大方廣佛華嚴經疏 17.7

17.7

第二「爾時」下，明不離覺樹各升釋天。問：動靜相違、去住懸隔，既云不離，何得言升？古有多釋。一云：本釋迦身不起道樹，別起應化以升天上。一云：不起是報，升天是化。一云：不起是法身，升天是化用。並非文意，以此文中俱是毘盧遮那十身雲故。一云：以去即非去故名不起，非去即去是以升天，如不來相而來等。若爾，但是升相離故，非是樹下別有不起之身，故不可也。有云：此佛神通同體業用，即住是去、去即是住，住是體遍、去是用應，應是體應，雖升後而不離前；體是應體，雖不離前而升後。若爾，何殊第三師，不起是法，又以住釋於不起？而言住是體遍，何得獨住菩提樹耶？升天何得非體遍耶？菩提樹下寧非用耶？今顯正義。然佛得菩提，智無不周、體無不在，無依無住、無去無來。然以自在即體之應，應隨體遍，緣感前後有住有升。閻浮有感，見在道樹；天宮有感，見升天上。非移覺樹之佛而升天宮，故云不離覺樹而升釋殿。法慧偈云「佛子汝應觀，如來自在力，一切閻浮提，皆言佛在中。」此不離也。「我等今見佛，住於須彌頂。」此而升也。文理有據，更以喻顯。譬猶朗月流影遍應，且澄江一月三舟共觀，一舟停住、二舟南北，南者見月千里隨南、北者見月千里隨北、停舟之者見月不移，是為此月不離中流而往南北。設百千共觀，八方各去，則百千月各隨其去。諸有識者曉斯旨焉。古德釋此，略有十義：一約處相入門，以一處中有一切處故，是故此天宮等本在樹下，故不須起；然是用彼，故說升也。二亦約相入門，以一處入一切處故，樹遍天中亦不須起；欲用天宮表法升進，故云升也。三由一切即一故，天在樹下。四由一即一切，樹在天上，不起等準前。五約佛身，謂此樹下身，即滿法界遍一切處，則本來在彼，不待起也；機熟令見，故云升也。是故如來以法界身常在此，即是在彼。六約佛自在不思議解脫，謂坐即是行住等，在此即在彼，皆非下位測量故也。七約緣起相由門、八約法性融通門、九約表示顯法門、十約成法界大會門。然此十解，前五玄門、次四所以、後一總意，欲成十義相參而立，雖似雜亂不違經宗，並可用也。然此中相望有四對法相即無礙：一此處彼處、二此身彼身、三若去若住、四若一若多。約處，此處彼處相即無礙，應如十中前四。約身相即無礙，應如五六及前正顯。又十中後四通於身處，約處唯有此彼，約身更加去住，謂此身即是彼身，去身即是住身。若身若處俱通一多，上來諸法同在一時，無前後也。一多相望應成四句：一不離一切樹下升一天宮，即如今文；二不離一樹升一切天；三不離一切樹而升一切天，經云「十方世界悉如是」故；四不離一樹下而升一天。經中欲顯一多相即，故舉初句。升釋天既爾，升餘天亦然，如後二會；升天既爾，往餘處亦然。復應樹樹相望而成二句，謂不離一樹下常在一切樹，不離一切樹而常在一樹。復應以不起餘處，類不起樹下，展轉相望皆悉周遍，不壞前後自在難思。又既一處有一切處，亦有微細義，所用不同有隱顯義。若加前時後時有十世義，唯見說住。及於餘法，有純雜義。後後帶於前前，有帝網義。此天望餘，成主伴義。十玄具矣。問：帶前起後事理應齊，何故三賢獨有斯旨？答：顯異義故。謂初二會相隣接故不假帶前，此三人天隔越故須連帶。又此三會同詮賢位，六已入證不假帶前、第七即位中普賢居然不假、第八頓彰五位體用已融、第九唯明證入體用一味故，並皆不假。

Second, from "At that time" onward, explains not leaving the tree of awakening while severally ascending to Śakra's heaven. Question: Motion and stillness are opposed; going and staying are far apart. Since it is said that he did not leave, how can it be said that he ascended? Ancient [masters] offered many explanations. One says: The original Śākyamuni body did not rise from the tree of awakening; a distinct responsive manifestation arose to ascend to the heavens. Another says: Not rising is the recompense [body], while ascending to heaven is the manifestation [body]. Another says: Not rising is the dharmakāya, while ascending to heaven is its manifestative function. None of these express the text's intention, because in this text all are the clouds of Vairocana's ten bodies. Another says: Because going is identical to non-going, it is called "not rising"; because non-going is identical to going, it is "ascending to heaven," just as coming with the characteristic of non-coming, and so forth. If so, this is merely because the mark of ascending is abandoned; it is not that beneath the tree there is a separate body that does not rise, and so this is unacceptable. Some say: This is the activity and function of the Buddha's spiritual powers having the same essence: staying is precisely going, and going is precisely staying; staying is the essence being omnipresent, and going is the function responding; responding is the essence responding, so although he ascends to the latter, he does not depart from the former; the essence is the responsive essence, so although he does not depart from the former, he ascends to the latter. If so, how does this differ from the third master's "not rising is the Dharma[-body]", and further using "staying" to explain "not rising"? And if one says that staying is the essence being omnipresent, how could he exclusively stay at the bodhi-tree? How could ascending to heaven not be the essence being omnipresent? Could being beneath the bodhi-tree not be a function? Now, the correct meaning is revealed: When the Buddha attained bodhi, his wisdom was nowhere not pervasive and his essence was nowhere not present; he was without reliance and without abide, without going and without coming. Yet, through his sovereign response which is identical to the essence, the response follows the essence in being omnipresent; according to the past and future of the conditions and receptivity, there is staying and there is ascending. When Jambudvīpa has the receptivity, they see him at the tree of the Way; when the heavenly palace has the receptivity, they see him ascending to heaven. It is not that the Buddha at the tree of awakening moves and ascends to the heavenly palace; therefore it is said that without leaving the tree of awakening, he ascends to Śakra's palace. As Dharmamati's verse says: "Buddha-sons, you should observe / the Tathāgata's power of sovereignty: / all of Jambudvīpa / says the Buddha is in its midst." This is "not leaving." "We now see the Buddha / abiding on the summit of Sumeru." This is "yet ascending." There is textual and doctrinal evidence [for this]; let it be further illustrated with an analogy: It is like the clear moon casting drifting reflections that respond everywhere. Suppose that on a clear river three boats together view a single moon: one boat remains stationary, while two boats travel south and north. The one going south sees the moon following south for a thousand li; the one going north sees the moon following north for a thousand li; the one in the stationary boat sees the moon not moving. This is how this moon, without leaving midstream, travels south and north. Even if hundreds of thousands view it together and depart in the eight directions, then hundreds of thousands of moons will each follow where they go. Those who possess discernment should understand this principle! Past masters of virtue explained this with roughly ten meanings: First, according to the gate of places mutually entering: because within one place there are all places, therefore this heavenly palace and so forth were originally beneath the tree, hence there was no need to rise; yet to make use of that, it is spoken of as "ascending." Second, also according to the gate of mutual entering: because one place enters all places, the tree pervades the heavens, so again there is no need to rise; wishing to use the heavenly palace to symbolize progress in Dharma, it is called "ascending." Third, because all are identical to one, the heavens are beneath the tree. Fourth, because one is identical to all, the tree is in the heavens; "not rising" and so forth are understood accordingly as before. Fifth, according to the Buddha's body: this body beneath the tree fills the dharmadhātu and pervades all places; thus it was originally there, not awaiting rising; because faculties are ripe, it causes them to see, hence it is called "ascending." Therefore, the Tathāgata, with his dharmadhātu body, is constantly here, which is precisely being there. Sixth, according to the Buddha's sovereign, inconceivable liberation: sitting is precisely walking, staying, and so forth; being here is precisely being there—all beyond the estimation of those in lower stations. Seventh, according to the gate of mutual conditioning of dependent origination. Eighth, according to the gate of the interpenetration of the dharmatā. Ninth, according to the gate of symbolizing and manifesting the Dharma. Tenth, according to the gate of constituting the great assembly of the dharmadhātu. These ten interpretations consist of: the first five are profound gates, the next four are reasons, and the last one is the general intention; they were established in mutual reference to complete ten meanings, and although seemingly mixed, they do not contradict the sūtra's central doctrine, and all are usable. Here, mutually viewed, there are four pairs of dharmas that are non-obstructedly identical: 1. this place and that place; 2. this body and that body; 3. going and staying; 4. one and many. Regarding places: this place and that place are non-obstructedly identical, as in the first four of the ten. Regarding bodies being non-obstructedly identical: as in the fifth and sixth, as well as the prior direct exposition. Furthermore, the latter four of the ten apply to both bodies and places: regarding places there is only "this" and "that"; regarding bodies "going" and "staying" are added, meaning that this body is precisely that body, and the going body is precisely the staying body. Both body and place apply to one and many; all the aforementioned dharmas exist at the same time, without before and after. Mutually viewed, one and many should form four propositions: 1. not leaving beneath all trees, ascending to one heavenly palace, as in the present text; 2. not leaving one tree, ascending to all heavens; 3. not leaving all trees and ascending to all heavens, because the sūtra says "the worlds of the ten directions are all like this"; 4. not leaving beneath one tree and ascending to one heaven. Wishing to reveal the mutual identity of one and many, the sūtra presents the first proposition. As it is with ascending to Śakra's heaven, so it is with ascending to the other heavens, as in the later two assemblies; as it is with ascending to heaven, so it is with going to other places. Furthermore, trees viewed mutually should form two propositions, namely: not leaving beneath one tree, he is constantly at all trees; not leaving all trees, he is constantly at one tree. Furthermore, by not rising from other places, one can infer not rising from beneath the tree; mutually viewed in turn, all are completely pervasive, not destroying before and after, sovereign and hard to fathom. Moreover, since one place contains all places, there is also the meaning of the subtle; and because what is utilized differs, there is the meaning of hidden and manifest. If one adds previous time and subsequent time, there is the meaning of the ten time-periods; only seeing the explanation of the [ten] abodes and other dharmas contains the meaning of pure and mixed. The latter carrying the former has the meaning of Indra's net. This heaven viewed in relation to the others constitutes the meaning of host and companions. The ten mysteries are complete. Question: If carrying the preceding to give rise to the succeeding should be equal in phenomena and noumenon, why do the three [ranks of] worthies uniquely have this principle? Answer: To reveal different meanings. That is, because the first two assemblies are contiguous, they do not need to carry the preceding; here, humans and devas are separated, so they must be linked together. Furthermore, these three assemblies equally elucidate the stages of worthies; the sixth is already entering realization, so it does not need to carry the preceding; the seventh is Samantabhadra within the stages, so naturally it does not need to; the eighth suddenly reveals the five stations with essence and function already interpenetrating; the ninth solely explains the realization of the single taste of essence and function; therefore none of them need to.