淨名玄論 5.8

5.8

問：此與開善至忌彌存義何異耶？答：彼彌存之義，終非至忌；至忌之義，終非彌存。今以彌存為至忌、至忌為彌存，是故為異。問：舊亦如是，與今何異？答：彼至忌之義，知終不作境、境終不成智，則是境智二見，何名至忌？若智則是境，境既無智，無智亦無知。若境則是智，智既無所不知，則境亦無所不知。而實不爾，故終是二見。今對此一門，略敘大乘樞要觀行淵府。經云「貪欲則是道，恚癡亦復然。如是三法中，具無量諸佛道。」貪欲則是道者，求貪欲四句內外畢竟無從，貪欲本來自性清淨，則是實相。如此了悟，便名般若。豈有實相之境異般若觀耶？故境智不二，雖四句內外求貪不得。而則見於眾生宛然有貪欲，便是方便。傷眾生無貪謂貪而欲拔之，故則此方便復名大悲。欲令悟貪無貪，與無貪之樂，則此大悲復名大慈。無故一句觀行，具足境智及慈悲等萬行。初信此法為十信，解此法為十解，乃至證悟此法為十地，究竟了達為佛果，豈非一貪中具無量諸佛道耶？故無不同。舊宗別有真境，會之而生慈悲，起境智至忌就。就一貪作既爾，歷一切法例然。

Question: How does this differ from the meaning of Kaishan's 'ultimate cessation yet pervasive preservation'? Answer: His meaning of pervasive preservation is ultimately not ultimate cessation; his meaning of ultimate cessation is ultimately not pervasive preservation. Now, taking pervasive preservation to be ultimate cessation, and ultimate cessation to be pervasive preservation—this is why they differ. Question: The old [teachings] were also like this; how does it differ from the present? Answer: In his meaning of ultimate cessation, cognition ultimately does not become the object, and the object ultimately does not become cognition; this constitutes the two views of object and cognition—how could it be called ultimate cessation? If cognition were the object, then since the object has no cognition, being without cognition it would also have no knowing. If the object were cognition, then since cognition has nothing it does not know, the object would also have nothing it does not know. But in reality it is not so; therefore it remains two views. Now, in response to this single gate, I will briefly set forth the great ocean and storehouse of contemplation practice, the pivotal essence of the Mahāyāna. A sūtra says: 'Greedy desire is precisely the Path; anger and delusion are also like this. Within these three dharmas, immeasurable Buddha Paths are complete.' That greedy desire is precisely the Path means that when seeking greedy desire within or outside the catuṣkoṭi, it is ultimately without source; the intrinsic nature of greedy desire is originally pure, which is precisely dharmatā. Awakening like this is called prajñā. How could the object of dharmatā be different from the contemplation of prajñā? Therefore object and cognition are nondual: although greed cannot be found when sought within or outside the catuṣkoṭi, one sees that sentient beings clearly possess greedy desire, which is upāya. Pitying sentient beings who, having no greed, consider themselves to have greed, and wishing to rescue them—this upāya is further called great compassion. Wishing to cause them to awaken to greed as non-greed and giving them the bliss of non-greed—this great compassion is further called great benevolence. For this reason, a single phrase of contemplation practice is fully endowed with object and cognition, benevolence and compassion, and all the ten thousand practices. Initial faith in this dharma constitutes the ten faiths; understanding this dharma constitutes the ten understandings; up to realizing and awakening to this dharma constituting the daśabhūmi, and exhaustively penetrating it constituting the fruit of Buddhahood. Does not a single greed contain immeasurable Buddha Paths? Therefore none are not identical. The old school posited a separate real object, upon meeting which benevolence and compassion arose, establishing the ultimate cessation of object and cognition. Just as it operates with respect to a single greed, so it is across all dharmas by analogy.