[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) › [翻譯名義集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131) › 7.142.3 # 翻譯名義集 7.142.3 翻譯名義集 7.142.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.142.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142.3) 圓人頓修一心三觀，登住入實，以之為淨。 」妙宗云：「若論實證，此土唯有圓聖所居。 別人初地，證與圓同，稱實感報，有何優降？ 今就教道，十地不融，致使感土，異於圓人。 」《雜編》雙取，謂偏成非次第頓入者，即別圓所修巧拙二觀也； 實報淨穢者，即地住所見融礙二相也。 良由別人久習次第，雖回向圓修，入地之時，仍見一分染礙之色，名之為穢。 圓人始終唯修頓行，入住之時，但見此土融通之相，號之為淨。 《往生記》破約教道說，則見神智，自違《輔行》。 義學之者，當思審矣。 四分證究竟，寂光淨穢。 《妙宗鈔》云：「若就別人，同證圓實，論寂光者，唯約真因。 對圓極果，而分淨穢。 今論教道，詮於極果，但斷無明一十二品，寂光猶穢。 圓知須斷四十二品，名究竟淨。 」《往生記》云：「今約分滿相對，故合中下，但名分證，寂光猶穢。 妙覺上品，真常究滿，方為極淨。 請觀今文，諸佛如來所游居處，極為淨土。 豈非分得究竟寂光？ 正約圓家真因極果，對分淨穢。 」四明云：「別教教道，深不可也。 」《刊正記》云：「由分證寂光，方生實報。 今約分證，猶帶無明，無明故穢。 究竟無明已盡故淨。 」《雜編》難云：「若爾，則成穢屬實報，淨屬寂光。 今謂無明分破，證少分無相，故穢。 無明全盡，證究竟無相，故淨。 」四定體，先達通以三道，為下三土當體之體。 引《輔行》云：「分段三道，謂見思惑，為煩惱道。 煩惱潤業，為業道。 感界內生，為苦道。 方便三道，謂塵沙惑，為煩惱道； 以無漏業，名為業道； 變易生死，名為苦道。 實報三道，謂無明惑，為煩惱道； 非漏非無漏業，為業道； 彼土變易，名為苦道。 通以三德為所依體。 苦道即法身，結業即解脫，煩惱即菩提。 先師乃謂惑業是因，苦道是果。 今之土體，三世間中，唯取苦道為國土一千當體之體，還以三德為所依體。 」故荊溪云：「既許法身遍一切處，報應未嘗離於法身。 若寂光土，《觀經》既約四德釋名，當以三德為土當體。 理無所存，遍在於事，乃以三土，為所依體。 」廣慈法師準妙樂云：「本有四德為所依，修德四德為能依。 」遂指修德三因為當體，性德三法為所依。 今謂妙樂因釋下方空中菩薩，所以將身表智，以空表土，故明身土。 今唯辨土，安得兼身。 況將修德以對理土，乃彰能所義顛倒矣！ 五示相，此約教門示四土相。 初示一異相。 娑婆安養，垢淨相別，故名異。 方便有餘，純清淨境，故名一。 《淨名疏》云：「三乘同以無言說道，發真無漏，所感國土，一往相同，故言一也。 」二示融礙相。 方便雖是一相，無明未破，果報隔別。 《淨名疏》云：「染淨有餘，二種眾生，見有障礙。 別圓地住，分破無明，依正互融，一多相即，故名融也。 」三示橫竪相。 舊釋橫竪，句義紛雜，惑亂學者。 今分二義，冷然易解。 初就土自分，如《妙玄》云：「若分別而言，謂方便在三界外； 若分別而言，謂實報在方便外。 例此分別，謂寂光在實報外。 」故《淨名記》「問：『三土之外，何殊太虛？ 』答：『遍同理別。 言理別者，法身即土。 離身無土，離土無身。 但真如實相，非智非境，說智說境。 非身非土，說身說土。 』」約此分別，義當竪矣。 若約相即，如妙樂云：「豈離伽耶，別求常寂？ 非寂光外，別有娑婆。 」《淨名記》云：「橫解者，如前所引《法華》經文，秖於此土，而覩上二。 故小被斥，見淨不驚，足指按地，即其事也。 」約此相即，義屬橫焉。 若約相攝，《淨名記》云：「既一土攝一切土，故得此界，遍攝下二。 準此以勝攝劣，土亦橫矣。 」二與教對分，妙樂記云：「橫論土體，與教相當。 竪論約土，用教多少。 > Those of the perfect \[teaching\]頓修 the three contemplations in a single mind, ascend to the stages of abidance and enter reality, which is considered pure." The Miaozong says: "If one discusses direct realization, this land is inhabited only by sages of the perfect \[teaching\]. When those of the distinct \[teaching\] reach the first bhūmi, their realization is identical with the perfect; in accordance with reality they evoke their retribution—what superiority or inferiority could there be? Now, taking the provisional teaching into account, the ten bhūmis are not interpenetrating, causing the evoked land to differ from that of persons of the perfect \[teaching\]." The Zabian accepts both, stating that the biased attainment versus non-gradual sudden entry refers to the skillful and clumsy contemplations practiced by the distinct and perfect \[teachings\]; the purity and defilement of the real retribution \[land\] refers to the two aspects of interpenetration and obstruction seen in the stages of bhūmi and abidance. This is because practitioners of the distinct \[teaching\], having long cultivated the gradual, even when redirecting toward the perfect practice, still perceive a fraction of defiled and obstructed form upon entering the bhūmi; this is termed 'defiled'. Persons of the perfect \[teaching\] from beginning to end cultivate only the sudden practice; upon entering abidance, they see only the interpenetrating aspects of this land; this is termed 'pure'. The Wangsheng ji refutes the explanation in terms of the provisional teaching, arguing that Shenzhi contradicts the Fuxing. Those who study the doctrine should ponder and examine this carefully. Fourth, partial realization and ultimate \[realization\], the purity and defilement of quiescent light. The Miaozong chao says: "If one considers those of the distinct \[teaching\] sharing the realization of the perfect reality, when discussing quiescent light, it is only in terms of the true cause. Relative to the ultimate fruit of the perfect \[teaching\], purity and defilement are distinguished. Now discussing the provisional teaching, when explaining the ultimate fruit, only twelve grades of fundamental ignorance are severed, and quiescent light is still defiled. The perfect \[teaching\] understands that forty-two grades must be severed; this is termed ultimate purity." The Wangsheng ji says: "Now, contrasting partial and complete, we combine the middle and lower, naming them merely 'partial realization'; quiescent light is still defiled. Only the superior grade of wondrous enlightenment, wherein the true and eternal is completely perfected, is the utmost purity. Please observe the present text: the dwelling place where the Tathāgatas roam is the utmost Pure Land. How could this not be the partially attained ultimate quiescent light? This precisely contrasts the true cause and the ultimate fruit of the perfect school to distinguish purity and defilement." Siming said: "The provisional teaching of the distinct school is profoundly non-acceptable." The Kanzheng ji says: "Because of partially realizing quiescent light, one is born into the real retribution \[land\]. Now regarding partial realization, because it still carries fundamental ignorance, on account of fundamental ignorance it is defiled. Because ultimate \[realization\] has exhausted fundamental ignorance, it is pure." The Zabian objects: "If so, then defilement would belong to real retribution, and purity to quiescent light. Now it is said: Because fundamental ignorance is partially broken, and one realizes a small portion of signlessness, it is defiled. Because fundamental ignorance is completely exhausted, and one realizes ultimate signlessness, it is pure." Fourth, determining the substance. Former masters universally took the three paths as the intrinsic substance of the lower three lands. Quoting the Fuxing, they said: "The three paths of portioned \[birth and death\] are: afflictions of views and thoughts are the path of afflictions; afflictions moistening karma are the path of karma; evoking birth within the realms is the path of suffering. The three paths of expedient means are: dust-and-sand afflictions are the path of afflictions; uncontaminated karma is the path of karma; the birth and death of change is the path of suffering. The three paths of real retribution are: fundamental ignorance is the path of afflictions; neither-contaminated-nor-uncontaminated karma is the path of karma; change in that land is the path of suffering. Universally, the three virtues are taken as the underlying substance. The path of suffering is none other than the dharmakāya; binding karma is none other than liberation; afflictions are none other than bodhi. The late master considered afflictions and karma to be the cause, and the path of suffering to be the fruit. As for the substance of the land now, among the three realms, only the path of suffering is taken as the intrinsic substance of the one thousand lands, while the three virtues are still taken as the underlying substance." Therefore Jingxi said: "Since it is acknowledged that the dharmakāya pervades all places, retribution and response are never separated from the dharmakāya. As for the land of quiescent light, since the Contemplation Sūtra explains the name in terms of the four virtues, the three virtues should be taken as the intrinsic substance of the land. Principle does not abide on its own; it pervades phenomena, and thus takes the three lands as its underlying substance." Dharma Master Guangci, following the Miaole, said: "The inherently existing four virtues are the underlying basis; the cultivated four virtues are what relies \[on them\]." He then pointed to the three cultivated causes as the intrinsic substance, and the three inherent dharmas as the underlying basis. Now it is said: because the Miaole was explaining the bodhisattvas in the empty space below, it used the body to represent wisdom and empty space to represent