淨名玄論 6.38

6.38

Originally, in opposition to intrinsic nature, the absence of an empty nature was clarified. If one does not adopt an understanding of a fixed nature, but then clings to having no fixed nature, abandoning what is outside principle while maintaining what is within principle, these are all operating with a mind of grasping and rejecting, and thus are equally termed failure. Once one knows that it is neither nature nor convention, as the treatise says: 'Phenomena possessing no nature also do not exist, because all phenomena are empty.' Knowing that it is neither convention nor nature and is ultimately pure—only this is called attainment. Question: Against what is this directed? Answer: There are two senses. First, it is for those who study the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and the Vijñaptimātratā treatises and do not grasp that the three natures are the principle of the three non-natures—the principle of the three non-natures being the amalavijñāna, and also the principle of the two selflessnesses. The three natures are the other-dependent nature, the discriminated nature, and the consummate nature. The discriminated nature is the six dusts being discriminated by consciousness; this is called the discriminated nature. The other-dependent nature is mind and consciousness arising in dependence on the six dusts and the fundamental ālayavijñāna; this is the other-dependent nature. The consummate nature is nirvāṇa. Hence they are named the three natures and the three non-natures. Attainment and failure must speak of advance and abandonment; above, both attainment and failure are unobtainable, and having a far-reaching awakening to the gate where all four propositions are cut off is considered attainment. Leaving this grand courtyard does not accord with human sentiments. Now it is clarified that from the beginning, all attainments and failures are themselves the Way, which is the correct contemplation. As Master Zhao said: 'Is the Way far away? Understand affairs and one is in truth. Is the sage far away? Embody it and one is divine.' Just as the two truths are distinguished by existence and non-existence, the two cognitions are also distinguished by existence and non-existence. Just as the two truths have root and non-root, the two cognitions likewise [are dual]. Next, taking the Madhyamaka contemplation as the root: just as the two truths oppose nonduality, the two cognitions return to the Madhyamaka contemplation. Just as the two truths are explained in three stages, the two cognitions are also explained in three stages. Just as the two truths are only spoken or only unspoken, the two cognitions are also like this: only able to speak or only unable to speak, only illuminating emptiness or only illuminating existence, only active or only passive, or both severed. Or just as the two truths are inside or outside principle, the two cognitions are also like this. Clarifying the two cognitions through physical form having no fixed nature means that there is no fixed nature in the mind; reaching the twelfth, where ignorance is itself cognition, where can one separate form and cognition? Assembling the twelve gates thoroughly connects all diagnoses and generally threads through all sūtras; though the phrasing is not ornate, the doctrine has its basis. Question: Why not explain them diffusely instead of establishing assembled stages? Answer: There are two kinds of people: the first study the intention of contemplation without attainment, yet their empty and subtle expressions are insufficient; the second merely discriminate dharmalakṣaṇas, losing the correct lineage that reveals the Way. Now, wishing to make both the text and the meaning clear, so that both the subtle and the actual are attained, these assembled stages are established.