宗鏡錄 88.5

88.5

答。攝論云。無分別智自性應知離五種相。一離非思惟故。二離非覺觀地故。三離滅想受定寂靜故。四離色自性故。五於真實義離異分別故。此智若由離思惟故。名無分別智。熟眠放逸狂醉。同離思惟。應得此智。若由過覺觀地故。名無分別智。從二定以上。已過覺觀。應得此智。若依此二義。凡夫應得此智。是處能離心及心法。應說名無分別智。謂想受滅定等。若人在此位中得無分別智。此則不成智。何以故。於滅定等位。無心及心法故。若言如色自性。智自性亦如此。如色鈍無知。此智應鈍無知。若於真實義。由已分別顯現。是分別應成無分別智。何以故。此分別能分別真實義。謂此義真實。若智離五相。緣真實義起。若不異分別真實義。謂此法真實。但緣真實義。如眼識不以分別為性。是名無分別智。無分別智。眾行中最為上首。更以偈顯。諸菩薩自性。五種相所離。無分別智性。於真無分別。菩薩以無分別智為體。無分別智與菩薩不異。無分別智自性。即是菩薩自性。由於真無分別故。離五相得無分別名。又三智總以喻顯。頌曰。如五求受塵。如五正受塵。如非五受塵。三智譬如是。釋曰。譬如人在眼等五識中求覓五塵。或緣實。或緣虛。意識與五識相間起故。加行無分別智亦爾。或證一分為實。或不證為虛。譬如人正在五識中得真實境。無分別。無言說。根本無分別智亦爾。得真實境。無分別。無言說。譬如人在意識中但緣先所受塵。名緣虛境。有分別。有言說。無分別後智亦爾。緣虛境。有分別。有言說。又偈云。如人初開目。是名加行智。如人正閉目。是無分別智。即彼復開眼。後得智亦爾。應知如虛空。是無分別智。於中現色像。後得智亦爾。

Answer: The Mahāyānasaṃgraha states: 'The intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom should be known as being free from five characteristics: first, because it is free from non-thinking; second, because it is free from grounds that are not vitarka and vicāra; third, because it is free from the quiescence of the absorption of the cessation of ideation and feeling; fourth, because it is free from the intrinsic nature of form; fifth, because with regard to true reality it is free from disparate conceptualization.' If this wisdom were called non-conceptual wisdom due to being free from thinking, then deep sleep, negligence, madness, and intoxication, all being equally free from thinking, ought to attain this wisdom. If it were called non-conceptual wisdom due to transcending the grounds of vitarka and vicāra, then from the second dhyāna upwards, having already transcended vitarka and vicāra, one ought to attain this wisdom. If relying on these two meanings, ordinary beings ought to attain this wisdom. If that state where one is able to be free from citta and caittas should be called non-conceptual wisdom—namely, the absorption of the cessation of ideation and feeling, and the like—if a person in this position attained non-conceptual wisdom, then this would not constitute wisdom. Why? Because in states such as the absorption of cessation, there are no citta and caittas. If one says that like the intrinsic nature of form, the intrinsic nature of wisdom is also like this: just as form is dull and unconscious, this wisdom ought to be dull and unconscious. If with regard to true reality, it were manifested due to already being conceptualized, then this conceptualization should become non-conceptual wisdom. Why? Because this conceptualization would be able to conceptualize true reality, saying, 'this reality is real.' If wisdom is free from these five characteristics, it arises conditioning true reality. If it does not disparately conceptualize true reality, saying, 'this dharma is real,' but solely conditions true reality—just as the eye-consciousness does not take conceptualization as its nature—this is called non-conceptual wisdom. Non-conceptual wisdom is the foremost of all practices. It is further revealed by a verse: / 'The intrinsic nature of the bodhisattvas / Is free from the five characteristics; / The nature of non-conceptual wisdom / Is non-conceptual regarding the real.' / Bodhisattvas take non-conceptual wisdom as their substance; non-conceptual wisdom and bodhisattvas are not different. The intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom is simply the intrinsic nature of bodhisattvas. Because it is non-conceptual regarding the real, being free from the five characteristics it obtains the name 'non-conceptual'. Moreover, the three wisdoms are explained collectively by analogies. The verse says: / 'As the five seek to perceive sense objects, / As the five directly perceive sense objects, / As what is not the five perceives sense objects, / The three wisdoms are exemplified in this way.' / The explanation says: For example, when a person is in the five consciousnesses such as the eye [-consciousness] seeking five sense objects, they may condition the real or condition the unreal, because the manovijñāna arises interlaced with the five consciousnesses. Preparatory non-conceptual wisdom is also like this: either realizing a part as real, or failing to realize it as unreal. For example, when a person is precisely within the five consciousnesses apprehending a real object, it is without conceptualization and without speech. Fundamental non-conceptual wisdom is also like this: apprehending a real object, it is without conceptualization and without speech. For example, when a person in the manovijñāna only conditions sense objects previously perceived, this is called conditioning an unreal object; there is conceptualization and there is speech. Post-attainment non-conceptual wisdom is also like this: conditioning an unreal object, there is conceptualization and there is speech. Furthermore, a verse states: / 'As when a person first opens their eyes, / This is called preparatory wisdom; / As when a person has their eyes closed, / This is non-conceptual wisdom; / When that same person opens their eyes again, / Post-attainment wisdom is also like this. / One should know that, as empty space / Is non-conceptual wisdom, / The appearance of forms within it / Is post-attainment wisdom likewise.'