[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) › 79.19 # 宗鏡錄 79.19 宗鏡錄 79.19 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [79.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.19) 答。以唯識故。則有世俗諦。既有世俗。則有似塵識。幻相不無。以無實不可得。故稱空耳。不可起蛇足鹽香。決定斷空之見。如密嚴經偈云。瓶等眾境界。悉以心為體。非瓶似瓶現。是故說為空。世間所有色。諸天宮殿等。皆是阿賴耶。變異而可見。眾生身所有。從頭至手足。頓生及漸次。無非阿賴耶。習氣濁於心。凡愚不能了。此性非是有。亦復非是空。如人以諸物。擊破於瓶等。物體若是空。即無能所破。譬如須彌量。我見未為惡。憍慢而著空。此惡過於彼。又經云。寧可執有如須彌。不可執空如芥子。大般涅槃經云。解脫者名不空空。空空者名無所有。無所有者。即是外道尼乾子等所計解脫。而是尼乾。實無解脫。故名空空。真解脫者。則不如是。故不空空。不空空者真解脫。真解脫者。即是如來。又解脫者。名曰不空。如水酒酪酥蜜等瓶。雖無水酒酪酥蜜時。猶故得名為水等瓶。如是瓶等。不可說空。及以不空。若言空者。則不得有色香味觸。若言不空。而復無有水酒等實。解脫亦爾。不可說色。及以非色。不可說空。及以不空。若言空者。則不得有常樂我淨。若言不空。誰受是常樂我淨者。以是義故。不可說空。及以不空。空者。謂無二十五有。及諸煩惱。一切苦。一切相。一切有為行。如瓶無酪則名為空。不空者。謂真實。善色。常樂我淨。不動不變。猶如彼瓶色香味觸。故名不空。是故解脫。喻如彼瓶。彼瓶遇緣。則有破壞。解脫不爾。不可破壞。不可破壞。即真解脫。真解脫者。即是如來。 > Answer: Because of consciousness-only, there is conventional truth. Since there is the conventional, there is consciousness that resembles dust \[objects\]; the illusory characteristics are not non-existent. Because nothing real can be apprehended, it is merely designated as empty; one must not produce views of absolute annihilating emptiness such as \[looking for\] a snake’s legs or the fragrance of salt. As a verse in the Ghanavyūhasūtra says: > ‘Realms of objects such as jars > All have mind as their substance. > They are not jars, but appear resembling jars; > Therefore, they are spoken of as empty. > All form in the world, > The palaces of the devas and so forth, > Are all transformed by the ālayavijñāna > And become visible. > All that is in the bodies of sentient beings, > From head to hands and feet, > Whether born at once or gradually, > Is none other than the ālayavijñāna. > Vāsanās defile the mind; > The common and foolish cannot understand this. > This nature is not existent, > Nor is it empty. > Just as when a person uses objects > To strike and break a jar and the like: > If the substance of the object were empty, > There would be neither breaker nor what is broken. > Even a self-view of the magnitude of Mount Sumeru > Would not yet be considered \[the worst\] evil; > To be arrogant and attach to emptiness— > This evil surpasses that.’ > Moreover, a sūtra says: ‘Better to cling to existence as \[large as\] Mount Sumeru than to cling to emptiness as \[small as\] a mustard seed.’ The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: ‘Liberation is called not-empty emptiness. Emptiness of emptiness is called having nothing. That which has nothing is the liberation postulated by externalists such as the Nirgranthas. Yet those Nirgranthas truly have no liberation; therefore it is called emptiness of emptiness. True liberation is not like that; therefore it is not-empty emptiness. Not-empty emptiness is true liberation; true liberation is the Tathāgata. Furthermore, liberation is called not-empty. Just as a jar for water, wine, curd, ghee, or honey, even when lacking water, wine, curd, ghee, or honey, is still called a jar for water and so forth. Such jars cannot be called empty, nor can they be called not-empty. If one calls them empty, then they could not have color, odor, taste, or touch; if one calls them not-empty, yet there is no reality of water, wine, and so forth. Liberation is also like this: it cannot be said to be form, nor non-form; it cannot be said to be empty, nor not-empty. If one calls it empty, then it could not have permanence, bliss, self, and purity; if one calls it not-empty, who is it that experiences this permanence, bliss, self, and purity? By this meaning, it cannot be called empty, nor can it be called not-empty. As for empty, it means being without the twenty-five states of existence and all kleśas, all suffering, all characteristics, and all conditioned formations; just as a jar without curd is called empty. As for not-empty, it means the real, wholesome form, permanence, bliss, self, purity, immobility, and changelessness; just like the color, odor, taste, and touch of that jar, therefore it is called not-empty. Therefore liberation is exemplified by that jar. When that jar encounters conditions, it is broken; liberation is not like that: it cannot be destroyed. That which cannot be destroyed is true liberation; true liberation is the Tathāgata.’ > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 79.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.18) - [Next: 79.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.20) - [Up: 79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.79.19) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [大乘密嚴經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.dharma.ghanavyuhasutra*zh-amoghavajra.3.9) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.79.19) · Pramāṇa