止觀輔行傳弘決 7.17.2

7.17.2

若六若十既是開合，不應以此而判大小宗教等別。 「如禪」下，正示開合。 合故即是事理合明，開之則是事理別說。 又明六則通於大小，明十則唯在於大。 又此十中，通則通於四教，別則唯在別圓。 如三藏菩薩即以伏惑為一切智，以三祇假為道種智，佛果以為一切種智，能起神通有勝願用，故三藏菩薩亦得有十。 若據未斷惑邊，則般若亦無。 非從空出，種智不成。 未得法身，無願智力。 且以分地而為般若，則但有六。 通教菩薩從但空邊開出方便、佛果種智及願智力，以為十度。 未得法身，與三藏同。 已斷通惑從空出假，從容進退多少不同。 是則兩教，或六或七、或八或十。 今文且約別圓義邊開六為十，餘諸增減文中未論。 又存教道且兼於別，意本在圓。 泥滓與願、婆羅與力，方音異耳。 言「定守禪度」者，若開禪為三，則根本定守第五度名禪度也，餘所開者名力名願。 空智守於第六般若，餘所開者名漚和等。 漚和，出假智也。 闍那，入中智也。 亦是方音不同也。 次明攝法者，正示合行故能攝法。 若不達於一切諸法皆入此之對治門中，如何對治攝一切法？ 初明六度攝道品者，下文廣釋。 意雖可見，今預通說，至文易明。 何者？ 檀攝二覺，謂除、捨也。 文中闕一、下文具列。 尸攝三謂，正語、業、命。 忍攝四，謂念根、念力、念覺、正念。 進攝八，謂四正勤、進根、進力、進覺分、正精進。 禪攝八，謂四如意、定根、定力、定覺、正定。 慧攝十，謂四念處、慧根、慧力、擇覺、喜覺、正見、正思。 合三十五。 餘有二信通三十五，一切諸法信為本故。 若準《婆沙》，以實體十一攝三十七。 故《婆沙》中先以七覺收餘六科，餘不入者謂二信為一及正思惟一。 以語業命三實體但二，足成十一。 《俱舍》唯十，以合戒支故也。 言入七者，謂四念處，及慧根力、正見，入擇法覺分。 四正勤、進根力及正方便，方便是進，入進覺分。 四如意足，及定根力、正定，入定覺分。 念根力、正念，入念覺分。 是則二十四法攝入七覺，并本七覺合三十一，并信等六合三十七。 今於七中，攝喜入擇、攝除入捨，則合七成五。 以念為忍、語等為尸，擇喜屬慧，除捨是檀，定等是禪，二信依前以為通入，所以七覺六度義足。 故今開合與論不殊。 開合雖爾，義與論別。 今此六文，義通四教，各含十故。 即此六度文為六段，一一段中皆有六義。 初三藏文，是事治正意，故文稍廣。 初明事檀攝二，文相可見。 「若三藏」下，正明事捨，仍舉理以況之。 雖未成理，檀有事治之益。 次引論徵問，「捨能」下答。 「又捨」下明檀能成五，通別如文。 次明圓捨中，圓是今文，與事合行，正意故也。 復順今文正修之體，是故引文廣明其相。 初正明圓捨中，言「十法界色身」等者，但觀三事，心冥法界，則十界三事冥然自亡。 正報是「身」，依報是「財」。 所言「命」者，連持為義，即諸界中各有連持。 如六道中報命不同，及四聖中有慧命、常住命等。 即此三事在一念心三諦具足，能除三惑，故名為捨。 「入不二邊」者，秖是中道不二之捨。 此約最後理觀檀義，若辯合行應具事理，故下文中結偏失云「理觀深微而不存事行」，即却舉三藏事治之相。 事治文竟，又復斥云「而不存理觀」，即以度品六句料簡。 是故當知修理觀者，重惑若起必須事助，事與理俱名為合行。 是故六句正顯度品俱有事理，故有相破、相修、相即。 人不見之，秖謂泛爾分別而已。 若如是者，何益修行？ 「何以故」下，釋也。 先明不二之捨、次引《殃掘》以證圓捨。 於中初列經文，從「有邊」下解釋經意。 言「不壞」者，即於百界生死之身達常住理，於慳成治復顯法身。 法身既爾，財命亦然。 次引《金剛》者，四句是教，依教修觀，觀教即具三種般者故。

Whether six or ten, since this is an opening and combining, one should not use this to differentiate between the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, teachings, traditions, and the like. Under "like dhyāna," he directly shows this opening and combining. Combining them means that phenomenal and noumenal aspects are explained together; opening them means that phenomenal and noumenal aspects are explained separately. Furthermore, explaining six applies generally to both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, whereas explaining ten pertains exclusively to the Mahāyāna. Moreover, among these ten, interpreted generally, they apply to the four teachings; interpreted specifically, they pertain only to the distinctive and perfect teachings. For example, a bodhisattva of the Tripiṭaka teaching regards the subduing of delusions as the knowledge of all phenomena, the provisional practice during the three asaṃkhyeya kalpas as the knowledge of the paths, and the fruit of buddhahood as the knowledge of all aspects; because they can manifest spiritual penetrations and possess superior uses of vows, a bodhisattva of the Tripiṭaka teaching may also be said to have the ten [pāramitās]. However, viewed from the perspective of not yet having severed delusions, even prajñā is lacking. Not yet having emerged from emptiness, the knowledge of the paths is unaccomplished. Not yet having attained the dharma-body, there are no powers of vows and knowledge. If, provisionally, their partial stage is taken as prajñā, then there are only six. A bodhisattva of the shared teaching, from the perspective of mere emptiness, opens up skillful means, the fruit of buddhahood's knowledge of the paths, and the power of vows and knowledge to constitute the ten pāramitās. Not yet having attained the dharma-body, they are identical to the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. Having already severed delusions common [to the three vehicles] and emerging from emptiness into provisionality, their ease of advance and retreat differs somewhat. Thus, within these two teachings, there are either six, or seven, or eight, or ten. The present text, for the moment, opens the six into ten based on the principles of the distinctive and perfect teachings; other increases or decreases are not discussed in the text. Furthermore, retaining the doctrinal method [of the distinctive teaching] also partially includes the distinctive teaching, but