華嚴經探玄記 6.76

6.76

Fifth, within 'explaining the text and discerning the aspects,' there are two parts: first, explaining the practices of one's own stage; second, from 'that bodhisattva' onward, revealing the practices of superior progress. Within the former, there are three parts: first, explaining that upon which practice arises, which refers to the various roots of goodness. 'Good' means according with principle; 'roots' has the meaning of superior condition and the meaning of producing and growing. In this, there are nine phrases: the first one is general, and the remaining eight are specific. Among the specific ones: first, the resolve that arouses practice is firm; second, it loftily surpasses emotional conception; third, the practice is deep and difficult to fathom; fourth, the generated virtues are vast and manifold; fifth, realizing quiescence is difficult to perturb; sixth, the practice is wondrous and without peer; seventh, the mind of taking and relinquishing is stilled; eighth, the vast practice is identical with the Buddha. Possessing these various meanings, it is therefore called 'veneration.' Second, directly revealing the aspects of the practice, within which there are four: first, the inner mind is firm, which refers to producing the two thoughts of vow and practice; second, the external conditions are superior, which refers to the two conditions of adversity and favor, Māra being an adverse condition that can also bring practice to completion; third, the practice becomes venerated, which refers to the two practices of purification and suffering; fourth, the vows become irreversible. Third, from 'this bodhisattva' onward, explaining the benefits of the completion of practice. In this, 'having stably abided in the practice of veneration' concludes that this practice of one's own stage has already been accomplished. From 'in thought after thought' onward directly explains the two benefits: first, within benefit of oneself, one increasingly departs from afflictions and increasingly increases in virtues; in terms of principle, this actually thoroughly increases all practices and vows. Its being revealed in terms of vows is because this is the stage of the pāramitā of vow. Below, explaining the benefit of others: because this bodhisattva internally possesses actual virtues, it causes those outside who see or hear them not to be in vain. Second, within the practices of superior progress, there are three: first, cultivating and accomplishing the mental practice of veneration; second, relying on the mind to cultivate and accomplish the practice of wisdom of veneration; third, relying on wisdom to cultivate and accomplish the practice of compassion of veneration. Within the first, there are also three: first, explaining cultivating the mental practice of unobstructedness; second, from 'the bodhisattva like this' onward, explaining cultivating the mental practice of inexhaustibility; third, from 'and the bodhisattva' onward, jointly concluding the two practices. Within the first, there are two: first, relying on principle to give rise to transformation, explaining unobstructed practice; second, from 'regarding the number of sentient beings' onward, explaining the practice in which principle and phenomena are interblended and unobstructed. Within the first, there are the doctrine, the simile, and the application. Question: Since one neither proceeds toward saṃsāra nor proceeds toward nirvāṇa, it should be said that one does not abide in the midstream between these two; why does it specifically say not abiding in the midstream of saṃsāra? Answer: Master Yuan explains: 'Previously not proceeding toward the two places is departing from existence. Not abiding in the middle is departing from non-existence. That is, the place where there is no saṃsāra is called cutting off the midstream; not abiding in this non-existence is why it is said "not abiding in the midstream."' Now I further explain: It is like water flowing east, which neither abides on the south bank nor abides on the north bank, yet one may also speak of it as not cutting off the midstream of the north bank, because the middle has no distinct substance and is demarcated in relation to the banks. If so, then the south bank would also be permissible; why does it not speak of the midstream of nirvāṇa? Explanation: Because the sentient beings to be liberated are on this shore, it is therefore discussed specifically with regard to saṃsāra; it would also be permissible with regard to that. Question: Why is there no distinct middle apart from the banks? Answer: For example, with regard to all sentient beings, taking the tathāgatagarbha, which is like water, as the other shore, and taking the deluded mind, which is like waves, as this shore: because the water that is identical with the waves is non-moving, the other shore is not this; because the waves that are identical with the water are non-static, this shore is not that. For this reason, both shores exist together. Furthermore, because the non-moving water is identical with the waves, that is not the other shore; because the non-static waves are identical with the water, this is not this shore. Neither this nor that: this is called the midstream. Therefore, when the bodhisattva resides in the middle, they are never not identical with the shore; when ordinary beings and followers of the small [vehicles] are on the shore, they are never not identical with the middle. Relying on this meaning, the bodhisattva is the transforming agent, yet ultimately there is no ability [to transform]; sentient beings are those who are transformed, yet ultimately there is also no transformation. Contemplate this through the mutual identity of the middle and the extremes, and the perfect interpenetration and unobstructedness of subject and object. Second, within the interblending of principle and phenomena, two explanations are made: first, in terms of characteristics; second, in terms of reality. Within the former, the first phrase is general and applies to all. From 'the mind has no clinging' onward, in the specific revelation, first it directly discerns [it], having five pairs and ten phrases: First, what was said above about having no clinging does not mean having no clinging to one sentient being while having clinging to all the rest, nor is it that the many are separated from the one; it is simply because there is no clinging to anything at all. Second, 'benefiting' means that through cultivating good there is no increase, and transforming them to sever evil causes no decrease; this is spoken with respect to the causal stage when the fruit is not yet accomplished. Third, 'good being full and the fruit arising' is non-arising, and 'delusive hindrances being eternally exhausted' is non-cessation; furthermore, 'virtuous fruit being full' is non-arising, and 'abiding in great nirvāṇa' is non-cessation; this is spoken with respect to when the fruit is first accomplished. Fourth, even if all accomplish the fruit, the realm of sentient beings is not exhausted, and the state of the fruit is not prolonged; this is spoken with respect to after the fruit has already been accomplished. Fifth, although there is no increase or decrease and so forth as spoken above, yet these deeds of transformation accomplish benefits that are not in vain; although the deeds of transformation are not in vain, yet they do not contradict what was previously spoken, and therefore are also non-dual; this concludes all that precedes. In the explanation below, there are two: in the first, it questions: Transforming sentient beings at present involves increase and decrease; why then say there is non-duality? Explanation: Because the realm of sentient beings is identical with the dharmadhātu, there is therefore no increase, decrease, arising, cessation, and so forth, and no reliance or clinging, which explains the previous non-clinging to one or many and so forth. In the latter explanation, first it questions: Even if identical with the dharmadhātu, how could there be non-duality? Explanation: Because the dharmadhātu is non-dual, it causes the realm of sentient beings to also be free of the two [aspects] of increase, decrease, and so forth. Second, regarding the explanation in terms of reality: the first phrase reveals the bodhisattva's own mind being free of defilement, because wisdom with clinging cannot illuminate this unobstructed Dharma; below reveals the unobstructed aspects. In the first five pairs, they are divided into three: the first two form one [group], unifying phenomena to make them harmonious, where the one and the many are unobstructed, with the initial heading and subsequent explanation. 'Clinging' (zhuo) is like 'placing' (zhi): that is, in one sentient being placing many sentient beings, there is no increase in the one and no decrease in the many; placing one in many may be understood inversely from the above. The 'realm of sentient beings' is the tathāgatagarbha. Because the nature is pervasive and characteristics are interblended, phenomena can accord with principle and be unobstructed. The next two form one [group], clarifying that phenomena are already identical with principle, and their arising and ending are unobstructed, which can also be understood as one heading and one explanation. The last one jointly concludes the previous two, clarifying the unobstructedness of principle and phenomena: that is, being identical with the true principle without losing phenomena is why it is called 'not in vain'; manifesting phenomenal characteristics while being identical with the true is why there is 'non-duality.' In the explanation below, there are two: first, explaining phenomena being identical with principle; second, explaining principle subsuming phenomena. The Sūtra of Neither Increase Nor Decrease states: 'The realm of sentient beings and the dharmadhātu are non-dual and without distinction.' This very dharmakāya, being defiled by afflictions, transmigrates in the five destinies and is called 'sentient beings.' It also says: 'The dharmakāya is sentient beings; sentient beings are the dharmakāya. Dharmakāya and sentient beings are one in meaning and different in name.' It also says: 'If anyone says that the realm of sentient beings and the dharmadhātu are dual and distinct, I say that person is called an icchantika.' Second, from 'the bodhisattva like this' onward, relying on the inexhaustible mind to cultivate inexhaustible virtues. In this, there are two: first, directly revealing; second, explaining and establishing. In the former, first, relying on principle to give rise to practice; second, superior virtues adorning oneself, where the first reveals superior merit, and from 'skillfully able to distinguish' onward clarifies deep wisdom. Because it illuminates the original limit of phenomena, it is called 'reaching the other shore.' Second, from 'completely distinguishing' onward clarifies that external transformation universally responds: first, bodily karma universally manifests; next, mental karma is undefiled; finally, verbal karma expounds extensively. In the second part, explaining and establishing, there are the doctrine, the simile, and the application. In the doctrine, it means that although one departs from the limit of all desires regarding all phenomena, one does not sever the path of one's own practice, nor abandon the practice of transforming others; therefore, relying on quiescence, one gives rise to practice, and the virtuous practices are inexhaustible, causing the virtuous aspects of the previous two benefits to be remarkably superior. Saying 'virtues are inexhaustible' refers to the vastness of virtues. 'Entering the pure dharmadhātu' refers to the depth of realization. In the application, the two benefits can be understood. Third, the joint conclusion means that because the previous two minds are blended into one practice, therefore, through mutual comparison and elimination, both characteristics are extinguished. In this, there are five pairs and ten phrases: The first pair is in terms of the cultivation of practice: 'ultimate' refers to the mental practice of unobstructedness, which, because of entering principle and resting seeking, is not ultimate. It is the mental practice of inexhaustibility, because of producing virtues boundlessly. Because producing virtues entails entering principle, and entering principle constantly produces virtues, both are therefore negated; the rest below are all on this model. Second, in terms of severing delusions: illuminating the delusion-nature as empty, there is nothing to sever or depart from; yet as the illumination of root and branch differs, it is therefore 'not non-departing.' Third, in terms of realizing principle: because principle is signless, it is not something that can be relied upon, yet by illuminating this principle of non-reliance, it causes wisdom to be completely luminous, so it is 'not non-relying.' Fourth, in terms of what is accomplished: at the time of realizing principle, in terms of defilement being empty, there is nothing to be abandoned, hence it is 'not worldly'; purity does not exist herein, hence it is 'not the Buddhadharma.' Furthermore, there is no defilement to be loathed and no purity to be desired. Fifth, in terms of the stage not being ordinary or small: 'attaining the fruit' refers to the four fruits of the two vehicles and so forth. From here down is the second: relying on the mind to cultivate and accomplish the practice of wisdom of veneration. In this, the first phrase restates the preceding to introduce what follows: 'accomplishing the mind of veneration' restates the preceding mind. 'Cultivating the bodhisattva practices' directly explains relying on the preceding to cultivate the practice of wisdom. In this, there are two: first, clarifying the wisdom that illuminates practice and enters principle; second, from 'just as space' onward, the wisdom in which principle and practice are mutually blended. In the former, first, clarifying that transforming practice is without instruction; second, one's own practice is without thought. In the former, first, the five pairs and ten phrases can be understood from the direct revelation; second, from 'for what reason' onward, explaining and establishing. In this, 'without reception and without turning' means there is no correct Dharma to receive, and no evil delusion to turn away and extinguish. Furthermore, because one does not accept extraneous conditions, there is no reception; because correct practice is firmly established, there is no turning. Furthermore, one is able not to receive the dharmas of the two vehicles and so forth in the above five pairs, and able not to turn away from the correct principle of non-instruction, giving rise to practice according with principle without retreating or resting, hence it says 'irreversible.' Second, within one's own practice being without thought, there are two: first, directly revealing; second, explaining and establishing. In the former, 'when practice is quiescent' restates the preceding. 'Not thinking' and so forth directly reveals non-thought; this is identical with the effortless practice of the eighth bhūmi, hence it is non-thought. 'Not having thoughts moved by the ten dharmas' refers to the three times, the three categories, and the three stages: internally there is direct retribution, and externally there is dependent retribution, with both being complete internally and externally. Alternatively, the three of faculties, objects, and consciousnesses are also permissible. The last one concludes with respect to the stage, because in this stage, although one cultivates great vows, one is also without thought. In the explanation below, there are two: first, explaining why there is non-thought: because in completely penetrating the equality of all dharmas, there is no practice of wisdom that can proceed toward an object or accomplishment, hence there is non-thought. Second, explaining why there is non-proceeding: because that which proceeds and that which is proceeded toward are non-dual, non-duality is also departed from, hence it says 'there is no non-duality.' Furthermore, this also explains the preceding to introduce what follows: 'principle and practice being non-dual' explains the preceding; although united and non-dual, that which does and that which is done are clearly distinct, hence it says 'there is no non-duality,' which introduces the subsequent text. Second, within the wisdom in which principle and practice are mutually blended, there are two: first, directly clarifying the unobstructedness of principle and practice; second, from 'this bodhisattva' onward, clarifying the completion of work and establishment of virtue. In the former, there are two: first, the doctrine and simile mark the beginning: 'no distinction' reveals that practice is identical with principle, and the characteristics of practice are extinguished; 'not unaccomplished' and so forth clarifies that principle is identical with practice, and the efficacy of practice is preserved; these two are one single practice. In accord with the simile, it is only that this space of non-distinction is not non-existent, not that there are other things; thus, in the doctrine, it is not that this samyaksaṃbodhi of non-distinction is unaccomplished. It does not mean that having no distinction is in terms of principle, and accomplishment and so forth is in terms of practice; this clarifies taking non-accomplishment as accomplishment—contemplate this. In the explanation below, first, explaining the practice of non-practice; second, explaining practice being identical with non-practice. Furthermore, first, clarifying that principle does not contradict practice, and practice gathers principle to achieve success; second, clarifying that practice does not contradict principle, and principle extinguishes practice to return to quiescence. First, explaining the initial meaning: practice that gathers principle, although it consists of ten thousand practices, is constantly quiescent; this is the practice of the eighth bhūmi. In this, the first single phrase directly reveals that true principle does not contradict correct practice. Below shows the aspects of practice that are identical with principle: first, the practice of the benefit of oneself; second, from 'taming' onward, the practice of the benefit of others. 'Not destroying cause and effect' concludes the two practices, meaning that because it does not obstruct their preservation, it does not wait to be destroyed. Below, explaining that practice does not contradict principle can be understood. Second, within clarifying the completion of work and establishment of virtue, there are two: first, being able to equal the Buddhas, which means that the tathāgatas of the three times all equally accomplish this unobstructed practice, and one now also attains that, hence they are equal; this is general. Below specifically discerns it: first, revealing the inner original enlightenment, hence saying 'not severing the Buddha-nature'; second, although practice is identical with principle, cultivation constantly arises, hence saying 'not destroying the correct Dharma,' and therefore equalling the Buddhas. Second, being able to promote the Dharma: the first phrase is general. From 'eloquence' onward specifically reveals it, having three: first, the eloquence that promotes the Dharma is undefiled; second, from 'stably abiding' onward clarifies that the wisdom that promotes the Dharma is fearless; third, from 'not abandoning' onward clarifies that the practice that promotes the Dharma is non-clinging. Third, relying on wisdom to cultivate the practice of compassion of veneration. In this, first, explaining the restatement of the preceding to introduce what follows: 'the bodhisattva like this accomplishing the wisdom of veneration' restates the deep wisdom previously accomplished. 'Cultivating bodhisattva practices' relies on that to cultivate this practice of great compassion. In the direct revelation below, there are two: first, generally indicating the intent of the compassionate practice, meaning that first transforming them to emerge from obstacles completes the teaching and transformation, and below transforming them to abide in the path. Furthermore, the former causes them to emerge from evil difficulties and attain the benefit of humans and gods; the latter causes them to emerge from saṃsāra and attain the benefit of liberation. Second, from 'teaching like this' onward, examining the mind through phenomenal events to reveal the accomplishment of compassionate practice. In this, there are two: first, clarifying that the mind has no extraneous seeking; second, from 'only desiring to tame' onward, being solely for the benefit of sentient beings. In the former, first, directly discerning; second, explaining. In the former, first, evil persons; second, good persons. That is, supposing those evil persons each had clearly wise good friends filling the world, I would never, for the sake of fame and gain, compete to transform them as my cultivation. Another explanation: The bodhisattva never abandons transforming persons of wrong views and evil, because they do not consider gratitude and one attains no fame or gain from them. As for gathering and transforming clearly wise good persons, because they consider gratitude and one attains fame and gain from them, it says 'I do not cultivate bodhisattva practice in places where one attains fame and gain from good persons.' Below explains having no extraneous seeking: a single thread is the absolute least among gains; a single loving word is the absolute least among fame; if one does not act even for the least, how much less for the much. Second, within being solely for the benefit of sentient beings, it also first directly discerns [it]: 'Taming' for others means imparting the three trainings; 'purifying' means causing them to sever delusions; 'liberating' means causing them to attain the fruit. In the explanation below, first, it questions: Why not seek one's own peace, but solely benefit sentient beings? The explanation states: 'The Dharmas of all Buddhas are like this' adduces the Buddhas to assimilate oneself to them. Below shows that oneself is identical with the Buddhas, within which, first, the transforming mind is identical; second, from 'desiring to cause' onward, the transforming benefits are identical.