二諦義 2.70

2.70

問：若爾，從來何意云俗非諦，緣諦俗故名俗諦耶？解云：此語有兩望。何者？俗非諦則望聖，緣諦俗名諦則就緣。望聖，俗是浮虛，故非諦；於緣為實，故秤諦。所以云俗非諦緣諦俗名俗諦耳。非俗非諦者，望真諦竝非。故論云「諸賢聖真知顛倒性空」。顛倒既空，何處有俗？既非俗，何所論諦？故望聖非俗非諦也。次更簡前諸佛隨眾生有六道是俗非諦，為當唯得是俗非諦，亦得是諦耶？解云：此言非諦者，明隨順眾生示有六道，非是情謂實有之於諦耳。

Question: If so, why has it hitherto been said that 'the conventional is not a truth, but because the condition takes the conventional as real it is named conventional truth'? Explanation: These words have two perspectives. Why? 'The conventional is not a truth' is with respect to the noble ones; 'taking the conventional as real is named truth' is with respect to conditions. With respect to the noble ones, the conventional is insubstantial, and therefore not a truth; from the perspective of conditions it is real, and therefore termed a truth. That is why it is said that 'the conventional is not a truth, but because the condition takes the conventional as real it is named conventional truth'. As for 'neither conventional nor a truth', both are negated with respect to the ultimate truth. Thus the treatise says: 'The noble ones truly know that inversion is empty of nature.' Since inversion is empty, where could there be the conventional? Since there is no conventional, what truth can be discussed? Therefore, with respect to the noble ones, it is neither conventional nor a truth. Next, to further distinguish the previous point that the Buddhas' possessing the six destinies in accordance with sentient beings is 'conventional and not a truth': can it only be 'conventional and not a truth', or can it also be a truth? Explanation: When it is said here to be 'not a truth', it clarifies that manifesting the six destinies to comply with sentient beings is simply not the truth from perspective that is sentimentally conceived as really existent.