大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 12

English (machine translation) 12

Language: English

12.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Chengguan of the Da Huayan Temple on Mount Qingliang of the Tang

Regarding the fourth, the gateway of the interfusion and penetration of the dharmatā: this means that since tathatā is endowed with virtues exceeding the sands of the Ganges, the phenomena produced from it are likewise endowed with inexhaustible virtues; because the true dharmatā interfuses and penetrates all phenomena, they are unobstructed. Within the text there are two parts: first general, and later specific. Within the general there are two: first, in distinguishing the incorrect, it means that if principle and phenomena stand in mutual opposition, the mutual non-obstruction among phenomena cannot be attained. Thus we know that whoever says: "Sumeru originally does not exist, / The mustard seed has always been empty; / Bringing emptiness to contain what does not exist, / Where would they fail to accommodate each other?"—such words are simply inappropriate.

12.3

Regarding the commentary's "Now, principle and phenomena..." and following: the second reveals the correct. Within this there are also two parts: first it marks out and raises [the point], and then from "means that a single phenomenon not different from principle..." downward, it specifically shows its characteristics. Within this there are four: (1) Explaining in the regular order. Because all phenomena rely upon principle, none are separated from principle. Now a single phenomenon completely subsumes principle, and therefore it brings all phenomena to enter into this single phenomenon. (2) From "If within one it does not subsume principle completely..." downward, establishing through the counter-case. This means that if it does not subsume principle completely, then the true principle could be divided, which would incur the error of there being one principle, two principles, or even multiple principles. Now, the true principle is serene and clear, and therefore cannot be divided; it is of one flavor and impartial, and therefore there are not two principles. If, to avert this error, one says that it subsumes principle completely, but the multiple phenomena do not enter into the single phenomenon, then the phenomena that do not enter would lie outside principle, which would cause principle to be separated from phenomena and to enter into a single phenomenon on its own, while phenomena, being separated from principle, would not come inside the single phenomenon. However, if there were phenomena separate from principle, phenomena would become fixed natures; if there were principle separate from phenomena, principle would be equivalent to annihilation, and the error would be even graver. (3) From "Now, since within a single phenomenon..." downward, the third concludes and establishes the correct doctrine. Since it is free from the error of being divisible, it completely subsumes principle entirely. Furthermore, there is no error of phenomena and principle being separated from each other, so phenomena follow principle and are manifested in a single phenomenon all at once. (4) From "Huazang..." downward, citing proof-texts, which can be understood.

12.4

Regarding the commentary's "This is the overall purport, yet specifically it also possesses the ten profound gateways": this is the second part, explaining specifically. Within this are two parts: first concluding what precedes and introducing what follows, and later, from "First, since the true principle and all phenomena..." downward, directly revealing the meanings of the specific characteristics of the ten gateways. From "all are established relying on the specific virtues of tathatā" downward: in the eighth pariṇāmanā, it explains that tathatā is endowed with virtues of a hundred gateways. Here it briefly raises fourteen kinds of virtues to establish the ten profound gateways. (1) The virtue of "for instance, tathatā and all phenomena are mutually congruent and do not abandon one another" establishes the first gateway of simultaneous complete congruence. (2) The two virtues of "for instance, because the nature of tathatā is constantly impartial, it is broad" and "for instance, because tathatā universally subsumes all phenomena, it is narrow" establish the gateway of broad and narrow. (3) The virtue of "being nowhere absent" establishes the gateway of mutual entering. (4) The two virtues of "for instance, tathatā is not separated from all phenomena" and "shares its essential nature with all phenomena" establish the gateway of mutual identity. (5) The two virtues of "for instance, tathatā has no divisions or limits" and "constantly preserves its original nature" establish the gateway of concealment and manifestation. (6) The virtue of "for instance, tathatā universally subsumes all phenomena" establishes the subtle gateway. (7) The virtue of "ultimately inexhaustible" establishes the Indra's net gateway. (8) The virtue of "for instance, tathatā shares its essential nature with all phenomena" establishes the gateway of relying on phenomena. (9) The two virtues of "pervading daytime and nighttime" and "pervading years and kalpas" establish the gateway of the ten periods. (10) The two virtues of "the nature constantly according" and "constantly being in mutual congruence with all phenomena" establish the gateway of host and companion. The commentary implicitly uses the intention of the sūtra; comparing the sūtra text with the commentary, there is not the slightest discrepancy. Even where it does not cite the complete sūtra text, the meaning is still present. In the text it first specifically explains the ten gateways, and later, that the one principle interfuses and penetrates. "The ten gateways are complete" is the conclusion. The text can all be understood. In the fifth [section], regarding "like an illusion or dream," there are two parts: first illusion, and later dream. In the former, first the simile, and later the application. In the former, first the correct explanation, and later, from "The sūtra says..." downward, citing proof-texts. This Jin sūtra's "Chapter on the Chief of the Wise" and others cite the lower line: "The power of illusion is sovereign and gladdens the world." The present sūtra states: "For example, a magician knows magical techniques / And can manifest all kinds of immeasurable things, / In an instant displaying days, months, and years, / Prosperous cities, and great peaceful bliss," and so forth. The "Chapter on the Conduct of Samantabhadra" says: "For example, a skilled magician / Manifests all kinds of things; / Their coming is from nowhere, / And their going reaches nowhere. / The nature of illusion is not measurable, / Nor is it immeasurable; / In that great assembly / He manifests the measurable and the immeasurable," and so forth. Fascicle forty-two says: "O sons of the Buddha! For example, a magician accomplishes it by holding dhāraṇī-spells, being able to manifest all kinds of distinct physical forms." The spell is distinct from the illusion yet capable of producing the illusion; the spell is merely sound, yet it can magically produce various visual forms cognized by visual consciousness, and so forth. The "Chapter on the Ten Ksāntis" says: "For example, an illusion is neither an elephant nor a horse, neither a chariot nor a foot-soldier, neither a man nor a woman, neither a boy nor a girl," down to saying, "neither one nor different, neither broad nor narrow, neither many nor few, neither measurable nor immeasurable, neither coarse nor subtle, and is not any of the various diverse things. The diverse is not the illusion; the illusion is not the diverse. Yet due to the illusion, all kinds of distinct things are manifested." Passages such as these are found in more than one place. The commentary's "Because all phenomena are produced by the illusion of karma, oneness and difference are unobstructed" is the application. The "Chapter on the Huazang World" says: "Just as a magician's incantation arts / Can manifest all kinds of things, / Due to the karmic power of sentient beings, / Lands are inconceivable." This clearly shows that karma is compared to the magician. Also, as a verse in the Madhyamakaśāstra states: "For example, a magically created person / Again creates a magically created person. / As for the initial magically created person, / This is called karma; / That which the magically created person creates / Is called the fruition of karma," and so forth. Also, the "Chapter on the Ten Ksāntis" says: "O sons of the Buddha! This bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows that all phenomena are entirely like illusions, arising from causes and conditions; within a single phenomenon he understands multiple phenomena, and within multiple phenomena he understands a single phenomenon," and so forth. In a verse it says: "Sentient beings and lands / Are created by various karmas; / Entering into the realm of illusion, / Therein there is nothing to cling to." Another verse says: "All karmas are produced from the mind, / Therefore the mind is said to be like an illusion. / If free from this discrimination, / All destinies of existence are universally extinguished." This then reveals that karma itself is like an illusion. It also says: "Delivering all sentient beings, / Causing them to know that phenomena are like illusions. / Sentient beings are not different from illusions; / Realizing the illusion, there are no sentient beings," and so forth. Its passages are not one. Regarding the commentary's "The words 'like a dream'" and following: the commentary text is divided into two: first the simile, and later citing a treatise for proof, which serves as the application. In the first part, the words "what is seen is vast, yet has not left the pillow": in the sixty-fascicle sūtra, the simile of wandering in a dream to the heavenly palace states: "For example, suppose someone in a great assembly falls into a deep sleep and rests peacefully, suddenly dreaming of seeing the great city Sudarśana atop Mount Sumeru where Śakra dwells," down to saying, "that person sees himself wearing heavenly robes, dwelling, stopping, and roaming everywhere in that place. Although all the people in that great assembly are in the same place, they do not know and do not see. Why is this? Because what is seen in the dream is not something that great assembly can see." Explanation: The heavenly palace is vast; how could it have left the pillow? The rest can be understood by analogy with this. An ancient said: "For a brief moment upon the pillow in a spring dream, / One traverses several thousand li of Jiangnan," and so forth; this also means time does not depart from an instant. The "Chapter on the Conduct of Samantabhadra" says: "Fully comprehending all worlds / As nominal designations devoid of reality; / Sentient beings and the worlds / Are like dreams and like shadows and reflections; / Toward all worldly phenomena / One does not give rise to discriminative views. / If one is free from discrimination, / One also does not see discrimination. / Immeasurable, incalculable kalpas, / When understood, are just a single thought-moment; / Knowing that the thought-moment is also without thought, / Thus does one see the world. / Immeasurable lands / In a single thought-moment are all transcended; / Passing through immeasurable kalpas, / One does not depart from one's original place," and so forth. Such sovereignty is entirely due to being like a dream. Therefore the "Chapter on the Ten Ksāntis" says: "For example, what is seen in a dream / Are all kinds of different characteristics; / The world is also like this, / Not different from a dream." It also says: "For example, what is seen in a dream, / Forms such as long and short." Passages such as these are found in more than one place; because like a dream long and short are immediately devoid of length and shortness, they do not obstruct long and short.

12.5

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Therefore the treatise says: 'In a dream one thinks years have passed, yet upon waking it has only been an instant,'" and so forth: secondly, this adduces proof, which then serves as the application of the metaphor. This is what was cited in fascicle six of Asabhāva's Mahāyānasaṃgraha-[śāstra], where it simply says "as a verse states"; hence it is indeed citing a sūtra. Examining the Records of the Western Regions, it says: "In the past, there was a recluse who built a hut and secluded himself. He broadly studied magical arts and plumbed the spiritual truths, being able to turn tiles and gravel into jewels and alter the forms of humans and animals. Yet he was not yet able to ride the wind and clouds to accompany the immortals. Reviewing diagrams and investigating antiquity, he further sought the arts of the immortals. He heard its method: 'The state of the spiritual immortals is an art of long life. When one desires to seek its study, one must first settle one's resolve. Construct an altar-precinct and order a courageous man of unbending will to hold a sharp blade and stand at the corner of the altar, holding his breath and severing speech from dusk until dawn. The seeker sits in the center of the altar, gripping a long sword with his hands and chanting spiritual mantras with his mouth, withdrawing sight and reversing hearing; when dawn arrives, he ascends to immortality.' Having obtained this immortal method, this man sought such a courageous man, searching for many years without fulfilling his wish. Later he found a courageous man who had previously labored bitterly for another person for five years; one day he committed a transgression, was immediately beaten and flogged, and received nothing, wandering the roads weeping aloud. Seeing him, the recluse invited him to travel together. Coming to the thatched hut, by the power of his arts he conjured an abundance of fine delicacies. Afterward, he ordered him to enter a pool to bathe, and clothed him in new garments. Furthermore, he gave him five hundred gold coins, saying: 'Whenever you run out, come and ask; please do not treat me as a stranger.' From that time forward, he repeatedly gave him generous gifts. Secretly practicing hidden benevolence, he stirred his heart; the courageous man begged to devote his life to repay him who recognized his worth. The recluse said: 'I have sought a courageous man for many years, and fortunately encountered you. Your extraordinary appearance corresponds to the diagram, for no other reason than that I wish you to remain silent for a single night.' The courageous man said: 'I would not decline even death, let alone merely holding my breath!' Thereupon they set up the altar-precinct, and, receiving the immortal method, were about to conduct their affair, sitting and waiting for dusk. After dusk, each attended to his duties: the recluse chanted the spiritual mantra, and the courageous man gripped the sharp blade. Just as dawn was about to break, he suddenly cried out loudly. At that time, fire fell from the sky, and smoke and flames billowed up like clouds. The recluse rushed swiftly and led this man into the pool to escape the disaster. Afterward he asked: 'I admonished you to make no sound. Why did you cry out in shock?' The courageous man said: 'After receiving your command, toward midnight I became dazed as if in a dream, and strange events arose anew. I saw my former master come in person to express gratitude; feeling indebted to his deep kindness, I endured it and did not speak to reply. That man became furious, and I was subsequently killed. I then took an intermediate state (antarābhava) body; sighing as I looked upon myself, I still vowed to remain silent across lifetimes to repay your deep virtue. I then saw myself being reborn into a great Brahmin family in South India, and up to taking rebirth in the womb, I experienced every suffering and adversity, yet bearing your kindness and virtue, I endured it and did not speak. When it came to receiving an education, capping, marriage, the death of parents, and giving birth to a son, each time I remembered your former kindness, I endured it and did not speak; my family members, relatives, and kin all regarded it as strange. Having passed the age of sixty, I had a single boy. My wife said to me: "You may speak now! If you do not speak, I shall kill your son." At that time, I considered: a lifetime has already separated us; seeing myself aged and frail, I have only this tender child. Wishing to stop my wife and prevent the killing, I spontaneously let out a cry.' The recluse said: 'It was my fault; this was harassment by māras.' The courageous man was moved to lamentation; grieved that the matter was unfulfilled, he died of rage and resentment." This, then, without even half a night passing, had already traversed two lifetimes, to say nothing of months and years! Cases of this kind are exceedingly numerous; hence we know that time, place, and so forth are all masterfully unhindered, just as in a dream.

12.6

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Sixth, as images and reflections," and so forth: the text also has two parts: first, a direct explanation, and second, adducing proofs. In the former, regarding the metaphor of the mirror and reflection, the mirror is not the reflection and the reflection is not the mirror, so [the reflection] does not possess the capacity of the mirror. This merely takes the reflection to illustrate the meaning of nature-emptiness and insubstantiality. Here, taking the mutual identification and interpenetration in sovereign mastery, it explains that everything possesses both meanings of mirror and reflection. Therefore, the Commentary concludes by saying "like mirrors mutually illuminating," meaning that upon each and every phenomenon there is both mirror and reflection. Where the Commentary says "The sūtra below states," and so forth, it is the "Chapter on the Ten Forbearances." There it says: "Yet all sentient beings know that in this place there is this reflection appearing, and they also know that in that place there is no such reflection. Although distant objects and near objects both appear as reflections, the reflections do not follow the objects in being distant or near. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this, able to know one's own body and other bodies as all being the cognitive sphere of wisdom, not generating a dual understanding of one's own and other bodies being different, yet in one's own lands and in other lands, in each and every distinction, appearing everywhere simultaneously." The explanation says: If it were not like a reflection, how could they appear simultaneously in all places? Therefore, citing the words "distant and near," the intention is to capture sovereign mastery. The verse says: / "Like a reflection in the water, / Neither inside nor outside. / The bodhisattva seeking bodhi / Understands that the world is not worldly; / Neither abiding in nor leaving the world, / Like a reflection appearing in the world. / Entering this extremely profound meaning, / Those free from defilement are clear and penetrating; / Not abandoning the mind of original vow, / Universally illuminating with the lamp of wisdom. / The world has no boundaries, / Wisdom enters them all equally; / Universally transforming all multitudes of beings, / Causing them to abandon all attachments." / The explanation says: If one does not comprehend that it is like a reflection, how could one universally enter the boundless world? Seventh, "unlimited causes" means that because the causes are many and the virtues far-reaching, cause and fruit correspond to one another. Even if one cultivates only a single cause of dependent origination, in the fruit there is already the unobstructedness of dependent origination; how much more so when there are unlimited causes, and the boundless ocean of practices is fully cultivated in its entirety? How much more so when each and every practice is itself inexhaustible—for example, the single gate of loving-kindness possesses dust-mote numbers of buddha-lands; how much more so for the other gates! In the Commentary, "contemplation of non-nature and so forth" means: first, it is nearly equal to the four above, namely the contemplation of manifestation by mind alone, the contemplation of the mutual fusion of dharmatā, the contemplation of being like an illusion and a dream, and the contemplation of being like images and reflections, along with being able to equalize the contemplation of the non-nature of dependent origination; therefore it comprehensively gathers the previous six. In the causal stage, the bodhisattva engages in all these contemplations, contemplating phenomena as mind alone, and so on up to contemplating phenomena as like images and reflections; thus, one uses these six contemplations to encompass all phenomena. That is, whether defiled or pure, whether the insentient realm or the sentient body, whether cause or fruit, whether of the same kind or different kinds, whatever is subsumed by phenomena, one uses the six contemplations to pervade them all; therefore, when bringing about the fruition, it is as sovereign and unobstructed as in the six contemplations. Second, it is equal to all remaining causes: matching what is known by the Buddha and practiced by Samantabhadra, all inexhaustible causal gates throughout the ten directions and the three times are all subsumed within this gate; hence it says "and the remaining immeasurable, supreme causes." Their great vows and pariṇāmanā are cultivated in accordance with the dharmadhātu, and also pervade all causes in the dharmadhātu. "Now corresponding to the fruit that has arisen" means being the fruit obtained in accordance with the causes of the past. Eighth, "the Buddha's ultimate realization": in the text there are two parts: first, a direct explanation. Simply having attained buddhahood, by the nature of things it is capable of being so. Where it says "The sūtra says," and so on, it adduces proof. "Incomparable merit" is precisely the Buddha's virtue. The "Chapter on Samantabhadra's Practices" says: "The diverse names / Of the world and the Tathāgata, / Though spoken of for immeasurable kalpas, / Cannot be exhausted. / How much more so the most supreme wisdom / And the Dharmas of all Buddhas of the three times, / Born from the dharmadhātu, / Pervading the Tathāgata ground!" This clarifies that the virtues and functions of the Buddha ground cannot be fully expressed. Moreover, a later verse states: / "Among them, the lions among men / Cultivate the various practices of the Buddha, / Attaining equal and perfect awakening, / Manifesting all forms of sovereign mastery." / This also clarifies that because causes are rounded out and fruits are perfected, there are great functions. The former is the characteristic of virtue, while this is the functioning of activity. Ninth, in "functions of profound samādhi," first there is the direct explanation. The words "ocean-seal samādhi and so forth" refer to what is below in the sixty-first fascicle, briefly explaining one hundred gates of samādhi, and the five hundred samādhis in the Da zhidu lun, and so forth. Below "Chapter of Xianshou," it adduces proof. The reason it says "and so forth" has two meanings: first, it merely includes the remaining text of this verse, which says: "Within one, universally manifesting inconceivable lands; / In that single dust mote, numerous lands, / Some with buddhas, some without buddhas, / Some mixed and defiled, some pure, / Some vast, some narrow," and so on, which is the sovereign mastery manifested by samādhi. Second, it includes other sūtras, namely the verse immediately preceding that one, which says: / "The physical forms of sentient beings are each different; / Their karmic activities and voices are also immeasurable. / All such things are able to be manifested / Through the mighty spiritual power of the ocean-seal samādhi." / Passages such as this are not found in just one place. From the Commentary's stating, "Due to the ten causes above," downward: thirdly, it summarizes what it belongs to, precisely concluding with universal pervasion and containment, because it is the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon. Encompassing the previous three, they are all the scope of the One Vehicle of the Distinct Teaching.

12.7

In the fourth [section], on the faculties of beings addressed by the teaching, there are two parts: first, general; second, specific. In the former, the beginning takes up what precedes to introduce what follows; from "If explaining..." downward, it evaluates and determines in terms of the Dharma.

12.8

From the Commentary's stating, "Now, directly revealing," downward is the second part, specific. Therein, it first marks out the two gates, and from "In the former" downward, specifically explains their characteristics.

12.9

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Grasping the meaning according to the sound has five faults": this is the text in the Daśabhūmika-śāstra explaining the scope of the exposition. The treatise says: "First, improper faith, because generating understanding according to words does not correspond to reality. Second, falling back from vigor, because one cannot forget characteristics and advance toward the real truth. Third, deceiving others, because one speaks to people based on one's own mistaken understanding. Fourth, slandering the Buddha, because one points to one's own mistaken understanding as what the Buddha taught. Fifth, disparaging the Dharma, because one interprets profound purports with shallow and proximate understanding." The text below explains this in full. In the Commentary, "The sūtra below says, 'Even if there were a bodhisattva,'" and so forth refers to the "Chapter on the Manifestation [of the Tathāgata]," as cited previously. "The devaputra in hell" refers to the "Chapter on the Accompanying Auspicious Signs." "The great ocean and the kalpa fire" refers to the "Chapter on the Ten Grounds." Hence its verse states: / "Even if abiding in the ocean water or the kalpa fire, / One who is worthy of receiving this Dharma will surely hear it." / This is it. In the Commentary, "It is termed 'concurrent' in terms of those who have not yet awakened and entered" resolves an external objection. It is feared that someone might object: "Since there is the benefit of sudden transcendence, they are the primary audience; why call them concurrent?" The intention of the resolution is evident.

12.10

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Because the ultimate fruit of the provisional teaching lacks real phenomena": as there are five teachings, only in the Perfect Teaching do both cause and fruit possess real phenomena; in the previous four, they exist in the cause, but when reaching the fruit, they are completely absent, because by cultivating provisional causes, if one enters the grounds, one then enters the real. It is just as hundreds of rivers surge for thousands of miles and also have no ultimate destination of their own, because their ultimate destination is the sea.

12.11

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Or in the Dharma assembly being deaf and blind," and so forth: this explains their manifested characteristics. There are roughly two categories: the former refers to the five hundred [śrāvakas] in the original assembly or manifested on the path; the latter refers to the six thousand monks at the beginning of the final assembly.

12.12

In the fifth [section], "distantly intended [recipients]," the text of the Commentary has four parts: first, establishing the principle and directly explaining it; second, adducing proofs from "Chapter on the Manifestation [of the Tathāgata]" downward; third, reconciling and explaining from "the former three are not vessels" downward; fourth, clarifying that evil beings are what is intended from "Furthermore, that chapter..." downward. The first one is self-evident. The second is the text on the benefit of seeing and hearing in that chapter. From where the Commentary states "The former three are not vessels" downward is the third part, reconciling and explaining: first, lacking faith; second, opposing the true; third, contradicting reality. The first one is precisely wrong view, whereas the second and third are not wrong views, yet are both categorized under wrong views. Wrong views are of two kinds: first, light; second, heavy. The first one is a deep and heavy wrong view; the second and third are shallow and proximate wrong views, meaning that anything that opposes the true and contradicts reality is a wrong view. Moreover, because the sūtra only singles out two places, and wishing to match the former non-vessels completely, they are combined into wrong views. The fourth non-vessel refers to the previously mentioned narrow and inferior two vehicles. Now, the fourth and fifth: among those intended, the fourth is the provisionally intended, and the fifth is the distantly intended; these two have never been loathed or abandoned.

12.13

In the commentary, from "Furthermore, in that chapter" downward, the fourth [section] explains that the wicked are [also] those for whom [the teaching is expounded]. Within this there are two [parts]: first, it directly explains that it is for the wicked; afterward, it infers [from this] to bring out the complete interpenetration. The former also has two: first, citing two sūtras to explain that it is for the wicked; second, citing two sūtras to explain that all equally possess the nature. In the former, first it says "that chapter," which refers to the tenth text, on the benefits of seeing and hearing. The sūtra says: "Sons of the Buddha! I now tell you: even if there are sentient beings who see or hear the Buddha, yet, wrapped and obscured by karmic hindrances, do not produce faith and joy, they nevertheless plant roots of goodness and none pass by in vain, ultimately even entering into nirvāṇa." The commentary says: "That is to say, although one falls into the evil destinies through slander..." downward, explaining and establishing the above meaning. Since slandering also brings benefit, should one slander? The explanation states: It is for the sake of long-term benefit, not that there is no guilt. Therefore, the devaputras of the hells [went there] because through slander they fell into hell. In the Lotus Sūtra, those who slandered the Bodhisattva Sadāparibhūta underwent immense suffering in Avīci for a thousand kalpas, and only after their guilt was exhausted did they receive the teaching and transformation of Sadāparibhūta. We pray that later students do not, upon seeing the benefit of slander, immediately generate slander. Furthermore, in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, the sin of slandering the Dharma is extensively explained: falling from this world into Avīci, when the kalpa of this world is destroyed and the sin is not yet exhausted, one is transferred to Avīci in another world; when that world's kalpa is destroyed and the sin is still not ended, one is transferred again to another world. In this way, touring through the Avīci hells of the ten directions, each passing through the destruction of kalpas, one is reborn again into the Avīci hell of this world; even when a thousand Buddhas appear in the world, rescuing them is still difficult. If one wished to speak of the bodies they receive, those who heard it would vomit blood and die. Therefore, when Subhūti requested [the Buddha] to speak of the bodies they receive, the Buddha ultimately did not speak of it; thus we know that slandering the great vaipulya sūtras must not be taken lightly. Furthermore, the first verse of the Mahāyānāvatāra-śāstra says: "Slandering the Mahāyāna Dharma, / one is certain to go to evil destinies. / That this person receives karmic retribution / is spoken by genuine cognition. / Reborn and falling into hell, / great fires blaze upon the body, / burning with extreme suffering and pain, / karmic retribution for sins causing this to be so. / Blazing great iron ploughs, / fully five hundred in number, / plough upon their tongues, / pulverizing the body with pain and suffering." Therefore the commentary says: "Although one falls into the evil destinies through slander..." As for the commentary's phrase "by what was heard passing through the ears," it means that after the punishment in the evil destinies is completed, because at the time of previously slandering [the Dharma] it passed before the eyes and through the ears and perfumed [them] into a seed, they therefore obtain the benefit. The words "in the end naturally awaken" refer to the fifty-eighth [fascicle of the] sūtra, which says: "Only because they had previously generated bodhicitta, in the end they naturally awaken." As for the commentary's "It also says, like the sun it also provides..." and so on, the prose text in the physical karma section of the "Appearance" chapter is extensive, so now a verse will be cited. The verse says: "Just as one blind from birth does not see the sun, / yet the sunlight still provides benefit for them, / causing them to know the seasons and take food and drink, / forever freed from many afflictions, body at peace. / Faithless sentient beings do not see the Buddha, / yet the Buddha also brings about profit and benefit for them; / hearing the name and touching the radiant light, / through this they even realize bodhi"—this is it.

12.14

In the commentary, from "Also, like the ocean waters flowing covertly" downward, two sūtras are cited to explain that the nature is equally possessed: the first explains complete possession; the second explains that all see it. Both sūtras are within the mental karma section of the "Appearance" chapter, and were also cited previously.

12.15

As for the commentary's "All these show that there is the nature abiding in its own nature..." and so on, the second [part] directly establishes the principle to reveal the marks of being reached by complete interpenetration. It adduces an analogy to explain it; however, there are two points of intent. First, adducing the former to infer the latter, it explains universal salvation: if merely relying on sentient beings equally possessing Buddha-nature they are still all universally acted for, how much more so with the unimpededness between phenomena and phenomena—how could there be any who are not reached? Second, adducing the latter to infer the former: regarding complete interpenetration, where the one is identical to the all, then insentient objects are also that which is reached; how much more so the former, where they equally possess Buddha-nature—how could they be excluded? As for saying that the insentient are reached: because the sentient who are reached are identical to the insentient. The one is identical to the all; how could the insentient not be the sentient? How much more so since the nature of form and the nature of cognition originally have no two essences, for there is no insentient outside of the sentient. Contemplate this.

12.16

In the fifth [topic], the shallow and deep of the teaching's essence, the text of the commentary is divided into three: first, a general [presentation]; next, particular [explanations]; finally, the conclusion. The general [presentation] also has three: first, bringing it forward. As for the words "shallow and deep," among the ten essences, the preceding ones are shallow and the succeeding ones are deep; therefore the explanation below says: "from shallow to deep." Although there are shallow and deep, through interpenetration and harmony they are all together the inexhaustible essence of the teaching. Second, from "First, sound" downward, listing the names, which will become clear in the text itself.

12.17

In the commentary, from "Among the ten, the first five" downward, the third [part] is the critical discernment. In total there are four tiers. First is the discernment of essence and nature. Marks are adduced outwardly, while the nature presides inwardly; "essence" is the common designation for both nature and marks. If one speaks of essence, it runs through both phenomena and principle. If one speaks of nature, it is exclusively regarding principle. Because among the latter five [essences], the objects subsumed are mind-only, if regarded from the true mind, it then runs through nature; because the true essence entered in the seventh is precisely the nature; because the principle in the eighth is the nature; because the ninth necessarily has the principle interpenetrating phenomena; and because the tenth lacks nothing. Thus, regarding the nature it is both essence and nature; regarding phenomena it can only be called essence. Second, from "Furthermore, the first four" downward, is the discernment between the Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna, which can be understood. Third, from "The first seven" downward, is the discernment between the triyāna and the ekayāna. Because gathering conditions to enter reality and returning to the one true principle is precisely the ekayāna. The lower three are all the ekayāna, which can be understood from the meaning. Fourth, from "The first eight are regarded in terms of the shared teaching" downward, is the discernment of the mutual contrast between the shared teaching and the distinct teaching. That is to say, although the seventh and eighth are the ekayāna, the seventh mostly clarifies the meaning in the sudden teaching, and the eighth is the meaning in the final teaching, so they belong to the shared teaching. The first eight are all shared, which can be understood from the meaning. The shared teachings all have them, so phenomena and phenomena are unimpeded, and the oceanic reflection brightly appears. Were it not for the distinct teaching of the ekayāna, there would be no such meaning. Regarding the latter three tiers of discernment, the preceding lack the succeeding, and the succeeding encompass the preceding, as can be understood.

12.18

In the commentary, from "Regarding the first three" downward, the second [main part] is the particular explanation. Within this there are two: first, jointly explaining the first three; afterward, separately explaining the latter seven. Now, the first: because they are shared in common by the Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna, they are explained jointly. Within this there are three: first, presenting both; next, explaining both; finally, synthesizing both.

12.19

In the commentary, from "As for the three of the Hīnayāna" downward, the second [part] explains both. First, explaining the Hīnayāna, in which there are two: first, a general interrogation; from the commentary's "First, it says" downward, the second is the particular explanation; the three explanations constitute three distinct [views]. Now, the first: "Verbal karma is the essence" is the proposition; speech is sound. From "meaning the Buddha's spoken words" downward, it particularly shows its marks, meaning calling out, phrasing, judging, discussing, and expounding. As for the words "vocal sounds," this refers to such as gong, shang, jue, zhi, and yu, and also like the fourteen sounds of the Western regions—that is, the falling-rising tone of a, the departing tone of a, and so forth. As for the words "path of speech," this is the locus where speech travels. The Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle ninety-three, says: "The figurative designation of sentient beings is precisely the path of speech." However, the Yogācārabhūmi explains figurative designation with two meanings: first, it says that figurative designation is names, and names can denote and express, superior to [mere] speech; second, it says there are those who say the mental consciousness is called figurative designation. Now the Hīnayāna does not take names, but properly uses the mental consciousness as the locus where speech travels, as well as the lips, tongue, and so forth. As for the words "verbal karma," it has karmic function. Just as evil words are the function of evil karma, the Buddha's good words are the function of good karma. Therefore the "Brahmacarya Chapter" says: "If speech is brahmacarya, then brahmacarya is vocal sound, breath, the movements of the lips, tongue, throat, and mouth, intonation, high and low, clear and turbid." This is vocal sound and the path of speech. It also says: "If verbal karma is brahmacarya, you should know that brahmacarya is inquiries into daily life, concise expounding, extensive expounding, expounding through parables, direct expounding, praising expounding, censuring expounding, expounding according to convention, expounding through establishment, and expounding with clarity." This is verbal karma. As for the words "verbal intimation," intimation is also karma; however, karma has the distinction of intimation and non-intimation, which is why here it only speaks of intimation. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle one hundred and twenty-six, also says: "It is only called verbal intimation and not non-intimation because it causes others to generate correct understanding, and is that which is apprehended by auditory consciousness. Furthermore, it is apprehended by two consciousnesses, while non-intimation is only one. Furthermore, for three incalculable kalpas [the Buddha] sought this intimation." The commentary's "this is called the Buddha's teaching" concludes and directly brings out its intent. Now, knowing the essence of the teaching, why call it the "Buddha's teaching"? First, because it is based on the root; second, because it is based on resemblance; third, because it is based on concordance. The Buddha spoke based on these four factors—the groups of names, phrases, and syllables—and now one also follows this.

12.20

In the commentary, from "Its names and phrases" downward, it discriminates the factors. It also resolves difficulties. Therefore, in that treatise there is naturally the objection: If so, as stated sequentially, how is it to be reconciled? That is, as stated: What dharmas are named as the Buddha's teaching? Namely, the groups of names, phrases, and syllables, sequentially arrayed, sequentially laid out, sequentially combined, and so forth. To answer this objection, the treatise therefore has this reconciliation. This objection merely repeats the text of the subsequent passage, which is why the commentary abridges it.

12.21

In the commentary, "Second, names and so forth are the essence" and so on is the proposition. From "Meaning the group of names" downward, it lists the names. From "Sequentially" downward, it explains the marks. Sequentially explains the three designations above: arraying applies to names, laying out forms phrases, and because syllables are that on which both rely, it says combined. The distinct marks of names and so forth will be explained immediately below.

12.22

In the commentary, from "Sound only" downward, it discriminates the factors. It also resolves difficulties. That is, the treatise asks: If so, how is what is stated in this text to be reconciled? As stated: How is the Buddha's teaching answered? Meaning the Buddha's words, calling out, phrasing, judging, and discussing, vocal sound and the path of speech, verbal karma and verbal intimation: this is called the Buddha's teaching. To answer this objection, the treatise therefore has this reconciliation. This is also because this objection merely repeats the preceding text, so the commentary abridges it. From "Sound is only reliant upon an indirect cause" downward, the treatise has an analogy: Just as with children and grandchildren in the world, dharmas arise through succession. The meaning is: a child is born from a father, and one says this is the child of a certain father. Although one speaks of the father's name, the intention is in the substance of the child. Furthermore, the child gives birth to a grandchild, and the grandchild is a certain grandchild. Although one mentions their grandfather, the intention is in the grandchild. The grandchild is like the meaning, the child is like the name, and the father is like the sound; thus there are three tiers, and the middle is the essence of the teaching. Therefore below it matches: "meaning that speech gives rise to names, and names are able to express meaning"; this is what is called an indirect cause.

12.23

The commentary's "The commentator's intent takes verbal karma as the essence": The commentator explains: It is said like this: verbal karma is the essence, because it is spoken by the Buddha's voice and heard by others. As for the "commentator," the Vibhāṣā was compiled jointly by arhats, and there were four great arhats who served as the authoritative opinions of the commentators: first, Vasumitra; second, Ghoṣaka; third, Dharmatrāta; fourth, Buddhadeva.

12.24

As for the commentary's "The Abhidharmahṛdaya agrees with the Kośa," it is because the first fascicle of that treatise has this verse, with only slight differences in text. The verse of the treatise says: "Extensively expounding the aggregates of dharmas, / their number is eighty thousand. / Morality and so forth and the remaining aggregates / are all subsumed under the five aggregates." The prose commentary explains: "The eighty thousand aggregates of dharmas are all subsumed under the aggregate of form, because the Buddha's speech has the nature of verbal karma." Some say that having the nature of names, they are subsumed under the aggregate of conditioning factors. Furthermore, the aggregate of morality is subsumed under the aggregate of form, and concentration, wisdom, and so forth are subsumed under the aggregate of conditioning factors; therefore it agrees with the Kośa. In the commentary, from "The Abhidharmakośa says" downward, it cites the text of the Kośa. Why is this proof cited in the context of the teaching of names and so forth? Because the Kośa has no preference in sentiment, employing the two meanings as appropriate. Citing it here doubly verifies the previous two, since it admits that both are valid. Taking them below as the third [view], as the essence of the four dharmas, is easy to understand in the text.

12.25

The Commentary states, "In the Nyāyānusāra, the intention accords with name and the like": this establishes the second position. Therefore, that treatise in its third roll completes its explanation of the preceding verse, because the Nyāyānusāra as a whole comments on the six hundred verse lines of the Abhidharmakośa, but its tenets accord with the correct reasoning of the Mahāvibhāṣā, hence it is entitled Following Correct Principles (Nyāyānusāra). However, its direct explanation of the above verse is no different from the Kośa. In the Kośa there is no acceptance or rejection, whereas the Nyāyānusāra decisively assigns [the essence] to name; in our Commentary this is abridged. In that treatise there is an objection: "Vocal teaching is different from name, and teaching can admit of being voice. Since name and teaching have distinct essences, why would teaching be name?" The subcommentarial note explains the intention of the objection: "Teaching means verbal instruction; taking voice as the essence of teaching means having an essence separate and different from your 'name'. If one takes name as the essence, name is a conditioned factor disassociated [from mind] (citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra) and not the essence of verbal teaching; why, then, would one take name and the like as the essence of teaching?" The treatise itself replies: "They explain it thus: it is only by relying on name that it is called teaching. Therefore the essence of the Buddha's teaching is simply name. Why so? Because it expresses the meaning as it truly is; thus it is called the Buddha's teaching." What follows is completely identical with our Commentary. The meaning of this answer is: although it is called the teaching of voice, if there were no name and the like to express its own-nature and distinctive features, how could the mere use of sound constitute teaching? Therefore, name and the like must definitely be used. The commentator preserved an abridgement, merely expressing the correct intention, which suffices to clarify the treatise's purport.

12.26

The Commentary states, "Therefore Nyāyānusāra 14 refutes that master, saying: You should not establish that the collection of names, phrases, and phonemes has voice itself as its essence": this is cited to confirm the Sautrāntika position mentioned above that establishes voice as the essence. The text of the treatise is extensive; here I will cite it briefly to make its source known. The treatise says: "Here, the master of the treatise [Vasubandhu] states: 'Do not these three have voice as their nature, thereby taking sound as their essence? Since they are subsumed under the own-nature of form, how can one speak of them as conditioned factors disassociated from mind?' This reprimand is unreasonable. Why so? Because from both teaching and reasoning we know they exist separately. 'Teaching' refers to the sūtra speaking of 'collections of voice' and 'collections of phonemes'; if phonemes were identical to voice, why speak of them separately? Furthermore, it says that one should uphold the phonemes and phrases of the true Dharma. It also says to rely on the meaning and not on the letter." In the explanation below, scriptural citations are extensively adduced, and the general meaning is the same. Therefore the treatise concludes: "From such scriptural proofs, we know that the collections of names, phrases, and phonemes that express the various meanings exist separately. Just as vocal sound is real and not nominal, by reasoning this is directly perceived. Sometimes one apprehends the sound but does not apprehend the letter; sometimes one apprehends the letter but does not apprehend the sound; thus we know their essences are distinct. 'Sometimes apprehending the sound but not the letter' means that although one hears the sound, one does not understand the meaning. We see in daily life that someone vaguely hears another's words and then asks again, 'What did you say?' This hearing of the vocal sound without understanding the meaning is entirely because they have not grasped the phonemes produced. How could one cling to phonemes not being different from sound? 'Sometimes apprehending the letter but not the sound' means that without hearing the sound, one understands the meaning. We see in daily life that someone does not hear another's words, yet observing the movement of the lips and so on, knows what they said. This understanding of the meaning without hearing the sound is entirely because they have already grasped the phonemes produced. By this logical proof, phonemes must be different from sound. (The text below explains this extensively, and the general meaning is the same.)" Below, the treatise further states: "Following thought, speech is produced; depending on speech, phonemes are produced; phonemes again produce names; and names only then reveal meaning. Relying on such an interrelated sequence of reasoning, it is said that speech produces names, and names are capable of revealing meaning. When established in this way, the reasoning is inevitable." Further below, it says: "Or just as a tree and the like are composed of the great elements, and it is not that, conditioned by this, a shadow is not separately produced; the shadow is produced from what is nominal, yet its essence is not nominal. Likewise, these various phonemes should also aggregate and separately produce names and phrases. And although those names and phrases are produced from what is nominal, their essence is not nominal. This is well spoken, because the reasoning is thoroughly established." Further below, it concludes: "Therefore, we know that apart from sound, there separately exist names and the like." And further below, it states: "Therefore, one should not establish that the collection of names, phrases, and phonemes has voice itself as its essence. Hence, according to what I have said, apart from sound there exist these three—names and the like—which are capable of revealing meaning and principle." Now, our Commentary merely cites this concluding passage to clarify the correct meaning.

First 26 of 39 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese