華嚴經探玄記 13.74

13.74

三所離障者，依《地論》，離細相習障。解云：以第六地有相觀少名為細相礙，於第七純無相觀，故以為障。《唯識論》云「細相現行障，謂所知障中俱生一分執有生滅細相現行，彼障七地妙無相道，入七地時便能永斷。由斯七地說斷二愚及彼麁重：一細相現行愚，則是此中執有生者猶取流轉細生相故；二純作意求無相愚，則是此中執有滅者尚取還滅。細滅相故，純於無相作意勤求，未能空中起有勝行。」解云：以所知障執於緣起流轉之生、還盡之滅，細於前地所離四諦染淨麁相，故以為名。問：此後一愚正迷還滅細相，何以不名還滅愚？答：此愚有二用，一執還滅相、二純作意求無相，且依後義立名。又釋：相有二種，一有、二無。取無之相名為細相。若依此釋，求無相則是愚。梁論名一向無相思惟方便無明。《金光明》云「一味執思惟欲斷，未得方便無明。」諸餘聖教可準通釋。

Third, regarding the obstacles abandoned: according to the Daśabhūmika-śāstra, one abandons the obstacle of the habit of subtle marks. The explanation says: because in the sixth bhūmi there is a small amount of contemplation with marks, it is called subtle marks; this obstructs the contemplation of pure marklessness in the seventh, so it is considered an obstacle. The Weishi lun says: “The obstacle of the active manifestation of subtle marks refers to an innate portion of the cognitive obstacle that grasps active manifestations of subtle marks of arising and ceasing; that obstructs the wondrous markless path of the seventh bhūmi, and upon entering the seventh bhūmi one is able to sever it forever. Due to this, the seventh bhūmi is said to sever two kinds of ignorance and their coarse heaviness: first, the ignorance of active manifestations of subtle marks, which is precisely grasping that there is arising here, because one still grasps subtle marks of arising in saṃsāric transmigration; second, the ignorance of seeking marklessness through unadulterated mental application, which is precisely grasping that there is cessation here, because one still grasps subtle marks of cessation in reversal and extinction; one diligently seeks purely by applying the mind to marklessness, and is not yet able to give rise to superior practices of existence within emptiness.” The explanation says: because the cognitive obstacle grasps the arising of transmigration in dependent origination and the cessation of reversal and exhaustion, which is subtler than the coarse marks of defilement and purity of the four truths abandoned in the previous bhūmi, it is given this name. Question: This latter ignorance is precisely delusion regarding the subtle mark of reversal and cessation; why is it not called the ignorance of reversal and cessation? Answer: This ignorance has two functions: first, grasping the mark of reversal and cessation; second, seeking marklessness through unadulterated mental application; it is named provisionally according to the latter meaning. Another explanation: marks are of two kinds: first, existence; second, non-existence. Grasping the mark of non-existence is called a subtle mark. If according to this explanation, seeking marklessness is precisely the ignorance. The Liang translation of the Saṃgraha calls it the nescience of the upāya of thinking exclusively on marklessness. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa says: “The nescience of grasping and thinking of wanting to sever with a single taste, not yet having attained upāya.” The other sacred teachings can be explained consistently along these lines.