大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 46.7

46.7

From the Commentary's "If one definitively takes the first two as fractured…" onward, is the fourth [part], concluding by refuting an ancient interpretation, namely the interpretation of the Kanding ji. The Commentary first recounts it, and from "then the three fruitions of the Hinayāna…" onward, shows the nature of its error. The latter three vehicles pertain commonly to cause and fruit; if taken now as inconceivable transformation, then the three fruitions would already have received transformation; but transformation is received only after entering nirvāṇa without remainder—how could the three fruitions already receive transformation? Furthermore, these three fruitions are not what is known here, because the three fruitions belong to fractured [saṃsāra]. As for "direct entrants up to the seventh ground" and so on: when turning from the Small to enter the Great, those from the first ground and above may receive transformation, but direct-entrant bodhisattvas receive transformation only from the eighth ground and above. Since it is taken comprehensively here as transformation, those up to and including the seventh ground would not be what is known here. Alternatively, direct entrants before the seventh ground would [absurdly] have to receive transformation. Each has two errors, and the Commentary's text only implies them briefly. As for fractured and transformational, the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra says: "There are two kinds of death. What are the two? They are fractured death and inconceivable transformational death. Fractured death refers to delusive ordinary persons. Inconceivable transformational death refers to the mind-made bodies of arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and mighty bodhisattvas, up to ultimate anuttarabodhi." Explanation: Based on this, it is clearly known that the Hinayāna's three fruitions and those up to and including the seventh ground have not yet received transformation. The meaning of the four transformations has already been broadly explained before. As for the Commentary's "It also reveals the characteristics of the object of knowledge", the object of knowledge refers to nature and characteristics below; only when the object of knowledge is revealed can the cognizing subject be recognized. From the Commentary's "Knowing characteristics and knowing nature…" onward, there are three points here: first, knowing characteristics; second, knowing nature; third, knowing non-obstruction. Non-obstruction has two aspects: first, the non-obstruction of nature and characteristics mentioned above; second, using nature to fuse characteristics in manifold non-obstruction, which is the four dharmadhātus and is the object of knowledge here. As for "cognition without cognition", it is the bodhisattva's cognizing subject. That is, prajñā is without cognition, illuminating while confronting conditions. As for the Commentary's "Moreover, within the two sections the previous five categories are subsumed…" and so on, it means that earlier, with knowing in accordance with reality, one traversed the previous five categories of phenomena one by one, which is obvious in the text. Now it clarifies that the meaning in the text subsumes the previous phenomena, so the Commentary shows this fully. As for the Commentary's "From rūpa above to the cognition of all aspects below", the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā briefly lists over eighty categories, and the Mahāprajñāpāramitā is even more extensive: it takes rūpa as the first, because it is the beginning of the five aggregates; next it traverses the four aggregates, then the twelve āyatanas and eighteen dhātus, then the sensations born from eye-contact and so on, then the four smṛtyupasthānas, four truths, four dhyānas, eight vimokṣas, dhāraṇīs, ten grounds, five eyes, ten powers, great kindness and great compassion, the four equanimities, the marks and signs, the unforgotten dharmas, the cognition of all aspects, the bodhisattva practices of the four fruitions, and anuttarabodhi. Explanation: The above is what is traversed. As for the Commentary's "Presently seeing all dharmas like a mass of foam…" and so forth, it cites the meaning of the five aggregates being unreal and disintegrating to object to their being indestructible; the intention of the explanation has already appeared frequently before. As for the Commentary's "All take non-attainment and so forth as a slight upāya", the Commentary explains the slight upāya in terms of non-attainment. The sūtra below says: "With non-attainment as upāya." According to the Mahāprajñāpāramitā, taking non-arising as upāya, taking non-abiding as upāya, and taking non-reliance as upāya are all characteristics of prajñā. However, serving as an upāya has broadly two senses: first, serving as the upāya to enter existence, causing existence to be non-attainment and so forth; second, serving as the upāya to enter emptiness, also not abiding in non-attainment. Hence here it properly takes it as the upāya to enter existence. As for the Commentary's "Also like the finest ghee having nowhere it does not penetrate", the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra praises true cognition as having nowhere it does not penetrate.