大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 11

English (machine translation) 11

Language: English

11.1

Expounded by the śramaṇa Chengguan of the Da Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang in the Tang

The fourth is the door of mutual identity. In this there are three [parts]: first, directly explaining; next, the number of propositions; afterwards, citing proof-texts. In the first, when it says “relinquishing oneself to be identical with the other,” this is the meaning of mutual identity. In the mutual entrance above, this and that mutually persist. It is like two mirrors reflecting each other: it is explained merely in terms of the intersecting interpenetration of their dynamic functions. Now, this is explained in terms of having an essence or being devoid of essence; hence it says “relinquishing oneself.” Relinquishing oneself means having no essence of oneself. Being identical with the other means that the other has an essence. This is also like relinquishing the wave to be identical with moisture in the passage on the non-obstruction of phenomenon and principle. Subsuming the other to be identical with oneself means that the other is devoid of essence and oneself has an essence.

11.3

Where the Commentary says, “The one and the many are mutually identical, seamlessly unobstructed; the spheres of understanding and practice are distinct, with the six propositions as before,” this is secondly to evaluate the number of propositions. In this, the first phrase concludes what precedes. Containing four propositions, it should say: first, the one is identical with the many; second, the many are identical with the one; third, the one is also identical with the many and the many are also identical with the one, because of combining the above two; hence these three propositions are all the mutual identity of the one and the many; fourth, the one is not identical with the many, nor are the many identical with the one, which is also because the mutual identity of the one and the many mutually negates each other—meaning that because the one is identical with the many, the many are not identical with the one, and because the many are identical with the one, the one is not identical with the many, forming a proposition of mutual obliteration; fifth, it perhaps possesses all four of the preceding, because it is the sphere of understanding, clearly illuminating them together; sixth, it perhaps cuts off all five of the preceding, because it is the sphere of practice, where words are forgotten and conceptual thought is cut off. Where the Commentary says that the spheres of understanding and practice are distinct, this refers to the latter two propositions. However, in terms of the same class of phenomena, there is the mutual relation of one and many, as one flower petal relative to all petals, and so forth. If in terms of different classes, as a flower relative to a world-system and so forth, it can be understood by analogy with this. By analogy with the previous, there should also be four propositions, namely: first, the one is identical with the one; second, the one is identical with all; third, all is identical with the one; fourth, all is identical with all. Because here it is discussed only in terms of a single flower, it is omitted and not spoken of. Thus, when concluding with the analogy below, it covers all phenomena, making clear that it possesses all four. Or there should be six, because after these four propositions there are the spheres of understanding and practice. Again, there may be six, meaning that after the previous four propositions, one adds: the one is identical with the multi-one, and the many are identical with the one-many. Furthermore, it should make eight, adding: the multi-one is identical with the one, and the multi-one is identical with the many; but because these do not go beyond the previous four propositions, they are not listed by analogy. The many and the one being thus, large and small, long and short, and so forth are each mutually identical and can be understood by analogy. However, the Kandingji, discriminating the door of mutual identity, sets apart identical essence to form the quality of identity, and thus calls it mutual identity. According to this, their mutual relation is the mutual identity of an identical essence, because this essence is itself all phenomena. If so, then it is the door of relying on phenomena to reveal principle. The main intention of the present Commentary, however, is merely that the door of mutual identity encompasses the identity of an identical essence; the identity of an identical essence is merely that the one is identical with the many. Where the Commentary says “Below it states,” this is thirdly to cite proof-texts. This is the prose text of the “Chapter on the Ten Abodes.” In verse it says: “The one is identical with the many, the many are identical with the one; the text follows the meaning, the meaning follows the text. In this way all are mutually accomplished in turn; to those who do not regress, this should be explained.” Since it says “mutually accomplished in turn,” this is the mutual relation of different essences and different classes. The “Chapter on Inconceivable Phenomena” states: “All Buddhas know that all Buddha-words are identical with a single Buddha-word”; this is mutual identity of the same class. The “Chapter on the Initial Arousal of the Mind” states: “By arousing the mind, one is immediately equal in essence with all Buddhas of the three periods of time,” up to saying “true wisdom” and so forth; this shows the mutual identity between the higher and lower stages. The seventy-eighth fascicle states: “Maitreya addressed the great assembly, saying: ‘Virtuous sirs! The other bodhisattvas, only after passing through immeasurable hundreds of thousands of koṭis of nayutas of eons, are able to fulfill the bodhisattva practices and vows, and are able to approach the Buddhas and bodhisattvas. This elder’s son, within a single lifetime, is able to purify Buddha-lands, able to transform sentient beings, able through wisdom to deeply enter the dharmadhātu, able to accomplish the pāramitās, able to broaden all practices, able to consummate all great vows, able to transcend all māra-actions, able to serve all good friends, able to purify all bodhisattva paths, and able to fully possess all practices of Samantabhadra.’” This is the mutual identity of both practices and stages. Moreover, just as a bodhisattva pervades all without ever dividing their body, this is also the one being identical with the many.

11.4

In the fifth door, the door of the simultaneous establishment of the secret, the hidden, and the manifest, the text of the Commentary is divided into four: first, directly explaining; second, the number of propositions; third, citing proof-texts; fourth, illustration by metaphors. In the first, where it says “the flower can contain that” and so forth, it also follows upon what precedes, because above it spoke of subsuming the other to be identical with oneself. If one subsumes the other and the other is manifest, that is the door of mutual entrance. If one subsumes the other and the other is exhausted, that is the door of mutual identity. If one subsumes the other and the other is neither exhausted nor manifest, that is the door of the hidden and the manifest. This has already been reconciled in the previous enumeration of names. Therefore, the Zhixiang Ten Mysteries states: “Just like ten coins: when the one contains the ten, the one is called manifest, and the two, three, up to ten are called hidden. It is also like seeing this and not seeing that: that is called hidden, and this is called manifest. It is also like the person of a single individual: when the six familial relations are viewed relative to one another, although each is different, each is fully obtained, yet without confusion. Because of this, the essences of the hidden and the manifest have no before or after and do not obstruct one another; it is named the simultaneous establishment of the secret.” Where the Commentary says “the manifest and manifest are not simultaneous” and so forth, it is because if the manifest were simultaneous there would be no hidden, and if the hidden were simultaneous there would be no manifest; hence they cannot be co-present. Yet the hidden and the manifest are simultaneous; hence they can be simultaneously established. Because the hidden and the manifest are unobstructed, it is called secret.

11.5

As for the commentary's "totally subsuming and mutually annihilating, co-persisting and co-vanishing both being established," this is the second [part], sorting out the number of propositions. "Totally subsuming" constitutes the first two propositions: this totally subsuming that means this is manifest and that is occult, which is the first proposition; that totally subsuming this means that is manifest and this is occult, which is the second proposition. "Both being established" is the third proposition: when this is precisely subsuming that, it does not impede that subsuming this, hence there is both occultation and manifestation. "Annihilating" is the fourth proposition: when this subsumes that and becomes manifest, this is precisely that subsuming this and thus not manifest, so manifestation is annihilated; when that subsumes this and becomes occult, this is precisely this subsuming that and thus not occult, so occultation is annihilated. Therefore it is neither occult nor manifest. "Co-persisting" means that the four propositions are all established, which is the cognitive realm of understanding. "Co-vanishing" means that the five propositions are all cut off, which is the realm of practice. The phrase "both being established" summarizes the six propositions above. As for the commentary's "Below it says entering correct concentration in the east...", this is citing proofs. Entering correct absorption in the east is manifest; arising from concentration in the west is occult, because one only sees entering concentration and does not see arising from it. The ancient Ten Mysteries also say: "Entering correct concentration in the eye-faculty is manifest; arising from samādhi in visual form is occult." By this analogy, the rest can be known. As for the commentary's "Like the moon on the eighth day...", the fourth [part] uses an analogy for clarification: taking the bright part as manifest and the dark part as occult, which must occur simultaneously, hence it is said to be "both established," unlike the fifteenth day which is exclusively manifest, or the final day of the lunar month which is exclusively occult. Furthermore, the dark part is not devoid of brightness, and the bright part is not devoid of darkness; it is merely that where brightness is manifest, darkness is occult, and where darkness is manifest, brightness is occult, so it can also be termed "occultation and manifestation both being established." It is also like the verse in the Yāma [Heaven]: "In all places of the ten directions, all claim the Buddha is right here; some see him in the human realm, some see him in the heavenly palaces." Thus, the place where he is seen is manifest, and the place where he is not seen is occult; it is not that the Buddha is not omnipresent. The "Chapter on the Ten Concentrations" says: "Some see the Buddha's body measured at seven cubits, some see the Buddha's body measured at eight cubits, some see the Buddha's body measured at nine cubits, up to seeing the Buddha's body measured as worlds of ineffable-ineffable Buddha-kṣetra dust motes." Thus, when seven cubits are seen, the seven cubits are manifest and the other measurements are all occult. Other manifestations follow this analogy. Hence that analogy says: "Just like the lunar disc: people of Jambudvīpa see its form as small, yet it does not diminish; those dwelling within the moon see its form as large, yet it does not increase." Explication: Seeing it large means the large is manifest and the small is occult; seeing it small means the small is manifest and the large is occult; yet there is neither increase nor decrease. This is secret simultaneous accomplishment. All other phenomena can be known analogously. Lady Māyā said: "In this one place I am the Bodhisattva's mother, and throughout the three-thousandfold world system I am likewise the mother. Yet this body of mine neither abides in a single place nor abides in multiple places." This also conveys the meaning of occultation and manifestation. Being the mother in this place means this is manifest and that is occult, and so forth. "Neither abides in a single place" is one occultation, by analogy with many manifestations; "nor abides in multiple places" is many occultations, by analogy with one manifestation. It is also the proposition of dual negation and mutual annihilation, the secret meaning of being neither occult nor manifest. However, if considered in terms of wisdom and illusion, it belongs to the portal of karmic functioning; if considered in terms of the accomplishment of the ultimate stage, it belongs to the portal of virtuous characteristics.

11.6

Sixth is the portal of subtle inter-containment and establishment. Within this there are two parts: first, directly clarifying; second, citing proofs. In the former, "blazing brightly and simultaneously appearing": "blazing brightly" means clear and manifest. It is like a lapis lazuli vase containing many mustard seeds, which are seen all at once through the vase. However, the term "subtle" has three meanings overall: First, subtle in terms of what is contained: just like the mustard vase, because a hair-pore can receive those lands, while those lands cannot pervade the hair-pore. A hair, considered in accord with nature, is like the lapis lazuli vase; a land, considered in terms of retaining characteristics, is thus like the mustard seeds inside. Second, subtle in terms of what contains: because a single hair or a single dust mote can contain them, as cited in the proofs below. Third, subtle in terms of being difficult to comprehend: a dust mote is not enlarged, nor is a land diminished, yet it can expansively contain them—this is the meaning of being difficult to comprehend. One being able to contain many is called "inter-containment." Furthermore, because each and every phenomenon is like this, it is called "inter-containment." The one and the many are not destroyed, hence it is called "establishment." As for the commentary's "Below it says, 'Within a single dust mote...'", this is citing proofs. Two passages are briefly cited: the first is from the Jin translation of the sūtra. As for "And at the tip of a single hair there are ineffable Tathāgatas," the Tenth Dedication says: "Within a single hair-pore, all are clearly seen: / Inconceivably numerous, limitless Buddhas. / All hair-pores are likewise so, / Universally paying homage to all Lamps of the World." This is that passage. However, these two passages strictly concern only virtuous characteristics. Fascicle 68 says: "Within each and every hair-pore, countless lands appear individually," etc., which belongs to the portal of karmic functioning. Furthermore, the monk Megha (Deyun) said: "Abiding in the subtle portal of mindfulness of the Buddha, at the tip of a single hair there are ineffable Tathāgatas appearing, and I go to all their locations to serve them." Thus it applies to both virtuous characteristics and karmic functioning. The Ninth Dedication says: "That bodhisattva, within a single thought-moment, manifests each of the ineffable thought-minds of all sentient beings." This belongs to the portal of karmic functioning. Among the ten subtle realms, it applies to both virtuous characteristics and karmic functioning. However, the Kanding ji split this subtlety into two portals: the third is called the virtue of inter-presence, and the ninth is called the virtue of subtlety. And it distinguishes them itself: "This is not the same as the prior meaning of inter-presence. That is based on different essences and different virtues looking toward each other and being mutually present; this is simply that the phenomenon itself possesses all, blazing brightly and manifesting simultaneously." If so, are all phenomena herein phenomena within the dharmadhātu, or are they distinct and inherent within a single phenomenon? If they are phenomena within the dharmadhātu, they are identical to inter-presence; if they are distinctly inherent, are they provisional manifestations or are they real? If provisional manifestations, then they are subsumed under the portal of karmic functioning, because he posits karmic functioning and virtuous characteristics as distinct; within virtuous characteristics there would then be no subtlety. If they are real, how do they differ from the portal of simultaneous complete correspondence? Therefore he himself explicates the subtlety portal: "This portal may also be called the universal portal. In fascicle 71, the night goddess Śāntasumanasamudra said to Sudhana: 'This liberation is precisely the universal portal, because within a single phenomenon one universally perceives all divine transformations.'" Since it is called the universal portal, it is identical to the portal of simultaneous complete correspondence. If one says that it only subsumes all phenomena of the same category: as in the ten subtleties, each of the eight phases contains the remaining seven phases, so how could it require the same category? Moreover, within a single dust mote, all phenomena abide vast and unhindered. Clearly we know that inter-presence is precisely subtlety; for this reason the ancient masters had the phrase "inter-containment." Even if this did not subsume it, it would be subsumed under the portal of mutual entrance, as explained previously. Thus we know that the new formulation contains many confusions. Even if there are minor differences, they are all subsumed under the original portals; the ten portals are sufficient.

11.7

Seventh is the portal of the realm of Indra's net. The commentary's text is divided into four: first, directly explaining its characteristics; second, explaining its name through an analogy; third, citing texts to prove and establish it; fourth, reiterating with an analogy for clarification. First: a single flower or a single dust mote, because it accords with nature, can subsume everything. The remaining dust motes and remaining phenomena also all accord with nature; how could there be any single phenomenon that does not subsume? One should contrast a dust mote with other dust motes to delineate layer upon layer, wishing to make it easy to see. For now, let us speak of one dust mote in relation to other dust motes. The lands contained within a single dust mote are also formed by gathering dust motes; these dust motes capable of forming [lands] must also accord with nature, and since the dust motes accord with nature, they must also contain lands. The lands contained within the second layer are also formed by gathering dust motes; the dust motes again accord with nature and must also contain lands. The dust motes of the third layer contain lands of the fourth layer; the dust motes of the fourth layer contain lands of the fifth layer. Layer upon layer of dust motes form, layer upon layer they accord with nature, inexhaustible and infinite, just like mirrors and lamps. Therefore the commentary text below again raises mirrors and lamps to illustrate Indra's net, allowing ordinary understanding to see what is near and know what is far. As for the commentary's "Like the Lord of Heaven...", this is the second [part], explaining its name through an analogy. Among the ten portals, only this one receives its name from an analogy. If established in terms of phenomena, it should be called the portal of infinite layered appearance. Within a single jewel, all phenomena suddenly appear, just as within a single dust mote all dharmas suddenly appear. But only when a single jewel appearing in multiple jewels is layered does it fulfill the meaning of "layer upon layer." The jewels are all clear and pure, like dust motes according with nature. A single jewel appearing in multiple jewels is like a single dust mote manifesting multiple lands and dust motes. The reflected jewels can again reflect images, just as the lands and dust motes within a dust mote again manifest lands; layer upon layer of images shine brightly, layer upon layer they mutually reflect, thus reaching infinity. As for the commentary's "Below it says, 'Like the worlds of Indra's net...'", this is the third [part], citing proofs. This is the text on the vow of service in the First Ground: "Again making a great vow: 'May all worlds—vast and limitless, coarse and subtle, chaotically positioned, inverted, or upright, whether entering or moving, coming or going, diverse like Indra's net, immeasurably varied in the ten directions—be clearly understood by wisdom, known and seen directly.'" The commentary (śāstra) explains: "'Diverse like Indra's net' refers to the characteristics of true meaning, aiming to clarify that because they constantly accord with true reality, they cannot be exhausted." Furthermore, the "Chapter on Incalculables" says: "The lands in a single dust mote are ineffable; / As with one, all are likewise so. / If these ineffable Buddha lands / In a single thought were crushed to dust, they would be ineffable. / Thought after thought crushing them to dust is likewise so, / Enduring through ineffable kalpas constantly thus. / These dust motes contain ineffable lands; / To explain these lands becoming dust is even harder," etc. The "Chapter on Inconceivable Phenomena" says: "The Buddhas have ten kinds of knowledge, exhausting all phenomena without remainder." The tenth says: "The Buddhas know all differentiations within the dharmadhātu like Indra's net, exhausting them without remainder," etc. This concerns virtuous characteristics. In terms of karmic functioning, the "Chapter on Samantabhadra's Samādhi" says: "All lands manifested by the Buddha's body, and all the dust motes possessed by these lands—within each and every dust mote there are Buddha-kṣetras as numerous as the dust motes of an ocean of worlds; within each and every land there are Buddhas as numerous as the dust motes of an ocean of worlds; before each and every Buddha there are Samantabhadra Bodhisattvas as numerous as the dust motes of an ocean of worlds." This is also the meaning of layer upon layer. However, the Kanding ji opens from this a seventh virtue of complete inexhaustibility, stating that each self-essence is inexhaustible, like ripples on water. This is different from Indra's net being mutually present layer upon layer, but simply possesses inexhaustibility within its very essence. Moreover, it is also different from subtlety: subtlety concerns multiple phenomena appearing simultaneously within one, whereas this concerns each and every one being inexhaustible. The "Chapter on Wondrous Adornments" says: "The Buddha's body universally pervades all great assemblies, / Filling the dharmadhātu without exhaustion." It also says: "That bodhi tree constantly emits wondrous sounds, / Expounding various dharmas without end." A verse on the Ten Abodes says: "Wishing to fully expound a single phrase of the Dharma / For incalculable kalpas without exhaustion, / Yet making the texts and meanings each distinct: / With this, the bodhisattva initially generates the mind [of awakening]." Fascicle 65 states: the upāsikā Guṇā (Juzu) produces from a small vessel all requisites, food, and drink, completely inexhaustible, yet without diminution. He himself explains: this clarifies the mastery of essential virtue, not karmic functioning such as liberation. The reason the ancient masters did not split it is that the inexhaustibility of a single layer and the inexhaustibility of layers mutually regarded are identically inexhaustible. If subtle simultaneous appearance appears throughout the dharmadhātu, and the dharmadhātu is inexhaustible, then subtlety is also inexhaustible. Even if it gives rise to inexhaustibility, it does not go beyond the dharmadhātu. If analyzed in detail, there are not without minor differences, but grasping its general import, it simply takes inexhaustibility. Therefore, relying on the ancient masters, it is not divided into two. As for the commentary's "Also like...", the fourth [part] reiterates with an analogy for clarification. Because the principle of layered appearance is profound and hard to fathom, and the analogy of Indra's net is not seen in physical form by worldly people, near matters are used to illustrate the distant purport.

11.8

Eighth is the gate of displaying phenomena to reveal the Dharma and generate understanding. The text of the commentary has three parts: first, directly explaining; next, distinguishing confusion; third, citing proof. Now, for the first part: since it says 'it is the inexhaustible dharmadhātu,' we clearly know that this is none other than the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon. When the ancients established the seventh gate of 'complete endowment of the inexhaustible,' it was not different from this.

11.9

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'It does not mean relying on this to separately signify something else': the second part distinguishes confusion, which means distinguishing [this from] other teachings where phenomena signify meanings. In those teachings, it is merely one phenomenon that signifies one Dharma, like robes signifying endurance, or a room signifying compassion and loving-kindness. Now it is explained that a single phenomenon is itself the Dharma and itself the person, is itself the environment and itself the primary [sentient being], and is endowed with inexhaustible virtues, because it is produced from inexhaustible causes.

11.10

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'As the text below says: "This canopy of flowers..."' and so forth: the third part cites proof. This is in the 'Ascending to the Tuṣita Heavenly Palace' chapter. There are three passages there, containing four meanings. In the first passage, the text has ten clauses, explaining that multiple causes accomplish multiple fruits; that is, it juxtaposes multiple causes and further speaks of multiple fruits. Hence the sūtra says: 'The assemblies of bodhisattvas, hundreds of thousands of koṭis of nayutas of ineffable numbers, who formerly dwelt in the Tuṣita Palace, are produced from the Dharma that surpasses the three realms, produced from the practices free from all defilements, produced from the all-pervading unhindered mind, produced from the profound Dharma of upāya, produced from immeasurable and vast cognition, produced from firm and pure faith, produced from increasing inconceivable roots of goodness, accomplished through generating asuṃkhyeyas of skillful transformations, manifested through the mind that makes offerings to the Buddha, and sealed by the gate of the unconditioned Dharma.' Explanation: The above presents the causes in full. Below it says, 'They bring forth offerings that surpass all the heavens to make offerings to the Buddha'—this speaks of the multiple fruits. Next are eight clauses where one cause accomplishes one fruit. The sūtra says: 'With all jewelled canopies produced from the pāramitās, all flower curtains produced from the pure understanding of all Buddha-realms, all robes produced from the anutpattikadharmakṣānti, up to all jewelled palaces where the Buddha dwells produced from the joyful mind that understands all phenomena to be like a dream.' Since anutpattikadharmakṣānti only produces robes and so forth, it is said that one cause only produces one fruit. Afterward there are nine clauses where one cause accomplishes multiple fruits. That is, it merely adduces the non-arising [insight] as the cause, which generally produces all fruits. Hence the sūtra says: 'Because of the nine clouds: all jewelled lotus clouds produced from unattached roots of goodness and unproduced roots of goodness, all firm fragrance clouds, all boundless-colored flower clouds,' and so on, there should also be multiple causes accomplishing one fruit. This is subsumed under the first passage, meaning that multiple causes each accomplish [a fruit], as in collectively accomplishing one canopy, collectively accomplishing one robe, and so forth. Now, when considering multiple causes accomplishing one fruit, any single robe is then the canopy and the rest, because those diverse accomplishments of multiple causes are together upon the single robe; hence, any single phenomenon is the inexhaustible dharmadhātu. How much more so since each such phenomenon accords with nature, they are all therefore the inexhaustible dharmadhātu, merely designated under one meaning or another! For instance, to manifest the meaning of venerable and perfect clarity, it is called a jewel. If speaking of sovereignty, it is called a king. If for moistening and benefiting, it is called a cloud, and so on. Thus, the Golden World is the fundamental nature; Maitreya's tower is the Dharma-gate; and the Brahman Jayoṣmīya's mass of fire and mountain of swords are the non-conceptual prajñā cognition, and so forth—all of these are such phenomena. Therefore, because each and every phenomenon is endowed with inexhaustible Dharmas, the established virtue of complete endowment of the inexhaustible does not go beyond this.

11.11

Ninth is the gate of the distinct accomplishment of separated phenomena in the ten time-periods. In the commentary there are three parts: first, directly explaining; next, citing proof; last, distinguishing confusion. Now, for the first part: the distinct divisions of the three times are called 'separated phenomena.' Yet their being mutually present in one another is 'distinct accomplishment.' However, the text of the commentary merely formulates the ten time-periods. In saying 'the three times each have three' and so on, this is formulated by grasping the intended meaning, which is the intention of the 'Transcending the World' chapter. The text says: 'A bodhisattva has ten ways of speaking of the three times. What are the ten? They are: speaking of the past in the past, speaking of the present in the past, speaking of the future in the past; speaking of the past in the present, speaking of equality in the present, speaking of the future in the present; speaking of the past in the future, speaking of the present in the future, speaking of inexhaustibility in the future. Moreover, the three times [and] a single thought-moment together make ten times.' When speaking above of 'inexhaustibility,' this is the future of the future; wishing to display endlessness, it is called 'inexhaustibility.' The 'present of equality' is the present of the present; because it can be seen with one's eyes and is analogous to the past and future, it is called 'equality.' Not mentioning a single thought-moment, it is also called subsuming the nine times back into a single thought-moment, hence it is called 'ten times.' However, if following the older explanation, it is like using five days to make nine times: the first, second, and third days are the past three times; the middle second, third, and fourth days are the present three times; the later third, fourth, and fifth days are the future three times. The meaning corresponds precisely to being on the third day: looking forward one takes two, and looking back one takes two, so there are five days. This accomplishes the meaning of three sets of three times; seemingly, moving forward it lacks the essence of nine times, and stepping back it exceeds the number of three times. Now, we merely use the mutual dependent origination of the three times, and that easily accomplishes nine times; being inseparable from a single thought-moment, they make ten times. That is to say, as the present exists because of the past and future, the present already contains the past and future; since phenomena arise from causes, they are not different from their causes. The other two, having two causes each, can be known by analogy with this. This is the chapter on time in the Madhyamakaśāstra refuting clinging to time by establishing the fallacy of infinite regress. Now, having nothing to cling to, that fallacy is transformed to accomplish dependent origination according with nature, as is explained at length in the commentary on the 'Transcending the World' chapter.

11.12

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Because time has no separate essence' and so forth: this brings out the reason for the interpenetration of the ten times. For example, seeing flowers blossom, one knows it is fragrant spring; lush growth and fruiting, one knows it is radiant summer; withering and falling is autumn; storing away is winter—all four seasons are known through things.

11.13

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'The Jin sūtra' and so forth: this cites proof. That the Jin sūtra is cited without explanation is because the text is obvious. 'And so forth' includes the subsequent half-verse: 'Neither long nor short, / The sphere of practice of liberated beings.' This corresponds to the 'Practices of Samantabhadra' chapter of the present sūtra, as cited below.

11.14

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'The Practices of Samantabhadra says: "The future within the past, the present within the future..."' and so forth: 'and so forth' includes the latter half-verse: 'The three times are mutually seen, / Each and every one clearly distinct.' This is identical to the verse from the Jin sūtra cited just before. Preceding this verse, the text has another verse saying: 'Immeasurable, countless kalpas / Are understood to be a single thought-moment; / Knowing that the thought-moment is also non-thought, / One thus sees the world.'

11.15

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Immeasurable kalpas are a single thought-moment, a single thought-moment is immeasurable kalpas': this is from the 'Merits of the First Aspiration' chapter of the Jin sūtra. The present sūtra says: 'Ineffable kalpas are equal to a single thought-moment; a single thought-moment is equal to ineffable kalpas.' In saying 'and so forth,' it includes other sūtras. Passages of this kind may all be cited as proof. For example, in the 'Ten Grounds' chapter, the tenth ground says: 'The bodhisattva knows the cognition of entering various kalpas, namely that one kalpa enters multiple kalpas, multiple kalpas enter one kalpa,' up to saying, 'long kalpas enter short kalpas, short kalpas enter long kalpas,' and so forth.

11.16

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Because time has no separate essence, it is not separately established as a support': the third part distinguishes confusion. This is because the Kanding ji does not accept the ten times as a profound gate. Its point is: because time is one among the ten phenomenal essences of support. If long kalpas enter short kalpas and so on, it is merely the gate of mutual entrance. If saying long kalpas are identical to short kalpas, it is the gate of mutual identity; hence, one knows that the ten times are not a separate profound gate. This also has its rationale. The ancient intention was that the other ten pairs have attainable essences that can serve as supports; time exists in reliance on phenomena and has no separate self-essence, so how could it serve as a support for others? Moreover, because non-Buddhists hypothesize time to be eternal, it is not retained as a phenomenal essence. For this reason, following the ancients, it is separately established as a profound gate.

11.17

Tenth is the gate of host and companion being perfectly clear and endowed with virtue. The text of the commentary is divided into three: first, directly explaining; second, citing proof; third, repeatedly explaining by analogy. Now, for the first part: 'Principle does not arise in isolation'—this is the reason for host and companion. Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'As the text below says: "This flower has..."' and so on: the second part cites proof, which is the passage on receiving the position in the Ten Grounds. The text says: 'Its final samādhi is named Receiving the Superior Office of All-Knowledge. When this samādhi manifests before one, a great jewelled lotus suddenly appears. That flower is vast, in measure equal to a million trichiliocosms.' Below, after praising its virtues at length, it says: 'There are lotus flowers in number like the dust motes of ten trichiliocosms that serve as its retinue.' This is the retinue of flowers. Again, in the 'Manifestation of Marks' chapter, from between the Buddha's brows emerges the bodhisattva Superior Sound, who appears simultaneously with immeasurable retinues—this is the retinue of persons. The Buddha emits light from between his brows, with immeasurable hundreds of thousands of koṭis of lights as its retinue—this is the retinue of light. Furthermore, the dharmadhātu sūtra has sūtras in number like dust motes of Buddha-lands as its retinue—this is the retinue of Dharma. Thus, each and every one has a retinue. If looking from other sūtras toward this, they are merely retinues, not hosts and companions. Now, speaking of retinues, it considers phenomena within the present sūtra as retinues; retinues are companions, and thus this proves host and companion. Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Also, like one direction being the host...' and so forth: this is also an interpretive citation of the sūtra text explaining host and companion in terms of directions. For example, when Bodhisattva Dharmamati in this direction expounds the ten abodes, bodhisattvas from the other directions all come to bear witness, saying: 'In the presence of our Buddhas this Dharma is also expounded, its phrasing and principle being no different from this.' This is the meaning of host and companion.

11.18

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Therefore host and host, companion and companion...' and so forth: the third part repeatedly explains by analogy. That is, when Dharmamati of this direction is the host, he cannot be a companion; when the Dharmamatis of the ten directions are companions, they cannot be hosts. Therefore, when this one is the host, he cannot see those [others] as hosts; when those are hosts, this one must be a companion, so they also cannot see this one as the host. Hence it says, 'Host and host, companion and companion, do not see one another.' In saying, 'Host and companion, companion and host, then can see one another': this direction as host and that direction as companion see each other; this direction as companion and that direction as host then see each other. If the meaning of host and companion is accomplished, then it is perfectly clear and endowed with virtue. The rest is as explained in the Jiaoji chao.

11.19

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Adducing the flower being already thus...' and so forth: the third part concludes with analogies to establish the benefit. In it are two parts: first, adducing one to analogize the rest; last, concluding by encouraging cultivation and its benefit. In the former, the text has four segments: first, using the flower to analogize phenomena; second, using phenomena to analogize other supports; third, using supports to analogize the gates that rely [on them]; fourth, concluding with multilayeredness extending to inexhaustibility. Now, for the first part, there are again two sections: first, directly explaining. Using the phenomenon of the flower to analogize other phenomena, hence it says that adducing the flower being already thus, phenomena like a single dust mote are also like this. Next, regarding 'As this phenomenal flower already bears simultaneously...' and so forth: this classifies and concludes them into gates. That is, the extensive explanation above of the ten gates is spoken solely in terms of phenomena, meaning that upon the phenomenon of the flower it explains all phenomena simultaneously complete, phenomena vast and narrow unhindered, phenomena one and many mutually containing, phenomena one and many mutually identical, up to host and companion; hence it says, 'as this phenomenal flower already bears the ten meanings such as simultaneous completeness.' Next, regarding 'and these phenomena and the like are endowed with the other ten gates of teaching, etc.': this means that upon phenomena there is the simultaneous completeness of teaching and meaning, the vastness and narrowness of teaching and meaning, the oneness and manyness of teaching and meaning, the mutual identity of teaching and meaning, up to the host and companion of teaching and meaning, which again makes twenty. First, the simultaneous completeness of realm and cognition, vast and narrow mutual containment, up to host and companion, again makes thirty. Third, the simultaneous completeness of practice and stage, vast and narrow, up to host and companion, makes forty. Fourth, cause and fruit simultaneously complete and corresponding, etc., makes fifty. Fifth, environment and primary sentient being; sixth, essence and function; seventh, person and Dharma; eighth, adverse and favorable; ninth, resonance and response—each having simultaneous completeness and so on, adding up to one hundred gates. Hence it says, 'and these phenomena and the like being endowed with the other ten gates of teaching, etc., makes one hundred gates.'

11.20

In the commentary, from "Since phenomena are thus" downward, is the second [section]: taking phenomena as the basis to draw the analogy to the other nine bases, such as teaching. That is, since phenomena already have a hundred gates, secondly, teaching and meaning constitute a hundred gates; thirdly, object and cognition constitute a hundred gates; and so on up to stimulus and response, which all possess a hundred gates; hence there are one thousand gates.

11.21

In the commentary, from "Just as teaching, meaning, and so forth have these one thousand gates" downward, is the third [section]: taking the based-upon dharmas to draw the analogy to the based-thereon profound gates, likewise forming one thousand gates. That is, previously the based-upon essential phenomena were taken as primary; now the based-thereon profound gates are taken as primary. Namely, within the gate of simultaneity, simultaneous teaching and meaning, simultaneous phenomenon and principle, simultaneous object and cognition, and so on up to simultaneous stimulus and response are possessed; hence there are ten gates. Within the gate of simultaneity, the broad and narrow and so forth are possessed. Those broad and narrow and so forth possess broad and narrow teaching and meaning and so forth; hence they form one hundred gates. Secondly, the broad and narrow possessing one hundred gates is an analogy drawn from simultaneity. Thirdly, the gate of mutual containment possesses one hundred gates; fourthly, the gate of mutual identity possesses one hundred gates; and so on up to the tenth gate of master and companion possessing one hundred gates; hence one thousand gates are formed. However, those latter thousand are not different from the former thousand; they merely take each other alternately as primary and thereby form differences. Furthermore, previously, distinguishing between the general and particular, the gate of simultaneity possessed the nine gates below it, while the nine gates below it did not possess simultaneity. Now, speaking in terms of inseparability, one is able to make the nine gates, on the analogy of the former simultaneity, likewise possess nine gates, forming two thousand gates.

11.22

As for the commentary's "If one takes them layer upon layer, it also reaches the inexhaustible": this is the fourth [section], concluding that they are inexhaustible. Saying "takes them layer upon layer" means that, just as within the first gate ten are possessed, taking one among the ten, this one must also possess ten, possess a hundred, and possess a thousand, because of their inseparability. Since the one is thus, each ten of the thousand gates is likewise of this meaning and category, thus possessing ten thousand. Taking any one from among the ten thousand, it also possesses ten thousand. Just as one thousand coins together form a conditioned arising: taking one coin as the head, it then possesses one thousand; the rest are also like this, so there are a thousand thousands. Taking any one from among the thousand thousands, it also possesses a thousand thousands; therefore it reaches the inexhaustible. Furthermore, regarding "layer upon layer": because within one phenomenon there are many phenomena, within one object there are also many objects, and within one cognition there are again many cognitions, and so forth; entering and interpenetrating with one another, they are also inexhaustible.

11.23

In the commentary, from "Regarding these ten gates" downward, is the second [section]: concluding by exhorting practice to gain benefit. Because this is the inexhaustible Dharma gate of virtuous characteristics, which only the superior cognition of the realm of the universal eye can enter, one should diligently practice it, and it will certainly bring great benefit.

11.24

Second, the causes of virtuous functions. The commentary text is divided into three: first, a general explanation through questions and answers; second, from "First, mind-only" downward, an individual explanation according to each gate; third, from "Due to the above ten causes" downward, a general conclusion on what they pertain to. In the first part there are four: 1. putting forth the headings of the chapters and gates; 2. from "Question: for what reasons?" downward, positing a question to introduce [the topic]; 3. from "Answer: the causes are vast and difficult to explain" downward, listing the numbers to give a general answer; 4. from "Taking any one among the ten" downward, generally reconciling and integrating them. Within this there are three: first, generally indicating the function; next, from "Among the ten, the first six" downward, discerning their distinctions—meaning that the former ten profound gates pervade both virtuous characteristics and karmic functions, whereas now presenting their reasons, there is universality and limitation; third, from "The former ten gates" downward, reconciling and integrating virtue and function, refuting divergent interpretations. That is, because the Kanding ji separately established two kinds of ten mysteries—virtuous characteristics and karmic functions—now this is reconciled and integrated, clarifying that there is only a single layer which inherently contains virtue and function, without needing to divide them into two. Within this there are two: first, an individual explanation; afterward, a conclusion. In the former part there are also two: first, using mutual integration to explain that they are not two separate things; afterward, integrating defilement and purity to distinguish the mutual blending of the two. Now for the first: first, two sentences set forth the premise; afterward, from "Regarding the Buddha" downward, explains it. That is, the function upon the Buddha's essence is itself the virtuous characteristic. For example, having the function of vocal speech and eloquence is the characteristic of the one possessing virtue. If it causes sentient beings to perceive identification and entrance without obstruction, the characteristic is named function.

11.25

In the commentary, from "The characteristic that is itself function" downward, is the second: reconciling defilement and purity to discern the mutual blending of the two. This is also because the Kanding established two distinctions, saying: "Virtuous characteristics are purely pure, whereas karmic functions extend to defilement." That is, causing sentient beings to make the Buddha's body and so forth; hence it extends to defilement. Now it is clarified that in the Buddha's virtuous characteristics, both characteristics of defilement and purity are exhausted, yet they manifest defiled functions, because function is identified with essence. In the lion throne, the dwelling places and houses of sentient beings are suddenly manifested; how could virtuous characteristics not be able to manifest defiled sentient beings? If the characteristic did not manifest, how could there be the subtle gate? The subtle suddenly manifests all defilements and purities, yet manifests them as constantly empty, like images in a mirror; hence it says "mutual blending." Furthermore, mutual making and mutual entering were absent in that [treatise's] virtuous characteristics. Now it is clarified that naturally, they constantly enter and are constantly able to make. As in the simile of the sunlight in the valleys and on the mountains in the "Chapter on the Ten Samādhis", although they are able to mutually illuminate, it is either said that the sunlight goes out between the seven mountains, or said that the sunlight enters between the seven mountains. With such exiting and entering, it is serenely unmoving, constantly entering and exiting. Must it depend on facing an audience to have entrance? Mutual making is precisely the meaning of mutual identity; its meaning is as integrated above.

11.26

In the commentary, from "Therefore characteristics and functions are not divided into two separate things" downward, is the second: the conclusion. It is not that the two meanings of virtue and function are not distinguished, but rather that two kinds of ten mysteries are not separately established; there is only a single ten mysteries that pervades both virtue and function.

11.27

As for the commentary's "Like the water of the great ocean having its entire essence become waves": the mind is able to transform objects, and the objects must resemble the mind. Since the mind is unobstructed, objects are also unobstructed. How much more so when manifested by the true mind, distinct from the deluded mind, the true Dharma is replete with virtues; therefore, they can identify with and enter one another, layer upon layer without obstruction. Saying "its entire essence" means that the whole of the true becomes the deluded.

11.28

As for the commentary's "Dharmas have no fixed nature" and so forth: within the text there are three: first, a direct explanation in terms of large and small; next, citing scriptural evidence; third, drawing analogies to explain the remaining dharmas. Now for the first. As for the commentary's "What difficulty is there?": because a small dust mote contains the large and is yet like empty space, and an expansive land contains the small and is yet like a small dust mote. A vast dust mote contains a small land, so there is no difficulty.

First 28 of 74 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese