大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 6.7

6.7

From the commentary's "Furthermore, because what is intended by the king's secret words is distinct" onwards, there are five points that demonstrate the faults of the earlier [view of] non-differentiation. This is the first. Chapter nine of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] explains that saindhava has one name and four referents: first, salt; second, a vessel; third, water; fourth, a horse. In the explanation, [they are ordered as] first water, second salt, third a vessel, and fourth a horse. Hence that text says: "These four things all share this same name. A wise minister knows this name well. If, when the king is bathing, he asks for saindhava, he immediately offers water. If, when the king is eating, he asks for saindhava, he immediately offers salt. If, when the king has finished eating and wishes to drink broth, he asks for saindhava, he immediately offers a vessel. If the king wishes to travel and asks for saindhava, he immediately offers a horse. A wise minister such as this understands the great king's four kinds of secret words well. This Mahāyāna sūtra is also just like this: there are four impermanences, which the wise minister of the Mahāyāna should know well. If the Buddha appears in the world and expounds the Tathāgata's nirvāṇa for sentient beings, the wise minister should know that this is the Tathāgata expounding the characteristic of impermanence for those who grasp at permanence, wishing to cause the monks to cultivate the contemplation of impermanence. Or again, if he says that the correct Dharma is about to be extinguished, the wise minister should know that this is the Tathāgata expounding the characteristic of suffering for those who grasp at pleasure, wishing to cause the monks to cultivate the contemplation of suffering extensively. Or again, if he says, 'I am now afflicted with illness, and the Saṅgha is broken,' the wise minister should know that this is the Tathāgata expounding the characteristic of non-self for those who grasp at a self, wishing to cause the monks to cultivate the contemplation of non-self. Or again, if he says that what is termed emptiness is correct liberation, the wise minister should know that this is the Tathāgata expounding that correct liberation is free from the twenty-five states of existence, wishing to cause the monks to cultivate and train in the contemplation of emptiness. For this reason, this correct liberation is named emptiness, and it is also named unmoving. What is meant by 'unmoving' is that in liberation there is no suffering; therefore it is unmoving. This correct liberation is also signless: what is meant by 'signless' is that it has no form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and so forth; therefore it is called signless. This correct liberation is eternal and unchanging; in this liberation there is no impermanence, feverish affliction, or alteration; therefore liberation is named eternally abiding, unchanging, and refreshing. Or again, if he says that all sentient beings possess the Tathāgata-nature, the wise minister should know that this is the Tathāgata expounding the eternal Dharma, wishing to cause the monks to cultivate the correct eternal Dharma. If these monks can follow and train like this, know that such a person is truly my disciple." However, that commentary on the sūtra does not explain the reason for the lack of sequence, but merely correlates and interprets them according to the sequence [of the text], with the first four manifesting the provisional and concealing the real, and the last one manifesting the real and concealing the provisional. Now I state that in the distinct metaphors above, they are sequenced according to impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self: because water conforms to the square or round shape of the vessel, it is impermanence; salt is suffering; the vessel corresponds to emptiness, because it possesses the utility of a vessel; the horse is whipped by a person, because it lacks autonomy. In the correlation: impermanence, suffering, and non-self are the three cultivated dharmas, belonging to saṃsāra; the fourth, correlated with emptiness, is correct liberation. Yet in liberation, being empty of non-self, suffering, impurity, and impermanence is precisely [true] permanence; therefore, within the single [aspect of] emptiness it clarifies four meanings, all using the metaphor of the vessel. And finally, the Buddha-nature manifests wondrous existence, corresponding to the horse mentioned before. However, the four meanings within emptiness negate impermanence and the like, while the single meaning of Buddha-nature reveals true permanence; self, pleasure, purity, and so forth should also be fully explained, being contained within correct liberation: unmoving is pleasure; signless is purity; free from changing feverish affliction is the meaning of permanence; the horse is also the meaning of self. Thus, herein the eight practices are fully manifested. Because within the impermanence and the like of saṃsāra, permanence and the like are secretly revealed, they are secret words. Furthermore, in the initial list, salt is first, which is also sequenced as suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self, as commonly explained. Therefore this explanation is not the same as the ancient masters' interpretations. However, the intention of citing this passage is to urge that one must adeptly grasp the intent behind the spoken words; how could one muddle them together without distinguishing provisional and real? As for the commentary's "Not recognizing the provisional and real, taking the deep as shallow" and so forth, this is the second point. For example, when it is said that upon first generating the mind one immediately accomplishes correct enlightenment, yet one regards this merely as the Tathāgata's provisional exposition, this is taking the deep as shallow. Being unable to cultivate correctly and holding the sage's realm aloof, one is then unable to quickly realize anuttarabodhi; hence it says "losing great benefit." The "Chapter on Leaving the World" says: "Those who cultivate this Dharma apply little effort and swiftly attain bodhi," and so forth. As for "taking the shallow as deep and wasting their effort," this is like the World-Honoured One, in order to stop distracted thoughts, instructing people to count breaths and observe the mind, and for those who despise suffering, instructing them to transcend the three realms. Sentient beings do not understand, indulge in the taste [of these] as the true, and strive endlessly; using much effort, what they obtain is minuscule, not gaining the value of a single day of nirvāṇa. Hence it says "wasting their effort," which means fruitlessly wasting effort. As for the commentary's "To adorn the sacred teachings so as to make them deep and vast," this is the third point. This means that by analyzing the provisional and real, emptiness and existence, and choosing between the partial and round, slow and swift, one only then knows that the Buddha-Dharma is subtle, profound, and abstruse, encompassing everything. For example, if one does not sail the great ocean, how could one know its margins? If one does not recognize earth and stone, how could one know true gems? Thus the Dazhidulun, explaining the giving of Dharma, says: "Relying on sūtras and treatises, broadly elaborating meanings and establishing names for them—all are called the giving of Dharma." Furthermore, if one does not distinguish provisional and real, one would assume that the three teachings are largely identical. Now it is clarified that even the Mahāyāna has provisional and real, so how much more so the Hīnayāna? The Hīnayāna compared to the Mahāyāna is like the glow of a firefly compared to the shining of the sun. The Hīnayāna, being the Buddha's teaching, is still rebuked, so how much more so when Confucianism and Daoism are compared to the Buddha-Dharma—they are as distant as heaven and earth! By screening them with these repeated layers, one only then knows the profound depth of the Buddha-Dharma. As for the commentary's "Because within the sacred teachings they are naturally differentiated," this is the fourth point. For instance, the Saṃdhinirmocana establishes the three periods, which differs from the Jieji. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa establishes the difference of the three wheels; the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] itself differentiates the half and full, and also does so in terms of the distinction of the five flavors—all are the Buddha's own differentiations. As for the commentary's "Because the great bodhisattvas also opened the teachings," this is the fifth point. This refers to Asaṅga's support of the five natures and the three periods, and Nāgārjuna's distinction of the four gates as shared and unshared; all of these screen the provisional and real and make selections.