X12n0276_楞嚴經摸象記
卍新續藏第 12 冊 No. 0276 楞嚴經摸象記
No. 276-A 楞嚴摸象記引
如經所言有諸盲人群手摸象其摸鼻者云象如箕其摸股者云象如柱其摸尾者云象如帚其摸腹者云象如石乃至摸眼則云如鼓風橐摸耳則云如倒垂葉摸蹄則云如覆地杯人執所摸互相是非觀者捧腹今日譚經何以異是佛已涅槃諮詢無繇出情識手為想像摸彼此角立如盲譏盲予實慨焉知己亦盲救獘為急因入盲侶與眾同摸唯首楞嚴於諸經中更多疑義由是諸盲競共鼓譟交臂[打-丁+(兟/曰)]指莫可誰何爰取是經百有餘則略為剖析以例全帙而於余經間附(一)二不復繁舉昔佛弟子各陳己見佛謂眾言汝等所說皆非我意然各當理足以利物則彼群摸除悖理者以理而摸雖不得像未嘗非像故不患摸唯執是患若虛其中不主先入會文切理理協文順厥旨自彰象之為象躍如卓如不于摸外別得一象如執所摸堅壁自持摸之彌勤失之彌遠秪增戲論成謗法咎則何益矣此特教事其譚禪者為摸尤甚或有摸馬謂是象者或有摸空謂是象者或有俱摸謂一切處咸是象者或於一切摸之不得謂無象者種種異見未易更仆愿諸仁者反摸其眼得具眼已像不須摸。
萬曆三十年歲次壬寅千佛澡浴日後學云棲寺沙門袾宏書于翠竹山房
No. 276
楞
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 《楞嚴經摸象記引》
正如經文所說，有一群盲人，用手觸控大象。摸到鼻子的人說大象像簸箕，摸到腿的人說大象像柱子，摸到尾巴的人說大象像掃帚，摸到肚子的人說大象像石頭，甚至摸到眼睛的人就說像鼓風用的風箱，摸到耳朵的人就說像倒垂的樹葉，摸到蹄子的人就說像倒扣在地上的杯子。人們堅持自己摸到的部分，互相爭論是非。旁觀者捧腹大笑。現在人們談論佛經，為什麼和這些盲人摸象沒有區別呢？佛陀已經涅槃，無從諮詢，只能用情識之手去想像，彼此爭執，就像盲人互相譏笑對方是盲人。我實在為此感到慨嘆，知道自己也是個盲人，所以急於糾正這種弊端，於是加入到盲人的行列中，和大家一起摸象。在所有的經典中，《首楞嚴經》的疑義最多，因此這些盲人競相喧囂，互相指責，莫衷一是。於是我選取這部經中的一百多則，略作剖析，以此為例來理解整部經，並在其他的經典中偶爾附帶一兩則，不再繁瑣地列舉。過去佛的弟子們各自陳述自己的見解，佛陀告訴大家說：『你們所說的都不是我的本意，但是各自都符合一定的道理，足以利益眾生。』那麼這些摸象的人，除了那些違背常理的人之外，用道理去摸象，即使沒有得到完整的象，也未嘗不是象的一部分。所以不怕摸，只怕執著于自己摸到的部分。如果能虛心接受，不先入為主，會通文句，切合義理，那麼經文的旨意自然彰顯，像的形象就會躍然紙上，宛如就在眼前，而不是在摸索之外另外去尋找一個象。如果執著于自己摸到的部分，像堅固的墻壁一樣固守，摸得越勤奮，反而失去得越遠，只會增加戲論，造成謗法的罪過，那又有什麼益處呢？這僅僅是教理方面的事情，那些談論禪的人，摸象的情況就更加嚴重了。或者有人摸到馬，卻說是象；或者有人摸到空，卻說是象；或者有人同時摸到各個部分，就說一切地方都是象；或者有人在一切地方都摸不到，就說沒有象。種種不同的見解，難以一一駁斥。希望各位仁者反過來摸摸自己的眼睛，得到能夠看見事物的眼睛之後，就不需要再去摸象了。
萬曆三十年壬寅年，千佛澡浴日之後，後學云棲寺沙門袾宏寫于翠竹山房。
《楞嚴經摸象記》
【English Translation】 English version An Excerpt from 'Notes on Touching the Elephant in the Surangama Sutra'
As stated in the sutra, there was a group of blind people who touched an elephant with their hands. The one who touched the trunk said the elephant was like a winnowing basket; the one who touched the leg said the elephant was like a pillar; the one who touched the tail said the elephant was like a broom; the one who touched the belly said the elephant was like a stone; even the one who touched the eye said it was like a bellows; the one who touched the ear said it was like an inverted leaf; the one who touched the hoof said it was like an overturned cup on the ground. People clung to what they had touched and argued with each other about what was right and wrong. Onlookers burst into laughter. Why is it that people today discussing the sutras are no different from these blind men touching an elephant? The Buddha has already entered Nirvana, and there is no way to consult him. They can only use their emotional minds to imagine and argue with each other, just like blind men ridiculing each other for being blind. I truly lament this and know that I am also blind, so I am eager to correct this flaw. Therefore, I join the ranks of the blind and touch the elephant with everyone. Among all the sutras, the Surangama Sutra has the most doubts, so these blind men compete to make noise, pointing fingers at each other, and no one can decide what is right. Therefore, I have selected more than a hundred sections from this sutra and made a brief analysis, using this as an example to understand the entire sutra, and occasionally attaching one or two sections from other sutras, without listing them all in detail. In the past, the Buddha's disciples each stated their own views, and the Buddha told everyone: 'What you have said is not my original intention, but each of you is in accordance with a certain principle, enough to benefit sentient beings.' Then, those who touch the elephant, except for those who violate common sense, touch the elephant with reason, even if they have not obtained the complete elephant, it is not that they have not touched a part of the elephant. So, there is no fear of touching, only fear of clinging to what one has touched. If one can accept with an open mind, without preconceived notions, understand the text, and fit the meaning, then the meaning of the sutra will naturally be revealed, and the image of the elephant will leap onto the paper, as if it were right in front of you, instead of looking for an elephant outside of touching. If one clings to what one has touched, guarding it like a solid wall, the more diligently one touches, the farther one loses, only increasing frivolous arguments and creating the sin of slandering the Dharma, then what benefit is there? This is only a matter of doctrine; those who talk about Chan touch the elephant even more seriously. Or someone touches a horse and says it is an elephant; or someone touches emptiness and says it is an elephant; or someone touches all parts at the same time and says that everything is an elephant; or someone cannot touch anything in everything and says there is no elephant. Various different views are difficult to refute one by one. I hope that all of you will turn around and touch your own eyes. After obtaining eyes that can see things, you will not need to touch the elephant anymore.
Written by the Shramana Zhuhong of Yunqi Temple at the Emerald Bamboo Mountain House after the Thousand Buddhas Bathing Day in the Renyin year of the Wanli reign (1602).
Notes on Touching the Elephant in the Surangama Sutra
嚴摸象記
明古杭云棲寺沙門袾宏述
△楞嚴經
凡看后解先置經文于案上使前後貫穿庶可尋討又此本為偶論楞嚴而作故楞嚴稍詳然亦止是于大義未明處眾說不同處或一段一句一字發其未發而不復為全部銷釋至於余經僅舉數部數部之中僅舉一二條以見大意庶幾就正於有道非曰是己而非人也有罪我者乎我知明道而已不知其他也
○第一卷
譯經
此經般剌密帝稱譯彌伽釋迦稱譯語丞相房融稱筆授而古本此後有羅浮沙門懷迪稱證譯不知今本何以不載竊惟譯者最初易梵為華也譯語者成其章句也筆授者潤其辭致也而證譯者總為參詳校正也夫參校之功胡可少也后刻經者宜增入之。
科經
此經序正流通三分溫陵長水所定略同而正宗中開為見修證結助五科亦甚當理初見道分從阿難啟請以至宣勝義中真勝義性使行人最初明見自己常住真心以為修行準的也二修道分從初心二決定義以至宣說神咒使行人依真見而起真修不於心外別有造作也三證道分從云何名為干慧之地以至方盡妙覺成無上道使行人知因真果正因地不真果招迂曲也四結經分從何名此經至汝當奉持使行人知五種名義攝今題二十字中也五助道分從地獄七趣以至微細魔事使行人正助交資乘戒雙急則能速到薩婆若海也中間細科或小
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本
《嚴摸象記》
明朝古杭云棲寺沙門袾宏 述
△《楞嚴經》
凡是閱讀後面的解釋，先將《楞嚴經》經文放置在案上，使前後貫穿，這樣才可以尋找到要點。又因為此書是為偶而談論《楞嚴經》而作，所以對《楞嚴經》稍作詳細解釋。然而也只是對於大義未明之處、眾說不同之處，或一段、一句、一字，闡發其未被闡發之處，而不全部進行消釋。至於其他經典，僅舉數部，數部之中僅舉一兩條，以表明大意，希望能夠向有道之人請教，並非說是自己正確而否定別人。如果有人因此而責備我，我知道闡明道理而已，不知道其他的了。
○第一卷
譯經
此經由般剌密帝（梵語：Paramiti，譯者名）稱譯，彌伽釋迦（譯者名）稱譯語，丞相房融（人名）稱筆授。而古本此後有羅浮沙門懷迪（人名）稱證譯，不知道現在的版本為什麼不記載。我私下認為，譯者最初是將梵文翻譯成華文，譯語者是使之成為完整的章句，筆授者是潤飾其辭藻，而證譯者是總的進行參詳校正。參校的功勞怎麼可以缺少呢？以後刻經的人應該將證譯者的名字增補進去。
科經
此經分為序分、正宗分、流通分三部分，溫陵長水（地名+人名）所定的分類大致相同，而正宗分中又分為見道、修道、證道、結經、助道五科，也非常合理。最初的見道分，從阿難（佛陀弟子名）的啟請開始，到宣說勝義中的真勝義性，使修行人最初明見自己常住的真心，作為修行的準則。第二修道分，從初心二決定義開始，到宣說神咒，使修行人依據真見而生起真修，不於心外另有造作。第三證道分，從云何名為干慧之地開始，到方盡妙覺，成就無上道，使修行人知道因真果正，因地不真，果招迂曲。第四結經分，從何名此經開始，到汝當奉持，使修行人知道五種名義都包含在今題二十字中。第五助道分，從地獄七趣開始，到微細魔事，使修行人正助互相資益，持戒和修定同時並進，就能迅速到達薩婆若（梵語：Sarvajna，一切智）海。中間的細科或小科...
【English Translation】 English version
Record of Blind Men Touching an Elephant
Composed by Shramana Zhuhong of Yunqi Temple in Hangzhou, Ming Dynasty
△ Surangama Sutra
Whenever reading the explanations that follow, first place the Surangama Sutra text on the table, so that the beginning and end are connected, and one can find the key points. Moreover, this book is written for occasional discussions on the Surangama Sutra, so it explains the Surangama Sutra in slightly more detail. However, it only elaborates on the unclear points of the general meaning, the different opinions, or a paragraph, a sentence, or a word, without providing a complete explanation. As for other scriptures, it only mentions a few, and among those few, it only mentions one or two to illustrate the general idea, hoping to learn from those who have attained the Way, not to say that oneself is correct and deny others. If someone blames me for this, I only know how to clarify the principles, and I don't know anything else.
○ Volume 1
Translation of the Sutra
This sutra was translated by Paramiti (translator's name), the language was translated by Migaśākya (translator's name), and the writing was dictated by Prime Minister Fang Rong (person's name). In the ancient version, it is said that Shramana Huaidi of Luofu (person's name) certified the translation. I don't know why the current version doesn't record this. I privately believe that the translator initially translated Sanskrit into Chinese, the language translator made it into complete sentences, the scribe embellished the wording, and the certifier generally reviewed and corrected it. How can the merit of reviewing and correcting be lacking? Those who engrave the sutras later should add the name of the certifier.
Categorization of the Sutra
This sutra is divided into three parts: the introduction, the main teaching, and the conclusion. The classification determined by Wenling Changshui (place name + person's name) is roughly the same, and the main teaching is further divided into five sections: seeing the path, cultivating the path, realizing the path, concluding the sutra, and assisting the path, which is also very reasonable. The initial section of seeing the path starts from Ananda's (name of Buddha's disciple) request to the declaration of the true supreme nature in the supreme meaning, so that practitioners can initially clearly see their own permanent true mind as the standard for practice. The second section of cultivating the path starts from the definition of the initial mind and the two decisions, to the declaration of the divine mantra, so that practitioners can generate true cultivation based on true seeing, without creating anything outside the mind. The third section of realizing the path starts from 'What is called the land of dry wisdom' to the complete realization of wonderful enlightenment and the attainment of the unsurpassed path, so that practitioners know that the cause is true and the result is correct, and if the cause is not true, the result will be crooked. The fourth section of concluding the sutra starts from 'What is the name of this sutra' to 'You should uphold it', so that practitioners know that the five kinds of names are all contained in the twenty characters of the current title. The fifth section of assisting the path starts from the seven realms of hell to subtle demonic affairs, so that practitioners can benefit each other with both the main and auxiliary practices, and advance simultaneously in upholding precepts and cultivating samadhi, so that they can quickly reach the Sarvajna (Sanskrit: all-knowing) sea. The intermediate fine sections or small sections...
不同亦無大礙後學只須遵古不必別立新科增益繁碎。
大佛頂。
大者法佛頂者喻法即常住真心佛頂者頂於人為至尊無上佛頂則尤為至尊之至尊無上之無上如悉達太子抱持之人慾見其頂彌仰彌高終莫能得是也此心豎窮三際不可量其短長橫亙十方不可測其近遠離諸相見亦復如是若悟此心則如來因地菩薩行門一言盡之矣有謂此經由佛頂放光宣咒故名佛頂此可乘帶旁顯而非正意又三字分釋即是三德大屬法身真如平等故佛屬般若智慧圓滿故頂屬解脫即相離相故亦即三大如次而分體相用故。
將毀戒體。
愚意此摩登伽將毀阿難之戒體也及觀合論補義先得我心此說甚為當理又令無賴僧不得借口其益大矣故下云心清凈故尚未淪溺也然則何必神咒往護蓋阿難心雖清凈道力尚微而摩登志既堅強魔力偏熾相持既久無救無依則事或不測故須護也聖既示凡法應如是。
佛敕文殊將咒往護。
佛咒威神無遠弗屆何俟文殊將之蓋是一往且順法門儀式如天子詔亦假使臣赍告諸郡邑耳實則梵音才舉聲遍十方不疾而速不行而至又文殊大智表擇魔歸佛返邪從正惟智為先導故也。
得成菩提妙奢摩他三摩禪那最初方便。
初菩提是果次三是因末最初方便是因中先務緊要工夫也大意謂啟請諸佛得成道果之奢
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
不同也沒有大的妨礙，後來的學習者只需要遵循古法，不必另外創立新的科目，增加繁瑣的內容。
《大佛頂》。
『大』指的是法，『佛頂』比喻法，也就是常住真心。『佛頂』對於人來說是至尊無上的，『佛頂』就更是至尊中的至尊，無上中的無上。就像悉達多太子，想要抱持他的人想看他的頭頂，越仰望越高，最終也不能看到。這顆心豎窮三際，無法衡量它的長短；橫亙十方，無法測度它的遠近。遠離諸相見也是這樣。如果領悟了這顆心，那麼如來因地菩薩的修行法門，一句話就說完了。有人說這部經由佛頂放光宣說咒語，所以叫做《佛頂》，這可以算是順帶提及，並非主要意思。而且這三個字分開解釋，就是三德：『大』屬於法身，真如平等；『佛』屬於般若，智慧圓滿；『頂』屬於解脫，即相離相。也就是三大依次而分體、相、用。
將要毀壞戒體。
我認為這個摩登伽（Matanga，指一個女子）將要毀壞阿難（Ananda，佛陀的十大弟子之一）的戒體。等到看到合論補義，先得到了我的心，這種說法非常合理。又讓無賴僧人不能借口，它的益處很大啊。所以下面說，因為心清凈的緣故，還沒有淪落。既然這樣，何必用神咒前往護持呢？因為阿難的心雖然清凈，道力還很微弱，而摩登伽的意志既然堅強，魔力就特別熾盛，相互堅持很久，沒有救助沒有依靠，那麼事情或許就不可以預測了，所以需要護持啊。聖人既然示現凡夫的法則，就應該這樣。
佛敕令文殊（Manjusri，智慧的象徵）將咒語前往護持。
佛的咒語威神無遠不屆，何必讓文殊將它送去呢？這只是一方面，而且順應法門的儀式，就像天子的詔令，也假使臣子拿著去告知各個郡邑罷了。實際上梵音才舉起，聲音就遍佈十方，不快而快，不行而至。而且文殊大智，表示選擇魔而歸佛，返邪而從正，只有智慧是先導啊。
得到成就菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）的妙奢摩他（Samatha，止）、三摩（Samma，正）、禪那（Dhyana，禪定）最初的方便。
首先，菩提是果，其次的三者是因，最後最初的方便是因中的先務，緊要的功夫啊。大意是說，啟請諸佛，得到成就道果的奢摩他
【English Translation】 English version:
It doesn't matter if there are differences; later learners only need to follow the ancient methods and don't need to create new subjects or add complicated content.
The Great Buddha's Crown (Dafoding).
'Great' refers to Dharma (law, truth), 'Buddha's Crown' is a metaphor for Dharma, which is the ever-abiding true mind. 'Buddha's Crown' is the most supreme for humans, and 'Buddha's Crown' is even the most supreme of the supreme, the unsurpassed of the unsurpassed. Just like Siddhartha (Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha)太子 (Crown Prince), those who want to hold him and see the top of his head, the more they look up, the higher it is, and in the end, they cannot see it. This mind extends vertically through the three periods of time, and its length cannot be measured; it extends horizontally in all ten directions, and its distance cannot be measured. Seeing it apart from all appearances is also like this. If you understand this mind, then the practice methods of the Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, enlightened being) in the causal ground of the Tathagata (Tathagata, 'one who has thus come' or 'one who has thus gone', an epithet of the Buddha) can be summarized in one sentence. Some say that this sutra is called 'Buddha's Crown' because it emits light from the Buddha's crown and proclaims mantras (Mantra, a sacred utterance). This can be considered a side note and not the main meaning. Moreover, the three characters can be explained separately as the three virtues: 'Great' belongs to Dharmakaya (Dharmakaya, the body of essence), true suchness is equal; 'Buddha' belongs to Prajna (Prajna, wisdom), wisdom is complete; 'Crown' belongs to liberation, which is the separation of appearances. That is, the three great ones are divided in order into substance, appearance, and function.
About to destroy the precepts.
I think this Matanga (Matanga, name of a woman) is about to destroy Ananda's (Ananda, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples) precepts. When I saw the combined theory and supplementary meaning, I first got my heart. This statement is very reasonable. It also prevents rogue monks from making excuses, and its benefits are great. Therefore, it is said below that because the mind is pure, it has not yet fallen. Since this is the case, why is it necessary to send a divine mantra to protect it? Because although Ananda's mind is pure, his spiritual power is still weak, and since Matanga's will is strong, the power of demons is particularly strong. If they persist for a long time without help or reliance, then things may be unpredictable, so protection is needed. Since the sage shows the law of ordinary people, it should be like this.
The Buddha ordered Manjusri (Manjusri, symbol of wisdom) to take the mantra to protect him.
The Buddha's mantra is powerful and reaches everywhere, so why have Manjusri send it? This is only one aspect, and it follows the ritual of the Dharma gate, just like the emperor's edict, which also has ministers take it to inform the various counties. In fact, as soon as the Sanskrit sound is raised, the sound spreads in all ten directions, fast without being fast, arriving without going. Moreover, Manjusri's great wisdom represents choosing demons to return to the Buddha, turning from evil to righteousness, and only wisdom is the guide.
To attain the initial expedient of wonderful Samatha (Samatha, cessation), Samma (Samma, right), Dhyana (Dhyana, meditation) of Bodhi (Bodhi, enlightenment).
First, Bodhi is the result, the next three are the cause, and finally, the initial expedient is the first task in the cause, the important effort. The general idea is that, requesting the Buddhas, to attain the Samatha of the fruit of the path
摩他三摩禪那其中最初方便門也方便斷屬耳根詳辨在後又此奢摩三摩禪那或有于經文中割截段落而作配合云某處至某處為奢摩某處至某處為三摩某處至某處為禪那意以從徴心至同別二見破妄顯真奢摩也從浮塵諸幻至十八界即妄明真三摩也從請問中道至七大文畢即妄即真禪那也又一說從徴心直至七大文畢總屬奢摩其三摩禪那覆在向後雖各不同要之闡析三觀所歸發揮一經大旨美則美也但恐初學聞此或便死執如是字眼名目謂一部經妙專在是則不可也且三觀之義隨文皆具故稱曰妙假如以徴心等文屬奢摩似矣矣細玩之七處求心心不可得奢摩也其後復言色身外洎山河虛空大地咸是妙明真心三摩也真心無處而含大地山河大地有形而曰妙心中物禪那也豈不三觀具足以一切浮塵諸幻化相屬三摩似矣細玩之諸相滅盡奢摩也諸相出生三摩也當處生隨處滅即生即滅禪那也豈不三觀具足以阿難請求中道了義屬禪那似矣細玩之佛言故我今時為汝開示第一義諦如何復將世間戲論云云則上文所示無非中道明矣況既曰禪那必從空假融會具足三觀又不待論也若據初文如來將欲敷演三摩而言汝于奢摩微密觀照心猶未明因引此以證先說空次說假之意而判初文為奢摩次為三摩空假而中乃至為禪那等不知向後文中頗多單說三摩者如此下便云有三摩提名大佛頂首楞嚴王
又云諸三摩提妙修行路又云從聞思修入三摩地又云因入流相得三摩提又云若諸菩薩入三摩地又云欲攝其心入三摩地又云汝教世人修三摩地又云縱得心開似三摩地又云若大妄語則三摩地不得清凈又云令其身心入三摩地又云一切真實入三摩地又云入三摩地修學法門又云修三摩地求大乘者又云是清凈人修三摩地又云復有從人不依正覺修三摩地又云汝輩修禪飾三摩地又云若得妙發三摩提者又云當住此處入三摩地又云圓定發明三摩地中又云斯則如來真三摩地又云又三摩中諸善男子如是單舉三摩提處皆直以三摩為大定豈拘局三觀必對奢摩而名假觀耶亦有一二處單舉奢摩他者例亦如是故知不必強割經文硬配三觀。
我見如來三十二相勝妙殊絕形體映徹猶如琉璃常自思惟此相非是欲愛所生。
阿難以妙相非從欲生以此發心未為不是而不知即此亦復正是病根蓋內取己見外取佛相相見對待能所宛然豈非是妄夫如來之相摩登之相雖聖凡迥異而其為相一也執幻妄不真之相昧常住不遷之心是生滅為因而欲求不生滅之果也然般若云若以三十二相觀如來者轉輪聖王即是如來今佛不以是直斥阿難之非顧詰其見與好樂生於心目方乃漸次破其妄心除其妄見者何也蓋善現解空阿難著相故且就窠打劫鋤其本根使彼之心逼至於無處安放彼之見追至於無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：還有經文說，各種三摩提（Samadhi，定、禪定）是精妙的修行之路，又說從聽聞、思考、修習進入三摩地，又說因為進入入流（入聖道之流）之相而得到三摩提，又說如果各位菩薩進入三摩地，又說想要收攝其心進入三摩地，又說你教導世人修習三摩地，又說即使心開了，也只是類似三摩地，又說如果說了大妄語，那麼三摩地就不能清凈，又說使其身心進入三摩地，又說一切真實進入三摩地，又說進入三摩地修習法門，又說修習三摩地求大乘佛法的人，又說是清凈的人修習三摩地，又說還有人從不依據正覺修習三摩地，又說你們修習禪定裝飾三摩地，又說如果能夠奇妙地發起三摩提，又說應當住在此處進入三摩地，又說圓滿的禪定在三摩地中發明，又說這就是如來的真三摩地，又說在三摩地中的各位善男子。像這樣單獨提出三摩提的地方，都直接把三摩提當作大定，難道要拘泥於三觀，必須對應奢摩他（Samatha，止）才稱為假觀嗎？也有個別地方單獨提出奢摩他，情況也類似這樣，所以可知不必強行分割經文，硬要配上三觀。 我看見如來的三十二相（Thirty-two marks of the Buddha）勝妙殊絕，形體映徹，猶如琉璃，常常自己思惟，這些相不是因為欲愛所生。 阿難（Ananda）以妙相不是從慾望產生而以此發心，不能說是不對的，但是卻不知道這正是問題的根源。因為向內執取自己的見解，向外執取佛的相，相和見解相互對待，能取和所取分明，難道不是虛妄嗎？如來的相和摩登伽（Matangi）的相，雖然聖凡迥異，但其作為相的本質是一樣的。執著虛幻不真實的相，迷惑于常住不遷的心，以生滅為因而想要尋求不生滅的果報。然而《般若經》（Prajna Sutra）說，如果以三十二相觀察如來，那麼轉輪聖王（Chakravartin）就是如來了。現在佛陀不直接斥責阿難的錯誤，而是反問他的見解和愛好從心和眼產生，才漸漸地破除他的妄心，去除他的妄見，這是為什麼呢？因為善現（Subhuti）理解空性，而阿難執著于相，所以暫且就他的執著之處進行破斥，剷除他的根本，使他的心逼迫到無處安放，使他的見解追趕到無
【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, it is said that various Samadhis (states of meditative concentration) are wonderful paths of practice. It is also said that one enters Samadhi through hearing, thinking, and cultivating. It is also said that one attains Samadhi through entering the stream (of the path to enlightenment). It is also said, 'If all Bodhisattvas enter Samadhi.' It is also said, 'Desiring to gather their minds into Samadhi.' It is also said, 'You teach the people of the world to cultivate Samadhi.' It is also said, 'Even if the mind opens, it is only similar to Samadhi.' It is also said, 'If one speaks great falsehoods, then Samadhi cannot be pure.' It is also said, 'Causing their body and mind to enter Samadhi.' It is also said, 'All truth enters Samadhi.' It is also said, 'Entering Samadhi to cultivate the Dharma methods.' It is also said, 'Those who cultivate Samadhi seeking the Great Vehicle.' It is also said, 'These pure people cultivate Samadhi.' It is also said, 'Moreover, there are those who do not rely on Right Enlightenment to cultivate Samadhi.' It is also said, 'You all cultivate Dhyana (meditation) to adorn Samadhi.' It is also said, 'If one attains the wonderful arising of Samadhi.' It is also said, 'One should abide here and enter Samadhi.' It is also said, 'Perfected concentration is manifested within Samadhi.' It is also said, 'This is the true Samadhi of the Tathagata (Buddha).' It is also said, 'Also, within Samadhi, all good men.' Thus, simply mentioning Samadhi in these places directly takes Samadhi as great concentration. Must one be confined to the Three Contemplations (Threefold Contemplation), necessarily corresponding to Samatha (tranquility meditation) to be called provisional contemplation? There are also one or two places where Samatha is mentioned alone, and the situation is similar. Therefore, it is known that one need not forcibly divide the sutra text and rigidly match it with the Three Contemplations. I see the Tathagata's Thirty-two Marks (Thirty-two marks of the Buddha) are supremely wonderful and extraordinary, the form radiant and clear like crystal. I constantly contemplate that these marks are not born from desire and love. Ananda's (Buddha's disciple) intention that the wonderful marks are not born from desire cannot be said to be wrong, but he does not know that this is precisely the root of the problem. Because inwardly he grasps his own views, and outwardly he grasps the Buddha's marks, the marks and views oppose each other, the grasper and the grasped are distinct. Is this not delusion? The Tathagata's marks and Matangi's (name of a woman) marks, although different between the holy and the mundane, their essence as marks is the same. Clinging to illusory and untrue marks, being deluded about the constant and unchanging mind, taking birth and death as the cause and wanting to seek the fruit of non-birth and non-death. However, the Prajna Sutra (Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) says, 'If one observes the Tathagata by the Thirty-two Marks, then the Chakravartin (Universal Monarch) is the Tathagata.' Now, the Buddha does not directly rebuke Ananda's fault, but instead questions his views and preferences arising from the mind and eyes, and then gradually breaks his deluded mind and removes his deluded views. Why is this? Because Subhuti (Buddha's disciple) understands emptiness, while Ananda clings to marks, so for the time being, he refutes his clinging, eradicates his root, forcing his mind to have nowhere to rest, and chasing his views to have no
可奈何智竭計空情窮理極而忽然自得其本心也化導之妙一至於是。
有三摩提名大佛頂首楞嚴王。
最初徴心阿難擬心在內佛未竟其答即曰有三摩提等語者何也蓋阿難本意為求三摩提最初方便佛就其擬心在內處特為詰難當時若是皮底有血漢才聞先見堂內便知須見身內不見身內便知心不在內心不在內便知亦不在外亦不在中間亦不在一切處又何待逐節推尋乃二乃三而至七耶故答語未竟而先舉此指阿難一個入處此處得入三摩提最初方便一了百當矣而阿難大權示現若不喻其旨然重重問答不厭頻煩者為後人作則也。
爪生髮長筋轉脈搖。
舊解謂心胃內藏縱不能見爪脈外浮雲何不知其意良是但外浮二字不順經文蓋此正破心不在內不宜說外良由爪發雖全體彰乎外實從內而生長筋脈雖影現形乎外實于內而動搖則均之內物耳特其有生有長有動有搖比心胃等稍異故心胃誠為難見爪脈應可了知然終不能知心不在內明矣。
是諸比丘適來從我室羅筏城循乞摶食歸祇陀林我已宿齋。
佛已應匿王之請何又言諸比丘從我乞食解者曰提獎阿難在赴請日為彼演法事應隔宵然經文齋畢旋歸提獎阿難至於佛所阿難見佛悲泣請法大眾俱時承受聖旨明是當日一會如何云是隔宵今謂佛具千百億化身一身受供王宮一身領眾循
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：當智慧枯竭，計謀用盡，情感困頓，道理走到盡頭時，忽然間領悟了自己的本心，這種化導的巧妙之處就在於此。
有三摩提（Samadhi，指禪定）名為大佛頂首楞嚴王（Śūraṅgama-samādhi，指一種強大的禪定）。
最初征詢阿難（Ānanda，佛陀的十大弟子之一）的心在哪裡，阿難認為心在身體內部，佛陀還沒有說完他的回答，就說有三摩提等等這些話，是什麼意思呢？大概是阿難本來的意思是要求得三摩提最初的方便法門，佛陀就著他認為心在身體內部這一點，特別加以詰難。當時如果是有真才實學的人，才聽到『先見堂內』（指明心見性）這句話，便應該知道必須見到身內，如果見不到身內，便應該知道心不在內。心不在內，便應該知道也不在外，也不在中間，也不在一切處。又何必等待逐一推尋，乃至於兩次三次，甚至七次呢？所以佛陀的回答還沒有說完，就先舉出這個，指點阿難一個入門之處。此處如果能夠得入，三摩提最初的方便法門就能夠一了百當了。而阿難是大權示現，好像不明白佛陀的旨意，然而重重問答，不厭其煩，是爲了給後人做榜樣啊。
指甲生長，頭髮變長，筋脈轉動，血脈跳動。
舊的解釋認為，心胃等內臟縱然不能看見，指甲血脈等在外顯現，怎麼能說不知道呢？這個意思很好。但是『外浮』這兩個字不順應經文。這正是爲了破除『心在內』的觀點，不應該說『外』。這是因為指甲頭髮雖然全部顯現在外，實際上是從內部而生長；筋脈雖然在形體外顯現，實際上是在內部而動搖。那麼，這些都是身體內部的東西。只是它們有生長、有長動、有搖動，比心胃等稍微不同，所以心胃確實難以看見，指甲血脈應該可以瞭解。然而最終還是不能知道心在身體內部，這很明顯。
這些比丘（bhikkhu，佛教出家眾）剛剛從我所住的室羅筏城（Śrāvastī，古印度城市）依次乞食，拿著飯食返回祇陀林（Jetavana，祇樹給孤獨園），我已經吃過早飯了。
佛陀已經答應了波斯匿王（Prasenajit，古印度拘薩羅國國王）的邀請，為什麼又說這些比丘從我這裡乞食呢？解釋的人說，這是爲了提攜阿難，在應邀赴請的那天，為他演說佛法，事情應該隔了一夜。然而經文說齋飯完畢就返回，提攜阿難來到佛陀處所，阿難見到佛陀悲泣請法，大眾同時承受聖旨，明明是當日的一次集會，怎麼能說是隔了一夜呢？現在認為佛陀具有千百億化身，一身在王宮接受供養，一身帶領大眾依次乞食。
【English Translation】 English version: When wisdom is exhausted, plans are depleted, emotions are trapped, and reason reaches its limit, one suddenly realizes one's original mind. The subtlety of such guidance lies in this.
There is a Samadhi (state of meditative consciousness) called the Great Buddha Crown Śūraṅgama-samādhi (a powerful state of meditative absorption).
Initially, Ānanda (one of the ten principal disciples of the Buddha) was asked where his mind was, and Ānanda thought it was within the body. Before the Buddha finished his answer, he said, 'There is Samadhi,' and so on. What does this mean? It is probably because Ānanda's original intention was to seek the initial expedient means of Samadhi. The Buddha, focusing on his idea that the mind was within the body, specifically questioned him. At that time, if one had genuine ability, upon hearing 'seeing within the hall first' (referring to seeing one's true nature), one should know that one must see within the body. If one cannot see within the body, one should know that the mind is not within. If the mind is not within, one should know that it is neither without, nor in the middle, nor in all places. Why wait for step-by-step investigation, even to the second, third, or seventh time? Therefore, before the Buddha finished his answer, he first pointed this out, indicating to Ānanda an entry point. If one can enter here, the initial expedient means of Samadhi can be achieved once and for all. Ānanda, however, was manifesting great power, as if he did not understand the Buddha's intention. Yet, the repeated questions and answers, without being tiresome, were to set an example for later generations.
Nails grow, hair lengthens, tendons move, and veins pulse.
The old interpretation believes that although internal organs like the heart and stomach cannot be seen, nails and veins appear externally. How can one say one does not know? This meaning is good. However, the words 'appear externally' do not align with the sutra. This is precisely to refute the view that 'the mind is within,' and one should not say 'external.' This is because although nails and hair fully manifest externally, they actually grow from within. Although tendons and veins appear externally, they actually move within. Therefore, these are all internal things. It is just that they have growth, lengthening, movement, and pulsing, which are slightly different from the heart and stomach. Therefore, the heart and stomach are indeed difficult to see, while nails and veins should be understandable. However, one ultimately cannot know that the mind is within the body, which is clear.
These bhikkhus (Buddhist monks) have just come from Śrāvastī (an ancient Indian city) where I reside, begging for food in order, and are returning to Jetavana (Jetavana Anathapindika's Monastery). I have already had my breakfast.
The Buddha has already accepted King Prasenajit's (King of Kosala in ancient India) invitation, so why does he say that these bhikkhus are begging for food from me? The explanation is that this was to uplift Ānanda. On the day of accepting the invitation, he expounded the Dharma for him, and the matter should have been overnight. However, the sutra says that they returned immediately after the meal, uplifting Ānanda to the Buddha's place. Ānanda saw the Buddha, wept, and requested the Dharma, and the assembly simultaneously received the holy decree. It was clearly a gathering on the same day, so how can it be said to be overnight? It is now believed that the Buddha has hundreds of billions of manifestations, one body receiving offerings in the royal palace, and one body leading the assembly to beg for food in order.
乞亦奚不可故宿齋古謂預齋于理無礙有說此據平日乞食常儀其義亦通但適來二字不似平日。
若見眼者眼即同境不得成隨。
琉璃籠眼眼見琉璃眼根籠心心不見眼設許見眼眼乃成境但可根見境不可境見境汝前言彼根隨見隨即分別今眼屬境不能隨見分別則隨義不成故曰不得成隨如不見眼安得云心在根里乎又溫陵雲事理俱違者事即是喻喻不當法於事不順是事違也理即是法法中心無潛根之理于理不順是理違也。
外不相知。
長水云不字當是又字此說甚正而合論補義謂為不然則上下文義如何安頓此不字若是則下身心相知須作身心不知矣有是理乎然止辨明其義而不敢更易其文者古人慎重之意儒釋皆然也。
兼二不兼二。
溫陵初以根塵為物心為體末又以塵為物根為體前後相背似失檢點不必論矣一說首尾皆以塵為物根為體似乎有理然天如謂佛明言此之心體則體應專屬心故一說首尾皆以根塵為物心為體雖較穩順而兼義不明又為後人駁云經亦明言眼有分別有分別則非物故今融通以上諸說別解如左兼二者謂雙挾根塵而處其中也不兼二者謂兩離根塵而孤然中立也今言兼與不兼二俱不可以破心不在中也云何兼二不可心體有知非無知汝既言眼有分別色塵無知是眼同心體之有知而惟色乃無知之物也則心止
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『乞亦奚不可故宿齋古謂預齋于理無礙有說此據平日乞食常儀其義亦通但適來二字不似平日』——如果乞討食物的人不可以因為過去的齋戒而停止今天的乞討，那麼古代所說的預先齋戒在道理上是沒有障礙的。有人說這是根據平日乞食的常規，這個解釋也說得通，但是『適來』這兩個字不像是指平日的情況。
『若見眼者眼即同境不得成隨』——如果能看見眼睛，那麼眼睛就等同於外境，不能成為能隨順心意的根。
『琉璃籠眼眼見琉璃眼根籠心心不見眼設許見眼眼乃成境但可根見境不可境見境汝前言彼根隨見隨即分別今眼屬境不能隨見分別則隨義不成故曰不得成隨如不見眼安得云心在根里乎又溫陵雲事理俱違者事即是喻喻不當法於事不順是事違也理即是法法中心無潛根之理于理不順是理違也』——如果用琉璃罩住眼睛，眼睛能看見琉璃，眼根包籠著心，心卻不能看見眼睛。假設允許心能看見眼睛，那麼眼睛就成了外境，只能是根看見境，不能是境看見境。你前面說那個根隨見隨即分別，現在眼睛屬於外境，不能隨見隨即分別，那麼隨順的意義就不成立，所以說不能成為能隨順心意的根。如果心不能看見眼睛，怎麼能說心在根里呢？溫陵說，這是事理都違背。事是指比喻，比喻不符合佛法，在事上不順，這是事違背。理是指佛法，佛法中心沒有潛藏根的道理，在理上不順，這是理違背。
『外不相知』——對外境不互相瞭解。
『長水云不字當是又字此說甚正而合論補義謂為不然則上下文義如何安頓此不字若是則下身心相知須作身心不知矣有是理乎然止辨明其義而不敢更易其文者古人慎重之意儒釋皆然也』——長水說，『不』字應該是『又』字。這個說法很正確。《合論補義》認為不是這樣，那麼上下文的意義如何安排呢？如果這個『不』字是正確的，那麼下面的『身心相知』就必須解釋為『身心不相知』了，有這樣的道理嗎？然而只是辨明其中的意義，而不敢更改原文，這是古人慎重的意思，儒家和佛家都是這樣。
『兼二不兼二』——兼顧兩者和不兼顧兩者。
『溫陵初以根塵為物心為體末又以塵為物根為體前後相背似失檢點不必論矣一說首尾皆以塵為物根為體似乎有理然天如謂佛明言此之心體則體應專屬心故一說首尾皆以根塵為物心為體雖較穩順而兼義不明又為後人駁云經亦明言眼有分別有分別則非物故今融通以上諸說別解如左兼二者謂雙挾根塵而處其中也不兼二者謂兩離根塵而孤然中立也今言兼與不兼二俱不可以破心不在中也云何兼二不可心體有知非無知汝既言眼有分別色塵無知是眼同心體之有知而惟色乃無知之物也則心止』——溫陵開始認為根和塵是事物，心是本體，後來又認為塵是事物，根是本體，前後矛盾，似乎沒有經過仔細檢查，不必討論。一種說法是始終都認為塵是事物，根是本體，似乎有道理。然而天如說，佛明確說明這個心是本體，那麼本體應該專屬心。所以另一種說法是始終都認為根和塵是事物，心是本體，雖然比較穩妥順暢，但是兼顧的意義不明確。又被後人反駁說，經書也明確說明眼睛有分別，有分別就不是事物。現在融通以上各種說法，另外解釋如下：兼顧兩者，是指同時包含根和塵而處在其中。不兼顧兩者，是指脫離根和塵而孤立地存在。現在說兼顧和不兼顧兩者都不可以用來否定心不在中間。為什麼兼顧兩者不可以呢？因為心體有知覺，不是沒有知覺。你既然說眼睛有分別，色塵沒有知覺，那麼眼睛就和心體一樣有知覺，而只有色塵是沒有知覺的事物，那麼心就只
【English Translation】 English version: 'If one who begs for food cannot stop begging today because of past fasting, then the ancient saying of fasting in advance is not a problem in principle. Some say this is based on the usual practice of begging for food on weekdays, which makes sense, but the words 'just came' do not seem to refer to weekdays.'
'If one sees the eye, the eye is the same as the object and cannot become compliant.' - If one can see the eye, then the eye is the same as the external object and cannot become a root that complies with the mind.
'If a crystal covers the eye, the eye sees the crystal, the eye-root envelops the mind, but the mind does not see the eye. If it is allowed that the mind sees the eye, then the eye becomes an object. Only the root can see the object, not the object see the object. You said before that the root follows seeing and immediately distinguishes. Now the eye belongs to the object and cannot follow seeing and distinguish, then the meaning of following is not established, so it is said that it cannot become compliant. If the mind cannot see the eye, how can it be said that the mind is in the root? Wenling said that this violates both the matter and the principle. The matter refers to the metaphor, and the metaphor does not conform to the Dharma, which is not in accordance with the matter, which is a violation of the matter. The principle refers to the Dharma, and there is no principle of latent roots in the center of the Dharma, which is not in accordance with the principle, which is a violation of the principle.'
'Externally, they do not know each other.' - They do not understand each other in relation to external objects.
'Changshui said that the word 'not' should be the word 'also'. This statement is very correct, but the Commentary on the Combination of Meanings says it is not so. Then how can the meaning of the context be arranged? If this word 'not' is correct, then the following 'body and mind know each other' must be interpreted as 'body and mind do not know each other'. Is there such a principle? However, it only clarifies the meaning and does not dare to change the original text. This is the cautious intention of the ancients, both Confucianism and Buddhism are the same.'
'Both inclusive and not inclusive.'
'Wenling initially considered the root and dust (Guna and Dhuli) as objects and the mind as the substance, and later considered the dust as the object and the root as the substance, which is contradictory and seems to have not been carefully examined, so there is no need to discuss it. One view is that from beginning to end, dust is considered the object and the root is the substance, which seems reasonable. However, Tianru said that the Buddha clearly stated that this mind is the substance, then the substance should belong exclusively to the mind. Therefore, another view is that from beginning to end, the root and dust are considered objects and the mind is the substance, which is relatively stable and smooth, but the meaning of inclusion is not clear. It was also refuted by later generations, saying that the scriptures also clearly state that the eye has discrimination, and if there is discrimination, it is not an object. Now, integrating the above views, another explanation is as follows: 'Both inclusive' means simultaneously containing the root and dust and being in the middle of them. 'Not inclusive' means being separated from the root and dust and existing independently. Now, saying that both inclusive and not inclusive cannot be used to deny that the mind is not in the middle. Why is 'both inclusive' not possible? Because the mind-substance has consciousness, it is not without consciousness. Since you say that the eye has discrimination and the color-dust has no consciousness, then the eye is the same as the mind-substance in having consciousness, and only the color-dust is an object without consciousness, then the mind only
應兼眼而曰雙兼眼色豈不物體雜亂夫物非體之有知體非物之無知心體正以有知敵對無知安得半有知半無知雙挾根塵而處其中耶云何不兼二亦不可汝既言眼有分別色塵無知識生其中是心體依根塵而有也今兼二不成不兼根則非知不兼塵則非不知非知非不知心尚無有將何所指而曰此為在中之相耶故云心在中間無有是處。
當由不知真際所詣。
舊解云因前徴發乃知迷妄求詣真際或謂阿難此時尚未識妄今說真際亦屬妄心以下文猶認能推為心乍聞此不是心生驚怖故愚見謂阿難尚未識妄此說誠然但謂真際亦妄則不可蓋七徴之後阿難計窮求佛開示心之真實際分此有何過或又謂七徴文中並無妄字真字然最初文中獨不曰皆由不知常住真心性凈明體用諸妄想乎則真妄二字在七徴以前顯露多時了也設阿難云我今已知真際所詣則真際誠妄今云不知亦復何礙若拘執太過則阿難前問菩提奢摩他亦應是妄。
識精元明能生諸緣緣所遺者。
言此陀那識精雖名曰識而是識精實即本覺妙明之體一切諸緣無不從此出生但眾生隨逐妄緣遺此元明耳夫眾生從無始來終日在此本元明中而不自知乃成遺失如魚在水而不識水是則名為可憐憫者或謂不然以本有之明焉得遺失寧知迷其本有即名為失如力士珠非失成失不見向下經文佛言遺失真性顛倒
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果同時使用眼睛和『雙兼眼色』的說法，難道不會導致物體雜亂嗎？物體不是身體的一部分，卻有知覺；身體不是物體的一部分，卻沒有知覺。心體正是因為有知覺才與無知覺相對立，怎麼能一半有知覺一半沒有知覺，同時夾帶著根（感官）和塵（對像）而處於其中呢？為什麼不能同時兼顧兩者呢？這也是不可能的。你既然說眼睛有分別能力，色塵沒有知識，而知覺在其中產生，那麼心體就是依賴根和塵而存在的。現在同時兼顧兩者做不到，不兼顧根就不能感知，不兼顧塵就不能認知，既不是感知也不是認知，心尚且不存在，又將用什麼來指認這就是在中間的狀態呢？所以說心在中間是沒有道理的。
正是因為不知道真際所歸之處。
舊的解釋說，因為前面的詰問啓發，才知道是迷惑顛倒，想要探求真際。或者說阿難此時還不認識妄，現在說真際也屬於妄心。因為下面的經文仍然認為能推究的心是真實的心，乍一聽到『這不是心』就產生了驚恐。所以愚見認為阿難還沒有認識妄，這種說法確實如此。但說真際也是虛妄的，則不可取。因為經過七番征問之後，阿難已經理屈詞窮，請求佛陀開示心的真實和實際的區分，這有什麼過錯呢？或者又說，七番征問的文章中並沒有『妄』字和『真』字。然而最初的文中難道沒有說『都是因為不知道常住真心，性凈明體，而使用各種虛妄的念頭』嗎？那麼『真』和『妄』二字在七番征問以前就已經顯露很久了。假設阿難說『我現在已經知道真際所歸之處』，那麼真際確實是虛妄的。現在說不知道，又有什麼妨礙呢？如果過於拘泥，那麼阿難先前問的菩提奢摩他，也應該是虛妄的了。
識精元明，能生出各種因緣，被因緣所遺忘的。
說這個陀那識精，雖然名叫『識』，但是這個識精實際上就是本覺妙明的本體。一切的因緣沒有不是從此出生的，但是眾生追逐虛妄的因緣，遺忘了這個元明。眾生從無始以來，整天都在這個本元明中，卻不自己知道，於是就成了遺失，如同魚在水中卻不認識水一樣，這就是所謂的令人可憐憫的人。或者說不是這樣，因為本來就有的光明，怎麼會遺失呢？要知道迷惑了本有的光明，就叫做遺失，如同力士額頭上的寶珠，不是真的丟失，而是變成了丟失的狀態。不見下面的經文佛說，遺失了真性，顛倒了。
【English Translation】 English version: If we use both the eyes and the phrase 'dual combination of eye and color', wouldn't that lead to a jumble of objects? An object is not part of the body, yet it has awareness; the body is not part of the object, yet it lacks awareness. The nature of the mind is precisely because it has awareness that it stands in opposition to non-awareness. How can it be half aware and half unaware, simultaneously harboring the root (sense organs) and the dust (objects) and residing in between? Why can't it encompass both? That's also impossible. Since you say that the eyes have the ability to distinguish, and color-dust has no knowledge, and awareness arises within them, then the nature of the mind relies on the root and dust to exist. Now, encompassing both is impossible; not encompassing the root means there's no perception; not encompassing the dust means there's no cognition. If it's neither perception nor cognition, and the mind doesn't even exist, then what will you use to point out that this is the state of being in between? Therefore, saying that the mind is in the middle is without reason.
It is precisely because one does not know where the true reality ultimately leads.
The old explanation says that because of the previous questioning and prompting, one realizes that it is delusion and seeks to reach the true reality. Or it says that Ānanda (the meaning of Ānanda is 'bliss') at this time does not yet recognize delusion, and now speaking of true reality also belongs to the deluded mind. Because the following text still considers the mind that can investigate to be the true mind, upon suddenly hearing 'this is not the mind' he becomes frightened. Therefore, the foolish view believes that Ānanda has not yet recognized delusion, and this statement is indeed true. But to say that true reality is also illusory is unacceptable. Because after the seven inquiries, Ānanda has exhausted his arguments and requests the Buddha to reveal the distinction between the truth and reality of the mind, what fault is there in this? Or it is also said that in the text of the seven inquiries there are no words 'delusion' and 'truth'. However, in the initial text, didn't it say 'all are due to not knowing the constant abiding true mind, the nature of pure brightness, and using various illusory thoughts'? Then the words 'truth' and 'delusion' had been revealed long before the seven inquiries. Suppose Ānanda said 'I now know where the true reality ultimately leads', then the true reality would indeed be illusory. Now saying that he does not know, what harm is there? If one is too rigid, then the Bodhi Samatha (the meaning of Bodhi Samatha is 'cessation of enlightenment') that Ānanda asked earlier should also be illusory.
The essence of consciousness is originally bright, capable of producing all conditions, but is forgotten by those conditions.
It says that this Tathata-consciousness essence, although named 'consciousness', this consciousness essence is actually the essence of the original enlightenment and wonderful brightness. All conditions are born from this, but sentient beings pursue illusory conditions and forget this original brightness. Sentient beings from beginningless time are constantly within this original brightness, yet they do not know it themselves, and thus it becomes forgotten, like a fish in water that does not recognize the water. This is what is called a pitiable person. Or it is said that it is not so, because how can the original brightness be forgotten? Know that being deluded about the original brightness is called forgetting, like the jewel on the forehead of a strong man, it is not truly lost, but it has become a state of being lost. Don't you see the following sutra text where the Buddha says, 'losing the true nature, inverted'?
行事。
縱滅一切見聞覺知內守幽間猶為法塵分別影事。
見聞覺知都已滅卻斯則外不隨於流逸內獨守乎幽間此幽間處莫便道得自本心蓋依然是法塵分別影事也本心似鏡法塵似物內之所守猶為明鏡中所現之影而已先德云學道之人不識真秪為從前認識神無量劫來生死本癡人喚作本來人世人觀此已知見聞覺知為識神而既滅見聞覺知將謂不落識神矣寧知質以今經亦復是識神窠窟生死根本也雖然千百人中且無一二至此即至此十個有五雙坐定擺不脫放不下嗟乎此幽間處埋沒古今幾許豪傑參禪秘要盡泄於是學人勉之哉。
汝觀阿難頭自動搖見無所動又汝觀我手自開合見無舒捲云何汝今以動為身以動為境從始洎終唸唸生滅遺失真性顛倒行事。
此處文義甚難銷會舊解雙斥凡小言凡夫不知身境有動見性無動無足論矣然身亦不動汝今云何以動為身境亦不動汝今云何以動為境故曰于常計無常也雖亦有理但如來此處方許其悟客塵二字正應以動為身以動為境故兩印以如是奈何忽爾反斥其非況前後文了無照應似乎自語矯亂今別為一解只順經文略加點掇佛意謂今此大眾以搖動者名為塵以不住者名為客故觀阿難頭自動搖動搖者塵也客也見無動也又觀如來手自開合開合者塵也客也見無動也云何如是明知以動為身以動為境矣卻乃
自始洎終唸唸生滅既順生滅則迷性真而以己隨物既失性真復迷境空而認物為己甘受輪轉豈不哀哉為順經文作如是解未知是否。
○第二卷
垂手正倒。
舊解豎手為倒垂手為正一說垂手是倒以後文如我垂手等無有異為據然經文雖止是如我垂手四字意則通該前文若云如我上來垂手示眾一段因緣非專指垂手也請以喻明頭以下垂為倒故時時上豎手既亦以下垂為倒何不亦時時上豎乎又一說手無正倒一時首尾相換世人妄見生正倒想以後文名字何處號為顛倒為據此說亦佳但非經正意良由下文棄海取漚認漚為海本末翻覆故名顛倒則知海者喻真漚者喻妄妄身在於心內如一漚至微真心遍乎身外如海水至廣棄真取妄認妄為真身心顛倒所在正在此耳與觀手者正倒錯亂何以異哉或謂合論亦云垂手是倒曰合論何可盡從也如前七徴中文外不相知古人謂不字當是又字其理甚正合論云當是不字而文義畢竟不通下文辨見展轉五重合論非之亦不當理。
晦昧為空(云云)趍外奔逸。
長水以晦昧為空至結暗為色配三細次聚緣內搖配前二粗次趍外奔逸配后二粗為煩惱道畢有非之者然此配合三細多說不同今長水所配下文因明立所等處陰入界大等處迷妄有虛空等處皆如是說前後經文語意符合蓋渠從清凈本然忽生山河大地中悟入故認
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：從開始到結束，唸唸生滅，如果順應生滅，就會迷惑于真性，而以自己的想法追隨外物。既然失去了真性，又迷惑于空境，而認為外物是自己，甘願承受輪迴，這難道不可悲嗎？對於順應經文作出這樣的解釋，不知道是否正確。
第二卷
垂手正倒。
舊的解釋是豎起手為倒，垂下手為正。一種說法是垂手是倒，以後文『如我垂手』等沒有不同之處作為依據。然而經文雖然只是『如我垂手』四個字，意思卻通貫前文，如果說『如我上來垂手示眾一段因緣』，並非專指垂手。請用比喻來說明，頭以下垂為倒，所以時時向上豎手，既然也是以下垂為倒，為什麼不也時時向上豎手呢？又一種說法是手無正倒，一時首尾相換，世人妄見產生正倒的想法，以後文『名字何處號為顛倒』作為依據。這種說法也好，但不是經文的真正意思。正是由於下文『棄海取漚，認漚為海』，本末翻覆，所以名叫顛倒。那麼就知道，海比喻真，漚比喻妄，妄身在於心內，如一漚至微，真心遍佈身外，如海水至廣。捨棄真而取妄，認妄為真，身心顛倒所在，正在於此啊！與觀看手的人正倒錯亂有什麼不同呢？或者說合論也是說垂手是倒，說合論怎麼可以完全聽從呢？如前七徴文中『文外不相知』，古人說『不』字應當是『又』字，其理甚正。合論說應當是『不』字，而文義畢竟不通，下文辨見展轉五重，合論否定它也是不合道理的。
晦昧為空（云云），趨外奔逸。
長水用『晦昧為空』到『結暗為色』，配三細，其次『聚緣內搖』配前二粗，其次『趨外奔逸』配后二粗，作為煩惱道完畢。有反對的人，然而這種配合三細的說法很多不同。現在長水所配，下文『因明立所』等處，陰入界大等處，迷妄有虛空等處，都是這樣說的，前後經文語意符合。大概他從清凈本然忽然產生山河大地中悟入，所以認為這樣。
【English Translation】 English version: From beginning to end, thoughts arise and cease moment by moment. If one conforms to this arising and ceasing, one becomes deluded about one's true nature and follows external objects with one's own thoughts. Having lost one's true nature, one is further deluded by the emptiness of phenomena, taking external objects as oneself, willingly enduring the cycle of rebirth. Is this not lamentable? This is how I interpret the sutra's meaning of conforming to arising and ceasing. I wonder if it is correct.
Volume 2
Lowering the Hand, Right and Upside Down.
The old interpretation is that raising the hand is upside down, and lowering the hand is right. One explanation is that lowering the hand is upside down, based on the subsequent text 'As I lower my hand,' etc., where there is no difference. However, although the sutra only says 'As I lower my hand' in these four words, the meaning encompasses the preceding text. If it is said, 'As I have lowered my hand to show the assembly this cause and condition,' it does not refer specifically to lowering the hand. Please explain with a metaphor: the head is upside down when it is lowered, so the hand is raised upwards at times. Since lowering is also considered upside down, why not raise the hand upwards at times as well? Another explanation is that the hand has no right or upside down; the beginning and end are interchanged at times. Worldly people falsely perceive the idea of right and upside down, based on the subsequent text 'Where is the name called upside down?' This explanation is also good, but it is not the true meaning of the sutra. It is precisely because the subsequent text says 'Abandoning the ocean to take a bubble, recognizing the bubble as the ocean,' the beginning and end are reversed, hence the name upside down. Then know that the ocean is a metaphor for truth (真, zhen), and the bubble is a metaphor for delusion (妄, wang). The deluded body is within the mind, like a tiny bubble, while the true mind pervades outside the body, like the vast ocean. Abandoning the true to take the deluded, recognizing the deluded as the true, the place where body and mind are upside down is precisely here! How is this different from the confusion of right and upside down in those who observe the hand? Or it is said that the combined discussion also says that lowering the hand is upside down. How can the combined discussion be completely followed? As in the previous seven inquiries, 'The meaning outside the text is not known.' The ancients said that the character '不' (bu, not) should be the character '又' (you, again), which is very reasonable. The combined discussion says it should be the character '不' (bu, not), but the meaning of the text is ultimately not clear. The subsequent text distinguishes seeing through five layers of transformation, and the combined discussion denies it, which is also unreasonable.
Obscurity is Emptiness (etc.), Rushing Outward and Fleeing.
Changshui uses 'Obscurity is emptiness' to 'concluding darkness as form' to match the three subtle aspects; then 'gathering conditions and internal stirring' to match the first two coarse aspects; then 'rushing outward and fleeing' to match the last two coarse aspects, completing the path of affliction. There are those who disagree, however, there are many different ways of matching these three subtle aspects. Now, Changshui's matching, in the subsequent text 'cause and evidence are established,' etc., the places of the skandhas (陰, yin), entrances (入, ru), realms (界, jie), and great elements (大, da), etc., the places where delusion has empty space, etc., are all spoken of in this way, and the meaning of the preceding and following texts are consistent. Probably he awakened from the pure and original nature suddenly giving rise to mountains, rivers, and the great earth, so he believes this.
