大方廣佛華嚴經疏 23.4

23.4

第八難得行，體即是願。就釋相中，文分二別：前明自分行、後明勝進行。然此二行各攝上求下化之願，略無神通。今初，分四：初明自行、次辨利他、第三雙結二行動寂無礙、第四雙非二行拂迹入玄。初中分三：一明修成善根、二顯善根行相、三行成利益。今初也，斯即起行所依。善謂順理益物，根謂增上生長，獲之在己故名成就。文有十句，初總、餘別。總具後九，受難得名。二「此菩薩」下顯善根行相，亦有十句，如次對前。謂由得最勝解，故受難得名等。亦可有難得根，能有勝解。又亦以後一行成前十善，隨前一善具後十行，而別配分明。三「是菩薩」下行成利益。文中先結前後、「於念念」下顯益。於中，初自益，能轉生死成大智益，不捨大願成大悲益。「若有」已下顯能益他，由前自行成此能益，夫正利他。第二「此菩薩」下辨利他行。文分為三，謂法、喻、合。今初。謂有大智故，了眾生非有，則不住生死；有大悲故，不捨眾生界，則不住涅槃。大悲般若互相輔翼，成無住道。二喻中，初句喻能化人；次三句喻悲智不住之行相；後「而能」下三句喻不住之功能，初二句正喻功能，以往返不息一句結能度所以。三法合中二：先正合、後徵釋。前中具合三段，生死即此岸、涅槃合彼岸，合上中流亦言生死者，以發心之後成佛之前，十地三賢尚居二死，是以中流即是生死，故云生死中流，非生死涅槃之中間名生死中也。文旨顯然，晉譯失旨，不應廣引。有以煩惱為中流，約其漂溺，從因說也。有以聖賢為中流，約受生死之人也。有以中道為中流，約觀行說並不應住。「安隱」已下涅槃之德，常故安隱、樂故無畏、我故無憂、淨則無惱。「亦不」已下廣明以智導悲，合前往返無休息義。謂由不住著故，所以往返運濟無休。及顯法中非有不捨之義，謂非唯悲故不捨，亦由了其非有無可捨故，則終日度而無度也。初句總明；「不捨」下別，有五對十句。初一多對，已化未化俱有捨著二義，思之。二增減對，化之成道生界不減，不從化者生界不增，此約多人相望。三約一人，果起不生，惑盡非滅。四謂空為盡，謂有為長。五一對總結，四對不亡並名為二，今無分別契本不二。第二徵釋中，文有兩番：前番正徵不著、後番重徵前義。今初也。先徵意云：現化眾生有增有減，而言不著，其故何耶？釋意云：以菩薩深觀生界同於法界無增等故，所以不著。文中初二句總，上句是不異義，故云如也；下句是相即義，故云無二。後無二法中下，別彰無二之相，即屬對上文。無取依著，釋不分別。餘文相顯。此文昭著，而末學之徒但謂一分眾生不成佛，故名不減生界。深可悲哉！第二番重徵意云：何以生界即同法界？釋云：一切諸法皆同法界，豈獨眾生而不同也。第三「菩薩如是」下雙結二行動寂無礙，亦名無盡心行，有法、喻、合。法中十句，初二牒前起後。既方便深入，故性相無礙。「住於」下餘有八對，正顯行相。一約起行之身、二了法藥、三識根緣、四遊佛剎、五達佛法、六深契離言不捨言說、七無求離欲而萬行爰修，前七明即寂之用；八「常勤」下一對明即用之寂，亦通顯所由，由勤修故涉權、入法界故常寂。二喻中，木喻法界，火喻所成身智，火事喻悲化，無邊本火不滅喻身智常湛。三合可知。第四「非究竟」下雙非二行拂迹入玄者，然初自行云能轉生死而不捨大願，已有權實雙行，而謂多明照體大智。次利他之中，既云無住運濟，則悲智相導，而多似起用大悲。次復以導悲之智遣彼著心，復似悲智二心行有前後故。第三段辨動寂雙行，則理無不盡。而猶慮物，謂二事不融故。此明形奪兩亡、權實無寄，豈唯十行菩薩修行善巧，彌顯功德林悲濟之深。文有五對十句，然其所非之法即前權實二行。且如究竟即實、不究竟即權，今乃雙非者，實即權故非究竟、權即實故非不究竟。又但言非究竟，非謂有不究竟，故亦非之。是則借權以遣實，實去而權亡；借實以破權，權亡實不立。言窮慮絕，何實何權？體本寂寥，孰非孰是？唯蕭然無寄理自玄會，故辨雙非，非有雙非可立。然雙非是遮、雙是為照，即遮而照故雙非即是雙行，即照而遮雙行即為雙遣，總前諸段理極於斯。下諸句中皆倣於此。二對所化，能所取寂，故非是取；了知心行，故非不取。三約化處，不著世界故非是依，依剎現身故非無依。亦約所證智無分別而善入故。四約化法，深達義理故非世法，隨世語言故非佛法。五證離欲際故非凡夫，不斷菩薩行故非得果。

Eighth, the practice of that which is difficult to attain; its essence is vow. In explaining its characteristics, the text divides into two parts: first, explaining the practices of its own station, and second, explaining the practices of superior progress. However, these two practices each subsume the vows to seek [bodhi] above and convert [sentient beings] below, briefly omitting supernatural powers. Now, for the first part, it divides into four: first, explaining one's own practice; second, distinguishing benefiting others; third, jointly concluding that the two practices are unobstructed between movement and stillness; fourth, jointly negating the two practices, brushing away traces to enter the profound. In the first part, there are three subdivisions: 1. explaining the perfection of kuśala-mūla through cultivation; 2. revealing the active characteristics of the kuśala-mūla; 3. the benefits when the practices are perfected. Now for the first subdivision: this is that upon which the initiation of practice relies. 'Good' means according with principle and benefiting things; 'roots' means sovereign growth; attaining them in oneself is called 'perfection'. The text contains ten clauses: the first is general, and the rest are specific. The general contains the subsequent nine, receiving the name 'difficult to attain'. Second, from 'this bodhisattva' onward, revealing the active characteristics of the kuśala-mūla, there are also ten clauses, sequentially corresponding to the preceding. That is to say, because of obtaining the most supreme understanding, one receives the name 'difficult to attain', and so forth. Alternatively, having roots difficult to attain enables one to have supreme understanding. Also, using each subsequent practice to complete the ten preceding goods, each preceding good is equipped with the ten subsequent practices, clearly distinguished and paired. Third, from 'this bodhisattva' onward, the benefits when the practices are perfected. In the text, it first summarizes the preceding and then, from 'in thought after thought' onward, reveals the benefits. Therein, first are the self-benefits: being able to turn saṃsāra into the benefit of great wisdom, and not abandoning the great vow into the benefit of great compassion. From 'if there are' onward, it reveals the ability to benefit others: due to the preceding self-practice, this ability to benefit is perfected, which is truly benefiting others. Second, from 'this bodhisattva' onward, distinguishing the practice of benefiting others. The text divides into three parts, namely, doctrine, metaphor, and application. Now for the first. That is to say, having great wisdom, one understands that sentient beings are non-existent, and thus does not abide in saṃsāra; having great compassion, one does not abandon the realm of sentient beings, and thus does not abide in nirvāṇa. Great compassion and prajñā support each other, completing the path of non-abiding. Second, in the metaphor: the first clause is a metaphor for the person capable of transforming; the next three clauses