止觀輔行傳弘決 3.13

3.13

次開通中，初問意者，前第二卷末云有發心所治之三障，乃至究竟所治之三障。又云有發心所得之三德，乃至究竟所得之三德。此則三障三德俱通至極。今將三道四倒以並三障，障之與道及以四倒名異義同，隱蔽聖德名之為障，通至生死名之為道。見解違理名之為倒，倒故能障，障故生死，是故今以三道四倒並難三障。開謂開拓，通近至遠。答中，先許所問、次為解釋。先許問云：倒道及倒三義既同，俱應至極。次「何者」下，為釋倒意，以義同故，於中重明三障義通。通至極故，極方破盡，故云至極。以許三道亦至極故，所以業報煩惱一一開三。言「報由三種煩惱」者，恐文誤，應云業由三種煩惱。從「又約」下，次示三道四倒至極。報障分三既至於極，一一報中開於三道，是故三道亦至於極。何者？分段三道，謂見思惑為煩惱道，煩惱潤業名為業道，感界內生名為苦道。方便三道，謂塵沙惑為煩惱道，以無漏業名為業道，變易生死名為苦道。實報三道，謂無明惑為煩惱道，非漏非無漏業為業道，彼土變易名為苦道。問：何不感寂光？答：今論感報，不論寂光，寂光無報故不說也。約三煩惱各開四倒者，見思煩惱有常等四，塵沙煩惱有無常等四，無明煩惱又有常等四。問：今文三障之中已明苦及煩惱，何不云業開為三耶？答：業由煩惱，是故感報。已說餘二，業居其間，故不須說。問：何故諸倒唯說有四，不三不五？答中但說常及無常等耶？答：理本無名彊為立名，雖彊為立德不出四。佛滅度後，外人竊佛常等四名以計神我。故佛初出說無常等以破常等。二乘不了計無常等以之為極，故佛復說常等四德、說無常等。出假菩薩異二乘邊名為常等。菩薩不達但執教道，又說非常非無常等以破常等。此約漸教化儀以說。若頓教者，即於常等說無常等而達無常，即達中道祕密之藏。依圓是頓、依別是漸，意亦同此。但別教次第少異化儀，思之可見。

Next, within opening up and penetrating: regarding the meaning of the initial question, the end of the previous second fascicle stated that there are three obstacles counteracted upon arousing the mind, up to three obstacles counteracted at the ultimate. It also stated that there are three virtues attained upon arousing the mind, up to three virtues attained at the ultimate. These [show that] both the three obstacles and the three virtues penetrate all the way to the ultimate. Now, bringing the three paths and four inversions into comparison with the three obstacles: obstacle, path, and the four inversions differ in name but are identical in meaning. Veiling the noble virtues is called an 'obstacle'; penetrating all the way to birth-and-death is called a 'path'. Views and understandings contrary to principle are called 'inversions'. Because of inversion, there is the ability to obstruct; because of obstruction, there is birth-and-death. Therefore, the three paths and four inversions are now brought forward together to question the three obstacles. 'Opening' means expanding; 'penetrating' means reaching from the near to the far. Within the answer, first the question is granted, and next the explanation is provided. First, granting the question, it says: since the three meanings of inversion, path, and [obstacle] are identical, all of them ought to reach the ultimate. Next, from 'Why is this?' onward, it explains the meaning of inversion; because their meanings are identical, within this it clarifies anew that the meaning of the three obstacles penetrates. Because they penetrate to the ultimate, only at the ultimate are they completely broken; hence it says 'reach the ultimate'. Because it is granted that the three paths also reach the ultimate, karma, retribution, and affliction are each opened into three. The phrase 'retribution arises from three kinds of afflictions' is likely a textual error; it should read 'karma arises from three kinds of afflictions'. From 'Furthermore, in terms of...' onward, next it shows that the three paths and four inversions reach the ultimate. Since the obstacle of retribution is divided into three and reaches the ultimate, within each retribution the three paths are opened, and therefore the three paths also reach the ultimate. How so? The three paths of portion and section: that is, the delusions of view and thought are the path of affliction; afflictions moistening karma is called the path of karma; and inducing birth within the realms is called the path of suffering. The three paths of expedient means: that is, the delusions of sands of dust are the path of affliction; non-outflow karma is called the path of karma; and inconceivable transformation birth-and-death is called the path of suffering. The three paths of real retribution: that is, the delusion of ignorance is the path of affliction; karma that is neither outflow nor non-outflow is the path of karma; and transformation in that land is called the path of suffering. Question: Why is Quiescent Light not induced? Answer: Here retribution induced [by karma] is discussed, not Quiescent Light; since Quiescent Light has no retribution, it is not mentioned. In terms of each of the three afflictions opening into four inversions: the affliction of view and thought has the four of permanence and so forth; the affliction of sands of dust has the four of impermanence and so forth; the affliction of ignorance also has the four of permanence and so forth. Question: Within the three obstacles in the present text, suffering and affliction have already been explained; why does it not say that karma opens into three? Answer: Karma arises from affliction, and therefore induces retribution. The other two having already been stated, karma resides between them, and so it does not need to be stated. Question: Why are the inversions explained only as four, and not three or five? Why does the answer only speak of permanence, impermanence, and so forth? Answer: Principle is originally without name, but is forcefully given a name; although forcefully given a name, its virtues do not exceed four. After the Buddha passed into extinction, outsiders stole the four names of the Buddha—permanence and so forth—to conceptualize a spiritual self (ātman). Therefore, when the Buddha first appeared, he spoke of impermanence and so forth to shatter permanence and so forth. Those of the two vehicles did not understand and conceptualized impermanence and so forth as the ultimate; therefore, the Buddha again spoke of the four virtues of permanence and so forth, and spoke of impermanence and so forth. Bodhisattvas who emerge from provisionality, being distinct from the side of the two vehicles, are called 'permanence and so forth'. Bodhisattvas who do not penetrate merely cling to the path of teaching, so he also spoke of neither permanence nor impermanence and so forth to shatter permanence and so forth. This is spoken in terms of the ritual of conversion of the gradual teaching. If it is the sudden teaching, then right within permanence and so forth he speaks of impermanence and so forth, and penetrating impermanence, one immediately penetrates the secret treasury of the Middle Way. Relying on the perfect is sudden; relying on the distinctive is gradual; the meaning here is also the same. It is only that the sequence of the distinctive teaching is slightly different from the ritual of conversion; by reflecting on this, it can be seen.