仁王般若經疏 2.120

2.120

大王下，第三正釋其所難，明二諦不二。於中有三：初舉果對因以明二諦不二；第二五眼下，偏就果以釋不二；第三菩薩未成佛下，雙結因果以釋不二。就初舉果對因中有二：初約菩薩能化見不二，照凡夫二乘所見二諦。佛及下，廣明所化眾生及法悉空不二。初能化文云菩薩於第一義中常照二諦化眾生者，於中道一實諦內常照空有二諦化眾生。所言常照二諦者，即大悲般若，化眾生以波若，故在生死而不著，則異於凡夫；以大悲故不住涅槃，異於二乘。不捨生死，異於二乘；不捨涅槃，異於凡夫。故言常照二諦化眾生。舊云第一義不說俗，是何言哉？佛及下，二廣明所化眾生及法悉空不二。就中有二：初明生空、後辨法空。生空文言佛及眾生一而無二者，佛及眾生本來寂滅，同無所得，故云一而無二。虛妄分別見眾生為因地、佛為果地；達觀之上體知佛及眾生本來寂滅，故云一而無二。此無二者，是因緣假名，對破二見言一，二息一消。一藥病俱遣，亦是遣無遣有。何以故下釋，以眾生空故得置菩提空，眾生與菩提同無所得，眾生如與菩薩如無異，故言置，非是兩物相置也。次明法空，文言以一切法空故空空。一切法空者，總標諸法空也。法門無量不可具出，今總標一切攝無盡，故云一切法空故。為眾生無始已來滯有情深，今借空智以遣有。復滯於空，今以空治空，故名空空。故《智論》十八空中破內空外空內外空竟，次明空空。以空治前三種空，故云空空。又解：一空空於智，一空空二諦法也。何以故下，釋二空。文言般若無相者，釋其智空。以智無生相，名之為空。文言二諦虛空者，釋其二諦法空。以一切畢竟清淨，故言虛空。文言波若空於無明者，因緣之法本性自空，不須智推然後明空。但眾生虛妄不知，故復假智照得空。故《涅槃》云「諸法雖空，要因菩薩修空見空也。」乃至薩波若無自相無他相者，內盡於觀，名為無自；外清諸緣，名為無他也。

From "Great King" onward, the third [part] properly resolves the objection, explaining that the two truths are non-dual. Within this there are three [sections]: first, adducing fruition in contrast to cause to explain that the two truths are non-dual; second, from "The five eyes" onward, specifically addressing the fruition to explain non-duality; third, from "When a bodhisattva has not yet attained Buddhahood" onward, jointly concluding with cause and fruition to explain non-duality. In the first section, which adduces fruition in contrast to cause, there are two [parts]: first, regarding the transforming bodhisattva's seeing non-duality and illuminating the two truths seen by ordinary persons and the two vehicles; from "Buddhas and [sentient beings]" onward, extensively explaining that the converted sentient beings and phenomena are all empty and non-dual. In the first part on the transforming agent, the text says: "Bodhisattvas, while within the ultimate truth, constantly illuminate the two truths to convert sentient beings": this means that within the single real truth of the Middle Way, they constantly illuminate the two truths of emptiness and existence to convert sentient beings. What is termed "constantly illuminating the two truths" is precisely great compassion and prajñā. They convert sentient beings by means of prajñā, and therefore abide in saṃsāra without clinging, thereby differing from ordinary persons; by means of great compassion, they do not abide in nirvāṇa, differing from the two vehicles. Not abandoning saṃsāra, they differ from the two vehicles; not abandoning nirvāṇa, they differ from ordinary persons. Hence it says, "constantly illuminate the two truths to convert sentient beings." Formerly it was said that the ultimate truth does not speak of the conventional—what kind of statement is that? From "Buddhas and [sentient beings]" onward, the second part extensively explains that the converted sentient beings and phenomena are all empty and non-dual. Within this there are two [points]: first, explaining the emptiness of sentient beings; afterwards, discerning the emptiness of phenomena. The text on the emptiness of sentient beings says, "Buddhas and sentient beings are one and not two": Buddhas and sentient beings are originally extinguished and tranquil, identical in having nothing to attain (aprāptitva); hence it says they are "one and not two." False discrimination sees sentient beings as the causal stage and Buddhas as the fruition stage; elevated in thorough contemplation, one understands in essence that Buddhas and sentient beings are originally extinguished and tranquil, and hence it says they are "one and not two." This "non-dual" is a provisional name based on causes and conditions; "one" is spoken of to refute the view of duality, and when duality ceases, oneness vanishes. The medicine and the illness are both dispelled, which is also dispelling non-existence and dispelling existence. The explanation begins below with "Why is this?": "Because the emptiness of sentient beings allows for establishing the emptiness of bodhi": sentient beings and bodhi are identical in having nothing to attain; the suchness of sentient beings and the suchness of bodhisattvas are not different, and hence it says "allows for establishing"; it is not that two things are established together. Next, explaining the emptiness of phenomena, the text says: "Because the emptiness of all phenomena is the emptiness of emptiness." "The emptiness of all phenomena" broadly indicates the emptiness of all phenomena. The Dharma gates are immeasurable and cannot be fully stated; here, broadly indicating "all" encompasses them without remainder, and hence it says: "Because the emptiness of all phenomena." Because sentient beings from beginningless time onward have been deeply mired in attachment to existence, the wisdom of emptiness is now borrowed to dispel existence. If they are again attached to emptiness, emptiness is now used to cure emptiness; hence it is called "the emptiness of emptiness." Therefore, after refuting internal emptiness, external emptiness, and internal-and-external emptiness among the eighteen emptinesses, the *Dazhidulun* next explains the emptiness of emptiness. Using emptiness to cure the preceding three kinds of emptiness, it is therefore called "the emptiness of emptiness." Another explanation: one emptiness empties wisdom, and the other emptiness empties the phenomena of the two truths. Below, "Why is this?" explains the two emptinesses. The text says, "Prajñā is devoid of characteristics": this explains the emptiness of wisdom. Because wisdom has no characteristic of arising, it is called empty. The text says, "The two truths are empty": this explains the emptiness of phenomena of the two truths. Because everything is completely pure, it says "empty." The text says, "Prajñā empties ignorance": phenomena of causes and conditions are inherently empty in their original nature; one does not need to deduce it through wisdom before understanding emptiness. But because sentient beings are falsely deluded and do not know this, wisdom's illumination is again borrowed to attain emptiness. Thus the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* says: "Although all phenomena are empty, it must rely on a bodhisattva cultivating emptiness to see emptiness." In "up to sarvajñā, because it has no self-characteristic and no other-characteristic": internally exhausting contemplation is called having no self-characteristic; externally purifying all objects is called having no other-characteristic.