維摩經玄疏 6.70

6.70

Second, explaining the use of the four siddhāntas to generate the door of emptiness: analogous to the door of existence above, when one uses the four siddhāntas to generate the door of emptiness, the meaning is thereby established. Yet the masters of the Tattvasiddhi say: 'The Abhidharma's door of existence merely regulates the mind and cannot attain the Way; the Tattvasiddhi's perception of emptiness is what attains the Way.' The Abhidharma masters say: 'We use the Hīnayāna to explain the meaning, and perceive existence to attain the Way; you illicitly draw upon the Mahāyāna to explain the meaning, and thus speak of perceiving emptiness to attain the Way.' We say now that neither of these grasps the meaning of the Tripiṭaka teaching. The Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra says: 'Those of eternalist views speak of severance through distinct thoughts; those of annihilationist views speak of severance through a single thought. Although the two views differ, their attainment of the Way is not different.' The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'In the śrāvaka sūtras, the meaning of the emptiness of dharmas is explained everywhere.' How could one say that perceiving emptiness to attain the Way is an illicit borrowing of the Mahāyāna! Now, relying on the intention of these four siddhāntas, we construct the meanings of establishment and refutation: the four meanings of the Abhidharma masters are established, while the four meanings of the Tattvasiddhi are refuted; the four meanings of the Tattvasiddhi are established, while the four meanings of the Abhidharma masters are refuted. Thus establishment and refutation are evenly matched. Which is the establishment of the Tattvasiddhi? Which is the refutation of the Abhidharma masters? If one understands the skillful and crude crossings of the Tripiṭaka teaching, then the Tattvasiddhi's meaning of the door of emptiness is established, and the Abhidharma masters' meaning of the door of existence is refuted.