欢迎访问本站。
Shurangama Sutra Chapter 1 Shurangama Sutra 楞严经
Shurangama Sutra
Śūraṅgama Sūtra
Shurangama Sutra
(The full title:)
Sutra of the Foremost Shurangama at the Crown of the Great Buddha; and of All
the Bodhisattvas' Myriad Practices for Cultivating and Certifying to the
Complete Meaning of the Tathagata's Secret Cause.
(Taisho Tripitaka 0945)
Translated during the Tang Dynasty by Shramana Paramiti from central India.
Chapter 2
When Ananda and the great assembly heard the Buddha's instructions, they became
peaceful and composed both in body and mind. They recollected that since time
without beginning, they had strayed from their fundamental true mind by
mistakenly taking the shadows of the differentiations of conditioned defilements
to be real. Now on this day as they awakened, they were each like a lost infant
who suddenly finds its beloved mother. They put their palms together to make
obeisance to the Buddha. They wished to hear the Tathagata enlighten them to the
dual nature of body and mind, of what is false, of what is true, of what is
empty and what is existent, and of what is subject to production and extinction
and what transcends production and extinction.
Then King Prasenajit rose and said to the Buddha, "In the past, when I had not
yet received the teachings of the Buddha, I met Katyayana and Vairatiputra, both
of whom said that this body ends at death, and that this is Nirvana. Now,
although I have met the Buddha, I still wonder about that. How can I go about
realizing the mind at the level of no production and no extinction? Now all in
this Great Assembly who still have outflows also wish to be instructed on this
subject."
The Buddha said to the great king, "Let's talk about your body as it is right
now. Now I ask you, will your physical body be like vajra, indestructible and
living forever? Or will it change and go bad?"
"Bhagavan, this body of mine will keep changing until it eventually perishes."
The Buddha said, "Great king, you have not yet perished. How do you know you
will perish?" "Bhagavan, although my impermanent, changing, and decaying body
has not yet become extinct, I observe it now, as every passing thought fades
away. Each new one fails to remain, but is gradually extinguished like fire
turning wood to ashes. This ceaseless extinguishing convinces me that this body
will eventually completely perish."
The Buddha said, "So it is. Great king, at your present age you are already old
and declining. How does your appearance and complexion compare to when you were
a youth?"
"Bhagavan, in the past when I was young my skin was moist and shining. When I
reached the prime of life, my blood and breath were full. But now in my
declining years, as I race into old age, my form is withered and wizened and my
spirit dull. My hair is white and my face is wrinkled and not much time remains
for me. How could one possibly compare me now with the way I was when in my
prime?"
The Buddha said, "Great king, your appearance should not decline so suddenly."
The king said, "Bhagavan, the change has been a hidden transformation of which I
honestly have not been aware. I have come to this gradually through the passing
of winters and summers. How did it happen? In my twenties, I was still young,
but my features had aged since the time I was ten. My thirties were a further
decline from my twenties, and now at 'sixty-two I look back at my fifties as
hale and hearty.
"Bhagavan, I now contemplate these hidden transformations. Although the changes
wrought by this process of dying are evident through the decades, I might
consider them further in finer detail: these changes do not occur just in
periods of twelve years; there are actually changes year by year. Not only are
there annual changes, there are also monthly transformations. Nor does it stop
at monthly transformations; there are also differences day by day. Examining
them closely, I find that kshana by kshana, thought after thought, they never
stop. And so I know my body will keep changing until it has perished."
The Buddha told the Great King, "By watching the ceaseless changes of these
transformations, you awaken and know of your perishing, but do you also know
that at the time of perishing there is something in your body which does not
become extinct?"
King Prasenajit put his palms together and said to the Buddha, "I really do not
know."
The Buddha said, "I will now show you the nature which is neither produced and
nor extinguished. Great King, how old were you when you saw the waters of the
Ganges?"
The King said, "When I was three years old my compassionate mother led me to
visit the goddess Jiva. We passed a river, and at the time I knew it was the
waters of the Ganges."
The Buddha said, "Great King, you have said that when you were twenty you had
deteriorated from when you were ten. Day by day, month by month, year by year
until you reached sixty, in thought after thought there has been change. Yet
when you saw the Ganges River at the age of three, how was it different from
when you were thirteen?"
The King said, "It was no different from when I was three, and even now when I
am sixty-two it is still no different."
The Buddha said, "Now you are mournful that your hair is white and your face
wrinkled. In the same way that your face is definitely more wrinkled then it was
in your youth, has the seeing with which you look at the Ganges aged, so that it
is old now but was young when you looked at the river as a child in the past?"
The King said, "No, Bhagavan."
The Buddha said, "Great King, your face is wrinkled, but the essential nature of
your seeing will never wrinkle. What wrinkles is subject to change. What does
not wrinkle does not change. What changes will perish, but what does not change
is fundamentally free of production and extinction. How could it be subject to
your birth and death? Furthermore, why bring up what Maskari G oshaliputra and
the others say: that after the death of this body there is total annihilation?"
The king heard these words, believed them, and realized that when the life of
this body is finished, there will be rebirth. He and the entire great assembly
were greatly delighted at having obtained what they never had before.
Ananda then arose from this seat, made obeisance to the Buddha, put his palms
together, knelt on both knees, and said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, if this seeing
and hearing are indeed neither produced nor extinguished, why did Bhagavan refer
to us people as having lost our true natures and as going about things in an
upside-down way? I hope that Bhagavan will give rise to great compassion and
wash my dust and defilement away."
Then the Tathagata let his golden-colored arm fall so his webbed fingers pointed
downward, and demonstrating this to Ananda, said, "You see the position of my
hand: is it right-side-up or upside-down?" Ananda said, "Being in the world take
it to be upside-down. I myself do not know what is right-side-up and what is
upside-down."
The Buddha said to Ananda, "If people of the world take this as upside-down,
what do people of the world take to be right-side-up? Ananda said, "They call it
right-side-up when the Tathagata raises his arm, with the fingers of his
cotton-soft hand pointing up in the air."
The Buddha then held up his hand and said: "And so for it to be upside-down
would be for it to be just the opposite of this. Or at least that's how people
of the world would regard it. In the same way they will differentiate between
your body and the Tathagata's pure Dharmabody and will say that the Tathagata's
body is one of right and universal knowledge, while your body is upside down.
But examine your body and the Buddha's closely for this upside-downness: What
exactly does the term 'upside down' refer to?"
Thereupon Ananda and the entire great assembly were dazed and stared unblinking
at the Buddha. They did not know in what way their bodies and minds were upside
down.
The Buddha's compassion arose as he empathized with Ananda and all in the great
assembly and he spoke to the great assembly in a voice that swept over them like
the ocean-tide. "All of you good people, I have often said that all conditions
that bring about forms and the mind as well as dharmas pertaining to the mind
and all the conditioned dharmas are manifestations of the mind only. Your bodies
and your minds all appear within the wonder of the bright, true, essential,
magnificent mind. Why do I say that you have lost track of what is fundamentally
wonderful, the perfect, wonderful bright mind, and that in the midst of your
gem-like bright and wonderful nature, you wallow in confusion while being right
within enlightenment.
"Mental dimness turns into emptiness. This emptiness, in the dimness, unites
with darkness to become form. Form mixes with false thinking and the thoughts
take shape and become the body. As causal conditions come together, there are
perpetual internal disturbances which tend to gallop outside. Such inner turmoil
is often mistaken for the nature of the mind. Once that is mistaken to be the
mind, a further delusion determines that it is located in the physical body. You
do not know that the physical body as well as the mountains, the rivers, empty
space, and the great earth are all within the wonderful bright true mind. Such a
delusion is like ignoring hundreds of thousands of clear pure seas and taking
notice of only a single bubble, seeing it as the entire ocean, as the whole
expanse of the great and small seas.
Refuting the false perception to eliminate the fourth aggregate
and reveal the non-existence of the seventh consciousness
Ananda's wrong view
"You people are doubly deluded among the deluded. Such delusion does not differ
from that caused by my lowered hand. The Tathagata says you are pathetic."
Having received the Buddha's compassionate rescue and profound instruction,
Ananda wept, folded his hands, and said to the Buddha, "I have heard these
wonderful sounds of the Buddha and have awakened to the primal perfection of the
wonderful bright mind as being the eternally dwelling mind-ground. But now in
awakening to the Dharma-sounds that the Buddha is speaking, I know that I have
been using my conditioned mind to regard and revere them. Having just become
aware of that mind, I dare yet claim to recognize that fundamental mind-ground.
I pray that the Buddha will be compassionate and with his perfect voice explain
to us in order to pull our doubts out by the roots and enable us to return to
the unsurpassed Way."
Unreality of illusory causes
The Buddha told Ananda, "You and others like you still listen to the Dharma with
the conditioned mind, and so the Dharma becomes conditioned as well, and you do
not obtain the Dharma-nature. This is similar to a person pointing his finger at
the moon to show it to someone else. Guided by the finger, the other person
should see the moon. If he looks at the finger instead and mistakes it for the
moon, he loses not only the moon but the finger also. Why? Because he mistakes
the pointing finger for the bright moon. Not only does he lose the finger, but
he also fails to recognize light and darkness. Why? He mistakes the solid matter
of the finger for the bright nature of the moon, and so he does not understand
the two natures of light and darkness. The same is true of you.
"If you take what distinguishes the sound of my speaking Dharma to be your mind,
then that mind itself, apart from the sound which is distinguished, should have
a nature which makes distinctions. Take the example of the guest who lodged
overnight at an inn; he stopped temporarily and then went on. He did not dwell
there permanently, whereas the innkeeper did not go anywhere, since he was the
host of the inn.
Falseness of both sense organs and consciousness
"The same applies here. If it were truly your mind, it would not go anywhere.
And so why in the absence of sound does it have no discriminating nature of its
own? This, then, applies not only to the distinguishing of sound, but in
distinguishing my appearance, that mind has no distinction-making nature apart
from the attributes of form. This is true even when the making of distinctions
is totally absent; when there is no form and no emptiness, or in the obscurity
which Goshali and others take to be the 'profound truth': that mind still does
not have a distinction-making nature in the absence of casual conditions.
"How can we say that the nature of that mind of yours plays the part of host
since everything perceived by it can be returned to something else?" Ananda
said, "If every state of our mind can be returned to something else as its
cause, then why does the wonderful bright original mind mentioned by the Buddha
return nowhere? We only hope that the Buddha will empathize with us and explain
this for us."
The Buddha said to Ananda, "As you now look at me, the essence of your seeing is
fundamentally bright. Although that seeing is not the wonderful essential
brightness of the mind, it is like a second moon, rather than the moon's
reflection. Listen attentively, for I am now going to explain to you the concept
of not returning to anything.
