大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 90.22

90.22

疏「今更」下，即就佛平等中，顯實是本師互遍，更過平等之意趣耳。於中，文前有八：一總舉大意；二「謂此文言」下，引此經文，質成正義；三「若言別讚」下，遮其欲救，彰其謬解；四「況華藏」下，引前經文，成屬我師；五「法華央掘」下，引他經文，成立今義；六「故知法藏」下，遮其引難，為決他經；七「以理推」下，結成正義，反質令見。八「然此段」下，辨其包含，重成本義。二中自有三意：一東方之佛云在此者，明阿閦即是本師。二阿彌陀充滿十方，亦合遍此，同於本方，即釋迦矣。三通取或見明是本師，或有見為阿閦、彌陀諸佛異耳。三遮救中，恐外救云：今明阿閦、彌陀遍等，自是別讚彌陀、阿閦，何得引是本師佛耶？故今遮云：若如此者，普賢本讚本師釋迦如來，今云東西諸佛遍此，何成讚我本師耶？四中引華藏者，娑婆當中剎海種內第十三層，而有十三佛剎塵數世界圍繞。無量壽佛國但言從此西方過十萬億佛土，尚未能滿一合之塵，況於一剎塵數。況十三佛剎塵數，其十三重內皆是化境。況華藏世界剎海有十不可說佛剎微塵數世界種，一一種中有不可說佛剎微塵數世界，皆是本師之所嚴淨，其中皆是遮那如來分身化往。安養近在十重之內，何得非是本師釋迦？故云豈非是此佛耶。五引他經成立中，二經分身已如前引。既十方中皆是釋迦分身之佛，何得彌陀、阿閦佛等近而非耶？六遮其引難者，謂外引二經：一引《清淨平等覺經》說法藏比丘。然《大寶積》第十七〈無量壽如來會〉，說名法處比丘。佛在耆闍崛山說，阿難起問白佛言：「大德世尊色身諸根悉皆清淨，威光赫奕如融金聚，又如眼鏡凝照光輝。從昔已來初未曾見，喜得瞻仰生希有心。世尊今者入大寂定，行如來行皆悉圓滿，善能建立大丈夫行，思惟現在去來諸佛。世尊何故住斯念也。」佛讚聖知，便為說：「往昔過無邊阿僧祇無數大劫，有佛出現號曰然燈。此前展轉復舉諸佛，最後云世主佛。前無邊數劫有佛出世，號世間自在王。彼佛法中，有一比丘名曰法處，有殊勝願，詣如來所，以偈讚佛。既讚佛已，佛為說二十一億清淨佛土具足莊嚴。彼比丘悉皆攝受攝，已滿足五劫思惟修習，便向彼佛發四十八願。發願已後，經多劫修行成就功德，乃至成佛。」後阿難問：「此法處比丘成佛，為過去耶？未來耶？為今現在？」佛告阿難：「西方去此十萬億佛剎，彼有世界名曰極樂，法處比丘在彼成佛，號無量壽，今現在說法。」然後廣說其土莊嚴。釋曰：既如來說他昔因今果，何得判為即本師耶？二引《法華經》十六王子，即第三大通智勝佛。經云「彼佛弟子十六沙彌，今皆得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，於十方國土現在說法，有無量百千萬億菩薩聲聞以為眷屬。其二沙彌東方作佛，一名阿閦，在歡喜國，二名須彌頂。東南方二佛，一名師子音、二名師子相。南方二佛，一名虛空住、二名常滅。西南方二佛，一名帝相、二名梵相。西方二佛，一名阿彌陀、二名度一切世間苦惱。西北方二佛，一名多摩羅跋栴檀香、二名須彌相。北方二佛，一名雲自在、二名雲自在王。東北方佛，名壞一切世間怖畏。第十六，我釋迦牟尼佛，於娑婆國土得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」釋曰：既第一佛名曰阿閦，第九王子即為彌陀，十六釋迦。本因既殊，得佛又別，云何渾亂言皆本師？故疏釋云「皆是方便」。復更問言：豈《法華經》判為方便？今當還引《法華》答之。《法華．壽量品》云「於是中間，我說然燈佛等，又復言其入於涅槃，如是皆以方便分別。」則等言已等十六王子。復應問言：然燈去今方一僧祇，可為方便。自在王佛、大通智勝，已經無量無邊不可思議阿僧祇劫，豈為方便？故應答云：然燈雖已久矣，比之壽量，劫數不多。謂說大通，但磨三千大千地種以為其墨，過於東方千國土即下一點，以為校量；彼佛滅度，但過是數無量百千阿僧祇劫，豈同壽量說成佛遠？經云「譬如五百萬億那由他阿僧祇三千大千世界，假使有人末為微塵，過於東方五百千萬億那由他阿僧祇國乃下一塵。如是東行盡是微塵，是諸世界若著微塵及不著者，盡以為塵，一塵一劫。我成佛以來，復過於此百千萬億那由他阿僧祇劫。」釋曰：以此之喻方之大通，三千墨點非可類矣。自此劫來皆是方便，故然燈等言無不該也。是以昔人云：「十六王子尚掩成道之初。」斯言愜當。則知彌陀、阿閦佛等，皆是本師成佛後事，義無惑矣。自在王佛展轉多劫，但以數明劫，豈如末塵為劫耶？

In the commentary, from 'Now further' onward, it directly takes up the equality of the Buddhas to reveal that in reality it is our Fundamental Teacher interpenetrating everywhere, an intention that further surpasses equality. Within this, the text contains eight points beforehand: first, summarizing the main purport; second, from 'As this text says' onward, citing the text of this sūtra to examine and establish the correct meaning; third, from 'If one claims it praises separately' onward, refuting an attempted counter-defense and exposing its erroneous interpretation; fourth, from 'How much more so the Lotus Treasury' onward, citing preceding scripture to establish that they belong to our Teacher; fifth, from 'The Lotus and the Aṅgulimāla' onward, citing other sūtras to establish the present meaning; sixth, from 'Hence know that Dharmākara' onward, refuting their cited objections to resolve [apparent conflicts with] other scriptures; seventh, from 'Deducing it by reason' onward, concluding and establishing the correct meaning, interrogating them in return so that they may see it; eighth, from 'Yet this passage' onward, discerning what it encompasses and reaffirming the original meaning. Within the second, there are three points: first, that the Buddha of the east is said to be here clarifies that Akṣobhya is precisely our Fundamental Teacher; second, that Amitābha fills the ten directions means he must also pervade here, identical with the original direction, which is precisely Śākyamuni; third, comprehensively taking the various perceptions to clarify that he is the Fundamental Teacher, while some perceive him differently as various Buddhas such as Akṣobhya and Amitābha. In the third, the refutation of counter-defenses, it is feared an opponent might defend: 'Now when it clarifies that Akṣobhya and Amitābha pervade and so forth, it is naturally praising Amitābha and Akṣobhya separately; how can one cite this as being our Fundamental Teacher Buddha?' Therefore, it now refutes this, saying: If that were so, Samantabhadra originally intended to praise our Fundamental Teacher Śākyamuni Tathāgata; now if he says the Buddhas of east and west pervade here, how would that amount to praising our Fundamental Teacher? In the fourth, citing the Lotus Treasury: the Sahā world is on the thirteenth tier within the central ocean-seed of worlds, surrounded by worlds numbering as many as the dust motes of thirteen Buddha realms. The realm of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life is said merely to be past a hundred thousand koṭis of Buddha lands to the west of here, which could not even fill the dust of a single aggregate, let alone the dust motes of a realm, and even less the dust motes of thirteen Buddha realms. Those thirteen tiers are entirely realms of transformation. How much more so the oceanic world of the Lotus Treasury, which contains world-seeds numbering as many as the subtle dust motes of ten ineffable Buddha realms; each seed contains worlds numbering as many as the subtle dust motes of ineffable Buddha realms, all adorned and purified by our Fundamental Teacher, and within them Vairocana Tathāgata travels as divided bodies of transformation. Sukhāvatī lies closely within the tenth tier; how could it not be our Fundamental Teacher Śākyamuni? Hence it says: 'How could it not be this Buddha?' In the fifth, citing other sūtras for confirmation: the divided bodies in the two sūtras have already been cited above. Since all those in the ten directions are the divided-body Buddhas of Śākyamuni, how could Amitābha, Akṣobhya, and the others nearby not be so? In the sixth, refuting their cited objections: this refers to opponents citing two sūtras. First, they cite the *Qingjing pingdeng jue jing* speaking of the bhikṣu Dharmākara. However, the seventeenth assembly of the *Mahāratnakūṭa*, the *Immeasurable Life Assembly*, calls him the bhikṣu Dharmākara. When the Buddha was expounding on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, Ānanda arose, questioned, and said to the Buddha: 'Venerable World-Honoured One, the faculties of your physical form are entirely pure; your majestic radiance is dazzling like a heap of molten gold, and like a mirror concentrating and shining with bright light. Never before from the past to the present have I seen such a thing; rejoicing to gaze upon it, I give rise to a rare mind. The World-Honoured One has now entered the great tranquil concentration, has completely perfected the conduct of Tathāgatas, is well able to establish the conduct of a great man, and contemplates the Buddhas of the present, past, and future. For what reason does the World-Honoured One abide in this thought?' The Buddha praised his holy knowledge and then expounded for him: 'In the distant past, passing boundless asaṃkhyeyas of countless great eons, there appeared a Buddha named Dīpaṃkara.' Prior to him, he further successively enumerated various Buddhas, finally mentioning the Buddha Lokanātha. Boundless countless eons before that, a Buddha appeared in the world named Lokeśvararāja. In that Buddha's Dharma, there was a bhikṣu named Dharmākara who made an extraordinary vow, went to the Tathāgata, and praised the Buddha with verses. After he had praised him, the Buddha expounded for him the complete adornments of twenty-one hundred million pure Buddha lands. That bhikṣu received them all, and having received them, spent five full eons contemplating and cultivating them, whereupon he made forty-eight vows before that Buddha. After making the vows, he cultivated over many eons, fulfilling his merits, up to attaining Buddhahood.' Later Ānanda asked: 'Has this bhikṣu Dharmākara attained Buddhahood in the past, in the future, or in the present?' The Buddha told Ānanda: 'Passing a hundred thousand koṭis of Buddha lands to the west of here, there is a world named Sukhāvatī. The bhikṣu Dharmākara attained Buddhahood there, named Amitāyus, and is currently expounding the Dharma.' Thereafter, he expounded at length the adornments of that land. Commentary explains: Since the Tathāgata expounded his past causes and present effects, how could one determine that he is identical to our Fundamental Teacher? Second, they cite the sixteen princes of the *Lotus Sūtra*, namely [the sons of] the third Buddha, Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū. The sūtra says: 'Those sixteen novices, disciples of that Buddha, have all now attained anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, and are currently expounding the Dharma in lands throughout the ten directions, having immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of bodhisattvas and śrāvakas as their retinues. Two novices became Buddhas in the east: one named Akṣobhya in the land of Abhirati, and the second named Merukūṭa. Two Buddhas in the southeast: one named Siṃhaghosa, the second named Siṃhadhvaja. Two Buddhas in the south: one named Ākāśapratiṣṭhita, the second named Nityaparinirvṛta. Two Buddhas in the southwest: one named Indradhvaja, the second named Brahmadhvaja. Two Buddhas in the west: one named Amitābha, the second named Sarvalokadhātupadravodvegapratyakṣatva. Two Buddhas in the northwest: one named Tamālapatracandanagandha, the second named Merudhvaja. Two Buddhas in the north: one named Meghasvara, the second named Meghasvararāja. The Buddha in the northeast is named Sarvajagad-bhayāstambhitatvapraheṇa. The sixteenth is myself, Śākyamuni Buddha, who attained anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi in the Sahā world.' Commentary explains: Since the first Buddha is named Akṣobhya, the ninth prince is Amitābha, and the sixteenth is Śākyamuni, their original causes being different and their attainment of Buddhahood also distinct, how can one confound them and say that all are the Fundamental Teacher? Hence the commentary explains: 'All are upāya.' Again it may be asked: Does the *Lotus Sūtra* determine this as upāya? We shall now cite the *Lotus Sūtra* in return to answer it. The 'Duration of the Tathāgata's Lifespan' chapter of the *Lotus Sūtra* says: 'In the interval, I spoke of Dīpaṃkara Buddha and others, and also spoke of their entering nirvāṇa; all such things were distinguished by upāya.' Thus the word 'and others' already includes the sixteen princes. It should further be asked: Dīpaṃkara was only one asaṃkhyeya ago from now, so he may be considered an upāya. Lokeśvararāja and Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū, having already passed immeasurable, boundless, inconceivable asaṃkhyeya eons—how could they be upāya? Therefore, one should reply: Although Dīpaṃkara was long ago, compared to the 'Lifespan' chapter, the number of eons is not large. For when speaking of Mahābhijñā, it only grinds the element of earth of the trichiliocosm into ink, dropping a single dot after passing a thousand realms to the east, using this as a measure; that Buddha's parinirvāṇa only passed immeasurable hundreds of thousands of asaṃkhyeya eons beyond that number. How could it be comparable to the 'Lifespan' chapter's account of the remote attainment of Buddhahood? The sūtra says: 'Suppose there were five hundred myriad koṭis of nayutas of asaṃkhyeyas of trichiliocosms; if someone ground them to fine dust, and passing five hundred thousand myriad koṭis of nayutas of asaṃkhyeyas of lands to the east, only then dropped one speck of dust. Traveling east in this manner until all the dust was exhausted, whether a speck fell on these worlds or not, all were pulverized into dust, each speck counting as an eon. The time since I attained Buddhahood exceeds this by hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of nayutas of asaṃkhyeyas of eons.' Commentary explains: Taking this analogy and comparing it to Mahābhijñā, the ink dots of the trichiliocosm cannot be compared. All since these eons has been upāya, so the phrase 'Dīpaṃkara and others' leaves nothing unincluded. Therefore, the ancient said: 'The sixteen princes still conceal the beginning of his attainment of the Way.' These words are exceedingly apt. Thus one knows that Amitābha, Akṣobhya Buddha, and the rest are all events after our Fundamental Teacher's attainment of Buddhahood; the meaning is beyond doubt. Lokeśvararāja Buddha passed through many eons, but these were only explained through numerals; how could that compare to pulverized dust taken as eons?