止觀輔行傳弘決 3.43

3.43

"Next, distinguishing the combinations of truths and wisdoms" means discussing both truths and wisdoms together, hence it is called "combined". Together with the joining [of capacities], across the four teachings there are five sections in total. In each section, first it explains that objects arouse wisdom, and next explains that wisdom conditions truths. Conditioning and arousing are both explained together. First, in the Tripiṭaka [teaching], where it says "the two truths together arouse [the third]", it is only the Buddha of the Tripiṭaka teaching who doubly illuminates the two truths and provisionally establishes the name of the middle; hence it says "together". In the shared teaching, where it says "the true truth together arouses the two eyes and the two wisdoms", this is because it contains the middle. Next, in the joining, where it says "opening the true to bring forth the middle", if one has been joined and gains entry into the path of realization, then they constitute the three truths. As for the question: why is only the shared teaching joined, and it does not mention the Tripiṭaka? Why is it only joined by the distinctive, and does not mention the perfect? This asks about the preceding "opening the true to bring forth the middle". In the answer, it first explains that the shared teaching must make use of the distinctive to join it, because capacities are distinct. If one does not hear it from beginning to end, one belongs entirely to the former two [teachings]; if one hears it from the very beginning, one belongs entirely to the latter two. Furthermore, there is a person who has completely destroyed the two [types of] delusions and only upon reaching the eighth ground hears the middle way; having heard it, he cultivates contemplation and advances to destroy ignorance, obtaining the fundamental Dharma body and manifesting the eight aspects to become a Buddha. Although he sees the middle way, he must rely on the two contemplations of emptiness and provisionality of the shared teaching as preliminary expedients, and must await the distinctive principle to join him before he can hear it. Now, in saying "joined by the distinctive", two meanings should be present: first, the distinctive teaching, because the teachings are adjacent; second, the distinctive principle, because the principle differs from the true [truth]. In "not using this [fruit]..." below, it next explains the intent of not joining the other teachings. First, in explaining not joining the Tripiṭaka, where it says "not using this Buddha fruit", although the first ground and the first abode have the eight aspects, they do not receive the name of "fruit". In the shared [teaching], the nine grounds and two contemplations are the cause, and reaching the tenth ground, the eight aspects are the fruit. If one is joined, destroying one grade of ignorance, one also attains the eight aspects; still following the conventional formulation, it is also called a fruit; therefore only this fruit is used to join the shared [teaching]. That it does not use this fruit to join the Tripiṭaka and the others is because of four meanings. First, joining applies to that which can be joined; because the cause in the Tripiṭaka is crude, it cannot be joined. Second, only when the name of "joining" can be received may joining be applied: this means using the former teaching having a beginning but no end—having used the seventh and eighth [stages], one does not reach the ninth and tenth; and using the latter teaching having an end but no beginning—only using the grounds without needing the abodes and practices—continuing in the middle to join them, hence it gets the name of "joining". Third, because there is no need for joining, it is also not named "joining": as in the first ground and first abode, where true causes are already accomplished, and one also destroys ignorance and manifests the eight aspects to become a Buddha, spontaneously flowing [into it]—why would one need to be joined further? Fourth, receiving the meaning of joining means in terms of the scope of the teachings. In the text, the first meaning is just this first [case] of being unjoinable; this second meaning corresponds precisely to the shared teaching being that which can be joined. If joined into the path of teaching, it is in the transference; if joined into the path of realization, it is in the first ground; if joined into the perfect, it also divides into teaching and realization; that explanation is understandable. Those who have undergone the three asamkhyeya kalpas and hundred kalpas [of the Tripiṭaka], when entering the distinctive teaching, are only in the ten faiths; when entering the perfect, they are only in the five grades [of disciples]; therefore they only become beginners in the latter teachings. From beginning to end they have a beginning and an end; although coming from the Tripiṭaka, they are still identical to [beginners of] that very teaching; therefore the Tripiṭaka does not receive the name of "joining". Therefore, although the shared [teaching] is joined, if one comes from the dry-wisdom or nature stages, it is also not called joining, because the meaning is identical to the beginning and ending minds of the Tripiṭaka. Thus the Four Stations of Mindfulness says: "The shared has three kinds: first, both cause and fruit are shared, which is the shared teaching itself; second, the cause is shared while the fruit is not shared, which refers to those who are joined; third, the shared-distinctive and the shared-perfect, which are the distinctive and the perfect. Using the shared teaching as an expedient, they merely become persons of the causes and fruits of the distinctive and perfect." Therefore, although bodhisattvas are identical in terms of station, the contemplative wisdom of the dry-wisdom and nature stages is still inferior, so it likewise does not receive the name of "joining". Where the text says "not taking this fruit to join the causes of the ten grounds", this is the third meaning: it is the distinctive joining the shared, still taking the seventh and eighth grounds as cause, and thus calling the eight aspects of the tenth ground the fruit. How could one take this fruit to turn around and join the causes of the ten grounds of the distinctive teaching where ten grades [of ignorance] have already been destroyed? This cause naturally advances toward the fruit of wondrous awakening; how could it turn back toward the fruit of [destroying only] one grade? If it joined the first ground, the first ground is also identical in having already destroyed one grade; since there is neither superiority nor inferiority, why would joining be needed? Furthermore, it would turn out to be using the distinctive to join the distinctive. Joining prior to the grounds of the distinctive naturally uses the fruit of wondrous awakening of the perfect teaching, or uses the fruit of wondrous awakening of the distinctive teaching; why would one need this one-grade fruit? Furthermore, the first ground of this teaching is not a fruit. Furthermore, the wondrous awakening of that teaching originally produced faith with a view to this fruit; why would one only say it is joined upon reaching this point? As for saying "not joining the ten abodes": although the ten grounds of the distinctive teaching have destroyed ten grades, they still carry the path of teaching and yet do not need to be joined; how much less taking the eight aspects of destroying one grade to turn back and join the stages of the ten abodes of the perfect teaching? The inverted meaning is also the same as with the ten grounds. The fourth meaning is just what the text says: "one can only use the distinctive to join the shared", which is the distinctive principle joining the shared principle. Therefore, the meaning of the present text is that one must cultivate contemplation to advance in destroying ignorance, without dividing into the exclusive middle or the non-exclusive middle; thus we know that speaking of the grounds already includes the abodes. How could the first abode further join the ten abodes? The present text reiterates not joining the ten abodes, hence not joining the perfect, still preserving the path of teaching of the distinctive teaching. Where the Xuanwen joins the shared and distinctive by means of the perfect, it is because it distinguishes the differences in stages and practices between teaching and realization. That it does not say so now is because it is in terms of the path of realization, and solely in terms of contemplation. Question: Between being joined and not being joined, which is supreme? Answer: The Four Stations of Mindfulness says: "A person who is joined is like using earth and stone as a foundation and piling gold and jewels on top. How could that compare to piling purely with vajra from the bottom up?" This is praising that the beginning and end are both wondrous, and that is all. If among the bodhisattvas in the ranks of the worthy there are those who have come from the gradual, their efficacy is still superior. Why is that? The dharmas have matured earlier, and the concealed principle is easy to clarify, like holding the highest office through advancing through ranks, or wealth that comes from having been poor. Therefore, bodhisattvas from other directions all praise the beginning bodhisattvas of this land for enduring suffering and withstanding labor. Those who came from [the land of] Fragrant Accumulation to this place to hear the Dharma had not yet mastered provisional dharmas, and for that reason they traveled through.