觀音義疏記 4.5

4.5

第三、勸供養，二：初、標章立意，二：初、標章。二、「佛答」下，立意，二：初、明始終相稱，二：初、示今立章，二：初、前後皆三，二：初、敘前三。二、「佛答後」下，示今三。二、「而總」下，明總別互舉。二、「有人」下，斥他傷義。前三後三始終開合，各得相稱。若以總答為歎德者，則令後三義不相稱；佛以總答廣前別答，若廢總答，則令三廣義意不顯。故云傷義。二、「問後」下，問答釋疑，二：初番，二：初、疑前無奉旨。二、答默念成機，二：初、明默念。前勸持名，唯令心念，是故受旨但當冥默。後勸供養，必假外物以表內懷，是故解瓔而為法施。二、「又欲」下，互成機。前陳三業已是顯機，奉旨默念更成冥感；今但宿善即是冥機，奉旨解瓔即成顯感。前後互現，各有深致。二番，二：初、問。以機難應。二、答。以機顯應。二、「初勸」下，依文釋義，二：初、分文。二、「先稱」下，釋義，二：初、勸供養，二：初、稱美。二、「出供」下，出意。若《佛頂首楞嚴經》明十四種無畏功德，即以救七難、赴二求、免三毒等為施無畏。今品既在第二問答之後明施無畏，似用現身說法為施無畏。若據文云「於怖畏急難之中能施無畏」，亦可總該前番問答，是則真應二身俱為能施，冥顯二益皆得無畏。二、奉旨，二：初、科。二、「經文」下，釋，六：初、奉命，二：初、釋解瓔，二：初、事釋，二：初、評眾寶文。二、「若依」下，釋百千價，二：初、問。經以事瓔表於行瓔，諸地功德莊嚴法身既有階差，故以世寶貴賤為表。今無盡意入位既高，瓔珞合用無價之寶，豈可止直十萬兩金？二、答。言百千者，略舉多數，如云百姓，豈局一百？萬民亦然。約位辯瓔，必無價也。二、「若就」下，觀解。所言百千，乃以事數表於理觀，豈專約事定其多少？頸是所嚴，故表中道，此性德也。全性起修，故能嚴行皆無著也。此行稱性，如瓔在頸。而言解者，菩薩雖有上求下化一切功德，未始不與常捨相應；欲示眾生常捨行故，乃解瓔珞而為施也。《大集》蓋明行瓔嚴理。一地成萬者，了達一心，十界百法、百界千法、千界萬法，此之萬法性本具足，全性起修轉名萬德，即三學、六度、三昧、總持、神通、智慧、四等、四攝、三念、八脫、十力、無畏，十地悉能分證。萬德即成十萬，故知言數不專事也。二、「法施」下，釋法施，二：初、舊取重法施。因重聖法故行財施，是則財法分為兩派，理豈然乎？二、今明如法施。法是三諦圓常理性，今體財即性，諸法趣財是趣不過。財尚叵得，云何當有趣與非趣？故財與法無二無別。財外無法、法外無財。豈唯財爾？施及受者皆空假中無非法界，如是乃名以法界心對法界境起法界施。「於財」下，引《淨名經》以一瓔珞分作二分，一分施與最下乞人、一分奉於難勝如來。而作是言：「若施主等心施一最下乞人，猶如如來福田之相無所分別，等于大悲不求果報，是則名曰具足法施。」彼疏釋云「此即觀所施田，入平等法界無有二相，成無緣悲，具足一切佛法。不求緣修之報，即是具足法施之會。」如此明文，諸師何得但約說法以明法施？疏文彼經居士觀於悲田，法界等佛。今無盡意對於敬田，既稱法施，豈不等彼一切眾生邪？二、「不肯」下，不受，二：初、事釋；二、觀解。不受三昧，即畢竟空。一心三觀破無不遍，以即空故不受於有，以即假故不受於空，以即中故不受二邊，照空假故不受中道。如是不受在一心中，方離次第及以但空。以五不受義遍衍門，應當料簡。三、「重白」下，重奉。三義解愍，前二自行、後一利他，此猶事釋。以無等者，復約理觀求觀音受。何者？圓論不受，則於諸法無所遺，故畢竟不受即畢竟受。故云「以無所受而受諸受」。四、佛勸。五、受施。觀音本地唯佛能知，今現因身須求極果，故雖受施迴奉敬田。以一瓔珞作二分者，表於一行必具二因，理則正因、事則緣了，事理不二名曰妙因，能成二身不思議果。法無增減而能出纏，性即修故、報有斷證。然匪功成，修即性故。若其然者，方曰事理之因趣於法報之果。不論應身者，因人趣果，合表二身；法報若成，應用自發。六、結德。文後重頌，什公不譯，諸師皆謂梵本中有。荊谿云：「此亦未測什公深意。」《續高僧傳》云「偈是闍那崛多所譯」，智者出時此偈未行，故無所解。荊谿亦於《輔行記》中，引還著於本人之文，故知具釋理亦無妨。近有天竺寺式法師，分節其文對於長行，二種問答宛如符契，今依彼科略消此偈。偈有二十六行，分三：初一行雙頌二問，二：初一句歎德。世尊具相，誠由萬德之所莊嚴，是故歎相即是美德。次、「我今」下三句，雙問，二：初一句含上二問。長行先問得名因緣，次問三業遊化之相。今既重頌，豈闕後問？故知句中問彼兩字兼含次問也。二、「佛子」下兩句，別頌初問，文甚顯著。二、「具足」下二十二行雙頌二答，二：初二句經家敘緝綴之語，合當直說。今為偈者，或集經者乘便頌之，或是崛多以偈翻之，貫散無在。二、「汝聽」下，正頌佛答，二：初一行半加頌總歎願行。汝聽二字，勅令審諦。觀音行者，一心三智觀彼類音。令無量苦一時解脫，即是已成利他行也。不動真心垂形三土，方名善應。處處現往，故曰諸方。此二句總歎所剋真應二身，次則總論能成行願。初明始心四弘願廣，復示行行經劫難量。以誓深故長時不退，以時長故值佛唯多。隨佛作為，方名侍佛修諸佛行也。一一佛所皆發淨願，後心別願也。若不爾者，安得真智遍拔眾苦，安能應身普度一切？二、「我為」下，別頌二答，二：初頌初答觀音得名，二：初一行頌總答。舉要言之，故云略說。聞名故稱口業機也，見身故禮身業機也，心念正當意業機也。上明冥應，今云見身，二應具也。亦可見於妙智之身，不虧冥應。長行總答機但稱名，而別答中機具三業，至今重頌總中三業，別但心念綺文互現，頌之巧也。二、「假使」下，頌別答，二：初十二行頌七難，十二：初一行頌第一火難，如前疏釋。下去諸難，皆可例知。

Third, encouraging offerings, which has two [parts]: first, presenting the heading and setting forth the intent; second, from "The Buddha answered" onward, setting forth the intent, which has two [parts]: first, explaining that beginning and end correspond to each other, which has two [parts]: first, showing the establishment of the sections here, which has two [parts]: first, both before and after are sets of three, which has two [parts]: first, recounting the preceding three; second, from "After the Buddha answered" onward, showing the present three; second, from "Yet generally" onward, explaining the mutual citation of the general and specific; second, from "Some say" onward, refuting others for impairing the meaning. The preceding three and following three, opening and closing from beginning to end, each correspond properly to one another. If one takes the general answer as praising virtue, that would cause the following three meanings not to correspond; the Buddha used the general answer to broaden the preceding specific answer, and if one discards the general answer, it would make the meaning and intent of the three broadnesses not apparent. Hence it is said to "impair the meaning." Second, from "Question: After..." onward, resolving doubts through question and answer, in two rounds, which has two [parts]: the first round, which has two [parts]: first, doubting that previously there was no compliance with the directive; second, answering that silent mindfulness constitutes the capacity, which has two [parts]: first, explaining silent mindfulness. Previously, when encouraging the upholding of the name, he only commanded mental mindfulness; therefore, in receiving the directive, one should simply remain silently inward. Later, when encouraging offerings, one must rely on external objects to express inner intentions; therefore he untied the necklace to make a Dharma offering. Second, from "Moreover, wishing to" onward, mutual constitution of capacities. Previously presenting the three karmas was already a manifest capacity, and complying with the directive in silent mindfulness further constitutes a hidden response; here, past goodness alone constitutes a hidden capacity, and complying with the directive by untying the necklace directly constitutes a manifest response. Preceding and succeeding mutually appear, each possessing deep purport. The second round, which has two [parts]: first, the question, questioning the response by means of the capacity; second, the answer, revealing the response by means of the capacity. Second, from "First, encouraging" onward, explaining the meaning according to the text, which has two [parts]: first, dividing the text; second, from "First praising" onward, explaining the meaning, which has two [parts]: first, encouraging offerings, which has two [parts]: first, praising beauty; second, from "Disclosing the offering" onward, disclosing the intent. As the Śūraṅgama Sūtra explains the fourteen kinds of virtues of fearlessness, taking rescuing from the seven perils, granting the two wishes, and freeing from the three poisons, etc., as bestowing fearlessness. In the present chapter, since bestowing fearlessness is explained after the second question and answer, it seems to take manifesting bodies and expounding the Dharma as bestowing fearlessness. If based on the text stating "in terrors, urgencies, and distress, he is able to bestow fearlessness," this can also generally cover the preceding question and answer; thus both real and manifestative bodies are capable of bestowing, and both hidden and manifest benefits obtain fearlessness. Second, complying with the directive, which has two [parts]: first, the outline; second, from "The sūtra text" onward, the explanation, in six [parts]: first, complying with the command, which has two [parts]: first, explaining untying the necklace, which has two [parts]: first, the literal explanation, which has two [parts]: first, evaluating the text on the multiple jewels; second, from "If according to" onward, explaining the value of a hundred thousand, which has two [parts]: first, the question. The sūtra uses the physical necklace to represent the necklace of practice; since the virtues of the various grounds adorning the dharmakāya have gradations, worldly jewels, expensive and base, are used as representations. Now, since Akṣayamati has attained a high stage, his necklace ought to use a priceless jewel; how could it be worth merely one hundred thousand ounces of gold? Second, the answer. Stating "a hundred thousand" briefly indicates a large number, just as saying "the hundred surnames" does not limit it to exactly one hundred; "the myriad commoners" is also like this. Discerning the necklace in terms of the stage, it is certainly priceless. Second, from "If from the perspective of" onward, the contemplative explanation. Stating "a hundred thousand" uses worldly numbers to represent principle contemplation; how could it be solely based on phenomena to determine quantity? The neck is what is adorned, hence it represents the Middle Way, which is inherent virtue. Giving rise to cultivation entirely from nature, all the practices that are able to adorn are free from attachment. This practice accords with nature, like a necklace upon the neck. As for stating "untying": although a bodhisattva possesses all virtues of seeking above and transforming below, they are never not in accord with constant renunciation; wishing to show sentient beings the practice of constant renunciation, he thus untied the necklace to give it as an offering. The Mahāsaṃnipāta mainly illuminates the necklace of practice adorning principle. One ground completing ten thousand means thoroughly realizing the single mind: the ten realms and a hundred dharmas, a hundred realms and a thousand dharmas, a thousand realms and ten thousand dharmas—these ten thousand dharmas are inherently complete in nature; giving rise to cultivation entirely from nature, they are redesignated as the myriad virtues, which are the three trainings, six perfections, samādhis, dhāraṇīs, supernormal powers, wisdom, four immeasurables, four means of embrace, three mindfulnesses, eight liberations, ten powers, and fearlessnesses—the ten grounds are all able to realize them partially. The myriad virtues then become a hundred thousand; thus we know the stated number is not solely phenomenal. Second, from "Dharma offering" onward, explaining the Dharma offering, which has two [parts]: first, the ancient view taking it as valuing the Dharma offering. Giving material gifts because of revering the noble Dharma would divide material and Dharma into two streams; how could the principle be so? Second, now explaining it as offering in accord with Dharma. Dharma is the round and eternal inherent principle of the three truths. Now, recognizing that material is itself the nature, all dharmas tending toward material is a tending that cannot be surpassed. Since material is still unobtainable, how could there be tending or non-tending? Therefore material and Dharma are not two and not distinct. Outside material there is no Dharma; outside Dharma there is no material. How could it be only material? The giver and the recipient are both empty, provisional, and Middle, none not being the dharmadhātu. Only in this way is it called giving rise to a dharmadhātu offering with a dharmadhātu mind facing a dharmadhātu objective realm. From "Regarding material" onward, citing the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, where one necklace was divided into two portions, one portion given to the lowliest beggar and one portion offered to the Tathāgata Duṣprasaha. And he spoke these words: "If a donor gives with an impartial mind to a single lowliest beggar, just like the mark of the Tathāgata's field of merit without differentiation, equal to great compassion without seeking retribution, then this is called being fully endowed with the Dharma offering." That commentary explains: "This is contemplating the field given to, entering the impartial dharmadhātu without dual marks, accomplishing causeless compassion, and being fully endowed with all Buddha-dharmas. Not seeking the retribution of conditioned cultivation is precisely the assembly fully endowed with the Dharma offering." With such clear text, how can the masters solely explain the Dharma offering in terms of preaching the Dharma? In that commentary, the lay practitioner of that sūtra contemplates the field of compassion as being dharmadhātu-equal to the Buddha. Now when Akṣayamati faces the field of reverence and it is called a Dharma offering, how could it not be equal to all those sentient beings? Second, from "Unwilling" onward, not