止觀輔行傳弘決 3.4

3.4

Below 'further, vertically', next is the vertical refutation: because it is produced from the previous four natures of self and other, it is the production of production. Both the subject and the object are produced, hence it is called the production of production. Not escaping the fault of nature, it is conditioned; being conditioned, it is shifted by the four characteristics. Great production produces small production, hence it is called the production of production. Causes and conditions being production, forming the dharmas produced, it is also called production, hence it is called the production of production. Furthermore, cause produces and fruit produces, hence it is called the production of production. Even if one gives rise to the fault of nature regarding the middle way, it still belongs to birth-and-death, so how much more so for the rest? Although the names of the three calmings and contemplations apply to the three truths, if one gives rise to the four attachments, one does not even have the initial contemplation, so it belongs to birth-and-death, called the production of production. Refuting these productions to enter nirvāṇa is called non-production. This non-production receives its name in relativity to production, called the non-production of production. Relative to the unproduced ultimate truth, conventional production is spoken of, called the production of non-production. Relative to the extremes, the middle is spoken of; both extremes are production, and refuting these two productions is called the non-production of non-production. In each text there should be the three calmings and three contemplations; in the text there are only the names of two calmings. Initially, stating 'halting views and thoughts' is the calming of halting; 'stopping in the ultimate truth' is the calming of stopping; the two below follow this example. Thus we know the three truths all lack the calming of neither-stopping-nor-non-stopping and the three contemplations; because the calming of neither-stopping-nor-non-stopping is merely the principle of truth, it is not mentioned, and the meaning of contemplation should also be known by analogy with calming. The four propositions successively generate the subsequent names; therefore, all four propositions are called mutual relativity. Hence one must bring the horizontal into the vertical. Each vertical proposition is never without the horizontal; therefore the names of halting and so forth pervade the vertical. Hence both horizontal and vertical refutations are necessary before revealing the inconceivable name of the absolute. Below 'all are', it delivers a general reproof. Although the horizontal and vertical differ, the reckonings are equal in meaning; therefore it also says 'opposed... up to broken and destroyed', and so forth. Question: Horizontally reckoning self, other, and up to uncaused, one therefore produces defilement; vertically reaching the middle way, why does it also say the production of bound defilement and so forth? Answer: The subsequent are all the bound defilements of the preceding, hence all are production. Furthermore, the middle way not yet being ultimate still belongs to the teaching path; the teaching path having defilement, it is also production. Furthermore, believing in the teaching path in the initial mind, pre-reckoning the stages as being able to produce successively, it therefore judges the initial mind as producing bound defilement and so forth. Below 'is not yet', it also reproves specifically. Gathering relative names to form the absolute, one turns around and uses the relative names to compare them successively; therefore, looking at the subsequent from the preceding, although it receives the name of calming, looking again at the subsequent, it turns back into non-calming. Therefore, summing up the three within mutual relativity, they do not yet form halting and stopping within the absolute, how much less neither-stopping-nor-non-stopping; contemplation is also like this. Although the middle way does not have a separate object of truth following it, when viewed from the inconceivable within the true path, it also does not yet form calming; therefore the calmings of the three truths are not yet called calming. Below 'why is this', it explains the intent of the preceding reproof. 'Not completely dispelling attachment' explains that in opposition, the grasping to natures in the horizontal and vertical four propositions is unsevered. 'The path of speech is not severed' explains that successive generation forms the conceivable. 'Karma' explains defilement. 'Fruit' explains production. It is also permissible that both karma and fruit are production. Saying 'unceasing' explains refutable and destructible.