Dust, guests, and companions
不與萬法為侶
Not taking the myriad dharmas as companions…
>Layman Pang asked Mazu: “Who is the person who does not take the myriad dharmas as companions?”
Mazu replied: “Wait until you have drunk up all the water of the Western River in a single gulp, and then I will tell you.”
Foyan:
> As for one who does not take the myriad dharmas as companions; is this not one who has gone beyond the dust-toil?
> Mind does not know mind; eye does not see eye. Since all opposition has been cut off, when seeing forms, there is no form that can be seen; when hearing sounds there is no sound that can be heard….
>When studying with a teacher, you do not see that there is a teacher; when investigating yourself, you do not see that there is a self; when looking at scripture you do not see that there is scripture…
>In daily activity there is no discrepancy, yet seeking even the slightest trace, you cannot find it. If you can see it this way, isn’t that freedom and ease?
From the Śūraṅgama Sūtra:
>Every worldly man knows that what moves is dust, and that he who does not stay is a guest. >Why do you still regard the moving as your body and surroundings, and so, from beginning to end, allow your thoughts to rise and fall without interruption, thereby losing (sight of) your true nature and indulging in backward actions?
>By missing the (True) Mind of your nature and by mistaking (illusory) objects for your Selves, you allow yourselves to be caught in the wheel (of samsara) thereby forcing yourselves to passthrough transmigrations.
- • -
What exactly are the “myriad dharmas” here? Things? Objects of perception? Teachings? All of the above?
And what does not taking them as companions have to do with departing the “dust-toils”?
When Foyan and other Chan masters explicitly reference and lecture on the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, shouldn’t its Buddhist context at least be part of the evidence when interpreting what they mean?