大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 49.3.3

49.3.3

‘Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas practice regarding suffering and pleasure with the conception of a Middle Way; by reason of this meaning, although they possess the Buddha-nature, they cannot perceive it.’ Below, the sūtra text broadens into what is not correct, explaining ordinary persons. Furthermore, the path has three kinds: namely lower, middling, and superior. The lower refers to Brahmā being impermanent yet falsely viewed as permanent, and so forth. Later it speaks of the original limit of saṃsāra, which has generally two kinds: first, avidyā; second, craving for existence; between these two there are birth, aging, illness, death, and so on—this is fixed painful practice. The commentary notes regarding the Dīrghāgama, the Twelve Nidānas Sūtra, and the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya concerning building stūpas that the matter has not yet been checked. As for the commentary's ‘The Wushangyi jing states that making offerings to a buddha-relic the size of a mustard seed completely brings about the ultimate escape from the suffering of saṃsāra’: the sūtra has two fascicles, and this is in the first. Because Ānanda followed the Buddha to beg for food and saw the storied pavilions of a new city, he thought: ‘If someone were to give such an excellent pavilion as alms to the saṃgha of the four directions, complete with the four necessities, versus after the Tathāgata's parinirvāṇa taking a buddha-relic the size of a mustard seed and enshrining it in a stūpa, raising a stūpa the size of an āmalaka fruit, mounting a spire the size of a needle, a dew-basin the size of a jujube leaf, and making an image of the Buddha the size of a barley grain—which of these two merits is superior?’ He asked the Buddha. The Buddha praised him and extensively adduced metaphors to weigh them. First he brought up filling all Jambudvīpa as dense as rice and sesame with those of the fourth fruit and pratyekabuddhas: if someone were to provide them with the four necessities of life throughout their lives, and after their passing raise great stūpas to make offerings to the buddhas, he asked: ‘Would the merit be great?’ Ānanda replied, ‘Great.’ Next he brought up Aparagodānīya, next Pūrvavideha, and next Uttarakuru, the quantities gradually broadening, the offerings made as before, comparing the pavilion built to the dwelling of Śakra, and asked Ānanda. Ānanda answered each time that it was exceedingly great. The Buddha told Ānanda: ‘If there be a good man or good woman who, after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, takes a relic the size of a mustard seed, builds a stūpa the size of an āmalaka fruit, mounts a spire the size of a needle, a dew-basin the size of a jujube leaf, and makes an image of the Buddha the size of a barley grain—this merit, compared to that previously spoken of, does not equal a hundredth part, a thousandth part, a hundred-millionth part, nor even what calculation and metaphor can reach. Ānanda! If this merit is not dedicated via pariṇāmanā toward anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, the karmic reward of fortune obtained from this heap of merit will be to become a king of Paranirmitavaśavartin Heaven, a king of Nirmāṇarati Heaven, a king of Tuṣita Heaven, a king of Yāma Heaven, or a king of the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven for as many times as there are dust motes in the entire Sahā world, not to mention a wheel-turning sage king (cakravartin).’ Explanation: According to this, it merely says the fortune is great; if one adds pariṇāmanā, it will certainly reach the ultimate. As for the commentary's ‘When attuned to its nonexistence, there is the utility of the carriage’: this is from the Dao jing of Laozi, which says, ‘Thirty spokes converge on a single hub; attuned to its nonexistence, there is the utility of the carriage.’ The annotation says, ‘This clarifies that nonexistence and existence assist one another in their function to bring it to completion.’ Furthermore, it concludes below: ‘Existence is that by which benefit is derived; nonexistence is that by which utility is had.’ The intended meaning is that shafts, carriage-box, wheels, and the like are relied upon to form a carriage, but if the inside of the carriage were not empty, it would have no utility. Thus, drawing upon the benefit of the coarse existence of physical form, it clarifies the utility of wondrous nonexistence. Borrowing this language now: the vehicle conditioned into being by the myriad practices—its internal lack of intrinsic nature is precisely its emptiness within. If it did not engage existence, there would be no means to benefit beings; if it did not enter emptiness, there would be no means for practice of the path. Because there is the meaning of emptiness, all phenomena can be accomplished; therefore it constitutes great utility. As for the commentary's ‘Overturning the three lifetimes and the hundred kalpas’: arhats cultivate merit for three lifetimes, pratyekabuddhas for a hundred kalpas; here it causes them to cultivate for hundreds of thousands of koṭis of nayutas of kalpas, and so forth. As for the commentary's ‘The tenth fascicle of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says that if one violates the four grave prohibitions,’ and so on: to clarify that the text of the sūtra assists people in eliminating delusions, there are ten restatements; this is one of them. The sūtra says: ‘If there be a bhikṣu, bhikṣuṇī, upāsaka, upāsikā, or any non-Buddhist who can uphold such a classic, recite it fluently, and further analyze and expound it for others, or write it out oneself or cause others to write it out, these are all causes and conditions for bodhi. If one has violated the four prohibitions or the crimes of the five immediate retributions, or is possessed by wicked ghosts or virulent poisons, upon hearing this classic, all bad deeds will be entirely eliminated, just as upon seeing an excellent physician, wicked ghosts depart far away. One should know that such a person is a true bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Why? Because they have temporarily heard this Great Nirvāṇa, and also because they have given rise to the thought that the Tathāgata is eternal. If one who only temporarily hears it still obtains such [benefits], how much more so one who writes it out, upholds, reads, and recites it.’ Explanation: Thus the commentary only cites the middle portion. As for the commentary's ‘It also says: “that one who violates the four grave prohibitions does not come back to life is an impossibility”’: the fifth fascicle of the sūtra says, ‘Furthermore, liberation is called empty and quiescent, without any indeterminacy. If there were indeterminacy, such that an icchantika ultimately never moved, or that one who violated the grave prohibitions did not achieve the Buddha Path, this would be an impossibility. Why? If this person gives rise to pure faith in the Buddha's true Dharma, at that moment the icchantika is immediately extinguished. If they further manage to become an upāsaka, they also extinguish the icchantika. One who has violated the grave prohibitions, having extinguished this transgression, will then achieve buddhahood. If one were to say that they ultimately do not achieve the Buddha Path, that is an impossibility.’ As for the commentary's ‘Passages such as these are found everywhere’: the sixth fascicle also says, ‘This wondrous classic of the Great Nirvāṇa cannot be worn away or suppressed; it is exceedingly marvelous and extraordinary. If there are those who hear it, and having heard it, believe and accept it, being able to believe that the Tathāgata is an eternally abiding phenomenon, such persons are extremely rare, like an udumbara flower. After my nirvāṇa, if there are those who get to hear such a wondrous Mahāyāna classic and give rise to a faithful and reverent mind, one should know that in future ages for hundreds of thousands of koṭis of kalpas they will not fall into the bad destinies.’ The beginning of the ninth fascicle also says: ‘Just as when the sun rises, the multitudes of mists are all cleared away, so too is this wondrous classic of the Great Nirvāṇa: appearing in the world, if there are sentient beings who merely let it pass their ears, it can completely eradicate all bad deeds and the karmas of the unspaced [hell].’ Other Mahāyāna passages are also extensive and numerous. As for the commentary's ‘The ninety-five kinds of non-Buddhist heterodox treatises’: first, according to the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, each of the six non-Buddhist teachers has sixteen kinds of paths. The commentary's second point, ‘Non-Buddhists attached to the Buddha's Dharma’: if one does not grasp the meaning of prajñā, entering into abhidharma leads to stagnating in existence. As for the commentary's ‘Therefore the first fascicle of the seven-fascicle Laṅkā[vatāra-sūtra],’ and so on: the seven-fascicle version is the one translated by the Tripiṭaka Master Śikṣānanda. While the ten-fascicle text is expansive and the four-fascicle text is terse, the seven-fascicle version is intermediate and its phrasing is polished; the scripture cited by the commentary gives the sūtra's words in full. The intention of citing it is to clarify that this designates the two vehicles as non-Buddhists. How is it known that it refers to the two vehicles? Because prior to this, the sūtra says: ‘Mahāmati!