大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 14.23

14.23

疏「然此十宗後後深於前前」下，第三料揀。於中二：先通料揀十宗、後會通妨難。前中有五：一通明淺深故後後深於前前。然此十宗，前六全同大乘法師。大乘則有八宗，七名勝義俱空，八名應理圓實，即以法相為應理圓實，法性為勝義俱空。今迴七為第八，八為第七，如前西域中二宗不同，今符法性，又加後二以顯甚深。疏「前四唯小，五六通大小」下，二大小乘料揀。然五六立在小乘，義通大乘，故云五六通大小。疏「七即法相」下，三權實料揀。疏「又七即始教」下，四以五教料揀。但舉四教，前六小乘即當第一小乘藏教。以前已有大小料揀，故略不言。疏「又第七亦名二諦俱有宗」下，五二諦料揀。亦是隨難別釋，唯料揀三宗，以含異義故重釋之。初宗二諦俱有，可知。疏「如掌珍頌」者，即清辯菩薩所造，一論唯釋此偈。此中有兩重比量：前半有為法比量。謂立云有為是有法，定空無性是宗法。因云從緣生故。同喻云如幻法。幻法從緣生，幻法空無性。有為從緣生，有為空無性。此中因喻前却，或迴文不盡。而言「真性」者，即有為性，亦合言有為真性空。二無為比量。云無為是有法，定無實故是宗法。因云不起故。同喻云如空華。空華無有起，空華無有實；無為無有起，無為亦無實。故《中論》云「若有有為法，則有無為法。既無有有為，何得有無為？」廣如彼論。

Regarding the Commentary's passage starting from "However, regarding these ten tenets, each subsequent one is deeper than the preceding ones": this is the third [section], the critical assessment. Within it are two parts: first, a general critical assessment of the ten tenets; second, resolving and harmonising objections. Within the former part there are five points: First, universally elucidating shallowness and depth, hence each subsequent one is deeper than the preceding ones. Now, regarding these ten tenets, the first six are completely identical to those of the master of the Mahāyāna. The Mahāyāna has eight tenets: the seventh is called "Ultimate Emptiness of Both," and the eighth is called "Conforming to Reason, Complete and Real"—namely, taking the characteristics of phenomena (dharmalakṣaṇa) as conforming to reason, complete, and real, and the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) as the ultimate emptiness of both. Now [Xianshou] switched the seventh to the eighth, and the eighth to the seventh. As mentioned previously regarding the divergence of the two schools in the Western Regions, this now accords with dharmatā, and further adds the latter two to demonstrate profound depth. Regarding the Commentary's passage starting from "The first four are solely Hīnayāna; the fifth and sixth apply to both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna": this is the second [point], the critical assessment in terms of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. Although the fifth and sixth are established within the Hīnayāna, their meaning applies to the Mahāyāna, which is why it says "the fifth and sixth apply to both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna." Regarding the Commentary's passage starting from "The seventh is dharmalakṣaṇa": this is the third [point], the critical assessment in terms of provisional and real. Regarding the Commentary's passage starting from "Furthermore, the seventh is the initial teaching": this is the fourth [point], the critical assessment using the five teachings. It only adduces four teachings because the first six, being Hīnayāna, correspond to the first—the Hīnayāna piṭaka teaching. Since the critical assessment in terms of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna was already presented before, it is omitted here. Regarding the Commentary's passage starting from "Furthermore, the seventh is also called the tenet of the existence of both two truths": this is the fifth [point], the critical assessment in terms of the two truths. This is also a distinct explanation following what is difficult: it solely assesses three tenets, explaining them again because they contain divergent meanings. That the first tenet possesses both two truths is readily known. Regarding "As in the verse of the Karatalaratna": this was composed by the Bodhisattva Bhāviveka; the entire treatise merely explains this one verse. In it there is a two-tiered syllogism (anumāna). The first half is the syllogism concerning conditioned phenomena (saṃskṛtadharma). That is, it posits that conditioned phenomena are the subject (pakṣadharmadharmī/dharmin), and being definitely empty and without intrinsic nature is the predicate (sādhyadharma). The reason (hetu) is "because of being produced from conditions." The homologous example (sādharmyadṛṣṭānta) is "like an illusory phenomenon." An illusory phenomenon is produced from conditions, and an illusory phenomenon is empty and without intrinsic nature. Conditioned phenomena are produced from conditions; conditioned phenomena are empty and without intrinsic nature. Here, the reason and example are transposed, or the phrasing has not been fully adjusted. As for saying "true nature," it means the nature of the conditioned, and it is also appropriate to say that the true nature of the conditioned is empty. The second is the syllogism concerning unconditioned phenomena (asaṃskṛtadharma). It says: unconditioned phenomena are the subject; being definitely devoid of reality is the predicate. The reason is "because of not arising." The homologous example is "like a flower in the sky." A flower in the sky does not arise, and a flower in the sky is devoid of reality; unconditioned phenomena do not arise, and unconditioned phenomena are likewise devoid of reality. Thus the Madhyamakaśāstra states: "If conditioned phenomena exist, then unconditioned phenomena exist. Since conditioned phenomena do not exist, how could unconditioned phenomena exist?" This is elaborated in that treatise.