宗鏡錄 71.17

71.17

Answer: Both are unreal. The Mirror of Consciousness Only states: 'Between the two divisions of nimitta and darśana, the darśanabhāga is solely real; with respect to the nimittabhāga, tathatā is real, and the remaining immediate and remote nimittas are all not real.' The commentary states: 'Because the remote object-condition and the like grasp the immediate nimitta and do not immediately attain [the archetype], it does not serve as an active mode (ākāra).' Because the cognizing citta of a remote object-condition does not immediately attain the archetype, the remote object is not called an active mode. For example, when the first five consciousnesses cognize the five dusts, they must rely on the five dusts transformed by the eighth [consciousness] as their archetype. When the five consciousnesses cognize them, they merely attain the nimittabhāga transformed by their own consciousness. Because this nimittabhāga must bear the archetype, when cognizing the nimittabhāga, it remotely cognizes the archetype; hence the remote object is not immediately attained and is not called an active mode. The nimittabhāgas of the five consciousnesses, relative to each's own consciousness, are nominal within the dependent (paratantra); subsuming the nominal into the real, there is no object outside citta, hence it is called consciousness-only. Relative to the substance of the transforming eighth consciousness, the archetype object is also not really existent; hence both immediate and remote objects are unreal. As for the meaning of object-condition, although it is common to both the Great and Small [Vehicles], remote and immediate are not distinguished. The immediate arises by grasping, bearing, and closely pressing against [the object], like tongs taking an object, or like the sun shining light: immediately illuminating and immediately holding, their substances are not separated. The remote arises by transforming, bearing, relying upon, and cleaving to a reflection: cognizing a form that resembles the archetype, separated from the immediacy of the nimittabhāga, their substances do not encompass each other, and contemplation and reliance arise internally. If one thoroughly penetrates thus, not confusing the remote and the immediate, only then will one know that there is no object outside citta and see that dharmas are citta. If one is ignorant and obscure without distinguishing them, then citta and objects appear distinctly separate. Deeply exhausting the nature of conditions, one first cleanses the dust of emotional attachments; subtly fathoming the origin of vision, one finally clarifies the Buddha's intent. Fourth, the sovereign condition (adhipatipratyaya): when a phenomenon has superior power and function, able to be either favorable or contrary toward other dharmas, this constitutes the meaning of a sovereign condition. The commentary explains: 'When a phenomenon exists' also means it has substance; this excludes the imaginary. 'Having superior power and function' means being a superior factor; that is, the conditioned and the unconditioned possess superior power and function. This function is not the function of giving fruit and the like, but merely the power of non-obstruction. 'Able toward other dharmas' excludes its own substance, showing it is not the same as the previous object-condition. 'Either favorable or contrary' shows that both favorable and contrary can serve as conditions. Serving as a condition for different dharmas that arise subsequently, it is not for dharmas that ceased previously. That is, among the ten causes, the first nine are favorable and the tenth is contrary; this too is because of this condition.