止觀輔行傳弘決 7.2.2

7.2.2

攝家割二死於荒外者，攝大乘師立七種生死：一分段，謂三界果報； 二流來，謂迷真之初； 三反出，謂背妄之始； 四方便，謂入滅二乘； 五因緣，謂初地已上； 六有後，謂第十地； 七無後，謂金剛心。 汝既自立七種生死釋五百義，何故捨二，但用方便及以因緣足於三界為五百耶？ 如汝所釋，寶渚之外更有有後及以無後，捨而不用，故名為割。 荒為八荒，八極之內，亦云四海之外，亦曰九州之外，亦云荒服之外，故曰荒外。 如第一卷所引。 《爾雅》云「九夷等四，此次荒之國也。 觚竹等四，此極遠荒之國也。 」今以地極名為遠荒，即以所極譬於寶渚，寶渚之外不應有地。 攝師猶有二種生死闕而不論，是故破之。 次判地家界內立城者，既將住位以對二百，住位復是見思斷位，二百對界秖是色界，故知即是界內立城，故不可也。 次家即以二乘足為五百，經過三百以立化城。 二乘至此即應入城，何故將對四百五百？ 故知擅行四百五百，唯至《法華》開權顯實，方可出城進四五百。 若開權已，成大菩薩，那得復云猶是二乘？ 而云二乘足為五百？ 言「徑廷」者，二乘本是被覆之權，輒自開權，故云徑廷。 至法華會佛為發權，不名擅行亦非徑廷。 廷者（他定切），越次之義。 又開權竟，二乘同八，亦非二乘各對一百，是故不用。 城者，盛也，盛於所住，即行人也。 「人師過如此」下，釋疑，先徵起、次正釋。 恐人見論疑破初家，論以二乘而為四百，何故不許四百立城？ 於中先序論文。 言「論有二文」者，《大論》六十八云「譬如欲過一百二百三百四百由旬曠野嶮道。 言嶮道者，即世間也。 一百欲界，二百色界，三百無色，四百二乘。 復次四百欲界，三百色界，二百無色，一百二乘。 菩薩摩訶薩當知不久得菩提記，當知不畏墮於二地，是過四百近菩提城。 」論文無五百之言者，既云通意過於四百曠野近菩提城，城即五百。 「今通之」下，即是今家判於論文但屬通義，是故但以二乘對於四百。 菩薩至此與二乘齊，仍約鈍根未見中者，是故不明五百由旬，故指三乘共得解脫名為涅槃。 「復以二乘為一百」者，如前引論，尋文可知。 「今明」下，今家正解。 正顯今家依《法華》明通塞義也。 經文既云「過於五百」，今家準經以為三釋：若約生死及以煩惱，不應云過； 若約觀智，即得云過。 過前生死煩惱二五，即至涅槃一切種智，故云「空觀智知三百」等。 知即是過。 初「約生死」者，五百皆是生死故也，是故不以寂光對於五百。 次「約煩惱者」，見通三界故合為一，下分繫欲故合為一。 《俱舍》云「由二不超欲，由三復還下。 」二謂貪瞋，上通名類，故合為一。 下分有五，謂身見、戒取、疑、貪、瞋。 言上分者，上分有五，謂掉、慢、無明、色染。 以此三釋即是一念，能所無著，方名善知。 「又諸師」下，結非顯正。 斥諸師釋唯依權教判位太高，於權位中又釋不了。 故下正以橫竪判權及橫別等，方曉權人所行之法。 若橫若竪俱破五百，但非一念，故判屬權。 遼，亦遠也。 遠而又逈，故名為遼。 二邊之外別立五百，故名「遼遠」。 此即通結諸師判位大高：初師以十地為五百、攝師在初地、地師在十地，如此判者凡下絕分，化城非冀、寶所望崖。 凡既望崖，為誰說教？ 若其此教唯為聖人，經不應云「為令眾生」。 又若定在十地等者，二乘被會尚亦未至，何況凡夫？ 今明圓門實相寶所，凡聖通具、六即甄分。 舊依權門判位太遠，今依實教，是故不用。 「今論」下，正以由旬釋通塞意，先縱橫、次一心。 初有三義，謂一橫、二竪、三者橫別。 初橫，如文。 次竪文中，先正明竪、次橫織竪。 竪三如經、橫三如緯，織之令成三諦文章。 若三諦中有苦集等，三諦不成故也。

Regarding "the Master of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha discarding the two deaths beyond the desolation": The master of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha posits seven kinds of birth-and-death: (1) fragmented [birth-and-death], referring to the karmic retributions of the triple realm; (2) flowing downstream, referring to the initial delusion regarding truth; (3) turning back to emerge, referring to the beginning of turning away from falsity; (4) expedient means, referring to the two vehicles entering extinction; (5) causes and conditions, referring to the first bhūmi and above; (6) with a remainder, referring to the tenth bhūmi; (7) without remainder, referring to the adamantine mind. Since you yourself establish seven kinds of birth-and-death to explain the meaning of the five hundred [yojanas], why do you discard two, using only expedient means and causes and conditions to supplement the triple realm to make five hundred? According to your explanation, beyond the jewel islet there are still "with remainder" and "without remainder", yet you discard them and do not use them; hence it is called "discarding". "Desolation" refers to the eight desolations, within the eight extremities, also described as outside the four seas, outside the nine provinces, or outside the wild domains; thus it is called "beyond the desolation". It is as cited in the first fascicle. The Erya says: "The four [barbarian lands] such as the Nine Yi are the lands bordering the desolation. The four such as Guzhu are the lands of the extreme distant desolation." Now, using the extreme boundary of the earth as the distant desolation, the extreme reached is likened to the jewel islet; beyond the jewel islet there should be no other land. The master of the Saṃgraha still has two kinds of birth-and-death that are omitted and not discussed, which is why he is refuted. Next, regarding the Master of the Daśabhūmika "establishing the city within the realms": Since he correlates the stage of abidings with two hundred, and the stage of abidings is furthermore the stage where [delusions of] view and thought are severed, and two hundred correlates among the realms only to the form realm, one therefore knows that this is establishing the city within the realms; hence it is unacceptable. The next master supplements [the three realms] with the two vehicles to