大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 42.6

42.6

第十菩薩。疏「故梵本第四句云於不思何思」者，此是《刊定》引梵本證第四句亦為標章，成於晉經所思不可思義。今疏取其所引，亦成第四句為總結義，謂於不思議之法不應思議。「以一真心」下，總結難思之相。文明可知。疏「次四釋不可見」等者，若順晉經，四皆標章，釋亦分四。前二則同三一偈釋所聞不可聞，四二偈釋所思不可思。今不依此。疏「執石為寶」者，《涅槃》春池喻中，入水求珠，競執草木瓦石，各各自謂得瑠璃寶，歡喜持出乃知非真，亦自誑也。又《莊嚴經論》說：有人見雹，謂是瑠璃，收之瓶內，皆悉成水。後見真瑠璃，亦謂為雹，棄而不取。世人皆爾，不應取而取、應取而不取也。疏「又以量無量取則墮斷常」者，此有二意：謂以量取則墮於斷、以無量取則墮於常；二者若以常取則墮於斷、若以斷取則墮於常。故《勝鬘經》云「修一切常者，墮於斷見。修一切斷者，墮於常見。如步屈蟲，要因前足得移後足。修斷常者亦復如是，要因斷常。」第三住中已廣分別。疏「今初，非色現色」者，此有三釋：一依體現用，與無邊不同。二「又色即空」下，事理相即，妙即無邊。色即是空，已為妙色，色空相即離空有邊。三「又淨識所現」下，約事事無礙方為妙色，亦是邊即無邊，無邊乃廣，如初無邊，淨識所現即唯心所現門，空色相融即法性融通門，此二即事事無礙之因也。疏「後二偈淨空現色喻」下，疏文有二：一正釋經文。言「此即見中絕思議」者，以古人將後二偈明所思不可思，今明不思遍上三段，故指此中身業中不思也。下指語中不思亦然。二「問：二喻」下，問答料揀。於中有二：先問、後答。問中言上經者，即初偈法說之文。前經亦有，今只要此亦違諸論，即《瑜伽》、《唯識》等。疏「古德云」下，第二答。答中三：一即賢首答、二苑公破、三疏會釋。今初，自有二意：一二喻意同、二「亦可」下二喻旨別。二「有云」下，即苑公破師。於中五：一引教反問；二「若執佛果唯如如」下，定師所立；三「無漏蘊界」下，以義反質；四「亦違」下，引文正破；五「此義具如」下，指教證成，成師非正。於前二中，言「唯有如如」等，即《金光明》亦梁《攝論》第十三。本論云「自性身者是如來法身」，釋論云「唯有如如智獨存說名法身」，又云「身以依止為義」。何法為依止？本論云「於一切法自在依止」，故釋論云「謂十種自在」。乃至云「云何此法依止？法身不離清淨及圓智。智即如如，如如即智。」故除實教，蘊界未離斷常之見。疏「具如智慧莊嚴經說」者，此引本是賢首證成摩尼隨映等喻。此經亦名度一切諸佛境界智嚴經一卷，在王舍城耆闍崛山頂說。如來放光，一切菩薩雲集，瞻仰佛。於山頂法界宮殿上，起大寶蓮華師子之座，無量摩尼寶宮殿等。於摩尼座中出偈。上取意引。次文殊師利問：「無生無滅其相云何？」佛答：「不生不滅即是如來。文殊師利！譬如大地瑠璃所成，帝釋毘闍延宮殿供具等影現其中。閻浮提人見瑠璃地諸宮殿影，合掌供養燒香散華，『願我得生如是宮殿，我當遊戲如帝釋』等。彼諸眾生不知此地是宮殿影，乃布施持戒修諸功德，為得如是宮殿果報。文殊師利！如此宮殿本無生滅，以地淨故影現其中。彼宮殿影亦有亦無，不生不滅。文殊師利！眾生見佛亦復如是，以其心淨故見佛身，佛身無為，不生不滅、不起不盡、非色非非色、不可見非不可見、非世間非非世間、非心非非心。以眾生心淨見如來身，散華燒香種種供養，『願我當得如是色身』，布施持戒作諸功德，為得如來微妙身故。如是文殊師利！如來神力出現世間，令諸眾生得大利益，如影如像隨眾生見。」次舉如日光無心普照喻，謂先照高山等，隨其所照而有種種。次云「文殊師利！如大海中有摩尼珠，名滿一切眾生所願。安置幢上，隨眾生所須，彼摩尼珠無心意識。如來無心意識亦復如是，不可測量、不可對、不可得、不可說，除過患、除無明，不實不虛、非常非不常、非光明非不光明、非世間非不世間」等，廣歷諸非。結云「文殊師利！如來清淨住大慈幢，隨眾生所樂，現種種身說種種法。」釋曰：大意皆以體無生滅不礙生滅，如非色約體、非不色約用等。次又舉谷響無實喻，次後即有虛空喻云「文殊師利！如虛空平等無下中上，如來平等亦復如是。眾生自見有上中下，如來不作下中上意。何以故？如來法身平等，離心意識，無分別故。文殊師利，一切諸法悉皆平等。」乃至云「若得法性則無希望」等。又云「若眾生著一切法，則起煩惱，不得菩提。」文殊問云：「云何得菩提？」佛答：「無根無處。」文殊重徵，佛言：「身見為根，不真實思惟為處。文殊師利！如來智慧與菩提等，與一切法等，是故無根無處是得菩提。」又云「文殊師利！如來不動名如如實。如如實者，不見此岸、不見彼岸，則見一切法。見一切法稱為如來。又菩提者，是不破句。不破句者，即無相句。無相句者，即如實。」下即廣釋大意，皆以遮過為不破、顯實為句。又云「以從本來不生不滅而為真實故。」又云「菩提者，以行入無行。以行者緣一切善法，無行者不得一切善法。」又云「無生無滅者，不起心意識，不思惟分別。是故我說見十二因緣即是見法，見法者即是見佛。如是見者名不思議。」又云「云何行菩薩行？答：不行不生不滅是行菩薩行」，下亦廣釋。後校量功德云「假使諸眾生，皆悉生人道，悉發菩提心，為求一切智。如是諸菩薩，皆作大施主，以種種供具，供養無數佛。并及諸菩薩，緣覺與聲聞，乃至入滅度，各起七寶塔，高至百由旬，種種寶嚴飾。若人持此經，或說一句偈，出過此功德，無量無有邊。以此經所說，無相法身故。」釋曰：上已具略經文。其瑠璃地喻眾生心，影喻佛身，即色即非色。摩尼珠喻則同此經。空無下中上，亦同此經淨空現色。故賢首意，證唯如如及如如智。苑公誤引於和尚之引，故略具出。疏「然上二解」下，第三疏為會釋，意在雙存，二義融即耳。於中有八：一總會。二「攝末從本」下，收賢首義。三「既所現即如」下，收苑公義。四「然如外無法」下，假以苑公重難。意云：既如收法更無所遺，何言機感現色無盡？五「萬法即如」下，為賢首通。由萬法如，實無所現，故正現時亦唯如矣。此即疏家立理收賢首也。六「如色相即有無交徹」者，正融前二。七「若定執」下，雙彈前執。八「故今二喻」下，出有無無礙之旨以釋喻文。言「無即但是無他」者，此借《俱舍論》意以會二喻別理。以古《俱舍》釋無為云「無為非因果」，唐三藏云：「無為是能作因，何得言非因？無為是離繫果，豈得言非果？」故新譯云「無為無因果」，謂無餘五因、無餘四果，故云無耳。所以總云非，即非其自體無，即乃是無他故。非無二言，理則懸隔，今借此言用之。摩尼現色，喻自受用身，有其根本色，但無青黃等異，青黃等異隨機映生。虛空以喻法性身，虛空本非色法，豈同摩尼？上顯二喻別相，即是顯文。從「此二不二」下，正明融會，即出經意。故下經云「下但引此文以證後義，以扶法相」者，不許無色故，有義文顯。如苑公難中，空色相融以為真身。亦繫表之談，可以雙摧二執。疏「故以聲取是行邪道，若離聲取未免斷無」者，結成上義。上句即《金剛經》意「若以色見我，以音聲求我，是人行邪道，不能見如來。」後句即兜率偈讚意，故偈云「色身非是佛，音聲亦復然，亦不離色聲，見佛神通力。」天鼓無心，〈出現〉當辨。疏「若依權教」等者，本影四句即如玄談。若依此宗，四句皆用知一切法即心自性，故質亦自心。

Tenth Bodhisattva. In the commentary, "Therefore the fourth line of the Sanskrit text reads: 'In that which is unthinkable, what is there to think?'": this is Master Kanding quoting the Sanskrit text to substantiate that the fourth line also serves to state the thesis, establishing the Jin translation’s meaning that what is thought of is unthinkable. The present commentary adopts what he cited, also establishing that the fourth line bears the meaning of a summary conclusion—namely, that one should not conceptualize or think about phenomena that are inconceivable. From "By means of the one true mind" onward, it summarizes the characteristics of what is difficult to conceive. The wording of the