bhagavān āha - nanu laṅkādhipate, dṛṣṭo ghaṭādīnāṃ bhedanātmakānāṃ vināśadharmiṇāṃ bālavikalpagocaraiḥ prativibhāgaḥ | evam ihāpi kiṃ na gṛhyate? asti dharmādharmayoḥ prativibhāgo bālaprativikalpam upādāya, na tv āryajñānādhigamaṃ prati darśanena |
tiṣṭhantu tāval laṅkādhipate ghaṭādayo bhāvā vicitralakṣaṇapatitā bālānāṃ na tv āryāṇām | ekasvābhāvikānām ekajvālodbhavaprajvālitānāṃ (8,1) gṛhabhavanodyānaprāsādapratiṣṭhāpitānāṃ dṛṣṭaḥ prativibhāgaḥ indhanavaśād dīrghahrasvaprabhālpamahāviśeṣāś ca |
evam ihāpi kiṃ (18*) na gṛhyate? asti dharmādharmayoḥ prativibhāgaḥ | na kevalam agnijvālāyā ekasaṃtānapatitāyā dṛṣṭo ’rciṣaś ca prativibhāgaḥ | ekabījaprasūtānāṃ yatsaṃtānānām api laṅkādhipate nālāṅkuragaṇḍaparvapatrapalāśapuṣpaphalaśākhāviśeṣāḥ |
evaṃ sarvadharmaprarohadharmiṇāṃ bāhyānām ādhyātmikānām apy avidyāniryātānāṃ skandhadhātvāyatanopagānāṃ sarvadharmāṇāṃ traidhātukopapannānāṃ dṛṣṭasukhasaṃsthānāmabhilāpyagativiśeṣāḥ | vijñānānām ekalakṣaṇānāṃ viṣayābhigrahaṇapravṛttānāṃ dṛṣṭo hīnotkṛṣṭamadhyamaviśeṣo vyavadānāvyavadānataś ca kuśalākuśalataś ca |
na kevalam eṣāṃ laṅkādhipate dharmāṇāṃ prativibhāgaviśeṣaḥ, yoginām api yogamabhyasyatāṃ yogamārge pratyātmagatilakṣaṇaviśeṣo dṛṣṭaḥ | kimaṅga punar dharmādharmayoḥ prativikalpapravṛttayor viśeṣo na bhavati? bhavaty eva ||
佛告楞伽王。楞伽王。汝不見(6)瓶等無常敗壞之法。毛道凡夫分別境界差(7)別之相。楞伽王。何故不如是取。
有法非法(8)差別之相。依毛道凡夫分別心有。非聖證(9)智以爲可見。楞伽王。且置瓶等種種相事。(10)毛道凡夫心謂爲有。非謂聖人以爲有法。(11)楞伽王。譬如一火炎燒宮殿園林草木。見(12)種種火光明色炎各各差別。依種種薪草木(13)長短。分別見有勝負之相。
此中何故不如(14)是知有法非法差別之相。楞伽王。非但火(15)炎依一相續身中見有種種諸相差別。
楞(16)伽王。如一種子一相續生牙莖枝葉華果(17)樹林種種異相。如是内外所生諸法。無明及(18)行陰界入等一切諸法。三界所生皆有差(19)別。現樂形相言語去來勝智異相。一相境界(20)而取於相。見下中上勝相染淨善不善相。
楞(21)伽王。非但種種法中見差別相。覺如實道(22)者内證行中亦有見於種種異相。何況法非(23)法無分別種種差別相。楞伽王。有法非法種(24)種差別相
爾(3)時佛告楞伽王言。楞伽王。汝豈不見瓶等(4)無常敗壞之法。凡夫於中妄生分別。汝今何(5)故不如是知
法與非法差別之相。此是凡(6)夫之所分別非證智見。凡夫墮在種種相(7)中。非諸*證者。楞伽王。如燒宮殿園林見(8)種種焔火性是一。所出光焔由薪力故。長(9)短大小各各差別。
汝今云何不如是知法(10)與非法差別之相。
楞伽王。如一種子生牙(11)莖枝葉及以花果無量差別。外法如是内法(12)亦然。謂無明爲縁生蘊界處一切諸法。於(13)三界中受諸趣生。有苦樂好醜語默行止(14)各各差別。又如諸識相雖是一隨於境界(15)有上中下染淨善惡種種差別。
楞伽王。非但(16)如上法有差別。諸修行者修觀行時。自智(17)所行亦復見有差別之相。況法與非法。而(18)無種種差別分別。
No Tibetan
No Tibetan
No Tibetan
No Tibetan
No Tibetan
bcom ldan ’das kyis bka’ stsal pa | laṅ ka’i bdag po ’di ltar bum pa la sogs pa ’chag pa’i raṅ bźin ’jig pa’i chos can rnams byis pa rnams kyi rnam par rtog pa’i spyod (7) yul la tha dad pa’i bye brag tu snaṅ ba | de bźin du ’di la yaṅ ci’i phyir mi gzuṅ | byis pa rnams kyi so so’i rnam par rtog pa ñe bar bzuṅ na | chos daṅ chos med pa tha daṅ pa’i bye brag kyaṅ yod do || ’phags pa’i ye śes khoṅ du chud par bya ba’i phyir mthoṅ bas ni ma yin no ||
laṅ ka’i [62b1] bdag po bum pa la sogs pa’i dṅos po mtshan ñid sna tshogs su lhuṅ ba rnams byis pa dag gi yin te | ’phags pa rnams kyi ma yin pa lta źog la | raṅ bźin gcig ciṅ ’bar ba gcig las byuṅ ba’i rab tu ’bar ba khyim daṅ gnas daṅ skyed mos tshal daṅ | khaṅ pa la ’dug pa śiṅ gi (2) dbaṅ gis ’od riṅ ba daṅ thuṅ ba’i khyad par daṅ tha dad pa’i bye brag tu snaṅ ba
de bźin du ’di la yaṅ chos daṅ | chos med pa tha dad pa’i bye brag yod par ci’i phyir mi gzuṅ | me lce’i rgyud gcig tu gyur pa’i ’od ’phro ba tha dad pa’i bye brag tu snaṅ ba ’ba’ źig tu’aṅ ma zad de | laṅ ka’i bdag pos (3) bon las byuṅ yaṅ myu gu daṅ | ljaṅ bu daṅ | sog ma daṅ | tshigs daṅ | lo ma daṅ | yal ga daṅ | me tog daṅ | ’bras bu daṅ | gra ma’i bye brag yod pa
de bźin du phyi naṅ gi chos skye ba’i chos can | ma rig pa las rab tu byuṅ ba | phuṅ po daṅ | khams daṅ | skye (4) mched du gtogs pa thams cad daṅ | khams gsum du skyes pa’i chos thams cad la bde ba’i dbyibs daṅ | brjod pa daṅ | ’gro ba’i khyad par dag kyaṅ snaṅ ste | mtshan ñid gcig pa’i rnam par śes pa yul la mṅon par ’dzin par rab tu ’jug pa’i khyad par rab daṅ ’briṅ daṅ tha ma’i (5) bye brag daṅ | rnam par byaṅ ba daṅ | dge ba daṅ | mi dge bar yaṅ snaṅ ṅo ||
laṅ ka’i bdag po chos de dag gi tha dad pa’i bye brag tu’aṅ ma zad de | rnal ’byor can rnal ’byor bsgom pa rnams kyi rnal ’byor gyi lam la yaṅ so so raṅ gis rig pa’i mtshan ñid kyi khyad par snaṅ na | (6) so so’i rnam par rtog pa las byuṅ ba’i chos daṅ | chos med pa’i khyad par lta ci’i phyir med de yod do ||
Said the Blessed One, “Lord of Laṅkā, seest thou not that the differentiation of things, such as is perceived in jars and other breakable objects whose nature it is to perish in time, takes place in a realm of discrimination [cherished by] the ignorant? This being so, is it not to be so understood?
It is due to discrimination [cherished by] the ignorant that there exists the differentiation of dharma and adharma. Noble wisdom (āryajñāna), however, is not to be realised by seeing [things this way]. Lord of Laṅkā, let it be so with the ignorant who follow the particularised aspect of existence that there are such objects as jars, etc., but it is not so with the wise. One flame of uniform nature rises up depending on houses, mansions, parks, and terraces, and burns them down; while a difference in the flames is seen according to the power of each burning material which varies in length, magnitude, etc.
This being so, why (18) is it not to be so understood? The duality of dharma and adharma thus comes into existence. Not only is there seen a fire-flame spreading out in one continuity and yet showing a variety of flames, but from one seed, Lord of Laṅkā, are produced, also in one continuity, stems, shoots, knots, leaves, petals, flowers, fruit, branches, all individualised.
As it is with every external object from which grows [a variety of] objects, so also with internal objects. From ignorance there develop the Skandhas, Dhātus, Āyatanas, with all kinds of objects accompanying, which grow out in the triple world where we have, as we see, happiness, form, speech, and behaviour, each differentiating [infinitely]. The oneness of the Vijñāna is grasped variously according to the evolution of an objective world; thus there are seen things inferior, superior, and middling, things defiled and free from defilement, things good and bad.
Not only, Lord of Laṅkā, is there such a difference of conditions in things generally, there is also seen a variety of realisations attained innerly by each Yogin as he treads the path of discipline which constitutes his practice. How much more difference in dharma and adharma do we not see in a world of particulars which is evolved by discrimination? Indeed, we do.