大方廣佛華嚴經疏 15

English (machine translation) 15

Language: English

15.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Chengguan of the Great Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang under the Tang

Fifth, the profundity of the field of merit. In the question: first, he addresses [the interlocutor]. Because the field of merit illuminates, guides, and brings forth [merit], and furthermore giving is the forerunner of all perfections, he questions Netraśīrṣa (Eye Chief). Second, in presenting the premise of the question, there are three parts: First, he adduces the principle to settle the premise. The Buddha is the field for generating merit, and is called the field of merit. The virtues of the field are non-dual, and are called equal and one. This principle is mutually accepted. Second, from 'Why' onward, he directly presents the doubt and difficulty: since the field is one, planting merit should be equal; why do differences arise in the retribution for giving? The previous equality and this difference constitute a contradiction between condition and fruit; he specifies ten matters, the text of which is easily understood. Third, he explains and completes the previous difficulty, stating: Although the field is equal, minds have higher and lower, so there could well be differences; but since [the Buddha's] mind has no divergent thoughts, why should the retributions differ? The answer has several points: 1. In terms of sentient beings: because their vessels have large and small, and their minds have light and weighty, the retributions they obtain have differences; this is not the Tathāgata's fault. 2. In terms of the Buddha: universally conforming to the diverse capacities of beings is precisely what accords with equality. The manifold that is identical with the one: difference does not violate equality; the one that is identical with the manifold: equality does not obstruct difference. Because his mind is equal and impartial, he can accordingly manifest manifold fruits, ultimately leading to the single flavor of liberation—how could there be any difference? The ten verses adduce ten metaphors to illustrate the above meanings: the first is a general metaphor confirming [the premise], and the remaining nine specifically reveal the reason. In the former: the first line confirms equality, which is equality of conditions, mutually agreed upon by both. The next line confirms difference, which is difference of causes, answering the reason for distinction. The next line, [stating that he is] without divergent thoughts, is indeed as perceived. The final line synthesizes [the doctrine]. In the remaining nine specific [metaphors], the first half of each is the metaphor and the second half is the doctrinal correlation: 1. The water metaphor: vessels have large, small, square, and round, and it adapts to the vessels. 2. The illusion metaphor: expedient means external to the essence are precious and please the mind. 3. The king metaphor: expedient means internal to the essence ultimately attain real joy. The above two illustrate the Buddha's skill in matching the capacities of beings. 4. The mirror metaphor: explained in terms of sentient beings, meaning that reflections differ according to beauty and ugliness, and retributions differ according to the heights and depths of minds; this differs from the previous mirror metaphor of causes and conditions, but the remaining meanings are not different. The last five are all explained in terms of the Buddha: 5. The medicine metaphor: the one that is identical with the manifold, because it possesses a hundred flavors and universally removes all poisons of defilement. 6. The sun metaphor: the manifold that is identical with the one, illuminating all darkness, eradicating both great and small obscurities. 7. The metaphor of moonlight shining universally: the Buddha's equality sweeps away all previous traces; although appearing according to capacities, fundamentally it is impartial. 8. The metaphor of the great wind shaking everywhere: universally moving all capacities. 9. The metaphor of the great fire burning everywhere: ultimately returning to quiescence. Furthermore, these five metaphors illustrate the destruction of the two hindrances of defilement and knowable objects, reaching the stage of equal nature wisdom, and universally stirring all states of existence so that all realize the unconditioned. The first four are skilful adaptation to capacities; these five lead them ultimately to reach the culmination—how could it not be equal?

15.3

Sixth, the profundity of the correct teaching. In the inquiry, first, the person questioned is indicated: because he dispels indolence, he questions Qianshou (Vīryāgra). Second, in directly setting forth the formulation of the question, there are four parts: First, "the Buddha's teaching is one" raises the doctrine to settle the premise. "One" has two meanings: first, that it cuts off the accumulation of afflictions to realize the cessation of liberation; this meaning does not differ, and is agreed upon by both sides. Second, that many people see it together, and what is seen does not differ. Second, from "sentient beings" onward, the doubt and objection are directly raised. The objection also has two aspects: First, matching the first meaning: after seeing the teaching, why is one not liberated for a long time? Hence it says: why do they not immediately sever delusion and attain liberation? Second, matching the latter meaning: many people see it together, so why are some liberated while others are not? Hence it says: why do they not all sever delusion and attain liberation? Third, from "yet their" onward explains and establishes the preceding objection, directly explaining the latter meaning, because for many people suffering and its accumulation do not differ at all. The five aggregates are the direct [retribution], and the three realms are the common support: these are the result of suffering; ignorance and craving give rise to and moisten it: these are the cause of its accumulation. It simultaneously clarifies the first meaning, because suffering and its accumulation before and after also do not differ. Fourth, from "this then" onward concludes the contradiction. If those who attain liberation obtain benefit, while those who do not attain liberation obtain no benefit, and the Buddha's teaching is one, where then does its meaning lie? The reply's intention says: practice has diligence and laziness, hindrances have depth and shallowness, capacities have raw and mature, conditions have presence and lack, wisdom has brightness and dullness, and merit has thickness and thinness; therefore accomplishment has slow and fast—this answers the first objection. Practice and non-practice account for seeing the same [teaching] yet differing in benefit—this answers the second objection. Because the distinctive meanings above do not go beyond the two approaches of diligence and laziness. The ten verses are divided into two: the first one opens the chapter and promises to speak, meaning the first half promises to speak according with reality, and the second half opens the two chapter headings; the remaining nine explain in detail, the first one explaining swift liberation, and the subsequent eight explaining difficulty in liberation. Now for the first: the first half reiterates the doubt, and the second half provides the explanation. Diligence generally spurs the myriad practices and is free from the marks of body and mind, and so one is able to attain swift liberation. Yet it has five marks: first, possessing power, through vigor of donning armor, which means making great vows within the Buddha's Dharma; second, courageous and dauntless, meaning vigor without timidity or inferiority regarding the vast Dharma; third, firm and fierce, through vigor that cannot be moved by cold, heat, gnats, mosquitoes, and so forth; fourth, constantly not abandoning the yoke of the good, through vigor without inferiority or self-satisfaction; fifth, vigor, through the vigor of applied preparation. Generating diligent vigor from these five marks, one swiftly realizes pervasive knowledge and wisdom, destroying hindrances and attaining liberation. The eight below use analogies to explain the section on difficulty in liberation; their general character reverses the preceding, and all are termed indolence. First, the analogy of faint fire and wet firewood illustrates that roots of goodness are raw and the three hindrances are heavy: having briefly heard the teaching once, one only slightly practices, yet karma and afflictions invade from within, causing what was heard to be quickly lost and what was practiced to be quickly abandoned; hence this becomes indolence, and it is difficult to attain liberation. Second, the analogy of drilling for fire but resting frequently illustrates having laxity and regression in practice. Yet the analogies below mostly apply across the three kinds of wisdom to discern indolence: as applied to hearing, frequent resting in listening and study means clear understanding does not arise; as applied to reflection, frequent resting in discerning means true wisdom does not arise; as applied to cultivation, frequent resting in concentration and wisdom means the noble path does not arise. The noble path is like fire, able to burn the firewood of afflictions; prior to [the stages of] heat and peak, it is all called not yet hot. When it is already hot and one rests, fire still does not arise; if it is not yet hot and one frequently rests, though kalpas and years pass, there is ultimately no principle by which it can be attained. Therefore the *Yijiao jing* (*Sūtra of the Buddha's Bequeathed Teaching*), contrasting with this, explains that a small stream flowing continuously can penetrate rock. The six patriarchs of the Chan school jointly transmitted this analogy; may all students inscribe it on their hearts and write it on their sashes. If explained directly in terms of practice: one should drill with wisdom focused on a single object, skillfully revolving it with the cord of skillful means; when mind and wisdom are non-abiding and the four deportments are uninterrupted, then the noble path can arise. Even a fleeting arising of thought or a temporary loss of illumination is called resting. Third, the analogy of lacking conditions when seeking fire: the material is moxa and the like. The teaching elucidates the noble path, just as that fire pearl must be held toward the sun of wisdom and received with practice, then the fire of the noble path arises. If one merely holds to the text without being able to discern it, with mental practice astray and perverse, how could the path arise? Fourth, the analogy of closing one's eyes and seeking to see: slight wisdom and inferior consciousness are compared to that young child. In terms of the wisdom of hearing, though facing a clear teacher, one is unwilling to consult and resolve [doubts]. In terms of reflection and cultivation, though facing the sun of the teaching, the eye of the mind does not open; to blame the noble path for not arising—how deluded this is! Fifth, the analogy of lacking conditions while the mind is broad illustrates that an ignorant person lacks the hand of pure faith to hold the bow of concentration, and further lacks the feet of precepts to resist the ground of delusion; using the inferior arrow of the wisdom of hearing, one wishes to shoot everywhere and destroy the thick ground of karma and delusion, so vain desires are hard to fulfill. Sixth, the analogy of a drop of hair in the great ocean means that with slight hearing and reflection one wishes to fathom the ocean of the Dharma, falsely giving rise to hopes and desires, wherein indolence is especially deep. Seventh, the analogy of a little water extinguishing fire: the fire of the kalpa blazing everywhere illustrates that afflictions increase upon encountering sense objects; how could a small portion of the three kinds of wisdom extinguish them completely? Eighth, the analogy of not moving while pervading space illustrates that though one knows that the nature is empty, one's wisdom has not traversed and practiced it, yet one claims to have completely realized it; these too are people of excessive pride.

15.4

Seventh, the profundity of correct practice. The reason he questions Fashou (Dharmāgra) is because of practicing the Dharma. Second, in setting forth the formulation of the question, there are three parts: First, citing the sacred teaching: "receptively accepting" means the mind grasps the meaning and principles; "upholding" means recollecting without forgetting. Second, from "for what reason" onward expresses his doubt. The Buddha said that it can sever them, yet now there are those who do not sever them, which is a contradiction between teaching and practice. First he indicates the contradiction; from "following craving" onward, he brings out what is not severed. From "power" onward concludes that they are not severed. This means that there are those who uphold the Dharma who not only do not eliminate old afflictions, but also, following their understanding, newly give rise to the power of eleven kinds of afflictions and are turned by them; the first four are root afflictions, and the latter seven are secondary afflictions. The reason all say "following" is that the seventh fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya* says that all afflictions are secondary afflictions, and there are secondary afflictions that are not [root] afflictions. Through this it is shown that root afflictions may also be termed "secondary" (following), because they arise following others. General explanations of craving and so forth are as in the nine stages. Here it is explained in terms of those newly arising by relying on the Dharma: that is, greedily seeking fame and gain, anger at what one does not understand, delusion regarding one's own practice, relying on the Dharma to elevate oneself, concealing one's own shortcomings, giving rise to anger during debates, harboring resentment and intending to retaliate, being jealous of those superior to oneself, being stingy with what one knows, claiming to understand what one does not understand, and abandoning the Dharma to pursue worldly feelings. Third, from "being able to accept and uphold" onward concludes the objection: the Buddha said that accepting the Dharma can sever afflictions, yet now when accepted they arise again; what is the reason for this? The reply's intention says: the Dharma is Dharma-medicine; the essential lies in taking and practicing it. Between taking it and not taking it, there is severing and not severing; it is not the physician's fault. Therefore the "Ten Practices Chapter" says: "As one speaks, one can practice; as one practices, one can speak." The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa* says: "Being able to practice what is spoken is correct; if one does not practice, what does one speak? If one speaks but cannot practice, one is not called wise." Therefore, only when one practices according to what is spoken does one obtain the Buddha's Dharma; it is not by words of the mouth that one can become pure. The ten verses are divided into two: the first one is an exhortation and praise that speaks briefly. The first line exhorts listening: only when one is free from the three kinds of defilements of pride, contempt, and timidity is it called listening well, because one seeks awakening and understanding. Focusing the mind in single-pointed direction, lending one's ear to hear the voice, cleansing one's mind, and gathering all thoughts—only this is called listening attentively. The next line praises the question: it reveals that practice conforms to noumenon, hence it is called "in accordance with reality." The second half speaks briefly. In saying "not merely," it must be combined with practice; relying solely on much learning cannot lead to entry into realization. Therefore the verses below all say: "If one does not practice in the Dharma, much learning is also like this." This is termed the fault of non-practice, not a denigration of much learning. If there were no much learning, practice would have nothing to rely upon; thus non-practice is a fault, as in Devadatta and Sunakṣatra; practicing it brings gain, as in Ānanda and Śāriputra. Therefore the practices of benefiting oneself and benefiting others both require clear comprehension. One vows to exhaust the ocean of Dharma as the cause for all-inclusive wisdom; one should merely be skilled in meaning and not cling to words. Fascicle forty-two of the *Mahāvibhāṣā* says: "Much learning can know the Dharma; much learning can depart from transgressions; much learning renounces what is meaningless; much learning attains nirvāṇa." The *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says: "Much learning increases wisdom, serving as the voice of self-awakening." In the subsequent sūtra, when inferring the skillful means of delivering sentient beings, it goes so far as not being apart from skillful, extensive learning. Above, hearing alone is shown as the proximate cause for the four matters of nirvāṇa; this praises both hearing and practice. Thus the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa* says: "Much learning and broad wisdom bring beautiful words; skillfully explaining all dharmas turns people's hearts. Practicing the Dharma with a correct mind has nowhere to rely, like a great cloud and thunder showering torrential rain." Such teachings and principles are immeasurable and boundless; fearing wordiness, we stop for now. The nine verses explain through analogies, all having the first half as an illustrative analogy and the second half as the Dharma matching it. First, the analogy of fearing drowning and dying of thirst illustrates the fault of craving following texts and meanings: meaning that the waves of doctrinal approaches toss one's mind about, and fearing drowning and drowning others, one has no leisure for practice, cutting off one's own life of wisdom; hence it is called dying of thirst. Second, the analogy of preparing food but starving oneself illustrates the fault of following speech while abandoning reflection: explaining the Dharma to give to others, one mostly seeks fame and gain, not contemplating the flavor of the Dharma and diminishing the dharmakāya. Third, the analogy of a physician not saving himself illustrates being skilled in knowing the remedies yet not curing oneself. Fourth, the analogy of a poor person counting another's treasures illustrates explaining the merits of buddhas and bodhisattvas yet being unable to seek them within one's own body and mind, hence having no share in them. Fifth, the analogy of a prince suffering hunger and cold means that a prince violates the king's laws and teachings, giving rise to offenses from within, and so suffers hunger and cold. Practitioners are also like this: born in the doctrinal palace of the Dharma King, their practice violates the Buddha's teachings, giving rise to evil afflictions and karma, and so lacking the garments of shame, conscience, and forbearance, how could they partake of the flavor of Dharma-joy and dhyāna-bliss? Hence they suffer hunger and cold. Sixth, the analogy of a deaf person playing music to please others illustrates the fault of speaking oneself without understanding: indeed, one who truly speaks and hears must forget speaking and hearing; pursuing words to speak means that one does not hear oneself. Seventh, the analogy of a blind person drawing to show others illustrates the fault of not seeing the meaning oneself. Eighth, the analogy of a ferryman drowning in the sea means that while leading the multitude to travel in the ocean of the Buddha's Dharma, one relies on one's own understanding and is not careful in bodily conduct, being submerged by the Dharma. Ninth, the analogy of clever speech without virtue means that one also speaks of practice or talks of one's own virtue, yet within there is no real virtue, only empty words. Only in this verse are three lines the analogy, and the matching text merely says "non-practice is also like this," which all the more reveals that much learning is not denigrated. Furthermore, these nine verses can also be specifically correlated with the meanings of following craving and so forth; one should reflect on this in accordance with principle.

