釋摩訶衍論 6.9

6.9

已說發起略問難違門，次說發起廣答解釋門。就此門中即有二門。云何為二？一者是總、二者是別。於總門中即有二種。云何為二？一者真如總、二者生滅總。如其次第，說相可見。答曰：雖實有此諸功德義，而無差別之相，等同一味，唯一真如者，即是真如總。謂雖自相大義門中作如是說，具種種德過於恒沙，而是生滅門之界量，非真如門。真如門中無差別相，平等平等一相一味，獨存真如淨法界故。以此義故，無相違過。自此已下作其緣由決斷疑惑。以無分別離分別相是故無二者，真如門中唯有同同、無異異故。自此已下釋生滅總。於此文中即有二種。云何為二？一者是問、二者是答。有廣略故，二重問答不同應知。初重問答其相云何，復以何義得說差別者，即是開問。謂若諸法從本已來，平等平等一味一相，獨存真理無二體者，復有何法而非平等，以之為依建立差別？即是舉異門以疑異門焉。自此已下發起答說決斷此疑，文相可見。以依業識生滅相示者，即是總答。謂真如門中無過恒沙一切染法以為所治，無能治之過於恒沙一切淨法以為對量，是故真如門中作如是說：一切諸法平等平等，一味一相無有二體等焉。而此生滅門中所治染法無量無邊，能治之淨法亦無量無邊，是故生滅門中作如是說：本覺體中具種種德，無量無邊過恒沙等焉。即是大意。次當作釋別別散說。所言依者，即是根本無明住地，一切染法之所依故。所言業者，即是業相。所言識者，轉等諸識。生滅相者，門之總稱。所言示者，相反顯示。此中以字遠流應至於三字，如是三法功德之起當緣由故。已說略說分，次說廣說分。就此分中即有二種。云何為二？一者是問、二者是答。此中問略答廣應知。此云何示者，即是詰問，所謂詰問其所由故。自此已下直答此問。此答釋中即有三種。云何為三？一者自宗正理、二者非道邪行、三者具舉對量，是名為三。如其次第，說相應觀。以一切法本來唯心實無於念者，即是第一自宗正理。所謂法性從無始來唯是一心，無一一法而非心故。而有妄心不覺起念，見諸境界故說無明者，即是第二非道邪行，所謂總舉本上之諸無明住地故。自此已下直顯具舉對量差別。如上所說本覺體中六相功德，各各待觀何等過患，以之為對建立顯示。所謂根本無明熏習一心之海，發起業等種種諸識，隱覆般若實智之明，增長愚癡迷亂之闇，即是不覺無明之界量明以之為對，一心之性寂滅無起，即是本覺慧明之安立德故建立顯示。如本心性無起即是大智慧光明義故故。自此已下顯第二德，文相可見。如是妄心起見達境，一向唯轉虛妄境中，不能通達真實境界。所以者何？真偽相違不契當故。如本若心起見則有不見之相故。自此已下明遍觀義。而真實心離轉見故，通達諸法無所不至，無所不當無所不盡。所以者何？真實智見離能見所見之邊見故。如本心性離見即是遍照法界義故故。自此已下明第三德，所謂若心有動轉相，即是無明熏習氣故虛妄轉明以之為對，心性寂靜無有喧動，正直無有顛倒之解，即是實智之照，隨順道理無倒建立顯示。如本若心有動非真識知故。自此已下顯第四德，所謂妄法從無始來無自體明以之為對，自性清淨本有功德建立顯示。如本無有自性故。自此已下顯第五德，所謂妄法四相之所遷故非常，三種苦俱轉故非樂，二種自在無故非我，一道清淨無故非淨，此四種過以為對量，本覺體中四種功德建立顯示。如本非常非樂非我非淨故。自此已下顯第六德，所謂妄法燒真心故，是故名熱；又是惱亂諸眾生故，是故名惱；破滅變德令不作故，是故衰變；由此事故一切眾生不得自在，是故亦名為不自在。待觀此事以為對故，清涼不變自在之德建立顯示。如本熱惱衰變則不自在故。自此已下顯示無邊功德相義，所謂若所對治染法無量無數，以能治之淨法亦無量無邊故。如本乃至具有過恒沙等妄染之義，對此義故心性無動，則有過恒沙等諸淨功德相義示現故。自此已下結圓滿德，所謂若一心法有動轉相，更見前境有可緣者，能見之心所見之境二差別故，本覺功德則不圓滿。而本性德雖過恒沙，唯一心量終無二體。所以者何？如是諸德悉皆各各不分其體，於一法界其量等故。是故圓滿自性功德，結縛解脫之二位中常恒具足，名為法身，名如來藏。如本若心有起更見前法可念者，則有所少，如是淨法無量功德即是一心，更無所念，是故滿足，名為法身如來之藏故。染淨數量平等決擇，依何契經所解釋耶？所謂文殊師利善巧方便相似譬喻大陀羅尼經。彼契經中如何說耶？謂彼經中作如是說：爾時文殊師利承佛神力，即說嗢拕南頌曰：

Having explained the section on raising a brief question to challenge contradictions, next I will explain the section on setting forth an extensive answer to interpret it. Within this section there are two sections. What are the two? The first is the general, and the second is the particular. Within the general section there are two kinds. What are the two? The first is the tathatā general [aspect], and the second is the arising-and-ceasing general [aspect]. Their characteristics can be seen in their proper order. The answer stating, "Although it truly possesses the meaning of these various virtues, there are no differentiated characteristics; they are equally of one taste, being only the single tathatā," is the tathatā general [aspect]. That is to say, although within the section on the great meaning of its own characteristics it is said in this way that it is endowed with various virtues exceeding the sands of the Ganges, this is the delimitation of the gate of arising and ceasing, not the gate of tathatā. Within the gate of tathatā there are no differentiated characteristics; it is universally equal, of one characteristic and one taste, uniquely preserving the pure dharmadhātu of tathatā. For this reason, there is no error of contradiction. From this point down, it sets forth the reason to resolve doubts. Regarding "Because there is no discrimination, it is free from discriminating characteristics, and therefore non-dual," within the gate of tathatā there is only sameness upon sameness, and no difference upon difference. From this point down, it explains the arising-and-ceasing general [aspect]. Within this text there are two kinds. What are the two? The first is a question, and the second is an answer. Because there are broad and brief [versions], one should know that the two levels of questions and answers are distinct. What are the characteristics of the first level of question and answer? "Furthermore, on what grounds can difference be spoken of?" is the opening question. That is to say: if all dharmas are from the beginning universally equal, of one taste and one characteristic, uniquely preserving the true principle without a second substance, then what dharma is not equal, by relying upon which difference could be established? This is adducing a different gate to raise doubt about a different gate. From this point down, it sets forth the answering explanation to resolve this doubt; the characteristics of the text can be seen. "Because it is shown relying upon the arising-and-ceasing characteristics of karma-consciousness" is the general answer. That is to say: within the gate of tathatā, there are no defiled dharmas exceeding the sands of the Ganges to serve as that which is cured, nor are there pure dharmas exceeding the sands of the Ganges that cure them to serve as counter-measures; therefore, within the gate of tathatā it is spoken of in this way: "All dharmas are universally equal, of one taste and one characteristic, without two substances," and so forth. Yet within this gate of arising and ceasing, the defiled dharmas to be cured are limitless and boundless, and the pure dharmas that cure them are also limitless and boundless; therefore, within the gate of arising and ceasing it is spoken of in this way: "Within the substance of original awakening, it is endowed with various virtues, limitless and boundless, exceeding the sands of the Ganges," and so forth. This is the general meaning. Next, an explanation shall be given, dispersing it into particular explanations. The word "relying upon" refers to the stage of fundamental ignorance, because it is that upon which all defiled dharmas rely. The word "karma" refers to the karma characteristic. The word "consciousness" refers to the evolving consciousness and the other [consciousnesses]. "Arising-and-ceasing characteristics" is the general designation for the gate. The word "shown" means shown by way of contrast. Here, the word "because" (以) extends distantly to apply to the three words [karma, consciousness, arising-and-ceasing], because these three dharmas are the conditions from which virtues arise. Having explained the brief explanation section, next I will explain the extensive explanation section. Within this section there are two kinds. What are the two? The first is a question, and the second is an answer. Here, one should know that the question is brief and the answer is extensive. "How is this shown?" is the interrogation, that is to say, interrogating its reason. From this point down, it directly answers this question. Within this answering explanation there are three kinds. What are the three? The first is the correct principle of our own school, the second is non-path erroneous practice, and the third is the full presentation of counter-measures; these are named the three. One should observe the characteristics of the explanation in their proper order. "Because all dharmas are originally mind only and truly have no thoughts" is the first, the correct principle of our own school. That is to say, the dharma-nature from beginningless time is only one mind, for there is not a single dharma that is not the mind. "Yet there is a deluded mind that non-awakeningly gives rise to thoughts and sees various sense objects; therefore it is called avidyā" is the second, non-path erroneous practice; that is to say, it generally adduces the stages of avidyā on top of the root. From this point down, it directly reveals the full presentation of the differences among the counter-measures. As spoken of above, regarding the six characteristics of virtues within the substance of original awakening, each is established and revealed by observing what faults it counters. That is to say, fundamental ignorance perfumes the ocean of the one mind, giving rise to karma and the other various consciousnesses, obscuring the light of the real wisdom of prajñā and increasing the darkness of stupidity and confusion; this is the delimitation of non-awakening avidyā. It is established and revealed in contrast to this, as the virtue of establishing the wisdom-light of original awakening, because the nature of the one mind is extinguished and free from arising. Just as the original text says: "Because the non-arising of the mind-nature is the meaning of the light of great wisdom." From this point down, it reveals the second virtue; the characteristics of the text can be seen. Such a deluded mind gives rise to views and reaches sense objects; it moves purely within false sense objects and cannot penetrate true sense objects. Why is this? Because truth and falsehood are contradictory and do not accord with each other. Just as the original text says: "Because if the mind gives rise to views, then there are characteristics of not seeing." From this point down, it clarifies the meaning of universal contemplation. And because the true mind is free from the evolving view, it penetrates all dharmas with nowhere it does not reach, nowhere it does not fit, and nowhere it does not exhaust. Why is this? Because true cognitive vision is free from the extreme views of that which sees and that which is seen. Just as the original text says: "Because the mind-nature being free from views is the meaning of universally illuminating the dharmadhātu." From this point down, it clarifies the third virtue. That is to say, if the mind has characteristics of motion and shifting, it is the perfumed habit-energy of avidyā and therefore moves falsely. It is established and revealed in contrast to this, in accordance with principle and without error, because the mind-nature is serene and free from noisy agitation, upright and free from inverted understanding, which is the illumination of real wisdom. Just as the original text says: "Because if the mind has motion, it is not true knowledge." From this point down, it reveals the fourth virtue. That is to say, it is established and revealed as the originally existent virtue of self-nature purity, in contrast to the fact that false dharmas from beginningless time have no self-substance. Just as the original text says: "Because it has no self-nature." From this point down, it reveals the fifth virtue. That is to say, false dharmas are impermanent because they are shifted by the four characteristics, are not pleasure because they evolve together with the three kinds of suffering, are not self because they lack the two kinds of sovereignty, and are not pure because they lack the purity of the single path. Using these four kinds of faults as counter-measures, the four kinds of virtues within the substance of original awakening are established and revealed. Just as the original text says: "Because it is not permanent, not pleasure, not self, and not pure." From this point down, it reveals the sixth virtue. That is to say, false dharmas burn the true mind, and therefore they are called "heat"; moreover, they vex and distress all sentient beings, and therefore they are called "distress"; they destroy and change virtues so as to prevent their function, and therefore they are "decay and change"; because of these facts, all sentient beings do not attain sovereignty, and therefore it is also called "lack of sovereignty." In contemplation of these facts as contrasts, the virtue of coolness, changelessness, and sovereignty is established and revealed. Just as the original text says: "Because heat, distress, decay, and change, then, are non-sovereignty." From this point down, it reveals the meaning of the characteristics of boundless virtues. That is to say, if the defiled dharmas to be cured are limitless and innumerable, then the pure dharmas that cure them are also limitless and boundless. Just as the original text says: "Down to having the meaning of false defilements exceeding the sands of the Ganges; in contrast to this meaning, because the mind-nature is motionless, there is the manifestation of the meaning of the characteristics of all pure virtues exceeding the sands of the Ganges." From this point down, it concludes with the complete virtue. That is to say, if the dharma of the one mind had characteristics of motion and shifting, and further saw an external object ahead that could be cognised, then because the mind that sees and the object that is seen would be two differentiated things, the virtues of original awakening would not be complete. Yet although the virtues of the original nature exceed the sands of the Ganges, they are only the measure of the one mind and ultimately lack two substances. Why is this? Because all such virtues each do not divide their substance, and their measure is equal in the one dharmadhātu. Therefore, the complete virtues of the self-nature are constantly and perpetually endowed across the two positions of bondage and liberation, and are called the dharmakāya, and called the tathāgatagarbha. Just as the original text says: "Because if the mind has arising and further sees a dharma ahead that can be thought of, then there would be a lack; such limitless virtues of pure dharmas are just the one mind, with nothing further to be thought of, and therefore it is complete, and called the dharmakāya, the tathāgatagarbha." By reliance upon which sūtra is this definitive resolution of the equality of the quantities of defilement and purity explained? It is the *Great Dhāraṇī Sūtra of Mañjuśrī's Skill-in-Means and Resemblance Parables*. How is it spoken of in that sūtra? That is to say, it is spoken of in that sūtra in this way: At that time, Mañjuśrī, receiving the Buddha's spiritual power, immediately spoke an udāna verse, saying: