金剛三昧經論 3.93

3.93

論曰：此是第二破諸邪解。邪解雖多，大邪有二，依甚深教如言取義，自謂究竟，難可化故。一者聞佛所說動靜無二，便謂是一一實一心，由是誹撥二諦道理。二者聞佛所說空有二門，計有二法而無一實，由此誹撥無二中道。是二邪解，服藥成病，甚難可治。今顯彼過，此二頌中次第顯之。初言若說法有一者，謂如前說計有一實，如自所計說有一法故。是相如毛輪者，謂彼所計一實法相，如目曀者所見毛輪故。如焰水迷倒者，謂如渴鹿見焰謂水，馳走而求直是迷倒，計有一心亦如是故。為諸虛妄故者，渴鹿見水、曀者見輪、學士計一，如是諸計齊虛妄故。次破無見。若見於法無者，謂如前說計有二諦，無一心法故。是法同於空者，彼計一心同於空理，空理之外本無一實故。如盲無日倒者，謂如生盲貧窮乞兒，本未曾見日輪光明，其有目者為說有日，盲者謂無、不信有日，直是顛倒。彼計亦爾，由彼本來唯學空有，而未曾聞無二中道，雖有說者不信受故。所以日輪喻於中道者，日輪圓滿有大光明，唯除盲者無不見故。一心亦爾，周圓無缺，有本始覺大光明照，除不信者，無不入故。說法如龜毛者，彼無見者說一心法但名無體猶如龜毛，不異盲人謂無日輪也。

Commentary: This is the second [division], refuting various heterodox understandings. Although heterodox understandings are numerous, there are two great heterodoxies: adhering to the profound teachings and grasping meanings according to the letter, they consider themselves ultimate and are difficult to transform. First, hearing the Buddha preach that movement and tranquility are not two, they immediately claim that it is a single, real one mind, thereby repudiating the principle of the two truths. Second, hearing the Buddha preach the two approaches of emptiness and existence, they conceive that there are two dharmas without a single reality, thereby repudiating the non-dual middle way. These two heterodox understandings are like taking medicine that turns into disease, and are extremely difficult to cure. Now, in demonstrating their errors, they are revealed in sequence within these two verses. First, stating 'If one asserts that dharmas are one' refers to conceiving a single reality as explained before; as conceived by oneself, one asserts that there is one dharma. 'This characteristic is like hairnets' means that the characteristic of the single real dharma conceived by them is like the hairnets seen by someone with cataracts. 'Like the delusion of mirage-water' means that just as a thirsty deer seeing a mirage thinks it is water and runs in pursuit, which is sheer delusion, conceiving of a single mind is also like this. 'Because of various falsehoods' means that the thirsty deer seeing water, the cataract patient seeing hairnets, and the scholar conceiving oneness—such conceptions are all equally false. Next, refuting the view of non-existence: 'If one sees that dharmas are non-existent' refers to conceiving the two truths while denying the dharma of the one mind, as explained before. 'This dharma is identical to emptiness' means that they conceive the one mind to be identical to the principle of emptiness, with no single reality existing outside the principle of emptiness. 'Like the blind man's delusion of having no sun' means that just as a destitute beggar blind from birth has never seen the light of the sun's orb, and when those with eyes tell him there is a sun, the blind man says there is none and does not believe in the sun's existence, which is sheer inversion. Their conception is also like this: because from the beginning they have only studied emptiness and existence and have never heard the non-dual middle way, even when someone explains it, they do not believe or accept it. The reason why the sun's orb is an analogy for the middle way is that the sun's orb is round and full with great illumination, and except for the blind, there is none who does not see it. The one mind is also like this: complete and without lack, illuminated by the great radiance of innate and initial awakening; except for those who lack faith, there is none who does not enter it. 'He speaks of dharmas like turtle's hair' means that this holder of the view of non-existence asserts that the dharma of the one mind is merely a name without substance, just like turtle's hair, no different from the blind man claiming there is no sun's orb.