般若波羅蜜多心經贊 1.9

1.9

第四判文解釋。於此經中總有三分，初、明能觀智，次、「舍利子」下辨所觀境，後、「以無所得故」下顯所得果。所以無序及流通者，於諸般若簡集綱要，故唯正宗，無序、流通。如《觀音經》，不具三分。「觀自在菩薩」者，就初分中復分為二，初、標能觀人，次、辨觀智體，此即第一標能觀人。若依舊本名觀世音，觀諸世間稱菩薩名音聲語業以救諸難，因而立號，名觀世音，猶未能顯觀身、意業。而今本云觀自在者，內證二空，外觀三業，不依功用，任運自在，故曰觀自在。今此菩薩實是因位一生補處，為已成佛。設爾，何失？若是菩薩，如何會釋？《觀音三昧》彼經說曰，佛告阿難，我今噵實，其事不虛，我念觀世音菩薩於我前成佛，號曰正法明如來、應供、正遍知、明行足、善逝、世間解、無上士、調御丈夫、佛、世尊。我於彼時，為彼佛下作苦行弟子。若是佛者，如何會釋觀音授記？故彼經曰，善男子！阿彌陀佛壽命無量百千億劫，當有終極，當般涅槃。復曰，善男子！阿彌陀佛正法滅後，過中夜分，明星出時，觀世音菩薩於七寶菩提樹下結加趺坐，成等正覺，號普光功德山王如來，十號具足，乃至國名眾寶莊嚴。又《無量壽》曰，觀音菩薩於是國土修菩薩行，命終轉化生彼佛國。解曰，觀音名同人異故，彼此說互不相違。如《法華經》諸佛同號日月燈明。又解，觀音自有二種，一、實，二、化。一者、實身，如《觀音經》；二者、化身，如《無量壽》。如《法華論》，釋迦如來成道已久，就化相故，今乃成佛。雖有兩釋，後解為勝，順諸聖教，不違理故。

Fourth, analyzing the text and explaining [it]. Within this sūtra there are altogether three parts: first, clarifying the wisdom that contemplates; next, from "Śāriputra" below, distinguishing the object that is contemplated; finally, from "Because there is nothing to attain" below, revealing the fruit that is attained. The reason why it has no preface and no dissemination section is that it is a concise compilation of the essentials from the various prajñās; therefore it has only the main body, without preface or dissemination, just like the Avalokiteśvara Sūtra, which does not possess the three parts. Regarding "Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva": within the first part it is further divided into two: first, indicating the person who contemplates; next, distinguishing the essence of the contemplative wisdom. This is the first, indicating the person who contemplates. According to the old version, he was named Guanshiyin: contemplating the sounds and vocal actions of all worldly beings calling the Bodhisattva's name in order to rescue them from various difficulties, his name was established accordingly as Guanshiyin; however, this could not yet reveal the contemplation of the actions of body and mind. The present version says Avalokiteśvara (Guanzizai): internally realizing the two kinds of emptiness and externally contemplating the three karmas, not relying on effortful exertion and spontaneous at will, he is therefore called Avalokiteśvara. Now, is this Bodhisattva really in the causal stage, bound to one more birth, or has he already become a Buddha? Supposing this is so, what is the fault? If he is a bodhisattva, how should one reconcile and explain it? The Guanyin Samādhi Sūtra says: "The Buddha told Ānanda, 'I now speak the truth; the matter is not false. I recall that Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva attained Buddhahood before me, with the name Zhengfaming Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksaṃbuddha, Vidyācaraṇasaṃpanna, Sugata, Lokavid, Anuttara, Puruṣadamyasārathi, Śāstā Devamanuṣyāṇām, Buddha, Bhagavat. At that time, I was an ascetic disciple under that Buddha.'" If he is a Buddha, how should one reconcile the prophecy regarding Avalokiteśvara? That sūtra says: "Good son! The lifespan of Amitābha Buddha is immeasurable hundreds of thousands of koṭis of kalpas, yet it will have an end, and he will enter parinirvāṇa." It further says: "Good son! After the true Dharma of Amitābha Buddha has perished, past midnight when the morning star appears, Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva will sit cross-legged under the seven-jeweled bodhi tree and achieve equal, perfect awakening, named the Tathāgata King of the Mountain of Universal Light and Merit, complete with the ten epithets, and up to the land being named Adorned with Many Jewels." Furthermore, the Sukhāvatīvyūha-sūtra says: "Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva practiced the bodhisattva conduct in this land, and at the end of his life transferred and was born in that Buddha-land." Explanation: Because the name Avalokiteśvara is the same while the persons are different, the two accounts do not contradict each other. It is just as in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, where various Buddhas share the same name Candrasūryapradīpa. Another explanation: Avalokiteśvara himself has two kinds: first, the real; second, the transformative. The first is the real body, as in the Avalokiteśvara Sūtra; the second is the transformation body, as in the Sukhāvatīvyūha-sūtra. It is like the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-upadeśa, where Śākyamuni Tathāgata achieved awakening long ago, yet with respect to the transformative appearance, he only now becomes a Buddha. Although there are two explanations, the latter explanation is superior, as it accords with the noble teachings and does not contradict reason.