華嚴經探玄記 10.16

10.16

自下第二明其說大。於中六頌分五：初一頌三句明所說分齊；二有三句彰已無過，誡眾除失；三有一頌半顯其所說略而非廣；四有一頌勸眾敬聽，彰已善說；五有一頌顯已得力，為生物信。前中，初一句是總言。是事雖為難者，是事謂牒前義大之事。雖者，是不定之辭。謂此地法有其二分，果分雖不可說，然因分可說。故論經云「我但說一分」，謂因分於果，為一分故。此二分義諸說不同。有說：能詮之教為因分，所詮之義為果分。此說甚疎。有說：地前因行為因分，地上證智為果分。此品豈說地前法耶？故知不然。若約諸地加行等為因，正證為果，亦少分得。有說：十地有二種門，一若約漸增之門名因分，十地是即可說，有分齊故，如月漸增可說差別；二若就圓滿時門名果分，十地是不可說，無分齊故，如月滿時無差別。故此二十地其體無別，但隨分滿假立二分。此亦未然，豈可未至法雲即歡喜可說，待剋十圓滿方不可說。若前能起後為因、後依前起為果，亦少分可然，猶非文意。有說：十地有二種義，一者教所安立十地法門，在聞者識上似義顯現，名為因分，由此表彼離言義故；二者亡詮證入十地正行，離諸言教所安立相，說名果分，由彼因分之所表故。是故因分可說，果分不可說。此說少順文意，猶非正當。今釋有兩重：一此十地有二分，一就實十地，唯佛所知、佛智所行，名為果分。上論云「此智是誰證？偈云佛智所行故。」又上文云「智起佛境界」故。又上加分中言不思議佛法，又如鳥跡所依太空為果海等。二隨相十地，菩薩所知、菩薩所行名為因分。是即果分玄絕當不可說，因分約機是即可說。此義通一部經中大意。問：若爾，菩薩證智豈可說耶？答：教說修中滿足修等是也。二言十地有二分：一約妙智，正證智如境故、離相離言故，名果分，即不可說，如彼鳥跡同於虛空不可說也。二約方便寄法顯地差別，如下文初二三地宮同世間，四五六地同二乘等。又寄禪支道品諸諦緣生以顯地別，令眾因此表解地義，故名因分，如空中跡約鳥說異名為因分，同空無別名為果分。一跡通二，故為二分。問：約鳥約空跡皆離相，云何有可說、有不可說？答：跡雖離相，就鳥得說；就鳥得說，所說常離也。跡同虛空，理不可說，所況地智，准此可知。此釋局斯〈地品〉，故云雖為難，即是一分也。此為總句。

