大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 48

English (machine translation) 48

Language: English

48.1

Expounded by the śramaṇa Chengguan of the Great Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang in the Tang

Regarding the commentary statement, "Later, 'like this, each and every...'" onward: in explaining this third section, the commentary text has three parts: first, the direct explanation; second, from "From countless..." onward, explaining back the characteristics of the increasing numbers in the preceding two sections; third, from "However, the words 'each and every'..." onward, determining and selecting. Regarding "It is said that it definitely pervades fragrance and so forth": the ten items of fragrance and so forth are the essences capable of forming [the offerings], hence they definitely pervade. Regarding "It does not completely pervade canopies and so forth": canopies and so forth are that which is formed. That which is formed has twenty items; for instance, using fragrance to make palaces, there are balustrades and the like, but when fragrance makes light, how could there be balustrades and the like? How much more so when the light of lamps is that which is capable of forming, and similar to the previous, it also forms canopies and so forth. Using the light of lamps to form the light of lamps, upon this light it is difficult to possess balustrades and the like; hence it is said that it does not completely pervade canopies and so forth. Because among that which is capable of forming there is the light of lamps, and among that which is formed there is also the light of lamps, light of lamps is briefly cited to show the absence of balustrades and the like. By analogy, take for instance a fragrant river: within the river, how could the aforementioned balustrades and the like be placed? It is clear that the general characteristics possess them, while specific characteristics may lack them; this can be seen upon reflection.

