[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) › 3 # 宗鏡錄 3 English (machine translation) 3 - **Language:** English ### [3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.1) Compiled by Yanshou, Chan Master Zhijue, Abbot of Huiri Yongming Monastery. ### [3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.2) Now, the teachings explain all the myriad phenomena. The ultimate principle is empty and profound, beyond the descriptions of existence and non-existence, cutting off the natures of self and other. If there is no individual substance to a single phenomenon, how can a source be established? ### [3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.3) Answer: If a source is not established, toward what destination would learning return? As for self and other, existence and non-existence, they are all discriminations of the conscious mind of sentient beings; they are antidotes, existing based on mutual relativity. The individual substance of the dharmakāya, the mind of the middle and true principle—how could it be identical to illusory existence or follow illusory non-existence? The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'The Buddha said: "Mahāmati, for example, it is not the nature of an ox or a horse; the nature of an ox or a horse is in fact neither existent nor non-existent, yet neither is without its own characteristic."' An ancient commentary explains: 'Regarding the body of a horse, one cannot say whether the nature of an ox is existent or non-existent, yet it is not that the horse itself has no substance. This illustrates that regarding the dharmakāya, one cannot say whether the nature of the aggregates (skandha), realms (dhātu), and entrances (āyatana) is existent or non-existent, yet it is not that the dharmakāya has no individual characteristic.' This principle of the emptiness of phenomena surpasses existence and non-existence; it is the very nature of the dharmakāya. Yet, if there is a direction and orientation, wisdom turns its back on natural genuineness; if there is no attainment and no return, feelings give rise to annihilationism. Merely positing existence without seeking the true, the pattern is clearly evident; positing non-existence naturally suffices, and the wondrous intent is fully radiant. Then in tranquility there is a destination to return to, and in calm there is no gap. Suddenly transcending subject and object, residing neither in existence nor non-existence, this can truly be called the genuine return, able to penetrate the ultimate Path. ### [3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.4) Question: Taking the mind as the source, what is the characteristic of penetrating the source (siddhānta)? ### [3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.5) Answer: Internally realizing the ultimate meaning and principle of one's own mind, abiding on the stage of self-realization, and entering the portal of noble wisdom—corresponding with this is called the characteristic of penetrating the source. This is at the time of practice, not at the time of understanding. Relying on understanding, practice is accomplished; when practice is accomplished, understanding terminates. Then the path of speech is cut off, and the place of mental activity is extinguished. As the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'The Buddha told Mahāmati: "As for penetrating the source, it means relying on the characteristic of self-attained superior progress, leaving far behind the false thoughts of speech and letters, proceeding to the self-characteristic of the stage of self-realization of the outflow-free realm, leaving far behind all deceptive perceptions and thoughts, subduing all outsiders and legions of Māras, and having the radiance blaze forth relying on the course of self-realization. This is called the characteristic of penetrating the source."' Therefore, awakening to the mind and becoming a patriarch has been transmitted from past sages. Hence Great Master Bodhidharma said: 'Understanding the Buddha's mind-source without an inch of error in awakening, and with practice and understanding in mutual accord—this is called a patriarch.' A verse also says: 'Neither seeing evil and giving rise to resentment, / Nor observing good and diligently applying oneself; / Neither abandoning foolishness to draw near the worthy, / Nor discarding delusion to approach awakening; / Comprehending the Great Way, one transcends measure; / Penetrating the Buddha's mind, one exceeds limits; / Not sharing the path of ordinary people or sages— / Supremely transcendent, this is called a patriarch.' ### [3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.6) Question: Awakening to the Way and clarifying the source is like someone drinking water—they know for themselves whether it is cold or warm. How can its operational characteristics be explained? ### [3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.7) Answer: It was already stated above: The skillful means of all buddhas are never interrupted in the present age; they secretly dispense deep compassion and do not let \[sentient beings\] be abandoned. Those who have already understood clearly never utter a word; it is only because of doubt that there is a question, and because of a question that there is an answer. This was personally spoken by our fundamental teacher at the Laṅkāvatāra assembly to the great bodhisattvas from the ten directions who had come seeking the Dharma: these two penetrations, first, penetration of the source, and second, penetration of speech. Penetration of the source is for bodhisattvas; penetration of speech is for beginners. The ancestral buddhas condescended to grant a little instruction for the beginner with initial capacity; this refers to the penetration of speech. Just because \[such people\] seek the Dharma from others and generate understanding according to words, there was fear that they would grasp skillful means as reality and become confused about penetration of the source. For this reason the meanings of the two penetrations were divided and distinguished. 'Penetration of the source' means: 'depending on oneself, one attains characteristics of superior advancement, far leaving behind speech, writing, and vain conceptualization,' and so on, up to 'depending on one's own awakened realm, radiance brightly emanates.' If one personally arrives at the ground of self-awakening, when radiance emanates, one may say: 'It is like a person drinking water: they know for themselves whether it is cold or warm.' It is like the blind opening their eyes and clearly illuminating the environment: verifying the elephant's true body, they never stroke its tail or tusk; seeing the proper color of milk, how could it depend on discussing a crane or snow? In front of this person with eyes, if one were further to preach and show it, one could not be called one who knows the proper time and is termed a great Dharma master. A person who truly sees the moon never looks at the finger; one who has personally arrived home naturally ceases to ask the way. Only when realization accords \[with it\] does it not wait upon words. One never grasps the finger as the moon, nor does one see the moon apart from the finger. As the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra states: 'For instance, there was a king who addressed a minister: "Lead an elephant and show it to the blind." Thereupon the minister, having received the king's order, gathered many blind people and showed them the elephant. At that time, those blind people each touched it with their hands. The minister then returned and reported to the king: "I have finished showing it." At that time the great king summoned the blind people and asked each of them: "Did you see the elephant?" The blind people each said: "We have seen it." The king said: "What kind of thing is an elephant?" The one who touched the tusk said: "The shape of an elephant is like a radish root." The one who touched the ear said: "An elephant is like a winnowing basket." The one who touched the head said: "An elephant is like a rock." The one who touched the trunk said: "An elephant is like a pestle." The one who touched the leg said: "An elephant is like a wooden mortar." The one who touched the back said: "An elephant is like a bed." The one who touched the belly said: "An elephant is like a jar." The one who touched the tail said: "An elephant is like a rope." Good sons, just like those blind people: they did not speak of the elephant's substance, yet nor did they not speak of it. If these various characteristics were all not the elephant, yet apart from these, there is no other elephant. Good sons, the king is an analogy for the Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksaṃbuddha. The minister is an analogy for the Vaipulya Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra. The elephant is an analogy for the buddha-nature. The blind are an analogy for all sentient beings with ignorance. Having heard the Buddha's preaching, these sentient beings might make this statement: "Form is the buddha-nature. Why? Although this form perishes, it continues in succession. Therefore, one attains the supreme Tathāgata's thirty-two characteristics, the Tathāgata's permanent form. Because the Tathāgata's form is permanent and uninterrupted, this form is called the buddha-nature. For example, true gold: though its substance changes, its color is always invariant. At times it is made into a bracelet or a plate, yet its yellow color is never altered from the beginning. Sentient beings' buddha-nature is also like this: though its substance is impermanent, its color is permanent. Therefore, form is spoken of as the buddha-nature." And so on, up to speaking of sensation, conception, volitional formations, and consciousness as the buddha-nature. Furthermore, some say: "Apart from the aggregates, there is a self; the self is the buddha-nature." Like those blind people each describing the elephant, although they do not attain the truth, nor do they fail to speak of the elephant. Those who speak of the buddha-nature are also like this: it is not identical to the six dharmas, nor is it apart from the six dharmas. Good sons, therefore I say that sentient beings' buddha-nature is neither form nor apart from form, and so on, up to neither self nor apart from self. Good sons, there are non-Buddhists who, although they speak of having a self, in reality have no self. The "self" of sentient beings is simply the five aggregates; apart from the aggregates, there is no other self. Good sons, for example, stem, leaves, filaments, and receptacle unite to form a lotus flower; apart from these, there is no other flower.' Furthermore, the Buddha said: 'Good sons, these non-Buddhists are as foolish as small children; lacking the skillful means of wisdom, they cannot comprehend permanence and impermanence, suffering and bliss, purity and impurity, self and non-self, lifespan and non-lifespan, sentient beings and non-sentient beings, real and non-real, existence and non-existence. Grasping a small fraction from within the Buddha's Dharma, they falsely imagine the existence of permanence, bliss, self, and purity, yet in reality do not know permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Like a person born blind who does not know the color of milk and asks another: "What is the color of milk like?" The other person answers: "Its color is white like a seashell." The blind person asks again: "Is this color of milk like a seashell sound?" The answer is: "No." He asks again: "What is the color of a seashell like?" The answer is: "It is like rice powder." The blind person asks again: "Is the color of milk soft like rice powder? What is rice powder like?" The answer is: "It is like falling snow." The blind person says again: "Is that rice powder cold like snow? What is snow like?" The answer is: "It is like a white crane." Although this person born blind hears these four analogies, in the end he cannot know the true color of milk. These non-Buddhists are also like this; in the end they cannot know permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Good sons, by this meaning, within my Buddha's Dharma there is the real truth, not among the non-Buddhists.' Now, the real truth is that to which the mirror of the source returns. When one has not yet heard and awakened, and does not faithfully understand it, whatever exposition of Dharma one gives and one's own practice all turn into gates of arising and ceasing and of subduing; they do not enter the ultimate path of non-arising. As the Āmrapālīsūtra states: 'At that time Mañjuśrī asked again: "Is there anyone who clearly knows the characteristic of arising yet non-arising, who is nevertheless detained by arising?" The answer was: "There is. Although they clearly see it themselves, their power is not yet sufficient, and they are detained by arising; this is such a one." He asked again: "Is there anyone who is ignorant and does not recognize the nature of arising, yet is ultimately not detained by arising?" The answer was: "No. Why? If one does not see the nature of arising, although through subduing one slightly attains a peaceful place, that characteristic of non-peace is constantly an object of antidote. If one can see the nature of arising, although one is in a non-peaceful place, the characteristic of peace constantly manifests before one. If one does not know in this way, although one has various superior debates and discussions of profound scriptures, it is just with a mind of arising and ceasing that one speaks those secret and essential words of the true mark. Like a blind person distinguishing colors: based on others' words, they can speak of blue, yellow, red, white, and black, but cannot themselves see the proper mark of color. Those today who cannot see phenomena are also like this. But if those who are now subject to the arising of arising and the death of dying make statements, does it mean that for such a person there is no meaning of birth and death? If one is bound by permanence and impermanence, it is also like this. One should know: can one who greatly attains emptiness not personally attain emptiness, so that an idea of emptiness is spoken of?" Therefore we know that being able to comprehend the non-arising nature of the ten thousand dharmas is attaining the Way. The Mahāprajñāpāramitāsūtra states: 'The Buddha said: "Subhūti, because all dharmas are empty and non-existent, all are not self-determined, and are false and unstable, all dharmas are without arising and without origination, without knowing and without seeing. Furthermore, Subhūti, the nature of all dharmas has nothing to rely upon and nothing to which it is tied. Due to these causes and conditions, they are without arising and without origination, without knowing and without seeing."' The Avataṃsakasūtra states: 'With the seal of true reality, one seals all gates of karma, attains the non-arising of dharmas, and abides where the buddhas abide. Contemplating the nature of non-arising, one seals all realms. Protected and remembered by all buddhas, one generates the mind of dedication; in accord with all dharmatā, one dedicates, entering unconditioned dharmas and accomplishing the skillful means of what is to be done.' Therefore, those who do not understand the purport of mind-only and have not entered the mirror of the source give rise to the defilement of greed and delusion toward non-arising, and cling to environmental conditions within true emptiness; taking them as antidotes, they bring about their transmigration. If they can reflect inward, citta and environment are both tranquil. As the Sarvadharmāpravṛttinirdeśasūtra states: 'If a bodhisattva sees the limit of greed, that itself is the limit of reality; if they see the limit of anger, that itself is the limit of reality; if they see the limit of delusion, that itself is the limit of reality—then they can completely extinguish the sins of karmic hindrances.' And so on, up to: 'Worldly fools, because they do not know the ultimately ceased characteristic of all dharmas, see their own bodies and also see other people. Due to this seeing, they then give rise to karma of body, speech, and mind.' And so on, up to: 'Not seeing the Buddha, not seeing the Dharma, not seeing the Saṅgha—this is not seeing any dharma. If one does not see any dharma, then among dharmas one gives rise to no doubt. Because one gives rise to no doubt, one does not grasp any dharma. Because one does not grasp any dharma, one naturally enters tranquility.' The Acintyabuddhaviṣayanirdeśasūtra states: 'At that time the World-Honoured One addressed the Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī again: "Youth, can you comprehend the equal Dharma in which the Tathāgata abides?" The Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, I have already comprehended it." The Buddha said: "Youth, what is the equal Dharma in which the Tathāgata abides?" The Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, the place where all ordinary people give rise to greed, anger, and delusion is the equal Dharma in which the Tathāgata abides." The Buddha said: "Youth, how is the place where all ordinary people give rise to greed, anger, and delusion the equal Dharma in which the Tathāgata abides?" The Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, all ordinary people give rise to greed, anger, and delusion within dharmas that are empty, markless, and wishless. Therefore, the place where all ordinary people give rise to greed, anger, and delusion is the equal Dharma in which the Tathāgata abides." The Buddha said: "Youth, is emptiness an existing dharma, such that you say greed, anger, and delusion exist within it?" The Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, emptiness exists; therefore greed, anger, and delusion also exist." The Buddha said: "Youth, how does emptiness exist? How, further, do greed, anger, and delusion exist?" The Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī said: "World-Honoured One, emptiness exists by virtue of conventional speech; greed, anger, and delusion also exist by virtue of conventional speech. As the Buddha said: 'Monks, there is the unarisen, the unoriginated, the unmade, the unconditioned, which is not an active conditioned dharma. This unarisen, unoriginated, unmade, unconditioned, which is not an active conditioned dharma, is not non-existent. If it were non-existent, then from the dharmas that arise, originate, are made, and are active formations, there would be no escape. Because it exists, escape is spoken of.' This is also like that: if emptiness did not exist, then from greed, anger, and delusion there would be no escape. Because it exists, detachment from the afflictions of greed and the like is spoken of."' A verse of the Madhyamakaśāstra says: 'From a existent dharma, an existent dharma does not arise, nor does a non-existent dharma arise; from a non-existent dharma, an existent dharma does not arise, nor does a non-existent dharma arise.' Directly explaining the meaning of the verse: an existent dharma is existence, like form, citta, and so on; a non-existent dharma is non-existence, like a rabbit's horns and so on. If an existent dharma arose from an existent dharma, it would be like a mother giving birth to a child; if an existent dharma produced a non-existent dharma, it would be like a person giving birth to a barren woman's child; if a non-existent dharma produced an existent dharma, it would be like a rabbit's horns producing a person; if a non-existent dharma produced a non-existent dharma, it would be like turtle hair producing a rabbit's horns. Therefore the Prajñāprajñaptiśāstra states: 'Furthermore, there is the thought: "If the Tathāgata only realized that nothing is to be attained, the Buddha's Dharma would be single and not boundless." Therefore the sūtra states: "The Tathāgata says that all dharmas are the Buddha's Dharma." What is meant by the Buddha's Dharma? It is simply that nothing is to be attained; never has a single dharma had an attainable