大方廣佛華嚴經疏 24.12.3

24.12.3

然法性真如亦假施設，遮撥為無故說為有，遮執為有故說為空，勿謂虛幻故說為實，理非妄倒故名真如，為法之性名為法性，非離色心別有實體。 今多聞之人不唯知名而已，應如是知。 第六有記法者，有釋云：謂能招愛非愛果，故名有記。 此乃通說。 餘處辨記，即是善惡。 今唯舉善，應云順理善法可記錄故。 下出所記法體，句有十一，義攝唯五。 四聖諦，如前本品已辨。 四沙門果，如〈梵行品〉。 四辨，如第九地。 三十七品，如第四地。 四無所畏，今當略明，謂外難無怯，故名無畏。 《瑜伽》云「如來於此謗難都不見有如實因相，由是因緣能自了知坦然無畏。 」無畏有四：一一切智無畏、二漏盡無畏、三者障道、四出苦道。 此之四段各有難答。 初外難云：若佛是一切智者，有諸比丘從他方來，何須問言安樂住不？ 言一切智無所不知，今問於他，一何相反。 佛自唱言：我是一切智人，但為攝受來者，隨順世間師弟人事故。 二有難云：若佛自言漏永盡者，何以愛語羅睺、訶罵調達？ 佛於此難正見無由、安隱無怯，自唱德號，我實漏盡，但為隨根而調伏故。 三有難云：若佛說欲能障道者，何故預流、一來尚有妻子之愛？ 佛於此難心無怯懼，謂自唱德號，我說欲能障道，但障不還、羅漢，非初、二果。 四有難云：若佛說諸聖道能盡苦者，何故羅漢受瘡潰蛇螫之苦？ 佛於此難心無怯懼，自唱德號，我說聖道實能盡苦邊際，但說未來，非現在故。 四中初一離所知障，次離煩惱障，三是出離道障，四即出離之道。 初二自利，後二利他。 所以自歎此四者，初一為菩薩、第二為聲聞、後二通為。 《智論》二十八、《瑜伽》五十、《對法》十四廣辨其相。 第七無記中分二：先徵名、後「謂世間」下辨相。 今初。 無記二義：一非善非惡，不能招感愛非愛果，名為無記。 可釋餘文。 今此正謂虛妄推度非理問難不可記錄，故名無記，非對善惡。 故《俱舍》第十九云「諸契經說十四無記」，即其義也。 亦名置記，記即答也，不應答故。 所以不答者何？ 謂此乃無義語也，知之不免生死，不知不障涅槃； 前說有記則反於此。 《智論》第三云「所以不答十四難者，此事無實故。 諸法有常，無此理故，言斷亦爾。 如有人問：𤛓於牛角，得幾升乳？ 豈曰問耶？ 復次世界無窮猶如車輪。 復次無利有失，墮惡邪中，覆於四諦諸法實相。 復次人不能知。 復次稱法說故。 」第十七云「有一比丘思惟十四難不能解，辭佛不為弟子。 佛言：『我為老病死人說法濟度。 此是鬪諍法，如中毒箭，不應推尋。 』」《楞伽》亦云「皆是世論，非我所說。 」言十四者，即此中前四四句，其第四四句但合為二，謂身與神一、身與神異。 然諸經論多說十四難，而相或同異，不繁會釋。 今經委論，不出我法二執。 文分五段：第一有四四句，就我明無記。 第二「過去」下，就三世橫論凡聖數之多少。 三「何等」下，約凡聖竪論初後。 四「世間從何」下，徵三世間所從。 五「何者」下，約生死際畔以辨無記。 今初句雖十六，其過不出斷常二見。 言世間者，準《大品》中通三世間，謂眾生世間、五蘊世間及器世間。 今此文意，正顯眾生世間，兼明五蘊世間，以眾生是總主假者，外道計以為我故。 有邊等諸見，初有邊四句約未來世，常等四句約過去世。 如來有無，依涅槃起。 故《中論．邪見品》云「我於過去世，為有為是無？ 世間常等見，皆依過去世。 我於未來世，為作為無作？ 有邊等諸見，皆依未來世。 」〈涅槃品〉云「如來滅後有無等，依涅槃起。 我及眾生有無四句，約現在說。 」既知起見之本，次隨文別釋，即為四段。 第一四句言有邊者，即斷見外道，計我於後世更不復作，則與此身俱盡。 無邊者，謂我於後世更有所作。

However, the dharmatā-tathatā is also a provisional designation: to ward off nihilistic denial it is said to exist; to ward off grasping at existence it is said to be empty; to prevent it from being thought illusory it is said to be real; because the noumenon is not deluded or inverted it is named tathatā; being the nature of all dharmas it is named dharmatā—there is no real entity apart from form and mind. Now, one who is of great learning does not merely know its name; one should know it in this way. Sixth, regarding designated dharmas (vyākaraṇa-dharma), some explain: because they are able to incur desirable or undesirable retributions, they are called designated (vyākaraṇa). This is a general explanation. Where vyākaraṇa is distinguished elsewhere, it refers to the wholesome and the unwholesome. Here, only the wholesome is raised; it should be said that wholesome dharmas that conform to principle may be recorded [or designated]. Below, the essences of the designated dharmas are presented: there are eleven phrases, which in meaning are subsumed under just five: The Four Noble Truths, as already distinguished above in this chapter. The four fruits of the ascetic (śramaṇa), as in the "Chapter on Pure Conduct". The four analytical knowledges (pratisaṃvid), as in the Ninth Stage. The thirty-seven factors [of enlightenment], as in the Fourth Stage. The four fearlessnesses (vaiśāradya) will now be explained briefly: because one has no cowardice in the face of external challenges, they are called fearlessnesses. The Yogācārabhūmi says: "Regarding these slanders and challenges, the Tathāgata sees no truly existent causal marks whatsoever; by this reason and condition he is able to understand inherently, remaining serene and fearless." The fearlessnesses are four: first, fearlessness of all-knowledge (sarvajñāna); second, fearlessness regarding the destruction of contaminations (āsravakṣaya); third, [fearlessness regarding] the obstructive dharmas; fourth, [fearlessness regarding] the path leading out of suffering. Each of these four sections has a challenge and an answer: First, the external challenge states: If the Buddha