[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) › [真心直說](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a) › 1.33 # 真心直說 1.33 真心直說 1.33 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1.33) 或曰。真心與妄心對境時。如何辨別真妄耶。曰妄心對境有知。而知於順違境起貪瞋心。又於中容境起癡心也。既於境上起貪瞋癡三毒。足見是妄心也。祖師云。逆順相爭是為心病。故知對於可不可者是妄心也。若真心者無知而知。平懷圓照故異於草木。不生憎愛故異於妄心。即對境虛明不憎不愛。無知而知者真心故。肇論云。夫聖心者。微妙無相不可為有。用之彌勤不可為無。乃至非有故知而無知。非無故無知而知。是以無知即知。無以言異於聖人心也。又妄心在有著有在無著無。常在二邊不知中道。永嘉云。捨妄心取真理。取捨之心成巧偽。學人不了用修行。深成認賊將為子。若是真心居有無而不落有無。常處中道故。祖師云。不逐有緣勿住空忍。一種平懷泯然自盡。肇論云。是以聖人處有不有。居無不無。雖不取於有無。然不捨於有無。所以和光塵勞周旋五趣。寂然而往怕爾而來。恬淡無為而無不為。此說聖人垂手為人。周旋五趣接化眾生。雖往來而無往來相。妄心不爾。故真心妄心不同也。又真心乃平常心也。妄心乃不平常心也。或曰。何名平常心也。曰人人具有一點靈明。湛若虛空遍一切處。對俗事假名理性。對妄識權號真心。無分毫分別。遇緣不昧。無一念取捨。觸物皆周。不逐萬境遷移。設使隨流得妙。不離當處湛然。覓即知君不見。乃真心也。或曰。何名不平常心耶。曰境有聖與凡。境有染與淨。境有斷與常。境有理與事。境有生與滅。境有動與靜。境有去與來。境有好與醜。境有善與惡。境有因與果。細論則萬別千差。今乃且舉十對皆名不平常境也。心隨此不平常境而生。不平常境而滅。不平常境心對前平常真心。所以名不平常妄心也。真心本具。不隨不平常境生起種種差別。所以名平常真心也。或曰。真心平常無諸異因。奈何佛說因果善惡報應乎。曰妄心逐種種境。不了種種境。遂起種種心。佛說種種因果法。治伏種種妄心須立因果也。若此真心不逐種種境。由是不起種種心。佛即不說種種法。何有因果也。或曰。真心平常不生耶。曰真心有時施用非逐境生。但妙用遊戲不昧因果耳。 > Someone asked: "When the true mind and the deluded mind confront an object, how are the true and the deluded to be distinguished?" The answer is: When the deluded mind confronts an object, it has knowledge; through this knowledge, it produces greed and anger toward agreeable and disagreeable objects, and it produces delusion toward neutral objects. Since it produces the three poisons of greed, anger, and delusion toward objects, this sufficiently shows that it is the deluded mind. The Patriarch said: "Conflict between the contrary and the compliant is the disease of the mind." Therefore, know that what reacts to the acceptable and unacceptable is the deluded mind. As for the true mind, it is knowing without knowledge: because its equanimous embrace is completely illuminating, it differs from grass and trees; because it does not produce hatred and love, it differs from the deluded mind. That is to say, confronting objects, it is empty and luminous, neither hating nor loving. That which is knowing without knowledge is the true mind. The Zhaolun states: "As for the sacred mind: wondrous and without characteristics, it cannot be deemed existent; its function ever more diligent, it cannot be deemed non-existent... Even to the point that because it is not existent, it knows and is without knowledge; because it is not non-existent, it is without knowledge and knows. Hence being without knowledge is knowing itself; there are no words to differentiate it from the mind of the sage." Furthermore, the deluded mind, when in existence, clings to existence, and when in non-existence, clings to non-existence; it always abides on the two extremes and does not know the Middle Way. Yongjia said: "Abandoning the deluded mind and grasping true principle—the mind that grasps and abandons becomes artful and false. Students who do not understand this employ it in their cultivation, gravely mistaking a thief for their child." If it is the true mind, it dwells in existence and non-existence without falling into existence or non-existence; because it always abides in the Middle Way, the Patriarch said: "Do not pursue conditioned existence; do not abide in patience of emptiness. One equanimous embrace completely vanishes by itself." The Zhaolun states: "Therefore the sage dwells in existence without being existent, and abides in non-existence without being non-existent. Although not grasping existence and non-existence, yet he does not abandon existence and non-existence. Therefore he softens his light in the worldly defilements and circles through the five destinies, tranquilly departing and serenely arriving, placid in non-action yet leaving nothing undone." This describes how the sage extends his hands for humanity, circling through the five destinies to receive and transform sentient beings: although coming and going, there are no marks of coming and going. The deluded mind is not like this. Therefore, the true mind and the deluded mind are different. Furthermore, the true mind is the ordinary mind; the deluded mind is the unordinary mind. Someone asked: "What is meant by the 'ordinary mind'?" The answer is: Everyone possesses a single point of numinous brightness, clear as empty space and pervading all places. Facing conventional matters, it is provisionally named 'principle-nature'; facing deluded consciousness, it is expediently designated 'true mind.' It is without the slightest discrimination. Meeting conditions, it is not dimmed; it is without a single thought of grasping or abandoning. Touching things, it is everywhere complete. It does not follow the myriad objects in shifting and changing. Even if it goes along with the flow, it attains wondrousness; not departing from its present place, it is limpid. If you seek it, then know that you will not see it—this is the true mind. Someone asked: "What is meant by the 'unordinary mind'?" The answer is: Objects have the sacred and the mundane; objects have the defiled and the pure; objects have annihilation and permanence; objects have principle and phenomena; objects have arising and ceasing; objects have movement and stillness; objects have going and coming; objects have the beautiful and the ugly; objects have good and evil; objects have cause and effect. In detailed discussion, there are ten thousand differences and a thousand distinctions; now, taking just ten pairs, they are all called 'unordinary objects.' The mind that arises in accordance with these unordinary objects and ceases with these unordinary objects is, in contrast to the aforementioned ordinary true mind, therefore called the unordinary deluded mind. The true mind is inherently possessed; it does not produce various distinctions in accordance with unordinary objects; therefore, it is called the ordinary true mind. Someone asked: "If the true mind is ordinary and devoid of various distinct causes, why did the Buddha speak of cause and effect, good and evil, and retribution?" The answer is: The deluded mind pursues various objects; failing to understand the various objects, it then produces various minds. The Buddha spoke of various dharmas of cause and effect to subdue and control the various deluded minds, which required establishing cause and effect. If this true mind does not pursue various objects, then from this it does not produce various minds; the Buddha then would not speak of various dharmas—how could there be cause and effect? Someone asked: "Does the true mind, being ordinary, not arise?" The answer is: When the true mind exercises its function, it does not arise by pursuing objects; it merely engages in wondrous function as sport, without being dimmed to cause and effect. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1.32) - [Next: 1.34](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1.34) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a~en-mt.1.33) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2019a.1.33) · Pramāṇa