nature. Therefore, there is nothing that is not the Buddha's Dharma. How is it that all are completely unobtainable? The sūtra says: "All dharmas are simply not all dharmas." Why are they not? Because of the nature of non-arising. If there is no arising, then there is no nature; why are they called all dharmas? Because within naturelessness, conventional speech is provisionally established. That all dharmas have no nature is simply sentient beings' tathāgatagarbha nature.' Layman Pang's verse says: 'The kalpa fire burns the heavens, yet the heavens are not hot; / The fierce wind blows, yet no sound is heard. / A hundred streams contend to pour into the sea, yet the sea does not overflow; / The five sacred peaks and famous mountains show no form. / Clear and tranquil contemplation leaves no trace; / A thousand paths all together enter non-arising.' Therefore we know that all dharmas take form from intention, and a thousand paths have appearance due to mind. In a single thought of clear tranquility, the ten thousand realms are vast and open; originally identical to the gate of non-duality, all enter the principle of non-arising. Therefore Mahāsattva Fu's 'Hard Journey' says: 'Do you not see / All dharmas are merely provisionally set up in emptiness; / Quietude without a gate is the Dharma gate. / Among all dharmas, mind is the master; / I now no longer find the source of the mind. / Since investigating and searching yields no source of mind, / You should know that all dharmas are entirely without root.' Furthermore, non-arising has two aspects, as the Tongxin lun states: 'First, the non-arising of the dharmatā. The wondrous principle is called "dharma"; the utmost emptiness is called "nature"; being originally so of itself is called "non-arising." Second, the non-arising of dependent origination. Since the environment appears from the mind, it does not arise from other; since the mind arises relying on the environment, it does not arise from self; since mind and environment are distinct, they do not arise together; since they exist due to mutual condition, they do not arise without cause.' It is also said: 'First, non-arising in principle: because the perfected nature is originally unarisen. Second, non-arising in phenomena: because the characteristics of conditioned arising are themselves non-arising.' The Zhiguan states: 'If one interprets the Diamond Sūtra, one shifts the meaning of non-arising and carries it into the gate of non-abiding: various non-abidings, not abiding in form when giving, not abiding in sound, fragrance, and so on when giving. Although dharmas do not abide, abiding in prajñā through the dharma of non-abiding is entering emptiness; abiding in worldly truth through the dharma of non-abiding is entering the provisional; abiding in the true mark through the dharma of non-abiding is entering the middle. This wisdom of non-abiding is itself the vajra samādhi, which can shatter bedrock and gravel and penetrate to the fundamental limit. Furthermore, as Śākyamuni entered the great tranquil meditation and vajra samādhi, and the treatises of Vasubandhu and Asaṅga and the extensive explanations of Kaishan \[Zhizang\]: how could they go beyond the meaning of non-arising and non-abiding?' If one attains this meaning, across a thousand sūtras and ten thousand treatises, one will be clearly free of doubt. This is the initial chapter of studying contemplation, the foundation of thinking and deliberation, the wondrous wisdom for resolving divergences, and the guiding destination for entering the Way. Its essential framework is vast, complete with phenomena and principle; with one understanding, a thousand follow, and one is at ease in the Dharma gates. Therefore we know that all dharmas exist from non-arising and nature-emptiness: existing yet not existing, not departing from the conventional yet constantly true; non-existing yet existing, not departing from the true yet constantly conventional. Then illusory existence is established and non-arising is revealed, with emptiness and existence distinct; both marks are obliterated and both affairs remain, with the true and conventional distinct and vivid. This, then, is non-arising yet with nothing unarisen, not abiding in the two extremes. As an ancient worthy's verse says: 'Non-arising ultimately does not abide, / The ten thousand images drift in vain. / If one forms an understanding of non-arising, / One is still bound fast by non-arising.' ### [3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.8) Question: Taking citta as the source requires ultimate precision in principle. Regarding the realm of sentient beings, the true and the false seem distinct; they must not be conflated, lest the complete enlightenment be corrupted. Just as gold and brass heated together immediately reveal the real and the counterfeit, and cooking gravel together with rice yields differences of raw and cooked, it is not yet known: which citta is taken as the source? ### [3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.9) Answer: It is truly as you ask: one must distinguish citta with subtlety. This wonder is difficult to know; only a Buddha can discern it. It is merely because those of the triyāna aspiring to the Way have discrepancies in their views: they mistakenly point to the deluded citta, taking it to be real; they mistake a treacherous thief for their true child, having their household treasures utterly robbed; and they gather fish eyes to serve as black-dragon pearls, blindly misleading the eye of wisdom. Consequently, they cause ignorant children to sink into the manifold barriers of the prison of existence, and perverse and inverted people to drown in the terrifying waves of the river of views, playing amidst fierce flames within a decaying house, forgetting their suffering and fatigue, and lying in a great dream through the long night, confused about citta and confused about their nature. All of this comes from clinging to this cognitive conditionality, taking it to be one's own body, forsaking this true citta, and mistaking other sights and sounds for it. This is the failure of world-renouncing non-Buddhists and householder worldlings. Furthermore, those of the triyāna who aspire to the Way, scholars of doctrine, and the Chan lineage are also deluded about this citta, clinging to the Buddha's expedient means, which has caused the teaching to open into eight nets and the vehicles to correspond to four faculties, bypassing a single thought to gallop afar through three asaṃkhyeya kalpas, expending effort in vain across great kalpas, and departing from the place of jewels to linger long in the conjured city, their tracks exhausted on the long road. This is the failure of those of provisional faculties and lesser fruits, down to those in the Chan lineage who fail to grasp the intent. Therefore, the Śūraṅgamasūtra states: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: All sentient beings, from beginningless time, have undergone various inversions, their karmic seeds naturally clustering like akṣa fruits. The reason practitioners cannot attain unsurpassed bodhi, but instead separately become śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, or become non-Buddhists, devas, māras, and their retinues, is entirely because they do not know the two kinds of roots and cultivate in confusion and error, just like boiling gravel hoping to make delicious food—even after kalpas as numerous as dust motes, they will never achieve it. What are the two kinds? Ānanda: The first is the root of beginningless saṃsāra, which is that you and all sentient beings presently take the citta that grasps conditions to be your self-nature. The second is the fundamentally pure substance of beginningless bodhi and nirvāṇa, which is your present primordial illumination of the essence of consciousness that can produce all conditions, yet is abandoned by conditions. Because all sentient beings abandon this fundamental illumination, though they act all day long, they are unconscious of it and vainly enter the various destinies.' Explanation: These two kinds of roots are precisely the two cittas: the true and the deluded. The first, 'the root of beginningless saṃsāra,' is fundamental avidyā; this is the deluded citta. Initially confused about the one dharmadhātu, unconsciously and suddenly a thought arises. Sudden arising is itself 'beginningless'—just like flowers appearing before strained eyes, or dreams occurring in deep sleep: there is fundamentally no point of origin, nor any fixed place from which it is born. All arise from deluded thoughts, not from other external conditions. From this, the subtle karmic consciousness is formed, which then gives rise to the evolving consciousness, evolving to function as the subject citta; subsequently, it gives rise to the manifesting consciousness, which manifests external spheres. All sentient beings together employ these three consciousnesses—karmic, evolving, and manifesting—to give rise to internal and external grasping of conditions, taking them to be the self-nature of citta. Saṃsāra continues because of this, which serves as its root. The second, 'the fundamentally pure substance of beginningless bodhi and nirvāṇa,' is this true citta, also called the intrinsically pure citta, and also called pure original enlightenment. Because it is without arising and without birth, its own substance motionless, unpolluted by saṃsāra and unpurified by nirvāṇa, it is designated as 'pure.' This pure substance is the primordial essence of the eight consciousnesses, fundamentally luminous and complete in itself. Because it accords with defilements unconsciously and does not maintain its nature, just as an empty valley responds to echoes, emitting sounds according to conditions, this is also like that: capable of producing all phenomena, it establishes the two divisions of darśanabhāga and nimittabhāga, citta and objects mutually generating each other. Merely according with defiled and pure conditions, one abandons this complete and eternal nature, just as water follows the wind to make various waves. Because of this, sentient beings lose the root to pursue the branches, sinking completely, unaware, and vainly enduring false suffering. Although they endure false suffering, true bliss always abides; though they undergo ascending and descending, original enlightenment is unmoving, just as water making waves does not lose its wet nature. They only know how to transform citta into objects, mistaking awakening for delusion, accumulating delusion upon delusion, vainly passing through kalpas as numerous as dust and sands, generating dreams from dreams, perpetually darkened in the long night. Therefore the sūtra says: 'You should know that all sentient beings, having saṃsāra continue from beginningless time, are all due to not knowing the constantly abiding true citta, the pure and luminous substance of nature, and instead using various false thoughts; these thoughts are not real, hence there is transmigration.' Because they do not comprehend the unmoving true citta, they follow the deluded consciousness of transmigration. This consciousness has no substance and is not apart from the true citta; originally, in the signless source of truth, it evolves to become the deluded thoughts of sentient beings. Just as wind stirs waves on a clear pond, though the waves move, they constantly abide in the unmoving source; just as a cataract generates flowers in the sky, though the flowers appear, they are not separate from the nature of empty space. When the cataract dissolves, space is clear; when the waves subside, the pond is pure. There is only the one true citta, universally pervading the dharmadhātu. Furthermore, this citta is not born from the past, does not abide in the present, and does not perish into the future; unmoved by ascent or descent, its nature and characteristics are as one. Thus, transmitted from above, this true citta is taken as the source. Cultivating apart from this, one is entirely entangled in Māra's snares; attaining anything else, one sinks completely into the forest of heresy. Therefore, it can stir deep compassion and generate redoubled pity. For this reason, the Second Patriarch sought this deluded citta and could not find it, whereupon the First Patriarch transmitted the robe; Ānanda clung to this deluded citta, which is why the Tathāgata reprimanded him. As the sūtra says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: You now wish to know the path of śamatha and desire to emerge from saṃsāra; I now ask you again.' Immediately the Tathāgata raised his golden arm, bent his five webbed fingers, and said to Ānanda: 'Do you see now or not?' Ānanda said: 'I see.' The Buddha said: 'What do you see?' Ānanda said: 'I see the Tathāgata raising his arm and bending his fingers into a luminous fist, dazzling my citta and eyes.' The Buddha said: 'With what do you see it?' Ānanda said: 'I, together with the great assembly, see it with our eyes.' The Buddha told Ānanda: 'Now answer me: the Tathāgata bent his fingers into a luminous fist, dazzling your citta and eyes; your eyes can see, but with what as citta do you confront the brilliance of my fist?' Ānanda said: 'The Tathāgata is now inquiring into where the citta resides, and I use citta to investigate and pursue it; that which can investigate is what I take to be citta.' The