止觀輔行傳弘決 7.31

7.31

次「所以」下，引昔化事釋成助意，有法、譬、合。初法中二。初引昔化，謂昔曾「繫珠」，義如正道。退大輪迴，義如重蔽。「以小起之」，義如用助。初曾稟大，退大流轉，不堪大化，先小導之方堪入大，是故名為以小起之。次從「又佛初欲」下，引現化儀以證助意。本是大緣，義之如正。大機未熟，義如重蔽。尋用方便，義如用事。以當宜故，如梵音讚。十方諸佛尚讚助道，況今重蔽而不助耶？「如富家子」下，次舉譬。若論觀蔽應用無生，事不獲已用事助者，如《大經》十九云「譬如有人閉在囹圄，從廁孔出。譬如有人懼於冤家，依旃陀羅。如婆羅門病，食不淨藥。菩薩摩訶薩行於事度亦復如是，為是義故應須事助。」況復今文正助合行，一切助行無非法界。合譬可見。此六度文，並在《大論》第十五至第二十一。每於一度眾釋不同，然亦不出此之四意。次以六句料簡事理者，先問意者，事度屬三藏，道品是無作。本以無作正行道品，通至無作三三昧門。今此乃云不修事度，無作三昧不成就者，事度應勝無作道品。次答意者，度之與品俱有事理，況復度品更互相攝，是故勝劣亦互受名。但作度名於治義便，所以對治從度為名。今文以事而助於理，故上文云「無事，理定不成。」前文已約佛今昔化，及以《大經》諸譬之文，足顯以事助理之意。為顯行門，何論勝劣？為欲更顯通別治相，是故更為三對六句。於中先列六句、次釋。釋中先別、次通。所言別者，三對不同，且以事度對理道品，生滅道品對圓六度，以明相破、相修、相即。言相破者，文云「如上道品不能契真」，指前第六正修道品，故知即是無作道品。「若修六度即能破蔽」，即是今文對治助開，即是六度破道品也。若修圓六度不能契真，修事道品即能破惑，是名道品破六度也。六度之下云波羅蜜，故云「彼岸」。相修者，修事六度為對治竟，更須進修無作道品。治道成就，故云「任運」。若修生滅道品為對治已，更須進修無作六度。言「如上所說」者，如上六度攝生滅道品中，即是生滅道品破事蔽竟，而理觀全無毫末，必須進修無作六度。言相即者，生滅六度即圓道品，生滅道品即圓六度，約事須有生滅等別，據諸法體本來相即，故引經云皆摩訶衍。檀度，舉六度之初。念處，舉道品之首。故知相破相修約判權實而成助道，相即即是約開權實而成合行。若且一往為無作故修事為治，如向所說。若以四教遞為助者，應以通教對事六度、別教對事、圓教對事、別教對通、圓教對通、圓教對別，總合六重度品不同。「通論」下，次通論諸法皆得相對以辯六句。文中略舉四諦因緣。言「有無」等者，有謂有益，無謂無益，非有無者即是相即。人見有無及以雙非作三諦釋，甚失文旨。若不論助，則於當教隨所宜樂以論有益無益等也。是故當教亦有相破、相修、相即。

