止觀輔行傳弘決 1.53

1.53

「圓頓者」去，釋圓頓中，初約止觀。「初緣實相至真實」者，即是止觀所緣之境。緣之與造雖屬能觀，意且正明所緣妙境。從「繫緣」去，次釋能觀。即念為繫，寂而常照；即繫為念，照而常寂。能所尚一，況止觀耶。「一色一香無非中道」者，中道即法界，法界即止觀，止觀不二境智冥一。所緣所念雖屬於境，且語能緣以明寂照。自山家教門所明中道，唯有二義：一離斷常，屬前二教；二者佛性，屬後二教。於佛性中教分權實，故有即離。今從即義，故云色香無非中道。此色香等，世人咸謂以為無情，然亦共許色香中道。無情佛性惑耳驚心，今且以十義評之，使於理不惑，餘則例知。一者約身。言佛性者應具三身，不可獨云有應身性。若具三身，法身許遍，何隔無情？二者從體。三身相即無暫離時，既許法身遍一切處，報應未嘗離於法身，況法身處二身常在。故知三身遍於諸法，何獨法身？法身若遍，尚具三身，何獨法身？三約事理。從事則分情與無情，從理則無情非情別。是故情具，無情亦然。四者約土。從迷情故分於依正，從理智故依即是正。如常寂光即法身土，身土相稱何隔無情？五約教證。教道說有情與非情，證道說故不可分二。六約真俗。真故體一、俗分有無，二而不二，思之可知。七約攝屬。一切萬法攝屬於心，心外無餘，豈復甄隔？但云有情心體皆遍，豈隔草木獨稱無情？八者因果。從因從迷執異成隔，從果從悟佛性恒同。九者隨宜。四句分別隨順悉檀，說益不同且分二別。十者隨教。三教云無，圓說遍有。又《淨名》云「眾生如故，一切法如。」如無佛性理小教權，教權理實亦非今意。又若論無情，何獨外色？內色亦然。故《淨名》云「是身無知，如草木瓦礫。」若論有情，何獨眾生？一切唯心。是則一塵具足一切眾生佛性，亦具十方諸佛佛性。從「己界」去，約諦明頓，即無作諦。至四弘中略明諦相，此中略示無作觀耳。故《四念處》釋無作四諦云「一念心中具十界苦，名為苦諦。具十界惑，名為集諦。苦即涅槃，名為滅諦。惑即菩提，名為道諦。」次從「法性」去，單以一止觀結無作諦，次結體不二。

From "The perfect and sudden" onward, in explaining the perfect and sudden, it first treats it in terms of calming and contemplation. "From the beginning, taking the true mark as object up to real" is the object cognized by calming and contemplation. Although cognizing and creating pertain to the contemplating [mind], the intent is primarily to clarify the wonderful object that is cognized. From "fastening the focus" onward, it next explains the contemplating [mind]. Directing mindfulness is fastening: tranquil yet constantly luminous; fastening is directing mindfulness: luminous yet constantly tranquil. Since subject and object are unified, how much more so calming and contemplation! "Every color and every scent is nothing other than the Middle Way": the Middle Way is the dharma-dhātu, the dharma-dhātu is calming and contemplation; calming and contemplation are non-dual, and object and wisdom are darkly unified. Although what is cognized and what is held in mindfulness pertain to the object, speaking for now of the cognizing [mind] clarifies tranquility and luminosity. In the teachings clarified by our school, the Middle Way has only two meanings: first, freedom from annihilationism and eternalism, which pertains to the former two teachings; second, Buddha-nature, which pertains to the latter two teachings. Within Buddha-nature, the teachings are divided into provisional and real, so there are identity and separation. Here, it follows the meaning of identity, hence it says "color and scent are nothing other than the Middle Way." These colors and scents are all regarded by worldly people as insentient, yet they also universally concede that colors and scents are the Middle Way. The Buddha-nature of the insentient strikes the ear with doubt and alarms the heart; now I shall assess it with ten meanings so that one is not deluded about the principle, and the rest can be known by analogy. First, in terms of the bodies: Buddha-nature should possess the three bodies; one cannot say it has only the nature of the response body. If it possesses the three bodies, and the Dharma body is admitted to be omnipresent, how could it exclude the insentient? Second, from the perspective of essence: the three bodies are mutually identical without momentary separation; since the Dharma body is admitted to be omnipresent, the reward and response [bodies] have never been separated from the Dharma body, not to mention that wherever the Dharma body is, the other two bodies are constantly present. Therefore we know that the three bodies are omnipresent throughout all dharmas; why only the Dharma body? If the Dharma body is omnipresent, it still possesses the three bodies; why only the Dharma body? Third, in terms of phenomena and principle: from the perspective of phenomena, sentient and insentient are divided; from the perspective of principle, there is no distinction between insentient and sentient. Therefore, since the sentient possesses it, the insentient does likewise. Fourth, in terms of lands: because of deluded feelings, circumstantial and direct [rewards] are divided; from the perspective of principle and wisdom, the circumstantial is the direct. Just as the Land of Eternally Quiescent Light is the land of the Dharma body, and the body and the land correspond to each other, how could it exclude the insentient? Fifth, in terms of teaching and realization: the path of teaching speaks of sentient and insentient, but speaking from the path of realization, they cannot be divided into two. Sixth, in terms of the ultimate and conventional: because of the ultimate, the essence is one; the conventional divides into existence and non-existence. They are two yet non-dual; this can be known upon reflection. Seventh, in terms of subsumption: all myriad dharmas are subsumed by the mind; outside the mind there is nothing else, so how could there be any segregation? If one merely says that the mental essence of sentient beings is omnipresent, how could it exclude grass and trees to call them alone insentient? Eighth, cause and effect: from the perspective of cause and delusion, clinging to differences creates separation; from the perspective of effect and awakening, Buddha-nature is ever identical. Ninth, according to adaptability: the fourfold distinction accords with the siddhāntas; because the benefits of preaching differ, they are tentatively divided into two. Tenth, according to the teachings: the three teachings say it is absent, while the perfect teaching says it is universally present. Furthermore, Vimalakīrti says: "Because sentient beings are suchness, all dharmas are suchness." If suchness lacked Buddha-nature, the principle would be lesser and the teaching provisional; that the teaching is provisional while the principle is real is also not the present intent. Moreover, if one discusses the insentient, why only external form? Internal form is also like this. Hence Vimalakīrti says: "This body is without sentience, like grass, trees, tiles, and rubble." If one discusses the sentient, why only sentient beings? Everything is mind-only. Thus a single dust mote fully possesses the Buddha-nature of all sentient beings, and also fully possesses the Buddha-nature of all Buddhas of the ten directions. From "one's own realm" onward, it clarifies the sudden in terms of the truths, which are the unconditioned truths. When reaching the four universal vows, the characteristics of the truths will be briefly clarified; here, it merely indicates the unconditioned contemplation. Therefore the Stations of Mindfulness explains the unconditioned four noble truths: "A single thought-moment of the mind contains the suffering of the ten realms; this is called the truth of suffering. It contains the defilements of the ten realms; this is called the truth of accumulation. Suffering is itself nirvāṇa; this is called the truth of cessation. Defilement is itself bodhi; this is called the truth of the path." Next, from "dharma-nature" onward, it concludes the unconditioned truths solely with a single calming and contemplation, and next concludes that their essence is non-dual.