[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) › 6.37 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 6.37 止觀輔行傳弘決 6.37 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.37](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6.37) 次明位者，初釋中位修相證相，亦為且存次第文故，故云兩觀以為方便。地相體真及以隨緣，能為入地雙遮方便，故至初地任運雙遮。地前空假能為入地雙照方便，故至初地任運雙照。故體真止以止見思，即以空觀而照真諦。假觀隨緣，准此可知。是故初地名中道位。次「修此」下，斥權位也。先立三位，謂通教八地、別教初地、圓教初住。若「別接」下，兼序通別修證之位。欲斥於權，是故重序。初明通教以別接者，方乃得云七地論修八、地論證。問：第三卷明別接通中，何故乃云八地聞中道、九地伏無明、十地破無明，方得名為佛。以何義故與此不同？答：始從四地終至九地咸受接名，三根不同故位不等。四地為上、六七為中、八九為下，文從中說故云七地；前為銷經，故從下說。故《大品》云「十地菩薩為如佛」。經從下者其位定故，故諸經論多從下說。言「如佛」者，通第十地名為佛地。被接之人能破無明，無明破已，如彼佛地同得八相，故名為如。「如此」下，斥權位也。通別二意雖破無明，權位猶高，故須斥破。問：乾慧正是初心所修，云何斥言初不得修？答？舉劣況勝，一往斥之。如乾慧中總含三賢，初心但可修五停心，尚無念處，況有八地道觀雙流，即今被接破無明耶？「又初心」下，次斥別教初立信心，尚未入信，豈論回向？文中但云「至回向」者，文略故也，故彼權位凡夫無分。言「修中」者，亦寄次第。實而言之，三觀圓修，以二觀心修於中道，是故至此即名圓修。故《四念處》云「別向圓修」，即此意也。次「今明」下，正顯圓位。初立五品，引《法華經》釋成三觀。空座、中衣、假室，復以定慧助釋忍衣。座畢竟故所以空圓，衣寂滅故所以中圓，室慈大故所以假圓。又室衣座三皆云「如來」，是故圓也。「始從」下，相似位也。「見鶴」下，舉譬似也。《大經》十四云「見有二種：一相貌見、二了了見。相貌見者，如遠見煙名為見火，雖不見火實非虛妄。空中見鶴便言見水，若見蓮華便言見根，籬間見角便言見牛，見女懷妊便言見欲，若見身口便言見心。」一一句下廣如初句，如是並名相貌見也。了了見者，如眼見色，菩薩見道，菩提涅槃亦復如是，及觀掌果義亦同之，如是並名了了見也。若相貌見名相似見，了了見者名究竟見。分證亦得分了之名。故此似位引彼相貌者相似見，實非見性。雖未見性，不同凡夫虛妄稱見。故諸譬云「實非虛妄」。五品尚得觀行名見，況復相似而非見耶？「例如」下，次引例釋成。「今五品」下，正明中位。次引《華嚴》以證初住，六根淨位界內惑盡，且名無餘。進破無明，方「過牟尼」。三藏牟尼未斷別惑，教門觀行復劣於圓，故初住心過牟尼也。「始自」下，顯觀功能。「不待」等者，重斥通教七地方接。「何暇歡喜」者，斥別初地始證中者。故《楞伽》第五云「菩薩摩訶薩住如如已升歡喜地，如是次第乃至法雲。」故知並是初地已上教道之說。「前教」下，正判權實。教彌實，位彌下；教彌權，位彌高。故通在八地，別在初地，圓在初住。「法華」下，引證權實也，方便證權、實事證實。「我」即釋迦，「諸」謂十方三世等也。借彼發迹之語，以成開權之文。「復次」下，更歷教判也。前但列二雙流入中，今更通說，故兼三藏。其教更下，其位極高，故雙流位唯在於佛，應明當分跨節二義。「雖言去至略語」者，明圓實位。「其位雖」下，破惑功多，至初住時一攝一切，雖云一品，品實無量。次舉譬，如文。次「又」下，引例釋也。如四禪是一，入者不同，以是而言，品不啻九，故知初住破品應多。「前兩觀後」等者，准文次第，至此方可結竪破遍，恐迷遠文，故預於前二觀後結。今至此中正當結處，故但略結，還却指前。「今中道觀」下，更略結前三番中觀以成二空，名破法遍。「無明」是結前初番，「法性」是結前次番，「不依」等結前第三，「不依四句」結成性空，「無倚無著」結成相空。准前破見在三假後方結二空，故今亦應然。次引《淨名》以證二空。佛具二空故稽首禮，具二空故盡淨諸法。以空喻空，故曰「如空」。無復性相，故曰「無依」。若入初住攝一切住，住既破惑，是故一破攝一切破。從初至後皆除一分，故名「一破一切破」也。 > Next, in explaining the stages: First, in explaining the characteristics of practice and realization at the stage of the middle, it is also for the sake of temporarily preserving the graduated text that it says that the two contemplations serve as expedients. The ground-characteristics of realizing the real and according with conditions can serve as the expedient for double cessation upon entering the \[first\] ground; thus, upon arriving at the initial ground, one spontaneously achieves double cessation. Emptiness and provisionality prior to the grounds can serve as the expedient for double illumination upon entering the \[first\] ground; thus, upon arriving at the initial ground, one spontaneously achieves double illumination. Hence, the cessation of realizing the real is used to cease views and thoughts, which is using the contemplation of emptiness to illuminate the truth of the real. The contemplation of provisionality according with conditions should be understood by analogy with this. Therefore, the initial ground is called the stage of the Middle Way. Next, from 'Practicing this' down, it refutes the provisional stages. It first establishes three stages: namely, the eighth ground of the shared teaching, the initial ground of the distinctive teaching, and the initial abode of the perfect teaching. From 'If distinctly incorporated' down, it also sets forth the stages of practice and realization of the shared and distinctive teachings. Wishing to refute the provisional, it therefore sets them forth again. First, in explaining that the shared teaching is incorporated by the distinctive, only then can it be said that practice is discussed at the seventh ground and realization at the eighth ground. Question: In the third fascicle, regarding the distinctive incorporating the shared, why does it instead say that at the eighth ground one hears the Middle Way, at the ninth ground one subdues ignorance, and at the tenth ground one destroys ignorance, and only then can one be called a Buddha? For what reason does that differ from this? Answer: From the fourth ground at the beginning to the ninth ground at the end, all receive the designation of being incorporated; because the three faculties differ, their stages are not equal. The fourth ground is for the superior, the sixth and seventh are for the middling, and the eighth and ninth are for the inferior. The text speaks from the middling perspective, and therefore says the seventh ground; earlier, in order to interpret the sutra, it spoke from the inferior perspective. Thus the Dapin states, 'A bodhisattva of the tenth ground is like a Buddha.' Because the sutra follows the inferior, its stage is fixed; hence, most sutras and treatises speak from the inferior perspective. Saying 'like a Buddha' means that the tenth ground of the shared \[teaching\] is called the Buddha Ground. A person who is incorporated can destroy ignorance; when ignorance has been destroyed, like that Buddha Ground they equally attain the eight aspects, and are therefore called 'like \[a Buddha\].' From 'In this manner' down, it refutes the provisional stages. Although the two intentions of the shared and distinctive destroy ignorance, their provisional stages are still high, and so they must be refuted and broken down. Question: The stage of dry wisdom is precisely what is practiced by the initial mind; why does \[the text\] refute it by saying that at the beginning one cannot practice it? Answer: Bringing up the inferior to contrast with the superior, it temporarily refutes it. For instance, the stage of dry wisdom comprehensively contains the three levels of the worthy; the initial mind can only practice the five methods of stilling the mind, yet does not even have the stations of mindfulness, much less the eighth ground's dual flow of path and contemplation, which is precisely the present destruction of ignorance upon being incorporated. Next, from 'Moreover, the initial mind' down, it refutes the distinctive teaching's initial establishment of the mind of faith: when one has not even entered faith, how could one discuss dedication? The text merely says 'reaching dedication' because it is abbreviated; hence, ordinary beings have no share in those provisional stages. Saying 'practicing the middle' is also provisional phrasing based on the graduated approach. Strictly speaking, it is the perfect cultivation of the three contemplations: using the mind of the two contemplations to cultivate the Middle Way; therefore, reaching this point is called perfect cultivation. Hence the Four Stations of Mindfulness says, 'Diverting toward the perfect practice,' which is precisely this meaning. Next, from 'Now explaining' down, it directly reveals the perfect stages. First, it establishes the five grades, citing the Lotus Sutra to interpret and establish the three contemplations: the seat of emptiness, the robe of the middle, and the room of provisionality; it further uses concentration and wisdom to aid the explanation of the robe of forbearance. Because the seat is ultimate, emptiness is perfect; because the robe is quiescent, the middle is perfect; because the room is great compassion, provisionality is perfect. Furthermore, room, robe, and seat are all called 'the Tathāgata's'; therefore they are perfect. From 'Beginning from' down is the stage of resemblance. From 'Seeing a crane' down, it adduces a metaphor for resemblance. Fascicle fourteen of the Great Sutra says, 'There are two kinds of seeing: first, seeing signs; second, seeing clearly. As for seeing signs: it is like seeing smoke in the distance and calling it seeing fire; although one does not see fire, it is truly not false. Seeing a crane in the sky, one then says one sees water; seeing a lotus flower, one then says one sees the root; seeing horns through a fence, one then says one sees an ox; seeing a woman pregnant, one then says one sees desire; seeing body and speech, one then says one sees the mind.' Each and every phrase below is expanded like the first phrase; such are all called 'seeing signs.' Seeing clearly is like the eye seeing form; the bodhisattva seeing the path, bodhi, and nirvāṇa is also like this; and observing the fruit in the palm of one's hand has the same meaning; such are all called 'seeing clearly.' If seeing signs is called resemblance-seeing, seeing clearly is called ultimate seeing. Partial realization can also be called partial clarity. Therefore, when this stage of resemblance cites those signs, it is resemblance-seeing, not truly seeing the nature. Although one has not yet seen the nature, it is not like an ordinary being falsely claiming to see. Therefore all the metaphors say, 'it is truly not false.' Even the five grades attain the designation of seeing through contemplative practice; how much more so could resemblance not be seeing? Next, from 'For example' down, it cites an analogy to complete the explanation. From 'Now the five grades' down directly clarifies the stage of the middle. Next, it cites the Avataṃsaka to verify the initial abode: at the stage of purity of the six faculties, internal delusions within the realms are exhausted, and this is temporarily called 'without remainder.' Advancing to destroy ignorance, one only then 'surpasses Śākyamuni.' The Śākyamuni of the Tripiṭaka has not severed distinct delusions, and the doctrinal gate's contemplative practice is furthermore inferior to the perfect; therefore, the mind of the initial abode surpasses Śākyamuni. From 'Beginning from' down reveals the function of contemplation. 