大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 27.36

27.36

疏「見普法故名為普眼」者，此釋經名，而有三義：一約所見稱普。言普法者，一具一切，一一稱性，同時具足等，斯即十眼之內一眼之能。經云「一切智眼見普門法界」故。二「況一眼即十眼」，融無障礙，約能見稱普，如五眼中佛眼。四眼入佛眼，皆名佛眼，如四河入海，無復河名，而具海味。故《金剛經》云「如來有肉眼不？如是世尊！如來有肉眼。乃至云如來有佛眼不？如是世尊！如來有佛眼。」今十眼亦耳，隨一具十。而諸教說唯佛眼具五，餘四則無。今因果之人皆許一眼即具十眼，不唯後勝具於前劣，若一不具十則非普眼。言十眼者，〈離世間品〉說，謂一肉眼、二天眼、三慧眼、四法、五佛、六智、七光明、八出生死、九無礙、十一切智。其融無礙則有二義：一者成上十眼無礙、二者成下即能所無礙。三眼外無法方真普眼，下約心境互收方稱普眼，此上標也。「以諸緣發見」下，別釋所以。如大乘法師以九緣發識，眼根名眼，餘不名眼。今則例之，眼根能發識，眼根得名眼。空明能發識，亦得同名眼。餘六例然，以緣起之法各有有力無力相成立故。次云「因沒果中緣皆號眼」者，九緣不見色，不見不名眼。九緣皆見色，沒果同名眼，以皆全有力故。言「全色為眼恒見色而無緣」者，色是所緣之境，眼是能緣之根。今即是眼，故無緣也。言「全眼為色恒稱見而非我」者，眼是我能見，今全為色，正見之時即非我也。此即賢首之意。下更有言，云「非我離於情想，無緣絕於貪求，收萬像於目前、全十方於眼際。是以緣義無盡，隨見見而不窮；物性叵思，應法法而難準。法普即眼普，義通乃見通；體之自隱隱，照之遂重重。然後窮十方於眼際，鏡空有而皎明；收萬像以成身，顯事理而通徹也。」

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because it sees universal phenomena, it is called the universal eye": this explains the title of the sūtra, and it has three meanings. First, the designation "universal" is based on what is seen. Speaking of "universal phenomena": the one contains all, each and every one accords with nature, they are simultaneously complete, and so forth; this is the capacity of a single eye among the ten eyes, because the sūtra says, "The eye of all-knowledge sees the dharmadhātu of universal gates." Second, "much more so when one eye is identical to the ten eyes," fusing without obstruction, the designation "universal" is based on the capacity to see, just like the Buddha-eye among the five eyes. When the [other] four eyes enter the Buddha-eye, they are all called the Buddha-eye, just as when the four rivers enter the ocean, they no longer have the names of rivers, yet they possess the flavor of the ocean. Thus the Diamond Sūtra says: "Does the Tathāgata possess the fleshly eye? Even so, World-Honoured One, the Tathāgata possesses the fleshly eye..." up to, "Does the Tathāgata possess the Buddha-eye? Even so, World-Honoured One, the Tathāgata possesses the Buddha-eye." Here the ten eyes are also like this: any single one possesses all ten. Yet the various teachings state that only the Buddha-eye possesses all five, while the other four do not. Here, for people in both cause and effect, it is allowed that a single eye possesses the ten eyes; it is not merely that the subsequent superior one possesses the prior inferior ones: if one does not possess all ten, it is not the universal eye. As for the ten eyes, they are explained in the chapter "Transcending the World": namely, 1. the fleshly eye, 2. the divine eye, 3. the wisdom eye, 4. the Dharma eye, 5. the Buddha-eye, 6. the cognition eye, 7. the radiance eye, 8. the eye transcending birth-and-death, 9. the unobstructed eye, and 10. the eye of all-knowledge. Their unimpeded fusion has two meanings: first, establishing the mutual non-obstruction of the above ten eyes; second, establishing the mutual non-obstruction of subject and object below. Third, only when there are no phenomena outside the eye is it the true universal eye; below, it is named the universal eye based on mind and realm mutually encompassing each other. This is stated above. From "Because the various conditions give rise to seeing" downward, it explains the reason separately. For example, Mahāyāna masters hold that consciousness is produced through nine conditions; the visual faculty is called the "eye," while the others are not called the "eye." Now, by analogy: the visual faculty can produce consciousness, so the visual faculty obtains the name "eye"; space and light can produce consciousness, so they too equally obtain the name "eye." The other six are treated likewise, because the phenomena of dependent origination each have efficacy or lack efficacy in mutually establishing one another. Next, it says: "When the causes are submerged within the effect, all conditions are called the eye": the nine conditions do not [individually] see form; when not seeing, they are not called the eye. When all nine conditions see form, being submerged within the effect they are collectively called the eye, because they are all completely efficacious. As for "Complete form being the eye, it constantly sees form yet is without conditions": form is the object that is conditioned, and the eye is the faculty that conditions. Now [form] is identical to the eye, hence it is without conditions. As for "The complete eye being form, it is constantly called seeing yet is not 'I'": the eye is my capacity to see; now it is completely form, so at the very moment of seeing, it is not "I." This is Xianshou's meaning. Below there are further words saying: "'Not I' is free from emotional conceptualization; 'without conditions' terminates greedy seeking; gathering the myriad forms before the eyes, realizing the ten directions within the scope of the eye. Therefore, the meanings of conditions are endless; seeing in accordance with seeing is inexhaustible. The natures of things are inconceivable; according with phenomena, phenomena are difficult to standardize. When phenomena are universal, the eye is universal; when meaning penetrates, seeing penetrates. When embodying it, it is inherently subtle; when illuminating it, it becomes layered. Thereafter, one exhausts the ten directions within the scope of the eye, mirroring emptiness and existence clearly and brightly; one gathers the myriad forms to form a body, making facts and principles completely transparent."