Name: Great Vehicle Calming and Contemplation Dharma Gate · Volume 3 (大乘止观法门 · 第三)
Author: 慧思说

次明何故依止。問曰。何故依止此心修止觀。答曰。以此心是一切法根本故。若法依本則難破壞。是故依止此心修止觀也人若不依止此心修於止觀則不得成。何以故。以從本以來未有一法心外得建立故。又此心體本性具足寂用二義。為欲熏彼二義令顯現故。何以故。以其非熏不顯故。顯何所用。謂自利利他故。有如是因緣故。依此心修止觀也。問曰。何謂心體寂用二義。答曰。心體平等離一切相。即是寂義。體具違順二用。即是用義。是故修習止行即能除滅虛妄紛動。令此心體寂靜離相。即為自利。修習觀行令此心用顯現繁興。即為利他。問曰。修止觀者為除生死。若令顯現繁興此即轉增流浪。答曰。不然。但除其病而不除法。病在執情不在大用。是故熾然六道權現無間。即是違用顯現。而復畢竟清淨不為世染。智慧照明故相好圓備。身心安住勝妙境界。具足一切諸佛功德。即是順用顯現也。此明止觀依止中何故依止竟。次明以何依止。就中復有三門差別。一明以何依止體狀。二明破小乘人執。三明破大乘人執。初明以何依止體狀者。問曰。以何依止此心修止觀。答曰。以意識依止此心修行止觀也。此義云何謂以意識能知名義故。聞說一切諸法自性寂靜本來無相。但以虛妄因緣故有諸法。然虛妄法有即非有。唯一真心亦無別真相可取。聞此說已。方便修習知法本寂唯是一心。然此意識如此解時。念念熏於本識增益解性之力。解性增已更起意識。轉復明利知法如實久久熏心。故解性圓明照己體。本唯真寂意識即息。爾時本識轉成無分別智。亦名證智。以是因緣故。以意識依止真心修止行也。是故論言。以依本覺故有不覺。依不覺故而有妄心。能知名義為說本覺。故得始覺即同本覺。如實不有始覺之異也。問曰。上來唯言淨心真心。今言本識意有何異答曰。本識阿梨耶識。和合識。種子識。果報識等。皆是一體異名。上共不共相中。已明真如與阿梨耶同異之義。今更為汝重說。謂真心是體。本識是相。六七等識是用。如似水為體。流為相。波為用。類此可知。是故論云。不生不滅與生滅和合說名阿梨耶識。即本識也。以與生死作本故名為本。是故論云。以種子時阿梨耶識與一切法作根本種子故。即其義也。又復經云。自性清淨心。復言。彼心為煩惱所染。此明真心。雖復體具淨性。而復體具染性故。而為煩惱所染。以此論之。明知就體偏據一性說為淨心。就相與染事和合說為本識。以是義故上來就體性以明。今就事相說。亦無所妨。問曰。熏本識時即熏真心以不。答曰。觸流之時即觸於水。是故向言增益解性者。即是益於真心性淨之力也。是故論云。阿梨耶識有二分。一者覺。二者不覺。覺即是淨心。不覺即是無明。此二和合說為本識。是故道淨心時更無別有阿梨耶。道阿梨耶時更無別有淨心。但以體相義別故。有此二名之異。問曰。云何以意識依止淨心修觀行。答曰。以意識知名義故。聞說真心之體。雖復寂靜而以熏習因緣故。性依熏起顯現世間出世間法。以聞此說故。雖由止行知一切法畢竟無相。而復即知性依熏起顯現諸法不無虛相。但諸凡惑無明覆意識。故不知諸法唯是心作。似有非有虛相無實。以不知故流轉生死。受種種苦。是故我當教彼知法如實。以是因緣即起慈悲。乃至具行四攝六度等行。如是觀時意識亦念念熏心。令成六度四攝慈悲等種子。復不令心識為止所沒。即是用義漸顯現也。以久久熏故真心作用之性。究竟圓興法界德備。三身攝化普門示現。以是因緣以意識依止淨心修觀行也。次明破小乘人執。問曰。但以意識修習止觀豈不成耶。何故要須依止淨心答曰。意識無體。唯以淨心為體。是故要須依止。又復意識念念生滅前非其後。若不以淨心為依止者。雖修諸行無轉勝義。何以故。以其前念非後念故。如前人聞法後人未聞。後人若聞無勝前人之義。何以故。俱始一遍聞故。意識亦爾。前後兩異前雖曾聞隨念即滅。後若重聞亦不增勝。何以故。前後二念俱始一遍聞故。又復如似前人學得甲字後已命終。後人更學乙字。即唯解乙字不識甲字。何以故。前後人異故。意識亦爾。前滅後生不相逐及。是故不得所修增廣。若以淨心為體。意識念念引所思修熏淨心性。性依熏起以成種子。前念念滅後念起時。即與前念所修種子和合而起。是故更修彼法即勝於前一念。如是念念轉勝。是故所修成就若不久熏尚自種子力劣。便則廢失所修不成。何況全無依止。直莫前後相熏而得成就也。以是因緣唯用意識不假依止。無有是處。問曰。小乘法中不明有本識。何得所聞所思皆得成就。答曰。博地凡夫乃至聞教畜生等。有所修習得成者。尚由本識為體故成。何況二乘。但彼自不知此義非彼不假淨心也。問曰。不聞教畜生。豈無淨心為體。答曰。造作癡業尤重。熏心起報亦即極鈍。雖有黠慧之性及有宿生黠慧種子。但以現報所障故。不得有用。故不聞教非是無淨心也。次明破大乘人執。問曰。但用淨心修行止觀即足。何用意識為。答曰。已如上說。由意識能知名義。能滅境界。能熏本識。令惑滅解成故須意識也。問曰。淨心自性寂靜即名為止。自體照明即名為觀。彼意識名義及以境界體性非有。何論意識尋名知義滅自心境界耶。答曰。若就心體而論實自如此但無始已來為無明妄想熏故。不覺自動顯現諸法。若不方便尋名知義依義修行。觀知境界有即非有者。何由可得寂靜照明之用。問曰。淨心自知己性本寂即當念息。何用意識為。答曰。淨心無二。復為無明所覆故。不得自知本寂。要為無塵智熏無明盡滅。方得念息。問曰。但息於念心即寂照。何故要須智熏寂照始現。答曰。若無無塵智熏心裡。無明終不可滅。無明不滅念即叵息。問曰。我今不觀境界。不念名義。證心寂慮泯然絕相。豈非心體寂照真如三昧。答曰。汝證心時。為心自證。為由他證。為證於他。若心自證即是不由功用而得寂靜。若爾一切眾生皆不作心求於寂靜。亦應心住。若言非是自然而證。蓋由心自作意自證名為自證者。作意即是意識。即有能所即名為他。云何得成心自證也若非他證。但心自止故名自證者。若不作意即無能所。云何能使心證。若當作意即是意識即是他證。若言眾生體實皆證。但由妄想不知體證。故有其念能知心體本性證寂。不念諸法故念即自息。即是真如三昧者。為是意識能知本寂。為是淨心能知本寂。若是淨心自知本寂不念諸法者。一切眾生皆有淨心。應悉自知本寂。故自息滅妄識。自然而得真如三昧。以不修不得故知淨心不得名自知也。若言意識能知淨心本證即自息滅。故但是意識自滅非是意識能證淨心。是故說言。心自證者意識知心本證之時為見淨心。故知本證為不見淨心能知證也。若言不見淨心能知證者。不見佛心應知佛證。若見淨心故知證者。淨心即是可見之相。云何論言心真如者離心緣相。又復經言。非識所能識亦非心境界。以此驗之。定知意識不見心也。以見與不見無有道理知心本寂故。設使心體本證妄念之心不可息也。若言妄識雖不見淨心。而依經教知心本寂故能知之。智熏於淨心令心自知本證。即不起後念名為自證者。汝依經教知心本寂之時。為作寂相而知。為不作寂相而知。若作寂相而知者。妄想之相云何名寂。若不作相即心無所繫便更馳散。若言作意不令馳散者。即有所緣。既有所緣即還有相。云何得言不作相也。若言七識能見淨心。故知心本寂。知已熏心。令心自知本證故不起後念。即名為自證者。是亦不然何以故。以七識是我執識故。不能見心本寂。又復若為能緣之所緣者。即非淨心。如上心體狀中已說。既所緣非實。故熏心還生妄念也。以是義故無有道理。淨心自證不起後念也。若言由他證者。是亦不然。何以故。心體自寂靜故。但以有六七識等名之為他。由有此他故說他心不證。是故乃可證他。何須以他證心也。若言心體雖復本寂。但以無始無明妄念熏故。有此妄念習氣在於心中。是故心體亦不證寂。故須他證者。何等方便能除心中習氣令心證也。若言更不起新念。故不熏益彼習氣。彼即自滅者。彼未滅間有何所以不起新念也。若無別法為對治者。彼諸習氣法應起念。若起念者更益彼力也。以是義故。