止觀輔行傳弘決 1.91

1.91

次顯是中，「初四諦」者，四種四諦即是《大經．聖行品》文。第十一初以八苦釋苦，即生滅苦也。苦諦文末，約四諦簡云「凡夫有苦而無諦，聲聞有苦有苦諦，菩薩解苦無苦。」餘三亦然，即是通教菩薩對三藏簡。第十二初，以善不善愛及以九喻，謂責主有餘羅剎女婦等，以釋集諦即生滅集也。集諦文末約四諦簡云「凡夫有苦無諦，二乘有苦有苦諦，菩薩解苦無苦而有真諦。」三諦亦然。疏云「前苦諦文末不云有真，故知是通。」今云有真，真是真實，故知即是次第不次第二種真實。此是別圓對三藏簡。至釋滅諦文末但云「見滅煩惱斷故常，無煩惱故樂，佛菩薩因緣名淨，無二十五有名我。」道諦文末但云常無常、有為無為等，滅道文末但云四德，既不復更與二乘比決，故知單約別圓釋也。自非一家圓會經旨，佛語巧略何由可通？乃至下文下智中智，此並四種四諦之明文也。後復因文殊問，佛廣答七種二諦，次廣明一實，具如《玄》文。今初明生滅四諦者，諦義具如《玄》文第三。言「三相」者，不立住相，與異合說，以人多於住起常計故。故《淨名》云「比丘！汝今亦生亦老亦滅。」老即是異，此中義兼一期念念二種三相。言「四心」者，即是四分煩惱。四分必是三相所遷，故云「流動」，流動即生滅也。四相雖屬不相應行，即彼煩惱是生等故，為顯此中成生滅義，是故須以生等說之。下文道滅尚成生滅，故此苦集須云生等。以實有道治彼苦集，故云「對治」。有苦集時則無有道，若有道時能除苦集，故云「易奪」。滅有因果，還歸無餘，故亦生滅。故《阿含》中明四諦義遍一切法，如云「知漏、知漏集、知漏滅、知漏滅道。」十二因緣、十二頭陀，一一皆生四諦之義，具如《法華疏》釋迦葉中。「雖世出世」等者，通結四諦並成生滅。通教具如《思益經》文，《釋籤》已引。別義者，先正釋苦中初總明境，次「乃是」下總明菩薩出假智力，次從「謂」下略舉一界況釋之也。鈹字從金從刀者俗。鈹謂鈹開，剝皮割肉截骨等也。然其字義大同小異，故《玉篇》云「剝者裂也，刻割也，去肉脫皮也。」割裁，截也。若，如也。干，數也。如其苦類，相狀無量。「故非」下，舉劣顯勝。下三諦準知。問：苦諦文中約十法界，集諦文中但云種種，道諦文中分析體等，滅諦文中分四教別者，何耶？答：苦集義通須約十界，是所治故須通云十。道亦應四，且據能斷內外苦集故但云二，滅若云二於理無妨。寄教分齊委分四別。此即苦集俱十、道滅並四，二種因果各同類故。集諦中云「身曲」等者，身如集、影如苦，聲如集、響如苦。道諦中云「析體巧拙」者，分界內外，方便通指。賢聖諸位斷惑用智皆云方便，則有四種方便不同。「曲直長短」者，化城寶所各有曲直，五百為長、三百為短。言「權實」者，如第三卷偏圓中說。俗釋權者，反常合道。又云：迹近而行遠，和光不同塵。賈逵曰：「變也，宜也。」字義申此，可以意知。「又滅」下，滅諦中言「若干正助」者，義通四種滅也。「又如是」下，別滅諦中云「塵沙」者，譬無知數多。他解唯二：一染污、二不染。不染即習氣。今家意者，小乘習氣即別惑是，故今釋之。分界內外一十六門，知病識藥及授藥也。「又三悉」下，以四悉檀判無量也。別教始終立四悉義，即初地去名第一義。今此無量，從於地前三悉義邊立無量名，故云「從多」。無作四諦中言「皆是」者，非但道滅，苦集亦實。初後不二故名無作，異別無量故云無復。又秖別三悉即第一義故云無復。遍在諸經，不可委記。次對土中言橫竪者，竪約設教對機，機既增減不同，致使教有差別。四土對教優劣多少，故名為竪。土體敵對無復優劣，故名為橫。問：方便土中已無通惑，何須通教橫竪二義皆云用通？答：大乘初門調機入頓，為知故學，非用斷惑。如諸聲聞至方等會，被彈斥已皆習通門，若至方等必到法華。在方便土須通教者，此約不至方等會人。問：若是實報，何須用別教耶？答：約教道說，證道必無。問：寂光既極何須用教？橫竪二文皆用無作。答：教被中下、不被究竟。初住已上名不寂光，等覺為中，妙覺為上。出《淨名疏》。「又總說」下，以別釋總。故離苦集為十二支，觀因緣智以為道諦，十二支滅以為滅諦。「故大經」下，引證。二十五云「觀因緣智凡有四種，謂下、中、上、上上。下智觀者不見佛性，以不見故得聲聞菩提。中智觀者不見佛性，不見佛性故得緣覺菩提。上智觀者見不了了，不了了故住十住地。上上智觀者見則了了，得阿耨菩提。以是義故，十二因緣名為佛性，佛性者第一義空，第一義空名為中道，中道名佛，佛名涅槃。」因緣不殊，四觀不等。對別教中，經云住十住地等者，以次第行從住入空，乃至十地方入中道，次第住三故名為住。住及不了並約教道，若無四教此文難消，至禪境中當復廣說。「又中論」下，離論四句以證四教。以此四句因緣居初，故將因緣以對初教有其二意：一者以初對初、二者以事對事。又復因緣為諸法本，隨觀別故成空假中，故證教別同觀因緣。次「又解」下，復將初句釋四四諦。四四諦中皆觀因緣，故以因緣對四苦集。滅苦方便空分析體及假中異，故成四別。前釋似同，對文少別，是故重釋。「又偈云」下復對因緣者，前雖四句對四因緣，未分因緣及以所生用對因果，作此對已即知初句為初觀也。下三句別皆觀因緣，故文云去引論一部俱觀因緣，約前後文而分小衍。此依古師判論教云：教有二種，一通、二別。通謂遍被，終期不二；別如《法華》，三乘各別。今此論文但申別教，於別教中正申於大，即前二十五品；兼申二乘，即後兩品，因緣申中、邪見申小。今且用之，故云「指」也。然今家意與古人別，古人雖以二十五品別屬大乘，而不知有兼通含別；以因緣品別對中乘，而不知論因緣為宗。「當知」下，次結諦緣與偈不殊。

Next, in revealing the correct, regarding 'first, the four noble truths': the four kinds of four noble truths are found in the text of the 'Chapter on Noble Practice' in the Great Scripture (Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra). Fascicle eleven first explains suffering through the eight sufferings, which is the suffering of arising and ceasing. At the end of the text on the truth of suffering, discriminating in terms of the four noble truths, it says: 'Ordinary beings have suffering but not the truth; śrāvakas have suffering and the truth of suffering; bodhisattvas understand suffering and have no suffering.' The remaining three [truths] are also like this; this is the bodhisattva of the shared teaching discriminated against the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. At the beginning of fascicle twelve, using wholesome and unwholesome craving and nine similes—namely, the debt collector, the leftover [meat], the rākṣasī wife, and so forth—to explain the truth of origin, this is the origin of arising and ceasing. At the end of the text on the truth of origin, discriminating in terms of the four noble truths, it says: 'Ordinary beings have suffering and no truth; the two vehicles have suffering and the truth of suffering; bodhisattvas understand suffering to have no suffering, but have the true truth.' The [other] three truths are also like this. The commentary says: 'Since the end of the preceding text on the truth of suffering did not say "having the true", we know it is the shared [teaching].' Now it says 'having the true'; 'true' means genuine and real, so we know it refers to the two kinds of genuine reality: the sequential and non-sequential. This is the distinctive and perfect [teachings] discriminated against the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. Coming to the end of the text explaining the truth of cessation, it only says: 'Because seeing cessation cuts off defilements, it is permanent; because there are no defilements, it is bliss; because of the conditions of the buddhas and bodhisattvas, it is called pure; because there is no twenty-five forms of existence, it is called self.' At the end of the text on the truth of the path, it only speaks of permanent and impermanent, conditioned and unconditioned, and so forth. At the end of the text on cessation and the path, it only speaks of the four virtues, and no longer compares and resolves them with the two vehicles; thus we know it is explained solely in terms of the distinctive and perfect [teachings]. Were it not for our tradition's perfect reconciliation of the sutra's intent, how could the Buddha's skilful and succinct words ever be penetrated? Down to the subsequent passage's 'inferior wisdom' and 'medium wisdom', these are all explicit texts of the four kinds of four noble truths. Later, due to Mañjuśrī's inquiry, the Buddha extensively answered the seven kinds of two truths, and next extensively clarified the single reality, fully detailed in the text of the Profound Meaning (Fahua xuanyi). Now, first in clarifying the four noble truths of arising and ceasing: the meaning of the truths is fully detailed in the third fascicle of the Profound Meaning. Regarding the 'three marks': the mark of abiding is not established, but is explained together with change, because people mostly give rise to the view of permanence regarding abiding. Hence the Vimalakīrti says: 'Monk! You now also arise, also grow old, and also cease.' Old age is precisely change; here the meaning兼 both the life-span and moment-to-moment types of the three marks. Regarding 'four minds': these are the four divisions of defilements. The four divisions must be shifted by the three marks, hence they are called 'fluctuating'; fluctuating is precisely arising and ceasing. Although the four marks belong to the mental formations not associated with mind, those very defilements are arising and so forth; to reveal that they constitute the meaning of arising and ceasing here, they must be explained by arising and so forth. Below, the path and cessation still constitute arising and ceasing, so this suffering and origin must be described as arising and so forth. Because the real, existent path cures those [defilements of] suffering and origin, it is called 'antidote'. When suffering and origin exist, there is no path; when the path exists, it can eliminate suffering and origin, hence it is called 'substituting and displacing'. Cessation has cause and fruit, returning back to remainderless [nirvāṇa], so it is also arising and ceasing. Hence in the Āgamas the meaning of the four noble truths is clarified as pervading all phenomena, as when it says: 'Knowing contaminants, knowing the origin of contaminants, knowing the cessation of contaminants, knowing the path to the cessation of contaminants.' The twelve links of dependent origination and the twelve dhūtas each give rise to the meaning of the four noble truths, fully detailed in the Lotus Commentary's explanation of Kāśyapa. 