大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 24

English (machine translation) 24

Language: English

24.1

Composed by Śramaṇa Chengguan of the Great Huayan Monastery at Qingliangshan under the Tang

Regarding the commentary's phrase “three, each being distinct”: as for the previous two explanations, the first matched each individually, and the second matched them collectively with one another. Now, in not matching the preceding, the two sections—seven and eight—are not related in meaning: the seventh concerns awakening in terms of the Dharma, and the eighth concerns producing benefit in terms of the body. Since body and Dharma are not the same, they are not matched against each other. When it was stated above that they are three in relation to the preceding: the previous two depended on each other and were therefore called matching; now, being distinct from the preceding is also in relation to the preceding.

24.3

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning with “The above bodhisattva's Dharma-transformation from beginning to end”: above was an explanation in direct order, whereas now it gathers them up in reverse order to display the profound and marvelous. Investigating it in detail, it is easy to understand.

24.4

Regarding the commentary's statement, “In the first verse, compassion and gnosis guide each other, delivering sentient beings without weariness”: if compassion lacks great gnosis, it turns into attachment and view. With the compassion of attachment and views, one will have a weary mind toward saṃsāra. Now, cultivating practice across oceans of kalpas without weariness shows that gnosis is guiding it. If gnosis lacks compassion, it mostly tends toward quiescence, which is called inferior. Now, in freeing sentient beings from suffering, the mind is not inferior, which means compassion is guiding it. Because of compassion, one can deliver; because of gnosis, there is no weariness.

24.5

Regarding the commentary's phrase “In the next verse, dual contemplation of emptiness and existence”, and so on: the dual contemplation of emptiness and existence is the first half [of the verse]—emptiness is without measure, and existence is boundless. Entering the Dharma doors while being constantly quiescent is the second half: through the previous contemplation of existence, one enters all Dharma doors; through the previous contemplation of emptiness, one is eternally quiescent.

24.6

Regarding the commentary's phrase “In the latter verse”, and so on: the two benefits across the three periods of time are practiced in every vow; this is called being without obstruction between self and others, which constitutes the second half of transforming others while purifying oneself.

24.7

Regarding the commentary's statement “mutually implicit and summarized with the preceding”: previously there was entering particles of dust, which is absent here. Here there is abiding on a single hair-tip to shake all kṣetras universally, instantaneously manifesting multiple bodies in every dust particle, and so forth, which were all summarized and omitted there.

24.8

Regarding the commentary's statement “Because both the partitioned and the unpartitioned are unobstructed, up to: each having four propositions”: speaking generally, the partitioned is phenomena, and the unpartitioned is principle; since principle and phenomena are interfused, there is no obstruction. When it says that each has two sets of four propositions, it is because principle and phenomena both have four. The four propositions of principle: (1) without limits or divisions, because it pervades all; (2) not unpartitioned, because there is no single phenomenon in which it is not fully present; (3) possessing both partition and non-partition—that is, partition and non-partition are of one flavor—because the entire essence resides in one phenomenon while remaining perpetually complete everywhere, as in observing a single dust particle and seeing the dharmadhātu of all places; (4) neither partitioned nor unpartitioned, because its own essence transcends opposites and is perfectly interfused, the two meanings being of one characteristic and not two separate approaches. The four propositions of phenomena: (1) having partition, because they have boundaries in accordance with their own phenomenal characteristics; (2) without partition, because their entire essence is identical to principle, as the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā says: “As with form, the previous limit cannot be grasped, and the posterior limit cannot be grasped”—this is non-partition; (3) both, because the previous two meanings are unobstructed, so possessing these two meanings is precisely what constitutes a phenomenon; (4) neither, because the two meanings are interfused, equal, and transcend the two characteristics.

24.9

Regarding the commentary's statement “The body and so forth are not merely partitioned”, and so forth: this means that owing to the meanings above, the nature of principle is not merely unpartitioned, so while being in all places its entire essence resides within one; and it is not merely partitioned, so while constantly being within one it is entirely in all places. Phenomenal dharmas are not merely partitioned, so while constantly being in this place they are perpetually in other directions; and they are not merely unpartitioned, so they pervade all places without moving from their original position. Furthermore, because the nature of principle is not merely unpartitioned, it is not outside a single phenomenon; because it is not merely partitioned, it is not inside a single phenomenon. Phenomenal dharmas are not merely partitioned, so they are constantly here yet nowhere; because they are not merely unpartitioned, they are constantly elsewhere yet nowhere absent. Therefore, being nowhere and nowhere absent, their presence here and presence there are free from obstruction. Here there are two pairs of principle and phenomena, each with two sets of four propositions, forming eight propositions in all. The commentary only sets forth two propositions: stating above that realizing principle is not merely unpartitioned is the single proposition regarding principle from the first pair. The remark that all dharmas are likewise merely gives an example. When it now states that the body and so forth are not merely partitioned, this is the single proposition regarding phenomena from the latter pair, since the body and so forth are phenomena. The remaining six propositions are omitted and not brought out. Hence, above it spoke generally of each having two sets of four propositions, their meaning being implicitly encompassed.

24.10

Regarding the commentary's phrase “regarding the essence, not grasping at the two extremes of existence and non-existence”: because the essence of all dharmas does not go beyond existence and non-existence. Regarding “regarding the meaning, not clinging to permanence”, and so forth: on a single existent entity there are naturally the meanings of permanence and impermanence; that is, arising and ceasing is the meaning of impermanence, and non-arising and non-ceasing is the meaning of permanence; furthermore, non-arising and non-ceasing is the meaning of impermanence, and so forth. As long as it is on a single existent dharma, there are permanence and impermanence, self and non-self, suffering and pleasure, pure and non-pure, etc.; hence it says “the extremes of the characteristics of all dharmas”. Regarding “regarding practice, not cultivating suffering or pleasure”: the view of annihilationism grasps at the practice of pleasure, the view of eternalism grasps at the practice of suffering, and so on. One who abides in the right path does not conceptualize whether it is deviant or right, because cause and effect interpenetrate. The worldly nature is empty, which is precisely the supramundane. In following and contemplating conventional truth, one immediately enters the ultimate truth. Regarding the truths, they are always naturally two; regarding understanding, it is always naturally one. Therefore, when beings are not yet capable of the real, one provisionally teaches the three for their transformation; once their great faculties are mature, one teaches the real for them; because the provisional is the provisional that is identical to the real, and the real is the real that is identical to the provisional.

24.11

Regarding the commentary's phrase “illuminating the first two garbhas, causing the bodhisattvas to realize them”: the first is the tathāgatagarbha amidst defilement, because it contains the fruit dharmas. The second is the garbha of naturally pure nature, because amidst defilement it is untainted. These two are fundamentally present, so he causes them to be realized.

24.12

Regarding the commentary's phrase “illuminating the next two garbhas, causing the bodhisattvas to accomplish them”: the first is the dharmakāya-garbha, referring to the stage of fruition, because it is that on which merits rely. The second is the supramundane supreme garbha, referring to emerging from defilement, because it surpasses the two vehicles and bodhisattvas. Both have already emerged from defilement, hence the word “accomplish” is used.

24.13

Regarding the commentary's phrase “illuminating the fifth garbha, causing transformation and causing purification”: because the fifth, the dharmadhātugarbha, applies to both cause and fruit. Externally, it sustains all defiled and pure conditioned phenomena, and is called the dharmadhātu; internally, it contains all merits as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, and is therefore also called a garbha. Because there is a cause, he transforms it; because there is defilement, he purifies it. The rest is as explained before.

24.14

Regarding the commentary's phrase “among the three, the latter two are as in the activities below”: the garbha has three meanings; regarding the middle and latter two meanings: below, shaking the net of kṣetras and manifesting countless buddhas in every single dust particle is the second meaning; third, raining the Dharma rain, is the third meaning. The wondrous Dharma wheel cloud is identical to the tathāgatagarbha, hence it is that which is realized. The second, the cloud of emancipation, is causing transformation and causing purification. The third, the cloud of great vows, has the meaning of causing attainment and causing accomplishment.

24.15

Regarding the commentary's phrase “meaning its color is like a cloud of lamps”: the “Chapter on the Ocean of Marks” says: “Between the eyebrows of the Tathāgata there is a mark of a great man, called the cloud of radiance pervading the dharmadhātu. Adorned with jewel maṇi flowers, it radiates great light endowed with the colors of all jewels, penetrating and pure like the sun and moon. Its light universally illuminates the lands of the ten directions, manifesting within them all buddha bodies, and further emitting wondrous sounds proclaiming all dharmas.”

24.16

Regarding the commentary's phrase “also endowed with the ten gates such as simultaneous complete containment, as well as doctrine and meaning, etc.”: the ten gates can be contemplated. The Dharma is simply the underlying essence. In phenomena, it is a single flower phenomenon; because this flower phenomenon is interfused with principle, it is endowed with ten pairs, causing simultaneity and so forth. Preceptor Kangzang, according to the demarcation of meaning, explained and established them: “First, doctrine and meaning: seeing this lotus flower can give rise to understanding. Second, phenomena and principle: the flower is a phenomenon whose entire essence is identical to reality. Third, object and gnosis: that which is contemplated is identical to the nature of gnosis. Fourth, practice and stages: it is the flower of myriad practices, distinguished according to stage. Fifth, cause and fruit: the flower of causal phenomena, where viewing the cause brings about the fruit. Sixth, reliance and based: it is entirely that which is cultivated, and is also that which relies. Seventh, essence and function: its essence is identical to the true nature, and its function responds to capacities. Eighth, person and dharma: it constantly observes persons and encompasses them as dharma. Ninth, adversity and compliance: adversity is identical to the five heats, compliance is the ten perfections. Tenth, resonance and response: universally responding to all, it can also resonate.”

24.17

Regarding the commentary's phrase “yet its original intention is precisely to symbolize the meaning”: taking the ten profundities and the ten pairs, whenever one phenomenon is cited it necessarily possesses the ten profundities, and whenever one profound gate is cited it necessarily subsumes the ten pairs, generally showing that one phenomenon completely encompasses them one by one. If it were treated as doctrine, it would only be secondary, whereas its original intention is solely to symbolize the meaning.

24.18

Regarding the commentary's phrase “suddenly appearing”: this is cited and explained in accordance with difficulties. Based on the second fascicle of the Sūtra on the Ocean of Samādhi Contemplating the Buddha, in explaining the light of the white curl of the ground vajra mark, it says: “When this mark appears, beneath the roots of the Buddha's bodhi tree, due to the power of the white curl, a jeweled flower naturally arises by transformation, precisely forty yojanas in length and breadth, its petals of golden color and with a vajra platform. The light between the Buddha's eyebrows illuminates this flower platform, its light descending straight to the vajra limit”, and so forth. This is largely identical to this.

24.19

Regarding the commentary's statement, "It is also like the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], where milk comes from a cow": this refers to the fourteenth fascicle—the thirteenth in the southern edition—which states: "At that time, there was a bodhisattva in the assembly named King Abiding in the Immaculate Storehouse, possessed of great majestic virtue, who had accomplished supernormal powers, attained great dhāraṇīs, was complete in samādhi, and had attained fearlessness. He immediately arose from his seat, bared his right shoulder, placed his right knee on the ground, knelt with palms joined, and addressed the Buddha, saying: 'World-Honoured One! As the Buddha has taught, the merit and wisdom that the buddhas and bodhisattvas may accomplish are immeasurable, boundless, hundreds of thousands of ten millions of koṭis, truly ineffable. Yet in my mind I still think it is not equal to these Mahāyāna scriptures. Why is this? Because by the power of these Mahāyāna vaipulya sūtras, they are able to give birth to the anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi of all Buddha-World-Honoured Ones.' Then the Buddha praised him, saying: 'Excellent, excellent! Good son, it is so, it is so, just as you have said. Although these Mahāyāna vaipulya scriptures accomplish immeasurable merits, if one wishes to compare them to this sūtra, no comparison can be made—a hundredfold, a thousandfold, hundreds of thousands of ten millions of koṭis, up to what reckoning and metaphors cannot reach. Good son! For example, from a cow comes milk; from milk comes curd; from curd comes fresh butter; from fresh butter comes clarified butter; and from clarified butter comes ghee. Ghee is the highest: if anyone ingests it, all diseases are eliminated, and all medicines enter into it. Good son! The Buddha is also like this: from the Buddha flow forth the twelve divisions of scripture; from the twelve divisions of scripture come the sūtras; from the sūtras come the vaipulya scriptures; from the vaipulya scriptures comes the prajñāpāramitā; and from the prajñāpāramitā comes the Mahāparinirvāṇa, just like ghee. What is called ghee is a metaphor for buddha-nature. Buddha-nature is none other than the Tathāgata. Good son! For this reason, it is said that all the merits of the Tathāgata are immeasurable, boundless, and incalculable.'" In explanation: in that text, in terms of praising the superiority of the teaching, it proceeds from the subtle to the manifest. Here, it merely takes the emergence of the teaching from the Buddha to analogize the emergence of the assembly from between his brows. However, various explanations of this passage of the sūtra differ. Master Zezhou, first in the bodhisattva's statement of his own understanding, posed a question: "This sūtra is verbal teaching, while anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi is the fruit of realization. The teaching is shallow and the realization is profound; why then is bodhi not equal to this sūtra?" He explained: "Here, the scripture specifically designates the expression that explains buddha-nature, the teaching of the dharmakāya. What is realized is the cause and fruit of the inherently pure nature, while the bodhi that is produced is its upāya. The inherently pure cause and fruit are the root, and upāya is the branch; because the branch is not equal to the root, the merit of the Buddha's bodhi does not equal it." Following this, the Buddha's answer matches this meaning. Next, in explaining the Buddha's response, in the correlation he states: matching the cow with the Buddha refers to the nirmāṇakāya Buddha. The twelve divisions of scripture matched with milk refer to the Hīnayāna sūtras. The sūtras matched with curd are called the Mahāyāna teaching. Because the Great is opened by relying on the Small, it is called "coming forth." The latter four are all Mahāyāna teachings explaining phenomenal matters, called sūtras, meaning matters such as giving and morality. The vaipulya matched with fresh butter is the teaching of emptiness that breaks characteristics in the Mahāyāna; because the principle is revealed through phenomenal matters, it is called "coming forth." Matching prajñā with clarified butter: the wisdom that ultimately departs from characteristics and realizes reality is called prajñā; wisdom arises based on principle, therefore it is called "coming forth"; explaining the teaching in terms of practice may also be called "coming forth." The Prajñā Sūtra states: "However, this prajñā is precisely the substance of the aforementioned bodhi." Matching ghee with nirvāṇa: prajñā is the revealing cause, which reveals that beginningless dharmatā-nirvāṇa, therefore it is called "coming forth"; explaining the teaching in terms of reality may also be called "coming forth." When the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says "buddha-nature is none other than the Tathāgata," this refers to the dharmakāya Tathāgata, not the saṃbhogakāya Tathāgata. The merit of the saṃbhogakāya does not equal this sūtra, hence it is not identical to it. The above are all Master Yuangong's views. Looking at the intention of the sūtra, it is not necessarily like this. That master rigidly matched the Great and Small [vehicles] and phenomena and principle with the five flavors, resulting in convoluted interpretations. How could it not speak of the Mahāyāna twelve divisions and so on? Now, I say: Vimalagarbha's intention is to attribute the achievement to the origin, the fruit being born from the teaching. The Tathāgata confirmed and endorsed it, fulfilling his meaning of attributing the achievement. Ghee is the highest, yet its merit originally comes from milk; the Tathāgata is the utmost, yet the achievement returns to the teaching. Therefore, nirvāṇa is none other than the Tathāgata, and the Tathāgata is none other than bodhi. Truly it is said, "The rushing waters originate from a goblet-overflowing trickle; a tree of an arm-span grows from a tiny sprout." Thus the teaching is said to be the Buddha's root; why force an artificial distinction between Great and Small, dharmakāya and saṃbhogakāya? Moreover, the Buddha himself distinguishes this sūtra as different from the Hīnayāna; here, the cow producing milk is simply the Great Teaching. If so, how does it constitute the five flavors? It means that the twelve divisions of scripture explain the teaching that is preached. That which brings forth the sūtras is because the twelve divisions of the teaching bring forth the meaning of tallying with principle and suiting capacities. Sūtras bringing forth the vaipulya is because, through tallying with principle, the true principle is revealed; the extensive setting forth of correct principle constitutes vaipulya. From vaipulya bringing forth prajñā means that wisdom arises based on principle, and so forth. Prajñā bringing forth nirvāṇa means that by wisdom tallying with principle, the ultimate fruit is achieved. Therefore it says that nirvāṇa is like ghee, ghee is a metaphor for buddha-nature, and buddha-nature is none other than the Tathāgata. The text and principle are luminous and clear; why must one be convoluted? There is also an explanation that says: the twelve divisions of scripture coming from the Buddha is the archetype teaching, and the sūtras coming from the twelve divisions is the shadow-image teaching. This too is a reckless speculation, having no meaning of archetype and shadow-image whatsoever.

