宗鏡錄 74.11

74.11

答。古釋經論正意。即分別麁。俱生細。唯識論云。俱生我執。無始時來虛妄熏習內力。常與身俱。不待邪教及邪分別。任運轉故。名俱生。十地論云。遠隨現行不作意緣。無始至今。任運而有。不假作意分別尋伺。如小孩兒見母生喜。是俱生貪。見別人啼哭。是俱生瞋。即不假別緣分別尋伺求。自任運起故。知俱生細。唯識論云。分別我執。亦由現世外緣方起。非與身俱。要待邪教邪師。及邪分別。然後方起。又此三緣。前二是麁。第三自思惟細。經云。緣力斷善根。地獄生時續。因力斷善根。地獄死時續。即自邪思惟是因力。餘二是緣力。所以首楞嚴經云。佛告阿難。一切眾生輪迴世間。由二顛倒分別見妄。當處發生。當業輪轉。云何二見。一者眾生別業妄見。二者眾生同分妄見。云何名為別業妄見。阿難。如世間人。目有赤眚。夜見燈光。別有圓影。五色重疊。於意云何。此夜燈明所現圓光。為是燈色。為當見色。阿難。此若燈色。則非眚人何不同見。而此圓影。唯眚之觀。若是見色。見已成色。則彼眚人見圓影者。名為何等。復次阿難。若此圓影離燈別有。則合傍觀屏帳凡筵。有圓影出。離見別有。應非眼矚。云何眚人目見圓影。是故當知。色實在燈。見病為影。影見俱眚。見眚非病。終不應言是燈是見。於是中有非燈非見。如第二月。非體非影。何以故。第二之觀。揑所成故。諸有智者。不應說言此揑根元。是形非形。離見非見。此亦如是。目眚所成。今欲名誰是燈是見。何況分別非燈非見。云何名為同分妄見。阿難。此閻浮提。除大海水。中間平陸。有三千洲。正中大洲。東西括量。大國。凡有二千三百。其餘小洲。在諸海中。其間或有三兩百國。或一或二。至于三十四十五十。阿難。若復此中有一小洲。只有兩國。唯一國人。同感惡緣。則彼小洲當土眾生。覩諸一切。不祥境界。或見二日。或見兩月。其中乃至暈適珮玦。彗孛飛流。負耳虹霓。種種惡相。但此國見。彼國眾生本所不見。亦復不聞。阿難。吾今為汝。以此二事進退合明。阿難。如彼眾生別業妄見。矚燈光中所現圓影。雖現似境。終彼見者。目眚所成。眚即見勞。非色所造。然見眚者。終無見咎。例汝今日。以目觀見山河國土。及諸眾生。皆是無始見病所成。見與見緣。似現前境。無我覺明。見所緣眚。覺見即眚。本覺明心。覺緣非眚。覺所覺眚。覺非眚中。此實見見。云何復名覺聞知見。是故汝今見我及汝。并諸世間十類眾生。皆即見眚。非見眚者。彼見真精。性非眚者。故不名見。阿難。如彼眾生同分妄見。例彼妄見別業一人。一病目人。同彼一國。彼見圓影。眚妄所生。此眾同分所現不祥。同見業中瘴惡所起。俱是無始見妄所生。例閻浮提三千洲中。兼四大海。娑婆世界。并洎十方諸有漏國。及諸眾生。同是覺明無漏妙心。見聞覺知虛妄病緣。和合妄生。和合妄死。若能遠離諸和合緣。及不和合。則復滅除諸生死因。圓滿菩提不生滅性。清淨本心。本覺常住。楞嚴經疏釋云。別業妄見者。分別煩惱也。同分妄見者。俱生無明也。夜見燈光五重圓影者。喻五見也。蘊喻燈光。此之五見。於蘊上起。妄生推度。是遍計性。情有理無。色實在燈見病為影者。依他蘊性。緣起不無。故云色實在燈。我見體空。從妄心起。故云見病為影。影見俱眚者。能執所執。分別惑故。見眚非病者。正證真時。了知。遍計脫體全空。故云見眚非病。分別惑亡。同一真性。離能所取。故云終不應言是燈是見。及非燈非見。即釋上來見見之時。見非是見。如第二月非體非影者。本來無月。將何為形。形既不立。非形亦無。是非一相。能所俱亡。故云何況分別非燈非見。然見眚者終無見咎者。若知眚即是眼病。終不執影以為實有。故無見咎。見與見緣似現前境者。皆是妄心變起。非實有境。見相二分。俱不離心。況是遍計唯影無質。此釋妄見也。元我覺明見所緣眚者。本元真覺也。以真能覺妄。了彼妄見及與所緣。俱是眚故。覺見即眚。本覺明心覺緣非眚者。結前真妄二覺也。妄見即是於眚。能覺真心不是於眚。但能覺彼妄緣。體非是眚。故云覺緣非眚。覺所覺眚者。牒妄覺能所俱眚也。覺非眚中者。牒真覺非眚也。此之真妄二見。俱離能見所見。故云此實見見。以證真時。無此二見故。能見所見。既不安立。云何復名覺聞知見。是故汝今見我及汝。并諸世間十類眾生。皆即見眚非見眚者。彼見真精。性非眚者。故不名見者。何故真見不名見。以無眚病故。只由見病。分能立所。遂見世間自他相異。故云皆即見眚。言非見眚者。真見非是眚也。以真無見相可立故。不名眚。既不名眚。亦不名見。正明離見之意。是以有見即妄。遍計情生。如眚目人。見夜燈之圓影。無見即真。圓成智現。如明眼人。見虛空之清淨。又若別業妄見。如增上惡業熟。生身變為蛇虎等。此不動總報。自受別報。唯自業識變。不同業者。即不見。如燈上圓影。唯眚之觀。若非眚人。則不同見。若同分妄見。如同造阿鼻地獄業。同受總報。同苦無間。若不同其惡業者。即不見。如唯一國人同感惡緣。同見一切不祥境界。若彼國眾生不同其惡緣者。則本所不見。亦復不聞。故知苦緣樂緣。總報別報。因緣和合。當處出生。因緣離散。當處滅盡。未曾有一法。非出我心耶。故經云。若能遠離諸和合緣。則見清淨本心常住。又若分別煩惱則麁因邪思而方起。俱生無明則細。自任運而常生。雖分麁細之文。俱同妄識。如別業妄見之者。因目眚而見燈上圓光。似同分妄見之人。因瘴惡而覩國中災怪。雖分同別之境。皆是妄心。可驗。眾生界中。凡有一切見聞之事。皆如一人別業之眚影。多人同分之不祥。若能知燈影是目眚所成。識災境乃瘴惡所起。則燈上之重光自沒。天中之兩日俄沈。如不動一心。萬緣俱寂。則見聞和合之病。分別全消。根本生死之災。俱生永絕。

Answer: The orthodox meaning according to ancient commentaries on the sūtras and treatises is that the intellectually discriminated is coarse and the innate is subtle. The *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra* says: 'Innate self-grasping is driven by internal force through beginningless perfuming of false [habits]; it always accompanies the body, and arises spontaneously without depending on heterodox teachings or heterodox discrimination; thus it is called innate.' The *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* says: 'It distantly follows active manifestations without intentional attention to conditions; it exists spontaneously from beginningless time down to the present, without requiring intentional discrimination, vitarka, or vicāra.' For example, when a little infant sees its mother and feels joy, this is innate rāga; when it sees a stranger and weeps, this is innate dveṣa. That is, it does not rely on distinct conditions, discrimination, vitarka, or vicāra seeking it out, but arises of itself spontaneously; hence we know that the innate is subtle. The *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra* says: 'Discriminated self-grasping arises only through external conditions in the present life; it does not accompany the body, but must await heterodox teachings, heterodox teachers, and heterodox discrimination before it arises.' Moreover, among these three conditions, the first two are coarse, and the third—one's own cogitation—is subtle. A sūtra says: 'When the roots of goodness are severed by the power of conditions, they are renewed when one is born into hell; when the roots of goodness are severed by the power of causes, they are renewed when one dies in hell.' That is, one's own heterodox cogitation is the power of the cause, while the other two are the power of conditions. Therefore the *Śūraṅgamasūtra* says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: "All sentient beings transmigrate in the world through two kinds of inverted, discriminating, deluded views, which arise right where they are and revolve along with their karma. What are the two views? First, sentient beings' deluded views born of individual karma; second, sentient beings' deluded views of common share. What are deluded views born of individual karma? Ānanda, suppose a person in the world has a red cataract in his eyes, and at night sees a separate circular halo around the light of a lamp, with five overlapping colours. What do you think? Is this circular halo appearing in the night lamp's light the colour-form of the lamp, or is it the colour-form of the seeing? Ānanda, if it were the colour-form of the lamp, why would a person without a cataract not also see it, whereas this circular halo is perceived only by the one with the cataract? If it were the colour-form of the seeing, then seeing having already become colour-form, what would the one with a cataract seeing the circular halo be called? Furthermore, Ānanda, if this circular halo existed separately apart from the lamp, then when looking sideways at screens, curtains, or mats, there should also be a circular halo emerging; if it existed separately apart from seeing, it should not be perceived by the eye—how could the cataract sufferer see a circular halo with his eyes? Therefore you should know that the colour-form is genuinely in the lamp, while the defect in seeing constitutes the halo. Both halo and seeing are the cataract, but seeing the cataract is not diseased. One should never say that it is the lamp or that it is the seeing, nor that in this there is that which is neither lamp nor seeing. It is like a second moon, which is neither substance nor shadow. Why? Because the perception of a second moon is produced by pressing on the eye. The wise should not say whether the root of this pressing is a shape or not a shape, or is apart from seeing or not apart from seeing. This is just the same: it is produced by the eye cataract. Now what would one wish to call the lamp or call the seeing, let alone discriminate what is neither lamp nor seeing? What are deluded views of common share? Ānanda, in this continent of Jambudvīpa, excluding the great oceans, on the level land in between there are three thousand islands. On the main continent right in the center, measuring east to west, there are altogether two thousand three hundred great kingdoms. As for the other smaller islands situated within the seas, among them there may be two or three hundred kingdoms, or one or two, up to thirty, forty, or fifty. Ānanda, if within them there is a small island with only two kingdoms, and the people of only one kingdom collectively undergo bad conditions, then the sentient beings of that land on that small island will behold all manner of inauspicious realms: perhaps seeing two suns, or seeing two moons, and therein even solar halos, eclipses, rings, comets, shooting stars, sun-dogs, and rainbows—various ominous portents. These are seen only in this kingdom; the sentient beings of the other kingdom originally do not see them, nor do they hear of them. Ānanda, I shall now correlate these two matters for you to make them clear. Ānanda, just as those sentient beings with deluded views born of individual karma behold the circular halo appearing in the lamplight: though it manifests like an object, in the end, that perceiver's [halo] is produced by an eye cataract; the cataract is an affliction of seeing, not created by the colour-form. Yet the one who sees the cataract has ultimately no fault of seeing. This parallels your seeing today with the eyes mountains, rivers, kingdoms, and sentient beings: all are produced by the disease of seeing from beginningless time. The seeing and the conditions of seeing seem to manifest as objects before you. The awareness-luminosity devoid of me sees the cataract that is the perceived condition. When awareness regards seeing as the cataract, the original luminous citta of awareness realizes that conditions are not the cataract. Awareness regards the perceived as the cataract; within awareness free of cataract, this is truly seeing seeing. How could it again be named sensing, hearing, knowing, and seeing? Therefore, your seeing now me and you, along with the ten classes of sentient beings in the world, is entirely the disease of seeing. That which is not the disease of seeing sees the true essence, its nature being not a cataract; hence it is not called seeing. Ānanda, just as those sentient beings