淨名玄論 3.20

3.20

Next, explaining the inconceivability of the real object. While the conventional object is the inconceivability of the one and the immeasurable, the real object is the inconceivability of the immeasurable and the one. Thus the Madhyamaka-śāstra states: "The dharmatā of all phenomena is where the activities of the mind and the paths of speech are severed; it is without arising and without cessation, quiescent like nirvāṇa." Question: The two vehicles also realize dharmatā; why do you say that dharmatā is inconceivable? Answer: Since this objection was raised in the past, ancient traditions have also found it difficult to resolve. If the three vehicles equally realize the real object and all transcend the catuṣkoṭi, and what the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas practice is the same, why is only the bodhisattva considered inconceivable? We now explain that the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas differ in six summary respects; hence there is the conceivable and the inconceivable. First, the two vehicles only attain the emptiness of persons and do not attain the emptiness of dharmas; hence it is conceivable. The bodhisattva fully attains both emptinesses; hence it is inconceivable. Second, the two vehicles also do not fully attain the emptiness of persons. Why is this so? Nonduality regarding self and nonself is the true meaning of nonself. The two vehicles view self and nonself as dual; how could they attain nonself? Third, even if sharp-rooted practitioners of the two vehicles attain the emptiness of dharmas, it is merely by analyzing dharmas to explain emptiness. The bodhisattva's emptiness of dharmas is inherent emptiness and specific-characteristic emptiness: emptiness is immediately existence, and existence is immediately emptiness. Hence the emptiness of dharmas of the two vehicles is conceivable, while that of the bodhisattva is inconceivable. Fourth, the Dazhidulun states: "The two vehicles attain mere emptiness, hence it is conceivable. The bodhisattva attains unobtainable emptiness, hence it is inconceivable." Fifth, the two vehicles attain a minor emptiness, like the emptiness inside a pore. The bodhisattva attains an emptiness that is vast and all-pervading, like the emptiness of the ten directions. Question: How can emptiness have size? Answer: The two vehicles cannot know the emptiness of all dharmas in their specific characteristics one by one, but only know the emptiness of the twelve sense bases in general characteristics; hence it is called minor. The bodhisattva can know all dharmas in their specific characteristics—namely coarse and fine, large and small, shallow and deep—and only then knows them to be empty; hence their emptiness is vast and great. Furthermore, the two vehicles only attain the emptiness of persons and dharmas within the three realms; hence, explaining emptiness in terms of existence, the scope of emptiness is brief. The bodhisattva knows that the persons and dharmas within the three realms as well as those outside the three realms are all empty; hence, explaining emptiness in terms of existence, the scope of emptiness is extensive. Therefore, the two vehicles attain a small portion of emptiness, like a hare or a horse [crossing a river]. The bodhisattva fully attains extensive emptiness, like a fragrant elephant. Thus emptiness has great and small [scopes]. Sixth, the two vehicles only attain the emptiness of saṃsāra and do not see that the wondrous existence of great nirvāṇa has an essence transcending all characteristics and is therefore empty—how much less do they know that the wondrous existence of nirvāṇa is itself empty! Hence the emptiness of the two vehicles is conceivable, while the emptiness of the bodhisattva is inconceivable. Question: If so, and the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas do not contemplate dharmatā in the same way, how can the Lotus Sūtra say that they equally enter the dharmatā, and the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra say that they equally contemplate the madhyamā pratipad? Answer: When the ancients distinguished the three vehicles' contemplation, some said they contemplate identically, while others said they contemplate differently; the two views were tangled in controversy. We now state briefly: the three vehicles have both identical contemplation and different contemplation. Because they equally see emptiness, it is said that they contemplate identically; because some attain both emptinesses while others do not—as in the six points above—they do not contemplate identically. Identity and difference each have their own meaning; one should not cling one-sidedly. Question: Is the real object only a single inconceivability, or can it also have multiple inconceivabilities? Answer: Dharmatā is without duality, but in terms of the teachings there are shallow and deep levels, as in the aforementioned explanation of the three stages of entering the Dharma gate of nonduality.