大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 76.10

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.