[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › 90.5.2 # 宗鏡錄 90.5.2 宗鏡錄 90.5.2 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [90.5.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5.2) 亦不可得。 如是橫竪求身。 畢竟不可得。 則是無。 無亦不可得。 亦有亦無亦不可得。 非有非無亦不可得。 但有名字。 名字為身。 如是名字。 不在內。 非四陰中故。 不在外。 非色陰中故。 不在中間。 非色心合故。 亦不常自有。 非離色心故。 當知名無得物之功。 物無應名之實。 假實既空。 名物安在。 如此觀身。 是觀實相。 觀身是假名。 假名既如此。 觀色受想行識亦如是。 即為苦道觀也。 觀煩惱道者。 煩惱與業。 皆是身因。 今且取煩惱為身因而觀也。 淨名經云。 不壞身因而隨一相者。 應作四句分別。 誰身因果俱壞。 誰身因果俱不壞。 誰壞果不壞因。 誰壞因不壞果。 云何身果。 父母所生頭等六分是也。 云何身因。 貪恚癡身口意業等是。 今且置三業。 觀貪恚癡等。 四果。 以無常苦空觀智。 破貪恚癡。 子斷名壞身因。 不受後有名壞身果。 凡俗之流。 名衣好食。 長養五陰。 縱心適性。 放逸貪恚。 自惱惱他。 一身死壞。 復受一身。 因果相續。 無有邊際。 是名因果俱不壞。 如犯王憲付栴陀羅。 如怨對者自害其體。 身既爛壞。 四陰亦盡。 是為壞果。 貪恚癡身因。 轉更熾盛。 彌淪生死。 無得脫期。 是為壞果不壞因。 以無常觀智。 斷五分下因縛。 五分下果身由未盡。 是名壞身因不壞身果。 如此四句存壞不同。 皆不隨一相。 而隨一相者。 所謂修大乘觀。 觀一念貪恚癡心。 心為自起。 為對塵起。 為根塵共起。 為離根塵起。 皆無此義。 非自非他。 非共非無因。 亦非前念滅故起。 非生非非生。 亦非滅非非滅。 如是橫竪求心叵得。 心尚無本。 何所論壞。 是名不壞身因而隨一相。 觀業道者。 如淨名經云。 舉足下足。 無非道場。 具足一切佛法矣。 觀舉足時。 為是業舉。 為是業者舉。 為是業業者共舉。 為離業業者舉。 若業舉。 不關業者。 業者舉。 不關於業。 各既無舉。 合亦無舉。 合既無舉。 離那得舉。 舉足既無。 下足亦無。 觀行既然。 住坐臥言語執作。 亦復如是。 是為觀業道實相。 二觀心明三識者。 諦觀一念。 即空即假即中。 即是觀心識於三識。 何者。 意識託緣發。 意。 本無其識。 緣何所發。 又緣中為有識。 為無識。 若有識。 緣即是識。 何謂為緣。 若無識。 那能發識。 若意緣合發。 二俱無故。 合不能發。 離亦不可。 當知此識不在一處。 從眾緣生。 從緣生法。 我說即是空。 於此空中假作分別。 是惡識。 是善識。 是非惡非善識。 種種推畫。 強謂是非。 識若定空。 不可作假。 識若定假。 不可作空。 當知空非空。 假非假。 非空非假。 雙亡二邊。 正顯中道。 一念識中三觀具足。 識於三識。 亦不得三觀。 故淨名云。 不觀色。 不觀色如。 不觀色性。 乃至不觀識。 不觀識如。 不觀識性。 雖不得識。 不得識如。 不得識性。 雙照識。 識如。 識性。 宛然無濫。 以照識性故。 是菴摩羅識。 照識如故。 是阿賴耶識。 亦照亦滅故。 是阿陀那識。 是名觀心中三識。 三觀心三佛性者。 一正因佛性。 佛名為覺。 性名不覺。 即是非常非無常。 如土內金藏。 天魔外道所不能壞。 二了因佛性。 覺智非常非無常。 智與理相應。 如人善知金藏。 此智不可破壞。 三緣因佛性。 一切非常非無常。 功德善根資助覺知。 開顯正性。 如耘除草穢。 掘出金藏。 觀心即中。 是正因佛性。 即空。 是了因佛性。 即假。 是緣因佛性。 復次佛。 是覺智也。 性者。 理極也。 能以覺智照其理極。 智境相稱。 合而言之。 名為佛性。 今觀五陰心。 稱五陰實相。 名正因佛性。 觀假名實相。 > is likewise unobtainable. Seeking the body horizontally and vertically in this way, in the end it cannot be obtained; thus it is non-existent. Non-existence is also unobtainable; both existence and non-existence are also unobtainable; neither existence nor non-existence is also unobtainable. There is only a conventional name, and the conventional name constitutes the body. Such a conventional name is not internal, because it is not within the four mental aggregates; it is not external, because it is not within the aggregate of form; it is not in between, because it is not a combination of form and mind; nor does it constantly exist of itself, because it is not apart from form and mind. One should know that a name has no power to grasp an object, and an object has no reality that corresponds to a name. Since both the provisional and the real are empty, where can name and object abide? Contemplating the body in this way is contemplating its true mark. To contemplate the body is \[to contemplate it as\] a provisional name. Since the provisional name is like this, contemplating form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is also like this. This is the contemplation of the path of suffering. / As for contemplating the path of afflictions: afflictions and karma are both causes of the body. Now, let us temporarily take afflictions as the cause of the body and contemplate them. The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra says: 'Not destroying the cause of the body yet conforming to the single characteristic.' One should make a distinction using four propositions: Who destroys both the cause and the result of the body? Who destroys neither the cause nor the result of the body? Who destroys the result but not the cause? Who destroys the cause but not the result? What is the result of the body? It is the six parts such as the head born of father and mother. What is the cause of the body? It is the bodily, verbal, and mental karmas of greed, anger, and delusion. Now setting aside the three karmas, we contemplate greed, anger, delusion, etc. \[Concerning\] the four results: by the contemplative wisdom of impermanence, suffering, and emptiness, one breaks through greed, anger, and delusion; when the seeds are severed, this is called destroying the cause of the body. Not receiving future existence is called destroying the result of the body. As for worldly commoners: with fine clothing and good food, they nourish the five aggregates, indulging their minds and giving free rein to their inclinations, abandoning themselves to greed and anger, tormenting themselves and tormenting others; when one body dies and disintegrates, they again receive another body, cause and effect continuing without end. This is called destroying neither cause nor effect. Like a violator of royal law handed over to a caṇḍāla, or like enemies harming their own bodies: when the body has already decayed and the four aggregates are also extinguished, this is destroying the result; but the causes of the body—greed, anger, and delusion—become ever more blazing, submerging them in birth and death with no time of release. This is destroying the result but not the cause. By the contemplative wisdom of impermanence, severing the lower fetters of the five causes, while the bodily results of the five lower divisions are not yet exhausted—this is called destroying the cause of the body but not destroying the result of the body. These four propositions differ in their preservation and destruction, and none conforms to the single characteristic. As for conforming to the single characteristic: this refers to cultivating the Mahāyāna contemplation, contemplating a single thought-moment of the mind of greed, anger, or delusion. Does the mind arise of itself? Does it arise in response to sense objects? Does it arise from sense faculties and sense objects together? Or does it arise apart from sense faculties and sense objects? In all cases, there is no such principle. It is not from itself, not from another, not from both, and not without a cause; nor does it arise because the preceding thought has ceased; it is neither arising nor non-arising, neither ceasing nor non-ceasing. Seeking the mind horizontally and vertically in this way, it is impossible to find. When mind does not even have an origin, how could there be any talk of destruction? This is called not destroying the cause of the body yet conforming to the single characteristic. / As for contemplating the path of karma: as the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra says, 'Lifting a foot and putting down a foot, there is nowhere that is not the bodhimaṇḍa, fully endowed with all buddhadharmas.' When contemplating the lifting of a foot: is it karma that lifts? Is it the agent of karma that lifts? Do karma and the agent of karma together lift? Or is it lifted apart from karma and the agent of karma? If karma lifts, it has nothing to do with the agent; if the agent lifts, it has nothing to do with karma. Since each separately does not lift, together they also do not lift. Since together they do not lift, how could there be lifting apart \[from them\]? Since lifting a foot is non-existent, putting down a foot is also non-existent. The contemplation of walking being like this, standing, sitting, lying down, speaking, and physical actions are also likewise. This is contemplating the true mark of the path of karma. / Second, contemplating the mind to illuminate the three consciousnesses: clearly contemplating a single thought as identical to emptiness, identical to the provisional, and identical to the middle is contemplating the mind's consciousness in terms of the three consciousnesses. What are they? The mental consciousness arises relying on conditions. In the mind itself, there is originally no such consciousness; from what condition could it arise? Furthermore, within the conditions, is there consciousness or is there no consciousness? If there is consciousness, then the condition is itself the consciousness; why call it a condition? If there is no consciousness, how could it give rise to consciousness? If the mind and conditions combine to produce it, since both are non-existent, in combination they cannot produce it; nor can it be apart \[from them\]. One should know that this consciousness does not reside in a single place; it arises from a multitude of conditions. 'What arises from conditions, that I explain as emptiness.' In this emptiness, one provisionally makes distinctions: this is an evil consciousness, this is a wholesome consciousness, this is a consciousness neither evil nor wholesome—delineating in various ways and arbitrarily asserting right and wrong. If consciousness were definitely empty, it could not be made provisional; if consciousness were definitely provisional, it could not be made empty. One should know that emptiness is not emptiness, the provisional is not provisional; neither empty nor provisional, both extremes are extinguished, directly manifesting the Middle Way. Within a single thought-moment of consciousness, the three contemplations are fully present. In being conscious of the three consciousnesses, one also does not grasp the three contemplations. Therefore, the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: 'Do not contemplate form, do not contemplate the suchness of form, do not contemplate the nature of form... up to do not contemplate consciousness, do not contemplate the suchness of consciousness, do not contemplate the nature of consciousness.' Although one does not grasp consciousness, does not grasp the suchness of consciousness, and does not grasp the nature of consciousness, one simultaneously illuminates consciousness, the suchness of consciousness, and the nature of consciousness, clearly and without confusion. Because it illuminates the nature of consciousness, it is the amalavijñāna. Because it illuminates the suchness of consciousness, it is the ālayavijñāna. Because it both illuminates and ceases, it is the ādānavijñāna. This is called contemplating the three consciousnesses within the mind. / Third, contemplating the mind's three buddha-natures: First, the buddha-nature of the direct cause: 'Buddha' is called awakening, and 'nature' is called unawakened; that is, neither permanent nor impermanent, like a treasure of gold within the earth, which heavenly demons and non-Buddhists cannot destroy. Second, the buddha-nature of the revealing cause: the wisdom of awakening is neither permanent nor impermanent, and wisdom corresponds with principle, like a person who skillfully knows where the treasure of gold is; this wisdom cannot be destroyed. Third, the buddha-nature of the conditioning cause: all things are neither permanent nor impermanent, and meritorious wholesome roots assist awakening and knowledge to disclose and reveal the direct nature, like weeding away impurities to excavate the gold treasure. Contemplating the mind as identical to the middle is the buddha-nature of the direct cause; as identical to emptiness is the buddha-nature of the revealing cause; as identical to the provisional is the buddha-nature of the conditioning cause. Furthermore, 'buddha' is the wisdom of awakening, and 'nature' is the ultimate principle. Being able to illuminate the ultimate principle with the wisdom of awakening, wisdom and object correspond to each other; spoken of together, they are named buddha-nature. Now, contemplating the mind of the five aggregates accords with the true mark of the five aggregates, which is named the buddha-nature of the direct cause. Contemplating the true mark of provisional names > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 90.5.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5.1) - [Next: 90.5.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5.3) - [Up: 90.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.90.5.2) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [金光明經玄義](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1783.2.9) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.90.5.2) · Pramāṇa