大方廣佛華嚴經疏 27.14

27.14

第二「佛子至以諸善根如」下實際迴向，中二：初總標、二「不於」下別顯。今初。用無所得為方便者，略有二義：一以無所得導前隨相，即涉有不迷於空，為入有之方便。二假無得以入有、不存無得，即此無得亦是方便，此為入空之方便也。今文正用前意，義兼於後，欲顯隨相離相無前後故。然略云無得，準《大般若》亦以無生無滅無住等皆為涉有之方便也。二別顯中三：初正顯觀心、二「菩薩如是了達」下明觀成之相、三「菩薩如是觀一切」下明觀成益。初中十句，義有四節：初一會事歸理。謂事法既虛，相無不盡、理無不現，故業果皆空。業空故，無體可能招報，況謂因中而有果耶。報空故，無體可以酬因，況謂果中而有因耶。若約觀心，名會用歸寂。次五句明理不礙事，約心則寂不礙用。於中初句理無能所分別，而不礙有能入之智、所入法界；次句無作而造作；次句無起而修起；次句無能所信而能即事入玄，此與初句但事理之異。《大般若》云「若信一切法，則不信一切法。以不信一切法，名信一切法。」此約不信是真信，今約不信不礙信。末句不有能所見，而不礙能所見。三有二句事理雙絕，約心即止觀兩亡。初句正釋，作事也，不作理也。待對假言，故皆不可得。下句釋成。法從緣起不能不生，諸緣離散不能不滅。從緣生滅不能不有，緣生無性不能不空。故諸法性無暫自在，何有性相而可得耶。四有二句明事理無礙，約心即寂照雙流。良以事虛攬理，無不理之事；理實應緣，無不事之理。所以寂而常照、照而常寂，故終日知見而無知見也。上四句初則會有歸空，有未曾損；次依空立有，有未始存；次空有兩亡，無隱無顯；後空有無礙，存沒同時。四句鎔融，方名離相實際觀也。二觀成之相。然此段文更有二意：一前是即觀之止、後明即止之觀。前雖云知，意明無知。二以後段釋成前文。由知因緣等故，不於業中分別報等。雖有此二，觀成相顯。於中分二：初句結前生後。由依如前了達心境故，能成下如是知見。後「知一切」下正顯其相。文有八句，初總、餘別。總中，由上觀故能知因緣。何等因緣？謂一切法若漏無漏、為無為等，皆以因緣而為其本。云何為本？謂因緣故有、因緣故空，因緣故不有、因緣故不空，因緣故流轉、因緣故還滅，乃至一切皆由因緣。故《中論》云「未曾有一法，不從因緣生。」有為緣生、無為緣顯，因有有為則有無為。又形奪相盡是真無為。下別有七句，釋成上義。由觀因緣得見佛等，是故因緣為諸法本。一見法身因緣無住，無住之本即是法身。經云「佛以法為身」故。論云「若見因緣法，則為能見佛。」二見法實際。因緣性離為法實故。三無性緣生故如化似有。四理外無事，故唯一法，皆如來藏。事事皆虛，故無二性。尚無有二，何況有五。五緣性無礙故，於業境皆得善巧。以業攝報境必對心，則內外因果皆善巧也。六即事顯理而不壞事，故云於有為等。七即理成事而不隱理，故云於無為等。若滅壞有為則失有為本空，若分別無為即壞無為之性。是以若約相即，為即無為，無可滅壞；無為即為，亦無可分別。若約無礙，則事能顯理而非理、理能成事而非事，事理相即性相歷然，故為無為體非一異。示謂顯示有為界分、無為界性。三觀成之益，文顯可知。

Second, from "Sons of the Buddha! ... by means of all roots of goodness, in accordance with..." onward is the pariṇāmanā into the reality-limit (bhūtakoṭi). In this there are two parts: first, a general indication; second, from "neither in..." onward, a specific presentation. Now to the first: taking non-apprehension as the expedient means contains, in brief, two meanings. First, using non-apprehension to guide the preceding [practice of] following marks: this means engaging with existence without being confused about emptiness, which serves as an expedient means for entering existence. Second, provisionally using non-apprehension to enter existence without clinging to non-apprehension: this non-apprehension itself is also an expedient means, which serves as an expedient means for entering emptiness. The present text properly employs the former meaning while also incorporating the latter, wishing to show that following marks and relinquishing marks have no before and after. However, while it states "non-apprehension" in brief, based on the Great Prajñāpāramitā [Sūtra], non-arising, non-cessation, non-abiding, and the rest are also all expedient means for engaging with existence. Within the second part, the specific presentation, there are three sections: first, directly displaying the mind of contemplation; second, from "The bodhisattva, having thoroughly comprehended in this way..." onward, explaining the marks of the accomplishment of contemplation; third, from "When the bodhisattva contemplates all in this way..." onward, explaining the benefits of the accomplishment of contemplation. In the first section there are ten phrases, the meaning of which consists of four clauses: First, one phrase resolves phenomena back into noumenon. This means that since phenomenal dharmas are illusory, their marks are completely exhausted and noumenon is completely revealed; hence karmic action and result are both empty. Because karma is empty, there is no essence capable of incurring retribution, much less can it be said that the result exists within the cause! Because retribution is empty, there is no essence capable of repaying the cause, much less can it be said that the cause exists within the result! In terms of the mind of contemplation, this is called resolving function back into quiescence. The next five phrases explain that noumenon does not obstruct phenomena; in terms of the mind, quiescence does not obstruct function. Among these, the first phrase means that noumenon lacks discriminating subjects and objects, yet this does not obstruct the existence of the wisdom that is capable of entering and the dharmadhātu that is entered; the next phrase means that without action there is active creation; the next phrase means that without arising there is the arising of practice; the next phrase means that without a subject or object of faith, one is able to enter the profound directly through phenomena—this differs from the first phrase only in terms of phenomena and noumenon. The Great Prajñāpāramitā [Sūtra] states: "If one has faith in all dharmas, one has no faith in all dharmas. Because one has no faith in all dharmas, it is called having faith in all dharmas." That is explained in terms of non-faith being true faith; here it is explained in terms of non-faith not obstructing faith. The final phrase means that there is no subject or object of seeing, yet this does not obstruct subject and object of seeing. Third, there are two phrases where phenomena and noumenon are both eliminated; in terms of the mind, śamatha and vipaśyanā are both forgotten. The first phrase directly explains: "acting" is phenomena; "not acting" is noumenon. Being conventional expressions based on opposition, both are ungraspable. The following phrase explains and establishes this: dharmas arising from conditions cannot fail to arise; the various conditions dispersing, they cannot fail to cease. Arising and ceasing from conditions, they cannot fail to exist; arising from conditions without self-nature, they cannot fail to be empty. Therefore, the nature of all dharmas is not autonomous for even a moment; how could there be any nature or mark that could be apprehended? Fourth, there are two phrases explaining the non-obstruction between noumenon and phenomena; in terms of the mind, quiescence and illumination flow together. This is truly because phenomena, being illusory, encompass noumenon, so there are no phenomena that are not noumenon; noumenon, being real, responds to conditions, so there is no noumenon that is not phenomena. Therefore, quiescent yet ever illuminating, illuminating yet ever quiescent, one knows and sees all day long without knowing or seeing. Among the above four clauses, the first resolves existence back into emptiness, yet existence is never diminished; the next establishes existence on the basis of emptiness, yet existence has never begun to endure; the next forgets both emptiness and existence, with neither concealment nor manifestation; the last shows the non-obstruction of emptiness and existence, where preservation and disappearance are simultaneous. Only when the four clauses interpenetrate is it called the contemplation of the reality-limit free of marks. Second, the marks of the accomplishment of contemplation. However, this passage of text has two further meanings: first, the preceding was śamatha identical with vipaśyanā, while the subsequent explains vipaśyanā identical with śamatha. Although the former spoke of "knowing", its meaning was to clarify "non-knowing". Second, the latter section is used to explain and establish the preceding text: because of knowing causes and conditions and so forth, one does not discriminate retribution within karma, and so forth. Although there are these two [intentions], the marks of the accomplishment of contemplation are clearly shown. In this there are two parts: the first phrase concludes the preceding and introduces the subsequent. Due to having thoroughly comprehended mind and objects as described before, one is able to accomplish such knowledge and vision as follows. Next, from "knowing all..." onward, the marks are directly displayed. The text has eight phrases: the first is general, the rest are specific. In the general one, due to the above contemplation, one can know causes and conditions. What causes and conditions? It means that all dharmas, whether contaminated or uncontaminated, conditioned or unconditioned, and so forth, all take causes and conditions as their foundation. Why are they the foundation? It means that due to causes and conditions they exist; due to causes and conditions they are empty; due to causes and conditions they do not exist; due to causes and conditions they are not empty; due to causes and conditions they transmigrate; due to causes and conditions they return to cessation; and so on, up to everything being due to causes and conditions. Therefore the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā states: "There has never been a single dharma that does not arise from causes and conditions." The conditioned arises from conditions, and the unconditioned is revealed through conditions; because there is the conditioned, there is the unconditioned. Moreover, when configurations are shed and marks are exhausted, that is the true unconditioned. Below there are seven specific phrases explaining and establishing the above meaning. Due to contemplating causes and conditions, one is able to see the Buddha and so on; therefore, causes and conditions are the foundation of all dharmas. First, seeing that the causes and conditions of the dharmakāya are non-abiding; the foundation of non-abiding is precisely the dharmakāya. The sūtra says: "The Buddha takes the Dharma as his body." The treatise says: "If one sees the dharma of causes and conditions, one is able to see the Buddha." Second, seeing the reality-limit of dharmas: the nature of causes and conditions being free [from clinging] is the reality of dharmas. Third, arising from conditions without self-nature, they are therefore like illusions, seeming to exist. Fourth, because outside noumenon there are no phenomena, there is only the one dharma, which is entirely the tathāgatagarbha. Phenomena are all illusory, so there are not two natures. Since there are not even two, how could there be five? Fifth, because conditions and nature are unobstructed, one attains skillfulness regarding the realms of karma. Since karma subsumes retribution, and the objective realm must correspond to the mind, then one is skillful in both internal and external causes and results. Sixth, directly manifesting noumenon through phenomena without destroying phenomena; hence it says "regarding the conditioned", and so on. Seventh, directly accomplishing phenomena through noumenon without concealing noumenon; hence it says "regarding the unconditioned", and so on. If one were to extinguish and destroy the conditioned, one would lose the intrinsic emptiness of the conditioned; if one were to discriminate the unconditioned, one would destroy the nature of the unconditioned. Therefore, in terms of mutual identity, the conditioned is the unconditioned, and there is nothing to extinguish or destroy; the unconditioned is the conditioned, and there is also nothing to discriminate. In terms of non-obstruction, phenomena can manifest noumenon yet are not noumenon; noumenon can accomplish phenomena yet is not phenomena. Phenomena and noumenon are mutually identical, yet nature and marks are distinctly clear; thus, the essence of the conditioned and unconditioned is neither one nor different. "Showing" means displaying the boundaries of the conditioned and the nature of the unconditioned. Third, the benefits of the accomplishment of contemplation: the text is clear and can be understood.