大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 41.11

41.11

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Because it signifies the establishment of the ten practices": this contains five meanings, the general sense of which can be known. First, "establishment" means giving rise to cultivation within that which has no cultivation in the nature of phenomena (dharmatā). Second, the myriad practices are not of one kind. Third, they are gathered into the ten perfections (pāramitā) and the practices of the four immeasurables, bringing to light the virtues of the nature and causing them to manifest; hence the Awakening of Faith says: "Because one knows the nature of phenomena is free from stinginess, one accords with it by cultivating the perfection of giving," and so forth. Fourth, each conforming with the principle is called profound; their purport being secret and marvelous is [called] esoteric; and they are continuous without interruption. Fifth, "spreading luxuriously" refers to the appearance of lush proliferation, as in giving rise [to giving] through donating countries, cities, outer and inner belongings, head, eyes, marrow, and brain, and so forth. As for "providing shelter and shade": each practice gate is accompanied by loving-kindness and compassion, universally overshadowing all and interreflecting with them. If "establishing" (jian) means cultivating and establishing, "standing" (li) means bringing to completion, "broad" (guang) refers to the breadth of their essence, and "numerous" (duo) pertains to the diversity of kinds, then the five phrases each have two [aspects], thus constituting ten meanings. That the latter three each have two may be understood. Therefore, it concludes below: "One may comprehend this through discernment."\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "It is fitting that the Buddha of that realm correspond with the bodhisattva of that realm": this is because the Buddha is the fruit of that station, while the bodhisattva is the cause of that station. As with Bodhisattva Guṇakānana (Virtue Forest), the lower commentary explains: "Accumulating practices in one's own person, one's virtues become fulfilled, and thus one attains the fruit of eternal abiding. Second, [his] two wisdoms are supreme, so he achieves the Eyes of Invincibility. Third, awakening to the ultimate truth, he is called Forest of Supremacy, and thus achieves the Buddha of Non-abiding Eyes. Fourth, hearing the profound without fear, he achieves Immovability. Fifth, venerating truth and repelling delusion, he achieves Great Purifying Radiance. Sixth, phenomena and principle being without discrepancy, he is free from bodily and mental marks, and thus achieves Liberation. Seventh, understanding marks to be motionless, he attains the Eyes of Thorough Examination. Eighth, illuminating the principle with proper cultivation, he achieves the Bright Mark. Ninth, illuminating the primal source of the mind, his fruit becomes supreme. Tenth, discerning and penetrating all buddhas, transcendent far beyond sights and sounds, with the path of mind and speech cut off, he is therefore named Forest of Wisdom." Therefore, the attained fruit is marvelously bright, being the dark-blue eyes. Because the bodhisattva's name is explained below in the text itself, matching them here makes the fruit's name intelligible.\n\nThird, the praise in verse. As for "Within a single dust mote, the body is everywhere throughout the ten directions": this is because being one, it is constantly many, and so forth.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The metaphor mentions the first month of summer": it translates according to the meaning. The commentary below has six parts: First, it reveals the overall meaning of the text. Second, from "the Sanskrit text" onward, it reconciles with the Sanskrit sūtra; this refers to the Kanding citing the Sanskrit to refute the sūtra, as will be explained below. Now the commentary adopts what it cited to make it conform with the present sūtra. Third, from "the Holy Teaching of the Tathāgata in the Western Regions" onward, it clarifies the characteristics of the latter hot month, explaining that the three seasons are used solely by Buddhist teachings; worldly usage does not necessarily employ three, as they also speak of four seasons, and so forth. Fourth, from "the words 'radiant sun'" onward, it reconciles the sūtra and resolves difficulties. This refers to the Kanding's objection: "How could the radiant sun of the fourth month surpass that of the sixth month? Thus the term 'first month of summer' does not accord with 'radiant sun.'" Therefore, the commentary states its intention: it merely takes the brightness being long; hence the Jin sūtra says: "Like the month following spring, / The sky is without cloud or haze, / And the sun shines with pure light." There is no conflict between "following spring" and "first month of summer"; "radiant sun" clearly takes the light reaching far. Fifth, from "that region sometimes divides into four seasons" onward, it details the seasonal divisions to correct confusing explanations. Sixth, from "not having seen this text" onward, it concludes by refuting the Kanding. That is, it refuted the translator by saying: "According to the Sanskrit text, it should say 'latter hot month'; it should not say 'first month of summer.' If translating the general sense, it should say: 'Like the midsummer month, / The radiant sun blazes with fire, / In the pure, open sky, / Illumining with boundless light.' Because the regional languages do not have exact literal equivalents, one should translate according to the meaning."\n\nAs for "latter hot month": there are two accounts of the names of seasons in the Western Regions: One says that one year has three seasons, namely spring, summer, and autumn, each lasting four months. From after the middle of the eleventh month to before the middle of the third month is called spring. The remaining two seasons may be known accordingly. Another says that one year has six seasons, each lasting two months: from the second half of the eleventh month to the first half of the first month is called spring; second, from the middle of the first month to the first half of the third month is called the hot season; third, from then to the first half of the fifth month is called the rainy season; fourth, from then to the first half of the seventh month is called the autumn season; fifth, from then to the first half of the ninth month is called the snowy season; sixth, from the second half of this to the first half of the eleventh month is called the season of extreme cold. Now what this Sanskrit text calls the "latter hot month" corresponds in this country to after the middle of the second month and before the middle of the third month; it is the latter hot month among the two hot months in that region. However, this is also different from the seasons in the Western Countries: when it is just warm here, it is already hot in the Western Regions; therefore one can only translate according to the meaning. The above is the view of the Kanding ji.\n\nThat the remaining two periods may be known accordingly means: from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is summer, namely the rainy period. From the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the cold period. These are the three periods of rain, heat, and cold. This is the view of Dharma Master Guang on the Abhidharmakośa. As for Dharma Master Tai's view, he takes the middle of the tenth month as the beginning. Master Tai speaks of increase and decrease after the point where day and night are equal; Master Guang speaks of increase and decrease after the time when day and night are at their longest. However, both of these two theories also do not tally with the text of the Xiyu ji. The Kanding inherited the error and further censured the meaning of the sūtra, hence it says that without having seen this text, it made an erroneous, disparate interpretation. Although the commentary has already corrected it, what it cited was still brief; I will now quote it fully. Fascicle 2 of that Record states:\n\n"From the waxing of the moon until it is full is called the bright half (śuklapakṣa); from the waning of the moon until it is dark is called the dark half (kṛṣṇapakṣa). The dark half has either fourteen or fifteen days, depending on whether the month is large or small. The bright half coming first and the dark half coming after together constitute one month; six months together constitute one course (ayana). When the sun moves inward, it travels toward the north; when the sun moves outward, it travels toward the south. Together these two courses constitute one year. Furthermore, one year is divided into six seasons: from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the third month is the gradually hot season; from the sixteenth day of the third month to the fifteenth day of the fifth month is the intensely hot season; from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the seventh month is the rainy season; from the sixteenth day of the seventh month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is the luxuriant season; from the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the eleventh month is the gradually cold season; from the sixteenth day of the eleventh month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the intensely cold season. In the Holy Teaching of the Tathāgata, the year has three seasons: from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the fifth month is the hot season; from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month is the rainy season; from the sixteenth day of the ninth month to the fifteenth day of the first month is the cold season. Or the year has four seasons: spring, summer, autumn, and winter. The three months of spring are the months of Caitra, Vaiśākha, and Jyeṣṭha, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the first month to the fifteenth day of the fourth month. The three months of summer are the months of Āṣāḍha, Śrāvaṇa, and Bhādrapada, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the fourth month to the fifteenth day of the seventh month. The three months of autumn are the months of Āśvina, Kārttika, and Mārgaśīrṣa, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the seventh month to the fifteenth day of the tenth month. The three months of winter are the months of Pauṣa, Māgha, and Phālguna, corresponding here to from the sixteenth day of the tenth month to the fifteenth day of the first month. Therefore, the monastic assembly in India, relying on the Buddha's Holy Teaching, observes two retreats (varṣā): either the former three months or the latter three months. The former three months correspond here to from the sixteenth day of the fifth month to the fifteenth day of the eighth month; the latter three months correspond here to from the sixteenth day of the sixth month to the fifteenth day of the ninth month. Translators of sūtras and vinayas in previous generations spoke sometimes of 'sitting summer' (zuoxia) or 'sitting la' (zuola); these are all vernacular terms of peripheral frontiers, failing to grasp the correct meaning of the Central Kingdom (Madhyadeśa), or because dialectal expressions were not harmonized, leading to errors in transmission and translation."\n\nExplication: With this text as proof, the correct and incorrect can be known. Moreover, the present 'sitting summer' actually adopts the four seasons of the Western Regions and is not what is elucidated in the Buddhist teaching; therefore the Record does not approve of it.