大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 86

English (machine translation) 86

Language: English

86.1

Authored by Śramaṇa Chengguan of Da Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang in the Tang

In the commentary, from "Now, at the beginning, saying 'wheel letters'" downwards: the commentary text has two parts: first, explaining the characteristics of meaning; second, analyzing the order. In the former, there are two: first, recounting the past; second, from "Now, relying further on Vairocana..." downwards, stating the present. In this there are three: first, recounting the intention; next, from "As at the very beginning..." downwards, directly analyzing the characteristics of the letters; last, from "The deep meaning beneath those letters..." downwards, analyzing the meaning of the letters; the text is understandable in all these cases. In the commentary, from "The reason for analyzing this following the previous one..." downwards: second, explaining the order. Above is the question, below is the answer; it secretly uses the intention of the Vairocana-sūtra. There is a verse there that says: / "The profound sign is signless, / Which inferior intelligence cannot endure. / In order to transform such beings, / It speaks while retaining both existence and non-existence." / Explanation: Entrusting to letters retains the sign of existence, while wisdom retains non-existence. As a verse says: / "The eight-petalled white lotus blossoms all at once, / Resplendently manifesting the pure radiant color of the letter A." / This is retaining existence; "A" expresses the meaning of non-arising, which is retaining non-existence; unifying them as non-dual is precisely the Middle Way. In the commentary, "furthermore, in order to maintain dāraṇī so it is not lost": because in adapting to worldly transformation and guidance, dhāraṇī preserves differences. From "Since he is a physician" downwards: it speaks directly with respect to existence. From "Born from the holy teaching": it speaks with respect to expressing the stage. In the commentary, "However, the letters are forty-two letters": as explained in the section on Śilpābhijña. The "fourteen vowels" have already been explained in the First Ground.

86.3

In the commentary, "Fifth, expressing the deep and secret": there are briefly three meanings: first, expressing principle and wisdom, where phenomenon is identical with reality, just as the nirvāṇa of the three virtues is called the secret treasury, etc.; second, because of secret intention; third, because of possessing the three secrets.

86.4

In the commentary, "Old in age and mature in virtue": "qi" means elder; "ai" means old and elder, with hair white as mugwort. Saying "superior to others in deeds": both age and virtue are high.

86.5

In the commentary, "all are for the sake of liberating..." etc.: in full, the sūtra says: "What is the bodhisattva's abode of complete upāya? The roots of good cultivated by this bodhisattva are all for the sake of rescuing and protecting all sentient beings; second, benefiting them; third, giving them peace and happiness; fourth, having pity on them; fifth, liberating them." The four above are all identical to the first phrase, having "all sentient beings". "Sixth, causing all sentient beings to be free from all calamities; seventh, emerging from the suffering of birth and death; eighth, generating pure faith; ninth, all obtaining subjugation; tenth, all realizing nirvāṇa." These are all like the sixth phrase, having "causing all sentient beings". Now the commentary conveniently cites two phrases.

86.6

In the commentary, "Fifth, the elder Muktaka, entrusted to the abode of complete upāya": because he carries the real while according with the conventional, practices measureless skill-in-means, and transforms without dwelling. In the commentary, "Concluding the previous characteristics of the arousal of the mind serves as the point of inquiry": as in the sūtra. It previously stated: "In order to enter the pure treasury, adorned with all characteristics," which serves as the inquiry: How does one enter the pure treasury, etc.? The rest are all modeled on this.

