大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 52.28

52.28

On the Commentary's passage starting from "Fourth, explaining the text": However, the following application of the Treatise differs slightly from the ancient [masters]. That is to say, the Treatise first fully quotes the sūtra text and then explains it with the Treatise. Venerable [Hui]yuan first meticulously explained the sūtra, and then further explained the Treatise. Later people mostly adopted Venerable Yuan's text explaining the Treatise without looking at the preceding passages explaining the sūtra, hence there were many omissions. Now both are brought together and compared; the explanation of the text in both places is the first difference. Second, the ancients either, after finishing the explanation of the sūtra, quoted the Treatise to explain it, or quoted the Treatise and then explained the Treatise. Now, what is easy in the sūtra is explained directly using the Treatise as the commentary, or adding one or two words to make the meaning evident. If the sūtra text is difficult, the sūtra is explained first, and the Treatise is cited afterward to explain it. If the Treatise is difficult, the Treatise text is quoted first, and then commented on and explained. Or, the intent of the Treatise is taken first to interpret the sūtra text, and then the Treatise is cited as proof. This is the second difference. Third, the Jin sūtra, the Treatise sūtra, and the current Tang version—these three sūtras—differ; Xianshou commented on the Jin [version], and Venerable Yuan commented on the Treatise, yet later people merely took them to explain the current sūtra. Without skillful collation, there would occasionally be errors. Now, where they are identical, no explanation is given; where they differ, they are reconciled and synthesised. This is the third difference. Fourth, the ancient masters explained the Treatise according to the difficulties without fully having an intentional plan, so as to lecture on the sūtra and Treatise in mutual confrontation; thus without the text of the Treatise, their explanation of the sūtra was incomplete. Later people, on the other hand, frequently quoted the Treatise without meticulously explaining the Treatise; the expressions already being difficult to match, lecturing on the text of the Treatise itself was all the more difficult. Now, both the easy and the difficult are quoted; those that are difficult are explained. Even if some are not cited, that Treatise is easy to understand. Thus, whether with or without the Treatise, lecturing proceeds without obstruction. This is the fourth difference. Having understood the intention of the text, next is the formal explanation of the text. The text of the Commentary divides into two: first, a general classification; next, explaining in accordance with the text. In the former, if based on Venerable Yuan's division of the sūtra, there are two meanings: (1) relying on the person to reveal virtue; (2) making distinctions in terms of Dharma. Within the first there are also two: (a) regarding the main transforming teacher; (b) regarding the assisting transformers. These two each possess the three: essence, characteristic, and function. The three of the main transforming teacher are: the Buddha attaining true awakening reveals the essence of the realized Dharma; next, seven days of contemplation display the characteristics of his virtues—the Treatise below states, "Contemplating causes and conditions reveals the unshared dharmas"; afterward, from Vajragarbha entering samādhi downward displays their virtuous function. Second, the three regarding Vajragarbha's assistance in transformation are: first, entering samādhi reveals the essence of the realized Dharma; the common empowerment of all Buddhas displays the superior characteristics of his virtues, hence below, all Buddhas mutually praise him for being able to enter this Mahāyāna samādhi; from the section on arising downward is their virtuous function. The explanation says: each of these three above has a profound reason. Because it is not an explanation of Dharma, it is omitted and not clarified. The divisions made in the present Commentary are simply distinctions made in terms of Dharma. The text of the Commentary divides into two: first, classifying by secondary reference to the Treatise based on the sūtra; second, from "making forty-eight" downward, classifying according to meaning based on the Treatise. In the former there are also two: first, the formal classification; next, clarifying the sequence. In the former there are again two: first, the front-to-back folded classification. Folding it from the back, there are three folds; if counting from the front, there should be four sections: (1) expounding the stages in this realm; (2) concluding and pervading the ten directions; (3) the bodhisattvas' verification; (4) verses summarising all.