Translator's Note: The following is a translation of a Dharma talk transcript by Teacher Hong Wenliang, recorded in May 2004 and posted online in 2009. It discusses key points of Zazen (Just Sitting) practice, common misunderstandings, and interpretations of classic Buddhist concepts and Zen teachings.

English Translation:

Essentials of Zazen (1) - Discourse by Teacher Hong Wenliang

(2009-11-09 12:29:23)

Reprinted ▼

Tags:

Category: Teacher Hong Wenliang

149

(Transferred from the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye Forum: http://www.hongzen.com)

Recorded from the May 2004 Meditation Retreat

Compiled by zhengdapang

Original Text:

坐禅要领(一) -洪文亮老师开示

(2009-11-09 12:29:23)

转载▼

标签：

分类： 洪文亮老师

149

（转自正法眼藏论坛：http://www.hongzen.com）

录自2004年五月禅修

zhengdapang整理

English Translation:

Essentials of Zazen

Zazen [seated meditation] is your best teacher.

Your body is placed like this, the spine neither leaning forward nor backward, sitting stably on the cushion. The breath, let it be long, let it be short. When it needs to be long, it becomes long by itself; when it doesn't need to be that long, it becomes short by itself. Therefore, it is said, the breath is long, the breath is short. Regarding Ānāpānasati¹ mentioned in the Āgama Sūtras², actually, people misunderstand some aspects. It says, when the breath is long, know the breath is long – the "know" of knowing. When your breath is short, know your breath is short. That "know" is not you initiating a cognition to know, "Ah, this breath of mine is long, this breath of mine is short." It's not that kind of "know." Telling you the breath is long, the breath is short, knowing long, knowing short, doesn't mean you become a stone person, a wooden person, knowing nothing, like a dead person; that's not the meaning. However, it's also not initiating a thought, "Ah, this breath of mine is long, oh, this time it's short." The knowing the breath is short, knowing the breath is long in the Āgama Sūtras is not this kind of "know"; don't get it wrong, don't misunderstand again. The Āgama Sūtras did not teach you to count one, count two, count three, no. Go take a look; it only tells you to "know" the breath is long, "know" the breath is short, right! The meaning of that "know" is simply that you are not like a wooden person or a stone person. This meaning is precisely the essential point of "just sitting" [Shikantaza].

Original Text:

打坐的要领

打坐，是你最好的老师。

你身体这样一摆，脊椎没有前俯后仰，稳稳地坐在蒲团上。呼吸，随它长，随它短。需要长的时候它自己长，不需要那么长的时候，它自己短。所以说，呼吸长，呼吸短。《阿含经》里讲的安那般那，其实大家有些地方误会了。它说，呼吸长，知呼吸长，知道的“知”。你的呼吸短，就知道你的呼吸短。那个“知”不是你起一个认识去知，“哎，我这一次呼吸长，我这一次呼吸短。” 不是那样的“知”。叫你呼吸长呼吸短，知道长知道短，你不是变成一个石头人，木头人，什么都不知道，死人一样，不是这个意思。但是，也不是起个念，“哎，我这一次呼吸长了，哦，这一次呼吸短了。”阿含经》的知呼吸短，知呼吸长，不是这样的“知”，别弄错了，又误会掉了。《阿含经》没有教你数一、数二、数三，没有哦。你去看看，它只告诉你，“知”呼吸长，“知”呼吸短，对不对！那个“知”的意思就是，不是木头人、石头人那个样子。这个意思就是“只管打坐”的要领。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Ānāpānasati (安那般那): Mindfulness of breathing, a core meditation practice in Buddhism.
2. Āgama Sūtras (《阿含经》): A collection of early Buddhist scriptures, corresponding roughly to the Pāli Nikāyas.

English Translation:

Body, speech, and mind are the three aspects. For the body aspect, the posture of the spine is most important. It's not about using force, not bending over or hunching the back, nor stretching ramrod straight – none of these; anything involving added intention is not it. The mouth is closed. Can you recite mantras when it's closed? Or recite Buddha's name? Can you? The mouth is closed, gently closed. The mind [意, yi] – this is where many people misunderstand. Oh dear, teaching you to observe the mind [观心, guānxīn], observe where your mind comes from, where the mind stops. Again, you've run off, where have you run off to? What observing the mind! The guidance regarding the three aspects of "body, speech, mind" taught by Śākyamuni Buddha was not taught like this. His meaning, the "mind" of body, speech, mind, teaches you to sit quietly like this, practice Zazen; when thoughts come and thoughts go, you should neither welcome them nor reject them. Not welcoming, not rejecting [不迎不拒, bù yíng bù jù], disregarding [不理, bù lǐ] them – having a "disregard" there is already incorrect. Having the thought "disregard" means you have already initiated a thought to "disregard"! Therefore, truly let your thoughts come and go freely; thoughts arise, thoughts pass. However, you are not dead, nor have you sunk into torpor.

Original Text:

身，口，意三个样子。身的样子，脊椎的姿式最重要。不是用力，不是弯腰驼背，也不是抻直起来，都不是，意加进去的都不是。口闭起来。闭起来可以念咒吗？还念佛号吗？可以吗？口闭起来，轻轻地闭起来。意，很多人就是误会在这里。哎呦，教你观心喽，观你的心从哪里来，心停在哪里。又是跑去了，跑到哪里去了。什么观心哪！释迦牟尼佛教的“身口意”三个方面的指导不是这样教的。他的意思，身口意的“意”，是教你这样静坐，坐禅，心念来了心念去，你不要欢迎它，也不要去排斥它。不迎不拒，不理它，有一个“不理”在那里，已经不对了。有一个“不理”这个念头，那就已经起个念头去“不理”了嘛！所以，真正的让你的心念来去自由，念头上来念头去。但是，不是死掉，也不是昏沉过去了。

English Translation:

Didn't Huaijang¹ say, "The inherent possession of sentient beings, the entirety of all dharmas"? Are thoughts not one of the myriad dharmas? Just like when the eyes perceive forms [相, xiāng], forms appear to the eyes. When the ears hear sound, sound resonates in the ears. When the mind-faculty [意根, yìgēn] encounters mental objects [法尘, fǎchén], mental signs [法相, fǎxiàng] appear. The coming and going of thoughts is one of the myriad dharmas! It's the whole body of the myriad dharmas, the entire body, the whole body – that is your own Treasury of Light [光明藏, guāngmíng zàng]! The arising of a thought, the thought itself, is the functioning of your Treasury of Light, your luminosity [光明, guāngmíng] itself. How do you know thoughts are coming and going? Yet you still initiate a thought there to observe – isn't that contradictory? Then there are those who think, "Oh, I know a thought has arisen. Okay, don't welcome it, don't follow it, and don't reject it." They think that 'not welcoming, not rejecting' constitutes the effort in the aspect of the mind-faculty, the "mind" aspect of body, speech, mind – completely wrong!

Original Text:

怀奘不是说吗，“众生的本有，万法的全体”。心念是不是万法之一呀？就好像眼睛照到有相，眼睛就有相现。耳朵听到有声音，耳朵就有响。意根由法尘现，就有法相。念头来去是万法之一呀！万法的全身哪，全体的身，全身，那是你自己的光明藏啊！念头的来，念头本身是你的光明藏的作用，你的光明本身，你怎么知道有念头来去呀？还要在那里起个念头去观，不是矛盾吗？还有的人是，“哦，我知道有念头来了。好，不迎，不要去欢迎它，不要随它，也不要去排斥它。”以为不迎不拒是做意根的、身口意方面的“意”方面的用功，错掉了！

150

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Huaijang (怀奘): Likely refers to Kangan Giin (懷奘鑑元, 1198–1280), a disciple of Dōgen Zenji and the compiler of the Eihei Kōroku. The quote emphasizes the all-encompassing nature of reality, which includes thoughts.

