English
English version: This refers to the Wonderful Contemplation (妙观) and the aspect of Accomplished Contemplation (观成相). Regarding the four realms of reliance (依等四) – taking one realm as the object, all are contemplated with the perfect and harmonious Three Contemplations (圆融三观). Since this contemplation is wonderful, it causes the defiled substance of the skandhas (阴), entrances (入), etc., to be extinguished and purified. That is, the previous dependent (依正) and retributive realms (等) entirely become the wonderful substance, the one real and perfect principle (一实圆理), hence the saying 'substance is extinguished' (体绝) and 'one reality' (一实), etc. Since the contemplated realm of the skandhas is extinguished, the contemplating Wonderful Contemplation is also tranquil. Then, the illness is gone and the medicine is no more, both the contemplator and the contemplated are doubly extinguished, hence the saying 'no emptiness, provisionality, or middle' (无空假中). At the place of double extinction, the perfect and wonderful Three Thousand Realms (三千) manifest simultaneously, suddenly all are truly pure. All dharmas are real, hence 'true' (真), all are free from defilement and obstruction, hence 'pure' (净), hence the saying 'clearly' (宛然), etc. Thus, all sentient beings are the substance of Vairocana (毗卢体), all lands are the Land of Eternal Tranquil Light (常寂光), what fixed dharmas are there called three, five, seven, nine, and purity, impurity, evil, and righteousness? Hence the saying 'no more to differing categories' (无复至差品也). And those Three Thousand Realms perfectly interpenetrate each other, like the net of Indra (因陀罗网), ultimately they will clearly manifest themselves, which is the aspect of the external contemplation's accomplishment. From the stage of contemplative practice (观行) upwards to Wonderful Enlightenment (妙觉), each stage is nothing other than such manifestation. If it were not so, how could it be said that the initial aspiration and the ultimate enlightenment are not different? Someone asks: 'Others say that the old version does not have the two words 'two provisionalities' (两假), but only says 'is emptiness, is the middle' (即空即中). Because emptiness is wonderful, it is said that emptiness is used to eliminate the provisionality of the dependent and retributive realms. How can this version arbitrarily add them?' The answer: 'Even if one wants to rely on the old version, the meaning is incomplete. It must be that the readers of the past were not familiar with the realms and contemplations, so they arbitrarily altered and deleted them. Moreover, the text indicates that the contemplated realms have inner and outer aspects. How can the realms of dependent and retributive realms, form and mind, skandhas, and entrances be regarded as provisional contemplation? Searching throughout the meaning of Jingxi (荆溪), this contemplation must not be missing. Why? For example, the 'Stopping and Observing' (止观) in the section on breaking the provisionality of thought (破思假文) says 'conditioned dharmas are emptiness, are the middle' (因缘生法即空即中). The 'Supplementing Conduct' (辅行) explains, 'Let us temporarily use the emptiness of dharma-nature to counter the illusory provisionality, in fact, the illusory provisionality is the inconceivable provisionality.' Since it says 'temporarily' (且以), we know that it does not exhaust the truth; it must be the wonderful provisionality, hence it says 'in fact' (其实). The text does not say 'is provisionality' (即假), yet one still wants to add it according to the meaning, how could one's own writing especially omit it? Moreover, they say that conditioned dharmas have the meaning of illusory provisionality, now it directly says dependent and retributive realms, etc., which have not yet become illusory provisionality, let alone wonderful provisionality! Also, the --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
一记中释十二入各具千如中云，境据假边，且存其数。空中尚无，其数安在？然必约假以立空中，此虽将境为假，然与今文不同。何者？彼约十二入各具千如为境，即已成不思议假，故非此例。恐未解者以此为据，故粗引之，仍出其意。又上若不立假观，下何亡之而云无空假中邪？又若更云空中兼上依正俱亡，故云无空假中者，文已自云色心体绝，何系重乎？若以色心体绝亡所观阴境，无空假中泯能观妙观，则无是过也。又准内体三千即空假中，三千已是妙境犹尚更立三观，今但云依正等，未结成妙境，那便略慈假观邪？” 问：“前门心之色心云是三千妙体，今云依正色心，何非妙境？” 答：“上云心之色心，即刹那念本具七科色心，此非妙境更指何邪？今但云依正等，乃是直论外阴入界，故不例上。” 问：“既将佛法众生法为外境，佛已离阴，何得皆是阴入邪？” 答：“修观行者外境未亡已来，见有他佛，故《起信论》云‘以依转识故说为境界’，则知过在于我，何关佛邪！然且置所定之文，试论能定之义，还合一家教宗不？只如他于谕迷显正决中，指色心门为外境者，岂可内境离色心门邪？又解外观成相豁同真净文，云同者似也，乃似其分真即六根净也，岂外观功能止齐相似？ 现代汉语译本： 有人引用《一记》中解释十二入（十二入：佛教术语，指眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意六根及其所对的色、声、香、味、触、法六境）各具千如（千如：指事物具有的多种属性和可能性）的说法，认为境是建立在假的基础上，所以暂时保留其数量。既然空中什么都没有，那数量又在哪里呢？然而，必须依靠假才能建立空中的概念，这虽然是将境视为假，但与现在的文章不同。为什么呢？因为《一记》中是基于十二入各具千如作为境，这已经构成了一种不可思议的假，所以不能作为此处的例子。恐怕有人不理解，以此作为依据，所以粗略地引用一下，仍然是出于其本意。而且，如果上面不建立假观，下面又如何舍弃它而说没有空、假、中呢？如果又说空中连同上面的依报（依报：指众生所居住的环境）和正报（正报：指众生的身心）都消失了，所以说没有空、假、中，那么文章已经自己说了色心体绝，又有什么关系呢？如果认为色心体绝是舍弃所观的阴境，没有空、假、中是泯灭能观的妙观，那就没有这个过失了。而且，按照内体三千（三千：指一念心中具足三千世界）就是空、假、中的说法，三千已经是妙境了，仍然还要建立三观，现在只是说依报和正报等，还没有构成妙境，怎么就省略了慈悲的假观呢？’ 问：‘前面说心之色心是三千妙体，现在说依报和正报的色心，为什么不是妙境呢？’ 答：‘上面说的心之色心，是指刹那念头本来就具有七科（七科：指地、水、火、风、空、识、根）色心，如果这不是妙境，还能指什么呢？现在只是说依报和正报等，是直接讨论外在的阴、入、界（阴、入、界：佛教用语，指构成世界的要素），所以不能和上面相提并论。’ 问：‘既然将佛法和众生法作为外境，佛已经脱离了阴，为什么都还是阴入呢？’ 答：‘修观行的人在外境没有消失之前，会看到其他的佛，所以《起信论》（《起信论》：指《大乘起信论》）说‘因为依于转识的缘故，所以说为境界’，那么就知道过错在于我们自己，和佛有什么关系呢！而且先放下所确定的文字，试着讨论能确定的意义，还符合一家（一家：指某个宗派）的教义吗？就像他在《谕迷显正决》中，将色心门（色心门：指色法和心法）指为外境，难道内境可以离开色心门吗？又解释外观成就相貌，豁然开朗如同真净的文章，说‘同’是相似的意思，是相似于分真即六根清净，难道外观的功能仅仅达到相似的程度吗？’
English
English version: Someone quoted the explanation in 'Yi Ji' regarding the twelve entrances (twelve entrances: Buddhist term referring to the six sense organs - eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, mind - and their corresponding six sense objects - form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma) each possessing a thousand suchnesses (thousand suchnesses: referring to the multiple attributes and possibilities of things), arguing that the realm is based on the provisional, so temporarily retain its number. Since there is nothing in emptiness, where does the number exist? However, it is necessary to rely on the provisional to establish the concept of emptiness. Although this regards the realm as provisional, it is different from the current text. Why? Because in 'Yi Ji', it is based on the twelve entrances each possessing a thousand suchnesses as the realm, which already constitutes an inconceivable provisional, so it cannot be used as an example here. Fearing that some may misunderstand and use this as a basis, I briefly quote it, still out of its original intention. Moreover, if the provisional contemplation is not established above, how can it be abandoned below and say there is no emptiness, provisional, or middle? If it is further said that emptiness, along with the dependent (dependent: referring to the environment in which beings live) and principal (principal: referring to the body and mind of beings) retributions above, have disappeared, so it is said there is no emptiness, provisional, or middle, then the text has already stated that the essence of form and mind is extinguished, so what is the relationship? If it is thought that the extinction of the essence of form and mind is the abandonment of the realm of the skandhas (skandhas: aggregates of existence) being contemplated, and the absence of emptiness, provisional, and middle is the annihilation of the wonderful contemplation that can contemplate, then there is no fault. Moreover, according to the saying that the inner essence of three thousand (three thousand: referring to the three thousand worlds inherent in a single thought) is emptiness, provisional, and middle, the three thousand is already a wonderful realm, and yet three contemplations still need to be established. Now it only says dependent and principal retributions, etc., which have not yet formed a wonderful realm, so how can the compassionate provisional contemplation be omitted?' Question: 'Earlier it was said that the form and mind of the mind are the wonderful essence of three thousand, now it is said that the form and mind of dependent and principal retributions, why is it not a wonderful realm?' Answer: 'The form and mind of the mind mentioned above refers to the seven categories (seven categories: referring to earth, water, fire, wind, space, consciousness, and root) of form and mind that are inherent in a momentary thought. If this is not a wonderful realm, what else can it refer to? Now it only says dependent and principal retributions, etc., which is a direct discussion of the external skandhas, entrances, and realms (skandhas, entrances, and realms: Buddhist terms referring to the elements that constitute the world), so it cannot be compared to the above.' Question: 'Since the Buddha-dharma and the dharma of sentient beings are taken as external realms, and the Buddha has already transcended the skandhas, why are they all still skandhas and entrances?' Answer: 'Those who practice contemplation will see other Buddhas before the external realm disappears, so the 'Awakening of Faith' (Awakening of Faith: referring to the 'Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana') says 'Because it relies on the transformation of consciousness, it is said to be a realm', then it is known that the fault lies in ourselves, what does it have to do with the Buddha! Moreover, let us first put aside the determined text and try to discuss the meaning that can be determined, does it still conform to the teachings of one's own school (one's own school: referring to a particular sect)? Just like in his 'Exhortation to Dispel Confusion and Reveal the Correct', he refers to the gate of form and mind (gate of form and mind: referring to form and mental phenomena) as the external realm, can the internal realm be separated from the gate of form and mind? Also, explaining that the appearance of external contemplation is enlightened and the same as the true pure text, saying 'same' means similar, it is similar to the partial truth, which is the purification of the six sense organs, does the function of external contemplation only reach the level of similarity?' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------