24.20

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Therefore, these ten lines are subsumed into five pairs": this gathers up the previous explanation again. That is: first, the pair of conforming to principle and conforming to measure; second, the pair of dharmakāya and saṃbhogakāya; third, the pair of bodily hair and mental thought; fourth, the pair of outer resonance and inner peaceful abiding; and fifth, the pair of vertical seeing and horizontal roundness.

24.21

Regarding the commentary's statement, "having appeared and having arrived": before explaining the text, the commentary generally reveals the intention of the praises. In this, there are two parts: first, the correct explanation; second, the general structural breakdown. Here is the first. "Having appeared" refers to the praise of Pramāṇaghoṣa. "Having arrived" refers to the praises of the bodhisattvas of the ten directions. "Boundless" refers to feelings that know no limit. Thus the Preface to the Odes states: "Feelings are stirred within and take form in words; when words are insufficient, one sighs and sings them; when singing them is insufficient, unconsciously one's hands dance them and one's feet stamp them." Therefore Master Sheng used this meaning to explain the intention of speaking the verses, saying: "With boundless hearts, they sing, chant, and dance."

24.22

Under the commentary's statement, "First, the praise of the one bodhisattva from between the brows": structural breakdown and explanation. First, the general breakdown; second, under "The newly arrived assembly having just gathered," explaining the sequence of the praises. In this there are also two parts: first, the correct explanation; second, the concluding rebuttal. Here is the first, which also resolves an objection. That is, someone might ask: "If the latter ten are the praises of the bodhisattvas of the ten directions, since the ten directions arrived first, why do their praises come later?" Therefore it now resolves this by saying: the appearance of the auspicious sign and the praises were both simultaneous; thus Pramāṇaghoṣa and the ten directions' praises were also simultaneous, and it was simply the redactors who compiled the praises into one place. Again, one might ask: "Since the redactors arranged the sequence clearly, they should have arranged the ten directions in front; why put them behind?" Therefore it explains: continuing from the sequence of previously praising the virtues of Pramāṇaghoṣa, the praise of Pramāṇaghoṣa is cited first.

24.23

Under the commentary's statement, "Past scholars did not understand": second, concluding with a rebuttal of ancient masters. In this there are also three parts: first, correctly discerning the error; next, under "Why is this? Furthermore, regarding the emergence of the assembly from between the brows," establishing the principle; third, citing precedents and combining praises from the "Chapter on Entering the Dharmadhātu".

24.24

Regarding the commentary's statement, "It also contains the various questions; reflect on it": the text contains forty lines, provisionally subsuming ten oceans: the first verse is the ocean of buddhas; the next verse is the ocean of preaching; the third is one verse on the ocean of transformations, because of manifestation in a single hair; the fourth is one verse on the ocean of sentient beings; the fifth is one verse on the ocean of worlds; the sixth is one verse on the ocean of the establishment of the dharmadhātu; the seventh is one verse on the ocean of pāramitās; the eighth is one verse on the ocean of the Buddha's lifespan, since having realized the Buddha ground there must be lifespan; the ninth is one verse on the ocean of liberations, since Samantabhadra's awakening has already departed from hindrances and already acquired the liberation of supernormal powers and functions; the eleventh is one verse on the ocean of names, because bodily clouds are pervasive and names are established according to beings. Since it is thus with the ten oceans, the subsuming of the remaining questions is analogous, hence it bids one to reflect on it.

24.25

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Then the ten bodies are perfectly fused and pervade the four dharmadhātus": because it only speaks of the Buddha's body, it applies generally to the ten bodies; because it only says the dharmadhātu, it applies generally to the four realms. Because essence is principle and function is phenomena, the non-obstruction of essence and function is the non-obstruction of phenomena and principle; being identical to the one and identical to the pervasive is the non-obstruction of phenomena and phenomena. Furthermore, the first line states that essence is pervasive; the second line clarifies function; the third line clarifies that function is pervasive; the fourth line states not moving from the root. The root has two kinds: first, the true body is the root, and the root essence is naturally pervasive; because function is like essence, it can pervade universally without moving from the root. Second, within the adaptive functions there are naturally root and branch: the body on the bodhi-seat is the root, while extending throughout the ten directions is the branch. Thus, later, not rising from the king of trees yet ascending to the four heavens directly clarifies pervading universally without moving from the root. Here it clarifies that although it pervades the dharmadhātu, it remains on this seat, clarifying returning to the root without destroying the branch. These two are not separate; therefore the commentary explains returning to the root without destroying the branch as 'pervading universally without moving from the root.'

24.26

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Above, then, because phenomena conform to principle," and so forth: the body on the bodhi-seat is a phenomenon; because it conforms to principle, it is pervasive. As for "Here, phenomena contain principle": a single hair is a phenomenon, and there is nothing it does not contain. Because principle has two meanings: first, there is nowhere it does not pervade; second, there is no phenomenon it does not contain—just as empty space possesses the meanings of containing and pervading. Here, phenomena conform to principle, and thus possess the above two meanings, which is the gate of the interpenetration of phenomena and principle within the non-obstruction of phenomena and phenomena.

24.27

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, a single hair symbolizes the gate of liberation": this is explained in terms of the contemplation of mind. A single hair has an exterior and an internal space, being able to receive and contain.

24.28

Regarding the commentary's statement, "The first two lines are the pervasion of the overall body and overall characteristic," and so forth: there are four lines, namely: first, the overall pervading the overall; second, the overall pervading the particular; third, the particular pervading the particular; and fourth, the particular pervading the overall. Furthermore, that which is pervaded applies generally to the dependent and proper [retributions]; provisionally speaking, that which can pervade is the proper, and that which is pervaded is the dependent. The dependent and proper each have overall and particular: the proper overall is the entire body, and the particular is the eye, ear, up to a single hair. The dependent overall is an entire land, and the particular is a tree, a stone, up to a single speck of dust. The first line merely speaks of sitting peacefully in the kṣetra, hence it is the pervasion of the overall body and overall characteristic. The latter line clarifies that the body pervades the lands within dust specks, which is the overall pervading the particular. As for the commentary's phrase "In the assembly": that is, within the ocean-like great assembly, in order to differentiate from past interpretations, which regarded it as the praise by Pramāṇaghoṣa's retinue, and thus bodhisattvas from within Pramāṇaghoṣa's assembly. Here it is clarified that it is within the ocean-like assembly of the two kinds—new and old.

24.29

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, each line corresponds to one wisdom": the above was in terms of the two wisdoms; this is in terms of the four wisdoms. The characteristics of the four wisdoms have already been seen in the first fascicle; here it merely takes the points where they correspond to the present sūtra text and cites them.

24.30

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because powers, fearlessnesses, and so forth are all not different": this is text from the "Chapter on Inquiries for Clarification." The sūtra states: "Mañjuśrī's dharma is always thus: the King of the Dharma has only a single dharma. All unimpeded persons transcend birth and death by a single path. All bodies of all buddhas share the same single dharmakāya, one mind, and one wisdom; powers and fearlessnesses are also like this." The expression "identical in characteristic" means being called identical because of similarity, not meaning sharing in common.

24.31

Regarding the commentary's statement, "This is the unobstructed wisdom-body relying on nothing whatsoever": above, non-reliance was explained in terms of the non-abiding root; non-reliance is principle, and therefore non-abiding is simply another name for the real mark. Here, non-reliance is explained in terms of wisdom, and therefore the "Manifestation Chapter" states: "All Buddha-dharmas rely on loving-kindness and compassion; loving-kindness and compassion furthermore rely on upāya to be established; upāya relies on jñāna, and jñāna relies on prajñā; the unobstructed wisdom-body relies on nothing whatsoever." Regarding the commentary's statement, "Being free from all conceptual discrimination is non-differentiation": above, non-differentiation was explained in terms of the non-duality of principle; here, non-differentiation is explained simply as the mind being free from conceptual discrimination. Thus, 'non-differentiation' and 'freedom from conceptual discrimination' have both general and specific usages: specifically, non-differentiation pertains to principle, and freedom from conceptual discrimination pertains to wisdom; generally, principle may also be termed free from conceptual discrimination. Hence the "Questions on Clarity Chapter" says: "Buddha-realms are free from conceptual discrimination, with neither hatred nor love." Wisdom may also be termed devoid of differentiation, meaning that non-differentiating wisdom is the cognitive subject that realizes [principle]. Here, the general meaning is adopted, explaining non-differentiation by means of freedom from conceptual discrimination.

24.32

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because the reflections of bodies, lands, and wisdom that can manifest and can produce are all non-dual": this refers to the capacity of the great round mirror wisdom as explained in the *Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi]*, which is also as cited above.

24.33

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Namely, the dharmakāya is formless, manifesting shapes in response to beings": citing as evidence, these words are precisely from the *Zhaolun*. The treatise states: "The dharmakāya is formless, manifesting shapes in response to beings. Prajñā is devoid of knowing, illuminating in confrontation with conditions." If one considers its ultimate source, it is the sūtra which states: "The Buddha's true dharmakāya is like empty space, manifesting shapes in response to beings like the moon in the water." A later passage of the sūtra also says: "The Buddha takes the Dharma as body, pure like empty space; the shapes of various forms manifested cause [beings] to enter into this Dharma."

24.34

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning, "Using wisdom to accord with suchness": this integrates the two bodies above so that they are unhindered; this is the true dharmakāya. The citation from the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa* is already as cited above, from the "Three Bodies Chapter".

24.35

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Relative to the preceding response body, this is a manifold transformation": the response body is contrasted with the dharma and reward [bodies]; the response body is a transformation body. Here, transformations arise upon the response body, and therefore it is called a manifold transformation. For instance, Śākyamuni is a response body; when receiving offerings in the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, he manifested multiple transformation buddhas at the tips of his hairs, which is precisely a manifold transformation.

24.36

Regarding the commentary's statement, "First, one verse reveals the true Buddha": this refers to the unhindered body of dharma and reward as the true Buddha. "Permanence of the ultimate truth" is fundamentally existent permanence, where wisdom tallies with principle. "Quiescent and constantly illuminating" is that which is cultivated and accomplished, unifying with what is fundamentally existent. If according to the Dharma-Characteristics school, the latter permanence is the permanence of continuity. Here, according to the Dharma-Nature school, it obscurely tallies with principle, sharing the permanence of principle. Therefore, Master Sengzhao's *Commentary on the Nirvāṇa-sūtra* states: "True principle is naturally awakened to; when one also obscurely tallies with the true, then one is unified with it without differentiation. How could awakening be easy? Its unalterable essence is quiescent and constantly illuminating." This is precisely its meaning. "Those that are revealed are freed from the two hindrances": this also has two senses. If explained separately: because of being freed from the affliction hindrance, the dharmakāya is revealed; because of being freed from the cognitive hindrance, the wisdom body is accomplished. Taken together: the two hindrances both obstruct both bodies, and being freed from the two hindrances mutually reveals both bodies, for the nature of wisdom is fundamentally existent and does not only now exist due to illumination.

24.37

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Every single sense-faculty, major mark, and minor mark is boundless": this is the fruit of the self-enjoyment body. "Because they are adorned with boundless merit and wisdom": this is the cause of the self-enjoyment body. Thus the *Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi]* states: "The second is the enjoyment body, of which there are two kinds: the first is self-enjoyment, which refers to all Tathāgatas, through cultivating immeasurable provisions of merit and wisdom for three incalculable eons, giving rise to boundless true virtues and an exceedingly complete, pure, permanent, and pervasive form-body, which continues quiescently to the end of future limits, constantly experiencing for itself the vast bliss of the Dharma." Explanation: comparing the treatise with the commentary, it is self-evident.

24.38

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning, "First, universally conforming to the inclinations of beings": the three meanings all apply to both the other-enjoyment body and the transformation body. Thus the *Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi]* states: "The second is other-enjoyment, which refers to all Tathāgatas, based on equality wisdom, manifesting subtle and wondrous pure bodies of virtue, residing in purely pure lands, and manifesting great spiritual transformations for the bodhisattvas dwelling on the ten grounds, turning the wheel of the true Dharma to resolve the net of doubts of the multitude, causing them to enjoy the bliss of the Mahāyāna Dharma."

24.39

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because unarisenness is the essence of the Buddha's teaching": all sūtras and treatises explain the principle of unarisenness. Therefore, the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* explains it from the very beginning of the Non-duality [chapter], the *Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra* states that all things are unarisen, and the *Madhyamakaśāstra* takes unarisenness as the central doctrine and essence of the treatise. Mahāsattva Fu also said: "The Buddha-Dharma takes unarisenness as its essence and non-attachment as its central doctrine; forgetting thoughts is the cause, and nirvāṇa is the fruit." The texts [stating this] are not one.

