大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 46.7

46.7

疏「若定以前二為分段」下，第四結彈古義，即《刊定記》釋。疏先敘之，後「則小乘三果」下示其過相。後之三乘通因通果，今為變易，則三果已受變易；變易入無餘竟方始受之，何得三果便受變易？又此三果，非此所知，三果是分段故。言「直往七地」等者，迴小入大，初地已上容受變易，直往菩薩八地已上方受變易。今總為變易故，七地已還非此所知。亦可直往七地已前應受變易，各有二過，疏文影略耳。然分段變易者，《勝鬘經》云「有二種死。何等為二？謂分段死、不思議變易死。分段死者，謂虛偽凡夫。不思議變易死者，謂阿羅漢、辟支佛、大力菩薩意生身，乃至究竟無上菩提。」釋曰：據此明知小乘三果、七地已還，未受變易也。四變易義，前已廣說。疏「亦顯所知之相」者，所知者即下性相，要顯所知方識能知耳。疏「知相知性」下，此中有三：一知相、二知性、三知無障礙。無障礙有二：一上性相無礙；二以性融相重重無礙，即四法界，是此所知。言「無知之知」者，是菩薩能知也。即般若無知，對緣而照耳。疏「又二段中含前五類」等者，謂前以如實知，一一歷前五類之法，在文昭著。今明文中義含前法，故疏具示。疏「自色已上種智已還」者，《大品》略列八十餘科，《大般若》更廣，謂色為首，是五蘊初故，次歷四蘊，次歷十二入、十八界，次眼等觸等所生諸受，次四念住、四諦、四禪、八解脫、陀羅尼、十地、五眼、十力、大慈大悲、四等相好、無忘失法、一切種智、四果菩薩行、無上菩提。釋曰：上即所歷也。疏「現見諸法猶如聚沫」等者，舉五蘊不實破壞之義以難不壞，釋意前已頻有。疏「皆已無得等為少方便」者，疏以無得釋少方便。下經云「以無所得而為方便」。若準《大般若》，亦以無生為方便、無住為方便、無依為方便，皆般若相也。然為方便略有二意：一為入有方便，令有無所得等；二為入空方便，亦不住無得。故今正取為入有方便。疏「亦如上酥無不入」者，《解深密經》歎真實智無不入也。

From the Commentary's "If one definitively takes the first two as fractured…" onward, is the fourth [part], concluding by refuting an ancient interpretation, namely the interpretation of the Kanding ji. The Commentary first recounts it, and from "then the three fruitions of the Hinayāna…" onward, shows the nature of its error. The latter three vehicles pertain commonly to cause and fruit; if taken now as inconceivable transformation, then the three fruitions would already have received transformation; but transformation is received only after entering nirvāṇa without remainder—how could the three fruitions already receive transformation? Furthermore, these three fruitions are not what is known here, because the three fruitions belong to fractured [saṃsāra]. As for "direct entrants up to the seventh ground" and so on: when turning from the Small to enter the Great, those from the first ground and above may receive transformation, but direct-entrant bodhisattvas receive transformation only from the eighth ground and above. Since it is taken comprehensively here as transformation, those up to and including the seventh ground would not be what is known here. Alternatively, direct entrants before the seventh ground would [absurdly] have to receive transformation. Each has two errors, and the Commentary's text only implies them briefly. As for fractured and transformational, the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra says: "There are two kinds of death. What are the two? They are fractured death and inconceivable transformational death. Fractured death refers to delusive ordinary persons. Inconceivable transformational death refers to the mind-made bodies of arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and mighty bodhisattvas, up to ultimate anuttarabodhi." Explanation: Based on this, it is clearly known that the Hinayāna's three fruitions and those up to and including the seventh ground have not yet received transformation. The meaning of the four transformations has already been broadly explained before. As for the Commentary's "It also reveals the characteristics of the object of knowledge", the object of knowledge refers to nature and characteristics below; only when the object of knowledge is revealed can the cognizing subject be recognized. From the Commentary's "Knowing characteristics and knowing nature…" onward, there are three points here: first, knowing characteristics; second, knowing nature; third, knowing non-obstruction. Non-obstruction has two aspects: first, the non-obstruction of nature and characteristics mentioned above; second, using nature to fuse characteristics in manifold non-obstruction, which is the four dharmadhātus and is the object of knowledge here. As for "cognition without cognition", it is the bodhisattva's cognizing subject. That is, prajñā is without cognition, illuminating while confronting conditions. As for the Commentary's "Moreover, within the two sections the previous five categories are subsumed…" and so on, it means that earlier, with knowing in accordance with reality, one traversed the previous five categories of phenomena one by one, which is obvious in the text. Now it clarifies that the meaning in the text subsumes the previous phenomena, so the Commentary shows this fully. As for the Commentary's "From rūpa above to the cognition of all aspects below", the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā briefly lists over eighty categories, and the Mahāprajñāpāramitā is even more extensive: it takes rūpa as the first, because it is the beginning of the five aggregates; next it traverses the four aggregates, then the twelve āyatanas and eighteen dhātus, then the sensations born from eye-contact and so on, then the four smṛtyupasthānas, four truths, four dhyānas, eight vimokṣas, dhāraṇīs, ten grounds, five eyes, ten powers, great kindness and great compassion, the four equanimities, the marks and signs, the unforgotten dharmas, the cognition of all aspects, the bodhisattva practices of the four fruitions, and anuttarabodhi. Explanation: The above is what is traversed. As for the Commentary's "Presently seeing all dharmas like a mass of foam…" and so forth, it cites the meaning of the five aggregates being unreal and disintegrating to object to their being indestructible; the intention of the explanation has already appeared frequently before. As for the Commentary's "All take non-attainment and so forth as a slight upāya", the Commentary explains the slight upāya in terms of non-attainment. The sūtra below says: "With non-attainment as upāya." According to the Mahāprajñāpāramitā, taking non-arising as upāya, taking non-abiding as upāya, and taking non-reliance as upāya are all characteristics of prajñā. However, serving as an upāya has broadly two senses: first, serving as the upāya to enter existence, causing existence to be non-attainment and so forth; second, serving as the upāya to enter emptiness, also not abiding in non-attainment. Hence here it properly takes it as the upāya to enter existence. As for the Commentary's "Also like the finest ghee having nowhere it does not penetrate", the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra praises true cognition as having nowhere it does not penetrate.