T46n1928_十不二門指要鈔
大正藏第 46 冊 No. 1928 十不二門指要鈔
No. 1928 [cf. No. 1927]
指要鈔序
宋東山沙門遵式述
大教隆夷存乎其人，諸祖既往玄化幾息，時不可以久替，必有間世者出焉。四明傳教導師禮公，實教門之偉人也！童子受經便能思義，天機特發不曰生知之上性者乎！及進具稟學于寶云通師，初預法席，厥父夢其跪于師前，師執瓶水注于口中，其引若泉、其受若谷，於是乎天臺大教圓頓之旨，一受即了不俟再聞。師謂之曰：「子于吾言無所不達，非助我也。」逮師始滅，公復夢貫師之首擐於左臂而行。嘻！得非初表受習，若阿難瀉水分瓶之莫二也；后表傳持，操師種智之首而行化也。淳化初，郡之乾符寺請開講席，諸子悅隨若眾流會海，繇是堂舍側陋門徒漸繁，未幾遂遷於保恩院焉。《法華》、《止觀》、《金光明》諸部，連環講貫，歲無虛日。嘗勖其徒曰：「吾之或出或處或默或語，未始不以教觀權實之旨，為服味焉、為杖幾焉。汝無怠也！」大哉！若夫被寂忍之衣，據大慈之室，循循善誘不可得而稱矣！《釋簽》十不二門者，今昔講流以為一難文也，或多註釋各陳異端，孰不自謂握靈蛇之珠、揮彌天之筆，豈思夫一家教觀，殊不知其啓發
之所。公覽之再嘆，豈但釋文未允，奈何委亂大綱。山隤角崩良用悲痛，將欲正舉舍我而誰！遂而正析斯文旁援顯據，綽有餘刃兼整大途，教門權實今時同昧者于茲判矣，別理隨緣其類也。觀道所託連代共迷者于茲見矣，指要所以其立也。至若《法華》、《止觀》綱格之文，隱括錯綜略無不在，后之學者足以視近見遠，染指知味。《易》不云乎：「通天下之志，定天下之業，斷天下之疑。」實此一二萬言得矣。式忝同學也，觀者無謂吾之亦有黨乎？取長其理、無取長其情，文理明白，誰能隱乎云也。
十不二門指要鈔捲上
宋四明沙門知禮述
十不二門者，本出《釋簽》，豈須鈔解。但斯宗講者，或示或注，著述云云，而事理未明、解行無托，荊溪妙解翻隱於時、天臺圓宗罔益於物，爰因講次對彼釋之，命為「指要鈔」焉。蓋指介爾之心，為事理解行之要也。聊備諸生溫習，敢期達士披詳邪？時大宋景德元年歲在甲辰正月九日敘。
鈔曰：
此文題目多本不同，或云法華本跡十妙不二門，或無本跡二字，有唯云玄文十不二門，此或以所通之義、所釋之文而冠于首，蓋不忘其本也，而儘是別錄者私安，取捨由情無勞苦諍，若十不二門四字，乃作者自立，故文云，為實施權則不二而二，開
權顯實則二而不二，法既教部咸開成妙，故此十門不二為目，須據此文釋其題旨，豈非四時三教所談，色心乃至受潤無不隔異故皆名二？今經開會實理既彰，十異皆融互攝無外咸名不二，即以不二當體為門。然亦可云十不二為能通，十妙為所通。
問：「妙即不二、不二即妙，俱名俱體，何分能通所通？」
答：「今不以粗妙分能所，亦不以名體分之，蓋以十妙法相該博，學者難入，此文撮要徑顯彼意，乃以略顯廣、以易通難，義立能通所通，數至十者，蓋從十妙而立，雖立門對妙互有多少，而不虧本數也。此且總明，待至釋文更為點示。」
若欲標述作人者，即是荊溪尊者。既是後人錄出，不可正斥其諱。
釋文為三：初、總敘立意，二、從一者去，列門解釋，三、是故十門訖文，結攝，重示此三即擬三分也。
初又四：
初、敘前文立述作之意，又二：
初、敘前，又二：
初、敘教廣二：
初、十妙意。然者是也，即領上之辭，亦信解之語，若不信者乃云不然。此跡門等者，指上玄文所談十妙，境智行位因也，三法果也，感應兼自他，神通說法，是能化者，作屬自也，眷屬利益是所化者，事屬他也。故因等四收十妙盡，一代教門所明法相豈過於此！今
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 權且顯現的（權顯）和真實的（實）實際上是二而不二的，佛法既然教導各部都開啟成就妙理，因此以這十門不二作為綱目，必須根據這段文字來解釋它的題旨。難道不是四時和三教所談論的嗎？色、心乃至受潤，沒有不隔絕差異的，所以都稱為『二』。現在此經開示融會貫通的真實道理已經彰顯，十種差異都融合互攝，沒有內外之分，都稱為『不二』，就以這不二的當體作為門徑。然而也可以說十不二作為能通達的途徑，十妙作為所通達的境界。 問：『妙』就是『不二』，『不二』就是『妙』，名稱和本體都是一樣，為什麼要區分能通和所通呢？ 答：現在不以粗妙來區分能所，也不以名稱和本體來區分。因為十妙法相該括廣泛，學者難以進入，這段文字撮取要點，直接顯現那個意思，乃是以簡略顯廣博，以容易通達困難，因此建立能通所通的意義。數量到十，是從十妙而建立的，雖然建立門徑對應妙理，互相之間有多少的差別，但不虧損根本的數量。這只是總體的說明，等到解釋經文時再詳細指點。 如果要標明作者，就是荊溪尊者（指唐代天臺宗僧人湛然）。既然是後人記錄出來的，不可以直呼他的名諱。 解釋經文分為三部分：第一，總述立意的緣由；第二，從『一者』開始，列舉各門進行解釋；第三，從『是故十門』到結尾，總結概括，再次提示這三部分就是擬議的三分結構。 第一部分又分為四部分： 第一，敘述前文立述作的意圖，又分為兩部分： 第一，敘述前文，又分為兩部分： 第一，敘述教義的廣博，分為兩部分： 第一，十妙的意義。『然』，是『是』的意思，即領會上面的文辭，也是信解的語氣，如果不相信，就說『不然』。『此跡門等』，指上面玄文所談的十妙，境（境界）、智（智慧）、行（修行）、位（果位）是因，三法（法身、報身、應身）是果，感應兼顧自身和他身，神通說法是能教化者，『作』屬於自身，眷屬利益是所教化者，『事』屬於他身。所以因等四項收攝了十妙的全部，一代教門所闡明的法相，難道還有超過這些的嗎？現在
【English Translation】 English version The provisional manifestation (Quan Xian) and the real (Shi) are actually two but not two. Since the Dharma teaches that all parts open up and achieve wonderful principles, these Ten Gates of Non-Duality are taken as the outline. It is necessary to interpret its theme based on this text. Isn't it what the four seasons and the three teachings discuss? Form (Se), mind (Xin), and even the reception of moisture (Shou Run) are all separated and different, so they are all called 'two'. Now, this sutra reveals the true principle of integration and penetration. The ten differences are all integrated and mutually inclusive, without inside or outside distinctions, and are all called 'non-duality'. This non-duality is taken as the gate itself. However, it can also be said that the Ten Non-Dualities serve as the means of access (Neng Tong), and the Ten Mysteries serve as the realm to be accessed (Suo Tong). Question: 'The Mysterious (Miao) is Non-Dual (Bu Er), and Non-Dual is Mysterious. The name and substance are the same, so why distinguish between the means of access and the realm to be accessed?' Answer: Now, we do not distinguish between the means and the object based on the coarse and subtle, nor do we distinguish them based on name and substance. Because the Ten Mysterious Dharmas (Shi Miao Fa Xiang) are broad and comprehensive, it is difficult for scholars to enter. This text extracts the key points and directly reveals that meaning. It uses the concise to reveal the extensive, and the easy to access the difficult, thus establishing the meaning of the means of access and the realm to be accessed. The number ten is established from the Ten Mysteries. Although establishing the gates corresponds to the mysteries, and there are some differences between them, it does not diminish the fundamental number. This is just a general explanation; a more detailed explanation will be given when interpreting the text. If you want to indicate the author, it is Venerable Jingxi (referring to Zhanran, a Tiantai Buddhist monk in the Tang Dynasty). Since it was recorded by later generations, you cannot directly call out his taboo name. The explanation of the text is divided into three parts: first, a general description of the intention; second, starting from 'One (Yi Zhe)', listing and explaining each gate; third, from 'Therefore, the Ten Gates (Shi Gu Shi Men)' to the end, summarizing and reiterating that these three parts are the proposed three-part structure. The first part is further divided into four parts: First, narrating the intention of establishing the writing in the previous text, which is further divided into two parts: First, narrating the previous text, which is further divided into two parts: First, narrating the vastness of the teachings, which is divided into two parts: First, the meaning of the Ten Mysteries. 'Ran' means 'is', which is to understand the above words, and is also a tone of belief and understanding. If you do not believe, you say 'not so'. 'These Trace Gates (Ci Ji Men) etc.' refer to the Ten Mysteries discussed in the above profound text. Realm (Jing), Wisdom (Zhi), Practice (Xing), and Position (Wei) are the cause; the Three Bodies (San Fa) are the effect; responsiveness includes both self and others; supernatural powers and preaching are the ones who can teach; 'action' belongs to oneself; family benefits are the ones who are taught; 'affairs' belong to others. Therefore, the four items of cause, etc., encompass all of the Ten Mysteries. Can the Dharma characteristics elucidated by the teachings of a generation exceed these? Now
於十義，皆用待絕二妙而融會之令無壅礙，故云融通入妙。
二、凡諸下，眾釋意。如初理境具有七科，一一皆用四教揀之，意開藏等俱圓，復以五味判之，欲開兼等皆妙，即使醍醐之外更無餘味，如此釋之方稱妙法。智行乃至利益各明種種法相，無不皆用四教五味，判后開之皆成極味。
二、觀心下，敘觀略。樞即門之要也，機謂機關，有可發之義。蓋一切教行皆以觀心為要，皆自觀心而發，觀心空故一切法空，即所修諸行、所起諸教皆歸空也，假中亦然，豈不以觀心為樞機邪！然今玄文未暇廣明，寄諸文末略點示爾。又雖據義一一合有，為避繁文故有存沒。如十二因緣，境后則有、四諦則略，蓋有止觀。對此明乎教觀旁正，如常所說，託事則借彼事義立境立觀，如王舍、耆山等，附法則攝諸法相入心成觀，如四諦、五行等，既非專行，故十乘不委。此即《義例》約行等三種觀相也。
二、所明下立意，又二：
初、重示大部意。更舉十妙方出其意，能化即應，並神通說法也，所化即感，及眷屬利益也，此十乃是一代教中能詮名字，大部明此意，在開顯諸名咸妙故也。須辨十者，欲收始末自他盡故。始謂境等，即自行因，末謂三法，即自行果，自他如前。若辨此十一一咸妙，則瞭如來出世
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 對於十種玄妙，都運用待、絕這兩種玄妙的方法來融合貫通，使之沒有阻塞和障礙，所以說融通而入于玄妙的境界。 其次，『凡諸下』，是總括解釋經文的意義。例如最初的理境具有七科，每一科都用四教（藏教、通教、別教、圓教）來判別，意思是說藏教等都歸於圓教，再用五味（乳味、酪味、生酥味、熟酥味、醍醐味）來判別，想要說明兼教等都歸於玄妙，即使在醍醐味之外再沒有其他的味道。像這樣解釋才可稱為妙法。智行乃至利益，各自闡明種種法相，沒有不都用四教五味來判別，判別之後開顯出來都成為極妙的滋味。 其次，『觀心下』，是敘述觀心的綱要。樞就是門的關鍵，機是指機關，有可以引發的意義。大概一切的教法和修行都以觀心為關鍵，都從觀心而引發。觀心是空性的，所以一切法也是空性的，也就是所修的各種行、所起的各種教法都歸於空性，假和中也是這樣，難道不是以觀心為關鍵嗎！然而現在《玄文》沒有時間詳細說明，寄託在文章的末尾稍微點示一下罷了。又雖然根據意義一一對應，爲了避免繁瑣的文字，所以有的保留，有的省略。例如十二因緣，在境之後就有，四諦就省略了，大概是因為有止觀。對此可以明白教觀的旁正，像平常所說的那樣，託事就是借用彼事之義來建立境和觀，例如王舍城（Rājagṛha）、耆阇崛山（Gṛdhrakūṭa）等，附法就是攝取各種法相進入心中而成為觀，例如四諦、五行等，既然不是專門的修行，所以十乘觀法就不詳細說明了。這就是《義例》中關於行等三種觀相的說明。 其次，『所明下立意』，又分為兩個方面： 首先，再次揭示《大部》（《摩訶止觀》）的意旨。再次舉出十妙，是爲了顯出它的意旨，能化就是應，包括神通說法，所化就是感，以及眷屬利益，這十種玄妙是一代教法中能詮釋的名詞，大部闡明這個意旨，在於開顯各種名稱都歸於玄妙的緣故。必須辨明這十種玄妙，是爲了收攝從開始到結束、從自身到他人的所有內容。開始是指境等，也就是自行之因，結束是指三法，也就是自行之果，自身和他人如前所述。如果辨明這十種玄妙，每一種都歸於玄妙，那麼就瞭解如來出世的意義了。
【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the ten mysteries, all employ the two subtle methods of 'awaiting' and 'severing' to integrate and connect them, ensuring there are no blockages or hindrances. Therefore, it is said to be a seamless integration into the realm of the profound. Secondly, 'Fan Zhu Xia' (凡諸下) is a general explanation of the meaning of the sutra. For example, the initial realm of principle possesses seven categories, each of which is distinguished using the Four Teachings (Tripiṭaka Teaching, Connecting Teaching, Distinct Teaching, and Perfect Teaching), meaning that the Tripiṭaka Teaching, etc., all return to the Perfect Teaching. Furthermore, they are judged using the Five Flavors (milk, cream, curd, cooked butter, and ghee), intending to illustrate that the combined teachings, etc., all return to the profound. Even beyond the flavor of ghee, there is no other flavor. Only such an explanation can be called the Wonderful Dharma. Wisdom, practice, and even benefits each elucidate various Dharma characteristics, all of which are invariably distinguished using the Four Teachings and Five Flavors. After distinguishing, revealing them all becomes the ultimate flavor. Secondly, 'Guan Xin Xia' (觀心下) outlines the essentials of contemplation. 'Shu' (樞) is the key to the door, and 'Ji' (機) refers to a mechanism, implying the potential for initiation. Generally, all teachings and practices consider contemplation of the mind as essential, originating from contemplation of the mind. Because contemplation of the mind is emptiness, all dharmas are also emptiness, meaning that all practices cultivated and all teachings initiated return to emptiness. The same applies to provisionality and the middle way. Is it not contemplation of the mind that serves as the key mechanism! However, the 'Profound Meaning' (玄文) does not have time to explain in detail now, entrusting it to the end of the text for a brief indication. Furthermore, although each corresponds according to meaning, some are retained and some are omitted to avoid verbose text. For example, the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination are present after the realm, while the Four Noble Truths are omitted, presumably because there is cessation and contemplation. From this, one can understand the direct and indirect aspects of teaching and contemplation. As commonly said, 'entrusting to events' means borrowing the meaning of those events to establish the realm and contemplation, such as Rājagṛha (王舍城) and Gṛdhrakūṭa (耆阇崛山), while 'attaching to dharmas' means incorporating various Dharma characteristics into the mind to form contemplation, such as the Four Noble Truths and the Five Elements. Since it is not a specialized practice, the Ten Modes of Contemplation are not explained in detail. This is the explanation of the three aspects of contemplation, such as practice, in the 'Meaning Examples' (義例). Secondly, 'Suo Ming Xia Li Yi' (所明下立意) establishes the intention, further divided into two aspects: Firstly, reiterating the intention of the 'Great Treatise' (大部) (Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra). Re-mentioning the Ten Mysteries is to reveal its intention. 'Able to transform' (能化) means response, including supernatural powers and Dharma preaching, while 'that which is transformed' (所化) means feeling, as well as the benefits to the retinue. These ten mysteries are the names that can explain the teachings of a lifetime. The Great Treatise elucidates this intention, in that it reveals that all names return to the profound. It is necessary to distinguish these ten mysteries in order to encompass all content from beginning to end, from oneself to others. The beginning refers to the realm, etc., which is the cause of self-cultivation, and the end refers to the Three Dharmas, which is the result of self-cultivation. Self and others are as mentioned before. If one distinguishes these ten mysteries, each returning to the profound, then one understands the meaning of the Tathāgata's appearance in the world.
意盡。
二、故不下，正明今述意二：
初、為成妙解。欲知此十皆妙，須了開顯大綱，即三千世間俱空假中，是今經之大體、能開之絕妙，境即此故事理俱融，智發此故無緣，行起此故無作，位歷此故相攝，三法究盡此故果滿，生具此故一念能感，佛得此故無謀而應，神通用此故化化無窮，說法據此故施開自在，眷屬全此故天性相關，利益稱此故無一不成佛。今此十門正示於此，若能知者名發妙解。
二、故撮下，為成妙行。言觀法者十乘也，應知止觀十乘是別論行相，而一一乘不離三千，即空假中，故云觀法大體。《義例》云：「散引諸文該乎一代，文體正意唯歸二經，一依《法華》本跡顯實，二依《涅槃》扶律顯常，以此二經同醍醐故。」是知用此十妙絕待之義為觀體者，方譬日光不與暗共。又此三千法門遍於諸法，若色若心、依之與正、眾生諸佛、剎剎塵塵無不具足，故《華嚴》云：「如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然，心佛及眾生，是三無差別。」故今家釋經題法字，約此三法各具三千互具互融方名妙法。然雖諸法彼彼各具，若為觀體必須的指心法三千，故玄文云，佛法太高，眾生法太廣，于初心為難，心佛及眾生，是三無差別，觀心則易。又《義例》云：「修觀次第必先內心」，今家凡曰觀心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 意盡。
二、故不下，正明今述意二：
初、為成妙解。想要知道這十種都是精妙的，必須了解開顯的大綱，也就是三千世間俱空假中，這是《法華經》的大體，是能夠開顯的絕妙之處。境即是此，故事和道理都融合在一起；智慧由此而生，所以沒有緣由；行動由此而起，所以沒有造作；位階經歷此，所以相互攝受；三法究竟窮盡於此，所以果報圓滿；眾生本具此，所以一念能夠感應；佛陀得到此，所以不用謀劃就能應機；神通運用此，所以化現無窮；說法依據此，所以施設和開示都自在；眷屬圓滿此，所以天性和諧相關；利益符合此，所以沒有一個不能成佛。現在這十門正是爲了闡述這些，如果能夠理解的人，就叫做發起妙解。
二、故撮下，為成妙行。所說的觀法就是十乘觀法，應當知道止觀十乘是分別論述行相，而每一個乘都不離開三千，也就是空假中，所以說觀法的大體。《義例》中說：『廣泛引用各種經文涵蓋一代時教，文章的體裁和正意都歸於兩部經，一部是依據《法華經》（Lotus Sutra）的本跡顯實，另一部是依據《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）扶律顯常，因為這兩部經都如同醍醐一樣。』由此可知，用這十種妙絕待的意義作為觀法的本體，才好比日光不與黑暗共存。而且這三千法門遍佈於一切法，無論是色法還是心法，依報還是正報，眾生還是諸佛，剎土還是微塵，沒有不具備的，所以《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra）說：『如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然，心佛及眾生，是三無差別。』所以天臺宗解釋經題中的『法』字，依據這三法各自具備三千，互相具備互相融合，才叫做妙法。然而即使諸法彼此各自具備，如果作為觀法的本體，必須明確地指向心法三千，所以《玄文》中說，佛法太高深，眾生法太廣闊，對於初學者來說很難，心、佛和眾生，這三者沒有差別，觀心就容易了。』又《義例》中說：『修習觀行的次第必須先從內心開始』，天臺宗凡是說觀心
【English Translation】 English version: The meaning is exhausted.
- Therefore, it does not go down, precisely clarifying the two aspects of stating the intention now:
Firstly, to accomplish wondrous understanding. To know that these ten are all wondrous, one must understand the outline of revelation, which is the three thousand realms of existence being simultaneously empty, provisional, and the middle way. This is the essence of the Lotus Sutra, the ultimate wonder that can reveal. The realm is this, where stories and principles are integrated; wisdom arises from this, hence without cause; action arises from this, hence without creation; the stages are experienced through this, hence mutually inclusive; the three dharmas are thoroughly exhausted through this, hence the fruition is complete; beings inherently possess this, hence a single thought can evoke; Buddhas attain this, hence responding without deliberation; spiritual powers are used through this, hence transformations are endless; teachings are based on this, hence skillful means and openings are freely applied; the retinue is complete through this, hence nature and characteristics are related; benefits are in accordance with this, hence none fail to become Buddhas. These ten gates now precisely demonstrate this. If one can understand this, it is called generating wondrous understanding.
Secondly, therefore, summarizing below, to accomplish wondrous practice. What is said about contemplating the Dharma is the ten vehicles. It should be known that the ten vehicles of cessation and contemplation are separate discussions of the aspects of practice, but each vehicle does not depart from the three thousand, which are emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way. Therefore, it is said that the essence of contemplating the Dharma. The Yi Li says: 'Extensively citing various texts covers an entire era, the style and true meaning of the texts all return to two sutras, one is based on the Lotus Sutra's (法華經) (Fahua Jing) traces and reveals reality, the other is based on the Nirvana Sutra's (涅槃經) (Nirvana Jing) supporting the precepts and revealing permanence, because these two sutras are like ghee.' It is known that using these ten wondrous and absolute meanings as the substance of contemplation is like sunlight not coexisting with darkness. Moreover, these three thousand Dharma gates pervade all dharmas, whether form or mind, dependent or proper, sentient beings or Buddhas, lands or dust motes, none are without completeness. Therefore, the Avatamsaka Sutra (華嚴經) (Huayan Jing) says: 'As the mind, so is the Buddha, as the Buddha, so are sentient beings, the mind, the Buddha, and sentient beings, these three are without difference.' Therefore, the Tiantai school explains the word 'Dharma' in the sutra title, based on these three dharmas each possessing three thousand, mutually possessing and mutually integrating, only then is it called wondrous Dharma. However, even though all dharmas each possess, if it is to be the substance of contemplation, it must specifically point to the three thousand of the mind-dharma. Therefore, the Xuan Wen says, 'The Buddha-dharma is too high, the sentient being-dharma is too broad, it is difficult for beginners, the mind, the Buddha, and sentient beings, these three are without difference, contemplating the mind is easy.' Also, the Yi Li says: 'The order of cultivating contemplation must begin with the inner mind', the Tiantai school generally says contemplating the mind.
，皆此意也。故今文中撮乎十妙入一念心。十門示者為成觀體故也，若不爾者，何故節節唯約心說，豈塵剎生佛而不具邪？若不見此，全失今文述作之意也。
二、若解下，例后義彰法理無殊二：
初、例本妙。若本若跡各論十妙而不同者，但是互有離合故也。跡因具明境智行位四者，離因故跡；果惟明三法一妙者，合果故本。中不云境等，唯明一本因妙者，合因故；本果之外，更立本國土、本涅槃、本壽命者，離果故。故知唯云因妙必具境等，唯云三法必具國土等，若知因果不殊，自他豈應有異？以本初坐道場時亦遍赴物，豈不現通說法，豈無眷屬獲益邪？應知久近雖異，皆以三千俱空假中而為大綱，故云不思議一。
二、況體下，例四章。如上所明二十重妙，皆是釋名而含體等，以釋名是總、三章是別，總總別故，目十妙中境即是體，智行位法是宗，應等三妙是用，感及眷屬既獲利益，必合從因至果還起利他之用亦具體等，故云只是自他因果法故。又名等四章皆是被下之法，即屬教也，而須以相別其粗妙。今之四章，出前三教四時之上，復能開前令皆圓妙，故永異之言含其待絕，以唯今經能遍開故。
三、若曉下，別示妙體令解行俱成三：
初、指妙歸心。三千妙體為教所歸，故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這些都與此意相通。所以現在文中使用『十妙入一念心』，用十門來展示，是爲了成就觀體的緣故。如果不是這樣，為什麼每一節都只圍繞心來說？難道塵剎中的眾生和佛不具備這些嗎？如果不能理解這一點，就完全失去了本文寫作的意義。
二、『若解下』，以下用例子來闡明，本跡義理沒有差別：
初、例本妙。如果本和跡各自論述十妙而有所不同，那只是因為相互之間有離合的緣故。跡因詳細說明了境、智、行、位四者，這是因為遠離了因的緣故；果只說明瞭三法一妙，這是因為合果的緣故。文中沒有提到境等，只說明一本因妙，這是因為合因的緣故；在本果之外，又設立本國土、本涅槃、本壽命，這是因為遠離果的緣故。所以要知道，只說因妙必定具備境等，只說三法必定具備國土等。如果知道因果沒有差別，自身和他者難道會有不同嗎？因為本初在道場成道時也普遍應赴眾生，難道不顯現神通說法，難道沒有眷屬獲得利益嗎？應該知道，時間長短雖然不同，都以三千俱空假中作為大綱，所以說不可思議一。
二、『況體下』，以下用例子說明四章。如上所說明的二十重妙，都是解釋名稱而包含體等，因為釋名是總說，三章是別說，總別結合，所以十妙中，境就是體，智、行、位、法是宗，應等三妙是用，感應和眷屬既然獲得利益，必定是從因到果還生起利他的作用，也具體包含了體等，所以說只是自身和他者的因果法。又名等四章都是被教化的對象，屬於教法，而需要用相來區別其粗妙。現在的四章，超越了前三教四時之上，又能開啟前三教使其都圓滿微妙，所以『永異』的說法包含了待絕之意，因為只有現在的經才能普遍開啟。
三、『若曉下』，以下分別展示妙體，使解行都能成就：
初、指妙歸心。三千妙體為教法所歸屬，所以
【English Translation】 English version: All these are in accordance with this meaning. Therefore, the current text uses 'Ten Mysteries Entering One Thought-Moment of Mind'. The ten gates are shown to accomplish the contemplation body. If not, why does each section only speak about the mind? Do sentient beings and Buddhas in countless lands not possess these? If this is not understood, the meaning of the composition of this text is completely lost.
- 'If understood below', the following uses examples to clarify that there is no difference in the principles of the original and manifested:
First, exemplify the Original Mystery. If the original and the manifested each discuss the Ten Mysteries differently, it is only because they have separation and combination. The manifested cause clearly explains the four aspects of object (境, jing), wisdom (智, zhi), practice (行, xing), and position (位, wei), because it is separated from the cause. The fruit only explains the One Mystery of the Three Laws, because it is the combined fruit. The text does not mention object, etc., but only explains the One Original Cause Mystery, because it is the combined cause. Outside of the original fruit, it establishes the Original Land (本國土, ben guo tu), Original Nirvana (本涅槃, ben nie pan), and Original Lifespan (本壽命, ben shou ming), because it is separated from the fruit. Therefore, know that only saying the Cause Mystery necessarily includes object, etc., and only saying the Three Laws necessarily includes land, etc. If you know that cause and effect are not different, how can self and other be different? Because when the original one sat in the Bodhimanda (道場, dao chang), he also universally responded to beings. Did he not manifest supernatural powers and preach the Dharma? Were there no dependents who benefited? It should be known that although the duration is different, all use the Three Thousand Worlds in One Thought (三千俱空假中, san qian ju kong jia zhong) as the main framework, so it is called Inconceivable One.
Second, 'Moreover, the substance below', exemplify the Four Chapters. The twenty layers of mysteries explained above all explain the name and contain the substance, etc. Because explaining the name is the general explanation, and the three chapters are the specific explanation. Combining the general and specific, in the Ten Mysteries, object is the substance, wisdom, practice, position, and Dharma are the doctrine, the three mysteries of response, etc., are the function. Since the response and dependents have gained benefits, it must be that from cause to effect, the function of benefiting others arises, and it specifically includes the substance, etc. Therefore, it is said that it is only the law of cause and effect of self and other. Also, the four chapters of name, etc., are all objects to be taught, belonging to the teaching, and need to be distinguished by their coarse and subtle aspects. The current four chapters surpass the previous three teachings and four periods, and can also open the previous three teachings to make them all complete and subtle. Therefore, the statement 'eternally different' contains the meaning of waiting for extinction, because only the current sutra can universally open them.
Third, 'If understood below', separately show the subtle substance, so that understanding and practice can both be accomplished:
First, point to the subtle returning to the mind. The subtle substance of the Three Thousand Worlds in One Thought belongs to the teaching, so
一期之內五味傳傳相生故縱，四教各各趣理故橫，而所詮法雖有顯覆，準今經意，未嘗暫離三千妙法。又雖諸法皆具三千，今為易成妙解妙觀故，的指一念即三法，妙中特取心法也。應知心法就迷就事而辨，故《釋簽》云，眾生法，一往通因果，二往唯局因，佛法定在果，心法定在因。若約迷悟分之，佛唯屬悟，二皆在迷。復就迷中眾生屬他，通一切故，心法屬己，別指自心故。四念處節節皆云觀一念無明心，止觀初觀陰入心九境，亦約事中明心，故云煩惱心、病心乃至禪見心等。及隨自意中四運心等，豈非就迷就事辨所觀心。有人解今一念云是真性，恐未稱文旨。何者？若論真性，諸法皆是，何獨一念！又諸文多雲觀於己心，豈可真理有於己他？更有人全不許立陰、界、入等為所觀境，唯云不思議境，此之二師灼然違教，唯《摩訶止觀》先於六章廣示妙解，豈不論諸法本真皆不思議？然欲立行造修，須揀入理之門、起觀之處，故於三科揀卻界、入復於五陰，又除前四的取識陰，《輔行》又揀能招報心，及以發得屬於下境，此是去丈就尺，去尺就寸，如炙得穴也。乃依此心觀不思議，顯三千法乃至貪瞋等心，及諸根塵，皆云觀陰、入、界及下九境，文中揀判毫末不差，豈是直云真性及不思議？
問：「常坐中雲
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：在生命的一個階段（一期之內），五蘊（五味）的生起是相互關聯、自然而然的，所以說是『縱』；四教（四種教義）各自趨向不同的真理，所以說是『橫』。而所要闡述的法，雖然有顯露和隱藏的區別，但按照《摩訶止觀》的意旨，從未曾片刻離開三千妙法。並且，雖然一切法都具備三千妙法，但爲了更容易成就微妙的理解和觀照，所以明確地指出一念即是三法（體、相、用），在『妙』中特別選取心法。應該知道，心法是就迷惑和事相來辨別的，所以《釋簽》中說：『眾生法，一般而言貫通因果，進一步說只侷限於因；佛法必定在果位，心法必定在因位。』如果按照迷悟來劃分，佛法只屬於覺悟，而眾生法和心法都在迷惑之中。再在迷惑之中區分，眾生法屬於他，因為它貫通一切；心法屬於自己，因為它特別指明自己的心。四念處（sati-patthana）的每一節都說觀照一念無明心，止觀（samatha-vipassana）最初觀照陰、入、心九境，也是就事相中來闡明心，所以說煩惱心、病心乃至禪見心等等。以及隨自意中的四運心等等，難道不是就迷惑和事相來辨別所觀照的心嗎？有人解釋現在所說的一念是真性，恐怕不符合經文的旨意。為什麼呢？如果說真性，那麼一切法都是，為什麼唯獨一念是呢！而且很多經文都說觀照自己的心，難道真理還有自己和他人之分嗎？更有人完全不允許建立陰（khandha）、界（ayatana）、入（dhatu）等作為觀照的境界，只說是不可思議境，這兩位法師顯然違背了教義。《摩訶止觀》首先在六章中廣泛地闡述了微妙的理解，難道不是說一切法的本真都是不可思議的嗎？然而想要立行造修，必須選擇進入真理的門徑、發起觀照的地方，所以在三科（五陰、十二入、十八界）中捨棄了界、入，又在五陰中，又除去前四陰，明確地選取識陰，《輔行》又揀擇能招感果報的心，以及已經發得的屬於下境，這是去丈就尺，去尺就寸，如同艾灸找準穴位一樣。於是依靠這個心來觀照不可思議，顯現三千法，乃至貪嗔等心，以及諸根塵，都說是觀照陰、入、界以及下九境，經文中的揀擇判斷毫釐不差，難道是直接說真性和不可思議嗎？ 問：『常坐中雲』
【English Translation】 English version: Within a single phase of life (Iki no uchi), the arising of the five skandhas (Gomi) is interconnected and natural, hence the term 'vertical' (ju); the four teachings (Shikyo) each tend towards different truths, hence the term 'horizontal' (o). And the Dharma being expounded, although there are distinctions between the manifest and the hidden, according to the intent of the Maka Shikan, has never for a moment departed from the Three Thousand Realms in a Single Thought (Ichinen Sanzen). Furthermore, although all dharmas possess the Three Thousand Realms, in order to more easily achieve subtle understanding and contemplation, it is clearly pointed out that a single thought is the three dharmas (body, nature, and function), and within the 'subtle' (myo), the mind-dharma (shinbo) is especially selected. It should be known that mind-dharma is distinguished based on delusion and phenomena, therefore the Shishaku says: 'The dharma of sentient beings (shujo-bo), generally speaking, penetrates cause and effect; further, it is limited only to cause; the Buddha-dharma (butsu-bo) is definitely in the effect, and the mind-dharma is definitely in the cause.' If divided according to delusion and enlightenment, the Buddha-dharma belongs only to enlightenment, while the other two are in delusion. Further distinguishing within delusion, the dharma of sentient beings belongs to others, because it penetrates everything; the mind-dharma belongs to oneself, because it specifically points to one's own mind. Each section of the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (sati-patthana) speaks of contemplating the one thought of ignorance-mind (mumyo-shin), and the Shikan initially contemplates the nine realms of the skandhas (khandha), entrances (ayatana), and mind, also clarifying the mind within phenomena, therefore speaking of afflicted mind, sick mind, and even meditation-view mind, etc. And the four moving minds within following one's own intention, etc., are they not distinguishing the contemplated mind based on delusion and phenomena? Some people interpret the current one thought as true nature, I fear it does not accord with the meaning of the text. Why? If speaking of true nature, then all dharmas are, why is only one thought? Moreover, many texts speak of contemplating one's own mind, how can true principle have a distinction between self and other? Still others completely disallow establishing the skandhas, realms, and entrances as objects of contemplation, only saying the inconceivable realm, these two teachers clearly violate the teachings. The Maka Shikan first extensively elucidates subtle understanding in six chapters, does it not speak of the original true nature of all dharmas being inconceivable? However, wanting to establish practice and cultivate, one must select the path to enter principle, the place to initiate contemplation, therefore in the three categories (skandhas, ayatana, and dhatu) it rejects the realms and entrances, and within the five skandhas, it also removes the first four skandhas, clearly selecting the consciousness skandha (vijnana-skandha), the Fogyo also selects the mind that can invite karmic retribution, and what has already been developed belongs to the lower realm, this is going from a jo to a shaku, from a shaku to a sun, like cauterizing to find the acupoint. Thus, relying on this mind to contemplate the inconceivable, revealing the Three Thousand Realms, even minds of greed and anger, etc., and the roots and dusts, all say to contemplate the skandhas, entrances, realms, and the lower nine realms, the selection and judgment in the text is not off by a hair's breadth, is it directly speaking of true nature and the inconceivable? Question: 'In constant sitting it says'
，以法界對法界起法界；安心中雲，但信法性，不信其諸；及節節云不思議境。今何不許？」
答：「此等諸文皆是能觀觀法，復是所顯法門，豈不讀《輔行》中分科之文，先重明境，即去尺就寸文也，次明修觀，即觀不思議境等十乘文也。況《輔行》委示二境之相非不分明，豈得直以一念名真理及不思議邪！應知不思議境對觀智邊不分而分名所觀境，若對所破陰等諸境，故不思議境之與觀皆名能觀。故《止觀》云：『譬如賊有三重，一人器械鈍、身力羸、智謀少，先破二重，更整人物方破第三，所以遲迴日月；有人身壯、兵利、權多，一日之中即破三重。』《輔行》釋云：『約用兵以譬能所』，『今以身壯譬圓三諦，兵利譬圓三止，權多譬圓三觀，械等並依身力故也。』上皆《輔行》文也，豈非諦觀俱為能觀邪！今更自立一譬，雙明兩重能所如器，諸淳樸豈單用槌而無砧邪？故知槌砧自分能所，若望淳樸皆屬能也。智者以喻得解，幸可詳之。皆為不辯兩重所觀，故迷斯旨。又若不立陰等為境，妙觀就何處用？妙境於何處顯？故知若離三道即無三德，如煩惱即菩提、生死即涅槃，玄文略列十乘，皆約此立。又《止觀大意》以此二句為發心立行之體格，豈有圓頓更過於此？若如二師所立，合云菩提即菩提、涅槃即
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：以法界對法界生起法界；安心中說，只相信法性，不相信其他的；以及節節都說不可思議境。現在為什麼不允許這樣說呢？
回答：這些經文都是能觀之智所觀的法，又是所顯現的法門，難道沒有讀過《輔行》中分科的文嗎？先著重闡明境，就是『去尺就寸』的文句；其次闡明修觀，就是觀不可思議境等十乘觀法的文句。況且《輔行》詳細地闡述了二境的相狀，並非不分明，怎麼能直接用一念來稱作真理和不可思議呢！應當知道，不可思議境相對於觀智來說，不分而分，稱為所觀境；如果相對於所破的五陰等諸境來說，不可思議境和觀都稱為能觀。《止觀》中說：『譬如盜賊有三重防衛，一人器械不鋒利、身力弱、智謀少，先攻破兩重防衛，再整頓人馬才能攻破第三重，所以耗費時日；有人身強體壯、兵器鋒利、權謀多，一天之內就能攻破三重防衛。』《輔行》解釋說：『用用兵來比喻能觀和所觀』，『現在用身強體壯比喻圓融的三諦，兵器鋒利比喻圓融的三止，權謀多比喻圓融的三觀，器械等都依賴於身力。』以上都是《輔行》的原文，難道不是諦觀都作為能觀嗎！現在我再自己立一個比喻，同時說明兩重能所，比如器物，那些淳樸的東西難道只用錘子而沒有砧子嗎？所以知道錘子和砧子自分能所，如果相對於淳樸的東西來說，都屬於能。智者通過比喻就能理解，希望仔細思考。都是因為不分辨兩重所觀，所以迷惑了這個宗旨。而且如果不設立五陰等為境，妙觀在哪裡運用？妙境在哪裡顯現？所以知道如果離開三道就沒有三德，如煩惱即菩提、生死即涅槃，《玄文》簡略地列出十乘觀法，都是依據這個道理建立的。而且《止觀大意》用這兩句話作為發心立行的體格，難道還有比這更圓頓的嗎？如果像二位法師所說的那樣，應該說菩提即菩提、涅槃即涅槃。
【English Translation】 English version: Using the Dharmadhatu (法界, the realm of Dharma) to counter the Dharmadhatu, arising from the Dharmadhatu; the 'An Xin' (安心, settling the mind) states, 'Only believe in the Dharma-nature (法性), do not believe in other things'; and repeatedly mentioning the 'Inconceivable Realm' (不思議境). Why is it not allowed now?
Answer: All these texts are the Dharma contemplated by the observing wisdom, and also the Dharma-gate that is revealed. Haven't you read the sectioned text in 'Fu Xing' (輔行, a commentary on Zhi Guan), which first emphasizes the realm, which is the phrase 'reducing feet to inches'; and then explains the cultivation of contemplation, which is the text on contemplating the Inconceivable Realm and the Ten Vehicles? Moreover, 'Fu Xing' elaborately explains the characteristics of the two realms, which are not unclear. How can one directly call a single thought 'Truth' and 'Inconceivable'! It should be known that the Inconceivable Realm, in relation to the observing wisdom, is undivided yet divided, and is called the 'Observed Realm'; if in relation to the realms of the skandhas (五陰) and others that are to be broken, both the Inconceivable Realm and the contemplation are called the 'Observer'. As 'Zhi Guan' (止觀, cessation and contemplation) says: 'It is like a thief with three layers of defense. If one's weapons are dull, one's strength is weak, and one's wisdom is lacking, one first breaks through two layers, and then reorganizes the troops to break through the third layer, so it takes time; if one is strong, one's weapons are sharp, and one has many strategies, one can break through all three layers in a day.' 'Fu Xing' explains: 'Using warfare to illustrate the observer and the observed', 'Now, using strength to represent the perfect Three Truths (三諦), sharp weapons to represent the perfect Three Cessations (三止), and many strategies to represent the perfect Three Contemplations (三觀), weapons etc. all depend on strength.' The above are all from the text of 'Fu Xing', isn't it that both Truth and Contemplation are the observer! Now I will create another analogy to simultaneously explain the two layers of observer and observed, like tools, would those simple things only use a hammer without an anvil? Therefore, it is known that the hammer and anvil separate the observer and the observed, but in relation to the simple things, they all belong to the observer. The wise can understand through analogy, I hope you consider it carefully. It is all because of not distinguishing the two layers of the observed, that one is confused about this principle. Moreover, if the skandhas etc. are not established as the realm, where would the wonderful contemplation be used? Where would the wonderful realm be revealed? Therefore, it is known that if one leaves the Three Paths (三道), there would be no Three Virtues (三德), such as afflictions are Bodhi (菩提, enlightenment), and birth and death are Nirvana (涅槃, liberation). 'Xuan Wen' (玄文, profound text) briefly lists the Ten Vehicles, all established based on this principle. Moreover, 'Zhi Guan Da Yi' (止觀大意, the main idea of Zhi Guan) uses these two sentences as the framework for initiating the mind and establishing practice, is there anything more perfect and sudden than this? If it is as the two masters say, it should be said that Bodhi is Bodhi, Nirvana is Nirvana.