Buddha said: 'Ha, Ānanda! This is not your citta.' Startled, Ānanda left his seat, joined his palms, stood up, and addressed the Buddha: 'If this is not my citta, what should it be called?' The Buddha told Ānanda: 'This is the deluded conceptual characteristic of external dust, deceiving your true nature. Because from beginningless time down to your present life you have taken a thief to be your child, losing your original eternity, you have undergone transmigration.' Ānanda addressed the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, I am the Buddha's favored younger brother; because my citta loved the Buddha, you caused me to leave the household life. How could my citta not only make offerings to the Tathāgata, but even travel throughout realms as numerous as the sands of the Ganges to serve all Buddhas and good spiritual friends, generate great vigor, and perform all difficult dharmic activities—all by using this citta? Even if one slanders the Dharma and permanently regresses from roots of goodness, it is also on account of this citta. If this manifestation is not citta, then I have no citta and am identical to earth and wood; apart from this awareness and cognition, nothing else exists. Why does the Tathāgata say this is not citta? I am truly terrified, and the great assembly is without exception perplexed. Please bestow great compassion to instruct those who are not yet awakened.' At that time, the World-Honoured One instructed Ānanda and the great assembly, wishing to cause their cittas to enter the tolerance of the unarisen dharmas. From the lion seat, he rubbed Ānanda's crown and told him: 'The Tathāgata has always said that what all dharmas arise from is manifested by citta alone; all causes and effects, worlds and dust motes, take citta as their substance. Ānanda, if throughout the worlds, regarding all that exists, even down to blades of grass, leaves, strands of thread, and knots, when you investigate their root source, each has a substance and nature. Even empty space has a name and appearance; how much more so should the pure, wonderfully pure, and luminous citta, which is the nature of all cittas, be without a substance of its own? If you stubbornly hold that the nature discerned by conceptualization and contemplation must be citta, then this citta should possess a complete nature of its own apart from all dust-activities of forms, sounds, scents, tastes, and tangibles. Just as you now listen to my Dharma, this is discrimination dependent upon sound. Even if you extinguish all seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing, keeping an inner tranquility, it is still the shadow-affair of discriminating dharmic dust. I am not commanding you to hold that it is not citta, but you must examine citta with subtlety: if apart from the front dust there is a discriminating nature, that is truly your citta; if the discriminating nature has no substance apart from dust, then this is merely the shadow-affair of discriminating the front dust. Dust is not constantly abiding; when it transforms and ceases, this citta will be identical to turtle hair and rabbit horns, and your dharmakāya will be identical to annihilation. Who then would cultivate and realize the tolerance of unarisen dharmas?' An ancient commentary says: 'That which can investigate is the deluded citta; all have the function of cognitive conditionality, and thus may also be called citta. However, it is not the true citta. The deluded citta is a reflection upon the true citta. Therefore it is said: Your body and your citta are all objects manifested within the wonderfully luminous true essence, the wonderful citta. If one clings to this reflection as real, when the reflection ceases, this citta is cut off. Hence it is said that if one clings to conditioning dust, it is identical to annihilation. Because the deluded citta grasps dust to form its substance, it is like a reflection in a mirror or a bubble upon water. Confused about the water and clinging to the waves, when the waves calm, citta ceases; confused about the mirror and clinging to the reflections, when the reflections vanish, citta is destroyed. If citta ceases, it becomes the annihilation view. If one knows that the wet nature is indestructible and the substance of the mirror is eternally bright, then the waves are fundamentally empty and the reflections are originally tranquil. Thus we know that the spheres and wisdom of the Buddhas pervade realms and pervade space, while the bodies and minds of worldlings are like shadows and reflections. If one clings to the branches as the root and takes the false to be true, only when saṃsāra appears will its unreality be verified. Hence the ancient sages said: Seeing the ore, one does not recognize the gold; only upon entering the furnace does one realize one's mistake.' ### [3.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.10) Question: In what sense are the two cittas, the true and the deluded, each called citta? What is taken as their substance, and what is taken as their characteristic? ### [3.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.11) Answer: The true mind takes numinous knowing and tranquil illumination as mind, non-emptiness and non-abiding as its substance, and the true mark as its characteristic. The deluded mind takes the reflected shadows of the six dusts as mind, the absence of intrinsic nature as its substance, and conditioned clinging and discursive thinking as its characteristic. This deluded mind of conditioned thinking, awareness, discernment, and capacity to know lacks a substance of its own; it is merely \[the reflection of\] external dusts, existing or not existing according to the presence or absence of objects. When an object arrives, it arises; when the object departs, it ceases. Because it arises dependent on objects, the entire object is mind. Furthermore, because the mind illuminates objects, the entire mind is an object. Neither has an intrinsic nature; they are nothing but causes and conditions. Therefore the Dharmapada says: 'In a mirage there is no water; there is only solar vapor. In the aggregates there is no form; there is only conditioned vapor.' Because the shimmering vapor of hot weather is illuminated by sunlight, from a distance it looks like water; but it arises solely from conceptualization and is only solar vapor. This unreal form and mind are also like this: with one's own karma as cause and the external dust of parents as conditions, their combination seems to manifest form and mind; it is only conditioned vapor. Therefore the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment says: 'Falsely recognizing the reflected shadows of the six dusts as one's own mental nature.' Thus we know that if this mind capable of inference lacks causes and conditions, it does not arise. It arises solely from conditions, and phenomena arisen from conditions are all impermanent—like a reflection in a mirror, lacking substance and entirely dependent on external objects; like the moon in the water, unreal and falsely manifesting an orb in the sky. To recognize this as real is foolish indeed! Therefore Ānanda clung \[to it\] without ground and was bewildered at all seven places; the Second Patriarch understood it and did not give rise \[to it\], and with a single word tallied with the Way. When the Second Patriarch sought this unquiet mind of conditioned thinking and could not find it, he immediately knew that the true mind is omnipresent. Awakening to this as the source, he then initially inherited the patriarchal throne. Because the Tathāgata analyzed and dismantled the deluded mind, all the way to closely and minutely interrogating the five aggregates, the six entrances, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements, and the natures of the seven great elements, each one was thoroughly \[seen to be\] solely empty, all lacking intrinsic nature. They are neither existent through the coming together of causes and conditions, self and other, nor are they born spontaneously without a cause; all are the discriminations of mental speech, consciousness, and thought. Because of this, \[Ānanda\] had a sudden awakening to the wondrous and bright true mind, which is vast, all-embracing, and omnipresent. Thereupon, together with the great assembly, he thoroughly realized this mind and praised the Buddha in unison. Thus the sūtra says: 'At that time, Ānanda and the great assembly, having received the Buddha Tathāgata's subtle and wondrous instruction, were completely free in body and mind and attained unhinderedness. These members of the great assembly each knew for themselves that mind pervades the ten directions, seeing the emptiness of the ten directions like looking at a leaf or an object held in one's hand. All things existing in all worlds are all the wondrous bright original mind of bodhi. The quintessential mind is omnipresent and complete, encompassing the ten directions. Turning back to look at their bodies born of parents, they were like a single mote of dust blown into the empty space of the ten directions, seeming to exist and seeming not to exist; like a single floating bubble tossed on the still, vast sea, arising and ceasing without origin. Clearly knowing for themselves, they attained the fundamental wondrous mind, constantly abiding and indestructible. Bowing to the Buddha with joined palms, having attained what they had never had before, they spoke verses before the Tathāgata praising the Buddha: "Wondrous, tranquil, holding all, unmoved Honored One; / King of Śūraṅgama, rare in the world! / Extinguish my inverted thoughts of countless kalpas, / without traversing asaṃkhya kalpas let me attain the dharmakāya!"' This is identical to the First Patriarch pointing directly to the human mind: seeing nature and becoming a buddha. ### [3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.12) Question: What textual proof is there for the active characteristics of the true mind? ### [3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.13) Answer: The Dhāraṇīśvararājasūtra says: 'The bodhisattva contemplates the mind: within the mind there is no mark of mind. From the beginning, this mind does not arise and does not originate; its nature is constantly pure. It is defiled by adventitious defilements, and therefore there is discrimination. Mind does not know mind, nor does it see mind. Why is this? This mind is empty; its nature is inherently empty, and therefore at its root it does not exist at all. This mind has no fixed dharma, because a fixed dharma cannot be found. This mind is without dharmas that either combine or disperse. The prior and subsequent limits of this mind cannot be found. This mind is formless, and none can see it. Mind does not see itself, nor does it know its own nature. Furthermore, at that time this person does not discriminate whether this is mind or not mind, but skillfully knows that mind has no mark of arising and thoroughly penetrates that this mind has no nature of arising. Why is this? Mind has no determined nature, nor does it have a determined mark. Furthermore, one does not find the mark of mental defilement, nor does one find the mark of mental purity; one only knows this mind's constant mark of purity.' The Great Prajñāpāramitāsūtra says: 'Although one grasps nothing among all phenomena, one can accomplish all endeavors.' Explanation: If one understands one's own mind, there is no endeavor that is not accomplished; but if one falsely grasps external objects, one instead becomes inwardly deficient. Therefore the Vajrasamādhisūtra says: 'A bodhisattva contemplates the original nature and marks, calling himself self-sufficient. A thousand thoughts and ten thousand reflections do not benefit the principle; they are merely agitation, losing the original king of the mind.' The commentary explains: 'Limitless merit is simply the one mind. The one mind is the sovereign, hence it is named the king of the mind. Arising, ceasing, and agitation violate this king of the mind and cannot return to it, hence it is said to be "lost".' Furthermore, 'mind' gathers and controls all dharmas, is supreme among all, and there is not a single dharma that it does not encompass. A 'king' governs the four seas, receives homage from the eight reaches, and there is not a single subject who is not subordinate. Therefore the Māyopamasamādhisūtra says: 'Not seeking dharmas is called one's own body.' The Sūtra on the Expedients of Advancing toward the Mahāyāna says: 'One who cultivates the true contemplation of tathatā contemplates the nature of the mind as unarisen and unceasing, not abiding in seeing, hearing, sensing, or knowing, and forever freed from all thoughts of discrimination.' ### [3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.14) Question: The mind can make a buddha; the mind makes sentient beings. Because one understands the true mind, one becomes a buddha; because one clings to the deluded mind, one becomes a sentient being. If one becomes a buddha, one is fully endowed with the unobstructed five eyes and the outflow-free five aggregates. Therefore a sūtra says: 'Extinguishing impermanent form, one attains eternal form.' And it also says: 'Wondrous form is tranquil and constantly abides.' And it also says: 'Skillfully able to discriminate all marks of phenomena.' Why do you say that the true mind does not abide in seeing, hearing, sensing, or knowing, and is forever freed from all thoughts of discrimination? ### [3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3.15) Answer: If it is the seeing and hearing of the deluded mind, it must rely on causes and conditions, subject and object, to arise—as in the saying that the eye requires nine conditions to generate \[vision\], and so forth. If the conditions of form and space combining are absent, the seeing-nature has no way to manifest. The five sense faculties are also like this: they all rely on conditioned origination. Thus, they arise when conditions assemble, and cease when conditions disperse; having no autonomous controller, they are ultimately empty by nature. As a verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'Citta is the acrobat, manas is the jester, the five consciousnesses are their companions, and conceptualization is the audience watching the act.' Like an acrobat standing to sing and dance, turning according to another's beat—if the beat is slow, his steps are slow; if the beat is fast, his steps are fast—the five sense faculties are also like this, merely turning in accordance with the mind. As it is said: 'The body is not a wheel of thought, yet it turns following thought.' Why? If the mental ground arises, the body's wheel moves; if the mental ground ceases, faculties and objects become quiescent. The true mind is not like this: it constantly illuminates and constantly manifests, and the Iron Ring Mountains cannot conceal its radiance; it pervades the realms and pervades space, and the azure vault cannot cover its substance; it is neither pure nor mixed, and the myriad phenomena cannot hide its reality; it has no abiding and no reliance, and the defilements of dust cannot alter its nature. How could it rely on external dust to radiate light, or generate knowledge in response to objects? Naturally, it is tranquilly illuminating, numinously knowing, and serenely boundless. Therefore the Śūraṅgamasūtra says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: "These six faculties are due to that luminous awareness: there being a brightness that illuminates awareness, losing that quintessential discernment, it adheres to delusion and emits light. For this reason, now, apart from darkness and apart from light, you have no substance of seeing; apart from movement and apart from stillness, there is originally no substance of hearing; without clearance and without obstruction, the smelling-nature does not arise; neither changing nor bland, taste has nowhere to come forth; neither separating nor joining, sensory contact is fundamentally nonexistent; without ceasing and without arising, where can discernment be lodged? If you simply do not follow the twelve conditioned marks—movement and stillness, joining and separating, blandness and change, clearance and obstruction, ceasing and arising, darkness and light—and extract any one faculty, untying its adhesion and subduing it inwardly, subduing it to return to original truth, it will emit its fundamental brightness. When the radiant nature is illuminated, the other five adhesions will be extracted and completely untied. Not relying on knowledge and vision arisen from external dust, brightness does not follow the faculties, but lodges in the faculties to emit brightness; hence the six faculties function interchangeably. Ānanda, do you not know that in this assembly now, Aniruddha sees without eyes; the nāga Upananda hears without ears; the Gaṅgā goddess smells fragrance without a nose; Gavāmpati tastes flavors with an abnormal tongue; the deity Śūnyatā experiences touch without a body, temporarily manifesting within the Tathāgata's light, yet being of the substance of wind, his body is fundamentally nonexistent; and the śrāvakas who have attained cessation and tranquility, such as Mahākāśyapa in this assembly, have long extinguished the mental faculty, yet are completely, brightly, and clearly aware without relying on mental thoughts? Ānanda, now if your faculties are completely extracted, glowing and emitting light within, these fleeting dusts and all the changing marks of the vessel world will, like ice melting in hot water, transform in an instant into unsurpassed awareness. Ānanda, consider an ordinary person who gathers seeing in his eyes: if you make him suddenly close them, dark marks appear before him, the six faculties are shrouded in darkness, and head and feet seem indistinguishable. If that person feels around the outside of his body with his hand, although he cannot see, once he distinguishes head from feet, his awareness is the same. Conditioned seeing relies on light, while darkness renders it non-seeing; but if brightness manifests of itself without light, all dark marks can never dim it. When faculties and dust are dissolved, how could luminous awareness fail to become complete and wondrous?"' Explanation: Regarding 'consider an ordinary person who gathers seeing in his eyes,' this first clarifies worldly seeing: without eyes one cannot observe; if made to close them suddenly, one sees nothing, similar to the other five faculties such as the ear. When that person feels around the outside of his body with his hand, although not relying on eyes, he still knows on his own; this illustrates that true seeing does not depend on external objects. Regarding 'conditioned seeing relies on light, while darkness renders it non-seeing,' this cites worldly ocular seeing, which must rely on the conditions of light and darkness, and the combination of faculties and dust, to effect seeing. 'Non-seeing manifests of itself without light' directly clarifies the moment of true seeing: the seeing-nature is not the eye; since it does not belong to the eye, how could it rely on what is emitted by light, darkness, faculties, and dust? Thus the brightness that is not light and the seeing that is not vision are naturally tranquilly illuminating and numinously knowing—how could they ever be interrupted? Moreover, how could the worldly marks of light and darkness, unreal and fleeting, ever cover it? For this reason, light cannot make it light, and darkness cannot make it dark. Therefore it says: 'All dark marks can never dim it.' The true nature is spontaneous; how could it not be complete and wondrous? Therefore, when a student asked an ancient master, 'What are the thousand hands and eyes of Great Compassion?', the master replied, 'Like a person reaching for a pillow in the middle of the night.' _First 15 of 20 passages. [Read on](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3)_ ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.3.1) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.3) · Pramāṇa