The Esoteric Significance of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra

Chapter 3  Interpretation of Passages from Volume Three

Section 1  The Six Entrances Are Illusory

1. Original text: 复次阿难。云何六入。本如来藏。妙真如性。阿难。即彼目睛。瞪发劳者。兼目与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因于明暗。二种妄尘。发见居中。吸此尘象。名为见性。此见离彼。明暗二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Furthermore, Ānanda, why are the six entrances originally the wondrous true-suchness nature of the tathāgatagarbha? Ānanda, it refers to the marks of activity, toil, and operation that appear when your eyes stare at objects; the eyes are the eye faculty, and the mark of strain is the aggregate of volitional formations; both are marks of strained contact manifested through the operation of the wondrous bodhi. The eye faculty, relying on the two illusory sense objects of light and darkness, contacts form objects, and within them the eye's seeing nature arises; the seeing nature absorbs these sense objects and thereby manifests them—this is called the seeing nature. When this seeing nature is apart from the two illusory sense objects of light and darkness, it fundamentally has no substance of seeing.

From the very beginning the Buddha explained how the six entrances are the wondrous true-suchness nature of the tathāgatagarbha; that is to say, the six entrances in their entirety are born of the tathāgatagarbha and are functional attributes of the tathāgatagarbha. Therefore, from within the six entrances one can discover the functions of the tathāgatagarbha and realize the tathāgatagarbha. The marks of activity and strained-contact marks of the eye faculty and the manas are the wondrous true-suchness nature; the seeing nature that is born is the wondrous true-suchness nature; moreover, the two conditions of light and darkness that give birth to the seeing nature are also the wondrous true-suchness nature. What sentient beings see, contact, and make use of is all the wondrous true-suchness nature; there is no dharma that is not the wondrous true-suchness nature.

Realizing the tathāgatagarbha is actually not difficult; His figure is everywhere and He does not hide at all. The key lies in the state of sentient beings' own karmic obstructions, whether the causes and conditions for seeing the nature have matured, whether the bodhisattva nature is complete, and whether precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom are complete—this is where the difficulty lies.

Original text: 如是阿难。当知是见。非明暗来。非于根出。不于空生。何以故。若从明来。暗即随灭。应非见暗。若从暗来。明即随灭。应无见明。若从根生。必无明暗。如是见精。本无自性。若于空出。前瞩尘象。归当见根。又空自观。何关汝入。是故当知。眼入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: Thus, Ānanda, you should know that this seeing nature does not come from the two marks of light and darkness, is not born from the eye faculty, and is not born from empty space. Why is this said? If the seeing nature were born from light, then when darkness arrives the seeing nature would cease and vanish, and one could not see darkness nor know darkness. If the seeing nature were born from darkness, then when light appears the seeing nature would vanish, and one could not see light.

If the seeing nature were born from the eye faculty, there would certainly be no marks of light and darkness, and such an essence of seeing would fundamentally have no substance of its own. If the seeing nature were born from empty space, then looking forward one sees object-images, and turning back one should be able to see the eye faculty, yet the eye faculty is not seen. Moreover, since empty space itself can see, what would that have to do with your eye faculty? Therefore you should know that the entrance of the eye faculty is illusory; it is fundamentally not born of causes and conditions, nor is it a natural nature—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

2. Original text: 阿难。譬如有人。以两手指。急塞其耳。耳根劳故。头中作声。兼耳与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因于动静。二种妄尘。发闻居中。吸此尘象。名听闻性。此闻离彼。动静二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Ānanda, for example, suppose a person tightly plugs both ears with the fingers of his two hands; because of the strain of the ear faculty, a buzzing sound arises in the head. The ear faculty and the strained-contact mark of the fingers touching the ears are both illusory, worldly marks produced by the operation of the mind of bodhi. The ear faculty, relying on the two illusory sense objects of motion and stillness, gives rise to the hearing nature within the strained contact between the fingers and the ear faculty; the hearing nature absorbs these marks of motion and stillness and manifests the marks of motion and stillness—this is called the nature of hearing. When this hearing nature is apart from the two sense objects of motion and stillness, it ultimately has no substance of its own; that is to say, without motion and stillness there would be no nature of hearing—apart from sense objects there is no consciousness and no hearing.

Original text: 如是阿难。当知是闻。非动静来。非于根出。不于空生。何以故。若从静来。动即随灭。应非闻动。若从动来。静即随灭。应无觉静。

若从根生。必无动静。如是闻体。本无自性。若于空出。有闻成性。即非虚空。又空自闻。何关汝入。是故当知。耳入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: Thus, Ānanda, you should know that this hearing nature is not born from motion and stillness, not born from the ear faculty, and not born from empty space. Why is this said? Because if the hearing nature came from the mark of stillness, then when the mark of motion appears the hearing nature would vanish, and one could not hear the mark of motion. If the hearing nature came from motion, then when the mark of stillness appears the hearing nature would vanish, and you would no longer perceive the mark of stillness.

