淨名玄論 1.59

1.59

問：理既是門，因何得入？答：藉不二教，通不二理，即是以迹顯本、教為理門。問：正應以教為門，云何乃以理為門耶？答：文云入不二法門，可言但入教耶？良以入理，故稱為入，所以因理為門。問：常云二諦為教門，為通不二理。何故不用二不為不二門耶？答：自有二通不二，以二為不二門。今此中云入不二法門，不云從二入不二，故不以二為門。問：二諦為門，遂入不二理者，亦應不二為門，應入非二非不二。若不二虛通，當體名門。二諦無垂，亦當二名門。答：通即義例。但二諦未極，可得更從二入不二。今此不二既為究竟，不得云從不二入非二非不二矣。

Question: Since the principle is the gate, whereby does one gain entrance? Answer: Relying on the teaching of nonduality, one gains access to the principle of nonduality; that is, using the trace to reveal the root, teaching serves as the gate to principle. Question: Teaching should properly serve as the gate; why then is principle taken as the gate? Answer: The text speaks of "entering the Dharma gate of nonduality"; could one say that one merely enters the teaching? It is precisely because one enters the principle that it is called "entering"; therefore, principle is taken as the gate. Question: It is commonly said that the two truths are the gate of teaching, serving to give access to the principle of nonduality. Why not use duality as the gate to nonduality? Answer: There is indeed duality giving access to nonduality, where duality serves as the gate to nonduality. Here, however, it speaks of "entering the Dharma gate of nonduality" and does not speak of entering nonduality from duality; hence duality is not taken as the gate. Question: If the two truths are the gate and one thereby enters the principle of nonduality, then nonduality should also be the gate, and one should enter neither duality nor nonduality. If nonduality is empty and pervasive and is named a gate as its identical essence, then the two truths without obstruction should also be named a gate as duality itself. Answer: As a pervasive analogy, the principle would follow. But because the two truths are not ultimate, one can still enter nonduality from duality. Now, since this nonduality is ultimate, one cannot speak of entering neither duality nor nonduality from nonduality.