止觀輔行傳弘決 3.41

3.41

「次明」下，約二四論開合也。與前但是橫竪不同，論其諦體更無差別。於中又四：先判橫竪、次「則有」下列。三「生滅」下正明開合、四以倫偈合。問：何名橫竪？答：三諦相望深淺不同，故名為竪。苦集滅道二二相望無復淺深，故名為橫。又以二望二亦無深淺，但是能治所治不同，是故四諦名之為橫。問：前三三四容可橫竪，圓融三四如何橫竪？答：實如所問。今言橫竪者，如三諦中且據開一以為二三，即名二三以為方便，方便望實亦得名竪。開權顯實無復二三，何所論竪？既於一實不分而分分為三諦，何妨此三非橫非竪而名為竪？四諦亦爾，約方便教可說為橫。無作四諦本來相即，與誰論橫？亦是不分而分分為四諦，何妨非橫非竪而名為橫？如六即位非橫非竪而得名竪，諸波羅蜜非橫非竪而得名橫，故知橫竪高廣不二。「今將」下，引《中觀論》者，但是觀諦巧拙四句攝持諸諦。

The passage from 'Next explaining' onward discusses opening and uniting in terms of two and four [truths]. It differs from the preceding only in being horizontal or vertical; when discussing their essential nature as truths, there is no further distinction. Within this there are again four parts: first, determining horizontal and vertical; next, listing from 'then there are' onward; third, directly clarifying opening and uniting from 'arising and perishing' onward; fourth, matching them with verses in orderly sequence. Question: What are called horizontal and vertical? Answer: The three truths, viewed in comparison with one another, differ in depth and shallowness, and are therefore called vertical. Suffering, origin, cessation, and the path, when paired two by two and viewed against each other, have no depth or shallowness, and are therefore called horizontal. Furthermore, viewing two against two also has no depth or shallowness; they differ merely as the antidote and what is remedied. For this reason, the four truths are called horizontal. Question: In the previous three [teachings], the three and four [truths] may well be vertical and horizontal, but in the perfectly interfused [teaching], how can the three and four be horizontal and vertical? Answer: It is indeed as you ask. When speaking here of horizontal and vertical, as in the case of the three truths, we temporarily base it on opening the one into two or three, which are then called expedients; viewed against the real, the expedients can also be called vertical. When expedients are opened and the real is revealed, there are no longer two or three, so what verticality could be discussed? Yet since within the one real, without dividing, it is divided into the three truths, what prevents these three—though neither horizontal nor vertical—from being called vertical? The four truths are also like this: in terms of the expedient teachings, they can be described as horizontal. The unconditioned four truths are fundamentally mutually identical; with what could they be discussed as horizontal? It is also that without dividing, they are divided into four truths; what prevents them—though neither horizontal nor vertical—from being called horizontal? Just as the six identities of stages are neither horizontal nor vertical yet can be called vertical, and the pāramitās are neither horizontal nor vertical yet can be called horizontal, so one knows that horizontal and vertical, high and broad, are non-dual. The citation of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā from 'Now taking' onward merely uses the four propositions of skillfulness and unskillfulness in contemplating the truths to subsume all truths.