[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 20.5 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 20.5 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 20.5 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [20.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.5) 疏「言一切者，謂分別俱生、若種若現」者，謂二障各二：一者分別，謂因邪師邪教及邪思惟，此見道斷，入初地時便永斷盡。二者俱生，不由上二，生而便有，此修道斷，地地斷之。此又二種：一者現行、二者種子。若所知現行，地地斷之。若煩惱現行，亦地地斷。煩惱種子，直至金剛定斷。疏「二障氣分麁重麁重」者，二障氣分即熏習所成，揀異現障故云習氣。然習氣有二，謂因與果。於現起障能為因者，亦名種子。此因習氣根本智斷，斷此因已現不起故，不起現因。但麁重者，唯名習氣，此果習氣後得智斷，斷現麁重知現無故。言麁重者，違細輕故。然麁重有三：一現起麁重，貪瞋癡等令行者心無堪任故。二種子麁重，煩惱種子障諸智故。三麁重麁重，實非煩惱似煩惱故，如身子瞋習、畢陵慢習等。今即第三，以經言餘習故，又位極故。前二即是一切中攝，故疏釋云「若種若現」。上言已斷，即有能斷之道，揀異伏道，故云已斷。斷道有二，謂一根本無分別智，親證二空所顯真理，無境相故，能斷二障種子現行。二後得無分別智，雖不親證，無力能斷迷理隨眠，而於安立非安立相明了現前無倒證故，亦能永斷彼修所斷迷事隨眠。上來皆是《唯識論》意。更有釋者，所知障中亦有二種：一於所知境而能為障，即是不染污無知而非法執。如於五明處有所未解，但是無知，何曾有執。然《唯識》云「由我法執，二障俱生。若證二空彼障隨斷者，據見道分別障說，以證空理而斷障故。言是障而非執者，據修道斷俱生障說，以遍知有成種智故。」上來所知之障。二所知即障，名所知障。此體即是善心心所，以彼空有二相未除，帶相觀心有所得故。前據了俗，此據證真，說名智障。此障對治亦有二種：一者解有、二者達空，空有俱明名遍知故。然《唯識》正義，唯所知之障。今就理通，故亦用之。問：永斷習氣唯是如來，云何此亦皆云已斷？答：此有二釋。一約法相，全分離盡，唯是如來。若據分離，亦通菩薩。以經中說三種麁重，三位斷故。《解深密經》說三麁重：一者在皮，初地即斷；二者在膚，八地方斷；三者在骨，唯佛地斷。雖則餘位亦斷麁重，而三位顯，是故偏說初地，捨凡入聖位故。八地無漏常相續故，佛地果滿頓得捨故。又此即是八地菩薩，故云斷也。二約圓融，如疏文顯。 > Regarding the commentary's statement, "As for 'all,' it refers to both discriminated and innate \[obscurations\], whether seeds or manifest activity": this means that the two obscurations are each twofold. First is the discriminated, which is due to false teachers, false teachings, and false conceptualization; this is severed on the path of seeing, and when one enters the first bhūmi it is severed and eradicated forever. Second is the innate, which does not depend on the previous two, but exists spontaneously from birth; this is severed on the path of cultivation, being severed bhūmi by bhūmi. These are again twofold: first, manifest activity, and second, seeds. As for the manifest activity of the cognitive obscuration, it is severed bhūmi by bhūmi. As for the manifest activity of the afflictive obscuration, it is also severed bhūmi by bhūmi. The seeds of affliction are severed continuously right up to the vajropamasamādhi. As for the commentary's statement, "The subtle traces and heavy residues of the heavy residues of the two obscurations": the subtle traces of the two obscurations are just what is formed through perfuming; they are called habit-energies to distinguish them from manifest obscurations. However, habit-energies are twofold: cause and fruit. Those that can serve as causes for actively manifest obscurations are also called seeds. These causal habit-energies are severed by fundamental cognition; when this cause is severed, manifest \[obscurations\] no longer arise, and hence they do not produce manifest causes. Those that are merely heavy residues are called solely habit-energies; these fruitional habit-energies are severed by subsequently acquired cognition, because when manifest heavy residues are severed, one knows that manifest \[obscurations\] do not exist. As for "heavy residue," it is so called because it contradicts what is fine and light. However, heavy residues are threefold: first, actively manifest heavy residues, because greed, anger, delusion, and so forth make the practitioner's mind unfit. Second, seed heavy residues, because the seeds of affliction obstruct all cognitions. Third, the heavy residues of heavy residues, which are not actually afflictions but resemble afflictions, such as Śāriputra's habit-energy of anger, Pilindavatsa's habit-energy of arrogance, and the like. Here it is the third, because the sūtra speaks of "residual habit-energies," and also because the stage is ultimate. The previous two are subsumed under "all"; thus the commentary explains, "whether seeds or manifest activity." Above it says "already severed," which implies the path capable of severing, distinguishing it from the path of suppression; hence it says "already severed." Paths of severing are twofold: first, fundamental non-conceptual cognition, which directly realizes the true principle revealed by the two empties; because it is free of objective marks, it can sever the seeds and manifest activity of the two obscurations. Second, subsequently acquired non-conceptual cognition: although it does not directly realize \[it\] and lacks the power to sever the dormant latencies that delude principle, nevertheless, because it has clear, immediate, and unerring realization regarding established and unestablished marks, it can also permanently sever those dormant latencies that delude phenomena, which are severed by cultivation. All the above represents the purport of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. There is another explanation: within the cognitive obscuration there are also two kinds. First is that which can obstruct the objective sphere of what is to be known, which is non-defiled unknowing and not grasping at dharmas. For example, regarding the five fields of knowledge, if there is something not yet understood, it is merely unknowing; how could there ever be grasping? However, the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: "Because of grasping at self and dharmas, the two obscurations arise together. If one realizes the two empties, those obscurations are accordingly severed." This is spoken in terms of the discriminated obscurations of the path of seeing, because one severs obscurations by realizing the principle of emptiness. When it says it is an obscuration and not grasping, this is spoken in terms of severing the innate obscurations on the path of cultivation, because universally knowing existent things accomplishes all-knowledge. The above is the obscuration of what is to be known. Second, what is to be known is itself the obscuration; hence it is named "cognitive obscuration." Its essence is simply wholesome minds and mental factors; because those two marks of emptiness and existence have not yet been eliminated, contemplating the mind with marks still entails grasping. The former is based on comprehending the conventional; the latter is based on realizing the real; hence it is called the obscuration to cognition. The antidotes to this obscuration are also twofold: first, understanding existence; second, penetrating emptiness; for when both emptiness and existence are clearly illuminated, it is called universal knowing. However, the orthodox doctrine of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi is solely the obscuration of what is to be known. Here, based on its theoretical coherence, it is also employed. Question: If the permanent severance of habit-energies belongs solely to the Tathāgata, why does this also state that all are already severed? Answer: There are two explanations for this. First, in terms of characteristic marks of dharmas, complete and absolute eradication belongs solely to the Tathāgata. If considered in terms of progressive separation, it also extends to bodhisattvas. For the sūtra teaches three kinds of heavy residues severed across three positions. The Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra teaches three heavy residues: first, in the skin, severed at the first bhūmi; second, in the flesh, severed only at the eighth bhūmi; third, in the bone, severed solely at the Buddha-bhūmi. Although other stages also sever heavy residues, these three stages are prominent; therefore, it speaks particularly of the first bhūmi because it abandons the ordinary and enters the stage of the noble; the eighth bhūmi, because undefiled \[cognition\] is constantly continuous; and the Buddha-bhūmi, because the fruit is complete and they can be abandoned all at once. Moreover, these are precisely bodhisattvas of the eighth bhūmi; hence it says "severed." Second, in terms of perfect fusion, it is as clearly shown in the commentary text. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 20.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.4) - [Next: 20.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.6) - [Up: 20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.20.5) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.20.5) · Pramāṇa