大方廣佛華嚴經疏 39.8

39.8

第三迷真起妄緣相次第者，即論相差別也。論云「若因緣無我，以何相住因緣集行？謂當相名住、生後為行，故經意云迷諸諦理起相集耳。」然成答相三，通是有支相續，而兩重緣相差別云何？略有五異：一前約妄我起緣，即迷我執；此約迷諦起緣，即迷真實義。二前約緣起，此約緣次故。前通取十因一處共起名色；此中一向單說次第。三前通三世二世，以許十因同一世故，義取亦通五世；此唯三世，以名色等唯約現故，義取亦通一世。四前文欲明三世並備，於無明中說有愛故，於現在中說無明故；此中三世互有隱顯，不許相通。五前為答難；此為辨相，如論意故。有斯五異，兩處辨緣，共明相續，總破癡倒，故但束為十門之一。文中亦二：初順、後逆。順中，初無明支，言於第一義不了者，然十二支皆依真起，無有自性，故下偈云「觀諸因緣實義空」也。而無明最初，親迷諦理而起於行。既橫從空起，不可復原，故令無明特受迷稱。論經云諸諦第一義者，即四諦也。故《對法》云「真實義愚者，謂迷四聖諦。」所迷即是實義，能迷即愚。別有闇法名為無明，非但遮詮明無而已。二所作業果名行者，行支也。業即罪等三業，是彼無明所起果故。故偈云「所作思業愚癡果」，而論云是中無明所作業果者所謂名色者，此出果體。體謂行體，即名色故。遠公《釋論》云「行有三業：意業為名，身口為色故。」《婆沙》云「名色有二：一方便名色、二報名色。若云名色緣識，即方便名色。若云識緣名色，即報名色。」今以行為方便名色。三「行依止」下識支。論云「於中識者，彼依止故。」彼即是行。此中語倒，應言依彼故。論經云「依行有初心識，謂由行熏心，有當果種乃至現行故。」《瑜伽》云「因識為緣，相續果識前後次第。」四「與識」下名色支。初一識字即是現行識支，識為種邊唯是賴耶，在現行位通於六識。今揀現非種，故云共生四蘊，識蘊已屬所依識故。若言四蘊曰名、羯剌藍等為色，則所依現行之識亦唯賴耶。《瑜伽》云「俱有依根曰色，等無間依根曰名。」則通五蘊為體，即四七日來根未滿位。論云名色與識共生故者，此言揀濫，恐人誤謂名共色生故。又云識名色遞相依故者，釋前共義，謂識由名色得起，名色依識得存，如水與塵互相依持以為泥團，亦如束蘆，乃至命終相依而轉。故上答文總名苦果為名色芽。五六處支，謂四七日後諸根滿位，六處明盛，名增成意處，色增成餘五。《俱舍》云「從生眼等根，三和前六處。」前段為明意根本有，云成五根耳。《俱舍》第十一，五果之中，前三胎內，餘二胎外。六觸謂觸對，雖有三和，於三受因尚未了知，但能觸對。七受支，分別三受領納於觸，名觸共生。此前四支唯約現行。八愛支，以三受中樂受纏綿希求，故云染著，即是中下品貪。此雖通緣內外二果，諸論多取緣外境愛增上果生。九取支，雖攝餘惑，而愛潤勝故，說是愛增。然上二支通現及種。十有支，由四取心中所起諸業，故名有漏。此業親能招當果，故名之為有。此約三世，不同前段愛取合潤業等名有，此前之業已隔現行名色等故。十一生支，約增上緣，云從業起。始從中有，未衰變來，皆名為生。十二老死，即諸衰變位名，為蘊熟故。上二支體通五蘊，唯是現行，欲令生厭，合五成二以顯三苦。老非定有，附死立支。別離等五餘時雖有，死時多故，偏就死說。然此一段有支，亦通一生前後建立，餘支可知。唯生一種通取於前耳，思之。後逆觀中，一結是苦樹，謂無明行引識至受為苦芽，愛緣引受至有是守養，生老死為苦樹。從芽守養是增長義。又於現法中，無明造業為小苦樹，若愛取潤則得增長，不潤尚滅，況更增耶。又初二為根，次二為身，次三為枝，次三為華，後二為果。無我我所結成無我，無作無受結成於空。「復作是念」下以我況法，結成勝義故。故《瑜伽》說「由十種相緣起甚深。六義依無常：一義依苦、一義依空、二義依無我。今初，一從自種子亦待他緣、二從他亦待自、三俱從無作用、四此二因性非不是有，此四義即前段中但因緣故集無有集者；五雖無始其相成就而剎那滅、六雖剎那滅而似停住，此二即前任運而滅亦無滅者。」一義依苦者，一味苦相而似三相故，結云苦樹。一義依空者，謂離有情作者受者，然似不離顯現，即今無作無受。二義依無我者，一雖實無我似我相現，即今無我我所；二依勝義諦雖不可說，而言諸法自性可說，即今「復作是念」已下經文。十義備矣，由前緣相皆是似義故。逆觀中，直顯真實性相無礙，故為甚深緣起之觀正在於此。又無作作者，即顯緣生，非天人作。若佛出世若不出世，安住法性、法住、法界故。於此一觀已為甚深，況加後二。

Third, regarding the succession of conditional marks arising as delusion from the real, this is the differentiation of marks in the treatise. The treatise says: 'If cause and condition lack a self, by what mark do causes and conditions abide and aggregate to act? That is, abiding according to their own mark is called "abiding"; giving rise to what follows is "acting." Therefore the intention of the sūtra is that, being deluded about the principle of the truths, one gives rise to marks and aggregates them.' Now, establishing, answering, and [differentiating] marks—these three all universally concern the succession of the factors of existence. Yet what is the difference between the two sets of conditional marks? Briefly, there are five differences: First, the former establishes conditions with respect to a false self, namely delusion concerning the grasping of a self; this establishes conditions with respect to delusion concerning the truths, namely delusion concerning the real meaning. Second, the former is based on conditioned arising, whereas this is based on the sequence of conditions; hence, the former collectively takes the ten causes to give rise together to name-and-form in one place, whereas here it solely and exclusively expounds the sequential order. Third, the former applies universally to three lifetimes or two lifetimes, because it permits the ten causes to belong to the same lifetime (and by implication also extends to five lifetimes); this applies only to three lifetimes, because name-and-form and the rest are taken solely as the present (and by implication also extends to one lifetime). Fourth, the former text wished to clarify that the three lifetimes are completely furnished together, stating that craving exists within ignorance and stating that ignorance exists within the present; here, the three lifetimes have mutual concealment and manifestation, not permitting mutual interchange. Fifth, the former was to answer an objection; this is to distinguish the marks, according to the intention of the treatise. With these five differences, conditions are analyzed in two places, jointly clarifying continuity and comprehensively shattering deluded inversions; thus they are combined as only one of the ten gates. In the text there are also two parts: first the forward order, then the reverse order. In the forward order, first, as for the link of ignorance, stating that one does not understand the ultimate truth: the twelve links all arise based on the real and have no intrinsic nature of their own; hence a verse below says: 'Contemplating that the real meaning of all causes and conditions is empty.' Yet ignorance is first, directly deluded about the principle of the truths to give rise to formations. Having arisen haphazardly from emptiness, it cannot be returned [to its source]; therefore, ignorance in particular receives the designation of 'delusion.' The Treatise Sūtra says 'the ultimate truth of all truths,' which is the four truths. Thus the Abhidharma-samuccaya says: 'Ignorance regarding the real meaning means being deluded about the four noble truths.' What is deluded about is the real meaning; that which is deluded is ignorance. There is a distinct dark dharma called ignorance; it is not merely a negative phrasing denoting the absence of clarity. Second, that which acts as the fruit of karma is called formations, which is the link of formations. Karma is the three karmas, sinful and otherwise, because they are the fruit arisen from that ignorance. Therefore the verse says: 'Formed volition and karma are the fruit of delusion.' And the treatise says, 'Herein, that which is the fruit of karma performed by ignorance is what is called name-and-form'—this reveals the essence of the fruit. The essence means the essence of formations, which is name-and-form. Master Yuan's Explanatory Treatise says: 'Formations have three karmas: mental karma is "name," and bodily and verbal [karmas] are "form."' The Mahāvibhāṣā says: 'Name-and-form are of two kinds: first, expedient name-and-form; second, retribution name-and-form. If one says that name-and-form condition consciousness, that is expedient name-and-form. If one says that consciousness conditions name-and-form, that is retribution name-and-form.' Here, formations are taken as expedient name-and-form. Third, from 'formations rely on' downward is the link of consciousness. The treatise says: 'Consciousness therein relies on them.' 'Them' means formations. The phrasing here is inverted; it should say 'because it relies on them.' The Treatise Sūtra says: 'Relying on formations, there is initial-mind consciousness, meaning that because formations perfuse the mind, there are seeds of future fruits up to active manifestations.' The Yogācāra says: 'Taking the causal consciousness as a condition, the continuous resultant consciousnesses precede and follow in sequence.' Fourth, from 'together with consciousness' downward is the link of name-and-form. The first word 'consciousness' is the actively manifest link of consciousness. While consciousness is on the side of seeds, it is solely the ālaya; in the state of active manifestation, it extends to the six consciousnesses. Now, selecting the active manifestation and not the seeds, it says 'co-arising four aggregates,' because the aggregate of consciousness already belongs to the consciousness that is relied upon. If one says that the four aggregates are called 'name' and kalala and the rest are 'form,' then the relied-upon actively manifest consciousness is also solely the ālaya. The Yogācāra says: 'The sense-bases that are simultaneous supports are called form; the sense-bases that are immediate supports are called name.' Then it encompasses the five aggregates as its essence; this is the stage within the four weeks when the faculties are not yet complete. The treatise says: 'Because name-and-form co-arise with consciousness'—these words prevent confusion, fearing people might mistakenly think that name co-arises with form. It also says: 'Because consciousness and name-and-form mutually rely on one another'—this explains the prior meaning of 'co-arising,' meaning that consciousness is able to arise through name-and-form, and name-and-form are able to abide relying on consciousness, like water and dust mutually supporting each other to make a lump of clay, or like two bundles of reeds, mutually relying and operating until the end of life. Therefore the answering text above collectively designates the fruit of suffering as the sprout of name-and-form. Fifth, the link of the six sense-bases refers to the stage after four weeks when the faculties are complete and the six sense-bases are bright and flourishing; the increase of name becomes the mental base, and the increase of form becomes the remaining five. The Abhidharmakośa says: 'From the birth of the eye and other faculties, / The six bases precede the triad of harmony.' The previous section, to clarify that the mental faculty originally exists, said merely that it forms the five faculties. In the eleventh chapter of the Abhidharmakośa, among the five fruits, the first three are inside the womb and the remaining two are outside the womb. Sixth, contact means contactual meeting; although there is the triad of harmony, with respect to the causes of the three feelings one does not yet understand them, but is only able to come into contact. Seventh, the link of feeling distinguishes the three feelings and experiences contact; it is called 'co-arising with contact.' These preceding four links pertain solely to active manifestation. Eighth, the link of craving, because pleasurable feeling among the three feelings is entangled and sought after, is said to be 'defiled attachment'; this is middling and lower greed. Although this universally conditions the two fruits, internal and external, treatises mostly take it as the arising of the sovereign fruit conditioning external objects. Ninth, the link of grasping, although it subsumes the remaining defilements, is said to be the increase of craving because the moisture of craving is supreme. However, the above two links apply to both active manifestations and seeds. Tenth, the link of existence: because of all karmas arisen within the mind of the four graspings, it is called 'having outflows.' Because this karma can directly incur future fruits, it is called 'existence.' This is stated in terms of the three lifetimes, unlike the previous passage where craving and grasping jointly moistening karma and the rest were called 'existence,' because the previous karma was already separated by actively manifest name-and-form and the rest. Eleventh, the link of birth, in terms of the sovereign condition, is said to arise from karma. From the intermediate existence up to before decline and change, it is all called 'birth.' Twelfth, aging and death: that is, the names of the stages of decline and change, because of the maturation of the aggregates. The essence of the above two links universally consists of the five aggregates and is solely active manifestation; wishing to induce revulsion, the five are combined into two to reveal the three sufferings. Aging is not definitely existent; it is established as a link appended to death. Separation and the other five [sorrows], though occurring at other times, mostly occur at the time of death, so they are spoken of specifically with respect to death. However, this section on the link of existence also universally establishes the before and after of a single life; the remaining links can be known accordingly. Only the single item of birth universally encompasses what precedes; reflect on this. In the reverse contemplation, first, concluding that it is the tree of suffering: ignorance and formations lead consciousness up to feeling as the sprout of suffering; conditions of craving leading feeling up to existence are the nurturing; birth, aging, and death are the tree of suffering. Nurturing from the sprout has the meaning of growth. Furthermore, in the present phenomenon, ignorance creating karma is the small tree of suffering; if moistened by craving and grasping, it grows; if not moistened, it would cease, how much less would it grow further! Furthermore, the first two are the roots, the next two are the trunk, the next three are the branches, the next three are the flowers, and the last two are the fruit. 'Without self or what belongs to self' concludes and forms selflessness; 'without agent or experiencer' concludes and forms emptiness. From 'Again, he reflects' downward, using the self to analogize phenomena, it concludes and forms the ultimate truth. Hence the Yogācāra says: 'Dependent origination is extremely profound through ten marks. Six meanings rely on impermanence, one relies on suffering, one relies on emptiness, and two rely on selflessness. Now, for the first [set]: 1. Arising from its own seed, it also awaits other conditions; 2. Arising from others, it also awaits itself; 3. Both arise without agency; 4. The causal nature of these two is not non-existent. These four meanings are [the meaning in] the previous passage: "solely through causes and conditions there is aggregation, and there is no aggregator." 5. Although beginningless, its marks are accomplished and yet it perishes in a kṣaṇa; 6. Although perishing in a kṣaṇa, it seems to abide. These two are [the meaning in] the previous passage: "perishing spontaneously, there is also no perisher."' The one meaning relying on suffering is that, being of a single flavor of suffering, it appears as three marks; hence it is concluded as the tree of suffering. The one meaning relying on emptiness means being devoid of a sentient being as agent or experiencer, yet appearing as if not separate [from them]; this is the present 'without agent and without experiencer.' The two meanings relying on selflessness: first, although there is truly no self, it appears like the mark of a self; this is the present 'without self or what belongs to self.' Second, although inexpressible according to the ultimate truth, the intrinsic nature of all phenomena is spoken of as expressible; this is the sūtra text from 'Again, he reflects' downward. The ten meanings are fully furnished, because the previous conditional marks are all apparent meanings. In the reverse contemplation, directly revealing the non-obstruction of real nature and marks, the contemplation of extremely profound dependent origination lies precisely in this. Furthermore, 'without agent or maker' reveals dependent arising, not made by devas or humans. Whether a Buddha appears in the world or does not appear in the world, it abides in dharmatā, the abiding of phenomena, and the dharmadhātu. In this one contemplation it is already extremely profound, how much more when the latter two are added!