止觀輔行傳弘決 1.102

1.102

「夫一說」下，以論偈結。此總標也。次「若言」去，一一教中各得四句，義當一教生於四解。前雖各生，未約法辨，故約論偈重辨相狀，故借論文相即之語而結四解。此為後來作聞一句生種種解之法式也。初結生滅中云「呼方空為即空」者，如人墮巖，雖未至地，得名已死。方，猶當也。常修無常雖未即空，當空之義在現境上，境即應空故曰即空。「賴緣假」者，然四教中俱有賴緣、施權二假，其相各別。空中亦然。今此虛假賴眾緣成，非從空出設權利物。離斷常中，二乘亦得。佛果勝於三乘弟子，偏受中名。廣如第三開合中說。「若作如此解者」下，欲辨後教，先斥、次結。如《阿含．無諍經》中，佛告比丘：「莫求欲樂，極下法故。亦莫苦行，太過法故。離此二邊則有中道。」又佛在舍衛，舍利弗言：「我如大地，諸大小便唾吐無嫌。乃至如水如火如巾。」佛言：「此經名為師子吼也。」阿難言：「身子所說妙中之妙。」又佛在鹿子母堂云：「堂上雖空，然有不空，唯比丘眾。又數念一無事，謂空於人想。然有不空，唯一無事。」又《婆沙》中處處皆云法性、實相及法身等，如是等名與大乘同，是故應須以義判屬。所以四教俱空假中，而隨教門所詮各別，故此斥云「尚不成即空」等也。次結無生中，初云「因緣」等者，釋即空也。「而不得」下，斥無法性妙假、妙中。從「設作」下，許有當教假中二名，未見別理唯成但空。雖有八地出假化物，一時施設非任運化，雖異因人立中道名，但離斷常終歸空理。「此三番」下，結斥。次結無量中，先結者，實有三諦不同藏通是故不斥，但斥次第未得名圓，亦順論文三語相即。雖復三諦皆空皆假皆中宛然次第，無主故空，真諦中空也，與前三藏無主空同。假即空者，以即空心而出假故。對他假病假設法藥，是故藥病無不即空，此俗諦中空也。中即空者，中理無邊即畢竟空，此中道空也，亦得名為一空一切空。雖復三諦俱得名空，不無次第，故屬別也。「三種皆假」者，亦似一假一切假，前後灼然。三諦雖俱，但有名字、次第前後，故屬別也。三皆中者，亦似一中一切中，而次第宛然，權立中名。是故三諦猶成次第，離斷常故名為中真，位在十住；與機無差名為中機，位在行向；法性實際名為中實，位在十地。三時各異，故亦別也。雖復三諦皆空假中，秖是次第三諦之相。次結成圓者，言思道斷既不思議，又即實相，故不同別。三種皆假亦云三諦，同有名字，與別何殊？然別教中約次第三但有名字，此三即一但有三名，二名似同其體永別。「當知」下，結意。法即是境，境謂四諦，依境起解、依解起願，願故名為發菩提心。世人多以坐禪安心名為發心，此人都未識所緣境，無所期果、全無上求，不識大悲、今無下化，是故發心從大悲起。種種之言不過四四一十六解。「其淨土徒眾」等者，十科明發已釋其四，餘六略無，指例而已；今更比前略辨相狀。言淨土者，或從經卷聞說諸土、或佛聲光令見諸土、或有機緣見此土異、或聖冥加目覩諸土，不可具論，略述綱要。若一質一見、異質異見，具如推理、見相等也。異質一見、一質異見，具如聞法，四義互通各成一意。如《法華》初會，及《淨名》中香積菩薩來此聽法，此見同居穢也。此會大眾見妙喜國，及法華中三變土田，此見同居淨也。聲聞菩薩共為僧等，此見方便淨也。如《淨名》中足指按地而皆自見坐寶蓮華，及《法華》中見此娑婆純諸菩薩，此見實報土也。如《淨名》中大士空室，及《法華》中下方空中寶塔在空，此見常寂光也。乃至《像法決疑》娑羅林地四見不同，亦如《玄》文釋國土妙迹土四別，即其相也。覩諸土相上求下化，國土是所依、生佛是能依，生佛相望故得亦具四弘誓也。下覩眾等五科不同，亦應委說質等四句（云云）。言覩眾者，如諸經初列同聞眾，隨教多少大小優劣，即其相也。自力他力聞說冥加，例前可知。若一質異見、異質一見者，或見大眾聚散生滅、或見大眾聚散如幻、或見大眾能紹佛法、或見大眾如常不輕，亦如《玄》文眷屬妙中。次見修行亦四見者，修六度行、四三昧等，皆以期心境智勘之，四相自別。若一質異見等者，或見捨身剜身為生為道伏惑修行，藏也。或見所捨如幻化等，通也。為常住故，別也。為法界故，圓也。亦如《玄》文行妙中說。若準諸部經論不同，三祇、六度，藏也；如《請觀音》、《文殊問》等，並有三乘共行，通也；若《華嚴》云「菩薩發心不為一人，乃至恒沙，為度一切發心修行。」別也。普賢道場及《華嚴》中普賢行等，圓也。約五味經，多少不同，準說可知。上二下三，準應可見。徒眾修行屬道諦攝，道即上求，義兼下化。次法滅中亦有四者，《十住婆娑》云「菩薩摩訶薩見法滅時起護法心」，準例應有四種菩薩護法不同。若立像正乃至末法流通護持，藏、通也；若見法藏誓於十方盡未來際，為護法故，別也；若見法滅即知法界常住不滅，盡未來際護常住法，圓也。一質異見等，比說可知。法滅護法，義兼上求及以下化（云云）。見受苦中生四解者，若見三界六道輪迴，生滅也；若見輪迴無逼惱相，通也；十界苦相一一無量，別也；百界千界苦在一念，圓也。若一質異見等，如見驅使鞭打繫縛，亦生四解、發心不同，亦如四諦四苦差別。次見起過中生四解者，四四諦中四集不同，即起過也。一質異見，比說可知。受苦起過，屬於下化義兼上求，亦四義足。初心行人甚要甚要，縱使發心不真實者，緣於正境功德猶多。何以故？發菩提心事希有故。如《首楞嚴》中佛告堅意：「我滅度後，後五百歲，多有比丘為利養故發心出家，以輕戲心聞是三昧發菩提心。我知是心亦得作於菩提遠緣，況清淨發心。」故知若非正境，縱無妄偽亦不成種。

From "Now, a single teaching..." down, [the text] concludes using verses from the treatise [Mūlamadhyamakakārikā]; this is the general introduction. Next, from "If one says..." onward, four phrases are obtained within each respective teaching, the meaning corresponding to one teaching generating four understandings. Although each was generated previously, they were not yet distinguished in reference to phenomena; hence, [the text] re-distinguishes their characteristics in reference to the verses of the treatise, thereby borrowing the phrasing of mutual identity from the treatise's text to conclude the four understandings. This serves as a model for later generations of generating varied understandings upon hearing a single phrase. First, in concluding [the understanding of] arising and perishing, where it says "calling what is on the verge of emptiness immediate emptiness," this is like a person falling from a cliff who, though not yet having hit the ground, can already be called dead. "On the verge of" (fang) is like "destined to" (dang). Though constantly cultivating impermanence is not yet immediate emptiness, the sense of being destined for emptiness is present on the manifest object; since the object must become empty, it is called "immediate emptiness." Regarding "provisionality reliant on conditions": in the four teachings, there are both [types of] provisionality—reliant on conditions and establishing the provisional—and their characteristics differ in each. The same is true of emptiness and the middle. Here, this illusory provisionality is accomplished by relying on multiple conditions; it does not emerge from emptiness to establish the provisional to benefit sentient beings. As for the middle that is free from [the extremes of] annihilation and permanence, the two vehicles also attain it; the Buddha-fruit surpasses the disciples of the three vehicles, so it exclusively receives the name of "the middle." This is explained extensively in the third section on opening and combining. From "If one forms such an understanding..." down, wishing to distinguish the subsequent teachings, [the text] first refutes and then concludes. For instance, in the Araṇavibhaṅga-sūtra of the Āgamas, the Buddha addressed the monks: "Do not pursue sensual pleasure, for it is an utterly base phenomenon. Nor engage in severe asceticism, for it is an excessive phenomenon. Free from these two extremes, there is the Middle Way." Furthermore, when the Buddha was at Śrāvastī, Śāriputra said: "I am like the great earth, devoid of aversion toward all feces, urine, spittle, and vomit; up to being like water, like fire, and like a dust-cloth." The Buddha said: "This discourse is called the Lion's Roar." Ānanda said: "What Śāriputra has spoken is the most wondrous of the wondrous." Furthermore, when the Buddha was in the mansion of the Mother of Mṛgāra, he said: "Although the upper hall is empty, yet there is that which is not empty, namely only the community of monks. Furthermore, frequently contemplating one thing that is non-existent means being empty of the perception of persons; yet there is that which is not empty, namely solely that one thing that is non-existent." Moreover, throughout the *Vibhāṣā* it repeatedly speaks of dharma-nature, the true mark, the Dharma-body, and so forth. Names such as these are identical with those of the Mahāyāna, which is why they must be classified and assigned according to their underlying meaning. Therefore, while all four teachings possess emptiness, provisionality, and the middle, what is explained accords with each teaching's portal and differs accordingly. Hence here it refutes this, saying "it still does not constitute immediate emptiness," and so forth. Next, in concluding [the understanding of] non-arising, where it first says "causes and conditions," etc., this explains immediate emptiness. From "yet not attaining..." down, it refutes the absence of the wondrous provisionality and wondrous middle of the dharma-nature. From "even if one posits..." down, it grants that it has the two names of provisionality and the middle belonging to this teaching, yet since it has not seen the distinctive principle, it merely constitutes solitary emptiness. Although there is emerging from emptiness on the eighth ground to transform beings, this is a provisional arrangement made at a given time, not spontaneous transformation; and though the name "Middle Way" is established to distinguish it from those on the causal stages, it merely departs from annihilation and permanence and ultimately reverts to the principle of emptiness. From "these three rounds..." down, it concludes and refutes. Next, in concluding [the understanding of] the immeasurable, the reason it first concludes [without refuting] is that it genuinely possesses the three truths, unlike the Tripiṭaka and shared [teachings], and is therefore not refuted; it merely refutes the sequential nature as not yet meriting the name "perfect," which also accords with the mutual identity of the three expressions in the treatise's text. Although the three truths are each empty, each provisional, and each the middle, they are clearly sequential: empty because devoid of a master is emptiness within the ultimate truth, identical with the Tripiṭaka's emptiness devoid of a master described earlier. That provisionality is immediately empty means that one emerges into the provisional with a mind that is immediately empty; since one sets up provisional dharma-medicines to counter another's provisional illnesses, neither medicine nor illness fails to be immediately empty—this is emptiness within the conventional truth. That the middle is immediately empty means that the principle of the middle is boundless, namely ultimate emptiness—this is the emptiness of the Middle Way, which can also be called "one emptiness is all emptiness." Although the three truths all equally receive the name "empty," they are not without sequence, and hence belong to the distinctive [teaching]. "All three kinds are provisional" is also similar to "one provisionality is all provisionality," yet the before and after are conspicuous; although the three truths are all present, there are merely names, sequential before and after, and hence it belongs to the distinctive [teaching]. "All three are the middle" is also similar to "one middle is all the middle," yet the sequence is distinct, provisionally establishing the name of "the middle." Therefore the three truths still constitute a sequence: being free from annihilation and permanence is called the true middle, situated at the ten abodes; being without discrepancy with capacity is called the functional middle, situated at the [ten] practices and [ten] dedications; the dharma-nature as the reality-limit is called the real middle, situated at the ten grounds. Since the three periods differ, it is also distinctive. Although all three truths are empty, provisional, and the middle, this is merely the character of the sequential three truths. Next, concluding [the understanding] as perfect: since the path of words and thought is severed, it is both inconceivable and immediately identical with the true mark, and therefore different from the distinctive. "All three kinds are provisional" also speaks of three truths, sharing the names; how does this differ from the distinctive? In the distinctive teaching, based on the sequential three, there are merely names; here, the three are immediately one, possessing merely three names: the two names appear identical, but their substance is forever distinct. From "One should know..." down, it concludes the essential meaning. The phenomenon is the object, and the object refers to the four truths; relying on the object, understanding arises, and relying on understanding, the vow arises; because of the vow, it is called arousing the aspiration for awakening. People of the world mostly take calming the mind in seated meditation to be arousing the aspiration [for awakening]; these people do not at all recognize the object of cognitive conditioning: having no fruit to anticipate, they are entirely devoid of seeking above; not recognizing great compassion, they now lack converting below. Therefore, arousing the aspiration arises from great compassion. The words "varied" do not exceed the four times four, namely sixteen understandings. Regarding "its pure lands, assemblies," and so forth: among the ten headings clarifying the arousing [of the aspiration], four have already been explained, and the remaining six are omitted in brevity, pointing to the precedent; now, by comparison with the preceding, their characteristics are briefly distinguished. As for "pure lands": whether hearing various lands spoken of from sūtra scrolls, or the Buddha's voice and light causing one to see various lands, or possessing the opportune conditions to see the differences of this land, or witnessing various lands with one's own eyes through the invisible assistance of the sages, they cannot be discussed comprehensively; a summary outline is briefly related. As for one substance seen uniformly or different substances seen differently, these are fully like the inference of principle, the seeing of marks, and so forth. Different substances seen uniformly, and one substance seen differently, are fully like hearing the Dharma: the four senses are mutually interchangeable, each forming a distinct meaning. For example, in the initial assembly of the *Lotus Sūtra*, and when the bodhisattvas of Fragrance Accumulated came to this [world] to listen to the Dharma in the *Vimalakīrti*, this was seeing the defiled land of common residence. When the great assembly in that assembly saw the land of Wonderful Joy, and during the threefold transformation of the lands in the *Lotus Sūtra*, this was seeing the pure land of common residence. When śrāvakas and bodhisattvas together formed the Saṅgha, this was seeing the pure land of skillful means. When in the *Vimalakīrti* the Buddha pressed the earth with his toe and everyone saw themselves seated on jeweled lotuses, and when in the *Lotus Sūtra* this sahā world was seen to consist purely of bodhisattvas, this was seeing the land of real reward. When in the *Vimalakīrti* there was the empty chamber of the Great Being, and when in the *Lotus Sūtra* the jeweled stūpa hung in empty space beneath the sky, this was seeing the land of eternal quiescent light. Up to the four different perceptions of the ground in the Śāla grove in the *Xiangfa jueyi [jing]*, and also as explained in the text of the *Fahua xuanyi* regarding the four differences of the wondrous lands of the trace [teaching], these are its characteristics. Witnessing the marks of the lands, one seeks above and transforms below; the lands are that which is relied upon, while sentient beings and Buddhas are that which relies; since sentient beings and Buddhas correspond to one another, they can also completely possess the four universal vows. The differences among the five headings below, such as witnessing the assembly, should also be explained in detail according to the four phrases of substance, etc. (and so forth). As for "witnessing the assembly": like the opening of various sūtras listing the assembly of shared listeners, differing in quantity, size, superiority, and inferiority according to the teaching, these are its characteristics. Self-power, other-power, hearing the teaching, and invisible assistance can be known by analogy with the preceding. As for one substance seen differently and different substances seen uniformly: whether seeing the great assembly gather and disperse in arising and perishing, or seeing the great assembly gather and disperse like an illusion, or seeing the great assembly able to carry on the Buddha's Dharma, or seeing the great assembly as Ever Not Disparaging—these are also like the section on the wondrous retinue in the text of the *Fahua xuanyi*. Next, in seeing practice there are also four seeings: cultivating the practice of the six perfections, the four types of samādhi, and so forth, when all are examined by the aspiring mind, object, and wisdom, the four characteristics naturally differ. As for one substance seen differently, etc.: whether seeing the sacrificing or carving of the body for beings and for the Path, subduing defilements in cultivation, this is the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. Or seeing what is sacrificed as like an illusion or magical creation, this is the shared [teaching]. For the sake of the eternal abiding, this is the distinctive [teaching]. For the sake of the dharma-dhātu, this is the perfect [teaching]. This is also as explained in the section on wondrous practice in the text of the *Fahua xuanyi*. If based on the differences among the various divisions of sūtras and treatises: the three asaṃkhyeya kalpas and six perfections are the Tripiṭaka; as in the *Qing Guanyin*, *Wenshu wen*, etc., which all contain shared practices of the three vehicles, this is the shared; if as the *Avataṃsaka* says, "The bodhisattva's arousing of the aspiration is not for one person... up to [not for] sands of the Ganges, but for delivering all that he arouses the aspiration and cultivates practice," this is the distinctive; the bodhimaṇḍa of Samantabhadra and Samantabhadra's practices in the *Avataṃsaka*, etc., are the perfect. Categorized by the sūtras of the five flavors, the differences in quantity can be known according to the explanation. The two above and three below should be understood accordingly. The assembly and practice are subsumed under the truth of the path; the path is seeking above, and its meaning also encompasses converting below. Next, under the extinction of the Dharma there are also four: the *Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā* says, "When a bodhisattva-mahāsattva sees the extinction of the Dharma, he arouses the mind to protect the Dharma." By analogy, there should be four different kinds of bodhisattvas protecting the Dharma. If establishing the semblance and true [Dharma] and even circulating and upholding them in the final age of the Dharma, this is the Tripiṭaka and shared [teachings]; if seeing the Dharma-treasury and vowing to protect the Dharma throughout the ten directions and to the end of future time, this is the distinctive; if seeing the extinction of the Dharma and immediately knowing that the dharma-dhātu is eternally abiding and never extinguished, protecting the eternally abiding Dharma to the end of future time, this is the perfect. One substance seen differently, etc., can be known by comparison with the explanation. Protecting the Dharma upon its extinction encompasses both seeking above and converting below (and so forth). Among generating the four understandings upon seeing the undergoing of suffering: seeing the transmigration of the three realms and six destinies is arising and perishing; seeing transmigration devoid of the mark of affliction is the shared; the marks of suffering in the ten realms each being immeasurable is the distinctive; the suffering of the hundred realms and thousand realms being in a single thought-moment is the perfect. As for one substance seen differently, etc.: such as seeing being driven, whipped, and bound, one also generates four understandings and the arousing of the aspiration differs, which is also like the distinctions of the four truths and four kinds of suffering. Next, among generating four understandings upon seeing the arising of faults: the differences of the four truths of origin within the four kinds of the four truths are precisely the arising of faults. One substance seen differently can be known by comparison with the explanation. Undergoing suffering and arising faults belong to converting below, with their meaning encompassing seeking above; thus the four meanings are fully present. For a beginner practitioner, this is extremely essential, extremely essential! Even if the arousing of the aspiration is not genuine, by conditioning oneself upon the correct object, the merit is still great. Why is this? Because the matter of arousing the aspiration for awakening is rare. As in the *Śūraṅgama[-samādhi-sūtra]*, the Buddha told Dṛḍhamati: "After my nirvāṇa, in the final five hundred years, there will be many monks who arouse the aspiration to leave home for the sake of gain and support, who with a frivolous mind hear of this samādhi and arouse the aspiration for awakening. I know that even this mind can serve as a distant condition for bodhi, not to mention a pure arousing of the aspiration." Therefore we know that if it is not the correct object, even if free from falsity, it will still not form the seed.