金剛般若論會釋 1.24

1.24

四下解對治，上來三相，問答俱有，次下三義唯在答中。對治是障所治金剛，由此經明二障，或唯所知障法執及三業故，不失是能治金剛地，是闊狹金剛，由不失中明中道理、智、境，正是能治體故。對治中有二，初、問，後、答。答中有二，初、標二，後、解二。標二中有解。邪行者是法執分別，是菩薩煩惱，名邪行故。共見正行者，共見是生執，是正行之所對治。由前以標對治之言，列名中略但言共見正行，正行非所治故，邪行即對治，後共見是正行之所對治。法執唯菩薩斷，但言邪行，是菩薩邪行，即知法執。其生執三乘通斷，故言共見，見是分別，違生空無分別智名分別，非是俱生、分別之惑名為分別。彼義不然，此論後卷上求佛地國土中云，若菩薩言我成就莊嚴國土，則非菩薩，此義為共見正行中轉，為斷彼故，安立第一義等。又云，若言我成就即為人我取，莊嚴國土者是法我取，故知二取俱名共見，障於正行。今正解者，邪行者是身、語、意行，二執所起行，今論多說是意邪行，生如是心意分別邪行業故。第二住處中應行布施，是邪行對治故，共見正行對治方是二執，見謂分別故，分別執著是菩薩煩惱，正是所除。如次前引後卷中說，此中二種如第二地說，斷二愚誤犯三業，即是此中二種對治。邪行對治，於彼彼位，各各因行彼行方起，不名為共，但名邪行。共見正行，見煩惱障及所知障，分別見體，諸位之中共所斷故。此解雖通人、法二執，准所知障名金剛，不說煩惱障，彼唯佛菩提智之所能斷故。復異釋如前既說，解二中有二，初、總解見義，後、配二經文。經文有二依，初二住處，解二治故。

Below section four, remedies are explained. The above three characteristics were present in both questions and answers; the next three meanings are solely within the answers. The remedy is the vajra that cures obstacles, because this sūtra clarifies the two obstacles, or solely the cognitive obstacle, attachment to phenomena, and the three karmas. Non-lapse is the vajra-stage of the curing agent; it is the wide and narrow vajra, because in non-lapse it clarifies the Middle Way, wisdom, and objects, which are precisely the essence of the curing agent. Under remedies there are two parts: first, the question; second, the answer. In the answer there are two: first, setting forth the two; second, explaining the two. Under setting forth the two, there is an explanation. Wrong practice is the conceptualization of attachment to phenomena, which is the affliction of bodhisattvas, hence called wrong practice. Correct practice of shared views: shared views are attachment to sentient beings, which is what correct practice remedies. Because it previously set forth the term "remedy," the list of names briefly states only "correct practice of shared views," since correct practice is not what is remedied; wrong practice is precisely the remedy, and subsequent shared views are what correct practice remedies. Attachment to phenomena is severed only by bodhisattvas; it merely states wrong practice, which is the wrong practice of bodhisattvas, and thus one knows it is attachment to phenomena. Attachment to sentient beings is severed in common by the three vehicles, hence it says "shared views"; "view" is conceptualization, and what goes against the non-conceptual wisdom of the emptiness of sentient beings is called conceptualization; it is not that the innate and conceptual afflictions are called conceptualization. That interpretation is incorrect. In the later fascicle of this treatise, under seeking the Buddha stage and the buddha-field, it says: "If a bodhisattva says, 'I will accomplish the adornment of a buddha-field,' then he is not a bodhisattva." This meaning turns within the correct practice of shared views, and to sever it, the ultimate truth and so forth are established. It also says: "If one says 'I accomplish,' this is grasping at a personal self; 'adornment of a buddha-field' is grasping at a phenomenal self." Therefore, one knows that both graspings are called shared views, which obstruct correct practice. The correct explanation now is: wrong practice refers to the bodily, verbal, and mental actions arising from the two attachments. In this treatise it mostly refers to mental wrong practice, because of the wrong mental karma of conceptualization arising from having such thoughts. In the second abode, one should practice giving as the remedy for wrong practice; the remedy for correct practice of shared views is precisely the two attachments, since "view" means conceptualization, and conceptual attachment is the affliction of bodhisattvas, which is precisely what is eliminated. As just cited above from the later fascicle, the two types here are as taught in the second stage: severing the two ignorances and mistakenly violating the three karmas are precisely the two remedies here. The remedy for wrong practice arises only by engaging in that respective practice in those respective stages, so it is not called "shared," but simply "wrong practice." Correct practice of shared views views the affliction obstacle and cognitive obstacle, the essence of the conceptual view, which are commonly severed across the stages. Although this explanation applies to both attachments to persons and phenomena, according to the cognitive obstacle being named vajra, it does not mention the affliction obstacle, because that is severed solely by the Buddha's bodhi wisdom. There are further differing explanations as stated earlier. Under explaining the two, there are two parts: first, a general explanation of the meaning of views; second, correlating with the two texts of the sūtra. The sūtra text has two bases, explaining the two remedies based on the first two abodes.