無方便。 悟此成佛。 迷此為凡。 唯是一心。 開合無異。 何者。 以一陰名色。 四陰名心。 從心所生。 故稱為色。 心是所依。 色是能依。 攝能歸所。 但是一心。 本末元同。 體用常合。 宗鏡大旨。 於此絕言。 破六入文云。 佛告阿難。 譬如有人。 勞倦則眠。 睡熟便寤。 覽塵斯憶。 失憶為忘。 是其顛倒生住異滅。 吸習中歸。 不相逾越。 稱意知根。 兼意與勞。 同是菩提瞪發勞相。 因于生滅二種妄塵。 集知居中。 吸撮內塵。 見聞逆流。 流不及地。 名覺知性。 此覺知性。 離彼寤寐生滅二塵。 畢竟無體。 如是阿難。 當知如是覺知之根。 非寤寐來。 非生滅有。 不於根出。 亦非空生。 何以故。 若從寤來。 寐即隨滅。 將何為寐。 必生時有。 滅即同無。 令誰受滅。 若從滅有。 生即滅無。 孰知生者。 若從根出。 寤寐二相。 隨身開合。 離斯二體。 此覺知者。 同於空華。 畢竟無性。 若從空生。 自是空知。 何關汝入。 是故當知。 意入虛妄。 本非因緣。 非自然性。 釋曰。 此破意入也。 疏云。 覽塵斯憶者。 憶即是生。 失憶為忘者。 忘即是滅。 失憶不離自心。 妄謂為境。 故云是其顛倒生住異滅。 吸習中歸不相逾越者。 吸習生住異滅。 歸識心內。 故云中歸。 前念滅。 後念生。 無雜亂失。 故云不相逾越。 故經云。 心性生滅。 猶如猿猴。 當知見境生滅者。 即是自心生滅相故。 故云心生種種法生。 吸撮內塵。 見聞逆流。 流不及地。 名覺知性者。 謂眼耳取外塵境。 剎那流入意地。 從外入內。 名為逆流。 眼耳唯緣現境。 至第二念緣不及故。 故云流不及地。 唯意根獨取。 > "The fundamental cause of the five aggregates is equally deluded conception. Your body was first produced through the conception of your parents; if your mind were not conceived, it could not come to transmit life within conception. As I have said before: when the mind conceives of a sour taste, saliva is produced in the mouth; when the mind conceives of ascending a height, the soles of the feet experience a tingling ache. The precipitous cliff is not there, and the sour object has not arrived: if your physical body were not of the same category as deluded unreality, how could saliva come forth because of talking about sourness? Therefore you should know that your present form-body is named the first deluded conception, which is solidity. As was just said, the mind conceiving of overlooking a height can make your form genuinely experience a tingling ache; because feeling arises, it can move the body of form. Your present favorable benefit and adverse harm, these two appearances driving each other, are named the second deluded conception, which is illusory clarity. Because of your thoughts and reflections, you direct your physical body. The body is not of the same category as thought; why then does your body follow what thought directs? Taking various images, the mind arises and the form grasps them, corresponding with thought: waking, it is the conceiving mind; sleeping, it becomes dreams. Thus your conceiving thoughts perturb deluded sentiments; this is named the third deluded conception, which is interpenetration. The principle of transformation does not abide; it imperceptibly shifts at every moment: nails grow and hair emerges, energy wanes and wrinkles appear on the face; day and night they replace each other, and you are never aware of it. Ānanda! If this were not you, why would your substance alter? If it were certainly your real self, why are you unaware of it? Thus your various formations, never stopping from moment to moment, are named the fourth deluded conception, which is latent obscurity. Furthermore, the essential clarity of yours, at the place where it is serene and unmoving, is called the permanent; within the body it does not go beyond seeing, hearing, sensing, and knowing. If it were truly pure and real, it would not admit habituated delusion. Why did you once in past years see a strange object, and as years passed by, there was neither remembering nor forgetting, yet afterwards, when suddenly beholding that past oddity again, the memory was clear and vivid, never having been lost? Then within this essential clarity, serene and unmoving, it is perfumed moment to moment—how could it be calculated? Ānanda, you should know that this serenity is not real; it is like a rushing stream of water that looks tranquil from afar, but because the flow is so rapid, it is not seen, yet it is not that there is no flow. If it were not the source of conception, how could it receive habituated conceiving? Unless your six faculties mutually function, joining and opening, this deluded conception will never be extinguished. Therefore within your present seeing, hearing, sensing, and knowing, there are subtle habituations; within the serene clarity, they are like shadowy non-entities, the fifth inverted, subtle essential conception. Ānanda, these