二諦義 2.54

2.54

次更釋二諦名。前出他釋。他云：俗諦審實浮虛、真諦審實真實，以審實浮虛，故名真俗二諦。今難：汝真諦審實、俗諦審虛。若爾，則審虛為諦，何謂審實為諦耶？彼云：俗審實是浮虛，是故審實為俗諦。何者？俗三假、真四忘，俗實是虛假也。今家者，諦以審實為義。俗於凡實、真於聖實，故諦以實為義也。然此釋具出經論。凡有兩論釋：一者《百論》、二者《中論》。《百論》云「俗於世人為實」也。《中論》云「俗諦者，一切法性空，世間顛倒謂有，於世人為實，名之為諦。諸賢聖真知諸法空，於聖人為實，名之為諦。」此則兩論皆以審實釋諦也。我明諦是審實，出於論文。汝明俗諦審虛，出何處耶？責之無通也。

Next, the names of the two truths are further explained. Previously, the explanations of others were presented. Others say: 'Conventional truth investigates and verifies insubstantiality; ultimate truth investigates and verifies genuine reality. By investigating and verifying insubstantiality, they are named the two truths of ultimate and conventional.' Now we object: 'Your ultimate truth investigates reality, and your conventional truth investigates unreality. If so, then investigating unreality would be the truth; how could one say that investigating reality is the truth?' They reply: 'Conventionally, one investigates and verifies that it is insubstantial; therefore, investigating and verifying is conventional truth. How so? Convention consists of the three designations, and the ultimate consists of the four oblivions; convention is truly unreal and nominal.' Our school holds that 'truth' has the meaning of 'investigating and verifying as real'. Convention is real from the ordinary [perspective], and the ultimate is real from the noble [perspective]; therefore, truth takes 'real' as its meaning. Moreover, this explanation is fully set forth in the sūtras and treatises. There are two treatises that explain it: first, the Śataśāstra; second, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. The Śataśāstra states: 'Convention is real for worldly people.' The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā states: 'Conventional truth means that all dharmas are in their nature empty, but the worldly, due to inversion, claim existence, which is real for worldly people, and it is named truth. The noble ones truly know that all dharmas are empty, which is real for noble persons, and it is named truth.' Thus, both treatises explain truth by investigating and verifying as real. Our explaining truth as investigating and verifying as real derives from the texts of treatises. Where does your explanation of conventional truth investigating unreality derive from? When pressed, they have no response.