華嚴經探玄記 13

English (machine translation) 13

Language: English

13.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Fazang of the Western Monastery of the State of Wei.

13.2

The Sixth, the Bhūmi of Manifestation (Abhimukhī), also has seven sections as before.

First, explaining the name: The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says, "Because through the cognition of dependent origination one is able to make the perfection of prajñā become manifest before one, it is called the 'Manifest Bhūmi' (abhimukhī-bhūmi)." Vasubandhu explains, "This means that in this bhūmi one abides in the cognition of dependent origination, and through the power of this cognition one causes non-conceptual cognition to become manifest, awakening to all dharmas as neither defiled nor pure." Asvabhāva's commentary and the Liang Treatise (Paramārtha's translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha) both agree with this explanation. Explanation: This is because preparatory cognition induces fundamental cognition, realizing the dharmadhātu of true suchness without defilement or purity and making it manifest. The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra says that it is called the Manifest Bhūmi because one observes the transmigration of all conditioned phenomena manifest before oneself, and furthermore, only after cultivating attention extensively regarding signlessness does [signlessness] become manifest. Explanation: This has two meanings: first, observing the transmigration of all conditioned phenomena manifest before oneself; second, through extensive attention, causing signless contemplation to become manifest. The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says, "The contemplative wisdom of abiding neither in saṃsāra nor in nirvāṇa becomes manifest; hence it is called the Manifest Bhūmi." The Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā says, "Having subdued the works of Māra, the dharmas of the bodhisattva path all become manifest before one." The Renwang jing names it 'Dharmas Becoming Manifest' (faxian). The Cheng weishi lun agrees with the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, and the Yogācārabhūmi agrees with the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, the Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra, and so forth, without any divergent explanations. The Daśabhūmikasūtra-śāstra and others have already been distinguished above.

13.4

Second, the sequence also has three meanings: First, the previous stage was assigned to the śrāvakas, while this [stage] clarifies the pratyekabuddhas; the assigned dharma surpasses the former, so it comes next. Second, although the fourth bhūmi transcends the world, it cannot accord with it; the fifth bhūmi can accord with the world, but cannot destroy views of defilement and purity; this bhūmi contemplates the dharmadhātu without defilement or purity to destroy those views, so it comes next. Third, the Cheng weishi lun says, "In the preceding five bhūmis, contemplation with signs is frequent and signless contemplation is rare; in the sixth bhūmi, signless contemplation is frequent and contemplation with signs is rare; from the seventh bhūmi onward, it is purely signless contemplation." Now, in this bhūmi one retreats from the rarity [of signless contemplation] and enters into its frequency; hence it must follow.

13.5

Third, the hindrances abandoned: According to the Daśabhūmikasūtra-śāstra, it is the hindrance of subtle afflictive latencies. Explanation: Because in this stage one frequently cultivates signless contemplation and the hindrance runs contrary to this, it is called a subtle latency. Furthermore, comparing it to the hindrances of the previous bhūmis, this is called subtle; in reality, it is a portion of the innate cognitive hindrances that grasps at subtle defilement and purity, running contrary to the dharmadhātu without defilement or purity of the sixth bhūmi, and thus it constitutes a hindrance. This is truly because the fifth bhūmi surpasses the separate stages of defilement and purity of the third and fourth, bringing them together in the same place, yet the two signs are not yet exhausted; only upon reaching this [bhūmi] are they eliminated, so it is called subtle. The Cheng weishi lun says, "It is called the hindrance of the active manifestation of coarse signs, meaning a portion of the innate cognitive hindrances that grasps at the active manifestation of coarse signs of defilement and purity; that hinders the path without defilement or purity of the sixth bhūmi, and when entering the sixth bhūmi, one is able to sever it forever. Due to this, the sixth bhūmi is said to sever two ignorances and their coarse heaviness: first, the ignorance of manifestly observing the transmigration of conditioned phenomena, which is that which grasps at defilement here, because the transmigration of conditioned phenomena is subsumed under the defiled part; second, the ignorance of the extensive active manifestation of signs, which is that which grasps at purity here, because one grasps at signs of purity, contemplation with signs is extensively active, and one is not yet able to abide for long periods in signless contemplation." Explanation: The first ignorance grasps at the process of transmigration of suffering and its origin, and the latter ignorance grasps at the process of the pure signs of cessation and the path. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra says, "First, the ignorance wherein the continuity of activities clearly manifests; second, the ignorance wherein the signs of dharmas repeatedly enter the mind." Explanation: This latter ignorance is the repeated manifestation of the pure signs of cessation in the mind, which runs contrary to prolonged, frequent signless contemplation; hence it constitutes a hindrance. The Liang Treatise, the Saṃdhinirmocana, and the Yogācārabhūmi agree with the explanation in the Cheng weishi lun.

13.6

Fourth, that which is realized: According to the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, one realizes the dharmadhātu without defilement or purity. Vasubandhu explains, "Originally there is no defilement, because the nature is undefiled. Since there is no defilement, there is likewise no purity." The Cheng weishi lun says, "The sixth is the true suchness without defilement or purity, meaning this true suchness is originally undefiled by nature, nor can it be said to become pure afterward." Asvabhāva and the Madhyāntavibhāga both agree with this explanation. Furthermore, the Madhyāntavibhāga-bhāṣya says, "Through fully understanding this, one knows that dependently arisen dharmas are neither defiled nor pure." The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says, "Fully understanding this meaning, one enters the sixth bhūmi."

13.7

Fifth, the specific practices: Among the ten pāramitās, this corresponds to the practice of prajñā; within this bhūmi, it corresponds to the practice of superior wisdom in the contemplation of dependent origination. The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says that in the sixth stage one does not give rise to a defiled mind, yet takes rebirth based on dependent origination; hence look to the text below.

13.8

Sixth, the specific fruits: In the Liang Treatise, through completely penetrating the dharmadhātu without defilement or purity, one attains the fruit of undefiled continuity of self and others. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra says that on the sixth bhūmi, generating the aspiration, one attains the samādhi of the radiant disk of the sun. The fruits of practice and fruits of the stage of this bhūmi can be known by examining the text.

13.9

Seventh, in explaining the text, the three divisions are the same as before. In the first, the section on praising and requesting, there are eighteen verses divided into five parts: first, two [verses] where the bodhisattvas, hearing the Dharma, make offerings and praise; next, two where the devas rejoice and make offerings; next, two where the deva kings and their retinues make offerings; next, eleven where the devīs sing music praising the Buddha's virtues—within this, the first two broadly praise the benefits of the teaching, the next three praise great wisdom realizing emptiness, the next one praises great compassion gathering in living beings, the next four praise the unobstructedness of principle and practice, and the next one describes the devīs falling silent; the last one is the chief leader requesting the teaching.

13.10

In the second section, the main exposition, the treatise divides it into three parts as in the previous bhūmis, but with an inversion: in the previous bhūmi, the upāya for approaching the bhūmi and initial abiding in the bhūmi were together called the antidote to superior conceit, whereas here initial abiding in the bhūmi is subsumed under the superior practice of the unconditioned path, because of its gradual superiority. First, as for the antidote to superior conceit: because in the previous five bhūmis one contemplated the defiled and pure characteristics of the truths of suffering and its arising, it was called the obstacle of grasping defilement and purity; therefore, the ten equalities universally contemplate the equality of all phenomena. Within the text there are three parts: first, restating what came before to introduce what follows; second, from "What are they?" onward, directly revealing the ten practices; third, from "In this manner" onward, concluding the practices and entering the bhūmi. Within the direct revelation, these ten equalities are divided into three: the first eight destroy existence by means of non-existence; the next one destroys non-existence by means of existence; the last destroys both existence and non-existence. Moreover, the first is general, and the remaining nine are specific. In the first, as for "all phenomena," the treatise designates the twelve āyatanas as "all," because unconditioned phenomena are not included in the aggregates, whereas the realms (dhātus) and bases (āyatanas) subsume them completely. First, the twelve āyatanas explain all phenomena, because sense faculties, dusts, objects, and consciousnesses are all not separate from the three non-natures; therefore it says, "equal because of having no nature." In the treatise text it is called "signless" because it lacks nature and characteristics; therefore the treatise says that because the twelve āyatanas, all phenomena, have an intrinsic nature that is signless, they are equal. In the nine specific ones below, the author of the treatise establishes nine kinds of characteristics to be countered to reveal signlessness. The first phrase explains that the individual characteristic of the twelve āyatanas is merely produced by false imagination and has no real existence, hence it says "signless." The treatise text calls it "not thought" in order to clarify that those characteristics are precisely thought, hence it says "not thought." Second, an external objection asks: "Since what is grasped is merely thought, one may say that characteristics are empty; but thought can manifest characteristics, so thought should exist." The treatise says: "'Characteristics of sequential mental activity,' meaning that mindfulness is like thought." Explanation: the intent is to clarify that this thought and mindfulness still rely on false characteristics; mutually sequential, they lack essence, hence it is called "equal because of being unproduced." Another sūtra states: "Arising from mental thoughts, it forms characteristics with the mind and exists in harmony; arising together and perishing together, they equally have no abiding." This is what it refers to. Third, an objection asks: "Since it is said that thoughts and characteristics are mutually dependent, then how could the production, completion, and establishment of phenomena be empty?" Explanation: it clarifies that because characteristics rely on thought, what is grasped is not established; thought still relies on characteristics, so the grasper is not established. Mutually reliant, both are destroyed, hence it is called "equal because of being unformed." The above destroys attachment resulting from delusion regarding the truth of suffering. Fourth, an objection asks: "Suffering is what is produced, so it may be said to be empty; but the truth of the cause of suffering can produce it, so how could it not exist?" The treatise says: "Because of the characteristic of defilement." Explanation: it clarifies that defilements and karma are fundamentally quiescent, free by their intrinsic nature, hence it is called "equal." This text is in the eighth phrase; according to the treatise it should be here, which is why it is distinguished here. Fifth, an objection asks: "Suffering and its cause are defiled phenomena, so they may be said to be empty; but cessation and the path are pure phenomena, so how could they not exist?" The treatise says: "Because of the characteristic of purity." Explanation: it clarifies that since defiled phenomena are already empty, there is no defilement to overturn and one cannot speak of purity, hence it is called "fundamentally pure." The preceding dispels characteristics. Sixth, an objection asks: "If both defilement and purity are empty, then various verbal expressions should not arise; since there are words and names, one clearly knows that there are referents designated by them." The treatise says: "'Characteristics of discrimination' refers to discrimination by names and words." Explanation: names are established based on referents, and referents are manifested through names; contemplating the cause of the referent, one does not see the result of the name, and contemplating the result of the name, one does not see the cause of the referent. For this reason, in the world some attain the name without attaining the referent, and some attain the referent without attaining the name; thus one knows that pursuing names to grasp referents is entirely false imagination and proliferation, hence it is called "equal because of being without proliferation." Seventh, an objection asks: "If defilement and purity, names and referents, are all empty, why do bodhisattvas abandon defilement and seek purity? Since there is grasping and abandoning, how could phenomena not exist? Furthermore, since false phenomena are empty, this verifies that true principle can be realized and grasped." The treatise says: "As for 'characteristics of emergence and submergence,' pure phenomena can be grasped, which is called 'emergence,' and defiled phenomena can be abandoned, which is called 'submergence.'" Explanation: it clarifies that false phenomena are empty in themselves, with nothing to be abandoned or left behind. True principle is free from conceptual thought and cannot be obtained, hence it says "equal because of being without grasping and abandoning." The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Neither abandoning nor not abandoning saṃsāra, neither attaining nor not attaining nirvāṇa." Also the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "If one realizes that the nature of saṃsāra is precisely nirvāṇa, and within it neither grasps nor abandons, this is entering the Dharma door of non-duality." This is this meaning. Eighth, an objection asks: "Above, views of the existence of the true and the false arose, so they were destroyed by non-existence. If so, then the complete non-existence of the two truths should be the correct principle." The treatise says: "'Characteristic of non-existence of a self.' Question: Is this 'non-existence of a self' not the correct principle? Why is it considered a characteristic to be countered? Answer: Because grasping this characteristic of the non-existence of a self is identical to nihilistic non-existence, it is therefore an error." Explanation: because illusion-like dependent origination does not obstruct existence, it is not the same as annihilation, hence it says "equal because of being like an illusion and so forth." Ninth, an objection asks: "Before, when I grasped existence, you destroyed it with non-existence; when I then grasped non-existence, you again spoke of illusory existence; therefore, if I now grasp both existence and non-existence, it should accord with the correct principle." The treatise says: "As for 'characteristics of arising and disintegration,' arising is the characteristic of existence, and disintegration is the characteristic of non-existence." Explanation: there are two paths. One says: "When I previously refuted you by speaking of non-existence because you asserted existence, I did not mean that the essence of phenomena is truly non-existent. When I refuted your attachment to non-existence by speaking of existence, I did not mean that the essence of phenomena exists in the way you sentimentally imagine. Therefore, the correct principle is neither existence nor non-existence, hence it says 'equal because existence and non-existence are non-dual.'" Another says: "What I previously called non-existence is a non-existence that is not different from existence, hence it is not non-existence. Also, what I previously called existence is an existence that is not different from non-existence, hence it is not existence. Therefore, apart from non-existence there is no separate existence that could be dual with non-existence, and apart from existence there is no separate non-existence that could be dual with existence; hence it says 'equal because existence and non-existence are non-dual.'" Here, it is not that mutually eliminating existence and non-existence is called non-duality, nor is combining existence and non-existence called non-duality, nor is total non-existence of both existence and non-existence called non-duality; but rather, precisely because existence is non-existence and non-existence is existence, it is called non-duality, which can be seen upon reflection. In the third part, concluding the practices and entering the bhūmi: first, generally concluding entry into the station; second, from "The bodhisattva thus..." onward, specifically concluding. Within the specific conclusion: "Contemplating thus," etc., restates the previous contemplation of the ten equal dharmas. As for "able to be patient (kṣānti)," it means patiently accepting the correct principle and staying far away from obscurations and defilements. Moreover, patiently realizing the profound principle is free of discriminating thought, hence it is called "patient." "Accordant" means that this contemplative wisdom accords with the equal dharmatā of suchness. "Clear and sharp" means being able to counter subtle conceit. The previous fourth and fifth bhūmis also equally attained accordant acceptance (anulomikī kṣānti), but because the removal of obstacles was not yet subtle, it was not called "clear and sharp." Because the obstacle of conceit regarding understanding the Dharma eliminated in the fourth bhūmi was the coarsest, it attained weak-grade accordant acceptance—"weak" means low. In the fifth bhūmi, the conceit regarding bodily purity was eliminated, which was medium, so it attained medium-grade acceptance. Here, the discrimination of grasping defiled and pure phenomena is the most subtle conceit, so it attains the superior grade of acceptance, hence it is called "clear and sharp." The inferior grade can counter what is countered of the superior grade, up to the superior grade being able to counter what is countered of the inferior grade; that the obstacle and the antidote correspond inversely is a matter of necessary principle. As for "the acceptance of the unproduced has not yet become manifest," because the seventh and eighth bhūmis and above are the stations of the acceptance of the unproduced (anutpattikadharmakṣānti), and this bhūmi is not those, it says "not yet manifest." Yet because it accords with that acceptance, it is called "accordant." In actual principle, the first bhūmi also attains the unproduced; it is in order to correlate the five acceptances across the various bhūmis that this explanation is made. That is: prior to the bhūmis is called the acceptance of suppression; the first, second, and third bhūmis are correlated with the worldly realm and called the acceptance of faith; the fourth, fifth, and sixth bhūmis are correlated with the stations of the two vehicles and called accordant acceptance; the seventh, eighth, and ninth bhūmis are the bodhisattva stations called the acceptance of the unproduced; the tenth bhūmi and the Buddha-bhūmi, being the culmination of cause and result, are called the acceptance of quiescent cessation. This bhūmi is the superior grade within accordant acceptance, hence it is called "clear and sharp." The antidote to superior conceit is completed. Second, from "This bodhisattva..." onward, explains the superiority of the practice of the unconditioned path. Within this there are two parts: first, explaining the unconditioned practice with respect to initial abiding in the bhūmi; second, from "makes this thought" onward, explaining the unconditioned with respect to properly abiding in the bhūmi. Because the previous bhūmi was inferior, only properly abiding in the bhūmi was called unconditioned; because this bhūmi is superior, initial abiding in the bhūmi immediately clarifies the unconditioned. Within initial abiding there are two parts: first, "contemplating all..." etc., restates what came before to introduce what follows; second, "great compassion..." etc., directly reveals the unconditioned. The treatise text has four phrases: the first three explain the mind that contemplates, and the last explains the production and cessation that is contemplated; this sūtra omits "fulfillment of great compassion." However, these three minds are explained in six layers: First, distinguishing characteristics: because the compassionate mind first arises, it says "compassion as the foremost"; in the treatise, it is because superior great compassion encompasses the sentient beings of the three times. Second, because seeking the result and reaching the culmination of sympathy is called "growth," and moreover seeking the Buddha-fruit above is called "growth"; in the treatise, it is because with respect to known dependent origination it purifies wisdom, and this pure wisdom is the root of the Buddha-fruit. Third, the mind of revulsion toward the conditioned: in the treatise, it is contemplating all kinds of subtle causes and conditions to give rise to revulsion; because the contemplation of conditions reaches the ultimate subtlety, it says "fulfillment." Second, clarifying sequence: taking advantage of the previous contemplation of emptiness, one immediately reflects on sentient beings bound by delusion, so one first gives rise to compassion; because of compassionate mindfulness, one seeks the wisdom of the Buddha-fruit to benefit sentient beings; next arises growth, since the Buddha's wisdom must be achieved through freedom from faults; therefore, at the very end arises contemplation of the ultimate faults of dependently arisen phenomena. Third, according to the two benefits: the first is the benefit of others, and the latter two are the benefit of oneself. Fourth, according to the two protections: the former two protect against the Hīnayāna—one protects against a narrow mind, the other protects against a small mind; the latter one protects against afflictions. Fifth, according to cause and result: the first and last subsume causes, while the middle one seeks the result. Sixth, according to non-abiding: the first does not abide in nirvāṇa, the last does not abide in saṃsāra, and the middle one abides in neither. Regarding the production and cessation that is contemplated: the twelve links of dependent origination arise sequentially in the forward order and cease in the reverse order, hence it says "contemplating the production and cessation of the world." This is the general contemplation. Below, contemplating those phenomena specifically through ten gates may be understood.

13.11

Second, within properly abiding in the bhūmi, extensively revealing the meaning of dependent origination, four gates are briefly established: first, generally clarifying the dependent origination of the dharmadhātu; second, specifically analyzing the twelve factors of existence; third, discerning distinctions; fourth, properly explaining the text. First, the dependent origination of the dharmadhātu briefly has three meanings: first, dependent origination in terms of defiled phenomena; second, in terms of pure phenomena; third, combined explanation of defilement and purity. Within the first there are four gates: first, the gate of conditions converging in one mind; second, the gate of subsuming the root into the branches; third, the gate of subsuming the branches into the root; fourth, the gate of mutual dependence of root and branches; all are as explained elsewhere. Second, dependent origination of pure phenomena also has four gates: first, fundamentally existing; second, produced through cultivation; third, fundamentally existing and produced through cultivation; fourth, produced through cultivation and fundamentally existing; as explained below in the section on "Nature Manifestation." Third, the combined explanation of defilement and purity also has four gates: first, the gate of overturning defilement to manifest purity; second, the gate of responding to defilement with purity; third, the gate of converging defilement to be identical with purity; fourth, the gate of the exhaustion of defilement and the cessation of purity; also as explained elsewhere. Second, specifically explaining the twelve factors of existence is fully set forth in a separate chapter.

13.12

Third, discerning distinctions involves three gates: first, with respect to the root sūtra; second, according to the explanatory treatise; third, the mutual subsumption of sūtra and treatise.

13.13

First, within the root sūtra there are two levels: first, specifically explaining the ten contemplations; second, manifesting the names and concluding again. What are the ten contemplations? First, the sequence of the parts of causes and conditions; second, being subsumed under one mind; third, mutual assistance through one's own karma; fourth, not abandoning one another; fifth, the non-interruption of the three paths; sixth, contemplating the earlier and later limits; seventh, the accumulation of the three sufferings; eighth, arising through causes and conditions; ninth, the fetters of production and cessation; tenth, the contemplation of accordant exhaustion of nothingness. Within these, each has a forward contemplation and a reverse contemplation, and so there are twenty gates. That is: the forward contemplation of great compassion does not abide in nirvāṇa, and the reverse contemplation of great wisdom does not abide in saṃsāra; hence it is called the unconditioned path. In the previous five bhūmis, one contemplated the defilement and purity of the four truths to explain non-abiding; because this bhūmi is superior, it gives rise to forward and reverse contemplations solely with respect to defiled phenomena to explain non-abiding.

13.14

Second, the division according to the commentary (śāstra): the author of the commentary generally makes a three-fold distinction regarding these ten contemplations of conditioned arising: 1. Interpreting these ten in terms of the mind of revulsion and detachment from the conditioned, which is the aforementioned contemplation of the fulfillment of great compassion. 2. Interpreting these ten in terms of the mind of deep concern for sentient beings, termed the contemplation in accord with great compassion, which is the aforementioned great compassion as foremost. 3. Interpreting these ten in terms of the mind of seeking buddhahood, termed the discriminative contemplation of the knowledge of all modes (sarvākārajñatā), which is the aforementioned great compassion as augmenting. That the sequence of these three differs from that of the previous three is because the earlier sequence was in terms of the arising of the mind, whereas the present one is in terms of the sequence of correct practice: namely, first one personally departs from errors, next one shows concern for sentient beings, and lastly one seeks the great fruition; thus it differs from the former. Within these three gateways, each contemplates the ten series, yielding thirty gateways; each further having forward and reverse, there are thus sixty gateways of discriminative contemplations of dependent origination. Third, the mutual subsumption of the sūtra and commentary contains two gateways: 1. Mutual confrontation, and 2. Mutual subsumption. First, regarding mutual confrontation: the author of the commentary above merely took the three minds at the position of the first dwelling of the bhūmis from the sūtra, distinguishing the ten gateways of dependent origination, each possessing forward and reverse, making sixty gateways. Now, investigating the text below, in the fruition division he further uses the three gates of liberation to contemplate the accumulation of causes and conditions; this verifies that, combined with the above, it amounts to one hundred and eighty gateways of discriminative contemplations of conditioned arising. Another explanation: as for why the author of the commentary did not follow the sequence of the ten gateways in the sūtra for his explanation, but instead altered the structure to make those three separate explanatory gateways, the intention is that the ten gateways in the sūtra themselves have already made the meaning of the twelve links of dependent origination manifest, so they do not require another explanation. As for the three minds of the initial dwelling passing through these ten gateways, the meaning is hidden and difficult to understand, requiring explanation before becoming manifest; therefore he separately made these three gateways of explanation. From this one should know: taking the sūtra and commentary together, there is a total of four tiers explaining this conditioned arising; each has ten, which makes forty gateways; each having forward and reverse, there are eighty gateways; contemplating them with the three emptinesses, there are altogether two hundred and forty gateways. One should understand this intention regarding the dharma of discriminative conditioned arising. Second, regarding mutual subsumption: within the first gateway of the commentary, it opens into three sections: 1. Termed the distinction of the characteristics of establishment and response, which subsumes the first contemplation of the sequence of causal conditions in the sūtra. 2. Termed the distinction of the ultimate truth, which subsumes half a contemplation within the second contemplation of being subsumed under one mind in the sūtra. 3. Termed the distinction of conventional truth, which subsumes the latter eight and a half gateways in the sūtra. Among these three, the first reveals that the false self is non-existent, and the latter two reveal that the ultimate and conventional are not non-existent, because the doctrinal meaning is fully complete. Within the second contemplation in accord with great compassion, the ten are divided into four: 1. Termed contemplating sentient beings' delusion and error, which subsumes the first gateway among the ten. 2. Termed seeking liberation elsewhere, which subsumes the second gateway. 3. Termed seeking liberation on a divergent path, which subsumes the next four gateways. 4. Termed seeking a divergent liberation, which subsumes the latter four gateways. Within the third discriminative contemplation of the knowledge of all modes, the ten are divided into nine: 1. Termed the contemplation of distinguishing defilement and purity, which subsumes the first half-gateway. 2. Termed the contemplation of relying upon, which subsumes the latter half of the first gateway and the second gateway. 3. Termed the contemplation of expedient means, which subsumes the third gateway. 4. Termed the contemplation of the characteristics of causes and conditions, which subsumes the fourth gateway. 5. The contemplation of entering truth, which subsumes the fifth gateway. 6. The contemplation of relying on faith and entry regarding capability and incapability, which subsumes the sixth gateway. 7. The contemplation of faith and entry regarding excessive arrogance and non-excessive arrogance, which subsumes the seventh gateway. 8. The contemplation of beginninglessness, which subsumes the eighth and ninth gateways. 9. The contemplation of varieties, which subsumes the tenth gateway. The characteristics of the explanations can all be understood by inferring accordingly. Fourth, explaining the text: explaining these ten gateways comprises ten sections; within each single gateway, an explanation in four gateways is made: 1. Specific explanation relying on the sūtra; 2. Relying on the commentary, first explaining in terms of revulsion and detachment from the conditioned; 3. Explaining in terms of accord with great compassion; 4. Explaining in terms of the discrimination of the knowledge of all modes. Only through these four tiers, relying on the sūtra and the commentary, is the subsumption exhausted.

13.15

Regarding the four gateways within the first section, first, in terms of the sūtra text, what is named the contemplation of the sequence of causal conditions directly reveals the contemplation of the selflessness of the factors of existence (bhava-aṅga). Within this there are two: first, explaining the erroneous clinging to a self that falsely gives rise to the division of conditions; second, from “further reflecting thus” downward, explaining the delusion regarding the principles of the truths that gives rise to the sequence of conditions. Within the first there are three: 1. Discerning and determining selflessness; 2. Delusion establishing dependent origination; 3. Concluding with the practice based on the stage. In the first part there are two sentences: the first says that receiving a body in the world is due to attachment to a self, which brings up the emotional delusion in the opposite manner to clarify that the self is contrary to principle. If the self existed in principle, attachment to a self would accord with principle and should result in world-transcendence; since one is born in the world, this makes clear that the self is contrary to principle. Second, if one is detached from clinging to a self then there is no birth, which brings up the understanding mind in a direct manner to clarify that principle is not a self. If the self existed in principle, detachment from the self would oppose principle and should result in birth in the world; since one attains world-transcendence, this makes clear that principle has no self. Second, from “all ordinary beings” downward, explaining that delusion regarding this selflessness gives rise to those factors of existence, within which one first forwardly contemplates dependent origination, and afterwards reversely contemplates selflessness. In the former, “following improper thoughts” etc. refers to improper reflection being the cause of ignorance (avidyā) in other sūtras. “Delusion and attachment to a self” is precisely the initial link of ignorance. “Habitual arising” etc. explains the link of formations (saṃskāra). Due to that ignorance, one is deluded about worldly cause and effect and creates sinful actions, and is deluded about world-transcending cause and effect and creates meritorious and immovable [actions]—namely, the karma that induces the three wretched destinies as well as the karmas of individual retributions of suffering in the human and heavenly realms are all sinful actions; the karma that induces the human and heavenly realms of the desire realm is called meritorious action; the karma that induces the form and formless realms is called immovable action. Third, from “because of these formations” downward, explaining the link of consciousness (vijñāna). However, other treatises state two meanings for the link of consciousness: first, it is that which is induced, referring to the seed of the ripening consciousness (vipāka-vijñāna) within the fundamental consciousness—this takes the seed; second, it is that which can induce, referring to the fundamental consciousness relied upon by the seeds of the five fruitions being called the link of consciousness—this is the active eighth [consciousness]. Now in this text, it is spoken of in terms of the latter meaning, because the link of formations is that which can induce. It induces the seeds of the five fruitions within consciousness, causing them to ripen until they reach existence; therefore it says that because of these formations, the seeds of the mind with outflows are produced. This forms the pair of the inducer and the induced. As for the statement that because of the mind with outflows and grasping, birth and death arise: due to craving, grasping, and becoming, there arise birth, old age, and death; this is the pair of the producer and the produced. Because the five fruitions are verbal seeds that also run through the stage without outflows, here, being induced by formations makes clear that they are not without outflows; hence it says “with outflows”. That the word “craving” is absent here is an abbreviation. Fourth, from “the so-called” downward, discerning consciousness giving rise to name-and-form (nāmarūpa), etc. There are six conditions, like worldly planting: 1. Karma as the earth: looking toward the retribution to be produced, it acts as the sovereign condition (adhipati-pratyaya), so it is like the earth. 2. Consciousness as the seed: the seeds of the five fruitions act as their direct cause, so it is like a seed; but because the dependent seed is not separate from the consciousness that is relied upon, it says consciousness is like a seed—this is citing the substratum to inclusively take that which depends on it. 3. Covered by ignorance: when taking birth, ignorance is deluded about parents and so forth; like worldly planting, although there is earth below and a seed in the middle, it must have soil covering it above. 4. Moistened by the water of craving: giving rise to a mind of defiled craving toward parents, moistening the reception of birth; like [a seed], although covered with soil, it must have moisture. 5. Irrigated by the mind of self: reckoning oneself to have a body and to be able to act; like [a seed], although moistened, it requires someone to irrigate it. 6. Various views: covered by the net of divergent views so that dharmas without outflows cannot destroy it; like worldly planting, it requires the protection of a net so that birds will not damage it. As for the sprouting of name-and-form, this clarifies the fruit produced: namely, when consciousness enters the womb, the seeds of the five fruitions are induced by ignorance and karma and moistened by craving and grasping, so they ripen together and produce the fruit. But their manifestation has an earlier and later; they all arise through the earlier inducing the latter, therefore it says: due to name-and-form, the sense faculties are produced, etc. This does not mean that name-and-form is the direct cause of the sense faculties; the rest can also be understood in this way. Third, from “these twelve” downward, explaining the reverse contemplation of selflessness; fourth, from “the bodhisattva” downward, concluding with the practice of the stage; both can be understood. Second, from “further reflecting thus” downward, explaining the delusion regarding the principles of the truths that gives rise to the sequence of conditions. Within this there are also two: first, forward; second, reverse. In the former, “not knowing the ultimate truth in accordance with reality” has two meanings: 1. Generally citing the ultimate truth as the fundamental basis upon which the twelve factors of existence rely, clarifying that the false arises based on the true, revealing that the factors of existence have no substantial nature; because ignorance is the very first, it first clarifies arising based [on the true], and the remaining links, like this, all arise based on the true. 2. Specifically revealing that this is what ignorance is deluded about: namely, this ignorance, due to being deluded about the two truths, creates the three formations; therefore the commentary-sūtra calls it the ultimate truth of the truths. The previous section clarified the three formations that are created; this section reveals the two truths that are deluded about; the texts simply interweave with each other. It is because each serves as the power of a sovereign condition, inducing the earlier to raise the latter and causing the continuity to be established. Regarding having four aggregates of grasping: the link of consciousness has two meanings: 1. If the ālaya is the link of consciousness, the remaining consciousnesses then belong to the name link within the link of name-and-form. 2. If it is comprehensive so that the sixth consciousness also enters the link of consciousness, then these four aggregates of form, feeling, perception, and formations constitute the link of name-and-form. Now it speaks in terms of the latter meaning, hence it makes this statement. The rest of the text can be seen. In the reverse contemplation, the absence of an agent is the emptiness of the person, and the absence of actions performed is the emptiness of dharmas. The explanation relying on the sūtra is concluded.

13.16

Second, within the three sections of the explanation based on the treatise according to distinguishing aspects and truths, the first gate is named the distinction of establishing and answering the characteristics. Within it, there are four individual gates; brought together, they make three; essentially subsumed, they make two; and totalized, they make one. As for the four: first, the gate of adducing understanding and delusion to demonstrate and establish non-self; second, below 'the treatise-sūtra's [mention of] delusion'—corresponding to below the sūtra text's 'all ordinary beings'—explaining the censuring of emotion and revealing of principle; third, below 'according to the treatise-sūtra's lack of wisdom'—corresponding to below the sūtra text's 'blinded by delusion,' etc.—named the gate of distinguishing characteristics and revealing the actual; fourth, below 'not knowing the supreme truth,' explaining the gate of distinguishing characteristics based on the actual. Second, their being brought together into three: of the four, the first is called 'establishing', meaning explaining and establishing non-self; the next two are called 'answering', answering and revealing non-self; the last one is called 'characteristics', meaning establishing the characteristics of conditioned arising based on the principles of the truths. Their essential subsumption into two: the prior three gates take as their principle revealing non-self, and thus are adduced and explained in one place; the latter gate takes as its principle revealing conditioned arising as arising in its characteristics based on the true, and thus is adduced and explained separately. Totalized as one: it is the first distinction of establishing and answering the characteristics. The treatise's stating 'all birth and death within the five destinies,' etc., explains 'all places of rebirth within the world,' etc. Below it opens into three gates; regarding the four phrases in the first explanation of establishing: first, an overall explanation establishing non-self. Second, below 'all worldly [beings],' repeating and citing the sūtra. 'The meaning of non-self is thereupon established': simply based on the sūtra, it already establishes the meaning of non-self. Third, below 'if the supreme truth,' directly manifesting the meaning of non-self based on the facts, there are two phrases: first, the error of ordinary beings not being established if a self truly exists; second, the error of noble ones not being established if a self truly exists. How so? If in the supreme truth there truly were a self, definitively fixing the mind that grasps that self would be the supreme-truth wisdom—distinguishing and defining the grasping [mind]. 'They should not be born in the world' directly points out the fault, meaning: if within the supreme truth there truly were a characteristic of a self, ordinary beings should be noble ones—this is the thesis. Because they would possess the wisdom that realizes the real self within the supreme truth—this is providing the reason. Like noble ones—this is the similar example. This is the fault of ordinary beings being identical to noble wisdom; there would be no ordinary beings. Since the principle is not so, one clearly knows there is no self. Furthermore, the thesis that noble ones should be identical to ordinary beings; the reason being: because in principle there truly is a self, yet noble ones realize it as non-existent, conflicting with principle and falling into inverted delusion, so it would not be noble wisdom. Like ordinary beings who should be born in the world—this is the similar example. This is the fault of noble ones being identical to ordinary inversions; there would be no noble ones. Since the principle is not so, one clearly knows there is no self. This is the fault of destroying the noble ones. In accordance with the above, this text lacks one phrase, which should say: 'The mind free from grasping a self would then not be the supreme-truth wisdom.' Since non-self would not be the supreme truth, how could the mind free from a self be termed supreme-truth wisdom? The statement 'they should constantly be born in the world' uses principle to interrogate directly: if the mind free from a self were not ultimate wisdom, they would not realize nirvāṇa and should constantly be born in the world. In the former phrase, since ordinary beings would have supreme-truth wisdom, belonging to the truth of the path, they should attain nirvāṇa and not be in the world. This text reveals the true principle of non-self, as can be seen in line with the above. Fourth, below 'manifesting and showing,' citing the sūtra to contrast and reveal it, as can be known. Second, in explaining the answer: because the objection lies outside the text, it is called an answer. There are two objections and two answers. First, the objection investigating principle based on grasped sentiment, and the answer of sentiment running contrary to correct principle. The objection says: 'If in principle there truly is no self, one should attach to non-self; why attach to a self? Since one attaches to a self and does not attach to non-self, one clearly knows there is a self. Just as where empty space has no person, how could one conceive of a person?' The formal syllogism can be known. Below, the answer is: because one is blinded by delusion, where there is no self one grasps it as a self. Just as when the eye has cataracts, one sees flowers in empty space; how could there be these flowers in empty space? The inference can be known. Second, below 'thus there truly is no self,' the objection investigating the real based on grasped characteristics, and the answer that characteristics do not depend on a self. The objection says: 'If there were a self, ignorance could cause conditions to act sequentially. Since it is said there is no self, there is only sequence up to old age and death.' Below 'this manifests,' citing the sūtra to answer directly: through delusion one creates karma; karmic activity arouses consciousness, up to old age and death. Just as in worldly planting there is a sequence of mutual arising, what need is there for a self? Such is the intention of the answer. Therein, longing for permanence is existence, and seeking annihilation is non-existence. Longing is craving, and lack of wisdom is delusion. Afflictions are immeasurable; why are these two alone singled out? Because they are the roots of the branches of existence. Next, in explaining the formations, there are three phrases: first, explaining incorrect thought; second, incorrect paths; third, false practice. Because bodhisattva practices include non-false practice, next it explains the consciousness branch and the rest, first bringing together and citing the sūtra text. Below 'therein,' it explains that since the heterogeneous maturation ālaya[-vijñāna] is precisely the body of retribution, it says it shows the body of birth, old age, and death. Another explanation: the seed consciousness is its cause, hence it says it is the body of the tathāgatagarbha-ālaya. Another explanation: because it is the nature of birth and death, meaning this consciousness-body can further conform to and maintain the seeds of the remaining branches, causing the accomplishers and the accomplished, the projected and the projectors, to be established; hence it says 'conforming to and appropriating,' and so forth. Sinful and meritorious karma is the earth. Master Yuan explained: '“Abiding like this” is the form branch; “arousing the mind like this” is the name branch, concluding the produced name-and-form.' Now I explain further: 'abiding like this' is the consciousness seed and the ground of karma; 'arousing the mind like this' is being obscured by delusion and moistened by craving; this concludes the four passages above. Another explanation: this summarizes the sūtra's 'sprinkling with the mind of self,' etc., meaning making such abiding and giving rise to such a mind. 'Self and what belongs to the self,' etc., means seeing oneself as the self. As when a male is reborn, seeing the father's semen as belonging to himself, he takes it as 'what belongs to the self', and seeing the mother as his own wife, she is also 'what belongs to the self'; for a female it is the opposite. The statement 'conceiving of self and self is conceit' takes up the prior two conceptions of self and what belongs to the self as conceit. Seeing oneself competing with the father for female beauty, thinking oneself victorious, one then gives rise to conception and conceit; for a female it is likewise. The words 'my birth,' etc., explain the net of views. Master Yuan said: 'Seeing oneself as born only in this place and not born in another place, hence it says “my birth and non-birth.”' He also said: 'Seeing permanence is “my birth”; seeing annihilation is “non-birth.”' Now I explain: seeing one's own primary retribution is taken as 'my birth'; seeing the supporting retribution in which one roams is called 'non-birth'. Because when entering the womb one either sees roaming in flowery groves or dwelling in palaces, different views are manifold, hence it says 'various'. Because views and attachments are difficult to relinquish, it is like being covered by a net. Below explains the reverse contemplation: because conditioned arising phenomena lack intrinsic nature, they cease; they are not called ceased because the power of wisdom cuts them off. Below concludes the prior and generates the following: if conditions are without a self, upon what further phenomena do the characteristics of conditions abide? Below, the sūtra is adduced to contrast and reveal, clarifying that the characteristics of conditioned arising arise dependent upon the true. In the treatise, ignorance creating karma is called name-and-form. Master Yuan cited the *Vibhāṣā* that there are two kinds of name-and-form: first, provisional name-and-form; second, retribution name-and-form. If one says name-and-form conditions consciousness, it is provisional name-and-form; if one says consciousness conditions name-and-form, it is retribution name-and-form. Now since it explains formations as being name-and-form, one knows it is that provisional name-and-form. The words 'its support': because the ālayavijñāna is that upon which name-and-form and the rest depend. This is explained in terms of the gate of supporting and sustaining. Second, 'name-and-form and consciousness arise together' is the meaning of co-arising. Third is the meaning of mutual dependence, meaning consciousness can arise by means of name-and-form, and name-and-form can exist by means of consciousness. Below explains the reverse contemplation: agent and deed, person and dharma, are both empty; this is called concluding the prior. How does the subsequent question of realizing this true reality and attaining liberation apply? Answer: it now adduces conditioned arising in order to distinguish that contemplation.

First 16 of 84 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

華嚴經探玄記 — Classical Chinese