with deluded views of common share parallel that one person with deluded views born of individual karma—the one diseased-eyed person parallels that one kingdom; his seeing the circular halo is produced by the delusion of a cataract, while this inauspiciousness manifesting for the common share of beings arises from pestilential evil amidst common karma of seeing—both are born of beginningless delusion of seeing. Paralleling the three thousand continents of Jambudvīpa, together with the four great oceans, the Sahā world, and reaching to all defiled lands and sentient beings in the ten directions: all are, in the wondrous unblemished citta of luminous awareness, the false, diseased conditions of seeing, hearing, sensing, and knowing, combining to falsely take birth, combining to falsely die. If one can leave behind all conditions of combination and non-combination, one will then extinguish all causes of birth and death, fulfilling bodhi's nature of non-arising and non-ceasing, the pure fundamental citta, the ever-abiding original awareness." The commentary on the *Śūraṅgamasūtra* explains: 'Deluded views born of individual karma are discriminated kleśas; deluded views of common share are innate avidyā. Seeing five overlapping circular halos in the lamplight at night is a metaphor for the five views. The aggregates are compared to the lamplight. These five views arise upon the aggregates, falsely generating conjectures; they are the parikalpita nature, existing in subjective emotion but absent in principle. "The colour-form is genuinely in the lamp, while the defect in seeing constitutes the halo" means that the nature of the dependent aggregates is not non-existent in dependent origination, hence it is said that the colour-form is genuinely in the lamp; the substance of the self-view is empty, arising from the deluded citta, hence it is said that the defect in seeing constitutes the halo. "Both halo and seeing are the cataract" means the grasper and the grasped, because they are discriminated confusions. "Seeing the cataract is not diseased" means that when one directly realizes the truth, one thoroughly understands that the parikalpita is completely empty of substance, hence it is said that seeing the cataract is not diseased. Discriminated confusions having perished, there is the identical single true nature, free of grasper and grasped; hence it is said: "One should never say that it is the lamp or that it is the seeing, nor that it is neither lamp nor seeing"—this explains the earlier statement that "when seeing sees, seeing is not seeing." "Like a second moon, which is neither substance nor shadow": originally there is no moon, so what could be taken as shape? Since shape is not established, non-shape is also absent; being and non-being are of one characteristic, grasper and grasped both having perished; hence it says: "let alone discriminate what is neither lamp nor seeing." "Yet the one who sees the cataract has ultimately no fault of seeing" means that if one knows that the cataract is simply a disease of the eye, one will never grasp the shadow as real, and therefore has no fault of seeing. "The seeing and the conditions of seeing seem to manifest as objects before you" means that all are transformed and arisen from the deluded citta, not real objects; neither the darśanabhāga nor the nimittabhāga departs from citta, not to mention that the parikalpita is merely a shadow without substance. This explains deluded seeing. "The awareness-luminosity devoid of me sees the cataract that is the perceived condition": this is the fundamental, original true awareness. Because the true can be aware of the false, it understands that the false seeing and its perceived conditions are both cataracts. "When awareness regards seeing as the cataract, the original luminous citta of awareness realizes that conditions are not the cataract": this concludes the previous two awarenesses, true and false. False seeing is indeed the cataract; the true citta that can be aware is not the cataract; it merely can be aware of those false conditions, while its substance is not a cataract; hence it is said: "realizes that conditions are not the cataract." "Awareness regards the perceived as the cataract" reiterates that both the grasper and grasped of false awareness are cataracts. "Within awareness free of cataract" reiterates