大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 10.12

10.12

疏「第二攝歸真實」者，疏文有三：初標章；次「真空絕相」者，即指法之本後；後「經云」下引文證成。二中，然杜順和尚《法界觀》中總有三觀：一真空絕相觀、二事理無礙觀、三周遍含容觀，即是今疏四門之中後之三門。初攝歸真實，即真空絕相觀也。於中自有四句十門：一會色歸空觀、二明空即色觀、三空色無礙觀、四泯絕無寄觀。此為四句，前二各四，故為十門。初句四門者，前三同言色不即空。以即空故，釋則不同。一色即空，明不即斷空，以即真空故。二色不空，明青黃等不即真空，以青黃無體故，即是真空。三色不即空，空中無色可即，故云不即空。以會色歸空，無有體故，即是真空。上三以法揀情。四色即是空，以無性故。如色既然，萬法皆爾。第二明空即色觀，亦四門：前之三門，準前釋言同釋，別但翻云空不即色，以即色故。亦有三義：一空不即色，斷空不即色，以真空必不異色故。二空不即色，以空理非青黃，故非色；青黃之真必不異青黃，故云即色。三空不即色，空是所依，故不即色；必與能依，為所依故，云即色也。上三揀情。四空即是色，凡是真空必不異色故。第三空色無礙觀者，謂色舉體是真空，故色不盡而空現；空舉體不異色，故空即色而空不隱。是故二法無礙一味。第四泯絕無寄觀者，謂此真空不可言即色不即色、即空不即空。一切法皆不可，不可亦不可，此語亦不受，逈絕無寄、言解不及，以生心動念乖法體故。以前八門揀情顯理。第三門解終趣行。第四門正成行體，由解成行，行起解絕。上皆法界觀義。所以疏中不廣引者，以第三色空無礙，濫於第二事理無礙觀故。彼所以立者，以第四泯絕無寄泯前三故，故名真空絕相。今但取一門總意，亦即泯絕無寄。又欲令四門成四種法界故，初門即事、次門即理、三即事理無礙、四即事事無礙。故第三事理無礙觀中，疏文分三：初總標、二「一理遍於事」下別釋、三「上之十事」下總結。今初。言「十對皆悉無礙」者，謂一教義無礙、二事理無礙、三行位無礙，乃至十應感無礙。今且約事理者，事理是所詮法中之總故、又諸處多明理事無礙故、為成四法界故。

As for the Commentary's "Second, subsuming and returning to the real," the text of the Commentary has three [parts]: first, indicating the section; next, "true emptiness cuts off characteristics," which points to the root and branch of dharmas; finally, from "The sūtra says" onward, quoting text to corroborate and complete it. In the second, however, in the Preceptor Dushun's Contemplation of the Dharmadhātu there are altogether three contemplations: first, the contemplation of true emptiness cutting off characteristics; second, the contemplation of the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle; third, the contemplation of universal pervasion and complete containment. These are the latter three gates among the four gates of the present Commentary. The first, subsuming and returning to the real, is the contemplation of true emptiness cutting off characteristics. Within it, there are intrinsically four propositions and ten gates: 1. the contemplation of resolving form back into emptiness; 2. the contemplation of clarifying that emptiness is identical to form; 3. the contemplation of the unobstructedness of emptiness and form; 4. the contemplation of annihilation without reliance. These constitute four propositions; the first two each have four [sub-gates], hence making ten gates. Regarding the four gates of the first proposition, the first three alike state that form is not identical to emptiness. Because it is identical to emptiness, their explanations differ: 1. Form is identical to emptiness: this clarifies that it is not identical to annihilatory emptiness, because it is identical to true emptiness. 2. Form is not empty: this clarifies that blue, yellow, and so forth are not identical to true emptiness; because blue and yellow lack essence, they are identical to true emptiness. 3. Form is not identical to emptiness: within emptiness there is no form that can be identified with it, hence it is said not to be identical to emptiness; because resolving form back into emptiness leaves no essence, it is identical to true emptiness. The above three use dharma to eliminate delusion. 4. Form is emptiness itself, because it is devoid of nature. As it is with form, so it is with all dharmas. The second, the contemplation of clarifying that emptiness is identical to form, also has four gates: the first three gates correspond to the previous explanation; their words are the same, but the explanation differs merely by inverting to say that emptiness is not identical to form because it is identical to form. It also has three meanings: 1. Emptiness is not identical to form: annihilatory emptiness is not identical to form, because true emptiness is necessarily not different from form. 2. Emptiness is not identical to form: because the principle of emptiness is not blue or yellow, it is not form; the reality of blue and yellow is necessarily not different from blue and yellow, hence it is said to be identical to form. 3. Emptiness is not identical to form: emptiness is that which is relied upon, hence it is not identical to form; because it must be that which is relied upon by that which relies, it is said to be identical to form. The above three eliminate delusion. 4. Emptiness is form itself, because whatever is true emptiness is necessarily not different from form. As for the third, the contemplation of the unobstructedness of emptiness and form: form in its entirety is true emptiness, so form is not exhausted while emptiness manifests; emptiness in its entirety is not different from form, so emptiness is identical to form while emptiness is not concealed. Therefore, the two dharmas are unobstructed and of one flavor. As for the fourth, the contemplation of annihilation without reliance: this true emptiness cannot be said to be identical to form or not identical to form, identical to emptiness or not identical to emptiness. All dharmas are inadmissible; even the inadmissible is inadmissible, and this statement itself is not maintained. Aloof and absolute, without reliance, beyond words and comprehension, because giving rise to mind and stirring thoughts goes against the essence of dharmas. The previous eight gates eliminate delusion to reveal principle. The third gate brings understanding to completion to head toward practice. The fourth gate directly accomplishes the substance of practice: through understanding practice is accomplished, and when practice arises understanding ceases. All the above are meanings from the Contemplation of the Dharmadhātu. The reason the Commentary does not quote them extensively is that the third, the unobstructedness of form and emptiness, would be conflated with the second contemplation of the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle. The reason he established it is that the fourth, annihilation without reliance, annihilates the preceding three, and is therefore called true emptiness cutting off characteristics. Here, only the general meaning of the single gate is taken, which is also annihilation without reliance. Furthermore, it is intended to make the four gates form the four dharmadhātus: the first gate is phenomena; the next gate is principle; the third is the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle; the fourth is the unobstructedness of phenomenon and phenomenon. Therefore, within the third, the contemplation of the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle, the text of the Commentary is divided into three: first, a general indication; second, from "First, principle pervades phenomena" onward, separate explanations; third, from "The ten phenomena above" onward, a general conclusion. Now, the first: saying "the ten pairs are all unobstructed" means: 1. the unobstructedness of teaching and meaning; 2. the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle; 3. the unobstructedness of practice and stages; up to 10. the unobstructedness of response and resonance. For now, it is discussed in terms of phenomenon and principle because phenomenon and principle are the general sum among the expressed dharmas, because various passages mostly clarify the unobstructedness of phenomenon and principle, and in order to accomplish the four dharmadhātus.