金剛般若經旨贊 2.61

2.61

This means that although at the time of realizing the fruit one does not abide in the path of verbal discourse, the path of verbal discourse can nevertheless serve as the cause for attaining the fruit of buddhahood. This is because the Buddhas possess four kinds of true wisdom, and they speak according to truth without falsehood. As for “one who speaks the truth [zhen]”: it speaks generally of conventional truth to reveal that worldly truth is of false and deceptive marks, and only cultivating true wisdom is real. As for “one who speaks the real [shi]”: it speaks specifically of conventional truth, referring to expounding the practices of the Four Noble Truths of the Hīnayāna: that suffering and origin are practices of defilement, and that cessation and path are practices of purity. As for “one who speaks thusness [ru]”: it speaks generally of ultimate truth, referring to the ultimate truth of the selflessness of phenomena, because it expounds the equal Dharma of the Mahāyāna. As for “one who speaks without divergence [buyi]”: it speaks specifically of ultimate truth, giving prophecies across the three times of the fruits obtained by cultivating practice based on the truth, prophesying the practices of abiding and non-abiding and whether the future fruits are pure or not pure. If one does not explain it in this way, the two treatises would contradict each other. For someone to be considered an authority, how could one fail to harmonize them? The phrase “one who does not deceive [bukuang]” was falsely added by the translator; neither the treatise nor other sūtras mention it. Therefore, Vasubandhu’s treatise gives a verse, saying: