宗鏡錄 38.3

38.3

Answer: Attaining and yet not attaining, the awakening of the initial and the original are without distinction. Not attaining and yet attaining, at the time of wondrous realization they are profoundly joined. As the Vajrasamādhi-sūtra states: 'The Buddha said: "Good sons, the five stages are a single awakening; one enters profitably from the source. If one transforms sentient beings, it is from their original place." Śāriputra asked: "What is meant by 'from their original place'?" The Buddha said: "Originally there is no original place. In the original limit of no place, entering reality, generating bodhi, one shall realize the noble path. Why is this? Good sons, it is like a hand grasping empty space: it neither grasps it nor does it not grasp it."' The commentary explains: 'Raising a doubt, the question arises: "If there is an original place, one should be able to enter it. If one can enter it, it is not without an original place." To dispel this doubt, an analogy is adduced and explained: "A hand grasping empty space"—the hand grasping is an analogy for the active practice of entering; empty space is an analogy for the source that is entered. "Neither grasps it" because empty space has no form that can be gripped. "Nor does it not grasp it" because within the grip empty space is not absent. The benefit of the source is also like this: originally there is no nature of an original place, hence it cannot be attained; yet the source of no source is not absent, hence it is not non-attainable.' Thus, realizing the source is termed 'attaining'; it is not seeking outward. If there is anything sought, that is losing the source. Furthermore, if there is anything attained, one does not attain bodhi, because it is through non-attainment that bodhi arises. Moreover, the dharma of non-attainment is not outside of attainment: one must seek all dharmas before completely exhausting the fountainhead of non-attainment. As the Bodhicittotpāda-śāstra states: 'Within the absence of dharmas, one explains the characteristics of dharmas; within non-attainment, one explains that there are attained dharmas. Matters as they are seen are the realm of the buddhas.' However, although one seeks all dharmas, because one understands non-attainment, there is no reliance. In that which is unsought, I therefore seek it. Hence the Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra states: 'The Buddha asked Mañjuśrī: "Relying on what does one practice correctly?" Mañjuśrī replied: "One who practices correctly relies on nothing at all."' The explanation says: 'Whatever is expressed by verbal teachings all verifies the meaning of the one mind. If one sees dharmas outside of mind, this is false practice, because there is something relied upon. If it is correct practice, one relies on not a single thing. When that which is relied upon is calmed, that which relies is also gone. Both subject and object are empty; the false and the correct are both extinguished—this is correct practice.' The Treatise on the Meaning of Non-arising states: 'The sūtra says: "Dharmas are free from eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and manas; therefore, the six sense faculties cannot grasp them." Hence it says that practitioners do not grasp. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "For example, a moth can congregate anywhere, but it cannot congregate in fire. The manovijñāna of sentient beings is also like this: whatever dharmas can be heard or seen, it can take them all as cognitive objects, but it cannot take prajñā as a cognitive object." Thus we know that the nature of prajñā is detached, and the manas cannot grasp it. Furthermore, the person who grasps is himself inherently empty by nature, and therefore cannot grasp. If one grasps with the eye, as the sūtra says, "The nature of the eye is also empty." If one grasps with the ear, the nature of the ear is also empty. If one grasps with the hand, the nature of the hand is also empty. If one grasps with the manas, the nature of the manas is also empty. Person and dharma are together one suchness; suchness cannot grasp suchness, and emptiness cannot grasp emptiness. This is the practitioner's non-grasping, and therefore it is called non-attainment.' Furthermore, when a single thought-moment arises in the mind, there are two kinds of awakening. First, in terms of having a mind: one observes that as soon as a single thought-moment arises, the subsequent thought-moment does not continue, and thus it does not constitute an error. Therefore, it is said in Chan: 'Fear not the arising of thoughts; only beware the delay of awakening.' It is also said: 'A fleeting arising is the illness; non-continuation is the medicine.' This is because the arising of mind is precisely when wrongdoing arises. Hence, for beginners, gathering thoughts is foremost, and is the gradual progression into the path. As the Collection of Essentials from Various Sūtras states: 'Gathering the mind in one place is a thicket of virtues; scattering thoughts for a single instant is a rākṣasa of kleśa.' Therefore, the Śākyan disciple Tanguang subdued a fierce tiger before his knees, and the sage with topknot of hair let birds nest on his crown. Even the manifold phenomena cannot touch themselves; they must depend upon the inner conceptions of the sense faculties to be stimulated and aroused. How do we know this is so? Now there is mind stimulated within and events manifested without; or taking external objects as conditions, defilement is stirred within. Thus we know that inner and outer support each other, and the manifest and the hidden function reciprocally. The sovereign and ministers of the mind and consciousness cannot both be abandoned. Hence the sūtra says: 'If the mind-king is upright, then the six ministers are not corrupt; if the consciousness-faculty is muddled, then its ruler is not bright.' Now, to repent regarding the six ministers, one should be ashamed and restrain the six sense faculties, not letting them run wild. The Mind Chapter of the Dharmapada states: 'Formerly, when the Buddha was in the world, there was a man of the Way practicing the path under a tree by a river. For twelve years, his greedy thoughts were not eliminated; his mind wandered and his intentions were scattered, only thinking of the six desires—visual forms of the eye, auditory sounds of the ear, olfactory fragrances of the nose, gustatory tastes of the tongue, tactile sensations of the body, and dharmas of the mind. While his body was still, his intention roamed, never finding peace. In twelve years, he could not attain the Way. The Buddha, knowing he could be delivered, transformed himself into a śramaṇa and went to his place to lodge together under the tree. Soon the moon grew bright, and a turtle came out of the river and came under the tree. There was also an otter roaming hungrily in search of food; encountering the turtle, it wished to devour it. The turtle withdrew its head, tail, and four legs, hiding them within its shell, so that it could not be devoured. When the otter moved slightly away, it stuck out its head and feet again and walked as before. The otter could do nothing, and the turtle thereupon escaped. Thereupon the man of the Way asked the transformed śramaṇa: "This turtle has an armor that protects its life, so the otter could not gain an advantage over it." The transformed śramaṇa answered: "I reflect that worldly people are not equal to this turtle: they do not know impermanence, indulge the six passions, and external māras gain the advantage over them; their forms decay and their spirits depart, endless in birth and death, revolving in the five destinies with hundreds of thousands of sufferings—all produced by the mind. One should exert oneself to seek the peace of extinguishing and crossing over." Thereupon the transformed śramaṇa spoke a verse: "Conceal the six like a turtle, / guard the mind like a citadel. / Let wisdom do battle with Māra; / victorious, there is no peril."' Therefore, if the ground of the mind is stilled, then the six destinies are all at peace; all māras of the objective realm cannot gain an advantage, like the turtle concealing its six limbs, well protecting its life. The Awakening of Faith says: 'If a subsequent thought becomes aware of a prior thought, although this is called awakening, it is still non-awakening.' This is spoken in terms of having a mind, because it refers to ordinary people at the initial stage of practice. Second, in terms of having no mind: one knows that at the very moment of initial arising, there is no initial characteristic; one does not wait for a subsequent thought to extinguish it further, because at the exact moment a single thought arises, it is ultimately unattainable. As the Sūtra of Fifty Calculations states: 'A bodhisattva asked the Buddha: "Wrongdoing arises and then ceases. Why is it that I do not see it at all?" The Buddha asked the bodhisattvas: "Do your minds turn and arise, or not?" The bodhisattvas answered the Buddha: "Our minds turn and arise. If our minds did not turn and arise, we could not converse with the Buddha." The Buddha asked the bodhisattvas: "When a thought arises, are you yourselves aware of the thought arising, or not?" The bodhisattvas said: "We only perceive when conditions are met; we are not aware of the moment of its initial arising." The Buddha said: "As you have said, you cannot even know when a thought first arises; how could you be free of wrongdoing?"' Thus we know that if one does not examine the provisionality of the causal formation of the initial thought-moment, how can one avoid the fault of subsequent thoughts continuing and becoming concrete events? For all birth-and-death and kleśas are due to non-awakening. If wisdom acts as the guide, whence could error arise? Furthermore, if one understands that there are no dharmas outside the mind, then emotions and thoughts do not arise; without needing extra effort, one directly enters the inconceivable ground. As the Qingliang Commentary says: 'The sūtra clarifies that the dharma-substance of the ten grounds cuts off the paths of mind and speech, and explains the inconceivable as the cutting off of the path of words and language, and the extinction of the sphere of mental activity. Viewing emotions in terms of dharmas, it is called inconceivable, because outside these dharmas there are originally no emotions. What is its meaning? The arising of emotional characteristics originates from false conceptualization. Because of false conceptualization, characteristics arise. Relying on characteristics, mental thoughts arise again; grasping realities according to names is vitarka and vicāra. Relying on this vitarka and vicāra, speech arises. After speech arises, false mental thoughts arise again, grasping the dharmas that were spoken. This is words and language acting as the path, and the mind acting as the activity. Thereupon characteristics and thoughts blaze incessantly. Now, accord with the reality of dharmas and extinguish false conceptualization: characteristics will not arise. Because characteristics do not arise, the mind that establishes names is extinguished. Because the mind of names is extinguished, names do not arise. Because names do not arise, vitarka and vicāra do not occur. Because vitarka does not occur, speech perishes accordingly. Because speech perishes, one no longer grasps what is spoken based on words. Because one does not grasp what is spoken, the path of words and language is cut off, and the sphere of mental activity is extinguished. Because mental activity is extinguished, it is called inconceivable. Because dharmas transcend emotions and are beyond the reach of mind and speech, it is inconceivable.' Thus we know that when the mind of false conceptualization perishes, the conditions of the objective realm are extinguished. It is like moxibustion hitting the acupoint, severing the source of the disease forever; this can be called the fine physician of the jewel of awakening.