止觀輔行傳弘決 7.4

7.4

「空即三觀」等者，次圓三觀。觀觀具三以破橫別，一一所破各別不同，故云「空即三觀乃至中即三觀」。有人云：破神通者，破第一卷圓頓止觀，通者騰空，騰空被破知前非頓。如此說者，殊乖文義。論文神通近在目前，何須遠求序中之說？又若破彼頓，更何所傳？師資不成，付法安在？祖乎龍樹，其言徒施。又彼頓譬文在序中，說止觀時未有此序，豈得將己正說預破弟子序耶？又序中所述、師資所傳，若破所傳，便成自壞。「良以」下，正歎功能。能破橫竪及橫別者，良由一心圓妙故也。「眾魔」等者，眾魔者即天魔也，「群道」者即外道也。又群道者，偏小通名，故以一心皆能對破。「終不」等者，若步涉乘馬、避嶮從夷，若神通騰空從虛避下。是故初修二觀先破二惑，次修中觀更破無明。今三觀一心初後無礙，不同三譬，故云終不等也。是故「去下陵高」斥前騰空。空假如下，中道如高。「避山從谷」斥前步馬。「終不」兩字冠下兩句。「若於」下，明一心中用通塞意。一心不當橫竪通塞，於此一心復起塞著，而生苦集無明蔽等。此苦集等即是見思，見思既生即空尚失，豈復更有去邊求中？故云非但失於中道神通，亦失空假步馬。此是一心別相之塞，尚須檢校令塞得通。「若於」下，令檢校此一心通塞。「是為」下，正判也。如此釋者，一切眾生理性五百，乃至諸佛究竟五百，不同舊義令凡望崖。

"Emptiness is itself the three contemplations," and so on: next are the perfect three contemplations. Each contemplation possesses the three in order to refute the horizontal distinctiveness; what each refutes is individually distinct, hence it says "emptiness is itself the three contemplations, up to the middle is itself the three contemplations." Someone says: "Refuting supernatural powers means refuting the perfect and sudden calming and contemplation of the first fascicle; 'powers' means soaring through the sky, and since soaring through the sky is refuted, one knows that the former is not sudden." One who speaks like this completely goes against the meaning of the text. The treatise's text on supernatural powers is right before one's eyes; why seek far away for what is stated in the preface? Moreover, if that sudden [calming and contemplation] were refuted, what else would be transmitted? Master and disciple would not be established, and where would the transmission of the Dharma lie? Taking Nāgārjuna as an ancestor, his words would have been offered in vain. Furthermore, the passage with that analogy of suddenness is in the preface; when the calming and contemplation was delivered, this preface did not yet exist—how could one use one's own correct teaching to anticipate and refute the disciple's preface? Moreover, what is described in the preface is what was transmitted between master and disciple; if one refutes what was transmitted, it would become self-destruction. From "Indeed because..." downwards, it directly praises its functional capacity. Being able to refute the horizontal and vertical as well as the horizontal distinctiveness is indeed due to the perfect wondrousness of the single mind. Regarding "the hosts of Māras" and so forth: "the hosts of Māras" are the heavenly Māras; "the host of paths" are the non-Buddhists. Furthermore, "the host of paths" is a general designation for the biased and the small; hence by means of the single mind, one can counter and refute them all. Regarding "never..." and so forth: if walking on foot or riding a horse, one avoids the precipitous and follows the level; if soaring through the sky with supernatural powers, one follows the void and avoids what is below. Therefore, in initially cultivating the two contemplations, one first breaks the two afflictions; next, cultivating the contemplation of the middle, one further breaks ignorance. Now, with the three contemplations in a single mind, beginning and end are unimpeded, not like the three analogies; hence it says "never," and so forth. Therefore, "leaving what is below and mounting what is high" rebukes the soaring through the sky mentioned earlier. Emptiness and provisionality are like what is below; the Middle Way is like what is high. "Avoiding the mountains and following the valleys" rebukes the walking on foot and the horse mentioned earlier. The two characters "never" (終不) govern the two lines below. From "If in..." downwards, it explains the intent of employing pass and blockage within the single mind. The single mind does not fall under horizontal or vertical pass and blockage, yet in relation to this single mind there again arise blockage and attachment, generating suffering, accumulation, ignorance, hindrances, and so forth. These sufferings, accumulations, and so forth are none other than view-and-thought; once view-and-thought arise, even emptiness is lost, so how could there still be leaving the extremes to seek the middle? Therefore it says that not only does one lose the supernatural powers of the Middle Way, one also loses the walking on foot and horse of emptiness and provisionality. This is a blockage of the specific aspect of the single mind, which still requires examination to make the blockage into a pass. From "If in..." downwards, it bids one examine this pass and blockage of the single mind. From "This is..." downwards, it directly determines it. When explained in this manner, the inherent nature of all sentient beings is the five hundred [yojanas], and up to all Buddhas' ultimate five hundred [yojanas]; it is not like the old interpretation that caused ordinary persons to gaze at the cliff [in despair].