"Ananda, this great lecture hall is open to the east. When the sun rises in the
sky, it is flooded with light. At midnight, during a new moon or when the moon
is obscured by clouds or fog, it is dark. Looking out through open doors and
windows your vision is unimpeded; facing walls or houses your vision is
hindered. In such places where there are forms of distinctive features Your
vision is causally conditioned. In a dull void, you can see only emptiness. Your
vision will be distorted when the objects of seeing are shrouded in dust and
vapor; you will perceive clearly when the air is fresh. Ananda, observe all
these transitory characteristics as I now return each to its source. What are
their sources? Ananda, among these transitions, the light can be returned to the
sun. Why? Without the sun there would be no light; therefore the cause of light
belongs with the sun, and so it can be returned to the sun. Darkness can be
returned to the new moon.
Penetration can be returned to the doors and windows while obstruction can be
returned to the walls and eaves. Conditions can be returned to distinctions.
Emptiness can be returned to dull emptiness. Darkness and distortion can be
returned to mist and haze. Bright purity can be returned to freshness, and
nothing that exists in this world goes beyond these categories. To which of the
eight states of perception would the essence of your seeing be reducible? Why do
I ask that? If it returned to brightness, you would not see darkness when there
was no light. Although such states of perception as light, darkness, and the
like differ from one another, your seeing remains unchanged.
"That which can be returned to other sources clearly is not you; if that which
you cannot return to anything else is not you, then what is it? Therefore I know
that your mind is fundamentally wonderful, bright, and pure. You yourself are
confused and deluded. You abuse what is fundamental, and end up undergoing the
cycle of rebirth, bobbing up and down in the sea of birth and death. No wonder
the Tathagata says that you are the most pathetic of creatures."
Ananda said, "Although I recognize that the seeing-nature cannot be traced back
to anything, but how can I come to know that it is my true nature?"
The Buddha told Ananda, "Now I have a question for you. At this point you have
not yet attained the purity of no outflows. Blessed by the Buddha's holy
strength, you are able to see into the first dhyana heavens without any
obstruction, just as Aniruddha looks at Jambudvipa with such clarity as he might
at an amala fruit in the palm of his hand. Bodhisattvas can see hundreds of
thousands of realms. The Tathagatas of the ten directions see everything
throughout pure lands as numerous as atoms of universe. By contrast, ordinary
beings' sight does not extend beyond a fraction of an inch."
"Ananda, as you and I now look at the palace where the four heavenly kings
reside, and inspect all that moves in the water, on dry land, and in the air,
some are dark and some are bright, varying in shape and appearance, and yet all
of these are nothing but the dust before us, taking solid form only through our
own distinction-making. Among them you should distinguish which is self and
which is other. I ask you now to select from within your seeing which is the
substance of the self and which is the appearance of things. Ananda, if you take
a good look at everything everywhere within the range of your vision extending
from the palaces of the sun and moon to the seven gold mountain ranges, all that
you see is phenomena of different features and degrees of light. At closer range
you will gradually see clouds floating, birds flying, wind blowing, dust rising,
trees, mountains, streams, grasses, seeds, people, and animals, all of which are
phenomena, but none of which are you."
"Ananda, all phenomena, near and far, have their own nature. Although each is
distinctly different, they are seen with the same pure essence of seeing. Thus
all the categories of phenomena have their individual distinctions, but the
seeing-nature has no differences. That essential wonderful brightness is most
certainly your seeing-nature."
"If seeing were a phenomenon, then you should also be able to see my seeing. If
we both looked at the same phenomenon, you would also be seeing my seeing. Then,
when I'm not seeing, why can't you see my not-seeing? If you could see my
not-seeing, it clearly would not be the phenomenon that I am not seeing. If you
cannot not see my not seeing, then it is clearly not a phenomena. How could it
not be you? Besides that, if your seeing of phenomena was like that, then when
you saw things, things should also see you. With substance and nature mixed
together, you and I and everyone in the world would no longer be distinguishable
from each other."
"Ananda, when you see, it is you who sees, not me. The seeing-nature pervades
everywhere; whose is it if it is not yours? Why do you have doubts about your
own true-nature and come to me seeking verification, thinking your nature is not
true?"
Ananda said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, given that this seeing-nature is certainly
mine and no one else's, when the Tathagata and I regard the hall of the Four
Heavenly Kings with its supreme abundance of jewels or stay at the palace of the
sun and moon, this seeing completely pervades the lands of the Saha world. Upon
returning to this sublime lecture hall, the seeing only observes the monastic
grounds and once inside the pure central hall, it only sees the eaves and
corridors. Bhagavan, that is how the seeing is. At first its substance pervaded
everywhere throughout the one realm, but now in the midst of this room it fills
one room only. Does the seeing shrink from great to small, or do the walls and
eaves press in and cut it off? Now I do not know where the meaning of this lies
and hope the Buddha will extend his vast compassion and proclaim it for me
thoroughly."
The Buddha told Ananda, "All the aspects of everything in the world, such as big
and small, inside and outside, amount to the dust before you. Do not say the
seeing stretches and shrinks. Consider the example of a square container in
which a square of emptiness is seen. I ask you further: is the square emptiness
that is seen in the square container a fixed square shape, or is it not fixed as
a square shape? If it is a fixed square shape, when it is switched to a round
container the emptiness would not be round. If it is not a fixed shape, then
when it is in the square container it should not be a square-shaped emptiness.
You say you do not know where the meaning lies. The nature of the meaning being
thus, how can you speak of its location? Ananda, if you wished there to be
neither squareness nor roundness, you would only need to remove the container.
The essential emptiness has no shape, and so do not say that you would also have
to remove the shape from the emptiness. If, as you suggest, your seeing shrinks
and becomes small when you enter a room, then when you look up at the sun
shouldn't your seeing be pulled out until it reaches the sun's surface? If walls
and eaves can press in and cut off your seeing, then why if you were to drill a
small hole, wouldn't there be evidence of the seeing reconnecting? And so that
idea is not feasible.
"From beginningless time until now, all beings have mistaken themselves for
phenomena and, having lost sight of their original mind, are influenced by
phenomena, and end up having the scope of their observations defined by
boundaries large and small. If you can influence phenomena, then you are the
same as the Tathagata. With body and mind perfect and bright, you are your own
unmoving Way-place. The tip of a single fine hair can completely contain the
lands of the ten directions."
Ananda said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, if this seeing-essence is indeed my
wonderful nature, my wonderful nature should no be right in front of me. The
seeing being truly me, what, then, are my present body and mind? Yet it is my
body and mind which make distinctions, whereas the seeing does not make
distinctions and does not discern my body. If it were really my mind which
caused me to see now, then the seeing-nature would actually be me, and my body
would not be me.
How would that differ from the question the Tathagata asked about phenomena
being able to see me? I only hope the Buddha will extend his great compassion
and explain for those who have not yet awakened."
The Buddha told Ananda, "What you have just now said--that the seeing is in
front of you--is actually not the case. If it were actually in front of you, it
would be something you could actually see, and then the seeing-essence would
have a location. There would have to be some evidence of it. Now as you sit in
the Jeta Grove you look about everywhere at the grove, the pond, the halls, up
at the sun and moon, and at the Ganges River before you. Now, before my Lion's
Seat, point out these various appearances: what is dark is the groves, what is
bright is the sun, what is obstructing is the walls, what is clear is emptiness,
and so on including even the grasses and trees, and the most minute objects.
Their sizes vary, but since they all have appearances, all can be located. If
you insist that your seeing is in front of you, then you should be able to point
it out. What is the seeing?
"Ananda, if emptiness were the seeing, then since it had already become your
seeing, what would have become of emptiness? If phenomena were the seeing, since
they had already become the seeing, what would have become of phenomena? You
should be able to cut through and peel away the myriad appearances to the finest
degree and thereby distinguish and bring forth the essential brightness and pure
wonder of the source of seeing, pointing it out and showing it to me from among
all these things, so that it is perfectly clear beyond any doubt."
Ananda said, "From where I am now in this many-storied lecture hall, reaching to
the distant Ganges River and the sun and moon overhead, all that I might raise
my hand to point to, all that I indulge my eyes in seeing, all are phenomena;
they are not the seeing. Bhagavan, it is as the Buddha has said: not to mention
someone like me, a Hearer of the first stage, who still has outflows, even
Bodhisattvas cannot break open and reveal, among the myriad appearances which
are before them, an essence of seeing which has a special nature of its own
apart from all phenomena."
The Buddha said, "So it is, so it is."
The Buddha further said to Ananda, "It is as you have said. No seeing-essence
that would have a nature of its own apart from all phenomena can be found.
Therefore, all the phenomena you point to are phenomena, and none of them is the
seeing. Now I will tell you something else: as you and the Tathagata sit here in
the Jeta Grove and look again at the groves and gardens, up to the sun and moon,
and at all the various different appearances, having determined that the
seeing-essence is not among anything you might point to. I now advise you to go
ahead and discover what, among all these phenomena, is not your seeing."
Ananda said, "As I look all over this Jeta Grove, I do not know what in the
midst of it is not my seeing. Why is that? If trees were not the seeing, why
would I see trees? If trees were the seeing, then how could they also be trees?
The same is true of everything up to and including emptiness: if emptiness were
not the seeing, why would I see emptiness? If emptiness were the seeing, then
how could it also be emptiness? As I consider it again and explore the subtlest
aspects of the myriad appearances, none is not my seeing."
The Buddha said, "So it is, so it is."
Then all in the great assembly who had not reached the stage beyond study were
stunned upon hearing these words of the Buddha, and could not make heads or
tails of it all. They were agitated and taken aback at the same time, having
lost their bearings. The Tathagata, knowing they were anxious and upset, let
empathy rise in his heart as he consoled Ananda and everyone in the great
assembly. "Good people, what the unsurpassed Dharma King says is true and real.
He says it just as it is. He never deceives anyone; he never lies. He is not
like Maskari Goshaliputra advocating his four kinds of non-dying, spouting
deceptive and confusing theories. Consider this carefully and do not be
embarrassed to ask about it."
Then Dharma Prince Manjushri, feeling sorry for the fourfold assembly, rose from
his seat in the midst of the great assembly, bowed at the Buddha's feet, placed
his palms together respectfully, and said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, the great
assembly has not awakened to the principle of the Tathagata's two-fold
disclosure of the essence of seeing as being both form and emptiness and as
being neither of them. World Honored One, if conditioned forms, emptiness, and
other phenomena mentioned above were the seeing, there should be an indication
of them; and if they were not the seeing, there should be nothing there to be
seen. Now we do not know what is meant, and this is why we are alarmed and
concerned. Yet our good roots from former lives are not deficient. We only hope
the Tathagata will have the great compassion to reveal exactly what all the
things are and what the seeing-essence is. Among all of those, what exists and
what doesn't?