five aggregates of clinging are accomplished by the five deluded conceptions. If you now wish to know the shallowness and depth of their causal boundaries: form and emptiness alone are the boundary of form; contact and separation alone are the boundary of feeling; remembering and forgetting alone are the boundary of conception; cessation and arising alone are the boundary of formations; serenity entering and merging into serenity returns to the boundary of consciousness. The sources of these five aggregates arise in overlapping layers: arising is caused by the existence of consciousness, while cessation is eliminated beginning with form. In principle, there is sudden awakening, and following awakening they simultaneously vanish; in phenomena, they are not suddenly eliminated, but exhausted step by step." Therefore, if one sees the five aggregates as existing, that is the world of sentient beings. If one realizes that the five aggregates are empty, that is the world of the truth of reality. If one reaches the true mark of the five aggregates, that is the world of correct wisdom of the middle way, the primary meaning. Apart from these three worlds of the five aggregates, there is not a single dharma that can be posited or established as conventional or as real; what is explained throughout the teachings of an entire lifetime offers no other skillful means than this. Awakened to this, one becomes a Buddha; deluded about this, one is an ordinary being. It is only the one mind; its expansion and contraction are not different. Why? Because one aggregate is named form, and four aggregates are named mind. Arising from the mind, it is therefore called form. Mind is the support; form is that which is supported. When that which is supported is gathered back to the support, there is only the one mind. Root and branch are fundamentally identical; substance and function are eternally joined. The great purport of the Mirror of the Source brings an end to words here. In refuting the six sense bases, the text states: "The Buddha told Ānanda, 'For example, when a person is weary, they sleep; having slept soundly, they then wake. Observing sense objects, they remember; losing memory, they forget. These are the inverted arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing, which are inhaled and habituated, returning inside, not transgressing one another; this is called the mental sense faculty. Both this mind and the weariness are equally manifestations of fatigue from staring bodhi. Based on the two kinds of deluded sense objects of arising and ceasing, gathered knowing dwells within, grasping inner sense objects; seeing and hearing flow in reverse, but the flow does not reach the ground; this is called the nature of sensing and knowing. This nature of sensing and knowing, apart from these two objects of waking and sleeping, arising and ceasing, has ultimately no substance. Thus, Ānanda, you should know that such a faculty of sensing and knowing does not come from waking or sleeping, does not exist from arising or ceasing, does not issue from the sense faculty, and is not produced from emptiness. Why? If it came from waking, sleep would immediately cease along with it—what would be used for sleeping? If it necessarily existed at the time of arising, ceasing would be identical to nonexistence—who would be made to experience ceasing? If it existed from ceasing, upon arising it would be ceased and nonexistent—who would know arising? If it issued from the sense faculty, the two marks of waking and sleeping open and close according to the body; apart from these two substances, this sensing and knowing is identical to flowers in the sky, ultimately devoid of nature. If it were produced from emptiness, it would naturally be the knowing of emptiness; what would it have to do with your sense base? Therefore you should know that the mental sense base is delusive and unreal; it is fundamentally neither causes and conditions nor a spontaneous nature.'" Explanation: This refutes the mental sense base. The commentary says: "'Observing sense objects, they remember'—remembering is arising. 'Losing memory, they forget'—forgetting is ceasing. Losing and remembering are not separate from one's own mind, yet one deludedly considers them to be external objects. Therefore it says, 'These are the inverted arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing.' 'Inhaled and habituated, returning inside, not transgressing one another' means that arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing are inhaled and habituated, returning within the conscious mind, hence 'returning inside.' The preceding thought ceases and the subsequent thought arises without disorder or confusion, hence 'not transgressing one another.' Thus the sūtra says: 'The nature of mind arises and ceases just like an ape.' One should know that seeing objects arise and cease is precisely the mark of the arising and ceasing of one's own mind. Therefore it is said, 'When the mind arises, various dharmas arise.' 'Grasping inner sense objects; seeing and hearing flow in reverse, but the flow does not reach the ground; this is called the nature of sensing and knowing' means that the eyes and ears grasp external sense objects, which instantly flow into the ground of the mind; coming from the outside to the inside is called 'flowing in reverse.' The eyes and ears only take present objects as conditions; by the second moment, their conditioning cannot reach them, hence 'the flow does not reach the ground'; the mental sense faculty alone grasps them." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [69.33.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.3) 名覺知性。 此覺知性。 因前塵起。 畢竟無體。 以妄知強覺。 成內眾生。 因滅想凝空。 為外國土。 經云。 想澄成國土。 知覺乃眾生。 迷湛寂一心。 作內六入。 更無別體。 唯是真空。 意入既虛。 前眼等五入亦爾。 破十二處文云。 佛告阿難。 汝常意中。 所緣善惡無記三性。 生成法。 則此法為復即心所生。 為當離心別有方所。 阿難。 若即心者。 法則非塵。 非心所緣。 云何成處。 若離於心別有方所。 則法自性。 為知非知。 知則名心。 異汝非塵。 同他心量。 即汝即心。 云何汝心。 更二於汝。 若非知者。 此塵既非色聲香味。 離合冷煖。 及虛空相。 當知何在。 今於色空。 都無表示。 不應人間。 更有空外。 心非所緣。 處從誰立。 是故當知。 法則與心。 俱無處所。 則意與法。 二俱虛妄。 本非因緣。 非自然性。 釋曰。 此破意法二處也。 夫分能標所構畫成持。 立境立心。 皆是意法。 先破其分別惑本。 則前五根十處自傾。 法處是所緣。 意處是能緣。 只如法處。 為復即心不即心。 若即心者。 法則全心。 心不見心。 云何成。 處若離於心別有。 方所。 則法之自性。 為有知無知。 若有知。 則名心。 不成於法。 若無知。 則不屬自心。 同他心量。 以知二處。 俱無自體。 則善惡無記三性等法。 四種意根等心。 皆同一性。 無有能緣所緣之異。 心境皆空。 故論云。 凡所分別。 皆分別自心。 心不見心。 無相可得。 則無相理現。 有作情亡。 因緣自然。 名義俱絕。 例十處色心。 亦復如是。 破十八界文云。 佛告阿難。 汝所明意法為緣。 生於意識。 此識為復因意所生。 以意為界。 因法所生。 以法為界。 阿難。 若因意生。 於汝意中。 必有所思。 發明汝意。 若無前法。 意無所生。 離緣無形。 識將何用。 又汝識心。 與諸思量。 兼了別性。 為同為異。 同意即意。 云何所生。 異意不同。 應無所識。 若無所識。 云何意生。 若有所識。 云何識意。 唯同與異。 二性無成。 界云何立。 若因法生。 世間諸法。 不離五塵。 汝觀色法及諸聲法。 香。 法味法及與觸法。 相狀分明。 以對五根。 非意所攝。 汝識決定依於法生。 汝今諦觀。 法法何狀。 若離色空。 動靜。 通塞。 合離。 生滅。 越此諸相。 終無所得。 生則色空。 諸法等生。 滅則色空。 諸法等滅。 所因既無。 因生有識。 作何形相。 相狀不有。 界云何生。 是故當知。 意法為緣。 生意識界。 三處都無。 則意與法。 及意界三。 本非因緣。 非自然性。 釋曰。 此破意識界也。 如十八界中。 皆因意識建立。 根本立處尚空。 所生枝末何有。 既無處所可得。 又無界分可憑。 事誑理。 虛情危執劣。 惡見之根株盡拔。 妄識之巢穴齊傾。 獨朗真心。 圓周法界。 安國云。 謂色等五塵界。 是限量境。 五識親證。 都無塵相。 如來藏中頓現身器無塵相。 六七妄想。 謂有我法。 想所現相。 是分別變。 分別變相。 但可為境。 而無實用。 如日發焰帶微塵而共紅。 非實紅也。 如水澄清。 含輕雲而俱綠。 非實綠也。 若了藏性。 則知塵境而為妄也。 故知諸法但從分別而生。 分別既空。 名相何有。 夫人空易了。 法我難除。 不達法逐緣生。 執有自體。 如攝論云。 若執法體是有。 名法我執。 如二乘人。 依麁分別事識修行。 但了法中無我。 不知法體全空。 聞諸法空。 生大怖畏。 是知法空是本。 人空是末。 夜繩未曉。 蛇想寧除。 瞖目猶存。 空華豈滅。 破七大性文云。 佛告阿難。 識性無原。 因於六種根塵妄出。 汝今遍觀此會聖眾。 > is named the nature of awareness and cognition. This nature of awareness and cognition arises due to the anterior dusts \[of sense objects\], and is ultimately without substance. Through false cognition and forced awareness, internal sentient beings are formed; due to the cessation of thought and the condensation of emptiness, external lands are formed. A sūtra says: 'Thoughts settled and clear form lands; knowing and awareness are sentient beings.' Deluded about the serene and tranquil One Mind, \[beings\] construct the internal six sense-entrances; there is no separate substance whatsoever, they are solely true emptiness. Since the entrance of the mind is empty, the preceding five entrances—the eye and so forth—are also like this. In the text refuting the twelve sense-bases, it says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: In your mind, that which is conditioned by the three natures—wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate—generates dharmas. Then are these dharmas produced by being identical to the mind, or do they have a separate location apart from the mind? Ānanda, if they are identical to the mind, then dharmas are not dust \[objects\]; not being what is conditioned by the mind, how could they form a sense-base? If they are apart from the mind and have a separate location, then is the intrinsic nature of dharmas knowing or non-knowing? If it is knowing, it is called mind; being different from you, it is not an object-dust, but is equivalent to the mental capacity of another; being identical to you, it is identical to your mind—how then could your mind be further doubled apart from you? If it is non-knowing, then since this dust is neither form, sound, smell, taste, separation and union, cold and warmth, nor the characteristic of empty space, where should it be known to reside? Now within form and emptiness it has no manifestation at all; it should not be that in the human realm there is yet something outside of emptiness. If it is not what is conditioned by the mind, on what basis is the sense-base established? Therefore you should know that dharmas and the mind both lack a location; thus the mind and dharmas are both false, originally neither causes and conditions nor spontaneous nature.' Explanation: This refutes the two sense-bases of the mind and dharmas. In dividing that which can mark and designating what is constructed, projecting and maintaining, establishing object and establishing mind—all are mind and dharmas. If one first refutes the root of their discriminative delusion, the preceding five sense-faculties and ten sense-bases will naturally collapse. The dharma sense-base is what is conditioned; the mind sense-base is that which conditions. Just take the dharma sense-base: is it identical to the mind, or not identical to the mind? If it is identical to the mind, then dharmas are entirely mind; the mind does not see the mind, so how could it form a sense-base? If it is apart from the mind and has a separate location, then is the intrinsic nature of dharmas with-knowing or without-knowing? If it has knowing, it is called mind and does not form a dharma. If it is without knowing, it does not belong to one's own mind, being equivalent to the mental capacity of another. Since one knows that neither of the two sense-bases has an intrinsic substance, the dharmas of the three natures—wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate—and the minds of the four kinds of mind-faculties, are all of the same nature; there is no distinction between that which conditions and what is conditioned. Mind and object are both empty. Therefore a treatise says: 'All that is discriminated is merely the discrimination of one's own mind; the mind does not see the mind, and no characteristics can be apprehended.' Then the principle of signlessness manifests, the feelings of constructed existence perish, and both the name and meaning of causes, conditions, and spontaneity are utterly extinguished. By extension, the form and mind of the ten sense-bases are also like this. In the text refuting the eighteen dhātus, it says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: As you understand, mind and dharmas serve as conditions to produce the manovijñāna. Is this consciousness produced by cause of the mind, taking the mind as its dhātu, or produced by cause of dharmas, taking dharmas as its dhātu? Ānanda, if it is produced by cause of the mind, in your mind there must be something thought of to bring forth your mind. If there are no preceding dharmas, the mind has nothing from which to arise; apart from conditions it has no form—what would the consciousness use? Furthermore, is your conscious mind, together with the various deliberations and the cognising nature, the same or different? If it is the same as the mind, it is the mind itself—how could it be what is produced? If it is different from the mind and not the same, it should have no consciousness; if it has no consciousness, how could it be produced from the mind? If it has consciousness, how could consciousness be the mind? Only sameness and difference: neither of the two natures is established—how could the dhātu be posited? If it is produced by cause of dharmas, the various worldly dharmas are not separate from the five dusts. You observe the dharmas of form, and the dharmas of sound, smell, taste, and tangibles: their characteristics are distinct and correspond to the five sense-faculties; they are not subsumed by the mind. If your consciousness is definitely produced in reliance on dharmas, you should now contemplate carefully: what is the shape of the dharma-dharmas? If separated from form and emptiness, movement and stillness, permeability and blockage, union and separation, production and cessation, going beyond these various characteristics, nothing whatsoever can be apprehended. When produced, form, emptiness, and all dharmas are equally produced; when ceasing, form, emptiness, and all dharmas equally cease. Since that which is the cause does not exist, when a consciousness is produced by that cause, what shape and characteristic does it have? If characteristics do not exist, how can the dhātu arise? Therefore you should know: mind and dharmas serving as conditions to produce the manovijñāna-dhātu—all three places do not exist. Thus the mind, dharmas, and the mind-dhātu—these three—are originally neither causes and conditions nor spontaneous nature.' Explanation: This refutes the manovijñāna-dhātu. Within the eighteen dhātus, all are established on the basis of the manovijñāna. If the root where they are established is already empty, how could the produced branches exist? Since no location can be found, nor any boundary to rely upon, phenomena deceive and principle is empty; sentiments collapse and attachments weaken. The roots and trunks of evil views are completely uprooted; the nest and den of false consciousness simultaneously collapse. The true mind alone shines brightly, completely pervading the dharmadhātu. Anguo said: 'This means that the dhātus of the five dusts—form and so forth—are objects of direct perception. When the five consciousnesses directly experience them, there are no dust-characteristics at all. In the tathāgatagarbha, the body and the receptacle\[-world\] appear suddenly without dust-characteristics. The sixth and seventh \[consciousnesses\] give rise to false thoughts, supposing that there are self and dharmas; the characteristics manifested by thought are transformations of discrimination. The transformed characteristics of discrimination can only serve as objects, but have no real function. Just as when the sun sends forth rays bearing fine dust particles, they appear red together, but are not truly red; or just as when water is clear and pure, holding thin clouds, it appears green together, but is not truly green. If one realizes the nature of the \[tathāgata\]garbha, one knows that the dust-objects are false.' Therefore we know that all dharmas merely arise from discrimination. Once discrimination is empty, how could names and characteristics exist? Now, the emptiness of persons is easy to comprehend, but the self of dharmas is difficult to eliminate. Failing to understand that dharmas arise following conditions, one clings to their having an intrinsic substance. As the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: 'If one clings to the substance of dharmas as existent, this is called the attachment to the self of dharmas.' For instance, people of the two vehicles practice by relying on the coarse discriminative vastu-prativikalpa-vijñāna; they only comprehend that within dharmas there is no self, but do not know that the substance of dharmas is entirely empty. Hearing that all dharmas are empty, they give rise to great dread. Hence we know that the emptiness of dharmas is the root, and the emptiness of persons is the branch. When the rope in the night is not yet understood, how could the thought of a snake be removed? While the cataracts in the eyes still remain, how could the flowers in the sky vanish? In the text refuting the natures of the seven great elements, it says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: The nature of consciousness has no origin; it falsely issues forth due to the six kinds of sense-faculties and dusts. You now observe all the noble assembly in this gathering.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [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) ### [69.33.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33.5) 譬如人畏時。 非人得其便。 如來得性火。 三界火燒不得。 如來自起智火。 焚得舍利。 其火猛盛。 諸大弟子將水求不得。 乃至龍王求亦不得。 唯天帝釋云。 我本願力始求得。 雖有性火而不自燒。 如刀能割。 不自割。 如眼能看。 不自看。 如火大性唯心。 七大性亦如是。 隨心俱遍法界。 法界本遍。 由執心故不能遍。 如三界中。 三乘天眼。 俱不能遍。 唯如來無執。 性合真空。 故能周遍。 如般若經中。 佛自言。 我以無執故。 得真金身。 圓光常現。 火燒天祠者。 昔有漁師。 河上見公主過。 因生染心。 思求不得。 身漸羸疾。 其母遂問病因。 與作方便。 日送鯉魚一頭。 公主怪問。 母直陳其事。 遂許云。 我因拜天祠。 即潛相見。 子知便喜。 公主後來。 正見漁人睡熟。 撼之不覺。 便繫帛子在手上。 公主去後。 漁人睡覺。 見手上帛子。 知公主來。 心生恨憶。 心中欲火內燒。 自身爛壞。 并燒天祠。 房室淨盡。 所以三界有法。 識外無文。 皆從四大內外成。 盡是一心虛妄變。 何者。 最初因不覺。 故有業識。 從業識因動。 故有轉識。 從轉識起見。 故有現識。 因見分。 成相分。 能所纔分。 心境頓現。 古鈔釋首楞嚴經云。 明妄非他。 覺明為咎者。 六識取塵。 由業識發起。 後有第七識執第八識中明。 變起外四大。 四大引起六根塵。 六根塵引起六識。 六識依六根塵。 因外有色。 內引眼根等。 明妄非他者。 其妄最初。 因自心動有風。 因執有金。 因愛有水。 因求有火。 皆是自心變起四大。 還自分別結業受生。 故非他累。 覺明為咎者。 由強覺了本體明為咎。 則無知覺明。 有知明覺。 如人見不淨。 便生厭心。 由分別故。 以猪狗見。 便生淨想。 皆由強覺無明。 但無分別妄見。 唯見法性淨土。 是知內外四大。 地水火風。 念念發現。 所以經云。 或各各發明。 若俱發明。 各各發明者。 汝見圓明。 知心欲取。 失却本明性空。 思想搖動。 心生風輪。 情愛相續。 性感水輪。 執心熾盛。 金輪則現。 求心若欲火輪方興。 若俱發明。 初起強覺。 四大俱現。 如人恨憶。 瞋則火生。 身心動轉。 以況於風。 目中淚盈。 而表於水。 面發赤相。 則表於地。 是以內外四大。 元是我心之性。 以為自性。 又自第八識。 變起根身器內外四大之相分。 為自相。 又因妄念而起強覺而知。 所以萬像森蘿欝然顯現。 若能窮因體本。 皆是自心之性。 自心之相。 於中妍醜憎愛。 全是意識計度分別而成。 既識根由。 須存正智。 但除強覺。 一念不生。 自然心境俱空。 前後際斷。 故知七大之性。 性真圓融。 一一大俱遍法界。 皆是一體。 如七顆氷。 將火鎔為一水。 亦如因陀羅網同而不同。 如水與氷。 異而不異。 乃至五陰。 六入。 十二處。 十八界等。 皆滿法界。 一一微塵。 亦滿法界。 一一毛孔。 亦遍法界。 一一身心亦遍。 皆如來藏。 如香水海中。 常說一切法。 為諸菩薩。 不見菩薩相。 不見邪師相。 不見生住異滅相。 所以盡合真空。 俱遍實際。 如說龜毛兔角焰水乾城。 但有言說之名。 且無實事。 例凡夫界。 中所有見聞陰入之根。 名色之境。 亦但有其名。 都無實事。 今將世間共知龜毛易解之虛。 破如今現執名色難解之虛。 還同龜毛無所執著。 即知從來所執一切境界。 皆從識變。 盡逐想生。 離識無塵。 識寂則諸塵並寂。 離想無法。 想空則諸法皆空。 因緣自然。 俱成戲論。 知解分別。 本末無從。 但有意言。 都無真實。 如此明達。 頓悟前非。 終不更待空裏之華。 將期結果。 取夢中之物。 擬欲牢藏。 > It is like when a person is afraid, non-humans take advantage of them. The Tathāgata attained the elemental nature of fire; the fire of the three realms cannot burn him. The Tathāgata himself produced the fire of wisdom to cremate \[his body into\] relics; this fire was so fierce that the great disciples could not put it out with water, and even the dragon kings could not quench it. Only Śakra, lord of the devas, said: 'By the power of my original vow alone have I been able to quench it.' Although there is the elemental nature of fire, it does not burn itself, just as a knife can cut, but cannot cut itself, and an eye can see, but cannot see itself. As the nature of the fire element is mind only, so too is the nature of the seven elements. In accord with the mind, they all pervade the dharmadhātu. The dharmadhātu is originally pervasive; it is due to the grasping mind that it cannot pervade. In the three realms, for instance, the divine eyes of the three vehicles cannot pervade it at all; only the Tathāgata is free from grasping, and his nature accords with true emptiness, and so he can completely pervade it. As the Buddha himself said in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra: 'Because I am free from grasping, I have attained the true golden body, with a round halo constantly appearing.' / As for the fire burning the heavenly shrine: once there was a fisherman who saw a princess passing by the river. A lustful mind arose in him, but yearning \[for her\], he could not obtain her, and his body gradually became emaciated and sick. His mother then asked the cause of the illness and made an expedient device for him, sending