二諦義 2.69

2.69

次更從前釋。問：前云六道無所有，於眾生有六道。諸佛隨眾生現五道身，為是俗諦、為是真諦？真諦則無六道，眾生無所有。有既是於諦，佛隨眾生有六道，亦是無所有，有亦是於諦不？解云：不例。六道無所有，於眾生實有，故是於諦。佛現六道身，非是實謂有，故非於諦。難：既非於，應非是俗。解云：是俗，非是於。何者？以虛假故是俗，非實有故非於諦。自有是俗非於諦、自有是俗是於諦。顛倒六道，則是俗是於諦；諸佛隨眾生，是俗非於諦也。次時更簡此語。六道無所有，於眾生有六道，是俗諦。諸佛隨眾生有六道。故經云「隨順眾生故，普入諸世間。」既隨眾生有六道身，為是真諦、為是俗諦耶？若是真諦，真諦無有六道；若是俗諦，復非實有，那是俗諦？為是義故，就俗諦中有三句：一是俗非諦、二是諦非俗、三亦諦亦俗。若圓成四句者，望真則有非俗非諦也。一是俗非諦者，諸佛隨眾生有六道，非情謂實有。以有六道故是俗，非情謂實有故非諦，是為是俗非諦也。然從來無此義，一往聞亦不信受。今明者，諸佛隨眾生有，非情謂有，所以是俗非諦也。二是諦非俗者，望聖是俗，於其非俗。此兩名相妨，俗即非諦、諦則非俗，望聖為俗、於其非俗。但是實有，故是諦非俗也。三亦諦亦俗者，凡聖合論。望聖是俗、於凡是諦，故云亦俗亦諦。又就世俗諦中，復有亦俗亦諦義。何者？其自有風俗、世俗之俗。此之風俗及與世俗，於其竝實，故亦俗亦諦也。風俗之俗則橫、世俗隔別則竪，此之橫竪皆實，故名俗諦也。

Next, to explain further based on the foregoing: Question: It was stated previously that the six destinies have no existence, but exist from the perspective of sentient beings. When the Buddhas manifest bodies in the five destinies in accordance with sentient beings, is this the conventional truth, or is it the ultimate truth? In the ultimate truth there are no six destinies, and sentient beings have no existence. Since their existence is truth from perspective, when the Buddha manifests the six destinies in accordance with sentient beings, are they also non-existent, and is their existence also truth from perspective or not? Explanation: This is not comparable. The six destinies have no existence, yet from the perspective of sentient beings they really exist, and therefore they are truth from perspective. When the Buddha manifests bodies in the six destinies, it is not a conception of real existence, and therefore it is not truth from perspective. Objection: Since it is not from perspective, it should not be conventional. Explanation: It is conventional, but not from perspective. Why? Because it is nominal, it is conventional; because it is not real existence, it is not truth from perspective. Something may be conventional and not truth from perspective; something may be conventional and be truth from perspective. The inverted six destinies are both conventional and truth from perspective; the Buddhas' complying with sentient beings is conventional and not truth from perspective. Next, to further distinguish these words: The six destinies have no existence, yet from the perspective of sentient beings there are six destinies, which is conventional truth. The Buddhas possess the six destinies in accordance with sentient beings. Therefore the sūtra says: 'In order to comply with sentient beings, / He universally enters all worldly realms.' Since they possess bodies in the six destinies in accordance with sentient beings, is this the ultimate truth or the conventional truth? If it is the ultimate truth, in the ultimate truth there are no six destinies; if it is the conventional truth, again it is not really existent, so how is it the conventional truth? For this reason, within the conventional truth there are three propositions: first, it is conventional and not a truth; second, it is a truth and not conventional; third, it is both a truth and conventional. If one completes the four propositions, with respect to the ultimate there is also 'neither conventional nor a truth'. The first, 'it is conventional and not a truth', means that the Buddhas possess the six destinies in accordance with sentient beings, which is not a sentimental conception of real existence. Because there are six destinies, it is conventional; because it is not a sentimental conception of real existence, it is not a truth; this is 'conventional and not a truth'. Yet hitherto there has been no such doctrine, and upon first hearing it people do not believe and accept it. What is explained now is: the Buddhas possess them in accordance with sentient beings and not as an existence conceived by sentiment; therefore it is conventional and not a truth. The second, 'it is a truth and not conventional', means that with respect to the noble ones it is conventional, but from their perspective it is not conventional. These two terms conflict with each other: 'conventional' is not 'truth', and 'truth' is not 'conventional'; with respect to the noble ones it is conventional, but from their perspective it is not conventional. It is merely real existence, and therefore it is a truth and not conventional. The third, 'both a truth and conventional', is discussed by combining the ordinary and the noble: with respect to the noble ones it is conventional, and from the perspective of the ordinary it is a truth; hence it is called 'both conventional and a truth'. Furthermore, within the conventional truth (shisudi), there is again the meaning of 'both conventional and a truth'. Why? There are conventions of customs (fengsu) and conventions of the world (shisu). These customs and worldly conventions are both real from their perspective; therefore it is both conventional and a truth. The convention of customs is horizontal, while the differentiation of worldly conventions is vertical; both the horizontal and the vertical are real, and thus it is named conventional truth.