大方廣佛華嚴經疏 31.18

31.18

Third, the section on empowerment from "entered this [samādhi]" onward has six parts: (1) explaining the cause of empowerment; (2) from "immediately" onward, the manifestation of the empowering Buddhas; (3) from "spoke thus" onward, praising his attainment of samādhi; (4) from "O son of good family, this is..." onward, explaining both the causes and conditions of empowerment and of samādhi; (5) from "wishing to cause you..." onward, explaining the purpose of empowerment; and (6) from "O son of good family" onward, separately revealing the marks of empowerment. First is the initial part. "Having entered this samādhi": if he had not entered samādhi, the Buddhas would not empower him. Hence the treatise below states: "The reason why Vajragarbha alone was empowered is that he attained this samādhi; at the assembly of the Ten Abodes, it was said to be 'by the power of samādhi.'" In the second part, the manifestation of the empowering Buddhas, there are five aspects: (1) the time the Buddhas manifested, namely, right when he entered samādhi; (2) from "the ten directions" onward, the distance of their origin; (3) from "each had" onward, the number of empowering Buddhas; (4) sharing the same name of Vajragarbha, revealing that their names are identical to that of the one empowered; and (5) "manifested before him", manifesting their bodies to inspire faith. In aspects (2) and (3) above, the intention is to clarify the great number, surpassing the preceding stations. If so, why does it not speak of "immeasurable worlds", but rather of "worlds [as numerous as] the dust motes of ten billion lands"? The treatise states: "As an expedient means to reveal the multitude of Buddhas." That is to say, although "immeasurable" is vast, the expression is still vague, and people would not regard it as immense. Now, by employing the metaphor of dust motes of lands—where each mote is a land, and each land has a Buddha—it is readily perceived as minute and unfathomable. If so, simply mentioning dust motes of lands would already reveal the multitude; why must it specifically state "ten billion"? There are two reasons: first, to teach the ten stages; second, because this sūtra often speaks of the number ten in this way to reveal inexhaustibility. It is precisely for this reason that it does not say "immeasurable", for "immeasurable" cannot reveal inexhaustibility. Why must this empowerment by many Buddhas be revealed? The treatise states: "To reveal that toward the Dharma and the dharmabhāṇaka, devotion is increased, and also to show that all Buddhas speak identically." Why must they empower with identical names? The treatise has two reasons: first, it says that it is due to the power of their fundamental vows. Why did the Tathāgatas make such vows? To reveal the multitude of Buddhas. This samādhi is the essence of the Dharma; when practicing on the bodhisattva path originally, they were all named Vajragarbha and spoke this Dharma together, and now having realized sambodhi, they are still named Vajragarbha; hence they empower without differing names. The treatise's meaning here is: when the Buddhas attained this samādhi in their causal stage, they were named Vajragarbha, and then made the vow, "When I become a Buddha, I shall also share this name." The purpose of sharing it is to show that the essence of the Dharma attained by the bodhisattva is identical to that of the many Buddhas, clarifying that though the persons are distinct, the path is identical. This is precisely the meaning of the treatise. If taken by principle, it also applies to Rocana's fundamental vow: because when the Buddha attained samādhi and preached the Dharma in the causal stage, it was natural that the empowering and the empowered shared the same name. He also made this vow to reveal that the path is identical; hence the sūtra below states, "It is also due to the power of the fundamental vow of Vairocana Tathāgata." As for the second reason, the treatise states: "Furthermore, when this bodhisattva heard that all the Tathāgatas shared his own name, his courage and joy were augmented." The former pertains to the principle of the Dharma, while the latter pertains to the etiquette of conversion.