摩訶止觀 白話全本 · 冊5

觀諸見境 · 1 單元 · 第 55 冊 · 冊目次

觀諸見境Contemplating the Object of Views

全文五層 →Full five layers →
白話Vernacular

摩訶止觀卷第十〔上〕

隋代天台智者大師講說

弟子灌頂記錄

什麼叫作諸見境

第七是觀察諸見境。數目不只一種,所以稱為『諸』;錯誤的理解,稱為『見』。也可以說,理解和認知就是見的意思。推究道理的方法不正確,卻對偏斜的一面看得十分分明,形成確定不移的理解,這就名為見。

聽講學習的人,背誦得種種名目和法相,只能依照文字作解釋;內心的眼目沒有開啟,完全沒有依理而作的觀照。他所依據的文字還在,離開驗證便像死去一般。修習禪定的人,卻只崇尚依理觀照,心在接觸任何境界時都自以為能融通;可是對名目和法相昏暗不明,連一句文字也不認識。背誦文字的人像守著樹樁,心情融通的人以為自己已經妙悟;兩方面各缺一邊,彼此評論時便都失去準則。

如果一個人見解通暢無礙,又熟悉種種名稱,他拿自己的見解追問別人時,意思可以無窮無盡,像以彎曲的箭路繞著飛鳥射去,使飛禽走獸都失去去路。他解釋難題、回答問難時又很有餘力,像把箭射向虛空,箭一去便沒有阻礙。應當知道,這不只是從學習造成,一定是見已經發起。這種見,有的因禪而發,有的因聽聞而發。譬如無漏智慧生起時,也要憑藉信、法兩類根性以及聞、思。因聽聞而發的人,本來聽得不多,卻能廣泛轉相領悟,見解分明,聰敏善辯,能問能答。因禪而發的人,起初因內心寂靜,後來觀照轉明,翻轉義理十分自在,像已經奇妙通達。南方修禪的人少,發見的人也少;北方則多有這類事情。

昏暗不明而不能辨識的人,會以為自己得到真道,或以為自己得到陀羅尼。他不懂得辨識別人,卻把自己的地位安得很高。也有人完全不信,斷定這只是瘋狂迷惑。現在要說,這既不是瘋狂,也不是聖證。被鬼附著的人能說話,鬼離去後又變得愚癡;這個人不是如此,所以知道不是瘋狂。再尋察他的舊有迷惑,貪欲、瞋恚仍然存在;從新添的迷惑來看,煩惱反而更加增長,八十八使的繫縛廣大分明,所以知道不是聖人。這只是見慧發起而已。

總括來說,見的發起有因聽聞、因禪定兩路,而以因禪者居多。有的是禪定之後見才發起;有的是禪與見同時發起;見先發而後又得到禪的情形較少,前兩種情形較多。譬如各種禪定都能通於發起無漏智慧,但在未到地發起的少,在六地、九地發起的多。由於這個緣故,才把諸見境放在禪定境之後說明。

如果有人見已發起,而利智根熟,能夠自己裁量改正;或者能尋查經論,勘驗而知道自己的過失,這樣的人很難得。若不能自我改正,卻遇到善知識明白指出是非,破除他的見心,這也很難得。所以說:『真實的法,以及說法的人、聽法的大眾,都很難遇到。』既不能自己覺察,又遇不到老師,錯誤的刻畫一天比一天增加,生死的困局一月比一月深重;就像在稠密樹林中拖曳彎曲的木頭,哪裡會有出去的日期?

現在觀察諸見境,分成四部分:第一,說明有諸見的人以及他們所執的法;第二,說明諸見發起的因緣;第三,說明諸見的過失;第四,說明如何以止觀觀察。

一、諸見的人與所執之法

第一,說明諸見的人與法,又分兩部分:第一,邪見之人各不相同;第二,邪見之人所執的法各不相同。邪見之人不同,又分三類:第一,佛法以外的外道;第二,依附佛法而成的外道;第三,學佛法卻成為外道的人。

佛法以外的外道

第一類是外外道。根本源頭有三家。第一是迦毘羅外道,名字譯作黃頭,主張因中已經有果。第二是漚樓僧佉,名字譯作休睺,主張因中沒有果。第三是勒沙婆,名字譯作苦行,主張因中既有果也沒有果。

《入大乘論》又說:迦毘羅所說的主張有計一的過失,把作者與所作看成一,把相與有相者看成一,把部分與具有部分的整體看成一,像這些都名為計一。優樓僧佉主張彼此相異;迦羅鳩馱主張既一又異;若提子主張既非一也非異;一切外道以及摩迦羅等人的異計,都沒有離開這四種。

從三家、四宗的外道又分出支派。到佛出世時,有六位大師。第一是富蘭那迦葉;迦葉是他的姓,他主張不生不滅。第二是末伽梨拘賒梨子,主張眾生的苦與樂沒有因緣,自然而然就是如此。第三是刪闍夜毘羅胝子,主張眾生等時節成熟便會得道,經過八萬劫,就像線丸被抽到線盡一般到達極限。第四是阿耆多翅舍欽婆羅;欽婆羅是粗衣的意思,他主張用投身山巖、拔除頭髮等苦行,代受罪業所招的苦報。第五是迦羅鳩馱迦旃延,主張既有也無。第六是尼揵陀若提子,主張業一旦造作便決定不能改變。

這些材料出自《羅什疏》。六師的名字與《大經》相同,所主張的內容有三項相同、三項不同;也許是翻譯有誤,也許另有用意,現在還不能詳知。不過,大體上都祖承迦毘羅等人;依根本可分三家,也可分為四宗,也就是有、無、亦有亦無、非有非無四見。

依附佛法而成的外道

第二類是附佛法外道,從犢子、方廣兩派開始。他們自恃聰明,讀了佛教經書便生起一種自己的見解;因為依附佛法而起,所以得到這個名稱。

犢子讀《舍利弗毘曇》,自行創制另一種義理,說:『我存在於四句之外,在第五不可說藏之中。』什麼是四句?外道主張色就是我、離開色另有我、我在色中、色在我中;其餘受、想、行、識四陰也都如此,每一陰有四句,合起來便成二十種身見。《大論》說:『破除二十種身見,便成為須陀洹。』就是這個意思。如今犢子所主張的我不同於六師,又不是佛法,各部論書都排斥而不接受,因此便是依附佛法而成的邪人邪法。也有人說,四句是三世及無為法。

方廣道人也自恃聰明,讀了佛說的十種譬喻,自己造出一套義理,說不生不滅,如幻如化,以空幻為宗旨。龍樹斥責這不是佛法。方廣所造的義理,也是邪人之法。

學佛法卻成為外道

第三類是學習佛法而成為外道的人。他們執著佛陀所教的門徑而生起煩惱,不能進入真理。《大論》說:如果沒有得到般若的方便,進入阿毘曇,就墮在有的一邊;進入空門,就墮在無的一邊;進入昆勒,就墮在亦有亦無的一邊。《中論》說,執著非有非無,名為愚癡論。顛倒地執著正法,反而成為邪人之法。

如果學習摩訶衍四門,卻失去般若的真意,被邪見之火燒傷,也會反成邪人之法。所以《百論》正面破斥佛法以外的外道。如今有些大乘論師猛烈破斥《毘曇》和《成實》,說它們就是計有、計無的外道;可是《成實論》自己說,三藏之中的真實義就是空,這看來近似無的意思。它又贊同百家所認為的是,反對百家所認為的非,取義時時進時出,又像因中亦有果亦無果的意思,也像昆勒的意思。這些論在當時興起時,人們依之都能得道;今天執著它們的人,是人自己失去真意,與法本身有什麼關係?對此應當從容辨析,不可把它們一概與迦毘羅等外道雷同。若以大乘破小乘,像《淨名》所斥,只取小乘未見中道真理的一邊而說它與外道相同,不是要奪去小乘作為方便門的意義。

邪人所得的法各不相同

第二,說明邪人所執的法不同。《關中疏》說:『每一位老師各有三種法:第一,得到一切智法;第二,得到神通法;第三,得到韋陀法。』

所謂一切智,是各人對自己所主張的內容生起一種見,理解敏銳明利,拿這種見智通釋一切法,所以稱為一切智外道。所謂神通法,是發得五種神通,能把城市變成鹽鹵地,把帝釋變成羊,把河流停在耳中,又能用手觸摸日月,這稱為神通外道。所謂韋陀法,是世間的文字、星象、醫術、軍事、商貨,無不理解通曉,這稱為韋陀外道。同一位老師便有三種不同的所得。犢子和方廣也是如此。

若就執著佛法而成邪來說,三藏教有四門,每一門各有三種:第一,直接發起對真理的理解,由智慧的性質而生見;第二,得到各種神通;第三,理解《四阿含》的文字。四門各三種,便有十二種不同的所得。

如果真正得到門中的意旨,每一門最初各有三種念處:第一,性念處;第二,共念處;第三,緣念處。性念處是直接緣於諦理;共念處是事與理合在一起修;緣念處是普遍緣一切境界與法,也就是緣三藏的教法。後來證果時,成為三種解脫:慧解脫、俱解脫、無疑解脫。所以結集法藏時選出一千人,全都取無疑解脫者;他們普遍理解內外經書,準備降伏外來的論敵。

《毘曇婆沙》說:煩惱障解脫、禪定障解脫、一切法障解脫。慧解脫的人得到第一種解脫,共解脫的人得到第二種解脫,只有佛得到第三種解脫,總名為無疑解脫。若執著摩訶衍通教、別教、圓教的四門而失去真意,照此推算,便有三十六種不同的所得。

二、諸見怎樣發起

第二,說明諸見的發起,分為兩部分:第一,說明諸見發起;第二,說明發起的法各不相同。

因禪或因聞而發

諸見的發起,有的因禪,有的因聞。眾生在長久劫數中,沒有什麼事情不曾做過,也曾熏習種種見;只是隔了一生便忘記,罪業遮覆原有的理解,所以內心不能很快開明。現在遮障若已微薄,便能發起各種禪定;或者禪與見同時發起,或者先有禪而後見發,或者聽別人說法,忽然豁達而生見。這像泉水被泥土石塊阻塞,挖開壅滯之後,水勢湧出便成河川。昏暗的遮障既已去除,分別之心向遠處奔馳,一天、十天連綿不止;一次又一次自己提出難題,又一次次自己解答。對自己執著的地方,覺得真實而且處處通達;對自己不執著的地方,則認為虛妄而自然破除。他的辯才又沒有阻礙,善於宣說自己的法,修飾莊嚴言辭;別人前來攻難時,也能巧妙申辯解釋。

這樣的見慧從哪裡生出來?由於禪定中有觀支。觀支屬於慧的心數,它放逸地觀察一切法,不知道自行停止;好像快馬已經出汗奔馳,不能控制。聽講的人如果沒有禪定滋潤自己的見,才要分別時,常常像把腸子抽出,甚至吐血,因此喪命,見解終究不能成就。若有定力滋潤觀支,觀雖奔逸而難制,卻不至於抽腸,多半能形成一套見解。

有人從觀支推究道理,認為一切法的因中已有果。這種理解明白敏利,能洞察遠處的意義,超過其餘的人。他拿這主張問難別人,別人不能解答,便被他說成妄語;自己執著的義理,別人不能破壞,他就認為這是真實,是無生的真智,是契理的妙心。若再細細推尋,這只不過是見惑,是世間的智慧和聰辯,其中具足八十八使與顛倒惑網,哪裡是真實理解?應當知道,這是迦毘羅見發起的相貌。

又有人依觀支推尋,認為一切法的因中沒有果。這種見十分分明,理解猛烈敏利;遇到種種難題,都能作種種通釋,引用種種證據,成立因中無果的義理。他拿這主張破別人,別人不能抵擋,便被認為是妄語;別人來破他,他自己的執著反而更堅固,便把這看作真實。他建立言論、歸結宗旨,都只朝向因中無果。應當知道,這就是僧佉見發。

如果依觀支思惟因中既有果也沒有果,《大論》說,有與無互相爭論,無也與有互相爭論;長爪所執的亦有亦無,又同執有、執無的人爭論。若進入這種見,問難便無窮無盡,這豈不是勒沙婆見發?

六師各自所主張的內容並不相同,必須善於掌握每一師所執的意思,再拿自己所發的見勘驗。雖然小處不同,只要大體相似,就是六師之見發起。

如果依觀支主張一定有我,這個我卻不在身見四句中,也不在三世、無為四句中,而在第五不可說藏中;這種見發起時,內心理解明利,能問能答,神氣俊逸,反應快捷,很難正面與他交鋒。他能破別人成立自己,決定不能移轉。應當知道,這就是犢子見發。

如果依觀支認為一切法如幻如化,生起一切皆空、窮盡形相的理解;這種理解落在虛無,看不出能解之心與所解諸法的差異,把它們全都看成幻化。只有自己的主張才是,其餘全是妄語。這是方廣見發。

如果依觀支推究一切法無常,生起便滅,不能停住;人與我像龜毛兔角一樣不可得到,只有實在的法。再把實法分析到微塵,不論粗細,總觀為無常、無我,認定這才是真實;所發的見解完全符合毘曇。從前只聽講的人雖懂名相,心路卻不通;若發起這種見,文字雖然昏昧,心中的領解卻超過百倍。不認識這種情形的人會以為他是賢聖,其實並非如此。若真是賢人,道心會盛大地與理解同時生起,能伏煩惱,成就方便位。如今他雖理解無常,爭競反而增長,道心沉沒,煩惱更盛,所以知道這是有門之見發。

如果依觀支忽然發起空解,認為一切無常生滅,三假浮虛,再以種種方便分析微塵而入空;這種見明白敏利,心用迅疾,善於問難,能破別人成立自己,認為自己真實而其餘虛妄,這是空門見發。如果依觀支主張一切法亦有亦無,進入此門後問難無窮,這是昆勒的意思;論書本來沒有流傳過來,而宿習的發起並不固定,這就是亦有亦無之見發。非有非無之見,可以照此知道。

應當知道,四門若能通達真理,就成為正見;若失去方便,就墮入四見,所以名為佛法之內的邪。豈只三藏四門會因執著而成邪見?無量劫以來,也曾學習摩訶衍通教、別教、圓教等門而不能入理,堅守它們為是,取著四邊,便被邪見之火燒傷。

如今有人依觀支忽然發起從前的理解,認為夢中所見的虛空花如幻而有,形成這種有解,理解明利;有人認為幻相本來沒有真實,因無實所以空,空解明利;有人形成亦空亦有的理解,譬如幻化之物,看見卻又不可得見;有人形成非空非有的理解,既不把它當幻有,也不把它當幻無。《中論.觀法品》說:若說諸法非有非無,就名為愚癡論。向道之人聽聞後當下領悟,名為得到實相;邪心取著而生戲論的人,便判屬愚癡論。這就是通教四門的四見。

如果依觀支思惟通教四門之解,認為那只是界內的幻夢;夢從睡眠生,睡眠就是無明。再觀無明而進入法性,也有四門:有人說法性像井中的七寶;有人說法性像虛空;有人說法性像盛酒、盛酪的瓶;有人直說法性是中道。這四種理解若明利,就是別教四門之見發。

如果依觀支忽然理解無明一轉便變成明,而明具足一切法;或者認為無明不可得,無明怎能變成明,明又怎能可得,而這個不可得具足一切法;或者認為法性之明既可得也不可得,既非可得也非不可得。一門就是三門,三門就是一門。這種理解明利,所破沒有不能破壞的,所立沒有不能成立的,沒有人能超過它,自己又認為得到無生忍。這樣的理解,就是圓教四門之見發。

大乘四門都能變成見,是因為真實語被執成虛妄語,從語言生出見;涅槃被轉成生死,因貪著而生起。這像服用太多甘露反而傷命早死,是失去方便門而墮入邪執,所以稱為內邪見。

四見是一切諸見的根本,自性、他性又是共性、無因的根本。所以龍樹破了自性、他性之後,指出共性兼有兩者的過失,而無因根本不能成立。自、他尚且不實,何況無因?根本被破,枝末也隨之傾倒,用意就在這裡。若要立自、他,共、無因也可照例建立。如今大小乘四門因偏執而成見,只須說明自、他的意思,其餘便可以知道。

三藏教說大生生起小生,都從無明而生,不從真理生起;無明滅便諸行滅,也不涉及真理的滅。執著這種說法,就成自性邪見。通教說真理本來不生,因不生所以能生,生起一切惑;若滅一切惑,也仍由不生。這樣執著,就是他性邪見。在界內,以惑為自、真為他,所以如此說。界外則以法性為自、無明為他。別教主張阿梨耶生起一切惑,依緣修智慧滅此無明,能生能滅都不關法性;執著這個說法,便成他性生的邪見。圓教說法性生一切法、法性滅一切法,執著它便是自性邪見。前一種像君主弱而臣子強,後一種像君主強而臣子弱;其餘共性、無因兩種可以照此知道。

因聽聞,多半發起對理的見,較少發神通、韋陀;因禪定,多半發神通、韋陀,較少發對理的見。發起理見的人能折伏學者;發起神通的人能折伏世俗人。世俗人取奇異而不取理解,學者取理解而不取奇異。發起韋陀能兼伏兩者;三種都發的人最能兼伏兩者。因禪而發已如上說,現在要說因聞而發。

修行人雖得到禪定而尚未發見,還須由前人啟發其心。心已寂靜敏利,忽然聽到因中有果,心便豁然開悟,洞明邪慧,百千重意思愈來愈深、愈來愈遠,像石間湧出的泉水。這就是從聽聞發起迦毘羅見。其餘三宗也是如此。若聽到第五不可說藏,或聽到幻化,就發起犢子、方廣之見。或者聽到三藏四門,隨其中一句生解,見心忽然發起,深解無常,觀心奔躍,再也不能控制,這就是因聞發有門見;其餘三門也是如此。若聽到摩訶衍十二門,依每一門生起理解,理解明利,超過先前所聽到的內容;雖發此解,卻沒有大方便,不能進入小乘賢位,又不同於迦毘羅等邪解,所以知道這是發十二門見。

發得的法各不相同

第二,說明發得之法不同。迦毘羅外道若直接發起見解,理解雄猛,邪慧超卓,很難摧伏,這就是得到一切智法。若直接發起神通,能在水火上行走,隱身、現身隨己自在,誰會不把他看作聖人?真諦三藏說:『震旦國有二種福〔云云〕。』這就是得到神通法。若直接發起韋陀,通曉世間文字,閱讀各種典籍,一看就懂;或者暗中閱讀三藏、大乘等經,眼睛才一接觸便能識別,再拿這些知識莊嚴自己的法。這樣一來,佛法內外便互相混雜,幾乎無法辨認。

如今有許多還俗的人,因畏懼國王差役而進入外道,偷取佛法義理,又竊取對《老子》《莊子》的理解,造成混雜,迷惑初學;誰是正,誰是邪?這就是發得韋陀法。一種外道各有三種法;若按人所得多少計算,共有七種人,就是單獨得到三種之一的三人、兼得兩種的三人、三種具足的一人。其餘兩家外道也是如此,合有二十一種不同的所得。若就六師說,每師有三種,合成十八種;按每人所得多少計算,便有四十二種不同的所得。犢子、方廣所得不同,也各有單獨三種、兼得三種、具足一種的七類人。

佛法內部的邪見所得也不相同。隨每一門所主張的道理而精細分別,這是得到性念處之見,也可說像慧解脫嗎?其餘各門都是如此。若單獨或兼帶發得神通,能自在飛騰,這是得到共念處之見,也可說像俱解脫嗎?若神通、智慧自在而不能說法,便去尋求經論,或聽別人講說,隨即通達名目數量;又向下通曉韋陀,向上通曉大乘,全用自己的見消解各種法門,再以各種法門莊嚴自己的見。四門每門有三種,按人所得也各有七類。

若通教、別教、圓教等四門,各有人直接發慧解,各有人只發變化神通,各有人通曉內外經書;自己以為所發是真道,別人也把他推得很高,如今只判這是邪見。每門有七類,合成八十四種〔云云〕。

其次,前面總說同與異,現在應逐一說明。三家外道、六師雖同樣發一切智,其中有的發有見的一切智,有的發無見的一切智,還有種種不同的一切智;因所主張之處有別,所以見智也不同。每家都認為自己才是,其餘人全非。

《法華》說:『野干先死。』這表示敏銳的使發起時,遲鈍的使便隱沒,所以說先死。又說:『各種大惡獸爭著前來吞食。』就是所執的一見能夠吞噉其他各見。論力說:『一切老師都有究竟道,其中鹿頭第一。』應當知道,各家的一切智彼此不同。乃至三藏四門的一切智、大乘四門的一切智,也各執己見而互相吞噉,彼此不同,可以由此領會。

其次,神通法也不同。神通依禪定而得,所得的禪並不一定。外外道只依根本禪發神通,或依初禪,或依二禪、三禪、四禪;所依既然不同,力量與作用也各別。佛法內部的邪見也依根本禪,又可能依淨禪;所依有淺有深,神通作用也有優有劣。《大論》說:『在所依的地方,神通作用廣;在不是所依的地方,神通作用劣。』禪只是事相,神通只是作用,兩者都屬福德莊嚴,不是義理爭論的所在。雖沒有理上的爭論,若比較所依,神通的作用仍全都不同。

其次,韋陀法也不同。外外道所發、所讀的治家濟世之書,部帙不同,詮釋敘述各異。發得、讀得多,所知便廣;發得、讀得少,所知便狹。人的傲慢自大,全由文字知識的差別而起。佛法內部的邪見者若不發、不讀外外道文字,所知便狹;若發、若讀,所知便廣。不發、不讀三藏文字,就不知界內名相,見解便狹;發得、讀得,見解便廣。不發、不讀大乘文字,就不知界外名相,見解便狹;發得、讀得,見解便廣。由此可知,韋陀法中的每一句知識都各不相同。

再次,總合判別內外諸見。內外各種邪見都能說理慧、神通、文字,也能立德調心,尊重別人、謙抑自己,以聲譽感動眾人;這像菴羅果的生熟很難從外表知道,即使天下最聰明的人,也難測邪正。現在判別卻很容易。

以迦毘羅的七類人來說,推究根本,全從錯誤的無而生。若主張因中有果,便以這一句破一切法,只留下此句。他顯作各種神通,動搖世俗,使人相信因中有果;又引用不同家派的韋陀,以名相莊嚴因中有果;所立種種行法,最後的宗旨和歸趣也都指向因中有果。為了所執之法,他發動身、口、意,造作無量罪業,詳情如後文所說。由此驗知,他是迦毘羅外道。僧佉、沙婆可以照此推知;從邪誤的無開始,最後歸回自己所執,犢子也如此。小乘、大乘四門都可依此理解。

從源頭驗察,再看最後歸宗,清濁就像涇水、渭水分流,豆與麥也各成種類。為什麼竟把《莊子》《老子》與佛法等同?邪正既被混合,又怎能拔除大的錯誤、分清小的差別?自己修行尚且不明,怎能教化別人?老師弟子都將一同墮落。

三、諸見的過失

第三,說明過失,分兩部分:第一,正面說明過失;第二,合併判決真偽。

漢地三玄的得失

正面說明過失。若天竺的宗計有三家,真丹也有相似的義理。周弘政解釋三玄說:《易》判八卦、陰陽、吉凶,是就有來說玄;《老子》虛融,是就無來說玄;《莊子》自然,是就有與無來說玄。其餘支派的源祖都從這裡分出。現在暫依這三者說明得失。

如《莊子》說,貴賤、苦樂、是非、得失,全都自然而然。若說一切自然,就是不破壞果,卻因不辨前世業而破壞因。禮制仁義能保衛自身、安定國家;若不實行,便會滅族亡家。若只說現世立德,不說能招後世果報,就是破果而不破因;若又說福慶流傳後世,合前面來看,就是亦有果亦無果。

依同一種主張,可以產生三種行:第一,計有而行善;第二,計有而行惡;第三,計有而行無記。譬如說,理分本來如此,富貴不能企求,貧賤不能怨恨逃避,生不足以欣喜,死又何必畏懼。用這種虛心,使身居富貴者不驕傲,處在窮困者不愁悶;貪欲瞋恚止息,安住同一胸懷。以自然教導眾人,作為入理的引導,這是它的好處。

它的所得還有多種。若說『常常無欲,觀察其中的妙』,究竟要無掉什麼欲?輕忽玉璧、拋棄公卿宰相之位,洗耳而拒牛,自守高潔志向,這只是捨棄欲界的欲,攀取上界勝妙,把初禪等當作妙。怎麼知道?莊公說,皇帝問道,觀察神氣,看見身內種種物;把這看作道,近似通明觀中發得初禪之妙。

若說一切苦的原因以貪欲為本,離開貪欲便得涅槃,這是捨棄三界之欲,得到滅、止、妙、離中的妙。又有一種法名為無染;若對法生染,就是染著涅槃。沒有這種染欲,便得一道微妙,使種種欲與妙都歸於無。可是你究竟得到哪一種?連欲界欲與初禪妙都不認識,何況後面的欲與妙?若從權宜說,這只是順應根機漸次引導,隱覆真相而談欲與妙,不能公開當作了義宣說。若只是平息跨越企求的欲,觀自然之妙,使險惡偏邪的行為去除,而留下仁讓風氣,這都屬於計有自然之理而行善。

又有人主張自然,任意放縱氣性,既不運心駕御自己從善,也不刻意役使自己作惡,認為一有造作就傷害精神和諧,不合自然。這雖沒有取捨,仍是行無記。行業尚未窮盡,受報哪有疑問?

主張自然而作惡的人,認為萬物自然,便任意造惡,反正最後都歸自然。這正是背離無欲而放縱欲望,違背妙而走向粗鄙。莊周斥責仁義,雖然是為防小盜,卻沒有料到大盜會高舉仁義來圖謀國家。本來借自然止息欲望,現在反而高舉自然來作惡,這個道理很清楚。

天竺空見的得失

其次,就天竺種種見來說,空見力量最強,現在寄空見說明得失。空見分三類:第一,破因不破果,或破果不破因;第二,因果都破,卻不破一切法;第三,因果及一切法全都破。這裡的一切法,是指三種無為。

第三種外道與佛法有什麼不同?《大論》說大乘、小乘的空,以體空、析空為差別;外道也有體空、析空,究竟怎樣分辨?外道依邪因緣或無因緣,不論分析而空、體達而空,乃至畢竟空,都是如此;佛弟子知道一切從愛的因緣生,不論分析、體達,乃至畢竟空,都依正因緣。

有人說只用破斥的語言,不是體達。現在看《中論》從頭到尾,各品都以破為題,破斥難道與體達不同嗎?所以不能用體、析來分邪正、大小,只能依《大論》所說:分析正因緣,便不同於外道;體達正因緣,便不同於小乘。

若依邪因緣生起空見,也有善、惡、無記三行,而多半作惡。真正觀空的人知道一切從愛而生,連善尚且不造作,何況作惡?發起空見的人,果報、財富、地位並不是他爭論的所在,空才是他所爭之處。贊同我的空法,便對他親愛;贊成有而破斥空,便對他怨恨瞋惱;別人不懂空,就被他輕慢得像泥土。

他仗著空心無所畏懼,不守規矩,任情縱欲,破壞正見、威儀、清淨生活,死後都將墮入三惡道。六師甚至說,有慚愧便墮地獄,無慚愧反而不墮地獄。於眾人面前違背魚膾之禁,躲在屏後作不當之事,對天雷撒尿、污穢水井,忤逆父親、輕慢母親,比對路人還要惡劣,反自稱無礙。若對親人一套、對疏遠者一套,便不平等;自己行姦惡,又拿來教人,普遍相約共同作非,失去禮法如同畜生,天下豈能容忍?

他雖自稱無礙,卻不敢忤逆君主、輕慢王后,仍愛惜自己的身體,可見對身體還有罣礙。這種人若直接發起此見,見只會愈來愈盛,永遠不能得禪;若先得禪而後見發,禪法多會失去;若見發後再得禪,多半是鬼禪、鬼通,能預記吉凶,也能知道他心。他又廣泛尋求韋陀,拿來證成此見,使人相信接受。

他破壞世間與出世間的善,名為吞噉人的狗;若還有一法未破,就不算飽足,破盡一切法,見心才飽,所謂飽就是見轉熾盛。內心沒有真實修行,只作空虛爭論,像叫喚求食。執空與執有相爭,空、有互破,就像狗露齒相咬;自我稱讚像長聲號叫;破別人叫作抓取,成立自己叫作拖拉。狐疑未決也像露齒,凌逼恐嚇別人像號叫,正如守家的狗為使別人害怕而吠。這種人純粹是自己作惡。

他教化別人有四種:第一,自己作惡,勸別人行善;第二,自己宣揚行善,勸別人作惡;第三,自己與別人都作惡;第四,自己與別人都行善。自己作惡而勸別人行善的,說我能通達真理,作惡無妨;你修行尚淺,必須先學善法,教化時也應先用善引導。自己行善卻勸別人作惡的,說我是教化之主,必須和光而行善;你只自行,正應作惡。自己與別人都作惡,是因自稱一同實行真道;自己與別人都行善,是因自稱一同行使權道。四種雖然不同,全都以惡為根本,隨業沉淪,哪有道路可依?

又有依空見而行善的人,認為空中本無善惡,卻仍必須行善;若不行善,毘紐天就會瞋怒,眾生便受苦惱。苦惱所以成為業,是由過去造成,現在承受果報;用現世持戒、苦行遮止當下惡果,就能得到漏盡。既然如此,他便因認為必須行善而持戒節身、少欲知足、穿粗衣、吃草。可是他為空造行,仍會生喜怒,空依舊是瞋恚、愛著與爭論之處。若先得禪而見發,禪退失而見轉熾;若先發見後得禪,仍是鬼禪、鬼通。這種空見自行只有一種,教化別人仍有前述四種。自行與化他都只是隨業,隨業上升或下沉,與真道有什麼關係?

再有執空見而不作善也不作惡的人,鬆鬆散散,自稱平等安住。雖說平等安住,遇稱讚便愛,遇毀謗便憂,又拿自己的平等高過別人。應當知道,這個平等本身就是生煩惱之處。得禪發見,情形如前;也可能通韋陀,偷取佛教義理,莊嚴自己的無記主張,露齒叫喚,無量結使從無記生起。自行只有一種,教化別人也有四種。若不發禪,便被業牽入惡道;若發禪,便隨禪受生;若這種業尚未成熟,前世種種業中力量強的先牽引受報。由此應知,各種見尚且不能伏惑,怎能說惑已斷?亦有亦無等見的得失,都可照此知道。

摩訶止觀卷第十〔上〕

摩訶止觀卷第十〔下〕

隋代天台智者大師講說

弟子灌頂記錄

佛法內部邪見的得失

其次,說明佛法內部邪見的得失。三藏教的四門本來都是為了使人進入真理;可是有人執著它們而造成戲論,發起見,又得到禪,並且通曉經籍。若拿其中一門自我執著,照理只應生善;但既然與見相應,仍會生起善、惡、無記三行。

其中行善的人,專為三界諸有造作果報;他取著有門而生愛恚,勝過別人便墮入我慢的深坑,輸給別人便墮入憂愁的牢獄。有門成為生煩惱之處,反而關閉,不能使他得到解脫。行惡的人,執著有門才是,其餘全非;為了維護這個有門,沒有惡事不作,邪鬼進入其心,只知增加眾人的過失。

九十六種外道中,有三種隨順佛法,所以有阿毘曇道、修多羅道;然而五百羅漢正是從這個有門得出,怎能說門本身是邪?今天的人偏執取著,鬼才進入其心,所以稱為阿毘曇鬼。有人從見進入,有人從禪進入。自己修行是一種,教化別人也有四種。一門如此,其餘三門也一樣。

通教、別教、圓教也各有四門,每門都可能生見;每一見同樣具足善、惡、無記三行。行善的情形可以知道。行惡的人,偏執大乘所說的貪欲就是道、三毒中具一切佛法。這些真實語本來是為滅煩惱,他偏取執著,反而生起結業;稱讚、毀謗、憂愁、愛著,欺凌、傲慢、露齒爭吵,都在名利上競逐。自己修行是一種,教化別人有四種。既然不是無漏,便由無明滋潤業,業力牽引受生,哪裡不能到達?不能一一細說,都可依前例知道。

像這些見都違背聖道,又能生長種種罪過。不認識的人,執著而認為這就是道;即使知道是見,仍隨見而行,把自己埋沒,又怎能在見的動與不動之中修習道品?以上是略說見發會產生的各種過失。

合併判決真偽

第二,合併判決真與偽,分兩部分:第一,依所生起的法判決;第二,依見所依止的法判決。

先從所生起的法來說。從外外道四句一直到圓教四門,從外道的見智與韋陀,一直到圓教的三念處、三解脫,名目雖有相同,所生起的見罪和繫縛卻沒有差別,譬如金鎖與鐵鎖,材質雖異,同樣能鎖人。從外道四句一直到圓教四見,名字雖清淨美妙,所生煩惱的本體卻都是污穢,譬如玉璞與鼠璞,外貌相似而內容不同。從外道四句一直到圓教四見,雖同樣加以研磨鍛鍊,卻有能成與不能成的差別,譬如牛乳與驢乳。從外道四見一直到圓教四見,又有害人與不害人的差別,譬如外形相似的迦羅果與鎮頭果。

他們所主張的神我其實是繫縛之法,不是自在的我。每人都執自己才對,說其餘全是妄語,互相判是判非,與如實有什麼關係?自己以為找到真道,反而開出通往三有的道路;希望得到涅槃,卻正在沉入生死。自己說所言真實正確,最後仍成邪僻;在可愛之處生愛,在可瞋之處生瞋。

他雖生起慈悲,只是由愛見而起的悲;雖能安忍塗香與割截兩種境遇,只是生滅心強行忍耐;雖有一切智,只是依世情推測度量;雖有神通,只是根本禪的變化、有漏的變化。所讀韋陀是世間智慧所說,不是陀羅尼之力,也不是從法界流出。雖暫時斷了鈍使,仍像尺蠖步行,又像世間醫生治病,病好後還會再發。八十八使的集海浩大,三界生死的苦輪無邊;沉著有漏,永遠沒有出離之日。這全是諸見的幻偽,怎能當成真實之道?

再依所依止的法來判別。一切見各依自己的法。三家外外道是有漏人發有漏法,以有漏心執著本來就是可著的法。所著之法與能著之心,本體都是爭競;不只在修因時彼此抓頭拔髮,發見後還把它當作涅槃。執著形成猛烈之見,毒害加深,鬥爭更盛。所依之法不真,所發之見也虛偽。

這雖是邪法,若有人暗中得到真意,也能藉邪相進入正相。花飛葉動,只憑少許因緣尚能使人證得支佛,何況世間舊有的法?然而支佛所得雖正,花與葉終究不是正教。外外道可以暗中領悟,但其法門只通向種種見,不是正法。這都是因為以執著心執著可著之法,因與果都在爭鬥,所以斷定是邪法生邪見。

三藏教四門卻是出世聖人所證的出世法,本體清淨,是滅除煩惱之處。不只佛經是正法,五百羅漢所申說的法也能使人得道。《妙勝定》說,佛滅度後一百年,有十萬人出家,九萬人得道;二百年時,有十萬人出家,一萬人得道。由此應知,若以無著之心,不執著本來無著之法,發心真誠正確,覺察一切無常,念念生滅,早晨尚不能保證晚上仍在,只一心尋求出離要道,就不會封閉在一門中生染著、起戲論。

譬如有人急著面見國王,接受賞賜、拜受官職,從四座城門任何一門進去都可以,哪有空停在門口爭論門的好壞?知道門是通路,便不必爭論;又像藥本為治病,不應只分別藥的名相。應當迅速走出火宅,窮盡一切苦的邊際。真明發起時,證究竟道,畢竟無諍;無諍便無業,無業便沒有生死,只有道、滅。心地平坦安然,因果的爭執全無,鬥諍也都止息,只剩正見,沒有邪見。

四門雖是正法,若用執著心執著四門,仍會生邪見,把四門看成彼此不同,修因時多起鬥爭。譬如有人長久住在城門,分別門上的瓦與木,評論厚薄、精粗,說南門好而北門不好,東門巧而西門拙,自己停留不肯前進;這不是門的過失。

執著法門的人也如此。他分別名相,廣泛知道煩惱,背誦許多道品,追求名聲、聚集徒眾,靠媒介炫耀自己以求顯達;敲響自大的鼓,豎起我慢的旗,向別人誇耀,彼此鬥爭,甚至抓頭拔髮。八十八使中的瞋愛浩大,全因以執著心著於正法門而生邪見。所起煩惱與外外道完全相同,至於所計之法,卻有天與地那樣的差別。

《方等》說,種種追問橋梁的事情,被智者呵斥。人也如此,本為學道而修四門,三十多年仍只分別一門,尚未明白;功夫才剛用上,年紀已經老了,得不到三種法味,空空地生,空空地死,白白丟棄這一期生命,像只顧問橋的人,有什麼利益?這都是由執著心執著本來無著之法,因而生邪見。

通教四門的本體也是正法,近則通往化城。三藏的門迂曲,通教的門直捷,巧拙雖然不同,通達之處並無差別。像天門端直華美,其他門迂曲粗陋;只要不住在兩種門下,都能通過前進。若只數算門上的瓦木,兩種門都會使人遲滯壅塞。若不稽留於法門,無論修因或證果都不爭著,這名為無著心;不執著無著之法,便不生邪見。

反過來,若以執著心執著這個直門,也會生邪見。或為名,或為徒眾,或為勝過別人,或為利益而分別門相,瞋、愛、慢等結便由此生起。這像把毒放進良藥,怎會不死?把見著之毒放進正法,便增長苦集,不是如來的過失。利根外道以邪相進入正相,從有著轉成無著,成為佛弟子;鈍根內道卻以正相進入邪相,使無著變成有著,成為邪弟子,豈不可悲?

別教、圓教四門,無論巧拙利鈍,都通往究竟涅槃;修因時不住著,證果時無鬥爭。若封閉在門上而起見,就生煩惱,與漚樓佉等外道相同。依此觀察,如有明眼的人站在涇水、渭水交會處,怎會只迷於名稱而不辨清濁?

見起所由與養見研心

約略說明見的發起,共有五番;一番有四門,便是二十門;一門又有七種人,合為一百四十種不同的見法。廣說則無量,全都憑因緣而開發。因為通修止,所以各種禪能發;因為通修觀,所以各種見能發。共同修習的緣雖由止觀,根本上的別因卻必定來自前世。

有人前世曾在外外道中學習,有人曾作佛弟子,在大小乘中學習;有人因聽聞法相而曾發各種見,有人因坐禪而發見。隔了一生便廢失忘記,理解不能現前;如今修寂靜心,或聽聞經論熏動宿業,見法便重新生起。前世熏習成熟,今生容易發;前世生疏,今生難發。隔生久遠的難發,接近的容易發。若外外道之見熏得熟而且近,就先發外見;佛法內見熏得熟而且近,就先現內見。

神通、韋陀屬於事相,隔生容易忘,所以難發;見屬慧性,比較難忘,所以容易發。這像人久別之後,記得名字卻忘了面貌;事與理的難易也一樣。若前世在外另有鬼的因緣,鬼便加持,使他發鬼禪、鬼見;若在外有聖者因緣,聖人加持,便發正禪、正見。

其次,若先前不知道諸見的過患,看到見發便恐怖,匆匆急著截斷;如今既已認識邪相,千萬不要倉卒截斷,可以暫且任它成就,轉作助道之力,必有很大益處。譬如腹中有蠱,先養寸白蟲,後用幹珠藥瀉除。

為什麼如此?世間愚癡的人頑鈍得像牛馬;即使法音如雷震響,言辭像錦繡鋪滿,對他的見聞仍沒有利益。他沉溺五欲,像腹中有蠱。若諸見發起,見能吞噉遲鈍的煩惱,像寸白蟲噉蠱。見慧與正觀相近,聽法容易領悟,像最後所用的珠湯。因此必須養見研心,使見慧走在前面開導。

若進入二乘,就移動所發之見而修道品;若進入大乘,就不移動所發之見而修道品。像面對敵寇、破除賊眾,事成之後才建立功勳;這就是養外見而使它作侍者。若發三藏迂拙四門之見、通教善巧四門之見,見雖是障礙,助道的力量也深。若只是福德法,升天很容易,取道卻難;見屬慧性,沉淪也容易,悟道卻很迅速。

《大論》說:『三惡道中也有得道者,只因人少,所以不說;白人身上有黑痣,不能因此名為黑人。』既然知道這是見,其他迷惑便不能乘隙生起,可以讓它盡量分別。各種外道先已有見心,受佛教化時,就像快馬看到鞭影立刻領悟;沒有見的人,像再多斧頭也砍不斷,又像對牛馬說法,彼此不能領會。

連語言都未理解的㺐獠,怎能向他談玄?所以對這種人,佛便不能直接以佛身出世,而要分化形質,作老師、作朋友,引導他的見法。佛日初出時,權宜之人引向實法,他們聽法便悟。《法華》所說密遣二人,約法是方便的兩教,約人則是權宜示同二乘。眾聖尚且屈曲方便,先教導他的見;如今既已見發,怎能匆忙除去?

若前世修別教、圓教八門,尚未斷通惑,今生這些見若發起,過失與三家外道相同。若前世已破通惑而未悟別理,或與二乘相同。前面的見尚且可以養,何況這類見?《淨名》取二乘有過的一邊,把它斥同外道;又取能助道的一邊,使它作侍者。應當從進、退兩面理解,不可一向而論。今生修道而見心發起,真理便可期待;見若尚未發,聖境便難以契會。

四、依諸見修止觀

第四,依諸見修止觀。如上總說,所得的見不同,共有一百四十種;若只就佛法內部邪見說,則有一百一十二種。若立宗說義,究竟有多少宗?十地論、中論、攝論、數論等所分別的見相,彼此相同還是不同?邪正道路如何分判,優劣高下又有多少?能理解以上意思,就知道這些問題並不相干;不理解的人,又能怎麼辦?

佛法有兩種說法:第一是攝受,第二是折伏。像〈安樂行〉不評論別人的長短,是攝受的意思;《大經》說執持刀杖乃至斬首,是折伏的意思。給與和奪去雖是不同道路,目的都在使人得到利益。若諸見使人流轉,必須折斷除盡;若它能幫助鍛鍊心神,使人回心入正,就可以攝受。

前面是依多種人說種種見,並沒有一個人同時發起全部見。即使全部都發,也會互相吞噉,最後只留一件自己認定的真實。若依每一見各自開作法門,用善巧方式顯示言說,經過九十日仍說不完。若把每一見束成同一觀門,其中具足一切法,也不可說盡。多與一都能自在運用。

現在暫以一見為例,其餘眾多的見也是如此。諸見之中,空見能破壞一切,而一切見不能破空,引導人的力量最敏銳,所以先觀空見,依它例開十種意思。

〔科§十四之四之一〕思議境:空見出生十法界

思議境,是說空見能出生十法界。胡瓜本身不是熱,卻能成為熱病的原因;空見本身不是十法界,卻能作十法界的因緣。《成論》說,剎那間邊見心生起,就是不善。《毘曇》說,剎那間邊見心生起,不屬善也不屬惡,名為無記;但是由它等起的心,一切善惡都依它生起。如今這個空見也有兩種意義。若分開來觀,就像因等起心,十法界都從它生起。為什麼?從前尚未發空見,就不曾依空見造行;如今空見發起,立即有善、惡、無記三行,如前所說。

依空見造惡的人,實行無礙之法,向上看不見經與佛是可尊敬的福田,向下看不見父母恩德;他學習裸體畜生的行法,斷滅世間與出世間種種善。闡提雖惡,尚且留有憐愛之善;空見卻永遠沒有,純造上、中、下三品惡。逆害傷毀,便是地獄法界;無慚無愧,便是畜生法界;慳貪破齋,以不清淨方式自活,便是餓鬼法界。因破齋而常常飢餓,因生活不淨而吞食污穢。

依空見行善的人,持戒苦行,以十善莊嚴自己,身、口、意三業淳熟,便是三善道法界;又若發起根本禪,便生色界。

聲聞法界

又依空見而生聲聞法。主張空的人,其實不認識空見之中具足四諦。為什麼?若真正證得法性,那才是空、才是清淨;虛妄空見一定依附果報身,而果報是污穢之色。《大品》說,色無論被說成常或無常等,這些說法全都依色;心所領受的是空才對,其餘都不對。

取著空的形貌,使它與有法相異;緣空而生善、惡、無記三行;分別空的心勝過其餘諸法,這些合起來名為五陰。空的塵境對著意根,就是兩入;再加意識,就是三界。界、入、陰等,便是苦諦。

空見又是瞋恚所依之處、愛著所依之處、我慢所依之處。執有見較弱的人,被空見抓破有法,把道理強拉到空的一邊,疑便不能生;若有法抓不破、道理拉不來,就露齒而生疑。即使現在沒有疑,以後仍會大疑。為什麼?若空真是道理,自己理當與聖人相等;既然並不相等,怎能不疑?

是誰主張空?是主張空的我。我其實不空,空也不是我;卻因空生我,便說是我修行、我理解,別人讚我、毀我。他執著空的一邊,不能捨離;又認為依空之道可以通往涅槃,便拿空作戒,而不是雞戒、狗戒等。把不是因的當成因,是偷取因的戒禁取;把空當作真正的空,其實並非理空,把不是果的當成果,是偷取果的見取;空見偏斜,就是邪見。

這樣十使都從空見而生。欲界苦諦下具足十使;集諦下有七使,除身見、邊見、戒禁取;道諦下有八使,除身見、邊見;滅諦下有七使,除身見、邊見、戒禁取,合成三十二使。色界、無色界各除四種瞋使,各有二十八使;三界總合為八十八使,這名為集諦。集因迷苦而起,苦又由集而生,苦集相續流轉,長爪不能認識。又有一鬼,頭上烈火燃燒;從非想天以下尚不能免,怎能面對空而不認識苦集?

若認識空見就是苦集,就知道苦集都依色身。一切色法名為身,身色污穢;污穢是不淨,為有智慧的人所厭惡。破除淨倒,名為身念處。

若領受空見,這個受就是所謂受而不受,是受的第二句。順從空見就是樂受,違背空見就是苦受,不違不順就是不苦不樂受;三受就是三苦,把苦當樂便是顛倒。知道其中無樂,破除樂倒,名為受念處。

空的塵境對心而生意識,這個心剎那生滅,不斷更新流動;有攀緣,思慮便生,沒有攀緣,思慮便不生。生滅無常而認為是常,就是顛倒;認識此識無常,便破常倒,名為心念處。

取空的形貌而行善惡,又在行中計我。若行就是我,行有好壞、興衰,我也應隨之有好壞、興衰。諸行無量;我若遍滿諸行,我便成無量;我若不遍,一行既無我,眾行也都無我。勉強計有我,便是顛倒;知道無我,便破想、行兩陰,名為法念處。

其實每一陰都可通計常、樂、我、淨四倒;只是在想、行上計我最強,在色上計淨最強,在心上計常最強,在受上計樂最強,這名為別念處。總念處便不如此分別。這就是空見生起念處觀。勤勉破除顛倒之觀,便顯四正勤;在定心中修習,名為四如意足;五種善根生起,名為五根;破除五種惑,名為五力;道用安穩,名為七覺分;在安穩道中行,名為八正道。這就是空見能生道諦。

四倒除去,所以愚癡滅;愚癡滅,所以愛滅;愛滅,所以瞋滅;瞋滅後知道空見不是道,慚愧低頭,便是慢滅;不再有執著,便是疑滅。空見既具苦集,苦集便不是畢竟空;執空之心破後,尋求我而不可得。我不可得,所以身見破;身見破,所以我見破;我見破,所以邊見破。空見不是道,所以戒禁取破;空不是真正的涅涅,所以見取破;空見不合道理,所以邪見破。

十使破,所以八十八使破;八十八使破,所以煩惱的子縛破;子縛破,便能發得初果,進而成為無學;果報的果縛也破,進入無餘涅槃。這就是空見生起滅諦,也就是聲聞法界。

若在空見中明白認識四諦,就知道窮盡苦的真道;以真道伏斷煩惱,便能成為賢聖。乃至一百四十種見,無論單獨、複合、具足、無言等見,都能在其中認識真道,便能移動、走出諸見。若非如此,便不能看見四真諦,所以長久流轉在生死大苦海。若能看見四諦,便能斷生死;一切受生既已窮盡,不再承受任何有。就是這個意思。

支佛法界

其次,說明空見生起支佛法。空見本來不是空,卻妄認為空,這是顛倒分別;顛倒就是無明。因無明而取著空見;若已知道無明,還取著什麼?若知道無明,就不起取、有;過去的業完結後,不再造新業。不造新業、不起取與有,過去業完結後,便是不再生無明;沒有無明,便成智慧光明。所以有智慧時便沒有煩惱,沒有煩惱時無明便滅;無明滅則行滅,一直到老死都滅。

《中論》問:聲聞怎樣觀十二因緣的義?回答時卻說常、無常等六十二見,問答幾乎不相應。現在正可知道,這就是回答。常、無常等見都是無明;認識無明,不再生取、有,就是聲聞法中的十二因緣觀。《法華》說,樂於獨處寂靜,尋求自然慧;這個慧正是善能寂滅六十二見。

又觀一剎那空見已具四諦,再問這個空見心是有還是無?剎那心一起便具五陰,怎能說無?這就是有支。有中已含果,也符合因中有果的意思。若說有支沒有果,有支仍有因;因的意義既已具足,有又從哪裡生?若沒有取,有便不生。

取就是五見:執空的一邊是邊見,在空中計我,認空為道,認空為涅槃,認空為正,這些就是取支。取從愛生;喜愛它、違逆時瞋怒、對別人起慢、對此理起疑,都名為愛支。愛依受而生,因有受才生愛;就像領受一法後,愛著滋味而追求。知道受依觸而生,是因意根與空塵相對而有觸。經說,因觸的因緣,所以生起種種受。觸又由入而有,塵接觸諸根,所以成為入。

入依名色而有。歌羅邏位有三事:色有五胞,命能連續維持,識具有受、想、行、識四陰之名,所以三事稱為名色。名色由最初託胎之識而有,識由過去業而有,業由無明而有。無明是過去的顛倒,主張有、主張無等一切見,因此能成辦今世的色身。

《經云》說,識是種子,業是田地,愛是水,無明覆蔽,於是生出名色之芽。如今又再顛倒,迷於空見,生起善惡之行,種下未來名色的芽。顛倒上再加顛倒,無明上再加無明,彼此互作因緣,沒有窮盡。

若知道無明是顛倒,就不必再推畫有或無;只須通達它的體性本來不實,只因妄想因緣和合而有。既知是顛倒,無明便止息;無明止息,所以諸行乃至老死全都止息。一種空見的無明與老死止息,一百四十種見的無明與老死也全都止息。因其止息,便破二十五有,逐漸除去習氣,這名為空見生支佛法界。

若在空見中認識這就是無明,無明便可滅;若不能認識,連空見的網都走不出去。為見造業,像蠶吐絲結繭,怎能成為支佛?鼻隔禪師發得空見,多半墮在網中不能自拔;散心法師雖能分別諸使,也不知道自己空見的過患。暗中自稱證悟的凡夫如龜,盲目的狗胡亂吠叫,自己修行、教化別人都完全沒有道氣。

六度菩薩法界

空見又能生六度菩薩法。既認識空見中的諦與緣,就是知道病、認識藥。因認識藥而自己欣喜,因知道病而悲愍別人,希望與眾生一同離苦得樂。空見的陰、界是苦,十使等是集,念處等是道,四倒破是滅;依這四諦生起四弘誓願。

就一個空見來說,一日一夜生出多少百千億五陰?每一組五陰都是眾生。一日一夜尚且如此,何況一生?何況無量生?空見如此,其餘見也如此。能生的見既多,所生五陰便不可計數。一個人尚且如此,何況許多人?這就是眾生無邊誓願度。

一個空見念念都生八十八使;其餘三見、六十二見等,也都生八十八使。一個人尚且如此,何況許多人?這就是煩惱無量誓願斷。

一個空見能修念處道品,其餘一切見各有正道、助道,無量無邊。一個人尚且如此,許多人也如此。這就是法門無盡誓願知。

一個空見的煩惱能滅;無量見、無量煩惱也都能滅。一個人如此,一切人也如此。這就是無上佛道誓願成。

如果眾生的苦集具有固定真實的自性,就不可能度;正因苦集從因緣生,沒有自性,苦海才可以乾涸,集的源頭才容易窮盡,所以稱為度。依空見生起誓願,情形如上。

再依空見生起六度之行。若執空見而布施,那只是魔施;若知道空見有諦、有緣,有無常、無我等過失,便捨空見,又悲愍別人,勸他捨空見而行布施。

若執空見而持戒,與持雞戒、狗戒等有什麼不同?知道空見有無常等過失,不受空見傷害,又慈愍別人,使他防範空見,這才是持戒。

若把空見作瞋恚與愛著之處,勉強忍耐,只是力量不足,因畏懼別人而忍。如今知道空見有無量過患,能伏空見及六十二見,又勸別人安忍空見,這才是忍辱。

若不除空見而精進,夾雜邪見便不是精,退入三惡道也不是進。如今知道空見,使空見不起,名為精;破除空見所造之業而能向上出離,名為進;又勸別人修這種精進。

若不破空見而得禪,多半是鬼法。如今知道空的過失,不被空見動搖,成就正禪、正通,不以神通諂媚、驕傲、求利;又用神通勸化眾生,使他們捨離見的散亂而進入禪定。

若執空見而修智慧,只是愚癡的世間智慧。如今認識空見中的諦緣,以無常之狼驚嚇空見之羊,使煩惱脂肪消去;再廣發願行,使功德之身肥壯,悲愍眾生,使他們除脂長肉。若有緣的根機成熟,便坐道場,斷結成佛。這名為空見生六度法界。

通教、別教與圓教法界

觀空見就是無明,無明當體就是空;從無明所生的一切苦集,全都不可得。為什麼?四倒是橫加計著,哪有固定真實的自性?所對治的顛倒既非實有,能對治的念處又怎能可得?乃至七覺、八道也都不生,所以不可得。因此《大品》說『習應苦空』等〔云云〕。

二乘知道一切即空,便斷苦入滅;菩薩知道一切即空,卻生慈悲願行,誓度眾生。雖度眾生,像度虛空;雖滅煩惱,像與虛空共同戰鬥;雖生法門,像從虛空生;雖滅眾生,實際沒有眾生得到滅度。這就是智慧,這就是斷德,這就是菩薩的無生法忍。這名為空見生通教菩薩法界。

再觀空見有無量相,也就是其中的四諦,若一一分別計量,不能窮盡。這無盡之法從空見生,空見從無明生;所生無量,能生也無量。能生既只是假名,所生也是假名。再推究這個無明從法性生,譬如尋究夢境,知道它由睡眠而來。觀此空見而認識實相,實相就是如來藏。無量客塵覆蓋藏理,修習恒河沙數法門,顯出清淨本性。這名為空見生別教法。

空見生圓教法,情形如前文,也如下文所說。

見惑浩浩蕩蕩,像四十里廣的水;思惑殘餘勢力,只像一滴水。前面各種方便共同對治見惑,見惑盡便名為入流,此後自然不退。見惑難除,必須善巧方便。《成論》說以空治惑。若只用空便能治惑入道,自然不必其餘法;若不能入道,還要另設什麼治法?可是水中若生火,水反而不能滅火;空見自己生起過失,空又怎能治空?如今必須先知道空見是苦集之病,然後才用諦智治它。

三藏用無常智,通教用即空智,都先除見;別教也先除見而入空,其次善巧出假,像在空中種樹;圓教雖不刻意除見,見也自然先除。要除堅固的見,必須用種種方法對治,怎能只說全用空治?各種治法又怎能共同治同一種見?

譬如同患寒病而用四種藥。服薑桂,病除又恢復氣力;服五石,病除又增益容色;服重婁,不只加壽還能飛行;服金丹,則成為大仙人。病同是一種,藥法卻不同,所得力量也不同。四教都治見,見除之後所得理解各異。治見如此,治其餘惑也如此。四種治法就是四念處。

遺教令人在四念處上修道,得以走出火宅。為什麼?一念空見就是三界。三界沒有別法,只是一心所作。空見生六道業,承受六道身,居住六道處;居處就是火宅,所受之身就是苦具,所造之業就是鬼神。彼此爭著推擠,三車各自運行,才能出去。

三車就是三藏教中三乘各自的念處;也是通教中三種人共修的一種念處;又是別教方便中的三種念處和真實的一種念處;又是圓教的一實念處。略說是九種四念處;中等說是九種道品;廣說是九種四諦。這些念處全都能治見,使人走出火宅。遺囑的意思就在這裡。

釋迦最初出世,先開示三種人各自用四念處,像《法華》中的羊車、鹿車、牛車,各自走出火宅。其次說三種人同修一種念處,像《大品》所說,這一乘從三界出去,到薩婆若中安住;也像《大集》所說,三乘人同以無言說道斷煩惱。其次說菩薩修次第念處,像《大品》的不共般若,各念處之乘分別而尚未會合。最後說一切小乘、大乘同一念處,像《法華》所說,同乘大車,直至道場。

依一個空見說明各種惑、各種治法,與諸經論沒有違背。一粒微塵之中含有大千世界的經卷,就是這個意思。

〔科§十四之四之二〕不思議境

其次,說明不思議境。一念空見具足十法界,就是法性;法性不是遠在別處的東西,就是當下的空見心。《淨名》說,諸佛解脫應當在眾生心行中求,也應當在六十二見中求。空見心、眾生心行、諸佛解脫三法沒有差別,所以輾轉互相指示。

一切眾生就是菩提,不可再得,這是圓淨解脫;五陰就是涅槃,不可再滅,這是方便淨解脫;眾生之如就是佛之如,這是性淨解脫。所謂佛的解脫,就是色解脫等五種涅槃;空見心則是污穢五陰。

五陰中有眾生,眾生也有五陰;名色與眾生互相繫縛,不能分離。觀這五陰就是涅槃,不可再滅;本來沒有繫縛,就是解脫。本有解脫能攝一切法,所以說解脫就在這一念心中求。

又觀見心的五陰就是法性,便不再有可得的見心五陰。因有漏色滅,得到常色等法性五陰;因凡夫眾生滅,得到常住法性的眾生。能在一色中具一切色,在一識中具一切識,在一眾生中具一切眾生,彼此不相妨礙;像明鏡清淨,映現種種色像,這名為性淨。

三種解脫不能彼此分離,不是縱向排列,也不是橫向並列,不可思議而圓滿具足;就在空見中求,名為不可思議境。

這個境界中,無明與法性分明具足。哀傷自己長久昏沉,今天才開始覺知;一切眾生也都如此。既然本是法性,怎能不生慈?既然仍是無明,怎能不生悲?

觀這一念空見,本性空寂,清淨如虛空;再以善巧使心安住,研察無明、法性二法。對見陰、見假作四句推求,四句都不能生;單句、複句等一切句,每一句都有苦集、無明形成的閉塞,每一句也都有道滅等形成的通達。

觀空見時,一陰就是一切陰;三諦不動,便明了法身。再觀這個不動之陰,既非清淨也非不清淨等,雙樹涅槃也就是道場,這一觀名為般若。八種顛倒破除,名為解脫。在一念處中生起一切念處,以此調伏眾生。法身、般若、解脫三法既不是因,也不是果;不是因而能作因,所以念處就是道場;不是果而能作果,所以在雙樹中間進入涅槃。

就在空見不動的當下,修不可思議的三十七道品。這樣周遍破除,再也得不到空見,名為空三昧;也不見有空相,名為無相三昧;這樣的三昧不從真理的攀緣而生,名為無作三昧。

若仍不能進入,便發起大誓願:在內捨棄執見,在外捨棄身命財物。空見違背真理,使戒不清淨,便誓願令空見不再侵犯自己的法身,守護身口七支,不擾害含識眾生。空見喧動,使內心不能成忍,便誓願縱使一切苦都到身上,像橋、地、海承受一切,心終究不動。

空見若夾雜其間,便誓願純一專精,使念念相續流入。空見擾動而不能安住一境,便至誠懺悔,止息相對的兩種攀緣。一切種智尚未開,是因無明未破,便誓願觀空見,使法性現前;剛毅決斷,勇猛前進,不證得便不休止。像這樣用對治法幫助開顯涅槃。

再深刻認識自己的位次,不冒充上地;內外風塵都不能破壞;對隨順道的法也不生愛,所以不會從頂位墮落。念念寂滅,流入薩婆若海;乘一大車,遊行四方,直接到達道場,成就正覺。其餘如前文所說。

摩訶止觀卷第十〔下〕

Mohe Zhiguan, Fascicle Ten〔Upper〕.

Taught by Great Master Zhizhe of Tiantai in the Sui dynasty.

Recorded by his disciple Guanding.

What Is Meant by the Object of Views

Seventh is contemplating the object of views. Because their number is not limited to one, they are called “views” in the plural. An erroneous understanding is called a “view.” It may also be said that view means understanding and cognition. One investigates principle by an incorrect method yet sees a slanted aspect with exceptional clarity, forming an understanding held as certain and immovable: this is called a view.

Those who learn by listening memorize various names and Dharma characteristics but can explain them only according to the words. The inner eye has not opened, and they possess no contemplation grounded in principle. The text upon which they rely remains, but apart from verification it is as though dead. Those who cultivate meditative concentration, by contrast, value only contemplation grounded in principle. Whenever their minds meet an object, they believe themselves able to comprehend it; yet they are dark concerning names and Dharma characteristics and do not recognize even one written sentence. Those who recite words resemble people guarding a tree stump, while those whose minds feel unobstructed think they have attained wondrous awakening. Each side lacks one half, so when they judge one another, both lose the standard.

If someone has a fluent, unobstructed view and also knows the various names, the implications can be endless when he questions others from his own understanding. It is like sending an arrow along a curving course around a flying bird, leaving birds and beasts nowhere to escape. When he explains difficult points and answers challenges, he has ample strength remaining, like shooting an arrow into empty space, where it travels without obstruction. Know that this does not arise from study alone: a view has certainly arisen. Such a view may arise through dhyāna or through hearing. Likewise, when outflow-free wisdom arises, it depends upon the faculties of faith and Dharma and upon hearing and reflection. Someone whose view arises through hearing may originally have heard little yet extend his understanding broadly from one point to another. His view is lucid, his intelligence keen, and his argument eloquent; he can both ask and answer. Someone whose view arises through dhyāna is inwardly still at first and later becomes increasingly clear in contemplation, turning meanings over with great freedom as though he had attained wondrous penetration. In the south, few cultivate dhyāna and few views arise; in the north, events of this kind are numerous.

Those too dim to distinguish the matter think they have attained the true path or a dhāraṇī. Unable to discern others, they place themselves very high. Some entirely disbelieve it and decide that it is only madness and delusion. It should now be said that this is neither madness nor noble realization. A person possessed by a ghost can speak, but becomes foolish again when the ghost departs. This person is not like that, so one knows it is not madness. Yet examine his old delusions: craving and anger still remain. Examine his newly added delusions: the afflictions have instead increased. The bonds of the eighty-eight agents are vast and evident, so one knows he is not a noble one. This is merely the arising of the wisdom of views.

In summary, views arise along two routes, through hearing and through meditative concentration, with the latter more common. In some cases a view arises only after meditative concentration; in some, concentration and view arise together. Cases in which the view arises first and concentration afterward are fewer, while the first two cases are more common. In the same way, various meditative concentrations can all lead to the arising of outflow-free wisdom, but it arises less often at the access ground and more often at the six or nine grounds. For this reason, the object of views is explained after the object of meditative concentration.

If a view has arisen in someone whose sharp wisdom and faculties are mature, he may be able to assess and correct it himself. Or he may search the scriptures and treatises, check his view against them, and recognize his own fault. Such a person is rare. If he cannot correct himself but meets a good spiritual friend who clearly points out right and wrong and breaks his mind of views, that too is rare. Thus it is said: “The true Dharma, one who teaches it, and an assembly that listens to it are all difficult to encounter.” If he neither awakens by himself nor meets a teacher, erroneous carving increases day by day and the confinement of birth and death deepens month by month. It is like dragging a crooked piece of wood through a dense forest: when could there ever be a day of escape?

Contemplating the object of views is now divided into four parts: first, clarifying the persons who possess views and the Dharmas they grasp; second, clarifying the causes and conditions through which views arise; third, clarifying the faults of views; fourth, clarifying how to contemplate them through calming-and-contemplation.

I. The Persons Who Possess Views and the Dharmas They Grasp

First, clarifying the persons and Dharmas of views is divided into two parts: first, the different kinds of persons with deviant views; second, the different Dharmas grasped by those persons. The different persons with deviant views are further divided into three kinds: first, non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma; second, non-Buddhists attached to Buddha-Dharma; third, people who study Buddha-Dharma yet become non-Buddhists.

Non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma

The first kind is the non-Buddhists outside Buddhism. At the root are three houses. First is the non-Buddhist Kapila, whose name is translated “Yellow Head,” who maintains that the result already exists within the cause. Second is Ulūka-Sāṃkhya, whose name is translated “Rāhu,” who maintains that the result does not exist within the cause. Third is Ṛṣabha, whose name is translated “Ascetic Practice,” who maintains that the result both exists and does not exist within the cause.

The Treatise on Entering the Great Vehicle further says: Kapila's doctrine has the fault of reckoning oneness. It takes agent and action as one, characteristic and what possesses the characteristic as one, and part and the whole possessing its parts as one. Positions such as these are all called reckoning oneness. Ulūka-Sāṃkhya reckons mutual difference; Kakuda reckons both oneness and difference; Jñātiputra reckons neither oneness nor difference. The different doctrines of all non-Buddhists, including Maskarin and the rest, do not depart from these four.

Branches further divide from the non-Buddhists of these three houses and four schools. By the time the Buddha appeared in the world, there were six teachers. First was Pūraṇa Kāśyapa—Kāśyapa was his family name—who maintained neither arising nor ceasing. Second was Maskarin Gośālīputra, who maintained that the suffering and happiness of sentient beings have no causes or conditions but are naturally just so. Third was Sañjaya Vairāṭīputra, who maintained that sentient beings attain the path when the proper time matures; after eighty thousand kalpas, they reach the limit as when all the thread has been drawn from a ball. Fourth was Ajita Keśakambala—kambala means coarse clothing—who maintained that the suffering produced as retribution for offenses could be substituted through ascetic practices such as throwing oneself from a cliff and pulling out one's hair. Fifth was Kakuda Kātyāyana, who maintained both existence and nonexistence. Sixth was Nirgrantha Jñātiputra, who maintained that once karma has been performed, it is fixed and cannot be changed.

This material comes from Kumārajīva's commentary. The names of the six teachers agree with the Great Sūtra, while three of the doctrines agree and three differ. Perhaps this resulted from a translation error; perhaps there was another intent. It cannot now be known in detail. Broadly, however, they all inherit from Kapila and the rest. According to the roots, they can be divided into three houses or into four schools: the four views of existence, nonexistence, both existence and nonexistence, and neither existence nor nonexistence.

Non-Buddhists Attached to Buddha-Dharma

The second kind is non-Buddhists attached to Buddha-Dharma, beginning with the Vātsīputrīya and Vaipulya schools. Relying on their own cleverness, they read Buddhist scriptures and produced views of their own. Because those views arose by attaching themselves to Buddha-Dharma, they received this name.

A Vātsīputrīya read the Śāriputra Abhidharma and independently devised another doctrine, saying: “The self exists outside the four propositions, in the fifth repository of the inexpressible.” What are the four propositions? Non-Buddhists maintain that form is the self, that a self exists apart from form, that the self is within form, or that form is within the self. The same applies to each of the other four aggregates—feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness. Four propositions for each aggregate make twenty views of a body. The Dazhidu Lun says: “When the twenty views of a body are broken, one becomes a stream-enterer.” This is the meaning. The self now maintained by the Vātsīputrīya differs from that of the six teachers and is not Buddha-Dharma. The treatises of every school reject and refuse to accept it. It is therefore the deviant Dharma of a deviant person attached to Buddha-Dharma. Some also say that the four propositions are the three times and the unconditioned Dharma.

Vaipulya practitioners likewise relied on their own cleverness. Reading the ten similes taught by the Buddha, they fabricated a doctrine of their own: neither arising nor ceasing, like illusion and transformation, with empty illusion as its cardinal principle. Nāgārjuna rebuked this as not Buddha-Dharma. The doctrine made by the Vaipulya practitioners is likewise the Dharma of deviant persons.

Studying Buddha-Dharma yet Becoming Non-Buddhists

The third kind is people who study Buddha-Dharma yet become non-Buddhists. They attach themselves to the gates taught by the Buddha, give rise to afflictions, and cannot enter principle. The Dazhidu Lun says that without skillful means in prajñā, one who enters the Abhidharma falls into the extreme of existence; one who enters the gate of emptiness falls into the extreme of nonexistence; and one who enters the Piṭaka of Categories falls into the extreme of both existence and nonexistence. The Madhyamaka Treatise says that attachment to neither existence nor nonexistence is called a foolish discourse. Grasping the correct Dharma upside down instead turns it into the Dharma of deviant persons.

If someone studies the four gates of the Mahāyāna but loses the true intent of prajñā and is burned by the fire of deviant views, these too become the Dharmas of a deviant person. Thus the Śataśāstra directly refutes non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma. Some present-day Mahāyāna treatise masters fiercely refute the Abhidharma and Chengshi Lun, saying that they are simply non-Buddhists who reckon existence or nonexistence. Yet the Chengshi Lun itself says that the true meaning in the Tripiṭaka is emptiness, which appears close to nonexistence. It also accepts what the hundred schools hold right and rejects what they hold wrong, moving in and out when taking up meanings; this resembles both the claim that the result both exists and does not exist within the cause and the meaning of the Piṭaka of Categories. When these treatises arose in their own time, people who relied on them could all attain the path. People today who attach themselves to them have themselves lost the true intent—what does that have to do with the Dharma itself? This must be distinguished with composure; they should not all be equated with Kapila and the other non-Buddhists. When the Great Vehicle refutes the Small Vehicle, as in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, it takes only the aspect in which the Small Vehicle has not seen the principle of the Middle Way and calls that aspect the same as non-Buddhism. It does not deprive the Small Vehicle of its significance as a preparatory gate.

The Different Dharmas Attained by Deviant Persons

Second is clarifying the different Dharmas grasped by deviant persons. The Guanzhong Commentary says: “Each teacher possesses three kinds of Dharma: first, attaining the Dharma of knowledge of all; second, attaining the Dharma of superknowledges; third, attaining the Dharma of the Vedas.”

“Knowledge of all” means that each person gives rise to a view concerning what he maintains. His understanding is keen and acute, and he uses this view-wisdom to interpret all Dharmas; he is therefore called a non-Buddhist possessing knowledge of all. “The Dharma of superknowledges” means producing the five superknowledges: one can turn a city into a salt flat, turn Śakra into a sheep, stop a river inside one's ear, or touch the sun and moon with one's hand. This is called a non-Buddhist possessing superknowledges. “The Dharma of the Vedas” means comprehending all worldly writing, astronomy, medicine, military affairs, and commerce. This is called a non-Buddhist possessing the Vedas. Thus one teacher can possess three different attainments. The Vātsīputrīya and Vaipulya schools are also like this.

For those who become deviant by attaching themselves to Buddha-Dharma, the Tripiṭaka Teaching has four gates, and each gate possesses three kinds. First is directly producing an understanding of principle, with a view arising from the nature of wisdom. Second is attaining various superknowledges. Third is understanding the words of the four Āgamas. Three kinds in each of four gates make twelve different attainments.

If one genuinely attains the intent within a gate, each gate initially has three establishments of mindfulness: first, the establishment of mindfulness through intrinsic nature; second, the conjoined establishment of mindfulness; third, the establishment of mindfulness through conditions. The first directly conditions truth and principle. The second cultivates phenomena and principle together. The third universally conditions all objects and Dharmas, meaning the teachings of the Tripiṭaka. When the fruit is later realized, these become three liberations: liberation through wisdom, liberation in both respects, and liberation without doubt. Therefore, when the Dharma treasury was compiled, one thousand people were chosen, all of whom had liberation without doubt; they comprehensively understood inner and outer scriptures and were prepared to subdue challengers from outside.

The Abhidharma Vibhāṣā speaks of liberation from the obstruction of afflictions, liberation from the obstruction of meditative concentration, and liberation from obstruction regarding all Dharmas. Those liberated through wisdom attain the first liberation; those liberated in both respects attain the second; only a buddha attains the third. All are generally called liberation without doubt. If the true intent is lost through attachment to the four gates of the Shared, Distinct, and Perfect Teachings of the Mahāyāna, the same calculation yields thirty-six different attainments.

II. How Views Arise

Second, clarifying the arising of views is divided into two parts: first, clarifying the arising of views; second, clarifying how the Dharmas that arise differ.

