妙法蓮華經玄義 5.113

5.113

三、明別教三法者，以緣修觀照為乘體，諸行是資成，以此二法為緣修智慧。慧能破惑顯理，理不能破惑，理若破惑，一切眾生悉具理性，何故不破？若得此慧，則能破惑，故用智為乘體。故《大經》云：「無為無漏，名菩薩僧。即是一地、二地，乃至十地智慧，名智慧莊嚴。」以此智慧運通十地，故為乘體。然《攝大乘》明三種乘：理乘、隨乘、得乘。理者，即是道前真如。隨者，即是觀真如，慧隨順於境。得者，一切行願熏習，熏無分別智，契無分別境，與真如相應。此三意，一往乃同於三軌，而前後未融。何者？九識是道後真如，真如無事，智行根本種子皆在梨耶識中熏習成就，得無分別智光，成真實性。是則理乘本有，隨得今有，道後真如方能化物。此豈非縱義？若三乘悉為黎耶所攝，又是橫義，又濫冥初生覺。既縱既橫，與真伊相乖。元夫如來初出，便欲說實；為不堪者，先以無常遣倒，次用空淨蕩著，次用歷別起心，然後方明常樂我淨。龍樹作論，申佛此意，以不可得空洗蕩封著，習應一切法空，是名與般若相應。此空豈不空於無明？無明若空，種子安在？淨諸法已，點空說法，結四句相。此語虛玄，亦無住著。如病除已，乃可進食，食亦消化。那得發頭據阿黎耶出一切法？本之見慢，全自未降，封此新文，若長氷添水。故知，彼論非逗末代重著眾生，乃是界外一途法門耳。又，阿黎耶若具一切法者，那得不具道後真如？若言具者，那言真如非第八識？恐此猶是方便，從如來藏中開出耳。若執方便，巨妨真實。若是實者，執之又成語見，多含兒蘇，恐將夭命（云云）。若能善解破立之意，於諸經論，淨無滯著也。

Third, in clarifying the three dharmas of the distinctive teaching, conditional cultivation of observation and illumination is taken as the substance of the vehicle, the various practices are the auxiliary support, and these two dharmas constitute conditionally cultivated wisdom. Wisdom can destroy delusions and reveal the principle, whereas the principle cannot destroy delusions. If the principle could destroy delusions, then since all sentient beings are fully endowed with the nature of the principle, why would they not destroy them? If one attains this wisdom, one can destroy delusions; therefore, wisdom is employed as the substance of the vehicle. Thus the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: 'Unconditioned and without outflow is called the saṅgha of bodhisattvas. That is, the wisdom of the first ground, second ground, up to the tenth ground, is called the adornment of wisdom.' Using this wisdom to transport and penetrate the ten grounds, it is therefore the substance of the vehicle. However, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains three kinds of vehicles: the vehicle of principle, the vehicle of compliance, and the vehicle of attainment. 'Principle' is the suchness prior to the path. 'Compliance' is observing suchness, with wisdom complying with the objective realm. 'Attainment' is when the perfuming of all practices and vows perfumes non-conceptual wisdom, tallies with the non-conceptual realm, and corresponds with suchness. These three senses, at first glance, are identical to the three tracks, yet their before and after are not interfused. Why is this? The ninth consciousness is suchness posterior to the path. Suchness is devoid of activity; the fundamental seeds of wisdom and practice are all perfumed and accomplished within the ālaya-vijñāna, attaining the light of non-conceptual wisdom and accomplishing the real nature. Thus, the vehicle of principle is fundamentally possessed, whereas compliance and attainment exist only now, and only suchness posterior to the path can transform beings. Is this not a vertical meaning? If the three vehicles are all subsumed under the ālaya, this is again a horizontal meaning, and moreover confounds with the primal darkness generating consciousness. Being both vertical and horizontal, it is contrary to the true letter I. Originally, when the Tathāgata first appeared, he wished immediately to speak the real; but for the sake of those incapable, he first used impermanence to dispel inversions, next used emptiness and purity to sweep away attachments, next used successive distinctions to arouse the mind, and only then clarified permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Nāgārjuna composed his treatise to set forth this intention of the Buddha: using unattainable emptiness to wash away fixation and attachment, and practicing in accord with the emptiness of all dharmas, which is called corresponding with prajñā. Does this emptiness not empty ignorance? If ignorance is empty, where do seeds remain? Having purified all dharmas, he designated emptiness to expound the Dharma, concluding with the characteristics of the four propositions. These words are vacant and profound, also without dwelling or attachment. Just as after illness is eliminated, food can then be taken, and the food is also digested. How could one right from the start rely on the ālaya to generate all dharmas? One's original views and pride are completely unsubdued, and grasping this new text is like adding water to growing ice. Therefore know that that treatise was not adapted to the heavily attached sentient beings of the latter age, but is merely a single approach to the Dharma outside the realms. Furthermore, if the ālaya is endowed with all dharmas, how could it not be endowed with suchness posterior to the path? If one says it is endowed with it, why say suchness is not the eighth consciousness? I suspect this is still an expedient, opened out from the tathāgatagarbha. If one clings to the expedient, it greatly obstructs the real. If it is the real, grasping it again becomes a view based on words; giving a child too much ghee, it is feared, will cut short its life (and so forth). If one can skillfully understand the intention behind refutation and establishment, one will be purely devoid of stagnation or attachment regarding all sūtras and treatises.