道元正法眼藏的一元思維(52) (英譯) 說心說性

《說心說性Talking of the Mind, Talking of the Nature》 永平道元禪師 (英譯)

神山僧密禪師與洞山悟本大師行次，悟本大師指旁院曰：“裡面有人說心說性。”僧密師伯曰：“是誰？”悟本大師曰：“被師伯問，直得去死十分。”僧密師伯曰：“說心說性底誰？”悟本大師曰：“死中得活。”

神山僧密禪師與洞山悟本大師行次，悟本大師指路旁院說：「裡面有『人』(有情識)，說心說性。」 僧密師伯問：「是誰？」 悟本大師說：「被師伯問，直得去死十分。」(道元認為：洞山這句是表達問話的當下就是心法一如，所以性全然因相顯而隱藏，但這不是有能所的二元性) 僧密師伯問：「說心說性底誰？」 悟本大師說：「死中得活。」(道元認為：洞山這句是說性因僧密師伯的問話，而又因其法相顯現，故是死中得活。)

(這公案道元認為：洞山這句『有人說心說性』就是說明佛道一元性的性相一如、心法一如。但很多不懂洞山法教的，都落入能所二元性的參究。道元不能認同大慧禪師所說的『二相不生時，是證契』，這種二元性的佛道認知，讓後輩以為性為澄湛寂靜，可以獨存，不知是性相一體、心法一如。而『說心說性』就是『有人(有情識)』緣起的法相。)

Once, when the Chan Master Shenshan Sengmi was traveling with the Great Master Dongshan Wuben, the Great Master Wuben pointed out a cloister beside [the road] and said, “Inside, there’s someone talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” Elder brother Sengmi said, “Who is it?” The Great Master Wuben said, “Questioned once by my elder brother, and he’s immediately doomed.” Elder brother Sengmi said, “Who is it that’s talking of the mind and talking of the nature?” The Great Master Wuben said, “In death, he lives.”

說心說性者，佛道之根本也，由此而令佛祖現成也。若不說心說性，則無轉妙法輪，無發心修行，無“大地有情同時現成”，無“一切眾生無佛性。”拈花瞬目者，說心說性也；破顏微笑者，說心說性也；禮拜依位而立者，說心說性也；祖師入梁者，說心說性也：夜半傳衣者，說心說性也；拈拄杖者，說心說性也；橫拂子者，是說心說性也。

『說心說性』，是佛道的根本，由此而令佛祖現成。若不說心說性，則無轉妙法輪，無發心修行，無『大地有情同時現成』，無『一切眾生無佛性』。拈花瞬目，是說心說性；破顏微笑，是說心說性；禮拜依位而立，是說心說性；祖師入梁朝，說心說性：夜半傳衣，說心說性；拈拄杖的，說心說性；橫拂子的，是說心說性。

“Talking of the mind and talking of the nature” is the great origin of the way of the buddha; from it are caused to appear buddha after buddha and ancestor after ancestor. Without “talking of the mind and talking of the nature,” there would be no turning the wheel of the wondrous dharma; there would be no production of the thought and cultivation of the practice; there would be no “the great earth and sentient beings simultaneously achieved the way”; there would be no “all living beings lack buddha nature.” “Holding up a flower and blinking” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature”; “breaking into a smile” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature”; “making a bow and standing there” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature”; “the ancestral master entering the Liang” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature”; “transmitting the robe in the middle of the night” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” “Taking up the staff” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature”; “laying down the whisk” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.”

蓋佛佛祖祖之所有功德，悉是說心說性也。有平常心之說心說性，有牆壁瓦礫之說心說性。謂心生種種法生之道理現成，心滅種種法滅之道理現成，全是心說之時節，性說之時節也。然則，不通心、不達性之庸俗之流，昧而不知說心說性，不知談玄說妙，謂其非佛祖之道，教其不可有。以不知說心說性之為說心說性，而謂說心說性為說性說性也，誠由不批判大道之通塞之故也。

蓋佛佛祖祖的所有功德，悉是說心說性。有平常心(正報身心)的說心說性，有牆壁瓦礫(依報萬法)的說心說性。所謂心生種種法生的道理現成，心滅種種法滅的道理現成，全是心(有情識)說的時節，性(真如法)說的時節。然而，不通心、不達性的庸俗之流，昧而不知說心說性，不知談玄說妙，說其非佛祖的法教，教修行人不可有。以不知說心說性是為心性一元性的言說功德，而稱說心說性為落入二元性言說心性，誠由不知批判大道的通塞之故。

In sum, every virtue of buddha after buddha and ancestor after ancestor is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” There is the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” of “the ordinary”; there is the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” of “fences, walls, tiles, and pebbles.” The realization of the principle, “when the mind arises, the various dharmas arise,” and the realization of the principle, “when the mind ceases, the various dharmas cease,” are in either case occasions of “talking of the mind,” occasions of “talking of the nature.” Yet, mediocre types, who have not penetrated the mind, who have not reached the nature, without knowing “talking of the mind and talking of the nature,” without knowing “discussing the dark, discussing the subtle,” say that these must not be the words of the buddhas and ancestors, teach that they should not exist. Because they do not know “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” as “talking of the mind and talking of the nature,” they think of “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” as “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” This is particularly because they have not been critical of the passage and obstructions of the great way.

後來，有徑山大慧禪師宗杲者，曰：“而今之徒，以其好說心說性，好談玄說妙，故得道者遲。但將心性二者拋卻，玄妙俱忘，二相不生時，是證契也。”此道取，未知佛祖之縑緗也，未聞佛祖之列辟也。依此，但知心為慮知念覺，而不學慮知念覺亦是心，故如是言也。只妄計性為澄湛寂靜，而不知佛性、法性之有無，於如是性，又夢也未見，故如是僻見佛法也。佛祖道取之“心”者，皮肉骨髓也；佛祖保任之“性”者，竹篦拄杖也；佛祖證契之“玄”者，露柱燈籠也；佛祖舉拈之“妙”者，知見會解也。

後來，有徑山大慧禪師宗杲，說：「而今之徒，以其好說心說性，好談玄說妙，故得道者遲。但將心性二者拋卻，玄妙俱忘，二相不生時，是證契。」 這種說法，是未知佛祖的經典，未聞佛祖的慧命。依此，但知心為二元的慮知念覺，而不學慮知念覺亦是識心的轉識，故如是說(即是說：一元性無分別的緣起七八識是心，經三能變落入二元性分別的五六識也是心)。只妄計性為澄湛寂靜，而不知佛性、法性的有無，於如是性，又夢也未見，所以如是邪見佛法。佛祖說明的『心』，是皮肉骨髓的萬法；佛祖保任的『性』，是竹篦拄杖(指真如法)的公案現成；佛祖證契的『玄』，是露柱燈籠說法；佛祖舉拈的『妙』，是知見會解。

Of late, there was a certain Zonggao, the Chan Master Dahui of Jingshan, who said, People today, because they like “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” or “discussing the dark and discussing the subtle,” are slow to attain the way. When, you have thrown away both “mind” and “nature” and forgotten both “dark” and “subtle,” so that the two do not arise, you will verify and accord. This saying does not know the pale yellow silk (means: sutras) of the buddhas and ancestors, has not heard of the monarchal line of the buddhas and ancestors. Consequently, he says this because he knows that the mind is merely consideration, knowledge, thought, and perception, and does not learn that consideration, knowledge, thought, and perception are also the mind. Mistakenly figuring only that the nature is pure, deep, quiescent, and still, he does not know about the existence or non-existence of the buddha nature or dharma nature. Because he has never seen “such a nature” even in his dreams, he has this biased view of the buddha dharma. The “mind” spoken of by the buddhas and ancestors is “skin, flesh, bones, and marrow”; the “nature” maintained by the buddhas and ancestors is “the bamboo truncheon and staff.” The “dark” that the buddhas and ancestors verify and accord with is “columns and lanterns”; the “subtle” that the buddhas and ancestors take up is “knowledge and understanding.”

佛祖之真實為佛祖者，自始即聽取、說取、行取、證取此心性也，保任取、參究取此玄妙也。如此之謂學佛祖之兒孫。不如此，則非學道。所以，得道（時），而不得道；不得道時，則得道。得（道）與不（得道）之時節，俱搓過也。設令如汝所道，心性二而俱亡者，則是令心有說分也，百千萬億分之少分也。謂玄妙共拋，則是令談玄有談分也。不學此關捩子，愚言亡之，則以為能離手、脫身，此尚未解脫小乘之局量也，如何到達大乘之玄奧？況乎究知向上之關捩子哉？難稱久吃佛祖之茶飯者！參師勤恪者，但將說心說性於身心之正當恁麽時體究也，於身前身後參究也，更無二三之異事。

佛祖的真實為佛祖(即性相一如的公案現成)，自始即聽取、說取、行取、證取此心性，保任取、參究取此玄妙。如此才說是學佛祖的兒孫。不如此，則非學道。所以，『得道』公案現成一元性時，則不落入二元慮知分別的言說；『不得道』(不落入言說)時，則是一元性得道。得道與不得道的時節，都是緣起法的公案現成。設令如你所說的，心性二而俱亡的，則是令心有能說分的，也只是百千萬億分的少分(即是說：心性二相俱亡當下的澄湛寂靜相，只是百千萬億緣起法的少分)。所謂『玄妙共拋』，則是令談玄有能談分。不學此關捩子，愚言以為無心性，則能離手、脫身，此尚未解脫能所二元性小乘的局量，如何到達一元性大乘的玄奧？況乎究知向上(佛性真如法)的關捩子呢？難稱是久吃佛祖的茶飯者！參師勤恪的，但將說心說性於身心的正當恁麽時體究，於身前身後(法的過、未)參究，只有一元性全然的性相一如，更無(身前身後)的異事。

The buddhas and ancestors who are truly buddhas and ancestors, from the beginning, hear this “mind and nature,” teach it, practice it, and verify it. They maintain this “dark and subtle,” and they study it. Those who are like this are called the children and grandchildren studying the buddhas and ancestors. Those who are not like this are not students of the way. Therefore, [Dahui’s] “attaining the way” does not attain the way; when it does not attain the way, it is not that it does not attain the way. It misses the occasions of both attaining and not [attaining]. While, to say, as you say, “forget both mind and nature,” may be a part expressing the talking of the mind, it is a small part, a hundredth, a thousandth, ten thousandth, a hundred millionth part. To say, “discard both dark and subtle,” is a part forming the discussion of discussing of the dark. Not having studied this pivot, if you stupidly say, “forgetting,” you think [it is] leaving the hand, you know it as escaping the body. You are not yet liberated from the confines of the Small Vehicle; how could you reach the innermost darkness of the Great Vehicle, let alone know “the higher pivot”? It is difficult to say that you have tasted the tea and rice of the buddhas and ancestors. To study with a teacher and be diligent in your work is just to investigate physically “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” at the very moment of body and mind, to investigate it before the body and after the body. There are not two or three other ways.

爾時，初祖謂二祖曰：“汝但外息諸緣，內心無喘，心如牆壁，可以入道。”二祖種種說心說性，俱不證契。一日忽然省得，果白初祖曰：“弟子此回始息諸緣也。”初祖知其已悟，更不窮詰，只曰：“莫成斷滅否？”二祖曰：“無。”初祖曰：“子作麼生？”二祖曰：“了了常知，故言之不可及。” 初祖曰：“此乃從上諸佛諸祖所傳心體，汝今既得，善自護持。”

爾時，初祖告訴二祖說：「汝但外息諸緣，內心無喘，心如牆壁，可以入道。」 二祖種種說心說性，俱不證契。一日忽然省得，果白初祖說：「弟子此回始息諸緣。」初祖知其已悟，更不窮詰，只說：「莫成斷滅否？」 二祖說：「無。」 初祖說：「子怎麼生？」 二祖說：「了了常知，故言之不可及。」 初祖說：「此乃從上諸佛諸祖所傳心體，汝今既得，善自護持。」

At that time, the First Ancestor said to the Second Ancestor, “Externally, put a stop to conditions; internally, the mind will be without panting. With the mind like fences and walls, you will enter the way.” The Second Ancestor talked of the mind and talked of the nature, but did not verify and accord [with them]. One day, he suddenly understood. Subsequently, he addressed the First Ancestor, saying, “Your disciple has this time finally put a stop to conditions.” The first ancestor recognized that he had awakened and did not further press him, saying only, “Haven’t you achieved severance and extinction?” The Second Ancestor said, “No.” The First Ancestor said, “How is the ‘master’?” The Second Ancestor said, “Clear, clear, always knowing; therefore words can’t reach it.” The First Ancestor said, “This is the substance of the mind transmitted down from the buddhas and ancestors. Now you’ve got it; protect it well.”

（於）此因緣，有疑著者，亦有拈舉者。二祖參侍初祖因緣中之一因緣者，乃如此也。二祖頻說心說性，而初為相契；漸積功累德，終得初祖之道。庸愚之徒以為：二祖始說心說性時，未證契，其過在說心說性；後拋捨說心說性而得證契。以其未參徹“心如牆壁，可以入道”之語，故如是言之。此尤昧於學道，不得分明也。

於此公案因緣，有疑著的，亦有拈舉的。二祖參侍初祖因緣中的一因緣，乃是如此。二祖頻仍說心說性，而初為了相契；漸積功累德，終得初祖的法教。庸愚的徒輩以為：二祖始說心說性時，未證契，其過在說心說性；後拋捨說心說性而得證契。以其未參徹『心如牆壁(即心識不落入二元分別的一元性時)，可以入道』的法教，故如是說。此尤其會昧於學道，不得分明此事。

There are those who doubt this episode, those who take it up. One episode among the episodes of the Second Ancestor’s service under the First Ancestor is like this. When the Second Ancestor was persistently talking of the mind and talking of the nature, at first he didn’t accord with it. Finally, piling up merit and accumulating virtue, he attained the way of the words of the First Ancestor. The mediocre fools think that, [if] the Second Ancestor failed to verify and accord when he was first talking of the mind and talking of the nature, the fault lay in his talking of the mind and talking of the nature; subsequently, having discarded talking of the mind and talking of the nature, he verified and accorded. They say this because they have not penetrated the words, “when the mind is like fences and walls, you will enter the way.” This is particularly ignorant of distinctions in studying the way.

所以者何？自發菩提心，趣于佛道修行之後，懇行難行時，雖行之，而百行則無一當。然則，或從知識，或從經卷，漸得承當。而今之一當，乃是往昔百不當之力量也，百不當之一老也。聞教、修道、得證，悉皆如是。昨日之說心說性縱令百不當，而昨日之說心說性之百不當則忽為今日之一當也。行佛道之初心時，無有以修煉未熟、不通達（佛道），即捨棄佛道，經別道而得佛道者。于佛道修行，始終不得通達之徒，則難以明究此通塞之道理。

為何如此呢？自發菩提心，趣於佛道修行之後，懇行難行時，雖行之，而百行則無一當。然而，或從善知識，或從經卷，漸得承當。而今的一當，乃是往昔百不當的力量，是百不當的一老成。聞教、修道、得證，悉皆如是。昨日的說心說性縱令百不當，而昨日的說心說性的百不當則忽為今日的一當。行佛道的初心時，無有以修煉未熟、不通達佛道，即捨棄佛道，經別道而得佛道的(即修道初心落入二元性是家常事)。於佛道修行，始終不得通達的徒輩，則難以明究此通塞的道理。

Why is this? After we have produced the thought of bodhi and turned to the practice of the way of the buddha, when we are wholeheartedly performing the difficult practices, though we may be performing them, we do not have one hit in a hundred practices. Still, “whether from a friend, whether from a scripture,” eventually we hit it. This one hit in the present is [due to] the power of a hundred misses in the past, is the “one maturation” of a hundred misses. Hearing the teachings, cultivating the way, attaining the verification are all like this. Yesterday’s “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” may be a hundred misses, but yesterday’s hundred misses of “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” are suddenly today’s one hit.

When we have the beginner’s mind in the practice of the way of the buddha, if [we think that], since we are untrained and have not mastered it, we might discard the the way of the buddha and take another path, then we cannot attain the way of the buddha. Those types who have not mastered the beginning and end of the practice of the way of the buddha have difficulty clarifying the fact that this passage and obstruction is reasonable.

佛道者，初發心時亦是佛道，成正覺時亦是佛道；初、中、後，皆是佛道也。比如步行萬里者，一步亦是千里中（之一步）也，千步亦是千里中（之千步）也；初一步與千步雖異，然千里則同也。然則，至愚之輩則謂：“學佛道時，不達佛道，只果上時為佛道也。”以不知舉道說道，不知舉道行道，不知舉道證道，故如是言也。只學迷人修行佛道而（得）大悟，不知不聞不迷之人亦修行佛道而（得）大悟之徒，乃如是言也。證契之前之說心說性雖（同）是佛道，然說心說性而證契者，（亦同是佛道）。不得參學證契者只是迷者之始得大悟之謂證契。迷者亦大悟，悟者亦大悟，不悟者亦大悟，不迷者亦大悟，證契者亦證契。

佛道，是初發心時亦是佛道，成正覺時亦是佛道；初、中、後，皆是佛道。比如步行萬里，一步亦是千里中的一步，千步亦是千里中的千步；初一步與千步雖異，然千里則同。然而，至愚的徒輩則說：「學佛道時，不達佛道，只有果上時為佛道。」 因不知舉(全)道說道，不知舉道行道，不知舉道證道，所以如是說。只學迷人修行佛道而得大悟，不知不聞不迷的人亦修行佛道而得大悟的徒輩，才如是說。證契之前的說心說性雖同是佛道，然說心說性而證契的，亦同是佛道。不得參學證契者，只是迷者的始得大悟才稱為證契。而是迷者亦大悟，悟者亦大悟，不悟者亦大悟，不迷者亦大悟，證契者亦證契。(即迷者只是自迷，悟者只是自悟，都仍是佛法的現成，即前所說：「得（道）與不（得道）之時節，俱搓過也。」)

The way of the buddha is the way of the buddha at the time of the first production of the thought; it is the way of the buddha at the time of attaining true enlightenment. It is the way of the buddha throughout beginning, middle, and end. For example, for one walking ten thousand ri, one step is within a thousand ri; the thousandth step is within a thousand ri. The first one step and the thousandth step may be different, but the thousand ri are the same. Yet, an extremely stupid bunch thinks that, when we are studying the way of the buddha, we have not reached the way of the buddha; only when we attain the fruit is it the way of the buddha. They do not understand “taking up the way and practicing the way.” They [talk] like this because they do not understand “taking up the way and practicing the way,” they do not understand “taking up the way and verifying the way.” Those who talk like this are the bunch who learn that only the deluded practice the way of the buddha and have the great awakening; they do not know, and have not heard, that the non-deluded also practice the way of the buddha and have the great awakening. Though we say that “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” before verification and accord is the way of the buddha, we verify and accord through “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” We should not learn that “verification and accord” refers only to the deluded initially having the great awakening: the deluded have the great awakening; the awakened have the great awakening; the unawakened have the great awakening; the undeluded have the great awakening; those who have verified and accorded verify and accord.

所以，說心說性者，正直之佛道也。杲公不達此道理，謂不得說心說性，非佛法之道理也。今大宋國中，及杲公者亦無。高祖悟本大師，以其諸祖中之獨尊，通達說心說性之道理。尚未通達之諸方祖師，則無有如今之因緣之道取。

所以，『說心說性』，是正直的佛道。杲公不達此道理，說不可說心說性，認此是非佛法的道理。今大宋國中，比得上杲公者亦無。高祖悟本大師，以其諸祖中的獨尊，通達說心說性的道理。尚未通達的諸方祖師，則無有如今的因緣的說法。

Thus, “talking of the mind and talking of the nature is the direct [approach] of the way of the buddha. Mister Gao’s saying, without his having mastered this principle, that we should not “talk of the mind and talk of the nature” is not the principle of the buddha dharma. In the present land of the great Song, there is no one who even reaches Mister Gao. The Eminent Ancestor, the Great Master Wuben, the single most honored among the ancestors, mastered the principle that “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” The ancestral masters everywhere who have not mastered it have no sayings like this present episode.

謂僧密師伯與大師行次，指旁院曰：“裡面有人，說心說性。”此道取，自高祖出世以來，為其法孫，必正傳其祖風，餘門則夢也未見也。何況夢知領會之方（法）乎！唯嫡嗣者，正傳之。此道理若不正傳，焉能通達佛道之本源？謂今之道理者，即：或裡或面，有人人有，說心說性，面裡心說，面裡性說。須功夫參究！非性之說今無，非說之心未有。

說僧密師伯與悟本大師行次，指路旁院說：『裡面有人，說心說性。』這種說法，自高祖出世以來，為其法孫，必正傳其祖風，餘門則夢也未見。何況夢知領會的方法呢！唯嫡嗣的，正傳這法。此道理若不正傳，焉能通達佛道的本源？說今的道理，即是：『或裡或面，有人人有，說心說性，面裡心說，面裡性說。』須功夫參究！非性的說法今無，非說法的心未有(即無依真如法必無緣起法，有識心而無緣起法相是未曾有的)。

When elder brother Sengmi and the great master were traveling, [Dongshan] pointed out a cloister beside [the way] and said, “Inside, there’s someone talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” Ever since the eminent ancestor appeared in the world, his dharma descendants have always correctly transmitted this saying [as] the ancestral style. It is not something other traditions have seen even in their dreams; still less have they known, even in their dreams, how to understand it. Only those who are legitimate heirs have correctly transmitted it. How can one who does not correctly transmit this principle reach the origin on the way of the buddha? The principle in question here is: whether “inside” or “surface,” “there’s someone” and “someone’s there” “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” Within the surface, the mind is talking; within the surface, the nature is talking. We should investigate and work at this. There has not yet been “talking” that is not “nature”; there is no “mind” that is not “talking.”

佛性者，一切之說也；無佛性者，一切之說也。雖云參學佛性之性，而不參學有佛性者，不是學道；不參學無佛性者，不是參學。參學說之為性者，是佛祖之嫡孫也；信受性之為說者，是嫡孫之佛祖也。

『佛性』(恁麼而有的三界有情識心)，是一切的『說』(即有恁麼的緣起功德)；『無佛性』(恁麼而有的真如法)的，也是一切的『說』。雖說參學佛性的性(指恁麼有的有情識性)，而不參學有佛性(一元性識性)的，不是學道；但不參學無佛性(依真如法位緣起)的，不是參學。參學說(緣起法相)是為法性的，是佛祖的嫡孫；信受，法性是為說法者，是嫡孫的佛祖(即證信性相一如的，才是入一元性的佛道)。

“Buddha nature” means all “talking.” “Lacking buddha nature” means all “talking.” Though one studies the nature of the buddha nature, [those who] do not study “having buddha nature” are not studying the way; [those who] do not study “lacking buddha nature” are not studying the way. [Those who] study that “talking” is “the nature” are the legitimate descendants of the buddhas and ancestors. [Those who] believe and accept that “the nature” is “talking” are the buddhas and ancestors of the legitimate descendants.

道取心疏動、性恬靜者，外道之見也。道取性澄湛、相遷移者，外道之見也。佛道之學心學性者不然。佛道之行心行性者不與外道等。佛道之明心明性者，外道不可有其分。

說心是疏動、性是恬靜的，分二頭的是外道的邪見。說性澄湛、相遷移的，是外道的邪見。佛道的一元性學心學性則不然。佛道的一元性行心行性則不與外道同等。佛道一元性的明心明性，是外道不可有其分。

To say that the mind is rattled and the nature is composed is the view of other ways; to say that the nature is clear and deep and the form shifts and moves is the view of other ways. The study of the mind and study of the nature on the way of the buddha are not like this. The practice of the mind and practice of the nature on the way of the buddha are not equivalent to the other ways. The clarification of the mind and the clarification of the nature on the way of the buddha, the other ways have no share in.

佛道之中，有有人之說心說性，有無人之說心說性；有有人之不說心說性，有無人之不說心說性；有說心未說心、說性未說性。若不學無人時之說心說性，則說心未到田地也。不學有人時之說心，則說心未到田地也。乃學說心無人，學無人說心，學說心是人，學是人說心也。

佛道之中，有有人的說心說性(即識心二元性的緣起法相)，有無人的說心說性(即識心一元性的緣起法相)；有有人的不說心說性(無想天)，有無人的不說心說性(真如法)；有說心未說心、說性未說性(即心法與識性落在欲界的散心位第六意識的獨頭妄想分別時)。若不學無人時的說心說性(即識心一元性)，則說心未到田地。不學有人時的說心，則說心未到田地。(即仍在三界的識有，而不是有情識與佛性識的一如境) 所以是學說心無人，學無人說心，學說心是人，學是人說心。

On the way of the buddha, there is the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” of “someone”; there is the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” of “no one.” There is the “not talking of the mind and not talking of the nature” of “someone”; there is the “not talking of the mind and not talking of the nature” of “no one.” There is “talking of the mind and not talking of the mind; there is “talking of the nature and not talking of the nature.” When one has not studied “talking of the mind” at the time when there is “no one,” then talking of the mind has not reached the field. When one has not studied “talking of the mind” at the time when there is “someone,” then talking of the mind has not reached the field. We study “no one who talks of the mind”; we study “no one talking of the mind”; we study “this one who talks of the mind”; we study “this one talking of the mind.”

臨濟盡力道取者，僅無位真人，而未道取有位真人。所剩之參學，所剩之道取未現成，可謂未到參徹地。以說心說性是說佛說祖故，耳處亦可相見，眼處亦可相見。

臨濟盡力說明的，僅『無位真人』(佛性恁麼而有的三界有情識)，而未說明『有位真人』(指佛性識)。所剩的參學，所剩的說明未現成，可謂未到參徹。因說心說性是說佛說祖，是耳處亦可相見，是眼處亦可相見。

Linji’s total power to say something is just “the true person without rank,” but he still has not said, “the true person with rank.” He has not realized what remains to be studied, what remains to be said; we can say he has not reached the ground of penetration. Because “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” are talking of the buddhas and talking of the ancestors, we meet them in the ear, we meet them in the eye.

因僧密師伯曰：“是誰？”此道取既得以現成，僧密師伯先前亦可乘此道取，日後亦可乘此道取。（謂）“是誰”者，即是那個之說心說性也。是故，道取“是誰”時，而思量“是誰”，則是說心說性也。此說心說性，餘方之徒，尚不知也。忘子為賊故，認賊為子也。

因僧密師伯說：『是誰？』 這說法既得以現成，僧密師伯先前亦可乘此道取，日後亦可乘此道取(即是說：『是誰』這功德法用，是因有情識『人』的緣起力量)。說『是誰』，即是那個的說心說性(即『是誰』這句就是心法一如)。所以，說『是誰』時，而落入二元性的思量分別『是誰』，則才是二元的說心說性。此一元性說心說性，餘門的徒輩，尚不知。是忘記『子』落入二元性能所的便是為『賊』，才認賊為子。

The elder brother Sengmi said, “Who is it?” When he expresses this saying, elder brother Sengmi should previously avail himself of this saying and should subsequently avail himself of this saying. “Who is it?” is the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” of “that inside.” Therefore, when “who is it?” is said, when “who is it? is thought, this is itself “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” This “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” is something that those of other quarters have never known. They have forgotten their child and taken it for a thief; so “they recognize the thief as their child.”

大師曰：“被師伯一問，直得去死十分。”聞此道取，參學之庸流則謂：“有人說心說性，謂是誰？直得去死十分。其所以者，是誰之語，對面不相識，全無所見，故當為死句也。”未必然也。此說心說性，徹者稀少。十分之去死者，非一二分之去死，所以是去死之十分也。被問之正當恁麽時，誰不以之為遮天蓋地？照古也際斷，照來也際斷，照正當恁麽時也際斷。

悟本大師說：『被師伯一問，直得去死十分。』 聽聞這種說法，參學的庸流則說：『有人說心說性，說是誰？直得去死十分。其所以者，是誰的話語，對面的人(識性)是不相識，全無所見，故當為死句(指對面人的法真如性不可說的)。』(這種說法，有能說與所說的二元性，有我相、人相) 未必是如此。此說心說性，透徹者稀少。悟本大師說是十分的去死，是非一二分地去死，所以是去死全然的十分。被問的正當恁麽時，誰不以此為遮天蓋地？照古也際斷，照來也際斷，照正當恁麽時也際斷。(道元是認為：當密師伯說：『是誰』當下，這法的現成因性相一如的一元性，就是時間、空間一相的全然，故悟本大師用『直得去死十分』表示。而不應該錯認有個能說心說性的『誰』，與所『說心說性』的法。)

The great master said, “Questioned once by my elder brother, and he’s immediately doomed.” When mediocre types of students hear these words, they think that the “someone” who is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature,” upon being asked, “who is it?” is “immediately doomed.” The reason is that they are facing the words, “who is it?” without recognizing them, without any view of them at all; hence, [the words] are “dead words.” This is not necessarily the case. Those who have penetrated this “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” are rare. To be “doomed” a hundred percent is not to be “doomed” ten or twenty percent; hence “doomed” is a hundred percent. At the very moment of “questioned,” who would hold that this is not “shielding the heavens and covering the earth”? Reflection of the past is cut off; reflection of the present is cut off; reflection of the future is cut off. Reflection of this very moment is cut off.

僧密師伯曰：“說心說性底誰？”先前之“是誰”與現今之“是誰”，其名設令是張三，然其人是李四。大師曰：“死中得活。”謂此“死中”者，非直指“直得去死”；設指“說心說性底”，而不得亂道其“是誰。”謂“是誰”者，其乃並指說心說性之“有人”也，或亦可參學為未必謂去死十分之為“是誰。”大師道之“死中得活”者，即“有人說心說性”之聲色現前也，又更應為去死十分中之一兩分也。活雖是全活，然非死之變為活現，得活之頭正尾正時，則唯脫落也。

僧密師伯說：『說心說性底誰？』 先前的『是誰』與現今的『是誰』，其『名』設令是張三，然其『人』是李四(即是說『是誰』這個法的法相是『張三』，但應有個識性『李四』)。悟本大師說：『死中得活。』 說此『死中』，非直指『直得去死』(不是指法的真如性)；假設是指『說心說性底』，而不得亂說其『是誰。』(即不可將法分開成二元性的有能所) 說『是誰』，其乃並指說心說性的『有人』(即『是誰』這法是因有情識『有人』依真如法緣起一體公案現成的)，或亦可參學為未必說是去死十分(指識性是佛性恁麼而有的，故非是佛性真如)的『是誰』。悟本大師說的『死中得活』(指識性緣起法相現前)，即是『有人說心說性』的聲色現前，又更應為去死十分中的一兩分(即指住佛性法位得真如法，是緣起法公案現成的所依)。活雖是全活(即指依識性的緣起一元性)，然非死的(指真如法位)變為活現，得活的頭正尾正(即公案現成)時，則是唯脫落(即是識性依真如法的一元性緣起)。

The elder brother Sengmi said, “Who is it that’s talking of mind and talking of the nature?” The previous “who is it?” and this “who is it,” though the name is “Zhang’s third,” the person is “Li’s fourth.” The Great Master said, “In death, he lives.” In regard to this “in death,” [we should not] think that it is directly referring to the “immediately doomed”; he is is not directly referring to [the one who is] “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” and arbitrarily saying, “who is it?” “Who is it?” arranges the “someone” who is “talking of the mind and talking of the nature.” There should be a study holding that he does not wait forever to be a hundred percent “doomed.” The Great Master’s words, “In death, he lives,” are the voices and forms of “someone talking of the mind and talking of the nature” right before us. Again, they are also one or two parts of completely “doomed.” Life may be fully alive, but it is not death changing to appear as life: it is just the sloughing off of “he lives” that is “true at the head and true at the tail.”

大凡佛道祖道中，即有如此之說心說性而被參究，且又是死十分之死，現成得活之活計也。須知自唐代至今日，不明說心說性之為佛道，暗於教行之說心說性，胡說亂說之可憐憫者多矣！須於身先身後救之。須為其說：說心說性是七佛祖師之要機也！

大凡佛道祖道中，即有如此的說心說性而被參究，且又是死十分的死(即性相一如時，是法相的全機現)，現成得活的活計。須知自唐代至今日，不明說心說性是為佛道，愚暗於教行是說心說性，胡說亂說的可憐憫者多啊！須於身先身後(即古人今人)救之。須為其說：說心說性是七佛祖師的要機啊(指七識的緣起功德法用)！

In general, there is this kind of “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” that is investigated on the way of the buddha and the way of the ancestors. When we go further, by dying a complete death, we realize the way of life of “he lives.” We should realize that, from the Tang period till today, there have been many pitiable types who have not clarified the fact that “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” are the way of the buddha, who are in the dark about the “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” in teaching, practice, and verification, and who talk rashly and speak wildly. We should save them “before the body and after the body.” What I say to them is this: “talking of the mind and talking of the nature” are the essential functions of the Seven Buddhas and the ancestral masters.

參考資料：

(1) 《正法眼藏》  道原 著 ， 何燕生 譯註， 宗教文化出版社

(2) 《Shōbōgenzō》 http://web.stanford.edu/group/scbs/sztp3/translations/shobogenzo/translations/bussho/intro.html