由他所證亦無道理。若言不須用他證心但證於他。以他證故習氣自滅者。是亦不然。他既有習氣為根本。故念念常起。若不先除彼習氣種子者。妄念何由可證也。又復淨心無有道理能證於他。若能證他者。一切眾生皆有淨心。應悉自然除於妄念也。若言妄念前後自相抑止。久久即息故名為證他者。為前止後為後止前若言前念止後念者。前在之時後識未生後若起時前念已謝不相逐及。云何能止。若言後念止前念者。亦復如是不相逐及。云何能止。若前念起時即自嫌起。嫌起之心熏於本識令不起後念者。心不自見。云何自嫌。若後念嫌前故。能嫌之心熏於本識令不更起後念者。能嫌之心嫌前心時為知前心是空故嫌。為不知是空故嫌。若知是空即是無塵智也。汝云何言不須此智。又若知是空則應不嫌。若不知前念空者。此心即是無明。何以故。以其前念實空而不能知故。又復不知前念空故。執有實念而生嫌心即是妄想。何以故。以其於空妄起實有想故。此能嫌之心既是無明妄想故。即是動法復言熏心。此乃亦增不覺。重更益動生起之識。於是雲興而言能令後念不起者。蓋是夢中之夢未惺覺也。故作斯說彷彿不睡者。必應不言如此。又復若言不作心念諸法故念不起者。為淨心不作心念。為是意識不作心念。若是淨心不作心念者。本來何因作心念法。今忽何因不念法也。若是意識不念法者。意識即是其念。若言意識不作心念法者。為對見法塵而不念。為不對見法塵而不念。為對而不見而不念。為全不對塵名為不念。若不對塵云何說為意識。何以故。以識者必識所識故。若對而不見即是頑瞽之法。若見而不念為何所因而得不念。為知空故所以不念。謂為有故所以不念。若知是空是無塵之智。對而不見見而不念。二俱無妨。何故汝言不須此智。若謂為有即不能不念。又復謂有之時即已是念。又復謂為有故。即是無明妄想而復不念。譬如怯人閉目入闇道理開眼而入。唯有外闇倒生怕怖閉目而入。內外俱黑反謂安隱。此亦如是。念前法時唯有迷境無明而生。嫌心不念之時心境俱闇。反謂為善。又復若不作意念法心則馳散。若作意不念諸法。作意即是亂動非寂靜法。云何得名證心也。但以專心在此不念故。即以此不念為境。意識為此境所繫故。於餘境界無容攀緣。是故惑者不知此事。便謂於諸法無復攀緣。遂更深生寶玩將為真法。是以策意相續不休。以晝夜久習熟故。不須作意自然而進。但不覺生滅常流剎那恒起。起復不知無明妄想未遣一毫。又不解自身居在何位。便言我心寂住。應是真如三昧。作如是計者且好不識分量也。雖然但以專心一境故。亦是一家止法。遠與無塵之智為基。近與猨猴之躁為鎖。比彼攀緣五欲游戲六根者。此即百千萬倍為殊為勝。但非心體寂照真如三昧耳。是故行者為而不執即是漸法門。若欲成就出世之道必藉無塵之智也。此明止觀依止中以何依止竟。上標五番建立中第一止觀依止訖。次明止觀境界者謂三自性法。就中復作兩番分別。一總明三性。二別明三性。所言總明三性者。謂出障真如及佛淨德悉名真實性。在障之真與染和合名阿梨耶識。此即是依地性六識七識妄想分別悉名分別性。此是大位之說也。所言別明三性者。初辨真實性。就中復有兩種一者有垢淨心以為真實性。二者無垢淨心以為真實性。所言有垢淨心者。即是眾生之體實事染之本性。具足違用依熏變現。故言有垢。而復體包淨用自性無染。能熏之垢本空。所現之相常寂。復稱為淨。故言有垢淨心也。所言無垢淨心者。即是諸佛之體性淨德之本實。雖具法爾違用之性。染熏息故事染永泯。復備自性順用之能。淨熏滿故事淨德顯。故言無垢。雖從熏顯。性淨之用非增。假遣昏雲。體照之功本具。復稱淨也。故言無垢淨心。然依熏約用。故有有垢無垢之殊。就體談真。本無無染有染之異。即是平等實性。大總法門。故言真實性。問曰。既言有垢淨。亦應稱無垢染。答曰。亦有此義。諸佛違用即是無垢染。但為令眾生捨染欣淨。是故不彰也。二明依他性者亦有二種。一者淨分依他性。二者染分依他性。清淨分依他性者。即彼真如體。具染淨二性之用。但得無漏淨法所熏。故事染之功斯盡。名為清淨。即復依彼淨業所熏。故性淨之用顯現。故名依他。所現即是所證三身淨土。一切自利利他之德是也。問曰。性染之用何謂由染熏滅故不起生死。雖然成佛之後此性豈全無用。答曰。此性雖為無漏所熏故不起生死。但由發心已來。悲願之力熏習故。復為可化之机為緣熏示違之用亦得顯現。所謂現同六道示有三毒權受苦報應從死滅等。即是清淨分別性法。問曰。既從染性而起云何名為清淨分。答曰。但由是佛德故。以佛望於眾生故。名此德以為清淨。若偏據佛德之中論染淨者。此德實是示違染用。問曰。既言依他性法。云何名為分別性。答曰。此德依於悲願所熏起故。即是依他性法。若將此德對緣施化。即名分別性法也。問曰。無垢真實性。與清淨依他性竟有何異。答曰。無垢真實性者體顯離障為義。即是體也。清淨依他性者。能隨熏力淨德差別起現為事。即是相也。清淨分別性者。對緣施設為能。即是用也。所言染濁依他性者。即彼淨心雖體具違順二用之性。但為分別性中所有無明染法所熏故。性違之用依熏變現虛狀等法。所謂流轉生死輪迴六趣。故言染濁依他性法也。問曰。性順之用未有淨業所熏。故不得顯現。雖然在於生死之中豈全無用耶。答曰。雖未為無漏熏故淨德不現。但為諸佛同體智力所護念故。修人天善遇善知識漸發道心。即是性淨之用也。問曰。一切眾生皆具性淨等為諸佛所護。何因發心先後復有發不發。答曰。無始已來造業差別。輕重不同先後不一。罪垢輕者蒙佛智力。罪垢重者有力不蒙。問曰。罪垢重者性淨之用豈全無能。答曰。但有性淨之體不壞。以垢重故更不有能也。問曰。上言凡聖之體皆具順違二性。但由染淨熏力有現不現。何故諸佛淨熏滿足而不妨示違之用有力。凡夫染業尤重而全使性順之用無能也。若以染重故性淨無能。亦應淨滿故染用無力。既淨滿而有示違之功。定知染重亦有性順之用。答曰。諸佛有大悲大願之熏。故性違起法界之染德。能令机感斯見。眾生無厭凡欣聖之習。故性順匿無邊之淨用。不使諸佛同鑑無淨器可鑑。故大聖捨之以表知机有染德可見故。下凡尋之明可化也。是故淨滿不妨有於染德。染重不得有於淨用。三明分別性者。亦有二種。一者清淨分別性。二者染濁分別性。所言清淨分別性者。即彼清淨依他性法中。所有利他之德。對彼內證無分別智故。悉名分別所謂一切種智能知世諦種種差別。乃至一切眾生心心數法無不盡知。及以示現五通三輪之相。應化六道四生之形。乃至依於內證之慧。起彼教用之智。說己所得示於未聞。如斯等事悉名清淨分別性法。此義云何。謂雖起無邊之事。而復畢竟不為世染不作功用。自然成辦故言清淨。即此清淨之覺隨境異用故言分別。又復對緣攝化令他清淨。攝益之德為他分別故言清淨分別性也。所言染濁分別性法者。即彼染濁依他性中。虛狀法內有於似色似識似塵等法。何故皆名為似。以皆一心依熏所現故。但是心相似法。非實故名為似。由此似識一念起現之時。即與似塵俱起。故當起之時即不知似塵似色等是心所作虛相無實。以不知故即妄分別執虛為實。以妄執故境從心轉皆成實事。即是今時凡夫所見之事。如此執時。即念念熏心還成依他性。於上還執復成分別性。如是念念虛妄互相生也。問曰。分別之性與依他性既迭互相生竟。有何別。答曰。依他性法者。心性依熏故起。但是心相體虛無實。分別性法者。以無明故不知依他之法是虛。即妄執以為實事。是故雖無異體相生而虛實有殊。故言分別性法也。更有一義。以明三性。就心體平等名真實性。心體為染淨所繫依。隨染淨二法名依他性。所現虛相果報名分別性。又復更有一義。就依他性中即分別為三性。一者淨分。謂在染之真即名真實性。二者不淨分。謂染法習氣種子及虛相果報即是分別性。二性和合無二即是依他性也。問曰。似識妄分別時。為是意識總能分別六塵。為六識各各自分別一塵。答曰。五識見塵時各與意識俱時而起。如眼識見似色時。即是一意識俱時。分別妄執也。餘識亦如是。是故意識總能分別妄執六塵五識。但能得五塵不生分別妄執。問曰。妄執五塵為實者。為是五意識。為是第六意識。答曰。大乘中不明五意識與第六別。但能分別者悉名意識。上來是明第二止觀所觀境界竟。次明第三止觀體狀。就中復有二番明義。一就染濁三性以明止觀體狀。二就清淨三性以明止觀體狀。初就染濁三性中復作三門分別。一依分別性以明。二約依他性以顯三對真實性以示。對分別性以明止觀體狀者。先從觀入止。所言觀者。當觀五陰及外六塵。隨一一法悉作是念。我今所見此法謂為實有形質堅礙本來如是者。但是意識有果時無明故。不知此法是虛。以不知法是虛故。即起妄想執以為實。是故今時意裡確然將作實事。復當念言。無始已來由執實故。於一切境界起貪瞋癡。造種種業招生感死。莫能自出。作此解者。即名觀門。非此觀已復作此念。我今既知由無明妄想。非實謂實故流轉生死。今復云何仍欲信此癡妄之心。是故違之彊觀諸法。唯是心相虛狀無實。猶如小兒愛鏡中像謂是實人。然此鏡像體性無實。但由小兒心自謂實。謂實之時即無實也。我今亦爾。以迷妄故非實謂實。設使意裡確然執為實時。即是無實。猶如想心所見境界無有實事也。復當觀此。能觀之心亦無實念。但以癡妄謂有實念。道理即無實也。如是次第以後念破前念。猶如夢中所有憶念思量之心無有實念也。作此解故執心止息。即名從觀入止也。復有知諸法無實。故反觀本自謂為實時。但是無明妄想即名從止起觀。若從此止徑入依他性觀者。即名從止入觀。次明依他性中止觀體狀者。亦先從觀入止。所言觀者。謂因前分別性中止行知法無實故。此中即解一切五陰六塵。隨一一法悉皆心作。但有虛相猶如想心所見似有境界其體是虛。作此解者即名為觀。作此觀已復作是念。此等虛法。但以無明妄想妄業熏心故。心似所熏之法顯現。猶如熱病因緣眼中自現空華。然此華體相有即非有不生不滅。我今所見虛法亦復如是。唯一心所現有即非有。本自無生今即無滅。如是緣心遣心知相本無。故虛相之執即滅。即名從觀入止。既知諸法有即非有。而復知。不妨非有。而有似有顯現即名從止起觀。若從此止行徑入真實性觀者。此即名從止入觀也。次明第三真實性中止觀體狀者。亦先從觀入止。所言觀者。因前依他性中止行。知一切法有即非有故。所以此中即知一切法本來唯心心外無法。復作是念。既言心外無法。唯有一心。此心之相何者是也。為無前二性故。即將此無以為心耶。為異彼無外別有淨心耶。作此念時即名為觀。即復念言。無是無法對有而生。有尚本來不有。何有無法以為淨心。又復無法為四句。攝淨心即離四句。何得以此無法為淨心也。作此念時執無之心。即滅則名為止。又從此止更入觀門。觀於淨心作如是念。二性之無既非是心者。更有何法以為淨心。又復此心為可見耶。為不可見耶。為可念耶。為不可念耶。作此分別時即名為觀。即復念言心外無法。何有能見此心者。何有能念此心者。若更緣念此心即成境界。即有能緣所緣。即是心外有智能觀此心何名為如。又復我覓心之心體唯是淨心。何有異法可緣可念也。但以妄想習氣故。自生分別。分別之相有即非有。體唯淨心。又復設使分別即知正是淨心分別也。喻如眼見空華。聞言華是眼作有即非有唯有自眼。聞此語已。知華本無不著於華。反更開眼自覓己眼竟不能見。復謂種種眼根是己家眼。何以故。以不知能覓之眼即是所覓眼故。若能知華本無眼外無法。唯有自眼不須更覓於眼者。即不以眼覓眼。行者亦爾。聞言心外無法唯有一心。故即使不念外法。但以妄想習氣故更生分別覓於淨心。是故當知。能覓淨心者。即是淨心。設使應生分別亦即是淨心。而淨心之體常無分別。作此解者。名為隨順真如。亦得名為止門。久久修習無明妄想習氣盡故。念即自息名證真如。亦無異法來證。但如息波入水。即名此真如為大寂靜止門。復以發心已來觀門方便及以悲願熏習力故。即於定中興起大用。或從定起若念若見若心若境。種種差別。即是真如用義也。此名從止起觀。又復熾然分別而常體寂。雖常體寂而即緣起分別。此名止觀雙行。上來三番明止觀二門。當知觀門即能成立。三性緣起為有。止門即能除滅。三性得入三無性。入三無性者。謂除分別性入無相性。除依他性入無生性。除真實性入無性性。就真實性中所以有四番明止觀者。但此窮深之處微妙難知。是故前示妄空非實。除妄空以明止。即是無性性。次一顯即偽是真。息異執以辨寂。即是無真性。是故無性性。或名無無性。或云無真性也。第三一重止觀者。即是根本真如三昧。最後第四一重止觀者。即是雙現前也。又復行者。若利机深識則不須從第一分別性修。但徑依第二依他性修。此依他性亦得名分別性。以具有二性義也。若不能如是者。即須次第從第一性修。然後依第二性修。依次而進也。終不得越前二性徑依第三性修也。又復雖是初行。不妨念念之中三番並學資成第三番也。問曰。既言真實性法有何可除。若可除者即非真實。答曰。執二無以為真實性者即須除之。故曰無無性妄智分別淨心。謂為可觀者亦須息此分別異相。示其無別真性可得分別。故言無真性。但除此等於真性上橫執之真。非謂除滅真如之體。復更有譬喻。能顯三性止觀二門。今當說之。譬如手巾本來無兔。真實性法亦復如是。唯一淨心自性離相也。加以幻力巾似兔現。依他性法亦復如是。妄熏真性現六道相也。愚小無知謂兔為實。分別性法亦復如是。意識迷妄執虛為實。是故經言。一切法如幻。此喻三性觀門也。若知此兔依巾似有唯虛無實。無相性智亦復如是。能知諸法依心似有唯是虛狀。無實相性也。若知虛兔之相唯是手巾。巾上之兔有即非有本來不生。無生性智亦復如是。能知虛相唯是真心。心所現相有即非有。自性無生也。若知手巾本來是有。不將無兔以為手巾。無性性。智亦復如是。能知淨心本性自有。不以二性之無為真實性。此即喻三無性止門也。是故若欲捨離世諦當修止門入三無性。若欲不壞緣起建立世諦。當修觀門解知三性。若不修觀門即不知世諦所以緣起。若不修止門即不知真諦所以常寂。若不修觀門便不知真即是俗。若不修止門即不知俗即是真。以是義故。須依幻喻通達三性三無性。如幻喻能通達三性三無性。其餘夢化。影像。水月。陽焰。乾城。餓鬼等喻。但是依實起虛執虛為實者。悉喻三性。類以可知。若直以此等諸喻依實起虛故。偏喻依他性亦得也。但虛體是實即可喻真實性。虛隨執轉即可喻分別性。是故此等諸喻通譬三性。解此喻法次第無相即可喻三無性也。又更分別夢喻以顯三性三無性。譬如凡夫慣習諸法故即於夢中心現諸法。依他性法亦復如是。由無始已來果時無明及以妄想熏習真實性故。真心依熏現於虛相果報也。彼夢裡人為睡蓋所覆故。不能自知己身他身皆是夢心所作。即便執為實事。是故夢裡自他種種受用得成。分別性法亦復如是。意識為果時無明所迷。故不知自他。咸是真心依熏所作。便即妄執為實。是故自他種種受用得成也。是以經言。是身如夢為虛妄見。虛者即是依他性。妄者即是分別性。此即緣起三性為觀門也。然此夢中所執為實者。但是夢心之相本無有實。分別性法亦復如是。但是虛想從心所起本來無實。即是無相性也。又彼夢中虛相。有即非有。唯是夢心更無餘法。依他性法亦復如是。自他虛相。有即非有。唯是本識更無餘法。即是無生性也。又彼夢心即是本時覺心。但由睡眠因緣故名為夢心。夢心之外無別覺心可得。真實性法亦復如是。平等無二。但以無明染法熏習因緣故。與染和合名為本識。然實本識之外無別真心可得。即是無性性法。此即除滅三性為止門也。以是喻故。三性三無性即可顯了。此明止觀體狀中約染濁三性。以明止觀體狀竟。次明清淨三性中止觀體狀。就中亦有三番。一明分別性中止觀體狀。二明依他性中止觀體狀。三明真實性中止觀體狀。第一分別性中止觀體狀者。謂知一切諸佛菩薩所有色身。及以音聲大悲大願。依報眾具殊形六道變化施設。乃至金軀現滅舍利分頒泥木彫圖表彰處所。及以經教威儀住持等法。但能利益眾生者。當知皆由大悲大願之熏。及以眾生机感之力。因緣具足熏淨心。故心性依熏顯現斯事。是故唯是真性緣起之能道理即無實也。但諸眾生有無明妄想故。曲見不虛。行者但能觀察。知此曲見執心。是無明妄想者即名為觀。以知此見是迷妄故。強作心意觀知無實唯是自心所作。如是知故實執止息即名為止。此是分別性中從觀入止也。

