二諦義 2.9

2.9

又問：何意說於諦教諦耶？解云：二意。一者為釋經讀論，經論中竝有此言也。二者為對他，他明二諦是天然之境，有此二理，而二諦名境復名理者，會二諦生二智名之為境，而道理有二諦，故名之為理。道理有此二理，道理有此二境。今對彼明此是於二理、此是於二境，非道理有此理有此境也。若爾，今時有兩境兩理。兩境者，一於境、二教境。兩理者，一於理、二教理。為是義故，明於諦教諦也。然如來直說二於諦，凡有三句，謂得、失、亦得亦失。直作此說，若為得解耶？今佛直說二於諦，云何得解？答：今明佛說於諦有三句，一皆得、二皆失、三亦得亦失。言亦得亦失者，即是前二於諦，諸法於凡是有，此有為失；諸賢聖真知諸法空，此空為得。示其空有，令識得失，令其捨有學空、改凡成聖也。二皆失者，二皆是於，故二皆失。於凡有，有既失；於聖空，空亦失。何者？諸法未曾空有，於凡謂有、於聖謂空。如一色未曾空有，有見之人謂色有、空觀之人謂色空。一色於空有兩緣成空有，故此空有竝是失也。兩皆得者，只知於二，即知不二，此下五句皆淨。於緣二，豈是二？

Another question: For what reason are the truth from perspective and the truth as teaching spoken of? Explanation: There are two reasons. First, to interpret the sūtras and read the treatises, for both sūtras and treatises have these words. Second, to respond to others. Others explain that the two truths are natural objects, that there are these two principles. Now, the two truths being called objects and also called principles means: matching the two truths gives rise to two cognitions, so they are called objects; and in principle there are two truths, so they are called principles. In principle there are these two principles; in principle there are these two objects. Now, responding to them, we clarify that these are the two principles from perspective, and these are the two objects from perspective; it is not that in principle there are these principles and there are these objects. If so, at present there are two objects and two principles. The two objects are: first, the object from perspective; second, the object as teaching. The two principles are: first, the principle from perspective; second, the principle as teaching. For this reason, the truth from perspective and the truth as teaching are clarified. However, when the Tathāgata directly speaks of the two truths from perspective, there are generally three propositions: namely, correct, erroneous, and both correct and erroneous. If it is directly stated in this way, how is understanding attained? Now when the Buddha directly speaks of the two truths from perspective, how is it understood? Answer: Now it is clarified that the Buddha's exposition of the truth from perspective has three propositions: first, both correct; second, both erroneous; third, both correct and erroneous. As for 'both correct and erroneous': this refers to the previous two truths from perspective; conditioned phenomena are existent from the perspective of ordinary persons, and this existence is erroneous; the worthy and holy ones truly know that conditioned phenomena are empty, and this emptiness is correct. Showing their emptiness and existence makes them recognize correctness and error, makes them abandon existence to study emptiness, and transform from ordinary persons into holy ones. As for 'both erroneous': both are perspectives, therefore both are erroneous. Being existent from the perspective of ordinary persons: existence is already erroneous; being empty from the perspective of holy ones: emptiness is also erroneous. Why? Conditioned phenomena have never been empty or existent; from the perspective of ordinary persons they are thought to be existent, and from the perspective of holy ones they are thought to be empty. Just as a single form has never been empty or existent: a person of existent views thinks form is existent, while a person of emptiness contemplation thinks form is empty. A single form becomes empty or existent from the perspective of the two conditions of emptiness and existence; therefore, this emptiness and existence are both erroneous. As for 'both correct': merely knowing the two from perspective, one immediately knows non-duality; below this, all five propositions are pure. Being two from the perspective of conditions—how could it be two?