取如是而孤山以文殊覺海性澄圓偈文與此相對而釋意頗合亦顯長水非無據而云然前後文義互為照應未可非也又愚意三細六粗本出起信而將論合經不必拘拘逐句逐字的配但取大意可也良由佛為法王於法自在或隨時增減開合辭不必同而理實無二太拘則反成齟齬況本論中三細六粗共成九相既而明血脈則又成八既而原染起則又成六開合增減彼論自不拘死法引之者獨可拘死法乎。
一迷為心。
一迷為心者明此不是心迷惑無知錯認此虛妄以為我心也則知我自有真心也何者上文晦昧為空空結暗而為色色雜想而為身內搖外趍昏昏擾擾即於此時認為己心自此一迷為心便生執著決定惑為心在此身方寸之中牢不可破寧復知此心廣大圓滿含褁虛空周遍法界乎顛倒如是故名為可憐憫者有人謂此處是一迷為心下文某處文是二迷為心又至某處文是三迷為心其說甚謬。
此見雖非妙精明心如第二月。
第二月者非真月也何故不還蓋第二雖非真月然真月外更無二月此第二月即從真起明眼人固直下見真月矣見精雖非真見全體即真亦復如是。
若不見吾不見之地自然非物云何非汝。
長水展轉五重合論直說本意要其歸結總是見既非物云何非汝真性耳二說一意何必相非。
若實我心令我今見見性實我而身非我何殊
如來先所難言物能見我。
此即重躡上文而斷之也溫陵所解極明言既此在前之見實是我心而能見物則彼見乃我而此身非我見在物而不在我是物來見我而非我去見物矣有是理乎。
指非指。
或謂指非指是莊子語非也何不看文中連有十處指字一云非無指示二云舉手指陳三云確實指陳四云指陳示我五云舉手所指六云指皆是物七云則汝所指八云受汝所指九云應有所指然後十云出指非指蓋佛令阿難指點何者是見何者非見故曰出指非指可指者是物非見不可指者是見非物出者是非雙泯也問莊子不可用乎肯綮亦莊子語也答用固無害但此指不是莊子一馬一指之意何可扭摼強合其肯綮等自非此例故用無害蓋經本梵語譯為華言不用此間文字則終成梵語矣何名為譯有闡提人言佛經剽獵老莊果爾則譯佛以覺伊尹早已曰予天民之先覺矣譯修多羅以經易詩書等早已名經矣則覺字經字亦是剽獵儒典乎其說不通無俟多辨。
諸外道種說有真我遍滿十方有何差別。
此疑佛說見性周遍十方外道亦說我遍十方差別安在下文惟廣說因緣自然不剖此疑者何也蓋外道所計不出斷常二見今說緣因自然兩非則斷見常見雙破而又非和合生非不和合則情窮理極諸計消亡真我自顯故云圓滿菩提不生滅性清凈本心本覺常住是佛之所謂周遍也豈外
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『如來先前所難以言說的東西能夠看見我。』
這句是再次強調並否定上文的觀點。溫陵的解釋非常明確，既然先前所說的『見』實際上是我的心，並且能夠看見事物，那麼那個『見』就是我，而這個身體不是我。『見』存在於事物中，而不是存在於我中，是事物來見我，而不是我去看事物。有這樣的道理嗎？
『指非指。』
有人說『指非指』是莊子的話，這是不對的。為什麼不看看文中連續有十處提到『指』字？一處說『非無指示』，二處說『舉手指陳』，三處說『確實指陳』，四處說『指陳示我』，五處說『舉手所指』，六處說『指皆是物』，七處說『則汝所指』，八處說『受汝所指』，九處說『應有所指』，然後第十處說『出指非指』。佛陀讓阿難指出什麼是『見』，什麼不是『見』，所以說『出指非指』。可以指出的，是事物，不是『見』；不可指出的，是『見』，不是事物。『出』這個動作，是是非雙泯。有人問：莊子的話不可用嗎？『肯綮』也是莊子的話啊。回答：用當然沒有妨礙，但是這裡的『指』不是莊子『一馬一指』的意思，怎麼可以牽強附會呢？像『肯綮』等自然不是這種情況，所以用沒有妨礙。佛經原本是梵語，翻譯成漢語，不用這裡的文字，最終還是梵語。什麼叫做翻譯？有闡提人說佛經剽竊老莊，如果真是這樣，那麼翻譯佛經以覺悟，伊尹早就說過『我，是上天百姓的先知先覺』了。翻譯修多羅用經書代替詩書等，早就叫做經了，那麼『覺』字、『經』字也是剽竊儒家的典籍嗎？這種說法不通，無需多辯。
『各種外道都說有真我(true self)，遍滿十方(ten directions)，這有什麼差別？』
這是懷疑佛陀所說的見性(seeing-nature)周遍十方，外道(heretics)也說『我』遍十方，差別在哪裡？下文只是廣泛地說明因緣(cause and condition)，自然(nature)，沒有剖析這個疑問，為什麼呢？因為外道的計較不出斷見(annihilationism)和常見(eternalism)兩種見解。現在說緣因(dependent origination)和自然(nature)，兩者都不是，那麼斷見和常見都被破除了，而且又不是和合生(arising from combination)，也不是不和合(not arising from combination)，那麼情理窮盡，各種計較消亡，真我(true self)自然顯現。所以說圓滿菩提(perfect Bodhi)不生滅性(non-arising and non-ceasing nature)，清凈本心(pure original mind)本覺(original enlightenment)常住(eternal dwelling)，這是佛陀所說的周遍(omnipresent)。難道是外道所說的嗎？
【English Translation】 English version 『That which is difficult for the Tathagata (如來, one of the titles of a Buddha) to speak of, can see me.』
This is to re-emphasize and negate the previous statement. Wenling's explanation is very clear: since the 'seeing' mentioned earlier is actually my mind and can see things, then that 'seeing' is me, and this body is not me. 'Seeing' exists in things, not in me; things come to see me, not I go to see things. Is there such a principle?
『Pointing is not pointing.』
Some say that 'pointing is not pointing' is Zhuangzi's saying, which is incorrect. Why not look at the text, where the word 'pointing' is mentioned ten times in a row? One place says 'not without indication', the second place says 'raising a finger to explain', the third place says 'indeed pointing out', the fourth place says 'pointing out to show me', the fifth place says 'what the hand points to', the sixth place says 'pointing is all things', the seventh place says 'what you point to', the eighth place says 'receiving what you point to', the ninth place says 'should point to something', and then the tenth place says 'pointing is not pointing'. The Buddha asked Ananda (阿難, one of the principal disciples of the Buddha) to point out what is 'seeing' and what is not 'seeing', so he said 'pointing is not pointing'. What can be pointed to is a thing, not 'seeing'; what cannot be pointed to is 'seeing', not a thing. The action of 'pointing out' is the annihilation of both right and wrong. Someone asked: Can Zhuangzi's words not be used? 'Kenqie' is also Zhuangzi's word. Answer: Of course, there is no harm in using it, but the 'pointing' here is not the meaning of Zhuangzi's 'one horse, one finger'. How can it be forced to fit? 'Kenqie' and the like are naturally not the case, so there is no harm in using it. The Buddhist scriptures were originally in Sanskrit, translated into Chinese. If the words here are not used, it will eventually become Sanskrit. What is translation? Some Chandala (闡提, outcast) people say that Buddhist scriptures plagiarize Lao Zhuang. If this is the case, then translating Buddhist scriptures to enlightenment, Yi Yin (伊尹, a famous minister in Chinese history) had already said, 'I am the first to be aware of the people of heaven.' Translating Sutras (修多羅, discourses of the Buddha) using scriptures to replace poetry and books, etc., has long been called scriptures, so are the words 'enlightenment' and 'scripture' also plagiarizing Confucian classics? This statement is untenable and does not require much debate.
『Various heretics (外道, non-Buddhist schools of thought) all say that there is a true self (真我, true self) that pervades the ten directions (十方, all directions), what is the difference?』
This is to doubt that the Buddha's saying that seeing-nature (見性, seeing-nature) pervades the ten directions, and the heretics also say that 'I' pervades the ten directions, where is the difference? The following only broadly explains the cause and condition (因緣, cause and condition), nature (自然, nature), and does not analyze this doubt, why? Because the heretics' calculations do not go beyond the two views of annihilationism (斷見, annihilationism) and eternalism (常見, eternalism). Now it is said that dependent origination (緣因, dependent origination) and nature (自然, nature) are neither, then annihilationism and eternalism are both broken, and it is neither arising from combination (和合生, arising from combination) nor not arising from combination (不和合, not arising from combination), then the reason is exhausted, all calculations disappear, and the true self (真我, true self) naturally appears. Therefore, it is said that perfect Bodhi (圓滿菩提, perfect Bodhi) is the non-arising and non-ceasing nature (不生滅性, non-arising and non-ceasing nature), pure original mind (清凈本心, pure original mind), original enlightenment (本覺, original enlightenment), and eternal dwelling (常住, eternal dwelling). This is what the Buddha said is omnipresent (周遍, omnipresent). Is it what the heretics said?
道妄見執有實我遍十方者可同日而語哉。
見見之時見非是見見猶離見見不能及。
見見古有正解言能見即今見物之見也則下之見字成所見矣見見之時是見也非尋常見物之見也故曰見非是見一說謂豈有真見覆見妄見之理二見字平看一真見一妄見此說似是而非二見平看則之時二字無所著落又下文云此實見見云何複名覺聞知見如何銷會試以本經語例之經云將聞持佛佛何不自聞聞今例云將見見如來何不自見見又經云不自觀音以觀觀者今例云不自見物以見見者如是則其義不辨而自明矣。
別業妄見同分妄見。
舊解別者一人妄見也同者多人妄見也混而不明隱而不暢未有發揮者然溫陵有說云別業者起惑之異同分者感妄之同會解失錄故講者忽焉但溫陵略出其意而止今更為詳言之譬如世人造種種罪人各殊科喻之如別後罹王法共入一獄喻之如同今曰起惑者隨心而造妄業也造業別其因由故名別業曰感妄者隨業而受妄報也受報同其劑限故名同分近又一說別者見根同者見境亦異舊說覽者詳焉。
進退合明。
經云吾今以此二事進退合明而舊解從此處過經文一百餘字直至如彼眾生處方曰進同例別一病目人處方曰退別例同進退雖顯而隔前大遠似為不妥溫陵以法喻互舉為進退合明頗覺穩當但合明則得進退未協
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 認為虛妄的見解執著于真實的我，並且認為這個『我』遍佈十方，這種說法怎麼能與正確的道理相提並論呢？ 當能見的『見』起作用的時候，這個『見』並非是通常所說的『見』。即使離開了能見的『見』，通常所說的『見』也無法達到真『見』的境界。 對於『見見』（jian jian）這個詞，古時候有正確的解釋，說能見的『見』就是現在見物體的『見』，那麼下面的『見』字就變成了所見的物體了。『見見』的時候，這個『見』是真『見』，不是平常見物體的『見』，所以說『見非是見』。有一種說法認為，難道有真『見』又去見虛妄之『見』的道理嗎？把兩個『見』字平等地看待，一個代表真『見』，一個代表妄『見』，這種說法似乎正確但實際上是錯誤的。如果把兩個『見』字平等看待，那麼『之時』這兩個字就沒有著落了。而且下文說『此實見見』，又怎麼能稱之為覺聞知見呢？如何才能消除這些疑問呢？可以拿本經的例子來說明。經中說，『將聞持佛（jiang wen chi fo）佛何不自聞』，現在可以仿照這個例子說，『將見見如來（jiang jian jian ru lai）何不自見見』。又經中說，『不自觀音（bu zi guan yin）以觀觀者』，現在可以仿照這個例子說，『不自見物以見見者』。這樣，它的含義自然就明白了。 別業妄見（bie ye wang jian）和同分妄見（tong fen wang jian）。 舊的解釋是，『別』是指一個人虛妄的見解，『同』是指多個人虛妄的見解。這種解釋混淆不清，隱晦不明，沒有充分地闡發。然而，溫陵（Wen Ling）有一種說法，認為『別業』是指產生迷惑的差異，『同分』是指感受虛妄的相同。這種解釋已經遺失，所以講解的人忽略了它。但是，溫陵只是略微地提出了這個意思而已。現在我更詳細地解釋它。比如世人造作各種各樣的罪業，每個人所犯的罪行各不相同，這可以比喻為『別』；後來觸犯了王法，一同進入監獄，這可以比喻為『同』。現在說，產生迷惑是隨著各自的心而造作虛妄的業，造業的因由各不相同，所以叫做『別業』；感受虛妄是隨著各自的業而承受虛妄的果報，承受果報的程度相同，所以叫做『同分』。最近又有一種說法，『別』是指見根（jian gen）不同，『同』是指見境（jian jing）相同。希望讀者詳細地考察舊的說法。 進退合明（jin tui he ming）。 經中說，『吾今以此二事進退合明』，而舊的解釋從這裡跳過了經文一百多個字，直到『如彼眾生處方』才說是『進』，用一個眼睛有病的人的處方來說明『退』，用『別』來比喻『同』。這樣，『進退』雖然明顯，但是和前面的內容相隔太遠，似乎不太妥當。溫陵用比喻和法理相互舉例來說明『進退合明』，我覺得比較穩妥。但是，『合明』是得到了，『進退』卻沒有協調。
【English Translation】 English version: How can the view that clings to a real 'self' (我, wo), which is a false perception, and believes that this 'self' pervades the ten directions, be compared to the correct principle? When the 'seeing' (見, jian) that is capable of seeing is in operation, this 'seeing' is not the ordinary 'seeing'. Even if one departs from the 'seeing' that is capable of seeing, the ordinary 'seeing' cannot reach the realm of true 'seeing'. Regarding the term 'seeing-seeing' (見見, jian jian), there was a correct explanation in ancient times, saying that the 'seeing' that is capable of seeing is the 'seeing' of objects that we do now. Then the 'seeing' in the following would become the object seen. When 'seeing-seeing' occurs, this 'seeing' is true 'seeing', not the ordinary 'seeing' of objects. Therefore, it is said 'seeing is not seeing'. One explanation suggests, 'Is there a reason for true 'seeing' to see false 'seeing' again?' Treating the two 'seeing' equally, one representing true 'seeing' and the other representing false 'seeing', this explanation seems correct but is actually wrong. If the two 'seeing' are treated equally, then the words 'at the time' have no basis. Moreover, the following text says 'This is truly seeing-seeing', so how can it be called awareness, hearing, and knowing? How can these doubts be resolved? We can use examples from this sutra to illustrate. The sutra says, 'If one uses hearing to hold onto the Buddha (將聞持佛, jiang wen chi fo), why doesn't the Buddha hear himself?' Now we can imitate this example and say, 'If one uses seeing to see the Tathagata (將見見如來, jiang jian jian ru lai), why doesn't one see oneself seeing?' Also, the sutra says, 'Not using oneself to observe sound (不自觀音, bu zi guan yin), but using observation to observe the observer.' Now we can imitate this example and say, 'Not using oneself to see objects, but using seeing to see the seer.' In this way, its meaning will naturally become clear. Separate karma false seeing (別業妄見, bie ye wang jian) and shared karma false seeing (同分妄見, tong fen wang jian). The old explanation is that 'separate' refers to the false view of one person, and 'shared' refers to the false view of many people. This explanation is confusing, obscure, and does not fully elaborate. However, Wen Ling (溫陵) has a saying that 'separate karma' refers to the difference in arising delusion, and 'shared karma' refers to the similarity in experiencing falseness. This explanation has been lost, so those who explain it ignore it. However, Wen Ling only briefly put forward this meaning. Now I will explain it in more detail. For example, people create all kinds of sins, and each person commits different crimes, which can be compared to 'separate'; later, they violate the law and enter the same prison together, which can be compared to 'shared'. Now it is said that arising delusion is creating false karma according to one's own mind, and the causes of creating karma are different, so it is called 'separate karma'; experiencing falseness is receiving false retribution according to one's own karma, and the degree of receiving retribution is the same, so it is called 'shared karma'. Recently, there is another saying that 'separate' refers to different seeing roots (見根, jian gen), and 'shared' refers to the same seeing realm (見境, jian jing). I hope readers will examine the old saying in detail. Combining advancement and retreat for clear understanding (進退合明, jin tui he ming). The sutra says, 'I will now combine these two matters of advancement and retreat for clear understanding', but the old explanation skipped more than a hundred words of the sutra from here, and only said 'advancement' when it came to 'prescribing for those beings', and used the prescription for a person with a diseased eye to illustrate 'retreat', using 'separate' to compare 'shared'. In this way, although 'advancement and retreat' are obvious, they are too far apart from the previous content, which seems inappropriate. Wen Ling uses metaphors and principles to illustrate 'combining advancement and retreat for clear understanding', which I think is more appropriate. However, 'combining for clear understanding' is achieved, but 'advancement and retreat' are not coordinated.
近索隱謂且置同分而舉別喻次以法合復置別業而舉同喻次以法合舉者進也置者退也兼此二說其義甚備。
譬如有人(云云)其人無故瞪以發勞。
有謂上有人人字屬菩薩下其人人字屬眾生此說非是上下即是一人。
取頻伽瓶塞其兩孔滿中擎空千里遠行用餉他國。
溫陵孤山皆以瓶喻妄身空喻識陰凈覺乃添出譬如有人之人喻業合論非之是也合論又云空喻識者無分別為真空有分別為識陰也瓶內之空局故有分別與外空異也塞其兩孔溫陵謂妄分同異不知何名同異今謂塞孔者恐物出瓶外也而瓶有兩孔兩孔俱塞者保護之極其至也空非出入之物而慎塞之喻識本虛幻而保持虛幻命根惟恐其失也千里用餉者喻多劫飄零死此生彼也。
○第三卷
前矚塵象歸當見根。
此破見不從空生也若從空生則空必前矚塵象乃名為見蓋空為能見塵象為所見今此眼根實在我面則我乃塵象矣空應反歸而見我之眼根如其不能見眼則前矚塵象之義不成矣安得見從空生。
見聞逆流流不及地。
依孤山解穩當見聞逆流者五根順流惟意能旋其見聞逆流而緣五塵以其逆流故攬塵而為憶也流不及地者如是逆流所不及之分際則闃然懵然而無所緣以流不及故失憶而為忘也。
聲來耳邊。
耳之有聽經明
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 有人最近研究並說，應該先擱置共同的方面，然後用不同的比喻來闡述，接著再用法理來結合；再擱置不同的方面，然後用相同的比喻來闡述，接著再用法理來結合。『舉』是前進，『置』是後退。兼顧這兩種說法，其意義就非常完備了。
譬如有人（云云），這個人無緣無故地瞪眼，以至於眼睛疲勞。
有人說，上面的『有人』的『人』字指的是菩薩，下面的『其人』的『人』字指的是眾生。這種說法是不對的，上下指的都是同一個人。
拿一個頻伽瓶（一種裝飾華麗的瓶子），塞住它的兩個孔，裝滿空氣，拿著它走一千里路，去供養其他國家。
溫陵和孤山都用瓶子來比喻虛妄的身體，用空來比喻識陰（五蘊之一，指精神意識），凈覺又新增了『譬如有人』的『人』來比喻業，這都是不正確的。合論又說，空比喻識，無分別的是真空，有分別的是識陰。瓶內的空是侷限的，所以有分別，與外面的空不同。塞住它的兩個孔，溫陵認為這是妄想分別同異，不知道什麼是同什麼是異。現在我認為，塞住孔是爲了防止東西從瓶外流出。而瓶子有兩個孔，兩個孔都塞住，這是保護到了極致。空不是可以出入的東西，卻謹慎地塞住它，比喻識本來是虛幻的，卻保持著虛幻的命根，惟恐失去它。走一千里路去供養，比喻多劫飄零，死在這裡，生在那裡。
○第三卷
向前看塵世的景象，最終應當看到根源。
這是爲了破除『見』不是從空產生的觀點。如果『見』是從空產生的，那麼空必定先看到塵世的景象，才能稱之為『見』。因為空是能見的，塵世的景像是所見的。現在這個眼根實實在在地在我面前，那麼我就成了塵世的景象了。空應該反過來看到我的眼根，如果它不能看到眼根，那麼『向前看塵世景象』的意義就不成立了。怎麼能說『見』是從空產生的呢？
見聞逆流，流不到盡頭。
依照孤山的解釋比較穩妥，見聞逆流指的是五根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身）順流，只有意根（意識）能夠旋轉。它的見聞逆流而緣於五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸），因為它逆流，所以攝取塵境而成為記憶。流不到盡頭，指的是像這樣逆流所不能到達的界限，那麼就寂靜、懵懂而無所緣，因為流不到盡頭，所以失去記憶而成為遺忘。
聲音來到耳邊。
耳朵有聽覺，經典中已經明確說明了。
【English Translation】 English version: Recently, someone researched and said that one should first set aside the common aspects and then use different metaphors to elaborate, followed by combining with legal principles; then set aside the different aspects and then use the same metaphors to elaborate, followed by combining with legal principles. '舉' (ju) means advancing, '置' (zhi) means retreating. Considering both of these perspectives, its meaning is very complete.
For example, someone (etc.), that person stares blankly for no reason, to the point of eye fatigue.
Someone said that the 'person' in 'someone' above refers to Bodhisattvas, and the 'person' in 'that person' below refers to sentient beings. This statement is incorrect; the top and bottom refer to the same person.
Take a Kalavinka vase (a decorative vase), plug its two holes, fill it with air, and carry it a thousand miles to offer it to other countries.
Wenling and Gushan both use the vase to symbolize the illusory body, and use emptiness to symbolize the Vijnana Skandha (one of the five aggregates, referring to mental consciousness). Jingjue added the 'person' in 'for example, someone' to symbolize karma, which is incorrect. Helun also said that emptiness symbolizes consciousness, non-discrimination is true emptiness, and discrimination is the Vijnana Skandha. The emptiness inside the vase is limited, so there is discrimination, which is different from the emptiness outside. Plugging its two holes, Wenling believes that this is delusional discrimination of similarities and differences, not knowing what is the same and what is different. Now I believe that plugging the holes is to prevent things from flowing out of the vase. And the vase has two holes, and both holes are plugged, which is the ultimate protection. Emptiness is not something that can enter or exit, but it is carefully plugged, symbolizing that consciousness is originally illusory, but it maintains the illusory life force, fearing to lose it. Carrying it a thousand miles to offer it symbolizes wandering through many kalpas, dying here and being born there.
○ Volume 3
Looking forward at the phenomena of the world, one should eventually see the root source.
This is to refute the view that 'seeing' does not arise from emptiness. If 'seeing' arises from emptiness, then emptiness must first see the phenomena of the world to be called 'seeing'. Because emptiness is the seer, and the phenomena of the world are what is seen. Now this eye-root is actually in front of me, then I have become the phenomena of the world. Emptiness should turn around and see my eye-root. If it cannot see the eye-root, then the meaning of 'looking forward at the phenomena of the world' is not established. How can it be said that 'seeing' arises from emptiness?
The flow of seeing and hearing goes against the current, not reaching the end.
According to Gushan's explanation, it is more stable. The flow of seeing and hearing against the current refers to the five roots (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body) flowing with the current, only the mind-root (consciousness) can rotate. Its seeing and hearing flow against the current and are related to the five dusts (form, sound, smell, taste, touch), because it flows against the current, so it takes in the dust realms and becomes memory. Not reaching the end refers to the boundary that such a reverse flow cannot reach, then it is silent, ignorant, and without anything to be related to. Because it does not reach the end, it loses memory and becomes forgetting.
The sound comes to the ear.
The ear has hearing, which has been clearly stated in the scriptures.
言非聲來耳邊矣今以事證之有可疑者假如鐘鼓樓介乎城南北之中央南風作則北城聞之而南不聞北風作則南城聞之而北不聞風送聲而人得聞如何道不是聲來耳邊人多於此草草看過無發難者愚意佛言寧有錯乎聲定不來耳邊心定遍周法界但諸眾生粘湛發聽失本妙圓局而礙之束而小之是以風順則聞風逆則否反為境使而不得自在耳之過也非聲之故也以是推之隔垣聽音響遐邇皆可聞亦復可難既垣不礙音何為城內一人面城而語城外一人附城而聽乃杳爾無聞乎此亦同前蓋耳之過也非垣與城之故也是以耳通者徹聽或聽一世界乃至恒沙世界而無盡也。
此摩所知誰為能觸。
凡物須一能一所彼此相感然後成觸則一有知一無知也今以手摩頭手與頭各各有知將以誰為能觸乎若手為能觸頭則木石也今頭亦有知何得名觸若頭為能觸手則木石也今手亦有知何得名觸此明身之覺觸皆虛妄也問手摩頭固不成觸矣若手摩外物豈不成觸答是亦妄分能所也然此意人所難明故借頭手引起畢竟身觸虛妄皆如頭手耳。
從變則變界相自無不變則恒既從色生應不識知虛空所在。
上文言此識若從色生色滅應與俱滅識既俱滅則空獨存誰識空者若色滅時識不俱滅則識獨存無色為侶誰界空者今又重申上意言不但識存無界假使隨色變滅則識已變滅亦誰與
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 你說聲音不是來到耳邊的，現在我用事實來證明，其中有可疑的地方。假如鐘鼓樓位於城市的南北中央，南風吹起時，北城的人能聽到鐘聲，而南城的人聽不到；北風吹起時，南城的人能聽到鐘聲，而北城的人聽不到。如果是風把聲音送到，人才聽到的，怎麼能說不是聲音來到耳邊呢？很多人對此草率看過，沒有人提出疑問。我認為佛說的話難道會有錯嗎？聲音一定不是來到耳邊的，心一定是周遍法界的。只是眾生執著于清凈的聽覺功能，失去了原本的妙圓，被侷限和障礙了。所以順風時能聽到，逆風時就聽不到，反而被外境所驅使，不能自在。這是耳朵的過錯，不是聲音的緣故。由此推論，隔著墻壁也能聽到聲音，遠近都可以聽到，這也可以提出疑問：既然墻壁不能阻礙聲音，為什麼城內的人面對城墻說話，城外的人貼著城墻聽，卻一點也聽不到呢？這和前面的情況一樣，都是耳朵的過錯，不是墻壁和城墻的緣故。因此，耳朵通達的人，能夠徹底地聽聞，或者聽聞一個世界，乃至恒河沙數的世界，也沒有窮盡。 『此摩所知誰為能觸。』 凡是事物，必須有一個能動者和一個被動者，彼此相互感應，然後才能形成觸覺。這樣，一個有知覺，一個沒有知覺。現在用手去觸控頭，手和頭各自都有知覺，那麼應該以誰作為能觸者呢？如果手是能觸者，那麼頭就如同木頭石頭一樣沒有知覺。現在頭也有知覺，怎麼能稱為觸覺呢？如果頭是能觸者，那麼手就如同木頭石頭一樣沒有知覺。現在手也有知覺，怎麼能稱為觸覺呢？這說明身體的覺觸都是虛妄的。有人問：手觸控頭固然不能形成觸覺，如果手觸控外物，難道還不能形成觸覺嗎？回答說：這也是虛妄地分別能動者和被動者。然而這個道理人們難以明白，所以借用頭和手來引發，最終說明身體的觸覺都是虛妄的，就像頭和手一樣。 『從變則變界相自無不變則恒既從色生應不識知虛空所在。』 上文說，這個識如果從色產生，色滅時，識也應該一起滅亡。識既然一起滅亡，那麼只有空存在，誰來認識空呢？如果色滅時，識沒有一起滅亡，那麼識獨自存在，沒有色作為伴侶，誰來界定空呢？現在又重新申明上面的意思，說不但識存在沒有界限，即使隨著色變滅，那麼識已經變滅，又和誰一起呢？
【English Translation】 English version: You say that sound does not come to the ear. Now I will use facts to prove it, and there are questionable points. Suppose the Bell and Drum Tower is located in the center of the north and south of the city. When the south wind blows, the people in the north city can hear the bell, but the people in the south city cannot; when the north wind blows, the people in the south city can hear the bell, but the people in the north city cannot. If the wind sends the sound, and then people hear it, how can you say that the sound does not come to the ear? Many people have hastily overlooked this and no one has raised any questions. In my opinion, could the Buddha's words be wrong? Sound certainly does not come to the ear; the mind is certainly pervasive throughout the Dharma Realm. It is just that sentient beings are attached to the pure hearing function, losing the original wonderful completeness, and are limited and obstructed. Therefore, when the wind is favorable, they can hear; when the wind is unfavorable, they cannot. Instead, they are driven by external circumstances and cannot be free. This is the fault of the ear, not the cause of the sound. From this, it can be inferred that one can hear sounds through walls, and one can hear both near and far. This can also be questioned: since the wall does not obstruct sound, why is it that when a person inside the city speaks facing the wall, and a person outside the city listens close to the wall, they cannot hear anything at all? This is the same as the previous situation; it is the fault of the ear, not the cause of the wall and the city wall. Therefore, those whose ears are unobstructed can thoroughly hear, or hear one world, or even countless worlds like the sands of the Ganges, without end. 'Of this touching and knowing, who is the toucher?' For all things, there must be an actor and an object, interacting with each other, and then touch can be formed. In this way, one has awareness and the other does not. Now, using the hand to touch the head, the hand and the head each have awareness. Then, who should be considered the toucher? If the hand is the toucher, then the head is like wood and stone, without awareness. Now the head also has awareness, how can it be called touch? If the head is the toucher, then the hand is like wood and stone, without awareness. Now the hand also has awareness, how can it be called touch? This shows that the bodily sensations of touch are all illusory. Someone asks: Touching the head with the hand certainly does not form touch. If the hand touches external objects, can it not form touch? The answer is: This is also falsely distinguishing the actor and the object. However, this principle is difficult for people to understand, so I use the head and hand to initiate, ultimately explaining that the bodily sensations of touch are all illusory, just like the head and hand. 'If it changes with change, then the boundaries and characteristics are non-existent. If it does not change, then it is constant. Since it arises from form, it should not recognize where emptiness is.' The previous text said that if this consciousness arises from form, then when form ceases, consciousness should also cease together. Since consciousness ceases together, then only emptiness exists. Who will recognize emptiness? If consciousness does not cease together when form ceases, then consciousness exists alone, without form as a companion. Who will define emptiness? Now, I restate the above meaning, saying that not only does consciousness exist without boundaries, but even if it changes and ceases with form, then consciousness has already changed and ceased. Then, with whom is it together?
空為界者不但識滅不應識空假使識不變滅則恒常與色一體與空無干誰識空者反覆較量眼識不生於色明矣。
合則中離離則兩合。
承上文眼識不從眼生不從色生矣既不分二處而各生得無兼二處而合生乎然汝欲合之彼則中離矣蓋眼自屬有知色自屬無知有知無知兩相敵對如之何其可合也若汝欲離之彼則兩合矣蓋眼根必合色色塵必閤眼而後識生其中兩相和會如之何其可離也合之則離離之則合此之體性渾然雜亂將於何處立共生之界乎前明眼色虛妄今言識亦虛妄故曰三處俱無。
又汝識心與諸思量兼了別性為同爲異。
舊解初句識心是意次二句是識但初句明標識心何得作意今謂仍以初句為識下二句為意以意屬思量亦能了別也蓋云今此識心與彼意之思量義乃了別義同乎異乎若識同意則識即意何得云意之所生若識異意則識乃無知與意判隔何得云意之所生若識異意而又能思量了別則意無知而識有知應當反識乎意而為識意又何得云意之所生同之不可異之不可識非意生何疑焉而謂以意為界者非也一說識心與思量之意俱能了別既俱能了別則同矣何得又問為同爲異既俱能了別則有識矣何得又問無識有識或謂意思量識了別今說意兼了別何也蓋心意識三古稱義可通用如金光明言意根分別一切諸法則意兼了別有何不可。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 以空為界定者認為，眼識的滅去不應該等同於空的滅去。如果眼識的體性不變不滅，那麼它就恒常地與色塵結合爲一體，與空毫無關係。那麼，是誰在認知空呢？反覆推敲，眼識並非從色塵而生，這是顯而易見的道理。
合在一起則會分離，分離則又會合在一起。
承接上文，眼識不是從眼根產生，也不是從色塵產生。既然不是分別從兩處產生，難道是從兩處結合而產生嗎？然而，如果你想讓它們結合，它們又會分離。因為眼根本身具有知覺，而色塵本身沒有知覺，有知覺和無知覺相互對立，怎麼可能結合在一起呢？如果你想讓它們分離，它們又會結合在一起。因為眼根必須與**塵結合，眼必須與眼塵結合，然後才能產生眼識，其中兩者相互調和，怎麼可能分離呢？結合則分離，分離則結合，這種體性渾然雜亂，要在哪裡建立共同產生的界限呢？前面說明眼根和色塵是虛妄的，現在說眼識也是虛妄的，所以說三處都沒有實在的自性。
再問，你的眼識之心與各種思量和了別的體性，是相同還是相異？
舊的解釋認為，第一句的『識心』是指意根，後面的兩句是指眼識。但是第一句明明標明是識心，怎麼能解釋為意根呢？現在認為仍然以第一句為眼識，後面的兩句為意根，因為意根屬於思量，也能進行分別。大概是說，現在的這個眼識之心與那個意根的思量之義和了別之義，是相同還是相異呢？如果眼識與意根相同，那麼眼識就是意根，怎麼能說是意根所生呢？如果眼識與意根相異，那麼眼識就是沒有知覺的，與意根截然分開，怎麼能說是意根所生呢？如果眼識與意根相異，但又能思量和分別，那麼意根沒有知覺而眼識有知覺，應該反過來是眼識產生意根，眼識怎麼能說是意根所生呢？相同也不行，相異也不行，眼識不是意根所生，還有什麼可懷疑的呢？所以說以意根為界定者是不對的。另一種說法是，眼識之心與思量的意根都能進行分別，既然都能進行分別，那就是相同的了，怎麼還要問是相同還是相異呢？既然都能進行分別，那就是有知覺的了，怎麼還要問有沒有知覺呢？或者說，意根是思量，眼識是分別，現在說意根兼具分別，這是為什麼呢？因為心、意、識三者，古人稱其意義可以通用，如《金光明經》說，意根分別一切諸法，那麼意根兼具分別又有什麼不可以呢？
【English Translation】 English version Those who define by emptiness believe that the cessation of eye-consciousness should not be equated with the cessation of emptiness. If the nature of eye-consciousness is unchanging and imperishable, then it is perpetually united with form (rupa) and has nothing to do with emptiness. Then, who is it that cognizes emptiness? Upon repeated examination, it is clear that eye-consciousness does not arise from form.
When joined, they separate; when separated, they join.
Following the previous text, eye-consciousness does not arise from the eye, nor does it arise from form. Since it does not arise separately from the two places, could it arise from the combination of the two? However, if you want them to combine, they will separate. This is because the eye itself has awareness, while form itself has no awareness. Awareness and non-awareness are opposed to each other, how can they be combined? If you want them to separate, they will join together. This is because the eye-organ must combine with dust (rupa), and the eye must combine with eye-dust, and then eye-consciousness can arise, in which the two harmonize with each other, how can they be separated? Combining leads to separation, and separation leads to combination. This nature is completely chaotic, where can one establish the boundary of co-arising? The previous explanation clarified that the eye and form are illusory, and now it is said that eye-consciousness is also illusory, therefore it is said that all three places have no real self-nature.
Furthermore, is your mind of eye-consciousness the same as or different from the nature of various thoughts and discriminations?
The old interpretation believes that the 'mind of consciousness' in the first sentence refers to the mind-organ (manas), and the following two sentences refer to eye-consciousness. However, the first sentence clearly indicates the mind of consciousness, how can it be interpreted as the mind-organ? Now it is believed that the first sentence still refers to eye-consciousness, and the following two sentences refer to the mind-organ, because the mind-organ belongs to thought and can also discriminate. It probably means, is this current mind of eye-consciousness the same as or different from the meaning of thought and the meaning of discrimination of that mind-organ? If eye-consciousness is the same as the mind-organ, then eye-consciousness is the mind-organ, how can it be said to be produced by the mind-organ? If eye-consciousness is different from the mind-organ, then eye-consciousness is without awareness and is completely separated from the mind-organ, how can it be said to be produced by the mind-organ? If eye-consciousness is different from the mind-organ, but can still think and discriminate, then the mind-organ has no awareness while eye-consciousness has awareness, it should be the other way around, with eye-consciousness producing the mind-organ, how can eye-consciousness be said to be produced by the mind-organ? Being the same is not possible, being different is not possible, eye-consciousness is not produced by the mind-organ, what else is there to doubt? Therefore, it is wrong to say that the mind-organ is the definer. Another saying is that both the mind of eye-consciousness and the mind-organ of thought can discriminate. Since both can discriminate, then they are the same, why ask whether they are the same or different? Since both can discriminate, then they have awareness, why ask whether they have awareness or not? Or it is said that the mind-organ is thought and eye-consciousness is discrimination, now it is said that the mind-organ also has discrimination, why is that? Because the three of mind, mind-organ, and consciousness, the ancients said that their meanings can be used interchangeably, such as the Golden Light Sutra saying that the mind-organ discriminates all dharmas, then what is wrong with the mind-organ also having discrimination?
瞭然自知獲本妙心常住不滅(此節當在空則同無後)。
如上微妙開示自抉擇心見以至發明五陰六根六塵六識七大皆即如來藏心因此了知自心常住不滅此是一經大旨趣大眼目誠得此心則我常為主萬法為客長安雖鬧我國晏然彼摩登伽猶如妖狐忽遇明鏡竄伏無地尚安所施其魔力耶。
自汝整衣云何倒拂。
此文因自汝整衣四字故解者不一今只依文順釋其意自顯蓋此是明風不生彼面也言風若生於彼面則當從彼至此拂汝阿難然今此風自汝整衣現拂于彼既風生彼面何為不順拂汝而倒拂彼耶故知風決不生彼面也若以倒拂屬阿難則非明風不生於彼面乃明風不生於阿難袈裟矣。
見覺無知因色空有。
或謂此言見覺無知下文舉見覺空頑作對則覺乃有知上下矛盾宜以上覺字屬身根下覺字屬知覺雖似有理然不應一覺兩解今謂無知者非實無知也以此引起因色空有一句蓋色空不現時見覺寂然宛似無知因色空現而後見覺有知也孔子曰吾有知乎哉無知也有問我者我叩其兩端而竭焉孔子實無知誰答問者兩無知相比意極痛快。
性見覺明覺精明見。
時解七大作一例看初地大云性色真空性空真色言真妄本同一性全性之色即空全性之空即色猶言全濕之波即水全濕之水即波也今此見大云性見覺明覺精明見照
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 完全明白地自己知道，獲得了本有的微妙真心，它是常住不滅的。（此節應當放在『空則同無』之後。） 像上面這樣微妙的開示，自己決斷選擇內心所見，以至於發明五陰（色、受、想、行、識，構成人身的五種要素），六根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意，六種感覺器官），六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法，六種感覺對像），六識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識、意識，六種感覺），七大（地、水、火、風、空、見、識，構成宇宙的七種要素），都即是如來藏心（Tathagatagarbha，如來所證悟的清凈自性）。因此了知自己的心是常住不滅的。這是一部經的大旨趣、大眼目。真正得到這個心，那麼『我』就常常是主人，萬法是客人。長安（Chang'an，古都，比喻繁華之地）雖然熱鬧，我的國家卻安然無事。那摩登伽（Matanga，古印度 जाति制度下的賤民）猶如妖狐，忽然遇到明鏡，只能竄伏無地，還怎麼能施展她的魔力呢？ 從你整理衣服，為什麼是倒拂？ 這段文字因為『從你整理衣服』這四個字，所以解釋的人不一致。現在只依照文字順著解釋它的意思自然顯現。大概這是說明風不是從對面產生的。說風如果從對面產生，那麼應當從那邊到這邊拂動你阿難（Ananda，佛陀的十大弟子之一）的袈裟。然而現在這風從你整理衣服時顯現，拂動在那邊，既然風是從對面產生的，為什麼不順著拂動你，反而倒著拂動那邊呢？所以知道風決不是從對面產生的。如果把『倒拂』歸於阿難，那就不是說明風不是從對面產生，而是說明風不是從阿難的袈裟產生的了。 見覺無知，因色空有。 有人說這句話『見覺無知』，下文舉『見覺空頑』作對比，那麼『覺』就是有知，上下矛盾。應該把上面的『覺』字歸於身根，下面的『覺』字歸於知覺，雖然好像有道理，但不應該一個『覺』字有兩種解釋。現在說『無知』，不是真的沒有知覺。用這句話引起『因色空有』一句，因為色空不顯現時，見覺寂然，宛如無知，因為色空顯現，然後見覺才有知覺。孔子說：『我有什麼知呢？沒有什麼知。有人問我，我叩問他問題的兩端，而竭盡我的理解。』孔子實在沒有什麼知，誰回答問題呢？兩無知相比，意思極其痛快。 性見覺明，覺精明見。 當時解釋七大（地、水、火、風、空、見、識，構成宇宙的七種要素）作一個例子來看，最初的地大說『性色真空，性空真色』，說真妄本來同一體性，全性的色就是空，全性的空就是色，猶如說全濕的波就是水，全濕的水就是波。現在這見大說『性見覺明，覺精明見』照
【English Translation】 English version: Clearly and knowingly realizing oneself, one obtains the inherent, subtle, and true mind, which is permanent and indestructible. (This section should be placed after 'emptiness is the same as nothingness.') As in the above subtle exposition, one's own mind is decisively chosen and seen, to the point of revealing that the five skandhas (form, feeling, perception, volition, consciousness, the five elements that constitute the human body), the six sense organs (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, the six sensory organs), the six sense objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma, the six objects of sensation), the six consciousnesses (eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness, the six consciousnesses), and the seven great elements (earth, water, fire, wind, space, perception, consciousness, the seven elements that constitute the universe) are all the Tathagatagarbha mind (Tathagatagarbha, the pure self-nature realized by the Tathagata). Therefore, one knows that one's own mind is permanent and indestructible. This is the great purpose and essence of this sutra. Truly obtaining this mind, then 'I' am always the master, and the myriad dharmas are the guests. Although Chang'an (Chang'an, the ancient capital, a metaphor for a prosperous place) is bustling, my country is peaceful. That Matanga (Matanga, a member of a low caste in ancient India) is like a demonic fox, suddenly encountering a bright mirror, can only flee and hide without a place to stand, how can she still exert her demonic power? From you adjusting your robe, why is it being brushed against in the opposite direction? This passage, because of the four words 'from you adjusting your robe,' has different interpretations. Now, I will only follow the text and explain its meaning naturally. This is probably to explain that the wind is not generated from the opposite side. If the wind were generated from the opposite side, then it should have come from there to here and brushed against your, Ananda's (Ananda, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples), robe. However, now this wind appears when you adjust your robe, brushing against that side. Since the wind is generated from the opposite side, why doesn't it brush against you in the same direction, but instead brushes against that side in the opposite direction? Therefore, it is known that the wind is definitely not generated from the opposite side. If the 'brushing against in the opposite direction' is attributed to Ananda, then it is not explaining that the wind is not generated from the opposite side, but rather that the wind is not generated from Ananda's robe. Seeing and awareness are without knowledge, due to form and emptiness. Some say that this sentence 'seeing and awareness are without knowledge,' and the following text uses 'seeing and awareness, emptiness and dullness' as a contrast, then 'awareness' is with knowledge, which is contradictory. The 'awareness' above should be attributed to the body's sense organ, and the 'awareness' below should be attributed to perception, although it seems reasonable, but one 'awareness' should not have two interpretations. Now, saying 'without knowledge' does not mean truly without knowledge. This sentence leads to the phrase 'due to form and emptiness,' because when form and emptiness are not manifest, seeing and awareness are silent, as if without knowledge, because form and emptiness are manifest, then seeing and awareness have knowledge. Confucius said, 'Do I have knowledge? I have no knowledge. When someone asks me, I question him on both ends of the problem, and exhaust my understanding.' Confucius truly had no knowledge, so who answers the questions? Comparing two instances of no knowledge, the meaning is extremely satisfying. The nature of seeing is enlightened awareness, the essence of awareness is enlightened seeing. At that time, the seven great elements (earth, water, fire, wind, space, perception, consciousness, the seven elements that constitute the universe) were explained as one example. The initial earth element said 'the nature of form is truly empty, the nature of emptiness is truly form,' saying that truth and falsehood are originally the same essence, the form of the whole nature is emptiness, and the emptiness of the whole nature is form, just like saying the wave of complete wetness is water, and the water of complete wetness is wave. Now this seeing element says 'the nature of seeing is enlightened awareness, the essence of awareness is enlightened seeing,' illuminating
上一例文小異而意實同也言全性之見即明全性之明即見也乃至識大云性識明知覺明真識亦言全性之識即知全性之知即識也真俗互動七大一例溫陵后二大與前五不同時解為是又地等四大用空字粗細之謂也空大用覺字無情有情之謂也見大用明字見乃妄明明者真明也識大用知字識乃妄知知者真知也。
空則同無有非同物縱發汝識欲何分別。
此明識必不生於空也若生於空則非相非見夫識應在相見之中今乃處此相見兩非之地將頑然一空歟空則畢竟同無既無矣識何由發將實然有是識歟有則同於何物既非物矣識何由發縱許發識而空本自無分別則其所發之識應與空同豈有分別乎識不生於空審矣。
不歷僧祇獲法身。
獲法身吳興謂是實證其說甚詳長水溫陵孤山諸師皆同此說蓋是分證法身不言五分究竟也即不通指大眾言阿難證亦復何礙其以阿難后卷文中僅證二果為礙而曰是解非證又是佛神力故暫俾得見今皆不必作如是解只依前來諸師言證法身後卷僅證二果至文自有詳辨。
舜若多性可銷亡爍迦羅心無動轉。
舜若多空也此有二義其一空決不可銷亡今欲極言心無動轉取以相形言空尚可銷心必不動如虛空可量風可系無能盡說佛功德之類也其二一人發真歸元虛空消殞則實說空可消殞心不可消殞如海水可
竭須彌可傾之類也劫壞之時海涸山崩非喻說也。
○第四卷
善為眾生敷演如來第一義諦。
即上四科七大皆如來藏心不空不有即性即相超三界過二乘至妙至玄最尊最上名第一義諦彼四加亦有第一之名而多世字故通小乘。
猶如聾人逾百步外聆于蚊蚋本所不見何況得聞。
文有三轉世間洪音人所易聞蚊蚋之音音之至微一也至微之音自近聽之則猶可聞今遠百步二也遠聽蚊蚋聰耳之人猶或難之今復聾者三也如是則蚊蚋之形且不能見蚊蚋之音又何能聞乎以法合之微妙諦理旨趣幽玄如蚊蚋音一也地位遼隔如越百步二也根性狹劣猶如聾人三也如是則此妙諦尚不能知其所在況能與之默契乎只順理順文其意自明有人謂蚊蚋身表真諦蚊蚋音表中道第一義諦夫聲聞見真諦成果何云本所不見又音從身出亦何得分屬二諦于理不通。
性覺妙明本覺明妙。
舊解以妙明明妙為寂照照寂其意雖正但明可云照而妙字云寂覺未穩蓋妙者通有無兼體用而圓融不測之謂也何專以屬寂今助一解性覺妙明者言此性覺是極妙之明蓋寂而常照之明故稱妙明也本覺明妙者言此本覺是明之極妙者蓋明雖照而未嘗不寂故稱明妙也則妙明二字既不敵訓寂照而寂照之意自在其中矣又性覺本覺小異大同性者性分所具不可遷改故本者
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 即使像竭盡須彌山那樣的事情也是可能發生的，劫難毀滅的時候，海洋乾涸，山嶽崩塌，這並非只是一個比喻的說法。 第四卷 善於為眾生敷演如來第一義諦（如來所證悟的最高真理）。 即上面所說的四科七大，都是如來藏（一切眾生本具的清凈覺性）的心，不空也不有，即是性也是相，超越三界（欲界、色界、無色界），超過二乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘），達到至妙至玄，最尊最上的境界，名為第一義諦。彼四加也有第一之名，但因為多了『世』字，所以是通於小乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。 就像聾人在百步之外，想要聽到蚊子的嗡嗡聲一樣，本來就看不見蚊子，更何況能聽到它的聲音呢？ 文中有三重轉折：世間的巨大聲音，人們容易聽到；蚊子的聲音，是聲音中極其微弱的，這是第一重。極其微弱的聲音，如果靠近了聽，或許還能聽到；現在距離百步之遠，這是第二重。遙遠地聽蚊子的聲音，即使是聽力好的人也或許難以聽到；現在又是聾人，這是第三重。像這樣，那麼蚊子的形體且且不能看見，蚊子的聲音又怎麼能聽到呢？用佛法來比喻，微妙的真諦，旨趣幽深玄妙，就像蚊子的聲音一樣，這是第一重。地位遙遠隔絕，就像超過百步的距離一樣，這是第二重。根性狹隘低劣，就像聾人一樣，這是第三重。像這樣，那麼這微妙的真諦尚且不能知道它在哪裡，更何況能與之默默契合呢？只要順著道理順著文字，它的意思自然就明白了。有人說蚊子的身體代表真諦，蚊子的聲音代表中道第一義諦，但是聲聞乘見證真諦而證得果位，怎麼能說『本來就看不見』呢？而且聲音是從身體發出的，又怎麼能將它們分別歸屬為二諦呢？這在道理上是講不通的。 性覺妙明，本覺明妙。 舊的解釋以『妙明』為寂照，『明明妙』為照寂，它的意思雖然正確，但是說『明』可以稱為『照』，而用『妙』字來形容『寂』，就顯得不夠穩妥。大概『妙』這個字，是貫通有和無，兼具本體和作用，圓融而不可測度的意思。為什麼專門把它歸屬於『寂』呢？現在我來輔助解釋一下：『性覺妙明』，是說這個性覺，是極其微妙的光明，是寂靜而常照的光明，所以稱為『妙明』。『本覺明妙』，是說這個本覺，是光明中極其微妙的，光明雖然照耀，但卻未嘗不是寂靜的，所以稱為『明妙』。那麼『妙明』這兩個字，既不是專門用來解釋寂照，而寂照的意思也自在其中了。而且性覺和本覺，小有差異，大體相同。性，是性分所具有的，不可改變的，所以本者
【English Translation】 English version: Even something like exhausting Mount Sumeru is possible; when a kalpa (an immense period of time) is destroyed, the oceans dry up and mountains collapse. This is not just a metaphorical saying. Volume 4 Skillfully expounding the Tathagata's (another name for Buddha) First Principle Truth for all sentient beings. That is, the Four Categories and Seven Great Elements mentioned above are all the mind of the Tathagatagarbha (the womb of the Tathagata, the inherent Buddha-nature in all beings), which is neither empty nor existent, both nature and form, transcending the Three Realms (Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm), surpassing the Two Vehicles (Shravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle), reaching the most subtle and profound, the most honored and supreme state, called the First Principle Truth. The 'Four Additions' also have the name 'First', but because they include the word 'World', they are accessible to the Hinayana (Small Vehicle, referring to Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas). It is like a deaf person trying to hear the buzzing of a mosquito from a hundred steps away; they cannot even see the mosquito, let alone hear its sound. There are three turns in the text: Loud sounds in the world are easily heard by people; the sound of a mosquito is the most subtle of sounds, this is the first turn. The most subtle sound, if listened to closely, might still be heard; now it is a hundred steps away, this is the second turn. Listening to the sound of a mosquito from afar, even those with good hearing might find it difficult; now it is a deaf person, this is the third turn. Like this, then the shape of the mosquito cannot even be seen, how could its sound be heard? Using the Dharma (Buddha's teachings) as an analogy, the subtle truth, its meaning profound and mysterious, is like the sound of a mosquito, this is the first turn. The position is far and separated, like being more than a hundred steps away, this is the second turn. The nature of the faculties is narrow and inferior, like a deaf person, this is the third turn. Like this, then this subtle truth cannot even be known where it is, how much more so to be able to tacitly understand it? Just follow the principle and follow the text, its meaning will naturally become clear. Some say the body of the mosquito represents the True Truth, and the sound of the mosquito represents the Middle Way First Principle Truth, but the Shravaka Vehicle (the vehicle of the disciples who hear the Buddha's teachings) witnesses the True Truth and attains the fruit, how can it be said 'cannot even be seen'? Moreover, sound comes from the body, how can they be separately assigned to the Two Truths? This does not make sense in principle. 'The nature-awareness is wonderfully bright; the original-awareness is brightly wonderful.' The old explanation takes 'wonderfully bright' as stillness and illumination, and 'brightly wonderful' as illumination and stillness. Although its meaning is correct, saying 'brightness' can be called 'illumination', but using the word 'wonder' to describe 'stillness' seems not stable enough. Generally, the word 'wonder' permeates existence and non-existence, encompassing both substance and function, being perfectly integrated and immeasurable. Why specifically assign it to 'stillness'? Now I will assist with an explanation: 'The nature-awareness is wonderfully bright' means that this nature-awareness is extremely wonderful brightness, it is the brightness of stillness and constant illumination, therefore it is called 'wonderfully bright'. 'The original-awareness is brightly wonderful' means that this original-awareness is the most wonderful of brightness, the brightness although illuminates, but has never not been still, therefore it is called 'brightly wonderful'. Then the two words 'wonderfully bright' are not specifically used to explain stillness and illumination, and the meaning of stillness and illumination is naturally within them. Moreover, nature-awareness and original-awareness are slightly different, but largely the same. Nature is what is inherent in the nature-division, unchangeable, therefore the original
本來自有不煩造作故或作真妄對說者非。
汝稱覺明(云云)性覺必明妄為明覺。
此文大意為欲發明本清凈心所以出生山河大地諸有為法者皆由妄起明覺而致然也故先舉平日所說性覺妙明本覺明妙之語而問富樓那言此明覺義汝作么生會為是性本自明不須再覺而稱為明覺耶為是性體有所不明必待覺之而後為明覺耶富樓那意以覺不明者為是因言不明須覺方有所明若便以不明為覺則無所明矣佛乃順其辭而示之曰汝謂不明為覺則無所明矣無所明則無明覺矣汝言似是然汝但知明不可無猶未知無明之與有明兩俱非也良由若有所明則非真覺矣不可也若無所明則正屬無明矣亦不可也蓋無明又非覺湛明性故也有明亦非無明亦非必如何而可因斷之曰性覺本自必明特因起妄而為明覺故不可耳如不起妄則覺明正妙湛明性也亦有何過一說性覺之體以其必明因此成妄則病在必字于義亦得於文不通或又引下文覺明為咎以證其妄不知覺明本無咎因起妄故非咎成咎則兩說異而不異。
覺非所明(云云)無同無異。
此處配三細亦復多說不同會解載吳興評斷謂資中長水等以熾然成異至無同無異配三細其說非是而以因明為業立所為現妄能為轉然起信所言業相能所未分而今有能所二說俱有未安況由明而所而能則不應所先能后不曰業轉
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 '本來自有，不煩造作'，因此說『或作真妄對』是不對的。 你說『覺明』（等等），如果是『性覺』，那必然是明，『妄為明覺』是不對的。 這段文字的大意是想要闡明，山河大地以及各種有為法的產生，都是由於虛妄而產生的明覺導致的。所以先提出平時所說的『性覺妙明，本覺明妙』，然後問富樓那：『這個明覺的含義，你是怎麼理解的？是說自性本來就光明，不需要再去覺悟，所以才稱為明覺嗎？還是說自性本體有所不明，必須等待覺悟之後才能成為明覺呢？』富樓那的意思是認為覺悟不明之處，是因為不明所以需要覺悟才能有所明瞭。如果把不明當作覺悟，那就沒有什麼可以明瞭的了。佛就順著他的話開示說：『你說把不明當作覺悟，那就沒有什麼可以明瞭的了。沒有什麼可以明瞭的，那就沒有明覺了。』你說的好像是對的，但是你只知道光明不可缺少，卻不知道無明和有明都是不對的。因為如果有所明瞭，那就不是真正的覺悟了，這是不可以的。如果什麼都不明瞭，那就正是屬於無明瞭，這也是不可以的。因為無明又不是覺悟湛明的自性。有明也不是，無明也不是，那到底應該怎麼樣才可以呢？因此斷定說：『性覺』本來就是必然光明的，只是因為生起了虛妄，才成為『明覺』，所以這是不對的。如果不生起虛妄，那麼覺明就是妙湛明性，又有什麼過失呢？有一種說法認為，『性覺』的本體，因為它必然光明，因此形成虛妄，那麼毛病就在這個『必』字上。從義理上說得通，但是從文句上說不通。或者又引用下文『覺明為咎』來證明它是虛妄的，卻不知道覺明本來沒有過失，是因為生起了虛妄，所以才使沒有過失變成了有過失。那麼這兩種說法，看似不同，實則相同。 『覺非所明』（等等），『無同無異』。 這裡配合三細相也存在很多不同的說法和理解。吳興的評論認為，資中、長水等人用『熾然成異』到『無同無異』來配合三細相，他們的說法是不對的。而以因明為業，建立所為現，妄能為轉，然起信所言業相能所未分，而今有能所二說，都有未安之處。況且由明而所而能，那麼不應該是所先能后，不應該說業轉。
【English Translation】 English version 'Originally inherent, not requiring fabrication,' therefore saying 'or creating a true-false duality' is incorrect. You say 'Awareness-illumination' (etc.), if it is 'nature-awareness,' then it must be illumination; 'deluded-as-illumination-awareness' is incorrect. The main idea of this passage is to clarify that the arising of mountains, rivers, and all conditioned dharmas is due to deluded arising of illumination-awareness. Therefore, it first brings up the commonly said 'nature-awareness wondrous illumination, original-awareness illumination wondrous,' and then asks Purna (F樓那): 'What is your understanding of the meaning of this illumination-awareness? Is it saying that the self-nature is inherently luminous, not needing further awakening, and therefore called illumination-awareness? Or is it saying that the self-nature's essence is somewhat unclear, and must wait for awakening before it can become illumination-awareness?' Purna's intention is to believe that awakening the unclear is because it is unclear, so awakening is needed to have clarity. If taking unclear as awakening, then there is nothing to be clear about. The Buddha then follows his words and reveals: 'You say taking unclear as awakening, then there is nothing to be clear about. If there is nothing to be clear about, then there is no illumination-awareness.' What you say seems correct, but you only know that illumination is indispensable, yet you do not know that both non-illumination and illumination are incorrect. Because if there is something to be clear about, then it is not true awakening, which is not permissible. If there is nothing to be clear about, then it precisely belongs to non-illumination, which is also not permissible. Because non-illumination is not the self-nature of awareness-clear illumination. Illumination is not, non-illumination is not, then what should it be? Therefore, it is determined: 'Nature-awareness' is inherently and necessarily luminous, but because of the arising of delusion, it becomes 'illumination-awareness,' so this is incorrect. If delusion does not arise, then awareness-illumination is wondrously clear self-nature, so what fault is there? One view believes that the essence of 'nature-awareness,' because it is necessarily luminous, therefore forms delusion, then the problem lies in the word 'necessarily.' It makes sense in terms of principle, but it does not make sense in terms of the sentence. Or it quotes the following passage 'awareness-illumination as fault' to prove that it is delusion, but it does not know that awareness-illumination originally has no fault, because delusion arises, so it turns no fault into a fault. Then these two views seem different, but in reality, they are the same. 'Awareness is not what is illuminated' (etc.), 'no same, no different.' Here, there are also many different sayings and understandings regarding the matching of the three subtle aspects. Wu Xing's commentary believes that Zi Zhong, Chang Shui, and others use 'blazing into difference' to 'no same, no different' to match the three subtle aspects, their saying is incorrect. And taking the study of logic as a profession, establishing what is manifested as appearance, deluded ability as transformation, however, the 'Awakening of Faith' says that the karma aspect's ability and what is done are not yet separated, and now there are two sayings of ability and what is done, both have uneasiness. Moreover, from illumination to what is done to ability, then it should not be what is done first and ability later, it should not be said that karma transforms.
