大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 41.11

41.11

疏「表十行建立故」者，此有五義，大意可知。初言建立者，於法性無修之中而起修故。二萬行非一故。三聚集為十度、四等行，顯發性德令現前故。故《起信》云「以知法性無慳貪故，隨順修行檀波羅蜜」等。四一一契理曰深，意趣祕妙為密，為相續無間。五「扶疎」，即茂盛之貌，如一布施國城內外頭目髓腦而興起故等。言「庇映」者，一一行門與慈悲俱，普蔭一切相映帶故。若建謂修建、立謂成立、廣謂體廣、多約類異，則五句皆二，便成十義。下三各二，可知。故下結云「可以意消息之」。疏「宜以當界之佛與當界菩薩共相屬對」者，以佛是當位之果，菩薩即當位之因。如功德林菩薩，下釋云「積行在躬功德圓滿，故得成於常住之果。二慧為最勝，故成無勝眼。三悟勝義諦，名為勝林，故成無住眼佛。四聞深無畏，故成不動。五崇真拒迷，成大光淨。六事理無差，離身心相，故得解脫。七了相不動，得審諦眼。八照理正修，故成明相。九照心本源，果成最上。十鑒達諸佛，逈超色聲，心言路絕，故名智林。」故得果妙明為紺青眼。以菩薩名下文自釋，故今屬對則果號可知。第三偈讚。言「一塵內身無不周于十方」者，以即一恒多故等。疏「喻言孟夏月」者，取意譯也。下疏文有六：一總顯文意。二「梵本」下會梵經，此即《刊定》引梵破經，如下當說。今疏取其所引，令順同今經。三「西域如來聖教」下，出後熱月相，明其三際但是佛教所用，俗之所用不必要三，亦說四時等故。四「赫日之言」下，會經通難。即《刊定》破云「四月赫日豈勝六月？故孟夏之言不順赫日。」故疏出意云：但取光長者，故晉經云「譬如春後月，虛空無雲翳，日曜清淨光。」春後與孟夏無違，赫日明取光遠。五「彼方或為四時」下，委彰時分以正濫釋。六「不見此文」下，結破《刊定》。謂彼破譯者云「準梵本應云後熱月，不合言孟夏月。」若取意總譯，應云「譬如盛暑月，赫日光熾然，於淨虛空中，無邊光照曜。」由方言實無敵對翻故，應取意譯也。言後熱月者，西域時節名字兩說：一云一年三時，謂春夏秋，各四月。從十一月半已後，至三月半已前，名春時。餘二時準知。一云一年六時，各兩月，謂從十一月後半至正月前半，名春時。二從正月半至三月前半，名熱時。三從此後至五月前半，名雨時。四從此後至七月前半，名秋時。五從此後至九月前半，名雪時。六從此後半至十一月前半，名極寒時。今此梵本云後熱月者，當此國二月半已後三月半已前，彼方兩熱月中後熱月也。然此與西國時復不同，此地正暄，西域已熱，是以但可取意譯耳。上即《刊定記》義。餘之二際準知者，應云從五月十六日至九月十五日為夏，即雨際。從九月十六日至正月十五日，即寒際。即雨熱寒之三際也。斯即《俱舍》光法師義。若泰法師意，從十月半為首。泰公約晝夜停等後說增減，光公約晝夜極長時後說增減。然其兩說，亦不愜《西域記》文，《刊定》承謬更斥經義，故云不見此文妄為異解。然疏文已正，所引猶略，今當具引。彼記第二卷云「月盈至滿謂之白分，月虧至晦謂之黑分。黑分或十四日或十五日，以月之大小故。然白前黑後合為一月，六月合為一行。日遊在內，近北行也。日遊在外，近南行也。總此二行合為一歲。又分一歲以為六時：正月十六日至三月十五日，漸熱時也。三月十六日至五月十五日，盛熱時也。五月十六日至七月十五日，雨時也。七月十六日至九月十五日，茂盛時也。九月十六日至十一月十五日，漸寒時也。十一月十六日至正月十五日，盛寒時也。如來聖教，歲為三時：正月十六日至五月十五日，熱時也。五月十六日至九月十五日，雨時也。九月十六日至正月十五日，寒時也。或歲為四時，春夏秋冬也。春三月，謂制呾羅月、吠舍佉月、逝瑟吒月，當此從正月十六日至四月十五日。夏三月，謂頞沙荼月、室羅伎拏月、婆羅鉢陀月，當此從四月十六日至七月十五日。秋三月，謂頞濕縛庚闍月、迦賴底迦月、末伽始羅月，當此七月十六日至十月十五日。冬三月，謂報沙月、磨袪月、頞勒窶拏月，當此十月十六日至正月十五日。故印土僧徒依佛聖教坐兩安居，或前三月或後三月，前三月當此從五月十六日至八月十五日，後三月當此從六月十六日至九月十五日。前代譯經律者，或云坐夏、或云坐臘，斯皆邊裔俗語，不達中國正旨，或方言未融而傳譯有謬。」釋曰：以此文證，邪正可知。又今之坐夏，正取西域四時，非佛教所明，故記不許。疏「後七中令於依他起修三無性觀」等者，文分為四：一總標意。《唯識》第九廣明，已如上引。二「以餘之二性」下，出於一性修三所以。三「故於一依他」下，結成上義。四「文即分三」下，正釋經文。二中有三：初明三性即一性、二明三無性即三性、三明融通為一。初中，圓成即是依他之體，故觀依他必觀其體。離依他性無可橫執，故遍計性亦約依他。「又迷真似現」者，此之一句具足三性，迷即遍計、真即圓成、似即依他。前意明二不離依他，此義明二能成依他，故但觀依他已具三性。疏「即依三性」下，第二明三無性不離三性，全是《唯識》偈文。具足應云「即依此三性，立彼三無性。初則相無性，次無自然性，後由遠離前，所執我法性。」明三無性依三性有也。疏「三性尚一」下，三明融通。謂三性是有尚猶是一，三無無相豈定有三？故收三性但是一有、三無但是一無，離有無無，故有無不二。初句約顯，後「有無形奪」下約遮，餘義玄中已具其相。疏「初三作生無自性性觀」者，即第二依他上無性也。即《唯識》云「次無自然性」。然三無性名，〈須彌偈品〉文中已有，今復略釋。謂法從緣無自然生性，故上生無自性即是所無，下一性字是無性性，謂無自然生之自性為其性故。言「勝義無自性性」者，即第三無性勝義。自性即是所無，下一性字義同於前，顯無彼勝義之性為其性故。勝義即是圓成，圓成即是真如，故《唯識》云「此諸法勝義，亦即是真如，常如其性故，即唯識實性。」言「相無自性性」者，即第一無性，謂遍計之相亦不可得，如繩上蛇。下一性字是第一性，以相無自性而為其性故。疏「初句果空，謂緣生果法非先有體」等者，即《中論》先有先無門觀也。然亦名奪破，於中先奪破其所計先有，總舉諸宗世性。微塵，即是外道。及未來藏，即一切有部。因緣通大小乘約相。心識即唯識，唯心所現。若執定有，皆為所遣。從「若有來處」下，縱破。鳥來棲樹，即《中論》青目釋無來文。謂先有鳥而來就樹，可名為來。今從無之有曰生，曾何先有？疏「次句因空」者，即經「亦無能作者」。能作是因，因者即我也。亦即牒辭則通於法。《瑜伽論》云「順益是因義，謂無常法為因，無有常法能為法因。又雖無常法為無常因，然與他性為因，亦與後自性為因，非即此剎那。」從「既無有果」下，破也。即相待門破，可知。從「又世性等亦是妄計因緣有故」者，亦因緣門，因緣無性故。亦無體門，但有妄計，無實體故。疏「又初句不自生」等者，上之四句各別門破，今通用因緣門，以四開破，略無無因。《中觀論》云「諸法不自生，亦不從他生，不共不無因，是故知無生。」而《雜集論》二門釋之「一云不自生者，謂一切法非自所作，彼未生時無自性故。不從他生者，謂彼法緣非作者故。不從共生者，謂即由此二種因故，非不自作他作故。不無因生者，緣望眾生有功能故。二又因緣互奪。」釋云「自種有故不從他等」，次後當釋。疏「又初句非先有」等者，前來唯初句用先有門，今通三句皆用先有先無門。《中論．因緣品》云「果先於緣中，有無俱不可。先無為誰緣？先有何用緣？」影公云：「因中先有，則可境界在六根。因中先無，則因同非因。因同非因，則可鑽氷出火。境界在六根，則可湯中求氷。若亦有亦無，則具上二過。其第四句，乃非此門。故《中論》云『若果非有生，亦復非無生，亦非有無生，何得言有緣？』」疏「次偈以無生釋無滅，略有三義」者，一是無體門、二相待門、三因緣門。疏「經云無生即是佛」者，正是《大品》法尚答常啼云：「諸法如即是佛，諸法無生即是佛」等。下句既云斯人見如來，即無生是佛義耳。〈須彌頂上偈讚品〉一切慧菩薩云：「一切法無生，一切法無滅，若能如是解，諸佛常現前。」疏「論云若見因緣法」等者，即《中論．四諦品》末云「是故經中說，若見因緣法，則為能見佛，見苦集滅道。」而論引經，即《智嚴經》，至第十菩薩當具引之。疏「各含二義故致兼言」者，釋上兼修之言。而云各者，正取上半觀相、下半觀益，為各二義，即依他、圓成，如下疏列。而下遣能亦含依圓，故此各言兼於能所，方順二偈兼修之言。疏「一者成前」下，別示二義之相，此即依他中義也。先明觀相。由前偈遣能相四相，略舉生滅已含住異。此偈遣所相色心法體，由四相相成其有為，當法緣生故無自性。觀益，可知。

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because it signifies the establishment of the ten practices": this contains five meanings, the general sense of which can be known. First, "establishment" means giving rise to cultivation within that which has no cultivation in the nature of phenomena (dharmatā). Second, the myriad practices are not of one kind. Third, they are gathered into the ten perfections (pāramitā) and the practices of the four immeasurables, bringing to light the virtues of the nature and causing them to manifest; hence the Awakening of Faith says: "Because one knows the nature of phenomena is free from stinginess, one accords with it by cultivating the perfection of giving," and so forth. Fourth, each conforming with the principle is called profound; their purport being secret and marvelous is [called] esoteric; and they are continuous without interruption. Fifth, "spreading luxuriously" refers to the appearance of lush proliferation, as in giving rise [to giving] through donating countries, cities, outer and inner belongings, head, eyes, marrow, and brain, and so forth. As for "providing shelter and shade": each practice gate is accompanied by loving-kindness and compassion, universally overshadowing all and interreflecting with them. If "establishing" (jian) means cultivating and establishing, "standing" (li) means bringing to completion, "broad" (guang) refers to the breadth of their essence, and "numerous" (duo) pertains to the diversity of kinds, then the five phrases each have two [aspects], thus constituting ten meanings. That the latter three each have two may be understood. Therefore, it concludes below: "One may comprehend this through discernment."\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "It is fitting that the Buddha of that realm correspond with the bodhisattva of that realm": this is because the Buddha is the fruit of that station, while the bodhisattva is the cause of that station. As with Bodhisattva Guṇakānana (Virtue Forest), the lower commentary explains: "Accumulating practices in one's own person, one's virtues become fulfilled, and thus one attains the fruit of eternal abiding. Second, [his] two wisdoms are supreme, so he achieves the Eyes of Invincibility. Third, awakening to the ultimate truth, he is called Forest of Supremacy, and thus achieves the Buddha of Non-abiding Eyes. Fourth, hearing the profound without fear, he achieves Immovability. Fifth, venerating truth and repelling delusion, he achieves Great Purifying Radiance. Sixth, phenomena and principle being without discrepancy, he is free from bodily and mental marks, and thus achieves Liberation. Seventh, understanding marks to be motionless, he attains the Eyes of Thorough Examination. Eighth, illuminating the principle with proper cultivation, he achieves the Bright Mark. Ninth, illuminating the primal source of the mind, his fruit becomes supreme. Tenth, discerning and penetrating all buddhas, transcendent far beyond sights and sounds, with the path of mind and speech cut off, he is therefore named Forest of Wisdom." Therefore, the attained fruit is marvelously bright, being the dark-blue eyes. Because the bodhisattva's name is explained below in the text itself, matching them here makes the fruit's name intelligible.\n\nThird, the praise in verse. As for "Within a single dust mote, the body is everywhere throughout the ten directions": this is because being one, it is constantly many, and so forth.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The metaphor mentions the first month of summer": it translates according to the meaning. The commentary below has six parts: First, it reveals the overall meaning of the text. Second, from "the Sanskrit text" onward, it reconciles with the Sanskrit sūtra; this refers to the Kanding citing the Sanskrit to refute the sūtra, as will be explained below. Now the commentary adopts what it cited to make it conform with the present sūtra. Third, from "the Holy Teaching of the Tathāgata in the Western Regions" onward, it clarifies the characteristics of the latter hot month, explaining that the three seasons are used solely by Buddhist teachings; worldly usage does not necessarily employ three, as they also speak of four seasons, and so forth. Fourth, from "the words 'radiant sun'" onward, it reconciles the sūtra and resolves difficulties. This refers to the Kanding's objection: "How could the radiant sun of the fourth month surpass that of the sixth month? Thus the term 'first month of summer' does not accord with 'radiant sun.'" Therefore, the commentary states its intention: it merely takes the brightness being long; hence the Jin sūtra says: "Like the month following spring, / The sky is without cloud or haze, / And the sun shines with pure light." There is no conflict between "following spring" and "first month of summer"; "radiant sun" clearly takes the light reaching far. Fifth, from "that region sometimes divides into four seasons" onward, it details the seasonal divisions to correct confusing explanations. Sixth, from "not having seen this text" onward, it concludes by refuting the Kanding. That is, it refuted the translator by saying: "According to the Sanskrit text, it should say 'latter hot month'; it should not say 'first month of summer.' If translating the general sense, it should say: 'Like the midsummer month, / The radiant sun blazes with fire, / In the pure, open sky, / Illumining with boundless light.' Because the regional languages do not have exact literal equivalents, one should translate according to the meaning."\n\nAs for "latter hot month": there are two accounts of the names of seasons in the Western Regions: One says that one year has three seasons, namely spring, summer, and autumn, each lasting four months. From after the middle of the eleventh month to before the middle of the third month is called spring. The remaining two seasons may be known accordingly. Another says that one year has six seasons, each lasting two months: from the second half of the eleventh month to the first half of the first month is called spring; second, from the middle of the first month to the first half of the third month is called the hot season; third, from then to the first half of the fifth month is called the rainy season; fourth, from then to the first half of the seventh month is called the autumn season; fifth, from then to the first half of the ninth month is called the snowy season; sixth, from the second half of this to the first half of the eleventh month is called the season of extreme cold. Now what this Sanskrit text calls the "latter hot month" corresponds in this country to after the middle of the second month and before the middle of the third month; it is the latter hot month among the two hot months in that region. However, this is also different from the seasons in the Western Countries: when it is just warm here, it is already hot in the Western Regions; therefore one can only translate according to the meaning. The above is the view of the Kanding ji.\n\nThat the remaining two periods may be known accordingly means: from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is summer, namely the rainy period. From the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the cold period. These are the three periods of rain, heat, and cold. This is the view of Dharma Master Guang on the Abhidharmakośa. As for Dharma Master Tai's view, he takes the middle of the tenth month as the beginning. Master Tai speaks of increase and decrease after the point where day and night are equal; Master Guang speaks of increase and decrease after the time when day and night are at their longest. However, both of these two theories also do not tally with the text of the Xiyu ji. The Kanding inherited the error and further censured the meaning of the sūtra, hence it says that without having seen this text, it made an erroneous, disparate interpretation. Although the commentary has already corrected it, what it cited was still brief; I will now quote it fully. Fascicle 2 of that Record states:\n\n"From the waxing of the moon until it is full is called the