[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [止觀輔行傳弘決](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912) › 1.103 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 1.103 止觀輔行傳弘決 1.103 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.103](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.103) 次以三止觀結者，十種發心推理居初，故約推理，餘九準例。故下文云「若見此意，例見相、聞法乃至起過。」故一一文皆生十六，一一皆以三止觀結。初上來、下標也。「然法性」下，正釋。初釋頓也。法性之理非復數量，若定執於三觀四教以為能發，反增迷倒。從「今言」下至「內惑故」，為深漸也。先法說。云「一二三四」者，秖三止觀及以四教次第重累，故一至四。此明漸次所以也。次云「說法性」下，辨不同相。界內界外權實二理各二根性，故四不同。次從「若界內鈍人」下，釋有四所由，由迷解故輕重巧拙。真與法性名異義同，界內利鈍迷於真諦，界外利鈍迷於中道。迷真迷中、所迷所解雖同法性，能迷能解巧拙等殊，故成四種。迷真迷中有二苦集，解真解中有二道滅，利名為即、鈍名為離，巧拙亦然。離謂離法性別有苦集，即謂即法性即是苦集，所解離者由能解拙，所解即者由能解巧。問：迷解秖應云集與道，何故復云苦與滅耶？答：以因召果相從而說，界外望內真中雖殊，巧拙即離其名不別。次「所以」下，舉譬也。通為界內界外作譬。以路人為父子名即，以父子為路人名離。何者？苦集之體本是法性，猶如父子；若謂法性異苦集者，名為路人。故謂苦集永異法性，可譬藏別兩教人也。體性雖同於事永異，名非骨肉。於異強親生父子想，則謂苦集即是法性，故譬通圓兩教人也。從「麁細」下，引例合譬也。若據譬文，則應內外各有麁細及難易等；今為生後不定文相對說易故，但以界內為麁、界外為細。枝本難易等，準此可知。如是麁細各有巧拙、父子等譬，故云「亦如是」。從「或云界內」去至「為深」，此中二對釋漸相也。故下結云「若作淺深輕重者，漸次相也。」雖有或言，以無交互，不名不定。次從「或言界內」下，六對交互釋不定相。最後難易雖無交互，但是文略義推應有。應云或界內初心能破故為易斷，界外後心方破故為難斷。諸交互句不能細記，讀者勿輕。從「如是等」下，結前不定兼指廣也。從「若作」下，總略結示。皆云「若作」者，三種止觀即是別相，但明諸教即是通相，以別辨通故云若作。淺深輕重指前二對，一實四諦指前法性，更互輕重指前六對。次「皆大乘」去，勸進也。夫發心者為求圓乘，圓乘不同，行分三別，獎勸行者不可不識。 > Next, as for concluding with the three types of calming and contemplation: among the ten modes of arousing the aspiration \[for awakening\], deducing through reason ranks first; therefore, based on deducing through reason, the remaining nine are understood by analogy. Hence the text below states: "If one sees this meaning, then by analogy seeing marks, hearing the Dharma, and even giving rise to transgressions \[are all likewise\]." Thus, each and every passage gives rise to sixteen, and each and every one concludes with the three types of calming and contemplation. The beginning looks back to the preceding, and the following marks what is to come. From "However, dharma-nature" onward, it directly explains. First, it explains the sudden. The principle of dharma-nature is beyond numerical quantities; if one were to rigidly cling to the threefold contemplation and the four teachings as that which is able to arouse \[it\], one would contrariwise increase delusion and inversion. From "Now it is said" down to "due to internal confusion," it explains the profound gradual. First is the exposition in terms of Dharma. Saying "one, two, three, four" refers merely to the three types of calming and contemplation along with the four teachings being sequentially layered, hence "one to four." This clarifies the reason for the gradual sequence. Next, saying "expounding dharma-nature" onward distinguishes the differing characteristics. The two principles of provisional and real, within and beyond the realms, each have two types of faculties, hence four differences. Next, from "If dull individuals within the realms" onward, it explains the grounds for there being four: due to delusion and understanding, there are lightness and heaviness, skillfulness and clumsiness. "Truth" and "dharma-nature" differ in name but are identical in meaning; the sharp and dull within the realms are deluded about the truth of emptiness, while the sharp and dull beyond the realms are deluded about the middle way. Though delusion about truth and delusion about the middle—that which is deluded about and that which is understood—are equally the dharma-nature, that which is able to be deluded and that which is able to understand differ in skillfulness and clumsiness, hence forming four types. In delusion about truth and delusion about the middle, there are two sets of suffering and origination; in understanding truth and understanding the middle, there are two sets of the path and cessation. The sharp is termed "identity" (ji) and the dull is termed "separation" (li); skillfulness and clumsiness are likewise. "Separation" means that separate from the dharma-nature there are distinct suffering and origination; "identity" means that identical with the dharma-nature, these very things are suffering and origination. That which is understood as separation is due to clumsiness in that which is able to understand; that which is understood as identity is due to skillfulness in that which is able to understand. Question: Delusion and understanding should only be spoken of as origination and the path; why also speak of suffering and cessation? Answer: Cause calls forth effect, so they are spoken of correlatively. Looking from beyond the realms toward within the realms, though truth and the middle differ, the names of skillfulness, clumsiness, identity, and separation do not differ. Next, from "Therefore" onward, an analogy is adduced. It serves as an analogy generally for both within and beyond the realms. Taking a passerby to be father and son is called identity; taking father and son to be passersby is called separation. Why? The substance of suffering and origination is fundamentally the dharma-nature, just like father and son; if one claims that the dharma-nature is different from suffering and origination, they are called passersby. Thus, asserting that suffering and origination are eternally separate from the dharma-nature can be compared to people of the Tripiṭaka and distinctive teachings. Although their nature is the same, in concrete phenomena they are eternally distinct, which is termed "not of one flesh and blood." Forcing an affinity onto what is distinct and conceiving them as father and son asserts that suffering and origination are identical with the dharma-nature, hence compared to people of the shared and perfect teachings. From "coarse and subtle" onward, examples are cited to match the analogy. If based on the text of the analogy, then both within and beyond should each have coarse and subtle, difficult and easy, and so forth; now, to introduce the subsequent indefinite text and make the antithetical exposition easy, it merely treats within the realms as coarse and beyond the realms as subtle. Branch and root, difficult and easy, and so forth are to be understood by analogy with this. Such coarse and subtle each have skillfulness and clumsiness, the analogies of father and son, and so forth; hence it says "is also like this." From "or it is said that within the realms" down to "is profound," these two pairs explain the gradual characteristics. Hence it concludes below: "If understood in terms of shallowness, depth, lightness, and heaviness, these are the characteristics of the gradual." Although there is the word "or," because there is no mutual alternation, it is not called indefinite. Next, from "or it is said that within the realms" onward, six pairs of mutual alternations explain the indefinite characteristics. Although the final pair of difficulty and ease lacks mutual alternation, this is merely an abbreviation of the text, and by deducing the meaning it should be present. It should state: or within the realms, being able to rupture with the initial mind, it is easy to sever; beyond the realms, being ruptured only with the final mind, it is difficult to sever. These alternating sentences cannot be recorded in detail; the reader should not take them lightly. From "such as these" onward, it concludes the preceding indefinite and also points to its broader scope. From "If understood" onward, it summarily concludes and demonstrates. In each case saying "If understood": the three types of calming and contemplation are specific characteristics, whereas merely clarifying the various teachings is the general characteristic; using the specific to distinguish the general, it therefore says "If understood." Shallowness, depth, lightness, and heaviness refer to the preceding two pairs; the one reality and four noble truths refer to the preceding dharma-nature; the mutual lightness and heaviness refers to the preceding six pairs. Next, from "are all the Great Vehicle" onward, it encourages advancement. Now, arousing the aspiration is for the sake of seeking the perfect vehicle; since the perfect vehicle is not uniform, practice is divided into three distinctions, so practitioners are exhorted that they must not fail to recognize them. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.102](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.102) - [Next: 1.104](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.104) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.1.103) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [摩訶止觀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1911.1.128) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.103](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.1.103) · Pramāṇa