宗鏡錄 83.5

83.5

答。若同若異。俱一心作故。如海涌千波。千波即海。以眾生差別性故。不能同種。以如來平等性故。不能異種。眾生雖差別。不能自異。如來雖平等。不能自同。不能自異故。即異無異也。不能自同故。即同非同也。摩訶衍論云。同相者。一切諸法唯一真如。異者。唯一真如作一切法。金剛三昧論云。平等一味故。聖人所不能異也。有通有別故。聖人所不能同也。不能同者。即同於異。不能異者。即異於同。又不可說異故。可得說是同。不可說同故。可得說是異耳。說與不說。無二無別也。又云。依甚深教如言取義者。有二種失。一者。聞佛所說動靜無二。便謂是一一實一心。由是撥無二諦道理。二者聞佛所說空有二門。計有二法而無一實。由是誹謗無二中道。又云。如是一心。通為一切染淨諸法之所依止故。即是諸法根本。本來靜門。恒沙功德無所不備。謂一切是隨緣動門。恒沙染。法無所不具。然舉染法以望心體。不能遍通。所以經云。若離若脫。若舉心體。望諸淨法。無所不遍。故經言。於世法中不離不脫。總明一心。通於動靜。為染淨所依。別顯動門。染法所依。別顯靜門。淨法所依。亦如起信。於一心立真如生滅二門。若卷若舒。或總或別。皆是一心之體用。如日月之光明。似江河之波浪。真心無寄。不落言思。但約世諦隨緣門中。分其二義。以真心不守性故。隨緣成異。即成異門。以隨緣時不失自性故。隨緣不變。即成同門。雖立同異。常冥一際。古釋。一真心非一非異者。真心全體動故。心與生滅非異。而恒不變真性故。與生滅不一。先明不異門有三義。一本從末明不異。經云。如來藏是善不善因。能遍造一切趣生。又經云。佛性隨流成別味。二攝末同本明不異。經云。眾生即如也。又云。十二因緣。即佛性。地論云。三界唯一心者。第一義諦也。前即末之本。本無別本。唯有生滅。更無別法可相異也。後即本之末。末無別末。故唯有不生滅。亦無別法可相異也。三本末平等明不異。經偈云。甚深如來藏。而與七識俱。又論云。唯真不立。單妄不成。此顯本末鎔融。際限不分。故云不異也。次明不一門者。此中非直不乖不異以明不一。亦乃由不異故成於不一。何以故。若如來藏隨緣作生滅時。失自不生滅者。即不得有生滅也。如水失濕性。則不能成大小之波。是故由不生滅。得有生滅。是故即不異故不一也。起信明如來藏與生滅和合。非一非異。而成辦世出世間染淨等事。

Answer: Both sameness and difference are made by the one mind. It is like the ocean surging in a thousand waves: the thousand waves are the ocean itself. Because of the differentiated nature of sentient beings, they cannot be of the same type. Because of the equal nature of the tathāgata, they cannot be of different types. Although sentient beings are differentiated, they cannot differentiate themselves. Although the tathāgata is equal, he cannot make himself identical. Because they cannot differentiate themselves, difference itself is devoid of difference. Because he cannot make himself identical, identity itself is not identity. The Commentary on the Mahāyāna states: 'Regarding the characteristic of sameness, all phenomena are solely the one tathatā. Regarding difference, the one tathatā solely produces all phenomena.' The Commentary on the Vajrasamādhi states: 'Because it is equal and of one taste, the sages cannot differentiate it. Because there are the universal and the particular, the sages cannot make it identical. Being unable to make it identical means that identity is identical to difference; being unable to differentiate it means that difference is different from identity. Furthermore, because it cannot be spoken of as different, it may be spoken of as identical; because it cannot be spoken of as identical, it may be spoken of as different. Speaking of it and not speaking of it are neither two nor distinct.' It also states: 'Those who take the meaning literally according to the profound teaching commit two kinds of errors: First, hearing the Buddha's explanation that activity and stillness are not two, they immediately claim that there is solely one real one mind, thereby rejecting the principle of the two truths. Second, hearing the Buddha's explanation of the two gates of emptiness and existence, they conceptualize that there are two dharmas without a single real one, thereby disparaging the non-dual Middle Way.' It also states: 'Because this one mind is universally the basis upon which all defiled and pure phenomena rely, it is the root of all phenomena. In the originally tranquil gate, immeasurable merit like the sands of the Ganges is fully present without deficiency. This means that all [defiled dharmas] are the gate of activity according to conditions, fully containing defiled dharmas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. However, if one considers defiled dharmas with respect to the mind-substance, they cannot pervade it universally; thus the sūtra says: "neither separated nor disjoined." If one considers the mind-substance with respect to pure dharmas, it is universally pervasive everywhere; thus the sūtra says: "among worldly phenomena it is neither separated nor disjoined." Overall, it explains that the one mind pervades both activity and stillness, serving as the basis for both defilement and purity. Individually, it reveals the gate of activity as the basis of defiled phenomena, and individually reveals the gate of stillness as the basis of pure phenomena.' This is just as the Awakening of Faith establishes the two gates of tathatā and arising-and-ceasing in the one mind. Whether folded up or unfolded, collective or particular, they are all the substance and function of the one mind, like the radiance of the sun and moon, or like the waves of rivers and streams. The true mind has no abode and is not caught in words or thought. It is only in terms of the worldly truth within the gate of following conditions that its two meanings are distinguished. Because the true mind does not abide by its fixed nature, it follows conditions and becomes differentiated, which constitutes the gate of difference. Because when following conditions it does not lose its own nature, it follows conditions yet does not change, which constitutes the gate of sameness. Although sameness and difference are established, they are always fused into a single realm. An ancient commentary states: 'That the one true mind is neither one nor different means: because the entire substance of the true mind moves, the mind is not different from arising-and-ceasing; yet because it constantly preserves its unchanging true nature, it is not one with arising-and-ceasing.' First, explaining the gate of non-difference has three meanings: First, explaining non-difference from the branches back to the root. The sūtra says: 'The tathāgatagarbha is the cause of good and non-good, capable of universally producing all destinies and births.' Another sūtra says: 'The Buddha-nature follows the stream and takes on different tastes.' Second, explaining non-difference by gathering the branches into the root. The sūtra says: 'Sentient beings are themselves tathatā.' It also says: 'The twelve links of dependent origination are themselves the Buddha-nature.' The Commentary on the Daśabhūmika says: 'The three realms are solely the one mind; this is the ultimate truth.' The former refers to the root within the branches: the root has no separate root, being solely arising-and-ceasing, with no separate dharma to be different from it. The latter refers to the branches within the root: the branches have no separate branches, being solely non-arising and non-ceasing, with no separate dharma to be different from it. Third, explaining non-difference through the equality of root and branches. A sūtra verse states: 'The profound tathāgatagarbha / is present together with the seven consciousnesses.' A treatise also says: 'The real alone cannot be established; delusion on its own cannot be accomplished.' This reveals that root and branches are fused and blended without distinction of boundaries; hence it is called non-difference. Next, in explaining the gate of non-identity: here, non-identity is not only explained without contradicting non-difference, but non-identity is actually established because of non-difference. Why? If the tathāgatagarbha, when following conditions to create arising-and-ceasing, were to lose its own non-arising and non-ceasing nature, then arising-and-ceasing could not exist. Just as when water loses its wet nature it cannot form large and small waves, so too because of non-arising and non-ceasing, arising-and-ceasing can exist. Therefore, precisely because of non-difference, there is non-identity. The Awakening of Faith explains that the tathāgatagarbha and arising-and-ceasing are combined, neither identical nor different, thereby accomplishing the defiled and pure affairs of both the worldly and transworldly realms.