大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 14.8

14.8

疏「以不知三界由乎我心」下，第三舉正折邪。於中三：初總明迷倒因緣、次況出深旨、後揀濫顯邪。初中，三界由乎我心，即唯大乘下十地有文，《唯識》等論皆引成立。謂心法剎那自類相續，無始時界展轉流來，不斷不常，憑緣憑對、非氣非稟，唯識唯心。豈同儒道氣變為神、神由氣就，氣非緣就，出於自然？自然而成，其性自化，非由修習耶？豈況心外別有冥性、微塵等耶？況梵天等為能生耶？疏「從癡有愛流轉無極」者，即《淨名經》。義通大小，大乘有二義：一無明發業，愛能潤業；二過去無明，現在愛取。小乘則唯有後義，雖由三毒，此二勝故。《涅槃》亦說生死本際凡有二種：一者無明、二者有愛，此二中間即有生老病死。其文非一。小乘立三毒為生死根本者，《中論．染染者品》云「經說貪欲嗔恚愚癡是世間根本，乃至云三毒因緣起於三業，三業因緣起於三行，是故有一切法。」〈十二因緣品〉云「眾生癡所覆，為後造三行，以有此行故，識受六道身。」皆是三毒為根本義。然外道雖立三德，不知是己心之所有故，又計從冥而起用故，故為邪見。

Regarding the commentary's "Because they do not know that the triple world arises from our mind" and what follows: this is the third [section], adducing the correct to refute the heterodox. Within this there are three [parts]: first, it generally clarifies the causes and conditions of deluded inversions; next, it uses comparison to bring out the profound purport; and last, it sorts out confusion to reveal the heterodox. In the first [part], "the triple world arises from our mind" is uniquely Mahāyāna, found in the text below on the ten stages, and treatises such as the Vijñaptimātratā cite it to establish [this doctrine]. That is to say, mental dharmas continue moment by moment in their own category, flowing and revolving from a beginningless boundary [of time], neither severed nor permanent, relying on conditions and relying on cognitive objects, neither [material] qi nor endowed [by nature], mind-only and consciousness-only. How could this be the same as the Confucian and Daoist [view that] qi transforms into spirit and spirit is accomplished through qi, [or that] qi is not accomplished through conditions but emerges from spontaneity—that it is completed spontaneously, its nature transforming of itself, rather than by means of cultivation and practice? How much less [could it be] that outside the mind there are separately a primordial nature (prakṛti), subtle atoms (paramāṇu), and the like? How much less could Brahmā and the like be the creator? Regarding the commentary's "From delusion arises craving, cycling in saṃsāra without end": this is from the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra. Its meaning applies to both the Great and Lesser [Vehicles]. The Mahāyāna has two meanings: first, avidyā generates karma, and craving can moisten karma; second, past avidyā, present craving and grasping. The Hīnayāna has only the latter meaning. Although it arises from the three poisons, these two are predominant. The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] also states that the roots of birth-and-death are basically twofold: first, avidyā; second, craving for existence; between these two there are birth, aging, illness, and death. Its texts [attesting this] are not singular. Regarding the Hīnayāna establishing the three poisons as the root of birth-and-death, the Madhyamakaśāstra's chapter "Examination of Lust and the Lustful" states: "A sūtra says that desire, hatred, and delusion are the root of the mundane world..." up to "...the conditions of the three poisons give rise to the three karmas, and the conditions of the three karmas give rise to the three saṃskāras; therefore all dharmas exist." The chapter "Examination of the Twelvefold Pratītyasamutpāda" states: "Sentient beings, covered by delusion, generate the three saṃskāras for the future; because these saṃskāras exist, consciousness receives bodies in the six destinies." These are all the meaning of the three poisons being the root. However, although non-Buddhists establish the three qualities (guṇas), they do not know that they are what belongs to their own mind, and furthermore they posit that functions arise from the unmanifest (prakṛti); therefore these are heterodox views.