大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 55.15

55.15

疏「第二釋難所以」中，疏文有二：先總明所以、二隨文釋。初中即是論意，論云行者，即牒前菩薩行。事者，即牒前地事。義住者，語倒，應言住義。故疏云「由住微妙深義」。深義，即義大妙理也。疏「偈中初二句」下，隨文解釋。疏「難得難證故」者，論經云「難得」，論釋云「難得者難證故」，即以證釋得。今疏經論雙牒耳。以論經有難字及難得字，今經但有一難字，故雙牒彼經論。論經偈云「微難見離念，非心地難得，境界智無漏，若聞則迷悶。」疏「難得有四」下，釋別。於中有三：初釋對劣彰深，初之二句；二「既非四心」下，釋第三句；三「末句云」下，釋第四句。初中，一「非聞慧境」者，有二義：一非所知境、二非分齊境，聞慧之中無此相故。論釋聞慧云「麁事不須思惟。謂教法麁事，聞慧能得故。」二思慧則可了見於心。三世間之修未忘念慮，故並非之。問：三慧皆是世間，何以就修偏云世間？答：有二義故。一修有真偽，真修似於正證，故不揀之；二報生識智亦是修慧，今取世間之修耳。疏「四超心地」中，疏文有四：一以論釋經、二「謂變易」下疏釋論、三「知無常」等釋經心地之言、四「又此善得」下重釋論文。二中，言「善得修道智」者，生而即得，不假修習，故名善得，其由生而知之者上也。言無常等，等取苦空無我及常樂我淨，以昔久修無漏因故，變易酬彼名為報生。言「以非照實」者，釋不能知。夫照實者，忘心體極。今報生識智雖知無常等，不契合故，不能知此。疏「未忘心境名為心地」者，心地之言通有二義：一就體性，如《梵網經》說盧舍那佛心地法門，謂心體包含生成住持。亦如《法華》一切智地斯之謂也。今言心地是所揀者，即是心量法門，故《楞伽》說「覺自心現量，非心之心量，我說為心量，心量即心地故。」疏「二出離於生是無漏故」者，如見道名離生，是無漏故。離生之義前已頻釋，良以論經云「境界智無漏」故。為此會無漏，出生皆是離過，當體得名。生於佛智，就於功能，望他立稱。然二相成，由無漏故能生佛智。

In the Commentary's "second, explaining the reason why it is difficult," the Commentary text has two parts: first, generally elucidating the reason; second, explaining following the text. In the first part, it reflects the treatise's intention: when the treatise says "practice," it repeats the preceding bodhisattva practice; "matters" repeats the preceding matters of the bhūmis; "abiding in meaning" is inverted phrasing and should say "meaning of abiding." Therefore the Commentary says: "because of abiding in the subtle and profound meaning." "Profound meaning" is the wondrous principle of the greatness of meaning. From the Commentary's "The first two lines in the verse..." onward, it explains following the text. Regarding the Commentary's "because it is difficult to attain and difficult to realise": the treatise-sūtra says "difficult to attain," and the treatise's explanation says, "'difficult to attain' means difficult to realise," which explains "attaining" by means of "realising." Now the Commentary cites both the sūtra and the treatise. Because the treatise-sūtra contains the character "difficult" as well as the characters "difficult to attain," whereas the present sūtra has only the single character "difficult," it therefore cites both that sūtra and the treatise. The verse in the treatise-sūtra says: "Subtle, difficult to see, free from thoughts, / Not the ground of mind, difficult to attain; / The cognition of the realm is undefiled (anāsrava); / If heard, one would be bewildered and confounded." Under the Commentary's "difficult to attain has four [meanings]," it explains the specifics. There are three parts therein: first, explaining the contrast with the inferior to reveal the profound in the first two lines; second, from "Since it is not the four minds..." onward, explaining the third line; third, from "The final line says..." onward, explaining the fourth line. In the first part, first, "not the domain of wisdom arisen from hearing" has two meanings: first, it is not the knowable domain; second, it is not the delimited domain, because within wisdom arisen from hearing there is no such characteristic. The treatise explains wisdom arisen from hearing: "Coarse matters do not require reflection, meaning that the coarse matters of the doctrinal teachings can be attained by wisdom arisen from hearing." Second, wisdom arisen from reflection can be clearly seen in the mind. Third, mundane cultivation has not yet forgotten thoughts and deliberation, and therefore both are excluded. Question: All three wisdoms are mundane; why, regarding cultivation, is it specifically said to be mundane? Answer: Because of two meanings: first, cultivation has the genuine and the counterfeit; genuine cultivation resembles direct realisation, so it is not excluded; second, the consciousness and wisdom of karmic retribution are also wisdom arisen from cultivation, and here only mundane cultivation is taken. Under the Commentary's "fourth, transcending the ground of mind," the Commentary text has four parts: first, explaining the sūtra by means of the treatise; second, from "meaning transformation..." onward, the Commentary explaining the treatise; third, "knowing impermanence" and so forth explaining the sūtra's words "ground of mind"; fourth, from "Furthermore, this 'well attained'..." onward, re-explaining the treatise text. In the second part, the statement "well attaining the wisdom of the path of cultivation" means that it is attained upon birth without requiring cultivation and practice, hence it is called "well attained," just as one who knows by birth is superior. Stating "impermanence and so forth" includes suffering, emptiness, non-self, as well as permanence, bliss, self, and purity; because of having long cultivated undefiled causes in the past, the transformation body answering to them is called retribution-born. The statement "because of not illuminating reality" explains the inability to know. For illuminating reality involves forgetting the mind and realizing the ultimate; now, although retribution-born consciousness and wisdom know impermanence and so forth, because they do not tally with it, they cannot know this. Regarding the Commentary's "not having forgotten mind and objects is called the ground of mind": the phrase "ground of mind" generally has two meanings: first, in terms of essence, as the Brahmajāla-sūtra speaks of Vairocana Buddha's Dharma-gate of the ground of mind, meaning that the essence of the mind contains, produces, and sustains—this is also like what the Lotus Sūtra calls the "ground of all-knowledge." What is now called the ground of mind that is excluded refers to the Dharma-gate of the mind's measure; hence the Laṅkāvatāra says: "Awakening to the mind's own manifest measure, / The measure of the mind that is not mind, / I teach as the measure of the mind; / For the measure of the mind is indeed the ground of mind." Regarding the Commentary's "second, departing from arising is undefiled": as the path of seeing is called departing from arising because it is undefiled. The meaning of departing from arising has already been explained frequently before; this is truly because the treatise-sūtra states "the cognition of the realm is undefiled." For this reason, harmonising with "undefiled," arising is entirely departing from faults, deriving its name from its intrinsic essence. Producing the Buddha's wisdom is in terms of function, establishing its designation with respect to the other. Yet the two are mutually accomplished: because of being undefiled, it is able to produce the Buddha's wisdom.