大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 60.92

60.92

疏「二自性不成實」下，疏文有四：一總釋名。二「即下三句」下，別釋經文。三「約三世遷滅」下，結示文意。經「從前際生」，即是生義；今非從故，名為不生。「向後際去」，即是滅義；今非向故，名為不滅。亦應不住，不住通於無生無滅。為對生滅是無常義，顯不生滅是無常義，順《淨名》故。四「此中三世約相續門」下，揀門不同。謂諸經論中辨法有二：一相續門者，約就三時以辨一法，當知是法從於過去來向於後世。如人說言：我從生來，向於老去。今是此門，故云非從前際生等。二以三時對別諸法，名生滅門。是則一法隨時為三，三法相望，過去已去、當者方來、現者今住。故引有部「從未來藏入現在」等，則謝往名過。過往背今，稱之為去。在當名未。當起之法，趣現名來。亦可來者是其現義，當法未現名為未來。今名現法，住現相故名為現在，依此門辨無生滅義故。今依前門，故於未來義則可具言：過去已滅、未來未至、現在無住，故無生滅。今依前門，故於未來却名不去。是故結云「二門不同」。

Regarding the commentary's "Second, its own nature is not established as real" and below, the text of the commentary has four parts: First, a general explanation of the name. Second, from "That is, the three lines below" and below, a specific explanation of the sūtra text. Third, from "In terms of transition and cessation across the three time periods" and below, a concluding indication of the text's intended meaning. In the sūtra, "arising from the past extremity" is the meaning of arising; now, because it does not arise from [the past], it is called "non-arising." "Going toward the future extremity" is the meaning of cessation; now, because it does not go toward [the future], it is called "non-cessation." It should also be non-abiding; non-abiding applies both to non-arising and non-cessation. In contrast to arising and cessation being the meaning of impermanence, showing non-arising and non-cessation is [also] the meaning of impermanence, which accords with the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. Fourth, from "Here, the three times are in terms of the approach of continuity" and below, distinguishing the different approaches. That is to say, in the various sūtras and treatises, the discrimination of phenomena is twofold: First, the approach of continuity discriminates a single phenomenon with reference to the three times; one should know that this phenomenon comes from the past and proceeds toward the future life. It is like a person saying: "I have come from birth and am heading toward old age." The present passage adopts this approach, and therefore says "not arising from the past extremity," and so forth. Second, contrasting distinct phenomena by means of the three times is called the approach of arising and cessation. In this case, a single phenomenon becomes three according to time; viewing the three phenomena in relation to each other, the past has already gone, the future is just coming, and the present now abides. Thus the commentary cites the Sarvāstivādins: "entering the present from the treasury of the future," and so on; then having passed away is termed "the past." Passing away and turning away from the present is called "going." Being yet to come is termed "the future." A phenomenon that is about to arise, tending toward the present, is called "coming." Alternatively, coming is its present sense, and a future phenomenon not yet manifested is called "the future." Now it is termed the present phenomenon; because it abides in the present characteristic, it is called "the present." It is based on this approach that the meaning of non-arising and non-cessation is discriminated. Now it is based on the former approach; therefore, with regard to the meaning of the future, one could fully state: "the past has already ceased, the future has not yet arrived, and the present does not abide; therefore there is no arising or cessation." Now, relying on the former approach, with regard to the future it is conversely termed "not going." Therefore it concludes: "The two approaches are different."