止觀輔行傳弘決 6.31

6.31

次釋中道四門不同。於中先更牒前空假，舉後入中，三文相對以顯圓妙。「生不生」等者，次第非實，並云「一往」。自他及以雙照自他，並非文旨。言同意殊，故皆名「似」。「生不生」，更牒前從假入空。「即不生生」等，是述文意。「自即不自」等者，重述前文次第行意，意本在於不次第也。依文次第空是自行，即此自行即是化他，即非自他。「不生生」，更牒前出假。「不生不生」，引後入中。假中二文比入空說，可以意得，故以三文展轉相即，使空成妙空乃至假中成妙假中，此即第六示文旨也。「種種」下，結前說意。意雖若是，還且附文次第而說，故釋中道復開四章。四章初文明中觀意者，於次第中，初文復先說於文旨。今雖次第，即是圓教二惑先除。除非本意，意在初心圓修三觀，故歷四教簡其觀相，前之兩教但中尚無，何況圓妙？別雖聞中如眼暗者，是故三教非今所論。三藏可見。次通教中，初明理同三藏，故無別理可觀。「雖無」等者，此教無中，假立中號，亦云不生不滅故也。故知他約緣生色心作三諦名，不能出此。「亦得」下，雖明遠通論被接者，是故當教終無第三。次別教中，初約諦離合中，言「元知中」者，但知而已。初雖未觀，然異通教後心方知，故云元知。「照此二諦」等者，既以有無共為俗諦，以佛法中而為真諦，有異於小，故曰「從容」。雖合真俗以之為俗，真諦不出中道理體。通教雖作三諦之名，實無中體。「此理」下，約觀譬顯真因分齊，初法、次譬。「如眼暗」等者，初標也。「云何」下，釋也，亦是合喻。雖標心本眼，以眼暗故，但穿旁眼。旁實無眼，謂旁有眼。別教菩薩亦復如是，雖初知常而行次第。中理之外實無真俗謂有真俗，名為旁眼。是故此教先破二惑。邊外無中，期心邊外，當知三諦俱名旁眼。「例如」下，舉例也，方便如二諦，見諦如見中。次明圓教，有法、譬、合。初法中云「先破兩惑」等者，秖是圓觀麁惑先除，故知一生初住可獲。故南嶽云：「望入銅輪，領眾太早，但淨六根。」次第行者，借使一生兩惑先除，雖不經歷亦成次第。或圓接別、或別圓接通、或解圓行漸，並兩惑先除，俱非今意，今意一向專在於圓。次譬中，初約用兵以譬能所，次以治鐵別譬於能。「器械」譬止，「身力」譬諦，「智謀」譬觀。械者，兵器通名。「兵」即五兵也，設弓、刀、槊、戈、殳也。殳音殊，長丈二，兩刃，戟有柄也。故《淮南子》云「用兵如決積水於千刃之隄，轉圓石於萬丈之壑。」即兵利也。今以身壯譬圓三諦，兵利譬圓三上也，權多譬圓三觀也。智械並依身力故也。「一日」者，一生也。「兩鐵」譬者，約教說之，乃有種種燒治故也。

Next is the explanation of the differences among the four gates of the middle way. Within this, [the text] first recapitulates the preceding [contemplations of] emptiness and provisionality, and adduces the subsequent entry into the middle, setting the three passages against one another to manifest the perfect and wondrous. Regarding "producing the unproduced" and so forth: gradual sequence is not the real, and all are termed "provisional statements." Self-benefit, benefiting others, and illuminating both self and others simultaneously are all not the underlying purport of the text. Because the words are identical while their meanings differ, all are called "simulated." "Producing the unproduced" recapitulates the previous entry from provisionality into emptiness. "That which is unproduced producing" and so forth expound the intent of the text. "Self being identical to not-self" and so forth re-explain the purport of the preceding text's sequential practice, the intent of which ultimately lies in non-sequence. According to the sequential order of the text, emptiness is self-practice; this very self-practice is itself the conversion of others, and is itself neither self nor other. "The unproduced producing" recapitulates the previous stepping out into provisionality. "The unproduced [producing] the unproduced" introduces the subsequent entry into the middle. The two passages on provisionality and the middle, when compared with the statement on entering emptiness, can be grasped in terms of their meaning; hence, using the mutual identity of the three passages step by step causes emptiness to become wondrous emptiness, and even provisionality and the middle to become wondrous provisionality and the wondrous middle. This is the sixth [section], which shows the text's purport. From "various" onward, the intent of the preceding explanation is concluded. Although the intent is such, it is still expounded in accordance with the sequential order of the text; therefore, in explaining the middle way, four chapters are again opened. In the first passage of the four chapters, which explains the intent of the contemplation of the middle: within the gradual sequence, the first passage again first expounds the underlying purport of the text. Although it is now presented sequentially, it means that in the perfect teaching the two [sets of] delusions are eliminated first. Elimination is not the original intent; the intent lies in cultivating the three contemplations in a unified and perfect manner from the initial mind. Therefore, passing through the four teachings, the characteristics of their contemplations are distinguished: in the former two teachings, even the middle [as an isolated reality] does not exist, so how could there be the perfect and wondrous? Although the distinctive [teaching] hears of the middle, it is like someone with dim eyesight; therefore, these three teachings are not what is currently discussed. The Tripiṭaka [teaching] is readily apparent. Next, within the shared teaching, it first clarifies that its principle is identical to that of the Tripiṭaka, so there is no separate principle to contemplate. Regarding "although there is no..." and so forth: this teaching lacks the middle and merely provisionally establishes the name of "middle," which is also called "neither arising nor ceasing." Hence we know that when others formulate the names of the three truths based on causally arisen form and mind, they cannot surpass this. From "it is also possible" onward: although it explains that broadly speaking it discusses those who are received [into higher teachings], there is ultimately no third [truth] in this teaching proper. Next, within the distinctive teaching, first, regarding the combination and separation of the truths: stating that one "originally knows the middle" means merely knowing it and nothing more. Although one does not yet contemplate it at first, it differs from the shared teaching where it is known only in the final mind; hence it says "originally knows." Regarding "illuminating these two truths" and so forth: since both existence and non-existence together are taken as the conventional truth, and the middle of the Buddha-dharma is taken as the real truth, it differs from the Hinayana, and is therefore called "spacious and leisurely." Although the real and conventional are combined to constitute the conventional, the real truth does not depart from the principle-essence of the middle way. Although the shared teaching establishes the names of the three truths, it actually lacks the essence of the middle. From "this principle" onward: through contemplation and metaphors, it reveals the limits of the true cause; first the dharma, then the metaphor. Regarding "like someone with dim eyesight" and so forth: first the heading. From "how is it" onward: the explanation, which is also the application of the metaphor. Although their mind is aimed at the original eye, because their eyesight is dim, they merely bore a side eye. At the side there is really no eye, yet they claim there is an eye at the side. The bodhisattva of the distinctive teaching is also like this: although they initially know the eternal, they practice sequentially. Outside the principle of the middle, there are really no real and conventional truths, yet they claim there are real and conventional [truths]; this is called the "side eye." Therefore, this teaching first breaks the two [sets of] delusions. Outside the extremes there is no middle, yet they direct their minds outside the extremes; one should know that all three truths are termed the "side eye." From "for example" onward: an example is adduced; the expedients are like the two truths, and seeing the truths is like seeing the middle. Next, the perfect teaching is clarified, comprising dharma, metaphor, and application. First, in the dharma, stating "first breaking the two delusions" and so forth merely means that through perfect contemplation the coarse delusions are eliminated first; hence we know that within a single lifetime the first abodiship can be attained. Thus Nanyue said: "Hoping to enter the copper wheel, I took charge of the assembly too early; I have merely purified the six sense faculties." As for the sequential practitioner, even if within a single lifetime the two delusions are eliminated first, although they do not pass through stages, it still constitutes a sequence. Whether the perfect receives the distinctive, or the distinctive or perfect receives the shared, or one understands the perfect yet practices gradually—in all these cases, the two delusions are eliminated first, and none of them is the present intent; the present intent is single-mindedly and exclusively focused on the perfect. Next, in the metaphor, it first uses the deployment of troops to illustrate the subjective and objective, and then uses the smelting of iron specifically to illustrate the subjective [capacity]. "Weapons and armor" illustrate calming, "physical strength" illustrates the truths, and "wisdom and strategy" illustrate contemplation. "Armor and weapons" (xie) is a general term for weapons. "Weapons" (bing) refers to the five weapons: namely bows, knives, lances, halberds, and wooden pikes (shu). Shu is pronounced shu; it is twelve feet long, double-edged, a halberd with a shaft. Hence the Huainanzi states: "Deploying troops is like releasing accumulated water from an embankment of a thousand fathoms, or rolling round boulders down a chasm of ten thousand yards." This refers to the sharpness of the weapons. Now, physical robustness illustrates the perfect three truths; sharpness of weapons illustrates the perfect three calmings; and abundance of expedients illustrates the perfect three contemplations. This is because wisdom and weapons both depend on physical strength. "One day" means a single lifetime. The metaphor of the "two pieces of iron" is explained in terms of the teachings, for there are various kinds of firing and refining.