大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 80.41

80.41

疏「隨門不同種種有異」下，第三結例，即類結餘門。門雖有多，且略分四：一約性，即一真法界。二約相，即無盡事法。三約性相交徹，顯此二門不即不離。四以性融相，德用重重。初約性門者，問：體是佛不？答：是。若無礙，應成四句：一是佛，法性身無所不至，故經云「性空即是佛故。」二非佛，絕能所覺。為其性平等一真法界，非佛非眾生故。三亦佛亦非佛，以法性身無自性故。四雙非，性與無性雙泯絕故。經云「無中無有二，無二亦復無。三世一切空，是則諸佛見。」二就相門，乃有二義：一情、二非情。真心隨緣，變能所故。然此二門各分染淨，謂無明熏真如成染緣起，真如熏無明成淨緣起。染成萬類，淨至成佛。以修淨緣斷彼染緣，方得成佛。依此二義，則生佛不同。於淨緣中復有因果，因有純雜、果有依正。若約純門，隨一菩薩盡未來際唯修一行，一一皆然；若約雜門，萬行齊修盡未來際。若約因門，盡未來際常是菩薩；若約果門，盡未來際常是如來。經云「為眾生故，念念新新成等正覺。」若雙辯二門，盡未來際修因得果；若約雙非，盡未來際非因非果，便同真性。前之二門，雙具悲智，雙融心境。第三性相交徹門中，曲有四門：一以性隨相，同第二門。二會相歸性，同第一門。三雙存無礙，具上二門。依此則悲智雙運、性相齊驅，寂照雙流，成大自在。四互奪雙亡，則性相俱絕，沒同果海，無成不成。第四以性融相門，相雖萬差，無不即性，性德包含全在相中。以性融相，相如於性，令上諸門皆無障礙，因果交徹純雜相融，事事相參重重無盡。今就性門四句之內，是即佛門，不取餘三。就相門中，約有情門，是淨非染、是果非因，是一分義非此所用。就交徹門，佛則性相雙融，生則會相歸性。今經正約第四以性融相，一成一切皆成。謂以佛之淨性融生之染，以佛一性融生之多，令多染生隨一真性，皆如於佛已成佛竟。非唯有情，會萬類相融為佛體無不皆成。故肇公云：「會萬物而成己者，其唯聖人乎。」又云：「故至人空洞無像，物無非我。」以佛之性融於物性，同佛皆成；以物之性融佛之相，故令三業等於萬類。即今經意，而非餘門，故云隨門不同，今是成佛門也。頓教多同約性四門，終教即同性相交徹，始教有二：一者幻有即空，同會相歸性，但唯心現，多同第二。小乘人天皆同相門，由此有云無情成佛，是約性相相融，以情之性融無情相、以無情相隨性融同有情之性，故說無情有成佛義。若以無情不成佛義融情之相，亦得說言諸眾生不成佛也。以成與不成情與無情無二性故、法界無限故、佛體普周故、色空無二故、法無定性故、十身圓融故、緣起相由故、生界無盡故、因果周遍故、遠離斷常故、萬法虛融故，故說一成一切成也，非謂無情亦有覺性同情成佛。若許成佛，此成則能修因，無情變情、情變無情，便同邪見。餘義具如前後廣說。

On the Commentary's passage from "According to different approaches there are various distinctions" downward: third, concluding by analogy, which brings other approaches under the same principle. Although the approaches are many, they are briefly divided into four: 1. in terms of nature, namely the one true dharmadhātu; 2. in terms of characteristics, namely inexhaustible phenomenal dharmas; 3. in terms of the interpenetration of nature and characteristics, showing that these two approaches are neither identical nor separate; 4. using nature to interpenetrate characteristics, so that virtuous functions are layered and multiply unfolded. Regarding the first approach, in terms of nature: Question: Is the essence the Buddha or not? Answer: It is. If unobstructed, it should form a tetralemma: (1) It is the Buddha, for the dharmatā-body reaches nowhere it does not pervade; hence the sūtra says, "Because the emptiness of nature is precisely the Buddha." (2) It is not the Buddha, as it cuts off the subject and object of awakening; because its nature is the equitable one true dharmadhātu, it is neither Buddha nor sentient being. (3) It is both Buddha and not Buddha, because the dharmatā-body lacks intrinsic nature. (4) It is neither, because both nature and absence of nature are mutually eradicated; the sūtra says, "Within nothingness there is no duality, / nor is there non-duality. / All across the three times is empty: / such is the vision of the Buddhas." Second, regarding the approach in terms of characteristics, there are two aspects: sentient and non-sentient. The true mind accords with conditions, transforming into subject and object. However, each of these two approaches is divided into defiled and pure: avidyā perfuming tathatā constitutes defiled dependent origination, and tathatā perfuming avidyā constitutes pure dependent origination. Defilement forms the myriad kinds; purity culminates in Buddhahood. Only by cultivating pure conditions and cutting off those defiled conditions does one attain Buddhahood. According to these two aspects, sentient beings and Buddhas are distinct. Within pure conditions there are further cause and effect: the cause has pure and mixed, and the effect has the circumstantial and the primary. In terms of the pure approach, any single bodhisattva exhausts the limits of the future cultivating only one practice, and every single one is likewise; in terms of the mixed approach, the myriad practices are cultivated together, exhausting the limits of the future. In terms of the causal approach, one is constantly a bodhisattva exhausting the limits of the future; in terms of the fruitional approach, one is constantly a Tathāgata exhausting the limits of the future. The sūtra says, "For the sake of sentient beings, in thought after thought, newly and afresh he attains equal and perfect enlightenment." If one treats both approaches together, exhausting the limits of the future one cultivates the cause and attains the fruit; if in terms of the negation of both, exhausting the limits of the future there is neither cause nor fruit, which then accords with the true nature. The preceding two approaches both fully possess compassion and wisdom, and both interpenetrate mind and object. In the third approach, the interpenetration of nature and characteristics, there are four intricate sub-approaches: 1. using nature to follow characteristics, identical to the second approach; 2. converging characteristics back into nature, identical to the first approach; 3. preserving both without obstruction, possessing the two approaches above—relying on this, compassion and wisdom are operated together, nature and characteristics proceed side by side, and quiescence and illumination flow in tandem, accomplishing great sovereignty; 4. mutual negating and mutual vanishing, whereby nature and characteristics are both cut off, submerged together into the ocean of fruition, with neither realization nor non-realization. In the fourth approach, using nature to interpenetrate characteristics: although characteristics have myriad differences, none is not identical to nature, and the virtues of the nature contain and fully abide within characteristics. Using nature to interpenetrate characteristics, characteristics are like nature, rendering all the above approaches free from obstruction: cause and effect interpenetrate, the pure and the mixed blend together, and phenomenon by phenomenon they mutually interweave, layered and inexhaustible. Now, within the tetralemma of the approach of nature, it is precisely the approach of being the Buddha, not taking the other three. In the approach of characteristics, in terms of sentient beings, it is pure and not defiled, fruitional and not causal, which is a partial meaning not employed here. In the approach of interpenetration, for the Buddha nature and characteristics are both interpenetrated, while for sentient beings characteristics are converged back into nature. Now the sūtra specifically relies on the fourth, using nature to interpenetrate characteristics, where when one realizes, all realize. That is to say, using the Buddha's pure nature to interpenetrate the defilement of sentient beings, and using the Buddha's single nature to interpenetrate the multiplicity of sentient beings, causes the multiple defiled sentient beings, following the one true nature, to all be like the Buddha, having already attained Buddhahood. Not only sentient beings: converging the characteristics of the myriad kinds and interpenetrating them into the Buddha's essence, there are none that are not all realized. Hence Master Zhao says: "He who converges the myriad things to make them himself—is he not none other than the sage?" He also says: "Therefore the ultimate person is empty, hollow, and formless, yet among things there is nothing that is not himself." Using the Buddha's nature to interpenetrate the nature of things, they are all realized identical to the Buddha; using the nature of things to interpenetrate the Buddha's characteristics, his three karmas are made equal to the myriad kinds. This is precisely the purport of the present sūtra, and not other approaches; hence it says that according to different approaches there are variations, and here it is the approach of realizing Buddhahood. The sudden teaching mostly accords with the four approaches in terms of nature; the final teaching accords with the interpenetration of nature and characteristics; the initial teaching has two aspects: first, illusory existence is immediately empty, identical to converging characteristics back into nature; but because it is only the manifestation of mind, it mostly accords with the second. The Hīnayāna, humans, and gods all accord with the approach of characteristics. For this reason, some say that the non-sentient attain Buddhahood: this is in terms of the mutual interpenetration of nature and characteristics, using the nature of the sentient to interpenetrate the characteristics of the non-sentient, and using the characteristics of the non-sentient following nature to interpenetrate and become identical to the nature of the sentient; therefore it is said that the non-sentient have the meaning of attaining Buddhahood. If one uses the meaning of the non-sentient not attaining Buddhahood to interpenetrate the characteristics of the sentient, one may also say that sentient beings do not attain Buddhahood. Because attaining and not attaining, sentient and non-sentient, have no dual nature; because the dharmadhātu is boundless; because the Buddha's essence is universally pervasive; because form and emptiness are non-dual; because dharmas have no fixed nature; because the ten bodies are completely interfused; because dependent origination is mutually conditioned; because the realm of sentient beings is inexhaustible; because cause and effect are omnipresent; because it is far removed from annihilation and permanence; and because the myriad dharmas are insubstantial and interpenetrated—for these reasons it is said that when one realizes, all realize. It does not mean that the non-sentient also possess an awakening nature that attains Buddhahood identically with the sentient. If one allowed them to attain Buddhahood, this attainment would then be able to cultivate the cause, the non-sentient turning into the sentient, and the sentient turning into the non-sentient, which would then be identical to heterodox views. The remaining meanings are fully explained before and after as stated above.