大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 51.7

51.7

Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “Second, clarifying the varieties,” in total there are six approaches: namely, one, two, three, seven, ten, and one hundred, making six categories. Among the twofold [division], there are three and six tathatās, which, together with the eight tathatās, make ten meanings in total. The rest are as explained in the “Ten Treasuries” [chapter] and previous assemblies. Here, only the seven tathatās should now be explained. That is to say, in the third fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā-śāstra, Chapter on Gathering Phenomena (first part, section three), the treatise states: “Regarding the characteristics of mental engagement with tathatā, it refers to mental engagement that takes the seven kinds of pervasive tathatā as its cognitive object, as explained extensively in the sūtra. First is the mental engagement with the tathatā of transmigration, which means having already seen and spoken of the bodhisattvas who, through the practice of superior phenomena, cultivate and master mental engagement, contemplating the real nature of the beginningless transmigration of conditioned phenomena during defiled and pure phenomena. Having contemplated this, they become free from the view of no cause and the view of unequal [causes]. Second is the mental engagement with the tathatā of real characteristics, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the nature of the selflessness of persons and the nature of the selflessness of phenomena in all phenomena regarding the causes of defiled and pure phenomena. Having contemplated this, all views of personal identity and mental engagements that conceptualize and discriminate various characteristics no longer arise. Third is the mental engagement with the tathatā of consciousness-only, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the consciousness-only nature of all phenomena regarding the basis of defiled and pure phenomena. Having contemplated this, they truly understand that it is solely because the mind is defiled that sentient beings are defiled, and solely because the mind is pure that sentient beings are pure. Fourth is the mental engagement with the tathatā of conventional establishment, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the truth of suffering with regard to the essence of defiled and pure phenomena. Having contemplated this, in order to enable them to know it, they preach it for sentient beings. Fifth is the mental engagement with the tathatā of erroneous practice, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the truth of arising with regard to the causes of defiled phenomena, preaching it for sentient beings in order to enable them to sever it. Sixth is the mental engagement with the tathatā of purification, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the truth of cessation with regard to the essence of pure phenomena. Having contemplated this, they preach it for sentient beings in order to enable them to realize it. Seventh is the mental engagement with the tathatā of correct practice, which means, as previously explained, up to contemplating the truth of the path with regard to pure practice. Having contemplated this, they preach it for sentient beings in order to enable them to cultivate it.” Commentary: The meaning of “mental engagement” is precisely the bodhisattva's contemplation; the rest can be known accordingly, and the Commentary merely lists the names and briefly enjoins them. Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “First, perfecting the function of being a support,” this corresponds to the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra's assertion that tathatā is the support for delusion and awakening. As extensively differentiated in the exposition on the fourfold transformation of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti), and discussed again in the “Ten Stages” [chapter]. Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “The Awakening of Faith explains the three greatnesses,” and so forth: the text of the Commentary has four parts: 1. citing the three greatnesses from the treatise; 2. correlating them with the present text; 3. explaining the treatise's greatness of function; 4. correlating them with the one hundred approaches. As for the first, it is entirely the text of the treatise. Yet, under the greatness of essence, following “First, the greatness of essence,” it merely lacks the words “all phenomena.” This is in the section Establishing the Meaning, where that commentary explains the essence, saying: “The true nature is profound and vast, and both ordinary persons and sages, defilement and purity, all take it as their support; hence it receives the name ‘great.’ Conforming to the flow [of saṃsāra], when defilement is added, it does not increase; opposing the flow, when defilement is eliminated, it does not decrease. Moreover, opposing the flow, when purity is added, it does not increase; conforming to the flow, when purity is lacking, it does not decrease.” Truly, because it is neither diminished by defilement nor purity, and does not alter from beginning to end, it is said to be “equal, without increase or decrease.” Second, the greatness of characteristics: the treatise says, “It means the tathāgatagarbha is replete with boundless intrinsic merits.” That commentary explains: “Among the two kinds of garbha, it is the non-empty tathāgatagarbha.” The present Commentary abridges and omits the words “tathāgatagarbha,” solely speaking of the characteristics in terms of tathatā, meaning the virtues not different from the essence; hence they are called “intrinsic merits,” just as the eight virtues of water are not different from water. Third, the greatness of function: this is entirely identical to that commentary. It explains: “It means that conforming to pure karma, in terms of the natural great function and the coarse and subtle functions of the two bodies—reward (saṃbhogakāya) and transformation (nirmāṇakāya)—it causes all sentient beings to first accomplish worldly goodness and ultimately accomplish supramundane goodness.” The text below in that treatise fully reveals the characteristics of this function. Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “However, based on that mind,” and so on: this is the second part, correlating [the treatise] with the present sūtra, and is also resolving an objection. The objection states: “That treatise establishes the three greatnesses based on the one mind, and tathatā is merely one of them; how then can tathatā be endowed with all three greatnesses?” Hence, in its section Establishing the Meaning, it says: “Mahāyāna, generally speaking, has two kinds. What are the two? First is the phenomenon (dharma); second is the meaning (artha). What is termed ‘phenomenon’ refers to the minds of sentient beings; this mind subsumes all worldly and supramundane phenomena, and based on this mind, the meaning of Mahāyāna is revealed. What is termed ‘meaning’ has three kinds: first, the greatness of essence,” and so on. Since the broad and the restricted are different, how can it be cited here? Thus it is resolved below, saying: by using the one to unite the two, both belong to tathatā. Therefore, below in the Explanatory Section, it divides into three gates, where tathatā is precisely the essence of the great general-characteristic dharma-gate of the one dharmadhātu. Furthermore, because these two gates are not separate from each other, tathatā must necessarily possess both characteristics and function. Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “However, running contrary to the true,” and so on: this is the third part, explaining the greatness of function. The meaning seems overly narrow, and this also resolves an objection. The objection states: “Since tathatā is the essence of all phenomena and becomes phenomena by conforming to the flow, why does it not say that it can produce evil causes and effects?” Hence this resolution is made. Thus the Yingluo jing says: “Initially giving rise to a single thought dwelling on conditions: conforming to the ultimate truth is named good; turning away from the ultimate truth is named evil.” In terms of the aspect of running contrary, it does not speak of producing evil. Within this, it first clarifies the reason why it does not produce evil, and after “Yet, though contrary and conforming differ,” it explains it as the essence of evil. Master Fazang said: “Because it runs contrary to the true, it cannot be separate from the true; because it runs contrary to the true, it is not its function.” Thus the present Commentary says: separate from tathatā, there would be nothing to run contrary to, so it is not separate. Just as waves run contrary to water, yet apart from water there are no waves. Regarding the Commentary's phrase, “If correlated with this sūtra,” and so on: this is the fourth part, correlating and explaining; whether the sūtra text is complete or lacking will be known below.