御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.95

2.95

演曰。由起倒故非真菩薩。此頌通釋淨國土文。問。上依此論證道住處訖。其此證道定是何位。答。此有二釋。一云此通十地說妙大身通十地故。其所離慢諸地所斷所知障故。又五平等與十相攝非唯初地有此行相。平等遍在十地中故。若爾如何前說淨心地狹初後闊耶。答。地前行願弘廣佛果亦爾。十地位中近求後地有分齊修一如一行。分分修證故名為狹。其究竟地唯在佛果。一云淨心唯是見道。如來地者是修道。從果為名名究竟地。如圓滿持為證道故。起加行資糧為究竟故。修六具足如見修俱見理。見道得見名十地皆淨心。唯初淨心地。若十地皆是淨心。淨心地後更何所作。又應淨心闊信行地淨心二劫信解一劫故。三地闊狹非唯說教亦兼行故。評曰。後釋為勝。以究竟地淨佛國土等。多約菩薩以顯其行。若唯佛果何論菩薩。又既名為上求佛地。如何說是佛果位收。又准三問唯在因中不應答中。爾許經文唯在佛果。佛果圓滿非所勸化。因何廣說。故廣說者對誘十地雖談果德。約所被人乃居因位。若不對因唯談果者。起懸崖想。何所造修。若爾平等通諸地有及說離慢如何通會。答。以初所證與後體同言得平等。非淨心地。可通於後。其所離慢在見位中理然非有經文指說見道無慢令前後位。諸菩薩等同證真位不起於慢故。文但是見道位收。問。何故此經廣明地前及以佛果。既對十地何不廣明十地行耶。答。經宗為明種性不斷果是所紹。發心已去是能紹繼。舉果令求地前難修。廣辨令學不斷義成故。修十地而不廣辨。由此名為金剛般若。以初後中闊狹異故。

Exposition: Due to giving rise to inversion, one is not a true bodhisattva. This verse generally explains the text on purifying the land. Question: Above, according to this treatise, the dwelling of the path of realization was concluded. Exactly which stage is this path of realization? Answer: There are two explanations. One says this pervades the ten bhūmis, because the wondrous great body is spoken of as pervading the ten bhūmis, and the arrogance abandoned is the jñeyāvaraṇa severed across the various bhūmis. Furthermore, the five equalities and the ten [bhūmis] mutually subsume each other; this mental mode does not belong solely to the first bhūmi, because equality pervades throughout the ten bhūmis. If so, why was it previously said that the bhūmi of pure mind is narrow, while the beginning and end are broad? Answer: The practices and vows before the bhūmis are vast, and the Buddha fruit is likewise so. In the stages of the ten bhūmis, one proximately seeks the subsequent bhūmi and has demarcated practices, practicing one suchness and one conduct; practicing and realizing section by section, it is therefore called narrow. The ultimate bhūmi is solely in the Buddha fruit. Another [explanation] says that the pure mind is only the darśana-mārga. The Tathāgata bhūmi is the bhāvanā-mārga. Taking its name from the fruit, it is called the ultimate bhūmi. Just as complete upholding serves as the path of realization, giving rise to preparatory application and accumulation serves as the ultimate. Practicing the six perfections is like the darśana[-mārga] and bhāvanā[-mārga] both seeing the principle; in the darśana-mārga one attains seeing, which is named as all ten bhūmis being pure mind, only it is the initial bhūmi of pure mind. If all ten bhūmis were pure mind, what further work would there be after the bhūmi of pure mind? Furthermore, the pure mind would have to be broad, because the bhūmi of pure mind in faithful practice is two kalpas, while resolute faith is one kalpa. The breadth and narrowness of the three bhūmis are not merely spoken of as teachings, but also involve practice. Assessment: The latter explanation is superior. Because in the ultimate bhūmi, purifying Buddha lands and so forth are mostly in terms of bodhisattvas to reveal their practice. If it were solely the Buddha fruit, why discuss bodhisattvas? Furthermore, since it is named 'upwardly seeking the Buddha bhūmi,' how could it be said to be subsumed under the fruit stage of Buddhahood? Moreover, according to the three questions, they reside solely in the cause; it would not be fitting in the answer for so much sūtra text to be solely in the Buddha fruit. The Buddha fruit is consummate and is not what is exhorted and transformed; why explain it at length? Therefore, that which is explained at length addresses and guides the ten bhūmis: although discussing the virtues of the fruit, in terms of the persons being addressed, they are indeed situated in the causal stages. If it did not address the cause and solely discussed the fruit, one would give rise to the thought of a precipitous cliff: what could one cultivate? If so, how are the pervasion of equality across the various bhūmis and the discussion of abandoning arrogance reconciled? Answer: Because what is initially realized is identical in substance with the later, it is called attaining equality; it is not that the bhūmi of pure mind can extend to the subsequent ones. That the arrogance abandoned is in the stage of seeing is naturally absent in principle; the sūtra text directly speaks of the darśana-mārga being free from arrogance to cause the bodhisattvas in prior and subsequent stages to equally realize the true stage and not give rise to arrogance. Hence the text is merely subsumed under the stage of the darśana-mārga. Question: Why does this sūtra extensively clarify the pre-bhūmi stages and the Buddha fruit? Since it addresses the ten bhūmis, why does it not extensively clarify the practices of the ten bhūmis? Answer: The main theme of the sūtra is to clarify that the lineage is not severed: the fruit is what is inherited, and from the generation of the mind onward is what can inherit and continue it. Adducing the fruit causes them to seek it; the pre-bhūmi stages are difficult to practice, so it extensively explains them to cause them to learn, thereby establishing the meaning of non-severance. Therefore, it cultivates the ten bhūmis without extensively explaining them. For this reason it is named Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā, because the beginning, middle, and end differ in breadth and narrowness.