大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 70.10

70.10

疏「六有二句分位過前」者，即遠公依德成位。上句可知。下句勝七地有功用，此地報熟名無功用。言「先已成就」者，論經云「善起先道故」。遠公就諸地中分別有三：一不起先道，謂前六地當地別習，不兼前行。二起而不善，謂七地念念修起一切佛法。前六地中所有諸行，至此皆起。而功用心起，不名為善。三亦起亦善，謂此八地前七地中所修諸行是其先道，至此地中報熟現前，名起先道。報熟現前，非功用生，故名善起。疏意順經，先已成就即是七地之中修無功用。為先已成就，故今無功。此意是總，易故不釋。疏「今更指文」者，第三順經釋。但是指文，義不異論，故疏云「則似論家闕指明據」。疏「智者釋名中」，一向不動，是勝進行也。一體不動，是自分行。先明勝進者，舉彼勝求，顯於自分從上滿也。

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Sixth, there are two phrases on the stage surpassing the preceding': this is Master Yuan's establishing stages based on qualities. The upper phrase is clear. The lower phrase surpasses the effort of the seventh stage; in this stage the karmic fruition has ripened, which is named effortlessness. Regarding 'having already been accomplished previously': the treatise's sūtra text states: 'because of properly giving rise to the prior path.' Master Yuan makes three distinctions regarding the stages: 1. not giving rise to the prior path: meaning that in the first six stages, one cultivates distinctively in each respective stage without combining the previous practices; 2. giving rise without being proper: meaning that in the seventh stage, one cultivates and generates all Buddha dharmas thought-moment by thought-moment; all practices in the first six stages arise at this point, yet because a mind of effort arises, it is not named proper; 3. both giving rise and being proper: meaning that in this eighth stage, all practices cultivated in the preceding seven stages constitute its prior path; reaching this stage, their fruition ripens and becomes present, which is called giving rise to the prior path. The fruition ripening and becoming present does not arise from effort, hence it is called properly giving rise. The Commentary's intent accords with the sūtra: having already been accomplished previously is precisely cultivating effortlessness within the seventh stage. Because it was already accomplished previously, it is now effortless. This meaning is general, and being easy, is not explained. Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Now pointing again to the text': this is the third, explaining in accordance with the sūtra. It merely points to the text, its meaning not differing from the treatise; hence the Commentary says 'it appears as though the treatise author lacked an explicit citation.' In the Commentary's 'In explaining the name in terms of wisdom,' being unswervingly immovable is the practice of superior progress; being immovable in one essence is the practice of one's own domain. Clarifying superior progress first brings forth that superior aspiration to show that one's own domain is fulfilled from above.