止觀輔行傳弘決 6.39

6.39

○「橫門」者下，正釋橫門。先列八不，一論具列故先明之。故論第一歸敬序云「不生亦不滅，不常亦不斷，不一亦不異，不來亦不去。能說是因緣，善滅諸戲論。我稽首禮佛，諸法中第一。」此之八不，明佛所說第一義諦。「一論」下，舉例指廣。「中論」下，引論攝相，以二攝六及垢淨等。論「問曰：諸法無量，何故但以此八破耶？答：法雖無量，此八破盡。」當知諸文所列門相不出此八，赴緣名異是故廣明。故論云「言不生者，一切邪計及四性等，生與無生皆不可得。不生無生，何得有滅？滅無生故，故生本無。」餘之六句，准此說之。問：不生不滅既已總破一切諸法，何須更列餘六句耶？答：為成初二，故列餘六。又信樂不同，隨宜說異。故《本業瓔珞》下卷、《大經》、《大論》第六，明破諸法並列八不，與《中論》同。故《瓔珞》云「八不相即，聖智不二，不二故是諸佛菩薩母，諸佛皆說八不故也。」故知八不攝門義盡。又今竪門三諦義足，度入橫門門門三諦，故使橫門無橫不竪，以竪望橫無竪不橫，從始至終並有橫故。如一無，生一切無生，乃至不出亦復如是。攝此橫竪皆入一心，具如後說。此八既爾，諸門例然，是故今文度入諸門，具如《中論》初二入六。是故今文先以諸法悉入無生，餘七展轉更互相入，乃至一切橫門亦然，是故且明無生度入。初云「若無生門至亦如是」者，是將無生門中陰入界境十雙互發來入諸門。次「若無生門觀心」下，是將無生門中十法成乘初文，及不思議境境中十如十界三千來入諸門。此中存略，但云「種種五陰」，即是略舉五陰世間。「一性相」等，即是略舉三世間中十如文來入諸門。次「若無生門發真正」等，是將無生門中發菩提心來入諸門。「若無生門安心」下，是將安心止觀來入諸門。此前法三列文並略，唯至破遍文相稍廣者，正約破遍明度入故，自餘諸文相承來耳。既相承來，無住無行理亦應具。彼二門中或時無者，是闕略耳。次「若無生門識有無」等下，是將破遍中竪三觀中入空文來，但是空中破見文耳。猶略破思，及以諸位四門料簡等。「若無生門破見」等下，是將入假中知病、知病中重數、重數中知見重數文來，餘知病中諸義及識藥授藥等文並略。「若無生門觀智障」等下，是將入中初觀無明文來。前文既以四句推破，破已乃云「若於一觀得悟，餘句即融。」故知一句得悟，悟即三觀現前，帶前二觀修中故也。餘三句如文。從「自滅」下，是將入中觀法性文來。從「自待」下，是將入中觀真緣文來。初無生門中明因成假，約無明法性以為自他共無因等。今入中道，中道文初攬前空假與中相即已具三諦，故今四句一一句內皆結三諦。相續相待亦復如是。又一一假中，皆初明自生、次明三句，在文可見。相續文中言「自滅」等者，前觀法性中云「為當無明滅法性生」等，故此文中以滅為名。無明滅生，無明即是自滅。法性生，即是他生。不滅而生，即是他滅。法性名自，滅不滅生即是共，滅離滅不滅即是無因。法性亦爾。何者？不滅生是自；不滅望滅，滅即成他。今通無明言之，故皆云滅。相待中云「自待」等者，前相待中云「待智說無智，待於諸佛名為他待，待我當來名為自待。」共與無因例此可知。「若無生門三觀結成」下，是將結破法遍文來。前於二觀後結竟，至第三觀後但指前結之。今度入文既於第三觀後說之，第二觀後故略不出，故知結遍正應合在第三觀末。「若無生門如上等」者，總結。「若得」下，次明二經。初通明入相；次「所以者何」下，正明二經，先明《無行》、次明《金剛》。初無行中云「諦無行」者，即是妙境。智是依境起解，菩提是發心，安心如文。「破見思」等者，即是破遍。「生死涅槃中間」即是通舉始終。「行位教」等，指下文中通塞道品及以正助。位是次位，通攝安忍及以離愛並在位中。過離愛已入初住位，必有起教，故云教也。次「金剛」者，初且引經六塵不住，次「境智」下明十乘也。「不住境智乃至見思無明」等者，且舉十乘初三文也，以破遍文是元度入故也。「不住地」等者，更引經中不住之文。入地尚乃云不應住，以未極故，況復住於初心境智。乃至若未破遍故不應住，即是無住而住，是則亦名不應住。故云「雖諸法不住，以無住法住般若中。」是則三諦復通初後，六即皆得名無住住。「此無住」下，更判位也。「故仁王」下，釋判也。通途言之，此之三處皆破無明，是故分得金剛無住。「釋迦」下，明究竟金剛。「若爾」下，釋疑。常途所釋但云金剛唯在伏道，故云斷道無金剛耳，故以等覺為金剛位，妙覺唯斷，無金剛也。《仁王》既云「釋迦所入」，故今引之，佛有金剛。通至初住、極在於佛，無非金剛不住義也。為破他解，故引佛有，從容釋之。有無無在用在等覺，功歸妙覺，二論所說亦不出於十乘不住。言「度曲」者，曲謂音曲，以無生義度入餘門，如世絃管，絃管不殊而曲各異。絃管如橫，諸曲如竪。初章根本妙慧旨歸，度曲之功曠大若是。入道為理，餘三屬事，「千從」之解，少分為言。

From “The horizontal gates” onward directly explains the horizontal gates. First, the eight negations are listed; because one treatise fully lists them, they are explained first. Thus, the introductory homage of the first fascicle of that treatise states: “Neither arising nor ceasing, / neither permanent nor annihilated, / neither identical nor different, / neither coming nor going. / Able to expound such dependent origination / and skillfully extinguish all conceptual proliferation, / I bow my head to the Buddha, / the supreme among all things.” These eight negations clarify the ultimate truth expounded by the Buddha. From “one treatise” onward, examples are cited to point to the broader scope. From “the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā” onward, the treatise is cited to subsume marks, using two to subsume six, as well as defilement, purity, and the like. The treatise states: “Question: Phenomena are measureless; why are they refuted only with these eight? Answer: Although phenomena are measureless, these eight refute them completely.” One should know that the gate-marks listed in various texts do not go beyond these eight; responding to capacities their names differ, which is why they are explained broadly. Thus the treatise states: “As for ‘unborn’, all false attachments, the four natures, and so on—arising and non-arising are both unattainable. If there is no arising and it is unarisen, how could there be ceasing? Because ceasing is unarisen, arising is originally nonexistent.” The remaining six clauses are explained on this model. Question: Since neither arising nor ceasing already collectively refutes all phenomena, why list the other six clauses? Answer: To accomplish the first two, the