大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 39.41

39.41

言「舉初況後巧顯深勝」者，初發心位劣，功德難思；後後位高，德無涯矣。疏「一三種發心之初」者，《起信論》發趣道相中，論云「略說發心有三種相。云何為三？一者信成就發心、二者解行發心、三者證發心。」今即第一，故云三種中初。所以知是初者，論云「信成就發心者，依何等人、修何等行，得信成就堪能發心？所謂依不定聚眾生，以有熏習善根力故。信業果報能生十善，厭生死苦、求無上菩提，得值諸佛親承供養，修行信心經一萬劫，信心成就故，諸佛菩薩教令發心等；或以大悲自能發心；或因正法欲滅，以護法因緣能自發心。如是信心成就得發心者，入正定聚畢竟不退，名住如來種中正因相應。」次說發三種心，已如〈十住品〉。又云「發是心故，則得少分見於法身。以見法身故，隨其願力能現八種利益眾生，所謂從兜率天退等。二解行發心者，當知轉勝，以是菩薩從初正信已來，經於第一阿僧祇劫將欲滿故，於真如法中能深解現前所修離相，以知法性無慳貪故，隨順修行檀波羅蜜等。三證發心者，從淨心地，乃至菩薩究竟地中證何境界？所謂真如，以依轉識說為境界。而此證者無有境界，唯真如智名為法身。是菩薩於一念頃，能至十方無餘世界，供養諸佛請轉法輪，唯為開道利益眾生，不依文字。」釋曰：上已明三種發心。第三登地已上；第二從十行發迴向心，以十行中能解法空；順行十度行法純熟發迴向心；從其因邊名為解行。今非後二；正與初心相應故。疏「二十住之初」，揀餘九住，彼名初發心住故。發亦二義：一發起上求心，望後論發。「二三德開發」者，望前論發。從初信心始入佛法，即發趣求如來果位，寂照雙流常觀心性。功行既著，至此開發，如發金藏見真金等。於中四意：初標。二「能知」下，示三德相，即下經文。三「在於信位」下，釋開發義。言「研窮」者，從初信入寂照雙流，常觀心性、精修諸度，以此為因。豁然開悟是開發相，如發金藏了見分明。四「故得」下，仍前釋於功德之義。疏「三即以初心」下，第三宗趣。於中二：一正釋宗趣、二「然住會」下揀異釋。於中三：初正揀、二遮破、三結成。今初，即安國意。然彼有二意。一云：此中三賢別說十地，十地一會總說十地，故其四會皆是十地。二者以此品中文義深奧，同十地故。今疏一文，一時雙破，而正破初意。今是十住之會說初發心，是明信成就攝後二，自屬第五六會，何得渾和？若言別說合說，略有四失：一令此經無三賢義；二令餘經三賢虛設；三成此經文義雜亂，謂以地義名住行向故；四何不一天總別說耶？而歷四天蓋有所表。是知此說殊乖教理，故云「住會發心定是信成就」等。疏「生如來家自約解說」下，第二遮破。彼云：據文既云初發心時便成正覺，應是初地。況下經云「以生如來廣大家，能生三世一切諸佛家，永斷一切諸疑網，盡除一切諸障礙。」若非初地安得爾耶？豈有久習無明，纔一發心便成大智，能知前際一切諸佛如來成等正覺乃至涅槃，能信後際一切諸佛所有善根，能知現在一切諸佛所有智慧，即能振動一切世界等耶？若謂不作齊限而能爾者，今何不發耶？已發，何不能爾耶？以斯義理，應知證發。釋曰：此中彼釋自有三段，一正立、二「豈有久習」下引文反質、三「若謂不作」下縱破法性。今疏文中亦有三節，但通前二。今初，通其第一正立。彼以有生家故名證發心，今揀生家不同，故非證也。然彼引四句，今但通一，餘例可知。且通生家，生家有六，如〈法界品〉前十住內亦說生家。家言雖同而義有異，豈以解生同證生也。解生生菩提心家。證生生真如家故不同也？此義若成，其餘皆成故，故不通餘也。若通餘三者，既許解生，何得不能生三世佛家，斷諸疑網除諸障礙？又彼初云初發心時便成正覺，最初建立是初地義。此義前品已曾廣釋，故不通耳。疏「若謂久習無明」下，即第二通其引文反質。彼引四句，今為兩節通之。初通久習無明，文可知也。後「若謂云何」下，三通知三世佛法。此即《涅槃》第六〈如來性品〉，南經即〈四依品〉，云「有四種人，能護正法、建立正法、憶念正法，能多利益憐愍世間，為世間依，安樂人天。何等為四？有人出世，具煩惱性，是名第一。須陀洹人，是名第二。阿那含人，是名第三。阿羅漢人，是名第四。云何名為具煩惱性？若有人能受持禁戒，威儀具足，建立正法，從佛所聞解其文義，轉為他人分別宣說，所謂少欲多欲非道廣說，如八大人覺。有犯罪人者，教令發露懺悔滅除，善知菩薩方便所行祕密之法，是名凡夫，非第八人。第八人者，不名凡夫，名為菩薩，不名為佛。」釋曰：遠公亦詺為種性解行人，非是登地。此初依人，既云具縛能知祕密，何言十住不能知耶？前義若成，動剎何惑？其第三段縱破法性，文理易故疏不通之。意云：此中非獨作無齊限便得爾也，亦久研窮方至此位。何得為此無理難也。

As for the statement "adducing the initial [stage] to illustrate the subsequent [stages], skilfully revealing their profound excellence": the initial rank of generating the mind is lower, yet its merits are inconceivable; subsequent and higher ranks are exalted, and their merits are boundless. Regarding the Commentary's phrase "First, it is the first among the three kinds of generating the mind": under the characteristics of embarking upon the path in the Awakening of Faith, the treatise states: "Briefly stated, there are three characteristics of generating the mind. What are the three? The first is generating the mind upon the perfection of faith; the second is generating the mind through understanding and practice; the third is generating the mind through realization." Here it is the first, which is why it is called the first among the three kinds. As to how it is known to be the first, the treatise states: "As for generating the mind upon the perfection of faith: relying on what kind of person and cultivating what kind of practice can one achieve the perfection of faith and become capable of generating the mind? Namely, relying on sentient beings of indeterminate destiny, because they possess the power of perfuming good roots. Having faith in karma and its retribution, they can produce the ten good deeds, loathe the suffering of birth and death, seek unexcelled bodhi, meet the Buddhas, attend upon and make offerings to them in person, and cultivate the mind of faith over the course of ten thousand kalpas. Because faith has been perfected, the Buddhas and bodhisattvas teach them to generate the mind, and so forth; or through great compassion they are able to generate the mind on their own; or because the true Dharma is about to perish, through conditions of protecting the Dharma they are able to generate the mind on their own. Those who achieve the perfection of faith and thus generate the mind enter the definitely determined