二諦義 3.24

3.24

Question: Where does this come from? Answer: It is precisely the verse in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā: 'Whatever dharma arises dependently, I explain as emptiness'—this is the horizontal simultaneity of emptiness and existence. 'It is also a provisional designation; it is also the meaning of the middle way'—this is the vertical simultaneity of duality and non-duality. These two kinds of simultaneity are the provisional, expedient simultaneity of all buddhas and bodhisattvas. Third, we explain the simultaneity of attainment and loss. Which is this? Sentient beings with appropriation and [clinging to] annihilation and eternity practice dharmas with appropriation; all buddhas and bodhisattvas without appropriation constantly practice dharmas without appropriation. This means attainment and non-attainment take separate paths: ordinary persons and noble ones are divided, and sympathetic resonance does not intersect. How could what is outside principle become what is inside principle, and how could what is inside principle convert what is outside principle? We now explain that this is not so. A bodhisattva constantly illuminates non-attainment and illuminates attainment; the Dao has never possessed attainment or non-attainment: from the perspective of sentient beings there is attainment, and from the perspective of all buddhas and bodhisattvas there is non-attainment. Now, returning to illuminate sentient beings as having appropriation and illuminating bodhisattvas as having no appropriation, these two contemplations constantly illuminate; there is not a single thought-moment when they do not illuminate. If for a single thought-moment they did not illuminate sentient beings with appropriation, the buddhas would commit the fault of missing their spiritual capacity, and when the capacity of sentient beings arose, they would not be aware of it. For this reason, they constantly illuminate sentient beings with appropriation. Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: 'With the Buddha eye I perceive sentient beings in the six destinies.' This constant illumination of attainment and non-attainment is called simultaneous contemplation. This meaning is most essential and must be understood. This briefly explains the three kinds of simultaneous contemplation. The next phrase is difficult to understand. Which is it? Earlier it was said that existence is real from the perspective of ordinary persons and constitutes a truth, while emptiness is real from the perspective of noble ones and constitutes a truth, initially opening up the two truths of attainment and loss for ordinary persons and noble ones, explaining that existence being real from the perspective of ordinary persons is a loss, and emptiness being real from the perspective of noble ones is an attainment. Traditionally it has been said that both truths from perspective are losses; we now explain that if both were losses, there would be no converting agent, and the sentient beings to be converted would have no way to attain awakening, to transform from ordinary to noble, or to abandon loss and follow attainment. We now explain that the initial two truths from perspective have attainment and loss, delusion and awakening, explaining that this is the truth of ordinary persons and this is the truth of noble ones, this is conventional truth and this is ultimate truth. The conventional truth is those to be converted; the ultimate truth is the converting agent. Therefore it is said: 'All conventional truths, from the perspective of the Tathāgata, are ultimate truth.' This is the perspective of the converting agent. Now, speaking in accordance with this perspective is also the converting agent; that is, the converting agent, in accordance with the existence of those to be converted, speaks of existence, and the converting agent, in accordance with the emptiness awakened to by the converting agent, speaks of emptiness. Therefore, these two truths from perspective are attainment and loss, delusion and awakening.