二諦義 3.16

3.16

Question: Where is there a scriptural text that clearly explains the Middle Way as the essence of the two truths? Explanation: The verse from the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is precisely it. It says: 'Whatever dharma originates dependently, I state to be emptiness; it is also a provisional designation, and it is also the meaning of the Middle Way.' This verse is both sūtra and treatise. How so? This is a verse found in the Kuśalamūlasaṃparigraha Sūtra, and when Nāgārjuna cited it, it became a treatise. Since it states that provisional designation is itself the Middle Way, the Middle Way is the essence of the two truths. Furthermore, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: 'Completely penetrating all dharmas of existence and non-existence as not being existence or non-existence.' Penetrating existence as not existence, penetrating non-existence as not non-existence, and penetrating existence and non-existence as not existence and non-existence; hence, neither-existence-nor-non-existence is the essence of existence and non-existence. Furthermore, the Renwang jing speaks of three truths, which also have non-duality as their essence: the truth of existence and the truth of non-existence are teaching, while the ultimate truth of the Middle Way that is neither existent nor non-existent is principle. [An opponent] might say: 'I too explain the Middle Way as neither ultimate nor conventional.' This is not so. Let us ask you: what is your neither-ultimate-nor-conventional? That which is not ultimate is still conventional; that which is not conventional is still ultimate; that which is not existent is still non-existent; that which is not non-existent is still existent. These are still the two views of existence and non-existence, and therefore lack the ultimate truth of the Middle Way. Furthermore, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'Therefore, one knows that space is neither existent nor non-existent, neither a characteristic nor something characterized; the remaining five [elements] are the same as space.' These six kinds are solely neither existent nor non-existent, neither ultimate nor conventional. How so? The six kinds are conventional; the absence of the six kinds is ultimate. Since they are neither existent nor non-existent, they are neither ultimate nor conventional. Furthermore, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Light and ignorance: fools consider them two; the wise fully penetrate that their nature is non-dual.' The non-dual nature is true nature itself. Dark dharmas and bright dharmas, defiled and undefiled, ultimate and conventional as two—all follow this pattern. It also says: 'Previously, in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā, I stated that self and non-self are non-dual.' Self is conventional; non-self is ultimate. Self and non-self being non-dual is precisely the ultimate and conventional being non-dual. Furthermore, the Lotus Sūtra says: 'Beliefs in existence, non-existence, and the like: relying on these views, they fully possess the sixty-two [views].' If one perceives existence or perceives non-existence, one fully possesses the sixty-two views. If one can abandon the two views of existence and non-existence, one awakens to the Middle Way. Scriptural passages like this are countless, so one knows that there are not two principles, but only one principle.