法界圖記叢髓錄 2.12

2.12

清涼第六地疏云：今經文內略現十重窮究性相，以現無盡，非唯寄位同於二乘。言十重者：一有支相續、二攝歸一心、三自業助成、四不相捨離、五三道不斷、六三際輪迴、七三苦集成、八因緣生滅、九生滅繫縛、十隨順無所有盡。各有逆順，即成二十，故下經云「如是逆順觀察，逆則緣滅、順則緣生（云云）。」於緣起論三觀者，一相諦差別觀、二大悲隨順觀、三一切相智觀。初但觀二諦，有為無有我故，即大悲為首觀也。二悲隨物增，即大悲增上觀。三即委悉窮究因緣性相諸門觀故，即大悲滿足觀。初一下同二乘一切智也，次一自現菩薩道相智，後即上同諸佛一切種智。故《涅槃》云「十二因緣，下智觀故得聲聞菩提，中智觀故得緣覺菩提，上智觀故得菩薩菩提，上上智觀故得佛菩提。」初二菩提即初觀意，餘二各一可知。前約為物，三皆稱悲；今約觀心，三皆智觀。是知三句各有悲智相導，融此三觀唯在一心，甚深般若於是而現。《探玄》云「何者十觀？一因緣分次第（云云），十隨順無所有盡。於中各有順觀逆觀故，有二十門也。謂順觀大悲不住涅槃，逆觀大智不住生死故，名不住道（云云）。」一因緣分次第中，正現有支無我。於中有二：初明倒執有我妄起緣分、二明迷諸諦理起緣次第。初中有三：一辨定無我、二迷成緣起、三（云云）。初中二句。初言世間受身皆由著我者，反舉惑情明我非理。若我理有，著我順理應得出世；既生世間，明我非理。二若離著我即無生者，順舉解心，明理非我。若理有我，離我違理應生世間；既得出世，明理無我。二明迷此無我起彼有支，於中先順觀緣起、後逆觀無我（云云）。二一心所攝中，言三界虛妄唯一心作。此之一文，諸論同引證成唯識。今此所說，是何等心？云何名作？今釋此義。依諸聖教說有多門：一相見俱存故說唯識、二攝相歸見故說唯識、三攝數歸王（云云）、四以末歸本、五攝相歸性、六轉真成事、七理事俱融、八融事相入、九全事相即、十帝網無礙。於中初三約初教說，次四約終頓說，後三約圓教中別教說。總具十門，約同教說（云云）。三自業助成中，此十二支皆有二義：一明自行相、二助成後用。謂緣中癡惑是無明自相，與行作因，是助成業。四不相捨離中，前能起後、離後無前，後依前起、離前無後，不相離故，各無自性，無性緣起如幻現前。五三道不斷中，如淨意菩薩十二緣論云「煩惱初八九，業二及與十，餘七說為苦，三攝十二盡。從三故生二，從二故生七，從七復生三，是故如輪轉。一切世間法，唯因果無人，但從於空法，還生於空法。」解云：此辨三道相生，現二無我。六分別先後際中、此十二支、初二是能引、次五是所引、次三是能生、後二是所生（云云）。一依此經開能所引分先際中際，合能所生總為後際，以引遠故開之、生近故合也。七三苦分別中有二門：一理實遍通門（云云）；二隨相增現門，如此經說。謂初五支遷流相現故稱行苦，觸受二種觸對生苦故云苦苦，餘為壞苦者但壞樂名壞苦。老死支既無樂可壞，何故名壞苦耶？釋有二：一樂壞為苦，望所壞說。二以壞是苦，故云壞苦。此老死支能壞生故，屬壞苦也。八因緣生中，理實無明望行無因緣義，而言因緣生行者，有二義：一自種為因、無明為緣，合說故云因緣。然隱彼親種、現此勝緣，故云無明因緣也。二但彼增上緣望自增上果還是親因，故說無明為行因緣。餘亦如是。欲明果不自起要從因緣，因緣形奪復各無性，是故言因緣生乃現無生。此猶順觀逆觀一泯非生不生，可知（云云）。此深觀中攝後三門合成四句：一不自生、二不他生、三不共生、四不無因生。釋此四句諸論不同，略有五說：一約破外道釋，謂諸法不從冥諦、自性生故，云不自生；二不從梵天、自在天等生故，云不他生；三亦非微塵大種和合生故，云不共生；四亦非無因自然而起故，云不無因生。二約破二乘，一謂諸法不定從自同類因生故，云不自生；二不定從異熟因生故，云不他生；三又亦非彼俱有因生故，云不共生；四小乘中許無明支前不正思惟托虛而起，似若無因，今亦不爾故離無因。三，約法現空：一果不自起，名不自生；二自既不立，對誰辨他？又他亦各自皆不成自，云何他生？故云不他生；三自他因果既各不成故，云不共生；四離因緣外無別果法故，云不無因生。此上三重，如《般若灯論》及《中論》等說。四約因緣形奪，《對法論》云「自種有故不從他，待眾緣故非自作，無作用故不共生，有功能故非無因。」凡諸緣起双土二句已為甚深，況總土四句，是故緣起最極甚深。五約緣起無礙門，但因緣生果，因緣相望各有二義：一全有力、二全無力。謂因望於果有全不生，緣必全生，故云因不生，緣生故；二緣望於果亦全不生，因必生故，云緣不生，自因生故；三二力不俱，故不共生；四二無力亦不俱故，不無因生。此門有二義：一據力具有不有義故令相入，謂因有力時，緣必無力，是故由因有力故能攝他、由緣無力故能入他，會彼緣力總歸因力，名不他生。雖言不他，反現自生。因力歸緣，不自亦爾，反前思之。以二力二無力各不俱故，無彼不相入；一力一無力相歸故，恒時相入。以不相障礙增上緣寬故，一切諸法無不相入。〈十忽品〉云「菩薩善觀緣起法，於一法中解眾多法、眾多法中解了一法。」良由此門故也。二據體有空不空義故有相即，謂非直因力歸緣明其相入，亦乃因體由緣，現因性空攝同於緣。何者？謂若無緣即無因故。以生果名因，無緣果不生，是時不名因。明知此因會歸彼緣，為不自生。是故緣是有義，無不能攝；因是空義，無不受攝。因受攝故，廢己同緣；緣能攝故，攝因同己。餘因攝緣受等，並准思知。由此義故，諸法相即無所障礙。上文云「知一即多多即一」等，皆此義也。是故無盡大緣起法無礙自在，皆從此門而開現矣。九因緣縛說中，因緣生縛者，謂此緣起互相縛住，不得是生，以是縛故，復非是滅。以一縛字印此法體離諸分別，然是緣起，縛相亦離故，寄言以現，故云縛說，為明此縛但在說中。此門現緣起法事相，向盡理性，將現極微妙處，故論云「隨順觀世諦，即入第一義諦」，是此門也。十無所有盡中，明此有支虛相既盡，隨順無所有，徹到第一義。此現不壞俗而恒真也，故云無明因緣諸行生，是隨順無所有。問：無明生行是順所有，何故乃言順無所有？答：乘前諸門次第至此，現彼無明正生行時，即順無生入理故也（云云）。何故經中順無，論名順有？釋：經意以緣歸理說，論意以性從相說，各現別意，故作是說（云云）。一有支行列、二攝歸一心、三力用相生、四前後相屬、五三道輪環、六三際因果、七三苦過失、八從因無性、九似有若無、十泯同平等，配結前十，文現可見。

The Commentary on the Sixth Ground by Qingliang states: In the text of the present sūtra, ten tiers are briefly revealed to exhaustively investigate nature and characteristics so as to manifest the inexhaustible, not merely lodging in stages identically to the two vehicles. As for the ten tiers: first, the continuation of existence-factors; second, subsumption into the one mind; third, self-karma assisting production; fourth, not abandoning one another; fifth, the three paths being uninterrupted; sixth, transmigration through the three time periods; seventh, the accumulation of the three sufferings; eighth, production and cessation through cause and condition; ninth, bondage of production and cessation; tenth, conformity to the exhaustion of non-existence. Each has direct and reverse [aspects], thus making twenty; hence the sūtra below states, "Thus observing in direct and reverse order: in the reverse, conditions cease; in the direct, conditions arise (and so forth)." Regarding the three contemplations on the treatise on pratītyasamutpāda: first, contemplation of the distinction of characteristics and truths; second, contemplation of conforming with great compassion; third, contemplation of the knowledge of all aspects. The first merely contemplates the two truths: since conditioned phenomena lack a self, this is the contemplation with great compassion foremost. In the second, compassion increases in accordance with beings; this is the contemplation of the augmenting of great compassion. The third is the contemplation of thoroughly investigating all approaches to the nature and characteristics of cause and condition; hence it is the contemplation of the fulfillment of great compassion. The first is below, identical with the all-knowledge of the two vehicles; the next personally manifests the bodhisattva's knowledge of the aspects of the path; the last is above, identical with the knowledge of all forms of all Buddhas. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] states: "Regarding the twelvefold pratītyasamutpāda, by contemplating with inferior wisdom one attains the bodhi of a śrāvaka; by contemplating with middling wisdom one attains the bodhi of a pratyekabuddha; by contemplating with superior wisdom one attains the bodhi of a bodhisattva; by contemplating with supreme wisdom one attains the bodhi of a Buddha." The first two bodhis are the meaning of the first contemplation, and the remaining two each correspond to one, as can be known. Previously, in terms of [acting] for sentient beings, all three were called compassion; now, in terms of the contemplating mind, all three are wisdom contemplations. From this we know that each of the three clauses has compassion and wisdom guiding each other; fusing these three contemplations resides solely in the one mind, and profound prajñā manifests from this. The Tanxuan [ji] states: "What are the ten contemplations? First, the sequence of the factors of cause and condition (and so forth), up to tenth, conformity to the exhaustion of non-existence. Within these, each has direct contemplation and reverse contemplation, hence there are twenty gates. That is, direct contemplation of great compassion does not abide in nirvāṇa, and reverse contemplation of great wisdom does not abide in saṃsāra; hence it is called the non-abiding path (and so forth)." In the first, the sequence of the factors of cause and condition, it directly reveals that the existence-factors are selfless. Herein there are two: first, explaining that inverted clinging to a self falsely gives rise to factors of conditions; second, explaining that bewilderment regarding the principle of the truths gives rise to the sequence of conditions. Within the first there are three: first, determining selflessness; second, bewilderment producing pratītyasamutpāda; third, (and so forth). In the first there are two clauses. First, stating that receiving a body in the world is entirely due to attachment to a self raises the confused sentiment to reveal that the self is contrary to principle. If the self existed in principle, attachment to self would accord with principle and should result in leaving the world; since one is born in the world, this shows that the self is contrary to principle. Second, stating that if one is free from attachment to a self there is no birth brings forward the understanding mind to clarify that the principle is not a self. If the principle had a self, separation from the self would violate the principle and one should be born in the world; since one attains transcendence of the world, this shows that the principle is selfless. Second, explaining that bewilderment regarding this selflessness gives rise to those existence-factors; herein one first directly contemplates pratītyasamutpāda, and later reversely contemplates selflessness (and so forth). In the second, subsumption into the one mind, it states that the three realms are illusory and made only by the one mind. This single passage is cited by all treatises to substantiate consciousness-only. Now, what kind of mind is being spoken of here? How is it called "making"? We now explain this meaning. In accordance with all sacred teachings, there are multiple gates: first, consciousness-only is taught because characteristics and perception both persist; second, consciousness-only is taught because characteristics are subsumed into perception; third, mental factors are subsumed into the sovereign [mind] (and so forth); fourth, taking the branches back to the root; fifth, subsuming characteristics into the nature; sixth, transforming the real to accomplish phenomenal events; seventh, principle and phenomena are mutually fused; eighth, phenomenal events are fused and mutually enter; ninth, whole phenomena are mutually identical; tenth, unimpeded as Indra's net. Herein, the first three are explained in terms of the initial teaching; the next four are explained in terms of the final and sudden teachings; the last three are explained in terms of the distinct teaching within the round teaching. Possessing all ten gates completely is explained in terms of the shared teaching (and so forth). In the third, self-karma assisting production, these twelve factors each have two meanings: first, clarifying one's own operational characteristic; second, assisting the production of subsequent functions. That is, delusion and confusion within conditions is the self-characteristic of ignorance; serving as a cause for formations is karma assisting production. In the fourth, not abandoning one another, the preceding can give rise to the subsequent, and without the subsequent there is no preceding; the subsequent arises relying on the preceding, and without the preceding there is no subsequent; because they do not separate from one another, each lacks self-nature, and pratītyasamutpāda lacking self-nature manifests before us like an illusion. In the fifth, the three paths being uninterrupted, as Bodhisattva Śuddhamati's Treatise on the Twelve Conditions states: "Affliction comprises the first, eighth, and ninth; karma comprises the second and tenth; the remaining seven are said to be suffering; the three completely subsume the twelve. From the three, two are born; from the two, seven are born; from the seven, three are born again; therefore it turns like a wheel. All worldly phenomena are merely cause and effect without a person; solely from empty phenomena, empty phenomena are born in turn." Explanation: This explains the mutual generation of the three paths, revealing the two kinds of selflessness. In the sixth, distinguishing the preceding and succeeding periods, among these twelve factors, the first two are that which induces, the next five are that which is induced, the next three are that which produces, and the last two are that which is produced (and so forth). One [way], relying on this sūtra, opens that which induces and that which is induced into the preceding and middle periods, and combines that which produces and that which is produced into the succeeding period; because inducing is remote it is opened, and because producing is proximate it is combined. In the seventh, distinguishing the three sufferings, there are two gates: first, the gate of actual principle pervading generally (and so forth); second, the gate of manifesting according to the increase of characteristics, as this sūtra says. That is, because the initial five factors manifest the characteristic of flux, they are called the suffering of conditioned existence; contact and feeling produce suffering upon encounter, hence they are called the suffering of suffering; the remainder are the suffering of change, which means that only the destruction of pleasure is called the suffering of change. Since the factor of aging and death has no pleasure to destroy, why is it called the suffering of change? There are two explanations: first, the destruction of pleasure is suffering, said with respect to that which is destroyed; second, because destruction itself is suffering, it is called the suffering of change. This factor of aging and death can destroy birth, hence it belongs to the suffering of change. In the eighth, production through cause and condition, in terms of actual principle, ignorance has no meaning of being a cause and condition with respect to formations; yet it is said that cause and condition produce formations because of two meanings: first, its own seed is the cause and ignorance is the condition; because they are spoken of together, it is called cause and condition. However, concealing that direct seed and manifesting this superior condition, it is called the cause and condition of ignorance. Second, merely that its augmenting condition, when viewed against its own augmenting result, is still a direct cause; hence ignorance is said to be the cause and condition for formations. The rest are also like this. Intending to clarify that results do not arise on their own but must follow causes and conditions, and that causes and conditions deprive one another of exclusivity and each lack self-nature, it is therefore said that production through cause and condition actually reveals non-production. This is still the direct contemplation and reverse contemplation both dissolving into neither production nor non-production, as can be known (and so forth). Within this profound contemplation, subsuming the subsequent three gates forms four propositions: first, not produced from self; second, not produced from other; third, not produced from both; fourth, not produced without a cause. Explanations of these four propositions vary across treatises, and there are briefly five explanations: First, explained in terms of refuting non-Buddhists: because phenomena are not produced from the unmanifest (pradhāna) or self-nature (svabhāva), it is said they are not produced from self; because they are not produced from Brahmā, Īśvara, and so forth, it is said they are not produced from other; because they are also not produced from the aggregation of subtle particles and primary elements, it is said they are not produced from both; because they also do not arise spontaneously without a cause, it is said they are not produced without a cause. Second, explained in terms of refuting the two vehicles: first, because phenomena do not definitely arise from their own homogeneous causes, it is said they are not produced from self; second, because they do not definitely arise from fruitional causes, it is said they are not produced from other; third, also because they are not produced from those simultaneous causes, it is said they are not produced from both; fourth, in the Hīnayāna it is conceded that prior to the factor of ignorance, improper reflection arises relying on unreality, seemingly as if without a cause; now this is also not so, hence it is free from [arising] without a cause. Third, in terms of phenomena manifesting emptiness: first, a result does not arise of itself, termed not produced from self; second, since self is not established, against what could an other be identified? Moreover, others individually fail to establish themselves as self, so how could there be production from other? Hence it is said they are not produced from other; third, since cause and effect of self and other are each unestablished, it is said they are not produced from both; fourth, apart from causes and conditions there is no separate resultant phenomenon, hence it is said they are not produced without a cause. The above three tiers are as explained in the Prajñāpradīpa-śāstra, the Madhyamaka-śāstra, and so forth. Fourth, in terms of cause and condition depriving one another of exclusivity, the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "Because one's own seed exists, it is not from other; because it depends on multiple conditions, it is not made by self; because it lacks active function, it is not produced from both; because it possesses efficacy, it is not without a cause." In all pratītyasamutpāda, two paired propositions are already profoundly deep, not to mention the total of four propositions; therefore, pratītyasamutpāda is most extremely profound. Fifth, in terms of the unimpeded gate of pratītyasamutpāda, simply when causes and conditions produce a result, cause and condition viewed against each other each have two meanings: first, completely efficacious; second, completely powerless. That is, viewing the cause with respect to the result, it has complete non-production, while the condition definitely completely produces; hence it is said the cause does not produce, because the condition produces. Second, the condition viewed with respect to the result is also completely non-producing, while the cause definitely produces; hence it is said the condition does not produce, because its own cause produces. Third, the two efficacies do not coexist, hence they are not produced from both. Fourth, the two powerlessnesses also do not coexist, hence they are not produced without a cause. This gate has two meanings: First, based on the meaning of having and not having efficacy, they are caused to mutually enter. That is, when the cause is efficacious, the condition must be powerless; therefore, because the cause is efficacious it can subsume the other, and because the condition is powerless it can enter the other, synthesizing that condition's efficacy and taking it wholly back into the causal efficacy, termed not produced from other. Although it is said not to be from other, conversely it manifests production from self. The causal efficacy returning to the condition being not from self is also like this; ponder this conversely. Because the two efficacies and the two powerlessnesses each do not coexist, there is no non-mutual entering between them; because one efficacy and one powerlessness return to each other, they perpetually enter each other. Because the augmenting condition is broad without obstructing one another, there are no phenomena among all phenomena that do not enter one another. The "Chapter on the Ten Clarifications" states: "A bodhisattva skillfully contemplates the dharmas of pratītyasamutpāda, understanding multiple dharmas within a single dharma, and thoroughly understanding a single dharma within multiple dharmas." This is truly due to this gate. Second, based on the meaning of the substance having emptiness and non-emptiness, there is mutual identity. That is, not only does causal efficacy return to condition to clarify their mutual entering, but the causal substance also, due to the condition, reveals that the causal nature is empty and subsumed into identity with the condition. Why so? Because if there were no condition, there would be no cause. Since producing a result is called a cause, if without condition the result is not produced, at that time it is not called a cause. Clearly know that this cause synthesizes and returns to that condition, being not produced from self. Therefore, the condition has the meaning of being existent, and nothing cannot be subsumed; the cause has the meaning of being empty, and nothing does not undergo subsumption. Because the cause undergoes subsumption, it abandons itself to be identical with the condition; because the condition can subsume, it subsumes the cause to be identical with itself. The remaining [cases of] cause subsuming condition and condition undergoing [subsumption] should all be understood by inference accordingly. By this meaning, all phenomena are mutually identical without obstruction. The text above states: "Knowing one is many, many is one," and so forth, which are all this meaning. Therefore, the inexhaustible great dharma of pratītyasamutpāda is unimpeded and sovereign, all opening and manifesting from this gate. In the ninth, the explanation of the bondage of cause and condition, production and bondage through cause and condition means that this pratītyasamutpāda mutually binds and abides, so that it cannot be production; because of this bondage, it is further not cessation. Sealing this phenomenal essence with the single word 'bondage' departs from all conceptual discriminations; yet being pratītyasamutpāda, the characteristic of bondage is also departed from; hence it is manifested lodged in words, so it is said to be an 'explanation of bondage' in order to clarify that this bondage exists only in the explanation. This gate manifests the phenomenal characteristics of pratītyasamutpāda approaching the exhaustion of principle-nature, about to reveal the supreme subtlety; hence the treatise states: "Conforming to the contemplation of conventional truth, one immediately enters the ultimate truth"—this is this gate. In the tenth, the exhaustion of non-existence, it clarifies that these empty characteristics of the existence-factors having been exhausted, conforming to non-existence thoroughly reaches the ultimate truth. This reveals not destroying the conventional while constantly being the real; hence it is said that formations arising from the cause and condition of ignorance is conformity to non-existence. Question: Ignorance producing formations conforms to existence; why then say it conforms to non-existence? Answer: Availing oneself of the sequence of the preceding gates up to this point reveals that at the very time when that ignorance produces formations, it conforms to non-production and enters principle (and so forth). Why does the sūtra say conforming to non-existence, while the treatise calls it conforming to existence? Explanation: The sūtra's intention explains by returning conditions to principle, whereas the treatise's intention explains by taking nature in accordance with characteristics; each manifests a distinct intention, and hence they speak this way (and so forth). First, the array of existence-factors; second, subsumption into the one mind; third, power and function mutually producing; fourth, preceding and succeeding mutually belonging; fifth, circular revolution of the three paths; sixth, cause and effect of the three periods; seventh, faults of the three sufferings; eighth, having no nature from cause; ninth, appearing as existent yet as if non-existent; tenth, dissolving into identity and equality. Matching and concluding the preceding ten, they are clearly visible in the text.