宗鏡錄 92.3

92.3

Answer: Although the sage perceives and knows, he constantly realizes that things are empty; like an illusory creation, there is no clinging. As the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra says: Kāśyapa Bodhisattva said to the Buddha, "World-Honoured One, if based on this thought of kleśa, inverted thoughts arise, all sages truly have inverted thoughts and yet are without kleśa—what is the meaning of this?" The Buddha said, "Good son, how could a sage have inverted thoughts?" Kāśyapa Bodhisattva said, "World-Honoured One, with all sages, when [seeing] an ox they think it is an ox and also say it is an ox; when [seeing] a horse they think it is a horse and also say it is a horse; the same applies to male, female, great, small, houses, vehicles, going and coming. These are called inverted thoughts." [The Buddha said:] "Good son, all ordinary people have two kinds of thoughts: the first is worldly conventional thought, and the second is clinging thought. All sages have only worldly conventional thought, and have no clinging thought. Because all ordinary people have unwholesome vitarka and vicāra, they generate clinging thoughts toward worldly conventions. Because all sages have wholesome vitarka and vicāra, they do not generate clinging thoughts toward worldly conventions. Therefore ordinary people are called having inverted thoughts; although the sage knows, it is not called inverted thought."

Moreover, since the objective realm is fundamentally empty of itself, what need is there to destroy characteristics? Since the numinous mind illuminates of itself, how could it depend on conditioned arising? It is not like the ordinary person's emotional clinging to subject and object in knowing and seeing. Therefore the Zhao lun says: "Whenever there is something known, there is something not known. Because the sage's mind has no knowledge, there is nothing it does not know. The knowing of not-knowing is called omniscience. Thus a sūtra says: 'The sage's mind has no knowledge, yet there is nothing it does not know.' How true this is!" Therefore the sage empties his mind and makes his illumination real, knowing all day long yet never [conventionally] knowing. Like still water reflecting an image, how could it establish a mind of subject and object? Then objective realm and wisdom are both empty; how could there be thoughts of perception and knowing?

The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: "The Buddha told Mahāmati: 'Because the worldly takes that delusion as real, the sages also appear [there], yet they are not inverted. Mahāmati, it is like a spring mirage, a fire-wheel, dangling hairs, a gandharvanagara, an illusion, a dream, or an image in a mirror: the worldly is inverted, not having clear wisdom; yet they are not non-apparent.'"

Explanation: The above seven similes clarify that the objective realm is one, but the views differ. Yet the sages use that delusive realm, appearing as form and the other dusts identically with ordinary beings; because the sages have no thought of clinging, they are not inverted. However, the sages do not fail to see those delusive dharmas; when seeing them, they are just like the moon in the water or an image in a mirror.

Nāgārjuna Bodhisattva said: "Sunlight touches dust, and a gentle breeze blows it, turning it in the open wilderness; it is called a mirage. When foolish people see it, they call it wild horses; when thirsty people see it, they take it to be flowing water. Karmic retributions are also like this: the sunlight of kleśas heats the dust of the saṃskāras; the wind of false mindfulness blows it in the wilderness of saṃsāra, causing it to turn; they falsely see it as humans, ghosts, men, or women. Craving and clinging, endlessly addicted and submerged, if one does not draw near to the holy Dharma, there is no way to recognize it.

Fire and the sun shine brightly on the outside; water and mirrors illuminate on the inside. Light being above makes a shadow; light being below makes an image. An image is transmitted by clarity, and the image appears in the water; a form is illuminated by the sun, and the light being blocked makes a shadow. Although these two things are empty, that which is depended upon falsely exists. Although false existence is empty, mad delusion sees it. If one sees it with an un-maddened [mind], then the form and the shadow are one, and the image and the form are the same. Worldly dharmas are also like this: arisen from conditions, the existence of that which arises and the conditions from which it arises are both empty things, without oneness or difference. Yet people, because of the invertedness of the wind-disease of falsehood, see what should not be seen and hear what should not be heard. If one attains the illumination of great wisdom, then the mad wind of the mind ceases, and there is no such seeing."

Moreover, the "prajñā has no knowledge" is not like wood and stone; "it is not possessing knowledge" is not the same as emotional thoughts. An ancient worthy said: "The Buddha's seeing of non-self is not lack of knowing; it is merely not-knowing knowing and not-seeing seeing. Because knowing is not-knowing knowing, there is no mind that does not know; because seeing is not-seeing seeing, there is no form that is not seen. Because there is no form that is not seen, it is due to not-seeing seeing; because there is no mind that does not know, it is by means of not-knowing knowing."

As the Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra says: "The form seen is equal to [what is seen by] the blind." The Congfu commentary says: "For example, it is like five fingers painting in empty space: in empty space no image appears. One cannot, because no image appears in space, say that the fingers did not paint in space; nor can one, because the five fingers painted in space, wish to make an image appear in space. The matter is not so. There is no hindrance to blazing painting in space, yet originally no image appears in space. How could the eye faculty seeing form make one become like the blind? How could the eye faculty being like the blind mean that there is nothing seen at all? There is no hindrance to seeing forms with the eyes full, while realizing that form is originally empty in its own-nature. Although at the time of seeing form, it is originally no different from being blind, one merely calms one's own discriminative mind; it is not the removal of dharmas. Dharmas are originally empty in themselves; there is nothing to remove."

Furthermore, "the sound heard is equal to an echo": how could this mean not hearing? It is just that all sounds are like echoes in a valley, without grasping or discrimination. Therefore, seeing forms with the eyes full and hearing sounds with the ears full, neither following nor destroying them, is because one realizes the true nature of sounds and forms. Why is that? If one follows the gate of sounds and forms, one falls into the clinging of ordinary people, discriminating characteristics of beauty and ugliness, deeply clinging to love and hate, receiving the sounds of slander and praise, and falsely giving rise to joy and revulsion. If one destroys the characteristics of sounds and forms, it is identical to the mind of the Hīnayāna, which entails three faults: First, since the nature of form and the rest is empty, there is nothing that can be destroyed; if it is empty only when destroyed, it is not fundamentally empty. Second, because emptiness is precisely the real, identical to the dharmatā; if it is real only when destroyed, phenomena would lie outside principle. Third, because it is immediately empty, it does not wait to be destroyed; if destroyed, it is annihilationism. Therefore, the Tathāgata's five eyes illuminate penetratingly without omission; how could it be like the congenital blindness of ordinary people or the one-eyed blindness of the two vehicles who see nothing at all? Merely neither following nor destroying, one leaves the extremes and deviations of the two views; neither existing nor empty, one accords with the middle principle of the one mind. Then, meeting conditions, there is no hindrance; encountering objects, there is no arising.

Therefore, the ten thousand things are fundamentally empty; from the mind they are seen as real. Depending on thoughts and reflections, one clings to non-existence or clings to existence, falling into the gate of delusion and confusion; through grasping and clinging, one forms illusions and madness, receiving the retributions of miscellaneous defilement. If one can reflect back on mind-only, and great wisdom exhaustively mirrors the true source of the real mark, then the dream of illusion is suddenly awakened from, and reflections and images are all stilled. Thereafter, with the mark of non-duality, one penetratingly sees the ten directions; using the gate of the one mind, one unifies and gathers the ten thousand kinds. Then seeing has nothing seen, while all characteristics tower to the heavens; hearing has nothing heard, while all sounds shake the earth. When one comprehends like this, the mind is vacant and the objective realm is empty; then one enters the gate of the great dhāraṇī and inherits the gotra of the Buddha Vehicle.

The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: "Realizing the self-mind's pratyakṣa, that external natures are non-natures, without falsely conceptualizing characteristics, one gives rise to the gotra of the Buddha Vehicle." If one is deluded about external dharmas and takes mind with mind, then this becomes the gate of karmic illusion, continuing the gotra of sentient beings.

A verse in the Śūraṅgamasūtra says:
"When the self-mind grasps the self-mind,
That which is not an illusion becomes an illusory dharma.
If one does not grasp, there is no non-illusion;
When even non-illusion does not arise,
From where can illusory dharmas be established?"
Therefore we know that all defiled and pure dharmas are produced from grasping. Hence it is said: "Grasping a self is defilement; not grasping a self is purity." If there is no mind of grasper and grasped, there are also no dharmas that are illusion or non-illusion. When real dharmas that are non-illusion do not even arise, on what can the illusory arising of empty traces be established?

Furthermore, seeing dharmas outside the mind all become relative, because having no substance and no power, they are provisionally interdependent on conditions. Therefore a verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says:
"Because of existence, there is non-existence;
Because of non-existence, there is existence.
If there is non-existence, one should not receive it;
If there is existence, one should not conceptualize it."
If opening up expedients, sometimes one speaks of existence to cure non-existence, and speaks of non-existence to destroy existence, then there is no hindrance. As a verse in the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā-śāstra says:
"If one employs existence and non-existence,
One may both refute and accept them;
Although speaking of them, if the mind does not cling,
Then there is no fault."
If according to the genuine source, both existence and non-existence are dissolved. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The Buddha does not speak of non-existence regarding what exists, nor does he speak of existence regarding what is non-existent; he merely speaks of the real mark of all dharmas. For example, the sunlight does not create high and low, but illuminates equally as one. The Buddha is also like this: he does not make existence become non-existence, nor make non-existence become existence."

From this we know that if one is deluded about the great purport, one sees existence and non-existence. As the Niepan lun says:
"The Nameless One said: 'The categories of existence and non-existence truly leave no dharma uncovered and no principle un-unified. Yet what they unify is merely conventional truth.' A sūtra says: 'What is ultimate truth? It is the path of nirvāṇa. What is conventional truth? It is the dharmas of existence and non-existence.' Why? That which exists, exists in relation to non-existence; that which is non-existent, is non-existent in relation to existence. Existence is called 'existence' because of non-existence; non-existence is called 'non-existence' because of existence. Thus existence is born from non-existence, and non-existence is born from existence. Apart from existence there is no non-existence, and apart from non-existence there is no existence. Existence and non-existence mutually generate each other, just as high and low incline toward each other: where there is high, there must be low; where there is low, there must be high. Thus, although existence and non-existence differ, neither escapes existence. This is that by which words and images are formed, and right and wrong are produced. How could they suffice to unify the profound ultimate or approximate the spiritual Way? Therefore, when the treatise speaks of 'transcending existence and non-existence', it is truly because the categories of existence and non-existence stop within the six sense objects. Within the six sense objects is not the dwelling place of nirvāṇa; hence it borrows 'transcending' to dispel them. It is hoped that those who seek the Way may glimpse the profound path, place their feelings in the transcendent realm, attain the meaning and forget the words, and realize that it is neither existence nor non-existence. How could it mean that outside of existence and non-existence there is another marvelous Way that can be designated? A sūtra says: 'As for the three unconditioned [dharmas], because sentient beings are agitated and troubled, arising from severe afflictions; among severe afflictions, none is prior to existence. To extinguish the designation of existence, none is prior to non-existence. Therefore, non-existence is borrowed to clarify that it is not-existence; clarifying that it is not-existence does not mean non-existence.'

The One with a Name said: 'The treatise's purport states that since nirvāṇa neither transcends existence and non-existence, nor is it within existence and non-existence: not being within existence and non-existence, it cannot be found in existence and non-existence; not transcending existence and non-existence, it cannot be sought apart from existence and non-existence. Seeking it nowhere, it should simply be non-existent. Yet, its Way is not non-existent. Since its Way is not non-existent, the profound path can be pursued; this is why a thousand sages have followed the same track and never returned in vain. Since its Way exists, yet you say it neither transcends nor is within, there must be a different meaning. May I hear it?'

The Nameless One said: 'Words arise from names, and names are generated by characteristics. Characteristics depend on what can be characterized; without characteristics there are no names. Without names there is no exposition; without exposition there is no hearing. A sūtra says: "Nirvāṇa is neither dharma nor non-dharma; without hearing and without exposition, it is not what the mind can know." How could I dare speak of it, and how could you wish to hear it? Even so, Subhūti had a saying: "If the assembly can receive with no-mind and hear with non-hearing, I shall speak of it with wordlessness." In setting forth its Way, it may perhaps also be spoken of. Vimalakīrti said: "Without departing from kleśas, one attains nirvāṇa." The devī said: "Without departing from Māra's realm, one enters the Buddha realm." Thus the profound Way lies in marvelous awakening; marvelous awakening lies in being immediately real. Being immediately real, existence and non-existence are viewed equally; viewing existence and non-existence equally, other and self are not two. Therefore heaven and earth share the same root with me; the ten thousand things are of one substance with me. Being identical with me, they are no longer existence or non-existence; being different from me, they violate comprehensive understanding. Therefore it neither transcends nor is within, and the Way abides in between them. Why? The consummate person empties his mind and darkly illuminates, leaving no principle un-unified. Embracing the six directions within his breast, his numinous mirror has room to spare; mirroring the ten thousand images in his square-inch [heart], his spirit remains ever empty. He can even pull up the profound root at the beginningless, and calming the mind in the midst of manifold movements, tranquil and profoundly silent, marvelously accords with spontaneity. Therefore, dwelling in existence, he is not existent; abiding in non-existence, he is not non-existent. Abiding in non-existence, he is not non-existent, hence he is not non-existent toward non-existence; dwelling in existence, he is not existent, hence he is not existent toward existence. Therefore he is able to neither transcend existence and non-existence nor be within existence and non-existence.

Thus dharmas have no characteristics of existence or non-existence, and the sage has no knowledge of existence or non-existence. When the sage has no knowledge of existence or non-existence, he has no mind on the inside; when dharmas have no characteristics of existence or non-existence, there are no categories on the outside. Without categories on the outside and without mind on the inside, this and that are stilled and extinguished, and things and self are darkly united. Tranquil and without omen, this is called nirvāṇa. When nirvāṇa is like this, conceptual calculation is cut off. How could one seek it within existence and non-existence, or search for it outside of existence and non-existence?'

Explanation: As for 'the profound Way lies in marvelous awakening; marvelous awakening lies in being immediately real': The profound and mysterious Way is without name and without characteristic; shallow and proximate emotional knowledge cannot reach it, and coarse and floating intellectual understanding can hardly measure it. Only at the time of marvelous awakening does one awaken to this purport. Having attained its purport, it is truly inconceivable: mind and objective realm blend and penetrate, just like spiritual transformations. Pointing to the dharmadhātu in one's palm, gathering the ten thousand images before one's eyes; like a mirror reflecting empty space containing [all], appearing simultaneously and equally; having neither before nor after, and cutting off any middle. The marvelous purport is brilliant; words and thoughts are cut off! This can be called marvelous awakening, this can be called being immediately real. Then existence and non-existence are viewed equally, other and self are not two; neither transcending nor within—does not its Way lie right here?