淨名經集解關中疏 1.395

1.395

若須菩提。不見佛不聞法　此下三明邪正等文三。初總明背正。次別明同邪。後結令取食。此初也。肇曰。猶誨以平等也。夫願能齊。是非一好醜者。雖復上同如來不以為尊。下等六師不以為卑。何則天地一指萬物一觀。邪正雖殊其性不二。豈有如來獨尊而六師獨卑。若同彼六師不見佛不聞法。因其出家隨其所墮而不以為異者。乃可取食也。蓋窮理盡性極無方之說也。善惡反論而不為其常。邪正同辯而不衰其真。斯可謂乎平等正化莫二三道乎。天台意云。已前證真故可食。此敬田也。此下為同惡故食即悲田也。

"'If, Subhūti, you do not see the Buddha and do not hear the Dharma," Below, the third clarifies the equality of heterodoxy and orthodoxy, in three parts: first, generally clarifying turning one's back on orthodoxy; next, specifically clarifying agreeing with heterodoxy; finally, concluding by enjoining him to take the food. This is the first. Sengzhao says: This is still instructing with equality. One whose vows can level [all things], making right and wrong, good and ugly into one: though associating above with the Tathāgata, he does not consider him elevated; though equal below with the six teachers, he does not consider them lowly. Why? Heaven and earth are a single finger; the ten thousand things are a single view. Though heterodoxy and orthodoxy differ, their nature is non-dual. How could the Tathāgata alone be noble while the six teachers alone are base? If one is identical to those six teachers, neither seeing the Buddha nor hearing the Dharma, going forth from household life under them and falling wherever they fall without regarding it as different, only then may one take the food. This indeed expresses the discourse that exhausts principle and nature to the utmost limits of boundlessness. Right and wrong are paradoxically argued without being ordinary; heterodoxy and orthodoxy are identically discerned without degrading their reality. Can this not be called equal, correct conversion, with no second or third paths? Tiantai's intent says: Previously, because of realizing reality, one may take food—this is the field of respect. Below, because of being identical with evil, eating is the field of compassion.