止觀輔行傳弘決 3.21.1

3.21.1

次明巧度，先列，即次第三觀通名為巧，望拙得名。 若《大論》中引喜根等名巧度者，即指三教。 是則次第與不次第俱名為巧。 今從初說，故亦名巧。 次正釋。 初次第中，先止、後觀。 初明止中，初體真止。 案文解釋其文尚略，具起應以四性推檢。 破性計已具二空故，方名得空。 次第二止者。 初且通語三乘所證，而大同小異。 「若二乘」下，釋不須方便。 次引經云動止心常一者，止即是空，動即入假，空心入假，故云常一。 次第三止中云「偏行」等者，斥前二止故也。 意之所趣曰行，意之所依曰用。 初體真止俱觀二諦，偏趣於真，依真起行故。 次方便止亦俱觀二諦，偏趣於俗。 雖依俗起行，未觀中道，故並名偏。 故今斥之「不會中道」。 又涅槃住空名為偏行，出假流動名為偏用。 又知俗非俗，義通二種，緣生之俗及出假俗。 二俗俱寂，故云「寂然」。 「此三止名」等者，釋疑。 此是大師謙退之辭。 次「釋論」下，證三止意。 何但映望三觀使名有憑，《大論》亦許隨義立名。 言「依三觀立三止」者，大小乘經止觀二名皆悉並立，況止觀秖是定慧異名。 既定慧之名處處並列，故今望觀以立止名。 所以《瓔珞》三觀義必兼止。 故《成論》中有〈止觀品〉。 四《阿含》中，凡有佛教令修二法，即是止觀。 又《婆沙》十七云「諸比丘問上座云：『樹下閑房為修何法？ 』上座答言：『當修二法，所謂止、觀。 』又問：『多修止觀為何所得？ 』答：『得初果乃至阿羅漢果。 』如是次第問五百比丘，皆云修止觀二法。 阿難白佛，佛亦云修止觀二法。 阿難歎言：『善哉善哉！ 如來與弟子所說皆同，句義味同。 』」又《淨名》云「法身者從止觀生」，《大瓔珞》云「若欲學諸法深入善本，當見菩薩力修習止觀。 」大小經論一切皆爾。 次「詳此」下，與釋名中對辨同異。 言「髣髴」者，上音彷，下音佛，非謂合同故云也。 所言「同者」，前云止息，約煩惱息； 今云體真，體妄即真。 前云停止，約心往理； 今云隨緣，心隨俗理。 前不止止約理，不當止與不止； 今息二邊，空邊如止、假如不止，中道不當空假二邊似不止止。 「其相異」者，前之三止共成一諦，今之三止各成一諦。 「前三成次三」等者，次之與後並指體相，綺文互說是故不同。 前釋名三成體相三，故體相三一一皆假釋名三成。 何者？ 如體真止，必息見思、停心真諦，及見真理非止不止。 體真既爾，餘二例然，是故一一皆具前三。 下句云「後一具前三」者，複疎上句云體相中一皆具釋名中三故也。 次明三觀者，先依經列。 彼《本業瓔珞》有兩處文明此三觀，下卷佛為普賢文殊等七菩薩說，具如第一卷引。 上卷明十迴向中一一迴向各各有十所緣境界，第十向中第十觀者名為無相第一義觀得入初地，初地已上三觀一心。 言三觀者，從假入空名二諦觀，從空入假名平等觀。 二觀為方便，因是二空觀得入中道第一義諦觀，雙照二諦、心心寂滅，自然進入初地法流水中，名摩訶薩。 今文依彼，略三五字耳。 從「所言」去，解釋經意。 初釋入空復名二諦，文有五重。 初通途約詮能所共論。 何者？ 俗是能詮、空是所詮，若無能詮無以識所，是故須立二諦之名。 「又會空」下，第二約證況修說，先法、次譬、後合。 初法中云會空之日秖應見空，尚空假俱見，況由觀假見真而不得云二諦觀耶？ 是故不得不立二諦。 「如雲除」等者，次舉譬也。 雲即是障，障除名「發」，發即開也。 如雲除時，上空一色顯，下萬象必明。 上顯譬見真，下明譬見俗，雲譬見思惑。 上顯必下明，是故須二諦。 「由真」下，合譬。 由真合上顯，假顯合下明。 由見真故其假更顯。 「今由」下，況釋。 明證真時尚見二諦，今始修真由觀假得，何意不名二諦觀耶？ 故云今由等也。

Next, explaining the skillful crossing over: first listing [them], that is, the three successive contemplations are generally called "skillful," acquiring their name in contrast to the "clumsy." If, as in the Dazhidulun, citing Xigen (Rocana/Prasannendriya) and others is called the skillful crossing over, that refers to the three teachings. Thus both the gradual and the non-gradual are called skillful. Here it is spoken from the beginning [of the three], hence it is also called skillful. Next, the direct explanation. First, in the gradual [presentation], calming comes first and contemplation after. First, in explaining calming: first, calming by embodying the real. Commenting on the text to explain it, the text is still brief; fully developed, one should investigate and examine by means of the four natures. Only after destroying the conceptual imputation of intrinsic nature, so that the two kinds of emptiness are fully present, is it termed attaining emptiness. Next, regarding the second calming: first, it speaks generally of what is realized by the three vehicles, which is largely identical with minor differences. From "If the two vehicles" onward, it explains why expedient means are not needed. Next, quoting the sūtra that "In movement and stillness the mind is constantly unified": stillness is emptiness, and movement is entering provisionality; with an empty mind one enters provisionality, hence it says "constantly unified." Next, in the third calming, saying "one-sided practice" and so forth rebukes the preceding two calmings. Where the intention tends is called practice; that on which the intention relies is called function. The first, calming by embodying the real, contemplates both truths, but tends one-sidedly toward the real, initiating practice based on the real. The next, calming by expedient means, also contemplates both truths, but tends one-sidedly toward the conventional. Although it initiates practice based on the conventional, it has not yet contemplated the Middle Way; hence both are called one-sided. Therefore it is now rebuked as "not according with the Middle Way." Furthermore, abiding in emptiness in nirvāṇa is called one-sided practice, and emerging into provisionality and drifting in movement is called one-sided function. Moreover, knowing that the conventional is not conventional applies broadly to two kinds: the conventional of conditioned origination and the conventional of emerging [from emptiness] into provisionality. Both conventionals are quiescent, hence it says "quiescent." As for "The names of these three calmings," and so forth, it resolves doubts; these are the Great Master's words of modesty and deference. Next, from "The treatise explains" onward, it provides scriptural verification for the intention behind the three calmings. How could it merely be to match the three contemplations to provide a basis for the names? The Dazhidulun also allows establishing names according to meaning. As for saying "establishing the three calmings based on the three contemplations": in both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras, the two terms "calming" and "contemplation" are always juxtaposed; moreover, calming and contemplation are simply different names for concentration and wisdom. Since the names concentration and wisdom are juxtaposed everywhere, calming is now named with reference to contemplation. This is why the three contemplations of the Yingluo sūtra necessarily encompass calming. Hence the Chengweishilun (or Harivarman's Tattvasiddhi) contains a "Chapter on Calming and Contemplation." In the four Āgamas, wherever the Buddha teaches the practice of two dharmas, they are precisely calming and contemplation. Furthermore, the Vibhāṣā, fascicle seventeen, states: "Bhikṣus asked the elder, 'Beneath the trees in an empty chamber, what dharmas should be cultivated?' The elder replied, 'Two dharmas should be cultivated, namely calming and contemplation.' They asked again, 'By frequently cultivating calming and contemplation, what is attained?' He replied, 'One attains the first fruit up to the fruit of arhatship.' Asking five hundred bhikṣus in this manner in turn, all said to cultivate the two dharmas of calming and contemplation. Ānanda addressed the Buddha, and the Buddha also said to cultivate the two dharmas of calming and contemplation. Ānanda praised, 'Excellent, excellent! What the Tathāgata and the disciples say is identical, with the same phrases, meanings, and flavor.'" Furthermore, Vimalakīrti says, "The Dharma-body is born from calming and contemplation." The Benye yingluo says, "If one wishes to learn all dharmas and deeply enter the roots of goodness, one should see the power of bodhisattvas in cultivating calming and contemplation." All Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras and treatises are like this. Next, from "Scrutinizing this" onward, [the text] compares the identities and differences with the explanation of the names. As for "roughly resembling" (fangfu): the upper character is pronounced fang, the lower fu; it does not mean complete identity, hence the expression. What is meant by "identity": previously it said "stopping and resting" with reference to the resting of defilements; now it says "embodying the real" by embodying delusion as precisely the real. Previously it said "halting," referring to the mind proceeding toward principle; now it says "following conditions," with the mind following conventional principle. Previously "non-stopping stopping" referred to principle not admitting of stopping or non-stopping; now "resting the two extremes" treats the extreme of emptiness as like stopping and provisionality as like non-stopping, while the Middle Way does not admit of the two extremes of emptiness and provisionality, resembling non-stopping stopping. As for "their characteristics being different": the previous three calmings jointly constitute one truth, whereas the present three calmings each constitute one truth. As for "the previous three form the subsequent three" and so forth: both "subsequent" and "latter" point to the substance and characteristics; the alternating phrasing expresses this mutually, hence the difference. The three in the previous explanation of the names form the three of the substance and characteristics; thus each of the three of substance and characteristics depends on the three in the explanation of the names to be formed. How so? For instance, calming by embodying the real necessarily rests view and thought [defilements], halts the mind in the truth of the real, and perceives that the real principle is neither stopping nor non-stopping. Since embodying the real is like this, the other two follow suit; therefore each fully possesses the previous three. The subsequent sentence saying "the latter one possesses the previous three" repeats and clarifies the preceding sentence, meaning that each one among the substance and characteristics possesses the three from the explanation of the names. Next, regarding the explanation of the three contemplations: first, listing them according to the sūtra. In that Benye yingluo there are two passages explaining these three contemplations: in the lower fascicle the Buddha speaks to seven bodhisattvas including Samantabhadra and Mañjuśrī, as cited fully in the first fascicle. In the upper fascicle, in explaining the ten dedications of merit, each dedication has ten objective realms; the tenth contemplation in the tenth dedication is named the contemplation of the signless supreme truth, by which one enters the first bhūmi; from the first bhūmi upward, the three contemplations are in a single mind. As for the three contemplations: entering emptiness from provisionality is called the contemplation of the two truths; entering provisionality from emptiness is called the contemplation of equality. These two contemplations serve as expedients; relying on these two contemplations of emptiness, one can enter the contemplation of the supreme truth of the Middle Way, illuminating both truths simultaneously, with mind after mind quiescent and extinguished, spontaneously entering into the Dharma-flow water of the first bhūmi, named a mahāsattva. The present text follows that, merely omitting three to five words. From "What is meant by" onward, it explains the sūtra's meaning. First, explaining why entering emptiness is also named the two truths, the text has five layers. First, generally discussing both the expressive and the expressed together: how so? The conventional is that which expresses, and emptiness is that which is expressed; if there were no expressive, there would be no way to recognize what is expressed; therefore the name of the two truths must be established. From "Furthermore, when realizing emptiness" onward is the second: speaking of cultivation by comparison to realization, first the doctrine, next the metaphor, and then the application. First, in the doctrine, it says that on the day of realizing emptiness one should only see emptiness, yet one still sees both emptiness and provisionality; how much more so when viewing the real by contemplating the provisional—could it not be called the contemplation of the two truths? Therefore one must establish the two truths. "As when clouds are cleared away" and so forth: next, adducing the metaphor. Clouds are precisely obstacles; the clearing away of obstacles is called "unfolding" (fa), unfolding being opening up. Just as when clouds are cleared away, the single color of the sky above is revealed, and the myriad phenomena below are necessarily clarified. The revelation above is a metaphor for seeing the real, and the clarification below is a metaphor for seeing the conventional; clouds are a metaphor for the delusions of view and thought. The revelation above necessarily entails the clarification below; therefore the two truths are necessary. From "Due to the real" onward, the application of the metaphor: "due to the real" matches the revelation above, and "provisionality being revealed" matches the clarification below. Because of seeing the real, provisionality is even more apparent. From "Now, due to" onward is the comparative explanation: explaining that even when realizing the real one still sees the two truths; now when initially cultivating the real, it is obtained by contemplating the provisional—why would it not be called the contemplation of the two truths? Hence it says "Now, due to..." and so on.