大方廣佛華嚴經疏 29.18

29.18

The second major section: from 'O sons of the Buddha, when bodhisattva-mahāsattvas dedicate with such kuśala-mūla' onward is pariṇāmanā detached from marks, which is turning toward the true limit, practice conforming to nirvāṇa. This demonstrates the depth of practice; the preceding demonstrated the breadth of practice. Depth and breadth are simultaneous, though words cannot express them together. The text is divided into two: first, directly clarifying detachment from marks; next, from 'when the bodhisattva observes in this way' onward, not obstructing conformity to marks. In the former are three: first, a brief indication; second, from 'no sentient beings' onward, specific revelation; third, from 'for what reason' onward, questioning and explanation. Now in the first, liberation in three phrases is general: not clinging to liberation and not tied to bondage is true liberation. In the second, specific revelation, there are two: 1. internally cutting off ideation, hence neither bondage nor liberation; 2. from 'O sons of the Buddha' onward, touching objects and leaving defilement, hence neither bondage nor liberation. In the first are two: first, clarifying the cutting off of ideation; next, from 'in this way' onward, demonstrating the accomplishment of practice. In the former are also two: first, cutting off the ideation of self, which is only deluded clinging onto dharmas, fully as explained above; next, from 'having no idea of existence' onward, cutting off the ideation of dharmas. The preceding passage used dharmas to eliminate self; now it uses self to eliminate dharmas. Since there is no self, there is no belonging to self; hence dharmas and self are unobstructed. The text has six pairs: 1. not giving rise to the idea of increase or decrease regarding the dharma essence; 2. leaving the idea of the three times regarding the time of dharmas; 3. leaving the idea of transmigration regarding states; 4. leaving the idea of annihilation or permanence regarding the meaning of dharmas; 5. leaving the idea of resting place regarding reflected images; 6. discarding the idea of mind and non-mind regarding the basis of dharmas. From 'without knowing the reason' onward, the sūtra explains itself; now we briefly clarify: the first pair is general. 'Having no idea of existence' means existence is emptiness, and the two emptinesses are of one flavor, equal without difference. 'Having no idea of non-existence' has five meanings: 1. using phenomena to exemplify non-existence: if one does not even produce ideation toward existent dharmas right before one's eyes, how could one keep non-existent dharmas and non-existent things in mind? 2. marks have no coming or going: existence is fundamentally non-existent, not that existence leaves and non-existence arrives; by this very meaning there is nothing to be non-existent, hence no idea of non-existence. 3. existence is non-existence, which cannot be called existence, much less spoken of as non-existence, so the path of speech and thought is cut off. 4. provisionally using non-existence to discard existence does not mean possessing non-existence, so it is discarded again. 5. because this is the principle of the selflessness of dharmas, not annihilating non-existence, it certainly does not obstruct existence, hence no idea of non-existence. Therefore the explanation below says: 'neither existent nor non-existent.' Since existence and non-existence are both tranquil, how could 'both' and 'neither' find any footing? The remaining pairs are understood by analogy. The final pair is the general conclusion: the preceding ideas of existence, non-existence, and so forth are collectively named 'ideas'; cutting off all of them is called 'no ideation.' Provisionally using non-ideation to discard ideation does not mean possessing non-ideation, hence it is said to be 'not non-ideation.' The remaining meanings are understood by analogy. Second, demonstrating the accomplishment of practice: the text has five pairs. The first pair is general: by cutting off such ideation of self and dharmas, there is neither bondage nor liberation; meaning, because of non-ideation there is no bondage, and because of not non-ideation there is no liberation. The four pairs below are specific. The first pair speaks solely of bondage, differing only as cause and effect, due to having no agent and no experiencer. The next pair reveals both bondage and liberation: due to having no ideas of existence, non-existence, and so forth, it reveals that the preceding two karma types—with conceptual discrimination and without conceptual discrimination—are both severed. The next pair reveals that both types of karma actions are actions of volition, and subsequently actions having willed. The final pair also clarifies both bondage and liberation as the basis of volition: if the mental king has mind, there are waves of saṃsāra; if without mind, it is identical to non-Buddhists. Further, taking 'without mind' to be right still does not avoid existence, hence both are negated.