大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 69.43

69.43

疏「第三生梵天喻」中，分五：一舉所喻，略不釋喻。二「合中」下，釋合文，即經住不動下文。三「所以不行」下，論釋不行所以，明有治故，經文略無。四「此離」下，明離過患。五「後此菩薩」下，別釋。「此菩薩下舉勝」下，經謂「佛等不順行」者，以論云「此中順行不順行二分心等，佛等不行故。」謂一心中分染淨二分，以淨況染。從「則若世」下，疏束成對。略有四對，兼於大小則有五對。「若世」者，即經「況復起於世間之心」。「若出世」者，佛等心也。「若人」，即佛菩薩。「若法」，即菩提涅槃。「若因」，即菩薩。「若果」，即佛。「若智」，即菩提。「若斷」，即涅槃。小雖經無，對菩薩有，論文具之。論云「佛等不行不行故，大乘小乘差別故，大乘小乘中眾生法差別故。眾生是人，無學學差別。佛等涅槃差別。應知是中順行者，順行分中心等不行故，如經一切心意識不行故。是中不順行者，不順行分中佛等不行故，如經佛心乃至涅槃心不行故。大乘小乘差別，大乘中差別者，佛菩薩涅槃差別故。小乘中差別者，聲聞涅槃阿羅漢等差別故。大乘中眾生差別者，佛菩薩差別故。法差別者，菩提涅槃差別故。小乘中無學學眾差別，是中法差別者，涅槃差別。無學差別者，阿羅漢差別。有學差別者，阿那含等差別。如是等皆悉不行故。」釋曰：恐欲知論，故復委出，亦不出於上之五對。然論差別之言，一一事中皆有差別，如有學中有三果四向等，菩提有多種菩提等，非全所要，故疏略之。就出世中遍多舉者，出世易著，今無著故。

In the commentary's "third, the metaphor of being born in the Brahmā heaven," there are five parts: first, citing what is illustrated, omitting the explanation of the metaphor; second, from "in the application..." onward explains the application text, which is the text below "dwelling in the Immovable" in the sūtra; third, from "the reason it does not operate..." onward is the treatise's explanation of why it does not operate, clarifying that there is an antidote, which is omitted in the sūtra text; fourth, from "this parts from..." onward clarifies parting from afflictions and faults; fifth, from "subsequently, this bodhisattva..." onward distinctly explains. From "this bodhisattva... citing superiority" onward: the sūtra's statement that "the minds of buddhas, etc., do not operate in accordance" is because the treatise says, "Here, because minds of the two divisions of conforming operation and non-conforming operation, such as buddhas, do not operate." That is, within the one mind are distinguished two divisions, defiled and pure, using the pure to illustrate the defiled. From "then as for the mundane..." onward, the commentary organizes them into pairs. There are roughly four pairs; adding the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, there are five pairs. "As for the mundane" refers to the sūtra's "how much less giving rise to mundane minds." "As for the supramundane" refers to the minds of buddhas, etc. "As for persons" refers to buddhas and bodhisattvas. "As for dharmas" refers to bodhi and nirvāṇa. "As for cause" refers to bodhisattvas. "As for fruition" refers to buddhas. "As for wisdom" refers to bodhi. "As for severance" refers to nirvāṇa. Although the Hīnayāna is not in the sūtra, it exists in contrast to the bodhisattva, and the treatise text has it in full. The treatise says: "Because buddhas, etc., do not operate, and because of the distinctions between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, and within the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, the distinctions between sentient beings and dharmas. Sentient beings are persons, distinguished into those beyond training and those in training. Distinctions in the nirvāṇa of buddhas, etc. It should be known that here, regarding conforming operation: because minds, etc., within the conforming division do not operate, as the sūtra says, 'all mind, intellect, and consciousness do not operate.' Here, regarding non-conforming operation: because buddhas, etc., within the non-conforming division do not operate, as the sūtra says, 'minds of buddhas up to minds of nirvāṇa do not operate.' As for distinctions between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna: within the Mahāyāna, there are distinctions because of the distinctions between the nirvāṇa of buddhas and bodhisattvas. Within the Hīnayāna, there are distinctions because of the distinctions between the nirvāṇa of śrāvakas and arhats, etc. As for distinctions of sentient beings in the Mahāyāna: because of distinctions between buddhas and bodhisattvas. As for distinctions of dharmas: because of distinctions between bodhi and nirvāṇa. In the Hīnayāna, there are distinctions between the assemblies of those beyond training and those in training; here distinctions of dharmas are distinctions of nirvāṇa. Distinctions of those beyond training are distinctions of arhats. Distinctions of those in training are distinctions of anāgamins, etc. Because such as these do not operate at all." Explanation: Fearing one might wish to know the treatise, it is again set forth in detail; it does not exceed the five pairs above. However, as for the treatise's word "distinctions," within each single item there are distinctions—such as among those in training having the three fruits and four fruitions, etc., and bodhi having many kinds of bodhi, etc.—which are not entirely necessary, and thus the commentary omits them. As for citing so many instances within the supramundane: attachment easily arises toward the supramundane, but now there is no attachment.