English Translation:

When the thought itself comes and goes, the thought itself is the function of your own luminosity, the movement of luminosity. The function of luminosity itself is your very self, the whole body, the whole body of the myriad dharmas! At this moment, if you initiate a thought, "Oh, there's a thought, don't touch it," this is already discriminative consciousness [分别意识, fēnbié yìshí]. However, the thought before this thought arose is natural; it is your original Treasury of Light, the function of your luminosity itself. When it arises like this, you are fundamentally unaware of this (thought), that (thought); at this time, you are fundamentally unaware, you see! Because we habitually give rise to discriminative consciousness, "Hey... oh, oh, this thought of yours..." Before this, hence it's called "before father and mother were born" [父母未生前, fùmǔ wèi shēng qián]¹, before even the premonition. Therefore, because your consciousness knows a thought has come, in that instant, the previous state "before birth" – you realize, "Oh! So it's like this!" The realm of consciousness versus the state "before father and mother were born," when even thoughts are not known as thoughts, when it is just thought, just your luminosity moving – in this instant, there are people who attain awakening [开悟, kāiwù], but they are extremely few, very few. This is even harder than seeing things when light appears or having your self-clinging [我执, wǒzhí] broken by hearing a sound; it's very rare, extremely scarce. It's likely due to past life causes and conditions [宿世因缘, sùshì yīnyuán], having already achieved considerable attainment in the past, being born with this capacity. Otherwise, this... the thought itself being the function of your luminosity is different from you recognizing this thought! Can you experience the difference? Do you understand? Merely understanding is useless, that's why you must practice Zazen! That's why you must practice Zazen!!!

Original Text:

当念头本身的来去，念头本身是你自己的光明的作用，光明的动。光明本身的作用，是你本身，全身，万法的全身嘛！这个时候你起了个念头，“哦，有个念头，不要去碰它”，这个已经是分别意识了。但是，这个念头起以前的那个念头是自然的，是你本来的光明藏，你的光明的本身的作用。这样起的时候，你根本不知道这个（念头），那个（念头），这个时候你根本不知道哦！因为我们习惯性地会生起分别意识，“哎…哦，哦，你这个念头…”在这个以前的，所以叫做“父母未生前”，还没有预兆以前。所以，因为你的意识知道念头来了，这个刹那之间，你前面那个“未生前”的那个就，你就“哦！原来是这样！”识的境界跟“父母未生前”，连念头都不知道念头的时候，光是念头，是你的光明在动的时候，这个一刹那，这个时候开悟的人也有，但太少太少，这比有光出现看到东西，或听到了声音而把你的我执打断还不容易，很少很稀有。大概是过去宿世因缘，过去已经相当成就，生下来就有这本事。否则的话，这个……念头本身是你的光明的作用，跟你去认到这个念头不同哎！体会的出吗？了解吗？光是了解没有用，所以要打坐！所以要打坐！！！

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Before father and mother were born (父母未生前): A classic Zen koan phrase pointing to one's original nature, prior to conceptualization and conditioned existence.

English Translation:

The Secret is On Your Side

Reciting Buddha's names [念佛号, niànfóhào]¹ expresses respect, expresses hope, expresses expectation to be able to reach the Pure Land in the future, to be beside the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Respecting them is good, but isn't all this within the realm of your consciousness [识, shí]? Now sound is resonating; whether reciting Buddha's name or something else, is the sound over there or over here on your side? If the sound is over there, can you not hear it here? If the sound is here? Then it has no connection with them! It just needs to arise here! One cannot say it arises over there, nor can one say it arises over here. But it is present! This is called "arising without arising" [无生之生, wú shēng zhī shēng], "having without having" [没有而有, méiyǒu ér yǒu]. This is explained using reasoning. Originally, reasoning is not needed! Right now, you are using your ears; ask your ears, it's just like this! "Arising without arising" is just like this; does it still need reasoning? Isn't that sound like "arising without arising"? Who gave rise to it? If you start thinking, you are not practicing Zazen. When sound resonates over there, there is sound resonating by the ear here. The person reciting over there, it's their luminosity moving; here, you hear it, it's your luminosity moving here, just like that. This is conveniently speaking of "your" luminosity and "their" luminosity; actually, it is the self-same, luminosity, the Treasury of Light, the movement of the Dharmadhātu [法界, fǎjiè] itself.

Original Text:

密在汝边

念佛号表示尊敬，表示希望，表示期望，将来能够到净土，到佛菩萨旁边。对他尊敬是好，但是，这个不都是你的“识”的境界吗？现在声音在响，念佛号还是念别的什么的，声音在那边呢还是在你这边？如果声音在那边，你这里听不到吗？如果声音是在这里呢？跟他们又不相干哪！你这里生起就好！也不能说那边也不能说这边生起。但是有啊！这个叫“无生之生”，“没有而有”。这是用道理讲的。本来不用道理嘛！你现在是用耳朵，你问耳朵，就是这样啊！“无生而生”就是这样，还讲道理吗？象那个声音不是“无生而生”吗？谁生了它？你去想就不是在打坐。那边响，就有声音在耳边响。那边念的人是他的光明在动，这边你听了是你的光明在这里动，就这样子。这是方便讲“你”的光明“他”的光明，其实是本身，光明，光明藏，法界本身的动。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Reciting Buddha's names (念佛号, niànfóhào): A common practice, especially in Pure Land Buddhism, involving chanting the name of a Buddha, typically Amitābha. The term nian (念) here primarily implies 'recitation' but also carries connotations of 'mindfulness'.

English Translation:

So someone asked the Sixth Patriarch¹, where is the utmost secret of the Buddhadharma, tell me. The most precious, most mystical essential point, please tell me, Sixth Patriarch. How did the Sixth Patriarch reply? Everyone knows. He said, "The secret is on your side" [密在你那边, mì zài nǐ biān]². The secret is on your side! Many people interpret this phrase simplistically. He said, "The secret, ah, the real secret is not here with me, nor in anyone else's hands; all secrets are there on your side." Understood? What's the use of this! It's like saying nothing. "The secret is on your side" – the Sixth Patriarch's meaning, the true meaning, do you know what it is? Everyone!

Original Text:

所以有人问六祖，佛法最秘密的在哪里，告诉我。最宝贵的，最神秘的要旨，请六祖告诉我。六祖怎么说，大家都知道。他说“密在你那边”。秘密在你那边！很多人都把这个话简单地解释过去了。他说“秘密啊，真正的秘密不在我这里，也不在别人手里，所有秘密都在你那边”。听懂了吗？这样有什么用啊！等于没有讲。“密在你那边”，六祖的意思，真义是什么意思知道吗？各位！

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Sixth Patriarch (六祖, Liùzǔ): Huineng (慧能, 638–713 CE), the influential Sixth Patriarch of Chan (Zen) Buddhism in China.
2. The secret is on your side (密在你那边, mì zài nǐ biān): A famous saying by Huineng, pointing towards the immediacy and intimacy of reality/truth within one's own experience.

English Translation:

Right now, are you hearing sounds, the sound of chanting sutras coming from afar? Who created this sound? Where was it created? Where is the factory? How are you able to hear? All unknown! Where does the power to hear emanate from? Unknown, yet you are hearing! So this is called the "unknown" [不知, bùzhī]; that is, the things that do not register in our consciousness, that we don't know, are the closest things to us, the most intimate – the "mì" [密] of intimacy [亲密, qīnmì], this is not the "mì" [秘] of secret [秘密, mìmì] – though of course, it is also secret. Actually, it means most intimate. It is most intimate with

151

you; that is your true reality [实相, shíxiàng]. Not knowing is most intimate, therefore "the secret/intimate [密, mì] is on your side." Hearing, seeing, feeling, knowing – how can you know? Which part of you did you move to be able to know? Even the Buddha doesn't know. Not knowing is closest, most true. Therefore, it is said, "The secret/intimate [密, mì] is on your side"; this is the meaning of the Sixth Patriarch.

Original Text:

现在是不是听到声音，远处传来念经的声音。这个声音谁造出来的？在什么地方造出来的？工厂在哪里？你怎么能会听呢？都不知道！能听的力量从哪里发出来的？不知道，但是在听啊！所以这个叫做“不知”的，也就是我们自己不知道不上我们意识的东西和我们最亲不过，最亲密——亲密的“密”，这个不是秘密的“秘”——当然也是秘密了。其实是最亲密的意思。跟

151

你最亲密，那是你的实相。不知最亲密，所以“密”在你那边。听，看，感觉，知道，怎么能知道？你动了哪个地方才能知道？佛也不知道。不知最亲，最真实。所以说，“密”在你那边，六祖的意思是这样。

English Translation:

When sitting cross-legged for a long time, there will be pain, soreness, numbness; where do this soreness and numbness arise from? Unknown [不知耶, bùzhī yē]. Unknown, yet there is soreness and numbness, it becomes unbearable. When you release your legs, it gets better; the pain is gone, the numbness is also gone. How was this "pain" removed, do you know? How did you remove this pain and numbness? You also don't know! "Not knowing" [不知, bùzhī] is closest, most intimate [密, mì]; it is our actual state. Every moment we are living truly [真实, zhēnshí], without a trace of falsehood [虚假, xūjiǎ], without a trace of illusion [幻, huàn]. It's that one thinks wrongly, that is the problem. Actually, we are all "true reality."

Original Text:

盘腿盘久了会痛会酸麻，这个酸麻从哪里生起？不知耶。不知，但是会酸会麻耶，会受不了。把腿放开了也就好了，痛没有了，麻也没有了。这个“痛”怎么除掉的你知道吗？你怎么把这个痛麻除掉？你也不知道！“不知”最亲，最密，是我们的实在的样子。我们每一刻都是真实的活着，没有一点虚假，没有一点幻。是自己想歪了，那才是问题。其实我们都是“真实”。

English Translation:

The Four Signs in the Diamond Sūtra

Okay, lastly, let's talk a bit about the Diamond Sūtra¹, which everyone is most familiar with. Friends from Kaohsiung might have heard this before, you can review it. The Diamond Sūtra says – a phrase everyone remembers, very important – what is it? "The sign of self [我相, wǒ xiàng], the sign of others [人相, rén xiàng], the sign of sentient beings [众生相, zhòngshēng xiàng], the sign of lifespan [寿者相, shòuzhě xiàng]." The Diamond Sūtra says these four signs are signs fabricated by our wrong thinking; they are our misperceptions, mistaken to an absurd degree. The Diamond Sūtra points out roughly four types of serious errors: One is that there is no "self" [我, wǒ], yet you insist on thinking there is a "self" – the "sign of self." Once you have the "sign of self," then naturally, what is not "self" is "you"! The "sign of others." Because the sign of self comes first! Then, what is not mine is the other party; the other party is the "sign of others." The "sign of self" and "sign of others" emerge. As for the "sign of sentient beings"? Many people say, 'I' is the "sign of self," 'you' is the "sign of others," and "sign of sentient beings" is 'they'. This is just one way of putting it, not ultimate. "Sign of self" can be called the subject; "sign of others"? The object. "Subject, object" [主、客, zhǔ, kè]; "perceiver, perceived" [能、所, néng, suǒ]². Do you understand? Once there is a "perceiver" [能, néng], there must be the subsequent "perceived" [所, suǒ]. Once there is a "subject," there is the relative "object." "Perceiver, perceived," "subject, object," "I, other" – these are all synonyms for "sign of self, sign of others," all meaning the same thing, subject and object.

Original Text:

《金刚经》里的四相

好，最后讲一点，大家最熟悉的《金刚经》。高雄来的朋友也许听过，你复习一下。《金刚经》说，大家记得的一句话，很重要，是什么，“我相，人相，众生相，寿者相”。《金刚经》说这四个相是我们想错出来的相，是我们的错觉的样子，错的太离谱了。《金刚经》里头提出来，严重的错误的样子大概有四种：一个是没有“我”，你偏偏要认为有“我”，“我相”。有了“我相”之后呢，自然不是“我”就是“你”了嘛！“人相”。因为先有我相啊！那，不是我的，就是对方，对方是“人相”。“我相”“人相”出来了。“众生相”呢？很多人说，I是“我相”，you是“人相”，“众生相”是they。这只是一种说法了，不究竟。“我相”可以说是主subject，“人相”呢？object 客。“主、客”，“能、所”。知道吗？有了“能”，一定有下面的“所”。有了“主”，就有相对的“客”。“能、所”，“主、客”，“我、人”，这都是“我相、人相”的代号了，都是一样的意思，subject and object。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Diamond Sūtra (《金刚经》, Jīngāng Jīng): The Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, a highly influential Mahāyāna text emphasizing emptiness and non-attachment.
2. Perceiver/Perceived, Subject/Object (能/所, néng/suǒ; 主/客, zhǔ/kè): Fundamental dualistic categories in perception and cognition that Mahāyāna philosophy deconstructs. 能 (néng) refers to the subjective capacity (e.g., seeing, hearing, knowing), while 所 (suǒ) refers to the object of that capacity (what is seen, heard, known). 主 (zhǔ) is the subject, and 客 (kè) is the object.

English Translation:

Then what is the "sign of sentient beings"? For example, I clap here, "Pa!" (Teacher claps hands forcefully). Is there a sound, everyone? There is. It resonates in everyone's ears, the sound of me clapping my hands. Let me ask you all, the sound itself, this sound – sound, or the voice I produced, either works. Does this itself contain "perceiver and perceived" [能所, néng suǒ]? The sound you hear, does this sound have "perceiver" and "perceived" within it? The sound you hear, moreover, it's only called sound because it is heard by you, isn't that right? Just the ability to hear cannot be called sound, right? Sound without a "perceived" [所, suǒ] – how could there be such a sound! However, just the sound that is heard by you, the "perceived," having the "perceived," if you don't have the "perceiver" [能, néng] that can hear, how did you hear it? Therefore, sound itself is originally just sound, without the division of "perceiver/perceived," correct! How can there be a division of "perceiver/perceived"? Where is it divided? Where does it mix? Sound itself cannot be divided into "perceiver/perceived," right? Am I deceiving you? You tell me, in the sound you hear, where do "your ability to hear" and "my sound that is heard by you" meet, where do they converge, where do they mix? Can they be distinguished? But merely being able to hear doesn't constitute sound, and merely being the perceived sound – what did you hear then? There is no perceiver and perceived [无能所, wú néng suǒ]. But sound is just like this: oh, wu, ai, ah, yi... so distinct, yet this sound itself has no perceiver/perceived. This you can prove by yourself. This is a perfectly clear matter! Sound has no perceiver/perceived; that which has no perceiver/perceived does not belong to the sign of self or the sign of others! So, what do we call it? This is precisely called the "sign of sentient beings." Sound is thus; are visual appearances [色相, sèxiàng] also thus? The appearance [相, xiàng] you see, does the appearance itself contain "your ability to see" and "what is seen by you"? Mixed where?

