大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 35.32

35.32

疏「信謂於實德能深忍樂欲心淨為性」者，《唯識》第六云「云何為信？於實德能深忍樂欲，心淨為性。對治不信，樂善為業（此總明體業）。然信差別略有三種：一信有實，謂於諸法實事理中深信忍故。二信有德，謂於三寶真淨德中深信樂故。三信有能，謂於一切世出世善深信有力能得能成起希望故。」釋曰：實德能三即信依處，忍樂欲三如次配之。言能得能成者，信己及他，今得後成。又無為得、有為成故。論云「由斯對治彼不信心，愛樂證修世出世善。」釋曰：上釋信業，下欲揀別，故又問答。論云「忍謂勝解，此即信因。樂欲謂欲，即是信果。確陳此信自相，是何問也。豈不適言心淨為性。此猶未了彼心淨言。若淨言即心，應非心所。若令心淨，慚等何別？心俱淨法，為難亦然。」釋曰：此中三難，初持業釋、次依主釋、後隣近釋。言為難亦然者，同前慚等何別？亦是心王，俱時法故。論曰「此性澄清能淨心等，以心勝故立心淨名，如水清珠能清濁水。慚等雖善，非淨為相，此淨為相，無濫彼失。又諸染法各別有相，雖有不信自相渾濁，復能混濁餘心心所，如極穢物自穢穢他。信正翻彼，故淨為相也（正義竟）。有說：信者，愛樂為相，應通三性，體應即欲。又應苦集非信所緣（此破小乘上座部）。有執：信者隨順為相，應通三性，即勝解欲。若印順者，即勝解故；若樂順者，即是欲故。離彼二體，無順相故（此破大乘異師也）。由此應知，心淨是信結也。」然今疏文略引標釋，義已周備。「今法寶」下，以論配經。復有二意：一者別配，謂法有事理，即是初實也。法有理行，即出世善等，故是後能，故云今「法寶中已攝初後」。後「亦三寶中皆具此三」者，義以前三通於三寶，如文可知。次「大者」下，釋下句也。

Regarding the commentary's "Faith has as its essential nature the deep conviction, delight, and desire regarding reality, virtues, and capabilities, with mental clarity": The sixth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratā states: "What is faith? It has as its essential nature deep conviction, delight, and desire regarding reality, virtues, and capabilities, with mental clarity. Its activity is to counteract non-faith and take joy in the wholesome (this generally clarifies the essence and activity). Yet the distinctions of faith are briefly of three kinds: 1. Having faith in the real, meaning deeply having faith in and conviction of the real facts and principles of all dharmas. 2. Having faith in virtue, meaning deeply having faith in and delighting in the true and pure virtues of the Three Jewels. 3. Having faith in capability, meaning deeply having faith that there is power capable of attaining and accomplishing all worldly and transworldly wholesome dharmas, giving rise to aspiration." Explanation: The three of reality, virtues, and capabilities are the bases of faith; the three of conviction, delight, and desire correspond to them in order. Saying "capable of attaining and accomplishing" means having faith in oneself and others, attaining now and accomplishing later; furthermore, unconditioned [dharmas] are attained, and conditioned [dharmas] are accomplished. The treatise states: "By this, one counteracts that non-faith, cherishing, delighting in, realizing, and cultivating worldly and transworldly wholesome dharmas." Explanation: The above explains the activity of faith; below, wanting to distinguish it, questions and answers are presented again. The treatise states: "Conviction means superior resolution (adhimokṣa); this is the cause of faith. Delight and desire mean desire (chanda); this is the fruit of faith. Then what is the question that definitely states this self-characteristic of faith? Was it not just said that mental clarity is its essential nature? This still does not understand the statement 'mental clarity'. If the word 'clarity' is precisely the mind, it should not be a mental factor. If it causes the mind to be pure, how does it differ from shame (hrī) and the like? The objection is the same for dharmas pure together with the mind." Explanation: There are three objections here: first, an appositional compound interpretation; next, a determinative compound interpretation; finally, a proximate compound interpretation. Saying "the objection is the same" means: how does it differ from shame and the like as mentioned before? It is also a primary mind, because it is a simultaneous dharma. The treatise states: "This nature is clear and limpid, capable of purifying the mind and so forth; because the mind is preeminent, it is named 'clarity of mind', just as a water-clearing jewel can clear turbid water. Although shame and the like are wholesome, they do not have clarity as their characteristic; this [faith] has clarity as its characteristic, so there is no fault of confusion with them. Moreover, defiled dharmas each individually have their characteristics: although non-faith has turbidness as its own characteristic, it can furthermore muddy the other minds and mental factors, just as an extremely filthy thing defiles itself and defiles others. Faith directly reverses that, hence having clarity as its characteristic (the orthodox doctrine ends). Some say: Faith has cherishing and delighting as its characteristic; it should pervade the three natures, and its essence should be desire. Furthermore, suffering and accumulation would not be the cognitive objects of faith (this refutes the Hinayāna Theravāda/Sthaviranikāya). Some maintain: Faith has compliance as its characteristic; it should pervade the three natures, being superior resolution and desire. If it confirms and complies, it is superior resolution; if it delights and complies, it is desire. Apart from those two essences, there is no characteristic of compliance (this refutes a deviant Mahāyāna master). From this one should know that mental clarity is the concluding definition of faith." Now, the commentary's text briefly cites the identification and explanation, and the meaning is already complete. From "Now, the Dharma jewel…" below, it correlates the treatise to the sūtra. There are again two meanings: first, separate correlation, meaning that the Dharma has facts and principle, which is the first, "reality". The Dharma has principle and practice, which are transworldly wholesome dharmas, etc., and thus the latter, "capability"; hence it says, "now within the Dharma jewel the first and last are already subsumed." Next, "Also within the Three Jewels all three are possessed": by meaning, the previous three apply generally to the Three Jewels, as is understandable from the text. Next, from "Great…" below, explains the subsequent line.