[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) › [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt) › 29.9 # 宗鏡錄 29.9 English (machine translation) 29.9 - **Language:** English ### [29.9.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9.1) Answer: The Buddhas have no qualities of form or sound; only tathatā and the wisdom of tathatā exist uniquely. Whatever seeing and hearing there may be are all images of sentient beings' own citta. Thus expounding is expounding only by citta, and listening is listening only by citta. Outside citta, where is there any dharma? As the Siyi jing says: "Brahmā said: 'Why is it said that one who does not listen to the Dharma is \[truly\] listening to the sūtra?' Mañjuśrī said: 'When eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and manas do not leak, that is listening to the Dharma. Why is this? When at the inner six entries, form, sound, scent, taste, tangibles, and dharmas do not leak, only then is it listening to the sūtra.' And further, Brahmā asked: 'Bodhisattvas who have attained kṣānti, do you not listen to this sūtra?' The answer: 'As we listen, we take not listening as listening.'" A worthy of old said: "The Tathāgata emits the vast sound of the eight eloquence-types; the listener relies on and gives rise to what appears from their own citta. Just as relying on a shape and appearance, it is transformed at the tip of a fine hair; the intrinsic substance is already absent, yet the reflected image is as if present. The assembly of the worthy compiles \[the teachings\], each following their own seeing and hearing; relying on what was heard and seen, they compile their own words. Truly because, apart from the source of one's own citta, there is no external object, and apart from the object, no internal citta can be found. Those who transmit the Dharma do not bestow it upon another; they merely serve as an excellent condition, causing them to attain the Dharma for themselves. If self-understanding has not arisen, there is no way to awaken another. If self-understanding does not come from another, how could another's understanding not arise from oneself? Therefore, both the compilers and the transmitters all obtain reflected images and do not obtain the intrinsic substance, because one's own citta cannot grasp another's object. Thus we know that compilation is the sūtra transformed by one's own citta, and arriving at transmitters, they transmit the Dharma transformed by their own citta. They obtain the image, not the substance; through contemplation, this can be known. If one can constantly and skillfully distinguish what is manifested by one's own citta, and can know that all external natures are without nature, this person's knowledge and vision can be the same as the Buddha's, and the Dharma they expound will be no different from the Buddha's, because they have awakened and entered the joy of the noble wisdom of self-realization." A verse from the Ratnagotravibhāga says: "The sound of the wonderful heavenly Dharma drum / arises depending on one's own karma. / The Buddhas' expounding of the Dharma / is heard by sentient beings through their own karma. / Just as the wonderful sound is free from / physical and mental effort, / causing all sentient beings / to leave fear and attain tranquility, / the Buddha's voice is also like this: / free from physical and mental effort, / causing all sentient beings / to attain the realization of the path of quiescence." Another verse says: "Just as in empty space / water of eight qualities rains down, / and reaching places where salt and so forth abide, / it produces various different tastes, / the Tathāgata's cloud of compassion / rains down the water of the eightfold noble path; / reaching the place of sentient beings' minds, / it produces various tastes of understanding." The explanation states: Just as the sound of the heavenly drum corresponds to the capacity of what the devas know, like the rain of the dragon king following the evocative conditions of the world, realizing their own dharma they are not identical, and becoming different tastes there are distinctions; the Dharma is also like this: following the divergence of views, from the One Vehicle various vehicles are opened out, and from the one Dharma it is divided into many dharmas. The Huayan tanxuan ji says: "Regarding the gate of dependent origination being mind-only: all these above differentiated teaching dharmas are without exception manifested only by citta; therefore, all take vijñaptimātra as substance. However, there are two meanings: first, the contrast of intrinsic substance and reflected image; second, the complete subsumption of expounding and listening. In the first, broadly discerning the various teachings, there are altogether four propositions. First: intrinsic substance only, without reflected image. As in the Hīnayāna teaching, because it lacks the meaning of vijñaptimātra; treatises masters such as Dharmatrāta mostly establish this meaning. Second: both intrinsic substance and reflected image. As in the initial teaching of the Mahāyāna, outside sentient beings' minds the Buddha possesses subtle and marvelous dharmas of form, sound, and so on; by the power of the predominant condition of the listener's wholesome roots, striking the Buddha's seeds of benefiting others as cause, on the Buddha's wisdom text and meaning mutually arise, serving as the teaching of intrinsic nature and characteristics. By the power of the predominant condition of this teaching of the Buddha, striking the seeds of the tainted wholesome roots of the listener of the Dharma, on the listener's consciousness text and meaning mutually arise, serving as the teaching of the characteristics of reflected images. A verse from the Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā says: 'Through mutual predominant power, / the two consciousnesses become determined.' Master Dharmapāla and others all establish this meaning. Third: reflected image only, without intrinsic substance. As in the final teaching of the Mahāyāna, apart from sentient beings' minds, the Buddha fruit has no physical body, voice, or phenomenal qualities; there are only tathatā and the wisdom of tathatā, with great compassion and great vows serving as predominant conditions. In the minds of those transformed sentient beings whose faculties have ripened, the Buddha's form and sound expounding the Dharma are manifested. Therefore, the sacred teaching is solely reflected images within sentient beings' minds. Hence a sūtra verse says: 'All Tathāgatas / do not expound the Buddha-Dharma; / according with those who should be transformed, / they expound the Dharma for them.' Another verse says: 'The Tathāgata's dharmakāya is inconceivable, / formless, signless, and peerless; / manifesting physical images for sentient beings, / in the ten directions those who receive transformation all behold it.' Teachings like this are not solitary. Treatise masters such as Nāgasena and Sthiramati both establish this meaning. Fourth: neither intrinsic substance nor reflected image. As in the sudden teaching, not only is there no Buddha-form and so forth outside the mind, the Buddha manifested within sentient beings' minds is also empty in its very characteristics. Because it is consciousness only, there is no distinct reflected image; because form and so forth are free from nature, they are non-existent; because all is ineffable, the ineffable is also non-existent. Therefore, the sacred teaching is the teaching of non-teaching. As a sūtra verse says: 'The Tathāgata does not appear in the world, / nor does he undergo nirvāṇa.' Furthermore, the Ghanavyūhasūtra clarifies that the Buddha constantly abides in the dharmadhātu, without appearing in the world, and so on. The school of Nāgārjuna and others mostly establishes this meaning. These four explanations are gathered into one teaching; they are perfectly fused without obstruction and do not impede one another, because each sacred teaching gathers sentient beings from the shallow to the deep. Through reflection, this can be seen. Second, as for the complete subsumption of expounding and listening, there are also four propositions. First: apart from the Buddha's mind, there are no sentient beings to be transformed, much less the teaching expounded; therefore, it is manifested solely by the Buddha's mind. What is the meaning of this? It means that sentient beings have no separate intrinsic substance of their own; grasping the tathāgatagarbha, they constitute sentient beings. However, this tathāgatagarbha takes wisdom-realization as its intrinsic substance. Therefore, the entirety of sentient beings is altogether within the citta of the Buddha's wisdom. A sūtra verse says: 'The Buddhas all completely know / that everything turns from citta.' It also says: 'Within the Tathāgata's body of bodhi, / he sees all sentient beings generating the bodhi-mind and accomplishing equal, perfect enlightenment, / up to seeing that all sentient beings have already entered quiescence.'" ### [29.9.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9.2) are also like this: they are all of one nature, because they are devoid of nature. Furthermore, a verse states: 'All kalpas of the three times, / Buddha lands and all phenomena, / all sense faculties, citta, and mental factors, / and all empty and false dharmas— / within a single body of the Buddha, / these phenomena are completely revealed.' Therefore, apart from the Buddha's mind and wisdom, not a single phenomenon can be obtained. Second, they are entirely within the minds of sentient beings, because apart from sentient beings, there are no distinct Buddha-virtues. What does this mean? It means that the Buddha realizes the tathatā within the minds of sentient beings to become a Buddha, and also because initial awakening is identical with original awakening. Therefore, they are entirely within the minds of sentient beings. Arising function from substance, when \[he manifests\] the responsive transformation bodies, this is precisely the greatness of function of the tathatā within the minds of sentient beings; there is no other distinct Buddha. Third, following any single sacred teaching, it is entirely of both minds, because the previous two explanations are not separate from each other. That is to say: the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings expounds the Dharma for the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind; the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind listen to the Dharma expounded by the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings. Completely encompassing them in this way, expounding and listening are unobstructed; this is called the most profound principle of consciousness-only. Fourth, or that sacred teaching is neither of the two minds, because both mutually negate and do not appear together, and doubly integrating the two positions leaves neither unextinguished. That is to say, because there is no listener among the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind, and there is no expounder among the Buddhas within the minds of sentient beings; both are doubly distinguished so that both characteristics are exhausted. A sūtra says: 'He who expounds the Dharma neither expounds nor indicates; he who listens to the Dharma neither hears nor attains.' Another sūtra verse states: 'What sentient beings give birth to is not birth, / nor is there transmigration within saṃsāra.' Another sūtra verse also states: 'The Tathāgata does not expound the Dharma, / nor does he save sentient beings,' and so forth. Therefore, when these four are roundly integrated and unobstructed in a single sacred teaching, only then is it ultimate. The \*Huayan yanyi\* raises a question: 'Sentient beings and Buddhas may be the same with regard to substance, but their characteristics and functions are naturally distinct; how could they be completely identical?' It explains: 'Function arises from substance, and function is not different from substance. Since substance is the substance of sentient beings, how could function be separated from sentient beings? Therefore, relying on substance to arise function is precisely the greatness of function of the tathatā within the minds of sentient beings; there is no other distinct Buddha.' \[Question:\] 'If so, this meaning is already present in the \*Awakening of Faith\* (\*Qixin lun\*); why then uniquely explain Huayan as the distinct teaching?' It explains: 'Although the \*Awakening of Faith\* explains the non-duality of initial awakening and original awakening and that the three greatnesses of substance, characteristic, and function are uniformly the same, these are practiced and realized separately in their own minds; it does not say that sentient beings and Buddhas mutually and completely encompass each other. Thus, using the text of the \*Awakening of Faith\*, it establishes the meaning of the Huayan.' Furthermore, regarding the complete encompassing of expounding and listening and the mutual presence of sentient beings and Buddhas, two analogies are briefly cited. First: just as before a single bright mirror master and disciple together face each other, expounding and listening—if taken from the master's perspective, it is the master's mirror; if taken from the disciple's perspective, it is the disciple's mirror. The mirror illustrates the one mind; master and disciple illustrate sentient beings and Buddhas. This means that the preceptor within the disciple's mirror expounds the Dharma for the disciple within the preceptor's mirror, and the disciple within the preceptor's mirror listens to the Dharma expounded by the preceptor within the disciple's mirror. All knowledgeable persons, please examine this analogy carefully. Fearing that this analogy may still not be understood: it is also like water and milk blending together in one place, serving mutually as that which blends and that which is blended. Following the context of expounding and listening, let that which blends be expounding and that which is blended be listening; let water illustrate the Buddha and milk illustrate sentient beings. One should say that the water within the milk blends with the milk within the water, and the milk within the water receives the water within the milk. Although they are of one taste, the agent and object are clearly distinct. Although agent and object are clearly distinct, they mutually abide in each other, mutually pervade, and mutually integrate. Consider and measure by this. Furthermore, 'the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings' clarifies that sentient beings universally pervade according to their nature, while the Buddha abides within the minds of sentient beings without destroying their characteristics. Saying 'expounding the Dharma for the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind' clarifies that the Buddha's mind universally pervades according to nature, while sentient beings abide within the Buddha's mind without destroying their characteristics. There is no other principle; there is only the difference between expounding and listening. Thus it is known that the speech of all sentient beings is the true substance of the wheel of Dharma. If separated from the speech of sentient beings, the Buddha would have nothing to expound. A former master said: 'Apart from regional dialects, the Buddha has nothing to expound.' The sage has no mind of his own, taking the mind of the myriad things as his mind; the sage has no body of his own, taking the body of the myriad things as his body. Thus one knows that the sage has no words of his own, taking the words of the myriad things as his words. The \*Huayan lun\* says: 'The adorned fruit-retribution of all realms of ordinary beings and sages serves as the substance of the teaching.' This is giving rise to the mind upon seeing the environment, without waiting for speech: seeing evil, one is repelled by it; seeing good, one rejoices in it, and all can give rise to goodness. Furthermore, it is because there is no phenomenon that is not the Buddha's work. Moreover, it takes the purity of the self-nature of all phenomena as the substance of the teaching, because through the power of observation, the mind accords and is naturally congruent, without waiting for speech. Moreover, it takes the four deportments of walking, standing, sitting, and lying down as the substance of the teaching, because giving rise to faith and reverence upon seeing does not wait for words. The \*Zhaolun\* says: 'Since what it accomplishes has no equal in greatness, it in turn appears as a minor achievement; since what it bestows has no equal in breadth, it in turn reverts to the nameless.' What is called a minor achievement? Comprehending the Dharma-gates of hundreds of thousands of Gaṅgā sands within the mind-ground on the tip of a hair. What is called the nameless? The forms of the teachings pervade the three-thousandfold \[world\], yet neither name nor characteristic can be grasped. Therefore, one must master both the source and the discourse to become an accomplished master. Hence a sūtra verse states: 'Mastering the source is one's own cultivation; / mastering the discourse is showing it to the unawakened.' Great Master Zhenjue said: 'Mastering the source and mastering the discourse as well, / samādhi and prajñā are completely luminous without stagnating in emptiness.' Mastering the source is samādhi; mastering the discourse is prajñā. When both the source and the discourse are fully expressed, samādhi and prajñā are both luminous. The two meanings are mutually complementary; neither can be lacked. As the \*Lotus Sūtra\* says: 'Adorned with the power of samādhi and prajñā, / one saves sentient beings through this.' Furthermore, an ancient verse says: 'Discourse mastered but the source not mastered / is like the sun shrouded by clouds; / source mastered and discourse also mastered / is like the sun dwelling in empty space.' Thus it is known: if one first understands the source, one's discourse will be without error. Hence the verse in the introductory chapter of the \*Lotus Sūtra\* states: 'Also seeing all the bodhisattvas / knowing the quiescent characteristic of phenomena, / each in their own lands / expounding the Dharma to seek the Buddha path.' Furthermore, wherever there is explanation expressed through spoken teaching, it is always to clarify the mind, not to explain other phenomena. If it speaks of vastness and unhindered sovereignty, this is clarifying the mind in terms of its virtuous characteristics. If it speaks of quiescence and unconditioned nature, this is clarifying the mind in terms of separation from faults. Even down to speaking of phenomena, they are the phenomena of the mind; or speaking of principle, it is the principle of the mind. ### [29.9.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.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. ### [29.9.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9.4) "Unifying" means making identical. The various sūtras and treatises each separately speak of various names for contemplation and so forth; now, unifying and explaining them, \[we say that\] they are merely differentiated aspects of vijñaptimātra, not different in substance. The first name comprises thirty-two classes. In sūtras such as the Buddhāvataṃsaka, rejecting the objective realm and upholding only consciousness is called "citta-only." The Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra, rejecting extreme biased attachments to pathways, calls it the "middle way." The Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, elucidating the nature of discernment, call it "prajñā." The Lotus Sūtra, elucidating the ultimate conveyance, calls it the "single vehicle" (ekayāna). These four names apply both to that which contemplates and to that which is contemplated. In terms of the ultimate and conventional objective realms and their contemplations, correct knowledge is solely the ultimate; preparatory application and post-attainment apply to both ultimate and conventional; in terms of realization, post-attainment is solely conventional. In the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, rejecting other unrealities is called the "single real truth" (ekasatya); revealing the root of dharmas is also called the "single reliance" (ekaśaraṇa); realizing through emptiness, and being the very nature of emptiness, it is also called "emptiness"; displaying freedom beyond the defilements, revealing the inclusion of the Buddha's virtues, and that the Buddha emerges from within it, it is called the "tathāgatagarbha"; elucidating that the substance is undefiled and the true, solid dharma-nature, it is called the "naturally pure mind"; the substance of merits is also called the "dharmakāya"; being able to produce the four vehicles and being able to enter the two vehicles, it is also called the "single vehicle"—distinct from the single vehicle of the Lotus Sūtra. In the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra, rejecting distinctions in principle is called the "Dharma gate of non-duality." In the Mahāmatirāja-sūtra, expressing the absence of arising and ending, it is also called "neither arising nor ceasing." In the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, showing the cause of the dharmakāya, it is mostly called "Buddha-nature"; being liberated from bonds, it is also called "nirvāṇa." In the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, expressing transcendence of speech, it is called "inconceivable." In the Yogācārabhūmi and so forth, showing it cannot be posited, it is called "non-established." In the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and so forth, showing it to be all-pervading, permanent, and so forth, it is called "consummated reality" (pariniṣpanna). In the Abhidharmasamuccaya and so forth, explaining it is not erroneous or inverted, it is called "tathatā." These fifteen classes of names are solely the principle contemplated, solely the domain of true knowledge. Fearing the text would become overly voluminous, I have merely mentioned this many; it is not that there are no more. That is, the various dharmadhātus, dharma-nature, non-erroneous nature, unalterable nature, nature of equality, nature free from birth, dharma-stability, dharma-abiding, dharma-status, true limit (bhūtakoṭi), realm of space, non-self, inconceivable ultimate realm, and so forth; down to the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra where, because of the depth or shallowness of positing and non-positing, they are called established and non-established truths; namely the active four noble truths and inactive four noble truths in the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra; in the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, they are also called the two truths of the ultimate and the conventional; down to the Saṃdhinirmocana and so forth, where showing the classifications and distinctions of existence and non-existence, phenomena and principle of all dharmas, it is called the "three natures"; showing that all three are without imagined nature (parikalpita), it is also called the "three non-natures." Again, in the Yogācārabhūmi and so forth, elucidating the expedient means of liberation from bonds, they are also called the "three gates of liberation." Expressing the sealing of profound principle, they are called the "three acquiescences in the non-arising of dharmas" (anutpattikadharmakṣānti). In the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, demonstrating distinctions, they are called the "four siddhāntas." Because subsequent contemplation is subtle in various treatises, they are also called the "four real knowledges." Differentiating stages and confirming them in the Renwang jing, they are also called the "five acquiescences." All of these, although spoken with different names, are all different names for the realm and knowledge of consciousness-only here. Moreover, some say cause and effect substance are both one consciousness whose functions become manifold—this is the doctrine of one group of bodhisattvas. Or both cause and effect are spoken of as two: as stated in the section on stages with mind in the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī, namely the root consciousness and the evolving consciousness. Or only cause is spoken of as three: as the verse in the Madhyāntavibhāga says, "Consciousness arises and transforms into the likeness of objects, sentient beings, self, and awareness." Or both cause and effect are spoken of as three: the Triṃśikā says, "Namely, maturation (vipāka), cogitation (manana), and the consciousness that perceives sense-objects." Because it is largely of the nature of maturation, it is especially spoken of thus; the name ādāna in principle pervades the fruit. Or only fruit is spoken of as four: the Buddhabhūmisūtra and so forth speak of the four divisions of knowledge. Or both cause and effect are spoken of as \[five\]—(the fifth meaning is missing here, absent in all editions)—six: following the Hīnayāna sūtras, six consciousnesses are spoken of. Or both cause and effect are spoken of as seven: various teachings speak of seven mind-elements. Or both cause and effect are spoken of as eight: namely, the eight consciousnesses. Or cause and effect combined are spoken of as nine: the verse in the ninth \[fascicle\] of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says, "The eight and nine various consciousnesses are like the waves on water." This is based on the \*Lakṣaṇāśūnyatā-śāstra\* and the Samatā-sūtra, where they take tathatā to be the ninth consciousness; because the one ultimate and the eight conventional are spoken of in combination. Now we take the eighth root-consciousness in its pure stage to be the ninth, because the defiled and pure root-consciousnesses are discussed separately, because it is the fundamental basis, and because the ninth is again named amalavijñāna; thus defiled and pure are spoken of separately in the eighth, making nine. Such distinctions of the various consciousnesses discussed above are from a preliminary perspective. According to the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra: "The self-nature of the eight consciousnesses cannot be said to be definitely different, because they are of the nature of cause and effect, because they lack a fixed nature, and because they are like water and waves. Nor are they definitely one, because their mental operations, bases, and objective conditions are different, because their arising and ceasing are different, and because their perfumings are different." A verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says, "The eight kinds—citta, manas, and consciousnesses—their marks are differentiated conventionally; ultimately, their marks are not differentiated, because mark and marked do not exist." All such classifications and distinctions of consciousness are named vijñaptimātra. If this illusory-natured consciousness is contemplated in preparatory application, it is solely universal and not specific; if contemplated in post-attainment, it is contemplation of specific marks, because each dependent \[arising\] is individually realized. As cited above, it is known that whether it be teachings or principle, causes or effects, practices or stages, down to the mundane and supramundane, all myriad dharmas realized by all Buddhas and cultivated by bodhisattvas—there is not the slightest dharma that is not citta. Those who see, hear, believe, and aspire toward the great import of the Mirror of the Source are as if imprinted by a precious seal or illuminated by a bright mirror; slight doubts can be severed forever. But all hairy-path ordinary beings, or those dwelling in the indeterminate group, have habituated natures easily defiled, just like white silk. As Mencius said: "Human nature is like swirling water; open a channel to the east and it flows east, open one to the west and it flows west." It is also like an inchworm: eating yellow its body becomes yellow, eating green its body becomes green. Furthermore, within the storehouse of the eight consciousnesses, the seeds of the ten dharmadhātus are fully possessed; in accordance with whatever dharma is heard, active manifestations immediately arise. If one hears the text of the Mirror of the Source, it immediately perfumes and arouses the seeds of the Buddha vehicle. ### [29.9.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9.5) "Yet one must dye one's spirit and internalize it into the mind, fathom the source and see the nature; do not wait for it to enter the ears and come out of the mouth, merely memorizing superficial words. As Xunzi said: 'The learning of the gentleman enters through his spirit, becomes fixed in his heart, spreads through his four limbs, and manifests as an exemplar in his movement and rest. The learning of the petty person enters through his ears and exits from his mouth; between mouth and ears is merely four inches—how could it suffice to beautify a seven-foot body?'" ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.29.9.1) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.29.9) · Pramāṇa