四明尊者教行錄 2.45

2.45

釋曰：用即為三，標三用也。一事等者，列三用也。中道總持被十種行者，修之不同，乃成三種消伏之用。觀音分證之法，遍於一切眾生之心，隨乎功行親疎，致使力用差別。如《起信論》明佛菩薩用，並就眾生事識業識辨之，以良醫妙藥狂子服之乃彰功用也。應知三種毒害，捨旁從正受名不同。如《普門別行疏》分別火難等相，報火至初禪，豈此下諸有全無業惑？蓋苦報為正也。業火至有頂，豈三界無惑報？以業為正也。煩惱火通四教，豈三乘人全無業報？以煩惱為正也。今事毒在欲界，此約果報，故受事名。行毒從色界，盡別教教道，以不即理故，別受行名。理毒唯圓，以談即故也。蓋煩惱中分即不即異，故名行名理不同。若分別相，從正受名，與彼不異。所消毒害既爾，能消三用可知。釋中事者，牒事消伏用也。虎狼刀劍等者，所消伏毒害也。蓋果報行人為免現在刀虎等難，多用散心持名誦呪。修因戒善者，亦免未來果報刀等。約此人明能消所消，一往屬事。行者者，牒行消伏用也。五住煩惱者，所消伏毒害也。雖不出能消之相，應以所消顯之。五住煩惱非三觀不消，但此三觀攝兩二乘及三菩薩。修因禪定者，亦伏八地之愛。此等行人雖能伏斷煩惱，而皆不即法性。如別教道，縱知能造之心體是佛性，而謂無明自住。以不聞本性具惡法門故，非即理之惑。別人尚爾，前教可知。故此等人所消毒害既當自住，能消之觀全是別修，是則四諦俱非無作，故能消所消皆名為行也。理者者，牒理消伏用也。法界無礙無染而染，即理性之毒也者所消伏也。雖不出能消之相，應以所消顯之。且明所消者，法界是所迷之理，無礙是受熏之德。所迷本淨故無染，受熏變造故而染，全三德而成三障，故曰即理性之毒。然即理之談難得其意，須以具不具簡，方見即不即殊。何者？若所迷法界不具三障染故有於三障，縱說一性隨緣，亦乃惑染自住，毒害有作。以反本時三障須破，即義不成，不名即理性之毒。屬前別教，等名為行毒也。若所迷法界本具三障染故現於三障，此則惑染依他，毒害無作。以復本時染毒宛然，方成即義，是故名為即理性之毒，的屬圓教也。故荊溪釋無明依他義云：此同體依，依而復即，故知體具三障。起三障用，用還依體，與體不二，此依方即。並由理具方有事用，斯是圓乘，若不談具乃名別教，是知由性惡故，方論即理之毒也。能消伏用者，所消之毒既即理性，能消之用豈不即理？斯乃理慧理定為能消能伏也。復應了知理消伏用，體是性惡，方得初心即修中觀。故荊溪云：忽都未聞性惡之名，安能信有性德之行。性德非理耶？行非消伏用耶？欲明理消之用，要知性惡之功。何者？以初心人皆用見思王數為發觀之始。前之三教不談性惡，故此王數不能即性。既不即性，故須別緣真中二理破此王數。既有能緣所緣、能破所破，故毒害消伏俱受行名。若圓頓教，既詮性惡，則見思王數乃即性之毒。毒既即性，故只以此毒為能消伏。既以毒為能消，則當處絕待，誰云能破所破？有何能緣所緣？毒害即中，諸法趣毒，遮照相即，言慮莫窮。故荊溪云：非但所觀無明法性體性不二，能觀觀智即無明是。若非理毒，焉即能觀？故一心三觀圓頓十乘更非別修，皆理消伏也。應知三用，得前前者不得後後，得後後者必具前前。且約誦呪為事辨之。如散心誦者，未修禪慧，則唯得事，不名行理。若三教人等，如優波斯那，聞六字已但觀心脈及四大實際，得阿羅漢。此是但修消伏觀行，既不兼口誦，則獨受行名。或有不捨口誦而修三教觀法，此乃誦全成觀。雖兼事用，而須從勝，皆名行消伏也，但不名理耳。若圓教人，如釋迦因地聞此章句即便數息住首楞嚴，則專理用也。若云過去得聞此句受持讀誦，則兼事用。若觀芭蕉幻化以為助道，則兼行用。雖兼事行，既約圓修，無不即性，故須從勝皆名理消伏也。又此三用消伏不定，自有以事消惑、自有以行消報，有修事行而能悟理、有修理用但消業報。文中但出所消三種之毒，不釋能消三種之用，蓋有對消互消之意，不可卒備，此令說者準義示之。況不獨此中諸文皆簡，儻迷山家教觀深旨，此疏敷揚誠為不易。今輒解此文，多有疎遺，庶幾達人許為刊正云耳。

The commentary states: 'Function, then, makes three'—this sets out the three functions. 'First is phenomena...' and so on lists the three functions. When the Middle Way total retention encompasses the ten kinds of practitioners, because their practices differ, they result in three kinds of extinguishing and subduing functions. The Dharma of partial realization of Avalokiteśvara pervades the minds of all sentient beings; according to how intimate or distant their practice is, it causes their powers and functions to differ. Just as the Awakening of Faith explains the function of the buddhas and bodhisattvas, examining it entirely with respect to sentient beings' phenomenal consciousness and karma consciousness: it is when the fine physician's wonderful medicine is taken by the mad sons that its function and efficacy are manifested. One should know that regarding the three kinds of poisonous harms, their receiving different names by setting aside the secondary and following the primary is distinct. As the Commentary on the Separate Practice of the Universal Gate differentiates the aspects of the fire disasters and so forth: retributive fire reaches up to the first dhyāna—could it be that the realms below this are entirely without karma and affliction? It is because suffering retribution is the primary [aspect]. Karmic fire reaches up to the Peak of Existence—could it be that the three realms lack afflictions and retributions? It is because karma is the primary. Affliction fire is common to the four teachings—could it be that people of the three vehicles are entirely without karma and retributions? It is because affliction is the primary. Here, phenomenal poison is in the desire realm; this is discussed in terms of fruition retribution, hence it receives the name 'phenomenal'. Practice poison extends from the form realm through the doctrinal path of the separate teaching; because it is not identical to principle, it separately receives the name 'practice'. Principle poison belongs exclusively to the perfect [teaching], because it speaks of identity. Since within affliction there is a distinction between identity and non-identity, they are called 'practice' and 'principle' differently. If one distinguishes their aspects, they receive their names from the primary [aspect], no different from that [former explanation]. The poisonous harms to be extinguished being thus, the three extinguishing functions that can extinguish [them] can be known. In the commentary, 'phenomena' takes up the phenomenal extinguishing and subduing function. 'Tigers, wolves, swords, knives, and so on' are the poisonous harms to be extinguished and subdued. Practitioners of fruition retribution, in order to avoid present disasters of knives, tigers, and so on, mostly use a distracted mind to uphold the name and chant the dhāraṇī. Those cultivating the causes of precepts and goodness also avoid the knives and so on of future fruition retribution. Explaining the can-extinguish and the to-be-extinguished with respect to such persons, it belongs provisionally to phenomena. 