86.7

In the commentary, "The Tathāgata's unhindered adornments have five meanings in all": and all are contained within the text. For instance, the first says: "Each Tathāgata possesses unhindered adornments": that is, the preceding sūtra says: "Various radiant adornments, whether causes or effects, whether dependent or primary [retribution]": these are the unhindered adornments. "Second, each Tathāgata mutually pervades without hindrance": because within the body manifest buddhas numerous as the atoms of ten buddha-lands in each of the ten directions, without confusion. Third, being unhindered with the elder's body: because the body is not large yet the lands are not small, nor is there coming or going; they mutually pervade without hindrance. That is, using the body containing lands to enter the lands within the body, there is nowhere it does not fill; this is the non-hindrance of inner and outer, one and many. The newly translated sūtra says: "The body and the buddha-lands interpenetrate each other without mutual obstruction." Thus this contains the sense of multiple layers: that is, the body containing lands enters the lands within the body; the bodies within the lands inside the body can also contain lands, and the contained lands can also have bodies; therefore bodies upon bodies are inexhaustible, and lands upon lands are limitless. "Fourth, the elder completely sees..." etc.: the sūtra says: "Also seeing the buddhas attaining correct enlightenment," etc. When he even causes Sudhana to see and hear, how much more the elder himself? Therefore below, emerging from samādhi, he tells him: "Entering and emerging from this samādhi, I immediately see in the east the Tathāgata Dragon Sovereign King of the World of Jāmbūnada-gold Radiance; thus I see the buddhas of the ten directions whenever I wish to see them." Fifth, the elder's wisdom-maintenance is unhindered: because of the power of the mind-only samādhi, when emerging from samādhi he can maintain and expound. In the commentary, "Therefore the term 'unhindered' also encompasses rotating and holding..." etc.: that is, the fifth meaning does not contradict the previous boundless-rotation dhāraṇī that universally gathers all buddha-lands. The meaning of universally gathering buddha-lands is prominently manifested in samādhi, and the wisdom-maintenance within does not contradict dhāraṇī. In the commentary, "Since one realizes that objects are mind-only..." etc.: the earlier sūtra says: "If a person wishes to know fully / All buddhas of the three periods of time, / They should contemplate the nature of the dharmadhātu: / Everything is made by mind alone." Regarding "realizing mind is Buddha": the sūtra says: "As the mind is, so is the Buddha; / As the Buddha is, so are sentient beings. / One should know that the Buddha and the mind / In their essential nature are both inexhaustible." Since objects are precisely the mind, and the mind is precisely the Buddha, then there is no object that is not the Buddha; how much more so for mind after mind? Furthermore, with undivided resolve unswerving, striving meticulously to reach the subtle, the Buddha must respond to dedicated sincerity—what could fail to be seen? In the commentary, "First, generally clarifying that characteristics have no coming or going": because their essential nature is quiescent. In the commentary, "Realizing those characteristics are illusory and manifest from mind alone": by using my quiescent mind-only to tap into their wonderful function which is identical to the essence, how could the subject of recollection and the object of recollection affect each other in movement and quiescence?

86.8

Regarding the commentary's phrase "First, in matching it to a dream" and so forth: among these four analogies, only the reflection is an exclusive analogy; the other three are all common analogies. If according to the new translation, the two analogies of dream and echo possess both common and exclusive senses, whereas the two analogies of reflection and phantom are exclusively specific without a common sense. Now, regarding the first dream analogy: that sūtra's specific analogy says, "Just as what is seen in a dream arises from conceptual distinction, so seeing all buddhas arises from one's own mind." The upper two lines are the analogy; the lower two lines are the application. Thus, the dream object exemplifies the Buddha, and the conceptual distinction as the cause of the dream exemplifies the mind capable of recollection. Therefore, the *Contemplation of Amitāyus Sūtra* says: "This mind makes Buddha; this mind is Buddha. The correct and universal knowledge of all buddhas arises from the thoughts of the mind." Because what is dependently arisen is not real, what is seen and the one seeing are both empty, without coming or going.

Regarding the commentary's phrase "The *Pratyutpanna*..." and so forth: this adduces testimony. This sūtra is in three fascicles; its title is the *Pratyutpanna-samādhi-sūtra*, also called the *Sūtra of the Samādhi in Which the Present Buddhas of the Ten Directions All Stand Before One*, translated by the Latter Han śramaṇa Lokakṣema. It was preached at Rājagṛha in the Bamboo Grove of Karanda, and Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla asked the questions. Fascicle one contains the "Chapter on Questions"; what is quoted now is also from the first fascicle, the "Chapter on Practice." Second, the Buddha first causes one to distance oneself from evil and draw near to good, cultivating this buddha-mindfulness samādhi; therefore he raises various analogies to show the characteristics of recollecting the Buddha. The sūtra text is vast and extensive; the commentary now quotes it briefly, and I shall now fully quote one analogy. The sūtra says: "'By what cause is the samādhi where all the present buddhas stand before one brought about like this? Bhadrapāla! If there are monks, nuns, laymen, or laywomen who maintain the precepts completely and, staying in a solitary place, focus their minds in recollection: Amitābha Buddha of the western direction is now present; according to what has been heard, one should recollect him. That land is hundreds of thousands of millions of buddha-lands away from here; that land is named Sukhavatī, where the Buddha preaches the sūtras in the midst of an assembly of bodhisattvas. At all times constantly recollect Amitābha Buddha.' The Buddha told Bhadrapāla: 'Suppose a person is asleep, and in a dream sees various gold, silver, and precious jewels, or dreams of parents, brothers, wife, children, relatives, and acquaintances enjoying themselves together, with incomparable joy and happiness. When he awakens, he speaks of it to others, and again weeps remembering what was seen in the dream. Just so, Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla! If a śramaṇa or a white-clad layman hears of Amitābha Buddha of the western direction, he should recollect that Buddha, not breaking the precepts, focusing exclusively with single-mindedness for one day and one night, or seven days and seven nights; after seven days have passed, he will see Amitābha Buddha. He does not see him while awake; he sees him in a dream. Just as what is seen in a dream knows neither day nor night, perceives neither inside nor outside, is not unseen because it is in the dark, and is not unseen because there is an obstruction: just so, Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla! The mind should recollect in this way. At that time, the realms of all the buddhas—named the Great Mount Sumeru—wherever there are dark places, all open up; the eyes are not obstructed, and the mind is not impeded. This bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not rely on the heavenly eye to see through, does not rely on the heavenly ear to hear through, does not rely on supernatural feet to travel to that buddha-land, does not die here, and is not born in that buddha-land; rather, sitting right here, he sees Amitābha Buddha, hears the Dharma he preaches, and receives and upholds it all. Able to arise from samādhi, he is completely able to explain it to others.'"