are metaphors for the active characteristics of non-abiding through compassion and wisdom; the subsequent three clauses from 'and can' onward are metaphors for the function of non-abiding: the first two clauses directly symbolize the function, while the clause 'going back and forth without resting' concludes with the reason why they can ferry across. Third, in the application to doctrine, there are two parts: first, the direct application, and second, an interrogation and explanation. In the first part, all three sections are matched: saṃsāra corresponds to this shore, nirvāṇa corresponds to that shore; matching the midstream above also speaks of saṃsāra because after generating the aspiration [for bodhi] and before attaining Buddhahood, those of the ten stages and the three ranks of the worthy still reside in the two kinds of death; therefore the midstream is itself saṃsāra, hence it says 'the midstream of saṃsāra', not that between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa is called the midst of saṃsāra. The import of the text is obvious; the Jin translation missed the point and should not be extensively cited. Some consider the defilements to be the midstream, regarding being tossed and drowned, speaking from the cause. Some consider the noble and worthy ones to be the midstream, regarding the persons who undergo saṃsāra. Some consider the middle way to be the midstream, speaking in terms of contemplation practice, neither of which should be dwelled in. From 'peaceful' onward are the virtues of nirvāṇa: because it is permanent, it is peaceful; because it is blissful, it is fearless; because it is self, it is free of sorrow; because it is pure, it has no distress. From 'nor does...' onward, it extensively explains guiding compassion with wisdom, matching the earlier meaning of 'going back and forth without resting'. That is to say, because of not abiding and clinging, one goes back and forth ferrying across without resting. It also reveals the meaning in the doctrine of 'non-existence yet not abandoning'—meaning not only does one not abandon out of compassion, but also by understanding their non-existence, there is nothing that can be abandoned; thus, one ferries across all day long yet there is no ferrying across. The first clause explains generally; from 'not abandoning' onward is specific, having five pairs and ten clauses. First, the pair of one and many: both the already transformed and the not yet transformed contain the two senses of abandoning and clinging; reflect upon this. Second, the pair of increase and decrease: transforming them to attain the Path does not decrease the realm of sentient beings; those who do not follow the transformation do not increase the realm of sentient beings; this is viewed with respect to multiple persons. Third, viewing with respect to one person: the arising of the fruit is not birth; the exhaustion of delusion is not extinction. Fourth, considering emptiness to be exhaustion, considering existence to be increase. Fifth, one pair summarizing in conclusion: if the four pairs are not obliterated, they are all called 'two'; now, being without conceptual discrimination, one tallies with the fundamental non-duality. In the second part, the interrogation and explanation, there are two rounds: the first round directly investigates non-clinging; the second round reinvestigates the previous meaning. Now for the first: first, the intention of the question says: 'Visibly transforming sentient beings has increase and decrease, yet you say there is no clinging; what is the reason?' The explanation says: 'Because the bodhisattva deeply contemplates that the realm of sentient beings is identical to the dharmadhātu without increase, etc., there is therefore no clinging.' In the text, the first two clauses are general: the upper clause conveys the meaning of non-difference, hence saying 'as'; the lower clause conveys the meaning of mutual identity, hence saying 'non-dual'. Next, from 'within non-dual dharmas' onward, it specifically displays the marks of non-duality, which correspond to the text above. 'Without grasping or relying' explains 'without conceptual discrimination'. The rest of the text is obvious. This text is lucid and prominent, yet students of later generations merely claim that one portion of sentient beings does not attain Buddhahood, which is why it is called 'not decreasing the realm of sentient beings'—how profoundly lamentable! The second round of reinvestigation asks: 'Why is the realm of sentient beings identical to the dharmadhātu?' The explanation says: 'All dharmas are identical to the dharmadhātu; how could sentient beings alone not be identical?' Third, from 'the bodhisattva like this' onward, jointly concluding that the two practices are unobstructed between movement and stillness, also called 'the inexhaustible mind and practice', has doctrine, metaphor, and application. In the doctrine, there are ten clauses: the first two repeat the preceding to introduce what follows. Having entered deeply with skillful means, nature and marks are unobstructed. From 'dwelling in' onward, there are the remaining eight pairs, directly displaying the active characteristics: 1. regarding the body that initiates practice; 2. understanding the Dharma-medicine; 3. recognizing faculties and conditions; 4. roaming through Buddha-lands; 5. penetrating the Buddhadharma; 6. deeply tallying with the ineffable while not abandoning verbal expression; 7. without seeking and detached from desire, yet the myriad practices are thereby cultivated—the first seven explain the function identical to stillness; 8. the pair from 'always diligently' onward explains the stillness identical to function, and also comprehensively reveals the reason: by diligent cultivation, one engages with the provisional; by entering the dharmadhātu, one is always still. In the metaphor: wood symbolizes the dharmadhātu, fire symbolizes the perfected body and wisdom, the activity of fire symbolizes compassionate transformation, and the inexhaustible original fire not being extinguished symbolizes the body and wisdom being constantly profound and still. The application can be understood. Fourth, from 'not ultimate' onward, jointly negating the two practices, brushing away traces to enter the profound: however, the initial self-practice says one can turn saṃsāra without abandoning the great vow, which already possessed the dual practice of provisional and real, yet is considered to mostly clarify the great wisdom that illuminates the essence. Next, in benefiting others, since it says non-abiding ferrying across, then compassion and wisdom guide each other, yet it seems mostly to initiate functional great compassion. Next, using the wisdom that guides compassion to dispatch that mind of clinging, it again seems that the two mental practices of compassion and wisdom have a sequence. The third section distinguishes the dual practice of movement and stillness, where the principle is fully exhausted. Yet still fearing that beings might think the two matters are not interfused, this section clarifies that form and deprivation are both obliterated, and provisional and real have no resting place—how could it merely be the skillful practice of the bodhisattvas of the ten practices? It all the more displays the depth of Guṇaprabha's compassionate salvation. The text has five pairs and ten clauses. However, the dharmas negated are precisely the preceding two practices of the provisional and real. For example, 'ultimate' is the real, and 'not ultimate' is the provisional; now jointly negating them, because the real is identical to the provisional, it is 'not ultimate'; because the provisional is identical to the real, it is 'not non-ultimate'. Furthermore, merely saying 'not ultimate' does not mean there is 'non-ultimate', hence it is also negated. Thus, one borrows the provisional to discard the real, and once the real is gone, the provisional perishes; one borrows the real to break the provisional, and once the provisional perishes, the real is not established. Words are exhausted and thoughts terminated: what is real and what is provisional? The essence is fundamentally desolate and empty: what is wrong and what is right? Only in being desolate with nowhere to abide does the principle naturally and profoundly tally. Therefore, distinguishing the joint negation does not mean there is a joint negation to be established. However, joint negation is refutation, and joint affirmation is illumination; being illumination precisely within refutation, joint negation is itself dual practice; being refutation precisely within illumination, dual practice is itself dual discarding—summarizing the preceding sections, the principle reaches its culmination here. The subsequent clauses are all modeled on this. The second pair concerns those transformed: since subject and object grasp stillness, it is 'not grasping'; because one completely knows their mental practices, it is 'not non-grasping'. The third is regarding the place of transformation: not clinging to worlds, it is 'not relying'; relying on lands to manifest bodies, it is 'not non-relying'. It also concerns the wisdom of what is realized being non-discriminative and entering skillfully. The fourth is regarding the Dharma of transformation: deeply penetrating the meaning and principle, it is 'not worldly dharma'; according with worldly language, it is 'not Buddhadharma'. Fifth, realizing the limit of detachment from desire, one is 'not an ordinary person'; not severing bodhisattva practices, one has 'not attained the fruit'.