金剛般若論會釋 2.41

2.41

對治三苦因緣中，上來明對治流轉苦因緣能發大心，下解第二眾生相違苦因緣對治。雖復發心，但為眾生相違之時，便生勞倦，不能濟度，勤修自行。對治此故有下經。釋疑有三，初、明對治，次、勸信佛語故忍，後、破如言執著。初文有三，初、牒經配，次、解忍相，後、釋二無我文。解忍相者，既為一切眾生而行於捨等者，即五忍中住親善想及攝受想。捨即布施，天親云，以檀度攝六度，偏說之。云何為利益眾生修行，而不名住於眾生事？為斷此疑故，下經云，此意既為眾生行施，云何不名住利生事？偈云，「修行利眾生，如是因當識，眾生及事相，遠離亦應知」，此說利益是因體故，彼行利益眾生，非取眾生相事，故雖利生亦成不住。釋二無我中，由不能無眾生相故，相違之時即生疲乏。由有人我，必有法我，二我既行，利益之時便為勞倦，故生疲乏。顯二無我以破彼執，經言一切眾生相即非相，依法無我；一切眾生即非眾生，顯人無我。此中總說。天親別釋云，「假名及陰事，如來離彼相，諸佛無彼二，以見實法故」。眾生事有二，一、眾生名，二、五陰事，即彼眾生能詮名相，非實體相，以名自性無實體故。由是一切眾生相即非相，眾生名相無實體故，能詮名成法無我。又以五陰假名眾生，於五蘊中無眾生體，以無實故，由是一切眾生即非眾生，明人無我；但有假陰和合及假呼名，若人、若法皆無實故，成二無我。故相違時不應嗔恨，五忍中住唯法相，人無我也；法名亦假，法無我也。彼偈又云，「如來離彼相，諸佛無彼二，以見實法故」者，諸佛見實二無我理，由佛離二相故，二我不實。觀此誦意何義故來？流支本中更無別說，唯真諦本「非眾生」下，更有「何以故？諸佛世尊遠離一切相故」，諸本以重，至皆刪略也。如前一段中已說此故，然觀彼論及真諦，有即顯世尊由內證實二無我故，外離不實人、法二想故，勸發心修行之時，眾生相違故，觀二無我不生嗔恨，故言「何以故」，微出二無我之所由，方言世尊離諸相等，有似重踏，乃順理成，文雖省繁，不闕成前說。

Among the antidotes to the causes and conditions of the three sufferings, the above has clarified that the antidote to the causes and conditions of the suffering of transmigration can generate the great mind; below is the explanation of the antidote to the second [cause and condition], the suffering of sentient beings' opposition. Even though one has generated the mind, when one encounters the opposition of sentient beings, weariness arises, so that one cannot bring them across and diligently cultivate one's own practice. To counteract this, there is the sūtra text below. Explaining doubts has three parts: first, clarifying the antidote; next, exhorting endurance through trusting the Buddha's words; and last, breaking attachments based on literal words. The first passage has three parts: first, reciting the sūtra and correlating it; next, explaining the characteristics of endurance; and last, explaining the text on the two selflessnesses. As for explaining the characteristics of endurance, since one practices renunciation and so forth for the sake of all sentient beings, this is abiding in the thought of intimacy and benevolence and the thought of embracing among the five endurances. Renunciation is giving; Vasubandhu says that because the perfection of giving subsumes the six perfections, it is mentioned specifically. Why is cultivating for the benefit of sentient beings not called abiding in the affairs of sentient beings? In order to sever this doubt, the sūtra below says: since this intent is practicing giving for the sake of sentient beings, how is it not called abiding in the affairs of benefiting sentient beings? The verse says: "Cultivating practice to benefit sentient beings—/ such a cause should be recognized; / marks of sentient beings and affairs / should also be known as departed from." This states that benefiting is the essence of the cause; their practice of benefiting sentient beings does not apprehend the marks and affairs of sentient beings, so although benefiting beings, it also accomplishes non-abiding. In explaining the two selflessnesses: because one cannot be free of the marks of sentient beings, when opposition occurs weariness immediately arises. Because there is a self of persons, there must be a self of phenomena; when both selves operate, at the time of benefiting one becomes weary, and therefore exhaustion arises. Revealing the two selflessnesses refutes those attachments. The sūtra says that all marks of sentient beings are non-marks, which relies on the selflessness of phenomena; all sentient beings are non-sentient beings, which reveals the selflessness of persons. This is a general statement here. Vasubandhu gives a separate explanation, saying: "Nominal designations and aggregate-affairs, / the Tathāgata is free from those marks; / the Buddhas lack both of them, / because they see real phenomena." Affairs of sentient beings are twofold: first, the name "sentient beings"; second, the affairs of the five aggregates. That is, the expressive nominal marks of those sentient beings are not real, substantial marks, because the intrinsic nature of names lacks real substance. By this, all marks of sentient beings are non-marks, because the nominal marks of sentient beings lack real substance; expressive names establish the selflessness of phenomena. Furthermore, because sentient beings are nominally designated on the basis of the five aggregates, within the five aggregates there is no substance of a sentient being; because there is nothing real, by this all sentient beings are non-sentient beings, clarifying the selflessness of persons. There are only the compounded gathering of provisional aggregates and provisional naming; whether persons or phenomena, both lack reality, establishing the two selflessnesses. Therefore, when encountering opposition, one should not feel anger and resentment; among the five endurances, abiding in the mark of mere dharmas is the selflessness of persons; dharmas and names are also provisional, which is the selflessness of phenomena. That verse also says: "The Tathāgata is free from those marks; / the Buddhas lack both of them, / because they see real phenomena." The Buddhas see the real principle of the two selflessnesses; because the Buddhas are free from both marks, the two selves are unreal. Considering the intent of this recitation, for what reason does it come? In Bodhiruci's edition there is no other distinct statement, but only in Paramārtha's edition, below "non-sentient beings," there is further: "For what reason? Because the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, is far removed from all marks." The other editions, considering it repetitive, all pruned and omitted it. Because this was already stated in the previous section, looking at that treatise and Paramārtha's text, its presence reveals that because the World-Honoured One internally realizes the true two selflessnesses, he externally departs from the unreal thoughts of persons and phenomena; therefore when exhorting generation of the mind and cultivating practice, because sentient beings are in opposition, one contemplates the two selflessnesses without generating anger and resentment. Therefore it says "For what reason?", subtly setting forth the basis for the two selflessnesses, and only then says that the World-Honoured One is free from all marks, and so forth. Although it appears to repeat, it accords with the principle and is established; though the text is simplified or elaborated, it does not fail to accomplish the former explanation.