Next, we explain why we rely on this mind. Question: Why do we rely on this mind to cultivate cessation and insight (calming and contemplation)? Answer: This mind is the root of all phenomena. If a dharma relies on its root, it is difficult to destroy. Therefore, we rely on this mind to cultivate cessation and insight. If a person does not rely on this mind to cultivate cessation and insight, it cannot be accomplished. Why? Because from the beginning, not a single phenomenon has been established outside the mind. Furthermore, the essence of this mind is inherently complete with the two aspects of stillness and function. To fumigate these two aspects and cause them to manifest, that is the reason. Why? Because they do not manifest without fumigation. What is the purpose of manifestation? It is for self-benefit and benefiting others. For these reasons, we rely on this mind to cultivate cessation and insight.

Question: What are meant by the two aspects of the mind’s essence: stillness and function? Answer: The mind’s essence is equal, free from all characteristics; this is the meaning of stillness. The essence inherently possesses the functions of accord and opposition; this is the meaning of function. Therefore, cultivating the practice of cessation eliminates false agitation, causing the mind’s essence to be still and free from characteristics. This is self-benefit. Cultivating the practice of insight causes the mind’s function to manifest and flourish. This is benefiting others.

Question: Cultivating cessation and insight is meant to eliminate birth-and-death. If we cause it to manifest and flourish, this instead increases wandering and flow. Answer: Not so. We only eliminate the disease, not the dharma. The disease lies in attachment and grasping, not in the great function. Therefore, the vigorous manifestation of the six destinies and the provisional appearance in the Avici hell are the manifestation of the function of opposition. Yet, ultimately, it is pure and not defiled by the world. Wisdom illuminates, so marks and features are perfectly complete. The body and mind abide in sublime states, fully endowed with all the virtues of the Buddhas. This is the manifestation of the function of accord. This clarifies why we rely on cessation and insight in the section on the basis of cessation and insight.

Next, we clarify what we rely on. Within this, there are three divisions: first, clarifying the substance of what we rely on; second, refuting the attachments of the Small Vehicle practitioners; third, refuting the attachments of the Great Vehicle practitioners.

First, clarifying the substance of what we rely on: Question: What is relied on to cultivate cessation and insight with this mind? Answer: It is by relying on the consciousness (mind consciousness) to cultivate cessation and insight with this mind. What does this mean? It means that the consciousness can grasp names and meanings. Upon hearing that all phenomena are inherently still and originally without characteristics, only existing due to false causes and conditions, yet false dharmas exist as non-existence, and there is only the one true mind without any separate true characteristic to grasp, after hearing this, one skillfully cultivates, knowing that dharmas are originally still—only one mind. However, when this consciousness understands in this way, thought after thought fumigates the root consciousness, increasing the power of understanding. Once the power of understanding increases, it gives rise to further consciousness, which becomes even clearer and more acute, knowing dharmas as they truly are. Over a long time, fumigating the mind causes the understanding nature to become perfectly clear, illuminating its own essence. Originally, it is only true stillness, and the consciousness ceases. At that time, the root consciousness transforms into non-discriminative wisdom, also called realization wisdom. For this reason, one relies on the consciousness, relying on the true mind, to cultivate the practice of cessation. Therefore, the Treatise says: By relying on inherent awakening, there is non-awakening. By relying on non-awakening, there is false mind. It can know names and meanings, explaining inherent awakening, thus attaining initial awakening, which is the same as inherent awakening. In truth, there is no difference between initial awakening and inherent awakening.

Question: Earlier, we only spoke of the pure mind and true mind. Now, you speak of the root consciousness. What is the difference in meaning? Answer: The root consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna), the combined consciousness, the seed consciousness, the retribution consciousness, etc., are all the same essence with different names. In the section on common and uncommon characteristics, we have already clarified the similarity and difference between true suchness and ālaya-vijñāna. Now, I will explain it again for you. The true mind is the essence, the root consciousness is the characteristic, and the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are the functions. It is like water being the essence, flow being the characteristic, and waves being the function. This can be understood through analogy. Therefore, the Treatise says: “The union of non-arising and non-ceasing with arising and ceasing is called ālaya-vijñāna,” which is the root consciousness. Because it serves as the root for birth-and-death, it is called “root.” Hence, the Treatise says: “At the time of the seed, ālaya-vijñāna serves as the root seed for all phenomena.” This is its meaning. Furthermore, the sutra says: “The mind is pure by nature” and also says: “That mind is defiled by afflictions.” This clarifies that although the true mind’s essence inherently possesses a pure nature, it also inherently possesses a defiled nature. Therefore, it is defiled by afflictions. Based on this, we clearly know that when speaking of the essence, we emphasize one nature and call it the pure mind. When speaking of the characteristic, combined with impure phenomena, we call it the root consciousness. For this reason, earlier we clarified based on essence and nature, and now we speak based on phenomenal characteristics—there is no conflict.

Question: When we fumigate the root consciousness, do we also fumigate the true mind? Answer: When one touches the flow, one touches the water. Therefore, earlier I said that increasing the power of understanding means increasing the strength of the true mind’s pure nature. Hence, the Treatise says: “Ālaya-vijñāna has two aspects: one is awakening, the other is non-awakening. Awakening is the pure mind; non-awakening is ignorance. These two combined are called the root consciousness.” Therefore, when speaking of the pure mind, there is no separate ālaya-vijñāna. When speaking of ālaya-vijñāna, there is no separate pure mind. Only because of the difference in essence and characteristic do these two names differ.

Question: How does one rely on the consciousness (mind consciousness) in dependence on the pure mind to cultivate the practice of insight? Answer: Because the consciousness knows names and meanings, it hears that although the essence of the true mind is still, due to the causes and conditions of fumigation, nature arises based on fumigation, manifesting worldly and supramundane dharmas. Upon hearing this, although through the practice of cessation one knows that all dharmas are ultimately without characteristics, one also knows that nature arises based on fumigation, manifesting dharmas—these are not devoid of false characteristics. However, ordinary deluded beings, with ignorance covering the consciousness, do not know that all dharmas are only creations of the mind, appearing as existent yet non-existent, with false characteristics lacking reality. Because they do not know, they flow through birth-and-death, experiencing various sufferings. Therefore, I should teach them to know dharmas as they truly are. For this reason, compassion arises, and one even practices the four means of attraction and the six perfections. When practicing insight in this way, thought after thought, the consciousness also fumigates the mind, creating seeds of the six perfections, four means of attraction, compassion, etc. It also prevents the mind and consciousness from being submerged by cessation. Thus, the function gradually manifests. Over a long period of fumigation, the function of the true mind’s nature fully and perfectly arises, with the dharmadhātu virtues complete. The three bodies transform and save beings, manifesting universally. For this reason, one relies on the consciousness, relying on the pure mind, to cultivate the practice of insight.

Next, we refute the attachments of the Small Vehicle practitioners. Question: Cultivating cessation and insight only with the consciousness—would this not suffice? Why must one rely on the pure mind? Answer: The consciousness has no essence; it only takes the pure mind as its essence. Therefore, it must rely on the pure mind. Furthermore, the consciousness arises and ceases thought by thought, with each moment not continuing. If one does not take the pure mind as the basis, even if one cultivates various practices, there is no meaning of progression. Why? Because the previous moment is not the next moment. For example, a previous person hears the Dharma; a later person has not heard it. If the later person hears it, there is no superiority over the previous person. Why? Because both hear it once from the beginning. The same applies to the consciousness: the previous and later moments are different. The previous may have heard, but it perishes with the thought. If the later person hears again, it does not become superior. Why? Because both previous and later moments hear it once from the beginning. Furthermore, just as a previous person learns the character “A” but then dies, and a later person learns the character “B,” that person only knows “B” and does not know “A.” Why? Because the people are different. The same applies to the consciousness: the previous moment perishes, the next arises, and they do not follow each other. Therefore, the cultivation cannot increase. If one takes the pure mind as the essence, the consciousness, thought after thought, connects the cultivated thoughts and fumigates the pure mind’s nature. The nature, based on fumigation, arises, forming seeds. When the previous thought perishes and the next arises, it arises in combination with the seeds cultivated in the previous thought. Therefore, cultivating that dharma again becomes superior to the previous thought. Thus, thought after thought becomes progressively superior, and the cultivation is accomplished. If one does not fumigate for a long time, the power of the seeds is weak, and the cultivation is abandoned and lost. How much more so if there is no reliance at all—directly without fumigation between previous and later moments—can it be accomplished? For this reason, using only the consciousness without relying on a basis has no validity.