The Buddha told Manjushri and the great assembly, "To the Tathagatas and the
great Bodhisattvas of the ten directions, who dwell in this Samadhi, seeing and
the conditions of seeing, as well as thoughts regarding seeing, are like flowers
in space--fundamentally non-existent. This seeing and its conditions are
originally the wonderful pure bright substance of Bodhi. How could one inquire
into its existence or non-existence? Manjushri, I now ask you: Could there be
another Manjushri besides you? Or would that Manjushri not be you?
"No, Bhagavan: I would be the real Manjushri. There couldn't be any other
Manjushri. Why not? If there were another one, there would be two Manjushris.
But as it is now, I could not be that non-existent Manjushri. Actually, neither
of the two concepts 'existent'or 'non-existent' applies."
The Buddha said, "That is how the basic substance of wonderful Bodhi is in terms
of emptiness and mundane objects. They are basically misnomers for the wonderful
brightness of unsurpassed Bodhi, the pure, perfect, true mind. Our misconception
turns them into form and emptiness, as well as hearing and seeing. They are like
the second moon: does that moon exist or not? Manjushri, there is only one true
moon. That leaves no room for questioning its existence or non-existence.
Therefore, your current contemplating of the seeing and the mundane objects and
the many observations that entails are all false thoughts. You cannot transcend
existence and non-existence while caught up in them. Only the true essence, the
wonderful enlightened bright nature is beyond pointing out or not pointing out."
Ananda said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, it is truly as the Dharma King has said:
the condition of enlightenment pervades the ten directions. It is clear and
eternal its nature is neither produced nor extinguished. How does it differ,
then, from the Elder Brahmin Kapila's teaching of the mysterious truth or from
the teaching of the ash-smeared ascetics or from the other externalist sects
that say there is a true self which pervades the ten directions? Also, in the
past, Bhagavan gave a lengthy lecture on this topic at Mount Lanka for the sake
of Great Wisdom Bodhisattva and others:
'Those externalist sects always speak of spontaneity. I speak
of causes and conditions which is an entirely different frame of
reference.' Now as I contemplate original enlightenment in its
natural state, as being neither produced nor extinguished, and as apart from all
empty falseness and inversion, it seems to have nothing to do with your causes
and conditions or the spontaneity advocated by others. Would you please
enlighten us on this point so we can avoid joining those of deviant views, thus
enabling us to obtain the true mind, the bright nature of wonderful
enlightenment?"
The Buddha told Ananda, "Now I have instructed you with such expedients in order
to tell you the truth, yet you do not awaken to it but mistake what I describe
for spontaneity. Ananda, If it definitely were spontaneous, you should be able
to distinguish the substance of the spontaneity. Now you investigate the
wonderful bright seeing. What is its spontaneous aspect? Is the bright light its
spontaneous aspect? Is darkness its spontaneous aspect? Is emptiness its
spontaneous aspect? Are solid objects its spontaneous aspect? Ananda, if its
spontaneous aspect consisted of light, you should not see darkness. Or, if its
spontaneous aspect were emptiness, you should not see solid objects. Continuing
in the same way, if its spontaneous aspect were all dark appearances, then, when
confronted with light, the seeing-nature should be cut off and extinguished, so
how could you see light?"
Ananda said, "The nature of this wonderful seeing definitely does not seem to be
spontaneous. And so I propose that it is produced from causes and conditions.
But I am not totally clear about this. I now ask the Tathagata whether this idea
is consistent with the nature of causes and conditions."
The Buddha said, "You say the nature of seeing is causes and conditions. I ask
you about that: because you are now seeing, the seeing-nature manifests. Does
this seeing exist because of light? Does it exist because of darkness? Does it
exist because of emptiness? Does it exist because of solid objects? Ananda, if
light is the cause that brings about seeing, you should not see darkness. If
darkness is the cause that brings about seeing, you should not see light. The
same question applies to emptiness and solid objects. Moreover, Ananda, does the
seeing derive from the condition of there being light? Does the seeing derive
from the condition of there being darkness? Does the seeing derive from the
condition of there being emptiness? Does the seeing derive from the condition of
there being solid objects? Ananda, if it existed because there is emptiness, you
should not see solid objects. If it exists because of there are solid objects,
you should not see emptiness: It would be the same with light or darkness as it
would be with emptiness or solid objects.
"Thus you should know that the essential, enlightened wonderful brightness is
due to neither causes nor conditions nor does it arise spontaneously. Nor is it
the negation of spontaneity. It is neither a negation nor the denial of a
negation. All dharmas are defined as being devoid of any attributes. Now in the
midst of them, how can you use your mind to make distinctions that are based on
clever debate and technical jargon? To do that is like grasping at empty space:
you only end up tiring yourself out. How could empty space possibly yield to
your grasp?"
Ananda said to the Buddha, "If the nature of the wonderful enlightenment has
neither causes nor conditions then why does Bhagavan always tell the bhikshus
that the nature of seeing derives from the four conditions of emptiness,
brightness, the mind, and the eyes? What does that mean?"
The Buddha said, "Ananda, what I have spoken about causes and conditions in the
mundane sense does not describe the primary meaning. "
Ananda, I ask you again: people in the world say, 'I can see.'
What is that 'seeing'? And what is 'not seeing'?"
Ananda said, "The light of the sun, the moon, and lamps is the cause that allows
people in the world to see all kinds of appearances: that is called seeing.
Without these three kinds of light, they would not be able to see."
