維摩經略疏垂裕記 3.37

3.37

Second, from "In terms of teachings" below, the specific explanation, [which has] two [parts]: First, correctly [explaining] in terms of teachings. Regarding "simple, compound, and complete": "compound" means reiterated. Existence, non-existence, both, and neither are the simple four. Existence of existence, non-existence of existence, up to the neither-existence-nor-non-existence of existence, and the neither-existence-nor-non-existence of non-existence, are the compound four. Existence of existence, non-existence of existence having existence, both-existence-and-non-existence having existence, neither-existence-nor-non-existence having non-existence, up to double negation at the head being likewise, are the complete four. Regarding "Even lacking" below: previously it lacked the emptiness of non-existence of the two teachings, how much more so the middle [way] of non-non-existence in the separate and perfect [teachings]? Regarding "If one attains expedients and so forth": Jingxi says: this is said in terms of the side of negation, merely saying "non-existent." Although there are four gates, negation merely results in non-existence, hence it says "non-existent." Passing to the Tripiṭaka teaching, although it again grants it, because there is this cessation it may also be existence. It merely results in existence and non-existence, and still lacks the third, so how could it have double negation alone? Therefore the former two teachings certainly lack double negation. Next, regarding "The separate teaching speaks of the storehouse nature": one must distinguish between the separate and the perfect. True suchness covered by afflictions is called the storehouse of the separate [teaching]. Afflictions are identical to principle, and principle inherently contains all phenomena—this is called the storehouse of the perfect [teaching]. Regarding "One gate is immediately four gates" and so forth: once one realizes that the three truths are mutually interfused, how could the four gates be mutually separated? The emptiness gate is the true truth, the existence gate is the conventional truth; both-existence-and-non-existence and double negation are simply the concealment and illumination of the middle truth. Regarding "Herein" below: attachment to the perfect must be dismantled, how much more so the partial, the lesser, as well as ordinary and heterodox [views]? Although gold and iron chains differ in value, their binding is the same.