止觀輔行傳弘決 6.17

6.17

次通教四門。初是有門。云「而有幻化」，即有門正體。「如是」下，破惑結成。「若言假實」下，空門正體。「如此」下，破惑結成。「若明一切法」下，空有門體。「如是」下，破惑結成。「既言」下，非空非有門體。「如此」下，破惑結成。初有門中云「諸法不生而般若生」者，《大論》六十二先引經云「身子白佛言：『云何生般若波羅蜜？』佛言：『色不生，般若波羅蜜生；乃至一切種智不生，般若波羅蜜生。』身子問：『云何色不生等？』佛言：『色不起不生、不得不失，乃至種智亦如是，是為般若生。』」生即是有，故證有門。雖具三教，今意在通。空門中云「乃至涅槃亦如幻化」者，《大論》五十三引經云「諸天子念：『誰應聞須菩提說？』須菩提知諸天子念，語諸天子云：『如幻如化，如是聞法。乃至涅槃亦如幻化。』」論釋云：佛於一切眾生中第一，涅槃於一切法中第一。以二法名字從因緣生故，假令有法勝涅槃者能令如幻，何況涅槃。以無有法勝涅槃故，假設言之。斥三藏如文。「體而論破」者，此通伏難。難云：通人既觀諸法如幻，幻本不生，今無所滅？名之為體，體則非破，今何故云體破見思名破法遍？答：此約即體而論破也。不破而破，故云體破。次引證中，云「火焰」等者，並證四門不可取也。乃至釋第一義中，云「一切實」等四句、「四門入池」等，並此意也。故讚般若偈云「般若波羅蜜，譬如大火聚，四邊不可取，無取亦不取。一切取悉捨，是名不可取。不可取而取，是即名為取。」釋曰：初句明實相般若，即是所通。次句譬所通也。第三句譬能通不可取也。第四句門觀俱亡。第五句能所俱亡。第六句總結。第七八句明無取故名為得八，義亦兼三且釋成通。「若不」下，明門體離諍。問答下，與三藏辨異。擋字（丁朗切），謂朋擋也。有門擋有而撥空，空門擋空而撥有。「亦名如實巧度」等者，《大論》第七作巧拙二醫譬云「如用針藥名為拙度，用呪術者名為巧度。亦如二渡，若用草筏名為拙渡，用方舟者名之為巧。」雙舟曰方。聲聞化人苦行頭陀，初中後夜勤心禪觀，苦而行道名為拙度。菩薩化人觀諸法實，無縛無解心得清淨，名為巧度。巧如喜根，拙如勝意。巧拙相形雖復若是，揣心量行無令濫非。此斥小宗事相頭陀專根本禪無常等觀，苦勵身口不知諸法畢竟清淨。此以衍教用斥拙度，行道之人善自斟酌。「三獸渡河」者，大經譬也。三人如獸，真如水底，象雖得底仍分二別，小象得泥通菩薩也，大象得實即見不空。見不空者復有二種，謂但、不但。今文且用得泥菩薩以共二乘。

Next are the four gates of the shared teaching. First is the gate of existence. The statement "yet there is illusory transformation" is the actual substance of the gate of existence. From "thus" downward, delusion is destroyed and conclusion is reached. From "if one speaks of provisional and real" downward is the actual substance of the gate of emptiness. From "thus" downward, delusion is destroyed and conclusion is reached. From "if one explains all phenomena" downward is the substance of the gate of both emptiness and existence. From "thus" downward, delusion is destroyed and conclusion is reached. From "since it is said" downward is the substance of the gate of neither emptiness nor existence. From "thus" downward, delusion is destroyed and conclusion is reached. In the first gate of existence, where it says "all phenomena are unarisen yet prajñā arises," the Dazhidulun, fascicle sixty-two, first cites a sūtra saying: "Śāriputra addressed the Buddha, saying: 'How does prajñāpāramitā arise?' The Buddha said: 'Form does not arise, prajñāpāramitā arises; up to the knowledge of all aspects does not arise, prajñāpāramitā arises.' Śāriputra asked: 'How is it that form does not arise, and so forth?' The Buddha said: 'Form neither starts nor arises, is neither obtained nor lost; up to the knowledge of all aspects is also like this; this is the arising of prajñā.'" Arising is existence; hence it is cited to verify the gate of existence. Although it contains three teachings, the present intention is in the shared [teaching]. In the gate of emptiness, where it says "even nirvāṇa is also like an illusory transformation," the Dazhidulun, fascicle fifty-three, cites a sūtra saying: "The devaputras thought: 'Who should listen to what Subhūti preaches?' Subhūti, knowing the devaputras' thought, told them: 'Hear the Dharma just as an illusion, just as a transformation. Even nirvāṇa is also like an illusory transformation.'" The treatise explains: "The Buddha is supreme among all sentient beings; nirvāṇa is supreme among all phenomena. Because the names of these two dharmas arise from causes and conditions, even suppose there were a phenomenon superior to nirvāṇa, it could still be made like an illusion, let alone nirvāṇa." Since there is no phenomenon superior to nirvāṇa, this was said hypothetically. The refutation of the Tripiṭaka is as in the text. Regarding "discussing refutation based on identity of substance," this resolves a covert objection. The objection says: "Since a practitioner of the shared teaching contemplates all phenomena as like an illusion, and an illusion is fundamentally unarisen, what is eliminated now? This is termed identity of substance. If it is identity of substance, then there is no refutation; why now do you say that refuting [delusions of] view and thought by identity of substance is called universal refutation of phenomena?" The answer is: this discusses refutation in terms of identical substance. Refuting without refuting, hence it is called refutation by substance. Next, in citing proof, where it says "flames of fire" and so forth, all prove that the four gates are not to be grasped. Up to the explanation of the primary truth, where the four phrases such as "all is real" and "entering the pool through the four gates" are given, all share this meaning. Therefore, a verse praising prajñā says: / "Prajñāpāramitā / Is like a great mass of fire; / It cannot be seized on any of the four sides, / And even not-seizing is not seized. / When all grasping is completely abandoned, / This is named ungraspable. / Grasping what is ungraspable, / That is what is called grasping." / The explanation says: The first line explains the prajñā of the true mark, which is what is penetrated. The second line is a simile for what is penetrated. The third line is a simile showing that what can penetrate is ungraspable. In the fourth line, both gate and contemplation vanish. In the fifth line, both subject and object vanish. The sixth line concludes in summary. The seventh and eighth lines explain that because there is no grasping, it is called attainment of the eight; the meaning also combines the three [teachings], but is provisionally interpreted to establish the shared [teaching]. From "if not" downward, it explains that the substance of the gates is free from dispute. Down from question and answer, distinctions are drawn with the Tripiṭaka. The character 擋 (pronounced dang) means taking sides and factional bias. The gate of existence takes sides with existence and rejects emptiness; the gate of emptiness takes sides with emptiness and rejects existence. Regarding "also called skillful crossing according to reality" and so forth, the Dazhidulun, fascicle seven, gives the simile of the two physicians, skillful and clumsy, saying: "Using needles and medicines is called clumsy crossing; using incantations is called skillful crossing. It is also like two crossings of a river: using a grass raft is called clumsy crossing; using coupled boats is called skillful." Coupled boats are called fang. When śrāvakas convert people through ascetic dhūtas, diligently meditating in the initial, middle, and late night watches, to practice the path through suffering is called clumsy crossing. When bodhisattvas convert people through contemplating the reality of all phenomena, with no bond and no liberation, their minds attaining purity, it is called skillful crossing. Skill is like Priyaṅkara (Xigen); clumsiness is like Varaprabha (Shengyi). Although the clumsy and skillful are contrasted like this, measure your heart and assess your practice so that there is no careless mistake. This refutes the small school's phenomenal dhūtas, exclusively focusing on the fundamental dhyānas and contemplations of impermanence, straining body and speech without knowing that all phenomena are ultimately pure. This uses the Mahāyāna teaching to refute clumsy crossing; practitioners of the path should deliberate well. Regarding "three beasts crossing a river," this is a simile from the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. The three persons are like beasts; the true suchness is like the bottom of the water. Although the elephant reaches the bottom, two kinds are still distinguished: the small elephant reaching the mud is the bodhisattva of the shared teaching; the great elephant reaching the solid bed sees the non-empty. Those who see the non-empty are further divided into two kinds: the merely [non-empty] and not-merely [non-empty]. The present text provisionally uses the bodhisattva who reaches the mud together with the two vehicles.