大方廣佛華嚴經疏 3.4

3.4

第六攝境唯心體者，總收前五並不離識。《唯識》等云：一切所有，唯心現故。《起信》亦云「依一心法，有二種門：一心真如門、二心生滅門。然此二門皆各總攝一切法，以此二門不相離故。」〈梵行品〉云「知一切法即心自性。」故唯心現。然有二門：一本影相對、二說聽全收。前中，通就諸教以成四句：一唯本無影，謂即小乘，不知唯識故。二亦本亦影，謂大乘初教，謂佛自宣說若文若義，皆是如來妙觀察智相應淨識之所顯現，名本質教故。《佛地論》第一云「有義，聞者善根本願增上緣力，如來識上文義相生。」此文義相，是佛利他善根所起，名為佛說；若聞者識上所變文義，名為影像。《佛地論》云「如來慈悲本願增上緣力，聞者識上文義相生。此文義相，雖親依自善根力起，而就強緣名為佛說」故。《二十唯識論》云「展轉增上力，二識成決定。」護法論師等皆立此義，然云文義相生，復說五心集現，謂如說諸行無常，即有四聲、四字、四名、一句及所詮義。此十四相，於聞者識上聚集顯現。然西方多釋，今略舉其一。謂如說諸字，有率爾、尋求二心，然未定知諸字所屬，無決定心。次說行字，由先熏習連帶解生，有三心起，謂率爾、尋求、決定，以決定知諸字所屬一切行故。聞諸行字，雖知自性，然未知義；為令知義，復說無字，但有二心，謂率爾、尋求，未有決定，以未定知無字所屬。後說常字，由前字力展轉熏習，連後字生具起五心，謂率爾、尋求、決定、染淨、等流。於最後時，四字周圓方能解義，總十二心，初二、次三、次二、後五，故有十四相，義如前說。餘如別章。三唯影無本，謂大乘實教。離眾生心，佛果無有色聲功德，唯有如如及如如智獨存。大悲大智為增上緣，令彼所化根熟眾生心中現佛色聲說法，是故聖教唯是眾生心中影像。〈夜摩〉偈云「諸佛無有法，佛於何有說？但隨其自心，謂說如是法。」龍軍、堅慧諸論師等並立此義。四非本非影，如頓教說。非直心外無佛色聲，眾生心內影像亦空，性本離故。亡言絕慮，即無教之教耳。〈須彌〉偈云「法性本空寂，無取亦無見。性空即是佛，不可得思量。」《淨名》云「其說法者無說無示，其聽法者無聞無得。」龍樹等宗多立此義。此前四說總合為一圓融無礙，自淺之深攝眾生故。第二說聽全收，成二四句：一約同教以成四句，謂一佛真心外無別眾生，以眾生真心即佛真心故。則唯說無聽，故所說教唯佛所現。二眾生心外更無別佛，以佛真心即眾生真心故。則唯聽無說，故所說教即眾生自現。〈梵行品〉云「知一切法即心自性」等。三佛真心現時，不礙眾生真心現故，說聽雙存、二教齊立。四佛即眾生故非佛、眾生即佛故非眾生，互奪雙亡，則說聽斯寂。故《淨名》云「其說法者無說無示，其聽法者無聞無得。」二約別教以明四句，謂由不壞相，生佛互在故、一眾生全在佛中故、則果門攝法無遺。生尚在佛心中、況所說教不唯佛現？故〈出現品〉云「如來成正覺時，於其身中普見一切眾生成正覺，乃至普見一切眾生入涅槃。」又《佛性論》第二〈如來藏品〉云「一切眾生悉在如來智內，故名為藏，以如如智稱如如境故。一切眾生決定無有出如如境者，並為如來之所攝持，故名為藏，眾生為如來藏。」又下〈出現品〉中明，三世劫剎眾生所有心念根欲尚皆一身頓現，況佛智廣大如虛空耶？二佛在眾生心中故，則因門攝法無遺。佛尚在於心中，況所說教非眾生心現？故〈出現品〉云「菩薩摩訶薩應知，自心念念常有佛成正覺。何以故？諸佛如來不離此心成正覺故。如自心，一切眾生心亦復如是，悉有佛成正覺。」此明佛證眾生心中真如成佛，故本覺無異，以始同本，總在眾生心中從體起用。應化身時，即是眾生心中真如用大，更無別佛。如《起信》中多明此義，而是自心體用。今以此經心佛眾生無差別故，佛證眾生之體，用眾生之用。三由前生佛互相在時各實非虛，則因果交徹，隨一聖教全在二心，故眾生心中佛，為佛心中眾生說法；佛心中眾生，聽眾生心中佛說法。四由生全在佛，則同佛非生；佛全在生，則同生非佛。兩相形奪，二位齊融，即隨一聖教俱非二心，則佛心中眾生無聽、眾生心中佛無說。是以〈賢首品〉云「因緣所生無有生，諸佛法身非是身。」又〈偈讚品〉云「如來不說法，亦不度眾生。」《大般若》四百二十五云「我從得道來不說一字，汝亦不聞」等。是故此四於一聖教圓融無礙，方為究竟甚深唯識道理。

Sixth, the essence [wherein] objects are gathered [into] consciousness-only: this gathers together the previous five completely without separating from consciousness. The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi and other texts state that everything that exists is merely an appearance of mind. The Awakening of Faith also says: 'Relying upon the dharma of the One Mind, there are two aspects: first, the aspect of the One Mind as tathatā; second, the aspect of the One Mind as arising and ceasing. Yet each of these two aspects completely gathers all dharmas, because these two aspects are not separate from each other.' The chapter 'Pure Conduct' says: 'Know that all dharmas are the intrinsic nature of mind.' Hence they are only mind-manifest. However, there are two approaches: first, the opposition between the substantial basis and the reflected image; second, the complete gathering of speaker and listener. In the first, traversing through the teachings to construct a fourfold proposition: 1. Only the substantial basis and no reflected image: this refers to the Hīnayāna, because it does not know consciousness-only. 2. Both the substantial basis and the reflected image: this refers to the initial teaching of the Mahāyāna, which holds that whether the words or meanings that the Buddha himself expounds, all are manifestations of the pure consciousness associated with the Tathāgata's pratyavekṣaṇā-jñāna, hence called the teaching of the substantial basis. The first fascicle of the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra says: 'One opinion is: by the power of the listener's kuśala-mūla and original vows as predominant conditions, marks of words and meanings arise upon the Tathāgata's consciousness.' These marks of words and meanings are produced by the Buddha's kuśala-mūla for benefiting others and are called the Buddha's preaching; whereas the words and meanings transformed upon the listener's consciousness are called the reflected image. The Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra says: 'By the power of the Tathāgata's compassion and original vows as predominant conditions, marks of words and meanings arise upon the listener's consciousness. Although these marks of words and meanings arise directly relying on the power of one's own kuśala-mūla, because they accord with a strong condition, they are called the Buddha's preaching.' The Viṃśikā-vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: 'Through mutual predominant influence, certainty is accomplished between the two consciousnesses.' Masters such as Dharmapāla all establish this doctrine. Yet, when saying that marks of words and meanings arise together, it is further explained that five minds gather and appear: for example, when preaching that 'all conditioned things are impermanent', there are four sounds, four characters, four names, one phrase, and the signified meaning. These fourteen marks gather and appear upon the listener's consciousness. However, the Western regions offer many interpretations; here we briefly cite one. For example, when uttering the character 'all' (zhū), there are two minds: the initial sudden mind and the seeking mind; but without yet definitively knowing to what the character 'all' pertains, there is no determinative mind. Next, when uttering the character 'conditioned things' (xíng), through prior perfuming a continuous understanding arises, and three minds arise, namely the initial sudden mind, the seeking mind, and the determinative mind, because one determinatively knows that to which the character 'all' pertains is 'all conditioned things'. Having heard the words 'all conditioned things', although one knows their intrinsic nature, one does not yet know the meaning; in order to make one know the meaning, next the character 'un-' (wú) is uttered, where there are only two minds, namely the initial sudden mind and the seeking mind, without the determinative mind, because one does not yet definitively know to what the character 'un-' pertains. Afterwards, when uttering the character 'permanent' (cháng), through the power of the preceding characters mutually perfuming, following the subsequent character there arises completely five minds, namely the initial sudden mind, the seeking mind, the determinative mind, defilement-or-purity, and the equivalent flow. At the final moment, when the four characters are complete, one is then able to understand the meaning—a total of twelve minds: the first two, the next three, the next two, and the final five; thus there are fourteen marks, the meaning of which is as explained before. The rest is as in the separate chapter. 3. Only the reflected image and no substantial basis: this refers to the actual teaching of the Mahāyāna. Separated from the minds of sentient beings, the Buddha-fruit has no forms, sounds, or virtues, but only tathatā and the wisdom of tathatā existing alone. Great compassion and great wisdom serve as predominant conditions, causing the forms and sounds of the Buddha expounding the Dharma to appear in the minds of those beings being converted whose faculties are mature; therefore, the sacred teachings are merely reflected images in the minds of sentient beings. A verse in the 'Yāma' chapter says: 'The Buddhas have no Dharma; / where could the Buddha expound anything? / Merely in accordance with their own minds, / they say that such a Dharma is expounded.' Commentators such as Nāgasena and Sthiramati both establish this doctrine. 4. Neither the substantial basis nor the reflected image: as expounded in the Sudden Teaching. Not only are there no forms and sounds of the Buddha outside the mind, the reflected image within the minds of sentient beings is also empty, because their nature is fundamentally free [from them]. Transcending speech and severing thoughts, this is indeed the teaching without teaching. A verse in the 'Sumeru' chapter says: 'The dharmatā is fundamentally empty and tranquil, / without appropriation and without perception. / Nature's emptiness is itself the Buddha; / it cannot be conceived.' The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: 'The one who preaches the Dharma has neither preaching nor demonstrating; the one who listens to the Dharma has neither hearing nor attaining.' The lineage of Nāgārjuna and others mostly establishes this doctrine. These four previous explanations are united into one that is perfectly interpenetrating and unobstructed, gathering sentient beings from the shallow to the profound. Second, the complete gathering of speaker and listener forms two fourfold propositions: 1. In terms of the shared teaching, forming a fourfold proposition: First, outside the Buddha's true mind there are no distinct sentient beings, because the true mind of sentient beings is itself the Buddha's true mind. Then there is only preaching and no listening; hence the teaching expounded is solely manifested by the Buddha. Second, outside the minds of sentient beings there is no distinct Buddha, because the Buddha's true mind is itself the true mind of sentient beings. Then there is only listening and no preaching; hence the teaching expounded is manifested by sentient beings themselves. The chapter 'Pure Conduct' says: 'Know that all dharmas are the intrinsic nature of mind', and so forth. Third, when the Buddha's true mind manifests, it does not obstruct the manifestation of the true mind of sentient beings; hence both preaching and listening persist, and the two teachings are established together. Fourth, because the Buddha is sentient beings, he is not the Buddha; because sentient beings are the Buddha, they are not sentient beings. Mutually subverting and both disappearing, then both preaching and listening are tranquil. Hence the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: 'The one who preaches the Dharma has neither preaching nor demonstrating; the one who listens to the Dharma has neither hearing nor attaining.' 