宗鏡錄 89.29

89.29

答。非同非異。不有不無。但隨自心因業所現。安法師云。淨穢二土。四句分別。一質不成。淨穢虧盈。異質不成。一理齊平。無質不成。緣起萬形。有質不成。搜原即冥。故楞伽經偈云。不知唯心現。是故分二見。如實但知心。分別即不生。密嚴經偈云。是心有二性。如鏡含眾像。亦如水現月瞖者見毛輪。毛輪瓔珞珠。此皆無所有。但從病瞖眼。若斯而顯現。瓶衣皆自識。眾生亦復然。虛妄計我人。不知恒執取。眾生及瓶等。種種諸形相。內外雖不同。一切從心起。依止賴耶識。一切諸種子。心如境界現。是故說世間。世間非作者。業及微塵作。但是阿賴耶。變現似於境。清涼記云。此上分別淨穢二土四句。是一向遮過。實則即異即同。即有即無。若互相形奪則一異而兩亡。有無雙寂。若圓融無礙。則即一即多。即無即有。有是無有。無是有無。多是即一之多。一是即多之一。有無即事理無礙。一多兼事事無礙。由此重重故。華嚴藏剎。一一塵中皆見法界。又依正無二四句渾融。一。佛身即剎者。佛體即是法性土故。廢他從己。佛體虛故。土外無佛。法性無二故。二剎即佛身者。剎體即是法性身故。廢己從他。剎體虛故。佛外無法。性無二故。由性無二以性融相。故身剎相即。三俱者。謂有身有土。不壞相故。若無身土。無可相即故。四泯者。謂佛。即剎。故非佛。剎即佛。故非剎。以互奪故。

Answer: They are neither identical nor distinct, neither existent nor non-existent, but merely manifested according to one's own mind in response to karmic causes. Master An said: 'The two lands, the pure and the defiled, are differentiated by four propositions: 1. A single substance is not established, for pure and defiled wax and wane. 2. Distinct substances are not established, for the one principle is completely equal. 3. Having no substance is not established, for conditioned arising [produces] myriad forms. 4. Having a substance is not established, for when one searches for their origin, it is dark and quiescent.' Therefore, a verse of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'Not knowing that it is solely a manifestation of mind, / they consequently divide it into two views; / if one truly knows only mind, / discrimination will not arise.' A verse of the Ghanavyūhasūtra says: 'This mind has two natures, / like a mirror holding manifold images, / or like water manifesting the moon. / One with cataracts sees hair-nets, / hair-nets, necklaces, and pearls; / none of these exist at all, / but merely appear like this / from eyes diseased with cataracts. / Bottles and garments are one's own consciousness; / sentient beings are likewise so. / Falsely clinging to self and person, / not knowing, they constantly grasp. / Sentient beings, bottles, and the like, / various shapes and forms, / though differing as internal and external, / all arise from the mind. / Relying on the ālayavijñāna, / which holds all seeds, / mind appears as objective realms; / therefore the world is spoken of. / The world is not made by a creator, / by karma, or by minute atoms; / it is only the ālaya / that transforms and appears like objective realms.' Qingliang's Commentary says: 'These four propositions distinguishing the two lands, pure and defiled, above are an exclusive refutation of errors. In reality, they are both distinct and identical, both existent and non-existent. If they mutually contrast and negate each other, then identity and difference are both abandoned, and existence and non-existence are both quiescent. If they are completely interfused without obstruction, then they are both one and many, both non-existent and existent. Existence is the existence of non-existence; non-existence is the non-existence of existence. The many is the many that is identical to the one; the one is the one that is identical to the many. Existence and non-existence constitute the non-obstruction of phenomenon and principle; the one and the many further constitute the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon. Because of this manifold layering, in the lands of the Huayan treasury, the dharmadhātu is seen in each and every particle of dust. Furthermore, the non-duality of the dependent and primary [retributions] is completely interfused in four propositions: 1. The Buddha's body is itself the land, because the Buddha's substance is precisely the Dharma-nature land. Casting aside the other to follow oneself, the Buddha's substance is empty, so outside the land there is no Buddha, because the Dharma-nature is non-dual. 2. The land is itself the Buddha's body, because the land's substance is precisely the Dharma-nature body. Casting aside oneself to follow the other, the land's substance is empty, so outside the Buddha there is no dharma, because the nature is non-dual. Because the nature is non-dual, the nature interfuses with characteristics, so the body and the land are mutually identical. 3. Both, meaning there is both body and land, because characteristics are not destroyed. If there were no body and land, there would be nothing to be mutually identical. 4. Annihilation of both, meaning because the Buddha is the land, he is not the Buddha; because the land is the Buddha, it is not the land, as they mutually negate each other.'