Explication: Right after this follows the analogy of the woman Sumanā. From "seven days" downward, it shows the application of the characteristics, taking it to be like a dream vision, without any definite, real substance. That sūtra has many dream analogies; now only two are cited: the former analogy of the seven jewels exemplifies being empty right within existence, because upon awakening nothing is obtained. The latter analogy of being like a dream exemplifies emptiness not obstructing existence, since existence is phenomena itself. However, the non-duality of both is the meaning of the middle way; hence only the intended sense is taken and two are briefly cited.

Furthermore, to explain specifically in terms of meaning: the mind-nature is like the object, contemplation is like the mental image based on conditions, and the completion of contemplation is like the dream; this applies solely to the practicing person. Again, the dharmakāya is like the object, the saṃbhogakāya is like the thought, and the nirmāṇakāya is like the dream; this applies solely to the Buddha's realm. Again, that Buddha is like the object, the practitioner is like the thought, and seeing the Buddha is like what is seen in a dream; this applies jointly to sympathetic resonance. These three explanations interpret the sūtra's common analogy that all buddhas as well as one's own mind are both like a dream.

Regarding the statement that there was a woman named Xumen: in the sūtra there are two people, on account of recollecting three women. The sūtra says: "Suppose a person hears that in the country of Vaiśālī there is a courtesan named Sumanā; or suppose someone hears of a courtesan named Jīvavartī; or suppose someone hears of Upasumā." Yet the sūtra's words are somewhat obscure. If we turn to the *Bhadrapālaparipṛcchā-sūtra*, the narrative events are entirely identical while the text is distinct. That sūtra says: "Furthermore, Bhadrapāla! In this country of Magadha there were three men. The first heard that in the city of Vaiśālī there was a courtesan named Sumanā. That second person heard of a courtesan named Āmrapālī. That third person heard of a courtesan named Utpalavarṇā. Having heard, they each devised upāya, binding their thoughts and diligently seeking them without ceasing for a moment. Yet those three men had never actually seen such women; merely from hearing of them from afar, they gave rise to lustful thoughts and recollected them unceasingly. Later, on account of a dream, they supposed themselves in the city of Rājagṛha engaging in sexual intercourse with those women. Once the sexual act was completed, their seeking mind ceased; their desire fulfilled, they then awakened. Having awakened, they remembered what was done in the dream, just as what they had heard and seen, and just as what they had experienced. If one who recalls in this way comes to your place and explains it all to you, you should preach the Dharma to him with upāya, teaching and transforming him in accordance, causing him to dwell on the stage of non-retrogression and ultimately achieve anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi. In the future he will certainly attain buddhahood, named Good Awakening."

Also, regarding the words "as in Śrāvastī" and so forth: this is the sixth fascicle of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*, which seems to cite this narrative with slight differences. The treatise says: "When the Buddha was in the world, three men were companions. They heard that in Vaiśālī there was a courtesan named Āmrapālī, in the country of Śrāvastī there was a courtesan named Sumanā, and in the city of Rājagṛha there was a courtesan named Utpalavarṇā, all incomparably handsome and upright. The three men, each having heard, long recollected them with attachment in their minds, and then in dreams engaged in relations with them. Having awakened, they thought: 'That person did not come, nor did I go, yet the lustful affair was accomplished.' Through this they immediately awakened to the fact that all phenomena are also like this. Thereupon they went together to the place of Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla and asked about the matter. The Bodhisattva answered: 'All phenomena are truly like this; they all arise from recollection.' The Bodhisattva then preached the Dharma to them with upāya, and they all attained the stage of non-retrogression."

Explication: The general meaning is identical to the sūtra, lacking only the prediction of buddhahood. However, the general meaning of the sūtra and treatise highlights that only after recollecting and seeing the Buddha does one awaken to the emptiness of nature and the mutual non-obstruction of existence and non-existence, which is identical to the commentary's intention.

86.9

Regarding the commentary's phrase "Second, in matching water and reflection" and so forth: this is an exclusive analogy. The mind is merely likened to water, because it serves as the condition for the reflection. If one takes the common sense, both mind and Buddha are then reflections. However, the newly translated sūtra is also an exclusive analogy, but adds a vessel, which can exemplify the pure body. When water is in a vessel, things based on rivers and streams can all serve as vessels. The *Pratyutpanna-sūtra* also has the analogy of reflection, containing the moon in water and the mirror image, in order to exemplify seeing oneself: it does not enter from outside, nor does it emerge from inside. This is precisely identical to the commentary, clarifying that there is neither entering nor emerging, and incorporating the meaning of mind-only.