text is self-evident. In the commentary, "The next four [verses] explain 'cannot be seen'" and so forth: if one accords with the Jin translation, all four state theses, and their explanation is likewise divided into four. The first two would be like the three [gāthās] where one verse explains that what is heard cannot be heard, and the four [gāthās] where two verses explain that what is thought cannot be thought. Here we do not follow this. In the commentary, "grasping a stone as a jewel": in the parable of the spring pool in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, those who enter the water in search of a pearl vie to grasp grass, wood, tiles, and stones, each person thinking for themselves that they have obtained a vaiḍūrya gem; rejoicing and bringing it out, they only then realize it is not genuine, and thus they have deceived themselves. Furthermore, the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra states that someone saw hail, thought it was vaiḍūrya, and collected it in a jar, whereupon it all turned into water. Later, upon seeing genuine vaiḍūrya, they also thought it was hail, discarded it, and did not take it. Worldly people are all like this: they grasp what should not be grasped, and do not grasp what should be grasped. In the commentary, "Furthermore, grasping it as limited or unlimited leads to falling into annihilationism or eternalism": this has two meanings. First, grasping it as limited leads to falling into annihilationism, while grasping it as unlimited leads to falling into eternalism. Second, if one grasps it as eternal, one falls into annihilationism; if one grasps it as annihilated, one falls into eternalism. Therefore the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra says: "Those who cultivate all things as eternal fall into the view of annihilationism. Those who cultivate all things as annihilated fall into the view of eternalism. Just as an inchworm must rely on its front feet in order to move its hind feet, those who cultivate annihilationism or eternalism are also like this: they must rely on annihilationism or eternalism." This has already been analyzed in detail in the [commentary to the] third dwelling. In the commentary, "Now, first: manifesting form that is non-form": this has three explanations. First, manifesting function based on essence, which is not the same as [merely] boundless. Second, from "Furthermore, form is immediately emptiness" onward: phenomenon and principle are mutually identical, and the wondrous is precisely the boundless. Form being immediately emptiness is already wondrous form; form and emptiness being mutually identical is free from the extremes of emptiness and existence. Third, from "Furthermore, that which is manifested by pure consciousness" onward: it is only in terms of the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena that it constitutes wondrous form; this is also the bounded being immediately boundless, and only the boundless is vast, like the initial boundlessness. That which is manifested by pure consciousness is the gate of manifestation by mind alone; the mutual interpenetration of emptiness and form is the gate of the interpenetration of the dharmatā. These two are precisely the causes of the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena. In the commentary, from "The latter two verses on the simile of pure space manifesting form" onward: the text of the commentary has two parts. First, directly explaining the sūtra text. In saying "This refers to the ending of conceptualization within seeing": because past masters took the latter two verses to explain that what is thought cannot be thought, and