the primary intention lies in the perfect [teaching]. *Nizi* [for praṇidhāna] and vow, *bala* and power, are merely differences in regional pronunciation. As for the statement "absorption guards the dhyāna pāramitā": if dhyāna is opened into three, then fundamental absorption guards the fifth pāramitā, termed the dhyāna pāramitā, while the others opened from it are termed power and vow. Empty knowledge guards the sixth, prajñā, while the others opened from it are termed upāya and so forth. Upāya is the knowledge of emerging into the provisional. Jñāna is the knowledge of entering the middle. These are also differences in regional pronunciation. Next, explaining the subsumption of dharmas directly demonstrates that because phenomenal and noumenal are practiced together, they can subsume all dharmas. If one does not comprehend that all dharmas enter into this gate of antidotes, how could the antidotes subsume all dharmas? First, explaining that the six pāramitās subsume the aids to the path is broadly explained below. Although the meaning can be seen, I will now explain it generally beforehand, so that when we reach the text it will be easy to understand. How so? Giving subsumes two factors of awakening, namely, elimination and equanimity. In the text one is omitted, but below they are completely listed. Precepts subsume three, namely, right speech, action, and livelihood. Patience subsumes four, namely, the faculty of mindfulness, the power of mindfulness, the mindfulness factor of awakening, and right mindfulness. Vigor subsumes eight, namely, the four right exertions, the faculty of vigor, the power of vigor, the vigor factor of awakening, and right vigor. Dhyāna subsumes eight, namely, the four bases of spiritual power, the faculty of concentration, the power of concentration, the concentration factor of awakening, and right concentration. Wisdom subsumes ten, namely, the four stations of mindfulness, the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, investigation of dharmas, joy, right view, and right thought. These total thirty-five. The remaining two are faith, which permeates the thirty-five, because faith is the basis of all dharmas. According to the *Vibhāṣā*, thirty-seven are subsumed by eleven real entities. Therefore, in the *Vibhāṣā*, the seven factors of awakening first subsume the other six categories; those that are not included are the two faiths counted as one, and right thought as one. Since speech, action, and livelihood constitute only two real entities, this brings the total to eleven. The *Kośa* has only ten, because it combines the limbs of moral discipline. What is meant by "entering the seven": the four stations of mindfulness, the faculty and power of wisdom, and right view enter the investigation-of-dharmas factor of awakening. The four right exertions, the faculty and power of vigor, and right skillful means (skillful means being vigor) enter the vigor factor of awakening. The four bases of spiritual power, the faculty and power of concentration, and right concentration enter the concentration factor of awakening. The faculty and power of mindfulness, and right mindfulness enter the mindfulness factor of awakening. Thus, twenty-four dharmas are subsumed under the seven factors of awakening; together with the original seven factors of awakening, they make thirty-one; together with the six including faith, they make thirty-seven. Now, among the seven, subsuming joy into investigation and subsuming elimination into equanimity combines the seven into five. Taking mindfulness as patience, speech and so forth as precepts, investigation and joy belonging to wisdom, elimination and equanimity being giving, concentration and so forth being dhyāna, and the two faiths as before being universally pervasive, the meaning of the seven factors of awakening and the six pāramitās is complete. Therefore, the present opening and combining does not differ from the treatise. Although the opening and combining