宗鏡錄 11.9

11.9

Answer: Difference is spoken of in accordance with sentiments: although different, they are the same. Sameness is spoken of in opposition to attachments: although the same, they are different. Sameness is employed to destroy difference; difference is employed to destroy sameness. Although the same and although different, they are neither different nor the same. This is like the saying about seizing your spear to pierce your shield, or like riding a thief's horse to pursue the thief, or using sound to stop sound. Therefore it is said: "Four in the morning and three in the evening makes the crowd of monkeys rejoice; applying bitter ointment and washing it with water nourishes the infant according to the proper time." These are all accommodating inclinations and capacities through excellent expedient means. As Zhuangzi says: "To exhaust one's spirit to make them one without knowing their sameness is called 'three in the morning'. What is meant by 'three in the morning'? The monkey keeper, handing out rations, said: 'Three in the morning and four in the evening.' The monkeys were all angry. He said: 'If so, then four in the morning and three in the evening.' The monkeys were all pleased. Name and reality suffered no loss, yet joy and anger were brought into play. This too is relying on 'it is this'." The commentary says: "Between four and three, the monkeys falsely give rise to joy and anger; between wrong and right, worldly people contend in giving rise to love and hate. The sage turns around and uses right and wrong to stop the right and wrong of worldly people, just as the monkey keeper used four and three to quiet the monkeys' three and four. How could the person of realization, being in oneness, exhaust their spirit therein?" The Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: "For example, a woman gave birth to a child, and the baby fell ill. Troubled and distressed, this woman sought a skilled physician. When the skilled physician arrived, he compounded three medicines—ghee, milk, and rock sugar—and gave it to him to ingest. He then instructed the woman: 'Now that the child has taken the medicine, for the time being do not give him milk; only after the medicine has digested should you then give it.' At that time, the woman applied a bitter flavor to her breast and said to her child: 'My breast is smeared with poison; it cannot be touched again.' The child was thirsty and wished to nurse, but smelling the poisonous odor, he turned away and went far off. Once the medicine had digested, the mother washed her breast and called her child to give it to him. At that time, the young child, although thirsty, had smelled the poisonous odor before and therefore would not come. The mother told him again: 'Because you took medicine, I smeared it with poison. Now that your medicine has digested, I have finished washing it. You may come at once and drink milk without suffering.' Having heard this, the child gradually returned to nurse." The sūtra combines the meaning of the parable: the teaching of non-self and so forth is like the smearing of poison; speaking of the tathāgatagarbha is like calling the child to nurse. Sometimes speaking of self, sometimes speaking of non-self, both are for the sake of suiting capacity, like that smearing and washing. As the Yihai says: "It means that phenomena of dust are different, while strictly as substance, only dharma is non-different. It is precisely because the substance of dharmas is not different that the meaning of difference can be established, because substance is not lost. It is precisely because of the differentiation of phenomena of dust that the meaning of non-difference can be established, because conditions are not destroyed; only then is principle spoken of." Therefore a sūtra says: "Wonderful, O World-Honoured One! Within non-different dharmas, you are able to speak of the differences of dharmas." Although the myriad phenomena are different, they cannot differentiate themselves; although the false is the same, it cannot make itself the same. Because they are without substance, dharma after dharma constantly arises; because they are without function, dust after dust is eternally quiescent. These are all worldly discriminations, the false sentiments of sentient beings, who within the equal Dharma spontaneously produce difference, and facing the place of non-dual characteristics forcibly establish many aspects, just like a painter depicting shapes of high and low, or like a goldsmith forging utensils large and small. The substance of the myriad dharmas is ever empty; they are transformed solely by one's own mind. A verse in the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says: / "Just as a skilled painter / paints a flat surface to appear concave and convex, / so false discrimination / sees grasper and grasped where there are none." / For example, a skilled painter can paint a flat wall to raise the appearance of concavity and convexity: in reality there is no high or low, yet one sees high and low. False discrimination is also like this: within the equal dharmadhātu, in the place without dual characteristics, it constantly sees the two characteristics of grasper and grasped. Therefore one should not be afraid. Why is there no need to be afraid? Because they are transformed by one's own mind, just like painting concavity and convexity is done by one's own hand.