止觀輔行傳弘決 7.37

7.37

次明「攝佛威儀」者，前之二科略攝因行，此去十科略攝果德。佛以無緣慈悲攝物，不動法性現諸威儀，必依不共力無畏等，故十力等名佛威儀。初文總標來意，「今逐」已下別明攝相。既以六度而為助道，即應六度攝佛威儀。六度名陜攝義不周，故隨名便以道品攝。前既六度以攝道品，當知道品不異六度。又道品秖是四諦之一，若有道諦方有四諦；若無道者，苦集非諦，何況滅耶？道名復陜，故具用四。文中雖分四種十力，十力之外無別十力。亦如四諦無量相等，故引殃掘力有無量，非諸聲聞緣覺所知。如處非處，聲聞經中即以六道而為非處、涅槃為處。今摩訶衍約四四諦十界四土辯處非處，故大乘力如十方土。《大經》既對二乘四諦以明無量，今亦且對二乘經力以明十力。於中初正攝四種十力，故一一力中皆須四義。初釋處非處中，言「乃至無作」者，中越二教。若欲例知，即以無生例於生滅、無量例於無作，巧拙雖殊，所緣理等。下九力中，一一皆須諸教對辯，方曉四種廣陜淺深。應知後之三力即三明也。《大論》二十七廣明十力，須者往尋。問：十力既不出四諦，何不但明四諦，何須明力？答：諦通所觀之境，力明如來勝能。四諦在因，十力唯果。四諦通小，力唯在大。故須別說。「是一法門」等者，釋疑也。初釋四種疑。力必利生，生機不同，能被必別，故須四種藥病相對以辯四法。「不令」等者，顯露法輪利益不等。同一座席所稟各殊，小不聞大令不謗大，大得密聞是故不抑。「能仁」者，亦曰能儒、直林、度沃焦等。具如《華嚴．名號品》明。「菩薩智臣」等者，明五時中諸大菩薩，知佛口密扣機而問。如王但云先陀婆來，智臣善知鹽水器馬，於一言音密被四類，機應主伴不差毫釐。「鄭」者，亦重也。故《漢書》云「皇天所以鄭重，即頻降命也。」菩薩亦爾，為眾生故，頻煩扣聖。「問十力」去，釋因果疑。初問意者，助道但在初心，十力唯居果位，何得初心而攝果力？答意者，引三處文以證初心可修十力。況助門遍，具攝始終。十力既然，諸法例爾。故但難力，餘不復論，是故下文但直爾釋乃至不共及相好等。初引《大論》者，引論二釋，並是初心已修十力。引初文者，既許菩薩修般若時十力不應住。初心若住，望佛有過。非初心無，故云初心但未究竟。為是義故，故不應住。當知初心已有力分。「又菩薩」下，釋是分得。「若爾」下，次引《華嚴》。先更難論。論中但云初心許修，豈名為得？此斥初解云多生著，故知即是修而未得。言「後語入位」者，次難後解云未究竟，應在初住方名入位，何關初心？準此二義，不名初心具足十力。「若依」下，正引經答。住前已得十力之分，是故當知非初心無。後云乃至如是觀者便成正覺，即是初住分證十力。言「先當分別十種法」者，自古講者云十梵行。既在住前，義當十信。文言「三業及佛法僧戒」者，此中語略，應云身身業、口口業、意意業及佛等四。舊經十七云「法慧菩薩承佛神力說十住竟，次正念天子問，具如今文所引者。是法慧答云：『此菩薩一向專求無上菩提，先當分別十種之法，身乃至戒應如是觀，觀此十法皆同法界。』」且從皆非梵行而說，以此菩薩棄俗出家修梵行故，為無上道，復觀事行不可得也。何者？具清淨戒名為梵行。從緣方具，緣謂三業、三寶、戒法，對於心因方能成就。今初推因緣皆無自性同法性理，故云如空。故彼經云「若身是梵行，當知梵行則不清淨，則為非法、則為混濁、則為臭穢，塵垢、諂曲、八萬戶蟲，一一皆如初句說之。若身業是梵行，當知四儀即是梵行。餘如今文，一一皆云應是梵行。若口是梵行，當知舌動即是梵行，唇齒和合即是梵行。若口業是梵行，當知語言為梵行，所說作無作稱譏毀譽即為梵行。若意為梵行，當知覺觀、憶念不忘、思惟、夢幻等為梵行。若意業為梵行，當知想是梵行、寒熱饑渴是梵行、苦樂憂喜是梵行。若佛是梵行，為色受想行識、為三十二相八十種好神通變化等是梵行耶？若法是梵行，為正法邪法、寂滅涅槃、生非生、實不實等法為梵行耶？若僧是梵行者，為四果向、為初果乃至阿羅漢果僧為梵行耶？為三明六通、八解脫、時不時解脫為梵行耶？若戒為梵行者，具在今文。又約三世五陰種種推求，梵行叵得。觀此十已，次修十力。」既初心許修，即是有分。次引《地持》，言「菩薩知如來藏」者，義通別圓，今意在圓。故前後文引九大禪，或通證二、或唯證圓，故今藏義應從圓釋。若爾，何故復云在初地耶？答：義兼別故，寄教道說。別教次第初心尚具，何況圓耶？故引《地持》助成《華嚴》。聞思前位既是十信，信中已修出生十力，故準《華嚴》不須疑也。「二乘除入」者，除者捨也，入者解也。捨煩惱故而得解悟，悟即是入，所入是處，即八勝處也。故《大論》、《仁王》並云八除入也。故知初地自性禪中攝得一切大小諸定。「豈非」等者，十信心修初地有分。「三據明矣」者，結前三文。「道品」下，結攝，如文。「十住」下，釋名。諸佛菩薩如實智用，通達一切了了分明，無能壞者、無能勝者，又無過失，是故究竟乃名無過，故云「得勝」。方便化物，故曰「堪能」。又至果時化用最勝，名勝堪能。今明攝法義雖通初，且約極果以釋力名。故《毘曇》、《婆沙》「問云：何故如來身中之智以立力名而非餘耶？答：無障礙義是力義，了見三界是力義。」名雖在小，義意通大，廣陜為異，比說可知。言「扶助」者，有此力能，扶於法身，用無窮盡。《地持》中意有自行故，外用無窮。「然佛力」下，重釋疑也。言「此二釋」者，此十化生足為一釋，殃掘無量力為一釋。此力云十，復云無量，當知一一皆無量也。雖云無量，不出於四，故云「彌顯」。此之十力及下九科，《大論》法相卒不可盡，今略存名目以顯攝法。

Next, explaining "subsuming the Buddha's deportments": The previous two sections briefly subsumed causal practices; from here onwards, the ten sections briefly subsume the virtues of fruition. The Buddha subsumes beings through compassion that has no conditions; without stirring from the dharma-nature, he manifests all deportments, which must rely on the unshared [qualities], the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so forth; hence the ten powers and so forth are called the Buddha's deportments. The initial text generally indicates the purpose of its inclusion; from "Now following..." onwards, it specifically explains the subsumptive aspects. Since the six perfections serve as auxiliary paths, the six perfections should subsume the Buddha's deportments. But the name "six perfections" is narrow and its subsumptive meaning incomplete, so following the convenience of terminology, they are subsumed under the aids to the path. Since the six perfections previously subsumed the aids to the path, one should know that the aids to the path are not different from the six perfections. Furthermore, the aids to the path are merely one of the four truths; only if there is the truth of the path are there the four truths; if there were no path, suffering and arising would not be truths, let alone cessation. The name "path" is also narrow, so all four are fully used. Although the text divides them into four kinds of ten powers, outside of the ten powers there are no other ten powers. Just like the four truths having immeasurable aspects, Angulimāla's [sūtra] is cited where the powers are immeasurable, not known by voice-hearers or solitary realizers. For instance, regarding the possible and the impossible, in voice-hearer sūtras the six destinies are considered the impossible, and nirvāṇa is considered the possible. Now the Mahāyāna, based on the four [kinds of] four truths, the ten realms, and the four lands, discriminates the possible and the impossible; hence the Great Vehicle's powers are like the lands of the ten directions. Since the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra contrasts them with the four truths of the two vehicles to explain their immeasurability, here we also provisionally contrast them with the powers in the two vehicles' sūtras to explain the ten powers. Therein, first it correctly subsumes the four kinds of ten powers; hence each and every power must involve four meanings. In the initial explanation of the possible and the impossible, saying "and so forth up to non-contrivance" leaps over the middle two teachings. If one wishes to know by analogy, one uses non-arising to analogize arising and ceasing, and immeasurable to analogize non-contrivance; though skill and crudeness differ, the principle that is the cognitive object is equal. Among the remaining nine powers below, each and every one must be contrasted across the various teachings before one can understand the breadth and narrowness, depth and shallowness of the four kinds. One should know that the final three powers are the three clarities. Fascicle twenty-seven of the Dazhidulun broadly explains the ten powers; those who need it may consult it. Question: Since the ten powers do not go beyond the four truths, why not merely explain the four truths? What need is there to explain the powers? Answer: "Truth" pervades the objects to be contemplated, while "power" clarifies the supreme capabilities of the Tathāgata. The four truths are in the causal stage; the ten powers are exclusively of the fruition. The four truths pervade the small [vehicle], while the powers are exclusively in the great. Therefore, they must be spoken of separately. "This one dharma-door..." and so forth resolves doubts. First, it resolves doubts about the four kinds. The powers must benefit sentient beings; because sentient beings' capacities differ, what is delivered must be distinct; therefore, the four kinds of medicine and disease must be contrasted to delineate the four dharmas. "Not causing..." and so forth shows that the benefits of the manifest wheel of Dharma are not equal. While in the very same assembly, what is received differs for each; the small do not hear the great so that they do not slander the great, while the great obtain secret hearing, and thus are not suppressed. "Nengren" (Capable of Benevolence) is also called Nengru, Zhilin, Duwojiao, and so forth, fully explained as in the "Chapter on Names" of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. "The wise ministers, the bodhisattvas..." and so forth explains that during the five periods, the great bodhisattvas, knowing the secret of the Buddha's speech, knocked at his capacities and questioned him. Just as when a king merely says, "Bring saindhava," a wise minister expertly knows whether salt, water, a vessel, or a horse is meant; in a single sound, the four categories are secretly delivered, and capacity and response, host and companion, do not err by a hairsbreadth. "Zheng" means heavy/frequent. Thus the Hanshu says, "That which August Heaven considers zhengzhong (grave/repeated) is to frequently send down decrees." The bodhisattvas are also like this: for the sake of sentient beings, they frequently knock upon the Sage. From "Question: The ten powers..." onwards, it resolves doubts regarding cause and fruition. The intent of the initial question is: Auxiliary paths belong only to the initial mind, whereas the ten powers reside exclusively in the fruition rank; how can the initial mind subsume the powers of fruition? The intent of the answer is: Three passages of text are cited to prove that the initial mind can cultivate the ten powers. Moreover, the auxiliary doors are comprehensive, fully subsuming the beginning and the end. Since the ten powers are thus, all dharmas are by analogy the same. Hence he only challenges the powers, and the rest are not discussed further; therefore, the text below simply directly explains up to the unshared [qualities] and the marks and hallmarks. First, citing the Dazhidulun: two explanations from the treatise are cited, both showing that the initial mind already cultivates the ten powers. Citing the first text: since it allows that when a bodhisattva cultivates prajñā, they should not dwell in the ten powers. If the initial mind were to dwell, compared to a buddha it would be a fault. It is not that the initial mind lacks them; hence it says the initial mind merely has not perfected them. For this reason, one should not dwell. One should know that the initial mind already possesses a portion of the powers. From "Moreover, the bodhisattva..." onwards, it explains this as obtaining a portion. From "If so..." onwards, it next cites the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. First, it challenges the treatise further: The treatise merely says the initial mind is allowed to cultivate them; how could this be called obtaining them? This refutes the first explanation by saying that attachment arises across many lives; hence we know this means cultivating without having obtained them. As for the statement "the later words refer to entering the rank," this next challenges the second explanation's "not perfected": this must be at the first abiding to be called entering the rank, so how does it pertain to the initial mind? Based on these two meanings, it cannot be called the initial mind fully possessing the ten powers. From "If relying on..." onwards, it directly cites the sūtra to answer. Prior to the abidings, one has already obtained a portion of the ten powers; therefore, one should know it is not absent from the initial mind. Later it says, "and so forth up to: contemplating thus, one immediately realizes correct awakening," which is partially verifying the ten powers at the first abiding. Regarding "first one should distinguish the ten kinds of dharmas": from antiquity, lecturers have called them the ten brahma-practices. Since they are prior to the abidings, in meaning they correspond to the ten faiths. The text says "the three actions, and the Buddha, Dharma, Saṅgha, and precepts"; here the phrasing is abbreviated, and should say body and bodily action, speech and verbal action, mind and mental action, and the four beginning with the Buddha. Fascicle seventeen of the old translation of the sūtra states: "Bodhisattva Dharmamati, receiving the Buddha's spiritual power, finished speaking on the ten abidings; next, Heavenly Son Right Mindfulness questioned him, fully as cited in the present text. Dharmamati answered, saying: 'This bodhisattva exclusively and single-mindedly seeks unsurpassable bodhi; first one should distinguish the ten kinds of dharmas; from body up to precepts, one should contemplate thus, contemplating these ten dharmas as all identical with the dharma-dhātu.'" For now, this is spoken from the perspective of their all not being brahma-practices, because this bodhisattva has renounced the secular world to leave home and cultivate brahma-practices for the sake of the unsurpassable path, and also contemplates that phenomenal practices cannot be apprehended. Why? Possessing pure precepts is called brahma-practice. It is fulfilled only through conditions; conditions refer to the three actions, the Three Jewels, and the precept dharmas, which only when paired with the mental cause can be accomplished. Now, first inquiring [into them], causes and conditions are all devoid of intrinsic nature, identical with the principle of the dharma-nature; hence they are said to be like space. Therefore, that sūtra says: "If the body were the brahma-practice, one should know that the brahma-practice would then be impure, would be non-dharma, would be turbid, would be foul-smelling and filthy; dust, defilement, deviousness, eighty thousand families of worms—each and every one should be spoken of like the first phrase. If bodily action were the brahma-practice, one should know that the four deportments would be the brahma-practice. The rest are as in the present text, each saying that it should be the brahma-practice. If speech were the brahma-practice, one should know that movement of the tongue would be the brahma-practice, that the coming together of lips and teeth would be the brahma-practice. If verbal action were the brahma-practice, one should know that speech would be the brahma-practice, and what is spoken—action, non-action, praise, blame, disparagement, fame—would be the brahma-practice. If the mind were the brahma-practice, one should know that initial inquiry and sustained examination, recollecting and not forgetting, pondering, dreams and illusions, and so forth would be the brahma-practice. If mental action were the brahma-practice, one should know that conceptualization would be the brahma-practice, cold, heat, hunger, and thirst would be the brahma-practice, and suffering, pleasure, grief, and joy would be the brahma-practice. If the Buddha were the brahma-practice, would form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness be the brahma-practice, or would the thirty-two marks, eighty minor characteristics, spiritual powers, transformations, and so forth be the brahma-practice? If the Dharma were the brahma-practice, would the correct dharma, false dharma, tranquil nirvāṇa, arising, non-arising, true, non-true, and such dharmas be the brahma-practice? If the Saṅgha were the brahma-practice, would the candidates for and attainers of the four fruits, from the first fruit up to the arhat fruit, be the brahma-practice as a saṅgha? Would the three clarities, six spiritual penetrations, eight liberations, and timely and non-timely liberations be the brahma-practice? If the precepts were the brahma-practice, it is fully in the present text. Furthermore, investigating across the three times and the five aggregates in various ways, brahma-practice cannot be apprehended. Having contemplated these ten, next one cultivates the ten powers." Since the initial mind is allowed to cultivate them, it possesses a portion. Next, citing the Bodhisattvabhūmi (Dichi): regarding "the bodhisattva knowing the tathāgatagarbha," the meaning pervades both the distinctive and the perfect; here the intent lies in the perfect. Therefore, the passages before and after cite the nine great dhyānas, either pervading and verifying both, or exclusively verifying the perfect; hence here the meaning of the garbha should be interpreted according to the perfect. If so, why does it also say it is at the first bhūmi? Answer: Because its meaning also encompasses the distinctive, it is spoken provisionally via the instructional path. In the distinctive teaching's gradual progression, even the initial mind possesses them, how much more so the perfect! Therefore, the citation of the Bodhisattvabhūmi supports and completes the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. Since the stages prior to hearing and reflecting are the ten faiths, and within faith one has already cultivated and produced the ten powers, therefore, according to the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, one need not doubt. "The two vehicles' eliminations and entries (abhibhvāyatana)": "eliminating" means letting go; "entering" means understanding. Because of letting go of afflictions, one attains understanding; understanding is entering, and what is entered is the locus, which is the eight bases of overcoming. Therefore, both the Dazhidulun and the Renwang Jing call them the eight eliminations and entries. Hence we know that within the first bhūmi's intrinsic dhyāna, all dhyāna concentrations, great and small, are subsumed. "How could it not be..." and so forth means that the mental cultivation of the ten faiths has a portion of the first bhūmi. "The three grounds are clear" concludes the previous three texts. From "aids to the path" onwards, it concludes the subsumption, as in the text. From "ten abidings" onwards, it explains the names. The real wisdom and application of buddhas and bodhisattvas thoroughly penetrates all clearly and distinctly; none can destroy it, none can surpass it, and it has no faults; therefore, being perfected is called faultless, hence it says "obtaining supremacy." Adaptively transforming beings is called "capability." Furthermore, upon reaching the fruition, transformative application is supreme, called supreme capability. Now, in explaining the subsumptive dharma, although the meaning pervades the beginning, we provisionally explain the name "power" in terms of the ultimate fruition. Thus the Abhidharma and Vibhāṣā "ask: Why is only the wisdom in the Tathāgata's body established with the name of power, and not the rest? Answer: The meaning of non-obstruction is the meaning of power; the meaning of clearly seeing the three realms is the meaning of power." Although the name exists in the small [vehicle], the intent of its meaning pervades the great; breadth and narrowness constitute the difference, as can be known by comparative explanation. Regarding "assisting and supporting": possessing this power and capability, it supports the Dharma body, its application inexhaustible. The intent in the Bodhisattvabhūmi is that because there is self-practice, external application is inexhaustible. From "However, the Buddha's powers..." onwards, it re-resolves doubts. Regarding "these two explanations": these ten transforming beings suffice as one explanation; Angulimāla's immeasurable powers serve as another explanation. These powers are called ten, yet also called immeasurable; one should know that each and every one is immeasurable. Although called immeasurable, they do not go beyond the four; hence it says "all the more evident." The doctrinal characteristics of these ten powers and the nine sections below in the Dazhidulun cannot be exhausted in haste; here the names and items are briefly preserved to reveal the subsumptive dharmas.