宗鏡錄 7.4.1

7.4.1

答。 為破去來。 明無去來。 所以據體言之。 故云各性而住。 非決定義。 則以無性而為性。 不同外道二乘。 執有決定自性。 從此向彼。 若不執有定性去來。 亦不說各性而住。 故論云。 言往不必往。 閑人之常想。 稱住不必住。 釋人之所住耳。 又劉湛注云。 莊子藏山。 仲尼臨川者。 莊子意明前山非後山。 夫子意明前水非後水。 半夜有力負之而趨者。 即生住異滅四時。 念念遷流不停也。 是以若心外取法。 妄夢所見。 情謂去來。 則念念輪迴。 心隨境轉。 尚不覺無常麁相。 焉能悟不遷之密旨乎。 若能見法是心。 隨緣了性。 無一法從外而入。 無一法從內而生。 無一法和合而有。 無一法自然而成。 如是。 則尚不見一微毫住相。 寧觀萬法去來。 斯乃徹底明宗。 透峯見性。 心心常合道。 念念不違宗。 去住同時。 古今一貫。 故法華經云。 我觀久遠。 猶若今日。 維摩經云。 法無去來。 常不住故。 若了此無所住之真心。 不變異之妙性。 方究竟明不遷矣。 已上論中。 所引內外之經典。 借世相之古今。 寄明不遷。 同入真實。 是以時因法立。 法自本無。 所依之法體猶空。 能依之古今奚有。 若假方隅而辯法。 因指見月而無妨。 或徇方便而迷真。 執解違宗而反誤。 故信心銘云。 信心不二。 不二信心。 言語道斷。 非去來今。 第二。 依火焰起滅喻中之義。 同前。 初唯焰者。 謂焰起滅。 有其二義。 一前焰謝滅。 引起後焰。 後焰無體而能知前。 前焰已滅。 復無所知。 是故各各皆不相知。 二前焰若未滅。 亦依前引。 無體。 故無能知。 後焰未至。 故無所知。 是故彼亦各不相知。 妄法亦爾。 剎那生滅。 不能自立。 謂已滅未生。 無物可知。 生已則滅。 無體可知。 是故皆無所有也。 斯則流金礫石而不熱也。 二依所依者。 謂彼火焰。 即由於此無體無用不相知故。 而有起滅虛妄之相。 是則攬非有而為有也。 妄法亦爾。 依此無所依之真理。 方是妄法。 是亦非有為有也。 三唯所依者。 推起滅之焰。 體用俱無。 無焰之理。 挺然顯現。 是則無妄法之有。 有妄法之無。 湛然顯現。 遂令緣起之相。 相無不盡。 無性之理。 理無不現。 又火依薪有。 薪是可燃。 火即是燃。 以燃因可燃。 則燃無體。 可燃因燃。 則可燃無體。 又前焰已滅。 後焰未生。 中間無住。 如一念之上。 即有三時。 已滅為已生。 未生為未生。 生已即減是生時。 故淨名經云。 若過去生。 過去生已滅。 若未來生。 未來生未至。 若現在生。 現在生無住。 經云。 比丘。 汝今即時。 亦生亦老亦滅。 故三時無體。 無可相知也。 第三依風有動作。 喻妄用依真起。 三義同前。 一唯動者。 離所動之物。 風之動相了不可得。 無可相知。 妄法亦爾。 離所依真體不可得故。 無可相知。 斯則旋嵐偃嶽而常靜也。 二依所依者。 謂風不能自動。 要依物現動。 動無自體可以知物。 物不自動。 隨風無體。 不能知。 風法中能依妄法。 要依真立。 無體知真。 真隨妄隱。 無相知妄。 三唯所依者。 謂風鼓於物。 動唯物動。 風相皆盡。 無可相知。 妄法作用。 自本性空。 唯所依真。 挺然顯現。 是故妄法全盡而不滅。 真性全隱而恒露。 能所熏等。 法本自爾。 思之可見。 第四依地有任持者。 喻妄為真所持。 三義同前。 初地界因依。 有二種義。 一約自類。 二約異類。 前中。 從金剛際。 上至地面。 皆上依下。 下持上。 展轉因依而得安住。 然上能依。 皆離所無體而能知下。 然下能持。 皆亦離所無體可令知上。 又上上能依。 徹至於下。 無下可相知。 下下能持。

