大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 54

English (machine translation) 54

Language: English

54.1

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

Regarding the commentary's: "The latter one, looking upward to reveal identity" onward: this clarifies the third culmination. This line reveals the meaning and states the title. As for "fulfilling the cognition of all aspects": this explains the phrase 'all-knowledge cognition' (sarvajña-jñāna). This has two meanings: first, the upper 'all-knowledge' is fundamental cognition, and the repeated word 'cognition' is subsequent cognition; these two being unobstructed is named the cognition of all aspects. Second, according to the intent of the treatise and sūtra, the upper 'all-knowledge' is the Buddha, and the lower word 'cognition' is the Buddha's wisdom. Therefore the treatise states: "Because the person who has attained all-knowledge has his cognition fulfilled." Both meanings are the cognition of all aspects. Regarding the commentary's: "Within distinguishing self-power" onward: this resolves an objection. The intent of the question asks: Other-power has only one line, while self-power has ten lines; why? The answer says: Other-power generally reveals the Buddha's empowerment, not aiming to display the Buddha's virtues. Self-power intends to display Vajragarbha's superior virtues, hence it fully lists many lines. Each subsequent one excels the preceding, so that no virtue is not fully possessed. For example, non-active Dharma purity excels active good Dharma purity; teaching sentient beings excels the preceding self-benefit; body purity has already excelled the preceding three; all reveal the fulfillment of both benefits. Within body purity, receiving the stage surpasses the perfection of the stage; future retribution excels present [retribution]; attaining the path of nirvāṇa excels what precedes it; and being identical with the Buddha's cognition of all aspects is subsequent to and excels the previous. Meaning that only when the stage is exceedingly noble and superior does it reveal that Vajragarbha, from cause to fruit, lacks no virtue, and only then is he competent to preach the Dharma; hence it is broadly revealed.

54.3

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The second [section], the mental empowerment': at that time the Tathāgata only invisibly empowered [him] in the mental ground, bestowing upon him the power of cognition, entirely without spoken words; these were all words of the compilers of the sūtra. Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'In the general [clause], bodies are of two kinds': the general clause of the treatise-sūtra says, 'bestowed upon Vajragarbha Bodhisattva an authentic and fearless body.' 'Fearless' means 'insurmountable.' The higher power is bestowed upon the lower, and therefore it is called 'bestowed.' Although one's own cognition cannot be used by another, in terms of acting as a conditioning support, it can properly be called 'bestowed.' Just as when a spirit enters a body it still increases intelligence and eloquence, how much more so with the Tathāgata! Question: Is this bestowal temporary or everlasting? Answer: There are three senses. First, in terms of the real mark, Vajragarbha tallies above with the Buddha's mind, and the Buddha's power is bestowed below; their correspondence is the bestowal, and this bestowal is constant. Second, in terms of the body of transformation, since Vajragarbha's transformations pervade the dharmadhātu, there is no time when he does not teach; whenever he speaks, it is bestowed, without temporary interruption, so it may also be called everlasting. Third, in terms of the characteristics of transformation, there are times of speaking and times of non-speaking; it is bestowed only when speaking, so this is not everlasting. However, this general clause is both general and specific: 'general' means that it subsumes all ten clauses as the insurmountable body; 'specific' means that this clause corresponds to the physical body, while the subsequent nine clauses specifically belong only to names. From the combination of two names onward, they are called a 'body' of names (nāmakāya), 'body' having the meaning of an aggregate.

54.4

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The subsequent [clauses], bestowing unimpeded...': it explains the specific clauses. Therein are four parts: First, generally showing that the specific clauses do not apply to the physical body. Second, from 'What is empowered extends to the three [karmas]' onward, it resolves an objection. That is, an objection states: 'Above it was said that verbal empowerment increases eloquence, mental empowerment augments cognition, and physical empowerment increases majesty; why now does mental empowerment increase physical majesty?' This objects to the aforementioned superiority of the body, and hence this answer is given. This explanation also states: according to the true intent, the empowering [agent] is restricted, while what is empowered is comprehensive; therefore, any single karma empowers all three karmas. Here, this mental empowerment augments the superiority of the body, and because cognition is obtained from the mind, he then speaks without impediment, which augments speech. Third, from 'In the mind it is called cognition' onward, it harmonizes the treatise with the sūtra, directly showing that what is empowered universally includes speech. Fourth, from 'The first is bestowing unattached...' onward, it explains specifically following the text. Among the nine, the first eight bestow the cognition of sovereign speech, and the last one bestows the sublime activity of transformation. Among the former, they are grouped correlatively into three pairs: the first two clauses form one pair—the first clause is the capacity of speech, and the second clause is the cognition capable of speech, enabling knowledge of worldly phenomena. The next three clauses form one pair—the first clause is the capacity of speech, and the subsequent two clauses are the cognition capable of speech; within these, the former is expedient cognition (upāya-jñāna) and the latter is cognition discerning reality. The final three clauses form one pair—the first two clauses are the capacity of speech, and the last clause is cognition, enabling knowledge of the Dharma of teaching. However, based on the text, it is abbreviated and implied, hence this classification was made. In reality, both cognition and capacity extend throughout all clauses; therefore, it is generally named 'bestowing cognition.' Having made the general outline, we shall now explain them individually.

