[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) › 7.4.4 # 宗鏡錄 7.4.4 宗鏡錄 7.4.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.4.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4.4) 又為智體無性。 但隨緣現。 如空中響。 應物成音。 無性之智。 但應緣分別。 以分別故。 癡愛隨起。 又中觀論。 破應無如來偈云。 邪見深厚者。 則說無如來。 如來寂滅相。 分別有亦非。 如是性空中。 思惟亦不可。 如來滅度後。 分別於有無。 次總拂偈云。 如來過戲論。 而人生戲論。 戲論破慧眼。 是皆不見佛。 論釋云。 戲論名憶念。 分別此彼等。 此如來品。 初中後思惟如來定性不可得。 乃至五求四句皆非是。 故偈云。 如來無有性。 即是世間性。 如來無有性。 世間亦無性。 以如來一性空義。 知一切世間法。 悉皆無性。 同如來義。 華嚴演義中。 引法華經偈云。 未來世諸佛。 雖說百千億。 無數諸法門。 其實為一乘。 諸佛兩足尊。 知法常無性。 佛種從緣起。 是故說一乘。 是法住法位。 世間相常住。 於道場知已。 導師方便說。 今但引兩句。 顯諸法無性。 成一性義耳。 然上三偈。 諸釋不同。 今直解經文。 初一偈。 明當佛開權。 終歸一實。 故云其實為一乘。 次偈釋說一乘所以。 以唯一性故。 謂若有二性。 容有兩乘。 既唯一性。 故說一乘耳。 知法常無性者。 知即證知。 法謂所證知法。 即色心等一切法也。 常無性者。 所證理也。 即如無性理。 覺諸法故。 云何無性。 謂色心等從本已來。 性相空寂。 非自非他。 非共非離。 湛然常寂。 故曰無性。 而言常者。 謂本來即無。 非推之使無。 故曰常無性耳。 佛種從緣起者。 然有二義。 一約因種。 因種即正因佛性。 故涅槃經云。 佛性者。 即是無上菩提中道種子。 此種即前常無性理。 故涅槃經云。 佛性者。 即是第一義空。 無性。 即空義也。 緣即六度萬行。 是緣因佛性。 起彼正因。 令得成佛。 是故說一乘者。 唯以佛性起於佛性。 更無餘性。 故說一乘。 稱理說也。 體同曰性。 相似名種。 故關中云。 如稻自生稻。 不生餘穀。 此屬性也。 萌𮑉華粒。 其類無差。 此屬種也。 二果種性。 關中云。 佛報唯佛。 其理不差。 即性義也。 說法度人。 類皆相似。 此種義也。 果之種性。 緣真理生。 故云從緣。 故釋此偈云。 佛緣理生。 理既無二。 是故說一乘耳。 意云。 證理成佛。 稱理說一。 此中知法常無性偈。 全同華嚴出現品經云。 如來成正覺時。 於其身中。 普見一切眾生成正覺。 乃至普見一切眾生入涅槃。 皆同一性。 所謂無性。 乃至知一切法。 皆無性故。 得一切智。 大悲相續。 救度眾生。 謂知無性。 佛性同故。 准經文云。 以知無性。 尚得一成一切皆成。 況不說一乘而度脫之。 後偈云。 是法住法位等者。 重釋前偈。 言是法者。 即前所知之法。 所以常無性者。 由住真如正位故。 由緣無性。 緣起即真。 由即真。 故云無性。 言法位者。 即真如正位。 故智論。 說。 法性。 法界。 法住。 法位。 皆真如異名。 世法即如。 故皆常住。 謂因乖常理。 成三界無常。 若解無常之實。 即無常而成常矣。 則常與無常。 二理不偏。 故涅槃經況之二鳥。 飛止同居。 今於道場。 證知一切世間無常。 即真常理。 猶懸鏡高堂。 萬像斯鑒。 二而不二。 不可言宣。 以方便力。 假以言說。 一乘尚是假說。 況有二三。 則一乘之理。 至理無過。 無性之宗。 諸宗莫及。 可謂宗鏡之綱骨。 祖教之指南也。 所以深密經云。 一切諸法。 皆無自性。 無生無滅。 本來寂靜。 自性涅槃。 商主天子所問經云。 若法是無。 即不自在。 若不自在。 是則無欲。 若無欲者。 則是真性。 若是真性。 即名無性。 > Furthermore, because the substance of wisdom has no nature, it merely manifests according to conditions—like an echo in the sky, producing sound in response to objects. Wisdom without nature merely makes distinctions in response to conditions; because of distinction, delusion and desire arise in succession. Furthermore, the Madhyamakaśāstra, refuting the verse that there should be no Tathāgata, says: / “Those with deep and thick wrong views / will say there is no Tathāgata. / The Tathāgata is of the characteristic of quietude; / to distinguish \[him\] as existent is also wrong. / In this way, within the emptiness of nature, / thinking \[of him\] is also inadmissible. / After the Tathāgata's parinirvāṇa, / one discriminates between existence and non-existence.” / Next, a verse sweeping it all away says: / “The Tathāgata transcends conceptual proliferation, / yet people produce conceptual proliferation. / Conceptual proliferation destroys the wisdom eye; / none of them see the Buddha.” / The commentary on the treatise explains: “Conceptual proliferation is called recollection, discriminating this and that, and so forth.” In this Chapter on the Tathāgata, in the beginning, middle, and end, a determinate nature of the Tathāgata cannot be found, and even up to the fivefold search and the four lemmas, none are correct. Therefore the verse says: / “The Tathāgata has no nature; / that is the nature of the world. / The Tathāgata has no nature; / the world also has no nature.” / By the meaning of the single emptiness of nature of the Tathāgata, one knows that all worldly phenomena are entirely without nature, identical with the meaning of the Tathāgata. In the Huayan yanyi, it quotes a verse from the Lotus Sūtra: / “Although the Buddhas of future ages / preach hundreds of thousands of millions / of countless approaches to the Dharma, / in truth it is for the sake of the One Vehicle. / The Buddhas, the two-footed honoured ones, / know that phenomena are eternally without nature. / The Buddha-seed arises from conditions; / therefore they preach the One Vehicle. / These phenomena abide in the Dharma-position; / the worldly characteristics are eternally abiding. / Having known this at the place of awakening, / the Guide preaches by expedient means.” / Now, only two lines are cited to reveal that all phenomena are without nature, establishing the meaning of the single nature. However, the various commentaries differ regarding the three verses above. Now we directly interpret the sūtra text. The first verse clarifies that the Buddha opens up the provisional and ultimately returns to the one real; hence it says: “in truth it is for the sake of the One Vehicle.” The next verse explains the reason for preaching the One Vehicle: because there is only one nature. That is to say, if there were two natures, there might be room for two vehicles; since there is only one nature, therefore the One Vehicle is preached. “Knowing that phenomena are eternally without nature”: “knowing” means knowing by realization; “phenomena” means the phenomena realized and known, which are all phenomena such as form and mind. “Eternally without nature” is the principle that is realized; it means awakening to all phenomena according to the principle of no nature. What is “no nature”? It means that form, mind, and the like, from the very beginning, have nature and characteristics that are empty and tranquil—neither self nor other, neither combined nor separated, serenely ever tranquil; hence it is called “no nature”. And as for saying “eternally”, it means they are originally non-existent, not made non-existent by deduction; hence it is said to be “eternally without nature”. “The Buddha-seed arises from conditions”: there are two meanings. First, in terms of the causal seed: the causal seed is the direct-cause Buddha-nature. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: “Buddha-nature is the seed of the middle way of supreme bodhi.” This seed is the aforementioned principle of eternal non-nature. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: “Buddha-nature is the emptiness of the ultimate truth.” “No nature” is the meaning of emptiness. “Conditions” are the six pāramitās and myriad practices, which are the conditioning-cause Buddha-nature, giving rise to that direct cause so that Buddhahood is attained. “Therefore they preach the One Vehicle”: only by using Buddha-nature to give rise to Buddha-nature, with no other nature remaining, is the One Vehicle preached—preaching in accord with principle. That which is identical in substance is called “nature”; that which is mutually similar is called “seed”. Therefore Guanzhong said: “Just as rice naturally generates rice and does not generate other grains—this belongs to nature. The sprouts, stalks, flowers, and grains are of a kind without distinction—this belongs to seed.” Second, the resultant seed-nature: Guanzhong said: “The Buddha-reward is only the Buddha; its principle is without discrepancy—this is the meaning of nature. Preaching the Dharma to liberate people is in every kind similar—this is the meaning of seed.” The resultant seed-nature arises conditioned by true principle; hence it is said to be “from conditions”. Therefore, in explaining this verse, it is said: “Buddhas arise conditioned by principle; since principle is not dual, therefore the One Vehicle is preached.” The meaning is that by realizing principle one accomplishes Buddhahood, and in accord with principle one preaches the One. Here, the verse “knowing that phenomena are eternally without nature” is entirely identical to what is said in the “Chapter on the Manifestation of the Tathāgata” in the Huayan Sūtra: “When the Tathāgata accomplished true awakening, within his body he universally saw all sentient beings accomplishing true awakening, up to universally seeing all sentient beings entering nirvāṇa, all identical in one nature—namely, having no nature—up to, because of knowing that all phenomena are entirely without nature, he attained all-knowledge, and with great compassion continuous, he rescued and liberated sentient beings.” This means knowing that they have no nature, because the Buddha-nature is identical. In accordance with the sūtra text, because of knowing that there is no nature, when one attains \[it\], all attain \[it\]—how much more so should one preach the One Vehicle to liberate them! The subsequent verse says: “These phenomena abide in the Dharma-position,” etc., re-explaining the previous verse. “These phenomena” refers to the previously known phenomena. The reason they are eternally without nature is that they abide in the correct position of tathatā. Because conditions have no nature, conditioned arising is itself the real. Because it is itself the real, it is said to have “no nature”. “Dharma-position” refers to the correct position of tathatā. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says that dharmatā, dharmadhātu, the abiding of phenomena, and the position of phenomena are all alternate names for tathatā. Worldly phenomena are identical with tathatā, and therefore are all eternally abiding. That is to say, because of diverging from the eternal principle, the impermanence of the three realms is formed; if one understands the reality of impermanence, then impermanence itself becomes eternal. Thus the two principles of permanence and impermanence are not one-sided. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra compares them to two birds flying and roosting together. Now, at the place of awakening, he realized and knew that all worldly impermanence is identical with the principle of true permanence—just like a mirror hung in a high hall reflecting all myriad images; they are two yet not two, beyond verbal expression. By the power of expedient means, they are provisionally expressed in words. Even the One Vehicle is a provisional expression, how much more so two or three! Thus the principle of the One Vehicle is supreme, with no principle surpassing it; the source of non-nature is unmatched by any school. It can indeed be called the backbone of the mirror of the source, the guide of the ancestral teachings. Therefore the Sandhinirmocanasūtra says: “All phenomena are without self-nature, unarisen and unceasing, originally quiet, by self-nature nirvāṇa.” The Śreṣṭhīdevaputraparipṛcchāsūtra says: “If a phenomenon is non-existent, it is not autonomous; if it is not autonomous, it is devoid of desire; if it is devoid of desire, it is the true nature; if it is the true nature, it is called having no nature.” > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4.3) - [Next: 7.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.5) - [Up: 7.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.4) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4.4) · Pramāṇa