大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 25.18

25.18

疏「智論云」下，三為論引證，共答前問。亦猶外典「天地萬物同稟陰陽之元氣也。」佛者是覺人有靈知之覺，今第一義空與之為性，故名佛性。非情無覺，但持自體，得稱為法。今真性與之為性，故名法性。是故結云「假說能所而實無差」。次引《唯識》亦為證前，即第十論云「又自性身依法性土。雖此身土體無差別，而屬佛法性相異故。此佛身土俱非色攝，雖不可說形量大小，然隨事相其量無邊，譬如虛空遍一切處。」釋曰：此文兼證後段如空，論文易了。謂「法性屬佛」下，是疏釋論。然準彼疏云「佛是相義，為功德法所依止故、眾德聚故、二身自體故。法是性義，功德自性故、能持自性故、諸法自性故。體為土義，相為身義。」此公意云：屬佛是相、屬法是性，直語所依名土，故云體為土義。以能依亦所依，為法性身，故云相義為身。今疏意小異，謂佛有覺義，故名屬佛。土無覺義，但持自性，故名為法性。言「性隨相異」者，身土約相則有二差，隨所依性則無差別。今以無差之性隨有差之相，故云性隨相之異也。

On the commentary's "The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra states" and following: the third is adducing proofs for the treatise to jointly answer the previous question. It is also like the secular texts saying: "Heaven, earth, and the myriad things equally receive the primordial qi of yin and yang." "Buddha" means awakening; a person has the awakening of numinous awareness, and now when the ultimate emptiness serves as their nature, it is therefore called the buddha-nature. Inanimate things have no awareness, merely upholding their own essence, and thus obtain the name "dharma." Now when the true nature serves as their nature, it is therefore called dharmatā. Hence it concludes by saying: "The 'agent' and 'object' are provisionally stated, yet in truth there is no difference." Next, citing the Vijñaptimātratā[siddhi] is also to prove the preceding. That is, the tenth fascicle of the treatise states: "Moreover, the svabhāvakāya relies upon the dharmatā-land. Although there is no difference in the essence of this body and land, because they belong to the Buddha and to dharmas, their nature and characteristics differ. This buddha-body and land are both not subsumed under form; although one cannot speak of the magnitude of their shapes, yet in accordance with phenomenal characteristics their magnitude is boundless, like space pervading everywhere." In explanation: This text also proves the subsequent passage on being "like space"; the treatise text is easy to understand. The commentary's "dharmatā belongs to the Buddha" and following is its explanation of the treatise. However, following that commentary [on the Siddhi], it says: "'Buddha' has the meaning of characteristics, because it is that which the dharmas of merit rely upon, because it is the accumulation of myriad virtues, and because it is the self-essence of the two bodies. 'Dharma' has the meaning of nature, because it is the self-nature of merit, because it can uphold its own nature, and because it is the self-nature of all dharmas. The essence is the meaning of land, and the characteristics are the meaning of body." The intention of that master [Kuiji] is: belonging to the Buddha is the characteristics, and belonging to dharmas is the nature; speaking directly of that which is relied upon is called the land, hence he says "the essence is the meaning of land." Because that which relies is also that which is relied upon, it is the dharmatā-kāya, hence he says "the meaning of characteristics is the body." Now this commentary's intention differs slightly: it means that "Buddha" has the meaning of awakening, and hence is called "belonging to the Buddha." The land has no meaning of awakening, merely upholding its own nature, and hence is called "dharmatā." As for "the nature follows the difference of characteristics": the body and land, in terms of characteristics, have two distinctions, but following the nature they rely upon, there is no difference. Now, because the undifferentiated nature follows the differentiated characteristics, it says "the nature follows the difference of characteristics."