[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) › 7.4.2 # 宗鏡錄 7.4.2 English (machine translation) 7.4.2 - **Language:** English ### [7.4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.2) penetrating completely to the top, with nothing above to know one another. Therefore, whether relying or holding, the characteristics are entirely exhausted. One should know that the manifested false phenomena are also like this: the coarse necessarily relies on the subtle. That is to say, bitter retribution relies on karma; karma relies on being created by ignorance; ignorance relies on what is created—mutually without substance, with no entity that can know another. This, then, is to bear the myriad things heavily without benevolence. Master Zhao also said: 'Even if heaven and earth were overturned, do not say that there is no stillness.' Laozi said: 'Heaven and earth are not benevolent; they treat the myriad things as straw dogs.' A sūtra says: 'Just like the great earth bearing four heavy loads without weariness.' 'Not benevolent' means not relying on benevolent virtue. Just like straw dogs, how could they have the ability to bark and keep watch? Therefore it is said: 'Only the Way is without mind, and the myriad things are completely equipped.' Second, in terms of different categories: as a sūtra says, 'The earth circle relies on the water circle; the water circle relies on the wind circle; the wind circle relies on space; space has nothing on which it relies.' In accordance with this, false objects rely on the false mind; the false mind relies on the fundamental consciousness; the fundamental consciousness relies on the tathāgatagarbha; and the tathāgatagarbha has nothing on which it relies. Therefore, apart from the tathāgatagarbha, all other false phenomena rely mutually on each other, having no substance capable of knowing one another. This being so, none of the false phenomena fail to be completely exhausted. Second, regarding relying on that which is relied upon: it is precisely because each lacks self-nature that the earth realm can be established. If they previously had a substance, they would not rely on each other. Because they would not rely on each other, phenomena could not exist. Therefore, grasping this absence of nature to form those phenomena, the phenomena are united and can be known. Third, regarding being solely that which is relied upon: this means that in grasping the absence of nature to form those phenomena, those phenomena are entirely exhausted without ever not ceasing, and only the principle of the absence of nature uniquely manifests before one. Question: Furthermore, since they do not know one another, due to what conditions are there varieties? Answer: There are four causes for this: first, due to false discrimination; second, the perfuming of the consciousnesses; third, due to the absence of nature not knowing one another; fourth, tathatā following conditions. However, these four causes are merely of one accord: namely, due to false discrimination serving as a condition, tathatā is made not to maintain its own nature, but to follow conditions and become existence. The perfuming of the consciousnesses continues mutually without end. If one reaches the source of falsehood, it forms pure dependent origination. Regarding the previous doubt: 'Is it varieties, or is it one nature?' Now the answer is: 'It is constantly varieties, and constantly one nature.' Moreover, the objection says: 'If the one nature follows varieties, then the ultimate truth is lost; if varieties follow the one nature, then the conventional truth is destroyed.' Now the answer is: these two mutually establish each other; how could they oppose each other? Nature is not outside of phenomena; how has it ever opposed varieties? Varieties are empty of nature; how have they ever opposed the one nature? Because of the absence of nature, there is existence: the one nature can form varieties. Because of arising through conditions, there is emptiness: varieties can form the one nature. Therefore, the phenomena of dependent origination have, in general, four meanings: first, existence because of arising through conditions—namely, the existence of the discrimination of the false mind and the perfuming of the consciousnesses; second, emptiness because of arising through conditions—namely, that all phenomena have no function and also have no substance or nature; third, existence because of the absence of nature—because of the meaning of emptiness, all phenomena can be established; fourth, emptiness because of the absence of nature—namely, that everything is empty and without nature. Furthermore, nature has two meanings: first, existence; second, emptiness. Again, there are two meanings: first, unchanging; second, following conditions. Because of the meaning of existence, it is said to be revealed by the two emptinesses, which is the original non-arising of dharmatā. Because of the meaning of emptiness, other-dependent nature is said to be without nature, which is the thoroughly established nature; that is, they do not know each other. Because of the meaning of existence, it is said to be unchanging. Because of the meaning of emptiness, it is said to follow conditions. These two are not two: following conditions is precisely unchanging; because it is unchanging, it can follow conditions. If it were solely the unchanging nature, what would it have to do with phenomena? If it merely followed conditions, how could it be called the true nature? Moreover, if nature were separated from phenomena, it would result in annihilation; if phenomena were separated from nature, then what originally did not exist would now exist. Furthermore, if phenomena were identical with nature, since nature is permanent, \[phenomena\] should be permanent; if nature were identical with phenomena, since phenomena cease, \[nature\] should cease. These two mutually complete each other, being neither permanent nor annihilated; these two mutually cancel each other, being neither existent nor empty. This constitutes the meaning of the Middle Way. A sūtra verse says: 'Eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, Citta, manas, and all the sense faculties: Through these there is constant transmigration, Yet there is no one who can transmigrate.' Because the eight consciousnesses, such as the eyes and so on, act as the active and passive perfumers, mutually serving as causes, there is constant transmigration; there is no separate self or person, which is why it says 'yet there is no one who can transmigrate.' Therefore, it is only when the entire substance is empty of nature that transmigration is established. Precisely because these eight consciousnesses each lack a substance or nature, there is no real self or phenomenon to serve as their master. If they previously had a nature, they could not be perfumed or transformed; how could there be transmigration? Therefore, one knows that the similarities and differences among destinies and births, and the beauty or ugliness of received retributions, all stem from consciousness seeds and all rely on citta—like a flow relying on water, like fire relying on firewood. Continuously without knowing, freshly renewing without abiding. The good destinies and bad destinies are the general retribution: due to karma perfuming citta, one receives the retribution that is to be received, just as water drifts and flows without interruption. Although there is transmigration, there is no transmigrator; hence it says: 'Through these there is constant transmigration, / Yet there is no one who can transmigrate.' An explanatory treatise says: 'Like a torrential waterfall, neither annihilated nor permanent, continuing for a long time, having that which it drifts and drowns. This consciousness is also like this: from beginningless time, moment to moment, fruits arise as causes cease. Because fruits arise, it is not annihilated; because causes cease, it is not permanent. It drifts and drowns sentient beings, causing them not to escape.' The Avataṃsakasūtra says: 'All sentient beings are submerged by the waves of a great torrent.' The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'The ocean of the storehouse consciousness is constantly abiding, moved by the winds of objects.' The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra says: 'Constantly turning like a torrential flow.' The Awakening of Faith says: 'Like the water of the great ocean having waves moving due to the wind,' and so forth. Furthermore, within falsity there are two meanings: first, false turning; second, absence of turning. Therefore, it is constantly varieties and constantly one nature. Because of false turning, the conventional is not different from the ultimate, and conventional characteristics are established. Because of the absence of turning, the ultimate is not different from the conventional, and the ultimate substance is preserved. Therefore, they do not contradict each other. Regarding 'the dharmatā is originally unarisen': as for 'dharmatā', 'dharma' refers to distinct phenomena such as dependent and proper \[retribution\], and 'nature' refers to the essential nature upon which those phenomena rely—that is, the nature of phenomena. - [Previous: 7.4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.1) - [Next: 7.4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.3) - [Up: 7.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4) ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.7.4.2) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.7.4.2) · Pramāṇa