止觀輔行傳弘決 9.35

9.35

○次「十二因緣」下、攝十如十境以入一念，具如前文陰入境中不思議說。「華嚴大集」等者，經文但云「一念心具」，不云十界，故知存略。凡諸大乘云一念者，意皆如是。若不爾者，云何遍收一切諸法？「此猶」下，舉略攝廣。「問：十二門」等者，釋疑也。緣謂因緣，法謂所生，因緣生法悉皆無生。此以論中問意而問今文。今文處處皆云緣生在一念心，論中云「為在一心？為在異心？」論問意者，為在一人之心？為在眾多人心？為在一人多人一念心耶？如是一念異念，並在今文一念心中悉具足耶？答中初引《華嚴》一多相即總答論意。多人一人於今一念悉皆具足，多人一人所起之心不出百界，百界為多、一念為一，一多相即非一非多。次引《大品》以釋相即。一切諸法皆趣因緣，百界因緣不出一念，是故名為「是趣不過」，故得名為一念具足。「今說」下，翻破前難。且直爾云十二因緣者，指前《華嚴》、《大集》兩文，並云一念具十二緣，其實兩經意兼十界。「復次」下，定前一念以成觀境。又有二義：一者以禪為境，不同世心；二者即此境心，復須離著。向辯禪心既言一念一多相即，為是何等一心能具？故簡示言不得同於妄計一念。能了妄念無一異相，達此無相具一切心、三千具足，方能照於一多相即。此據初心習觀之人。恐濫託於妄情境觀，是故應須簡示入門。若據理論，無非法界，亦何隔於取著妄情。此中一文及第一卷佛法界屬可思議，第三卷初地即是初住，第四卷以思議釋不思議，第五卷不思議初明一心任運具於三千，及下約十禪修觀中云。行人觀法極至正助，及魔境後明陰入十乘度曲入別。如是七文，檢驗諸部唯一處出，若尋文者請以例諸。「譬如」下，舉譬。具如陰境三喻中說，故指《法華》安樂行等。

Next, from "twelve causes and conditions" onward, subsuming the ten thusnesses and ten objects into a single moment of thought is fully as explained under the inconceivable in the preceding section on the realm of aggregates and sense bases. Regarding "Avataṃsaka, Daji, and so on," the sūtra texts only say "contained within a single thought-moment of the mind," not mentioning the ten realms; thus we know this is an abbreviation. Whenever the Mahāyāna speaks of a single thought-moment, the intent is always like this. If not so, how could it universally encompass all dharmas? From "this still" onward, citing the abbreviated to subsume the extensive. "Question: The Twelve Gate Treatise, etc." resolves doubts. "Causes" refers to causes and conditions; "dharmas" refers to what is produced; dharmas produced by causes and conditions are all unproduced. This asks about the present text using the intent of the question in the treatise. The present text states everywhere that production through conditions resides in a single thought-moment of the mind, whereas the treatise asks: "Does it reside in a single mind, or in different minds?" The intent of the treatise's question is: Does it reside in the mind of one person, or in the minds of many people? Or does it reside in a single thought-moment of one person and many people? Are such a single thought and distinct thoughts all fully contained within a single thought-moment of the mind in the present text? In the answer, it first cites the Avataṃsaka on the mutual identity of the one and the many to answer the treatise's intent broadly. Many people and one person are all fully contained in the present single thought-moment; the thoughts arisen in many people and one person do not exceed the hundred realms. The hundred realms are the many, and a single thought is the one; the one and the many are mutually identical, neither one nor many. Next, it cites the Dapin to explain mutual identity. All dharmas converge upon causes and conditions; the causes and conditions of the hundred realms do not exceed a single thought-moment, which is why it is called "converging with none beyond"; thus it can be called complete in a single thought-moment. From "now stating" onward, it refutes the previous objection. Simply stating the twelve causes and conditions points to the two passages from the Avataṃsaka and Daji; both state that a single thought contains the twelve links, yet the intent of both sūtras in fact includes the ten realms. Next, from "furthermore" onward, determining the preceding single thought-moment to establish the object of contemplation also has two meanings: first, taking dhyāna as the object, which differs from the worldly mind; second, this very object and mind must further be freed from attachment. Having just analyzed the dhyāna mind as the mutual identity of one and many in a single thought, what kind of single mind is capable of containing this? Thus it distinguishes and shows that it must not be identified with the falsely conceived single thought. Only by realizing that false thoughts have neither singular nor distinct marks, and penetrating this marklessness that contains all minds and is fully equipped with the three thousand, can one illuminate the mutual identity of the one and the many. This addresses beginners practicing contemplation. Fearing that they may erroneously rely on false emotional objects and contemplations, it is necessary to distinguish and point out the entry gate. According to the principle, nothing is not the dharma-dhātu; how could it exclude clinging, false sentiments? This passage, along with Fascicle 1 where the Buddha realm belongs to the conceivable, Fascicle 3 where the first bhūmi is identical to the first abode, Fascicle 4 where the conceivable explains the inconceivable, Fascicle 5 where the inconceivable first explains that a single mind spontaneously contains the three thousand, and below where contemplating the ten dhyānas states that the practitioner's contemplation method goes to the utmost in direct and auxiliary aids, and after the demonic object explaining the ten vehicles of the aggregates and sense bases to enter the distinctive—these seven passages, upon examination of all sections, occur in only one place; those examining the text, please take them as models for the rest. From "for example" onward, an analogy is raised. Fully as explained in the three metaphors of the aggregate realm, it points to the Lotus Sūtra's comfortable practices and so forth.