北山錄 2.4.1

2.4.1

昭機之士是有也（昭顯也。 依言論之教歷修證之門也）冥機之士是其無也（冥默也。 超言論之相離作為之境也）相反為道（說真者於俗猶迷。 存俗者於真未了。 各執為道）如隻輪騁衢奇翰戾天偕何得也（奇單也。 翰翼也。 車本雙輪方轉。 鳥以兩翼而飛。 今於真俗若不圓通。 如隻輸之車。 單翼之鳥也。 偕齊也）但道之不弘為物所宗篾其攸濟（篾無也。 攸所也。 若不弘真俗之道。 欲為物之宗匠。 必無所成也。 濟成也）故以真俗兩門為道之樞總。 吹萬有於一指。 靜群動於絕眹。 蕩蕩焉真可入不二法門之夷路也（攝萬有而入於一指趣。 寂眾慮而泯其形兆。 於所對則了然無滯。 內外不取中間本無。 此則入不二之門也）何則會極捐情之謂真。 起微涉動之謂俗（未必以造至極之境。 便為之真。 涉有作之相。 便謂之俗。 豈期然乎）真也者性空也（謂真性之空圓成之理）俗也者假有也（謂依他幻有也）假有之有謂之似有（其法本無。 仗緣而有緣离却無。 似其幻化之有）性空之空謂之真空（真性之上百非四相了然無得故也）故悟士立真於俗相違（真即無為。 俗即有為。 二法不同故也）合真俗於不二（真者理也。 俗者事也。 事無理而不興。 理無事而不顯。 無俗不可言真。 無理不可談事。 不即不离故為不二也）中道洞照赫然玄會。 未甞有一事當情者也。 夫如是簡易之理于何不著。 久大之業于何不備（繫辭云。 易則易知。 簡則易從。 易知則有親。 易從則有功。 順萬物之情。 通天下之志。 則能成可久可大之功）雖僧祇云遠法身無外於焉悟哉（阿僧祇此云無量也。 自十信初發心至世第一末名初僧祇。 從見道至第七地末名第二僧祇從第八地至解脫道名第三僧祇。 此三祇外方得成佛不亦遠乎。 然法身之理。 本來混融。 迷悟雖殊。 而非外得者也）故萬象語其真。 以空為性（青青翠竹盡是真如。 欝欝黃華無非般若）辯其假以有為相（依　假即真空之相）既空假一質。 二際無得。 非中道如何（空是性。 假是相。 相不离性。 性不离相。 故云一質。 二際者二邊也。 二邊無得故契中道也）是以觀象之生也不有自體。 待彼眾緣生。 既待緣則象本無矣（萬象之法本無自體。 緣合而生。 緣离而滅。 若心法四緣。 色法二緣。 自不能生。 則為無體也）根於空矣（假有之象以空為本）空含於象。 待象以顯。 顯既在象則空為象矣。 象外無空矣（無為之空含有為之象。 將顯無為必仗有為。 有為則能顯無為則所顯也）譬諸水月緣會則見。 孰得謂之空也。 形虛無在。 孰得謂之有也（月本在天。 影流于水。 誰言其空水本無月　假影所流誰得言有也）故聖人妙體有無之間。 能成有無之用。 是謂至矣（是以聖人方了其體用）清辯云。 有為如幻化。 無為如空花也（掌珍論云　有為之法猶如幻化。 本非有故。 無為之法猶若空花。 定不起故也）夫幻法假有。 蓋以有而適無（兔角本無。 幻師以手巾而假有。 离手巾外都無兔角。 猶有為之法仗眾緣而假有。 离眾緣外假法元無。 則是以有而適無也）空花本無。 蓋以無而似有。 無而似有。 湛乎真際（真性本無不起猶若空花。 為焉有為作依　所以似有了此似有本無。 即是湛然真際也）有而適無。 復歸無物（若以有為假有之法緣散歸元即本無物也）叩兩喻以表法則法無所在矣（兩喻。 幻法以喻真性有為也。 以空花喻真性無為也）但善文字者。 得其徼而不得其數。 善心學者。 知其極而不知其象（物生有象象。 然後有數。 徼者邊也。 極者終也。 尋文之徒。 雖得邊徼之小逕。 而不得其指歸之總數。 傳心印者。 雖得終極之妙門。 復不知原始之兆象也）守兩厓而不泯。 患在此焉（一則緣文字而著有。 一則斥眾相而著空。 各守一岸之邊。

Persons of manifest capacity affirm existence (manifest means clear: relying on the teachings of words and discourses, they traverse the gates of practice and realization). Persons of subtle capacity affirm non-existence (subtle means silent: transcending the marks of words and discourses, they leave behind the realm of deliberate activity). Opposing one another, [each] takes [their own view] as the Way (those who speak of the ultimate are still confused about the conventional; those who preserve the conventional have not yet understood the ultimate; each clings to it as the Way). Like a single wheel galloping down a highway, or a single wing soaring to heaven—how could they together succeed? (Single means solitary. Wing means feather. A carriage fundamentally turns by two wheels; a bird flies with two wings. Now if one is not completely penetrated in the ultimate and conventional, it is like a carriage with a single wheel or a bird with a single wing. Together means uniformly.) Yet if the Way is not magnified, being held as an authority by creatures, it will lack that whereby anything is accomplished (lack means not having. Accomplished means successful. If one does not magnify the Way of the ultimate and conventional and yet wishes to be a master to creatures, one will surely achieve nothing). Therefore, taking the two gates of ultimate and conventional as the pivotal summary of the Way, one blows the ten thousand existences into a single point, and stills the multitude of activities at the cessation of all omens. Boundlessly, it is truly the level road to enter the non-dual Dharma gate (subsuming the myriad existences into a single import, and silencing the multitude of thoughts to obliterate their signs; regarding whatever one confronts, one is clearly without obstruction; not grasping inner or outer, the middle is fundamentally non-existent; this then is entering the non-dual gate). Why is this? Converging at the utmost and casting off emotional grasping is called the ultimate; initiating subtly and engaging in activity is called the conventional (one does not necessarily take reaching the supreme realm as the ultimate, nor does one take engaging in the marks of conditioned activity as the conventional. How could it be expected to be so?). That which is ultimate is the emptiness of nature (meaning the emptiness of the true nature, the principle of perfected nature); that which is conventional is provisional existence (meaning dependent illusory existence). The existence of provisional existence is called apparent existence (such phenomena are fundamentally non-existent; relying on conditions they exist, but when conditions disperse, they are absent; it resembles the existence of illusory transformations). The emptiness of the emptiness of nature is called true emptiness (because above the true nature, the hundred negations and four marks are clearly ungraspable). Therefore, the awakened master establishes that the ultimate and conventional conflict in appearance (the ultimate is wuwei, and the conventional is saṃskṛta; because the two dharmas are different), yet unifies the ultimate and conventional in non-duality (the ultimate is principle; the conventional is phenomena. Phenomena do not arise without principle; principle is not manifest without phenomena. Without the conventional, one cannot speak of the ultimate; without principle, one cannot discuss phenomena. Being neither identical nor separate, they are non-dual). When the Middle Way is clearly illuminated, one radiantly harmonizes with the subtle; never has there been a single phenomenon obstructing the mind. If it is like this, in what does the simple and easy principle not manifest? In what are the enduring and great endeavors not fully prepared? (The Commentary on the Appended Phrases says: 'Being easy, it is easy to know; being simple, it is easy to follow. Being easy to know, it attracts affection; being easy to follow, it brings success. Following the sentiments of the myriad things and penetrating the will of the world, one can accomplish enduring and great works.') Although asaṃkhyeyas are said to be distant, the Dharmakāya has nothing outside it—how is one awakened therein? (Asaṃkhyeya is translated here as immeasurable. From the initial generation of the mind in the ten faiths to the end of the worldly supreme stage is called the first asaṃkhyeya; from the path of seeing to the end of the seventh bhūmi is called the second asaṃkhyeya; from the eighth bhūmi to the path of liberation is called the third asaṃkhyeya. Attaining Buddhahood only outside these three asaṃkhyeyas, is it not distant? Yet the principle of the Dharmakāya is originally blended and unified; although delusion and awakening differ, it is not something attained from outside.) Therefore, when speaking of the ultimate of the myriad phenomena, they take emptiness as their nature (the lush green bamboos are all suchness; the dense yellow flowers are nothing but prajñā); when discerning their provisionality, they take existence as their characteristics (relying on the provisional, it is the characteristic of true emptiness). Since emptiness and the provisional are of one substance, and neither of the two extremes can be grasped, how could this not be the Middle Way? (Emptiness is nature; the provisional is characteristics. Characteristics do not separate from nature; nature does not separate from characteristics; therefore it is said to be of one substance. The two extremes are the two margins. Because the two extremes cannot be grasped, one accords with the Middle Way.) For this reason, observing the arising of phenomena: they do not possess a self-nature, but arise dependent on those myriad conditions. Since they depend on conditions, phenomena are fundamentally non-existent (the dharmas of the myriad phenomena fundamentally have no self-nature; when conditions assemble they arise, and when conditions disperse they cease. Just as mental dharmas depend on four conditions and physical dharmas on two conditions, unable to arise of themselves, they are without substantiality); they are rooted in emptiness (the phenomena of provisional existence take emptiness as their root). Emptiness contains phenomena, and relies on phenomena to be revealed. Once revealed through phenomena, then emptiness is phenomena; outside of phenomena there is no emptiness (the emptiness of wuwei contains the phenomena of saṃskṛta; wishing to reveal wuwei, one must rely on saṃskṛta; saṃskṛta can reveal, while wuwei is that which is revealed). Like the moon in the water: when conditions gather, it is seen; who can call it empty? Its form is insubstantial and has no location; who can call it existent? (The moon is fundamentally in the sky, while its reflection drifts upon the water. Who can say it is empty? The water fundamentally has no moon, it is merely the drifting of a provisional reflection; who can say it is existent?) Therefore, the sage marvelously embodies the interval between existence and non-existence, and can accomplish the functioning of existence and non-existence; this is called the supreme (thus the sage fully understands their substance and function). Qingbian said: saṃskṛta is like an illusion, and wuwei is like a flower in the sky (The Treatise on the Jewel in the Palm says: 'Saṃskṛta dharmas are like an illusion, because fundamentally they do not exist; wuwei dharmas are like flowers in the sky, because definitively they do not arise'). Now, illusory dharmas are provisionally existent; they fundamentally go from existence to non-existence (a hare's horns fundamentally do not exist; an illusionist uses a handkerchief to make them provisionally exist. Outside of the handkerchief there are no hare's horns at all. It is like saṃskṛta dharmas relying on myriad conditions to be provisionally existent; outside of the myriad conditions the provisional dharmas are originally absent. Thus it is going from existence to non-existence). Flowers in the sky fundamentally do not exist; they fundamentally appear as existent from non-existence. Apparent existence from non-existence is serene in the ultimate realm (the true nature fundamentally does not exist and does not arise, just like flowers in the sky. Acting as the support for saṃskṛta, it thus appears as existent. Understanding that this apparent existence is fundamentally non-existent, it is immediately the serene ultimate realm). Going from existence to non-existence, it returns again to the absence of things (if, through the provisional existence of saṃskṛta dharmas, conditions disperse and return to the origin, it is fundamentally without things). Tapping both metaphors to express the Dharma, then the Dharma has no abiding place (the two metaphors: the illusory dharma metaphors the saṃskṛta of true nature; the flower in the sky metaphors the wuwei of true nature). Yet those who are skilled in letters grasp the periphery but do not grasp the overarching principle; those who are skilled in the learning of the mind know the ultimate but do not know the manifestations (when things arise there are manifestations; after manifestations there are numbers. The periphery means the edge; the ultimate means the end. Those who follow texts, although they find the narrow path of the periphery, do not grasp the overall principle of the destination. Those who transmit the mind-seal, although they find the marvelous gate of the ultimate, do not know the initial omens and manifestations). Clinging to the two shores without obliteration—herein lies the trouble (one attaches to existence through texts; the other attaches to emptiness by rejecting all characteristics. Each clings to the margin of one shore).