大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 59.3

59.3

疏「然論兼結文總分三段」者，其結一文，即疏科經，即前具足諸苦觀初，以約十二緣明苦故。總科云文分為二：先別明緣相、後「如是眾生」下結成妄苦。就前方開為二：初明前際三支、後辨中後九支。今論乃於中後九中，籠取結文分為三段。若直就經文，此下兼第三，彼二顛倒觀總應分四：一示九支緣相；二「如是眾生」下，結成妄苦；三「是中皆空」下，明緣體空；四取彼二顛倒經文，結成迷惑。其第四段是第三觀，今為順論，就前三段開初一為二，合後半及第二為一，以第三為一，故亦有三。就疏之中文分三段：一列三名、二「言自相」下釋三名、三隨文釋。二中言「同相者釋有二義」者，初即遠公義、二即今疏正意。於中四：一正明。二「猶如」下，引例釋尋常自相共相證成，則自相全同同相，寬狹不等，此唯約因緣故狹，彼通有為故寬。然緣起過患，即是同無常等。三「是則現在」下，結成隱顯。未來隱自相顯同相者，令厭當果、絕現因故。四「此釋順論」下，引論證成。

Regarding the Commentary's statement: 'However, the Śāstra combines the concluding passage and divides it into three sections in total': the concluding passage is the Commentary's sectioning of the sūtra—that is, the beginning of the previous contemplation of possessing all sufferings, because it clarifies suffering in terms of the twelve links. The general outline says the text is divided into two: first, individually clarifying the characteristics of the conditions; second, from 'Such sentient beings...' onward, concluding as false suffering. Regarding the former, it is initially divided into two: first, clarifying the three branches of the prior limit; second, distinguishing the nine middle and later branches. Now, within the middle and later nine, the Śāstra includes the concluding passage and divides it into three sections. If one proceeds directly by the sūtra text, this down through the third—the contemplation of those two inversions—should be divided into four in total: 1. Showing the characteristics of the nine conditions; 2. from 'Such sentient beings...' onward, concluding as false suffering; 3. from 'Among these all are empty...' onward, clarifying the emptiness of the conditions' essence; 4. taking the sūtra text on those two inversions to conclude as delusion. The fourth section is the third contemplation. Now, in order to accord with the Śāstra, regarding the previous three sections, it opens the first into two, combines the latter half and the second into one, and takes the third as one, so there are also three. Within the Commentary, the text is divided into three sections: 1. Listing the three names; 2. from 'Concerning self-characteristic...' onward, explaining the three names; 3. explaining according to the text. In the second, 'concerning common characteristic, the explanation has two meanings': the first is Master Yuan's meaning; the second is the present Commentary's primary intent. Within this are four points: 1. Directly clarifying it. 2. From 'Just as...' onward, citing an analogy to explain the ordinary self-characteristic and common characteristic to verify and establish it: self-characteristic completely corresponds to common characteristic, while their breadths differ; this [one] is narrow because it only pertains to causes and conditions, while that [other] is broad because it pervades the conditioned. However, the faults of dependent origination are identical with impermanence and so forth. 3. From 'This then is the present...' onward, concluding on the concealed and revealed: concealing the self-characteristic and revealing the common characteristic in the future is meant to cause revulsion toward future fruits and sever present causes. 4. From 'This explanation accords with the Śāstra...' onward, citing the Śāstra for verification.