[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 47.18 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 47.18 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 47.18 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [47.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47.18) 疏「今初，若直就經文」下，先按經釋、後「若取論」下依論勢釋。前中，先釋文、後「故收前後」下攝為體性。前中，先別釋三句、後「然總論品內」下總顯難思。前三句中，釋第二句自有四義：一以體釋不思議、以用釋大；二雙約體用釋不思議；三體用雙融釋不思議；四約三大相融釋不思議。疏「即是廣大不顛倒心」者，四心之二，至第八迴向當廣引釋。救護眾生，即廣大心。離眾生相，即不顛倒心。上釋救護等竟。次「迴向是行」下，以第一別名對總迴向以辨得名。三「明知」下，結彈古義，以救護言為所迴向故。四「將墜」下，別釋救護二字。第二不壞迴向，從所迴善根得名。三通能所迴，悉皆等佛。四從所迴向立名。五從所成德。六從所迴。七通能所。八亦通能所善根，皆同如故。第九從能迴向心得名。第十亦通能所迴及所向法界立名。疏「二通論一一中」下，疏文有五：一總摽有三；二「此三各有二義」下，明成三之因；三「所以」下，立三所以；四「又此三者其必相資」下，融通三相；五結成圓融。今初，可知。疏「此三各有二義」者，第二成三之因。言「必由眾生」者，若無眾生，菩薩不修行故。即由上義，故此修善屬於眾生，是彼之分，如父資財而子有分。言「餘二流故」者，同上必由眾生而成。為菩提故、為實際故而修其善，即是二流。從「菩提分故」下，同上是眾生之分。一切萬行皆菩提分，分亦因義。皆稱實際，即實際分耳。疏「二凡是菩薩」下，前就境明，此就人說。又前以人從法，此則攝法從人。又前是順釋，此是反顯。疏「所以要須三者」下，第三立三所以。於中二：先取三類、後通約所成。前中有十文，有標、列、釋、結。疏「一依三法者」下，釋也。三法，即《智論》意，亦三般若及三大也，文中但出三大。真性實際即實相般若、觀照即觀照般若、資成即是眷屬般若，以不同三般若名，又不攝五名，故略不配耳。疏「二滅三道」，即三雜染，謂煩惱道、業道、苦道也。疏「三淨三聚」者，故《法集經》云「若菩薩捨於三聚迴向之心，菩薩不應與彼共住。」疏「四顯三佛性」，即《涅槃》意，以第一義空是正因性故。了因雖通萬行成於菩提，究竟了故，了了見佛性故。緣因亦通萬行成於菩提，對上正因，今以菩提照了故，以向生為緣耳。疏「五成三寶」，諸佛所師所謂法也，以法真常體性離故。以眾生同體，故我向之。次四但列不釋，下但云如次配之。六法身即所證之實際故，報身即能證菩提故，化身為眾生故。七證實無惑故為斷德，菩提是智、化生是恩，不在言也。八言「實相菩提」者，下經云「譬如世界有成壞，而其虛空不增減。一切諸佛成菩提，成與不成無差別。」合中，上句即實智菩提，下句即實相菩提。《淨名》云「菩提者不可以身得、不可以心得，寂滅是菩提，滅諸相故。」「九證三涅槃」，於中先正釋，後「若依地論」下，結彈地論。《地論》但說性淨及方便淨，方便淨即真淨。今明真淨，即圓滿淨。萬德俱圓、相累俱寂，故云圓淨。迹盡雙樹，機盡應移，故是方便淨也。疏「十安住三種」下，此義深難，又復最後，故偏釋之。釋解脫中，具有三義：一自解脫；二解脫他，若自有縛，能解他縛，無有是處；三化眾生，即作用解脫。餘如前後說。疏「以斯」下結例。先結前、後「若立三種菩提」下例釋。於中，先例三菩提心。即《起信》云：信成就發心者，發於三心：一是直心，正念真如法故，即向實際。二者深心，樂修一切諸善行故，即向菩提。三者大悲心，救護一切苦眾生故，即向眾生。則亦用此十而成彼三。後「又此十內」下，展轉相成，成百三門，可知。 > Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "Now first, if one directly relies on the sūtra text": it first explains relying on the sūtra, and afterwards, under "if one takes the treatise's approach", it explains according to the flow of the treatise. In the former, it first explains the text, and afterwards, under "therefore, gathering what precedes and follows", it subsumes them into the essential nature. In the former, it first individually explains the three phrases, and afterwards, under "however, generally speaking within the chapter", it generally reveals their unfathomability. Within the first three phrases, the explanation of the second phrase itself has four meanings: first, explaining unfathomability through essence and explaining greatness through function; second, jointly explaining unfathomability in terms of essence and function; third, explaining unfathomability through the mutual interpenetration of essence and function; fourth, explaining unfathomability in terms of the mutual interpenetration of the three greatnesses. As for the commentary's "that is, the vast and non-inverted mind": it is the second of the four minds; when reaching the eighth pariṇāmanā, it will be broadly cited and explained. Rescuing and protecting sentient beings is the vast mind. Freeing oneself from the notion of sentient beings is the non-inverted mind. The above concludes the explanation of rescuing and protecting, etc. Next, under "pariṇāmanā is practice", it contrasts the first distinct name with the general pariṇāmanā to distinguish the derivation of the name. Third, under "clearly knowing", it concludes by criticizing the old interpretation, because the words "rescue and protect" are that which is dedicated. Fourth, under "about to fall", it individually explains the two words "rescue" and "protect". The second, indestructible pariṇāmanā, takes its name from the good roots that are dedicated. The third covers both that which can dedicate and that which is dedicated, all being equal to the Buddhas. The fourth establishes its name from that to which one dedicates. The fifth is from the virtue accomplished. The sixth is from that which is dedicated. The seventh covers both that which dedicates and that which is dedicated. The eighth also covers both the good roots that can dedicate and those that are dedicated, because all are identical with tathatā. The ninth derives its name from the mind that can dedicate. The tenth also establishes its name covering both that which can dedicate and that which is dedicated, as well as the dharmadhātu dedicated toward. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "Second, discussing each generally": the commentary's text has five parts: first, a general indication that there are three; second, under "each of these three has two meanings", clarifying the causes for constituting the three; third, under "the reason why", establishing the rationale for the three; fourth, under "furthermore, these three must necessarily support each other", interpenetrating the three characteristics; fifth, concluding in perfect interpenetration. Now, the first is clear. Regarding the commentary's "each of these three has two meanings": this is the second, the cause for constituting the three. As for saying "must depend on sentient beings": if there were no sentient beings, the bodhisattva would not cultivate practice. Thus, by the above meaning, this cultivation of good belongs to sentient beings and is their share, just as a father has wealth and his son has a share. As for saying "because the remaining two flow \[from it\]": like the above, they are necessarily accomplished depending on sentient beings. Cultivating one's good for the sake of bodhi and for the sake of the bhūtakoṭi are the two flows. From "because they are factors of bodhi" downward: like the above, they are a share of sentient beings. All myriad practices are factors of bodhi; "factor" also means cause. All accord with the bhūtakoṭi, which is simply the share of the bhūtakoṭi. Regarding the commentary's "second, wherever there is a bodhisattva": the former clarified in terms of the objective realm, while this speaks in terms of the person. Furthermore, previously it subordinated person to Dharma, whereas here it subsumes Dharma under the person. Furthermore, previously it was a direct explanation, whereas this is a demonstration by contrast. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "The reason why three are necessarily required": this is the third, establishing the rationale for the three. In this there are two parts: first, taking three categories; afterwards, generally in terms of what is accomplished. In the former there are ten texts, which have a marking, listing, explaining, and concluding. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "first, relying on the three dharmas": this is the explanation. The three dharmas are the sense of the \*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa\*, and also the three prajñās and the three greatnesses; the text only brings forth the three greatnesses. The true nature as the bhūtakoṭi is the prajñā of the real mark; contemplative illumination is the prajñā of contemplation; and providing support is the prajñā of accessories. Because they differ from the names of the three prajñās and also do not subsume the five names, they are omitted and not matched here. Regarding the commentary's "second, extinguishing the three paths": these are the three afflictions, namely the path of defilements, the path of karma, and the path of suffering. Regarding the commentary's "third, purifying the three collections": thus the \*Dharmasaṅgīti-sūtra\* states, "If a bodhisattva abandons the mind of pariṇāmanā of the three collections, a bodhisattva should not dwell together with them." Regarding the commentary's "fourth, manifesting the three Buddha-natures": this is the sense of the \*Nirvāṇa-sūtra\*, because emptiness of the primary truth is the nature as direct cause. Although the revealing cause generally applies to the myriad practices accomplishing bodhi, it is because of ultimate revelation, clearly seeing Buddha-nature. Although the conditioning cause also generally applies to the myriad practices accomplishing bodhi, when contrasted with the direct cause above, here it is because bodhi illuminates, and dedicating toward sentient beings acts as the condition. Regarding the commentary's "fifth, accomplishing the Three Jewels": that which all Buddhas take as teacher is what is called the Dharma, because the true eternity of Dharma has an essential nature free \[from defilement\]. Because sentient beings share an identical essence, I dedicate toward them. The next four are merely listed and not explained, and below it only says to match them in order. Sixth, the dharmakāya is the bhūtakoṭi that is realized, the sambhogakāya is that which can realize bodhi, and the nirmāṇakāya is for the sake of sentient beings. Seventh, realizing reality without confusion is the virtue of severance; bodhi is cognition, and transforming sentient beings is grace, which goes without saying. Eighth, as for "bodhi of the real mark": a later sūtra passage says, "Just as worlds have formation and destruction, / Yet space neither increases nor decreases; / All Buddhas accomplish bodhi, / Accomplished or unaccomplished there is no distinction." In applying this: the preceding line is the bodhi of true cognition; the subsequent line is the bodhi of the real mark. The \*Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa\* says, "Bodhi cannot be attained through the body, nor can it be attained through the mind; quiescence is bodhi, because it extinguishes all marks." Regarding "ninth, realizing the three nirvāṇas": in this, it first directly explains, and afterwards, under "if one relies on the \*Daśabhūmika-śāstra\*", it concludes by criticizing the \*Daśabhūmika-śāstra\*. The \*Daśabhūmika-śāstra\* only speaks of natural purity and purity of upāya; purity of upāya is true purity. Now, clarifying true purity means complete and perfect purity. When the myriad virtues are all complete and the burdens of marks are all tranquil, it is called completely pure. When traces vanish at the twin trees, and conditions are exhausted so responses shift, it is purity of upāya. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "tenth, abiding peacefully in the three": this meaning is profound and difficult, and being the very last, it is explained in particular. In explaining liberation, it possesses three meanings: first, self-liberation; second, liberating others, for if one is bound oneself, that one could untie the bonds of others is impossible; third, transforming sentient beings, which is the liberation of function. The rest is as explained before and after. Regarding the commentary's "with this" downward: concluding by analogy. It first concludes the preceding, and afterwards, under "if one establishes three kinds of bodhi", it explains by analogy. In this, it first draws an analogy with the three bodhicittas. That is, the \*Awakening of Faith\* states: one whose faith is perfected and gives rise to the mind gives rise to three minds: first, the straightforward mind, because of correctly being mindful of the dharma of tathatā, which is dedicating toward the bhūtakoṭi; second, the profound mind, because of delighting in cultivating all good practices, which is dedicating toward bodhi; third, the mind of great compassion, because of rescuing and protecting all suffering sentient beings, which is dedicating toward sentient beings. Thus these ten are also used to accomplish those three. Afterwards, under "moreover, within these ten", their mutual generation producing one hundred and three gates can be understood. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 47.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47.17) - [Next: 47.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47.19) - [Up: 47](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.47.18) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.47.18) · Pramāṇa