destiny, never to regress, and are called abiding in the lineage of the Tathāgata, in harmony with the correct cause." Next, it speaks of generating the three kinds of mind, as already explained in the "Chapter on the Ten Abidings". It further states: "Because they generate this mind, they obtain a partial vision of the dharmakāya. Because they see the dharmakāya, according to the power of their vows they can manifest eight kinds of [deeds] to benefit sentient beings, namely descending from Tuṣita Heaven, and so forth. Second, as for generating the mind through understanding and practice: it should be known to be progressively superior, because from the first arising of correct faith, as the first asaṃkhyeya kalpa is about to be fulfilled, this bodhisattva can deeply understand that the practices currently cultivated are free of marks within the dharma of tathatā. Because they know that the dharmatā is free of parsimony and greed, they accord with and cultivate dānapāramitā, and so forth. Third, as for generating the mind through realization: from the ground of the pure mind up to the ultimate ground of the bodhisattvas, what sphere do they realize? Namely, tathatā; it is spoken of as a 'sphere' only based on the transforming consciousness. Yet this realization has no sphere; wisdom in identity with tathatā alone is called the dharmakāya. In a single thought-moment, this bodhisattva can reach all worlds of the ten directions without remainder, make offerings to the Buddhas, and entreat them to turn the wheel of the Dharma, solely to open up the path and benefit sentient beings, not relying on words or letters." The Explication states: The three kinds of generating the mind have been explained above. The third belongs to the entering of the bhūmis and above. The second generates the mind of pariṇāmanā from the ten practices, because within the ten practices one can understand the emptiness of phenomena, and by according with and practicing the ten pāramitās, the practices mature and one generates the mind of pariṇāmanā; in terms of its causal aspect, it is termed 'understanding and practice'. Here it is not the latter two, for it corresponds precisely to the initial mind. Regarding the Commentary's phrase "Second, it is the initial [stage] of the ten abidings": this distinguishes it from the remaining nine abidings, because that [stage] is named the Abiding of Initial Mind-Generation. 'Generating' also has two senses: first, generating the mind that seeks what is above, which is discussed as 'generating' in relation to what follows. As for "second, the development and uncovering of the three virtues", it is discussed as 'generating' in relation to what precedes. From the initial mind of faith, first entering the Buddhadharma, one straightaway sets out to seek the fruit-rank of the Tathāgata, with quiescence and illumination flowing together, constantly contemplating the mind-nature. Once practice and cultivation have become manifest, it develops and uncovers up to this point, like unearthing a treasury of gold to see the real gold, and so on. Within this there are four senses: first, setting up the heading. Second, from "can know" onwards, showing the characteristics of the three virtues, which is the sūtra text below. Third, from "being in the rank of faith" onwards, explaining the meaning of development and uncovering. The word "painstakingly investigated" means entering the dual flow of quiescence and illumination from the initial faith, constantly contemplating the mind-nature and meticulously cultivating the pāramitās, taking this as the cause. Sudden awakening is the characteristic of development and uncovering, like unearthing a treasury of gold and seeing it clearly and distinctly. Fourth, from "therefore obtaining" onwards, continuing the explanation of the meaning of merit based on the preceding. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "Third, taking the initial mind" onwards: this is the third, the central doctrine. Within this are two parts: first, correctly explaining the central doctrine; second, from "however, in the assembly of the abidings" onwards, distinguishing divergent interpretations. Within this there are three parts: first, correctly distinguishing; second, refuting; third, concluding. Now for the first, which is the opinion of [Master] Anguo. However, he had two ideas. One states: here the three ranks of worthies explain the ten grounds separately, and the single assembly of the ten grounds explains the ten grounds collectively; therefore, these four assemblies all pertain to the ten grounds. The second is that because the text and meaning of this chapter are profound and obscure, they are identical to the ten grounds. Now a single passage of the Commentary refutes both at once, primarily refuting the first idea. Here, the assembly of the ten abidings speaks of the initial mind-generation, which clarifies that the perfection of faith subsumes the latter two; [the latter two] naturally belong to the fifth and sixth assemblies—how could they be conflated? If one claims they are explained separately and collectively, there are roughly four errors: first, it causes this sūtra to lack the meaning of the three ranks of worthies; second, it renders the three ranks of worthies in other sūtras pointless; third, it creates confusion in the text and meaning of this sūtra, by naming the abidings, practices, and pariṇāmanās with the meaning of the grounds; fourth, why not explain them collectively and separately within a single heaven? That they span four heavens surely has symbolic significance. One knows from this that such a claim severely contradicts doctrine and reason; hence it says: "Mind-generation in the assembly of the abidings is definitely the perfection of faith," and so on. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "'Being born into the Tathāgata's family' is naturally explained in terms of understanding" onwards: this is the second, the refutation. That [master] says: "Since the text says, 'At the very moment of first generating the mind, one straightaway realizes right awakening,' it should be the initial ground. Furthermore, the sūtra below says, 'Because one is born into the vast family of the Tathāgata, one can give birth to the family of all Buddhas of the three periods of time, permanently sever all webs of doubt, and completely eliminate all obstacles.' If it were not the initial ground, how could it be so? How could one who has long habituated in avidyā, upon merely generating the mind for once, immediately accomplish great wisdom, being able to know all Buddha-Tathāgatas of the past attaining equal and right awakening up to nirvāṇa, able to have faith in all the good roots of all Buddhas of the future, able to know all the wisdom of all Buddhas of the present, and immediately able to shake all worlds, and so forth? If one claims that without setting boundaries one can accomplish this, why do [ordinary people] now not generate it? Having generated it, why are they unable to do so? By this reasoning, one should know it is generating through realization." The Explication states: Within that master's interpretation there are three sections: first, the initial thesis; second, from "how could one who has long habituated" onwards, citing the text to cross-examine; third, from "if one claims that without setting boundaries" onwards, granting the premise to refute in terms of dharmatā. The Commentary's text also contains three parts, but only resolves the first two. Now for the first, resolving his first initial thesis. He holds that because of "being born into the family", it is called mind-generation through realization; now we distinguish that "being born into the family" is not the same, hence it is not realization. Although he cites four lines, now only one is resolved; the rest may be understood by analogy. Let us first resolve "being born into the family": there are six kinds of being born into the family; as in the "Entry into the Dharmadhātu Chapter", being born into the family is also discussed before the ten abidings. Although the word "family" is the same, its meanings differ: how could birth through understanding be the same as birth through realization? Birth through understanding is birth into the family of bodhicitta; birth through realization is birth into the family of tathatā—is this not different? If this meaning is established, the rest are all established; therefore the rest are not resolved. If one were to resolve the remaining three: once birth through understanding is accepted, why could one not give birth to the family of Buddhas of the three periods, sever all webs of doubt, and eliminate all obstacles? Furthermore, what he initially said—that at the very moment of first generating the mind one straightaway realizes right awakening, established from the start as the meaning of the initial ground—has already been extensively explained in the preceding chapter, and thus is not resolved here. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "If one says: having long habituated in avidyā" onwards: this is the second, resolving his citation of the text to cross-examine. He cited four lines; now it is resolved in two sections. First, resolving "having long habituated in avidyā", the text can be understood. Later, from "If one says: how could..." onwards, the third resolves knowing the dharmas of the Buddhas of the three periods of time. This comes from the sixth chapter of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], the "Chapter on the Nature of the Tathāgata"—which is the "Chapter on the Four Reliances" in the southern edition—stating: "There are four kinds of persons who can protect the true Dharma, establish the true Dharma, and keep the true Dharma in mind, who can greatly benefit and have compassion for the world, acting as a refuge for the world and bringing peace and happiness to humans and devas. What are the four? There is a person who appears in the world endowed with the nature of defilement; this is called the first. A srotāpanna is called the second. An anāgāmin is called the third. An arhat is called the fourth. What is meant by being endowed with the nature of defilement? If there is a person who can receive and uphold the prohibitive precepts, is complete in deportment, establishes the true Dharma, understands the text and meaning from what they heard from the Buddha, and explains it in detail for others—namely that having few desires and having many desires is not the path, expounding broadly as in the Eight Awakenings of Great Beings—and if there is someone who commits a transgression, instructs them to disclose, repent, and eliminate it, skillfully knowing the secret dharmas practiced through upāya by the bodhisattvas; this is called an ordinary person, not the eighth person. The eighth person is not called an ordinary person; they are called a bodhisattva, not a Buddha." The Explication states: Master Huiyuan also referred to them as persons of lineage, understanding, and practice, not those who have ascended to the grounds. Since this person of the initial reliance, while being completely bound, can know the secret dharmas, why say that the ten abidings cannot know them? If the preceding meaning is established, what doubt can there be about shaking the worlds? The third section, granting the premise to refute in terms of dharmatā, is easy in text and principle, so the Commentary does not resolve it. The intention is: here it is not solely that without setting boundaries one can immediately achieve this; one must also investigate painstakingly for a long time to reach this rank. How could one pose such an unreasonable objection?