大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 85.2

85.2

第二末會疏。今初，「夫圓滿教海」下，此文有二：先標、後「故非頓」下釋。前標有三對，今疏釋有二：一出三對之由、二明該羅等義。今初。若無頓證法界，豈顯此經圓妙？若無善財漸進，眾生如何趣入？若無本會佛為其主，何有末會皆得成經？若無末會善財成益，豈顯本會頓證之實？然此一對，語出肇公《維摩注．序》。彼以不思議中以分本末，云「此經所明，統萬行則以權智為主、樹德本則以六度為根、濟蒙惑則以慈悲為首、語宗極則以不二為言，凡此眾說皆不思議之本也。至若借座燈王、請飯香土、手接大千、室包乾象，不思議迹也。然幽關難辯、聖應不同，非本無以垂迹、非迹無以顯本，本迹雖殊，不思議一也。」今但借其言，不取其義，自以二會為本末耳。「非人無以證法」者，法無廢興，弘之由人故。「非法無以成人」者，不證性原，豈名菩薩？故《中論》云「以法知有人，以人知有法。離法何有人？離人何有法？」

Second, the commentary on the final assembly. Now to begin: concerning the passage starting from "Now, the ocean of the complete teaching," this text has two parts: first it introduces the topic, and then from "Therefore, it is not sudden" it explains it. The preceding introduction contained three pairs; now the commentary's explanation has two parts: first, stating the reasons for the three pairs; second, explaining the meanings such as encompassing. First, the former: If there were no sudden realization of the dharmadhātu, how could the perfect wondrousness of this sūtra be revealed? If Sudhana did not make gradual progress, how could sentient beings enter into it? If the Buddha were not the host in the original assembly, how could the final assembly have been compiled into a sūtra? If Sudhana in the final assembly did not achieve benefit, how could the reality of the sudden realization in the original assembly be demonstrated? However, this single pair comes from Master Sengzhao's Preface to the Commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. Differentiating the root and the traces within the inconceivable, he said: "Regarding what this sūtra illuminates: to unify the myriad practices, it takes expedient cognition as primary; to establish the root of virtue, it takes the six pāramitās as the foundation; to rescue the deluded, it takes compassion as the foremost; and to express the ultimate purport, it speaks of non-duality. All these various discourses are the root of the inconceivable. As for borrowing thrones from the King of Lamps, requesting food from the Fragrant Land, taking the great trichiliocosm in hand, and enclosing heaven and earth in a single room—these are the traces of the inconceivable. Yet the profound gate is difficult to discern, and holy responses vary. Without the root, there is nothing with which to leave traces; without traces, there is nothing with which to reveal the root. Although root and traces differ, their inconceivability is one." Here we merely borrow his words without adopting his specific meaning, taking the two assemblies themselves as the root and traces. As for "without persons, there is no way to realize the Dharma," the Dharma neither declines nor flourishes, and its propagation relies on people. As for "without the Dharma, there is no way to perfect persons," without realizing the source of one's nature, how could one be called a bodhisattva? Therefore, the Madhyamakaśāstra states: "Through the Dharma we know there are persons, and through persons we know there is the Dharma. Apart from the Dharma, where are there persons? Apart from persons, where is there the Dharma?"