大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 46.21

46.21

疏「上所引」下，總顯用文之意，兼結彈古人。疏「若別配屬義成偏近」者，五彈賢首以後十結句科上二十一德之經。彼云「然此所現佛法界身，豈有限量？」今且依下結文，分為十門。於中二：先顯十門之德、後「如是」下正結十門之名。前中，即為十段。然案後結文，少不次第。從初至清淨善根來，超明第十見佛示現不可思議自在神力門。彼約晉經，與今小異，恐尋不曉，會取今經。今經即至功德善根悉已清淨為第一段，神通自在第二已去全依今經。謂第二從色相第一下，却明第一如是信解門。第三獲一切智放大光下，第二觀察正覺門。第四示現色身不思議下，明入智慧門。第五恒以佛日普照法界下，第四入功德海門。第六以大慈悲現不可說無量佛身下，明第七正念現前觀察門。第七以智慧月下，明第五普至虛空智慧門。第八放光明網普照十方下，即第八觀察如來諸業相好門。第九為大法王如日普照下，却明第六如是而知眾生福田門。第十清淨第一離垢光明下，却明第九如是觀佛普現世間門。釋曰：此即賢首解為十門。以其總名收其別義，皆不盡理，故云偏近。況結中不出內德外相，內德不出福智，如何攝得前文諸德？又《刊定記》科為十六三業，而段段之中三業多闕，亦消文不盡，故皆偏近。依今之釋，一句無遺矣。疏「句各一位」者，初信位、二增長是住位、三清淨是行位、四成熟是向位、五調伏是地位。疏「亦稱五號」者，一世尊，二善逝，三如來，四應供，五正遍知。然尋常略舉下三，今加上二，故為五德。疏「有云」下，敘《刊定》破經。二「未必然也」，總非。三「謂初請入」下，出其正理。彼破意云：謂入殿即坐，坐竟方歎，故合迴文。今明初入殿竟，次即歎處請坐，後方受請，於理何失？

In the commentary, from "What is cited above" downward, it generally reveals the purpose of applying the text, and in addition concludes with a criticism of the ancients. In the commentary, "If individually allocated, the meaning becomes biased and narrow": this is the fifth [critique], criticizing Xianshou for using the ten concluding phrases below to analyze the sūtra text of the twenty-one virtues above. He said: "However, this manifested dharmadhātu-kāya of the Buddha, how could it have limits? Now, relying provisionally on the concluding text below, it is divided into ten gates. Within this there are two: first, revealing the virtues of the ten gates; next, from 'thus' downward, formally concluding with the names of the ten gates. In the former, there are then ten sections. However, examining the concluding text below, it is slightly out of order. From the beginning down to 'pure roots of good', it leaps ahead to clarify the tenth gate, 'seeing the Buddha manifest inconceivable sovereign spiritual powers'. That was based on the Jin sūtra, which differs slightly from the present one; fearing that readers searching it would not understand, I reconcile it with the present sūtra. In the present sūtra, down to 'virtues and roots of good are all completely purified' is the first section; from the second, sovereign spiritual powers, onwards it entirely accords with the present sūtra. That is, the second, from 'foremost physical marks' downward, conversely clarifies the first, 'thus having faith and understanding' gate. The third, 'attaining all-knowledge and emitting great light' downward, is the second, 'observing right awakening' gate. The fourth, 'manifesting an inconceivable physical form' downward, clarifies the 'entering the gate of wisdom'. The fifth, 'constantly illuminating the dharmadhātu with the sun of the Buddha' downward, is the fourth, 'entering the ocean of virtues' gate. The sixth, 'with great compassion manifesting ineffable, immeasurable Buddha bodies' downward, clarifies the seventh, 'observing with correct mindfulness manifest before one' gate. The seventh, 'with the moon of wisdom' downward, clarifies the fifth, 'universally reaching empty space through wisdom' gate. The eighth, 'emitting a net of light universally illuminating the ten directions' downward, is the eighth, 'observing the Tathāgata's karmic marks' gate. The ninth, 'being the great Dharma King, universally illuminating like the sun' downward, conversely clarifies the sixth, 'thus knowing the fields of merit of sentient beings' gate. The tenth, 'pure foremost light free from defilement' downward, conversely clarifies the ninth, 'thus observing the Buddha universally manifest in the world' gate." Explanation: This is Xianshou's explanation into ten gates. Because his general titles subsume their particular meanings, they do not exhaust the principle; thus it is called biased and narrow. Moreover, the concluding [passages] do not go beyond internal virtues and external marks, and internal virtues do not go beyond merit and wisdom—how could they encompass all the preceding virtues? Furthermore, the *Kanding ji* analyzes it into sixteen [sets of] three karmas, yet in section after section the three karmas are mostly missing, and it also fails to fully explain the text; hence both are biased and narrow. According to the present explanation, not a single phrase is omitted. In the commentary, "each phrase is one stage": the first is the stage of faith; the second, increasing, is the stage of abodes; the third, purification, is the stage of practices; the fourth, maturation, is the stage of dedications; the fifth, taming, is the stage of grounds. In the commentary, "also called the five titles": first, World-Honoured One; second, Sugata; third, Tathāgata; fourth, Arhat; fifth, Samyaksaṃbuddha. Usually, one briefly lists the lower three, but here the upper two are added, thus making five virtues. In the commentary, from "Some say" downward, relates the *Kanding*’s refutation of the sūtra. Second, "It is not necessarily so", generally rejects it. Third, from "That is, first requesting him to enter" downward, presents the correct principle. The intention of their refutation was: one enters the palace and immediately sits down, and only after having sat down does one praise; therefore the text ought to be transposed. Here we clarify: having first entered the palace, next one praises the place and requests him to sit, and only afterwards does he accept the request—what flaw is there in this principle?