宗鏡錄 78

English (machine translation) 78

Language: English

78.1

Compiled by Yanshou, Chan Master Zhijue, Abbot of Huiri Yongming Temple.

78.2

Now, it is said that one awareness is all awareness. Why then does the teaching distinguish many kinds?

Answer: The substance of awareness is one; according to its functions it is divided into many. Functions have depth and shallowness, but awareness has no before or after. As the Yingluo jing says: 'Wonderful awareness is only designated when quietude illuminates; equal awareness illuminates quietude.' Furthermore, awareness has three meanings: First, awareness as inspection: like waking from a dream, or like a person discovering a thief—the thief can do nothing; delusion is the thief. Second, awareness as illumination: illuminating principle and phenomena; also like a lotus opening, illuminating and seeing the one true dharmadhātu of one's own mind and the nature's virtues as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, according with their supreme meaning to be aware of all dharmas. Third, wonderful awareness: that is, the above two awarenesses being free from that which is aware and that which is an object of awareness; hence it is wonderful, not a separate awareness. Therefore the sūtra says: 'There is no Buddha's nirvāṇa that is far removed from that which is aware and that which is an object of awareness.' Furthermore, the nature of awareness is devoid of awareness—this is the fundamental wisdom; the characteristics of awareness are distinctly apparent—this is the subsequent wisdom.

78.4

Question: Since it is said that the one mind of tathatā does not change from past to present, why is there a continuity of sentient beings?

78.5

Answer: In the equal, true dharmadhātu, there are neither Buddhas nor sentient beings. Accompanying defiled and pure conditions, it then forms the ten dharmadhātus. Because the true mind accords with conditions and does not abide by its own nature, it is solely because sentient beings do not themselves know the nature of naturelessness. Merely according with defiled conditions they become ordinary mortals; according with pure conditions they become sages. Like an echo in an empty valley, it is set off at the mercy of conditions; or like sudden clouds in the great void, or sudden dust on a bright mirror. Seeking the initial point where a single thought first arises, it is completely unfindable; hence it is called beginningless avidyā. The Śūraṅgamasūtra says: 'The Buddha told Ānanda: What is called the inversion of sentient beings? Ānanda, because the mind of the nature's luminosity is completely perfect in the nature's luminosity, relying on luminosity, nature is produced, and the false seeing of nature arises. From ultimate non-existence, final existence is formed. This existence and what it possesses are not what causes cause; the characteristics of abiding and what abides have no root at all. Based on this non-abiding, the world and all sentient beings are established. Confusing the original perfect luminosity, this falsehood arises. The nature of falsehood has no substance; it is not something possessing that upon which it relies. Intending to return to the real, the desire for the real is already false; the nature of true tathatā is not real in seeking to return, and it turns out to become a non-characteristic. Being non-arising, non-abiding, non-mind, and non-dharma, they unfold and arise in succession. Through the power of arising, luminosity is generated, perfuming to form karma; identical karma mutually resonates, and because there is resonance of karma, characteristics cease and characteristics arise. Due to this, there is the inversion of sentient beings.' An ancient commentary says: 'Relying on luminosity, nature is produced, and the false seeing of nature arises': because of relying on the nature's luminosity, it transforms reflections and arises; relying on reflections it is born, grasping existence from emptiness. Thus it says: 'From ultimate non-existence, final existence is formed'—this is the karmic characteristic. 'This existence and what it possesses are not what causes cause'—this is the transforming characteristic. The karmic characteristic is that which can possess; the transforming characteristic is that which is possessed. Since subject and object are divided, the two characteristics exist. Thus it says, 'characteristics of existence and what it possesses.' This very transforming characteristic is capable of acting; establishing itself by manifesting forms, it arises from the preceding and induces the birth of the succeeding; mutually causing one another in turn, it is called 'not what causes cause.' This very manifesting characteristic is capable of inducing the realms of the six dusts. The manifesting characteristic is that which can abide; the six dusts are that which is abided in. Thus it says, 'characteristics of abiding and what abides.' 'Based on this non-abiding, the world is established': the manifesting characteristic is established from falsehood and fundamentally has no basis; this manifesting characteristic becomes the basis of the world. Thus it says, 'based on this non-abiding, the world is established.' From the root of non-abiding, all dharmas are established. 'Non-abiding' is avidyā; avidyā has no cause, hence it does not abide. These three characteristics are all beginningless; the one thought of the false mind is collectively named avidyā. 'Confusing the original perfect luminosity, this falsehood arises. The nature of falsehood has no substance; it is not something possessing that upon which it relies. Intending to return to the real, the desire for the real is already false; the nature of true tathatā is not real in seeking to return, and it turns out to become a non-characteristic. Non-arising, non-abiding, non-mind, and non-dharma': the first is the karmic characteristic, which is the mind of deluded awareness; its substance is false. When this falsehood first arises, it has no causal beginning; this is called 'not something possessing that upon which it relies.' 'Intending to return to the real, the desire for the real is already false' explains the transforming characteristic: that is, the reflection on the real, resembling the real yet not real; deluded awareness grasps this as real. That is, the initial thought is called movement; movement must have stillness, and stillness again resembles the real. Formed by movement, stillness is established, which is not truly unmoving. Thus it says, 'the desire for the real is already false.' The nature of true tathatā fundamentally does not establish stillness because of movement; thus it says, 'not real in seeking to return.' 'It turns out to become a non-characteristic' explains the manifesting characteristic. From this manifesting characteristic, all realms are transformed and arise: non-characteristics manifest characteristics, non-arising manifests arising, non-abiding manifests abiding, non-mind manifests mind, and non-dharma manifests dharma. Explaining the sequence: first, through the mutual comparison of the two characteristics of light and darkness, form is born—that is, condensing darkness to form matter, exhibiting manifest form. Because of form, there are the obstructions of sense organs and dusts; this is called abiding. Because there are sense organs and dusts, there is discriminatory consciousness; this is called mind. Perceiving these images of dust as the realms of consciousness is called dharma. These exist in turn through mutual causation. Conversely, revealing tathatā: its characteristics have neither light nor darkness, and without mutual comparison of characteristics, it is 'non-characteristic'; having no arising or ceasing, it is 'non-arising'; having no obstruction, it is 'non-abiding'; having no cognitive deliberation, it is 'non-mind'; being free from images of dust, it is 'non-dharma.' Another explanation: either the preceding indicates that the three characteristics exist through mutual causation to lay out the sequence, and afterwards the three characteristics are explained together, all stating that the three characteristics are false and their substance is avidyā, having no further cause; thus it says, 'not something possessing that upon which it relies.' These three characteristics arise as reflections of the real, resembling the real yet not real; grasping the reflection as actual, it therefore says, 'intending to return to the real.' Since the reflection is not actual, it therefore says, 'the desire for the real is already false.' 'It turns out to become a non-characteristic' and below contrasts falsehood to explain the real, so as to establish designations. Since designations are established by relying on falsehood to reveal the real, we know that the establishment of stages exists from this. If one did not explain the real because of falsehood, there would also be no stages or names to speak of. Therefore we know that all existing dharmas in the three realms are fabricated, fundamentally without root or origin; beginningless false habituations have been handed down successively, reaching up to the present and becoming established ruts. Just as an initial person fabricates a matter and later people believe and accept it, passing it down from one to another, so one person transmits a falsehood and ten thousand people transmit it as truth. Accumulating delusion from delusion, they pass through dust-like kalpas. If one recognizes that the place where the very first thought arose is untrue, one immediately awakens to prior errors, the Great Path is broad and level, and there is nothing else. As it is said: 'If you only know today is right, / why worry that former years were wrong?' Thus we know that whether sentient or insentient, when their original beginning is investigated, none depart from the fundamental limit of the one mind. As the Faxing lun says:

78.6

Question: May we hear of the fundamental limit?

78.7

Answer: The principle is subtle and difficult to contemplate; thus there is the statement of not knowing. The import is profound and rarely perceived; thus it prompted the question of Dhvajāgra. There was a deva named Dhvajāgra who asked Mañjuśrī, "Regarding the phrase 'the original limit' (pūrvakoṭi), what does it mean?" Mañjuśrī answered, saying, "The origin of sentient beings is called the original limit." Again he asked, "What does the origin of sentient beings mean?" [Mañjuśrī] answered, saying, "The root of saṃsāra is the origin of sentient beings." Again he asked, "Regarding that, what is meant by the root of saṃsāra?" [Mañjuśrī] answered, saying, "The root of empty space is the origin of saṃsāra." Thereupon Dhvajāgra embraced the profound teaching and ceased his questioning, having for the first time awakened to the root of non-abiding. If so, then the beginning of causes and conditions may be heard of but cannot be clarified; it may be retained but cannot be debated. Question: Does empty space have a root? Answer: No. Question: If it has no root, why say that the root of empty space is the origin of saṃsāra? Answer: This is like the root of the original limit. Empty space's having no root is the source of all roots; that which is beyond transformation having no transformation is the treasury of all transformations. Furthermore, an ordinary person is also citta, and an arya is also citta. It is only because the places they cultivate are base that they cannot expand themselves, and so they merely drown in defilements. If one relies upon things with citta, it becomes narrow and inferior; if one subordinates things to citta, it becomes vast. In general, worldly people mostly value external things and do not understand their own citta within. Therefore, what they do is never ultimate, merely because the places to which they attach are lowly. It is like a gadfly that attacks cattle: its flight reaches at most a hundred paces; but if it attaches itself to the tail of a luan-bird, it can soar ten thousand li in a single flight. This is not due to the skill of its wings, but to the swiftness of that to which it has attached. It is also like the grass atop a wall, or the sound from a horn: that they can attain such height and distance is due to the excellence of that to which they attach. If one enters the mirror of the source and attaches everything to one's own citta, then a single hair can swallow the vast ocean, and a single speck of dust can contain the ten directions. Is this not profound and vast?

78.8

Question: Inside and outside are vijñaptimātra, and both citta and objects are empty. Why then do the teachings establish external characteristics?

78.9

Answer: It is because of comprehending the emptiness of characteristics that one can then speak of vijñaptimātra. If one grasps onto having characteristics, the doctrine of vijñaptimātra is not established. If one grasps onto having no characteristics, the principle of true emptiness is not revealed. Because non-characteristic is itself characteristic, one only then penetrates true emptiness; because characteristic is itself non-characteristic, one only then clarifies vijñaptimātra. Therefore, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Regarding the principle of vijñaptimātra, one must clarify three characteristics: first, penetrating vijñaptimātra as measure-only, because external dust-objects truly do not exist; second, penetrating vijñaptimātra as two-only, because both characteristic and vision are only vijñāna; third, penetrating the arising of various rūpas, because there are merely various appearances without substance." Therefore, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "All characteristics are of two kinds: namely, currently abiding and established. The six dust-objects cognized by a distracted mind are called 'currently abiding.' The skeleton and so forth cognized by a concentrated mind are 'established.' Furthermore, manifesting like a dust-object is called 'characteristic'—namely, the cognized object. Manifesting like vijñāna is called 'vision'—namely, the cognizing vijñāna. Between these two phenomena, the first is cause and the second is effect; again, the first is that on which one relies, and the second is that which relies. Thus we know that when thoughts arise within due to imagination and reflection, appearances are manifested externally. If thoughts do not arise, characteristics do not appear before one. Because the external is produced due to the internal, gathering the branches back to the root, the entire object is citta. Why? If citta does not arise, objects are fundamentally empty. All objective realms are merely the erroneous movement of citta."

78.10

Question: In terms of worldly erroneous views, which vijñāna is it definitely?

78.11

Answer: What sentient beings see is simply confused vijñāna (bhrāntivijñāna). The Madhyāntavibhāga-bhāṣya says: "All the worldly realm is merely confused vijñāna." Why is this confused vijñāna called false? Because its objects are unreal and its substance is scattered and confused. Furthermore, if one grasps that there is permanently no confused vijñāna, then neither bondage nor liberation would be established, and one would then give rise to wrong views, denying both the pure and impure categories. Therefore, we know that obtaining awakening by relying on delusion is not without cause; entering sagehood from the ordinary has its reasons. Just as a reflected image reveals the brightness of a mirror, it is through erroneous vijñāna that true jñāna is accomplished.

78.12

Question: The rūpa resulting from samādhi seen within samādhi is manifested by the concentrated mind itself; it does not cognize present external rūpa, nor does it recall past objects. Through this, one can verify that it is mind-only. But for those who have not attained samādhi, everything is external rūpa seen by a distracted mind. How can it be verified that this is one's own mind?

78.13

Answer: Inside samādhi and outside samādhi, although stillness and disturbance differ, the rūpa that is seen is in all cases only one's own vijñāna. Because external objects have no substance, they arise from conditions; the nature of arising is fundamentally empty, and no characteristics can be apprehended. The Vijñāna Treatise says: "Like the practitioner's realm of rūpa characteristics seen within samādhi, which is manifested by vijñāna, there is definitely no objective realm. These rūpa characteristics such as blue are objects of samādhi, not the vijñāna of recollection. The vijñāna of recollection is defiled, whereas this rūpa that arises and is seen right before one is clear and pure. Thus the import of vijñaptimātra is even more apparent here. Just as, relying on the surface of a mirror, there is only one's own face and no separate reflection—why? Because the principle of the combination of all phenomena is inconceivable, causing imperceptible phenomena to be seen. The concentrated mind is also like this: the concentrated mind has two divisions, one division resembling vijñāna and one division resembling dust-objects. These two kinds are in reality only vijñāna. If the vijñāna of recollection were past rūpa, then this rūpa within samādhi—if in the five vijñānas of a distracted mind—could be said to arise by cognizing present external dust-objects; if in the distracted manovijñāna, it would arise by cognizing past dust-objects. But if one is in contemplation, it definitely cannot cognize external rūpa as its object. The rūpa is present right before one, yet it does not cognize a past object. One should know that the rūpa cognized by the concentrated mind is just seeing one's own citta, not seeing a separate object." Comparing rūpa inside samādhi with rūpa outside samādhi, one should know that outside there is also no separate object. Thus we know that the one mind is the ten thousand phenomena, and the ten thousand phenomena are the one mind. Why? Because the one mind is unmoving, and its entire substance constitutes the ten thousand phenomena. As the Commentary on the Awakening of Faith says: "'Entire substance' means that tathatā in its entire substance becomes arising and ceasing; arising and ceasing have no nature of their own and are themselves tathatā. There has never been a place where tathatā is not arising and ceasing, nor has there ever been a place where arising and ceasing is not tathatā." It also says: "Not being the same as emptiness means numinous awareness. Awareness means spiritual comprehension. That which cannot be measured by yin and yang is called spiritual; comprehension is jñāna; jñāna is knowing; knowing is the one mind. Therefore, knowing is the substance of citta. Thus the ancestral master said: 'Upon the empty and quiescent substance, there is naturally fundamental jñāna capable of knowing.' The general meaning is: within all defiled and pure phenomena, there is a true substance, clearly perceiving and aware, which is designated as citta."

78.14

Question: Since all external realms are said to be the internal vijñāna manifesting as if rūpa, and are merely vijñaptimātra, why do they not change and vary in accordance with vijñāna?

78.15

Answer: If one grasps that external rūpa truly abides, that is seeing rūpa in the absence of rūpa and falsely giving rise to inversion. It is like rubbing one's eyes and producing two images—how could that be real?

78.16

The Mahāyānasaṃgraha poses this question: "If there is no separate dust-object of rūpa and it is merely the fundamental vijñāna, why does it manifest resembling rūpa and so forth? Why does it abide continuously and solidly, similar before and after? If it were produced by the transformation of vijñāna, it should arise suddenly and perish suddenly, changing and unstable. Why does a single rūpa remain continuously for a long time? Therefore, we know there must be a separate rūpa."

78.17

Answer: It is due to inversion. Inversion is the root of kleśas. Due to the transformation of vijñāna, various discriminations arise. When the paratantra-svabhāva accords with the parikalpita-svabhāva, that is inversion, the resting place of kleśas. Inversion and kleśas are, in turn, the resting place of the transformation of vijñāna. If there were no meaning of mutual reliance, vijñāna would not transform, and discriminating non-things as things—this inversion should not exist. If there were no kleśas, how could there be the noble path? Therefore, that argument is also not established. For this reason, one should have faith that apart from vijñāna there is no separate phenomenon.

78.18

Question: Internal citta's discriminating is called vijñāna. External rūpa does not discriminate; how can it be vijñāna?

78.19

Answer: Both the capable of seeing and the seen are confused vijñāna. Grasping existence within non-existence, rūpa is fundamentally empty of itself. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Regarding confused vijñāna, grasping existence within non-existence is called confusion. Among the eleven vijñānas, the six vijñānas such as the worldly realm, any single vijñāna, has only two divisions: one division transforms into characteristics such as rūpa, and one division transforms into vision and so forth; it does not exceed these two. In the nature of vijñāna, if it can discriminate, it becomes vision; if it cannot discriminate, it becomes characteristics." As the Ākiñcanyabodhisattvasūtra says: "At that time, the World-Honoured One said to Ākiñcanya, 'You should explain to these bodhisattvas the matter of the composite body of the five skandhas.' Bodhisattva Ākiñcanya said, 'World-Honoured One, as I see it, just as the Buddha's rūpa is empty, my rūpa is also like that. As the Buddha's rūpa is, the rūpa of all sentient beings and the rūpa of all forests, medicinal herbs, and grasses are also like that. As the rūpa of all forests, medicinal herbs, and grasses is, the composite aggregate rūpa of all dhātus is also like that. All empty rūpa, my rūpa, the Tathāgata's rūpa, the rūpa of all sentient beings, the rūpa of all forests, medicinal herbs, and grasses, and the composite aggregate rūpa of all dhātus have no dual characteristics; they are neither phenomena nor non-phenomena. Those of little wisdom, within the absence of rūpa, perhaps form this conception, hoping and wishing to enter this Dharma, and while practicing within non-rūpa, falsely give rise to the conception of practice. Briefly stated, it is so up to vedanā, saṃjñā, saṃskāra, and vijñāna. As it is with rūpa, just as empty space's vijñāna is, my vijñāna is also like that. As that vijñāna is, the Tathāgata's vijñāna is also like that. As the Tathāgata's vijñāna is, that vijñāna of all sentient beings is also like that. As the vijñāna of all sentient beings is, that vijñāna of all forests, medicinal herbs, and grasses is also like that. The true empty space's vijñāna, the Tathāgata's vijñāna, and my vijñāna, the vijñāna of all sentient beings, and the vijñāna of all forests, medicinal herbs, and grasses are also like that. All composite vijñānas have no dual characteristics, cannot be known, cannot be discriminated, are unarisen, and are unequalled.'"

78.20

Question: Since it is called vijñāna-only, how can the name 'rūpa' be established?

78.21

Answer: All names are merely adventitious designations. There is no phenomenon within a name, and there is no name within a phenomenon. Names do not correspond to phenomena, and phenomena do not correspond to names. A sūtra says: "This self-nature has no arising and no ceasing, no defilement and no purity. This rūpa having nothing that exists is the common characteristic. If there is arising, there is defilement; if there is ceasing, there is purity. Because it lacks these four meanings, rūpa has no separate characteristic." A sūtra says: "By provisionally establishing adventitious names, one speaks of the various characteristics in accordance with them." The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "All phenomena have vijñāna as their characteristic and tathatā as their substance." It also says: "All characteristics are of two kinds: first, manifesting as external; second, manifesting as internal. Manifesting as external is characteristic; manifesting as internal is thought." Therefore, we know that the single substance manifests two, with internal and external bifurcated. Then citta is neither internal nor external, and internal and external are citta. Furthermore, the capable and the object accomplish each other, and citta and objects mutually subsume each other. Being two yet not two, they are constantly merged in the true origin of a single taste; being not two yet two, they constantly divide into the false characteristics of citta and objects.

78.22

Question: Citta is moment-to-moment ceasing, having the characteristic of a kṣaṇa. Do the internal body and external rūpa also perish in a kṣaṇa?

78.23

Answer: All internal and external forms are appropriated solely by the mind and likewise perish momentarily from thought-instant to thought-instant following the mind. Outside of the mind there is not a single dharma that could be permanent, nor that could arise and perish. The Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā states: “Just as the mind and mental factors have momentary characteristics, one should know that form and the rest also have momentary characteristics, based on eight meanings: First, because they are appropriated by the mind. That is, the body composed of form and the rest, because it is appropriated thought-instant by thought-instant by the momentary mind, perishes momentarily, and so on. Second, because their well-being and distress are equal to the mind's. That is, the body composed of form and the rest is constantly accompanied by consciousness; if consciousness departs, it immediately rots and decays. Third, because they transform following the mind. That is, it is seen in the world that when the mind is in states of pleasure, pain, attachment, anger, and so forth, the body transforms accordingly; because it transforms following the momentary mind, the body perishes from thought-instant to thought-instant. Fourth, because they are that which the mind relies upon. That is, it is commonly known in the world that the mind relies upon the endowed physical body, just as fire relies on firewood or a sprout relies on a seed; therefore, this body is the support of the momentary mind, and hence it also perishes momentarily. Fifth, because they arise through the predominance of the mind. That is, all internal and external forms are born through the predominance of the mind; because the producing cause perishes momentarily, the produced effect also perishes momentarily. Sixth, because they transform according to the mind's mastery. That is, if one realizes a mind of supreme majesty, one can transform all forms at will; because they are produced by transformation following the momentary supreme resolution that transforms them, the principle that form and the rest arise and perish momentarily is established. Seventh, because alteration and destruction are observable in the final state. That is, regarding forms and the rest, if they initially lacked an intrinsic nature of altering and destructing from thought-instant to thought-instant, for them to suddenly alter and destruct in the final state would not be reasonable; yet this [final destruction] is observable. Therefore, we know that form and the rest, from the very beginning, alter and destruct from thought-instant to thought-instant; their homogeneous continuity, gradually intensifying as a cause, can lead to the final gross alteration and destruction. For this reason, form and the rest arise and perish from thought-instant to thought-instant. Eighth, because once arisen they do not depend on conditions, but naturally perish. That is, once all dharmas are born from conditions, they do not depend on conditions for destruction, but naturally perish. Therefore, we know that all destructible dharmas, the very moment they arise, immediately perish. Thus, the meaning of momentariness of all dharmas is established.” The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: “If all dharmas truly existed, their characteristics should not be known by virtue of the mind and consciousness. If they are known to exist by virtue of the mind and consciousness, then they do not exist. For example, the characteristic of earth's solidity exists because it is known by the tactile organ and body-consciousness; if there were no tactile organ and body-consciousness knowing it, then the characteristic of solidity would not exist.” Furthermore, because they arise through the conjunction of causes and conditions, they are empty; because they are mind-only, they are empty. From this we know that internal form and external form are both established by consciousness; existing and non-existing according to the mind, they truly lack self-substance.

78.24

Question: In the treatises it is maintained that there is only the internal mind and no real external objects. However, when one cultivates the ten wholesome deeds, one experiences the pleasures of the heavens; when one commits the five deadly sins, one experiences the sufferings of hell. Ascending to Trāyastriṃśa, the five desires delight the eyes; falling into Avīci, ten thousand sufferings amass upon the body. To delight the eyes there are divine phoenixes and soaring luan birds making joyful affairs; to amass upon the body there are iron snakes and copper dogs causing oppressive and afflicting disasters. Clearly we know that there is not only the internal mind, but that external objects truly exist.

78.25

Answer: The characteristics of suffering and pleasure in the heavens and hells are all the karmic shadows of the retribution of one's own mind. Since what is created by one's own mind serves as the cause, what is experienced by one's own mind in turn serves as the effect. Thus a sūtra says: “Never has one created and another received.” Now we shall briefly take the experience of suffering in the hell realm to prove mind-only; among the ten dharma realms, all follow this example.

78.26

The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra asks: “How is it called the transformation of the four great elements? Those four great elements transform in various ways, moving hands and feet and speaking words, causing the sinner to give rise to terror. For example, two rams come from both sides and strike together to kill; those sentient beings of hell see mountains either coming or going to crush and kill sentient beings. By this meaning, one cannot say that there is only internal mind and no external objects.”

78.27

I reply: The verse says:
‘If by the karma of sentient beings
The four great elements transform like this,
Why not by karma
Does the citta transform like this?’
You said earlier that the external four great elements and so forth transform like this through the karma of those sinners. Why do you not say that through the power of those sentient beings' sinful karma, their own inner mind-consciousness transforms like this? Furthermore, the verse says:
‘Karma perfuses a different dharma;
How could the fruit be in a different place?
Good and bad perfuse the mind;
Why speak of it apart from the mind?’
Therefore, regarding what the verse says—‘Karma perfuses a different dharma; / How could the fruit be in a different place?’—what does this mean? All the sinful karma of those suffering sentient beings in hell was done relying on their original mind, remains within the mind, and is not separated from the mind. For this reason, evil karma perfuses the mind, and within the mind one should conversely experience the fruit and retribution of suffering. Why is that? Because good and evil karma perfuse the mind-consciousness, but do not perfuse those external four great elements and so forth, as there is no phenomenon of being perfused within the four great elements. Why do you falsely conceptualize and claim that the four great elements transform, and that one receives the retribution of suffering within the four great elements? Therefore, the verse says:
‘Good and bad perfuse the mind;
Why speak of it apart from the mind?’
As the *Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra* says: ‘The vigor cultivated by a bodhisattva is always concordant with body, speech, and mind. Although there is vigor of body and speech, it all stems from the mind, with the mind being predominant. What is the bodhisattva's vigor of mind? It is called mind at the beginning and mind at the end. What is the mind at the beginning? It is the initial resolve of the mind. What is the mind at the end? It is the quiescent extinction of the bodhicitta.’ Thus we know that both arising and ending are the mind, and beginning and end are both alike. This is not only true of pure karma; the myriad matters are all like this. They do not depart from the one mind, perfecting the path of awakening. Furthermore, just as when the oil is exhausted the lamp goes out, when karma is extinguished suffering ceases. If there were definitively an external object to be perceived that is not evoked from within, one would only suffer continuously without any time of liberation. Since there is a time of cessation, one should know it has no real existence. This can verify that when the mind arises, dharmas arise; when the mind ceases, dharmas cease. Thus, all sentient beings from beginningless time have created false causes and received false fruits, which all stem from emotional bonds and arise purely following conceptions. Therefore, the *Śūraṅgamasūtra* says: ‘Thereupon Ānanda and the great assembly […] addressed the Buddha, saying: “World-Honoured One, if this wondrous, luminous, truly pure, wondrous mind is originally all-pervading and perfect, up to and including the great earth, grasses and trees, wriggling and crawling living beings, which are fundamentally tathatā, being the true substance of the Tathāgata's attainment of buddhahood; and if the Buddha-substance is real, why then are there the destinies of hell, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, and gods? World-Honoured One, do these destinies exist fundamentally of themselves, or do they arise from sentient beings' false habits? World-Honoured One, for example, the bhikṣuṇī Precious Lotus Fragrance (Baolianxiang), while holding the bodhisattva precepts, secretly engaged in carnal lust, falsely claiming that lust was neither killing nor stealing and had no karmic retribution. Having spoken these words, a great raging fire first arose in her female organ, and subsequently burned through each of her joints until she fell into the Relentless Hell. King Virūḍhaka and the bhikṣu Sunakṣatra—Virūḍhaka for exterminating the Gotama clan, and Sunakṣatra for falsely claiming that all dharmas are empty—fell alive into the Avīci Hell. Do these hells have a fixed location, or are they spontaneous? Does each generate karma and each privately receive [its fruit]? We only ask that you extend great compassion to open the minds of the ignorant, so that all precept-holding sentient beings, hearing the definitive meaning, will joyfully receive it on the crown of their heads, and remain pure without transgression.” The Buddha told Ānanda: “Splendid is this question, which prevents sentient beings from entering wrong views! Listen attentively now, and I will explain it for you. Ānanda, all sentient beings are fundamentally and truly pure. Because of false views, false habits arise. From this, they are divided into an internal portion and an external portion. Ānanda, the internal portion is within the share of sentient beings. Due to various cravings and attachments, false feelings are aroused. When feelings accumulate without ceasing, they can generate the water of craving. Therefore, when sentient beings recall delicacies in their minds, water flows from their mouths. When their minds recall someone from before, whether with fondness or hatred, tears fill their eyes. When they covet wealth and treasures, love-saliva arises in their minds and their entire bodies become lustrous. When their minds are fixated on engaging in lust, the male and female organs naturally discharge fluid. Ānanda, although cravings differ, their flowing and binding are identical. Moisture does not ascend; naturally it sinks. This is called the internal portion. Ānanda, the external portion is outside the share of sentient beings. Due to various longings, empty thoughts become manifest. When thoughts accumulate without ceasing, they can produce superior energy. Therefore, when sentient beings uphold the prohibitive precepts in their minds, their entire bodies feel light and clear. When their minds hold dhāraṇīs and mudrās, their gazes become bold and resolute. When their minds wish to be born in heaven, their dreams soar aloft. When their minds dwell on the Buddha-land, sacred realms secretly manifest. In serving good friends, they hold their own bodies and lives lightly. Ānanda, although thoughts differ, their lightness and soaring are identical. Flying movement does not sink; naturally it transcends. This is called the external portion.”’ Therefore we know that stagnation caused by emotion can produce the water of craving, which, soaking continuously, naturally leads to falling. Because the realm of emotion is dark and concealed, it is called the internal portion. Because raising a thought conditions external dust and grasping characteristics is called thought, moving and scattering, it is called the external portion. No realm arises except through thought. Therefore a sūtra says: ‘If one knows that all lands are sustained solely by thought, that is called a bodhisattva of the initial resolve.’ Furthermore, a verse in the *Avataṃsakasūtra* says:
‘The valiant sons of the Buddha
Follow and enter the wondrous Dharma;
Skillfully contemplating all thoughts
That entangle the world like a net.
The various thoughts are like a mirage,
Causing sentient beings to form inverted understandings.
The bodhisattva skillfully knows thoughts
And abandons all inversions.
Sentient beings are distinct from one another,
Their physical forms and types not being of one kind;
Understanding that all are thoughts,
Nothing is real.
All sentient beings in the ten directions
Are covered by thoughts;
If they abandon inverted views,
They extinguish worldly thoughts.
The world is like a mirage,
Having distinctions due to thoughts;
Knowing that the world abides in thoughts,
One departs far from the three inversions.
Just as with a mirage in hot weather,
Worldly perception considers it to be water;
Water truly does not exist,
So the wise should not seek it.
Sentient beings are also like this;
The worldly destinies do not exist at all,
Abiding in thoughts like a mirage,
The realm of an unobstructed mind.
If one departs from all thoughts,
One also departs from all conceptual proliferation;
Those foolishly attached to thoughts
Are all brought to liberation.
Departing far from the mind of pride,
Extinguishing worldly thoughts,
Abiding in the place where exhaustion is exhausted—
This is the bodhisattva’s skillful means.’
It also says: ‘For example, when a person is on the verge of death, they see the characteristics of the retribution they are to receive according to their karma. Those who performed evil karma see all the realms of myriad sufferings in hell, the animal realm, and among hungry ghosts; or they see hell wardens holding weapons in their hands, raging or cursing, seizing them and dragging them away, and they also hear the sounds of wailing and grief-stricken lamentation; or they see the river of ash, or the boiling caldron, or the mountain of knives, or the forest of swords, being constrained in various ways and suffering diverse pains and distress. Those who performed good karma immediately see the palaces of all the heavens, immeasurable heavenly assemblies, heavenly maidens, and various garments, fully adorned, with palaces and parks that are all exquisite. Although their bodies have not yet died, through the power of karma they see such things.’ The *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: ‘Like the city of the Gandharvas, which is not a city, but the thoughts of human minds make it a city; ordinary people are also like this: they think of what is not a body as a body, and think of what is not a mind as a mind.’ Therefore we know that hell and heaven fundamentally have no fixed locations; before the body has even gone there, they have already appeared in one's own mind. The objects do not appear externally; it is only the mind's false perception. It can be verified that the realms of suffering and pleasure fundamentally do not originate from anywhere; good and evil matters are only summoned by oneself. Emptiness is emptily right and emptily wrong; there is false birth and false death. As Master Bodhidharma said: ‘Because of one's own view, one does not attain the Way. "One's own" means the self. If there is no self, when encountering things there is neither right nor wrong. "Right" is what I myself deem right, yet things are not right; "wrong" is what I myself deem wrong, yet things are not wrong.’ If one enters the mirror of the source, both self and dharmas are empty, mind and objects perish of themselves, right and wrong are entirely quiescent, the spiritual nature stands independently, and there is nowhere for dualities to originate. These are all attained through awakening to the fundamental source, not obtained through study. As a past virtuous master said: ‘Objects are empty of themselves, there is no need to fear; shining all day long, originally there is no counterpart. Even if one sustains this floating, illusory body, spontaneously there is no tongue, body, or mind.’ A verse by an ancient also says: ‘Serenely pacifying the spirit to extinguish right and wrong, the present body is the Land of Peace and Bliss.’ Therefore the treatise says: ‘When wisdom and objects are expansive and clear, it is called the Buddha-land.’

78.28

Furthermore, a student asked Venerable Baizhang: ‘Facing all objects, how can one make the mind like wood and stone?’

78.29

He replied: ‘All dharmas fundamentally do not say of themselves that they are right or wrong, defiled or pure, nor do they have a mind to bind people. It is only that people themselves falsely conceptualize and attach, forming several kinds of understanding, giving rise to several kinds of views, and generating several kinds of fear and love. If one only understands that dharmas do not arise of themselves, but all exist through one's own inverted grasping of characteristics, and knows that mind and objects fundamentally never reach each other, there is liberation right where one is. Each and every dharma and each and every mind is quiescent extinction right where it is, and right where it is, it is the place of enlightenment. Furthermore, the inherently existing nature cannot be named. Fundamentally it is neither ordinary nor holy, neither foolish nor wise, neither defiled nor pure, neither empty nor existent, neither good nor evil. When concordant with defiled dharmas, it is called the realm of sentient beings; when concordant with pure dharmas, it is called humans, gods, and the two vehicles. If the mind of defilement and purity is exhausted, not dwelling in bondage or liberation, without any mental measures of conditioned, unconditioned, bound, or liberated, then dwelling in saṃsāra, the mind is autonomous. Ultimately, it does not coalesce with the illusory dusts, afflictions, aggregates, realms, saṃsāra, and sense-bases. Remotely free of abiding, unconstrained by anything, its going and coming are unobstructed, traversing saṃsāra just like passing through an open door.’

78.30

Question: Since hell is insentient, how can it move and act?

78.31

Answer: It is evoked by the inconceivable karmic power of sentient beings, causing the suffering sentient beings to see such things themselves. It is like the wind of the kalpa of formation: although insentient, it can also form a kalpa. It is like a lodestone: how could it have consciousness or thoughts, yet it moves iron? Even though sentient beings transmigrate in the six destinies, ascending and descending through good and evil, there is truly no controlling agent; persons and dharmas are both empty. Therefore a past virtuous master said: ‘Cycling without bounds, movement and stillness have a single source; containing the myriad wonders with surplus, transcending words and thoughts to emerge far beyond—is it not solely the dharmadhātu?’ Thus we know that if one enters within the dharmadhātu of a single limit, what distinction could there be? Subject and object secretly merge; object and wisdom are identical in suchness. How could there be any further dharma that acts as movement or stillness, transforming in accordance with karmic consciousness? If one has not entered the dharmadhātu and has not awakened to this source, whenever a single dharma confronts the mind, it is all one's own karmic consciousness; apart from consciousness, there is definitively no dharma.

78.32

Question: If all that is carried out is solely one's own mind, why does killing living beings incur the sin of killing?

78.33

Answer: It is entirely based on discrimination in one's own mind, obstinately grasping the causes of good and evil, and falsely receiving the fruits of suffering and pleasure. If one investigates the substance of the three wheels, the killer and the killed are fundamentally empty. Therefore Mañjuśrī brandished a sword against Gautama, and Aṅgulimāla held a knife against the Śākya; ultimately they did not perceive beings or perceive killing, nor grasp self or grasp other, falsely undergoing saṃsāra to repay sinful retribution.

78.34

The *Treatise on Consciousness* asks: ‘If those three realms are solely the internal mind and there are no external objects of body and speech, why do butchers, hunters, and others incur the sin of killing by slaughtering pigs, sheep, and the like?’

78.35

The verse answers: / 'Death depends on another's mind, / And also depends on one's own mind; / Dependent on various causes and conditions, / One's own mental consciousness is ruined and lost.' / The explanation states: For example, when a person is possessed by a demon, a piśāca, or the like, on that account they lose their mind. Or it may depend on their own mind, and on that account they lose their mind. Or someone may remember pleasant or unpleasant events, and on that account lose their mind. Or someone may dream of being possessed by a demon and lose their mind. Or through the transformations wrought by a sage's supernatural powers, another person loses their mind. Just as a certain monk who stepped on an eggplant peel at night, thought he had killed a toad, and upon dying fell into an evil destiny. Therefore it is said that 'Death depends on another's mind, and also depends on one's own mind.' Because, relying on the rishi's mind of anger—due to anger toward the asura king Vemacitra—he killed other sentient beings; this depended on another's mind. The minds of those other sentient beings made false discriminations, their life-faculties perished, and their bodily life was broken off in continuity. It should be understood in this way. A verse says: / 'The sūtra speaks of Daṇḍaka, / Kaliṅga, and the realm of Mātaṅga; / Through the rishi's anger they became empty, / Therefore mental karma is the weightiest.'

78.36

Question: It was relying on the rishi's mind of anger [that] spirits dependent on the rishi killed the sentient beings of these three realms; they did not die dependent [solely] on the rishi's mind of anger.

78.37

Answer: The Buddha asked the Nirgrantha: 'The sentient beings of the three realms such as Mātaṅga—have you ever heard how they died? Were they killed by bodily karma, or were they killed by mental karma?' The Nirgrantha said: 'Gautama, I once heard of old that through the rishi's mind of anger, he killed all those sentient beings by mental karma.' The Buddha said: 'By this my thesis is established: the three realms are citta-only, and there is no bodily or vocal karma. Why is this? Just as worldly people say, "Thieves burned the mountain forests, villages, and towns," but do not say, "Fire burned them." This meaning is likewise so: it is solely dependent on citta that wholesome and unwholesome karma are accomplished. Therefore a verse says: / "All phenomena take citta as their root, / All phenomena take citta as foremost; / Apart from citta there are no phenomena, / Body and speech are merely nominal expressions of citta." / The Tattvasiddhi-śāstra states: "If there were karma apart from citta, non-sentient things would also possess demerit and merit. If a wind collapsed a mountain and harmed sentient beings, the wind should have demerit. If it blew fragrant flowers so that they fell upon a stupa or monastery, it should also have merit. But this cannot be so. Therefore we know that apart from citta there is neither demerit nor merit." / Based on this textual evidence, demerit and merit are grounded in citta, and there is no bodily or vocal karma. What is called bodily and vocal karma is merely nominal; in reality it is mental karma, spoken of under the names of body and speech. The Huayan Huiyi states: 'Whenever there is seeing of self and seeing of other, all are the self-manifestation of a deluded mind. Why is this? As when seeing another wielding a sword to kill oneself, one should know that both other and self are produced from oneself, because apart from the mind that sees for itself, there is neither self nor other. Not only are self and other false manifestations of citta, but the swords and clubs wielded are also one's own citta. Why is this? Because apart from citta there are no actual swords or clubs. What is seen to be wielded consists only of the six sense-objects. Because one does not recognize the manifestations of one's own citta, upon seeing killing one is alarmed and frightened. If one realizes that it is only one's own citta, even if killing occurs, who worries and who fears? All arise due to the deluded mind, and therefore various things exist; the deluded mind ceases, and therefore various things cease to exist. Having recognized that they are merely false manifestations of citta, and that citta does not see citta, then both object and self are destroyed, and sorrow and joy are entirely stilled. Furthermore, acts of killing in a dream are likewise so. As it is said: "The worldly realm is ever like a dream, / Where existence and non-existence cannot be found." / The Ghanavyūhasūtra states: "Internal and external objects, / The realms traversed by citta, / Are all consciousness alone, / Perceived through confusion and delusion. / Herein there is no self, / Nor is there anything belonging to a self. / The killer, the killed, / The killing, and the instruments of killing— / All are objects of manovijñāna, / Discriminated in this way based on the ālayavijñāna."'"

First 37 of 46 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

宗鏡錄 — Classical Chinese