From here on, the second [major section] clarifies the greatness of explanation. Within it, six verses are divided into five parts: First, one verse and three lines clarify the scope of what is explained. Second, three lines show that he is without fault, admonishing the assembly to eliminate errors. Third, one and a half verses show that what is explained is brief and not extensive. Fourth, one verse urges the assembly to listen respectfully, showing that he explains well. Fifth, one verse shows that he has attained empowerment, to generate faith in living beings. In the first part, the first line is a general statement. “Although this matter is difficult”: “this matter” refers back to the aforementioned matter of the greatness of meaning. “Although” is an concessive term. It means that this dharma of the bhūmis has two portions: although the fruition portion is inexplicable, the cause portion can be explained. Thus, the treatise sūtra states: “I speak of only one portion,” meaning that the cause portion is one portion relative to the fruition. Regarding this meaning of two portions, various explanations differ. Some say: The teaching that serves as signifier is the cause portion, and the meaning that is signified is the fruition portion. This explanation is very tenuous. Some say: The causal practice prior to the bhūmis is the cause portion, and the realizing wisdom above the bhūmis is the fruition portion. Does this chapter ever explain dharmas prior to the bhūmis? Hence we know this is not so. If one understands the preparatory practices of the various bhūmis as the cause, and direct realization as the fruition, this is also partially acceptable. Some say: The ten bhūmis have two approaches: First, in terms of gradual increase, it is called the cause portion; the ten bhūmis can then be explained because they have limits, just as the waxing moon can have its distinctions explained. Second, in terms of the time of culmination, it is called the fruition portion; the ten bhūmis are then inexplicable because they have no limits, just as the full moon has no distinctions. Therefore, the essence of these ten bhūmis is not different; it is merely that two portions are provisionally established according to partial or full [realization]. This is also not quite right: how could it be that before reaching the Dharmameghā [bhūmi] the Pramuditā can be explained, whereas only upon definitively completing the tenth it becomes inexplicable? If the preceding being able to arouse the subsequent is the cause, and the subsequent arising in reliance on the preceding is the fruition, this is also partially plausible, but it is still not the textual intent. Some say: The ten bhūmis have two meanings: First, the dharma-gates of the ten bhūmis established by the teaching appear as semblance meanings in the consciousness of listeners, which is called the cause portion, because it thereby indicates that meaning free from words. Second, eliminating the signifiers to realize and enter the correct practice of the ten bhūmis, free from all characteristics established by verbal teachings, is called the fruition portion, because it is indicated by that cause portion. Therefore, the cause portion can be explained, while the fruition portion cannot be explained. This explanation is somewhat in accord with the textual intent, but is still not entirely precise. Now, I explain with two levels: First, these ten bhūmis have two portions: (1) In terms of the actual ten bhūmis, they are known only to buddhas and are the domain of the Buddha's wisdom, which is called the fruition portion. The treatise above says: “By whom is this wisdom realized? The verse says: Because it is the domain of the Buddha's wisdom.” Furthermore, the text above says: “Wisdom arises in the Buddha's realm.” Furthermore, the aforementioned portion on empowerment speaks of “inconceivable buddhadharmas”; and like the great space relied upon by the bird's tracks being the ocean of fruition, and so forth. (2) In terms of the ten bhūmis according to characteristics, they are known to bodhisattvas and are the domain of bodhisattvas, which is called the cause portion. Thus, the fruition portion is profoundly transcendent and must be inexplicable, while the cause portion can be explained in relation to capacities. This meaning runs through the broad intent of the entire scripture. Question: If so, can the bodhisattva’s realizing wisdom be explained? Answer: It refers to what is explained in the teaching concerning the practice of fulfillment, and so forth. Second, it is said that the ten bhūmis have two portions: (1) In terms of subtle wisdom, because it directly realizes wisdom conforming to the object, and because it is free from characteristics and words, it is called the fruition portion, which is inexplicable, just as the bird’s tracks are identical to empty space and inexplicable. (2) In terms of upāya, relying on dharmas to reveal the distinctions of the bhūmis—as the text below says, the palaces of the first, second, and third bhūmis are identical to the worldly; the fourth, fifth, and sixth bhūmis are identical to the two vehicles, and so forth; moreover, relying on the dhyāna factors, the bodhipakṣa-dharmas, the truths, and dependent origination to reveal the distinctions of the bhūmis, so that the assembly may thereby understand the meaning of the bhūmis—this is called the cause portion. It is like the tracks in space: explained in relation to the bird, their differences are called the cause portion; being identical to space without difference, they are called the fruition portion. A single track pertains to both, and hence there are two portions. Question: Both in relation to the bird and in relation to space, the tracks are free from characteristics; why is one explainable and the other inexplicable? Answer: Although the tracks are free from characteristics, they can be explained in relation to the bird; yet when explained in relation to the bird, what is explained is always free [from characteristics]. The tracks being identical to empty space, in principle they cannot be explained; what is illustrated by this regarding the wisdom of the bhūmis can be known by analogy. This explanation is specific to this “Chapter on the Bhūmis”; hence it says “although it is difficult,” which refers to one portion. This is the general line.