"Ananda, if you say there is no seeing in the absence of light, then you should
not see darkness. If in fact you do see darkness, which is just lack of light,
how can you say there is no seeing?"
"Ananda, if, when it is dark, you call that 'not seeing' because you do not see
light, then since it is now light and you do not see the characteristic of
darkness, that should also be called 'not seeing.' Thus, both aspects would be
called 'not seeing.' Although these two aspects counteract each other, your
seeing-nature does not lapse for an instant. Thus you should know that seeing
continues in both cases. How, then, can you say there is no seeing?
"Therefore, Ananda, you should know that when you see light, the seeing is not
the light. When you see darkness, the seeing is not the darkness. When you see
emptiness, the seeing is not the emptiness. When you see solid objects, the
seeing is not the solid objects. And by extention of these four facts, you
should also know that when you see your seeing, the seeing is not that seeing .
Since the former seeing is beyond the latter, the latter cannot reach it. Such
being the case, how can you describe it as being due to causes and conditions or
spontaneity or that it has something to do with mixing and uniting? You
narrow-minded Hearers are so inferior and ignorant that you are unable to
penetrate through to the purity of ultimate reality. Now I will continue to
instruct you. Consider well what is said. Do not become weary or negligent on
the wonderful road to Bodhi."
Ananda said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, we have still not understood what the
Buddha, the Bhagavan, has explained for me and for others like me about causes
and conditions, spontaneity, the attributes of mixing and uniting, and the
absence of mixing and uniting. And now to hear further that the seeing that can
be seen is not the seeing adds yet another layer of confusion. Humbly, I hope
that with your vast compassion you will bestow upon us the great wisdom-eye so
as to show us the bright pure enlightened mind." After saying this he wept, made
obeisance, and waited to receive the sacred instruction.
Then the Bhagavan, out of pity for Ananda and the great assembly, began to
explain extensively the wonderful path of cultivation for all Samadhis of the
Great Dharani. And said to Ananda, "Although you have a keen memory, it only
benefits your extensive learning. But your mind has not yet understood the
subtle secret contemplation and illumination of shamatha. Listen attentively now
as I explain it for you in detail and cause all those of the future who have
outflows to obtain the fruition of Bodhi.
"Ananda, all living beings turn in the cycle of rebirth in this world because of
two upside-down discriminating false views. Wherever these views arise, they
cause one to revolve through the cycle in accord with their corresponding karma.
What are the two views? The first consists of the false view based on living
beings' individual karma. The second consists of the false view based on living
beings' collective karma.
"What is meant by false views based on individual karma? Ananda, take for
example someone who has cataracts on his eyes so that at night he alone sees
around the lamp a circular reflection composed of layers of five colors. What do
you think? Are the colors that compose the circle of light that appears around
the lamp at night created by the lamp or are they created by the seeing? Ananda,
if the colors were created by the lamp, why is it that someone without the
disease does not see the same thing, and only the one who is diseased sees the
circular reflection?
If the colors were created by the seeing,, then the seeing would have already
become colored; what, then, should the circular reflection that the diseased
person sees to be called? Moreover, Ananda, if the circular reflection were a
thing in itself, apart from the lamp, then it should be seen around the folding
screen, the curtain, the table, and the mats. On the other hand, if it had
nothing to do with the seeing, the eyes should not see it. So why does the man
with cataracts see the circular reflections with his eyes? Therefore, you should
know that in fact the colors originate from the lamp, and the disease of the
seeing brings about the reflection. Both the circular reflection and the faulty
seeing are the result of the cataract. But that which sees the diseased film is
not sick. Thus you should not say that the cause is the lamp or the seeing or
neither the lamp nor the seeing. Consider the example of which is neither
substantial nor a reflection. This is because the double image of the moon is
merely a result of applying pressure on the eyeball. Hence, a wise person would
not try to aruge-spelling? that the second moon either has or doesn't have a
form, or that it is apart from the seeing or not apart from the seeing. The same
is true in this case: the illusion is created by the diseased eyes. You cannot
say it originates from the lamp or from the seeing: even less can it be said not
to originate from the lamp or the seeing.
"What is meant by the false view of the collective karma? Ananda, in Jambudvipa,
besides the waters of the great seas, there is level land that forms some three
thousand continents. "East and west, throughout the entire expanse of the great
continent, there are twenty-three hundred large countries. In the other smaller
continents in the seas there may be two or three hundred countries, or perhaps
one or two, or perhaps thirty, forty, or fifty. Ananda, suppose that among them
there is one small continent where there are only two countries. The people of
just one of the countries collectively experience evil conditions. On that small
continent, all the people of that country see all kinds of inauspicious omens.
"Perhaps they see two suns, perhaps they see two moons ,perhaps they see the
moon with circles of , or a dark haze, or girdle-ornaments around them(white
vapor around it, or half around it ); or comets with long rays, or comets with
short rays, moving (or "flying")stars, shooting stars, 'ears' on the sun or
moon, (evil haze above the sun, or evil haze besides the sun), (morning)
rainbows, secondary (evening) rainbows, and various other evil signs. Only the
people in that country see them. The beings in the other country never do see or
hear anything unusual.
"Ananda, I will now summarize and compare these two cases for you, to make both
of them clear. Ananda, let us examine the case of the being's false view
involving individual karma. He saw the appearance of a circular reflection
around the lamp. Although this appearance seemed to be real, in the end, what
was seen came about because of the cataracts on his eyes. The cataracts are the
result of the weariness of the seeing rather than the products of form. However,
what perceives the cataracts is free from all defects. By the same token, you
now use your eyes to look at the mountains, the rivers, the countries, and all
the living beings: and they are all brought about by the disease of your seeing
contracted since time without beginning. Seeing and the conditions of seeing
seem to reveal what is before you. Originally our enlightenment is bright. The
cataracts influence the seeing and its conditions, so that what is perceived by
the seeing is affected by the cataracts. But no cataract affects the perception
and the conditions of our fundamentally enlightened bright mind. The perception
that perceives the cataracts is a perception not affected by the cataracts. That
is the true perception of seeing. Why name it other things like awareness,
hearing, knowing, and seeing? T herefore, you now see me and yourself and the
world and all the ten kinds of living beings because of a disease in the seeing.
What perceives the disease is not diseased. The nature of true essential seeing
has no disease. Therefore it is not called seeing.
"Ananda, let us compare the false views of those living beings' collective karma
with the false views of the individual karma of one person. The individual
person with the diseased eyes can be likened to the people of that one country.
He sees circular reflections, erroneously brought about by a disease of the
seeing. The beings with a collective share see inauspicious things. In the midst
of their karma of identical views arise pestilence and evils. Both are produced
from a beginningless falsity of seeing. It is the same in the three thousand
continents of Jambudvipa, throughout the four great seas in the saha world and
on through the ten directions. All countries that have outflows and all living
beings are the enlightened bright wonderful mind without outflows. Seeing,
hearing, awareness, and knowing are an illusory falseness brought about by the
disease and its conditions. Mixing and uniting with that brings about a false
birth; mixing and uniting with that creates a false death.
"If you can leave far behind all conditions which mix and unite as well as those
which do not mix and unite, then you can also extinguish and cast out the causes
of birth and death, and obtain perfect Bodhi, the nature of which is neither
produced nor extinguished. That is the pure clear basic mind, the eternal
fundamental enlightenment.
"Ananda, although you have already realized that the wonderful bright
fundamental enlightenment is not orginated by conditions nor is it originated by
spontaneity, you have not yet understood that the source of enlightenment does
not originate from mixing and uniting or from a lack of mixing and uniting.
"Ananda, now I will once again make use of the mundane objects before you to
question you. You now hold that false thoughts mix and unite with the causes and
conditions of everything in the world, and you wonder if the Bodhi-Heart one
realizes might arise from mixing and uniting. To follow that line of thinking,
right now, does the wonderful pure seeing-essence mix with light, does it mix
with darkness, does it mix with penetration or does it mix with obstructions? If
it mixed with light, then when you looked at light, when light appeared before
you, at what point would it mix with your seeing? Given that seeing has certain
attributes, what would the altered shape of such a mixture be?
If that mixture were not the seeing, how could you see the light? If it were the
seeing, how could the seeing see itself? If you insist that seeing is complete,
what room would there be for it to mix with the light? And if light were
complete in itself, it could not unite and mix with the seeing. If seeing were
different from light, then, when mixed together, both its quality and the light
would lose their identity. Since the mixture would result in the loss of the
light and the quality of seeing, the proposal that the seeing-essence mixes with
light doesn't hold. The same principle applies to its mixing with darkness, with
penetration, or with all kinds of solid objects.
"Moreover, Ananda, as you are right now, once again, does the wonderful pure
seeing-essence unite with light, does it unite with darkness, does it unite with
penetration, or does it unite with solid objects? If it united with light, then
when darkness came and the attributes of light ceased to be, how could you see
darkness since the seeing would not be united with darkness? If you could see
darkness and yet at the same time there was no union with darkness, but rather a
union with light, you should not be able to see light. Since you could not be
seeing light, then why is it that when your seeing comes in contact with light,
it recognizes light, not darkness? The same would be true of its union with
darkness, with penetration, or with any kind of solid object."
Ananda said to the Buddha, "Bhagavan, as I consider it, the source of this
wonderful enlightenment does not mix or unite with any conditioned mundane
objects or with mental speculation. Is that the case?"
The Buddha said, "Now you want to say that the enlightened nature neither mixes
nor unites. So now I ask you further: as to this wonderful seeing-essence's
neither mixing nor uniting, does it not mix with light? Does it not mix with
darkness? Does it not mix with penetration? Does it not mix with solid objects?
If it does not mix with light, then there should be a boundary between seeing
and light. Examine it closely:
At what point is there light? At what point is there seeing? Where are the
boundaries of the seeing and the light? Ananda, if there were no seeing within
the boundaries of light, then there would be no contact between them, and
clearly one would not know what the attributes of light were. Then how could its
boundaries be defined? As to its not mixing with darkness, with penetration, or
with any kind of solid object, the principle would be the same.
"Moreover, as to the wonderful seeing essence's neither mixing nor uniting, does
it not unite with light? Does it not unite with darkness? Does it not unite with
penetration? Does it not unite with solid objects? If it did not unite with
light, then the seeing and the light would be at odds with each other by their
nature, as are the ear and the light, which do not come in contact. Since the
seeing would not know what the attributes of light were, how could it determine
clearly whether there is union? As to its not uniting with darkness, with
penetration, or with any kind of solid object, the principle would be the same."
"Ananda, you have not yet understood that all the defiling objects that appear,
all the illusory, ephemeral phenomena, spring up in the very spot where they
also come to an end. Their phenomena aspects are illusory and false, but their
nature is in truth the bright substance of wonderful enlightenment. Thus it is
throughout, up to the five skandhas and the six entrances, to the twelve places
and the eighteen realms; the union and mixture of various causes and conditions
account for their illusory and false existence, and the separation and
dispersion of the causes and conditions result in their illusory and false
extinction. Who would have thought that production and extinction, coming and
going are fundamentally the eternal wonderful light of the Tathagata, the
unmoving, all-pervading perfection, the wonderful nature of True Suchness! If
within the true and eternal nature one seeks coming and going, confusion and
enlightenment, or birth and death, one will never find them.
"Ananda, Why do I say that the five skandhas are basically the wonderful nature
of true suchness, the Treasury of the Tathagata? Ananda, suppose a person with
clear vision were to gaze at clear bright space. His gaze would perceive only
clear emptiness devoid of anything else. Then if that person for no particular
reason fixed his gaze, the staring would cause fatigue. Thus in empty space he
would see illusory flowers and other illusory and disordered unreal appearances.
You should be aware that the form skandha is like that. Ananda, those illusory
flowers did not originate from space nor did they come from the eyes. In fact,
Ananda, if they came form space, coming from there they should also return to
and enter space. But if objects were to enter and leave it, space would not be
empty. And if space was not empty, then there would be no room for it to contain
the flowers that might appear and disappear, just as Ananda's body cannot
contain another Ananda. If the flowers came from the eyes, coming from them,
they should also return to the eyes. If the image of flowers originated in the
eyes, then they themselves should have vision. If they had vision, when they
went out to space, they should be able to turn around and see the person's eyes.
If they didn't have vision, then in going out, they would obscure space and in
returning they would obscure the eyes. But when the person saw the flowers, his
eyes should not have been obscured. But on the contrary, isn't it when we see
clear space that our vision is said to be clear? From this you should understand
that the form skandha is empty and false. Fundamentally its nature cannot be
attributed to either causes and conditions or spontaneity.
"Ananda, suppose a person's hands and feet were relaxed and his entire body was
in balance. He was unaware of his life-processes to the point that he
experienced neither pain nor pleasure. Then for no particular reason that person
might rub his hands together creating the illusory sensation of friction and
smoothness, cold and warmth, and other sensations. You should be aware that the
feeling skandha is like that. Ananda, that imaginary contact did not originate
in the surrounding air nor did it originate in the palms. In fact, Ananda, if it
had come from the air, since the contact affected the palms, why didn't it
affect the rest of the body? Nor should the air select what it comes in contact
with. If the sensation came from the palms, there would be no need to rub the
palms together to experience it. Besides, if it came from the palms, the palms
would experience it when joined, but when they were not joined, the sense of
contact should return into the palms. And in that case, the arms, wrists, bones,
and marrow should also be aware of its course of entry. If you insist that the
mind would be aware of is leaving and entering, then the contact would be a
thing in itself that came and went in the body. What need would there be to wait
for the palms to be joined to experience it and identify it as contact? From
this you should understand that the feeling skandha is empty and false.
Fundamentally its nature cannot be atttributed to either causes andconditions or
spontaneity.
"Ananda, suppose a person's mouth watered at the mention of sour plums, or the
soles of his feet tingled when he thought about walking along a precipice. You
should be aware that the thinking skandha is like that. Ananda, The mouth's
watering caused by the mention of plums does not originate from the plums, nor
does it originate in the mouth. In fact, Ananda, if the mouths' watering came
from the plums, the plums should speak for themselves, why wait for someone to
mention them? If it came from the mouth, the mouth itself should hear, so what
need would there be to wait for the ear's perception? If the ear alone heard,
then why doesn't it produce the saliva? Thinking about walking along a precipice
can be explained in the same way. From this you should understand that the
thinking skandha is empty and false. Fundamentally its nature cannot be
attributed to either causes and conditions or spontaneity.
"Ananda, suppose a swift rapids had waves that follow upon one another in
orderly succession, the ones behind never overtaking the ones in front. You
should be aware that the activity skandha is like that. Ananda, that flowing
does not arise because of emptiness, nor does it come into being because of
water. It is not identical to the water and yet it is not separate from either
the emptiness or the water. In fact, Ananda, if the flow arose because of
emptiness, then the inexhaustible emptiness throughout the ten directions would
become an unending flow, and all the worlds would inevitably be drowned. If the
swift rapids existed because of water, then they would have to differ from
water, and the location and attributes of their existence should be apparent. If
the rapids were identical to water, then when the rapids disappeared and became
still and clear, the water should also disappear. Suppose the rapids were
separate from both the emptiness and the water. But there isn't anything beyond
emptiness, and without water there couldn't be any flow. From this you should
understand that the activity skandha is empty and false. Fundamentally its
nature cannot be attributed to either causes and conditions or spontaneity.
"Ananda, suppose a man picked up a kalavinka pitcher, up its two holes, lifted
up the pitcher filled with emptiness, and walking some thousand miles away,
presented it to another country. You should be aware that the consciousness
skandha is like that. Ananda, that emptiness did not originate in one place, nor
did it go to another. In fact, Ananda, if the emptiness were to come from one
place, then, when the stored-up emptiness in the pitcher was carried elsewhere,
there should be less emptiness in the place where the pitcher originally was.
And if it were to enter the other region, when the holes were unplugged and the
pitcher was turned over, one would see emptiness emerge. From this you should
understand that the feeling skandha is empty and false. Fundamentally its nature
cannot be attributed to either causes and conditions or spontaneity.
Further Reading:
感谢您访问本站。