[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) › 78.7 # 宗鏡錄 78.7 English (machine translation) 78.7 - **Language:** English ### [78.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.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? - [Previous: 78.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.78.6) - [Next: 78.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.78.8) - [Up: 78](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.78) ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.78.7) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.78.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.78.7) · Pramāṇa