現而曰業現轉其說亦有所礙若云業相中不妨說有同異則資中長水等說亦是若云能所同時不妨說有先後則吳興所說亦是今依溫陵以妄為明覺為業相而後不盡用之乃融諸說為一說曰性覺必明此一法界真心也妄為明覺已屬業相而下曰所曰能曰異曰同曰無同無異俱是表顯業相一動以後有如是種種差別卻不必板定編排次第等級則三細之意隱然在中而又不犯如上兩說礙處愚見如是更俟高明裁之。
交妄發生遞相為種。
溫陵謂妄覺感於五行故交妄發生遞相為種如土水生木而曰相待成搖木土生金而曰堅明立礙等雖甚有理但經止言四大恐不必入以五行又言我克為妻必夫劣妻勝而後生子雖日者家有據之論然此等語經中罕言及之不如只用四大為正蓋四大所該者廣舉四大而五行在其中矣更有略說載竹窗隨筆中。
彼太虛空日照則明云屯則暗。
富那疑諸大勢不俱遍故佛即虛空為喻知虛空不拒諸相則知識性不礙諸大矣諸相泛論一切有人謂日照則明下七句的指前文七大而云日照是火大云屯是空大霽澄是見大氣凝是識大等湊合而成七大夫日配火大猶可其空見識三者配合甚為無理太虛空一句已是空大如何又有空大則成二空況云屯與日照相對蓋言此空中日照則明此空中雲屯則暗此空中霽澄則清此空中氣凝則濁云也霽也氣也皆空
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說『現』（xiàn，顯現）是指業現（yè xiàn，業相的顯現）轉變，那麼這種說法也有所障礙。如果說在業相中不妨說有同（tóng，相同）異（yì，不同），那麼慈中（Cí zhōng，人名）長水（Cháng shuǐ，地名）等人的說法也是成立的。如果說能（néng，能見）所（suǒ，所見）同時，不妨說有先後，那麼吳興（Wú xīng，地名）的說法也是成立的。現在依照溫陵（Wēn líng，地名）的觀點，以妄（wàng，虛妄）為明覺（míng jué，明瞭覺知）作為業相，但又不完全採用他的說法，而是融合各種說法成為一種說法，即『性覺必明，此一法界真心也』（xìng jué bì míng, cǐ yī fǎ jiè zhēn xīn yě，自性覺悟必然光明，這唯一的法界才是真心）。以虛妄為明覺已經屬於業相，而下面所說的『所』、『能』、『異』、『同』、『無同無異』（wú tóng wú yì，非同非異）都是爲了表顯業相一動以後有如此種種差別，卻不必板定地編排次第等級，那麼三細（sān xì，三種細微的相）的意義就隱然在其中了，而且又不犯上面兩種說法的障礙之處。我個人的看法是這樣，還請高明的人裁決。
交妄發生，遞相為種。（jiāo wàng fā shēng, dì xiāng wéi zhǒng，虛妄相互交織產生，互相作為種子。）
溫陵認為虛妄的覺知感應於五行（wǔ xíng，金木水火土），所以虛妄相互交織產生，互相作為種子，比如土水生木，所以說『相待成搖』（xiāng dài chéng yáo，相互依賴而動搖），木土生金，所以說『堅明立礙』（jiān míng lì ài，堅固明亮而產生障礙）等，雖然很有道理，但經文只說了四大（sì dà，地水火風），恐怕不必加入五行。又說『我克為妻，必夫劣妻勝而後生子』（wǒ kè wéi qī, bì fū liè qī shèng ér hòu shēng zǐ，我剋制為妻，一定是丈夫弱於妻子才能生子），雖然日者（rì zhě，算命的人）家有這樣的說法，但這種話在經中很少提及，不如只用四大作為正統，因為四大所包含的範圍更廣，舉出四大就包含了五行了。更有略說記載在竹窗隨筆（zhú chuāng suí bǐ，書名）中。
彼太虛空，日照則明，云屯則暗。（bǐ tài xū kōng, rì zhào zé míng, yún tún zé àn，那廣大的虛空，陽光照耀就明亮，云聚集就昏暗。）
富那（Fù nà，人名）懷疑諸大（zhū dà，各種元素）的勢力不都普遍存在，所以佛（Fó，佛陀）就用虛空作為比喻，讓他知道虛空不拒絕各種現象，那麼知識性（zhī shí xìng，認識的性質）也不妨礙各種元素了。各種現象泛指一切，有人認為『日照則明』下面的七句話是專門指前面的七大（qī dà，七種元素），而說『日照』是火大（huǒ dà，火元素），『云屯』是空大（kōng dà，空元素），『霽澄』是見大（jiàn dà，見的元素），『氣凝』是識大（shí dà，識的元素）等，湊合而成七大。如果說太陽配合火大還可以，但空、見、識這三種元素的配合就非常沒有道理。『太虛空』一句已經是空大了，怎麼又有一個空大，那就成了兩個空大了。況且云屯與日照相對，是說這個空中陽光照耀就明亮，這個空中雲聚集就昏暗，這個空中雨後放晴就清澈，這個空中氣息凝結就渾濁。云、晴、氣息，都是空中的現象。
【English Translation】 English version: If '現' (xiàn, manifestation) is said to refer to the transformation of '業現' (yè xiàn, manifestation of karma), then this statement also has its obstacles. If it is said that within the karmic manifestations, it is permissible to speak of '同' (tóng, sameness) and '異' (yì, difference), then the statements of Cí zhōng (慈中, a person's name), Cháng shuǐ (長水, a place name), and others are also valid. If it is said that the '能' (néng, the seer) and '所' (suǒ, the seen) are simultaneous, and it is permissible to speak of precedence and subsequence, then the statement of Wú xīng (吳興, a place name) is also valid. Now, according to the view of Wēn líng (溫陵, a place name), taking '妄' (wàng, delusion) as '明覺' (míng jué, clear awareness) as the karmic manifestation, but not fully adopting his statement, but rather integrating various statements into one, namely, '性覺必明，此一法界真心也' (xìng jué bì míng, cǐ yī fǎ jiè zhēn xīn yě, the self-nature of awakening is necessarily bright, this unique dharma realm is the true mind). Taking delusion as clear awareness already belongs to the karmic manifestation, and the following '所', '能', '異', '同', '無同無異' (wú tóng wú yì, neither same nor different) are all to express that after the karmic manifestation moves once, there are such various differences, but there is no need to rigidly arrange the order and hierarchy, then the meaning of the three subtleties (sān xì, three subtle aspects) is implicitly within it, and it does not violate the obstacles of the above two statements. My personal view is like this, and I await the judgment of those with higher wisdom.
'交妄發生，遞相為種。' (jiāo wàng fā shēng, dì xiāng wéi zhǒng, Delusions intertwine and arise, serving as seeds for each other.)
Wēn líng believes that delusional awareness resonates with the five elements (wǔ xíng, metal, wood, water, fire, and earth), so delusions intertwine and arise, serving as seeds for each other, such as earth and water generating wood, hence the saying '相待成搖' (xiāng dài chéng yáo, relying on each other to sway), wood and earth generating metal, hence the saying '堅明立礙' (jiān míng lì ài, firmness and brightness establishing obstacles), etc. Although this is very reasonable, the sutra only speaks of the four great elements (sì dà, earth, water, fire, and wind), so it is probably not necessary to add the five elements. It also says, '我克為妻，必夫劣妻勝而後生子' (wǒ kè wéi qī, bì fū liè qī shèng ér hòu shēng zǐ, I conquer to make a wife, it must be that the husband is inferior to the wife for a child to be born), although fortune-tellers (rì zhě, fortune tellers) have such a saying, such words are rarely mentioned in the sutra, so it is better to use only the four great elements as orthodox, because the four great elements encompass a wider range, and mentioning the four great elements includes the five elements. There is also a brief account recorded in the 'Bamboo Window Notes' (zhú chuāng suí bǐ, a book title).
'彼太虛空，日照則明，云屯則暗。' (bǐ tài xū kōng, rì zhào zé míng, yún tún zé àn, That great void, when the sun shines, it is bright; when clouds gather, it is dark.)
Fù nà (富那, a person's name) doubted that the powers of the various elements (zhū dà, various elements) were not all pervasive, so the Buddha (Fó, the Buddha) used the void as a metaphor, to let him know that the void does not reject various phenomena, then the nature of knowledge (zhī shí xìng, the nature of cognition) does not hinder the various elements. Various phenomena generally refer to everything, and some people think that the seven sentences below '日照則明' (rì zhào zé míng, when the sun shines, it is bright) specifically refer to the previous seven great elements (qī dà, seven elements), and say that '日照' (rì zhào, sun shining) is the fire element (huǒ dà, fire element), '云屯' (yún tún, clouds gathering) is the space element (kōng dà, space element), '霽澄' (jì chéng, clearing after rain) is the seeing element (jiàn dà, seeing element), '氣凝' (qì níng, air condensing) is the consciousness element (shí dà, consciousness element), etc., combining to form the seven great elements. If it is said that the sun matches the fire element, that is still acceptable, but the combination of the space, seeing, and consciousness elements is very unreasonable. The sentence '太虛空' (tài xū kōng, great void) is already the space element, how can there be another space element, then there would be two space elements. Moreover, clouds gathering is contrasted with the sun shining, saying that in this space, when the sun shines, it is bright; in this space, when clouds gather, it is dark; in this space, when it clears after rain, it is clear; in this space, when air condenses, it is turbid. Clouds, clearing, and air are all phenomena in space.
中物與日風一例何得云配空霽配見氣配識也若言晦昧為空故以云屯則暗屬空此甚不通既是云屯則暗必然雲散則明是虛空本不暗矣何得云晦昧為空又引經言識動見澄故以澄屬見則佛何不直說是見而以霽喻見凡此七大何不都取一喻乎又言識動則氣凝夫凝者定也定則不動如何以氣凝喻識動此斷斷乎不可者也又引吳興注云譬前藏性本非七大而不拒彼七大以此為據故配七大不知吳興明說是喻汝今云何作實法會經意蓋言即彼空中不礙諸相如我性中不礙七大也是舉一空大中所有之物而作喻也便泥此文硬作配合圭峰所謂豈識喻焉者也不唯不達經意亦不達注意矣又以下文中宵雲霧表佛涅槃不見明曜表入涅槃時火大不現夫雲霧為涅槃則涅槃乃昏暗不明之相矣涅槃而火大不現則藏性乃拒彼火大發揮矣有是理乎況向後佛自合法云真覺妙明亦復如是(云云)其說甚顯何須此處穿鑿扭捏。
而如來藏本妙圓心(云云)是即非即。
溫陵帶上文滅塵合覺故發真妙妙覺明性接下而如來藏本妙圓心最得經旨言雖滅塵合覺一多小大相攝相入起大神用而實如來藏中纖塵不立非一切也雖非一切又萬法悉備即一切也雖即一切又互泯互存不可思議也尚何疑七大之周遍法界而不相陵奪也哉其本妙圓心元明心妙妙明心元三句舊解初真次俗次中其說相承已久唯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 中物與日風的例子，怎麼能說云配空，晴朗配見，氣配識呢？如果說晦暗為空，所以用云屯來表示黑暗屬於空，這非常不通。既然是云屯，那麼黑暗是必然的，雲散則光明，虛空本來就不暗。怎麼能說晦暗為空呢？又引用經文說識動見澄，所以用澄來配見，那麼佛為什麼不直接說是見，而用晴朗來比喻見呢？凡此七大，為什麼不都取一個比喻呢？又說識動則氣凝，凝是安定，安定則不動，怎麼能用氣凝來比喻識動呢？這絕對是不可以的。又引用吳興的註釋說，譬如前藏性本來不是七大，但不拒絕彼七大，以此為依據來配合七大。不知道吳興明明說是比喻，你現在怎麼當作實法來理解經意呢？經意是說，即彼空中不妨礙諸相，如我性中不妨礙七大，這是舉一個空大中所有的事物來作比喻。你卻拘泥於此文，硬作配合，就像圭峰所說的『豈識喻焉』。這不僅不理解經意，也不理解註釋的意思。又以下文中宵雲霧表佛涅槃，不見明曜表入涅槃時火大不現。如果雲霧為涅槃，那麼涅槃乃是昏暗不明之相了。涅槃而火大不現，那麼藏性乃是拒絕彼火大發揮了。有這樣的道理嗎？況且向後佛自己合法云真覺妙明亦復如是(云云)，其說甚顯，何須此處穿鑿扭捏。 而如來藏本妙圓心(云云)是即非即。 溫陵帶上文滅塵合覺故發真妙妙覺明性接下而如來藏本妙圓心最得經旨言雖滅塵合覺一多小大相攝相入起大神用而實如來藏中纖塵不立非一切也雖非一切又萬法悉備即一切也雖即一切又互泯互存不可思議也尚何疑七大之周遍法界而不相陵奪也哉其本妙圓心元明心妙妙明心元三句舊解初真次俗次中其說相承已久唯
【English Translation】 English version How can the examples of objects, sun, and wind be used to say that clouds match emptiness (kong), clear skies match seeing (jian), and qi matches consciousness (shi)? If it is said that obscurity is emptiness, and therefore dark clouds (yuntun) are used to indicate that darkness belongs to emptiness, this is very illogical. Since there are dark clouds, then darkness is inevitable; when the clouds dissipate, there is light. Emptiness is originally not dark. How can it be said that obscurity is emptiness? Furthermore, the scripture says that when consciousness moves, seeing becomes clear (shīdòng jiànchéng), so clarity is used to match seeing. Then why doesn't the Buddha directly say it is seeing, but uses clear skies to symbolize seeing? Why not take just one metaphor for all seven great elements (qīdà)? It is also said that when consciousness moves, qi congeals. Congelation is stability, and stability is immobility. How can qi congelation be used to symbolize the movement of consciousness? This is absolutely impossible. Furthermore, it is cited that Wu Xing's commentary says, 'For example, the previous storehouse nature (cángxìng) is originally not the seven great elements, but it does not reject those seven great elements,' and this is used as a basis to match the seven great elements. It is not known that Wu Xing clearly said it was a metaphor, but how do you now understand the meaning of the scripture as actual dharma? The meaning of the scripture is that in that emptiness, it does not hinder all phenomena, just as in my nature, it does not hinder the seven great elements. This is taking all things within one great element of emptiness as a metaphor. But you cling to this text and force a match, just like what Guifeng said, 'How can one recognize a metaphor?' This not only fails to understand the meaning of the scripture, but also fails to understand the meaning of the commentary. Furthermore, in the following text, 'evening clouds and mist represent the Buddha's Nirvana (nièpán),' and 'not seeing bright radiance represents the fire element not appearing at the time of entering Nirvana.' If clouds and mist are Nirvana, then Nirvana is a state of darkness and obscurity. If the fire element does not appear in Nirvana, then the storehouse nature is rejecting the manifestation of that fire element. Is there such a reason? Moreover, later the Buddha himself combines the dharma, saying, 'True awareness and wondrous brightness are also like this (zhenjue miaoming yifu rushe),' the explanation is very clear, why is there a need to force and twist it here? And the Tathagatagarbha (rúlāizàng) is originally a wondrously perfect mind (běnmiàoyuánxīn) (etc.), is it identical or not identical? Wenling connects the preceding text of 'extinguishing dust and uniting with enlightenment (mièchén héjué),' hence 'developing true wondrousness and wondrously enlightened bright nature (fāzhēn miàomiàojué míngxìng)' connects below, and the Tathagatagarbha is originally a wondrously perfect mind, which best captures the essence of the scripture. Although extinguishing dust and uniting with enlightenment involves the interpenetration and mutual inclusion of one and many, small and large, giving rise to great divine functions, in reality, not a speck of dust is established in the Tathagatagarbha; it is not everything. Although it is not everything, all dharmas are fully present; it is everything. Although it is everything, they mutually extinguish and mutually exist, which is inconceivable. Why still doubt that the seven great elements pervade the dharma realm without conflicting or robbing each other? The three phrases 'originally wondrously perfect mind (běnmiàoyuánxīn),' 'original bright mind (yuánmíngxīn),' and 'wondrously bright mind origin (miàomiàomíngxīnyuán)' are traditionally interpreted as true, mundane, and middle, respectively, and this interpretation has been passed down for a long time, but only...
合論補註以本妙圓心為總次非一切則如來藏元明心妙也次即一切則如來藏妙明心元也一是空如來藏一是不空如來藏而云不必定配三諦其說甚當蓋元明心妙妙明心元不差一字而文略轉換空假之意便隱然可見言此本妙圓心中一切俱非者則元明心妙本如是照而常寂也此本妙圓心中一切俱即者則妙明心元本如是寂而常照也故二句皆結屬上文但離即離非是即非即八字似上下無交覺孤別耳今云即一切也妙明心元又雙離雙是者也。
非明無明明無明盡。
諸經十二緣生滅止曰無無明無無明盡今每句多一明字遂眾說紛然溫陵謂明無明者緣覺欲翻無明而為明也一說二明字屬觀智觀此無明生觀此無明盡也一說上明字屬真從真出生無明也下明字屬智以智還滅無明也今融會而折衷之二明字俱作真明之明明無明者由真明而起之無明也而言非者如來藏中本無如是由真明而起之無明也明無明盡者由真明而起之無明盡也而言非者如來藏中本無如是由真明而起之無明盡也雖多二明字原只是無明無無明之意耳。
汝但不隨分別世間業果眾生三種相續三緣斷故三因不生。
諸說不同今直據經文其義自顯經明言以是因緣世界相續以是因緣眾生相續以是因緣業果相續而鞠其因緣則覺明空昧相待成搖等為世界因緣明妄非他覺明為咎等為眾生
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《合論補註》以本妙圓心（根本的、微妙的、圓滿的心）為總綱，說『非一切』，則是如來藏（Tathagatagarbha，如來法身所藏之處，也指眾生本具的佛性）元明心妙（最初的、光明的、微妙的心）；說『即一切』，則是如來藏妙明心元（微妙的、光明的、最初的心）。一個是空如來藏，一個是不空如來藏，而說不必一定配三諦（空諦、假諦、中諦），這種說法很恰當。因為元明心妙和妙明心元，文字上略微轉換，空假的意義就隱約可見。說這本妙圓心中一切俱非，則是元明心妙本來就是這樣，照而常寂（光明照耀卻又常處於寂靜之中）；這本妙圓心中一切俱即，則是妙明心元本來就是這樣，寂而常照（寂靜卻又常處於光明照耀之中）。所以兩句話都總結歸屬於上文，只是離即離非、是即非即這八個字，似乎上下沒有關聯，感覺孤立而獨立。現在說『即一切』，是妙明心元，又是雙離雙是（既遠離又肯定）的境界。
非明無明明無明盡。
各部經典中關於十二緣起（十二因緣）生滅止息的說法是『無無明無無明盡』，現在每句多了一個『明』字，於是眾說紛紜。溫陵認為，『明無明』是緣覺（Pratyekabuddha，通過觀察因緣而覺悟的人）想要翻轉無明（Avidya，無知、愚昧）而使其變為光明。一種說法是，兩個『明』字都屬於觀智（觀察的智慧），觀察這無明生起，觀察這無明滅盡。一種說法是，上面的『明』字屬於真（真如），從真如出生無明；下面的『明』字屬於智（智慧），用智慧來還滅無明。現在融合各種說法而折中，兩個『明』字都作為真明的明。『明無明』是由真明而生起的無明，說『非』，是因為如來藏中本來就沒有這種由真明而生起的無明。『明無明盡』是由真明而生起的無明滅盡，說『非』，是因為如來藏中本來就沒有這種由真明而生起的無明滅盡。雖然多了兩個『明』字，原本只是無明無無明的意思。
汝但不隨分別世間業果眾生三種相續三緣斷故三因不生。
各種說法不同，現在直接根據經文，其意義自然顯現。經文明確說，因為這些因緣，世界相續；因為這些因緣，眾生相續；因為這些因緣，業果相續。而追究其因緣，則是覺明空昧（覺悟的光明和空性的闇昧）相待成搖等，成為世界因緣；明妄非他覺明為咎等，成為眾生相續的因緣。
【English Translation】 English version: The 'Combined Treatise with Supplementary Notes' takes the fundamental, wondrous, and perfect mind (本妙圓心) as its general principle. To say 'not everything' (非一切) refers to the Tathagatagarbha (如來藏, the womb of the Tathagata, also referring to the inherent Buddha-nature in all beings) as the original, bright, and wondrous mind (元明心妙); to say 'is everything' (即一切) refers to the Tathagatagarbha as the wondrous, bright, and original mind (妙明心元). One is the empty Tathagatagarbha, and the other is the non-empty Tathagatagarbha. To say that it is not necessarily matched with the Three Truths (三諦, emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way) is quite appropriate. Because the original, bright, and wondrous mind and the wondrous, bright, and original mind are only slightly different in wording, the meaning of emptiness and provisional existence is subtly visible. To say that in this fundamental, wondrous, and perfect mind, everything is not, then the original, bright, and wondrous mind is originally like this, illuminating and constantly tranquil (照而常寂); in this fundamental, wondrous, and perfect mind, everything is, then the wondrous, bright, and original mind is originally like this, tranquil and constantly illuminating (寂而常照). Therefore, both sentences conclude and belong to the preceding text, but the eight characters 'apart from is apart from not, is is not is' (離即離非、是即非即) seem to have no connection between the top and bottom, feeling isolated and independent. Now to say 'is everything' is the wondrous, bright, and original mind, which is also a state of both being apart and being (雙離雙是).
'Not illuminating ignorance, no illuminating ignorance ceases.' (非明無明明無明盡)
In various sutras, the cessation of the arising and ceasing of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination (十二緣起) is described as 'no ignorance, no cessation of ignorance' (無無明無無明盡). Now, each sentence has an extra character 'illuminating' (明), leading to various interpretations. Wenling believes that 'illuminating ignorance' (明無明) is the Pratyekabuddha's (緣覺, one who attains enlightenment through observing dependent origination) intention to transform ignorance (Avidya, 無明, ignorance) into illumination. One interpretation is that both 'illuminating' characters belong to the wisdom of observation (觀智), observing the arising of this ignorance and observing the cessation of this ignorance. Another interpretation is that the upper 'illuminating' character belongs to truth (真如), from which ignorance arises; the lower 'illuminating' character belongs to wisdom (智慧), using wisdom to extinguish ignorance. Now, reconciling various interpretations, both 'illuminating' characters are taken as the illumination of true illumination. 'Illuminating ignorance' is the ignorance that arises from true illumination. Saying 'not' is because in the Tathagatagarbha, there is originally no such ignorance arising from true illumination. 'Illuminating ignorance ceases' is the cessation of ignorance arising from true illumination. Saying 'not' is because in the Tathagatagarbha, there is originally no such cessation of ignorance arising from true illumination. Although there are two extra 'illuminating' characters, the original meaning is simply ignorance and no cessation of ignorance.
'You only do not follow the distinctions of the world, karmic results, and the three continuities of beings; because the three conditions are severed, the three causes do not arise.' (汝但不隨分別世間業果眾生三種相續三緣斷故三因不生)
Various interpretations exist, but now directly based on the sutra text, its meaning naturally becomes clear. The sutra clearly states that because of these conditions, the world continues; because of these conditions, beings continue; because of these conditions, karmic results continue. And investigating its conditions, the mutual dependence of awareness, brightness, emptiness, and obscurity (覺明空昧) becoming agitation, etc., becomes the condition for the world; the fault of awareness and delusion not being other than awareness, etc., becomes the condition for the continuity of beings.
因緣欲貪殺貪盜貪等為業果因緣因親緣疏一如常說又總結云皆是覺明明瞭知性因了發相從妄見生則均之無明妄見而已或疑文中雲殺盜淫業三緣斷故三因不生似因緣正屬三業然殺盜淫三乃業果一因緣耳文雖止此一句而意該世界眾生若曰如殺盜淫等也。
菩提涅槃尚在遙遠非汝歷劫辛勤修證。
舊解菩提涅槃果位尚遠茍非歷劫辛勤何以能得今解不爾謂承上文極談生滅因緣自然和合皆為戲論直饒做盡伎倆不出戲論二字必至情亡惑罄見謝執空死盡倫心方堪湊泊由是而知菩提涅槃尚遙遠在非恃汝歷劫辛勤所可修證雖有多聞廣學將安用之徒增戲論而已狂心歇處戲論亡時無意求之妙果自獲故前云何藉劬勞肯綮修證也庶與上文融貫照應。
流變三疊。
此中合數諸說不一有以三世積累重加根本為說者有以五根五塵為說者有以十善十惡為說者而溫陵吳興直以一十百千增倍合之較於諸說似為明白簡便蓋界四世三彼此相涉以三乘四以四乘三俱成十二是一疊也即此十二一各變十則成一百二十是二疊也即此一百二十十各變百則成一千二百是三疊也而人在世界之中身所居止前後左右其數亦四身所經歷已歷今歷當歷其數亦三三四四三亦兩相涉而成千二百也世界虛幻互互發生故云織妄世界世界曰器世界我身所有世界曰眾生世界
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：以因緣、欲貪、殺貪、盜貪等作為業果的因緣，因緣有親疏之分，這些道理和通常所說的一樣。總結來說，這些都是覺明明瞭的知性，因爲了知而生起現象，從虛妄的見解產生，那麼都可以歸結為無明和虛妄的見解而已。或許有人疑惑文中說，殺、盜、淫三種業的因緣斷絕，所以三種因不會產生，似乎因緣正是屬於這三種業。然而，殺、盜、淫三種只是業果的一個因緣罷了。文中的意思雖然只說了這一句，但實際上涵蓋了世界上的所有眾生，就像說殺、盜、淫等等一樣。
菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）和涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）還很遙遠，不是你經歷無數劫的辛勤修行所能證得的。
舊的解釋認為，菩提和涅槃的果位還很遙遠，如果不是經歷無數劫的辛勤修行，怎麼能夠得到呢？現在的解釋不是這樣認為，而是說承接上文極力談論生滅的因緣，自然和合都只是戲論。即使你用盡各種手段，也逃不出戲論這兩個字，必定要到情感消失、疑惑窮盡，看破執著空性，斷絕一切倫常之心，才能夠勉強接近。由此可知，菩提和涅槃還很遙遠，不是憑藉你經歷無數劫的辛勤修行所能證得的。即使你有很多的見聞和廣博的學識，又有什麼用呢？只不過是徒增戲論罷了。狂妄的心停止，戲論消失的時候，不刻意去追求，美妙的果實自然獲得。所以前面說，何必憑藉辛勤的努力去追求關鍵的修證呢？這樣或許能與上文融會貫通，互相照應。
流變三疊。
這裡面合計的數字，各種說法不一，有的以三世積累，重疊加上根本為說法，有的以五根（five roots）、五塵（five objects of sense）為說法，有的以十善（ten wholesome actions）、十惡（ten unwholesome actions）為說法。而溫陵吳興直接用一、十、百、千增倍相合，相比于各種說法，似乎更為明白簡便。大概是因為界、四、世、三彼此互相牽涉，用三乘以四，用四乘以三，都成為十二，這是一疊。用這十二，各自乘以十，就成為一百二十，這是二疊。用這一百二十，各自乘以百，就成為一千二百，這是三疊。而人在世界之中，身體所居住的地方，前後左右，其數也是四；身體所經歷的，已經歷、現在經歷、將來經歷，其數也是三。三和四，四和三，也互相牽涉，而成為一千二百。世界虛幻，互相發生，所以說是織妄世界。世界叫做器世界（vessel world），我身所有的世界叫做眾生世界（sentient world）。
【English Translation】 English version: Taking conditions, desire-greed, killing-greed, stealing-greed, etc., as the causes and conditions for karmic results. Conditions have close and distant relationships, and these principles are as commonly said. To summarize, these are all the knowing nature of clear awareness, because of knowing that phenomena arise, and from false views they are produced, then they can all be attributed to ignorance and false views. Perhaps someone doubts that the text says that the causes and conditions of the three karmas of killing, stealing, and lust are severed, so the three causes will not arise, and it seems that conditions precisely belong to these three karmas. However, the three karmas of killing, stealing, and lust are only one condition of karmic results. Although the meaning of the text only says this one sentence, it actually encompasses all sentient beings in the world, just like saying killing, stealing, lust, and so on.
Bodhi (覺悟, enlightenment) and Nirvana (寂滅, liberation) are still far away, not something you can attain through diligent cultivation over countless kalpas.
The old interpretation believes that the fruits of Bodhi and Nirvana are still far away, and if it were not for diligent cultivation over countless kalpas, how could one attain them? The current interpretation does not think so, but says that continuing from the previous text, which vigorously discusses the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing, natural harmony is all just a play. Even if you exhaust all means, you cannot escape the two words 'play', and you must reach the point where emotions disappear, doubts are exhausted, you see through attachment to emptiness, and sever all ethical and moral thoughts, before you can barely approach. From this, it can be known that Bodhi and Nirvana are still far away, not something you can attain by relying on your diligent cultivation over countless kalpas. Even if you have much learning and broad knowledge, what use is it? It only increases the play. When the mad mind ceases and the play disappears, without intentionally seeking it, the wonderful fruit will naturally be obtained. Therefore, it was said earlier, 'Why rely on diligent effort to seek the key cultivation?' Perhaps this can be integrated and correspond with the previous text.
Flowing changes in three layers.
Regarding the numbers totaled here, there are various explanations. Some explain it as accumulating through the three times, overlapping and adding the root. Some explain it as the five roots (五根), and the five objects of sense (五塵). Some explain it as the ten wholesome actions (十善), and the ten unwholesome actions (十惡). And Wenling Wuxing directly uses one, ten, hundred, and thousand, multiplying and combining them, which seems clearer and simpler than the various explanations. It is probably because realms, four, times, and three are mutually involved. Using three multiplied by four, and four multiplied by three, both become twelve, which is one layer. Using this twelve, each multiplied by ten, it becomes one hundred and twenty, which is the second layer. Using this one hundred and twenty, each multiplied by one hundred, it becomes one thousand two hundred, which is the third layer. And in the world, the place where the body resides, front, back, left, and right, the number is also four; what the body experiences, past, present, and future, the number is also three. Three and four, four and three, are also mutually involved, and become one thousand two hundred. The world is illusory, mutually arising, so it is said to be a woven illusory world. The world is called the vessel world (器世界), and the world possessed by my body is called the sentient world (眾生世界).
咸以妄成而自然有此千二百功德六根各具然六根性中本同而以對六塵用分全闕良由時方選擇圓通似有優劣耳若夫豪傑之士根根功德無不具足。
前方全明後方全暗左右旁觀三分之二。
三分之二謂三分中止得二分也蓋前二百后二百共成四百左二百右二百共成四百四方之隅共成四百是三分也後方不見少其二百后二隅不見少其二百千二百中共少四百故曰三分之二。
雖得六銷猶未亡一如太虛空(云云)說空為一。
溫陵謂須陀洹人不入色聲香味觸法是名六銷其未亡一謂是法執孤山謂是未亡涅槃資中謂是尚迷六根而為一體今謂只消用本色語經云元依一精明分成六和合茲乃已銷六和合卻守一精明也然下言除器觀空寧欲除空耶蓋不病其空病執有一空也執有一精明亦猶是也並一俱亡方證心體。
不由前塵所起知見明不循根寄根明發由是六根互相為用。
向也粘妄發光是由前塵所起知見也則其覺明明覺必循乎根由是六根各成違礙今也脫粘內伏伏歸元真是不由前塵所起知見也則其本明耀性不循彼根特寄根以發其明性而已由是六根互相為用是則向之於根乃是實依今之於根不過權寄實依則賴根而根為王故非眼不見非耳不聞無眼無耳便成䏊瞽權寄則無賴於根而心為主故眼能作耳耳能作眼無眼無耳視聽宛
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：總是因為虛妄才形成，而自然具備這一千二百種功德，六根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）各自具備。然而六根的體性原本相同，只是因為對應六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）的作用而有所區分，功用有全有缺，這實在是由於時節和方位的選擇，圓融通達似乎有優劣之分罷了。至於豪傑之士，每一個根都具備全部的功德。
前方完全明亮，後方完全黑暗，左右兩旁觀察，只能看到三分之二。
三分之二是指在三分之中只能得到二分。因為前方二百，後方二百，共計四百；左方二百，右方二百，共計四百；四方的角落共計四百，這是三分。後方看不見，減少了二百；後面的兩個角落看不見，減少了二百。在一千二百中總共減少了四百，所以說三分之二。
即使得到了六種銷亡，仍然沒有失去唯一，就像太虛空一樣（云云），說空為一。
溫陵認為須陀洹（梵文Srotāpanna，預流果）之人不執著於色、聲、香、味、觸、法，這叫做六銷。他所說的『未亡一』指的是法執。孤山認為指的是沒有失去涅槃（梵文Nirvana，寂滅）。資中認為指的是仍然迷惑於六根而認為是一個整體。現在我認為只需要用本來的體性來說。經中說，『原本依靠一個精明，分成六個和合』，這才是已經銷除了六個和合，卻守護著一個精明。然而下面說『除去器皿來觀察空』，難道想要除去空嗎？是因為不以空為病，而是以執著于有一個空為病。執著于有一個精明也是一樣。將一併除去，才能證得心體。
不是由前塵所引起的知見，光明不依循根，憑藉根而光明生髮，由此六根互相為用。
之前執著于虛妄而發光，是由前塵所引起的知見。那麼他的覺明明覺必定依循于根，由此六根各自形成障礙。現在脫離執著，向內收斂，收斂迴歸元真，不是由前塵所引起的知見。那麼他的本明耀性不依循那個根，只是憑藉根來發其明性而已，由此六根互相為用。這樣說來，之前對於根是實在的依靠，現在對於根不過是權宜的憑藉。實在的依靠就依賴於根，而根為王，所以不是眼不能見，不是耳不能聞，沒有眼沒有耳就成了聾瞎。權宜的憑藉就不依賴於根，而心為主，所以眼能做耳的事情，耳能做眼的事情，沒有眼沒有耳，視聽依然。
【English Translation】 English version: It is always due to delusion that it is formed, and naturally possesses these one thousand two hundred merits, with the six roots (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind) each possessing them. However, the nature of the six roots is originally the same, but they are differentiated by their functions corresponding to the six dusts (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma), and their functions are complete or incomplete. This is really due to the selection of time and direction, and the perfect and thorough understanding seems to have advantages and disadvantages. As for heroes, each root possesses all the merits.
The front is completely bright, the back is completely dark, and observing from the left and right sides, only two-thirds can be seen.
Two-thirds means that only two parts can be obtained from three parts. Because the front is two hundred, the back is two hundred, totaling four hundred; the left is two hundred, the right is two hundred, totaling four hundred; the corners of the four sides total four hundred, which is three parts. The back cannot be seen, reducing two hundred; the two corners behind cannot be seen, reducing two hundred. A total of four hundred is reduced from one thousand two hundred, so it is said to be two-thirds.
Even if the six extinctions are obtained, the one has not yet been lost, just like the great void (etc.), saying that emptiness is one.
Wenling believes that a Srotāpanna (stream-enterer) does not cling to form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma, which is called six extinctions. What he calls 'one not yet lost' refers to the clinging to dharma. Gushan believes it refers to not losing Nirvana. Zizhong believes it refers to still being confused by the six roots and considering them as a whole. Now I think it is only necessary to use the original nature to speak. The sutra says, 'Originally relying on one essence of brightness, divided into six harmonies', this is already eliminating the six harmonies, but guarding one essence of brightness. However, below it says 'remove the vessel to observe emptiness', does it want to remove emptiness? It is because it is not sick of emptiness, but sick of clinging to having an emptiness. Clinging to having an essence of brightness is also the same. Eliminating even the one, one can then realize the nature of the mind.
The knowledge and views that are not caused by the previous dust, the brightness does not follow the root, the brightness arises by relying on the root, and from this the six roots use each other.
Previously, clinging to delusion and emitting light was the knowledge and views caused by the previous dust. Then his awareness and bright awareness must follow the root, and from this the six roots each form obstacles. Now, detaching from clinging, withdrawing inward, withdrawing and returning to the original truth, is not the knowledge and views caused by the previous dust. Then his original bright and radiant nature does not follow that root, but only relies on the root to emit its bright nature, and from this the six roots use each other. In this way, previously relying on the root was a real reliance, now relying on the root is only an expedient means. Real reliance depends on the root, and the root is the king, so it is not that the eye cannot see, it is not that the ear cannot hear, without eyes and ears one becomes deaf and blind. Expedient reliance does not depend on the root, and the mind is the master, so the eye can do the work of the ear, the ear can do the work of the eye, without eyes and ears, seeing and hearing remain.
然。
○第五卷
真性有為空緣生故如幻無為無起滅不實如空華。
凡重頌多體貼長行長行雲根塵同源縛脫無二識性虛妄猶如空華吳興即真即俗之解欲影射下文真妄而稍涉牽強掌珍論前二句破有為后二句破無為意亦影下然味經文上下語意總是發明有為本空其妄真同妄之語蓋以真尚不立何況于妄極言妄之必空耳解此當以溫陵為正而會解失錄今略記於此溫陵曰真性之中有為之法皆空則根塵亦空此頌根塵同源也緣生之法皆幻則縛脫亦幻此頌縛脫無二也起滅無則妄識亦無此頌識性虛妄猶如空華也今更為貫串其義真性之中有為悉空所以然者以有為皆因緣所生故如幻也如幻故無為無為故無起滅無起滅故如空華也。
言妄顯諸真(云云)是故若交蘆。
此承上文言有為皆幻將無為則真乎然言妄秪為顯真言真姑以對妄妄真同妄耳而別真別妄所謂辨空華之濃淡爭兔角之短長者也故真與非真兩非則能見所見安在能見根也所見塵也中間識也若相若見俱無實性豈不若交蘆之互為依倚而其中實空者哉一說即交為空非蘆中空今兼用之又顯諸真有人解曰顯眾真以真有多種故不知諸者猶乎也于也其也文理不通自不必論況止可眾妄歸一真安有一妄對眾真乎其不通尤甚。
當於結心。
諸說多指中道為結心蓋以
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 好。
第五卷
真性有為（真實本性所顯現的有為法）為空緣生，所以如幻（如夢幻泡影）；無為（不造作，不依賴因緣的法）無起滅，不真實，如空華（虛空中的花朵）。
大凡重頌（偈頌）多與長行（散文）相貼合。長行說根（感覺器官）、塵（感覺對像）同源，縛（束縛）、脫（解脫）無二，識性（認識的本性）虛妄，猶如空華。吳興（地名，此處指吳興人）即真即俗的解釋，想要影射下文的真妄，但稍顯牽強。掌珍論（佛教論書）前二句破有為，后二句破無為，意思也只是影射下文。然而品味經文的上下文語意，總是發明有為（因緣和合而生）的本性為空，其真與妄相同于妄的說法，大概是因為真尚且不成立，更何況是妄，極言妄的必定為空罷了。理解此句應當以溫陵（地名，此處指溫陵人）的解釋為正，而會解失錄，現在略記於此。溫陵說，真性之中有為之法皆空，那麼根塵（感覺器官和感覺對像）也空，此頌根塵同源也。緣生之法皆幻，那麼縛脫（束縛和解脫）也幻，此頌縛脫無二也。起滅（生起和滅亡）無，那麼妄識（虛妄的認識）也無，此頌識性虛妄猶如空華也。現在更為貫串其義，真性之中有為悉空，所以然者，以有為皆因緣所生，故如幻也。如幻故無為，無為故無起滅，無起滅故如空華也。
『言妄顯諸真』（說妄是爲了顯現諸真）等等，所以若交蘆（如果像相互交錯的蘆葦）。
此句承接上文說有為皆幻，難道無為就是真嗎？然而說妄只是爲了顯真，說真姑且用來對應妄，妄真（虛妄和真實）都相同于妄罷了。而分別真假，辨別空華的濃淡，爭論兔角的短長，就是這樣。所以真與非真，兩者都不是，那麼能見（能看見的主體）和所見（被看見的客體）在哪裡呢？能見是根（感覺器官），所見是塵（感覺對像），中間是識（認識）。如果相（現象）和見（見解）都沒有實性，豈不像交蘆（相互交錯的蘆葦）一樣互相依倚，而其中實空嗎？一種說法是交為空，不是蘆中空，現在兼用之。又，顯諸真，有人解釋說顯眾真，因為真有多種，所以不知道『諸』字相當於『乎』、『于』、『也』、『其』，文理不通，自然不必論。況且只可眾妄歸一真，哪裡有一妄對眾真呢？其不通尤甚。
當於結心（應當在結心之處）。
諸種說法大多指中道（不偏不倚的道路）為結心，大概是認為
【English Translation】 English version: Yes.
Volume 5
The true nature of conditioned existence (the conditioned phenomena manifested by the true nature) is empty because it arises from causes and conditions, therefore it is like an illusion (like a dream, bubble, or shadow); unconditioned existence (non-fabricated, not dependent on causes and conditions) has no arising or ceasing, it is not real, like a flower in the sky (an unreal flower in the void).
Generally, verses (gatha) are closely related to prose (long lines). The prose says that roots (sense organs) and dust (sense objects) have the same origin, bondage (samsara) and liberation (nirvana) are not two, and the nature of consciousness (the nature of cognition) is illusory, like a flower in the sky. The interpretation of 'being both true and mundane' by the person from Wuxing (place name, referring to a person from Wuxing) attempts to allude to the truth and falsehood mentioned later, but it is somewhat far-fetched. The first two sentences of the 'Treatise on the Palm of Treasures' negate conditioned existence, and the latter two sentences negate unconditioned existence, also alluding to what follows. However, savoring the context of the sutra, it always reveals that the nature of conditioned existence (arising from the combination of causes and conditions) is empty, and the statement that its truth and falsehood are the same as falsehood is probably because truth is not even established, let alone falsehood, extremely emphasizing that falsehood is bound to be empty. Understanding this should be based on the interpretation of the person from Wenling (place name, referring to a person from Wenling) as correct, but the comprehensive explanation is lost, so I will briefly record it here. The person from Wenling said that all conditioned dharmas within the true nature are empty, then the roots and dust (sense organs and sense objects) are also empty, this verse praises that roots and dust have the same origin. The dharmas arising from conditions are all illusory, then bondage and liberation (bondage and liberation) are also illusory, this verse praises that bondage and liberation are not two. If arising and ceasing (birth and death) are absent, then deluded consciousness (false cognition) is also absent, this verse praises that the nature of consciousness is illusory, like a flower in the sky. Now, to further connect the meaning, all conditioned existence within the true nature is empty, and the reason for this is that all conditioned existence arises from causes and conditions, so it is like an illusion. Because it is like an illusion, there is no unconditioned existence; because there is no unconditioned existence, there is no arising or ceasing; because there is no arising or ceasing, it is like a flower in the sky.
'Speaking of delusion reveals all truths' (言妄顯諸真) etc., therefore, it is like intertwined reeds (交蘆).
This sentence follows the previous text, saying that all conditioned existence is illusory. Is unconditioned existence then true? However, speaking of delusion is only to reveal truth, and speaking of truth is only to correspond to delusion. Delusion and truth (虛妄 and 真實) are both the same as delusion. And distinguishing between truth and falsehood, discerning the density of flowers in the sky, and arguing about the length of rabbit horns are like this. Therefore, if truth and non-truth are both not, then where are the seer (the subject who sees) and the seen (the object being seen)? The seer is the root (sense organ), the seen is the dust (sense object), and in between is consciousness (cognition). If phenomena (相) and views (見) have no real nature, wouldn't they be like intertwined reeds (相互交錯的蘆葦), relying on each other, while being empty inside? One interpretation is that the intertwining is empty, not that the reeds are empty inside, and now both are used. Also, 'revealing all truths' (顯諸真), some people interpret it as revealing many truths, because there are many kinds of truths, so they don't know that the word '諸' is equivalent to '乎', '于', '也', '其', the logic is not clear, so there is no need to discuss it. Moreover, many delusions can only return to one truth, how can one delusion correspond to many truths? Its lack of coherence is even more severe.
Should be at the knot of the mind (當於結心).
Most of the various explanations refer to the Middle Way (不偏不倚的道路) as the knot of the mind, probably because
文中左右牽掣為斷常二邊故也然前後文都無此意唯溫陵謂是狂心其說似勝今更為闡之左右者解于結之末也故勞而無功結心者解于結之本也故逸而有成良由虛妄狂心迷而取境因此成結此結心也若不於此結心中解其餘解法左之右之舍一取一終莫能得則所謂斷常空有等種種諸法又盡攝於其中矣。
結不同時則結解時云何同除佛言六根解除亦復如是(此屬上文)此根初解先得人空(此屬下文)。
結解次第非眼結解已次解耳結次解鼻結之謂也良由六結不能一時齊解必須一根先解次五根者任運而解也又有以人法為結解次第者其意雖佳但與上文意不相協文中佛言六根解除亦復如是此一句當屬上文是允可阿難之辭原在根上而分次第此根初解二句當屬下文應別是一意蓋上明結解次第已竟下明結解所得之功能也或又難云結之解也縱許次第結之成也寧有次第而經稱巾以一綰得一結名二綰得二結名則今日成眼明日成耳乎成結不喻六根何疑于解不知喻非死法有克實喻者有彷彿喻者六結不同時彷彿喻六根不同位也結不能一時並解彷彿喻根不能一時盡消也試玩經中一則曰斯第六名終非第一二則曰如何令此六結亂名三則曰六結不同四則曰此結非彼彼結非此根之異位意可見矣若據母腹受胎則六根生起亦有次第可言而非今正意也若據發通者或
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：文中說左右牽掣是因為落入了斷見和常見這兩種極端，但前後文都沒有這個意思，只有溫陵認為這是狂妄之心，他的說法似乎更好。現在進一步闡釋：『左右』是指在解開繩結的末端用力，所以徒勞無功；解開繩結的關鍵在於繩結的根源，所以輕鬆而有成就。這是因為虛妄的狂心迷惑而執取外境，因此形成繩結，這就是結心。如果不在這個結心中解開，其他的解法，無論是向左還是向右，捨棄一個而取另一個，終究無法成功。那麼，所謂的斷見、常見、空、有等等各種法，也都被包含在其中了。
繩結不是同時形成的，那麼解開繩結的時候如何同時解開呢？佛說：『六根的解除也是這樣。』（這句話屬於上文）『這個根最初解開，首先證得人空。』（這句話屬於下文）
解開繩結的次第，不是說眼根的繩結解開后，接著解開耳根的繩結，再接著解開鼻根的繩結。這是因為六個繩結不能同時解開，必須先解開一個根，然後其餘五個根自然而然地解開。也有人以人空和法空作為繩結解開的次第，他們的想法雖然很好，但是與上文的意思不相符。文中佛說『六根的解除也是這樣』，這句話應當屬於上文，是佛允許阿難的說法。原本是在根上區分次第，『這個根最初解開』這兩句應當屬於下文，應該是另外一個意思，大概是上面說明了解開繩結的次第已經完畢，下面說明了解開繩結所得到的功能。或者又有人問：繩結的解開，縱然允許有次第，繩結的形成難道也有次第嗎？而經中說用手巾打結，打一個結就叫做一個結，打兩個結就叫做兩個結，那麼今天形成眼根的繩結，明天形成耳根的繩結嗎？形成繩結不比喻六根，為什麼懷疑解開繩結呢？不知道比喻不是死法，有完全符合的比喻，有相似的比喻。六個繩結不是同時形成，相似地比喻六根不在同一個位置。繩結不能同時解開，相似地比喻根不能同時完全消除。試著玩味經中的一則說：『這第六個名稱終究不是第一個』，二則說：『如何讓這六個繩結混亂名稱』，三則說：『六個繩結不同』，四則說：『這個繩結不是那個繩結，那個繩結不是這個繩結』，根的不同位置的意思可以看出來了。如果根據在母腹中受胎，那麼六根的生起也有次第可言，而不是現在所要表達的真正意思。如果根據發通的人，或許...
【English Translation】 English version: The text states that being pulled left and right is due to falling into the two extremes of annihilationism (斷見 duànjiàn) and eternalism (常見 chángjiàn), but the preceding and following texts do not imply this. Only Wenling considers it to be a deluded mind, and his explanation seems better. Now, to further elaborate: 'Left and right' refers to exerting effort at the end of the knot, hence the labor is fruitless. Untying the knot at its origin leads to ease and success. This is because the deluded mind, through delusion, grasps at external objects, thus forming a knot, which is the knot of the mind (結心 jiéxīn). If one does not untie it within this knot of the mind, other methods of untying, whether to the left or to the right, abandoning one and taking another, will ultimately fail. Then, the so-called annihilationism, eternalism, emptiness (空 kōng), existence (有 yǒu), and all sorts of dharmas are all encompassed within it.
If the knots are not formed simultaneously, how can they be untied simultaneously? The Buddha said, 'The liberation of the six roots (六根 liùgēn) is also like this.' (This belongs to the preceding text.) 'When this root is first liberated, one first attains the emptiness of the person (人空 rénkōng).' (This belongs to the following text.)
The order of untying the knots is not that after the knot of the eye root is untied, the knot of the ear root is untied, and then the knot of the nose root is untied. This is because the six knots cannot be untied simultaneously; one root must be untied first, and then the remaining five roots are untied naturally. Some also use the emptiness of the person and the emptiness of phenomena (法空 fǎkōng) as the order of untying the knots. Although their idea is good, it does not agree with the meaning of the preceding text. In the text, the Buddha said, 'The liberation of the six roots is also like this,' which should belong to the preceding text, as it is the Buddha's approval of Ananda's statement. Originally, the order was distinguished on the roots. The two sentences 'When this root is first liberated' should belong to the following text and should be a separate meaning, probably because the above explains that the order of untying the knots has been completed, and the following explains the function obtained by untying the knots. Or someone may ask: Even if the untying of the knots is allowed to have an order, does the formation of the knots also have an order? And the sutra says that tying a knot with a towel, tying one knot is called one knot, and tying two knots is called two knots, so is the knot of the eye root formed today and the knot of the ear root formed tomorrow? The formation of knots is not analogous to the six roots, so why doubt the untying of the knots? Not knowing that analogy is not a dead law, there are analogies that are completely consistent and analogies that are similar. The six knots are not formed simultaneously, similarly analogous to the six roots not being in the same position. The knots cannot be untied simultaneously, similarly analogous to the roots not being completely eliminated simultaneously. Try to savor the sutra, one says, 'This sixth name is ultimately not the first,' the second says, 'How to confuse the names of these six knots,' the third says, 'The six knots are different,' the fourth says, 'This knot is not that knot, that knot is not this knot,' the meaning of the different positions of the roots can be seen. If based on conception in the mother's womb, then the arising of the six roots also has an order, but that is not the true meaning to be expressed now. If based on those who develop psychic powers, perhaps...
既得天眼乃得天耳或既得神足乃得他心則六根神用亦有次第可言而與此略同也是故譬喻不應膠泥死法若泥死法則經云六解一亡而六結解已一巾儼然安得亡一況佛明言隨汝心中選擇六根曰隨曰擇非泛舉也正一根在先次及其餘而以是知六結定配六根何緣更立他說其人空法空自是六根上之人法也根根有人法二執亦根根有人法二空也前輩釋此其旨皆然但不點破上下文段落後人將佛言如是一句聯串讀下致斯難耳愚故以此根初解二句為起下文別是一意也先得人空等雖有先後而法爾如然非其本意故欲先此後彼也注引濁水沙土其意自明蓋菩薩本意在斷無明自然粗垢先落無先後中之先後也。
若復因此際會道成所得密言還同本悟則與未聞無有差別惟垂大悲惠我秘嚴。
承上賜與華屋請乞入門佛已指陳二決定義今于決定義中又復蒙佛開示慧覺圓通雖已悟知一六亡義猶未的曉圓通本根乃思多劫飄零何意今得值佛如失乳兒忽逢慈母可謂奇際良會實大幸矣若復因此際會之道終成不虛而使所得密言但只同於向所悟之一六亡義則圓通本根依然不知與未聞開示有何差別故愿佛大悲更惠秘嚴以成就最後開示也上云悟知下云本悟上云蒙佛開示下云最後開示前後照應明白。
最初發心悟十八界誰為圓通從何方便入三摩地。
方便斷屬
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 既已獲得天眼，才能獲得天耳，或者既已獲得神足通，才能獲得他心通，那麼六根的神通運用也有次第可言，這與前面的論述略同。因此，譬喻不應拘泥於死板的法則，如果拘泥於死板的法則，那麼經文所說的『六解一亡』，六結已經解開，一條毛巾仍然完好無損，怎麼能說亡一呢？況且佛明確地說，隨你的心意選擇六根，說是『隨』、『擇』，並非泛泛而談。正是一根在先，然後及於其餘。由此可知，六結必定對應六根，為何還要另立其他說法呢？其人空法空，自然是六根上的人法。根根都有人法二執，也根根都有人法二空。前輩解釋此意，其旨皆是如此，但不點破上下文段落，後人將佛言『如是』一句，聯串讀下，導致這種困難。我因此認為『根初解』、『二句』是開啟下文，是另外一個意思。先得人空等，雖然有先後，但法爾如是，並非其本意，所以想要先此後彼。註釋引用濁水沙土，其意自明，大概菩薩本意在於斷除無明，自然粗垢先落，是無先後中的先後。
如果因此際會，道業成就，所得的秘密言教還和最初的領悟相同，那麼和未曾聽聞開示就沒有差別了，唯愿佛陀垂憐大悲，賜予我秘密莊嚴。
承接上文佛陀賜予華屋，請乞入門，佛已經指陳了兩種決定義。現在於決定義中，又蒙佛開示慧覺圓通，雖然已經領悟了一六亡義，但還未徹底明白圓通的根本，於是思念多劫的飄零，為何今天才能遇到佛陀，如同丟失乳汁的嬰兒忽然遇到慈母，真是奇特的際遇，實在是大幸啊！如果因此際會之道最終成就，不是虛妄，而使所得的秘密言教，僅僅和先前所悟的一六亡義相同，那麼圓通的根本依然不知，和未曾聽聞開示有什麼差別呢？所以愿佛陀大悲，更加賜予秘密莊嚴，以成就最後的開示。上文說『悟知』，下文說『本悟』，上文說『蒙佛開示』，下文說『最後開示』，前後照應，明白。
最初發心，領悟十八界（六根、六塵、六識），誰是圓通？從什麼方便入三摩地（禪定）？
方便斷屬
【English Translation】 English version: Having obtained the divine eye, one then obtains the divine ear, or having obtained the power of miraculous locomotion, one then obtains the ability to know the minds of others. Thus, the divine functions of the six senses also have an order, which is roughly the same as the previous discussion. Therefore, metaphors should not be rigidly adhered to as dead laws. If one adheres to dead laws, then the scripture says 'six knots untied, one gone,' but with the six knots already untied, a towel remains intact. How can one say 'one gone'? Moreover, the Buddha clearly said, 'Choose the six senses according to your mind.' The words 'according' and 'choose' are not general statements. It is precisely that one sense comes first, and then the others follow. From this, it can be known that the six knots must correspond to the six senses. Why establish other theories? The emptiness of self and the emptiness of dharma are naturally the self and dharma on the six senses. Each sense has the two attachments of self and dharma, and each sense also has the two emptinesses of self and dharma. Previous scholars explained this meaning, and their intentions were all the same, but they did not point out the context and paragraphs. Later people connected the Buddha's words 'as is' and read them together, leading to this difficulty. Therefore, I believe that 'the initial untying of the root' and 'two sentences' are to start the following text, which is another meaning. Obtaining the emptiness of self, etc., although there is an order, is naturally so, not its original intention, so I want to do this first and then that. The commentary quotes muddy water and sand, its meaning is clear. Probably the original intention of the Bodhisattva is to cut off ignorance, and naturally the coarse dirt falls first, which is the sequence within no sequence.
If, because of this gathering, the path is accomplished, and the secret words obtained are the same as the original understanding, then there is no difference from not having heard the teachings. I only hope that the Buddha will have great compassion and bestow upon me secret adornments.
Following the Buddha's granting of the magnificent dwelling and the request to enter, the Buddha has already pointed out the two definitive meanings. Now, within the definitive meanings, I have again received the Buddha's enlightenment on the perfect penetration of wisdom and awareness. Although I have already understood the meaning of 'one and six are lost,' I have not yet fully understood the root of perfect penetration. Therefore, I contemplate the wandering of many kalpas. Why is it that I can meet the Buddha today, like a baby who has lost its milk suddenly encountering a loving mother? It is truly a rare encounter and a great fortune! If the path of this gathering is ultimately accomplished and not false, and the secret words obtained are only the same as the previously understood meaning of 'one and six are lost,' then the root of perfect penetration is still unknown. What difference is there from not having heard the teachings? Therefore, I wish that the Buddha would have great compassion and bestow even more secret adornments to accomplish the final teachings. The above says 'understood,' the below says 'original understanding.' The above says 'received the Buddha's enlightenment,' the below says 'final teachings.' The beginning and the end correspond clearly.
When initially aspiring, understanding the eighteen realms (six senses, six objects, six consciousnesses), who is the perfect penetration? From what expedient means does one enter Samadhi (meditative absorption)?
Expedient means belong to
耳根蓋此經自阿難幾陷淫室如來神咒攝還中間始則曰得成菩提最初方便次曰最初方便誰為圓通次曰汝今各說最初方便次曰從何方便入三摩地次曰何方便門得易成就次曰方便有多門次曰詢我諸方便次曰自余諸方便次曰方便易成就如是重重所說方便其文義皆與耳根圓通照應體貼無可疑者又華屋之喻阿難言要因門入門者方便也隨後便說二決定義其一則審因心謂不生滅心也即聞性也其二則審業本謂六根中誰為圓通也即耳根也意甚明顯。
既不洗塵亦不洗體。
塵字一說不洗垢塵一說不洗水塵體字一說勝義根一說浮塵根浮塵可洗勝義不可洗一說初塵次根次識三皆空寂為悟水因今謂言塵是垢亦不妨言體是浮塵根亦不妨不配根塵識亦不妨只重在悟水因耳因者由也本也此水洗塵乎塵自無體隨洗隨失何塵被洗此水洗體乎體屬四大彼自洗地及水火風何體被洗外塵內體內外既無安有中間為水洗者夫觸之為義本為水之與我兩相交涉而得觸名今皆無之觸果安在無觸而觸觸實無觸非因非緣及與自然本如來藏妙真如性故曰妙觸宣明也雖然此亦義解將此當悟尚未尚未。
樂見照明金剛三昧。
樂見者深切好樂而愿見乎照明之相也略似修凈土之作日觀也夫瞽人目雖不自照明而今以心目樂見樂見之極忽得照明此之照明體無時昏物莫
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 此經中，阿難因耳根險些多次陷入淫室，幸得如來神咒才被救回。經文中間先說『得到成就菩提的最初方便』，接著問『最初方便，誰最為圓通』，然後說『你們現在各自說說最初方便』，又問『從什麼方便入三摩地』，再問『什麼方便之門容易成就』，接著說『方便有很多門』，又說『詢問我各種方便』，再說『其餘各種方便』，最後說『方便容易成就』。這樣重重所說的方便，其文義都與耳根圓通互相照應，體貼入微，無可置疑。還有華屋的比喻，阿難說『要因門入門』，這個『門』就是方便。隨後便說二種決定義，其中之一是審因心，即不生滅心，也就是聞性；其二是審業本，即六根中誰最為圓通，也就是耳根。意思非常明顯。 『既不洗塵，也不洗體。』 對於『塵』字，一種說法是不洗垢塵，一種說法是不洗水塵；對於『體』字，一種說法是勝義根，一種說法是浮塵根。浮塵可以洗，勝義不可洗。還有一種說法是初塵、次根、次識，三者皆空寂，才能悟入水因。現在說『塵』是垢塵也不妨，說『體』是浮塵根也不妨，不配根塵識也不妨，只重在悟入水因。『耳因』的『因』是『由』，是『本』的意思。這水洗塵嗎？塵本無自體，隨洗隨失，有什麼塵可被洗？這水洗體嗎？體屬四大，它自己會洗地、水、火、風，有什麼體可被洗？外塵、內體、內外既然都沒有，哪裡還有中間被水洗的東西？觸的意義，本是水與我兩相交涉才得名為觸，現在這些都沒有了，觸又在哪裡？沒有觸而觸，觸實無觸，非因非緣以及自然，本是如來藏妙真如性，所以說『妙觸宣明』。雖然這也是義理上的解釋，但如果將此當作悟入，還差得遠。 『樂見照明金剛三昧。』 『樂見』是深切喜愛而願意見到照明之相。略微類似於修凈土宗的人做日觀。盲人眼睛雖然不能自己照明，但現在用心眼樂意見到，樂見到了極點，忽然得到照明，這照明的本體沒有一時昏暗，萬物莫能...
