金剛般若論會釋 2.5

2.5

第二為離少聞中分二，初、屬經離障，後、指可觀知。經文分二，初、問，後、答。天親論云，此中有疑，「釋迦如來昔住第八地，逢燃燈佛，為說授記，彼佛有說，此佛有受，云何言法不可取、說？」今此論意，言有取、說者，由不遇善友，離佛出世，法不廣聞解，由少聞故，言於彼時此佛、彼佛有取、有說。今為除此少聞之障，故有下經。前卷為外不遇善友，故有下經令逢善友；此卷為內有所知障，𨷂多聞故，有少聞障，故說下經，令學多聞。故經中說，「多聞能斷或，多聞能引樂，多聞捨無義，多聞得涅槃」。又論言，多聞熏習是出世心之種子，由此少聞是所知障。疑生通二障，牒彼論疑從前起，此論依自少聞不逢善友，各望一義，亦不相違。若遇善友，得逢諸佛，廣學多聞，便知釋迦於燃燈佛所，真實義中無少法可得，不生分別；言於彼時有取、有說，起此分別，由不遇佛，有少聞障；為令遇善友離分別障而學多聞，故經文起。世俗諦中有得、有說，勝義諦中便無此事，二論三文各望一說。諸本皆同，唯流支本云，「昔在燃燈所，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法不」，有是意，「於勝義諦中，有所得不？」說此本緣，如《過去現在因果經》第一，善慧仙人作五夢等，《婆沙論》有少不同，疏中當解。

In the second [section], "on eliminating little learning", there are two parts: first, correlating with the sūtra to eliminate obstacles; second, pointing out what can be contemplated and known. The sūtra text has two parts: first, a question; second, an answer. Vasubandhu's treatise states that here there is a doubt: "The Tathāgata Śākyamuni in the past, abiding in the eighth stage, met Dīpaṅkara Buddha, who gave him the prediction. That Buddha had something to speak, and this Buddha had something to receive; how can it be said that dharmas cannot be grasped or spoken?" Now, the meaning of this treatise is: to say that there is grasping and speaking is due to not having met good friends and being separated from the advent of buddhas in the world, so that one does not broadly hear and understand the Dharma. Because of little learning, one says that at that time this Buddha and that Buddha had grasping and speaking. Now, in order to remove this obstacle of little learning, the subsequent sūtra text appears. The preceding fascicle was for externally not meeting good friends, so the subsequent sūtra text appeared to cause one to meet good friends; this fascicle is for internally possessing the obstacle of the knowable, where because of lacking much learning there is the obstacle of little learning, so the subsequent sūtra text is spoken to cause one to study much learning. Therefore it is said in a sūtra: "Much learning can cut off delusion; much learning can bring about joy; much learning abandons what is meaningless; much learning attains nirvāṇa." Moreover, the treatise says that the perfuming of much learning is the seed of the supramundane mind; therefore this little learning is an obstacle of the knowable. The arising of doubt pertains to both obstacles. Taking up the doubt in that treatise as arising from what preceded, and this treatise relying on one's own little learning of not meeting good friends—each looks to one sense, and they also do not contradict each other. If one meets good friends, encounters the buddhas, and widely studies much learning, one will know that in the presence of Dīpaṅkara Buddha, Śākyamuni in ultimate truth had not the slightest dharma to attain, and does not give rise to discrimination. Saying that at that time there was grasping and speaking, and giving rise to this discrimination, is due to not having met buddhas and possessing the obstacle of little learning; in order to cause one to meet good friends, abandon the obstacle of discrimination, and study much learning, the sūtra text arises. In conventional truth there is attainment and speaking; in ultimate truth there is no such thing. The two treatises and the three texts each look to one explanation. The various versions are all the same; only Bodhiruci's version says, "In the past, when in the presence of Dīpaṅkara, was there any dharma of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi attained or not?" having the sense of: "In ultimate truth, was there anything attained or not?" The origin story of this is as related in the first fascicle of the Sūtra on Past and Present Causes and Effects, where the ṛṣi Sumati had the five dreams, and so forth; the Vibhāṣā-śāstra has minor differences, which will be explained in the commentary.