Regarding the commentary's phrase "One should deliberate on the concentrated and distracted states of the mind following this analogy": water has four types: first, clear; second, turbid; third, moving; fourth, calm. In the commentary's application, turbid water corresponds to the preceding bright clarity, and surging waves correspond to the limpid pool. Applying the Dharma to the analogy, there are generally two meanings: first, possessing delusion and lacking faith is turbid; second, possessing faith and lacking delusion is clear. Distraction is moving; having concentration is calm. The four items interweave to form multiple propositions:
1. Water is turbid and moving, like the swirling current of the Yellow River: this exemplifies possessing delusion and lacking faith, and additionally having many turbulent thoughts.
2. It is turbid and not moving, like thin mud without waves: this exemplifies possessing delusion and lacking faith while also having no cognitive grasping. Yet this single proposition implicitly contains multiple meanings: first, having delusion and being calm; second, lacking faith and being calm—this is the concentration of ignorance.
3. It is pure and moving: this exemplifies lacking delusion and possessing faith, but having much investigation and reflection. Compared to the second above, it also has three meanings: first, lacking delusion and being distracted; second, possessing faith and being distracted; third, being clear and being distracted.
4. It is both clear and calm: this exemplifies lacking delusion, possessing faith, and being concentrated.

Briefly mentioning concentration and distraction actually encompasses purity and turbidity. If the first person recollects the Buddha and sees the Buddha, it is like the foot of a black elephant with flickering instability; when the second person sees, it has the color of ash and charcoal, settled and immobile; when the third person sees, he may behold the marks and signs, suddenly present and suddenly absent, abruptly separating and abruptly joining; when the fourth person sees, the physical appearance is stately, dignified, settled, and undistracted—the more he sees, the calmer he is; the more he observes, the clearer it becomes. Now, it is like the fourth in recollecting and seeing. Therefore the *Lotus Sūtra* says: "Entering deeply into dhyāna-concentration, one sees the buddhas of the ten directions." Hence it is said: "One should deliberate on the concentrated and distracted states of the mind following this analogy."

However, the general meaning is that since the Buddha is like a reflection, how could there be characteristics of existence or non-existence, one or many, superior or inferior, going or coming, entering or exiting? The contemplation of the middle way, neither empty nor existent, is accomplished. If water exemplifies the mind-nature, then the moon-reflection of the Buddha is entirely something within the true mind of sentient beings. Mind and Buddha interpenetrate; this is truly mind-only.

86.10

Regarding the commentary's phrase "Third, in matching it to a phantom": this is only a common analogy. The exclusive analogy of the new sūtra says: "Furthermore, one knows one's own mind to be like an illusionist's art, and knows all buddhas to be like what is made by illusion. That is, only when there is an illusory dharma is there an illusory phenomenon. Without the mind capable of recollection, there is no Buddha seen." In the commentary, the three contemplations are fully revealed: first, the contemplation of emptiness; next, from "yet it is not without illusory marks" downward, the contemplation of the conventional; finally, from "to properly make an analogy" downward, the contemplation of the middle way.

86.11

"Fourth, the counterpoint of the echo" is also solely a general metaphor. The specific metaphor in the new translation of the sūtra states: "Just as in an empty valley an echo resounds following a voice, one realizes one's own mind, and following thought sees the Buddha." Explanation: Here there is only one meaning: the dharmakāya is like the empty valley, one's own mind is like the utterance of the sound, and seeing the Buddha is like the response of the echo. However, the commentary explains the sūtra's general metaphor [by taking] both the mind and the Buddha as echoes, and thus explains it in two sentences: First, illustrating the Buddha as like an echo, the valley and so forth are the same as above. Later, under "taking the Buddha as the condition," it illustrates the mind as like an echo, taking the inherently pure mind as the empty valley; the Buddha's response is the sound, and the arising of the mind that sees the Buddha is then like the echo. Therefore the commentary concludes, "This merely illustrates the general principle of being formed by conditions." However, the sound and the valley also both illustrate the principle of being formed by conditions: sound and valley being both conditions illustrates that with the mind as a condition there is the Buddha-echo, and that with the Buddha as a condition the mind attains seeing; thus both above are echoes. Now, the above four metaphors are all termed "counterpoints" because, although the metaphors contain three phenomena, they fundamentally illustrate only the two: mind and Buddha. The above four metaphors all possess four contemplations: first, directly illustrating mind-only; second, being empty because of mind-only; third, being provisional because of mind-only; fourth, being the middle [way] because of mind-only. Blended and unimpeded, this is the intent of the Avataṃsaka. If all possess the four, why use four metaphors? It is because they additionally convey specific meanings: First, to broadly expound that mind-only is devoid of inherent nature and so on. Second, speaking in terms of preeminence, the four meanings differ: the dream illustrates neither coming nor going; the reflection illustrates neither exiting nor entering; the illusion illustrates neither existence nor non-existence; the echo illustrates neither joining nor dispersing. Furthermore, the dream illustrates the scattered mind, because its mental words are conceptualizations; the water illustrates the concentrated mind, being identical with still water; the illusion illustrates the mind that gives rise to function, being like magical arts; the echo illustrates superiority and inferiority, because the mind sees according to its thoughts. Furthermore, the first three metaphors illustrate seeing the Buddha's body, while the latter one additionally illustrates hearing the Dharma. Among the three, the dream illustrates the dharmakāya, because it is merely an imagined perception and ultimately devoid of seeing; the reflection illustrates the saṃbhogakāya, because its characteristics are bright and pure; the illusion illustrates the nirmāṇakāya, because it is formed according to will. Furthermore, the illusion illustrates that this mind creates the Buddha; the reflection illustrates that this mind is the Buddha; the dream illustrates that the ocean of right and universal knowledge of all buddhas arises from mental ideation; the echo illustrates that seeing the Buddha differs according to the superiority or inferiority of the mind. Possessing the above diverse meanings, the four metaphors differ; hence the commentary above states, "The specific metaphors illustrate mind-only while additionally explaining neither exiting nor entering," and so on.

