Originally from: https://chengdawu.blogspot.com/2013/09/blog-post_17.html
Also see: Shinkantaza / Just Sitting: Letting All Phenomena Prove that There is No You!
Paragraph 1
English Translation:
This website was established out of personal
gratitude for Master Hong’s kindness. It is a personal, unofficial site, hoping
to record in the form of collected sayings the guidance that Master Hong has
offered to students in ordinary times. If, because of Master Hong’s words, you
have gained some realization and wish to go deeper, you can join us in
attending Master Hong’s monthly lectures. We pray that Master Hong may abide
long in this world and continually turn the wheel of the Dharma.
Original Text:
本站乃是個人為感念洪師之恩德而設立，屬於個人性的非官方網站，希望將平時聽到洪師對於學生們的指導，以語錄的型態記錄下來。 若您因洪師的話有所體悟，希望能更深入的話，可以同我們參加洪師每個月的講課。 祈求 洪師 恆長住世、法輪常轉
Paragraph 2
English Translation:
▼
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
The A Needle for
Zazen (Zazenshin)—The True Meaning of Seated Meditation Transmitted Through
Successive Generations
Original Text:
▼
2013年9月17日 星期二
坐禪箴——遞代相傳的坐禪真意
Paragraph 3
English Translation:
The A Needle for
Zazen (Zazenshin)—The True Meaning of Seated Meditation Transmitted Through
Successive Generations
Original Text:
坐禪箴——遞代相傳的坐禪真意
Paragraph 4
English Translation:
Written by Great Master Dōgen of the Sōtō School in
Japan
Lectures by Teacher Hong Wen-liang
Compiled by Wu Cheng-da
Original Text:
日本國 曹洞宗 道元禪師 著
洪文亮老師 講述
吳政達 整理
Paragraph 5
English Translation:
Original text:
The Twelfth Chapter of the Shōbōgenzō, “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin)”—Proclaimed by Dōgen Zenji
Original Text:
原文：
正法眼藏第十二坐禪箴——道元禪師提唱
Paragraph 6
English Translation:
At the time when Great Master Yaoshan Hongdao was
seated in meditation, a monk asked, “Being so utterly still, what are you
thinking?” The Master replied, “I am thinking non-thinking.” The monk said,
“How do you think non-thinking?” The Master replied, “Non-thinking.”
Original Text:
藥山弘道大師坐次。有僧問：兀兀地思量什麼？師云：思量箇不思量底。僧曰：不思量底如何思量？師云：非思量。
Paragraph 7
English Translation:
Excerpt of Dōgen Zenji’s Proclamation
To directly realize the Master’s Way as such, you
must sit in stillness. The method of sitting in stillness must not be
transmitted wrongly—this alone is the legitimate transmission in the Buddha’s
Way, namely pointing directly to this sitting in stillness. Although there are
many meanings to “utterly still thinking,” what Yaoshan said is only one among
them: it is called “think non-thinking.” Within “thinking,” there is a
“thinking of skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.” Within “non-thinking,” there is
also a “non-thinking of skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.”
A monk asked: “How do we think non-thinking?” There
is not the slightest doubt that non-thinking has existed from time
immemorial—what need is there now to think about it again? In that situation of
utter stillness right where you are, is there truly no thinking at all? Why
can’t one directly realize that utterly still state of empty quiescence and
shining clarity? Unless one is terribly dull, one should raise the power to
inquire about that utter stillness and examine it.
The Master said: “Non-thinking.” Indeed, from
beginningless time, we have never deviated from this “non-thinking.” But if you
wish to experience and directly realize this domain, you cannot do so apart
from “non-thinking.” All things in the universe belong to “non-thinking,” but
various natures and characteristics differ. Although sitting utterly still
appears to reveal a self, it is not restricted to thinking alone. Thus, “the
cypress tree in the courtyard” is the same. How can one “think” this utterly
still condition where emptiness clearly illumines itself?
Therefore, utter stillness is not the measure of
buddhas or the measure of Dharma, nor is it the measure of realization or
understanding. From Śākyamuni Buddha’s single transmission down to Yaoshan,
thirty-six generations have passed. Such is the true transmission that is
“think non-thinking.”
Yet recently, there are fools who fabricate and say:
“If, through the effort of sitting in meditation, one can gain a mind free of
concerns, then one has a stable and even ground.” Such a view does not match
even the practitioners of the Lesser Vehicle, nor is it as good as those who
practice heavenly or human teachings. How could it be called being a disciple
of the Buddha? Right now, in the Great Song Empire, many people practice in
this way. That the ancestral Way lies in waste is truly sorrowful and lamentable!
There is yet another type of person who says:
“Meditation in sitting is what beginners must learn; it is not necessarily the
practice of the Buddha, since walking is also Zen, sitting is also Zen—when
talking or silent, moving or still, the substance is at peace. Therefore, there
is no need to rely solely on sitting meditation for one’s effort.” The majority
of those who call themselves ‘of the Linji lineage’ hold this view. Because the
proper livelihood of the Buddha’s Dharma has grown distant from the legitimate
transmission, such diverse arguments have emerged. Now let me ask: what is
‘beginner,’ and what is ‘not beginner’? By what standard does one judge a
beginner?
You should know that the correct path for learning
the Way is exactly to discern the Way by sitting in meditation. Its essential
point is “acting as buddha without seeking to become buddha.” Acting as buddha
is simply acting as buddha, and it is by no means for the sake of becoming
buddha. The case is right before your eyes. Even the body of a buddha is not
produced by wanting to become buddha. Once the basket is broken open, sitting
as buddha does not obstruct your inherent being as buddha. Precisely at such a
time, one naturally realizes that from beginningless eons up to the present,
entering buddha or entering demons is powered by this—whether you move forward
or back, whether you fill ditches or hollows, you freely exercise this function
with no obstruction.
Original Text:
道元禪師提唱摘譯
要親證大師之道如是，必須兀坐。兀坐之法，不可誤傳，佛道所嫡傳，正指此兀坐。兀兀地之思量，雖有多種，藥山所云，僅為其中之一；所謂思量箇不思量底。思量有皮肉骨髓之思量，不思量亦有皮肉骨髓之不思量。
僧問：不思量底如何思量？毫無疑問，不思量底本自亙古亙今，何須今時再予以思量？兀兀地當處，難道無有思量？虛凝明寂之兀兀地，為何無法親證？除非一個人太蠢，否則該有問取兀兀地之力量去審思。
大師曰：非思量。雖然無始以來未曾偏離非思量，但要親證此田地，則又非思量不可。森羅萬象皆屬非思量，但諸性相各異。兀兀地雖顯有自我，卻非唯指思量而已，故庭前柏樹子亦然。虛明自照之兀兀地，如何思量？
因此，兀兀地，非佛量法量悟量解量，從釋迦牟尼佛單傳至藥山，已歷三十六代。如此正傳者乃是思量箇不思量底。
然而，近來有愚者杜撰曰：功夫坐禪得胸襟無事了，便是平穩地也。此種見解不及小乘行者，更不如人天乘，如何能說是佛弟子？現在在大宋國，恁麼做功夫者甚眾，祖道之荒蕪，實可悲可歎！
又有一類人說：坐禪辨道是初修的晚輩所必學的要機，不一定為佛的行履，因為行亦禪、坐亦禪，語默動靜體安然，故不必只坐禪用功。自稱為臨濟一派者，大半有此見解。由於佛法的正命，疏於嫡傳，故有此紛紜眾說。我今且問，何謂初心非初心，以何為初心之標準？
要知學道之正軌，即是坐禪辨道，其宗旨為不求作佛之行佛而已。行佛只是行佛，更非作佛之故，公案現成。身佛猶非作佛所成，一旦打破籮籠，坐佛卻不礙本自成佛。正當恁麼時，自覺無始劫來入佛入魔之力，進步退步，盈溝填壑，運用無礙。
Paragraph 8
English Translation (Part 1 of Paragraph 8):
This text is the twelfth chapter, “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin),” in Master Dōgen’s work
Shōbōgenzō. Originally, “A Needle for Zazen
(Zazenshin)” was composed by Zen Master Zhengjue, also called Hongzhi. In the
beginning, when Dōgen Zenji was in Japan, he sought out many great masters, but
none could thoroughly resolve his inner question. His question was: after the
Buddha awakened, he said that every being is already replete with the same
Dharma-nature as the Buddha—so why do we still have to practice? Take note: it
is self-perfected, meaning it is already complete! It is not the idea that we
have a Dharma-nature that is defiled and needs gradual purification through
practice to become as pure as the Buddha. It is not like that at all!
Eventually, when Dōgen Zenji traveled to China in
search of the Dharma, he was extremely fortunate to find Master Rujing. Master
Rujing saw that, at that time in China, the direct transmission of the Dharma
was on the verge of disappearing. When Dōgen Zenji arrived, Rujing, noticing
this young man’s exceptional diligence, recognized that Dōgen indeed attained
direct realization of mind-nature, and so this Dharma was transmitted to Japan.
It was similar to how Bodhidharma realized that it could no longer be transmitted
in India, so he brought the Dharma to China. Therefore, we should not look upon
Japan narrowly and say, “Ah, Japan is such a shallow nation…” After all,
Chinese Buddhism was also introduced from India, so how would Indians view it?
“Buddhism is originally from India.” We must not think in that way. As long as
it is transmitted from the Buddha in one generation after another, recognized
by the patriarchs of successive generations, that is all that really matters.
[Continued in next message]
[Continued from previous message]
Paragraph 8 (continued)
English Translation (continued):
Just as when Bodhidharma realized that it could no
longer be transmitted in India, and so brought the Dharma to China, we likewise
should not view Japan through a narrow-minded, nationalistic lens, saying
things like, “Ah, Japan is a shallow nation….” Wasn’t Chinese Buddhism itself
transmitted from India? Then how would India speak of it? “Buddhism is
originally ours in India.” We must not think in this way. As long as it is
transmitted generation after generation from the Buddha, recognized by the
patriarchs in successive transmissions, that is what is truly important.
Original Text (full paragraph 8):
這個是道元禪師的著作《正法眼藏》的第十二章『坐禪箴』。「坐禪箴」本來是正覺和尚，也就是宏智禪師所寫的。當初道元禪師在日本，找了很多位大師，都無法徹底解決他內心的問題。他的問題是：佛在悟道時說了，每位眾生本來就具足了跟佛一樣的法性，那為什麼還要修行？注意喔！是本自具足，已經具足了的喔！不是說本來有法性，不過是有染污的法性，經過修行，慢慢地把法性洗乾淨，然後跟佛一樣，不是這樣的喔！後來道元禪師到中國求法時，最後很幸運，找到了如淨禪師。如淨禪師知道當時的中國，已經無法傳下去了，所以道元禪師找到如淨禪師時，如淨禪師看到這位年青人非常用功，後來道元禪師也確實有了明心見性這一事，於是這個法就傳到了日本去了。就像當初達摩祖師知道當時的印度傳不下去了，把法傳到中國一樣。所以我們不要以狹礙的民族眼光來看說：「哎呀！日本那是個膚淺的國家……」那中國的佛教還不是從印度傳過來的，那麼印度怎麼講：「佛教是我們印度的東西。」不要這樣子。只要是佛一代一代傳下來的，遞代的祖師爺認可下來的就是了，這才是真正重要的地方。
Paragraph 9
English Translation:
Every time Master Rujing ascended the hall to give
teachings, whenever he mentioned Zen Master Zhengjue (that is, Hongzhi), he was
extremely respectful. Each time he mentioned him, he called him “Ancient
Buddha, Ancient Buddha.” When referring to other Chan masters, he never used
such an address. And so, each time he mentioned Zen Master Zhengjue, he honored
him as “Ancient Buddha.” From this, you can imagine how very highly he revered
Zen Master Zhengjue.
Original Text:
如淨禪師每一次陞堂說法，只要提到正覺和尚，也就是宏智禪師，都非常非常恭敬，每一次提到他，都稱他「古佛、古佛」。他提到別的禪師時，都沒有這樣稱呼。而每次提到正覺和尚時，都以「古佛」尊稱他。所以他對正覺和尚的尊敬可想而知。
Paragraph 10
English Translation:
There are many texts offering guidance on seated
meditation, and they are collected in various books, including “Song on Seated
Meditation,” “Rules for Seated Meditation,” and so on. However, Master Rujing
specifically instructed Dōgen Zenji that, aside from Zen Master Hongzhi’s “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin),” he was absolutely not to
read any other texts. None of those were the correct transmission; none were
genuinely recognized and handed down in successive generations. They had mostly
been compiled by simply reading the sutras and concluding that sitting should
be done in such-and-such a way, or else they were muddled with many other
non-Buddhist methods of cultivation. Such texts are fabrications that differ
fundamentally from the Dharma that was transmitted from the Buddha to
Mahākāśyapa, from Mahākāśyapa to Ānanda, all the way down to Bodhidharma, and
then to the Chinese masters Huike and Huineng—transmitted generation after
generation. One must never read other instructional manuals on seated
meditation—this was Master Rujing’s strict injunction to Dōgen Zenji. That was
the situation already during the Song Dynasty; in our present day, there are
even more intricate variations, making it more difficult for us to discern what
truly is the genuine Buddha-Dharma.
Original Text:
關於指導坐禪的文章很多，收錄在各種書上，有坐禪銘、坐禪儀等等。可是如淨禪師就是嚴格交代道元禪師，除了宏智禪師的「坐禪箴」以外，其餘的千萬不可以看。那些都不是正傳的、都不是真正遞代印可下來的；都是自己讀讀經書，認為是這個樣子，或是已經跟佛以外的其他很多修行的方法混在一起的。那些杜撰的，跟佛傳給大迦葉，大迦葉傳給阿難，一直到達摩傳到中國的慧可、慧能的遞代相傳的佛法，根本不同。所以千萬不要看其他指導坐禪的書。——這是如淨禪師嚴格交代道元禪師的話。當時在宋朝的時候就已經是這種情形了，那麼到了現代，更多形形色色的花樣，使我們更加不清楚什麼才是真正的佛法。
Paragraph 11
English Translation:
Today, we are going to examine “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin).” Its content is quite short.
Dōgen Zenji used his own words to explain this text, and we will now look at
that explanation.
The word “箴” (zhen,
“needle”) in ancient China originally referred to a tool made of bamboo
for acupuncture. Later, “箴” came to be
widely used for anything that treats ailments of body and mind. Ultimately, for
instructions that address the real essentials of cultivation, the term “箴” was used. In this section, Dōgen Zenji clarifies
for the very first time the true meaning of seated meditation. Everyone, please
note well this “true meaning”! These days, many people are practicing seated
meditation, and there are all sorts of teachings on it—some call it “super
meditation,” and so on. Many variations exist. Here, for the very first time,
Dōgen Zenji teaches us what is the genuine meaning of seated meditation.
Before explaining “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin),” Dōgen Zenji quotes a famous
dialogue between Chan Master Yaoshan and his disciple, to clarify what genuine
seated meditation is. Dōgen Zenji greatly praises the “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin)” that Zen Master Zhengjue wrote, this
text that gives instruction on meditation. Thus, he also wrote his own treatise
called “A Needle for Zazen (Zazenshin).”
That is just a brief introduction. Let us now look
at the content.
Original Text:
今天我們就來看「坐禪箴」。「坐禪箴」的內容很短。道元禪師用自己的話來解說這篇「坐禪箴」。現在我們來看內容。
「箴」在中國古代，是竹子作的、針炙用的工具。後來「箴」的意思被廣用，所有用來治療身心的方法都被稱為「箴」。最後，對於在修行上，真正的要點上的指導，都用「箴」來表示。道元禪師在這裡第一次把「坐禪真正的意義」說明清楚。大家請注意這個「真正的意義」！現在很多朋友在坐禪，很多地方也在教導坐禪，有的叫什麼「超級靜坐」……一大堆，花樣很多。在這裡，道元禪師頭一次把什麼「是坐禪的真正意義」教給我們。
在開始講「坐禪箴」之前，道元禪師引用了藥山禪師與他的弟子之間一段很有名的對話，來說明什麼叫做真正的坐禪。道元禪師非常稱讚正覺和尚所寫的這篇「坐禪箴」，這篇指導打坐的文章。所以他也寫了一篇自己的「坐禪箴」。
以上是一段簡單的紹介，現在請各位看內容。
Paragraph 12
English Translation:
At the time Chan Master Yaoshan Hongdao was in
seated meditation, a monk asked:
“Sitting utterly still, what are you thinking?”
