維摩經玄疏 6.41

6.41

答曰：有師言「並是理」，有師言「二諦並是教」，有師言「俗諦是教，真諦是理」，故經云：「皆以世諦名字故說，非第一義。」今詳此三家明義，互有得失也。應四句分別：若約隨情二諦，二諦並是教，是則二諦皆可說也，故有種種二諦，諸師所用不同，經論所明各別。若就隨情智二諦，即俗諦是教，真諦是理，是則俗是可說，真不可說也。若就隨智二諦，二諦皆是理，是則二諦皆不可說也。若約隨智世諦、隨情真諦，是則俗是不可說也。是以迦葉如來之所證見，尚非釋迦、文殊因地情之所知，況復末代凡夫之所能解！今略明此三種二諦，言雖不多，意則靡所不該。佛法義學、坐禪之人，若不信此，疑諍豈息也。

Answer: Some masters say, 'Both are principle.' Some masters say, 'Both two truths are teaching.' Some masters say, 'The conventional truth is teaching, and the ultimate truth is principle.' Therefore a sūtra says: 'All are spoken by means of conventional names and words; they are not the paramārtha.' Now, examining the positions clarified by these three masters, they each have strengths and weaknesses. One should distinguish them using the four propositions: in terms of the two truths conforming to sentiment, both truths are teaching; thus both truths can be spoken, and therefore there are various two truths, used differently by masters and clarified distinctly in sūtras and treatises. In terms of the two truths of sentiment and wisdom, the conventional truth is teaching and the ultimate truth is principle; thus the conventional can be spoken, while the ultimate cannot be spoken. In terms of the two truths conforming to wisdom, both truths are principle; thus both truths cannot be spoken. In terms of the conventional truth conforming to wisdom and the ultimate truth conforming to sentiment, the conventional is unspeakable. Therefore, what was verified and seen by Kāśyapa Tathāgata could not be known by the sentiment of Śākyamuni and Mañjuśrī on the causal ground, how much less could ordinary beings of latter ages understand it! Now, briefly clarifying these three kinds of two truths, although the words are few, the meaning is all-encompassing. If doctrinal scholars and meditators in the Buddha-Dharma do not believe this, how could their doubts and disputes ever cease?