86.12

Regarding the commentary's "subsequently concluding with mind-only": this explains the sūtra's statement, "All the buddhas seen through my recollective mindfulness in this manner are entirely due to my own mind." The commentator then cites sūtras as proof. First, he cites the Contemplation Sūtra, briefly as mentioned above; later he cites the Pratyutpanna-[samādhi-sūtra], citing it in reliance upon the Śamathavipaśyanā, where the text was somewhat truncated. Now I shall cite the sūtra text fully in order. The sūtra says: "He reflects thus: 'From where did the Buddha come? Where has he gone?' He reflects to himself: 'The Buddha came from nowhere, and I too have gone nowhere.' He reflects to himself on the three realms—the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm—that these three realms are merely made by the mind; whatever I contemplate, I immediately see. The mind creates the Buddha-mind; one sees for oneself that the mind is the Buddha-mind, which is the tathāgata-mind (tathāgata is translated here as Rulai). It is my mind that sees the Buddha; the mind does not know the mind, the mind does not see the mind; for the mind to have ideation is delusion, while for the mind to be without ideation is nirvāṇa. These phenomena cannot be demonstrated; they are all made by thought. Even if thought is made, it is merely empty; even if there is thought, it is entirely non-existent. Thus it is, Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla! What is seen by one who is in samādhi is like this." The Buddha at that time uttered a gāthā: / "The mind does not know the mind, / The mind does not see the mind. / For the mind to have ideation is delusion; / Being without ideation is nirvāṇa. / These phenomena lack solidity; / They are always established upon the prior thought. / For one who understands and sees emptiness, / All is devoid of thoughts and ideations." / Explanation: By comparing this with the commentary, its abridgment can be known. Next, explaining the commentary text: First, it explains that the Buddha has no coming or going, and following thought one immediately sees the Buddha. Second, from "the mind creates the Buddha" downward, it explains that the contemplation of mindfulness of the Buddha as mind-only is accomplished: first, one knows that it is my mind that creates the Buddha, and there is no Buddha outside the mind; therefore, seeing the Buddha is seeing one's own mind. In saying "it is the Buddha-mind," because my mind and the Buddha's mind are not two, if one sees one's own mind one sees the Buddha-mind; suchness is the Buddha, so this is omitted and not stated. In saying "it is my mind that sees the Buddha," it concludes with mind-only: it is definitively my mind, and seeing it, there is no separate Buddha outside the mind. Therefore the commentary concludes, "The above only gathers objects back to the mind; below, it sweeps them away again": first, it sweeps away the above "the mind sees the mind itself." Now, the mind is that which sees, and the Buddha is that which is seen. A blade does not cut itself, and a finger does not touch itself; how could one's own mind turn back to see one's own mind? Subject and object are not divided, and the marks of seeing are thereby eliminated. The following sentence sweeps away the above knowing that it is my mind: since both that which knows and that which is known are the mind, they also eliminate subject and object, so there is no knowing. Therefore it concludes that having ideation is delusion. Furthermore, the alternative translation of the Pratyutpanna-[samādhi-sūtra] by the monk Jñānagupta of the Sui dynasty, namely the Mahāsaṃnipāta-Bhadrapāla[-sūtra], comprises a text of five fascicles; its first chapter is titled "Contemplation" and its second chapter is titled "Samādhi Practice." The meaning here is found in the first chapter; the rest may be understood.

