大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 64.76

64.76

Regarding the statement "Because volition associated with the three karmas generates the three formations": this generally identifies the essence of karma, and also corresponds to the categorical distinction of the three natures in the eighth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. In the Mahāyāna, all three karmas have volition as their essence: volition moving the body is called bodily karma; volition initiating speech is called vocal karma; volition's own essence is mental karma. The three formations—that is, the three phrases in the sūtra—all pervade the three karmas, and thus pervade both the material and immaterial states. From "meaning that due to" downward, it reveals the characteristics of the three karmas. Now, delusion is briefly twofold: first, delusion regarding the meaning of maturation; second, delusion regarding the meaning of true reality. The first delusion means being deluded about future retribution, not knowing that wholesome and unwholesome bring about future suffering and pleasure, and therefore indulging one's passions in the present to create evil. Because killing and the like have three grades, they become the causes of the three destinies, as explained in the first bhūmi. As for "and the painful karma of distinct retribution in the human and heavenly realms": the five precepts and lower-grade ten wholesome actions are the karma of collective retribution for humans. Having formerly harmed others, one incurs sensory deficiencies and the like, which are distinct retributions. Having formerly punished others, one also invites such retribution, and hence it is painful karma. From "However, the distinct must encompass the collective" downward, it explains the meaning that what brings about distinct retribution does not belong to the link of formations. The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi also states: "Consequently, all karma to be experienced in the present life, and that which separately assists future karma, are not the link of formations. For within initiating karma, the link of avidyā has that which can initiate both collective and distinct retributions generally, that which can initiate solely collective retribution, and that which can initiate solely distinct retribution; taking only the first two as initiated by the link of avidyā and subsumed under the link of formations, because the third is not subsumed under the link of formations." The commentary discriminates: "Because that which solely brings about distinct retribution is not the link of formations."