華嚴經探玄記 6.20

6.20

Ninth, because of contemplating the tathatā of the mind, he is named Forest of the Tathāgata. The ten verses are divided into two: the first six explain the mind creating ordinary beings, and the latter four explain the mind raising up the noble. In the former, the first four verses and a half present metaphors, and the latter half verse is the doctrinal application. In the former, the first two are the metaphor of a painter producing a painting, illustrating false dharmas relying on the true; the next two explain the metaphor of the painting mind producing a painting, illustrating the false relying on the mind; the latter half explains the metaphor of the painter not knowing the painting mind, illustrating the absence of deliberate knowledge in dependent arising. The intended meaning here is that all sentient beings depend on the true dependent arising; the mind of the fundamental consciousness, perfumed by nominal designations, factors of existence (aṅga), view of self, and so forth, manifests the bodies of the six destinies. Dependent arising is fictitious; it does not obstruct nothingness, nor does it destroy existence. Therefore, synthesizing it involves two gates: if one synthesizes conditions to follow the real, differentiated marks are exhausted and there is only the one tathatā; if one subsumes branches back to the root, the different forms of the six destinies only turn according to the mind. Regarding the first, dependent arising is not maintained, because it is the gate of tathatā; regarding the latter, dependent arising is not destroyed, because it is the gate of arising and ceasing. Therefore, maintaining and destroying are not two, but are solely the one dependent arising; the two gates are unobstructed, being solely the one mind. Hence the Awakening of Faith states: 'Relying on the dharma of the one mind, there are two gates: first, the gate of the mind as tathatā; second, the gate of the mind as arising and ceasing. Yet these two gates each universally subsume all dharmas.' This is what it means. Now, in this text, the painting also has two meanings: first, relying on the wall, it is solely flat; second, relying on the painter's skillful mind, it appears to have high and low. The first two verses explain the first gate: the upper half of the first verse illustrates distributing differences according to perfuming; the next line reveals that difference lies in false feelings; the bottom line indicates that marks are exhausted and identical to the true. The four great elements illustrate the true mind. The colored pigments illustrate the fictitious marks of dependent arising. The upper half of the latter verse explains that the true and the false are not identical: the upper line illustrates that what can create is not what is created; the true that subsumes the false is not identical to the false, because its nature is true; the lower line illustrates that what is created is not what can create; the false that relies on the true is not identical to the true, because its nature is fictitious. The lower half explains that the false does not depart from the true: it means that through the fictitious penetrating the true, when the fictitious is exhausted the true appears, hence it says 'not departing.' Therefore they are not apart, not different, and not identical; contemplate this. The next two verses explain the painted image relying on the painting mind, illustrating the latter gate of arising and ceasing: this painter's mind illustrates the transforming mind such as the fundamental consciousness; the painted colors illustrate the recompense transformed by the body of the five aggregates. The upper half explains that subject and object are not identical; the lower half reveals that root and branches do not depart: because the mind is the root and the form is the branch, they are not identical; because the mind transforms into recompense, they do not depart. This explains that the mind can transform into the object; the mind's essence is not the object, and the object transforms from the mind, so the mark of the object is not the mind. Because it transforms from the mind, the object does not depart from the mind; because it can transform into the object, the mind does not depart from the object. Therefore, although they are neither identical nor separate, crucially it is consciousness-only, not object-only. Question: The previous verse only explained that the colors do not depart from the four great elements, and did not explain that the four great elements do not depart from the colors; why is it different from this? Answer: The former explained that the true does not transform into the false, whereas this reveals that the mind transforms into the object; hence they are not the same. The upper half of the latter verse explains the painter's skillful mind, illustrating that the transforming consciousness takes non-abiding as its root, hence it is inconceivable. The lower half reveals the manifested painted colors, illustrating that the transformed marks each manifest from the mind, having no substantial entity that can mutually know one another. The latter half indicates that the painter does not know that these paintings all manifest from the mind, illustrating that sentient beings are deluded about the measure of their own minds. The next verse and a half is the doctrinal application, which can be understood. In the second, explaining the mind raising up the Buddha: 'Just as the mind is, the Buddha is also like this'—taking the ordinary to analogize the Buddha: just as the mind creates the ordinary, producing the Buddha is also like this; both arise from the mind. 'Just as the Buddha is, sentient beings are thus'—taking the Buddha to analogize the ordinary. The lower two lines synthesize to reveal identity, meaning that the mind makes the Buddha, so mind and Buddha are without difference; the mind makes ordinary beings, so mind and ordinary beings are without difference. That which relies and that on which it relies are identical, hence it says 'without difference.' Another explanation: this is the second part, concluding and exhorting practice, where the first verse harmonizes and concludes root and branches. Root and branches have three aspects: 1. only the root, meaning that true principle in terms of the pure nature, original enlightenment, is named Buddha; 2. only the branches, meaning the transformed sentient beings; 3. both, meaning the mind that can transform, because it can transform relying on the true. These three of dependent arising are interfused without obstruction; according with any one, it completely subsumes [the others], and the remaining natures are not different, hence it says 'without difference.' The next verse presents the benefit to exhort cultivation: the upper half explains that the Buddha already knows, presenting the superior to exhort the inferior; the next line exhorts the inferior to be identical to the superior; the bottom line concludes by clarifying the benefit of knowing. The next verse explains that body and mind are neither identical nor separate: in the upper half, body and mind are differentiated in marks, hence not identical; in the lower half, the body manifests relying on the mind, hence not separate. The next verse exhorts cultivation: the upper half presents what is sought; the lower half exhorts relying on the contemplation of principle. It means that entering reality by uniting this mind is precisely the Tathāgata, whereas reversing this is going away. Another explanation: it is also because the mind transforms into the Buddha's marks to manifest.