大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 86.11

86.11

「四如響對」，亦唯通喻。新經別喻云「譬如空谷，隨聲發響。悟解自心，隨念見佛。」釋曰：此唯一義，則法身如空谷，自心如發聲，見佛如響應。而疏釋經通相之喻，心佛皆響，故兩句釋之：初喻佛如響，則谷等同上。後「以佛為緣」下，喻心如響，則以自性清淨心為空谷；佛應為聲，起見佛心即如響也。故疏結云「此但總喻緣成之義」。然亦聲谷皆喻緣成之義，聲谷皆緣喻二心為緣而有佛響，二佛為緣而心得見，故上二皆響。而上四喻皆言對者，雖喻有三法，本但喻於心佛二故。上之四喻皆具四觀：一正喻唯心、二唯心故空、三唯心故假、四唯心故中。融而無礙即《華嚴》意。若皆具四，何用四喻？兼別義故。一欲廣唯心無性等故。二從增勝說，四義不同，謂夢喻不來不去、影喻不出不入、幻喻非有非無、響喻非合非散。又夢喻散心意，言分別故；水喻定心，同靜水故；幻喻起用心，如幻術故；響喻勝劣，心隨念見故。又前三喻喻見佛身，後一兼喻聞法。三中，夢喻法身，但有想見竟無見故；影喻報身，相明淨故；幻喻化身，隨意成故。又幻喻是心作佛，影喻是心是佛，夢喻諸佛正遍知海從心想生，響喻隨心勝劣見佛有異。具上諸意，四喻不同，故上疏云「別喻唯心兼明不出入」等。

"Fourth, the counterpoint of the echo" is also solely a general metaphor. The specific metaphor in the new translation of the sūtra states: "Just as in an empty valley an echo resounds following a voice, one realizes one's own mind, and following thought sees the Buddha." Explanation: Here there is only one meaning: the dharmakāya is like the empty valley, one's own mind is like the utterance of the sound, and seeing the Buddha is like the response of the echo. However, the commentary explains the sūtra's general metaphor [by taking] both the mind and the Buddha as echoes, and thus explains it in two sentences: First, illustrating the Buddha as like an echo, the valley and so forth are the same as above. Later, under "taking the Buddha as the condition," it illustrates the mind as like an echo, taking the inherently pure mind as the empty valley; the Buddha's response is the sound, and the arising of the mind that sees the Buddha is then like the echo. Therefore the commentary concludes, "This merely illustrates the general principle of being formed by conditions." However, the sound and the valley also both illustrate the principle of being formed by conditions: sound and valley being both conditions illustrates that with the mind as a condition there is the Buddha-echo, and that with the Buddha as a condition the mind attains seeing; thus both above are echoes. Now, the above four metaphors are all termed "counterpoints" because, although the metaphors contain three phenomena, they fundamentally illustrate only the two: mind and Buddha. The above four metaphors all possess four contemplations: first, directly illustrating mind-only; second, being empty because of mind-only; third, being provisional because of mind-only; fourth, being the middle [way] because of mind-only. Blended and unimpeded, this is the intent of the Avataṃsaka. If all possess the four, why use four metaphors? It is because they additionally convey specific meanings: First, to broadly expound that mind-only is devoid of inherent nature and so on. Second, speaking in terms of preeminence, the four meanings differ: the dream illustrates neither coming nor going; the reflection illustrates neither exiting nor entering; the illusion illustrates neither existence nor non-existence; the echo illustrates neither joining nor dispersing. Furthermore, the dream illustrates the scattered mind, because its mental words are conceptualizations; the water illustrates the concentrated mind, being identical with still water; the illusion illustrates the mind that gives rise to function, being like magical arts; the echo illustrates superiority and inferiority, because the mind sees according to its thoughts. Furthermore, the first three metaphors illustrate seeing the Buddha's body, while the latter one additionally illustrates hearing the Dharma. Among the three, the dream illustrates the dharmakāya, because it is merely an imagined perception and ultimately devoid of seeing; the reflection illustrates the saṃbhogakāya, because its characteristics are bright and pure; the illusion illustrates the nirmāṇakāya, because it is formed according to will. Furthermore, the illusion illustrates that this mind creates the Buddha; the reflection illustrates that this mind is the Buddha; the dream illustrates that the ocean of right and universal knowledge of all buddhas arises from mental ideation; the echo illustrates that seeing the Buddha differs according to the superiority or inferiority of the mind. Possessing the above diverse meanings, the four metaphors differ; hence the commentary above states, "The specific metaphors illustrate mind-only while additionally explaining neither exiting nor entering," and so on.