觀心論疏 2.15

2.15

論云：「問觀自生心，云何四不說？離戲論諍訟，心淨如虛空。」此一偈去是第二正說分，有三十六偈，為三十六問。就正說分為十章。初一偈明教理圓妙不可說。二有兩偈，明迷理教，起見思二惑。三有四偈，明悟理有淺深，致有四教之別。四有一偈，明欲尋教下之理，應依四種三昧方軌而修。五有一偈，明妙理不可頓階，應先修二十五方便。六有一偈，明心觀理實，而諸境雜發不同。七有一偈，明隨觀一境，用十法成乘。八有七偈，明十法觀成證諸地住，具諸法門不同。九有十四偈，明化他起用法不同。十有四偈，總結自行化他法門並在於一心盡淨、言語道斷也。偈云：「四不可說者，一生生不可說，二生不生不可說，三不生生不可說，四不生不生不可說。」論釋云「生生故生，生故不生」，云何可說？令例此語者，生生故生，不生生故不生不生，云何單可說？失其圓旨也。又生生即三藏教，生不生即通教，不生生即別教，不生不生即圓教。是則不但三句即一句、一句即三句，不可說亦即三教即一教、一教即三教，云何可說？故論初云「四不可說」，次後辯其四教也。又經釋云「生生是有漏之法」，故云生生即是《中論》「因緣所生法」也。生不生者，釋云「世諦死時名生不生」，即《中論》「我說即是空」。不生生者，釋云「初出胎名不生生」，即《中論》「亦名為假名」。不生不生者，釋云「大般涅槃有不生不生」，即《中論》「亦名中道義」也。是則論中四句即是論中三觀，三觀即一觀、一觀即三觀，云何可單說？單說，則惑者極乎題目而領，豈會玄旨耶？經云「止止不須說，我法妙難思」，即其義也。故初明四不可說，復明三觀理妙也。又經云：「一切眾生亦一、非一、非一非非一。」亦一者，一切眾生則一乘故，即佛法義也。非一者，如是數法記三乘故，即聲聞、辟支佛、菩薩三法數也。非非一者，如是數不定故，即六道法界。又言眾生者，即六道也。是則經明一念之心具十法界，明矣。又經云「眾生身有毒草，復有妙藥王」，毒草即六道界，藥王即四聖界是。六道即生生也，二乘即生不生也，菩薩界即不生生，佛界即不生不生。結四句即一句，在乎一心；九界即一界，在乎一念。文義合會，結六道界即生死，四聖界即涅槃；涅槃即生死，生死即涅槃；九界即一界，一界即九界。即是不可思議境，云何可說？又六道生死即是罪，四聖涅槃則是福，是則識心中十界四不可說。不思議境者，即是識「生死非涅槃」之妙理，深達罪福之相也。法華云「深達罪福相，遍照於十方，微妙淨法身，具相三十二」，龍女悟斯圓理，疾成佛道；常不輕圓信妙理故，得六根清淨。是則境智理妙不可說也。故初明不可說，後辯心具十界，明不思議境也。結四句教、十法界、三觀諸教文字，論云「文字即解脫，解脫即妙理」，妙理云何可說？故初明不可說，後結云「一切語言道斷，畢竟無所得」也。然四不可說等法並須約一念，一念心即是因緣所生、即空、即假、即中。即空故是常寂，即假故是常照，即中故即非寂非照，因緣所生法亦得是空假雙照。結此四句即四不可說。如前辯者，則寂照四句類之可知。既即寂而照，即照而寂，即寂照而非寂非照而雙寂照。一句即四句，是則理圓，云何單可說？故云「四不可說」也。得其圓理者，「息諍訟，心淨如虛空」，事如偈說也。

The treatise says: "[One] asks: In contemplating the spontaneously arising mind, why are there the four inexpressibles? Free from frivolous debate and disputes, the mind is pure as space." From this single verse onward is the second [major section], the presentation proper, which comprises thirty-six verses forming thirty-six questions. The presentation proper is divided into ten chapters. The first single verse clarifies that the principle of the teaching is consummate, wondrous, and inexpressible. The second has two verses, clarifying that being confused about the principle and the teaching gives rise to the two delusions of views and inclinations. The third has four verses, clarifying that awakenings to the principle have depths and shallows, giving rise to the distinction of the four teachings. The fourth has one verse, clarifying that one who wishes to seek the principle underlying the teachings should practice in accordance with the methods and rules of the four kinds of samādhi. The fifth has one verse, clarifying that the wondrous principle cannot be ascended to all at once, so one must first cultivate the twenty-five expedient means. The sixth has one verse, clarifying that when the mind contemplates the true nature of the principle, various objects arise in diverse and differing ways. The seventh has one verse, clarifying that in accord with contemplating any single object, one employs the ten dharmas to form the vehicle. The eighth has seven verses, clarifying that when contemplation through the ten dharmas is perfected, one witnesses the various stages and abodes, possessing distinct dharma-doors. The ninth has fourteen verses, clarifying the differences in the application of dharmas to convert others. The tenth has four verses, concluding generally that the dharma-doors of one's own practice and converting others all reside in the complete purity of the one mind, where the path of words is cut off. The verse says: "As for the four inexpressibles: first, arising-arising is inexpressible; second, arising-non-arising is inexpressible; third, non-arising-arising is inexpressible; fourth, non-arising-non-arising is inexpressible." The treatise's explanation says: "Because of arising-arising, there is arising; because of arising, there is non-arising." How could it be expressed? To extrapolate from this statement: because of arising-arising, there is arising; because of non-arising-arising, there is non-arising-non-arising. How could it be expressed in isolation? It would lose its consummate purport. Furthermore, arising-arising is the Tripiṭaka teaching; arising-non-arising is the shared teaching; non-arising-arising is the separate teaching; non-arising-non-arising is the consummate teaching. Thus, not only are the three phrases the one phrase and the one phrase the three phrases, inexpressible also means the three teachings are the one teaching and the one teaching is the three teachings; how could it be expressed? Therefore, the treatise first states "the four inexpressibles," and subsequently delineates the four teachings. Furthermore, the sūtra's explanation says, "Arising-arising refers to conditioned dharmas"; hence it says arising-arising is the "dharmas produced through causes and conditions" of the Madhyamakaśāstra. Arising-non-arising is explained as: "At the time of death in conventional truth, it is named arising-non-arising"; this is the Madhyamakaśāstra's "I declare that it is emptiness." Non-arising-arising is explained as: "First emerging from the womb is named non-arising-arising"; this is the Madhyamakaśāstra's "It is also a provisional designation." Non-arising-non-arising is explained as: "The great parinirvāṇa has non-arising-non-arising"; this is the Madhyamakaśāstra's "It is also the meaning of the Middle Way." Thus, the four phrases in the treatise are precisely the three contemplations in the treatise; the three contemplations are the one contemplation, and the one contemplation is the three contemplations. How could they be spoken of in isolation? If spoken of in isolation, those who are confused would only grasp the superficial title; how could they tally with the profound purport? The sūtra says: "Stop, stop! There is no need to speak; my Dharma is wondrous and difficult to conceive"—this is precisely its meaning. Therefore, it first clarifies the four inexpressibles, and further clarifies the wondrousness of the principle of the three contemplations. Furthermore, the sūtra says: "All sentient beings are both one, not one, and neither one nor not-one." "Both one" means all sentient beings are of the One Vehicle; hence it is the meaning of the Buddhadharma. "Not one" means that enumerating these dharmas registers the three vehicles; hence it refers to the enumerations of the three dharmas of śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. "Neither one nor not-one" means that these numbers are indefinite; hence it refers to the dharma-realms of the six destinies. Moreover, the word "sentient beings" refers to the six destinies. Thus the sūtra clarifies that the mind in a single thought-moment is endowed with the ten dharma-realms; this is clear. Furthermore, the sūtra says: "Within the body of sentient beings there are poisonous herbs, and there is also the king of wondrous medicines." The poisonous herbs are the realms of the six destinies; the king of medicines is the realms of the four nobles. The six destinies are arising-arising; the two vehicles are arising-non-arising; the bodhisattva realm is non-arising-arising; the Buddha realm is non-arising-non-arising. In conclusion, the four phrases are the one phrase, residing in the one mind; the nine realms are the one realm, residing in a single thought-moment. The text and its meaning accord and join: in conclusion, the realms of the six destinies are saṃsāra, and the realms of the four nobles are nirvāṇa; nirvāṇa is saṃsāra, saṃsāra is nirvāṇa; the nine realms are the one realm, and the one realm is the nine realms. This is the inconceivable object; how could it be expressed? Furthermore, the saṃsāra of the six destinies is demerit, and the nirvāṇa of the four nobles is merit. Thus, within the mind, one recognizes the four inexpressibles of the ten realms. The inconceivable object is precisely recognizing the wondrous principle that "saṃsāra is not [other than] nirvāṇa," profoundly penetrating the characteristics of demerit and merit. The Lotus Sūtra says: "Profoundly penetrating the characteristics of demerit and merit, / Illuminating everywhere throughout the ten directions, / The subtle, wondrous, pure dharmakāya / Is endowed with the thirty-two marks." The dragon girl awakened to this consummate principle and swiftly achieved the Buddha Path; because Sadāparibhūta had consummate faith in this wondrous principle, he attained purity of the six sense faculties. Thus, the object, wisdom, and principle are wondrous and inexpressible. Therefore, it first clarifies the inexpressible, and afterwards delineates that the mind possesses the ten realms, clarifying the inconceivable object. Concluding the teachings of the four phrases, the ten dharma-realms, the three contemplations, and the texts of the various teachings, the treatise says: "Words are liberation, and liberation is the wondrous principle." How could the wondrous principle be expressed? Therefore, it first clarifies the inexpressible, and subsequently concludes: "The path of all language is cut off, and in the end nothing is attained." However, the four inexpressibles and other such dharmas must all be approached through a single thought-moment: the mind in a single thought-moment is produced through causes and conditions, is empty, is provisional, and is the Middle. Being empty, it is ever tranquil; being provisional, it is ever illuminating; being the Middle, it is neither tranquil nor illuminating; the dharmas produced through causes and conditions can also be said to doubly illuminate both emptiness and the provisional. Concluding these four phrases, they are the four inexpressibles. As explained previously, one can understand the four phrases of tranquility and illumination by analogy. Since it is precisely tranquil yet illuminating, precisely illuminating yet tranquil, precisely tranquil and illuminating yet neither tranquil nor illuminating while doubly tranquil and illuminating—one phrase is four phrases, and thus the principle is consummate; how could it be spoken of in isolation? Therefore it says, "the four inexpressibles." For one who attains its consummate principle, "disputes cease, and the mind is pure as space," just as the verse says.