【English Translation】 English version: In this sutra, Ānanda (Buddha's attendant, meaning 'bliss') nearly fell into lascivious chambers several times due to his ear faculty, but was rescued by the Tathāgata's (meaning 'Thus Gone One', an epithet of the Buddha) divine mantra. In the middle of the text, it first says 'obtaining the initial expedient for achieving Bodhi (enlightenment)', then asks 'among the initial expedients, which is the most comprehensive?', then says 'now each of you speak of the initial expedient', then asks 'from what expedient does one enter Samādhi (a state of meditative consciousness)?', then asks 'which expedient gate is easy to achieve?', then says 'there are many expedient gates', then says 'inquire of me about all the expedients', then says 'the remaining various expedients', and finally says 'expedients are easy to achieve'. The expedients mentioned repeatedly in this way, their meaning all corresponds to and intimately fits with the perfect penetration of the ear faculty, leaving no doubt. There is also the analogy of the magnificent house, where Ānanda says 'one must enter through the door', this 'door' is the expedient. Following this, two definitive meanings are discussed, one of which is examining the causal mind, which is the non-arising and non-ceasing mind, that is, the hearing nature; the second is examining the root of karma, which is which of the six faculties is the most comprehensive, that is, the ear faculty. The meaning is very clear. 『Neither washes the dust, nor washes the body.』 Regarding the word 『dust』, one interpretation is not washing away defiled dust, another is not washing away water dust; regarding the word 『body』, one interpretation is the supreme meaning root, another is the floating dust root. Floating dust can be washed, but the supreme meaning cannot be washed. Another interpretation is that initial dust, then root, then consciousness, all three are empty and still, only then can one awaken to the water cause. Now saying that 『dust』 is defiled dust is fine, saying that 『body』 is the floating dust root is fine, not matching root, dust, and consciousness is also fine, only emphasizing awakening to the water cause. The 『cause』 in 『ear cause』 means 『due to』, it means 『root』. Does this water wash the dust? Dust originally has no self-nature, it is lost as it is washed, what dust can be washed? Does this water wash the body? The body belongs to the four great elements, it washes the earth, water, fire, and wind itself, what body can be washed? Since there is no external dust, internal body, or inside and outside, where is there something in the middle to be washed by water? The meaning of touch is originally that water and I interact with each other to obtain the name of touch, but now none of these exist, where is the touch? Without touch and yet touching, touch is truly no touch, not caused by causes or conditions, nor by nature, it is originally the wonderful true nature of the Tathāgatagarbha (meaning 'Buddha-nature'), therefore it is said 『wonderful touch clearly manifests』. Although this is also an explanation of the meaning, if one takes this as awakening, it is still far from it. 『Joyfully seeing the illuminating Vajra (meaning 'diamond' or 'thunderbolt') Samādhi.』 『Joyfully seeing』 is deeply loving and wishing to see the aspect of illumination. It is somewhat similar to those who practice Pure Land Buddhism doing sun contemplation. Although a blind person's eyes cannot illuminate themselves, now with the mind's eye, they joyfully see, and when joyfully seeing reaches its extreme, they suddenly obtain illumination, the essence of this illumination has no moment of darkness, and nothing can...
能蔽不失不壞故云金剛也。
我念有知知此深痛(云云)寧有雙覺。
方足痛時心作是念木石無知則刀割香塗了無所知矣我今有知知此深痛蓋痛者吾足而吾更有知此深痛者在也如是雖有覺知之心以覺此深痛而求吾本原清凈覺心不見有痛者不見有覺痛者雖然我又重思惟之現今有痛者有覺痛者夫痛者一覺也覺痛者又一覺也則我一身寧有雙覺真疑既起攝念反觀理極情亡忽然之間身心空寂也緊要在寧有雙覺上正禪宗參究工夫身心忽空則是悟處身空故無痛者心空故無覺痛者純覺遺身身心俱遺不言心者省文也。
說多淫人成猛火聚。
大三災水從貪致火因嗔生今以多淫為猛火者何也良以法無定相請以喻明彼多淫者自其淫心漸潰潤生死根則喻如水自其淫心昌熾枯清凈種則喻如火無不可也例嗔亦爾自其嗔心猛烈炎炎不可滅則喻如火自其嗔心洶涌滔滔不可御則喻如水亦無不可也又不必將冷暖氣三事配水火風以重在火大故蓋人身氣有冷暖以多淫心醞釀薰蒸諸冷暖氣悉皆成暖今以正念周遍審察氣從何來因何成火觀力所注此諸氣者化為神光神光內凝向之慾火今成智火向之火者爇功德藏今之火者燒煩惱薪故曰火光三昧。
窺窗觀室惟見清水(云云)我后出定身質如初。
月光正入水觀童子以瓦礫投之遂致心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 能遮蔽、不散失、不毀壞，所以叫做金剛（Jingang，指堅固不壞之物）。 我思念有知覺，能知曉這深刻的痛苦（等等），難道會有兩種知覺嗎？ 當腳疼痛時，心中這樣想：木頭石頭沒有知覺，所以用刀割或者涂香，它們都完全沒有感覺。我現在有知覺，知道這深刻的痛苦，大概是我的腳在痛，而我還有能知道這深刻痛苦的存在。像這樣，雖然有覺知的心來感覺這深刻的痛苦，但尋求我本來的清凈覺心，卻看不到有痛者，也看不到有感覺痛者。雖然這樣，我又重新思惟：現在有痛者，有感覺痛者，那麼痛者是一種知覺，感覺痛者又是另一種知覺，那麼我這一個身體難道會有兩種知覺嗎？真正的疑惑產生后，收攝念頭反觀自照，道理達到極致，情感消失，忽然之間身心空寂。最重要的是在『難道會有兩種知覺嗎』上，正是禪宗參究的功夫。身心忽然空寂，這就是開悟之處。身空了，所以沒有痛者；心空了，所以沒有感覺痛者。純粹的覺性遺忘了身體，身心都遺忘了，不說心，是爲了省略文字。 說貪淫的人會變成猛烈的火堆。 大三災中的水災是從貪慾導致的，火災是因為嗔恨產生的，現在用多淫來比喻猛火，這是為什麼呢？因為法沒有固定的相狀，請用比喻來說明。那些貪淫的人，從他們的淫心逐漸潰爛，滋潤生死之根，這就好比水；從他們的淫心昌盛熾熱，枯萎清凈的種子，這就好比火，沒有什麼不可以的。嗔恨也是這樣，從他們的嗔心猛烈，火焰無法熄滅，這就好比火；從他們的嗔心洶涌，波濤無法阻擋，這就好比水，也沒有什麼不可以的。又不必將冷暖氣這三件事與水火風相配，因為重點在於火大。因為人身的氣有冷暖，用多淫的心醞釀燻蒸，各種冷暖氣都變成暖氣。現在用正念周遍審察，氣從哪裡來，因為什麼變成火？用觀想的力量專注，這些氣就化為神光，神光內斂，以前的淫慾之火現在變成智慧之火，以前的火燃燒功德之藏，現在的火燃燒煩惱之薪，所以說火光三昧（Huoguang Sanmei，指火光禪定）。 從窗戶縫隙看房間，只能看見清水（等等），我出定後身體和原來一樣。 月光正好進入，水觀童子用瓦礫投擲，於是導致心...
【English Translation】 English version: It can shield, not be lost, and not be destroyed, therefore it is called Vajra (Jingang, referring to something solid and indestructible). I contemplate having awareness, knowing this deep pain (etc.), could there be two awarenesses? When the foot hurts, the mind thinks like this: wood and stone have no awareness, so cutting with a knife or applying fragrance, they have no feeling at all. I now have awareness, knowing this deep pain, probably my foot is hurting, and I also have something that can know this deep pain. Like this, although there is a conscious mind to feel this deep pain, but seeking my original pure awareness, I cannot see the one who is in pain, nor can I see the one who feels the pain. Although like this, I rethink: now there is the one who is in pain, and there is the one who feels the pain, then the one who is in pain is one awareness, and the one who feels the pain is another awareness, then could there be two awarenesses in this one body of mine? When true doubt arises, gather the thoughts and reflect inwardly, the principle reaches its extreme, emotions disappear, and suddenly the body and mind are empty and silent. The most important thing is on 'could there be two awarenesses?', which is precisely the effort of Chan (Zen) practice. When the body and mind suddenly become empty and silent, this is the place of enlightenment. The body is empty, so there is no one who is in pain; the mind is empty, so there is no one who feels the pain. Pure awareness forgets the body, both body and mind are forgotten, not mentioning the mind is to save words. Saying that a lustful person will become a raging fire. The water disaster in the three major disasters is caused by greed, and the fire disaster is caused by anger. Now, using excessive lust as a metaphor for raging fire, why is that? Because Dharma has no fixed form, please use a metaphor to explain. Those who are lustful, from their lustful mind gradually festering, nourishing the root of birth and death, this is like water; from their lustful mind flourishing and burning, withering the seeds of purity, this is like fire, there is nothing that cannot be. Anger is also like this, from their anger being fierce, the flames cannot be extinguished, this is like fire; from their anger surging, the waves cannot be stopped, this is like water, there is also nothing that cannot be. Also, there is no need to match the three things of cold and warm air with water, fire, and wind, because the focus is on the great element of fire. Because the air in the human body has cold and warmth, using a lustful mind to brew and steam, all kinds of cold and warm air become warm air. Now, using right mindfulness to thoroughly examine, where does the air come from, and why does it become fire? Using the power of contemplation to focus, these airs transform into divine light, the divine light converges inward, the fire of lust in the past now becomes the fire of wisdom, the fire in the past burned the treasury of merit, the fire now burns the fuel of afflictions, therefore it is called Huoguang Sanmei (火光三昧, Firelight Samadhi). Looking at the room through a crack in the window, one can only see clear water (etc.), after I came out of Samadhi, my body was the same as before. The moonlight was just entering, the water contemplation boy threw tiles and stones, thus causing the mind...
痛難者曰幸是瓦礫止令心痛脫其時投以刀劍寧不破肢體碎腸胃乎是不知經言初成此觀未得亡身以身存故因有小苦以觀成故雖有小苦終無大害縱投刀劍亦止心痛不能傷也又身未亡者身水猶二有我之身同彼水也身已亡者身水為一求於我身不可得也既無身矣復誰能苦之經義分明無俟多難。
心重世名好游族姓。
只消說求世名利游世族炷不必配以名相等蓋人唯不悟唯識故背心逐境若了唯識則攝境歸心視世間名聞利養一切萬法如夢如幻尚何惑著者哉而名相等在其中矣故不必配。
○第六卷
入流亡所。
入流二字諸說不同一說流者法性流一說流者生死欲流一說流者三心中等流一說眾人隨流而出今此反流而入反流而入似合反聞自性但前偈中入流成正覺彼意應是入法性流以法性對聲塵不入聲塵而入法性即反流意故從第一說。
下合十方一切六道眾生與諸眾生同一悲仰。
一說菩薩觀眾生苦惱故悲觀眾生即佛故仰一說悲屬菩薩下憫仰屬眾生上慕二說俱未穩只依古解悲仰皆屬眾生悲者悲己沉淪仰者仰他救度眾生悲菩薩與同悲眾生仰菩薩與同仰所謂以萬物為一體又云恫瘝切身又云象憂亦憂象喜亦喜意正相似。
如幻聞薰聞修。
萬法虛妄唯是一心聲塵本空聞性常住于常住心中一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本
痛苦難忍的人說：『幸好只是瓦礫，僅僅是心痛而已。如果當時投擲的是刀劍，難道不會肢體破碎、腸胃斷裂嗎？』這是因為不瞭解經文所說的，『初步成就此觀想，尚未達到忘我的境界，因為身體還存在，所以才會有小的痛苦。因為觀想逐漸成就，所以即使有小的痛苦，最終也不會有大的傷害。即使投擲刀劍，也僅僅是心痛，不能真正傷害到你。』而且，身體尚未消亡的人，身體和水還是二者，有『我』的身體如同那水一般。身體已經消亡的人，身體和水融為一體，再也找不到『我』的身了。既然沒有了身體，又有誰能讓你痛苦呢？』經文的意義非常明白，無需多問。
內心看重世俗名利，喜歡與名門望族交往。
只需說明追求世俗名利，與世家大族交往，不必再配以『名』、『相等』之類的詞語。因為人們只是不明白唯識的道理，所以才背離自心而追逐外境。如果明白了唯識的道理，就能將外境收攝歸於自心，看待世間的名聞利養一切萬法，都如同夢幻泡影一般，又有什麼可以迷惑執著的呢？而『名』、『相等』之類的概念，自然也包含在其中了，所以不必再額外說明。
第六卷
入流亡所（進入法性之流，失去執著之處）。
對於『入流』二字，各種說法不同。一種說法是，『流』指的是法性之流；一種說法是，『流』指的是生死欲流；一種說法是，『流』指的是三心中的等流；一種說法是，眾人隨波逐流而出，現在這是反過來逆流而入。『反流而入』似乎與『反聞自性』相合。但前面偈頌中說『入流成正覺』，那裡的意思應該是進入法性之流。因為法性是相對於聲塵而言的，不進入聲塵而進入法性，就是『反流』的意思，所以這裡採用第一種說法。
下與十方一切六道眾生，與諸眾生同一悲傷仰望之情。
一種說法是，菩薩觀察到眾生的苦惱，所以生起悲憫之心；觀察眾生就是觀察佛，所以生起仰慕之心。一種說法是，『悲』屬於菩薩，是向下憐憫；『仰』屬於眾生，是向上仰慕。這兩種說法都不太穩妥，還是依照古人的解釋，『悲』和『仰』都屬於眾生。『悲』是悲傷自己沉淪，『仰』是仰望他人救度。眾生悲憫菩薩，與菩薩一同悲憫；眾生仰望菩薩，與菩薩一同仰望。這就是所謂的『以萬物為一體』，又說『恫瘝切身』，又說『象憂亦憂，像喜亦喜』，意思非常相似。
如幻聞薰聞修（如夢幻般地聽聞熏習，聽聞修習）。
萬法虛妄，唯是一心。聲塵本來是空，聞性常住不滅。在常住不滅的自心中，一心
【English Translation】 English version
The sufferer says, 'Fortunately, it was only rubble, causing only heartache. If swords and knives had been thrown then, wouldn't limbs be broken and intestines shattered?' This is because they do not understand the sutra's words: 'Initially achieving this contemplation, one has not yet attained selflessness. Because the body still exists, there is minor suffering. Because contemplation gradually develops, although there is minor suffering, ultimately there will be no great harm. Even if swords and knives are thrown, it will only be heartache and cannot truly injure you.' Moreover, for those whose bodies have not perished, the body and water are still two separate entities; the 'I' body is like that water. For those whose bodies have perished, the body and water become one, and the 'I' body cannot be found. Since there is no body, who can cause suffering?' The meaning of the sutra is very clear, requiring no further questioning.
The mind values worldly fame and enjoys associating with prominent families.
It is sufficient to say seeking worldly fame and associating with prominent families, without needing to add words like 'name' or 'equal'. Because people simply do not understand the principle of Consciousness-Only, they turn away from their own minds and pursue external objects. If they understand Consciousness-Only, they can gather external objects back into their own minds, viewing worldly fame, profit, and all phenomena as dreams and illusions. What is there to be deluded and attached to? And concepts like 'name' and 'equal' are naturally included within this, so there is no need for further explanation.
Volume Six
Entering the Stream, Abandoning the Place (Entering the stream of Dharma-nature, abandoning the place of attachment).
There are various interpretations of the phrase 'entering the stream'. One interpretation is that 'stream' refers to the stream of Dharma-nature. Another is that 'stream' refers to the stream of birth and death desires. Another is that 'stream' refers to the equal stream in the three minds. Another is that people follow the stream outwards, but now they are turning against the stream and entering. 'Turning against the stream and entering' seems to align with 'reversing the hearing to hear the self-nature'. However, the previous verse says 'entering the stream to achieve right enlightenment', which should mean entering the stream of Dharma-nature. Because Dharma-nature is relative to sound-dust, not entering sound-dust but entering Dharma-nature is the meaning of 'reversing the stream', so the first interpretation is adopted here.
Below, uniting with all sentient beings in the ten directions and the six realms, sharing the same sorrow and longing with all sentient beings.
One interpretation is that Bodhisattvas observe the suffering of sentient beings, so they generate compassion; observing sentient beings is observing the Buddha, so they generate longing. Another interpretation is that 'sorrow' belongs to the Bodhisattva, which is downward compassion; 'longing' belongs to sentient beings, which is upward admiration. Both of these interpretations are not very stable. It is better to follow the ancient interpretation that both 'sorrow' and 'longing' belong to sentient beings. 'Sorrow' is sorrowing for one's own sinking, 'longing' is longing for others to save. Sentient beings sorrow for the Bodhisattva, sharing the same sorrow with the Bodhisattva; sentient beings long for the Bodhisattva, sharing the same longing with the Bodhisattva. This is what is meant by 'regarding all things as one body', and also 'feeling others' pain as one's own', and also 'if the elephant is sad, one is also sad; if the elephant is happy, one is also happy', the meaning is very similar.
Like an Illusion, Hearing, Perfuming, Hearing, Cultivating (Hearing and perfuming like a dream, hearing and cultivating).
All phenomena are illusory, only the mind is real. Sound-dust is originally empty, the hearing-nature is constantly abiding. In the constantly abiding self-mind, wholeheartedly
切聲塵及與萬法悉皆如幻以此如幻法門始於聞中薰習終於聞中修證無作而作作實無作隨緣應用本體如如不動不搖不失不壞此三昧者名如幻聞薰聞脩金剛三昧也。
若諸菩薩入三摩地(云云)是名妙凈三十二應入國土身。
此三十二應與法華大同小異彼俱稱得度平等無二此則種種差別初菩薩獨覺緣覺聲聞梵天則云解脫解脫者即彼經得度也次帝釋諸天等則云成就成就者各滿其本所欲也梵亦天類而例居解脫者以離欲也又天等以下云出倫脫倫者厭本倫而欲超之也又眾生樂人修人者承上天龍八部中有樂生人道者也上言欲出未委出此樂生何所故今曰樂人也所以樂人者經云諸天嘗自思我何時當得人身生釋迦如來法中受比丘戒裴相國亦云可以整心慮趣菩提者唯人道耳人之為貴明矣故樂生也或疑均之三十二應何得兩經不同不知菩薩利生有百千萬億種種方便況此小不同乎。
一者由我不自觀音以觀觀者令彼十方苦惱眾生觀其音聲即得解脫。
自猶獨也凡人聽音只觀其音今不獨觀音而復觀其能觀音者如是旋倒聞機反觀自性則了無諸妄惟是一真覓樂尚不可得有何苦惱所謂照見五陰皆空度一切苦厄者是也以此神力加被眾生故眾生聞菩薩聖號之音而一心觀之專注不捨皆于苦惱而得解脫觀者即持念之謂也而有二義但以事觀專
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 斷絕聲塵以及一切萬法，都如幻象一般。這種如幻的法門，開始於聽聞時的熏習，最終在聽聞中修證。無作而作，作了實際上又像是沒有作，隨順因緣而應用，本體卻如如不動，不搖晃，不消失，不毀壞。這三昧，名為如幻聞熏聞脩金剛三昧。
如果各位菩薩進入三摩地（禪定狀態），（內容省略）這被稱為妙凈三十二應入國土身。
這三十二應與《法華經》大同小異。《法華經》都稱作『得度』，平等沒有差別；而這裡則有種種差別。最初的菩薩、獨覺、緣覺、聲聞、梵天，經中說『解脫』，『解脫』就是《法華經》中的『得度』。其次的帝釋、諸天等，經中說『成就』，『成就』就是各自滿足他們原本所希望的。梵天也屬於天人一類，但被歸為『解脫』，是因為他們已經脫離了慾望。另外，天等以下說『出倫』、『脫倫』，是指厭倦了原本的類別而想要超越。還有眾生樂人、修人，是承接上文天龍八部中喜歡生在人道的人。上面說想要出來，但沒有說明要從這種喜歡中出來到哪裡去，所以現在說『樂人』。之所以說『樂人』，是因為經中說，諸天曾經自己思考，我什麼時候才能得到人身，生在釋迦如來（釋迦牟尼佛）的法中，受比丘戒？裴休宰相也說，能夠整理心緒，趨向菩提的，只有人道啊。人之所以可貴，很明顯就在這裡，所以說『樂生』。或許有人疑惑，同樣是三十二應，為什麼兩部經不同？不知道菩薩利益眾生有百千萬億種方便，何況這點小小的不同呢？
第一，因為我不自己觀察聲音，而是用觀音（Avalokiteśvara，觀世音菩薩）的方式來觀察，讓那些十方受苦惱的眾生，觀察他們的音聲，就能得到解脫。
『自』就是『獨』的意思。一般人聽聲音，只觀察聲音本身，現在不只是觀察聲音，而且還觀察那個能聽聲音的。這樣迴轉顛倒的聽聞機能，反過來觀察自性，就能明白沒有虛妄，只有真實。尋找快樂尚且不可得，哪裡還有什麼苦惱？這就是所謂的『照見五蘊皆空，度一切苦厄』。用這種神力加持眾生，所以眾生聽到菩薩聖號的聲音，一心一意地觀察，專注不捨，都能從苦惱中得到解脫。『觀』就是持唸的意思，有兩種含義，只是用事情來觀察專注。
【English Translation】 English version Cutting off the sound-dust and all dharmas are like illusions. This 'like-illusion' Dharma gate begins with the熏習 (xunxi, perfuming or imprinting) in hearing and culminates in the cultivation and realization within hearing. Acting without acting, acting as if not acting, applying according to conditions, the essence remains 如如不動 (ruru budong, thus thus unmoving), unwavering, not lost, not destroyed. This samadhi is called the 'Like-Illusion Hearing-熏聞 (xunwen, perfuming hearing)-修聞 (xiuwen, cultivating hearing) Vajra Samadhi'.
If all Bodhisattvas enter samadhi (etc.), this is called the 'Wonderfully Pure Thirty-two Manifestations Entering the Land Body'.
These thirty-two manifestations are largely the same but slightly different from the Lotus Sutra. The Lotus Sutra refers to them all as 'attaining liberation' (得度, dedu), equal and without difference, while here there are various distinctions. Initially, Bodhisattvas, Pratyekabuddhas (獨覺, dujue), those enlightened by conditions (緣覺, yuanjue), Śrāvakas (聲聞, shengwen), and Brahma heavens (梵天, fantian) are said to attain 'liberation' (解脫, jietuo), which is equivalent to 'attaining liberation' in the Lotus Sutra. Next, Indra (帝釋, dishi), various heavens, etc., are said to attain 'accomplishment' (成就, chengjiu), which means each fulfills their original desires. Brahma is also a type of heaven but is categorized under 'liberation' because they are free from desires. Furthermore, those below the heavens are said to 'transcend their class' (出倫, chulun) or 'escape their class' (脫倫, tuolun), indicating a weariness of their original class and a desire to surpass it. Additionally, sentient beings who delight in humans (樂人, leren) and those who cultivate as humans (修人, xiuren) are a continuation of the previous mention of those among the eight classes of gods and dragons (天龍八部, tianlongbabu) who enjoy being born in the human realm. It was previously mentioned that they wish to emerge, but it was not specified where they wish to emerge from this delight, hence the term 'those who delight in humans'. The reason for 'those who delight in humans' is that the sutra states that the heavens once pondered, 'When will I be able to obtain a human body, be born in the Dharma of Śākyamuni Tathāgata (釋迦如來, shijia rulai), and receive the Bhikshu precepts?' Chancellor Pei Xiu also said, 'Only the human realm can regulate thoughts and aspire to Bodhi.' The nobility of humans is evident, hence the term 'delight in birth'. Some may wonder why the thirty-two manifestations are different in the two sutras. It should be understood that Bodhisattvas benefit sentient beings through hundreds of thousands of millions of various expedient means, let alone these minor differences.
First, because I do not observe sounds myself, but observe with the observation of Avalokiteśvara (觀音, Guanyin), allowing those suffering sentient beings in the ten directions to observe their sounds, they will attain liberation.
'Self' means 'alone'. Ordinary people only observe the sound when listening to it. Now, one does not merely observe the sound but also observes the one who can hear the sound. By reversing the hearing faculty and turning inward to observe one's own nature, one realizes that there are no delusions, only truth. Seeking pleasure is unattainable, so where is there suffering? This is what is meant by 'Illuminating the emptiness of the five skandhas and overcoming all suffering and distress'. By using this divine power to bless sentient beings, when they hear the sound of the Bodhisattva's holy name and observe it with one mind, focusing without abandoning, they can all be liberated from suffering and distress. 'Observing' means holding and reciting, and it has two meanings: simply observing with focused attention.
持名號解脫世間苦惱而獲安隱兼以理觀反聞自性解脫三界苦惱而得涅槃此與法華不同彼屬菩薩觀此屬眾生觀也一說菩薩以反觀自性之力能令眾生脫苦則觀其音聲一句似無著落。
猶如割水亦如吹光性無搖動。
上言刀斷斷壞次言割水吹光夫割水不能壞刀似與上意不合何也蓋此各為一義上明能斫之刀反招自損此明所斫之體曾無所損云何無損如割水而水不痕吹光而光不動是也故與上文語若相悖而意實相成也。
我從耳門圓照三昧緣心自在因入流相得三摩提。
由從耳根圓照三昧緣心自在因此入法性流得三摩地也圓照者一照一切照即圓通也以從觀音故不曰圓聞而曰圓照緣心自在者凡夫心為緣礙而不自在今緣隨乎心心任乎緣無不如意觸處自在所謂他人被十二時使老僧使得十二時也因此三昧自在力故入法性流得三摩地。
覺海性澄圓(云云)知覺乃眾生。
覺海者以覺性澄湛圓融喻之如海元妙者以圓澄性絕諸對待不可思議故曰元妙合而言之是名圓澄元妙大覺海也此覺本自常明無照無不照是真照也所謂本來無有世界眾生者也無端于真照體上忽生一念妄起照用局為所照此照立而真照隱矣真照既隱遂成妄想妄想未起空覺不分今因妄想乃有虛空即此空中妄想之澄凝不動也則成國土妄想之靈明有知也
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 持念名號可以解脫世間的苦惱，獲得安寧，同時通過理性的觀察，反聞自性，可以解脫三界的苦惱，從而證得涅槃。這與《法華經》不同，《法華經》屬於菩薩的觀法，而這裡屬於眾生的觀法。有一種說法是，菩薩以反觀自性的力量，能夠使眾生脫離苦難，那麼觀其音聲一句似乎沒有著落。 猶如切割水面，又如吹拂光芒，水的本性沒有搖動，光芒的本性也沒有變化。 前面說刀能斬斷，會斷壞，後面說切割水面，吹拂光芒。切割水面不能損壞刀，似乎與前面的意思不合，為什麼呢？因為這裡各自表達一個意思。前面是說明能砍的刀反而會招致自身的損壞，這裡是說明所砍的物體根本沒有受到損害。為什麼沒有損害呢？就像切割水面而水面沒有痕跡，吹拂光芒而光芒沒有動搖一樣。所以與前面的文字在字面上好像是相反的，而意思實際上是相互成就的。 我從耳根的圓照三昧，緣心自在，因此進入法性之流，獲得三摩提（Samadhi，禪定）。 由於從耳根的圓照三昧，緣心自在，因此進入法性之流，獲得三摩地（Samadhi，禪定）。圓照，就是一照一切照，照即是圓通。因為是從觀音法門入手，所以不說圓聞，而說圓照。緣心自在，是說凡夫的心被外緣所障礙，不能自在，現在緣隨順於心，心任憑外緣，沒有不如意的，觸處自在，這就是所謂的『他人被十二時辰所役使，老僧卻能役使十二時辰』。因此三昧的自在力量，進入法性之流，獲得三摩地（Samadhi，禪定）。 覺海的本性澄澈圓融（云云），知覺乃是眾生。 覺海，是用覺悟的本性澄澈圓融來比喻，就像大海一樣。元妙，是用圓澄的本性斷絕一切對待，不可思議，所以說是元妙。合起來說，就叫做圓澄元妙大覺海。這個覺悟本來就是常明，無照而無不照，這是真照。這就是所謂的本來沒有世界眾生。無端地在真照的本體上忽然生起一念，妄想產生照的作用，侷限於所照的範圍，這個照一旦確立，真照就隱沒了。真照既然隱沒，就形成了妄想，妄想還沒有生起的時候，空覺是不分的，現在因為妄想才有了虛空，也就是這個空中妄想的澄凝不動，就形成了國土，妄想的靈明有知，就形成了眾生。
【English Translation】 English version: Holding the name [of the Bodhisattva] liberates from worldly suffering and attains peace. Simultaneously, through rational contemplation, turning the hearing inward to perceive one's self-nature liberates from the suffering of the three realms and attains Nirvana (Nirvana, 涅槃). This differs from the Lotus Sutra, which pertains to the contemplation of Bodhisattvas, while this pertains to the contemplation of sentient beings. One explanation is that Bodhisattvas, through the power of turning inward to contemplate self-nature, can enable sentient beings to escape suffering, then the phrase 'observing its sound' seems to have no basis. It is like cutting water or blowing on light; the nature [of water] does not waver, [the nature of light] does not move. The previous statement says that the knife that cuts will be damaged, while the latter statement speaks of cutting water and blowing on light. Cutting water does not damage the knife, which seems inconsistent with the previous meaning. Why is this? Because each expresses a separate meaning. The former explains that the knife that can cut will instead bring about its own damage, while the latter explains that the object being cut suffers no damage at all. Why is there no damage? It is like cutting water without leaving a trace, or blowing on light without moving it. Therefore, although the words seem contradictory to the previous text, the meanings actually complement each other. I, from the ear-gate, perfect illumination Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定), with the mind free from conditions, thus entering the stream of Dharma-nature, attained Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定). Because from the ear-root, [I entered] perfect illumination Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定), with the mind free from conditions, thus entering the stream of Dharma-nature, attained Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定). 'Perfect illumination' means one illumination illuminates all, illumination is perfect penetration. Because it starts from Avalokiteshvara's (Avalokiteshvara, 觀音) practice, it is not called 'perfect hearing' but 'perfect illumination'. 'Mind free from conditions' means that the mind of ordinary people is obstructed by conditions and is not free. Now, conditions follow the mind, and the mind relies on conditions, without anything not being as desired, being free everywhere. This is what is called 'Others are used by the twelve hours, but the old monk uses the twelve hours'. Because of the power of this Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定), [I] entered the stream of Dharma-nature and attained Samadhi (Samadhi, 禪定). The nature of the sea of awareness is clear and perfect (etc.), awareness is [characteristic of] sentient beings. The sea of awareness is used as a metaphor for the clear and perfect nature of enlightenment, like the ocean. 'Profoundly subtle' is used because the perfect and clear nature cuts off all duality and is inconceivable, therefore it is called 'profoundly subtle'. Combining them, it is called the 'perfectly clear, profoundly subtle great sea of awareness'. This awareness is originally always bright, without illumination yet illuminating everything, this is true illumination. This is what is called 'originally there were no worlds or sentient beings'. Groundlessly, on the substance of true illumination, suddenly arises a thought, delusionally creating the function of illumination, limited to the scope of what is illuminated. Once this illumination is established, true illumination is hidden. Since true illumination is hidden, delusion is formed. When delusion has not yet arisen, emptiness and awareness are not separate. Now, because of delusion, there is emptiness, that is, the still and unmoving condensation of delusion in this emptiness forms the land, and the intelligent knowing of delusion forms sentient beings.
則成眾生圓澄元妙之覺海於是乎失其初矣故必假方便門入歸元路而復其初也。
明前不明後四維虧一半。
以四正方言之全不見后是明前不明後也依天如正方各具二百功德則三方止具六百矣以四隅方言之見前二隅不見后二隅是四維虧一半也依天如隅方各具一百功德則二隅止具二百矣故成八百維者方隅之總名對方則維者隅也。
神通本宿因何關法分別。
目連神通從旋湛生今揀之謂神通本于宿因非關依法分別修習而成彼其旋意識而復妙湛亦法分別也況始聞迦葉談說因緣深義由之發心既屬因緣則不離物不離物則有所著而安得為圓通也。
諸行是無常念性元生滅因果今殊感云何獲圓通。
佛明言不知常住真心是以流轉又明言生滅為因無由得不生滅果則唸佛乃無常生滅法也薄凈土而不修者不亦宜乎此勢至唸佛因緣彌陀疏鈔中已發大意而專銷彼經無暇及此此義若不辨明初學必成疑阻有不容終嘿者昔吳興謂勢至都攝六根則所念之佛必通三身然其子母相憶多就應身故指同無常生滅也意謂法身唸佛者自證真常不生滅法今是應身念耳此意固善而尚未盡如來法王於法自在時當耳根則一切法趍耳而眼等諸根皆在所揀時當眼根則一切法趍眼而耳等諸根覆在所揀四科七大萬法皆然神而明之存乎其人而已彼耳
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，眾生原本圓滿澄澈、玄妙的覺悟之海，便由此失去了它的本初狀態。所以必須藉助方便之門，進入迴歸本源的道路，才能恢復它的本初狀態。
『明前不明後四維虧一半』。
如果從四正方位的角度來說，完全看不到後面，這就是『明前不明後』。如果按照天如禪師所說，正方每個方位都具有二百種功德，那麼三個方位就只有六百種功德了。如果從四隅方位的角度來說，看到前面的兩個隅，看不到後面的兩個隅，這就是『四維虧一半』。如果按照天如禪師所說，隅方每個方位都具有一百種功德，那麼兩個隅就只有二百種功德了。所以說『八百維』，是方隅的總稱，相對於方來說，維就是隅。
『神通本宿因何關法分別』。
目連（Maudgalyayana，佛陀十大弟子之一，以神通著稱）的神通是從旋湛（指清凈的覺性）中產生的，現在加以選擇，是說神通本于宿世的因緣，並非通過依法分別修習而成就的。他們那個旋意識而恢復妙湛，也是法分別。況且當初聽到迦葉（Kasyapa，佛陀十大弟子之一，以頭陀行著稱）談說因緣深義，由此發心，既然屬於因緣，那麼就不離外物，不離外物就會有所執著，又怎麼能說是圓通呢？
『諸行是無常念性元生滅因果今殊感云何獲圓通』。
佛陀明確地說，因為不知道常住真心，所以才會流轉生死。又明確地說，以生滅為因，不可能得到不生滅的果。那麼唸佛就是無常生滅法了。輕視凈土而不修習的人，不是也很應該嗎？勢至（Mahasthamaprapta，阿彌陀佛的右脅侍菩薩，以智慧之光普照一切）唸佛因緣，在《彌陀疏鈔》中已經闡發了大意，而專門解釋彼經，沒有時間顧及此處。這個道理如果不辨明，初學者必定會產生疑惑，不能始終沉默。過去吳興（地名，此處指吳興一帶的僧人）認為勢至菩薩都攝六根，那麼所念的佛必定通於三身（法身、報身、應身）。然而他的母子相憶，大多就應身而言，所以指同於無常生滅。意思是說，法身唸佛的人，是自證真常不生滅法，現在是應身唸佛罷了。這個意思固然很好，但還沒有完全說透。如來法王，於法自在，當耳根起作用時，一切法都趨向于耳，而眼等諸根都在所揀選之外；當眼根起作用時，一切法都趨向于眼，而耳等諸根又在所揀選之外。四科（五蘊、十二處、十八界、七大）七大（地、水、火、風、空、見、識）萬法都是這樣。能夠心領神會，就看各人的領悟能力了。那個耳...
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, the originally perfect, clear, and profound ocean of enlightenment of sentient beings loses its original state. Thus, it is necessary to rely on the expedient means to enter the path of returning to the source in order to restore its original state.
'Knowing the front but not the back, half of the four corners are missing.'
If speaking from the perspective of the four cardinal directions, completely not seeing the back is 'knowing the front but not the back.' According to Chan Master Tianru, each cardinal direction possesses two hundred merits, then the three directions only possess six hundred merits. If speaking from the perspective of the four intermediate directions, seeing the two front corners but not the two back corners is 'half of the four corners are missing.' According to Chan Master Tianru, each intermediate direction possesses one hundred merits, then the two corners only possess two hundred merits. Therefore, 'eight hundred dimensions' is the general term for cardinal and intermediate directions. Relative to the cardinal directions, the dimensions are the intermediate directions.
'Supernatural powers are rooted in past causes, what does it have to do with discriminating through the Dharma?'
Maudgalyayana's (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his supernatural powers) supernatural powers arise from the revolving clarity (referring to pure awareness). Now, selecting it means that supernatural powers are rooted in past causes and are not achieved through discriminating and cultivating according to the Dharma. Their revolving consciousness and restoring to wonderful clarity is also discriminating through the Dharma. Moreover, initially hearing Kasyapa (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his ascetic practices) speak of the profound meaning of dependent origination, and thereby generating the aspiration, since it belongs to dependent origination, then it does not depart from external objects. Not departing from external objects will lead to attachment, so how can it be said to be perfect penetration?
'All phenomena are impermanent, the nature of thought is fundamentally arising and ceasing, the causes and effects are now different, how can one attain perfect penetration?'
The Buddha clearly stated that because one does not know the permanent true mind, one transmigrates in samsara. He also clearly stated that taking arising and ceasing as the cause, it is impossible to obtain the fruit of non-arising and non-ceasing. Then, reciting the Buddha's name is an impermanent, arising and ceasing Dharma. Those who belittle the Pure Land and do not cultivate it, shouldn't they? The causal conditions of Mahasthamaprapta (the bodhisattva who is the right attendant of Amitabha Buddha, known for illuminating everything with the light of wisdom) reciting the Buddha's name have already been elaborated in the 'Commentary on the Amitabha Sutra,' and it is dedicated to explaining that sutra, without time to attend to this. If this principle is not clarified, beginners will inevitably have doubts and cannot remain silent. In the past, Wu Xing (a place name, referring to monks in the Wu Xing area) believed that Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva gathers in all six senses, then the Buddha being recited must be connected to the three bodies (Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Nirmanakaya). However, his mother and son remembering each other mostly refers to the Nirmanakaya, so it is referred to as impermanent, arising and ceasing. The meaning is that those who recite the Buddha in the Dharmakaya are self-realizing the true permanent, non-arising and non-ceasing Dharma, now it is just reciting the Buddha in the Nirmanakaya. This meaning is certainly good, but it has not been fully explained. The Tathagata Dharma King, being free in the Dharma, when the ear root functions, all Dharmas tend towards the ear, and the eye and other roots are outside of the selection; when the eye root functions, all Dharmas tend towards the eye, and the ear and other roots are again outside of the selection. The four aggregates (five skandhas, twelve entrances, eighteen realms, seven elements) and seven great elements (earth, water, fire, wind, space, perception, consciousness) and all phenomena are like this. Being able to understand it spiritually depends on each person's ability to comprehend. That ear...
根所以為常為不生滅者以聲有聲無聞性不隨之而有無也獨不曰念起念滅念性不隨之而起滅乎惡得謂唸佛為無常生滅法也且據此方教體則云然耳故世人徒知今經獨貴耳根不知他經云此五根者意為之主則耳根不圓通歟世人徒知此經獨尚觀音不知他經云正法眼藏惟付迦葉則觀音不得正法歟持百千萬億觀音名號不如一稱地藏則觀音不足稱念歟喻如夫子云吾與點也未聞顏閔之見棄也又云君哉舜也未聞堯禹之不君也敬母而慢父譽日而毀月拘人曲士之僻見耳尚何足以語圓通哉。
毗奈耶中宣說修行三決定義所謂攝心為戒因戒生定因定發慧。
三決定指戒定慧莫見下文殺盜淫妄各云決定明誨便謂是殺盜淫況妄語亦曰決定明誨則四決定矣又決定字亦不必泥前文云有二決定義豈亦指殺盜淫耶然必曰毗奈耶中者何蓋言律中所明三決定義者決定戒為最先決定定依戒生決定慧依定生也所謂二字緊緊接下良由以戒為本故曰毗奈耶中。
求佛菩提如噬臍人慾誰成就。
噬臍一說用莊子如麝噬臍喻悔之無及也一說經云如噬臍人不曰獸而曰人則指人不能自噬其臍喻趁之莫及也而上云求佛菩提下云欲誰成就則第二說較切。
○第七卷
要先持此四種律儀皎如冰霜自不能生一切枝葉心三口四生必無因。
身口意三
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 認為常住不變、不生不滅的根本原因，是因為聲音存在時有聽性，聲音消失時聽性也不隨之消失。難道不可以說念頭生起時有念性，念頭滅去時念性也不隨之生滅嗎？怎麼能說唸佛是無常生滅之法呢？況且這只是根據此方（指我們這個世界）的教法體系來說的。所以世人只知道《楞嚴經》特別推崇耳根，卻不知道其他經典說這五根以意根為主，那麼耳根就不圓通了嗎？世人只知道這部經特別推崇觀音菩薩（Avalokiteśvara，觀世音菩薩），卻不知道其他經典說正法眼藏只傳付給迦葉尊者（Mahākāśyapa），那麼觀音菩薩就沒有得到正法嗎？持念百千萬億觀音菩薩的名號，不如一聲稱念地藏菩薩（Kṣitigarbha），那麼觀音菩薩就不值得稱念了嗎？這好比孔子說：『我讚賞子路和曾點，沒聽說顏回和閔子騫被拋棄。』又說：『舜是偉大的君王啊，沒聽說堯和禹不是君王。』 敬重母親而輕慢父親，讚美太陽而詆譭月亮，這是拘泥於個人偏見的片面看法，哪裡足以談論圓融通達呢？ 毗奈耶（Vinaya，律）中宣說修行有三種決定義：所謂攝心為戒，因戒生定，因定發慧。 三種決定指的是戒、定、慧。不要看到下文殺、盜、淫、妄各自都說『決定明誨』，就認為是指殺、盜、淫。況且妄語也說是『決定明誨』，那就變成四種決定了。而且『決定』二字也不必拘泥。前文說有二種決定義，難道也是指殺、盜、淫嗎？然而一定要說『毗奈耶中』是什麼意思呢？這是說律中所闡明的三種決定義，決定以戒為最先，決定由戒生定，決定由定生慧。『所謂』二字緊緊承接下文，正是因為以戒為根本，所以說『毗奈耶中』。 求佛菩提（bodhi，覺悟）就像咬自己肚臍的人，想要誰來成就呢？ 『噬臍』一說，用莊子的典故，像麝香鹿咬自己的肚臍，比喻後悔也來不及了。另一說，經中說『如噬臍人』，不說是獸而是人，就是指人不能自己咬到自己的肚臍，比喻趕不上。而上文說『求佛菩提』，下文說『欲誰成就』，那麼第二種說法比較貼切。 第七卷 要先持守這四種律儀，像冰霜一樣清白皎潔，自然不能生出一切枝葉，身、口、意三業，生起惡業的因緣必然沒有。
【English Translation】 English version: The reason why we consider the root to be constant, neither arising nor ceasing, is that when sound exists, there is the nature of hearing, and when sound disappears, the nature of hearing does not disappear with it. Can't we say that when a thought arises, there is the nature of thought, and when a thought ceases, the nature of thought does not arise or cease with it? How can we say that reciting the Buddha's name is an impermanent, arising and ceasing dharma? Moreover, this is only according to the teachings of this world. Therefore, people only know that the Śūraṅgama Sūtra particularly values the ear-root, but they do not know that other sutras say that the mind-root is the master of these five roots. Then, is the ear-root not perfectly interconnected? People only know that this sutra particularly values Avalokiteśvara (觀世音菩薩), but they do not know that other sutras say that the treasury of the true Dharma eye is only entrusted to Mahākāśyapa (迦葉尊者). Then, did Avalokiteśvara not attain the true Dharma? Reciting the name of Avalokiteśvara hundreds of millions of times is not as good as reciting the name of Kṣitigarbha (地藏菩薩) once. Then, is Avalokiteśvara not worthy of recitation? It is like Confucius saying, 'I approve of Zilu and Zengdian, but I have not heard of Yan Hui and Min Ziqian being abandoned.' He also said, 'Shun was a great ruler, but I have not heard of Yao and Yu not being rulers.' Respecting the mother and slighting the father, praising the sun and slandering the moon, these are narrow-minded views that are attached to personal biases. How can they be sufficient to talk about perfect interpenetration? In the Vinaya (律), three definitive trainings are proclaimed: namely, restraining the mind is morality, from morality arises samadhi, and from samadhi arises wisdom. The three definitive trainings refer to morality, samadhi, and wisdom. Do not see that the following passages on killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, and lying each say 'definitive teaching' and then think that they refer to killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct. Moreover, lying is also said to be a 'definitive teaching,' so there would be four definitive trainings. Furthermore, the word 'definitive' need not be rigidly adhered to. The previous passage said there are two definitive trainings. Does that also refer to killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct? However, why must it say 'in the Vinaya'? This means that the three definitive trainings elucidated in the Vinaya are that morality is the most important, samadhi arises from morality, and wisdom arises from samadhi. The word 'namely' closely connects to the following passage, precisely because morality is the foundation, so it says 'in the Vinaya'. Seeking Buddha's bodhi (覺悟) is like a person biting their own navel. Who do you want to accomplish it? One explanation of 'biting the navel' uses Zhuangzi's analogy of the musk deer biting its own navel, which is a metaphor for regretting something when it is too late. Another explanation is that the sutra says 'like a person biting their own navel.' It does not say an animal but a person, which refers to a person not being able to bite their own navel, which is a metaphor for not being able to catch up. And the previous passage says 'seeking Buddha's bodhi' and the following passage says 'who do you want to accomplish it?' Then, the second explanation is more appropriate. Volume 7 You must first uphold these four kinds of precepts, as pure and bright as ice and frost, and naturally no branches and leaves can grow. The three karmas of body, speech, and mind will certainly have no cause to arise evil karma.
意乃其主今心與口同名枝葉者何也蓋為門不同故也語生起而原其內外則意為根本內起意業外發身口故語罪垢而斷其重輕則四重為根本重乃最急輕可稍緩故一是生起次第門一是罪垢較量門也又四種律儀已有妄語何以又曰口四上四種中是大妄語故下口四中是小妄語故。
建立道場云何結界合佛世尊清凈軌則。
當以清凈軌則四字為主而分四段第一罈場清凈軌則從大力白牛至純燒沉水無令見火止第二享獻清凈軌則從取白牛乳至燒令煙盡享佛菩薩止第三像設清凈軌則從四外懸幡至使其形影重重涉入止第四禮誦清凈軌則從七日頂禮至汝問道場建立如是止皆取其潔凈精微整齊嚴肅而已所有表法且依自古諸師其中或一二牽強者亦不必盡依也有人更以己意別立表法牽扯附會硬配天臺十乘觀法理極不通況無旨趣著甚來由費此心力只如第五知通塞中以蓮華表塞以香爐表通夫蓮華出污泥而不染自古取其清凈解脫自在虛通乃以為塞理云何通其一如是余可知矣何況此之壇儀次第又恰恰與彼之十乘同一次第乎智者時楞嚴未至十乘之說非為楞嚴設也何扭捏如是。
取白牛乳。
前文乳酪皆禁今取乳供養者何也此有二意一者心異二者物異心異者前是奉己今乃奉佛如絹帛等比丘禁服然亦奉佛故物異者前是常牛今乃白牛白牛之乳最
潔凈故又此牛雖出雪山雪山亦不恒有蓋瑞物也故其糞可用塗地。
一百八遍。
經云一時常行一百八遍是行道旋繞數非誦咒數也有謂跢侄他唵下九句方是咒故一時可誦此數然經說常行不說常誦又不曾明言咒止此九句故。
十方如來因此咒心(云云)悉得清凈。
悉怛多般怛啰華言白傘蓋是全咒之名題謂之咒心者以此是無為心佛所說心咒故經中或曰心咒或曰咒心其義一也又此咒密藏中之精要如人身百體之統乎心也有說此六字在一咒之正中而謂之咒心然以前後文約之又非正中謬可知矣因此執此乘此以下十段所重在咒言咒有廣大神異功德故十方如來無不因此執此乘此乃至傳此以成種種妙用佛且然況凡夫乎今略為十喻因此咒心者此咒諸佛之母是出生如來之真種子也故佛必因之以得菩提執此咒心者此咒具大威神是斷邪惑之金剛王寶劍也故佛必執之以制魔外乘此咒心者此咒運載眾生脫離生死是出火宅之大白牛車也故佛必乘之以應塵國含此咒心者此咒包羅萬德是具足法財之真寶藏也故佛必含之以轉法輪持此咒心者此咒總持一切善惡諸法是無上覺皇之正印也故佛必持之以受記記人依此咒心者此咒為安隱功德之所住處是離怖畏之尊勝幢也故佛必依之以救苦濟厄隨此咒心者此咒隨順覺性是從心滿愿之如意珠王也故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為潔凈的緣故，這牛雖然產自雪山（喜馬拉雅山），但雪山也不是一直都有這種牛的，這是一種吉祥的生物，所以它的糞便可以用來塗地。
一百零八遍。
經中說，『一時常行一百零八遍』，這是指行道旋繞的次數，而不是誦咒的次數。有人說『跢侄他 唵』以下的九句才是咒語，所以一時可以誦這個次數。然而，經中說的是『常行』，而不是『常誦』，而且也沒有明確說明咒語只到這九句為止。
十方如來因此咒心（云云）悉得清凈。
悉怛多般怛啰（Siddhatapatra，白傘蓋）用華言來說是白傘蓋，是整個咒語的名稱。題目稱之為『咒心』，是因為這是無為心佛所說的心咒，所以在經中或者叫做『心咒』，或者叫做『咒心』，它們的意義是一樣的。而且這個咒語是密藏中的精華要義，就像人身百體都由心來統領一樣。也有人說這六個字在一個咒語的正中間，所以稱之為咒心，然而以前後的文義來衡量，又不是正中間，錯誤是可以知道的。因此執此、乘此以下的十段，所重視的是咒語的語言，咒語有廣大的神異功德，所以十方如來沒有不因此執此、乘此，乃至傳此，以成就種種妙用的，佛且如此，更何況凡夫呢？現在略微用十個比喻來說明：『因此咒心』，這個咒語是諸佛之母，是出生如來的真正的種子，所以佛必定因此而得到菩提；『執此咒心』，這個咒語具有大威神力，是斷除邪惑的金剛王寶劍，所以佛必定執持它來制伏魔外；『乘此咒心』，這個咒語運載眾生脫離生死，是出離火宅的大白牛車，所以佛必定乘坐它來應化塵世國土；『含此咒心』，這個咒語包羅萬德，是具足法財的真正寶藏，所以佛必定含藏它來轉動法輪；『持此咒心』，這個咒語總持一切善惡諸法，是無上覺皇的正印，所以佛必定持之以接受授記；『記人依此咒心』，這個咒語是安隱功德的住所，是遠離怖畏的尊勝幢，所以佛必定依靠它來救苦濟厄；『隨此咒心』，這個咒語隨順覺性，是從心滿愿的如意珠王，所以...
【English Translation】 English version: Because of its purity, although this cow comes from the Snow Mountains (Himalayas), even the Snow Mountains do not always have this kind of cow. It is an auspicious creature, so its dung can be used to plaster the ground.
One hundred and eight times.
The sutra says, 'At one time, constantly walk one hundred and eight times.' This refers to the number of circumambulations, not the number of mantra recitations. Some say that the nine lines from 'Tadyatha Om' onwards are the mantra, so this number can be recited at one time. However, the sutra says 'constantly walk,' not 'constantly recite,' and it does not explicitly state that the mantra ends with these nine lines.
The Tathagatas of the ten directions, because of this mantra-heart (etc.), all attain purity.
Siddhatapatra (White Umbrella Canopy) in Chinese means White Umbrella Canopy, which is the name of the entire mantra. The title calls it the 'mantra-heart' because it is the heart-mantra spoken by the non-active mind Buddha. Therefore, in the sutra, it is sometimes called 'heart-mantra' or 'mantra-heart,' and their meanings are the same. Moreover, this mantra is the essence of the secret treasury, just as the hundred limbs of the human body are governed by the heart. Some also say that these six words are in the very middle of a mantra, so they are called the mantra-heart. However, judging from the preceding and following texts, it is not exactly in the middle, and the error can be known. Therefore, the ten sections from 'because of holding this,' 'riding this' onwards emphasize the language of the mantra. The mantra has vast and miraculous merits and virtues, so the Tathagatas of the ten directions all, without exception, because of holding this, riding this, and even transmitting this, achieve various wonderful functions. If Buddhas are like this, how much more so are ordinary people? Now, let me briefly use ten metaphors to explain: 'Because of this mantra-heart,' this mantra is the mother of all Buddhas, the true seed that gives birth to the Tathagatas, so the Buddha must attain Bodhi because of it; 'Holding this mantra-heart,' this mantra possesses great power and spiritual strength, it is the Vajra King's precious sword that cuts off evil delusions, so the Buddha must hold it to subdue demons and heretics; 'Riding this mantra-heart,' this mantra carries sentient beings away from birth and death, it is the great white ox-cart that escapes the burning house, so the Buddha must ride it to respond to the dusty lands; 'Containing this mantra-heart,' this mantra encompasses all virtues, it is the true treasure trove that is full of Dharma wealth, so the Buddha must contain it to turn the Dharma wheel; 'Holding this mantra-heart,' this mantra upholds all good and evil dharmas, it is the supreme awakened emperor's true seal, so the Buddha must hold it to receive predictions; 'People rely on this mantra-heart,' this mantra is the dwelling place of peaceful and virtuous merits, it is the victorious banner that is free from fear, so the Buddha must rely on it to save from suffering and hardship; 'Following this mantra-heart,' this mantra follows the nature of awakening, it is the wish-fulfilling jewel king that fulfills desires from the heart, so...
佛必隨之以遍供恒沙聖賢行此咒心者此咒通達無礙是千聖萬賢所共適之通衢也故佛必行之以攝親因而開秘藏誦此咒心者此咒究竟圓滿是法王詔告萬國之嚴敕也故佛必誦之以成正覺而入涅槃傳此咒心者此咒永存不滅是普照世出世間無盡之大明燈也故佛必傳之以垂化萬世以上十種如華嚴十十法門十者數之成故舉十以表無盡也有人將此十咒心輳合法數如因此則云是正緣了三佛性執此則云是實相觀照方便三般若乘此則云是理隨得三乘以下共配十個三法恐初學信受遞相傳流不得不辨何者佛本教人持咒今都派作別法本所持咒反成無用以客為主其過一也咒是密教今成顯教教體違反其過二也試以咒文從頭點檢何處是正因何處是緣因何處是了因如不能派則成虧論其過三也經言書寫此咒貯于香囊或於宅中或帶身上明是秘章如王密語不得宣泄若果三佛性等何不直說使人解義其過四也因此乘此屬三因三乘猶有兩字相同其他執此之為三般若持此之為三菩提等殊無意況其過五也依此咒心謂是苦惑業三道然此三是惡法卻牽扯三善法以除滅之迥異餘九于理不通其過六也若云有文字咒有實相咒此指實相既指實相只宜以楞嚴大定當之不宜妄立為十蓋咒本是一持誦之功有十而咒未嘗十也其過七也既云十個三法則其梵語應一一別豈得一種梵語而成十類華言其過八
也若言經有七常住果夫經文止云七果何得扭而為十每果渾成一語何必劈而為三經自經咒自咒何乃割經附咒其過九也此之十法分屬出何經論何佛所說及何菩薩之所闡析若其無據安得杜撰匹夫矯詔罪在不原如何法王容可僭擬其過十也慎之哉。
二十八大惡星而為上首。
大集經佛明二十八宿攝護國土養育眾生如何舊解以今所說二十八大惡星當之假如第二亢宿云主出家求聖道者則是吉祥福德之大善星矣又八大惡星中如羅孛誠為兇曜彼五行未必皆兇故知今二十八等或別有所指佛未明言不敢強為之說。
云何名為干慧之地。
上文讚歎神咒功德如是廣大阿難聞已不云我當一心持咒乃問干慧四十四心而至等覺者何也蓋經言或有宿習不能滅除應持此咒則知咒為修道之助干慧而至等覺是正修成佛之大綱大要也。
云何名為眾生顛倒。
或見此文結處云由此建立世界眾生謂此統論二種顛倒其云何名為眾生顛倒之文當在後段今不須爾蓋世界眾生兩不相離眾生必依世界而居世界后因眾生而起言眾生不妨先說世界喻如言草木亦不妨先說大地也況下文世界顛倒亦帶說十二類生兩相互動其義明甚又見下文世界中有十二類生復疑此世界是眾生分中世界亦非也由性明心者言眾生何所由由性明心也性明心者一法界真
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說經文中有七種常住果位，但經文中只說了七果，為何要強行說成十種？每種果位都是一個完整的整體，為何要強行分割成三個部分？經是經，咒是咒，為何要割裂經文附加咒語？這是第九個過失。這十種方法分別出自哪部經論？是哪尊佛所說？又是哪位菩薩所闡釋的？如果沒有任何依據，怎麼能擅自杜撰，如同假傳聖旨，罪不可赦，法王怎麼能容忍這種僭越行為？這是第十個過失。要謹慎啊。
以二十八大惡星作為首領。
《大集經》中佛陀明明說二十八星宿是用來攝護國土、養育眾生的，為何舊有的解釋卻用現在所說的二十八大惡星來對應？假如說第二亢宿，是主管出家求聖道的人，那麼它就是吉祥福德的大善星了。而且八大惡星中，比如羅睺星確實是兇星，但其他五行未必都是兇星。所以知道現在的二十八星等，或許另有所指，佛陀沒有明確說明，不敢強行為其解釋。
什麼是干慧地？
上文讚歎神咒的功德如此廣大，阿難聽了之後，不說我應當一心持咒，而是問從干慧到四十四心，最終達到等覺的修行方法是什麼。這是因為經文說，或許有人宿世的習氣不能消除，應當持誦此咒。由此可知，咒語是修道的輔助，而從干慧到等覺，才是真正修成佛果的大綱大要。
什麼是眾生顛倒？
或許有人看到這段文字結尾說『由此建立世界眾生』，就認為這裡統論了兩種顛倒，認為『云何名為眾生顛倒』的文字應當在後面的段落。現在不需要這樣認為，因為世界和眾生是不可分離的，眾生必定依存於世界而居住，世界後來也因為眾生而產生。說眾生不妨先說世界，就像說草木，也不妨先說大地一樣。況且下文的世界顛倒也帶說了十二類眾生，兩者相互交錯，其意義非常明顯。又有人看到下文說世界中有十二類眾生，又懷疑這個世界是眾生分中的世界，這也是不對的。由性明心的人說，眾生由什麼而來？由性明心而來。性明心，就是一法界真。
【English Translation】 English version: If it is said that there are seven permanent fruits in the scripture, but the scripture only mentions seven fruits, why forcibly say there are ten? Each fruit is a complete whole, why forcibly divide it into three parts? The scripture is the scripture, and the mantra is the mantra. Why sever the scripture and attach the mantra? This is the ninth fault. From which scriptures and treatises do these ten methods originate? Which Buddha spoke of them? And which Bodhisattva elucidated them? If there is no basis, how can one fabricate them arbitrarily, like falsely claiming imperial authority, a crime that cannot be pardoned. How can the Dharma King tolerate such usurpation? This is the tenth fault. Be cautious!