Arising through Dhyāna or through Hearing

Views arise either through dhyāna or through hearing. Across long kalpas, sentient beings have done every kind of thing and have also perfumed themselves with various views. Yet after the separation of one lifetime they forget; karmic offenses cover their former understanding, so the mind cannot quickly become clear. If those obstructions are now thin, various dhyānas can arise. Sometimes dhyāna and view arise together; sometimes dhyāna comes first and view afterward; sometimes one hears another person teach the Dharma and suddenly becomes open, producing a view. This is like a spring stopped by earth and stones: after the blockage is dug away, the force of the water surges out and forms a river. Once the dim obstruction is removed, the discriminating mind races into the distance without stopping for one day or ten days. Again and again, it poses its own challenges and again and again answers them itself. Wherever it is attached, it feels the matter is real and comprehensible everywhere; wherever it is not attached, it considers the matter false and naturally refuted. Its eloquence is unobstructed; it skillfully proclaims its own Dharma and adorns its language. When others come with challenges, it can also defend and explain its position cleverly.

Where does such view-wisdom come from? Dhyāna contains the factor of examination. Examination is a mental factor belonging to wisdom. It ranges wantonly over all Dharmas and does not know how to stop itself, like a swift horse already sweating as it races and impossible to control. If a person who learns through hearing lacks meditative concentration to moisten his view, then as soon as he tries to discriminate he may feel as though his intestines were being pulled out, may even vomit blood, and may consequently lose his life without ever completing his view. If the power of concentration moistens the factor of examination, however, examination may run wild and be difficult to control, but it does not pull out the intestines, and in most cases a whole system of views can be formed.

Some people use the factor of examination to investigate principle and maintain that the result already exists in the cause of every Dharma. This understanding is lucid and acute, able to penetrate distant implications beyond everyone else. They use this doctrine to challenge others; when others cannot answer, they call them liars. When others cannot break the doctrine to which they cling, they take it as real—the true wisdom of nonarising and the wondrous mind that accords with principle. On closer investigation, however, it is merely the delusion of views, worldly wisdom, and clever argument. Within it are fully present the eighty-eight agents and the web of inverted delusion. How could it be genuine understanding? Know that this is the appearance of Kapila's view arising.

Others use the factor of examination to investigate and maintain that the result does not exist in the cause of any Dharma. Their view is exceptionally lucid and their understanding fierce and sharp. Meeting various challenges, they can interpret them in various ways and cite various evidence to establish that the result is absent from the cause. They use this doctrine to refute others; when others cannot withstand it, they are deemed liars. When others refute them, their own attachment only becomes firmer, so they take it as real. The arguments they establish and the principle to which they return all point solely toward the absence of the result from the cause. Know that this is the arising of Sāṃkhya's view.

If someone relies on the factor of examination to think that the result both exists and does not exist within the cause, the Dazhidu Lun says that existence disputes with nonexistence and nonexistence likewise disputes with existence. Dīrghanakha, who holds both existence and nonexistence, also disputes with those who hold existence and those who hold nonexistence. Once someone enters this view, challenges are inexhaustible. Is this not the arising of Ṛṣabha's view?

The doctrines maintained by the six teachers are all different. One must skillfully grasp the meaning held by each teacher and then check it against the view that has arisen in oneself. Although minor points may differ, a broad resemblance is enough for it to be the arising of that teacher's view.

If someone relies on the factor of examination to maintain that a self definitely exists, yet this self is neither within the four propositions of views of a body nor within the four propositions of the three times and the unconditioned, but within the fifth repository of the inexpressible, then when this view arises the mind's understanding is acute. The person can ask and answer, possesses an exceptional bearing, and responds so quickly that direct confrontation is difficult. He can refute others and establish himself, and he is resolutely immovable. Know that this is the arising of a Vātsīputrīya view.

If someone relies on the factor of examination to regard all Dharmas as like illusion and transformation and produces an understanding that everything is empty and all characteristics exhausted, that understanding falls into vacuity. It cannot distinguish the mind that understands from the Dharmas understood and regards them all as illusory transformations. Only its own doctrine is right; everything else is false speech. This is the arising of a Vaipulya view.

If someone relies on the factor of examination to investigate all Dharmas as impermanent, ceasing as soon as they arise and unable to remain, then person and self cannot be found, like the hair of a turtle or horns of a hare; only real Dharmas exist. He further analyzes those real Dharmas down to motes of dust and contemplates all of them, coarse and subtle, as impermanent and without self, deciding that this alone is real. The view that arises agrees entirely with the Abhidharma. Previously, those who learned only through hearing might have understood names and characteristics without opening the path of mind. When this view arises, the person may be dim concerning the words yet surpass his former understanding a hundredfold. Those who do not recognize this situation take him to be a worthy or noble one, but he is not. If he were truly worthy, the mind of the path would arise powerfully together with his understanding, suppressing the afflictions and accomplishing the preparatory stages. Although he now understands impermanence, contentiousness increases, the mind of the path sinks, and the afflictions grow stronger. One therefore knows this is a view of the gate of existence arising.

If someone relies on the factor of examination and suddenly produces an understanding of emptiness, regarding all things as impermanent, arising and ceasing, with the three provisional constructions floating and unreal, and then enters emptiness by analyzing motes of dust through various preparatory means, this view is lucid and acute. Its mental activity is swift; it excels at challenges, can refute others and establish itself, and takes itself as real and everything else as false. This is the arising of a view of the gate of emptiness. If one relies on the factor of examination to maintain that all Dharmas both exist and do not exist, then after entering this gate, challenges become endless. This is the meaning of the Piṭaka of Categories. Although the treatise itself was never transmitted here, the arising of past habituation is not fixed; this is the arising of a view of both existence and nonexistence. The view of neither existence nor nonexistence can be understood accordingly.

Know that if the four gates penetrate principle, they become correct views; if they lose their skillful means, they fall into the four views and are therefore called deviance within Buddha-Dharma. Would attachment turn only the four gates of the Tripiṭaka into deviant views? Over immeasurable kalpas, beings have also studied the gates of the Mahāyāna's Shared, Distinct, and Perfect Teachings without entering principle. Maintaining them rigidly as correct and grasping the four extremes, they are burned by the fire of deviant views.

Some people now rely on the factor of examination and suddenly produce former understandings. Some regard the flowers seen in empty space within a dream as illusorily existent and form this understanding of existence with lucid acuity. Some hold that illusory appearances originally have no reality and are empty because unreal, producing an acute understanding of emptiness. Some form an understanding of both emptiness and existence, like an illusory thing that is seen yet cannot be found upon looking. Some form an understanding of neither emptiness nor existence, taking it neither as illusory existence nor as illusory nonexistence. The “Examination of Dharmas” chapter of the Madhyamaka Treatise says that to call Dharmas neither existent nor nonexistent is a foolish discourse. A person directed toward the path who hears and immediately comprehends this is said to attain the true mark; one whose deviant mind grasps it and produces conceptual proliferation is classified under foolish discourse. These are the four views of the four gates of the Shared Teaching.

If someone relies on the factor of examination to reflect on the understanding of the Shared Teaching's four gates and considers it only an illusory dream within the realm, the dream arose from sleep, and sleep is ignorance. He then contemplates ignorance and enters Dharma-nature, which also has four gates. Some say Dharma-nature resembles seven treasures inside a well; some say it resembles empty space; some say it resembles a bottle holding wine or curds; some directly say Dharma-nature is the Middle Way. If these four understandings become acute, this is the arising of views of the Distinct Teaching's four gates.

If someone relies on the factor of examination and suddenly understands that ignorance turns once and becomes illumination, and that illumination fully possesses all Dharmas; or thinks ignorance cannot be found, so how could ignorance become illumination and how could illumination itself be found, while this very unfindability fully possesses all Dharmas; or thinks the illumination of Dharma-nature is both findable and unfindable, neither findable nor unfindable—then one gate is the three gates and the three gates are one gate. This understanding is acute: there is nothing it cannot refute, nothing it cannot establish, and no one who can surpass it. The person himself thinks he has attained the tolerance of nonarising. This is the arising of views of the Perfect Teaching's four gates.

All four Mahāyāna gates can become views because true speech is grasped as false speech and views are produced from language; nirvāṇa is turned into birth and death, arising through craving and attachment. This is like taking so much ambrosia that it instead damages life and brings an early death. Losing the gate of skillful means, one falls into deviant attachment, which is therefore called an inner deviant view.

The four views are the roots of all views, while intrinsic nature and other-nature are also the roots of conature and causelessness. Therefore, after Nāgārjuna refuted intrinsic nature and other-nature, he pointed out that conature combines the faults of both, while causelessness is fundamentally impossible to establish. If the two roots of intrinsic and other are already unreal, how much more so is causelessness? When the roots are broken, the branches and twigs fall with them. This is the intent. If one wished to establish intrinsic nature and other-nature, conature and causelessness could also be established by analogy. Because biased attachment now turns the Great- and Small-Vehicle four gates into views, it is only necessary to explain intrinsic nature and other-nature; the remainder can then be understood.

The Tripiṭaka Teaching says that great arising produces small arising and that both arise from ignorance, not from principle. When ignorance ceases, formations cease, and this too does not concern the ceasing of principle. Attachment to this teaching becomes a deviant view of arising from intrinsic nature. The Shared Teaching says that principle originally does not arise; because it does not arise, it can produce all delusions, and when all delusions cease, that too occurs through nonarising. Attachment to this becomes a deviant view of arising from other-nature. Within the realm, delusion is taken as intrinsic and truth as other, so it is explained in this way. Beyond the realm, Dharma-nature is taken as intrinsic and ignorance as other. The Distinct Teaching maintains that the ālaya produces all delusions and that wisdom cultivated in dependence upon conditions extinguishes this ignorance; neither production nor extinction concerns Dharma-nature. Attachment to this teaching becomes a deviant view of arising from other-nature. The Perfect Teaching says that Dharma-nature produces all Dharmas and Dharma-nature extinguishes all Dharmas. Attachment to it is a deviant view of arising from intrinsic nature. The former resembles a weak ruler with strong ministers, and the latter a strong ruler with weak ministers. The remaining two, conature and causelessness, can be understood accordingly.

Hearing most often produces views of principle and less often superknowledges and the Vedas. Meditative concentration most often produces superknowledges and the Vedas and less often views of principle. Those who produce views of principle can subdue learned people; those who produce superknowledges can subdue ordinary people. Ordinary people value marvels rather than understanding; learned people value understanding rather than marvels. One who produces the Vedas can subdue both, while one who produces all three can most fully subdue both. Arising through dhyāna has already been explained; arising through hearing is now explained.

Although a practitioner has attained meditative concentration, if no view has yet arisen, another person must still stimulate his mind. His mind has already become still and acute; suddenly hearing that the result exists within the cause, it opens in realization and penetrates deviant wisdom. Hundreds and thousands of layers of meaning grow ever deeper and more distant, like a spring welling from among stones. This is Kapila's view arising from hearing. The other three schools are also like this. Hearing about the fifth repository of the inexpressible or hearing about illusion and transformation produces Vātsīputrīya or Vaipulya views. Or someone hears the four gates of the Tripiṭaka, produces understanding from one statement within them, and suddenly gives rise to the mind of views. He deeply understands impermanence, and his contemplative mind bounds forward beyond control. This is a view of the gate of existence arising through hearing; the remaining three gates are likewise. If one hears the twelve gates of the Mahāyāna and produces understanding in dependence on each gate, that understanding becomes acute and surpasses what was previously heard. Although this understanding has arisen, the person lacks the great skillful means, cannot enter even the worthy stages of the Small Vehicle, and differs from the deviant understandings of Kapila and the rest. One therefore knows this is the arising of views of the twelve gates.

The Different Dharmas That Arise

Second is clarifying the differences among the Dharmas that arise. If a Kapila non-Buddhist directly produces a view, his understanding is forceful, his deviant wisdom exceptional, and he is very difficult to subdue. This is attaining the Dharma of knowledge of all. If he directly produces superknowledges, he can walk upon water and fire and disappear or appear at will. Who would not regard him as a noble one? Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha said: “The land of China has two kinds of merit〔and so forth〕.” This is attaining the Dharma of superknowledges. If he directly produces the Vedas, he comprehends worldly writings and understands all manner of books as soon as he sees them. Or he secretly reads the Tripiṭaka and Mahāyāna scriptures and can identify them as soon as his eyes touch the text; he then uses this knowledge to adorn his own Dharma. Buddha-Dharma and what lies outside it consequently become intermingled and nearly impossible to distinguish.

Today many people who have returned to lay life enter non-Buddhist paths because they fear conscription for the king's service. They steal meanings from Buddha-Dharma and also steal understandings of Laozi and Zhuangzi, creating a mixture that confuses beginners. Who is correct and who deviant? This is producing the Dharma of the Vedas. Each kind of non-Buddhist has three Dharmas. If counted according to how many each person attains, there are seven kinds of people: three who attain only one of the three, three who attain combinations of two, and one who possesses all three. The other two houses of non-Buddhists are likewise, making twenty-one different attainments. For the six teachers, each has three, making eighteen; counted according to how many each person attains, this makes forty-two different attainments. The different attainments of the Vātsīputrīya and Vaipulya schools likewise each comprise seven types of people: three with single attainments, three with combined attainments, and one who possesses them all.

The attainments of deviant views within Buddha-Dharma also differ. Precisely discriminating the principle maintained by each gate is attaining a view of the establishment of mindfulness through intrinsic nature—might it also be said to resemble liberation through wisdom? The remaining gates are all likewise. If one singly or jointly produces superknowledges and can fly freely, this is attaining a view of the conjoined establishment of mindfulness—might it also be said to resemble liberation in both respects? If one's superknowledges and wisdom are unhindered but one cannot teach the Dharma, one searches the scriptures and treatises or listens to another's teaching and immediately masters names and enumerations. Downward, one comprehends the Vedas; upward, one comprehends the Great Vehicle. One uses one's own view to dissolve all Dharma gates and uses all Dharma gates to adorn one's own view. Each of the four gates has three kinds, and counted by the attainments of persons, each also has seven types.

Within each of the four gates of the Shared, Distinct, and Perfect Teachings, some directly produce an understanding through wisdom, some produce only transformative superknowledges, and some comprehend scriptures both inner and outer. They themselves consider what has arisen to be the true path, and others also exalt them; these are now judged to be only deviant views. Each gate has seven types, making eighty-four in all〔and so forth〕.

Next, sameness and difference were previously explained in general; they should now be explained one by one. Although the three houses of non-Buddhists and the six teachers all produce knowledge of all, some produce a knowledge of all based on the view of existence, some produce one based on the view of nonexistence, and still others produce various different kinds of knowledge of all. Because what they maintain differs, their view-wisdoms also differ. Each house regards itself alone as right and everyone else as wrong.

The Lotus Sūtra says: “The jackals die first.” This indicates that when the acute agents arise, the dull agents become hidden and are therefore said to die first. It also says: “Various great evil beasts compete to come forward and devour them.” This means that the single view one holds can devour all other views. The Treatise on the Power of Argument says: “All teachers possess an ultimate path; among them Deer-Head is foremost.” Know that every house's knowledge of all differs from the others. Even the knowledge of all in the Tripiṭaka's four gates and the Great Vehicle's four gates grasps its own view and devours the others. Their mutual differences can be understood from this.

Next, the Dharmas of superknowledge also differ. Superknowledges are attained in dependence upon meditative concentration, and the dhyāna attained is not fixed. Non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma produce superknowledges only in dependence upon root dhyāna, sometimes the first dhyāna, sometimes the second, third, or fourth. Since their bases differ, their powers and functions also differ. Deviant views within Buddha-Dharma also rely on root dhyāna and may further rely on purifying dhyāna. The supporting dhyāna may be shallow or deep, and the function of superknowledge superior or inferior. The Dazhidu Lun says: “At the place that serves as its basis, the function of superknowledge is broad; at a place that does not serve as its basis, its function is weak.” Dhyāna is only a phenomenon and superknowledge only a function; both belong to the adornment of merit and are not points of doctrinal dispute. Although there is no dispute over principle here, when the bases are compared, the functions of the superknowledges still differ in every case.

Next, the Dharmas of the Vedas also differ. The books on household management and governing the world produced and read by non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma differ in their collections and in their expositions. When much is produced and read, knowledge is broad; when little is produced and read, knowledge is narrow. Human arrogance and self-importance arise entirely from differences in textual knowledge. If those with deviant views within Buddha-Dharma neither produce nor read the writings of non-Buddhists outside it, their knowledge is narrow; if they produce or read them, their knowledge is broad. If they neither produce nor read the writings of the Tripiṭaka, they do not know the names and characteristics within the realm, and their views are narrow; if they produce or read them, their views are broad. If they neither produce nor read the writings of the Great Vehicle, they do not know names and characteristics beyond the realm, and their views are narrow; if they produce or read them, their views are broad. It follows that every item of knowledge within the Vedas differs.

Next, the inner and outer views are judged together. All inner and outer deviant views can discuss wisdom of principle, superknowledges, and writings. They can also establish virtue and regulate the mind, esteem others and humble themselves, and move crowds by reputation. This resembles the difficulty of knowing from its appearance whether an āmra fruit is ripe. Even the cleverest person in the world would have trouble discerning deviance from correctness. Yet the judgment can now be made easily.

Consider the seven types of Kapila practitioners. Tracing their root, all arise from an erroneous nothingness. If someone maintains that the result exists within the cause, he uses this one statement to refute all Dharmas and leaves only this statement standing. He displays various superknowledges, shakes ordinary people, and causes them to believe that the result exists within the cause. He also cites the Vedas of different houses and uses their names and characteristics to adorn this doctrine. The various practices he establishes ultimately point in their cardinal principle and final destination toward the result's existence within the cause. For the sake of the Dharma he holds, he sets body, speech, and mind into motion and produces immeasurable karmic offenses, as explained in detail below. By this one verifies that he is a Kapila non-Buddhist. Sāṃkhya and Ṛṣabha can be inferred in the same way. Beginning from an erroneous nothingness, they finally return to what they themselves grasp. The Vātsīputrīya is likewise. The four gates of the Small and Great Vehicles can all be understood by this method.

When one examines the source and then looks at the doctrine to which each finally returns, the clear and muddy are as distinct as the waters of the Jing and Wei Rivers, and beans and wheat each fall into their own kind. Why, then, would one equate Zhuangzi and Laozi with Buddha-Dharma? Once deviance and correctness are mixed, how could one pull out great errors and clarify small differences? If one's own cultivation remains unclear, how could one teach others? Teacher and disciple will fall together.

III. The Faults of Views

Third, clarifying faults is divided into two parts: first, directly clarifying the faults; second, judging truth and falsity together.

Gains and Losses in China's Three Mysteries

First is directly clarifying the faults. If the doctrinal systems of India have three houses, China has analogous meanings. Explaining the Three Mysteries, Zhou Hongzheng said that the Book of Changes, which judges the eight trigrams, yin and yang, good and ill fortune, makes a mystery from existence; Laozi, with its empty openness, makes a mystery from nonexistence; and Zhuangzi, with its spontaneity, makes a mystery from both existence and nonexistence. The ancestral sources of the other branches all divide from these. Their gains and losses are now provisionally explained through these three.

As Zhuangzi says, noble and base, suffering and happiness, right and wrong, gain and loss are all naturally so. To say everything is natural does not destroy the result, but because it does not distinguish karma from past lives, it destroys the cause. Ritual, humaneness, and righteousness can protect oneself and stabilize the state; without practicing them, one's clan is destroyed and one's house lost. To speak only of establishing virtue in the present life, without saying it can bring results in a later life, destroys the result but not the cause. To say in addition that blessings and good fortune pass down to later generations, when combined with the former position, means that a result both exists and does not exist.

Three kinds of conduct can arise from the same doctrine: first, doing good while reckoning existence; second, doing evil while reckoning existence; third, doing what is indeterminate while reckoning existence. For example, it is said that one's allotted principle is originally just so: wealth and honor cannot be sought, poverty and low station cannot be resented or escaped, life is not worth delighting in, and why fear death? Through such an empty mind, those who live amid wealth and honor do not become arrogant, while those in hardship do not become distressed. Craving and anger cease, and all dwell within one breast. Teaching people through spontaneity and using it as a guide into principle—this is its benefit.

Its attainments have further varieties. If it says, “Constantly be without desire in order to observe its wonder,” precisely what desire is to be eliminated? Disdaining jade disks, casting away the office of minister, washing one's ears to refuse an ox, and guarding one's lofty purity abandon only desire in the desire realm while reaching toward the excellence of the upper realms and taking the first dhyāna and the rest as wondrous. How is this known? Duke Zhuang said that when the emperor inquired into the path, he contemplated the vital spirit and saw various things within his body. Taking this as the path resembles attaining the wonder of the first dhyāna within the contemplation of penetrating illumination.

If it is said that craving is the root cause of all suffering and that abandoning craving attains nirvāṇa, this abandons desire throughout the three realms and attains the wonder in cessation, stillness, wonder, and separation. There is also a Dharma called the stainless; if one becomes stained by that Dharma, it is attachment to nirvāṇa. Without this desire for staining, one attains a subtle path in which the various desires and wonders all return to nothingness. But which of these has actually been attained? If one does not even recognize desire in the desire realm and the wonder of the first dhyāna, how much less the later desires and wonders? If spoken as an expedient, this merely adapts to faculties and guides them gradually, concealing the truth while discussing desire and wonder. It cannot openly be proclaimed as definitive meaning. If it merely stills the desire to overreach and seek, contemplates the wonder of spontaneity, eliminates dangerous and perverse conduct, and leaves a disposition of humaneness and deference, all this is doing good while reckoning a naturally existent principle.

Others maintain spontaneity and freely indulge their temperaments. They neither direct their minds and control themselves to do good nor deliberately compel themselves to do evil, believing that any deliberate action harms spiritual harmony and does not accord with spontaneity. Although this involves neither taking nor rejecting, it remains indeterminate conduct. Its active karma is not yet exhausted—how could there be doubt about undergoing retribution?

Those who maintain spontaneity and do evil believe the myriad things to be naturally so, so they freely do evil, since everything returns to spontaneity in the end. This precisely abandons desirelessness and indulges desire, turns away from wonder, and goes toward the coarse. Zhuang Zhou rebuked humaneness and righteousness to guard against petty thieves, yet failed to foresee great robbers raising the banner of humaneness and righteousness to plot against the state. Spontaneity was originally borrowed to still desire, but is now raised as a banner for doing evil. The principle is clear.

Gains and Losses of the Indian View of Emptiness

Next, among the various Indian views, the view of emptiness has the greatest power, so its gains and losses are provisionally explained through it. Views of emptiness are divided into three kinds: first, destroying the cause but not the result, or destroying the result but not the cause; second, destroying both cause and result but not all Dharmas; third, destroying cause, result, and all Dharmas. “All Dharmas” here refers to the three kinds of unconditioned Dharma.

How does the third kind of non-Buddhist differ from Buddha-Dharma? The Dazhidu Lun says that the emptinesses of the Great and Small Vehicles differ as substantive emptiness and analytical emptiness. Yet non-Buddhists also have substantive and analytical emptiness; how, then, are they distinguished? Non-Buddhists depend upon deviant causes and conditions or no causes and conditions. Whether they analyze into emptiness, penetrate directly into emptiness, or reach ultimate emptiness, this remains true. Disciples of the Buddha know that everything arises from causes and conditions of craving. Whether they analyze, directly penetrate, or reach ultimate emptiness, they rely on correct causes and conditions.

Some say that merely using language of refutation is not direct penetration. Yet consider the Madhyamaka Treatise: from beginning to end, each chapter takes refutation as its subject. Could refutation differ from direct penetration? Therefore, substantive and analytical emptiness cannot distinguish deviant from correct or Great from Small. One can rely only on what the Dazhidu Lun says: analyzing correct causes and conditions differs from non-Buddhists, while directly penetrating correct causes and conditions differs from the Small Vehicle.

If a view of emptiness arises in dependence upon deviant causes and conditions, it too has the three conducts of good, evil, and indeterminate, but most often does evil. One who truly contemplates emptiness knows that everything arises from craving and does not produce even good, much less evil. For someone in whom a view of emptiness has arisen, retribution, wealth, and position are not what he contests; emptiness is the point of contention. If another approves his Dharma of emptiness, he loves that person. If another affirms existence and refutes emptiness, he resents and angrily torments that person. If another does not understand emptiness, he scorns that person like mud.

Relying on a mind of emptiness, he fears nothing, observes no rules, indulges his impulses and desires, and destroys correct views, deportment, and pure livelihood. After death, all such people fall into the three evil destinies. The six teachers even said that one who has shame and conscience falls into hell, while one without shame and conscience does not. In front of a crowd, they violate the prohibition on raw fish; behind a screen, they engage in misconduct. They urinate at thunder in the sky, foul wells, rebel against their fathers, and scorn their mothers more viciously than strangers, then call themselves unobstructed. To treat relatives one way and strangers another is not equality. They themselves practice depravity and teach it to others, universally agreeing to commit wrong together. Having lost ritual and Dharma like animals, how could the world tolerate them?

Although he calls himself unobstructed, he does not dare rebel against the ruler or scorn the queen and still cherishes his own body. He therefore remains obstructed by the body. If such a person directly produces this view, the view only grows more powerful and he can never attain dhyāna. If he attains dhyāna first and the view arises afterward, the Dharma of dhyāna is usually lost. If dhyāna is attained after the view arises, it is usually ghostly dhyāna and ghostly superknowledge, able to predict good and ill fortune and also know the minds of others. He searches widely through the Vedas and uses them to establish this view and cause people to believe and accept it.

He destroys the good of the world and beyond the world and is called a dog that devours people. If even one Dharma remains unbroken, he is not full; only when all Dharmas have been destroyed is the mind of views full, and “full” means that the view has grown more blazing. Inwardly he possesses no genuine cultivation and only conducts empty disputes, like a dog barking for food. Attachment to emptiness contests attachment to existence; emptiness and existence refute each other like dogs baring their teeth and biting. Praising himself resembles prolonged howling. Refuting others is called seizing; establishing himself is called dragging. Suspicion and indecision also resemble bared teeth, while intimidating and threatening others resemble howling, just as a watchdog barks to make others afraid. Such a person does evil entirely by himself.

He teaches others in four ways: first, doing evil himself while urging others to do good; second, proclaiming that he does good while urging others to do evil; third, both he and others doing evil; fourth, both he and others doing good. One who does evil while urging others to do good says, “I can penetrate principle, so doing evil does me no harm. Your cultivation is still shallow, so you must first learn good Dharmas; when teaching, too, you should first guide people through goodness.” One who does good but urges others to do evil says, “I am the leader who teaches and must harmonize my light and do good. You cultivate only for yourself, so you should do evil.” When both he and others do evil, he calls it practicing the true path together. When both he and others do good, he calls it exercising an expedient path together. Although the four differ, all take evil as their root and sink according to karma. What road could be followed there?

Others rely on the view of emptiness yet do good. They believe there is originally neither good nor evil in emptiness but that good must nevertheless be done; otherwise Viṣṇu becomes angry and sentient beings suffer torment. Suffering becomes karma because it was produced in the past and is now undergone as retribution. By observing precepts and ascetic practices in the present life to stop the current evil result, they can attain the exhaustion of the outflows. Believing that good must therefore be done, they observe precepts, restrain the body, possess few desires, know contentment, wear coarse clothes, and eat grass. Yet because their conduct is produced for emptiness, joy and anger still arise; emptiness remains the locus of anger, attachment, and dispute. If they first attain dhyāna and then produce the view, dhyāna is lost while the view grows more blazing. If they first produce the view and later attain dhyāna, it is still ghostly dhyāna and ghostly superknowledge. Their own conduct based on this view of emptiness has only one kind, but they still teach others in the preceding four ways. Their own conduct and their teaching of others merely follow karma, rising or sinking according to karma. What does this have to do with the true path?

There are also those who grasp a view of emptiness and do neither good nor evil. Loose and unrestrained, they call themselves established in equality. Although they speak of equality, they feel love upon being praised and distress upon being reviled, and elevate their own equality above others. Know that this very equality is a locus where afflictions arise. Attaining dhyāna and producing the view proceed as before. They may also comprehend the Vedas, steal meanings from Buddhism, and use them to adorn their indeterminate doctrine; they bare their teeth and howl, and immeasurable bonds and agents arise from the indeterminate. Their own conduct has one kind, and their teaching of others has four. If they do not produce dhyāna, karma draws them into evil destinies. If they produce dhyāna, they undergo birth according to the dhyāna. If that karma has not yet matured, the strongest among their various past karmas draws them first into retribution. It follows that the various views cannot even suppress delusion; how could anyone say delusion has been severed? The gains and losses of views of both existence and nonexistence and the rest can all be understood accordingly.

Mohe Zhiguan, Fascicle Ten〔Upper〕.

Mohe Zhiguan, Fascicle Ten〔Lower〕.

Taught by Great Master Zhizhe of Tiantai in the Sui dynasty.

Recorded by his disciple Guanding.

Gains and Losses of Deviant Views within Buddha-Dharma

Next are the gains and losses of deviant views within Buddha-Dharma. The four gates of the Tripiṭaka Teaching were all originally intended to enable people to enter principle. Yet some attach themselves to them and create conceptual proliferation, produce views, attain dhyāna, and comprehend the scriptures. If they grasp one gate as their own, in principle they should produce only good; but because it corresponds with a view, the three conducts of good, evil, and indeterminate still arise.

Those among them who do good act only to produce retribution within the various modes of existence in the three realms. Attaching themselves to the gate of existence, they produce love and anger. When they surpass others, they fall into the deep pit of pride; when others surpass them, they fall into the prison of sorrow. The gate of existence becomes a locus where afflictions arise; it closes instead and cannot enable them to attain liberation. Those who do evil cling to the gate of existence alone as right and everything else as wrong. To defend this gate, they stop at no evil. A deviant ghost enters their minds, and they know only how to multiply everyone's faults.

Among ninety-six kinds of non-Buddhists, three accord with Buddha-Dharma, so there is a path of Abhidharma and a path of sūtras. Yet the five hundred arhats departed precisely through this gate of existence. How could the gate itself be called deviant? People today grasp it one-sidedly, and only then does a ghost enter their minds; it is therefore called the ghost of Abhidharma. Some enter through views and some through dhyāna. Their own cultivation has one kind, while their teaching of others has four. One gate is like this, and so are the remaining three.

The Shared, Distinct, and Perfect Teachings likewise each have four gates, and views may arise in every gate. Each view similarly possesses all three conducts: good, evil, and indeterminate. Conducting oneself well can be understood. Those who do evil grasp one-sidedly the Great Vehicle statements that craving itself is the path and that the three poisons fully possess all Buddha-Dharmas. These true statements were originally meant to extinguish afflictions, but through one-sided grasping and attachment the person instead produces bonds and karma. Praise and blame, sorrow and love, bullying, arrogance, and bared-teeth quarrels all compete over reputation and gain. His own conduct has one kind and his teaching of others four. Since this is not outflow-free, ignorance moistens karma, and karmic power draws him into birth. Where could he not go? It is impossible to explain every case; all can be understood from the preceding examples.

Views such as these all oppose the noble path and can produce and increase various wrongs. Those who do not recognize them attach themselves and take them to be the path. Even those who know they are views still follow the views in their conduct and bury themselves. How then could they cultivate the factors of the path amid movement or stillness within views? The various faults produced when views arise have now been explained in brief.

Judging Truth and Falsity Together

Second, judging truth and falsity together is divided into two parts: first, judging according to the Dharmas produced; second, judging according to the Dharmas upon which the views depend.

First, consider the Dharmas produced. From the four propositions of non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma through the Perfect Teaching's four gates, and from the non-Buddhists' view-wisdom and Vedas through the Perfect Teaching's three establishments of mindfulness and three liberations, the names may agree, but the offenses and bonds produced by the views do not differ. This resembles gold chains and iron chains: their materials differ, but both bind people. From the four propositions of non-Buddhists through the Perfect Teaching's four views, the names may be pure and beautiful, but the substance of the afflictions produced is filthy. This resembles a rough jade and a rat-stone: their appearances are alike but their contents differ. From the four propositions of non-Buddhists through the Perfect Teaching's four views, all may equally undergo refinement and training, but some can be completed and some cannot. This resembles cow's milk and donkey's milk. From the four views of non-Buddhists through the Perfect Teaching's four views, some harm people and others do not. This resembles the kālaka fruit and the zhentou fruit, similar in outward form.

The divine self they maintain is actually a Dharma of bondage, not an autonomous self. Each clings to his own position as right and calls everything else false speech. They judge one another right and wrong—what has this to do with suchness? Thinking they have found the true path, they instead open roads into the three modes of existence. Hoping to attain nirvāṇa, they are sinking into birth and death. They call their statements true and correct, but end in deviance. They love what is lovable and become angry at what provokes anger.

Although they produce kindness and compassion, it is only compassion arising from views of love. Although they can patiently endure both being anointed with fragrant paste and having their bodies cut, it is merely the forced endurance of an arising-and-ceasing mind. Although they possess knowledge of all, it is merely conjecture and measurement according to worldly sentiment. Although they possess superknowledges, they are only transformations of root dhyāna, transformations with outflows. The Vedas they read are taught through worldly wisdom, not through the power of dhāraṇī and not flowing from the Dharma realm. Although they temporarily sever the dull agents, this is still like the progress of a looper caterpillar or a worldly physician treating an illness that will recur after it has healed. The ocean of origination composed of the eighty-eight agents is vast, and the wheel of suffering in birth and death throughout the three realms has no end. Immersed in outflows, they have no day of escape. All this is the illusory falsity of views. How could it be taken as the real path?

Next, judge according to the Dharmas upon which views depend. Every view depends upon its own Dharma. The three houses of non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma are people with outflows who produce Dharmas with outflows; with minds possessing outflows, they attach themselves to Dharmas that are inherently attachable. Both the Dharma attached to and the mind that attaches are contentious in substance. Not only do they seize one another by the head and pull out hair while cultivating causes; once a view arises, they further take it to be nirvāṇa. Attachment forms fierce views, the poison deepens, and conflict becomes more intense. The Dharma depended upon is not true and the view produced is also false.

Although this is a deviant Dharma, someone who covertly attains its true intent may still borrow a deviant characteristic to enter the correct characteristic. The flight of a flower or movement of a leaf can, through the slightest cause and condition, enable someone to realize pratyekabuddhahood. How much more can an old Dharma already present in the world do so? Yet although what the pratyekabuddha attains is correct, flowers and leaves are ultimately not correct teachings. Non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma may awaken covertly, but their Dharma gates lead only to various views and are not correct Dharmas. Because an attached mind attaches to an attachable Dharma, both cause and result remain in conflict. They are therefore judged to be deviant Dharmas producing deviant views.

The four gates of the Tripiṭaka Teaching, by contrast, are world-transcending Dharmas realized by world-transcending noble ones. Their substance is pure, and they are loci where afflictions are extinguished. Not only the Buddha's scriptures are correct Dharma; the Dharma explained by the five hundred arhats can also enable people to attain the path. The Samādhi of Wondrous Excellence says that one hundred years after the Buddha's extinction, one hundred thousand people left home and ninety thousand attained the path; after two hundred years, one hundred thousand left home and ten thousand attained the path. From this one knows that if a person uses an unattached mind and does not attach himself to Dharma that is originally unattached, gives rise to a sincere and correct mind, awakens to the impermanence of everything and to arising and ceasing thought after thought, recognizes that morning cannot guarantee the evening, and single-mindedly seeks the essential road of escape, he will not seal himself inside one gate, produce defilement and attachment, or give rise to conceptual proliferation.

Suppose someone urgently wishes to see the king, receive a reward, and be appointed to office. He may enter through any of the city's four gates. How would he have time to remain at the gate arguing over whether it is good or bad? Knowing that a gate is a thoroughfare, he need not dispute it. Likewise, medicine exists to treat illness, so one should not merely discriminate the medicine's name and characteristics. One should swiftly leave the burning house and exhaust the farthest limit of suffering. When true illumination arises, one realizes the ultimate path and is ultimately free of contention. With no contention there is no karma; with no karma there is no birth and death, only path and cessation. The ground of mind is level and at ease; all dispute over cause and result is absent, all contention ceases, and only correct view remains, with no deviant view.

Although the four gates are correct Dharma, attaching to them with an attached mind still produces deviant views. One regards the four gates as mutually different and produces much conflict while cultivating causes. It is like someone who lives at the city gate for a long time, distinguishes its tiles and timbers, judges them thick or thin, fine or coarse, and says the south gate is good but the north bad, the east clever but the west clumsy. He remains there and refuses to proceed; this is not the gate's fault.

People attached to Dharma gates are likewise. They discriminate names and characteristics, know the afflictions extensively, memorize many factors of the path, pursue reputation, gather followers, and rely on intermediaries to display themselves and seek prominence. They beat the drum of self-importance and raise the banner of pride, boasting before others and struggling with one another even to the point of seizing heads and pulling hair. The vast anger and love among the eighty-eight agents all arise because an attached mind attaches to a correct Dharma gate and produces a deviant view. The afflictions that arise are entirely the same as those of non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma, although the Dharmas reckoned differ as greatly as heaven and earth.

