觀音玄義記 3.26

3.26

Second, under "Why...", he explains the meaning of the sūtra, in two parts: first, he explains based on this sūtra itself. If it is true non-duality, it definitely does not retain oneness. "Also called neither existent nor non-existent" is the Middle Way of the Perfect Teaching. Here, the Middle can refute the single conventional and single real of the Tripiṭaka and Shared teachings; hence it says: "'Neither existent' refutes the provisional; 'nor non-existent' refutes emptiness." It also refutes the complex conventional and single real of the Separate Teaching; hence it says: "'Neither existent' refutes the two; 'nor non-existent' refutes the one." This is because the preceding three teachings each take the two truths as bondage and liberation. The Perfect Middle can inherently include the three kinds of two truths; because it includes them, they are interpenetratingly identical, thereby using interpenetrating identity to refute non-interpenetration so as to bring about non-duality. Under "If so...", he clarifies that what interpenetrates is also cleared away. Although it is called the Perfect Middle, if it is retained it becomes relational. Second, under "The Great Sūtra...", he explains by analogy with the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. In the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are non-dual; in the Great Sūtra, ignorance and illumination are non-dual: the two are dismissed and the one is abolished, so the meanings of both sūtras coincide. Since both the two extremes and the Middle are cleared away, it is called ultimate emptiness; this clarifies the universal gate in terms of emptiness. Second, under "Thirty...", he examines the gates in the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa. The gates possess four [aspects], in two parts: first, he adduces all the gates in the one chapter. The thirty-one bodhisattvas, Mañjuśrī, and Vimalakīrti, whether speaking or remaining silent, are nothing other than the true mark; their very essence constitutes the gate. If speaking in terms of the predominant qualities of the present text, they may be correlated respectively with the four gates of emptiness and the rest, as well as the fifth, the inexpressible treasury—all are called non-dual and none are other than universal gates. Second, under "Examining closely...", he indicates the four aspects for each in the Perfect meaning. The Great Master's marvelous understanding exhaustively plumbs the principle; he sees that each single gate possesses the meaning of four gates. As cited above regarding saṃsāra and nirvāṇa: since the two are precisely the Middle and the Middle is also precisely the two, the Middle being saṃsāra is called the gate of marvelous existence; the Middle being nirvāṇa is called the gate of marvelous emptiness. The two are precisely the Middle Way, and the Middle necessarily quells and illuminates: double illuminating is the third gate, and double quelling is precisely the fourth gate. Although within a single gate, four are opened according to meaning, and these four all encompass phenomena universally, so all may be named universal. Since the remaining thirty gates all resolve duality back into non-duality, the four aspects of each are clearly evident. Mañjuśrī uses words to reveal the wordless; Vimalakīrti uses silence to manifest the inexpressible. This is to indicate that the essence of the three truths is the secret treasury, originally transcending verbal expression. Having indicated the three truths, how could they not be the four gates? Furthermore, because the aforementioned thirty-one bodhisattvas all manifest the four gates from the inexpressible—each gate wonderfully transcendent and beyond verbal thought—capacities that grasp the meaning attain realization by forgetting words according to what they hear; whereas those who miss the meaning still think there is something spoken and fail to accord with the unborn. Therefore the two great beings, through speech and silence, manifest that the four gates transcend the characteristics of verbal expression, thereby causing the capacities of the respective four gates to each forget words and approach the principle in their own gate. One must realize that the inexpressible has the greatest efficacy in accommodating the capacities of the four gates. Therefore, although the various bodhisattvas each spoke without uttering a single word, Vimalakīrti kept his mouth closed yet broadly expounded the four gates; thus, when speaking they are always silent, and when silent they are always speaking. Were it not so, why would all thirty-three gates be fully cited, and stated to each possess the meaning of the four gates? Without revolving dhāraṇī, none could plumb this import; the statement to "examine closely" has an extremely profound import. Third, under "Master Zhao...", he correlates the texts with the four based on the various sūtras. Each of the thirty-three gates possesses four. Although the meaning is established, the text remains subtle and deep. To cause all to understand, he indicates the characteristics of the four gates based on explicit texts. Sengzhao's commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "The bodhisattvas successively spoke of the characteristics of dharmas; Mañjuśrī spoke of the wordless." Our school, following Sengzhao, assigns these to two gates. The Viśeṣacinti-brahma-paripṛcchā states that all things are both deviant and correct: the deviant is conventional existence; the correct is true emptiness. The Avataṃsaka-sūtra states that allowing the mind to wander and penetrate everywhere into the dharmadhātu—is this not marvelous existence? And immediately reaching it as like empty space—is this not marvelous emptiness? Therefore these two sūtras both represent the gate of both-is. Furthermore, taking Vimalakīrti's cessation of speech to reveal that all dharmas are neither of the two extremes indicates the fourth gate, and its text is very explicit. Thus, based on the Perfect real principle, the various sūtras open the four gates; being profound and vast, they are all universal gates. Second, under "The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā...", he clarifies the universal gate in general. The three phrases clarifying the gate in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā and the Lotus Sūtra, although not distinctly belonging to the enumeration of the four gates, universally encompass dharmas and are all universal gates. In the forty-two syllables, each syllable possesses the three kinds of prajñā, neither vertical nor horizontal, yet lofty and broad; therefore they can mutually encompass the merits of the various syllables. The gate of wisdom is a single gate that leads to the real principle; "difficult to enter" and "narrow" are mutually complementary in meaning. Because it is difficult to enter, it is narrow; because it is narrow, it is difficult to enter; only after training capacities for more than forty years was it expounded. This gate is extremely marvelous; it cannot be understood or entered by persons of the seven expedient stages; thus it is maximally broad yet receives the name "narrow." Second, under "The various sūtras...", he concludes that the gate is named universal. This sūtra's opening of the provisional is forever distinct from the various other sections; its revelation of the real principle is identical with the Perfect of the past; hence, together with the various sūtras, it clarifies the universal gate. The four kinds of contemplation of the mind are all explained in the eighth fascicle of the main text of the Fahua xuanyi under "discerning the substance." That is, in accordance with the various differences in those roots and capacities, matching their desires, matching their fitness, matching their remediation, and matching their awakening, the four gates are expounded differently. Regarding contemplation of the mind: if one takes the teaching as the gate, then within the four gates one attains awakening according to whichever gate, without needing to cultivate contemplation; this is called a person of faith-practice. If one hears but does not awaken, one must cultivate contemplation; this is called a person of Dharma-practice. Each of the four gates of the four teachings has ten contemplations; let scholars seek them out.