one carp every day. The princess was surprised and questioned her, and the mother told the story directly. \[The princess\] then agreed, saying: 'When I go to worship at the heavenly shrine, I will secretly meet him.' The son was delighted upon knowing this. Later, when the princess arrived, she saw the fisherman fast asleep; she shook him, but he did not wake up, so she tied a piece of silk to his hand. After the princess departed, the fisherman awoke. Seeing the silk on his hand, he realized the princess had come, and remorse and longing arose in his heart. The fire of desire within his mind burned inward; his own body rotted and was destroyed, and it also burned the heavenly shrine, leaving the chambers completely consumed. / Therefore, whatever phenomena exist in the three realms are nothing outside of consciousness. They are all formed internally and externally from the four elements, and are entirely the false transformations of the one mind. Why is this? Initially, due to non-enlightenment, there is karmic consciousness (karmavijñāna). Due to movement resulting from karmic consciousness, there is transforming consciousness (pravṛttivijñāna). Due to seeing arising from transforming consciousness, there is manifesting consciousness (ākhyātavijñāna). Due to the darśanabhāga, the nimittabhāga is formed. The moment subject and object separate, mind and objects instantly manifest. / An ancient commentary on the Śūraṅgamasūtra states: 'To illuminate delusion as not other \[than oneself\], taking awareness and brightness as the fault.' The six consciousnesses grasping sense objects is initiated by karmic consciousness. Later, the seventh consciousness grasps the brightness within the eighth consciousness, transforming and giving rise to the external four elements. The four elements give rise to the six sense faculties and objects. The six sense faculties and objects give rise to the six consciousnesses. The six consciousnesses rely on the six faculties and objects; because form exists externally, it inwardly draws out the eye faculty and the rest. / 'To illuminate delusion as not other \[than oneself\]': delusion initially occurs because wind arises from the movement of one's own mind, metal from grasping, water from attachment, and fire from seeking. These are all the four elements transformed and produced by one's own mind, which in turn discriminates them itself, binding karma and receiving birth; hence it is not burdened by another. / 'Taking awareness and brightness as the fault': it is a fault to forcefully cognize the originally bright substance; it is cognition-brightness without knowledge, and bright cognition with knowledge. For example, when a human sees impurity, an attitude of revulsion arises through discrimination; but when a pig or dog sees it, an idea of purity arises. Both are due to the avidyā of forced cognition. If only there is no discriminating false seeing, one sees only the pure land of the Dharmatā. One thus knows that the internal and external four elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—manifest from moment to moment. Therefore the sūtra states: 'either manifest individually, or manifest simultaneously.' / 'Manifesting individually': your seeing is perfectly bright; when the mind of cognition desires to grasp, it loses the original brightness and nature of emptiness; thoughts fluctuate, and the wind wheel is generated in the mind. When emotional affection is continuous, its nature evokes the water wheel. When the grasping mind blazes, the metal wheel appears. When the seeking mind has desire, the fire wheel arises. / 'Manifesting simultaneously': when forced cognition initially arises, the four elements all appear together. For instance, when a person has remorse and longing, anger produces fire; the movement of body and mind illustrates wind; tears filling the eyes represent water; and the face turning red represents earth. Therefore, the internal and external four elements are fundamentally the nature of our own mind as their own-nature. Furthermore, from the eighth consciousness, the nimittabhāga of the internal and external four elements of the bodily faculties and the receptacle world is transformed as their own characteristics. Again, due to false thoughts, forced cognition arises and cognizes; therefore the myriad phenomena manifest densely and abundantly. / If one can trace the cause and realize the source, they are all the nature of one's own mind and the characteristics of one's own mind. In their midst, beauty and ugliness, hatred and love are entirely constructed through the reckoning and discrimination of the manovijñāna. Once the source is recognized, one must preserve right wisdom: simply eliminate forced cognition so that not a single thought arises, and naturally mind and objects will both be empty, with past and future cut off. / Therefore, we know that the natures of the seven elements are truly and harmoniously integrated; each and every great element completely pervades the dharmadhātu and is entirely of one substance. It is like seven pieces of ice being melted by fire into one water. It is also like Indra's net: identical yet not identical; like water and ice: distinct yet not distinct. Even the five skandhas, six āyatanas, twelve dhātus, eighteen dhātus, and so forth all fill the dharmadhātu; every single minute dust mote also fills the dharmadhātu; every single pore also pervades the dharmadhātu; every single body and mind also pervades it; all are the tathāgatagarbha. / It is like in the ocean of fragrant water, where all dharmas are constantly spoken for all bodhisattvas, yet no characteristic of a bodhisattva is seen, no characteristic of a false master is seen, and no characteristics of arising, staying, changing, or ceasing are seen. Therefore, all merge with true emptiness and completely pervade the limit of reality (bhūta-koṭi). / Just as when speaking of a tortoise's hair, a hare's horns, a mirage's water, or a Gandharva city, there are only names in speech without any real entity; so by analogy, all the faculties of seeing and hearing, the skandhas and āyatanas, and the objects of name and form in the realm of ordinary beings also have only their names, entirely without real entities. Now, using the unreality of a tortoise's hair, which is universally known and easy to understand in the world, we refute the unreality of currently grasped name and form, which is difficult to understand, so that it becomes identical to the tortoise's hair, with nothing clung to. Thus one knows that all spheres of cognition grasped from time immemorial are transformed by consciousness and entirely produced following thought. Apart from consciousness, there are no sense objects; when consciousness is stilled, all sense objects are stilled as well. Apart from thought, there are no dharmas; when thought is empty, all dharmas are empty as well. / Both causes and conditions and intrinsic nature become conceptual proliferation (prapañca). Knowledge, understanding, and discrimination have nowhere to come from, from root to branch; there are only words and expressions of the intellect, utterly devoid of reality. Understanding clearly like this, one suddenly awakens to previous errors, and will never again wait for a flower in the sky expecting it to bear fruit, or take an object in a dream intending to store it securely. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) _First 5 of 7 passages. [Read on](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.69.33.1) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (3) - [金剛經纂要刊定記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1702.7.182) — Classical Chinese - [法界次第初門](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1925.3.67) — Classical Chinese - [持世經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.paripriccha.lokadharapariprccha*zh-kumarajiva.2.6) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.69.33) · Pramāṇa