'Practice' takes up the practice extinguishing and subduing function. The 'five entrenchments of affliction' are the poisonous harms to be extinguished and subdued. Although it does not set forth the aspect of that which can extinguish, it should be revealed through that which is to be extinguished. The five entrenchments of affliction cannot be extinguished without the three contemplations, but these three contemplations encompass the two [kinds of practitioners of the] two vehicles and the three [kinds of] bodhisattvas. Those who cultivate the cause of dhyāna-concentration also subdue the attachment of the eight stages. Although these practitioners can subdue and sever afflictions, none [of their practices] is identical to the Dharma-nature. As in the path of the separate teaching, even if they know that the essence of the mind that can create is the Buddha-nature, they still consider ignorance to abide independently. Because they have not heard the Dharma-gate that original nature inherently includes evil, it is not an affliction that is identical to principle. If practitioners of the separate [teaching] are still like this, the prior teachings can be known. Therefore, since the poisonous harms to be extinguished by these persons are taken to abide independently, the contemplations that can extinguish them are entirely separate cultivations; thus none of the four truths is without activity. Therefore, both that which can extinguish and that which is to be extinguished are named 'practice'. 'Principle' takes up the principle extinguishing and subduing function. 'The Dharma realm is unimpeded, non-defiled yet defiled: this is the poison of the nature of principle' is that which is to be extinguished and subdued. Although it does not set forth the aspect of that which can extinguish, it should be revealed through that which is to be extinguished. To first explain that which is to be extinguished: the Dharma realm is the principle that is deluded about; unimpededness is the virtue of receiving perfuming. What is deluded about is originally pure, hence 'non-defiled'; receiving perfuming, it transforms and creates, hence 'yet defiled'. Entirely constituting the three virtues yet forming the three obstructions, it is therefore called 'the poison of the nature of principle'. However, the discussion of identity with principle is difficult to grasp; one must differentiate by whether it inherently includes [evil] or not, and only then see the distinction between identity and non-identity. How so? If the deluded-about Dharma realm does not inherently include the defilement of the three obstructions, and because of this there are the three obstructions, then even if one says that the single nature accords with conditions, the defilement of affliction still abides independently, and the poisonous harm has activity. Because when returning to the source the three obstructions must be broken, the meaning of identity is not accomplished, and it cannot be called the poison of the nature of principle. It belongs to the preceding separate teaching and is equally named 'practice poison'. If the deluded-about Dharma realm originally includes the defilement of the three obstructions and therefore manifests the three obstructions, then this defilement of affliction is other-dependent, and the poisonous harm is without activity. Because when returning to the source the defiling poison remains vividly present, only then is the meaning of identity accomplished; therefore it is called 'the poison of the nature of principle', strictly belonging to the perfect teaching. Therefore, Jingxi, explaining the meaning of ignorance being other-dependent, said: 'This is reliance within the same substance; relying and yet identical. Hence we know the substance inherently includes the three obstructions. Arising the functions of the three obstructions, the functions still rely on the substance and are non-dual with the substance; this reliance is precisely identity.' All arise from the principle's inherent inclusion, and only then is there phenomenal function; this is the perfect vehicle. If one does not speak of inherent inclusion, it is called the separate teaching. One knows that it is only because of nature inclusion of evil that one discusses the poison that is identical to principle. As for the function that can extinguish and subdue: since the poison to be extinguished is identical to the nature of principle, how could the function that can extinguish not be identical to principle? This is principle-wisdom and principle-concentration acting as that which can extinguish and subdue. Furthermore, one should understand that the principle extinguishing and subduing function's substance is nature-evil; only then can one, at the initial mind, immediately cultivate the contemplation of the Middle. Therefore Jingxi said: 'If one has not even heard the name of nature-evil, how could one believe there is the practice of nature-virtue?' Is not nature-virtue principle? Is not practice the extinguishing and subduing function? If one wishes to understand the function of principle extinguishing, it is essential to know the efficacy of nature-evil. How so? Because people of the initial mind all use the principal and mental factors of views and thoughts as the starting point for initiating contemplation. The prior three teachings do not speak of nature-evil, hence these principal and mental factors cannot be identical to the nature. Since they are not identical to the nature, they must separately take the two principles of truth and middle as objects to destroy these principal and mental factors. Since there are that which perceives and that which is perceived, that which destroys and that which is destroyed, the poisonous harm and the extinguishing and subduing both receive the name 'practice'. In the perfect and sudden teaching, since it explains nature-evil, the principal and mental factors of views and thoughts are the poison identical to the nature. Since the poison is identical to the nature, one simply takes this poison as that which can extinguish and subdue. Since one takes the poison as that which can extinguish, right there it is absolute and beyond comparison; who speaks of that which destroys and that which is destroyed? What is there of that which perceives and that which is perceived? The poisonous harm is identical to the Middle; all dharmas tend toward poison; concealing and illuminating are mutually identical; words and thoughts cannot fathom it. Therefore Jingxi said: 'Not only are the contemplated ignorance and the Dharma-nature non-dual in their essential nature; the contemplating contemplative wisdom is itself ignorance.' If it were not principle poison, how could it be identical to the contemplating [wisdom]? Therefore, the three contemplations in one mind and the perfect and sudden ten vehicles are by no means separate cultivations; they are all principle extinguishing and subduing. One should know that regarding the three functions, one who attains the former does not attain the latter, while one who attains the latter must possess the former. Let us examine this provisionally with respect to chanting the dhāraṇī as phenomena. For those who chant with a distracted mind, having not yet cultivated dhyāna and wisdom, they only attain phenomena, and it is not called practice or principle. As for people of the three teachings, like Upasena, who, upon hearing the six syllables, merely contemplated the mind-pulse and the actual limit of the four great elements and attained arhatship: this is merely cultivating the contemplation practice of extinguishing and subduing; since it does not combine with oral chanting, it solely receives the name 'practice'. Or there are those who, without abandoning oral chanting, cultivate the contemplation methods of the three teachings: this is chanting entirely becoming contemplation. Although it combines phenomenal function, one must follow the superior; all are named 'practice extinguishing and subduing', only they are not named 'principle'. If it is a person of the perfect teaching, like Śākyamuni in his causal stage who, upon hearing these lines, immediately counted breaths and dwelt in Śūraṅgama, then this is exclusively principle function. If one says that in the past one heard these phrases, upheld, read, and recited them, it combines phenomenal function. If one contemplates plantains and illusions to assist the path, it combines practice function. Although combining phenomena and practice, since it is evaluated in terms of perfect cultivation, none is not identical to the nature; therefore, one must follow the superior, and all are named 'principle extinguishing and subduing'. Furthermore, the extinguishing and subduing of these three functions is not fixed: some use phenomena to extinguish afflictions; some use practice to extinguish retributions; some cultivate phenomenal practice and can awaken to principle; some cultivate principle function and merely extinguish karmic retributions. The text merely presents the three kinds of poisons to be extinguished, without explaining the three kinds of functions that can extinguish them; this is because there is the meaning of direct extinguishing and reciprocal extinguishing, which cannot be presented all at once, prompting the expositor to demonstrate it according to the principle. Moreover, not only is it here that all texts are concise: if one is confused about our mountain school's profound purport of doctrinal teaching and contemplation, expounding this commentary is truly not easy. Now, in rashly explaining this text, there are many omissions and lapses; may perceptive persons be willing to correct them.