二諦義 3.35

3.35

問：萬德成涅槃，何故非因成假耶？解云：萬德無別體，非別法成此人，人即是法。但義論人法，可軌義為法、統御義為人，無別異法成人，故云佛果不為異具所成，非因成假也。以涅槃具二假故是世諦，即以此二假空為真諦，故涅槃具二諦攝。彼云：大品權教、雙林實說，二諦往收悉無不盡，故明二諦攝法盡也。莊嚴明二諦攝法不盡。二諦故，自不攝涅槃。攝生死中法亦復不盡。何者？生死中有有法、有空法。虛空不為二諦所攝，虛空不為異具所成，故非因成假；無前滅後生，非相續假；亦非相待假。開善明虛空非因成假、非相續假，是相待假。何者？虛空有名相，故是相待假。莊嚴明虛空故，非因成、相續，亦非相待假。何者？虛空是常，無有名相。名相是無常，以虛空常故無名相，無名相故非相待假。故虛空非三假，非三假非世諦，非三假故不可即空，故非真諦。

Question: The myriad virtues form nirvāṇa; why is it not provisionality as conditioned composition? Explanation: The myriad virtues have no separate substance; there is no distinct phenomenon forming this person—the person is itself the phenomenon. It is only conceptually that person and phenomenon are discussed: the sense of being a model is 'phenomenon', and the sense of presiding and guiding is 'person'; there is no separate, distinct phenomenon that forms the person. Therefore it is said that the fruit of Buddhahood is not constituted by distinct components and is not provisionality as conditioned composition. Because nirvāṇa possesses the two provisionalities, it is conventional truth; and using the emptiness of these two provisionalities as ultimate truth, nirvāṇa is fully subsumed by the two truths. He said: whether the provisional teaching of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā or the definitive explanation of the Twin Trees, when the two truths are applied to encompass them, none are not exhausted; therefore it is explained that the two truths subsume phenomena exhaustively. Zhuangyan explained that the two truths do not subsume phenomena exhaustively. As for the two truths, naturally they do not subsume nirvāṇa. Their subsumption of phenomena within saṃsāra is also incomplete. Why? Within saṃsāra there are existent phenomena and empty phenomena. Space is not subsumed by the two truths: space is not constituted by distinct components, so it is not provisionality as conditioned composition; it has no prior cessation and subsequent arising, so it is not provisionality of continuity; nor is it provisionality of relativity. Kaishan explained that space is not provisionality as conditioned composition nor provisionality of continuity, but is provisionality of relativity. Why? Space has names and marks; therefore it is provisionality of relativity. Zhuangyan explained that space is not conditioned composition or continuity, nor is it provisionality of relativity. Why? Space is eternal and has no names or marks. Names and marks are impermanent; because space is eternal it has no names and marks, and because it has no names and marks it is not provisionality of relativity. Therefore, space is not among the three provisionalities; not being among the three provisionalities, it is not conventional truth; and because it is not among the three provisionalities, it cannot be identified with emptiness, and therefore is not ultimate truth.