make five hundred, establishing the conjured city after passing three hundred. When the two vehicles reach this point, they should enter the city; why then correlate them with four hundred and five hundred? Thus we know that advancing arbitrarily through four hundred and five hundred is only possible upon reaching the Lotus, where the provisional is opened and the real is revealed—only then can one emerge from the city and advance through the four and five hundred. If the provisional has already been opened, they become great bodhisattvas; how could one still say that they are the two vehicles, and claim that the two vehicles supplement [the count] to make five hundred? As for the term "abruptly taking shortcuts" (jingting): the two vehicles are originally provisionalities that are covered over; to open the provisional arbitrarily on one's own is why it is called "abruptly taking shortcuts". Reaching the assembly of the Lotus, the Buddha reveals the provisional for them; this is not called acting arbitrarily, nor is it abruptly taking shortcuts. Ting (spelled tha + ding) carries the sense of skipping stages. Moreover, once the provisional has been opened, the two vehicles are unified with the eight [stages], and it is not that each of the two vehicles corresponds to one hundred; therefore it is not adopted. A "city" means fullness (sheng), being full with what one abides in, which refers to the practitioner. From "Teachers have erred in this way" downward, doubts are resolved: first raised, then properly resolved. There is a fear that someone seeing the treatise might doubt the refutation of the first master: the treatise makes the two vehicles four hundred, so why not allow establishing the city at four hundred? Therein, the text of the treatise is first quoted. In "The treatise has two texts", the Dazhidulun, fascicle sixty-eight, states: "For example, one wishes to pass through a wilderness and perilous path of one hundred, two hundred, three hundred, or four hundred yojanas. The 'perilous path' refers to the worldly realm: one hundred is the desire realm, two hundred is the form realm, three hundred is the formless realm, and four hundred is the two vehicles. Furthermore, four hundred is the desire realm, three hundred is the form realm, two hundred is the formless realm, and one hundred is the two vehicles. A bodhisattva-mahāsattva should know that before long he will receive the prediction of bodhi, and should know that he does not fear falling into the two stages; this is passing four hundred and nearing the city of bodhi." As for the treatise text lacking mention of "five hundred": since it says the general meaning is passing through the wilderness of four hundred and nearing the city of bodhi, the city itself is five hundred. From "Now interpreting it" downward: our school judges that the text of the treatise belongs only to the shared meaning; therefore it merely correlates the two vehicles with four hundred. Bodhisattvas reaching this point are on par with the two vehicles, which is still formulated according to dull roots who have not seen the middle; for this reason it does not clarify five hundred yojanas, and therefore points to the three vehicles mutually attaining liberation as nirvāṇa. In "Furthermore making the two vehicles one hundred": as cited from the treatise earlier, one can understand by consulting the text. From "Now clarifying" downward: our school's correct interpretation. This directly reveals our school's meaning of pass and blockage based on the Lotus. Since the sūtra text says "passing beyond five hundred", our school bases itself on the sūtra to provide three interpretations: If considered in terms of birth-and-death and afflictions, one should not say "passing beyond"; if considered in terms of contemplative wisdom, then one can say "passing beyond". Passing beyond the two fives of prior birth-and-death and afflictions, one reaches nirvāṇa, the knowledge of all aspects; thus it says "the wisdom of contemplating emptiness knows three hundred", and so on. "Knowing" is precisely "passing beyond". First, regarding "in terms of birth-and-death": because all five hundred are birth-and-death, one therefore does not correlate quiescent light with the five hundred. Next, regarding "in terms of afflictions": because views pervade the triple realm, they are combined into one; because the lower bonds tie one to desire, they are combined into one. The Kośa says: "Due to two, one does not transcend desire; due to three, one falls back down again." The two are greed and anger; since their names and categories generally correspond above, they are combined into one. The lower bonds are five: views of individuality, clinging to precepts, doubt, greed, and anger. As for the higher bonds, the higher bonds are five: agitation, conceit, ignorance, and attachment to form. Understanding these three interpretations as being present within a single thought-moment, without attachment to either the agent or the object [of contemplation], is alone termed "skilfully knowing". From "Furthermore, the various masters" downward: concluding the errors and revealing the correct. It rebukes the interpretations of the various masters as relying solely on the provisional teachings and judging the stages to be excessively high, while within the provisional stages they also fail to explain thoroughly. Therefore, below we properly judge the provisional by means of the horizontal and vertical, as well as the horizontal-distinctive, etc.; only then can one understand the dharmas practiced by persons of the provisional. Whether horizontal or vertical, both refute the five hundred, but because they are not a single thought-moment, they are judged as belonging to the provisional. Liao also means distant. Far away and remote, it is therefore called liao. Establishing the five hundred separately outside the two extremes is why it is called "remote and distant". This generally concludes that the various masters judge the stages to be excessively high: the first master considers the tenth bhūmi to be the five hundred, the Saṃgraha master places it at the first bhūmi, and the Daśabhūmika master places it at the tenth bhūmi. Explaining in this way, ordinary and low persons are completely excluded; the conjured city is beyond hope, and the jewel place is an inaccessible precipice. Since ordinary beings view it as an inaccessible precipice, for whose sake was the teaching expounded? If this teaching were exclusively for noble ones, the sūtra should not have said "in order to cause sentient beings...". Furthermore, if it were fixed at the tenth bhūmi and so on, even the two vehicles when convened have not yet arrived there, let alone ordinary beings. Now we clarify that the jewel place of the true mark of the perfect gate is possessed in common by both ordinary beings and noble ones, distinguished by the six identities. The old interpretations relied on the provisional gate and judged the stages too remotely; now we rely on the real teaching, and therefore do not adopt them. From "Now discussing" downward: properly explaining the meaning of pass and blockage by means of the yojanas; first the vertical and horizontal, then the single mind. First there are three meanings, namely: (1) horizontal, (2) vertical, and (3) horizontal-distinctive. First, the horizontal, as in the text. In the subsequent vertical text: first the vertical is properly clarified; next the horizontal weaves through the vertical. The vertical three are like the warp; the horizontal three are like the weft; weaving them causes the pattern of the three truths to be formed. If suffering and accumulation and so forth are present within the three truths, it is because the three truths would not be accomplished.