Answer: It is spoken in order to dismantle coming and going and make clear that there is no coming and going; hence it speaks based on substance, and thus says that "each abides in its own nature." It is not a doctrine of fixity, for it takes naturelessness as nature. It is not like the non-Buddhists and the two vehicles, who grasp at having a determinate self-nature that moves from this to that. If one does not grasp at there being a determinate nature that comes and goes, neither does one speak of "each abiding in its own nature." Therefore the treatise says: "To speak of going does not necessarily mean going—it puts an end to ordinary people's habitual thoughts; to call it abiding does not necessarily mean abiding—it unpacks that in which people abide, that is all." Furthermore, Liu Zhan's commentary says: "Zhuangzi speaks of hiding the mountain, and Confucius stands by the stream: Zhuangzi's intention was to clarify that the former mountain is not the later mountain; Confucius's intention was to clarify that the former water is not the later water. That which has the strength at midnight to carry it on its back and hasten away is precisely the four periods of arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing, shifting and flowing uninterruptedly from moment to moment." Therefore, if one apprehends dharmas outside the mind, what is seen in a delusive dream, and in one's sentiments posits coming and going, then from moment to moment one transmigrates, the mind turning along with objects; failing even to perceive the coarse characteristic of impermanence, how could one awaken to the esoteric import of non-shifting? If one is able to see that dharmas are the mind and discern their nature in accordance with conditions, then not a single dharma enters from without, not a single dharma arises from within, not a single dharma exists through combination, and not a single dharma is formed spontaneously. In this way, when one does not even see the slightest hair-tip of an abiding characteristic, how could one view ten thousand dharmas coming and going? This is thoroughly illuminating the source and penetrating the summit to see the nature: thought after thought constantly accords with the Way, and moment to moment never deviates from the source. Going and abiding are simultaneous; past and present are a single thread. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "I view the distant past as if it were today." The Vimalakīrti Sūtra says: "Dharmas have no coming and going, because they constantly do not abide." If one understands this true mind that has nowhere to abide and this wondrous nature that does not alter, only then does one definitively clarify non-shifting. In the treatises cited above, the internal and external scriptures invoked borrow the past and present of worldly characteristics to express and clarify non-shifting, entering together into the real truth. Thus, time is established based on dharmas, while dharmas are originally nonexistent. The substance of the dharmas on which it relies is already empty; how could the past and present that rely upon it exist? If one relies on spatial designations to discern dharmas, pointing to the moon is unobjectionable; but if one conforms to expedients and loses sight of the true, clinging to conceptual understanding and deviating from the source, one errs instead. Thus the Inscription on Faith in Mind says: "Faith and mind are not two; non-duality is faith in mind. The path of words is cut off; it is not past, future, or present." Second, the meaning within the simile of the arising and ceasing of the flame of fire is the same as above. First, 'the flame alone' means that the arising and ceasing of the flame has two meanings: 1. The former flame wanes and ceases, inducing the later flame; the later flame has no substance and can know the former, while the former flame has already ceased and again has nothing to be known; therefore, each does not know the other. 2. If the former flame has not yet ceased, it also relies on what went before to be induced; having no substance, it has no capacity to know, while the later flame has not yet arrived, so there is nothing to be known; therefore, they also do not know each other. Delusive dharmas are also like this: arising and ceasing moment to moment, they cannot establish themselves. That which has already ceased and that which has not yet arisen have no object that can be known; once arisen, they immediately cease, having no substance that can be known. Therefore, they are entirely nonexistent. This is precisely [what is meant by] "melting gold and cracking stone, yet it is not hot." Second, 'relying on what is relied upon' means that because that flame of fire has no substance, no function, and lacks mutual knowledge, it has the false characteristics of arising and ceasing. This is grasping the nonexistent to make it existent. Delusive dharmas are also like this: relying on this true principle that has nothing to rely upon, they are then delusive dharmas; this too is taking the nonexistent to be existent. Third, 'what is relied upon alone' means: inquiring into the arising and ceasing flame, substance and function are both absent; the principle of the non-flame stands forth and manifests prominently. This is having no existence of delusive dharmas, while the nonexistence of delusive dharmas is serenely manifest. Consequently, it causes the characteristics of dependent origination to have no characteristic that is not exhausted, and the principle of naturelessness to have no principle that is not manifest. Furthermore, fire exists in reliance on fuel: fuel is the combustible, and fire is the burning. Since burning depends on the combustible, burning has no substance; since the combustible depends on burning, the combustible has no substance. Moreover, the former flame has already ceased, the later flame has not yet arisen, and in the middle there is no abiding. Just as on a single thought there are three times: having ceased is having already arisen; not yet arisen is not yet arisen; once arisen, it immediately diminishes—this is the time of arising. Therefore the Vimalakīrti Sūtra says: "If it is past arising, past arising has already ceased; if it is future arising, future arising has not yet arrived; if it is present arising, present arising does not abide." A sūtra says: "Monk, you right at this moment also arise, also age, and also cease." Therefore, the three times have no substance and have nothing that can know each other. Third, relying on the wind having movement similes delusive functions arising in reliance on the real; the three meanings are the same as above. First, 'movement alone' means that apart from the object moved, the moving characteristic of the wind is completely ungraspable; there is nothing that can know the other. Delusive dharmas are also like this: because they cannot be found apart from the real substance upon which they rely, there is nothing that can know the other. This is precisely [what is meant by] "swirling gales toppling mountains, yet it is constantly still." Second, 'relying on what is relied upon' means that the wind cannot move of itself; it must rely on objects to manifest movement. Movement has no self-substance that could know the object; the object does not move of itself, and following the wind it has no substance and cannot know. Among dharmas, the reliant delusive dharmas must rely on the real to be established; lacking substance, they know the real; the real follows the delusive into concealment, and having no characteristic, it knows the delusive. Third, 'what is relied upon alone' means that when the wind stirs an object, the movement is solely the object's movement; the characteristics of the wind are completely exhausted, and there is nothing that can know the other. The functioning of delusive dharmas is originally empty of own-nature; only the real that is relied upon stands forth and manifests prominently. Therefore, delusive dharmas are completely exhausted yet do not cease; the true nature is completely concealed yet constantly exposed. The perfumer and the perfumed, and so forth, are naturally so in the dharmas themselves; contemplate this and it can be seen. Fourth, relying on the earth having the capacity to uphold similes the delusive being upheld by the real; the three meanings are the same as above. First, the earth-element's causal reliance has two meanings: 1. In terms of its own kind; 2. In terms of different kinds. In the former, from the vajra-stratum up to the surface of the earth, all above rely on below, and below upholds above, reciprocally serving as cause and reliance so that they achieve stable abiding. Yet the upper that relies has no substance apart from that which it relies upon to be able to know the lower; and the lower that upholds also has no substance apart from that which it upholds to be able to know the upper. Furthermore, the highest that rely reach all the way down to the lower without any lower that can know each other; the lowest that uphold...