大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 13.37.3

13.37.3

然《金七十論》將自性望變異，有九不似、有六相似。 我翻似不似。 言九不似者，一無因、二常、三多人共一、四遍一切、五無事、六不沒、七無分、八不依他、九不屬他。 自性有此九德，不似變異，變異則有因等。 我有八義同於自性不似變異，但多人共一義，不同自性，謂人人各有我故。 自性有六義似變異者，謂一同有三德、二不相離、謂三德不可分。 三皆為我所受用之塵。 四平等，俱為一切我受用，如一婢多主使。 五無知者，本末同無知，唯我知故。 六能生，自性能生，大等亦能生故。 而我知亦無此六相似，故總云我翻似不似。 謂亦無三德，不能生等故。 我有八不似變異乃成八德。 無六似於變異但成二德，謂一無三德，二是我知者，餘之四似是自性變異之德，非我之德。 餘義可知。 有云：由三德是生死因，由所轉變擾亂我故，不得解脫。 若能去彼二十三諦轉變無常，生厭修道，自性隱迹不生諸諦，我便解脫。 《金七十》云「人無縛無脫，無輪轉生死，以無三德故、無變異故、無作者故。 若爾，誰得解脫？ 答：輪轉及繫縛，解脫唯自性。 由自性變異故縛，若得正遍知即得解脫。 」意明知二十五諦為正遍知，明縛與脫不由於我。 言我解脫者，約自然脫耳。 論總結云「此祕密智，應施設五德婆羅門：一生好地、二好族姓、三淨行、四有能、五離欲。 」上依《金七十論》略敘其計。 其間不同，兼《智論》意，並已具釋。 若廣破者，如《唯識》、《中》、《百》等論，下疏略總破耳。 疏「或計六句」者，即衛世師計。 新云吠世史迦薩多羅，此云勝論。 吠世亦云鞞世，吠世為正。 立六句義最為勝故，或是勝人所造論故。 其能造人即成劫之末，人壽無量，外道出世名嗢露迦，此云鵂鶹。 晝避聲色，匿跡山藪，夜絕視聽，方行乞食。 時人以為似鵂鶹鳥，故名鵂鶹仙人。 即《百論》中優樓佉也。 或名羯拏僕，羯拏此云米臍，僕翻為食。 先為夜遊，驚他稚婦，乃不夜乞，遂收碾場糠粃之中米臍而食，故時號為食米臍仙人。 多年修道遂獲五通，謂證菩提，便欣入滅。 但嗟所悟未有傳人，愍世有情癡無慧目，乃觀七德授法令傳：一生中國、二父母俱是婆羅門性、三有般涅槃性、四身相具足、五聰明辯捷、六性行柔和、七有大悲心。 經無量時，無具七德。 後經多劫，波羅痆斯國有婆羅門，名摩納嚩迦，此云儒童。 其儒童有子，名般遮尸棄，此云五頂，頂髮五旋，頭有五角。 其人七德雖具，根熟稍遲，既染妻奴卒難化道，經無量歲伺其根熟。 後經三千歲因入園遊，與其妻室競華相忿，鵂鶹因此乘通化之，五頂不從仙人具返。 又三千歲化之不得。 更三千年兩競尤甚，相厭既切，仰念空仙。 仙人應時神力化引騰空，迎往所住山中，與說所悟六句義法：一實、二德、三業、四大有、五同異、六和合。 實者，諸法體實，德業所依，名之為實。 德業不依有性等故。 德者道德。 業者作用，動作義也。 一實有九種：一地、二水、三火、四風、五空、六時、七方、八我、九意。 二德有二十四：一色、二香、三味、四觸、五數、六量、七別性、八合、九離、十彼性、十一此性、十二覺、十三樂、十四苦、十五欲、十六嗔、十七勤勇、十八重性、十九液性、二十潤、二十一行、二十二法、二十三非法、二十四聲。 三業有五種：一取、二捨、三屈、四申、五行。 四大有唯一，實德業三同一有故。 離實德業外，別有一法為體，由此大有有實等故。 五同異亦一，如地望地有其同義，望於水等即有異義。 地之同異是地非水，水等亦然。 亦離實等有別體實。 六和合句者，謂法和合聚。 由和合句，如鳥飛空，忽至樹枝住而不去，由和合句故令有住等。 上已略敘。 廣出體相及廣破斥，並如《唯識》及疏，并《百論》等疏。

Now, the Suvarṇasaptati-śāstra, comparing the primordial nature (prakṛti) with its transformations (vikāra), identifies nine ways in which they are dissimilar and six ways in which they are similar. The self (puruṣa) reverses these similarities and dissimilarities. As for the nine dissimilars: first, having no cause; second, being eternal; third, being one shared by many; fourth, pervading all things; fifth, lacking agency in activity; sixth, not perishing; seventh, having no parts; eighth, not relying on another; ninth, not belonging to another. The primordial nature has these nine qualities and is not similar to the transformations, whereas the transformations have causes and so forth. The self has eight characteristics that are the same as the primordial nature and dissimilar to the transformations; however, the single characteristic of being one shared by many differs from the primordial nature, because each individual has their own self. As for the primordial nature having six characteristics that are similar to the transformations: first, equally possessing the three qualities (guṇas); second, being inseparable, meaning the three qualities cannot be divided; third, all serving as objects enjoyed by the self; fourth, equality, in that both are enjoyed by all selves, just like one maidservant employed by many masters; fifth, being insentient, in that root and branches are equally devoid of consciousness, the self alone having consciousness; sixth, being able to produce, since the primordial nature can produce, and the intellect (mahat) and so forth can also produce. Yet the conscious self also lacks these six similarities; therefore it is said overall that the self reverses the similarities and dissimilarities. That is, it also lacks the three qualities, cannot produce, and so forth. The self having eight dissimilars to the transformations thus constitutes eight qualities. Lacking the six similars to the transformations constitutes only two qualities: first, lacking the three qualities; second, being the knower; the remaining four similars are qualities of the primordial nature and the transformations, not qualities of the self. The remaining points can be understood from this. Some say: Because the three qualities are the cause of saṃsāra, and because what they transform into agitates and disrupts the self, one cannot attain liberation. If one can eliminate the impermanent transformations of those twenty-three categories of truth, generate revulsion, and cultivate the path, the primordial nature will conceal its traces and no longer produce the categories of truth, and the self will then be liberated. The Suvarṇasaptati says: 'Man is neither bound nor liberated, nor does he transmigrate through birth and death, because he lacks the three qualities, lacks transformation, and is not an agent. If so, who attains liberation? Answer: Transmigration and bondage, as well as liberation, belong solely to the primordial nature. It is bound because of the transformations of the primordial nature; if it attains correct and complete knowledge, it then attains liberation.' This is intended to explain that knowing the twenty-five categories of truth constitutes correct and complete knowledge, clarifying that bondage and liberation do not derive from the self. Speaking of the self's liberation merely refers to its natural release. The treatise summarizes: 'This secret wisdom should be bestowed on a brāhmaṇa of five virtues: first, born in a good land; second, of a good clan and lineage; third, of pure conduct; fourth, possessing capability; fifth, free from desire.' The above briefly recounts their doctrine according to the Suvarṇasaptati-śāstra. The variations among them, combined with the intended meaning of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, have all been fully explained. For detailed refutations, they are as in treatises such as the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, the Madhyamakaśāstra, and the Śataśāstra; the commentary below merely refutes them in brief. In the commentary, 'or positing the six categories' refers to the doctrine of the Vaiśeṣikas. The new translation is Vaiśeṣika-śāstra, translated here as the Superior Treatise (Sheng lun). 'Feishe' is also written 'beishe'; 'feishe' is correct. It is called this either because the establishment of the six padārthas is the most superior, or because the treatise was composed by a superior person. The person who composed it lived at the end of the kalpa of formation, when human lifespan was immeasurable; an outsider teacher appeared in the world named Ulūka, translated here as 'Owl'. By day he avoided sights and sounds, concealing his traces in mountain thickets; by night, cutting off sight and hearing, he went about begging for food. People of the time thought he was like an owl, so they called him the Owl Sage. He is Ulūka in the Śataśāstra. He was also named Kaṇabhuk; 'kaṇa' is translated here as 'grain-embryo', and 'bhuk' translates to 'eat'. Formerly, when roaming by night, he frightened the young wives of others, so he stopped begging by night and instead collected and ate the grain-embryos from among the chaff on the threshing floors; hence he was known at the time as the Grain-Embryo-Eating Sage. Cultivating the path for many years, he attained the five supernatural powers, thought he had realized bodhi, and rejoiced at entering cessation. But lamenting that what he had realized had no successor, and pitying the sentient beings of the world who were foolish and lacked the eye of wisdom, he looked for seven virtues before transmitting the teaching to be handed down: first, born in the Central Country; second, both parents being of brāhmaṇa caste; third, possessing the nature for parinirvāṇa; fourth, fully endowed with physical marks; fifth, intelligent and eloquent; sixth, gentle in nature and conduct; seventh, possessing great compassion. An immeasurable time passed without anyone possessing all seven virtues. Later, after many kalpas, in the country of Vārāṇasī there was a brāhmaṇa named Māṇavaka, translated here as 'Brahmin youth'. This Brahmin youth had a son named Pañcaśikha, translated here as 'Five-Tufted', because the hair on his crown had five whorls and his head had five protuberances. Although this man possessed the seven virtues, his faculties matured rather slowly, and being ensnared by wife and slaves, it was difficult to quickly convert him to the path; [Ulūka] waited an immeasurable number of years for his faculties to mature. After three thousand years, on the occasion of entering a park for an outing, he quarrelled with his wife over a flower, and Ulūka used this opportunity to mount his supernatural powers to convert him, but Pañcaśikha would not comply, and the sage returned. Another three thousand years passed without succeeding in converting him. After yet another three thousand years, the couple's quarrelling grew even worse; experiencing intense mutual revulsion, he looked up and thought of the sky-faring sage. The sage immediately used his divine power to transform and guide him into the air, welcoming him to the mountain where he lived, and explained to him the teaching of the six categories (padārthas) that he had realized: first, substance (dravya); second, quality (guṇa); third, motion (karman); fourth, universal existence (sāmānya / mahāsattā); fifth, particularity and commonality (viśeṣa / sāmānya-viśeṣa); sixth, inherence (samavāya). Substance means the substantial reality of phenomena, the locus upon which qualities and motions depend; hence it is called substance. Qualities and motions do not depend on the nature of existence and so forth. Quality means virtuous attributes. Motion means operation, the meaning of movement. First, substance is of nine kinds: 1. earth, 2. water, 3. fire, 4. wind, 5. space, 6. time, 7. direction, 8. self, 9. mind. Second, quality is of twenty-four kinds: 1. form/color, 2. smell, 3. taste, 4. touch, 5. number, 6. dimension, 7. distinctness, 8. conjunction, 9. disjunction, 10. priority, 11. posteriority, 12. cognition (buddhi), 13. pleasure, 14. pain, 15. desire, 16. aversion, 17. effort, 18. heaviness, 19. fluidity, 20. viscidity, 21. disposition/velocity (saṃskāra), 22. merit (dharma), 23. demerit (adharma), 24. sound. Third, motion is of five kinds: 1. throwing upward (utkṣepaṇa), 2. throwing downward (avakṣepaṇa), 3. contraction (ākuñcana), 4. expansion (prasāraṇa), 5. locomotion (gamana). Fourth, universal existence is singular, because substance, quality, and motion are all identically existent. Apart from substance, quality, and motion, there is a distinct dharma serving as its essence; it is through this universal existence that substance and the rest exist. Fifth, particularity and commonality is also singular; for example, earth with respect to earth has the meaning of commonality, but with respect to water and so forth it has the meaning of particularity. The particularity and commonality of earth is that it is earth and not water; the same applies to water and the others. Apart from substance and the others, it also has a distinct, real substantial entity. Sixth, the category of inherence refers to the inherence and aggregation of dharmas. Through the category of inherence, just as when a bird flies in the air and suddenly lands on a tree branch, abiding there without leaving, it is due to the category of inherence that it abides, and so on. The above is a brief recount. Detailed expositions of their essential characteristics and detailed refutations are found in the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi and its commentaries, as well as commentaries on the Śataśāstra and so forth.