are such, their meaning differs from the treatise. These six passages here have a meaning that runs through the four teachings, each containing ten. These six pāramitās are structured into six sections, each having six meanings. First is the Tripiṭaka text, which is the primary intent regarding phenomenal antidotes; hence the text is somewhat broad. First, explaining that the phenomenal giving subsumes two, the textual structure is clear. From "If in the Tripiṭaka" onward, it directly explains phenomenal relinquishment, still adducing the noumenal by way of comparison. Although it has not yet realized the noumenon, giving possesses the benefit of phenomenal antidotes. Next, citing the treatise, he raises a query, which is answered from "Relinquishment can" onward. Next, from "Moreover, relinquishment" onward, it explains that giving can accomplish the [other] five; its general and specific aspects are as in the text. Next, in explaining perfect relinquishment: the perfect is the present text, practiced together with phenomenal action, which is the primary intent. It also accords with the substance of the primary practice in the present text; hence the passage is cited to broadly clarify its characteristics. First, in directly explaining perfect relinquishment, the phrase "the physical bodies of the ten dharma-dhātus" and so forth means that merely by contemplating the three items, the mind is merged with the dharma-dhātu, and the three items of the ten realms are mysteriously and spontaneously eradicated. The direct reward is the "body," and the dependent reward is the "wealth." What is termed "life" means continuous maintenance, which exists in each of the realms. For example, the karmic life spans in the six destinies differ, and among the four noble ones there are the life of wisdom, the life of eternal abiding, and so on. These three items, being complete with the three truths in a single thought-moment, can eliminate the three delusions; hence it is called relinquishment. As for "entering the non-dual limit," it is simply the relinquishment of non-duality of the middle way. This refers to the final noumenal contemplation on the meaning of giving; if one is to explain their combined practice, both phenomenal and noumenal must be complete. Thus, in the text below, concluding on one-sided errors, it says, "noumenal contemplation is profound and subtle, yet phenomenal practice is neglected," which in turn cites the characteristics of phenomenal antidotes in the Tripiṭaka. After the text on phenomenal antidotes concludes, it also reproaches, "yet noumenal contemplation is neglected," and then evaluates it with the six phrases on pāramitā aids. Therefore, one should know that for those cultivating noumenal contemplation, if severe delusions arise, they must rely on phenomenal assistance; phenomenal and noumenal operating together is termed "combined practice." Thus, the six phrases directly reveal that the pāramitā aids possess both phenomenal and noumenal aspects; hence there are mutual refutation, mutual cultivation, and mutual identity. People fail to see this, thinking it is merely an ordinary distinction. If that were so, what benefit would it have for cultivation? From "Why is this?" onward is the explanation. First, he clarifies the non-dual relinquishment; next, he cites the *Aṅgulimālīya-sūtra* to corroborate perfect relinquishment. Therein, he first lists the sūtra text, and explains the meaning of the sūtra from "possessing limits" onward. Saying "not destroyed" means that right within the bodies of saṃsāric birth-and-death of the hundred realms, one realizes the principle of eternal abiding; serving as an antidote to stinginess, it also reveals the dharma-body. Since the dharma-body is such, wealth and life are likewise. Next, citing the *Diamond Sūtra*, the four lines are the teaching; cultivating contemplation based on the teaching, the contemplation and the teaching are endowed with the three kinds of prajñā.