If the hearing nature came from the ear faculty, it would follow the attributes of the ear faculty, having neither the mark of motion nor the mark of stillness, and would not hear any motion or stillness; such a hearing nature fundamentally has no self-substance. If the hearing nature came from empty space, then since empty space would have a hearing nature, it could no longer be called empty space; moreover, it would be empty space itself that hears—what would that have to do with your ear faculty? Therefore it is said that the hearing nature of the ear faculty is illusory; it is fundamentally not a nature of causes and conditions, nor a natural nature—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

3. Original text: 阿难。譬如有人。急畜其鼻。畜久成劳。则于鼻中。闻有冷触。因触分别。通塞虚实。如是乃至。诸香臭气。兼鼻与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因于通塞。二种妄尘。发闻居中。吸此尘象。名嗅闻性。此闻离彼。通塞二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Ānanda, for example, suppose a person rapidly twitches his own nose; after twitching for a long time, the nose develops a strained-contact mark, and one feels a cool tactile sensation in the nose. Because the nose contacts the mark of coldness, one knows whether the nose is open or blocked, empty or solid. Thus, down to the nose faculty contacting all fragrant and foul odors, the nose knows there is a tactile sensation. The nose faculty and these strained-contact marks are all strained-contact marks brought forth by the mind of bodhi. Because of knowing the illusory sense objects of openness and blockage, the smelling nature arises within them; the smelling nature absorbs these object-marks and manifests the various odor objects—this is called the nature of smelling. When this smelling nature is apart from the two sense objects of openness and blockage, it ultimately has no substance of its own.

Original text: 当知是闻。非通塞来。非于根出。不于空生。何以故。若从通来。塞则闻灭。云何知塞。如因塞有。通则无闻。云何发明。香臭等触。

若从根生。必无通塞。如是闻机。本无自性。若从空出。是闻自当。回嗅汝鼻。空自有闻。何关汝入。是故当知。鼻入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: Ānanda, you should know that this smelling nature does not come from openness and blockage, does not come from the nose faculty, and does not come from empty space. Why is this said? If the smelling nature came from openness, then when there is blockage the smelling nature would vanish—how could one know the nose is blocked? If the smelling nature came from blockage, then when there is openness the smelling nature would vanish—how then could one discern and contact fragrant and foul odors?

If the smelling nature came from the nose faculty, it would follow the attributes of the nose faculty, having neither the sense object of openness nor that of blockage, and would not know openness or blockage—what self-nature would such a smelling nature have? If the smelling nature came from empty space, this hearing nature should itself turn back and smell your nose; since empty space itself has a hearing nature, what would that have to do with your nose entrance? Therefore you should know that the smelling nature is illusory; it is fundamentally not a nature of causes and conditions, nor a natural nature—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

4. Original text: 阿难。譬如有人。以舌舐吻。熟舐令劳。其人若病。则有苦味。无病之人。微有甜触。由甜与苦。显此舌根。不动之时。淡性常在。兼舌与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因甜苦淡。二种妄尘。发知居中。吸此尘象。名知味性。此知味性。离彼甜苦。及淡二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Ānanda, for example, suppose a person licks the inside of his own mouth with his tongue; after a long time he feels fatigue. If this person is ill, the tongue will perceive a bitter taste; a person without illness will perceive a slight sweet sensation. Through the two marks of sweetness and bitterness, the function of the tongue faculty is revealed. When the tongue is not moving, the mouth always tastes bland. The tongue faculty and the mark of fatigue—these two object-marks—are both strained-contact marks born and manifested by the mind of bodhi. Because of the two taste objects of sweetness-bitterness and blandness, the tongue faculty gives rise to the knowing nature within them; absorbing these object-marks of sweetness, bitterness, blandness, and so forth, it is called the taste-knowing nature. When this taste-knowing nature is apart from the two sense objects of sweetness-bitterness and blandness, it ultimately has no substance of its own.

Original text: 如是阿难。当知如是。尝苦淡知。非甜苦来。非因淡有。又非根出。不于空生。何以故。若甜苦来。淡则知灭。云何知淡。若从淡出。甜即知亡。复云何知。甜苦二相。

若从舌生。必无甜淡。及与苦尘。斯知味根。本无自性。若于空出。虚空自味。非汝口知。又空自知。何关汝入。是故当知。舌入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: Thus, Ānanda, you should know that the knowing nature that tastes bitterness and knows blandness does not come from the marks of sweetness and bitterness, does not come from blandness, does not come from the tongue faculty, and still less does it come from empty space. Why is this said? If this knowing nature came from the tastes of sweetness and bitterness, then when blandness appears the knowing nature would vanish—how could it know blandness? If this knowing nature came from blandness, then when the tastes of sweetness and bitterness appear the knowing nature would vanish—how then could it know the two marks of sweetness and bitterness?

If this knowing nature came from the tongue faculty, then in accordance with the attributes of the tongue faculty there would certainly be no two sense objects of sweetness-bitterness and blandness, and it would not know the marks of sweetness-bitterness or the mark of bland taste; therefore it is said that such a knowing nature fundamentally has no substance of its own. If the knowing nature came from empty space, empty space itself would possess the nature of knowing tastes, and the tongue in your mouth would not know; moreover, it would be empty space itself that knows the taste objects—what would that have to do with your tongue faculty? Therefore it is said that the tongue entrance is illusory; it is fundamentally not a nature of causes and conditions, nor a natural nature—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

5. Original text: 阿难。譬如有人。以一冷手。触于热手。若冷势多。热者从冷。若热功胜。冷者成热。如是以此。合觉之触。显于离知。涉势若成。因于劳触。兼身与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因于离合。二种妄尘。发觉居中。吸此尘象。名知觉性。此知觉体。离彼离合。违顺二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Ānanda, for example, suppose a person touches one hot hand with a cold hand; if the cold force is greater than the heat, the hot hand, imbued with coldness, will turn cold; if the power of heat is greater, the cold hand, imbued with heat, will turn hot. In this way, by means of the contact that is together with awareness, the knowing nature of separation and union is revealed; as the interaction of the two forces takes effect over long contact between the hands, a balance of cold and heat is produced. Taking into account both the body faculty and the strain, both are strained-contact marks manifested within the mind of bodhi. Relying on the two illusory sense objects of separation and union, the body faculty gives rise to the nature of awareness within them; absorbing the object-marks of contact, it is called the nature of awareness. The body faculty that knows and is aware, when apart from the two sense objects of separation-union and compliance-opposition, ultimately has no self-substance.

Original text: 如是阿难。当知是觉。非离合来。非违顺有。不于根出。又非空生。何以故。若合时来。离当已灭。云何觉离。违顺二相。亦复如是。若从根出。必无离合。违顺四相。则汝身知。元无自性。必于空出。空自知觉。何关汝入。是故当知。身入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: Ānanda, you should know that this nature of awareness does not come from the marks of separation and union, does not exist because of compliance and opposition, does not come from the body faculty, and does not come from empty space. Why is this said? If the sensation of touch came about when the body faculty and the contact object unite, then when the body faculty and the contact object separate, the sensation of touch would vanish—how could one know that faculty and object have separated? If the sensation of touch came about when faculty and object separate, then when faculty and object unite, the sensation of touch would vanish—how could one know that faculty and object have united?

If the sensation of touch came from one of the two marks of compliance and opposition, it would not be aware of the other mark. If the sensation of touch came from the body faculty, then in accordance with the attributes of the body faculty there would certainly be no marks of separation and union, nor marks of compliance and opposition, and it would not be aware of these marks; therefore the sensation of touch on your body fundamentally has no self-substance. If the sensation of touch came from empty space, empty space itself would have the sensation of touch—what would that have to do with the body entrance of tactile sensation in your body? Therefore you should know that the body entrance is illusory; it is neither a nature of causes and conditions nor a natural nature—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

6. Original text: 阿难。譬如有人。劳倦则眠。睡熟便寤。览尘斯忆。失忆为忘。是其颠倒。生住异灭。吸习中归。不相踰越。称意知根。兼意与劳。同是菩提。瞪发劳相。因于生灭。二种妄尘。集知居中。吸撮内尘。见闻逆流。流不及地。名觉知性。此觉知性。离彼寤寐。生灭二尘。毕竟无体。

Explanation: Ānanda, for example, a person who is fatigued and weary will fall asleep, and after sleeping soundly will wake. (The manas), upon contacting sense objects, gives rise to (the mind consciousness's) recollection; when recollection cannot be brought forth, it is called forgetting. This is the inverted mark of arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing in which the manas dwells. The manas absorbs these object-marks into its own mind, one object-mark following another in orderly sequence without confusion—this is called the mind-knowing faculty. The manas and the strained-contact mark of the manas contacting dharma objects are both strained marks generated and manifested by bodhi. The manas, relying on the two illusory sense objects of arising and ceasing, gives rise to the mind consciousness's nature of awareness in contact with dharma objects; the mind consciousness absorbs the dharma-object marks within the manas's mind, gives birth to the seeing nature and the hearing nature, and chases after dharma objects outside the mind, never knowing whence the dharma objects come and failing to awaken to the source of all dharmas—this is called the nature of awareness. When this nature of awareness is apart from the two object-marks of sleeping-waking and arising-ceasing, it ultimately has no self-substance.

The manas is one among the six faculties, and its strained-contact mark with the dharma objects is the aggregate of volitional formations; both are illusory marks manifested by bodhi. When the body grows weary, the manas arranges for sleep and the mind consciousness ceases; when rest is complete one wakes, and the mind consciousness appears and gives rise to the nature of awareness. When the manas grasps at sense objects, the mind consciousness recollects; when recollection cannot be brought forth, it is forgetting, called loss of memory. This nature of awareness of the mind consciousness appears owing to the two object-marks of sleeping-waking and arising-ceasing: after falling asleep, when the manas does not gather in object-marks, the mind consciousness ceases; when the manas gathers in object-marks, the mind consciousness appears and wakes up. Herein the manas is inverted: it ceaselessly grasps at object-marks, taking them to be real, and causes the mind consciousness to arise and cease moment after moment, aware outwardly of all dharma-marks yet never aware of the source of these dharma-marks. Without the two illusory sense objects of sleeping-waking and arising-ceasing, there would likewise be no nature of awareness of the mind consciousness. Seeking dharmas outside the mind is going against the stream of dharmas; only by searching within the mind, going along with the stream of dharmas, can one know the source of dharmas and thereby awaken to the Path.

Original text: 如是阿难。当知如是。觉知之根。非寤寐来。非生灭有。不于根出。亦非空生。何以故。若从寤来。寐即随灭。将何为寐。必生时有。灭即同无。令谁受灭。若从灭有。生即灭无。谁知生者。

Explanation: Thus, Ānanda, you should know that the faculty that is aware of sense objects is not born from sleeping and waking, not born from the phenomena of arising and ceasing, not born from the mind of the manas, and not born from empty space. Why? If this nature of awareness were born during wakefulness, then when sleeping the awareness would vanish—who then would know sleep? If the nature of awareness came from the dharma object of sleep, then upon waking it would vanish—who then would know waking? If the nature of awareness emerged when dharmas arise, then when dharmas cease the nature of awareness would vanish—who then could perceive the ceasing of dharmas? If the nature of awareness came from the ceasing of dharmas, then when dharmas arise the nature of awareness would vanish—who then would know the arising of dharmas?

Original text: 若从根出。寤寐二相。随身开合。离斯二体。此觉知者。同于空华。毕竟无体。若从空生。自是空知。何关汝入。是故当知。意入虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: If the nature of awareness were born from the manas, since the manas does not possess the two dharma objects of sleeping and waking, the nature of awareness, following the attributes of the manas, would necessarily not know sleeping or waking. Sleeping and waking appear in accordance with the body's stretching and stilling: 'opening' is the body stretching and moving, and 'closing' is the body curling up and being still. Apart from sleep and waking, the nature of awareness would be like a flower in empty space, fundamentally nonexistent. If the nature of awareness were born from empty space, then naturally it would be empty space itself that knows—what would that have to do with the manas's intake of dharma objects? Therefore you should know that the entrance of the manas is illusory; it is fundamentally not born of causes and conditions, nor does it exist naturally—it is the tathāgatagarbha nature.

7. All Dharmas Are Fundamentally Neither Causes and Conditions nor a Natural Nature

All dharmas are fundamentally not from causes and conditions and are not a natural nature. In the Śūraṅgama Sūtra the World-Honored One negated those two [possibilities]—the nature of causes and conditions and the natural nature—for the arising of all dharmas, leaving only one: all dharmas are the tathāgatagarbha nature, born and conjured forth by the tathāgatagarbha. Therefore all dharmas possess the tathāgatagarbha nature; this is the only conclusion one can draw. The non-Buddhists who do not know of the tathāgatagarbha or do not acknowledge its existence all say that all dharmas are either born of various causes and conditions, or that they come about naturally and exist of themselves. But the World-Honored One declared that all are born of the tathāgatagarbha; without the tathāgatagarbha, no dharma whatsoever could be established.

The World-Honored One said that for the five aggregates, the six faculties, the six objects, the six consciousnesses, the twelve entrances (āyatanas), and the eighteen elements (dhātus), the source of each and every dharma is the tathāgatagarbha; they are not conglomerations of various causes and conditions, nor do they exist naturally; they are produced by the tathāgatagarbha in accordance with various conditions. The World-Honored One explained this most thoroughly, negating and blocking off every other location and source from which all dharmas might be produced; only the tathāgatagarbha can produce all these dharmas. The analysis the World-Honored One gives in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra teaches sentient beings to engage in contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) [to see] that the five aggregates, the twelve entrances, and the eighteen elements are all illusory, all born after the fact, all subject to arising and ceasing, and all come from the tathāgatagarbha. On this basis we can likewise, through contemplative practice, eradicate the view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi-prahāṇa), and then locate the tathāgatagarbha and know the functions He performs—this is seeing the mind and attaining realization. Therefore the Śūraṅgama Sūtra is fully sufficient to enable us to realize the tathāgatagarbha.