金光明經文句 4.9.1

4.9.1

從「善女當觀」下二十一行，是第二明生法二空觀。 文為二：初八行半明修因生法二空觀、次十二行半明果成起用。 因中又二：初三行半約苦集明生法二空觀、次從「無明體相」下五行約十二因緣明生法二空觀。 約苦集又二：初從「善女」下一行半明眾生空、次從「如是諸大」下二行明法空。 問：四諦十二緣是二乘法，云何是菩薩觀門？ 答：四諦十二緣通是三乘觀境，譬如大道貴賤同遊，不可群小行之而判屬民庶。 通意云何？ 《涅槃》云「我昔與汝等不見四真諦（云云）。 」又云「凡夫有苦無諦，聲聞有苦有苦諦，菩薩解苦無苦而有真諦，諸佛如來有真有實。 」所以然者？ 二乘觀有量四諦，菩薩觀有量無量四諦。 《大經》云「十二因緣凡有四種：下智觀故得聲聞，中智觀故得支佛，上智觀故得菩薩，上上智觀故得佛菩提。 」復有別意，《大品》云「十二因緣獨菩薩法。 如佛昔為儒童，雖行眾行，非波羅蜜。 見然燈佛，得無生法忍，一念相應習應苦空，乃至習應滅空，習應無明空乃至老死空。 諸相應中，空相應最為第一，以空導行皆名波羅蜜。 以得無生法忍，故佛即與記。 」當知菩薩豈不觀於四諦十二緣邪？ 二乘雖復同觀，觀法有異。 聲聞觀諸果，總作一苦諦觀。 觀諸煩惱及業，總作一集諦觀。 又苦之與集總是現在，所以名總相觀也。 緣覺觀苦為七，現在五、未來二。 觀集為五，過去二、現在三。 別觀三世，別開苦集，故言緣覺別相觀也。 雖復總別有殊，同是自調自度，同是析生法二空觀爾，與菩薩有異。 菩薩為眾生修四等六度，觀四諦十二緣，作生法二空。 今舉譬喻之。 如握五指成拳，若一指一拳應有五拳； 若一指無拳，五何得有？ 我人亦爾，攬五陰成眾生。 一陰有眾生，應有五眾生； 一陰無眾生，雖五亦無。 即陰求眾生不得，離陰求眾生亦不得。 雖求拳不得拳，不妨有皮骨之指存； 雖求人不得人，不妨有五陰之法。 在二乘人得生空時，未能知法空，更須析指皮肉骨髓分分推求亦不得指，地水火風窮逐隣虛亦不得色，前念後念亦無想受，求指不得指，始知指無； 求法不得法，方知法虛。 既不得生法二空境，亦不得生法二空智。 通菩薩觀亦然，是為菩薩二乘析生法二空相，如此但有自行為他之異（云云）。 若論別菩薩體空，與其永異。 如見鏡拳，懸體既空，不勞尋檢。 鏡拳既虛，鏡指非實。 鏡內拳指既是虛，鏡外拳指亦非實。 眾生亦爾，但有名字名為眾生。 此之名字本來自空，非檢後空。 名既假名，法亦非法。 體名即體法，如《大品》云「我性如色性，色性如我性。 」今世生法由無明行，五果既虛，二因寧實？ 下文云「本性空寂，無明故有。 」無明既寂，從無明生，寧得不寂？ 雖不得生法二境，而能了了通達二境，不為境所染； 雖不得生法二空智，而能了了通達二空智，不為智所淨。 非染非淨，雙亡二邊，正入中道第一義諦，而能雙照二諦。 三諦朗然，非前非後一時大覺，與此甚深法性相應，金剛寶藏具足而得，是為菩薩體生法二空觀。 諸小乘師雖說析空，同外道義。 何者？ 析色極至隣虛，或存塵不破、或破塵令盡。 若存不破，秖是常見； 若破塵盡，秖是斷見。 斷常宛然，非邪何謂？ 諸大乘師雖說體空，同於小道。 何者？ 單用體慧，不能一念空心，遊戲神通，淨佛國土，具足解釋佛之知見，何能三智一心中得，五眼具足而成菩提耶？ 似小乘壞法人，無三明六通願智頂等，秖是慧解脫人而已，非小何謂？ 今經首軸窮深極廣，〈序品〉云「遊於無量甚深法性」，〈空品〉云「求於如來真實法身」，〈捨身品〉云「求於寂滅無上涅槃」，豈可用世人邪見？ 豈可用小乘之析？ 豈可用大乘師之體解此空義邪？ 「善女當觀」下一行半明生空觀，初一句對告勸發、次一句指上境、次四句正作觀。

From "Good woman, you should contemplate" onward for twenty-one lines is the second [section], which explains the contemplation of the two kinds of emptiness—of the sentient being and of dharmas. The text has two parts: first, eight and a half lines explain cultivating the contemplation of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas as the cause; next, twelve and a half lines explain arising function once the fruit is accomplished. Within the cause there are also two parts: first, three and a half lines explain the contemplation of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas with reference to suffering and origination; next, from "The essence and characteristics of ignorance" onward for five lines, it explains the contemplation of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas with reference to the twelve links of dependent origination. With reference to suffering and origination, there are also two parts: first, from "Good woman" onward for one and a half lines, it explains the emptiness of the sentient being; next, from "Such great elements" onward for two lines, it explains the emptiness of dharmas. Question: The four truths and the twelve links are dharmas of the two vehicles; how can they be a contemplation gate of the bodhisattva? Answer: The four truths and the twelve links are common contemplation objects for the three vehicles. For example, on a great highway, the noble and the base travel alike; it cannot be that because common folk walk on it, it is classified as belonging exclusively to the common people. What is the common meaning? The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Formerly, I together with you did not see the four true truths…" and so on. It also says: "Ordinary persons have suffering but no truth; śrāvakas have suffering and have the truth of suffering; bodhisattvas understand suffering as having no suffering, yet having the absolute truth; the Buddhas, the Tathāgatas, have the true and have the real." Why is this so? The two vehicles contemplate the measurable four truths; bodhisattvas contemplate both measurable and immeasurable four truths. The Great Sūtra says: "The twelve links of dependent origination are of four kinds: through contemplating them with inferior wisdom, one becomes a śrāvaka; through contemplating them with intermediate wisdom, one becomes a pratyekabuddha; through contemplating them with superior wisdom, one becomes a bodhisattva; through contemplating them with supreme wisdom, one attains the Buddha's bodhi." There is also a distinct meaning: the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says, "The twelve links of dependent origination are exclusively the dharma of bodhisattvas. As when the Buddha formerly was the young scholar, though he practiced numerous practices, they were not pāramitās. Seeing Dīpaṅkara Buddha, he attained the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas; in a single moment of thought he was in correspondence, cultivating correspondence with the emptiness of suffering, up to cultivating correspondence with the emptiness of cessation, cultivating correspondence with the emptiness of ignorance, up to the emptiness of aging and death. Among all correspondences, the correspondence with emptiness is the foremost; guiding practice by means of emptiness, all are called pāramitās. Because he attained the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas, the Buddha immediately bestowed prophecy upon him." You should know: how could a bodhisattva not contemplate the four truths and the twelve links? Although the two vehicles also contemplate them in common, their methods of contemplation are different. Śrāvakas contemplate all fruits collectively as a single contemplation of the truth of suffering. They contemplate all afflictions and karma collectively as a single contemplation of the truth of origination. Furthermore, both suffering and origination are entirely present; therefore it is called the contemplation of general characteristics. Pratyekabuddhas contemplate suffering as seven: five in the present and two in the future. They contemplate origination as five: two in the past and three in the present. Contemplating the three times separately and opening suffering and origination distinctively, it is therefore called the pratyekabuddha's contemplation of specific characteristics. Although there is a difference between general and specific, both are self-taming and self-delivering, and both are merely contemplations analyzing the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas; they differ from the bodhisattva. Bodhisattvas, for the sake of sentient beings, cultivate the four immeasurables and the six pāramitās, contemplate the four truths and the twelve links, and realize the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas. Now let us present a simile for this. It is like clenching five fingers into a fist: if one finger were one fist, there should be five fists; if one finger has no fist, how could five have it? The 'self' or 'person' is also like this: gathering the five aggregates constitutes a sentient being. If one aggregate had a sentient being, there should be five sentient beings; if one aggregate has no sentient being, even with five there is none. Seeking the sentient being within the aggregates, one cannot find it; seeking the sentient being apart from the aggregates, one also cannot find it. Although seeking the fist one cannot find the fist, this does not prevent the fingers of skin and bone from existing; although seeking the person one cannot find the person, this does not prevent the dharmas of the five aggregates from existing. When practitioners of the two vehicles attain the emptiness of the sentient being, they are not yet able to know the emptiness of dharmas; they must further analyze the skin, flesh, bones, and marrow of the fingers, seeking part by part, and yet cannot find the finger; tracing earth, water, fire, and wind to their ultimate limit in adjacent subtle atoms, they also cannot find matter; in prior thoughts and subsequent thoughts, there is also neither perception nor feeling. Seeking the finger and not finding the finger, only then do they know that the finger does not exist; seeking dharmas and not finding dharmas, only then do they know that dharmas are empty. Neither attaining the object of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas, nor attaining the wisdom of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas. The contemplation of the common bodhisattva is also like this; these are the characteristics of the analysis of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas by bodhisattvas and the two vehicles: like this, there is only the difference between personal practice and benefiting others, and so on. If one discusses the distinctive bodhisattva's embodiment of emptiness, it is eternally different from this. It is like seeing a fist in a mirror: the suspended substance is already empty, requiring no investigation. Since the mirrored fist is already illusory, the mirrored fingers are not real. Since the fist and fingers inside the mirror are illusory, the fist and fingers outside the mirror are also not real. Sentient beings are also like this: there is only a name called 'sentient being'. This name is originally and naturally empty; it is not empty only after investigation. Since the name is already a provisional name, dharmas are also not real dharmas. Embodying the name is immediately embodying dharmas, as the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: 'The nature of the self is like the nature of form; the nature of form is like the nature of the self.' In the present life, sentient beings and dharmas arise from ignorance and volitional formations: since the five fruits are already illusory, how could the two causes be real? The text below says: 'Original nature is empty and tranquil; it exists because of ignorance.' Since ignorance is already tranquil, how could that which is born from ignorance fail to be tranquil? Although they do not grasp the two objects of the sentient being and dharmas, they can clearly and thoroughly penetrate the two objects without being defiled by them; although they do not grasp the wisdom of the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas, they can clearly and thoroughly penetrate the wisdom of the two kinds of emptiness without being purified by the wisdom. Neither defiled nor purified, double-negating both extremes, directly entering the supreme absolute truth of the Middle Way, they can double-illuminate the two truths. The three truths shine brightly; neither before nor after, in a single moment there is great awakening, corresponding with this profound dharmatā, fully attaining the diamond treasure-trove. This is the bodhisattva's contemplation of embodying the two kinds of emptiness of the sentient being and dharmas. Although the various Hīnayāna masters speak of analytical emptiness, it is identical to non-Buddhist doctrines. Why? In analyzing matter to the extreme of adjacent subtle atoms, they either preserve the dust particles without breaking them down, or break down the dust particles to extinguish them entirely. If they preserve them without breaking them down, it is merely the view of permanence; if they break down the dust particles entirely, it is merely the view of annihilationism. Annihilationism and permanence are clearly evident—if not heterodox, what can this be called? Although the various Mahāyāna masters speak of embodying emptiness, it is identical to the inferior path. Why? Exclusively employing the wisdom of embodiment, they cannot in a single thought of an empty mind playfully sport in spiritual penetrations, purify Buddha-lands, or fully explain the Buddha's knowledge and vision; how could they attain the three wisdoms in a single mind, be fully endowed with the five eyes, and achieve bodhi? They resemble the Hīnayāna person of broken dharmas who lacks the three clarities, the six spiritual penetrations, the knowledge of aspiration, the summits, and so forth, being merely a person liberated by wisdom and nothing more—if not inferior, what can this be called? The opening scroll of the present sūtra exhausts the profound and reaches the utmost breadth: the 'Introductory Chapter' says, 'roaming in the immeasurable, profound dharmatā'; the 'Chapter on Emptiness' says, 'seeking the Tathāgata's true Dharmakāya'; the 'Chapter on the Relinquishing of the Body' says, 'seeking quiescent, unsurpassed nirvāṇa'. How could one use worldly people's heterodox views? How could one use the Hīnayāna analysis? How could one use the Mahāyāna masters' embodiment to understand this meaning of emptiness? The one and a half lines from 'Good woman, you should contemplate' onward explain the contemplation of the emptiness of the sentient being: the first line directly addresses and exhorts her; the next line points to the object above; the next four lines directly perform the contemplation.