大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 62.25

62.25

疏「如分別四諦」下，第二引證。暗引《涅槃》，即第十三經，南本十二。「迦葉菩薩白佛言：『世尊！佛昔一時在恒河岸尸首林中，爾時如來取少許樹葉，告諸比丘：「我今手中葉多？一切因地草木葉多？」諸比丘言：「世尊！一切因地草木葉多，不可稱計。如來所捉，少不足言。」「諸比丘！我所覺了一切諸法，如因大地生草木等。為諸眾生所宣說者，如手中葉。」』（迦葉難言）『世尊爾時說如是言：「如來所了無量諸法，若入四諦，即為已說。若不入者，應有五諦。」』佛讚迦葉：『善哉善哉！善男子。汝今所問，則能利益安隱快樂無量眾生。善男子！如是諸法，悉已攝在四聖諦中。下云智有二種：一者中智、二者上智。善男子！知諸陰苦，是名中智。分別諸陰有無量相，悉皆是苦，非是聲聞緣覺所知，是名上智。』廣說（云云）。又云：『善男子！知愛因緣能生五陰，是名中智。一人起愛無邊無量，聲聞緣覺所不能知，是名上智。』又云：『善男子！知滅煩惱，是名中智。分別煩惱不可稱計，滅亦如是不可稱計，非是聲聞緣覺所知，是名上智。』又云：『善男子！知是道相能離煩惱，是名中智。分別道相無量無邊，所離煩惱亦無量無邊，非諸聲聞緣覺所知，是名上智。』」釋曰：皆明四諦有無量相，而皆攝在四諦之中。故知三十七品，若分別之，有無量相，則三十七攝無量道品。

Regarding the commentary's phrase “As in distinguishing the four truths” and so forth: this is the second [section], citing textual proofs. It tacitly cites the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, namely the thirteenth fascicle [in the Northern edition], which is the twelfth in the Southern edition: “The Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honoured One! Once in the past the Buddha was on the bank of the Gaṅgā in the Śmaśāna Grove. At that time, the Tathāgata picked up a few tree leaves and asked the monks: “Are there more leaves now in my hand, or are there more leaves among all the grass and trees upon the ground?” The monks replied: “World-Honoured One! The leaves among all the grass and trees upon the ground are far more numerous, beyond reckoning. What the Tathāgata holds is so few as to hardly be worth speaking of.” [The Buddha said:] “Monks! All the phenomena I have fully awakened to are like the grass and trees growing upon the great earth. Those I have expounded for sentient beings are like the leaves in my hand.”’ (Kāśyapa challenged:) ‘World-Honoured One, at that time you spoke these words: “If the immeasurable phenomena understood by the Tathāgata are subsumed within the four truths, then they have already been expounded. If they are not subsumed within them, then there ought to be a fifth truth.”’ The Buddha praised Kāśyapa: ‘Excellent, excellent! Good son. What you ask now can benefit, bring peace, and bring joy to immeasurable sentient beings. Good son! All such phenomena are fully subsumed within the four noble truths.’ Below it says: ‘There are two kinds of cognition: the first is intermediate cognition, and the second is superior cognition. Good son! Knowing that the aggregates are suffering is called intermediate cognition. Distinguishing the immeasurable aspects of the aggregates and knowing that all of them are suffering—which is beyond the understanding of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas—is called superior cognition.’ It expounds this at length (and so forth). It also says: ‘Good son! Knowing that the conditions of craving can generate the five aggregates is called intermediate cognition. Knowing that a single person engenders craving that is boundless and immeasurable—which cannot be known by śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas—is called superior cognition.’ It also says: ‘Good son! Knowing the cessation of afflictions is called intermediate cognition. Distinguishing afflictions as beyond reckoning, and their cessation likewise as beyond reckoning—which is beyond the understanding of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas—is called superior cognition.’ It also says: ‘Good son! Knowing the characteristics of the path capable of leaving afflictions behind is called intermediate cognition. Distinguishing the characteristics of the path as immeasurable and boundless, and the afflictions left behind as likewise immeasurable and boundless—which is beyond the understanding of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas—is called superior cognition.’” The explanation states: All of these make clear that the four truths have immeasurable aspects, yet all are subsumed within the four truths. Thus we know that if one distinguishes the thirty-seven factors, they have immeasurable aspects; hence the thirty-seven subsume immeasurable factors of the path.