般若心經略疏連珠記 1.30

1.30

問：般若談空，以空為始。始固屬權，故政觀以來議斯權實，眾說不同。或約大小、或約通別，或曰教果是權、理行是實。何以記皆不敘？答曰：論云「從得道夜乃至涅槃，常說般若。」斯經權實雙彰、漸頓兼唱，諸宗判釋不同，故使後賢多誤。今將具列，以罄源流。一戒賢論師曰：「依遍計所執而說諸法自性皆空，依他、圓成猶未說有。」即判《般若》等經、《中》、《百》等論，說六識空，多談空理，屬第二時法界無差。論疏依此以判《般若》等經屬第二宗攝。二、智光論師曰：「第三時中方為上根說無相大乘，謂此緣生即是性空平等一相，依計是有、圓成是空。依此以判《般若》等經，總破大小法相八識俱空多說空理。《圓覺疏》等敘彼所判，《般若》等經、《中》、《百》等論屬於空宗，始教所攝。」三、吾祖鎮國大和尚曰：「若唯說法華為實，則抑諸部般若了義大乘之經。般若離四句，何曾存空？般若不壞四句，豈無妙有？是知實相般若即是正因佛性，觀照般若即為了因。《大品》、《仁王》、《理趣》等經皆屬終教。」四者、諸祖皆曰：二邊既離，中道不存，心境兩亡，亡絕亦絕。般若現前，已當八部無相六乘之極致。鎮國曰：「即同智照無二，亦同頓教。」《文殊問》、《光讚》、《放光》等經，諸祖並曰頓教。五、鎮國曰：「《大品》云『一切法趣色』即一切皆色，一中具一切，即事事無礙。般若義該五教，即具圓矣。」而疏主以戒賢、智光二宗所判真諦之空非第一義空，故不攝此義當後三，故言實攝。若約今經顯詮分齊者，鎮國云：「若以三觀就心經意，色不異空明俗不異真，空不異色明真不異俗，色空相即明是中道，為空假中之三觀。」疏中亦以三觀釋經，當前第三義也。又云：「以會色觀中明色不異空等，明空即色中明空不異色等。第三觀但合前二，第四拂前四，向相現真空相不生不滅，無智亦無得真空觀備矣。」貞元判同頓教，即前第四義也。前疏廣敘中道，下文備彰相作相成，互存互泯無礙自在，圓中同教。經詮堅實一心，即圓覺妙心，含圓別矣。皆前第五義也。疏文經旨明若矚日，別議權實者，惑亦甚焉。「第三」下，三、明宗趣，二：初、唱章釋名。「宗」者，崇也、尚也。今云語之所表者，即此經表彰表顯之崇，崇尚也。「趣」者趣向也，即宗意所歸趣之處也。「然先」下，二、總別演義：二：先、總。「總以」等者，《大論》云「說智及智處，智智皆般若。」曉公曰：「此中即顯三種般若。說智者，文字般若。及智處者，實相般若。智智，即觀照般若。是三皆此經之宗。」「一實」等者，古德曰：妙心湛寂，無相而相，謂之實相。實相隨緣，為諸法之真性。肇公云：「實相、法性、性空、緣會、本無，一義耳。」「二觀照」等者，即正體智等無相離分別之慧也。三即文字般若，《孔目》云「熟教有三種智，謂實相般若智等。」清涼曰：「清涼法界，相宗不得名智，法性宗中亦名為智。」即此實相也。或說五種般若不離此三，故云「不越」等。

Question: Prajñā speaks of emptiness, taking emptiness as the beginning. The beginning inherently belongs to the expedient; hence, from the Zhenguan era onward, discussions of its expedient and real nature have produced differing views among many. Some treat it according to the Great and Small [Vehicles], or according to the Common and Distinct, or say that the teaching and fruition are expedient while principle and practice are real. Why do the notes not recount any of these? Answer: A treatise says: "From the night of attaining the Way up to nirvāṇa, he constantly preached prajñā." In this sūtra, expedient and real are both made manifest, and gradual and sudden are both proclaimed; the classifications and interpretations of the various schools differ, which has led later scholars into many errors. Now I will list them in full to exhaust their source and flow. First, Master Śīlabhadra says: "Relying on the imagined nature, he taught that all dharmas are empty of own-nature; he had not yet taught the existence of the dependent and the consummate." That is, he classified sūtras such as the Prajñā and treatises such as the Madhyamaka and Śata as teaching the emptiness of the six consciousnesses and mostly discussing the principle of emptiness, belonging to the second period, the non-differentiation of the dharmadhātu. Treatise commentaries, relying on this, classify sūtras such as the Prajñā as subsumed under the second doctrine. Second, Master Jñānaprabha says: "In the third period, he only then taught the signless Great Vehicle for those of superior faculties, stating that this arising through conditions is itself nature-emptiness, equal in one mark, where the dependent and imagined are existent, and the consummate is empty. Relying on this, he classified sūtras such as the Prajñā as completely refuting the Great and Small dharma-marks, with all eight consciousnesses being empty, mostly discussing the principle of emptiness. The Yuanjue shu and other texts recount his classification, placing sūtras such as the Prajñā and treatises such as the Madhyamaka and Śata in the Emptiness school, subsumed under the initial teaching." Third, our patriarch, the Great Preceptor Zhenguo, says: "If one speaks only of the Lotus Sūtra as real, one disparages the sūtras of the definitive Great Vehicle among the various prajñā divisions. Prajñā departs from the four propositions—how could it ever preserve emptiness? Prajñā does not destroy the four propositions—how could it lack wondrous existence? From this we know that true-mark prajñā is precisely the direct-cause Buddha-nature, and contemplative prajñā is the revealing cause. Sūtras such as the Dapin, the Renwang, and the Liqu all belong to the final teaching." Fourth, the various patriarchs all say: When both extremes are abandoned, the middle way does not remain; both mind and object perish, and even the cessation of perishing ceases. When prajñā appears before one, it already constitutes the culmination of the eight divisions, the signless, and the six vehicles. Zhenguo says: "It is identical to the non-duality of wisdom and illumination; it is also identical to the sudden teaching." Sūtras such as the Wenshu wen, the Guangzan, and the Fangguang are all called the sudden teaching by the patriarchs. Fifth, Zhenguo says: "The Dapin states, 'All dharmas converge into form'—that is, all are form; within the one, all are possessed, which is the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon. The meaning of prajñā encompasses the five teachings, thus fully possessing the perfect [teaching]." And because the commentator considered the emptiness of the ultimate truth classified by the two schools of Śīlabhadra and Jñānaprabha not to be the emptiness of the primary meaning, he does not subsume this meaning under them, but under the latter three; hence he says it is subsumed under the real. If considered according to the scope of what this sūtra explicitly expresses, Zhenguo says: "If one applies the three contemplations to the meaning of the Heart Sūtra: 'form is not different from emptiness' clarifies that the conventional is not different from the ultimate; 'emptiness is not different from form' clarifies that the ultimate is not different from the conventional; and the mutual identity of form and emptiness clarifies that this is the middle way—these constitute the three contemplations of emptiness, provisionality, and the middle." The commentary also explains the sūtra through the three contemplations, which corresponds to the third meaning above. He also says: "In the contemplation of integrating form, it clarifies that form is not different from emptiness, etc.; in clarifying that emptiness is form, it clarifies that emptiness is not different from form, etc. The third contemplation merely combines the previous two, and the fourth sweeps away the previous four; toward marks, true emptiness appears with marks neither arising nor ceasing; with 'no wisdom and no attainment,' the contemplation of true emptiness is fully present." The Zhenyuan [commentary] classifies it as identical to the sudden teaching, which is the fourth meaning above. The preceding commentary extensively recounts the middle way, and the text below fully displays mutual creation and mutual completion, mutual preservation and mutual eradication, unobstructed and unhindered—the common teaching within the perfect. The sūtra expresses the firm and real one mind, which is the wondrous mind of complete awakening, containing the perfect and the distinct. These are all the fifth meaning above. The text of the commentary and the purport of the sūtra are as clear as looking at the sun; those who separately debate its expedient or real nature are greatly deluded. From "The third" downward is the third [major section]: clarifying the doctrine and aim, which has two parts. First, stating the section and explaining the terms. "Doctrine" (zong) means to revere, to venerate. What is now said to be "that which the words express" refers to that which is revered, that which is venerated, as shown and revealed by this sūtra. "Aim" (qu) means to tend toward, that is, the place to which the intent of the doctrine returns and tends. From "However, first" downward is the second [part]: expounding the meaning in general and in detail, which has two parts: first, in general. "In general, taking" and so on: the Da zhidu lun says, "Speaking of wisdom and the locus of wisdom, wisdom of wisdom—all are prajñā." Master Xiao says: "Herein are revealed the three kinds of prajñā. 'Speaking of wisdom' is verbal prajñā. 'And the locus of wisdom' is true-mark prajñā. 'Wisdom of wisdom' is contemplative prajñā. These three are all the doctrine of this sūtra." "First, true-[mark]" and so on: an ancient master of virtue said, "The wondrous mind is calm and quiescent; markless yet with marks, it is called the true mark. The true mark complies with conditions, acting as the true nature of all dharmas." Master Zhao says: "The true mark, dharma-nature, nature-emptiness, the conjunction of conditions, and fundamental non-being are one and the same meaning." "Second, contemplation" and so on: this is the fundamental wisdom and so on, the signless wisdom free from discrimination. The third is verbal prajñā; the Kongmu says, "The mature teaching has three kinds of wisdom, namely, true-mark prajñā wisdom, etc." Qingliang says: "In the pure dharmadhātu, the Characteristic School does not allow it to be called wisdom, but in the Dharma-nature School it is also called wisdom." This refers to this true mark. Or, it is said that the five kinds of prajñā are not separate from these three; hence it says "does not exceed," etc.