'Although worldly and world-transcending' and so on generally concludes that the four noble truths all constitute arising and ceasing. The shared teaching is fully detailed in the text of the Siṃhaparipṛcchā-sūtra, already cited in the Appended Notes (Shiqian). For the distinctive meaning: first, in the direct explanation of suffering, it first generally clarifies the object; next, from 'is none other than' downward, it generally clarifies the bodhisattva's power of wisdom in stepping out of provisionality; next, from 'that is' downward, it briefly adduces one realm by way of analogy to explain it. The character pi (鈹) written with the metal and knife radicals is a vulgar form. Pi means to cut open, flaying skin, slicing flesh, severing bone, and so forth. However, the meanings of these words are broadly similar with slight differences; thus the Yupian says: 'Flaying means tearing, carving and cutting, removing flesh and stripping skin.' Slicing means trimming, severing. Ruo means like. Gan means a number. Their kinds of suffering and outward aspects are immeasurable. 'Hence not' and so on adduces the inferior to reveal the superior. The three truths below should be understood accordingly. Question: Why is it that in the text on the truth of suffering it refers to the ten dharma-realms, in the text on the truth of origin it only says 'various kinds', in the text on the truth of the path it analyzes substance and so forth, and in the text on the truth of cessation it differentiates the four teachings? Answer: The meaning of suffering and origin is pervasive and must be referenced to the ten realms; being what is cured, it must generally be stated as ten. The path should also be four; but taking it temporarily as that which can cut off internal and external suffering and origin, it is only stated as two. If cessation were stated as two, it would not conflict with the principle. By borrowing the boundaries of the teachings, it is minutely differentiated into four. This means that suffering and origin are both ten, and path and cessation are both four, because the two kinds of cause and effect are each of the same type. In the truth of origin, 'the body is crooked' and so forth: the body is like origin and the shadow is like suffering; the sound is like origin and the echo is like suffering. In the truth of the path, 'skill and clumsiness in analyzing substance': dividing within and outside the realms, 'expedient means' generally refers [to both]. The various stages of the worthy and noble using wisdom to sever delusions are all called expedient means, so there are four different kinds of expedient means. 'Bent and straight, long and short': the conjured city and the place of jewels each have bent and straight; five hundred [yojanas] is long, three hundred is short. Regarding 'provisional and real': it is as explained in fascicle three under biased and perfect. A worldly explanation of 'provisional' (quan) is to reverse the normal to conform to the Dao. It is also said: 'The traces are close while the journey is far; blending with the light yet not mingling with the dust.' Jia Kui says: 'It means change; it means suitability.' The meaning of the character expresses this, as can be understood from its intent. 'Further, cessation' downward: in the truth of cessation, 'a number of primary and auxiliary' has an import that runs through the four kinds of cessation. 'Further, such' downward: in the truth of cessation of the distinctive [teaching], 'dust and sand' is an analogy for the great number of types of nescience. Other interpretations hold there are only two: first, defiled; second, undefiled. The undefiled is the residual impressions. The intent of our school is that the Hinayana's residual impressions are precisely the delusions distinctive [to bodhisattvas], and hence they are explained now. Dividing into sixteen gates within and outside the realms, one knows the sickness, recognizes the medicine, and dispenses the medicine. 'Further, the three siddhāntas' downward evaluates the immeasurable by means of the four siddhāntas. The distinctive teaching from beginning to end establishes the meaning of the four siddhāntas, that is, from the first bhūmi upward is called the supreme-meaning [siddhānta]. Now this 'immeasurable' establishes the name 'immeasurable' from the side of the meaning of the three siddhāntas before the bhūmis, hence it is said to be 'from the majority'. In the four noble truths of uncreated action, 'are all' means that not only path and cessation, but suffering and origin are also real. The beginning and end are non-dual, hence they are called uncreated; being different from the distinctive immeasurable, it is said that 'there are no more'. Furthermore, the three siddhāntas of the distinctive [teaching] are themselves the supreme meaning, hence it is said that 'there are no more'. This is pervasive in the sutras and cannot be recorded in detail. Next, regarding horizontal and vertical in matching with the lands: 'vertical' refers to establishing teachings according to capacities; since capacities vary in increase and decrease, this causes teachings to have differences. The four lands matched against the teachings have superior and inferior, more and fewer, hence it is called vertical. The substances of the lands directly face each other with no further superiority or inferiority, hence it is called horizontal. Question: In the land of expedient means, the shared delusions are already absent; why do both the horizontal and vertical meanings of the shared teaching state that the shared [teaching] is used? Answer: It is the initial gate of the Mahayana, regulating capacities to enter the sudden; it is studied for the sake of knowing, not used for cutting off delusions. Just as the śrāvakas, upon reaching the Vaipulya assembly and being rebuked, all practiced the shared gate; if they reached the Vaipulya, they would certainly arrive at the Lotus. The necessity of the shared teaching in the land of expedient means applies to those people who did not reach the Vaipulya assembly. Question: If it is the land of real reward, why must the distinctive teaching be used? Answer: This is spoken in terms of the pedagogical path of the teaching; on the path of realization, it is certainly absent. Question: Since the [land of] calm light is ultimate, why must a teaching be used? Both horizontal and vertical texts use uncreated action. Answer: The teaching covers the intermediate and lower, not the ultimate. From the first abidance upward is called the non-calm light; equal awakening is intermediate, and wondrous awakening is superior. This comes from the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti. 'Further, in general exposition' downward explains the general by means of the distinct. Thus suffering and origin are separated into the twelve links, the wisdom contemplating dependent origination is taken as the truth of the path, and the cessation of the twelve links is taken as the truth of cessation. 'Hence the Great Scripture' downward adduces proof. Fascicle twenty-five says: 'The wisdom contemplating dependent origination has four kinds in all: inferior, medium, superior, and supreme. One who contemplates with inferior wisdom does not see the Buddha-nature; because he does not see it, he attains the bodhi of a śrāvaka. One who contemplates with medium wisdom does not see the Buddha-nature; because he does not see the Buddha-nature, he attains the bodhi of a pratyekabuddha. One who contemplates with superior wisdom sees it indistinctly; because he sees it indistinctly, he abides on the ten stages of abidance. One who contemplates with supreme wisdom sees it distinctly and attains anuttarā [samyak-saṃbodhi]. For this reason, the twelve links of dependent origination are called Buddha-nature; Buddha-nature is the emptiness of the supreme meaning; the emptiness of the supreme meaning is called the middle way; the middle way is called Buddha; Buddha is called nirvāṇa.' Dependent origination is not different, but the four contemplations are not equal. Matched to the distinctive teaching, the sutra says 'abides on the ten stages of abidance' and so forth because, through sequential practice, one enters emptiness from the abidances, up to the ten bhūmis where one first enters the middle way; sequentially abiding in the three, it is therefore called abiding. 'Abiding' and 'indistinct' are both spoken in terms of the pedagogical path of the teaching; without the four teachings, this text would be difficult to resolve, as will be explained at length in [the section on] the object of dhyāna. 'Further, the Madhyamaka-śāstra' downward divides the four lines of the treatise to prove the four teachings. Because among these four lines dependent origination stands first, matching dependent origination to the initial teaching has two meanings: first, matching the initial to the initial; second, matching phenomenal fact to phenomenal fact. Furthermore, dependent origination is the root of all phenomena; depending on differences in contemplation, it becomes emptiness, provisionality, and the middle; hence it proves that the different teachings equally contemplate dependent origination. Next, 'further explained' downward again takes the first line to explain the four kinds of four noble truths. In the four kinds of four noble truths, all contemplate dependent origination, hence dependent origination is matched with the four sufferings and origins. The expedient means for ceasing suffering differ in terms of emptiness, analysis and substance, and provisionality and the middle, thereby constituting four differences. The preceding explanation appeared similar, but matched the text with slight difference; therefore it is explained again. 'Further, the verse says' downward again matches with dependent origination: although the previous four lines were matched with the four kinds of dependent origination, dependent origination and that which it produces were not yet divided to match with cause and effect; having made this matching, one then knows the first line is the initial contemplation. The three lines below differ, yet all contemplate dependent origination, hence the text says 'further' and cites the entire treatise as all contemplating dependent origination, dividing the Hinayana and Mahayana according to the earlier and later texts. This relies on the ancient masters' evaluation of the treatise's teaching, saying: 'The teachings are of two kinds: first, shared; second, distinctive. "Shared" means pervasively covering [all], ultimately aiming at non-duality; "distinctive" is like the Lotus, where the three vehicles are each distinct.' Now the text of this treatise only sets forth the distinctive teaching: within the distinctive teaching, it primarily sets forth the Mahayana, which is the first twenty-five chapters; it secondarily sets forth the two vehicles, which is the last two chapters: dependent origination sets forth the intermediate [vehicle], and wrong views sets forth the small [vehicle]. For the time being this is used, hence it says 'points to'. However, the intent of our school differs from the ancients: although the ancients assigned the twenty-five chapters distinctly to the Mahayana, they did not know that they also contain the shared and include the distinctive; and assigning the chapter on dependent origination distinctly to the intermediate vehicle, they did not know that the treatise takes dependent origination as its central theme. 'One should know' downward next concludes that the truths and conditions are not different from the verse.