02-灭谛与道谛：以果为道

三大阿僧祇劫为菩萨道全程之数，见《大乘庄严经论》卷一（T31, no. 1604, p. 591c1–7）；同论卷十二说修位二僧祇即第二、第三大劫阿僧祇（pp. 626b16–23）。初发心至见道（初地）为第一，初地至第七地为第二，第八地至成佛为第三。故见道后余两大阿僧祇劫（瑜伽行篇下篇第三章即用此数），全程则三大。即身成佛所压缩者是全程，故与显教相较取三大之数；密续"即生成办"之说即以此为对照背景。

"世间为贪所缚，亦以贪而解脱"，《喜金刚本续》（Hevajratantra）II.ii.51（D. Snellgrove 校订本编号）。梵本作"rāgeṇa badhyate loko rāgeṇaiva vimucyate"，斯内尔格罗夫英译作"By passion the world is bound, by passion too it is released"（The Hevajra Tantra: A Critical Study, London Oriental Series VI, Oxford，译文见书内第 93 页；梵藏本一册版心即标 II. ii，颂次可径复核。此颂下句正文未引，宜并观："viparītabhāvanā hy eṣā na jñātā buddhatīrthikaiḥ"，谓此颠倒之修不为佛法中外道所知。汉译《佛说大悲空智金刚大教王仪轨经》（T0892）卷三文字有异，作"諸眾生貪火所燒，為諸惡業之所纏縛，我以方便為說貪火而令解脫。如若有人為火燒烙還炙以火，即以是貪令斷貪縛，而不能知是顛倒觀想者，是人名為佛法中外道"，末二句正与梵本下句相当，顛倒觀想即 viparītabhāvanā，佛法中外道即 buddhatīrthika。同一形式于 I.ix 已见，T0892 卷二作"則為蘊等之所纏縛；若於世間癡闇真實了知，即於是縛而得解脫"。以欲为道之通式，无上瑜伽诸续广说。

禅门"冥想经验"之被读作纯粹、当下、离中介，很大程度是近代建构，见 Robert H. Sharf, "Buddhist Modernism and the Rhetoric of Meditative Experience", Numen 42:3 (1995)，及氏著 "Ritual", in D. S. Lopez Jr. (ed.), Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism, University of Chicago Press, 2005；禅门（尤宋代）之仪式性与机缘问答之文体性，见 T. Griffith Foulk, "Myth, Ritual, and Monastic Practice in Sung-Dynasty Ch'an", in P. B. Ebrey & P. N. Gregory (eds.), Religion and Society in T'ang and Sung China, University of Hawai'i Press, 1993。道元"修证一如"（修証一等）见《正法眼藏·辨道话》。禅宗顿渐与见性详见本书第一卷第十篇。福尔克该文未获原书复核；同一题目，另有两本可核。其一，机缘问答之为文体，见 John R. McRae. "Encounter Dialogue and the Transformation of the Spiritual Path in Chinese Ch'an." In R. E. Buswell Jr. & R. M. Gimello (eds.), Paths to Liberation: The Mārga and Its Transformations in Buddhist Thought, University of Hawai'i Press, 1992（起书内 339 页）。书内 340 页："The texts of Ch'an encounter dialogue, as they exist today, are not journalistic accounts of actual events, although centuries of Chinese readers and practitioners have assumed that they are. Rather, they are literary re-creations of how the enlightened masters of the past must have spoken and acted."；书内 341 页并谓此类材料"may not have appeared as a genre of Ch'an literature until sometime during the tenth century"。同书起书内 371 页另有 Gimello 论北宋禅之学问与文字一篇，可并参。其二，仪式性一层，见 Bernard Faure. The Rhetoric of Immediacy: A Cultural Critique of Chan/Zen Buddhism. Princeton University Press, 1991，书内 314 页："what happens when the incongruency is the ritualization itself, when ritual disguises itself as nonritual, as in the Chan 'encounter dialogues' or in sitting meditation? What goes on when spontaneity itself is ritualized, when immediacy…is mediated by ritual, when ultimate truth is framed by conventional truth?"。惟须记一层：麦克雷把机缘问答成为一种文体的时间下推至十世纪，即在马祖诸家之后、宋初之前；两本所论的仪式性与文体性，都是当作唐末以来长程演变的结果讲的，非宋人所独造。

仪式作为"虚拟语气"（subjunctive）、"仿佛"（as-if）世界之建立，见 Adam B. Seligman, Robert P. Weller, Michael J. Puett & Bennett Simon, Ritual and Its Consequences: An Essay on the Limits of Sincerity, Oxford University Press, 2008，导论（书内第 7 至 8 页，）揭其纲，第一章详之。