Question: In the Small Vehicle teachings, there is no mention of a root consciousness. How then are all that is heard and thought accomplished? Answer: Ordinary beings, even animals that hear teachings, achieve cultivation due to the root consciousness as the essence. How much more so for the two vehicles! But they themselves do not know this meaning. It is not that they do not depend on the pure mind.

Question: Do animals that do not hear teachings lack the pure mind as essence? Answer: They create heavy ignorance karma. Fumigating the mind, the retribution is extremely dull. Although they have the nature of intelligence and seeds of intelligence from past lives, because the present retribution blocks them, it cannot function. Therefore, they do not hear teachings. It is not that they lack the pure mind.

Next, we refute the attachments of the Great Vehicle practitioners. Question: Using only the pure mind to cultivate cessation and insight would suffice. Why use the consciousness? Answer: As already explained above, because the consciousness can know names and meanings, eliminate objects, and fumigate the root consciousness, causing afflictions to cease and understanding to be accomplished, the consciousness is necessary.

Question: The pure mind’s self-nature is still, which is called cessation. Its self-essence illuminates, which is called insight. The names and meanings of that consciousness, as well as objects, have no actual essence. Why discuss the consciousness seeking names, knowing meanings, and eliminating the mind’s own objects? Answer: If we speak of the mind’s essence, it is indeed so. However, since beginningless time, due to fumigation by ignorance and false thoughts, it unconsciously stirs and manifests dharmas. If one does not skillfully seek names and know meanings, practice according to the meaning, and observe that objects exist as non-existence, how can one attain the functions of stillness and illumination?

Question: The pure mind itself knows its nature is originally still, and this should be the cessation of thoughts. Why use the consciousness? Answer: The pure mind is non-dual, yet covered by ignorance. Therefore, it cannot know its original stillness. It must be fumigated by the dust-free wisdom until ignorance is completely eliminated; then the thoughts cease.

Question: Simply stopping thoughts, the mind will become still and illuminating. Why does one need wisdom fumigation for stillness and illumination to appear? Answer: If there is no fumigation of the mind by dust-free wisdom, ignorance can never be eliminated. If ignorance is not eliminated, thoughts cannot cease.

Question: Now, I do not observe objects or consider names and meanings. I realize that the mind is still and serene, completely free from characteristics. Is this not the stillness and illumination of the mind’s essence, the true suchness samādhi? Answer: When you realize the mind, does the mind realize itself, or is it realized by another, or does it realize another? If the mind realizes itself, it would obtain stillness without effort. If so, all beings, without seeking stillness, should abide in stillness. If you say it is not natural realization but is caused by the mind’s own intention to realize itself, called self-realization, then intention is the consciousness. There is a subject and object, which is called “other.” How can this be called self-realization of the mind? If it is not realization by another, but the mind simply stops itself, called self-realization—if there is no intention, there is no subject or object. How can the mind realize? If there is intention, that is the consciousness, which is realization by another. If you say all beings inherently realize, but due to false thinking they do not know their essential realization, so there are thoughts. One who knows the mind’s essence is originally realized and still, does not think of dharmas, and thus thoughts cease, which is the true suchness samādhi—does this knowledge of original stillness come from the consciousness or the pure mind? If the pure mind itself knows its original stillness and does not think of dharmas, then all beings have the pure mind and should all know their original stillness. Then false consciousness would cease, and they would naturally attain true suchness samādhi. Because they do not cultivate and do not attain it, we know the pure mind cannot be called self-knowing. If you say the consciousness can know the pure mind’s original realization and then ceases itself, it is only the consciousness’s own cessation, not that the consciousness realizes the pure mind. Therefore, it is said that the mind realizes itself. When the consciousness knows the mind’s original realization, does it see the pure mind to know the original realization, or does it not see the pure mind to know it? If it does not see the pure mind and yet knows its realization, then not seeing a Buddha’s mind would mean knowing the Buddha’s realization. If seeing the pure mind is how one knows the realization, then the pure mind would be a visible characteristic. How then does the Treatise say: “The true suchness of the mind is free from the characteristics of the mind’s objects”? And the sutra says: “It is not known by consciousness, nor is it an object of the mind.” Based on this verification, we certainly know that consciousness does not see the mind. Whether one sees or does not see, there is no principle by which the mind’s original stillness is known. Therefore, even if the mind’s essence is originally realized, the false thought mind cannot be stopped.

Question: Although false consciousness does not see the pure mind, by relying on the sutras and teachings, it knows the mind is originally still, and this knowing wisdom fumigates the pure mind, causing the mind to know its own original realization, so that subsequent thoughts do not arise. This is called self-realization. When you rely on the sutras and teachings to know the mind is originally still, do you know it by forming a characteristic of stillness or without forming a characteristic? If you know by forming a characteristic of stillness, how can a characteristic of false thought be called stillness? If you do not form a characteristic, the mind has no support and becomes scattered. If you say intention prevents scattering, then there is an object. If there is an object, there is a characteristic. How can you say you do not form a characteristic? If you say the seventh consciousness can see the pure mind, thus knowing the mind is originally still, and after knowing it fumigates the mind, causing the mind to know its own original realization, so that subsequent thoughts do not arise—this is called self-realization—this is also not correct. Why? Because the seventh consciousness is the self-grasping consciousness; it cannot see the mind’s original stillness. Furthermore, if something is an object of a perceiving consciousness, it is not the pure mind, as explained earlier in the section on the mind’s essence. Since the object is not real, fumigating the mind again gives rise to false thoughts. For this reason, there is no principle by which the pure mind realizes itself and does not produce subsequent thoughts.

