大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 47.18

47.18

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "Now first, if one directly relies on the sūtra text": it first explains relying on the sūtra, and afterwards, under "if one takes the treatise's approach", it explains according to the flow of the treatise. In the former, it first explains the text, and afterwards, under "therefore, gathering what precedes and follows", it subsumes them into the essential nature. In the former, it first individually explains the three phrases, and afterwards, under "however, generally speaking within the chapter", it generally reveals their unfathomability. Within the first three phrases, the explanation of the second phrase itself has four meanings: first, explaining unfathomability through essence and explaining greatness through function; second, jointly explaining unfathomability in terms of essence and function; third, explaining unfathomability through the mutual interpenetration of essence and function; fourth, explaining unfathomability in terms of the mutual interpenetration of the three greatnesses. As for the commentary's "that is, the vast and non-inverted mind": it is the second of the four minds; when reaching the eighth pariṇāmanā, it will be broadly cited and explained. Rescuing and protecting sentient beings is the vast mind. Freeing oneself from the notion of sentient beings is the non-inverted mind. The above concludes the explanation of rescuing and protecting, etc. Next, under "pariṇāmanā is practice", it contrasts the first distinct name with the general pariṇāmanā to distinguish the derivation of the name. Third, under "clearly knowing", it concludes by criticizing the old interpretation, because the words "rescue and protect" are that which is dedicated. Fourth, under "about to fall", it individually explains the two words "rescue" and "protect". The second, indestructible pariṇāmanā, takes its name from the good roots that are dedicated. The third covers both that which can dedicate and that which is dedicated, all being equal to the Buddhas. The fourth establishes its name from that to which one dedicates. The fifth is from the virtue accomplished. The sixth is from that which is dedicated. The seventh covers both that which dedicates and that which is dedicated. The eighth also covers both the good roots that can dedicate and those that are dedicated, because all are identical with tathatā. The ninth derives its name from the mind that can dedicate. The tenth also establishes its name covering both that which can dedicate and that which is dedicated, as well as the dharmadhātu dedicated toward. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "Second, discussing each generally": the commentary's text has five parts: first, a general indication that there are three; second, under "each of these three has two meanings", clarifying the causes for constituting the three; third, under "the reason why", establishing the rationale for the three; fourth, under "furthermore, these three must necessarily support each other", interpenetrating the three characteristics; fifth, concluding in perfect interpenetration. Now, the first is clear. Regarding the commentary's "each of these three has two meanings": this is the second, the cause for constituting the three. As for saying "must depend on sentient beings": if there were no sentient beings, the bodhisattva would not cultivate practice. Thus, by the above meaning, this cultivation of good belongs to sentient beings and is their share, just as a father has wealth and his son has a share. As for saying "because the remaining two flow [from it]": like the above, they are necessarily accomplished depending on sentient beings. Cultivating one's good for the sake of bodhi and for the sake of the bhūtakoṭi are the two flows. From "because they are factors of bodhi" downward: like the above, they are a share of sentient beings. All myriad practices are factors of bodhi; "factor" also means cause. All accord with the bhūtakoṭi, which is simply the share of the bhūtakoṭi. Regarding the commentary's "second, wherever there is a bodhisattva": the former clarified in terms of the objective realm, while this speaks in terms of the person. Furthermore, previously it subordinated person to Dharma, whereas here it subsumes Dharma under the person. Furthermore, previously it was a direct explanation, whereas this is a demonstration by contrast. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "The reason why three are necessarily required": this is the third, establishing the rationale for the three. In this there are two parts: first, taking three categories; afterwards, generally in terms of what is accomplished. In the former there are ten texts, which have a marking, listing, explaining, and concluding. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "first, relying on the three dharmas": this is the explanation. The three dharmas are the sense of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*, and also the three prajñās and the three greatnesses; the text only brings forth the three greatnesses. The true nature as the bhūtakoṭi is the prajñā of the real mark; contemplative illumination is the prajñā of contemplation; and providing support is the prajñā of accessories. Because they differ from the names of the three prajñās and also do not subsume the five names, they are omitted and not matched here. Regarding the commentary's "second, extinguishing the three paths": these are the three afflictions, namely the path of defilements, the path of karma, and the path of suffering. Regarding the commentary's "third, purifying the three collections": thus the *Dharmasaṅgīti-sūtra* states, "If a bodhisattva abandons the mind of pariṇāmanā of the three collections, a bodhisattva should not dwell together with them." Regarding the commentary's "fourth, manifesting the three Buddha-natures": this is the sense of the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, because emptiness of the primary truth is the nature as direct cause. Although the revealing cause generally applies to the myriad practices accomplishing bodhi, it is because of ultimate revelation, clearly seeing Buddha-nature. Although the conditioning cause also generally applies to the myriad practices accomplishing bodhi, when contrasted with the direct cause above, here it is because bodhi illuminates, and dedicating toward sentient beings acts as the condition. Regarding the commentary's "fifth, accomplishing the Three Jewels": that which all Buddhas take as teacher is what is called the Dharma, because the true eternity of Dharma has an essential nature free [from defilement]. Because sentient beings share an identical essence, I dedicate toward them. The next four are merely listed and not explained, and below it only says to match them in order. Sixth, the dharmakāya is the bhūtakoṭi that is realized, the sambhogakāya is that which can realize bodhi, and the nirmāṇakāya is for the sake of sentient beings. Seventh, realizing reality without confusion is the virtue of severance; bodhi is cognition, and transforming sentient beings is grace, which goes without saying. Eighth, as for "bodhi of the real mark": a later sūtra passage says, "Just as worlds have formation and destruction, / Yet space neither increases nor decreases; / All Buddhas accomplish bodhi, / Accomplished or unaccomplished there is no distinction." In applying this: the preceding line is the bodhi of true cognition; the subsequent line is the bodhi of the real mark. The *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says, "Bodhi cannot be attained through the body, nor can it be attained through the mind; quiescence is bodhi, because it extinguishes all marks." Regarding "ninth, realizing the three nirvāṇas": in this, it first directly explains, and afterwards, under "if one relies on the *Daśabhūmika-śāstra*", it concludes by criticizing the *Daśabhūmika-śāstra*. The *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* only speaks of natural purity and purity of upāya; purity of upāya is true purity. Now, clarifying true purity means complete and perfect purity. When the myriad virtues are all complete and the burdens of marks are all tranquil, it is called completely pure. When traces vanish at the twin trees, and conditions are exhausted so responses shift, it is purity of upāya. Regarding the commentary's passage beginning "tenth, abiding peacefully in the three": this meaning is profound and difficult, and being the very last, it is explained in particular. In explaining liberation, it possesses three meanings: first, self-liberation; second, liberating others, for if one is bound oneself, that one could untie the bonds of others is impossible; third, transforming sentient beings, which is the liberation of function. The rest is as explained before and after. Regarding the commentary's "with this" downward: concluding by analogy. It first concludes the preceding, and afterwards, under "if one establishes three kinds of bodhi", it explains by analogy. In this, it first draws an analogy with the three bodhicittas. That is, the *Awakening of Faith* states: one whose faith is perfected and gives rise to the mind gives rise to three minds: first, the straightforward mind, because of correctly being mindful of the dharma of tathatā, which is dedicating toward the bhūtakoṭi; second, the profound mind, because of delighting in cultivating all good practices, which is dedicating toward bodhi; third, the mind of great compassion, because of rescuing and protecting all suffering sentient beings, which is dedicating toward sentient beings. Thus these ten are also used to accomplish those three. Afterwards, under "moreover, within these ten", their mutual generation producing one hundred and three gates can be understood.