勝鬘寶窟 1.37.4

1.37.4

今明所以有此文來者，上但略歎三德，人情謂如來理極於此，故今明如來體與虛空同量不可窮盡，上所歎者略歎少分耳。 又上來歎如來德，人謂佛德可歎； 今明歎所不能歎，乃窮稱歎之美，故有此文來也。 又上歎四德，此一一德具過稱量等四義。 世間之物，可稱其重輕、量其長短； 佛德過稱之故，言過稱量也。 世間之物，可以譬況、可以類取； 佛德不爾，故云無譬類。 世間之物，有其邊表畔齊； 佛德不爾，故稱無邊法。 世間之法，可以心思、可以口議； 佛德不爾，故言敬禮難思議也。 問：云何名為難思議？ 答：夫欲禮佛，須精識佛。 龍樹《中論》云「如來在世時，不言有與無，亦有及亦無，非有及非無。 」滅後亦爾，佛既絕乎四句，不可作四句而禮。 若作有而禮，佛非是有，此則謗佛。 又是禮有，不名禮佛。 下三句亦然。 問：作絕四句而禮，是禮佛不？ 答：亦非禮佛。 所以然者，《大品》云「行亦不受，亦行亦不行亦不受，非行非不行亦不受，不受亦不受。 」則知五句皆捨。 而般若即是佛，龍樹云：「若如法觀佛，般若及涅槃，是三則一相，其實無有異。 」故知般若絕五，佛亦如之。 問：所禮之佛既絕五句，能禮之人其義云何？ 答：須識不二二義、二不二義。 若不二而二，師弟宛然； 二而不二，則尊卑寂滅。 故《維摩》云「普於一切國，供養諸如來，諸佛及以身，無有分別想。 」此意明上半即是不二二義，下半即是二不二義也。 禮佛既爾，念與歸依義亦如是。 此雖一句之經，乃是佛法大事，不可不留心也。

Now it is explained that the reason this text appears is that above, the three virtues were only briefly praised, and human sentiment might assume that the Tathāgata's principle culminates here. Therefore, it is now explained that the Tathāgata's essence is equal in measure to empty space and cannot be exhausted; what was praised above was merely a brief praise of a small fraction. Furthermore, the above praised the Tathāgata's virtues, and people assumed that the Buddha's virtues could be praised; now it is explained that praising what cannot be praised exhausts the excellence of praise; hence this text appears. Moreover, the four virtues were praised above, and each one of these virtues is endowed with the four meanings of exceeding measurement and the like. Worldly things can be weighed for their lightness and heaviness, or measured for their length and shortness; because the Buddha's virtues exceed weighing, it says 'exceeds measurement.' Worldly things can be illustrated by metaphor or categorized by likeness; the Buddha's virtues are not like this, so it says 'has no comparison.' Worldly things have boundaries, edges, and limits; the Buddha's virtues are not like this, so it is called 'the boundless Dharma.' Worldly phenomena can be thought of with the mind and discussed with speech; the Buddha's virtues are not like this, so it says 'homage to the difficult to conceive.'

Question: Why is it called 'difficult to conceive'?

Answer: One who wishes to pay homage to the Buddha must accurately recognize the Buddha. Nāgārjuna's *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* states: 'When the Tathāgata was in the world, he did not say existent or non-existent, both existent and non-existent, or neither existent nor non-existent.' It is likewise after his extinction. Since the Buddha is completely beyond the four propositions, one cannot pay homage by framing him within the four propositions. If one pays homage treating him as existent, the Buddha is not existent, and this is slandering the Buddha. Moreover, this is paying homage to existence, and is not called paying homage to the Buddha. The lower three propositions are also like this.

Question: If one pays homage while transcending the four propositions, is that paying homage to the Buddha?

Answer: It is also not paying homage to the Buddha. Why is this so? The *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā* says: 'Practice is also not accepted; both practice and non-practice are also not accepted; neither practice nor non-practice is also not accepted; non-acceptance is also not accepted.' Thus we know that all five propositions are relinquished. And prajñā is none other than the Buddha. Nāgārjuna says: 'If one contemplates the Buddha in accordance with the Dharma, prajñā, and nirvāṇa, these three are of one characteristic, and in reality there is no difference.' Therefore, we know that prajñā is beyond five [propositions], and the Buddha is likewise.

Question: Since the Buddha who is the object of homage is beyond the five propositions, what is the meaning of the person who pays homage?

Answer: One must recognize the meaning of duality in non-duality, and the meaning of non-duality in duality. If there is duality in non-duality, master and disciple are distinctly evident; if there is non-duality in duality, then high and low are quiescent and extinguished. Therefore, the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says: 'Everywhere in all lands, make offerings to the Tathāgatas; regarding the Buddhas and oneself, there is no conceptual thought of distinction.' The intent here clarifies that the first half is the meaning of duality in non-duality, and the second half is the meaning of non-duality in duality. Paying homage to the Buddha being like this, the meanings of mindfulness and taking refuge are also like this. Although this is only a single phrase of the sūtra, it is indeed a great matter of the Buddha-Dharma, and one must not fail to pay close attention to it.