152

Appearance is just appearance. It cannot be divided into where the "perceiver" [能, néng] that can see and the "appearance" [相, xiàng] that is seen by you converge to become an appearance. Is there such a thing? No. Perceiver/perceived cannot be divided; perceiver-seeing and perceived-seen cannot be divided, just like perceiver-hearing and perceived-heard cannot be divided. Therefore, appearance is just appearance, without perceiver/perceived, thus called the sign of sentient beings. Not the sign of self, not the sign of others, therefore called the sign of sentient beings. So sound is also the sign of sentient beings, visual appearance is also the sign of sentient beings. Pain, numbness are also signs of sentient beings; comfort, that 'feeling' [觉, jué] is also the sign of sentient beings. "Knowing," what do you know? You talk about knowing this, that, the content of what is known. The knower and what is known by you do not meet; what do you know then? Therefore, even "knowing" [知, zhī] is without perceiver/perceived. Form, sound, smell, taste, touch, mental objects [色声香味触法, sè shēng xiāng wèi chù fǎ] – form is form, sound is sound, smell is smell, taste is taste. Form, sound, smell, taste, touch, mental objects are all different! However, each of these different things – form, sound, smell, taste, touch, mental objects – lacks perceiver/perceived; perceiver/perceived cannot be found. But there are so many "sentient beings" [众生, zhòngshēng], many kinds – form, sound, smell, taste, touch, mental objects, each different – the sign of sentient beings.

Original Text:

那么“众生相”是什么？比方说，我这里“啪”（师用力击掌），有没有声音，各位？有了。在各位耳边都响起来，有一个我拍手的声音。我请问各位，声音本身，这个声音哪，sound也可以，我发出的voice也可以。这个上头有没有“能所”？你听到的声音，这个声音上有没有“能”跟“所”在里面？你听到的声音哪，而且是被你听到的声音，才叫做声音是不是？只是你能听的不能称其为声吧，没有“所”的声，哪有这样的声音！但是，光是被你听到的声音，“所”，有了“所”，你没有能听的“能”，你怎么听到的。所以声音本身呢，本来就是声音而已，没有“能、所”之分对不对！哪有“能、所”之分，在哪里分呀？在哪里mix？声音本身没有办法分“能、所”，对不对，我有没有骗你？你告诉我，你听到的声音里有“你能听的”跟“被你听到的”我的声音在哪里碰头，在哪里交汇，在哪里混合，分得出来吗？可是光是能听不成其声，光是所听那你听到了什么？没有能所。但声音就是这样哦、呜、哎、啊、咿……那么明显，这声音上头没有能所。这个you can prove by yourself。这是很明历历的事嘛！声音是没有能所的，没有能所的是不属于我相人相哦！那么，我们把它叫做什么？这个才叫做“众生相”。声音如是，色相是不是？你看到的相，相上有没有“你能看到的”跟“被你看到的”？混在什么地

152

方？相就是相。没有办法分成你能看的“能”跟被你看到的“相”在哪里交汇，才变成一个相。有没有？没有。不能分能所，能看所看不能分，跟能听所听不能分一样。所以呢，相就是相，没有能所，所以叫众生相。不是我相，不是人相，所以叫众生相。所以声音也是众生相，色相也是众生相。痛啊、麻啊也是众生相，舒服啊那个“觉”也是众生相。“知道啊”，你知道什么？你说知道这个、那个，知道的那个内容。能知的跟被你所知的两个没有碰在一起，你知道什么东西呀？所以连“知”也是没有能所。色声香味触法，色是色，声是声音，香味是香，味道是味。色声香味触法各个不同哎！但是，不同的这些色声香味触法各个没有能所，找不出能所。但是有那么多“众生”，很多啊，色、声、香、味、触、法，各个不同——众生相。

English Translation:

Alright, what does he talk about last? The sign of lifespan [寿者相, shòuzhě xiàng]. Oh dear, we practice and practice and practice; sound has no perceiver/perceived, visual appearance has no perceiver/perceived; we mistakenly think there is a 'self' [我, wǒ] that sees this visual appearance – ah, that is the fundamental error! But strangely, form is form, sound is sound, touch is touch, thought is thought; although there is no perceiver/perceived, each exists independently – hence, the sign of sentient beings. Right? Okay, then one thinks that visual appearance has the fundamental essence [本体, běntǐ] of visual appearance, there is an essence [体, tǐ] that manifests this visual appearance. We always think it comes from some... it must have a point of origin [出生点, chūshēng diǎn], a manufacturing plant, a factory that produced it; there must be an origin point, a point of arising. Understand? We are only satisfied if there is a point of origin. This delusion, this illusory thought [妄想, wàngxiǎng] that "there must be a point of origin," that things must arise from this thing – what is this called? The sign of lifespan! This thing is difficult to deal with. You know that form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects are all without perceiver/perceived, yet each seems truly existent. Reaching this point, for practitioners,莫名其妙的念头 [mòmíngqímiào de niàntou - inexplicable thoughts] gradually become fewer, fainter. However, one still clings here, attached to the idea that every existing thing truly exists, has its point of origin, its point of arising – this is clinging to dharmas [法执, fǎzhí]! The so-called view of Buddha [佛见, fójiàn] and view of Dharma [法见, fǎjiàn] are both this sign of lifespan. How is this sign of lifespan severed? Relying on your clever big brain, the brains of ten million Einsteins cannot sever it. It cannot be thought through. What method can sever it? Please rely on your two legs, your waist, and your buttocks on the cushion; sit down firmly and stably. Don't show off your cleverness, show off your thinking, show off your emotions – emotions are even more out of the question! Only then can you know, ah, so this sign of lifespan is actually illusory [假, jiǎ]! Must there be a point of origin? Must all arisen things have an essence?