Next, from "therefore" onwards, teaching activities of the past are cited to explain and establish the meaning of auxiliary [practices], comprising the dharma, the analogy, and the application. Within the first part, the dharma, there are two points. First, citing the teaching of the past: having formerly "tied the jewel" corresponds in meaning to the correct path; retrogressing from the Great Vehicle and transmigrating corresponds in meaning to heavy coverings; and "rousing them through the small" corresponds in meaning to employing auxiliary [means]. Having initially received the Great Vehicle, they then retrogressed and transmigrated, unable to bear the great conversion; so by first guiding them through the small, they were enabled to enter the Great. Therefore it is called "rousing them through the small." Second, from "Furthermore, when the Buddha first intended…" onwards, the contemporary ritual of conversion is cited to verify the meaning of auxiliary [practices]. Originally there was a great affinity, which corresponds in meaning to the correct [path]. The capacity for the Great had not yet ripened, which corresponds in meaning to heavy coverings. Forthwith using expedients corresponds in meaning to employing phenomenal [means]. Because it was appropriate to the circumstances, it was like the praise uttered in a Brahma voice. If even the Buddhas of the ten directions praise the auxiliary path, how much more so should one not use auxiliary [means] now when faced with heavy coverings? Next, from "Just as a son of a wealthy family…" onwards, an analogy is presented. If we speak of contemplating coverings, one should apply the unproduced; but when there is no other choice and one must use phenomenal auxiliaries, this is as stated in fascicle nineteen of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*: "It is like a person imprisoned in a dungeon who escapes through a privy hole. It is like a person who fears an enemy and takes refuge with a caṇḍāla. It is like a sick brahmin who consumes impure medicine. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practicing phenomenal perfections is also just like this. For this reason, one must have phenomenal auxiliaries." How much more so when the present text practices the correct and the auxiliary in combination, such that none of the auxiliary practices is not the dharma-dhātu! The application of the analogy can be seen from this. These passages on the six perfections are all found in the *Dazhidulun*, from fascicle fifteen to fascicle twenty-one. Although there are various differing explanations for each perfection, they do not go beyond these four meanings. Next, regarding the analysis of phenomenal and principle by means of six propositions: First, as to the intention behind the question: phenomenal perfections belong to the Tripiṭaka [teaching], while the aids to the path are uncreated. Originally, by directly practicing the aids to the path as uncreated, one reaches the gate of the uncreated three samādhis. Now, however, the text states that if one does not cultivate phenomenal perfections, the uncreated samādhi will not be achieved; if so, phenomenal perfections would be superior to the uncreated aids to the path. Next, as to the intention behind the reply: both perfections and aids possess phenomenal and principle aspects, and moreover, perfections and aids mutually subsume one another; therefore, superiority and inferiority are also mutually assigned. It is merely that the term "perfection" is convenient for the meaning of remedy; therefore, the counteracting remedy is named after perfection. The present text uses the phenomenal to assist the principle; thus the preceding text states: "Without the phenomenal, the meditation on the principle will certainly not be accomplished." The preceding text has already drawn on the Buddha's past and present teaching activities, as well as the various analogies in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*, which sufficiently clarifies the meaning of using the phenomenal to assist the principle. For the sake of demonstrating the gateway of practice, why discuss superiority and inferiority? In order to further reveal the shared and distinctive characteristics of the remedies, three pairs of six propositions are therefore formulated. Therein, the six propositions are first listed, and next explained. Within the explanation, the distinctive is treated first, followed by the shared. As for the distinctive, the three pairs are different: for now, phenomenal perfections are paired against principle aids to the path, and arising-and-perishing aids to the path are paired against perfect six perfections, in order to clarify mutual refutation, mutual cultivation, and mutual identity. As for mutual refutation, the text says: "If the aids to the path above cannot accord with the real," which points to the preceding sixth [chapter on] correct cultivation of the aids to the path, so one knows that these are the uncreated aids to the path. "If one cultivates the six perfections, one can break through coverings," which is the present text's counteracting auxiliary opening, meaning that the six perfections refute the aids to the path. If one cultivates the perfect six perfections and cannot accord with the real, cultivating the phenomenal aids to the path can then destroy afflictions; this is called the aids to the path refuting the six perfections. Below the six perfections it says pāramitā, hence "the other shore." As for mutual cultivation, when one has cultivated the phenomenal six perfections as remedies, one must further advance to cultivate the uncreated aids to the path. When the path of remedy is accomplished, it is therefore called "spontaneous." If one has cultivated the arising-and-perishing aids to the path as remedies, one must further advance to cultivate the uncreated six perfections. The statement "as explained above" refers to the preceding subsumption of the arising-and-perishing aids to the path within the six perfections; that is, the arising-and-perishing aids to the path have thoroughly broken through the phenomenal coverings, yet contemplation of principle is utterly lacking even a fraction, so one must advance to cultivate the uncreated six perfections. As for mutual identity, the arising-and-perishing six perfections are the perfect aids to the path, and the arising-and-perishing aids to the path are the perfect six perfections. From the standpoint of phenomena, there must be distinctions such as arising and perishing; but according to the essence of all dharmas, they are fundamentally identical. Therefore, the sūtra is cited saying that all are Mahāyāna. The perfection of giving is cited as the first of the six perfections; the stations of mindfulness are cited as the first of the aids to the path. Thus one knows that mutual refutation and mutual cultivation constitute the auxiliary path from the standpoint of distinguishing the provisional and the real, whereas mutual identity constitutes combined practice from the standpoint of opening the provisional into the real. If, tentatively speaking, one cultivates the phenomenal as a remedy for the sake of the uncreated, it is as just explained. If one uses the four teachings to mutually assist one another, one should pair the shared teaching against the phenomenal six perfections, the distinctive teaching against the phenomenal, the perfect teaching against the phenomenal, the distinctive teaching against the shared, the perfect teaching against the shared, and the perfect teaching against the distinctive, totaling six layers of differing perfections and aids. Next, from "speaking generally" onwards, it is generally discussed that all dharmas can be set in opposition to discern the six propositions. In the text, the four noble truths and dependent origination are briefly cited. In "existence and non-existence" and so forth, "existence" means beneficial, "non-existence" means non-beneficial, and "neither existence nor non-existence" means mutual identity. People see existence, non-existence, and the negation of both, and explain them as the three truths, which drastically misses the import of the text. If one does not discuss auxiliary [means], then within that particular teaching, benefit, non-benefit, and so forth are discussed according to what is suitable and delightful. Therefore, within a given teaching, there are also mutual refutation, mutual cultivation, and mutual identity.