48.3

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "This is an upāya for entering emptiness": this is because true emptiness is unobtained, yet nothing is not obtained. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "In order to show that conforming to characteristics and parting from characteristics have no prior or posterior": in explaining the above, it properly uses the preceding meaning. This is because it intends to employ the parting from characteristics and non-attainment to guide the preceding existence of conforming to characteristics. Regarding the statement, "The meaning also covers what follows": the preceding meaning concludes what came before; this meaning generates what follows, because one also does not abide in parting from characteristics. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "Based on the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā*" onwards: this illustrates by parallel example that non-attainment serves as an upāya. Just as purity runs through all dharmas, so purity is taken as an upāya. If one speaks of non-arising, one then says that when practicing the prajñāpāramitā, one knows that all dharmas are unarisen—namely, that form is unarisen, sensation, conception, volition, and consciousness are unarisen, the eye is unarisen, and the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind are unarisen, and so forth. Here, this is still merely a brief mention of the upāyas that enable entry; extensively, there are many more. Therefore, the text adds the word "and so forth," which collectively encompasses being without reliance, without activity, purity, neither increasing nor decreasing, neither defiled nor pure, ungraspable, invisible, immovable, indestructible, and so on. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "Because phenomenal dharmas are already insubstantial" onwards: this is divided into two parts: first, a general explanation; next, the specific explanation from "Because karma is empty" onwards. Here there are two intentions: first, properly using the principle that conditioned arising is empty to refute provisional and Hinayāna views, revealing that karma cannot act as a cause to bring about a fruit, nor can a fruit act as a fruit to requite a cause. Second, it concurrently refutes the heterodox views that the fruit is present within the cause, and so forth. Those who assert that the fruit is present within the cause claim, for instance, that milk is the cause of curd, that curd is present within milk, and that after curd is formed, milk is also present within it; hence they say that the cause is present within the fruit. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "If understood in terms of the contemplating mind": above, it was explained in terms of the principle of dharmas, spanning both object and cognition; here, it is explained in terms of the contemplating mind. Whenever either [affirmation or negation] is not existent, it is called quiescence; furthermore, when the mind does not dwell on phenomena or principle, only then is it called quiescence. Not losing illumination is called function; not grasping at the characteristic of function means that function is constantly quiescent. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "This differs from the initial line only in terms of phenomenon and principle": the initial line is in terms of principle—entering without entering. Here, it is in terms of phenomena—being able to enter without entering. Because all dharmas are deep-seated precisely as phenomena, it states: "entering the profound right through phenomena." Regarding the Commentary's citing the text from "The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā* states" onwards: this passage is cited to distinguish differing nuances of meaning. That is, the intention of the *Prajñāpāramitā* is rather that quiescence occurs precisely through function. This is the same as the verse atop Mount Sumeru cited earlier: "Non-seeing is precisely seeing, / able to see all dharmas. / If one has seeing regarding dharmas, / that is seeing nothing at all." This verse first presents the positive and then the counter-position, whereas the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā* first presents the counter-position and then the positive. The intention here is to clarify that principle does not obstruct phenomena; hence the intention is distinct. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "The final line does not assert an agent or object of seeing": because the text says "not having dharmas," and "dharmas" encompasses both the agent and the object of seeing. How is it known that dharmas are both the agent and object of seeing? Because the lower line says "completely knowing and seeing," which is identical to the Vajra[cchedikā]'s statement that the Tathāgata completely knows and completely sees. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Being provisional designations based on mutual dependence, they are both unattainable": this brings out the meaning of transcending phenomena and principle. First is the gate of mutual dependence: that is, principle is spoken of in dependence on phenomena, and phenomena are spoken of in dependence on principle. Just as short exists in dependence on long, short is unattainable, and so forth. Second, regarding "provisional designations": all dharmas are quiescent and extinguished, fundamentally transcending name and speech. Here it is said that phenomena and principle are merely provisional designations, and thus both are mutually transcended. The above is the commentator's analytical exposition; the lower line is the sūtra's own analytical exposition. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "Truly, because phenomena are insubstantial" onwards: this brings out the characteristic of the non-obstruction of phenomena and principle. This is the general intention, and also the gate of mutual identity among the ten gates, and the meaning of non-obstruction among the three meanings, extensively discussed as above. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "The above four lines" onwards: this generally harmonizes the preceding four. The statement "existence has never been diminished" means that dharmas are precisely emptiness, not that emptiness results from the destruction of dharmas. "Existence has never persisted" means that it is the existence of emptiness itself, for the characteristics of existence are insubstantial. The statement "neither hidden nor manifest" means that when phenomena persist, emptiness is hidden, and when principle persists, emptiness is manifest; now, because both have ceased, it is neither hidden nor manifest. The statement "persistence and vanishing are simultaneous" means that because emptiness does not obstruct existence, there is persistence; because existence does not obstruct emptiness, there is vanishing. However, hidden and manifest are both explained in terms of principle, while persistence and vanishing are both stated in terms of phenomena; this is also a complementary and abridged phrasing. Regarding the Commentary's concluding from "The four lines are fused" onwards: this not only departs from the preceding conformity to characteristics, but also departs from departing from characteristics; this is true non-obstruction, true bhūtakoṭi. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Existing due to causes and conditions": generally speaking, there are four meanings in all: 1. existing due to conditioned arising; 2. being empty due to having no intrinsic nature; 3. being empty due to conditioned arising; 4. existing due to having no intrinsic nature. Here, it merely takes the two lines on causes and conditions: that is, when dharmas arise from conditions, how could one call them nonexistent? Second, from conditions they lack intrinsic nature, and are therefore called empty. The above two are the two gates of emptiness and existence. To state that from causes and conditions they are not existent clarifies that the Middle Way also derives from causes and conditions. That is, since they exist conditionally, existence is precisely non-existence; since they are empty from conditions, emptiness is precisely non-emptiness. Combining the preceding two lines yields being both empty and existent. The principles of the four gates all derive from causes and conditions. Further, from "Due to causes and conditions there is transmigration" onwards, it distinguishes that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are also both due to causes and conditions. From "Up to and including everything" onwards, it concludes. This parallels the meanings clarified above, merely giving an outline. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "Therefore the *Madhyamakaśāstra* says" onwards: this cites scriptural proof that all derive from causes and conditions. However, preceding this verse in the treatise is a verse stating: "Whatever dharma is produced from causes and conditions, / that I declare to be emptiness; / it is also a provisional designation, / and also the meaning of the Middle Way. / There has never been a single dharma / that does not arise from causes and conditions; / therefore, among all dharmas, / there are none that are not empty." The preceding verse could also verify that the preceding four lines establish the meaning of the three contemplations, but the subsequent verse explains the preceding verse, so it is solely cited. And the treatise summarily concludes, "Therefore among all dharmas, there are none that are not empty"; it could likewise say, "There has never been a single dharma that does not arise from causes and conditions; therefore among all dharmas, there are none that are not provisional," and also, "Therefore among all dharmas, there are none that are not the Middle." Here, it merely takes the meaning that all dharmas derive from conditions. Regarding the Commentary's dealing with an objection from "Conditioned dharmas are conditionally arisen" onwards: the objection asks: "The *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* states, 'I contemplate all conditioned factors as being entirely impermanent. How is this known? Because of causes and conditions. If all dharmas arise from conditions, one knows they are impermanent; among all heterodox teachings, there is not a single dharma that does not arise from conditions, and therefore they are impermanent. Space, the Tathāgata, and the Buddha-nature do not arise from conditions, and are therefore called permanent; thus the unconditioned is not due to causes and conditions.' Why then say that conditioned and unconditioned dharmas both derive from causes and conditions?" Therefore it now answers: deriving from conditions has two meanings: 1. arising from conditions, which has the meaning of impermanence; 2. being revealed in relation to conditions, so how could it not be conditional? Therefore it says that the Buddha-nature is revealed by revealing causes (vyañjakahetu)—how could it not be arisen from causes and conditions? This is one meaning. Next, it states from "Dependent on the existence of the conditioned" onwards, explaining via the gate of mutual dependence: depending on the conditioned is precisely the meaning of deriving from conditions. It further says, "Moreover, by mutually overshadowing and exhausting characteristics": it must wait for mutual overshadowing and exhaustion of characteristics, and therefore true unconditioned nature also derives from conditions. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "The treatise says, 'If one sees the dharma of causes and conditions, one is able to see the Buddha'": both the verse above and this passage are from the "Chapter on the Four Noble Truths." The line below says, "seeing suffering, origination, cessation, and the path," which can also verify the second line. Regarding the statement, "There are not even two, how much less five": this concludes by rebuking the five natures doctrine. Regarding the statement, "Karma subsumes retribution," and so forth: because the sūtra merely speaks of the realm of karma, now karma subsumes retribution, so there are cause and effect; the objective realm must correspond to mind, so there are internal and external. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "Six: manifesting principle right through phenomena without destroying phenomena": the conditioned is phenomena, and the unconditioned is principle. Phenomena can manifest principle; therefore it says, "within the conditioned realm, displaying unconditioned dharmas." Phenomena are precisely principle, so phenomena are not destroyed; if one were to destroy phenomena, it would result in annihilationism. The lower line is the inverse of this, as can be understood. Regarding the Commentary's stating from "If one extinguishes and destroys the conditioned" onwards: this conversely establishes the above two. From "Therefore, if viewed in terms of mutual identity" onwards, it concludes and establishes the correct doctrine. Within this, there are briefly several gates: 1. the gate of mutual identity. 2. From "If viewed in terms of non-obstruction" onwards: that is the gate of mutual formation. It also says, "yet neither principle nor phenomena": that is the gate of not being identical. These are six of the ten gates of the non-obstruction of phenomena and principle: namely, the gate of true principle being identical to phenomena, the gate of phenomenal dharmas being identical to principle, the gate of phenomena being formed based on principle, the gate of phenomena being able to manifest principle, the gate of true principle not being phenomena, and the gate of phenomenal dharmas not being principle. Furthermore, what was earlier referred to as "mutually overshadowing and exhausting characteristics" is the gate of true principle overshadowing phenomena and the gate of phenomena being able to conceal principle. Discussing non-obstruction generally means that phenomena pervade principle and principle pervades phenomena. Eight gates are not different, and the two gates of not being identical are not one; therefore the Commentary concludes, "Conditioned and unconditioned essences are neither one nor different." Regarding the Commentary's stating from "'Displaying' means showing" onwards: it individually explains according to difficulties.

