大方廣佛華嚴經疏 11.10

11.10

第二廣陳本義分中分二：初結集生起、二「諸佛子」下普賢顯說。於三十句果問中，廣釋世界安立海問，餘並攝之。文分為二：初標舉章門、後依章別釋。今初，分三：一立數顯同、二徵數列異、三結略顯廣。今初。先告佛子者，使時情注其耳目也。世界廣深目之為海，謂積剎成種、積種成海，海無別體，世界都名。然事類廣多，略舉其十以表無盡，三世同說彰其要勝。又顯說決定，無改易也。二徵列中，一明攬緣成立、二成已依住、三外狀區分、四內體差別、五寶等莊校、六垢穢不生、七佛出差殊、八劫住修短、九隨業改變、十包容必均。此十亦攝十八圓滿，後品當會。三「諸佛子」下，結略顯廣。言世界海塵者，智猶難測，言豈具陳？非證法雲，安受茲說？然上十事，於一一剎多少不定。具緣一種，或一、或二、或三、或多、或成四句，謂一成一，一成一切等。清淨一種，或一或多、或亦無之，以有純穢剎故。其次七事各各唯一，謂依空住者，非依光等故。餘準思之。其無差別，一切皆具，以約體性平等、佛力融攝故說無差，所以染淨皆具也。有云：一切世界相望互同名無差者，則違下經文。經云「一一世界海有世界海塵數，無差別故。」若依相望互同，則無有差別之事。若將此十望剎種者，具緣一種多少不定，不得云一，以其種中含有多類剎故。清淨一事不得定言有無，以其種中必含淨穢故。其無差別多少亦均。佛出劫住，隨業轉變不得云一，依形體嚴不得云多，以其剎種別有體等故。若以此十獨望剎海，形體依住莊嚴等四許其唯一，餘必兼多故，經云「一一世界海有種種形」故。今言有世界海塵數者，約融攝無盡之說也。有云：約一一剎海中所有諸剎各各一因等故，有剎海塵數者，孟浪之甚。何者？且如剎海中剎雖多，豈如剎海盡末為塵之多？若欲相同，即一塵一緣方得相似。何得以一剎一緣充一剎多塵之數？況積具緣等十有剎海之塵，其一具緣自有剎海塵數，是則通有剎海微塵數箇剎海微塵數矣。一剎一緣一依一體安得充耶？亦不得言通一切世界海說，以下依住云一一世界海，有世界海塵數所依住故。

In the second part, the section that extensively sets forth the fundamental meaning, there are two parts: first, the compilation's arising; second, Samantabhadra's explicit explanation from "Sons of the Buddha…" onward. Among the thirty clauses of questions on the fruit, it extensively explains the question on the ocean of the establishment of worlds, and subsumes all the rest. The text is divided into two: first, setting forth the headings of the chapters; second, separately explaining according to the chapters. Now, the first is divided into three: (1) establishing the number to show identity, (2) inquiring into the number and listing differences, and (3) concluding with the summary to show the extensive. As for the first: first addressing the sons of the Buddha is to cause the listeners at that time to focus their ears and eyes. The worlds are vast and deep, hence named an "ocean," meaning that the accumulation of kṣetras forms a species, and the accumulation of species forms an ocean; the ocean has no separate essence, it is merely the collective name for the worlds. Yet because the varieties of phenomena are vast and numerous, ten are briefly cited to symbolize the inexhaustible; that the three times explain them identically reveals their supreme importance. Furthermore, it shows that the explanation is definitive and without change. In the second, the inquiring and listing: (1) clarifying that they are established by taking up conditions; (2) their dwelling places upon being established; (3) their external shapes and distinctions; (4) their internal essential differences; (5) their adornment with jewels and the like; (6) the non-arising of defilements; (7) the differences in the Buddhas' appearances; (8) the duration—long or short—of the kalpa's abiding; (9) their transformations according to karma; (10) that their containment is necessarily equal. These ten also subsume the eighteen perfections, which will be reconciled in a later chapter. Third, from "Sons of the Buddha…" onward, concluding with the summary to show the extensive: as for the phrase "the dust motes of the oceans of worlds," wisdom still finds them hard to fathom, so how could words completely express them? If one has not realized the Dharma-cloud, how could one receive this exposition? However, the above ten matters are indefinite in quantity within each individual kṣetra. The single category of possessing conditions may be one, or two, or three, or many, or form four propositions—namely, one establishes one, one establishes all, and so forth. The single category of purity may be one, or many, or even absent, because there are purely defiled kṣetras. The following seven matters are each uniquely singular—namely, those dwelling in space do not dwell upon light and the like. The rest are to be deduced accordingly. As for being without distinction, all possess it, because it is explained as without distinction in terms of the equality of their essence and nature and the Buddha's power of fusion and containment; therefore, defiled and pure alike possess it. Some say: "That all worlds are mutually identical when viewed against one another is called 'without distinction'"—this contradicts the subsequent sūtra text. The sūtra states: "In each ocean of worlds there are as many [worlds] as dust motes in an ocean of worlds, because they are without distinction." If it relied on mutual identity when viewed against one another, then there would be no differentiated phenomena. If one views these ten in relation to the species of kṣetras: the single category of possessing conditions is indefinite in quantity and cannot be called one, because that species contains many types of kṣetras. The single matter of purity cannot be definitively said to exist or not, because that species must contain both pure and defiled. Its non-distinction is also equal in quantity. The Buddha's appearance, the kalpa's abiding, and the transformations according to karma cannot be called one, while their adornment based on shape and essence cannot be called many, because the species of kṣetras has a distinct essence and so forth. If one views these ten solely in relation to the ocean of kṣetras, the four—shape, essence, dwelling place, and adornment—are permitted to be uniquely singular, while the rest must combine multiplicity; hence the sūtra states: "Each ocean of worlds has various shapes." Now, when it says there are as many as the dust motes in an ocean of worlds, this is an explanation based on inexhaustible fusion and containment. Some say: "Because all the kṣetras within each ocean of kṣetras each have a single cause and so forth, there are as many as the dust motes in an ocean of kṣetras"—this is exceedingly reckless. Why so? Take, for instance, the kṣetras in an ocean of kṣetras: though numerous, how could they be as numerous as an ocean of kṣetras completely ground down to dust motes? If they are to correspond, only one dust mote to one condition would achieve similarity. How could one use one kṣetra and one condition to fill the number of the many dust motes of a single kṣetra? Moreover, accumulating the ten [matters] such as possessing conditions yields the dust motes of an ocean of kṣetras; that single [matter of] possessing conditions itself has as many as the dust motes in an ocean of kṣetras—this then means that in total there are as many dust-mote-counts of oceans of kṣetras as there are dust motes in an ocean of kṣetras! How could one kṣetra, one condition, one dwelling, and one essence ever fill that? Nor can one say it is spoken generally of all oceans of worlds, because below, regarding the dwelling places, it says that each individual ocean of worlds has as many dwelling places as dust motes in an ocean of worlds.