[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [二諦義](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854) › 3.17 # 二諦義 3.17 二諦義 3.17 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3.17) 問：汝既有三諦，應有三體；我有二諦，有二體。解云：若得一家意致，不應作此難。前云假有為世諦、假無為真諦。假有不有有、假無不無無。不有有，有無所有；不無無，無無所無。那忽有三體耶？又問：有無終是二諦，非有非無是中道諦，終是三諦、終有三體。既有假三諦，有假三體。解云：不得。假有假無是教、非有非無是理，中道第一義諦是理諦、真俗是教諦。開理教為三諦則得也。次泯之。一往開理教二不二，再往皆泯。何者？二不二不二二、二不二非不二、不二二非二，斯即非二非不二，乃至五句皆流，一無依倚畢竟清淨。理教亦然。故《華嚴》云「一切有無法，了達非有無，不著不二法，以無一二故。」達有無二不二，既無二即無不二，故云「不著不二法，以無一二故」也。然此語是兩處說，師合為一偈說之耳。前說二為表不二，悟二不二；無二更住不二，則還為縛。故《大經》云「如擒捕獼猴，隨觸隨著。」為是故今明，既識二不二，無二即無不二。如是清玄轉悟，一切皆離也。然二諦體義大格如此。猶有竝觀義，兩句難解，今且論一句義，一句付後釋也。言一句者，他明二諦是有二理，三假為世諦理、四忘為真諦理。以有二理故，有出入觀、有二諦竝觀。汝今明唯有中道不二一理，云何得有出入觀？有兩物，可有出有入；既無有二，若為明出入耶？又無有二理，若為明並觀耶？有二，可論並；既無二，何得有並耶？今且論出入觀並觀，位處何位出入觀？何位並觀耶？古有三釋：一者靈味法師，明初地菩薩二諦並觀。初地得真無生，故得並觀也。二者什肇等諸師，明七地菩薩得並觀。故肇師云「施極於施，而未甞施；戒極於戒，而未甞戒。」此即施無施並故也。三者即是三大法師，於世盛行者，八地並觀。初地至七地出入觀，八地始得並觀，八地菩薩道觀雙行、真俗並照也。然此之三釋皆出經論，若偏執是則為非。第一家以初地為是，餘二為非；第三家八地為是，餘二為非。所以成失。今山門釋者，即四節明並觀義。然此之四節，非但是菩薩之要行，亦是二諦之大綱也。四節者，一者山中師云「從初發心已來即並觀。」 > Question: Since you have three truths, you ought to have three essences; I have two truths, so I have two essences. Explanation: If you grasped our school's purport, you would not raise this difficulty. Earlier, it was said that provisional existence is conventional truth, and provisional non-existence is ultimate truth. Provisional existence does not exist as existence; provisional non-existence does not not-exist as non-existence. Not existing as existence, there is no existence that exists; not not-existing as non-existence, there is no non-existence that does not exist. How could there suddenly be three essences? Opponent questions: Existence and non-existence are ultimately two truths, and neither-existence-nor-non-existence is the truth of the Middle Way; there are ultimately three truths, and ultimately three essences. Since there are provisionally three truths, there are provisionally three essences. Explanation: That cannot be. Provisional existence and provisional non-existence are teaching; neither existence nor non-existence is principle. The ultimate truth of the Middle Way is the truth as principle; the ultimate and conventional are the truths as teaching. Opening principle and teaching as three truths is admissible. Next, efface them: initially, one opens principle and teaching, the dual and the non-dual; subsequently, both are effaced. How so? The non-dual of the dual is not non-dual; the dual of the non-dual is not dual; this is neither dual nor non-dual, and so forth through the flow of the five propositions, completely independent and ultimately pure. Principle and teaching are also like this. Hence the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: 'Completely penetrating all dharmas of existence and non-existence as not being existence or non-existence, not clinging to the non-dual dharma, because there is neither one nor two.' Penetrating existence and non-existence as the dual and the non-dual: since there is no dual, there is no non-dual; hence it says, 'not clinging to the non-dual dharma, because there is neither one nor two.' However, these words were spoken in two different passages; the Master combined them into a single verse. Previously it was said that the dual expresses the non-dual, so that one awakens to the non-duality of the dual; if with no dual one further abides in non-duality, one is bound once again. Hence the Great Sūtra says: 'Like catching a monkey: wherever it touches, it clings.' For this reason it is now clarified that once one recognizes the non-duality of the dual, without duality there is no non-duality. Awakening progressively to such clarity and profundity, one is detached from everything. Now, the broad framework of the meaning of the essence of the two truths is like this. There remains the doctrine of simultaneous contemplation, which involves two phrases difficult to understand. For now, let us discuss the meaning of one phrase, leaving the other phrase to be explained later. Speaking of one phrase: others explain that the two truths have two principles, the three provisional designations being the principle of conventional truth, and the four forgettings being the principle of ultimate truth. Because there are two principles, there is exiting and entering contemplation, and there is the simultaneous contemplation of the two truths. Now you explain that there is only the single principle of the non-dual Middle Way; how can there be exiting and entering contemplation? If there are two things, there can be exiting and entering; since there are not two, how could you explain exiting and entering? Moreover, if there are not two principles, how could you explain simultaneous contemplation? If there are two, simultaneity can be discussed; since there are not two, how could there be simultaneity? Now let us discuss exiting and entering contemplation and simultaneous contemplation: at which stages does one exit and enter contemplation, and at which stages does one contemplate simultaneously? Anciently, there were three explanations: The first is Master Lingwei, who explained that bodhisattvas of the first bhūmi contemplate the two truths simultaneously. At the first bhūmi, having attained the true unborn, they are able to contemplate simultaneously. The second is Kumārajīva, Sengzhao, and the other masters, who explained that bodhisattvas of the seventh bhūmi attain simultaneous contemplation. Hence Master Zhao says: 'Giving reaches the utmost of giving, yet one has never given; morality reaches the utmost of morality, yet one has never observed morality.' This is because giving and non-giving are simultaneous. The third is the Three Great Dharma Masters, whose view is widespread in the world, \[holding that\] simultaneous contemplation occurs at the eighth bhūmi: from the first bhūmi to the seventh bhūmi there is exiting and entering contemplation, and only at the eighth bhūmi does one attain simultaneous contemplation, where the bodhisattva's path and contemplation proceed together, illuminating both ultimate and conventional simultaneously. Now, these three explanations all derive from sūtras and treatises; if one clings exclusively to one as correct, it becomes an error. The first house considers the first bhūmi correct and the other two incorrect; the third house considers the eighth bhūmi correct and the other two incorrect. This is why fault arises. Now, as for our mountain school's explanation, we explain the meaning of simultaneous contemplation in four stages. However, these four stages are not only the essential practice of bodhisattvas, but also the great guideline of the two truths. As for the four stages: first, the master of the mountain says, 'From initial aspiration onward, there is simultaneous contemplation.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3.16) - [Next: 3.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3.18) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854~en-mt.3.17) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1854.3.17) · Pramāṇa