華嚴經探玄記 4.34

4.34

問：佛初成道第二七日放此光明，如何却現菩薩生等？又佛始出世，何因乃現有般涅槃？答：下文云「於一念中顯現三世一切佛事。」此明現在攝過未也。問：若爾，何不現彼無量劫事？答：此中文意但為論此世界中佛興之事，故不說餘耳。三現諸天，可知。四「此世界等」一句總結悉現。二現自法會，中二：先現本會、二「以佛神力」下現新眾來集。於中佛神力者，是前則如其像現神力是也。所集中有三世間等可知。又如此處光照無邊界，一一眾會皆悉顯現，彼一一會皆亦如是光照無邊，以法無二與此不別也。又諸光交往不相突礙，以各見當處光照他、不見他處光照自故。何以故？主主及伴伴皆不並故、主伴伴主皆不違故。問：此諸會云何相顯？答：有二相。一以此光照彼，令彼現此攝成一會，彼處亦爾，此同《法華》分身諸佛；二即此一會佛及文殊等融遍法界，是一切會，以圓教中未有一法不則一切者。是故一文殊從東來，則是一切處文殊一時來。縱今西方過無邊世界說華嚴處，亦見文殊從東十剎外來。東方亦爾，未有見彼過向西者，乃至賢首亦然，以是一乘緣起門不雜故，思之。二智光覺，中二：先此處、後結通。此中頌意只融會前光所照諸事，於中二義：一約境，有三種：初一頌明法離情謂、二有八頌會事同理、三末後一頌顯事無礙，皆依前起後。二約心者，一恐眾見前光所照事隨相執取，是故初偈約佛遣之，令眾捨相離乖理之失。又《涅槃經》云「如來非無流。何以故？如來常行有流中故。」又《佛地論》明佛非流非無流故也。二恐眾生疑：何因此事而得普遍？故次八偈會事同理，令眾見真顯順法之得。三疑云：事既同理則平等無二，何因得有事事普遍？故後一偈明則理之事，故而得一事則無量事也。八頌中，初一前既知佛是無流法便為過失，未知若為是無失邪？今云觀佛無所有是無失也，以佛功德法從緣，無性自散滅故。又釋：觀佛及法悉離性故，此即會前放光之佛，明離見也。二會前光所照處，又明前依正俱絕住著。三明依正不二也，又明佛身及無流法俱無所有故不二也。心隨者，是方便觀也。入者，是正證觀。四通會三世間。我是眾生我執也，佛是智正覺，此二主伴平等。彼二所住是器世間，無所住故，離諸有也。又我謂妄執，佛則真智，此二平等，是標也。下二句釋真智。於理住無所住，妄我當體遠離於有。五通會五蘊。數是緣起俗數之相，謂五蘊若有可在俗數，以蘊空故無有數。又會前所放百億光等，及所照世界諸數量等，皆依五蘊色心上立，求此五蘊實無彼數，故云無數。六絕能所觀，非直所見世界等空，能見之智亦無所有。又見者是人，此亦空也。七即用常寂觀，謂此佛出世即無起故。又如此空理現前名為佛出，則空佛名無起。八二空觀，上句人空、次句法空。轉如是相者，一約執轉却二執之相、二轉現二空理相。皆下一句明觀益，並可知。一中解無量等者，為明此一會等中而有無量會等，無量會等中而是一會，是前光所照處也。於中，初二句標、次一句釋、後一句益。標中，通論此有同體異體，各有相容相即，准上釋應知。此文且明相容，故云一中無量等，然通同異體也。二釋中，略舉二因以釋，一由展轉生故、二由非實故。初門者，總攬如此盡窮法界差別之緣成一緣起，是故一一諸緣相望各有二義：一約體，具空有義，故有相即。謂若無一，即一切緣全失自體。何以故？以無一時，多無所成，無所成故不是緣也。是故有一即有一切、却一即却一切，此即一切是空義故，泯自即他；以一是有義故，攝他即自。返上，即一是空義故，亦泯自即他；多是有義故，攝他即自。由二空二有各不俱故，無不相即時；一空一有不相礙故，恒時有相即。又由一一緣中空有不二故，不壞自而即他。妙義思之。二約用，有有力、無力義，故有相入。謂諸緣起非各少力而共生故，即一一緣各有全作義、全不作義。何以故？若無一緣，餘全不作，則一有力，餘皆無力。餘緣亦爾。是即一有力故能容多、多無力故潛入一。多有力等亦爾，亦由二有力、二無力不俱故，無不相入時。一有力、一無力無礙故，常恒相入耳。又於一一緣中各由有力無力不二故，不壞在外而恒相入，思之。由緣起門中有此相作等義成一多，故云展轉生也。此即一多更互展轉相生，故得一中無量、無量中一也。二非實故者，亦二門：一相即義，謂一非實一故能攝多，多非實多故能即一；又多非實多故能攝一，一非實一故能即多；又即多之一非一，即一之多非多。何以故？以不實故。又即多之一方名一、即一之多乃名多。何以故？是不實一故。多亦爾。又是亦一亦不一、亦多亦不多。何以故？不實故具二義。又非一非不一、非多非不多。何以故？不實故，絕二相也，思之。二相容門者，謂一事是不實，以無性故。無性真理既無分限，是故於一事上觀無性時，無不圓盡法界真如。若觀一少事無自性時不得圓盡法界真者，即真如有分，便同有為，是故一事無性即攝真盡。攝真盡時，餘一切法既不礙存而即真故，同理俱在一事中現。多中亦爾，准之。又由俱不壞本事故，不是相即門也；由不實之事攝真理故，得相入也。又可前展轉生，約異體即入；此門約同體即入，思之。又但此經中相即相入義，釋皆有二門：一約緣起相由門、二約法性融通門。故是此二文也，由展轉生故不實，即二門不別。又由相即容，二門各攝法盡，故亦不別也。然義恒不雜，思之。此下文與此同者，應准此知。此文且約相容義說，故云一中無量等，知之。觀益者，達此正理，於緣不懼，故云無所畏也。以境法無礙，故令智無畏也。二結通中，唯結此一娑婆界中百億閻浮處，非是後文盡空界等。次第二重，云一切處文殊者，但是十方十佛國土各百億處，非是第三重處。乃至末後方為盡法界，文意如此，應知。

Question: When the Buddha had just attained enlightenment, on the second seventh-day period, he emitted this light. Why then does it reveal the Bodhisattva's birth and so on? Furthermore, since the Buddha had only just appeared in the world, for what reason does it reveal his Parinirvāṇa? Answer: A later passage states: "In a single thought-moment, all Buddha-affairs of the three times are manifested." This clarifies that the present subsumes the past and the future. Question: If so, why does it not manifest the affairs of countless kalpas? Answer: The intended meaning of the text here is only to discuss the affairs of the Buddha's arising in this world; therefore, it does not speak of the rest. Third, manifesting the devas, which can be understood. Fourth, the single phrase "this world, etc." concludes by summarizing that all are manifested. Second, manifesting his own Dharma assembly, in which there are two parts: first, manifesting the original assembly; second, from "through the Buddha's spiritual power" onward, manifesting the newly arrived assemblies gathering together. Therein, "the Buddha's spiritual power" is the spiritual power of manifesting according to forms mentioned earlier. Among those gathered, there are the three realms and so on, which can be understood. Furthermore, just as the light here illuminates boundless worlds and every single assembly is fully manifested, so too does every single one of those assemblies likewise illuminate the boundless with light; because the Dharma is non-dual, it is no different from this. Moreover, the various lights intersect without conflicting or obstructing one another, because each sees the light of its own location illuminating others and does not see the light of other locations illuminating itself. Why is this? Because principal and principal, and retinue and retinue, do not stand side by side; and principal and retinue, or retinue and principal, do not contradict one another. Question: How do these assemblies mutually manifest? Answer: There are two aspects. First, by this light illuminating those, it causes those to appear here, subsumed into a single assembly, and it is likewise in those locations; this is the same as the divided-body Buddhas in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra. Second, this single assembly of the Buddha, Mañjuśrī, and the rest fuses and pervades the dharmadhātu, being all assemblies; for in the Perfect Teaching, there has never been a single phenomenon that is not identical to all. Therefore, when one Mañjuśrī comes from the east, it is Mañjuśrī in all places coming simultaneously. Even now, in a place in the western direction beyond boundless worlds where the Avataṃsaka is being expounded, one also sees Mañjuśrī coming from ten lands away in the east. It is likewise in the eastern direction—none has ever seen him passing toward the west; and so it is up to Bhadramukha. Because this is the unconfused gate of dependent origination of the One Vehicle, reflect upon it. Second, awakening by the light of wisdom, in which there are two parts: first, this place; second, concluding with its universal reach. The intention of the verses here is merely to integrate and synthesize all the phenomena illuminated by the preceding light. Therein are two aspects. First, in terms of the object, there are three kinds: the first single verse clarifies that phenomena are free from conceptual projections; second, eight verses synthesize phenomena into identity with principle; third, the final single verse reveals the non-obstruction of phenomena. All arise successively, the later based on the earlier. Second, in terms of the mind: first, fearing that the assembly might follow forms and grasp at the phenomena illuminated by the preceding light, the first verse therefore dismisses them in terms of the Buddha, causing the assembly to abandon marks and leave behind the fault of deviating from principle. Furthermore, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "The Tathāgata is not without outflow. Why is this? Because the Tathāgata constantly acts among outflows." Furthermore, the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra clarifies that the Buddha is neither with outflow nor without outflow. Second, fearing that sentient beings might doubt, "Why is it that these phenomena are able to be pervasive?" the subsequent eight verses therefore synthesize phenomena into identity with principle, causing the assembly to perceive reality and revealing the gain of according with the Dharma. Third, if they doubt, saying, "Since phenomena are identical to principle, they are equal and non-dual; for what reason can there be the pervasiveness of phenomenon and phenomenon?" the final verse therefore clarifies phenomena that are identical to principle; therefore, one phenomenon is identical to countless phenomena. Among the eight verses, as for the first: having previously understood that the Buddha being a phenomenon without outflow is an error, they do not yet know what would be without error. It now states that contemplating the Buddha as having nothing that exists is being without error; for the Buddha's qualities and dharmas arise from conditions, and being devoid of intrinsic nature, they disperse and cease of themselves. Another explanation: contemplating the Buddha and dharmas as being entirely free from intrinsic nature; this integrates the Buddha who emitted light earlier, clarifying freedom from views. Second, it integrates the places illuminated by the light earlier, further clarifying that both the dependent and the primary [recompenses] are entirely devoid of attachment. Third, it clarifies that the dependent and the primary are non-dual; further, it clarifies that the Buddha's body and the dharmas without outflow are both non-existent, and thus are non-dual. "Mind following" is the contemplation of skillful means. "Entering" is the contemplation of direct realization. Fourth, it universally integrates the three realms. "I" is the self-grasping of sentient beings. "Buddha" is the wisdom of the fully enlightened one. These two, principal and retinue, are equal. That in which the two abide is the vessel-world; because there is nowhere to abide, it is free from all existences. Furthermore, "I" refers to false grasping, while "Buddha" is true wisdom; that these two are equal is the thesis. The lower two lines explain true wisdom. In principle, it abides in having nowhere to abide, and the false self in its very substance is far removed from existence. Fifth, it universally integrates the five aggregates. "Number" is the characteristic of conventional numbers in dependent origination, meaning that if the five aggregates existed, they could be counted conventionally; but because the aggregates are empty, there is no number. Furthermore, it integrates the hundreds of millions of rays of light emitted earlier, as well as the quantities of worlds illuminated, which are all established upon the matter and mind of the five aggregates; searching for these five aggregates, there are truly no such numbers, hence it is said to be "countless." Sixth, it is the contemplation transcending the perceiver and the perceived: not only are the worlds seen and so forth empty, the wisdom capable of seeing is also non-existent. Furthermore, the seer is a person, which is also empty. Seventh, it is the contemplation of immediate functioning being ever-quiescent, meaning that this Buddha's appearing in the world is precisely unarisen. Furthermore, when such an empty principle manifests before one, it is called the Buddha's appearance; thus the empty Buddha is called unarisen. Eighth, it is the contemplation of the two emptinesses: the upper line is the emptiness of persons, and the next line is the emptiness of dharmas. As for "transforming such marks": first, in terms of grasping, it transforms and eliminates the marks of the two graspings; second, it transforms to manifest the marks of the principle of the two emptinesses. In all [verses], the last single line clarifies the benefit of contemplation, which can all be understood. In "comprehending the immeasurable within one, etc.," it is to clarify that within this single assembly and so forth, there are immeasurable assemblies and so forth, and within immeasurable assemblies and so forth, it is a single assembly; this is the place illuminated by the light earlier. Therein, the first two lines state the thesis, the next line explains it, and the final line gives the benefit. In the thesis, discussing this generally, there are the identical substance and different substances, each possessing mutual containment and mutual identity; it should be understood by analogy with the above explanation. This text temporarily clarifies mutual containment, hence it says "the immeasurable within one, etc.," yet it applies to both identical and different substances. In the second, the explanation, it briefly cites two causes to explain: first, because of arising through reciprocal succession; second, because of not being real. As for the first approach, it brings together these distinct conditions that exhaust the dharmadhātu to form a single dependent origination. Therefore, looking toward each other, each single condition possesses two meanings. First, in terms of essence, it possesses the meanings of emptiness and existence, hence there is mutual identity. That is, if one did not exist, then all conditions would completely lose their own essence. Why is this? Because when the one does not exist, the many cannot be established; because they cannot be established, they are not conditions. Therefore, when the one exists, all exist; when the one is eliminated, all are eliminated. This is because the all possesses the meaning of emptiness, obliterating itself to become identical with the other; because the one possesses the meaning of existence, it gathers the other to become identical with itself. In reverse: the one possesses the meaning of emptiness, so it also obliterates itself to become identical with the other; the many possess the meaning of existence, so they gather the other to become identical with themselves. Because the two emptinesses and the two existences each cannot coexist, there is no time when they are not mutually identical; because one emptiness and one existence do not obstruct each other, they are constantly mutually identical. Furthermore, because emptiness and existence are non-dual within each single condition, it does not destroy itself while being identical to the other. Reflect upon this subtle meaning. Second, in terms of function, it has the meanings of being efficacious and being without efficacy, hence there is mutual entry. That is, because dependent originations do not each contribute a small force to co-produce, each single condition has the meaning of acting entirely and the meaning of not acting at all. Why is this? If one condition is absent, the rest do not act at all; then the one is efficacious and the rest are all without efficacy. The other conditions are also like this. That is, because the one is efficacious, it can contain the many; because the many are without efficacy, they covertly enter the one. When the many are efficacious and so forth, it is also like this; also, because the two efficacies and the two inefficacies cannot coexist, there is no time when they do not mutually enter. Because one efficacy and one inefficacy are unobstructed, they constantly mutually enter. Furthermore, because efficacy and inefficacy are non-dual within each single condition, it does not destroy its being outside while constantly mutually entering; reflect upon this. Because there are such meanings of mutual acting and so on within the gate of dependent origination that establish the one and the many, it is called "arising through reciprocal succession." This means that the one and the many reciprocally give rise to each other in turn; therefore, one obtains the immeasurable within the one and the one within the immeasurable. Second, as for "because of not being real," it also has two gates. First, the meaning of mutual identity: that is, because the one is not a real one, it can gather the many; because the many are not a real many, they can be identical to the one. Furthermore, because the many are not a real many, they can gather the one; because the one is not a real one, it can be identical to the many. Furthermore, the one that is identical to the many is not one; the many that are identical to the one are not many. Why is this? Because they are not real. Furthermore, only the one that is identical to the many is called one; only the many that are identical to the one are called many. Why is this? Because it is an unreal one; the many are also like this. Furthermore, it is both one and not one, both many and not many. Why is this? Because being unreal, it possesses both meanings. Furthermore, it is neither one nor not one, neither many nor not many. Why is this? Because being unreal, it transcends both marks; reflect upon this. Second, the gate of mutual containment: that is, a single phenomenon is unreal because it lacks intrinsic nature. Since the true principle of naturelessness has no boundaries, therefore, when contemplating naturelessness upon a single phenomenon, there is nothing that does not completely exhaust the tathatā of the dharmadhātu. If, when contemplating that a single minor phenomenon lacks intrinsic nature, one could not completely exhaust the reality of the dharmadhātu, then tathatā would have divisions and would be the same as the conditioned; therefore, the naturelessness of a single phenomenon gathers the whole of reality. When it gathers the whole of reality, since all other phenomena do not obstruct their own existence and are identical to reality, they manifest together within a single phenomenon identical to principle. In the many, it is also like this; deduce by analogy. Furthermore, because neither destroys the original phenomenon, this is not the gate of mutual identity; because unreal phenomena gather true principle, they can mutually enter. Furthermore, the previous "arising through reciprocal succession" may be in terms of identity and entry between different substances, while this gate is in terms of identity and entry within the identical substance; reflect upon this. Furthermore, whenever the meanings of mutual identity and mutual entry are explained in this sūtra, there are two gates: first, the gate of mutual dependence in dependent origination; second, the gate of fusion and interpenetration of the dharmatā. Thus there are these two texts. Because arising through reciprocal succession is unreal, the two gates are not distinct. Furthermore, through mutual identity and containment, each of the two gates completely gathers phenomena, so they are also not distinct. Yet their meanings are constantly unconfused; reflect upon this. Those places below that are the same as this should be understood by analogy with this. This text temporarily speaks in terms of the meaning of mutual containment, hence it says "the immeasurable within one, etc."; know this. As for the benefit of contemplation: penetrating this correct principle, one has no fear in the face of conditions, hence it is said "without fear." Because object and dharma are unobstructed, wisdom is caused to be fearless. Second, in concluding with its universal reach, it only concludes with the hundreds of millions of Jambūdvīpa locations in this single Sahā world; it is not exhausting the space-realm and so forth in the subsequent text. In the next, the second tier, it says "Mañjuśrī in all places," which is only the hundreds of millions of places in each of the ten Buddha lands of the ten directions; it is not the places of the third tier. It is only at the very end that it exhausts the dharmadhātu. Such is the meaning of the text, and it should be known.