Original Text:

好了，最后他讲什么？寿者相。嗨呀，我们这修修修的，声音没有能所，色相没有能所，我们误会有个我去看到这个色相，啊，那是根本的错误！但是奇怪，色是色啊，声音是声音啊，触觉是触觉啊，思想是思想啊，虽然没有能所，各个独立存在，所以众生相。对不对？好了，于是认为色相有色相的本体，有一个体，现出这个色相。我们总是认为它是从某一个…它一定有出生点、制造厂、工厂制造出来的，一定要有个原点、出生点。知道吗？一定要有出生点我们才心服。这个“一定要有个出生点”，一定由这个东西里生出来的迷知、妄想，这个叫什么？寿者相！这个东西不好处理。你知道色声香味触法都是没有能所的，但是它各个都好象真的有。到了这个时候，那修道的人，你慢慢能清楚到了这里，有的人莫名其妙的念头，越来越少、越来越淡。但是呢，还挂在这里，执著每一样存在都是真的存在，有它的来点，有它的出生点——这就是法执！所谓佛见、法见都是这个寿者相。这个寿者相怎么断？凭你聪明的大头脑，一千万个爱因斯坦的头脑都断不了。想不通的。什么方法能断？请你的两只腿跟你的腰部、臀部靠坐垫，好好稳稳地坐--下--去。不要去卖弄你的聪明，卖弄你的思想，卖弄你的感情，那感情更不用说了！这样你才能知道，原来这个寿者相都是假的啊！一定要一个出生点吗？所有生出来的东西一定要有体吗？

English Translation:

So Chan patriarchs often tell you to investigate [参, cān], investigate what? "Before father and mother were born" [父母未生前, fùmǔ wèi shēng qián]. We all think we were born from our father and mother; without father and mother, there would be no me; ordinary people all say this. Then he asks, since you believe that without father and mother, I wouldn't exist, I wouldn't be here – generally it's like this, this is correct. Alright, before your father and mother were born, before they were conceived, before father was born, before mother was born, at that time, where were you? Where were you! How can you think about this, how can you approach this question? No matter how you think, you can't figure it out. But strangely, where did you come from then? Clearly, it's due to the relationship between father and mother that I exist! So where was I hiding before father and mother were born? Search to the ends of the earth, "search high in the azure heavens and deep into the yellow springs"¹, search everywhere, can't find it. The Chan patriarch's question, what is the answer? Do you know? Ask your "just sitting" [只管打坐, zhǐguǎn dǎzuò]. The four signs of the Diamond Sūtra are so clear, yet look at the many explanations of the four signs – sigh, piles of literary works, but not a single piece written through the effort of the buttocks [屁股用功, pìgu yònggōng - i.e., through actual meditation practice]. Sigh, what a headache!

Original Text:

所以禅宗祖师常常叫你参，参什么？“父母未生前”。我们都认为是爸爸妈妈生我的，没有爸爸妈妈就没有我，一般的人都这样讲。那他就问，既然你认为爸爸妈妈没有的话，我就不存在，我就没有，一般都是这样，这样正确啊。好了，你爸爸妈妈还没有出生，还没有投胎以前，爸爸还没有出生，妈妈还没有出生，这个时候，你在哪里？你在哪里！怎么想，你怎么去想这个问题？怎么想也想不通的。但是奇怪，那你从哪里来？明明是爸爸妈妈的关系我才有啊！那爸爸妈妈还没出生以前我躲在哪里呀？天涯海角去找，“上穷碧落下黄泉”，到处找，找不到。禅宗祖师爷的问题，答案是什么？知道吗？问你的“只管打坐”。《金刚经》的四相那么清楚，你看看很多解说四相的，唉，文学作品一大堆，但看不到一篇屁股用功出来的作品。唉，头好大！

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. "Search high in the azure heavens and deep into the yellow springs" (上穷碧落下黄泉, shàng qióng bìluò xià huángquán): A line from Bai Juyi's poem "Song of Everlasting Regret," meaning to search everywhere imaginable.

English Translation:

Who is Sitting in Meditation?

153

Everyone studying Buddhism, ah, really likes to study the magical, the novel, the very special; they really like studying these things. Very, very few people like to investigate this "luminosity" [光明, guāngmíng]. Luminosity is your fundamental essence [本体, běntǐ], your true reality [实相, shíxiàng]; very few people pay attention to this. Luminosity is moving constantly, everywhere; it's all your own luminosity moving. Instead of investigating this, they investigate the magical, the strange and bizarre, the very complex, the very special. Things others can't do, I can do – oh my, Kālacakra¹, oh, initiation², oh, inserting grass³, oh, visualization⁴ – what is this called? "Coveting the moon in the sky, losing the pearl in hand" [贪看天上月，失却手中珠]⁵. One day someone flared up during a meal; when someone mentioned this, he said, "The moon in the sky is illusory [假, jiǎ], the pearl in hand is also illusory, both are non-existent." Look, using the brain to read Master Hongzhi's⁶ poem, without sitting cross-legged, just using the brain. Master Hongzhi was compassionate, using this analogy to explain. Your own self is moving right there, you yourself are luminosity; he used this analogy to explain, yet this person started elaborating, "The moon doesn't truly exist, the pearl in hand also doesn't truly exist." Well, are you speaking truly or falsely right now? Sigh, people who like using their brains specialize in finding this sort of thing...

Original Text:

谁在打坐

153

大家学佛啊，很喜欢学神奇的、新奇的、很特殊的，很喜欢学这些，很少很少人喜欢去参这个“光明”。光明是你的本体、你的实相，很少人去理会这个。光明时时处处在动，都是你本身的光明在动。不去参这个，去参那个神奇的、奇奇怪怪的、很复杂的、很特殊的。人家不会的我会的，荷呦，时轮金刚呦，灌顶喔，插草喔，观想喔，这个叫做什么？“贪看天上月，失却手中珠”。有一天有人发飙，吃饭的时候，有人讲到这个，他就说，“天上月是假，手中珠也是假，两个都是不存在。”你看，用头脑去读宏智禅师的诗偈，不盘腿，光是用头脑。宏智禅师是慈悲啊，是用这个比方讲的。你自己本身在那里动，你自己就是光明，用这个比方讲的，他还做文章起来了“月亮不是真的有，手中珠也不是真的有。”那你现在讲的是真讲还是假讲。唉，喜欢用头脑的人就是专门找这个……

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Kālacakra (时轮金刚, Shílún Jīngāng): A complex tantric system in Tibetan Buddhism.
2. Initiation (灌顶, guàndǐng): Abhiṣeka, empowerment ceremony in Vajrayāna Buddhism.
3. Inserting grass (插草, chācǎo): Likely refers to practices associated with Phowa (consciousness transference).
4. Visualization (观想, guānxiǎng): Meditative practice involving visualizing deities, mandalas, etc.
5. "Coveting the moon in the sky, losing the pearl in hand" (贪看天上月，失却手中珠): A metaphor used by Master Hongzhi Zhengjue, warning against seeking external goals while neglecting the inherent treasure within.
6. Master Hongzhi (宏智禅师, Hóngzhì Chánshī): Hongzhi Zhengjue (宏智正覺, 1091–1157), a prominent Caodong (Sōtō) Chan master known for his teachings on silent illumination (默照禅, mòzhào chán), closely related to Shikantaza (只管打坐).

English Translation:

Let me ask everyone, ultimately, who is sitting in meditation? Who? Can you find out? Who is sitting in meditation? Some people might say, the Diamond Sūtra says there is no sign of self, so they dare not say "I" am sitting in meditation. Therefore, they will definitely say, "There is no 'I' sitting in meditation." Along comes a "no I"! Before, there was an "I"; thinking about it, that's incorrect, so the answer is, "no I," there isn't such an "I" sitting in meditation. "I" is incorrect, and "no I" is also incorrect. Why? Having an 'I', not having an 'I' – 'having' and 'not having' are both your thoughts. By the same token, birth and death: having that which is born is called "birth"; not having that which is born is called "death." It amounts to "having birth" and "not having birth," which we call "birth" and "death." Isn't it still reasoning based on "having" and "not having"? So, ultimately, what thing is sitting in meditation? Cannot use "I." "I" is wrong, "no I" is also wrong, but meditation is happening! Then what entity is sitting in meditation? What thing is sitting in meditation? What to do? Some slightly more advanced Chan masters, like Zemu Xingdao¹, sometimes, for the sake of guiding, say "Sitting is sitting" [打坐在打坐, dǎzuò zài dǎzuò], speaking thus for convenience. Because he is someone who has crossed over [an experienced practitioner], whatever he says is correct. Or using English, "the universe is universing," the universe is sitting the universe, the universe is universing. Some people hearing this will become even more confused.

Original Text:

我请问各位呀，到底谁在打坐？谁呀？查得出来吗？谁在打坐？有的人会说，《金刚经》说没有我相，所以不敢讲“我”在打坐，所以他一定会说“没有一个我在打坐”。来了一个“没有我”！前面是有个“我”，想想不对，那么回答，“没有我”，没有这样子一个“我”在打坐。“我”也不对，“没有我”也不对，为什么？有个我，没有个我，“有”跟“没有”都是你的想法。同样道理，生和死，有一个生的叫做“生”，没有那个生的就叫“死”。等于是“有生”跟“没有生”，我们叫“生”跟“死”。还不是一样和“有”跟“没有”上头讲道理？那么，到底什么东西在打坐？不能用“我”。“我”也不对，“没有我”也不对，但是在打坐啊！那何物在打坐？什么东西在打坐？怎么办？有些高明一点的禅师，象择木兴道，他有的时候是为了开导说“打坐在打坐”，为了方便才这样讲。因为他是过来人，他怎么讲都对。或者用英文讲the universe is universing ，宇宙在坐宇宙，宇宙在宇宙。有的人听了会更莫名其妙。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Zemu Xingdao (择木兴道): This name doesn't correspond to a widely known historical Chan master. It might be a less famous figure, a contemporary teacher, or perhaps a misremembered name or pseudonym. The point is about how experienced teachers might use seemingly tautological or unconventional phrases.

English Translation:

Everyone, listen while applying effort [in your practice]. If you don't want to listen, just let it flow from the left ear out the right ear, don't grasp onto it! I am not giving a Buddhist studies lecture. Just listen, and if it's somewhat useful, you yourself will know. That sound, the sound of cars honking outside, and the Buddhist principles, the so-called Buddhist theory I am explaining now, are of eq-ual val-ue. There's no distinction between high and low! It's not that only what I'm saying now is Buddhadharma, and that honking outside is not Buddhadharma; this sound of the air conditioner is also currently speaking the Dharma. How can it be that only someone wearing robes, appearing majestic, ascending a platform, a throne, and then proclaiming "All conditioned things are impermanent" [诸行无常, zhū xíng wúcháng] is the Buddhadharma? Sigh, you'll never find it, forever confused, completely misunderstanding the Buddha's truly precious Buddhadharma.

Original Text:

各位一边听一边用功，如果不想听，从左边耳朵到右边耳朵溜过去就是了，不要抓住喽！我不是上佛学课。听了就算了，有点用处你自己知道。那个声音，外面那个叫的汽车声，跟我现在讲佛法，所谓的佛学的道理，等-同-价-值。没有分高低啊！不是我现在讲的才是佛法，外面那个叫的不是佛法，冷气机的这个声音也正在说法。哪有象穿袈裟、威严、上台、宝座，然后讲“诸行无常”这才是佛法。唉，永远也找不到，永远莫名其妙，把佛的真正宝贵的佛法都误解掉了。

English Translation:

Everyone knows Master Yaoshan¹, the great disciple of Master Shitou². Someone asked him about the essentials of Zazen, how to sit correctly. Yaoshan simply and concisely said... how did he explain how to sit? Master Yaoshan didn't teach you, oh, inhale once, exhale once; inhale, recite 'Ami'; exhale, recite 'tabha'³. Inhale, 'Ami'; exhale, 'tabha'; then slowly circulate through the Ren and Du meridians⁴... He would never teach you this kind of circus trick. He only told the student, how did he put it? "Think non-thinking" [思量箇不思量底, sīliàng ge bù sīliàng dǐ]⁵. Hey, here comes the problem. Thinking [思量, sīliàng], means to think! Think about something; he tells us to think about the essential point during Zazen, "Think non-thinking"; think about that which does not think. Since it doesn't think, how do you tell me to think about "that which does not think"? Therefore, people don't understand. Ordinary people would find it very contradictory; what's

154

this Master Yaoshan up to? Utterly confusing. Yaoshan said, you don't understand? I'll tell you again, how to practice Zazen, how to apply effort – Non-thinking! [非思量, fēi sīliàng]⁶. Three characters, "Non-thinking."

Original Text:

大家知道，石头禅师的大弟子，药山大师。有人问他打坐的要领，怎么打坐才对呀？药山简单扼要的说…怎么打坐他怎么讲？药山禅师不是教你，哦，一呼一吸，一吸进去，念阿弥，吐气，念陀佛。吸进，阿弥，吐气，陀佛，那么任脉、督脉那样慢慢转，慢慢转……他才不会教你这种马戏团的戏法。他只告诉学生，怎么说？“思量个不思量的”。嘿，问题来了。思量，就是要想啊！想一个什么东西，他叫我们想打坐的时候的要领，“思量个不思量的”，想那个不想的。既然不想那你叫我怎么去想“那个不想的”呢？所以听不懂。一般的人会觉得很矛盾，你这

154

个药山禅师怎么搞的，一头雾水。药山说，你不懂啊？我再告诉你，怎么打坐，怎么用功——非思量！三个字，“非思量”。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Master Yaoshan (药山大师, Yàoshān Dàshī): Yaoshan Weiyan (藥山惟儼, 745–828), a prominent Chan master.
2. Master Shitou (石头禅师, Shítou Chánshī): Shitou Xiqian (石頭希遷, 700–790), another highly influential Chan master, teacher of Yaoshan.
3. 'Ami'...'tabha' (阿弥...陀佛, Āmí...tuófó): Shortened syllables of Amitābha Buddha's name, sometimes used in breathing/recitation practices, which the speaker dismisses as superficial.
4. Ren and Du meridians (任脉、督脉, Rènmài, Dūmài): Two major channels in traditional Chinese medicine and Daoist internal alchemy, sometimes incorporated into Qi Gong or meditation techniques aimed at circulating energy. The speaker contrasts Yaoshan's direct pointing with such methods.
5. Think non-thinking (思量箇不思量底, sīliàng ge bù sīliàng dǐ): Yaoshan's first instruction. It literally means "Think about the state/entity of non-thinking."
6. Non-thinking (非思量, fēi sīliàng): Yaoshan's second, clarifying instruction. It points beyond both thinking (思量) and its opposite (不思量, simple absence of thought or deliberate suppression of thought).

English Translation:

Non-thinking

Alright, those who like to spin around in the scriptures, who haven't encountered the true Dharma, who haven't tasted even a drop of that flavor, how do they immediately interpret this? Hey, it seems I introduced this in the afternoon, and also mentioned it this morning. The ear hears sounds; whatever sound resonates, the ear has that resonance. A dog barks, there's the sound of a dog barking; a car horn sounds, there's the sound of a car horn. All happens without going through your thinking [思量, sīliàng], without needing to deliberate [费思量, fèi sīliàng], doesn't require your thinking; that sound naturally arises. Big is big, small is small, high is high, low is low, effortlessly. Our six sense faculties [六根, liù gēn]¹ are all in this state of non-thinking [非思量, fēi sīliàng]; their function, their operation, is called moving in that non-thinking way. He has heard this principle, but he hasn't actually understood it through experience, nor does he practice Zazen often; he likes to practice Zazen with his brain, resting his buttocks on his brain – inverted [颠倒, diāndǎo]. Head placed on the cushion, buttocks facing upwards, practicing Zazen like that. I often laugh at them; many people studying Buddhadharma differ from the correct sitting posture taught by the Buddha! What the Buddha taught is to stably place the buttocks on the cushion. I see many people studying Buddhadharma who seem to place their heads on the cushion, with their buttocks sticking up towards the sky. This is called inverted delusion [颠倒妄想, diāndǎo wàngxiǎng]. Even the sitting is inverted delusion. Having heard that the movement of the six faculties requires no deliberation, that they move naturally like that, mind and environment as one [心境一如, xīnjìng yīrú] – sometimes it's explained this way – so they think non-thinking means, "Ah, originally, just ignore it; the six faculties all move like that, so just let it be like that. When practicing Zazen, just let the six faculties run loose [放任六根, fàngrèn liù gēn]." Oh! Practicing Zazen like this, letting the six faculties run loose! Alright, sitting down, they desperately strive, doing what? Letting the six faculties run loose. Hey, does it still require you to let the six faculties run loose! Who told you to let the six faculties run loose? Which one is called the eye faculty? Which one is called the ear faculty? Is there also one called the ear faculty, eye faculty, mind faculty? Do all these exist? Are these truly concrete entities with self-nature [自性, zìxìng]? Aren't you still just talking in terms of principles? (The six faculties) are just spoken of this way for convenience.

Original Text:

非思量

好了，喜欢在经典里转，没有接触到正法的，那一滴的味道都没有尝过的人马上怎么解释？哎，听过我好像下午介绍过，上午也说过。耳朵听声音，有什么声音响，耳朵就有那种响，狗叫就有狗叫声，汽车的喇叭声，就有汽车的喇叭声，都不要经过你的思量，不用费思量，就是不经过你的思量，自然就响起那种声音。大就大，小就小，高就高，低就低，毫不费力。我们的六根都在这种非思量的状态，它的function，它的作用叫做非思量的那样动。他听过这个道理，但他没有实际听懂，也不常常打坐，喜欢用头脑打坐，屁股垫在头脑上，颠倒。头放在坐垫上，屁股朝上那样打坐。我都笑他们，很多人学佛法，跟佛教导的那个正坐不同啊！佛教导的是稳稳地把屁股坐在坐垫上。我看很多人学佛法都是，头垫在坐垫上，屁股往上翘，上天。这叫颠倒妄想。连坐都颠倒妄想。听过六根的动，不要费一点思量，自然的那样子动，心境一如，有的时候这么讲，那么他们认为非思量就是，“唉呀，原来不管它，六根都是那样动，就那样好了，打坐的时候就是放任六根。反正眼睛、耳朵、鼻子、舌头、身子，还有意根都是在非思量的状态跟境界交换，心境一如的状态在动。”哦！这样打坐，六根放任！好了，坐上去，就拼命在努力，做什么？放任六根。哎，还要你去放任六根啊！谁叫你去放任六根？哪个叫眼根？哪个叫耳根？还有一个叫耳根、眼根、意根的，都有吗？这些都是真正的具体的有自性的吗？你这还不是在道理上讲吗？（六根）只是方便这样一讲而已。

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Six sense faculties (六根, liù gēn): Eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind faculties.

English Translation:

The mystery within the phrase [句中玄, jù zhōng xuán], or the meaning beyond the words [言外意, yán wài yì]. Without genuine, lineage-transmitted patriarchs and Chan masters [嫡代相传的祖师爷禅师们, dídài xiāngchuán de zǔshīyé chánshīmen] who have passed through this themselves, who provide guidance beside you constantly, you will surely misunderstand. Right away, it's "let the six faculties run loose, let the six faculties run loose"; "originally my six faculties move in a state of non-thinking, so I should just do that." This is called adding legs to a snake [多此一举, duō cǐ yī jǔ - superfluous]; it's just that your thinking is slightly more refined, that's all!

Original Text:

句中玄，或者言外意。没有经过真正的、透过这个的、嫡代相传的祖师爷禅师们交待过来、在旁边时常指导你，都会错掉。一上来就是放任六根、放任六根，本来我的六根都是非思量的状态动，所以我就应该这样做。就叫做多此一举，只是你的想法比较高明了一点而已！

English Translation:

What does Yaoshan mean here by non-thinking [非思量, fēi sīliàng]? He is not referring to letting go of your six faculties. Some people equate this teaching with the teaching of Mañjuśrī¹, considering them the same explanation. How does Mañjuśrī put it? Don't rely on body, don't rely on mind, don't rely on not relying either [不依身，不依心，不依也不依, bù yī shēn, bù yī xīn, bù yī yě bù yī]². There's a "don't rely" applied to body and mind, which is still incorrect; it's don't rely on not relying either. It seems very similar, so they practice like this. For beginners, this might be okay, starting out like this. But for someone who has heard, who has encountered a drop from Cao Creek [曹溪一滴, Cáoxī yī dī - the true Chan lineage]³, to still be stuck on this, alas, then you are utterly foolish! Mañjuśrī's meaning is not telling you not to rely, and then also not to rely on not relying – is there still a 'you' who doesn't rely on not relying?! Is that his meaning? When Master Yaoshan tells you "non-thinking," he is also not describing the state of your body and mind, that your existence, all your activities, physiological and psychological, are non-thinking; he is not explaining this matter. Why do people always like explanations? What's the point of liking to understand the reasoning? What difference does it make whether you understand or not? If you don't understand, you still know to eat when you're hungry, and you'll feel full after eating. Anyway, we just like to understand, like to know. If we don't know, it feels like something is missing. Unsatisfied if we don't know, must know. True reality [实相, shíxiàng] cannot be known by you, hey miss! Then you say, "True reality, I don't know!" Hey, knowing is incorrect, so is not knowing even more correct? Stop making jokes!

Original Text:

药山在这里讲非思量是什么意思呢？他指的不是你的六根放下。有些人就把这个教法跟文殊师利的教法，认为是相同的说法。文殊师利怎么讲？不依身，不依心，不依也不依。有个“不依”在身心上弄还不对，是不依也不依。好像很类似，就这样用功。初修的人还可以啦，刚开始这样进去。可是听过、接触到曹溪一滴的人还一直在这个上头，哎呀，那你就笨透了！文殊师利的意思不是叫你不依，连不依也不依，还有一个你不依的不依嘛！他是这样的意思吗？药山禅师跟你讲“非思量”，也不是描写你的身心的状态，你的存在、你的一切活动、生理的和心理的都是非思量，不是在解说这个事。怎么老是喜欢说明呢？喜欢理解它的道理是干嘛的。你理解跟不理解有什么关系呢？你不理解，肚子饿了也懂的吃，吃了就会饱。反正我们就喜欢去理解，喜欢知道。不知道就好像缺少了什么东西似的。不知道就不满意，一定要知道。实相不由得你知道哎小姐！那么你说实相我不知道！嘿，知道的不对，难道不知道的更对吗？不要闹笑话了！

155

Footnotes/Annotations:

1. Mañjuśrī (文殊师利, Wénshū shīlì): The Bodhisattva of wisdom.
2. Don't rely on body, don't rely on mind, don't rely on not relying either (不依身，不依心，不依也不依): A teaching attributed to Mañjuśrī emphasizing radical non-attachment, going beyond reliance on body, mind, or even the concept of non-reliance itself.
3. A drop from Cao Creek (曹溪一滴, Cáoxī yī dī): A metaphor for the authentic Chan transmission originating from the Sixth Patriarch Huineng, who resided at Cao Creek (Caoxi).

English Translation:

Actually, what Yaoshan calls non-thinking [非思量, fēi sīliàng], what Mañjuśrī calls don't rely on not relying either [不依也不依, bù yī yě bù yī], are not telling you to grasp onto this body and mind, telling you not to rely on body, not to rely on mind, nor to initiate the thought of not relying; that's not the meaning. Don't rely on not relying either, non-thinking – these all point entirely to your original aspect [本相, běnxiàng], your true reality [真相, zhēnxiàng]. You can call it native scenery [本地风光, běndì fēngguāng], fundamental nature [本性, běnxìng], Treasury of Light [光明藏, guāngmíng zàng], Samādhi [三昧, sānmèi], whatever you like. What else do you need to do! Eating, picking up a pair of chopsticks. When you pick up a pair of chopsticks, isn't non-thinking in action? You simply don't recognize your own true form is limitless, an existence utterly transcending time and space, infinite and boundless. Why always confine it within such a tiny scope, discussing non-thinking, or don't rely on not relying either? Who knows where the scriptures have been read to [i.e., how badly misinterpreted]. The entire scripture is you; the real you is the scripture, not the theories in the scripture over there for you to read, for you to understand. Śākyamuni Buddha's sūtra is your own actual state, true reality itself is the sūtra. Does it still need your master to ascend the stage and explain: Thus have I heard [如是我闻, rúshì wǒ wén]. Who heard! Zazen is just like this. Picking up a pair of chopsticks, you have already become Buddha; that is the state of becoming Buddha. So, sitting cross-legged, stably seated, isn't it the same as grabbing a pair of chopsticks! It's just that you add an extra illusory thought [妄想, wàngxiǎng], and you yourself ruin yourself. Inexplicably falling into the fetters of your own illusory thoughts.

Original Text:

其实药山讲的非思量，文殊师利讲的不依也不依，也不是叫你抓住你这个身心，叫你不依身，不依心，也不要起那个不要依念头，他不是这个意思。不依也不依，非思量，统统指的是你的本相、真相。你说它是本地风光、本性、光明藏、三昧都可以。还要你怎么做！吃饭，拿起一双筷子。当你拿起一双筷子的时候，不是非思量在动吗？根本不认得自己的真正的样子是无限的、一个非常超越时空的、无限无量的一个存在。怎么老是拘束在那么一个小小的范围里，讨论非思量啊，不依也不依呢？经典都不晓得读到哪里去了。整个经典就你，真正的你就是经典，不是经典的理论在那里，你去读它，你去了解它。释迦牟尼佛的sutra就是你自己本身实在的样子，真相本身就是sutra。还要你师父上台去解说：如是我闻。谁闻哪！打坐就是这个样子。拿起一双筷子，就已经成佛了，那个就是成佛的样子。那么，盘起腿稳稳的坐，还不是和抓起一双筷子一样！只是你多加了一个妄想，你就自己糟蹋了自己。莫名其妙的要掉进自己妄想的桎梏里头去了。

Brief Explanation of Key Concepts and Choices:

1. Core Theme: The talk emphasizes direct experience through Zazen (只管打坐, "just sitting") over intellectual understanding or striving after specific states or phenomena. It critiques common misinterpretations of Buddhist teachings, such as the nature of awareness during breathing meditation, how to handle thoughts, the meaning of the four signs in the Diamond Sūtra, and Yaoshan's instruction "non-thinking" (非思量).
2. Luminosity (光明, guāngmíng) and Treasury of Light (光明藏, guāngmíng zàng): These terms refer to the fundamental nature of mind or reality – the cognizant and empty nature of mind and all phenomena. The speaker stresses that thoughts are not separate entities to be manipulated but are natural functions of this luminosity.
   
   Thrangu Rinpoche said, "The word osalwa, often translated as luminous, is related to the word light in that it expresses some kind of brightness or clarity. However, the real meaning of this is not a light that is visible to the eye. Luminosity refers more to the capacity to know. This ability is present within us at any point in that we always can understand; we always have a readiness to perceive and cognize. So luminosity is the capacity to know. Hearing that mind is emptiness may lead us to believe that there is no mind. It sounds like we are a mindless piece of matter, which we are not. We are able to experience. Our natural cognizance is available at any moment. That is luminosity, which is not made out of anything whatsoever."
   
   "If we look for a perceiver, we won’t find one. We do think, but if we look into the thinker, trying to find that which thinks, we do not find it. Yet, at the same time, we do see and we do think. The reality is that seeing occurs without a seer and thinking without a thinker. This is just how it is; this is the nature of the mind. The Heart Sutra sums this up by saying that “form is emptiness,” because whatever we look at is, by nature, devoid of true existence. At the same time, emptiness is also form, because the form only occurs as emptiness. Emptiness is no other than form and form is no other than emptiness. This may appear to apply only to other things, but when applied to the mind, the perceiver, one can also see that the perceiver is emptiness and emptiness is also the perceiver. Mind is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than mind. This is not just a concept; it is our basic state.
   
   The reality of our mind may seem very deep and difficult to understand, but it may also be something very simple and easy because this mind is not somewhere else. It is not somebody else’s mind. It is your own mind. It is right here; therefore, it is something that you can know. When you look into it, you can see that not only is mind empty, it also knows; it is cognizant. All the Buddhist scriptures, their commentaries and the songs of realization by the great siddhas express this as the “indivisible unity of emptiness and cognizance,” or “undivided empty perceiving,” or “unity of empty cognizance.” No matter how it is described, this is how our basic nature really is. It is not our making. It is not the result of practice. It is simply the way it has always been."
3. Non-Thinking (非思量, fēi sīliàng): This key term from Yaoshan is presented not as a technique (like suppressing thought or merely observing the senses' natural function) but as a direct pointer to the fundamental nature itself, which is inherently beyond conceptual thought (思量) and its simple negation (不思量). It's the state accessed through Zazen, revealed in everyday actions like picking up chopsticks when done without added conceptual overlay.
4. The Four Signs (四相, sì xiàng): The speaker explains these (self, others, sentient beings, lifespan) not just as philosophical concepts but as deeply ingrained misperceptions rooted in the subject-object duality (能所, néng/suǒ). He particularly elaborates on 众生相 (sign of sentient beings) as referring to phenomena lacking inherent subject-object division, and 寿者相 (sign of lifespan) as the subtle clinging to the idea of an underlying essence or origin point for these phenomena (法执, fǎzhí). Severing this requires practice, not intellect.
5. The Secret/Intimate (密, mì): Huineng's phrase "密在汝边" (The secret is on your side) is interpreted not just as "secret" but crucially as "intimate" (亲密, qīnmì), pointing to the immediate, undeniable, yet ultimately inexplicable ("不知", bùzhī, not knowing) nature of direct experience (hearing, feeling pain, etc.) as the true reality (实相, shíxiàng).
6. Translation Choices: Adherence to the user's specific terminology list was prioritized (e.g., "sign" for 相 in the four signs, "non-thinking" for 非思量, "fundamental essence" for 本体, "disregard" for 不理). The translation aimed for literal fidelity while capturing the colloquial, didactic tone of a Dharma talk, including rhetorical questions and critiques. Footnotes were added to explain specific names, texts, and potentially obscure terms or concepts. The distinction between intellectual understanding and embodied practice ("using the buttocks") is a recurring motif reflected in the translation.