大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 82

English (machine translation) 82

Language: English

82.1

Composed by Śramaṇa Chengguan of Da Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang of the Tang.

The third major section [treats] the ten practices. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "Among the ten, the first three are upheld by the Three Jewels" onward, the commentary has four [parts]: first, it explains by drawing upon the treatise's meaning; second, from "However, the tenth bhūmi" onward, it reconciles differences and similarities with the treatise; third, from "Since the numbers and names" onward, it reconciles the treatise with the same explanation; fourth, from "Above, distinguishing the dhāraṇī" onward, it reconciles the word 'uphold' across the three passages, as can be known.

82.3

(Fascicle 54 of the sūtra) The Commentary's passage from "One who preaches the Dharma" onward is from the Maudgalyāyana chapter of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: "At that time Maudgalyāyana was preaching the Dharma to householders in a lane, and Vimalakīrti came and said to me: 'O Great Maudgalyāyana! Preaching the Dharma to lay householders should not be as the Venerable One preaches it. Why is that? One who preaches the Dharma should preach it in accordance with the Dharma. The Dharma is free of sentient beings, because it is free from the defilement of sentient beings. The Dharma has no self, because it is free from the defilement of a self,'" and so forth. From "Since preaching the Dharma [includes] both provisional and real" onward, the meaning is drawn from the intention of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa.

82.4

Regarding the Commentary's "not only relying on the precepts": in Ānanda's four questions, the Buddha instructed that one should take the precepts as one's teacher. That [instruction] considers the precepts to be of profound benefit, which is the meaning of 'taking refuge [and relying upon]'.

82.5

Regarding the Commentary's "How could [the bodhisattva] fear sentient beings afflicting and harming him?": this is because the practice of non-opposition is mostly explained in terms of the patience of enduring resentment and harm.

82.6

Regarding the Commentary's "Among the eight, there are ten phrases forming five pairs": the commentary text has two [parts]. First, it marks the dharmalakṣaṇas relied upon, which have two senses; later, from "However, each has two senses" onward, it explains both of the above two together. Saying that "each has two senses" means that the ten phrases forming five pairs each possess the above two [senses]. Below, it explains them according to these two senses: first, it explains directly in terms of the essence of phenomena, solely with reference to the two truths, which explains the former five [pairs] concerning cognitive object and mind, and so forth; later, from "Second, with reference to delusion and awakening" onward, it explains the above with reference to the five dharmas, explaining generally in terms of delusion and awakening. The former is with reference to the cognitive object, not going beyond the two truths; the latter is with reference to the mind, not going beyond delusion and awakening. Awakening is correct cognition, and delusion is false conceptualization; due to these two, the five dharmas are spoken of as being established. The five dharmas are then divided into five: first, with reference to characteristics, pairing them with tathatā, hence signlessness is tathatā; second, in terms of false conceptualization, pairing it with correct cognition; third, in terms of suchness, explaining solely through the attainment and loss of suchness; fourth, in terms of correct cognition, also explaining through the attainment and loss of correct cognition; fifth, in terms of names, also explaining solely through the attainment and loss of names. All five pervade both delusion and awakening; however, delusion comprises name, characteristic, and false conceptualization, whereas awakening is solely correct cognition and suchness. Cognition accords with suchness, of one flavor and equal. The rest is as explained earlier and later.

82.7

Regarding the Commentary's "Among the nine, first blending the three matters": this is because mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are not differentiated. Later, "apart from the characteristics of blending": hence it explains non-blending. Now, within non-blending there are two [aspects]: first, not destroying characteristics; second, being apart from the characteristics of blending. 'Apart from the characteristics of blending' is because, in terms of the principle, there is nothing that can be blended, and in terms of the mind, there are no conceptual thoughts. 'Not destroying characteristics' is because, in terms of their being fundamentally blended in themselves, they cannot be [further] blended. From "the three matters" onward, it points to the text to cite corroboration.

82.8

Regarding the Commentary's "the four realities of saindhava": these are salt, water, vessel, and horse, which have been extensively explained earlier. "The nine meanings of the word go": that is, the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya says: "Direction, animal, earth, light, word, / Vajra, eye, heaven, and water; / For these nine kinds of things, / The wise establish the word go." Only the two characters vajra make up one meaning; the other eight each constitute one.

82.9

The Commentary's "like finding fire when cold" and so forth is from the Nirvāṇa-sūtra.

82.10

Regarding the Commentary's "Fifth, preaching a different dharma with different words": this is the fourth secret, the secret of transformation, among the secrets in the fourth [chapter] of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. The treatise says: "Furthermore, there are four kinds of intentionality (abhiprāya) and four kinds of secrets (saṃdhi); all the words of the Buddha must be decisively understood." The meaning of the four kinds of intentionality has already appeared in the chapter 'Samantabhadra's Samādhi'. As for the four kinds of secrets: first, the secret of causing entry, which means that within the three vehicles, relying on the principle of conventional truth, persons and dharmas are spoken of to cause entry into conventional truth; second, the secret of characteristics, which means speaking of dharmalakṣaṇas, the three intrinsic natures, and so forth; third, the secret of antidotes, which remedies the eighty-four thousand afflictions; fourth, the secret of transformation, which aims to cause awakening and entry. They are collectively named 'secrets'. In explaining the fourth, the secret of transformation, the treatise says: "It means that in this context, with various words and syllables having different meanings, different meanings are revealed. As a verse says: 'Perceiving the non-firm as firm, / Abiding well in inverted views, / Extremely afflicted by afflictions, / One attains supreme bodhi.'" Asabhāva explains: "It refers to the transformation and differentiation of meaning." The Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā says: "It means stating expressions of names, phrases, and phonemes that have no further meaning, yet through covert transformation they reveal other meanings." Asabhāva explains the verse above: "'Hard, unyielding, and scattered' is called 'firm'; that which is not firm in this way is called 'non-firm', which is samādhi that is pliable and unscattered; precisely within this, one generates firm wisdom and perceives that as firm." Vasubandhu explains: "'Non-firm' refers to samādhi: because it is not hard and unyielding, nor wandering and hard to subdue, it is called non-firm. Within this, one generates the perception of reverence, designating this perception as 'firm'." The commentary says: The explanations of the treatise by those two masters differ in words but are identical in intent; both are able to express covertly that which accords with attaining bodhi. If one takes the explicit [sense], generating firm wisdom in a scattered mind, one is far from bodhi. Here, taking the secret [sense], generating firm wisdom in the non-firmness of samādhi, one attains bodhi. As for "abiding well in inverted views", Asabhāva explains: "It means being well able to abide in the four inverted views, knowing them to be inverted, decisively unmoving." The commentary says: If one takes the explicit [sense], abiding within the four inversions such as imputing permanence to the impermanent, one cannot attain bodhi. Here, according to the secret [sense], knowing that permanence and so forth are falsely imputed onto the impermanent and so forth, one generates decisive knowledge; this is called 'abiding well', and abiding in inverted views in this way can bring attainment of bodhi. Vasubandhu explains: "This is the meaning of abiding well within inverted views, meaning that one is able to invert with respect to the impermanent and so forth." The commentary says: This means arriving at the meaning they impute, which is called 'good inversion'; abiding in this, one therefore attains bodhi. As for "extremely afflicted by afflictions", Asabhāva explains: "For the sake of sentient beings, one is afflicted by the prolonged labor of vigor." It also cites the verse above, saying: "The first is identical to Asabhāva; the two explanations have no distinction." The commentary says: If one takes the explicit explanation, the practitioner being tormented and disturbed by greed, anger, and so forth is called 'affliction', which is being far removed from bodhi. Here, taking the secret [sense], the practitioner's vigorous, diligent, painful labor is also called 'affliction', and thereby one attains bodhi. Its fourth line, "attains supreme bodhi", encompasses the above two senses. The eighth [chapter] of the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra and the twelfth [fascicle] of the Abhidharmasamuccaya both agree with this explanation.

82.11

Regarding the Commentary's "also like the Hinayāna ten kasinas (kṛtsnāyatana)": the Mahāyāna also has them, differing in broadness and brevity. Here, following the definitive number of ten, it cites the Hinayāna; when reaching the 'Dharmadhātu Chapter', it will be extensively differentiated.

82.12

Regarding the Commentary's "also like accomplishing the eight liberations by relying on dhyāna": this is also as in the 'Dharmadhātu Chapter'.

82.13

Regarding the Commentary's "mindfulness, ideation, and observation are eliminated": this is a passage from the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa. The text says: "Prajñāpāramitā / Is the real dharma, not inverted; / Mindfulness, ideation, and observation have been eliminated, / And the dharma of spoken words is also extinguished; / Immeasurable multitudes of offenses are eliminated, / And the pure mind is ever unified. / Such an exalted and wondrous person / Is then able to see prajñā." That is it. 'Mindfulness, ideation, and observation are eliminated' is said in terms of internal wisdom: one does not receive external cognitive objects, seeing visible forms as if blind, and so forth. And saying 'skillful' does not mean skillfulness in engaging in affairs; not conceptualizing and not receiving is simply the skillfulness of entering into principle.

82.14

Regarding the Commentary's "First, there are eight phrases specifically knowing the characteristics of conditions": these are the characteristics of the twelve links of dependent origination. Second, "From 'knowing delusion' onward, twelve phrases know defilement and purity": that is, knowing both nature and characteristics. Delusion and awakening, defilement and purity, are still explained in terms of characteristics, as extensively treated in the sixth bhūmi. In the ultimate truth, neither can be apprehended, which is spoken of in terms of nature. Third, "From 'knowing abiding' onward, clarifying knowledge of the mental activity of the mind": that is, the mind of contemplation that can know nature and characteristics. Here, one can realize it with a tranquil, illuminating, and empty mind; this also clearly indicates the locus of mental contemplation.

82.15

Regarding the Commentary's "also like the three Dharma seals, etc.": 'etc.' encompasses the four seals and five seals, all of which are as explained in the chapter 'Illuminating the Dharmas'.

82.16

(Fascicle 56 of the sūtra) The Commentary's "just as one who manages a ship well does not fear the perils of the ocean" draws its meaning from the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, already cited in the seventh bhūmi.

82.17

Regarding the Commentary's statement, "The spring pool of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] may be explained in this context": this sūtra's simile contains two meanings: first, explained in terms of teaching; second, explained in terms of principle. The present citation of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] is in terms of teaching, being the second, known as the simile of the spring pool. The sūtra states: "Just as in springtime, when many people are bathing in a large pool and playing in a boat, they drop a lapis lazuli jewel, which sinks into deep water. At that time, the people all enter the water together to search for this jewel. Vying with each other, they grasp tiles, stones, grass, wood, sand, and pebbles, each claiming to have obtained the lapis lazuli jewel. Rejoicing, they carry them out, only to realize they are not genuine. At that time, the precious gem is still in the water; by the power of the gem, the water becomes completely clear. Thereupon the multitude sees the precious gem still beneath the water, just like looking up at the shape of the moon in the open sky. At that time, there is a wise person among the assembly who, by the power of skillful means (upāya), calmly and slowly enters the water and promptly retrieves the precious gem." Master Yuan explained: "This is addressed to the earlier bhikṣus who praised their past understanding of the true Dharma of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self, instructing them to discriminate and select [the truth]. Within this, first comes the simile, followed by the admonition and instruction based on the simile. Within the simile there are three parts: 1. The simile of seeking the genuine and grasping the counterfeit. 2. From 'Rejoicing, they carry them out' onward, the simile of knowing the counterfeit is not genuine. 3. 'At that time, the precious gem is still beneath the water': the simile of abandoning the counterfeit and taking the genuine. The above was the meaning of the simile; below is the admonition and instruction to the bhikṣus based on the simile. The text has four distinct parts: 1. Based on the first simile, rebuking their taking the counterfeit. The sūtra states: 'O you bhikṣus! You should not cultivate and accumulate the perception of impermanence, suffering, non-self, impurity, and the like, taking them to be the real meaning.' Just as those people each took tiles, stones, grass, wood, sand, and pebbles to be the precious gem. 2. Based on the third simile, teaching them to grasp the genuine. The sūtra states: 'You should skillfully learn upāya, and everywhere always cultivate the perception of self, and the perception of permanence, bliss, and purity.' 3. Based on the second simile, urging them to recognize past counterfeits. The sūtra states: 'Furthermore, you should know that the marks of the four dharmas previously cultivated and accumulated are all inverted.' 4. Again based on the third simile, urging cultivation so that it becomes genuine. The sūtra states: 'Those who wish to attain the genuine and cultivate the perceptions should be like that wise person skillfully bringing out the precious gem—namely, the perception of self, permanence, bliss, and purity.'" Guanzhong's explanation states: "Regarding 'Just as in springtime, when many people are bathing in a large pool': the simile is set forth entirely to cause them to recognize past errors, and to learn what is now attained—this is its function. Spring is delightful, and it marks the beginning of bathing; moreover, the large pool is clear and vast, and washing in it is most suitable for removing defilements in accordance with the season. This refers only to those who previously taught the perception of impermanence. Bathing and assembling together, like gathering in a grove to listen, was originally intended to cleanse afflictions; this is compared to bathing in a large pool. Now, the simile does not fit [the real intent], hence it says 'there are many people.' When the sūtra states 'playing in a boat,' listening gave rise to confusion, and consequently words went astray. The traces of words seem loose, and their meaning is called floating and empty; and preceding the words, they corresponded to the former errors. The listeners rode on them, taking them to be real—this is the image of drifting in a boat. Being outside of the internal, there is no real efficacy—this is 'playing.' When the sūtra states 'they drop a lapis lazuli jewel, which sinks into deep water,' the principle of permanence and impermanence is fundamentally impartial; words embracing both are worthy of treasure, and this must surely be attained. Because riding on looseness deviated from it, this is 'dropping the jewel.' Once deviated, it is forever hidden; this is 'sinking deep.' When the sūtra states 'At that time, the people all enter the water together to search for this jewel,' the listeners should originally have grasped the intent of the words; to turn from loss to searching—how could it be said that they knew it? It is the natural course of principle. Seeking must rely on teaching; this is the people entering the water. When the sūtra states 'Vying with each other, they grasp tiles and stones' up to 'only to realize they are not genuine,' although both the words and their intent treat deviation as concealment, one text overtly compares floating and another covertly compares sinking, yet they are grasped interchangeably. In fact, they are not the gem, being the sinking and floating of grass, wood, tiles, and stones; all claimed to have obtained the genuine, and everyone rejoiced and carried them out. Through the simile of the letter *i* and the Buddha's adjudication of error, outside of clarity they finally knew it was not [genuine]. When the sūtra states 'At that time, the precious gem' up to 'the water becomes completely clear,' in terms of seeking without obtaining, it is 'still in the water.' In terms of recognizing the error as the meaning, the true intent first manifests in words. Once the intent manifests, it no longer muddies the traces; this is the power of the gem making it clear. When the sūtra states 'Thereupon the multitude' up to 'the shape of the moon in the open sky,' once they know their own error, only then do they see the intent of the words. Still beneath the words, it is clear and distinct like the moon, without any darkness; and the principle can be looked up to, hence it is 'like looking up at the shape of the moon in the open sky.' When the sūtra states 'At that time, there is among the assembly' up to 'promptly retrieves the gem,' practicing in accordance with the teaching is 'calmly and slowly entering the water.' The essential point lies in cultivating the four dharmas of self and permanence, without abandoning the meaning of upāya. First cultivating permanence and later understanding impermanence—to accomplish it in this way rests with oneself; how could this not be wisdom? When the sūtra states 'You should not cultivate the perception of impermanence and the like' up to 'taking them to be the precious gem,' this is the application. Because it was already elaborated in the simile, it is applied briefly here. What was cultivated in the past was wholly mistaken, yet they took it to be correct, resembling those foolish people. When the sūtra states 'You should skillfully learn upāya, and everywhere always cultivate the perception of self, and the perception of permanence, bliss, and purity,' always cultivating these four dharmas everywhere must take the attainment of them as upāya. When the sūtra states 'Furthermore, you should know that the marks of the four dharmas previously cultivated and accumulated are all inverted,' knowing what is right entails knowing what is wrong, and knowing what is wrong entails knowing what is right; only after contemplating them contrastingly will there be no confusion. When the sūtra states 'Those who wish to attain the genuine and cultivate the perceptions should be like that wise person skillfully bringing out the precious gem—namely, the perception of self, permanence, bliss, and purity,' one must constantly cultivate and attain self, permanence, bliss, and purity, and only then will one attain the complete genuine, like that wise person." The above explanation by Master Sheng is largely the same as Master Yuan's, but not as detailed as this. The above cites the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] in terms of provisional and real teaching. If approached directly from the sūtra, one should contemplate with the mind and explain in terms of principle. In the sūtra, first is the dharma, second the simile, and third the application. Taking the immaculate, wondrous dharma of omniscient knowledge as the gem is because it possesses the three virtues: brilliance is prajñā, purity is liberation, and wondrousness is the dharmakāya. Wisdom identical to essence is called brilliance; quiescence identical to illumination is purity; the non-duality of these two is the utmost wondrousness of the dharmakāya's essence. Ordinary beings are like mud; the two vehicles possess shallow wisdom like puddles. Not altering its light and color and not destroying its own mind to make turbid water clear is benefiting others. Seeing afflictions from afar is different from ordinary beings; seeking omniscient knowledge is different from the two vehicles; therefore, it is neither the practice of ordinary beings nor the practice of worthies and noble ones, but the practice of bodhisattvas.

82.18

(Fascicle 57) Commentary: "First, one clarifies the pure antidote," etc. That text has four divisions; the present text includes three of them, omitting only the fruit, because the fruit is not the main ground. However, each of the gates corresponds to that original division; if there is anything unclear, one will understand by investigating what precedes.

82.19

Regarding the Commentary's text from "Now, the first three grounds" downward: the commentary has four parts: 1. Explaining the reason for interpreting the fourth ground by means of this gate. 2. From "Namely, departing from the conditioned" downward, explaining the general name. 3. From "The Daśabhūmika-sūtra has ten" downward, harmonizing with that sūtra. 4. From "Concluding, it states" downward, distinguishing the Mahāyāna from the Hīnayāna. However, here "departing from arising" has two aspects: first, departing from arising; second, departing from rough arising. "Giving rise to" also has two aspects: first, going from nonexistence to existence is called arising; second, growth is called arising. The rest can be deduced. Commentary: "Chapter 46 of the Yogācārabhūmi clarifies the nominal designations of bodhisattvas according to virtue": that treatise states, "It should be known that for all bodhisattvas, there are further such nondifferentiated nominal designations according to virtue. Namely, they are called bodhisattva, mahāsattva, one who achieves the supreme illumination of awakening cognition, the most supreme true child, the most supreme maintainer, one universally capable of subduing, the most supreme sprout; they are also called heroic, most noble, leader of merchants (sārthavāha), one of great fame, compassionate, one of great merit, master of sovereignty, and Dharma master. It should be known that for boundless bodhisattvas in boundless and limitless worlds throughout the ten directions, up to the distinct internal virtues, there are immeasurable and boundless provisionally established names and marks." Explanation: The two treatises cited below are completely identical with this, with only slight differences in one or two words, and no difference in meaning.

82.20

Regarding the Commentary's "Furthermore, the Sūtra of the Devaputra Merchant Leader gives five meanings": 1. Because of abiding in, upholding, and entering into the bodhipakṣa dharmas, one is called a bodhisattva; 2. Because of entering the Mahāyāna and fulfilling the cognition of the Mahāyāna, one is called a mahāsattva; 3. Because of entering into the cognition and virtue of unobtainable dharmas, one is called the most supreme sattva; 4. Because of not cohabiting with afflictions, and generating vigor for the sake of eliminating afflictions for sentient beings, one is called a pure sattva; 5. Because of causing sentient beings to practice the pure path, one is called an extremely pure sattva.

82.21

Regarding the Commentary's "The meaning belongs only to the real teaching": this generally introduces the six sections below: 4. Taking unceasing pariṇāmanā as real. 5. Taking definite knowledge of the entry and exit of samādhi as real. 6. By the divine eye of superknowledges, seeing only three thousand [worlds], etc.; the three clarities and ten powers can only see the past, future, and present; seeing deaths here and births there is identical to the meaning of the powers, not the real teaching, which lacks this meaning. 7. Taking the augmentation of compassionate mindfulness toward sentient beings as real. It also states: "It also expands upon the mindfulness factor among the seven factors of awakening." The Daśabhūmika-sūtra clarifies the antidotes in terms of the factors of the path; now the five faculties and eightfold noble path are precisely the factors of the path, and this expands upon the mindfulness factor. Since it also includes the seven factors of awakening, it is explained in shadow and brevity with the preceding text. 8. In the eightfold path, taking accordance with omniscient knowledge as distinct from the two vehicles to be real. 9. Taking the concurrent practice of the provisional and the real in the absorptions as real: just as the first dhyāna's departure from desire, malice, and harmfulness is real, being able to reverse transformation involves the provisional, and is therefore distinct from the nine absorptions of the provisional and the Hīnayāna. The rest below can be deduced. Contrasted with the nine successive absorptions of the preceding three grounds, one knows that here the provisional and real are practiced concurrently. From "Because the absorptions belong to the real teaching" downward points to the preceding text.

82.22

From the Commentary's "The four gates jointly reveal the meaning of the path" downward sets forth the reason for the sūtra's general designation. From "According to the meaning, they must be divided" downward sets forth the reason for the commentary's specific allocation. Among the four, the first two belong to the fifth ground, cultivating the path belongs to the sixth ground, and adorning the path belongs to the seventh ground; therefore it says, "According to the meaning, they must be divided." "The latter two belong to the subsequent" is likely a contemporaneous label added by the translator.

82.23

Regarding the Commentary's "Among the ten, the first four are each one immeasurable": this matches the five immeasurable realms.

82.24

Regarding the Commentary's text from "Two, the immeasurable aids to the path" downward: the commentary has four parts: 1. Showing identity with the preceding text. However, that text has three parts: first, the antidote to superior conceit; second, the superiority of the practice of the non-abiding path; third, the superiority of its fruit. The ten equalities above are the antidote to conceit regarding other grounds; the path according with thusness is the antidote to conceit regarding one's own ground; both belong to the first part. The present text comprises the second and third parts. 2. From "Through cognition tallying with thusness" downward explains and establishes the meaning of the non-abiding path, directly following the previous explanation of the correct path. 3. From "Now, by means of perfect fusion" downward resolves an objection and establishes the explanation. The objection asks: Here they are aids to the path; how can they be the practices within the superiority of the practice of the non-abiding path, etc.? Thus the answer states: They are both the correct path and the aids to the path. Hence within the aids to the path there is the correct path, so they can be combined into the non-abiding path. 4. From "However, the correct path does not change with phenomena" downward, another question asks: Since both are mutually pervasive, why are they divided into two names in the sūtra? Thus the answer states: Although they are mutually pervasive, within the text they have already secretly distinguished them, thereby showing that the text has already secretly used emptiness and the like in common, revealing the meaning of mutual pervasion. Not concealing them along with phenomena reveals the meaning of their distinction.

82.25

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "Sixth, the immeasurable cultivation of the path," there are four parts: First, it reveals that cultivating the path is that by which the sixth ground is attained. Second, from "no coming or going" onward, it demonstrates their shared characteristics; the preceding showed the shared meaning, while this shows the shared textual phrasing. Third, from "of the ten, the first four" onward, it individually categorizes and assigns them. Fourth, from "among the four" onward, it individually explains them according to the text. Within this, there are two points: First, it explains the words "ten equalities." When it states, "those [ten] are expanded from distinct meanings to form the preceding eight," these are the equalities of: (1) signlessness, (2) being without essence, (3) non-arising, (4) non-production, (5) being originally pure, (6) being free from prapañca, (7) being without taking up or discarding, and (8) quiescence. Under "now explaining them collectively," there are briefly three meanings: (1) "Not giving rise to mind" is from the standpoint of samādhi, which the sūtra explains as "being without motion or operation." (2) "Accordance with the original nature" is from the standpoint of the cognition of contemplation, which comprehends the original nature so that mind and objective realm coalesce; hence the sūtra explains it as "being like the original nature." (3) "Dispelling the characteristics of cultivation" means that even the aforementioned two cultivations are not posited; hence it is explained as "being without svabhāva."

82.26

Regarding the commentary’s statement "they may also be correlated with the three natures," just as the first [items of] coming and going correspond to the parikalpita-svabhāva (imagined nature), negate it by non-negation and it is the lakṣaṇa-niḥsvabhāvatā (signlessness of nature). The following two correlate the paratantra-svabhāva (dependent nature) and pariniṣpanna-svabhāva (consummated nature) with utpatti-niḥsvabhāvatā (natureless through origination) and paramārtha-niḥsvabhāvatā (natureless through ultimate truth); this can be grasped by reflection.

82.27

Regarding the commentary’s statement "Fourth, presenting seven similes to comprehensively demonstrate non-attachment," the seven similes are completely identical to that text. The treatise explains: "This demonstrates the dispelling of the non-existent characteristics of the self, and there are two explanations: First, the preceding seven phrases use non-existence to destroy existence, while the seven similes use existence to dispel non-existence, causing one not to cling to non-existence. Second, by analogy with what precedes, they also use non-existence to dispel existence; therefore, it states that the self is a non-existent characteristic. Phantoms, dreams, reflections, and images do not destroy the empty appearance, yet grasping [them] is unattainable."

82.28

Regarding the commentary’s statement "Now specifically clarifying the five viscera," this refers to the spleen, kidneys, heart, lungs, and liver. The above comprehensively presented everything contained in a single abdomen, while this refers solely to these five viscera. Below it is only the one mind. In terms of phenomenal things, it is just so; in terms of dharmas, they are all ten, blending inexhaustibly.

82.29

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "First, clarifying the ten eyes," the commentary has five parts: First, pointing to the preceding sūtra text to explain the meaning of "eye," for knowing and seeing in accordance with reality constitutes the meaning of "eye"; second, from "among the ten" onward, harmonizing and explaining them according to the text; third, identifying their essence; fourth, clarifying their sequence; fifth, the rest is as demonstrated in its source in the separate chapter. Now, most doctrinal chapters divide this into seven headings: (1) explaining the name and its derivation; (2) determining the essence; (3) the sequence of cultivation and completion; (4) classification and differentiation; (5) differences in the objective realms seen; (6) distinguishing differences according to persons; (7) differentiation through questions and answers. Here, the meaning is simply synthesized into five sections: The first corresponds to explaining the name, since illuminating and inspecting is called an "eye"; the specific names are determined within their respective explanations. In the second, harmonizing and explaining them according to the text, the expansion, contraction, similarities, and differences are determined relative to the other five eyes. Within this, the first five are first explained as clarifying merely the similarities and differences in function and activity, while the latter five concern the similarities and differences in expansion and contraction. In the former, it first clarifies the similarities and differences collectively, and then explains them individually. This is divided into five parts: In the flesh eye, regarding seeing and not seeing, there are briefly five meanings: (1) seeing the coarse but not the subtle; (2) seeing the near but not the distant; (3) seeing light but not darkness; (4) seeing the front but not the back; and (5) seeing inside obstructions but not outside obstructions. This also constitutes differences in the objective realms seen; thus the commentary's explanation and quotation from the treatise implicitly indicate three of them, and when it says "and so forth," this includes the coarse, subtle, light, and darkness. The statement "the divine eye only then sees the distant, etc." includes the remaining four; this establishes not seeing the distant, etc., and is not an explanation of the divine eye. From "now, the flesh eye" onward, it adduces this to reveal its superiority. From "forty-four" onward, it cites that text to refer to this one; the character ying (應) should properly be shuo (說). "Not spoken of here" refers to the Dazhidulun indicating the Mahāprajñāpāramitā as "here."

82.30

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "However, the divine eye," in the second part explaining the divine eye, it first introduces the five eyes. The phrase "provisional combination" identifies its essence, because the flesh and divine eyes both have pure subtle matter of the four great elements, which is invisible and possesses resistance, as their essence; they differ only by the human and heavenly destinies. The phrase "not seeing the true mark" refers to the objective realm seen, which merely inverts the preceding seeing the near but not the distant, and so on. Thus, what the preceding five cannot see, the divine eye can see all of them, yet it cannot see the true mark, because the true mark is the objective realm of the wisdom eye. From "now, clarifying the seeing of mind" onward, it reveals these ten eyes. The statement "it seems identical to that" means that if mind is viewed in terms of characteristics, it is not the true mark. Here it encompasses both nature and characteristics, and therefore it is not identical.

82.31

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "Here, the wisdom eye," in the third part explaining the wisdom eye, the statement "it seems like the Dharma eye" is based on the difference in the objective realms seen. Because that Dharma eye sees phenomena, faculties, desires, and so on, while this one sees the differences in the faculties and realms of sentient beings, it is therefore identical to that Dharma [eye]. Here, the Dharma eye resembles that wisdom eye because the wisdom eye there sees the realm of principle, which is knowing reality as it is. From "the reason they reciprocally [interchange]" onward, it presents the reason for their difference. Because the wisdom eye only sees principle, it does not see the exhaustive cessation, oneness, or difference. Now it presents what that one cannot see, and therefore states that it "surpasses that"; this reveals that the wisdom eye can also see principle, but what is identical is simply not mentioned.

82.32

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "Here, the Dharma eye," in the fourth part explaining the Dharma eye, it likewise adduces what that one cannot do to reveal the capability of this one; thus, the statement "all dharmas as they truly are" encompasses both phenomenal reality and noumenal reality. If so, how are the Dharma [eye] and the wisdom [eye] distinguished? Both the Dharma eye and wisdom eye take the mental factor of wisdom (prajñā) as their essence. Within the five eyes, two meanings naturally exist: First, the wisdom eye has fundamental non-conceptual wisdom as its essence, while the Dharma eye has subsequently attained wisdom as its nature. Second, it is said: the Dharma eye takes its name from the dharmas that are known, and what is known also extends to principle; the wisdom eye takes its name from the cognition that knows. Now, we take precisely the latter meaning, which reveals that the wisdom eye also extends to both kinds of wisdom.

82.33

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "That Buddha eye," in the fifth part explaining the Buddha eye, it first presents another school that also explains it in terms of the objective realm known, and then, from "now adducing" onward, harmonizes and explains the present text. There are two meanings: If one directly follows the text, the ten powers are narrower than all dharmas; hence it is called "adducing the superior." Below it also states, from "ten powers" onward, it separately reveals their identity. Since that does not go beyond what is known by the ten powers, it reveals that it belongs solely to the Buddha, distinguishing it from the Dharma and wisdom [eyes]; therefore, the ten powers are adduced. However, that explanation of the name has three meanings. The first says: when the four eyes are in the Buddha, they are all called the Buddha eye. This is the eye of the Buddha's body, taking its name from its possessor. The second says: "Buddha" has the meaning of awakening; awakening is itself the eye, taking its name from its very essence. Third, it may also be that illuminating and penetrating the Buddha-nature is called the Buddha eye, as the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "If a person can see the Buddha-nature within the body, even though it is a flesh eye, it is called the Buddha eye." Therefore, taking the ten powers in their very essence as illuminating and penetrating is called the eye. That text determines its essence by saying: "The Buddha eye takes non-effortful wisdom as its nature, or it takes the four wisdoms, such as the great round mirror wisdom, as its essence." These are all the meaning of the ten powers.

82.34

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "Among the latter five," it explains the latter five eyes. The phrase "its meaning encompasses both the Dharma and wisdom [eyes]" means that fundamental wisdom is the wisdom eye, and by subsuming subsequently attained wisdom, it encompasses both Dharma and wisdom. Furthermore, that which knows is wisdom, and that which is known is Dharma. As for the "eye that transcends birth and death," this is also the former wisdom eye, because the wisdom eye sees principle. Explaining the unobstructed eye, it first clarifies it directly, and then, from "in order not to destroy characteristics" onward, resolves an objection. The objection asks: If so, one eye would be sufficient; why speak of ten? Therefore, it provides this resolution. In explaining the omniscient eye, the statement "this is the universal eye" means that the names differ but the essence is one. In the Jin translation it is called the universal eye, which is the comprehensive meaning of the Buddha eye. The universal eye has briefly three meanings: (1) seeing universal dharmas; (2) universally seeing all dharmas; (3) that which is seen is itself the eye. Using the first two meanings to illustrate the third is fully explained in the "Chapter on Vairocana." If according to the Faxiang school, the five eyes below the Buddha eye are all subsumed under the Buddha eye, and the omniscient eye is itself the Buddha eye.

82.35

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "Therefore we know that the ten eyes," this is the third part, identifying the essence. The individual essences according to characteristics have appeared previously; this is the comprehensive essence of perfect interpenetration.

82.36

Regarding the commentary’s section beginning with "If determining the sequence," this is the fourth part, determining the sequence, which clarifies the sequence solely in terms of the ten eyes. "Next, individually knowing faculties and realms" is the wisdom eye. "Next, guiding into reality as it is" is the Dharma eye. "Next, causing one to attain the Buddha's powers" is the Buddha eye. "Next, seeing by following the light" applies to both the wisdom eye and the eye of light. Since light contains the light of wisdom, it is identical with wisdom. "Next, collectively returning to quiescence and cessation" is the eye that transcends birth and death. "Finally, becoming equal to the dharmadhātu" is the omniscient eye. The unobstructed eye, being universal, applies throughout what precedes and follows. If clarifying the sequence within the Faxiang school, it is explained in terms of cultivation: In order to guide and sustain the body, one first cultivates the flesh eye. Since the flesh eye sees the coarse but not the subtle, etc., one next cultivates the divine eye. Since the divine eye sees form but has not yet seen the true realm, one cultivates the wisdom eye. Since the wisdom eye sees principle but cannot see phenomena, one cultivates the Dharma eye. Since the Dharma eye is not yet complete, one cultivates the Buddha eye.

82.37

Regarding the commentary's words, "The rest are as [explained in] separate chapters": they are all broadly expounded in various chapter divisions. However, the essential and subtle points of the general idea have already been briefly provided above; now I will further set forth the breadth and narrowness of the objects seen [by the eyes]. What is seen is twofold and twofold (fourfold): first, phenomena; second, dharmas; third, principle; and fourth, reality. The distinctions among aggregates, realms, entrances, and so forth are phenomena; suffering, impermanence, and so forth, as well as the capacities and dispositions of sentient beings, are dharmas; the tathatā of the two emptinesses is principle; the truly eternal Buddha-nature within the tathāgatagarbha is reality. These four dharmas are what the five eyes perceive.

First, what is seen by the fleshly eye is seeing within obstacles, and so forth. Ordinary people's fleshly eye sees one hundred yojanas; the fleshly eye of the two vehicles sees the same as that of ordinary people; the fleshly eye of a bodhisattva, as the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā* explains, sees as far as three thousand [great thousand] worlds; the Tathāgata's fleshly eye is identical to that of a bodhisattva, seeing its domain with distinct clarity.

The heavenly eye is of two kinds: first, retributively acquired, which accords with the stages one resides in and the stages below; what is below cannot see what is above. As for that acquired through cultivation, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: "The heavenly eye of an ordinary person sees one set of four continents. A lesser śrāvaka sees a minor-thousand world; a great śrāvaka sees a medium-thousand world; Aniruddha sees a three-thousand [great-thousand] world. Among pratyekabuddhas, a lesser one sees a medium-thousand world, and a greater one sees a great-thousand world. That acquired through cultivation by a bodhisattva is indeterminate in what is seen, varying with the greatness or smallness of the person: the far-reaching ones see all worlds." Thus the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* says: "Bodhisattvas take all worlds as the object of their heavenly eye." As for that retributively acquired, the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā* says: "At the [stage of] Utmost Joy (Pramuditā), one sees three thousand [worlds]." The Tathāgata sees all.

The latter three eyes cannot be definitively categorized by spatial location; they are distinguished solely in terms of the depth or shallowness of the dharma attained. The wisdom eye of the two vehicles only sees personal emptiness. The wisdom eye of a bodhisattva fully sees both emptinesses, but cannot exhaustively penetrate them. The Tathāgata's is ultimate. The dharma eye of the two vehicles only sees the general characteristics of dharmas, such as suffering and impermanence; this is a coarse observation, incapable of subtlety. If framed in terms of not knowing capacities and desires, then they possess no dharma eye. The dharma eye of a bodhisattva comprehends the capacities, desires, and nature, as well as all dharmas, whether general or specific, coarse or subtle, with nothing unexhausted. The Tathāgata's is identical to the bodhisattva's, fully exhausting them. As for the Buddha eye, the two vehicles lack it entirely. Among bodhisattvas, advancement and retreat are indeterminate: bodhisattvas before the bhūmis hear of and see Buddha-nature, but do not yet possess the Buddha eye; those on the bhūmis see it with their eyes, and thus possess the Buddha eye. If based on the *Nirvāṇa-sūtra*, from the ninth bhūmi downward one hears of and sees Buddha-nature; on the tenth bhūmi, one sees it with the eye, but not yet clearly, seeing only the Buddha-nature present within oneself, not seeing the Buddha-nature present in sentient beings. Within one's own person, one sees one part in ten. The Tathāgata's Buddha eye exhaustively penetrates it. This clarifies seeing reality. If distinguished in terms of persons, the rest can be known.

Among the three bodies of the Buddha, the transformation body is complete with all five; the enjoyment body lacks the fleshly eye; the dharmakāya lacks the five eyes, but if considered as the eye of the dharmatā, it also possesses all five. However, this accords with the distinctions of the Dharmalakṣaṇa school. In this Dharmatā school, each and every one is harmoniously merged, fully as explained above.

82.38

(Fascicle 58 of the sūtra) Commentary: "With the three givings, nine givings," and so forth: the three givings are material giving, Dharma giving, and giving of fearlessness. The nine givings are: first, intrinsic nature; second, all; third, difficult practice; fourth, all doors; fifth, good persons; sixth, all kinds; seventh, fulfilling desires; eighth, bliss in both lives; and ninth, purity. Even up to the six perfections and four means of embracing, all possess these nine; they have already been broadly expounded at the beginning of the Ten Practices. "Therefore, directly explaining in accordance with what is prominent": if material giving is prominent, it is simply termed material, difficult practice, etc., without further broadly citing the specific meanings among the nine or the specific meanings among the three.

82.39

Commentary: "Now, the first ten givings" and so forth: the statement "first, without favoring or opposing" is a specific meaning within purity. Purity has ten aspects; here there is only the single one of "without favoring or opposing," which corresponds to the eighth there. "Second, giving that fulfills desires": fulfilling desires comprises eight, but here there is only one. "Third, bliss in both lives": bliss in both lives comprises nine, but here there are also only two. The reason for citing the Sanskrit text is that the word "not troubled" does not conform to "bliss in both lives," because relieving difficulties according with the proper time conforms to "bliss in both lives."

82.40

Commentary: "The remaining seven are all giving of all": "all" refers to the three givings, yet it is also one of the nine. However, "all" has two [aspects]: first, the two of internal and external; second, it has its three, namely material, Dharma, and fearlessness. Therefore, in the concluding section below, all ten extend across the three. Now the former three possess their specific characteristics, while the latter seven lack the specific characteristics of the other givings; hence it says they are simply "all." Although the fifth also incorporates the meaning of purity, "not seeking vipāka" is the second among the ten. "The sixth is also difficult practice": because it combines with the giving of all, it says "also." Difficult practice comprises three, and this is the second among the three. "Seventh, internal and external wealth, etc.": internal and external is the first meaning within "all"; wealth, etc., extends across the three within "all." From "eight and nine" downward, it comprehensively interprets the last three. First, it gives the general heading. "This skillfulness in pariṇāmanā" specifically interprets the eighth. Remedying the first fault is, in the sūtra, "distancing oneself from the conditioned"; remedying the second fault is "distancing oneself from the unconditioned." The above interprets the clause. From "practicing the path of non-abiding" downward, it clinches the introductory clause.

82.41

Commentary: "The ten perfections all possess the three wheels": this has already been expounded in the Chapter on Pure Practice. "Wheels" refers to the three wheels of the practitioner of giving.

First 41 of 59 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese