大方廣佛華嚴經疏 13.25

13.25

偈文分二：先彰說人、後顯偈辭。今初。言一切處文殊者，略申三義：一約當節，如初節中，百億佛前有百億文殊為一切也。各各皆說當節之偈，故文皆云各於佛所。二一文殊從一處東來，即從一切處東來。至一法會，即至一切法會故。雖東來而即一切處，以是法界即體之用身故。三約表法，文殊乃是不動智之妙用，觸境斯了。六根三業盡是文殊，實相體周，萬像森羅無非般若，何有一處非文殊哉。下九節中皆有二段，倣此可知。二正顯偈辭。然釋此偈，有通有別，通者此明菩提超情，別謂顯前光中所見之事。於中又二：一約境，謂融前所照，顯理法故。二約觀，謂令大眾泯絕諸見，於所照事不生執取。然觀資理成、理由觀顯，故通而釋之即明菩提超情。大分為二：初一反顯、餘九順釋。今初，反顯違理之失，謂菩提體德超絕一切。《佛地論》明佛非漏非無漏，亦應於世非著非無著。今乃見佛內離諸漏、外不著世，則有漏可離、有世不著，取捨未亡，此見違理，故非道眼。證道眼者，無分別故。餘偈順顯見理之益，皆上三句觀相、下句觀益。於中九偈各是一義，且分為四：初六觀佛、次一趣求、次一觀生、後一了法。初中，初偈正顯佛菩提性本來自空，稱此而知，則無上失。體謂真性、相謂德相，並性無所有，竟何所離？本無有著，誰為無著？如是知者名為正解，修習明了斯為正行。下句觀益。言疾作佛者，約文殊門，情盡理現即名作佛；約普賢門，信終圓收；約行布說，則不見此理，成佛未期。他皆倣此。次一偈依正等觀，佛菩提性依正無二故。亦顯光所照處，以明離見。謂上半於前所見世界，令離妄動，知真法界不應動故。次句例前八相，佛身亦同，平等不動而了，故成勝智。次偈佛法等觀了同體故，二念豈生、一亦不存，得難思果。次偈生佛等觀，言身即眾生，以梵本中云佛及我故，我即行人之身，稱理普周云平等住，平等則無能所，故曰無住。我即法性，更不證入。法性無性，復何所入？如是知者，曠世難逢，故《般若》文殊分云「若知我性即知無法，若知無法即無境界，若無境界即無所依，若無所依即無所住」也。又本會即住無所住，新集則入無所入。問：若皆平等，云何分別有三寶耶？《智論》答云：平等即是三寶。謂平等即法寶，法寶即是佛，以未得法不名佛故。得平等法，分別有須菩提等。次偈會通平等，謂上來主伴依正不離五蘊，五蘊性空即是平等。有相差別總名為數，即同無為故非數法，離數超世成寂靜果。次偈拂上出世，謂真出世者超越入出、不礙照知，故成光耀。又上第三偈佛即是法。第四偈法即是眾。第五偈明是三寶皆無為相，此偈與虛空等。二有一偈趣求者，以上雖離見而知，猶恐帶寂，故上半勸求。次句又觀性離，謂了迴向心本自不生，是離相迴向也。離相求佛，得名稱果。三次一偈，所見眾生亦皆稱真，故無生壞，知無眾生是無上道故。下經云「無上摩訶薩，遠離眾生想。」末後一偈知法，即成前法會周遍所由。上半標門，即十玄門中一多相容不同門也。次一句釋所由，即十種所由中緣起相由門也。並如義分齊中謂一與多互相生起。且一依多起，則一是所起而無力也，多是能起故有力也。以多有力能攝一，以一無力入於多，是故此一恒在多中；多依一起準上知之，是則此多恒在一中也。以俱有力及俱無力各不並故，無彼不相在也；以一有力一無力不相違故，有此恒相在也。緣起法界理數常爾，稱斯而見何所畏哉？由此緣起成前平等，由前平等成此緣起，文理昭然，不許事事無礙，恐未著深思。

The text of the verses is divided into two: first, revealing the speaker; second, showing the words of the verses. First, regarding "Mañjuśrī in all places," this briefly expresses three meanings. First, in terms of the specific section: just as in the first section, where before each of the ten billion Buddhas there was one Mañjuśrī, this makes ten billion Mañjuśrīs as "all." Each speaks the verses of the corresponding section, which is why the text repeatedly states, "each at the place of a Buddha." Second, one Mañjuśrī coming from the east from one place is precisely coming from the east from all places. Arriving at one Dharma assembly is precisely arriving at all Dharma assemblies. Though coming from the east, he is identical to all places, because this is the functional body that is identical with the essence of the dharmadhātu. Third, in terms of representing the Dharma: Mañjuśrī is indeed the wondrous function of unmoving wisdom; whatever object is encountered is clearly understood. The six sense organs and three types of karmic action are all Mañjuśrī. The essence of the true mark is all-pervading; the myriad phenomena in their dense array are none other than prajñā. How could there be any place that is not Mañjuśrī? In the nine sections below, both parts are present in each; they can be known by analogy with this. Second, properly explaining the words of the verses. In interpreting these verses, there is a general [interpretation] and a specific [interpretation]. The general [interpretation] is that this illuminates bodhi as transcending conceptual thought. The specific [interpretation] refers to revealing the phenomena seen previously within the light. Within this there are also two [aspects]: First, in terms of the object: that is, fusing what was previously illuminated to reveal the noumenal Dharma. Second, in terms of contemplation: that is, causing the great assembly to eliminate all views and not give rise to grasping with regard to the illuminated phenomena. Contemplation, however, relies on noumenon to be accomplished, and noumenon is revealed through contemplation; therefore, interpreting them generally, it illuminates bodhi as transcending conceptual thought. Broadly divided, there are two parts: the first one reveals negatively, and the remaining nine explain positively. First, negatively revealing the error of going against noumenon: this means that the essence and virtues of bodhi transcend everything. The Buddhābhūmi-śāstra explains that the Buddha is neither with out-flows nor without out-flows, and should likewise be neither attached nor unattached to the world. Now, if one merely sees the Buddha internally free from all out-flows and externally unattached to the world, then there would be out-flows to be abandoned and a world to be unattached to; grasping and rejecting would not yet be extinguished. This view goes against noumenon and is therefore not the eye of the path. One who has realized the eye of the path is free from discrimination. The remaining verses positively reveal the benefit of seeing the noumenon; in all of them, the first three lines contemplate the marks, and the final line contemplates the benefit. Within these, the nine verses each have one meaning, which may be tentatively divided into four: the first six contemplate the Buddha, the next one tends toward seeking, the next one contemplates sentient beings, and the last one thoroughly understands dharmas. In the first part, the first verse properly reveals that the nature of the Buddha's bodhi is originally empty of itself. Knowing in accordance with this, one is without the above error. "Essence" refers to the true nature; "marks" refers to the marks of virtue. Both are completely devoid of intrinsic nature; what, in the end, could there be to leave behind? Originally there is no attachment; who could be the one unattached? One who knows in this way is said to have correct understanding; practicing and cultivating with clarity is correct practice. The final line contemplates the benefit. In saying "swiftly becomes a Buddha": in terms of Mañjuśrī's approach, when conceptual emotions are exhausted and noumenon appears, this is called becoming a Buddha. In terms of Samantabhadra's approach, it is fully encompassed at the end of faith. In terms of sequential steps, if one does not see this noumenon, there is no set expectation for Buddhahood. Others are all analogous to this. The next verse contemplates the dependent and primary [retribution] as equal, because the nature of the Buddha's bodhi is non-dual with regard to the dependent and the primary. It also reveals the place illuminated by the light to clarify the transcendence of views. The first half causes one to be free from false movement with respect to the previously seen worlds, knowing that the true dharmadhātu cannot be moved. The next line draws an analogy with the eight aspects [of the Buddha's life] mentioned earlier: the Buddha's body is also the same; one clearly understands it to be equal and unmoving, and thus accomplishes superior wisdom. The next verse contemplates the Buddha and Dharma as equal, because one thoroughly understands them to have the same essence. How could two thoughts arise? Even "one" does not remain, and one attains the inconceivable fruit. The next verse contemplates sentient beings and the Buddha as equal. Saying "body" means sentient beings, because the Sanskrit text says "Buddhas and me." "Me" is the practitioner's body. Extending universally in accord with noumenon is called "abiding in equality." In equality, there is neither subject nor object; hence it is called "non-abiding." "Me" is precisely the dharmatā; one does not enter into it any further. Dharmatā has no nature; into what could one enter further? One who knows thus is difficult to encounter in countless ages. Hence, the Mañjuśrī section of the Prajñā[-pāramitā Sūtra] states: "If one knows the nature of the self, one knows there are no dharmas; if one knows there are no dharmas, there is no realm of cognitive objects; if there is no realm of cognitive objects, there is nothing on which to rely; if there is nothing on which to rely, there is no place to abide." Furthermore, the original assembly abides in non-abiding, while the newly gathered assembly enters into non-entering. Question: If all are equal, why are the Triratna distinguished? The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa answers: Equality is precisely the Triratna. This means that equality is the jewel of the Dharma; the jewel of the Dharma is precisely the Buddha, because without attaining the Dharma one is not called a Buddha. Having attained the equal Dharma, one discriminates Subhūti and the others. The next verse harmonizes and integrates equality: the host and companions, dependent and primary [retributions] mentioned above are not apart from the five skandhas; the emptiness of the nature of the five skandhas is precisely equality. Distinctions with marks are collectively called "numbers"; being identical with the unconditioned, they are not numbered dharmas. Transcending numbers and surpassing the world, one accomplishes the quiescent fruit. The next verse brushes away the above [notion of] transcending the world: one who truly transcends the world surmounts both entering and emerging, yet does not obstruct illumination and knowing; hence, it becomes a blazing radiance. Furthermore, in the third verse above, the Buddha is precisely the Dharma. In the fourth verse, the Dharma is precisely the Saṅgha. The fifth verse clarifies that these Triratna all have unconditioned marks; this verse is equal to empty space. The second [group], having one verse on tending toward seeking: although one knows while transcending views through the above, there is still fear of harboring quietism; hence, the first half encourages seeking. The next line also contemplates nature as detached, meaning that one understands the mind of pariṇāmanā to be originally unproduced; this is pariṇāmanā detached from marks. Seeking the Buddha detached from marks, one attains the fruit of good reputation. Third, the next verse: the sentient beings seen also all conform to the real, and therefore are without arising or destruction, because knowing that there are no sentient beings is the unsurpassed path. A later section of the sūtra states: "An unsurpassed mahāsattva / Leaves far behind the conception of sentient beings." The final verse is on knowing dharmas, which establishes the reason why the previous Dharma assemblies are all-pervading. The first half indicates the approach, which is the approach of the mutual containment and difference of the one and the many among the Ten Mysterious Approaches. The next line explains the reason, which is the approach of the mutual conditionality of pratītyasamutpāda among the ten kinds of reasons. Both are as explained in the "Distinction of Meanings": the one and the many mutually give rise to each other. For instance, when the one arises relying on the many, the one is what is arisen and is powerless, while the many is what gives rise and is therefore powerful. Because the many is powerful, it can encompass the one; because the one is powerless, it enters into the many. Therefore, this one is constantly within the many. The many relying on the one to arise can be known by analogy with the above; thus, these many are constantly within the one. Because both being powerful and both being powerless do not occur side by side, there is never a case where they are not mutually present; because one being powerful and one being powerless do not contradict each other, they are constantly mutually present. The noumenon and principle of the dharmadhātu of pratītyasamutpāda are constantly so; seeing in accordance with this, what is there to fear? Due to this pratītyasamutpāda, the previous equality is accomplished; due to the previous equality, this pratītyasamutpāda is accomplished. The text and principle are clearly evident; if one does not accept the non-obstruction among phenomena, I fear one has not yet reflected deeply.