[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [止觀輔行傳弘決](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912) › 3.15 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 3.15 止觀輔行傳弘決 3.15 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3.15) 次開章別釋中，所詮諦理名之為體。分別權實大小不同，故名為相。亦云顯體者，體是所顯、教相眼智即是能顯，能從於所，故云顯體。初云「粗寄四意」者，粗，略也。體相難申，略寄四意方能識體。「夫理藉」下，明用章所依及生起者。教能詮理，故教居初。詣理須行，行即眼智，是故居次。次辨所詣，即是理境，是故居次。辨取理人自他得失，是故居次。若從生起，似如四章共成體相。解釋文旨當分高深，俱能顯體豈須相假？問：初教相章與釋名何別？答：彼釋通名，但得名教；今判同異，故云教相。問：既云體相，那列教相？答：雖語能詮，意在所詮。不約能詮無以辨所，約眼智章能所亦爾。如前通德，德是所詮。明能通名能至於所，以所顯能，故云通德。故釋名四段意在絕待，體相四章意在境界，是故四章文四義二，章意在一。「法華」下，明用章意者，前釋名中既用《玄》文待絕二妙，故今顯體還用疏中四一顯實，實不異彼是故用之。此四一名本出光宅，光宅疏意，以三三為權指於昔教、以四一為實指於《法華》。昔三無果，故三但三；今教無三，四種皆一，故云四一。今家和舊亦作四一，數同名異，不全同舊。舊云果一，今云理一，若無理印則同魔說。舊云因一，今云行一，因語則單，行通因果，人教二一與舊不殊，《玄》文有破，今不具論。《玄》文復以十妙而為十一，今且依四以對四章。故經云「為令眾生開佛知見」，取所知見而為理一。「但教菩薩」，即是人一。「常為一事」，即是行一。「為眾生說」，即是教一。疏釋理一約能知見。又為四釋，謂四智、四門、四位觀心，能所相對四章義足。智是眼智、門是教相，觀心秖是稟教證智，次位秖是眼智所階以契於理。 > Next, within opening the chapters and explaining them separately: the truth-principle that is expressed is called the 'essence'. Distinguishing the differences between provisional and real, great and small, is called the 'characteristics'. It is also called 'revealing the essence': the essence is that which is revealed, while the teaching characteristics and eyes-and-wisdom are precisely that which can reveal; that which can reveal follows that which is revealed, and hence it is called 'revealing the essence'. What first says 'roughly lodging four intentions': 'roughly' means briefly. The characteristics of the essence are difficult to express; only by briefly lodging four intentions can one recognize the essence. From 'Principle relies on...' onward, it clarifies that upon which the chapters rely for their use and their generation in sequence. Teaching can express principle; therefore teaching is placed first. To arrive at principle requires practice; practice is eyes-and-wisdom, and therefore it is placed next. Next, determining that which is arrived at: this is the objective realm of principle, and therefore it is placed next. Determining the attainments and losses of the persons who grasp principle, both self and other, is therefore placed next. If viewed from their generation in sequence, it seems as if the four chapters together constitute the characteristics of the essence. Yet when explaining the purport of the text according to its respective depth, each can reveal the essence—why should they need to rely on one another? Question: How does the initial chapter on teaching characteristics differ from the Explanation of the Name? Answer: That explained the common name, and thus only attained the teaching of the name; here it determines sameness and difference, and hence it is called 'teaching characteristics'. Question: Since it is called 'characteristics of the essence', why list teaching characteristics? Answer: Although it speaks of that which can express, the intention rests on that which is expressed. Without relying on that which can express, there is no way to discern that which is expressed; in terms of the chapter on eyes-and-wisdom, that which can reveal and that which is revealed are likewise so. As with the previous penetrating virtues: virtue is that which is expressed. Clarifying the ability to penetrate means the name can arrive at that which is expressed; revealing that which can reveal through that which is revealed, it is therefore called 'penetrating virtues'. Thus, the four sections in the Explanation of the Name intend the absolute; the four chapters in the characteristics of the essence intend the objective realm. Therefore, across the four chapters, the text is fourfold, the meaning is twofold, and the chapter's intention is one. From 'Lotus...' onward clarifies the intention of using the chapters: since previously in the Explanation of the Name the relative and absolute wonders of the Profound Meaning were used, now in revealing the essence, the four onenesses in the Commentary are likewise used to reveal the real; because the real is not different from that, they are used. The names of these four onenesses originally came from Guangzhai. The intention of Guangzhai's commentary was to take the three threes as provisional, pointing to the past teachings, and the four onenesses as real, pointing to the Lotus. The past three had no fruit, so the three were merely three; the present teaching has no three, and all four kinds are one, hence called the 'four onenesses'. Our school, harmonizing with the old, also formulates the four onenesses; the numbers are the same while the names differ, not being entirely identical with the old. The old spoke of 'oneness of fruit'; we now speak of 'oneness of principle'—if there is no seal of principle, it would be identical to demonic preaching. The old spoke of 'oneness of cause'; we now speak of 'oneness of practice'—the term 'cause' is singular, whereas 'practice' penetrates cause and fruit. The two onenesses of person and teaching are not different from the old; there is a refutation in the Profound Meaning, which will not be fully discussed now. The Profound Meaning also takes the ten wonders to be ten onenesses; here we provisionally rely on the four to correspond to the four chapters. Thus the sūtra says: 'To cause sentient beings to open the Buddha's knowledge and vision'—taking that which is known and seen to be the oneness of principle. 'Only teaching bodhisattvas' is precisely the oneness of person. 'Constantly for the sake of the one matter' is precisely the oneness of practice. 'Explaining for the sake of sentient beings' is precisely the oneness of teaching. The commentary explains the oneness of principle in terms of that which can know and see. It also makes four explanations: that is, the four wisdoms, four gates, four stages, and contemplation of mind; with that which can know and that which is known set against each other, the meaning of the four chapters is complete. Wisdom is eyes-and-wisdom; gates are teaching characteristics; contemplation of mind is merely receiving the teaching and realizing wisdom; and stages are merely the gradations of eyes-and-wisdom by which one tallies with principle. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3.14) - [Next: 3.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3.16) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.3.15) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.3.15) · Pramāṇa