涅槃也。又引常坐中起對俱法界者，今問法界因何有起對邪？須知約根、塵、識故方云起對法界，故《義例》釋此文云，體達(修觀)若起若對(陰入)不出法界(成不思議)。彼有約理、約觀、約果三義，此文正約觀行辨也。又安心文云，唯信法性者，未審信何法為法性邪？而不知此文正是于陰修乎止觀，故《起信論》云：『一切眾生從本已來未曾離念。』又下文云『濁成本有』，若不觀三道即妙，便同偏觀清凈真如。荊溪還許不？故《輔行》解安住世諦云『以止觀安故世諦方成不思議』，又云『安即觀也』。故談圓妙，不違現文方為正說。今釋一念，乃是趣舉根塵和合一剎那心，若陰若惑、若善若惡皆具三千，皆即三諦，乃十妙之大體，故云咸爾。斯之一念為成觀故，今文專約明乎不二，不可不曉，故茲委辨。」
問：「相傳云，達磨門下三人得法而有淺深，尼總持云，斷煩惱、證菩提。師云，得吾皮。道育云，迷即煩惱、悟即菩提。師云，得吾肉。慧可云，本無煩惱元是菩提。師云，得吾髓。今煩惱即菩提等，稍同皮肉之見，那云圓頓無過？」
答：「當宗學者因此語故迷名失旨，用彼格此陷墜本宗，良由不窮即字之義故也。應知今家明即永異諸師，以非二物相合，及非背面相翻，直須當體全是方
【現代漢語翻譯】 涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫生死輪迴的境界）也。又引用常坐中起對俱法界者，現在問法界因何有起對呢？須知是依根、塵、識的緣故才說起對法界，所以《義例》解釋此文說，體達（通過修行觀照）若起若對（陰入）不出法界（成就不可思議）。那裡有約理、約觀、約果三種意義，此文正是約觀行辨析。又安心文說，唯信法性者，未審信何法為法性呢？而不知此文正是在陰（五蘊，構成個體經驗的要素）上修止觀，所以《起信論》說：『一切眾生從本已來未曾離念。』又下文說『濁成本有』，若不觀三道即妙，便同於偏觀清凈真如。荊溪（指湛然，天臺宗的重要人物）還允許嗎？所以《輔行》解釋安住世諦說『以止觀安故世諦方成不思議』，又說『安即觀也』。所以談論圓妙，不違背現有的經文才是正確的說法。現在解釋一念，乃是趣向舉出根塵和合的一剎那心，若陰若惑、若善若惡都具備三千，都即是三諦，乃是十妙的大體，所以說咸爾。這一念是爲了成就觀行，所以本文專門在於闡明不二，不可不明白，所以這裡詳細辨析。
問：『相傳云，達磨（Bodhidharma，禪宗初祖）門下三人得法而有淺深，尼總持云，斷煩惱、證菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）。師云，得吾皮。道育云，迷即煩惱、悟即菩提。師云，得吾肉。慧可（禪宗二祖）云，本無煩惱元是菩提。師云，得吾髓。今煩惱即菩提等，稍同皮肉之見，那云圓頓無過？』
答：『當宗學者因此語故迷名失旨，用彼格此陷墜本宗，良由不窮即字之義故也。應知今家明即永異諸師，以非二物相合，及非背面相翻，直須當體全是方』
【English Translation】 Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term referring to the state of liberation from the cycle of birth and death). Furthermore, it cites the 'rising and opposing' within constant sitting, which encompasses the entire Dharma Realm. Now, the question arises: why does the Dharma Realm have 'rising and opposing'? It should be understood that 'rising and opposing' the Dharma Realm is spoken of because of the interaction of the roots (senses), dust (objects of senses), and consciousness. Therefore, the 'Meaning and Examples' explains this passage by saying that 'realizing through contemplation, whether rising or opposing (skandhas and entrances), does not go beyond the Dharma Realm (achieving the inconceivable).' There are three meanings there: in terms of principle, in terms of contemplation, and in terms of result. This passage specifically discusses discernment through contemplative practice. Furthermore, the 'Text on Pacifying the Mind' says, 'Only those who believe in the Dharma-nature.' I wonder, what Dharma is believed to be the Dharma-nature? It is not known that this passage is precisely about cultivating cessation and contemplation on the skandhas (five aggregates, the elements that constitute individual experience). Therefore, the 'Awakening of Faith' says: 'All sentient beings have never been apart from thought since the beginning.' Furthermore, the following passage says 'defilement is inherently existent.' If one does not contemplate the three paths as being wondrous, then it is the same as partially contemplating pure True Thusness. Would Jingxi (referring to Zhanran, an important figure in the Tiantai school) allow this? Therefore, the 'Supplement to Practice' explains abiding in worldly truth by saying 'because of cessation and contemplation, worldly truth becomes inconceivable.' It also says 'abiding is contemplation.' Therefore, discussing perfect wonder, without contradicting the existing text, is the correct teaching. Now, explaining a single thought, it is directing attention to the momentary mind of the union of roots and dust. Whether skandhas, delusions, good, or evil, all possess three thousand, all are identical to the three truths, and are the essence of the ten wonders. Therefore, it is said that all are like this. This single thought is for the sake of accomplishing contemplation, so this text is specifically about clarifying non-duality. It is essential to understand this, so it is explained in detail here.
Question: 'It is said that among the disciples of Bodhidharma (Bodhidharma, the first patriarch of Zen), three attained the Dharma with varying degrees of depth. Nun Zongchi said, 'Cut off afflictions and realize Bodhi (Bodhi, enlightenment).' The master said, 'You have attained my skin.' Daoyu said, 'Confusion is affliction, enlightenment is Bodhi.' The master said, 'You have attained my flesh.' Huike (the second patriarch of Zen) said, 'Originally there are no afflictions, fundamentally it is Bodhi.' The master said, 'You have attained my marrow.' Now, 'affliction is Bodhi' and so on, is somewhat similar to the view of skin and flesh. How can it be called perfect and sudden without fault?'
Answer: 'Scholars of our school are misled by these words, losing the meaning and purpose, using that to judge this, falling into the trap of our own school, because they do not fully understand the meaning of the word 'is'. It should be known that our school's explanation of 'is' is eternally different from other teachers, because it is not two things combined, nor is it a reversal of front and back, but directly the entirety of the substance is the way.'
名為即。何者？煩惱生死既是修惡，全體即是性惡法門，故不須斷除及翻轉也。諸家不明性惡，遂須翻惡為善、斷惡證善，故極頓者仍云本無惡元是善，既不能全惡是惡，故皆即義不成。故第七記云，忽都未聞性惡之名，安能信有性德之行？」
「若爾，何不云煩惱即煩惱等，而云菩提涅槃邪？」
答：「實非別指，只由性惡融通寂滅，自受菩提涅槃之名，蓋從勝立也。此則豈同皮肉之見乎？又既煩惱等全是性惡，豈可一向云本無耶？然汝所引達磨印于可師，本無煩惱元是菩提等，斯乃圭峰異說，致令後人以此為極，便棄三道唯觀真心。若據祖堂自云，二祖禮三拜，依位立。豈言煩惱菩提一無一有耶？故不可以圭峰異說，而格今家妙談爾。」
(元本云：「此乃又超得髓之說也，可師之見，意縱階此，語且未圓。」問：「今明圓教，豈不論斷惑證理及翻迷就悟邪？若論者，何異持、育之解？」答：「只如可師豈不斷惑翻迷？豈亦同前二邪？故知凡分漸頓，蓋論能斷能翻之所以爾。」)
「今既約即論斷故無可滅，約即論悟故無可翻，煩惱生死乃九界，法既十界互具方名圓，佛豈壞九轉九邪？如是方名達于非道，魔界即佛。故圓家斷證迷悟但約染凈論之，不約善惡凈穢說也。諸宗既不明性具十
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『名為即。何者？』（什麼是『即』呢？）煩惱生死既是修惡（煩惱和生死既然是修行所要對治的惡），全體即是性惡法門（那麼它們的全體就是性惡的法門），故不須斷除及翻轉也（所以不需要斷除和翻轉它們）。諸家不明性惡（各家不明白性惡的道理），遂須翻惡為善、斷惡證善（於是需要將惡翻轉為善，斷除惡以證得善），故極頓者仍云本無惡元是善（所以即使是最頓悟的宗派仍然說本來沒有惡，原本就是善），既不能全惡是惡（既然不能完全承認惡就是惡），故皆即義不成（所以他們的『即』的道理都不能成立）。故第七記云（所以《第七記》中說），『忽都未聞性惡之名（如果從來沒有聽過性惡這個名稱），安能信有性德之行？』（怎麼能相信有性德的修行呢？）
『若爾，何不云煩惱即煩惱等，而云菩提涅槃邪？』（如果這樣，為什麼不說煩惱即是煩惱等等，而說菩提涅槃呢？）
答：『實非別指（實際上並非特別指代），只由性惡融通寂滅（只是由於性惡融通而達到寂滅），自受菩提涅槃之名（自然就獲得了菩提涅槃的名稱），蓋從勝立也（這是從殊勝的角度來建立的）。此則豈同皮肉之見乎？（這難道能和膚淺的見解相同嗎？）又既煩惱等全是性惡（既然煩惱等等全是性惡），豈可一向云本無耶？（怎麼可以一直說本來沒有呢？）然汝所引達磨印于可師，本無煩惱元是菩提等（然而你所引用的達摩印證慧可大師，說本來沒有煩惱，原本就是菩提等等），斯乃圭峰異說（這乃是圭峰禪師的異說），致令後人以此為極（導致後人以此為最高真理），便棄三道唯觀真心（就拋棄了三道，只觀察真心）。若據祖堂自云（如果根據祖堂的記載），二祖禮三拜，依位立（二祖慧可禮拜三次，然後按照原來的位置站立）。豈言煩惱菩提一無一有耶？（難道是說煩惱和菩提一無所有嗎？）故不可以圭峰異說，而格今家妙談爾（所以不能用圭峰禪師的異說，來衡量我們現在的精妙論述）。』
（元本云：『此乃又超得髓之說也，可師之見，意縱階此，語且未圓。』（原本說：『這又是超越而得到精髓的說法，慧可大師的見解，意思上已經達到了這個層次，只是語言上還不夠圓滿。』）問：『今明圓教，豈不論斷惑證理及翻迷就悟邪？（現在闡明圓教，難道不談論斷除迷惑、證得真理以及翻轉迷惑、成就覺悟嗎？）若論者，何異持、育之解？』（如果談論這些，那和持、育的解釋有什麼不同呢？）答：『只如可師豈不斷惑翻迷？（就像慧可大師難道沒有斷除迷惑、翻轉迷惑嗎？）豈亦同前二邪？（難道也和前面兩種說法相同嗎？）故知凡分漸頓，蓋論能斷能翻之所以爾（所以說，凡是區分漸悟和頓悟，都是在討論能否斷除和翻轉的原因）。』）
『今既約即論斷故無可滅（現在既然從『即』的角度來談論斷除，所以沒有什麼可以滅除），約即論悟故無可翻（從『即』的角度來談論覺悟，所以沒有什麼可以翻轉），煩惱生死乃九界（煩惱和生死是九法界的現象），法既十界互具方名圓（法既然是十法界相互具足，才能稱為圓滿），佛豈壞九轉九邪？（佛怎麼會破壞九法界，轉變九種邪惡呢？）如是方名達于非道（這樣才能說是通達了非道），魔界即佛（魔界就是佛）。故圓家斷證迷悟但約染凈論之（所以圓教談論斷除、證悟、迷惑、覺悟，只是從染污和清凈的角度來談論），不約善惡凈穢說也（不從善惡、清凈和污穢的角度來說）。諸宗既不明性具十』（各宗派既然不明白性具十）
【English Translation】 English version: 『What is meant by 『is』 (即)?』 Since afflictions and birth-and-death are the evils to be cultivated against, their entirety is the Dharma-gate of inherent evil (性惡法門), therefore there is no need to eliminate or reverse them. Because various schools do not understand inherent evil, they must reverse evil into good, eliminate evil to realize good. Therefore, even the most sudden schools still say that there is originally no evil, but originally good. Since they cannot fully acknowledge that evil is evil, their understanding of 『is』 is not established. Therefore, the Seventh Record (第七記) says, 『If one has never heard of the name of inherent evil, how can one believe in the practice of inherent virtue?』
『If so, why not say afflictions are afflictions, etc., but instead say Bodhi and Nirvana?』
Answer: 『In reality, it is not a separate designation. It is only because inherent evil is all-pervasive and quiescent that it naturally receives the names of Bodhi and Nirvana. This is established from the perspective of superiority. How can this be the same as superficial views? Furthermore, since afflictions, etc., are entirely inherent evil, how can one always say that they originally do not exist? However, what you quoted, that Dharma sealed upon Master Ke (慧可), saying that there are originally no afflictions, and originally is Bodhi, etc., is a divergent view of Guifeng (圭峰). This has led later generations to take this as the ultimate, abandoning the Three Paths and only observing the true mind. According to the ancestral hall records, the Second Ancestor bowed three times and stood in his original position. Does this mean that afflictions and Bodhi are neither existent nor non-existent? Therefore, one cannot use the divergent view of Guifeng to measure the wonderful teachings of our school.』
(The original text says: 『This is a saying that transcends and obtains the marrow. Master Ke』s view, in intention, reaches this level, but the language is not yet complete.』 Question: 『Now that we are clarifying the perfect teaching, do we not discuss eliminating delusion and realizing truth, and reversing delusion to attain enlightenment? If we do, how is it different from the interpretations of Chi (持) and Yu (育)?』 Answer: 『Just like Master Ke, did he not eliminate delusion and reverse delusion? Is it also the same as the previous two? Therefore, all distinctions between gradual and sudden enlightenment are based on the ability to eliminate and reverse.』)
『Now, since we discuss elimination from the perspective of 『is』, there is nothing to eliminate. Since we discuss enlightenment from the perspective of 『is』, there is nothing to reverse. Afflictions and birth-and-death are the phenomena of the Nine Realms. Since the Dharma is mutually inclusive of the Ten Realms, it can be called perfect. How can the Buddha destroy the Nine Realms and transform the nine evils? Only in this way can it be said to have reached the non-path. The realm of demons is the Buddha. Therefore, the perfect school discusses elimination, realization, delusion, and enlightenment only from the perspective of defilement and purity, not from the perspective of good and evil, clean and unclean. Since the various schools do not understand the inherent possession of the Ten』
界，則無圓斷圓悟之義，故但得即名而無即義也。此乃一家教觀大途，能知此已，或取或舍，自在用之，故《止觀》亦云『唯信法性，不信其諸』，語似棄妄觀真(元云豈異可師之說)。而《義例》判云，破昔計故約對治說，故知的示圓觀，須指三道即是三德，故於陰等觀不思議也。若不精揀何稱圓修？此義難得的當，至因果不二門更為甄之。」
二、則止下，示成由行。已約心法顯乎妙旨，雖知十妙不離一念，若非妙行何能成之？故玄文雖立觀心，而且託事附法蓋非部意，故多闕略。若具論能成之功，須指摩訶止觀也。故境等五妙且論諸聖及佛世當機所觀、所發、所行、所歷、所究盡法，而於我曹稟教行人如何成就，故令修止觀用十法成乘，方能親觀妙境，發智、立行、歷位、登果，故彼十乘能令行人成就自行因果也。
言起教一章成今化他能所者，彼文起教雖即弗宣，而且不出裂網之意，此裂網文泛論生起，雖在果后化他，細尋其意，多明初心自行，故文云，種種經論開人眼目，執此疑彼、是一非諸，今融通經論解結出籠，豈非始行能裂他網！又文云，若人善用止觀觀心，則內慧明瞭，通達漸頓諸教，如破微塵出大千經卷，河沙佛法一心中曉，豈非自行起教。又云，若欲外益眾生逗機設教等，此文方
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果執著于界限，那就無法理解圓滿斷除煩惱和圓滿覺悟的含義，因此只能得到名稱上的相似，而沒有實際意義。這是一家教觀的重要途徑，如果能理解這一點，那麼取捨運用就能自在。所以《止觀》也說：『只相信法性，不相信其他的。』這話聽起來像是拋棄虛妄而觀照真實（元云認為這與可師的說法有什麼不同呢？）。而《義例》判斷說，這是爲了破除以往的執著，所以從對治的角度來說。因此，要知道開示圓觀，必須指出三道（煩惱道、業道、苦道）就是三德（法身德、般若德、解脫德），所以在陰等五陰的觀照中，要進行不可思議的觀照。如果不精細地選擇，怎麼能稱為圓滿的修行呢？這個意義很難真正理解，到因果不二的法門時，更要仔細辨別。 其次，『則止下』，是說明成就來自於修行。已經從心法的角度彰顯了微妙的宗旨，即使知道十妙不離一念，如果沒有微妙的修行，又怎麼能成就呢？所以《玄文》雖然立足於觀心，但實際上是依託於事相，附帶於法理，這並非該部的本意，所以多有缺失和省略。如果要完整地論述能夠成就的功用，必須指出《摩訶止觀》。所以境等五妙，只是論述諸聖以及佛在世時，當機者所觀照、所啓發、所修行、所經歷、所究竟的法，而對於我們這些接受教導的修行人來說，如何才能成就呢？所以要修習止觀，運用十法成乘，才能親自觀照微妙的境界，啓發智慧，建立修行，經歷位次，登上果位。所以這十乘能夠使修行人成就自身的因果。 關於『言起教一章成今化他能所者』，那篇文章所說的『起教』雖然是即事而不宣說，但也沒有超出『裂網』的含義。這個『裂網』文泛泛地論述了生起，雖然是在證果之後教化他人，但仔細探尋它的意思，大多是說明初心者的自身修行。所以文中說，種種經論開啟人的眼目，執著這個而懷疑那個，認為這個是對的而其他的都是錯的，現在融通經論，解開束縛，走出牢籠，這難道不是開始修行就能破除他人的羅網嗎！文中又說，如果有人善於運用止觀來觀照內心，那麼內在的智慧就會明亮，通達漸教和頓教，就像從微塵中破開，出現大千經卷，在心中明白如恒河沙數般的佛法，這難道不是自身修行而生起教化嗎！文中又說，如果想要對外利益眾生，隨機施教等等，這段文字才...
【English Translation】 English version: If one clings to boundaries (界), then there is no meaning of complete severance of afflictions and complete enlightenment, therefore one only obtains the similarity in name but not in reality. This is a major path of teaching and contemplation of one school. If one can understand this, then taking or discarding, applying it will be free. Therefore, the Zhi Guan (止觀) also says, 'Only believe in the Dharma-nature (法性), do not believe in the others.' These words sound like abandoning the false and contemplating the true (Yuan Yun (元云) asks, 'How is this different from the teachings of Teacher Ke (可師)?'). And the Yi Li (義例) judges that this is to break the previous attachments, so it is discussed from the perspective of counteracting. Therefore, to know the demonstration of the perfect contemplation, one must point out that the three paths (三道) [path of affliction, path of karma, path of suffering] are the three virtues (三德) [Dharma-body virtue, Prajna virtue, Liberation virtue], so in the contemplation of the five aggregates (陰等), one must contemplate the inconceivable. If one does not carefully select, how can it be called perfect cultivation? This meaning is difficult to truly understand, and when it comes to the gate of non-duality of cause and effect, it must be carefully distinguished. Secondly, 'Ze Zhi Xia (則止下),' demonstrates accomplishment arising from practice. The subtle essence has already been revealed from the perspective of mental Dharma. Even if one knows that the ten subtleties (十妙) are inseparable from a single thought, without subtle practice, how can one accomplish it? Therefore, although the Xuan Wen (玄文) establishes contemplation of the mind, it actually relies on phenomena and is attached to Dharma principles, which is not the original intention of this section, so there are many omissions and abbreviations. If one wants to fully discuss the function of being able to accomplish, one must point to the Mohe Zhi Guan (摩訶止觀). Therefore, the five subtleties such as realm (境) only discuss the Dharma that the sages and the Buddha in his time contemplated, inspired, practiced, experienced, and ultimately exhausted, and how can we, the practitioners who receive teachings, accomplish it? Therefore, one must practice Zhi Guan (止觀), using the ten methods to accomplish the vehicle (十法成乘), in order to personally contemplate the subtle realm, inspire wisdom, establish practice, experience positions, and ascend to the fruit. Therefore, these ten vehicles can enable practitioners to accomplish their own causes and effects. Regarding 'Yan Qi Jiao Yi Zhang Cheng Jin Hua Ta Neng Suo Zhe (言起教一章成今化他能所者),' the 'arising of teaching (起教)' mentioned in that article, although it is immediate and unspoken, it does not go beyond the meaning of 'tearing the net (裂網).' This 'tearing the net' text generally discusses arising, although it is after attaining the fruit and teaching others, but carefully exploring its meaning, it mostly explains the self-cultivation of beginners. Therefore, the text says that various sutras and treatises open people's eyes, clinging to this and doubting that, thinking that this is right and the others are wrong, now integrating the sutras and treatises, untying the bonds, and getting out of the cage, isn't this the ability to break others' nets from the beginning of practice! The text also says that if someone is good at using Zhi Guan (止觀) to contemplate the mind, then the inner wisdom will be clear, and he will understand the gradual and sudden teachings, just like breaking open from a dust mote, appearing the great thousand sutra scrolls, understanding the Buddha-dharma as numerous as the Ganges sands in one mind, isn't this self-cultivation giving rise to teaching! The text also says that if one wants to benefit sentient beings externally, teaching according to their capacity, etc., this text only...
是果后化他也。《輔行》二釋，謂化他裂網、自行裂網，但自行文略，故讀者多暗。至於歸大處文，亦為初心修觀而說，故云膠手易著、寱夢難醒，封文齊意自謂為是，乃至云爲此意故須論旨歸。故知五略十廣雖該自他、始終而盡，是行者修法若了彼文，方可銷今相成之意。故今十門從染凈不二已去，皆指果後設化之相，悉在初心剎那一念，而必須三觀功成此用方顯，故文云，故須初心而遮而照等。故知能修起教之觀，則能成就應機現通說法之用也。此意稍隱，解者方知。不作此解，則《止觀》裂網旨歸之文，《記》中自行之釋，及今相成之語，如何銷之？若云但修十乘果用自顯者，則合云十乘成今化他能所爾。
三、則彼下，功成識體。故知得此相成之意，則不唐學問、不謾修行，教下所詮妙體可識。
四、故更下，結示立名使詮旨斯顯四：
初、立門所由。如文。
二、何者下，出門名義。理事三千本皆融即，實機未熟權化宜施，佛須物情分隔而說，故云不二而二，半滿諸法暫有差殊，權化若成實理須顯，佛隨自意開會而談，故云二而不二。境等十法即是所通，既約教部判后開之俱圓俱妙，故能通門宜名不二。
三、各自高深。一家所判，法門名義無間高下，己他無不理性本具，
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這是指證果之後，爲了教化他人而示現的境界。《輔行記》中的兩種解釋，即『化他裂網』和『自行裂網』，但因為『自行』部分文字簡略，所以很多讀者不明白。至於『歸大處』的文字，也是為初學者修習觀行而說的，所以說『膠手易著，寱夢難醒』，如果封固文字，自以為是，甚至說爲了這個意思需要討論旨歸。因此可知，五略十廣雖然涵蓋了自利利他、從始至終的全部內容，但只有修行者瞭解了這些文字，才能理解『相成』的含義。所以現在這十門，從『染凈不二』開始，都是指證果后爲了教化眾生而示現的境界，這些都體現在初心一念之間，而且必須三觀（空觀、假觀、中觀）功成才能顯現這種作用，所以經文說，『所以需要初心而遮而照』等等。因此可知，能夠修習依教起觀，就能成就應機示現神通、說法的功用。這個意思比較隱晦，理解的人才能明白。如果不這樣解釋，那麼《止觀》中『裂網旨歸』的文字，《輔行記》中關於『自行』的解釋，以及現在『相成』的說法，又該如何解釋呢？如果說只要修習十乘觀法，證果后的功用自然顯現，那麼就應該說『十乘成就了現在教化他人的能與所』。 三、『則彼下』，指功行成就，認識到實相本體。因此可知，如果能夠理解這種『相成』的含義，就不會白費學問，不會徒勞修行，教法所詮釋的微妙本體就可以被認識。 四、『故更下』，總結並揭示立名的原因，使教法的宗旨得以彰顯，分為四個方面： 初、說明設立此門的原因。如經文所說。 二、『何者下』，解釋門的名義。事理三千（宇宙萬法）本來就是圓融一體的，但因為眾生的根機尚未成熟，所以佛陀才方便示現權巧之法，佛陀需要根據眾生的不同情況來分別解說，所以說『不二而二』，半教和滿教等各種法門暫時存在差別，但權巧之法成就之後，真實的道理就會顯現，佛陀隨自己的意願來開顯和會歸，所以說『二而不二』。境等十法（十種境界）就是所通達的內容，既然根據教部來判斷，那麼前後所開顯的都是圓滿而微妙的，所以這個能通之門應該命名為『不二』。 三、各自高深。一家所判，法門名義無間高下，己他無不理性本具。
【English Translation】 English version: This refers to the state manifested after attaining enlightenment in order to teach others. The two explanations in 『Fu Xing Ji』 (輔行記) regarding 『Hua Ta Lie Wang』 (化他裂網, breaking the net for others) and 『Zi Xing Lie Wang』 (自行裂網, breaking the net for oneself), but because the text on 『Zi Xing』 is brief, many readers do not understand it. As for the text on 『Gui Da Chu』 (歸大處, returning to the great source), it is also spoken for beginners practicing contemplation, so it says, 『Sticky hands are easily attached, and nightmares are difficult to wake from.』 If one seals off the text and considers oneself correct, even saying that for this meaning, it is necessary to discuss the main purpose. Therefore, it can be known that although the five summaries and ten expansions cover self-benefit and benefiting others, from beginning to end, only if the practitioner understands these texts can they understand the meaning of 『interdependence』. Therefore, these ten gates, starting from 『Ran Jing Bu Er』 (染凈不二, non-duality of defilement and purity), all refer to the state manifested after attaining enlightenment in order to teach sentient beings, which are all embodied in the initial thought, and this function can only be manifested when the three contemplations (Kong Guan 空觀, Jia Guan 假觀, Zhong Guan 中觀 - emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way) are accomplished. Therefore, the text says, 『Therefore, it is necessary to use the initial mind to obstruct and illuminate,』 and so on. Therefore, it can be known that being able to cultivate contemplation based on the teachings can accomplish the function of manifesting supernatural powers and preaching the Dharma according to the occasion. This meaning is relatively obscure, and only those who understand it can comprehend it. If this explanation is not made, then how can the text of 『Lie Wang Zhi Gui』 (裂網旨歸, breaking the net and returning to the source) in 『Zhi Guan』 (止觀, cessation and contemplation), the explanation of 『Zi Xing』 in 『Fu Xing Ji』, and the current statement of 『interdependence』 be explained? If it is said that as long as one cultivates the ten vehicles of contemplation, the function after attaining enlightenment will naturally manifest, then it should be said that 『the ten vehicles accomplish the ability and object of teaching others now.』 Three, 『Ze Bi Xia』 (則彼下), refers to the accomplishment of practice and the recognition of the essence of reality. Therefore, it can be known that if one can understand this meaning of 『interdependence』, one will not waste learning, nor will one practice in vain, and the subtle essence explained by the teachings can be recognized. Four, 『Gu Geng Xia』 (故更下), summarizes and reveals the reason for establishing the name, so that the purpose of the teachings can be manifested, divided into four aspects: First, explain the reason for establishing this gate. As the text says. Second, 『He Zhe Xia』 (何者下), explains the meaning of the gate's name. The three thousand realms of phenomena and principles (Shi Li San Qian 事理三千, all phenomena in the universe) are originally integrated, but because the faculties of sentient beings are not yet mature, the Buddha conveniently manifests skillful means. The Buddha needs to explain separately according to the different situations of sentient beings, so it is said 『Bu Er Er Er』 (不二而二, non-dual but dual), the partial and complete teachings and other various Dharma gates temporarily have differences, but after the skillful means are accomplished, the true principle will be revealed. The Buddha opens and converges according to his own will, so it is said 『Er Er Bu Er』 (二而不二, dual but non-dual). The ten dharmas such as realms (Jing Deng Shi Fa 境等十法, ten kinds of realms) are what is to be penetrated. Since it is judged according to the teachings, then what is revealed before and after is complete and subtle, so this gate of penetration should be named 『Non-duality』. Third, each is profound. As judged by one school, the names and meanings of the Dharma gates have no difference in height or depth, and both self and others are inherently endowed with rationality.
全性起修分顯究盡，故今十門一一如是，皆為觀體，其義更明。然事異故六、理一故即，此宗學者誰不言之，而的當者無幾。應知圓家明理已具三千，而皆性不可變，約事乃論迷解、真似、因果有殊。故下文云，三千在理同名無明，三千果成咸稱常樂(約事明六)，三千無改無明即明，三千並常俱體俱用(約理明即)。若見斯旨，稍可持論。
四、直彰宗趣。如文。
二、一者下，第二列門解釋二：
初、列門對妙二：
初、列門。可見。
二、是中下，對妙。七科之境不出色心，此二不二則諸境皆妙，故云第一從境立名。智、行二法正論修相，儻二境不融、修性有異，則不成妙，故二三從智行立名。位多在相、三法唯果，若了始終理一，此二皆妙，故第四從位法立名。通應二事果后利他，既是凈用依正必融，縱是他機亦同自體，此之妙事在今染心，能如是觀妙用方顯，故五六七從感應、神通立名。三業是能說之人，權實是所說之法，此二若融說法方妙，故八九從說法立名。眷屬是三草二木，利益由法雨所滋，若知本一地雨則權實益等，故第十從眷屬利益立名。立此十門，意成十妙解行故也。
二、一色下，釋門旨趣十段：
初、色心不二門三：
初、標一切諸法
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 全性起修，分明地探究到極致，所以現在這十門，每一門都是這樣，都是爲了觀照本體，其中的意義更加明白。然而，從現象上來說，它們是不同的，從本質上來說，它們是統一的，這個宗派的學者誰不說這個道理呢？但是真正理解透徹的人卻很少。應該知道圓教（圓滿的教法）闡明道理時已經具備了三千法，而且這些法都是本性不可改變的，從現象上來說，才討論迷惑和覺悟、真實和相似、因和果的差別。所以下文說，『三千法在理上都叫做無明（Avidyā，無知），三千果成就后都稱為常樂（Nitya-sukha，永恒的快樂）』（這是從現象上來說明六即（六個層次的統一）），『三千法沒有改變，無明就是明，三千法都是常，本體和作用都是統一的』（這是從本質上來說明統一）。如果明白了這些宗旨，才能稍微可以進行討論。 四、直接彰顯宗派的宗旨。就像經文所說的那樣。 二、一者下，第二部分，解釋這十門，分為兩個部分： 初、列出這十門，並對應于妙： 初、列出這十門。顯而易見。 二、是中下，對應于妙。七科（七種分類）的境界不出色（Rūpa，物質）和心（Citta，精神），如果這兩者不是對立的，那麼所有的境界都是妙的，所以說『第一門從境界來立名』。智（Jñāna，智慧）和行（Karma，行為）這兩種法，主要論述的是修行的狀態，如果這兩個境界不能融合，修行的本性存在差異，那就不能成就妙，所以第二門和第三門從智慧和行為來立名。位（avasthā，階位）大多體現在現象上，三法（佛法僧）唯有果位才能體現，如果瞭解了開始和結束的道理是統一的，那麼這兩者都是妙的，所以第四門從階位和法來立名。通（Abhijñā，神通）和應（Pratibhāsa，感應）這兩件事，是在證得果位之後利益眾生的，既然是清凈的作用，那麼依報（所居住的環境）和正報（自身）必然是融合的，即使是其他的根機，也和自身的本體相同，這種妙事就在現在染污的心中，能夠這樣觀照，妙用才能顯現，所以第五門、第六門和第七門從感應和神通來立名。三業（身口意）是能說法的人，權（Upāya，方便）和實（Tathatā，真如）是所說的法，如果這兩者融合，說法才能妙，所以第八門和第九門從說法來立名。眷屬（Parivāra，隨從）是三草二木（比喻不同根性的眾生），利益來自於法雨的滋潤，如果知道根本是統一的，那麼普降甘霖，權法和實法所帶來的利益是相同的，所以第十門從眷屬和利益來立名。設立這十門，意在成就十種妙解和妙行。 二、一色下，解釋這十門的宗旨和趣味，分為十段： 初、色心不二門，分為三個部分： 初、標明一切諸法
【English Translation】 English version The complete nature arises from cultivation, thoroughly investigating to the utmost extent. Therefore, each of these ten gates is like this, all for contemplating the essence, and their meaning becomes even clearer. However, in terms of phenomena, they are different; in terms of principle, they are unified. Which scholar of this school does not speak of this principle? But few truly understand it thoroughly. It should be known that the perfect teaching (perfect Dharma) already possesses three thousand dharmas when explaining the principle, and these dharmas are immutable in nature. Only in terms of phenomena do we discuss the differences between delusion and enlightenment, truth and semblance, cause and effect. Therefore, the following text says, 'The three thousand dharmas are all called ignorance (Avidyā) in principle, and the three thousand fruits, when accomplished, are all called eternal bliss (Nitya-sukha)' (this is explaining the six identities (six levels of unity) in terms of phenomena), 'The three thousand dharmas are unchanged, ignorance is enlightenment, the three thousand dharmas are all eternal, and the essence and function are unified' (this is explaining unity in terms of principle). If you understand these tenets, you can then engage in discussions. Four, Directly Manifesting the Tenets of the School. As the text says. Two, From 'One' below, the second part explains the ten gates in two sections: First, Listing the Gates and Corresponding to the Wonderful: First, Listing the Gates. It is evident. Two, From 'In this' below, corresponding to the wonderful. The realms of the seven categories do not go beyond form (Rūpa) and mind (Citta). If these two are not dualistic, then all realms are wonderful. Therefore, it is said, 'The first gate is named from the realm.' Wisdom (Jñāna) and practice (Karma) are the two dharmas that mainly discuss the aspect of cultivation. If these two realms cannot be integrated, and the nature of cultivation is different, then it cannot achieve the wonderful. Therefore, the second and third gates are named from wisdom and practice. Stages (avasthā) are mostly manifested in phenomena, and the three jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) are only manifested in the fruit stage. If one understands that the principle of beginning and end is unified, then both are wonderful. Therefore, the fourth gate is named from stages and dharma. Penetrations (Abhijñā) and responses (Pratibhāsa) are two matters that benefit sentient beings after attaining the fruit stage. Since it is a pure function, the environment (support) and the self (reward) must be integrated. Even if it is another capacity, it is the same as one's own essence. This wonderful matter is in the defiled mind now. Only by contemplating in this way can the wonderful function be manifested. Therefore, the fifth, sixth, and seventh gates are named from response and penetration. The three karmas (body, speech, and mind) are the ones who can speak the Dharma, and expedient (Upāya) and real (Tathatā) are the dharmas that are spoken. If these two are integrated, then the Dharma speaking is wonderful. Therefore, the eighth and ninth gates are named from Dharma speaking. Retinue (Parivāra) are the three grasses and two trees (metaphor for sentient beings of different capacities), and the benefits come from the nourishment of the Dharma rain. If one knows that the root is unified, then the benefits brought by expedient and real dharmas are the same when the rain falls universally. Therefore, the tenth gate is named from retinue and benefits. Establishing these ten gates is intended to achieve ten kinds of wonderful understanding and wonderful practice. Two, From 'One form' below, explaining the purpose and interest of the ten gates in ten sections: First, the gate of non-duality of form and mind, divided into three parts: First, indicating all dharmas.
無非妙境。本文七科亦且從要，七科尚廣妙旨難彰，今以色心二法收盡，故大論云：「一切世間中，唯有名與色，若欲如實說，但當觀名色。」此二不二諸法皆妙，故今攝別入總，特指心法明乎不二，以此為門則解行易入也。
二、且十下，釋中又二：
初、約諸境明總別二：
初、雙標。總在一念者，若論諸法互攝，隨舉一法皆得為總，即三無差別也。今為易成觀故，故指一念心法為總。然此總別不可分對理事，應知理具三千、事用三千各有總別，此兩相即方稱妙境。
二、何者下，雙示二：
初、別。十如中，相可別故屬色；性據內故屬心；《觀音玄義》指心為體，而諸文中雙取色心；力、作單不能運；緣或指愛或指具度，既存兩說義必雙兼，若云業為因者，則似兼色，今從習邊故因果皆心；五陰皆報則須兼心，今從受身約色義強；本末究竟文雖不對，既論三等，同后三諦，因緣中現未七支皆須雙具，識、名雖獨必含中陰故亦兩兼，行、有是業不可遍屬，無明、愛、取唯心可知。諸諦中，苦同七支、集既兼業、道亦含戒，皆具色心，俗論諸法兼二可知。滅及真中一實無諦，體唯是理無相可表，並心證故故不兼色。然上所對不可永殊，欲成別義故且從強。
二、既知下，次總
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：無非是微妙的境界。本文的七科內容也只是從要點出發，但七科的內容仍然很廣泛，難以彰顯微妙的旨意。現在用色法和心法兩種方法來概括所有，所以《大智度論》說：『一切世間中，唯有名與色，若欲如實說，但當觀名色。』這二者不二，所有的法都是微妙的，所以現在將個別的歸入總體，特別指出心法來說明不二的道理，以此為門徑，那麼理解和實踐就容易進入了。
二、且十下，解釋中又分為二：
初、約諸境明總別二：
初、雙標。總在一念者，如果討論諸法互相包含，隨便舉出一個法都可以作為總，也就是三無差別。現在爲了容易成就觀想，所以指一念心法作為總。然而這個總別不可以分別對應理和事，應該知道理具三千和事用三千各有總別，這兩者相互即是才稱為妙境。
二、何者下，雙示二：
初、別。十如中，相（現象）可以區分，所以屬於色法；性（本質）依據內在，所以屬於心法；《觀音玄義》指心為體，而在各種文章中都同時取色心；力（能力）、作（作用）單獨不能運作；緣（條件）或者指愛（貪愛）或者指具度（具備尺度），既然存在兩種說法，意義必定雙重兼顧，如果說業（行為）為因（原因），則好像兼顧色法，現在從習（習慣）的角度，所以因果都是心法；五陰（色、受、想、行、識）都是報（果報），則必須兼顧心法，現在從受身（接受身體）的角度，約色法的意義更強；本末究竟文（根本和究竟的文字）雖然不對稱，既然討論三等，同於后三諦（苦諦、集諦、滅諦），因緣中現未七支（現在和未來的七個分支）都必須雙重具備，識（意識）、名（名稱）雖然單獨，必定包含中陰（中陰身），所以也兩者兼顧，行（行為）、有（存在）是業（行為），不可以普遍歸屬，無明（無知）、愛（貪愛）、取（執取）只有心才能知道。諸諦（四聖諦）中，苦（苦諦）同於七支，集（集諦）既然兼顧業，道（道諦）也包含戒（戒律），都具備色心，俗論諸法兼顧二者可以知道。滅（滅諦）以及真中一實無諦（真實中唯一的真實），體唯是理（本體只是真理），沒有相可以表達，並且是心證的，所以不兼顧色法。然而以上所對應的不可以永遠不同，想要成就別義，所以暫且從強調的方面。
二、既知下，次總
【English Translation】 English version: This is nothing but a wondrous state. The seven categories in this text are also based on essential points, but the seven categories are still too broad to clearly manifest the subtle meaning. Now, we use the two dharmas of form (色, sè) and mind (心, xīn) to encompass everything. Therefore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra (大智度論) says: 'In all the world, there are only name (名, míng) and form (色, sè). If you want to speak truthfully, you should only observe name and form.' These two are non-dual, and all dharmas are wondrous. Therefore, we now incorporate the individual into the whole, specifically pointing out the mind dharma to clarify the principle of non-duality. Using this as a gateway, understanding and practice become easier to enter.
- 'Moreover, ten...' Below, the explanation is further divided into two:
First, explaining the general and specific based on various realms:
First, double designation. 'The general is in a single thought' means that if we discuss the mutual inclusion of all dharmas, any single dharma can be taken as the general, which is the non-difference of the three (理, 事, and 觀). Now, for the sake of easily achieving contemplation, we point to the single thought of mind dharma as the general. However, this general and specific cannot be separately corresponded to principle (理, lǐ) and phenomena (事, shì). It should be known that the principle possessing three thousand and the phenomena using three thousand each have general and specific aspects. These two being mutually identical are what is called a wondrous state.
Second, 'What are...' Below, double indication of two:
First, specific. Among the Ten Suchnesses (十如, shí rú), appearance (相, xiàng) can be distinguished, so it belongs to form; nature (性, xìng) is based on the internal, so it belongs to mind; the Profound Meaning of Avalokiteśvara (觀音玄義) points to mind as the substance (體, tǐ), while various texts take both form and mind; power (力, lì) and function (作, zuò) alone cannot operate; condition (緣, yuán) either refers to craving (愛, ài) or possessing measure (具度, jù dù), since there are two sayings, the meaning must be doubly inclusive. If it is said that karma (業, yè) is the cause (因, yīn), then it seems to include form. Now, from the perspective of habit (習, xí), both cause and effect are mind; the Five Skandhas (五陰, wǔ yīn) are all retribution (報, bào), so they must include mind. Now, from the perspective of receiving a body (受身, shòu shēn), the meaning of form is stronger; the text on fundamental and ultimate (本末究竟文, běn mò jiū jìng wén) although not corresponding, since it discusses the three levels, is the same as the latter three truths (苦諦, 集諦, 滅諦). In cause and condition, the seven branches of present and future (現未七支, xiàn wèi qī zhī) must all be doubly possessed. Consciousness (識, shí) and name (名, míng) although alone, must contain the intermediate state (中陰, zhōng yīn), so they are also doubly inclusive. Action (行, xíng) and existence (有, yǒu) are karma, which cannot be universally attributed. Ignorance (無明, wú míng), craving (愛, ài), and grasping (取, qǔ) can only be known by the mind. Among the Truths (諸諦, zhū dì), suffering (苦, kǔ) is the same as the seven branches, accumulation (集, jí) already includes karma, the path (道, dào) also contains precepts (戒, jiè), all possessing form and mind. The common discussion of all dharmas including both can be known. Extinction (滅, miè) and the one real truth within truth (真中一實無諦, zhēn zhōng yī shí wú dì), the substance is only principle, without appearance that can be expressed, and is mind-verified, so it does not include form. However, the above correspondences cannot be permanently different. Wanting to achieve the meaning of specific, so for now, we proceed from the emphasized aspect.
Second, 'Having known...' Below, next general.
