仁王般若經疏 2.122

2.122

From "The five eyes" onward, the second [section] specifically addresses the fruition stage to explain that what can see and what is seen are non-dual. The text says, "Seeing is non-seeing": this seeing is the seeing of non-seeing. When it says "non-seeing," since all phenomena are originally pure, what could be seen? Yet when it speaks of "seeing," it accords with convention and is therefore without fault. The *Lotus Sūtra* explains that the Buddha-eye sees sentient beings of the six destinies; the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā* explains that the five eyes do not see sentient beings. The *Lotus Sūtra* is the seeing of non-seeing; the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā* is the non-seeing of seeing. This sūtra brings forth the non-absence of what is seen to reveal the non-existence of what can see. In "Action also is not accepted": the samādhi of non-acceptance in the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā* fully has five propositions; here there are precisely four propositions, and if one includes "up to all [phenomena] also are not accepted," that is the fifth proposition. In "Action also is not accepted," the *Dazhidulun* says: "'Action also is not accepted' cures the view of existence. 'Non-action also is not accepted' eliminates the view of non-existence." Speaking of non-existence is to cure existence, not to mean that there is this non-existence; speaking of existence is to eliminate non-existence, not to mean that there is this existence. Speaking of non-existence has never been non-existence; speaking of existence has never been existence. Because of causes and conditions of antidotes, there is this teaching. Wishing to cause adherents of both views to reach the correct contemplation together, to level existence and non-existence, equalize arising and ceasing, dissolve the supramundane and conventional, and obliterate the two extremes, it therefore says that action, non-action, and so forth are all not accepted. One neither accepts existence nor identifies with non-existence, being free from both faults. In "Neither action nor non-action": when an existent cause cannot even be grasped, how much less an uncaused one? In "All phenomena also are not accepted": according to the *Dazhidulun*, this means that not accepting is also not accepted. From "When a bodhisattva has not yet attained Buddhahood" onward, the third [section] jointly concludes that cause and fruition are non-dual. The text says: "When a bodhisattva has not yet attained Buddhahood, they take bodhi to be defilement": this is like tying a cloth into a rabbit; one who understands sees a cloth, while one who is deluded sees a rabbit. It is also like a sick person tasting sweetness as bitter; when the illness is cured, they taste what was formerly bitter as sweet, without there being any distinct phenomenon. Due to delusion, one sees non-saṃsāra as saṃsāra, and defilements are also like this. Deluded, bodhi is defilement; awakened, defilement is bodhi. Deluded, the four directions swap places; awakened, all is vast and clear with nothing left over. Below, "Why is this?" explains the above defilement being bodhi. In "Because in the ultimate truth there is no duality": defilement and bodhi are identical in having nothing existent; this is called non-dual. All Buddhas up to all phenomena transcend mental activities, and are therefore called suchness. The first question and answer is concluded.