English
English version: Within a single phase of life (Iki no uchi), the arising of the five skandhas (Gomi) is interconnected and natural, hence the term 'vertical' (ju); the four teachings (Shikyo) each tend towards different truths, hence the term 'horizontal' (o). And the Dharma being expounded, although there are distinctions between the manifest and the hidden, according to the intent of the Maka Shikan, has never for a moment departed from the Three Thousand Realms in a Single Thought (Ichinen Sanzen). Furthermore, although all dharmas possess the Three Thousand Realms, in order to more easily achieve subtle understanding and contemplation, it is clearly pointed out that a single thought is the three dharmas (body, nature, and function), and within the 'subtle' (myo), the mind-dharma (shinbo) is especially selected. It should be known that mind-dharma is distinguished based on delusion and phenomena, therefore the Shishaku says: 'The dharma of sentient beings (shujo-bo), generally speaking, penetrates cause and effect; further, it is limited only to cause; the Buddha-dharma (butsu-bo) is definitely in the effect, and the mind-dharma is definitely in the cause.' If divided according to delusion and enlightenment, the Buddha-dharma belongs only to enlightenment, while the other two are in delusion. Further distinguishing within delusion, the dharma of sentient beings belongs to others, because it penetrates everything; the mind-dharma belongs to oneself, because it specifically points to one's own mind. Each section of the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (sati-patthana) speaks of contemplating the one thought of ignorance-mind (mumyo-shin), and the Shikan initially contemplates the nine realms of the skandhas (khandha), entrances (ayatana), and mind, also clarifying the mind within phenomena, therefore speaking of afflicted mind, sick mind, and even meditation-view mind, etc. And the four moving minds within following one's own intention, etc., are they not distinguishing the contemplated mind based on delusion and phenomena? Some people interpret the current one thought as true nature, I fear it does not accord with the meaning of the text. Why? If speaking of true nature, then all dharmas are, why is only one thought? Moreover, many texts speak of contemplating one's own mind, how can true principle have a distinction between self and other? Still others completely disallow establishing the skandhas, realms, and entrances as objects of contemplation, only saying the inconceivable realm, these two teachers clearly violate the teachings. The Maka Shikan first extensively elucidates subtle understanding in six chapters, does it not speak of the original true nature of all dharmas being inconceivable? However, wanting to establish practice and cultivate, one must select the path to enter principle, the place to initiate contemplation, therefore in the three categories (skandhas, ayatana, and dhatu) it rejects the realms and entrances, and within the five skandhas, it also removes the first four skandhas, clearly selecting the consciousness skandha (vijnana-skandha), the Fogyo also selects the mind that can invite karmic retribution, and what has already been developed belongs to the lower realm, this is going from a jo to a shaku, from a shaku to a sun, like cauterizing to find the acupoint. Thus, relying on this mind to contemplate the inconceivable, revealing the Three Thousand Realms, even minds of greed and anger, etc., and the roots and dusts, all say to contemplate the skandhas, entrances, realms, and the lower nine realms, the selection and judgment in the text is not off by a hair's breadth, is it directly speaking of true nature and the inconceivable? Question: 'In constant sitting it says' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
，以法界对法界起法界；安心中云，但信法性，不信其诸；及节节云不思议境。今何不许？” 答：“此等诸文皆是能观观法，复是所显法门，岂不读《辅行》中分科之文，先重明境，即去尺就寸文也，次明修观，即观不思议境等十乘文也。况《辅行》委示二境之相非不分明，岂得直以一念名真理及不思议邪！应知不思议境对观智边不分而分名所观境，若对所破阴等诸境，故不思议境之与观皆名能观。故《止观》云：‘譬如贼有三重，一人器械钝、身力羸、智谋少，先破二重，更整人物方破第三，所以迟回日月；有人身壮、兵利、权多，一日之中即破三重。’《辅行》释云：‘约用兵以譬能所’，‘今以身壮譬圆三谛，兵利譬圆三止，权多譬圆三观，械等并依身力故也。’上皆《辅行》文也，岂非谛观俱为能观邪！今更自立一譬，双明两重能所如器，诸淳朴岂单用槌而无砧邪？故知槌砧自分能所，若望淳朴皆属能也。智者以喻得解，幸可详之。皆为不辩两重所观，故迷斯旨。又若不立阴等为境，妙观就何处用？妙境于何处显？故知若离三道即无三德，如烦恼即菩提、生死即涅槃，玄文略列十乘，皆约此立。又《止观大意》以此二句为发心立行之体格，岂有圆顿更过于此？若如二师所立，合云菩提即菩提、涅槃即 现代汉语译本：以法界对法界生起法界；安心中说，只相信法性，不相信其他的；以及节节都说不可思议境。现在为什么不允许这样说呢？ 回答：这些经文都是能观之智所观的法，又是所显现的法门，难道没有读过《辅行》中分科的文吗？先着重阐明境，就是‘去尺就寸’的文句；其次阐明修观，就是观不可思议境等十乘观法的文句。况且《辅行》详细地阐述了二境的相状，并非不分明，怎么能直接用一念来称作真理和不可思议呢！应当知道，不可思议境相对于观智来说，不分而分，称为所观境；如果相对于所破的五阴等诸境来说，不可思议境和观都称为能观。《止观》中说：‘譬如盗贼有三重防卫，一人器械不锋利、身力弱、智谋少，先攻破两重防卫，再整顿人马才能攻破第三重，所以耗费时日；有人身强体壮、兵器锋利、权谋多，一天之内就能攻破三重防卫。’《辅行》解释说：‘用用兵来比喻能观和所观’，‘现在用身强体壮比喻圆融的三谛，兵器锋利比喻圆融的三止，权谋多比喻圆融的三观，器械等都依赖于身力。’以上都是《辅行》的原文，难道不是谛观都作为能观吗！现在我再自己立一个比喻，同时说明两重能所，比如器物，那些淳朴的东西难道只用锤子而没有砧子吗？所以知道锤子和砧子自分能所，如果相对于淳朴的东西来说，都属于能。智者通过比喻就能理解，希望仔细思考。都是因为不分辨两重所观，所以迷惑了这个宗旨。而且如果不设立五阴等为境，妙观在哪里运用？妙境在哪里显现？所以知道如果离开三道就没有三德，如烦恼即菩提、生死即涅槃，《玄文》简略地列出十乘观法，都是依据这个道理建立的。而且《止观大意》用这两句话作为发心立行的体格，难道还有比这更圆顿的吗？如果像二位法师所说的那样，应该说菩提即菩提、涅槃即涅槃。
English
English version: Using the Dharmadhatu (法界, the realm of Dharma) to counter the Dharmadhatu, arising from the Dharmadhatu; the 'An Xin' (安心, settling the mind) states, 'Only believe in the Dharma-nature (法性), do not believe in other things'; and repeatedly mentioning the 'Inconceivable Realm' (不思议境). Why is it not allowed now? Answer: All these texts are the Dharma contemplated by the observing wisdom, and also the Dharma-gate that is revealed. Haven't you read the sectioned text in 'Fu Xing' (辅行, a commentary on Zhi Guan), which first emphasizes the realm, which is the phrase 'reducing feet to inches'; and then explains the cultivation of contemplation, which is the text on contemplating the Inconceivable Realm and the Ten Vehicles? Moreover, 'Fu Xing' elaborately explains the characteristics of the two realms, which are not unclear. How can one directly call a single thought 'Truth' and 'Inconceivable'! It should be known that the Inconceivable Realm, in relation to the observing wisdom, is undivided yet divided, and is called the 'Observed Realm'; if in relation to the realms of the skandhas (五阴) and others that are to be broken, both the Inconceivable Realm and the contemplation are called the 'Observer'. As 'Zhi Guan' (止观, cessation and contemplation) says: 'It is like a thief with three layers of defense. If one's weapons are dull, one's strength is weak, and one's wisdom is lacking, one first breaks through two layers, and then reorganizes the troops to break through the third layer, so it takes time; if one is strong, one's weapons are sharp, and one has many strategies, one can break through all three layers in a day.' 'Fu Xing' explains: 'Using warfare to illustrate the observer and the observed', 'Now, using strength to represent the perfect Three Truths (三谛), sharp weapons to represent the perfect Three Cessations (三止), and many strategies to represent the perfect Three Contemplations (三观), weapons etc. all depend on strength.' The above are all from the text of 'Fu Xing', isn't it that both Truth and Contemplation are the observer! Now I will create another analogy to simultaneously explain the two layers of observer and observed, like tools, would those simple things only use a hammer without an anvil? Therefore, it is known that the hammer and anvil separate the observer and the observed, but in relation to the simple things, they all belong to the observer. The wise can understand through analogy, I hope you consider it carefully. It is all because of not distinguishing the two layers of the observed, that one is confused about this principle. Moreover, if the skandhas etc. are not established as the realm, where would the wonderful contemplation be used? Where would the wonderful realm be revealed? Therefore, it is known that if one leaves the Three Paths (三道), there would be no Three Virtues (三德), such as afflictions are Bodhi (菩提, enlightenment), and birth and death are Nirvana (涅槃, liberation). 'Xuan Wen' (玄文, profound text) briefly lists the Ten Vehicles, all established based on this principle. Moreover, 'Zhi Guan Da Yi' (止观大意, the main idea of Zhi Guan) uses these two sentences as the framework for initiating the mind and establishing practice, is there anything more perfect and sudden than this? If it is as the two masters say, it should be said that Bodhi is Bodhi, Nirvana is Nirvana. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
涅槃也。又引常坐中起对俱法界者，今问法界因何有起对邪？须知约根、尘、识故方云起对法界，故《义例》释此文云，体达(修观)若起若对(阴入)不出法界(成不思议)。彼有约理、约观、约果三义，此文正约观行辨也。又安心文云，唯信法性者，未审信何法为法性邪？而不知此文正是于阴修乎止观，故《起信论》云：‘一切众生从本已来未曾离念。’又下文云‘浊成本有’，若不观三道即妙，便同偏观清净真如。荆溪还许不？故《辅行》解安住世谛云‘以止观安故世谛方成不思议’，又云‘安即观也’。故谈圆妙，不违现文方为正说。今释一念，乃是趣举根尘和合一刹那心，若阴若惑、若善若恶皆具三千，皆即三谛，乃十妙之大体，故云咸尔。斯之一念为成观故，今文专约明乎不二，不可不晓，故兹委辨。” 问：“相传云，达磨门下三人得法而有浅深，尼总持云，断烦恼、证菩提。师云，得吾皮。道育云，迷即烦恼、悟即菩提。师云，得吾肉。慧可云，本无烦恼元是菩提。师云，得吾髓。今烦恼即菩提等，稍同皮肉之见，那云圆顿无过？” 答：“当宗学者因此语故迷名失旨，用彼格此陷坠本宗，良由不穷即字之义故也。应知今家明即永异诸师，以非二物相合，及非背面相翻，直须当体全是方 涅槃（Nirvana，佛教术语，指解脱生死轮回的境界）也。又引用常坐中起对俱法界者，现在问法界因何有起对呢？须知是依根、尘、识的缘故才说起对法界，所以《义例》解释此文说，体达（通过修行观照）若起若对（阴入）不出法界（成就不可思议）。那里有约理、约观、约果三种意义，此文正是约观行辨析。又安心文说，唯信法性者，未审信何法为法性呢？而不知此文正是在阴（五蕴，构成个体经验的要素）上修止观，所以《起信论》说：‘一切众生从本已来未曾离念。’又下文说‘浊成本有’，若不观三道即妙，便同于偏观清净真如。荆溪（指湛然，天台宗的重要人物）还允许吗？所以《辅行》解释安住世谛说‘以止观安故世谛方成不思议’，又说‘安即观也’。所以谈论圆妙，不违背现有的经文才是正确的说法。现在解释一念，乃是趣向举出根尘和合的一刹那心，若阴若惑、若善若恶都具备三千，都即是三谛，乃是十妙的大体，所以说咸尔。这一念是为了成就观行，所以本文专门在于阐明不二，不可不明白，所以这里详细辨析。 问：‘相传云，达磨（Bodhidharma，禅宗初祖）门下三人得法而有浅深，尼总持云，断烦恼、证菩提（Bodhi，觉悟）。师云，得吾皮。道育云，迷即烦恼、悟即菩提。师云，得吾肉。慧可（禅宗二祖）云，本无烦恼元是菩提。师云，得吾髓。今烦恼即菩提等，稍同皮肉之见，那云圆顿无过？’ 答：‘当宗学者因此语故迷名失旨，用彼格此陷坠本宗，良由不穷即字之义故也。应知今家明即永异诸师，以非二物相合，及非背面相翻，直须当体全是方’