48.4

Fifth: pariṇāmanā. Regarding the Commentary's stating, "The first three can be known": the remainder refers to the five in the sūtra: 1. repentance, 2. reverent salutation, 3. requesting [the turning of the wheel of Dharma], 4. rejoicing [in merit], 5. pariṇāmanā; pariṇāmanā comes last. Formerly, there was an independent treatise distinguishing them through six gates: 1. explaining the number, 2. explaining the names, 3. identifying the essence, 4. explaining the characteristics, 5. clarifying the benefits, 6. questions and answers. Now all of these are complete, but identifying the essence is merely brief. It is divided into three overall: first, clarifying expansion and contraction, which is that number; second, explaining the names and distinguishing the characteristics; third, critical examination, encompassing the remaining distinct gates. Now, the first. First, as eight practices. Regarding the "Sūtra of the Questions of the Bodhisattva Vimalaprabhā": this is a sūtra in only one fascicle; its general purport is standard, as can be known. Second: "or combining salutation and praise," as both are the basis for repentance. Third: "or omitting offerings," which makes only six, since offerings also pertain to the Buddhas. Fourth: "or merely making five, since pariṇāmanā and generating vows differ only as general and particular": both are vows. Pariṇāmanā is general, while generating vows is particular, because it is an individual generation [of a vow]. Regarding the statement, "as in the *Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā*": that is, the third section initially clarifies it, and not until the fourth is repentance treated, which is today's morning repentance; the fifth is generating vows, which is King Ajātaśatru's generation of vows in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*, inserted by later people. Fifth: "The present text relies on this": this then matches the five above. Sixth: "or there are only three": this is chapter seven of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*. If relying on the *Śīlavaiśāradya*, they are combined into two, because salutation and praise are what repentance relies upon, relying on the virtue of the person. Pariṇāmanā subsumes vows, and also subsumes rejoicing and requesting. Therefore it concludes, "expansive or abridged according to the occasion." Furthermore, "according to the occasion" means observing the occasion at hand and applying what is expansive or abridged, though during the three periods of day and night, it should not be neglected.

48.5

Regarding the Commentary's stating from "However, repentance (*kṣamā*) means confession and revelation" onwards: second is explaining the text, which means explaining the names and distinguishing the characteristics. The four matters constitute four sections. Now, the first: explaining repentance. First, explaining the name. For the two characters *chanhui* (repentance), ancient masters had two explanations; the Commentary's present explanation is that of Tiantai. It also combines Chinese and Sanskrit: the present explanation is half Sanskrit and half Chinese. *Chan* in *chanhui* is *kṣama* in Sanskrit, which is translated here as requesting forbearance. *Hui* belongs to this land. Its essence is remorse (kaukṛtya): abhorring past faults, and entreating the Three Jewels to bear with and forgive one's transgressions. To use *hui* alone is not one of the six compound interpretations; combining the two constitutes a tatpuruṣa compound. The above explains the name. Second, stating "Because it eliminates bad karmic obstructions, repentance is required": this distinguishes the benefit of repentance, and is also the purpose of repentance.

48.6

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "However, repentance has two kinds": this distinguishes the characteristics.

48.7

As for the commentary's phrase "As in the Vaipulya [sūtras]": the sūtra instructs that one must first adorn and purify the sanctuary, smearing the ground and both the inside and outside of the chamber with scented mud; make a circular altar with coloured paintings; hang five-coloured banners; burn shore-incense (kālāguru); light lamps; spread high seats; and invite twenty-four statues of the Honoured Ones (more are also fine). One must prepare delicacies and dishes with all one's might, and must have new clothes and footwear; if there are no new ones, wash old ones, taking them off and putting them on when going out and coming in, so that there is no admixture of impurities. One observes a continuous fast for seven days, bathing three times a day. On the first day, make offerings to monks as many or as few as one wishes, and separately invite one master who is clear on the inner and outer Vinaya to be one's preceptor, receive the twenty-four precepts and the dhāraṇī-mantras, and confess one's transgressions facing the master. It must be on the eighth day or the fifteenth day of the month; seven days must be taken as one period, and this cannot be reduced; if one can proceed further, it is at one's discretion and capability. There must be ten persons or fewer; it must not exceed this, and laypeople are also permitted. One must prepare single-seamed triple robes, fully equipped with the Buddha's ritual forms, circumambulate one hundred and twenty circuits, sit back and contemplate, and so forth. It is extensively as explained in the sūtras. The Fo ming jing is commonly seen and heard.

48.8

As for the commentary's phrase "as explained by Vimalakīrti": this refers to the section on Upāli. Upāli addressed the Buddha: "I remember that in the past, there were two bhikṣus who had violated the Vinaya conduct; feeling ashamed, they did not dare ask the Buddha, but came and said to me: 'We have violated the Vinaya, and truly feeling ashamed, do not dare ask the Buddha. We wish you to resolve our doubts and regrets, so that we may escape this fault.' I then explained the Dharma to them according to the rules. At that time, Vimalakīrti came and said to me: 'O Upāli! Do not further increase the offenses of these two bhikṣus; you should directly eradicate them and not disturb their minds. Why is this? The nature of that offense does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and does not exist in the middle. As the Buddha taught, because the mind is defiled, sentient beings are defiled; because the mind is pure, sentient beings are pure. The mind also does not exist inside, does not exist outside, nor does it exist in the middle. Just as the mind is so, the defilement of offenses is also so, and all phenomena are also so; they do not go beyond suchness. When you, Upāli, attain liberation through the characteristic of the mind, is there any defilement?' I said: 'No.' Vimalakīrti said: 'The characteristic of the mind of all sentient beings is undefiled, and it is also like this. O Upāli! False discrimination is defilement; absence of false discrimination is purity. Grasping a self is defilement; not grasping a self is purity. Perversion is defilement; non-perversion is purity. All phenomena are like a dream, like a mirage, like the moon in the water, like an image in a mirror, arising from false discrimination. One who understands this is called one who upholds the Vinaya; one who understands this is called one of excellent comprehension'", and so forth; this is purely using contemplation on principle to scold [reliance on] phenomena. As for the commentary's phrase "If in the contemplation of Samantabhadra": at the beginning of the sūtra, it instructs one to confess through all six sense faculties facing the buddhas of the ten directions and the Bodhisattva Samantabhadra throughout the six periods of the day and night; this is confession through phenomena. It further instructs one to contemplate the mind, so that this wisdom of emptiness accords with the mind; this is confession through principle. As in the earlier explanation of Vairocana, the sūtra has already been cited. What is commonly used in present times—"The sea of all karmic hindrances arises entirely from false discrimination" and so forth—is the summary gāthā at the end of that sūtra; all of them clarify both phenomena and principle. The intent of the "Chapter on the Minor Marks" will be explained below.

48.9

As for the commentary's phrase "Paying reverent homage": this takes up the second practice in the sūtra. Below the phrase "eradicates arrogance", the commentary's explanation first clarifies the benefit of the practice. Because of arrogance, one cannot pay reverent homage. Now, destroying the mountain of arrogance is precisely the eradication of evil; generating the wholesome [attitude] of faith and reverence is precisely the accomplishment of virtue; both are benefits of the practice. From "Ratnamati" downward, this distinguishes the characteristics. The former seven are the Tripiṭaka master's meaning; the latter three were added by the commentary based on doctrine. The explanation of the name is omitted because it is easy to understand. However, concerning the third, "homage of reverence", where it says "the five wheels touching the ground": the Li gou hui jing says: "Making vows one by one, the initial general vow says: 'Now, with my five wheels I pay homage to the Buddha in order to cut off the five destinies and leave behind the five hindrances; may all sentient beings always dwell peacefully, not destroying the five superknowledges and fully possessing the five eyes. When my right knee touches the ground, may all sentient beings attain the path of true enlightenment. When my left knee touches the ground, may all sentient beings not generate wrong views toward non-Buddhist teachings, and all be firmly established in the path of true enlightenment. When my right hand touches the ground, just as the World-Honoured One sat on the diamond seat, with his right hand pointing to the ground, shaking [the earth] and manifesting auspicious signs to realize great bodhi, may I now also, together with all sentient beings, equally realize the path of enlightenment. When my left hand touches the ground, may all sentient beings leave behind the non-Buddhists; as for those difficult to subdue, through the four means of gathering, may they be gathered in and made to enter the correct path. When my head and crown touch the ground, may all sentient beings leave behind the mind of pride, and all accomplish the characteristic of the invisible crown.'" The remaining meanings may be contemplated.

48.10

As for the commentary's phrase "As for entreaty": this takes up the third practice. Below, the commentary explains it. From "eradicate slandering the Dharma" downward, it first clarifies the accomplished benefit. Second, from "the śrāvaka saves oneself" downward, is the purpose of its appearance. Third, from "this text is brief" downward, distinguishes the characteristics.

48.11

As for the commentary's phrase "The Upadeśa further adds entreating the Buddha to remain in the world": this is like the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā also entreating [the Buddha] to remain in the world, saying: "All buddhas of the ten directions / who presently attain the path, / I entreat to turn the wheel of the Dharma / and bring peace and joy to all sentient beings. / All buddhas of the ten directions, / if they wish to relinquish their lifespan, / I now bow with head and face / and entreat them to remain long."

48.12

As for the commentary's phrase "The Zhancha jing, etc.": that sūtra fully possesses the five confessions. In entreating, it says: "I only wish that all bodhisattvas of the ten directions who have not yet attained true enlightenment may quickly attain true enlightenment; and that those who have already attained true enlightenment may always remain in the world, turning the wheel of the true Dharma and not entering nirvāṇa." Explanation: this contains all three.

48.13

As for the commentary's phrase "The next sentence, 'Because of hearing the Dharma...'" downward: this is the sūtra itself distinguishing the accomplished benefits of entreaty. "Mental application that understands characteristics" and so forth are the seven kinds of mental application; their meaning is as explained in the Third Ground.

48.14

As for the commentary's phrase "Rejoicing in merit": this clarifies the fourth practice. From "in order to celebrate" downward is the explanation: first, it clarifies the name of the practice; second, from "eradicates jealousy" downward, the benefits of the practice; third, from "however, the Daśabhūmika" downward, distinguishes the characteristics. Now, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* is largely identical to the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā. The Vibhāṣā-śāstra says: "All merit from generosity, / keeping precepts, and cultivating meditation, / produced from body, speech, and mind, / existing in the past, future, and present, / of those who study the three vehicles, / and those who are complete in the One Vehicle, / and all the merit of ordinary beings— / in all of these I rejoice accordingly." Explanation: its first three lines apply to the buddhas of the three times.

48.15

As for the commentary's phrase "Rejoicing in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā" downward: this re-illustrates the accomplished benefits of rejoicing, explaining the above "merit of equal wholesome roots". First, it cites the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, which is the seventeenth [chapter]. Next, it cites the Lotus Sūtra, which is the eighteenth chapter in the sixth fascicle, "Chapter on the Merit of Rejoicing": "At that time, the Bodhisattva Maitreya addressed the Buddha, saying: 'World-Honoured One! If there is someone who hears this Lotus Sūtra and rejoices, how much blessing does that person obtain?' and spoke in verse: 'After the World-Honoured One's parinirvāṇa, / if there is someone who hears this sūtra, / if they can rejoice, / how much blessing do they obtain?'" The sūtra's answer is extensive; here it will be briefly cited. It means that there is a person who, having heard this Lotus Sūtra in the assembly and rejoiced, leaves the Dharma assembly and goes to another place to expound it for others. This second person, having heard it, expounds it in turn for a third person. In this manner it is passed on sequentially up to the fiftieth person; the merit obtained by that fiftieth good son or good daughter shall now be spoken of. Suppose that in four hundred myriad koṭis of asaṃkhyeya worlds, the six destinies and four modes of birth fill them entirely. A person seeking blessings gives to each and every sentient being enough gold, silver, lapis lazuli, mother-of-pearl, agate, coral, and amber to fill Jambudvīpa, up to and including elephants, horses, carriages, male and female servants, people, and seven-jeweled pavilions. Compared to the merit of the fiftieth person hearing the Lotus Sūtra and rejoicing, it does not amount to a hundredth part, up to being beyond what reckoning or metaphor can know. Below it concludes: "How much more so for the one who initially heard it in the assembly and rejoiced!" Explanation: this reveals the greatness of the merit. From the phrase "This is based on rejoicing in the Tathāgata's expedient and ultimate merit": the commentary sets forth the reason why so much is obtained. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā merely explains the blessings of rejoicing in a general way; here, within the objects of rejoicing, superior and inferior are differentiated: rejoicing in a superior object yields still greater blessings. The words "expedient and ultimate merit" refer to the Lotus Sūtra. Therefore, the sūtra says: "This Lotus Sūtra opens the gate of expedient means (expedient) and reveals the characteristic of reality (ultimate). The Tathāgata's wisdom is profound and immeasurable (ultimate); the gate to that wisdom is difficult to understand and difficult to enter (expedient)." "Within the one Buddha vehicle, he discriminates and preaches three"—this is opening the expedient from the ultimate. "In the buddha lands of the ten directions, there is only the Dharma of the One Vehicle, there is neither a second nor a third"—this is gathering the three back to the one, gathering the expedient back into the ultimate. "The World-Honoured One's Dharma having lasted long, he must at last preach the real"—this is the ultimate. "The Buddha, through the power of expedient means, reveals the teaching of the three vehicles"—this is the expedient. The text of the three cycles across the twenty-eight chapters merely reveals the Tathāgata's expedient and ultimate knowledge and vision. The ancients said: "If this flower does not exist, that is all; if it exists, flower and fruit are both contained. If this sūtra is not preached, that is all; if it is preached, expedient and ultimate are both distinguished." One clearly knows that the Lotus Sūtra does not go beyond expedient and ultimate merit. Since it reaches the ultimate and proclaims what is difficult to believe and difficult to comprehend, if one can now rejoice in it, one's virtue is immeasurable. The person who initially hears it will in the near term obtain purification of the six faculties, and in the long term swiftly accomplish the fruit of buddhahood; therefore it is said that their blessings are still greater.

48.16

As for the commentary's phrase "However, the Buddha is the superior condition for eradicating offenses" downward: this is the third [section], Critical Analysis. Within this, there are precisely three parts: first, clarifying the sequence; second, from "however, the five fruits of homage, etc." downward, distinguishing the karmic retributions; third, from "in terms of teachings" downward, selecting and determining according to the teachings. As for "may be contemplated": like the earlier ten layers of paying homage to the Buddha, the first two are not proper deportment, and are distinguished simply to let one know they are incorrect. The third applies to the expedient and Hīnayāna. The fourth is the initial teaching, because it accords with the meaning of emptiness. The fifth is the final teaching, because it encompasses both phenomena and principle. The sixth and seventh are the sudden teaching, because one only pays homage to the mind-Buddha and there is no homage within homage. The eighth applies to the final teaching, because of the One Vehicle of shared teaching. The latter three combine to form the perfect teaching. The eighth is the subject paying homage, because one contains all. The ninth harmonizes the profound and the shallow, because phenomena follow principle in harmonization, and phenomena and phenomena are unobstructed. And as for saying that it subsumes the former six: because two are improper deportment; one merely pays homage to the mind-Buddha; and the ten layers are endlessly layered. A lower sūtra passage says: "Within a single pore, one clearly sees / an inconceivable number of limitless buddhas. / All pores are also like this; / paying homage everywhere to all lamps of the world. / Raising the whole body, sequentially and reverently paying homage / to such boundless Supreme Ones; / also with words praising everywhere, / exhausting all future kalpas. / The offering implements at a single Tathāgata's place, / their number is limitless, equal to sentient beings", and so forth. Furthermore, the "Practices of Samantabhadra" says: "Within a single particle of dust, one sees all buddhas / surrounded by assemblies of bodhisattvas; / the dust of the dharmadhātu is also like this. / At the place of each and every Tathāgata, / paying homage with all the dust of kṣetras", and so forth. If one relies on this homage, a single homage has inexhaustible merit—how could it be measured? The other seven gates can be contemplated and calibrated accordingly. Without entering this contemplation, one exhausts oneself in vain.

48.17

Regarding the commentary's statement that "Moreover, these two passages are fully endowed with the eighteen perfections": according to the *Buddhagūmi-sūtra-śāstra*, these eighteen kinds have already been fully listed and explained in the "Flower Treasury Chapter." Since the present sūtra text possesses them completely, the commentary merely correlates them in accordance with the text, explaining any difficulties. The subcommentary now follows that sūtra and śāstra again in citing the sūtra and correlating the categories. The śāstra states: "The sūtra says: 'The Bhagavān resided in a great palace adorned with the supreme radiance of the seven jewels, emitting great light that universally illuminated all boundless worlds (this above is perfection of visible color); wonderfully ornamented and arrayed in immeasurable locations (perfection of shape and color); circular and boundless, its dimensions difficult to fathom (perfection of measure); surpassing the realms traversed by the three realms of existence (perfection of location); arisen from superior supramundane roots of goodness (perfection of cause); having the most utterly sovereign pure consciousness as its characteristic (perfection of fruit). The capital where the Tathāgata resides (perfection of host); where assemblies of great bodhisattvas gather together like clouds (perfection of auxiliary retinue); constantly attended and followed by immeasurable devas, nāgas, humans, non-humans, and others (perfection of retinue); sustained by the joy and bliss of the vast Dharma taste (perfection of maintenance); accomplishing all meaningful benefits for all sentient beings (perfection of activity); eliminating all defilements, disasters, calamities, entanglements, and impurities (perfection of gathering benefit); far removed from all māras (perfection of fearlessness); the basis upon which the Tathāgata's adornments, surpassing all other adornments, rest (perfection of basis); taking great mindfulness and wisdom as the path of travel (that is, perfection of path); taking great śamatha and wondrous vipaśyanā as the One Vehicle (perfection of vehicle); taking the liberations of great emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness as the gates of entry (perfection of gate); adorned by an assemblage of immeasurable merits; established upon a multitude of great jewel flower kings (perfection of support).'" The śāstra states: "This demonstrates the perfection of the Tathāgata's dwelling place. That is, because the Buddha's pure land is constituted by the eighteen pure circumstances of perfection, it is termed 'perfection.'" Having thus completed the listing of the eighteen perfections, it concludes below: "Such eighteen perfections are precisely this perfection. The palace adorned by them is named the Buddha's pure land. The Buddha resided in such a great palace and preached this sūtra." Explanation: The explanations following the commentary below proceed in the order of the present sūtra, and their exegesis is based on the extensive commentary of that śāstra.

48.18

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Now, first, it raises the time and specifies the place": within this general summary, "many in number" refers to the vast lands adorned by the Buddha being equal to the number of all atoms; within this, the characteristics of perfection are already present. For instance, "arrayed across directions and locations" is the perfection of direction and location; "because it is without measure" is the perfection of measure. "Manifested by pure consciousness" means it is fathomed only by a Buddha. That is, the pure consciousness of the ālaya manifests the land of self-enjoyment; the seventh pure consciousness manifests the land of other-enjoyment; and the remaining five pure consciousnesses manifest the land of transformation. "Fathomed only by a Buddha" refers to the eight consciousnesses transformed into wisdom being fathomed only by a Buddha. Upon ascending the stages, it is seen partially, for one sees the other-enjoyment [land]. Although it contains distinctions, the intent in all cases is general.

48.19

Regarding the commentary's statement, "First, it clarifies the perfection of cause": this clarifies it in general. From "The first sentence is also general" onward, it clarifies it specifically, with five specific sentences. Both general and specific, it refers to that which is flowed forth and drawn forth by pure karmic practices. Within the passage of "both general", one's own self-benefiting karmic actions directly bring about that which is "flowed forth", while other-benefiting karmic actions serve as conditions for sentient beings and are thus called "drawn forth"; hence the commentary explains, "because it manifests in accordance with karma." This karma is the karma of those being transformed: taking the karma of bodhisattvas and sentient beings as the cause, it directly evokes the lands of other-enjoyment and transformation. The Tathāgata's benefiting of others acts as the sovereign condition, which is accomplished in accordance with the karma of other sentient beings; hence it is called "drawn forth." A spring being able to form a pond is called "flowed forth"; digging a pond to draw water in, that water is called "drawn forth." This is precisely the same as the citation of the venerable Dao Sheng's meaning in the "World Chapter": practice leads to the pure land, it does not fabricate it; that which fabricates the land is the category of sentient beings.

48.20

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Specifically, it pertains solely to the enjoyment land": this explains the above statement that it is "also specific." Within this, there are three parts: first, a general explanation; second, citing the śāstra to establish the meaning of the two causes; third, indicating the essence of the two causes. Now, regarding the first: direct generation through the primary cause is called "flowing"; secondary generation through the sovereign condition is called "drawing."

48.21

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Therefore the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra* says": this is the second part, citing the śāstra to establish the meaning of the two causes. Here there are three meanings. First, positing only the primary cause: this already contains two dharmas—first, the Tathāgata's pure consciousness, and second, uncontaminated goodness; combining these two constitutes the cause, just as the permeation from much hearing combines with the nature of understanding in the ālayavijñāna to form the cause. However, the citation of the śāstra is still brief; if given fully, it should say: "The great palace takes the supramundane non-conceptual wisdom and the subsequent wisdom's roots of goodness as its cause, thereby arising; it is not without cause, nor does it have Maheśvara or the like as its cause." And further: "This uses the seeds of uncontaminated wholesome dharmas of the originally present non-conceptual wisdom and subsequent wisdom, cultivated and expanded over three incalculable eons, as the generative cause for the manifestation of this pure land. This Buddha pure land is generated taking the uncontaminated roots of goodness within the Tathāgata's consciousness as its cause." Thus, the two dharmas—that generated through cultivation and that originally present—combine to constitute the primary cause. Second, it says: "Another opinion holds that it is produced solely by the sovereign condition": setting forth the reason, it says that it is due to external phenomena. That is, using consciousness to produce consciousness can be a primary cause, but how could an external pure land be produced by a primary cause? The external land is the sovereign fruit, and therefore it is a sovereign condition. Third, it says: "Another opinion holds that it is also a primary cause": this establishes both. It does not mean accepting only the primary cause; it accepts both the sovereign and the primary cause, which is why it says "it is also directly able to generate," thereby setting forth the meaning of the primary cause. Below, "If it were not so" raises an objection in reverse, establishing that all external phenomena invariably take internal permeation as their cause, thus clarifying that there is a primary cause; hence it says: "If not, there would be no primary cause. To have none would be illogical." Next, "Because external phenomena considered in relation to each other are not primary causes" precisely validates the above meaning, using the first master's position to challenge the second master: since you hold that because they are external phenomena they are solely sovereign conditions, external phenomena cannot be established as primary causes. Now it is asserted that the external relies on internal permeation, clearly showing that there is a primary cause. If so, since the internal permeates the external and they are not of the same category, how can it be called a primary cause? The objective realm is completely transformed by mind; that is, the objective division of the eight consciousnesses is not separate from mind, and thus is also a primary cause. "The intention is to take the latter meaning as correct": fourth, the commentator definitively adopts this, also showing that it encompasses both meanings.

48.22

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Some say that the retribution pure land takes the seeds of the four dusts as its primary cause": this identifies the essence of the two causes. The seeds of the four dusts are entirely within consciousness; that is, they are the seeds of the objective division within the eight consciousnesses. As for the statement "or taking the self-benefiting subsequent [wisdom]": above it was stated that the ten thousand practices of the six pāramitās pertain to both benefits. Here, relying on the distinctive meaning of Consciousness-Only, subsequent wisdom that benefits others is the condition for the lands of other-enjoyment and transformation, and therefore subsequent wisdom that benefits oneself is used as the condition for the land of self-enjoyment. Below, the commentary says "Relying on the tenet of this sūtra": this directly differs from the previous text that took only self-benefit as the condition for self-enjoyment; therefore, practices of both benefits together grasp the land of other-enjoyment. From "Because they are all..." onward, it provides the reason for their mutual interchangeability, hence pointing to the "World Chapter." It is also clarified in the Xianshou chapter of the "Chapter on Inquiries and Clarifications." The rest can be deduced accordingly.

48.23

Regarding the commentary's statement, "Presently accomplishing all meaningful benefits for all sentient beings": this is text from the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra*, merely abbreviated to its essentials. In full, the śāstra says: "'Just as its pure land has the perfection of maintenance, what activity does it perform?' (this is the question). 'It accomplishes all meaningful benefits for all sentient beings' (citing the sūtra text as a general reply). This means that within it, it can presently accomplish all meaningful benefits for all sentient beings, or generate the meaningful benefits that all sentient beings accomplish for themselves," and so forth. Now, the eighteen perfections all begin by positing a hypothetical question to introduce them, then cite the sūtra in reply, and thirdly explain them with the śāstra; furthermore, they are all explained in terms of the palace. What is clarified here is a general explanation. Because the questions are easy to know, they are not presented at all.

48.24

Regarding the commentary's statement, "From when first attaining Buddhahood": this is text from the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra*. However, that śāstra says "continuously transforms into a purely pure Buddha land"; here the character "transforms" is omitted, which is an exegetical explanation, meaning that although it is continuously transforming, it is unlike the lands of other-enjoyment which change from earlier to later, and therefore it does not say "transforms." As for the statement "horizontally pervading the dharmadhātu is called boundless": this is from the earlier citation of the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra*, which later says "circular and boundless"; in the *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra*, it is the same as the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra*. Further, "boundless" means being without length, shortness, and the like, because the characteristics of its delimitations are difficult to measure. The discussion below of other-enjoyment is entirely as in the "World Chapter."

48.25

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning with "Perfection of fruit": citing mirror wisdom and so forth is as in the "World Chapter." The *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra* states: "Having the most utterly sovereign pure consciousness as its characteristic."

48.26

Regarding the commentary's passage beginning with "Three: Immeasurable...": this is the perfection of support. The commentary text is divided into three parts: first, citing the *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra*; second, from "The present text" onward, explaining the text; third, from "The *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* relies solely upon..." onward, harmonizing with the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra*. Now, regarding the first: that śāstra first raises a question, saying: "Since the gate of such a pure land is already perfected, like other palaces it must have that upon which it relies; therefore, the perfection of support must next be explained (raising the question). Adorned by an assemblage of immeasurable merits, established upon a multitude of great jewel flower kings (citing the sūtra in reply)." Now the commentary cites the sūtra saying "serving as that which is relied upon and supported," because previously there was no question and subsequently no explanation is cited, so it merely concludes with the name. Later it harmonizes with that śāstra, in which there are two parts: first, setting forth the intent of that śāstra, since the extensive explanation of the śāstra is solely in terms of the flower. The śāstra says: "Just as the earth and so forth rely on the wind-wheel and the like, or just as worldly palaces rely on the earth, so too this pure land is adorned by an assemblage of immeasurable merits. Established upon a multitude of great jewel red lotus flower kings, it is made of the great jewels of the red lotus flowers; such great jewels arise from the numerous virtues of immeasurable merits, and being superior among all jewels, they are called great jewels. This red lotus flower is the most superior among all flowers, and is therefore called a flower king. Or, compared with the red lotuses arisen from the roots of goodness of all bodhisattvas, this jewel flower is the most superior, and is therefore called great. The Buddha, the Dharma King, arises from the Buddha's most superior roots of goodness, and is therefore called a king. Moreover, because this jewel flower is extremely difficult to obtain, it is called great; being the most superior among jewel flowers, it is called a flower king. Furthermore, this great flower is not singular, or because its petals and stamens are numerous, it is called a multitude." Explanation: This relies solely on concrete phenomena, because the adornment of merit is attributed to the Buddha. If immeasurable merit is extended to principle, then the Buddha stage is also sustained by the Buddha's power; therefore, the commentary says "merit also encompasses both phenomenon and principle." "The capital where the Tathāgata resides" is completely identical to the *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra* and *śāstra*. Explanation: This means that within the great palace, the Buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones, are the masters and none other; because of its supreme excellence, it belongs solely to the World-Honoured One. Or, it is solely sustained and gathered in by the World-Honoured One, which is beyond the capacity of others.

First 26 of 54 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese