仁王護國般若經疏 3.12

3.12

「白佛言」下，第二明觀照般若。文二：先問、後答。問意云：有法既非是大乘，云何照？此從上非非見一切法文而生此難也。「大王摩訶衍」下，二答。文二：先略、後廣。初答意云：大乘見者，見法非法，以色等法空故也。「法若非非法」下，二廣答釋。文二：初正廣釋、二明能觀之智雙照空有。初文二：先明法空性空、次歷法明空。今初。云「法若非非法」，是名法空也。「法性空」者，性本若不空，不可令其得空。以性本自空，故諸法皆空也。「色受想行」下，二歷法明空。文二：先正明、後釋成空義。今初，約六門明空。《大論》云「五陰空是果報空，十二入空是受用空，十八界空是性別空。以所病不同說斯三種，為疑心數者說於五陰，為疑色者說十二入，為疑色心等者說十八界。」「六大」名遍到空，《阿含》云「六王諍大。地云我能載，水云能漂潤，火云能燒照，風云能生動，空云能容受，識云若無我者色則敗壞。」五雖大而識為主，故云四大圍空識居其中也。四諦是境空，因緣是義空云云。「是法」下，二釋成空義。文二：初就識陰、次例四蘊及諸法。初文四：一標宗、二類釋、三徵詰、四釋通。今初，以色法中有五義故空。「即生即住即滅」者，諸小乘師或云：生前、住次、滅後。或云：生住同時。皆不免難。何者？若云生前住次滅後，則生時無住，以生前故。若無住者，云何有生？以先無住，住於此生，生不得住則無生也。若住前無生，則亦無住，以無因故。若生前有住，則生住同時。若生滅已方有住者，住非生有。此計異之過也；若生住同時，則因果一體生死同相，此計一之失。今云即生即住即滅者，不同二說，以諸法體念念遷流無有暫止，亦是生時即住時滅時，如疾炎過鋒奔緣經刃不已則來無暫住時。故《淨名》云「汝今即時亦生亦老亦滅」也。「即有即空」者，色性自空，非色壞故空也。「剎那剎那」下，二類釋，明念念皆空，同上五也。剎那者，極短時也。「何以故」者，三徵詰。意云：生滅相違，云何言即生即住即滅等云云。「九十剎那」下，四釋通。以九十小剎那為一大念，一念中一剎那復有九百生滅，是故生時即有住滅也。又九十剎那為一念，一念中一剎那經九百生滅，一念有九十剎那，合有八萬一千生滅。以生滅攝剎那、剎那攝一念，如是心法不可得，此明心空。以四大分諸根，諸根不可得；以四微分四大，四大不可得；以麁微分四微，四微不可得；以極微分麁微，麁微不可得。推色至於極微、窮心盡於生滅，色盡心窮豁然無住，無住之住不可名之，強是為空，即護三藏佛果也。若見色色空、見心心空，無得無住，此護通佛果也。若見色心二法而一而異，廣大如法界、究竟若虛空，函蓋相稱，此護別佛果也。若見色心二法本來空寂，不動不住不生不滅，此護圓佛果也云云。「乃至色」下，第二類釋四陰及諸法，亦即生即滅即有即空也云云。

From "said to the Buddha" below is the second [section], clarifying observational prajñā. The text has two parts: first the question, then the answer. The gist of the question is: Since existent phenomena are not the Great Vehicle, how does one illuminate [them]? This objection arises from the preceding text, "[one does] not not see all phenomena." From "Great King, the Mahāyāna" below is the second [part], the answer. The text has two parts: first brief, then detailed. The gist of the first answer is: The seeing of the Great Vehicle is seeing that phenomena are non-phenomena, because form and other phenomena are empty. From "If phenomena are not non-phenomena" below is the second [part], elaborating the answer and explanation. The text has two parts: first directly elaborating the explanation, second clarifying that the wisdom capable of contemplating doubly illuminates both emptiness and existence. The first text has two parts: first clarifying the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of nature, next examining phenomena in sequence to clarify emptiness. As for the first: Saying "if phenomena are not non-phenomena" is called the emptiness of phenomena. "The nature of phenomena is empty": if their nature were originally not empty, one could not cause them to become empty. Because their nature is fundamentally empty in itself, all phenomena are empty. From "form, feeling, perception, compositional factors" below is the second [part], examining phenomena in sequence to clarify emptiness. The text has two parts: first directly clarifying, then explaining and completing the meaning of emptiness. First, emptiness is clarified with reference to six gates. The *Dà zhìdù lùn* says: "The emptiness of the five aggregates is the emptiness of retributive fruition; the emptiness of the twelve sense bases is the emptiness of experiencing; the emptiness of the eighteen elements is the emptiness of distinct natures. These three kinds are spoken because the illnesses [of beings] differ: for those who doubt mental concomitants, the five aggregates are taught; for those who doubt physical form, the twelve sense bases are taught; for those who doubt form, mind, and the like, the eighteen elements are taught." The "six great elements" are called all-pervading emptiness. The *Āgama*s state: "The six kings disputed over which was greatest. Earth said, 'I can carry'; water said, '[I can] float and moisten'; fire said, '[I can] burn and illuminate'; wind said, '[I can] generate and move'; space said, '[I can] contain'; consciousness said, 'Without me, form would perish.'" Although the [other] five are great, consciousness is primary; hence it says that the four great elements surround space, and consciousness resides within them. The four noble truths are the emptiness of objects, and conditioned arising is the emptiness of principles, and so forth. From "These phenomena" below is the second [part], explaining and completing the meaning of emptiness. The text has two parts: first with respect to the aggregate of consciousness, next by analogy to the [other] four aggregates and all phenomena. The first text has four parts: 1. stating the main thesis, 2. explaining by category, 3. questioning and examining, 4. explaining and resolving. As for the first: phenomena of form are empty because they possess five aspects. "Instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing": the masters of the Lesser Vehicle either say that arising is before, enduring is next, and ceasing is after; or they say arising and enduring are simultaneous. Neither avoids difficulty. Why? If one says arising is before, enduring next, and ceasing after, then at the time of arising there is no enduring, because arising is prior. If there is no enduring, how can there be arising? For previously there is no enduring, and enduring belongs to this arising; if arising cannot endure, then there is no arising. If prior to enduring there is no arising, then there is also no enduring, because there is no cause. If before arising there were enduring, then arising and enduring would be simultaneous. If enduring only exists after arising has ceased, then enduring is not possessed by arising. This is the fault of positing difference. If arising and enduring are simultaneous, then cause and effect would be of one body, and birth and death would share the same characteristic; this is the error of positing oneness. Now, saying "instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing" differs from both explanations, because the substance of all phenomena shifts and flows from moment to moment without a temporary stop; it is also that the time of arising is itself the time of enduring and the time of ceasing, like a swift flame passing over a blade's point, or a coursing steed passing a blade without stop, coming without any temporary stay. Therefore the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says: "You right now are also arising, also aging, and also ceasing." "Instantly existent, instantly empty": the nature of form is empty in itself, not empty because form is destroyed. From "ksana by ksana" below is the second, explaining by category, clarifying that every thought-moment is empty, identical to the five above. A kṣaṇa is an extremely short time. "Why is that?" is the third, questioning and examining. The intention is: arising and ceasing are mutually contradictory; how can one say "instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing," and so on? From "ninety ksanas" below is the fourth, explaining and resolving. Ninety small kṣaṇas make one large thought-moment; within one thought-moment, one kṣaṇa further has nine hundred arisings and ceasings; therefore at the time of arising there are already enduring and ceasing. Furthermore, ninety kṣaṇas make one thought-moment; one kṣaṇa within one thought-moment undergoes nine hundred arisings and ceasings; one thought-moment has ninety kṣaṇas, bringing together eighty-one thousand arisings and ceasings. Arising and ceasing subsume kṣaṇas, and kṣaṇas subsume a single thought-moment; thus mental phenomena cannot be apprehended. This clarifies the emptiness of mind. If one divides the various sense organs by the four great elements, the sense organs cannot be apprehended; if one divides the four great elements by the four subtle elements, the four great elements cannot be apprehended; if one divides the four subtle elements by coarse subtle elements, the four subtle elements cannot be apprehended; if one divides coarse subtle elements by atomic particles, coarse subtle elements cannot be apprehended. Reducing form down to atomic particles, and fathoming the mind to the limit of arising and ceasing—when form is exhausted and mind is fathomed, there is sudden openness without abiding. The abiding of non-abiding cannot be named; one forcibly terms it emptiness: this protects the buddha-fruit of the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. If one sees that form is the emptiness of form, and sees that mind is the emptiness of mind, without attainment and without abiding, this protects the buddha-fruit of the shared [teaching]. If one sees that the two phenomena of form and mind are both one and different, vast as the dharmadhātu, ultimate as empty space, fitting like a box and lid, this protects the buddha-fruit of the distinctive [teaching]. If one sees that the two phenomena of form and mind are originally empty and quiescent, unmoving, non-abiding, unborn, and unceasing, this protects the buddha-fruit of the perfect [teaching]. From "even form" below is the second [part], explaining by category the four aggregates and all phenomena: they too are instantly arising, instantly ceasing, instantly existent, and instantly empty.