Three Contemplations Meaning (三觀義) · Three Contemplations Meaning Sutra (三觀義) · Thus have I heard - Illuminating Buddhist Wisdom with AI

夫三寸之管氣序不衰。一尺之表朝陽可測。是知得其道者。豈遠乎哉。三觀詣理之妙門。今明此義。故借為喻也。作佛遐蹤。神功浩曠。求茲非遠。寄以一心。體之有源。總乎三智。若其假方便以致殊。會歸一道寂然而雙照。況復發軫入不二之門。圓觀成十法之乘。兼用七義。義無不攝。非止淨名名顯。一部宗致。文意炳然。今明三觀義。即為二意。一先分別境智。二正解釋。一先分別境智者。所觀之境。即十二因緣所生之法為境。大聖說此正因緣生法。為破外人說邪因緣生無因緣生之邪僻也。正因緣生一切法者。無明因緣則生六道凡夫之法。若解因緣則生四種聖人之法。故涅槃經云。因滅無明即熾然菩提。所言十二因緣者。即無明緣行。行緣識。識緣名色。名色緣六入。六入緣觸。觸緣受。受緣愛。愛緣取。取緣有。有緣生。生緣老死也。言因緣者。有展轉感果故名為因。互相由有謂之為緣。此約三世明十二支。初二過去。次八現在。後二未來。明此因緣有三種事。一煩惱。二業。三苦。此三事互為因緣。煩惱業因緣。業苦因緣。苦苦因緣。苦煩惱因緣。煩惱業因緣。業苦因緣。苦苦因緣是為展轉。互為因緣。因緣相續生二十五有。若知無明不起取有。則三界生死皆息。三乘行人入涅槃之要道也。問曰。佛開三乘因緣。是中乘觀。何得三乘通觀也。答曰。經論赴緣不同。或如所問。如智度論云。十二因緣獨菩薩法。中論云。為鈍根聲聞說因緣生滅相。為利根菩薩說因緣不生滅相。如涅槃說。十二因緣有四種觀。下智聲聞。中智緣覺。上智菩薩。上上智佛。即是約十二因緣明四種境也。今一家明義。四諦既為四種。十二因緣亦為四種。一者生滅十二因緣。二者無生滅十二因緣。三者無量十二因緣。四者無作十二因緣。生滅無生滅即為初觀之境。無量十二因緣為第二觀境。無作十二因緣為第三觀境。今取中觀論偈四句判此義也。因緣所生即空之理是第一觀境。因緣即假之理是第二觀境。因緣即中之理是第三觀境。問曰。為當境自是境。為當由智故說境。答曰。若言境自境。即是自性境。若言由智故說境。即是他性境。若言境智合說境。即是共生境。義有二過。謂自他性。若言離智境故說境。即是無因緣而說境。從因緣說境尚不可得。何況無因緣而說境也。四句說智。其過亦然。今中觀論所明諸法不自生。豈得說言由境故境。亦不從他生。豈得言由智故說境。亦不共生。豈得境智合故境。亦不無因生。豈得離境智故境。四句明智亦復如是。今四句撿境。性不可得。而說為境者。即是假境。假境是不思議境也。智亦如是。有無因果。善惡是非。一切諸法。類如此撿。若用此意研覈眾家解釋經論。難免性義也。問曰。若境自境。可是自性境。今待智故說境。何得是他性境也。答曰。境既稱自。智豈非他。不待智他。那論境自。若待境自。智即是他。境自是自性。他即他性。自性之境不名假境。他性之境豈成假境。若非假境。即非不思議境也。智亦如是。今明不思議境者。即是此經所明之境。不思議智者。即是此經所明之觀智。故金光明經散脂鬼神品云。我現見不可思議智境。不可思議智照。即其義也。

A three-inch pipe can maintain a continuous flow of air, and a one-foot sundial can measure the morning sun. This shows that attaining the Way is not far away at all. The three contemplations are a wondrous gateway to reaching the truth. To clarify this meaning, we now use them as a metaphor.

