請觀音經疏闡義鈔 4.31

4.31

Regarding the sūtra's [words] 'all inverted thoughts' and so forth: this is also explained in terms of the mind sense organ. Thought is the mental factor of ideation. The five sense organs such as the ear all have three kinds of associated containment, which can be understood by analogy with the eye; therefore, the commentary does not discuss them. Regarding 'it is now said' below, this explains the body sense organ. As for 'the five sense organs are subtle', in contrast with the body, the body sense organ is coarse and great. Regarding 'if the mind sense organ receives' and so forth, this explains that the five sense organs are all lodged in the mental phenomena of the body sense organ. The mind sense organ reflecting in advance on the five sense objects is just the receiving of mental phenomena. As for 'already falsely having various contacts', one does not actually encounter objects such as form, but merely when the mind contemplates form and so forth, the eyes and the like already falsely have the various contacts of form and the like. The text has the two surplus characters *bei zhi* ('fully reaches'); otherwise, the two characters *ling shou* ('receive') are missing below 'falsely having'. Regarding 'therefore it says' below, this cites the sūtra. Thus we know that the five objects cited in the sūtra are all the imaginative reflection of the mind, and merely belong to mental phenomena. Associating with fine smoothness is precisely the false reception of various contacts when the mind contemplates. Therefore the sūtra says: 'And this consciousness-thief even universally conditions all dharmas.' Harming the true nature is called a thief. Climbing and grasping unceasingly, it is therefore said to be like a monkey running. Universally conditioning all dharmas means that when imaginatively reflecting on the five objects, the body has already falsely received the various contacts. Therefore, this section of the sūtra text only explains the body sense organ. As for 'the intentions of the shared, distinct, and perfect [teachings]', the shared understands sense organs and objects as being identical to emptiness, the distinct understands them as nominal, and the perfect understands them as the middle way; all are called containment. Here, containment is discussed with respect to practitioners of all ten kinds. The previous literal explanation pertained to people suffering retributions and people cultivating worldly wholesome dharmas. As for 'because it is in accordance with true reality, it is said to have no solidity', realizing that earth is fundamentally empty and entering the limit of true reality means having no solidity. Regarding 'the shared teaching' below, this demonstrates the contemplation method. The shared connects to the distinct and the perfect; thus, by showing the shared meaning, the rest can also be understood. 'Having solidity' should be 'no solidity', which is a textual error. Regarding 'moreover, the four' below, this refutes the four views and demonstrates the meaning of having no solidity. That is, if based on the views of the four gates of the Tripiṭaka [teaching], all turn into rigid graspings; how could there be no solidity? 'Paramāṇu' refers to the most subtle dust particle, bordering on empty space; it is called dust bordering on empty space. The *Abhidharma* analyzes form without annihilating the paramāṇu; this is the gate of existence. As for 'seeing emptiness is having no view', the *Satyasiddhi* analyzes form so that the paramāṇu is also annihilated; this is the gate of emptiness. As for 'up to the four propositions', both-affirmation is like the *Peṭakopadeśa*, and double-negation is like the *Kātyāyana Sūtra*. Regarding 'deeply attached' and so forth, analyzing earth down to paramāṇus means that earth is existent; existence is reality, and reality is the meaning of solidity. If one claims that earth is non-existent, or both-affirmation and double-negation are real, with the rest being false speech—these deviant attachments are all the meaning of solidity; hence it says 'deeply attached and unable to relinquish' and so forth. Having parted from the four faults, it cannot be found upon investigation; that is the nature of no solidity. However, this earth element is fundamentally not the words 'four propositions' or 'no solidity'; it is because of delusion that it is called solid, so the four propositions rely on solidity to refute attachment. As for 'water does not abide in the four propositions', claiming water to be existent means existence is abiding; even claiming water to be neither existent nor non-existent is also abiding. Now, it does not abide in the four propositions of existence, nor does it abide in the four propositions of non-existence, nor does it abide in the ineffable; therefore it is said that the nature of water has no abiding. Regarding 'wind is unobstructed' and so forth: contemplating wind as existent means existence is obstruction, up to wind as double-negation, which are all obstruction. Hence it says, 'How could there not be the material obstruction of the four propositions?' Now, because one contemplates the absence of the four propositions, it is said that the nature of wind is unobstructed. That it does not mention the fire element is an abbreviation of the text. It should say that fire does not arise from itself, up to not arising from no cause; fundamentally lacking self-nature, it exists reliant on conditions; hence it is said that the nature of fire is not real. This explains that the four great elements are fundamentally empty, which is the form aggregate entering the limit of true reality. As for the remaining four aggregates, the sūtra text abbreviates them, merely taking the form aggregate as an analogy; hence it says 'feeling, ideation, formation, and consciousness' and so forth. If one wishes to deduce it, one should say that feeling's nature of receiving cannot be found. If one claims feeling is existent, existence is receiving; up to claiming feeling is neither existent nor non-existent is also receiving. Even up to consciousness being discernment, it is likewise so.