What does “utterly still” (兀兀地)
mean? It means to be thoroughly and simply that way—when sitting in meditation,
just sit in meditation. Or, in modern English, we could say “naked,” meaning
not meticulously carving out or chiseling piece by piece like a sculpture, but
just plainly as it is. The monk asked, “What are you actually doing there? What
are you thinking about while you’re seated like that?”
Yaoshan answered:
“I am thinking that which is not of our
discriminating thought.”
“Thinking,” in this context, may be equivalent to
investigating or applying effort. That which is “not of our discriminating
thought” is called “non-thinking.” In our everyday life, we remain in seeing,
hearing, perceiving, and knowing; even when we sleep and dream, we still have
awareness, unless we do not dream at all. Here, do not misunderstand “think
non-thinking” as telling you to just sit there using your head to figure out
how to reach a state beyond discriminating thought. If you sit in meditation wondering
how to attain that realm of non-thinking, that is already thinking. This is not
what it means! If you think about how to get yourself to non-thinking, you
could think until you die and still not attain it. “Think non-thinking” means
that I am earnestly being in the realm of non-thinking. The monk, however,
didn’t understand. Since non-thinking or mind unmoved cannot be achieved by
ordinary mental function, does that mean if we simply keep ourselves from
thinking, we can realize that realm? Not quite. Because ordinarily, in our
practice, we rely on mental processes, intellectual analysis, personal
knowledge, and judgments of like or dislike—so how do we enter into “think
non-thinking”? Still, this monk was diligent, which is why he asked further.
The average person, upon hearing “think
non-thinking,” might suppose it means “sit there thinking nothing,” but that
itself is still thinking. Even if you sit facing a wall and note inwardly, “I
see a wall in front of me,” that is already thinking; it is not the realm of
non-thinking.
Some people say: “I will enter a state of meditative
absorption….” Indeed, many people nowadays like to talk about “entering
samādhi”—the first, second, third, or fourth dhyāna, or even the states of the
formless realm such as infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness,
neither perception nor non-perception, etc., in which breathing slows to almost
nothing, pulses become incredibly faint, and so on. But Shakyamuni Buddha
himself attained these with ease in the past and yet gave them all up, because
once you come out of such states, everything is back to where it was. So that
is not true awakening. One should look at why the Buddha abandoned those
states.
So the monk inquired again:
“How can one ‘think’ that which belongs to
non-thinking?”
Because if we try to figure it out, it’s still the
mind in operation. If we try to suppress all thoughts, that becomes the
attainment of a “no-thought absorption,” but that is also not the Way. Genuine
practice is not about forcibly making no thoughts arise. On the other hand, if
thoughts keep arising, that also seems far from non-thinking. Confused about
all this, the disciple asked:
“Non-thinking—how can I think it?”
Chan Master Yaoshan answered in three words:
“Non-thinking” (非思量).
He was not merely indicating that the state in
question is called “non-thinking,” but also instructing the method: you must
apply “non-thinking” to your meditation. You absolutely cannot use thinking to
reach that utterly still sitting. This is the true, legitimate transmission
from the time of the Buddha, which has been passed down generation to
generation.
Original Text:
藥山弘道大師坐次。有一位和尚問：
『兀兀地思量什麼？』
「兀兀地」是什麼？「兀兀地」就是徹底地、單純地、就是那個樣子地，打坐就是打坐。或者可以用英文講「Naked-赤裸裸的」。在日文的意思是：不是經過很細巧、慢慢雕琢的，不是像雕刻那樣一刀一刀地細細雕琢，不是那樣子的，叫做「兀兀地」。看起來就是在打坐，「Suchas」。但是，你在幹什麼呀？思量什麼嗎？你在打坐的那個樣子，到底是怎麼樣？
藥山回答：『我在徹底地參究那個不屬於我們分別思量的。』
「思量」我們可以叫做參，用功也可以叫做參。不屬於我們分別思量的，叫「不思量底」。我們日常生活都處在見聞覺知上面，睡覺時做夢也是知，除非你不作夢。在這裡，大家不要誤會，「思量箇不思量底」，不是要你坐在那邊動頭腦想，怎麼樣才能達到那個不屬於我們分別思量的境界。你在打坐時，想要看看用什麼辦法達到那個不思量的境界，那已經是思量了。不是這樣子的，大家千萬要弄清楚！你用思量在那邊想怎麼樣才能達到不思量的境界，這樣是辦不到的，你想到死也達不了那個境界，不是這樣子的。『思量箇不思量底』是我努力地在那個不思量的境界，是這個意思。那這個和尚不知道啊，那個不思量的境界，用思量當然做不到啊。即然是不思量、思想不動，那麼思想不動就可以達到那個不屬於思想的境界嗎？他弄不清楚啊，為什麼？一般人修行，都是用頭腦、意識的境界在修行，讀經、聽法都先用頭腦去了解，以自己的知識、見解去分析、評斷合理、不合理、喜歡、不喜歡，都是以頭腦在分別，所以他聽不懂什麼是「思量箇不思量底」。不過這位和尚也是蠻用功的，所以他才會問。普通一般人一聽到「思量箇不思量底」，就認為是坐在那裡什麼都不想，以為這個是不思量。「我坐在這裡什麼都不想」就已經是思量了。坐在牆壁前面，看到牆壁，你知道前面是一面牆，這也是思量了，都不是不思量的境界。
有些人想：「我坐在這兒慢慢入定……」現在很多人都喜歡談入定，有初禪定、二禪定、三禪定，做到色界天的第四禪定是什麼？氣住脈停。「氣住」，呼吸幾乎都沒有了，不是完全沒有。完全氣住怎麼可能做到？你一百萬年永遠氣住嗎？不行的，那是暫時的一段時間而已。比方說本來一分鐘呼吸三十六次，變成一分鐘五、六次，這個叫「氣住」。「脈停」也不是完全停掉，你一萬年停掉看看，不行的啦。那是暫時性的，呼吸減半，脈搏變得很慢，一分鐘十次或十幾次。氣住脈停，達到了四禪、色界天的境界，但這個是人為的呀！大家不要以為這個就是修佛法呀！這個等於是一種人為的功夫，透過訓練，讓身體的功能可以做到呼吸減半、脈搏減慢。出定的時候又回到原來的狀態，這哪裡是開悟呀！這不是開悟，這是色界天的定。這些釋迦牟尼佛都做過的，什麼空無邊處、無所有處、非想非非想處……，這些定他一下子就做到了，但是他為什麼全都把它們捨掉啊？大家要往這個地方去想。氣住脈停，他老人家為什麼覺得還不是？出定了還不是一樣嗎？玩那些花樣，人為的方法、訓練，做到很多很靈異的花樣，大家會覺得很稀奇，因為很多人做不到，你做到了所以覺得很稀奇。這個不是道！
所以他說：「不思量底如何思量？」。那個不屬於分別思量的境界要如何達到，我想進入這個境界，但不知道如何進入呀。呆呆地坐嗎？你說你坐在那裡，什麼都不想，但念頭總是會來吧。因為我們不是木頭人呀，我們不能防止我們的念頭來，你怎麼樣想防止也防止不了。但是有些人可以用人為的功夫，不讓念頭上來。注意喔！是人為的功夫喔！硬是不讓念頭上來。那是什麼？那個叫「無想定」，定的一種。這個也不是道喔！那什麼叫做「不思量底」？真正做到什麼樣的境界才叫「不思量底」？藥山禪師在那邊兀兀地坐，念頭也動呀！但是就是不太一樣。學生不懂：「老師你在打坐時，到底是什麼樣的情況呀？要怎麼做呀？」所以他問：
『不思量底如何思量？』
請問老師方法，要用什麼方法才能做到？藥山回答三個字：
『非思量。』
他回答「非思量」，不是指那個境界是「非思量」的境界，而是告訴他，用「非思量」這個方法去坐。他告訴你方法，什麼方法？「非思量」的方法去坐。你絕對不可以用思量喔！用思量的方法就不可能做到這種兀兀地坐。這個叫做真正正傳、禪宗一代傳一代、遞遞相傳、一代一代印可下來的真正的佛法。
[Continued in next message]
Paragraph 1
English Translation:
What is certification in accord (印可)? You must actually accomplish it before there is certification in
accord! It is not about writing out some proof, some diploma, stating which
generation you are—any kind of writing like that is fine if you wish. The true
succession of certification in accord is exemplified by Shakyamuni Buddha
regarding Venerable Kāśyapa: Shakyamuni Buddha attained that state, and Kāśyapa
also accomplished it. Kāśyapa also knew; following the method that the Buddha
guided him to practice, he really practiced it—he did not merely listen, nor
did he just understand intellectually. Later, he realized, “Ah! Teacher, you
are not mistaken,” and there was mutual certification in accord between teacher
and disciple. It is not the case that the teacher says over there: “It is that,
that, that is…,” while the student is over here unclear about what exactly the
teacher is indicating. The teacher–disciple certification in accord is mutual
and simultaneous: the teacher knows that the student has reached that state,
and the student, having followed the teacher’s method, discovers that the
teacher is not mistaken. At that moment, the student, in turn, certifies the
teacher. When the teacher certifies the student, at the same time the student
certifies the teacher. Only at this time is there a true “teacher and student
seeing each other,” a truly successive inheritance, the most genuine, the most
precious, a direct “mind transmitting mind,” passed down generation by
generation. Without this, Buddhism has no life—it has only ceremony, only
doctrine, only a great heap of human-contrived external forms. These forms are
artificially created; you can produce as many kinds as you want. But only this
“thing” cannot be forced: even if someone wanted to give it to you, it is not
certain that you could receive it. That must be achieved by your own
doing—“self-awakening”—only then can you know. It is astounding! Each great
Chan master, when seeing their fundamental nature, exclaims, “Ah! So that’s how
it is!” That is not a matter of thinking! It is not as though you try very hard
to think it through, and in the end figure it out, “Ah! So that’s how it is!”
It is not like that—it is different! If it were merely a product of thought,
then it would be easy; you would just need to think diligently. But this state
does not fall within seeing, hearing, feeling, knowing. It is not superstition,
and it is not worship.
Original Text:
“什麼是印可？做到才印可！不是寫個什麼證據、文憑，你是第幾代第幾代，那隨便你怎麼寫都行。真正的遞代印可，就是做到了像釋迦牟尼佛看迦葉尊者，釋迦牟尼佛達到了的境界，迦葉也做到了。迦葉也知道，他按照佛指導的方法去做，實際去做喔！不是聽，不是去理解喔！後來發現「啊！老師，你沒有錯」，師徒之間互相印可。並不是老師在那邊說：「就是那個、那個、那個才是……」，學生在這邊搞不清楚老師指的是什麼東西。師徒之間的印可雙方是同時的，老師知道學生已經達到了那個境界，學生依照老師指導的方法去做，發現老師並沒有錯，這時是學生反過來印可老師。老師印可學生的同時，學生也印可老師。這個時候才是真正的「師資相見」，這才是真正遞代相傳、最純、最可貴、以心印心、一代一代傳的東西。沒有這個，佛教沒有生命，只有儀式，只有教理，只有一大堆人為的外形。這些形式是人為的，你要多少花樣都可以做到。但是只有這個東西沒有辦法，想要給你也不見得你就得的到。那是要你自己做到——「自覺」，才會知道。那是驚嘆呀，每一位大禪師在見性的時候，都是「啊！原來是這樣！」那不是思想呀！那不是努力地在那邊想，後來想通了「啊！原來是這樣！」不是這樣，不一樣的呀！如果是想出來的話，那就好辦了，你就努力去想就好了。但是這個境界不屬於見、聞、覺、知，不屬於迷信，不屬於崇拜。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Paragraph 2
English Translation:
Worship does not work; it is just an
emotional matter. What is the highest sort of emotional devotion? Wholehearted
admiration—dedicating your entire being to someone, sacrificing yourself, even
giving up your life to uphold righteousness—this is a lofty sentiment indeed.
But if one has not left behind mental consciousness, then would one still be
revolving within mental consciousness, still stuck in a personal “I” realm?
Emotions are just like clouds in the sky: they depend on whether the weather
today is good or not. Sometimes the scorching sun is high overhead; sometimes
thick clouds abound, and then you cry out, “I love you, I hate you…” and so on.
Original Text:
崇拜是行不通的，那是情緒的東西。崇拜的最高情操是什麼？全身心的景仰。我全身心的景仰你，全身心都供獻給你，犧牲自己，殺身成仁，那麼高尚的情操。但如果沒有脫落心意識的境界，那麼是不是仍然是在心意識上打轉，仍然是個人我的境界？那個情緒的東西，好像天上的雲一樣，就看今天的天氣好不好，有時就豔陽高照，有時就烏雲密佈，然後在那裡喊愛你啦、恨你啦……。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Paragraph 3
English Translation:
It is not about emotion! Nor is it a
matter of “I beg you, I trust you, I wholeheartedly have faith in you—so give
it to me, impart it to me, bestow upon me much empowerment…” This is just human
selfishness. “Because, Teacher, do you see how respectful I am toward you? I
give you my whole being in faith, so you ought to grant me this.” What kind of
Buddhadharma is that? A truly awakened teacher—no matter who—if that person is
capable, they are always happy to give guidance. They will not discriminate: “If
someone is good to me, I will transmit a bit more to them; if someone is not so
nice to me, I will refrain from clarifying for them.” There is none of that.
The question is whether the student can accept the teacher’s guidance.
Especially in this type of direct succession from Shakyamuni Buddha’s
certification, it was conferred while each generation was still alive! The
Buddha, while alive, recognized Kāśyapa; Kāśyapa, while alive, recognized
Ānanda; thus it has continued down through successive generations. It is not
that some Buddha or Bodhisattva appears out of thin air in empty space to
certify you! We have this lineage transmitted from generation to generation.
The problem is that, because of the student’s many views and opinions, they
cannot accept it—this is the real issue. If such attitudes exist, then no
matter how much the teacher wants to guide you, it is impossible to break
through. Some people come from the stance of “I will treat you better; you give
me more teachings… more empowerment…”—this is also human selfishness. As soon
as you have such a notion arising in your mind, it is already impossible to be
in accord. The directly transmitted method of the Buddha is precisely that, for
the “non-thinking” state, one absolutely must not use “thinking” to try to
reach it. Practicing this is extremely difficult. Let us see how Master Dōgen
teaches us.
Original Text:
不是情緒！也不是說「我拜託你、我信你、我全身心信仰你，你給我，傳授給我，你給我很多加持……」，這是人的自私。「因為老師你知道我對你多恭敬呀！全身心都信仰你了，所以你應該給我這個」，這個是什麼樣的佛法？真正開悟的師父，不論是誰，只要是有能力做到的話，他都很樂意指導。沒有說誰對他好就想多傳一點給誰，誰對他不好就不太想給他指導清楚，沒有這個樣子的。問題是學生對於老師的指導能不能接受而已，尤其是這種遞代相傳、從釋迦牟尼佛印可下來的，活著的時候就印可下一代了喔！佛陀活著的時候就認可了迦葉，迦葉活著的時候認可阿難，這樣子遞代傳下來的。不是什麼虛空中出現什麼佛菩薩來給你印可的喔！有這種遞代相傳下來的老師，學生因為自己的許多見解、看法而無法接受，這個才是問題。有了這種想法的話，就算老師再怎麼想指導你也沒有辦法，打不進去。有的人以自己的立場，認為「我對你好一點，你傳授給我，給我多一點加持……」這也是人的自私，一有這種起心念頭，就已經不可能相應了。佛直接正傳的方法就是這個「非思量」的境界千萬不能用思量去想要達到。這個做起來非常困難。我們看看道元禪師怎麼教我們。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Non-thinking” renders 非思量 (fēi sī liàng or bù sī liàng).
Paragraph 4
English Translation:
When Master Yaoshan was sitting in
meditation, a certain monk asked him:
“When you sit there so silently, what
are you thinking about?” In fact, “thinking” does not necessarily refer to
conceptualizing something. Master Yaoshan was meditating with the method of
“non-thinking,” so asking him “what are you thinking about?” was misguided, but
this monk did not know that. Yaoshan replied:
“I am thinking of that genuine reality
that does not belong to thought.”
We usually presume that if there are
no more thoughts, one becomes like wood or stone. That is not the case! He is
telling us that the state that does not belong to discriminating thought is not
like being wooden or stony! It is a truly existent state. Is it abstract? Is it
something we casually imagine? It is not! It is not conjured by imagination,
and it is not just random talk. There truly is that real state called
“non-thinking.” It truly exists; once you accomplish it, you can directly get
hold of it. Hence, he answered, “That genuine reality that does not belong to
thought.” Therefore, that state free from discriminating thought is not
dullness, not sleep—and of course not deluded thinking running rampant. It is
not “thinking.” Yet, strangely enough, it is neither deluded thinking running
rampant, nor is it that no thoughts arise at all—so what exactly is it? That is
where we get stuck. You say that having one thought after another, with
ceaseless mental chatter, is incorrect. Then, does suppressing thoughts and not
letting them arise lead to a state of no-thought? That is just the attainment
of “no-thought samādhi,” which is also not correct. Yet there really is a
genuine state called “non-thinking.” This is difficult. If you explain it this
way, then no one knows what to do or how to train. When students first hear the
teacher say, “I am thinking that which does not belong to thought,” they get
confused: How could one use thought to think of that which is not of thought?
Do you understand the meaning here? What does Master Yaoshan want the student
to think about? What is the object of his thought—this glass of orange juice?
Is he thinking about some concrete object? Of course not. So that monk asked:
“How is one supposed to do that
‘non-thinking’ state?”
If thinking is not right, and not
thinking is also not right, then how does one do it at all? “Teacher, when you
sit there, thoughts come and go in your mind. When I sit in meditation, it’s
the same, with thoughts coming and going; I would never dare to consider myself
awakened, as I always feel I am not awakened at all!” The biggest problem in
meditation, aside from the issue of thoughts, what else is there? “Ah! My legs
go numb.” — That is a thought! Thinking of how tasty the steamed bun this
morning was — that is a thought! “Ah! All phenomena are without self-nature” —
that, too, is a thought! “Ah! Let the thoughts come and go, pay them no heed” —
that is also a thought! Many people meditate and just spin in that place, and
many non-Buddhist practices are mixed in; after decades of diligent practice in
meditation, they have been striving in the wrong direction all along.
Original Text:
藥山禪師在打坐時，有一位和尚問：
『兀兀地打坐時，你在想什麼呀？』其實思量不一定就是想什麼。他用非思量的方法在打坐，所以問他在想什麼就不對了，但是這位和尚不知道。藥山回答：
『我在想那個真正不屬於思想的真實境界。』
我們都以為沒有了思想，就像木頭、石塊一樣。不是的喔！他告訴我們，不屬於分別思慮的那個狀態，並不是木頭石塊般的喔！那是一個真實存在的境界。是抽象的嗎？是隨便幻想出來的嗎？不是呀！不是想像出來的，也不是隨便亂講的喔！確實有那個真實狀態叫做「非思量」，真的有，你做到了就可以把握得到的，所以回答「那個真正不屬於思想的真實境界」。所以，不屬於分別思量的那個境界，不是昏沉，不是睡著了，當然也不是妄想紛飛，不是思想。但是奇怪，妄想紛飛不是，念頭都不來也不是，那到底是什麼呀？這個地方就搞不清楚了。你說念頭來來去去，妄想紛飛不對，那麼什麼念頭都不來，把念頭壓制，不讓它起，那是無想定；也不對。但卻真的有叫做「非思量」真實的那個境界。這個難了，這麼講就變成不知道該怎麼做才好，不曉得怎麼練習才好。學生一聽到老師講：「我在想那個不屬於念頭的那個。」學生就搞糊塗了，怎麼能用思想去想那個不屬於想的？各位知道這裡的意思嗎？藥山禪師要學生想什麼，想的對象是什麼？是這一杯柳橙汁嗎？是去想某個具體的對象嗎？當然不是。所以那個和尚問：
『那個不屬於思量的那個境界，到底要怎麼做到呀？』
想也不是，不想也不是，到底要怎麼做呀？「老師你坐在那邊，念頭也來來去去呀！我打坐的時候也跟老師一樣，念頭也來來去去，但我總是不肯自己是開悟的人，總覺得自己不是開悟的樣子呀！」打坐最大的問題，除了念頭的問題還有什麼呀？「啊！腿麻。」——念頭！想到早上的饅頭好吃——念頭！「啊！諸法無自性」——念頭呀！「啊！念頭來來去去都不管它」，也是個念頭呀！有很多人打坐時，就這個地方打轉，然後很多外道的修法就摻雜進去了，結果打坐了幾十年，非常用功，但一直往錯誤的方向努力。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Without self-nature” is used for 無自性.
• “Non-thinking” for 非思量.
• “No-thought samādhi” for 無想定.
Paragraph 5
English Translation:
Then Master Yaoshan only spoke of a
single core point at the beginning: “You ask me which method I use to
accomplish this? First, cast aside your discriminating thoughts!” Do this
first: get rid of human opinions and human feelings, all of them! But then the
question arises: how to cast them aside? If you think, “I want to cast aside my
opinions,” that already implies a viewpoint. If you say, “When thinking arises,
pay no attention,” well, you ignore it, but the thoughts still come. So if
thoughts come, is that not then contrary to the state of non-thinking? Ordinary
people cannot distinguish, cannot see clearly how to differentiate.
Master Dōgen then explains:
“Shakyamuni Buddha conveyed to Kāśyapa
precisely this silent sitting. This alone is the truly authentic transmission
from generation to generation in Buddhism.”
It is the genuine transmission! It is
not something you get by simply reading sutras or occasionally sitting in
meditation. It is truly transmitted in succession from Shakyamuni Buddha to the
twenty-eighth generation, Bodhidharma, who came to the Eastern Land, and then
on to Master Yaoshan, who is the thirty-sixth generation. It is precisely
that—not self-importance, not just reading some sūtras and concluding that this
must be the way, or attaining a slight miraculous ability and thinking that is
it. That is not how it is. To reach this state of non-thinking, only the
Buddha’s genuine, direct method can achieve it; no other method can do
it—absolutely cannot do it.
Original Text:
那麼藥山禪山一開始只講了一句最核心的話：「你問我用什麼方法做到的呀？首先，先將你的分別思慮抛開！」先做到這點，把人的見解、人的感受通通給我抛開！但問題來了，要怎麼抛開？你想「我要將我的見解抛開」，那也已經起了個見。那麼思量來了不管它，你不管它，念頭一樣會來呀。那麼念頭來就不是不思量的境界嗎？一般人不會分別，不清楚如何去分辦它。
道元禪師開始解釋：
『釋迦牟尼佛交給迦葉的，就是這種兀兀地坐。這個就是一代一代，真正正傳的佛法。』
正傳的喔！不是自己讀讀經，打打坐來的喔！這個就是真正遞代從釋迦牟尼佛一直傳到第二十八代達摩，然後傳到東土的，傳到藥山禪師是第三十六代。就是這個！不是自以為是，不是自己讀讀經，覺得那個樣子對。或是有了一點小神通，就以為這樣就是，不是這樣子。要達到這種不思量的境界，只有佛正傳的這個方法做得到，這個以外的方法做不到，絕對做不到。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Paragraph 6
English Translation:
“There are many ways of describing
this ‘non-thinking’ state. In the past, many Chan masters used different
approaches to transmit it, but all were referring to the same state. All
descriptions point to the same realm, and what Master Yaoshan refers to as
‘using non-thinking to arrive at non-thinking’ is just one kind of explanation.
Now, pay attention:
‘Thinking is also skin, flesh, bones,
and marrow; non-thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.’”
What does this mean? Is there anyone
who would like to venture an explanation? Why did he suddenly come out with
such a statement? Everyone can understand what came before: the student asked
the teacher, “How should one ‘think non-thinking’?” The teacher instructs him
to use the method of “non-thinking.” But then, why the added statement,
“Thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and marrow; non-thinking is also skin,
flesh, bones, and marrow”? Why must he say this line? Think about it carefully
yourselves.
The silent-sitting state taught by the
Buddha definitely requires “non-thinking” to achieve; using “thinking”
absolutely cannot do it. This is the authentic, direct method of the Buddha!
Now he says that thinking is skin, flesh, bones, and marrow, and that
non-thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. If both are indeed part of
your skin, flesh, bones, and marrow, then why must we use non-thinking to get
there? Wouldn’t that be contradictory?
Original Text:
這個「不思量的境界」有很多種說法，過去很多禪師，用各種方法來傳，講的都是這個境界。境界都是在講同樣一個境界，而藥山禪師所說的「以非思量的方法來達到不思量的境界」，是其中一種說法。下面重要了：
『思量也是皮肉骨髓，不思量也是皮肉骨髓。』
這是什麼意思呀？有沒有哪一位想來說說看？怎麼忽然冒了這樣一句話？前面所說的大家都清楚，學生問老師：「不思量底如何思量？」老師教他用什麼方法做到呢？用「非思量」的方法做到。但是為什麼後來講了一句「思量也是皮肉骨髓，不思量也是皮肉骨髓」？為什麼一定要講這句話？大家自己想一想。
佛講的兀兀地坐的境界，一定要用非思量才能做到，用思量絕對做不到，這是佛正傳的方法喔！那現在又講思量是皮肉骨髓，不思量也是皮肉骨髓，既然思量是皮肉骨髓，那就跟不思量一樣了嘛！那為什麼還教我們一定要用非思量的方法？矛盾嘛！是不是？
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Paragraph 7
English Translation:
When we sit in meditation, unless we
fall asleep and do not dream, there will inevitably be arising thoughts. If you
forcefully suppress those thoughts and do not let them arise, you can achieve
the state of no-thought samādhi. But eventually you come out of that samādhi,
and thoughts will appear once again. What then is the meditation transmitted by
the Buddha? When thoughts arise, you know they are arising. Do you know in
advance which thought is about to arise? No. When thoughts depart, can you hold
on to them? You cannot. Do you know from where these thoughts come? Do they
come out of the void? Out of the left side of your brain or the right side of
your brain? You also do not know. Thoughts are weird like that. How they come,
how long they linger, you cannot control. This is the real situation. We are
now inquiring into it directly, so do not just listen superficially. You say
the thought is formless and shapeless, so you do not know, but how is it that
you are aware of the thought? Thinking is also your skin, flesh, bones, and
marrow—thinking is also your Dharma body! So, of course, non-thinking is too.
Why did he need to speak this line?
When we sit in meditation, we suddenly
hear “Om mani padme hum,” and think, “Oh! That’s good!” That is already
thinking. Or when a thought arises and you think, “I’m a practitioner of the
Buddha’s way, I’m meditating now; this thought is not good, it shouldn’t
appear.” … Don’t do that! That is already thinking; it is not non-thinking. It
is not that the thought itself is produced by your thinking. It is like the
sound of a handclap—when we clap, you hear it. It’s not that your ears chose to
hear, which is why you heard the sound. Our mind faculty automatically displays the arising thought when it emerges; it is not that we produce it by
thinking. Sitting there in meditation, do you know what the next thought will
be? “This thought is good; that thought is bad. Let them come, let them go, pay
them no mind.” That is not how it is. Intellectually, you know you should not
grasp or reject them, so you say to yourself: “Now I’m meditating, so I must
not grasp or reject.” You have already grasped another viewpoint—grasping a
viewpoint of “not grasping or rejecting.” The thought itself is not the
problem. Thinking that a certain thought is good, or that another is bad, that
is the problem. Sitting in meditation, you feel the air in the meditation hall
is not good—why can’t that be?
You have the capacity to think, which
is why thoughts appear. Without the capacity to think, thoughts could not
arise! Thinking and the thought itself are not the same thing; the thought
itself cannot think itself. Try this right now: if a thought arises, can the
thought itself recognize itself? If you think, “Ah! A thought,” that is already
a second thought. Realizing “Ah! This is that thought” is already arising a
second thought—that is no longer the original thought. If you want to recognize
the second thought again, “Ah! My second thought is such and such…,” that is
already a third thought. You are like a dog chasing its tail, going in circles,
never catching it. Are you all clear about this? The Buddha wants everyone to
sit silently, exactly to train in this. The authentic Dharma that the Elder
Shakyamuni Buddha handed down is precisely for everyone to sit silently,
casting aside human notions. That is the authentic Dharma he taught. He did not
teach anything else. By practicing in this way consistently, you become
increasingly clear about the difference between the activity of your
discriminating mind and the activity of the six sense faculties that does not
belong to discriminating mind. As this distinction grows clearer and clearer,
everything becomes easier to handle. Normally, we are constantly living in our
own opinions: “I feel…”—that is an opinion; “the present moment”—that is an
opinion; “Dharma-nature”—that is an opinion; “impermanence”—that is an opinion;
“It’s so hot”—that is an opinion. After the experience of heat arises in
consciousness, you say, “I feel hot.” This is extremely difficult to explain in
words… From the moment we are born, we have the ability to recognize our
surroundings, and every day’s experience reinforces that recognizing function,
so our entire life is spent in that realm of recognition. Therefore, the Buddha
said that people living in that realm of recognition can never see their own
true nature. Because you do not realize you are living in that realm. Unless
you settle down and sit, using the method called “non-thinking,” you cannot
succeed.
“Non-thinking” is just one way of
expressing it among many. Ultimately, they all aim for you to recognize that
condition before the activity of recognition arises. This is extremely
difficult unless you follow the Buddha’s instructions to sit silently. The
authentic line of transmission passed down from generation to generation is
precisely transmitting this; all other methods are merely expedients. The
Buddha himself did not dare to teach the One Vehicle teaching from the start,
so he began gradually from the Small Vehicle, guiding step by step. Even so,
many people could not accept it. When he expounded the One Vehicle teaching,
many left, just like when you use a few yellow leaves to coax a crying child…
“Yellow leaves to stop the baby’s crying!” The child is crying, so you grab a
few yellow leaves to amuse them, so that they do not cry anymore.
Why can’t they accept it? Why do they
not trust it? Because the power of self-awakening has not arisen. If the power
of self-awakening has not arisen, it is very difficult to accept the Buddha’s
One Vehicle teaching. If you want to reach the state where the Buddha saw the
bright star and awakened at once, you absolutely must sit in this way. To enter
the state of non-thinking, the best way is Master Yaoshan’s approach of
“non-thinking.” That is why he suddenly mentions: “Thinking is also skin,
flesh, bones, and marrow; non-thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and marrow,”
to prevent people’s misunderstanding that if a thought arises, it is incorrect.
If no thoughts arise, that is the no-thought samādhi, and once you exit that
samādhi, thoughts come anyway. You are not wood or stone, so thoughts will
definitely come. According to the Buddha’s guidance, it does not matter if
thoughts come and go—so how is that different from how ordinary people let
their thoughts come and go? He says, “Thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and
marrow; non-thinking is also skin, flesh, bones, and marrow,” precisely to
point out this. He is telling you that when thoughts come, generating the
notion to accept them or to reject them is the real issue. The thought itself
is your skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. It is not that you are over here
observing the thought, noticing the coming and going of thoughts, while you, on
this side, remain unmoving and aware… Aha! That is the method of outsiders to
the way (non-Buddhist). Many people are taught, “I am over here, noticing when
a thought comes, noticing when it goes; before the next thought arises, oh, how
quiet it is. I am the host, the thoughts are guests….” That is the approach of
outsiders to the way! Many people get stuck here without realizing it is
erroneous. You still have a “you” that remains pure and unmoving, observing all
the movement—that is not real Buddhist practice taught by the Tathāgata. Truly,
in the Buddha’s teaching, thinking is also your skin, flesh, bones, and marrow!
Original Text:
我們在那邊打坐，除非我們睡著了，也不做夢，否則一定有念頭上來。那用力把念頭壓制下去，不讓它上來，功夫做到這樣，那是無想定。但是一定會出定喔！出定了又是念頭來。那麼佛傳的打坐是怎樣？念頭來，你知道念頭來，你事先就知道什麼念頭要來嗎？不知道。念頭去，你留得住嗎？留不住。念頭從哪裡來，你知道嗎？什麼念頭要來你都不知道，從哪個地方來也不知道。從腦子裡來嗎？虛空中來的嗎？腦子裡的左邊來，右邊來？從哪一點出來也不知道。念頭是這樣怪。怎麼來，停留多久，你也不能控制。這是真實的情況，我們現在是在參，各位不要光是聽。你說念頭無形無狀，所以我不知道，但你怎麼知道念頭呀？思量也是皮肉骨髓——思量也是你的法身呀！不思量當然也是。那他為什麼要講這句話？打坐的時候，忽然聽到「嗡瑪呢唄咩吽」，然後覺得「喔！這個好」！這已經是思量了。或者是念頭來，心裡想：「我是修佛的人，我現在正在打坐，這個念頭不好，不要來。」……不要這個樣子。這已經是思量了，不是非思量了。念頭本身不是你想出來的耶！念頭本身不是思量的結果耶！就像現我拍手，「啪！」你聽到聲音，這個聲音不是你想要聽，耳朵才聽到的耶。我們的意根，有念頭浮上來，它就顯示出來，不是你把它想出來才有念頭的呀。在那裡打坐，下一個要浮出什麼樣的念頭，你知道嗎？「這個念頭好，這個念頭不好，念頭來來去去不管它」，不是這個樣子。你在理解上知道不取不捨，然後想：「我現在正在打坐，我要不取不捨」。你已經取了嘛！正取了一個不取不捨的見。念頭本身不是問題，認為念頭好，念頭不好，這個才是思量。在那裡打坐，覺得禪堂的空氣不好，怎麼不可以啊？
你有能夠想的力量，念頭才會來，你沒有能夠想的力量，念頭起不來呀！思量跟念頭本身不一樣，念頭本身不是思量呀！念頭本身可以想它自己本身嗎？大家現在試試，現在起了一個念頭，念頭它可以認它自己嗎？你想「啊！念頭」，那已經是第二個念頭了。你去認到「啊！這是什麼念頭」，那已經是起了第二念了，已經不是念頭本身了。你想再去認第二個認頭嗎？你一認「啊！我的第二個念頭是什麼什麼……」，這又是第三念了。狗咬尾巴一樣，一直在那邊打轉，怎麼也咬不到。這個大家分得清楚嗎？佛要大家兀兀地坐，就是要訓練大家這個。釋迦牟尼佛他老人家傳的正法，就是要大家這樣兀兀地坐，把人的見解抛開，這是他老人家傳的正法，其他都沒有傳授。大家常常這樣子訓練，會愈來愈清楚屬於我們分別思想的那個樣子，跟六根不屬於我們分別思想地活動的那個樣子，兩者的不同會愈來愈清楚。這個很重要，大家一定要細細地弄清楚，這個弄清楚了，什麼東西都好辦。我們平常都活在自己的見解，「我覺得……」——見解、「當下」——見解、「法性」——見解、「無常」——見解、「好熱」——見解，先有熱的那個覺之後，才說「我好熱」。這個用講的實在很難說明……。我們從一出生，有認識週遭環境的能力，每天每天的生活經驗一直在加強這個認識的活動，所以我們的生活一直都是認識的境界裡。所以佛就說，活在這個認識境界裡的人，根本不可能認到自己的真性。因為你沒有發覺到我們都在這個境界裡生活啊！除非你靜下來上坐，「非思量」就是要領。
「非思量」是眾多講法中的其中的一種說法，其實都是為了讓我們認到在認識作用未起以前的那個樣子。這個非常困難，除非你照佛交代的方法，這樣兀兀地坐。一代一代傳下來的就是傳這個東西，這個以外的法門，都是方便而已。佛也不敢一開始就講一乘法門啊，所以從小乘開始慢慢講解，一路給大家誘導過來，不過還是有很多人無法接受。講這個一乘法門，你沒有辦法接受，信不過，就像佛要講法華經時，很多人都跑掉了一樣。沒辦法，只好用幾片黃葉逗逗你……黃葉止啼啦！孩子哭了，拿幾片黃葉安撫一下，小孩就不哭了。
為什麼無法接受？為什麼信不過？因為自覺的力量沒有昇起。若自覺的力量沒有昇起的話，很難接受佛講的這個一乘法門。如果要做到跟佛一樣一見明星的狀態，一定要這樣子坐。要進入不思量的境界，用藥山禪師所提的非思量的方法最好。所以他這裡忽然提到「思量也是皮肉骨髓，不思量也是皮肉骨髓」是怕大家誤會，以為念頭來了是不對的。念頭都不來，那是無想定，出定了照樣有念頭來。你不是木頭石塊呀，念頭一定會來。佛所指導的，念頭來去沒有關係，那麼跟普遍一般人念頭來去有什麼不同？他講「思量也是皮肉骨髓，不思量也是皮肉骨髓」，就是在指這個地方。他告訴你，念頭來了，你起一個意見要取它，起一個念頭要捨它，那才是問題。那個念頭的本身就是皮肉骨髓。不是我在這裡觀察念頭，念頭來知道，念頭去知道，念頭動來動去，我這裡有一個不動的在這邊知道……哎！這是外道的方法呀，很多人在教這個方法。「我在這裡知道念頭來，念頭去也知道，第二個念頭還沒來以前，啊！清靜。我這裡是清靜，不會跟著念頭來去，清靜無比，都沒有動。來去的是客人，我是主人……」，这是外道的修法喔！很多人掉在這裡，不知道錯誤，你還不是有一個清淨不動的你在那邊觀察動！真正佛陀教導的是什麼？思量也是皮肉骨髓呀！
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “No-thought samādhi” again renders 無想定.
[Continued in next message]
[Continued from previous message]
Paragraph 8
English Translation:
A thought itself is not an issue—just
like a sound. The sound of clapping is the sound of clapping; the sound of
knocking on a table is the sound of knocking on a table. Does your ear decide,
“I want to hear a clapping sound” so that it hears? The moment a sound differs,
it just manifests differently. There is no need for you to use your mind to
discriminate them. If you do not discriminate, they themselves still appear in
their respective ways! Do you need to discriminate in order for them to become
two different sounds? You do not! Even if you do not discriminate, they are
already distinct. “Discriminating yet non-discriminating, non-discriminating
yet discriminating”—this is what it means. Sound arises; where does it appear?
It does not arise within “me.” We have already presupposed there is an “I,” and
that external conditions produce a sound that “I” hear. If you stick to that
view, you will never accord with the Dharma taught by the Buddha. You first set
up the existence of “me,” with me in here, and whenever there is a sound out
there, I can hear it; if there is some appearance, I can see it; if there are
conditions, that means something arises. If the conditions are present, it
exists; if the conditions are absent, it does not exist. My six sense faculties
follow the external conditions, according to conditions I hear and see. “My ear
faculty, my ear faculty…” Think about it: is this what the Buddha taught? From
the start, you have taken an illusory “I” as your basis, right? When a sound
appears, is there any difference of whose sound it is—yours, mine, or his? Is
there any difference in whose ear faculty is hearing it? To even speak of an
“ear faculty” is already inexact; it is only used for explanatory convenience.
If you try to pinpoint an actual ear, which one would it be? From the ultimate
perspective, there is fundamentally no act of hearing—this is how it is heard.
Who hears, and who is heard? It is all a single wholeness revealed there. There
is no “heard” sound, nor is there a hearer. Is there truly an ear that hears?
Yet, we all abide in a condition where “I” exist, and we cannot shake off the
concept of “I.” Then, from this position of “me,” we listen to the Buddha’s
teachings and form our own conclusions. But in the end, they are still just our
own assumptions.
Someone once asked Master Zhaozhou,
“Does a dog have buddha-nature or not?” Master Zhaozhou answered, “No!” A
confused monk wondered, “Isn’t it said that the Buddha declared all sentient
beings possess buddha-nature? Why do you say that a dog has no buddha-nature?
Then all your usual teachings must be nonsense!” We are constantly living
within conceptual viewpoints, applying them to everything we do. “All sentient
beings possess buddha-nature”—that is a conceptual viewpoint. A realized master
is not speaking from that conceptual realm. It is only that we ourselves fail
to notice that we are stuck in mental consciousness. Often, we take his words
and, from our own understanding, evaluate them, concluding: “All sentient
beings have buddha-nature.” Yet “buddha-nature,” in our mind, is itself
something imagined. Sentient beings too are an imagined concept in your
mind—aren’t they? If I ask you, “What is buddha-nature? What is realization?”
each person gives a different reply. As soon as you hear my question, you think:
“I believe this is buddha-nature, that is awakening”—and it is purely
conceptual. You are just imagining buddha-nature in your mind. Once you
understand the principle, you believe you “get it,” your knowledge of
Buddhadharma is excellent, and then you either become a scholar or fall into
superstition. You do not genuinely wonder, “What, exactly, did the Buddha pass
down to Kāśyapa? What did each generation transmit?” Could it really be an
empty name? The certification document? Or perhaps some amazing psychic
abilities? That is not it! Yet you are unconcerned about it and wander around
seeking mantras or empowerments, wanting to read more Buddhist texts than
others, to comprehend more Buddhist principles so you can teach and deliver
beings… “I know far more Yogācāra and Madhyamaka than you do; let me first
attain accomplishment, and then I’ll help you.” Or “Every month, I give
offerings to a great master!” “I often stay by the master’s side to receive
blessings from him!” “As long as I recite the Buddha’s name, then at my death,
the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas will come to welcome me…” All are simply
expressions of human self-centeredness, having no heartfelt interest in what
your real self truly is.
Master Zhaozhou said “No!” and we
presume he means there is “no buddha-nature.” The moment we dwell in mental
consciousness, we take the bait. Master Zhaozhou’s “No” does not mean “there is
no buddha-nature.” Nor does it mean “there is buddha-nature.” His point is:
Right now, I say “No”; you are hearing me say “No.” Why do you hear it? How
could that be? It is directly appearing before you. I say “No,” and it directly
connects with your mind’s state—directly manifests what? It has already shown
itself! Master Zhaozhou was demonstrating precisely this—but the monk did not
understand and got stuck in mental reasoning: “All sentient beings possess
buddha-nature. How can you say a dog does not have buddha-nature? Then the
doctrine you usually teach must be false…”
Therefore, people generally reading
sūtras are really just reading themselves. Whatever they themselves believe is
correct is what they take as correct. After learning all sorts of doctrines, do
they comprehend them? Yes, they comprehend them. Do they accept the logic? Yes,
they find it quite rational and correct. Are they able to become truly
awakened? They believe they understand deeply. But is that enough? Merely
agreeing with the logic—does that suffice? You are still living in the realm of
conceptual thinking. It is still your personal viewpoint. Yet that viewpoint is
not necessarily wrong! It is not incorrect in itself, but it lacks true power.
Why? Because it remains your viewpoint, arising from your understanding. A
person may have wonderful knowledge of Buddhist principles in daily life, but
once something truly severe occurs, everything changes. Why? Because it is not
complete to the end. Even so, not having that viewpoint would be no good,
either. Plenty of people attempt to practice Buddhism without the foundation of
correct understanding, mixing in random methods of “reciting the Buddha’s name,
reciting mantras,” and so forth. Without this fundamental correct view, many
things go astray. Yet merely grasping that correct view intellectually and trying
to practice strictly according to that ideal is also incorrect. It is enough
that you know not to do that, and instead genuinely strive in that direction
with real effort.
Original Text (全文原文):
念頭本身沒有問題，跟聲音一樣，拍手的聲音是拍手的聲音、敲桌子的聲音是敲桌子的聲音，耳朵有沒有分「我要聽拍手的聲音」才聽到？聲音不一樣，就現不一樣的樣子，你需不需要用頭腦去分別它？你不要去分別它，它本身就顯現不一樣的樣子了嘛！是你去分別它，它才變成兩種不同的聲音的嗎？這兩種聲音一樣嗎？不一樣，有分別。是你去分別它的嗎？需要你去分別它，它才不一樣的嗎？不用！不用你去分別它，它自然就有分別。「分別也不分別，不分別也分別」，就是這個意思。聲音顯現，在哪裡顯現？不是在我這裡顯現耶！我們都先認定有一個我存在，然後聲音在外境顯現，我在這裡聽到聲音。這樣的話，根本無法跟佛講的法相應。先認定有我，我在這裡，然後有什麼東西我就看到，有什麼聲音我就聽，有什麼緣就現什麼，緣有就有，緣沒有就沒有。我的六根隨著外境隨緣顯現……我的六根……就這樣子學去了。先已經建立在「有我存在」的基礎上了，然後在那裡等著，有什麼聲音就現，有什麼影像就看到，隨緣聽隨緣看，我的耳根，我的耳根……。你看看，這哪是佛講的法？起點就已經錯掉了，就已經以假我為基礎了，對不對？聲音顯現，有沒有分你的我的他的？耳根有沒有分？說耳根就已經不對了，那是為了方便說明而已。你指耳朵是哪個耳朵呀？所以講起是根本沒有聽，是這樣子聽。誰聽誰被聽呀？一體地在那邊顯現嘛！沒有被聽的聲音，也沒有聽的人，難道有聽的耳朵嗎？但我們都在有我存在的狀態，那個「我」的概念揮不掉，以這個狀態來聽佛法，聽了後認為是怎麼樣，還不是自己認為的。
有人問趙州禪師，狗有沒有佛性。趙州禪師回答：「無！」糊塗的和尚就想：「奇怪？佛說眾生都有佛性，你怎麼回答無佛性？那你平常講課都是亂講的喔！」我們都活在見解的狀態，做什麼事情都在見解的狀態下做事。「眾生都有佛性」——見解，人家證道的大師，不是在這種見解狀態下講出來的話，是我們自己沒發覺自己活在心意識的狀態而已。往往把他的話拿來，以自己的理解去判斷，然後說所有眾生有情的都有佛性，佛性也是你頭腦裡頭想像的佛性，眾生也是頭腦裡想像「會動的，會呼吸的……那個叫眾生」，眾生也是概念耶！不是嗎？我問你什麼是佛性？什麼是成道？每個人講的都不一樣，聽到我的問題，然後在頭腦裡面想，認為這樣才是佛性，這樣才是成道，這不就是概念嗎？你在概念裡頭想像佛性呀！道理懂了，就自以為我們懂了，自以為佛學很好，然後不是搞學問，就是搞迷信。沒有真心去想要澈明佛傳給迦葉的是什麼東西，一代一代傳的是什麼東西。佛遞代傳下來的是什麼？難道是虛名嗎？傳那個認證文憑嗎？還是傳那個很奇妙的神通變化？不是嘛！對這個一點也不關心，然後到處求，求念咒，求加持，要比別人讀更多的佛書，比別人懂更多的佛理，這樣才可以指導別人，救渡眾生……，「我懂很多唯識、中觀，你們大家都不行，等我成就再去救渡你們」；或都是「我每個月都有供養大師喔！」「我常常跟在大師身邊，常常都可以受大師的加持」「我就這樣念佛就好了，臨終時佛菩薩就會來接引我了……」。人的自私，對於什麼是真正的自己沒有一點真切想了解的心。
趙州禪師回答：「無！」我們聽了就認為他說「沒有佛性」。活在心意識境界的我們馬上就上鈎了。趙州回答「無」，不是「沒有佛性」，也不是「有佛性」。他的意思是什麼？我現在說「無」，我在這裡講「無」，你那邊是不是就聽到了？你為什麼聽到？你怎麼會的？當下就在那邊顯現。我講「無」的境界，跟你心的境界是直通的嘛！直通的什麼！？已經顯給你看了。趙州禪師在顯的就是這件事，聽的和尚不懂，在腦子裡打轉，「眾生都有佛性呀！怎麼你說狗沒有佛性呀？……」
所以說，一般人讀經都是在讀自己，自己認為怎麼樣，就覺得怎麼樣對。聽了很多道理，因為我們有想的能力，所以聽了之後能不能理解？能理解。同不同意這個道理？同意這個道理，認為這麼講很合理、很正確。能不能明白？能明白。能明白這個道理，這樣子就夠了嗎？同意了之後就可以了嗎？這還是活在見解的狀態，是你的見解。但是這個見解沒有錯呀。這個見解沒有錯，但是它沒有力量。為什麼？因為這還是你的見，你了解了之後產生的嘛！平常佛學道理都很高明，但是一發生什麼嚴重的事情就整個都變掉了，為什麼？因為不究盡。但是你沒有這個見也不行呀。沒有正確觀念而亂修佛法的人一大堆。沒有這個最根本的正見，然後在那邊念佛念咒。光是了解這個正見，拿著這個理想要照這樣子去做，雖然這是不對的，但大家知道這樣是錯的就好，自己要努力往那個方向去做才行。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “No” here (無) does not necessarily mean “does not exist.” In Zen dialogues, “Wu!” or
“Mu!” can be a direct pointer beyond conceptuality.
• “Buddha-nature” refers to the
intrinsic capacity for awakening.
Paragraph 9
English Translation:
The monk asked Master Yaoshan, “How
can one accomplish the state of non-thinking?” That genuine state of
non-thinking, present since beginningless time, is perpetually so. Now the
question is how to accomplish it—how to realize it for oneself? How to spark
one’s innate wisdom of self-awakening, exclaiming, “Ah, that is it!”? It is
already there from the start—it is not produced through cultivation. We also
cannot say it was originally “possessed,” because the non-thinking state is
fundamentally outside time and space, beyond conventional thought. Early on,
the Buddha learned from numerous great teachers, and as for all sorts of subtle
channels, energies, extraordinary psychic abilities—he already mastered them to
a remarkable degree. Yet at that time, why did the Buddha not begin teaching
Buddhadharma? Why did he still feel something was off, abandon them
all—completely give them all up—and then insist on sitting alone under the
Bodhi tree? Then, one morning, he suddenly saw a star in the sky, “Ah!”—only then
did he start teaching the Dharma. It was because he discovered that none of
those methods could fully reveal one’s true nature. So he discarded them all.
Sitting alone beneath the Bodhi tree, he sat silently until one daybreak, when
upon seeing a star in the sky, he recognized his own original face. It is not
that “the Buddha practiced for twelve years, gradually cleansing his
Dharma-nature a little bit at a time, until every defilement was removed, and
thus he became a buddha. The Buddha had superior capabilities, so in twelve
years, he cleaned his Dharma-nature. We, with inferior capabilities, might need
thirty years to clean it—so first we study the Small Vehicle, cleaning our
Dharma-nature somewhat, and then we can learn the Great Vehicle…” That is not
the case. We are originally abiding in the buddha’s state, yet we are oblivious
to it.
When Shakyamuni Buddha first awakened
under the Bodhi tree—which truly happened—his first words, one could say his
grand pronouncement, were: “Marvelous! Marvelous! All beings throughout the
great earth possess the Tathāgata’s wisdom and virtues. It is only because of
deluded thinking and clinging that they cannot realize it.” The reason they
cannot realize their own original face is that they are burdened by deluded
thoughts, and then cling to their own delusion. Do you see? People first
generate inexplicable delusions, then tightly grasp those delusions. The
greatest delusion is the sense that “I” exist. Hence one fails to know that one
already possesses the Tathāgata’s wisdom and virtues. Master Dōgen states:
“As long as you follow the method the
Buddha taught—silently sitting in this way—every sentient being can attain the
state of non-thinking. If you just do it, how could you fail to attain it?”
Who would not be able to do it? Anyone
can do it. Why then do they fail to do it? Because you cannot discard your
personal viewpoints. At the slightest provocation, your own opinions appear.
Because we have so many attachments, our own opinions inevitably rise up. Next,
Master Dōgen says:
“If you are not so foolish, you would
naturally inquire, ‘How can I do this silent sitting?’”
If you are not that dull, you would
surely wonder how to achieve the silent sitting that has been directly
transmitted by the Buddha. If you lack even the ability to question, then he
calls that too foolish. None of you here would be that foolish, right? He is
implying that every being should have the natural capacity to question how to
accomplish that silent sitting. Master Yaoshan says, “To achieve the silent
sitting personally transmitted by the Buddha, I used the method of
non-thinking!”
“To sit using non-thinking is
extremely supreme. If you want to reach the non-thinking state, you must use
the method of non-thinking.”
“Within the realm of non-thinking,
there is a certain ‘someone’—that ‘someone’ can uphold me.”
He is not using the pronoun “that” in
the usual sense. His main meaning is: “The non-thinking state is not empty
quiescence.” If one enters the realm of non-thinking, with “no self in persons”
and “no self in phenomena,” does that mean you cannot distinguish me from you?
People often assume that once we are in no-self for persons and phenomena,
everything merges into a blank, with no differentiation whatsoever. But that is
not how it is. An awakened person does not lose the difference between me and
you. Non-discriminating, yet there is still a natural difference. You must
uphold your personal existence.
“Through silent sitting, not only does
the state of non-thinking become manifest, but you become ever more clear about
that realm of ‘thinking’ that cannot be avoided.”
Silent sitting does not remove all
thoughts, nor is it the stance: “I am practicing Buddhism; this thought is no
good—go away. Ah! This is the thought of Amitābha—this is excellent, welcome
it.” Absolutely not! Thought is spontaneously there, shaped by the relationship
between the mind faculty and mental objects. In conventional terms, we say “the
mind faculty and mental objects”—but truly, where is there any mind faculty or mental
objects? It is simply all of it, acting as one.
“While silently sitting, how could the
silent sitting itself reflect upon itself as silent sitting? Silent sitting
itself cannot think, ‘I am silent sitting.’”
This is very important. Silent sitting
itself cannot know, “I am silently sitting.” How could silent sitting itself
know, “I am silent sitting”? “Ah! I am silently sitting!” That is your second
thought. Non-thinking in itself is not lacking in seeing, hearing, feeling,
knowing! Many imagine that “non-thinking” means no experiences of pain,
numbness, or joy. Actually, non-thinking means your seeing, hearing, feeling,
knowing continue to function, but you do not raise any viewpoint to interfere.
That is called “non-thinking.” Whether you grasp or reject, or even say, “I
will neither grasp nor reject,” you have already generated a viewpoint. When
you do not generate any viewpoint, your seeing, hearing, feeling, knowing still
function. That is non-thinking. If you train in this regularly, there will come
a moment you truly enter the non-thinking state, and yet you yourself cannot
know, “I am in the non-thinking state!” A single thought cannot recognize its
own nature! “Ah! I am silently sitting…” Sorry, by that time, you are no longer
in that state. Yet how often do people exclaim, “This is it! This is it!”—what
is it exactly? When silently sitting, one simply cannot know, “I am silently
sitting.”
When Shakyamuni Buddha was silently
sitting, he saw a star in the sky and went “Ah!” In that moment, what happened?
While silently sitting, he was still seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing. He
could still hear the bleating of sheep. In that state, there was no trace of
personal viewpoints. Mind and object were not separated, a state of mind–object
nonduality. After a very long time, suddenly, in the early morning, he saw a
star in the sky and spontaneously generated a deluded thought. What delusion? “I
am seeing a star.” The instant that deluded thought arose, it shattered the
original state of mind–object nonduality. At that time, he exclaimed, “Ah!” and
became aware of how since beginningless eons, all the illusions and misguided
thinking had stemmed exactly from that. “The bright moon soared above the high
peak last night—indeed, it was just this thief.” During the time of mind–object
nonduality, one cannot know that one is in that state! Shakyamuni Buddha,
Master Xiangyan—both dwelt in that mind–object nonduality for a while, then
upon seeing a star or hearing a stone strike bamboo, a momentary lingering
habit of deluded thinking flared up, producing one thought, thus breaking the
prior mind–object nonduality. Only then could they recognize: “Ah! So it was
just this thief all along.” When the Buddha saw the star, or when Xiangyan
heard the stone hitting bamboo and exclaimed “Ah!”—what did they awaken to? By
now you understand, right? Everyone should value this greatly. What we have
described is the very heart, the core lifeblood of Buddhadharma.
The notion of a “self” is just a
concept. If one does not comprehend this, it is very difficult to accord with
the Buddhadharma—meaning, it is difficult to connect with one’s true nature. By
constantly following the method of silent sitting taught by the Buddha, you
gradually become clearer and clearer about the difference between movement
under the realm of mental consciousness and movement outside the realm of
mental consciousness. This is the true vital essence of the Buddha’s teaching.
Many so-called Buddhist practices sprang up later, as the generations went by.
Because of people’s own opinions and the influx of many non-Buddhist methods,
the original teaching became more and more adulterated.
“Therefore, this silent sitting taught
by the Buddha is not the measure of the Buddha, nor does it belong to what is
lawful or unlawful.”
Is silent sitting the measure of the
Buddha? No! Why not? Because as soon as you think, “Ah! This is the
buddha-state,” you have, once again, introduced a viewpoint, thereby spoiling
it. “Yes, this is the buddha-state!”—please do not be so confused. Likewise,
“Is this in accord with the Dharma or not?”—it also does not belong to any such
duality. Is it realization? “Ah! I understand now, I get it!”—It does not
belong to your intellectual comprehension, nor your awakening. It is neither
lawful nor the measure of the Buddha! If you try to describe it with knowledge,
speech, or writing, the moment you label it, it is nothing of the sort anymore.
“From the Buddha directly, in
successive single transmissions, up to Master Yaoshan, who is the thirty-sixth
generation, the Dharma-lifeblood that has been handed down is precisely this.
Such a correct transmission—this is ‘think non-thinking.’”
Note the phrase “single transmission.”
That refers to mutual certification between teacher and student. It is not a
matter of a teacher delivering a lecture with a large audience, everyone
listening, and each thinking they have understood, so they go off to teach.
That is not it. In that scenario, each one thinks they themselves understand,
but they all say different things—that is still only their personal viewpoint.
Master Inoue is the eighty-sixth generation, and Master Harada is the
eighty-seventh generation. Let us see whether you can become the eighty-eighth
generation.
Original Text (全文原文):
和尚問藥山，不思量的境界要如何去做到？那個不思量的真實的境界，從無始一來就一直是這樣，現在問題是怎麼做到？如何去自覺這個？怎麼樣才能夠起自覺聖智，「啊！就是這樣。」本來就有，不是後來才有的，不是修行修出來才有的。也不能講本來就有的，這個不思量的境界根本不屬於這個時間空間，無法思議。佛陀當初跟了許多大師學習，什麼氣脈，什麼神通早就非常高明，妙不可思議，但佛那時候為什麼不開始講佛法？為什麼他老人家還是覺得不對，然後通通放棄，注意喔！是通通放棄喔！然後硬是要一個人坐在菩提樹下，等到有一天早上，突然看到天上的一顆星，「啊！」的一下，才開始講佛法。因為他發現，那些方法都沒有辦法徹底地見到自己的真性，所以他又通通放棄，一個人坐在菩提樹下，這樣子兀兀地坐，才認到了自己的本來面目。不是說「佛經過十二年的修行，慢慢地把自己的法性一點一點地洗乾淨，最後乾淨到一點染污都沒有了就成佛了。佛的根器很好，修十二年就把法性洗乾淨了，我們的根器比較不好，可能需要三十年才能洗乾淨，一定要先學學小乘法門，等法性比較乾淨了，再開始學大乘法門……」。不是這樣子的。本來就在佛地上了嘛！自己混然不知而已。
釋迦牟尼佛最初在菩提樹下成道的時候，這是真實的事喔！第一句講的話，也可以說是一大宣言，就是：「奇哉！奇哉！大地眾生皆有如來智慧德相，只因妄想執著不能證得。」不能證得自己本來面目的原因是什麼？因為有妄想，有了妄想後，又執著在自己的妄想上。知道嗎？自己先莫名奇妙有了妄想，然後又緊抓著自己的妄想不放。最大的妄想是什麼？覺得有「我」存在。所以沒有辦法知道自己也具足了如來的智慧德相。道元禪師就講了：
『只要你按照佛所指導的方法，這樣子兀兀地坐，每一位眾生都能達到不思量的境界。只要你照這個樣子去坐，怎麼會達不到呀？』
怎麼會做不到呢？誰都可以做到。為什麼會做不到？你的「見」抛不掉呀！動不動就是我的意見上來。因為我們的罣礙很多呀，自己的意見總是揮不掉。接下來道元禪師說：
『如果你不是那麼笨的話，你應該會有「如何做到兀兀地坐」的這個疑問才對。』
如果你不是那麼笨的話，你應該會對佛所傳的這個兀兀地坐，要如何達到的這個問題起疑問才對。連起疑問的力量都沒有，他說這個是太笨了。各位不會這麼笨吧？他的意思是說：「每一位眾生應該都有這種起疑問的力量，想要了解到底如何做才能像這樣兀兀地坐才對。」藥山禪師說：「要做到佛正傳的這樣子兀兀地坐，我就是用非思量的方法做到的喔！」
『用非思量的方法打坐，是非常殊勝的。如果想要達到不思量的境界，一定要用非思量的方法。』
『非思量的境界有個誰人，那個誰人可以保任我。』
他講的「那個」，不是普通我們講的這個那個。他主要的意思是：『不思量的境界並非空寂斷滅。』達到不思量的境界，人無我、法無我，人法都沒有……。我看到你，進入了不思量境界，很多人都以為，我跟你就不分了，以為人法無我就什麼都沒有了，大家都誤會這樣。一個開悟的人，難道我跟你就不分了嗎？不是這樣子的。不思量的「那個」，思量也好，非思量也好，都屬於「那個」，不思量的「那個」可以倒認你。拿個比方講，我常舉的例子，像這個拍手的聲音，跟這個敲桌子的聲音，不一樣吧！你經過思量之後，它才不一樣的嗎？不必你經過思量，它自然就不一樣，這個能體會嗎？我是我，你是你，不是經過你思考後才分別出來我跟你。像這樣子，不分別的分別。我跟你很自然的就不一樣，但不是經過思考後才分別出來的那種不一樣。這個很難用說明，各位要努力去做才會明白。這裡是告訴我們，證道的修行人，不是那種一概的假平等一樣，以為你我他都不分，什麼東西都不分了一樣，不是這樣子的。無分別的分別還是有，要保任這個我。
『兀兀地坐，不僅僅是不思量的境界能顯現出來，而且也能愈來愈清楚那個不得不思量的境界。』
兀兀地坐不是把所有念頭掃光，也不是因為你在打坐，認為這個念頭不好，不要來，或是阿彌陀佛的念頭來，「啊！這是很好的念頭，我現在在修佛法，這個念頭歡迎」。都不是！念頭本身很必然的在那邊動，意根法塵必然的關係。說意根法塵是以我們人類的思考模式，這樣子說明比較容易懂，事實上，哪有什麼意根法塵？那是方便講的，整個都在那裡起用。
『兀兀地坐時，兀兀地本身怎麼能夠思量兀兀地？兀兀地本身無法思量自己是兀兀地。』
這個很重要。兀兀地本身無法知道自己是兀兀地。兀兀地坐本身如何知道自己兀兀地坐？「啊！我兀兀地坐」，那是第二念了嘛！非思量本身不是沒有見聞覺知喔！大家都以為非思量是沒有任何覺受。在這裡解釋了半天的非思量，不是都不痛、不麻、不快樂喔！非思量是你的見聞覺知照樣起作用，但你沒有起任何一個見解去干預它，這個叫做非思量。起一個「取」，起一個「捨」，起一個「不取也不捨」，都是起了一個見。不起一個見的底下，見聞覺知照樣在那裡動，這樣子叫非思量。常常這樣子練習，當你有一天進入了不思量的境界，自己是無法知道自己進入了不思量的境界喔！一個念頭本身能認到自己本身是什麼念頭嗎？認到它是什麼念頭時，又已經是第二念了嘛！「啊！我兀兀地坐……」，對不起，那已經不是了。常常有很多人「啊！這個就是，這個就是……」，是什麼呀？兀兀地坐本身沒有辦法知道自己兀兀地坐。
釋迦牟尼佛在兀兀地坐時，看到天邊的一顆星，然後「啊」的一聲……，什麼道理？釋迦牟尼佛兀兀地坐時，照樣見聞覺知呀，羊叫聲他也聽到啊；兀兀地坐時，沒有起絲毫一點人的見，心跟境界沒有分開，心境一如的狀態。在這種心境一如的境界裡久久久久……，有一天早上，看到天邊的一顆明星，突然起了一個妄念。什麼樣的妄念？「我看到了一顆星。」這個妄念一起，打破了原本心境一如的境界，這時候才「啊」的一聲，才知道自己處在心境一如的境界，才知道原來我們從過去無始劫來，所有顛倒妄想的根源，原來都是這個。「夜來明月上高峰，原來只是這個賊」。心境一如的境界，本身沒有辦法知道自己在心境一如的境界喔！釋迦牟尼佛、香嚴禅师，在這種心境一如的境界久久，碰到明星、石頭，一個契機，突然無始劫來妄念的習氣一起，起了一個妄念，打破了原來心境一如的境界，這時才比較出跟心境一如不同的境界，才能認到「啊！原來只是這個賊」。釋迦牟尼佛一見明星，香嚴聽到石頭碰到竹子的聲音，「啊」的一下，到底悟到了什麼？現在大家知道了吧！大家要好好珍惜。上面講的，是佛法最中心，最根本的命根子，這才是佛法的命脈。
「我相」是概念裡的東西，這點如果不清楚的話，很難跟佛法相應，也就是說很難跟自己的真性相應。你若常常照著兀兀地坐的這個方法，常常練習，你那個屬於心意識狀態下的動，跟不屬於心意識狀態下的動，這兩個區分會愈來愈清楚。這才是佛法的真命，其他很多很多的所謂修佛法，都是後來年代愈久，人因為自己很多的見，很多外道的修法就加進去了。
『所以說，佛傳的這種兀兀地坐，不是佛量，也不屬於如法。』
兀兀地坐就是佛量嗎？不是！為什麼？你以為「啊！這個就是佛的境界」，這個就是你的見！那是你又把它量化了。「這就是佛的境界！」本來好好的，你又提起一個意見把它搞壞了。「喔！這就是佛的境界」，不要這樣糊塗。同樣地，當然也不屬於如不如法。這是悟嗎？「啊！我理解了，我知道了。」哎！不屬於你的理解，不屬於你的悟，也不是如法，也不是佛量呀！用知識、語言、文字想要去描述，一描述又什麼都不是了。
『從佛陀遞代單傳下來，傳到藥山禪師是第三十六代，一直傳的佛法命脈就是這個。這樣子的正傳，這個就是思量箇不思量底囉。』
注意「單傳」兩字，這是師徒間互相印可的才是。不是我在這裡說法，一大堆人在下面聽，你聽了之後覺得你懂了就行了，就可以到處講法了。不是這樣子的！那每個人都覺得自己懂了，結果個個講的都不一樣，那還不是自己的見？井上禪師是八十六代，原田禪師是第八十七代，看看各位能不能做八十八代。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Single transmission” or “direct
transmission” (單傳) refers to the personal confirmation
between teacher and disciple.
• “Think non-thinking” renders 思量箇不思量底 as “think non-thinking.”
[Continued in next message]
English Translation and Original Text,
Paragraph by Paragraph
Paragraph 1
English Translation:
“In recent times, there have been
these fabrications lacking in wisdom…”
What kind of fabrications? People
casually write and casually speak. What do they say?
“They say: ‘Skill in seated
meditation! I have skill in seated meditation; I can have a mind free of any
concerns, and that means everything is stable.’”
Original Text:
『近年來那些沒有智慧的杜撰……』
什麼杜撰？隨便寫，隨便說。說什麼？
『它們說：功夫坐禪呀！我有坐禪的功夫，可以得胸襟無事了，便是平穩地也。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Paragraph 2
English Translation:
“I possess skill in seated meditation!
Once I sit, my mind is calm and untroubled, perfectly at ease—that is what they
call a ‘stable state,’ a state of such perfect stability that there is not a
single vexation, as though the sky were boundlessly clear, with not a single
cloud in sight. But Venerable Dōgen says that these are, in recent times,
unwise fabrications—random talk, random writing. What do they write? ‘Seated
meditation—when you sit until your mind has no obstructions at all, and your
mind is utterly at ease—that is what it means to have real skill in
meditation!’ He says that as far back as the Song Dynasty, people were already
talking like this. Think about it—Venerable Dōgen was warning everyone about
this back in the Song Dynasty, so how much more extreme has it become in our
present era? If you can manage such a state, people say, ‘Oh! You’ve got it!
You’ve got it!’—completely free of obstructions, unlikely to get angry,
indifferent to whatever you see, replying only, ‘Hmm, hmm…’ If they eat something
delicious, they merely say, ‘It’s all right, it’s all right,’ not daring to say
it is truly delicious; if they eat something unpalatable, they also say, ‘It’s
all right, it’s all right,’ not daring to say it tastes bad at all. But let me
tell you, that kind of viewpoint is not the same as the silent sitting, that
‘steadfast silent sitting,’ that the Buddha wants us to accomplish. That is not
the realm of non-thinking—that is merely a conceptual viewpoint! People think
it is some grand realization, but in reality, it is just an idea they hold.”
Original Text:
我有坐禪的功夫喔！坐了以後，心中坦然無事，坦坦蕩蕩，是平穩地也，平穩穩地，一點煩惱都沒有，萬里無雲，一片晴朗天空……。道元禪師說，那是近年來，沒有智慧的杜撰，亂講、亂寫。亂寫什麼？「坐禪呀！在坐到心中毫無罣礙，心中坦蕩蕩，這樣子坐禪才有功夫喔！」他說近年來，宋朝的時候就已經這樣子了，各位想想，道元禪師在宋朝那麼久以前就這樣子警告大家了，現在這個時代更是離譜了。你能做到這樣就說：「喔！你對了！你對了！」毫無罣礙，不容易生氣，看見什麼都「嗯、嗯…」，吃到好吃的東西就說「差不多、差不多」，不敢說很好吃；吃到難吃的東西也說「差不多、差不多」，也不敢說很難吃……。告訴各位，這種見解，不是佛要我們做到的兀兀地坐的那個境界。那不是非思量的那個境界，那個只是見解而已呀！自以為這樣的一個見解。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Non-thinking” renders 非思量.
Paragraph 3
English Translation:
“Such a viewpoint does not even
measure up to the scholars of the Small Vehicle, nor does it compare to the
path of humans and heavenly beings. Back in the Song Dynasty, it was already
like this. Now, in the Great Song Empire, there are many, many people
practicing in this manner! Alas, how desolate is the True Way—how lamentable
indeed!
Look at our present time: many people
teaching meditation guide others in exactly this direction. You meditate until
you reach a smooth, stable state, with no cares in your mind—like a vast, clear
sky, wind blowing here or there but never affecting you. What kind of talk is
that? That is an outside path, something even inferior to the Small Vehicle.
People think that is correct, and so many are practicing it! All these are
later generations, handing down the same erroneous methods from the Song
Dynasty until today.
‘How could people who practice in this
way be said to be learning the Buddha’s path?’
According to Venerable Dōgen, it is
astonishing that those who consider themselves students of Buddhadharma speak
this way.”
Original Text:
『這種見解，不及小乘的學者，也不如人天乘。』
這樣的見解連人天乘都不如。各位想想，宋朝那個時候就已經是這樣了。
『現在在大宋國，這樣做功夫的人還很多很多呀！至道的荒蕪呀，可嘆！可嘆！』
各位看到了嗎？現在很多人教人打坐，都是往這個方向走。打坐打到平穩穩地，心中無罣擬，一片晴朗天空，風吹過來吹過去，跟我都沒關係……——什麼話呀？這是外道的方法，小乘都不如。以為這樣子就對了，這樣子的人多的不得了。這些都是後代的人，把宋朝時候 那些錯誤的方法這樣子傳下來到現在。
『這樣子做功夫的人，怎麼可以說是學佛的人呢？』
道元禪師的意思是：學佛法的人還講這種話呀？
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Small Vehicle” translates 小乘, meaning Hīnayāna in a historical sense.
• “Outside path” refers to
non-Buddhist teachings, also called 外道.
Paragraph 4
English Translation:
“There is another faction that claims:
‘Only beginners need to sit in meditation—practitioners of the Buddha’s path do
not necessarily need to meditate.’ Some say that, for those who cultivate
Buddhism, sitting meditation is simply a convenience for novices, those who are
just starting. Their rationale is something like: walking is Chan, sitting is
Chan… Some people even write in my books, ‘Walking is also Chan, sitting is
also Chan, whether speaking or silent, active or still, the fundamental substance
remains at ease…’—don’t you see how beautifully that is stated! But Venerable
Dōgen says, ‘That is merely an excuse! It is not actually like that.’ They say
that only beginners need to do seated meditation, and that cultivating Buddhism
does not necessarily require meditation. The Buddha never taught such a thing!
That is a teaching of later times, mixed with many outside methods. So-called ‘substance
at ease’—I ask you: what is that ‘substance? Does that ‘substance’ remain
absolutely unmoving? That so-called ‘substance/essence’ is nothing but your own
conceptual creation. You imagine some fundamental substance that is entirely
unmoving—like a vast ocean, with our talking, silence, action, stillness being
the waves on its surface, while the ocean never moves… But that is merely your
conceptual imagining! Unless you yourself actually achieve the realm of non-thinking,
you cannot understand this. Speaking of ‘the substance is at ease… the substance,
the substance…,’ is just one more concept. You must not tread that path of mere
talk—that is just reasoning. Venerable Rujing was extremely strict and most
incisive. Among those recognized by him as true patriarchs, very few appear.
Hongzhi, Huangbo, and Dōgen were among the ones he recognized… He even
criticized Linji for not being fully thorough, so many later people disliked
Rujing’s remarks. If you read the Record of Pointing to the Moon (Zhiyuelu),
you see only a few lines from Venerable Rujing. Venerable Dōgen continues:
‘Now, there are many who call
themselves Linji’s students, but for the most part, they only have this single
viewpoint.’”
Original Text:
『還有一些人主張說：初修的人才需要坐禪打坐，修佛不一定要打坐。』
還有一派人說，修佛的人不一定要打坐，打坐是給那些初修，剛開始要學佛的人的方便。他們的理由是什麼？走路也是禪呀，坐也是禪呀……。有些人在我的書上寫「行亦禪、坐亦禪，語默動靜體安然」……「所以你走路、唱歌、行也禪、坐也禪、睡覺也禪、講話也禪、不講話也禪，那個本體都不動……」你看看，講得多漂亮呀！道元禪師說：「這是藉口呀！不是這樣子的。」他們說初修的人才需要打坐，學佛不一定要打坐。佛陀沒有這樣子講呀！這樣的講法都是後來的人滲雜了很多外道修法。體安然？我問你，你那個體是什麼？那個體都沒有動？那個體還不是你概念裡想出來的體。你在概念裡想一個本體，那個體怎麼樣都不動，本體好像大海，我們的語默動靜都好像波浪一樣，那個大海都不動……。你在概念裡想的呀！非得你親自做到非思量的境界，否則你沒有辦法領會這個。你講體安然，體、體……，那個體還不是你的概念嗎？千萬不能走這個路子，那是講道理去了。如淨禪師非常嚴格，非常高明，被如淨禪師認可的祖師爺不多，像宏智禪師、黃檗禪師、道元禪師……。他連臨濟禪師都批評，批評臨濟不夠澈底，所以後代很多人不喜歡如淨講的話，你看《指月錄》裏面，如淨的語錄只有一點點。道元禪師說：
『現在很多自稱為臨濟的學生們，大部份只有這個見解。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Non-thinking” for 非思量.
Paragraph 5
English Translation:
“Linji is the lineage of
‘investigating kōans’ that descended through the Tang and Song dynasties,
focusing on the use of kōans. The genuine, direct teaching from the Buddha to
Kāśyapa and Ānanda, then passed on through Qingyuan Xingsi, Yaoshan, Dongshan,
and so on, down to Inoue and eventually Master Harada, is solely the method of
‘just sitting.’ They do not have it in the Linji tradition. Therefore, most who
claim to be students of Linji hold only this viewpoint—believing that one does
not necessarily need to practice seated meditation, that walking is Chan,
sitting is Chan, speech or silence is Chan, action or stillness is Chan, ‘the substance
remains at ease’… that sort of perspective.
Master Inoue once gave an example:
there was a certain Master Iida, a very eminent teacher, who awakened at age
twenty-three, genuinely attaining an awakening state. However, at the same time
he awakened, he realized that he had awakened—and the self-view that had
originally been broken reemerged like a shadow. (This is described in the
section on ‘Awakening Illness.’) That shadow of self-view reappeared.
Acknowledging that you yourself have awakened is effectively acknowledging
there is a ‘you.’ Thus, although he had reached an awakening state, he always
felt some lingering obstruction, never able to affirm himself. Later, someone
told him to go to the Central Plains region to investigate kōans. For twenty
years, he investigated various kōans there. No matter what kōan the teacher
assigned him, he solved it immediately, because he truly had an awakening
state, so that aspect was already resolved, letting him quickly answer many
kōans. The teacher, too, would say, ‘Yes, correct!’ Yet he still felt something
obstructing him, unable to be satisfied. Finally, one day Master Iida had a
great ‘Ah!’—a genuine, thorough awakening. In retrospect, he said that
traveling to the Central Plains to investigate kōans had been superfluous; had
he known earlier, he would have just sat alone in his original place. While he
indeed had an ‘awakening illness,’ it was an ‘illness’ and not delusion—only
one who has genuinely awakened can have such an ailment. He had truly broken
the self-view of ‘person and me’—it was just that the ingrained habits of
ignorance were too strong, and that shadow of self-view kept resurging. But
that shadow is easier to deal with compared to a self-view that has not been
broken at all. Master Iida said that if, at that time, a bright teacher had
been present to shatter his awakened state right there, it would have sufficed.
It was just like when Master Dōgen ran to Rujing exclaiming, ‘Teacher! I’ve
dropped away body and mind!’, and Venerable Rujing immediately responded, ‘What
are you talking about, dropping away body and mind!? … In truth, body and mind
were already dropped away from the start!’ With just that phrase, Master Dōgen
gave a great ‘Ah!’—a total awakening. But that was because Dōgen truly had an
awakened state, a profoundly genuine state of awakening, so that Rujing’s
statement triggered his complete breakthrough. Otherwise, even if Rujing had
told him a thousand times, ‘Body and mind were originally dropped away!,’ it
would not have been of any use, unable to break his self-view of personhood.
Hence, even if the teacher had
recognized Master Iida and said, ‘You are correct!,’ Master Iida would still
have felt doubt, unable to confirm himself. That is because he already had
clarity on that side—he truly had an awakened state, possessing the power of
self-awakening, so he perpetually felt something was missing. If one has not
truly resolved that matter, and the teacher says, ‘You are correct!,’ one would
simply think, ‘Ah! I’m awakened!,’ and go around proclaiming oneself awakened,
becoming yet another so-called Chan master of some generation or lineage.
Master Inoue criticized kōan-investigation as not easily reaching complete
thoroughness. Therefore, most who claim the Linji lineage cling to this
viewpoint, believing that one need not necessarily do seated meditation to
cultivate.
‘As a result, the Buddha’s wisdom-life
is difficult to transmit any further.’”
Original Text:
臨濟是參公案這一派的，唐宋下來的，他們只參公案，真正佛傳給迦葉、阿難，傳到青原行思、藥山、洞山……井上，一直傳到現在的原田禪師，真正傳的只管打坐的這個方法，他們並沒有。所以，自稱是臨濟的學生們，大部份只有這個見解，認為不一定要打坐，行亦禪嘛，坐亦禪嘛，語默動靜體安然……就是這樣。
井上禪師曾舉過一個例子：有一位飯田禪師，非常高明的一位禪師，二十三歲時就開悟了，確實是有了開悟的境界，但就是在開悟的那個同時，發現自己開悟了，那個本來打破的我見又像影子一樣冒上來。這段內容在「悟病」裡有提過。那個我見的影子又冒出來。承認自己開悟不就等於承認有自己嗎？所以，雖然他已經有了開悟的境界，但心裡總是覺得還有什麼罣礙，自己不能自肯。後來人家告訴他，叫他去中原一個地方那裡參公案。他在那邊，參了二十年的公案，每一次，不管老師拿什麼公案給他，他都一下子就解決了，因為他確實已經有悟的境界了，那邊事確實已經了了，所以一下子就解決了很多公案，老師也說：「對！對！」不過他還是覺得有什麼罣礙，不能滿意。飯田禪師後來有一天，當他「啊」的那麼一下，真正大澈大悟時，事後回想起來，他說去中原那裡參公案是多餘的，早知道就在原來的地方一個人打坐就好了。雖然有個悟病，但它是「病」，不是「迷」——真的悟了之後才有的毛病。人我之見確實已經打破了，只是無明的習氣實在太厲害了，那個我見的影子又冒出來。不過這個影子比起原本還沒打破的我見，要好解決多了。飯田禪師就講，如果當時有一位明師在場，當下把他的悟境打掉就好了。就像當初道元禪師跑去跟如淨禪師說：「老師！我身心脫落了！」，如淨禪師馬上回答他說：「講什麼身心脫落！？……本來脫落的身心啊！」道元禪師給如淨禪師那麼一講，才「啊」當下真正大澈大悟。但那是因為道元禪師確實有了悟境，非常真實正確的悟境，所以如淨那麼一講才讓他大澈大悟。否則就算跟他講一千遍「本來脫落的身心啊！」還是沒有用，沒有辦法打破他的人我之見。
所以，即使老師認可飯田禪師，說：「你對了！」但他仍然覺得有疑問，不能自肯，那是因為他確實已經了了那邊事，確實有了開悟的境界，自覺的力量有了，所以他才會一直覺得還不是。如果那邊事還沒了，老師跟你說：「你對了！」你就會認為：「啊！我開悟了。」然後又一個禪師出現了，又一個什麼宗第幾代傳人了。井上禪師是批評參公案不容易澈底。所以，那些自稱是臨濟的學生們，大部份只有這個見解，認為修行不一定要打坐。
『因此，佛的慧命就這樣難以傳續下去。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Self-view” translates 身見 or 我見.
• “Awakening illness” (悟病) is an expression referring to lingering subtle attachments that appear
after an initial awakening.
Paragraph 6
English Translation:
“Venerable Dōgen then asks, ‘What kind
of person is a “beginner”? Who is not a beginner?’ From the start,
Dharma-nature is complete! Do you think that because you have practiced for
many years, your Dharma-nature is somewhat cleaner, while the beginner’s
Dharma-nature is less clean? That is entirely mistaken. The Buddha’s
transmission is that you are already abiding in the buddha-realm; it is merely
that you believe otherwise. It is for the purpose of letting you recognize that
you originally are like this. So you must make an effort to realize and confirm
it—that is what we call cultivation. Where is there “beginner” or “advanced” in
that? You are already there, but you do not recognize it. It is not a matter of
taking something that did not exist and slowly carving it, polishing it,
scrubbing it clean to become like the Buddha. Absolutely not! You are already
in the buddha-realm but remain unaware. Even if someone tells you, you do not
believe it. Why not? Because you lack the power of self-awakening. Until that
power of self-awakening arises, you absolutely will not believe it. Hence, in
the Lotus Sūtra, many bhikṣus departed, for precisely this reason. When the
Buddha originally awakened under the Bodhi tree, he did not start by
proclaiming, ‘Marvelous, marvelous! All beings throughout the great earth have
the Tathāgata’s wisdom and virtues, but it is only due to deluded thinking and
attachment that they cannot realize them.’ He could not just say that
outright—nobody would have believed it. So he had to start from the śrāvaka and
pratyekabuddha teachings, gradually guiding them, and finally expounded the One
Vehicle teaching. Yet many people could not accept it. Some, upon hearing it,
did not like it. Why? Because they all had demands, seeking worldly benefits,
ever wanting to gratify that sense of ‘I.’ If you ask them, ‘Who is this “I”?
…’ Some will say, ‘How could I not know who I am? I am me! Of course I
know!’—like a drunk staggering into a closet to relieve himself, calling it a
restroom, refusing to hear differently. Are we still going to argue with him?
So what can we do? We just practice silent sitting.
Thus, the point is merely to let you
know that you were originally sleeping in your own home, and it is just to help
you awaken. The best way for you to realize it for yourself is precisely the
method the Buddha handed down to Kāśyapa, ‘just sit.’ In the Song of Seated
Meditation it is explained very clearly: the very act of your sitting in
meditation is already the Buddha’s bearing and conduct. You do not sit in order
to become a buddha. You do not rely on the power of meditation to scrub away
unwholesome stains, gradually becoming cleaner and cleaner—that is an
outside-path notion. Simply sitting in that manner is already the Buddha’s
bearing and conduct, though you do not realize it. You might say, ‘When I
meditate, I have countless wandering thoughts—what of it?’ If you say,
‘Wandering thoughts are bad, I want to get rid of them,’ that is already
unnecessary. Wandering thoughts come and go—manifestations of the Dharma-realm!
‘So what is the essential point of
meditation, then? It is not to seek to become a buddha!’”
Original Text:
道元禪師就請問了：「什麼是初修的人？什麼樣叫做不是初修的人？」本來本法性嘛！你以為你的法性因為修法很多年，所以比較乾淨，他的法性因為是初修的，所以比較不乾淨呀？根本就已經錯掉了。佛傳的是，你本來已經在佛地上了，你自己以為不是而已，只是為了讓你知道你本來就是。為了讓你認清你本來的樣子，要你努力去做，這樣子叫修行，哪有什麼初修晚修的呀！你本來就在那裡了，你不認。不是要你把一個沒有的東西，慢慢雕、慢慢洗刷，洗得乾乾淨淨，變成像佛一樣的樣子。不是這樣！本來已經在佛地上了，自己不知道。告訴他，他也不相信。為什麼不相信？沒有自覺的力量。自覺的力量沒有升起以前，絕對不相信這個。所以佛陀講法華經時，很多比丘走開，就是這個道理。佛陀最初在菩提樹下成道的時候，不是一開始就講了嘛：「奇哉！奇哉！大地眾生皆有如來智慧德相，只因妄想執著不能證得。」但不能一下子就說這個呀！大家信不過呀！只好從聲聞緣覺慢慢引導過來，最後才講這個一乘法門，不過還是很多人接受不了。有些人聽到這個就不喜歡了，為什麼？因為都有所求，對現世的利益有需求，一直在想要去滿足那個「我」。問他說「我」是誰……。曾經有人回答我說：「我怎麼會不知道我是誰？我就是我呀！怎麼會不知道！」喝醉酒的人跑到衣櫃裡尿尿，跟他講說「你怎麼在衣櫃裡尿尿？」他回答說「什麼衣櫃！這是廁所！」一樣的道理，難道還跟他辯嗎？那要怎麼辦？只管打坐。
所以，為的只是要讓你知道，你本來就在自己家裡睡覺而已，為了讓你醒過來而已。讓你自己自覺最好的方法，就是佛交給迦葉的「只管打坐」這個方法。這個在「坐禪箴」裡講得非常清楚。你打坐的本身就是佛的行儀了，不是你去打坐變成佛耶！不是要你靠打坐的力量，把不好的染污除掉，慢慢地愈來愈乾淨……，那是外道的說法。你這樣子坐的本身就是佛的行儀呀，你不知道而已。你說打坐時妄想一大堆。妄想一大堆有什麼關係？你說「妄想不好，想除掉」，那已經是多餘了。妄想來來去去，法界的顯現呀！
『那麼打坐的要領是什麼呢？不要想求做佛！』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Just sit” renders 只管打坐.
• “No self-nature” for 無自性 (mentioned later in the text).
• “One Vehicle teaching” refers to 一乘法門.
Paragraph 7
English Translation:
“When you sit there, do not keep
thinking, ‘Because I’m cultivating, I want to become a buddha.’ Do not use that
mindset to meditate—just sit. Sitting itself is the Buddha’s bearing and
conduct. Just sit, nothing else. Counting breaths, ānāpāna, none of that is
needed—not even the idea of ‘just sitting.’ Someone might say, ‘Ah! My legs are
numb—I must subdue it!’ That intention to subdue is already an error. If it
hurts, let it hurt. Of course it should hurt—normally you don’t sit much, so
it’s natural for the legs to ache in meditation. That is simply how phenomena
arise from causes and conditions. It is the natural display of Dharma-nature!
If you want to subdue it, that is a selfish thought arising—a notion of “I.” ‘I
want to sit well, so I must…’—striving to suppress the pain. Who is suppressing
it? The minute you bring forth that sense of self, you have begun interfering.
Hence, a major principle in cultivating the way by sitting is: do not seek to
become a buddha. But do not then hear this and raise yet another thought: ‘Ah!
So I shouldn’t seek to become a buddha!’ That in turn becomes another
viewpoint.
‘Once the cage is broken, in that
moment, the meditation itself will not hinder you from enacting buddha.’”
Original Text:
坐在那裡，不要一直想「因為我在修行，所以我想要成佛」。不要以這樣的念頭去打坐，坐就是坐。坐就是佛的行儀了。只管打坐，坐就是坐，什麼數息、安那般那都不要，連只管打坐的念頭也沒有。你說：「哎呀！腿麻！我要降服它。」你要降服它的這個念頭就錯了。痛就讓它痛，應該痛的嘛！平常不常打坐，所以打坐容易痛，緣所生法嘛！這是法性自然的顯示呀！你要降服它，那是自私的念頭起來了，「我」的念頭起來了。「我要坐得好，所以我要……」，努力去壓制腿痛。誰在壓制？提起一個你在壓制。所以坐禪辦道很重要的一點是什麼？不要想求做佛。但是你不要一聽這個，又起一個念「啊！我不要想求做佛」，那又是另一個見了。
『如果籠子打破，這時，坐禪本身不妨礙你行佛。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Ānāpāna” is 安那般那 (mindfulness of breathing).
• “Enacting buddha” or “行佛” means spontaneously manifesting the conduct of a buddha.
Paragraph 8
English Translation:
“What does ‘breaking the cage’ mean?
It means shattering the realm of mental consciousness, breaking self-view. You
have achieved the state of ‘think non-thinking.’ Even though you are simply
sitting there, even though you have no intention of cultivating to be a buddha,
it is at that very moment the Buddha’s bearing and conduct. No need for you to
think or seek to become a buddha—once you have dissolved the cage of mental
consciousness, then simply by sitting quietly, that cage naturally vanishes
without you having to apply any effort to make it disappear. This is a major
key point. The more you think about trying to break it, the more solid it
becomes. That is because you have stirred a notion, ‘I want to find some way to
destroy mental consciousness!’—which uses that very mental consciousness. The
more you try to break it, the more you reinforce its activity. The cage of
mental consciousness is itself formed by mental consciousness, so when mental
consciousness gradually ceases to move, that cage that never truly existed
simply dissolves. The most direct method to experience ‘no self in persons, no
self in phenomena’ is simply to sit, leaving the six sense faculties alone,
allowing them to move in their naturally selfless condition, without adding any
personal viewpoint to interfere.
Hence, ‘enacting buddha’ is not
something you do. Merely by silently sitting at that moment, you are enacting
the Buddha’s bearing and conduct. You cannot cultivate or create that! It is an
ever-ready public case—each person has it right now. If it is time to turn into
a dog, you become a dog; time to become a cat, you become a cat; time to
descend into the hells, you descend into the hells. Becoming a dog arises
through conditions—phenomena produced by conditions, lacking any intrinsic
essence, appearing like illusions or dreams. In this illusion-like
manifestation lacking any real essence, if you remain fixated on ‘I want to
become a buddha here and now,’ then that has nothing to do with what the Buddha
taught. ‘I want to make this into the Buddha’s teaching…’—huh! Do you call that
Buddhadharma? If the cause and conditions say dog, dog is already Buddhadharma.
It is not that, since I am a Buddhist, I recite some mantra and can thus
transform into a dragon, so we get fixated on a self again—cat’s self, dog’s
self—that is not Buddhadharma at all. Understand?
Thus, in hell, if you can genuinely
see your true nature, you do not need to change your hellish form in order to
be liberated right there. ‘Without changing the ordinary body, one immediately
becomes the saintly body’—you become liberated in the very form of hell. It is
not that Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva or Guanyin Bodhisattva comes and says, ‘Since
you have practiced Buddhism so well, let me take your hand and pull you out of
hell.’ You do not need to alter your form—if you are a hungry ghost, you remain
a hungry ghost; if you are in hell, you remain in hell. As soon as you awaken
to it—seeing your nature—the fundamental nature we originally have is without
self-nature, empty. This emptiness is not just a principle; it is not academic
knowledge, nor is it the emptiness of mere devout worship. You must personally
verify it. Verify what? That which you originally have but do not yet know. The
movement of your eyes and ears itself is empty! When your eyes connect with an
object, seeing appears; when they do not, seeing is absent—this does not mean
nothing exists at all! Rather, infinite possibilities manifest there. ‘Not
leaving the Dharma-seat, it is revealed.’ In any condition, that condition is
displayed. This is emptiness—this is the Buddha. Why add a notion that you must
become a buddha? That would not match the Buddha’s teaching. Yet as long ago as
the Song Dynasty, a great number of people believed, ‘Hurry and meditate until
your mind has no more hindrances, like a boundless, cloudless sky; the things that
used to make you angry no longer anger you so much; you feel less hungry than
before; you do not feel the cold as much…’—and they regard these as the
accomplishments of practice. Look at how misguided that is! The Buddha never
taught such a thing!
‘Right at such a time, from the
distant past until now, whether one enters the buddha realm or the demonic
realm, both rely on this same power.’”
Original Text:
籠子打破是什麼？是指你心意識的境界打破了，我見打破了，把這個意識的籠子打破了，思量箇不思量的境界做到了。雖然你只是這樣子坐，雖然你沒有想修做佛的念頭，但當下就是佛的行儀了。不需要你去想，不需要你去求要成佛，只要你打破你心意識思想的籠子。所以當你就這樣只管打坐，心意識的籠子自然會化掉，不要你用力想要去化掉它。這是一個大訣竅，你愈是想要去打破它，它就愈是堅固。因為你動了念頭嘛！「我想用什麼樣的方法把心意識打破！」用的還是你的心意識，愈是想打破它，就愈是加強心意識的活動。心意識的籠子本身是心意識所構成的，所以心意識慢慢不動的話，那籠子本來沒有，你自以為有而已嘛！最容易讓你體會到人法無我的方法，就是只管打坐，放任六根，讓它們在原來無我的狀態下動，不要加入人的見解去干預它。
所以，「行佛」根本不是你去做，你就那麼當下只管打坐就是佛的行儀了。這不是你去修得來的啦！現成公案，當下每個人都有，該變狗就變狗，該變貓就變貓，該下地嶽就下地嶽。變成狗的因緣顯現嘛！緣所生法，沒有本體地如幻如夢地顯現。在這個沒有本體的顯現裡，在那裡想我要成佛，那就別談了，別談什麼佛法了。「我想把這個修成佛法……」，哼！這個就是佛法了吗？該狗就狗，狗就是佛法，不是說因為我是學佛的，我來唸一個咒，然後就可以化成一條龍化去，所以我執來了嘛！貓的我執，狗的我執來了嘛！這不是佛法了，知道嗎？所以在地獄裡頭，如果你能真正見性的話，不改變地獄身就當下解脫。「不易凡身，頓成聖體」，就在地獄裡的那個樣子解脫。不是說地藏王菩薩或是觀世音菩薩來，說你因為修佛很好，所以牽著你的手，把你從地獄裡拉出去。不用改變你的樣子，餓鬼就餓鬼的樣子，地獄就地獄的樣子，只要你能悟到這個——見性，我們原來的本性。我們原來的本性是什麼？無自性、空，這個空不是道理，不是學問的，不是用拜的，迷信的空，是非要你親身實證的。實證什麼？你本有的你不知道而已。你眼睛耳朵的那個動，那個動的本身就是空啊！眼睛對到相就有，沒對到就沒有，不是什麼都沒有啊！有無限的可能性在那裡顯現。「不離法座顯現」。什麼緣就顯現什麼緣的事情，這就是空啊，就是佛啊。你多加一個自己要成佛幹嘛？那跟佛講的不一樣呀。但是在宋朝那麼久以前，就有一大堆人認為：「趕快打坐，坐到心胸無罣礙，萬里無雲，一片晴朗天空一樣；以前會生氣的事，現在比較不會生氣了；比較不會覺得肚子餓了；天氣冷時，比較不會覺得冷了……」把這些當做修行的成就，你看糟不糟糕？佛沒有這樣講耶！
『正當任麼時，萬古以來，入佛入魔都有這個力量。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Without self-nature” for 無自性.
• “Empty” for 空.
• “Seeing your nature” translates 見性.
Paragraph 9
English Translation:
“Right at that time—precisely in that
moment—just sit and let the six sense faculties function freely; that is the
manifestation of buddha-nature, the movement of Dharma-nature, utterly without
self-nature, appearing spontaneously. In that moment, without the slightest
addition of human conceptual viewpoints, you truly accomplish the realm of
non-thinking, which is the buddha-state. But do not, upon hearing this, think,
‘I want to enter the realm of non-thinking,’ thereby conjuring up yet another
fabricated notion of non-thinking. In that very moment—like right now, if you
raise your hand—in that moment of raising your hand, do you direct which nerves
or muscles to move? You do not have to direct them at all: raising is just
raising, lowering is just lowering, precisely in that moment. Hence, in the
past, someone asked a Chan master, ‘What is the main intent of the Buddha’s
teaching?’ The Chan master simply lifted his hand. What does that mean?
Everyone assumes raising the hand, then putting it down, is perfectly natural.
It is not so simple—it is the activity of the Dharma-body! Do you need to use
your mind to decide which nerve or muscle to move? Not at all! If you say, ‘Ah!
My hand is rising now,’ that is deluded thinking.
Naturally, everything appears
according to conditions, so whether one enters buddha or enters māra relies on
the same inherent power. It is not that, ‘I am a Buddhist; I must remain pure,
so I cannot go somewhere “bad,” lest it contaminate me.’ Imagining that you
have some attainment in cultivation and must avoid certain people or places is
a method of outsiders. Of course, if you lack the strength, still believing in
a ‘me,’ then indeed you should not go to ‘bad’ places, or you might get even
more confused. But when one has genuinely beheld one’s original face, we see
them going anywhere—good places, bad places. Yet the person him- or herself is
no longer that person we imagine them to be. They are everywhere but nowhere in
particular—why? ‘Abiding nowhere, they give rise to the mind.’ That is what is
being pointed to here.
Now, pay attention to the following:
This relates to Venerable Dōgen’s own inner world. Venerable Dōgen was so
extraordinarily brilliant, impeccably moral, and diligent—yet just like Huike,
he still could not settle his mind. He traveled all the way from Japan to the
Great Song Dynasty, and at last was fortunate to find Venerable Rujing.
Initially, he visited many masters, but from Dōgen’s perspective, they were all
just teaching Buddhist theory. Venerable Dōgen said:
‘How pitiable! So many people spend
their entire lives traveling to the great monastic forests of the ten
directions, yet they do not attain even a single session of genuine practice!’
They have no knowledge of what correct
practice is, what correct meditation is. Their entire life, they roam
everywhere—seeking famous masters, esoteric methods, mantras—and end up with
nothing. Though traveling among the various monastic centers, they never gain
even one session’s worth of the Buddha’s direct meditation method entrusted to
Kāśyapa. Venerable Dōgen laments, ‘How pitiful!’
‘Such students fundamentally do not
understand meditation, let alone actual cultivation.’
Original Text:
正當任麼時，正這個時候，只管打坐放任六根，就是佛性的顯現，法性在那裡動，毫無自性地在顯現。正當這個時候，沒有絲毫人的見解加入，真的做到了非思量的境界，佛的境界時，這個就是佛喔！你不要聽了之後，又想說：「我要進去非思量的境界」，又假想一個非思量的境界。正當任麼時，現在你舉手，正當這個時候，舉手的這個動，你有沒有指揮哪條神經，哪一條肌肉動？你根本不用指揮哪條肌肉要伸，哪條肌肉要縮，舉手就舉手，放下就馬上放下，正當任麼時。所以以前有人問禪師，佛法的大意是什麼？禪師就把手舉起來。什麼意思？大家以為舉手、放下，這是很自然的。不是呀！那是法身的動用呀！需要你動頭腦去決定動哪條神經，哪條肌肉嗎？根本不需要呀！你說：「啊！我的手舉起來了」，這是妄想。
隨緣任運而現，所以入佛入魔都有這個力量。不是說：「我現在修佛了，乾乾淨淨，我那個不好的地方不能去，去了會污染我。」你以為自己有修行，不能跟那些人接觸，這是外道的修法。當然，如果你還沒有這個力量的話，還認為這個是我的話，不好的地方千萬不能去。你自己都搞不定了，去那些不好的地方，那就把自己給薰染得更糊塗了。但如果有一個人，真正澈見自己本來面目時，我們覺得他到處都去，好的地方不好的地方都去。但他自己本身已經不是我們覺得的那個他的本身。到處在，但到處不在那兒，知道嗎？為什麼？因為應無所住而生其心啊！這在講這邊的消息。
下面各位注意，這個道元禪師心理的話。道元禪師那麼絕頂聰明，守戒非常清淨用功的一位大和尚，就是無法解決心裡的問題，跟慧可一樣，心不安。千里迢迢從日本跑到大宋國，最後也很幸運找到如淨禪師。剛開始也是找了很多位大師，但是道元一看就知道他們都不是，都只是講佛學的。道元禪師說了：
『好可憐！許多人終其一生的時間，遍訪十方叢林，可是連一座的功夫都沒有。』
什麼才是正確的修行，正確的打坐都不會，但是一輩子一直到處遍訪名師啦、法啦、咒子啦，空過一生。在十方叢林遍訪，但是關於這個佛交代給迦葉的坐禪方法，卻連一座的功夫也沒有。道元禪師說：「好可憐啊！」
『這些學生，根本不懂得打坐，更別說是修行了。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Huike” references 慧可, traditionally the Second Patriarch of Chan.
• “Rujing” is 如淨禪師, Dōgen’s teacher.
Paragraph 10
English Translation:
“It is not that seated meditation is
unsuitable for you; it is that you have not genuinely resolved to cultivate.
You just muddle about aimlessly—without applying genuine effort to realize the
essential point of cultivation. It is not that meditation suits some but not
others, or that if you have an affinity for meditation, you easily connect with
it, while if I do not, I cannot. That is not the case. Meditation itself does
not discriminate. The real problem is that you have never truly awakened the
resolve to practice in earnest. Rather, you idly drift: ‘Oh, I can just recite
the Buddha’s name, or get some empowerment from a teacher…’ or bury yourself
all day in the sūtras, busily at work writing academic papers, never asking
yourself sincerely, ‘Does this suffice? Does this settle birth and death for
me? Even though I know so much about Buddhist scholarship, so many mantras, and
so many eminent masters have conferred empowerments on me, why is my mind still
unsettled whenever conditions change—whether good or bad? Have I dealt with the
ultimate personal issue of liberation?’ You never ask that at all! You simply
say, ‘At least I’m practicing. At least I sometimes listen to the Dharma. At
least I do some good deeds. At least I accumulate merit…’—and stop there, never
delving thoroughly. You have never sincerely thought of personally solving the
fundamental question of liberation.
‘What they are striving after is
merely a return to the origin, reverting to some root—dabbling in a pursuit of
quiescence of thought. They have not even approached the level of real
contemplative cultivation, let alone the direct realization of the Ten Grounds
or equal awakening.’
This is crucial. They believe
themselves to be cultivating the Buddha-path, but in fact they only seek to
‘return to the root, revert to some primordial state.’ This is basically the
ideology of Daoism. They do it casually, without genuine earnestness. They do
nothing beyond seeking mental stillness and utmost quiescence, thinking, ‘If my
mind is stilled, if I can hold it at the highest point, then wisdom will
emerge.’ In that way, they strain for these experiences. They do not even
achieve the level of mindful cultivation, much less the realization described
in the ten bodhisattva grounds or equal awakening. Those are even further
beyond. They only pursue a regression to the origin.
‘So how can the Buddha’s authentic,
direct method of seated meditation be transmitted? In the Song Dynasty, many
erroneous methods of seated meditation were recorded. We later generations of
Buddhist practitioners should discard them.’”
Original Text:
『不是坐禪這件事不適合你，而是沒有真正發心修行。隨便迷醉。不努力契要真正修行的功夫。』
不是說坐禪這件事，只適合初修的啦，或是只適合什麼人去做，不是這樣的。不是說打坐這件事很適合你，所以你很容易相應；打坐不適合我，所以我打坐比較不能相應。不是這樣子的！打坐本身沒有選擇。問題是什麼呢？你根本沒有真正發心想要真正修行的關係，什麼樣才是真正的修行，你跟本沒有認真去找。隨便迷醉：「啊！這樣子念佛就好了，這樣子給人家加持就可以了……」，或者是一天到晚在經典裡頭轉，好用功好用功，一天到晚寫論文，根本沒有捫心自問：「這樣子可以嗎？這樣子生死可以了嗎？難道我懂了那麼多的佛學，那麼多的咒子，那麼多的法師給我灌頂，我的心就安了嗎？碰到好的環境，壞的環境，我心為什麼還是那麼不安？真正的這個最究盡要救自己的事件，我自己有沒有辦成？」根本根本就不問這個！反正我修行了，反正我偶爾聽聽佛法，反正我做些好事，反正都有功德嘛……，就這樣！不澈底！真正自己想要解脫問題，從來沒想過。
『他們所努力追求的只有還原返本而已。隨便玩玩，息慮寧極的經營。連觀修也不及，更不及十地等覺的見解。』
這裡要緊囉！他們所追求的是什麼？他們以為自己在修佛道，但他們努力所追求的只有還原返本而已。這個是道家思想對不對！返到那個本位，返本。隨便做做，沒有真正認真。只是在息慮寧極而已，「求個寧靜就好了，心裡沒有雜念。寧極，止到最高點，慧就跑出來了」，只是拼命在求這些而己。根本連觀念薰修，很多觀想的修法都不及，更不用談十地等覺的見解。十地等覺的見解都不如喔！還不是講十地等覺的實證喔！只是在求還原返本而已。
『這樣怎麼有辦法將佛佛正傳的坐禪方法傳下來呢？宋朝有很多錯誤的坐禪方法被記錄下來，我們後代學佛的人，要把它捨棄。』
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Ten Grounds” or 十地: refers to the ten stages of a bodhisattva’s progress in Mahayana.
• “Equal awakening” translates 等覺, often referring to the penultimate stage before buddhahood.
Paragraph 11
English Translation:
“In the Song Dynasty, many mistaken
methods of seated meditation were recorded; we later practitioners of Buddhism
must cast them aside, lest we go astray. All those teachings about quelling
thoughts to utmost quiescence, returning to the origin, or fancy slogans like
‘walking is Chan, sitting is Chan, speech and silence, movement and stillness,
the body at ease’—they are all from the Song era. These erroneous teachings got
recorded, and we must not study them, or we will mix ourselves up with Daoist
or other random directions. Are these not quite popular nowadays? Venerable
Dōgen says:
‘It is only Master Hongzhi’s “Song of
Seated Meditation” that is the authentic, directly transmitted guidance for
seated meditation in Buddhism. Back then, Venerable Rujing also instructed me
that I could only read Master Hongzhi’s “Song of Seated Meditation.” Only that
can illuminate the entire Dharma-realm. All buddhas and patriarchs, from
ancient times on, awakened due to the presence of this “Song of Seated
Meditation.”’
Back then, Venerable Rujing was
extremely strict in telling Dōgen he could only study Hongzhi’s Song of Seated
Meditation, for all other works were wrongly composed. Relying on the
essentials within Song of Seated Meditation, Master Dōgen awakened in under two
years.
‘So time is nearly up for today.
Hopefully, next time there is an opportunity, we can begin introducing the
“Song of Seated Meditation.” What was discussed today is Venerable Dōgen’s
preamble before explaining the “Song of Seated Meditation,” a preparatory
lesson. If you can understand these points, it will be easier to comprehend the
“Song of Seated Meditation.”
I can say for certain that for
everyone who has a chance to hear and read the “Song of Seated Meditation,” and
who meditates according to its essential instructions—this is precisely the
authentic Dharma directly transmitted by the Buddha to Kāśyapa. By virtue of
your past merit and conditions, you have encountered it. In my own past
groping, I spent so long before finally discovering it—it is extraordinarily
rare and precious indeed. I hope all of you keep it as your motto when
meditating. Follow its essential instructions in meditation, and you will
absolutely not go astray. That is not just my opinion—Venerable Rujing and
Venerable Dōgen guarantee it. Thus, everyone should thoroughly recognize it.’”
Original Text:
宋朝有很多錯誤的坐禪方法被記錄下來，我們後代學佛的人，要把它丟掉，不要去讀它，會弄錯的。都是講一些息慮寧極啦、還原返本啦、行亦禪啦、坐亦禪、語默動靜體安然……，统统都是宋朝時候，錯誤的東西都把它們記錄下來的。希望以後修佛的人，千萬不要根據這些指導，不然就變成道家或是一些莫名奇妙的方向去了。現在不是很流行這樣子的修法嗎？道元禪師說：
『宏智禪師的「坐禪箴」才是真正佛正傳的坐禪指導。如淨禪師當初也是叮嚀我只能看宏智禪師的「坐禪箴」。只有這個照澈法界。所有過去的佛佛祖祖，都是因為由於坐禪箴的這個現前。』
如淨禪師當時也很嚴格交代道元禪師，只能看宏智禪師的「坐禪箴」，其餘的都不能看，都是寫錯的。道元禪師也因為宏智禪師的「坐禪箴」，依其要領，不到兩年的時間就開悟了。
今天的時間差不多就這樣了，希望下次有機會開始跟大家介紹「坐禪箴」。今天講的這些是道元禪師在開始說明「坐禪箴」以前，先給大家說明的，算是先前預備的功課。這些能體會了，對於「坐禪箴」會比較容易了解。
我敢說，各位有機會聽到，有機會看到「坐禪箴」，依它的要領打坐，這個是佛陀正傳給迦葉的正法，憑各位過去的福德因緣能夠碰到這個。我過去摸了好久之後才給我碰到，非常難得珍貴的。希望各位打坐的時候，把它擺著當座右銘，依其要領打坐，絕對絕對不會錯。不是我講的，是如淨禪師、道元禪師保證的。所以大家要好好地認到這個。
Footnotes/Annotations (if any):
• “Song of Seated Meditation” is 坐禪箴, composed by Master Hongzhi (宏智禪師).
• “Directly transmitted by the Buddha
to Kāśyapa” refers to the core method of silent sitting (只管打坐).
Paragraph 12 (Final Lines from the
Original Text)
English Translation:
“Share
‹
›
Home Page
View web version
Technology provided by: Blogger.”
Original Text:
分享
‹
›
首頁
查看網路版
技術提供：Blogger.
Footnotes/Annotations (if any): None.
Brief Explanation of Key Concepts and
Terminologies
1. Non-thinking (非思量): The state of silent sitting that does not suppress thought, nor
indulges in discursive ideas. One does not generate additional views of “I am
meditating” or “I must eliminate thoughts,” and yet seeing, hearing, and
awareness continue to function.
2. Just sit (只管打坐): The essential method taught by Shakyamuni Buddha and passed down
through Mahākāśyapa, culminating in the tradition to which Dōgen (道元禪師) belongs. Also known in Japanese as shikantaza, meaning to simply sit
with no added agendas.
3. Self-view (我見): The fundamental misperception of an “I.” Breaking this is central to
Chan/Zen practice.
4. Cage of mental consciousness: A
metaphor for the realm of discursive thought and ego-clinging. Attempting to
forcefully destroy it paradoxically strengthens it. Gradual relaxing of mental
consciousness is achieved through just sitting, letting the six faculties
operate freely without personal interference.
5. Returning to the origin (還原返本): A concept akin to Daoist approaches, which, as the text warns, differs
from the genuine method of direct realization taught by the Buddha. Merely
seeking quiescence or mental calm is not the complete Buddhist path.
6. Song of Seated Meditation (坐禪箴) by Master Hongzhi (宏智禪師): A key text
that both Rujing (如淨禪師) and Dōgen
insisted upon as the authentic guide for seated meditation.
7. No self-nature (無自性) and “empty” (空): Core Buddhist terms indicating that
all phenomena, including the mind and body, do not possess an intrinsic,
independent essence. This points directly to the nature of awareness being free
from fixations, spontaneously manifesting in response to conditions.
8. Ten Grounds (十地) / Equal Awakening (等覺): Stages of
the Bodhisattva path in Mahayana Buddhism, far beyond mere calm states or
conceptual achievements.
End of Translation
Originally from: https://chengdawu.blogspot.com/2013/09/blog-post_17.html
Also see: Shinkantaza / Just Sitting: Letting All Phenomena Prove that There is No You!
Posts