The path to Buddhahood is vast and its divine workings immense, yet seeking it is not distant—it is entrusted to a single mind. To embody it has its source, which is encompassed by the three wisdoms. If one employs skillful means to attain the extraordinary, they converge into a single path—tranquil yet illuminating both sides. Moreover, setting out to enter the gate of non-duality, perfect contemplation accomplishes the vehicle of the ten dharmas, incorporating seven meanings that encompass all principles.

This is not only made clear by Vimalakīrti; the entire text’s purpose and meaning shine brightly. Now, to explain the meaning of the three contemplations, we proceed in two parts: first, distinguishing object and wisdom; second, the proper explanation.

**I. First, Distinguishing Object and Wisdom**

The object of contemplation is the dharma produced by the twelve links of dependent origination. The Great Sage taught this proper dependent origination of dharmas to refute outsiders’ erroneous views of arising from improper causes or from no cause at all.

From proper dependent origination arise all dharmas: due to ignorance, the dharmas of the six realms of ordinary beings arise; if one understands dependent origination, the dharmas of the four kinds of sages arise. Thus, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: “With the cessation of ignorance, bodhi blazes forth.”

The twelve links of dependent origination are: ignorance conditions volitional formations, formations condition consciousness, consciousness conditions name-and-form, name-and-form conditions the six sense bases, the six sense bases condition contact, contact conditions feeling, feeling conditions craving, craving conditions grasping, grasping conditions becoming, becoming conditions birth, birth conditions aging-and-death.

“Cause” and “condition” refer to successive production of effects: what brings about an effect is called a cause; mutual reliance is called a condition. This explains the twelve branches across three periods: the first two belong to the past, the next eight to the present, and the last two to the future.

This dependent origination involves three matters: afflictions, karma, and suffering. These three mutually serve as cause and condition: afflictions and karma as cause and condition, karma and suffering as cause and condition, suffering and suffering as cause and condition, suffering and afflictions as cause and condition, afflictions and karma as cause and condition, karma and suffering as cause and condition, suffering and suffering as cause and condition—this is their successive, mutual causation. Through this causal continuity, the twenty-five realms of existence arise. If one knows that ignorance does not give rise to grasping and becoming, then birth and death in the three realms cease entirely. This is the essential path for practitioners of the three vehicles to enter nirvāṇa.

**Question:** The Buddha taught dependent origination for the three vehicles. Here, it is the contemplation for the middle vehicle; how can it be a common contemplation for all three vehicles?

**Answer:** Sūtras and treatises adapt to circumstances differently. Some are as you ask. For example, the Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise says: “The twelvefold dependent origination is exclusively the dharma of bodhisattvas.” The Middle Treatise says: “For dull-rooted śrāvakas, the characteristic of dependent origination’s arising and ceasing is taught; for sharp-rooted bodhisattvas, the characteristic of dependent origination’s non-arising and non-ceasing is taught.” As the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says, there are four kinds of contemplation of the twelvefold dependent origination: lower wisdom for śrāvakas, middle wisdom for pratyekabuddhas, higher wisdom for bodhisattvas, and highest wisdom for buddhas. This means the twelvefold dependent origination clarifies four kinds of objects.

Now, our school’s explanation is: just as the four truths are of four kinds, so too the twelvefold dependent origination is of four kinds: 1. The twelvefold dependent origination of arising and ceasing. 2. The twelvefold dependent origination of non-arising and non-ceasing. 3. The twelvefold dependent origination of the immeasurable. 4. The twelvefold dependent origination of the non-created.

The first two serve as the object for the initial contemplation; the immeasurable twelvefold dependent origination as the object for the second contemplation; the non-created twelvefold dependent origination as the object for the third contemplation. Here, we adopt the four-line verse from the Middle Treatise to determine this meaning: - The principle of emptiness of dependently arisen dharmas is the object of the first contemplation. - The principle of conventional existence of dependent origination is the object of the second contemplation. - The principle of the middle way of dependent origination is the object of the third contemplation.

