宗鏡錄 57.11

57.11

Answer: Because when one cognizes sky-flowers, rabbit horns, and all nonexistent dharmas, the mind also arises. Why then say that deliberation does not arise when taking nonexistence as an object? Therefore, we know that there is the nimittabhāga of the internal mind as a solitary mental image. With respect to the darśanabhāga, this nimittabhāga also constitutes the meaning of the object-condition. If there were no nimittabhāga of the internal mind, that mind would not arise. The Tang Tripiṭaka Master said: 'Though the object is not real, deliberation arises; this proves that there is only consciousness.' Although the imaginary characteristic is not real, it is not the case that there is no nimittabhāga of the internal mind capable of inducing and generating the mind. From this, there is a fourfold analysis: 1. If there is no image but there is external substance, the mind does not arise. 2. If there is an image but no external substance, the mind can arise. 3. If both image and substance are present, the arising of the mind is obvious. 4. If both image and substance are absent, the mind can also arise, which is precisely the fundamental wisdom realizing tathatā. The Treatise on Consciousness-Only says: 'An existent object induces and generates the mind.' If the ultimate principle serves as the object, it can induce and generate the mind of wisdom; if conventional truth serves as the object, it can induce and generate the mind of consciousness. Thus there has never been an object without mind, nor has there ever been a mind without an object.