大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 19.35

19.35

Regarding the commentary from "What has been explained above" onward, this is the second part, setting forth the present intention. Within this there are three parts: first, establishing the past interpretation; next, from "has not exhausted" onward, analyzing accordance and discordance; finally, from "Now correctly" onward, presenting the doctrine. Now for the first. In establishing the past interpretation, it clarifies that it has textual authority, deriving from the *Awakening of Faith*; yet in drawing out the treatise's intention, it shows that the past interpretation did not exhaust its source. That is, in the previous conclusion, with respect to the objective realm, it does not obstruct the true while constantly being conventional; with respect to wisdom, it does not obstruct quiescence while constantly illuminating. Although it clarifies non-obstruction, if they are individually matched, the intention is to match the mind's quiescence with the realm's truth, and the mind's illumination with the realm's convention. Matching illumination with convention, mind and realm are not one; matching quiescence with truth, mind and realm are not different. This clarifies that illumination is solely matched with convention, and quiescence is solely matched with truth. Next, although it merges both the realms of emptiness and existence, it ultimately cannot be said of the two minds of quiescence and illumination that the realm does not obstruct convention while constantly being true, and the mind does not obstruct illumination while constantly being quiescent—which would mean mind and realm are not different. Thus we clearly know that the original intention was an individual matching. Therefore, the present commentary adopts that intention to show the treatise's meaning, saying that true principle's silent aloofness accords with calming quiescence, and conventional truth's flux accords with contemplative illumination. When it says, "In the *Awakening of Faith* and so forth, it is provisionally explained this way," it reveals the source upon which it relies. "And so forth" includes the *Yogācārabhūmi* and other sūtras and treatises. As for in the *Awakening of Faith*, in its section on Cultivating Faith and Practice it states: 'How does one cultivate the gate of calming and contemplation? What is called calming means putting to rest all characteristics of objective realms, because it accords with the meaning of śamatha contemplation. What is called contemplation means discerning the characteristics of arising and ceasing through causes and conditions, because it accords with the meaning of vipaśyanā contemplation. How does one accord? By gradually cultivating these two meanings without abandoning each other, so that both manifest before one. If one cultivates calming, one resides in a quiet place, sits erect with a correct mind, not relying on breath, not relying on form, not relying on emptiness, not relying on earth, water, fire, or wind, and even not relying on seeing, hearing, perceiving, or knowing. All thoughts are eliminated as they are recollected, and the thought of eliminating is also dispatched. Because all phenomena are fundamentally free of thoughts, from moment to moment unborn and from moment to moment unceasing, one must also not follow the mind to think of external realms and then use the mind to eliminate the mind. If the mind scatters, one should immediately gather it back to abide in correct mindfulness. As for this correct mindfulness, one should know it is only mind, with no external realms. Furthermore, this mind also lacks an intrinsic characteristic, unobtainable from moment to moment. If one rises from the seat, coming and going, advancing and stopping in whatever one undertakes, at all times constantly mindful of upāya, observing in accordance with it, when cultivated for a long time until pure and mature, one's mind will come to abide. Because the mind abides, it gradually becomes sharp and keen, and one accords and enters the samādhi of tathatā.' Explanation: All the above is text from the treatise. Within calming, one knows signlessness and being neither born nor extinguished; within contemplation, one is constantly mindful of upāya and discerns arising and ceasing through causes and conditions; this clearly shows that calming accords with principle, and contemplation accords with phenomena. Furthermore, a later passage in the treatise states: 'Moreover, if a person only cultivates calming, the mind will sink or give rise to indolence, not delighting in good deeds and distancing itself from great compassion; therefore, one cultivates contemplation. One who cultivates contemplation should contemplate that all conditioned phenomena of the world cannot endure for long, changing and disintegrating in an instant, and that all mental formations arise and cease from moment to moment, and are therefore suffering,' and so forth. Explanation: The above also mostly explains contemplation in terms of phenomena. Furthermore, the treatise states below: 'Except when sitting, when one focuses exclusively on calming, at all other times one should contemplate what should and should not be done, with calming and contemplation proceeding together. That is to say, although one is mindful that the intrinsic nature of all phenomena is unborn, one is simultaneously mindful of the conjunction of causes and conditions, and that the retributions of good and bad karma, suffering and pleasure, are not lost or destroyed. Although one is mindful of causes, conditions, and good and bad karmic retributions, one is also simultaneously mindful that their nature is unobtainable.' Explanation: This simultaneous proceeding also clarifies that being mindful that intrinsic nature is unborn is calming, while being mindful of the conjunction of causes and conditions is contemplation. Hence the commentary draws out the treatise's intention, saying that true principle's silent aloofness accords with calming quiescence, and conventional truth's flux accords with contemplative illumination. As for the earlier word "and so forth," it includes fascicle 77 of the *Yogācārabhūmi*, which also explains that dhyāna has three divisions: first, the śamatha division; second, the vipaśyanā division; third, the yuganaddha (conjoined) division. Its broad tenets are mostly identical with the *Awakening of Faith*, which is why it says 'and so forth.'