Chinese
文。不历四教一一三结。总以四教共为三结。以三对一三复为别。人不见之。便以又以之言凭兹别立。深不可也。问两种顿位同异云何。答住前则别登住则同。喻曰。凡列位者皆须准教及以古师。一家立位唯分四别。一期教迹因果显著。有始有终莫过此四。三藏则四果支佛百劫僧祇。通教则三乘共位及名别义通别圆并立五十二位。但行有赊促断伏不同。圆依法华更加五品。一家所用诸部咸然。辄不曾闻两顿之位。已如前破。问何故分别立。二顿耶。答由根利钝立二不同。喻曰。自昔承禀一圆家教法。不见二顿而分两根。处处文中但云华严兼于利钝。利则圆教钝则别人。或一一教中而分三根。或信法二行以分利钝。是则教教部部无不皆然。来至法华同入一实。无容开会同一根性。仍称为钝。覆权隐迹有钝有利。而名为利。深不可也。问方等中四渐中开四。两四中圆为何同异。答但是四。教中圆皆是渐圆。喻曰。此师不识渐教之义。是故不知方等只是渐中之一。谓言渐教与方等殊。即便答云。但是四教皆名为渐。若知不别云何便答。但是之言借使法华会前四教中圆。皆名渐圆。法华开权独显一圆。何故仍立渐圆之称。若尔但识四教从渐之言。不了法华开废等意。因兹暗立渐顿之言。问涅槃中圆复何差别。答亦是渐圆。喻曰 。若如所判。始自鹿苑终至涅槃。一概渐圆。玄文何故若破光宅。光宅仍以法华异昔。引昔通谩尚乃破之。此师禀受山门。翻更不如光宅。应云涅槃虽四前三知圆。方等虽四三不入实。渐中开四不殊方等。诸文盛说何足复疑。依彼所论涅槃圆伊便成无用。复有一行乃是徒设。问涅槃四教俱入圆不。答有不入者。十仙外道即是其流。喻曰。徒闻涅槃入实之言。不晓捃拾得入之意。若十仙不入三修岂闻。初后俱无。中间宁入。十仙不入。世尊何故为其说常。破云。汝外道中因虽是常而果无常。我佛法中因是无常而果是常。乃至陈如色常受想行识常。余诸外道大意皆尔。如何谬判以为无常。易见之文尚谬。况复难见耶。问止观第一卷后多种譬文。如迦陵频伽声。捣万种为丸。在大海浴。阿伽陀药等为喻何顿。答并是渐顿。何以故。犹在㲉中。万种须捣。须待诸水入于大海。合诸药为阿伽陀。故是渐顿。若不出㲉。诸水是海。不捣万种。不合为药。任运自具方是顿顿。喻曰。此中二失。一者不晓喻旨。二者违于自言。不晓喻者。夫言喻者但约少分。故大经云。不可以喻喻真解脱。如雪山类象。岂可求其尾牙。举扇喻月。岂可求其光挂。况本文意。意在一法。具是诸法。取现见者以之为喻。未入海诸水不具。未捣为丸众气不足。 若如所判，始自鹿苑（Sārnāth，佛陀初转法轮之地）终至涅槃（Nirvana，佛教术语，指解脱生死轮回的境界），一概渐圆。玄文何故若破光宅（隋代僧人，精研佛学）？光宅仍以法华（《妙法莲华经》的简称）异昔，引昔通谩尚乃破之。此师禀受山门，翻更不如光宅。应云涅槃虽四前三知圆，方等（佛教经典，宣讲空性）虽四三不入实。渐中开四不殊方等，诸文盛说何足复疑。依彼所论，涅槃圆伊便成无用，复有一行乃是徒设。问：涅槃四教俱入圆不？答：有不入者，十仙外道即是其流。喻曰：徒闻涅槃入实之言，不晓捃拾得入之意。若十仙不入，三修岂闻？初后俱无，中间宁入？十仙不入，世尊何故为其说常？破云：汝外道中因虽是常而果无常，我佛法中因是无常而果是常。乃至陈如（Kaundinya，佛陀最早的五位弟子之一）色常受想行识常，余诸外道大意皆尔。如何谬判以为无常？易见之文尚谬，况复难见耶？问：止观（佛教禅修方法）第一卷后多种譬文，如迦陵频伽（Kalavinka，一种美妙的鸟）声，捣万种为丸，在大海浴，阿伽陀药（Agada，万能药）等为喻何顿？答：并是渐顿。何以故？犹在㲉中，万种须捣，须待诸水入于大海，合诸药为阿伽陀，故是渐顿。若不出㲉，诸水是海，不捣万种，不合为药，任运自具方是顿顿。喻曰：此中二失，一者不晓喻旨，二者违于自言。不晓喻者，夫言喻者但约少分，故大经云：‘不可以喻喻真解脱。’如雪山类象，岂可求其尾牙？举扇喻月，岂可求其光挂？况本文意，意在一法，具是诸法，取现见者以之为喻。未入海诸水不具，未捣为丸众气不足。 如果像你所判断的那样，从鹿野苑（佛陀初次说法的地方）开始，到涅槃（佛教的最高境界）结束，一切都是逐渐圆满的。那么，玄文为什么还要像批评光宅（一位精通佛学的僧人）那样去破斥呢？光宅仍然认为《法华经》（一部重要的佛教经典）与以往不同，引用过去的说法来随意解释，甚至加以否定。这位法师接受了山门的教义，反而不如光宅。应该说，虽然《涅槃经》中四教的前三种教义已经知道是圆满的，但《方等经》（宣讲空性的经典）中的四种教义，有三种没有进入真实的境界。在渐教中开显的四种教义与《方等经》并没有什么不同，各种经典中都有详细的说明，还有什么值得怀疑的呢？如果按照他的说法，《涅槃经》的圆满教义就变得没有用了，而且还有一种修行也是白费力气。问：涅槃经中的四教都进入圆教了吗？答：有不进入的，十仙外道就是其中的一类。比喻说：只是听说了涅槃进入真实境界的说法，却不明白收集积累才能进入的道理。如果十仙不进入，那么三修（戒定慧）又怎么能听到呢？开始和最后都没有，中间又怎么能进入呢？十仙不进入，世尊为什么还要为他们说常呢？反驳说：你们外道中，因虽然是常，但果却是无常；我们佛法中，因虽然是无常，但果却是常。甚至陈如（佛陀最早的弟子之一）的色受想行识都是常，其他外道的大意也都是这样。怎么能错误地判断为无常呢？容易理解的文字尚且理解错误，更何况是难以理解的呢？问：《止观》（一种禅修方法）第一卷后面有很多比喻，比如迦陵频伽（一种美妙的鸟）的声音，捣碎各种东西做成药丸，在大海中沐浴，阿伽陀药（一种万能药）等等，这些比喻为什么是渐顿呢？答：都是渐顿。为什么呢？因为还在蛋壳里，各种东西需要捣碎，需要等待各种水流入大海，各种药物混合成阿伽陀药，所以是渐顿。如果不在蛋壳里，各种水就是大海，不用捣碎各种东西，不用混合成药物，自然具备才是顿顿。比喻说：这里有两个错误，一是不能理解比喻的含义，二是违背了自己的说法。不能理解比喻的含义，是因为比喻只是取其少部分，所以《大涅槃经》说：‘不能用比喻来比喻真正的解脱。’就像用雪山来比喻大象，难道可以寻找它的尾巴和牙齿吗？用扇子来比喻月亮，难道可以寻找它的光芒吗？况且本文的意思，意在一种法，具备所有的法，选取现在能看到的来作为比喻。没有进入大海的各种水是不完备的，没有捣碎成药丸的各种气息是不充足的。
English
If it is as you judge, from the Deer Park (Sārnāth, where the Buddha first turned the Wheel of Dharma) to Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term referring to the state of liberation from the cycle of birth and death), everything is gradually perfected. Why does Xuan Wen criticize Guang Zhai (a monk of the Sui Dynasty who was proficient in Buddhist studies) as if to refute him? Guang Zhai still considers the *Lotus Sutra* (the short name of *The Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra*) different from the past, using past statements to interpret arbitrarily and even deny it. This teacher, who received the teachings of the mountain gate, is even inferior to Guang Zhai. It should be said that although the first three of the four teachings in the *Nirvana Sutra* are known to be complete, three of the four teachings in the *Vaipulya Sutra* (Buddhist scriptures expounding emptiness) do not enter the realm of reality. The four teachings revealed in the gradual teaching are no different from the *Vaipulya Sutra*. There are detailed explanations in various scriptures, so what is there to doubt? According to his argument, the complete teaching of the *Nirvana Sutra* becomes useless, and one practice is in vain. Question: Do all four teachings in the *Nirvana Sutra* enter the complete teaching? Answer: There are those who do not enter, and the ten celestial heretics are one of them. It is like saying: They only hear the saying that Nirvana enters the realm of reality, but do not understand the principle of accumulating and gathering to enter. If the ten celestial beings do not enter, how can they hear the three trainings (sila, samadhi, prajna)? There is nothing at the beginning and the end, so how can they enter in the middle? If the ten celestial beings do not enter, why did the World Honored One speak of permanence for them? Refuting, it says: In your heretical ways, although the cause is permanent, the result is impermanent; in our Buddha-dharma, although the cause is impermanent, the result is permanent. Even Kaundinya's (Kaundinya, one of the Buddha's earliest five disciples) form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness are permanent, and the general idea of other heretics is the same. How can it be wrongly judged as impermanent? Even easily understood texts are misunderstood, let alone those that are difficult to understand? Question: There are many metaphors after the first volume of *Stopping and Contemplation* (a Buddhist meditation method), such as the sound of the Kalavinka (a beautiful bird), grinding ten thousand kinds of things into pills, bathing in the great sea, Agada medicine (Agada, a panacea), etc. Why are these metaphors gradual and sudden? Answer: They are both gradual and sudden. Why? Because they are still in the eggshell, ten thousand kinds of things need to be ground, and one needs to wait for all the waters to flow into the great sea, and all the medicines to be mixed into Agada medicine, so it is gradual and sudden. If it is not in the eggshell, all the waters are the sea, there is no need to grind ten thousand kinds of things, and there is no need to mix them into medicine, and naturally possessing them is sudden and sudden. It is like saying: There are two mistakes here, one is not understanding the meaning of the metaphor, and the other is violating one's own words. Not understanding the meaning of the metaphor is because the metaphor only takes a small part of it, so the *Great Nirvana Sutra* says: 'One cannot use a metaphor to describe true liberation.' Just like using a snow mountain to describe an elephant, how can one look for its tail and teeth? Using a fan to describe the moon, how can one look for its light? Moreover, the meaning of this text is in one dharma, which possesses all dharmas, and takes what is visible now as a metaphor. The various waters that have not entered the sea are incomplete, and the various essences that have not been ground into pills are insufficient. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
自余诸鸟㲉中不鸣。余药虽合治病不遍。故用此等以为顿喻。如何破喻而为渐圆。养子不肖过而难他喻。即其事也。二违自言者。自立大意以为顿顿。此等喻文皆在大意。如何自斥以为渐圆。问第一卷中实非父子两谓路人。此喻何等。答实非骨肉是前两教。两谓路人是后两教。喻曰。此深不见文中喻意。文以界内界外各有一理。理各两教以为能诠。并用四谛以为迷解文中自合。瞋以譬集。打譬苦。若两谓父子瞋打薄者。以譬直教。两谓路人瞋打厚者以喻纡回。此谓道谛智解不同。故使灭谛即离亦别。若即解者苦集即理。如路人为父子。若离解者苦集异理。如父子为路人。当知实非骨肉两谓路人。但约拙教一离义尔。亦阙分判界内外。是何等拙而便跨节以为四教。具如止观记中释。问渐之与别为同为异。答此二不同。渐则开四。别不开四。喻曰。既其不识渐教开四。徒与别教辨异何益。今言渐别皆应开四者两文不同。渐教开四已如前说。别开四者具如别教四弘之中。约四谛境皆历四教。但须委知开四所以。然于别人。自行化他未必全立四教之名。但云界内界外曲直巧拙。自行则次第竖入。化他则随缘横被。被机虽横行终成竖。自行虽竖遍学成横。如初入空偏用析体。以破见思。仍是偏用一门自行。若至十行为利他故。方 现代汉语译本 自从其余的鸟类之中不再鸣叫，其余的药物即使混合也无法普遍地治疗疾病。所以用这些来作为顿悟的比喻。如何破除顿悟的比喻而成为渐悟圆融呢？养育不孝顺的儿子，过错难以用其他比喻来形容，这就是这件事本身。 ‘二违自言’是指：自己树立大意认为是顿悟，这些比喻的文字都在大意之中，如何自己否定自己而认为是渐悟圆融呢？ 问：第一卷中‘实非父子’和‘两谓路人’的比喻是什么意思？ 答：‘实非骨肉’比喻前两教，‘两谓路人’比喻后两教。比喻说：这是深深地没有看见文中的比喻意义。文中的意思是界内和界外各有其道理，道理各有两教作为能诠释的，并且用四谛来作为迷和解，文中自然会合。嗔怒譬喻集谛，打譬喻苦谛。如果‘两谓父子’，嗔怒和打骂轻微，就譬喻直教；‘两谓路人’，嗔怒和打骂严重，就譬喻迂回。这是说道谛的智慧理解不同，所以使得灭谛的证离也有差别。如果理解是相同的，苦集就是真理，如同路人变为父子；如果理解是不同的，苦集就是不同的真理，如同父子变为路人。应当知道‘实非骨肉’和‘两谓路人’，只是就拙教的一种离义而言。也缺少分判界内和界外。这是什么样的拙劣，竟然跨越阶段而认为是四教？具体如《止观记》中的解释。 问：渐教和别教是相同还是不同？ 答：这二者不同。渐教开显四教，别教不开显四教。比喻说：既然不认识渐教开显四教，徒劳地与别教辨别差异有什么用？现在说渐教和别教都应该开显四教，这两种说法不同。渐教开显四教已经如前面所说。别教开显四教，具体如别教的四弘誓愿之中，就四谛的境界来说，都经历四教。但必须详细地知道开显四教的原因。然而对于别人，自行化他未必完全建立四教的名称，只是说界内界外、曲直巧拙。自行则是次第竖入，化他则是随缘横被。被机虽然是横的，最终成就的还是竖的。自行虽然是竖的，普遍学习就成为横的。如初入空，偏用析体，以破除见思惑，仍然是偏用一门自行。如果到了十行位，为了利益他人，才...