二諦義 1.50

1.50

問：說有無可是二諦教，說非有無不二，云何亦是二諦教耶？答：為是義故，所以山門相承、興皇祖述，明三種二諦。第一明說有為世諦、於無為真諦。第二明說有說無二竝世諦，說非有非無不二為真諦。汝所問者，只著我家第二節，二是世諦、不二是真諦。我今更為汝說第三節二諦義。此二諦者，有無二、非有無不二，說二說不二為世諦、說非二非不二為真諦。以二諦有此三種，是故說法必依二諦。凡所發言不出此三種也。又此二節二諦，竝出經論。有為世諦、空為真諦，如論所明。故論云「有為世諦，此賢聖真知空為真諦」也。二為世諦、不二為真諦，亦出論。論云「有無竝世諦，故說第一義諦即無」也。又《淨名》云「我無我不二，是無我義。」反即我無我二為我義。真俗亦爾也。二不二為世諦、非二非不二為真諦者，《華嚴》云「不著不二法，以無一二故」，又《大論》云「破二不著一」。若爾，故知非二非不二名為第一義諦也。次明所以。大師明此三種二諦者，有數意。兩意已如前說，一者為釋諸佛所說常依二諦，亦是明諸佛所發言不出三種二諦也。二者為釋經論，經論復有此三種二諦，文如前所引云云。然經中所以有此三種說者，竝是赴緣不同，即是各各為人悉檀。或有聞說有無二諦悟，即為說之；乃至聞說二不二為世諦、非二非不二為第一義諦，故說之也。又所以明三重二諦者，此三種二諦竝是漸捨義，如從地架而起。何者？凡夫之人謂諸法實錄是有，不知無所有，是故諸佛為說諸法畢竟空無所有。言諸法有者，凡夫謂有，此是俗諦、此是凡諦；賢聖真知諸法性空，此是真諦、此是聖諦。令其從俗入真、捨凡取聖。為是義故，明初節二諦義也。次第二重明有無為世諦、不二為真諦者，明有無是二邊，有是一邊、無是一邊，乃至常無常、生死涅槃竝是二邊。以真俗、生死涅槃是二邊故，所以為世諦；非真非俗、非生死非涅槃不二中道為第一義諦也。次第三重，二與不二為世諦、非二非不二為第一義諦者，前明真俗、生死涅槃二邊是偏，故為世諦；非真非俗、非生死非涅槃不二中道，為第一義。此亦是二邊。何者？二是偏，不二是中。偏是一邊、中是一邊，偏之與中還是二邊，二邊故名世諦；非偏非中乃是中道第一義諦也。然諸佛說法治眾生病，不出此意，為是故明此三種二諦也。此之三種，只得為一緣亦得為三緣者，初節為凡夫，凡夫謂諸法是有，所以說諸法有為俗諦、空為真諦，正為破凡夫有見，故說有為俗、空為真諦也。第二重為破二乘人，二乘謂諸法空，沈空見坑，故《法華》云「我爾時但念空無相無願之法，於菩薩遊戲神通、淨佛國土永無願樂。」若爾，凡夫著有、二乘滯空，此之空有竝是世諦。若非空非有、非凡非聖，乃是第一義。故經云「非凡夫行、非聖人行，是菩薩行。」亦非有行、非空行，是菩薩行。為是故明第二重二諦也。第三重為破有得菩薩，有得菩薩云：凡夫見有、二乘著空，凡夫沈生死、二乘著涅槃。我解諸法非有非無、非生死非涅槃。為是故明有無二、非有無不二，生死涅槃二，非生死非涅槃不二，竝是世諦。若非真俗、非生死涅槃、非非真俗非非生死涅槃，乃是第一義諦也。此即攝五乘為三緣，開三種二諦赴此三緣，皆令悟一乘一道。若悟此三即究竟，悟此三即非凡非聖、非大非小。若爾，始是悟也。是故經云「我今得道得果，於無漏法得清淨眼。」以得如此悟故，所以如來便入涅槃也。又所以明三種二諦者，為對由來人。由來人明三假是世諦、四忘是真諦。今明此之二諦是我家初節二諦。我家有三重二諦義，汝二諦是初重二諦，今過汝有兩重二諦也。第二節二諦，若真若俗為世諦、若非真若非俗為第一義諦。若爾，汝二諦是我家世諦也。又第三節，攝彼若二諦若中道竝是今世諦。何者？前第二節明二為世諦、不二為真諦，汝二諦但是我家世諦也。彼即云：我亦有非真非俗中道義。為是故第三節明二不二為世諦。汝若二諦若中道，悉是我家世諦。為是故明此三種二諦義也。

Question: Saying 'existence' and 'non-existence' can indeed be teaching in terms of the two truths, but how is saying 'neither existence nor non-existence' as non-dual also teaching in terms of the two truths? Answer: It is for this reason that our lineage tradition and Master Xinghuang [Falang]'s transmission expound three tiers of the two truths. First, it explains that saying 'existence' is the conventional truth, and [saying] 'non-existence' is the ultimate truth. Second, it explains that saying both 'existence' and 'non-existence' as a duality is the conventional truth, and saying 'neither existence nor non-existence' as non-dual is the ultimate truth. What you ask about only touches upon our school's second tier, where duality is the conventional truth and non-duality is the ultimate truth. I will now explain for you the third tier of the meaning of the two truths. These two truths are: the duality of existence and non-existence and the non-duality of neither existence nor non-existence—saying duality and saying non-duality are the conventional truth, and saying neither duality nor non-duality is the ultimate truth. Because the two truths have these three kinds, preaching the Dharma must rely on the two truths. Whatever utterance is made does not go beyond these three kinds. Furthermore, these tiers of the two truths both derive from the sūtras and treatises. That existence is the conventional truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth is as the treatise explains. Therefore the treatise says: "Existence is the conventional truth; that the noble ones truly know emptiness is the ultimate truth." That duality is the conventional truth and non-duality is the ultimate truth also derives from the treatises. A treatise says: "Existence and non-existence are both conventional truth; therefore it is said that the ultimate truth is non-existent." Furthermore, the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "The non-duality of self and non-self is the meaning of non-self." Conversely, then, the duality of self and non-self is the meaning of self. The ultimate and the conventional are also like this. As for duality and non-duality being the conventional truth, and neither duality nor non-duality being the ultimate truth, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "Do not attach to non-dual dharmas, because there is neither one nor two"; and the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa also says: "Refuting duality without clinging to oneness." If so, one knows that neither duality nor non-duality is termed the ultimate truth. Next is to explain the reasons. The Great Master's explanation of these three kinds of two truths has several purposes. Two purposes have already been stated as above: one is to explain that what the Buddhas expound always relies on the two truths, which also shows that what the Buddhas utter does not go beyond these three kinds of two truths. The second is to explain the sūtras and treatises, for the sūtras and treatises also contain these three kinds of two truths, as in the texts cited above, and so forth. However, that there are these three kinds of statements in the sūtras is entirely because of responding to different faculties, which is the individual-adaptation siddhānta. Some, upon hearing the two truths of existence and non-existence expounded, awaken, and so it is expounded for them; up to those who awaken upon hearing duality and non-duality expounded as the conventional truth and neither duality nor non-duality as the ultimate truth, and so it is expounded for them. Furthermore, the reason for explaining the three tiers of the two truths is that these three kinds of two truths are all meanings of gradual relinquishment, like building up from the ground. How so? Worldly people claim that phenomena truly exist in reality, not knowing that there is nothing that exists; therefore the Buddhas expound for them that all phenomena are ultimately empty and non-existent. To say that phenomena exist is what worldly people claim to exist; this is the conventional truth, this is the worldly truth. That the noble ones truly know that the nature of phenomena is empty: this is the ultimate truth, this is the noble truth. This causes them to enter the ultimate from the conventional, and to abandon the worldly and take up the noble. For this purpose, the first tier of the meaning of the two truths is explained. Next, the second tier explains that existence and non-existence are the conventional truth, and non-duality is the ultimate truth: this explains that existence and non-existence are two extremes—existence is one extreme and non-existence is one extreme, up to permanence and impermanence, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, all being two extremes. Because the ultimate and conventional, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, are two extremes, they are the conventional truth; neither ultimate nor conventional, neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa, the non-dual middle way, is the ultimate truth. Next, the third tier, that duality and non-duality are the conventional truth and neither duality nor non-duality is the ultimate truth: previously it was explained that the two extremes of ultimate and conventional, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, are biased, and therefore are the conventional truth; while neither ultimate nor conventional, neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa, the non-dual middle way, is the ultimate. This, too, is two extremes. How so? Duality is biased, and non-duality is the middle. Biased is one extreme, and middle is one extreme; the biased and the middle are still two extremes, and because they are two extremes, they are called conventional truth; neither biased nor middle is the middle way ultimate truth. Thus, when the Buddhas preach the Dharma to cure the illnesses of sentient beings, it does not go beyond this meaning; it is for this reason that these three kinds of two truths are explained. These three kinds can be for a single capacity or can be for three capacities. The first tier is for worldly people: worldly people claim that phenomena exist, so it is said that the existence of phenomena is the conventional truth and emptiness is the ultimate truth; precisely to refute the worldly view of existence, existence is said to be conventional and emptiness the ultimate truth. The second tier is to refute followers of the two vehicles: the two vehicles claim that phenomena are empty and sink into the pit of the view of emptiness; thus the Lotus Sūtra says: "At that time I only contemplated dharmas of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, having no aspiration or joy whatsoever for the bodhisattva's playful mastery of supernatural powers and purifying of Buddha-lands." If so, worldly people cling to existence and the two vehicles stagnate in emptiness; both this emptiness and existence are the conventional truth. Only neither emptiness nor existence, neither worldly nor noble, is the ultimate. Thus the sūtra says: "Neither worldly practice nor noble practice is the bodhisattva practice." Neither practice of existence nor practice of emptiness is the bodhisattva practice. It is for this reason that the second tier of the two truths is explained. The third tier is to refute bodhisattvas with appropriation. Bodhisattvas with appropriation say: worldly people see existence, the two vehicles cling to emptiness; worldly people sink into saṃsāra, the two vehicles cling to nirvāṇa. I understand that phenomena are neither existent nor non-existent, neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa. For this reason, it is explained that the duality of existence and non-existence and the non-duality of neither existence nor non-existence, the duality of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa and the non-duality of neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa, are both the conventional truth. Only neither ultimate nor conventional, neither saṃsāra nor nirvāṇa, neither non-ultimate-nor-conventional nor non-neither-saṃsāra-nor-nirvāṇa, is the ultimate truth. This subsumes the five vehicles under three capacities, opening the three kinds of two truths to respond to these three capacities, all causing them to awaken to the one vehicle and the one path. If one awakens to these three, it is ultimate; awakening to these three is neither worldly nor noble, neither great nor small. If it is like this, it is genuine awakening. Therefore the sūtra says: "I have now attained the path and attained the fruit, gaining the pure eye regarding uncontaminated dharmas." Because of attaining such an awakening, the Tathāgata then entered nirvāṇa. Furthermore, the reason for explaining the three kinds of two truths is to counter traditional theorists. Traditional theorists explain that the three designations are the conventional truth, and the four forgettings are the ultimate truth. Now it is explained that these two truths are our school's first tier of the two truths. Our school has the meaning of three tiers of the two truths; your two truths are the first tier of the two truths, and now we surpass you with two further tiers of the two truths. In the second tier of the two truths, both the ultimate and the conventional are conventional truth; neither ultimate nor conventional is the ultimate truth. If so, your two truths are our conventional truth. Furthermore, the third tier subsumes their two truths as well as the middle way as our present conventional truth. How so? Previously, the second tier explained that duality is the conventional truth and non-duality is the ultimate truth; your two truths are merely our conventional truth. They then say: we also have the meaning of the middle way that is neither ultimate nor conventional. For this reason, the third tier explains that duality and non-duality are the conventional truth. Both your two truths and your middle way are entirely our conventional truth. It is for this reason that these three kinds of meanings of the two truths are explained.