大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 86.20

86.20

第十慈行童女，「寄灌頂住」者，從前觀空得無生心最為上首，諸佛法水灌其頂故。疏「般若中云了色是般若」等者，即《大品經》意，具歷諸法。且初歷五蘊，云「了色是般若，一切法趣色。色尚不可得，云何當有趣非趣？」如是具歷諸法皆然。若《般若》意，似當諸法之性不異色性，故皆趣色。色不可得，當法性空。既無所趣，安有能趣？若智者意，一切法趣色，是假觀；色尚不可得，是空觀；云何當有趣非趣，即中道觀。今疏用意但要初句，以取色性為諸法依，以性普收故皆趣色。則一色中具一切法，是事事無礙之意，故隨一法皆收法界。故得依果一一境中具諸莊嚴，則莊嚴屬果，以果詺因，名普莊嚴。第二意即因自莊嚴。疏「言三十六」下，但約表義。若約事釋，如休捨處。疏「又彼總此別」者，謂《地經》之中但云「無量百千阿僧祇陀羅尼門，解脫門三昧門亦然。」設有列者，但列其十。今有一百一十八門總持，故云別也。疏「用上三眼」下，釋此名。

Regarding the tenth, the maiden Maitrāyaṇī, 'placed in the dwelling of consecration': this is because from the previous contemplation of emptiness she attained the mind of non-arising as the foremost leader, and the Dharma water of all Buddhas consecrates her crown. Regarding the Commentary's 'In the Prajñā[-sūtras] it says: Understanding form is prajñā', etc., this is the intent of the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā*, systematically going through all dharmas. First, taking the five aggregates, it says: 'Understanding form is prajñā; all dharmas tend toward form. Form itself cannot be apprehended; how could there be tending or non-tending?' Systematically going through all dharmas like this is the same. According to the meaning of the *Prajñā[-sūtra]*, it seems that the nature of all dharmas is not different from the nature of form; therefore all tend toward form. Form cannot be apprehended, as the nature of dharmas is empty. Since there is no destination, how could there be a goer? According to Zhiyi's interpretation, 'all dharmas tend toward form' is the provisional contemplation; 'form itself cannot be apprehended' is the contemplation of emptiness; and 'how could there be tending or non-tending' is the contemplation of the middle way. Now, the intent of the Commentary requires only the first line, taking the nature of form as the support of all dharmas; because the nature universally gathers [them], all tend toward form. Thus within a single form all dharmas are fully present—this is the purport of the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena, so according with any single dharma gathers the dharmadhātu. Hence, within each and every object of the resultant support all adornments are fully present; adornment thus belongs to the fruit, and naming the cause after the fruit, it is called universal adornment. The second meaning is that the cause itself is adorned. Regarding the line 'The mention of thirty-six', this merely explains the symbolic meaning. If explained in terms of the actual facts, it is as in the passage on Devaśreṣṭhin. Regarding the Commentary's 'Moreover, that was general and this is specific', this means that in the *Daśabhūmika-sūtra* it only says 'immeasurable hundreds of thousands of asaṃkhyeyas of dhāraṇī-doors, and likewise for vimokṣa-doors and samādhi-doors.' Even where they are enumerated, only ten are listed. Here there are one hundred and eighteen doors of dhāraṇī, hence it is called specific. Regarding the Commentary's line beginning 'Employing the above three eyes', it explains this name.