大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 70.44

70.44

Regarding "Completing karma pervades the three natures; nominal perfuming also pervades the three natures, being admitted as causal seeds" in the commentary: the eighth fascicle of Vijñaptimātratā states: "However, habitual tendencies broadly have three kinds: first, nominal habitual tendencies, which are the respective direct seeds of conditioned dharmas; second, self-grasping habitual tendencies; third, bhava-aṅga (existential link) habitual tendencies." The latter two habitual tendencies are extensively clarified in the Sixth Ground. Its nominal habitual tendencies were already explained in the 'Inquiry and Clarification [Chapter]'. In order to clarify the three natures, it again cites the treatise explaining nominal habitual tendencies, stating: "Nominal designation has two kinds: first, nominal designation expressing meaning, which is the distinction of sounds that can express meaning; second, nominal designation manifesting objects, which are the mind and mental factors that can cognize objects. The seeds perfumed according to the two nominal designations, which produce conditioned dharmas, are called particular causes and conditions." That commentary explains: "Nominal perfuming refers to dharmas of the three natures, each referring to its direct seed. As for nominal designation expressing meaning being the distinction of sounds that can express meaning, this excludes sound that does not express, because that is not a name. However, a name is an inflection upon sound, uniquely non-defined in nature, and unable to perfume into seeds of form, mind, and so on. Yet seeds arising dependent on names are called nominal seeds, meaning that because of the name, the mind is made to cognize and thus forms seeds." In the present sūtra, following the meaning of arising from a cause refers to nominal designation manifesting objects; hence it says they are admitted as causal seeds. In the commentary, "Furthermore, Kośa 17 correlates the causes of the three natures with the five kinds of fruits; the non-defined is also able to bring about fruits. The treatise generally takes the three as causes of the path": at the beginning of the fifth fascicle of that commentary, the treatise states: "The fruits spoken of previously are of five kinds; here, which karma has how many kinds of fruits? The verse says: 'Defiled karma of the path of severing / Is fully possessed of five fruits. / Pure karma has four, / Meaning only excluding retribution. / Other defiled wholesome and unwholesome [karmas] / Also have four, excluding disconnection. / Other pure and non-defined [dharmas] / Have three, excluding what was excluded before.'" The explanation states: The path of severing is the uninterrupted path; the extensive correlation is as found there. The second part therein correlates the three natures against one another. The treatise states: "Having generally distinguished that all karmas have fruits, we next explain the aspects of karmic fruits through different gates; among them, we first distinguish the three fruits of the wholesome and so on. The verse says: 'Wholesome and so on, toward wholesome and so on, / Have four, two, and three for the first; / The middle has two, three, and four; / The last has two, three, and three fruits.'" The explanation states: The upper 'wholesome and so on' refers to karma; the lower 'wholesome and so on' refers to dharmas. The first is wholesome karma: taking wholesome dharmas as four fruits, meaning excluding retribution, because retribution is uniquely non-defined. Taking unwholesome as two fruits, meaning puruṣakāra (virile) and adhipati (dominant). Taking non-defined as three fruits, excluding niṣyanda (equal outflow) and visaṃyoga (disconnection); hence it says 'the first has four, two, and three.' Regarding 'the middle has two, three, and four': the middle is unwholesome karma. Taking wholesome as two fruits, meaning dominant and virile. Taking unwholesome as three fruits, adding equal outflow. Taking non-defined as four fruits, meaning excluding disconnection. Regarding 'the last has two, three, and three fruits': the last is non-defined. Taking wholesome as two fruits, meaning virile and dominant. Taking unwholesome as three fruits, excluding retribution and disconnection. Taking non-defined as three fruits, also excluding retribution and disconnection. The exposition states: Since non-defined relative to wholesome and unwholesome has two, three, and three fruits, it is clear that it has fruits. How much more so, as the particular is not separate from the general, there is no error in it being a cause.