大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 76

English (machine translation) 76

Language: English

76.1

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

Seventh, echo-like forbearance. The text of the commentary is self-evident. Master Sengrui praised it, saying: "Sound is repaid by an echo, harmonizing as one. Responding when struck by conditions, who can distinguish the empty from the real? Though karma is illusory, sin and merit are not lost; if this illumination reflects it, it is bright like the blazing sun." He also made a praise saying: "An echo has no dwelling place; when conditions meet, sound comes forth. Not knowing it is from oneself, joy and anger contend with one another. Delusion harmonizes with the true mind; phenomenal images take ten thousand forms. Not knowing their root, all day long one busily schemes."

76.3

Eighth, shadow-like forbearance. Regarding the commentary's "Its nature is non-cultivation, yet its characteristics are not abandoned": this explains and establishes the meaning of dual illumination. As the previous text said, "It is not worldly, its meaning corresponds to supra-worldly." The subsequent line said, "It is not supra-worldly," which brushes away the aforementioned supra-worldly. Brushing away both worldly and supra-worldly is called dual occlusion. In the present text, if it were to say 'not cultivating the bodhisattva practices,' it would correspond to dual occlusion; since it says 'not abandoning the great vows,' it is clearly dual illumination. That is, not cultivating the bodhisattva practices is illuminating the real; not abandoning the great vows is illuminating the provisional; thus it receives the name 'dual illumination.' Next, clarifying 'neither real nor unreal' likewise by analogy dually illuminates the ultimate and the conventional.

76.4

Regarding the commentary's "Simultaneous occlusion and illumination constitute dual operation" and so on: if we take the simultaneous practice of provisional and real as dual operation, then the second section has already completed dual operation. Now, taking occlusion and illumination as dual operation only occurs here; that is, combining the previous two gates forms this third gate. Since it says occlusion and illumination are simultaneous, then total occlusion is illumination and total illumination is occlusion, and the two gates stand opposite each other. When illumination negates occlusion, occlusion vanishes; when occlusion negates illumination, illumination is stilled. Then both occlusion and illumination vanish. The term "unhindered" inherently has two meanings: first, occlusion does not hinder illumination, and illumination does not hinder occlusion; second, preserving both does not hinder negating both, and negating both does not hinder preserving both. Hence it is called unhindered. Only in this way can it be called unhindered mastery. Therefore, it concludes below: "Using this to conclude the above two sections, both share this unhinderedness; hence it is called profound and abstruse."

76.5

Regarding the commentary's "Now first, if in terms of the shadow metaphor we specifically illustrate the bodhisattva manifesting bodies" and so on: the commentary text has two parts. First, it distinguishes between the general and specific of what is illustrated; second, from "The two kinds, river and spring..." downward, it distinguishes between the general and specific of that which illustrates. The phrase "Although universally functioning as that which manifests" means that because the sun and moon are seen within rivers and springs, they function as that which manifests. The phrase "For now taken as that which is manifested" is because the subsequent sūtra says: "In oil and in water" and only then clarifies that which manifests; here the rivers and springs are taken as that which is manifested. "Because long rivers and flying springs enter into the mirror" reveals the characteristic of being that which is manifested. Going up a tower holding a mirror, the entire stretch of the Yellow River enters into the mirror, and a thousand-fathom waterfall appears within a single foot's diameter. Wang Youcheng said: "Beyond the window, clouds and mists arise upon one's robe; / Rolling up the curtain, mountain springs enter into the mirror." This clearly shows it is that which is manifested.

76.6

Regarding the commentary's "Second, within that which manifests there are also general and specific" and so on: the commentary text has two parts. First, it explains the general tenor of the text; second, it distinguishes and unfolds the meaning of the metaphors. Now to the first. The phrase "Specifically illustrating the capacity of beings to respond and the places of responsive manifestation": since the sun and moon illustrate the bodhisattva, the water and so forth illustrate the receptivity of beings, and also illustrate the places of the bodhisattva's response. Just as a shadow falls upon a hundred rivers, illustrating the bodhisattva's body pervading the dharmadhātu, the hundred rivers and streams illustrate the beings' receptivity and the lands where manifestation occurs.

76.7

Regarding the commentary's "However, this text contains the three metaphors of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha" downward: this is the second [part], separately unfolding the meaning of the metaphors. These two lines generally identify the topic; below, establishing the three meanings, it divides into three distinct points.

76.8

Regarding the commentary's "First, matching oil and water against the sun and moon above constitutes the water-and-moon metaphor": the sun and moon illustrate the bodhisattva's compassion and wisdom, while the water illustrates the mind of the receptive beings. The moon in the water illustrates the realm of the state of meditative absorption (samādhi), meaning seeing the Buddha within absorption and so on. It also illustrates the kasina-spheres (kṛtsnāyatana), because the realms of absorption are blue, yellow, red, white, and so on. The verse in the "Appearance" chapter says: "Just like the pure moon in empty space, / Able to outshine the host of stars and show waxing and waning, / Casting reflections in all waters, / Appearing right before all who look upon it: / The pure moon of the Tathāgata is also like this, / Able to outshine the other vehicles and show long and short life, / Universally appearing in the pure mind-water of humans and devas, / So that all say he is right before them." Master Sengrui said: "The moon in the water is not real, there is only an empty reflection. People are also like this, never grasping it; toiling busily for it, turning their backs on this true purity. If one can awaken to this, one awakens alone, transcendent."