**Question:** Is the object inherently the object, or is it called an object because of wisdom?

**Answer:** If you say the object is inherently the object, that is the object of self-nature. If you say it is called an object because of wisdom, that is the object of other-nature. If you say the object is spoken of through the combination of object and wisdom, that is the object of co-production, which involves two faults: self-nature and other-nature. If you say the object is spoken of apart from wisdom and object, that is speaking of an object without cause or condition. If speaking of an object from causes and conditions is already untenable, how much more so speaking of an object without cause or condition? The same faults apply to the four propositions regarding wisdom.

Now, the Middle Treatise states that dharmas do not arise from themselves—how can one say the object exists because of the object? They also do not arise from another—how can one say the object is spoken of because of wisdom? They also do not arise from both—how can the object exist through the combination of object and wisdom? They also do not arise without cause—how can the object exist apart from object and wisdom? The same applies to the four propositions regarding wisdom.

Now, examining the object through these four propositions, its nature cannot be apprehended. Yet we speak of it as an object—this is a provisional object. A provisional object is an inconceivable object. The same applies to wisdom. Existence and non-existence, cause and effect, good and evil, right and wrong—all dharmas are to be examined in this way. If one uses this meaning to scrutinize the various schools’ explanations of sūtras and treatises, they will find it difficult to avoid the fault of inherent nature.

**Question:** If the object is inherently the object, it could be the object of self-nature. But now you say it is called an object in relation to wisdom; how can that be the object of other-nature?

**Answer:** If the object is called “self,” then is wisdom not “other”? Without relying on wisdom as other, how can we speak of the object as self? If we rely on the object as self, then wisdom is other. The object as self-nature is not called a provisional object; how could the object as other-nature become a provisional object? If it is not a provisional object, it is not an inconceivable object. The same applies to wisdom.

Now, the inconceivable object is the object clarified in this sūtra. The inconceivable wisdom is the contemplative wisdom clarified in this sūtra. Thus, the Golden Light Sūtra, in the chapter on the ghost Samjñā, says: “I directly see the inconceivable object of wisdom and the illumination of inconceivable wisdom.” This is its meaning.

第一釋三觀名者。三觀之名出瓔珞經。一者從假入空觀。二者從空入假觀。三者中道第一義觀。所言從假入空觀者。無而虗設。目之為假。觀假知無。名之入空。若觀諸法如幻如化。但有名字。即入真諦也。而說為二諦觀者。或就情智二諦。或約隨智二諦觀耳。次釋從空入假觀者。若不住空。還入幻化。假名世諦。分別無滯也。而言平等者。若破一用一。不名平等。前觀知假非假。破假入空。次觀知空非空。破空入假。空假互破互用。名為平等也。次釋中道觀者。中以不二為義。道以能通為目。照一實諦。虗通無滯。是中道觀也。故云是二觀為方便道。因是二空觀得入中道。雙照二諦。心心寂滅。自然流入薩婆若海。此三通名觀者。觀以觀穿為義。亦是觀達為能。觀穿者。即是觀穿見思恒沙無明之惑。故名觀穿也。觀達者。達三諦之理。是以涅槃經云。即以利钁斵之。磐石沙鹵直過無礙。徹至金剛。磐石者。見思惑也。沙者。塵沙無知惑也。鹵者。即是無明住地惑也。徹過者。觀穿之義。至金剛者。即達中道佛性理也。問曰。三觀俱照二諦。有何等殊。答曰。前觀雖照二諦。破用不等。次第二觀亦照二諦。破用平等。既不見中道。但是異時平等也。第三觀者得見中道。雙照二諦。即是一時平等也。

First, explaining the names of the Three Contemplations. The names of the Three Contemplations come from the Sutra of the Garland of Jewels. The first is the Contemplation of Entering Emptiness from the Provisional. The second is the Contemplation of Entering the Provisional from Emptiness. The third is the Contemplation of the Supreme Meaning of the Middle Way.

What is called the Contemplation of Entering Emptiness from the Provisional: That which is nonexistent yet provisionally established is called "provisional." Contemplating the provisional and knowing it to be nonexistent is called "entering emptiness." If one contemplates all phenomena as like illusions, like mirages, having only names, then one enters the truth of ultimate reality. And when it is spoken of as the Contemplation of the Two Truths, it is either based on the two truths of conventional perception and wisdom, or it refers to the contemplation of the two truths in accordance with wisdom.

Next, explaining the Contemplation of Entering the Provisional from Emptiness: If one does not abide in emptiness, but returns to enter the illusory, provisional names of worldly truth, then discrimination proceeds without obstruction. And when it is spoken of as "equality": If one destroys one and employs another, it is not called equality. The previous contemplation knows the provisional is not truly provisional, destroying the provisional to enter emptiness. The subsequent contemplation knows emptiness is not truly empty, destroying emptiness to enter the provisional. Emptiness and the provisional mutually destroy and mutually employ each other; this is called equality.

Next, explaining the Contemplation of the Middle Way: "Middle" takes non-duality as its meaning. "Way" takes the capacity to penetrate as its designation. Illuminating the one true reality, empty yet penetrating without obstruction—this is the Contemplation of the Middle Way. Therefore it is said these two contemplations are the expedient path. Relying on these two contemplations of emptiness, one enters the Middle Way, simultaneously illuminating the two truths, with mind and mind-states becoming tranquil and extinguished, naturally flowing into the ocean of All-Knowledge.

These three are collectively called "contemplations." Contemplation takes "seeing through" as its meaning, and also "penetrating understanding" as its function. "Seeing through" means seeing through the afflictions of views and thoughts, the sands of the Ganges, and fundamental ignorance; therefore it is called seeing through. "Penetrating understanding" means understanding the principle of the three truths. Therefore, the Nirvana Sutra says: "Then with a sharp pickaxe, one strikes it. Hard rock, sand, and saline soil are directly passed through without obstruction, penetrating all the way to the vajra-like ground." The hard rock is the affliction of views and thoughts. The sand is the affliction of ignorance as numerous as grains of sand. The saline soil is the affliction of fundamental ignorance dwelling in the ground. "Passing through" is the meaning of seeing through. "Reaching the vajra-like ground" is attaining understanding of the principle of the Middle Way, the Buddha-nature.

Question: All three contemplations illuminate the two truths. What is the difference between them? Answer: The first contemplation, although it illuminates the two truths, its destruction and employment are unequal. The second contemplation also illuminates the two truths, with destruction and employment being equal. However, since it does not yet perceive the Middle Way, it is merely equality at different times. The third contemplation attains perception of the Middle Way, simultaneously illuminating the two truths; this is equality at the same time.

