[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [四明尊者教行錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937) › 3.44 # 四明尊者教行錄 3.44 四明尊者教行錄 3.44 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3.44) 答：原夫三藏理唯一真，觀有四諦，理因觀顯，故云苦忍真明。理顯觀忘，故云滅非真諦。何者？蓋由滅無之真、離幻之俗，雖則知苦斷集修因證果，皆生滅之事行，非空寂之理體。究論法性，何所迷悟？故大師云：三藏法性自天而然，集不能染、苦不能惱、道不能通、滅不能淨。然而由於苦忍方明於真如，析色盡處乃見於空。雖能析所析俱非是空，而見空者由於析色故也。是知苦忍真明、滅非真諦，義無相違。又上明必下顯，諦俗則諦真，豈前後異耶？ > Answer: Originally, in the Tripiṭaka \[teaching\], principle is uniquely one truth, while contemplation has four truths. Principle is revealed through contemplation, which is why it says, "the true illumination of the patient cognition of suffering." When principle is revealed, contemplation is forgotten, which is why it says, "cessation is not the true truth." Why so? Because it relies on the ultimate truth of cessation into non-existence and the conventional truth of departing from illusion. Although knowing suffering, abandoning the accumulation of karma, cultivating the cause, and realizing the fruit are all active practices of arising and ceasing, they are not the empty and still substance of principle. In examining the dharmatā thoroughly, what delusion or awakening could there be? Thus the Great Master said: "In the Tripiṭaka \[teaching\], the dharmatā is naturally so from heaven; accumulation cannot defile it, suffering cannot afflict it, the path cannot penetrate it, and cessation cannot purify it." However, only through the patient cognition of suffering is True Suchness illuminated, and only where form is analyzed to the end is emptiness seen. Although that which can analyze and that which is analyzed are both not emptiness, the perception of emptiness arises on account of the analysis of form. Hence we know that the true illumination of the patient cognition of suffering and the statement that cessation is not the true truth do not contradict each other in meaning. Furthermore, illumination above necessarily entails manifestation below: if conventional truth is true, then ultimate truth is true. How could there be a difference between before and after? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3.43) - [Next: 3.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3.45) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937~en-mt.3.44) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [摩訶止觀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1911.1.91) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1937.3.44) · Pramāṇa