the land, thereby clarifying body and land. Now we are distinguishing only the land, so how could it include the body? Furthermore, matching cultivated virtue against the land of principle reveals an inversion of the meaning of container and contained! Fifth, showing the characteristics. This is showing the characteristics of the four lands according to the doctrinal gates. First, showing the characteristics of unity and difference. The defilement and purity of Sahā and Anyang are distinct, and are therefore called different. Expedient Means with Remainder is a purely clean realm, and is therefore called one. The Jingming shu says: "Because the three vehicles alike, through the ineffable path, bring forth true uncontaminated \[wisdom\], the lands they evoke are on the whole identical; hence they are called one." Second, showing the characteristics of interpenetration and obstruction. Although Expedient Means is of a single aspect, because fundamental ignorance is not yet broken, the retribution states are kept apart. The Jingming shu says: "The two kinds of sentient beings in defilement and purity with remainder perceive obstructions. In the bhūmis and abidances of the distinct and perfect \[teachings\], fundamental ignorance is partially broken, so environment and person interpenetrate, and the one and the many are mutually identical; hence it is called interpenetrating." Third, showing the characteristics of horizontal and vertical. Past explanations of horizontal and vertical had confusing sentences and doctrines, misleading students. Now two senses are differentiated, making it clear and easy to understand. First, with respect to the land's own divisions: as the Miaoxuan says, "If spoken of by way of discrimination, Expedient Means is outside the three realms; if spoken of by way of discrimination, Real Retribution is outside Expedient Means. By this analogy of discrimination, Quiescent Light is outside Real Retribution." Therefore the Jingming ji asks: "'Outside the three lands, how does it differ from great space?' The answer: 'Universally identical, yet principle is distinct. That principle is distinct means the dharmakāya is the land. Apart from the body there is no land; apart from the land there is no body. Yet true suchness and the real mark are neither wisdom nor realm, though spoken of as wisdom and realm; neither body nor land, though spoken of as body and land.'" According to this discrimination, the meaning corresponds to the vertical. If considered in terms of mutual identity, as the Miaole says: "How could one leave Gayā to seek the eternally quiescent elsewhere? There is no Sahā existing outside of quiescent light." The Jingming ji says: "The horizontal understanding is as quoted earlier from the Lotus Sūtra: right in this land, one beholds the upper two. Thus the lesser \[vehicle\] was reproached, while those who saw the pure were not astonished; pressing the earth with the toe was precisely this matter." In terms of this mutual identity, the meaning belongs to the horizontal. If considered in terms of mutual containment, the Jingming ji says: "Since one land contains all lands, this realm fully contains the lower two. By this analogy of the superior containing the inferior, the land is also horizontal." Second, divided in relation to the teachings: the Miaole ji says: "Horizontally discussing the substance of the land corresponds to the teachings. Vertically discussing with respect to the land uses the teachings in greater or lesser extent." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.142.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142.2) - [Next: 7.142.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142.4) - [Up: 7.142](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131~en-mt.7.142.3) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.7.142.3) · Pramāṇa