24.40

Regarding the commentary's statement that "Having no dwelling place refutes [the attachment regarding] nature": it is said, "The dharma-nature is like empty space, and all Buddhas dwell within it." This seems to imply a dwelling place. Here it is maintained that if the dharma-nature is like space, then there is nowhere to dwell. Moreover, since the essence is unarisen, how could there be an agent that dwells or does not dwell? When all dharmas first dwell in the dharma-nature, then the earlier text says "all Buddhas dwell within it." Therefore the *Vajracchedikā* says, "One should give rise to that mind without dwelling anywhere"; if the mind has a dwelling, then that is non-dwelling. The *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā* states: "If one dwells in all dharmas, one does not dwell in prajñāpāramitā. When one does not dwell in all dharmas, only then does one dwell in prajñāpāramitā." Therefore, at the beginning of each assembly of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā*, non-dwelling is always clarified first. The *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* also states, "Taking non-dwelling as the root."

24.41

Regarding the commentary's statement, "The phrase 'inexhaustible marks' encompasses the true body as well": first, responsive functions are inexhaustible, like a mirror facing myriad forms. Second, the true essence is inexhaustible, which again has two kinds: first, because of the form-marks of the ten Lotus Treasuries; second, because each and every form-mark's essence is infinite, quiescent, and unchanging. The sūtra says: "The Tathāgata's wondrous form is constantly tranquil and at ease, never altered by seasons or eons. The Great Sage, having practiced loving-kindness and compassion for vast eons, has obtained a vajra-like indestructible body." The *Śrīmālādevī-sūtra* says: "The Tathāgata's form is inexhaustible, and wisdom is likewise so." As for the commentary's mention of the "ten transformations," the *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* states: the Buddha's body has ten transformations. First, relying on the body wheel, three kinds of transformations arise: 1. transformation of taking birth, meaning taking one's final body; 2. transformation of spiritual power, meaning manifesting various miraculous changes and so forth; 3. transformation of karmic fruition, meaning receiving the golden pike and so forth. Furthermore, relying on the speech wheel, three kinds of transformations arise: 1. transformation of expounding, meaning turning the wheel of the Dharma, severing doubts, and answering difficult questions; 2. transformation of praise and encouragement, meaning praising the superior and urging study; 3. transformation of celebration and consolation, meaning rejoicing and offering consolation when someone advances in practice or is able to sever [defilements] and realize [the truth]. Mental transformations are four: 1. transformation of receiving mind, meaning accepting questions, receiving offerings, and so forth; 2. transformation of discerning mind, meaning observing the differences in sentient beings' mental actions and distinguishing the different natures and characteristics of dharmas; 3. transformation of instigating mind, meaning being able to arouse past good roots and causing followers of the two vehicles to give rise to great practice, etc.; 4. transformation of constructing mind, meaning being able to establish the affairs and meanings of all dharmas. Therefore, one should know that function arising based on reality is precisely the transformation body, which is why it is said that the transformation body has no separate mind or form. Explanation: the above is from the treatise; the commentary uses it in full, and in wishing to correlate it with the sūtra, there is slight addition and reduction; just observe the words of host and guest in the previously cited commentary and it will be clear.

24.42

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Being free from all marks is named all Buddhas": another text also says, "If one sees that all marks are not marks, one sees the Tathāgata."

24.43

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Maitreya's treatise says: 'One merely separates from the four marks...'" and so forth: this explains the preceding word "all." Bodhisattvas in the stage of the four aids only contemplate these four. The four are: first, name; second, referent; third, the intrinsic nature of name and referent; fourth, the distinction of name and referent. 'Name' is that which expresses. 'Referent' is that which is expressed. Within names there are sentences: names express intrinsic nature, while sentences express distinctions; thus within names there are intrinsic nature and distinctions, and within referents there are also intrinsic nature and distinctions, because that which expresses and that which is expressed are two different marks. Second, observing them separately: the intrinsic nature of name and referent, and the distinction of name and referent, are identical in pairs, so they are contemplated together. That is to say, when contemplating a name, it necessarily expresses intrinsic nature; when contemplating a sentence, it necessarily expresses distinctions. Therefore the name of intrinsic nature and the referent of intrinsic nature are identical, and the distinction of name and referent are likewise identical.

24.44

Regarding the commentary's statement, "This also resolves the doubt that manifesting marks for the sake of beings does not contravene being like empty space": the doubt runs: Since the Buddha's body takes the Dharma as body and is pure like empty space, for what reason does it manifest a golden color and so forth? How does it cause people to awaken to empty space? Answer: There are three points. First, although the essence is formless, it manifests marks for beings because it is appropriate for beings to see them, according with the minds of others. Second, if it did not manifest marks, how could it cause people to awaken to formlessness? Just as without relying on words, how could the principle beyond words be revealed? The above two points are resolved within the phrase "manifesting marks for beings." Third, the words "like empty space" take its purity and marklessness, not seeking it apart from marks. Marks are themselves marklessness, and thus do not contravene empty space. Therefore a later passage of the sūtra says: "The Buddha dwells in the profound true dharma-nature, quiescent and markless, identical to empty space; yet within the primary, real truth, he manifests diverse actions undertaken. The deeds done to benefit sentient beings all exist relying on the dharma-nature; marks and marklessness are without distinction, and entering into the ultimate, all are markless." Therefore, marks do not contravene marklessness; marks are themselves marklessness.

24.45

Regarding the commentary's statement, "The three minds of each ground": these are entering, dwelling, and emerging, which will be explained extensively below.

24.46

Regarding the commentary's phrase “Because of the single Brahmā sound”: First, it refers only to the Brahmā sound of the Five Indias, the intention resting on oneness; second, because this single Brahmā sound accords with nature, it is all-pervasive; third, this single Brahmā sound already contains within it all sounds. Hence the commentary explains: “Because phenomena and principle are interfused.” The single Brahmā sound is a phenomenon; because phenomena are interfused with principle, the one contains the all. Fourth, regarding “many rains of Dharma”: In accordance with that single prior sound, it expounds phenomena such as the four truths, the twelve links of dependent origination, the six pāramitās, and cause and effect. Fifth, according as any single phenomenon is expounded, it is equipped with numerous phrases and words, just as the Chapter on the Four Truths expounds the four noble truths pervading the dharmadhātu, with principal and attendant beings without end. Sixth, in accordance with the single prior sound and single phenomenon, each conforms to the sounds of all sentient beings, just as a hundred currents of wind each blow through many orifices, competing in uttering distinct sounds. The third point above—that one sound contains many—means that the Buddha's sound inherently possesses them within itself. Here, that the one contains many means that, in accordance with the single sound, it outwardly assimilates to the types of sentient beings. Seventh, in accordance with each category of sound, each pervasively reaches all places, and so too for the many categories. Eighth, it solely proclaims in accordance with nature, because it interfuses distinctions. Ninth, it can cause the myriad categories [of beings] to see and hear the pure nature above. Tenth, in accordance with what is heard, whether of great or small [capacity], the benefit is in each case ultimate. As for the statement “This can be seen in the passages of the text”: each of the above eight meanings corresponds to a single line, and only the ninth meaning encompasses three lines. The tenth is also one line; hence, twelve lines contain ten meanings. Regarding the commentary's statement “The mention of shadows and images reveals freedom from spatial location”: This line introduces the topic, and the text below explains it separately. It distinguishes shadows and images into two metaphors. “Shadow” adopts the metaphor of light and shadow; hence it says that when light is in the east, the shadow is in the west, and so forth. Yet the metaphor of light and shadow itself contains two senses: First, either a body or a tree is used to metaphorise the capacities of sentient beings, the light of the sun and moon is used to metaphorise the Buddha's wisdom, and the perceived shadow is used to metaphorise the Buddha's physical form. Just as, in response to Ghoṣila's short stature, the Buddha's wisdom faces him as a three-foot shadow; whereas in response to Anantakāya's tall stature, the Buddha's wisdom faces him as a shadow that reaches the summit of the realms and still exceeds it. The present text does not adopt this sense. Second, the physical substance metaphorises the dharmakāya, because it lacks dual characteristics. The light metaphorises the responsive capacity of beings, because the responses differ according to east and west. The shadow metaphorises the physical form, because it moves east or west according to the response of beings to the light. The present text adopts this sense, stating that it has no spatial location. Second, the single entity of the image is used for the metaphor of a reflection in a mirror; hence it says that facing the physical substance, the reflection arises. Having nowhere from which it comes and nowhere to which it goes, it has no spatial location. Below “Therefore this shadow and reflection”, it concludes both metaphors with the words “having no spatial location”, the meaning intending to illuminate emptiness. Regarding the commentary's statement “The mention of ‘like space’ refers to its being unobtainable, etc.”: “Etc.” covers four meanings. That is, within this verse, five meanings are like space: First, unobtainability: there is no thing to be obtained, because wisdom observes it to lack intrinsic nature. Second, non-arising: because it does not come from non-existence into existence. Third, absence of initiation or creation: because it is not newly produced. Fourth, manifesting before things in response to them: because there is no single thing that is not situated within space, according with differences in the size of vessels and their apertures. Fifth, equality: the empty space of the ten directions is immeasurable in all cases, and the empty space of the three time periods shares a single characteristic. As for the five meanings of the Tathāgata: First, freedom from characteristics; second, true permanence; third, serene quiescence—these three are quiescent and unmoving; fourth, responding wherever there is an impulse; fifth, equality of essence, characteristic, and function. Viewed from one Buddha to another, they are equal and non-dual.

24.47

Regarding the commentary's statement “Therefore, although manifesting form, it is like the moon in the water”: The sūtra says: “The Buddha's true dharmakāya is like empty space; responding to things, it manifests form like the moon in the water.” This meaning applies equally from Buddha to Buddha; hence it concludes: “equal like empty space”.

24.48

Regarding the commentary's statement “Since it universally concludes with the clouds of bodhisattvas assembling, it shows all the more clearly that the praise above belongs to those from the ten directions”: That is, if they were the retinue of Jinadhvaja, why, after the praise, would it conclude: “In this bodhimaṇḍa of the four continents, through the Buddha's spiritual power, bodhisattvas numbering as many as the dust motes in a sea of a hundred million worlds from each of the ten directions came and assembled”? Thus we know clearly that the above was merely the bodhisattvas of the ten directions praising the Buddha's virtues. The Chapter on Manifesting Characteristics is concluded.

First 48 of 75 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese