止觀輔行傳弘決 5.67

5.67

Third, in clarifying the stages: the enumeration of stages can be seen [in the root text]. Although the text fully lists the four stages of refuting views, what is used in the present text, namely contemplating the non-arising of the three provisionalities and four propositions, is the beginning of the sequential Mahāyāna gate. In order to know comprehensively, the purport of the text is retained. From 'severing and subduing' onward, it determines similarities and differences. Next, in the analytical distinctions, the intent of the next question is: if simultaneously revealing the purport of the text, one must retain the sequence to display the non-sequential, then one should directly clarify the stages of the distinctive and perfect teachings. Because the sequential meaning resembles the distinctive stages, a twofold question is posed: If directly discussing the purport of the text, why not directly clarify the stage of refuting views in the perfect teaching—why use the stages of the previous three teachings? If solely retaining the sequence, one should only clarify the distinctive—why use the three? This is the primary text of the calming and contemplation, yet readers remain confused. Some who interpret the text speak only of sequence; some who cultivate contemplation seek non-obstruction separately. One need only examine the text of the reply, and the doctrinal principle will naturally become clear. Previously, at the end of the text on arousing the aspiration for awakening in fascicle one, the aspiration of bodhisattvas of the three teachings was already analyzed in terms of the four siddhāntas. Here four meanings are stated again: First, from 'above it clarifies' onward, for fear that habitual tendencies of past lives may manifest during contemplation, one must recognize the sequential stages of severing views across the various teachings. Second, from 'further wishing' onward, it is to enable the practitioner to recognize the stages of the half and full [teachings]; if one does not recognize them, the provisional and the real will be conflated. Third, from 'further, the half' onward, it clarifies the understanding that the previous three teachings are all aids to the path for the perfect and sudden; if one does not understand this, the vehicle of the perfect teaching will collapse. 'Attendants' means serving. 'Guards' means protecting. Fourth, from 'further, how could' onward, it reveals identity: views are the dharma-dhātu, and there is no stage that is not real; if one fears differentiation, how does that differ from fleeing emptiness? The statement 'this is the bodhisattva's endurance of non-arising' borrows words from the Dapin. The words are shared, but the intent is of the perfect [teaching]; one must grasp the meaning well. From 'embodying provisionality' onward, it concludes with calming and contemplation. The cessation of views and entrance into emptiness is called calming; discerning that views are doubly empty is called contemplation. This concludes across all the aforementioned views, realizing that all are empty. This is the first section revealing the wondrous purport.