華嚴經探玄記 4.59

4.59

第三業果甚深內，先難、後明。難中二：先舉法正難、後「然法性」下遮救重難。此中難意：若四大中無我者，誰作善惡？誰能受報？此中執有作用，應有作者，是以用徵體難。設小乘救言：雖無我人作者，然有善惡因果法故，得如此也。猶是法執。故重難云：然於法性無善無惡，此顯法空。既於法性空無善惡，若無作者，更因何法而有業果？故知有我。我既實有，無我之理安在？難意如此。前中二：先一句舉正義、下顯相違。於中五對十句：初一約受報計有受者。二約作業計有作者。三約報中差別，內約行、外約身，若無作業者，何因有此別？四約多少報，如經中說「能作多業，受報亦多；少亦爾。」故知有我。上約生報。五約現後報。下遮救難可知，亦是覆却重徵。第二答中，何故寶首答者？謂事中顯理得可貴多寶。於中有二：初一偈法說、下九喻況。前中二義：一舉義正答；二引佛證說，非己能知。初中，上二句明業果不壞；下一句明無作者，謂隨其所作諸差別業熏於本識，本識依他變似其業所起果報，故有多報等種種不同。但是諸識緣起互相集成無自性故，得有業果；實非四大中別有人我能作業受果，故云造者無有也。此則由無性理，故法性無善惡，由無性故成因果，故有業果差別。此但有無性之因果，何關有我人？故云四大中非我等也。如此正法，理數決定，三世諸佛之所同說，故云諸佛說也。《楞伽》第一云「我常說空法，遠離於斷常。生死猶如夢，而彼業不失。」此之謂也。下九喻中皆有二義，謂業果歷然而無所有，故成喻也。一明依他離性喻，謂本識如鏡，隨熏所現，業果如像，此是依他義。內外無所有者，明離自性義。此有三重四句：一約像，謂無質不現故，內無所有；非鏡無現故，外無所有；由是一像故，俱無所有；由是像故，俱非無所有。以凡是像義，必由內外方得現故。二約質，謂面南像北故，質內無所有；由如面而現故，質外無所有；俱不俱，可知。三約鏡，謂鏡鐵堅密，間無空處，不受物故，像非內也；凡欲觀像者，皆臨鏡觀之，所以非外；俱不俱等，准之。如此無所有而影像歷然。業如像、性如鏡，故云亦如是也。《起信論》云「二者因熏習鏡，謂一切世間境界悉於中現，不出不入、不失不壞。常住一心，以一切法則真實性故。」此之謂也。第二明無知成因喻，謂本識如田，業等如種子。多類種子同一本識，故各無自體可得相知。然識功能不失壞故，而能為因。如純淨土得雨生草，此多草種於彼土中，求各各性皆不可得，而能為因。縱深掘地，所得之土得雨生草，草種同土雖多年不失，此亦爾。經云「業雖經百劫，而終無失壞。遇眾緣合時，要當酬彼果。」故云業性亦如是也。又水土為疎緣、種子為親因，各全奪有無故，是故不相知。識中准此知之。第三因能現果喻，謂業性如幻師、現果如幻色，雖似有而非有故也。第四果法無念喻，謂由咽喉等因緣和合出聲，實無我能，但從名言熏習生似於言說。如木人出聲，無自念云我能出聲及非我出聲之二念也。又木如藏性，匠如妄想業等，木人如眾生報相，故無我非我也。第五因體無雜喻，謂鳥在㲉時未辨音相，出㲉隨類方有異音。口業種子在本識中同無記性，無若干相，至受生處報熟之時能出眾聲。又功能生果不同，如鳥出㲉。業體性空無別，如鳥在㲉。此乃喻是前後，約法同時。第六現果無來喻，謂如父母為緣受生，識有煩惱業等種子為因。此識與赤白和合時名因緣會，則此名受生，無別來者。雖無來去，而報漸長，不妨諸根各別。業亦爾，思動身等造業，無別來處，後若熟時，感報差別。第七苦報無本喻，謂以惡業熏自心故，令心變作種種苦具，還自惱害。然彼苦具雖外無來處，然惱害事不壞。業亦如是，雖無自性，然感報不滅，故云業性亦如是也。第八勝果無根喻，謂善業熏心、心幻現果亦無根本。小乘說輪王滅後七寶貯在鐵圍山中，後聖王出，七寶還復現於王前。今此不爾，但由業熏自心變現，無別寶體使之來去。業性亦爾。論云「善惡熏於心，何故異心說。」第九有無同性喻，謂有流業未得果，及治道前為本識攝持功能不滅，名為成。至其得果及得治道時，業功能盡，名為敗。尋其成時無所從來，求其敗時亦無所趣，此竝不壞世間說第一義也。

Within the third [section], on the profound depth of karma and its results, first there is an objection, and then an explanation. Within the objection, there are two parts: first, positing the doctrine to make the direct objection, and then, from "However, within dharmatā..." onward, refuting a defense with a renewed objection. The intention of the objection here is: if there is no self within the four great elements, who performs good and evil, and who can experience the retribution? Here, clinging to the presence of activity, there ought to be an agent; thus, it uses function to interrogate the essence as an objection. Even if the Hīnayāna were to defend, saying: "Although there is no personal self as an agent, yet because there are phenomena of good and evil causes and effects, this can happen," this is still clinging to phenomena. Therefore, the renewed objection says: "However, within dharmatā there is neither good nor evil"; this reveals the emptiness of phenomena. Since within dharmatā there is emptiness without good or evil, if there is no agent, then due to what phenomenon could there be karma and results? Therefore, we know there must be a self. Since the self genuinely exists, where is the principle of non-self? Such is the intention of the objection. Within the former part, there are two: first, one line posits the correct principle, and below, the contradiction is revealed. Within it, there are five pairs in ten lines: The first is postulating an experiencer based on receiving retribution. The second is postulating an agent based on performing karma. The third is based on the distinctions within retribution—internally regarding behavior, externally regarding the physical body: if there is no performer of karma, what is the cause of these distinctions? The fourth is based on the quantity of retribution, as the sūtras say: "One who performs much karma receives much retribution; the same applies to little." Therefore, we know there is a self. The above pertains to retribution in the next birth. The fifth is based on present and later retribution. Below, the objection refuting the defense is understandable; it is also a reversal and renewed interrogation. Within the second part, the reply, why does Ratnacūḍa reply? It means that within phenomenal events, the principle is revealed, acquiring precious and abundant jewels. Within it, there are two parts: first, one verse speaks through doctrine; below, nine verses use analogies. In the former, there are two meanings: first, presenting the principle as a direct reply; second, citing the Buddha's testimony to show that it is not something one can know on one's own. In the first, the first two lines explain that karma and results are not destroyed; the next line explains that there is no agent—that is, in accordance with the various differentiated karmas performed, they perfume the fundamental consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna); the fundamental consciousness, being dependent on other [causes], transforms to resemble the resultant retribution generated by that karma; hence, there are various differences such as abundant retributions. It is merely that the dependent origination of the consciousnesses mutually integrates without intrinsic nature; thus, karma and results can exist. It is truly not that within the four great elements there is a separate human self that can perform karma and experience results; hence it is said, "There is no creator." This means that owing to the principle of non-self-nature, dharmatā lacks good and evil; and owing to non-self-nature, causes and effects are established; thus, there are distinctions of karma and results. Here there are only causes and effects without intrinsic nature; what does this have to do with having a self or person? Hence it is said: "Within the four great elements, there is no self," and so forth. Such true Dharma, with its principle and order determined, is spoken in common by all Buddhas of the three times; hence it is said, "The Buddhas have spoken." The first fascicle of the Laṅkāvatāra says: "I always teach the dharma of emptiness, far removed from annihilation and permanence. Saṃsāra is like a dream, yet that karma is not lost." This is what it refers to. Within the nine analogies below, each has two meanings: namely, karma and results are distinct and vivid, yet nonexistent; thus, they form analogies. The first explains the analogy of other-dependence being free from intrinsic nature: the fundamental consciousness is like a mirror, appearing according to perfuming; karma and results are like reflections; this is the meaning of other-dependence. "Nonexistent within or without" clarifies the meaning of being free from intrinsic nature. This has a threefold fourfold proposition (catuṣkoṭi): First, with regard to the reflection: because it does not appear without an object, it is nonexistent within; because it does not appear without a mirror, it is nonexistent without; by being a single reflection, it is nonexistent in both; by being a reflection, it is not nonexistent in both. For wherever there is the meaning of a reflection, it must appear by relying on both inside and outside. Second, with regard to the object: because the face is south and the reflection north, it is nonexistent within the object; because it appears according to the face, it is nonexistent outside the object; both and neither are understandable. Third, with regard to the mirror: because the mirror's iron is dense and solid, without empty space between, and does not receive objects, the reflection is not internal; whenever one wishes to observe the reflection, one looks facing the mirror, so it is not external; both and neither are inferred accordingly. Being thus nonexistent, the reflection is yet distinct and vivid. Karma is like the reflection, and nature is like the mirror; hence it is said, "It is also like this." The Awakening of Faith says: "Second is the mirror of causal perfuming, meaning that all worldly spheres of cognition appear within it, neither emerging nor entering, neither lost nor destroyed, permanently abiding in the one mind, because all dharmas are of the true reality nature." This is what it refers to. The second explains the analogy of unconsciousness becoming a cause: the fundamental consciousness is like a field, and karma and the like are like seeds. Many kinds of seeds share the same fundamental consciousness, so they have no separate intrinsic essences to know one another. Yet because the function of the consciousness is not lost or destroyed, it can act as a cause. Just as pure, clean earth receiving rain produces grass—for these many grass seeds within that earth, seeking their individual natures is completely impossible, yet they can act as causes. Even if one digs deeply into the ground, the earth obtained will produce grass upon receiving rain; though the grass seeds share the earth for many years, they are not lost; this is also like that. The sūtras say: "Though karma passes through a hundred kalpas, in the end it is never lost or destroyed. When it encounters the assembly of conditions, it must repay that result." Hence it is said, "The nature of karma is also like this." Furthermore, water and earth are distant conditions, while seeds are direct causes; each mutually appropriates existence and nonexistence entirely; therefore, they do not know one another. Within the consciousness, this should be understood accordingly. The third is the analogy of the cause being able to manifest the result: the nature of karma is like a magician, and manifesting results is like illusory forms; though appearing to exist, they do not exist. The fourth is the analogy of the resultant dharma having no thought: due to the harmonious combination of causes and conditions such as the throat, sound is produced; in truth, there is no self-capacity, but from the perfuming of nominal expressions, it arises resembling speech. Like a wooden puppet emitting sound, it has neither of the two thoughts: "I can emit sound" or "A non-self emits sound." Furthermore, the wood is like the storehouse nature (tathāgatagarbha), the craftsman is like delusional karmas, and the wooden puppet is like the resultant characteristics of sentient beings; hence, there is neither self nor non-self. The fifth is the analogy of the causal essence being unmixed: when a bird is in its egg, its vocal characteristics cannot be distinguished; upon leaving the egg, distinct sounds appear according to its kind. The seeds of vocal karma in the fundamental consciousness are uniformly indeterminate in nature, lacking diverse marks; when retribution matures at the place of rebirth, they can produce various sounds. Furthermore, functions producing different results are like the bird leaving the egg; the intrinsic nature of karma being empty and without differentiation is like the bird in the egg. This analogy implies sequence, but with regard to the dharma, they are simultaneous. The sixth is the analogy of the manifest result having no coming: just as parents serve as conditions for taking rebirth, and the consciousness possesses seeds of afflictions and karma as causes; when this consciousness unites with the red and white [fluids], this is called the meeting of causes and conditions, which is named taking rebirth, with no separate entity that comes. Although there is no coming and going, yet as the retribution gradually grows, this does not hinder the sense organs from being distinct. Karma is also like this: volition moving the body and so forth creates karma without any separate place of origin; later, when it matures, it evokes differentiated retributions. The seventh is the analogy of painful retribution having no origin: because evil karma perfumes one's own mind, it causes the mind to transform into various instruments of suffering, which in turn torment oneself. Although those instruments of suffering have no external place of origin, the tormenting events are not destroyed. Karma is also like this: although it lacks intrinsic nature, the evoked retribution is not annihilated; hence it is said, "The nature of karma is also like this." The eighth is the analogy of supreme results having no root: good karma perfumes the mind, and the mind illusorily manifests results, also having no fundamental root. The Hīnayāna says that after a cakravartin passes away, the seven treasures are stored in the Iron Ring Mountains, and later when a sage king appears, the seven treasures reappear before the king. Now this is not so; it is merely transformed and manifested by karma perfuming one's own mind, with no separate substance of treasures causing them to come and go. The nature of karma is also like this. The treatise says: "Good and evil perfume the mind; why speak of them apart from the mind?" The ninth is the analogy of existence and nonexistence sharing the same nature: when defiled karma has not yet attained its result, and prior to the counteractive path, its function is maintained by the fundamental consciousness without annihilation, which is called 'establishment.' When it attains its result and attains the counteractive path, the function of karma is exhausted, which is called 'ruin.' Searching for its establishment, it comes from nowhere; seeking its ruin, it goes nowhere. Both of these do not destroy the worldly while expounding the ultimate truth.