English
Question: You believe that the concept of 'dwelling' (住), stating that 'self-dwelling' (自住) is the meaning of the Distinct Teaching (别教), and 'other-dependent dwelling' (依他住) is the meaning of the Perfect Teaching (圆教). Moreover, the meaning of following conditions (随缘) is that truth (真) and delusion (妄) must combine to create all dharmas (诸法), which is precisely other-dependent (依他). How can it be determined that it belongs to the Distinct Teaching? Answer: The language in the 'Commentary' (疏) is concise and profound, requiring the 'Commentary and Explanation' (记释) to reveal its precise meaning. Therefore, when explaining 'self-dwelling,' Dharma-nature (法性) and afflictions (烦恼) observe each other, both establishing self (自) and other (他). The conclusion states that these two types of 'self and other' are not the meaning of the Perfect Teaching because deluded nature (惑性) can certainly become an obstacle, and only by removing the obstacle can truth be revealed. When explaining 'other-dependent,' it says that they rely on each other and are identical to each other because the essence is the same, so they are dependent and identical. The conclusion states that both the Distinct Teaching and the Perfect Teaching speak of 'self and other,' and the two teachings are distinguished by the similarity or difference of their essence. Now, it is explained that the nature-essence (性体) fully possesses the arising cultivation (起修) and function (用) of the nine realms (九法界), and the function still depends on the essence, which is nominally the same-essence dependence (同体依). This dependence is identical (即). If it is not like this, it is not the meaning of 'dependence' as it is now understood. Therefore, Miaole (妙乐, a commentator) says that the Distinct Teaching does not have the nine realms of inherent virtue (性德九法界), so both self and other must eliminate the nine realms. It should be known that only principle (理) follows conditions to create the nine realms, without any enlightenment function (明功). Since it is not non-action (无作), it can certainly become an obstacle, so only by removing these nine realms can truth be revealed. If the whole nature (全性) arises in cultivation, then phenomena are identical to principle (事即理). How can it certainly become an obstacle and certainly be removed? If one insists that only principle following conditions to create the nine realms is the meaning of the Perfect Teaching, why is it that in Miaole, Tathata (真如, Suchness) in delusion can produce the nine realms and is judged as a heretical view of the Distinct Teaching? Therefore, the meaning of truth and delusion being identical (真妄合即) is not established and is still called 'self-dwelling.' The subsequent text of that 'Commentary' analyzes opening and closing. The Distinct Teaching also speaks of dwelling in accordance with Dharma-nature (依法性住), so one must investigate the principle and not be misled by the name. If this school had not been simplified by Jingxi (荆溪, a commentator), the meaning of the Perfect Teaching would have been forever submerged. He said that the old version says that the Three Bodies (三身, Trikaya) are both eternal (常). Now I ask: How can it be said that both essence and function (俱体俱用) are present? He feared that it would be inconvenient to say that the Manifestation Body (应身, Nirmanakaya) is the essence and the Dharma Body (法身, Dharmakaya) is the function, so he established his own theory that the entire essence is the entire function (举体全用). Even with such a clever explanation, the meaning is ultimately not accepted. V. The gate of non-duality of defilement and purity (染净不二门) three: First, introduction (标). With the entangled mind (在缠心) transforming and creating all dharmas, one and many obstruct each other (一多相碍), moment to moment dwelling and attachment (念念住着), it is called defilement (染); with the mind free from obstacles (离障心) responding to various conditions (应赴众缘), one and many are unhindered (一多自在), moment to moment abandoning (念念舍离), it is called purity (净). Now, revealing that the single defiled thought of the entangled mind (在缠一念染心) inherently possesses three thousand realms (三千), both essence and function (俱体俱用), is not different from purity (与净不殊). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
故名不二。有人云，染即是惑，净即是应。不解文旨，但对而已。须知此门指果后净用，凡夫染心已具，乃令观此染心显于净用，并后依正俱在能应，自他不二方兼于感。 二、若识下，释二： 初、明所显净法二： 初、染净体用理无增减三： 初、法二： 初、明染净体者，三千寂体即寂而照，既无能照亦无所照，名为法性，以本愚故妄谓自他，三千静明全体暗动，即翻作无明，本来不觉，故名无始。若识此者，即照无明体本明静，即翻为法性。 二、法性下，明染净用者，体既全转、用亦敌翻，法性既作无明，全起无明之用，用既缚著名之为染；无明若为法性，全起法性之用，用既自在名之为净。 问：“他云，无二与字，及将二之训往，迷即法性往趣无明，悟即无明往趣法性。其义云何？” 答：“二与有无，俱有其义，二之训往，释义稍迂。且之字者，乃是常用文字而多为语助，虽《尔雅》训往，用自有处，安于此中文似不便。如一理之内净秽之土，岂皆训往邪？若旧本无二与字，则之字不须训往，但为助辞其义自显。何者？但云即法性之无明，其用则染，即无明之法性，其用则净，其文既宛，其义稍明。” 问：“若有与字，义复云何？” 因此称之为‘不二’。有人说，‘染’（Klesha）就是迷惑，‘净’（Vishuddhi）就是应现。这是不理解经文的旨意，只是片面地理解。要知道这个法门指的是证果后的清净妙用，凡夫的染污心本来就具备这种妙用，所以才要观照这个染污心，使它显现出清净的妙用，并且后得智和所依的清净世界都包含在能应现之中，自己和他人不二，才能兼顾到感应。 二、若识下，解释第二点： 初、明所显净法二： 初、染净体用理无增减三： 初、法二： 初、明染净体者，三千寂体（Trisahasra）即寂静而照，既没有能照的主体，也没有所照的客体，这叫做‘法性’（Dharmata）。因为根本的愚痴，所以妄认为有自己和他人，三千世界的静止光明全体暗昧动摇，就翻转成了‘无明’（Avidya），本来就不觉悟，所以叫做‘无始’。如果认识到这一点，就能照见无明的本体本来就是明净的，立刻就翻转为法性。 二、法性下，说明染净的用处，本体既然完全转变，用处也相对地翻转，法性既然转为无明，就完全生起无明的用处，这种用处如果被束缚，就叫做‘染’；无明如果转为法性，就完全生起法性的用处，这种用处如果自在，就叫做‘净’。 问：‘有人说，‘无二’和‘与’字，以及把‘二’解释为‘往’，迷惑就是法性往趣无明，觉悟就是无明往趣法性。’这个说法是什么意思？’ 答：‘‘二’和‘有无’，都有其道理，把‘二’解释为‘往’，解释得稍微牵强。而且‘之’字，是常用的文字，多半是语气助词，虽然《尔雅》解释为‘往’，但也有它适用的地方，放在这里似乎不太合适。比如一个道理之内的清净和污秽的国土，难道都要解释为‘往’吗？如果旧的版本没有‘无二’和‘与’字，那么‘之’字就不需要解释为‘往’，只作为助词，意思自然就明白了。为什么呢？只要说‘即法性的无明，它的用处就是染，即无明的法性，它的用处就是净’，这样文句就顺畅了，意思也比较明白。’ 问：‘如果有‘与’字，意思又是什么呢？’
English
Hence it is called 'non-duality'. Some say that 'Klesha' (染) is delusion, and 'Vishuddhi' (净) is response. This is not understanding the meaning of the text, but only understanding it one-sidedly. It should be known that this Dharma gate refers to the pure function after attaining enlightenment. Ordinary people's defiled minds inherently possess this function, so they should contemplate this defiled mind to reveal its pure function. Furthermore, the subsequent wisdom and the pure world it relies on are both contained within the ability to respond. Only when self and others are non-dual can both sensation and response be taken care of. 2. 若识下, Explaining the second point: First, 明所显净法二: First, 染净体用理无增减三: First, 法二: First, 明染净体者, The Trisahasra (三千) still body is still and illuminating. There is neither a subject that can illuminate nor an object that can be illuminated. This is called 'Dharmata' (法性). Because of fundamental ignorance, it is falsely believed that there is self and others. The still light of the Trisahasra world is entirely obscured and agitated, and it turns into 'Avidya' (无明). Originally, there was no awakening, so it is called 'beginningless'. If one recognizes this, one can see that the essence of Avidya is originally bright and pure, and it immediately turns into Dharmata. Second, 法性下, Explaining the function of defilement and purity, since the essence is completely transformed, the function is also relatively reversed. Since Dharmata turns into Avidya, it completely gives rise to the function of Avidya. If this function is bound, it is called 'defilement'. If Avidya turns into Dharmata, it completely gives rise to the function of Dharmata. If this function is free, it is called 'purity'. Question: 'Someone said, 'The words 'non-duality' and 'with', and interpreting 'two' as 'going', delusion is Dharmata going towards Avidya, and enlightenment is Avidya going towards Dharmata.' What does this mean?' Answer: 'Both 'two' and 'existence or non-existence' have their reasons. Interpreting 'two' as 'going' is a slightly far-fetched explanation. Moreover, the word '之' is a commonly used word, mostly a modal particle. Although the Erya (《尔雅》) interprets it as 'going', it also has its appropriate uses. It seems inappropriate to put it here. For example, do the pure and impure lands within a single principle all need to be interpreted as 'going'? If the old version does not have the words 'non-duality' and 'with', then the word '之' does not need to be interpreted as 'going', but only as a particle, and the meaning will naturally be clear. Why? Just say 'Avidya of Dharmata, its function is defilement, Dharmata of Avidya, its function is purity'. In this way, the sentence is smooth and the meaning is clearer.' Question: 'If there is the word 'with', what does it mean?' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
答：“此文既辨二用，有则于义更明。何者？夫与者，借与、赐与也，亦助也。法性无明既互翻转成于两用，互有借力助成之义，而劣者借力助于强者，若法性内熏无力、无明染用强者，则法性与无明力造诸染法。若无明执情无力、法性内熏有力，则无明与法性力起诸净应。以由无明虽有成事之用，以体空故自不能变造，须假法性借力助之方成染法。法性虽具三千净用，显发由修，真修纵不藉无明，缘修宁无欣厌？故下文云，必藉缘了为利他功，无明与力助于法性方成净用。荆溪既许随缘之义，必许法性无明互为因缘，但约体具明随，自异权教。” 二、浊水下，谕。浊水谕迷中染心，清水谕果后净心，波谕三千俱用，湿谕三千俱体。须知染中其水虽浊，亦全湿为波，清时岂别有波湿？故云无殊，则波之与湿皆无殊也。他谓波中之湿无殊者，湿性既不变，波性岂变邪？ 问：“第四记云，如清浊波湿性不异，岂非波异湿同？今何违彼？” 答：“读彼文者不看前后，但取一文成我局见。今为粗引彼文仍聊释出，令欲据彼证唯湿无殊者闻之自诫。何者？彼文本释世间相常，但相本流动，今欲说常须约位显，全位为相位、常相亦常，故文数云，相位无二。仍自问云：位可一如，相云何等？答曰：位 现代汉语译本： 答：这段文字既然辨析了两种作用，那么‘与’字的意义就更加明确了。为什么呢？‘与’，是借给、赐予的意思，也是帮助的意思。法性和无明既然相互转化形成两种作用，就有了相互借力帮助成就的意义，而且弱的一方借力帮助强的一方。如果法性内在的熏习没有力量，无明的染污作用强大，那么法性就与无明的力量共同造作各种染污的法。如果无明的执着情感没有力量，法性内在的熏习有力量，那么无明就与法性的力量共同生起各种清净的应化。因为无明虽然有成就事的作用，但由于体性是空，自身不能变化造作，必须借助法性借力帮助才能成就染污的法。法性虽然具足三千种清净的作用，但显发要通过修行，真实的修行纵然不凭借无明，缘分的修行难道没有欣喜和厌恶吗？所以下文说，必须凭借缘和了作为利他的功用，无明与力量帮助法性才能成就清净的作用。荆溪既然允许随顺因缘的意义，必定允许法性和无明互为因缘，只是就体性具足来说明随顺，自然不同于权教的说法。 二、浊水下，比喻。浊水比喻迷惑中的染污心，清水比喻证果后的清净心，波浪比喻三千种作用都存在，湿性比喻三千种体性都具备。要知道染污中的水虽然浑浊，也完全是湿性成为波浪，清净的时候难道另外有波浪和湿性吗？所以说没有差别，那么波浪和湿性都是没有差别的。别人说波浪中的湿性没有差别，湿性既然不变，波浪的性质难道会改变吗？ 问：第四记中说，如清净和浑浊的水，波浪和湿性没有差异，难道不是波浪不同而湿性相同吗？现在为什么违背它呢？ 答：读那段文字的人不看前后文，只是取其中一句来形成自己的片面见解。现在我粗略地引用那段文字，并且稍微解释出来，让那些想要根据它来证明只有湿性没有差别的人听了之后自我警戒。为什么呢？那段文字本来是解释世间相是常住不变的，但是相的本质是流动变化的，现在想要说常住不变，必须就位置来显示，全部的位置就是相位，常相也是常住不变的，所以文中多次说，相位没有二致。接着自己问：位置可以相同，相怎么说呢？回答说：位置