15.5

Eighth: The Profundity of the Factors Contributing to the Path. Asking Jñānaśrī is done to reveal that wisdom is the essence of the noble path and commands its auxiliary [factors]. Second, within the direct presentation of the starting points of the questions, there are three [parts]: First, he adduces the doctrine to establish the premise. That is, that severing affliction, realizing noumenon, guiding practice, and attaining the fruit is exclusively [the work of] great wisdom is mutually agreed upon by both sides. Second, from "The Tathāgata…" onwards, he directly sets forth the doubt and objection. That is, since wisdom is the foremost, one should praise only wisdom; why does he also praise the others? This is the objection regarding the contradiction between the primary and the auxiliary. Third, from "Yet never…" onwards, he concludes the former point. The previous objection said: Since wisdom is already the foremost, it should not be fitting to praise the others. Furthermore, since one does not accomplish Buddhahood through a single practice, it is certainly inappropriate to praise [one] one-sidedly. Does it necessarily rely on many? Or does it use only wisdom? Or does one attain Buddhahood by following any single practice? If it is accomplished by following any single one, this also contradicts wisdom being the foremost; whether advancing or retreating, both are obstructed. In the meaning of the answer below, he affirms both the beginning and the end, and explains what lies between them. That wisdom is the foremost is truly as stated. Wisdom is like an enlightened king, the commander of the multitude; hence the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā Sūtra* says: "Prajñā is like the eyes; the [other] five pāramitās are like the blind." Affirming the latter point, [he says]: There has never been [attainment] solely through a single practice; indeed, the Tathāgata praises the Buddhas of the three periods of time as all having taught them in full, because the remaining myriad practices support wisdom. Explaining what lies between them: praising them individually has many purposes—namely, to cause joy according to [different] minds, to generate goodness according to the time, because the obscurations to be counteracted are different, because the eight gates are not the same, and because sentient beings cannot receive them all at once; these will be correlated with the text below. Moreover, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra* says: "Prajñā must possess all practices." Therefore, praising one is praising the rest, and praising the rest is praising wisdom. The ten verses are divided into two parts: The first single [verse] praises the question and consents to speak; the remaining nine directly answer the objection. These are briefly divided into two: First, two verses introduce the two topical headings; next, seven verses jointly explain the two headings. As for the first: The first verse presents the heading on the myriad practices bringing about the fruit. It means that the primary and auxiliary mutually rely on each other and must cultivate the myriad practices in unison; hence all Buddhas teach them alike. Saying that "none teach a single one" means that they must teach them fully. The second verse presents the heading on praising them separately according to capacity. The text fully contains the four conformities of the *Dhyāna-sūtra*: the first line is conforming to inclination, because it protects their intentions and pleases their minds. "Dispositions are different" refers to conforming to suitability, adapting to former habitual tendencies to make them easy to accept and practice, since habit becomes nature. "Portions are different" refers to conforming to the antidote, observing the lightness or gravity of the illness and dispensing more or less medicine—such as teaching impurity to those with an excess of greed. "According to how they should be delivered" refers to conforming to meaning, because when their capacity for the path is ripe in due season, upon hearing it they immediately awaken. In the detailed explanation below, there are two parts: The first three explain the heading on praising separately according to capacity; the latter four explain the heading on the myriad practices bringing about the fruit. Within the former, there are two: The first two and a half verses separately explain conforming to the antidote; the latter two lines conclude the preceding and introduce the subsequent. As for the first: Now, the six pāramitās accomplish their practice, and the four immeasurables broaden their minds. The four immeasurables mostly concern benefiting others, while the six pāramitās mostly clarify benefiting oneself. The six pāramitās are like [those explained in] the first assembly; the four immeasurables are as explained below. Yet both pervade the four conformities; here he merely adduces one antidote. The *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* says: "Before a stingy person, one must not praise giving"—this is the intention of conforming to inclination. In the second part, concluding the preceding and introducing the subsequent: the upper line concludes the preceding, and the lower line introduces the subsequent. In the latter four verses explaining how the myriad practices bring about the fruit, each upper half is a simile and the lower half is the application. However, there are two meanings: First, following the preceding sense of gradual completion, it then serves to explain why wisdom is the foremost; second, it directly clarifies that what they apply to is different, so they must be combined. Now, the ninth chapter of the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* clarifies the establishment of the six pāramitās as having three general purposes: first, to eliminate afflictions; second, to generate the Buddha-dharma; third, to mature sentient beings. The preceding section possessed the first purpose; this section fully possesses all three: the pairing two by two is due to the difference in antidotes; foundation first and chambers later is gradual completion; and their all being for the sake of benefiting others is maturation. In the text, the two pāramitās in the first verse counteract the causes for not giving rise to practice; hence they are collectively called the "foundation of practice." That is, attachment to wealth prevents the giving rise to giving, and attachment to family prevents the giving rise to morality. "Foundations and walls" has two meanings: First, the foundation is the wall; giving is the beginning of advancing in goodness, and morality is the start of guarding against evil, both being termed "foundations." Second, "wall" means an encircling wall; thus dāna is the foremost foundation of the myriad practices. Morality guards before [evils] arise, so it is the wall. "Palaces and chambers" means liberation. The two pāramitās in the next verse, once the mind for cultivation has arisen, counteract the causes of a retreating and weak mind. That is, being unable to endure the sufferings of saṃsāra, one becomes weary and indolent in cultivating the auxiliary wholesome factors over a long period. Now, the fortress of patience defends against the advancing enemy of external afflictions, and [vigor] increases the host of internal practices. Broadly speaking, both of these can defend against the external and nourish the internal. The two pāramitās in the next verse counteract the causes of a ruined and lost mind. That is, distraction ruins quiet contemplation, and wrong view ruins right understanding. Now, it clarifies that the bodhisattva calms delusion and turmoil through samādhi, and observes the myriad phenomena through wisdom, being at ease in both movement and tranquility. Relying on them, the bodhisattva gives rise to supernormal knowledges and insight, and depending on them, realizes the noumenal fruit. This is like a powerful king who pacifies the four seas and clearly perceives the myriad affairs; hence all across the realm people bear his grace, and all under heaven look up to him as their model. In the final verse, the four immeasurables are the cause, bringing peace and happiness to oneself and others, and procuring inexhaustible fruits.