bright half (śuklapakṣa); from the waning of the moon until it is dark is called the dark half (kṛṣṇapakṣa). The dark half has either fourteen or fifteen days, depending on whether the month is large or small. The bright half coming first and the dark half coming after together constitute one month; six months together constitute one course (ayana). When the sun moves inward, it travels toward the north; when the sun moves outward, it travels toward the south. Together these two courses constitute one year. Furthermore, one year is divided into six seasons: from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the third month is the gradually hot season; from the sixteenth day of the third month to the fifteenth day of the fifth month is the intensely hot season; from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the seventh month is the rainy season; from the sixteenth day of the seventh month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is the luxuriant season; from the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the eleventh month is the gradually cold season; from the sixteenth day of the eleventh month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the intensely cold season. In the Holy Teaching of the Tathāgata, the year has three seasons: from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the fifth month is the hot season; from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is the rainy season; from the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the cold season. Or the year has four seasons: spring, summer, autumn, and winter. The three months of spring are the months of Caitra, Vaiśākha, and Jyeṣṭha, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the fourth month. The three months of summer are the months of Āṣāḍha, Śrāvaṇa, and Bhādrapada, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the fourth month to the fifteenth day of the seventh month. The three months of autumn are the months of Āśvina, Kārttika, and Mārgaśīrṣa, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the seventh month to the fifteenth day of the tenth month. The three months of winter are the months of Pauṣa, Māgha, and Phālguna, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the tenth month to the fifteenth day of the first month. Therefore, the monastic assembly in India, relying on the Buddha's Holy Teaching, observes two retreats (varṣā): either the former three months or the latter three months. The former three months correspond here to from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the eighth month; the latter three months correspond here to from the sixteenth day of the sixth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month. Translators of sūtras and vinayas in previous generations spoke sometimes of 'sitting summer' (zuoxia) or 'sitting la' (zuola); these are all vernacular terms of peripheral frontiers, failing to grasp the correct meaning of the Central Kingdom (Madhyadeśa), or because dialectal expressions were not harmonized, leading to errors in transmission and translation."\n\nExplication: With this text as proof, the correct and incorrect can be known. Moreover, the present 'sitting summer' actually adopts the four seasons of the Western Regions and is not what is elucidated in the Buddhist teaching; therefore the Record does not approve of it.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Among the latter seven, causing one to cultivate the contemplation of the three non-natures upon the other-dependent (paratantra)": the text is divided into four: First, generally indicating the meaning. The ninth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi explains this extensively, as already quoted above. Second, from "due to the other two natures" onward, providing the reason for cultivating the three upon a single nature. Third, from "therefore upon the single other-dependent" onward, concluding the above meaning. Fourth, from "the text then divides into three" onward, directly explaining the sūtra text.\n\nWithin the second, there are three parts: First, clarifying that the three natures are identical to one nature; second, clarifying that the three non-natures are identical to the three natures; third, clarifying their harmonization into one. In the first, the fully perfected nature (pariniṣpanna) is the essence of the other-dependent; therefore, in contemplating the other-dependent, one must contemplate its essence. Apart from the other-dependent nature, there is nothing that can be arbitrarily grasped; therefore the imagined nature (parikalpita) also relies on the other-dependent. "Moreover, deluded about the real, a semblance appears": this single phrase is complete with the three natures—delusion is the imagined, real is the fully perfected, and semblance is the other-dependent. The former idea clarified that the two are not apart from the other-dependent; this meaning clarifies that the two can establish the other-dependent; therefore merely contemplating the other-dependent already contains the three natures.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "namely relying on the three natures": second, it clarifies that the three non-natures are not apart from the three natures; this is entirely the verse text of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. Given in full, it should state: "Relying on these three natures, / Those three non-natures are established. / First is the non-nature of marks, / Next the non-nature of spontaneous arising, / And lastly, through detachment from the previously / Grasped nature of self and phenomena." This clarifies that the three non-natures exist relying on the three natures.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The three natures are still one": third, it clarifies harmonization. That is, the three natures are existent and yet are still one; how could the three non-natures, being without mark, definitely be three? Therefore, subsuming the three natures is merely one existence, and the three non-natures is merely one non-existence; apart from existence there is no non-existence, so existence and non-existence are non-dual. The first phrase pertains to revealing; the latter from "existence and non-existence mutually subvert" onward pertains to refuting. The remaining meanings have already had their characteristics fully set forth in the profound discourse.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The first three engage in the contemplation of the non-nature of arising": this is the second non-nature upon the other-dependent, namely what the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi calls "next the non-nature of spontaneous arising." The names of the three non-natures already appeared in the text of the chapter on "Verses on Mount Sumeru," and are now briefly explained again: Phenomena arise from conditions and have no nature of spontaneous arising; thus the upper "non-nature of arising" is what is negated, while the lower word "nature" is the nature of non-nature, meaning that having no self-nature of spontaneous arising is their nature. As for "the nature of ultimate non-nature": this is the third non-nature, the ultimate. Self-nature is what is negated, and the lower word "nature" has the same meaning as before, showing that having no such ultimate nature is its nature. The ultimate is the fully perfected, and the fully perfected is suchness (tathatā); hence the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: "The ultimate of these phenomena / Is also suchness; / Because it is eternally thus in its nature, / It is the true nature of consciousness-only." As for "the nature of marklessness": this is the first non-nature, meaning that the marks of the imagined are also unobtainable, like a snake upon a rope. The lower word "nature" is the first nature, taking the non-nature of marks as its nature.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The first line is the emptiness of the fruit, meaning that fruit dharmas arisen from conditions do not previously have an essence": this is the contemplation via the gates of previous existence and previous non-existence in the Madhyamakaśāstra. However, it is also called refutation by negation. Therein, it first negates and refutes their posited previous existence, generally citing the worldly primal nature (prakṛti) of the various traditions: minute particles (paramāṇu), which belongs to the non-Buddhists; the future treasury, which belongs to the Sarvāstivādins; causes and conditions, which pertains to both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna regarding marks; and mind-consciousness, which is Consciousness-Only, manifested by mind alone. If grasped as definitively existent, all are refuted. From "if there is a place of coming" onward, it refutes by concession: birds coming to roost in a tree is the text of Qingmu's commentary on the Madhyamakaśāstra explaining non-coming. It means that only if there were a bird previously that comes to the tree could it be called coming; now, going from non-existence to existence is called arising—how could it have existed previously?\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The next line is the emptiness of the cause": this refers to the sūtra's "there is also no maker." The maker is the cause, and the cause is the self. It is also a phrase of recitation, so it extends to phenomena. The Yogācārabhūmi says: "Conforming and benefiting is the meaning of cause; that is, an impermanent dharma serves as a cause; no permanent dharma can serve as a cause for a dharma. Moreover, although an impermanent dharma serves as a cause for impermanence, it serves as a cause for another nature and also serves as a cause for a subsequent own-nature, not this very instant." From "since there is no fruit" onward, it refutes it. This is refutation via the gate of mutual dependence, which can be understood. From "moreover, primal nature and so forth are also falsely imagined to exist through causes and conditions": this is also the gate of causes and conditions, because causes and conditions are without self-nature. It is also the gate of no essence, because there is only false conceptualization, without real essence.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, the first line is not arising from self": the above four lines were refuted through separate gates, but now they are all refuted using the gate of causes and conditions, broken open through four divisions, omitting only non-causality. The Madhyamakaśāstra says: "Dharmas do not arise from themselves, / Nor do they arise from another, / Nor from both, nor without a cause; / Therefore know they are unarisen." The Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā explains this via two gates: "First, 'not arising from self' means that all dharmas are not made by themselves, because they have no self-nature when not yet arisen. 'Not arising from another' means because the conditions of that dharma are not agents. 'Not arising from both' means because it is precisely through these two kinds of causes, not because they are not self-made and made by another. 'Not arising without cause' means because conditions have functionality with respect to sentient beings. Second, causes and conditions mutually subvert." The explanation says: "Because one's own seed exists, it is not from another," and so forth, as will be explained immediately below.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, the first line is not having existed previously": previously, only the first line used the gate of previous existence; now, all three lines use the gate of previous existence and previous non-existence. The "Examination of Conditions" chapter of the Madhyamakaśāstra says: "Before conditions, the fruit / Is neither existent nor non-existent. / If non-existent previously, of what is it the condition? / If existent previously, what use is a condition?" Master Ying says: "If previously existent in the cause, then it would be permissible for the sense-objects to reside in the six faculties. If previously non-existent in the cause, then the cause is identical to a non-cause. If the cause is identical to a non-cause, then one could drill ice to produce fire. If the sense-objects reside in the six faculties, then one could seek ice in boiling water. If both existent and non-existent, it would incur both of the above faults. The fourth line does not belong to this gate; hence the Madhyamakaśāstra says: 'If the fruit is not an arising of the existent, / Nor an arising of the non-existent, / Nor an arising of both existent and non-existent, / How can it be said that there are conditions?'"\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The next verse explains non-cessation by means of non-arising, having roughly three meanings": first is the gate of no essence; second, the gate of mutual dependence; third, the gate of causes and conditions.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The sūtra says non-arising is precisely the Buddha": this is precisely Dharmodgata answering Sadāprarudita in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: "The suchness of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha; the non-arising of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha," and so forth. Since the lower line says "This person sees the Tathāgata," non-arising is precisely the meaning of the Buddha. In the chapter on "Verses atop Mount Sumeru," Bodhisattva Sarvamatī states: "All dharmas are without arising, / All dharmas are without cessation; / If one can understand in this way, / All buddhas will constantly appear before one."\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The treatise says if one sees the dharma of causes and conditions": this is at the end of the "Examination of the Four Noble Truths" chapter of the Madhyamakaśāstra: "Therefore it is said in the sūtra: / If one sees the dharma of causes and conditions, / One is able to see the Buddha, / And see suffering, origination, cessation, and the path." The sūtra cited by the treatise is the Jñānālokālaṃkāra-sūtra, which will be fully cited at the tenth bodhisattva.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Because each contains two meanings, the word 'both' is used": this explains the above statement "cultivating both." That it says "each" specifically takes the upper half as contemplating marks and the lower half as contemplating benefits, constituting two meanings each, namely the other-dependent and the fully perfected, as listed in the commentary below. The lower negation of the agent also contains the other-dependent and fully perfected; thus this word "each" encompasses both the active and the passive, only then according with the statement of cultivating both across the two verses.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "First, completing the preceding": it specifically shows the characteristics of the two meanings; this is the meaning within the other-dependent. It first clarifies the contemplation of marks. Because the preceding verse negated the four active characteristics—briefly mentioning arising and cessation, which already includes abiding and change—this verse negates the characterized essence of physical and mental dharmas. Because the four characteristics combine to form the conditioned, the dharma itself arises from conditions and is thus without self-nature. The contemplation of benefits can be understood.