廣弘明集 18.47

18.47

Sengwei asked: I have heard that the Dharma master of the new treatise holds that the ultimate is subtle and profound, not admitting of gradual stages, causing the practitioner to exhaust the ultimate of being, so that the non-being of self-so matches it like two halves of a tally; why must one speak of non-being? If one relies on non-being to exhaust being, how can this not be called gradual awakening? First answer: When encumbrances are not yet exhausted, non-being cannot be attained; only when the defects of encumbrance are exhausted can non-being be attained. When encumbrances are exhausted, there is non-being; this is truly like two halves of a tally. When about to remove one's encumbrances, one must rely on the teachings. While in being, it is learning and not awakening; awakening is beyond being, and relies on learning to reach it. Stages are merely talk to teach the foolish; a single awakening is a discourse that captures the inner meaning. Wei asked again: The treatise says that awakening is beyond being and is not attained gradually. If the practitioner who aspires to the ultimate is to advance daily in his illumination, would it not be better if illumination did not advance daily, which would be the same as not speaking of it? If one advances daily in one's illumination, can this be anything other than gradual awakening?