54.5

Now for the first, 'unattached eloquence': the commentary text has four parts: 1. The name established in the treatise above, because it is as steep as a hanging torrent, free from roughness or hesitation. 2. 'Teaching the Dharma continuously, without stagnation or impediment,' which is the treatise's explanation. 3. 'Meaning that having no one-sided attachment, he is unstagnant in both principle and phenomena,' which is the subcommentary explaining the treatise. 4. 'Saying unimpeded delight in speech,' where the subcommentary cites the sūtra to match it. The remaining eight are largely identical.

54.6

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The second, bestowing capable eloquence': this is the name established by the treatise. From 'distinguishing the characteristics of dharmas' onward, the commentary harmonizes the sūtra with the intent of the treatise. Because of understanding the characteristics of dharmas, one is able to explain them correctly; understanding is called 'capable,' and correctness is called 'pure.' From 'The treatise says' onward, it specifically demonstrates the characteristics of capability. Understanding these four matters is called understanding the characteristics of dharmas, and therefore one is capable of expounding the Dharma. Therein are two parts: first, citing the treatise to explain correctly; second, from 'Here, the word "pratyaya"' onward, the commentary explains the text of the treatise. Therein are three parts: first, capturing the meaning with a brief explanation; next, from 'However, these four' onward, briefly pointing to two sūtras; and finally, from 'Now relying on the Abhidharma-samuccaya' onward, citing the treatise to explain correctly. Within that are two parts: first, the correct explanation; next, from 'Yet those sūtras and treatises' onward, clarifying their sequence. Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The meaning to be proven refers to the distinction of the intrinsic entity': sound is the intrinsic entity, and impermanence and permanence are the distinctions. Furthermore, form is the intrinsic entity, while shape-form, color-form, revealing, non-revealing, and so on are the distinctions. The words 'direct perception, etc.' include inference and testimony of the noble ones. The words 'not contradicting the thesis stated, etc.' include the reason. The reason is just a single word; why does it not say 'not contradicting the thesis and reason'? Now, including 'words', what are the 'etcetera words'? For instance, saying 'Sound is the locus (dharmin), necessarily impermanent' is the thesis. The reason says, 'because it arises from conditions.' Since these words are numerous, the four characters 'words stating the thesis, etc.' subsume them, hence it says 'etcetera words.' Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Just as fire is able to burn, etc.': this explains the specific characteristic (svalakṣaṇa); below, it explains the universal characteristic (sāmānyalakṣaṇa).

54.7

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The third, unconstrained eloquence': therein are three parts. This establishes the name: words flowing freely from the heart, hence called 'unconstrained.' 2. From 'speaking without waiting' onward is the treatise's explanation. 3. From 'meaning in accordance with the gates' onward is the commentary explaining the treatise. However, the treatise-sūtra says, 'bestowed with the empowerment of good recollection without forgetting.' The treatise explains the word 'empowerment' saying, 'It is the power of intention of the empowerment of non-forgetting.' The reason it explains it exclusively in this way is that mental empowerment is precisely for non-forgetting.

54.8

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The fourth, eloquent capacity': first, it cites the treatise; from the word 'meaning' onward, the commentary harmonizes the treatise with the sūtra.

54.9

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The fifth, unconfused eloquence': first, it cites the treatise; because the three meanings are not disordered, it is called 'unconfused.' Next, from 'the three share the same cognition' onward, the commentary explains the treatise. From 'no dharma is not thus' onward, it harmonizes with the sūtra.

54.10

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The sixth, instructive and emancipating eloquence': However, the treatise merely says, 'obtaining the indestructible ten powers of the Buddha, to sever afflictions in those who can be saved.' Explanation: It means causing sentient beings to sever confusion and attain emancipation, hence it is called 'instructive and emancipating.' But the treatise-sūtra says, 'bestowing the indestructible power of the Buddha,' so there is the phrase 'indestructible.' Now the Commentary's phrase 'transforming beings' is the meaning of 'instructive.' 'Severing confusion' is the meaning of 'emancipating.' The treatise does not have the words 'attaining the fruit'; here it harmonizes with the two words 'accomplishing the path' in the sūtra text.

54.11

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The eighth, immeasurable eloquence': first, it cites the treatise saying 'sūtras, etc.', the 'etc.' including the other two baskets; next, from 'The six right views' onward, the commentary explains the treatise. These six right views are precisely the six kinds of principles (yukti) in the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra, as already explained in the chapter 'Samantabhadra's Samādhi'; here the names differ only slightly. Being able to know the Dharma of teaching should collectively be called the 'path of teaching.' The first three are the root, and the latter three sequentially explain the first three. In terms of what is known, they are called 'principles'; in terms of that which knows, they are called 'right views.' They are completely identical to the previous. In terms of the present text, the first three are principle, practice, and teaching, merely omitting the fruit.

54.12

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'The above ten have already distinguished the power of the other': however, in the text of the treatise there is no text mentioning 'one's own power' and 'the power of the other.' Because previously in the verbal empowerment there were two kinds of eloquence of self-power and other-power, it is analogized by principle. Thus, above there was already the Buddha directly bestowing cognition, which is the power of the other; being endowed with virtues and worthy of empowerment is one's own power.

