[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 86.21 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 86.21 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 86.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [86.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86.21) 大文第三，十行位。疏「初善見比丘寄歡喜行」者，施悅自他，故名歡喜。疏「初二約菩薩」者，理智一對。初「一報類難知」者，如〈迴向品〉說。「二妄想為因即無性」者，妄想為因，釋依想住。即無性言，釋於甚深。故《楞伽》云「前聖所知，轉相傳授，妄想無性。」斯為自覺聖智之境，故甚深也。疏「三染分行業」等者，以約眾生故。如一孔雀毛，一切種因相等。疏「四感異熟識」者，行相深細故。經云「阿陀那識甚深細」等。亦如《楞伽》「上中下修，照見自心生滅流注。」又經云「諸識有二種生，謂流注生、相生。有二種住，謂流注住、相住。有二種滅，謂流注滅及相滅。」古同釋云：流注是八識相續。然相有三種，已如前引。今此即剎那流注，與上照見自心生滅流注義相符也。若常照之，見其無性，即自覺聖智故。疏「五所變影像」等者，相分即是影像。第八緣三種境，境即相分，謂種子。根身，即內境也。器世間，即外境也。變現心所等，皆是內也。色為二所現，影亦通內外，外即五塵、內即五根等。疏「六名無得物之功」，已見上文。疏「七文字言說皆解脫故」者，即《淨名》中天女折身子，已如前引。疏「皆嚴法界而無嚴」者，故《金剛》云「莊嚴佛國土，即非莊嚴，是名莊嚴。」謂雖復莊嚴，無能嚴心，則稱實理，事理無礙方真嚴也。餘二可知。言「總上二分」下，結法所屬。疏「此則但是一相」者，以晉經合其身殊妙屬後尼拘陀，故今經二相彼但成一。然「如尼俱陀」者，其枝橫布與上聳相稱，非如建木一向直聳，非如傍覆一向婆娑，故云「上下端直」。若順樹相，圓滿最妙，此明不長不短。如人橫尋與身相稱，七尺之人，尋亦七尺，此為福相。疏「明其心相」者，然世之相亦有三類：一色相、二聲相、三心相。心相最勝，然可修成，含弘仁惠是勝相也。今此正明菩薩心相。言「即止觀雙運」者，經初二句標示止觀，初智慧為觀、後「於諸境」下即止。從「止過」下釋若沈若舉已下經文。然沈舉略有二種：一昏沈掉舉，此相即麁，今所不論。二細沈舉，即如疏辨。若靜無遺照、動不離寂，則是雙行不沈不舉，故云「正受現前」。然經一切皆息，總該上四；而疏釋之，四對別顯。上釋第一若沈若舉竟。二「不智不愚則雙契中道」者，即取下皆息該此名不智不愚。若智，牒前觀也，非智，牒前止也。今由皆息，則止觀兩亡，為真止觀，方契中道。三「起念」下，釋動轉皆息。若有止觀即為動轉，今由兩亡故無動轉。四「雙非」已下，釋戲論字。言雙非者，非止非觀，斯則第四戲論謗也。「再遣」者，又亡雙非，謂非非止觀等。由迹不忘，如楔出楔，故並戲論。今由皆息，戲論自亡。上但遮過，從「得佛」下顯其成德，故疏云「雖止觀雙運而無心寂照」等。雙運即為雙照，無心即為雙遮。遮照同時互融平等，即是如如平等之境。 > The third major section concerns the stages of the ten practices. Regarding the commentary's statement, "First, the bhikṣu Sudarśana is assigned to the practice of joy": giving brings joy to both oneself and others, and therefore it is called "joy." Regarding the commentary's statement, "The first two pertain to the bodhisattva": these form a pair of principle and cognition. First, regarding "1. the categories of retribution are difficult to know": it is as explained in the "Chapter on Pariṇāmanā." Regarding "2. false discrimination being the cause, they are therefore without nature": false discrimination being the cause explains their relying on conceptualization to abide; the words "being without nature" explain their profundity. Thus the Laṅkāvatāra says, "Known by the noble ones of old and transmitted in succession from one to another, false discrimination is without nature." This is the domain of self-realized noble cognition, and therefore it is profound. Regarding the commentary's statement, "3. karmic activities of the defiled portion," and so forth: this is because it pertains to sentient beings. It is like the causes and characteristics of all types found in a single peacock feather. Regarding the commentary's statement, "4. inducing the maturation consciousness": this is because its functioning characteristics are profound and subtle. The sūtra states, "The ādāna consciousness is extremely profound and subtle," and so forth. It is also as the Laṅkāvatāra states, "Cultivating in superior, middling, and inferior manners, one illuminates and perceives the continuous flow of arising and ceasing of one's own mind." Furthermore, the sūtra states, "Consciousnesses have two kinds of arising: arising as continuous flow and arising as characteristics. They have two kinds of abiding: abiding as continuous flow and abiding as characteristics. They have two kinds of ceasing: ceasing as continuous flow and ceasing as characteristics." The ancients unanimously explained: the continuous flow is the continuity of the eight consciousnesses. However, there are three types of characteristics, as already cited above. Here, this refers to the momentary continuous flow, which accords with the meaning of illuminating and perceiving the continuous flow of arising and ceasing of one's own mind stated above. If one constantly illuminates it and perceives its lack of nature, this is indeed self-realized noble cognition. Regarding the commentary's statement, "5. the reflected images transformed \[by consciousness\]," and so forth: the objective aspect (nimittabhāga) is precisely the reflected image. The eighth consciousness takes three kinds of objects as its domain, and the domain is precisely the objective aspect: namely, the seeds; the physical body with sense faculties, which is the internal domain; and the container world, which is the external domain. Manifested mental factors and the like are all internal. Form is what is manifested by both, and reflections also pertain to both internal and external: the external being the five sense objects, and the internal being the five sense faculties and so forth. Regarding the commentary's statement, "6. names lack the capacity to capture actual things": this has already appeared in the preceding text. Regarding the commentary's statement, "7. characters and verbal discourses are all liberated": this refers to the celestial maiden in the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa refuting Śāriputra, as already cited above. Regarding the commentary's statement, "all adorn the dharmadhātu yet there is no adorning": thus the Vajracchedikā states, "Adorning Buddha-lands is precisely non-adorning; this is called adorning." That is to say, although there is adornment, there is no mind capable of adorning; thus it accords with the actual principle, and only through the non-obstruction of phenomena and principle is it true adornment. The remaining two can be known \[by extension\]. From the words, "Summarizing the above two divisions," downward, it concludes by stating that to which the dharma belongs. Regarding the commentary's statement, "This, then, is merely a single mark": because the Jin dynasty translation combines his exceptionally wonderful body with the subsequent nyagrodha, what are two marks in the present sūtra form only one in that version. However, regarding "like a nyagrodha tree": its branches spread horizontally in balance with its upright height; it is neither like the Jian tree, which rises purely vertical, nor like a drooping canopy, which spreads purely broad; hence it is described as "straight and upright from top to bottom." If one accords with the mark of the tree, its perfect proportion is most wonderful; this clarifies that it is neither too long nor too short. Just as a person's outstretched arms match their height—a person of seven spans also measures seven spans across—this is a mark of merit. Regarding the commentary's statement, "Clarifying the marks of his mind": worldly marks are also of three types: first, marks of form; second, marks of voice; third, marks of mind. Marks of mind are the most supreme; furthermore, they can be cultivated to perfection: being broad-minded, benevolent, and kind is a supreme mark. Here, it specifically clarifies the marks of a bodhisattva's mind. Regarding the words, "That is, the simultaneous practice of śamatha and vipaśyanā": the first two lines of the sūtra indicate śamatha and vipaśyanā; the initial mention of wisdom is vipaśyanā, and from "regarding all objects" downward is śamatha. From "stopping faults" downward, it explains the sūtra text from "whether sinking or floating" downward. However, sinking and floating are generally of two kinds: first, dullness and agitation, which are coarse characteristics and not discussed here; second, subtle sinking and floating, which are precisely as differentiated in the commentary. If quiescence does not neglect illumination, and movement does not depart from tranquility, then this is the dual operation free from both sinking and floating; hence it says, "correct attainment becomes manifest." However, the sūtra's phrase "all completely cease" generally covers the above four; yet the commentary explains them by distinguishing four pairs. The explanation of the first pair, whether sinking or floating, is concluded above. Second, regarding "being neither wise nor foolish, it dually accords with the Middle Way": taking the subsequent "all completely cease" to cover this is termed "neither wise nor foolish." If "wise," it refers to the preceding vipaśyanā; if "not wise," it refers to the preceding śamatha. Now, because all have ceased, both śamatha and vipaśyanā are discarded, becoming true śamatha and vipaśyanā, only then according with the Middle Way. Third, from "giving rise to thoughts" downward, it explains the cessation of all movements. If there were śamatha and vipaśyanā, that would constitute movement; now, because both are discarded, there is no movement. Fourth, from "dually negating" downward, it explains the word "prapañca." Saying "dually negating" means being neither śamatha nor vipaśyanā; this, then, is the fourth slander of prapañca. "Relinquishing again" means further discarding the dual negation, namely, not being non-śamatha and non-vipaśyanā, and so on. Because traces are not forgotten, like driving out a wedge with another wedge, both are prapañca. Now, because all have ceased, prapañca naturally disappears. The above merely refutes faults; from "attaining the Buddha" downward, it reveals the realization of virtues; thus the commentary states, "Although śamatha and vipaśyanā are dually practiced, there is no mind of quiescence and illumination," and so forth. Dual practice is precisely dual illumination; being without mind is precisely dual negation. Negation and illumination occurring simultaneously, interpenetrating and equal, is precisely the realm of suchness and equality. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 86.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86.20) - [Next: 86.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86.22) - [Up: 86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.86.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.86.21) · Pramāṇa