[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) › 56.22 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 56.22 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 56.22 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [56.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56.22) 疏「明知此顯」下，第三結彈昔義。疏「此即雙指」下，疏釋。論言「聖道是體難知故微」者，聖之一字即今經如來大仙，即聖人之道名為聖道。以人取法意在於道，道即地智，故云是體。言「難知故微」者，難知是微所以，亦是微相。該於說證，故下開二義。言「故淨名云」者，即〈菩薩品〉彌勒章中文也。疏「云何難知」下，開章別釋。「口欲辯而辭喪」者，言語道斷故。「心將緣而慮息」者，心行處滅故。前來頻釋。問：既云說時，云何難知？答：有心不能說故。故《淨名》云「其說法者無說無示」，則言而無言矣。疏「上大仙道是所證說」者，牒經第一句為其地體，即論經聖道二字上直就法體以論微妙。今以人顯法，以是佛因，何不微妙？疏「初句即說時難知」者，次第釋上二章也。非念離念，語則非念似南宗義，無念離念似北宗義。釋乃非念同北宗，修得非念故；離念同南宗，本性離故。若二宗相成，由本無念要須離念。方知今此云：何以非念者，由本離念故；言自體無念者，以無緣故。然體無念復有二意：一性淨無念，以心體離念故。今非此義，以此通一切凡小故。二契理無緣都無所得，名為無念，即今所用。若依此義，亦異偏就南宗，故南北圓融方成離念。「由上二」下，結即非念離念二義。疏「求欲證見難證得故」者，以論經但云「難得」，今經云「求見不可得」，得之與見俱約證說，故云求欲證見難可得故。次「以無見無得」下，雙證二經。言無見者，上經精進慧菩薩云：「有見則為垢，此則未為見。遠離於諸見，如是乃見佛。」又善慧菩薩云：「無見說為見，無生說眾生。若見若眾生，了知無體性。」又功德慧菩薩云：「無見即是見，能見一切法。於法若有見，此則無所見。」無得者，智慧菩薩云：「有諍說生死，無諍說涅槃。生死及涅槃，二俱不可得。」真實慧菩薩云：「佛法不可覺，了此名覺法。諸佛如是修，一法不可得。」又云「一切法無住，定處不可得。諸佛住於此，究竟不動搖。」般若宗中，無智亦無得，以無所得故菩薩心無罣礙，諸佛則得菩提。《淨名》天女云：「若有得有證，於佛法中為增上慢。」故無見無得方能證得。得與無得俱絕名言，非離有得而證無得，方為真無得也。亡言亡言。 > From "Clearly one knows that this reveals" onward in the commentary, it thirdly concludes by refuting the former interpretation. From "This dual pointer refers to" onward, the commentary explains. Regarding the treatise stating, "The noble path is the essence, difficult to know, and therefore subtle": the single word "noble" corresponds to "Tathāgata, Great Immortal" in the present sūtra—that is, the path of the noble person is called the noble path. Because the person is taken to indicate the Dharma, the intention rests on the path; the path is the stage-cognition, and hence it is called the essence. Regarding "difficult to know and therefore subtle": "difficult to know" is the reason for subtlety, and is also the mark of subtlety. It encompasses both exposition and realization; hence, below two meanings are opened up. As for the citation, "Therefore Vimalakīrti states," this is the text from the Maitreya section of the 'Bodhisattva Chapter'. From "Why is it difficult to know?" onward, it opens the sections for distinct explanation. "The mouth wishes to argue, yet words are lost" because the path of language is cut off. "The mind is about to take conditions, yet thoughts cease" because the place of mental activity is extinguished. This has been explained frequently above. Question: Since it speaks of the time of exposition, how can it be difficult to know? Answer: It is because possessing mind renders one incapable of speaking. Therefore the Vimalakīrti says, "Those who explain the Dharma are without exposition and without demonstration"; thus, speaking is non-speaking. The commentary's "The aforementioned path of the Great Immortal is what is realized and spoken" takes the first verse-line of the sūtra as the stage-essence, corresponding directly to the two words "noble path" in the treatise-sūtra, discussing subtlety directly in terms of the essence of the Dharma. Now, using the person to reveal the Dharma, because it is the Buddha's cause, how could it not be subtle? The commentary's "The first line is difficult to know at the time of exposition" sequentially explains the preceding two sections. Regarding non-thought and freedom from thought: verbally, "non-thought" seems like the doctrine of the Southern Lineage, while "without thought and freedom from thought" seems like the doctrine of the Northern Lineage. In explanation, non-thought is identical to the Northern Lineage, because non-thought is attained through cultivation; freedom from thought is identical to the Southern Lineage, because the original nature is free from it. If the two lineages complement each other, it is due to the original absence of thought that one must be free from thought. Only then do we understand the present statement: why is it non-thought? Because it is originally free from thought. Stating that the self-essence is without thought is because it is devoid of conditions. However, the self-essence's absence of thought also has two meanings: first, pure by nature and without thought, because the essence of mind is free from thought. Here this meaning is not intended, because it extends universally to all ordinary people and followers of the Small Vehicle. Second, tallying with principle and devoid of conditions, completely without anything to be attained, which is called non-thought; this is what is applied here. According to this meaning, it also differs from exclusively adopting the Southern Lineage; therefore, when North and South are perfectly integrated, only then is freedom from thought accomplished. From "Due to the two above" onward, it concludes with the two meanings of non-thought and freedom from thought. Regarding the commentary's "Seeking and desiring to realize and see, it is difficult to realize and obtain": because the treatise-sūtra merely states "difficult to obtain," while the present sūtra states "seeking to see, it cannot be obtained," both "obtaining" and "seeing" are explained in terms of realization; hence it says that seeking and desiring to realize and see, it is difficult to obtain. Next, from "Through no-seeing and no-attaining" onward, it provides twofold verification from two sūtras. Regarding "no-seeing," earlier in the sūtra Bodhisattva Vīryamati says: "To possess seeing is defilement; this is not yet seeing. Far removed from all views, one thus sees the Buddha." Furthermore, Bodhisattva Sadmati says: "No-seeing is spoken of as seeing, non-arising is spoken of as sentient beings. Whether seeing or sentient beings, understand that they are without self-essence." Furthermore, Bodhisattva Guṇamati says: "No-seeing is precisely seeing, capable of seeing all phenomena. If one has seeing regarding phenomena, this is seeing nothing at all." Regarding "no-attaining," Bodhisattva Prajñāmati says: "With dispute, saṃsāra is spoken of; without dispute, nirvāṇa is spoken of. Saṃsāra and nirvāṇa—both cannot be obtained." Bodhisattva Tattvamati says: "The Buddha-dharma cannot be awakened to; comprehending this is called awakening to phenomena. All buddhas cultivate thus: not a single phenomenon can be obtained." He also says: "All phenomena are without abiding; a definite place cannot be obtained. All buddhas abide in this, ultimately unshakeable." Within the Prajñā lineage, there is neither wisdom nor attainment; because there is nothing to be attained, the bodhisattva's mind is without hindrance, and all buddhas attain bodhi. The goddess in the Vimalakīrti states: "If there is attainment and realization, in the Buddha-dharma that is excessive pride." Therefore, only through no-seeing and no-attaining can one realize and obtain. Both attainment and non-attainment transcend words and speech; it is not by leaving behind attainment that one realizes non-attainment that it counts as true non-attainment. Words are extinguished, words are extinguished! > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 56.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56.21) - [Next: 56.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56.23) - [Up: 56](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.56.22) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.56.22) · Pramāṇa