止觀輔行傳弘決 10.2

10.2

In the initial explanation of the object of views, there is first a general explanation, followed by opening headings for specific explanations. At the beginning, as for the word "various," the self-commentary explains it as "not one," meaning many. Although many arise, they do not exceed one hundred and forty. Arising not in accord with principle is called "view." Below "further, understanding and knowing...," the word "view" is re-explained. Arising one view each within the one hundred and forty, all infer principle improperly; thus they are termed "deviant." As for "Those who listen and study...," etc., it distinguishes faults that are not views. Those who listen and study claim to have proof on their own, whose meaning is like "living"; they denounce practitioners of contemplation as having no realization, whose meaning is like "dead." The Zhuangzi states: "If there is an explanation, it is permissible; if there is no explanation, it is dead." Below "Those who practice dhyāna...," it clarifies that practitioners of contemplation inwardly contemplate principle, claiming that their feelings have penetrated, taking this as marvelous awakening, and denounce students as "watching the stump." What they call "feelings" refers to affective nature, not deluded passions. As for "watching the stump," it is like the plowman of Song: in the field, a hare ran into a stump and died. He subsequently abandoned plowing to constantly watch this stump, hoping there would be another hare. Bystanders admonished him, but he was all the more unwilling to stop. Hence, as popularly transmitted, those who cling in delusion are called "watching the stump." These two persons originally have the two faculties of faith and Dharma. Because they do not understand the intention of mutual penetration, they negate each other, yet have not formed views. Therefore, both the refuted and the refuter are judged as not having manifested views; thus each has stagnation. Now they are evaluated and both said to have failed. From "If view-understanding..." onwards, it briefly demonstrates the manifestation of views. Question and answer are both inexhaustible. The first is inexhaustible questioning; below "if explaining...," it is inexhaustible answering. The term "curved shooting" is an analogy for the inexhaustible raising of questions. The Shujing states: "Like Yi who was skilled in archery. In the ninth year of Yao, during the flood, seven suns appeared together, and Yi shot down six of them." This is also an exaggerated account by scholars. It also says: "Like Yang Youji who was skilled in archery: a hundred paces away from tree leaves, he shot them with a hundred hits out of a hundred. Going hunting with King Xiang of Chu, they saw a troop of gibbons circling a tree. The king ordered his attendants to shoot them, but the gibbons leaped and bounded even more wildly. The king ordered Youji to shoot them, and the gibbons held onto the tree, wailing mournfully." View-understanding is the view manifested by dhyāna; names and letters are the view manifested by hearing. Possessing these two, they are not like the previous group of students and meditators who lack views; therefore, questioning others is like shooting with a curved trajectory to hem in birds. Following the convenience of phrasing in the text, only one side is mentioned; fully stated, it should be like shooting with a curved trajectory to surround birds and beasts, causing neither flying fowl nor running beasts to fail to lose their way. With this, a person who has manifested views and is conversant in terminology can refute a dhyāna practitioner who lacks views, like causing flying creatures to lose their way; and can refute a student who lacks views, like causing running beasts to lose their way. For the one hundred and forty, each and every one is thus. As for chuo, Guo Pu says: "It means broad and ample." The Shijing states: "Broad, broad with ample room." "Like shooting into empty space" is an analogy for inexhaustible answers. This distinguishes them from persons without views. Those who sit in dhyāna or study all succeed through learning, unlike those who manifest views, which are born from concentration. Below "these views...," it clarifies that what they depend on is different. Below "for example...," it cites an analogy. The practice of faith is like depending on hearing; the practice of Dharma is like depending on dhyāna. Hearing and thinking should be understood accordingly. As for "clever eloquence in questioning and answering," the person who has manifested views is skilled in questioning and answering, completely resembling the four unhindered eloquences. As for "resembling marvelous penetration," whatever they refute or harmonize is like penetrating marvelous principle. These two belong to views and have nothing to do with eloquence or awakening. Below "In the south, practitioners of dhyāna are few...," etc., it properly distinguishes errors from the past. The Chen and Qi were separated by territory, and Chen was referred to as the south; this refers to place to distinguish the quantity, existence, or nonexistence of persons manifesting views. "True path" refers to the confusion of those who manifest views through dhyāna. "Dhāraṇī" refers to the confusion of those who manifest views through hearing. As for "dark regarding knowing people...," etc., those ignorant fellows, being dark in knowing people, judged those who manifested views as being in high positions, even calling it the non-arising Buddha-ground; or alternatively, disbelieving, they judged them as demonic madness. Both judgments are incorrect. Below "now it is stated...," it judges and concludes that they are neither mad nor sage. From "Now, when possessed by a ghost..." onwards, it explains being neither mad nor sage. Because views belong to the nature of wisdom, it is called "view-wisdom."