大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 14.6

14.6

Regarding the commentary’s "Taking the Supreme Ultimate as the cause," and so on: the second part is judging the meaning. It means that if one uses the Supreme Ultimate as the cause, this posits non-being as [producing] being, which is also a false cause. Regarding the commentary's section beginning with "If one says that one yin...": this comprehensively shows both false cause and no cause. The Yi states: "One yin and one yang is what is called the Dao; the unfathomability of yin and yang is what is called the spiritual." Regarding "One yin and one yang is what is called the Dao," the commentary says: "What is the Dao? It is a designation for non-being. There is nowhere it does not permeate, nothing that does not proceed from it; it is figuratively called the Dao. Quiescent and without form, it cannot be made into an image. Only when the function of being reaches its utmost does the efficacy of non-being become manifest; therefore, reaching the point where the spiritual has no direction and change has no body, the Dao can then be seen. Thus, by exhausting changes one exhausts the spiritual, and relying on the spiritual one illuminates the Dao. Although yin and yang are distinct, non-being is the One by which they are treated. In yin it is non-yin, whereby yin is born; in yang it is non-yang, whereby yang is completed. Therefore it says 'one yin and one yang is what is called the Dao.'" Kong's subcommentary says: "(Kong's subcommentary is not by Confucius, but by Kong Yingda.) 'One' means non-being; having neither yin nor yang is precisely what is called the Dao. The reason 'one' can be non-being is that non-being is vacuous non-being, and vacuous non-being is the Supreme Ultimate. It cannot be differentiated; it is uniquely One and nothing else, so 'one' is taken to be non-being. If there were objective realms, then there would be mutual delineation of this and that, resulting in two and three, which could not be One. Therefore, in the time of yin one does not see the efficacy of being yin, and in the time of yang one does not see the power of being yang; yin and yang exist naturally. Being naturally without contrivance is precisely what the Dao means; hence it says 'is what is called the Dao.' In terms of number, it is called 'one'; in terms of essence, it is called 'non-being'; in terms of things being opened and permeated, it is called 'Dao'; in terms of being subtle and unfathomable, it is called 'spiritual'; in terms of responding to situations and transforming, it is called 'change.' Summing them up, they are all designations for vacuous non-being. The sages named it according to human affairs, establishing designations in accordance with its principles." Explanation: If one takes the change and transformation of yin and yang as being able to generate the myriad things, that is a false cause. Yet both the commentary and subcommentary state that the "One" is non-being; therefore it is [the view of] no cause. Thus it says: if one posits the One as vacuous non-being, and nature, then it is also [the view of] no cause. Because vacuous non-being can also be interpreted as a false cause, it uses the word "also."