The Vaipulya Sūtra tells of many questions about a bridge that a wise person rebuked. People are also like this. They originally cultivate the four gates to study the path, yet after more than thirty years they still merely discriminate one gate and have not understood it. Their effort has only just begun when they are already old. They do not attain the three flavors of Dharma, but are born empty and die empty, vainly throwing away this lifetime. Like the person who only asks about the bridge, what benefit is there? All this arises because an attached mind attaches to a Dharma originally without attachment and thereby produces a deviant view.

The substance of the Shared Teaching's four gates is also correct Dharma, leading in the near term to the conjured city. The Tripiṭaka gates are circuitous and the Shared Teaching's gates direct. Although skillful and clumsy differ, there is no difference in what they reach. It is like a celestial gate that is straight and splendid while other gates are circuitous and coarse: as long as one does not remain beneath either kind of gate, one can pass through and advance. If one only counts the tiles and timbers, both kinds of gate delay and obstruct. If one does not linger at the Dharma gate, one contends neither while cultivating the cause nor when realizing the result. This is called an unattached mind. By not attaching to an unattached Dharma, one does not produce a deviant view.

Conversely, attaching to this direct gate with an attached mind also produces a deviant view. Whether for reputation, followers, superiority over others, or gain, one discriminates the characteristics of the gate, and the bonds of anger, love, pride, and the rest arise from this. It resembles putting poison into good medicine—how could one not die? Putting the poison of attachment to views into the correct Dharma increases suffering and origination; this is not the Tathāgata's fault. A sharp-facultied non-Buddhist enters the correct characteristic through a deviant characteristic and turns attachment into nonattachment, becoming a disciple of the Buddha. A dull-facultied Buddhist, however, enters a deviant characteristic through the correct characteristic and turns nonattachment into attachment, becoming a deviant disciple. Is this not lamentable?

The four gates of the Distinct and Perfect Teachings, whether skillful or clumsy, sharp or dull, all lead to ultimate nirvāṇa. One does not abide in attachment while cultivating the cause and does not contend when realizing the result. If one seals oneself at the gate and produces a view, one gives rise to afflictions and becomes the same as Ulūka and the other non-Buddhists. Observed in this way, how could someone with clear eyes standing where the Jing and Wei Rivers meet be confused only by names and fail to distinguish clear from muddy?

Why Views Arise and How to Nurture Views while Examining the Mind

In brief, views arise in five rounds. Each round has four gates, making twenty gates; each gate further has seven types of people, making one hundred and forty different Dharmas of views. Explained extensively, they are immeasurable. All open through causes and conditions. Because calming is cultivated generally, various dhyānas can arise. Because contemplation is cultivated generally, various views can arise. Although the shared conditioning cause lies in calming-and-contemplation, the distinct root cause necessarily comes from a past life.

Some people studied among non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma in a past life. Some were disciples of the Buddha and studied within the Great or Small Vehicle. Some heard Dharma characteristics and produced various views; some produced views through seated dhyāna. With the separation of a lifetime, those studies were lost and forgotten, and the understanding could no longer appear. Now, by cultivating a still mind or hearing scriptures and treatises that stir past karma, the Dharmas of views arise again. What was maturely perfumed in the past arises easily in the present; what was unfamiliar then arises with difficulty now. What is separated by many lives is difficult to produce, while what is near arises easily. If views of non-Buddhists outside Buddha-Dharma were recently and maturely perfumed, outer views arise first. If inner views of Buddha-Dharma were recently and maturely perfumed, inner views appear first.

Superknowledges and the Vedas concern phenomena and are easily forgotten between lives, so they are difficult to produce. Views belong to the nature of wisdom and are harder to forget, so they arise easily. It resembles someone who, after a long separation, remembers a name but has forgotten a face. Phenomena and principle differ in ease and difficulty in the same way. If one had a cause and condition involving a ghost outside oneself in a past life, the ghost empowers one and causes ghostly dhyāna and ghostly views to arise. If one had a cause and condition involving a noble one outside oneself, the noble one empowers one and correct dhyāna and correct views arise.

Next, if one did not previously know the faults of views, one would be terrified upon seeing a view arise and hastily try to cut it off. Now that its deviant characteristics are recognized, it must never be cut off abruptly. It may provisionally be allowed to reach completion and turned into a power that assists the path; this will certainly have great benefit. It resembles someone with abdominal worms who first nurtures a tape-worm and later uses dried-pearl medicine to purge it.

Why is this so? Foolish people in the world are as stubborn and dull as oxen and horses. Even if the sound of Dharma thunders and the language spreads out like brocade, what they see and hear brings no benefit. They are submerged in the five desires, like someone with abdominal worms. If various views arise, the views can devour dull afflictions like a tape-worm devouring abdominal worms. View-wisdom lies close to correct contemplation and makes the Dharma easy to understand upon hearing, like the final pearl decoction. One must therefore nurture views and examine the mind, allowing view-wisdom to go ahead as a guide.

If one enters the Two Vehicles, one shifts the view that arose and cultivates the factors of the path. If one enters the Great Vehicle, one does not shift the view that arose but cultivates the factors of the path within it. It resembles confronting enemies and destroying bands of thieves, then establishing merit only after the affair is finished. This is nurturing an outer view and making it an attendant. If views of the Tripiṭaka's circuitous and clumsy four gates or the Shared Teaching's skillful four gates arise, those views may be obstructions, but their power to assist the path is also profound. If there are only Dharmas of merit, ascending to heaven is easy but attaining the path difficult. Views belong to the nature of wisdom: sinking is easy, but awakening to the path is also swift.

The Dazhidu Lun says: “There are also those who attain the path in the three evil destinies. They are not mentioned only because they are few; a black mole on a white person's body does not make that person black.” Once one knows this to be a view, other delusions cannot seize an opening, and the view may be allowed to discriminate fully. Various non-Buddhists already possess minds of views. When they receive the Buddha's teaching, they are like swift horses that awaken as soon as they see the shadow of the whip. Those without views are like material that cannot be cut through even with many axes, or like oxen and horses being taught the Dharma, with neither side able to understand the other.

How could profound matters be discussed with peoples whose language is not even understood? For such people, the Buddha therefore cannot appear directly in a buddha-body. He must divide and transform his form, becoming a teacher or a friend who guides their Dharmas of views. When the sun of the Buddha first rose, expedient persons guided them toward the real Dharma, and they awakened upon hearing. The Lotus Sūtra's “secretly dispatching two people” refers, in terms of Dharma, to the two expedient teachings and, in terms of persons, to expedient manifestations resembling the Two Vehicles. Even the assembled noble ones bend through skillful means and first teach a person's views. Now that views have arisen, how could they be hastily removed?

If someone cultivated the eight gates of the Distinct and Perfect Teachings in a past life but had not yet severed the shared delusions, then if those views arise in this life, their faults are the same as those of the three non-Buddhist houses. If the shared delusions had already been broken but the distinct principle not yet awakened to, the person may resemble the Two Vehicles. Even the earlier views can be nurtured—how much more these? The Vimalakīrti Sūtra takes the aspect in which the Two Vehicles are at fault and rebukes them as the same as non-Buddhists; it also takes the aspect in which they can assist the path and makes them attendants. The matter must be understood from both advance and retreat and cannot be treated from only one direction. If the mind of views arises during cultivation of the path in this life, principle can be expected. If views have not yet arisen, the noble object is difficult to meet.

IV. Cultivating Calming-and-Contemplation in Relation to Views

Fourth is cultivating calming-and-contemplation in relation to views. As generally explained above, the views attained differ, making one hundred and forty kinds. If only deviant views within Buddha-Dharma are considered, there are one hundred and twelve. How many schools result if doctrines are established and meanings explained? Are the characteristics of views discriminated in the Treatise on the Ten Grounds, Madhyamaka Treatise, Summary Treatise, Sāṃkhya treatises, and the rest the same or different? How are the deviant and correct roads distinguished, and how many grades of superior and inferior are there? One who understands the meanings above knows that these questions are irrelevant. What can be done for one who does not understand?

Buddha-Dharma has two methods of teaching: first, gathering in; second, breaking and subduing. The “Peaceful Practices” chapter's refusal to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of others expresses gathering in. The Great Sūtra's teaching about taking up knives and staves and even beheading expresses breaking and subduing. Although giving and taking away are different roads, both aim to bring people benefit. If views cause circulation, they must be broken and removed without remainder. If they can assist the refinement of spiritual understanding and turn the mind back toward correctness, they may be gathered in.

The foregoing explained various views in relation to many kinds of people; it did not mean that one person produces all views simultaneously. Even if they all arose, they would devour one another until only the one thing the person considers real remained. If each view were individually opened into a Dharma gate and words skillfully presented, ninety days would not suffice to finish explaining it. If each view were gathered into one gate of contemplation, with all Dharmas fully present within it, that too could not be exhaustively explained. Both multiplicity and unity can be applied freely.

One view will now provisionally serve as an example; the many remaining views are the same. Among all views, the view of emptiness can destroy everything, while no other view can destroy emptiness. Its power to guide people is the most acute, so the view of emptiness is contemplated first and ten meanings are opened from it by analogy.

〔Section §14.4.1〕 The Conceivable Object: The View of Emptiness Produces the Ten Dharma Realms

The conceivable object means that the view of emptiness can produce the ten Dharma realms. A cucumber is not itself hot but can become a cause of hot illness. The view of emptiness is not itself the ten Dharma realms but can serve as their cause and condition. The Chengshi Lun says that when a mind of an extreme view arises for one moment, it is unwholesome. The Abhidharma says that when such a mind arises for one moment, it is neither wholesome nor unwholesome but indeterminate; nevertheless, all wholesome and unwholesome states arise in dependence on the mind that it activates. The present view of emptiness likewise has two meanings. When contemplated separately, it resembles a mind activated by a cause: all ten Dharma realms arise from it. Why? Before a view of emptiness arose, one had never acted in dependence upon such a view. As soon as it arises, the three conducts of good, evil, and indeterminate appear, as explained above.

Those who do evil in dependence upon the view of emptiness practice a Dharma of nonobstruction. Looking upward, they see neither scripture nor Buddha as a field of merit worthy of reverence; looking downward, they see no kindness owed to their parents. They imitate the naked conduct of animals and annihilate the various kinds of worldly and world-transcending good. Although an icchantika is evil, he still retains the good of affection; the view of emptiness lacks even that forever and produces only the three grades of evil, upper, middle, and lower. Rebellion, harm, injury, and destruction are the Dharma realm of hells. Having neither shame nor conscience is the Dharma realm of animals. Stinginess, greed, breaking a fast, and impure livelihood are the Dharma realm of hungry ghosts. Breaking a fast causes constant hunger, and impure livelihood causes one to consume filth.

Those who do good in dependence upon the view of emptiness observe precepts and practice austerities, adorn themselves with the ten good acts, and mature the three karmas of body, speech, and mind. This is the Dharma realm of the three good destinies. If they also produce root dhyāna, they are born in the form realm.

The Dharma Realm of Śrāvakas

The view of emptiness can further produce the Dharma of śrāvakas. Those who maintain emptiness do not actually recognize that the four truths are fully present within the view of emptiness. Why? Genuine realization of Dharma-nature alone is emptiness and purity. A false view of emptiness necessarily depends upon a body of retribution, and retribution is defiled form. The Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra says that whether form is described as permanent or impermanent and so forth, all such statements depend upon form. The mind takes emptiness alone to be right and everything else wrong.

Grasping the appearance of emptiness makes it different from existent Dharmas. Conditioning emptiness produces the three conducts of good, evil, and indeterminate. The mind that discriminates emptiness prevails over other Dharmas. Together, these are called the five aggregates. The dust-object of emptiness facing the faculty of mind makes two sense fields; adding mind-consciousness makes three elements. The elements, sense fields, and aggregates are the truth of suffering.

The view of emptiness is also a locus upon which anger, attachment, and pride depend. When a weak view of existence is seized and broken by the view of emptiness and principle is forcibly dragged toward the extreme of emptiness, doubt cannot arise. If the existent Dharma cannot be broken and principle cannot be dragged over, the person bares his teeth and produces doubt. Even if doubt is absent now, great doubt will arise later. Why? If emptiness were truly principle, he himself should be equal to the noble ones. Since he is not equal to them, how could he avoid doubt?

Who maintains emptiness? It is the self that maintains emptiness. In fact, the self is not empty and emptiness is not the self; yet because a self arises from emptiness, the person says, “I cultivate, I understand; others praise me or revile me.” He attaches himself to the extreme of emptiness and cannot abandon it. He further thinks a path based on emptiness can penetrate to nirvāṇa, so he takes emptiness as a precept, though it is not a chicken precept, dog precept, or the like. Taking what is not a cause as a cause is the precept-and-vow attachment that steals a cause. Taking emptiness to be true emptiness, although it is not emptiness in principle, and taking what is not a result as a result is the view-attachment that steals a result. The slanted view of emptiness is a deviant view.

In this way, all ten agents arise from the view of emptiness. Beneath the truth of suffering in the desire realm, all ten agents are present. Beneath the truth of origination are seven, excluding the view of a body, the extreme view, and precept-and-vow attachment. Beneath the truth of the path are eight, excluding the view of a body and the extreme view. Beneath the truth of cessation are seven, excluding the view of a body, the extreme view, and precept-and-vow attachment. Together these make thirty-two agents. From each of the form and formless realms, the four agents of anger are removed, leaving twenty-eight. The total for the three realms is eighty-eight agents; this is called the truth of origination. Origination arises through delusion about suffering, and suffering in turn arises from origination. Suffering and origination continue and circulate, yet Dīrghanakha does not recognize them. There is also a ghost whose head blazes with fire. Below the Heaven of Neither Perception nor Nonperception, one still cannot escape—how could one face emptiness without recognizing suffering and origination?

If one recognizes the view of emptiness as suffering and origination, one knows that both depend upon the body of form. All form Dharmas are called body, and bodily form is defiled. Defilement is impure and is rejected by people of wisdom. Breaking the inversion of purity is called the establishment of mindfulness of body.

If one experiences the view of emptiness, this experience is “feeling without feeling,” the second proposition concerning feeling. Conforming to the view of emptiness is pleasant feeling; opposing it is painful feeling; neither opposing nor conforming is neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. The three feelings are the three sufferings. Taking suffering as happiness is an inversion. Knowing that no happiness exists within them breaks the inversion of happiness and is called the establishment of mindfulness of feelings.

When the dust-object of emptiness faces the mind, mind-consciousness arises. This mind arises and ceases from moment to moment, constantly renewing and flowing. When there is an object, thought arises; without an object, thought does not arise. It arises and ceases impermanently, yet is regarded as permanent—this is an inversion. Recognizing this consciousness as impermanent breaks the inversion of permanence and is called the establishment of mindfulness of mind.

One grasps the appearance of emptiness and performs good and evil, then reckons a self within those formations. If the formations were the self, then as formations improve or decline and flourish or decay, the self should improve or decline and flourish or decay with them. Formations are immeasurable. If the self pervaded them all, the self would become immeasurable. If it did not pervade them, then since one formation would lack a self, all formations would lack a self. Forcibly reckoning a self is an inversion. Knowing there is no self breaks the aggregates of perception and formation and is called the establishment of mindfulness of Dharmas.

In fact, each aggregate can be subject to all four inverted reckonings of permanence, happiness, self, and purity. It is only that reckoning self is strongest regarding perception and formation, purity strongest regarding form, permanence strongest regarding mind, and happiness strongest regarding feeling. These are called the distinct establishments of mindfulness. The general establishment of mindfulness does not discriminate in this way. This is the view of emptiness producing the contemplation of the establishments of mindfulness. Diligent contemplation that breaks the inversions reveals the four right efforts. Cultivating within a concentrated mind is called the four bases of spiritual power. The arising of five good roots is called the five faculties. Breaking five kinds of delusion is called the five powers. When the function of the path becomes stable, these are called the seven factors of awakening. Proceeding within the stable path is called the eightfold noble path. This is the view of emptiness producing the truth of the path.

Because the four inversions are removed, delusion ceases. Because delusion ceases, love ceases. Because love ceases, anger ceases. Once anger ceases, one knows that the view of emptiness is not the path; bowing one's head in shame and conscience, pride ceases. With attachment no longer present, doubt ceases. The view of emptiness fully contains suffering and origination, so suffering and origination are not ultimate emptiness. Once the mind attached to emptiness is broken, one seeks a self and cannot find it. Because the self cannot be found, the view of a body is broken. Because the view of a body is broken, the view of self is broken. Because the view of self is broken, the extreme view is broken. Because the view of emptiness is not the path, precept-and-vow attachment is broken. Because emptiness is not true nirvāṇa, view-attachment is broken. Because the view of emptiness does not accord with principle, deviant view is broken.

Because the ten agents are broken, the eighty-eight agents are broken. Because the eighty-eight agents are broken, the bondage of afflictive seeds is broken. Once the bondage of seeds is broken, one can produce the first fruit and proceed to arhatship. The bondage of the resultant retribution is also broken, and one enters nirvāṇa without remainder. This is the view of emptiness producing the truth of cessation, and it is the Dharma realm of śrāvakas.

If one clearly recognizes the four truths within the view of emptiness, one knows the true path that exhausts suffering. By suppressing and severing the afflictions through the true path, one can become a worthy or noble one. Even among the one hundred and forty kinds of views, whether simple, compound, fully endowed, wordless, or otherwise, if one can recognize the true path within a view, one can shift and leave the views. Otherwise, one cannot see the four true truths and circulates for a long time in the great ocean of suffering in birth and death. If one can see the four truths, one can sever birth and death; all further birth is exhausted and no mode of existence is undergone again. This is the meaning.

The Dharma Realm of Pratyekabuddhas

Next is the view of emptiness producing the Dharma of pratyekabuddhas. The view of emptiness is originally not empty, yet emptiness is falsely reckoned; this is inverted discrimination. Inversion is ignorance. Because of ignorance, one grasps the view of emptiness. If one has recognized ignorance, what is there still to grasp? If one recognizes ignorance, grasping and existence do not arise. Once past karma is exhausted, no new karma is produced. With no new karma produced and no grasping or existence arising, when past karma is exhausted, ignorance is no longer produced. In the absence of ignorance, the light of wisdom is present. Thus, when wisdom is present, afflictions are absent, and when afflictions are absent, ignorance ceases. When ignorance ceases, formations cease, and so on through the ceasing of aging and death.

The Madhyamaka Treatise asks how śrāvakas contemplate the meaning of the twelve links of dependent origination, yet the answer speaks of the sixty-two views of permanence, impermanence, and the rest; question and answer appear almost unrelated. It can now be known that this is precisely the answer. Views of permanence, impermanence, and the rest are all ignorance. Recognizing ignorance and no longer producing grasping and existence is contemplation of the twelve links within the Dharma of śrāvakas. The Lotus Sūtra speaks of delighting in solitary quietude and seeking natural wisdom. This wisdom is precisely the ability to still and extinguish the sixty-two views.

Further contemplate how one moment of the view of emptiness already fully possesses the four truths, then ask whether this mind of the view of emptiness exists or does not exist. As soon as the momentary mind arises, it fully possesses the five aggregates; how could it be called nonexistent? This is the link of existence. Existence already contains its result and therefore accords with the meaning that the result exists within the cause. If the link of existence were said to lack a result, it would still possess a cause. Once the meaning of cause is fully present, from where does existence arise? Without grasping, existence does not arise.

Grasping means the five views: attachment to the extreme of emptiness is the extreme view; reckoning a self in emptiness, taking emptiness as the path, taking emptiness as nirvāṇa, and taking emptiness as correct are all the link of grasping. Grasping arises from craving. Loving emptiness, becoming angry when it is opposed, growing proud toward others, and doubting this principle are all called the link of craving. Craving arises in dependence upon feeling, for craving is produced only because there is feeling. It resembles experiencing a Dharma and then craving its flavor and pursuing it. Know that feeling arises in dependence upon contact, because the faculty of mind faces the dust-object of emptiness and contact occurs. Scripture says that various feelings arise through the causes and conditions of contact. Contact, in turn, exists through the sense fields, for dust contacts the faculties and thereby becomes an entering.

The sense fields exist in dependence upon name-and-form. At the kalala stage there are three matters: form has five embryonic vesicles, vitality continuously sustains them, and consciousness possesses the name composed of the four aggregates of feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness. The three matters are therefore called name-and-form. Name-and-form exists through the consciousness that first enters the womb; consciousness exists through past karma; karma exists through ignorance. Ignorance is past inversion, all views that reckon existence, nonexistence, and the rest; it can therefore produce the body of form in this life.

Scripture says that consciousness is the seed, karma the field, craving the water, and ignorance the covering, and thus the sprout of name-and-form is produced. Now inversion occurs again: deluded about the view of emptiness, one produces wholesome and unwholesome formations and plants the sprout of future name-and-form. Inversion is added to inversion, ignorance to ignorance; they act as one another's causes and conditions without end.

If one recognizes ignorance as inversion, there is no need to continue drawing the lines of existence and nonexistence. One need only penetrate that its substance is originally unreal and exists solely through the conjunction of the causes and conditions of false thought. Once it is known as inversion, ignorance ceases. Because ignorance ceases, formations and all the links through aging and death cease. When the ignorance and aging-and-death of one view of emptiness cease, the ignorance and aging-and-death of all one hundred and forty kinds of views also cease. Through their ceasing, the twenty-five modes of existence are broken and residual habits gradually removed. This is called the view of emptiness producing the Dharma realm of pratyekabuddhas.

If one recognizes within the view of emptiness that it is ignorance, ignorance can cease. If one cannot recognize this, one cannot even leave the net of the view of emptiness. Producing karma for views resembles a silkworm spinning its cocoon; how could one become a pratyekabuddha? Dhyāna masters whose noses are blocked and who produce the view of emptiness mostly fall into the net and cannot extricate themselves. Dharma teachers with distracted minds may discriminate the various agents yet remain unaware of the faults in their own views of emptiness. Ordinary people who covertly claim realization resemble turtles; blind dogs bark at random. Both their own cultivation and their teaching of others entirely lack the air of the path.

The Dharma Realm of Bodhisattvas of the Six Perfections

The view of emptiness can also produce the Dharma of bodhisattvas of the six perfections. Once one recognizes the truths and dependent origination within the view of emptiness, one knows both illness and medicine. Knowing the medicine, one feels joy oneself; knowing the illness, one feels compassion for others and wishes to leave suffering and attain happiness together with sentient beings. The aggregates and elements of the view of emptiness are suffering; the ten agents and the rest are origination; the establishments of mindfulness and the rest are the path; the breaking of the four inversions is cessation. The four vast vows arise in dependence upon these four truths.

Within a single view of emptiness, how many hundreds of thousands of millions of sets of five aggregates arise during one day and night? Every set of five aggregates is a sentient being. If this is so even in one day and night, how much more throughout a lifetime? How much more throughout immeasurable lives? The view of emptiness is like this, and so are the remaining views. Since the views capable of producing are many, the five aggregates produced are beyond calculation. This is so even for one person, much more for many people. This is the vow to deliver boundlessly many sentient beings.

One view of emptiness produces the eighty-eight agents thought after thought. The other three views, the sixty-two views, and the rest all likewise produce the eighty-eight agents. This is so even for one person, much more for many people. This is the vow to sever immeasurably many afflictions.

One view of emptiness can cultivate the establishments of mindfulness and the factors of the path. All other views each have a correct path and an assisting path, immeasurable and boundless. This is so for one person and likewise for many people. This is the vow to know inexhaustibly many Dharma gates.

The afflictions of one view of emptiness can cease. Immeasurably many views and immeasurably many afflictions can likewise cease. This is so for one person and likewise for all people. This is the vow to accomplish unsurpassed buddhahood.

If the suffering and origination of sentient beings possessed a fixed, real intrinsic nature, they could not be delivered. Precisely because suffering and origination arise through causes and conditions and lack intrinsic nature, the ocean of suffering can be dried and the source of origination easily exhausted. This is why it is called deliverance. The vows arise in dependence upon the view of emptiness as above.

Next, the conduct of the six perfections arises in dependence upon the view of emptiness. Giving while attached to the view of emptiness is only demonic giving. If one knows that the view of emptiness contains truths and dependent origination and possesses faults such as impermanence and no-self, one abandons the view of emptiness, feels compassion for others, and urges them to abandon the view of emptiness and practice giving.

How does observing precepts while attached to the view of emptiness differ from observing chicken precepts, dog precepts, and the like? Knowing that the view of emptiness has faults such as impermanence, not being harmed by it, and compassionately enabling others to guard against it—this alone is moral discipline.

If the view of emptiness is made a locus of anger and attachment, forced endurance means merely that one's power is insufficient and one endures because one fears others. Now one knows that the view of emptiness has immeasurable faults, can suppress that view and the sixty-two views, and can urge others to endure the view of emptiness. This alone is patience.

If one does not remove the view of emptiness but practices effort, the admixture of a deviant view means it is not pure, and retreating into the three evil destinies means it does not advance. Now one recognizes the view of emptiness and prevents it from arising; this is called purity. One breaks the karma produced by the view of emptiness and can rise and depart; this is called advance. One further urges others to cultivate such effort.

If one attains dhyāna without breaking the view of emptiness, it is usually a ghostly Dharma. Now one recognizes the faults of emptiness, remains unmoved by the view of emptiness, and accomplishes correct dhyāna and correct superknowledges, without using superknowledges for flattery, arrogance, or the pursuit of gain. One further uses superknowledges to teach sentient beings, causing them to abandon the distraction of views and enter meditative concentration.

If one cultivates wisdom while attached to the view of emptiness, it is only foolish worldly wisdom. Now one recognizes the truths and dependent origination within the view of emptiness. Using the wolf of impermanence to frighten the sheep of the view of emptiness, one removes the fat of afflictions; then, extensively producing vows and practices, one fattens the body of merit. Out of compassion for sentient beings, one causes them to lose fat and grow flesh. If the faculties of those with affinity have matured, one sits at the place of the path, severs the bonds, and becomes a buddha. This is called the view of emptiness producing the Dharma realm of bodhisattvas of the six perfections.

The Dharma Realms of the Shared, Distinct, and Perfect Teachings

Contemplate the view of emptiness as precisely ignorance and ignorance in its very substance as empty. All suffering and origination produced from ignorance are entirely unfindable. Why? The four inversions are reckoned transversely; how could they possess a fixed and real intrinsic nature? Since the inversions to be treated do not truly exist, how could the establishments of mindfulness that treat them be found? Even the seven factors of awakening and eightfold path do not arise and therefore cannot be found. Thus the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra speaks of “accordingly cultivating suffering as empty” and so forth〔and so forth〕.

The Two Vehicles know that everything is immediately empty, so they sever suffering and enter cessation. Bodhisattvas know that everything is immediately empty yet produce compassionate vows and practices and vow to deliver sentient beings. Although they deliver sentient beings, it resembles delivering empty space. Although they extinguish afflictions, it resembles battling empty space. Although they produce Dharma gates, it resembles producing them from empty space. Although they extinguish sentient beings, in fact no sentient being attains extinction. This is wisdom, this is the virtue of severance, and this is the bodhisattva's tolerance of the nonarising of Dharmas. This is called the view of emptiness producing the bodhisattva Dharma realm of the Shared Teaching.

Next, contemplate the view of emptiness as possessing immeasurably many characteristics, which are the four truths within it. If each is discriminated and calculated, they cannot be exhausted. This inexhaustible Dharma arises from the view of emptiness, while the view of emptiness arises from ignorance. What is produced is immeasurable, and what produces it is also immeasurable. Since what produces bears only a provisional name, what is produced also bears a provisional name. Next, trace this ignorance as arising from Dharma-nature, like investigating a dream and learning that it came from sleep. Contemplating the view of emptiness, one recognizes the true mark, and the true mark is the tathāgata-garbha. Immeasurably many adventitious defilements cover the principle of the treasury. By cultivating Dharma gates as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, one reveals the pure nature. This is called the view of emptiness producing the Dharma of the Distinct Teaching.

The view of emptiness produces the Dharma of the Perfect Teaching as in the preceding text and as explained below.

View-delusion surges vast as water forty li across; the remaining force of thought-delusion is only like one drop of water. The preceding preparatory means jointly treated view-delusion. When view-delusion is exhausted, this is called entering the stream, after which one naturally does not retreat. Because view-delusion is difficult to remove, skillful means are required. The Chengshi Lun says that emptiness treats delusion. If emptiness alone could treat delusion and enable entry into the path, no other Dharmas would be needed. If it cannot enable entry into the path, what other treatment should be established? Yet if fire arises within water, the water instead cannot extinguish the fire. When the view of emptiness itself produces faults, how could emptiness treat emptiness? One must now first recognize the view of emptiness as the illness of suffering and origination and only then treat it with wisdom of the truths.

The Tripiṭaka Teaching uses wisdom of impermanence, and the Shared Teaching uses wisdom of immediate emptiness; both first remove views. The Distinct Teaching also first removes views and enters emptiness, then skillfully leaves emptiness for provisional existence, like planting a tree in empty space. Although the Perfect Teaching does not deliberately remove views, views are naturally removed first. To remove a solid view, various methods of treatment must be used. How could one say that everything is treated through emptiness alone? And how could the various treatments jointly treat the same kind of view?

It resembles treating the same cold illness with four kinds of medicine. Taking ginger and cinnamon removes the illness and restores strength. Taking the five minerals removes the illness and enhances the complexion. Taking the multi-storied formula not only lengthens life but enables flight. Taking the golden elixir makes one a great immortal. The illness is one, but the medicines differ and the powers attained differ. The four teachings all treat views, but after the views are removed, the understandings attained differ. Treatment of views is like this, and treatment of the remaining delusions is likewise. The four treatments are the four establishments of mindfulness.

The Bequeathed Teaching Sūtra instructs people to cultivate the path upon the four establishments of mindfulness and thereby leave the burning house. Why? One thought of the view of emptiness is the three realms. The three realms have no separate Dharma but are made by one mind alone. The view of emptiness produces the karma of the six destinies, undergoes bodies of the six destinies, and dwells in the places of the six destinies. The dwelling place is the burning house, the bodies undergone are implements of suffering, and the karma produced is ghosts and spirits. Jostling and pushing one another, the three carts must each travel in order to depart.

The three carts are the separate establishments of mindfulness for each of the three vehicles in the Tripiṭaka Teaching. They are also the one establishment of mindfulness cultivated in common by the three kinds of people in the Shared Teaching; the three expedient establishments of mindfulness and one real establishment in the Distinct Teaching; and the establishment of mindfulness of the one reality in the Perfect Teaching. Explained briefly, these are nine kinds of four establishments of mindfulness; at middle length, nine kinds of factors of the path; extensively, nine kinds of four truths. All these establishments of mindfulness can treat views and enable people to leave the burning house. This is the intent of the bequest.

When Śākyamuni first appeared in the world, he first revealed that the three kinds of people each use their own four establishments of mindfulness, like the goat cart, deer cart, and ox cart in the Lotus Sūtra, each leaving the burning house. Next, he taught the three kinds of people to cultivate one establishment of mindfulness in common, like the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra's one vehicle leaving the three realms and coming to rest in omniscience, and like the Great Collection Sūtra's three vehicles all severing afflictions through the wordless path. Next, he taught bodhisattvas to cultivate sequential establishments of mindfulness, like the prajñā not shared with the Two Vehicles in the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, where the vehicles of the establishments of mindfulness remain separate and are not yet converged. Finally, he taught the Small and Great Vehicles alike to share one establishment of mindfulness, like the Lotus Sūtra's all riding one great cart directly to the place of the path.

Using one view of emptiness to explain the various delusions and treatments does not contradict the scriptures and treatises. A mote of dust containing the scripture scrolls of the great-thousand world means precisely this.

〔Section §14.4.2〕 The Inconceivable Object

Next is clarifying the inconceivable object. One thought of the view of emptiness fully possesses the ten Dharma realms and is precisely Dharma-nature. Dharma-nature is not something far away elsewhere; it is this very mind of the view of emptiness. The Vimalakīrti Sūtra says that the liberation of all buddhas should be sought within the mental activities of sentient beings and within the sixty-two views. The mind of the view of emptiness, the mental activities of sentient beings, and the liberation of all buddhas do not differ, so each is indicated through the others in turn.

All sentient beings are awakening and cannot be attained anew: this is the liberation of perfect purity. The five aggregates are nirvāṇa and cannot be extinguished anew: this is the liberation of purity through skillful means. The suchness of sentient beings is the suchness of buddhas: this is the liberation of intrinsic purity. The liberation of the buddhas means the five kinds of nirvāṇa—liberation of form and so forth. The mind of the view of emptiness is the defiled five aggregates.

Sentient beings exist within the five aggregates, and sentient beings also possess the five aggregates. Name-and-form and sentient beings bind one another and cannot be separated. Contemplating these five aggregates as precisely nirvāṇa, one sees nothing that can be extinguished anew. Originally there is no bondage; this is liberation. Inherent liberation can embrace all Dharmas, so it is said that liberation is sought within this one thought of mind.

Further contemplate the five aggregates of the mind of views as precisely Dharma-nature; then no five aggregates of the mind of views remain to be found. Because outflowed form ceases, one attains the Dharma-nature five aggregates, including permanent form. Because ordinary sentient beings cease, one attains the sentient beings of permanent Dharma-nature. One color fully possesses all colors, one consciousness fully possesses all consciousnesses, and one sentient being fully possesses all sentient beings without mutual obstruction. This resembles a bright, clean mirror displaying various colored images and is called intrinsic purity.

The three liberations cannot be separated from one another. They are neither arranged vertically nor set alongside one another horizontally, but are inconceivably and perfectly complete. Seeking them precisely within the view of emptiness is called the inconceivable object.

Within this object, ignorance and Dharma-nature are clearly and fully present. One grieves that one has long been sunk in darkness and only today begun to awaken; all sentient beings are likewise. Since they are originally Dharma-nature, how could kindness not arise? Since they remain ignorance, how could compassion not arise?

Contemplate this one thought of the view of emptiness as empty and still in its nature, pure like empty space. Then, through skillful means, cause the mind to abide and examine the two Dharmas of ignorance and Dharma-nature. Investigate the aggregate of views and the provisional construction of views through the four propositions: no arising can be found in any of the four. In every simple proposition, compound proposition, and all other propositions, there is an obstruction formed by suffering, origination, and ignorance; in every proposition, there is also a penetration formed by the path, cessation, and the rest.

When contemplating the view of emptiness, one aggregate is all aggregates. The three truths remain unmoved, and one thereby understands the Dharma-body. Next, contemplate this unmoving aggregate as neither pure nor impure and so forth. Nirvāṇa between the twin trees is precisely the place of the path; this contemplation is called prajñā. The breaking of the eight inversions is called liberation. Within one establishment of mindfulness, all establishments of mindfulness arise, and through them sentient beings are regulated and subdued. The three Dharmas of Dharma-body, prajñā, and liberation are neither cause nor result. Not cause, they can function as cause, so the establishment of mindfulness is precisely the place of the path. Not result, they can function as result, so one enters nirvāṇa between the twin trees.

In the very moment when the view of emptiness remains unmoved, cultivate the inconceivable thirty-seven factors of the path. When they universally break through in this way and the view of emptiness can no longer be found, this is called the samādhi of emptiness. When no characteristic of emptiness is seen, this is called the signless samādhi. When such samādhi does not arise from conditioning principle, this is called the wishless samādhi.

If one still cannot enter, one makes great vows: inwardly abandoning attachment to views and outwardly abandoning body, life, and possessions. Because the view of emptiness opposes principle and makes moral discipline impure, one vows that it will no longer violate one's Dharma-body; one guards the seven branches of body and speech and does not disturb or harm conscious beings. Because the view of emptiness clamors and moves so that the inner mind cannot accomplish patience, one vows that even if every suffering comes upon one's body, one will bear everything like a bridge, the earth, or the ocean, and the mind will ultimately remain unmoved.

If the view of emptiness becomes mixed in, one vows to remain pure and single-minded so that thought after thought continues and flows inward. If the view of emptiness disturbs the mind so that it cannot abide in one object, one sincerely repents and stills the two opposing kinds of conditions. Because wisdom of all modes has not yet opened and ignorance has not yet been broken, one vows to contemplate the view of emptiness so that Dharma-nature appears. Resolute and decisive, one advances courageously and does not rest until realization. In this way, one uses treating Dharmas to assist the revelation of nirvāṇa.

One further recognizes one's own stage deeply and does not impersonate a higher ground. Neither inner nor outer winds and dust can destroy it. One does not produce attachment even to Dharmas conforming to the path and therefore does not fall from the stage of the summit. Thought after thought becomes quiescent and flows into the ocean of omniscience. Riding one great cart, one travels in the four directions, goes directly to the place of the path, and accomplishes correct awakening. The remainder is as explained in the preceding text.

Mohe Zhiguan, Fascicle Ten〔Lower〕.

Translator · 釋慧鏡 Shi Huijing — with AI-assisted consistency checking

License · CC BY-NC-SA 4.0