宗鏡錄 29.9.3

29.9.3

Therefore it is said that the thousands of sūtras and ten thousands of treatises all speak of citta. How could it be limited to this Mirror of the Source alone? As the Lotus Sūtra says: "It is for the sake of the one great causal condition that [the Buddhas] appear in the world." Whenever "great" is spoken of, nothing exceeds citta. Among the five great elements, space is the greatest, yet it is still contained within citta. Thus the Śūraṅgamasūtra says: "Space arises within the great awakening like a single bubble breaking out on the ocean." It also says: "Quiet illumination encompasses empty space." This "great" is not termed great in contrast to quantity, nor is it termed great in relational comparison. Therefore it is called the "one great matter." Furthermore, this "one" is not [a numerical] one. As a verse in the Dharmapada says: / "The myriad phenomena and ten thousand forms / Are imprinted by the one Dharma. / The one is also not a one; / It is in order to shatter all numbers." / From this one knows that the appearance of the Buddhas in the world and the ancestral masters' coming from the West were all to illuminate this principle, not for any other matter. The Commentary on the Awakening of Faith says: "That the one mind subsumes the myriad existents and the myriad existents do not go beyond the one mind is intended merely to reveal the substance, not to encompass the myriad phenomena. Fearing that there might remain a view of [things existing] outside phenomena, it therefore universally subsumes them." However, in the various teachings, all speak of the myriad phenomena as the one mind, yet with differences of depth and shallowness. Now, according to the five teachings, we briefly analyze them: First, the Dharma for fools, the Śrāvaka Teaching, provisionally speaks of the one mind, meaning that both mundane and supramundane, defiled and pure phenomena, are all induced by the karma created by citta. If one investigates and examines it, the meaning of the one mind is not established; because it posits objective spheres before it, it is called "provisional speech." Second, the Mahāyāna Provisional Teaching elucidates the vipākālayavijñāna as the one mind, because the myriad phenomena of the three realms are transformations of vijñāna alone. Third, the Final Teaching speaks of the tathāgatagarbha as the one mind, because the phenomena of consciousness and objective spheres are all like a dream. Fourth, the Sudden Teaching obliterates defilement and purity to speak of the one mind, in order to shatter all numbers and provisional designations. Fifth, the Perfect Teaching universally subsumes the myriad existents as the one mind, because phenomenon and principle, root and branch, have no distinction. As explained above, the earlier are shallow and the later are deep. The shallow does not reach the deep, but the deep necessarily subsumes the shallow. Therefore, although the Mirror of the Source comprehensively cites the one mind across the five teachings as proof, it points ultimately to the one mind of the Perfect Teaching, because it comprehensively integrates what precedes it. Furthermore, as the Commentary says: "The one mind is the root of the Dharma spoken by the Tathāgata, because it is by relying on this one mind that the Tathāgata accomplishes [enlightenment]." Thus, faith, understanding, practice, and realization all rely on this citta. From the subtle to the manifest, it has never departed from this. If it were possible to attain Buddhahood apart from citta, there is no such possibility. Whatever is taught apart from this is all the teaching of outsiders. Therefore the Awakening of Faith says: "That which is called 'Dharma' refers to the citta of sentient beings. This citta subsumes all mundane and supramundane dharmas. Relying on this citta, the meaning of Mahāyāna is revealed." The subcommentary explains: "Analyzing the function of the Dharma: Because the substance and characteristics of this citta are unhindered, defilement and purity rely on it alike. Going along with the flow or returning against the flow is solely the turning of this citta. Therefore, if it is drawn along by defilement to become non-awakening, it then subsumes mundane dharmas; if it is the unchanging original awakening and the initial awakening that returns against the flow, it then subsumes supramundane dharmas." This is still analyzed in terms of the gate of arising and ceasing. If it is considered in terms of the gate of tathatā, then it blends and encompasses, and defilement and purity are not distinct. What was indicated above exhausts the principle without fault. Yet regarding all defiled and pure dharmas, dharmas have no independent standing of their own; they are solely turned by citta. Hence we know that dharmas are formed because of citta—how could dharmas not be citta? Since that which is relied upon is entirely citta, how could that which relies be different? For that which relies arises from that which is relied upon. Just as waves arise from water and vessels are formed from gold, root and branch are both identical, and substance and function are boundless. The Fayuan yilin [zhang] says: "Thoroughly examining the various teachings, all vijñaptimātra spoken of does not exceed five kinds: First, vijñaptimātra of the objective sphere. A verse of the Abhidharmasūtra says: / 'Pretas, animals, humans, and devas, / Each according to what is appropriate to them, / Have different minds regarding the same matter; / Therefore it is admitted that the object is not real.' / Passages such as this, which only speak of the objective sphere contemplated by vijñaptimātra, are all vijñaptimātra of the objective sphere. Second, vijñaptimātra of teaching: verses such as 'Owing to the clinging of one's own citta' are all vijñaptimātra of teaching. Third, vijñaptimātra of principle: the Triṃśikā says: / 'These consciousnesses transform; / Discriminating and that which is discriminated, / Because of this, both are non-existent; / Therefore, all is vijñaptimātra.' / In this way establishing the principle of vijñaptimātra is vijñaptimātra of principle. Fourth, vijñaptimātra of practice: verses such as 'Bodhisattvas in the fixed state' and the four kinds of thorough search into things as they truly are are all vijñaptimātra of practice. Fifth, vijñaptimātra of fruit: the Buddhabhūmisūtra says: 'In the great round mirror wisdom, the consciousnesses of all sense-bases and objective spheres are all manifested therein.' Also, a verse of the Tathāgataguṇālaṃkārasūtra says: / 'The immaculate consciousness of the Tathāgata / Is the pure, uncontaminated realm, / Liberated from all obstructions, / Associated with the round mirror wisdom.' / Teachings such as these, concerning the attainment of the fruit through vijñaptimātra, are all vijñaptimātra of fruit. The five kinds of vijñaptimātra spoken of here—objective sphere, teaching, principle, practice, and fruit—comprehensively encompass all vijñaptimātra without remainder. However, in the various teachings, according to the meaning and in adaptation to capacities, there are various different explanations regarding vijñaptimātra of the objective sphere: Some elucidate vijñaptimātra by relying on what is clung to: a verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: / 'Owing to the clinging of one's own citta, / Citta appears like external objective spheres; / Since those objective spheres do not exist, / Therefore it is said to be citta-alone.' / This is solely relying on the clinging citta to explain false appearance. Some illuminate vijñaptimātra by relying on the contaminated: the Avataṃsakasūtra says: 'The three realms are citta-alone,' which speaks of vijñaptimātra with respect to the mundane world. Some elucidate vijñaptimātra by relying on what is clung to and according with the conditioned: the Triṃśikā says: / 'Due to the provisional designation of self and dharmas, / Various characteristics transform; / They rely on the transformation of vijñāna, / And arise relying on the self-substance of vijñāna.' / Some elucidate vijñaptimātra by relying on sentient beings: the Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra says: 'Because the mind is pure, sentient beings are pure; because the mind is defiled, sentient beings are defiled.' Some elucidate vijñaptimātra by relying on all dharmas being non-existent: the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra says: 'The cognitive objects of the consciousnesses are solely the manifestations of vijñāna.' Some elucidate vijñaptimātra according to pointing to particular matters: the Abhidharma treatise cites a scriptural verse: / 'Pretas, animals, humans, and devas, / Each according to what is appropriate to them' / —which elucidates vijñaptimātra by pointing to a single matter. For such innumerable gates of teaching, that which categorizes and subsumes the principles and meanings of all the teachings completely is only the fifth teaching, because it universally explains that all things are vijñaptimātra. Moving on to analyzing the terms by separation, combination, and integrated explanation: 'separation' means distinction.