2. In terms of the distinct teaching, illuminating a fourfold proposition: namely, because through non-destruction of marks, sentient beings and the Buddha exist mutually within each other; because a single sentient being is entirely within the Buddha, the approach of the fruit gathers dharmas without remainder. If sentient beings are still within the Buddha's mind, how could the teaching expounded not be solely manifested by the Buddha? Hence the chapter 'Manifestation' says: 'When the Tathāgata attained sambodhi, within his body he universally saw all sentient beings attain sambodhi, and even universally saw all sentient beings enter nirvāṇa.' Furthermore, the second fascicle of the Buddha-Nature Treatise, in the chapter 'Tathāgatagarbha', says: 'All sentient beings are entirely within the Tathāgata's wisdom, hence it is called the garbha; because the wisdom of tathatā matches the realm of tathatā. All sentient beings definitely never go beyond the realm of tathatā and are entirely held and sustained by the Tathāgata; hence it is called the garbha: sentient beings are the tathāgatagarbha.' Furthermore, below in the chapter 'Manifestation', it is clarified that all the mental thoughts, faculties, and desires of sentient beings in the kṣetras and kalpas of the three times are all suddenly manifested within a single body; how much more so the Buddha's wisdom, which is vast like empty space! Second, because the Buddha is within the minds of sentient beings, the approach of the cause gathers dharmas without remainder. If the Buddha is still within the mind, how could the teaching expounded not be manifested by the mind of sentient beings? Hence the chapter 'Manifestation' says: 'A bodhisattva-mahāsattva should know that in one's own mind, from thought to thought, there is always a Buddha attaining sambodhi. Why? Because the Buddhas and Tathāgatas do not separate from this mind in attaining sambodhi. Just like one's own mind, the minds of all sentient beings are also like this: in all of them there is a Buddha attaining sambodhi.' This clarifies that the Buddha realized tathatā within the minds of sentient beings to become a Buddha; therefore, original enlightenment is not different. Because the initial [enlightenment] is identical with the original [enlightenment], all arise from essence into function within the minds of sentient beings. When it is the nirmāṇakāya, that is itself the greatness of function of tathatā within the minds of sentient beings, and there is no separate Buddha. The Awakening of Faith mostly clarifies this meaning, showing that it is the essence and function of one's own mind. Now, according to this sūtra, because mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are without distinction, the Buddha realizes the essence of sentient beings and functions with the function of sentient beings. Third, because formerly sentient beings and the Buddha exist mutually within each other and each is real and not illusory, then cause and fruit mutually penetrate: any single sacred teaching is entirely within both minds. Therefore, the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings expounds the Dharma for the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind; the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind listen to the Dharma expounded by the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings. Fourth, because sentient beings are entirely within the Buddha, they are identical to the Buddha and are not sentient beings; because the Buddha is entirely within sentient beings, he is identical to sentient beings and is not the Buddha. The two aspects mutually condition and subvert each other, and the two stations are equally interpenetrated; that is, any single sacred teaching belongs to neither of the two minds, so that the sentient beings within the Buddha's mind do not listen, and the Buddha within the minds of sentient beings does not expound. For this reason, the chapter 'Bhadraśrī' says: 'That which arises from causes and conditions has no arising; / the dharmakāya of the Buddhas is not a body.' Furthermore, the chapter 'Verses of Praise' says: 'The Tathāgata does not expound the Dharma, / nor does he liberate sentient beings.' The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, fascicle 425, says: 'Since I attained the Way, I have not spoken a single word, nor have you heard one', and so forth. Therefore, these four are perfectly interpenetrating and unobstructed regarding a single sacred teaching, which only then constitutes the ultimate, profound principle of consciousness-only.