is omniscient, when monks come from other lands, why is it necessary to ask them, 'Are you dwelling in comfort?' Saying he is omniscient means there is nothing he does not know; now asking others, how contradictory! The Buddha proclaimed of himself: 'I am an omniscient person; it is only to gather in those who come, following the conventional manners of teacher and pupil among worldly beings.' Second, some challenge: If the Buddha says of himself that his contaminations are forever destroyed, why did he address Rāhula with loving words and scold Devadatta? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha saw correctly that it had no basis, remaining secure and without cowardice, proclaiming his virtuous title: 'My contaminations are truly destroyed; it is only to subdue them according to their capacities.' Third, some challenge: If the Buddha said that desire can obstruct the path, why do stream-enterers (srotāpanna) and once-returners (sakṛdāgāmin) still have love for wives and children? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha's mind was without fear or dread; he proclaimed his virtuous title: 'I say that desire can obstruct the path, but it obstructs non-returners (anāgāmin) and arhats, not the first two fruits.' Fourth, some challenge: If the Buddha said that the noble paths can end suffering, why do arhats suffer the pain of ulcers bursting and snakebites? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha's mind was without fear or dread, proclaiming his virtuous title: 'I say that the noble path truly can end the limit of suffering, but I speak of the future, not the present.' Among the four, the first one is free from the cognitive obscurations (jñeyāvaraṇa); the second is free from the affliction obscurations (kleśāvaraṇa); the third concerns the obstacles to the path of departure; the fourth is the path of departure itself. The first two are for one's own benefit; the latter two are for the benefit of others. As to why he praises these four himself: the first is for bodhisattvas; the second is for śrāvakas; the latter two are for both in common. The Dazhidulun, scroll 28, the Yogācārabhūmi, scroll 50, and the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā, scroll 14, distinguish their marks at length. Seventh, the undesignated [or undeclared] (avyākṛta) dharmas are divided into two: first, inquiring into the name; second, from "namely, the world" below, distinguishing the marks. Now, the first: Undesignated has two meanings: first, being neither wholesome nor unwholesome, unable to incur desirable or undesirable retribution, it is called undesignated. This may explain other texts. Here, it precisely refers to false conjectures and unreasonable questions that cannot be recorded [or answered]; hence they are called undesignated, not in contrast to wholesome and unwholesome. Therefore, the Kośa, scroll 19, says: "Various sūtras speak of the fourteen undeclared matters," which is precisely this meaning. They are also called 'set-aside declarations' (sthāpanīya-vyākaraṇa); 'declaration' means answering, and because they should not be answered. Why are they not answered? It is because these are meaningless words: knowing them does not free one from birth and death; not knowing them does not obstruct nirvāṇa. The designated matters mentioned earlier are the opposite of this. The Dazhidulun, scroll 3, says: "Why are the fourteen challenges not answered? Because these matters have no reality. That dharmas are permanent—there is no such principle; to speak of annihilation is also like this. As if someone were to ask: 'Milking a cow's horn, how many pints of milk do you get?' Can this be called a question? Furthermore, the world is endless like a cartwheel. Furthermore, there is no benefit and there is harm, falling into evil views, obscuring the true reality of the Four Truths and all dharmas. Furthermore, humans are incapable of knowing. Furthermore, [the Buddha] speaks in accord with the Dharma." Scroll 17 says: "There was a monk who contemplated the fourteen challenges and could not understand them; he took leave of the Buddha to no longer be a disciple. The Buddha said: 'I teach the Dharma to save those subject to old age, sickness, and death. These are matters of dispute, like a poisoned arrow; they should not be pursued.'" The Laṅkāvatāra also says: "These are all worldly debates, not what I teach." As for the fourteen, these are the four tetralemmas (catuṣkoṭi) mentioned earlier here, where the fourth tetralemma is simply combined into two, namely, whether the body and the soul are one, or the body and the soul are different. Now, various sūtras and treatises mostly speak of the fourteen challenges, though their characteristics may be the same or different; they will not be harmonized in detail. When this sūtra discusses them fully, they do not go beyond the two attachments to self and dharmas. The text is divided into five sections: First, there are four tetralemmas, clarifying the undeclared with respect to the self. Second, from "past" below, horizontally discussing the quantity of ordinary beings and noble ones with respect to the three periods of time. Third, from "what kind" below, vertically discussing the beginning and end with respect to ordinary beings and noble ones. Fourth, from "from whence does the world" below, inquiring into where the three worlds come from. Fifth, from "which" below, distinguishing the undeclared with respect to the limits of birth and death. Now, regarding the first, although there are sixteen phrases, their faults do not go beyond the two views of annihilation and permanence. As for "the world," according to the Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, it extends across the three worlds, namely, the world of sentient beings, the world of the five aggregates, and the receptacle world. The meaning of this text here primarily reveals the world of sentient beings, and secondarily clarifies the world of the five aggregates, because sentient beings are the general, primary provisional entities, which non-Buddhists impute to be the self. Regarding the views such as having an end: the first four phrases on having an end pertain to future times; the four phrases on permanence and so forth pertain to past times. The existence or non-existence of the Tathāgata arises based on nirvāṇa. Therefore, the Madhyamakaśāstra, "Chapter on Erroneous Views," says: "Did I exist in past times, or did I not exist? Views such as the permanence of the world all depend on past times. Will I act in future times, or will I not act? Views such as having an end all depend on future times." The "Chapter on Nirvāṇa" says: "The existence, non-existence, etc., of the Tathāgata after extinction arises based on nirvāṇa. The four phrases on the existence and non-existence of the self and sentient beings are spoken in relation to the present." Having known the basis for the arising of views, next they are individually explained according to the text, which forms four sections. In the first four phrases, saying "having an end" refers to non-Buddhists holding the view of annihilation, who impute that the self will no longer act in future lifetimes, ending along with this body. "Without an end" means that the self will act further in future lifetimes.