止觀輔行傳弘決 10.20

10.20

次明西方。初敘來意，次例外。「見為三」者，「破因不破果」者，不說往因名為破因，猶存現果名不破果。立現因故名不破因，不言當果名為破果。第二「俱破，不破一切法」者，往因現果、現因當果，並破云無，故云俱破。而不能破三無為法，名不破一切法。以外道中立虛空常，若擇滅、非擇滅，外道法中本無此二，猶存不破，故云不破一切法。若復不許立三無為，名破因果及一切法。第三外道與佛法何異者？以第三師難佛法：佛法亦破世間因果，如斷三界一切見愛，亦破三無為。何者？數緣滅處尚自非真，但因此滅而會於真。證位非數，亦復如是。此二尚非，況復餘一。故知佛法亦破因果及三無為。又大乘亦破小乘因果及三無為，當知第三與佛法不異。「大論」去，答邪正不同。我正法中雖體析殊，並是正法。「外道亦有」下，重難。「外道邪因緣」下，重答。邪正既別，體析不同。「有人」下，復出他難。他人云：外道但云破因破果，破但是析，不名為體，當知外道唯析無體。

Next, [the text] clarifies the Western [teachings]. First it sets forth the purpose of their arrival, and next it makes analogies with the external. In "Views are threefold": "Refuting the cause without refuting the effect" means not speaking of past causes is called refuting the cause, while still retaining the present effect is called not refuting the effect. Positing present causes is called not refuting the cause, while not speaking of future effects is called refuting the effect. In the second, "refuting both, but not refuting all dharmas": past causes and present effects, and present causes and future effects, are both refuted as non-existent, hence called refuting both. Yet being unable to refute the three unconditioned dharmas is called not refuting all dharmas. Because among non-Buddhists space is posited as permanent, while as for cessation through deliberation and cessation without deliberation, these two do not exist in non-Buddhist teachings originally; [these] are still preserved and not refuted, hence it says "not refuting all dharmas." If one furthermore does not permit positing the three unconditioned dharmas, it is called refuting causes, effects, and all dharmas. How does the third non-Buddhist differ from the Buddha Dharma? Because the third teacher challenges the Buddha Dharma: the Buddha Dharma also refutes worldly causes and effects, as in cutting off all views and cravings of the three realms, and it also refutes the three unconditioned. How so? The place where cessation through deliberate reckoning occurs is itself not yet the real; one only meets the real by means of this cessation. The stage of realization is not reckonable, and the same is true of it. Even these two are not [the real], how much less the remaining one. Thus know that the Buddha Dharma also refutes causes, effects, and the three unconditioned dharmas. Furthermore, the Great Vehicle also refutes the causes, effects, and three unconditioned dharmas of the Lesser Vehicle; know that the third does not differ from the Buddha Dharma. From "Dazhidulun" onward, it replies that the heterodox and orthodox are different. Although somatic and analytical differ in our correct Dharma, both are the correct Dharma. From "Non-Buddhists also have" downward, it challenges again. From "Non-Buddhists' heterodox causes and conditions" downward, it answers again. Since heterodox and orthodox differ, somatic and analytical are not the same. From "Someone says" downward, it raises another challenge. Another person says: "Non-Buddhists only speak of refuting cause and refuting effect; refuting is merely analytical, not called somatic. Know that non-Buddhists have only the analytical and no somatic."