大乘義章 12.60

12.60

第三門中開合辨相。開合不定。約之唯一，統攝諸行唯一助道。或分為二，二有兩門：一約行分二，謂自利利他之道，如彼《相續解脫經》說。前三是其化眾生力，化力即是利他行也；後三是其護煩惱力，護惱即是自利行也。化眾生中，先以布施攝取眾生，次以持戒不惱不怖，後以忍辱於彼惱害逼迫恐怖堪忍攝取。護煩惱中，先以精進麁伏煩惱修習善法，不為煩惱之所傾動；次以禪定正伏煩惱，令其不起；後以智慧永斷煩惱。二就德分二。德有二種：一是福德、二是智慧。辨此二種，經論不同，乃有四別。第一依彼《優婆塞經》，施戒精進判為福分，以彼事中方便所作故說為福，忍禪般若判為慧分。般若正是慧之正體。慧心安法說之為忍，如五忍等，蓋乃是其法思惟解忍，不取安苦他不益忍。專心住理不動名定，非是事中住心之定。以此忍定同即慧故，說為慧分，斥取小分非盡言耳。第二依彼《相續解脫》及《地持論》，前三是福，般若是智，精進與禪亦福亦智。依精進故，修施戒忍四無量等，名為福分；起聞思修陰巧便等，名為智分。又依禪定，修四無量，名為福分；修陰界入巧便觀，名為智分。然此就其功能以分判為福智，論其體性，性是福德。第三就彼《大品》等經，前五為福，非慧性故；般若是智，是慧性故。四依《涅槃經》，前五及與事中般若同為福分，理觀般若說為智分。故彼經言「福莊嚴者，謂檀波羅蜜乃至般若，非般若波羅蜜；慧莊嚴者是般若波羅蜜。」依彼經中，六度之行各有二種：一者隨事修行不到實性，非是自性清淨度故，非波羅蜜。二依理修行到法實性，是其自性清淨度故，是波羅蜜。前五莫問依事依理，同名為福；就般若中，隨事修者不見實性亦判為福，依理成者見實性故說為智分。或分為三，所謂三學，前四戒學、次一定學、後一慧學。故《地持》云「眾具、自性、眷屬、無盡是名戒學，禪為定學，般若慧學。」言眾具者，是其布施。施為戒因，故曰眾具。言自性者，是其戒度，戒度正是戒學自體，故言自性。言眷屬者，忍波羅蜜，堪忍諸緣助成戒行，故云眷屬。言無盡者，以精進故持戒不息，故曰無盡。精進通策，以何義故偏說為戒？釋有三義：一三學中戒學在初，就初以言，故攝戒中。二戒學中備具三聚，攝行寬廣難可成立，必須精進佐助方成，故攝戒中。三者戒學隨事修行，難成易敗，必須精進佐助方立，故攝戒中。或分為四，如彼《相續解脫經》說，前三戒學，禪為定學，般若慧學，精進通策別為一門，故有四種。或說為五，謂哀愍、愛語、勇猛、惠施、說深法義，如《地持》說。哀愍攝禪，哀愍是悲，悲亦是禪，故攝禪定。愛語攝戒及與智慧，良以愛語離口四過，戒分所收，是故攝戒；依慧起說，是故攝慧。勇猛攝於忍進及慧，由勇猛故苦緣不動，故攝忍辱；由勇猛故策修善法，故攝精進；由勇猛故能入深義，故攝般若。惠施攝檀。說深法義攝禪攝慧，依禪起說是故攝禪，依智起說是故攝慧。或分為六，所謂檀等六波羅蜜。或復說十，謂十波羅蜜，就前六中開出方便、願、力、智等四波羅蜜，故合有十，是故經中說後四種為前六伴。然經論中說伴不同。若依《相續解脫經》中別說其伴，彼說方便別伴前三，願伴精進，力伴禪定，智伴般若。何故方便偏伴前三？以前三種化眾生力化物須巧，故為方便別伴前三。何故以願別伴精進？精進勝求須願佐助，故偏伴之。伴有二種：一者前伴，如彼經說，以現在世多煩惱故，不能精進懃修善法，願未來世煩惱微薄懃修善法，故為前伴。二者後伴，依精進故，能起願心上上勝求，故為後伴。何故以力別伴禪定？定多力用，故力伴之。伴有二種：一者前伴，如彼經說，近善知識、聽聞正法、內正思惟，轉劣悕望得勝悕望，名之為力，以是力故能修禪定，故為前伴。二者後伴，依禪定故起神通力，故為後伴。又復禪定發生如來十力種性，名之為力，此力亦是禪定後伴。何故以智別伴般若？知見性同，相伴義親，故偏伴之。伴有二種：一者前伴，由世諦智開引出生第一義慧，故為前伴。二者後伴，依真諦智起世智用，故為後伴。若依《地經》及《地持論》，通伴前六。彼說巧智以為方便，以方便故能修施等無量善法求增進智，名之為願。以是願故，令其施等上上勝進，堅固之智不為魔動，名之為力。以是力故，令彼施等不可破壞，於法開覺，名之為智。以是智故，於施等法差別示現，攝化眾生。故後四種通伴前六。或復分為八萬四千諸度法門，如《賢劫經》說。彼說如來三十二相、八十種好、十力無畏一切功德，令有三百五十種門。一一門中皆以六度行修為因，便有二千一百度門。用此對四大及六衰、十種之患，便有二萬一千度門。言四大者，地水火風，自身之患。言六衰者，謂外色聲香味觸法六塵之患。此六大賊衰耗善法，故名為衰。以此二萬一千度門化四眾生，故有八萬四千度門。四眾生者，一是多嗔、二是多貪、三是多癡、四是三毒等分。此等廣略各隨一宜，今據一門且論六種。

In the third section, the characteristics are distinguished through opening and combining. Opening and combining are not fixed. In summary, they are only one: comprehensively subsuming all practices, there is only the one path of aid. Or they are divided into two. The twofold division has two models: First, dividing into two based on practice: namely, the path of self-benefit and benefiting others, as explained in the *Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra*. The first three are the power of transforming sentient beings; the power of transformation is the practice of benefiting others. The latter three are the power of guarding against afflictions; guarding against afflictions is the practice of self-benefit. Within transforming sentient beings, one first gathers sentient beings through giving, next causes them neither affliction nor fear through keeping the precepts, and finally endures and gathers them through forbearance when subjected to their afflictions, harm, coercion, and terror. Within guarding against afflictions, one first uses vigor to coarsely subdue afflictions and cultivate wholesome dharmas so as not to be shaken by afflictions; next, one uses meditation correctly to subdue afflictions and keep them from arising; and finally, one uses wisdom to permanently eradicate afflictions. Second, dividing into two based on merit. There are two kinds of merit: the first is merit, and the second is wisdom. In distinguishing these two, sūtras and treatises differ, yielding four distinct views: First, according to the *Upāsaka[-śīla]-sūtra*, giving, morality, and vigor are classified as belonging to merit, being called merit because they are enacted as expedient means within phenomenal affairs; while forbearance, meditation, and prajñā are classified as belonging to wisdom. Prajñā is precisely the primary substance of wisdom. The mind of wisdom being settled in phenomena is termed forbearance, as in the five forbearances and so forth; this is merely the forbearance of reflecting upon and understanding dharmas, not taking in the forbearance of enduring suffering or not benefiting others. The mind single-pointedly abiding in principle without moving is called meditation, not the meditation of steadying the mind amidst phenomenal affairs. Because these [types of] forbearance and meditation are identically wisdom itself, they are said to belong to wisdom; this is an exclusive selection of a minor part, not an exhaustive statement. Second, according to the *Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra* and the *Bodhisattvabhūmi*, the first three are merit, prajñā is wisdom, and vigor and meditation are both merit and wisdom. Because, relying on vigor, one cultivates giving, morality, forbearance, the four immeasurables, and so on, it is called a component of merit; because it generates hearing, reflection, cultivation, the skillfulness regarding the aggregates, and so forth, it is called a component of wisdom. Furthermore, relying on meditation, one cultivates the four immeasurables, which is called a component of merit; and one cultivates the skillful contemplation of the aggregates, realms, and sense bases, which is called a component of wisdom. However, this is divided and classified into merit and wisdom based on their functions; if discussed in terms of their essential nature, their nature is merit. Third, based on sūtras such as the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra*, the first five are merit because they are not of the nature of wisdom, and prajñā is wisdom because it is of the nature of wisdom. Fourth, according to the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, the first five together with prajñā within phenomenal affairs are both components of merit, while the prajñā of contemplating principle is called a component of wisdom. Thus that sūtra states: 'The adornment of merit refers to the dāna-pāramitā up to prajñā, but not the prajñā-pāramitā; the adornment of wisdom is the prajñā-pāramitā.' According to that sūtra, the practices of the six pāramitās each have two forms: First, cultivating them in accordance with phenomenal affairs without arriving at the true nature; because this is not the pāramitā of intrinsic purity, it is not a pāramitā. Second, cultivating them in accordance with principle and arriving at the true nature of dharmas; because this is the pāramitā of intrinsic purity, it is a pāramitā. As for the first five, regardless of whether they accord with phenomena or principle, they are collectively termed merit; regarding prajñā, that cultivated in accordance with phenomenal affairs without seeing the true nature is also classified as merit, while that accomplished in accordance with principle is termed a component of wisdom because it sees the true nature. Or they are divided into three: namely, the three trainings—the first four are the training in morality, the next one is the training in concentration, and the last one is the training in wisdom. Thus the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* states: 'Requisites, intrinsic nature, retinues, and inexhaustibility are called the training in morality; meditation is the training in concentration; and prajñā is the training in wisdom.' 'Requisites' refers to giving. Giving is the cause of morality, and is therefore called 'requisites.' 'Intrinsic nature' refers to the pāramitā of morality; the pāramitā of morality is precisely the primary entity of the training in morality, and is therefore called 'intrinsic nature.' 'Retinues' refers to the pāramitā of forbearance; enduring diverse conditions assists in accomplishing the practice of morality, and is therefore called 'retinues.' 'Inexhaustibility' means that through vigor, the maintenance of morality does not cease, and is therefore called 'inexhaustibility.' Since vigor universally spurs them on, for what reason is it specifically explained under morality? The explanation has three aspects: First, among the three trainings, the training in morality comes first; spoken of in terms of the beginning, it is therefore subsumed under morality. Second, the training in morality fully possesses the three collections of precepts; because the practices it subsumes are vast and difficult to establish, it necessarily requires vigor to support and accomplish them, and is therefore subsumed under morality. Third, the training in morality is cultivated in accordance with phenomenal affairs and is difficult to accomplish yet easy to ruin, so it necessarily requires vigor to support and establish it, and is therefore subsumed under morality. Or they are divided into four: as explained in the *Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra*, the first three are the training in morality, meditation is the training in concentration, prajñā is the training in wisdom, and vigor, universally spurring them on, forms a distinct category; thus there are four kinds. Or they are explained as five: namely, sympathy, affectionate speech, valor, generous giving, and expounding profound principles of the Dharma, as explained in the *Bodhisattvabhūmi*. Sympathy subsumes meditation: sympathy is compassion, and compassion is also meditation, so it subsumes meditation. Affectionate speech subsumes morality as well as wisdom: indeed, because affectionate speech is free from the four verbal faults, it is gathered within the category of morality, and thus subsumes morality; and because it is spoken in reliance upon wisdom, it therefore subsumes wisdom. Valor subsumes forbearance, vigor, and wisdom: because through valor one is unmoved by conditions of suffering, it subsumes forbearance; because through valor one spurs on the cultivation of wholesome dharmas, it subsumes vigor; and because through valor one is able to penetrate profound principles, it subsumes prajñā. Generous giving subsumes dāna. Expounding profound principles of the Dharma subsumes meditation and subsumes wisdom: because it is spoken in reliance upon meditation, it therefore subsumes meditation; and because it is spoken in reliance upon wisdom, it therefore subsumes wisdom. Or they are divided into six: namely, the six pāramitās of dāna and so forth. Or again they are explained as ten: namely, the ten pāramitās, where from the previous six are opened up the four pāramitās of expedient means, vow, power, and gnosis, making ten in total; therefore the sūtras explain that the latter four are companions to the former six. However, the sūtras and treatises explain their companionship differently: If according to the *Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra*, where companions are explained individually, that text explains that expedient means individually accompanies the first three, vow accompanies vigor, power accompanies meditation, and gnosis accompanies prajñā. Why does expedient means specifically accompany the first three? Because the first three are the power of transforming sentient beings, and transforming beings requires skill; therefore expedient means individually accompanies the first three. Why does vow specifically accompany vigor? Superior aspirations of vigor require vows to support them; therefore it specifically accompanies it. There are two kinds of accompaniment: First is preceding accompaniment: as that sūtra explains, because in the present life there are many afflictions, one cannot vigorously cultivate wholesome dharmas, so one vows that in future lives, with afflictions diminished, one will vigorously cultivate wholesome dharmas; hence it is a preceding accompaniment. Second is succeeding accompaniment: because, relying on vigor, one is able to give rise to an aspiration of vows to seek ever higher excellence; hence it is a succeeding accompaniment. Why does power specifically accompany meditation? Meditation has many powers and functions; therefore power accompanies it. There are two kinds of accompaniment: First is preceding accompaniment: as that sūtra explains, drawing near to good spiritual friends, hearing the correct Dharma, and proper internal reflection transform inferior aspirations to obtain superior aspirations, which is called power; because one can cultivate meditation through this power, it is a preceding accompaniment. Second is succeeding accompaniment: because, relying on meditation, one gives rise to the power of supernormal faculties; hence it is a succeeding accompaniment. Moreover, meditation gives rise to the lineage of the Tathāgata's ten powers, which is called power; this power is also the succeeding accompaniment of meditation. Why does gnosis specifically accompany prajñā? Knowing and seeing are identical in nature, and the meaning of companionship is close; therefore it specifically accompanies it. There are two kinds of accompaniment: First is preceding accompaniment: conventional gnosis opens, guides, and gives rise to ultimate wisdom; hence it is a preceding accompaniment. Second is succeeding accompaniment: relying on the wisdom of absolute truth, one gives rise to the functions of conventional gnosis; hence it is a succeeding accompaniment. If according to the *Daśabhūmika-sūtra* and the *Bodhisattvabhūmi*, they universally accompany the first six. They explain skillful knowledge as expedient means, through which one can cultivate giving and other immeasurable wholesome dharmas. Seeking to increase and advance wisdom is called vow; through this vow, one causes giving and so forth to progressively advance to excellence. Solid wisdom that cannot be moved by Māra is called power; through this power, one makes giving and the others indestructible. Awakening to dharmas is called gnosis; through this gnosis, one diversely manifests amidst the practices of giving and so on to gather and transform sentient beings. Therefore, the latter four universally accompany the former six. Or again, they are divided into eighty-four thousand gates of pāramitā dharmas, as explained in the *Bhadrakalpika-sūtra*. That text explains that the Tathāgata's thirty-two marks, eighty minor signs, ten powers, fearlessnesses, and all virtues make three hundred and fifty gates. In each and every gate, the cultivation and practice of the six pāramitās serves as the cause, yielding two thousand one hundred pāramitā gates. Matching these against the four great elements and the six deteriorations—ten kinds of afflictive conditions—there are twenty-one thousand pāramitā gates. The 'four great elements' are earth, water, fire, and wind, the afflictions of one's own body. The 'six deteriorations' refer to the afflictive conditions of the six external dusts: form, sound, odor, taste, tangible objects, and dharmas. These six great thieves decay and exhaust wholesome dharmas, and are therefore called deteriorations. Using these twenty-one thousand pāramitā gates to transform four kinds of sentient beings, there are eighty-four thousand pāramitā gates. The four kinds of sentient beings are: first, those with predominant anger; second, those with predominant greed; third, those with predominant delusion; and fourth, those with equal parts of the three poisons. These extensive and condensed [explanations] each accord with a particular suitability; for now, based on one approach, we briefly discuss the six kinds.