。前約諸法不失自體為別，今明諸法同趣剎那為總，終日不失終日同趣，性具諸法總別相收，緣起諸法總別亦爾，非謂約事論別、以理為總。又復應知，若事若理，皆以事中一念為總，以眾生在事未悟理故，以依陰心顯妙理故。
問：「他云，一念即一性也，一念靈知性體常寂，又云，性即一念，謂心性靈寂，性即法身，靈即般若，寂即解脫。又云，一念真知妙體。又云，並我一念清凈靈知。據此等文，乃直指文中一念，名真凈靈知，是約理解。今云屬事，是陰入法。與他所指，賒切如何？」
答：「此師只因將此一念約理釋之，致與一家文義相違。且違文者，一、違玄文。彼判心法定在因、佛法定在果，眾生法一往通因果，二往則局因。他執心法是真性，故乃自立云，心非因果。又礙定在因句，復自立云，約能造諸法故判為因，佛定在果者，乃由研修覺了究盡為果。今問：既將因果分判法相，何得因果卻不相對？果若從覺，因須指迷，何得自立理能造事而為因邪？既不相對，何名分判？又違《華嚴》心造之義，彼經如來林菩薩說偈云：『心如工畫師，造種種五陰，一切世間中，無法而不造。如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然，心佛及眾生，是三無差別。』《輔行》釋云，心造有二種，一者約理，造即是具，二者
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：之前約定諸法不失其自體，這是從『別』的角度來說的；現在說明諸法共同趨向剎那，這是從『總』的角度來說的。終日不失其自體，也終日共同趨向剎那。性具諸法，總和別相互包容；緣起諸法，總和別也是這樣。不是說從現象上談論『別』，而從理體上談論『總』。而且還應該知道，無論是現象還是理體，都以現象中的一念作為『總』，因為眾生執著于現象而未能領悟理體，所以要依靠陰心來顯現微妙的理體。
問：『他們說，一念即是一性，一念靈知，性體常寂。又說，性即一念，認為心性靈寂，性即法身（Dharmakāya，佛的法性之身），靈即般若（Prajñā，智慧），寂即解脫（Moksha，從輪迴中解脫）。又說，一念真知妙體。又說，連同我這一念清凈靈知。』根據這些文字，是直接指明文中的一念，名為真凈靈知，這是從理體上說的。現在說屬於現象，是陰入法（Skandha-āyatana-dhātu，五蘊、十二處、十八界）。與他們所指的，差別在哪裡呢？』
答：『這位法師只是因為將這一念從理體上解釋，導致與一家（天臺宗）的文義相違背。且違背文義之處有：一、違背玄文（《法華玄義》）。他判心法（Citta-dharma，心識之法）定在因位，佛法（Buddha-dharma，佛陀之法）定在果位，眾生法（Sattva-dharma，眾生之法）一般情況下通於因果，再次分析則侷限於因位。他執著於心法是真性，所以自己立論說，心非因果。又妨礙了『定在因』這句話，又自己立論說，從能造諸法的角度判為因，佛定在果位，是因為研修覺悟到了究竟為果。現在問：既然將因果分開判別法相，為何因果卻不相對？果若從覺悟而來，因就必須指向迷惑，為何自己立論說理能造事而作為因呢？既然不相對，為何稱作分判？又違背了《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra）心造的含義，這部經中如來林菩薩（Rulai Lin Pusa）說偈語道：『心如工畫師，造種種五陰（Skandha，構成眾生的五種要素），一切世間中，無法而不造。如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然，心佛及眾生，是三無差別。』《輔行》（《法華玄義輔行記》）解釋說，心造有兩種，一是約理，造即是具足，二是...
【English Translation】 English version: Previously, it was agreed that all dharmas do not lose their own self-nature, which is from the perspective of 'difference'. Now, it is explained that all dharmas tend towards the kshana (moment), which is from the perspective of 'totality'. Not losing its own self-nature all day long, it also tends towards the kshana all day long. The dharmas inherent in nature, totality and difference encompass each other; the dharmas arising from conditions, totality and difference are also like this. It is not to say that 'difference' is discussed from the perspective of phenomena, and 'totality' is discussed from the perspective of principle. Moreover, it should also be known that whether it is phenomena or principle, it takes one thought in phenomena as 'totality', because sentient beings are attached to phenomena and have not realized the principle, so they must rely on the skandha-mind to manifest the subtle principle.
Question: 'They say that one thought is one nature, one thought is spiritual knowing, and the nature-essence is always tranquil. They also say that nature is one thought, believing that the mind-nature is spiritual and tranquil, nature is the Dharmakāya (the Dharma-body of the Buddha), spiritual is Prajñā (wisdom), and tranquil is Moksha (liberation from samsara). They also say, 'one thought is true knowing, a wonderful essence.' They also say, 'including my one thought of pure spiritual knowing.' According to these texts, it directly points to one thought in the text, named true pure spiritual knowing, which is from the perspective of principle. Now it is said to belong to phenomena, which is skandha-āyatana-dhātu (the five aggregates, twelve entrances, and eighteen realms). What is the difference between what they point to?'
Answer: 'This teacher only explained this one thought from the perspective of principle, which led to a contradiction with the meaning of the texts of one school (Tiantai). Moreover, the places that violate the meaning of the texts are: First, it violates the Xuan Wen (Profound Text, i.e., Fa Hua Xuan Yi). He judged that Citta-dharma (mind-dharma) is fixed in the cause position, Buddha-dharma (Buddha-dharma) is fixed in the effect position, and Sattva-dharma (sentient being-dharma) generally passes through cause and effect, and the second analysis is limited to the cause position. He is attached to the fact that Citta-dharma is true nature, so he established his own theory that the mind is neither cause nor effect. It also hinders the sentence 'fixed in the cause', and he established his own theory that it is judged as the cause from the perspective of being able to create all dharmas, and the Buddha is fixed in the effect position because the study and enlightenment have reached the ultimate as the effect. Now ask: Since the characteristics of dharmas are judged separately by cause and effect, why are cause and effect not relative? If the effect comes from enlightenment, the cause must point to confusion. Why do you establish your own theory that principle can create phenomena as the cause? Since they are not relative, why is it called separation and judgment? It also violates the meaning of the Avatamsaka Sutra (Flower Garland Sutra) of mind-made, in which the Bodhisattva Rulai Lin (Tathagata Forest) said in a verse: 'The mind is like a painter, creating all kinds of skandhas (the five aggregates that constitute sentient beings), in all the worlds, there is nothing that it does not create. Like the mind, so is the Buddha, like the Buddha, so are sentient beings, the mind, the Buddha, and sentient beings, these three are not different.' Fu Xing (Supplement to the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra) explains that there are two kinds of mind-made, one is about principle, creation is completeness, and the other is...
約事，即三世變。造等心法既有二造，經以心例于佛，復以佛例于生，故云『如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然』，是則三法各具二造方無差別，故荊溪云，不解今文如何銷偈『心造一切三無差別』？何忽獨云心造諸法得名因邪？據他所釋，心法是理，唯論能具能造，生佛是事，唯有所具所造，則心造之義尚虧，無差之文永失矣。又若約能造釋因，則三法皆定在因，以皆有二造故。此文應今家立義綱格，若迷此者，一家教旨皆翻倒也，焉將此解定教文之欠剩邪！
「二、違《大意》及《金剛錍》。他自引云，隨緣不變名性，不變隨緣名心。引畢乃云，今言心即真如不變性也。今恐他不許荊溪立義。何者？既云不變隨緣名心，顯是即理之事，那得直作理釋？若云，雖隨緣邊屬事，事即理故，故指心為不變性者。佛法生法豈不即邪？若皆即理，何獨指心名不變性？故《金錍》云：『真如是萬法，由隨緣故，萬法是真如，由不變故。』故知若約萬法即理，則生佛、依正俱理，皆不變故，何獨心是理邪？若據眾生在事，則內外色心俱事，皆隨緣故，何獨心非事邪？他云，生佛是因果，法心非因果。驗他直指心法名理，非指事即理，生佛二事會歸心故方云即理，亦非當處即具三千。是知他師雖引唯色之言，亦只曲成唯真心爾。況復
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於約事，指的是三世的變化。既然造等心法具有兩種『造』，經文以心來比擬佛，又以佛來比擬眾生，所以說『如心佛亦爾，如佛眾生然』，這樣三法各自具備兩種『造』才能沒有差別。因此荊溪大師說，不理解這段經文，如何解釋偈頌『心造一切三無差別』？為什麼忽然只說心造諸法才能稱為因呢？按照他的解釋，心法是理體，只論能具能造，而生佛是事相，只有所具所造，那麼心造的意義尚且有虧缺，無差別的說法就永遠喪失了。而且如果按照能造來解釋因，那麼三法都必定在因位，因為都具有兩種『造』。這段文字應該作為我們宗派確立義理綱格的依據，如果對此迷惑不解，我們宗派的教義宗旨就會全部顛倒，又怎麼能用這種理解來評判經文的欠缺或剩餘呢！ 第二，違背了《大意》和《金剛錍》。他自己引用說，隨緣不變叫做性，不變隨緣叫做心。引用完畢后卻說，現在所說的心就是真如不變的性。現在恐怕他不認可荊溪大師的立義。為什麼呢？既然說不變隨緣叫做心，明顯是即理之事，怎麼能直接作為理體來解釋呢？如果說，雖然隨緣的一面屬於事相，但事相就是理體，所以指心為不變的性。那麼佛法生法難道不也是即理的嗎？如果都是即理，為什麼只指心名為不變的性？所以《金錍》中說：『真如是萬法，因為隨緣的緣故；萬法是真如，因為不變的緣故。』所以知道如果按照萬法即理，那麼生佛、依正都屬於理體，都是不變的緣故，為什麼只有心是理體呢？如果按照眾生在事相，那麼內外色心都屬於事相，都是隨緣的緣故，為什麼只有心不是事相呢？他說，生佛是因果，法心不是因果。驗證他的說法，是直接指心法名為理體，而不是指事相即理體，生佛二事會歸於心才能說是即理，也不是當處就具足三千。由此可知，他的老師雖然引用唯色之說，也只是勉強成就唯真心的說法罷了。更何況...
【English Translation】 English version: Regarding 'yue shi' (discussing events), it refers to the changes of the three times (past, present, and future). Since the 'zao deng xin fa' (mind-creating dharma) possesses two kinds of 'zao' (creation), the sutra uses the mind to compare to the Buddha, and further uses the Buddha to compare to sentient beings, hence it says, 'As the mind is, so is the Buddha; as the Buddha is, so are sentient beings.' Thus, only when the three dharmas each possess two kinds of 'zao' can there be no difference. Therefore, Master Jingxi said, 'Without understanding this passage, how can one reconcile the verse 'The mind creates all, the three are without difference'?' Why suddenly only say that the mind creates all dharmas to be named as cause? According to his explanation, the mind-dharma is principle (li), only discussing the ability to possess and create, while sentient beings and Buddhas are phenomena (shi), only having what is possessed and created. Then the meaning of 'mind-creating' is still deficient, and the statement of 'no difference' is forever lost. Moreover, if interpreting cause according to the ability to create, then all three dharmas are definitely in the causal position, because they all possess two kinds of 'zao'. This passage should serve as the basis for our school's establishment of the framework of meaning. If one is confused about this, the doctrinal tenets of our school will be completely overturned. How can one use this understanding to judge the sutra's deficiency or surplus! Second, it contradicts the 'Da Yi' (Great Meaning) and the 'Jin Gang Bi' (Diamond Scalpel). He himself quoted, 'Following conditions without changing is called nature; not changing while following conditions is called mind.' After quoting, he then said, 'Now the mind spoken of is the unchanging nature of True Thusness (tathata).' Now, I fear that he does not acknowledge Master Jingxi's establishment of meaning. Why? Since it is said that 'not changing while following conditions is called mind,' it is clearly a phenomenon that is identical to principle. How can it be directly interpreted as principle? If it is said that although the aspect of following conditions belongs to phenomena, phenomena are identical to principle, therefore pointing to the mind as the unchanging nature. Then, are not the Buddha-dharma and the sentient being-dharma also identical to principle? If all are identical to principle, why only point to the mind as the unchanging nature? Therefore, the 'Jin Bi' says, 'True Thusness is all dharmas, because of following conditions; all dharmas are True Thusness, because of not changing.' Thus, knowing that if according to all dharmas being identical to principle, then sentient beings, Buddhas, support, and retribution all belong to principle, all being unchanging. Why is only the mind principle? If according to sentient beings being in phenomena, then internal and external form and mind all belong to phenomena, all following conditions. Why is only the mind not phenomena? He said that sentient beings and Buddhas are cause and effect, while dharma and mind are not cause and effect. Examining his statement, he directly points to mind-dharma as principle, not pointing to phenomena being identical to principle. Only when the two phenomena of sentient beings and Buddhas return to the mind can it be said to be identical to principle, and it is not that it inherently possesses three thousand at that very place. From this, it can be known that although his teacher quoted the statement of 'only form,' it is only勉強 (mian qiang) accomplishing the statement of 'only true mind.' Moreover...
觀心自具二種，即唯識觀及實相觀，因何才見言心便云是理？又實相觀雖觀理具，非清凈理，乃即事之理也，以依陰等顯故。」
問：「若爾，二觀皆依事，如何分邪？」
答：「實相觀者，即于識心體其本寂，三千宛然即空假中。唯識觀者，照于起心變造十界即空假中。故《義例》云，夫觀心法有理有事，從理則唯達法性更無餘途，從事則專照起心四性叵得，亦名本末相映事理不二。又應知，觀于內心二觀既爾，觀于外境二觀亦然，此皆《止觀》及《輔行》文意，非從臆說。他云，真心具三千法，乃指真如名不思議境，非指陰入也。《金錍》云『旁遮偏指清凈真如』，那得持偏指邪？又云，夫唯心之心豈唯真如心邪？須知煩惱心遍。第一記云，專緣理性而破九界，是別教義。那得句句唯于真心？又此標一念乃作一性真如釋之，後文多就剎那明具三千，亦作真如釋邪？」
問：「《永嘉集》既用今家觀法，彼奢摩他云，一念即靈知自性，他立正合于彼，何謂不然？」
答：「彼文先於根塵體其本寂，作功不已，知滅對遺，靈知一念方得現前。故知彼之一念，全由妙止所顯。不爾，何故五念息已一念現前？只如五念何由得息，那得將彼相應一念類今剎那念邪？況奢摩他別用妙止安心，毗缽舍那
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：觀心的修習本身就具備兩種方式，即唯識觀和實相觀。為什麼一提到『心』就說是『理』呢？而且，實相觀雖然觀察到『理』的具足，但並非清凈之『理』，而是即事之『理』，因為它依賴於五陰等現象而顯現。
問：如果這樣，兩種觀法都依賴於現象，如何區分正邪呢？
答：實相觀，即在識心中體悟其本來的寂靜，三千世界宛然存在，即是空、假、中三諦。唯識觀，則是觀照起心動念所變造的十法界，即是空、假、中三諦。《義例》中說，觀心之法有理有事，從理入手，就只能通達法性，沒有其他途徑；從事入手，就專門觀照起心動念的四性不可得，也叫做本末相映，事理不二。還應該知道，觀內心是這樣，觀外境也是這樣，這都是《止觀》和《輔行》的文意，不是我憑空捏造的。有人說，真心具足三千法，那是針對真如（tathata，事物的真實如是之性）而說的，稱之為不可思議境，不是指五陰、十二入、十八界。 《金錍》（Jin Pi，天臺宗的重要著作）中說，『旁敲側擊是爲了顯明清凈真如』，怎麼能執著于片面的理解呢？又說，所謂的『唯心』之心，難道僅僅是真如之心嗎？要知道煩惱心也是普遍存在的。《第一記》中說，專門緣于理性而破除九法界，這是別教的教義。怎麼能句句都只說真心呢？而且這裡標明『一念』，就用一性真如來解釋它，後面的文章又多用剎那來闡明具足三千，也要用真如來解釋嗎？
問：《永嘉集》（Yongjia Ji，永嘉禪師的著作）既然採用了天臺宗的觀法，其中的奢摩他（samatha，止）說，『一念即是靈知自性』，他人的立論正好與此相合，為什麼說不對呢？
答：那篇文章先在六根、六塵上體悟其本來的寂靜，不斷用功，知道滅除對境的執著，靈知的一念才能顯現出來。所以知道他所說的一念，完全是由妙止所顯現的。不然的話，為什麼五念止息之後，一念才能現前？那麼五念又是如何止息的呢？怎麼能將他們相應的『一念』，與現在所說的剎那之念相提並論呢？況且奢摩他特別使用妙止來安心，毗缽舍那（vipassana，觀）
【English Translation】 English version: The practice of contemplation inherently possesses two methods: the Contemplation of Consciousness-only (唯識觀, Weishi Guan) and the Contemplation of Reality (實相觀, Shixiang Guan). Why is it that as soon as 'mind' is mentioned, it is immediately equated with 'principle' (理, li)? Furthermore, although the Contemplation of Reality observes the completeness of 'principle,' it is not a pure 'principle,' but rather the 'principle' that is inherent in phenomena, as it manifests based on the aggregates (陰, yin) and other elements.
Question: If that's the case, and both contemplations rely on phenomena, how can we distinguish between what is correct and what is incorrect?
Answer: The Contemplation of Reality involves realizing the inherent stillness of the mind of consciousness, where the three thousand worlds are clearly present, embodying the three truths of emptiness (空, kong), provisional existence (假, jia), and the middle way (中, zhong). The Contemplation of Consciousness-only involves illuminating the ten realms (十界, shijie) transformed by the arising of thoughts, which also embody the three truths of emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way. Therefore, the Yi Li (義例, Explanation of Principles) states, 'The method of contemplating the mind involves both principle and phenomena. Entering through principle, one can only attain the Dharma-nature (法性, faxing), with no other path. Entering through phenomena, one focuses solely on illuminating the four unobtainable natures of arising thoughts, also known as the mutual reflection of root and branch, the non-duality of phenomena and principle.' It should also be understood that just as these two contemplations apply to the inner mind, they also apply to the external environment. These are all meanings from the texts of Zhi Guan (止觀, Cessation and Contemplation) and Fu Xing (輔行, Commentary on Cessation and Contemplation), not something I fabricated. Some say that the true mind possesses three thousand dharmas, but that refers to the tathata (真如, the thusness or suchness of reality), called the inconceivable realm, not the aggregates, entrances, and realms. The Jin Pi (金錍, Golden Scalpel) says, 'Indirectly pointing aims to reveal pure tathata,' so how can one cling to a partial understanding? Furthermore, it is said, 'Does the 'mind' of 'only mind' refer only to the tathata mind? One must know that the mind of afflictions is also pervasive.' The First Record states that exclusively focusing on principle to break through the nine realms is the doctrine of the Distinct Teaching (別教, biejiao). How can every sentence refer only to the true mind? Moreover, here, 'one thought' is labeled and explained as the one-nature tathata, while later passages often use a moment to clarify the completeness of three thousand, should that also be explained as tathata?
Question: Since the Yongjia Ji (永嘉集, Collection of Yongjia) uses the current Tiantai (天臺) contemplation method, and its samatha (奢摩他, calming meditation) states, 'One thought is the self-nature of spiritual knowing,' and others' views align with this, why do you say it's incorrect?
Answer: That text first realizes the inherent stillness of the roots and dusts, continuously applying effort, knowing to abandon attachment to objects, and only then does the one thought of spiritual knowing manifest. Therefore, it is known that their 'one thought' is entirely revealed by the wonderful cessation. Otherwise, why would one thought appear only after the five thoughts have ceased? How do the five thoughts cease in the first place? How can their corresponding 'one thought' be compared to the momentary thought we are discussing now? Moreover, samatha specifically uses wonderful cessation to pacify the mind, while vipassana (毗缽舍那, insight meditation)
別用妙觀安心，優畢叉方乃總用止觀，故出觀體中一念，正是今之陰識一念也。何者？彼文序中先會定慧同宗，法爾中乃云故即心為道，可謂尋流得源矣。故出觀體云，只知一念即空不空、非空非不空。言只知者，乃即體(止也)了(觀也)理，今剎那是三諦理，不須專亡根境顯其靈知，亦不須深推緣生求其空寂，故云只知，此乃即心為道也。若奢摩他觀成，顯出自性一念，何用更修三觀？」
問：「彼云，若於相應一念起五陰者，仍以二空破之，那云不更修觀？」
答：「于真知起陰、以觀破之，不起陰者何用觀之？彼二空觀乃是觀陰，非觀真知。故知解一千從、迷一萬惑。若欲廣引教文驗其相違，不可令盡，書倦且止。」
二、違義者。
問：「據上所引眾教，雖見相違，且如立此十門，欲通妙理亡于名相，若一念屬事，豈但通事，將不違作者意乎？」
答：「立門近要則妙理可通，若夐指真如，初心如何造趣？依何起觀邪？今立根塵一剎那心，本具三千即空假中，稱此觀之，即能成就十種妙法，豈但解知而已！如此方稱作者之意。若也偏指清凈真如、偏唯真心，則杜初心入路，但滋名相之境。故第一記云，本雖久遠，圓頓雖實，第一義雖理，望觀屬事。他謂圓談法性便是觀心，
{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：\n別用妙觀安心，優畢叉方（Upayakauśalya，方便善巧）乃是總用止觀，所以從觀的本體中生起的一念，正是現在所說的陰識一念。為什麼這麼說呢？因為那篇文章的序言中先是會合定慧同宗，在『法爾』中又說『故即心為道』，可以說是尋流得源了。所以從觀的本體中說，『只知一念即空不空、非空非不空』。說『只知』，就是即體（止也）了（觀也）理，現在剎那便是三諦理，不需要專門亡根境來顯現其靈知，也不需要深入推究緣生來求其空寂，所以說『只知』，這便是即心為道了。如果奢摩他（Śamatha，止）觀成就，顯出自性一念，哪裡還需要再修三觀呢？」\n\n「問：他那裡說，『如果於相應一念生起五陰，仍然用二空破除它』，那怎麼說不需要再修觀呢？」\n\n「答：對於從真知生起的五陰，用觀來破除它，沒有生起五陰的，哪裡需要用觀呢？那二空觀乃是觀五陰，不是觀真知。所以說理解一千條道理，反而會迷惑一萬種事物。如果想要廣泛引用經文來驗證其是否相違背，那是說不完的，就此停筆吧。」\n\n「二、違背義理的地方。」\n\n「問：根據上面所引用的眾多教義，雖然看起來互相違背，但比如設立這十門，是想要通達妙理而忘卻名相，如果一念屬於事相，豈止是通達事相，恐怕會違背作者的本意吧？」\n\n「答：設立門徑，接近要點，那麼妙理就可以通達，如果遠遠地指向真如，初學者如何造詣趨向？依靠什麼來起觀呢？現在設立根塵一剎那心，本來就具備三千即空假中，依照這個來觀照它，就能成就十種妙法，豈止是理解知道而已！這樣才符合作者的本意。如果偏執于清凈真如、偏執于唯有真心，那麼就堵塞了初學者入門的道路，只會滋長名相的境界。所以第一記中說，根本雖然久遠，圓頓雖然真實，第一義雖然是理，但從觀的角度來說，是屬於事相的。他們認為圓談法性便是觀心，", "English version:\nDon't use妙觀 (Miàoguān, Wondrous Contemplation) to settle the mind. Upayakauśalya (方便善巧, skillful means) is the general use of Śamatha-Vipassanā (止觀, cessation and contemplation). Therefore, the single thought arising from the essence of contemplation is precisely the single thought of the Ālaya-consciousness (陰識, consciousness of the base). Why is this so? Because the preface of that text first unites Samādhi (定, concentration) and Prajñā (慧, wisdom) as being of the same origin, and in '法爾' (Fǎ'ěr, Suchness) it says 'therefore, taking the mind as the path,' which can be said to be finding the source by tracing the stream. Therefore, from the essence of contemplation, it says, 'Only knowing that a single thought is both empty and not empty, neither empty nor not empty.' Saying 'only knowing' means immediately embodying (cessation) and understanding (contemplation) the principle. Now, a kṣaṇa (剎那, instant) is the principle of the Three Truths (三諦, three aspects of truth), so there is no need to specifically eliminate the sense bases and objects to reveal its spiritual awareness, nor is there a need to deeply investigate dependent origination to seek its emptiness and stillness. Therefore, it says 'only knowing,' which is taking the mind as the path. If Śamatha (奢摩他, calming the mind) contemplation is accomplished, revealing a single thought of self-nature, why would one need to further cultivate the Three Contemplations (三觀, three kinds of contemplation)?」\n\n「Question: It says there, 'If the five skandhas (五陰, five aggregates) arise from a corresponding single thought, then still use the Two Emptinesses (二空, emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena) to break them.' Then how can you say that there is no need to further cultivate contemplation?」\n\n「Answer: For the five skandhas arising from true knowledge, use contemplation to break them. For those that do not arise, what is the use of contemplation? That Two Emptinesses contemplation is contemplating the five skandhas, not contemplating true knowledge. Therefore, understanding a thousand principles can lead to confusion about ten thousand things. If you want to widely cite scriptures to verify their contradictions, it is impossible to exhaust them. Let us stop writing for now.」\n\n「Two, places where the meaning is violated.」\n\n「Question: According to the many teachings cited above, although they appear contradictory, such as establishing these ten gates, it is to penetrate the wondrous principle and forget about names and forms. If a single thought belongs to phenomena, wouldn't it not only penetrate phenomena but also violate the author's intention?」\n\n「Answer: Establishing gates close to the essentials allows the wondrous principle to be penetrated. If you point far away to the Tathatā (真如, suchness), how can beginners achieve and approach it? What can they rely on to start contemplation? Now, establishing the mind of a single kṣaṇa (剎那, instant) of the sense bases and objects inherently possesses the Three Thousand Worlds in a Single Thought (三千, three thousand realms) which is emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way. Contemplating it accordingly can accomplish ten kinds of wondrous dharmas, not just understanding and knowing! Only in this way does it align with the author's intention. If you are biased towards pure Tathatā (真如, suchness), biased towards only the true mind, then you block the path for beginners to enter, only increasing the realm of names and forms. Therefore, the first record says that although the root is ancient, the perfect and sudden teaching is real, and the first principle is the truth, from the perspective of contemplation, it belongs to phenomena. They think that talking about the Dharma-nature (法性, nature of phenomena) is contemplating the mind," "" ] }
為害非少。今問：一念真知為已顯悟？為現在迷？若已顯悟，不須修觀，十乘觀法將何用邪？若現在迷，全體是陰。故《金錍》云，諸佛悟理，眾生在事。既其在事，何名真凈？然誰不知全體是清，其奈濁成本有！應知觀心大似澄水，若水已清何須更澄，若水未清須澄濁水。故《輔行》釋以識心為妙境云，今文妙觀觀之令成妙境，境方稱理。又解安於世諦云，以止觀安故，世諦方成不思議境。故知心雖本妙，觀未成時且名陰、入，為成妙故用觀體之。若撥棄陰心，自觀真性，正當偏指清凈真如之責，復招緣理斷九之譏。且如今欲觀心，為今剎那便具三千，為須真如體顯方具三千；若即剎那，何不便名陰心為于妙境，而須立真心邪？又大師親令觀于陰等諸境，及觀一念無明之心，何違教邪？應是宗師立名詮法未的，故自別立邪！又若謂此中一念不同止觀所觀陰等諸心者，此之十門因何重述？觀法大體、觀行可識，斯言謾設也。又中諦一實別判屬心，與總真心如何揀邪？心性二字不異而異，既言不變隨緣名心，即理之事也，隨緣不變名性，即事之理也，今欲於事顯理，故雙舉之，例此合云不變隨緣名佛，隨緣不變名性，生性亦然。應知三法俱事俱理，不同他解心則約理為通、生佛約事為別，此乃他家解心佛眾生之義。不深
本教，濫用他宗，妨害既多，旨趣安在？」
一性等者，性雖是一而無定一之性，故使三千色心相相宛爾，此則從無住本立一切法，應知若理若事皆有此義。故第七記釋此文云，理則性德緣了，事則修德三因，迷則三道流轉，悟則果中勝用，如此四重，並由迷中實相而立。今釋曰，迷中實相即無住本，乃今文一性無性也，上之四重即立一切法，乃今文三千宛然也。第一重既以性德緣了為一切法，須以正因為無住本，余之三重既將逆順二修為一切法，必以性德三因為無住本，此即理事兩重總別也。
問：「既以迷中實相為一性，對三千為別，正當以理為總，何苦破他？」
答：「以三千法同一性故，隨緣為萬法時，趣舉一法總攝一切也。眾生無始全體在迷，若唯論真性為總，何能事事具攝諸法？而專舉一念者，別從近要立觀慧之境也。若示一念總攝諸法，則顯諸法同一真性。故《釋簽》云，俗即百界千如，真則同居一念。須知同一性故，方能同居一念，故以同居一念用顯同一真性，非謂便將一念名為真諦，豈同居一塵非真諦邪？今文以一性為總，前後文以一念為總，蓋理事相顯也。此之二句，正出攝別入總之所以也，由一性無性立理事三千故，故兩重三千同居一念也，豈同他釋直以一念名真性邪？」
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 問：『你們的教義，濫用其他宗派的理論，造成很多妨礙，其根本宗旨究竟是什麼？』
答：『所謂『一性等』，是指『性』雖然是唯一的，但並沒有固定不變的『一』的性質。因此，才能使三千種色法和心法相互宛然存在。這便是從『無住本』建立一切法。應該知道，無論是理還是事，都包含這個道理。』所以，《第七記》解釋這段經文說：『從理上說，是性德緣了；從事上說，是修德三因；迷惑時，是三道流轉；覺悟時，是果中的殊勝作用。』這四重境界，都是由迷惑中的實相而建立的。現在解釋說，迷惑中的實相就是『無住本』，也就是現在經文所說的『一性無性』。上面的四重境界就是『立一切法』，也就是現在經文所說的『三千宛然』。第一重境界既然以性德緣了為一切法，就必須以正因為『無住本』；其餘的三重境界既然將逆修和順修為一切法，就必須以性德三因為『無住本』。這就是理事兩重境界的總別關系。
問：『既然以迷惑中的實相為『一性』，對應三千法為差別，正應當以理為總，為什麼還要破斥其他宗派的觀點呢？』
答：『因為三千法同一『性』，所以隨順因緣而成為萬法時，只要舉出一個法，就能總攝一切法。眾生從無始以來，全體都處於迷惑之中，如果只談真性為總，怎麼能事事都包含諸法呢？而專門舉出一個念頭，是從接近且重要的角度建立觀慧的境界。如果顯示一個念頭總攝諸法，就能顯現諸法同一真性。』所以，《釋簽》說：『從俗諦來說，就是百界千如；從真諦來說，就是同居一念。』要知道，因為同一『性』，才能同居一念，所以用同居一念來顯示同一真性，而不是說就把一個念頭稱為真諦。難道同居一塵就不是真諦了嗎？現在經文以『一性』為總，前後文以『一念』為總，這是理事相互顯現。這兩句話，正是說明攝別入總的原因。由於『一性無性』建立了理事三千，所以兩重三千同居一念，難道像其他解釋那樣直接把一個念頭稱為真性嗎？』
【English Translation】 English version: Question: 'Your teachings, misusing the theories of other schools and causing much obstruction, what is its fundamental purpose?'
Answer: 'The so-called 'one nature equality' (一性等) means that although 'nature' (性) is one, it does not have a fixed 'one' nature. Therefore, it can cause the three thousand forms of matter (色法) and mind (心法) to exist distinctly. This is establishing all dharmas from the 'non-abiding root' (無住本). It should be known that whether it is principle (理) or phenomena (事), both contain this truth.' Therefore, the 'Seventh Record' explains this passage by saying: 'In terms of principle, it is the inherent virtue of conditioned understanding (性德緣了); in terms of phenomena, it is the three causes of cultivated virtue (修德三因); when deluded, it is the cycle of the three paths (三道流轉); when enlightened, it is the supreme function in the fruit (果).』 These four levels are all established from the reality (實相) in delusion. Now, it is explained that the reality in delusion is the 'non-abiding root,' which is the 'one nature non-nature' (一性無性) mentioned in the current text. The above four levels are 'establishing all dharmas,' which is the 'three thousand distinctly' (三千宛然) mentioned in the current text. Since the first level takes the inherent virtue of conditioned understanding as all dharmas, it must take the right cause (正因) as the 'non-abiding root'; since the remaining three levels take reverse and forward cultivation (逆順二修) as all dharmas, they must take the three causes of inherent virtue as the 'non-abiding root.' This is the total and separate relationship of the two levels of principle and phenomena.
Question: 'Since the reality in delusion is taken as 'one nature,' corresponding to the three thousand dharmas as difference, it should be principle as the totality. Why criticize the views of other schools?'
Answer: 'Because the three thousand dharmas are of the same 'nature,' when following conditions to become myriad dharmas, just by citing one dharma, all dharmas can be totally included. Sentient beings have been entirely in delusion since beginningless time. If only true nature is discussed as the totality, how can all dharmas be included in every matter? And specifically citing one thought (一念) is to establish the realm of wisdom (觀慧) from a close and important perspective. If it is shown that one thought totally includes all dharmas, then it will reveal that all dharmas are of the same true nature.' Therefore, the 'Explanation Sign' (釋簽) says: 'From the perspective of conventional truth (俗諦), it is the hundred realms and thousand suchnesses (百界千如); from the perspective of ultimate truth (真諦), it is dwelling in one thought (同居一念).' It should be known that because of the same 'nature,' one can dwell in one thought. Therefore, dwelling in one thought is used to reveal the same true nature, not to say that one thought is called ultimate truth. Is it not that dwelling in one dust is not ultimate truth? The current text takes 'one nature' as the totality, and the preceding and following texts take 'one thought' as the totality. This is the mutual manifestation of principle and phenomena. These two sentences precisely explain the reason for including the separate into the totality. Because 'one nature non-nature' establishes the principle and phenomena of three thousand, the two levels of three thousand dwell in one thought. Is it like other explanations that directly call one thought true nature?'
二、當知下，就理事明諦境二：
初、約理事明三諦二：
初、明理事心之色心者，即事明理具也。初言心者，趣舉剎那也。之者，語助也。色心者，性德三千也。圓家明性既非但理，乃具三千之性也，此性圓融遍入同居剎那心中，此心之色心乃只心是三千色心，如物之八相更無前後，即同《止觀》心具之義，亦向心性之義。三千色心一不可改，故名為性，此一句約理明總別，本具三千為別，剎那一念為總，以三千同一性故，故總在一念也。即心名變等者，即上具三千之心，隨染凈緣不變而變、非造而造，能成修中三千事相，變雖兼別、造雖通四，今即具心名變、此變名造，則唯屬圓不通三教。此二句則事中總別，變造三千為別，剎那一念為總，亦以三千同一性故，故咸趣一念也。造謂體用者，指上變造即全體起用，故因前心具色心隨緣變造，修中色心乃以性中三千為體，修起三千為用，則全理體起於事用，方是圓教隨緣之義。故《輔行》云，心造有二種：一者約理，造即是具；二者約事，乃明三世凡聖變造。即結云，皆由理具方有事用。此文還合彼不？
問：「變名本出《楞伽》，彼云『不思議熏不思議變故』。造名本出《華嚴》，彼云『造種種五陰』。故《華嚴》唯有二教，《楞伽》
【現代漢語翻譯】 二、當知下，就理事明諦境二： 接下來，應當瞭解，從理和事兩個方面來闡明真諦之境： 初、約理事明三諦二： 首先，從理和事兩個方面來說明三諦： 初、明理事心之色心者，即事明理具也。初言心者，趣舉剎那（ksana）也。之者，語助也。色心者，性德三千也。圓家明性既非但理，乃具三千之性也，此性圓融遍入同居剎那心中，此心之色心乃只心是三千色心，如物之八相更無前後，即同《止觀》心具之義，亦向心性之義。三千色心一不可改，故名為性，此一句約理明總別，本具三千為別，剎那一念為總，以三千同一性故，故總在一念也。即心名變等者，即上具三千之心，隨染凈緣不變而變、非造而造，能成修中三千事相，變雖兼別、造雖通四，今即具心名變、此變名造，則唯屬圓不通三教。此二句則事中總別，變造三千為別，剎那一念為總，亦以三千同一性故，故咸趣一念也。造謂體用者，指上變造即全體起用，故因前心具色心隨緣變造，修中色心乃以性中三千為體，修起三千為用，則全理體起於事用，方是圓教隨緣之義。故《輔行》云，心造有二種：一者約理，造即是具；二者約事，乃明三世凡聖變造。即結云，皆由理具方有事用。此文還合彼不？ 首先，闡明理事之心中的色心，即是從事上說明理具。最初說『心』，是爲了提起剎那（ksana）。『之』是語氣助詞。『色心』指的是性德三千。圓教認為，性不僅僅是理，而是具備三千之性。這種性圓融無礙，遍入同居的剎那心中。這個心中的色心，就是心本身是三千色心，如同事物的八相沒有前後之分，這與《止觀》中『心具』的含義相同，也符合心性的意義。三千色心一個都不能改變，所以稱為『性』。這句話從理上說明了總和別的關係，本來具有三千是別，剎那一念是總，因為三千具有同一的性質，所以總在一念之中。『即心名變等』，就是說，上面所說的具有三千之心，隨著染凈的因緣，不變而變，非造而造，能夠成就修行中的三千事相。『變』雖然兼顧別，『造』雖然通於四教，但現在說『具心名變』，『此變名造』，那麼就只屬於圓教，不通於三教。這兩句話是從事上說明總和別的關係，變造三千是別，剎那一念是總，也是因為三千具有同一的性質，所以都趨向於一念。『造謂體用者』，指的是上面的變造就是全體起用，所以因為前面的心具有色心，隨著因緣變造，修行中的色心是以性中的三千為體，修行所起的三千為用，那麼就是全體的理體起於事用，這才是圓教隨緣的意義。所以《輔行》說，心造有兩種：一種是從理上說，造就是具；一種是從事上說，就是闡明三世凡聖的變造。總結說，都是由於理具，才會有事用。這段文字與前面的內容相符嗎？ 問：「變名本出《楞伽》（Lankavatara Sutra），彼云『不思議熏不思議變故』。造名本出《華嚴》（Avatamsaka Sutra），彼云『造種種五陰』。故《華嚴》唯有二教，《楞伽》 問：『變』這個名稱出自《楞伽經》（Lankavatara Sutra），其中說『不思議熏不思議變故』。『造』這個名稱出自《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra），其中說『造種種五陰』。所以《華嚴經》只有二教，《楞伽經》
【English Translation】 II. Concerning 'Dang Zhi Xia', explain the realm of truth from the perspectives of principle and phenomena: Next, it should be understood that the realm of truth is explained from the two aspects of principle and phenomena: First, explain the Three Truths based on principle and phenomena: First, explain the Three Truths from the perspectives of principle and phenomena: First, explaining the 'rupa-citta' (form and mind) of the mind in terms of principle and phenomena, it means that phenomena manifest the inherent principle. The initial word 'citta' (mind) is used to highlight the 'ksana' (moment). 'Zhi' is a grammatical particle. 'Rupa-citta' refers to the '3000 aspects of inherent nature'. The 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao) explains that nature is not merely principle, but possesses the 3000 aspects of nature. This nature is perfectly integrated and pervades the 'co-dwelling' (tongju) 'ksana-citta' (momentary mind). The 'rupa-citta' of this mind means that the mind itself is the 3000 'rupa-citta', like the eight aspects of a thing without any before or after. This is the same as the meaning of 'mind possesses' in 'Zhi Guan' (stopping and contemplating), and also aligns with the meaning of 'mind-nature'. The 3000 'rupa-citta' cannot be altered, so they are called 'nature'. This sentence explains the general and specific from the perspective of principle. Inherently possessing the 3000 is specific, and the 'ksana' (momentary) thought is general, because the 3000 have the same nature, so the general is in one thought. 'Ji xin ming bian deng' (that the mind is called transformation, etc.) means that the above-mentioned mind possessing the 3000, transforms according to defiled and pure conditions, transforming without transforming, creating without creating, and can accomplish the 3000 phenomena in practice. Although 'transformation' includes the specific, and 'creation' is common to the four teachings, now saying 'possessing mind is called transformation', 'this transformation is called creation', then it only belongs to the 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao) and does not extend to the three teachings. These two sentences explain the general and specific in phenomena. Transforming and creating the 3000 is specific, and the 'ksana' (momentary) thought is general, also because the 3000 have the same nature, so they all tend towards one thought. 'Zao wei ti yong zhe' (creation means substance and function) refers to the above-mentioned transformation and creation being the entire substance giving rise to function. Therefore, because the previous mind possesses 'rupa-citta', it transforms and creates according to conditions. The 'rupa-citta' in practice takes the 3000 in nature as its substance, and the 3000 arising from practice as its function. Then the entire principle-substance arises from phenomena-function, which is the meaning of 'following conditions' in the 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao). Therefore, 'Fu Xing' says, there are two kinds of mind-creation: one is from the perspective of principle, creation is possession; the other is from the perspective of phenomena, which is to explain the transformation and creation of the sages and ordinary beings of the three times. Concluding, it says that all phenomena-functions arise from the inherent principle. Does this text align with the previous one? First, explaining the 'rupa-citta' (form and mind) of the mind in terms of principle and phenomena, it means that phenomena manifest the inherent principle. The initial word 'citta' (mind) is used to highlight the 'ksana' (moment). 'Zhi' is a grammatical particle. 'Rupa-citta' refers to the '3000 aspects of inherent nature'. The 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao) explains that nature is not merely principle, but possesses the 3000 aspects of nature. This nature is perfectly integrated and pervades the 'co-dwelling' (tongju) 'ksana-citta' (momentary mind). The 'rupa-citta' of this mind means that the mind itself is the 3000 'rupa-citta', like the eight aspects of a thing without any before or after. This is the same as the meaning of 'mind possesses' in 'Zhi Guan' (stopping and contemplating), and also aligns with the meaning of 'mind-nature'. The 3000 'rupa-citta' cannot be altered, so they are called 'nature'. This sentence explains the general and specific from the perspective of principle. Inherently possessing the 3000 is specific, and the 'ksana' (momentary) thought is general, because the 3000 have the same nature, so the general is in one thought. 'Ji xin ming bian deng' (that the mind is called transformation, etc.) means that the above-mentioned mind possessing the 3000, transforms according to defiled and pure conditions, transforming without transforming, creating without creating, and can accomplish the 3000 phenomena in practice. Although 'transformation' includes the specific, and 'creation' is common to the four teachings, now saying 'possessing mind is called transformation', 'this transformation is called creation', then it only belongs to the 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao) and does not extend to the three teachings. These two sentences explain the general and specific in phenomena. Transforming and creating the 3000 is specific, and the 'ksana' (momentary) thought is general, also because the 3000 have the same nature, so they all tend towards one thought. 'Zao wei ti yong zhe' (creation means substance and function) refers to the above-mentioned transformation and creation being the entire substance giving rise to function. Therefore, because the previous mind possesses 'rupa-citta', it transforms and creates according to conditions. The 'rupa-citta' in practice takes the 3000 in nature as its substance, and the 3000 arising from practice as its function. Then the entire principle-substance arises from phenomena-function, which is the meaning of 'following conditions' in the 'perfect teaching' (yuanjiao). Therefore, 'Fu Xing' says, there are two kinds of mind-creation: one is from the perspective of principle, creation is possession; the other is from the perspective of phenomena, which is to explain the transformation and creation of the sages and ordinary beings of the three times. Concluding, it says that all phenomena-functions arise from the inherent principle. Does this text align with the previous one? Question: 'Bian' (transformation) originally comes from the 'Lankavatara Sutra', where it says 'because of inconceivable perfuming and inconceivable transformation'. 'Zao' (creation) originally comes from the 'Avatamsaka Sutra', where it says 'creating various skandhas'. Therefore, the 'Avatamsaka Sutra' only has two teachings, and the 'Lankavatara
合具四教，何故《金錍》云『變義唯二，造通於四』？」
答：「部中具教多少。雖爾，今約字義通局不同。何者？大凡云變，多約當體改轉得名，故變名則局。若論造者，乃有轉變之造，亦有構集之造，故造名則通。別、圓皆有中實之性，是故二教指變為造，藏、通既無中實之體，但明業惑構造諸法，不云變也。大乘唯心小乘由心，故云變則唯二、造則通四。」
問：「他云造謂體同，及改此文二十來字，而云收得舊本，又云勘契多同。今何違舊？」
答：「舊本諸文全無錯邪？應是荊溪親書本邪？又多本同者，止如杭州十藏中臺教，頃曾略讀錯字不少，豈非初將一本寫之，一本或錯十處皆訛。又云，日本傳來別行十門，題云國清止觀和尚錄出，亦云體同等者。未審止觀和尚又是誰邪？此人深諳一家教不？始錄之本全不錯不？豈以先死之人遵之為古，所立之事皆可依邪？如干淑所錄邃和尚止觀中異義，乃以三界為無漏總中之三，可盡遵不？況諸異義特違《輔行》，自立己見，故皆云《記》文易見。和尚云云，此師又稱第七祖，故知止觀和尚多是此師，若其是者則全不可依，既暗荊溪深旨必有改易也。又日本教乘脫誤亦多，唯有別行十不二門，則全同他所定之本，他既曾附《示珠指》，往于彼國必
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：問：既然四教（四種教義）都具備，為什麼《金錍》（書名）中說『變義只有兩種，造義則通於四種』呢？ 答：部中具備的教義有多少。即使如此，現在根據字義的通用範圍不同來解釋。為什麼呢？一般來說，說到『變』，大多是指對事物本體進行改變和轉化而得名，所以『變』的含義就比較侷限。如果說到『造』，既有轉變的『造』，也有構建集合的『造』，所以『造』的含義就比較寬泛。別教（藏教、通教、別教、圓教中的別教）和圓教（藏教、通教、別教、圓教中的圓教）都具有中實之性（指真實不虛的體性），因此這兩種教義認為『變』就是『造』。藏教（藏教、通教、別教、圓教中的藏教）和通教（藏教、通教、別教、圓教中的通教）既然沒有中實的本體，只是闡明業和惑構造諸法，所以不說是『變』。大乘（Mahayana）唯心，小乘（Hinayana）由心，所以說『變』則只有兩種，『造』則通於四種。 問：別人說『造』是指本體相同，並且修改了這段文字中的二十多個字，就說是收錄了舊版本，又說勘校符合的地方很多。現在為什麼說與舊版本不符呢？ 答：舊版本中的文字就完全沒有錯誤嗎？應該是荊溪（地名）親自書寫的版本嗎？又說多個版本相同，只不過像杭州十藏中的臺教，曾經略讀過，錯字也不少，難道不是最初將一個版本抄寫下來，一個版本哪怕錯十處，都會全部訛誤。又說，日本傳來的別行十門，題目說是國清止觀和尚（Guoqing Zhiguan Heshang）記錄出來的，也說是本體相同等等。不知道止觀和尚（Zhiguan Heshang）又是誰呢？這個人對天臺宗（Tiantai）的教義理解得很深刻嗎？最初記錄的版本完全沒有錯誤嗎？難道因為先去世的人就遵從他為古人，他所立的事情都可以依據嗎？比如干淑所記錄的邃和尚（Sui Heshang）《止觀》（Zhi Guan）中的異義，竟然把三界（Trailokya）作為無漏（Anasrava）總中之三，可以全部遵從嗎？況且這些異義特別違背《輔行》（Fu Xing），自立己見，所以都說《記》（Ji）中的文字容易看懂。和尚（Heshang）云云，這位法師又自稱是第七祖，所以知道止觀和尚（Zhiguan Heshang）多半就是這位法師，如果是這樣，那就完全不可依據，既然不瞭解荊溪（Jingxi）的深刻旨意，必定會有改動和刪減。而且日本的教乘脫漏錯誤也很多，只有別行十不二門，則完全與他所定的版本相同，他既然曾經附上《示珠指》（Shi Zhu Zhi），前往那個國家必定……
【English Translation】 English version: Question: Since the four teachings are all complete, why does the Jin Pi (name of a book) say, 'The meaning of 'transformation' is only two, while the meaning of 'creation' encompasses all four'? Answer: How many teachings are contained within the section. Even so, we are now explaining based on the different scopes of the meanings of the words. Why? Generally speaking, 'transformation' mostly refers to gaining a name by changing and transforming the substance itself, so the meaning of 'transformation' is limited. If we talk about 'creation', there is both the 'creation' of transformation and the 'creation' of construction and assembly, so the meaning of 'creation' is broad. The Separate Teaching (of the four teachings: Tripitaka Teaching, Shared Teaching, Separate Teaching, and Perfect Teaching) and the Perfect Teaching (of the four teachings: Tripitaka Teaching, Shared Teaching, Separate Teaching, and Perfect Teaching) both have the nature of substantial reality (referring to the true and non-illusory nature), therefore these two teachings consider 'transformation' to be 'creation'. Since the Tripitaka Teaching (of the four teachings: Tripitaka Teaching, Shared Teaching, Separate Teaching, and Perfect Teaching) and the Shared Teaching (of the four teachings: Tripitaka Teaching, Shared Teaching, Separate Teaching, and Perfect Teaching) do not have a substantial reality, they only explain how karma and delusion construct all dharmas, so they do not speak of 'transformation'. Mahayana (Mahayana) is mind-only, Hinayana (Hinayana) is from the mind, so it is said that 'transformation' is only two, while 'creation' encompasses all four. Question: Others say that 'creation' refers to the same substance, and they have modified more than twenty characters in this passage, claiming that they have collected the old version, and also saying that many places are in agreement after collation. Why do you now say that it does not match the old version? Answer: Are there absolutely no errors in the texts of the old version? Is it supposed to be a version personally written by Jingxi (place name)? Also, it is said that multiple versions are the same, but just like the Tiantai (Tiantai) teaching in the ten collections of Hangzhou, I once briefly read it and there were quite a few typos. Isn't it that initially one version was copied down, and even if one version had ten errors, they would all be corrupted. Also, it is said that the Separate Practice of the Ten Gates transmitted from Japan is titled as recorded by Guoqing Zhiguan Heshang (Guoqing Zhiguan Heshang), and it is also said that the substance is the same, etc. I don't know who this Zhiguan Heshang (Zhiguan Heshang) is? Does this person have a deep understanding of the Tiantai (Tiantai) teachings? Is the initially recorded version completely without errors? Just because someone who died earlier is followed as an ancient person, can everything they established be relied upon? For example, the different meanings in Sui Heshang's (Sui Heshang) Zhi Guan (Zhi Guan) recorded by Gan Shu, actually take the Three Realms (Trailokya) as the three within the totality of the Unconditioned (Anasrava), can they all be followed? Moreover, these different meanings especially violate the Fu Xing (Fu Xing), establishing their own views, so they all say that the text in the Ji (Ji) is easy to understand. Heshang (Heshang) says, this teacher also claims to be the Seventh Patriarch, so it is known that Zhiguan Heshang (Zhiguan Heshang) is mostly this teacher, if that is the case, then it is completely unreliable, since he does not understand the profound meaning of Jingxi (Jingxi), there must be alterations and deletions. Moreover, there are also many omissions and errors in the teachings transmitted from Japan, only the Separate Practice of the Ten Non-Dual Gates is completely the same as the version he determined, since he once attached the Shi Zhu Zhi (Shi Zhu Zhi), going to that country must...