76.9

Regarding the commentary's "Second, matching the body against the sun and moon above constitutes the light-and-shadow [metaphor]": the sun and moon illustrate the bodhisattva's compassion and wisdom, the body illustrates the receptivity of beings, and the sun shining to cast a shadow illustrates the manifestation of bodies and so forth. As for the expression "reflected by the sun, etc.," the "etc." includes the words 'moon' and 'lamps and candles' found in the sūtra. Regarding the commentary's "Manipulating shadows in diverse ways therefore illustrates the various consciousnesses": above, it specifically illustrated the bodhisattva manifesting bodies; here, it generally illustrates all consciousnesses. Moving the body and bending or looking up is precisely manipulating the shadow: when the form is upright the shadow is straight, when the form is crooked the shadow is oblique; hence it is called "diverse ways." This illustrates how the eight consciousnesses differ based on the body, and also illustrates the seven consciousnesses confronting different sensory realms based on the eighth consciousness. The above are all the intent of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. Master Sengrui said: "Where light does not illuminate is called a shadow. When not illuminated by the light of wisdom, saṃsāra is long and eternal; abandoning the distant, level path, one walks among thorns and briars. If one can awaken to this, madness is extinguished and one awakens naturally."

76.10

Regarding the commentary's "Third, matching the precious mirror and so forth to the man above": this explains the third simile. The text of the commentary has two parts: first, it properly correlates the text of the sūtra; second, it distinguishes differences with respect to the similes. Now, for the first. The commentary speaks generally, saying: "It is an analogy for retribution not of the state of meditative stabilization (samāhitā-bhūmi)." This is the intention of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. Because it is contrasted with the preceding meditative spheres such as the moon in the water, it is called "not of the state of meditative stabilization." Thus the mirror serves as an analogy for the cause, hence it says that the archetype such as ignorance serves as an analogy for conditions, and the image serves as an analogy for retribution. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "This body is like a shadow, appearing from karmic conditions." Furthermore, the mirror is an analogy for the tathāgatagarbha nature of the fundamental consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna); the archetype is an analogy for ignorance, karma, and so forth; and the reflection is an analogy for retribution, as in the "Chapter on Inquiring into Clarity." If one takes the mirror image specifically as an analogy for the manifestation of the bodhisattva's body, then the mirror and so on are an analogy for the bodhisattva, the archetype is an analogy for the capacities [of beings], and the reflection is an analogy for the body manifested by the bodhisattva.

76.11

Regarding the commentary's "Because the reflection in the mirror is apart from the archetype": this is the second part, distinguishing differences with respect to the similes. It clarifies that this mirror reflection receives the name of "retribution" because the fruit is distinct from the cause, just as the reflection is outside the body. From "The preceding reflection against the archetype" downward, it distinguishes how the former differs from this. The sun and moon are in the sky, and the shadow and light are on the body; the body serves as an analogy for the cause, and so the manifested phenomena can be together with the cause. The commentary says: "Hence it serves as an analogy that although the various consciousnesses arise supported by objects, their difference and independence lie in themselves, not in the objects." This corresponds to the earlier statement that although it follows the sun and so forth, the shadow ultimately follows the body; this is explained in terms of a general analogy for all consciousnesses. If one takes the light and shadow as an analogy for the bodhisattva manifesting a body, then the shadow following the body's differences does not lie in the sunlight, meaning that the body's having differences arises from itself, not from the bodhisattva's sun of wisdom making it differ. Master Rui says: "Form does not enter the mirror, yet under the illumination of light it exists; the world is also like this, receiving karmic shadows. Those who do not know this / will long suffer its guilt. / If one can awaken to this, / one returns the spirit to the mother of qi." Regarding the commentary's "Among them, oneness and difference, union and separation generally reveal the meaning of reflection": this discriminates between the general and particular among the various pairs in the sūtra. This applies to all three reflections, hence it is said to "generally reveal." Next, from "In streams and currents" downward, it clarifies only the reflection of the moon in water. Regarding the commentary's "However, oneness and difference pertain to this reflection and that reflection": it self-discriminates the different doctrinal points of the two pairs, showing that there is no fault of repetition. "This reflection and that reflection" means: if the moon in the river were one with the water, it could not be in the stream; if it were different from the water, the difference between river and stream would entail two moons. Regarding "Union and separation pertain to the reflection versus the water": if the water and the reflection were united, when the water flows the moon should also flow; if the water and the reflection were separated, away from the water there should still be a reflection. Furthermore, regarding "union and separation," the meaning of "union" also involves two things, like two palms clapping together. "Oneness and difference" is not like this: "oneness" has no pair, like ice becoming water; if the reflection were different from the water, the moon could emerge from the water. If the reflection were one with the water, wherever there is water there would be the moon, and it could not shift. The meaning of union and separation does not differ from the previous explanation. Regarding the commentary's "It does not apply to the two reflections": this is because it pertains solely to the moon in the water, not applying to the mirror reflection or to the reflection cast by an archetype. This is because the text merely says "streams, currents, pools, and wells." Regarding "the moon reflecting on the Huai's current": thus the Wen Xuan says "the moon reflecting on the clear current."

76.12

Regarding the commentary's "Also including the mirror image": because the text says "although appearing within it," it applies to the mirror image as well, but does not apply to the shadow cast by an archetype, because the shadow cast by an archetype has no appearance within anything. If one takes the shadow of a person's body cast by the sun entering the water, it would also apply, but it is subsumed under the reflection in water.

76.13

Regarding the commentary's "Not knowing that this reflection has no far or near": this explains the sūtra's phrase "The reflection does not follow objects in having far or near." It is like holding a mirror before a pool: when the moon appears in the pool, this reflection is not near the moon in the sky. Forty-two thousand yojanas from the earth, the reflection falls into the pool and yet is not far away either. This serves as an analogy for the bodhisattva, who, though distant in another realm, constantly abides here; though in this place, he is constantly there. How could there be different characteristics of far and near? All far and near can be understood by analogy with this.

76.14

Ninth: the forbearance of [phenomena being] like an illusion (māyopama-kṣānti). Regarding the commentary's "The Renwang says: 'Dharmas fundamentally do not exist of themselves; dependent origination produces them'": this confirms the two meanings above, namely, unreality and the appearance of characteristics. However, there are two meanings: First, being produced by cause and conditions is itself the appearance of characteristics. Because it is produced from conditions, the moment existence arises it is non-existent, hence it says dharmas fundamentally do not exist of themselves, which is the meaning of having no reality. Second, the two lines together establish a single meaning: "of themselves" means from the beginning. Arriving at existence from non-existence is called "production"; it is not that they existed primarily beforehand, hence it says "dharmas fundamentally do not exist of themselves." Arising upon meeting conditions, it says "dependent origination produces them." Thus, simply using "dependent origination produces them" establishes both meanings: because they are produced from cause and conditions, characteristics exist; because what is produced from conditions lacks inherent nature, they have no reality. Precisely in accordance with non-existence suddenly becoming existence is it called "an illusion"; therefore this text is cited. This passage is from the verse spoken by King Samantaprabhā to the thousand kings in the fifth chapter, the "Chapter on Protecting the Country," in the second fascicle. After this, there is another verse: "What flourishes must decline, / what is real is entirely false. / The bustling multitude of worlds / is completely like living in an illusion. / Sound and echo are both empty; / lands are also like this," and so forth. In total there are eight verses and the narrative context, all as in that sūtra.

76.15

Regarding the commentary's "The two meanings of pure illusion can be known by following this": these are precisely the two meanings of unreality and the appearance of characteristics.

76.16

Regarding the commentary's "Kindness and compassion are furthermore established upon upāya": this is the text of the subsequent "Chapter on the Appearance [of the Tathāgata]." Hence its verse says: "Just as forests exist based on the earth, / the earth exists based on water and does not decay, / the water wheel is based on wind and wind on space, / while empty space has nothing on which it relies. / All buddhadharmas are based on kindness and compassion, / kindness and compassion are furthermore established upon upāya, / upāya is based on cognition and cognition on wisdom, / and the body of unimpeded wisdom has nothing on which it relies." There it speaks of five layers of mutual dependence; here we only need kindness and compassion relying on upāya. Upāya is precisely the subsequently attained cognition (pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna). Kindness and compassion take the subsequently attained cognition as their essence, because it is within subsequently attained cognition that one bestows happiness and relieves suffering.

76.17

Regarding the commentary's "Meaning that non-existence is also non-existent": the sūtra has two lines, saying "neither existent nor non-existent." Here it specifically explains the line "not non-existent": "not existent" means non-existent, and now it also dispels that non-existence, hence it says "neither existent nor non-existent," which means non-existence is also non-existent. The preceding line is easy, so it is not explained. Master Rui says: "Sentient beings are like an illusion, / neither existent nor real. / Those who do not comprehend this / revolve like a chariot wheel. / Understand that dharmas are pure, / without self and without person; / when the multitude of defilements is extinguished, / it is like the sun without clouds."

76.18

Tenth: the forbearance of [phenomena being] like space (ākāśopama-kṣānti). Regarding the commentary's "Indicating it as 'like space', what is analogized by space pervades all dharmas": from here downward, the text of the commentary has four parts: first, showing the general and particular scope of what is analogized; second, explaining the differences in the characteristics of the similes; third, citing treatises to harmonize and explain them; fourth, concluding the main intention. In the first part, the above is the intention of this sūtra, generally serving as an analogy for everything; second, from "The Buddhabhūmi-vyākhyāna analogizes purity" downward, it cites the treatise to clarify the general and particular.

