止觀輔行傳弘決 2.17

2.17

次明破障中，事理具如第四懺淨中說，具於事理方懺三道。文云「等」者，引證事理也。《虛空藏神呪經》云「若大比丘志心方等，誦陀羅尼一千四百遍乃一懺，如是次第八十七日行道。比丘尼四十九遍一懺，九十七日行道。沙彌、沙彌尼、信男、信女四百遍一懺，四十七日行道。若諸菩薩八百遍一懺，六十七日行道。」經中隨眾各有小呪。初文既以七日為期，復云行道八十七日等，即是八十個七乃至六十個七，儀則具如七日行法，但呪不同耳。尼眾皆須大僧為生，如是懺者皆論夷罪。犯此罪竟佛法死人，今復清淨戒體還生。悔法若成罪無不滅，故云「若不還生無有是處」。然小乘教門尚不開懺，雖曰還生無任僧用，沙彌犯已懺成進具；大乘所許事可通行。儻聽大僧招姦來詐，況《寶梁》誠制足數無文，信大小區分聽制條別。小無懺重之說，仍成重罪未亡，安用大教懺夷以足小乘僧數？依大懺已內進已道，何須混濫以惑時情？「眼等淨」者，唯至六根方名相似苦道淨耳。「第七日見十方佛」者，彼經日日各有相狀。前苦道淨位在六根，此中不退位在初住，破於無明名煩惱淨。「三障去即因緣樹壞」等者，《婆沙》云「過去二支為根，現在五支為質，現在三支為華，未來二支為果。有華有果謂凡夫，無華有果謂學人，無華無果謂無餘。」義推亦應更云少華有果謂學人，無華有果謂有餘。此乃藏通約界內說。若依《寶性論》，緣相生壞四事俱無方名永壞者，謂緣為根、相為質、生為華、壞為果，即界外兩種十二緣也。「亦是五陰舍空」等者，諸教不同，陰空亦異（云云），今且置別以存於圓。《淨名》云「不觀色、不觀色如。」色假如空，即雙非空假以顯中道也。四陰亦爾，《大品》云「色淨乃至識淨」，《大經．金剛身品》云「如來身者，非陰界入、不離陰界入，非增非減」等，皆是觀陰畢竟空也。故知因果俱明陰空。

Next, in explaining the destruction of obstacles, phenomena and principle are fully as explained in the fourth [section on] repentance and purification; only when equipped with both phenomena and principle does one repent the three paths. The text saying 'and so on' cites evidence for phenomena and principle. The Ākāśagarbha-dhāraṇī-sūtra says: 'If a great monk focuses his mind on the Vaipulya, he recites the dhāraṇī one thousand four hundred times for one repentance, and in this manner practices the path for eighty-seven days in sequence. A nun does forty-nine times for one repentance and practices the path for ninety-seven days. A novice monk or novice nun, a layman or laywoman does four hundred times for one repentance and practices the path for forty-seven days. If bodhisattvas, they do eight hundred times for one repentance and practice the path for sixty-seven days.' In the sūtra, corresponding to each assembly there is a short dhāraṇī. Since the initial text set a period of seven days, and further speaks of practicing the path for eighty-seven days and so forth, this refers to eighty periods of seven up to sixty periods of seven; the ritual procedures are fully as in the seven-day practice, only the dhāraṇī is different. The assemblies of nuns all require the great monks for their livelihood (ordination); repentances such as these all concern pārājika offenses. Once having committed this offense, one is a dead person in the Buddhadharma; now, the pure essence of the precepts is reborn. If the method of repentance succeeds, there is no sin that is not eradicated; therefore it says: 'If it were not reborn, there is no such possibility.' However, the teachings of the Hīnayāna do not permit repentance [for pārājika]; although it is said to be reborn, one is not fit for monastic duties. When a novice has committed it, once repentance succeeds he can advance to full ordination; what the Mahāyāna permits can be carried out in practice. If one were to allow great monks [to do so], it would invite fraud and deceit; moreover, the Baoliang strictly prohibits [it] and there is no text permitting [them] to make up the quorum; one should believe that the division between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna has distinct rules of prohibition. In the Hīnayāna there is no teaching of repenting grave [offenses], and it still constitutes a grave offense not being eradicated; why use the Mahāyāna teaching of repenting pārājika to make up the quorum of the Hīnayāna Saṅgha? Having repented according to the Mahāyāna, one internally advances along one's own path; why mix them up and confuse contemporary sentiments? 'The purification of the eye and so forth' means that only upon reaching the six sense faculties is it called the purification of the resemblance painful path. 'Seeing the Buddhas of the ten directions on the seventh day': that sūtra has different signs for each day. The preceding purification of the painful path has its stage at the six sense faculties; non-retrogression here has its stage at the first abidance, where destroying ignorance is called the purification of afflictions. 'When the three obstacles are removed, the tree of causes and conditions is destroyed' and so forth: the Vibhāṣā says: 'The past two branches are the roots, the present five branches are the trunk, the present three branches are the flowers, and the future two branches are the fruits. Having flowers and fruits refers to ordinary beings; having no flowers but having fruits refers to trainees (śaikṣa); having neither flowers nor fruits refers to remainderless [nirvāṇa].' By reasoned deduction, it should also be said that having few flowers and having fruits refers to trainees, while having no flowers and having fruits refers to with-remainder [nirvāṇa]. This is explained according to the realms within the Tripiṭaka and shared [teachings]. If according to the Ratnagotravibhāga, only when the four matters of condition, characteristic, arising, and destruction are entirely absent is it called eternal destruction—meaning conditions as roots, characteristics as trunk, arising as flowers, and destruction as fruits; these are precisely the two kinds of twelve links outside the realms. 'It is also the house of the five aggregates being empty' and so forth: the various teachings differ, and the emptiness of the aggregates is also different (and so forth); for now we set aside the distinctive to preserve the perfect. Vimalakīrti says: 'Not contemplating form, not contemplating the suchness of form.' Form provisionally enters emptiness, which negates both emptiness and provisionality to reveal the Middle Way. The [other] four aggregates are also like this. The Dapin says: 'Purity of form up to purity of consciousness.' The 'Diamond Body Chapter' of the Great Sūtra says: 'The Tathāgata's body is neither the aggregates, realms, and entrances, nor is it separate from the aggregates, realms, and entrances; it neither increases nor decreases,' and so forth; all of these are contemplating the aggregates as ultimately empty. Therefore we know that both cause and fruit elucidate the emptiness of the aggregates.