that true awareness is not a cataract. Both of these two seeings, true and false, are free of seer and seen; hence it says: "this is truly seeing seeing." Because when realizing the truth, these two seeings do not exist, and since seer and seen are not established, how could it again be named sensing, hearing, knowing, and seeing? Therefore: "your seeing now me and you, along with the ten classes of sentient beings in the world, is entirely the disease of seeing. That which is not the disease of seeing sees the true essence, its nature being not a cataract; hence it is not called seeing." Why is true seeing not called seeing? Because it is free from the disease of cataract. It is solely due to the disease of seeing that grasper and grasped are divided and established, whereby one sees self and others as different in the world; hence it is said: "all is entirely the disease of seeing." Saying: "That which is not the disease of seeing" means that true seeing is not a cataract. Because in the truth there is no characteristic of seeing that can be established, it is not called a cataract; since it is not called a cataract, neither is it called seeing; this precisely clarifies the meaning of being free of views. Therefore, where there is seeing, there is delusion, and parikalpita feelings arise—like a person with cataract-diseased eyes seeing a circular halo around a night lamp; where there is no seeing, there is truth, and pariniṣpanna wisdom manifests—like a clear-eyed person seeing the purity of empty space. Furthermore, deluded views born of individual karma are like when dominant evil karma ripens and the living body transforms into a snake, tiger, or the like: this does not alter the universal retribution, but one personally undergoes individual retribution, which is transformed solely by one's own karmic consciousness; those with different karma do not see it. It is like the circular halo on the lamp, which is perceived only by the one with cataracts; a person without cataracts does not share the same vision. Deluded views of common share are like mutually creating the karma of Avīci Hell, collectively undergoing universal retribution, and suffering uninterruptedly together; those who do not share that evil karma do not see it. It is like the people of only one kingdom collectively experiencing evil conditions and together beholding all manner of inauspicious realms; if the sentient beings of the other kingdom do not share those evil conditions, they originally do not see them, nor do they hear of them. Thus we know that conditions of suffering and conditions of pleasure, universal retribution and individual retribution, arise right where they are when causes and conditions assemble, and are extinguished right where they are when causes and conditions disperse. Has there ever been a single dharma that did not arise from our citta? Hence the sūtra says: "If one can leave behind all conditions of combination, one will see the pure fundamental citta ever-abiding." Furthermore, discriminated kleśas are coarse and arise only due to heterodox cogitation; innate avidyā is subtle, arising spontaneously and continuously. Although the texts distinguish coarse and subtle, both are equally deluded consciousness. It is like the person with deluded views born of individual karma who sees the circular halo on the lamp due to an eye cataract, which resembles the person with deluded views of common share who beholds calamitous omens in the kingdom due to pestilential evil. Although the realms are divided into common and individual, all are the deluded citta. It can be verified: whatever matters of seeing and hearing there are within the realm of sentient beings are all like the cataract-shadow of one person's individual karma, or the inauspicious portents of many persons' common share. If one can know that the shadow on the lamp is produced by the eye cataract, and recognize that calamitous realms are caused by pestilential evil, then the layered halos on the lamp will naturally vanish, and the two suns in the sky will suddenly sink. If one does not stir from the one mind and the ten thousand conditions are completely tranquil, then the disease of combined seeing and hearing, along with discrimination, will entirely vanish, and the calamities of fundamental birth and death, along with the innate, will be forever cut off.