集古今佛道論衡 4.19

4.19

On the eighth day of the twelfth month in the second year of Longshuo, in the Biyu Hall of the Penglai Palace, Lingbian received an imperial decree to explain the title of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra. [A challenger] asked, "Is the inconceivable Way fathomless only to ordinary mortals, or is it also unknown to the sage?" Lingbian answered, "Neither mortal nor sage conceives of it." The challenger objected, "The ultimate principle is profound and subtle; the ordinary stream may well fail to fathom it. But with the sage's heart holding a mirror from afar, how could wondrous wisdom fail to know it?" Lingbian answered, "The Dharma-nature is empty and interfused; the Way pervades everywhere. The nature of things is equal; what phenomenon could be conceived of?" The challenger objected, "A mountain cannot enter [a mustard seed]; to mortals, this is indeed inconceivable. But the sage has the principle of large containing small; for the sage, how could it be unfathomable?" Lingbian answered, "The inconceivable Way pervades all things. Why must it be that a mountain is received [in a mustard seed], and that mortals and sages are divided into conceiving and not conceiving?" The challenger objected, "Mortals' wisdom and sages' wisdom do not divide into conceiving and not conceiving; mortals' power and sages' power do not divide into containing and not containing." Lingbian answered, "The traces of mortals and sages differ, so there may be containing and not containing; the origin of mortals and sages is one, so it does not divide into conceiving and not conceiving." The challenger objected, "If the origin of mortals and sages is fundamentally not two, and does not divide into conceiving and not conceiving, then since their traces differ, there should be discussing and not discussing." Lingbian answered, "Though origin and traces differ, the inconceivable is one." The challenger objected, "This is a difference between the sage's origin and traces; how does it concern ordinary mortals?" Lingbian answered, "All sentient beings are themselves the mark of nirvāṇa. How could the inconceivable Way discriminate between sage and mortal?" The challenger objected, "If the inconceivable is without duality, allowing that mortals and sages are fundamentally not distinct, then since the inconceivable does not differ, how could the traces of mortal and sage be two?" Lingbian answered, "Where there is non-duality, one speaks of duality; but in duality, what duality is there?" The challenger objected, "Then one could also say that where there is no conceiving, one speaks of conceiving. If one speaks of conceiving, how can it be that the sage also does not conceive?" Lingbian answered, "Where there is non-duality, one speaks of duality, but there is neither two nor not-two. If two were retained, you could say that where there is no conceiving, one speaks of conceiving, and what is inconceivable would come to have conceiving. But where there is non-duality, one speaks of duality, and with no duality, two is not retained; where there is no conceiving, one speaks of conceiving, yet neither conceiving nor non-conceiving is established." The challenger objected, "If it is not merely that conceiving is not established, but non-conceiving is also not retained, why then does the head of the sūtra state 'inconceivable'?" Lingbian answered, "Because thinking and conceptualising are cut off, it is called 'inconceivable'; it does not mean there exists a 'non-conceiving'. Therefore the Avataṃsaka Sūtra states: 'Such inconceivability cannot be attained; entering deeply into the inconceivable, both conceiving and non-conceiving are quiescent and ceased.'"