No. 291-A首楞嚴直指敘
Preface to the Direct Pointing of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra
大覺能仁，成道十日即說華嚴，以眾生住地煩惱為諸佛不動智，如將寶位直授凡庸，故非三乘之流所能諦信。當時聲聞在坐，不見不聞，然而最後拈華，則金色頭陀獨得別傳之囑。慶喜繼之為西天二祖，雖登位於剎竿倒却之時，而發悟在擊鐘驗常之際，則楞嚴一經又宗門之法印也。古今疏此，俱擅所長。吾師天然昰和上宴坐丹霞，以三月成直指，適屆示生之期，甘露降於叢竹。今釋受而伏讀，青蓮發筆端之瑞，赤珠映意地之光，微眹不留，是跡皆剗，言言本色，不借華詞，其不可思議之妙，實有與諸家迥絕者。彼皆悟門各得，然而見量未忘，往往以詞害志，執藥成病。原其所由，不過能推非心，離塵有性而已。夫能推是妄，離塵無體，此如來語也。如來不云性真常中求於去來、迷悟、生死了無所得耶？真覺無功，根塵何咎？極其轉名不轉體之致，未能迷悟併銷，而迷悟不銷，則常光便隔，妄即不存，真復何在？當下覺了，已落紆回。故為之直示曰：非別有一真，在緣慮之先，影像之外也。若謂分別之心，與塵俱滅，則無分別，晳不與塵俱生，各成一物，於何立界？故為之直示曰：但據其所謂全性者，捨分別而更有；不知其所謂分別者，捨全性而必無也。於此不明，詎稱圓悟？所以破心破目，無罪加誅；有正有倒，將名作實。體用上下，析見見於現前；人法後先，失空空於頓覺。斷而得顯，因緣自然之戲論滋深；修乃可成，諸佛眾生之分疆愈遠。倘能豎掃同時，始信因果俱幻。是故法性海中，本絕思惟，四十九年，不說一字。若云此謂權，此謂實，此謂見，此謂修，此謂圓融，此謂行布，纔成實法，便非了義。乃至性覺必明，妄為明覺，依經立解，寧不較然？然於性覺生取心，則明能生所無，如其與妄俱來；於明覺生捨心，則所必障明無，如其并真俱棄。遂使覺與所明，如來語下，二俱有過；安知明與無明，如來藏中，一亦不存？故又為之直示曰：覺明不礙性覺之常然，性覺豈傷覺明之自異。悟理之士，亦可以立地冰消矣。而每至險崖，輒生前却者，蓋聖境不捐，故凡情競起也。識其惟一乾慧，則流轉四生，名為亂想。洊登妙覺，名為極果。皆是分外，不契本然。故又為之直示曰：捨亂想必無乾慧，亦猶捨乾慧必無極果。遂以亂想為乾慧，似有悟迷。至於乾慧，而回觀亂想，悔不安住，尚若遜其所不及者，然後知迷之不可得也。迷不可得，悟亦何為。能仁成道之後，適還其眾生之初，泯法界量，現法界身，說法界事，顯法界理。若作聖解，即受羣邪。縱將寶位直授凡庸，亦恐凡庸不應重受。彼聲聞在坐，不見不聞，正與破顏微笑，同一玄賞。今釋豈能更有思議於吾師不可思議之中耶。謹因讀疏之餘，隨見隨拈。因月有指，非月所取。若其全經旨趣，則一總論，已化為無縫天衣。一切眾生，於一原題，全現出無見頂相。開卷了然，無塵不破。此即枝中覓本，委上求原。不妨引而伸之，作鈍根之助爾。
The Great Awakened One, the Able and Compassionate, spoke the Avatamsaka Sutra just ten days after his enlightenment, revealing that the afflictions inherent in sentient beings' minds are none other than the Buddhas' unwavering wisdom. This is like directly handing over the throne of enlightenment to ordinary people—a teaching beyond the grasp of those confined to the Three Vehicles. At that time, the hearers (śrāvakas) were present but neither saw nor heard. Yet later, when the Buddha held up a flower, Mahākāśyapa, the "Golden-Headed One," alone received the special transmission. Ānanda succeeded him as the Second Patriarch in the West, even as the victory banner toppled—his awakening came at the moment he struck the bell and recognized the eternal. Thus, the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is itself the seal of the Chan school.
Commentaries on this sutra, ancient and modern, each have their own strengths. Our teacher, the Venerable Master Tianran, while meditating in seclusion at Danxia, completed a direct commentary in three months. At the very moment of his birthday, sweet dew fell upon the bamboo grove. Now receiving and humbly reading it, I see lotuses blooming at the tip of his brush, rubies reflecting the light of mind-ground. Not a trace of subtlety remains; every footprint is erased. Every word is plain, borrowing no flowery phrases. Its inconceivable subtlety truly surpasses all other schools.
