[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 29.54 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 29.54 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 29.54 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [29.54](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29.54) 疏「又上第三偈」下，收上四偈成一不二法門。即《淨名經》寂根菩薩曰：「佛法眾為二。佛即是法，法即是眾。是三寶皆無為相，與虛空等，一切法亦爾。能隨此行者，是為入不二法門。」疏「下經云：無上摩訶薩遠離眾生想」者，即第十六經，無上慧菩薩偈下半云「無有能過者，故號為無上。」今無生可壞，即離眾生想。疏「謂一與多」下，上標舉二門，今正將緣起相由所以釋一多相容之門。此中大意，凡所知所起即無有力，若能知能起即是有力，廣如玄文。疏「由此緣起」下，結破靜法。彼云「此偈了一多平等，謂解多由一起、解一由多生，無一不成多、無多亦無一。了彼一多相由生起，一多之念息，一多相平等。此會差別，歸平等性，理事無礙，非事事無礙。應審思其文，勿謬解也。」釋曰：今疏即賢首意。此公破師，言是謬解。故今結示即符昔大義中之一也。此公意云：是理事無礙者，以例前諸偈多約會事歸理，一切平等拂諸見故，不合是事事無礙故。今先出此偈本意，言「由此緣起成前平等」者，上云本會則住無所住，新集則入無所入等，皆平等義。何以得此皆平等耶？特由緣起互相由故。且如本會，與彼十方新集之會共成緣起。由因本會有十方，故十是所起，所起無體，即是本會由因。十方說本會，故本是所起，所起無力故、入十方故。由緣起成前一切，皆悉平等。言「由前平等成此緣起」者，謂一有定性，不由於多；多有定性，不由於一。今由一無定性，假多而起；多無定性，由一而生。故由無性平等之義，方成緣起。若有一可一，此是自性一；若有多可多，此是定性多。若是定性多，多不因於一；若是定性一，一不因於多。今由多故一，此一不自一；今由一故多，此多不自多。多不自多，此多則無力；此一不自一，此一則無力。無力隨有力，一多互相收，故隨一佛會即一切佛會，法界一切會即是一法會，故此一法會不動而常遍、不分而常多，前後互相成，如何不信？故賢首云：「緣起法界，理數常爾。」應細深思，自當見耳。觀此疏文，似此弟子當聽之時早已不受，特令深思，故疏結云「不信事事無礙，恐未著深思」也。 > Regarding the commentary's phrase "Furthermore, the third verse above..." onwards: it brings together the above four verses to form a single Dharma-gate of non-duality. This is precisely what Bodhisattva Śāntendriya in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra says: "The Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha are two. The Buddha is precisely the Dharma, and the Dharma is precisely the Saṅgha. These Three Jewels all have the mark of the unconditioned and are equal to empty space, and all phenomena are likewise. One who can practice accordingly is said to enter the Dharma-gate of non-duality." As for the commentary's "A lower section of the sūtra states: 'The unsurpassed mahāsattvas are free from the notion of sentient beings'": this refers to the sixteenth fascicle of the sūtra, where the lower half of Bodhisattva Anuttarabuddhi's verse states, "Because none can surpass them, they are called 'unsurpassed'." Now, since there are no sentient beings that can be destroyed, one is free from the notion of sentient beings. As for the commentary's "This means one and many..." onwards: above, it pointed out the two gates; now, it properly takes the reason for dependent origination's mutual reliance to explain the gate of mutual containment of one and many. The general import here is that whatever is known and whatever arises is powerless, whereas that which can know and that which can give rise is powerful, as detailed in the "Mysteries". As for the commentary's "Due to this dependent origination..." onwards: it concludes by refuting Jingfa. That author says: "This verse understands the equality of one and many, meaning that one understands that the many arise from the one, and one understands that the one is produced from the many; without the one, the many would not be established, and without the many, there would also be no one. Understanding that this one and many arise in mutual reliance, thoughts of one and many cease, and the characteristics of one and many are equal. This gathers differences into the nature of equality; it is the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena, not the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena. One should carefully consider its text and not misunderstand it." Explanation: The present commentary follows the intention of Xianshou. This master \[Jingfa\] refutes his teacher, asserting that it is a misunderstanding. Thus, the present concluding demonstration conforms to one of the great doctrines of the past. That master's intent was that it is the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena because, by analogy with the previous verses which mostly concern gathering phenomena to return to principle, obliterating all views in universal equality, it should not be the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena. Now, first presenting the original intent of this verse, the statement "due to this dependent origination the preceding equality is accomplished" refers to the above statements that the original assembly abides in having nowhere to abide, and the newly gathered enter where there is nowhere to enter, all of which are meanings of equality. How is it that these are all equal? It is solely because of dependent origination's mutual reliance. Take, for instance, the original assembly: it forms dependent origination together with those newly gathered assemblies from the ten directions. Because the ten directions exist dependent on the original assembly, the ten are what is arisen; and what is arisen has no essence, so it is the original assembly that serves as the cause. Because the original assembly is spoken of in dependence on the ten directions, the original is what is arisen; and because what is arisen is powerless, it enters the ten directions. Through dependent origination, everything preceding is accomplished and all are equal. As for "due to the preceding equality this dependent origination is accomplished": this means that if the one had a fixed nature, it would not rely on the many; if the many had a fixed nature, they would not rely on the one. Now, because the one lacks a fixed nature, it arises provisionally based on the many; because the many lack a fixed nature, they are born relying on the one. Therefore, only through the meaning of the equality of naturelessness is dependent origination accomplished. If there were a one that could exist on its own, this would be a self-natured one; if there were many that could exist on their own, this would be a fixed-nature many. If it were a fixed-nature many, the many would not rely on the one; if it were a fixed-nature one, the one would not rely on the many. Now, because of the many there is the one, this one is not a one of itself; now, because of the one there are many, these many are not many of themselves. Since the many are not many of themselves, these many are powerless; since this one is not a one of itself, this one is powerless. The powerless follows the powerful, and the one and the many mutually subsume each other. Therefore, conforming with a single Buddha-assembly is just all Buddha-assemblies, and all assemblies in the dharmadhātu are just a single Dharma-assembly. Hence, this single Dharma-assembly is unmoving yet constantly all-pervasive, undivided yet constantly manifold, the preceding and subsequent mutually accomplishing one another—how could one not believe it? Thus Xianshou said: "In the dharmadhātu of dependent origination, the principle and numbers are always thus." One should ponder this deeply and minutely, and one will naturally see it. Observing this commentary text, it seems that when this disciple listened, he had already failed to accept it, so \[the master\] specifically instructed him to contemplate deeply; hence the commentary concludes: "If you do not believe in the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena, I fear you have not applied deep thought." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 29.53](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29.53) - [Next: 29.55](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29.55) - [Up: 29](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.29.54) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [諸經要抄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2819.1.28) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29.54](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.29.54) · Pramāṇa