大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 22.13

22.13

Regarding the commentary's seventh part, explaining the text, the commentary text has three parts: first, generally discerning the central intent; second, from "The first verse..." downward, correctly explaining; third, from "However, regarding the above ten powers..." downward, re-evaluating through various gates. In the second part, within each text it is divided into two: first, name and meaning; second, explaining the text. Within name and meaning, there are either two or three, as will be known when reaching the text. Now, within the first power there are three: first, explaining the name: that causes and effects correspond is called the possible (sthāna); if they do not correspond, it is called the impossible (asthāna). Second, from "Its operation..." downward is the operation. In the second verse on the power of karma: first, explaining the name; second, from "How does it differ from the first?" downward, next discerning the difference. The first power is in terms of what is done, while one's own karma is in terms of the doer; this is still not understood as to what doer and done mean. That is, viewing karma in relation to the person, having already killed, etc., this karma of killing and the like will inevitably incur a retribution, which is called 'what is done.' If this person commits killing, he will inevitably fall into hell; this is called 'the doer.' This is the above 'one's own karma,' because each incurs retribution according to good or evil, which is its operation. In the third verse on the power of faculties: first, explaining the name; from "and being able to..." downward, second, clarifying the operation. Its "correctly knowing regarding this" explains the words 'cognition power' upwards, and explains 'able to operate' downwards. The following are all modeled on this. In the fourth, the cognition of resolute faith: first, explaining the name; second, from "causing them to relinquish..." downward, the operation; third, from "This and the previous..." downward, third, discerning the difference. Here there are two explanations: first, in terms of the difference between past and present arising, hence the Upadeśa states: 'Because the two kinds of desire serve as the causes and conditions for superior and inferior faculties.' The Daśabhūmika-śāstra separately praises faculties and desires, as in 'having faculties without desire, one can understand but does not delight; having desire without faculties, although hearing, one does not understand.' Second, from "The treatise states..." downward, the second is the Yogācāra[-bhūmi] distinguishing that delight arising relying on faculties is the power of faculties; correctly discriminating desire and delight is called the power of resolute faith. In the fifth, the power of realms: first, explaining the name and essence; second, from "nature is seed..." downward, discerning the difference. Herein there are two: first, correctly explaining; second, resolving an objection. First: first citing the Upadeśa, whose meaning can be known; next citing the Yogācāra[-bhūmi], where someone might ask: in the power of resolute faith, one also knows that their resolute faith will form this seed; what difference is there between that and the nature of realms here? Therefore the commentary answers: illuminating resolute faith as giving rise to seeds is the power of resolute faith; merely illuminating seeds is the power of realms. However, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa clarifies the distinction between seed and present manifestation, internal and external, while the Yogācāra[-bhūmi] holds that resolute faith encompasses both seed and present manifestation, whereas nature is solely seed.