now it is explained that unthinkability pervades all three preceding sections, it therefore refers here to unthinkability within bodily karma. The subsequent reference to unthinkability within speech karma is likewise so. Second, from "Question: regarding the two similes" onward: sorting through questions and answers. Therein are two parts: first the question, then the answer. The phrase "the earlier sūtra [text]" in the question refers to the text of the teaching in the first verse. It is also found in the preceding sūtra text; here it is simply required that this also contradicts various treatises—namely, the Yogācārabhūmi, Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, and so forth. In the commentary, from "An ancient worthy said" onward: the second part, the answer. In the answer there are three parts: first, Xianshou's answer; second, Master Yuan's refutation; third, the commentary's synthesis and reconciliation. In the first part, there are inherently two meanings: first, the intent of the two similes is the same; second, from "It may also be said" onward, the purports of the two similes are different. In the second part, from "Some say" onward, Master Yuan refutes the master. Therein are five parts: 1. citing teaching to counter with a question; 2. from "If one clings to the Buddha-fruit being solely tathatā" onward, defining what the master established; 3. from "The untainted aggregates and realms" onward, using principle to counter-interrogate; 4. from "It also contradicts" onward, citing texts to directly refute; 5. from "This meaning is fully as stated in" onward, pointing to scriptural authority to corroborate and prove that the master was not correct. Within the first two, the expression "solely possessing tathatā" and so forth refers to the Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra as well as the thirteenth fascicle of the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. The root treatise says: "The essential nature body is the Tathāgata’s dharmakāya." The commentary on the treatise says: "Solely the solitary existence of the cognition of tathatā is designated the dharmakāya." It also says: "'Body' has the meaning of basis." What dharma serves as the basis? The root treatise says: "It is the sovereign basis in relation to all dharmas." Therefore the commentary on the treatise says: "It refers to the ten kinds of sovereignty." Up to its saying: "How does this dharma serve as a basis? The dharmakāya is not separated from purity and consummate cognition. Cognition is precisely tathatā, and tathatā is precisely cognition." Therefore, apart from the ultimate teaching, the aggregates and realms have not yet departed from the views of annihilationism and eternalism. In the commentary, "Fully as stated in the Sarvabuddhaviṣayāvatārajñānālokālaṃkāra-sūtra": this citation was originally Xianshou's corroboration of the similes of the mani jewel reflecting according to conditions, and so forth. This sūtra is also named Sūtra on the Adornment of Wisdom Penetrating the Realm of All Buddhas in one fascicle, spoken atop Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain in Rājagṛha. The Tathāgata emitted light, and all bodhisattvas assembled like clouds, looking up reverently at the Buddha. Above the palace of the dharmadhātu atop the mountain, a great jewel-lotus lion throne and immeasurable mani-jewel palaces arose. From within the mani throne, verses emerged. The above cites the general idea. Next, Mañjuśrī asked: "What is the characteristic of non-arising and non-ceasing?" The Buddha answered: "Non-arising and non-ceasing is precisely the Tathāgata. Mañjuśrī! For example, suppose the great earth were made of vaiḍūrya, and the palaces, offerings, and utensils of Śakra's Vaijayanta were reflected therein. The people of Jambudvīpa, seeing the reflections of the various palaces on the vaiḍūrya ground, would join their palms in worship, burn incense, and scatter flowers, praying: 'May I be born in such a palace, and may I sport like Śakra,' and so forth. Those sentient beings do not know that this ground merely bears the reflections of palaces, and so they practice giving, maintain precepts, and cultivate various merits in order to obtain the retributive reward of such palaces. Mañjuśrī! Such palaces originally have no arising or ceasing; because the ground is pure, reflections appear therein. The reflections of those palaces are both existent and non-existent, neither arising nor ceasing. Mañjuśrī! Sentient beings seeing the Buddha is also just like this: because their minds are pure, they see the Buddha's body. The Buddha's body is unconditioned, neither arising nor ceasing, neither appearing nor ending, neither form nor non-form, neither visible nor invisible, neither worldly nor non-worldly, neither mind nor non-mind. Because sentient beings' minds are pure, they see the Tathāgata's body, scattering flowers, burning incense, and making various offerings, praying: 'May I attain such a physical body,' practicing giving, maintaining precepts, and performing various merits for the sake of attaining the Tathāgata's subtle and wondrous body. Thus, Mañjuśrī, the Tathāgata's spiritual power appears in the world to cause sentient beings to obtain great benefit, like a shadow and like an image, appearing in accordance with what sentient beings see." Next, he brought up the simile of sunlight universally shining without deliberate intention, shining first on high mountains and so forth, with various distinctions according to what is illuminated. Next, it says: "Mañjuśrī! Just as in the great ocean there is a mani jewel named 'Fulfilling All Sentient Beings' Wishes,' which, when placed upon a banner, provides according to what sentient beings require, yet that mani jewel has no mind, intellect, or consciousness. The Tathāgata having no mind, intellect, or consciousness is also like this: immeasurable, peerless, unobtainable, ineffable, eliminating faults, eliminating ignorance, neither real nor unreal, neither eternal nor non-eternal, neither luminous nor non-luminous, neither worldly nor non-worldly," and so forth, extensively going through various negations. It concludes: "Mañjuśrī! The pure Tathāgata abides on the banner of great compassion, manifesting various bodies and preaching various dharmas in accordance with what sentient beings delight in." Explanation: The general meaning is that the essence has no arising and ceasing yet does not obstruct arising and ceasing, just as "non-form" refers to essence while "not non-form" refers to function, and so forth. Next, he also raised the simile of an echo having no reality. Immediately following that, there is the simile of empty space, saying: "Mañjuśrī! Just as empty space is equal, having no lower, middle, or upper, the equality of the Tathāgata is also like this. Sentient beings themselves see upper, middle, and lower, but the Tathāgata does not formulate ideas of lower, middle, or upper. Why is this? The Tathāgata's dharmakāya is equal, free from mind, intellect, and consciousness, and without discrimination. Mañjuśrī, all dharmas are completely equal." Up to: "If one attains the dharmatā, one has no expectations," and so on. It also says: "If sentient beings cling to all dharmas, they give rise to defilements and do not attain bodhi." Mañjuśrī asked: "How does one attain bodhi?" The Buddha answered: "It has no root and no locus." Mañjuśrī questioned again, and the Buddha said: "The view of self is the root; improper reflection is the locus. Mañjuśrī! The Tathāgata's wisdom is equal to bodhi and equal to all dharmas; therefore, having no root and no locus is attaining bodhi." It also says: "Mañjuśrī! The Tathāgata being unmoving is called the reality of tathatā. As for the reality of tathatā, seeing neither this shore nor that shore is seeing all dharmas. Seeing all dharmas is termed the Tathāgata. Furthermore, bodhi is an indestructible phrase. An indestructible phrase is a signless phrase. A signless phrase is suchness." Below, it extensively explains that the general meaning is that negating faults constitutes "indestructible," and revealing reality constitutes the "phrase." It also says: "Because originally non-arising and non-ceasing is reality." It also says: "Bodhi enters non-activity by means of activity. Through activity, one conditions all wholesome dharmas; through non-activity, one cannot grasp any wholesome dharmas." It also says: "Non-arising and non-ceasing means not giving rise to mind, intellect, and consciousness, and not thinking or discriminating. Therefore I say that seeing the twelve links of dependent origination is seeing the Dharma; seeing the Dharma is seeing the Buddha. Seeing in this way is named inconceivable." It also says: "How does one practice the bodhisattva practice? Answer: Not practicing non-arising and non-ceasing is practicing the bodhisattva practice," which is also extensively explained below. Later, evaluating the merit, it says: "Supposing all sentient beings / were entirely born in the human realm, / and all generated bodhicitta, / seeking omniscience; / if all such bodhisattvas / became great donors, / and with various articles of offering / made offerings to countless Buddhas, / as well as bodhisattvas, / pratyekabuddhas, and śrāvakas, / up to their entering extinction, / building for each a seven-jeweled stūpa, / a hundred yojanas in height, / adorned with various jewels; / if someone upholds this sūtra, / or speaks even a single verse, / their merit surpasses this, / immeasurably and boundlessly, / because of what this sūtra explains: / the signless dharmakāya." Explanation: The above has comprehensively summarized the sūtra text. The vaiḍūrya ground illustrates the minds of sentient beings; the reflection illustrates the Buddha's body, which is simultaneously form and non-form. The simile of the mani jewel is identical to this sūtra. The space having no lower, middle, or upper is also identical to this sūtra's manifesting of form in pure space. Therefore, Xianshou's intention was to substantiate solely tathatā and the cognition of tathatā. Master Yuan mistakenly quoted the Preceptor's citation; hence it has been briefly set forth in full. In the commentary, from "However, regarding the above two interpretations" onward: thirdly, the commentary synthesizes and reconciles them, with the intention of preserving both and harmoniously identifying both meanings. Therein are eight points: 1. general reconciliation; 2. from "Subsuming the branch into the root" onward, incorporating Xianshou's meaning; 3. from "Since that which is manifested is immediately suchness" onward, incorporating Master Yuan's meaning; 4. from "However, there are no dharmas outside of suchness" onward, hypothetically posing Master Yuan's renewed objection. The intent is: since suchness gathers all dharmas without leaving anything out, why speak of the manifestation of forms in response to capacities being inexhaustible? 5. From "The myriad dharmas are immediately suchness" onward, resolving this for Xianshou. Because the myriad dharmas are suchness, in truth nothing is manifested; therefore, precisely at the time of manifestation, it is also solely suchness. This is the commentator establishing the principle to incorporate Xianshou. 6. "Suchness and form being mutually identical, existence and non-existence thoroughly interpenetrate": directly harmonizing the previous two. 7. From "If one rigidly clings" onward, mutually critiquing the previous attachments. 8. From "Therefore, the present two similes" onward, drawing out the purport of the non-obstruction of existence and non-existence to explain the text of the similes. The phrase "Non-existence merely means non-existence of others": this borrows the idea from the Abhidharmakośa-śāstra to reconcile the distinct principles of the two similes. Because the old Kośa explained unconditioned dharmas as "unconditioned dharmas are neither cause nor effect," the Tripiṭaka Master of the Tang said: "Unconditioned dharmas are efficient causes; how could one say they are not causes? Unconditioned dharmas are fruits of disjunction; how could one say they are not effects?" Therefore the new translation says "unconditioned dharmas lack cause and effect," meaning they lack the other five causes and lack the other four effects; hence it says "lack." Therefore, generally speaking, "not" means not that its own essence is non-existent, but rather that it lacks others. The two words "not" and "lack" are far apart in principle; here we borrow this phrasing and apply it. The mani jewel manifesting colors illustrates the body of personal enjoyment, which has its fundamental form, but lacks differences such as blue and yellow; the differences of blue, yellow, and so forth arise as reflections in accordance with capacities. Empty space illustrates the dharmatā-body; empty space is originally not a physical form, so how could it be the same as a mani jewel? The above reveals the distinct characteristics of the two similes, which is the manifest text. From "These two are non-dual" onward, it directly clarifies their harmonious synthesis, which brings forth the sūtra's intent. Therefore, the subsequent sūtra text says "Below it merely cites this text to prove the latter meaning, so as to support Dharma-characteristics": because it does not allow for non-form, the textual meaning of existence is evident. As in Master Yuan's objection, the mutual interpenetration of emptiness and form constitutes the true body. This is also a discourse transcending appearances, which can simultaneously shatter both attachments. In the commentary, "Therefore, grasping by sound is walking a heterodox path; if one grasps by departing from sound, one cannot avoid nihilistic non-existence": concluding the above meaning. The first line reflects the meaning of the Vajracchedikā-sūtra: "If one sees me by form, or seeks me by sound, this person walks a heterodox path and cannot see the Tathāgata." The second line reflects the meaning of the verse of praise in Tuṣita, hence the verse says: "The form-body is not the Buddha, and sound is likewise so; yet not departing from form and sound, one sees the Buddha's supernatural power." The intentionless celestial drum will be analyzed in the "Manifestation" chapter. In the commentary, "If according to the provisional teaching" and so forth: the four propositions on archetype and reflection are just as in the overarching discussion. If according to this school, all four propositions serve to know that all dharmas are immediately the mind's own nature; hence the archetype is also one's own mind.