大方廣佛華嚴經疏 15.6

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.