Those other commentators each gained their own understanding, but they never let go of their personal perspectives. Often, they clung to words and lost the meaning, grasping at medicine and turning it into disease. The root of this: they believed there was a "that which can be identified" as a non-mind, and a "nature apart from objects." But the "that which can be identified" is delusion; apart from objects, there is no substance. This is the Buddha's own teaching. Did he not say: "In the true, constant nature, seeking coming and going, delusion and enlightenment, birth and death—nothing is to be obtained"? True awakening is effortless. What fault can the faculties and objects have? When we push to the ultimate point of "changing the name but not the substance," we find that delusion and enlightenment cannot be erased together. And if delusion and enlightenment are not erased, the constant light is obscured. If delusion does not exist, where does truth abide? To realize it instantly—that is already a detour.
So he directly pointed: There is not a separate Truth existing before mental activity or beyond images. If you say that the discriminating mind ceases along with objects, then the non-discriminating—which clearly does not arise with objects—would become a separate entity. Where would you draw the boundary? So he directly pointed: According to what is called "whole nature," it exists apart from discrimination; but one does not realize that what is called "discrimination" must, apart from whole nature, not exist at all. If this is not understood, how can it be called perfect awakening?
Thus, breaking the mind and breaking the eye—there is no crime requiring punishment. With right and wrong, we take names for realities. Subject and object, above and below, we analyze visions before us. Person and dharma, first and last, we lose "emptiness" in sudden awakening. Severance leads to manifestation, and then the futile discourse of causes and conditions deepens. Cultivation becomes something to be achieved, and the boundary between Buddhas and sentient beings grows ever wider. If you could sweep away all at once, only then would you trust that cause and effect are both illusory.
Therefore, within the ocean of Dharma-nature, thought is originally absent. In forty-nine years, the Buddha spoke not a single word. If someone says, "This is provisional, this is ultimate, this is seeing, this is cultivation, this is perfect fusion, this is sequential arrangement"—the moment something is fixed as "real," it ceases to be the ultimate meaning. Even statements like "The nature of awakening must be luminous, and delusion becomes bright awakening"—if we interpret them as fixed doctrines, wouldn't we be painfully obvious? If, within the nature of awakening, we grasp a mind, then luminosity gives rise to object, and once nonexistent, it comes together with delusion. If, regarding bright awakening, we develop aversion, then object must obstruct luminosity, and being nonexistent, it discards truth along with delusion. Thus, awakening and its luminous object—under the Buddha's own words—both become faulty. How could we know that luminosity and non-luminosity—within the Tathāgatagarbha—not even one remains? Therefore, he directly pointed: Luminous awakening does not obstruct the constancy of the nature of awakening; the nature of awakening does not harm the distinctness of luminous awakening. Those who awaken to truth can have all ice melt instantly.
Yet, whenever we reach a precipice, we step back. The reason: we cannot let go of sacred states, so worldly impulses arise. Know that if we only have one single "dry wisdom," we flow through the four modes of birth, and we call it "confused thinking." Climbing through to sublime awakening, we call it "ultimate fruit." Both are extra; they do not accord with the original essence. So he directly pointed: If you discard confused thinking, you have no dry wisdom—just as if you discard dry wisdom, you cannot have the ultimate fruit. If you then treat confused thinking as dry wisdom, you still seem to have awakening and delusion. When you reach dry wisdom and look back on confused thinking, you may regret not having abided there peacefully—as if you had failed to reach something. Then you realize that "delusion" cannot be obtained. If delusion cannot be obtained, what further use is "awakening"?
After the Able and Compassionate One achieved Buddhahood, he simply returned to the state of an ordinary being. He merged the realms of reality, manifested the reality-body, spoke of reality-events, and revealed reality-principles. If you interpret this as a sacred understanding, you fall into heretical views. Even if the throne of enlightenment were directly handed to ordinary people, I fear the ordinary person would not accept such a heavy gift. Those hearers, present but not seeing or hearing, are exactly of the same mysterious appreciation as the one who broke into a smile when a flower was held up. How could I ever have a thought to add to our teacher's inconceivable dimensions?
Humbly, while reading his commentary, I followed each insight as it came. The finger points to the moon; the finger is not the moon itself. As for the full scope of the sutra, the Single Summary has already woven an unseamed celestial robe. All sentient beings, in just one title, completely reveal the Peak of Non-Visible. Opening the book, all is clear; no dust remains unbroken. This itself is "seeking the root in the branches, tracing the source from the stream." There is no harm in extending it further, as an aid for those of dull faculties.
嗣法門人今釋稽首和南敬序
The Dharma successor, who has now taken ordination, humbly bows and respectfully writes this preface.