是依之勘寫爾。設是舊本，須將義勘莫可專文。」
問：「文縱難定，義復相違。何者？此文攝別入總，合云變造體同。若云從體起用，還是開總出別。既失不二之義，便無開會之功也。」
答：「若得前之總別意者，則自不執舊訛文也。豈理體唯總，事用唯別？如常坐中修實相觀，既云唯觀理具，文中廣辨三千，還有總別不？若無者，那云一心具三千邪？隨自意中修唯識觀，觀于起心即約變造事用而說，還有總別不？若無，那云一切法趣檀等？那云觀一念善惡心起十界邪？豈隨自意三昧非不二開會觀邪？應知立茲體用，欲于理體及以事用皆明三諦事用。苦即空假中，還成不二圓妙不？既于理事兩重總別皆顯絕妙，那將攝別入總而為難邪？又夫開顯乃示法法皆妙，若知即具而變用，豈不妙邪？」
問：「他云，之猶往也，即全真心往趣色心則全理作事。此義如何？」
答：「非唯銷文不婉，抑亦立理全乖。何者？心不往時遂不具色心邪？又與心變義同，正招從心生法之過。況直云心是真理者，朗乖《金錍》釋心，既云不變隨緣名心，何得直云真理？又造謂體用，方順文勢。如何以同釋造？」
問：「若真心往作色心，有從心生法之過者，文云即心名變，亦有此過邪？」
答：「
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『是依照之前的勘校進行謄寫。如果是舊的版本，必須將義理勘校清楚，不能只看文字。』
問：『文字內容已經難以確定，義理又互相違背。是什麼情況呢？這段文字將個別攝入總體，合起來說是變造體同。如果說是從體起用，還是開總出別。既然失去了不二的義理，就沒有開顯融合的功用了。』
答：『如果懂得前面所說的總別之意，自然就不會執著于舊的訛誤文字了。難道理體只有總體，事用只有個別嗎？比如在常坐中修習實相觀，既然說是隻觀理具，文中又廣泛辨析三千，還有總別之分嗎？如果沒有，那怎麼能說一心具足三千呢？隨自己的意願修習唯識觀，觀想起心動念，就約變造的事用而說，還有總別之分嗎？如果沒有，那怎麼能說一切法都趨向檀那等等呢？怎麼能說觀一念善惡心生起十界呢？難道隨自己意願的三昧不是不二開會觀嗎？應該知道建立這個體用，是爲了在理體以及事用上都明白三諦的事用。苦即是空假中，還能成為不二圓妙嗎？既然在理事兩重總別上都顯現了絕妙，怎麼能用攝別入總來作為詰難呢？而且開顯是顯示法法皆妙，如果知道即具而變用，難道不是妙嗎？』
問：『他人說，『之』就是『往』的意思，就是全真心前往趣向色心，就是全理作事。這個義理如何？』
答：『這不僅是解釋文字不夠委婉，而且是立論完全錯誤。為什麼呢？心不前往時，難道就不具足色心了嗎？又與心變的意義相同，正好招致從心生法的過失。況且直接說心是真理，完全違背了《金錍》（Jin Pi，書名）解釋心的方式，既然說不變隨緣名為心，怎麼能直接說是真理呢？而且說『造』是體用，才順應文勢。怎麼能用『同』來解釋『造』呢？』
問：『如果真心前往作色心，有從心生法的過失，那麼文中說『即心名變』，也有這個過失嗎？』
答：
【English Translation】 English version: 'It should be transcribed according to the previous collation. If it is an old version, the meaning must be carefully examined, and one should not rely solely on the text.'
Question: 'The text is already difficult to determine, and the meanings contradict each other. What is the situation? This passage incorporates the particular into the general, and together it says 'transformation and substance are the same'. If it is said that 'use arises from substance', it is still 'opening the general to bring out the particular'. Since it loses the meaning of non-duality, it has no function of opening and merging.'
Answer: 'If you understand the meaning of general and particular mentioned earlier, you will naturally not cling to the old erroneous text. Is it that the principle only has the general, and the function only has the particular? For example, in constant sitting, practicing the contemplation of true reality, since it is said to only contemplate the principle, the text extensively analyzes the three thousand realms. Is there still a distinction between general and particular? If not, how can it be said that one mind possesses three thousand realms? According to one's own intention, practicing the contemplation of consciousness-only, contemplating the arising of thoughts, it is said in terms of the transformative function. Is there still a distinction between general and particular? If not, how can it be said that all dharmas tend towards generosity (Dana) etc.? How can it be said that contemplating one thought of good and evil gives rise to the ten realms? Is the samadhi according to one's own intention not a non-dual opening and merging contemplation? It should be known that establishing this substance and function is to clarify the function of the three truths in both principle and function. Suffering is emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way, can it still become non-dual and perfectly wonderful? Since the absolute wonder is revealed in both the general and particular aspects of principle and phenomena, how can you use incorporating the particular into the general as a difficulty?' Moreover, opening and revealing is to show that every dharma is wonderful. If you know that it is fully possessed and transformed, is it not wonderful?'
Question: 'Others say that 'zhi' (之) means 'going', that is, the whole true mind goes towards form and mind, that is, the whole principle acts. What about this meaning?'
Answer: 'This is not only an inadequate explanation of the text, but also a completely wrong argument. Why? If the mind does not go, does it not possess form and mind? Moreover, it has the same meaning as the transformation of the mind, which leads to the fault of dharmas arising from the mind. Furthermore, directly saying that the mind is the true principle completely contradicts the way the Jin Pi (金錍, a book title) explains the mind. Since it says that the unchanging following of conditions is called mind, how can it be directly called the true principle? Moreover, saying that 'making' (造) is substance and function is in accordance with the text. How can 'same' be used to explain 'making'?'
Question: 'If the true mind goes to make form and mind, and there is the fault of dharmas arising from the mind, then does the passage 'the mind is called transformation' also have this fault?'
Answer:
不明剎那具德，唯執真心變作，灼然須招斯過。今先明心具色心，方論隨緣變造，乃是全性起修，作而無作何過之有？」
問：「即心名變，此心為理事邪？若理者，上約隨緣名心；若事者，乃成事作於事。那言全理起事？」
答：「《止觀》指陰入心能造一切，而云全理成事者，蓋由此心本具三千方能變造。既云心之色心，已顯此心本具三千，今即此心變造，乃是約具名變。既非但理變造，自異別教也。」
二、是則下，結成三諦者，上之事理三千，皆以剎那心法為總，心空故理事諸法皆空，即非色非心也；心假故理事諸法皆假，即而色而心也；心中故理事諸法皆中，即唯色唯心也。故《輔行》云：「並由理具方有事用，今欲修觀但觀理具，俱破俱立俱是法界，任運攝得權實所現。」言良由於此者，即由心之色心故(理也)、即心名變故(事也)、全體起用故(理事合也)，方能一空一切空，一假一切假，一中一切中也。他解此文，分擘對當大義全失，仍不許對三諦，而云此中未論修觀故。設未修觀，立諦何妨？況此色心本是諦境。更有人互對三諦云得圓意，蓋不足言也。
二、故知下，會生佛居一念。己生佛者，心法三千，他生佛者，佛法、眾生法併名為他，各具三千，三千不出生佛也
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果不明白剎那具德的道理，只執著于真心變現萬物，必然會招致過失。現在先闡明心本身就具備色心（色法和心法），再來討論隨緣變造的道理，這才是全性起修，在作為的同時又沒有作為，哪裡會有什麼過失呢？
問：『即心名變』，這個『心』是指理體還是事相呢？如果是理體，那麼上面所說的隨緣就只是個名義上的心；如果是事相，那就成了從事相上造作。怎麼能說是全理起事呢？
答：《止觀》中說陰入心能造一切，並且說全理成事，是因為這個心本身就具備三千法界，才能變造萬物。既然說了心的色心，就已經顯示出這個心本身具備三千法界，現在用這個心來變造萬物，就是從具備的角度來說變。這並非只是理體的變造，自然不同於別教的觀點。
二、『是則下』，總結成就三諦的道理：上面的事理三千，都以剎那心法為總綱，心空，所以理事諸法都空，就是非色非心；心假，所以理事諸法都假，就是即色即心；心中，所以理事諸法都中，就是唯色唯心。所以《輔行》中說：『都是因為理體具備，才有事相的作用，現在想要修觀，只要觀理體具備，俱破俱立都是法界，自然而然地攝取權實所顯現的境界。』說『言良由於此者』，就是因為心的色心（理體）、即心名變（事相）、全體起用（理事合一），才能一空一切空，一假一切假，一中一切中。其他人的解釋，把這些道理分開來對應，完全失去了大義，仍然不允許對應三諦，還說這裡沒有討論修觀。即使沒有修觀，建立三諦又有什麼妨礙呢？況且這個色心本來就是諦境。還有人互相對應三諦，說得到了圓教的意旨，實在不值得一提。
二、『故知下』，會合生佛同在一念。『己生佛者』，指心法三千，『他生佛者』，指佛法、眾生法，並稱為『他』，各自具備三千法界，這三千法界不超出眾生和佛。
【English Translation】 English version: If one does not understand the virtuous qualities inherent in a kshana (moment), and only clings to the true mind as transforming everything, one will surely incur faults. Now, first clarify that the mind itself possesses both rupa-citta (form-mind) and arūpa-citta (formless-mind), then discuss the principle of transformation according to conditions. This is the complete nature arising in cultivation, acting without acting, so what fault could there be?
Question: 'The mind is named transformation,' does this 'mind' refer to principle or phenomena? If it refers to principle, then the above-mentioned 'according to conditions' is merely a nominal mind. If it refers to phenomena, then it becomes creating and acting upon phenomena. How can it be said that the entire principle gives rise to phenomena?
Answer: The Zhǐ Guān (止觀, Cessation and Contemplation) points out that the skandhas (陰), entrances (入), and mind can create everything, and says that the entire principle accomplishes phenomena because this mind inherently possesses the three thousand realms. Since the rupa-citta and arūpa-citta of the mind have been mentioned, it has already been shown that this mind inherently possesses the three thousand realms. Now, using this mind to transform everything is speaking of transformation from the perspective of possession. This is not merely the transformation of principle, so it is naturally different from the views of other teachings.
Two, '是則下' (therefore, below), concludes the principle of accomplishing the Three Truths: The above-mentioned three thousand realms of principle and phenomena all take the mind-dharma of a kshana as the general principle. Because the mind is empty, all dharmas of principle and phenomena are empty, which is neither form nor mind. Because the mind is provisional, all dharmas of principle and phenomena are provisional, which is both form and mind. Because the mind is the Middle Way, all dharmas of principle and phenomena are the Middle Way, which is only form and only mind. Therefore, the Fǔ Xíng (輔行, Commentary on Cessation and Contemplation) says: 'All are due to the inherent possession of principle that there is the function of phenomena. Now, if you want to cultivate contemplation, just contemplate the inherent possession of principle. Both breaking and establishing are the Dharma Realm, naturally encompassing the manifestations of provisional and real.' Saying '言良由於此者' (the reason is due to this), is because of the mind's rupa-citta and arūpa-citta (principle), the mind being named transformation (phenomena), and the entire substance arising in function (the unity of principle and phenomena), that one emptiness is all emptiness, one provisionally is all provisionally, and one Middle Way is all the Middle Way. Other interpretations divide and correspond to these principles, completely losing the great meaning, and still do not allow correspondence to the Three Truths, saying that cultivation is not discussed here. Even if cultivation is not discussed, what harm is there in establishing the Three Truths? Moreover, this rupa-citta is originally the realm of truth. There are also people who mutually correspond to the Three Truths, saying that they have obtained the meaning of the perfect teaching, which is really not worth mentioning.
Two, '故知下' (therefore, know below), unites sentient beings and Buddhas in one thought. '己生佛者' (sentient beings and Buddhas themselves), refers to the three thousand realms of mind-dharma. '他生佛者' (other sentient beings and Buddhas), refers to the Buddha-dharma and sentient being-dharma, collectively called 'other,' each possessing the three thousand realms. These three thousand realms do not go beyond sentient beings and Buddhas.
。以理攝事同趣我心，蓋心之具故、即心變故、全體用故，故識一念即能遍見也。
三、故彼下，結不二。可見。他云，此本多一差字。存略無妨，不須苦諍。
二、內外不二門，又三：
初、標。正約三法立內外境也。眾生諸佛及以依報名為外境，自己心法名為內境，故《觀音玄義》立所觀境有二，所謂自他。他者謂眾生佛，自者即心而具，乃引《華嚴》心如工畫師等為證。有人立佛界為內、九界為外，乃引此經，或說己事、或說他事證之，而不知彼明果后垂跡，乃以佛界為己、九界為他。今論初心觀所依境，既未成佛，安用佛為己邪？據觀音玄方為允愜。
問：「前引大部，揀于佛法太高、眾生太廣，今何取之？」
答：「辨其難易故且揀之，若論機入不同故須雙列，復為顯其妙義必須內外互融，隨觀一境皆能遍攝故名不二，此之不二悉得稱門。泛論雖爾，一家觀法多用內心妙義為門也。」
二、凡所下，依門釋二：
初、明內外境觀二：
初、標示者，大小乘中所明觀法，二境收盡故云不出，今非偏小也。
二、外謂下，釋相二：
初、明外境觀相。言托者依也。彼者，既以內心為自，乃指依報及生佛色心為彼，此乃正立外境。即空假中去，即
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：以理來統攝事相，最終都歸於我的心，這是因為心具備一切事物，一切事物都是心的顯現，一切事物都是心的全體作用。所以，認識到一念，就能普遍地見到一切。
第三點，因此在下面總結不二的道理。這是可以理解的。有人說，這個版本多了一個『差』字。保留省略也無妨，不必為此爭論。
二、內外不二門，又分為三個部分：
首先是標示。這裡主要根據三法來確立內外境。眾生、諸佛以及依報（指眾生所依賴的生存環境）名為外境，自己的心法名為內境。所以《觀音玄義》確立了所觀之境有二，即自和他。他指眾生和佛，自指心中本具的。並引用《華嚴經》中『心如工畫師』等來作為證明。有人認為佛界為內，九界為外，並引用此經，或說自己之事，或說他人之事來證明，卻不知道那是說明果后垂跡，才以佛界為自己，九界為他人。現在討論的是初心觀所依之境，既然還未成佛，怎麼能用佛作為自己呢？按照《觀音玄義》的說法才算恰當。
問：『前面引用大部經典，是因為佛法太高深、眾生太廣泛，現在為什麼又要引用呢？』
答：『因為要辨別難易，所以暫時捨棄。如果從根機進入的不同來說，就必須兩者都列出。而且爲了彰顯其妙義，必須內外互相融合，隨著觀任何一境，都能普遍攝取，所以名為不二。』雖然泛泛而談是這樣，但一家觀法多用內心妙義作為入門。
二、凡所下，依據門來解釋二：
首先，闡明內外境觀二：
首先是標示，大小乘中所闡明的觀法，都被這內外二境所包含，所以說沒有超出，現在不是偏於小乘。
二、外謂下，解釋相二：
首先，闡明外境觀的相狀。『托』是依靠的意思。『彼』，既然以內心為自己，那麼就指依報以及眾生和佛的色心為『彼』，這才是真正確立外境。即空假中去，即
【English Translation】 English version: To govern affairs with reason ultimately converges to my mind. This is because the mind possesses all things, all things are manifestations of the mind, and all things are the complete function of the mind. Therefore, recognizing one thought enables one to universally see everything.
Thirdly, therefore, the following concludes the principle of non-duality. This is understandable. Someone said that this version has an extra character 『差』 (chā, difference). Retaining the omission is fine, no need to argue about it.
Two, the gate of non-duality of inner and outer, is further divided into three parts:
First is the indication. Here, the inner and outer realms are mainly established based on the three dharmas. Sentient beings, all Buddhas, and the dependent environment (依報, yībào, the environment upon which beings depend for survival) are called the outer realm, and one's own mind-dharma is called the inner realm. Therefore, the 『Profound Meaning of Avalokiteśvara』 establishes that there are two realms to be contemplated, namely self and other. 『Other』 refers to sentient beings and Buddhas, and 『self』 refers to what is inherent in the mind. It also cites 『The mind is like a skilled painter』 from the Avatamsaka Sutra as proof. Some consider the Buddha realm as inner and the nine realms as outer, and cite this sutra, either speaking of their own affairs or speaking of others' affairs to prove it, but they do not know that it is explaining the traces left after attaining Buddhahood, and thus take the Buddha realm as self and the nine realms as other. Now we are discussing the realm upon which the initial mind relies for contemplation. Since one has not yet become a Buddha, how can one use the Buddha as oneself? The explanation according to the 『Profound Meaning of Avalokiteśvara』 is appropriate.
Question: 『Earlier, the great sutras were cited because the Buddha-dharma was too profound and sentient beings were too vast. Why are they being cited now?』
Answer: 『Because we need to distinguish between what is difficult and what is easy, so we temporarily set them aside. If we consider the different ways in which beings enter the path, then both must be listed. Moreover, in order to reveal its profound meaning, the inner and outer must be mutually integrated. By contemplating any one realm, one can universally encompass everything, so it is called non-duality.』 Although this is a general discussion, the contemplation methods of one school often use the profound meaning of the inner mind as the gateway.
Two, 『凡所下』 (Fán suǒ xià, Generally below), explains the two based on the gate:
First, clarifying the contemplation of the inner and outer realms:
First is the indication. The contemplation methods explained in the Mahayana and Hinayana are all encompassed by these two realms of inner and outer, so it is said that there is nothing beyond them. This is not biased towards the Hinayana.
Two, 『外謂下』 (Wài wèi xià, Outer called below), explains the aspects of the two:
First, clarifying the aspects of contemplating the outer realm. 『托』 (Tuō, rely) means to depend on. 『彼』 (Bǐ, that), since the inner mind is taken as self, then it refers to the dependent environment (依報, yībào) and the form and mind of sentient beings and Buddhas as 『that』. This is the true establishment of the outer realm. Namely, emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way, namely,
是妙觀及觀成相，于依等四隨托一境，皆以圓融三觀觀之，此觀既妙故令陰入染體泯凈。即前依正等，全為妙體一實圓理，故云體絕及一實等，所觀陰境既絕，能觀妙觀亦寂，則病去藥亡、能所雙絕，故云無空假中。于雙絕之處融妙三千一時顯現，豁然同皆真凈，法法皆實故真，皆非染礙故凈，故云宛然等。如是則一切眾生皆毗盧體，一切國土悉常寂光，有何定法名三五七九及凈穢邪？故云無復至差品也。而彼彼三千圓融互入，猶因陀羅網終自炳然，即是外觀功成之相。觀行已上至於妙覺，節節無非如此顯發。不爾，安云發心畢竟二不別邪？
問：「他云，舊本無兩假字，唯云即空即中，空中妙故，而云以空中亡彼依正之假，此本何得妄加邪？」
答：「雖欲依于舊本，其如義理殘缺，必是往時讀者不諳境觀，故妄有改削矣。且文標所觀境有內外，豈以依正色心陰入之境而為假觀邪？遍尋荊溪之意，必不闕此一觀。何者？如《止觀》破思假文中雲『因緣生法即空即中』，《輔行》云，且以法性空中對幻假說其實，幻假即不思議假。既云且以，知非盡理；須即妙假，故云其實。文中不云即假，尚欲據義加之，豈自著述而特略之？況彼云，因緣生法方有幻假之義，今直云依正等，且未成幻假，況妙假乎！又第
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這是指妙觀和觀成之相，對於所依賴的依報等四種境界，都用圓融的三觀來觀察。這種觀法既然精妙，就能使五陰、十二入等染污的本體消泯而清凈。即是說，之前的依報和正報等，完全成為精妙的本體，是真實圓滿的理體，所以說『體絕』以及『一實』等。所觀的五陰境界既然斷絕，能觀的妙觀也寂靜，那麼病除藥亡，能觀和所觀都雙雙斷絕，所以說『無空假中』。在雙重斷絕之處，圓融的三千法門一時顯現，豁然開朗，一切都真實清凈，一切法都是真實的，所以說是『真』，一切法都不是染污的障礙，所以說是『凈』，所以說『宛然』等。這樣，一切眾生都是毗盧遮那佛的本體，一切國土都是常寂光土，哪裡有什麼固定的法則叫做三五七九以及凈穢邪正呢？所以說『無復至差品也』。而那些三千法門圓融互入，就像因陀羅網一樣，最終會清晰地顯現出來，這就是外觀功成的相狀。從觀行以上直到妙覺，每個階段都無非如此顯發。如果不是這樣，怎麼能說發心和最終的覺悟沒有差別呢？ 有人問：『別人說，舊本沒有『兩假』二字，只說『即空即中』，因為空中精妙，所以說用空中來消滅那些依報和正報的假象，這個版本怎麼能隨意增加呢？』 回答：『即使想要依據舊本，但是義理殘缺不全，一定是以前的讀者不熟悉境界和觀法，所以隨意改動刪削了。況且文章標明所觀的境界有內外，難道要把依報、正報、色心、五陰、十二入的境界作為假觀嗎？遍尋荊溪大師的意旨，一定不會缺少這一觀。為什麼呢？比如《止觀》破思假文中說『因緣生法即空即中』，《輔行》解釋說，暫且用法性空來對治幻假，其實幻假就是不可思議假。既然說是『暫且』，就知道不是窮盡真理；必須是精妙的假，所以說是『其實』。文中沒有說『即假』，尚且想要根據義理加上，難道自己著述反而特別省略嗎？況且他們說，因緣生法才有幻假的意義，現在直接說依報和正報等，還沒有成為幻假，更何況是妙假呢！又，第
【English Translation】 English version: This refers to the Wonderful Contemplation (妙觀) and the aspect of Accomplished Contemplation (觀成相). Regarding the four realms of reliance (依等四) – taking one realm as the object, all are contemplated with the perfect and harmonious Three Contemplations (圓融三觀). Since this contemplation is wonderful, it causes the defiled substance of the skandhas (陰), entrances (入), etc., to be extinguished and purified. That is, the previous dependent (依正) and retributive realms (等) entirely become the wonderful substance, the one real and perfect principle (一實圓理), hence the saying 'substance is extinguished' (體絕) and 'one reality' (一實), etc. Since the contemplated realm of the skandhas is extinguished, the contemplating Wonderful Contemplation is also tranquil. Then, the illness is gone and the medicine is no more, both the contemplator and the contemplated are doubly extinguished, hence the saying 'no emptiness, provisionality, or middle' (無空假中). At the place of double extinction, the perfect and wonderful Three Thousand Realms (三千) manifest simultaneously, suddenly all are truly pure. All dharmas are real, hence 'true' (真), all are free from defilement and obstruction, hence 'pure' (凈), hence the saying 'clearly' (宛然), etc. Thus, all sentient beings are the substance of Vairocana (毗盧體), all lands are the Land of Eternal Tranquil Light (常寂光), what fixed dharmas are there called three, five, seven, nine, and purity, impurity, evil, and righteousness? Hence the saying 'no more to differing categories' (無復至差品也). And those Three Thousand Realms perfectly interpenetrate each other, like the net of Indra (因陀羅網), ultimately they will clearly manifest themselves, which is the aspect of the external contemplation's accomplishment. From the stage of contemplative practice (觀行) upwards to Wonderful Enlightenment (妙覺), each stage is nothing other than such manifestation. If it were not so, how could it be said that the initial aspiration and the ultimate enlightenment are not different? Someone asks: 'Others say that the old version does not have the two words 'two provisionalities' (兩假), but only says 'is emptiness, is the middle' (即空即中). Because emptiness is wonderful, it is said that emptiness is used to eliminate the provisionality of the dependent and retributive realms. How can this version arbitrarily add them?' The answer: 'Even if one wants to rely on the old version, the meaning is incomplete. It must be that the readers of the past were not familiar with the realms and contemplations, so they arbitrarily altered and deleted them. Moreover, the text indicates that the contemplated realms have inner and outer aspects. How can the realms of dependent and retributive realms, form and mind, skandhas, and entrances be regarded as provisional contemplation? Searching throughout the meaning of Jingxi (荊溪), this contemplation must not be missing. Why? For example, the 'Stopping and Observing' (止觀) in the section on breaking the provisionality of thought (破思假文) says 'conditioned dharmas are emptiness, are the middle' (因緣生法即空即中). The 'Supplementing Conduct' (輔行) explains, 'Let us temporarily use the emptiness of dharma-nature to counter the illusory provisionality, in fact, the illusory provisionality is the inconceivable provisionality.' Since it says 'temporarily' (且以), we know that it does not exhaust the truth; it must be the wonderful provisionality, hence it says 'in fact' (其實). The text does not say 'is provisionality' (即假), yet one still wants to add it according to the meaning, how could one's own writing especially omit it? Moreover, they say that conditioned dharmas have the meaning of illusory provisionality, now it directly says dependent and retributive realms, etc., which have not yet become illusory provisionality, let alone wonderful provisionality! Also, the
一記中釋十二入各具千如中雲，境據假邊，且存其數。空中尚無，其數安在？然必約假以立空中，此雖將境為假，然與今文不同。何者？彼約十二入各具千如為境，即已成不思議假，故非此例。恐未解者以此為據，故粗引之，仍出其意。又上若不立假觀，下何亡之而云無空假中邪？又若更云空中兼上依正俱亡，故云無空假中者，文已自云色心體絕，何系重乎？若以色心體絕亡所觀陰境，無空假中泯能觀妙觀，則無是過也。又準內體三千即空假中，三千已是妙境猶尚更立三觀，今但云依正等，未結成妙境，那便略慈假觀邪？」
問：「前門心之色心云是三千妙體，今云依正色心，何非妙境？」
答：「上云心之色心，即剎那念本具七科色心，此非妙境更指何邪？今但云依正等，乃是直論外陰入界，故不例上。」
問：「既將佛法眾生法為外境，佛已離陰，何得皆是陰入邪？」
答：「修觀行者外境未亡已來，見有他佛，故《起信論》云『以依轉識故說為境界』，則知過在於我，何關佛邪！然且置所定之文，試論能定之義，還合一家教宗不？只如他于諭迷顯正決中，指色心門為外境者，豈可內境離色心門邪？又解外觀成相豁同真凈文，云同者似也，乃似其分真即六根凈也，豈外觀功能止齊相似？
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
有人引用《一記》中解釋十二入（十二入：佛教術語，指眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意六根及其所對的色、聲、香、味、觸、法六境）各具千如（千如：指事物具有的多種屬性和可能性）的說法，認為境是建立在假的基礎上，所以暫時保留其數量。既然空中什麼都沒有，那數量又在哪裡呢？然而，必須依靠假才能建立空中的概念，這雖然是將境視為假，但與現在的文章不同。為什麼呢？因為《一記》中是基於十二入各具千如作為境，這已經構成了一種不可思議的假，所以不能作為此處的例子。恐怕有人不理解，以此作為依據，所以粗略地引用一下，仍然是出於其本意。而且，如果上面不建立假觀，下面又如何捨棄它而說沒有空、假、中呢？如果又說空中連同上面的依報（依報：指眾生所居住的環境）和正報（正報：指眾生的身心）都消失了，所以說沒有空、假、中，那麼文章已經自己說了色心體絕，又有什麼關係呢？如果認為色心體絕是捨棄所觀的陰境，沒有空、假、中是泯滅能觀的妙觀，那就沒有這個過失了。而且，按照內體三千（三千：指一念心中具足三千世界）就是空、假、中的說法，三千已經是妙境了，仍然還要建立三觀，現在只是說依報和正報等，還沒有構成妙境，怎麼就省略了慈悲的假觀呢？』
問：『前面說心之色心是三千妙體，現在說依報和正報的色心，為什麼不是妙境呢？』
答：『上面說的心之色心，是指剎那念頭本來就具有七科（七科：指地、水、火、風、空、識、根）色心，如果這不是妙境，還能指什麼呢？現在只是說依報和正報等，是直接討論外在的陰、入、界（陰、入、界：佛教用語，指構成世界的要素），所以不能和上面相提並論。』
問：『既然將佛法和眾生法作為外境，佛已經脫離了陰，為什麼都還是陰入呢？』
答：『修觀行的人在外境沒有消失之前，會看到其他的佛，所以《起信論》（《起信論》：指《大乘起信論》）說『因為依于轉識的緣故，所以說為境界』，那麼就知道過錯在於我們自己，和佛有什麼關係呢！而且先放下所確定的文字，試著討論能確定的意義，還符合一家（一家：指某個宗派）的教義嗎？就像他在《諭迷顯正決》中，將色心門（色心門：指色法和心法）指為外境，難道內境可以離開色心門嗎？又解釋外觀成就相貌，豁然開朗如同真凈的文章，說『同』是相似的意思，是相似於分真即六根清凈，難道外觀的功能僅僅達到相似的程度嗎？』
【English Translation】 English version:
Someone quoted the explanation in 'Yi Ji' regarding the twelve entrances (twelve entrances: Buddhist term referring to the six sense organs - eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, mind - and their corresponding six sense objects - form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma) each possessing a thousand suchnesses (thousand suchnesses: referring to the multiple attributes and possibilities of things), arguing that the realm is based on the provisional, so temporarily retain its number. Since there is nothing in emptiness, where does the number exist? However, it is necessary to rely on the provisional to establish the concept of emptiness. Although this regards the realm as provisional, it is different from the current text. Why? Because in 'Yi Ji', it is based on the twelve entrances each possessing a thousand suchnesses as the realm, which already constitutes an inconceivable provisional, so it cannot be used as an example here. Fearing that some may misunderstand and use this as a basis, I briefly quote it, still out of its original intention. Moreover, if the provisional contemplation is not established above, how can it be abandoned below and say there is no emptiness, provisional, or middle? If it is further said that emptiness, along with the dependent (dependent: referring to the environment in which beings live) and principal (principal: referring to the body and mind of beings) retributions above, have disappeared, so it is said there is no emptiness, provisional, or middle, then the text has already stated that the essence of form and mind is extinguished, so what is the relationship? If it is thought that the extinction of the essence of form and mind is the abandonment of the realm of the skandhas (skandhas: aggregates of existence) being contemplated, and the absence of emptiness, provisional, and middle is the annihilation of the wonderful contemplation that can contemplate, then there is no fault. Moreover, according to the saying that the inner essence of three thousand (three thousand: referring to the three thousand worlds inherent in a single thought) is emptiness, provisional, and middle, the three thousand is already a wonderful realm, and yet three contemplations still need to be established. Now it only says dependent and principal retributions, etc., which have not yet formed a wonderful realm, so how can the compassionate provisional contemplation be omitted?'
Question: 'Earlier it was said that the form and mind of the mind are the wonderful essence of three thousand, now it is said that the form and mind of dependent and principal retributions, why is it not a wonderful realm?'
Answer: 'The form and mind of the mind mentioned above refers to the seven categories (seven categories: referring to earth, water, fire, wind, space, consciousness, and root) of form and mind that are inherent in a momentary thought. If this is not a wonderful realm, what else can it refer to? Now it only says dependent and principal retributions, etc., which is a direct discussion of the external skandhas, entrances, and realms (skandhas, entrances, and realms: Buddhist terms referring to the elements that constitute the world), so it cannot be compared to the above.'
Question: 'Since the Buddha-dharma and the dharma of sentient beings are taken as external realms, and the Buddha has already transcended the skandhas, why are they all still skandhas and entrances?'
Answer: 'Those who practice contemplation will see other Buddhas before the external realm disappears, so the 'Awakening of Faith' (Awakening of Faith: referring to the 'Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana') says 'Because it relies on the transformation of consciousness, it is said to be a realm', then it is known that the fault lies in ourselves, what does it have to do with the Buddha! Moreover, let us first put aside the determined text and try to discuss the meaning that can be determined, does it still conform to the teachings of one's own school (one's own school: referring to a particular sect)? Just like in his 'Exhortation to Dispel Confusion and Reveal the Correct', he refers to the gate of form and mind (gate of form and mind: referring to form and mental phenomena) as the external realm, can the internal realm be separated from the gate of form and mind? Also, explaining that the appearance of external contemplation is enlightened and the same as the true pure text, saying 'same' means similar, it is similar to the partial truth, which is the purification of the six sense organs, does the function of external contemplation only reach the level of similarity?'
又解內觀，先了外色心一念無念，謂外境亡，唯內體三千即空假中，謂內體顯，既全不約解行分文，先了之言乃是牒前外觀，內體已下方觀于內，是則六根凈後方修內觀，則識陰十乘初心絕分。又若謂外境亡時內體必顯者，則唯有外觀不須觀內，又成內觀初心後心皆不修也。此等相違，請當宗匠者觀之，還可將此見解定教文之是非乎？或須云終日炳然，有何損益而苦諍之？境觀乖失而全不知，況依正本融、迷情強隔，觀成情遣且云不見，塵去鑒凈、現像非磨，故云終自炳然。此則自勝於日，他莫知之。」
問：「染凈不二門云，照故三千常具，遮故法爾空中。又云，亡凈穢故以空以中。又《義例》云：『觀此一運即具十界百界千如，即空即中。』此文何須添假字邪？」
答：「因徴彼文，驗知舊本是往人改削。何者？若不解彼之文意，須據彼文除今假字。今人既然，往人亦爾，不足疑也。嗚呼！不解境觀以至於斯。且如染凈門云，故須初心而遮而照，照故三千常具，遮故法爾空中，蓋三觀相成也。既云照故三千常具，照是觀不？三千是妙假不？既不可單修假觀，遂須空中成之，故云遮故法爾空中。因茲遮照，妙用現前，故云遍應無方。既以妙假歷于凈穢，復須空中亡之，故云亡凈穢故以空以中。《義例》
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 還有一種對內觀的解釋，先要了解外在的色和心，達到一念不生的狀態，意思是外在的境界消失了，只有內在的本體，即空、假、中三諦，意思是內在的本體顯現了。這完全不按照理解和實踐來劃分，一開始說的『先了解』，是承接前面的外觀。『內體已下』，是說在外觀之後才修內觀。如果這樣，那麼六根清凈之後才修內觀，那麼識陰十乘的初心就沒有份了。又如果說外境消失的時候內體必然顯現，那麼只需要外觀，不需要觀內，又變成了內觀的初心和後心都不需要修了。這些互相矛盾的地方，請各位宗師仔細觀察，還可以用這種見解來判斷佛教經文的是非嗎？或者需要說『終日光明，有什麼損失或增益而要如此爭論呢？』境界和觀法乖離而完全不知道，更何況是依據正本融通、迷情強行隔斷，觀修成就情執消除了卻說沒看見，塵埃去除鏡子乾淨了、顯現的形象不是磨出來的，所以說『終究是自己光明』。這就像自己勝過太陽，別人不知道。」
有人問：『染凈不二門』中說，『照故三千常具（照了的緣故，三千世界本來就具備），遮故法爾空中（遮止的緣故，本來就是空性）。』又說，『亡凈穢故以空以中（因為要去除清凈和污穢的緣故，用空和中）。』又《義例》中說：『觀察這一念就具備十界百界千如（十法界、百法界、千如是），即空即中。』這段文字為什麼需要新增『假』字呢？」
回答說：『因為引用那段文字，驗證得知舊的版本是被前人修改過的。為什麼呢？如果不理解那段文字的意思，就應該按照那段文字去除現在的『假』字。現在的人既然這樣做了，以前的人也一樣，不足為怪。』唉！不理解境界和觀法以至於這樣。比如『染凈門』中說，所以需要初心時而遮止時而照了，照了的緣故三千世界本來就具備，遮止的緣故本來就是空性，這是三觀互相成就。既然說照了的緣故三千世界本來就具備，這個『照』是觀嗎？三千是妙假嗎？既然不可以單獨修假觀，於是需要用空觀來成就它，所以說遮止的緣故本來就是空性。因為這個遮止和照了，妙用顯現，所以說普遍應合沒有方所。既然用妙假來經歷清凈和污穢，又需要用空觀來去除它，所以說去除清凈和污穢的緣故用空和中。《義例》
【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, there is an explanation of inner contemplation (內觀, nèi guān), which begins with understanding that external forms (色, sè) and mind (心, xīn) reach a state of no-thought (無念, wú niàn). This means that the external realm vanishes, leaving only the inner essence, which is the threefold truth of emptiness (空, kōng), provisional existence (假, jiǎ), and the middle way (中, zhōng). This signifies that the inner essence becomes manifest. This does not follow the division of understanding and practice. The initial statement 'first understand' refers back to the preceding external contemplation. 'Inner essence below' means that inner contemplation is practiced after external contemplation. If this is the case, then inner contemplation is practiced only after the six senses (六根, liù gēn) are purified, and the initial intention of the ten vehicles of consciousness (識陰十乘, shí yīn shí shèng) has no part. Furthermore, if it is said that when the external realm vanishes, the inner essence necessarily appears, then only external contemplation is needed, and there is no need for inner contemplation. This would mean that neither the initial nor the subsequent stages of inner contemplation need to be practiced. These are contradictory points. Let the masters of this school observe them carefully. Can this view be used to determine the correctness of Buddhist scriptures? Or should it be said, 'It is always bright, what loss or gain is there to argue about?' The realm and the contemplation are misaligned, and this is not known at all. Moreover, it is based on the original text being integrated, while deluded emotions are forcibly separated. Contemplation is accomplished, and emotional attachments are eliminated, yet it is said that nothing is seen. Dust is removed, and the mirror is clear; the appearing images are not polished away. Therefore, it is said, 'Ultimately, it is bright of itself.' This is like oneself surpassing the sun, which others do not know.
Someone asks: In the 'Gate of Non-Duality of Purity and Impurity' (染凈不二門, rǎn jìng bù èr mén), it says, 'Because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete (照故三千常具, zhào gù sānqiān cháng jù); because of cessation, they are inherently empty (遮故法爾空中, zhē gù fǎ ěr kōng zhōng).' It also says, 'Because of eliminating purity and defilement, use emptiness and the middle way (亡凈穢故以空以中, wáng jìng huì gù yǐ kōng yǐ zhōng).' Furthermore, the 'Meaning and Examples' (義例, yì lì) says: 'Contemplating this one thought contains the ten realms, the hundred realms, and the thousand suchnesses (觀此一運即具十界百界千如, guān cǐ yī yùn jí jù shí jiè bǎi jiè qiān rú), which are emptiness and the middle way.' Why is it necessary to add the word 'provisional' (假, jiǎ) to this passage?'
The answer is: 'Because of quoting that passage, verification reveals that the old version was altered by previous people. Why? If one does not understand the meaning of that passage, one should follow that passage and remove the current word 'provisional'. Since people today do this, people in the past did the same, there is no need to be surprised.' Alas! Not understanding the realm and contemplation leads to this. For example, the 'Gate of Purity and Impurity' says, therefore, it is necessary to both cease and illuminate at the initial intention. Because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete; because of cessation, they are inherently empty. This is the mutual accomplishment of the three contemplations. Since it says that because of illumination, the three thousand realms are always complete, is this 'illumination' contemplation? Are the three thousand realms wondrous provisional existences? Since one cannot practice provisional contemplation alone, one must use emptiness contemplation to accomplish it. Therefore, it says that because of cessation, they are inherently empty. Because of this cessation and illumination, wondrous functions manifest, therefore, it says that it universally corresponds without direction. Since wondrous provisional existences are experienced in purity and defilement, one must use emptiness contemplation to eliminate them. Therefore, it says that because of eliminating purity and defilement, use emptiness and the middle way. The 'Meaning and Examples'
照此一運即具十界百界千如者，即于內心唯識之境，用不思議假觀照之，方顯百界千如，仍須遮之，故云即空即中，正是三觀相成；則與染凈門中觀相恰同也。故彼三文有，即是剩；此文無，即是欠。何者？今文標云，凡所觀境不出內外，即云外謂托彼依正色心，既無心具及百界等言，未成妙境，又無觀照之義，因何便云是假觀邪？黨理之者見斯曉諭，更何由執？」
二、所言下，明內境觀相者。先了等者，初心行人慾依內心修觀，先須妙解了達外法唯一念造，此能造念本無念性，能造既無所造安有？外法既虛，唯有內體三千實性，如是解已，方依內心修乎三觀，故內體二字亦事理雙舉。內即內心，隨緣義故，對外立也；體即是性，不變義故，非內外也。故《義例》云：「修觀次第必先內心。」乃至云「又亦亦先了諸法唯心方可觀心。」又彼文云：「唯于萬境觀一心故知」，若無此解，如何知心具足諸法？若不知具但直觀心，何殊藏、通？藏、通何曾不云觀心？縱知心體是中，若不云具，未異別教教道也。故《止觀》先開六科妙解然始正修，觀心之義如是。如何釋云，先修外觀至六根凈方修內觀邪？又此內觀含于唯識、實相兩觀之義，學者尋之。
問：「外觀何不先明解了，而直修三觀邪？」
答
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
一、如果按照這種方式運作，就能立即具備十法界、百法界、千如是（十界：地獄、餓鬼、畜生、阿修羅、人、天、聲聞、緣覺、菩薩、佛；百界千如：每一界又包含十界，每一界都具備如是相、如是性、如是體、如是力、如是作、如是因、如是緣、如是果、如是報、如是本末究竟等十如是），那就是在內心唯識的境界中，用不可思議的假觀來觀照它，才能顯現百界千如。但仍然需要遮遣它，所以說『即空即假即中』，這正是空、假、中三觀相互成就。那麼，這和染凈門中的觀想就完全相同了。所以，那三段文字有這些內容，就是多餘的；這段文字沒有這些內容，就是欠缺的。為什麼呢？因為這段文字標明說，凡所觀的境界，都不超出內外。所謂『外』，是指依託于外在的依報和正報的色法和心法，既然沒有『心具』以及『百界』等說法，就沒有成就妙境；又沒有觀照的意義，憑什麼就說是假觀呢？贊同這種道理的人，見到這個曉諭，更有什麼理由可以固執己見呢？ 二、下面所說的，是說明內境的觀想。首先要了解等等，是指初學修觀的人，想要依靠內心來修觀，首先必須巧妙地理解和通達外在的法，都是由唯一的心念所造。這個能造的心念，本來就沒有唸的自性。能造既然沒有，所造的又怎麼會有呢？外在的法既然是虛幻的，就只有內在的本體三千實性。像這樣理解之後，才能依靠內心來修習空、假、中三觀。所以，『內體』這兩個字，也是事和理雙重並舉。『內』就是內心，是隨順因緣的意義，是相對於外在而說的；『體』就是自性，是不變的意義，不是內外所能概括的。所以，《義例》中說：『修觀的次第，必須先從內心開始。』乃至說『又必須先了解諸法唯心，才可以觀心。』又那段文字說：『因為只在萬境中觀一心，』要知道，如果沒有這種理解，怎麼知道心具足諸法呢？如果不知道心具足諸法，只是直接觀心，那和藏教、通教有什麼區別呢？藏教、通教難道不也說觀心嗎？縱然知道心體是中道，如果不說心具足諸法，那就和別教的教道沒有什麼區別。所以，《止觀》首先開示六科妙解，然後才正式修習。觀心的意義就是這樣。怎麼能解釋成，先修外觀，直到六根清凈，才修內觀呢？而且，這個內觀包含了唯識觀和實相觀的意義，學者可以自己去探尋。 問：為什麼外觀不先說明了解，而直接修習三觀呢？ 答：
【English Translation】 English version:
- If one operates in this way, one immediately possesses the ten realms, the hundred realms, and the thousand suchnesses (Ten realms: hell, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, heavens, sravakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, Buddhas; Hundred realms and thousand suchnesses: each realm contains ten realms, and each realm possesses such appearance, such nature, such entity, such power, such function, such cause, such condition, such effect, such retribution, and such ultimate equality of beginning and end). That is, within the realm of mind-only consciousness, one contemplates it with the inconceivable provisional contemplation, in order to reveal the hundred realms and thousand suchnesses. However, it is still necessary to negate it, hence the saying 'is emptiness, is provisional, is the middle way,' which is precisely the mutual accomplishment of the three contemplations. Then, this is exactly the same as the contemplation in the defiled and pure gates. Therefore, if those three passages have these contents, they are superfluous; if this passage lacks these contents, it is deficient. Why? Because this passage states that all objects of contemplation do not go beyond internal and external. The so-called 'external' refers to relying on the external circumstantial and direct rewards of form and mind. Since there is no mention of 'mind possessing' and 'hundred realms,' the wonderful realm is not accomplished. Furthermore, there is no meaning of contemplation, so how can it be said to be provisional contemplation? Those who agree with this reasoning, upon seeing this explanation, will have no reason to persist in their views.
- The following explains the contemplation of the internal realm. 'First understand,' etc., refers to the fact that beginners who wish to cultivate contemplation based on the internal mind must first skillfully understand and comprehend that external dharmas are solely created by a single thought. This creating thought originally has no nature of thought. Since the creator does not exist, how can the created exist? Since external dharmas are illusory, there is only the internal essence of three thousand real natures. Having understood in this way, one can then cultivate the three contemplations of emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way based on the internal mind. Therefore, the words 'internal essence' also refer to both phenomena and principle. 'Internal' is the internal mind, meaning dependent origination, and is established in relation to the external; 'essence' is self-nature, meaning unchanging, and is beyond internal and external. Therefore, the Yi Li (Meaning and Examples) says: 'The order of cultivating contemplation must begin with the internal mind.' And even says, 'Furthermore, one must first understand that all dharmas are mind-only before one can contemplate the mind.' Also, that passage says: 'Because one contemplates one mind in all phenomena,' one must know that without this understanding, how can one know that the mind possesses all dharmas? If one does not know that the mind possesses all dharmas and only directly contemplates the mind, what is the difference from the Tripitaka and Common teachings? Do the Tripitaka and Common teachings not also say to contemplate the mind? Even if one knows that the essence of the mind is the middle way, if one does not say that the mind possesses all dharmas, then there is no difference from the teaching path of the Distinct Teaching. Therefore, the Zhi Guan (Ceasing and Observing) first reveals the six sections of wonderful understanding, and then formally cultivates. The meaning of contemplating the mind is like this. How can it be explained as first cultivating external contemplation until the six senses are purified, and then cultivating internal contemplation? Moreover, this internal contemplation contains the meaning of both the Consciousness-Only contemplation and the Reality contemplation, which scholars can explore for themselves. Question: Why does external contemplation not first explain understanding, but directly cultivate the three contemplations? Answer:
：「據義合有，但是文略。何者？若不先了唯色唯香，如何觀外依正等邪？但為外觀攝機須故、為對內故顯不二故，故且並列。今之文意正明內觀，以十門妙理唯指心法，故諸部中皆云觀心。」
二、是則下，明內外融泯二：
初、互融。三法體性各具三千本來相攝，前雖解了心攝一切，今觀稱性包攝灼然，故是則下，先明內心融于外法。既云互攝，生佛亦然，故十方下，次明若生若佛各自遍融。又此性體非謂一性，蓋三千性也。以佛具三千方攝心生，生具三千方融心佛。心具三千，豈隔生佛？若心無佛性，豈能攝佛？佛無生性，何能攝生？故性體無殊之語有誰不知，一切咸遍之言須思深致。他解唯論融外歸內名不二者，一何局哉！一切咸遍，如何銷之？況餘九門皆歸一邊，全傷大體。
二、誰云下，俱泯。既各融即，不可定分，故稱理觀。誰云有二？然內外等三雙但泛舉相對，今皆融泯。亦可云內色心為己，外色心為他，更用己他揀其內外。
三、此即下，結門所從。十門理一莫不相由，今從依境修觀，內外二境皆色心故。此二妙故，內外不二也。
十不二門指要鈔捲上 大正藏第 46 冊 No. 1928 十不二門指要鈔
十不二門指要鈔卷下
宋四明沙門
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『據義合有，但是文略。』意思是說，從義理上來說是應該有的，但是文字上省略了。為什麼呢？如果不能首先了解『唯色』（一切事物都只是物質現象）和『唯香』（一切事物都只是精神現象），又如何觀察外在的依報（眾生所依賴的生存環境）和正報（眾生的身心）等邪見呢？只是爲了外觀能夠攝受眾生的根機，爲了對治內心的迷惑，爲了彰顯不二的真理，所以才並列出來。現在的文意正是要闡明內觀，用十門微妙的道理只是指向心法，所以各個經典中都說要觀心。
二、『是則下』，說明內外融泯二：
首先，是互融。三法（色、心、空）的體性各自具有三千本來相攝的特性，前面雖然解釋了心能攝一切，現在觀察稱性（符合本性）的包攝是明確的，所以『是則下』，先說明內心融于外法。既然說是互相攝入，那麼眾生和佛也是這樣，所以『十方下』，其次說明無論是眾生還是佛，各自都普遍融合。而且這個性體不是說只有一個性，而是說有三千性。因為佛具有三千性才能攝受眾生的心，眾生具有三千性才能融合佛的心。心具有三千性，怎麼會隔絕眾生和佛呢？如果心沒有佛性，怎麼能攝受佛呢？佛沒有眾生性，又怎麼能攝受眾生呢？所以『性體無殊』（性體沒有差別）這句話有誰不知道呢？『一切咸遍』（一切都普遍存在）這句話需要深入思考。其他的解釋只說融合外在歸於內在叫做不二，這多麼侷限啊！『一切咸遍』，又如何消除呢？況且其餘九門都歸於一邊，完全損害了大體。
其次，『誰云下』，是俱泯。既然各自融合，就不可固定區分，所以稱為理觀。誰說有內外二者呢？然而內外等三雙只是泛泛地舉出相對的概念，現在都融合泯滅了。也可以說內色心為自己，外色心為他人，再用自己和他人來區分內外。
第三，『此即下』，是總結此門所從來的依據。十門道理是一致的，沒有不互相聯繫的，現在是從依境修觀，內外二境都是色心。因為這二者都很微妙，所以內外是不二的。
《十不二門指要鈔捲上》 《大正藏》第 46 冊 No. 1928 《十不二門指要鈔》
《十不二門指要鈔卷下》
宋 四明沙門
【English Translation】 English version: 'According to the meaning, it should exist, but the text is abbreviated.' This means that according to the principle, it should be there, but it is omitted in the text. Why? If one cannot first understand 'only form' (that all things are merely material phenomena) and 'only fragrance' (that all things are merely mental phenomena), how can one observe external dependent retributions (the environment beings rely on for survival) and proper retributions (beings' body and mind) as being heretical? It is only for the sake of the external appearance being able to gather in the faculties of beings, to counteract internal confusion, and to manifest the truth of non-duality, that they are listed together. The current meaning of the text is precisely to elucidate internal contemplation, using the ten subtle principles to point only to the mind-dharma, so all the scriptures say to contemplate the mind.
Two, 'Shi Ze Xia', explains the merging and annihilation of inner and outer two:
First, mutual merging. The substance of the three dharmas (form, mind, emptiness) each possesses three thousand originally interpenetrating characteristics. Although it was previously explained that the mind encompasses everything, now observing the all-encompassing nature that accords with the essence is clear. Therefore, 'Shi Ze Xia', first explains that the inner mind merges into outer dharmas. Since it is said that they mutually encompass, beings and Buddhas are also like this. Therefore, 'Shi Fang Xia', secondly explains that whether it is beings or Buddhas, each universally merges. Moreover, this nature is not said to be a single nature, but rather three thousand natures. Because the Buddha possesses three thousand natures, he can encompass the minds of beings; beings possess three thousand natures, they can merge with the mind of the Buddha. The mind possesses three thousand natures, how can it be separated from beings and Buddhas? If the mind does not have Buddha-nature, how can it encompass the Buddha? If the Buddha does not have the nature of beings, how can he encompass beings? Therefore, who does not know the phrase 'the nature is not different'? The statement 'everything is universally present' requires deep thought. Other interpretations only discuss merging the external into the internal as non-duality, how limited is that! 'Everything is universally present', how can it be eliminated? Moreover, the remaining nine doors all return to one side, completely damaging the overall structure.
Second, 'Shui Yun Xia', is mutual annihilation. Since they each merge, they cannot be fixedly distinguished, so it is called principle contemplation. Who says there are two, inner and outer? However, the three pairs of inner and outer are only general examples of relative concepts, now they are all merged and annihilated. It can also be said that inner form and mind are oneself, outer form and mind are others, and then use oneself and others to distinguish inner and outer.
Third, 'Ci Ji Xia', is the conclusion of the origin of this door. The principles of the ten doors are consistent, and none are unrelated. Now it is from relying on the environment to cultivate contemplation, and both the inner and outer environments are form and mind. Because these two are subtle, inner and outer are non-dual.
《Ten Non-Dual Gates Essential Notes Volume 1》 《Taisho Tripitaka》 Volume 46 No. 1928 《Ten Non-Dual Gates Essential Notes》
《Ten Non-Dual Gates Essential Notes Volume 2》
Shramana of Siming, Song Dynasty
知禮述
三、修性不二門三：
初、標。修謂修治造作，即變造三千，性謂本有不改，即理具三千，今示全性起修則諸行無作，全修在性則一念圓成，是則修外無性、性外無修，互泯互融故稱不二，而就心法妙為門。
二、性德下，釋二：
初、修性雙立三：
初、修性對論二：
初、直明性德。言德者即本具三千，皆常樂我凈故。界如一念，即前內境具德剎那心也。界如既即空假中，任運成於三德三軌等，即空是般若清凈義故，即假是解脫自在義故，即中是法身究竟義故，諸三例之。然諸法皆可論于修性，亦為成觀唯指一念。應知前二門直明依境立觀，此門及因果不二乃委示前二，令成圓行始終也。何者？性德豈出色心不二，修德莫非一心三觀。今示修性互成成妙智行，以此智行從因至果，則位位無作，方名如夢勤加等，即自行始終皆妙也。
二、性雖下，以修對辨二：
初、相成者，性雖具足全體在迷，必藉妙智解了發起圓修，故云性雖本爾藉智起修，由此智行方能徹照性德。而此智行復由性德全體而發，若非性發不能照性，若非徹照性無由顯，故云由修照性、由性發修，此二句正辨相成之相。
二、在性下，明互具者，相成之義雖顯，恐謂修從顯發方
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本
知禮述
三、修性不二門三：
初、標。『修』指的是修治造作，也就是變造三千（指一念三千），『性』指的是本有不改，也就是理具三千（指一切諸法）。現在說明全性起修，那麼一切行為都無作（無造作），全修在性，那麼一念就能圓滿成就。這樣就是修外無性、性外無修，互相泯滅互相融合，所以稱為不二，而就心法來說，這是很微妙的門徑。
二、性德下，釋二：
初、修性雙立三：
初、修性對論二：
初、直明性德。說『德』就是本具的三千，都是常樂我凈的緣故。『界如一念』，就是前面所說的內境具德的剎那心。『界如』既然就是空假中，自然成就三德三軌等，即空是般若清凈的意義，即假是解脫自在的意義，即中是法身究竟的意義，各種三的道理依此類推。然而各種法都可以討論修性，也爲了成就觀想，只指一念。應該知道前面兩個門徑直接說明依據境界建立觀想，這個門徑以及因果不二，是詳細地開示前面兩個門徑，使之成為圓滿的修行始終。為什麼呢？性德難道不是色心不二？修德沒有不是一心三觀的。現在說明修性互相成就，成就妙智行，用這個智行從因到果，那麼位位都是無作，才叫做如夢勤加等，就是自行始終都是妙。
二、性雖下，以修對辨二：
初、相成者，性雖然具足，全體都在迷惑中，必須憑藉妙智瞭解發起圓修，所以說『性雖本爾藉智起修』，由此智行才能徹底照見性德。而這個智行又由性德全體而發，如果不是性發就不能照性，如果不是徹底照見性就沒有辦法顯現，所以說『由修照性、由性發修』，這兩句正是辨別相成的相狀。
二、在性下，明互具者，相成的意義雖然明顯，恐怕認為修從顯發才
【English Translation】 English version
Zhilishu
III. The Three Gates of Non-Duality of Cultivation and Nature:
First, the heading. 'Cultivation' (修) refers to cultivating and creating, that is, transforming the three thousand (referring to a single thought containing the three thousand realms); 'Nature' (性) refers to the inherent and unchanging, that is, the principle of the three thousand (referring to all dharmas). Now, it is shown that when the entire nature arises in cultivation, then all actions are without creation (no fabrication); when the entire cultivation is in nature, then a single thought can be perfectly accomplished. Thus, there is no nature outside of cultivation, and no cultivation outside of nature. They mutually annihilate and fuse, hence called non-dual, and in terms of the mind-dharma, it is a subtle gateway.
Second, 'Nature Virtue' below, explanation in two parts:
First, the dual establishment of cultivation and nature in three parts:
First, the discussion of cultivation and nature in contrast in two parts:
First, directly clarifying the virtue of nature. Saying 'virtue' (德) is the inherent three thousand, all being characterized by permanence, bliss, self, and purity. 'The realm is like a single thought' is the mind of a kshana (instant) with the virtue of the inner realm mentioned earlier. Since 'the realm is like' is emptiness, provisionality, and the middle, it naturally accomplishes the three virtues and three models, etc. That is, emptiness is the meaning of prajna (wisdom) and purity; provisionality is the meaning of liberation and freedom; the middle is the meaning of the ultimate dharmakaya (dharma body). The principles of the various threes are analogous to this. However, all dharmas can be discussed in terms of cultivation and nature, and also for the sake of accomplishing contemplation, it only refers to a single thought. It should be known that the previous two gates directly clarify establishing contemplation based on the realm, this gate and the non-duality of cause and effect are detailed explanations of the previous two, making them a complete and perfect practice from beginning to end. Why? Is the virtue of nature not the non-duality of form and mind? Is the virtue of cultivation not the three contemplations in one mind? Now it is shown that cultivation and nature mutually accomplish each other, accomplishing the wonderful wisdom practice. Using this wisdom practice from cause to effect, then every position is without creation, and it is called 'diligently applying oneself as in a dream', that is, the entire self-practice from beginning to end is wonderful.
Second, 'Although nature' below, using cultivation to distinguish in two parts:
First, those that complement each other: Although nature is complete, the whole is in delusion, it must rely on wonderful wisdom to understand and initiate perfect cultivation, therefore it is said 'although nature is inherently so, it relies on wisdom to initiate cultivation'. By this wisdom practice, one can thoroughly illuminate the virtue of nature. And this wisdom practice is developed entirely from the virtue of nature. If it is not nature that develops it, one cannot illuminate nature; if one does not thoroughly illuminate nature, there is no way to manifest it, therefore it is said 'by cultivation, one illuminates nature; by nature, cultivation develops'. These two sentences precisely distinguish the aspect of complementing each other.
Second, 'In nature' below, clarifying mutual possession: Although the meaning of complementing each other is clear, there is concern that cultivation only
有、性德稍異修成，故今全指修成本來已具。如《止觀》廣辨三千之相，雖是逆順二修，全為顯于性具，則全修成性也。又一一行業因果自他，雖假修成，全是性德三千顯現，故云全性成修也。又雖全性起修，而未嘗少虧性德，以常不改故，故云性無所移。雖全修成性，而未始暫闕修德，以常變造故，故云修常宛爾。然若知修性各論三千，則諸義皆顯，故荊溪云，諸家不明修性，蓋不如此明也。
問：「他云，舊本作藉知曰修，而以本性靈知用釋知字。若云藉智起修者，蓋寫者書曰逼知，後人認作智字，既不成句，又見下句有起修之言，遂輒加起字爾。此復云何？」
答：「既許寫曰逼知，遂成智之一字，何妨往人寫日遠知，誤成知曰二字。必是因脫起字，復由二字相懸，致使有本作藉知曰修也。故知寫字添脫，遠近難可定之，魚魯之訛豈今獨有，須將義定方見是非。何者？他既暗於三法妙義，尚將一念因心陰識，直作真知解之，況今有此訛文知字可執，豈不作靈知解邪？且靈知之名圭峰專用，既非即陰而示，又無修發之相，正是偏指清凈真如，唯于真心及緣理斷九之義也。他云，因真教緣示善惡知，即是真知，乃知諸法唯心，故云藉知曰修。今問：此之知字，為解為行？若隨闕者則不名修。若單立知字
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 有，性德（本性具有的功德）稍有不同於修成，所以現在完全指的是修成本來就具有的。例如《止觀》廣泛地辨析三千種相，雖然是逆修和順修兩種，完全是爲了顯現本性具有的，那麼就是完全修成即是本性。又，每一個行業、因果、自身和他者，雖然假借修成，全部是性德三千的顯現，所以說全性成修。又，雖然全性起修，而未曾稍微虧損性德，因為本性常住不變的緣故，所以說性無所移。雖然全修成性，而未曾暫時缺少修德，因為修德常變造作的緣故，所以說修常宛然。然而如果知道修和性各自論述三千，那麼各種意義都顯現了，所以荊溪大師說，各家不明白修和性，大概就是不如此明白的緣故。 問：『他們說，舊本寫作「藉知曰修」，而用本性靈知來解釋「知」字。如果說是憑藉智慧起修，大概是抄寫的人寫成「逼知」，後人誤認為「智」字，既不成句，又看到下句有「起修」的說法，於是就擅自加上「起」字罷了。這又該怎麼說呢？』 答：『既然允許寫成「逼知」，就成了「智」這一個字，為什麼不能是往人寫成「遠知」，誤成「知曰」二字呢？必定是因為脫落了「起」字，又因為兩個字相隔較遠，導致有的版本寫作「藉知曰修」啊。所以知道抄寫文字的增添和脫落，遠近難以確定，魚魯的錯誤難道只有今天才有嗎？必須用義理來確定才能辨別是非。為什麼呢？他們既然不明白三法（法身、報身、應身）的妙義，還把一念因心陰識，直接當作真知來理解，何況現在有這個訛誤的「知」字可以執著，豈不是要當作靈知來解釋嗎？況且靈知這個名稱是圭峰禪師專門使用的，既不是即陰而示，又沒有修發的相狀，正是偏指清凈真如，只在真心以及緣理斷九的意義上使用。』他們說，『因真教緣示善惡知，就是真知，乃是了知諸法唯心，所以說憑藉知而修。』現在問：這個『知』字，是解還是行？如果缺少隨順，就不叫做修。如果單單立一個『知』字
【English Translation】 English version: There is, the inherent virtue (性德) (virtues inherent in one's nature) differs slightly from that which is cultivated, so now it refers entirely to the cultivation that is originally inherent. For example, the Zhi Guan (止觀) extensively analyzes the three thousand aspects, although it involves both reverse and forward cultivation, it is entirely to reveal what is inherent in one's nature, then the complete cultivation is the inherent nature. Moreover, each and every action, cause and effect, self and others, although borrowed from cultivation, are all manifestations of the three thousand virtues of inherent nature, hence it is said that the entire nature becomes cultivation. Furthermore, although the entire nature gives rise to cultivation, it has never diminished the inherent virtue, because the nature is constant and unchanging, hence it is said that the nature does not move. Although the entire cultivation becomes nature, it has never temporarily lacked the virtue of cultivation, because the virtue of cultivation is constantly changing and creating, hence it is said that cultivation is always clearly present. However, if one knows that cultivation and nature each discuss the three thousand, then all meanings become clear, hence Master Jingxi (荊溪) said that the various schools do not understand cultivation and nature, probably because they do not understand it so clearly. Question: 'They say that the old version wrote 'borrowing knowledge is cultivation' (藉知曰修), and used the spiritual knowledge of inherent nature to explain the word 'knowledge' (知). If it is said that cultivation arises by relying on wisdom, it is probably that the scribe wrote 'forcing knowledge' (逼知), and later people mistakenly thought it was the word 'wisdom' (智), which does not form a sentence, and seeing that the following sentence has the saying 'arising cultivation' (起修), they then arbitrarily added the word 'arising' (起). What is to be said about this?' Answer: 'Since it is allowed to write 'forcing knowledge' (逼知), which becomes the one word 'wisdom' (智), why can't it be that people in the past wrote 'distant knowledge' (遠知), mistakenly becoming the two words 'knowledge says' (知曰)? It must be because the word 'arising' (起) was dropped, and because the two words were far apart, resulting in some versions writing 'borrowing knowledge is cultivation' (藉知曰修). Therefore, it is known that the addition and omission of written words, near and far, are difficult to determine, and the errors of fish and Lu (魚魯之訛) are not unique to today. It is necessary to use the meaning to determine right and wrong. Why? Since they are ignorant of the wonderful meaning of the three bodies (三法) (Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Nirmanakaya), they even directly take the one thought of causal mind and the consciousness of the alaya (陰識), and understand it as true knowledge, let alone now that there is this erroneous word 'knowledge' (知) that can be clung to, wouldn't it be interpreted as spiritual knowledge? Moreover, the name 'spiritual knowledge' (靈知) is exclusively used by Chan Master Guifeng (圭峰), which is neither shown as being identical to the skandhas (陰), nor has the appearance of cultivation arising, it is precisely referring to pure true thusness (真如), and is only used in the meaning of true mind and severing the nine aspects of principle.' They say, 'Because of the true teaching, the conditions show good and evil knowledge, which is true knowledge, that is, knowing that all dharmas are only mind, so it is said that cultivation is based on knowledge.' Now I ask: Is this word 'knowledge' (知) understanding or action? If it lacks compliance, it is not called cultivation. If only the word 'knowledge' (知) is established
解行足者，乃玄文智行二妙，《止觀》妙解正修便為徒設，則天臺但傳《禪詮都序》也。又言示善惡知即真知者，還須先用妙解即之不？次用妙行即之不？若然者，正是藉智起修。若不然者，智行二妙全無用也。今云藉智起修，直是由於智妙起於行妙耳，故后結文云，如境本來具三，依理生解故名為智。智解導行，行解契理，三法相符不異而異。然智行俱修今偏在行者，蓋智從解了發起義強，行就進趣修治義強，故從強也。又此一句，全是《釋簽》行妙中文，彼云藉智起行故。他又云，智名未稱全性成修。若爾，何名智妙？應亦本是知妙，後人改為智妙乎！」
二、修又下，明逆順相返二：
初、明對逆故二性並存。
二、明因順故二心俱泯。初文者，上之全性起修，一往且論順修，脩名既通，有順有逆，今欲雙亡先須對辨。了性為行者，即藉智起修也。背性成迷者，始從無間至別教道，皆背性故。逆稱修者，即修惡之類也。心雖不二等者，隨緣迷了之處，心性不變，故云不二。逆順二性是全體隨緣，故即理之事常分，故曰事殊。是則以前稱圓理修，對今背性，故成二也。二因順故二心俱泯者，可不可也。由，因也。不可因逆順二事同一心性，便令迷逆之事作了順邪！此乃責其不分迷悟也。故正立
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
一、「解行足」指的是玄文（深刻的文字）和智行（智慧的行動）這兩種精妙之處。《止觀》（天臺宗的重要著作）的精妙解釋和正確的修行如果被拋棄，那麼天臺宗就只剩下《禪詮都序》了。又有人說，指出善惡的知識就是真正的知識，那麼是否需要先用精妙的理解來認識它？然後用精妙的行動來實踐它？如果是這樣，這正是藉助智慧來發起修行。如果不是這樣，那麼智慧和行動這兩種精妙之處就完全沒有用處了。現在說藉助智慧來發起修行，直接就是由於智慧的精妙而產生了行動的精妙。所以後面的結論說，就像境界本來就具備三法（法身、般若、解脫），依據真理產生理解，所以叫做智慧。智慧的理解引導行動，行動的理解契合真理，這三種法相互符合，不異而異。然而智慧和行動都要同時修行，現在偏重於行動，是因為智慧是從理解了悟而發起的意義更強，行動是就進取修行和修正的意義更強，所以偏重於行動。而且這句話，完全是《釋簽》（《摩訶止觀釋簽》）中關於行動精妙之處的文字，其中說藉助智慧來發起行動。他又說，智慧的名稱還不能完全體現本性的成就和修行。如果是這樣，為什麼叫做智慧的精妙？應該本來是知識的精妙，後來人改成了智慧的精妙吧！ 二、『修又下』，說明逆順相返的兩種情況： 首先，說明因為對立的緣故，兩種本性並存。 其次，說明因為順應的緣故，兩種心念都泯滅。第一段文字，上面所說的『全性起修』，一般只是論述順修，修行的名稱既然通用，就有順修和逆修，現在想要同時消除這兩種情況，首先需要對比辨別。『了性為行者』，就是藉助智慧來發起修行。『背性成迷者』，從無間地獄到別教的道，都是背離本性的緣故。逆修被稱為修行，就是修行惡業之類。『心雖不二等者』，隨著因緣迷失或了悟的地方，心性不變，所以說不二。逆順兩種本性是全體隨緣，所以就是理體的事相常常有分別，所以說事相不同。這樣，以前面所說的圓理修，對照現在背離本性，所以形成了兩種情況。第二段，因為順應的緣故，兩種心念都泯滅，就是可與不可。『由』，是『因』的意思。不可因為逆順兩種事物的同一心性，就讓迷惑顛倒的事情變成理解順應的事情啊！這乃是責備其不區分迷惑和覺悟。所以要正確地樹立。
【English Translation】 English version:
- 'Perfect in Understanding and Practice' refers to the two subtleties of profound texts (Xuán Wén) (deep writings) and wisdom-based actions (Zhì Xíng) (wise actions). If the subtle explanations and correct practice of 'Zhǐ Guān' (Cessation and Contemplation) (an important work of the Tiantai school) are abandoned, then the Tiantai school will only have the 'Preface to the Complete Explanation of Chan' (Chán Quán Dōu Xù). Furthermore, someone says that knowing good and evil is true knowledge, then is it necessary to first use subtle understanding to recognize it? And then use subtle action to practice it? If so, this is precisely using wisdom to initiate practice. If not, then the two subtleties of wisdom and action are completely useless. Now, saying that using wisdom to initiate practice is directly due to the subtlety of wisdom giving rise to the subtlety of action. Therefore, the conclusion later says, just as the realm originally possesses the three dharmas (Fǎ Shēn, Bō Rě, Jiě Tuō) (Dharmakaya, Prajna, Liberation), understanding arises based on the principle, so it is called wisdom. The understanding of wisdom guides action, and the understanding of action conforms to the principle. These three dharmas correspond to each other, not different and yet different. However, both wisdom and action should be cultivated simultaneously, but now there is a preference for action, because the meaning of wisdom arising from understanding is stronger, and the meaning of action is stronger in terms of advancing in practice and correction, so it is biased towards action. Moreover, this sentence is entirely from the text on the subtlety of action in 'Shì Qiān' (Annotations on the Great Concentration and Insight), which says that action is initiated by wisdom. He also said that the name of wisdom cannot fully reflect the accomplishment and practice of the entire nature. If so, why is it called the subtlety of wisdom? It should originally be the subtlety of knowledge, and later people changed it to the subtlety of wisdom!
- 'Xiū Yòu Xià' (The following on practice), explains the two situations of reverse and forward correspondence: First, it explains that because of opposition, the two natures coexist. Second, it explains that because of compliance, the two minds are both extinguished. The first paragraph, the 'whole nature arising practice' mentioned above, generally only discusses compliant practice. Since the name of practice is common, there are compliant and reverse practices. Now, if you want to eliminate these two situations at the same time, you must first compare and distinguish them. 'Liǎo Xìng Wéi Xíng Zhě' (Understanding nature as practice), is to use wisdom to initiate practice. 'Bèi Xìng Chéng Mí Zhě' (Turning away from nature and becoming deluded), from Avici Hell to the path of the Separate Teaching, are all turning away from nature. Reverse practice is called practice, which is the practice of evil deeds. 'Xīn Suī Bù Èr Děng Zhě' (Although the mind is not two), with the places where conditions are confused or understood, the nature of the mind does not change, so it is said to be non-dual. The two natures of reverse and compliant are the whole being in accordance with conditions, so the phenomena of the principle are often different, so it is said that the phenomena are different. In this way, comparing the previously mentioned perfect principle practice with the current turning away from nature, two situations are formed. The second paragraph, because of compliance, the two minds are both extinguished, which is possible and impossible. 'Yóu' (By), means 'because'. It is impossible to make the confused and inverted things become understood and compliant because of the same mind-nature of the two things of reverse and compliant! This is to blame them for not distinguishing between confusion and enlightenment. Therefore, it is necessary to establish correctly.
理云，故須一期迷了照性成修。言一期者，即與一往之語同類，乃非終畢之義也。蓋言雖據寂理二修終泯，且須一期改迷爲了，了心若發必照性成修，若見性修心自然二心俱泯，此義顯然如指諸掌，人何惑焉？豈非逆修如病、順修如藥，雖知藥病終須兩亡，一往且須服藥治病，藥力若效其身必康，身若安康藥病俱泯。法諭如此，智者思之。
問：「他云，舊本作此其字，釋意云，豈可由不移生死涅槃常殊之性事，便任此爲了修乎？是故下句便云，故須一其迷了照性成修。此復云何？」
答：「他雖執于舊本，而違現文。何者？文云，可由事不移心則令迷修成了。文意唯責執迷爲了，何曾雙責迷了爲了邪？豈非彰灼違文乎！故知迷了雙泯功由了修。何者？迷既背性，故立了修翻之，遂一期事殊也。了既順理，理無違順，故二心自泯也。是知用此期字者，既不違文兼得順理。若用此其字，相違稍多，不能廣破也。」
三、又了下，明離合本同二：
初、約法明離合相異者。復置逆修，但論順修法相離合。蓋此修性在諸經論不易條流，若得此離合意，則不迷修性多少。如《金光明玄義》十種三法，乃是採取經論修性法相，故具離合兩說。如三德三寶，雖是修德之極，義必該性；三身三智，文雖約悟
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：理上說，所以必須經歷一個階段，從迷惑的照性轉變為修行。說『一個階段』，與『暫且』的說法類似，並非最終結束的意思。這是說，雖然從寂靜的道理上講，修行最終會泯滅，但必須經歷一個階段，轉變迷惑為覺悟，覺悟之心一旦生起，必然會照亮本性併成就修行。如果明見本性，修心自然會使二心都泯滅，這個道理顯而易見，就像指著手掌一樣，人們為何還會疑惑呢？這難道不是逆修像生病，順修像服藥嗎？雖然知道藥和病最終都要消除，但暫且必須服藥治病，藥力如果有效，身體必然康復，身體如果安康，藥和病都會消失。這個譬喻就是這樣，智者應該思考。
問：『他們說，舊版本寫作『此其』二字，解釋說，難道可以因為不改變生死涅槃常殊的本性，就任由此（不移的本性）來成就覺悟和修行嗎？所以下一句就說，所以必須經歷一個階段，從迷惑的照性轉變為修行。』這又該如何解釋呢？』
答：『他們雖然執著于舊版本，卻違背了現在的經文。為什麼呢？經文說，可以因為事情不改變，心就迷惑，從而使修行得以成就。經文的意思只是責備執著于迷惑來成就覺悟，何曾同時責備迷惑和覺悟來成就覺悟呢？這難道不是明顯違背經文嗎！所以知道迷惑和覺悟都泯滅，功勞在於覺悟和修行。為什麼呢？因為迷惑背離本性，所以設立覺悟和修行來扭轉它，從而使事情在一個階段內有所不同。覺悟順應道理，道理沒有違背和順從，所以二心自然泯滅。由此可知，使用『一個階段』這個詞，既不違背經文，又能順應道理。如果使用『此其』二字，相互違背的地方稍多，不能廣泛地破除謬論。』
三、又在『了』字下，闡明離合的根本相同：
首先，從法理上闡明離合的差異。再次設定逆修，只討論順修的法相離合。因為這種修性在各種經論中不容易條分縷析，如果懂得這種離合的意義，就不會迷惑于修性的多少。例如《金光明玄義》中的十種三法，就是採取經論中修性的法相，所以具備離合兩種說法。例如三德（sāmaṇaguṇa，三種功德）三寶（triratna，佛法僧），雖然是修德的極致，但意義必然包含本性；三身（trikāya，法身、報身、應身）三智（trijñāna，三種智慧），經文雖然是關於覺悟的
【English Translation】 English version: In terms of principle, therefore, it is necessary to go through a period of transforming the deluded illuminating nature into cultivation. Saying 'a period' is similar to saying 'for the time being,' it does not mean a final end. This means that although from the perspective of the stillness of principle, cultivation will eventually be extinguished, it is necessary to go through a period of transforming delusion into awakening. Once the awakened mind arises, it will inevitably illuminate the inherent nature and accomplish cultivation. If one clearly sees the inherent nature, cultivating the mind will naturally cause both minds to be extinguished. This principle is as clear as pointing to the palm of one's hand, so why are people still confused? Isn't it that reverse cultivation is like illness, and forward cultivation is like medicine? Although it is known that both medicine and illness must eventually be eliminated, one must temporarily take medicine to treat the illness. If the medicine is effective, the body will surely recover. If the body is healthy, both medicine and illness will disappear. This is the analogy, and the wise should contemplate it.
Question: 'They say that the old version writes '此其' (cǐ qí), and explains it as, 'How can one rely on this unchanging nature of birth, death, Nirvana, and constant difference to accomplish awakening and cultivation?' Therefore, the next sentence says, 'Therefore, it is necessary to go through a period of transforming the deluded illuminating nature into cultivation.' How should this be explained?'
Answer: 'Although they cling to the old version, they contradict the current text. Why? The text says, 'One can, because things do not change, have the mind deluded, thereby enabling cultivation to be accomplished.' The meaning of the text only blames clinging to delusion to accomplish awakening. How could it simultaneously blame delusion and awakening to accomplish awakening? Isn't this a clear contradiction of the text! Therefore, it is known that both delusion and awakening are extinguished, and the merit lies in awakening and cultivation. Why? Because delusion deviates from the inherent nature, awakening and cultivation are established to reverse it, thereby making things different within a period. Awakening accords with principle, and principle has no deviation or accordance, so the two minds naturally extinguish themselves. From this, it can be known that using the term 'a period' not only does not contradict the text but also accords with principle. If the term '此其' (cǐ qí) is used, there are slightly more contradictions, and it cannot widely refute fallacies.'
Three, further, under the word '了' (liǎo, awakening), clarify the fundamental sameness of separation and union:
First, clarify the differences in separation and union from the perspective of Dharma. Again, set aside reverse cultivation and only discuss the separation and union of the characteristics of forward cultivation. Because this cultivation of nature is not easily categorized in various sutras and treatises, if one understands the meaning of this separation and union, one will not be confused about the amount of cultivation of nature. For example, the ten types of three dharmas in the Golden Light Sutra Profound Meaning are taken from the characteristics of cultivation of nature in sutras and treatises, so they have both separation and union explanations. For example, the three virtues (sāmaṇaguṇa, three merits), the three jewels (triratna, Buddha, Dharma, Sangha), although they are the ultimate of cultivating virtue, their meaning must include the inherent nature; the three bodies (trikāya, Dharmakāya, Sambhogakāya, Nirmāṇakāya), the three wisdoms (trijñāna, three wisdoms), although the text is about enlightenment
，理必通迷；三識三道，既指事即理，必全性起修。此六豈非修性各三。三因既以一性對智行二修，三菩提、三大乘、三涅槃，並以一性對證理起用二修，此四豈非修二性一。若各三者唯屬於圓，以各相主對全性起修，故修二性一則兼于別。直以修二顯于性一，則教道所詮，若知合九為三，復是圓義。此文多用各三，如雲性指三障，是故具三，修從性成，成三法爾。又云，一念心因既具三軌，此因成果名三涅槃。若后結文三法相符，雖似修二性一，乃合九為三也。修二各三等者，就合各開。如三般若等，是了因之三；如三菩提等，是緣因之三；共發三道等，正因之三。既發性三俱云修九者，雖兼性三，咸為所發，故皆屬修。又凡論修者必須兼性。九隻是三者，如三般若只是了因，如三解脫只是緣因，如三道等只是正因。為對等者，釋前合意。性既唯立正因，為對性以成三，故修但緣了也。諸合三義，例皆如是。
問：「十種三法俱通修性，各可對三德三因。何故三般若等唯對了因，三菩提等獨對緣因？」
答：「如此對之方為圓說。單云了因不少，以具三故，了三自具三因三德等，故緣正亦然。應知一德不少、三九不多，至於不可說法門，豈逾於一邪？」
二、二與下，約諭明修性體同者。雖明修
【現代漢語翻譯】 理若不通達，必然會陷入迷惑；三識（三種意識）、三道（三種道），既然是指事即理，必然是全體本性發起修行。這六者難道不是修行與本性各有三種？三因（三種因）既然用一個本性來對應智慧和行為兩種修行，三菩提（三種菩提）、三大乘（三種大乘）、三涅槃（三種涅槃），都是用一個本性來對應證悟真理和起用兩種修行，這四者難道不是修行兩種本性為一？如果各自有三種，就只屬於圓融之說，因為各自為主對應全體本性發起修行，所以修行兩種本性為一就兼顧了差別。直接用修行兩種來彰顯本性為一，那麼教義所詮釋的，如果知道將九合為三，又是圓融之義。這段文字多用各自三種，比如說到本性指代三種障礙，所以具備三種，修行從本性成就，成就三種是自然而然的。又說，一念心因既然具備三種法則，此因成果名為三種涅槃。如果後面的結論是三種法則相互符合，雖然像是修行兩種本性為一，實際上是將九合為三。修行兩種各自三種等，是就合而言各自展開。比如三般若（三種般若）等，是了因（證了之因）的三種；比如三菩提等，是緣因（助緣之因）的三種；共同發起三種道等，是正因（正本之因）的三種。既然發起本性的三種都說是修行九種，雖然兼顧本性的三種，都作為所發起的，所以都屬於修行。而且凡是論述修行，必須兼顧本性。九種只是三種，比如三般若只是了因，比如三解脫只是緣因，比如三種道等只是正因。爲了對應等同，解釋前面合的意思。本性既然隻立正因，爲了對應本性以成就三種，所以修行只緣了因。各種合為三種的意義，都可以此類推。 問：『十種三法都貫通修行與本性，各自可以對應三德（三種功德）、三因。為什麼三般若等只對了因，三菩提等單獨對應緣因？』 答：『如此對應才是圓融的說法。單說爲了因不少，因為具備三種，了因的三種自然具備三因三種功德等，所以緣因正因也是這樣。應該知道一種功德不少、三種九種不多，至於不可說的法門，難道會超過一個邪見嗎？』 二、二與下，用比喻來說明修行與本性本體相同。雖然說明修行
【English Translation】 Modern Chinese version If the principle is not understood, one will surely fall into confusion; the three consciousnesses (三識), the three paths (三道), since they refer to phenomena that are identical to principle, must be the entire nature initiating cultivation. Are these six not three each for cultivation and nature? Since the three causes (三因) use one nature to correspond to the two cultivations of wisdom and action, the three Bodhis (三菩提), the three Great Vehicles (三大乘), the three Nirvanas (三涅槃), all use one nature to correspond to the two cultivations of realizing principle and initiating function. Are these four not cultivating two natures as one? If each has three, it only belongs to the doctrine of perfect fusion, because each is the master corresponding to the entire nature initiating cultivation, so cultivating two natures as one also takes into account the differences. Directly using the cultivation of two to manifest the oneness of nature, then what the teachings explain, if one knows to combine nine into three, is again the meaning of perfect fusion. This passage often uses each three, such as saying that nature refers to the three obstacles, so it possesses three, cultivation is accomplished from nature, and accomplishing three is natural. It also says that since the cause of a single thought possesses three rules, the result of this cause is named the three Nirvanas. If the later conclusion is that the three laws correspond to each other, although it seems like cultivating two natures as one, it is actually combining nine into three. Cultivating two each with three, etc., is unfolding each from the combination. For example, the three Prajnas (三般若), etc., are the three of the condition of understanding (了因); for example, the three Bodhis, etc., are the three of the condition of relationship (緣因); jointly initiating the three paths, etc., are the three of the direct cause (正因). Since initiating the three of nature all say cultivating nine, although taking into account the three of nature, they are all as what is initiated, so they all belong to cultivation. Moreover, whenever discussing cultivation, one must take into account nature. Nine is only three, such as the three Prajnas are only the condition of understanding, such as the three liberations are only the condition of relationship, such as the three paths, etc., are only the direct cause. In order to correspond equally, explaining the meaning of the previous combination. Since nature only establishes the direct cause, in order to correspond to nature to accomplish three, so cultivation only relates to the condition of understanding. All meanings of combining into three can be inferred in this way. Question: 'The ten kinds of three laws all penetrate cultivation and nature, and each can correspond to the three virtues (三德) and the three causes. Why do the three Prajnas, etc., only correspond to the condition of understanding, and the three Bodhis, etc., correspond solely to the condition of relationship?' Answer: 'Such correspondence is the perfect and harmonious explanation. Simply saying the condition of understanding is not little, because it possesses three, the three of the condition of understanding naturally possess the three causes and the three virtues, etc., so the condition of relationship and the direct cause are also like this. One should know that one virtue is not little, three nines are not many, as for the indescribable Dharma gate, how could it exceed one wrong view?' Two, two and below, use metaphors to illustrate that the substance of cultivation and nature are the same. Although explaining cultivation
性及智行等別，皆不二而二，故約波水橫豎諭之，仍約閤中三法而說，開豈不然？初明修二如波、性一如水，二而不二波水可知。修性既然，修中二法，亦二而不二，同乎波水。
問：「修二性一已同波水，修尚即性，豈修中二法更須約諭融之耶？」
答：「如身兩臂雖與身連，臂自未合，為防此計，故云亦如波水。有本云，亦無波水者，既不成諭，此定訛也。」
二、應知下，修性俱亡正示不二。性指三障等者，既全理成事，乃即障名理，是故立性為三。性既非三立三，修性從成亦非三立三，豈唯各定無三，抑亦修性體即，如是了達即不動而運，游於四方直至道場，名一妙乘也。
問：「性三本具，那言對障名三？」
答：「本具妙理若定是三，不能作一及無量故，故知立則一多宛然，亡則修性寂矣。今就亡說，豈得將立以難之！」
三、結門。從前可解。
四、因果不二門三：
初、標。因果名通，今就開顯唯約圓論。因從博地至等覺還，果唯妙覺，雖通傳立，約極義強。三千實相未顯名因，顯則名果，隱顯雖殊始終常即，故名不二。門義如前。
二、眾生下，釋三：
初、就圓理明因果暫存三：
初、明始終理一。眾生一往通於因果，佛
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 性和智行等差別，都是不二而二的，所以用波和水的橫向和縱向來比喻它，仍然結合閤中三法來說明，展開難道不是這樣嗎？首先說明修是二，就像波，性是一，就像水，二而不二，波和水是可以理解的。修和性既然如此，修中的二法，也是二而不二，和波水相同。 問：『修二性一已經和波水相同，修尚且就是性，難道修中的二法更需要用比喻來融合它嗎？』 答：『就像身體的兩臂雖然和身體相連，手臂自身還沒有合一，爲了防止這種想法，所以說也像波和水。有的版本說，也沒有波和水，既然不能成為比喻，這一定是訛誤。』 二、應知下，修和性都消亡，正是顯示不二。性指三障等，既然完全依理成事，就是依著障礙而名為理，所以立性為三。性既然不是三而立為三，修和性從成就來說也不是三而立為三，豈止是各自確定沒有三，而且修和性的本體就是一，像這樣了達就是不動而動，游於四方直至道場，名為一妙乘。 問：『性三本來就具備，為什麼說針對障礙而名為三？』 答：『本來具備的妙理如果確定是三，就不能作為一以及無量，所以知道立則一和多宛然存在，消亡則修和性寂然不動。現在就消亡來說，怎麼能用立來詰難呢！』 三、總結部分。從前面可以理解。 四、因果不二門三： 初、標明。因和果名稱通用，現在就開顯來說，只針對圓教來論述。因從凡夫地到等覺位，果只有妙覺，雖然普遍地傳立，但就極義來說是強調果。三千實相沒有顯現時名為因，顯現時名為果，隱和顯雖然不同，但始終常即，所以名不二。門的含義和前面一樣。 二、眾生下，解釋三： 初、就圓理說明因果暫時存在三： 初、說明始終的理是一。眾生一般貫通因和果，佛（Buddha)
【English Translation】 English version Differences in nature, wisdom, and conduct are both non-dual and dual. Therefore, they are illustrated by the horizontal and vertical aspects of waves and water, and explained in relation to the three dharmas of 'union'. Isn't this unfolding clear? First, it is clarified that cultivation (修) is dual, like waves, while nature (性) is one, like water. The duality and non-duality of waves and water are understandable. Since cultivation and nature are like this, the two dharmas within cultivation are also dual and non-dual, similar to waves and water. Question: 'If the duality of cultivation and the oneness of nature are already like waves and water, and cultivation is identical to nature, is it necessary to further illustrate and integrate the two dharmas within cultivation with a metaphor?' Answer: 'Just as the two arms of the body are connected to the body, the arms themselves are not yet unified. To prevent this notion, it is said that they are also like waves and water. Some versions say that there are no waves and water, which is not a valid metaphor and must be an error.' Second, 'It should be known' below, the extinction of both cultivation and nature directly reveals non-duality. 'Nature' refers to the three obstacles (三障) and so on. Since it is entirely based on principle to accomplish phenomena, it is based on obstacles to name principle. Therefore, nature is established as three. Since nature is not three but established as three, cultivation and nature, from the perspective of accomplishment, are also not three but established as three. It is not only that each is determined to be without three, but also that the essence of cultivation and nature is identical. Understanding this is moving without moving, wandering in all directions until reaching the bodhimanda (道場), called the One Wonderful Vehicle (一妙乘).' Question: 'The three natures are originally inherent, why say that they are named three in relation to obstacles?' Answer: 'If the wonderful principle that is originally inherent is determined to be three, it cannot function as one or as immeasurable. Therefore, know that when established, one and many are clearly present, and when extinguished, cultivation and nature are still and unmoving. Now, speaking from the perspective of extinction, how can one use establishment to challenge it!' Third, the concluding section. It can be understood from the previous sections. Fourth, the gate of non-duality of cause and effect, in three parts: First, the heading. The names of cause and effect are commonly used, but now, in terms of manifestation, it is only discussed in relation to the perfect teaching (圓教). Cause extends from the ordinary ground to the stage of equal enlightenment (等覺), while effect is only wonderful enlightenment (妙覺). Although it is universally transmitted and established, it is emphasized in terms of ultimate meaning. When the three thousand aspects of reality (三千實相) are not manifest, it is called cause; when manifest, it is called effect. Although hidden and manifest are different, they are always identical from beginning to end, hence the name non-dual. The meaning of 'gate' is as before. Second, 'Sentient beings' below, explaining the three: First, explaining that cause and effect temporarily exist in three aspects based on perfect principle: First, explaining that the principle of beginning and end is one. Sentient beings (眾生) generally encompass cause and effect, Buddha
名無上眾生故，二往則局，因對佛立生故。生雖在因復通一切，唯取心因是今觀體，體具三軌是果之性，故名為因。此性若顯名三涅槃，三法體常始終理一。
二、若爾下，悟迷事異二：
初、問意者，求證果位為成功德，因德既具何須求果？
二、但由下，答意者，因德雖具但為在迷，諸法本融執之為實，始從無間終至金剛皆有此念，若不謂實，鐵床非苦、變易非遷。此念若盡，即名妙覺，故云各自謂實。若了所迷之性有何佛果別生，還證因德，故云住因，而因德顯處自受果名，故約迷悟而分事殊。
三、只緣下，明事極理亡。理顯等者，對隱名因、稱顯為果，顯已無對，果名豈存？果能稱實，名尚不存。因既屬權，故宜雙廢。又對因果事立理融之，所對既泯、能融自亡。
二、只由下，依圓解明修證無得二：初、約法明惑智之體本虛。言亡智者，即上事理頓亡之智方能圓斷，故云只由。圓人始終用絕待智頓亡諸法，理果尚亡，惑何次第？只由此智功力微著故成疏親，由疏親故惑落前後名迷厚薄。智疏惑厚，智親惑薄，傳傳明之，此乃約智分惑也。既有厚薄之義，故強分三惑，又義開六即，名其亡智淺深。若論亡智了于即理，無一德可修、無一惑可破，強名厚薄淺深也。
二
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為名為無上眾生，所以二往則侷限，因為面對佛而立生。生雖然在因中，卻又貫通一切，只取心因作為現在的觀照本體，本體具備三軌是果的性質，所以名為因。此性如果顯現，就名為三涅槃（三種涅槃：自性清凈涅槃、有餘依涅槃、無餘依涅槃），三法（法身、報身、應身）的本體恒常，始終道理一致。
二、『若爾』下，悟迷事異二：
初、問意是，求證果位是爲了成就功德，因德既然具備，何須求果？
二、『但由』下，答意是，因德雖然具備，但因為還在迷惑之中，諸法本來是融合的，卻執著認為是真實的，從無間地獄到金剛位都有此念。如果不認為是真實的，鐵床就不是苦，變易生死就不是遷流。此念如果斷盡，就名為妙覺，所以說各自認為真實。如果了知所迷惑的自性，哪裡還有什麼佛果另外產生，還是證得因德，所以說安住于因，而因德顯現之處自然承受果名，所以從迷惑和覺悟來區分事相的差別。
三、『只緣』下，說明事極理亡。理顯等，對隱沒的稱為因，稱顯現的為果，顯現之後沒有對立，果的名號哪裡還存在？果能稱合實相，名號尚且不存。因既然屬於權巧方便，所以應該一起廢除。又因果是相對事相而立，理體是融合的，所對立的既然泯滅，能融合的自然消亡。
二、『只由』下，依據圓融的理解說明修證無所得二：初、約法說明惑智的本體本來是虛妄的。『言亡智』，就是上面所說的，事理都頓然消亡的智慧，才能圓滿斷除，所以說『只由』。圓教的人始終用絕待的智慧頓然消亡諸法，理和果尚且消亡，迷惑哪裡還有次第可言？只由此智慧的功力稍微有執著，所以形成疏遠和親近，由於疏遠和親近，所以迷惑落在前後，名為迷的厚薄。智慧疏遠則迷惑厚重，智慧親近則迷惑輕薄，層層說明，這是從智慧來區分迷惑。既然有厚薄的意義，所以勉強分出三惑（見思惑、塵沙惑、無明惑），又義理開出六即（理即佛、名字即佛、觀行即佛、相似即佛、分證即佛、究竟即佛），名為亡智的淺深。如果論亡智，了達于即理，沒有一德可以修，沒有一惑可以破，勉強名為厚薄淺深。
二
【English Translation】 English version: Because it is named the unsurpassed sentient being, the two goings are limited, because it stands and arises facing the Buddha. Although arising is in the cause, it pervades everything. Only the mind-cause is taken as the present object of contemplation. The substance possessing the three models is the nature of the fruit, hence it is called the cause. If this nature manifests, it is called the three Nirvanas (three kinds of Nirvana: self-nature pure Nirvana, Nirvana with remainder, Nirvana without remainder). The substance of the three Dharmas (Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Nirmanakaya) is constant, and the principle is the same from beginning to end.
- 『If so』 below, the difference between enlightenment and delusion is two:
First, the intention of the question is: seeking to attain the fruit position is to achieve merits. Since the merits of the cause are already complete, why seek the fruit?
Second, 『But because of』 below, the intention of the answer is: although the merits of the cause are complete, they are still in delusion. All dharmas are originally integrated, but they are clung to as real. From Avici Hell to the Vajra position, all have this thought. If it is not considered real, the iron bed is not suffering, and variable life and death are not transient. If this thought is exhausted, it is called Wonderful Enlightenment, hence it is said that each considers it real. If one understands the nature of what is deluded, what Buddha-fruit is produced separately? One still attains the merits of the cause, hence it is said to abide in the cause, and the place where the merits of the cause manifest naturally receives the name of the fruit. Therefore, the difference in phenomena is distinguished from delusion and enlightenment.
Third, 『Only because of』 below, it explains that phenomena reach the extreme and principle vanishes. 『Principle manifests』 etc., what is hidden is called the cause, and what is manifested is called the fruit. After manifestation, there is no opposition, so where does the name of the fruit exist? The fruit can match reality, and even the name does not exist. Since the cause belongs to expedient means, it should be abandoned together. Moreover, cause and effect are established relative to phenomena, and the principle is integrated. Since what is opposed is extinguished, what can be integrated naturally vanishes.
- 『Only because of』 below, based on the perfect understanding, it explains that cultivation and realization are without attainment: First, it explains according to the Dharma that the substance of delusion and wisdom is originally illusory. 『The wisdom of the extinction of words』 is what is said above, that the wisdom of the sudden extinction of phenomena in phenomena and principle can perfectly cut off, hence it is said 『only because of』. People of the perfect teaching always use the wisdom of absolute opposition to suddenly extinguish all dharmas. Since principle and fruit are extinguished, where is there any order to delusion? Only because of the power of this wisdom being slightly attached, it forms distance and closeness. Because of distance and closeness, delusion falls before and after, and is named the thickness and thinness of delusion. Wisdom is distant and delusion is thick, wisdom is close and delusion is thin, explaining it layer by layer. This is distinguishing delusion from wisdom. Since there is the meaning of thickness and thinness, the three delusions (delusions of views and thoughts, delusions like dust and sand, ignorance) are reluctantly divided, and the principle opens up the six identities (principle identity Buddha, name identity Buddha, contemplation and practice identity Buddha, similar identity Buddha, partial realization identity Buddha, ultimate identity Buddha), named the shallowness and depth of the extinction of wisdom. If one discusses the extinction of wisdom, understanding the identity of principle, there is not a single virtue that can be cultivated, and not a single delusion that can be broken, reluctantly named thickness, thinness, shallowness, and depth.
2.
、故如下，約諭明修證之功不立二：
初、明修證功亡。他云，夢空幻像四皆是諭，以對智斷因果。釋意雖即不顯，對法稍似相當。又云，空下須作此名，其義甚便。蓋言惑體如空但有名字，故大乘十諭第四云，虛空者，空但有名而無真實等。作此冥字，義說雖眾，終恐未親。今只圖顯理，豈敢黨情。如予意者，舊文諸字若稍有理即便遵行，必諸聖眼洞見我心。儻智短言疏未能稱理，請諸匠碩示以彈訶。然舉此四諭者，蓋顯圓人妙解，眾德元具萬惑本空，雖立證修一一無作，故勤修慧行如夢作，為都無所辨。惑但有名，如空無實，知無即絕。復約智斷始終以明因果，因無能感故如幻，果非所克故如像，解既稱實，四皆無作。因果既爾，何有二邪？
二、空像下，明德障體異。空惑像果，不實之義雖同，而空但有名，知無永絕，像雖無性，色相宛然，故云空虛像實也。像實等者，釋成體異。果德三千非今方得，故論非果。然稱本而證，不可泯亡，故云稱理本有。迷即無明，無明轉故即變為明，迷名永失轉成性明，故云迷轉成性。他云，須作性成，若云成性則令果成因也。若爾，後文云，了今無明為法性，豈亦果為因邪？
三、是則下，約圓乘明始終不二二：
初、翻覆對揚明體一。可解。
二、所以下，高廣無減明不二。大乘因果皆是實相，三千皆實相相宛然，實相在理為染作因，縱具佛法以未顯故同名無明。三千離障、八倒不生，一一法門皆成四德，故咸常樂。三千實相皆不變性，迷悟理一，如演若多失頭得頭，頭未嘗異，故云無明即明。三千世間一一常住，理具三千俱名為體，變造三千俱名為用，故云俱體俱用。此四句中，初二明因果各具三千，三明因果三千隻一三千，以無改故，四明因果三千之體俱能起用，則因中三千起于染用，果上三千起于凈用，此第四句明圓最顯。何者？夫體用之名本相即之義，故凡言諸法即理者，全用即體方可言即。《輔行》云，即者，《廣雅》云合也。若依此釋，仍似二物相合，其理猶疏。今以義求，體不二故，故名為即(上皆《輔行》文也)。今謂全體之用方名不二。他宗明一理隨緣作差別法，差別是無明之相，淳一是真如之相，隨緣時則有差別，不隨緣時則無差別，故知一性與無明合方有差別，正是合義，非體不二，以除無明無差別故。今家明三千之體隨緣起三千之用，不隨緣時三千宛爾，故差別法與體不二，以除無明有差別故。驗他宗明即，即義不成，以彼佛果唯一真如，須破九界差別歸佛界一性故。今家以即離分于圓別，不易研詳，應知不談理具、單說真
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 二、所以下文說，（實相）在高、廣方面都沒有減少，光明不二。（這表明）大乘的因果都是實相，三千世界皆是實相，其相貌宛然。（然而，）實相在理上作為染污的因，即使具備佛法，因為沒有顯現的緣故，同樣被稱為無明（avidyā）。三千世界遠離了障礙，八倒（asta viparyāsas）不生，每一個法門都成就四德（catvāri guna），所以都恒常快樂。三千實相都具有不變的本性，迷惑和覺悟在理上是一致的，就像演若達多（Yajñadatta，一個寓言人物）丟失了頭又找回了頭，頭從來沒有改變過，所以說無明就是明。三千世間一一常住，理體上具備三千，都稱為體（svabhāva），變現造作三千，都稱為用（karma），所以說俱體俱用。這四句話中，前兩句說明因果各自具備三千，第三句說明因果的三千隻是一個三千，因為沒有改變的緣故，第四句說明因果的三千之體都能起作用，那麼因中的三千就產生染污的作用，果上的三千就產生清凈的作用，這第四句說明圓教最為明顯。為什麼呢？體和用這兩個名稱，本來就是相即的含義，所以凡是說諸法即理的，必須是全用即體，才可以稱為即。《輔行記》（《法華經玄義釋簽》的別名）中說，即，《廣雅》中解釋為合。如果按照這種解釋，仍然像是兩個東西相合，這個道理就顯得疏遠了。現在用義理來探求，體是不二的，所以稱為即（以上都是《輔行記》中的文字）。現在說全體的作用才稱為不二。其他宗派說明一理隨緣而產生差別的法，差別是無明之相，淳一（純一）是真如（tathatā）之相，隨緣時則有差別，不隨緣時則沒有差別，所以知道一性與無明結合才有差別，這正是合義，不是體不二，因為去除無明就沒有差別了。現在天臺宗（Tiāntāi）說明三千之體隨緣而起三千之用，不隨緣時三千宛然存在，所以差別法與體不二，因為去除無明才有差別。驗證其他宗派所說的即，即的含義不能成立，因為他們的佛果只有唯一的真如，必須破除九界的差別，歸於佛界的一性。天臺宗所說的即，將即與離分別開來，在圓教和別教中不容易詳細研究，應該知道不談理具，只說真如。
【English Translation】 English version 2. Therefore, the following text says that (Reality) is undiminished in height and breadth, and its light is non-dual. (This indicates that) the causes and effects of Mahāyāna are all true reality, and the three thousand worlds are all true reality, with their appearances clearly discernible. (However,) when true reality is the cause of defilement in principle, even if one possesses the Buddha-dharma, it is still called ignorance (avidyā) because it is not manifest. When the three thousand worlds are free from obstacles and the eight inversions (asta viparyāsas) do not arise, each and every Dharma gate achieves the four virtues (catvāri guna), so they are all eternally joyful. The three thousand aspects of reality all possess an unchanging nature. Delusion and enlightenment are one in principle, just like Yajñadatta (an allegorical figure) who lost his head and then found it again; the head was never different. Therefore, it is said that ignorance is enlightenment. The three thousand realms of existence are each eternally abiding. The principle inherently possesses the three thousand, all of which are called substance (svabhāva). The transformations and creations of the three thousand are all called function (karma). Therefore, it is said that they are both substance and function. Among these four sentences, the first two explain that cause and effect each possess the three thousand. The third sentence explains that the three thousand of cause and effect are just one set of three thousand because they are unchanging. The fourth sentence explains that the substance of the three thousand of cause and effect can all give rise to function. Thus, the three thousand in the cause give rise to defiled functions, and the three thousand in the effect give rise to pure functions. This fourth sentence explains the perfect teaching most clearly. Why? The names of substance and function inherently imply the meaning of identity. Therefore, whenever it is said that all dharmas are identical to principle, it must be that the entire function is identical to the substance in order to be called identity. The Auxiliary Conduct (Fahua Jing Xuan Yi Shi Qian』s alias) says that 『identity』 is explained in the Guang Ya as 『union.』 If we follow this explanation, it still seems like two things are united, and this principle appears distant. Now, if we seek it through meaning, the substance is non-dual, so it is called identity (all of the above are words from the Auxiliary Conduct). Now, we say that the function of the entire substance is called non-dual. Other schools explain that one principle gives rise to differentiated dharmas according to conditions. Differentiation is the aspect of ignorance, and pure oneness is the aspect of true thusness (tathatā). When following conditions, there is differentiation; when not following conditions, there is no differentiation. Therefore, it is known that oneness combined with ignorance gives rise to differentiation. This is precisely the meaning of union, not the non-duality of substance, because the removal of ignorance eliminates differentiation. Now, the Tiāntāi school explains that the substance of the three thousand gives rise to the function of the three thousand according to conditions. When not following conditions, the three thousand exist as they are. Therefore, differentiated dharmas are non-dual with the substance because the removal of ignorance creates differentiation. Examining the identity explained by other schools, the meaning of identity cannot be established because their Buddha-fruit only has one true thusness, and they must break down the differentiation of the nine realms and return to the oneness of the Buddha-realm. The identity spoken of by the Tiāntāi school separates identity from division, making it difficult to study in detail within the perfect and distinct teachings. It should be known that they do not discuss inherent principle and only speak of true thusness.
如隨緣，仍是離義。故第一記云，以別教中無性德九，故自他俱斷九也。若三千世間是性德者，九界無所破，即佛法故，即義方成、圓理始顯。故《金錍》云「變義唯二，即是唯圓」，故知具變雙明方名即是，若隨闕一皆非圓極。荊溪云，他家不明修性。若以真如一理名性，隨緣差別為修，則荊溪出時甚有人說也。故知他宗極圓，只云性起，不云性具。深可思量。又不談性具百界，但論變造諸法，何名無作邪？世人見予立別教理有隨緣義，惑耳驚心，蓋由不能深究荊溪之意也。且如《記》文釋阿若文中雲，別教亦得云從無住本立一切法，無明覆理，能覆所覆俱名無住，但即不即異而分教殊。既許所覆無住，真如安不隨緣，隨緣仍未即者，為非理具隨緣故也。又云，真如在迷能生九界。若不隨緣，何能生九？又《輔行》釋別教根塵一念為迷解本，引《楞伽》云：「如來為善不善因。」自釋云，即理性如來也。《楞伽》此句，乃他宗隨緣之所據也。《輔行》為釋此義，引大論云，如大池水，像入則濁，珠入則清。當知水為清濁本，珠象為清濁之緣，據此諸文別理豈不隨緣邪？故知若不談體具者，隨緣與不隨緣皆屬別教。何者？如雲梨邪生一切法，或云法性生一切法，豈非別教有二義邪？
問：「《凈名疏》釋無明無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說隨緣，那就仍然偏離了『即』的真義。所以《法華經文句記》第一卷中說，因為別教中沒有性德九界，所以自他和合斷絕了九界。如果三千世間是性德所具，那麼九界就無所破，也就是佛法，這樣『即』的真義才能成立，圓融的道理才能顯現。所以《金錍論》說：『變的含義只有兩種，那就是唯圓。』因此可知，同時具備『具』和『變』才能稱為『即』，如果缺少任何一個，都不能達到圓滿的極致。荊溪湛然大師說，其他宗派不明白修性和性具的道理。如果用真如一理來稱作『性』，隨緣差別為『修』，那麼在荊溪大師出世的時候，就已經有很多人這樣說了。所以可知，其他宗派所說的極圓，只是說『性起』，而不說『性具』，這一點很值得深思。而且他們不談性具百界，只是論述變造諸法，這怎麼能稱為『無作』呢？世人看到我立別教的道理中有隨緣的含義，感到迷惑和驚訝，這是因為他們不能深入研究荊溪大師的意圖。例如，《法華經文句記》中解釋阿若憍陳如時說，別教也可以說從無住本立一切法，無明遮蔽了真理，能遮蔽的和所遮蔽的都稱為無住，但『即』與『不即』的差異導致了教義的不同。既然允許所遮蔽的是無住，那麼真如怎麼能不隨緣呢？如果隨緣仍然不是『即』，那是因為它不是理具隨緣的緣故。又說，真如在迷的時候能夠產生九界。如果不隨緣，怎麼能夠產生九界呢？此外，《法華經輔行記》解釋別教的根塵一念為迷解的根本，引用《楞伽經》說：『如來為善不善因。』自己解釋說，這是指理性如來。《楞伽經》的這句話，是其他宗派隨緣的依據。《輔行記》爲了解釋這個含義，引用《大智度論》說，就像大池中的水，大象進入就會渾濁，寶珠進入就會清澈。應當知道水是清濁的根本，寶珠和大象是清濁的因緣，根據這些經文，別教的道理難道不隨緣嗎？所以可知，如果不談體具，那麼隨緣與不隨緣都屬於別教。為什麼呢？例如說梨耶識產生一切法，或者說法性產生一切法，這難道不是別教的兩種含義嗎？ 問：《凈名疏》解釋無明無住，這又是什麼意思呢？
【English Translation】 English version: If we speak of 'following conditions' (suiyuan), it still deviates from the meaning of 'immediacy' (ji). Therefore, the first volume of the 'Annotations on the Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra' (Fahua Jing Wenju Ji) says that because the Separate Teaching (biejiao) lacks the inherent nature (xingde) of the Nine Realms, the self and others are both cut off from the Nine Realms. If the Three Thousand Worlds are inherent in nature, then the Nine Realms are indestructible, which is the Buddha-dharma. Only then can the meaning of 'immediacy' be established, and the perfect principle can be revealed. Therefore, the 'Golden Scalpel' (Jin Pi) says, 'The meaning of transformation is only twofold, which is solely perfect.' Thus, it is known that only when both 'inherent' (ju) and 'transformation' (bian) are clearly stated can it be called 'immediacy.' If either is lacking, it is not perfect. Jingxi Zhanran says that other schools do not understand the principle of cultivating nature and inherent nature. If one calls the single principle of True Thusness (zhenru) 'nature' and the differences arising from conditions 'cultivation,' then many people would have said this even before Jingxi appeared. Therefore, it is known that the ultimate perfection spoken of by other schools only speaks of 'nature arising' (xingqi), not 'nature inherent' (xingju). This is worth pondering deeply. Furthermore, they do not discuss the inherent nature of the Hundred Realms, but only discuss the transformation and creation of all dharmas. How can this be called 'non-action' (wu zuo)? When people see that I establish the Separate Teaching with the meaning of following conditions, they are confused and alarmed. This is because they cannot deeply investigate the intention of Jingxi. For example, in the 'Annotations' (Ji) explaining Ajnata-Kaundinya (Aruo), it says that the Separate Teaching can also say that all dharmas are established from the basis of non-abiding (wuzhu), and ignorance (wuming) covers the principle. Both the covering and the covered are called non-abiding, but the difference between 'immediacy' and 'non-immediacy' leads to different teachings. Since it is allowed that what is covered is non-abiding, how can True Thusness not follow conditions? If following conditions is still not 'immediacy,' it is because it is not the reason for the inherent nature to follow conditions. It also says that True Thusness can generate the Nine Realms when deluded. If it does not follow conditions, how can it generate the Nine Realms? Furthermore, the 'Supplementary Commentary' (Fuxing) explains that the root and dust of a single thought in the Separate Teaching are the basis of delusion and liberation, quoting the 'Lankavatara Sutra' (Lengqie Jing): 'The Tathagata is the cause of good and non-good.' It explains itself, saying that this refers to the True Thusness of principle. This sentence from the 'Lankavatara Sutra' is the basis for other schools' following conditions. The 'Supplementary Commentary,' in order to explain this meaning, quotes the 'Great Treatise' (Da Lun), saying that it is like water in a large pond: an elephant entering makes it turbid, and a pearl entering makes it clear. It should be known that water is the basis of turbidity and clarity, and the pearl and elephant are the conditions for turbidity and clarity. According to these texts, does the principle of the Separate Teaching not follow conditions? Therefore, it is known that if one does not discuss the inherent nature of the substance, then following conditions and not following conditions both belong to the Separate Teaching. Why? For example, saying that the Alaya-consciousness (Liyeshi) generates all dharmas, or that the nature of dharma generates all dharmas, are these not two meanings of the Separate Teaching? Question: What does the 'Vimalakirti Sutra Commentary' (Jingming Shu) mean by explaining ignorance as non-abiding?
住云，說自住是別教意，依他住是圓教意。且隨緣義，真妄和合方造諸法，正是依他，那判屬別？」
答：「疏中語簡意高，須憑記釋方彰的旨，故釋自住，法性煩惱更互相望，俱立自他。結云，故二自他並非圓義，以其惑性定能為障，破障方乃定能顯理。釋依他云，更互相依更互相即，以體同故依而復即。結云，故別圓教俱云自他，由體同異而判二教。今釋曰，性體具九起修九用，用還依體名同體依，此依方即，若不爾者，非今依義。故妙樂云，別教無性德九，故自他俱須斷九，是知但理隨緣作九全無明功，既非無作定能為障，故破此九方能顯理。若全性起修乃事即理，豈定為障而定可破？若執但理隨緣作九為圓義者，何故妙樂中真如在迷能生九界判為別邪？故真妄合即義未成，猶名自住。彼疏次文料簡開合，別教亦云依法性住，故須究理不可迷名，此宗若非荊溪精簡，圓義永沈也。他云，舊本云三身並常。今問：如何說俱體俱用邪？他恐應身說體、法身說用不便，乃自立云舉體全用。縱茲巧釋，義終不允。」
五、染凈不二門三：
初、標。以在纏心變造諸法，一多相礙唸唸住著，名之為染；以離障心應赴眾緣，一多自在念念舍離，名之為凈。今開在纏一念染心本具三千，俱體俱用與凈不殊，
【現代漢語翻譯】 問：你認為『住』（Dwell）這個概念，說『自住』（Self-dwelling）是別教（Distinct Teaching）的含義，『依他住』（Other-dependent dwelling）是圓教（Perfect Teaching）的含義。而且隨緣（Following conditions）的意義，是真（Truth）和妄（Delusion）和合才能造作諸法（All Dharmas），這正是依他（Other-dependent），那怎麼能判定它屬於別教呢？」
答：『疏』（Commentary）中的語言簡練而意義深遠，必須憑藉『記釋』（Commentary and Explanation）才能彰顯其確切的旨意。所以解釋『自住』時，法性（Dharma-nature）和煩惱（Afflictions）更互相觀望，都建立自（Self）和他（Other）。結論說，所以這兩種『自他』並非圓教的含義，因為惑性（Deluded nature）必定能夠成為障礙，破除障礙才能必定顯現真理。解釋『依他』時說，更互相依賴，更互相即（Identical），因為本體相同，所以依賴而又即。結論說，所以別教和圓教都說『自他』，由於本體的同異而判定兩種教義。現在解釋說，性體（Nature-essence）具足九法界（Nine realms）的起修（Arising cultivation）和九法界的用（Function），用還依賴於體，名稱上是同體依（Same-essence dependence），這種依賴才是即（Identical），如果不是這樣，就不是現在所說的『依』的意義。所以妙樂（Miaole, a commentator）說，別教沒有性德九法界（Nine realms of inherent virtue），所以自他和他都必須斷除九法界，要知道只是理（Principle）隨緣造作九法界，完全沒有明功（Enlightenment function），既然不是無作（Non-action）就必定能夠成為障礙，所以破除這九法界才能顯現真理。如果全性（Whole nature）起修，那就是事即理（Phenomena are identical to principle），怎麼會必定成為障礙而必定可以破除呢？如果執著于只是理隨緣造作九法界是圓教的含義，為什麼妙樂中說真如（Tathata, Suchness）在迷時能夠產生九界被判定為別教的邪見呢？所以真妄合即（Truth and delusion are identical）的意義沒有成立，仍然叫做『自住』。那部『疏』的後面的文字辨析開合，別教也說依法性住（Dwelling in accordance with Dharma-nature），所以必須探究理，不可迷惑于名稱，這個宗派如果不是荊溪（Jingxi, a commentator）精簡，圓教的意義就永遠沉沒了。他說，舊本說三身（Trikaya, Three bodies of Buddha）並常（Eternal）。現在問：如何說俱體俱用（Both essence and function）呢？他恐怕應身（Nirmanakaya, Manifestation body）說體、法身（Dharmakaya, Dharma body）說用不方便，就自己立論說舉體全用（The entire essence is the entire function）。縱然這樣巧妙地解釋，意義最終還是不被允許。」
五、染凈不二門（The gate of non-duality of defilement and purity）三：
初、標（Introduction）。以在纏心（Entangled mind）變造諸法，一多相礙（One and many obstruct each other），唸唸住著（Moment to moment dwelling and attachment），名之為染（Called defilement）；以離障心（Mind free from obstacles）應赴眾緣（Responding to various conditions），一多自在（One and many are unhindered），唸唸舍離（Moment to moment abandoning），名之為凈（Called purity）。現在開啟在纏一念染心（Single defiled thought of the entangled mind）本具三千（Inherently possesses three thousand realms），俱體俱用（Both essence and function）與凈不殊（Not different from purity）。
【English Translation】 Question: You believe that the concept of 'dwelling' (住), stating that 'self-dwelling' (自住) is the meaning of the Distinct Teaching (別教), and 'other-dependent dwelling' (依他住) is the meaning of the Perfect Teaching (圓教). Moreover, the meaning of following conditions (隨緣) is that truth (真) and delusion (妄) must combine to create all dharmas (諸法), which is precisely other-dependent (依他). How can it be determined that it belongs to the Distinct Teaching?
Answer: The language in the 'Commentary' (疏) is concise and profound, requiring the 'Commentary and Explanation' (記釋) to reveal its precise meaning. Therefore, when explaining 'self-dwelling,' Dharma-nature (法性) and afflictions (煩惱) observe each other, both establishing self (自) and other (他). The conclusion states that these two types of 'self and other' are not the meaning of the Perfect Teaching because deluded nature (惑性) can certainly become an obstacle, and only by removing the obstacle can truth be revealed. When explaining 'other-dependent,' it says that they rely on each other and are identical to each other because the essence is the same, so they are dependent and identical. The conclusion states that both the Distinct Teaching and the Perfect Teaching speak of 'self and other,' and the two teachings are distinguished by the similarity or difference of their essence. Now, it is explained that the nature-essence (性體) fully possesses the arising cultivation (起修) and function (用) of the nine realms (九法界), and the function still depends on the essence, which is nominally the same-essence dependence (同體依). This dependence is identical (即). If it is not like this, it is not the meaning of 'dependence' as it is now understood. Therefore, Miaole (妙樂, a commentator) says that the Distinct Teaching does not have the nine realms of inherent virtue (性德九法界), so both self and other must eliminate the nine realms. It should be known that only principle (理) follows conditions to create the nine realms, without any enlightenment function (明功). Since it is not non-action (無作), it can certainly become an obstacle, so only by removing these nine realms can truth be revealed. If the whole nature (全性) arises in cultivation, then phenomena are identical to principle (事即理). How can it certainly become an obstacle and certainly be removed? If one insists that only principle following conditions to create the nine realms is the meaning of the Perfect Teaching, why is it that in Miaole, Tathata (真如, Suchness) in delusion can produce the nine realms and is judged as a heretical view of the Distinct Teaching? Therefore, the meaning of truth and delusion being identical (真妄合即) is not established and is still called 'self-dwelling.' The subsequent text of that 'Commentary' analyzes opening and closing. The Distinct Teaching also speaks of dwelling in accordance with Dharma-nature (依法性住), so one must investigate the principle and not be misled by the name. If this school had not been simplified by Jingxi (荊溪, a commentator), the meaning of the Perfect Teaching would have been forever submerged. He said that the old version says that the Three Bodies (三身, Trikaya) are both eternal (常). Now I ask: How can it be said that both essence and function (俱體俱用) are present? He feared that it would be inconvenient to say that the Manifestation Body (應身, Nirmanakaya) is the essence and the Dharma Body (法身, Dharmakaya) is the function, so he established his own theory that the entire essence is the entire function (舉體全用). Even with such a clever explanation, the meaning is ultimately not accepted.
V. The gate of non-duality of defilement and purity (染凈不二門) three:
First, introduction (標). With the entangled mind (在纏心) transforming and creating all dharmas, one and many obstruct each other (一多相礙), moment to moment dwelling and attachment (唸唸住著), it is called defilement (染); with the mind free from obstacles (離障心) responding to various conditions (應赴眾緣), one and many are unhindered (一多自在), moment to moment abandoning (唸唸舍離), it is called purity (凈). Now, revealing that the single defiled thought of the entangled mind (在纏一念染心) inherently possesses three thousand realms (三千), both essence and function (俱體俱用), is not different from purity (與凈不殊).
故名不二。有人云，染即是惑，凈即是應。不解文旨，但對而已。須知此門指果后凈用，凡夫染心已具，乃令觀此染心顯于凈用，並后依正俱在能應，自他不二方兼于感。
二、若識下，釋二：
初、明所顯凈法二：
初、染凈體用理無增減三：
初、法二：
初、明染凈體者，三千寂體即寂而照，既無能照亦無所照，名為法性，以本愚故妄謂自他，三千靜明全體暗動，即翻作無明，本來不覺，故名無始。若識此者，即照無明體本明靜，即翻為法性。
二、法性下，明染凈用者，體既全轉、用亦敵翻，法性既作無明，全起無明之用，用既縛著名之為染；無明若為法性，全起法性之用，用既自在名之為凈。
問：「他云，無二與字，及將二之訓往，迷即法性往趣無明，悟即無明往趣法性。其義云何？」
答：「二與有無，俱有其義，二之訓往，釋義稍迂。且之字者，乃是常用文字而多為語助，雖《爾雅》訓往，用自有處，安於此中文似不便。如一理之內凈穢之土，豈皆訓往邪？若舊本無二與字，則之字不須訓往，但為助辭其義自顯。何者？但云即法性之無明，其用則染，即無明之法性，其用則凈，其文既宛，其義稍明。」
問：「若有與字，義復云何？」
【現代漢語翻譯】 因此稱之為『不二』。有人說，『染』（Klesha）就是迷惑，『凈』（Vishuddhi）就是應現。這是不理解經文的旨意，只是片面地理解。要知道這個法門指的是證果后的清凈妙用，凡夫的染污心本來就具備這種妙用，所以才要觀照這個染污心，使它顯現出清凈的妙用，並且后得智和所依的清凈世界都包含在能應現之中，自己和他人不二，才能兼顧到感應。
二、若識下，解釋第二點：
初、明所顯凈法二：
初、染凈體用理無增減三：
初、法二：
初、明染凈體者，三千寂體（Trisahasra）即寂靜而照，既沒有能照的主體，也沒有所照的客體，這叫做『法性』（Dharmata）。因為根本的愚癡，所以妄認為有自己和他人，三千世界的靜止光明全體闇昧動搖，就翻轉成了『無明』（Avidya），本來就不覺悟，所以叫做『無始』。如果認識到這一點，就能照見無明的本體本來就是明凈的，立刻就翻轉為法性。
二、法性下，說明染凈的用處，本體既然完全轉變，用處也相對地翻轉，法性既然轉為無明，就完全生起無明的用處，這種用處如果被束縛，就叫做『染』；無明如果轉為法性，就完全生起法性的用處，這種用處如果自在，就叫做『凈』。
問：『有人說，『無二』和『與』字，以及把『二』解釋為『往』，迷惑就是法性往趣無明，覺悟就是無明往趣法性。』這個說法是什麼意思？』
答：『『二』和『有無』，都有其道理，把『二』解釋為『往』，解釋得稍微牽強。而且『之』字，是常用的文字，多半是語氣助詞，雖然《爾雅》解釋為『往』，但也有它適用的地方，放在這裡似乎不太合適。比如一個道理之內的清凈和污穢的國土，難道都要解釋為『往』嗎？如果舊的版本沒有『無二』和『與』字，那麼『之』字就不需要解釋為『往』，只作為助詞，意思自然就明白了。為什麼呢？只要說『即法性的無明，它的用處就是染，即無明的法性，它的用處就是凈』，這樣文句就順暢了，意思也比較明白。』
問：『如果有『與』字，意思又是什麼呢？』
【English Translation】 Hence it is called 'non-duality'. Some say that 'Klesha' (染) is delusion, and 'Vishuddhi' (凈) is response. This is not understanding the meaning of the text, but only understanding it one-sidedly. It should be known that this Dharma gate refers to the pure function after attaining enlightenment. Ordinary people's defiled minds inherently possess this function, so they should contemplate this defiled mind to reveal its pure function. Furthermore, the subsequent wisdom and the pure world it relies on are both contained within the ability to respond. Only when self and others are non-dual can both sensation and response be taken care of.
- 若識下, Explaining the second point:
First, 明所顯凈法二:
First, 染凈體用理無增減三:
First, 法二:
First, 明染凈體者, The Trisahasra (三千) still body is still and illuminating. There is neither a subject that can illuminate nor an object that can be illuminated. This is called 'Dharmata' (法性). Because of fundamental ignorance, it is falsely believed that there is self and others. The still light of the Trisahasra world is entirely obscured and agitated, and it turns into 'Avidya' (無明). Originally, there was no awakening, so it is called 'beginningless'. If one recognizes this, one can see that the essence of Avidya is originally bright and pure, and it immediately turns into Dharmata.
Second, 法性下, Explaining the function of defilement and purity, since the essence is completely transformed, the function is also relatively reversed. Since Dharmata turns into Avidya, it completely gives rise to the function of Avidya. If this function is bound, it is called 'defilement'. If Avidya turns into Dharmata, it completely gives rise to the function of Dharmata. If this function is free, it is called 'purity'.
Question: 'Someone said, 'The words 'non-duality' and 'with', and interpreting 'two' as 'going', delusion is Dharmata going towards Avidya, and enlightenment is Avidya going towards Dharmata.' What does this mean?'
Answer: 'Both 'two' and 'existence or non-existence' have their reasons. Interpreting 'two' as 'going' is a slightly far-fetched explanation. Moreover, the word '之' is a commonly used word, mostly a modal particle. Although the Erya (《爾雅》) interprets it as 'going', it also has its appropriate uses. It seems inappropriate to put it here. For example, do the pure and impure lands within a single principle all need to be interpreted as 'going'? If the old version does not have the words 'non-duality' and 'with', then the word '之' does not need to be interpreted as 'going', but only as a particle, and the meaning will naturally be clear. Why? Just say 'Avidya of Dharmata, its function is defilement, Dharmata of Avidya, its function is purity'. In this way, the sentence is smooth and the meaning is clearer.'
Question: 'If there is the word 'with', what does it mean?'
答：「此文既辨二用，有則于義更明。何者？夫與者，借與、賜與也，亦助也。法性無明既互翻轉成於兩用，互有借力助成之義，而劣者借力助於強者，若法性內熏無力、無明染用強者，則法性與無明力造諸染法。若無明執情無力、法性內熏有力，則無明與法性力起諸凈應。以由無明雖有成事之用，以體空故自不能變造，須假法性借力助之方成染法。法性雖具三千凈用，顯發由修，真修縱不藉無明，緣修寧無欣厭？故下文云，必藉緣了為利他功，無明與力助於法性方成凈用。荊溪既許隨緣之義，必許法性無明互為因緣，但約體具明隨，自異權教。」
二、濁水下，諭。濁水諭迷中染心，清水諭果后凈心，波諭三千俱用，濕諭三千俱體。須知染中其水雖濁，亦全濕為波，清時豈別有波濕？故云無殊，則波之與濕皆無殊也。他謂波中之濕無殊者，濕性既不變，波性豈變邪？
問：「第四記云，如清濁波濕性不異，豈非波異濕同？今何違彼？」
答：「讀彼文者不看前後，但取一文成我局見。今為粗引彼文仍聊釋出，令欲據彼證唯濕無殊者聞之自誡。何者？彼文字釋世間相常，但相本流動，今欲說常須約位顯，全位為相位、常相亦常，故文數云，相位無二。仍自問云：位可一如，相云何等？答曰：位
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 答：這段文字既然辨析了兩種作用，那麼『與』字的意義就更加明確了。為什麼呢？『與』，是借給、賜予的意思，也是幫助的意思。法性和無明既然相互轉化形成兩種作用，就有了相互借力幫助成就的意義，而且弱的一方借力幫助強的一方。如果法性內在的熏習沒有力量，無明的染污作用強大，那麼法性就與無明的力量共同造作各種染污的法。如果無明的執著情感沒有力量，法性內在的熏習有力量，那麼無明就與法性的力量共同生起各種清凈的應化。因為無明雖然有成就事的作用，但由於體性是空，自身不能變化造作，必須藉助法性借力幫助才能成就染污的法。法性雖然具足三千種清凈的作用，但顯發要通過修行，真實的修行縱然不憑藉無明，緣分的修行難道沒有欣喜和厭惡嗎？所以下文說，必須憑藉緣和了作為利他的功用，無明與力量幫助法性才能成就清凈的作用。荊溪既然允許隨順因緣的意義，必定允許法性和無明互為因緣，只是就體性具足來說明隨順，自然不同於權教的說法。 二、濁水下，比喻。濁水比喻迷惑中的染污心，清水比喻證果后的清凈心，波浪比喻三千種作用都存在，濕性比喻三千種體性都具備。要知道染污中的水雖然渾濁，也完全是濕性成為波浪，清凈的時候難道另外有波浪和濕性嗎？所以說沒有差別，那麼波浪和濕性都是沒有差別的。別人說波浪中的濕性沒有差別，濕性既然不變，波浪的性質難道會改變嗎？ 問：第四記中說，如清凈和渾濁的水，波浪和濕性沒有差異，難道不是波浪不同而濕性相同嗎？現在為什麼違背它呢？ 答：讀那段文字的人不看前後文，只是取其中一句來形成自己的片面見解。現在我粗略地引用那段文字，並且稍微解釋出來，讓那些想要根據它來證明只有濕性沒有差別的人聽了之後自我警戒。為什麼呢？那段文字本來是解釋世間相是常住不變的，但是相的本質是流動變化的，現在想要說常住不變，必須就位置來顯示，全部的位置就是相位，常相也是常住不變的，所以文中多次說，相位沒有二致。接著自己問：位置可以相同，相怎麼說呢？回答說：位置
【English Translation】 English version: Answer: Since this passage distinguishes between two functions, the meaning of 'to give' is even clearer. Why? 'To give' means to lend, to bestow, and also to assist. Since Dharma-nature (法性) and ignorance (無明) mutually transform to form two functions, they have the meaning of mutually borrowing strength to help achieve something, and the weaker side borrows strength to help the stronger side. If the inner influence of Dharma-nature is weak and the defiling function of ignorance is strong, then Dharma-nature and the power of ignorance together create various defiled dharmas. If the clinging emotions of ignorance are weak and the inner influence of Dharma-nature is strong, then ignorance and the power of Dharma-nature together give rise to various pure responses. Because although ignorance has the function of accomplishing things, it cannot transform and create on its own due to its empty nature; it must rely on Dharma-nature to borrow strength to achieve defiled dharmas. Although Dharma-nature possesses three thousand pure functions, their manifestation depends on cultivation. Even if true cultivation does not rely on ignorance, how can conditioned cultivation be without joy and aversion? Therefore, the following text says that it must rely on conditions and understanding as a benefit to others, and ignorance and power assist Dharma-nature to achieve pure functions. Since Jingxi (荊溪) allows the meaning of following conditions, he must allow Dharma-nature and ignorance to be mutual causes and conditions, but only in terms of the inherent nature to explain following, which is naturally different from the provisional teachings. Second, turbid water below, a metaphor. Turbid water is a metaphor for the defiled mind in delusion, clear water is a metaphor for the pure mind after enlightenment, waves are a metaphor for the three thousand functions all existing, and wetness is a metaphor for the three thousand natures all being present. It should be known that although the water in defilement is turbid, it is entirely wetness becoming waves. Is there another wave and wetness when it is clear? Therefore, it is said that there is no difference, then the wave and the wetness are both without difference. Others say that the wetness in the wave is not different, since the nature of wetness does not change, will the nature of the wave change? Question: The fourth record says, 'Like the purity and turbidity of water, the waves and wetness are not different, isn't it that the waves are different but the wetness is the same?' Why do you contradict it now? Answer: Those who read that passage do not look at the context, but only take one sentence to form their own one-sided view. Now I roughly quote that passage and explain it slightly, so that those who want to use it to prove that only wetness is without difference will hear it and be self-admonished. Why? That passage originally explains that the characteristics of the world are constant, but the essence of characteristics is flowing and changing. Now, if you want to say constant, you must show it in terms of position. The entire position is the phase, and the constant phase is also constant. Therefore, the text repeatedly says that the phases are not different. Then he asked himself: 'Positions can be the same, how about the characteristics?' He replied: 'Positions'
據理性決不可改，相約隨緣緣有染凈，緣雖染凈同名緣起，如清濁波濕性不異，同以濕性為波，故皆以如為相，同以波為濕性，故皆以如為位，所以相與常住其名雖同，染凈既分如位須辨。釋曰：彼問既云，相云何等？故知答文以位例相成乎等義，乃先法次諭，諭中以法參而合之，法中先舉位一，故云決不可改；次明相等，故云同名緣起。諭中亦先舉濕性不異顯上位一，次明以濕為波、以波為濕，正當顯上位相無二、位等相等，故知文中本答相等，但相兼染凈，等義難彰，故光以濕性諭位論等，仍顯全位為相、全濕為波，以位例相明其咸等。因何但將濕性不異一句為證，全不以濕而例于波，及拋相等之問，豈可得乎？況若論異義，豈獨相異、位無異義邪？故當科即云，染凈既分如位須辨，豈非染相必以在纏真如為位，豈可凈相不以出纏真如為位？若論等者，濁水清水既同一濕，豈不得言同一波邪？以水清后還是濁時動用故也。」
三、清濁下，合者，水之波濕常無增減，若其清濁必各由緣。雖象入則濁、珠入則清，而其濁緣與水俱有，從來未悟故濁在前，如山抱玉、如沙有金，礦璞本有。水雖本濁，濁非水性，故全體是清，以清濁二波只一動性，故云理通，而皆全濕為動，故云舉體是用。既悟后不迷，知清是水
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：根據理性，真如的體性是決不可改變的。相約隨順因緣，因緣有染污和清凈之分。雖然因緣有染污和清凈，但都同樣名為緣起。比如清澈的水波和渾濁的水波，它們的濕性沒有差異，同樣以濕性作為水波的體性，所以都以『如』作為現象。同樣以水波作為濕性的顯現，所以都以『如』作為本體的位置。因此，現象與本體常住不變，雖然名稱相同，但染污和清凈既然有分別，本體的位置也必須加以辨別。 解釋說：他問既然說了，『現象如何等同？』因此知道回答的文字以本體的位置來比喻現象的成就等同的意義，於是先說法理，然後用比喻，比喻中將法理參雜而結合起來。法理中先舉出本體位置的唯一性，所以說『決不可改』；其次說明現象的相等性，所以說『同名緣起』。比喻中也先舉出濕性沒有差異來顯示本體位置的唯一性，其次說明以濕性作為水波，以水波作為濕性，正當顯示本體位置的現象沒有二致、本體位置的相等性，因此知道文中本來回答的是現象的相等性，但現象兼有染污和清凈，等同的意義難以彰顯，所以用濕性來比喻本體位置，論證等同，仍然顯示全體本體位置作為現象，全體濕性作為水波，用本體位置來比喻現象，明白它們的完全等同。因為什麼只將『濕性不異』一句作為證據，完全不以濕性來比喻水波，以及拋棄相等性的問題，怎麼可以得到正確的理解呢？況且如果論述差異的意義，難道只有現象有差異、本體位置沒有差異的意義嗎？所以當科就說，『染凈既然有分別，本體的位置也必須加以辨別』，難道不是染污的現象必定以在纏的真如作為本體位置，難道清凈的現象不以出纏的真如作為本體位置嗎？如果論述等同，渾濁的水和清澈的水既然是同一濕性，難道不能說同一水波嗎？因為水清澈后還是渾濁時的動用啊。
三、清濁下，合者，水之波濕常無增減，若其清濁必各由緣。雖象入則濁、珠入則清，而其濁緣與水俱有，從來未悟故濁在前，如山抱玉、如沙有金，礦璞本有。水雖本濁，濁非水性，故全體是清，以清濁二波只一動性，故云理通，而皆全濕為動，故云舉體是用。既悟后不迷，知清是水 現代漢語譯本：三、清濁之下，合起來說，水的波和濕性常常沒有增減，如果水的清澈和渾濁必定各自由於因緣。雖然大象進入水中則水變渾濁，寶珠進入水中則水變清澈，但渾濁的因緣與水本來就具有，從來沒有領悟，所以渾濁在先，如同山中蘊藏著玉石，如同沙子中含有黃金，礦石和璞玉本來就存在。水雖然本來是渾濁的，但渾濁不是水的本性，所以水的全體是清澈的，因為清澈和渾濁兩種水波只有一種動性，所以說理是相通的，而且都是全體濕性在動，所以說整個本體都在起作用。既然領悟之後就不會迷惑，知道清澈就是水。
【English Translation】 English version: According to reason, the essence of Tathata (真如, true thusness) is absolutely unchangeable. Agreeing to accord with conditions, conditions have defilement and purity. Although conditions have defilement and purity, they are both equally named dependent origination (緣起, pratītyasamutpāda). For example, clear water waves and turbid water waves, their wetness is not different, both equally take wetness as the nature of the wave, so both take 'suchness' (如, tathatā) as the phenomenon. Both equally take the wave as the manifestation of wetness, so both take 'suchness' as the position of the essence. Therefore, phenomenon and essence are constant and unchanging, although the names are the same, since defilement and purity are distinguished, the position of the essence must also be distinguished. The explanation says: Since he asked, 'How are phenomena equal?' Therefore, it is known that the words of the answer use the position of the essence to illustrate the meaning of the accomplishment of phenomena being equal, so first the Dharma principle is stated, and then a metaphor is used, in which the Dharma principle is mixed and combined. In the Dharma principle, the uniqueness of the position of the essence is first mentioned, so it is said 'absolutely unchangeable'; secondly, the equality of phenomena is explained, so it is said 'same name dependent origination'. In the metaphor, the non-difference of wetness is first mentioned to show the uniqueness of the position of the essence, and secondly, it is explained that wetness is taken as the wave, and the wave is taken as wetness, which is precisely to show that the phenomena of the position of the essence are not different, and the equality of the position of the essence, therefore it is known that the text originally answers the equality of phenomena, but phenomena have both defilement and purity, and the meaning of equality is difficult to manifest, so wetness is used to illustrate the position of the essence, arguing for equality, still showing the entire position of the essence as the phenomenon, the entire wetness as the wave, using the position of the essence to illustrate the phenomenon, making it clear that they are completely equal. Why only take the sentence 'wetness is not different' as evidence, completely not using wetness to illustrate the wave, and abandoning the question of equality, how can one obtain the correct understanding? Moreover, if discussing the meaning of difference, is it only that phenomena have difference, and the position of the essence has no meaning of difference? Therefore, the section says, 'Since defilement and purity are distinguished, the position of the essence must also be distinguished', is it not that the defiled phenomenon must take the Tathata in bondage as the position of the essence, and the pure phenomenon does not take the Tathata out of bondage as the position of the essence? If discussing equality, since turbid water and clear water are the same wetness, can it not be said that they are the same wave? Because after the water is clear, it is still the function of the turbid time.
English version: 3. Below 'clear and turbid', combining them, the wave and wetness of water are always without increase or decrease, if the clarity and turbidity of water must each be due to conditions. Although an elephant entering the water makes it turbid, and a pearl entering the water makes it clear, the condition of turbidity is inherent in the water, and has never been realized, so turbidity comes first, like jade hidden in the mountain, like gold in the sand, minerals and uncut jade are originally there. Although water is originally turbid, turbidity is not the nature of water, so the whole of water is clear, because clear and turbid waves have only one movement, so it is said that the principle is interconnected, and all are the movement of the whole wetness, so it is said that the entire essence is functioning. Since enlightenment, there will be no confusion, knowing that clarity is water.
性，違性可轉、稱性則常故也。
二、故三下，界如緣起性本圓常二：
初、約性德直示者，迷悟緣起皆三千之體起于妙用，體既不出剎那，妙用豈應離體？故使緣起咸趣剎那。三千既其不變，剎那之性本常，以體收用緣起理一，不分而分十界百界，約十界則六穢四凈，約百界則十通凈穢，十中一一各六四故。
二、故知下，約修反顯者。
問：「前云，剎那百界有穢有凈，今何悉凈？」
答：「前論凈穢法門，皆理本具，通於迷悟無有增減，即性善性惡也。今之染凈約情理說，情著則凈穢俱染，理性則凈穢俱凈，故剎那染情體具十界，互融自在故名悉凈。疑者云：剎那既具三千，我何不見？答：未顯者，驗體仍迷非理不具，此名字中疑也。觀行既亦未顯，遂以相似驗之，父母生身發於相似，五眼五耳乃至五意皆能遍照，自身既現十界，以驗他身亦然，故相似位人，比知百界同在一心；若至分真，普現色身能現十界，一一復起十界三業，故云亦然；果地究盡諸法實相，等彼性中所具百界，故知性具百界互融廣遍，染心自局濁體本清。」
二、故須下，明能顯妙觀。然今十門皆為觀心而設，故色心門攝別入總，專立識心為所觀故。內外門正示觀法，雖泛論二境正在內心。第三門全
【現代漢語翻譯】 性，違背自性可以轉變，順應自性則是永恒不變的。
二、故三下，從界如緣起性本圓常兩個方面進行闡述：
初、從性德直接開示：迷惑和覺悟的緣起都是三千世界的本體所產生的妙用，本體既然不離剎那，妙用又怎麼會離開本體呢？所以使得緣起都歸於剎那。三千世界既然是不變的，剎那的自性本來就是永恒的，以本體統攝妙用，緣起之理是一致的，不分而分出十界百界，從十界來說，有六穢四凈，從百界來說，十界都包含凈穢，十界中的每一個都包含六穢四凈。
二、故知下，從修證反過來顯明：
問：『前面說，剎那百界有穢有凈，現在為什麼都說是清凈的呢？』
答：『前面所說的凈穢法門，都是理體本來就具備的，貫通迷惑和覺悟，沒有增減，這就是性善性惡。現在所說的染凈是從情理上來說的，情感執著，那麼凈穢都染污，理性顯現，那麼凈穢都清凈，所以剎那染情體具十界，互相融合自在，所以叫做都清凈。』懷疑的人說：『剎那既然具備三千世界，我為什麼看不見呢？』回答：『沒有顯現出來，驗證本體仍然是迷惑，不是理體不具備，這是名字位中的疑惑。』觀行位既然也沒有顯現，就用相似位來驗證，父母所生的身體發於相似位，五眼（flesh eye, divine eye, wisdom eye, law eye, buddha eye）五耳乃至五意都能普遍照見，自身既然顯現十界，以此來驗證他人也是這樣，所以相似位的人，比較得知百界同在一心；如果到了分真位，普遍顯現色身，能夠顯現十界，每一個又產生十界的三業，所以說也是這樣；果地究竟諸法實相，等同於自性中所具備的百界，所以知道自性具備百界，互相融合廣闊普遍，染污的心自己侷限，濁惡的身體本來是清凈的。
二、故須下，說明能夠顯現的妙觀。現在這十門都是爲了觀心而設立的，所以色心門將個別的攝入總體的，專門設立識心作為所觀的對象。內外門正是開示觀法，雖然泛泛地談論二境，但重點在於內心。第三門全部
【English Translation】 The nature, going against the nature can be transformed, conforming to the nature is constant.
Two, therefore, below three, the realms are like the arising of conditions, the nature is originally complete and constant in two aspects:
First, directly showing from the inherent virtue of the nature: the arising of delusion and enlightenment are all the wonderful functions produced by the substance of the three thousand worlds. Since the substance is inseparable from the instant, how can the wonderful functions be separated from the substance? Therefore, it makes the arising of conditions all tend to the instant. Since the three thousand worlds are immutable, the nature of the instant is originally constant. Taking the substance to encompass the functions, the principle of the arising of conditions is one. Without dividing, it divides into the ten realms and the hundred realms. From the perspective of the ten realms, there are six defiled and four pure. From the perspective of the hundred realms, all ten realms contain both pure and defiled. Each of the ten realms contains six defiled and four pure.
Two, therefore know below, showing from cultivation in reverse:
Question: 'Earlier it was said that the hundred realms in an instant have defilement and purity, why are they all said to be pure now?'
Answer: 'The Dharma gate of purity and defilement mentioned earlier are all inherent in the principle, permeating delusion and enlightenment without increase or decrease, which is the nature of good and the nature of evil. The defilement and purity mentioned now are discussed from the perspective of emotion and reason. If one is attached to emotion, then both purity and defilement are defiled. If reason manifests, then both purity and defilement are pure. Therefore, in an instant, defiled emotion embodies the ten realms, mutually融和(rónghé) and自在(zìzài) , hence it is called all pure.' Those who doubt say: 'Since an instant embodies the three thousand worlds, why can't I see it?' Answer: 'It has not manifested, verifying that the substance is still deluded, not that the principle is not complete, this is the doubt in the stage of name.' Since the stage of contemplation and practice has also not manifested, it is verified with the stage of resemblance. The body born of parents originates from the stage of resemblance, the five eyes (flesh eye, divine eye, wisdom eye, law eye, buddha eye), five ears, and even five minds can all universally illuminate. Since one's own body manifests the ten realms, verifying that others are also the same. Therefore, people in the stage of resemblance comparatively know that the hundred realms are all in one mind; if one reaches the stage of partial realization, universally manifesting the physical body can manifest the ten realms, each of which again gives rise to the three karmas of the ten realms, hence it is said to be the same; the stage of fruition ultimately realizes the true nature of all dharmas, equal to the hundred realms inherent in the nature, therefore know that the nature embodies the hundred realms, mutually融和(rónghé) , vast and universal, the defiled mind confines itself, the turbid body is originally pure.
Two, therefore it is necessary below, explaining the wonderful contemplation that can manifest. Now these ten gates are all established for contemplating the mind, therefore the gate of form and mind incorporates the individual into the whole, specifically establishing the mind of consciousness as the object of contemplation. The gate of inner and outer precisely shows the method of contemplation, although it broadly discusses the two realms, the focus is on the inner mind. The third gate is entirely
性起修辨觀令妙，第四門即因成果顯證非新，故此二門皆論一念。已上四門攝自行法門，同在剎那而為觀體。從此門去純談化他，而化他法門雖即無量，豈出三千？亦攝歸剎那同爲觀體，此當其首，故廣示觀門，后既仿此但略點示，不得此意徒釋十門空談一念，故今文先明凈用同在染心，理具情迷顯發由觀。遮照者，空中名遮，一相不立，假觀名照，三千宛然。復令三觀俱亡、三諦齊照，乃亡前遮照。照前遮故，故各名雙亡，照同時故云終日，此則同前即空假中無空假中也。他見法爾空中，欲例即空即中，而不看上句照故三千常具，彼門但舉依正之境，況不云三千及以百界，尚未結成妙境，何關假觀邪？若此中縱無上句照故三千常具，但云空中，于理亦成。何者？上已具示三千凈用在剎那，故彼只云依正色心，據何文義云是妙假？思之思之！不動此念者，明觀成相不移，即今剎那之念，而能盡未來際作三千化事，此之剎那即法界故，有何窮盡？第五記云，剎那剎那皆盡過未，施設三千皆妙假力，亡凈穢相須藉空中，故云以空以中。染中凈穢更顯明者，復是空中之力，故云轉染為凈。染凈各具三千，空中了之，三千既亡空中亦泯，方名染凈不二，此則同前因果既泯理性自亡。
六、依正不二門三：
初、標
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『性起修辨觀令妙』，第四門即因成果顯證非新，故此二門皆論一念。以上四門攝自行法門，同在剎那而為觀體。從此門去純談化他，而化他法門雖即無量，豈出三千？亦攝歸剎那同爲觀體，此當其首，故廣示觀門，后既仿此但略點示，不得此意徒釋十門空談一念，故今文先明凈用同在染心，理具情迷顯發由觀。遮照者，空中名遮，一相不立，假觀名照，三千宛然。復令三觀俱亡、三諦齊照，乃亡前遮照。照前遮故，故各名雙亡，照同時故云終日，此則同前即空假中無空假中也。他見法爾空中，欲例即空即中，而不看上句照故三千常具，彼門但舉依正之境，況不云三千及以百界，尚未結成妙境，何關假觀邪？若此中縱無上句照故三千常具，但云空中，于理亦成。何者？上已具示三千凈用在剎那，故彼只云依正色心，據何文義云是妙假？思之思之！不動此念者，明觀成相不移，即今剎那之念，而能盡未來際作三千化事，此之剎那即法界故，有何窮盡？第五記云，剎那剎那皆盡過未，施設三千皆妙假力，亡凈穢相須藉空中，故云以空以中。染中凈穢更顯明者，復是空中之力，故云轉染為凈。染凈各具三千，空中了之，三千既亡空中亦泯，方名染凈不二，此則同前因果既泯理性自亡。
六、依正不二門三：
初、標
【English Translation】 English version: 'Xing Qi Xiu Bian Guan Ling Miao' (性起修辨觀令妙, the wonderfulness of observing and cultivating based on inherent nature), the fourth gate demonstrates that cause and effect are not new, hence these two gates both discuss a single thought. The above four gates encompass the Dharma gate of self-cultivation, all being in a kshana (剎那, an instant) and serving as the object of contemplation. From this gate onwards, it purely discusses transforming others, and although the Dharma gates for transforming others are limitless, how could they exceed the three thousand? They are also encompassed within a kshana, serving as the object of contemplation. This is the foremost, hence it extensively shows the gates of contemplation. Later ones imitate this, but only briefly point it out. Not understanding this meaning leads to empty talk about a single thought while explaining the ten gates. Therefore, this text first clarifies that pure function is also within the defiled mind, the principle is fully present but obscured by emotions, and manifestation arises from contemplation. 'Zhe Zhao' (遮照, obscuring and illuminating) means that in emptiness, there is obscuring, not establishing a single form; false contemplation is called illuminating, with the three thousand clearly present. Furthermore, causing the three contemplations to vanish together and the three truths to illuminate simultaneously is to eliminate the previous obscuring and illuminating. Because illuminating obscures the previous, each is called 'dual vanishing'; because illuminating is simultaneous, it is called 'all day long'. This is the same as the previous 'neither empty nor false nor middle within emptiness, falseness, and the middle'. Others see the emptiness as it is by Dharma, wanting to exemplify 'neither empty nor middle within emptiness', but not seeing the previous sentence 'illuminating, therefore the three thousand are always present'. That gate only mentions the realm of dependent and proper, moreover, it does not say 'three thousand and a hundred realms', not yet forming a wonderful realm, what does it have to do with false contemplation? If this one, even without the previous sentence 'illuminating, therefore the three thousand are always present', only says 'emptiness', it is still logically sound. Why? The above has already fully shown that the pure function of the three thousand is in a kshana, therefore that one only says 'dependent and proper form and mind', according to what text and meaning is it a wonderful falseness? Think about it, think about it! 'Not moving this thought' clarifies that the formed appearance of contemplation does not shift, that is, the thought of this kshana, and it can exhaust the future to create three thousand transformative events. This kshana is the Dharmadhatu (法界, Dharma Realm), therefore how can it be exhausted? The fifth record says, kshana after kshana exhausts the past and future, establishing the three thousand is all the power of wonderful falseness, eliminating pure and impure appearances requires relying on emptiness, hence it says 'with emptiness and with the middle'. That purity and impurity are more clearly manifested in defilement is again the power of emptiness, hence it says 'transforming defilement into purity'. Defilement and purity each fully possess the three thousand, emptiness understands them, and when the three thousand vanish, emptiness also disappears, then it is called 'defilement and purity are not two', this is the same as the previous cause and effect are both extinguished, and the inherent nature itself vanishes.
Six, The Gate of Non-Duality of Dependent and Proper (依正不二門): Three parts:
First, the heading.
。果后示現下三國土，名為依報，示現前三教主及九界身，名為正報，以寂光、圓佛本無二故，即是能開之妙法故也。此凈穢土及勝劣身，同在初心剎那，有何二邪？
二、已證下，釋二：
初、明果用由因本具三：
初、示依正不二二：
初、明不二之由。已證者，蓋舉已證之位也。寂光、遮那依正不二，全由因德一念三千，儻因本不融，果何能一？縱修治令合，亦是無常，終歸分隔。
二、以三千下，示不二之相。在文可見。
二、是則下，明因理本融二：
初、明三位本妙。理等三位融相未顯，如五品人，雖以理觀遍融一切，而於事用未能自在。此位尚爾，前二可知。然迷情自異，不二天真，故云己有。自即己心、他是生佛，佛唯在果，餘二在因，果攝心生縱由修證，心能攝二全由性融，推功歸理乃言故使。
二、但眾下，示一切皆融。不可任情必須順理，理智未顯見法仍差，須知本融無非妙境。
三、然應下，明始終無改二：
初、明情智局遍。于生局處佛能遍融，于佛遍處生自侷限。
二、始終下，明體用常融二：
初、略示。有四句，初、三約因果豎辨理同，二、四約諸法橫辨相入。意顯終既大小無妨，始亦如是，由不改故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 果后示現下三國土（地獄、餓鬼、畜生三惡道），名為依報（眾生所依賴的生存環境），示現前三教主（天臺宗、華嚴宗、禪宗的祖師）及九界身（佛以外的九道眾生），名為正報（眾生的身心本體），因為寂光（常寂光凈土）、圓佛（圓滿的佛）本來就沒有分別，這也就是能開顯的妙法啊。這清凈的國土和污穢的國土，殊勝的身和低劣的身，都在最初一念的剎那間，哪裡有什麼二種邪見呢？ 二、已證下，解釋第二點： 初、說明果的功用源於因地本具的三法： 初、揭示依報和正報不二的道理： 初、說明不二的原因。『已證者』，大概是舉出已經證悟的地位。寂光（常寂光凈土）、遮那（毗盧遮那佛）的依報和正報不二，完全由於因地的功德，一念三千（一念包含三千世界），如果因地本來就不融合，果地怎麼能合一呢？即使通過修行使之勉強合一，也是無常的，最終還是會分離。 二、『以三千下』，揭示不二的相狀。在經文里可以見到。 二、『是則下』，說明因地的理體本來就融合： 初、說明三位（理、智、行）本來就妙。理等三位融合之相尚未顯現，如同五品位的人，雖然以理觀遍融一切，但在事相和功用上還不能自在。這個地位尚且如此，前面的兩種（藏教、通教）就可想而知了。然而迷情（迷惑的情感）自然不同，不二才是天真本性，所以說『己有』。『自』就是己心，『他』就是生佛（眾生和佛），佛只在果位，其餘二者在因位，果位攝持心和眾生，縱然依靠修證，心能攝持二者，完全依靠本性的融合，推功歸於理體，所以說『故使』。 二、『但眾下』，揭示一切都融合。不可隨意任情，必須順應理體，理智沒有顯現，見解仍然有偏差，須知本來就融合，無非都是妙境。 三、『然應下』，說明始終沒有改變： 初、說明情和智的侷限和普遍。對於眾生來說是侷限之處，佛能普遍融合，對於佛來說是普遍之處，眾生自己侷限。 二、『始終下』，說明體和用常常融合： 初、簡略揭示。有四句，第一、三句從因果的豎向來辨別理體相同，第二、四句從諸法的橫向來辨別相互融入。意思是說，最終既然大小沒有妨礙，開始也是這樣，因為沒有改變的緣故。
【English Translation】 English version: After attaining Buddhahood, the manifestation of the lower three realms (hell, hungry ghosts, and animals) is called the dependent environment (依報, yībào, the environment upon which sentient beings depend for survival). The manifestation of the founders of the former three schools (Tiantai, Huayan, and Chan) and the bodies of the nine realms (九界身, jiǔjiè shēn, the beings of the nine realms excluding Buddhas) is called the principal reward (正報, zhèngbào, the body and mind of sentient beings). Because the Tranquil Light (寂光, jìguāng, the Pure Land of Eternal Tranquil Light) and the Perfect Buddha (圓佛, yuán fó, the perfect Buddha) are fundamentally not two, this is the wonderful Dharma that can be revealed. These pure and impure lands, and superior and inferior bodies, are all within the moment of the initial thought. Where are the two kinds of wrong views? 2. Below, 『已證下』 explains the second point: First, explaining that the function of the result originates from the three inherent dharmas of the causal ground: First, revealing the principle that the dependent and principal rewards are not two: First, explaining the reason for non-duality. 『已證者』 (yǐ zhèng zhě), 'those who have already attained,' probably refers to the position of those who have already attained enlightenment. The non-duality of the dependent and principal rewards of Tranquil Light (寂光, jìguāng, the Pure Land of Eternal Tranquil Light) and Vairocana (遮那, zhēnà, Vairocana Buddha) is entirely due to the merits of the causal ground, the Three Thousand Worlds in a Single Thought (一念三千, yīniàn sānqiān, the concept that a single thought contains three thousand worlds). If the causal ground were not inherently integrated, how could the result be one? Even if one were to force them together through cultivation, it would be impermanent and would eventually separate. Second, 『以三千下』 (yǐ sānqiān xià), 'below, 'with the three thousand',' reveals the appearance of non-duality. It can be seen in the text. Second, 『是則下』 (shìzé xià), 'below, 'therefore',' explains that the principle of the causal ground is inherently integrated: First, explaining that the three positions (principle, wisdom, practice) are inherently wonderful. The aspect of the integration of the three positions, such as principle, wisdom, and practice, has not yet manifested, like the people of the Five Grades, although they can universally integrate everything through the contemplation of principle, they are not yet free in phenomena and function. This position is still like this, and the previous two (the Tripitaka and Common Teachings) can be imagined. However, deluded emotions are naturally different, and non-duality is the true nature, so it is said 『己有』 (jǐ yǒu), 'already possessed'. 『自』 (zì), 'self,' is one's own mind, 『他』 (tā), 'other,' is sentient beings and Buddhas. The Buddha is only in the result position, and the other two are in the causal position. The result position encompasses the mind and sentient beings, although it relies on cultivation and realization. The mind can encompass the two entirely because of the integration of the inherent nature. Attributing the merit to the principle, it is said 『故使』 (gù shǐ), 'therefore, it enables'. Second, 『但眾下』 (dàn zhòng xià), 'below, 'but all',' reveals that everything is integrated. One should not act arbitrarily according to emotions, but must follow the principle. If principle and wisdom have not manifested, views will still be biased. One must know that it is inherently integrated, and all are wonderful realms. Third, 『然應下』 (rán yīng xià), 'below, 'however, one should',' explains that there is no change from beginning to end: First, explaining the limitations and universality of emotion and wisdom. What is limited for sentient beings, the Buddha can universally integrate. What is universal for the Buddha, sentient beings limit themselves. Second, 『始終下』 (shǐzhōng xià), 'below, 'from beginning to end',' explains that essence and function are always integrated: First, briefly revealing. There are four sentences. The first and third sentences distinguish the sameness of principle from the vertical perspective of cause and effect. The second and fourth sentences distinguish the mutual integration from the horizontal perspective of all dharmas. The meaning is that since size does not hinder the end, the beginning is also like this, because it does not change.
；果既依正不二，因亦復然，由理同故。
二、故凈下，廣示。文有八句，初、二句雙舉依正，同居等三土傳作凈穢，地獄等十界身迭分勝劣。次塵身下二句，雙示依正體性，一微塵身、一微塵國，各具三千、體遍法界，彼彼身土亦復如是。三是則下二句，明遍攝一切剎趣一剎、一切身趣一身，文雖剎身各攝，意必依正互收。四廣狹下二句，結妙，三千無礙出生無盡，不可心思、不可口議，如是融相今古常然，迷悟不改。
二、若非下，明理顯以觀為功二：
初、克彰觀行之功。性具三千，若體若用本空假中，常自相攝，微塵本含法界，芥子常納須彌，無始無明強生隔礙，順性修觀即空假中，則自在體用顯現成就。性本空假中，性凈解脫也；修成空假中，實慧解脫也；起用空假中，方便凈解脫也。雖是修二性一，以皆空假中故則成合義。
二、如是下，結示生佛一致。既解修成全是本具，即知迷悟體用不二，波濕無殊之譬于茲更明。我心為此，生佛為彼，緣起為事，性具為理，彼此三千理同不隔，遂令緣起互入無妨，依正不二斯之謂歟。
七、自他不二門三：
初、標。染凈依正及以此門，都為感應神通而立，且即染之凈依正必融，即是神通及以能應，既由已辦，須名為自，唯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：既然果報的依報和正報不是二元的，那麼因也是如此，因為它們的道理是相同的。
二、『故凈下』，廣泛地闡述。這段文字有八句，前兩句同時舉出依報和正報，同樣居住在三土（指凡聖同居土、方便有餘土、常寂光土），傳播著凈與穢，地獄等十界眾生的身體交替地呈現勝與劣。接著，『次塵身下』兩句，同時揭示依報和正報的體性和本質，一微塵之身、一微塵之國，各自具備三千世界，本體遍佈法界，其他各個身土也是如此。三、『是則下』兩句，闡明普遍地攝取一切剎土歸於一剎土，一切身歸於一身，文句雖然是剎土和身各自攝取，但意思必然是依報和正報互相包含。四、『廣狹下』兩句，總結其妙處，三千世界無礙地出生無盡的事物，不可思議、不可言說，這樣的融合相從古至今都是如此，迷惑和覺悟都不能改變。
二、『若非下』，闡明通過觀行來顯現真理的功用，分為兩部分：
首先，明確彰顯觀行的功用。自性本具三千世界，無論是體還是用，其本質都是空、假、中，它們常常互相攝持，微塵本身就包含法界，芥子常常容納須彌山（Sumeru，佛教宇宙觀中的中心山）。從無始以來，無明（ignorance）強行產生隔閡和障礙，順應自性修習觀行，即是空、假、中，那麼自在的體和用就會顯現和成就。自性本是空、假、中，就是自性清凈解脫；通過修行成就空、假、中，就是真實的智慧解脫；起用空、假、中，就是方便清凈解脫。雖然是修行二性歸一，因為都是空、假、中，所以成就了融合的意義。
二、『如是下』，總結並揭示眾生和佛的一致性。既然理解到通過修行所成就的一切都是本自具足的，那麼就知道迷惑和覺悟的體和用不是二元的，波浪和水的譬喻在這裡更加明顯。我的心是『此』（指眾生），佛是『彼』（指佛），緣起是事，性具是理，彼此的三千世界道理相同，沒有隔閡，於是使得緣起互相進入也沒有妨礙，依報和正報不是二元的，說的就是這個道理吧。
七、自他不二門，分為三部分：
首先，標明宗旨。染凈、依正以及這個自他不二門，都是爲了感應神通而設立的，並且即使是染污的凈依正也必然是融合的，也就是神通以及能感應者，既然已經具備，必須稱為『自』，只有...
【English Translation】 English version: Since the dependent and principal rewards are non-dual, the causes are also the same, because the principles are identical.
-
'Therefore, the pure below' extensively illustrates. The text has eight sentences. The first two sentences simultaneously mention the dependent and principal rewards, residing in the same three lands (Lands of Coexistence of Saints and Ordinary Beings, Land of Expedient Remainder, Land of Eternal Tranquility), transmitting purity and defilement. The bodies of beings in the ten realms, such as hells, alternately display superiority and inferiority. Next, the two sentences 'Next, dust body below' simultaneously reveal the substance and nature of the dependent and principal rewards. A single dust-mote body, a single dust-mote land, each possesses three thousand worlds, with the substance pervading the Dharma Realm. The other bodies and lands are also like this. Third, the two sentences 'This is then below' clarify the universal inclusion of all lands into one land, and all bodies into one body. Although the text refers to the inclusion of lands and bodies separately, the meaning must be the mutual inclusion of dependent and principal rewards. Fourth, the two sentences 'Wide and narrow below' conclude the wonder, the three thousand worlds unimpededly give rise to endless phenomena, inconceivable and inexpressible. Such a fused appearance has always been so, unchanging through delusion and enlightenment.
-
'If not below' clarifies the merit of revealing the truth through contemplation, in two parts:
First, clearly manifest the merit of contemplative practice. The inherent nature possesses three thousand worlds. Whether it is substance or function, its essence is emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way. They constantly hold each other. A dust-mote itself contains the Dharma Realm, and a mustard seed often contains Mount Sumeru. From beginningless time, ignorance (Avidyā) forcibly creates separation and obstacles. Cultivating contemplation in accordance with the inherent nature is emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way. Then the free substance and function will manifest and be accomplished. The inherent nature is emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way, which is the pure liberation of the inherent nature. Achieving emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way through cultivation is the true wisdom liberation. Initiating the function of emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way is the expedient pure liberation. Although it is cultivating two natures into one, because they are all emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way, it achieves the meaning of fusion.
-
'Thus below' concludes and reveals the unity of sentient beings and Buddhas. Since it is understood that everything achieved through cultivation is inherently complete, then it is known that the substance and function of delusion and enlightenment are non-dual. The analogy of waves and water is even clearer here. My mind is 'this' (referring to sentient beings), the Buddha is 'that' (referring to the Buddha), dependent origination is the event, and inherent nature is the principle. The three thousand worlds of each are the same in principle, without separation, thus allowing dependent origination to enter each other without hindrance. Is this what is meant by the non-duality of dependent and principal rewards?
-
The Gate of Non-Duality of Self and Other, in three parts:
First, the heading. Defilement and purity, dependent and principal rewards, and this gate of non-duality of self and other are all established for the sake of responsive connection and supernatural powers. Moreover, even the pure dependent and principal rewards of defilement must be fused, which is the supernatural power and the one who can respond. Since it is already possessed, it must be called 'self', only...
未論感，感即他機，雖分自他同在一念，故上文云，他生他佛尚與心同，況己心生佛寧乖一念？佛法眾生法皆名為他，而各具生佛，若己生佛顯，則與他佛生佛同俱為能化，唯他眾生生佛而為所化，既同一念自他豈殊？故名不二。依此觀察能成二妙，複名為門。
二、隨機下，釋二：
初示感應之體本同二：
初、約法示三：
初、約一性明自他。證果之後不動而應，眾機普益，既非謀作皆由性同，因果驗之灼然不二。
二、如理下，約三千明感應。先以三諦例自他本同，三千既即空假中，乃三德三諦之三千也。自行即凈穢亡泯，無不空中，利他則帝網交羅三千皆假，三諦既即三是一，自他則分而不分。然今所辨自他俱在妙假，以能化所化皆三千故。欲約三諦論不二故，且對空中辨之。妙假尚不離空中，一假豈應隔異？
問：「前修外觀既當自行，但列空中與今符合，何苦責之？」
答：「往時不解境觀之徒，據此等文妄有除削。何者？此約三千以明空中，已具不思議假，況複利他之觀，初心豈可不修？不修則何名摩訶薩？只為假觀始行須修，方得感應同居一念，自他不二據茲而立，如何劫云自行無假？又若自行唯修空中，內觀豈非自行？何故言即空假中邪？」
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：未論及感應，感應即是其他眾生的根機。雖然區分了自身和他者，但都同在一念之中。所以上文說，其他眾生所生的佛，尚且與自己的心相同，更何況自己心中所生的佛，怎麼會違背這一念呢？佛法和眾生法都可以稱為『他』，而各自都具有生佛。如果自身的生佛顯現，那麼就與他者的佛和生佛一樣，都成為能教化者；只有他者的眾生和生佛才成為被教化者。既然同在一念之中，自身和他者又有什麼區別呢？所以稱為『不二』。依照這個道理來觀察，就能成就二種玄妙，因此又稱為『門』。
二、隨機下，解釋二：
首先揭示感應的本體本來相同，分為兩部分：
首先，從法的角度揭示，分為三部分：
首先，從一性的角度說明自身和他者。證得果位之後，不需動搖就能應化，普遍利益眾生的根機。既然不是刻意造作，都是由於本性相同，從因果關係來驗證，確實是不二的。
二、如理下，從三千的角度說明感應。先用三諦來比喻自身和他者本來相同，三千既然就是空、假、中，也就是三德、三諦的三千。自行，就是清凈和污穢都消亡泯滅，沒有不在空中的；利他，就像帝釋天的網一樣交錯羅列，三千都是假。三諦既然就是三即一，自身和他者也就分而不分。然而現在所辨析的自身和他者，都在妙假之中，因為能教化者和被教化者都是三千。想要從三諦的角度來論述不二，所以姑且針對空中來辨析。妙假尚且不離空中，一假又怎麼會隔絕差異呢？
問：『前面修習外觀，既然相當於自行，只是列出了空中，與現在的情況符合，為什麼還要責備它呢？』
答：『過去不理解境觀的人，根據這些文字胡亂地進行刪減。為什麼呢？這裡是從三千的角度來說明空中，已經具備了不可思議的假，更何況是利益他人的觀行，初學者怎麼可以不修習呢？不修習又怎麼能稱為摩訶薩（Mahāsattva，大菩薩）呢？正因為假觀開始修行時必須修習，才能使得感應同在一念之中，自身和他者不二的道理，就是根據這個而建立的，怎麼能隨便說自行沒有假呢？又如果自行只修習空中，內觀難道不是自行嗎？為什麼又說即空、假、中呢？』
【English Translation】 English version: Without discussing response, response is the potential of others. Although self and other are distinguished, they exist in the same thought. Therefore, the previous text says that the Buddhas born from others are still the same as one's own mind, let alone the Buddhas born from one's own mind, how could they deviate from this one thought? Buddha-dharma and sentient being-dharma can both be called 'other,' and each has the potential to become a Buddha. If one's own potential to become a Buddha manifests, then it is the same as the Buddhas and potential Buddhas of others, all becoming capable of transformation; only the sentient beings and potential Buddhas of others are transformed. Since they are in the same thought, what difference is there between self and other? Therefore, it is called 'non-duality.' Observing according to this principle can achieve two mysteries, hence it is also called 'gate'.
- According to potential, explaining two:
First, showing that the essence of response is originally the same, divided into two parts:
First, showing from the perspective of dharma, divided into three parts:
First, explaining self and other from the perspective of one nature. After attaining the fruit, one responds without moving, universally benefiting the potential of all beings. Since it is not intentional, it is all due to the same nature. Verifying it from the cause-and-effect relationship, it is indeed non-dual.
- As the principle below, explaining response from the perspective of Three Thousand. First, use the Three Truths to illustrate that self and other are originally the same. Since the Three Thousand are emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, they are also the Three Thousand of the Three Virtues and Three Truths. Self-practice is the extinction of purity and impurity, all existing in emptiness. Benefiting others is like the net of Indra, with the Three Thousand all being provisional existence. Since the Three Truths are three-in-one, self and other are divided but not separated. However, what is being discussed now, both self and other, are in the wonderful provisional existence, because both the transformer and the transformed are the Three Thousand. Wanting to discuss non-duality from the perspective of the Three Truths, therefore, we will analyze it in relation to emptiness. The wonderful provisional existence is still inseparable from emptiness, how could one provisional existence be isolated and different?
Question: 'The previous practice of external observation is equivalent to self-practice, only listing emptiness, which is consistent with the current situation, why criticize it?'
Answer: 'In the past, those who did not understand the realm of observation arbitrarily deleted based on these texts. Why? This is explaining emptiness from the perspective of the Three Thousand, already possessing inconceivable provisional existence, let alone the practice of benefiting others, how can beginners not practice it? If one does not practice, how can one be called a Mahāsattva (大菩薩, Great Bodhisattva)? It is precisely because the provisional observation must be practiced at the beginning of practice that response can be in the same thought, and the principle of non-duality between self and other is established based on this. How can one casually say that self-practice has no provisional existence? Also, if self-practice only cultivates emptiness, isn't internal observation self-practice? Why then say it is emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way?'
物機等者，正明自他各具三千，細辨故三千，總論故十界，轉現互生即無記化，化化復作化也，依正皆爾，應必對感機豈不然！一念從事寂光約理，二必相即故互舉爾。
三、眾生下，約俱具明道交。既三無差別則感應相收，眾生感心中他佛，諸佛應心中他生，不然，豈能一念皆令解脫邪？
二、不然下，約諭示二：
初、順諭。諸佛三千即現像之理，眾生三千即生像之性，若不然者，不能即感即應，非任運化也。
二、若一下，反諭。以鑒凈形對無不現之理，而反顯之。意云若不現者可言鑒理有窮形事不通也，諸佛悟理、眾生在事，三千理滿，若一機扣之不應，則可云三千互闕，既無此理則前義善成。仍釋伏疑。何故？眾生多不見佛，故云若與鑒隔則容有是理，即障重機生名與鑒隔，機成名對，若其對者終無不現。然未通字必誤，合云不通，縱移于下句，語稍不便，智者詳之。
二、若鑒下，明觀行之功方顯二：
初、帶諭彰用匪功成者，故知心鑒本明、三千之像本具。對物未能現者，蓋三惑之塵所遮，去塵雖緣、了之功，現像乃全由性具，此中正明觀心發用。他云，由機現像。其義天隔。觀法大旨者，非唯此中，諸門皆爾，但在此說為便耳。
二、應知下，就法明發
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『物機等者』，正是說明自身與他身各自完備三千世間，細緻分辨，所以說是三千世間，總括來說，就是十法界。轉變顯現，互相產生，就是無記之化，化化又復化，依報和正報都是這樣，感應必定對應于根機，難道不是這樣嗎！一念從現象上說是寂光凈土，從理體上說，二者必定相互包含，所以互相舉例說明。
三、『眾生下』，從俱備的角度說明道交（佛與眾生之間的交流）。既然三法沒有差別，那麼感應就相互包含。眾生感應心中其他的佛，諸佛應於心中其他的眾生，如果不是這樣，怎麼能一念之間都使他們解脫呢？
二、『不然下』，用比喻來開示，分為兩部分：
首先，順著比喻來說明。諸佛的三千世間就是顯現形象的理，眾生的三千世間就是產生形象的性。如果不是這樣，就不能立即感應，不是自然而然的化現。
其次，『若一下』，反過來用比喻說明。用明亮的鏡子來比喻無所不現的理，從而反過來顯明這個道理。意思是說，如果不顯現，就可以說鏡子的理有限，不能通達一切事物。諸佛覺悟了理，眾生存在於事，三千世間的理完滿具備，如果一個根機叩擊它而不應，那麼就可以說三千世間互相欠缺，既然沒有這個道理，那麼前面的意義就完全成立。仍然解釋先前隱藏的疑問。為什麼呢？因為眾生大多見不到佛，所以說如果與鏡子隔開，或許有這個道理，就是業障深重的根機產生，叫做與鏡子隔開，根機成熟叫做相對，如果相對，最終沒有不顯現的。然而『未通』二字必定是錯的，應該說是『不通』，即使移到下一句，語句稍有不便，智者詳細考慮。
二、『若鑒下』，說明觀行（通過修行來觀察）的功用才能顯現，分為兩部分：
首先，帶著比喻來彰顯作用不是靠功勞成就的，所以知道心如明鏡本來就光明，三千世間的形象本來就具備。對著事物不能顯現，是因為三惑（見思惑、塵沙惑、無明惑）的塵垢所遮蔽，去除塵垢雖然依靠了悟的功夫，顯現形象完全是由於本性具備，這其中正是說明觀心發起作用。其他人說，由根機顯現形象，他們的意義相差甚遠。觀法的要旨，不僅僅在此處，各個法門都是這樣，只是在這裡說比較方便罷了。
其次，『應知下』，就法來說明發起。
【English Translation】 English version 'Things and mechanisms, etc.,' precisely explain that self and others each fully possess three thousand realms. Differentiating minutely, hence the three thousand realms; speaking generally, hence the ten realms. Transformation and manifestation, arising mutually, are thus unconditioned transformations. Transformation after transformation occurs again. Both the dependent and the fundamental are like this. Response must correspond to the capacity of the recipient; how could it be otherwise! A single thought, from the perspective of phenomena, is the Land of Tranquil Light (Śāntiprabha); from the perspective of principle, the two must be mutually inclusive, hence the mutual examples.
-
'Sentient beings below' explains the interaction of the Way (道交, Dàojiāo) from the perspective of mutual possession. Since the three (principle, wisdom, and practice) are without difference, response and interaction are mutually inclusive. Sentient beings sense other Buddhas in their minds; Buddhas respond to other sentient beings in their minds. If it were not so, how could they all be liberated in a single thought?
-
'Otherwise below' uses analogy to reveal, in two parts:
First, explaining in accordance with the analogy. The three thousand realms of the Buddhas are the principle of manifesting phenomena; the three thousand realms of sentient beings are the nature of producing phenomena. If it were not so, there could be no immediate sensing and responding, no spontaneous transformation.
Second, 'If below' uses a reverse analogy. Using a clear mirror to represent the principle of all-pervasiveness, thereby revealing the principle in reverse. The meaning is that if it does not manifest, it could be said that the principle of the mirror is limited, and cannot penetrate all things. Buddhas are enlightened to the principle; sentient beings exist in phenomena. The three thousand realms are fully complete in principle. If a single capacity knocks and does not receive a response, then it could be said that the three thousand realms are mutually deficient. Since there is no such principle, then the previous meaning is well established. This still explains the hidden doubt. Why? Because most sentient beings do not see the Buddha, so it is said that if there is a separation from the mirror, perhaps there is this reason. That is, a capacity with heavy karmic obstacles arises, called separation from the mirror. The maturation of the capacity is called correspondence. If there is correspondence, there will ultimately be no non-manifestation. However, the word 'not penetrate' (未通, wèitōng) must be a mistake; it should be 'does not penetrate' (不通, bùtōng). Even if moved to the next sentence, the wording is slightly inconvenient. The wise should consider this carefully.
- 'If the mirror below' explains that the merit of contemplation and practice can then be revealed, in two parts:
First, using analogy to highlight that the function is not achieved through merit. Therefore, know that the mind-mirror is inherently bright, and the images of the three thousand realms are inherently possessed. The reason why they cannot manifest when facing objects is that they are obscured by the dust of the three delusions (見思惑, jiànsīhuò - delusions of views and thoughts; 塵沙惑, chénshāhuò - delusions like dust and sand; 無明惑, wúmínghuò - delusions of ignorance). Although removing the dust relies on the effort of understanding, the manifestation of images is entirely due to the inherent nature. This precisely explains the arising of function through contemplation of the mind. Others say that images manifest due to the capacity of the recipient; their meaning is vastly different. The main point of the method of contemplation is not only in this passage; all methods are like this, but it is simply more convenient to explain it here.
Second, 'Should know below' explains the arising from the perspective of the Dharma.
由觀合。雖由緣、了須揀前三，稱性圓修方名一合，功成用顯設化無方。
八、三業不二門三：
初、標者，果后逗機示諸三業，四時三教謂有差殊。今經開之，唯圓法體，諸身尚即，三業豈分？故名不二。亦就心法示也。
二、于化下，釋二：
初、明所顯果用二：
初、約對機顯逗會無差二：
初、示三輪不同。三皆秘妙，非下地知，故名為密，能轉摧碾複名為輪，轉己示他摧他惑業，稱機示現毫髮不差。
二、在身下，明真應復殊，說三權法皆是應身，若聞圓乘必見法佛，別縱睹報猶是修成，圓見應身皆唯本具，仍約四味權實，未會真應且分。
二、約稱理明卷舒自在二：
初、融身說。
問：「此中法身說佛道邪？余文何故不許法身有說？」
答：「蓋華嚴宗獨謂我經是遮那說，余經皆是釋迦所說。故今家會之，遮那乃是釋迦異名，縱勝劣有殊，而說必是應、法定無說。若相即者，法全是應、無說即說，應全是法、說即無說。今云，法身者非離應之法，故經云：『微妙凈法身，具相三十二』等。若論即者，凡說圓教皆即法身，何獨《華嚴》？但彼經隔小故現勝身，乃報身像而即法身。今經開權，故於應身即法身也。」
問：「現
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 由觀合（通過觀想達到融合）。即使是因緣和了義，也必須選擇前面的三種（指實相、境界、智），只有符合本性的圓滿修習才能稱為一合，功德成就，作用顯現，設立教化才能沒有侷限。 八、三業不二門三： 初、標明：在果位之後，根據眾生的根機來顯示諸佛的三業，四時（指春夏秋冬）和三教（指儒釋道）認為三業有差別。現在《圓覺經》開啟了這個道理，唯有圓滿的法體，諸佛之身尚且是即，三業怎麼會有分別呢？所以稱為不二。這也是就心法來顯示的。 二、于化下，解釋二： 初、說明所顯的果地作用二： 初、約對機顯逗會無差二： 初、顯示三輪的不同。身輪、口輪、意輪三者都是秘密而微妙的，不是下地位的修行者所能瞭解的，所以稱為『密』，能夠運轉、摧伏、碾碎，所以又稱為『輪』，運轉自己來開示他人，摧伏他人的迷惑和業障，根據根機來示現，絲毫沒有差錯。 二、在身下，說明真身和應身的差別，說三種權巧的法門都是應身所為，如果聽聞圓頓之教，必定能見到法身佛，即使見到報身佛，仍然是修證而成的，圓滿的見地是應身佛本來就具備的，仍然是根據四味（指乳、酪、生酥、熟酥）和權實（權教和實教）來區分，沒有融會真身和應身之前，還是有所分別的。 二、約稱理明卷舒自在二： 初、融身說。 問：『這裡說法身佛道嗎？為什麼其他經文中不允許法身說法？』 答：『因為華嚴宗獨自認為《華嚴經》是毗盧遮那佛（Vairochana）所說，其他經典都是釋迦牟尼佛（Sakyamuni）所說。所以現在我們融合這兩種說法，毗盧遮那佛（Vairochana）是釋迦牟尼佛（Sakyamuni）的異名，即使在殊勝程度上有所不同，但說法的一定是應身佛，法身佛是決定沒有說法的。如果從相即的角度來看，法身完全是應身，無說就是說，應身完全是法身，說就是無說。現在說，法身不是離開應身的法身，所以經中說：『微妙凈法身，具相三十二』等等。如果從相即的角度來說，凡是說圓教的都是即法身，為什麼只有《華嚴經》是這樣呢？只是因為《華嚴經》隔歷小乘，所以顯現殊勝的報身形象而即是法身。現在《圓覺經》開啟權巧，所以在應身即是法身。』 問：『現在』
【English Translation】 English version: Through contemplation, one achieves union. Even with conditions and definitive meanings, one must select the first three (referring to reality, realm, and wisdom). Only perfect cultivation in accordance with one's nature can be called union. When merit is accomplished and function manifests, the establishment of teachings is without limitation. 8. The Gate of Non-Duality of the Three Karmas, in three parts: First, the heading: After the fruition, according to the capacity of beings, the three karmas of all Buddhas are shown. The four seasons (referring to spring, summer, autumn, and winter) and the three teachings (referring to Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism) consider the three karmas to have differences. Now, the Yuanjue Sutra opens up this principle, stating that only the perfect Dharma body exists. Since the bodies of all Buddhas are already identical, how can the three karmas be separate? Therefore, it is called non-dual. This is also shown in terms of the mind-Dharma. Second, 'Yu Hua Xia', explanation in two parts: First, explaining the function of the manifested fruition in two parts: First, showing the absence of difference in accordance with the capacity of beings in two parts: First, showing the difference of the three wheels. The body wheel, speech wheel, and mind wheel are all secret and subtle, not understandable by practitioners of lower levels, so they are called 'secret'. They can revolve, subdue, and crush, so they are also called 'wheels'. They revolve oneself to enlighten others, and subdue others' delusions and karmic obstacles, manifesting according to the capacity of beings without any error. Second, 'Zai Shen Xia', explaining the difference between the true body and the manifested body, saying that the three expedient Dharma methods are all actions of the manifested body. If one hears the perfect and sudden teaching, one will surely see the Dharma body Buddha. Even if one sees the reward body Buddha, it is still achieved through cultivation. The perfect view is that the manifested body Buddha is inherently possessed. It is still distinguished according to the four flavors (referring to milk, curd, raw butter, and cooked butter) and the expedient and real (expedient teaching and real teaching). Before the true body and manifested body are integrated, there are still distinctions. Second, explaining the freedom of contraction and expansion in accordance with principle in two parts: First, explaining the integration of bodies. Question: 'Does this speak of the Dharma body Buddha-path? Why do other sutras not allow the Dharma body to speak?' Answer: 'Because the Huayan School uniquely believes that the Huayan Sutra is spoken by Vairochana (毗盧遮那佛), while other sutras are spoken by Sakyamuni (釋迦牟尼佛). Therefore, we now integrate these two views, saying that Vairochana (毗盧遮那佛) is another name for Sakyamuni (釋迦牟尼佛). Even if there are differences in superiority, the one who speaks must be the manifested body Buddha, and the Dharma body Buddha definitely does not speak. If viewed from the perspective of identity, the Dharma body is completely the manifested body, and non-speaking is speaking; the manifested body is completely the Dharma body, and speaking is non-speaking. Now it is said that the Dharma body is not a Dharma body apart from the manifested body, so the sutra says: 'Subtle and pure Dharma body, possessing the thirty-two marks,' etc. If viewed from the perspective of identity, all who speak of the perfect teaching are identical to the Dharma body. Why is only the Huayan Sutra like this? It is only because the Huayan Sutra is separated from the small vehicle, so it manifests the superior reward body image, which is identical to the Dharma body. Now the Yuanjue Sutra opens up the expedient, so the manifested body is identical to the Dharma body.' Question: 'Now'
住靈山，豈不垂世？」
答：「身既即法，土非寂光邪？故施開廢會，身土咸然。」
二、身尚下，會三輪。雖知權實相冥、真應互即，儻三業尚殊則色心不泯，故會身說，令知身口本融，以二等意使色心不二，方名即應見法不動而施，靈山見聞無不爾也。
二、豈非下，明能顯觀體三：
初、結指心因。指上果人三業真應互融，雖即難思，豈過百界？百界融泯全在我心。因心若無，果須造得，若信因果相稱，方知三密有本。他云，信下無因果字。有亦未多，令義易顯，故須存之。
二、百界下，觀成用顯。百界一念本空假中，須順性三以成修德，修性一合果用乃彰，遂使色聲傳生百界，豈無記化化禪不即陰發邪？
三、故一下，染體本妙。三密相海本理，遮那心塵皆具，例彼生佛名三無差，既云一念凡心，那作非因果釋？
九、權實不二門三：
初、標。權是九界七方便，實則佛法圓乘，四時未會權實不融，此經開之皆稱秘妙，故云不二。
二、平等下，釋三：
初、明等鑒由理融。權實優劣不名平等，實不融權復非於大，故法法皆妙、一一互收，常如是知，即名平等大慧。此之大慧雖由果證，凡心本然，故但觀心此慧自發。
二、至果下，
【現代漢語翻譯】 『住在靈鷲山（Grdhakuta），難道不是爲了垂範後世嗎？』
回答：『既然身即是法，那麼國土難道不是寂光凈土嗎？』所以才會有開權顯實、廢權立實的說法，身和土都是如此。
二、『身尚下，會三輪』。即使知道權實相互融合、真應相互即是，如果身口意三業還有差別，那麼色和心就不能泯滅。所以通過會歸身來說法，讓人知道身和口本來就是融合的，用二等意使色和心不二，才能稱之為即應見法不動而施，靈鷲山所見所聞無不如此。
二、『豈非下，明能顯觀體三』：
首先，總結並指出心是根本原因。指向上文所說的果位之人三業真應相互融合，雖然難以思議，難道能超過百界嗎？百界的融合泯滅完全在於我的心。如果因心沒有，果須要造作才能得到，如果相信因果相稱，才知道三密有根本。有人說，『信』字下面沒有『因果』二字。即使有也沒有什麼不妥，使意義容易顯現，所以需要保留。
第二，『百界下，觀成用顯』。百界一念本空假中，必須順應性具三德以成就修德，修性一旦合一，果地的作用才能彰顯，於是使色聲傳遍百界，難道沒有記化、化禪不即陰發邪嗎？
第三，『故一下，染體本妙』。三密相海本來就是真理，毗盧遮那佛（Vairocana）的心塵都具備，例如生佛名三無差別，既然說是一念凡心，怎麼能作為非因果來解釋呢？
九、權實不二門三：
首先，標明。權是指九界七方便，實則是佛法圓乘，四時沒有會歸時權實不能融合，這部經開顯了權實，都稱之為秘妙，所以說不二。
第二，『平等下，釋三』：
首先，說明平等鑑照是因為理體融合。權實有優劣就不能稱為平等，實不融合權，又不能稱之為大，所以法法都是妙的、一一互相收攝，常常這樣認知，就叫做平等大慧。這種大慧雖然是由果地證得，但凡心本來就具有，所以只要觀心，這種智慧自然就會生髮。
第二，『至果下』
【English Translation】 'Living on Grdhrakuta (Vulture Peak Mountain), isn't it for the sake of setting an example for future generations?'
Answer: 'Since the body is identical to the Dharma, isn't the land the Pure Land of Tranquil Light?' Therefore, there is the saying of opening provisional teachings to reveal the true, and abandoning the provisional to establish the true. Both the body and the land are like this.'
Two, 'The body is still lower, converging the three karmas.' Even if one knows that the provisional and the real interpenetrate, and the true and responsive are mutually identical, if the three karmas of body, speech, and mind are still different, then form and mind cannot be extinguished. Therefore, by explaining the Dharma through the convergence of the body, it allows people to know that body and speech are originally fused. Using the meaning of the two equalities makes form and mind non-dual, only then can it be called responding to the Dharma without moving and bestowing. All that is seen and heard on Grdhrakuta is like this.
Two, 'Isn't it below, clarifying the three aspects of the ability to manifest contemplation':
First, concluding and pointing out that the mind is the fundamental cause. It refers to the mutual fusion of the true and responsive of the three karmas of the person in the fruit position mentioned above. Although it is difficult to conceive, can it exceed the hundred realms? The fusion and extinction of the hundred realms are entirely in my mind. If the causal mind is absent, the fruit must be created to be obtained. If one believes that cause and effect correspond, then one knows that the three secrets have a foundation. Others say that the words 'cause and effect' are missing below the word 'belief'. Even if they are there, it is not too much, making the meaning easier to manifest, so it needs to be retained.
Second, 'Below the hundred realms, the manifestation of the accomplishment of contemplation is revealed.' The hundred realms, in a single thought, are originally empty, provisional, and middle. One must follow the three virtues inherent in nature to accomplish cultivated virtue. Once cultivation and nature are united, the function of the fruit position will be manifested, thus enabling form and sound to spread throughout the hundred realms. Isn't there unrecorded transformation, and isn't the transformation of Chan not immediately the arising of evil from the Yin?
Third, 'Therefore, below, the nature of defilement is originally wondrous.' The sea of characteristics of the three secrets is originally the truth. The mind-dust of Vairocana (the universal Buddha) is fully possessed. For example, the names of sentient beings and Buddhas are three without difference. Since it is said to be a single thought of an ordinary mind, how can it be interpreted as non-causal?
Nine, the gate of non-duality of the provisional and the real, in three parts:
First, labeling. The provisional refers to the nine realms and seven expedient means, while the real is the perfect vehicle of the Buddha-dharma. When the four times have not converged, the provisional and the real cannot be fused. This sutra reveals the provisional and the real, all of which are called secret and wondrous, so it is said to be non-dual.
Second, 'Below equality, explaining three':
First, explaining that equal illumination is due to the fusion of the principle. The provisional and the real, with their superiority and inferiority, cannot be called equal. If the real does not fuse with the provisional, it cannot be called great. Therefore, every Dharma is wondrous, and each one mutually encompasses. Always knowing in this way is called equal great wisdom. Although this great wisdom is attained from the fruit position, the ordinary mind inherently possesses it. Therefore, as long as one contemplates the mind, this wisdom will naturally arise.
Second, 'To the fruit below'
遍逗由心證。證果之後，于體內不分之權實，而被機分隔說之。既理元不分，故此經稱理而會，如是施會自在者由契本因，因本若隔，果那得融？若欲契之，但觀一念。
三、對說下，結示歸理一。如文。
十、受潤不二門三：
初、標者，從諭立也。能受者即三草二木、七方便眾生，能潤者即大云注雨，即前四時三教。今經開之，唯一地所生、一雨所潤，無復差降，名為不二。觀己心地三千與佛心地三千不殊，則唸唸受潤常沾妙益，依此為門，則成二妙。
二、物理下，釋三：
初、明權實本圓、熏修如幻二：
初、由具可熏。如文。
二、因熏可發。豈唯權實相冥，抑亦感應體一，性本圓具，偏發由熏，以性奪修故修如幻，平等法界佛不度生，不分而分，暫立感應，欣赴本虛，故皆如幻。然此尚非但理隨緣之幻，豈同緣生無體之幻邪？今明各具本融、暫分如幻，能知此者方是圓乘。
二、然由下，明生佛一際欣赴不遍。若圓理無偏、感應一致，故一塵應色無非法身，自他所依不逾秘藏，方為色香中道起對法界也。
三、故知下，明地雨無殊利益平等。四微約諭，即一地所生，權實約法，即一雨所潤。凡地三千無隔，隨一念以俱圓；佛地三千既融，隨一應
而盡具。況生感心中之佛，佛應心中之生，感應之體尚同，權實之益何別？故云但化菩薩不為二乘，其有聞法者無一不成佛，方名受潤不二。
是故下，結文示意三：
初、明十門通貫、理體無殊二：
初、約十門明理一。門門皆顯三千即空假中，十門既然，十妙亦爾，故云通入及理一也。
二、如境下，約十妙釋理一。性德三千，即空假中，名為境三；境能發智，照此三千即空假中，故名智三；智慧導行，契此三千即空假中，名為行三。此是修中論九，九隻是三，一一具三開合無礙，功成歷位雖有淺深，三九圓融未始差別，三九究盡，等彼三千即空假中，名為三法。由空假中方能起用，他機因果亦復如然，故十章始終皆得稱妙。
二、既是下，明一念包容觀行可識三：
初、明一念境觀之功。此上十門十妙攝法雖廣，同在凡夫剎那一念，三千世間即空假中，性三為境，修三為觀，成則是果，用則化他，若不攝歸心法，焉能成辦自他，是故《指要》其功莫大。
二、若了下，明心法攝成之要。言非遙者，一念三千總攝故非遙，一心三觀易成故非遙。
三、故重下，明重述觀行易明。將彼十妙無邊法相，攝作十門不離一念，令修觀者可識，作者再三顯示何以迷之。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 完全具備（佛性）。更何況是眾生感應心中之佛，佛應眾生心中之感，感應的本體尚且相同，權巧和真實的利益又有什麼區別呢？所以說只教化菩薩而不為二乘（聲聞、緣覺），凡是聽聞佛法的人沒有一個不能成佛，這才稱得上是接受滋潤而沒有分別。
因此下面，總結全文，顯示三重意義：
首先，說明十門貫通，理體沒有差別：
首先，用十門來說明理一。每一門都顯示三千即是空、假、中，十門既然如此，十妙也是這樣，所以說貫通進入以及理一。
其次，如境下，用十妙來解釋理一。性德的三千，即是空、假、中，稱為境三；境能啓發智慧，照見這三千即是空、假、中，所以稱為智三；智慧引導修行，契合這三千即是空、假、中，稱為行三。這是修行中的論九，九隻是三，一一都具備三，開合沒有障礙，功成經歷位次雖然有深淺，三九圓融從來沒有差別，三九究竟，等同那三千即是空、假、中，稱為三法。由於空、假、中才能起作用，其他眾生的因果也是這樣，所以十章始終都可以稱為妙。
其次，既是下，說明一念包容觀行可以認識三重意義：
首先，說明一念境觀的功用。這上面的十門十妙所包含的法雖然廣泛，都在凡夫剎那的一念之中，三千世間即是空、假、中，性三為境，修三為觀，成就就是果，作用就是化他，如果不歸攝於心法，怎麼能成就自己和他人，所以《指要》的功用非常大。
其次，若了下，說明心法攝成的要點。說不遠，是因為一念三千全部包含所以不遠，一心三觀容易成就所以不遠。
再次，故重下，說明重述觀行容易明白。將那十妙無邊的法相，歸攝為十門不離一念，讓修觀的人可以認識，作者再三顯示為什麼還會迷惑呢？
【English Translation】 English version: And fully possesses (Buddha-nature). Moreover, how about sentient beings sensing the Buddha in their minds, and the Buddha responding to the sentience in the minds of sentient beings? The substance of the sensing and responding is the same, so what difference is there between the benefits of expedient means and reality? Therefore, it is said that only Bodhisattvas are taught, not the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas), and none who hear the Dharma fail to become Buddhas. Only then can it be called receiving nourishment without differentiation.
Therefore, below, the concluding text indicates three meanings:
First, clarifying that the ten gates interpenetrate and the principle-substance is not different:
First, explaining the oneness of principle through the ten gates. Each gate reveals that the Three Thousand are identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way. Since the ten gates are like this, so are the Ten Mysteries. Therefore, it is said that they interpenetrate and enter into the oneness of principle.
Second, as in 'Environment' below, explaining the oneness of principle through the Ten Mysteries. The Three Thousand of inherent nature are identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, and are called the Three Aspects of Environment; the Environment can inspire wisdom, illuminating these Three Thousand as identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, hence they are called the Three Aspects of Wisdom; wisdom can guide practice, aligning with these Three Thousand as identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, hence they are called the Three Aspects of Practice. This is the nine-fold theory in cultivation, where nine is simply three, and each one possesses three, with opening and closing being unobstructed. Although there are shallow and deep levels in the accomplishment of merit and progression through stages, the perfect fusion of the three nines has never been different. The ultimate of the three nines is equal to those Three Thousand as identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way, and are called the Three Dharmas. It is because of emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way that function can arise, and the causes and effects of other beings are also like this. Therefore, all ten chapters can be called 'Mysterious' from beginning to end.
Second, as in 'Since it is' below, clarifying that a single thought encompasses contemplation and practice, which can be recognized, in three aspects:
First, clarifying the function of contemplation and observation in a single thought. Although the Dharma encompassed by the above Ten Gates and Ten Mysteries is vast, it is all within the single thought of an ordinary person. The Three Thousand Worlds are identical to emptiness, provisional existence, and the middle way. The Three Aspects of Inherent Nature are the environment, the Three Aspects of Cultivation are the contemplation, accomplishment is the result, and function is transforming others. If it is not gathered back into the mind-Dharma, how can one accomplish oneself and others? Therefore, the function of 'The Essentials' is extremely great.
Second, as in 'If understood' below, clarifying the key to the mind-Dharma's accomplishment. To say 'not far' means that the Three Thousand in a single thought are all-encompassing, hence not far; the Three Contemplations in a single mind are easy to accomplish, hence not far.
Third, as in 'Therefore, again' below, clarifying that restating contemplation and practice makes it easy to understand. Gathering those boundless Dharma characteristics of the Ten Mysteries into the Ten Gates, not apart from a single thought, allows those who cultivate contemplation to recognize it. The author repeatedly shows why one would still be confused?
三、首題下，明得意符文總別無異。此之十門雖在跡門之後，仍例本門，復將釋名例餘四章，故知五義釋題盡備，故云既爾。此既一部都名，必覽三分諸品別相而立，既得總意，令將此總符彼別文，故云可知。欲銷一部文文句句，皆須預知絕待之意，無不入心成乎觀行。儻迷茲旨銷彼別文，何能顯妙乎？
問：「他云，釋名是總、三章是別，名中具三即覽別為總，將此四章符教相文則可知也。今以首題為總，經文為別，據何所出？」
答：「名總三別，少分可然，以教相為符文，全不允當，況餘四章前文已例，不須更示，令依《記》文云：『所以釋題不可率爾，題下別釋理非容易。』豈非以題為總、以文為別？」
問：「觀心既非此部正意，何故十門皆約觀釋？豈作者特違部意邪？」
答：「文初既云觀心乃是教行樞機，信非閑緩之義，但為妙義難解，故部中判教生解義強、觀且旁示，然部之妙旨乃《摩訶止觀》之大體也。何者？若非三千空假中，何能頓止三惑、圓觀三諦，故《義例》云『唯依本跡顯實』，應知《止觀》用此妙義為能止能觀，蓋不思議境即觀，故三障四魔為所止所觀也。故千如妙旨，玄文廣約眾生法示之，《文句》廣約佛法明之，此十門欲與《止觀》同成觀體，皆專
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
三、首題之下，說明領會總題的意義在於用總體的概念去印證各個區域性的概念，這樣才能明白它們之間並無差異。這十門雖然在跡門之後，仍然遵循本門的慣例，再次像其餘四章一樣解釋名稱，因此可知五義釋題已經完備，所以說『既爾』。這既然是一部經的總名，必須通覽三分（指經文的三個部分）中各個品目的不同表相才能確立。既然已經理解了總體的意義，就能用這個總體的概念去印證各個區域性的經文，所以說『可知』。想要理解一部經的每一句每一字，都必須預先了解絕對和相對的意義，這樣才能無不入心，成就觀行。如果迷惑于這個宗旨，去理解那些區域性的經文，又怎麼能夠彰顯妙義呢？
問：『別人說，解釋名稱是總體的，三章是區域性的，名稱中包含了三章的內容，就是通過理解區域性來把握總體，用這四章來印證教相的經文就可以理解了。現在你以首題為總體，經文為區域性，是根據什麼呢？』
答：『說名稱是總體的，三章是區域性的，這在小部分上是可行的。但用教相來印證經文，完全不恰當。況且其餘四章，前面的經文已經舉例說明，不需要再重複說明。應該按照《記》（指《法華經玄義釋簽》）中的說法：『所以解釋題目不可以草率，在題目下分別解釋義理並非易事。』這難道不是以題目為總體，以經文為區域性嗎？』
問：『觀心既然不是這部經的正意，為什麼十門都圍繞觀來解釋？難道是作者故意違背這部經的本意嗎？』
答：『經文一開始就說觀心是教和行的關鍵，確實不是可有可無的意義。只是因為妙義難以理解，所以經中判教是爲了產生理解，義理方面比較強，觀只是輔助說明。然而這部經的妙旨，正是《摩訶止觀》（《摩訶止觀》，佛教天臺宗的重要著作）的總體。為什麼呢？如果不是三千空假中，怎麼能頓止三惑、圓觀三諦？所以《義例》（指《法華玄義義例》）說『唯依本跡顯實』，應該知道《止觀》用這個妙義作為能止能觀的工具，因為不思議境就是觀，所以三障四魔就是所止所觀的對象。所以千如妙旨，《玄文》（指《法華玄義》）廣泛地用眾生法來闡述，《文句》（指《法華文句》）廣泛地用佛法來闡明。這十門想要與《止觀》共同成就觀體，都專門』
【English Translation】 English version:
Three, under the initial title, it is clarified that understanding the meaning of the overall title lies in using the overall concept to verify each partial concept, so as to understand that there is no difference between them. Although these ten gates are after the Trace Gate, they still follow the example of this gate, and again explain the name like the remaining four chapters. Therefore, it can be known that the explanation of the title with five meanings is complete, hence the saying 'already so'. Since this is the overall name of a scripture, it is necessary to thoroughly examine the different appearances of each chapter in the three divisions (referring to the three parts of the scripture) in order to establish it. Since the overall meaning has been understood, this overall concept can be used to verify each partial scripture, hence the saying 'knowable'. To understand every sentence and every word of a scripture, it is necessary to know the meaning of the absolute and the relative in advance, so that it can be internalized and achieve contemplation and practice. If one is confused by this purpose and tries to understand those partial scriptures, how can one reveal the wonderful meaning?
Question: 'Others say that explaining the name is overall, the three chapters are partial, and the name contains the content of the three chapters, which is to grasp the overall by understanding the partial. Using these four chapters to verify the scriptures of the teaching aspect can be understood. Now you take the initial title as the overall and the scriptures as the partial, what is the basis for this?'
Answer: 'Saying that the name is overall and the three chapters are partial is feasible in a small part. However, using the teaching aspect to verify the scriptures is completely inappropriate. Moreover, the previous scriptures have already exemplified the remaining four chapters, so there is no need to repeat the explanation. It should be in accordance with the statement in the 'Record' (referring to the 'Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra'): 'Therefore, the explanation of the title cannot be hasty, and it is not easy to explain the principles separately under the title.' Isn't this taking the title as the overall and the scriptures as the partial?'
Question: 'Since contemplating the mind is not the main intention of this scripture, why do the ten gates all revolve around contemplation to explain? Is it that the author deliberately violated the original intention of this scripture?'
Answer: 'The scripture initially states that contemplating the mind is the key to teaching and practice, and it is indeed not a dispensable meaning. It is only because the wonderful meaning is difficult to understand, so the judgment of teaching in the scripture is to generate understanding, the aspect of reasoning is relatively strong, and contemplation is only an auxiliary explanation. However, the wonderful purpose of this scripture is precisely the overall structure of the 'Mahayana Cessation and Contemplation' ('Mahayana Cessation and Contemplation', an important work of the Tiantai school of Buddhism). Why? If it were not for the three thousand aspects of emptiness, provisionality, and the middle way, how could one suddenly stop the three delusions and perfectly contemplate the three truths? Therefore, the 'Exemplary Meaning' (referring to the 'Exemplary Meaning of the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra') says 'Only rely on the original and trace to reveal the reality'. It should be known that 'Cessation and Contemplation' uses this wonderful meaning as the tool for cessation and contemplation, because the inconceivable realm is contemplation, so the three obstacles and four demons are the objects of cessation and contemplation. Therefore, the wonderful purpose of the thousand suchnesses, the 'Profound Text' (referring to the 'Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra') extensively uses the Dharma of sentient beings to elaborate, and the 'Commentary' (referring to the 'Commentary on the Lotus Sutra') extensively uses the Dharma of the Buddha to clarify. These ten gates want to jointly achieve the body of contemplation with 'Cessation and Contemplation', and all specialize'
約心法說之，所以節節云一念或心性剎那等也。故總結文云，令觀行可識。前文云『則彼此昭著法華行成』，又云『故撮十妙為觀法大體』，應知前四門為十乘觀體，后六門為起教觀體也。大部既教廣觀略，此文乃行正解旁，互相顯映，方進初心，豈重述十門但銷名相而已。愿諸聞見，如理思修云爾。」
十不二門指要鈔卷下
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：關於約心法（Yue Xin Fa，約束心念之法）的解說，所以才逐一提到一念（Yi Nian，一個念頭）或者心性剎那（Xin Xing Chana，心性的瞬間）等等。因此總結性的文字說，使觀行（Guan Xing，觀照修行）可以被認識。前面的文字說，『那麼彼此昭著，法華行（Fa Hua Xing，《法華經》的修行）成就』，又說『所以撮取十妙（Shi Miao，十種微妙）作為觀法（Guan Fa，觀修方法）的大體』，應當知道前面的四門是十乘觀體（Shi Sheng Guan Ti，十乘觀法的本體），後面的六門是起教觀體（Qi Jiao Guan Ti，發起教化的觀法本體）。《摩訶止觀》（Da Bu，指《摩訶止觀》）既然是教義廣博而觀法簡略，這篇文章乃是修行正解而旁及其他，互相輝映，才能夠進入初心，難道只是重述十門，僅僅消除名相而已嗎？希望所有聽聞和見到的人，能夠如理思維和修習。』
《十不二門指要鈔》（Shi Bu Er Men Zhi Yao Chao）卷下
【English Translation】 English version: Explaining the Yue Xin Fa (Method of Restraining the Mind), that's why it mentions 'Yi Nian' (a single thought) or 'Xin Xing Chana' (the moment of mind-nature) and so on, section by section. Therefore, the concluding text says, 'making Guan Xing (contemplative practice) recognizable.' The preceding text says, 'then they will be mutually manifest, and the Fa Hua Xing (practice of the Lotus Sutra) will be accomplished,' and also says, 'therefore, extracting the Shi Miao (Ten Subtleties) as the general framework of Guan Fa (methods of contemplation).' It should be known that the first four gates are the Shi Sheng Guan Ti (Substance of the Ten Vehicles Contemplation), and the latter six gates are the Qi Jiao Guan Ti (Substance of the Contemplation that Initiates Teaching). Since the Da Bu (Mahā Samatha Vipassanā, referring to the 'Mahā Samatha Vipassanā') is broad in doctrine and concise in contemplation, this article is the correct understanding of practice and touches on other aspects, mutually illuminating each other, so that one can enter the initial mind. Is it merely restating the ten gates and only eliminating names and forms? May all who hear and see this be able to think and practice according to the truth.'
Shi Bu Er Men Zhi Yao Chao (Essential Commentary on the Ten Non-Dual Gates), Volume 2