華嚴經探玄記 11.73

11.73

第二攝善法戒中有四：一智、二願、三觀、四行。初言作是思惟眾生墮惡道者由十不善者，此是智，有其三義：一何所知？知眾生苦因果；二何因知？因前自離十惡，即念眾生不能離惡；三何故知？知物有惡，自行善業為欲化他，是大悲故。論中乘惡等者，釋道也。亦名趣苦身苦處，釋惡也。常墮者，釋墮也。上釋苦果。下釋苦因，謂十不善業攝到一切惡果數故，論中以數攝經中十也。惡攝不善。果攝三塗。到攝其業，以業能到果處故。受解集義，謂集果名集、納果名受，義相似故。行解因義，謂生果名因、趣果稱行，義相似故。第二「我當自住」下明願中亦三義：一何所願？願自住善亦令他住；二何因願？因前知生由業墮惡；三何故願？以大悲心不捨離故，故自行皆為眾生。文中二：初總舉願事。二「何以故」下徵責釋成可知。《攝論》頌（云云）。第三「又深思惟」下明觀。謂通觀十善有其五重，義亦有三：一何所觀？通觀障所治十惡、能治五重；二何因觀？因前願自住善亦令他住，若不識善知何所住；三何故觀？觀善為欲攝起行故。文中有二：初思惟十不善墮惡道，是所治障也。二「行十善」下明五重十善，是能治行也。問：此中十善與上律儀戒十善何別？答：前望止惡、今約作善，止作不同，故分二位。問：十善翻十惡，十惡既唯一，十善何得有五重？答：計翻不善亦應是一，但以善隨無智故名世間，隨智勝劣故有出世間之四位。問：善既五重，所翻十惡亦應有五。何者？謂人天十善翻惡道十惡，聲聞十善翻人天十惡，乃至如來十善翻菩薩十惡，應如是耶？答：不爾。翻善之惡違理損物，不善相麁不通上位，故唯有一。反惡之善順理益物，福隨於智通於上位，故有五種。是故五位所離惡齊故唯一種，所成善異故有五重，此即止同而作別也。是故此地是菩薩十善，尚非二乘，況同凡位。若約寄言，亦攝凡位。問：不善業麁不通上位，不得約上說有五重；不善望下，未知亦有階降以不？答：約心約境亦有五種。一極重，如《如來祕密藏經》云「如父得緣覺道，子斷父命，是殺生中重。」餘如上說。二稍重，如殺人等，如戒經說。三重，如殺畜等，如此中說。四輕，如《祕密藏經》後復次說。五無罪，如菩薩戒說，為救生多命及救無間業而斷彼命，不犯等也。竝具如前十不善章說。五重之中，初人天可知。二聲聞內，論云實相觀者，總觀十惡及人天十善，具四諦故，名實相也。下別顯二門四諦觀，如論可知。與此四諦觀智和合修聲聞行，論中智慧同觀。修行無分別者，有二義：一約境，於前善惡二種四諦同觀齊修無別異故，名無分別；二約智，謂此聲聞觀諦之智，與十善道和合故，名同觀同行無分別也。上來總句，對下彰勝；下別有五句，對上顯劣。論中五內，初三明劣菩薩、後二對劣緣覺。五中，初因集，有二義：一性因、二習因。今此論中且舉習因，謂過去所習狹劣善根，依之集起今所成行，故因集亦是集成種性，名曰因集，如經若心劣等，可知；餘四，論文自顯，可知。第三緣覺十善中二：初總；二「不從他」下別顯，有三：初不從他聞自然得知者，地論名自覺義，謂不假佛說及菩薩故。《瑜伽》第三十四獨覺地中明獨覺種姓有三相中，第三相云「本性獨覺，先未證得彼菩提時，有中根種性，是慢行類，由是因緣深心悕願，無師無敵而證菩提。」二不能具足大悲方便者，《地論》是不能說法義，謂不起心說法者，釋不具大悲也。不堪說法故者，釋不具方便也，《瑜伽》名薄悲種性。由是因緣，於說正法利有情事心不愛樂，於少思務寂靜住中深心愛樂。三言而能深入乃至辟支佛乘者，《地論》名觀小境界義，謂觀微細因緣境行故。此中小境有二義：一約十二緣，但有苦集二法故名小；二是緣生深細名小。今取後義。《瑜伽》云「有薄塵種性，由此因緣，於憒閙處心不愛樂」等。《瑜伽》中五相：一種性、二道、三習、四住、五行，廣釋如彼。《地論》云因集畏苦捨眾生等者，明與聲聞辨同異，謂聲聞五相中三同二異。二異者，此不依師故依止勝，能觀深細因緣法故觀勝。問：此不能說法，與捨眾生何別？答：聲聞亦有能說辯力，為無大悲，捨生趣寂。今獨覺亦無說力，《瑜伽》云「或濟度他下劣愚昧，以身濟度，不以語言。何以故？唯現身相為彼說法，不發言故。示現種種神通境界，乃至為令心誹謗者生歸向故。」然此有二類：一成獨覺者，名麟角喻，二成獨勝者，名部行喻。餘如《瑜伽》說。第四菩薩十善中，《地論》四內，初一行因、次二行相、後一行位。初言行是十善乃至無量無邊者，此是因集，謂宿習善根，依之起行。論中三義釋：一依一切善起行者，明自利行因；二依一切眾生等，明利他行因；三大乘心等，出因體，謂此廣大心無量等也。又釋：初釋大心、二廣心、三無量心可知。二言「於眾生」下明用，謂利他心緣苦能益故。見眾生習苦因受苦果，起慈悲，是菩薩用也。三言有方便力者，明彼力是利他行，即四攝方便，依前慈起故，是彼力。四言「志願」下明地，謂行所依位。於中分三，謂三阿僧祇各滿處為一，故有三位也。文義如論具釋，應知。言淨諸地等者，以淨諸地上上淨故，及淨波羅蜜第一淨故，令彼第三廣成之行方得圓滿。論中問答解釋可知。第五佛十善中，論經有總有別，此中但別無總。別中四內，初三正是佛果、後一是此地中行。前中言得佛者，彼十不善習氣同滅故方得佛。二言「十力」下顯佛別德，明善自在成，捨於二乘故。三言集諸佛法者，謂依菩薩乘方便善巧集諸佛法令圓滿故。上來觀竟。四「是故」下是第四行也。釋有二義：一近望佛善以結求心，故名無厭足。論依此釋，屬佛善中收。二上既通觀善有五重，今乃結己應行十善唯求佛善。攝善法戒竟。

Second, within the precept of collecting wholesome qualities (kuśala-dharma-saṃgraha-śīla), there are four aspects: first, cognition; second, vows; third, contemplation; fourth, practice. First, the text stating: 'making this reflection: sentient beings fall into evil destinies because of the ten unwholesome paths of action' is cognition, which has three meanings: First, what is known? Knowing sentient beings' suffering as both cause and effect. Second, by what cause is it known? Because of having previously personally abandoned the ten unwholesome actions oneself, one then reflects that sentient beings are unable to abandon evil. Third, for what reason is it known? Knowing that beings possess evil, one personally practices wholesome karma in order to transform others, which is out of great compassion. In the treatise, 'riding on evil,' and so forth, explains 'destinies' (gati). It is also called 'the physical realm of suffering in which one goes to suffering,' which explains 'evil.' 'Always falling' explains 'falling.' The above explains the effect of suffering. Below, it explains the cause of suffering: that is, because the ten unwholesome karmas encompass and arrive at all the numbers of evil fruits. In the treatise, 'number' encompasses the 'ten' in the sūtra. 'Evil' encompasses 'unwholesome.' 'Fruit' encompasses the 'three paths [of misery].' 'Arrive' encompasses their karma, because karma can arrive at the place of the fruit. 'Receive' explains the meaning of 'accumulation' (samudaya): gathering fruits is called 'accumulation,' and taking in fruits is called 'receiving'; their meanings are similar. 'Practice' explains the meaning of 'cause' (hetu): producing fruits is called 'cause,' and heading toward fruits is called 'practice'; their meanings are similar.
Second, below 'I shall abide personally,' the explanation of vows also has three meanings: First, what is vowed? Vowing to personally abide in the wholesome and also cause others to abide in it. Second, by what cause is it vowed? Because of previously knowing that beings fall into evil on account of karma. Third, for what reason is it vowed? Because with the mind of great compassion, one does not abandon or leave them; thus one's own practice is entirely for the sake of sentient beings. In the text, there are two parts: first, it generally presents the matters of the vow; second, below 'Why is this so?' it questions, censures, and explains to establish it, which can be understood. The verses in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha are as stated therein.
Third, below 'further deeply contemplating,' contemplation is explained. That is to say, generally contemplating the ten wholesome actions as having five tiers; this meaning also has three aspects: First, what is contemplated? Generally contemplating the ten unwholesome actions as the hindrances to be counteracted, and the five tiers as the counteragents. Second, by what cause is it contemplated? Because of previously vowing to personally abide in the wholesome and also cause others to abide in it; if one does not recognize the wholesome, how would one know what to abide in? Third, for what reason is it contemplated? One contemplates the wholesome in order to collect and arouse practice. In the text, there are two parts: First, contemplating that the ten unwholesome actions lead to falling into evil destinies—this is the hindrance to be counteracted. Second, below 'practicing the ten wholesome actions,' explaining the five tiers of the ten wholesome actions—this is the practice that serves as the counteragent.
Question: What is the difference between the ten wholesome actions here and the ten wholesome actions of the precept of restraining behavior above? Answer: The former looks to stopping evil, while the present one concerns doing good; because stopping and doing are not the same, they are distinguished into two positions.
Question: The ten wholesome actions overturn the ten unwholesome actions. Since the ten unwholesome actions are only single, how can the ten wholesome actions have five tiers? Answer: By reckoning, overturning the unwholesome should also be single; however, because the wholesome conforms to the absence of wisdom, it is called mundane, and depending on whether wisdom is superior or inferior, there are the four transmundane stages.
Question: Since the wholesome has five tiers, the overturned ten unwholesome actions should also have five. How so? Namely, the human and deva ten wholesome actions overturn the ten unwholesome actions of the evil destinies; the śrāvaka ten wholesome actions overturn the human and deva ten unwholesome actions; and so on up to the tathāgatas' ten wholesome actions overturning the bodhisattvas' ten unwholesome actions—should it be like this? Answer: It is not so. Evil that is overturned by the wholesome goes against principle and harms beings; the characteristics of the unwholesome are coarse and do not penetrate to the higher stages, and therefore there is only one kind. Wholesome actions that reverse evil accord with principle and benefit beings; merit follows wisdom and penetrates to the higher stages, and therefore there are five kinds. For this reason, because the evil abandoned across the five stages is equal, there is only one kind; because the wholesome accomplished differs, there are five tiers. This means stopping is identical, but doing is distinct. Therefore, this bhūmi concerns the bodhisattva's ten wholesome actions, which do not even belong to the two vehicles, much less are identical to the ordinary worldly stages. If discussed in terms of provisionally applied words, they also encompass the ordinary worldly stages.
Question: Unwholesome karma is coarse and does not penetrate to the higher stages, so one cannot speak of five tiers with respect to what is above; but looking downward, can unwholesome karma also be known to have gradations or not? Answer: In terms of the mind and the object, there are also five kinds. First, extremely grave: as the Tathāgataguhya Sūtra says, 'If a father attains the path of a pratyekabuddha and the son takes his father's life, this is the gravest among killing living beings.' The rest is as spoken above. Second, slightly grave: such as killing a human being, and so forth, as spoken in the vinaya sūtras. Third, grave: such as killing an animal, and so forth, as spoken here. Fourth, light: as spoken subsequently in the Guhya Sūtra. Fifth, non-offense: as spoken in the Bodhisattva Precepts, taking another's life in order to save many lives or to save someone from unremitting (āvīci) karma is not an infraction, and so forth. All are fully as stated in the previous chapter on the ten unwholesome actions.
Among the five tiers, first, human and deva can be understood. Second, within the śrāvaka, the treatise's mention of the 'contemplation of true reality' refers to generally contemplating the ten unwholesome actions and the human and deva ten wholesome actions as being complete with the four truths; thus it is called 'true reality.' Below, the distinct presentation of the two gates of the contemplation of the four truths can be understood as in the treatise. Harmonizing and combining with the cognitive insight of this contemplation of the four truths to cultivate the śrāvaka practices, the treatise states: 'Wisdom contemplates together; cultivation and practice are without distinction.' This has two meanings: First, in terms of the object: contemplating together and cultivating equally without difference with respect to the two kinds of four truths, wholesome and unwholesome; thus it is called 'without distinction.' Second, in terms of cognition: that is, because this śrāvaka cognitive insight that contemplates the truths harmonizes with the ten wholesome paths of action, it is called 'contemplating together and practicing together without distinction.' The above general phrase reveals superiority in contrast to what follows; below there are five specific phrases that show inferiority in contrast to what precedes. Among the five in the treatise, the first three explain inferiority to bodhisattvas; the latter two contrast inferiority with pratyekabuddhas. Among the five, the first, the accumulation of causes, has two meanings: first, causal nature; second, causal habituation. Here in this treatise, it temporarily cites causal habituation: that is, the narrow and inferior roots of wholesome qualities habituated in the past, based on which one accumulates and arouses the practices accomplished now. Thus, the accumulation of causes is also accumulating and bringing about the disposition (gotra), which is called the accumulation of causes; as the sūtra says: 'If the mind is inferior,' and so forth, which can be understood. The remaining four are self-evident in the treatise text and can be understood.
Third, within the pratyekabuddha's ten wholesome actions, there are two parts: first, general; second, below 'not from another,' distinct presentation, which has three points: First, not hearing from another and knowing naturally on one's own is called 'the meaning of self-awakening' in the Daśabhūmika-śāstra, meaning not relying on the teaching of Buddhas and bodhisattvas. In the thirty-fourth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi, in the Pratyekabuddha-bhūmi, among the three characteristics explaining the pratyekabuddha disposition, the third characteristic states: 'The innate pratyekabuddha, before having realized that bodhi, has a middling faculty disposition and belongs to the type that acts with pride; due to this condition, with a deep mind of aspiration, they realize bodhi without a teacher and without an adversary.' Second, being unable to fulfill great compassion and skillful means (upāya): in the Daśabhūmika-śāstra this is the meaning of being unable to teach the Dharma, meaning not arousing the intention to preach the Dharma explains not fulfilling great compassion. Inability to preach the Dharma explains not having skillful means; the Yogācārabhūmi calls this the 'scant-compassion disposition.' Due to this condition, their mind takes no delight in expounding the true Dharma to benefit sentient beings, but takes deep delight in few affairs and dwelling in quiescence. Third, the words 'yet able to deeply enter... up to the pratyekabuddha vehicle': in the Daśabhūmika-śāstra this is called the meaning of contemplating a small realm, meaning practicing the contemplation of the realm of subtle causes and conditions. In this, 'small realm' has two meanings: first, in terms of the twelve links of dependent origination, there are only the two dharmas of suffering and accumulation, hence it is called 'small'; second, conditioned arising is profound and subtle, hence it is called 'small.' Here we take the latter meaning. The Yogācārabhūmi states: 'Having a disposition with scant defilement, due to this condition their mind takes no delight in noisy gatherings,' and so forth. In the Yogācārabhūmi there are five characteristics: first, disposition; second, path; third, habituation; fourth, dwelling; fifth, practice; they are extensively explained therein. When the Daśabhūmika-śāstra says: 'Accumulation of causes, fearing suffering, abandoning sentient beings,' and so forth, it explains the similarities and differences with the śrāvaka: that is, among the five characteristics of the śrāvaka, three are identical and two are different. As for the two differences: this [pratyekabuddha] does not rely on a teacher, so the reliance is superior; and being able to contemplate the profound and subtle dharma of causes and conditions, the contemplation is superior.
Question: What is the difference between this 'inability to preach the Dharma' and 'abandoning sentient beings'? Answer: Śrāvakas also have the power of eloquence to preach, but because they lack great compassion, they abandon beings and incline toward quiescence. Now, pratyekabuddhas also lack the power to preach. The Yogācārabhūmi states: 'Or they deliver others who are base, inferior, and ignorant, delivering them through their physical body and not through language. Why is this so? Because they only manifest bodily postures to teach the Dharma to them, without uttering words. They display various realms of spiritual powers, and so on, to cause those whose minds slander to produce refuge.' However, there are two types of these: first, those who become pratyekabuddhas, called the rhinoceros-horn metaphor; second, those who become individually supreme, called the flocking-traveler metaphor. The rest is as explained in the Yogācārabhūmi.
Fourth, within the bodhisattva's ten wholesome actions, among the four aspects in the Daśabhūmika-śāstra: the first is the causal practice; the next two are the characteristics of practice; the last is the stage of practice. First, the statement 'practicing these ten wholesome actions... up to immeasurable and boundless' is the accumulation of causes, meaning roots of wholesome qualities habituated in past lives, based on which one arouses practice. The treatise explains this with three meanings: first, arousing practice based on all wholesomeness explains the causal practice of benefiting oneself; second, based on all sentient beings, and so forth, explains the causal practice of benefiting others; third, the Mahāyāna mind, and so forth, reveals the essence of the cause, meaning this vast mind is immeasurable, and so forth. Another explanation: the first explains the great mind; the second, the vast mind; the third, the immeasurable mind; which can be understood. Second, the words below 'toward sentient beings' explain function, meaning that because the mind of benefiting others focuses on suffering, it is able to provide benefit. Seeing sentient beings habituating causal suffering and experiencing the fruit of suffering, arousing kindness and compassion is the bodhisattva's function. Third, the statement 'possessing the power of skillful means' explains that this power is the practice of benefiting others; that is, the skillful means of the four means of embracing (saṃgrahavastu), which are aroused based on the aforementioned compassion, hence they are that power. Fourth, below 'aspiration,' the grounds (bhūmi) are explained, meaning the stages upon which practice relies. Divided within this are three, meaning where each of the three asaṃkhyeyas is fulfilled constitutes one, hence there are three stages. The text and meaning are fully explained as in the treatise and should be understood. As for the statement 'purifying the various bhūmis,' and so forth: because of purifying the various bhūmis with higher and higher purity, and because of purifying the pāramitās with foremost purity, they cause that third, vastly accomplished practice to achieve completion. The questions, answers, and explanations in the treatise can be understood.
Fifth, within the Buddha's ten wholesome actions, the treatise and sūtra have both general and specific parts; here there is only the specific, without the general. Within the four specific parts: the first three are precisely the Buddha fruit, and the last is the practice on this bhūmi. In the former, the statement 'attains Buddhahood' means that only because the latencies of those ten unwholesome actions are extinguished together does one then attain Buddhahood. Second, below 'ten powers,' the distinct virtues of the Buddha are revealed, explaining that wholesome qualities are accomplished with mastery, abandoning the two vehicles. Third, the statement 'accumulating all Buddha dharmas' means that based on the bodhisattva vehicle's skillful means, one gathers all Buddha dharmas to cause them to be completed. The contemplation above is now concluded.
Fourth, below 'therefore' is the fourth: practice. There are two meanings in the explanation: First, looking closely toward the Buddha's wholesome qualities to conclude the seeking mind, it is therefore called 'without satiety.' The treatise relies on this explanation, subsuming it under the Buddha's wholesome qualities. Second, having above generally contemplated the five tiers of wholesome qualities, one now concludes that the ten wholesome actions one should practice seek only the Buddha's wholesome qualities. The precept of collecting wholesome qualities is concluded.