止觀輔行傳弘決 1.84

1.84

次「問行者」去，約是簡非。先問意者，雖無十非，若計性過亦同非攝。次答意者，性計有過故云不可。「但是」已下，寄此明是。離性過已，約不思議而論感應，方乃名是。聖既非應而應以赴四機，受者非感而感以得四益。次「如子」下，舉譬感應。天性相關，義同感應。次引兩經以證感應。從惡機說故云病子，廣如《玄》文三十六句。「動法性山」等者，結感應義。法性不動如山，眾生惡深如海，非大誓願無謀善權，安能動難動山入難入海？同善同惡，示逆示順。同惡故有「病行」，同善故有「嬰兒行」。慈悲從因、感應從果，以有因故果方能入。「禪經云」去，釋成感應。感應秖是隨順物機，故用四隨以釋感應。將護彼意，樂欲也；附先世習，便宜也；觀病輕重，對治也；道機時熟，第一義也。隨之與悉名異義同，故引《大論》以釋《禪經》。「五復次」者，《大論》明說經緣起中「問曰：有何因緣而說此經？」答中有二十一復次，今引彼五以證四悉及五因緣。此五復次仍非次第，隨義便故。初為明菩薩種種行，故說《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》，是第一復次。次為令菩薩增念佛三昧故，是第二復次。三為說跋致相貌故，是第六復次。四為拔弟子惡邪故，是第五復次。五為說第一義故，是第十復次。「此五」等者，會五因緣。初略會。論中因明第一義故釋出四悉，今開四悉與五復次以為兩門，及四隨、五略、四科法門同是感應義故。四悉檀義，廣如法華、維摩等《玄》委釋，今消感應故不具論。《楞伽》亦云「佛告大慧：『於自悉檀應善修學。』」若迷今家總別安心六十四番，自行四悉云何可識？自行必成感應故也。「若不隨機」等者，明感應意。此五復次、四隨、四悉及五因緣，既是感應稱機之法，莫非大悲益物故也。「論云」去，引證。「真法說」者，明妙應難感。「聽眾難得」，明妙機難發。難得故三字，通結上三妙法、妙應、妙機故也。「如是」去，釋上真法，妙應所說、妙機所感無非中道，是故雙非。「非有非無」，即雙非真俗，言雖雙非意在相即。「非難非易」，重顯中體。非泥洹智故云非易，非分別智故云非難。「有三悉益」等者，重以四悉結成真法。意明四悉秖是二諦及感應意，即顯中道以為真諦，異於但真是故雙非，故知感應不出二諦。「故知緣起」下，明妙感應能辦佛事。

Next, from "questioning the practitioner" onwards, he sifts error by reference to correctness. First, as for the intent of the question: although free from the ten errors, if one grasps at nature, the fault is likewise subsumed under error. Next, as for the intent of the answer: because grasping at nature has faults, he says "it is not permissible." From "it is only..." onwards, relying on this he clarifies correctness. Having separated from the faults of nature, discussing stimulus and response in terms of the inconceivable is only then termed "correctness." Since the sage does not respond yet responds to meet the four capacities, the recipient is not stimulated yet is stimulated to obtain the four benefits. Next, from "like a child" onwards, he adduces an analogy for stimulus and response: innate nature being interrelated is equivalent in meaning to stimulus and response. Next, he cites two sūtras to prove stimulus and response. Speaking from the perspective of evil capacities, he says "sick child," as explained extensively in the thirty-six propositions of the Xuan text. Regarding "moving the mountain of dharma-nature," etc., he concludes the meaning of stimulus and response. Dharma-nature is unmoving like a mountain, and the evil of sentient beings is deep like an ocean; without great vows and uncalculated skillful means, how could one move the difficult-to-move mountain and enter the difficult-to-enter ocean? Accommodating the wholesome and accommodating the evil, displaying defiance and displaying compliance: accommodating evil, there is "practice regarding illness"; accommodating the wholesome, there is "infantile practice." Kindness and compassion derive from the cause; stimulus and response derive from the effect; because there is the cause, the effect can only then enter. From "The Dhyāna Sūtra states" onwards, he explains and establishes stimulus and response. Stimulus and response are simply complying with the capacities of beings; hence he uses the four compliances to explain stimulus and response. Guarding their wishes is "desire"; according with past habits is "suitability"; observing the severity of the illness is "countermeasure"; the ripening of the path-capacity in due time is the "supreme truth." Compliance and siddhānta differ in name but are identical in meaning; hence he cites the Dazhidulun to explain the Dhyāna Sūtra. Regarding the "five restatements": in the Dazhidulun's clarification of the conditions for preaching the sūtra, it asks, "For what cause and condition was this sūtra preached?" In the answer there are twenty-one restatements; here he cites five of them to corroborate the four siddhāntas and the five conditions. These five restatements are nevertheless not in sequence, following the convenience of the meaning. First, to clarify the various practices of bodhisattvas, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra was preached—this is the first restatement. Next, to cause bodhisattvas to increase their mindfulness-of-the-Buddha samādhi—this is the second restatement. Third, to explain the characteristics of an avaivartika—this is the sixth restatement. Fourth, to eradicate the evil and heterodox views of disciples—this is the fifth restatement. Fifth, to explain the supreme truth—this is the tenth restatement. Regarding "these five," etc., he reconciles the five conditions. First, he reconciles them briefly. In the treatise, relying on clarifying the supreme truth, it explains the four siddhāntas; now opening the four siddhāntas and the five restatements into two gates, as well as the four compliances, the five summaries, and the four topics of dharma gates, they all share the meaning of stimulus and response. The meaning of the four siddhāntas is fully explained as in the profound meanings (xuan) of the Lotus and Vimalakīrti; here, interpreting stimulus and response, it is not discussed in full. The Laṅkāvatāra also states: "The Buddha told Mahāmati: 'You should skillfully train in your own siddhānta.'" If one is confused about our school's sixty-four turns of general and specific calming of the mind, how could the four siddhāntas of one's own practice be recognized? It is because one's own practice must accomplish stimulus and response. Regarding "if one does not accord with capacity," etc., he clarifies the intent of stimulus and response. These five restatements, four compliances, four siddhāntas, and five conditions, since they are teachings of stimulus and response that match capacity, are all nothing other than great compassion benefiting beings. From "The treatise states" onwards, he cites evidence. "Preaching the true dharma" clarifies that the wondrous response is difficult to stimulate. "An audience is difficult to find" clarifies that the wondrous capacity is difficult to arouse. The three characters "difficult to find" comprehensively conclude the preceding three: wondrous dharma, wondrous response, and wondrous capacity. From "Such..." onwards, he explains the true dharma above: what is preached by the wondrous response and what is stimulated by the wondrous capacity are nothing other than the middle way; therefore, both are negated. "Neither existent nor non-existent" is the dual negation of the real and the conventional; although the words are a dual negation, the intent resides in mutual identity. "Neither difficult nor easy" further reveals the substance of the middle. Not being the wisdom of nirvāṇa, it is called "not easy"; not being discriminative wisdom, it is called "not difficult." Regarding "possessing the benefits of the three siddhāntas," etc., he again concludes the true dharma with the four siddhāntas. The intent clarifies that the four siddhāntas are simply the two truths and the meaning of stimulus and response, which reveals the middle way as the true truth; differing from mere truth, both are therefore negated; hence we know that stimulus and response do not go beyond the two truths. Next, from "hence know that dependent origination" onwards, he clarifies that the wondrous stimulus and response can accomplish the Buddha's work.