76.19

Regarding the commentary's "However, their characteristics of analogy" downward: this is the second part, explaining the differences in the characteristics of the similes. Within it there are four: first, solely taking the simile of space to distinguish differences in characteristics against the preceding six similes; second, from "Furthermore, if these various similes are considered in terms of the vehicle of analogy" downward, it comprehensively distinguishes the differences in what is refuted by the seven similes; third, from "Furthermore, the preceding six dispel existence" downward, it for the third time takes the simile of space against the six to clarify the difference between emptiness and existence, meaning that the various similes together analogize emptiness, while the simile of space conversely accomplishes existence; fourth, from "Furthermore, what is analogized above pervades everything" downward, it comprehensively distinguishes the general and particular scope of what analogizes and what is analogized in the seven similes. "Here what analogizes possesses multiple meanings" means: like a single space, it has the meaning of marklessness, the meaning of non-arising, the meaning of single flavor, and so forth. "What is analogized each follows a distinct meaning to analogize a specific category of phenomena" means: marklessness only analogizes the dharmadhātu of phenomena, non-arising only analogizes the worlds, and single flavor only analogizes the teaching dharmas, and so forth.

76.20

In the commentary, under "However, Nāgārjuna...", is the third [part], citing sūtras and treatises to reconcile and explain. Therein, one treatise and two sūtras are cited. First, the four meanings from the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, which are briefly complete as in the text; second, the ten meanings from the Buddhabhūmi[-sūtra]; third, the ten meanings from the Eighth Stage. The texts of both of these two sūtras each have ten meanings, but their intents are different. The ten meanings of the Buddhabhūmi exclusively serve as metaphors for the Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu; the ten meanings of the Eighth Stage cognize the ten different characteristics of the space-body, namely: 1. the characteristic of being immeasurable, 2. the characteristic of being all-pervading, 3. the characteristic of being formless, 4. the characteristic of being undifferentiated, 5. the characteristic of being boundless, 6. the characteristic of manifesting the form-body. Although the text has only six, by analogy there ought to be ten. They speak only of space, without distinctively serving as metaphors for phenomena. Now we should cite in full the ten meanings from the Buddhabhūmi; they begin in the third fascicle of the treatise and end only in the fourth. The first meaning: The sūtra states, "O Subhūti, you should know: The pure dharmadhātu is, for example, like space; although it pervades the various characteristics of all forms, it cannot be said to have various characteristics, for its essence is solely of one flavor. Likewise, although the Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu pervades the realms of cognizable objects of various characteristics and classes, it cannot be said to have various characteristics, for its essence is solely of one flavor." The second states, "Furthermore, just as space, although it pervades all forms without mutually departing from them, is not defiled by the faults of form; likewise, although the Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu pervades the mind-natures of all sentient beings and does not mutually depart from them because it is real, it is not defiled by their faults." The third states, "Furthermore, just as space contains and tolerates all actions of body, speech, and mind, yet this space has no active initiating; likewise, the Tathāgata contains and tolerates all activities of benefiting sentient beings that are transformed by wisdom, yet the pure dharmadhātu has no active initiating." This corresponds to the beginning of the fourth fascicle, which hence states, "Furthermore, just as in space various characteristics of forms appear to arise and appear to cease, yet this space has no arising and no cessation; likewise, so on and so forth, the activities of benefiting sentient beings transformed by all wisdoms appear to arise and appear to cease, yet the pure dharmadhātu has no arising and no cessation." The fifth states, "Furthermore, just as in space various characteristics of forms appear to increase and appear to decrease, yet this space has no increase and no decrease; likewise, so on and so forth, it is displayed that the Tathāgata's holy teaching of the deathless has increase and decrease, yet the pure dharmadhātu has no increase and no decrease." The sixth states, "Furthermore, just as space: the characteristics of form in the ten directions are boundless and inexhaustible, and because this realm of space is boundless and inexhaustible, this space has no going, no coming, no motion, and no transformation; likewise, so on and so forth, the various functions that establish the benefit, peace, and happiness of all sentient beings in the ten directions are boundless and inexhaustible, and because the pure dharmadhātu is boundless and inexhaustible, the pure dharmadhātu has no going, no coming, no motion, and no transformation." The seventh states, "Furthermore, just as space: the trichiliocosms appear to form and appear to disintegrate, yet the realm of space has no disintegration and no formation; likewise, so on and so forth, manifesting immeasurable characteristics to attain equal and perfect awakening, or manifesting entrance into great nirvāṇa, yet the pure dharmadhātu does not attain equal and perfect awakening, nor does it enter cessation." The eighth states, "Furthermore, just as based upon space, various characteristics of forms can be found to decay, rot, burn, blaze, and undergo mutation, yet the realm of space is not mutated by them, nor does it suffer weariness or obstruction; likewise, based upon the Tathāgata's pure realm, within the realms of sentient beings various transgressions of the trainings and of actions of body, speech, and mind can be found, yet the pure dharmadhātu is not mutated by them, nor does it suffer weariness or obstruction." The ninth states, "Furthermore, just as based upon space, the great earth, great mountains, radiance, water, fire, Śakra's retinue, and even the sun and the moon can all be found, yet the realm of space does not have those characteristics; likewise, based upon the Tathāgata's pure realm, the aggregate of morality, the aggregate of concentration, the aggregate of wisdom, the aggregate of liberation, and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation can all be found, yet the pure dharmadhātu does not have those characteristics." The tenth states, "Furthermore, just as in space, through the mutual arising of various causes and conditions, the rotations of immeasurable trichiliocosms can be found, yet the realm of space has no active initiating; likewise, in the Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu, the circumambulating assemblies of Buddhas possessing immeasurable characteristics can be found, yet the pure realm has no active initiating." Exposition: The above ten meanings are fully drawn from the text of the sūtra. Beneath the phrase "likewise" there is always the phrase "the Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu"; the rest all follow the sūtra. The treatise, however, explains them all extensively, and their general import is similar; therefore, the commentary does not cite the treatise, nor does it fully list the sūtra text. Saying that "their general import is similar" means they universally share the sense of being neither identical with nor separate from all phenomena. The above directly distinguishes the one true dharmadhātu among the five dharmas, which is why it uses the ten meanings of space as a metaphor. If one briefly takes their distinct characteristics: 1. its essence is solely of one flavor, 2. its nature is pure and undefiled, 3. it has no active initiating, 4. it has no arising or cessation, 5. it has no increase or decrease, 6. it has no going, coming, motion, or transformation, 7. it has no formation or disintegration, 8. it has no mutation, weariness, or exhaustion, 9. it is not [any of] the characteristics, 10. it has nothing actively initiated. Examining the sūtra text, the tenth and the third are the same; but the third is containing and tolerating without active initiating, while the tenth is generating without active initiating; combining the two, they are called the absence of agent and object. If one examines the treatise's conclusion, the tenth should be called "free from conceptual differentiation" and the third should be called "free from mental orientation." Now we briefly cite the treatise's explanation. Explaining the first, it says: "Next we shall display the characteristic of the pure dharmadhātu, resolve objections, and determine the differentiations of the dharmadhātu. There is an objection that says: If all Tathāgatas have the dharmadhātu as their nature, then the dharmadhātu takes tathatā as its essence. Tathatā is the common characteristic of all phenomena. Since all phenomena have various differentiations, how can the dharmadhātu, in following them, be free from various differentiations? If the dharmadhātu has various differentiations, how is it pure? It is not like a crystal that mutually corresponds with various supports, so it lacks various characteristics. To resolve this objection, the initial metaphor of vast space is spoken." The intent is: although it pervades various things, it does not conform to take on shapes, because it does not abandon its own nature. From "solely of one flavor" onward, it cites the treatise according to its intent. The second objection says: If the dharmadhātu pervades everything, it must mutually correspond with greed and the like; why then does it not become impure, like defiled mental factors? Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: because its nature is pure and not of their essence, it is not defiled by them. The third objection says: The Tathāgata's pure dharmadhātu takes tathatā as its essence, so it is free from prapañca and free from active initiating; how then can it contain activities that benefit sentient beings? Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: by the power of past vows acting as a predominant condition, it performs activities of benefit and joy for sentient beings, abiding effortlessly, without conceptual differentiation and without prapañca. The fourth objection says: If the pure dharmadhātu pervades everything without mutually departing from it and unreservedly conforms with it, then the dharmadhātu ought to have arising and cessation. Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: although it pervades everything, according to conventional designations there are arising and cessation, but the essence of the ultimate truth neither arises nor ceases. The fifth objection says: If the pure dharmadhātu pervades everything without mutually departing from it, and the Tathāgata's holy teachings visibly have increase and decrease, then the dharmadhātu ought also to increase and decrease. Therefore, it is resolved by saying: while in all conventional principles there is said to be increase and decrease, it is not that the true dharmadhātu has increase and decrease. The sixth objection says: If all Tathāgatas take the dharmadhātu as their essence, and the Tathāgata's bestowing of benefit and joy upon sentient beings involves going and coming, then the dharmadhātu ought to have coming and going. Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: it is in terms of the enjoyment-body that going and coming are spoken of, not that the essence of the dharmadhātu has going and coming. The seventh objection says: If there is no going or coming, how can there be the attainment of equal and perfect awakening? Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: attaining is in terms of the conventional, whereas the ultimate has no formation or disintegration. The eighth objection says: If the dharmadhātu pervades all classes of sentient beings, how can sentient beings commit transgressions? Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: sentient beings have transgressions, but the dharmadhātu has no mutation. The ninth objection says: If the dharmadhātu pervades everything, there ought not to be the characteristics of the uncontaminated aggregates such as morality. Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: having predominant conditions that increase everything, it itself lacks all characteristics. The tenth objection says: If all Buddhas take the dharmadhātu as their essence, they ought to lack enjoyment; how then can there be differentiations among assemblies? Therefore, it is now resolved by saying: they are obtained in terms of distinct causes and conditions, not that the Tathāgata's body has prapañca, conceptual differentiation, and so forth. Given the above ten objections, comparing them with the sūtra text above makes them clearly easy to understand.

76.21

In the commentary, under "However, with distinct meanings having these differences...", is the fourth [part], concluding the general import. The text has three parts: first, a general explanation; second, under "Therefore Master Rui...", citing evidence to establish that they are identical in their meaning of emptiness. This merely concludes in general the praise of the ten metaphors. If one explains emptiness separately, the eulogy says: "Emptiness has only a name, / Lacking function and lacking form. / A person is also like this; / None is able to cognize it. / Falsely creating false suffering, / Beset with a hundred severe perils, / Galloping after emptiness to seek emptiness, / Emptying and exhausting their strength." This also reveals the meaning of emptiness. Finally, regarding "The remaining meanings of unimpededness are as explained before and after", this is the third [part], concluding the general import of this sūtra. The commentary on the sūtra has already spoken of this before, as in the patience with the illusion-like, etc.; it will also speak of it later, as in the explanation of virtue being equal to space. Far-flung passages before and after contain even more text. As for the commentary's "arising from the common karma of worlds", this will be explained in the "Chapter on the Manifestation [of the Tathāgata]".

76.22

The commentary's "the fourth is the reverse of this" refers to: existing because of lacking nature, and being empty because of conditioned arising, all as in the "Chapter on the Clarification of Inquiries". If matched to the sūtra text, one should say: because it exists from conditions, it serves as the support for worlds; because it is empty of nature, it is without support. The four propositions merely articulate the reasons for the distinctions in the meaning of emptiness.

76.23

In the commentary, under "No phenomenon transcends space...", is the distinctive explanation. For example, like space, all worlds appear before it, but it does not appear before all worlds.

76.24

Regarding the commentary's "because the single flavor of liberation is undifferentiated", the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says, "All share the same single amṛta, the single flavor of liberation", and the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says, "Taking the flavor of liberation as beverage." The rest of the prose and the verses may all be understood accordingly. The Chapter on the Ten Patiences ends here.

76.25

Chapter Thirty: Asaṃkhyeya

76.26

Regarding the commentary's "First, the contextual purpose has two aspects...", etc.: first is general, contrasting the latter three chapters with the former three chapters; second is specific, where this chapter corresponds to the "Chapter on the Ten Patiences". This in turn has three intents: 1. answering the beginning of the second assembly; 2. under "First, to answer from afar...", answering the ten oceans in the first assembly; 3. under "Also, generally...", revealing the numbers across the entire work. In the first there are again two intents: directly distinguishing the bodhisattvas; and under "Also, the two difficult-to-conceive...", clarifying the bodhisattva's cognition of the Buddha's virtues. The verse text outlined below also contains these two intents.

76.27

Regarding the commentary's "fully carrying the name of a number": "innumerable" (asaṃkhyeya) is indeed one among the one hundred and twenty-four numbers. Regarding the commentary's "mentioning both person and dharma": if person and dharma were different, it would be a contradiction. Saying below "and the calculations inquired about by the bodhisattva" is a determinative compound (tatpuruṣa). In the commentary, under "However, saṃghya...", it resolves an objection. The objection says: "Saṃkhyeya" is not the first, nor is it the last; why is it singled out for the title? The intent of the resolution is evident.

76.28

In the commentary, under "Fourth, explaining the text...", this first gives an overall outline, which has two parts: directly outlining in terms of the dharma, and later, under "However, regarding these three chapters...", discriminating in terms of persons. The commentary's "indicating that numbers are not separate [from the mind]" explains the word "mind". Under "Numbers and non-numbers...", it explains the word "king", because "king" takes sovereign mastery as its meaning. Under "Also revealing that this number...", it explains both words "mind" and "king" together. "Mind" comprehensively subsumes all phenomena and is the most supreme of all; "king" governs the four seas and is the most supreme. From "the reason for specifically inquiring..." onward, it discriminates what is inquired about. As for the word "turn" (vivarta), it refers to asaṃkhyeya: an asaṃkhyeya of asaṃkhyeyas is one asaṃkhyeya turn, and so on.

76.29

Regarding the commentary's "starting from one and two, and ending at zheng and zai": from one to ten is ten, and next are thirteen numbers: ten tens are one hundred, ten hundreds are one thousand, [ten thousands are one wan], followed by yi, zhao, jing, gai, zi, rang, gou, jian, zheng, and zai. "Zai" means that heaven and earth cannot contain or bear (zai) it.

76.30

Regarding the commentary's "Hīnayāna's sixty reaches 'innumerable' (wushu)": that is, the Abhidharmakośa-śāstra speaks of sixty, beyond which there are no more numbers. That is, the twelfth fascicle of the treatise cites the Vimukti-sūtra explaining sixty numbers, in which asaṃkhyeya is the fifty-second number. That text enumerates them in full: from one to ten is ten, and so on up to balakṣa being one asaṃkhyeya. In this count, the remaining eight are omitted, being only fifty-two. Now, when it is said that Hīnayāna's sixty reaches "innumerable," this "innumerable" means that beyond this there are no more; it is not the term asaṃkhyeya.

76.31

Regarding the commentary's "if according to the Kośa, lakṣa is taken as yi": fascicle eleven of that treatise, explaining the three circles, contains the verse: "In establishing the receptacle world, / the wind circle rests at the very bottom; / its extent is vast and innumerable, / its thickness sixteen lakṣas. / Next above, the water circle's depth / is eleven hundred and twenty thousand [yojanas]; / the lower eight lakṣas of water / solidify into gold, save for the rest." Here, "eleven yi [and twenty thousand]" is the language of this land (China), while "lakṣa" below is Sanskrit. If both followed this land's usage, it should say that the lower eight yi are water, and the rest solidifies into gold. Hence we know that lakṣa is taken as yi.

76.32

Regarding the commentary's "there would be four occurrences of the word ineffable (buke shuo)": taking the earlier pattern, it should say: "an ineffable-ineffable, ineffable-ineffable is one ineffable-ineffable revolution." The first two occurrences of "ineffable-ineffable" are the single unit accumulated—meaning one ineffable-ineffable, two ineffable-ineffables, up to an ineffable-ineffable number of ineffable-ineffables—hence there are four occurrences. Now, replacing two occurrences of "ineffable" with this word "again" (you)—is this not marvelous! The reason this is raised is that the Kanding ji criticized this word "again" in the sūtra as superfluous.

76.33

Regarding the commentary's "the fruitional virtues being profound and vast, the cause can enter them": "entering" pertains to experiential realization, whereas the earlier "fathoming well" pertains to understanding. Furthermore, regarding the virtues mentioned, one pertains to unobstructedness and the other to profundity and vastness, so the two are distinct. However, both "entering" and "fathoming well" should apply to unobstructedness as well as profundity and vastness; it is simply an elliptical cross-reference.

76.34

Regarding the commentary's "a single hair matching the dharmatā" and so forth: this text is also an elliptical cross-reference. If stated fully, both the lands and the pore possess both the meaning of matching the nature and the characteristic of non-destruction. Here, in the case of the hair, the meaning of matching the nature is taken, and hence it is like the dharmatā having nothing outside it; in the case of the lands, the characteristic of non-destruction is taken, and hence they do not pervade the hair that matches the nature, and so the words "the one who has awakened" are added. There is yet another meaning, which is also an elliptical cross-reference: placing the one who has awakened on the hair reveals that the lands exist due to delusion. In delusion, there are partitions; in awakening, there are no boundaries. The former meaning is discussed directly in terms of phenomena; the latter takes phenomena in reference to the person; this can be seen upon reflection. Regarding the commentary's "because inner and outer dependent origination are neither identical nor separate": there are also two meanings. First, in terms of the inner and outer jointly forming dependent origination: because they are not identical, there are the enterer and the entered; because they are not separate, they can interpenetrate. Second, in terms of inner and outer dependent origination being neither identical to nor separate from the true dharmatā: this again has two meanings. First, because the inner and outer are not identical to the dharmatā, there are the enterer and the entered; because they are not separate from the dharmatā, the hair can contain and the lands can completely enter. Second, the hair, in terms of not being separate from the dharmatā, contains [all] in accordance with the principle; the lands, in terms of not being identical to the dharmatā, do not pervade the pore. Reflecting on this constitutes contemplation. However, among the ten sections, in one section the number is mentioned and in another it is not; not mentioning it is out of a desire for brevity, while mentioning it stems from concern over losing the sequence.

76.35

From the commentary's "For now, from the perspective of manifest characteristics" onward, the concluding explanation reveals its profundity.

76.36

Chapter 31: The Life Span

76.37

In the commentary's section on the "purpose of this text," there are two parts: first, establishing the principle; second, directly revealing it. In the first part, it directly reveals the life span of the ten bodies, temporarily clarifying it through the three bodies. That is, the true body has neither length nor brevity, whereas the response body manifestively displays length and brevity. In the first part, "profound" refers to the profound principle, and "illuminating" refers to illuminating awareness. The tacit merging of principle and cognition constitutes the true body. Because it is profound, it is empty and tranquil; because it is illuminating, it is bright and penetrating. Transcending calculation, its life span cannot be spoken of as short or long; transcending spatial boundaries, the location of its physical dimension cannot be stated. Furthermore, transcending calculation, it cannot be described as a single body or multiple bodies; transcending spatial boundaries, it cannot be equated with the life spans of humans and gods. If the aforementioned distinction between that which realizes and that which is realized is differentiated, the meaning of the three bodies is complete. From "Yet in responding to beings" onward, it analyzes its response and transformation. Hence the sūtra says: "The Buddha takes the Dharma as body, / pure like empty space; / the manifold physical forms he manifests / cause [beings] to enter into this Dharma." It also says: "The Tathāgata's true body is fundamentally non-dual; / responding to beings in accord with their capacities, it pervades the ten directions," and so forth.

76.38

From the commentary's "Therefore, the preceding chapter" onward is the second part, which directly reveals the purpose of this text. Within it are two points: first, looking nearby, it expands upon the preceding chapter, also encompassing the bodhisattvas' life span; second, from "It is also to" onward, looking afar, it answers the initial assembly, concerning solely the Tathāgata's life span.

76.39

Regarding the commentary's "Second, explaining the name" and so forth: the name is also established based on the true [body] and the response [body]. However, when various sūtras and treatises speak of the life spans of the three bodies: the transformation [body] has a beginning and an end, with myriad kinds of length and brevity; the reward [body] has a beginning but no end, being eternally constant once attained; the dharmakāya has neither beginning nor end, being motionless and unchanging. Hence, in the Lotus Sūtra, birth in Gayā and extinction in the Twin Trees are the transformation body; the life span attained when I originally practiced the bodhisattva path is the reward body; being constantly abiding and indestructible is the dharmakāya. The essential purport of this sūtra is that since the three bodies are merged, the three life spans are unobstructed: the long can immediately be short, and the short is ever long. While there is neither long nor short, long and short are preserved; each and every one is perfectly interfused, beyond words and thought.

76.40

Regarding the commentary's "already bordering on the equality of the ocean of lands": because there is still a numerical limit, the word "bordering" is used, since the equality of the ocean of lands is without measure or quantity.

76.41

Chapter 32: Dwellings of the Bodhisattvas

76.42

In the commentary's section on the "purpose of this text," there are three parts: first, expanding on the "Asaṃkhyeya" [chapter]; second, from "It also answers afar" onward, repaying the initial assembly; third, from "In the past, taking this chapter" onward, recounting different theories, the meaning of which is as explained in the second assembly. From the commentary's "The mountains and oceans contain and hold" onward, it explains the intent of mountains and oceans. This sentence pertains to phenomena: mountains harbor, and oceans take in. "Where the humane and wise abide" is an explanation borrowed from external texts. The Master (Confucius) said: "The humane delight in mountains, the wise delight in water." The meaning is: the humane are fond of mountains, like mountains being stable and unmoving; the wise are fond of water, like the virtue of water being clear, reflective, and cleansing, flowing or stopping according to conditions. Thus, it is not necessary that the humane must reside in mountains or the wise must live near water. From "Representing great wisdom" onward, it directly pertains to what is represented. The single great wisdom jointly combines both above: high as a mountain, deep as an ocean; quiescence is the mountain, illumination is the ocean. Regarding the commentary's "it must be the Gandhamādana Mountain north of the Snow [Mountains]": whenever the words "it must be" occur, doubt is entailed; since the phenomenon is difficult to reconcile and cannot be known decisively, one should naturally hear much and suspend judgment on what is doubtful. As for "north of the Snow [Mountains]," the Abhidharmakośa-śāstra states that north of the Snow [Mountains] and south of Gandhamādana is Lake Anavatapta; hence we know that the Snow Mountains reach to the south of Gandhamādana.

76.43

Regarding the commentary's "fifth, Qingliangshan": the text of the commentary is divided into six: first, briefly explaining the sūtra text; second, demonstrating what it represents; third, determining its location; fourth, revealing its spiritual sanctity; fifth, inquiring into its origin; sixth, encouraging beings to cultivate reverence. Now, as for the first: briefly, there are two names. "Wutai of Daizhou" refers to the border between Wutai County and Fanshi County. Those who have gone there are not few, so it may be stated briefly.

76.44

From the commentary's "representing our Great Sage" onward is the second part, demonstrating what it represents. Much of it comes from the Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṃgraha-tantra (Vajraśekhara), and some is analyzed through principle. "Great Sage" refers to Mañjuśrī. Without specifying his name, it directly says Great Sage; today, recitation in the mountain simply refers to the "Great Sage Bodhisattva," which cites the general title while specifically referring to the Auspicious One. Regarding the "five cognitions": according to the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra, five dharmas subsume the nature of great awakening, namely the four cognitions of bodhi and the one true dharmadhātu. According to the Vajraśekhara, the one true dharmadhātu is named the cognition of the pure dharmadhātu, thus making five cognitions. Second, the five eyes are understood. Third, as for the "five families": first, the Buddha family; second, the Vajra family; third, the Ratna family; fourth, the Padma family; fifth, the Karma family. All mantras of the devas belong to the Ratna family; mantras of the ghosts and spirits belong to the Karma family. Fourth, the "five aggregates" refers to our five aggregates, representing that within these five terraces is great awakening, namely the Unshakable Cognition Buddha (Akṣobhya) possessing wondrous wisdom and sovereignty, who is Mañjuśrī. Fifth, as for "bearing on the head a crown of the five Buddhas": many great bodhisattvas possess this crown, but the Great Sage does not merely wear a crown. Sixth, he also constantly has five topknots. Now, the meanings of these various sets of five are largely analogous: the central topknot, represented by the Central Terrace, is where Vairocana Buddha resides, being the lord of the Buddha family, the cognition of the pure dharmadhātu, and also the Buddha eye. The eastern topknot is the Eastern Terrace, where Akṣobhya Buddha resides, being the lord of the Vajra family, the great round mirror-like cognition, and the wisdom eye. The southern topknot is the Southern Terrace, where Ratnasaṃbhava Tathāgata resides, being the lord of the Ratna family, the cognition of equality, and the divine eye. The western topknot is the Western Terrace, where Amitābha Tathāgata resides, being the lord of the Padma family, the wondrously observing cognition, and the Dharma eye. The northern topknot is the Northern Terrace, where Amoghasiddhi Tathāgata resides, being the lord of the Karma family, the cognition that accomplishes actions, and the fleshly eye. Seventh, if correlated with the five vehicles: the center is the Buddha vehicle, the east the bodhisattva vehicle, the south the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the west the śrāvaka vehicle, and the north the human and deva vehicle. If human and deva vehicles are separated, the north is the human vehicle, combining the Buddha and bodhisattva, with the rest following in order. Eighth, if purifying the five defilements, it merely takes the five differences without necessarily following the sequence. If correlated with the five aggregates: the center is the aggregate of consciousness, the east the aggregate of mental formations, the south the aggregate of perception, the west the aggregate of feeling, and the north the aggregate of form. They are ordered analogously to this sequence, because consciousness is primary. However, the five Tathāgatas all have seed-syllables, and each of their meditative visualizations is distinct; only those who study the Esoteric Teaching will know their essentials. Here, they are merely correlated in brief.

First 44 of 52 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese