宗鏡錄 68.17

68.17

Answer: The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra says: 'First, if bodily manifest form were truly existent, what would be its nature? If it is said to be shape, then it is not truly existent, because it can be analyzed and because minute atoms of length, etc., cannot be found. If it is said to be motion, it is also not truly existent, because it perishes as soon as it arises and has no meaning of motion; for conditioned dharmas perish without depending on a cause, and if perishing depended on a cause, it should not be perishing. If it is said that there is a form, neither visible color nor shape, induced by the mind, which can move the hands, etc., called the karma of bodily manifestation, this is also not reasonable. If this were motion, its meaning has been refuted as before; if it were the cause of motion, it should just be the wind element, and since wind has no indication, it should not be called manifestation. Therefore, the karma of bodily manifestation is definitely not truly existent. However, with the mind as cause, it makes the form characteristics of hands, etc., transformed by consciousness, continue in arising and perishing and shift toward other directions, resembling movement; because it indicates the mind, it is conventionally termed bodily manifestation. Vocal manifestation is also not real sound by nature, because a single instant of sound has no expressive indication, and a continuity of many moments is not real; furthermore, external resistant form has already been refuted above. However, due to the mind, consciousness transforms to resemble sound, continuing in arising and perishing, resembling an indication; conventionally terming it vocal manifestation does not conflict with reason. Since manifestation is really non-existent, how could unmanifest [form] be real? Yet conventionally establishing unmanifest [form] on the basis of the limits of good and evil of intention and resolve also does not conflict with reason.'