二明摩訶衍體假入空觀者。入空觀門乃有多途。今約無生觀門明體假入空也。就此觀門。亦為兩別。一明體見假以入空。二明體愛假以入空。先明體見假以入空者。體因緣所生見法。皆如幻夢。因成．續．待。但有名字。名字即空。非滅故空。空即是真諦。真諦即是涅槃。是為體假入空觀也。問曰。所明觀法。其義云何。答曰。當觀因緣所生身見之心。約三假而撿。一就因成撿者。內有意根。外有法塵。根塵相對則有意觸。因緣生受。受生者即是身見意識生也。今此見識。定從何生。為意根生。為法塵生。為根塵合生。為離根塵生。若意根生。即自性生。若法塵生。即他性生。根塵合生。即是共生。共生有二過。所謂自他性也。若離根塵生。即無因緣生。從因緣生尚不可說。何況無因緣生也。故中觀論偈云。諸法不自生。亦不從他生。不共不無因。是故說無生。當知身見之心本自不生。不生而說生者。但是隨順世間名字故說。生名字之法。不在內。不在外。亦非兩間。亦不常自有。是字不住。亦不不住。是字無所有。言語道斷。是名從因成假以入空也。問曰。空有二種。一者性空。二相空。此云何分別。答曰。前四句撿生性不可得。即是得性空無生。而說生即是假生。假生即是不生生。不生生即是相空也。故世諦破性立假。即是性空也。真諦破假即是相空也。問曰。四句皆撿。撿即是析。撿析何殊。答曰。撿非析也。如見鏡像。撿像鏡不得像。離撿鏡形亦不得像。此即無像之像。像但有名。豈可破析。不如前析㲲從麤至細。極隣虗塵。無實以入空也。次撿相續假。此一念心。為是生生。為滅生。為生滅生。為離生滅而有生。若是生生。即自性生。由滅故生。即他性生。若生滅生。即是共生。共生有二過。謂自他性。若離生離滅生。即無因緣生。從因緣生尚不可得。況無因生也。今觀此心。不自性生。故非生生。不他性生。故非滅生。不自他性生。故非生滅共。不無因生。故非離生滅生也。如此四句撿生不得。不生而說生者。但以隨順世間名字故說生。名字之生即是假生。假名之生即是不生。若無生名字。則言語道斷。是名從相續假以入空也。問曰。若說生生。可是自性生。待滅故生。滅生非生。即是假義。何得言是他性生也。答曰。生若稱自。滅豈非他。滅若非他。生豈是自。生是自性。滅即他性。生是自性。不得成假。滅是他性。何得說假。滅是他性。遂得說假。生是自性。亦應說假。如此撿覈。由生故生。即是自性之過。說滅為生。即墮他性之失。如是論者。由滅說生。假不成也。次撿相待假。此身見心生。為是生生。為不生生。為生不生生。為離生離不生生。若是生生。即自性生。若不生生。即他性生。若生不生生。即是共生。共生有二過。謂自他性。若離生離不生生。即是無因生。因緣生尚不可說。何況無因緣而說生也。今觀此心不自性生。故非生生。不他性生。故非不生生。不自他性生。故非生不生共生。不無因生。故非離生。不生而說生也。如此四句撿生不得。即是不生。不生而說生者。但以隨順世間名字故說生。名字之生。即是假生。假名之生。即是不生。若無生名字。則言語道斷。是名從相待假以入空也。問曰。若說生生。可是自性生。待不生而說生。豈是他性生也。答曰。若生稱自。不生豈非他也。相續科已並覈竟。細類可知。故舍利弗問須菩提。為生生。為不生生。須菩提答。非生生。非不生生也。是則破生見。三假合有十二番觀門。若觀三假生不生而執著無生。還用十二番觀而破之也。破亦生亦無生見。亦有十二番觀。破非生非無生見。亦有十二番。合破四見。有四十八番觀能破。如所破是。則破能觀之心亦有四十八番。合能所共有九十六番觀門。善修此觀。觀生相。生生畢竟不可得。乃至複四見．具足四見．不可說見。皆不可得。豁然開悟。六十二見八十八使皆滅。得須陀洹。故大品經云。須陀洹若智若斷。是菩薩無生法忍。此即巧度。不斷而斷。不同拙度之定斷也。

二明從空入假觀者。亦為三意。一明入假之意。二明入假之觀。三明觀成化物。一明入假之意者。此觀正為觀俗諦。破塵沙無知。若二乘不為化物。不須此觀。菩薩弘誓。必須此觀。所言從空入假者。若滯於空。墮二乘地。如大品經云。我以佛眼觀十方世界恒沙菩薩學菩薩道。少得入菩薩位。多墮二乘。是故教道菩薩從空入假。用道種智入菩薩位。若不滯空。如空中種樹。分別藥病化眾生也。二明修入假觀者。入假有二種。一者入見假一切法。二者入愛假一切法。一明入見假一切法者。菩薩住深禪定。知空非空。觀假見假。有四種。從此四見。出無量見。一自生見。二他生見。三共生見。四無因生見。此四見各有執諍之病也。復次。執有二種。一執外人邪因緣無因緣四生之見。所謂從冥初生。覺從微塵生。自在天生時生。自然生也。二執佛法正因緣生。自．他．共．無因四生之見。執自生見者。若計意根生意識。是則心能生心。故正法念經云。心如工畵師。作種種五陰。一切世間法。無不從心造。亦如唯識之所明也。他生者。經云。心不孤生。必藉緣而起。故大品經云。有緣思則生。無緣思不生。當知一切法皆從外緣生也。共者。有言如經所說。六觸因緣生六受識。得一切法也。自然生者。如龍王經云。一切法皆自然而生。大品經云。十二因緣。非佛．天．人．脩羅作。性自爾也。佛有四種之說。皆是四悉檀。方便赴緣利物而說。諸眾生顛倒不了。或執外人邪說四邊而生見著。或執佛法經論四邊而生見著。故大智論云。譬如大火聚。四邊不可取。邪見火燒故。故隨所執見有苦集。若能知苦斷集。必須修道證滅。二明愛假諸法亦如是。三明觀成化物者。菩薩從空入假修證。即是觀因緣。亦名為假。名生不生無量四諦。亦名道種智。亦名法眼。過二乘地。用道種智入菩薩位。入假修證。道種智合有三種。一生滅道種。二無生滅道種。三依藏識道種。菩薩住是位。為降伏天魔及其眷屬。即入愛假。現諸神通。乃至同事利物。說諸愛論。如此土三墳五典。安國育民之經書也。為降伏外道及其眷屬。入見假顯示智慧。乃至同事利物。說諸見論。如十八種六師皆稱一切智也。深知愛見苦集之病無量。道滅之藥亦復無量。皆如夢幻。用四悉檀赴其根緣。隨病授藥。復次。菩薩為度如是無量眾生故。遊戲神通淨佛國士。成就眾生。入假修無量願行。是為觀成化物也。

