[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) › [弘明集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102) › 2.7 # 弘明集 2.7 弘明集 2.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2.7) 答曰。今神妙形麁而相與為用。以妙緣麁則知以虛緣有矣。今愚者雖鄙。要能處今識昔在此憶彼。皆有神功。則練而可盡知其本均虛矣。心作萬有備於前論。據見觀實三者固已信然矣。但所以然者其來無始。無始之始豈有始乎。亦玄之又玄矣。莊周稱冉求問曰。未有天地可知乎。仲尼曰。古猶今也。蓋謂雖在無始之前。仰尋先際初自茫眇。猶今之冉求耳。今神明始創及群生最先之祖。都自杳漠非追想所及。豈復學者通塞所豫乎。夫聖固凝廢。感而後應耳。非想所及。即六合之外矣。無以為感。故存而不論聖而不論。民何由悟。今相與踐地戴天。而存踐戴之外。豈有紀極乎。禹之弼成五服敷土不過九州者。蓋道世路所及者耳。至於大荒之表暘谷濛氾之際。非復人理所豫。則神聖已所不明矣。況過此彌往渾沌冥茫。豈復議其邊陲哉。今推所踐戴。終至所不議。故一體耳。推今之神用求昔之所始。終至於聖人之所存而不論者。亦一理相貫耳。豈獨可議哉。皆由冥緣隨宇宙而無窮。物情所感者有限故也。夫眾心稟聖以成識。其猶眾目會日以為見。離朱察秋毫於百尋。資其妙目假日而覩耳。今布毫於千步之外。目力所匱無假以見。於而察微避危無所少矣。何為以千丈所昧。還疑百尋之毫乎。今不達緣本。情感所匱無會以聖。而知取至於致道之津無所少矣。何為以緣始之昧。還疑既明之化矣哉。 > I reply: "Now spirit is subtle while corporeal form is coarse, and they serve each other in function. Taking the subtle as a condition for the coarse, one knows how emptiness serves as a condition for existence. Now, although a foolish person is base, he is essentially able to reside in the present and know the past, to be here and remember there—these are all functions of the spirit. Thus, through refinement, one can fully know that its original emptiness is uniform. That the mind makes the myriad existences has been fully treated in the previous treatise; relying on perception and observing reality, these three are already verified as true. However, the reason why it is so originates from beginninglessness. Can the beginning of beginninglessness have a beginning? It is indeed the mystery of mysteries. Zhuang Zhou stated that Ran Qiu asked, 'Can it be known what was before Heaven and Earth existed?' Zhongni said, 'The ancient is like the present.' This means that although it was before beginninglessness, tracing back to the first boundary is initially boundless and indistinct, just like the Ran Qiu of today. Now, the first arising of the spirit and the earliest ancestor of all living beings are entirely vast and obscure, beyond the reach of retrospective thought. How could this be something with which the open or blocked \[faculties\] of scholars are concerned? Indeed, the sage is fundamentally serene and motionless, responding only after being stimulated. What thought cannot reach lies outside the cosmos. Having no means to be stimulated, it is preserved but not discussed. If the sage does not discuss it, how could the people understand it? Now, together we tread the earth and bear the sky on our heads; beyond what we tread and bear, how could there be a boundary? That Yu assisted in establishing the five dependencies and laid out the land not exceeding the Nine Provinces was simply because they were what could be reached by the paths of the world. As for what lies beyond the Great Waste, on the borders of the Sun Valley and the Meng Sea, these no longer pertain to human principles, so the divine sage did not illuminate them. How much less, going ever further beyond this into the primeval chaos and vast darkness, could one discuss their borders? Now, tracing what we tread and bear, we ultimately reach what is not to be discussed, so they are of one essence. Tracing the present functions of the spirit to seek their ancient origin, ultimately reaching what the sage preserves and does not discuss, is likewise connected by a single principle. How could this alone be disputed? It is all because obscure conditions are limitless as they follow the cosmos, while the feelings of beings are stimulated within limits. Indeed, the minds of the multitude depend on the sage to achieve consciousness, just like the eyes of the multitude meet the sun to achieve sight. Li Zhu discerned an autumn down at a hundred cubits by relying on his wondrous eyes and borrowing the sun to see it. Now, if the down is placed a thousand paces away, the strength of his eyes is exhausted and has no means to see it; yet his ability to discern the minute and avoid danger is not at all deficient. Why, on account of what is obscured at a thousand fathoms, should he turn back to doubt the down at a hundred cubits? Today, failing to fathom the origin of conditions, feeling and consciousness are exhausted and have no means to encounter the sage; yet the knowledge required to reach the ford to the Dao is not at all deficient. Why, on account of obscurity concerning the beginning of conditions, should one turn back to doubt the transformation that has already been illuminated?" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2.6) - [Next: 2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2.8) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102~en-mt.2.7) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2102.2.7) · Pramāṇa