三彌勒經疏 1.64

1.64

經曰「是諸化佛」以下，第二說法。此中二：初重化佛說法、二應佛說法即釋迦也。是初也。清淨者，八地以上，一切煩惱不現行故。或初地以上證性淨理，伏諸惑故。言甚深者，圓得分得，如次得故。不可思議者妙義，超分別心、絕言說道故。陀羅尼者，此云總持，義作四門：一釋名、二辨體、三問答、四釋本文。言釋名者，即念慧等能總合眾德，識明達、記不忘，以略含廣名總持。第二辨體者，昔來三解。有說以定為體，謂《智度論》云「定得智火」，能持故。有說念為體，彼論云「念力故，持令不失」。有說以慧為體，彼論云「若菩薩心中名般若，聲聞心中名道品，不忘人心中名陀羅尼」。今以念定慧為體，謂《瑜伽論》云「妙陀羅尼，略有四種：一法、二義、三呪、四忍。」此中景法師云：「初三唯後智為體，後一正體智為體。」今云法義二以念慧為體；呪一種以自在定為體，謂定力令有神驗故；忍一種以慧為體，謂無分別智能忍無生理故。第三問答者，問：准《智度論》既說定慧念三名陀羅尼，如何三家各談一耶？答：彼文意者，定為體者即念慧為方便也，念為體者定慧為方便也，慧為體者念定為方便也。問：若慧亦陀羅尼為體者，何故《智度論》云「三昧共實相故能生陀羅尼」。答：智未必能總持，總持依定而成辦故。不違彼文也。問：智等三名總持者，應說相應法。何故《智度論》云「或心相應，或心不相應」？答：三法皆通現種，種即不相應，現即相應故。第四釋本文者，言諸者，有二義：一法義非一故、二空有非一故。言法者，亦有二義：一總持自體即有軌持義故名法。總持即法故，持業釋。二詮陀羅尼之教名為法。陀羅尼之法故，依主釋。

From the sūtra's words "These transformation Buddhas..." downward is the second [section], explaining the teaching of the Dharma. Within this there are two [parts]: first, the transformation Buddhas reiterate the teaching of the Dharma; second, the response Buddha explains the Dharma, which refers to Śākyamuni. This is the first part. "Pure" means that from the eighth bhūmi and above, all afflictions do not manifest. Alternatively, from the first bhūmi and above, one realizes the principle of the intrinsically pure nature and subdues all confusions. As for the word "profound," this refers to attaining it completely or attaining it in part, which are attained in due order. The "inconceivable" refers to its wondrous meaning, as it transcends the conceptualizing mind and cuts off the path of verbal explanation. As for dhāraṇī, here translated as "total retention" (zongchi), its meaning comprises four gates: first, explaining the name; second, distinguishing its essence; third, questions and answers; fourth, explaining the text itself. In explaining the name: mindfulness, wisdom, and so forth are able to unite all virtues comprehensively, having clear comprehension of consciousness and unforgetting retention; because they concisely contain what is broad, they are called "total retention." Second, in distinguishing its essence, there have historically been three explanations. Some say it takes samādhi as its essence, citing the *Dazhidulun* (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*), which says: "Samādhi obtains the fire of wisdom," because it is able to retain. Some say it takes mindfulness as its essence, as that treatise says: "By the power of mindfulness, it retains and prevents loss." Some say it takes wisdom as its essence, as that treatise says: "In the minds of bodhisattvas it is called prajñā; in the minds of śrāvakas it is called the factors of enlightenment; in the minds of those who do not forget it is called dhāraṇī." Now, [we say that] it takes mindfulness, samādhi, and wisdom as its essence; as the *Yogācārabhūmiśāstra* says: "Wondrous dhāraṇīs are briefly of four kinds: first, of teaching (dharma); second, of meaning (artha); third, of mantra; fourth, of patient endurance (kṣānti)." Regarding this, Master Jing says: "The first three take only subsequent wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna) as their essence; the latter one takes fundamental wisdom (mūla-jñāna) as its essence." Now we say that the two—teaching and meaning—take mindfulness and wisdom as their essence. The single kind of mantra takes sovereign samādhi as its essence, as the power of samādhi causes it to have spiritual efficacy. The single kind of patient endurance takes wisdom as its essence, as non-conceptual wisdom is able to patiently endure the principle of the unproduced. Third, regarding questions and answers: Question: Since, according to the *Dazhidulun*, samādhi, wisdom, and mindfulness are all three called dhāraṇī, why do the three traditions each speak of only one? Answer: The intent of that text is that when samādhi is taken as the essence, mindfulness and wisdom serve as skillful means; when mindfulness is taken as the essence, samādhi and wisdom serve as skillful means; when wisdom is taken as the essence, mindfulness and samādhi serve as skillful means. Question: If wisdom is also the essence of dhāraṇī, why does the *Dazhidulun* say: "Samādhi together with real mark is able to give birth to dhāraṇī"? Answer: Wisdom cannot necessarily retain totally, because total retention is accomplished in reliance upon samādhi. Thus it does not contradict that text. Question: If the three factors of wisdom and so forth are called total retention, they should be spoken of as associated dharmas. Why does the *Dazhidulun* say: "It is either associated with mind or unassociated with mind"? Answer: All three dharmas apply to both active manifestations and seeds: seeds are unassociated, and active manifestations are associated. Fourth, in explaining the text itself: The word "all" (諸) has two meanings: first, because teachings and meanings are not one; second, because emptiness and existence are not one. The word "dharmas" (法) also has two meanings: first, the essence of total retention itself has the meaning of maintaining norms (guichi), and is therefore called dharma; total retention is itself dharma, which is an appositional compound (karmadhāraya). Second, the teaching that expounds the dhāraṇī is called dharma; it is the dharma of dhāraṇī, which is a genitive tatpuruṣa compound.