宗鏡錄 83.23

83.23

答。此一念心。亦不孤起。依他假有。內外皆空。此一念瞥起覺了能知之心。如阿難妄執在其七處。世尊一一推破。俱無所在。然因依之處。不過此七。世人同執。熏習堅牢。若非大聖子細推尋。情見無由可脫。此七處既破。則一切處皆無。可以即今現知。無勞更執。如首楞嚴經云。佛告阿難。如汝所說。真所愛樂。因。于心目。若不識知心目所在。則不能得降伏塵勞。譬如國王為賊所侵。發兵討除。是兵要當知賊所在。使汝流轉。心目為咎。吾今問汝。唯心與目。今何所在。阿難白佛言。世尊。一切世間十種異生。同將識心居在身內。縱觀如來青蓮華眼。亦在佛面。我今觀此浮根四塵。只在我面。如是識心。實居身內。佛告阿難。汝今現坐如來講堂。觀祇陀林。今何所在。世尊。此大重閣清淨講堂。在給孤園。今祇陀林。實在堂外。阿難。汝今堂中先何所見。世尊。我在堂中先見如來。次觀大眾。如是外望。方矚林園。阿難。汝矚林園。因何有見。世尊。此大講堂。戶牖開豁。故我在堂。得遠瞻見。乃至佛告阿難。如汝所言。身在講堂。戶牖開豁。遠矚林園。亦有眾生在此堂中。不見如來。見堂外者。阿難答言。世尊。在堂不見如來。能見林泉。無有是處。阿難。汝亦如是。汝之心靈。一切明了。若汝現前所明了心。實在身內。爾時先合了知內身。頗有眾生。先見身中。後觀外物。縱不能見心肝脾胃。爪生髮長。筋轉脈搖。誠合明了。如何不知。必不內知。云何知外。是故應知。汝言覺了能知之心。住在身內。無有是處。阿難稽首而白佛言。我聞如來如是法音。悟知我心實居身外。所以者何。譬如燈光然於室中。是燈必能先照室內。從其室門。後及庭際。一切眾生不見身中。獨見身外。亦如燈光。居在室外。不能照室。是義必明。將無所惑。同佛了義。得無妄耶。佛告阿難。是諸比丘。適來從我室羅筏城。循乞摶食。歸祇陀林。我已宿齋。汝觀比丘。一人食時諸人飽不。阿難答言。不也。世尊。何以故。是比丘雖阿羅漢。軀命不同。云何一人能令眾飽。佛告阿難。若汝覺了知見之心。實在身外。身心相外。自不相干。則心所知。身不能覺。覺在身際。心不能知。我今示汝兜羅綿手。汝眼見時。心分別不。阿難答言。如是。世尊。佛告阿難。若相知者。云何在外。是故應知。汝言覺了能知之心。住在身外。無有是處。阿難白佛言。世尊。如佛所言。不見內故。不居身內。身心相知。不相離故。不在身外。我今思惟。知在一處。佛言。處今何在。阿難言。此了知心。既不知內而能見外。如我思忖。潛伏根裏。猶如有人取瑠璃椀合其兩眼。雖有物合而不留礙。彼根隨見隨即分別。然我覺了能知之心。不見內者。為在根故。分明矚外無障礙者。潛根內故。佛告阿難。如汝所言。潛根內者。猶如瑠璃。彼人當以瑠璃籠眼當見山河。見瑠璃不。如是。世尊。是人當以瑠璃籠眼。實見瑠璃。佛告阿難。汝心若同瑠璃合者。當見山河。何不見眼。若見眼者。眼即同境。不得成隨。若不能見。云何說言。此了知心。潛在根內。如瑠璃合。是故應知。汝言覺了能知之心。潛伏根裏。如瑠璃合。無有是處。阿難白佛言。世尊。我今又作如是思惟。是眾生身。腑藏在中。竅穴居外。有藏則闇。有竅則明。今我對佛。開眼見明。名為見外。閉眼見闇。名為見內。是義云何。佛告阿難。汝當閉眼見闇之時。此闇境界。為與眼對。為不對眼。若與眼對。闇在眼前。云何成內。若成內者。居暗室中無日月燈。此室闇中皆汝焦腑。若不對者。云何成見。若離外見內對所成。合眼見闇。名為身中。開眼見明。何不見面。若不見面。內對不成。見面若成。此了知心。及與眼根乃在虛空。何成在內。若在虛空。自非汝體。即應如來今見汝面。亦是汝身。汝眼已知。身合非覺。必汝執言身眼兩覺。應有二知。即汝一身應成兩佛。是故應知。汝言見闇。名見內者。無有是處。阿難言。我常聞佛開示四眾。由心生故種種法生。由法生故種種心生。我今思惟。即思惟體。實我心性。隨所合處。心則隨有。亦非內外中間三處。佛告阿難。汝今說言。由法生故種種法生。隨所合處心隨有者。是心無體。則無所合。若無有體而能合者。則十九界因七塵合。是義不然。若有體者。如汝以手自挃其體。汝所知心。為復內出。為從外入。若復內出。還見身中。若從外來。先合見面。阿難言。見是其眼。心知非眼。為見非義。佛言。若眼能見。汝在室中門能見不。則諸已死尚有眼存。應皆見物。若見物者。云何名死。阿難。又汝覺了能知之心。若必有體。為復一體。為有多體。今在汝身。為復遍體。為不遍體。若一體者。則汝以手挃一支時。四支應覺。若咸覺者。挃應無在。若挃有所。則汝一體自不能成。若多體者。則成多人。何體為汝。若遍體者。同前所挃。若不遍者。當汝觸頭。亦觸其足。頭有所覺。足應無知。今汝不然。是故應知。隨所合處。心則隨有。無有是處。阿難白佛言。世尊。我亦聞佛。與文殊等諸法王子。談實相時。世尊。亦言。心不在內。亦不在外。如我思惟。內無所見。外不相知。內無知故。在內不成。身心相知。在外非義。今相知故。復內無見。當在中間。佛言。汝言中間。中必不迷。非無所在。今汝推中。中何為在。為復在處。為當在身。若在身者。在邊非中。在中同內。若在處者。為有所表。為無所表。無表同無。表則無定。何以故。如人以表表為中時。東看則西。南觀成北。表體既混。心應雜亂。阿難言。我所說中。非此二種。如世尊言。眼色為緣。生於眼識。眼有分別。色塵無知。識生其中。則為心在。佛言。汝心若在根塵之中。此之心體。為復兼二。為不兼二。若兼二者。物體雜亂。物非體知。成敵兩立。云何為中。兼二不成。非知不知。即無體性。中何為相。是故應知當在中間。無有是處。阿難白佛言。世尊。我昔見佛。與大目連。須菩提。富樓那。舍利弗。四大弟子。共轉法輪。常言覺知分別心性。既不在內。亦不在外。不在中間。俱無所在。一切無著。名之為心。則我無著。名為心不。佛告阿難。汝言覺知分別心性。俱無在者。世間虛空水陸飛行。諸所物像。名為一切。汝不著者。為在為無。無則同於龜毛兔角。云何不著。有不著者。不可名無。無相則無。非無則相。相有則在。云何無著。是故應知。一切無著。名覺知心。無有是處。如上所推。即今生滅身中。妄心無寄。現量所知。分明無惑。可謂頓悟真心。直了無生矣。

Answer: This single thought of the mind also does not arise alone; it exists dependently and provisionally, and inside and outside are both empty. This mind that momentarily arises, perceiving and capable of knowing, is like what Ānanda falsely clung to as being in seven locations, which the World-Honoured One refuted one by one, showing that it resides nowhere at all. Indeed, the places of its dependence do not exceed these seven; worldly people universally cling to them, and their habituation is deep-seated and firm. Were it not for the Great Sage's meticulous investigation and inquiry, there would be no way to become free from emotional clinging and biased views. Once these seven locations are refuted, then it is absent in all places. This can be directly known right now, and there is no need to cling to it further.

As the Śūraṅgamasūtra says: The Buddha said to Ānanda: “As you have said, that which is genuinely loved and cherished is due to the mind and the eyes. If you do not recognize where the mind and the eyes are located, you will not be able to subjugate the afflictions of the dust-realm. It is like a king whose realm is invaded by bandits: when he dispatches troops to quell them, these troops must know where the bandits are. That which causes you to transmigrate is the fault of the mind and the eyes. I now ask you: where are this mind and these eyes located right now?”

Ānanda said to the Buddha: “World-Honoured One, all the ten varieties of living beings throughout the world together consider this conscious mind to reside within the body. And even when observing the Tathāgata’s blue-lotus eyes, they too are on the Buddha’s face. I now observe these floating sense-bases of the four elements, and they are merely upon my face; thus, this conscious mind truly resides within the body.”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “You are now seated here in the Tathāgata’s lecture hall, looking out at the Jeta Grove. Where is it located right now?”

“World-Honoured One, this great multi-storied, pure lecture hall is in Anāthapiṇḍada's park, and the Jeta Grove is truly outside the hall.”

“Ānanda, what do you see first right now within the hall?”

“World-Honoured One, inside the hall I first see the Tathāgata, next I observe the great assembly, and gazing outward in this manner, only then do I behold the grove and the park.”

“Ānanda, when you behold the grove and the park, by what means do you see them?”

“World-Honoured One, the doors and windows of this great lecture hall are open wide; therefore, being in the hall, I am able to gaze far and see them.”

And so forth, until the Buddha said to Ānanda: “As you have said, when your body is in the lecture hall, with the doors and windows open wide, you gaze far and see the grove and the park. Could there also be a living being who, being in this hall, does not see the Tathāgata, but sees outside the hall?”

Ānanda replied: “World-Honoured One, for one to be in the hall, not see the Tathāgata, and yet be able to see the grove and the springs—this is impossible.”

“Ānanda, you are also like this. The spiritual essence of your mind is completely clear and comprehending. If the comprehending mind presently before you truly resided within your body, then at that very moment you should first clearly perceive the inside of your body. Are there any living beings who first see inside their bodies and only later observe external objects? Even if you cannot see your heart, liver, spleen, and stomach, the growth of your nails, the lengthening of your hair, the twitching of your sinews, and the pulsing of your veins should truly be plainly discerned; how could you not know them? If you definitely do not know what is inside, how could you know what is outside? Therefore, you should know that when you say the mind that perceives and is capable of knowing dwells within the body, this is impossible.”

Ānanda bowed his head and said to the Buddha: “Having heard such Dharma sounds of the Tathāgata, I have awakened to the realization that my mind truly resides outside the body. Why is that? For example, like a lamp lit inside a room, this lamp must surely first illuminate the interior of the room, and from its doorway it only later reaches the courtyard. All living beings do not see inside their bodies, but only see outside their bodies; this is just like the light of a lamp situated outside a room, which cannot illuminate the room. This meaning must surely be clear and without doubt; it accords with the Buddha’s definitive meaning. Could it not be free of error?”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “Just now, these monks followed me through the city of Śrāvastī, begging for food from house to house, and have returned to the Jeta Grove. I have already finished the meal. Look at the monks: when one person eats, are all the others sated or not?”

Ānanda replied: “No, World-Honoured One. Why? Although these monks are arhats, their bodies and lifespans are different. How could one person cause the assembly to be full?”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “If your mind that perceives and knows truly resided outside the body, then body and mind would be external to each other, naturally having no relation to one another. Then what the mind knows, the body could not perceive; and what is perceived at the body, the mind could not know. I now show you my hand like a tula cotton blossom: when your eyes see it, does your mind make distinctions or not?”

Ānanda replied: “It is so, World-Honoured One.”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “If they mutually know, how could it be outside? Therefore, you should know that when you say the mind that perceives and is capable of knowing dwells outside the body, this is impossible.”

Ānanda said to the Buddha: “World-Honoured One, as the Buddha has said, because it does not see within, it does not reside within the body; and because the body and mind mutually know and are not separated, it is not outside the body. Now as I reflect upon it, I know it is in a certain place.”

The Buddha said: “Where is that place now?”

Ānanda said: “Since this comprehending mind does not know the interior yet can see the exterior, according to my consideration, it lies hidden within the sense-organs. It is just like someone taking a crystal bowl and covering both of his eyes with it; although there is an object covering them, it poses no obstruction, and the sense-organ makes distinctions in accordance with what it sees. Thus my mind that perceives and is capable of knowing does not see within because it resides in the sense-organ; that it clearly beholds the exterior without obstruction is because it is hidden within the sense-organ.”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “As you have said, being hidden within the sense-organ is like a crystal bowl. When that person covers his eyes with the crystal bowl and sees the mountains and rivers, does he see the crystal bowl or not?”

“He does, World-Honoured One. When that person covers his eyes with the crystal bowl, he truly sees the crystal bowl.”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “If your mind were joined with the crystal bowl, when seeing mountains and rivers, why does it not see your eyes? If it sees the eyes, then the eyes would be identical to an external object, and it could not be said to follow [the sight]. If it cannot see them, how can you say that this comprehending mind is hidden within the sense-organ like the joining of the crystal bowl? Therefore, you should know that when you say the mind that perceives and is capable of knowing is hidden within the sense-organs like the joining of a crystal bowl, this is impossible.”

Ānanda said to the Buddha: “World-Honoured One, I now reflect further in this way: the viscera and organs of living beings’ bodies are located inside, while the orifices reside on the outside. Where there are viscera, it is dark; where there are orifices, it is bright. Now as I face the Buddha, opening my eyes to see brightness is called seeing outside; closing my eyes to see darkness is called seeing inside. What is the meaning of this?”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “When you close your eyes and see darkness, is this dark realm opposite your eyes, or is it not opposite your eyes? If it is opposite your eyes, then the darkness is in front of your eyes; how could it constitute the inside? If it constitutes the inside, then when you are in a dark room without the sun, moon, or a lamp, the darkness in this room would all be your viscera and organs. If it is not opposite, how could it constitute seeing? If, apart from external seeing, an internal opposition is formed, so that closing the eyes and seeing darkness is called being inside the body, then when opening the eyes and seeing brightness, why do you not see your face? If you do not see your face, internal opposition is not established. If seeing the face were established, then this comprehending mind, along with the eye-organ, would be out in empty space; how could it be inside? If it is in empty space, it is naturally not your body; it would then follow that the Tathāgata now seeing your face is also your body! If your eyes already know, the body should not perceive; but if you stubbornly maintain that the body and the eyes both perceive, there should be two consciousnesses, which means that you in your single body would become two Buddhas! Therefore, you should know that when you say seeing darkness is called seeing inside, this is impossible.”

Ānanda said: “I have often heard the Buddha explain to the four assemblies that ‘because the mind arises, diverse dharmas arise; because dharmas arise, diverse minds arise.’ I now reflect: the very substance of this thinking is truly the nature of my mind; wherever it joins, the mind exists accordingly. It is not in the three locations of inside, outside, or in between.”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “You now say that ‘because dharmas arise, diverse dharmas arise,’ and that wherever it joins, the mind exists accordingly. If this mind has no substance, then there is nothing to join with. If, lacking substance, it could join, then there would be a nineteenth dhātu joining with a seventh dust-realm. This principle is not correct. If it has substance, then just as when you pinch your body with your hand, does the mind that knows it come out from within, or enter from without? If it comes out from within, it should again see inside the body; if it comes from without, it should first see your face.”

Ānanda said: “Seeing belongs to the eyes; the mind knows, it is not the eyes. To say that it sees is not correct.”

The Buddha said: “If the eyes can see, when you are in a room, can the door see? Then those who have already died still have eyes remaining—they should all see objects. If they see objects, how could they be called dead? Ānanda, furthermore, if your mind that perceives and is capable of knowing must have substance, does it have one substance, or does it have many substances? Now in your body, does it pervade the body, or does it not pervade the body? If it is one substance, then when you pinch one limb with your hand, all four limbs should feel it. If they all feel it, the pinch would have no specific location. If the pinch has a specific location, then your single substance naturally cannot be established. If it has many substances, then you would become many people; which substance would be you? If it pervades the body, it is the same as the previous pinch. If it does not pervade, when you touch your head and also touch your foot, the head having perception, the foot should have no sensation. But this is not so with you. Therefore, you should know that to say ‘wherever it joins, the mind exists accordingly’ is impossible.”

Ānanda said to the Buddha: “World-Honoured One, I have also heard the Buddha, when discussing the true characteristic with Mañjuśrī and other Dharma princes, say that the mind is not inside and not outside. As I reflect upon it: since nothing is seen inside, and there is no mutual knowing outside—because there is no knowledge inside, being inside is not established; and since the body and mind mutually know, being outside is not correct. Now, because they mutually know and yet there is no seeing inside, it must be in the middle.”

The Buddha said: “You say ‘the middle’; this ‘middle’ must certainly not be confused, and it cannot be without a location. Now, as you investigate the middle, where does the middle reside? Is it in a place, or is it in the body? If it is in the body, being on the edge is not the middle, and being in the center is the same as being inside. If it is in a place, does it have an indication, or does it not have an indication? If there is no indication, it is the same as non-existence; if there is an indication, then it is not fixed. Why? If someone sets up a marker to indicate the middle, when looking from the east it is west, and when looking from the south it becomes north. Since the body of the marker is confused, the mind should be disordered.”

Ānanda said: “The middle of which I speak is neither of these two kinds. As the World-Honoured One has said, ‘eye and form serving as conditions give rise to eye-consciousness.’ The eye has discrimination, and the form-dust has no awareness; consciousness arises between them, and that is where the mind resides.”

The Buddha said: “If your mind is between the sense-organ and the dust-object, does this substance of the mind partake of both, or does it not partake of both? If it partakes of both, the material and the substance would be mixed and disordered; matter is not the substance that knows, and the two would stand in opposition—how could it be the middle? If partaking of both is not established, being neither knowing nor not-knowing, it would have no essential nature; what characteristic would the middle have? Therefore, you should know that to say it must be in the middle is impossible.”

Ānanda said to the Buddha: “World-Honoured One, formerly I saw the Buddha turning the Dharma wheel together with the four great disciples Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Subhūti, Pūrṇa, and Śāriputra, always saying that the nature of the mind that perceives, knows, and discriminates is neither inside nor outside nor in the middle; it resides nowhere at all. Being without any attachment to anything is called the mind. Then would my non-attachment be called the mind or not?”

The Buddha said to Ānanda: “You say that the nature of the mind that perceives, knows, and discriminates resides nowhere at all. All the worldly objects and appearances in empty space, in water, on land, and flying in the air are called ‘everything.’ Is that to which you do not attach existent or non-existent? If it is non-existent, it is just like the horns of a hare or the hair of a tortoise; how could there be non-attachment? If there is that which is unattached, it cannot be called non-existent. Having no characteristic means non-existence; not being non-existent implies a characteristic. When a characteristic exists, there is a location; how could it be unattached? Therefore, you should know that to say ‘being without any attachment to anything is called the perceiving and knowing mind’ is impossible.”

Through such refutation as above, right now within the body of arising and ceasing, the false mind has nowhere to rely. This is known by direct perception, clearly and without doubt. This can truly be called sudden awakening to the true mind, direct comprehension of non-arising.