'Not waiting for' and so forth again refutes the shared teaching's only being incorporated at the seventh ground. 'What leisure for joy' refutes the distinctive's initial ground only then realizing the middle. Thus the fifth \[fascicle\] of the Laṅkāvatāra says, 'When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abides in suchness, he ascends to the Joyful Ground, and so forth sequentially up to the Dharma Cloud.' Therefore we know these are all statements of the doctrinal path from the initial ground upward. From 'The preceding teachings' down directly judges the provisional and the real. The more real the teaching, the lower the stage; the more provisional the teaching, the higher the stage. Therefore the shared is at the eighth ground, the distinctive at the initial ground, and the perfect at the initial abode. From 'Lotus' down cites proof for the provisional and the real: expedient means prove the provisional, and the real matter proves the real. 'I' is Śākyamuni; 'all' means the ten directions, the three times, and so forth. It borrows those words on revealing the trace to fulfill the passage on opening the provisional. Next, from 'Furthermore' down, it again judges by running through the teachings. Previously it merely listed two dual flows entering the middle; now, speaking comprehensively, it also includes the Tripiṭaka. Its teaching is even lower, and its stage is extremely high, so the stage of the dual flow is only in the Buddha; one should clarify the two meanings of its own proper share and transcending levels. 'Although saying going to the end is an abbreviated statement' clarifies the stage of the perfect and real. From 'Although its stage' down: the merit of destroying delusions is great; upon arriving at the initial abode, one embraces all, and although one grade is spoken of, the grades are truly measureless. Next, it gives a metaphor, as in the text. Next, from 'Moreover' down, it cites an analogy to explain. Just as the four dhyānas are one, those who enter them are not the same; speaking from this, the grades are not merely nine; thus we know that the grades destroyed at the initial abode must be many. As for 'After the preceding two contemplations' and so forth: according to the order of the text, only at this point could one conclude the vertical universal refutation; fearing confusion over the distant text, it was concluded in advance after the preceding two contemplations. Now arriving at this place is precisely the concluding point; hence it merely concludes in brief, pointing back to the preceding. From 'Now the contemplation of the Middle Way' down, it further briefly concludes the preceding three turns of the contemplation of the middle to constitute the two kinds of emptiness, which is named universally refuting phenomena. 'Ignorance' concludes the preceding first turn; 'dharma-nature' concludes the preceding second turn; 'not relying on' and so forth concludes the preceding third; 'not relying on the four phrases' concludes by forming the emptiness of nature; 'having no reliance and no attachment' concludes by forming the emptiness of signs. Analogous to previously concluding the two kinds of emptiness after the three provisionalities in refuting views, it should also be so now. Next, it cites the Vimalakīrti to verify the two kinds of emptiness. Because the Buddha is endowed with the two kinds of emptiness, one bows in homage; because he is endowed with the two kinds of emptiness, he completely purifies all phenomena. Using space to allegorize emptiness, it therefore says 'like space.' There being no further nature or signs, it therefore says 'without reliance.' If one enters the initial abode, it encompasses all abodes; since an abode destroys delusion, one destruction encompasses all destructions. From the beginning to the end, a portion is eliminated in each; hence it is called 'one destruction is all destructions.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.36](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6.36) - [Next: 6.38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6.38) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.6.37) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6.37](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.6.37) · Pramāṇa