二諦義 1.20

1.20

Question: According to what meaning is it determined that the two truths are taught for sentient beings? Answer: This is determined as teaching or not teaching in terms of delusion and awakening, and in terms of agent and object: it clarifies that because sentient beings are deluded about existence and non-existence and have not awakened to existence and non-existence, existence and non-existence are taught for sentient beings, making clear that 'this is existence, this is non-existence; this is ordinary, this is noble; this is inverted, this is non-inverted', causing sentient beings to enter non-existence from existence, and to abandon the ordinary to take up the noble. For this reason, the two truths are taught. If someone is a noble one who is already awakened, why would there be a need to teach them? Because the ordinary have not yet awakened, the two truths must be taught for them. The ordinary, not being awakened, receive the teaching; the noble, having already awakened, do not receive the teaching. Regarding agent and object: all conventional truths, from the perspective of the Tathāgata, are ultimate truth. Since they are ultimate truth from the perspective of the Tathāgata, he is the converting agent. Could the converting agent teach the Dharma for the converting agent? All ultimate truths, from the perspective of sentient beings, are conventional truth; since sentient beings are those to be converted, the Dharma must be taught for sentient beings. Next, this meaning will be established and explained by adducing two passages from the "Chapter on the Examination of Phenomena" in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā and the commentary on the "Chapter on Rebirth" in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa. The "Chapter on the Examination of Phenomena" in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: / "The Buddhas have spoken of a self, / and they have also spoken of non-self. / Within the true nature of all phenomena, / there is neither self nor non-self." / In the prose commentary it explains: teaching self and non-self for ordinary people, and also teaching self and non-self for noble ones who have attained the path. Self and non-self are indeed the two truths. Thus, the first chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Persons and the like exist because of conventional truth, but are non-existent according to ultimate truth." One should know that self is conventional truth and non-self is ultimate truth. Since self and non-self are taught for ordinary people, and self and non-self are taught for noble ones, then the two truths are taught for ordinary people, and the two truths are taught for noble ones. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, in commenting on the "Chapter on Rebirth", says: "Question: The preceding chapter on 'Practicing in Accordance' explained that without bodhisattvas there is no going and coming; why does it now say that there are bodhisattvas and there is going and coming? Answer: They do not contradict each other. For ordinary people, no going and coming is taught; for noble ones, going and coming is taught. For noble ones, no going and coming is taught; for ordinary people, going and coming is taught." Yet going and coming versus no going and coming are still the two truths; thus the two truths are taught for ordinary people, and the two truths are taught for noble ones. The general meaning is identical to the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. However, the Master further explained that teaching existence for ordinary people, teaching emptiness for noble ones, and teaching emptiness and existence for both ordinary and noble constitute in total three sections explaining the meaning of the two truths. Previously, teaching the two truths for ordinary people and not teaching the two truths for noble ones was also determined in terms of delusion versus awakening and agent versus object, as stated above. Next is the explanation of the "Chapter on Phenomena". Question: For what reason does the "Chapter on Phenomena" teach the two truths for ordinary people and teach the two truths for noble ones? Answer: Teaching self and non-self for ordinary people is like the previous case of teaching existence and non-existence for ordinary people, causing them to transform and awaken to the non-existence of both existence and non-existence. Self and non-self are also like this. Sentient beings are deluded about self and non-self; self and non-self are taught for them to cause them to depart from self and non-self. Departing from self means departing from eternity; departing from non-self means departing from annihilation. Causing them to depart from annihilation and eternity and awaken to the Middle Way, self and non-self are taught for ordinary people. As for teaching self and non-self for noble ones: noble ones understand self and non-self, and therefore self and non-self are taught for noble ones. Previously, self and non-self were taught for ordinary people because ordinary people were deluded about self and non-self; teaching self and non-self for noble ones is not because noble ones are deluded about self and non-self that self and non-self are taught for them, but rather that when noble ones hear self and non-self they immediately understand self and non-self, and therefore self and non-self are taught for them. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa cites the Devaparipṛcchā Sūtra, which asks: "Can an arhat in his final body speak of self and non-self?" The explanation says: He can speak of them, and therefore noble ones understand self and non-self. It also says: Just as with a secret military watchword, only the guards understand it, while others do not understand; when self and non-self are spoken of, only noble ones understand, while other people do not understand. Because noble ones can understand self and non-self, self and non-self are taught for noble ones. Since this is so in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, the "Chapter on Rebirth" can be understood by analogy.