十二門論宗致義記 1.12

1.12

第二、立義者，法本離言，機緣罕悟，聖悲巧引務令被益，致使隨緣立義勢變多端，大略而言亦有其五：一、應機立，如《涅槃》中外道見佛金色身等，而言：「瞿曇雖是好人，枉理說空而是斷見。」佛則告言：「我不言空。一切眾生有佛性故，有常樂我淨」等。聞已入法，後悟道迹，而實文中佛性名第一義空如是等。《楞伽》中為恐怖空者說如來藏有三十二相等，文意亦同，具如經說。二、斥破立，謂此龍樹於三論等中隨破彼執盡滅之處，心無寄故真空便顯，則為是立，謂無立立也。三、隨時立，謂如聖天菩薩於一時中有外道論議，便立二蘊以對擔人為證義故。如人兩肩有荷擔故，義已極成，後於大眾之中便立五蘊。其本外道則問：「若爾，何故先立二耶？」答：「前為對擔人更無智者，今對智眾，方具足說。」如是等。四、翻邪立，謂如聖天菩薩對八方外道立三寶義，若有見屈當斬首謝，眾敵雖攻而義理無墮，遂令外道歸信入法。此等所立未必有三支五分比量道理，但以勝辯隨時顯說，令義堅固使其信伏，亦言無所在故也。五、定量立，謂要依彼世間因明，於宗因喻無諸過類，義理極成，名真能立。若於宗等有過墮者，名似能立，不成立也。又如以八種比量道理，證大乘經真是佛語等。是故當知如上所說立破等義，並悉方便，務令前機歸伏生信，未必得具佛法深旨。且如真如，無同法喻，故不得立者，豈可真如為非法也？是故要當離此立破之諍論等，方為順實究竟義也。

Second, establishing propositions: Dharma is fundamentally beyond words, and those with the capacity to understand it rarely awaken. Out of compassion, the Sage skillfully guides them, striving to bring them benefit, causing the establishing of propositions in accordance with conditions to take on varied postures and many shifts. Broadly speaking, there are also five: 1. Establishing in response to faculties: as in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], where non-Buddhists saw the Buddha's golden body and so forth, and said: 'Although Gautama is a good man, he perversely preaches emptiness, which is an annihilationist view.' The Buddha then told them: 'I do not speak of emptiness. Because all sentient beings possess the Buddha-nature, there is permanence, bliss, self, and purity,' and so forth. Having heard this, they entered into the Dharma and later awakened to the tracks of the path; yet in reality, within the text, the Buddha-nature is named the ultimate emptiness, and so forth. In the Laṅkāvatāra, for those terrified of emptiness, he taught that the tathāgatagarbha possesses the thirty-two marks and so on; the text's meaning is likewise the same, fully as stated in the sūtra. 2. Establishing by rebuking and refuting: this refers to Nāgārjuna in the Three Treatises and elsewhere, where, as soon as he refutes those attachments until they are utterly eradicated, because the mind has no support, true emptiness is immediately manifested, which constitutes establishing; this is called establishing without establishing. 3. Establishing according to the occasion: as when Bodhisattva Āryadeva, on an occasion during a debate with a non-Buddhist, established two aggregates to provide an argument to match a load-carrier; just as a person has two shoulders to carry a load, the meaning was already fully established. Later, amidst a great assembly, he established the five aggregates. The original non-Buddhist then asked: 'If so, why did you previously establish two?' He replied: 'Previously, it was for the sake of confronting a load-carrier where there was no other person of wisdom; now, confronting a wise assembly, I explain it in full.' Such are cases of this. 4. Establishing by overturning heresy: as when Bodhisattva Āryadeva, confronting non-Buddhists of the eight directions, established the meaning of the Three Jewels, saying that if anyone found him bested, he would decapitate himself in apology; though the many opponents attacked, his principles did not collapse, and he thereupon caused the non-Buddhists to convert with faith and enter into the Dharma. What was established in cases such as these did not necessarily have the principles of three-membered or five-membered syllogisms; he simply used superior eloquence to reveal and explain according to the occasion, making the meaning firm so as to cause them to submit with faith; this too is because words have no fixed abode. 5. Establishing by normative pramāṇa: this requires relying on worldly Hetuvidyā, free from all classes of fallacies regarding the thesis, reason, and example, with the principles fully established, which is called true establishing. If there are fallacies and lapses regarding the thesis and so forth, it is called pseudo-establishing and is not established. It is also like using eight kinds of inferential principles to prove that the Mahāyāna sūtras are truly the Buddha's word, and so forth. Therefore, one should know that the meanings of establishing and refuting explained above are all expedients, striving to make the faculties addressed submit and give rise to faith; they do not necessarily embody the Buddha-Dharma's profound purport. For instance, as with Suchness, because it has no homogeneous example, it cannot be established [syllogistically]; yet how could Suchness be a non-dharma? Therefore, one must transcend these disputes of establishing and refuting before one accords with the real and ultimate meaning.