54.13

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Why is this samādhi attained?': the commentary inquires into the cause of attaining the samādhi. In the general clause above, because he attained the samādhi he received special empowerment; now the question inquires: this samādhi is so superior, how could he attain it? From 'Specifically showing below' onward, it answers that there are two causes: First, past vows are deep and weighty, meaning that while in the causal stage he made vows wishing to realize the wisdom-radiance samādhi of the ten grounds, so now he attains it. Second, present conditions, which are the merits gathered by the samādhi-body. If the present body lacked virtue, even with past vows, he could not enter. However, all bodhisattvas are endowed with this virtue; revealing the Dharma in accordance with the specific approach rests upon Vajragarbha, so it is uniquely said that he possesses it. Furthermore, according to the Buddha's power being able to empower even grass and trees, why must one have virtue? It is because he wishes to cause bodhisattvas to advance in practice and be endowed with virtue, so that only by tallying above with the Buddha's mind can they receive empowerment, expressing that the Dharma of this ground must be realized before it can be expounded.

54.14

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'This, furthermore, has eight kinds': it unfolds the specific from the general. Therein are three parts: first, a general outline; second, specific explanations; third, generally showing them as causes. Now for the first, it first brings out the text of the treatise. From 'meaning the first four' onward, the commentary explains. From the Commentary's phrase 'First, the well-purified deep mind' onward, it explains specifically. Within this single clause, the text has five sections: The upper clause repeats the sūtra. Second, saying 'this is causal purity' is the name established by the treatise. Third, 'faith and aspiration reaching the utmost, proceeding to the bodhisattva grounds, are entirely purified' is the treatise's explanation of the meaning. The treatise says fully: 'First, causal purity of the deep mind, proceeding to the bodhisattva grounds, because it is entirely purified. As the sūtra says: "well-purified deep mind," faith and aspiration, etc., are furthermore the root of all goods.' Now the commentary takes the subsequent part of the treatise to explain the words 'faith and aspiration' earlier; this is the treatise explaining the sūtra's 'deep mind', which is the pure mind that tallies with principle on the first ground. The author of the treatise merely says 'faith and aspiration'; the two words 'reaching the utmost' are the commentary explaining the words 'deep mind,' for because faith and aspiration are earnest and profound, it is called 'deep mind.' Due to this deep mind, one is able to attain the second, third, up to the tenth ground, which is 'the end of the bodhisattva grounds', namely the treatise's word 'etc.' Once reaching the end of the grounds, there are no hindrances that are not eliminated, so it is said to be 'entirely purified.' Fourth, 'therefore it says well-purified' is the commentary harmonizing the treatise with the sūtra. Fifth, 'this single one is the root of all practices, hence called the cause' is the commentary explaining the name established by the treatise, which is 'furthermore the root of all goods.' Since this is the cause, it reveals the subsequent virtues as the essence of its practice. Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Meaning the second is purity of cognition, proceeding to the bodhisattva grounds, the contemplation of tathatā on the path of cultivation': citing the treatise reveals that the first clause is the path of seeing (darśanamārga). Next, from 'like the solar disc' onward, it takes the meaning from the treatise's explanation. In full, the treatise says: 'This contemplation of tathatā has internal cognition perfected, universally illuminating the dharmadhātu, just as the light of the solar disc pervades the world.' Now, this text of the commentary contains both the doctrine and the metaphor.

54.15

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Third, the progressively purified body': the supportive path (sambhāramārga) is able to attain the supramundane retribution-body, which is called 'body.' From the first ground onward, the bodies received are not one; each subsequent one is superior to the preceding one, which is called 'increasingly superior life after life,' entirely due to the purity of the meritorious practices of the supportive path.

54.16

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Fourth, purity of mental subdual': sovereignty in both emptiness and existence is called 'mental subdual.' As for 'well severing, etc.': because of not clinging to existence, coarse afflictions are severed; because of not abiding in non-existence, subtle habitual tendencies are severed; severing without abiding is thus termed 'well severing.' As for 'therefore it is called cultivating and refining': this harmonizes the treatise with the sūtra. Non-abiding is the fundamental undertaking (mūlakarma) of the bodhisattva, which is cultivating and refining; hence the treatise-sūtra says, 'well cultivating fundamental undertakings.' 'Fundamental undertakings' is what is performed in the present sūtra, and it also means using the non-abiding mind to cultivate the previous realization and aids, taking this as one's fundamental undertaking. As for 'this is the virtue of severance (prahāṇa-guṇa)': the first was the virtue of wisdom, which reveals that the supportive path is the virtue of grace. Having already correlated them with the three virtues, below they are correlated with the three paths, hence the word 'also' is used.

54.17

Regarding the Commentary's phrase 'Fifth, purity of hearing and retaining': the cognition that retains what is heard acts as that which is mindful, and the immeasurable dharmas are that which is recollected. Retaining is precisely mindfulness; being endowed with both that which retains and that which is retained, he is a vessel of the Dharma. The treatise says: 'The secret dharmas spoken by all Tathāgatas: "all" clarifies breadth, and "secret" reveals depth. If one does not retain the Dharma, one cannot benefit others. Taking hearing and retaining as the expedient means. The word "immeasurable" contains two meanings: first, immeasurable in quantity; second, immeasurable in depth.'

54.18

Regarding the commentary's "From the eight lines above downward," this is the third [part], which generally reveals that the eight practices above function as causes. Regarding the commentary's "It means that by means of the profound mind one can generate practice, and so forth": previously it was explained that the profound mind is the upāya for generating practice; generating practice is itself diligence, and therefore the profound mind is the cause of diligence. Second, because of obtaining cognition of suchness, one is constantly unforgetful. Third, through the aids to the path, superior power is accomplished. Fourth, through the path of non-abiding, by not abiding in emptiness or existence, or in saṃsāra or nirvāṇa, one is free from defiling attachment. Fifth, through self-recollection of the Dharma, one can sever the doubts of others. Sixth, through supernatural powers, one causes others to be reverent; reverence is indeed entering with faith. Regarding the commentary's "Seventh: the cause of rolling the wheel of the principles of the Dharma": this is the non-erroneous dhāraṇī. "Dharma" is the teaching, and "principle" is the doctrinal sense; spreading the transformation is called "rolling." That is to say, when the true Dharma is on the verge of extinction, one relies on other external texts to circulate, chant, and uphold the meaning of that true Dharma; hence, upholding the other noble teachings with dhāraṇī serves as the cause of rolling the wheel of teaching and principle. Regarding the commentary's "Eighth: the cause of teaching transcendence": fully speaking, the Śāstra says: "The cause of teaching transcendence is indicated by the sūtra's 'Because of being well sealed with the seal of the dharmadhātu cognition.' It means that in teaching others, through tallying with the dharmadhātu, one transcends grasping at signs oneself—meaning transforming while free of transformation—and also causes others to transcend." Next, it cites the Śāstra to explain it. From "This intent explains" onward, the commentary interprets the Śāstra.

54.19

Regarding the commentary's "Without departing from their original places, and so forth": the present sūtra merely says, "Each extended their right hand." The sūtra text [cited in] the Śāstra says, "At that time, the Buddhas of the ten directions, without departing from their original places, each extended their right hand by their supernatural power." Thus, the commentary provides this explanation. Regarding "namely, the four supernatural powers": the Dazhidulun says, "First is the power of base transformation (ṛddhi), transforming one's own body, making all hear with a great sound, and so on. Second is the power of illusion, transforming external things. Third is the power of Dharma-cognition, cognition and phenomena being unimpeded. Fourth is the power of noble mastery, capable of generating the idea of pleasure within suffering, capable of generating the idea of suffering within that pleasure, and generating the idea of equanimity within both suffering and pleasure. And so on for all [such things]." Here, with respect to their own bodies, they merely extend or contract, unify or multiply; hence, it is base transformation (ṛddhi) and not the other three.

54.20

Regarding the commentary's "The reason for arising is that the matter of the samādhi was finished, and so forth": investigating the cause of arising, there are four senses. The treatise master merely says: "Arising immediately from the samādhi is because the matter of the samādhi was finished; furthermore, because of obtaining superior power; because the time for speaking had arrived again; and because the absorption is free of speech." In interpreting this treatise text, two lines of interpretation are admissible: first, interpreting clause by clause; second, interpreting by sequential progression—that is, the commentary's intent that the latter clauses build on the former ones. In interpreting clause by clause: as for "the matter was finished," previously entering the samādhi was to manifest what had already been realized, so that he could expound it; now that he had finished manifesting it, it is termed "the matter was finished." Second, previously entering the samādhi was to receive the Buddha's empowerment; now the Buddhas have already empowered him, which is called "obtaining superior power." Third, previously entering the samādhi was to observe the capacities of beings to adaptively receive the Dharma; the beings' awakening is at this moment, hence it says "the time had arrived." Fourth, previously entering the samādhi was to manifest realization as transcendent of words; now, in speaking of arising from absorption, it conversely reveals that the absorption entered was quiescent and transcendent of words; hence it says "the absorption is free of speech." Clause by clause reveals that entering absorption has its four senses; clause by clause is different. In sequential progression, the phrase "obtaining superior power" contains multiple senses: namely, manifesting realization, receiving empowerment, and observing capacities having all ended are collectively named "obtaining power." Both interpretations should be retained.

54.21

Regarding the commentary's "Fifth: the primary portion below that generally addresses [the assembly]": if divided into three portions according to the path of teaching, this section onward corresponds to the central doctrine, because it directly expounds the grounds, as explained at the beginning of the chapter. For example, from the "Expedient Means" chapter onward in the Lotus Sūtra serves as the central doctrine. Here, the primary portion is like the dual praise of the two depths; the requesting portion below is like Śāriputra's three requests; and the expounding portion is like its detailed clarification of opening the provisional and revealing the real. Thus, the preceding four portions serve as the introduction—that is, the cause for initiating the preaching, causing beings to generate faith. Now this primary portion adduces the Dharma and praises its superiority to cause them to generate yearning; it is the practice to be accomplished. In the text there are four parts: first, explaining the name; second, resolving objections; third, the sectional outline; fourth, interpreting the text. Now for the first: why is it called the "primary"? It generates the latter two portions; hence, in this section it briefly demonstrates the essentials, possessing both essence and characteristics. In the expounding portion, it explains the characteristics of the grounds to reveal their essence. In the requesting portion, having heard the names and essence, they step forward to request. If explained specifically, the ten names and characteristics of the grounds are the basis of the expounding portion, for the expounding portion extensively reveals the characteristics of the ten grounds; hence it is called the basis of the extensive [exposition]. The essence of the grounds here is the basis of the requesting portion, for the requesting portion extensively reveals that the essence of the grounds is quiescent and transcends the path of words. Therefore, it says that it also serves as the basis for the requesting portion.

54.22

From the commentary's "Speaking without being requested" downward is the second [part], resolving objections. The objection says: below it awaits three requests; why is there no request here? The answer is: there are two intents; the former intent doubts the speaking, and the latter intent doubts the Dharma. That is, even supposing they knew he wished to speak, they did not know what he would speak; this is a sūtra spoken spontaneously without inquiry. Question: It was stated above that the Buddha's empowerment was to cause him to speak the Dharma; why say that they did not know whether he would speak or not? Answer: Although the Buddhas empowered him, they did not know whether Vajragarbha would undertake that power to speak or not. Question: It was stated above that he spoke the illumination of the inconceivable Buddhadharma; how can you say they still did not know what Dharma he wished to speak? Answer: Among inconceivable Dharmas, the distinct approaches are more than one; hence, they still did not know. If so, since above the empowering ones were all named Vajragarbha, then they knew that what was undertaken was the adamantine Dharma; how could they not know? Answer: Relying on signs to indicate knowledge is not definitive; it is still called not knowing what Dharma he would speak. From the commentary's "The text is divided into three" downward is the third [part], the sectional outline. It is divided into three sections. If contrasted specifically, they mutually generate and accomplish one another with the request below: this initial essence of the ground generates the quiescence of the ground's essence in the request below, and the subsequent revelation of quiescence accomplishes this designated essence. This demonstrates the essentials and superiority, generating yearning in the great assembly below. The subsequent self-declaration having capacities and desires accomplishes this. Its second section corresponds to the expounding portion: this can generate that, and that can accomplish this, as can be known. From the commentary's "Now the essence of the first ground has already been distinguished above" downward is the fourth [part], interpreting the text. That is, at the beginning of the chapter there are ten essences: 1. the essence transcendent of words; 2. the essence that is realized; 3. the essence that realizes; 4. the essence of the tallying of that which realizes and that which is realized; 5. the essence conforming to characteristics; 6. the essence of samādhi; 7. the essence in terms of virtues; 8. the essence conforming to essentials; 9. the all-subsuming essence; 10. the essence of cause alone. Now this corresponds to the eighth, conforming to essentials, taking the six determinations as the essence.

54.23

Regarding the commentary's "In the general [statement], 'the vows of the bodhisattva,'" and so forth: in interpreting this general phrase, the text has six sections: first, explaining "bodhisattva."

54.24

From the commentary's "Toward great bodhi" downward is the second [section], explaining the meaning of "vow." In this there are two: first, directly explaining the vow, for vow takes yearning and seeking as its meaning; next, "namely, generating the bodhicitta within the initial ground below" refers to the generation of bodhicitta within the abiding portion of the initial ground below, which is this very vow; thus the treatise text below points back to this vow. Therefore, that text says: "Generating this mind is the well-determined vow within the primary portion." Indeed, because the essence of mind and vow is one, the two passages point to each other, and the texts of both places manifest the essence of the ground. That is, the wholesome roots of true realization in this life, because they are capable of increasing and conforming to the path toward bodhi, are called "vows" and are also called "generating the mind." Although the essence is identical, according to the meaning there are differences, so mind and vow are not the same. As for the difference in meaning: directing one's intention toward great bodhi is the meaning of generating the mind; intending that it belong to oneself is the meaning of the vow. Question: The excellence of vows is the essence of all the grounds, whereas from the expounding portion downward is all the characteristics of the grounds; why specifically point to generating the mind on the initial ground? Answer: Because it is spoken of in terms of the beginning. Another question: The excellence of vows is the essence, while from the expounding portion downward are merely the characteristics of the grounds; how can pointing to characteristics manifest the essence? Answer: Pointing to it generally is among the characteristics of the grounds; pointing to it distinctly is that which is manifested by the characteristics; generating the mind in the fruit portion is this very vow.

54.25

From the commentary's "The reason why this vow..." downward is the third [section], explaining the meaning of "well-determined." A vow is yearning and seeking; if it is a vow prior to the grounds, it cannot be called "good" [or well] and "determined." Now it is a vow associated with realized cognition. A vow that is associated [with it] truly conforms to principle, and is therefore called "good" [or well]; this "good" is the very meaning of "determined."

54.26

From the commentary's "True cognition is itself good" downward is the fourth [section], harmonizing the six interpretations of compounds. In this there are two: first, directly explaining; next, from "therefore the Śāstra" downward, citing proof. The inversion of the text is not exhaustive; combined, it should say "well-determined" (kuśalaniścita) means that which is good is itself determination.

54.27

From the commentary's "This has already entered the initial ground" downward is the fifth [section], selecting "well-determined." Prior to the grounds there is also goodness of the mind conforming to characteristics, but not being subsumed by true cognition, it is not named "determined." Prior to the grounds there is also determination, but again not reaching supreme conformity with principle, it cannot be called "good." Therefore the Bodhisattvabhūmi says there are three determinations: 1. the ground of gotra is named determination, definitively being of the Buddha-lineage; 2. the ground of resolute conduct is named determination, definitively being able to generate the mind; 3. from the initial ground upward is named determination. Now this is the third, selected as not being the former two.

54.28

From the commentary's "If generally discussing determination" downward is the sixth [section], generally revealing how determination gets its name, taking only the third determination. In the specific phrases below there are six determinations, each possessing the present six senses.

54.29

Regarding the commentary's "In the subsequent specific [section], this well-determined [vow] has six kinds": in interpreting these specific phrases, before the sūtra text there are three [parts]: first, opening the specific based on the general; second, from "the Yogācāra" downward, pointing to the text to cite proof—since all the treatises speak of it, they must be six; third, from the commentary's "The operational aspects of these six" downward, a general analysis: first gathering gradually from the end, and then, from "therefore the self-essence" downward, sequentially reciting and concluding to indicate them. Regarding the commentary's "First, unmixed, and so forth": the text has four parts in total: 1. citing the sūtra; 2. "namely, well-determined in contemplating characteristics": the treatise master establishes the name, unfolded from the general, and hence there is "determination"; 3. "because of contemplating tathatā as having a single flavor": this is the treatise's explanation, where contemplating tathatā explains "contemplating," and having a single flavor explains "characteristics"; principle transcends false sentiments, so it is spoken of as "true" (tatha), and the essence of all phenomena is identical, so it is designated as "suchness" (tathatā); illuminating principle is called "contemplation," and the essential manner of contemplation is called "characteristics of contemplation"; 4. from "that is, the fundamental [cognition] conditioning suchness" downward, the commentary explains the treatise above, where the fundamental conditioning suchness further explains contemplating tathatā. As for "fundamental" (samāhita), it is distinguished from the subsequent [cognition]; it is the fundamental cognition (mūlajñāna), named "fundamental." This is the contemplator; suchness is what is contemplated; conditioning is the meaning of contemplating. Hence the Vijñaptimātratā says: "When cognition has no apprehension regarding the cognitive object, then it abides in representation-only, because it is free from the characteristics of the two graspings." Object and cognition are the two graspings; being free from the characteristics of the two graspings constitutes having a single flavor; that is, taking a single flavor as the essential characteristic of contemplation. "Single flavor" is a metaphor: just as the ocean, though vast, shares the identical salty flavor; and also like many medicinal herbs boiled in one vessel, their flavor is without difference. Contemplator and contemplated are both without apprehension, which is a single flavor. As for "then it is free of the mixture of carrying signs," it harmonizes the Śāstra with the sūtra. The sūtra says "unmixed"; the Śāstra explains "unmixed" by "the characteristic of a single flavor." If it is prior to the grounds, manifesting a slight object before oneself and calling it the nature of representation-only, because there is something apprehended, one does not truly abide in representation-only; being unable to forget suchness, it carries the sign of suchness, and this sign is "mixture." Now both are without apprehension; hence, it is free of this mixture.

54.30

Regarding the commentary's "Second: invisible": citing the sūtra. "It is the well-determined of the truly real": the Śāstra establishes the name. "Because it is not an object of any world": this is the Śāstra's explanation of the meaning. From "It means that this true cognition" downward, the commentary explains the Śāstra. From this phrase, it clarifies that the essence of practice is free from faults. When practice is accomplished and free from delusion, it is called "truly real." Conditioned contemplation does not see it, which is named "not an object of the world." As for "because it is supramundane," it further explains "not an object." Since it is supramundane, how could worldly cognition know it? The sūtra says, "Invisible, this tallies with reality." Reflecting back on sentimental conceptualizations as false, which have never existed from the beginning, it is named "transcendent"; it is not that there is a world against which one transcends. From "It means that this true [cognition]" downward, the commentary's explanation can be known.

54.31

The Commentary's words, "Third, 'vast like the dharmadhātu'," repeat the sūtra text. "Superior good determination" is the name established in the treatise. This clarifies the virtue of the practice: because practice conforms to the dharmadhātu and becomes vast in accordance with its meaning, it is named 'superior'.

54.32

From the Commentary's words, "The treatise explains in general..." onward, it explains the characteristics by means of the treatise. Now the treatise has two sections: first, a general explanation; second, a re-examination of the preceding section. In the Commentary, it first cites the text of the treatise. Afterwards, from "Here, the upper phrase..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise's upper phrase, namely where the treatise says "because of the great dharmadhātu." The lower phrase is "the root of all Buddhas," because ground-cognition is the root of all Buddhas and is therefore vast like the dharmadhātu. From "The reason why the dharmadhātu..." onward, it separately explains the two phrases: first it explains the dharmadhātu that is conformed to, and afterwards, from "Now the ground-cognition that can conform to it..." onward, it combines the above two meanings: the dharmadhātu is the root of awakening, while the present ground-cognition is the root of bodhi-cognition; the dharmadhātu is the nature of all dharmas, while the present ground-cognition is the original nature of the Buddha. From "How much more when its essence coalesces..." onward, it explains and establishes the above meaning. The reason why ground-cognition can be like the dharmadhātu is that through uniting with it, uniting is of one taste; and because it is free from the two graspings, there is nothing to be conformed to. Cognition is itself tathatā; how much more so when they coalesce with one another! Only in this way is it truly like the dharmadhātu.

54.33

From the Commentary's words, "Below, opening up the meanings to explain..." onward, this is the treatise's second re-differentiation. In this there are two parts: first, the Commentary poses a hypothetical question to introduce it; afterwards, from "The treatise's general explanation says..." onward, it cites the treatise to explain it, first generally and then specifically. In the general part, it first cites the text of the treatise, and afterwards, from "The statement 'a single essence'..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise. Since they are different names for a single essence, there is no impediment to taking 'superior' to explain 'vast'. Furthermore, taking 'lofty' to explain 'broad' likewise involves no contradiction in principle, because the four meanings share the same essence. The Commentary's words, "'Naturally so' is the meaning of 'dhātu' (realm)," mean that the Sanskrit is dharmadhātu, which here is translated as dharmadhātu (realm of phenomena), and also as "naturally so" (dharmatā). From the Commentary's words, "First, explaining both 'great' and 'superior'..." onward, the treatise explains what can conform; the text has three sections, and the meaning embraces four terms. In these three sections, the first phrase in each case sets forth the treatise's intent, next cites the text of the treatise, and afterwards the Commentary explains the treatise; all are evident and intelligible.

54.34

From the Commentary's words, "Therefore in accordance with the meaning..." onward, it concludes the above three passages in general. Moreover, the word 'great' is the general term, so the above four passages all contain the word 'great'. Although the other three meanings lack their names in the three specific passages, their meanings are not omitted. However, all three sections ought to mention 'great' and 'pure white': the second reveals 'broad' by speaking of 'expounding the Mahāyāna'; the third reveals 'lofty' by specifically speaking of 'white'.

54.35

The Commentary's words, "is causal good determination," is the name established in the treatise. Second, from "This has..." onward, the treatise explains it. Third, from "An explanation says..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise. In this there are three parts: first, it recounts an earlier interpretation; second, from "This accords with the characteristics of dharmas..." onward, it analyzes accord and discord; third, from "Now, to further..." onward, it sets forth the correct explanation. Within this, there are five divisions: First is the correct explanation. The statement, "Although its function wanes and waxes," properly singles out the cognitive essence as not being impermanent. The cognitive essence is like empty space, and space is not impermanent. The form that is produced has arising and ceasing, and like function responding to capacities, it is described as impermanent. The statement, "ultimately like empty space," means that in the final analysis there is no sense in which it is not like empty space.

54.36

Second, from "If reconciling..." onward, it reconciles the three bodies, making clear that the reward body is not included within the causes of impermanence.

54.37

Third, from "Even if cognition is taken as a revealing cause..." onward, it refutes a counter-argument. Fearing that the opponent might argue in defense: "Cognition, as a revealing cause, reveals nirvāṇa; if it serves as a generative cause, it generates bodhi." Therefore it now answers: naturally pure bodhi is also revealed by the revealing cause, because it fundamentally possesses the meaning of the light of wisdom.

54.38

Fourth, from "Therefore the treatise says 'the path of nirvāṇa'..." onward, it explains and establishes the above meaning. Ancient translations rendered bodhi as 'the path'; therefore the Commentary says "'the path' is also bodhi," making clear that the treatise also speaks of bodhi and nirvāṇa as permanent. If function is impermanent, and if one separately correlates it with the causes of bodhi and nirvāṇa, then the illumination that is itself quiescence is the cause of bodhi, and the quiescence that is itself illumination is the cause of nirvāṇa. Since quiescence and illumination are fused, the two fruits are also fused; hence it says, "if they mutually fuse and subsume each other, it goes without saying."

54.39

Fifth, from "Regarding 'desire for impermanence'..." onward, it explains the treatise following the difficult points. The Commentary's words, "great good determination," is the phrase that designates the name. Second, from "accordance with..." onward, the treatise explains its characteristics. Third, "that is, universal cover is named 'great'" is the Commentary's explanation of the treatise's name. The Commentary's words, "The treatise also says, 'following the preceding'..." onward, cites the treatise to explain the meaning of non-abiding. In this there are two parts: first, citing the treatise; afterwards, from "meaning that due to..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise. In this there are three points: first, repeating the treatise and explaining it correctly; second, recounting different interpretations; third, broadly explaining non-abiding. Now the first again has two parts: first, the correct explanation; afterwards, "Although previously there was functioning in response, it was also accomplished by cognition" refutes a difficulty. Fearing someone might raise the objection: "The cause of the permanent fruit is cognition, while the cause of the impermanent fruit is function. Since it is functioning in response, how is it not compassion?" The answer: within causal good [determination], non-abiding has already been established, which is why this answer is given. Second, from "Someone says..." onward, it recounts a different interpretation, conceding that it does not contravene principle; this is Master Huiyuan's view. It means that the cause of the permanent fruit can attain nirvāṇa, and therefore does not abide exclusively in the mundane world; the cause of the fruit of desiring the impermanent, as well as this great good [determination], can accord with the mundane world, and therefore do not abide exclusively in nirvāṇa. Third, from "However, in terms of double negation..." onward, it broadly explains the meaning of non-abiding. There are further two meanings: abiding and non-abiding. The intent of the treatise is precisely the meaning of double abiding: it says "not abiding exclusively," but does not say "without abiding." Yet precisely because of not abiding exclusively, non-abiding is accomplished. Just as a ferryman does not abide exclusively on this shore, nor does he abide exclusively on the other shore, and so by being non-abiding he carries sentient beings across. As for the statement, "meaning that on account of great compassion one constantly dwells in saṃsāra, etc.," the word 'etc.' has multiple meanings: First, 'etc.' includes: on account of great cognition one constantly dwells in nirvāṇa; this is the meaning of abiding in both. Second, on account of great compassion one does not abide in nirvāṇa, and on account of great cognition one does not abide in saṃsāra; that is, non-abiding in both. Again, to clarify non-abiding in both, there are two meanings for not abiding in saṃsāra: first, because of seeing the faults and perils of saṃsāra, one cannot abide; second, because of seeing that saṃsāra is fundamentally empty, there is nothing in which to abide. Both of the above are non-abiding in terms of cognition. There are two meanings for not abiding in nirvāṇa: first, seeing that nirvāṇa is fundamentally self-existent, it does not depend on abiding; second, because it is not different from saṃsāra, one cannot abide. Furthermore, because cognition is merged with principle without difference, and traces of subject and object are severed, there is neither subject nor object of abiding; thus one does not abide in either saṃsāra or nirvāṇa. All of the above are in terms of cognition. Second, to clarify abiding in both, there are two meanings for abiding in saṃsāra: first, by seeing the faults and perils, one generates great compassion and therefore abides in order to purify and eliminate them; second, seeing emptiness, one therefore abides without fear. The upper phrase is in terms of compassion, the lower phrase in terms of cognition. Furthermore, there are two meanings: first, seeing faults generates revulsion, hence one abides; second, seeing emptiness as nirvāṇa itself, hence one abides. This means constantly being in saṃsāra and perpetually being in nirvāṇa. Both of these are in terms of cognition: the former penetrates characteristics, the latter penetrates the nature. There are two meanings for constantly abiding in nirvāṇa: first, constantly realizing principle, hence one abides; second, constantly transforming sentient beings, hence one abides, because the sentient beings being transformed are themselves nirvāṇa. The upper phrase is in terms of cognition; the lower phrase possesses both compassion and cognition. Furthermore, combining the two spheres of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, their essences are not two, so there is no one-sided place to abide; hence it is called non-abiding. Furthermore, it is precisely abiding in this non-dual place, and therefore it is also called abiding. Furthermore, combining the two practices of abiding and non-abiding into unobstructedness, it is truly that non-abiding is abiding, and abiding is non-abiding; it is solely a single non-conceptual practice, and therefore they are not two. Furthermore, combining the two approaches of sphere and practice: because the dharma-gate of the dharmadhātu severs subject and object, and the equal dharmatā is solely of one taste, there is no difference between sphere and practice. Above, when opened up, there are many approaches; when combined, they are not two. Opening and combining are not two, together constituting one great unobstructed gate, wherein words and thought are utterly severed.

54.40

From the Commentary's words, "Sixth, 'for all'..." onward, this is non-timorous good determination. In the text there are three parts: First, the treatise establishes the name. Because one can enter what is profound, one is not timorous. Second, from "Entering the above..." onward, the treatise explains it. Third, from "The treatise-sūtra..." onward, the Commentary explains the treatise and aligns it with the sūtra. The statement, "They mutually accomplish one another with entering the cognitive ground:" cognition reaching the Buddha's realm constitutes entering the cognitive ground, and therefore one receives the protection of the Buddhas; this uses entering the cognitive ground to accomplish the protection of the Buddhas. Because one receives the protection of the Buddhas, one is able to enter the cognitive ground; that is, the protection of the Buddhas accomplishes the cognitive ground. The Commentary's words, "The treatise below on the six characteristics being perfectly interfused:" the treatise says that 'good determination' is the general characteristic, and the rest are specific characteristics. As for the characteristic of identity, 'good determination' means that all six are identically named 'good determination'. As for the characteristic of difference, these are the specific characteristics: first, the characteristic of contemplation; second, real; third, superior; fourth, causal; fifth, great; sixth, non-timorous. Their characteristics are differentiated and not identical; hence, unlike before, a single general phrase is specifically divided into the six determinations, making them specific characteristics. The characteristic of integration is because it is stated in brief. The characteristic of disintegration is because each is explained in detail, like the formation and disintegration of a world. Since this appeared previously, it says, "It may be understood by analogy with the preceding."

First 40 of 66 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese