大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 1.34

1.34

From the commentary's "True and false interpenetrate, so that right in the ordinary mind one perceives the Buddha-mind" onward, it harmonizes the true and the false. The text contains two pairs: the first pair directly clarifies mutual fusion; the second pair [clarifies] that non-obstruction allows both to manifest simultaneously. Now, the first. The "true" means principle and the Buddha. The "false" means affliction and sentient beings, as well as saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. As for saying "interpenetrate," this means that the true encompasses the false branches, and the false penetrates to the true source; hence it is called "interpenetrate." It is like waves and wetness: there are no waves that are not wet, and there is no wetness apart from waves. If one were to discuss interpenetration, it would also be fitting to say that "right in the noble mind one perceives the ordinary mind," just as within wetness one sees waves; therefore the Tathāgata does not cut off the evil nature. Furthermore, sentient beings exist within the Buddha-mind, and so on. If one relies on this meaning, it would be fitting to say that the true and the false interpenetrate, and the ordinary and the noble mutually subsume each other. That it does not say so here is because: if one treats principle as harmonizing reality, then the true and the false mutually possess each other. But here, taking it from the standpoint that existence does not destroy characteristics, it only clarifies that the ordinary is identical to the noble because it is identical to the true; yet the noble is not identical to the ordinary, because it lacks afflictions. It is like waves being identical to wetness, whereas wetness is not necessarily identical to waves, because clear water exists. Therefore, when waves are spoken of in clear water, there is the nature of motion, but not the actual occurrence of motion. When wetness is spoken of within waves, both motion and wetness are present. Moreover, to say that an ordinary person is identical to a Buddha brings benefit to the ordinary person; but saying that a Buddha is identical to an ordinary person leads people to misunderstand. Therefore it merely says, "right in the ordinary mind one perceives the Buddha-mind." Now, as for the reason why the true and the false interpenetrate: it is because the two dharmas of the true and the false are the same one mind. Since the false grasps the true to come into being, there is no separate false; since the true becomes manifest in accord with the false, there is no separate true. The true and the false differ in name, yet have no dual essence. If outside the true there were the false, principle would not be all-pervasive; if outside the false there were the true, phenomena would have nothing to rely upon. However, it is sometimes said that the false is empty and the true exists, or that the false exists and the true is empty; both empty and both existent; both neither and both both—although there are many facets, all of them interpenetrate. What is the meaning of this? First, what dharmas are spoken of as true, and what dharmas as false? The true and the false inherently have two meanings: First, spoken in terms of the three natures, the perfected nature is true, the imagined nature is false, and the other-dependent nature extends across both the true and the false: its pure portion corresponds to the true, and its defiled portion is false. Second, spoken in terms of the two truths, the ultimate truth is true, and the conventional truth is false. There are many approaches to the two truths, which will be extensively explained below. For now, taking only the two approaches of principle and phenomena, principle is the ultimate truth and is true; phenomena are the conventional truth and are false. Even if phenomena belong to the pure portion, falsehood has not yet been exhausted. Question: Between the two dharmas of the true and the false, which is empty and which exists? As in the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra, if the imagined nature is taken as the false, then the false is empty and the true exists. If the defiled portion is taken as the false, then both the true and the false exist. If, as the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says, what is empty is what is called saṃsāra and what is not empty is called great nirvāṇa, then the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature is empty, while the pure portion and the perfected nature both exist. If relying on the Sanlun, because of the worldly truth there is existence, and because of the ultimate truth there is emptiness. If taking the false as the conventional truth and the true as the ultimate truth, then the false exists and the true is empty; if the two truths are spoken of in accordance with convention, then both the true and the false extend across emptiness and existence; if in accordance with "touching an object, it is entirely the middle," then the true and the false are both neither empty nor existent. Question: As for the interpenetration of the true and the false, what is its functioning characteristic? When it says "all of them interpenetrate," if clarified according to the characteristics schools, schools such as Vijñaptimātra cannot achieve interpenetration. Now, according to the Huayan, all the preceding meanings can interpenetrate, because they possess the preceding meaning of being identical to the one mind and so forth. For instance, taking the imagined nature as the false: existence in sentiment is non-existence in principle—this is the false penetrating the true; non-existence in principle is existence in sentiment—this is the true penetrating the false. If the defiled portion of the other-dependent nature is taken as the false: arising from conditions lacks self-nature—this is the false penetrating the true; lacking self-nature is brought about by conditions—this is the true penetrating the false. If spoken in terms of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa: saṃsāra is identical to nirvāṇa—this is the false penetrating the true; nirvāṇa is identical to saṃsāra—this is the true penetrating the false. Therefore the Madhyamakaśāstra says: "The actual limit of saṃsāra is the limit of nirvāṇa. The actual limit of nirvāṇa is the limit of saṃsāra. Between these two limits, there is not the slightest difference." This is interpenetration. Later in this sūtra it says: "With contention, one speaks of saṃsāra; without contention, one speaks of nirvāṇa. Both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are unobtainable." This is also the meaning of interpenetration as both empty and both existent. If relying on the two truths, taking the false as the conventional truth and the true as the ultimate truth: that which is called "interpenetrate" means being identical to the conventional and thereby true, and being identical to the true and thereby conventional. Therefore Master Ying said: "When their essential conclusion is unified, it brings together and integrates the two truths: through the ultimate truth, there is no existence; through the conventional truth, there is no non-existence. Because it is ultimate, there is no existence, yet though non-existent, it exists; because it is conventional, there is no non-existence, yet though existent, it is non-existent. Though existent it is non-existent, and so is not encumbered by existence; though non-existent it exists, and so is not stranded in non-existence. Quelling these extremes is therefore called the middle way." This is the interpenetration of the true and the false. "Because it is ultimate, there is no existence, yet though non-existent, it exists"—this is the true penetrating the false; "because it is conventional, there is no non-existence, yet though existent, it is non-existent"—this is the false penetrating the true. The rest can be deduced by reflection. If spoken in accordance with convention, the true and the false are fundamentally empty, so naturally they interpenetrate. If the true and the false are both true, then root and branch are of a single taste, so naturally they interpenetrate. If touching an object is entirely the middle, naturally they interpenetrate. Next, clarifying the reason for interpenetration. Question: The true and the false conflict with each other like water and fire. How can they interpenetrate? Answer: There are many reasons for this. First, because the two dharmas of the true and the false are the same one mind, being bound together by the one, they are therefore able to interpenetrate. Thus the Awakening of Faith says: "Relying on the dharma of the one mind, there are two kinds of gates: first, the mind as tathatā gate; second, the mind as arising and ceasing gate." Yet each of these two gates totally subsumes all dharmas exhaustively; because these two gates are not separate from each other, it is therefore said that they are not separate from the one mind, and thus they can interpenetrate. Second, because the false grasps the true to come into being, there is no separate false. This is also the import of the Awakening of Faith, the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, and others. Tathatā in concordance with conditions brings about all dharmas; hence the true penetrates the false. As for saying "the true becomes manifest in accord with the false, so there is no separate true": this is the false penetrating the true. If there were no false, in contrast to what would one speak of the true? Just as if there were no arising from conditions, there would be no absence of self-nature. Third, as for "the true and the false differ in name, yet have no dual essence": as cited above, "with contention one speaks of saṃsāra; without contention one speaks of nirvāṇa," and so forth, both being unobtainable, they are therefore non-dual in essence. Therefore the sūtra below says: "If one follows provisional names and grasps at these two dharmas, this is inverted and not the true meaning, and one cannot see the Rightly Awakened One." It clarifies that non-duality is the truth; how could this not be interpenetration? Fourth, "if outside the true there were the false, principle would not be all-pervasive" and the following, conversely establish the two meanings. This line is the true penetrating the false. Fifth, "if outside the false there were the true, the false would have nothing to rely upon": this is the false penetrating the true. This is also the doctrine of the Dharma-nature school: all dharmas are tathatā; how could there be the true outside the false? Tathatā pervades everything; how could there be the false outside the true? From this one knows that the true and the false always interpenetrate, yet do not destroy the characteristics of the true and the false. Thus the true that encompasses the false is true without being true, remaining clear and quiescent; the false that penetrates the true is false without being false, billowing forth like clouds.