15.6

Ninth: The profundity of the single path, which is also called the Ekayāna. In the inquiry, the reason the question is addressed to Bhadraśrī is that the ultimate path is pliable and compliant. Furthermore, *bhadra* (virtuous) means upright and good; all Buddhas identically share one and the same upright path.

Second, the formulation of the question consists of three parts: First, setting forth the proposition and establishing it. This means that that which all Buddhas mount is the identical contemplation of mind-nature and the simultaneous cultivation of the myriad practices; from beginning to end there is no divergent path whatsoever, hence it is called "a single path"—this principle is mutually acknowledged.

Second, from "How is it…" onward, the doubt and difficulty are formally posed, first generally and then specifically. In the former, it means: since the causal path is single, the fruit should not be distinct; how is it that one visibly sees differences in Buddha-lands and so forth? Is it that because the fruits are distinct, the cause is not single? Or is it that because the cause is single, there are no distinct fruits? If both are maintained, then cause and fruit contradict each other.

Below, ten matters are distinguished specifically:
1. The realms have distinctions such as defiled and pure;
2. The inhabitants have differences such as good and evil;
3. The vehicles and so forth have distinctions such as broad and abridged;
4. Some are tamed through the three trainings, while others are subdued through forceful or gentle means;
5. Lifespans are long or short;
6. Light differs in color and form, or is constantly emitted versus present or lacking, or illuminates near or far;
7. In accordance with the differences in the inhabitants of defiled or pure lands, the manifestations of spiritual powers also differ;
8. Assemblies differ, in three respects: quantity, frequency of gatherings, and whether ordinary, noble, large, or small;
9. The modes of teaching: as in this land where sounds constitute the teaching, or in Fragrance Accumulation (Gandhavatī) where various fragrances are used for transformation, and so on;
10. The duration of the Dharma: having long or short endurance.
"Each has differences" applies throughout the above ten items. However, if this concerned one Buddha whose ten matters were each different, that was already clarified by Guṇaśrī; here the question asks about the mutual differences among all Buddhas' ten matters.

Third, from "There is no…" onward, the previous difficulty is concluded. It means: if the Buddhas were complete or incomplete regarding the causal practices and dharmas, there might be differences in lands and so forth; now they all equally possess them completely, so how could their lands and so forth differ? Equal possession is itself the single path.

Second, the import of the response states: Not only are the causes identical, but the fruitional virtues are also identical; that differences are seen is merely due to the responses to the capacities of beings, not that there are differences within the Buddhas' own stations. Why? Because the cause and fruit of all Buddhas possess both identity and difference. The identical fulfillment of the ocean of practices is the identical cause; taking this identical cause and, in accordance with those to be tamed, diversely dedicating it to fruitional states that respond to their capacities is the differentiated cause. Due to this differentiated cause, distinct fruits are induced; due to the aforesaid identical cause, they identically induce fruits such as the true and responsive bodies and lands. Thus, regarding the Buddhas, identity can adapt to difference. Regarding capacities, in the same place they see differences. Taking sentient beings with respect to the Buddhas, though different, they are constantly identical; taking the Buddhas with respect to sentient beings, though identical, they are seen as different. Viewing Buddha in contrast to Buddha, what can be different must be identical, just like brocade patterns that are constantly identical yet constantly different.

According to *Yogācārabhūmi* fascicle thirty-eight, all Buddhas are equal, with the exception of only four dharmas: 1. lifespan, 2. name, 3. lineage and clan, 4. physical bodily form. The intention clarifies that it is in accordance with capacities that these four matters are excepted, while all the rest are equal.

Regarding identity in the fruit, the svābhāvika-kāya and its land are unequivocally identical in essence; the self-enjoyment (svasaṃbhoga) body is equal and non-dual, being called "identical" by way of resemblance; the other two bodies and lands are also called "identical" by resemblance, yet they are seen differently in accordance with capacities. The *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi* states: "Because the svābhāvika-kāya and its land are equally realized by all Tathāgatas, their essence has no distinction. Although the svasaṃbhoga-kāya and its supporting land are each transformed differently by all Buddhas, they are all boundless and do not obstruct one another. The other two bodies and lands are shared or unshared in accordance with the sentient beings transformed by the Tathāgatas. As for those that are shared, at the same place and same time, the Buddhas each transform into bodies and lands that resemble one another in form, do not obstruct one another, and are mutually intermixed, serving as predominant conditions (adhipati-pratyaya) to cause the transformed sentient beings' own consciousnesses to transform and manifest. That is, in one land there is one Buddha body displaying spiritual powers and expounding the Dharma for their benefit. As for those that are unshared, only one Buddha transforms them, because the various sentient beings belong to different Buddhas."

Because the principles in the verses contain much meaning, the flow of the text is not uniform; it is tentatively divided into two: the first two verses confirm the established proposition, clarifying that the true body is non-dual; the remaining verses answer the doubt and difficulty, discerning the differences and identities in responsive manifestation. First is the former.

The first line generally confirms. First naming Mañjuśrī alerts him to listen and receive. "The Dharma is ever thus" clarifies that cause and fruit have no differences, being the natural, constant norm (dharmatā). The remainder displays the single mark, briefly clarifying four identities: the first line is identity of Dharma—because the Dharma is constant, all Buddhas are also constant; the next line is identity of person; the next line is identity of cause; the following verse is identity of fruit.

Briefly, five are cited:
1. Identity of body, which has two meanings: if taking the realized dharmadhātu as the body, then the essence is identically one; if also including the unobstructed wisdom that can realize it as the body, then it is called "one" by resemblance. Since mind and wisdom are distinguished below, this properly corresponds to the first meaning, yet the essence is identical while the senses differ.
2. Identity of mind, because the mental kings of the eight consciousnesses are all unknowable.
3. Identity of wisdom, because the four wisdoms, three wisdoms, two wisdoms, and one wisdom all have no distinction.
4. Identity of the ten powers.
5. Identity of the fearlessnesses. These five also briefly subsume all virtues.

Second, the response to the doubt and difficulty is divided into two: the first two verses generally clarify that differences are seen in accordance with capacities; within this, the preceding verse concerns the Buddha, and the following verse concerns capacities. In the former, in accordance with original differentiated causes, dedication is made for beings so that each obtains distinctions, hence it says "thus"—"thus" carries the meaning of difference. It merely cites three matters out of the ten, which is taking a Buddha-land in accordance with the sentient beings to be transformed. The following verse concerns capacities: with respect to the Buddha, the lands and so forth are all consummate; with respect to capacities, differences are seen in accordance with practices. For instance, when a straight mind is practice, one sees a land free of flattery; thus classes of sentient beings are the bodhisattva's Buddha-land.

The remaining six verses resolve doubts step by step, divided into four:
First, one verse addresses the doubt: "If all are consummate, why are they not seen?" The meaning of the answer states: Sentient beings do not see them, but how can one say they do not exist? Yet there are three meanings: 1. Regarding the other-enjoyment (parasaṃbhoga) body, ordinary beings and Hinayāna practitioners prior to the stages do not see it. 2. Regarding the self-enjoyment (svasaṃbhoga) body, even sentient beings at equal enlightenment (samyaksaṃbodhi) do not see it; if regarding responsive manifestation being identical with the true, bodhisattvas of the provisional teachings do not see it.

The next verse addresses the doubt: "If none see it, how is it known to exist?" The explanation says: Because there are those who do see it. This also has three meanings: First, from the stage of pure intention (śuddhādhyāśaya-bhūmi) onward, by the power of mastery over vows, one sees the parasaṃbhoga body. Second, when purified of subtle habituations and Samantabhadra's vows are fulfilled, one only then sees the svasaṃbhoga body. Third, a person of perfect understanding is called "pure in mind" and immediately sees the true body. The intention lies in the first and last, and the meaning subsumes the middle.

Third, one verse addresses the doubt: "If responsive manifestation depends on beings seeing it, why is it called a Buddha-land?" The explanation says: Due to the Buddha's majestic spiritual power. Thus one knows that beings and Buddha jointly accomplish it. Since assembling identity produces difference, it also accords with the essence to accomplish benefit.

Fourth, three verses provide the explanation. The doubt says: "Above it was said that sentient beings do not see the pure land, and also that the Buddha's spiritual power causes differences; are the essence and locations of the lands distinct, or does the Buddha have conceptual distinctions?" Therefore, the explanation says: The lands are truly in the same place, and the Buddha is also free of conceptual mind; beings themselves merely see differences. Within this, the first half reveals the actual fact, saying that the lands have no discrimination and the Buddha has neither hatred nor love. "Discrimination" carries the meaning of difference. Thus the Jin translation says that Buddha-lands have no distinct marks and the Tathāgata has neither hatred nor love. If following the present sūtra, these two can also apply to both the Buddha and the lands. The next half-verse clarifies that differences rest with beings. The next half-verse clarifies the direct seeing of differences in lands. The next half-verse reveals that it is not the Buddha's fault. The next three lines explain that the Buddha has neither hatred nor love: when there is an accord, he manifests, which is not because the Buddha has love; when there is no accord, he is not seen, which is not because the Buddha has hatred. The final line summarizes: the Dharma of all Buddhas is always thus; appearing and disappearing according to capacities, the true essence constantly abides. This also concludes the entire section.

15.7

Tenth, the profoundness of the Buddha's realm: when the contemplation of the ten faiths is perfected, one directly accesses the Buddha's realm. Within this, there is also first a question, followed by an answer. In the question there are two parts: first, indicating the questioner and the one questioned. That the great assembly questions together indicates subsuming the particular back into the universal; thus universal and particular are unobstructed, and the six aspects are perfectly interpenetrating. Questioning Mañjuśrī is because the Buddha's realm is extremely profound, and except for the wondrous virtue of prajñā, none can reach it. Beginning with faith and ending with wisdom, all depend on the Buddha's realm; hence there is no fixed presupposition. Concluding with a challenge is to express deep reverence, because both the person and the Dharma are difficult to interrogate. Second, from "Sons of the Buddha, we..." onward, properly submitting the inquiry. This is further divided into two: first, concluding the preceding and indicating what follows. Adding praise of his wondrous eloquence is to revere the foremost leader. Second, from "What..." onward, individually presenting the points of inquiry, consisting of eleven phrases: the first is general, and the rest are specific. First, "realm" has two meanings: 1. the delimited realm, meaning the dharmas of the fruit state following the cause of the ten stages belong to the Buddha; 2. the cognitive object realm, meaning the realm known by the Buddha, which cannot be measured by others; collectively these constitute the Buddha's realm. Second, inquiring what serves as the cause of the Buddha's realm. Third, requesting the procedures by which the Buddha's realm liberates sentient beings. Fourth, responding to capacities by universally entering the world. Fifth, the wisdom that can know. Sixth, the dharmas that are known. Seventh, giving rise to exposition with the perfect voice. Eighth, clarifying knowledge's essence and characteristics. Ninth, internal realization of equality. Tenth, what dharmas are manifested. Eleventh, the greatness and smallness of measure. None of these are reached by the operations of the causal state, nor can they be known by those in lower states; hence it is called the Buddha's realm. In terms of the capacity to know, liberate, and so forth, it is the delimited [realm]; in terms of what is known and so on, it is called the cognitive object [realm]. When subject and object are both harmonized, difference is precisely non-difference, and the paths of speech and thought are cut off: this is the Buddha's realm. In the answer, the ten verses reply in sequence, with only the one meaning of breadth uniquely placed at the beginning to be treated together with the general, wishing to show that the measure pervades the whole, being broad precisely because it is profound. The first line generally indicates the profundity of the essence; the next line indicates the vastness of its measure. Therefore, the *Buddhagūmi-śāstra* cites a sūtra in explanation, stating: "For the realm of the Buddhas, except for empty space, nothing can serve as a metaphor." The next line explains the aforesaid breadth, and the last line explains the aforesaid profundity. However, there are three meanings: 1. In terms of all sentient beings being the tathāgatagarbha, what else is there to enter? Overturning delusion into awakening is therefore called "realizing entry." 2. In terms of the noumenon being neither identical nor different, it is called "entering that which has no entrance." 3. In terms of mind and object, the mind merging with the true object is spoken of as entry. If there were something entered, object and wisdom would not yet be obliterated, so how could it be called entry? Only when there is truly nothing entered is it called true entry. The profundity that is broad fundamentally gives rise to speech and thought; how could one measure the limits of the breadth that is profound? Second, answering the question about the cause: this cause is limitless, briefly indicated by three meanings: 1. excellence, because its practice is transcendent and peerless; 2. subtlety, because its realization of noumenon is profound and occult, exhausting the source of dharmas; 3. vastness, because even if spoken of for many kalpas, not even a fraction can be exhausted. Third, answering the question about liberation: following the differences of their mental capacities and inclinations, and following the distinctions in their intellectual power of understanding, one attracts and guides them to cultivate so that each gains benefit. Because it is detailed and without error throughout the entire dharmadhātu, its differences are difficult to know; hence it is called the Buddha's realm. Fourth, answering the question about entering: "world" means the world of sentient beings; "realms" means the material world. "All" means pervading the dharmadhātu. Entering has two meanings: 1. secretly entering with the wisdom-body to secretly benefit sentient beings; 2. visibly entering with the form-body to manifestly benefit sentient beings; the wisdom-body is difficult to know, so it is specially highlighted in the text. Fifth, answering the question about wisdom: the first half of the verse concerns expedient wisdom, which horizontally leaves nothing unknown, hence called "sovereign," and vertically penetrates the three times, hence "without obstruction." The second half concerns real wisdom, hence saying that the sphere of wisdom is equal like empty space, without multiplicity. The word "empty space" also serves as a metaphor for the aforesaid lack of obstruction; only when expedient and real are unobstructed is it the Buddha's realm. Sixth, answering the question about dharmas: the dharmadhātu is noumenon, and the realm of sentient beings is phenomena; taking hold of noumenon forms phenomena, and noumenon penetrates the surface of phenomena, hence they are said to be "without distinction." Therefore, phenomena do not wait to be destroyed to be constantly true, and noumenon does not wait to be hidden to be constantly conventional; it is not merely vast and limitless, but also profoundly boundaryless, thoroughly and exhaustively known; hence it is called the Buddha's realm. Furthermore, the dharmadhātu is that which is realized, the realm of sentient beings is that which is transformed, and thorough knowledge is that which can realize and transform; when its source is investigated, there is also no difference, which is the Buddha's realm that is difficult to know. Seventh, answering the question about exposition: all spoken sounds are completely known according to their nature and characteristics; never having given rise to thoughts, there is no conceptual discrimination, because all distinct spoken sounds are subsumed under the sound of the Tathāgata's wheel of Dharma. Answering the question on exposition with this means that the true mark of sounds is precisely the wheel of Dharma. Eighth, knowledge is the mental essence; discriminative perception is not true knowledge, hence it is not what consciousness perceives. A fleeting thought is also not true knowledge, hence it is not the realm of the mind. The mental essence is free from thoughts, meaning it is not that there are thoughts that can be negated; hence it is said that its "nature is fundamentally pure." Sentient beings possess it equally, yet obscured they do not know it; therefore the Buddha discloses it so that all are caused to awaken and enter. It is the function of the essence, so he is asked about "knowledge"; it is the essence of the function, so he answers with "purity of nature." The single word "knowing" is the gate of all wonders; if one can empty oneself and meet it, one will directly tally with the Buddha's realm. Ninth, answering the question about realization: this is realizing the perfection of the three virtues of great nirvāṇa. Not bound by karma, hence liberation. Not afflictions: transforming afflictions into bodhi is prajñā. Without entities: because empty marks are exhausted, the dharmakāya is revealed. Having no abiding place: completes the above dharmakāya having no location. Having no illumination: completes the above prajñā whose mark of being able to realize is quiescent. Having no practice: completes the above liberation having no function of karmic practice. Because it has no function, its function pervades the dharmadhātu; because it has no illumination, there is nothing it does not know; because it has no location, there is nowhere it is not present. Therefore the concluding line says "equally practicing in the world"; this is called the secret treasury of the three virtues, the Buddha's realm. Tenth, answering the question about manifestation: the first half is what is manifested; the first line horizontally exhausts the ten directions, and the next line vertically exhausts the three times. The second half is that which can manifest; all manifest without thought and instantaneously within the Tathāgata's great round mirror wisdom. Therefore the "Chapter on Arising and Appearing" says, "Bodhi universally manifests all mental activities"; this is precisely the meaning. Clarifying the ten profundities above concludes the questions and answers.

15.8

From here below is the second part, manifesting phenomena to conclude their universal reach. Within this there are two: first, manifesting phenomena; second, concluding their universal reach. Now, the first. Why do the ten leaders above manifest? Because the light of Dharma illuminates the bodies and minds of sentient beings. The Buddha's power temporarily manifests to reply by displaying marks, causing them to witness with their own eyes and produce admiration or revulsion. There are ten things manifested: 1. Dharma, meaning the dharmas practiced, namely the distinctions among the three trainings and so forth; 2. karma, meaning correct practice, outflows and outflowness, and so forth; 3. the causes of accumulation and the fruits of suffering; 4. the differences in classes of bodies; 5. distinctions in faculties and capacities; 6. the four modes of birth not being one; 7. upholding precepts leading to superiority or inferiority among humans and devas; 8. violating precepts leading to gravity or lightness in the three destinies; 9. lands, meaning the purity or impurity of dwelling places; 10. expounding the Dharma, meaning the proximate reward of the Pure Abodes, sharp intelligence and keen wisdom swiftly fulfilling the Buddha's dharmas; this is missing in the text of this sūtra, but is complete in the Jin translation. Moreover, these can also be matched to the ten profundities, because they are replies given through displaying marks: 1. Dharmaprabha, the profoundness of the correct teaching; 2. Ratnaprabha, karmic fruits; 3. Vīryaprabha, laziness being difficult to escape; 4. Dhanaprabha, contemplating the internal body, etc.; 5. Guṇaprabha, the Buddha-Dharma having a single taste yet expounded differently according to faculties, etc.; 6. Buddhaprabha, going to good or evil destinies; 7. Jñānaprabha, the six pāramitās practiced in sequence generally being the fruit of upholding precepts; 8. Cakṣuḥprabha, the Buddha-field being equal, but giving while violating precepts results in different fruits; 9. Bhadraprabha, worlds having distinctions according to mind, etc.; 10. since the Jin sūtra has expounding the Dharma, this is expounding the dharma of the Buddha's realm. Second, from "Thus..." onward, concluding the universal pervasiveness. Within this there are two: first, concluding the eastern direction; then, from "South, west..." onward, generalizing to the remaining nine directions. They also manifest ten things; since expounding the Dharma here manifests phenomena reaching through the ten directions, expounding the Dharma in other places should also be analogous to this, collectively forming the great assembly of the single dharmadhātu. Reflect on this. The chapter "Clarifying Inquiries," which analyzes understanding within faith, is finished.

First 8 of 19 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經疏 — Classical Chinese