Taking the twenty-eight great evil stars as the leaders.
In the Mahasamnipata Sutra (Dajijing), the Buddha clearly stated that the twenty-eight constellations are used to protect the country and nurture sentient beings. Why do old interpretations use the currently mentioned twenty-eight great evil stars to correspond to them? For example, if the second constellation, Kang (Kang Su), is in charge of those who leave home to seek the holy path, then it is a great auspicious and virtuous star. Moreover, among the eight great evil stars, such as Rahu (Luohou), is indeed an ominous star, but the other five elements are not necessarily all ominous. Therefore, it is known that the current twenty-eight stars, etc., may refer to something else. The Buddha did not explicitly state it, so I dare not force an explanation.
What is called the Dry Insight Ground?
The above text praises the merits of the divine mantra as being so vast. After hearing this, Ananda (Anan) did not say, 'I should wholeheartedly uphold the mantra,' but instead asked what the method of practice is from Dry Insight to the forty-four minds, ultimately reaching Perfect Enlightenment. This is because the scripture says that perhaps some people's karmic habits from past lives cannot be eliminated, and they should recite this mantra. From this, it can be known that the mantra is an aid to cultivation, while from Dry Insight to Perfect Enlightenment is the great outline and essence of truly cultivating and attaining Buddhahood.
What is called the Inversion of Sentient Beings?
Perhaps some people see the end of this passage saying 'From this, the world and sentient beings are established,' and think that this discusses the two kinds of inversions, and that the text 'What is called the Inversion of Sentient Beings' should be in the later paragraph. There is no need to think this way now, because the world and sentient beings are inseparable. Sentient beings must rely on the world to live, and the world later arises because of sentient beings. Saying sentient beings first is like saying grass and trees, and it is also okay to say the earth first. Moreover, the following text on the inversion of the world also mentions the twelve kinds of beings, and the two are intertwined, and its meaning is very clear. Also, some people see the following text saying that there are twelve kinds of beings in the world, and suspect that this world is the world within the sentient beings' portion, which is also incorrect. Those who understand the mind through nature say, from what do sentient beings come? They come from understanding the mind through nature. Understanding the mind through nature is the true reality of the One Dharma Realm.
心也此性明心本非凝然之物其體圓融而能隨緣是以因明故發性性妄故見生而從無成有矣此能有所有實非因所因言能有無能因所有無所因也既無因所因自無住所住即此無住建立世界眾生此處未有世界眾生由此為建立之根本也故曰從無住本立一切法。
將欲復真欲真已非真真如性非真求復宛成非相非生非住非心非法(云云)故有眾生顛倒。
承上文性明圓故而言迷自本性圓明乃生虛妄雖云生妄妄實無體妄既無體妄即是真更將誰復汝欲復真欲已成妄故曰非真真如既知非真猶自求復如知是幻猶自求幻終竟無有故曰非相何名非相凡所有相不過生住異滅身受心法而已非生非住異滅可知非心非法身受可知于本無中虛妄成有展轉發生此之生力起惑造業造業感果生滅相因無有窮已是則名為眾生顛倒有配三細者不如只取大意如前所說不須逐句逐字相配又有以非真求復配七識八識者尤為不通。
是故世界因動有聲因聲有色(云云)為一旋復。
因動而聲而色而香而觸而味而法次第歷然而諸解不出其由有謂六中隨舉其一餘五從之則經中次第似為浪說何不曰色聲香味觸法乎惟長水引前文覺明空昧等釋之頗于次第相協惜前文止有從聲至觸而味與法無文可引耳然差勝諸說也窮十二變為一旋復者上言因味知法換一知字便接意根
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：心，即是此本性，明白心原本不是凝固不變的東西，它的本體圓滿融合而能隨順因緣。因此，因為有了『明』，所以才引發了本性；因為本性虛妄，所以才產生了『見』，從而從無到有。這個『能有』和『所有』，實際上並非由『因』所導致。這裡所說的『能有』，是沒有能動的『因』；『所有』，是沒有所依的『因』。既然沒有能動的『因』和所依的『因』，自然就沒有住所。這個『無住』，就是建立世界和眾生的基礎。這裡原本沒有世界和眾生，而是由此作為建立的根本。所以說，『從無住本立一切法』。
想要恢復真如，當想要恢復的時候，就已經不是真如了。真如本性不是真實存在的，如果去尋求恢復，最終還是會變成虛妄的表象。它既不是生，也不是住，也不是心，也不是法等等。因此才會有眾生的顛倒。
承接上文，因為本性光明圓滿，所以才會說迷失了本來的自性圓明，從而產生了虛妄。雖然說是產生了虛妄，但虛妄實際上沒有實體。虛妄既然沒有實體，那麼虛妄就是真如。如果還要去恢復真如，那麼想要恢復的念頭本身就成了虛妄，所以說『非真』。既然已經知道真如不是真實存在的，卻還要去尋求恢復，就像知道是幻象卻還要去追求幻象一樣，最終什麼也得不到，所以說『非相』。什麼叫做『非相』？凡是所有的相，都不過是生、住、異、滅，以及身、受、心、法而已。『非生』、『非住』、『異滅』是可以理解的，『非心』、『非法』，身受是可以理解的，在本無中虛妄地產生，輾轉地發生。這個產生的力量，引發迷惑，造作惡業，造作惡業感受惡果，生滅相續，沒有窮盡。這就是所謂的眾生顛倒。有人將此與三細（指無明業相、能見相、境界相）相配，不如只取其大意，就像前面所說的那樣，不需要逐句逐字地對應。還有人將『非真求復』與七識八識相配，尤其是不通順。
因此，世界因為動而有聲音，因為聲音而有顏色等等，形成一個循環往復的過程。
因為動而有聲，有色，有香，有觸，有味，有法，次第分明地排列出來，但是各種解釋都說不出其中的緣由。有人說，六根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）中隨便舉出一個，其餘五個都跟隨它，那麼經文中的次第似乎就成了隨便說說，為什麼不說色聲香味觸法呢？只有長水（人名）引用前文的『覺明空昧』等來解釋它，勉強與次第相符合，可惜前文只有從聲到觸，而味與法沒有原文可以引用。然而，這比其他的說法要好一些。窮盡十二變（指十二因緣）而成為一個循環往復的過程，上面說因為味而知道法，換一個『知』字，就連線到意根（manas）。
【English Translation】 English version: The mind is this very nature. Understand that the mind is not originally a solidified thing; its essence is perfectly integrated and able to adapt to conditions. Therefore, because of 'awareness' (ming), the nature is triggered; because the nature is deluded, 'perception' (jian) arises, thus transforming from nothingness into existence. This 'capable of having' (neng you) and 'that which is had' (suo you) are not actually caused by 'cause' (yin). The 'capable of having' here means there is no active 'cause'; 'that which is had' means there is no dependent 'cause'. Since there is neither an active cause nor a dependent cause, there is naturally no dwelling place. This 'non-dwelling' (wu zhu) is the foundation for establishing the world and sentient beings. Originally, there were no worlds or sentient beings here; it is from this that the foundation for establishment arises. Therefore, it is said, 'From the basis of non-dwelling, all dharmas are established.'
If you desire to restore the True Nature (zhen ru), the very desire to restore it means it is no longer the True Nature. The True Nature is not something real; if you seek to restore it, you will ultimately create a false appearance. It is neither birth, nor abiding, nor mind, nor dharma, etc. Therefore, sentient beings are deluded.
Following the previous text, because the nature is bright and complete, it is said that one is deluded about the original, bright, and complete self-nature, thus giving rise to delusion. Although it is said that delusion arises, delusion actually has no substance. Since delusion has no substance, then delusion is the True Nature. If you still want to restore the True Nature, then the very thought of wanting to restore it becomes delusion, so it is said 'not true' (fei zhen). Since you already know that the True Nature is not real, yet you still seek to restore it, it is like knowing it is an illusion but still pursuing the illusion, ultimately gaining nothing, so it is said 'not form' (fei xiang). What is meant by 'not form'? All forms are nothing more than birth, abiding, change, and cessation, as well as body, sensation, mind, and dharma. 'Not birth', 'not abiding', 'change and cessation' are understandable; 'not mind', 'not dharma', body and sensation are understandable. From original nothingness, delusion arises, developing and occurring in succession. This power of arising causes confusion, creates karma, and experiencing the results of karma, birth and death continue endlessly. This is what is called the delusion of sentient beings. Some people match this with the three subtle aspects (san xi) (referring to ignorance, karmic appearance, the appearance of perception, and the appearance of the realm), but it is better to just grasp the general meaning, as mentioned earlier, without needing to match each phrase and word. Others match 'seeking restoration of the untrue' with the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, which is especially illogical.
Therefore, the world has sound because of movement, and color because of sound, etc., forming a cycle of repetition.
Because of movement, there is sound, color, smell, touch, taste, and dharma, arranged in a clear sequence, but various explanations cannot explain the reason for this. Some say that if you pick one of the six senses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind), the other five follow it, then the sequence in the sutra seems to be just casually stated. Why not say color, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma? Only Changshui (a person's name) quotes the previous text 'awareness, brightness, emptiness, obscurity' etc. to explain it, barely matching the sequence, but unfortunately, the previous text only has from sound to touch, and there is no original text to quote for taste and dharma. However, this is better than other explanations. Exhausting the twelve transformations (shi er bian) (referring to the twelve links of dependent origination) to become a cycle of repetition, the above says that because of taste, one knows dharma, changing one 'know' (zhi) word, it connects to the mind-consciousness (manas).
次接六亂妄想則六境六情共成十二十二週已更動有聲而至味法名一旋復則循環無已也。
枯槁亂想。
枯稿則無想曰枯槁亂想者何也又次雲精神化為土木金石既化土石為有輪迴為無輪迴若有輪迴世間土石皆當受身六趣若無輪迴何云無想羯南流轉國土蓋枯槁云者特其妄想暫遏不行如草乍枯根本未絕時至復生則知彼之妄想潛伏于中未嘗無也精神之為土石亦是以頑定力而成頑物頑定力過緣觸情生依舊流轉。
○第八卷
是人即獲無生法忍。
此方漸次便曰無生如何幹慧之前已齊八地之位蓋所稱圓頓行人者正謂此也前云顛倒妙圓真凈明心具足亂想次云於是本因元所亂想立三漸次則知最初便於本原心體以為因地從真如而出亂想從即真如之亂想而入真如唸唸已在真如雖無生法忍今未即獲而勢在必獲無足疑者故違現業文中不但曰禁制使不流逸而曰旋元自歸旋元自歸者一旋轉力何藉劬勞旋何所歸還歸自己圓頓法門四字之中攝盡無餘矣孤山之言曰漸次者事漸理圓不同偏漸於六即中乃名字中修能成觀行乃發真似也從名至真一以貫之妙哉言乎。
名信心住。
十信位多結住字孤山謂是初住分開則信即是住吳興非之是矣然不必泥此住字蓋此經四字成文故信心念心慧心定心皆有住字中間精進心不退心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：接下來是六種由錯亂產生的妄想，這六種妄想與六境（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）和六情（喜、怒、哀、樂、愛、惡）共同構成了十二類，十二類相互作用，不斷地產生聲音，乃至味道和法塵，這被稱為『一旋復』，意味著循環往復，沒有止境。
枯槁亂想。
如果說『枯槁』意味著沒有妄想，那麼為什麼又說『枯槁亂想』呢？而且經文中還說精神會轉化為土木金石。既然精神能轉化為土石，那麼這種狀態是有輪迴還是沒有輪迴呢？如果說有輪迴，那麼世間所有的土石都應當承受身形，進入六道輪迴；如果說沒有輪迴，又怎麼能說沒有妄想，卻仍然在『羯南』（指業力）中流轉於國土之間呢？實際上，所謂的『枯槁』，只是指妄想暫時被遏制，停止活動，就像草木暫時枯萎，但根本未斷絕，時機一到還會復生。由此可知，那些妄想潛伏在內心深處，從未真正消失。精神轉化為土石，也是因為用頑固的定力形成了頑固的物質。一旦這種頑固的定力消失，外緣觸動，情感產生，仍然會繼續流轉。
○第八卷
這個人立刻就能獲得無生法忍（Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti）。
此方（指中國）的漸修法門認為需要逐步修行才能證得無生法忍，那麼為什麼說在干慧地（Sukkhavipassaka-bhumi）之前就已經達到了八地菩薩的果位呢？這是因為這裡所說的圓頓行人，正是指這種情形。前面說顛倒也是妙圓真凈明心的具足，亂想也是。接著又說，從最初的本因，也就是元所亂想，建立了三漸次。由此可知，最初就將本原心體作為因地，從真如（Tathata）中生出亂想，又從即是真如的亂想而進入真如，唸唸都已在真如之中。雖然現在還沒有立刻獲得無生法忍，但證得無生法忍的趨勢是必然的，沒有什麼可懷疑的。所以，在違背現行業文中，不僅說要『禁制』，使妄想不流逸，而且說要『旋元自歸』。『旋元自歸』意味著一旋轉力，不需要任何的勤勞，旋轉到哪裡呢？還歸自己。圓頓法門這四個字之中，已經包含了所有的一切。孤山（指孤山智圓）的說法是，漸次是指事漸理圓，不同於偏漸，在六即位中，乃是名字位中修，能成就觀行位，乃是發真似位。從名字位到真位，一以貫之，說得太好了。
名信心住（Shraddha-citta-sthiti）。
十信位（ దశ విశ్వాస భూమి）大多帶有『住』字，孤山認為這是從初住位（Prathama Bhumi）中分開的，所以信就是住。吳興（指吳興沈avio）反對這種說法，這是正確的。但是不必拘泥於這個『住』字，因為這部經是四字成文，所以信心、念心、慧心、定心都有『住』字，中間的精進心、不退心沒有『住』字。
【English Translation】 English version: Next are the six disordered thoughts arising from delusion. These six delusions, together with the six sense objects (rupa, shabda, gandha, rasa, sparsha, dharma) and the six emotions (joy, anger, sorrow, pleasure, love, hate), jointly form twelve categories. These twelve categories interact, constantly producing sounds, and even tastes and dharmas. This is called 'one cycle of repetition,' meaning that it cycles endlessly without ceasing.
Withered and Desiccated Deluded Thinking.
If 'withered and desiccated' means without thought, then why is it called 'withered and desiccated deluded thinking'? Furthermore, the sutra says that the spirit transforms into earth, wood, metal, and stone. Since the spirit can transform into earth and stone, is this state with or without reincarnation? If it is with reincarnation, then all the earth and stone in the world should bear forms and enter the six realms of reincarnation. If it is without reincarnation, then how can it be said that there is no thought, yet it still circulates in the 'Karman' (referring to karmic force) among the lands? In reality, the so-called 'withered and desiccated' only refers to the temporary suppression of delusion, ceasing its activity, like grass and trees temporarily withered, but the roots are not severed, and when the time comes, they will revive. From this, it can be known that those delusions are lurking deep within the heart, never truly disappearing. The transformation of the spirit into earth and stone is also due to the formation of stubborn matter through stubborn samadhi power. Once this stubborn samadhi power disappears, external conditions arise, emotions are produced, and it will continue to circulate as before.
○ Volume 8
This person will immediately obtain Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti (無生法忍, the patience with the unborn dharma).
The gradual cultivation method in this land (referring to China) believes that one needs to cultivate step by step to attain Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti, so why is it said that one has already reached the position of the eighth Bhumi (八地菩薩, eighth stage bodhisattva) before Sukkhavipassaka-bhumi (干慧地, dry insight stage)? This is because the 'perfect and sudden' practitioner mentioned here refers to this situation. Earlier, it was said that delusion is also the complete manifestation of the wonderful, perfect, true, pure, and bright mind, and so are disordered thoughts. Then it was said that from the original cause, which is the original disordered thought, three gradual stages are established. From this, it can be known that from the beginning, the original mind-essence is taken as the causal ground, and disordered thoughts arise from Tathata (真如, suchness), and then enter Tathata from the disordered thoughts that are identical to Tathata. Every thought is already within Tathata. Although one has not yet immediately obtained Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti, the trend towards attaining Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti is inevitable, and there is nothing to doubt. Therefore, in the text on opposing present karma, it is not only said to 'restrain' and prevent disordered thoughts from flowing away, but also to 'revolve the origin and return to oneself.' 'Revolving the origin and returning to oneself' means that one rotation of power does not require any effort. Where does it rotate to? It returns to oneself. The four characters of the 'perfect and sudden' Dharma gate contain everything. Gushan (孤山智圓, Zhiyuan of Gushan) said that gradual means gradual in practice and complete in principle, which is different from partial gradualness. In the six identities, it is cultivation in the name identity, which can achieve the contemplation practice identity, which is the manifestation of true similarity. From the name identity to the true identity, it is consistent throughout. Well said!
Named Shraddha-citta-sthiti (信心住, Abode of Faith).
Most of the ten abodes of faith ( దశ విశ్వాస భూమి, Dasha Vishvasa Bhumi) have the character 'abode' (住, sthiti). Gushan believes that this is separated from the first abode (Prathama Bhumi, 初住位), so faith is abode. Wuxing (吳興沈avio, Shen avio of Wuxing) opposes this view, which is correct. However, there is no need to be attached to this character 'abode,' because this sutra is composed of four-character phrases, so faith-mind, mindfulness-mind, wisdom-mind, and samadhi-mind all have the character 'abode,' while the middle diligent-mind and non-retreating-mind do not have the character 'abode.'
獲法心迴向心皆無住字至第九戒心第十願心復有住字隨句長短加減住字其理明甚不然既初住分開句句應有住字何或有而或無也蓋此住即是位分之意非信住行向地之住也又瑜伽師地論以地前諸位共為一位十地等覺為十一住如來為一住共十三住均結住名足可為證。
是覺始獲金剛心中初干慧地。
不必苦苦與前之干慧究同究異蓋同而異異而同者也但順經文看去其義自顯今逐字釋之是覺者等覺也始獲者言前之干慧但發其端倪而未獲其全體今始獲也金剛心者言是大乘心中之慧也干慧者言未與如來妙莊嚴海接也干慧而必曰初者正明最初之慧歷信住行向地至此而始獲其全體也因該果海果徹因源則異而同而因非是果果非是因則同而異也。
如是重重單復十二。
諸說不一溫陵以干信至等金為十二天如謂其既以金為能歷又以金為所歷于義不順吳興以信住行及地為單十回向為復十加干慧等覺為十二天如取之然其湊合未甚安妥而單復義亦不快唯長水以干慧暖頂忍世等妙各各獨一為單信住行向地各各有十為複合之十二而干慧之單次以信住行向之復此復后又次以四加行之單此單后又次以十地之復此復后又次以等覺之單乃至妙覺故曰重重其說甚妙。
五十五位真菩提路。
此五十五亦有多說惟吳興謂除前干
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於『獲法心迴向心皆無住字至第九戒心第十願心復有住字』，其中『住』字是否使用，取決於句子的長短，其道理非常明顯。如果不是這樣，既然最初的『住』字分開句子，那麼每個句子都應該有『住』字，為何有時有，有時沒有呢？這是因為這裡的『住』指的是位階，而不是信住、行、向、地中的『住』。此外，《瑜伽師地論》將地前諸位共計為一位，十地和等覺為十一住，如來為一住，總共十三住，均可作為『結住』之名的佐證。
『是覺始獲金剛心中初干慧地。』
不必費力地與之前的干慧去探究相同或不同，因為相同之中有不同，不同之中有相同。只需順著經文看下去，其含義自然顯現。現在逐字解釋：『是覺』指的是等覺。『始獲』表示之前的干慧只是發端，而未獲得其全體，現在才開始獲得。『金剛心』指的是大乘心中的智慧。『干慧』指的是尚未與如來妙莊嚴海相接。『干慧』而特別說是『初』，正是表明最初的智慧經歷了信、住、行、向、地，到這裡才開始獲得其全體。因該果海，果徹因源，所以異而同；因不是果，果不是因，所以同而異。
『如是重重單復十二。』
對此有多種說法，溫陵認為從干信到等金為十二天。天如認為既然已經將金視為能歷之位，又將金視為所歷之位，在意義上不順暢。吳興認為信、住、行以及地為單十，迴向為復十，加上干慧和等覺，共為十二。天如採納了這種說法，但其組合不夠妥當，單復的含義也不夠明確。只有長水認為干慧、暖、頂、忍、世等妙各各獨立為單，信、住、行、向、地各各有十為複合，總共十二。干慧的單次於信、住、行、向的復，此復之後又次於四加行的單，此單之後又次於十地的復，此復之後又次於等覺的單，乃至妙覺，所以說是重重，這種說法非常精妙。
『五十五位真菩提路。』
關於這五十五位，也有多種說法，只有吳興認為除去之前的干
【English Translation】 English version: Regarding 'Gaining the Dharma mind, the turning towards mind are all without the word 'abiding'; until the ninth precept mind and the tenth vow mind, there is again the word 'abiding'. Whether to use the word 'abiding' depends on the length of the sentence, and the reason is very clear. If it were not so, since the initial 'abiding' separates the sentences, then every sentence should have the word 'abiding'. Why is it sometimes present and sometimes absent? This is because the 'abiding' here refers to the stage, not the 'abiding' in faith, abiding, practice, dedication, and grounds. Furthermore, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra considers all the stages before the grounds as one stage, the ten grounds and Equal Awakening as eleven abidings, and the Tathāgata as one abiding, totaling thirteen abidings, all of which can serve as evidence for the name 'concluding abiding'. (Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論): Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice; Tathāgata (如來): 'Thus Gone One', an epithet of the Buddha)
'This awakening initially attains the first dry insight ground in the Vajra mind.' (Vajra (金剛): Diamond)
There is no need to painstakingly investigate whether it is the same or different from the previous dry insight, because there are differences within similarities, and similarities within differences. Just follow the sutra text, and its meaning will naturally become clear. Now, explaining it word by word: 'This awakening' refers to Equal Awakening. 'Initially attains' means that the previous dry insight only initiated the beginning and did not attain its entirety, but now it begins to attain it. 'Vajra mind' refers to the wisdom in the Mahayana mind. 'Dry insight' means that it has not yet connected with the Tathāgata's wonderful adorned ocean. 'Dry insight' specifically saying 'first' precisely indicates that the initial wisdom has experienced faith, abiding, practice, dedication, and grounds, and only here does it begin to attain its entirety. The cause encompasses the ocean of effects, and the effect penetrates the source of causes, so there are differences within similarities; the cause is not the effect, and the effect is not the cause, so there are similarities within differences. (Mahayana (大乘): The Great Vehicle)
'Thus, repeatedly single and compound, twelve.'
There are various interpretations of this. Wenling considers the twelve heavens from dry faith to Equal Gold. Tianru believes that since gold is already considered the stage that can be traversed, and gold is also considered the stage that is traversed, it is not smooth in meaning. Wuxing considers faith, abiding, practice, and grounds as single tens, dedication as compound tens, plus dry insight and Equal Awakening, totaling twelve. Tianru adopted this view, but its combination is not appropriate, and the meaning of single and compound is not clear enough. Only Changshui considers dry insight, warmth, peak, forbearance, mundane, etc., each independent as single, faith, abiding, practice, dedication, and grounds each having ten as compound, totaling twelve. The single of dry insight is followed by the compound of faith, abiding, practice, and dedication; after this compound, it is followed by the single of the four preparatory practices; after this single, it is followed by the compound of the ten grounds; after this compound, it is followed by the single of Equal Awakening, and even Wonderful Awakening, so it is said to be repeated, this explanation is very wonderful.
'Fifty-five stages of the true Bodhi path.' (Bodhi (菩提): Enlightenment)
Regarding these fifty-five stages, there are also various interpretations, only Wuxing believes that removing the previous dry
慧不敘但由信位至等覺為五十五又自辨云經言真菩提路則顯干慧非真妙覺非路此說最當。
是經名大佛頂悉怛多般怛啰無上寶印十方如來清凈海眼(云云)亦名灌頂章句諸菩薩萬行首楞嚴。
此五名者隨取其一皆可名經譯人撮略捃摭會其大意而立今名庶幾該括五義矣有人謂此一部經從一至十挨次配合經題某捲至某處為大佛頂某捲至某處為如來密因乃至某處為修證了義某處為菩薩萬行是不知五名皆可名經也使譯人昔取第一為題則將曰某捲至某處為悉怛多乎某處為無上寶印某處為如來清凈海眼乎或取第二三等亦復如是而向來挨次配合皆失之矣豈理也哉。
斷除三界修心六品微細煩惱。
合論謂阿難及諸大眾得第二果故言斷除修心六品煩惱其言雖合教相但楞嚴一經至此五十五位而入妙覺上文已結經名自後皆名助行則亦至矣盡矣而所證方止於此何名此經大乘了義教耶惟溫陵謂是增上頓斷不同小乘其九品之中所餘三品佛地方斷似得其旨蓋三界九地地地各有九品煩惱今經文不曰欲界六品而曰三界不但曰煩惱而曰微細煩惱蓋盡三界而言之乃最後一地之六品矣若曰世尊滅后阿難為迦葉呵責方得無漏今此應在二果是則是矣亦有二義可辨一者阿難下有大眾二字不宜以一人之故例抑群聖二者阿難大權示現前後出沒無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：慧公沒有詳細敘述，只是從信位到等覺位，總共有五十五個位次。他又在《自辨云經》中說：『真正的菩提之路，顯示的是干慧，不是真正的妙覺，不是道路。』這種說法最為恰當。
這部經名為《大佛頂悉怛多般怛啰無上寶印十方如來清凈海眼》（等等），也名為《灌頂章句諸菩薩萬行首楞嚴》。
這五個名稱，隨便取用其中一個都可以作為經名。譯經人撮取、簡略地收集，領會其大概意思而立了現在的名稱，大概可以概括這五個含義了。有人說這部經從第一卷到第十卷，按照順序配合經題，某捲到某處為《大佛頂》，某捲到某處為《如來密因》，乃至某處為《修證了義》，某處為《菩薩萬行》。這是不知道這五個名稱都可以作為經名啊！如果譯經人當初取第一個名稱作為經題，那麼將要說某捲到某處為《悉怛多》嗎？某處為《無上寶印》嗎？某處為《如來清凈海眼》嗎？或者取第二、第三等名稱，也是這樣。那麼向來按照順序配合經題的做法就都錯了，這難道是正確的道理嗎？
斷除三界修心六品微細煩惱。
綜合討論認為，阿難（Ananda）及諸位大眾證得二果，所以說斷除了修心六品煩惱。這種說法雖然符合教相，但是《楞嚴經》到此已經講了五十五個位次，進入了妙覺位，上文已經總結了經名，自此之後都名為助行，那麼也算是到了盡頭了。然而所證悟的境界僅僅止於此，怎麼能稱這部經為大乘了義之教呢？只有溫陵的說法，認為是增上頓斷，不同於小乘，認為九品煩惱中剩餘的三品在佛地才能斷除，似乎抓住了要旨。大概三界九地，每一地都有九品煩惱，現在經文不說欲界六品，而說三界，不但說煩惱，而說微細煩惱，大概是就整個三界而言，乃是最後一地之六品煩惱了。如果說世尊滅度后，阿難（Ananda）被迦葉（Kasyapa）呵責才證得無漏，那麼現在阿難（Ananda）的證悟應該在二果的境界，這種說法是對的。但也有兩種理由可以辨析：一是阿難（Ananda）下面有『大眾』二字，不應該因為一個人的緣故而壓抑眾聖；二是阿難（Ananda）是大權示現，前後出沒不定。
【English Translation】 English version: Hui did not elaborate, but from the stage of Faith to the stage of Equal Enlightenment, there are fifty-five stages in total. He also said in the Zi Bian Yun Jing: 'The true path to Bodhi reveals dry wisdom, not true wonderful enlightenment, not a path.' This statement is most appropriate.
This sutra is named Great Buddha's Summit Sitātapatra Aparājita Supreme Secret Sovereign Dhāraṇī Sutra (etc.), also named The Chapter of Anointing Verses, Shurangama, the Foremost of Ten Thousand Practices of All Bodhisattvas.
Any one of these five names can be used as the name of the sutra. The translator extracted, briefly collected, and understood its general meaning to establish the current name, which can probably encompass these five meanings. Some people say that this sutra, from the first volume to the tenth volume, matches the sutra title in order, from a certain volume to a certain place is Great Buddha's Summit, from a certain volume to a certain place is The Secret Cause of the Tathagata, and even a certain place is The Ultimate Meaning of Cultivation and Realization, and a certain place is The Ten Thousand Practices of Bodhisattvas. This is not knowing that all five names can be used as the name of the sutra! If the translator had initially taken the first name as the title, then would it be said that from a certain volume to a certain place is Sitātapatra? A certain place is Supreme Secret Sovereign? A certain place is The Pure Sea Eyes of the Tathagata? Or taking the second, third, etc., names would be the same. Then the practice of matching the sutra title in order would all be wrong. Is this reasonable?
Cutting off the subtle afflictions of the six grades of mind cultivation in the Three Realms.
The combined discussion believes that Ananda (Ananda) and all the assembly attained the second fruit, so it is said that they cut off the afflictions of the six grades of mind cultivation. Although this statement is consistent with the teachings, the Shurangama Sutra has already discussed fifty-five stages to this point, entering the stage of Wonderful Enlightenment. The sutra name has already been concluded in the previous text, and from then on, they are all called auxiliary practices, so it can be considered to have reached the end. However, the realized state is only limited to this, how can this sutra be called the ultimate teaching of Mahayana? Only Wenling's statement is that it is an increasing and sudden cutting off, different from the Hinayana, believing that the remaining three grades of afflictions among the nine grades can only be cut off in the Buddha Land, which seems to have grasped the essence. Probably the Three Realms and Nine Lands, each land has nine grades of afflictions. Now the sutra text does not say the six grades of the Desire Realm, but says the Three Realms, and not only says afflictions, but says subtle afflictions, probably referring to the entire Three Realms, which is the six grades of afflictions of the last land. If it is said that after the World Honored One passed away, Ananda (Ananda) was scolded by Kasyapa (Kasyapa) before attaining non-outflow, then Ananda's (Ananda) realization should be in the realm of the second fruit, this statement is correct. But there are also two reasons to distinguish: one is that there are the words 'the assembly' after Ananda (Ananda), and it should not suppress the saints because of one person; the second is that Ananda (Ananda) is a manifestation of great power, appearing and disappearing unpredictably.
定亦不可一途而取也。
想明斯聰情幽斯鈍。
情想均則為人類矣而人有聰鈍之不同者蓋想屬明情屬幽明主聰幽主鈍想雖等於情而想之明有力則明勝而為聰情雖等於想而情之幽有力則幽勝而為鈍又聰鈍且舉其一推而廣之想正斯善情偏斯惡想平斯慈情陂斯刻想高斯剛情卑斯柔例皆然也有說想與情各得五分是為均等其五分以上為聰其五分以下為鈍則不均等矣。
從地涌出。
六報俱云入于地獄獨此從地涌出而入地獄則似先在地獄又涌出而復入矣蓋六根惟鼻具出入息吸則下入呼則上出故其神識覺得從地涌而上又從上墜而下方入地獄也從地之地非地獄也。
惡業同造入阿鼻獄受無量苦經無量劫(云云)見見一根單犯一業是人則入一百八地獄。
此分五等其一同造者六根十習具足兼造而造又同時也其二各造者雖具足而先後不同時也其三身口意三業造殺盜淫三惡也其四三業中二犯三惡中二也其五三業中一犯三惡中一也故地獄從重而漸輕也曰造曰作二事何別造者始於六根發起惡業也作者次於六境成就惡業也見見一根稍難銷會且依吳興謂能見之眼及眼所見專在一根也一說上見字作現現見一根也其意亦通但現字見字俱無謂。
參合柔類。
或疑以恨為因從地獄畢而蠱鬼而毒類而至人中
{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：\n\n禪定也不可以用一種方法來獲得。\n\n思慮清晰則聰明，情感深沉則遲鈍。\n\n情感和思慮相等就是人類了，但人有聰明和遲鈍的不同，這是因為思慮屬於明，情感屬於幽，明主導聰明，幽主導遲鈍。思慮雖然等於情感，但思慮的明亮有力，那麼明就勝過幽而成為聰明；情感雖然等於思慮，但情感的深沉有力，那麼幽就勝過明而成為遲鈍。而且聰明和遲鈍只是舉出一個方面，可以由此推而廣之，思慮正當就善良，情感偏頗就邪惡，思慮平和就慈愛，情感偏私就刻薄，思慮高尚就剛強，情感卑下就柔弱，這些都是一樣的道理。也有人說思慮和情感各自得到五分，這才是均等，超過五分就是聰明，低於五分就是遲鈍，那麼就不均等了。\n\n從地底下涌出來。\n\n六種報應都說進入地獄，只有這裡說從地底下涌出來，那麼進入地獄就好像先在地獄，又涌出來再進入。大概六根只有鼻子具有出入氣息的功能，吸氣就向下進入，呼氣就向上出來，所以他的神識覺得是從地底下涌上來，又從上面墜落而向下進入地獄。從地之『地』不是指地獄。\n\n共同造作惡業，進入阿鼻地獄，遭受無量痛苦，經歷無量劫（等等）。僅僅一根（六根之一）觸犯一種惡業，這個人就進入一百零八地獄。\n\n這裡分為五等：第一種是共同造作，六根和十種習氣都具備，同時造作；第二種是各自造作，雖然具備六根和十種習氣，但先後不同時；第三種是身口意三業造作殺盜淫三種惡業；第四種是三業中犯兩種，三惡中犯兩種；第五種是三業中犯一種，三惡中犯一種。所以地獄從重到輕。說『造』和『作』兩件事有什麼區別？『造』是指從六根開始發起惡業，『作』是指接著六境成就惡業。僅僅一根觸犯惡業很難理解，暫且按照吳興的說法，能見的眼睛和眼睛所見，專在一根。一種說法是上面的『見』字當作『現』，『現見一根』，意思也通順，但『現』字和『見』字都沒有道理。\n\n摻雜柔弱的種類。\n\n有人懷疑以怨恨為因，從地獄結束，然後是蠱鬼，然後是毒類，然後才到人中。" , "english_translations": [ "English version:\n\nSamadhi (定) cannot be attained through a single method.\n\nClear thinking leads to intelligence; deep emotions lead to dullness.\n\nWhen emotions and thoughts are equal, it is humanity. However, people differ in intelligence and dullness because thoughts belong to clarity (明), and emotions belong to depth (幽). Clarity governs intelligence, and depth governs dullness. Although thoughts are equal to emotions, if the clarity of thought is strong, then clarity overcomes depth, resulting in intelligence. Although emotions are equal to thoughts, if the depth of emotion is strong, then depth overcomes clarity, resulting in dullness. Furthermore, intelligence and dullness are just one example; this can be extended. Correct thinking leads to goodness; biased emotions lead to evil. Peaceful thinking leads to compassion; selfish emotions lead to meanness. Noble thinking leads to strength; base emotions lead to gentleness. All these examples follow the same principle. Some say that thoughts and emotions each receive five parts, which is equality. More than five parts is intelligence, and less than five parts is dullness, which is inequality.\n\nEmerging from the earth.\n\nAll six retributions mention entering hell, but only this one mentions emerging from the earth. Entering hell seems like being in hell first, then emerging and re-entering. It is likely that among the six senses (六根), only the nose has the function of inhaling and exhaling. Inhaling goes down, and exhaling goes up. Therefore, one's consciousness feels like emerging from the earth and then falling from above into hell. The 'earth' (地) in 'from the earth' does not refer to hell.\n\nTogether creating evil karma, entering Avici Hell (阿鼻獄), enduring immeasurable suffering, experiencing immeasurable kalpas (劫) (etc.). Merely one sense (見見一根) committing one evil deed, this person enters one hundred and eight hells.\n\nThis is divided into five levels: The first is creating together, where all six senses (六根) and ten habits (十習) are complete, and the creation is simultaneous. The second is creating individually, where although the six senses and ten habits are complete, they are not simultaneous. The third is the three karmas (身口意) of body, speech, and mind creating the three evils (殺盜淫) of killing, stealing, and lust. The fourth is committing two of the three karmas and two of the three evils. The fifth is committing one of the three karmas and one of the three evils. Therefore, the hells go from heavy to light. What is the difference between 'creating' (造) and 'making' (作)? 'Creating' refers to initiating evil karma from the six senses. 'Making' refers to completing evil karma through the six objects (六境). It is difficult to understand 'merely one sense committing evil'. For now, according to Wu Xing's explanation, the seeing eye and what the eye sees are focused on one sense. Another explanation is to take the 'seeing' (見) above as 'appearing' (現), 'appearing to see one sense'. The meaning is also understandable, but neither 'appearing' nor 'seeing' makes sense.\n\nMixed with gentle kinds.\n\nSome suspect that hatred is the cause, ending with hell, then Gu ghosts (蠱鬼), then poisonous kinds (毒類), and then reaching humanity." ] }
為狼類則因果相似矣何傲因者從地獄出展轉至人乃為柔類傲與柔反今為柔類者何蓋報有多種有宿習報有反對報則兇狠者化為虎狼貪婪者化為羊犬是名宿習報奢侈太過者化為貧窮狡猾罔人者化為愚憃是名反對報今屬反對蓋傲者昔藐視乎人柔者今為人所藐也柔非溫和善順之謂乃怯弱委靡人人得而易之者也。
堅固服餌(云云)堅固草木。
服餌草木二事似同而異服餌曰食道胡麻蓮芡之類也食所常用故草木曰藥道黃精鬆柏之類也藥所常用故食道止可延年藥道乃能輕舉溫陵不應以藥餌代服餌藥是第二種中事。
堅固交遘而不休息。
十種仙始於服餌終於變化蓋後後深於前前者也其第九交遘不可如古解以內坎離外男女為說此交遘純是內事彼書所謂取坎填離抽鉛添汞乃至龍虎烏兔嬰姹黃婆等皆喻也尚不許以心腎為離坎何況男女房術乃下品之下清庵所謂貪淫男女嗜利者為之是大亂之道也安得已當第九超前思念鄰后變化而反作鄙陋猥褻之邪功耶經云此等亦於人中煉心但不修正覺三昧故不離妄想不出輪迴耳使其得遇如來正法一點化之當必有了悟者如呂巖真人之於黃龍是也。
壽千萬歲。
南嶽大師發願文其中一則曰作長壽仙見彌勒二則曰得長命力求佛道三則曰為求大乘入深山愿速成就大仙人南嶽應
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果轉產生為狼類，那是因為因果相似。那麼，『傲因』（傲慢的原因）是從地獄出來，輾轉投胎到人道，才成為柔弱的種類。傲慢與柔弱是相反的，現在成為柔弱種類的人是什麼原因呢？這是因為報應有多種，有宿習報，有反對報。所以兇狠的人會轉生為虎狼，貪婪的人會轉生為羊或狗，這叫做宿習報。奢侈過度的人會轉生為貧窮，狡猾欺騙他人的人會轉生為愚蠢，這叫做反對報。現在的情況屬於反對報，大概是傲慢的人過去輕視他人，柔弱的人現在被人輕視。這裡的『柔』不是指溫和善良順從，而是指怯懦委靡，人人都可以欺負的狀態。 『堅固服餌』（堅固地服用餌藥），（等等），『堅固草木』（堅固地服用草木）。 服用餌藥和服用草木這兩件事相似而不同。『服餌』指的是食用稻米、胡麻、蓮子、芡實之類，是日常食用的東西。所以『草木』指的是藥用，如黃精、松柏之類，是藥材中常用的東西。食用只能延年益壽，藥用才能輕身飛舉。溫陵不應該用藥餌代替服餌，藥是第二種（仙人）中的事情。 『堅固交遘而不休息』（堅固地交合而不休息）。 十種仙的修行，開始於服餌，最終於變化，後面的境界比前面的境界更深。其中第九種『交遘』（交合），不能像古人那樣解釋為以內坎離（內丹術語，指心腎）外男女為說，這種交遘純粹是內修的事情。那些書上所說的『取坎填離』（內丹術語），『抽鉛添汞』（內丹術語），乃至『龍虎』（內丹術語）、『烏兔』（內丹術語）、『嬰姹』（內丹術語）、『黃婆』（內丹術語）等，都是比喻。尚且不可以用心腎來比作離坎，更何況男女房中之術，那是下品之下的東西。清庵所說的貪淫男女、嗜利之徒才會做這種事，是大亂之道。怎麼可以到了第九步，超越前面的思念後面的變化，反而去做這種鄙陋猥褻的邪功呢？經書上說，這些人也在人世間煉心，但是不修正覺三昧（正確的覺悟和禪定），所以不能脫離妄想，不能脫離輪迴。如果他們能夠遇到如來正法，一點化他們，一定會開悟的，就像呂巖真人（道教人物）之於黃龍（佛教禪師）一樣。 『壽千萬歲』（壽命千萬歲）。 南嶽大師（佛教人物）的發願文中，其中一條是『作長壽仙見彌勒』（成為長壽的仙人，見到彌勒佛），第二條是『得長命力求佛道』（得到長壽的力量，追求佛道），第三條是『為求大乘入深山愿速成就大仙人』（爲了追求大乘佛法，進入深山，希望迅速成就大仙人）。南嶽大師應該是...
【English Translation】 English version: If one is reborn as a wolf, it is due to similar karma. So, the 'Aoyin' (cause of arrogance) comes from hell, transmigrates to the human realm, and becomes a weak species. Arrogance and weakness are opposite. What is the reason for those who are now weak species? It is because there are many kinds of retribution: habitual retribution and opposite retribution. Therefore, the fierce will be reborn as tigers and wolves, and the greedy will be reborn as sheep or dogs. This is called habitual retribution. Those who are excessively extravagant will be reborn as poor, and those who are cunning and deceive others will be reborn as foolish. This is called opposite retribution. The current situation belongs to opposite retribution, probably because the arrogant people looked down on others in the past, and the weak people are now looked down upon by others. The 'weakness' here does not refer to gentleness, kindness, and obedience, but to cowardice and listlessness, a state where everyone can bully them. 'Firmly taking elixirs' (Jiāngù fú ěr) (firmly taking elixirs), (etc.), 'firmly taking herbs' (Jiāngù cǎomù) (firmly taking herbs). Taking elixirs and taking herbs are similar but different. 'Taking elixirs' refers to eating rice, sesame, lotus seeds, gorgon fruit, etc., which are commonly eaten foods. Therefore, 'herbs' refers to medicinal use, such as Polygonatum sibiricum, pine and cypress, etc., which are commonly used in medicinal materials. Eating can only prolong life, while medicinal use can lighten the body and fly. Wenling should not replace elixirs with medicinal elixirs. Medicine is a matter in the second type (of immortals). 'Firmly engaging in intercourse without rest' (Jiāngù jiāo gòu ér bù xiūxí) (firmly engaging in intercourse without rest). The cultivation of the ten types of immortals begins with taking elixirs and ends with transformation. The later realms are deeper than the earlier realms. Among them, the ninth type, 'intercourse' (Jiāo gòu) (intercourse), cannot be explained as the ancients did, using inner Kan and Li (inner alchemy terms, referring to the heart and kidneys) and outer men and women. This intercourse is purely a matter of inner cultivation. The so-called 'taking Kan to fill Li' (inner alchemy term), 'extracting lead and adding mercury' (inner alchemy term), and even 'dragon and tiger' (inner alchemy term), 'rabbit and crow' (inner alchemy term), 'infant and maiden' (inner alchemy term), 'yellow woman' (inner alchemy term), etc., are all metaphors. It is not even permissible to compare the heart and kidneys to Li and Kan, let alone the art of the bedroom between men and women, which is the lowest of the low. What Qing'an said is that only lustful men and women and those who are greedy for profit will do this kind of thing, which is the way of great chaos. How can one, in the ninth step, surpass the previous thought of the later transformation, and instead do this kind of vulgar and obscene evil work? The scriptures say that these people are also refining their minds in the world, but they do not correct the Samadhi of Right Awakening (correct enlightenment and meditation), so they cannot escape delusion and cannot escape reincarnation. If they can encounter the Tathagata's Right Dharma and enlighten them, they will surely be enlightened, just like Lu Yan Zhenren (Taoist figure) to Huanglong (Buddhist Zen master). 'Longevity of ten million years' (Shòu qiān wàn suì) (longevity of ten million years). In the vow of Master Nanyue (Buddhist figure), one of them is 'to become a long-lived immortal and see Maitreya' (Zuò chángshòu xiān jiàn Mílè) (to become a long-lived immortal and see Maitreya Buddha), the second is 'to obtain the power of longevity and seek the Buddha's path' (Dé chángmìng lì qiú Fódào) (to obtain the power of longevity and seek the Buddha's path), and the third is 'to enter the deep mountains to seek the Mahayana and wish to quickly achieve the great immortal' (Wèi qiú Dàchéng rù shēnshān yuàn sù chéngjiù dà xiānrén) (to enter the deep mountains to seek the Mahayana and wish to quickly achieve the great immortal). Master Nanyue should be...
化聖賢何所求乃楞嚴所不取良由彼之本願為見彌勒為求佛道為學大乘非為長年故又言不貪身命發此愿也豈世人寶惜幻軀希冀長生之比哉然其中又有外丹內丹之說愚人見之或起邪見初學但宜篤信今經佛語南嶽所云姑置之可也。
于邪淫中心不流逸。
非謂不斷邪淫但弗流逸而已蓋謂于邪淫法中能制其心不邪淫也不得錯會經文助發邪見。
上升精微(云云)三災不及。
兜率欲界四天曰上升精微曰不接地獄曰三災不及說者謂俱指內院似矣然本天無竟不言及之理今細味之當是意在言外言正當本天分位者不待論矣其有超越倫類上升精微乃至三災不及者雖云內院總之皆號兜率陀天也。
○第九卷
加以明悟。
經言清凈禁戒加以明悟雖云明悟非明心悟道之謂也特悟欲之不足貪好而已下文若於舍心發明智慧成阿羅漢入菩薩乘此之發明方是正悟。
無量凈天(云云)名遍凈天。
無量則遍今分前後淺深者何也蓋前言身心輕安則外之形骸內之思想二處皆凈故云無量乃遍身心之無量身心之外未凈也後言世界身心身心正報世界依報依正咸凈方名遍凈。
其中惟留阿賴耶識全于末那半分微細。
合論及長水疏謂半分微細屬六識而上二句接下稍難溫陵諸師皆以半分微細屬
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：化導聖賢所追求的，並非《楞嚴經》所讚許的。這是因為他們的本願是謁見彌勒（Maitreya，未來佛），追求佛道，學習大乘佛法，而不是爲了長生。所以他們說『不貪身命，發此愿也』。這難道能與世人珍視虛幻的身體，希望長生不老相比嗎？然而，其中又有外丹、內丹的說法，愚昧的人見了可能會產生邪見。初學者最好篤信《楞嚴經》中的佛語，南嶽（指懷讓禪師）所說的話可以暫時放在一邊。 對於邪淫，內心不放縱。 並非說要斷絕邪淫，只是不放縱而已。這是說在邪淫的境況中，能夠控制自己的心，不生邪念。不要錯誤理解經文，助長邪見。 上升精微（等等），三災不能侵襲。 兜率天（Tushita Heaven，欲界天之一）欲界四天被稱為『上升精微』，『不接地獄』，『三災不及』。解說的人認為這些都指的是兜率內院，似乎有道理。然而，本經沒有窮盡一切，沒有說到兜率內院的道理。現在仔細體會，這應該是意在言外，意思是說，真正處於兜率天本天分位的人，就不必討論了。那些超越同類，上升精微，乃至三災不能侵襲的人，雖然說是兜率內院，但總的來說都稱為兜率陀天（Tushita Heaven）。 第九卷 加以明悟。 經文說『清凈禁戒，加以明悟』，雖然說是明悟，但不是指明心見性，悟道。只是領悟到慾望的不足，貪戀美好的事物而已。下文說『若於舍心，發明智慧，成阿羅漢，入菩薩乘』，這種發明才是真正的覺悟。 無量凈天（等等），名為遍凈天。 『無量』就是『遍』，現在區分前後淺深是什麼意思呢？大概是前面說身心輕安，那麼外在的形骸和內在的思想兩處都清凈，所以稱為『無量』，是遍及身心的無量，身心之外還沒有清凈。後面說世界、身心，身心是正報，世界是依報，依報和正報都清凈，才名為『遍凈』。 其中只留下阿賴耶識（Alaya-vijñana，第八識），完全保留末那識（Manas-vijnana，第七識），只有一半是微細的。
【English Translation】 English version: What the sages and worthies seek is not what the Shurangama Sutra approves of. This is because their original vows are to see Maitreya (the future Buddha), to seek the path of Buddhahood, and to study Mahayana Buddhism, not to seek longevity. Therefore, they say, 'Not coveting life, they make this vow.' How can this be compared to worldly people who cherish their illusory bodies and hope for immortality? However, there are also doctrines of external and internal alchemy, which ignorant people may see and develop wrong views. Beginners should firmly believe in the Buddha's words in this sutra, and the words of Nanyue (referring to Chan Master Huairang) can be put aside for the time being. Regarding lustful acts, the mind does not become unrestrained. It is not said to cut off lustful acts, but simply not to be unrestrained. It means that in the face of lustful situations, one can control one's mind and not give rise to lustful thoughts. Do not misunderstand the sutra and encourage wrong views. Ascending to subtle realms (etc.), the three calamities cannot reach. Tushita Heaven (one of the heavens in the Desire Realm), the four heavens of the Desire Realm are called 'ascending to subtle realms,' 'not connecting to lower realms,' and 'the three calamities cannot reach.' Those who explain this believe that these all refer to the inner court of Tushita, which seems reasonable. However, this sutra does not exhaust everything and does not speak of the principles of the inner court of Tushita. Now, upon careful consideration, this should be implied, meaning that those who are truly in the position of the original heaven of Tushita need not be discussed. Those who transcend their kind, ascend to subtle realms, and even the three calamities cannot reach, although they are said to be the inner court of Tushita, are generally called Tushita Heaven. Volume 9 Adding clear understanding. The sutra says, 'Pure precepts, adding clear understanding.' Although it is said to be clear understanding, it does not refer to seeing one's nature and attaining enlightenment. It is only realizing the insufficiency of desires and the attachment to beautiful things. The following passage says, 'If, in the mind of renunciation, wisdom is developed, one becomes an Arhat and enters the Bodhisattva path.' This kind of development is true enlightenment. Immeasurable Pure Heaven (etc.), named All-Pervading Pure Heaven. 'Immeasurable' is 'all-pervading.' What is the meaning of distinguishing between before and after, shallow and deep? It is probably because the previous passage speaks of lightness and ease of body and mind, so both the external form and the internal thoughts are pure, hence it is called 'immeasurable,' which is the immeasurability pervading body and mind, and what is outside of body and mind is not yet pure. The later passage speaks of the world, body, and mind; body and mind are the direct reward, and the world is the dependent reward; both the dependent and direct rewards are pure, and only then is it called 'All-Pervading Pure'. Among them, only the Alaya-vijñana (the eighth consciousness) remains, the Manas-vijnana (the seventh consciousness) is fully retained, and only half is subtle.
末那而溫陵判此處無復六識則下文識心都滅須通八識不然既六識已無當滅何識予向據溫陵謂都滅識心未亡識性故通八識無礙今思終是未妥乃取前論疏意更為貫穿其說言此中六識粗分已滅唯留根本賴耶全體末那與六識不緣色空但內緣之微細半分而已至下識心都滅方滅此半分也雖然半分微細上須得與彼六識四字方好或者有脫文乎一說六識流注亦未盡滅且據大分而云滅實似滅而非滅也。
彼之天王即是菩薩游三摩地。
非彼天王決定儘是菩薩也華嚴經云初地菩薩多作閻浮提王二地輪王乃至六慾天王及大梵天王等多之一字言多分如是則亦有時乎不然矣。
一人發真歸元。
真對妄言元對末言真雖本具隱而不發逐妄流逸迷不還元今則發起真心復歸元本也真元之地纖塵不立如何虛空不成消殞。
此十方空皆悉消殞。
前言終不聞爛壞虛空矣今云虛空消殞前後語似矛盾何也此有二義一是虛實相對門世間實法有生必有滅虛空無形不生則不滅故虛空未聞爛壞也二是真妄相對門以萬物對虛空則萬物皆妄以虛空對真如則虛空亦妄迷妄有虛空復真無虛空矣故虛空亦可消殞也是知虛空本無存泯存泯由乎自心迷心成境者虛空歷然即境惟心者虛空安在故一人之虛空消殞多人之虛空不消殞兩無礙也長安雖鬧我國晏
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 末那（Manas，意為『意』）和溫陵的判決認為此處沒有第六識，那麼下文『識心都滅』就需要貫通八識，不然如果六識已經沒有了，應當滅掉的是什麼識？我之前根據溫陵的說法，認為『都滅識心』並未消亡識性，所以貫通八識沒有障礙。現在思考，終究還是不夠妥當，於是採用之前的論疏之意，重新貫穿其說，說的是：此中六識粗略的部分已經滅掉，只留下根本的阿賴耶識（Alaya-vijnana）的全體，末那與六識不緣色空，只是向內緣取那微細的一半而已，到下文『識心都滅』的時候，才滅掉這微細的一半。雖然這一半很微細，但上面需要得到與那『六識』四個字才好，或許是有脫漏的文字嗎？一種說法是六識的流注也沒有完全滅掉，只是根據大部分而說是滅掉了，實際上像是滅掉了但並非真的滅掉了。 那些天王就是游於三摩地（Samadhi，意為『禪定』）的菩薩。 並非那些天王就一定是菩薩。《華嚴經》說，初地菩薩多做閻浮提（Jambudvipa，意為『南贍部洲』）王，二地菩薩做轉輪王，乃至六慾天王以及大梵天王等。『多』之一字，說的是大部分是這樣，那麼也有時候不是這樣。 一人發起真性迴歸本元。 真相對於妄而言，元相對於末而言。真性雖然本來就具備，但隱藏而不顯發，追逐虛妄而流逝，迷惑而不迴歸本元。現在則是發起真心，恢復到元本的狀態。真元之地纖塵不染，為什麼虛空不會消殞呢？ 這十方虛空全部都消殞。 前面說『終不聞爛壞虛空』，現在說虛空消殞，前後說法似乎矛盾，這是為什麼呢？這裡有兩種含義：一是虛實相對的層面，世間的實法有生就必定有滅，虛空無形不生就不會滅，所以虛空未曾聽說過會爛壞。二是真妄相對的層面，以萬物對比虛空，那麼萬物都是虛妄的；以虛空對比真如，那麼虛空也是虛妄的。迷惑于虛妄，所以有虛空；恢復到真如，就沒有虛空了。所以虛空也可以消殞。由此可知虛空本來就沒有存在和泯滅，存在和泯滅都由自心所決定。以迷惑的心形成境界，虛空就歷歷分明；如果認識到境界只是心，虛空又在哪裡呢？所以一人的虛空消殞，多人的虛空不消殞，兩者沒有妨礙。長安即使喧鬧，我國仍然安寧。
【English Translation】 English version: The Manas (meaning 'mind') and Wenling's judgment consider that there is no sixth consciousness here, then the following 'the consciousness-mind is completely extinguished' needs to connect with the eight consciousnesses, otherwise if the six consciousnesses are already gone, what consciousness should be extinguished? I previously based on Wenling's statement, believing that 'the consciousness-mind is completely extinguished' has not extinguished the consciousness-nature, so connecting with the eight consciousnesses has no obstacles. Now thinking about it, it is still not appropriate, so I adopt the meaning of the previous commentary and re-penetrate its explanation, saying: In this, the rough part of the six consciousnesses has been extinguished, leaving only the entire fundamental Alaya-vijnana (meaning 'storehouse consciousness'), the Manas does not relate to form and emptiness with the six consciousnesses, but only inwardly relates to that subtle half, and when it comes to the following 'the consciousness-mind is completely extinguished', this subtle half is extinguished. Although this half is very subtle, it needs to get the four words 'six consciousnesses' above to be good, perhaps there is a missing text? One saying is that the flow of the six consciousnesses has not been completely extinguished, but it is said to be extinguished according to the majority, in fact, it seems to be extinguished but not really extinguished. Those heavenly kings are Bodhisattvas who are in Samadhi (meaning 'meditative absorption'). It is not necessarily the case that those heavenly kings are all Bodhisattvas. The Avatamsaka Sutra says that Bodhisattvas of the first Bhumi (meaning 'ground' or 'stage') mostly become kings of Jambudvipa (meaning 'the continent of Jambu', often referring to the human realm), Bodhisattvas of the second Bhumi become Chakravartin kings, and even kings of the Six Desire Heavens and Great Brahma Heaven, etc. The word 'mostly' means that most of them are like this, so there are times when it is not. One person initiates true nature and returns to the origin. True is spoken in contrast to false, and origin is spoken in contrast to end. Although true nature is inherent, it is hidden and not manifested, pursuing falsehood and flowing away, confused and not returning to the origin. Now, the true mind is initiated and restored to the original state. In the land of true origin, not a speck of dust can stand, why wouldn't emptiness be extinguished? This emptiness of the ten directions is completely extinguished. The previous statement was 'never heard of emptiness being rotten and destroyed', now it is said that emptiness is extinguished, the previous and subsequent statements seem contradictory, why is this? There are two meanings here: one is the level of relative reality and emptiness, worldly real dharmas have birth and must have extinction, emptiness is formless and does not arise, so it will not be extinguished, so emptiness has never been heard of being rotten and destroyed. The second is the level of relative truth and falsehood, comparing all things to emptiness, then all things are false; comparing emptiness to Suchness, then emptiness is also false. Confused by falsehood, so there is emptiness; returning to Suchness, there is no emptiness. Therefore, emptiness can also be extinguished. From this, it can be known that emptiness originally has no existence or annihilation, existence and annihilation are determined by one's own mind. With a confused mind forming a realm, emptiness is clearly distinct; if one recognizes that the realm is only mind, where is emptiness? Therefore, the emptiness of one person is extinguished, and the emptiness of many people is not extinguished, the two are unobstructed. Even if Chang'an is noisy, our country is still peaceful.
然則一人之國土晏然多人之長安自鬧亦兩無礙也。
見其宮殿無故崩裂大地振折水陸飛騰無不驚懾凡夫昏暗不覺遷訛。
行人入禪之際諸魔自然見其宮殿崩裂大地振折本陸飛騰群物驚懾而凡夫昏暗不覺遷訛然此境界惟魔見而人不覺者固以其昏暗矣人雖昏暗比物為靈物既各驚人反不覺豈以人而不如物乎今謂不覺者非全不覺如木石也特不覺是行人三昧神力之遷訛耳彼世間山崩地震等人亦與物同怖懼故又遷者動轉訛者怪異以三昧時乃凡聖變易之秋正邪交戰之候故轉動不寧怪異不測也。
如摩登伽殊為眇劣彼惟咒汝破佛律儀八萬行中秪毀一戒心清凈故尚未淪溺此乃隳汝寶覺全身。
律儀者戒也八萬行中之一行也此逐句與下文相對摩登眇劣對諸魔熾盛只毀貪慾一戒對墮汝寶覺全身未盡有漏之小果對發真歸元之大心小果而失其本有如民庶之家凋敗猶未足言大心而喪其成功如閥閱之門籍沒良可嘆也。
當在此中精研妙明。
色陰中曰精研妙明曰內外精研曰究竟澄徹曰研究深遠曰研究精極如是數語直揭參禪緊要真實工夫不厭重疊學人所當凝神殫思猛著精彩處也色陰若盡雖四陰宛然于佛菩提全未全未而實破竹之勢已張倒峽之機莫御斬關奪門進入有路秪恐得少為足自畫不前耳然破此色陰大不容易非是
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：既然一個人的國土可以安寧，眾多人的長安城自顧喧鬧，這兩者也是互不干擾的。 現代漢語譯本：看見他們的宮殿無緣無故崩塌，大地震動斷裂，水陸空中的生物飛騰，沒有不驚恐害怕的。凡夫俗子昏昧愚鈍，不覺察到這種變遷。 現代漢語譯本：修行人在入禪的時候，眾魔自然會顯現出宮殿崩塌、大地震動斷裂、水陸空中的生物飛騰、各種生物驚恐害怕的景象，而凡夫俗子昏昧愚鈍，不覺察到這種變遷。然而這種境界只有魔能看見而人不能覺察，本來就是因為人的昏昧愚鈍。人雖然昏昧愚鈍，但相比其他生物來說，人是更有靈性的。其他生物尚且各自驚恐，人反而不覺察，難道人還不如其他生物嗎？現在說的不覺察，不是完全像木頭石頭一樣什麼都不知道，只是不覺察這是修行人三昧（Samadhi）神力的變遷罷了。那些世間的山崩地震等災難，人們也會和生物一樣感到恐懼。所以說『遷』是指動轉，『訛』是指怪異。在修習三昧的時候，正是凡夫和聖人轉變的時期，正義和邪惡交戰的時候，所以才會轉動不安寧，怪異不可測。 現代漢語譯本：比如摩登伽（Matanggi），實在是極其渺小卑劣的，她只是用咒語迷惑你，破壞佛的律儀，在八萬行中只毀壞了一條戒律，因為你的心清凈，所以尚未完全沉淪。這卻是要摧毀你寶貴的覺悟全身。 現代漢語譯本：『律儀』就是戒律，是八萬行中的一行。這裡逐句與下文相對，摩登伽的渺小卑劣對應眾魔的熾盛，只毀壞貪慾一條戒律對應墮落你寶貴的覺悟全身，未盡有漏的小果對應發起真正歸元的大心。得到小果而失去根本，就像平民百姓的家庭衰敗，還不足以嘆息；發起大心而喪失成功，就像高門大戶被抄家沒籍，實在令人嘆息。 現代漢語譯本：應當在這裡面精細地研究微妙的光明。 現代漢語譯本：在色陰中說『精研妙明』，說『內外精研』，說『究竟澄徹』，說『研究深遠』，說『研究精極』，像這樣的幾句話，直接揭示了參禪最緊要、最真實的功夫，不怕重複。學人應當集中精神，竭盡心思，猛下功夫。如果色陰破盡，即使其他四陰依然存在，對於佛的菩提（Bodhi）來說，也完全沒有完全沒有，但實際上破竹的形勢已經張開，倒峽的勢頭無法阻擋，斬斷關卡奪取門戶，進入有道路。只是恐怕得到一點就滿足，自我設限，不肯前進。然而破除這色陰非常不容易，不是...
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, one person's country can be peaceful, and the bustling Chang'an (ancient capital of China) of many people can be noisy on its own, and these two do not interfere with each other. English version: Seeing their palaces collapsing for no reason, the earth shaking and splitting, creatures in water, on land, and in the air flying about, none are not terrified. Ordinary people are dim-witted and do not perceive the changes. English version: When a practitioner enters meditation, the demons will naturally manifest scenes of palaces collapsing, the earth shaking and splitting, creatures in water, on land, and in the air flying about, and all kinds of creatures being terrified. But ordinary people are dim-witted and do not perceive these changes. However, this state is only seen by demons and not perceived by people, precisely because of people's dim-wittedness. Although people are dim-witted, compared to other creatures, they are more spiritual. Other creatures are each terrified, yet people do not perceive it. Are people then inferior to other creatures? Now, saying 'not perceiving' does not mean being completely unaware like wood or stone, but simply not perceiving that these are transformations of the practitioner's Samadhi (Samadhi) power. Those worldly disasters like mountain collapses and earthquakes, people will feel fear just like other creatures. Therefore, 'transformation' refers to movement and change, and 'error' refers to strangeness and abnormality. During the practice of Samadhi, it is the time of transformation between ordinary people and sages, the time of the battle between righteousness and evil, so there is unrest and unpredictable strangeness. English version: For example, Matanggi (Matanggi), is extremely insignificant and lowly. She only used spells to bewilder you, destroying the Buddha's precepts. Among the eighty thousand practices, she only destroyed one precept. Because your mind is pure, you have not completely fallen. This, however, is to destroy your precious awakened body entirely. English version: 'Precepts' are the rules, one of the eighty thousand practices. Here, each sentence corresponds to the following text. Matanggi's insignificance corresponds to the demons' intensity, destroying only one precept of greed corresponds to the fall of your precious awakened body entirely, not exhausting the small fruit of leakage corresponds to the arising of the great mind of returning to the origin. Obtaining a small fruit and losing the root is like the decline of a commoner's family, not worth lamenting; arousing the great mind and losing success is like the confiscation of a noble family's property, truly lamentable. English version: You should diligently study the subtle brightness within this. English version: In the Skandha of Form, it says 'diligently study the subtle brightness,' it says 'diligently study internally and externally,' it says 'thoroughly clarify,' it says 'study deeply and far,' it says 'study to the extreme.' Such words directly reveal the most important and real effort of Chan practice, not fearing repetition. Students should concentrate their minds, exhaust their thoughts, and make vigorous efforts. If the Skandha of Form is broken, even if the other four Skandhas still exist, for the Buddha's Bodhi (Bodhi), it is not complete at all, but in reality, the momentum of splitting bamboo has already unfolded, the momentum of overturning a gorge cannot be resisted, cutting through barriers and seizing gates, there is a road to enter. It is only feared that one will be content with little, self-limit oneself, and refuse to move forward. However, breaking this Skandha of Form is not easy, it is not...
說了便休行人須努力死戰一番始得。
其時魂魄意志精神除執受身余皆涉入互為賓主。
醫經以魂屬肝魄屬肺意屬脾精屬腎神屬心今曰互為賓主與道家所云三華聚五氣朝水火交金木並如是等語何別此有二義一者彼由作如是因得如是果今經則惟是精研自性無心求之而自得之者也二者彼方以為玄妙耽著不捨今經則不作聖解雖有之而漠然若無者也此其所以異也。
觀察不停抑按降伏制止超越。
不須以抑按等對四分煩惱只就文順說義自明顯初觀察者審究妄心之起處也次抑按者于其起處而遏捺之也然我固抑之彼未必伏次降伏者隨其所抑皆從順也又恐暫時降伏后復跳梁次制止者更為防範使不動也今為一喻觀察者如訪賊也抑按如己捉獲降伏如己服辜制止如又加約束也如是重重處分超越過甚故妙明逼極渙散發見致虛空成寶色也虛空寶色即自己心光也。
其心離身反觀其面去住自由無復留礙。
神仙家出神與今所說意略相似而實不同彼有心求之此無心得之彼自謂妙用此不作聖心與前同也初色陰中少選之間身能出礙者欲出也次色陰中遙見遠方逼極飛出者漸出也今受陰中去住自由無復留礙者妙于出也復想陰中其心離形如鳥出籠者妙之又妙而能上歷聖位得意生身也彼書有陰神陽神之說色中二處未別陰陽
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 說了便休，修行之人須努力死戰一番才能有所得。 此時，魂（hún，精神，與肝相關）、魄（pò，肉體的力量，與肺相關）、意志（yìzhì，決心，與脾相關）、精神（jīngshén，生命力，與腎相關）除去執受之身，其餘都相互涉入，互為賓主。 醫經以魂屬於肝，魄屬於肺，意屬於脾，精屬於腎，神屬於心。現在說互為賓主，與道家所說的『三華聚頂，五氣朝元，水火交融，金木相併』等話有什麼區別？這裡有兩層含義：一是道家通過特定的方法以求獲得相應的結果，而此經則只是精研自性，不刻意追求卻自然獲得；二是道家認為這些是玄妙的，執著而不捨，而此經則不作聖解，雖有之卻漠然視之，好像沒有一樣。這就是它們的不同之處。 觀察不停，抑按降伏，制止超越。 不必用抑按等來對應四分煩惱，只需順著文意解釋，意義自然明顯。首先，『觀察』是審察妄心從何處生起；其次，『抑按』是在妄心生起之處遏制它。然而，我雖然遏制它，它未必會降伏。再次，『降伏』是使其隨著我的遏制而順從。又恐怕暫時降伏之後又會跳動反抗，所以『制止』是進一步防範，使其不動。現在用一個比喻來說明：『觀察』就像訪賊，『抑按』就像已經捉獲，『降伏』就像已經認罪服法，『制止』就像又加上約束。像這樣重重處置，超越過甚，所以妙明逼極，渙散發見，以致虛空成為寶色。虛空寶色就是自己的心光。 其心離身，反觀其面，去住自由，無復留礙。 神仙家出神與現在所說的意思略微相似，但實際上不同。他們有心去追求，而這裡是無心得之。他們自認為這是妙用，而這裡不作聖心，與前面所說相同。最初在色陰中，少選之間身體能夠出礙，這是想要出去；其次在色陰中，遙見遠方，逼極飛出，這是逐漸出去；現在在受陰中，去住自由，無復留礙，這是妙于出去；再在想陰中，其心離形，如鳥出籠，這是妙之又妙，而且能夠上歷聖位，得到意生身。他們的書中有陰神陽神之說，色陰中的兩處沒有分別陰陽。
【English Translation】 English version: Having spoken, cease. The practitioner must strive and fight to the death before attaining anything. At this time, the hún (魂, spirit, associated with the liver), pò (魄, corporeal soul, associated with the lungs), yìzhì (意志, will, associated with the spleen), jīngshén (精神, essence, associated with the kidneys), and shén (神, mind, associated with the heart), except for the body that is being clung to, all interpenetrate each other, becoming both guest and host. Medical texts attribute hún to the liver, pò to the lungs, yì to the spleen, jīng to the kidneys, and shén to the heart. Now, it is said that they interpenetrate each other, becoming both guest and host. How is this different from the Taoist sayings such as 'the three flowers gather at the crown, the five qì pay homage, water and fire mingle, metal and wood combine'? There are two meanings here: first, the Taoists obtain corresponding results by performing specific practices, while this sutra only deeply investigates one's own nature, attaining naturally without intentional seeking; second, the Taoists consider these things mysterious, clinging to them without letting go, while this sutra does not create a saintly interpretation, regarding them indifferently as if they do not exist, even though they are present. This is the difference between them. Unceasing observation, suppression and subjugation, restraint and transcendence. There is no need to use suppression, etc., to correspond to the four divisions of afflictions. Simply explain according to the meaning of the text, and the meaning will naturally become clear. First, 'observation' is to carefully examine where the deluded mind arises; second, 'suppression' is to restrain it at the point where it arises. However, even though I suppress it, it may not submit. Next, 'subjugation' is to make it obedient to my suppression. Furthermore, fearing that it may temporarily submit and then rebel again, 'restraint' is to further guard against it, preventing it from moving. Now, let's use a metaphor to illustrate: 'observation' is like searching for a thief, 'suppression' is like having already captured him, 'subjugation' is like having already confessed and submitted to the law, and 'restraint' is like adding further constraints. Such repeated measures, exceeding the limit, cause the wondrous brightness to be forced to its extreme, brilliantly scattering and revealing, so that emptiness becomes a precious color. The precious color of emptiness is one's own mind-light. The mind leaves the body, reflects upon its face, goes and stays freely, without any further obstruction. The Taoist's spirit projection is somewhat similar to what is being said now, but in reality, they are different. They intentionally seek it, while here it is attained without intention. They consider it a wondrous function, while here there is no saintly mind, as mentioned before. Initially, in the realm of form, the body can overcome obstacles in a short time, which is the desire to go out; next, in the realm of form, one sees distant places from afar, forced to the extreme and flying out, which is gradually going out; now, in the realm of sensation, one goes and stays freely, without any further obstruction, which is wonderful in going out; furthermore, in the realm of thought, the mind leaves the body, like a bird leaving its cage, which is wonderful beyond wonder, and able to ascend through the holy positions, attaining the mind-made body. Their books speak of yin spirits and yang spirits, but the two places in the realm of form do not distinguish between yin and yang.
受陰所說彷彿陽神想陰所說則非彼陽神所及矣雖彼屬妄想精魂此修正覺三昧根源自殊然總之止是破得色受二陰想行識三居然未破亦何足奇而生奇想便言證聖鼓發魔事不亦宜乎。
前無新證歸失故居。
此言前無新證歸失故居憶魔生焉下言新證未獲故心已亡憂魔生焉此二何別蓋境同而所以當之者異也一是見其前後雙脫不欲守前不欲向後從中別求一路是以晝夜撮心懸思掛念而憶魔入也一是見其前後雙脫又欲守前又欲退後二念交發不知何從是以計無所定彷徨愁悶而憂魔入也。
于精明中圓悟精理。
此言于精明中圓悟精理次下於明悟中得虛明性此二悟字乃是破色陰而見受陰受陰將空覺得胸中精一虛朗是受陰中之悟耳餘后三陰尚爾迷昧而行人有至此便謂得悟大事了畢蓋不知此。
從是凡身上歷菩薩六十聖位得意生身。
六十聖位依孤山三漸次干慧十信十住十行十向四加十地等妙共六十位此于諸說似為穩當又孤山泥經言雖未盡漏四字遂以七信八信十信判意生身然經言從此凡身上歷聖位得意生身正明圓頓行人即凡身而歷聖果耳況歷者聖位之階級途路言從此定然證聖不曰今即是聖也亦何礙焉準楞伽三種意生身初在三地四地五地次在八地終在九地以往何必疑其太高而判以信位耶例如無生法忍八地
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於受陰所說的，彷彿是陽神（指光明、積極的神靈）的想法，而想陰所說的，就不是陽神所能達到的境界了。即使想陰屬於虛妄的想像和精魂，但此修正覺三昧（正確的覺悟和禪定）的根源與彼不同。總之，這只是破除了色陰和受陰，而想陰、行陰、識陰這三陰仍然沒有破除，又有什麼值得驚奇的呢？如果因此而產生奇異的想法，便說自己已經證得了聖果，鼓動引發魔事，不也是很正常的嗎？
以前沒有新的證悟，卻失去了原來的居所。
這句話說的是，以前沒有新的證悟，卻失去了原來的居所，憶魔（回憶之魔）因此產生。下面說，新的證悟沒有獲得，原來的心已經喪失，憂魔（憂愁之魔）因此產生。這兩種情況有什麼區別呢？大概是境界相同，但應對的方式不同。一種是看到前後都脫離了，既不想守住以前的，也不想走向以後的，想從中間另外尋求一條道路，因此晝夜撮心懸思，掛念不已，憶魔就進入了。一種是看到前後都脫離了，又想守住以前的，又想退回到以後，兩種念頭交織在一起，不知道該怎麼辦，因此計無所定，彷徨愁悶，憂魔就進入了。
在精明之中，圓滿地領悟精深的道理。
這句話說的是，在精明之中，圓滿地領悟精深的道理。接下來一句說，在明悟之中，得到虛明的自性。這兩個『悟』字，都是破除色陰而見到受陰時的『悟』。受陰將要空掉的時候，覺得胸中精一虛朗，這是受陰中的『悟』罷了。其餘後面的三陰，仍然是迷惑闇昧的，而修行人有的人到了這裡，就認為自己已經得到了悟，大事已經了結，這是不知道這個道理。
從此從凡夫的身上，經歷菩薩的六十個聖位，得到意生身（由意念產生的身體）。
六十聖位，依照孤山的『三漸次』：干慧、十信、十住、十行、十向、四加行、十地、等覺、妙覺，共六十位。這種說法在各種說法中，似乎是比較穩妥的。另外，孤山在註釋《泥經》時說，雖然沒有完全斷盡煩惱，這四個字，於是用七信、八信、十信來判定義生身。然而經文說，『從此凡身上歷聖位，得意生身』，正是說明圓頓的修行人，即以凡夫之身而經歷聖果。況且『歷』，是聖位的階級途路，意思是說從此必定能夠證得聖果，而不是說現在就是聖人。這又有什麼妨礙呢？按照《楞伽經》的三種意生身，最初在三地、四地、五地，其次在八地，最終在九地以上，又何必懷疑它太高，而判為信位呢？例如無生法忍（對事物不生不滅的深刻理解），在八地。
【English Translation】 English version: What is said about the feeling aggregate (受陰, shou yin) seems like the thoughts of a Yang spirit (陽神, yang shen) [referring to a bright, positive deity], but what is said about the thinking aggregate (想陰, xiang yin) is beyond what that Yang spirit can reach. Even though the thinking aggregate belongs to illusory imagination and subtle spirits, the source of this correct awakening samadhi (修正覺三昧, xiu zheng jue san mei) [correct enlightenment and meditation] is different from that. In short, it is only breaking through the form aggregate (色陰, se yin) and the feeling aggregate, while the thinking, volition (行陰, xing yin), and consciousness (識陰, shi yin) aggregates remain unbroken. What is so strange about that? If one generates strange thoughts because of this, claiming to have attained sainthood and inciting demonic affairs, isn't that quite appropriate?
Having no new attainment, one loses one's original dwelling.
This statement means that without new attainment, one loses one's original dwelling, and the memory demon (憶魔, yi mo) arises. The following statement says that new attainment has not been obtained, and the original mind has been lost, so the worry demon (憂魔, you mo) arises. What is the difference between these two situations? It is probably that the state is the same, but the way of dealing with it is different. One is seeing that both the past and the future are detached, not wanting to hold onto the past, nor wanting to go to the future, and seeking another path from the middle, so one's heart is constantly worried and one is constantly thinking about it, and the memory demon enters. One is seeing that both the past and the future are detached, and wanting to hold onto the past, and wanting to retreat to the future, two thoughts intertwined, not knowing what to do, so one's plans are uncertain, and one is wandering and worried, and the worry demon enters.
In the midst of refined clarity, one fully understands refined principles.
This statement means that in the midst of refined clarity, one fully understands refined principles. The next sentence says that in the midst of clear understanding, one obtains the nature of empty clarity. These two 'understandings' are the 'understanding' when breaking through the form aggregate and seeing the feeling aggregate. When the feeling aggregate is about to become empty, one feels that the chest is refined, unified, empty, and bright, which is the 'understanding' in the feeling aggregate. The remaining three aggregates are still confused and obscure, but some practitioners, upon reaching this point, think that they have attained enlightenment and that the great matter has been completed, but they do not know this principle.
From this, from the body of an ordinary person, one goes through the sixty holy positions of a Bodhisattva and obtains the mind-made body (意生身, yi sheng shen) [a body created by thought].
The sixty holy positions, according to Gu Shan's 'three gradual stages': dry wisdom, ten faiths, ten abidings, ten practices, ten dedications, four additional practices, ten grounds, equal enlightenment, and wonderful enlightenment, are a total of sixty positions. This statement seems to be more stable among various statements. In addition, Gu Shan, in his commentary on the Nirvana Sutra, said that although the four words 'not completely exhausted afflictions' were not completely exhausted, he used the seventh faith, eighth faith, and tenth faith to judge the mind-made body. However, the sutra says, 'From this, from the body of an ordinary person, one goes through the holy positions and obtains the mind-made body,' which precisely explains that the practitioner of perfect and sudden enlightenment experiences the holy fruit from the body of an ordinary person. Moreover, 'goes through' refers to the stages and paths of the holy positions, meaning that one will surely be able to attain the holy fruit from this, not that one is a saint now. What is the hindrance in that? According to the three kinds of mind-made bodies in the Lankavatara Sutra, the first is on the third, fourth, and fifth grounds, the second is on the eighth ground, and the last is above the ninth ground. Why doubt that it is too high and judge it as the position of faith? For example, the non-origination forbearance (無生法忍, wu sheng fa ren) [profound understanding of the non-arising and non-ceasing of things] is on the eighth ground.
方名正得而不妨初住即曰悟無生忍亦猶是也。
貪求契合。
此想陰中求善巧求經歷求辨析求冥感求靜謐求宿命求神力求深空求永歲此九或非急務至於求契合者乃欲融會妙理何故亦起魔事要之病在求之一字及貪之一字耳善乎先德之解曰忘機寂照理自玄會希求契合擬心即差從是天魔得其便故至哉言也雖然若忘機失照則沉死水又宜辨之。
讚歎行淫不毀粗行。
想陰文云讚歎行淫不毀粗行此頗難解有謂贊彼行淫不毀壞粗行何況細行則以粗行屬善邊事文義不通蓋毀字二用一是譭譽之毀譏謗也一是成毀之毀廢滅也古訓毀為隳隳者廢也滅也如仲尼隳三都是也此二句是二事一者于淫慾法反加讚歎二者于諸粗行安意為之不復隳滅粗行者粗陋鄙褻之事稍次於淫慾即僧殘之類皆惡邊事也。
○第十卷
夢想消滅。
般若心經五陰皆空方曰遠離顛倒夢想今此僅空想陰亦曰夢想消滅者何也蓋語同而義之淺深異也今此且據想之一陰而言經云晝則想心寐為諸夢故想滅則夢滅夢想滅故寤寐恒一也而所滅者本陰之融通妄想耳行陰之幽隱想識陰之微細想未滅也彼經五陰皆空其云顛倒夢想則不止融通而幽隱微細畢盡矣故此經識陰中獨曰顛倒微細精想顛倒字正與彼經顛倒吻合是可為證又彼經究極而言凡夫于無常
計常此夢想顛倒也二乘于常計無常此夢想顛倒也菩薩多劫修六度萬行而不入華嚴大威德法門此夢想顛倒也乃至一念之無明流注一念之夢想顛倒也豈獨夢寐云乎哉此經則夢乃實夢何以故以正較量五陰則五重次第有劑限故。
如波瀾滅化為澄水。
此澄水為對波瀾而言瀾大波也波瀾雖息水未停流流似不流暫名澄水如後文識陰妄想中言此湛非真如急流水望如恬靜流急不見非是無流其明證也然不妨亦可喚作澄水但貴知之莫起上慢未得謂得。
死後俱非起顛倒論(云云)死後俱非心顛倒論。
此下二節吳興謂前節雙亦後節雙非雙亦則俱是矣經始終言俱非何得添入俱是又自救云文義且寄雙亦夫文義雙非甚明何必為且寄之說蓋前節以三陰對行陰明言三陰有而非有行陰無而非無結尾云死後有相無相者省文也有相則非無無相則非有也是第一個俱非也次節推廣從色受想以及世間一切萬法皆悉遷訛有而非有無而非無者也於此盡能曉了故曰通悟非無則虛失其虛非有則實失其實是第二個俱非也如是望於後際冥冥沉沉渺渺漠漠道有不得道無不得莫知所之故曰后際昏瞢無可道故。
內外湛明(云云)內外明徹。
前文識陰區宇中諸本云內外湛明一本云內內湛明長水謂內之又內猶深而又深也且向內言至識陰盡方曰
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 計常，這是夢想顛倒。二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）執著于常，認為無常，這也是夢想顛倒。菩薩歷經多劫修行六度萬行，卻不能進入華嚴大威德法門，這也是夢想顛倒。乃至一念的無明流注，也是一念的夢想顛倒。豈止是夢中如此呢？這部經所說的夢，才是真正的夢。為什麼呢？因為用正知正見來衡量五陰（色、受、想、行、識），那麼五重次第是有界限的。 就像波浪平息，化為澄清水。 這澄清水是相對於波浪而言的，波浪是動盪的。波浪雖然平息，水卻沒有停止流動，流動好像沒有流動，暫時稱為澄清水。就像後文在識陰妄想中說的那樣：『這湛寂並非真如急流水，看起來好像恬靜，流動很快所以看不出來，但並不是沒有流動』，這是很明顯的證據。然而不妨也可以稱作澄清水，但重要的是要知道這一點，不要生起增上慢，沒有得到卻說得到了。 死後俱非，這是起顛倒論（等等），死後俱非，這是心的顛倒論。 以下兩節，吳興認為前一節是雙亦，后一節是雙非。雙亦就是俱是了。經中始終說俱非，怎麼能添入俱是呢？又自我辯解說文義且寄雙亦。文義雙非非常明顯，何必做且寄之說呢？前一節用三陰（受、想、識）對行陰，明確地說三陰有而非有，行陰無而非無，結尾說死後有相無相，這是省略的說法。有相則不是無，無相則不是有，這是第一個俱非。下一節推廣，從色受想以及世間一切萬法，都遷變訛誤，有而非有，無而非無。如果能完全明白這一點，就叫做通悟。非無則虛失其虛，非有則實失其實，這是第二個俱非。這樣望向後來的際涯，冥冥沉沉，渺渺漠漠，說有說不得，說無說不得，不知道在哪裡，所以說后際昏瞢，無可言說。 內外湛明（等等），內外明徹。 前文識陰的區域中，各版本都說內外湛明，有一個版本說內內湛明，長水認為內之又內，就是深而又深。且向內說，到識陰窮盡才說。
【English Translation】 English version: Clinging to permanence is a dreamlike inversion. The two vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) are attached to permanence, considering impermanence as permanent, which is also a dreamlike inversion. Bodhisattvas cultivate the Six Perfections and myriad practices for many kalpas, yet fail to enter the Avataṃsaka's (Flower Garland) Dharma gate of great power and virtue, which is also a dreamlike inversion. Even a single thought of ignorance flowing is a single thought of dreamlike inversion. Is it only in dreams? The dream spoken of in this sutra is the real dream. Why? Because when using right knowledge and right view to measure the Five Skandhas (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness), the fivefold sequence has its limits. Like waves ceasing and transforming into clear water. This clear water is spoken of in relation to the waves, the waves are turbulent. Although the waves have subsided, the water has not stopped flowing, the flow seems like no flow, temporarily called clear water. Just like what is said later in the delusions of the Consciousness Skandha: 'This stillness is not the true suchness of rapidly flowing water, it looks like tranquility, the flow is so fast that it cannot be seen, but it is not that there is no flow,' this is clear evidence. However, it can also be called clear water, but it is important to know this and not give rise to arrogance, claiming to have attained what has not been attained. 'After death, all is not,' this is to start inverted arguments (etc.), 'After death, all is not,' this is the mind's inverted argument. In the following two sections, Wuxing believes that the previous section is 'both also,' and the latter section is 'both not.' 'Both also' means 'all is.' The sutra always says 'both not,' how can one add 'all is'? He then defends himself by saying that the meaning is 'temporarily relying on both also.' The meaning of 'both not' is very clear, why make the 'temporarily relying on' explanation? The previous section uses the three skandhas (feeling, perception, and consciousness) against the Formation Skandha, clearly saying that the three skandhas exist but are not truly existent, and the Formation Skandha is non-existent but not truly non-existent. The ending says 'after death, there is form and no form,' which is an abbreviated way of saying it. 'Having form is not no, and no form is not having,' this is the first 'both not.' The next section extends from form, feeling, perception, and all the myriad dharmas in the world, all are changing and erroneous, existing but not truly existing, non-existent but not truly non-existent. If one can fully understand this, it is called thorough understanding. 'Not non-existent, then the emptiness loses its emptiness; not existent, then the reality loses its reality,' this is the second 'both not.' Looking towards the future, it is dark and deep, vast and indistinct, one cannot say it exists, one cannot say it does not exist, one does not know where it is, so it is said that the future is dark and confused, and nothing can be said. "Inner and outer are clear and bright" (etc.), inner and outer are clear and transparent. In the previous text, in the section on the Consciousness Skandha, various versions say 'inner and outer are clear and bright,' one version says 'inner inner is clear and bright.' Changshui believes that 'inner of inner' means 'deep and deep.' And speaking inwardly, it is only when the Consciousness Skandha is exhausted that it is said.
內外明徹此亦有理而前後都云內外亦自無礙蓋識陰未盡故止曰湛明是雖明而未徹至識陰盡方曰明徹也湛明僅如止水澄清明徹方似琉璃含寶月也宜從諸本內外。
合開成就。
古解根合而不分界開而不隔義猶未快今謂合開是敵對語如總別闔辟之例也向也行陰雖盡識陰未盡則六門具在特製伏而不馳逸耳今識盡則源竭水乾炭灰火滅始得消磨六根如冰已消渾化而無質礙也如鏡已磨瑩凈而無垢類也六門消磨故合開成就合者此之根門雖行布成六六處未嘗不一返流歸源則精明獨存更無餘物喻如鉼镮釵釧為一金也是之謂合開者此六根門雖圓融成一一處未嘗不六從體起用則門門相通無有隔礙喻如一金而為鉼镮釵釧也是之謂開合開自在名成就也然下節方在識中何亦曰能令己身根隔合開乎蓋止曰合開不曰成就猶屬乍合乍分乍開乍隔如何便得互用故第五節亦但是六根互用中已得隨順而已隨順者向而不逆將得而未得之稱也。
廣化七珍多增寶媛恣縱其心生勝解者。
七珍曰廣寶媛曰多是窮奢極欲也又中雖云自己所化然亦不應恣縱其心如何四陰已盡之人更作如是去就蓋求菩薩乘利他心切亦有留惑潤生者但留惑潤生非是小事乃深智弘願過量大人方優為之其或智慧稍疏願力稍弱則其端一開其勢莫御始猶有主終遂沉酣尚自不知執
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：內外明徹，這也有道理，但前後都說內外也自然沒有妨礙，大概是因為識陰還沒有窮盡，所以只說『湛明』，這是雖然明亮但還沒有透徹，到識陰窮盡才說『明徹』啊。『湛明』僅僅像止水澄清，『明徹』才像琉璃包含寶月啊。應該按照各種版本，使用『內外』的說法。
合開成就。
過去的解釋是根合而不分，界開而不隔，意義好像還不明確，現在說合開是相對的詞語，如總別、闔辟的例子。之前行陰雖然窮盡，識陰還沒有窮盡，那麼六門都還在，只是制伏而不放縱罷了。現在識陰窮盡，那麼源頭枯竭，水乾涸，炭灰熄滅，火焰消滅，才能夠消磨六根，如冰已經融化，渾然一體而沒有質礙啊，如鏡子已經磨好，瑩潔乾淨而沒有污垢一樣。六門消磨，所以合開成就。合，是指這些根門雖然行布成六六處，未嘗不一，返流歸源，那麼精明獨存，更沒有其他東西，比喻如鉼（bǐng，餅狀金銀）、镮（huán，手鐲）、釵（chāi，髮釵）、釧（chuàn，手鐲）為一金，這就是所謂的合。開，是指這六根門雖然圓融成一一處，未嘗不六，從體起用，那麼門門相通，沒有隔礙，比喻如一金而為鉼、镮、釵、釧，這就是所謂的開。合開自在，名為成就啊。然而下節還在識陰中，為什麼也說能令己身根隔合開呢？大概只是說合開，不說成就，還屬於乍合乍分、乍開乍隔，如何能夠互用？所以第五節也只是六根互用中已經得到隨順而已，隨順是指向而不逆，將得而未得的稱呼啊。
廣化七珍，多增寶媛，恣縱其心生勝解者。
七珍，叫做廣；寶媛，叫做多，這是窮奢極欲啊。又經文中雖然說自己所化，然而也不應該恣縱其心，為什麼呢？四陰已經窮盡的人，更作出這樣的取捨。大概是求菩薩乘，利他心切，也有留惑潤生的人，但留惑潤生不是小事，乃是深智弘願，過量大人才這樣做，如果智慧稍有疏漏，願力稍有減弱，那麼這個端緒一開，其勢頭就無法控制，開始還能夠做主，最終就會沉溺其中，甚至不知道執著。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Inner and outer clarity,' this also makes sense, but both before and after it is said that inner and outer are naturally without obstruction. This is probably because the 識陰 (shíyīn, the consciousness aggregate) has not yet been exhausted, so it is only called '湛明 (zhànmíng, clear and bright).' This is bright but not yet thorough. Only when the 識陰 (shíyīn, the consciousness aggregate) is exhausted is it called '明徹 (míngchè, clear and penetrating).' '湛明 (zhànmíng, clear and bright)' is merely like still water clarifying, while '明徹 (míngchè, clear and penetrating)' is like crystal containing a precious moon. It is appropriate to follow the various versions and use the term 'inner and outer.'
Union and separation accomplished.
The ancient explanation is that the roots unite without dividing, and the boundaries open without separating. The meaning seems not yet clear. Now it is said that union and separation are opposing terms, like totality and difference, closure and opening. Previously, although the 行陰 (xíngyīn, the formation aggregate) was exhausted, the 識陰 (shíyīn, the consciousness aggregate) was not, so the six gates were still present, merely controlled and not allowed to run wild. Now that the 識陰 (shíyīn, the consciousness aggregate) is exhausted, the source is depleted, the water dries up, the charcoal ash is extinguished, and the flame disappears. Only then can the six roots be dissolved, like ice that has melted, becoming completely unified without substance or obstruction, like a mirror that has been polished, becoming bright and clean without impurities. The six gates are dissolved, so union and separation are accomplished. Union refers to these root gates, although they are arranged into the six sixes, they are never not one, flowing back to the source, so that only the pure brightness remains, with nothing else. It is like 鉼 (bǐng, cake-shaped gold or silver), 镮 (huán, bracelet), 釵 (chāi, hairpin), and 釧 (chuàn, bracelet) being one gold. This is what is called union. Separation refers to these six root gates, although they are perfectly integrated into one place, they are never not six, arising from the substance to function, so that the gates are all interconnected, without separation. It is like one gold becoming 鉼 (bǐng, cake-shaped gold or silver), 镮 (huán, bracelet), 釵 (chāi, hairpin), and 釧 (chuàn, bracelet). This is what is called separation. Union and separation are free and at ease, called accomplishment. However, the next section is still within the 識陰 (shíyīn, the consciousness aggregate), so why is it also said that it can enable one's own roots to be separated and united? It probably only says union and separation, not accomplishment, still belonging to temporary union and temporary separation, temporary opening and temporary separation. How can they be used interchangeably? Therefore, the fifth section is only that the six roots have already obtained compliance in their mutual use. Compliance refers to moving forward without resisting, a term for what is about to be obtained but not yet obtained.
Widely transforming the seven treasures, greatly increasing the precious consorts, indulging their minds to generate superior understanding.
The seven treasures are called 'wide'; the precious consorts are called 'many.' This is extreme extravagance and desire. Furthermore, although the sutra says that they are transformed by oneself, one should not indulge their minds. Why? A person whose four aggregates have been exhausted should not make such choices. It is probably because they seek the Bodhisattva vehicle and are eager to benefit others, and there are also those who retain delusion to nourish life. However, retaining delusion to nourish life is not a small matter. Only those with deep wisdom and great vows, adults of extraordinary measure, can do this. If their wisdom is slightly lacking and their vows are slightly weak, then once this beginning is opened, its momentum cannot be controlled. At first, they can still be in control, but eventually, they will become immersed in it, even without knowing their attachments.
為勝解謂己恒與欲俱不受欲染喻似久沉廁溷穢惡浸淫過者掩鼻卻道身在旃檀樓閣如李赤然豈非魔哉。
聲聞緣覺不成增進。
五十種魔終之以聲聞緣覺夫羅漢辟支聖果也何為亦與魔列耶吳興謂是二乘違中道理起界外邪見夫違中則皆墮于偏界外之邪是亦邪也故等之以魔而實與前之魔異經云外道邪魔所感業終墮阿鼻獄其在聲聞緣覺則但曰不成增進而已蓋得少為足不復求進而安於小果者也梵網不受菩薩戒者皆名為惡習學二乘者皆名為邪其意亦猶是也所謂同條而異致者也。
識陰若盡(云云)入于如來妙莊嚴海。
經謂識陰若盡則汝現前諸根互用從互用中能入菩薩金剛乾慧如是乃超信住行向以至等覺入于如來妙莊嚴海圓滿菩提歸無所得此極則語也孤山泥能入二字乃以七信配位愚謂經意蓋言金剛乾慧也從何處入從此六根中入也即此便入非循次漸入也此數語禪宗直指闡露已竟如雲但盡凡心別無聖解又云一超直入如來地正此意耳與前受陰若盡上歷六十聖位其意各別彼言歷此言入從下望上之謂歷和身已到之謂入也。
圓滿菩提歸無所得。
圓滿菩提則似有所得故即繼以歸無所得也菩提原未曾失今云何得菩提原未曾殘缺今云何圓滿菩提原無處今欲何歸歸無所得而已是之謂真得真歸真圓滿也。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果自以為已經證悟，卻仍然沉溺於慾望之中，不受慾望的污染，這就好比一個人長期浸泡在污穢的廁所里，臭氣熏天，卻捂著鼻子說自己身處旃檀（一種香木）樓閣之中，如同李赤然（人名，比喻顛倒之人）一樣，這難道不是魔嗎？
聲聞（聽聞佛法而悟道者）、緣覺（通過自身覺悟而悟道者）不能增進。
五十種魔的最後一種是聲聞和緣覺。羅漢（斷除煩惱，證得解脫的聖者）和辟支佛（無需佛陀教導，依靠自身力量證悟的聖者）是聖果，為什麼也被列為魔呢？吳興（地名，此處指吳興的僧人）認為這是因為二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）違背了中道（不偏不倚的真理），生起了界外邪見（超出三界之外的錯誤見解）。違背中道就會墮入偏頗，界外的邪見也是邪見，所以將他們與魔並列。但實際上他們與前面的魔不同。經書上說，外道邪魔所感召的業力最終會墮入阿鼻地獄（八大地獄中最苦之處），而聲聞和緣覺只是『不能增進』而已。這是因為他們滿足於已獲得的少量成就，不再尋求進步，安於小果（較小的成就）。《梵網經》中說，不受菩薩戒（發願救度一切眾生的戒律）的人都被稱為惡習，學習二乘的人都被稱為邪見，意思也是如此。這就是所謂的『同條而異致』（同一條理，但結果不同）。
識陰（精神意識的蘊聚）如果斷盡（等等），就能進入如來（佛陀的稱號）妙莊嚴海。
經書上說，識陰如果斷盡，那麼你現前的諸根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）就能互用，從互用中能夠進入菩薩（發願救度一切眾生的人）的金剛乾慧（如金剛般堅固的智慧），這樣就能超越信住行向（菩薩修行的四個階段），乃至等覺（接近佛陀的覺悟），進入如來的妙莊嚴海，圓滿菩提（覺悟），歸於無所得。這是最極端的說法。孤山（地名，此處指孤山的僧人）將『能入』二字與七信（菩薩修行的七個階段）相配，我認為經書的意思是說金剛乾慧。從哪裡進入？從此六根中進入。當下就能進入，不是循序漸進地進入。這幾句話禪宗（佛教宗派）已經直接闡明了，如同說『但盡凡心，別無聖解』，又說『一超直入如來地』，正是這個意思。與前面受陰（感受的蘊聚）斷盡后經歷六十聖位（菩薩修行的六十個階段）不同，它們的含義各不相同。彼言『歷』，此言『入』，從下往上看的叫做『歷』，和自身已經到達的叫做『入』。
圓滿菩提歸於無所得。
圓滿菩提似乎有所得，所以緊接著說歸於無所得。菩提原本未曾失去，現在又如何得到？菩提原本未曾殘缺，現在又如何圓滿？菩提原本無處可去，現在又要歸向何處？歸於無所得而已，這才是真正的得到，真正的歸宿，真正的圓滿。
【English Translation】 English version: To mistakenly believe oneself to be enlightened while still indulging in desires, claiming to be unaffected by them, is like being immersed in a filthy latrine, surrounded by foul odors, yet holding one's nose and declaring oneself to be in a sandalwood pavilion, like Li Chi-ran (a person's name, used as a metaphor for someone who is inverted). Is this not demonic?
Śrāvakas (those who attain enlightenment by hearing the Buddha's teachings) and Pratyekabuddhas (those who attain enlightenment through their own efforts without a teacher) cannot progress further.
The last of the fifty kinds of demons are the Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas. Arhats (saints who have eradicated afflictions and attained liberation) and Pratyekabuddhas are holy fruits, so why are they also listed as demons? The monks of Wuxing (a place name) believe that this is because the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) deviate from the Middle Way (the truth of non-duality) and give rise to heretical views beyond the realms (incorrect views that go beyond the Three Realms). Deviating from the Middle Way leads to falling into bias, and heretical views beyond the realms are also heretical, so they are equated with demons. But in reality, they are different from the previous demons. The scriptures say that the karmic forces generated by heretics and demons ultimately lead to falling into Avīci hell (the most painful of the eight great hells), while Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas only 'cannot progress further.' This is because they are content with the small amount of achievement they have attained, no longer seek progress, and are content with small fruits (smaller achievements). The Brahma Net Sutra says that those who do not receive the Bodhisattva precepts (vows to save all sentient beings) are all called evil habits, and those who study the Two Vehicles are all called heretical views, and the meaning is the same. This is what is called 'the same principle but different results.'
If the Skandha of Consciousness (the aggregate of mental consciousness) is exhausted (etc.), one can enter the Wondrously Adorned Ocean of the Tathāgata (an epithet of the Buddha).
The scriptures say that if the Skandha of Consciousness is exhausted, then your present faculties (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind) can interact with each other, and from this interaction, you can enter the Bodhisattva's (one who vows to save all sentient beings) Vajra Dry Wisdom (wisdom as firm as a diamond), and in this way, you can transcend the stages of Faith, Abiding, Practice, and Dedication (four stages of Bodhisattva practice), and even Equal Enlightenment (close to the Buddha's enlightenment), enter the Wondrously Adorned Ocean of the Tathāgata, perfect Bodhi (enlightenment), and return to non-attainment. This is the most extreme statement. The monks of Gushan (a place name) associate the words 'can enter' with the Seven Faiths (seven stages of Bodhisattva practice), but I think the meaning of the scriptures is Vajra Dry Wisdom. From where do you enter? You enter from these six faculties. You can enter immediately, not gradually in sequence. These few words have already been directly explained by the Chan school (a school of Buddhism), like saying 'Just exhaust the ordinary mind, there is no holy understanding,' and also saying 'One leap directly enters the Tathāgata's land,' which is exactly this meaning. It is different from the previous statement that after the Skandha of Feeling (the aggregate of feeling) is exhausted, one experiences sixty holy positions (sixty stages of Bodhisattva practice), and their meanings are different. The former says 'experience,' the latter says 'enter,' looking from below upwards is called 'experience,' and what one has already arrived at oneself is called 'enter.'
Perfect Bodhi returns to non-attainment.
Perfect Bodhi seems to be something attained, so it is immediately followed by returning to non-attainment. Bodhi was never lost in the first place, so how can it be attained now? Bodhi was never incomplete in the first place, so how can it be perfected now? Bodhi originally has nowhere to go, so where should it return to now? It only returns to non-attainment, and this is true attainment, true return, and true perfection.
知妄所起說妄因緣(云云)元無所有。
上言彼虛空性猶實妄生因緣自然豈得非妄所以然者由其知萬法皆從妄起故於妄中說妄因緣而此妄者若其本有則因緣亦有若妄元無彼因緣者元無所有因緣亦是假立何況不知諸法從因緣生求其生而不得推而委之自然是益增其妄計矣。
汝心非想則不能來想中傳命。
合論補註云儒曰知命道曰覆命佛曰傳命其意蓋謂三者義同然此三實異不可不察也夫子曰不知命無以為君子又曰死生有命孟子曰知命者不立乎巖牆之下則窮通夭壽之謂命非今所謂命也若曰窮理盡性以至於命則理性之原於穆不已之天命亦非今所謂命也道家或以臍輪為命蒂或以丹田為命宮或對性而言則元神為性元氣為命亦非今所謂命也今所謂命識暖息三事相依而成命也息依暖暖依識息絕然後暖滅暖滅然後識去識也者暖之元息之本而命之所由立也全舉則三約言則一識盡之矣故此經言縱汝形銷命光遷謝命而曰光正識之謂也識之動為想因我心屬想故受生之際隨彼當生父母之想而以我之想合彼之想兩想相投由是入胎則前陰之命轉而為后陰之命如嗣續然不至斷絕故名傳命若心非想則為類既殊氣味各別寧有水傳火火傳水牛傳馬馬傳牛之理乎是以妄想盡則生死盡。
湛入合湛歸識邊際。
上湛字是行不流逸下
【現代漢語翻譯】 知曉虛妄的生起，是由於陳述虛妄的因緣（等等），而原本什麼都沒有。
上面說，那虛空的體性尚且是真實的虛妄產生的因緣，自然怎麼能說不是虛妄呢？之所以這樣說，是因為知道萬法都是從虛妄產生的，所以在虛妄之中陳述虛妄的因緣。而這虛妄，如果它本來就存在，那麼因緣也存在；如果虛妄原本不存在，那麼因緣也原本什麼都沒有，因緣也是假立的。更何況不知道諸法從因緣生，尋求它的生卻得不到，推卸責任給自然，這是更加增長了虛妄的計較。
如果你的心沒有妄想，就不能在妄想中傳遞生命。
合論補註說，儒家說『知命』，道家說『覆命』，佛家說『傳命』，其意思大概是說三者意義相同，然而這三者實際上是不同的，不可不察。孔子說，『不知命，無以為君子』，又說『死生有命』，孟子說『知命者不立乎巖牆之下』，這些都是指窮通夭壽叫做命，不是現在所說的命。如果說窮理盡性以至於命，那麼理性的根源於穆不已的天命，也不是現在所說的命。道家或者以臍輪為命蒂，或者以丹田為命宮，或者對性而言，那麼元神為性，元氣為命，也不是現在所說的命。現在所說的命，是識、暖、息三事相互依存而成的命。息依靠暖，暖依靠識，息斷絕然後暖滅，暖滅然後識去，識是暖的根源，息的根本，而命的所由成立的。全部說就是三，概括地說就是一，識就概括了全部。所以這部經說，縱然你的形體消亡，命光遷謝，說命而說是光，正是說的識。識的動就是妄想，因為我的心屬於妄想，所以在受生的時候，隨著那將要出生的父母的妄想，而用我的妄想合他們的妄想，兩個妄想相互投合，由此入胎，那麼前陰的命就轉為后陰的命，如同繼承一樣，不至於斷絕，所以名叫傳命。如果心沒有妄想，那麼因為種類不同，氣味各異，哪裡有水傳遞給火，火傳遞給水，牛傳遞給馬，馬傳遞給牛的道理呢？因此妄想斷盡，那麼生死也就斷盡。
完全沉入而與湛寂融合，就會歸於識的邊際。
上面的『湛』字是說行不流逸
【English Translation】 Knowing the arising of delusion is due to explaining the causes and conditions of delusion (etc.), while originally there is nothing at all.
The above says that even the nature of emptiness is actually the cause and condition of delusion arising. How can it naturally be said that it is not delusion? The reason for this is that it is known that all dharmas arise from delusion, so within delusion, the causes and conditions of delusion are explained. And if this delusion originally exists, then the causes and conditions also exist; if delusion originally does not exist, then the causes and conditions also originally have nothing at all, and the causes and conditions are also falsely established. Moreover, not knowing that all dharmas arise from causes and conditions, seeking their arising but not obtaining it, and shifting the responsibility to nature, this is further increasing the deluded calculations.
If your mind is without thought, then it cannot transmit life within thought.
The combined commentary and annotation says that Confucianism speaks of 'knowing destiny' (知命 zhī mìng), Daoism speaks of 'returning to destiny' (覆命 fù mìng), and Buddhism speaks of 'transmitting life' (傳命 chuán mìng). The meaning is roughly that the three have the same meaning, but in reality, these three are different and must be examined. Confucius said, 'Without knowing destiny, one cannot be a gentleman,' and also said, 'Life and death are determined by destiny.' Mencius said, 'One who knows destiny does not stand beneath a dangerous wall.' These refer to poverty, success, premature death, and longevity as destiny, not what is meant by destiny now. If it is said that one exhausts principles and realizes one's nature to the point of understanding destiny, then the origin of rationality, the ceaseless and profound mandate of Heaven, is also not what is meant by destiny now. Daoists sometimes consider the navel chakra as the root of life, or the dantian (丹田 dāntián) as the palace of life, or in relation to nature, the original spirit (元神 yuánshén) is nature, and the original qi (元氣 yuánqì) is life, which is also not what is meant by destiny now. What is meant by destiny now is the life formed by the mutual dependence of consciousness (識 shì), warmth (暖 nuǎn), and breath (息 xī). Breath relies on warmth, warmth relies on consciousness. When breath ceases, then warmth disappears. When warmth disappears, then consciousness departs. Consciousness is the source of warmth, the root of breath, and the basis upon which life is established. To speak of all three is complete, to speak concisely is one; consciousness encompasses all. Therefore, this sutra says, even if your form decays and the light of life transmigrates, speaking of life as light is precisely referring to consciousness. The movement of consciousness is thought. Because my mind belongs to thought, at the time of rebirth, following the thoughts of the parents to be born, and using my thoughts to combine with their thoughts, the two thoughts mutually correspond, and thus enter the womb. Then the life of the previous existence is transformed into the life of the subsequent existence, like inheritance, without interruption, so it is called 'transmitting life'. If the mind is without thought, then because the species are different and the flavors are distinct, how can there be the principle of water transmitting to fire, fire transmitting to water, a cow transmitting to a horse, or a horse transmitting to a cow? Therefore, when delusion is exhausted, then birth and death are also exhausted.
Completely immersing and merging with the still and clear, one will return to the boundary of consciousness.
The 'still' (湛 zhàn) character above means that conduct is not unrestrained.
湛字則湛了之體如前文言以湛旋其虛妄又曰反流全一又曰伏歸元真意正如此而此湛非真如急流水望如恬靜正八識之邊涯分際也又前行陰中如波瀾滅化為澄水此水非真即此湛爾此湛合湛乃識境界而行人乍獲輕安尚謂得道何況至此四陰已滅惟識獨存豈不暢然自謂已證涅槃寧知此湛正生死微細根本此之不盡暗長潛滋由微而著由細而巨依舊再為螻蟻從頭復作蚊虻直須澄之又澄凈之又凈如萬丈清潭水天一色方是到家訊息耳得少為足烏可哉。
理則頓悟乘悟並消事非頓除因次第盡。
此在禪宗所謂頓悟而漸修者也四句二義皆上一句指示下一句重明言此五陰之滅有可頓者有不可頓者可頓者理也蓋理無二致人自迷源故乘此一悟合併消盡更無遺余如持火炬入于暗室一明盡明寧有次第乎不可頓者事也蓋事有萬殊勢難兼舉故從淺至深次第而盡如治垢衣重重浣練漸漸瑩潔寧可頓盡乎然頓悟之理是即事之理非二乘斷空之理也漸除之事是即理之事非凡夫著有之事也頓悟即冰之水漸除即水之冰豈判然二物哉故善財已發無上菩提之心而必遍參五十三善知識溈山謂行人雖從緣得一念頓悟自理猶有無始習氣未能頓凈皆理悟事除頓漸之說也此十六字乃千佛相傳之的訓萬世不易之宏規也參學者宜盡心焉。
知有涅槃不戀三界。
知有二
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『湛』字所指的『湛了之體』，正如前文所說，用『湛』來回旋那些虛妄。又說『反流全一』，又說『伏歸元真』，意思正是如此。而這個『湛』並非真如，就像看急流時覺得好像恬靜一樣，這正是第八識的邊際分界。又如前文所說，在行陰中，如波瀾滅化為澄水，這個水並非真如，就是這個『湛』。這個『湛』合起來的『湛』，乃是識的境界。而修行人剛獲得輕安，就以為得道了，何況到了這個時候，四陰已經滅盡，只有識單獨存在，豈不暢快地自認為已經證得涅槃？哪裡知道這個『湛』正是生死的微細根本。這個根本如果不盡除，就會暗中生長，潛滋暗長，由微小而顯著，由細微而巨大，依舊再次變為螻蟻，從頭再做蚊虻。必須澄之又澄，凈之又凈，如同萬丈清潭，水天一色，才是到家的訊息啊！得到少許就滿足，怎麼可以呢？ 理則頓悟，乘悟並消；事非頓除，因次第盡。 這在禪宗所說的就是頓悟而漸修。這四句話，兩種意義，都是上一句指示下一句，重複說明。說這五陰的滅除，有可以頓悟的，有不可以頓悟的。可以頓悟的是理，因為理沒有兩樣，是人自己迷惑了本源，所以憑藉這一悟，合併消盡，更沒有遺留。如同拿著火炬進入暗室，一明全明，哪裡有什麼次第呢？不可以頓悟的是事，因為事有萬殊，勢難兼顧，所以從淺到深，次第而盡。如同洗滌污垢的衣服，重重浣洗，漸漸瑩潔，哪裡可以頓然乾淨呢？然而頓悟的理，就是即事之理，不是二乘斷空的理；漸除的事，就是即理之事，不是凡夫執著有的事。頓悟就像冰之於水，漸除就像水之於冰，豈是截然不同的兩樣東西呢？所以善財童子已經發了無上菩提之心，而必須遍參五十三善知識。溈山禪師說，修行人雖然從因緣得到一念頓悟自性之理，還有無始以來的習氣未能頓然清凈，都是理悟事除，頓漸的說法。這十六個字，是千佛相傳的訓誡，萬世不易的宏大規矩。參學者應該盡心啊。 知有涅槃，不戀三界。 知道有涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅），就不會貪戀三界（Three Realms，欲界、色界、無色界）。 知有二（二，指兩種）
【English Translation】 English version: The 『Zhan』 (湛) character refers to the 『Zhan Liao Zhi Ti』 (湛了之體, the essence of clarity), just as the previous text said, using 『Zhan』 to revolve those illusions. It also says 『Fan Liu Quan Yi』 (反流全一, reversing the flow to return to oneness), and 『Fu Gui Yuan Zhen』 (伏歸元真, submitting and returning to the original truth), the meaning is exactly like this. But this 『Zhan』 is not True Thusness (Tathata, 真如), just like when looking at a rapid current, it seems calm, this is exactly the boundary of the Eighth Consciousness (Alaya-vijnana, 阿賴耶識). Also, as the previous text said, in the process of the Skandha of Formation (行陰), like waves disappearing and transforming into clear water, this water is not True Thusness, it is this 『Zhan』. This 『Zhan』 combined together is the realm of consciousness. And practitioners, just gaining a little ease, think they have attained the Way, let alone at this time, when the Four Skandhas (四陰) have already been extinguished, and only consciousness exists alone, wouldn't they happily think they have already attained Nirvana (涅槃)? How would they know that this 『Zhan』 is exactly the subtle root of birth and death. If this root is not completely eliminated, it will grow secretly, develop latently, from small to obvious, from subtle to huge, still transforming again into ants, starting over again as mosquitoes. One must clarify it again and again, purify it again and again, like a ten-thousand-foot clear pool, where the water and sky are one color, that is the news of arriving home! Being content with getting a little, how is that possible? 『Li Ze Dun Wu, Cheng Wu Bing Xiao; Shi Fei Dun Chu, Yin Ci Di Jin.』 This is what is called sudden enlightenment and gradual cultivation in Zen Buddhism. These four sentences, two meanings, are all that the previous sentence indicates the next sentence, repeating the explanation. Saying that the extinction of these Five Skandhas (五陰) has what can be suddenly enlightened, and what cannot be suddenly enlightened. What can be suddenly enlightened is principle (Li, 理), because principle has no two differences, it is people themselves who are confused about the source, so relying on this one enlightenment, merge and eliminate completely, with no remainder. Like holding a torch into a dark room, one light is completely bright, where is there any order? What cannot be suddenly eliminated is practice (Shi, 事), because practice has myriad differences, it is difficult to take care of everything, so from shallow to deep, gradually and completely. Like washing dirty clothes, washing repeatedly, gradually becoming clean, where can it be suddenly clean? However, the principle of sudden enlightenment is the principle of practice, not the principle of emptiness of the Two Vehicles (二乘); the practice of gradual elimination is the practice of principle, not the practice of attachment to existence of ordinary people. Sudden enlightenment is like ice to water, gradual elimination is like water to ice, how can they be two completely different things? Therefore, Sudhana (善財童子) has already developed the supreme Bodhi mind, and must visit fifty-three good advisors. Zen Master Weishan (溈山禪師) said that although practitioners obtain a moment of sudden enlightenment of the principle of self-nature from conditions, there are still beginningless habits that have not been suddenly purified, all are the sayings of principle enlightenment and practice elimination, sudden and gradual. These sixteen characters are the teachings passed down by thousands of Buddhas, the grand rules that will not change for ten thousand generations. Those who participate in learning should do their best. 『Zhi You Nirvana, Bu Lian San Jie.』 Knowing there is Nirvana (涅槃, extinction), one will not be attached to the Three Realms (三界, Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm). 『Zhi You Er』 (知有二, Knowing there are two)
義其一知者聞見之知也聞說涅槃為歸依處唸唸趨之何戀三界喻如窮子知有故鄉自不貪戀異鄉而欲久居之也其二知者了悟之知也已悟涅槃真樂在我何戀三界喻如窮子既返故鄉豈復追戀異鄉而欲更居之也今人口誦三界火宅之文而心實孳孳焉耽著不捨者不知有涅槃故也不患不出三界唯患不知涅槃知之時大矣哉。
能以一念將此法門于末劫中開示未學。
經言將此法門開示未學能使垂入阿鼻地獄者即成極樂凈邦供養恒沙如來者不及少分功德知解狂流一見此文生大我慢不復精進寧知佛之一言自利利他義實雙具今但知將此法門開示人之未學曾不知將此法門開示己之未學何其不明一至於是。
附諸經
△般若心經
般若心。
賢首疏云般若是法心是喻一說非喻云是般若智心二各有旨今依賢首良以心為百體之主而此經以少文攝般若之全義有心象故。
觀自在菩薩。
據施護譯是大士所說若然菩薩下應有言字今謂佛說為是什師奘師二譯皆可證。
是諸法空相。
空本無相欲人識空故於無相中特出其相言無有生滅垢凈增減者是空相也空相如是而無相之意益顯矣。
揭諦。
疏先云神咒秘密不翻次言亦可強翻因云梵語揭諦華言去也度也蓋揭諦二字合成梵語而其義
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 第一種知是聞見之知，聽到說涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫生死輪迴的境界）是歸宿之處，唸唸嚮往，為何還貪戀三界（Trailokya，佛教術語，指欲界、色界、無色界）？好比窮人知道有故鄉，自然不會貪戀異鄉而想長久居住。第二種知是了悟之知，已經領悟涅槃的真正快樂就在自身，為何還要貪戀三界？好比窮人已經返回故鄉，哪裡還會追戀異鄉而想再次居住？現在的人口中唸誦『三界火宅』的文章，而心中卻孜孜不倦地貪戀不捨，這是因為不知道有涅槃的緣故。不擔心不能出離三界，只擔心不知道涅槃，知曉涅槃的時刻太重要了。 能夠以一念之心將此法門在末劫（Deterioration，佛教術語，指佛法衰敗的時期）中開示給尚未學習的人。 經書上說，將此法門開示給尚未學習的人，能夠使即將墮入阿鼻地獄（Avici hell，佛教術語，八大地獄中最苦之處）的人立即成就極樂凈土，供養恒河沙數如來（Tathagata，佛教術語，佛的稱號之一）的功德也比不上開示此法門所獲功德的少分。知解的狂流一旦見到此文，便生起極大的我慢，不再精進，哪裡知道佛的一句話，自利利他的意義實在兼具。現在只知道將此法門開示給他人中尚未學習的人，卻不知道將此法門開示給自己中尚未學習的部分，這是多麼的不明白，以至於此。 附錄諸經 △般若心經 般若心（Prajna Heart，佛教術語，指般若智慧的核心）。 賢首疏解釋說，般若是法，心是比喻。另一種說法認為『心』不是比喻，而是指般若智慧的心。兩種說法各有旨趣，現在依從賢首的說法，是因為心是百體之主，而此經以簡短的文字概括了般若的全部意義，具有心的象徵。 觀自在菩薩（Avalokitesvara，佛教術語，觀世音菩薩的另一種稱謂）。 根據施護的譯本，這是大士所說。如果是這樣，『菩薩』下應該有『言』字。現在認為是佛所說才是正確的，鳩摩羅什法師和玄奘法師的兩種譯本都可以證明。 是諸法空相。 空本來沒有相狀，爲了使人認識空，所以在無相之中特別指出它的相狀，說『無有生滅垢凈增減』，這就是空的相狀。空的相狀是這樣，而無相的意義更加明顯了。 揭諦（Gate，梵語，意為去）。 疏中先說神咒秘密不可翻譯，接著說也可以勉強翻譯，因此說梵語『揭諦』在漢語中是『去』或『度』的意思。大概『揭諦』二字是合成的梵語，而它的意義...
【English Translation】 English version The first kind of knowledge is the knowledge of hearing and seeing. Hearing that Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term, referring to the state of liberation from the cycle of birth and death) is the place to return to, one constantly yearns for it. Why still be attached to the Three Realms (Trailokya, a Buddhist term, referring to the Desire Realm, the Form Realm, and the Formless Realm)? It is like a poor man knowing he has a hometown, naturally he will not covet a foreign land and want to live there for a long time. The second kind of knowledge is the knowledge of enlightenment. Having realized that the true joy of Nirvana is within oneself, why still be attached to the Three Realms? It is like a poor man having returned to his hometown, how could he still yearn for a foreign land and want to live there again? People today recite the text of the 'Burning House of the Three Realms' (referring to the impermanence and suffering of the world), but in their hearts, they are diligently attached and unwilling to let go. This is because they do not know that there is Nirvana. They are not worried about not being able to leave the Three Realms, but only worried about not knowing Nirvana. The moment of knowing Nirvana is extremely important. To be able to use a single thought to reveal this Dharma (Dharma, Buddhist term, meaning the teachings of the Buddha) in the Age of Degeneration (Deterioration, a Buddhist term, referring to the period when the Buddha's teachings decline) to those who have not yet learned. The scriptures say that revealing this Dharma to those who have not yet learned can enable those who are about to fall into Avici Hell (Avici hell, a Buddhist term, the most painful place in the Eight Great Hells) to immediately achieve the Pure Land of Ultimate Bliss. The merit of making offerings to countless Tathagatas (Tathagata, a Buddhist term, one of the titles of the Buddha) is not even a small fraction of the merit gained from revealing this Dharma. The torrent of intellectual understanding, once it sees this text, will give rise to great arrogance and no longer strive diligently. How can they know that a single word of the Buddha has the meaning of benefiting both oneself and others? Now they only know to reveal this Dharma to those among others who have not yet learned, but they do not know to reveal this Dharma to the part of themselves that has not yet learned. How unclear is this, to the point of this! Attached Scriptures △ Heart Sutra Prajna Heart (Prajna Heart, a Buddhist term, referring to the core of Prajna wisdom). The commentary by Master Xianshou explains that Prajna is the Dharma, and 'heart' is a metaphor. Another explanation is that 'heart' is not a metaphor, but refers to the heart of Prajna wisdom. Both explanations have their own merits. Now we follow Master Xianshou's explanation because the heart is the master of the hundred bodies, and this sutra summarizes the entire meaning of Prajna in concise words, having the symbolism of the heart. Avalokitesvara (Avalokitesvara, a Buddhist term, another name for Guanshiyin Bodhisattva). According to the translation by Dharmaraksha, this was spoken by the Great Bodhisattva. If this is the case, the word 'said' should be after 'Bodhisattva'. Now it is believed that it is correct that the Buddha spoke it, as evidenced by the two translations of Kumarajiva and Xuanzang. These dharmas are characterized by emptiness. Emptiness originally has no characteristics. In order to make people recognize emptiness, its characteristics are specifically pointed out in the midst of no characteristics, saying 'there is no birth, no death, no defilement, no purity, no increase, no decrease'. This is the characteristic of emptiness. The characteristic of emptiness is like this, and the meaning of no characteristics is even more evident. Gate (Gate, Sanskrit, meaning to go). The commentary first says that the mantra is secret and cannot be translated, then says that it can be reluctantly translated, therefore saying that the Sanskrit word 'Gate' in Chinese means 'to go' or 'to cross over'. Probably the two words 'Gate' are a compound Sanskrit word, and its meaning...
則為去為度非以去訓揭而謂揭去惑障也夫既曰強翻強之為言不得已而然非出乎自然也曷若已之。
△圓覺經
知是空華即無輪轉亦無身心受彼生死(云云)彼知覺者猶如虛空知虛空者即空華相亦不可說無知覺性。
疏中知是二句無生死之法亦無二句無免輪迴之人彼知二句拂觀智知虛二句泯拂心亦不二句遮斷滅其說甚精萬世不可易者一說知是空華便脫輪迴有何人法彼知覺者是我真性猶如虛空起心知空乃是空華如是任意而說亦似省便但以經文照應體貼上云知是空華次云彼知覺者次云知虛空者次云亦不可說無知覺性末復結云如來藏中無知見故以五知字前後融貫讀之方知疏之不茍。
種種取捨皆是輪迴。
圭峰以忻彼極樂為取厭此娑婆為舍蓋為上根遣著而執之者遂生疑障不願往生然今人止據圭峰略疏未見諸家詮釋苕水云經言始終等相舉世間法皆然只如一人之身始終生滅或前有後無或前無後有四大之聚散心識之起止煩惑相續苦報循環種種境界或取或舍非指取極樂舍娑婆也鄣南云取捨約道業言圭峰何意以舍穢取凈銷經耶愚按此言種種取捨下文彌勒章中即問輪迴有幾種性而佛答以種種貪慾故有輪迴其種種字前後相應則取捨乃重有貪慾欲順則取欲違則舍取捨不休所謂煩惑相續也豈以往生凈土為貪慾乎或
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說『去』是用來訓釋『揭』的，那麼就意味著『揭』是去除迷惑和障礙。如果已經說是『強翻』，那麼『強』這個說法就表示不得已而為之，並非出於自然。又何必如此呢？
△《圓覺經》
『知是空華，即無輪轉，亦無身心，受彼生死』（等等）。『彼知覺者，猶如虛空，知虛空者，即空華相，亦不可說無知覺性』。
疏中『知是』二句，說的是沒有生死之法；『亦無』二句，說的是沒有免除輪迴之人。『彼知』二句，是拂去觀智；『知虛』二句，是泯滅心識；『亦不』二句，是遮斷斷滅之說。這樣的解釋非常精妙，萬世不可更改。有一種說法是，『知是空華』便能脫離輪迴，有什麼人和法可以做到呢？『彼知覺者』是我的真性，猶如虛空，起心去知虛空，那就是空華。像這樣隨意而說，似乎很簡便，但如果用經文來對照，體會上下文，上面說『知是空華』，接著說『彼知覺者』，又說『知虛空者』，最後說『亦不可說無知覺性』，最後又總結說『如來藏（Tathagatagarbha）中無知見故』。把這五個『知』字前後貫通地讀，才能知道疏的解釋並非隨意而為。
種種取捨皆是輪迴。
圭峰（Guifeng）認為欣慕極樂世界（Sukhavati）是『取』，厭惡此娑婆世界（Saha）是『舍』，這大概是爲了讓上根之人去除執著，但執著的人因此產生疑惑和障礙，不願往生。然而現在的人只根據圭峰的略疏，沒有看到其他各家的詮釋。苕水（Tiaoshui）說，經中說始終等相，世間法都是這樣，就像一個人的身體，始終生滅，或者前有後無，或者前無後有，四大（catvari mahabhutani）的聚散，心識的起止，煩惱迷惑相續，苦報循環，種種境界，或取或舍，並非指取極樂舍娑婆。鄣南（Zhangnan）說，取捨是就道業而言。圭峰為什麼要用捨棄污穢、取求清凈來消解經文呢？我認為，這裡說的種種取捨，在下文彌勒（Maitreya）章中，彌勒菩薩（Maitreya Bodhisattva）就問輪迴有幾種性，而佛陀（Buddha）回答說因為種種貪慾故有輪迴。這個『種種』二字前後呼應，那麼取捨就是因為有貪慾，想要順從就取，想要違背就舍，取捨不休，這就是所謂的煩惱迷惑相續。難道以往生凈土為貪慾嗎？或者
【English Translation】 English version: If 'to remove' is used to explain 'to reveal', then it means 'to reveal' is to remove delusion and obstacles. If it is already said to be a 'forced translation', then the term 'forced' indicates that it is done out of necessity and not naturally. Why bother doing that?
△ The Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment (Yuanjue Jing)
'Knowing that it is an empty flower, there is no turning of the wheel, nor is there body and mind, receiving their birth and death' (etc.). 'That knower is like empty space, and the knower of empty space is the appearance of an empty flower, and it cannot be said that there is no knowing nature.'
In the commentary, the two sentences 'Knowing that it is' mean that there is no dharma of birth and death; the two sentences 'nor is there' mean that there is no one who can escape reincarnation. The two sentences 'That knower' brush away the wisdom of observation; the two sentences 'knower of empty' obliterate consciousness; the two sentences 'and it cannot' block the theory of annihilation. This explanation is very subtle and cannot be changed for ten thousand generations. One saying is that 'Knowing that it is an empty flower' can escape reincarnation. What person or dharma can do this? 'That knower' is my true nature, like empty space. To arise the mind to know empty space is an empty flower. To speak arbitrarily like this seems convenient, but if you compare it with the sutra text and understand the context, above it says 'Knowing that it is an empty flower', then it says 'That knower', and then it says 'knower of empty space', and finally it says 'and it cannot be said that there is no knowing nature', and finally it concludes that 'because there is no knowledge in the Tathagatagarbha'. Only by reading these five 'knowing' characters from beginning to end can one know that the commentary is not arbitrary.
All kinds of taking and rejecting are reincarnation.
Guifeng believes that admiring the Pure Land (Sukhavati) is 'taking', and disliking this Saha world is 'rejecting'. This is probably to remove the attachment of those with superior roots, but those who are attached to it thus generate doubts and obstacles and are unwilling to be reborn there. However, people today only rely on Guifeng's brief commentary and have not seen the interpretations of other schools. Tiaoshui said that the sutra says that the beginning and end are equal, and all worldly dharmas are like this. Just like a person's body, it is born and dies from beginning to end, or there is a beginning and no end, or there is no beginning and an end, the gathering and scattering of the four great elements (catvari mahabhutani), the arising and ceasing of consciousness, the continuous afflictions and delusions, the cycle of suffering and retribution, all kinds of realms, either taking or rejecting, do not refer to taking the Pure Land and rejecting the Saha world. Zhangnan said that taking and rejecting are in terms of the path of practice. Why does Guifeng use abandoning the impure and seeking purity to dissolve the sutra? I think that the various taking and rejecting mentioned here, in the following Maitreya chapter, Maitreya Bodhisattva asks how many natures there are in reincarnation, and the Buddha answers that there is reincarnation because of various desires. The word 'various' corresponds to each other from beginning to end, so taking and rejecting are because of desire. If you want to follow it, you take it; if you want to go against it, you reject it. Taking and rejecting do not stop, which is the so-called continuous afflictions and delusions. Is being reborn in the Pure Land a desire? Or
疑慕羨彼土而愿往生寧非貪慾不知求仁求其在我尚謂欲而不貪凈土凈其自心何得名為貪慾故下文所開貪慾初云貪者謂樂五欲次云貪者謂樂十善次云貪者謂樂四禪八定曾不言樂凈土為貪慾也如必盡理而言樂求圓覺亦貪慾也豈獨凈土乎須玩疏云又于根身器界厭此忻彼又之一字是正解經文已竟而發其餘意耳非專指凈土也故特會苕鄣二師之說而詳辨之。
但諸聲聞所圓境界身心語言皆悉斷滅終不能至彼之親證所現涅槃何況能以有思惟心測度如來圓覺境界。
但諸聲聞者言無論如來大道但諸聲聞修習所圓滿之境界其身心語言縱皆斷滅終不能至彼親證所顯現之涅槃夫無心尚不能至小乘之涅槃況有心乃能入如來之圓覺乎以理反覆較量而知其必不然矣或疑身心等既已斷滅正謂涅槃何云不至又既曰聲聞則聲聞涅槃乃其本分中事何云不至此之文義稍難銷會今詳彼之身心雖云已滅若作是念我今能滅身心已證涅槃即不名證故金剛經雲實無有法名阿羅漢若作是念我得阿羅漢道即著我人眾生壽者彼經無得此經不至意正同也言親證者謂身親證之也自心取自心非幻成幻法豈有自身至自身所證之涅槃乎且涅槃何物其住何所而欲至之譬如虛空有人于中竭力馳走欲至空之極處而為親證窮歷十方備經多劫終不能至亦猶是耳一說聲聞不能至佛之涅槃如
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：懷疑羨慕西方極樂世界而希望往生，難道不是貪慾嗎？如果知道追求仁德，應該向自身求取，還說這是貪慾，那就不對了。如果說嚮往凈土就是貪慾，那麼凈化自己的內心又怎麼能稱之為貪慾呢？所以下文所說的貪慾，一開始說『貪者，謂樂五欲』，接著說『貪者，謂樂十善』，又說『貪者，謂樂四禪八定』，從來沒有說過嚮往凈土是貪慾。如果一定要按照這個道理來說，那麼喜歡追求圓覺也是貪慾了，難道僅僅是凈土嗎？需要仔細玩味疏文所說的『又于根身器界，厭此忻彼』，這個『又』字，是正確解釋經文之後，才發出的其餘意思，並非專門指凈土。所以特別會合苕溪和鄣安二位法師的說法，而詳細辨析。
但是，所有聲聞乘所圓滿的境界，他們的身、心、語言都完全斷滅，最終也不能到達西方極樂世界親自證悟所顯現的涅槃境界，更何況能夠用有思有慮的心去揣測如來的圓覺境界呢？
這裡說的『但諸聲聞者』，是說無論如來的大道如何，但那些聲聞乘修行者，他們修習所圓滿的境界，即使他們的身、心、語言都斷滅了，最終也不能到達西方極樂世界親自證悟所顯現的涅槃。沒有心尚且不能到達小乘的涅槃，更何況有心，又怎麼能進入如來的圓覺境界呢？用道理反覆衡量比較，就知道必定不是這樣的。或許有人會懷疑，身心等既然已經斷滅，這正是涅槃的境界，為什麼說不能到達呢？又說既然是聲聞乘，那麼聲聞乘的涅槃應該是他們本分內的事情，為什麼說不能到達呢？這段文字的含義稍微難以理解。現在詳細解釋，他們的身心雖然說是已經滅了，但如果作這樣的念頭：『我現在能夠滅掉身心，已經證得涅槃』，這就不能算是證得了。所以《金剛經》說：『實無有法名阿羅漢』，如果作這樣的念頭：『我得到了阿羅漢道』，那就著了『我、人、眾生、壽者』四相。《金剛經》說『無得』，這部經說『不至』，意思是一樣的。『親證』，是指自身親自證悟。用自己的心去取自己的心，用虛幻的法成就虛幻的法，哪裡有自身到達自身所證悟的涅槃呢？而且涅槃是什麼東西？它住在什麼地方？想要到達它？這就像虛空中有人在裡面竭力奔跑，想要到達天空的盡頭，並且親自證悟，窮盡十方，經歷無數劫，最終也不能到達，也是這樣的。另一種說法是，聲聞乘不能到達佛的涅槃，就像……
【English Translation】 English version: Doubting and envying that Pure Land and wishing to be reborn there, isn't that greed? If one knows to seek benevolence, one should seek it within oneself. To say that this is greed is incorrect. If longing for the Pure Land is considered greed, then how can purifying one's own mind not be called greed? Therefore, the text below, when discussing greed, initially states, 'Greed is the enjoyment of the five desires,' then 'Greed is the enjoyment of the ten virtues,' and further, 'Greed is the enjoyment of the four dhyanas and eight samadhis.' It never mentions that longing for the Pure Land is greed. If one must follow this logic, then enjoying the pursuit of Perfect Enlightenment (Yuanjue) is also greed. Is it only the Pure Land? One needs to carefully contemplate the commentary that says, 'Furthermore, regarding the roots, body, environment, disliking this and rejoicing in that.' This 'furthermore' is an additional meaning expressed after correctly interpreting the sutra, not specifically referring to the Pure Land. Therefore, I especially combine the teachings of Masters Tiaoxi (苕溪) and Zhang'an (鄣安) and analyze them in detail.
However, all the realms perfected by the Shravakas (聲聞, Hearers), their body, mind, and speech are completely extinguished, and they ultimately cannot reach the Nirvana (涅槃) manifested by personal realization in that Pure Land. How much less can they fathom the Perfect Enlightenment realm of the Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) with a mind of thought?
The phrase 'But all Shravakas' means regardless of the Great Way of the Tathagata, the realms perfected by those Shravaka practitioners, even if their body, mind, and speech are extinguished, they ultimately cannot reach the Nirvana manifested by personal realization in that Pure Land. If one without mind cannot reach the Nirvana of the Small Vehicle, how much less can one with mind enter the Perfect Enlightenment realm of the Tathagata? By repeatedly weighing and comparing with reason, one knows that it is certainly not so. Perhaps someone may doubt, since the body and mind have already been extinguished, isn't that precisely Nirvana? Why say they cannot reach it? And since it is said to be Shravakas, then the Nirvana of the Shravakas should be their inherent matter, why say they cannot reach it? The meaning of this passage is slightly difficult to understand. Now, I will explain in detail: although their body and mind are said to be extinguished, if they have the thought, 'I can now extinguish my body and mind and have attained Nirvana,' then this cannot be considered attainment. Therefore, the Diamond Sutra (金剛經) says, 'In reality, there is no dharma called Arhat (阿羅漢, one who is worthy).' If they have the thought, 'I have attained the Arhat path,' then they are attached to the four marks of 'self, person, sentient being, and lifespan.' The Diamond Sutra says 'no attainment,' and this sutra says 'cannot reach,' the meaning is the same. 'Personal realization' refers to personally realizing it oneself. Using one's own mind to grasp one's own mind, using illusory dharmas to achieve illusory dharmas, how can there be oneself reaching the Nirvana realized by oneself? Moreover, what is Nirvana? Where does it reside? And wanting to reach it? It is like someone running with all their might in the void, wanting to reach the end of the sky and personally realize it, exhausting the ten directions, experiencing countless kalpas (劫, eons), and ultimately not being able to reach it, it is the same. Another explanation is that Shravakas cannot reach the Nirvana of the Buddha, just like...
果指佛不合云彼彼之親證是聲聞所親證也妄得云佛一說金剛藏不能至聲聞之涅槃如果指剛藏則所圓境界下當云汝今身心語言皆悉斷滅方可不然是何人身心斷滅又須於終不能至處文便畢方可不然後語重前不成文理請從但諸聲聞一氣讀至所現涅槃自知上下語意血脈貫穿明指聲聞何得扭捏而云剛藏且初心菩薩猶可謂心雖廣大趨寂證果未至聲聞而剛藏何如人哉是十地位或等覺流文殊普賢之等侶也不應劣之反贊小乘為大菩薩所不能至故宜專就聲聞于理極當疏中以百官宰相庶民天子巧為比喻精確明快無勞異說矣。
一切眾生皆證圓覺。
圭峰謂此譯人之訛當云證諸眾生皆有圓覺真凈罵斥謂眾生若止有圓覺而不證者畜生常為畜生人亦不須求解脫矣古今相承咸病圭峰然圭峰亦自有見蓋經文若云一切眾生能證圓覺而圭峰以為訛則其說誠謬今經文語局意圓其意實謂一切眾生皆有證圓覺分非謂眾生見前悉已證圓覺也圭峰恐狂人據此便擬安坐成佛則上文所云勒斷二障二障永滅即入如來微妙圓覺者果何為哉其真凈罵斥亦自有見亦恐狂人由此擅以己意竄易經文也然則真凈不罵圭峰圭峰不改圓覺兩得之矣不然自知心是佛心定當作佛圭峰何以有是語。
非性性有。
圓覺本非諸性而諸性必有圓覺喻如金體本非釵釧鉼镮而釵釧鉼
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 如果說『果』指的是佛，那麼說『彼彼之親證』是聲聞所親證的就不合適了。如果妄自認為佛一說『金剛藏』就不能達到聲聞的涅槃，如果說指的是『剛藏』，那麼在『所圓境界』下就應當說『你現在身心語言都全部斷滅』才可以。不然，是誰的身心斷滅了呢？又必須在『終不能至處』文句結束才可以，不然後面的話就和前面的不合，不成文理。請從『但諸聲聞』一口氣讀到『所現涅槃』，自然知道上下語句的意義血脈貫穿，明明指的是聲聞，為什麼還要扭捏地說『剛藏』呢？況且，初發心的菩薩還可以說心雖然廣大，但趨向寂滅證果還沒有達到聲聞的境界，而『剛藏』又是什麼樣的人呢？是十地位或者等覺的同伴，是文殊、普賢等等的同伴啊！不應該貶低他們，反而讚揚小乘是連大菩薩都不能達到的境界。所以應該專門就聲聞來說，在道理上非常恰當。疏中用百官、宰相、庶民、天子來巧妙地作比喻，精確明快，不需要其他的說法了。
一切眾生皆證圓覺。（一切眾生都證得了圓滿覺悟的本性）
圭峰說這是翻譯的人的錯誤，應當翻譯成『證諸眾生皆有圓覺』（證明一切眾生都具有圓滿覺悟的本性）。真凈罵斥說，如果眾生只是有圓覺而不證得，那麼畜生就永遠是畜生，人也不需要求解脫了。古今相承都認為圭峰的說法是錯誤的。然而圭峰也有自己的見解，因為經文如果說『一切眾生能證圓覺』，而圭峰認為這是錯誤，那麼他的說法確實是錯誤的。現在經文語句簡略而意義圓滿，它的意思實際上是說一切眾生都具有證得圓覺的『分』（可能性），而不是說眾生現在都已經證得了圓覺。圭峰是擔心狂妄的人根據這句話就打算安坐成佛，那麼上文所說的『勒斷二障，二障永滅，即入如來微妙圓覺』又算什麼呢？真凈的罵斥也有自己的見解，也是擔心狂妄的人因此擅自用自己的意思竄改經文。既然這樣，真凈不罵圭峰，圭峰不改圓覺，兩方面都說得通了。不然，如果自認為心是佛，心一定當作佛，圭峰怎麼會有這種說法呢？
非性性有。（圓覺不是諸法的自性，但諸法的自性中都具有圓覺）
圓覺本來不是諸法的自性，而諸法的自性中必定有圓覺，比喻就像金子的本體本來不是釵、釧、鉼、镮（各種金飾），而釵、釧、鉼、
【English Translation】 English version: If 『果』 (Guo, the result) refers to the Buddha, then it is inappropriate to say that 『彼彼之親證』 (bǐ bǐ zhī qīn zhèng, the personal realization of those) is what the Śrāvakas (聲聞, disciples who hear the teachings) personally realize. If one presumptuously thinks that once the Buddha speaks of 『金剛藏』 (Jīngāngzàng, Vajragarbha, the Diamond Womb), one cannot reach the Nirvāṇa (涅槃, liberation) of the Śrāvakas, and if it refers to 『剛藏』 (Gāngzàng), then under 『所圓境界』 (suǒ yuán jìngjiè, the perfected realm) it should be said 『Your body, mind, and speech are now completely extinguished』 to be correct. Otherwise, whose body and mind are extinguished? And it must end at the sentence 『終不能至處』 (zhōng bù néng zhì chù, the place that cannot be reached), otherwise the later words will contradict the former, making the text incoherent. Please read from 『但諸聲聞』 (dàn zhū shēngwén, but all the Śrāvakas) to 『所現涅槃』 (suǒ xiàn nièpán, the manifested Nirvāṇa) in one breath, and you will naturally know that the meaning of the upper and lower sentences is consistent, clearly referring to the Śrāvakas. Why twist it and say 『剛藏』 (Gāngzàng)? Moreover, it can be said that the Bodhisattva (菩薩, enlightened being) who has just set out has a vast mind, but the tendency towards tranquility and the realization of the fruit have not yet reached the realm of the Śrāvakas. But what kind of person is 『剛藏』 (Gāngzàng)? They are companions of the Ten Grounds (十地位, shí dìwèi) or Equal Enlightenment (等覺, děng jué), companions of Mañjuśrī (文殊, Wénshū) and Samantabhadra (普賢, Pǔxián)! One should not demean them and instead praise the Hīnayāna (小乘, xiǎochéng, lesser vehicle) as a realm that even great Bodhisattvas cannot reach. Therefore, it is most appropriate to focus specifically on the Śrāvakas in terms of reason. The commentary uses officials, prime ministers, commoners, and the Son of Heaven as clever metaphors, which are precise and clear, and there is no need for other explanations.
All sentient beings realize perfect enlightenment.
Guifeng (圭峰, a commentator) said that this is a mistake by the translator and should be translated as 『證諸眾生皆有圓覺』 (zhèng zhū zhòngshēng jiē yǒu yuán jué, proving that all sentient beings have perfect enlightenment). Zhenjing (真凈, a commentator) scolded, saying that if sentient beings only have perfect enlightenment but do not realize it, then animals will always be animals, and people will not need to seek liberation. It has been passed down through the ages that Guifeng's statement is wrong. However, Guifeng also has his own views, because if the scripture says 『一切眾生能證圓覺』 (yīqiè zhòngshēng néng zhèng yuán jué, all sentient beings can realize perfect enlightenment), and Guifeng thinks this is wrong, then his statement is indeed wrong. Now the scripture's wording is concise and the meaning is complete. Its meaning is actually that all sentient beings have a 『分』 (fēn, share/potential) to realize perfect enlightenment, not that sentient beings have already realized perfect enlightenment. Guifeng is worried that madmen will use this as a basis to sit down and become Buddhas, then what about the 『勒斷二障，二障永滅，即入如來微妙圓覺』 (lè duàn èrzhàng, èrzhàng yǒng miè, jí rù rúlái wēimiào yuán jué, suppressing the two obstacles, the two obstacles are forever extinguished, and then entering the Tathāgata's (如來, Rúlái, Thus Come One) subtle and perfect enlightenment) mentioned above? Zhenjing's scolding also has his own views, also worried that madmen will take this opportunity to arbitrarily change the scripture according to their own ideas. Since this is the case, Zhenjing does not scold Guifeng, and Guifeng does not change perfect enlightenment, and both sides make sense. Otherwise, if one thinks that one's mind is the Buddha, and one's mind will definitely become the Buddha, how could Guifeng have such a statement?
非性性有 (fēi xìng xìng yǒu, not the nature of nature, but nature has nature). (Perfect enlightenment is not the nature of all dharmas, but the nature of all dharmas has perfect enlightenment)
Perfect enlightenment is originally not the nature of all dharmas, but the nature of all dharmas must have perfect enlightenment. The metaphor is like the essence of gold is originally not hairpins, bracelets, ingots, or rings (various gold ornaments), but hairpins, bracelets, ingots,
镮必有金體也不必更為異說。
諸戒定慧及淫怒癡俱是梵行。
三毒本空即是法性如堅冰本空即是澄水故淫怒癡與戒定慧同名梵行非謂見前淫怒癡便是梵行可安意為之也任運三毒之場逍遙成佛是謂腰纏騎鶴豈不美哉而寧有是理乎故此文唯如來隨順覺性中有之上文凡夫隨順未入地菩薩隨順已入地菩薩隨順曾有此文否又凡夫文中但教永斷勞慮又後文云但當精勤降伏煩惱淫怒癡既是梵行則勞慮煩惱自應任之何須更要永斷更要降伏。
云何人相謂諸眾生心悟證者善男子悟有我者不復認我所悟非我悟亦如是悟已起過一切證者悉為人相。
心悟證者一句總標言證是我悟此證者是人也下乃申明其義言何故悟證者名人悟證是我自不認我所悟之證既非我則能悟者亦非我矣如是則悟已超過一切證者非人相而何一切證恐泛說為是以證有能所及淺深也疏云絕能悟之累夫人相正屬悟處今非絕悟絕其為悟之累者我相是也。
無令求悟惟益多聞。
圭峰謂無人教其求悟惟崇尚多聞而已慈室云無令者禁止辭也戒以心待悟也二說俱通今細玩之據上文心存少悟皆是我相則禁止之義長據問中開悟法性頌中若能歸悟剎則無人教令之義勝以前後悟字不妨文同而意異故故從圭峰。
△法華經
迦樓羅王。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 镮（huán，指環）必定有金的本體，不必再有其他的說法。
諸戒（shìla，佛教的戒律）、定（samādhi，禪定）、慧（prajñā，智慧）以及淫（kāma，性慾）、怒（krodha，憤怒）、癡（moha，愚癡）都是梵行（brahmacarya，清凈的行為）。
三毒（指貪、嗔、癡）本來就是空性，也就是法性（dharmatā，事物的本性），就像堅硬的冰本來就是空性，也就是清澈的水。所以淫、怒、癡與戒、定、慧同樣可以稱為梵行。但這並不是說眼前的淫、怒、癡就是梵行，可以隨意放縱。如果認為可以順應三毒的場所，逍遙自在地成佛，這就像腰纏萬貫騎著仙鶴，難道會有這樣的道理嗎？所以這段文字只是如來（tathāgata，佛的稱號）隨順覺性（bodhi，覺悟的本性）中的說法。上文是凡夫隨順，未入地的菩薩隨順，已入地的菩薩隨順，曾有這樣的說法嗎？而且凡夫的文字中只是教導永遠斷除勞慮，後面的文字又說只要精勤降伏煩惱。如果淫、怒、癡是梵行，那麼勞慮煩惱自然應該順其自然，何須還要永遠斷除，還要降伏呢？
什麼是人相（pudgala-saṃjñā，眾生相）？就是指那些心中覺悟證得的眾生。善男子，如果覺悟到有『我』（ātman，自我）的存在，就不再認為『我所』（mamata，屬於我的事物）存在。覺悟到『非我』（anātman，無我）也是如此。覺悟之後，超越一切證得的境界，都是人相。
『心悟證者』一句總括說明證得的是『我』的覺悟，這個證得者就是人。下面是進一步闡明它的含義，為什麼覺悟證得者被稱為人？覺悟證得的是『我』，自己卻不認為『我所』證得的是『我』，既然證得的不是『我』，那麼能覺悟的也不是『我』了。這樣，覺悟之後，就超越了一切證得的境界，不是人相又是什麼呢？『一切證』恐怕泛指，所以說證得有能所及淺深。疏中說，斷絕能悟的累贅，夫人相正屬於悟處，現在不是斷絕悟，而是斷絕作為悟的累贅，『我相』就是這樣。
不要讓人去追求覺悟，只會增加多聞。
圭峰（宗密，唐代高僧）認為沒有人教導他們去追求覺悟，只是崇尚多聞而已。慈室（僧人名號）說，『無令』是禁止的詞語，告誡要用心等待覺悟。兩種說法都說得通。現在仔細玩味，根據上文，心中存有少許覺悟，都是『我相』，那麼禁止的意義更長。根據問中開悟法性頌中，如果能夠歸於覺悟的剎那，那麼就沒有人教令的意義更勝。以前後的『悟』字不妨礙文字相同而意義不同，所以遵循圭峰的說法。
△《法華經》（Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra）
迦樓羅王（garuḍa-rāja，金翅鳥王）。
【English Translation】 English version A ring (huán) must have a gold body; there is no need for further different explanations.
All precepts (śīla, Buddhist precepts), concentration (samādhi, meditation), wisdom (prajñā, insight), as well as lust (kāma, sexual desire), anger (krodha, wrath), and delusion (moha, ignorance) are all pure conduct (brahmacarya, pure practice).
The three poisons (referring to greed, hatred, and delusion) are inherently emptiness, which is the Dharma-nature (dharmatā, the nature of things), just as solid ice is inherently emptiness, which is clear water. Therefore, lust, anger, and delusion can be called pure conduct in the same way as precepts, concentration, and wisdom. However, this does not mean that the lust, anger, and delusion before our eyes are pure conduct and can be indulged in at will. If one thinks that one can go along with the realm of the three poisons and attain Buddhahood freely, it would be like riding a crane with a fortune tied around one's waist. Could there be such a reason? Therefore, this passage is only a statement of the Tathāgata (title of the Buddha) following the awakened nature (bodhi, nature of enlightenment). The previous text is about ordinary people following, Bodhisattvas who have not entered the grounds following, and Bodhisattvas who have entered the grounds following. Has there ever been such a statement? Moreover, the text for ordinary people only teaches to permanently cut off worries and anxieties, and the later text says that one should diligently subdue afflictions. If lust, anger, and delusion are pure conduct, then worries and anxieties should naturally be allowed to take their course. Why is it necessary to permanently cut them off and subdue them?
What is the perception of a person (pudgala-saṃjñā, the perception of a being)? It refers to those sentient beings who have awakened and realized in their minds. Good son, if one realizes that there is a 'self' (ātman, ego), one no longer believes that 'what belongs to me' (mamata, things that belong to me) exists. Realizing 'no-self' (anātman, non-self) is also the same. After awakening, surpassing all attained states, all are the perception of a person.
The phrase 'mind awakened and realized' summarizes that what is realized is the awakening of 'I', and this realizer is a person. The following is a further explanation of its meaning. Why is the one who awakens and realizes called a person? The one who awakens and realizes is 'I', but one does not recognize that what 'I' realizes is 'I'. Since what is realized is not 'I', then the one who can awaken is also not 'I'. In this way, after awakening, one surpasses all attained states. What else is it if not the perception of a person? 'All attainments' is feared to be a general term, so it is said that attainment has ability and place, as well as shallowness and depth. The commentary says that cutting off the burden of being able to awaken, the perception of a person rightly belongs to the place of awakening. Now it is not cutting off awakening, but cutting off the burden of being awakening. The 'self-perception' is like this.
Do not let people seek enlightenment, it will only increase learning.
Guifeng (Zongmi, a prominent monk of the Tang Dynasty) believes that no one teaches them to seek enlightenment, but only advocates learning. Cishi (monk's name) said that 'do not let' is a prohibitive word, warning to wait for enlightenment with the mind. Both statements make sense. Now, upon careful consideration, according to the previous text, having a little enlightenment in the mind is all 'self-perception', then the meaning of prohibition is longer. According to the verse on opening enlightenment and Dharma-nature in the question, if one can return to the moment of enlightenment, then the meaning of no one teaching is more superior. The previous and subsequent 'enlightenment' characters do not hinder the text from being the same but the meaning is different, so follow Guifeng's statement.
△ Lotus Sutra (Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra)
Garuda King (garuḍa-rāja, King of the Golden-Winged Birds).
梵語迦樓此云金翅文句言世書以金翅為大鵬大鵬一名鳳凰鳳凰唯食竹實不食生物金翅啖龍故知非鵬金翅非鵬文句之論明矣未辨鵬之非鳳也鵬亦曰朋即古鳳字字雖同而鵬實非麒麟鳳凰之鳳也舜典所載文紀所稱有若所舉以及諸書凡言鳳者並非是鵬鵬鳳自二鳥耳且鳳身高不過仞故能儀虞廷鳴岐山棲梧桐若大鵬則莊生謂翼如垂天之云齊諧謂于扶搖而上九萬里豈虞之廷岐之山梧桐之樹所能容乎鵬既非鳳則以比金翅不必啖龍與不食生物為別但較形之大小其義自顯經云金翅兩翼相去三百六十萬里則何止垂天之云奮翼而飛百千萬億無數由旬尚不足恣其翱翔又何止九萬里而已哉。
若人散亂心入于塔廟中一稱南無佛皆已成佛道。
初雲散心次云一稱散則不專一則不久不專不久胡遽成佛有說雖止一稱由其懇切故少勝多如張善和臨終十念之類是也其說亦是然非經旨況既云懇切何名散心當知此處全重悟解一乘自性故散心尚爾況至心者一稱尚爾況久稱者圓機入道與不圓人日劫相倍正此意也又此乃正作何言已成蓋有二義就事則往昔劫中如是稱佛之人皆已成佛就理則才舉口時成佛已竟何待三祇熏煉抑豈有佛新成者哉。
若草木及茟。
此茟字人多作筆硯之筆訛也筆從竹茟從草彼音畢此音委茟者草木華始生也故曰若草木及茟文
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：梵語中，迦樓（Garuda）被稱為金翅鳥。文句中說，世俗的書籍將金翅鳥視為大鵬鳥。大鵬鳥又名鳳凰，鳳凰只吃竹子的果實，不吃有生命的生物。而金翅鳥吃龍，因此可知金翅鳥不是大鵬鳥。金翅鳥不是大鵬鳥，文句中的論述已經很清楚了。但還沒有辨明大鵬鳥不是鳳凰。大鵬鳥也寫作『朋』，就是古時候的『鳳』字。字雖然相同，但大鵬鳥實際上不是麒麟鳳凰的『鳳』。舜典所記載的，文紀所稱頌的，有若所舉薦的，以及各種書籍中凡是說到鳳凰的，都不是大鵬鳥。大鵬和鳳凰本來就是兩種不同的鳥。而且鳳凰的身高不超過八尺，所以才能在虞舜的朝廷上舞蹈，在岐山上鳴叫，棲息在梧桐樹上。如果換成大鵬鳥，莊子說它的翅膀像遮天蔽日的云，齊諧說它乘著旋風飛上九萬里高空，難道是虞舜的朝廷、岐山、梧桐樹所能容納的嗎？大鵬鳥既然不是鳳凰，那麼用它來比喻金翅鳥，就不必用吃龍與不吃生物來區分，只要比較形體的大小，意義自然就明顯了。《經》中說，金翅鳥兩翼相距三百六十萬里，那麼它振翅飛翔，何止像遮天蔽日的云？奮力飛翔百千萬億無數由旬（yojana，古印度長度單位），尚且不足以讓它自由翱翔，又何止九萬里而已呢。 如果有人在散亂的心態下進入佛塔或寺廟，只要唸一聲『南無佛』（Namo Buddha，皈依佛），就已經成就了佛道。 前面說『散心』，後面說『一稱』，散亂就是不專心，一聲就是時間不長。不專心，時間又短，怎麼能成就佛道呢？有人說，即使只念一聲，由於非常懇切，所以少勝於多，就像張善和臨終十念（指張善和臨終時念誦十聲佛號）之類的事例。這種說法也有道理，但不是經文的本意。況且既然說是懇切，又怎麼能說是散心呢？應當知道，這裡完全重視領悟一乘（Ekayana，唯一佛乘）自性，所以散亂的心態尚且如此，何況是至誠的心？一聲尚且如此，何況是長久地稱念？圓頓根機的人入道，與不圓頓根機的人相比，就像一天和一劫的差距一樣，正是這個意思。而且這裡明明說的是『已成』，這是什麼意思呢？大概有兩種含義：從事情上說，往昔劫中像這樣稱念佛名的人，都已經成佛；從理上說，才一張口，成佛就已經完成了，哪裡還需要經歷三大阿僧祇劫（asamkhya-kalpa，無數大劫）的熏修磨練？難道還有新成佛的佛嗎？ 如果（用於書寫的）草木和茟（bié）。 這裡的『茟』字，很多人都寫作筆硯的『筆』，這是錯誤的。『筆』字從竹，『茟』字從草，『彼』音『畢』，『此』音『委』。『茟』是指草木的花剛剛生長出來的時候。所以說『若草木及茟文』。
【English Translation】 English version: In Sanskrit, Garuda is called 'Jinchi' (金翅, golden-winged bird). The text states that secular books regard Garuda as the 'Dapeng' (大鵬, Roc). The Dapeng is also known as the Phoenix. The Phoenix only eats bamboo fruits and does not eat living beings. However, Garuda eats dragons, so it is known that Garuda is not a Dapeng. That Garuda is not a Dapeng is clear from the discussion in the text. However, it has not yet been clarified that the Dapeng is not a Phoenix. The Dapeng is also written as 'Peng' (朋), which is the ancient character for 'Feng' (鳳, Phoenix). Although the characters are the same, the Dapeng is actually not the 'Feng' of the Qilin (麒麟, Chinese unicorn) and Phoenix. What is recorded in the 'Shundian' (舜典, Canon of Shun), what is praised in the 'Wenji' (文紀), what You Ruo (有若, a disciple of Confucius) recommended, and all the Phoenixes mentioned in various books are not Dapengs. The Dapeng and the Phoenix are originally two different birds. Moreover, the height of the Phoenix does not exceed eight chi (尺, a unit of length), so it can dance in the court of Emperor Shun, sing on Mount Qi, and perch on the Wutong tree. If it were the Dapeng, Zhuangzi (莊子, a Daoist philosopher) said that its wings are like clouds hanging from the sky, and 'Qixie' (齊諧, a book) said that it rides the whirlwind and soars ninety thousand li (里, a unit of distance) high. Could the court of Emperor Shun, Mount Qi, or the Wutong tree accommodate it? Since the Dapeng is not a Phoenix, then using it to compare Garuda, there is no need to distinguish it by eating dragons or not eating living beings. Just compare the size of the forms, and the meaning will naturally be clear. The Sutra says that the distance between the two wings of Garuda is three hundred and sixty thousand li, so how can it only be like clouds hanging from the sky when it flaps its wings? Striving to fly hundreds of thousands of millions of countless yojanas (由旬, an ancient Indian unit of length) is not enough to let it soar freely, and it is more than just ninety thousand li. If a person enters a pagoda or temple with a distracted mind, just uttering 'Namo Buddha' (南無佛, Homage to the Buddha), they have already attained the path to Buddhahood. The previous statement says 'distracted mind,' and the following says 'one utterance.' Distraction means not being focused, and one utterance means a short time. If one is not focused and the time is short, how can one attain Buddhahood? Some say that even if one only utters it once, because it is very sincere, therefore less is better than more, like the example of Zhang Shanhe (張善和) reciting ten times at the time of death (referring to Zhang Shanhe reciting the Buddha's name ten times at the time of death). This statement also makes sense, but it is not the original intention of the Sutra. Moreover, since it is said to be sincere, how can it be said to be a distracted mind? It should be known that this completely emphasizes understanding the self-nature of the Ekayana (一乘, One Vehicle), so even a distracted mind is like this, let alone a sincere mind? One utterance is like this, let alone prolonged recitation? The entry into the path of those with sharp faculties is like the difference between a day and a kalpa (劫, an eon) compared to those without sharp faculties. This is exactly the meaning. Moreover, here it clearly says 'already attained.' What does this mean? There are probably two meanings: From the perspective of events, those who have recited the Buddha's name like this in past kalpas have already attained Buddhahood; from the perspective of principle, the moment one opens one's mouth, the attainment of Buddhahood is already completed. Where is there a need to experience the cultivation and refinement of three great asamkhya-kalpas (阿僧祇劫, countless great eons)? Could there be a newly enlightened Buddha? If (used for writing) grass and trees and 'bié' (茟). The character 'bié' (茟) here, many people write it as the 'bi' (筆) of pen and ink, which is wrong. The character 'bi' (筆) is from bamboo, and the character 'bié' (茟) is from grass. 'Bi' is pronounced 'bì,' and 'bié' is pronounced 'wěi.' 'Bié' refers to the time when the flowers of grass and trees are just beginning to grow. Therefore, it says 'If grass and trees and 'bié' (茟) patterns.'
義極明無可疑者經中種種譬喻皆從勝至劣極劣之善皆成佛道況其勝者乎故上自金銀下至草木又下而至草木始生之華也諸刻本有作筆者有作茟者然讀筆者少讀茟者多凡為五種法師當正其是非毋令初學展轉訛誤。
其祖輪轉聖王(云云)頭面禮足。
大通智勝如來既成佛已父率臣民頭面禮足有人引此以破予正訛集中父母反拜之辨因再辨于竹窗隨筆猶恐誦法華經者但見彼說不見辨辭倘為所惑為害不淺何者佛言必依于忠孝而執其僻見作此逆理敗倫之語又引經以證何怪乎世儒謗佛氏為無父無君也茲不憚煩再為剖析大通已成佛道佛者大千世界三聖六凡之慈父也其父雖貴極輪王亦只是四天下之父而已此何等境界而蠢爾凡夫才墮僧數便擬如佛有是理乎故云待汝成佛受父母拜未晚若言三寶一體者佛具三十二相汝今幾相佛見父王頂禮涌身高七多羅樹汝今涌身幾樹以是較之云何一體況涌身虛空者正示不受父禮而汝猶未悟也哀哉。
還著于本人。
東坡謂咒咀毒藥還著本人則失佛慈悲當云兩家總沒事吾不意東坡之高明而作此鄙俗語也或記錄者訛也此還著一言有事有理事則邪不勝正慈能制兇今以正念觀音大悲神力自然還著譬如含血噴天還污己身將頭觸火反焦己額不期然而然非觀音加罰于彼而行人亦不宜起心願彼還著也理
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 對於那些極度清晰、毫無疑問的例子，經文中的各種比喻都是從最好到最差的。即使是最差的善行也能成就佛道，更何況是那些更好的呢？所以，從金銀等貴重之物，到草木等尋常之物，甚至到草木剛生出的花朵。各種版本的經書，有的寫作『筆』，有的寫作『茟』，但讀作『筆』的較少，讀作『茟』的較多。凡是作為五種法師的人，應當糾正這些錯誤，不要讓初學者輾轉相傳，以訛傳訛。
其祖先輪轉聖王（等等）以頭面禮拜佛足。
大通智勝如來成佛之後，他的父親率領臣民以頭面禮拜佛足。有人引用這件事來反駁我在《正訛集》中關於父母反拜的辨析。因此，我在《竹窗隨筆》中再次辨析，仍然擔心誦讀《法華經》的人只看到那種說法，而沒有看到辨析的文字，如果被他們迷惑，危害不淺。為什麼呢？佛的言論必然依據忠孝，而他們卻執著于片面的見解，說出這種違背常理、敗壞倫常的話，又引用經文來證明，這難道不怪世俗儒生誹謗佛教是無父無君嗎？現在我不怕麻煩，再次進行剖析。大通已經成就佛道，佛是大千世界三聖六凡的慈父。他的父親雖然尊貴到輪王的地位，也只是四天下的父親而已。這是何等境界？而愚蠢的凡夫，才剛剛出家為僧，就想和佛一樣，有這種道理嗎？所以說，等你成佛了，接受父母的拜見也不晚。如果說三寶是一體的，佛具有三十二相，你現在有幾相？佛見到父王頂禮，涌身高七多羅樹，你現在涌身幾樹？用這些來比較，怎麼能說是一體呢？況且涌身於虛空，正是表示不受父禮，而你仍然沒有領悟，可悲啊。
還返回到本人身上。
東坡說，咒詛毒藥會返回到本人身上，那就失去了佛的慈悲。應當說，兩家都沒事。我沒想到東坡如此高明的人，竟然會說出這種鄙俗的話，或許是記錄的人寫錯了。這『還著』一言，有事和理兩方面。從理上說，邪不勝正，慈能制兇。現在以正念觀音大悲神力，自然會返回到對方身上。譬如含血噴天，反而會玷污自己；用頭撞火，反而會燒焦自己的額頭。不是期望這樣，而是自然而然的，不是觀音菩薩加以懲罰，而修行人也不應該起心願對方受到報應。這是理。
【English Translation】 English version: For those extremely clear and unquestionable examples, the various metaphors in the scriptures range from the best to the worst. Even the worst good deeds can achieve Buddhahood, let alone the better ones? Therefore, from precious things like gold and silver to ordinary things like grass and trees, even to the newly sprouted flowers of grass and trees. In various editions of the scriptures, some write '筆' (bǐ, brush), some write '茟' (yù, ancient form of brush), but fewer read it as '筆', and more read it as '茟'. All those who serve as the five kinds of Dharma masters should correct these errors, and not allow beginners to pass them on and distort them.
His ancestor, the Chakravarti King (etc.), prostrated at the Buddha's feet with his head and face.
After the Mahābhijñā Jñānābhibhū Buddha (Great Universal Wisdom Excellence Buddha) attained Buddhahood, his father led his ministers and people to prostrate at his feet with their heads and faces. Some people cite this to refute my analysis in the 'Zheng E Ji' (Collection for Correcting Errors) regarding the reversal of parents bowing. Therefore, I analyzed it again in the 'Zhu Chuang Sui Bi' (Jottings from a Bamboo Window), still worried that those who recite the 'Lotus Sutra' would only see that statement and not see the analysis. If they are misled, the harm would be significant. Why? The Buddha's words must be based on loyalty and filial piety, but they cling to one-sided views and say such things that violate reason and corrupt ethics, and cite scriptures to prove it. Is it any wonder that worldly Confucians slander Buddhism as being without father or ruler? Now, I am not afraid of trouble and will analyze it again. Mahābhijñā has already attained Buddhahood. The Buddha is the compassionate father of the three sages and six realms of the great chiliocosm. Although his father is as noble as a Chakravarti King, he is only the father of the four continents. What kind of realm is this? And foolish ordinary people, having just become monks, want to be like the Buddha. Is there such a reason? Therefore, it is said, 'It is not too late to receive your parents' bowing when you become a Buddha.' If you say that the Three Jewels are one, the Buddha has thirty-two marks, how many marks do you have now? When the Buddha saw his father bowing, he rose to a height of seven Tala trees, how many trees do you rise to now? Comparing these, how can you say they are one? Moreover, rising into the void is precisely to show that he does not accept his father's bowing, but you still have not realized it, alas.
It returns to the person himself.
Tongpo (Su Shi) said that curses and poisons would return to the person himself, which would lose the Buddha's compassion. It should be said that both families are fine. I did not expect such a brilliant person like Tongpo to say such vulgar words. Perhaps the recorder wrote it wrong. This word 'returns' has both event and principle aspects. In principle, evil does not overcome good, and compassion can subdue violence. Now, with the power of the right mindfulness of Avalokiteśvara (Guanyin) and great compassion, it will naturally return to the other person. For example, spitting blood at the sky will only stain oneself; hitting one's head against fire will only burn one's forehead. It is not expected, but it happens naturally. It is not that Avalokiteśvara is punishing them, and practitioners should not wish for the other person to be punished. This is the principle.
則三毒十惡皆出當人菩提妙心今以正念觀音智照神力旋流返聞復歸元真彼毒惡等應念化成無上知覺不還著本人而誰著耶。
△佛遺教經
諂曲之心與道相違是故汝等宜應質直其心。
疏云離邊觀中舍事求理皆名諂曲夫尋常言質直者乃質實無偽正直無邪而已今所明即起信直心正念真如之謂也何謂離邊觀中蓋執有執無固邊非中離有無之二邊而處乎其中者亦非也故有但中不但中但者獨也獨中之為中而邊非中也不但則無邊而非中矣先德云拈來無不是又云大福德人執石成寶又云一色一香無非中道又云咳唾掉臂無不是祖師西來意是之謂即邊觀中也彼事與理例此可知如是則何等明白簡易真率徑捷法爾如然無假造作名之質直不亦宜乎回視拘拘然離邊而後中舍事而後理者秪見其牽合遷就迂迴委宛出乎造作而非自然矣名之諂曲不亦宜乎大哉斯經佛所遺囑言近旨遠不可忽也。
△金剛般若經
應無所住而生其心。
應當也應當無住而生心不當有住而生心也無住而生者清凈心也若疑心本不生不得言生但看下文云應生無所住心又云不應住色生心前言應後言不應正反覆明之也無所住而生者生即無生也。
四句偈等。
四句諸說不一唯中峰謂經中凡言四句偈必上有乃至字下有等字言於此經中受持一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：那麼三毒（貪嗔癡）和十惡（殺生、偷盜、邪淫、妄語、兩舌、惡口、綺語、貪慾、嗔恚、邪見）都出自當人的菩提妙心。現在用正念觀音的智慧光明照耀的神力，迴轉潮流，返回聽聞的本源，恢復到原本的真性，那些毒惡等念頭，應當當下化成無上的知覺。既然不執著于本來的我，那麼又會執著于誰呢？
△《佛遺教經》
諂媚虛偽的心與正道相違背，因此你們應當心地質樸正直。
疏鈔解釋說，離開一邊而觀察中間，捨棄事物而尋求道理，都叫做諂曲。通常所說的質直，就是質樸實在沒有虛假，正直沒有邪念而已。現在所闡明的是依據《起信論》的直心，正念真如的道理。什麼叫做離開一邊而觀察中間呢？就是執著于有，執著于無，固守一邊而非中道。離開有和無的二邊而處於其中，也不是中道。所以說『但中』，不是『不但中』。『但』是獨的意思，獨守中道就成為中道，而邊就不是中道了。『不但』就是沒有一邊不是中道了。先德說，『拈起任何事物沒有不是的』，又說『大福德的人執著石頭也能變成寶』，又說『一色一香沒有不是中道』，又說『咳嗽吐唾沫，搖手動臂，沒有不是祖師西來意』，這就是所謂的從邊觀察中道。事物和道理的例子，可以依此類推。像這樣，還有什麼比明白簡易、真實坦率、直接快捷、自然而然、沒有虛假造作，稱之為質直更合適的呢？回頭看看那些拘泥於離開一邊然後才求中道，捨棄事物然後才求道理的人，只見他們牽強附會，遷就迎合，迂迴委婉，出於造作而不是自然。稱之為諂曲不是很合適嗎？偉大啊，這部經是佛所遺囑，言語淺近而旨意深遠，不可忽視啊。
△《金剛般若經》
應無所住而生其心。
應當，是應當無所執著而生起心，不應當有所執著而生起心。無所執著而生起的心，是清凈心。如果懷疑心本來不生，不能說生，但看下文說『應生無所住心』，又說『不應住色生心』，前面說『應』，後面說『不應』，正是正反覆明這個道理。無所執著而生起，生起就是無生起。
四句偈等。
對於四句偈的各種說法不一致，只有中峰禪師認為經中凡是說到四句偈，必定上面有『乃至』二字，下面有『等』字，說在此經中受持一
【English Translation】 English version: Then all the Three Poisons (greed, hatred, and delusion) and Ten Evils (killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, divisive speech, harsh speech, idle chatter, greed, anger, and wrong views) all originate from the wondrous Bodhi mind of the person. Now, using the power of the wisdom and light of Right Mindfulness Avalokiteshvara (Guanyin, 觀音), reversing the flow, returning to the source of hearing, and restoring to the original true nature, those poisonous and evil thoughts should instantly transform into unsurpassed awareness. Since there is no attachment to the original self, then who would one be attached to?
△ The Sutra of the Buddha's Last Teaching
A flattering and deceitful mind is contrary to the Path. Therefore, you should be honest and upright in your hearts.
The commentary explains that leaving one extreme to observe the middle, abandoning affairs to seek principle, are all called flattery and deceit. What is commonly called honesty and uprightness is simply being genuine and without falsehood, upright and without evil. What is now being explained is the direct mind according to the Awakening of Faith, the principle of Right Mindfulness of Suchness (真如). What is meant by leaving one extreme to observe the middle? It is clinging to existence, clinging to non-existence, stubbornly adhering to one extreme and not the middle way. Leaving the two extremes of existence and non-existence and dwelling in the middle is also not the middle way. Therefore, it is said 'only the middle' (但中), not 'not only the middle' (不但中). 'Only' means exclusive; exclusively adhering to the middle becomes the middle way, and the extreme is not the middle way. 'Not only' means that there is no extreme that is not the middle way. A former sage said, 'Picking up anything, there is nothing that is not it,' and also said, 'A person of great merit can turn stone into treasure,' and also said, 'One color, one fragrance, there is nothing that is not the Middle Way,' and also said, 'Coughing, spitting, shaking arms, there is nothing that is not the meaning of Bodhidharma's (祖師) coming from the West.' This is what is meant by observing the middle from the extreme. The examples of affairs and principles can be inferred by analogy. In this way, what could be more suitable than being clear, simple, genuine, straightforward, direct, natural, without pretense, and calling it honesty and uprightness? Looking back at those who are拘泥 (k拘泥) to leaving one extreme and then seeking the middle, abandoning affairs and then seeking principle, one only sees them forcing connections, accommodating and catering, being circuitous and indirect, arising from contrivance and not from nature. Isn't it very appropriate to call it flattery and deceit? Great indeed, this sutra is the Buddha's last instruction, the words are near and the meaning is far, it cannot be ignored.
△ The Diamond Prajna Sutra
One should produce the mind without dwelling anywhere.
'Should' means one should produce the mind without dwelling anywhere; one should not produce the mind with dwelling. The mind produced without dwelling is a pure mind. If you doubt that the mind is originally not produced and cannot be said to be produced, then look at the following text which says 'One should produce the mind that dwells nowhere,' and also says 'One should not produce the mind dwelling in form.' The former says 'should,' the latter says 'should not,' which is precisely clarifying this principle from both sides. Producing without dwelling means that producing is non-producing.
Four-line verse, etc.
