仁王經疏 1.282

1.282

Exposition: Below, this is the second part: explaining that the contemplating wisdom illuminates emptiness and even existence. Within this there are two parts: first, explaining the illumination of emptiness and existence; and later, from “Good sons” onward, explaining the gains and losses of contemplation. The former has two parts: first, explaining the illumination of emptiness; and later, from “Only because dharmas gather” onward, explaining its realization of existence. Therefore the Original Commentary divides this into two sections: the first is signlessness, and the second is possession of signs. As for “signlessness,” not only is there nothing illuminated, but there is also no illuminator; illuminating what is not illuminated is the definitive (nītārtha) teaching. Hence the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā calls it true prajñā. As for “possession of signs,” it gathers and guides the immeasurable teachings for ordinary beings and noble ones: there are ten bhūmis to be cultivated and the fruit of buddhahood to be attained; explaining illumination where there is no illumination is the provisional (nītārtha) teaching. Hence the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā says it is called “conforming prajñā.” Regarding the realization of emptiness, the text is divided into two parts: first, explaining that prajñā realizes the sign of the emptiness of the cognitive object; and later, from “due to emptiness” onward, distinguishing the extent of the emptiness of all dharmas. This is the first. “Prajñāpāramitā” is the contemplating wisdom; because it has arising and so on, it is also called empty, since the wisdom itself is empty. It can realize three emptinesses: 1. not seeing the conditions means not seeing the twelve links of dependent origination; 2. not seeing the truths means not seeing the four truths; 3. and so forth through all means not seeing the emptiness of existent dharmas from the six great elements up through the five aggregates. This is explained from the end to the beginning. As for “not seeing,” it means being free from discriminative view; therefore it is said to “not see,” not that it is called “not seeing” because of not realizing.