大方廣佛華嚴經疏 17.28

17.28

Seventh is Jñānamati (Wisdom) of the southwest: being decisive and immovable, he is therefore named 'Wisdom'. The verses intend to show that one can achieve transcendence from all dharmas, because in the text both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are skillfully transcended. The ten verses are divided into two: the first one adduces himself to encourage the assembly; the remaining verses hope that the assembly will become identical with himself. There are also two within this: the first six show delusion, and the later three awaken to understanding. Within the former there are also two: the first one is the attachment to a person—in noumenal truth there is really no person, yet falsely conceptualizing one becomes a peril; the rest are all attachments to dharmas. Among these, the first two attach to mundane dharmas, and the latter three attach to both the mundane and the supramundane. Now, the first: the first two lines explain the attachment, meaning that conceptualizing the aggregates as real, one cannot contemplate the real mark of the body; the rest all explain the fault: the first two lines state that grasping at reality contrary to noumenon, one does not see the Buddha; the next two lines state that lacking wisdom, one does not see the Buddha; the final two lines state that this only increases transmigration. Within the latter three on dual attachment, they are also divided into two: the first two attach to dharmas, and the latter one attaches to the Buddha. In the former there are also two: first, establishing the principle; second, giving rise to attachment. In the first: the first half provisionally establishes, meaning that nirvāṇa is established relative to the preceding transmigration in saṃsāra. Affliction is called 'strife'. Because it agitates wholesome qualities and damages self and other, it is called strife. These defiled dharmas, because strife increases accordingly with them, are called 'with strife', having that strife. Therefore, saṃsāra has the defiled as its essence; being devoid of those afflictions, it is termed nirvāṇa. The second half negates both, meaning that both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are provisionally established names caused by afflictions, so how could there be any reality to them? Furthermore, because the two are mutually relative, they are both empty; because the two mutually divest each other, they are both serene. The subsequent verse gives rise to attachment: the first half is the attachment, and the second half is the detriment. In the latter verse on attaching to the Buddha, the first half is also the attachment and the second half is the detriment. Attachment has three meanings: first, looking from Buddha to Buddha; second, looking among the three bodies and so forth; third, looking between mind and Buddha. In the latter three on awakening to understanding, there are also two: the first two are the gains from conforming to noumenon, and the latter one adduces the Buddha to explain and establish it. In the former there are also two: half a verse explains knowing by conforming to noumenon, and the rest show the benefits of conforming knowledge. Within the benefits there are also two: half a verse states them, and one verse explains them. How does one transcend speech? If one grasps that knowing is capable of knowing serenity, one still does not escape speech, because there is an object of cognition. If one knows that self knows knowing, this also is not without an object of cognition. Therefore, subject and object must be equal; being equal, it does not lose illumination, so the knowing of non-knowing is not like wood or stone; hence it says 'able to see'. As for the latter verse adducing the Buddha to explain: above it was said that the Buddha is thus; how is the Buddha thus? It is explained: he awakens to the three times, because he is free from conceptual discrimination. That seeds and habits are all extinguished means severing the root. Moreover, having no mind and relinquishing conceptual discrimination is called severing the root.