The various explanations of the four-line verse are inconsistent. Only Zen Master Zhongfeng (中峰) believes that whenever the sutra mentions a four-line verse, there must be the words 'even' (乃至) above and the word 'etc.' (等) below, saying that in this sutra, upholding one
句二句乃至四句以及十百千句等此說最為穩當況下文云隨說是經乃至四句偈等隨之一字義更明顯。
若菩薩作是言我當莊嚴佛土即不名菩薩。
菩薩不莊嚴佛土奈何法藏比丘四十八愿莊嚴極樂此有二義一者為門不同故般若是實際理地不受一塵法藏是佛事門中不捨一法也二者空有不二故經云雖知諸佛國及與眾生空而常修凈土教化諸眾生是故發阿耨菩提心者於法不說斷滅相假使云菩薩作是言我不莊嚴佛土即不名菩薩亦可也如是滅度無邊眾生實無眾生得滅度者則終日莊嚴而未嘗莊嚴也。
如是如是以三十二相觀如來(云云)於法不說斷滅相。
佛身非相不可以三十二相得見如來善現既已了悟今問不異上而答反似迷顧云可以相觀如來者何也古有二說天臺以此答為邪答下答為領會意云時情謂然我解不爾則此答時情所擬為邪下答善現自解為領也但于問同答異義尚未明賢首據大云謂前言不以相見是悟色身今言可以相見是猶迷法身蓋善現已知色身從法身流出則即色身可觀法身如苗從根出即苗可以觀根也故言如是如是以三十二相觀如來而佛詰以輪王相不異佛寧可即是如來善現便會佛意謂佛相起於法身而輪王相雖同佛起于福德云何可以三十二相觀如來乎佛既𠃔之而復恐其淪於無相不知即色即空故又云莫作是念如來
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『句二句乃至四句以及十百千句等此說最為穩當』，意思是說，哪怕只是經文中的兩句、四句，乃至十句、百句、千句，這種說法都是最穩妥的。更何況下文還說『隨說是經乃至四句偈等』，其中的『隨』字意義更加明顯。
『若菩薩作是言我當莊嚴佛土即不名菩薩』，如果一個菩薩說『我應當莊嚴佛土』，那他就不能被稱為菩薩。
菩薩不莊嚴佛土，那法藏比丘（Dharmākara Bodhisattva）的四十八愿（forty-eight vows）莊嚴極樂世界（Sukhavati）又該如何解釋呢？這裡有兩種解釋：一是門徑不同，般若（Prajna）是實際理地，不接受任何塵埃；法藏（Dharmākara）是在佛事門中，不捨棄任何一法。二是空有不二，經中說『雖知諸佛國及與眾生空而常修凈土教化諸眾生』，所以發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心（Anuttarā-Samyak-Sambodhi-citta）的人，對於法不說斷滅相。假設說菩薩說『我不莊嚴佛土』，那他也就不能被稱為菩薩了。就像滅度無邊眾生，實際上沒有眾生得到滅度，那就是終日莊嚴而未曾莊嚴。
『如是如是以三十二相觀如來(云云)於法不說斷滅相』，像這樣，像這樣以三十二相（thirty-two marks of a Buddha）觀察如來（Tathagata），（等等），對於法不說斷滅相。
佛身並非有相，不可以三十二相得見如來。善現（Subhuti）既然已經了悟，現在提問不應該和之前所悟不同，但回答反而像是迷惑，說『可以相觀如來』，這是為什麼呢？古人有兩種說法，天臺宗（Tiantai）認為這個回答是邪答，下面的回答才是領會了佛的意思，意思是當時的情形是這樣認為的，我的理解不是這樣，那麼這個回答是當時的情形所擬定的，是邪答，下面的回答是善現（Subhuti）自己理解的，是領會。但是問相同而回答不同的意義還不明確。賢首宗（Xianshou）根據《大云經》（Mahamegha Sutra）認為，前面說不以相見是悟了色身（rupa-kaya），現在說可以相見是仍然迷惑於法身（dharma-kaya），大概是善現（Subhuti）已經知道色身（rupa-kaya）從法身（dharma-kaya）流出，那麼從色身（rupa-kaya）可以觀察法身（dharma-kaya），就像苗從根長出，從苗可以觀察根。所以說『如是如是以三十二相觀如來』，而佛（Buddha）詰問說輪王相（cakravartin）不異於佛，難道就可以說是如來（Tathagata）嗎？善現（Subhuti）便領會了佛（Buddha）的意思，認為佛相（Buddha-lakshana）起於法身（dharma-kaya），而輪王相（cakravartin）雖然和佛（Buddha）相同，卻是起于福德，怎麼可以用三十二相（thirty-two marks of a Buddha）觀察如來（Tathagata）呢？佛（Buddha）既然𠃔之，又恐怕他陷入無相，不知道即色即空，所以又說『莫作是念如來』
【English Translation】 English version: 'Saying two lines, or even four lines, as well as ten, hundred, or thousand lines, etc., this statement is the most reliable.' This means that even if it's just two or four lines from the scripture, or even ten, a hundred, or a thousand lines, this way of speaking is the most secure. Moreover, the following text says, 'Wherever this sutra is spoken, even a four-line verse, etc.,' the meaning of the word 'wherever' is even clearer.
'If a Bodhisattva says, 'I will adorn the Buddha-land,' he is not called a Bodhisattva.' If a Bodhisattva says, 'I should adorn the Buddha-land,' then he cannot be called a Bodhisattva.
If Bodhisattvas do not adorn Buddha-lands, how can Dharmākara Bodhisattva's (法藏比丘) forty-eight vows (四十八願) to adorn the Pure Land of Sukhavati (極樂世界) be explained? There are two explanations for this: First, the approaches are different. Prajna (般若) is the actual ground of principle, not accepting a speck of dust. Dharmākara (法藏) is within the realm of Buddha-activities, not abandoning a single dharma. Second, emptiness and existence are not two. The sutra says, 'Although knowing that all Buddha-lands and sentient beings are empty, one constantly cultivates the Pure Land to teach and transform sentient beings.' Therefore, those who generate the mind of Anuttarā-Samyak-Sambodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心) do not speak of annihilation in relation to the Dharma. Supposing a Bodhisattva says, 'I do not adorn the Buddha-land,' then he also cannot be called a Bodhisattva. It is like liberating boundless sentient beings, but in reality, no sentient being is liberated; that is, adorning all day long without ever having adorned.
'Thus, thus, contemplate the Tathagata (如來) by means of the thirty-two marks (三十二相) (etc.), and do not speak of annihilation in relation to the Dharma.' Like this, like this, observe the Tathagata (如來) by means of the thirty-two marks (三十二相), (and so on), and do not speak of annihilation in relation to the Dharma.
The Buddha's body is not form; the Tathagata (如來) cannot be seen by means of the thirty-two marks (三十二相). Since Subhuti (善現) has already awakened, the question now should not differ from what he has already realized, but the answer seems confused, saying, 'The Tathagata (如來) can be observed by means of the marks.' Why is this? There are two ancient explanations. The Tiantai school (天臺宗) considers this answer to be a wrong answer, and the following answer to be an understanding of the meaning, meaning that the situation at the time thought so, but my understanding is not like that, then this answer was proposed by the situation at the time, it is a wrong answer, and the following answer is Subhuti's (善現) own understanding, it is an understanding. But the meaning of the same question and different answers is not yet clear. The Xianshou school (賢首宗), according to the Mahamegha Sutra (大雲經), believes that the previous statement of not seeing by means of the marks is an awakening to the form-body (rupa-kaya 色身), and the current statement of being able to see by means of the marks is still confused about the dharma-body (dharma-kaya 法身), probably because Subhuti (善現) already knows that the form-body (rupa-kaya 色身) flows out from the dharma-body (dharma-kaya 法身), then the dharma-body (dharma-kaya 法身) can be observed from the form-body (rupa-kaya 色身), just like a sprout grows from a root, and the root can be observed from the sprout. Therefore, it is said, 'Thus, thus, contemplate the Tathagata (如來) by means of the thirty-two marks (三十二相),' and the Buddha (佛) questioned, saying that the marks of a cakravartin (輪王相) are not different from the Buddha (佛), can it be said that it is the Tathagata (如來)? Subhuti (善現) then understood the Buddha's (佛) meaning, believing that the Buddha's marks (Buddha-lakshana) arise from the dharma-body (dharma-kaya 法身), while the marks of a cakravartin (輪王相), although the same as the Buddha (佛), arise from merit, how can the Tathagata (如來) be observed by means of the thirty-two marks (三十二相)? Since the Buddha (佛) has𠃔之, and is afraid that he will fall into non-form and not know that form is emptiness, he said again, 'Do not think like this of the Tathagata (如來).'
不以相得菩提乃至云發菩提心者於法不說斷滅相是則恐彼著相佛即遣相恐彼著空佛即遣空直至色空雙泯亦復雙存存泯兩忘遣無可遣而後為般若真空也。
△維摩經
隨其心凈則佛土凈。
莫見此心凈土凈之說便欲撥無凈土蓋據理則即心即土心凈是名土凈何須更願往生據事則上之隨字下之則字因果相應隨心凈則土由以凈隨心穢則土由以穢也下文舍利弗心作是念世尊為菩薩時意豈不凈而是佛土不凈若此則知心凈為因土凈為果必有凈土明矣。
不起滅定現諸威儀是名宴坐。
不是身入滅定而又外有一身以現威儀也依然一念不生自爾萬行具足蓋不以心應物而以形應物故肇法師云心智永滅而形克八極也是外彌現而內彌寂也。
唯舍利弗。
唯字不可圈上聲圈則音當作委應諾聲也不圈則音如本字助語辭也彼人有語此方應諾今舍利弗無語維摩詰何所聞而諾之也。
△觀無量壽佛經
九品往生。
有言經列九品教令作觀正為普度利鈍諸根俱得往生蓋易行道也而知禮法師之鈔此經也全重一心三觀其旨深玄則反成難行之道予初亦以為然今知彼鈔原以妙宗為名是欲往生者皆發最上之心以副如來是心是佛是心作佛之本意其不能者任彼但修事觀而已亦利鈍俱收也。
欲生彼
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：不執著于通過外相獲得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟），乃至說發起菩提心的人，對於佛法不說斷滅之相。這是因為恐怕他們執著于外相，佛就去除外相；恐怕他們執著于空，佛就去除空。直到色（rupa，物質）與空（sunyata，空性）都泯滅，又同時存在，存在與泯滅兩方面都忘卻，去除到無可去除的地步，然後才是般若（prajna，智慧）真空（sunyata，空性）的境界。
△《維摩詰經》
隨著心清凈，那麼佛土（Buddha-kshetra，佛的國土）也就清凈。
不要因為見到『此心清凈則佛土清凈』的說法，就想要否定凈土（Sukhavati，凈土）的存在。從理上說，就是心即是土，心清凈就叫做土凈，何須另外發愿往生？從事上說，上面的『隨』字和下面的『則』字，因果相應，隨著心清凈，那麼佛土就因此而清凈；隨著心污穢，那麼佛土就因此而污穢。下文舍利弗（Sariputra，佛陀十大弟子之一）心中想：『世尊（Bhagavan，佛陀的尊稱）做菩薩（Bodhisattva，菩薩）時，心難道不清凈嗎？而他的佛土卻不凈。』如果這樣，就知道心凈是因，土凈是果，必定有凈土存在，這很明顯。
不離開滅盡定（nirodha-samapatti，滅盡定）而顯現各種威儀，這叫做宴坐（dhyana，禪定）。
不是身體進入滅盡定，而又另外有一個身體來顯現威儀。而是一念不生，自然萬行具足。因為不是用心來應物，而是用形來應物，所以肇法師說：『心智永遠寂滅，而形體能達到八方極遠之處。』這是外表顯現而內心寂靜。
唯，舍利弗（Sariputra，佛陀十大弟子之一）。
『唯』字不可以圈上聲，圈上聲則讀音應當作『委』，是應諾的聲音。如果不圈上聲，那麼讀音如本字，是助語詞。別人有話，此方應諾，現在舍利弗沒有說話，維摩詰（Vimalakirti，一位在家菩薩）聽到了什麼而應諾呢？
△《觀無量壽佛經》
九品往生（nine levels of rebirth）。
有人說，經文列出九品，教人作觀，正是爲了普遍度化利根和鈍根的眾生，都能往生，是易行道。而知禮法師註解這部經，完全注重一心三觀，其旨意深奧玄妙，反而成了難行之道。我起初也這樣認為，現在知道他的註解原本以妙宗為名，是想要往生的人都發起最上之心，來符合如來『是心是佛，是心作佛』的本意。不能這樣做的，就任憑他們只修事觀而已，也利於利根和鈍根的眾生都能得度。
想要往生彼（凈土）
【English Translation】 English version: Not clinging to attaining Bodhi (覺悟, enlightenment) through external forms, and even those who aspire to Bodhicitta (菩提心, the mind of enlightenment) do not speak of annihilation in relation to the Dharma. This is because they fear attachment to forms, so the Buddha removes forms; they fear attachment to emptiness, so the Buddha removes emptiness. Until both rupa (色, form/matter) and sunyata (空性, emptiness) are extinguished, yet simultaneously exist, and both existence and extinction are forgotten, removing until there is nothing left to remove, then it is the realm of prajna (智慧, wisdom) and true sunyata (空性, emptiness).
△ Vimalakirti Sutra (《維摩詰經》)
As the mind is purified, so is the Buddha-kshetra (佛土, Buddha-field) purified.
Do not, upon seeing the saying 'As the mind is purified, so is the Buddha-field purified,' wish to deny the existence of Sukhavati (凈土, Pure Land). In terms of principle, the mind is the land; a pure mind is called a pure land. Why seek rebirth elsewhere? In terms of practice, the 'as' above and the 'so' below correspond to cause and effect. As the mind is purified, so the Buddha-field is purified; as the mind is defiled, so the Buddha-field is defiled. In the following text, Sariputra (舍利弗, one of the Buddha's ten principal disciples) thinks, 'When the Bhagavan (世尊, the Blessed One) was a Bodhisattva (菩薩, an enlightened being), was his mind not pure? Yet his Buddha-field was not pure.' If this is so, then we know that a pure mind is the cause, and a pure land is the result. Clearly, there must be a Pure Land.
Without arising from the Nirodha-samapatti (滅盡定, cessation of perception and sensation), manifesting all kinds of dignified behavior is called dhyana (宴坐, meditation).
It is not that the body enters Nirodha-samapatti, and there is another body to manifest dignified behavior. Rather, it is that with a single thought not arising, naturally all practices are complete. Because it is not using the mind to respond to things, but using form to respond to things, Master Zhao said, 'The wisdom of the mind is eternally extinguished, yet the form can reach the eight extremes.' This is outwardly manifesting while inwardly being still.
Only, Sariputra (舍利弗, one of the Buddha's ten principal disciples).
The word 'only' should not be circled with a rising tone. If circled, the pronunciation should be 'wei,' which is a sound of agreement. If not circled, the pronunciation is as the original character, which is an auxiliary word. When others speak, this side agrees. Now Sariputra has not spoken, so what did Vimalakirti (維摩詰, a lay Buddhist) hear to agree to?
△ Contemplation Sutra (《觀無量壽佛經》)
The nine levels of rebirth (九品往生).
Some say that the sutra lists the nine levels, teaching people to contemplate, precisely to universally liberate beings of both sharp and dull faculties, so that all can be reborn, which is an easy path. However, Master Zhili's commentary on this sutra focuses entirely on the Three Contemplations of the One Mind, its meaning being profound and mysterious, which instead becomes a difficult path. I initially thought so as well, but now I know that his commentary is originally named 'Mysterious School,' intending that all who wish to be reborn should generate the supreme mind, to accord with the Tathagata's (如來, Thus Come One) original intention of 'This mind is Buddha, this mind makes Buddha.' Those who cannot do so, let them only cultivate the practice of contemplation, which also benefits both sharp and dull faculties.
Wishing to be reborn in that (Pure Land)
國當修三福一曰孝養父母(云云)如是三事名為凈業。
經以十六觀為往生正因而此乃言當修三福謂孝養父母等下文上上品中又說三種心謂至誠心等又說三種眾生謂慈心不殺等不言修觀其故何也蓋往生多門不必盡修十六觀而生也六度萬行皆可迴向西方而此十六觀為因特切故佛苦口開示以普度有情耳末又會事歸理則三福等俱入實相即是妙觀。
△大彌陀經
觀音補佛。
經云彌陀般泥洹時觀音次補佛處夫既有泥洹安得為壽命無量此有二義一者彌陀原是有量之無量以壽雖有量然無能知其量處則有量而無量也二者經云觀音補佛及勢至則永無泥洹豈勢至獨勝觀音兼勝彌陀耶明是觀音勢至即彌陀一身勢至永存即彌陀永存也妙宗云菩薩機忘如來應息名補佛處非前佛實滅后佛定生為補處也又云觀音補處無量之無量則觀音亦永無泥洹況彼佛乎。
其上輩者舍家離俗而作沙門。
或疑論道不論跡何為以僧俗別上下輩此有事有理事則僧者與三寶流號眾中尊先僧而後俗亦自然之分也理則豈必越門閫而後為舍家棄眷屬而後為離俗哉超出于煩惱之外而何家不捨解脫于結縛之表而何俗不離俗名而僧行是真舍家而離俗者也但能如是舍離豈不即為上輩。
△盂蘭盆經
欲度父母報乳哺之恩。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 國家應當修習三種福業：第一是孝養父母（等等），像這樣的三件事，就叫做凈業。 經文以十六觀作為往生西方的正因，而這裡卻說應當修習三種福業，即孝養父母等等。下文《上品上生章》中又說了三種心，即至誠心等等，又說了三種眾生，即慈心不殺等等，為什麼不提修觀呢？大概是因為往生的門路很多，不必全部修習十六觀才能往生。六度萬行都可以迴向西方，而這十六觀是特別重要的原因，所以佛才苦口婆心地開示，以普遍度化有情眾生。最後又會事歸理，那麼三種福業等等都進入實相，也就是妙觀。 《大彌陀經》 觀世音菩薩補佛位。 經文說，阿彌陀佛般涅槃（parinirvana，完全的涅槃）時，觀世音菩薩依次補佛位。既然有涅槃，怎麼能說是壽命無量呢？這裡有兩種解釋：一是阿彌陀佛原本是有量的無量，因為壽命雖然有量，但沒有人能知道它的量，所以是有量而無量。二是經文說觀世音菩薩補佛位以及大勢至菩薩，那麼就永遠沒有涅槃，難道大勢至菩薩單獨勝過觀世音菩薩，甚至勝過阿彌陀佛嗎？這明明是說觀世音菩薩、大勢至菩薩就是阿彌陀佛一身，大勢至菩薩永遠存在，就是阿彌陀佛永遠存在。妙宗大師說，菩薩的應機示現結束，如來的應化止息，叫做補佛位，不是前佛實際滅度，后佛一定出生來補位。又說，觀世音菩薩補位的無量是真正的無量，那麼觀世音菩薩也永遠沒有涅槃，更何況阿彌陀佛呢。 那些上輩往生的人，捨棄家庭，離開世俗，而出家做沙門（sramana，出家人）。 有人或許會疑惑，論道不應該論跡象，為什麼用僧俗來區分上下輩呢？這裡有事相和理體兩個層面。從事相上說，僧人與三寶（triratna，佛法僧）同流，是大眾中最尊貴的，先有僧然後有俗，也是自然而然的區分。從理體上說，難道一定要跨過寺廟的門檻才算是舍家，拋棄眷屬才算是離開世俗嗎？超脫于煩惱之外，又有什麼家不能捨棄？解脫于結縛的表面，又有什麼世俗不能離開？有名為俗，而行持僧人的行為，才是真正的舍家而離俗。只要能夠這樣舍離，難道不就是上輩往生的人嗎？ 《盂蘭盆經》 想要超度父母，報答乳哺的恩情。
【English Translation】 English version: The country should cultivate three kinds of meritorious deeds: first, to be filial and support parents (etc.). Such three things are called pure karma. The sutra takes the Sixteen Contemplations as the direct cause of rebirth in the Pure Land, but here it says that one should cultivate the three meritorious deeds, namely, being filial and supporting parents, etc. In the section on the Highest Class of Rebirth, it also speaks of the three minds, namely, the sincere mind, etc., and also speaks of the three kinds of beings, namely, the compassionate mind, not killing, etc. Why does it not mention cultivating contemplation? It is probably because there are many paths to rebirth, and one does not necessarily have to cultivate all sixteen contemplations to be reborn. The Six Perfections and myriad practices can all be dedicated to the West, and these Sixteen Contemplations are a particularly important reason, so the Buddha earnestly taught them to universally liberate sentient beings. Finally, when returning from phenomena to principle, the three meritorious deeds, etc., all enter into reality, which is wonderful contemplation. The Great Amitabha Sutra Avalokitesvara (Guanyin) Bodhisattva succeeds the Buddha. The sutra says that when Amitabha Buddha enters parinirvana (parinirvana, complete nirvana), Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva will succeed the Buddha. Since there is nirvana, how can it be said that his lifespan is immeasurable? There are two explanations for this: first, Amitabha Buddha's lifespan is originally measurable yet immeasurable, because although his lifespan is measurable, no one can know its measure, so it is measurable yet immeasurable. Second, the sutra says that Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva and Mahasthamaprapta (Da Shi Zhi) Bodhisattva will succeed the Buddha, then there will never be nirvana. Does Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva surpass Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva alone, or even surpass Amitabha Buddha? It is clear that Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva and Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva are the same body as Amitabha Buddha. Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva's eternal existence is Amitabha Buddha's eternal existence. Master Miaozong said that the Bodhisattva's responsive manifestation ends, and the Tathagata's transformation ceases, which is called succeeding the Buddha's position. It is not that the previous Buddha actually passes away and the next Buddha is definitely born to succeed the position. It also says that Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva's succession is immeasurable, then Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva will also never enter nirvana, let alone Amitabha Buddha. Those of the highest class abandon their homes, leave the secular world, and become sramanas (sramana, renunciates). Some may wonder, in discussing the Way, one should not discuss appearances. Why distinguish between the upper and lower classes by monks and laity? There are two levels here: phenomena and principle. From the perspective of phenomena, monks flow with the Three Jewels (triratna, Buddha, Dharma, Sangha), and are the most honorable in the assembly. Monks come before laity, which is also a natural distinction. From the perspective of principle, is it necessary to cross the threshold of a temple to be considered abandoning one's home, and to abandon one's family to be considered leaving the secular world? Transcending beyond afflictions, what home cannot be abandoned? Liberating from the surface of entanglements, what secular world cannot be left? One is named a layman, but practices the behavior of a monk, which is the true abandonment of home and leaving the secular world. As long as one can abandon and leave in this way, wouldn't one be a person of the highest class? The Ullambana Sutra Wishing to deliver parents and repay the kindness of breast-feeding.
疏中引父母恩重經而間以己意觀者宜善分別使經疏瞭然又所云凡夫年長唯貪妻愛頓忘母恩曲盡人情懇切苦到孝子讀之當哽咽不能為情其忤逆輩亦惻然激發其久蔽之良心矣講者須力為開導毋謂此經文淺而忽之也。
皆同一心受缽和羅飯。
同者聖凡同會也則知設蘭盆者不是專供過去聖僧當普供現在凡僧也一心疏開五種心今不若以定心釋一心為妙若非定心受食何能遽拔餓鬼經劫之苦下文愿七世父母當屬上文行禪定意當屬下文蓋先咒愿彼父母而後行禪定意以受彼食也若愿彼父母行禪定恐理不通二愿字若省一字文更穩順缽和羅圭峰云當是缽多羅和字訛也遇榮鈔云缽和羅此云自恣食二說俱通自恣食載翻譯名義未據出何經律如有所出后義為正。
△摩訶般若波羅蜜經
直過入菩薩位中。
經意須菩提問學般若菩薩諸善功德無事不得亦得聲聞辟支佛功德否佛答皆得但不于中住以智觀已直過入菩薩位中莫錯會直過二字便謂菩薩輕藐三乘跳越而過夫二乘聖人斷三界見思惑盡所作已辦不受後有是人天福田安可忽也菩薩雖志在斷無明成佛道然理勢自然必先斷見思故二乘功德皆悉得之但不住著而直過耳直過之義今以喻明譬如三人同欲涉遠計其所至路經千里一人步行一人乘馬一人乘千里馬三人雖殊必皆從近而遠一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 疏中引用《父母恩重經》，並夾雜了自己的見解，讀者應該仔細分辨，使經文和疏解清晰明瞭。其中所說的凡夫俗子，年紀大了只貪戀妻子，愛戀之情深重以至忘記了父母的恩情，這話說盡了人情，懇切而痛苦。孝順的子女讀了應該會哽咽，不能自已；那些忤逆不孝的人也會因此而內心觸動，激發他們久已矇蔽的良心。講解的人必須努力開導，不要認為這部經文淺顯而忽視它。 『皆同一心受缽和羅飯。』 『同』是指聖人和凡人共同集會。由此可知，設定盂蘭盆會不是專門供養過去的聖僧，應當普遍供養現在的凡僧。『一心』，疏解中開了五種心，現在不如用『定心』來解釋『一心』最為恰當。如果不是以定心接受食物，怎麼能立刻拔除餓鬼經歷劫數的痛苦呢？下文『愿七世父母』應當屬於上文『行禪定意』應當屬於下文，因為先咒愿他們的父母，然後才以禪定之心接受他們的食物。如果希望他們的父母修行禪定，恐怕道理上說不通。『二愿』這兩個字如果省略一個字，文句會更穩順。『缽和羅』，圭峰說應當是『缽多羅』，『和』字是訛誤。遇榮鈔說，『缽和羅』，這裡譯為『自恣食』。兩種說法都講得通。『自恣食』記載在翻譯名義中，但沒有依據出自哪部經律，如果有所出處，后一種說法為正確。 △《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra，偉大的智慧完成之經） 『直過入菩薩位中。』 經文的意思是，須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）問學習般若（Prajna，智慧）的菩薩，各種善功德，是否能得到聲聞（Śrāvaka，聽聞佛法而悟道者）、辟支佛（Pratyekabuddha，獨自悟道者）的功德？佛陀回答說，都能得到，但不要執著于其中，用智慧觀察后，直接進入菩薩的果位中。不要錯誤地理解『直過』這兩個字，就認為菩薩輕視三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘），跳躍而過。二乘的聖人，斷除了三界（欲界、色界、無色界）的見思惑，已經完成了該做的事情，不再受後世的果報，是人天的福田，怎麼可以忽視呢？菩薩雖然志在斷除無明，成就佛道，但理勢上自然必須先斷除見思惑，所以二乘的功德都能得到，只是不住著而直接過去罷了。『直過』的意義，現在用比喻來說明，譬如三個人都想遠行，估計要到達的地方路程有一千里，一個人步行，一個人騎馬，一個人騎千里馬。三個人雖然不同，但必定都是從近到遠，一步步前進。
【English Translation】 English version: The commentary quotes the Sūtra of the Profound Kindness of Parents, interspersed with its own interpretations. Readers should carefully distinguish between them, so that the sutra and the commentary are clear. What it says about ordinary people, that when they grow old they only covet their wives, and their love is so deep that they forget the kindness of their parents, expresses human feelings to the fullest extent, earnestly and painfully. Filial children should choke with sobs when they read it, unable to control themselves; those who are disobedient and unfilial will also be touched and aroused in their long-obscured conscience. Those who explain it must make an effort to enlighten, and not neglect this sutra because it is superficial. 『All receive the bowl of parora rice with one mind.』 『Same』 refers to the common gathering of saints and ordinary people. From this, it can be known that setting up the Ullambana Festival is not exclusively for offering to past holy monks, but should be universally offered to present ordinary monks. 『One mind,』 the commentary opens up five kinds of minds, now it is best to explain 『one mind』 with 『fixed mind』. If one does not receive food with a fixed mind, how can one immediately remove the suffering of hungry ghosts through eons? The following 『may the parents of seven lifetimes』 should belong to the above text, and 『practice the intention of meditation』 should belong to the following text, because one first makes vows for their parents, and then accepts their food with a meditative mind. If one hopes that their parents will practice meditation, I am afraid that the reasoning is not sound. If one word is omitted from the two words 『two vows』, the sentence will be more stable. 『Parora』, Guifeng said that it should be 『Patra』, and the word 『and』 is an error. Yu Rongchao said, 『Parora』, here it is translated as 『self-willed food』. Both statements make sense. 『Self-willed food』 is recorded in the translation of terms, but there is no basis for which sutra or precepts it comes from. If there is a source, the latter statement is correct. △ Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra (The Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) 『Directly enter the Bodhisattva position.』 The meaning of the sutra is that Subhuti (a disciple of the Buddha) asked the Bodhisattvas who study Prajna (wisdom), whether various good merits can obtain the merits of Śrāvakas (those who attain enlightenment by hearing the Buddha's teachings) and Pratyekabuddhas (those who attain enlightenment on their own)? The Buddha replied that they can all be obtained, but do not be attached to them. After observing with wisdom, directly enter the position of Bodhisattva. Do not misunderstand the two words 『directly enter』 and think that Bodhisattvas despise the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) and jump over them. The saints of the Two Vehicles have eliminated the delusions of views and thoughts in the Three Realms (Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm), have completed what should be done, and will no longer receive the retribution of future lives. They are fields of merit for humans and gods, how can they be ignored? Although Bodhisattvas aspire to eliminate ignorance and achieve Buddhahood, it is natural that they must first eliminate the delusions of views and thoughts, so the merits of the Two Vehicles can all be obtained, but they are not attached to them and directly pass by. The meaning of 『directly pass by』 is now explained with a metaphor. For example, if three people want to travel far, and it is estimated that the journey to the destination is a thousand miles, one person walks, one person rides a horse, and one person rides a thousand-mile horse. Although the three people are different, they must all proceed step by step from near to far.
里二里十里百里乃至千里特步行最遲馬行稍速千里馬者為尤速耳菩薩直過亦復如是于彼二乘之位蓋徑直速過而不留非脫然不過也留故止宿草菴卒限於二乘位中不留故前達寶所徑入于菩薩位中也永嘉之言曰二乘何過而欲不為者哉有明訓矣。
△大寶積經
不聽聞菩薩藏微妙法門。
佛言有樂定菩薩不曾聽聞菩薩藏微妙法門於三摩中生知足相是人起增上慢不能解脫生老病死或見此文謂定不當習不知佛意為彼住定自足無復求進徒守偏空而大法不明祖關不透定力過時還沉生死耳故極言菩薩微妙法門須聽聞也非謂習定為不可也。
雖觀如來相好而不生愛著之心。
唸佛求生凈土正謂篤好深愿而寶積十心其最後云雖念如來相好而又不生愛著者何也蓋此事理二念中理念佛也知佛相好從因緣生因緣即空因緣既空即我自心心本不生何所愛著不生愛著是真善觀如來相好者也故下文云于無念中常念彼佛無念之念是真唸佛者也若事念者于佛相好必須深生好樂念茲在茲觀始成就泥不可愛著之文悠悠揚揚似念不念觀何由成今經蓋為執事迷理者言恐其發起魔事故也。
△般舟三昧經
慈心比丘終不中毒中兵(云云)亦復如是。
佛言慈心比丘終不中毒終不中兵火不能燒入水不死帝王不能得其便行般
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 二里、十里、百里乃至千里，徒步行走最慢，馬行稍快，千里馬尤其快。菩薩的直超也是如此，對於那聲聞、緣覺的地位，乃是徑直快速超過而不停留，並非完全不經過。停留的緣故，就止宿于草菴，最終侷限於二乘的地位中；不停留的緣故，就前進到達寶所，直接進入菩薩的地位中。《永嘉集》里說：『二乘有什麼過錯而想要不去做呢？』這有明確的訓誡啊。
△《大寶積經》
不聽聞菩薩藏微妙法門。
佛說，有樂於禪定的菩薩，不曾聽聞菩薩藏微妙法門，在三摩地（Samadhi，禪定）中產生知足的想法，這種人會生起增上慢，不能解脫生老病死。或許有人看到這段文字，認為禪定不應當修習，卻不知道佛的意思是為那些住在禪定中就自滿，不再求進步，只是守護偏頗的空性，而大法不明瞭，祖師的關隘不通透，定力過時後還會沉淪於生死輪迴的人說的。所以極力強調菩薩微妙法門必須聽聞，並非說修習禪定是不可以的。
雖觀如來相好而不生愛著之心。
唸佛求生凈土，正是說要真誠愛好、深刻發願，而《寶積經》十心中的最後一條說，即使念如來的相好，卻又不生起愛著之心，這是為什麼呢？這大概是事念和理念兩種唸佛方式中，屬於理念唸佛。知道佛的相好是從因緣生起的，因緣就是空，因緣既然是空，就是我自己的心，心本來不生，有什麼可以愛著的呢？不生愛著，才是真正善於觀察如來相好的人。所以下文說，在無念中常常憶念佛，無念的念才是真唸佛。如果是事念，對於佛的相好必須深深地生起愛好和樂意，時時刻刻想著，觀想才能成就。如果泥於不可愛著的文字，悠悠揚揚，好像念又好像沒念，觀想怎麼能成就呢？這部經大概是為執著事相而迷惑于理體的人說的，恐怕他們發起魔事啊。
△《般舟三昧經》
慈心比丘終不中毒中兵(云云)亦復如是。
佛說，具有慈心的比丘，終究不會中毒，終究不會中兵器，火不能燒，入水不會死，帝王不能加害於他。行般舟三昧（Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra，般舟三昧經）也是這樣。
【English Translation】 English version: Two 'li' (unit of distance, approximately 500 meters), ten 'li', a hundred 'li', or even a thousand 'li', walking is the slowest, a horse is slightly faster, and a 'qianli ma' (legendary horse capable of traveling a thousand 'li' in a day) is especially fast. The Bodhisattva's direct transcendence is also like this. Regarding the positions of 'Sravakas' (hearers) and 'Pratyekabuddhas' (solitary Buddhas), they directly and quickly surpass them without stopping, not completely bypassing them. Because of stopping, they dwell in a thatched hut, ultimately limited to the position of the Two Vehicles; because of not stopping, they advance to reach the treasure land, directly entering the position of the Bodhisattva. Yongjia's words say: 'What fault do the Two Vehicles have that one would want not to do them?' There is a clear instruction.
△ Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra (The Great Treasure Heap Sutra)
Not listening to the subtle Dharma gate of the Bodhisattva-piṭaka (Bodhisattva Store).
The Buddha said, there are Bodhisattvas who delight in 'samadhi' (meditative absorption), who have not heard the subtle Dharma gate of the Bodhisattva-piṭaka, and in 'samadhi' (Samadhi, meditative concentration) they develop a sense of contentment. These people will develop 'adhimāna' (superiority complex), and will not be able to liberate themselves from birth, old age, sickness, and death. Perhaps some see this passage and think that 'samadhi' should not be practiced, but they do not know that the Buddha's intention is for those who dwell in 'samadhi' and become complacent, no longer seeking progress, only guarding a biased emptiness, and the Great Dharma is not understood, the ancestral barrier is not penetrated, and when the power of 'samadhi' fades, they will still sink into the cycle of birth and death. Therefore, it is emphasized that the subtle Dharma gate of the Bodhisattva must be heard, not that practicing 'samadhi' is not allowed.
Although contemplating the marks and characteristics of the 'Tathāgata' (Thus Come One), they do not generate attachment.
Reciting the Buddha's name seeking rebirth in the Pure Land is precisely about sincere love and deep vows, but the last of the ten minds in the Ratnakūṭa Sūtra says that even if one recites the marks and characteristics of the 'Tathāgata', one does not generate attachment. Why is this? This is probably the 'lǐ niàn fó' (principle-based mindfulness of the Buddha) among the two types of mindfulness of the Buddha, 'shì niàn' (practice-based mindfulness) and 'lǐ niàn' (principle-based mindfulness). Knowing that the marks and characteristics of the Buddha arise from conditions, and conditions are empty, and since conditions are empty, it is my own mind, and the mind is originally unborn, so what is there to be attached to? Not generating attachment is truly good at contemplating the marks and characteristics of the 'Tathāgata'. Therefore, the following text says, constantly remembering the Buddha in non-thought, the thought of non-thought is true mindfulness of the Buddha. If it is 'shì niàn', one must deeply generate love and delight for the marks and characteristics of the Buddha, thinking of them at all times, and contemplation can be achieved. If one is stuck on the text of not being attached, being casual and unfocused, as if reciting and not reciting, how can contemplation be achieved? This sutra is probably for those who are attached to phenomena and confused about the principle, fearing that they will initiate demonic affairs.
△ Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra
A 'bhikṣu' (monk) with a compassionate heart will never be poisoned or struck by weapons (etc.), and so it is.
The Buddha said, a 'bhikṣu' (monk) with a compassionate heart will never be poisoned, will never be struck by weapons, fire cannot burn him, he will not die in water, and the emperor cannot harm him. Practicing the 'Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra' (Samadhi of Encountering Buddhas of the Present) is also like this.
舟三昧者亦復如是此須善會經意所以者何以如是善人萬一中毒如孔雀經有比丘為蛇所螫萬一中兵如善友太子為弟刺其雙目萬一中王難如歌利割截乃至三武滅僧安在帝王不能得其便也凡夫邪見人便謗佛經為妄語矣應知此中有事有理事則慈能制兇實有是事如佛言我以無量劫來修慈忍力於五指端出金師子而伏醉像是慈力也如持金剛經者逢遇強寇刃三下而體不傷是三昧力也佛何妄語之有理則其心普慈噁心永所不興是毒不能施也其心大悲殺心永所不起是兵不能刃也其心恬寂嗔心永所不生是火不能燒也其心凈潔貪心永所不染是水不能溺也其心堅固猶如金剛最劇諸緣強力妄想無間得入是帝王不能得其便也佛何妄語之有。
△楞伽經
佛在南海濱楞伽山中。
楞伽此云不可往山在海中非神通莫能至故異域僧謂有寶八楞故云楞伽其說無考從古為正。
彼名及相是妄想自性(云云)名成自性。
此明三性入五法也五法名相妄想正智如如也三性遍計依他圓成也名相對妄想妄想即遍計也妄想對分別分別即依他也正智如如對成成即圓成也此宋譯也魏唐二譯文小不同而義一也有人謂不然以名相應對依他妄想應對遍計而無奈三譯經文炳如杲日則遁而歸之唯識然唯識云五法三性諸聖教說相攝不一故有三說其一依他攝名相
分別正智四法圓成攝真如一法遍計不攝是第一說無彼人所說也其二依他攝相及分別二法遍計攝名一法圓成攝正智真如二法是第二說無彼人所說也其三依他攝分別一法遍計攝名相二法圓成攝正智真如二法正今經義是第三說無彼人所說不待言也三說皆無何引唯識為證即唯識誠有之亦無是論非經之理何以故論必宗經違經立論成邪外故。
△彌陀經
彼佛壽命及其人民無量無邊阿僧祇劫故名阿彌陀。
經意蓋云彼佛及其人民所有之壽命悉無量無邊阿僧祇劫也亦可云佛之壽命及其人民之壽命悉無量無邊阿僧祇劫也置人民于壽命之下是倒語法補壽命於人民之下是含語法隨用二法銷文無不可者有人謂不然言彼佛則誠壽命久遠佛之人民則其數眾多而無量無邊也非其壽久遠而無量無邊也審爾則劫之一字如何解釋既取數多何不曰阿僧祇數而曰阿僧祇劫也為此說者文理不通故耳不達二種語法文不通也不思法藏本願云我作佛時我剎中人皆壽命無量無有能計其數者而欲將極樂壽命同於娑婆理不通也恐誤初學疑沮往生不得不辨。
△華嚴經
世主妙嚴品。
或疑世尊成道諸菩薩諸天諸神皆來集會如一人御極而百辟咸輔也何為適合信住行等法門諸位此恐寓言非為實事今請以喻明之既知一人百辟之交相成也則一人
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：第一種說法是，『分別』（分別作用）和『正智』（正確的智慧）這四法，以及『圓成』（圓滿成就）所攝的『真如』（事物的真實本性）這一個法，『遍計』（虛妄分別）不攝。這是第一種說法，沒有那個人所說的情況。第二種說法是，『依他』（依他起性）所攝的『相』（現象）和『分別』這二法，『遍計』所攝名為一個法，『圓成』所攝『正智』和『真如』這二法。這是第二種說法，沒有那個人所說的情況。第三種說法是，『依他』攝『分別』這一個法，『遍計』攝『名』和『相』這二法，『圓成』攝『正智』和『真如』這二法。這正是現在經文的含義，是第三種說法，不需要多說。三種說法都沒有，為何要引用唯識宗作為證據？即使唯識宗確實存在，也沒有道理。因為論著必定以經文為依據，違背經文而立論，就會成為邪門外道。 △《彌陀經》（Amitabha Sutra） 『彼佛壽命及其人民無量無邊阿僧祇劫故名阿彌陀。』（那尊佛的壽命以及他國度里的人民的壽命都是無量無邊的阿僧祇劫（asaṃkhya-kalpa，無數大劫），所以叫做阿彌陀（Amitābha，無量光）。） 經文的意思大概是說，那尊佛以及他國度里的人民所有的壽命，都是無量無邊的阿僧祇劫。也可以說，佛的壽命以及他國度里人民的壽命，都是無量無邊的阿僧祇劫。把『人民』放在『壽命』之下，是倒裝的語法；在『人民』之下補充『壽命』，是包含的語法。隨意使用這兩種方法來理解經文，都沒有問題。有人說不是這樣，說『彼佛』確實壽命長遠，佛的『人民』只是數量眾多而無量無邊，不是他們的壽命長遠而無量無邊。如果真是這樣，那麼『劫』這個字如何解釋？既然是取數量眾多的意思，為什麼不說『阿僧祇數』，而說『阿僧祇劫』呢？這樣說的人，文理不通順，是因為不理解這兩種語法。不思考法藏比丘（Dharmākara，阿彌陀佛的前身）的本願，他說：『我成佛時，我的剎土中的人，都壽命無量，沒有人能夠計算他們的壽命。』而想要把極樂世界的壽命等同於娑婆世界（Sahā，我們所居住的這個世界）的壽命，道理上說不通。恐怕誤導初學者，使他們懷疑而阻礙往生，不得不加以辨析。 △《華嚴經》（Avataṃsaka Sūtra） 『世主妙嚴品。』（The Wondrous Adornments of World Rulers） 有人懷疑，世尊（Śākyamuni，釋迦牟尼佛）成道時，諸菩薩（Bodhisattva，覺悟的眾生）、諸天（Deva，天神）、諸神都來祝賀，就像一位君王登基，百官都來輔佐一樣。為什麼要適合信、住、行等法門的各個位次呢？這恐怕是寓言，不是真實的事情。現在請用比喻來說明，既然知道君王和百官之間是互相成就的關係，那麼一人
【English Translation】 English version: The first statement is that the four dharmas of 'discrimination' (vikalpa) and 'correct wisdom' (samyag-jñāna), and the one dharma of 'suchness' (tathatā) encompassed by 'perfected nature' (pariniṣpanna), are not encompassed by 'imputed nature' (parikalpita). This is the first statement, and there is no such thing as what that person said. The second statement is that the two dharmas of 'phenomena' (lakṣaṇa) and 'discrimination' encompassed by 'dependent nature' (paratantra), and the one dharma named encompassed by 'imputed nature', and the two dharmas of 'correct wisdom' and 'suchness' encompassed by 'perfected nature'. This is the second statement, and there is no such thing as what that person said. The third statement is that 'dependent nature' encompasses the one dharma of 'discrimination', 'imputed nature' encompasses the two dharmas of 'name' (nāma) and 'phenomena', and 'perfected nature' encompasses the two dharmas of 'correct wisdom' and 'suchness'. This is precisely the meaning of the current sutra, and it is the third statement, which needs no further explanation. Since none of the three statements exist, why cite the Yogācāra school as evidence? Even if the Yogācāra school truly exists, it is still unreasonable. Because treatises must be based on sutras, and establishing a theory that contradicts the sutras will lead to heterodoxy. △ Amitabha Sutra 'That Buddha's lifespan and the lifespan of his people are immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhya-kalpas (asaṃkhya-kalpa, countless great eons), hence the name Amitābha (Amitābha, Immeasurable Light).' The meaning of the sutra is roughly that the lifespan of that Buddha and all the people in his land are immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhya-kalpas. It can also be said that the Buddha's lifespan and the lifespan of the people in his land are all immeasurable and boundless asaṃkhya-kalpas. Placing 'people' below 'lifespan' is an inverted syntax; supplementing 'lifespan' below 'people' is an inclusive syntax. Using these two methods to interpret the text at will, there is no problem. Some people say it is not so, saying that 'that Buddha' indeed has a long lifespan, and the Buddha's 'people' are only numerous and boundless, not that their lifespan is long and boundless. If this is really the case, then how should the word 'kalpa' be explained? Since it is taken to mean numerous, why not say 'asaṃkhya number' but say 'asaṃkhya-kalpa'? Those who say this do not understand the text, because they do not understand these two types of syntax. Without considering the original vow of the Bhikshu Dharmākara (Dharmākara, the previous life of Amitābha), who said: 'When I become a Buddha, the people in my land will all have immeasurable lifespans, and no one will be able to calculate their number.' And wanting to equate the lifespan of the Pure Land with the lifespan of the Sahā world (Sahā, the world we live in) is unreasonable. Fearing that it will mislead beginners, causing them to doubt and hinder their rebirth, it must be clarified. △ Avataṃsaka Sūtra 'The Wondrous Adornments of World Rulers' Some people doubt that when Śākyamuni (Śākyamuni, the Buddha) attained enlightenment, all the Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, enlightened beings), Devas (Deva, gods), and spirits came to congratulate him, just like when a king ascends the throne, all the officials come to assist him. Why should it be suitable for the various positions of the Dharma gates such as faith, dwelling, practice, etc.? This is probably an allegory, not a real event. Now, please use a metaphor to explain it. Since we know that the relationship between the king and the officials is mutually fulfilling, then one person
御極百辟之中法爾職文職武職禮樂職刑罰職財用等共佐一人以成一代之治功也一佛出世而諸聖賢之同時下生者亦法爾為信為住為行為向為地為等共佐一佛以成一代之時教也又如一心為主亦法爾內之五臟六腑外之四肢百骸相與共為一心之佐孰主張是孰造作是孰施行是例而觀之彼諸聖凡幽顯佐佛揚化適與法門吻合者皆不期然而然所謂不可思議者也但當信受無容致疑。
華藏世界品。
或疑世界焉得浮處虛空重重無盡此恐寓言非為實事然塵沙剎海渺漠難明日月晨辰顯明易見試觀日月等上無繩系下無根生豈不浮處虛空而又前無所引后無所催誰為之執行者凡此亦皆不可思議又何疑于華藏世界乎。
凈行品。
先德有以此品令蓮社中人各各持誦蓋是即塵勞而為佛事不離穢土而已成凈邦者也人各持誦不亦宜乎。
十住品。
四教儀注雲華嚴十住前無十信位或以十梵行當之以梵行在十住前故也然經中十住第十五梵行第十六而晉經亦十住第十一梵行第十二何名梵行在前又問明品不出十信之名已具十信之事注者蓋未察耳。
隨好光明功德品。
阿僧祇品明出世間廣大算數菩薩尚不能知必佛自說固矣隨好光明菩薩亦不能知者何也蓋佛有無量相今姑就足言相有無量好今姑就一好言好有無量光
今姑就一光言即此一光不特菩薩聲聞天人等蒙其利益而下被地獄眾生又不特脫離地獄生於人世而徑生於天又不特生天而直登十地如是至神至妙至廣至大超情越量不思議事非佛金口儔能言之。
普賢行愿品。
華嚴所說十方法界如是廣大不可思議圓頓法門如是廣大不可思議普賢菩薩為華嚴長子如是廣大不可思議所發十愿如是廣大不可思議而要其歸宿乃曰愿我臨欲命終時盡除一切諸障礙面見彼佛阿彌陀即得往生安樂剎夫不曰見遮那不曰生華藏而所愿在見彌陀生安樂果何為而然哉又繼之以愿于勝蓮華生又繼之以愿于佛前授記又繼之以普愿沉溺眾生悉得往生彼剎噫誦是經可以深長思矣。
愿我臨欲命終時。
十愿長行俱曰善男子則知是普賢勸發眾生今頌中曰愿我臨欲命終故清涼大師謂應以愿我二字作是人讀之則文義明顯矣人有因此疑普賢勸人非其自願遂以往生專為凡夫不知菩薩自利利人曾無二心勸人如是則自願亦如是又何疑乎經云佛告彌勒此世界有七百二十億菩薩如彌勒者皆生彼國乃至無量佛剎菩薩往生普賢何獨不願。
△永嘉集
恰恰用心時恰恰無心用無心恰恰用常用恰恰無。
此四句先出心體為下文惺寂張本言心體本來如是故惺寂工夫不可偏廢也恰恰兩解一云恰恰者用心也依
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：現在姑且就一光來說，這光不僅菩薩、聲聞、天人等蒙受其利益，而且下及地獄眾生。又不僅脫離地獄而生於人世，而且直接生於天界。又不僅生於天界，而且直接登上十地（菩薩修行的十個階段）。像這樣至神至妙、至廣至大的超情越量、不可思議之事，不是佛的金口也不能完全說盡。
出自《普賢行愿品》。
華嚴經所說的十方法界如此廣大不可思議，圓頓法門如此廣大不可思議，普賢菩薩作為華嚴會上諸菩薩之首，他的境界如此廣大不可思議，所發的十大愿如此廣大不可思議。而要說到它的歸宿，乃是說『愿我臨欲命終時，盡除一切諸障礙，面見彼佛阿彌陀（Amitabha，西方極樂世界的佛），即得往生安樂剎（Sukhavati，阿彌陀佛的凈土）』。經中不說見遮那佛（Vairocana，毗盧遮那佛，通常被認為是法身佛），不說生華藏世界（Lotus Treasury World，華藏莊嚴世界），而所愿在於見阿彌陀佛，生安樂凈土，這是為什麼呢？又接著說『愿于勝蓮華生』，又接著說『愿于佛前授記』，又接著說『普愿沉溺眾生悉得往生彼剎』。唉！誦讀這部經，可以深入而長久地思考啊。
『愿我臨欲命終時。』
十大愿的長行文中都說『善男子』，就知道這是普賢菩薩勸發眾生。現在頌文中說『愿我臨欲命終』，所以清涼澄觀大師認為應該把『愿我』二字理解為『是人』，這樣文義就明顯了。有人因此懷疑普賢菩薩勸人往生，並非他自己的願望，於是把往生只看作是凡夫的事情，卻不知道菩薩自利利人，從來沒有二心。勸人如此，那麼自己的願望也應該如此，又有什麼可懷疑的呢？經中說，佛告訴彌勒菩薩（Maitreya）：『此世界有七百二十億菩薩，像彌勒菩薩這樣的，都往生到那個國度。』乃至無量佛剎的菩薩都往生凈土，普賢菩薩又怎麼會不願往生呢？
△永嘉禪師的《永嘉集》
恰恰用心時，恰恰無心用，無心恰恰用，常用恰恰無。
這四句先點明心體的本來面目，為下文強調惺寂（覺醒與寂靜）雙運打下基礎。說明心體本來就是這樣，所以覺醒和寂靜的功夫不可偏廢。『恰恰』有兩種解釋，一種解釋是『恰恰』就是用心。依靠
【English Translation】 English version: Now, let's just take one ray of light as an example. This light not only benefits Bodhisattvas, Sravakas (voice-hearers), Devas (gods), and other beings, but also extends down to beings in hell. Moreover, it not only liberates them from hell to be reborn in the human world, but also directly leads them to be born in the heavens. Furthermore, it not only leads them to be born in the heavens, but also directly ascends them to the Ten Bhumis (ten stages of Bodhisattva practice). Such supremely divine, supremely wondrous, supremely vast, and supremely great matters, transcending emotions and exceeding measure, are inconceivable events that even the Buddha's golden mouth cannot fully express.
From the 'Samantabhadra's Conduct and Vows' Chapter.
The ten Dharma realms described in the Avatamsaka Sutra are so vast and inconceivable. The perfect and sudden Dharma gate is so vast and inconceivable. Samantabhadra Bodhisattva, as the eldest son of the Avatamsaka assembly, is so vast and inconceivable. The ten vows he made are so vast and inconceivable. And to speak of its ultimate destination, it is said, 'When I am about to die, may I eliminate all obstacles, see that Buddha Amitabha (Amitabha, the Buddha of the Western Pure Land), and be reborn in the Land of Bliss (Sukhavati, Amitabha's Pure Land).' The sutra does not say to see Vairocana Buddha (Vairocana, often considered the Dharmakaya Buddha), nor does it say to be born in the Lotus Treasury World, but the vow is to see Amitabha Buddha and be born in the Land of Bliss. Why is this so? It continues with 'May I be born in a supreme lotus flower,' then 'May I receive prediction of Buddhahood before the Buddha,' and then 'May all beings drowning in suffering be reborn in that land.' Alas! Reciting this sutra allows for deep and prolonged contemplation.
'When I am about to die.'
The long prose sections of the Ten Great Vows all say 'Good man,' which shows that Samantabhadra Bodhisattva is encouraging all beings. Now, the verse says 'When I am about to die,' so Master Qingliang (澄觀大師) believes that the words 'When I' should be understood as 'This person,' so that the meaning of the text becomes clear. Some people therefore doubt that Samantabhadra Bodhisattva is encouraging others, not expressing his own vow, and thus regard rebirth in the Pure Land as only for ordinary people. They do not know that Bodhisattvas benefit themselves and others without any duality. If he encourages others in this way, then his own vow should also be the same. What is there to doubt? The sutra says that the Buddha told Maitreya Bodhisattva (Maitreya): 'In this world, there are seven hundred and twenty billion Bodhisattvas like Maitreya Bodhisattva, all of whom will be reborn in that land.' Even Bodhisattvas from countless Buddha lands are reborn in the Pure Land, so why would Samantabhadra Bodhisattva not wish to be reborn there?
△ Yongjia Collection
Precisely when using the mind, precisely when using no-mind; no-mind precisely when using, constant use precisely when not.
These four lines first point out the original face of the mind-essence, laying the foundation for the following emphasis on the dual cultivation of wakefulness and stillness. It explains that the mind-essence is originally like this, so the effort of wakefulness and stillness cannot be neglected. There are two explanations for 'precisely,' one explanation is that 'precisely' is using the mind. Relying on
此解亦得但恰恰即是用心何須句句入此二字一云恰恰者適當也今用此解則常言所謂恰好也恰好正用心時恰好正無心用不是用心已過方乃無心即時用心即時無心適當一時之頃也下二句反覆申明而已先言無心恰恰用者上明恰恰用心時恰恰無心用今明恰恰無心時恰恰有心用也末句又重申之言此不獨一念為然如是恰恰常用而常無即影射如是恰恰常無而常用也故知心體本自有無不二下文惺惺寂寂不過復其本體而豈有所加損哉然此非永嘉語融禪師偈也偈有八句永嘉擷取其四耳偈云恰恰用心時恰恰無心用曲談名相勞直說無繁重無心恰恰用常用恰恰無今說無心處不與有心殊至哉言也非真了了何能及此。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這種解釋也可以，但『恰恰』就是指用心，何必句句都落入『用心』這兩個字呢？有人說，『恰恰』就是適當的意思。如果用這種解釋，那就是我們常說的『恰好』。恰好正是用心的時候，恰好正是無心用的時候，不是用心已過之後才達到無心，而是即時用心，即時無心，在適當的一瞬間。下面兩句反覆申明這個道理。先說『無心恰恰用』，是說明在恰恰用心的時候，恰恰是無心用；現在說『恰恰無心用』，是說明在恰恰無心的時候，恰恰是有心用。最後一句又再次申明，說這不僅僅是一念如此，而是像這樣恰恰常用而常常無，也影射像這樣恰恰常無而常用。所以要知道，心體本來就是有無不二的。下文的『惺惺寂寂』不過是恢復其本體，哪裡有什麼增加或減少呢？然而，這並非永嘉（Yongjia）的語錄，而是融禪師（Rong Chanshi）的偈語。偈語有八句，永嘉只擷取了其中的四句。偈語說：『恰恰用心時，恰恰無心用，曲談名相勞，直說無繁重，無心恰恰用，常用恰恰無，今說無心處，不與有心殊。』說得太好了！如果不是真正明瞭，怎麼能達到這種境界呢？ English version: This explanation is also acceptable, but '恰恰 (qiàqià)' precisely refers to the act of engaging the mind. Why must every phrase fall into these two words, 'engaging the mind'? Some say '恰恰 (qiàqià)' means 'appropriate'. If we use this explanation, it's like what we often say as 'just right'. 'Just right' is precisely the time of engaging the mind; 'just right' is precisely the time of using without mind. It's not that one achieves no-mind after the mind has been used, but rather, at the very moment of using the mind, there is no-mind; it's in that appropriate instant. The following two sentences repeatedly clarify this principle. First, 'no-mind, just right, using' explains that at the moment of 'just right' engaging the mind, it is precisely using without mind. Now, 'just right, no-mind, using' explains that at the moment of 'just right' no-mind, it is precisely engaging the mind. The last sentence reiterates, saying that this is not only true for a single thought, but it's like this: 'just right' often used and often not; it also implies 'just right' often not and often used. Therefore, know that the essence of mind is originally non-dual in being and non-being. The '惺惺寂寂 (xīngxīng jìjì)' (clear and still) in the following text is merely restoring its original state; how could there be any addition or subtraction? However, these are not the words of Yongjia (永嘉), but rather the verse of Chan Master Rong (融禪師). The verse has eight lines, of which Yongjia only excerpted four. The verse says: 'Just right, engaging the mind, just right, using without mind; elaborately discussing terms is laborious, directly speaking is without complexity; no-mind, just right, using; often used, just right, without; now speaking of the place of no-mind, it is not different from having mind.' How wonderfully said! If one is not truly clear, how could one reach this state?
【English Translation】 English version: This explanation is also acceptable, but '恰恰 (qiàqià)' precisely refers to the act of engaging the mind. Why must every phrase fall into these two words, 'engaging the mind'? Some say '恰恰 (qiàqià)' means 'appropriate'. If we use this explanation, it's like what we often say as 'just right'. 'Just right' is precisely the time of engaging the mind; 'just right' is precisely the time of using without mind. It's not that one achieves no-mind after the mind has been used, but rather, at the very moment of using the mind, there is no-mind; it's in that appropriate instant. The following two sentences repeatedly clarify this principle. First, 'no-mind, just right, using' explains that at the moment of 'just right' engaging the mind, it is precisely using without mind. Now, 'just right, no-mind, using' explains that at the moment of 'just right' no-mind, it is precisely engaging the mind. The last sentence reiterates, saying that this is not only true for a single thought, but it's like this: 'just right' often used and often not; it also implies 'just right' often not and often used. Therefore, know that the essence of mind is originally non-dual in being and non-being. The '惺惺寂寂 (xīngxīng jìjì)' (clear and still) in the following text is merely restoring its original state; how could there be any addition or subtraction? However, these are not the words of Yongjia (永嘉), but rather the verse of Chan Master Rong (融禪師). The verse has eight lines, of which Yongjia only excerpted four. The verse says: 'Just right, engaging the mind, just right, using without mind; elaborately discussing terms is laborious, directly speaking is without complexity; no-mind, just right, using; often used, just right, without; now speaking of the place of no-mind, it is not different from having mind.' How wonderfully said! If one is not truly clear, how could one reach this state?