If you say it is realization by another, that is also not correct. Why? Because the mind’s essence is itself still. But because there are sixth and seventh consciousnesses, they are called “other.” Because of this “other,” we say the mind does not realize. Therefore, one can realize the other, but why need the other realize the mind? If you say although the mind’s essence is originally still, because of beginningless ignorance and false thoughts fumigating it, there are habitual tendencies of false thought in the mind, so the mind’s essence also does not realize stillness. Therefore, it needs another to realize it. What skillful means can eliminate the habitual tendencies in the mind so that the mind realizes? If you say not giving rise to new thoughts, so not fumigating those habitual tendencies, they will cease on their own—before they cease, what is the reason for not giving rise to new thoughts? If there is no opposing dharma, those habitual tendencies naturally give rise to thoughts. If they give rise to thoughts, they increase their power. For this reason, realization by another also has no principle. If you say one does not need another to realize the mind but realizes the other, and because of that realization, habitual tendencies cease on their own—this is also not correct. The other has habitual tendencies as its root, so it constantly arises thought by thought. If one does not first eliminate the seeds of those habitual tendencies, how can false thoughts be realized? Furthermore, the pure mind has no principle by which it can realize the other. If it could realize the other, all beings, having the pure mind, would naturally eliminate false thoughts. If you say false thoughts suppress each other sequentially over a long time, and they eventually cease—called realizing the other—does the previous thought stop the later, or does the later stop the previous? If the previous stops the later, when the previous exists, the later consciousness has not yet arisen. When the later arises, the previous thought has already perished and does not follow. How can it stop? If the later stops the previous, the same applies—they do not follow. How can it stop? If the previous thought, when arising, dislikes itself, and this dislike fumigates the root consciousness so it does not give rise to later thoughts—the mind cannot see itself, so how can it dislike itself? If the later thought dislikes the previous, and this disliking mind fumigates the root consciousness so it does not give rise to further thoughts—when the disliking mind dislikes the previous thought, does it know the previous thought is empty and dislike it, or does it not know it is empty and dislike it? If it knows it is empty, that is dust-free wisdom. Why do you say this wisdom is unnecessary? Furthermore, if it knows it is empty, it should not dislike. If it does not know the previous thought is empty, this mind is ignorance. Why? Because the previous thought is actually empty, but it cannot know it. Moreover, because it does not know the previous thought is empty, it grasps a real thought and generates dislike—this is false thinking. Why? Because it falsely creates a notion of reality where there is emptiness. This disliking mind, being ignorance and false thinking, is a moving dharma. To say it fumigates the mind only increases non-awakening, further agitating and giving rise more violently to beings. To say it can prevent later thoughts from arising is like a dream within a dream, not yet awakening. Therefore, those who say this are like sleeping beings. One who is truly not asleep would certainly not say this. Furthermore, if you say that by not producing thoughts about dharmas, thoughts do not arise—is it the pure mind that does not produce thoughts about dharmas, or the consciousness? If it is the pure mind that does not produce thoughts, why did it produce thoughts about dharmas in the first place? And why does it suddenly not think of dharmas now? If it is the consciousness that does not think of dharmas, consciousness itself is thought. If you say the consciousness does not produce thoughts about dharmas, does it mean it does not think while facing objects, does not think without facing objects, or faces objects without seeing them? If it does not face objects, how can it be called consciousness? Why? Because consciousness always cognizes its object. If it faces but does not see, it is like a blind person. If it sees but does not think, for what reason does it not think? Is it because it knows the object is empty that it does not think, or because it believes the object is real that it does not think? If it knows it is empty, that is dust-free wisdom. Facing without seeing, seeing without thinking—both are fine. Why do you say this wisdom is unnecessary? If you say it is real, then it cannot not think. Furthermore, saying it is real is itself a thought. And saying it is real is ignorance and false thinking, yet you say there is no thought. For example, a coward closes his eyes and enters darkness. Logically, he should enter with eyes open. Because of the external darkness, he becomes afraid and closes his eyes. Both inside and outside are dark, but he wrongly thinks it is safe. The same applies here. When thinking of previous dharmas, there is only the state of delusion—ignorance arises. When one dislikes and does not think, the mind and state are both dark, but one wrongly considers it good. Furthermore, if one does not intend to think of dharmas, the mind becomes scattered. If one intends not to think of dharmas, intention itself is agitation, not stillness. How can this be called realizing the mind? But because one focuses the mind on not-thinking, this not-thinking becomes an object. The consciousness is bound by this object, so it cannot reach other mental states. Therefore, deluded people do not understand this; they think they no longer cling to any dharma. They deeply cherish this state as true dharma. Thus, they continue willfully uninterrupted. Because of long practice day and night, it becomes familiar, and they advance without intention. But they do not realize that thoughts arise and cease constantly, flowing continuously in each instant. They arise, and they do not know. They have not eliminated even a hair’s breadth of ignorance and false thinking. They do not understand where they stand. So they say, “My mind is still and abides—this should be true suchness samādhi.” Making such a claim, they do not know their own level. However, because they focus on a single state, this is also a kind of cessation practice. It serves as a distant foundation for dust-free wisdom and a near lock for the unrestrained mind of a monkey. Compared with those who cling to the five desires and play among the six senses, this practice is hundreds, thousands, millions of times superior. But it is still not the stillness and illumination of the mind’s essence, true suchness samādhi. Therefore, practitioners who practice without attachment will gradually enter the gate. If one wishes to accomplish the path transcending the world, one must rely on dust-free wisdom. This clarifies “with what one relies on” in the cessation and insight basis section.

Above, the first of the five frameworks—the basis of cessation and insight—is completed.

Next, we clarify the objects of cessation and insight: they are the three self-natures. Within this, we make two distinctions: first, a general explanation of the three natures; second, a specific explanation.

What is meant by the general explanation of the three natures? The true suchness free from obstacles and the pure virtues of the Buddhas are all called the consummate nature (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva). The true suchness within obstacles, combined with defilements, is called ālaya-vijñāna. This is the dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva). The false discriminations of the six and seven consciousnesses are all called the discriminated nature (parikalpita-svabhāva). This is a general classification.

What is meant by the specific explanation of the three natures? First, we explain the consummate nature. Within it, there are two: 1) the impure pure mind (with defilements) as the consummate nature, and 2) the pure pure mind (without defilements) as the consummate nature. The “impure pure mind” is the essence of sentient beings—the true nature of defilements in actual facts. It is complete with functions of opposition and manifests based on fumigation—hence “impure.” Yet its essence includes pure functions; its self-nature is undefiled. The fumigating defilements are originally empty, and the manifested characteristics are always still—hence “pure.” Thus, it is called the “impure pure mind.” The “pure pure mind” is the essence of all Buddhas, the foundation of pure virtues. Although it inherently possesses the nature of functions of opposition, since the fumigation of defilements has ceased, the defiled phenomena are entirely gone. It is also equipped with the capacity for functions of accord; when pure fumigation is complete, pure virtues manifest—hence “pure.” Although it manifests through fumigation, the function of the pure nature does not increase; it is like removing clouds—the illumination of the essence is originally present—hence “pure.” Therefore, the “pure pure mind.” But depending on fumigation regarding function, there is a difference between “with defilements” and “without defilements.” In terms of essence, there is originally no distinction between unstained and stained. This is the equal true nature, the great total dharma gate—hence the “consummate nature.”

Question: Since there is “impure pure,” should there also be “pure impure”? Answer: This meaning exists as well. The Buddhas’ function of opposition is the “pure impure.” But to make sentient beings abandon defilement and seek purity, it is not explicitly stated.

Second, explaining the dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva): There are also two kinds: 1) the pure dependent nature and 2) the impure dependent nature. The pure dependent nature is the true suchness essence, which possesses the nature for both pure and impure functions. Because it is fumigated by pure uncontaminated dharmas, the power of defiled actions is entirely exhausted—hence “pure.” It relies on pure karma fumigation, so the function of the pure nature manifests—hence “dependent.” What manifests are the realized three bodies, pure lands, and all virtues of self-benefit and benefiting others.

Question: Since the nature of defiled function is eliminated by uncontaminated fumigation and does not give rise to birth-and-death, after becoming a Buddha, does this nature become completely useless? Answer: Although this nature is fumigated by the uncontaminated, so birth-and-death does not arise, from the time of generating the mind, through the fumigation of compassionate vows and the conditions of convertible beings, the function of opposition can also manifest. For example, manifesting in the six destinies, showing the three poisons, provisionally experiencing suffering and retribution, undergoing death, etc.—these are the pure discriminated nature dharmas.

Question: Since they arise from the nature of defilement, how can they be called the “pure” division? Answer: Because they belong to the Buddha’s virtues. From the Buddha’s perspective compared to sentient beings, these virtues are called pure. If one analyzes purely within the Buddha’s virtues, these virtues indeed manifest the function of opposition.

Question: Since you speak of dependent nature dharmas, why call them discriminated nature? Answer: These virtues arise from the fumigation of compassionate vows—they are dependent nature dharmas. When these virtues are applied to specific beings, they are called discriminated nature dharmas.

Question: What is the difference between the pure pure nature and the pure dependent nature? Answer: The pure pure nature (consummate nature) means essence manifest and free from obstacles—this is the essence. The pure dependent nature means it can follow the power of fumigation, with pure virtues arising distinctly—this is the characteristic. The pure discriminated nature means being applied to beings—this is the function.

What is meant by the impure dependent nature? Even though the pure mind’s essence possesses the nature for both accord and opposition functions, due to being fumigated by the ignorance defilements of the discriminated nature, the function of opposition based on fumigation manifests false appearances, such as flowing through birth-and-death and revolving in the six paths. Hence, it is called the “impure dependent nature dharma.”

Question: The function of accord, not yet fumigated by pure karma, does not manifest. Nevertheless, in the state of birth-and-death, is it completely useless? Answer: Although not fumigated by the uncontaminated, so pure virtues do not manifest, it is still protected by the same-essence wisdom of all Buddhas. Thus, beings can cultivate good karma in human or heavenly realms, meet good spiritual friends, and gradually develop the mind for the path—this is the function of the pure nature.

Question: All sentient beings equally possess the pure nature and are protected by all Buddhas. Why do some generate the mind before others, and some not at all? Answer: Since beginningless time, karma-creation differs: light and heavy, before and after. Those with light karmic defilements receive the help of the Buddha’s wisdom; those with heavy karmic defilements, though that power exists, do not receive it.

Question: For those with heavy karmic defilements, is the function of the pure nature completely powerless? Answer: They still possess the essence of the pure nature, which is indestructible. But due to the heavy defilements, it cannot function.

Question: Above you said that the essence of all beings, ordinary and holy, possesses both accord and opposition natures. But due to pure or impure fumigation, they either manifest or not. Why do the Buddhas, when pure fumigation is complete, still have the power of the function of opposition, while ordinary beings, with heavy impure karma, have no power for the function of accord? If heavy defilement eliminates the power of the pure nature, then complete purity should eliminate the power of the impure function. Since the Pure have the power to manifest opposition, surely the defiled—heavy as they are—also have the power of accord function. Answer: The Buddhas are fumigated by great compassion and great vows. Therefore, their nature of opposition manifests the realm-wide defiled virtues, enabling beings with affinity to see them. Sentient beings lack the habit of detaching from the ordinary and seeking the holy. Therefore, their nature of accord hides the boundless pure functions, making it impossible for all Buddhas to sense pure vessels since no pure vessel exists. So the Great Sages abandon them, showing their knowledge of beings. Those with impure virtues can be seen—thus lower beings can recognize the possibility of conversion. Therefore, complete purity does not preclude the function of defilement; heavy defilement prevents the utility of the pure nature.

Third, explaining the discriminated nature (parikalpita-svabhāva): There are also two kinds: 1) the pure discriminated nature and 2) the impure discriminated nature. The pure discriminated nature refers to all the virtues of benefiting others within the pure dependent nature. Compared to the non-discriminative wisdom of internal realization, they are all called discriminations. For example, the wisdom of all modes knows all distinctions within worldly truth, even the mental states of all beings without exception. It also manifests the five spiritual powers and the three modes of transformation, responds to the six paths and four kinds of birth, and uses the wisdom derived from internal realization to teach others—speaking their own attainment to those who have not yet heard. Such things are called pure discriminated nature dharmas. What does this mean? Although boundless activities arise, they are ultimately undefiled by the world and occur without effort, naturally accomplished—hence “pure.” This pure awareness functions differently according to objects—hence “discriminated.” Moreover, it causes others to become pure through conversion; the virtue of benefiting is distinguished for others—hence “pure discriminated nature.”

The impure discriminated nature dharmas refer, within the impure dependent nature, to false appearances—seeming matter, seeming consciousness, seeming objects, etc. Why are they all called “seeming”? Because they are manifestations from the one mind, based on fumigation. They are only mind-similar dharmas, not real—thus “seeming.” When this seeming consciousness arises in an instant, the seeming objects arise together. At the time of arising, one does not know that seeming objects, seeming matter, etc., are mind-created false appearances without reality. Because of this lack, one falsely discriminates, grasping the empty as real. Through this false grasp, external objects transform into real things according to the mind. This is what ordinary beings now see as reality. In this grasping, thought after thought fumigates the mind, again forming dependent nature. Then, based on that, one grasps again, forming discriminated nature. Thus, thought after thought, false appearances produce each other.

Question: The discriminated nature and the dependent nature produce each other serially—what is the difference? Answer: Dependent nature dharmas are the mind-nature that arises based on fumigation; they are only mind-appearances, empty and unreal. Discriminated nature dharmas arise when, due to ignorance, one does not know dependent dharmas are empty and grasps them as real. Therefore, although there is no difference in essence and serial production, there is a difference between empty and real. Thus, they are called “discriminated nature dharmas.”

There is another meaning to clarify the three natures: When the mind’s essence is equal, it is called the consummate nature. The mind’s essence, as the basis bound by pure and impure dharmas, following pure and impure dharmas, is called the dependent nature. The false appearances and retributions that manifest are called the discriminated nature.

Yet another meaning: Within the dependent nature itself, one can distinguish the three natures: 1) The pure part—the true within defilement—is the consummate nature. 2) The impure part—the seeds and habitual tendencies of defilement and the false retributions—is the discriminated nature. 3) The combination and non-duality of these two is the dependent nature.

Question: When the seeming consciousness falsely discriminates, does the mind consciousness alone discriminate all six objects, or do the six consciousnesses each discriminate their own object? Answer: When the five consciousnesses perceive objects, each arises together with the mind consciousness at the same moment. For example, when the eye consciousness perceives seeming matter, the mind consciousness simultaneously discriminates falsely. The same applies to other consciousnesses. Therefore, the mind consciousness alone falsely discriminates and grasps all six objects. The five consciousnesses only obtain the five objects; they do not produce false discrimination and grasping.

Question: When the five objects are falsely grasped as real, is it the five consciousnesses or the sixth mind consciousness that does this? Answer: In the Great Vehicle, there is no distinction made between the five consciousnesses and the sixth consciousness. Whatever is able to discriminate is all called mind consciousness.

Above, this completes the explanation of the second—the objects of cessation and insight.

Next, we clarify the third—the essence of cessation and insight. Within this, there are two sections: 1) the essence of cessation and insight in terms of the impure three natures, and 2) in terms of the pure three natures.

First, regarding the impure three natures, there are again three divisions: 1) Based on the discriminated nature, 2) Based on the dependent nature, 3) Based on the consummate nature.

Based on the discriminated nature, we explain the essence of cessation and insight, starting with entering cessation from insight. What is meant by “insight”? One should observe the five aggregates and the external six objects. For each and every dharma, think: “What I now see as a real dharma with solid form and substance—this is only due to the consciousness” present fruition ignorance, not knowing this dharma is empty. Because of not knowing it is empty, false thoughts arise, grasping it as real. Therefore, in the present moment, the mind firmly considers it as real. Then again, think: “Since beginningless time, because of grasping reality, we have produced greed, hatred, and ignorance toward all objects, creating various karma, attracting birth and death, unable to escape on our own.” Having this understanding is called the insight gate. After this insight, think again: “Now that I know that due to ignorance and false thoughts, the unreal is deemed real, causing rebirth in samsara, how can I still believe this ignorant and deluded mind?” Therefore, one goes against it, forcefully observing all dharmas as only mind-appearances—empty and unreal—like a child loving an image in a mirror, thinking it is a real person. Yet the mirror image has no real nature; it is the child’s mind that grasps it as real. When grasped as real, it is not real. I am the same. Due to delusion, the unreal is taken as real. Even if the mind firmly grasps it as real, it is unreal—like the states seen by an imagining mind have no reality. Also observe that this observing mind itself has no real thought. It is only through ignorant delusion that one thinks there is a real thought. In principle, there is no reality. In this way, use a later thought to break a previous one—like in a dream, all recollecting and thinking minds have no real thought. With this understanding, the grasping mind stops, which is called entering cessation from insight.

Again, knowing that all dharmas are unreal, one looks back at the original thought of reality as only ignorance and false thought—this is called arising insight from cessation. If one directly enters dependent nature insight from this cessation, that is called entering insight from cessation.

Second, explaining the essence of cessation and insight in terms of the dependent nature, also starting with entering cessation from insight. What is meant by “insight”? Because through the cessation practice in the previous discriminated nature, one knows dharmas are unreal. Here, one understands that the five aggregates and six objects—each and every dharma—are only mind-created. They have only false appearances, like imagined mental states—appearing to exist but empty in essence. This understanding is called insight. Having this insight, think again: “These false dharmas exist only because ignorance, false thoughts, and false karma fumigate the mind. The mind appears similar to what is fumigated—like due to a fever illness, empty flowers appear in the eyes. But these flowers exist as non-existence, neither arising nor ceasing. What I now see as false dharmas are also like this—only manifested by the one mind, existing as non-existence, originally unborn, now unceasing.” Thus, using the mind to let go of the mind—know that appearances are originally non-existent—the grasp of false appearances ceases. This is called entering cessation from insight. Knowing that all dharmas exist as non-existence, and also knowing that non-existence includes seeming existence, this is called arising insight from cessation. If one directly enters the consummate nature insight from this cessation practice, this is called entering insight from cessation.

Third, explaining the essence of cessation and insight in terms of the consummate nature, also starting with entering cessation from insight. What is meant by “insight”? Because through the cessation practice in the previous dependent nature, one knows all dharmas exist as non-existence—thus, here one knows that all dharmas are originally only mind, with no dharma outside the mind. Think again: “Since no dharma exists outside the mind, there is only one mind. What is this mind’s characteristic? Are the previous two natures absent? Do we take this absence as the mind? Or is there a separate pure mind apart from that absence?” Having this thought is called insight. Then think: “Absence is a dharma arising relative to existence. Existence itself originally does not exist—how can there be an existence of absence as a pure mind? Furthermore, absence is covered by the four propositions. The pure mind is free from the four propositions. How can we take this absence as the pure mind?” At this thought, the mind that grasps absence ceases—this is called cessation. From this cessation, entering the insight gate, observe the pure mind: “If the absence of the two natures is not the mind, what dharma is the pure mind? Is this mind visible? Invisible? Thinkable? Unthinkable?” Making this distinction is called insight. Then think: “No dharma outside the mind—how can there be one who sees this mind? How can there be one who thinks of this mind? If one further thinks of this mind, it becomes an object. Then there is a perceiver and perceived—outside the mind, there is a wisdom to observe this mind. How can this be called suchness? Furthermore, the mind that seeks the mind’s essence is only the pure mind. What separate dharma is there to be perceived or thought of? It is only due to the habitual tendencies of false thought that discrimination arises spontaneously. The characteristics of discrimination exist as non-existence; the essence is only the pure mind. Even if one discriminates, one knows it is exactly the pure mind’s discrimination. For example, someone sees empty flowers in the eye. Hearing that the flowers are eye-created, existent as non-existent, and there are only one’s own eyes, they know the flowers are originally non-existent and do not cling to them. But then, opening their eyes to look for their own eyes, they cannot see them. They think various eye organs are their own eyes—not knowing that the eye seeking is precisely the eye being sought. If one knows that flowers are originally non-existent, and there is no dharma outside the eye (only one’s own eye), one does not need to seek the eye with the eye. Practitioners are the same. Having heard that no dharma exists outside the mind—only one mind—one stops thinking of external dharmas. Yet due to habitual tendencies of false thought, discrimination arises again seeking the pure mind. Therefore, know that the ability to seek the pure mind is exactly the pure mind. Even if discrimination arises, it is still the pure mind. The pure mind’s essence is always free from discrimination. Understanding this is called conforming to true suchness. It can also be called the cessation gate. Over long practice, when the habitual tendencies of ignorance and false thought are exhausted, thoughts cease naturally—called realizing true suchness. There is no separate dharma that comes to realize it; it is like stopping waves entering water. This true suchness is called the great still cessation gate. Then, due to the methods of the insight gate from the time of generating the mind, and through fumigation by compassionate vows, from within samādhi, great functions arise—whether from within samādhi, in thoughts, perceptions, mind, or objects—various distinctions—this is the function of true suchness. This is called arising insight from cessation.

Again, vigorous discrimination while the essence remains ever still, and from within constant stillness, discrimination depends on conditions to arise—this is called the simultaneous practice of cessation and insight.

Through these three explanations of the two gates of cessation and insight, know that the insight gate establishes the three natures’ conditioned arising as existence, while the cessation gate eliminates the three natures, enabling entry into the three non-natures. Entering the three non-natures means: eliminating the discriminated nature, entering the nature of no characteristics; eliminating the dependent nature, entering the nature of no origination; eliminating the consummate nature, entering the nature of no self-nature.

Within the consummate nature, we have four explanations of cessation and insight. This is because this profound and subtle region is extremely difficult to know. Therefore, the first teaching on the emptiness of falsehood is not real, and eliminating false emptiness through cessation—this is the nature of no self-nature. Next, showing that the seeming is the true, and stilling different attachments through calming—this is the nature of no true nature. Therefore, the nature of no self-nature is sometimes called the nature of no non-nature, or the nature of no true nature. The third pair of cessation and insight is the fundamental true suchness samādhi. The fourth and final pair is the simultaneous manifestation of both.

Furthermore, if a practitioner has sharp faculties and deep awareness, he does not need to practice from the first discriminated nature. He can directly practice based on the second dependent nature. This dependent nature can also be called the discriminated nature because it contains the meaning of both natures. If this is not possible, one must practice step by step, starting from the first nature, then the second, and so on. One should never skip the first two natures to directly practice the third. However, even in the initial practice, at each moment one can learn all three natures together, supporting the third.

Question: Since it is called the consummate nature, what is there to eliminate? If it can be eliminated, it would not be consummate. Answer: The attachment that takes the absence of the two natures as the consummate nature—this must be eliminated. Therefore, it is called the nature of no non-nature. False wisdom that discriminates the pure mind as an object to be perceived—such discrimination of different characteristics must also be calmed, showing that there is no separate true nature to be discriminated. Hence, it is called the nature of no true nature. This eliminates the attachment to a true nature that is superimposed on the true nature itself; it is not about eliminating the essence of true suchness.

Another metaphor can illustrate the cessation and insight gates of the three natures. For example, a handkerchief originally has no rabbit. The consummate nature is the same—only the one pure mind, free from characteristics by nature. By magic, a rabbit appears in the handkerchief. The dependent nature is the same—false fumigation of the true nature manifests the six paths. The ignorant child takes the rabbit as real. The discriminated nature is the same—the deluded consciousness grasps the empty as real. Thus, the sutra says: “All dharmas are like illusions.” This metaphor illustrates the insight gate of the three natures. If one knows that this rabbit, dependent on the handkerchief, seems to exist but is only empty and unreal, the wisdom of no-characteristics is the same—knowing all dharmas as mind-appearing, only false appearances with no real characteristic. If one knows that the false rabbit’s appearance is only the handkerchief—the rabbit on the handkerchief exists as non-existence, originally unborn—this is the wisdom of no-origination. Similarly, know that false appearances are only the true mind; the appearances manifested by the mind exist as non-existence, self-nature is unborn. If one knows the handkerchief is originally existent and does not take the absence of the rabbit as the handkerchief, this is the wisdom of no-self-nature. Similarly, know that the pure mind is originally self-existent and does not take the absence of the two natures as the consummate nature. This metaphor illustrates the cessation gate of the three non-natures.

Therefore, if one wishes to abandon worldly truth, one should cultivate the cessation gate and enter the three non-natures. If one wishes not to destroy conditioned arising and establish worldly truth, one should cultivate the insight gate and understand the three natures. If one does not cultivate the insight gate, one does not know why worldly truth arises through conditions. If one does not cultivate the cessation gate, one does not know that ultimate truth is always still. If one does not cultivate the insight gate, one does not know that the ultimate is identical to the conventional. If one does not cultivate the cessation gate, one does not know that the conventional is identical to the ultimate. For this reason, one should rely on the illusion metaphor to penetrate the three natures and three non-natures. Just as the illusion metaphor can penetrate them, other metaphors—dreams, transformations, images, water moons, mirages, celestial cities, hungry ghosts—all illustrate dharmas that arise from the real based on emptiness, with the empty grasped as real. They all illustrate the three natures. One can also say that these metaphors, as they arise from the real based on emptiness, particularly illustrate the dependent nature. But since the empty essence is the real, it can illustrate the consummate nature, and since the empty follows grasping, it illustrates the discriminated nature. Thus, these metaphors generally illustrate the three natures. Understanding the sequence of these metaphors without attachment can also illustrate the three non-natures.

We further discuss the dream metaphor to illustrate the three natures and three non-natures. For example, ordinary beings are accustomed to various dharmas. Thus, in a dream, the mind manifests these dharmas. The dependent nature is the same. Since beginningless time, fruition ignorance and false thoughts have fumigated the pure nature. The true mind, based on fumigation, manifests false retribution appearances. The person in the dream, covered by sleep, does not know that his own body or others’ bodies are mind-created. He thus grasps them as real. Therefore, in the dream, he experiences himself and others, receiving and benefiting—this becomes discriminated nature. Similarly, the mind consciousness, deluded by fruition ignorance, does not know that self and others are all manifestations of the true mind based on fumigation. It falsely grasps them as real. Therefore, the experience of self and others arises. Thus, the sutra says: “This body is like a dream, a false seeing.” The “false” refer to the dependent nature; the “deluded” refer to the discriminated nature. This is the conditioned arising of the three natures as the insight gate.

In the dream, what is grasped as real is only the appearance of the dream mind; originally it has no reality. The discriminated nature is the same—it is only false thought arising from the mind, originally unreal. This is the nature of no characteristics. The false appearances in the dream exist as non-existence; there is only the dream mind, no other dharma. The dependent nature is the same—the false appearances of self and others exist as non-existence; there is only the root consciousness, no other dharma. This is the nature of no origination. The dream mind itself is the waking mind, but due to the causes of sleep, it is called the dream mind. There is no separate waking mind outside the dream mind. The consummate nature is the same—equal, non-dual. But due to the causes of fumigation by ignorance defilements, it combines with defilements and is called the root consciousness. Actually, there is no separate true mind outside the root consciousness. This is the dharma of the nature of no self-nature. This eliminates the three natures as the cessation gate.

Through this metaphor, the three natures and three non-natures can be clearly understood.

This completes the section on the essence of cessation and insight regarding the impure three natures.

Next, we explain the essence of cessation and insight in terms of the pure three natures. Within this, there are three divisions: 1) the essence of cessation and insight regarding the discriminated nature, 2) the essence regarding the dependent nature, and 3) the essence regarding the consummate nature.

First, the essence of cessation and insight regarding the pure discriminated nature: Know that all the physical bodies of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, their voices, great compassion, great vows, retinues, various forms in the six paths, magical transformations, even the golden body’s cessation and distribution of relics, wooden and clay images, scriptures, and dignified deportment—all these dharmas that benefit beings—are only due to fumigation by great compassion and vows, and by the power of beings’ responsive conditions. Full causes and conditions fumigate the pure mind, causing the mind’s nature to manifest these things based on fumigation. Therefore, they are only the ability of the true nature’s conditioned arising; in principle, they are not real. However, sentient beings with ignorance and false thoughts see them crookedly and take them as not empty. The practitioner only needs to observe and know this crooked view and grasping mind as ignorance and false thought—this is called insight. Knowing that this view is deluded, one forcefully makes the mind observe, knowing they are not real but only created by one’s own mind. Knowing thus, the grasping stops, which is called cessation. This is entering cessation from insight within the pure discriminated nature.