宗鏡錄 8.7

8.7

答曰。經道持心如虛空者。只是持心令不生故。言如虛空。非即是空。經言。如虛空也。經言。若識在二法。則有喜悅。若識在無二實際法中。則無喜悅。實際即是法性。空識即是妙神。故知實際中。含有妙神也。華嚴經性起品。作十種譬喻。明法身佛有心。大師言。雖有妙神。神性不生。與如一體。譬如凌還是水。與水一體。水亦有凌性。若無凌性者。寒結凌則不現。如中亦有妙神。性同。如清淨則現。不淨不復可見。乃至如師主姓傅傅姓。身內覓不得。身外覓不得。中間覓不得。當知傅姓是空。而非是斷空之空。以傅姓中。含有諸男女。故言性空異於虛空。佛性是空。諸佛法身不空。大師引經曰。女身色相。無在無不在。夫無在無不在者。佛所說也。釋言。女身色相即如。故言無在。如性真常。體含眾相。故言無不在。含者。含有男女色聲等相。涅槃經明菩薩念法。善男子。唯此正法。無有時節。法眼所見。非肉眼見。不生不出。不住不滅。不始不終。無明無數。此正明如體也。非結非業。斷結斷業。而亦是業。非男斷男。而亦是男。非有斷有。而亦是有。非入斷入。而亦是入。乃至諸佛所遊居處。常不變易。是名菩薩念法。如上空有二門。約廣其義用。遂說存泯開合。若破其情執。乃說。即離有無。設當見性證會之時。智解俱絕。如泯絕無寄觀云。謂此所觀真空。不可言即色不即色。亦不可言即空不即空。一切皆不可。不可亦不可。此語亦不受。逈絕無寄。非言所及。非解所到。是謂行境。何以故。生心動念。即乖法體。失正念故。乃至若不洞明前解。無以躡成此行。若不解此行法。絕於前解。無以成其正解。若守解不捨。無以入茲正行。是故行由解成。行起解絕。古釋云。空若即色者。聖應同凡見妄色。凡應同聖見真空。又應無二諦。空若不即色者。見色外空。無由成於聖智。又應凡聖永別。聖不從凡得故。又色若即空者。凡迷見色。應同聖智見空。又亦失於二諦。色不即空者。凡夫見色應不迷。又所見色。長隔真空。應永不成聖。生心動念。即乖法體。失正念故者。真空理性。本自如然。但以迷之。動念執相故。雖推破。簡情顯解。今情忘智泯。但是本真。何存新生之解數。若有解數。即為動念。動念生心。故失正念。正念者。無念而知。若總無知。何成正念。又解為遣情。說因破執。若情消執喪。說解何存。真性了然。寂無存泯。所以若言。即與不即。皆落是非。瞥挂有無。即非正念。故云。纔有是非。紛然失心。