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Among the latter seven, causing one to cultivate the contemplation of the three non-natures upon the other-dependent (paratantra)": the text is divided into four: First, generally indicating the meaning. The ninth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi explains this extensively, as already quoted above. Second, from "due to the other two natures" onward, providing the reason for cultivating the three upon a single nature. Third, from "therefore upon the single other-dependent" onward, concluding the above meaning. Fourth, from "the text then divides into three" onward, directly explaining the sūtra text.\n\nWithin the second, there are three parts: First, clarifying that the three natures are identical to one nature; second, clarifying that the three non-natures are identical to the three natures; third, clarifying their harmonization into one. In the first, the fully perfected nature (pariniṣpanna) is the essence of the other-dependent; therefore, in contemplating the other-dependent, one must contemplate its essence. Apart from the other-dependent nature, there is nothing that can be arbitrarily grasped; therefore the imagined nature (parikalpita) also relies on the other-dependent. "Moreover, deluded about the real, a semblance appears": this single phrase is complete with the three natures—delusion is the imagined, real is the fully perfected, and semblance is the other-dependent. The former idea clarified that the two are not apart from the other-dependent; this meaning clarifies that the two can establish the other-dependent; therefore merely contemplating the other-dependent already contains the three natures.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "namely relying on the three natures": second, it clarifies that the three non-natures are not apart from the three natures; this is entirely the verse text of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. Given in full, it should state: "Relying on these three natures, / Those three non-natures are established. / First is the non-nature of marks, / Next the non-nature of spontaneous arising, / And lastly, through detachment from the previously / Grasped nature of self and phenomena." This clarifies that the three non-natures exist relying on the three natures.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The three natures are still one": third, it clarifies harmonization. That is, the three natures are existent and yet are still one; how could the three non-natures, being without mark, definitely be three? Therefore, subsuming the three natures is merely one existence, and the three non-natures is merely one non-existence; apart from existence there is no non-existence, so existence and non-existence are non-dual. The first phrase pertains to revealing; the latter from "existence and non-existence mutually subvert" onward pertains to refuting. The remaining meanings have already had their characteristics fully set forth in the profound discourse.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The first three engage in the contemplation of the non-nature of arising": this is the second non-nature upon the other-dependent, namely what the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi calls "next the non-nature of spontaneous arising." The names of the three non-natures already appeared in the text of the chapter on "Verses on Mount Sumeru," and are now briefly explained again: Phenomena arise from conditions and have no nature of spontaneous arising; thus the upper "non-nature of arising" is what is negated, while the lower word "nature" is the nature of non-nature, meaning that having no self-nature of spontaneous arising is their nature. As for "the nature of ultimate non-nature": this is the third non-nature, the ultimate. Self-nature is what is negated, and the lower word "nature" has the same meaning as before, showing that having no such ultimate nature is its nature. The ultimate is the fully perfected, and the fully perfected is suchness (tathatā); hence the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: "The ultimate of these phenomena / Is also suchness; / Because it is eternally thus in its nature, / It is the true nature of consciousness-only." As for "the nature of marklessness": this is the first non-nature, meaning that the marks of the imagined are also unobtainable, like a snake upon a rope. The lower word "nature" is the first nature, taking the non-nature of marks as its nature.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The first line is the emptiness of the fruit, meaning that fruit dharmas arisen from conditions do not previously have an essence": this is the contemplation via the gates of previous existence and previous non-existence in the Madhyamakaśāstra. However, it is also called refutation by negation. Therein, it first negates and refutes their posited previous existence, generally citing the worldly primal nature (prakṛti) of the various traditions: minute particles (paramāṇu), which belongs to the non-Buddhists; the future treasury, which belongs to the Sarvāstivādins; causes and conditions, which pertains to both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna regarding marks; and mind-consciousness, which is Consciousness-Only, manifested by mind alone. If grasped as definitively existent, all are refuted. From "if there is a place of coming" onward, it refutes by concession: birds coming to roost in a tree is the text of Qingmu's commentary on the Madhyamakaśāstra explaining non-coming. It means that only if there were a bird previously that comes to the tree could it be called coming; now, going from non-existence to existence is called arising—how could it have existed previously?\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The next line is the emptiness of the cause": this refers to the sūtra's "there is also no maker." The maker is the cause, and the cause is the self. It is also a phrase of recitation, so it extends to phenomena. The Yogācārabhūmi says: "Conforming and benefiting is the meaning of cause; that is, an impermanent dharma serves as a cause; no permanent dharma can serve as a cause for a dharma. Moreover, although an impermanent dharma serves as a cause for impermanence, it serves as a cause for another nature and also serves as a cause for a subsequent own-nature, not this very instant." From "since there is no fruit" onward, it refutes it. This is refutation via the gate of mutual dependence, which can be understood. From "moreover, primal nature and so forth are also falsely imagined to exist through causes and conditions": this is also the gate of causes and conditions, because causes and conditions are without self-nature. It is also the gate of no essence, because there is only false conceptualization, without real essence.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, the first line is not arising from self": the above four lines were refuted through separate gates, but now they are all refuted using the gate of causes and conditions, broken open through four divisions, omitting only non-causality. The Madhyamakaśāstra says: "Dharmas do not arise from themselves, / Nor do they arise from another, / Nor from both, nor without a cause; / Therefore know they are unarisen." The Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā explains this via two gates: "First, 'not arising from self' means that all dharmas are not made by themselves, because they have no self-nature when not yet arisen. 'Not arising from another' means because the conditions of that dharma are not agents. 'Not arising from both' means because it is precisely through these two kinds of causes, not because they are not self-made and made by another. 'Not arising without cause' means because conditions have functionality with respect to sentient beings. Second, causes and conditions mutually subvert." The explanation says: "Because one's own seed exists, it is not from another," and so forth, as will be explained immediately below.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Moreover, the first line is not having existed previously": previously, only the first line used the gate of previous existence; now, all three lines use the gate of previous existence and previous non-existence. The "Examination of Conditions" chapter of the Madhyamakaśāstra says: "Before conditions, the fruit / Is neither existent nor non-existent. / If non-existent previously, of what is it the condition? / If existent previously, what use is a condition?" Master Ying says: "If previously existent in the cause, then it would be permissible for the sense-objects to reside in the six faculties. If previously non-existent in the cause, then the cause is identical to a non-cause. If the cause is identical to a non-cause, then one could drill ice to produce fire. If the sense-objects reside in the six faculties, then one could seek ice in boiling water. If both existent and non-existent, it would incur both of the above faults. The fourth line does not belong to this gate; hence the Madhyamakaśāstra says: 'If the fruit is not an arising of the existent, / Nor an arising of the non-existent, / Nor an arising of both existent and non-existent, / How can it be said that there are conditions?'"\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The next verse explains non-cessation by means of non-arising, having roughly three meanings": first is the gate of no essence; second, the gate of mutual dependence; third, the gate of causes and conditions.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The sūtra says non-arising is precisely the Buddha": this is precisely Dharmodgata answering Sadāprarudita in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: "The suchness of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha; the non-arising of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha," and so forth. Since the lower line says "This person sees the Tathāgata," non-arising is precisely the meaning of the Buddha. In the chapter on "Verses atop Mount Sumeru," Bodhisattva Sarvamatī states: "All dharmas are without arising, / All dharmas are without cessation; / If one can understand in this way, / All buddhas will constantly appear before one."\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "The treatise says if one sees the dharma of causes and conditions": this is at the end of the "Examination of the Four Noble Truths" chapter of the Madhyamakaśāstra: "Therefore it is said in the sūtra: / If one sees the dharma of causes and conditions, / One is able to see the Buddha, / And see suffering, origination, cessation, and the path." The sūtra cited by the treatise is the Jñānālokālaṃkāra-sūtra, which will be fully cited at the tenth bodhisattva.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "Because each contains two meanings, the word 'both' is used": this explains the above statement "cultivating both." That it says "each" specifically takes the upper half as contemplating marks and the lower half as contemplating benefits, constituting two meanings each, namely the other-dependent and the fully perfected, as listed in the commentary below. The lower negation of the agent also contains the other-dependent and fully perfected; thus this word "each" encompasses both the active and the passive, only then according with the statement of cultivating both across the two verses.\n\nRegarding the commentary's statement, "First, completing the preceding": it specifically shows the characteristics of the two meanings; this is the meaning within the other-dependent. It first clarifies the contemplation of marks. Because the preceding verse negated the four active characteristics—briefly mentioning arising and cessation, which already includes abiding and change—this verse negates the characterized essence of physical and mental dharmas. Because the four characteristics combine to form the conditioned, the dharma itself arises from conditions and is thus without self-nature. The contemplation of benefits can be understood.