大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 31.15

31.15

疏「展轉異同成多差別」者，都有六十二句，謂初對是善惡為二；第二對開二成四，兼前二成六；第三對開四成八，配前六成十四；第四對開八成十六，兼前十四成三十；第五對開十六成三十二，配前三十成六十二。此約以後添前，故成六十二，剋實而言，但有三十二。以後開前，前更無體故。如開善惡趣各成滿缺，但有其四耳，謂一善趣根滿、二善趣根缺、三惡趣根滿、四惡趣根缺。此四之外，更無有別善惡趣故。又但若二二開之，唯成三十二。若更展其四生，則復成多句，謂第三對先以四生乘上四句，四四成十六句。更有勝劣乘十六，已有三十二，配六已成三十八。後後開之，句數更多。第四對開成六十四，第五對開成一百二十八。若從初善惡開為六趣，則句數更多，並可思準。故云「後後必帶前前，展轉異同成多差別。」疏「第三結成前難」。於中文二：先總顯文意、後「已知大意」下釋文。今初，準下諸菩薩問，皆有三段。其第三段多是直結故。次釋文中，疏「一約本識」者，業是心所，故依於心。心是第八，為根本依。從「離所無能」下，釋不相知義，以相待門釋。言「離所無能」者，既無所依心王，亦無能依之業。今依心有業，業從緣生故無自性，不能知心。「離能無所」者，離能依業，則心非所依。今由業成所依，所依無性，故不能知業。以各下結，謂各從緣成，性空無體，相依無力，故云無用。覺首亦云無體用故，故不相知。

Regarding the commentary's "Progressively differentiating and agreeing to form many distinctions": there are sixty-two propositions in total. That is, the first pair consists of good and evil, making two. The second pair unfolds the two into four, which together with the previous two makes six. The third pair unfolds the four into eight, matching the previous six to make fourteen. The fourth pair unfolds the eight into sixteen, which together with the previous fourteen makes thirty. The fifth pair unfolds the sixteen into thirty-two, matching the previous thirty to make sixty-two. This is based on adding the former to the latter, thus making sixty-two; strictly speaking, there are only thirty-two, because when the latter unfolds the former, the former has no separate entity. For instance, unfolding good and evil destinies into complete and deficient [faculties] yields only four: first, good destiny with complete faculties; second, good destiny with deficient faculties; third, evil destiny with complete faculties; fourth, evil destiny with deficient faculties. Outside of these four, there are no distinct good and evil destinies. Moreover, if unfolded two by two, they form only thirty-two. If one further expands them by the four modes of birth, then they form even more propositions: the third pair first multiplies the above four propositions by the four modes of birth, four times four making sixteen propositions; further multiplying these sixteen by superior and inferior already makes thirty-two, which paired with the six makes thirty-eight. When unfolded successively thereafter, the number of propositions becomes even greater: the fourth pair unfolds into sixty-four, and the fifth pair unfolds into one hundred and twenty-eight. If from the initial good and evil one unfolds into the six destinies, the number of propositions would be even greater, all of which may be deduced accordingly. Hence it says: "Each subsequent one necessarily entails the previous ones, progressively differentiating and agreeing to form many distinctions." Regarding the commentary's "Third, concluding and establishing the previous challenge": herein the text has two parts. First, it generally shows the intent of the text; second, from "having understood the main import" downward, it explains the text. Now for the first: according to the questions of the various bodhisattvas below, all have three sections. The third section mostly concludes directly. Next, in explaining the text, the commentary says "First, in terms of the fundamental consciousness": karma is a mental factor (caitta), and therefore relies on the mind. The mind is the eighth [consciousness], which is the fundamental basis. From "apart from the based, there is no based-upon" downward, it explains the meaning of not knowing one another by way of the approach of mutual dependence. "Apart from the based, there is no based-upon" means: since there is no primary mind (citta) that is the basis, there is also no karma that relies upon it. Now karma exists in reliance on the mind, and karma arises from conditions and thus lacks intrinsic nature, unable to know the mind. "Apart from that which relies, there is no basis" means: apart from the karma that relies, the mind is not a basis. Now, because of karma it becomes a basis; since the basis lacks intrinsic nature, it cannot know karma. It concludes with "because each...": meaning that each is formed from conditions, is empty of nature and devoid of entity, and relies on the other without efficacy; hence it is said to have "no function." Bodhisattva Jñānamūrti also states that because they lack entity and function, they do not know one another.