大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 75.2

75.2

第三廣釋中，疏「謂聞無相不驚」等者，此不驚等，同《金剛經》，諸論皆釋。天親論第二有其二解：一云「不驚者，謂於諸無生之理心不驚愕，趣生道故。不怖者，謂於諸法無和合相，心不怖懼。而於世俗和合相中相續分別，不執為實故。不畏者，心不如是，永決定故。」第二釋云「復次不驚等言，如其次第，謂聞時思時修習時心安不動，眾生等想已遠離故。」無著論第二云「聲聞乘中，世尊說有法及空法。於聽聞時，聞有法無有故驚，聞空法無有故怖。於思量時，於二不有理，聞不能相應故畏。」更有一釋：約三種無性故，即下疏意。《能斷金剛般若論》第二云「驚者，謂於非處生懼（若正釋梵音，應云越怖也），違越正理如越正道，可厭惡故。言怖者（應云續怖），相續生懼，怖既生已不能除斷故。言畏者（應言定畏），生決定心一向畏懼。此等若無，便成心離惶惑。」今疏中總有三釋：初一即無著，第二釋而展彼論文，次釋即合其三釋。一正是天親；第二約三慧釋，亦別配論文。二初句「越」字，次句「續」字，後句「定」字，即正是《能斷金剛》意。三者即此三字，亦兼天親第一釋意。

In the third part, the detailed explanation, where the commentary says: "Hearing the absence of characteristics without being startled," and so forth: this "not being startled" and the rest is the same as in the *Vajracchedikā-sūtra*, and all the treatises explain it. In the second fascicle of Vasubandhu's treatise, there are two explanations. One says: "'Not being startled' means that toward the principle of non-arising, the mind is not startled, because it proceeds toward the path of birth. 'Not being terrified' means that toward the absence of composite characteristics in all phenomena, the mind is not terrified; and within the composite characteristics of conventional reality, it continuously discriminates without grasping them as real. 'Not being afraid' means that the mind is not like that, being eternally resolved." The second explanation says: "Furthermore, the words 'not startled' and so forth, in their respective order, mean that when hearing, contemplating, and cultivating, the mind is peaceful and unmoving, because notions of sentient beings and the like have already been left far behind." In the second fascicle of Asaṅga's treatise, it says: "In the Śrāvakayāna, the World-Honoured One spoke of existent phenomena and empty phenomena. At the time of hearing, upon hearing that existent phenomena do not exist, one is startled; upon hearing that empty phenomena do not exist, one is terrified. At the time of contemplating, because one cannot accord with what is heard regarding the principle that both do not exist, one is afraid." There is yet another explanation based on the three kinds of non-nature, which is the meaning of the commentary below. The second fascicle of the *Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra* says: "'Startled' means giving rise to fear in an improper situation (if correctly translated from the Sanskrit, it should be called 'transgressive terror'), because transgressing correct principle is like straying from the correct path and is deplorable. 'Terrified' (which should be called 'continuous terror') means giving rise to fear continuously, because once terror has arisen one cannot eliminate it. 'Afraid' (which should be called 'fixed fear') means giving rise to a resolved mind of being singularly fearful. If these are absent, one's mind becomes free from panic and confusion." Now in the commentary there are three explanations in total: the first is Asaṅga's, and the second unfolds that treatise's text; the next explanation combines three interpretations. One precisely accords with Vasubandhu; the second is explained in terms of the three wisdoms, also separately matching the treatise text; two, the word "transgress" in the first phrase, "continuous" in the second, and "fixed" in the last phrase, precisely represent the intention of the *Vajracchedikā-śāstra*. Three, these three words also encompass the meaning of Vasubandhu's first explanation.