Answer: "When the sūtra speaks of 'maintaining the mind like empty space,' it is merely to maintain the mind so that it does not arise; hence it says 'like empty space.' It is not that it is identical to emptiness. The sūtra says: 'like empty space.' The sūtra states: 'If consciousness rests in dual phenomena, there is pleasure; if consciousness rests in the non-dual reality-limit of phenomena, there is no pleasure.' The reality-limit is the dharmatā; empty consciousness is the wonderful spirit. Hence know that within the reality-limit, the wonderful spirit is contained. The 'Nature Arising' chapter of the *Avataṃsaka-sūtra* employs ten kinds of similes to clarify that the dharmakāya Buddha has a mind. The Great Master said: 'Although there is a wonderful spirit, the nature of the spirit does not arise, and is of one substance with Suchness. Just as ice is still water and of one substance with water, water also has the nature of ice. If it did not have the nature of ice, then when cold congeals, ice would not appear. Within Suchness there is also the wonderful spirit; their nature is identical. When Suchness is pure it appears; when impure it cannot be seen again. Furthermore, just as the master's surname is Fu: the Fu surname cannot be found inside the body, cannot be found outside the body, and cannot be found in between. You should know that the Fu surname is empty, but not the emptiness of annihilative emptiness; because within the Fu surname all men and women are contained, we say that the emptiness of nature is different from empty space. Buddha-nature is empty; the dharmakāya of all buddhas is not empty.' The Great Master cited the sūtra: 'The physical characteristics of a woman's body are nowhere present and nowhere absent.' That they are 'nowhere present and nowhere absent' is spoken by the Buddha. The explanation states: 'The physical characteristics of a woman's body are identical to Suchness; hence it is said they are nowhere present. The nature of Suchness is truly permanent, and its substance contains the myriad characteristics; hence it is said they are nowhere absent. "Containing" means containing the characteristics of male and female, forms, sounds, and so forth.' The *Nirvāṇa-sūtra* clarifies the bodhisattva's mindfulness of the Dharma: 'Good sons, only this true Dharma has no season. It is seen by the Dharma-eye, not seen by the fleshly eye; it does not arise and does not emerge, does not abide and does not perish, has no beginning and no end, is without darkness and without number'—this directly clarifies the substance of Suchness—'It is neither saṃyojana nor karma, severs saṃyojanas and severs karma, and yet is also karma; it is not male, severs maleness, and yet is also male; it is not existent, severs existence, and yet is also existent; it is not an āyatana, severs āyatanas, and yet is also an āyatana... up to the dwelling places where all buddhas roam, constantly unchanging—this is called the bodhisattva's mindfulness of the Dharma.' As above, the two gates of emptiness and existence, in broadly expanding their meaning and function, then speak of preservation and elimination, opening and closing. If one is refuting emotional attachments, one then speaks of identity and divergence, existence and non-existence. Supposing that when one sees the nature and realizes comprehension, both wisdom and understanding are entirely cut off. As the *Contemplation on the Quenching and Severing without Reliance* states: 'This contemplated true emptiness cannot be said to be identical to form or not identical to form, nor can it be said to be identical to emptiness or not identical to emptiness. Everything is inadmissible, and inadmissibility is also inadmissible; even this utterance is not accepted. Remote, cut off, and without reliance, it is beyond the reach of words and unattainable by understanding. This is called the realm of practice. Why? Because giving rise to mind and stirring thoughts directly goes against the substance of phenomena and loses right mindfulness.' Up to: 'If one does not thoroughly comprehend the preceding understanding, there is no way to step forward and achieve this practice. If one does not understand this practice-dharma and cut off the preceding understanding, there is no way to achieve its correct understanding. If one clings to understanding and does not let go, there is no way to enter this correct practice. Therefore, practice is accomplished through understanding, and when practice arises, understanding is cut off.' An ancient commentary says: 'If emptiness were identical to form, the noble would, like the ordinary, see delusive form, and the ordinary would, like the noble, see true emptiness; moreover, there would be no two truths. If emptiness were not identical to form, seeing emptiness outside of form would provide no way to accomplish noble wisdom; moreover, ordinary and noble would be forever separate, because the noble would not be attained from the ordinary. Furthermore, if form were identical to emptiness, the ordinary being's deluded seeing of form should, like noble wisdom, see emptiness; moreover, the two truths would also be lost. If form were not identical to emptiness, ordinary beings seeing form should not be deluded; moreover, the form seen would be forever separated from true emptiness, and they would never become noble ones.' 'Giving rise to mind and stirring thoughts directly goes against the substance of phenomena and loses right mindfulness' means: the principle-nature of true emptiness is originally so. It is merely because of delusion that one stirs thoughts and grasps at characteristics. Although one engages in analytical refutation, sorting out emotions to reveal understanding, now that emotions are forgotten and wisdom is quenched, there is only the original reality—how could any newly arisen category of understanding remain? If there are categories of understanding, that is stirring thoughts; stirring thoughts gives rise to mind, and therefore loses right mindfulness. Right mindfulness is knowing without thought. If there were altogether no knowing, how could it constitute right mindfulness? Furthermore, understanding is meant to dispel emotions, and explanation is caused by refuting attachments. If emotions vanish and attachments are destroyed, how could explanation and understanding remain? The true nature is clear and distinct, quiescent, with neither preservation nor elimination. Therefore, if one speaks of identity or non-identity, all fall into right and wrong; if one catches a fleeting glimpse of existence or non-existence, that is not right mindfulness. Hence it is said: 'No sooner is there right and wrong than one is confusedly lost to the mind.'"