第二一心三觀者。此觀是深行。利根菩薩之所修習。所以者何。不思議因緣之理。甚深微妙。其觀慧門難解難入。今明此觀亦為三意。一明所觀之境。二明能觀之觀。三證成。一所觀之境者。即是一念無明因緣具十法界三諦之境也。十法界者。一地獄法界。二畜生法界。三餓鬼法界。四脩羅法界。五人法界。六天法界。七聲聞法界。八緣覺法界。九菩薩法界。十佛法界。此即六是凡夫。四是聖人。所言法界者。法名自體。界以性別為義。此十種法體。因果不同。事性隔別。不相混濫。故言十法界。此十法界。皆是十二因緣之所成。故言因緣所生法也。十二因緣並依無明。無明之理體非異念。故言一念具足十法界也。一念十二因緣。出華嚴．大集．瓔珞經文。因緣三諦已如前辨。問曰。九法界可是十二因緣所成。佛法界清淨。非生死法。云何亦說為十二因緣耶。答曰。大品經云。若有能深觀十二因緣。即是坐道場。此經云。緣起是道場。無明乃至老死皆無盡故。又涅槃經云。十二因緣名為佛性。見佛性故住大涅槃。依此而推。十二因緣何得非佛法界也。問曰。一念十二因緣具十法界。何得以為一心三觀之境。答曰。以一念十二因緣。即空．即假．即中。三諦之理。不縱不橫。不一不異。十法界法雖復無量。不礙一念無明之心。一念無明之心含十法界。無有迫妨。問曰。一人具十法界次第。經無量劫。云何止在一念無明心內不相妨礙耶。答曰。此經明不思議。須彌入芥子。不相妨礙。無情之物尚得如此。況心神微妙。一念具足一切三世諸心諸法。何足致疑。問曰。諸大乘經皆明不思議。其意難見。云何了別。答曰。佛法不思議道理。唯可仰信。豈可情求。若苟抱深迷。當以近譬。法華經安樂行品。明持經之人。若於夢中。但見妙事。所謂夢見從初值佛發菩提心。乃至成道轉法輪。經千萬億劫。度無量眾生。是則少時眠心有無量夢事。無量夢事而不礙一念眠心。一念眠心能含無量劫事。無明一念具一切法不相妨礙。亦復如是。而眠時謂無量。別覺已反觀。知止是一念眠心具無量心。今時人雖不夢裏見無量劫事。而亦倐忽見三數日事。見是無量夢事。只是一念眠心之內而不相妨。世間現見如此。無明一念具一切法不相妨礙。何所致疑。眠法覆心。即譬無明覆中道佛性之真心。無量夢。即譬恒沙無知覆一切佛法妙事。夢事不實而取著憂喜。譬見思覆真空也。若不細尋夢譬。此不思議理。疑終難決。故諸大乘經多說十喻。但諸師解譬。或時偏淺。唯見譬夢不實空邊。不見譬無明一念無量邊也。二明能觀之觀者。若觀此一念無明之心非空非假。一切諸法非空非假亦不得。非空非假而能照此中道之空假。即是照一切法性法界之空假也。知假非假。即是入真。知空非空。即是入俗。照中道見二諦。即一心三觀之相也。

第三對眼智者。智即三智。眼即五眼。三觀能知因緣三諦之理即是三智。能見因緣三諦之理即是五眼。若解三觀．三智．五眼。兩科大義宛然明了。若分別為論。三觀為因。三智．五眼為果。通而為論。三觀即是三智．五眼之異名耳。如大智論釋般若云。別即般若為因。至佛心則變名一切種智。若通而為論。俱通因果。如大智論偈云。若如法觀佛。般若及涅槃。是三則一相。其實無有異。故知般若之名亦至佛果。又如三德成大涅槃。不縱不橫。如世伊字。摩訶般若。果上之一德也。問曰。三觀對三智。其數相應。三觀對五眼。數豈相當。答曰。若觀麤細因緣。即是肉眼．天眼之境。若見三諦之理。即是慧眼．法眼．佛眼也。問曰。若觀因緣。未見真諦而開天．肉二眼者。亦應觀假方便．一切智方便。開為兩觀兩智也。答曰。觀智通漫方便。不須別開。見義指的。必須離出二眼。問曰。慧解脫人亦觀因緣入空而無天眼。豈得觀因緣麤細之境說肉．天二眼耶。答曰。慧解脫人雖觀麤細因緣。不為修通。若觀因緣麤色。修諸功德。則肉眼漸淨。所見轉遠。若入禪定觀因緣細色。斷障通無知。即發天眼。故知因緣麤細色境即是修二眼之方便。亦是二眼所見之境界也。今正明對智眼。即為三意。一對三智。二對五眼。三約教料簡。一對三智者。從假入空觀即是一切智之異名也。此二同照真諦故。從空入假觀即道種智之異名也。此二同照世諦故。中道第一義觀即是一切種智之異名也。此二同照中道。中道一相雙照二諦也。二對五眼者。初觀因緣麤細之法。若見麤細之色即是肉．天二眼。入空見真即是慧眼。第二觀從空入假。見俗分明。即是法眼。第三觀深觀中道二諦。即是佛眼也。三約教料簡者。問曰。四教所明三智．五眼。悉得對三諦不。答曰。三藏通教。三智五眼通。但照二諦。所以者何。不明佛性常住涅槃是佛果。不出二諦也。若別教．圓教則如前。是則佛果通出二諦外也。問曰。三藏．通教若不對中道。云何辨三智．五眼之別。答曰。別照二諦則有二觀．二智．四眼之別。雙照二諦。二諦理窮。即受種智．佛眼之名。問曰。佛別教二諦。二諦只是二觀．二智．四眼。何得有三智．五眼耶。答曰。若是含中入真。世諦守本。即是通教二諦。從假入空觀。一切智．慧眼。但見真空。不見不空。從真入假觀。道種智．法眼。照俗如前。第三觀種智．佛眼。能見第一義不空。即是見佛性住大涅槃。此即佛果不出二諦也。復次。若將真含俗。中道諦守本。為二者。初二觀。二智．四眼同照俗諦。俗諦有。空有也。第三觀種智．佛眼。悉照真諦。真諦即是佛性。見佛性故住大涅槃。此亦佛果不出二諦也。

**I. First, Distinguishing Object and Wisdom**

**Question:** The Buddha taught dependent origination for the three vehicles. Here, it is the contemplation for the middle vehicle; how can it be a common contemplation for all three vehicles?

**Question:** Is the object inherently the object, or is it called an object because of wisdom?

**Question:** If the object is inherently the object, it could be the object of self-nature. But now you say it is called an object in relation to wisdom; how can that be the object of other-nature?

**I. First, Distinguishing Object and Wisdom**

**Question:** The Buddha taught dependent origination for the three vehicles. Here, it is the contemplation for the middle vehicle; how can it be a common contemplation for all three vehicles?

**Question:** Is the object inherently the object, or is it called an object because of wisdom?

**Question:** If the object is inherently the object, it could be the object of self-nature. But now you say it is called an object in relation to wisdom; how can that be the object of other-nature?