English
English version 2. Therefore, the following text says that (Reality) is undiminished in height and breadth, and its light is non-dual. (This indicates that) the causes and effects of Mahāyāna are all true reality, and the three thousand worlds are all true reality, with their appearances clearly discernible. (However,) when true reality is the cause of defilement in principle, even if one possesses the Buddha-dharma, it is still called ignorance (avidyā) because it is not manifest. When the three thousand worlds are free from obstacles and the eight inversions (asta viparyāsas) do not arise, each and every Dharma gate achieves the four virtues (catvāri guna), so they are all eternally joyful. The three thousand aspects of reality all possess an unchanging nature. Delusion and enlightenment are one in principle, just like Yajñadatta (an allegorical figure) who lost his head and then found it again; the head was never different. Therefore, it is said that ignorance is enlightenment. The three thousand realms of existence are each eternally abiding. The principle inherently possesses the three thousand, all of which are called substance (svabhāva). The transformations and creations of the three thousand are all called function (karma). Therefore, it is said that they are both substance and function. Among these four sentences, the first two explain that cause and effect each possess the three thousand. The third sentence explains that the three thousand of cause and effect are just one set of three thousand because they are unchanging. The fourth sentence explains that the substance of the three thousand of cause and effect can all give rise to function. Thus, the three thousand in the cause give rise to defiled functions, and the three thousand in the effect give rise to pure functions. This fourth sentence explains the perfect teaching most clearly. Why? The names of substance and function inherently imply the meaning of identity. Therefore, whenever it is said that all dharmas are identical to principle, it must be that the entire function is identical to the substance in order to be called identity. The *Auxiliary Conduct* (*Fahua Jing Xuan Yi Shi Qian*’s alias) says that ‘identity’ is explained in the *Guang Ya* as ‘union.’ If we follow this explanation, it still seems like two things are united, and this principle appears distant. Now, if we seek it through meaning, the substance is non-dual, so it is called identity (all of the above are words from the *Auxiliary Conduct*). Now, we say that the function of the entire substance is called non-dual. Other schools explain that one principle gives rise to differentiated dharmas according to conditions. Differentiation is the aspect of ignorance, and pure oneness is the aspect of true thusness (tathatā). When following conditions, there is differentiation; when not following conditions, there is no differentiation. Therefore, it is known that oneness combined with ignorance gives rise to differentiation. This is precisely the meaning of union, not the non-duality of substance, because the removal of ignorance eliminates differentiation. Now, the Tiāntāi school explains that the substance of the three thousand gives rise to the function of the three thousand according to conditions. When not following conditions, the three thousand exist as they are. Therefore, differentiated dharmas are non-dual with the substance because the removal of ignorance creates differentiation. Examining the identity explained by other schools, the meaning of identity cannot be established because their Buddha-fruit only has one true thusness, and they must break down the differentiation of the nine realms and return to the oneness of the Buddha-realm. The identity spoken of by the Tiāntāi school separates identity from division, making it difficult to study in detail within the perfect and distinct teachings. It should be known that they do not discuss inherent principle and only speak of true thusness. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
如随缘，仍是离义。故第一记云，以别教中无性德九，故自他俱断九也。若三千世间是性德者，九界无所破，即佛法故，即义方成、圆理始显。故《金錍》云“变义唯二，即是唯圆”，故知具变双明方名即是，若随阙一皆非圆极。荆溪云，他家不明修性。若以真如一理名性，随缘差别为修，则荆溪出时甚有人说也。故知他宗极圆，只云性起，不云性具。深可思量。又不谈性具百界，但论变造诸法，何名无作邪？世人见予立别教理有随缘义，惑耳惊心，盖由不能深究荆溪之意也。且如《记》文释阿若文中云，别教亦得云从无住本立一切法，无明覆理，能覆所覆俱名无住，但即不即异而分教殊。既许所覆无住，真如安不随缘，随缘仍未即者，为非理具随缘故也。又云，真如在迷能生九界。若不随缘，何能生九？又《辅行》释别教根尘一念为迷解本，引《楞伽》云：“如来为善不善因。”自释云，即理性如来也。《楞伽》此句，乃他宗随缘之所据也。《辅行》为释此义，引大论云，如大池水，象入则浊，珠入则清。当知水为清浊本，珠象为清浊之缘，据此诸文别理岂不随缘邪？故知若不谈体具者，随缘与不随缘皆属别教。何者？如云梨邪生一切法，或云法性生一切法，岂非别教有二义邪？ 问：“《净名疏》释无明无 现代汉语译本：如果说随缘，那就仍然偏离了‘即’的真义。所以《法华经文句记》第一卷中说，因为别教中没有性德九界，所以自他和合断绝了九界。如果三千世间是性德所具，那么九界就无所破，也就是佛法，这样‘即’的真义才能成立，圆融的道理才能显现。所以《金錍论》说：‘变的含义只有两种，那就是唯圆。’因此可知，同时具备‘具’和‘变’才能称为‘即’，如果缺少任何一个，都不能达到圆满的极致。荆溪湛然大师说，其他宗派不明白修性和性具的道理。如果用真如一理来称作‘性’，随缘差别为‘修’，那么在荆溪大师出世的时候，就已经有很多人这样说了。所以可知，其他宗派所说的极圆，只是说‘性起’，而不说‘性具’，这一点很值得深思。而且他们不谈性具百界，只是论述变造诸法，这怎么能称为‘无作’呢？世人看到我立别教的道理中有随缘的含义，感到迷惑和惊讶，这是因为他们不能深入研究荆溪大师的意图。例如，《法华经文句记》中解释阿若憍陈如时说，别教也可以说从无住本立一切法，无明遮蔽了真理，能遮蔽的和所遮蔽的都称为无住，但‘即’与‘不即’的差异导致了教义的不同。既然允许所遮蔽的是无住，那么真如怎么能不随缘呢？如果随缘仍然不是‘即’，那是因为它不是理具随缘的缘故。又说，真如在迷的时候能够产生九界。如果不随缘，怎么能够产生九界呢？此外，《法华经辅行记》解释别教的根尘一念为迷解的根本，引用《楞伽经》说：‘如来为善不善因。’自己解释说，这是指理性如来。《楞伽经》的这句话，是其他宗派随缘的依据。《辅行记》为了解释这个含义，引用《大智度论》说，就像大池中的水，大象进入就会浑浊，宝珠进入就会清澈。应当知道水是清浊的根本，宝珠和大象是清浊的因缘，根据这些经文，别教的道理难道不随缘吗？所以可知，如果不谈体具，那么随缘与不随缘都属于别教。为什么呢？例如说梨耶识产生一切法，或者说法性产生一切法，这难道不是别教的两种含义吗？ 问：《净名疏》解释无明无住，这又是什么意思呢？
English
English version: If we speak of 'following conditions' (suiyuan), it still deviates from the meaning of 'immediacy' (ji). Therefore, the first volume of the 'Annotations on the Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra' (Fahua Jing Wenju Ji) says that because the Separate Teaching (biejiao) lacks the inherent nature (xingde) of the Nine Realms, the self and others are both cut off from the Nine Realms. If the Three Thousand Worlds are inherent in nature, then the Nine Realms are indestructible, which is the Buddha-dharma. Only then can the meaning of 'immediacy' be established, and the perfect principle can be revealed. Therefore, the 'Golden Scalpel' (Jin Pi) says, 'The meaning of transformation is only twofold, which is solely perfect.' Thus, it is known that only when both 'inherent' (ju) and 'transformation' (bian) are clearly stated can it be called 'immediacy.' If either is lacking, it is not perfect. Jingxi Zhanran says that other schools do not understand the principle of cultivating nature and inherent nature. If one calls the single principle of True Thusness (zhenru) 'nature' and the differences arising from conditions 'cultivation,' then many people would have said this even before Jingxi appeared. Therefore, it is known that the ultimate perfection spoken of by other schools only speaks of 'nature arising' (xingqi), not 'nature inherent' (xingju). This is worth pondering deeply. Furthermore, they do not discuss the inherent nature of the Hundred Realms, but only discuss the transformation and creation of all dharmas. How can this be called 'non-action' (wu zuo)? When people see that I establish the Separate Teaching with the meaning of following conditions, they are confused and alarmed. This is because they cannot deeply investigate the intention of Jingxi. For example, in the 'Annotations' (Ji) explaining Ajnata-Kaundinya (Aruo), it says that the Separate Teaching can also say that all dharmas are established from the basis of non-abiding (wuzhu), and ignorance (wuming) covers the principle. Both the covering and the covered are called non-abiding, but the difference between 'immediacy' and 'non-immediacy' leads to different teachings. Since it is allowed that what is covered is non-abiding, how can True Thusness not follow conditions? If following conditions is still not 'immediacy,' it is because it is not the reason for the inherent nature to follow conditions. It also says that True Thusness can generate the Nine Realms when deluded. If it does not follow conditions, how can it generate the Nine Realms? Furthermore, the 'Supplementary Commentary' (Fuxing) explains that the root and dust of a single thought in the Separate Teaching are the basis of delusion and liberation, quoting the 'Lankavatara Sutra' (Lengqie Jing): 'The Tathagata is the cause of good and non-good.' It explains itself, saying that this refers to the True Thusness of principle. This sentence from the 'Lankavatara Sutra' is the basis for other schools' following conditions. The 'Supplementary Commentary,' in order to explain this meaning, quotes the 'Great Treatise' (Da Lun), saying that it is like water in a large pond: an elephant entering makes it turbid, and a pearl entering makes it clear. It should be known that water is the basis of turbidity and clarity, and the pearl and elephant are the conditions for turbidity and clarity. According to these texts, does the principle of the Separate Teaching not follow conditions? Therefore, it is known that if one does not discuss the inherent nature of the substance, then following conditions and not following conditions both belong to the Separate Teaching. Why? For example, saying that the Alaya-consciousness (Liyeshi) generates all dharmas, or that the nature of dharma generates all dharmas, are these not two meanings of the Separate Teaching? Question: What does the 'Vimalakirti Sutra Commentary' (Jingming Shu) mean by explaining ignorance as non-abiding? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
住云，说自住是别教意，依他住是圆教意。且随缘义，真妄和合方造诸法，正是依他，那判属别？” 答：“疏中语简意高，须凭记释方彰的旨，故释自住，法性烦恼更互相望，俱立自他。结云，故二自他并非圆义，以其惑性定能为障，破障方乃定能显理。释依他云，更互相依更互相即，以体同故依而复即。结云，故别圆教俱云自他，由体同异而判二教。今释曰，性体具九起修九用，用还依体名同体依，此依方即，若不尔者，非今依义。故妙乐云，别教无性德九，故自他俱须断九，是知但理随缘作九全无明功，既非无作定能为障，故破此九方能显理。若全性起修乃事即理，岂定为障而定可破？若执但理随缘作九为圆义者，何故妙乐中真如在迷能生九界判为别邪？故真妄合即义未成，犹名自住。彼疏次文料简开合，别教亦云依法性住，故须究理不可迷名，此宗若非荆溪精简，圆义永沈也。他云，旧本云三身并常。今问：如何说俱体俱用邪？他恐应身说体、法身说用不便，乃自立云举体全用。纵兹巧释，义终不允。” 五、染净不二门三： 初、标。以在缠心变造诸法，一多相碍念念住着，名之为染；以离障心应赴众缘，一多自在念念舍离，名之为净。今开在缠一念染心本具三千，俱体俱用与净不殊， 问：你认为‘住’（Dwell）这个概念，说‘自住’（Self-dwelling）是别教（Distinct Teaching）的含义，‘依他住’（Other-dependent dwelling）是圆教（Perfect Teaching）的含义。而且随缘（Following conditions）的意义，是真（Truth）和妄（Delusion）和合才能造作诸法（All Dharmas），这正是依他（Other-dependent），那怎么能判定它属于别教呢？” 答：‘疏’（Commentary）中的语言简练而意义深远，必须凭借‘记释’（Commentary and Explanation）才能彰显其确切的旨意。所以解释‘自住’时，法性（Dharma-nature）和烦恼（Afflictions）更互相观望，都建立自（Self）和他（Other）。结论说，所以这两种‘自他’并非圆教的含义，因为惑性（Deluded nature）必定能够成为障碍，破除障碍才能必定显现真理。解释‘依他’时说，更互相依赖，更互相即（Identical），因为本体相同，所以依赖而又即。结论说，所以别教和圆教都说‘自他’，由于本体的同异而判定两种教义。现在解释说，性体（Nature-essence）具足九法界（Nine realms）的起修（Arising cultivation）和九法界的用（Function），用还依赖于体，名称上是同体依（Same-essence dependence），这种依赖才是即（Identical），如果不是这样，就不是现在所说的‘依’的意义。所以妙乐（Miaole, a commentator）说，别教没有性德九法界（Nine realms of inherent virtue），所以自他和他都必须断除九法界，要知道只是理（Principle）随缘造作九法界，完全没有明功（Enlightenment function），既然不是无作（Non-action）就必定能够成为障碍，所以破除这九法界才能显现真理。如果全性（Whole nature）起修，那就是事即理（Phenomena are identical to principle），怎么会必定成为障碍而必定可以破除呢？如果执着于只是理随缘造作九法界是圆教的含义，为什么妙乐中说真如（Tathata, Suchness）在迷时能够产生九界被判定为别教的邪见呢？所以真妄合即（Truth and delusion are identical）的意义没有成立，仍然叫做‘自住’。那部‘疏’的后面的文字辨析开合，别教也说依法性住（Dwelling in accordance with Dharma-nature），所以必须探究理，不可迷惑于名称，这个宗派如果不是荆溪（Jingxi, a commentator）精简，圆教的意义就永远沉没了。他说，旧本说三身（Trikaya, Three bodies of Buddha）并常（Eternal）。现在问：如何说俱体俱用（Both essence and function）呢？他恐怕应身（Nirmanakaya, Manifestation body）说体、法身（Dharmakaya, Dharma body）说用不方便，就自己立论说举体全用（The entire essence is the entire function）。纵然这样巧妙地解释，意义最终还是不被允许。” 五、染净不二门（The gate of non-duality of defilement and purity）三： 初、标（Introduction）。以在缠心（Entangled mind）变造诸法，一多相碍（One and many obstruct each other），念念住着（Moment to moment dwelling and attachment），名之为染（Called defilement）；以离障心（Mind free from obstacles）应赴众缘（Responding to various conditions），一多自在（One and many are unhindered），念念舍离（Moment to moment abandoning），名之为净（Called purity）。现在开启在缠一念染心（Single defiled thought of the entangled mind）本具三千（Inherently possesses three thousand realms），俱体俱用（Both essence and function）与净不殊（Not different from purity）。