淨名玄論 5.15

5.15

問：《大品》明有為般若、無為般若，豈不正辨常無常耶？答：無為般若，凡有二種：一者以實相境名無為般若，所生觀智名有為般若。二者以佛果法身名無為般若，菩薩因慧名有為般若。《大品》中正明境智為無為義，傍明因果為無為義，是以論云「欲得有為般若，當學無為」，此明欲得觀智當觀實相境。若言欲得於因當學果者，於義不便也。又實相能生般若，正是以境生智。若言以果生因，義非便也。若以實相則是法身、以如為佛者，則此境智便是因果。上五句中，已詳此意。《法華經》正為迴小入大之人，故明三乘為方便，令其捨小乘，一乘為真實，勸其取大，故正明三一二慧也。既捨小求大，則發菩提心、修菩薩行。復學空有權實，不著三界，不墮二乘，直至佛道。但《大品》既已廣明，故《法華》但略說也。三根聲聞當法華之席，不執無常、未明常樂，但既說一乘之因，須辨法身之果，是故後分略辨常與無常。又說常住成其一乘，若是無常應同灰斷，既異昔三則知常住。皆是傍明，非正宗也。

Question: The Pañcaviṃśati clarifies saṃskṛta-prajñā and asaṃskṛta-prajñā; does this not directly distinguish permanence and impermanence? Answer: As for asaṃskṛta-prajñā, in general there are two kinds: First, taking the object of dharmatā as asaṃskṛta-prajñā, and the contemplative cognition produced by it as saṃskṛta-prajñā. Second, taking the dharmakāya of the Buddha fruit as asaṃskṛta-prajñā, and the bodhisattva's causal wisdom as saṃskṛta-prajñā. In the Pañcaviṃśati, it directly clarifies object and cognition as the meaning of asaṃskṛta, and secondarily clarifies cause and effect as the meaning of asaṃskṛta. Therefore the treatise states: "If one wishes to attain saṃskṛta-prajñā, one should learn the asaṃskṛta"—this clarifies that if one wishes to attain contemplative cognition, one should contemplate the object of dharmatā. If one were to say that wishing to attain the cause one should learn the effect, that would not be suitable in meaning. Furthermore, that dharmatā can produce prajñā is precisely producing cognition by means of the object. If one were to say that the effect produces the cause, the meaning would not be suitable. If one takes dharmatā to be precisely the dharmakāya and takes suchness to be the Buddha, then this object and cognition are indeed cause and effect. In the five propositions above, this meaning has already been explained in detail. The Lotus Sūtra is directly intended for those who turn from the small and enter the great; therefore it clarifies that the three vehicles are provisional to make them abandon the Small Vehicle, and that the one vehicle is real to encourage them to adopt the Great; hence it directly clarifies the two wisdoms of the three and the one. Having abandoned the small and sought the great, they generate the bodhicitta and cultivate the bodhisattva practices. They further learn the provisional and real of emptiness and existence, not clinging to the three realms and not falling into the two vehicles, proceeding directly to the Buddha path. However, since the Pañcaviṃśati had already broadly clarified this, the Lotus merely states it briefly. When the śrāvakas of the three faculties were in the assembly of the Lotus, they did not cling to impermanence, yet had not understood permanence and bliss; but having preached the cause of the one vehicle, one must distinguish the fruit of the dharmakāya; for this reason, the latter section briefly distinguishes permanence and impermanence. Furthermore, preaching eternal permanence establishes its one vehicle; if it were impermanent, it would be identical to annihilation into ashes; since it differs from the former three, one knows it is eternally permanent. These are all secondary clarifications, not the primary doctrine.