remaining six are listed. Moreover, because faith and inclination differ, explanations differ according to suitability. Thus, the lower fascicle of the Benye yingluo jing, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, and fascicle six of the Dazhidulun all list the eight negations when explaining the refutation of all phenomena, identical to the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Thus the Yingluo jing states: “The eight negations are mutually identical, and noble wisdom is non-dual; being non-dual, it is the mother of all buddhas and bodhisattvas, for all buddhas expound the eight negations.” Hence we know the eight negations exhaustively encompass the meanings of the gates. Furthermore, now that the meaning of the three truths is complete in the vertical gates, passing over into the horizontal gates means that each and every gate possesses the three truths. This causes the horizontal gates to have nothing horizontal that is not vertical, and viewing the horizontal from the vertical, nothing vertical that is not horizontal, since from beginning to end both include the horizontal. Just as when one is unarisen, all are unarisen, so too down to “no exit.” Subsuming both this horizontal and vertical into a single mind is fully as explained later. Since these eight are thus, all gates are likewise; therefore, the present text passes over into the various gates fully as the first two enter the [other] six in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Therefore, the present text first enters non-arising with all phenomena, and the remaining seven mutually enter one another in succession, down to all horizontal gates being likewise; hence for now it explains passing over through non-arising. The opening statement, “From the gate of non-arising down to ‘is also like this,’” brings the ten pairs of mutual manifestation of the realm of aggregates, sense bases, and elements from within the gate of non-arising into the various gates. Next, from “If within the gate of non-arising one contemplates the mind” onward, brings the opening passage on the ten methods constituting the vehicle within the gate of non-arising, as well as the ten suchnesses, ten realms, and three thousand within the inconceivable object, into the various gates. Here it is abbreviated: merely stating “the various five aggregates” is an abbreviated mention of the realm of the five aggregates. “One nature and mark” and so forth is an abbreviated bringing of the text on the ten suchnesses within the three realms into the various gates. Next, from “If within the gate of non-arising one arouses genuine…” brings arousing the aspiration for bodhi within the gate of non-arising into the various gates. From “If within the gate of non-arising one calms the mind” downward brings calming and contemplation for calming the mind into the various gates. These previous three listings of dharmas are all abbreviated; only when reaching universal refutation is the textual mark somewhat expanded, because passing over is clarified specifically in terms of universal refutation, while the remaining passages merely follow in succession. Since they follow in succession, non-abiding and non-practice should also be included in principle. Where they are sometimes absent in those two gates, it is merely an omission. Next, from “If within the gate of non-arising one recognizes existence and non-existence…” brings the passage on entering emptiness within the vertical threefold contemplation of universal refutation, but it is only the passage on refuting views within emptiness; it still abbreviates refuting thought, as well as the appraisal of the four gates across various stages. From “If within the gate of non-arising one refutes views…” brings the passage on knowing sickness within entering provisionality, the multiple layers within knowing sickness, and the multiple layers of knowing views; the other meanings within knowing sickness, recognizing medicine, administering medicine, and so forth are all abbreviated. From “If within the gate of non-arising one contemplates cognitive obstacles…” brings the opening passage on contemplating ignorance within entering the middle. Since the previous text used the four clauses to analyze and refute, and having refuted then stated, “If one attains awakening in one contemplation, the remaining clauses immediately fuse,” we know that attaining awakening in one clause means the three contemplations manifest at once upon awakening, because one practices the middle while bearing the previous two contemplations. The remaining three clauses are as in the text. From “self-extinction” downward brings the passage on contemplating dharma-nature within entering the middle. From “self-dependence” downward brings the passage on contemplating the real and causal conditions within entering the middle. In the initial gate of non-arising, clarifying the provisionality of causal formation applies ignorance and dharma-nature to self, other, both, causeless, and so forth. Now entering the middle path, the beginning of the text on the middle path brings together the previous emptiness and provisionality as mutually identical with the middle, already fully possessing the three truths; therefore now, within each of the four clauses, all conclude with the three truths. Serial continuity and mutual dependence are also like this. Moreover, in each provisionality, self-arising is first clarified, followed by the [other] three clauses, as can be seen in the text. In the text on serial continuity, the words “self-extinction” and so forth refer to the earlier contemplation of dharma-nature which said, “Does ignorance cease and dharma-nature arise?”, and so on; hence this text takes extinction as its name. Ignorance ceasing and arising: ignorance is itself self-extinction. Dharma-nature arising is arising from other. Arising without ceasing is extinction from other. Dharma-nature is called self; arising from both extinction and non-extinction is both; arising apart from extinction and non-extinction is causeless. Dharma-nature is also like this. Why? Non-extinction arising is self; relative to extinction, extinction becomes other. Now speaking generally of ignorance, all are called extinction. In mutual dependence, the words “self-dependence” and so forth refer to the earlier statement in mutual dependence: “Dependent on wisdom, one speaks of non-wisdom; dependent on all buddhas is called dependence on other; dependent on my future is called self-dependence.” Both and causeless can be understood by analogy. From “If within the gate of non-arising the three contemplations conclude…” brings the passage concluding universal refutation of dharmas. Previously, after the two contemplations the conclusion was already made, and reaching after the third contemplation it merely referred to the previous conclusion. Now, since the text on passing over explains it after the third contemplation, it is abbreviated and not presented after the second contemplation; hence we know concluding universality properly belongs at the end of the third contemplation. The words “If within the gate of non-arising as above…” summarize. From “If one attains” downward next clarifies the two sūtras. First it explains the marks of entry in general; next, from “Why is this?” downward, it directly clarifies the two sūtras: first the Wuxing