[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [妙法蓮華經玄義](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716) › 3.96 # 妙法蓮華經玄義 3.96 妙法蓮華經玄義 3.96 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.96](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3.96) 今若約根緣利、鈍，內外事、理，開即成四：聲聞根鈍，緣四諦事，即生滅四諦智；緣覺根利，緣四諦理，即無生四諦智；菩薩智淺，緣不思議事，即無量四諦智；諸佛智深，緣不思議理，即無作四諦智也。此乃《大經》之一文。又云：「凡夫有苦無諦，聲聞有苦、有苦諦。」凡夫不見苦理，故言無諦。聲聞能見無常、苦、空，故言有諦。即是生滅四諦智也。又云：「菩薩之人解苦無苦，而有真諦。」即是體苦非苦，故言無苦；即事而真，故言有諦。乃是摩訶衍門無生四諦智也。又云：「知諸陰是苦，知諸入為門，亦名為苦。知諸界為分，亦名為性，亦名為知，是名中智。」依前說者，即屬聲聞也。分別諸苦、諸入、界等有無量相，「我於彼經，竟不說之」，是名上智。受、想、行、識，亦復如是。非諸聲聞、緣覺境界，此則異前兩意。既稱上智，又非二乘境界，豈非別教菩薩觀恒沙佛法如來藏理耶？是為無量四諦智。又云：「如來非苦、非集、非滅、非道、非諦，是實；虛空非苦、非諦，是實。」非苦者，非虛妄生死。非諦者，非二乘涅槃。是實者，即是實相、中道佛性也。又云：「有苦、有苦因、有苦盡、有苦對，如來非苦乃至非對，是故為實。」如此明義，既異上三番，豈非無作四諦智耶？例此一諦為四，餘三亦應爾。謂有集、有集果，有集盡、有集對，有盡、有盡因，有盡障、有盡障相，有對、有對果，有對障、有對障相。如來非此四四十六種，但是於實（云云）。 > Now, if based on the sharp and dull faculties and conditions, internal and external phenomena and principles, opening them produces four: with dull faculties, śrāvakas condition the phenomena of the four truths, which is the wisdom of the four truths of arising and perishing. With sharp faculties, pratyekabuddhas condition the principle of the four truths, which is the wisdom of the four truths of non-arising. With shallow wisdom, bodhisattvas condition inconceivable phenomena, which is the wisdom of the immeasurable four truths. With deep wisdom, the buddhas condition the inconceivable principle, which is the wisdom of the uncreated four truths. This is one passage from the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. It also says, 'Ordinary persons have suffering but no truth; śrāvakas have suffering and have the truth of suffering.' Ordinary persons do not see the principle of suffering, hence it says they have no truth. Śrāvakas are able to see impermanence, suffering, and emptiness, hence it says they have truth. This is the wisdom of the four truths of arising and perishing. It also says, 'Bodhisattvas understand suffering as having no suffering, yet having the real truth.' This is embodying suffering as not suffering, hence saying there is no suffering; yet phenomena are identical to reality, hence saying there is truth. This is the wisdom of the four truths of non-arising in the Mahāyāna gate. It also says, 'Knowing the aggregates to be suffering, knowing the sense-bases to be gates which are also called suffering, and knowing the elements to be divisions, also called nature and also called knowing—this is called intermediate wisdom.' According to what was said earlier, this belongs to the śrāvaka. Discerning that the various sufferings, sense-bases, and elements have immeasurable characteristics—'which I never expounded in that sūtra'—this is called superior wisdom. Feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are also like this. This is not the realm of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; this is different from the previous two meanings. Since it is called superior wisdom and is not the realm of the two vehicles, is it not the distinctive teaching bodhisattvas contemplating the principle of the tathāgatagarbha and the buddha-dharmas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges? This is the wisdom of the immeasurable four truths. It also says, 'The Tathāgata is neither suffering, nor the accumulation, nor cessation, nor the path, nor truth; it is the real. Space is neither suffering nor truth; it is the real.' 'Not suffering' means not false birth-and-death. 'Not truth' means not the nirvāṇa of the two vehicles. 'It is the real' means the real mark, the Buddha-nature of the middle way. It also says, 'There is suffering, there is the cause of suffering, there is the exhaustion of suffering, and there is the antidote to suffering. The Tathāgata is neither suffering nor the antidote; therefore it is the real.' Since explaining the meaning like this is different from the three turns above, is it not the wisdom of the uncreated four truths? Drawing an analogy from this single truth into four, the other three should also be like this. Namely, there is accumulation, the fruit of accumulation, the exhaustion of accumulation, and the antidote to accumulation; there is exhaustion, the cause of exhaustion, the obstacle to exhaustion, and the characteristics of the obstacle to exhaustion; there is antidote, the fruit of antidote, the obstacle to antidote, and the characteristics of the obstacle to antidote. The Tathāgata is not these four-times-four, sixteen kinds; it is solely the real, and so forth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.95](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3.95) - [Next: 3.97](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3.97) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716~en-mt.3.96) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3.96](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.3.96) · Pramāṇa