仁王般若經疏 2.108

2.108

The reason why this chapter follows is that the preceding [passages] contemplated emptiness to teach and transform, illuminating that practical wisdom and skillful means are both empty and non-dual; and one can also understand that protecting the cause and protecting the fruit are ultimately without distinction. Arising like illusions and transformations to transform sentient beings, transformations do not arise in isolation but must rely on an objective realm and teaching that are contemplated. What is this objective realm and teaching? It refers to the two truths. As for the two truths, ultimate truth and conventional truth are not one, hence they are called "two"; being non-erroneous, they are called "truths"; therefore it is called the "Chapter on the Two Truths." The meaning of the two truths is the great foundation of the Buddha's Dharma. If one wishes to discuss the realm and the teaching in detail, the various explanations are not single, and cannot all be related. Now, regarding the two truths: taking conditioned emptiness as existing constitutes conventional truth, and taking conditioned existence as empty constitutes ultimate truth. When discussing to the ultimate extent, all phenomena are originally non-dual; yet because of causes and conditions, they are spoken of as two. Within this chapter there are three exchanges of question and answer discussing and distinguishing the non-duality of the two truths, making three distinct sections: the first question and answer properly distinguishes the non-duality of the two truths; the second question and answer clarifies that preaching the Dharma is non-dual; the third question and answer properly distinguishes that the Dharma-gates are non-dual. Within the former question and answer there are two parts: first the question, and later the answer. Within the first question there are three parts: first the question, second the objection, and third the concluding question, properly distinguishing the existence and non-existence of the two truths. The text stating "Is there conventional truth within ultimate truth or not?" is precisely the question.