二諦義 2.16

2.16

問曰：經中有立有破，何得言皆破耶？解云：經中若立若破，皆為破病。何者？經中若說一色一香，皆為顯道。若不顯道，可不破病。既若立若破皆為顯道，故破立皆為破病也。經既然，故論主學經，師學論主。大小乘人有新故兩病，故有兩論主出世破之。提婆破故病，龍樹破新病。論主既然，大師亦爾，破此新舊等病，故作如此說也。然道義大意如此，必須得如此意，非為立名道義，乃道義為息名也。將欲息名，故前須釋名。

Question: In the sūtras there is establishing and there is refuting; how can you say all is refuting? Explanation: In the sūtras, whether establishing or refuting, all is to refute illness. Why? In the sūtras, if a single color or a single fragrance is spoken of, all is to reveal the Way. If it did not reveal the Way, it might not refute illness. Since both establishing and refuting reveal the Way, both refuting and establishing are to refute illness. Since the sūtras are like this, the treatise masters studied the sūtras, and the Master studied the treatise masters. Followers of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna have two illnesses, new and old; therefore, two treatise masters appeared in the world to refute them: Āryadeva refuted the old illness, and Nāgārjuna refuted the new illness. Since the treatise masters were like this, the Great Master was also like this, refuting these new and old illnesses, and therefore made such an exposition. The broad purport of the doctrinal meaning of the Way is indeed like this; one must obtain this intention: it is not that the doctrinal meaning of the Way is for establishing names, but that the doctrinal meaning of the Way is for putting names to rest. Because one intends to put names to rest, one must first explain names.