止觀輔行傳弘決 8.44

8.44

次料簡者，初約障不障料簡中，先列四句、次釋、次判。初約事生滅判。次約三諦中言「初善」者，總約有漏及以三諦，故以有漏名為初善。次約作無作中言「性與無作」者，習因既以內心驗之，但依心判，善惡易知。報果相現於禪心中，忽見外境不由於心，是故難判。「若善報相」下，正判也。今以性之善惡，因時必假相扶而起，故後相現亦須相扶。若無作善惡，一發已後未捨失來任運恒有，故今相現不假內心。此且據發得，形俱無作。若作俱無作，亦假內心，以作事時必須於心。是故若有外相復有內心，或是因時作俱無作。既成無作，後時違教及違本要，名違無作，故無作後復以十法三相往驗。「復次諸惡」下，更約三時以判善生惡滅之相。文云初瞋後喜則惡滅相，以此例知初喜後瞋即善滅相，初後俱瞋即惡生相，初後俱喜即善生相。「諫」者，《字書》云「以道訓人名之為諫。」又云「諫有五，謂諷、順、闚、指、陷。」此中即諷諫也。「天發心」下，約解行簡。「若自正正他」下，約師證簡。謂他判相實不容易，故須自證方可彰言。所言證者，非謂入位，但是曾感，以自證他。若全未感，卒無師氏，應以此文及禪門中驗善惡相，并大師口決此附略知。若不爾者，但以不思議觀觀之，令成不思議境，一切諸障無如之何，即如向文觀解者是。文中所以誡者，恐後學輩自無微行、倚傍少解，徒占師氏之位，輒𬾫判斷之能，翻為自沈，益他無幾。若近師氏理須諮疑，仍須善用觀力抵拒。「氏」者，族姓也。古人從師為姓，是故自古名為師氏，自安公來同稱釋種。「問」下，簡現相疑。問中本問諸惡業相現，答中不非相現之問，故初文但云「實爾」者，凡道場神非護怨責，如軍虞候。但業是實責，非神所防。所言防者，防於橫擾耳。言「虞候」者，軍中遊邏伺候之官。虞者助也、專也、備也。候者伺也。亦云掌山澤之官，候於山澤非常之過。「覘」亦候也，亦闚見也。「復次諸業」下，釋闕略疑。云「彼二家互有所闕」者，《毘曇》闕觀法，《中論》闕業相。今略明業相足辯邪正，竪明觀法入門深詣，自行入道誠為有餘。若望二家雖曰未足，二論但橫明法相而已，約法成觀，彼論疎遺。

Next is the analysis. First, within the analysis regarding obstructing and not obstructing, it first lists the four propositions, next explains them, and next judges them. First, it judges according to phenomenal arising and perishing. Next, regarding the three truths, "initial good" is stated in general terms regarding the contaminated and the three truths; thus the contaminated is called the initial good. Next, regarding manifest and non-manifest [karma], in the phrase "nature and non-manifest," habitual causes are verified through the inner mind, so merely judging by the mind makes good and evil easy to know. When the sign of the retribution fruit manifests in the meditative mind, an external object suddenly appears independent of the mind, and therefore it is difficult to judge. From "If the signs of good retribution" onward, it makes the actual judgment. Now, as the good and evil of nature necessarily rely on mutual assistance to arise at the time of the cause, later when the sign appears, they must also mutually assist. As for non-manifest good and evil, once they have been aroused, until abandoned or lost they spontaneously and constantly persist; therefore, when the sign now manifests, it does not rely on the inner mind. This is stated tentatively based on the non-manifest [karma] that arises with and accompanies the physical body. If it is non-manifest karma that accompanies action, it also relies on the inner mind, because when undertaking an act, one must rely on the mind. Therefore, if there is an external sign and also an inner mind, it may be non-manifest karma accompanying action at the time of the cause. Once it has become non-manifest, later transgressing the teaching or transgressing the original resolution is called transgressing the non-manifest; hence after the non-manifest, one further applies the ten dharmas and three characteristics to verify it. From "Furthermore, various evils" onward, it further judges the signs of good arising and evil perishing according to the three periods of time. The text says that initial anger followed by joy is the sign of evil perishing; by this analogy we know that initial joy followed by anger is the sign of good perishing, anger at both beginning and end is the sign of evil arising, and joy at both beginning and end is the sign of good arising. Regarding "remonstrance" (jian), the dictionary says: "Instructing a person by means of the Dao is called jian." It also says: "There are five types of remonstrance: satiric, compliant, exploratory, pointing, and trap-setting." Here it is satiric remonstrance. From "Heavenly aspiration" onward, it analyses in terms of understanding and practice. From "If one rectifies oneself and rectifies others" onward, it analyses in terms of the master's realization. That is to say, judging the signs for others is truly not easy, so one must have one's own realization before one may speak openly. What is called "realization" does not mean entering stages, but simply having previously experienced them, so as to verify others through oneself. If one has completely lacked such experiences and abruptly has no master, one should use this text and the verification of good and evil signs in the Chanmen, together with the oral decisions of the Great Master, to arrive at a rough understanding. If not so, one simply contemplates them with inconceivable contemplation to make them become the inconceivable object, and no obstacles whatsoever can do anything against it; this is just as in the contemplation and understanding of the preceding text. The reason the text gives admonition is for fear that later students, having no modest practice of their own and relying on slight understanding, vainly usurp the position of a master and rashly assert the ability to pass judgment, only to drown themselves while benefiting others little. If one is near a master, by principle one must consult on doubts, and one must still skillfully use the power of contemplation to resist [obstacles]. "Shi" (氏) means clan name. In ancient times people took their master's surname, which is why since antiquity they have been called shishi (master lineage); since Master Daoan onward, they have uniformly taken the surname of the Śākya clan. From "Question" onward, doubts about the manifestation of signs are examined. In the question, it originally asks about the manifestation of various evil karma signs; the reply does not negate the question of the manifestation of signs, so the initial text merely says "It is indeed so." In general, the spirits of the bodhimaṇḍa do not protect against debts of vengeance, just like a military patrol inspector (yuhou). But karma is a real debt that spirits do not guard against. What is meant by "guard against" is guarding against extraneous disturbances. "Yuhou" refers to an officer in the army on patrol and watch. Yu means to assist, to concentrate, to be prepared. Hou means to watch. It is also said to be an official in charge of mountains and marshes, watching for extraordinary infractions in the mountains and marshes. Zhan also means to watch, and to spy or peek. From "Furthermore, various karmas" onward, it resolves the doubt about omissions and brevity. Saying "Those two traditions each have omissions" means that the Abhidharma lacks methods of contemplation, while the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā lacks karmic signs. Now, briefly explaining karmic signs is sufficient to distinguish the wrong and the correct, and vertically explaining contemplation methods allows deep entry at the gate; for one's own practice and entry into the path, this is truly more than sufficient. Although looking toward the two traditions it might be said to be incomplete, those two treatises merely horizontally explained the characteristics of dharmas, while in developing contemplation based on dharmas, those treatises were careless and omitted it.