jing, then the Diamond Sūtra. First, in the Wuxing jing, “truth without practice” is the wonderful object. Wisdom is giving rise to understanding based on the object; bodhi is arousing the mind; calming the mind is as in the text. “Refuting view and thought” and so forth is universal refutation. “Between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa” generally cites the beginning and end. “Practices, stages, teachings” and so forth point to the passages below on pass and blockage, aids to the path, and direct and auxiliary [practices]. Stages are the sequence of stages, generally subsuming peaceful endurance and detachment from affection, both being within the stages. Having passed detachment from affection and entered the stage of the first abode, there must be the setting forth of teachings, hence it says “teachings.” Next, regarding the Diamond Sūtra, it first briefly cites the sūtra on not abiding in the six dusts; next, from “object and wisdom” downward, clarifies the ten vehicles. “Not abiding in object and wisdom down to view, thought, and ignorance” briefly cites the opening three passages of the ten vehicles, because the text on universal refutation was originally that which passed over. “Not abiding in stages” and so forth further cites the sūtra’s statements on not abiding. Entering the stages is still said to be something one should not abide in because it is not yet ultimate, so how much less should one abide in the object and wisdom of the initial mind! Down to: if one has not universally refuted, one should not abide; this is abiding without abiding, and therefore is also called should not abide. Thus it says: “Although all dharmas do not abide, through the dharma of non-abiding one abides in prajñā.” Thus the three truths again pervade beginning and end, and the six identities can all be called non-abiding abiding. From “This non-abiding…” further determines the stages. From “Therefore the Renwang…” downward explains the determination. Speaking generally, these three places all break through ignorance; hence they partially attain the adamantine non-abiding. From “Śākyamuni” downward clarifies the ultimate adamantine. From “If so…” resolves a doubt. Ordinary explanations merely state that the adamantine is solely in the path of subduing, hence saying that the path of severance has no adamantine; thus they take equal awakening as the adamantine stage, and wondrous awakening as severance alone, having no adamantine. Since the Renwang jing says “that which Śākyamuni entered,” it is now cited to show that the Buddha has the adamantine. Reaching generally to the first abode and culminating in the Buddha, there is none that is not the meaning of adamantine non-abiding. In order to refute others' interpretations, it cites that the Buddha has it, explaining it with ease. Whether existent or non-existent does not matter: its application is in equal awakening, and its merit returns to wondrous awakening; what is expounded in the two treatises also does not go beyond the non-abiding of the ten vehicles. As for “transposing the tune”: a tune means a musical melody; transposing the meaning of non-arising into the other gates is like strings and pipes in the world—the strings and pipes do not differ, yet the melodies are distinct. Strings and pipes are like the horizontal, while the various melodies are like the vertical. The fundamental wonderful wisdom of the opening chapter is the purport to which they return; the efficacy of transposing the tune is vast like this. Entering the path pertains to principle, while the remaining three belong to phenomena; the interpretation of “a thousand following” is stated as a small part.