accepting, which has two [parts]: first, the literal explanation; second, the contemplative explanation. The non-accepting samādhi is ultimate emptiness. The three contemplations in a single mind leave nothing unbroken: because it is identical to emptiness, it does not accept existence; because it is identical to provisionality, it does not accept emptiness; because it is identical to the Middle, it does not accept the two extremes; illuminating emptiness and provisionality, it does not accept the Middle Way. Such non-acceptance being within a single mind only then departs from gradual stages and mere emptiness. Since the meaning of the five non-acceptances pervades the Mahāyāna, it should be examined. Third, from "Repeatedly addressed" onward, offering again. Three meanings explain pity: the first two are for one's own practice, the latter one is benefiting others; this is still the literal explanation. Due to having no equal, Avalokiteśvara's acceptance is again sought based on principle contemplation. How so? Expounding non-acceptance in the perfect [teaching], nothing is left out regarding all dharmas; hence ultimate non-acceptance is precisely ultimate acceptance. Thus it is said, "by having nothing received, one receives all receipts." Fourth, the Buddha's encouragement. Fifth, accepting the offering. Avalokiteśvara's original ground is known only to the Buddha; now manifesting a causal body, he must seek the ultimate fruit; thus although he accepts the offering, he turns and offers it to the field of reverence. Dividing one necklace into two portions represents that a single practice must possess two causes: principle is the direct cause, phenomena are the conditioning and revealing [causes]; phenomena and principle being non-dual is called the wondrous cause, which can accomplish the inconceivable fruit of the two bodies. The Dharma has no increase or decrease yet can emerge from entanglement, because nature is cultivation; the saṃbhogakāya has severing and realization. Yet it is not an accomplished deed, because cultivation is nature. If so, only then is it called the cause of phenomena and principle tending toward the fruit of Dharma and saṃbhoga. Not discussing the nirmāṇakāya is because when a causal person tends toward the fruit, it should represent the two bodies; if Dharma and saṃbhoga are accomplished, manifestative function naturally arises. Sixth, concluding the virtues. The verse recapitulation following the text was not translated by Master Kumārajīva; various masters all claim it existed in the Sanskrit text. Jingxi said: "This also leaves Master Kumārajīva's deep intent unfathomed." The Continued Biographies of Eminent Monks states, "The verses were translated by Jñānagupta." When Zhiyi appeared, these verses had not yet circulated, hence he did not explain them. Jingxi, in the Fuxing ji, also cited the text 'returning to strike the original person'; thus we know that fully explaining them also presents no hindrance in principle. Recently there is Dharma Master Shi of Tianzhu Monastery, who divided the text to correlate with the prose; the two kinds of questions and answers match like tally-halves. Now following his outline, I briefly clarify these verses. The verse has twenty-six stanzas, divided into three: the first stanza recapitulates both questions, which has two [parts]: first, one line praising virtue. The World-Honoured One possesses the marks truly because he is adorned by the myriad virtues; therefore praising the marks is praising virtue. Next, from "I now" onward, three lines questioning both, which has two [parts]: first, one line containing both preceding questions. The prose first asked about the causes and conditions of obtaining the name, and next asked about the marks of wandering and transforming in the three karmas. Now since it recapitulates, how could it lack the latter question? Hence we know that within the line the two words "ask him" additionally contain the subsequent question. Second, from "Disciple of the Buddha" onward, two lines specifically recapitulating the initial question; the text is very clear. Second, from "Fully endowed" onward, twenty-two stanzas recapitulating both answers, which has two [parts]: first, two lines of narrator's connective words, which should properly be spoken in prose. Their being in verse now is either because the compiler of the sūtra versified them conveniently, or because Jñānagupta translated them in verse; whether continuous or dispersed, it makes no difference. Second, from "Listen to" onward, directly recapitulating the Buddha's answer, which has two [parts]: first, one and a half stanzas adding a recapitulation that generally praises the vows and practices. The two words "listen to" order one to be attentive. A practitioner of Avalokiteśvara, with a single mind and three wisdoms, contemplates their categories of sounds. Causing immeasurable suffering to be liberated all at once is precisely the already accomplished practice of benefiting others. Manifesting forms in the three lands without moving the true mind is only then called skillful response. Appearing and going everywhere, it is thus called "the various directions." These two lines generally praise the realized real and manifestative bodies; next they generally discuss the practices and vows capable of accomplishing them. First, explaining the broadness of the four universal vows of the initial mind, and further showing that practicing actions through kalpas is immeasurable. Because the vows are deep, there is no regression over a long time; because the time is long, the Buddhas encountered are particularly numerous. Following the Buddha's actions is only then called serving the Buddha and cultivating the Buddhas' practices. Generating pure vows before each and every Buddha refers to the specific vows of the subsequent mind. If not so, how could true wisdom universally uproot all suffering, and how could manifestative bodies universally liberate everyone? Second, from "I for..." onward, specifically recapitulating the two answers, which has two [parts]: first, recapitulating the initial answer on Avalokiteśvara obtaining the name, which has two [parts]: first, one stanza recapitulating the general answer. Presenting the essentials, it is therefore called "briefly speaking." Hearing the name and therefore invoking is the verbal karma capacity; seeing the body and therefore paying homage is the physical karma capacity; mindfulness in the mind properly corresponds to the mental karma capacity. Above, the hidden response was explained; now it says seeing the body, so both responses are complete. One may also see the body of wondrous wisdom, which does not diminish the hidden response. In the prose general answer, the capacity only invoked the name, whereas in the specific answer, the capacity possessed the three karmas; coming now to the verse recapitulation, the three karmas are in the general and only mental mindfulness is in the specific—the interwoven text mutually appears, which is the skill of the verse. Second, from "Suppose..." onward, recapitulating the specific answer, which has two [parts]: first, twelve stanzas recapitulating the seven perils, in twelve [parts]: first, one stanza recapitulating the first peril of fire, as explained in the preceding commentary. All subsequent perils can be known by analogy.