宗鏡錄 82.3

82.3

答。法性寂然名止。寂而常照名觀。非能所觀。但是一法。若台教總論二種止觀。一相待止觀。二絕待止觀。前是拙度。後是巧度。相待止觀者。有三止三觀。三止者。一止息義。二停止義。三不止止義。三觀者。一觀穿義。二觀達義。三不觀觀義。絕待止觀者。有三止三觀。三止者。一體真止。二方便隨緣止。三息二邊分別止。三觀者。一從假入空。名二諦觀。二從空入假。名平等觀。三二觀為方便道。得入中道。雙照二諦。心心寂滅。自然流入薩婆若海。名中道第一義諦觀。今宗鏡所明。唯論一心圓頓之旨。圓頓止觀相者。以止緣於諦。則一諦而三諦。以諦繫於止。則一止而三止。譬如三相在一念心。雖一念心。而有三相。止諦亦如是。所止之法。雖一而三。能止之心。雖三而一也。以觀觀於境。則一境而三境。以境發於觀。則一觀而三觀。如摩醯首羅面上三目。雖是三目。而是一面。觀境亦如是。觀三即一。發一則三不可思議。不權不實。不優不劣。不前不後。不並不別。不大不小。故中論云。因緣所生法。即空即假即中。又如金剛般若經云。譬如人有目。日光明照。見種種色。若眼獨見。不應須日。若無色者。雖有日眼亦無所見。如是三法不異時。不相離。眼喻於止。日喻於觀。境喻於色。如是三法。不前不後。一時論三。三中論一。亦復如是。若見此意。即解圓頓教止觀相也。何但三一一三。總前諸義皆在一心。其相云何。體無明顛倒即是實相之真。名體真止。如此實相。遍一切處。隨緣歷境。安心不動。名隨緣方便止。生死涅槃靜散休息。名息二邊止。體一切諸假悉皆是空。空即實相。名入空觀。達此空時。觀冥中道。能知世間生滅法相。如實而見。名入假觀。如此空慧。即是中道。無二無別。名中道觀。體真之時。五住盤石砂礫一念休息。名止息義。心緣中道。入實相慧。名停止義。實相之性。即非止非不止義。又此一念。能穿五住。達於實相。實相非觀。亦非不觀。如此等義。但在一念心中。不動真際而有種種差別。經言。善能分別諸法相。於第一義而不動。雖多名字。蓋乃般若之一法。佛說種種名。眾名皆圓。諸義亦圓。相待絕待對體。不可思議。不可思議故。無有障礙。無有障礙故。具足無減。是圓頓教相顯止觀體也。又三止三觀為因。所得三智三眼為果。三智者。一切智。道種智。一切種智。三眼者。慧眼。法眼。佛眼。若一心眼智者。眼即是智。智即是眼。眼故論見。智故論知。知即是見。見即是知。佛眼具五眼。佛智具三智。王三昧。一切三昧悉入其中。首楞嚴定。攝一切定。如來雖具五眼。實不分張。只約一眼。備有五用。能照五境。所以者何。佛眼亦能照麁色。如人所見。亦過人所見。名肉眼。亦能照細色。如天所見。亦過天所見。名天眼。達麁細色空。如二乘所見。名慧眼。照達假名不謬。如菩薩所見。名法眼。於諸法中。皆見實相。名佛眼。當知佛眼。圓照無遺。故經云。五眼具足成菩提。永與三界作父母。而獨稱佛眼者。而眾流入海。失本名字。非無四用也。佛智照空。如二乘所見。名一切智。佛智照假。如菩薩所見。名道種智。佛智照空假中。皆見實相。名一切種智。故言三智一心中得。故知一心三止。所成三眼。見不思議三諦。此見從止得。故受眼名。一心三觀。所成三智。知不思議三境。此智從觀得。故受智名。境之與諦。左右異耳。見之與知。眼目殊稱。不應別說。雖作三止三觀之三說。實是不思議一法耳。又云。善巧安心者。以觀止安於法性。無明癡惑。本是法性。以癡迷故。法性變作無明。如眠來變心有種種夢。雖顛倒起滅。如旋火輪。不信顛倒起滅。唯信此心。但是法性。起是法性起。滅是法性滅。體其實不起滅。妄謂起滅。以法性繫法性。以法性念法性。常法性。無不法性時。體達既成。不得妄想。亦不得法性。還原反本。法界俱寂。是名為止。觀者。觀察無明之心。等。於法性。本來皆空。譬如劫盡。下等一切妄想善惡。皆如虛空。無二無別。又如劫盡。從地上至初禪炎炎無非是火。如虛空藏菩薩所現之相。一切皆空。如海慧如來所現。一切皆水。介爾念起。所念念者。無不即空。空亦不可得。如火木能使薪燃亦復自燃。法界洞朗。咸皆大明。名之為觀。上所言止者。尚不得法性。何況妄想。所言觀者。尚不得空。何況有法。則有無俱寂。染淨雙融。方成究竟一心止觀耳。又絕待止觀者。絕橫竪諸待。絕諸思議。絕諸教觀。悉皆不生。故名止。止亦不可得。觀冥如境。境既寂滅清淨。尚無清淨。何得有觀。世人約種種語釋絕待義。終不得絕。若得意忘言。心行亦斷。隨智妙悟。無復分別。緣理分別。皆名為待。真慧開發。絕此諸待。絕即復絕。諸法不相待。乃至一念不住故。即此意也。輔行記云。若無生門。千萬重疊。唯是一心者。為欲修觀人措心難當故。撮示其正意。名為一心。此即正明一心無生之門。乃至既於念念止觀現前。約此心念名為眾生。何者。總撮前來若橫若竪。既入一心。凡一念起。不離於我。我即眾生。達念念心而寂而照。寂故名止。照故。名觀。一心既爾。諸心例然。止觀為因。眼智為果。一一念中。無非止觀眼智也。如上三一。若有三可三。便成差別。有一可一。便成無差。若差則失無差。若無差則失差。開一為三。則失一。合三為一。則失三。今明不爾。昔三猶是今一。今一猶是昔三。開三不失一。合一不失三。即是差即無差。無差即差。若得此意。本有今無。三世有法。無有是處。亦應例云。本無今有。三世有法。斯有是處。無常非無常。境智非境智。因果非因果。例皆如是。昔三猶是今一。今一猶是昔三者。即是不動。眾生之性。能成諸佛之性。亦是從實開權會權歸實。亦是因果同時。迷悟一際。故云汝等所行。是菩薩道。一切眾生。即涅槃相。又說一心三觀。三觀一心。若三觀一心。即約縱說。一心三觀。即約橫說。今非縱故不一。非橫故不三。三一一三。但是真心上義。不可定執為一為三非三非一之解。以宗非數量。道絕名言故。

Answer: The dharma-nature being quiescent is called śamatha (calming). Being quiescent yet ever-illuminating is called vipaśyanā (contemplation). There is no contemplator or contemplated; it is simply a single dharma. If we speak comprehensively of the Tiantai teachings, there are two kinds of calming and contemplation: first, relative calming and contemplation; second, absolute calming and contemplation. The former is clumsy crossing; the latter is skillful crossing. As for relative calming and contemplation, there are three calmings and three contemplations. The three calmings are: first, the meaning of ceasing; second, the meaning of stopping; third, the meaning of stopping what does not stop. The three contemplations are: first, the meaning of contemplation penetrating; second, the meaning of contemplation reaching; third, the meaning of contemplating what is not contemplated. As for absolute calming and contemplation, there are three calmings and three contemplations. The three calmings are: first, the calming that realizes the true; second, the calming that accords with conditions through skillful means; third, the calming that puts an end to distinctions between the two extremes. The three contemplations are: first, entering emptiness from conventional designations, which is called the contemplation of the two truths; second, entering conventional designations from emptiness, which is called the contemplation of equality; third, using the two contemplations as the path of skillful means to gain entry into the middle path, doubly illuminating the two truths so that thought after thought is quiescent and extinguished, naturally flowing into the ocean of sarvajñā, which is called the contemplation of the middle path as supreme truth. What is now clarified in the Mirror of the Source solely discusses the principle of the one mind's perfect and sudden [nature]. As for the characteristics of the perfect and sudden calming and contemplation: when calming takes the truth as its object, then a single truth is three truths; when the truth is bound to calming, then a single calming is three calmings. For example, just as the three characteristics exist in a single thought-moment of citta, though it is a single thought-moment of citta, there are three characteristics. Calming and truth are also like this: the dharma that is calmed, though one, is three; the mind that can calm, though three, is one. When contemplation contemplates the object, then a single object is three objects; when the object arouses contemplation, then a single contemplation is three contemplations. It is like the three eyes on the face of Maheśvara: though there are three eyes, it is a single face. Contemplation and object are also like this: the three of contemplation are just one; the arousing of the one is three—inconceivable. It is neither provisional nor real, neither superior nor inferior, neither before nor after, neither combined nor distinct, neither large nor small. Therefore the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'Dharmas arisen from causes and conditions / Are identical to emptiness, conventional designation, and the middle.' Moreover, just as the Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: 'For example, it is like a person who has eyes, when the sunlight brightly shines, seeing various colors. If the eye saw on its own, it would not need the sun. If there were no colors, then although there were the sun and eyes, nothing would be seen.' These three dharmas are not at different times and not separated from one another. The eyes are an analogy for calming; the sun is an analogy for contemplation; the object is an analogy for colors. These three dharmas are neither before nor after; when speaking of three at one time, speaking of one within three is also like this. If one understands this meaning, one understands the characteristics of calming and contemplation in the perfect and sudden teaching. How could it merely be three-one and one-three? All the preceding meanings are within the one mind. What are their characteristics? Realizing that the upside-down delusions of avidyā are themselves the truth of the real mark is called 'calming that realizes the true'. This real mark pervades all places; according with conditions and encountering objects, one settles the mind in unmovingness, which is called 'calming that accords with conditions through skillful means'. Putting to rest the quietude and distraction of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa is called 'calming that puts an end to the two extremes'. Realizing that all conventionalities are entirely empty, and that emptiness is itself the real mark, is called 'the contemplation of entering emptiness'. When one reaches this emptiness, the contemplation merges with the middle path, and one can know the characteristics of worldly phenomena of arising and ceasing, seeing them as they truly are, which is called 'the contemplation of entering conventional designations'. Such wisdom of emptiness is itself the middle path, non-dual and undivided, which is called 'the contemplation of the middle path'. At the time of realizing the true, the bedrock, sand, and gravel of the five entrenchments are put to rest in a single thought-moment, which is called 'the meaning of ceasing'. When the mind takes the middle path as its object and enters into the wisdom of the real mark, this is called 'the meaning of stopping'. The nature of the real mark is itself 'the meaning of neither stopping nor not stopping'. Furthermore, this single thought-moment can pierce the five entrenchments and reach the real mark. The real mark is not contemplation, nor is it non-contemplation. Meanings such as these are simply within a single thought-moment of citta: without moving from the true limit, there are various distinctions. The sūtra says: 'Skillfully able to distinguish the characteristics of all dharmas, yet unmoved in the supreme truth.' Though there are many names, they are all merely the single dharma of prajñā. The Buddha spoke of various names: all names are perfect, and all meanings are also perfect. The relative and the absolute matching the substance are inconceivable. Because they are inconceivable, there is no obstruction. Because there is no obstruction, they are complete without deficiency. This is the characteristic of the perfect and sudden teaching revealing the substance of calming and contemplation. Furthermore, the three calmings and three contemplations are the cause; the obtained three wisdoms and three eyes are the fruit. The three wisdoms are: sarvajñā (all-knowledge), mārgākārajñatā (knowledge of the aspects of the path), and sarvākārajñatā (knowledge of all aspects). The three eyes are: the wisdom eye, the dharma eye, and the buddha eye. If we speak of the eye and wisdom in the one mind: the eye is itself wisdom, and wisdom is itself the eye. Because of the eye, one speaks of seeing; because of wisdom, one speaks of knowing. Knowing is itself seeing, and seeing is itself knowing. The buddha eye is endowed with the five eyes; the buddha wisdom is endowed with the three wisdoms. It is the king of samādhis: all samādhis enter into it. The Śūraṅgama samādhi subsumes all samādhis. Although the Tathāgata possesses the five eyes, in reality they are not divided; based simply on a single eye, it is fully endowed with five functions and can illuminate five objects. Why is this? The buddha eye can also illuminate coarse forms, as seen by humans, and also surpasses what is seen by humans; this is called the fleshly eye. It can also illuminate subtle forms, as seen by devas, and also surpasses what is seen by devas; this is called the divine eye. Comprehending the emptiness of coarse and subtle forms, as seen by the two vehicles, is called the wisdom eye. Illuminating and comprehending conventional designations without error, as seen by bodhisattvas, is called the dharma eye. Seeing the real mark in all dharmas is called the buddha eye. One should know that the buddha eye illuminates completely without omission. Therefore the sūtra says: 'Fully endowed with the five eyes, one achieves bodhi, eternally serving as father and mother to the three realms.' As for it being called solely the buddha eye: when the many streams enter the ocean, they lose their original names; it is not that the four functions do not exist. The buddha wisdom illuminating emptiness, as seen by the two vehicles, is called sarvajñā. The buddha wisdom illuminating conventionalities, as seen by bodhisattvas, is called mārgākārajñatā. The buddha wisdom illuminating emptiness, conventionality, and the middle, seeing the real mark in all of them, is called sarvākārajñatā. Therefore it is said that the three wisdoms are attained within the one mind. Hence we know that the three eyes produced by the three calmings of the one mind see the inconceivable three truths. Because this seeing is attained from calming, it receives the name 'eye'. The three wisdoms produced by the three contemplations of the one mind know the inconceivable three objects. Because this wisdom is attained from contemplation, it receives the name 'wisdom'. Object and truth are merely different terms for left and right; seeing and knowing are distinct names for eyes and vision, and should not be spoken of separately. Although there is the threefold explanation of three calmings and three contemplations, in truth it is simply a single inconceivable dharma. It is also said: as for skillfully settling the mind, one uses contemplation and calming to settle it in the dharma-nature. The foolish delusion of avidyā is originally the dharma-nature. Because of foolish delusion, the dharma-nature turns into avidyā. It is like sleep coming and transforming the mind into various dreams; though arising and ceasing upside down like a whirling firebrand, one does not believe in the arising and ceasing of delusion, but only believes that this mind is simply the dharma-nature. Arising is the arising of the dharma-nature; ceasing is the ceasing of the dharma-nature. One realizes that in truth there is neither arising nor ceasing, and that calling it arising and ceasing is false. One binds dharma-nature with dharma-nature; one is mindful of dharma-nature with dharma-nature; it is constantly dharma-nature, and there is no time that is not dharma-nature. Once the comprehension is achieved, one cannot find false thoughts, nor can one find dharma-nature. Returning to the source and reverting to the origin, the dharmadhātu is entirely quiescent; this is called calming. As for contemplation: one contemplates that the mind of avidyā is equal to the dharma-nature and originally empty. For example, at the end of a kalpa, all false thoughts, good and bad below, are like empty space, non-dual and undivided. Again, it is like at the end of a kalpa, from the ground up to the first dhyāna, all is blazing fire; just as in the manifestation shown by Ākāśagarbha Bodhisattva, everything is empty space; or as in the manifestation shown by Sāgaramati Tathāgata, everything is water. Whenever the slightest thought arises, that which is thought of is in every case identical to emptiness, and emptiness is also ungraspable—just as fire from wood can burn fuel and also burns itself. The dharmadhātu is clearly illuminated, entirely in great brightness; this is called contemplation. As for the calming spoken of above, even the dharma-nature cannot be found, let alone false thoughts. As for the contemplation spoken of, even emptiness cannot be found, let alone existent dharmas. Then existence and non-existence are both quiescent, and defilement and purity are both fused; only then is the ultimate calming and contemplation of the one mind accomplished. Furthermore, as for absolute calming and contemplation: it cuts off all horizontal and vertical relations, cuts off all conceptual thought, cuts off all teachings and contemplations, so that none arise at all; hence it is called calming. Calming is also ungraspable. Contemplation merges with the object of suchness; since the object is quiescent and pure, and there is not even purity, how could there be contemplation? Worldly people explain the meaning of 'absolute' based on various verbal expressions, but ultimately fail to cut off [relativity]. If one grasps the meaning and forgets the words, mental activities are also severed. Following wisdom in marvelous awakening, there are no further distinctions. Distinctions that take principle as an object are all called relative. When true wisdom unfolds, it cuts off all these relations: cutting off is in turn cut off, all dharmas do not depend on one another, and even for a single thought-moment there is no abiding. This is precisely the meaning. The Fuxing ji says: 'If the doors of non-arising are ten-thousandfold, yet are solely the one mind, this is because it is difficult for someone cultivating contemplation to position the mind; therefore, grasping and showing the correct intention is called the one mind.' This precisely clarifies the one-mind door of non-arising. 'Furthermore, since in thought-moment after thought-moment calming and contemplation are present before one, based on these thoughts of the mind, it is called sentient beings. Why? Grasping all the preceding, whether horizontal or vertical, once one enters the one mind, whenever a single thought arises, it is not apart from the self; the self is just sentient beings. Comprehending that the mind in thought-moment after thought-moment is both quiescent and illuminating: being quiescent, it is called calming; being illuminating, it is called contemplation. Since the one mind is like this, all minds are by analogy the same. Calming and contemplation are the cause; the eyes and wisdom are the fruit. In each and every thought-moment, there is nothing that is not calming, contemplation, eye, and wisdom.' As for the three and the one above: if there were three that could be three, it would become differentiation; if there were one that could be one, it would become non-differentiation. If differentiated, one loses non-differentiation; if non-differentiated, one loses differentiation. Opening the one into three loses the one; combining the three into one loses the three. It is now clarified that this is not so: the former three are still the present one; the present one is still the former three. Opening into three does not lose the one; combining into one does not lose the three. This is just differentiation being non-differentiation, and non-differentiation being differentiation. If one grasps this meaning, [one sees that] there is no basis for dharmas existing in the three times as 'originally existing but now non-existent'; one should also similarly say that there is basis for dharmas existing in the three times as 'originally non-existent but now existing'. Impermanence and non-impermanence, object and wisdom, cause and effect—all follow this analogy. 'The former three are still the present one; the present one is still the former three' means: without moving from it, the nature of sentient beings can accomplish the nature of all buddhas; it is also opening the provisional from the real and converging the provisional back into the real; it is also cause and effect being simultaneous, and delusion and awakening being of the same limit. Therefore it is said: 'What you all practice is the bodhisattva path; all sentient beings are the characteristic of nirvāṇa.' Furthermore, it is said that the one mind is three contemplations, and the three contemplations are the one mind. If the three contemplations are the one mind, it is spoken of vertically; if the one mind is three contemplations, it is spoken of horizontally. Now, not being vertical, it is not one; not being horizontal, it is not three. Three-one and one-three are merely meanings upon the true mind; one must not rigidly cling to an understanding of being one, being three, or being neither three nor one. This is because the source is not a numerical quantity, and the path transcends names and words.