Chinese
又解内观，先了外色心一念无念，谓外境亡，唯内体三千即空假中，谓内体显，既全不约解行分文，先了之言乃是牒前外观，内体已下方观于内，是则六根净后方修内观，则识阴十乘初心绝分。又若谓外境亡时内体必显者，则唯有外观不须观内，又成内观初心后心皆不修也。此等相违，请当宗匠者观之，还可将此见解定教文之是非乎？或须云终日炳然，有何损益而苦诤之？境观乖失而全不知，况依正本融、迷情强隔，观成情遣且云不见，尘去鉴净、现像非磨，故云终自炳然。此则自胜于日，他莫知之。” 问：“染净不二门云，照故三千常具，遮故法尔空中。又云，亡净秽故以空以中。又《义例》云：‘观此一运即具十界百界千如，即空即中。’此文何须添假字邪？” 答：“因徴彼文，验知旧本是往人改削。何者？若不解彼之文意，须据彼文除今假字。今人既然，往人亦尔，不足疑也。呜呼！不解境观以至于斯。且如染净门云，故须初心而遮而照，照故三千常具，遮故法尔空中，盖三观相成也。既云照故三千常具，照是观不？三千是妙假不？既不可单修假观，遂须空中成之，故云遮故法尔空中。因兹遮照，妙用现前，故云遍应无方。既以妙假历于净秽，复须空中亡之，故云亡净秽故以空以中。《义例》 现代汉语译本： 还有一种对内观的解释，先要了解外在的色和心，达到一念不生的状态，意思是外在的境界消失了，只有内在的本体，即空、假、中三谛，意思是内在的本体显现了。这完全不按照理解和实践来划分，一开始说的‘先了解’，是承接前面的外观。‘内体已下’，是说在外观之后才修内观。如果这样，那么六根清净之后才修内观，那么识阴十乘的初心就没有份了。又如果说外境消失的时候内体必然显现，那么只需要外观，不需要观内，又变成了内观的初心和后心都不需要修了。这些互相矛盾的地方，请各位宗师仔细观察，还可以用这种见解来判断佛教经文的是非吗？或者需要说‘终日光明，有什么损失或增益而要如此争论呢？’境界和观法乖离而完全不知道，更何况是依据正本融通、迷情强行隔断，观修成就情执消除了却说没看见，尘埃去除镜子干净了、显现的形象不是磨出来的，所以说‘终究是自己光明’。这就像自己胜过太阳，别人不知道。” 有人问：‘染净不二门’中说，‘照故三千常具（照了的缘故，三千世界本来就具备），遮故法尔空中（遮止的缘故，本来就是空性）。’又说，‘亡净秽故以空以中（因为要去除清净和污秽的缘故，用空和中）。’又《义例》中说：‘观察这一念就具备十界百界千如（十法界、百法界、千如是），即空即中。’这段文字为什么需要添加‘假’字呢？” 回答说：‘因为引用那段文字，验证得知旧的版本是被前人修改过的。为什么呢？如果不理解那段文字的意思，就应该按照那段文字去除现在的‘假’字。现在的人既然这样做了，以前的人也一样，不足为怪。’唉！不理解境界和观法以至于这样。比如‘染净门’中说，所以需要初心时而遮止时而照了，照了的缘故三千世界本来就具备，遮止的缘故本来就是空性，这是三观互相成就。既然说照了的缘故三千世界本来就具备，这个‘照’是观吗？三千是妙假吗？既然不可以单独修假观，于是需要用空观来成就它，所以说遮止的缘故本来就是空性。因为这个遮止和照了，妙用显现，所以说普遍应合没有方所。既然用妙假来经历清净和污秽，又需要用空观来去除它，所以说去除清净和污秽的缘故用空和中。《义例》
English
English version: Furthermore, there is an explanation of inner contemplation (内观, nèi guān), which begins with understanding that external forms (色, sè) and mind (心, xīn) reach a state of no-thought (无念, wú niàn). This means that the external realm vanishes, leaving only the inner essence, which is the threefold truth of emptiness (空, kōng), provisional existence (假, jiǎ), and the middle way (中, zhōng). This signifies that the inner essence becomes manifest. This does not follow the division of understanding and practice. The initial statement 'first understand' refers back to the preceding external contemplation. 'Inner essence below' means that inner contemplation is practiced after external contemplation. If this is the case, then inner contemplation is practiced only after the six senses (六根, liù gēn) are purified, and the initial intention of the ten vehicles of consciousness (识阴十乘, shí yīn shí shèng) has no part. Furthermore, if it is said that when the external realm vanishes, the inner essence necessarily appears, then only external contemplation is needed, and there is no need for inner contemplation. This would mean that neither the initial nor the subsequent stages of inner contemplation need to be practiced. These are contradictory points. Let the masters of this school observe them carefully. Can this view be used to determine the correctness of Buddhist scriptures? Or should it be said, 'It is always bright, what loss or gain is there to argue about?' The realm and the contemplation are misaligned, and this is not known at all. Moreover, it is based on the original text being integrated, while deluded emotions are forcibly separated. Contemplation is accomplished, and emotional attachments are eliminated, yet it is said that nothing is seen. Dust is removed, and the mirror is clear; the appearing images are not polished away. Therefore, it is said, 'Ultimately, it is bright of itself.' This is like oneself surpassing the sun, which others do not know. Someone asks: In the 'Gate of Non-Duality of Purity and Impurity' (染净不二门, rǎn jìng bù èr mén), it says, 'Because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete (照故三千常具, zhào gù sānqiān cháng jù); because of cessation, they are inherently empty (遮故法尔空中, zhē gù fǎ ěr kōng zhōng).' It also says, 'Because of eliminating purity and defilement, use emptiness and the middle way (亡净秽故以空以中, wáng jìng huì gù yǐ kōng yǐ zhōng).' Furthermore, the 'Meaning and Examples' (义例, yì lì) says: 'Contemplating this one thought contains the ten realms, the hundred realms, and the thousand suchnesses (观此一运即具十界百界千如, guān cǐ yī yùn jí jù shí jiè bǎi jiè qiān rú), which are emptiness and the middle way.' Why is it necessary to add the word 'provisional' (假, jiǎ) to this passage?' The answer is: 'Because of quoting that passage, verification reveals that the old version was altered by previous people. Why? If one does not understand the meaning of that passage, one should follow that passage and remove the current word 'provisional'. Since people today do this, people in the past did the same, there is no need to be surprised.' Alas! Not understanding the realm and contemplation leads to this. For example, the 'Gate of Purity and Impurity' says, therefore, it is necessary to both cease and illuminate at the initial intention. Because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete; because of cessation, they are inherently empty. This is the mutual accomplishment of the three contemplations. Since it says that because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete, is this 'illumination' contemplation? Are the three thousand realms wondrous provisional existences? Since one cannot practice provisional contemplation alone, one must use emptiness contemplation to accomplish it. Therefore, it says that because of cessation, they are inherently empty. Because of this cessation and illumination, wondrous functions manifest, therefore, it says that it universally corresponds without direction. Since wondrous provisional existences are experienced in purity and defilement, one must use emptiness contemplation to eliminate them. Therefore, it says that because of eliminating purity and defilement, use emptiness and the middle way. The 'Meaning and Examples' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
照此一运即具十界百界千如者，即于内心唯识之境，用不思议假观照之，方显百界千如，仍须遮之，故云即空即中，正是三观相成；则与染净门中观相恰同也。故彼三文有，即是剩；此文无，即是欠。何者？今文标云，凡所观境不出内外，即云外谓托彼依正色心，既无心具及百界等言，未成妙境，又无观照之义，因何便云是假观邪？党理之者见斯晓谕，更何由执？” 二、所言下，明内境观相者。先了等者，初心行人欲依内心修观，先须妙解了达外法唯一念造，此能造念本无念性，能造既无所造安有？外法既虚，唯有内体三千实性，如是解已，方依内心修乎三观，故内体二字亦事理双举。内即内心，随缘义故，对外立也；体即是性，不变义故，非内外也。故《义例》云：“修观次第必先内心。”乃至云“又亦亦先了诸法唯心方可观心。”又彼文云：“唯于万境观一心故知”，若无此解，如何知心具足诸法？若不知具但直观心，何殊藏、通？藏、通何曾不云观心？纵知心体是中，若不云具，未异别教教道也。故《止观》先开六科妙解然始正修，观心之义如是。如何释云，先修外观至六根净方修内观邪？又此内观含于唯识、实相两观之义，学者寻之。 问：“外观何不先明解了，而直修三观邪？” 答 现代汉语译本： 一、如果按照这种方式运作，就能立即具备十法界、百法界、千如是（十界：地狱、饿鬼、畜生、阿修罗、人、天、声闻、缘觉、菩萨、佛；百界千如：每一界又包含十界，每一界都具备如是相、如是性、如是体、如是力、如是作、如是因、如是缘、如是果、如是报、如是本末究竟等十如是），那就是在内心唯识的境界中，用不可思议的假观来观照它，才能显现百界千如。但仍然需要遮遣它，所以说‘即空即假即中’，这正是空、假、中三观相互成就。那么，这和染净门中的观想就完全相同了。所以，那三段文字有这些内容，就是多余的；这段文字没有这些内容，就是欠缺的。为什么呢？因为这段文字标明说，凡所观的境界，都不超出内外。所谓‘外’，是指依托于外在的依报和正报的色法和心法，既然没有‘心具’以及‘百界’等说法，就没有成就妙境；又没有观照的意义，凭什么就说是假观呢？赞同这种道理的人，见到这个晓谕，更有什么理由可以固执己见呢？ 二、下面所说的，是说明内境的观想。首先要了解等等，是指初学修观的人，想要依靠内心来修观，首先必须巧妙地理解和通达外在的法，都是由唯一的心念所造。这个能造的心念，本来就没有念的自性。能造既然没有，所造的又怎么会有呢？外在的法既然是虚幻的，就只有内在的本体三千实性。像这样理解之后，才能依靠内心来修习空、假、中三观。所以，‘内体’这两个字，也是事和理双重并举。‘内’就是内心，是随顺因缘的意义，是相对于外在而说的；‘体’就是自性，是不变的意义，不是内外所能概括的。所以，《义例》中说：‘修观的次第，必须先从内心开始。’乃至说‘又必须先了解诸法唯心，才可以观心。’又那段文字说：‘因为只在万境中观一心，’要知道，如果没有这种理解，怎么知道心具足诸法呢？如果不知道心具足诸法，只是直接观心，那和藏教、通教有什么区别呢？藏教、通教难道不也说观心吗？纵然知道心体是中道，如果不说心具足诸法，那就和别教的教道没有什么区别。所以，《止观》首先开示六科妙解，然后才正式修习。观心的意义就是这样。怎么能解释成，先修外观，直到六根清净，才修内观呢？而且，这个内观包含了唯识观和实相观的意义，学者可以自己去探寻。 问：为什么外观不先说明了解，而直接修习三观呢？ 答：
English
English version: 1. If one operates in this way, one immediately possesses the ten realms, the hundred realms, and the thousand suchnesses (Ten realms: hell, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, heavens, sravakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, Buddhas; Hundred realms and thousand suchnesses: each realm contains ten realms, and each realm possesses such appearance, such nature, such entity, such power, such function, such cause, such condition, such effect, such retribution, and such ultimate equality of beginning and end). That is, within the realm of mind-only consciousness, one contemplates it with the inconceivable provisional contemplation, in order to reveal the hundred realms and thousand suchnesses. However, it is still necessary to negate it, hence the saying 'is emptiness, is provisional, is the middle way,' which is precisely the mutual accomplishment of the three contemplations. Then, this is exactly the same as the contemplation in the defiled and pure gates. Therefore, if those three passages have these contents, they are superfluous; if this passage lacks these contents, it is deficient. Why? Because this passage states that all objects of contemplation do not go beyond internal and external. The so-called 'external' refers to relying on the external circumstantial and direct rewards of form and mind. Since there is no mention of 'mind possessing' and 'hundred realms,' the wonderful realm is not accomplished. Furthermore, there is no meaning of contemplation, so how can it be said to be provisional contemplation? Those who agree with this reasoning, upon seeing this explanation, will have no reason to persist in their views. 2. The following explains the contemplation of the internal realm. 'First understand,' etc., refers to the fact that beginners who wish to cultivate contemplation based on the internal mind must first skillfully understand and comprehend that external dharmas are solely created by a single thought. This creating thought originally has no nature of thought. Since the creator does not exist, how can the created exist? Since external dharmas are illusory, there is only the internal essence of three thousand real natures. Having understood in this way, one can then cultivate the three contemplations of emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way based on the internal mind. Therefore, the words 'internal essence' also refer to both phenomena and principle. 'Internal' is the internal mind, meaning dependent origination, and is established in relation to the external; 'essence' is self-nature, meaning unchanging, and is beyond internal and external. Therefore, the *Yi Li* (Meaning and Examples) says: 'The order of cultivating contemplation must begin with the internal mind.' And even says, 'Furthermore, one must first understand that all dharmas are mind-only before one can contemplate the mind.' Also, that passage says: 'Because one contemplates one mind in all phenomena,' one must know that without this understanding, how can one know that the mind possesses all dharmas? If one does not know that the mind possesses all dharmas and only directly contemplates the mind, what is the difference from the *Tripitaka* and *Common* teachings? Do the *Tripitaka* and *Common* teachings not also say to contemplate the mind? Even if one knows that the essence of the mind is the middle way, if one does not say that the mind possesses all dharmas, then there is no difference from the teaching path of the Distinct Teaching. Therefore, the *Zhi Guan* (Ceasing and Observing) first reveals the six sections of wonderful understanding, and then formally cultivates. The meaning of contemplating the mind is like this. How can it be explained as first cultivating external contemplation until the six senses are purified, and then cultivating internal contemplation? Moreover, this internal contemplation contains the meaning of both the Consciousness-Only contemplation and the Reality contemplation, which scholars can explore for themselves. Question: Why does external contemplation not first explain understanding, but directly cultivate the three contemplations? Answer: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------