86.13

The sixth [good friend], the monk Sāgaradhvaja, is assigned to the Abode of the Rectified Mind; having perfected prajñā, he thoroughly realizes the emptiness of dharmatā, and because he is without abiding, without reliance, without crookedness, and without straightness, hearing praise and blame, he rectifies his mind, his thoughts unmoved. Regarding the commentary's "first, the samādhi of the cessation of sensation and ideation": this is as expounded at the beginning of this chapter and on the seventh ground. The citation of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra is also as stated earlier. Regarding the commentary's "distributing the ten virtues to cause them to turn toward the Buddhadharma": the sūtra text contains this itself, and it can be known through careful examination. Regarding the commentary's "the ten rains of Dharma are the ten abodes": this is easily understood by consulting the sūtra. Regarding the commentary's "revealing that skillful means practice is not separated from prajñā": since thoroughly understanding the conventional is due to realizing the ultimate, subsequent attainment is taught, clarifying that they are not separated. Regarding the commentary's "able to know the Buddhadharma of the three periods of time": the above was explained in terms of the spiritual friend, while this is explained in terms of representing the stage. The sūtra states: "Sons of the Buddha! This bodhisattva should be encouraged to learn ten kinds of vast Dharmas. What are the ten? Namely: speaking of one as many; speaking of many as one; the text following the meaning; the meaning following the text; non-existence being existence; existence being non-existence; signlessness being signs; signs being signlessness; lack of nature being nature; nature being lack of nature; these are the vast ocean of Dharmas." The rest can be deduced accordingly.

86.14

The seventh [good friend], the upāsikā Āśā, is assigned to the Abode of Non-retrogression; she enters the principle of non-arising and ultimate emptiness. Mind-moment by mind-moment she constantly practices emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness; calming and contemplation operate in tandem, and conditions cannot disrupt her, for she is profound like a clear ocean. Regarding the commentary's "the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] also has this number": this refers to the sixth fascicle, the 'Chapter on the Tathāgata Nature', which explains the meaning of the four reliances. Later in the sūtra it states: "Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One! When such scriptures and the true Dharma are destroyed, when the true precepts are ruined, when non-Dharma proliferates, and when there are no beings who conform to the Dharma, who will listen, receive, uphold, read, recite, and master them, make offerings, revere, transcribe, and explain them?' Below, the meaning is cited in summary. At that time, the Buddha praised Kāśyapa: 'Excellent, excellent! Good man, you are able to ask such a meaning. Good man! If there are sentient beings who have aroused the bodhicitta before as many buddhas as the sands of one Ganges River, they will be able not to slander this sūtra in an evil age, but will not be able to analyze and broadly explain it for others. If they have aroused the bodhicitta before as many buddhas as the sands of two Ganges Rivers, they will be able in an evil age not to slander it, but faithfully rejoice, receive, uphold, read, and recite it, yet still not be able to expound it for others. If they have aroused the bodhicitta before as many buddhas as the sands of three Ganges Rivers, they possess the virtues of the second person; although they explain it for others, they do not yet understand its profound meaning. If they have aroused the mind before as many buddhas as the sands of four Ganges Rivers, they also possess the previous virtues, and broadly explain for others one part out of sixteen parts of its meaning, yet in expounding it, they are not yet complete. If they have aroused the mind before as many buddhas as the sands of five Ganges Rivers, they can broadly explain for others eight parts out of sixteen parts of its meaning. If they have aroused the mind before as many buddhas as the sands of six Ganges Rivers, they can broadly explain for others twelve parts out of sixteen parts of its meaning. If they have aroused the mind before as many buddhas as the sands of seven Ganges Rivers, they broadly explain for others fourteen parts of its meaning. If there are those who have aroused the mind before as many buddhas as the sands of eight Ganges Rivers, only then can they avoid slandering this Dharma in an evil age, receive, uphold, read, recite, and copy the sūtra scrolls, also encourage others to transcribe them, personally listen and receive, and also encourage others to listen, receive, and master them,' and so on. However, the sūtra merely accumulates from one to eight; the count of thirty-six is derived through its underlying meaning: adding two onto one makes three; adding three onto three makes six; adding four onto six makes ten; adding five onto ten makes fifteen; adding six onto fifteen makes twenty-one; adding seven onto twenty-one makes twenty-eight; adding eight onto twenty-eight makes thirty-six. Thus, accumulating the two, three, four, and so on of the eight persons amounts to thirty-six in total. Although this is derived through meaning, the principle must necessarily be so. Regarding the commentary's "the heavenly maiden said": this refers to the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra, which was already cited above. Regarding the commentary's "hence that text on the abode states 'emitting a vast, all-pervasive sound'": this is merely one line among the ten Dharmas of superior progress.

86.15

The eighth [good friend], the ṛṣi, is "assigned to the Abode of the Kumārabhūta"; this is because the mind does not generate inverted views and does not give rise to demonic obstacles that break the bodhicitta. Regarding the commentary's "just like the catalpa tree of this region, and so on, down to: the rest is as in the Sounds and Meanings": the Sounds and Meanings states in full: "Catalpa tree," and below says, "However, it is extremely fragrant; its flowers are purple, and its fruit is like a loquat." It states in full: "Its leaves are like the willow tree of this region; its fruit resembles the loquat fruit, with calyxes like persimmons. Moreover, its species is enduring and long-lived, and among all trees it can grow the tallest and largest." Regarding the commentary's "holding hands signifies the meaning of bestowing": this is explained in terms of doctrinal characteristics. Stating "having the power of mutual gathering": this is explained in terms of doctrinal principle. The above is common to all teachings. Here in the Avataṃsaka, the spiritual friend has power and Sudhana lacks power; the powerful gathers the powerless, so through the spiritual friend Sudhana is caused to see. If Sudhana has power, then the ṛṣi lacks power; the powerful gathers the powerless, and what the ṛṣi has realized is entirely attained by Sudhana. Therefore, they mutually gather each other.

86.16

Regarding the Commentary's line beginning 'The text has ten lines and five pairs', the commentary text has three parts: First, it explains generally in terms of shared characteristics. Second, from 'Yet the first pair' onwards, it explains by progressive development; thus the overarching Invincible Banner serves as the primary agent of benefit, and for the remaining four by turns, what was benefited transforms into an agent of benefit. Third, from 'If in terms of the ability to illuminate' onwards, it explains the general and the particular, showing that the overarching Invincible Banner encompasses five meanings. Although the first single capability is designated with a general title, it immediately receives a specific name; hence it says, 'The abilities to illuminate are all particular meanings within the general'—this will become evident upon careful examination. Regarding the Commentary's statement 'Therefore, Sudhana was able to accomplish the practices of many eons in a single lifetime', since it is by the power of the good friend, within the span of an instant. Or, in the presence of a Buddha, one may see the eons of practice, numbering as many as the dust motes of unspeakably unspeakable Buddha-fields, without fatigue—how then could a single lifetime not pass through many eons? This is because the rishi's power commands temporal duration with ease. It is like the worldly Wang Zhi who encountered the immortals playing chess; having just watched, the handle of his axe rotted away and three years had already passed, yet he still considered it merely the space of a meal. Since [an immortal] can make the long into the short, he can likewise make the short into the long. It is like King Mu of Zhou following the illusionist: though many years passed, it was actually only an instant. Therefore, it concludes: 'One should not fix its purport by the length or brevity of time, or the broadness or narrowness of space.' Regarding the Commentary's statement 'He was long because he well knew the three periods of time; he was straight because he well knew the supreme truth', this draws on the meaning of the ninth dwelling. Furthermore, the sūtra states: 'This bodhisattva well knows ten kinds of dharmas. What are the ten? Namely: well knowing the taking of rebirth by all sentient beings; well knowing the manifestation of all karmas and afflictions; well knowing the continuity of habitual propensities; well knowing the upāyas practiced; well knowing immeasurable dharmas; well understanding all deportments; well knowing the distinctions among world realms; well knowing matters of the past and future; well knowing how to expound conventional truth; and well knowing how to expound ultimate truth.' Explanation: If taken strictly, it only takes the eighth and tenth lines. If spoken of generally, excluding the tenth line, all the rest are dharmas of the three periods of time.

86.17

Regarding the ninth, Jayoṣmīṣa, 'placed in the dwelling of the prince': this is because from the teachings of the Dharma King he gave rise to correct understanding and was destined to inherit the Buddha's rank. Regarding the Commentary's quote 'Therefore, the Upadeśa states: The prajñāpāramitā is like a great mass of fire', this is from the twentieth fascicle of the treatise. Regarding the Commentary's 'It also explains that the sword represents the virtue of severance', etc., above it was explained solely in terms of prajñā; here below, it refers to the three virtues of nirvāṇa: the mountain of swords is the virtue of liberation, the fire is the virtue of prajñā, and the principle is the dharmakāya.

86.18

Regarding the Commentary's line beginning 'Now first, the mountain of swords cannot be grasped', the commentary text has three parts: First, it directly interprets the text's intended meaning, which is in terms of the earlier explanation based on prajñā, because prajñā can accomplish all practices. Second, from 'Herein' onwards, it generally identifies the profound and mysterious meaning of the three poisons. Third, from 'Yet there are five meanings' onwards, it opens the headings and explains them individually. First, regarding the statement 'The passages in the various sections of the Prajñā[-sūtras] are not singular', this is because the text extensively explains that the three poisons and four inversions are all completely pure, and extensively explains that the natures of lust, anger, and delusion are all empty and quiescent. Second, regarding 'Just as in Vimalakīrti it is walking the improper path', this is from the second fascicle, the chapter 'The Path of the Buddha'. 'Mañjuśrī asked Vimalakīrti: "How does a bodhisattva penetrate the Buddha's path?" Vimalakīrti said: "A bodhisattva walks the improper path—this is penetrating the Buddha's path." He further asked: "How does walking the improper path penetrate the Buddha's path?" The reply was: "The bodhisattva walks the five deeds of immediate retribution without vexation or malice; goes to the hells without any stains of transgression; goes to the animal realm without the faults of ignorance, arrogance, and the like; goes to the hungry ghosts yet is fully endowed with the Buddha's teachings; and even manifests the practice of anger while constantly maintaining loving-kindness and compassion."' These all say 'manifesting the practice', which refers to the illusory functioning of gathering sentient beings. It also says: 'What are the seeds of the Tathāgata?' Mañjuśrī answered: 'The conditioned constitutes the seed; ignorance and craving for existence constitute the seed; lust, anger, and delusion constitute the seed, etc.', concluding that the sixty-two views and all afflictions are all the seeds of the Buddha. He asked: 'Why is this so?' The reply was: 'If one sees the unconditioned and enters the correct determination, one cannot again generate the thought of anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi. For example, lotuses do not grow on high plateaus or dry ground', and so forth—these are all the bodhisattva's illusory functions to transform sentient beings. The phrase 'first hooking them with desire' is also from this chapter, being Vimalakīrti's essential verse in response to Universal Manifestation of the Body of Form. The sūtra says: 'Manifesting acceptance of the five desires, / Yet also manifesting the practice of dhyāna, / Causing the minds of Māras to be bewildered / So that they cannot gain an advantage. / A lotus growing in fire / May indeed be called rare; / Practicing dhyāna while amid desires / Is rare in just the same way. / Or appearing as a courtesan, / Attracting those who lust for beauty: / First hooking them with desire, / Then later leading them to enter the Buddha's path.' Since it says 'appearing as', this clearly shows it is illusory function. 'Third, employing the mind within delusion': because they are ordinary householders, being accompanied by a wife and embracing children is their constant occupation, and they are not yet able to renounce worldly affairs. Employing the mind within worldly affairs, they are led to understand the emptiness of their nature: [thinking,] 'These are merely my false thoughts; I have not yet attained self-mastery, and I do not take them to be correct', causing delusion to gradually thin, so that they can leave it behind. The earlier sūtra also states: 'When the bodhisattva dwells at home with wife and children, he never for a moment abandons the mind of omniscience', and so forth. 'Fourth, retaining delusion to moisten rebirth', which has already been explained in the chapter 'Manifestation'. In Vimalakīrti's 'not entering the great ocean of saṃsāra', the preceding metaphor says: 'Just as without entering the great ocean, one cannot obtain the priceless jewel.' The Commentary merely summarizes the text. 'Fifth, the characteristic itself is the Way': this is because it is the substance of the Way, because the principle has no dual flavor, and because there is not a single dharma that is not the Buddha's Dharma. The phrase 'because it is inconceivable' is a general praise. They cannot be conceived of as ordinary desire and the like; hence it cites the text of the *Aningo-sūtra*. Previously, when using it once to apprehend the empty nature of desire, it employed the first meaning; here, taking it as being directly the Way, it is also like the seventh fascicle of the *Upadeśa*. The Bodhisattva Ānandabhadra spoke verses for Bodhisattva Jayamati, saying: 'Lust is precisely the Way; / Anger and delusion are likewise so. / Within these three matters / Lie the immeasurable paths of all Buddhas. / If someone makes distinctions / Between lust, anger, delusion, and the Way, / That person is far from the Buddha, / Like heaven and earth. / The Way and lust, anger, and delusion / Are equal as a single dharma. / If someone hears this and feels terror, / He is very far from the Buddha's path. / The dharma of lust is unproduced and unceasing; / It cannot cause the mind to be afflicted. / If someone clings to self and ego, / Lust will lead him into the evil destinies. / Seeing existence and non-existence as different practices, / One does not depart from existence and non-existence; / If one knows that existence and non-existence are equal, / He transcends them and accomplishes the Buddha's path.' In all, he spoke more than seventy verses, all showing they are directly the Way. Ānandabhadra is presently in the eastern direction, having become a Buddha past ten billion Buddha-fields; his land is also named Jewel Treasury, and the Buddha's name is King Whose Light Surpasses the Sun and Moon. Mañjuśrī said: 'The bhikṣu Jayamati was my very self.' At that time he did not believe, and suffered immeasurable torment. The Buddha asked: 'What benefit did you obtain upon hearing the verses?' He answered: 'I was able to end all sufferings, and generation after generation with sharp faculties understand the profound and wondrous Dharma', and so forth. Regarding the Commentary's line beginning 'Above, doubting was to discern its genuineness', the commentary text has five parts: First, it directly explains the sūtra's intended meaning. Second, from 'Māra can also do this' onwards, it poses a doubt and objection. Third, from 'Because of this good friend' onwards, it explains. Fourth, from 'If so' onwards, it follows the trace to give rise to a doubt. Fifth, from 'Because of revealing the Dharma' onwards, it explains and reveals the intention behind the doubt. Regarding the Commentary's 'Vimalakīrti says: Experiencing all contacts is like the realization of wisdom', this is from the first section on Kāśyapa, meaning that when wisdom realizes the true mark, contact is non-contact. When contact is non-contact, sensation is likewise so. When mind and object are both quiescent, this is direct realization.

86.19

Regarding the Commentary's 'Signifying the shaking', etc., that sūtra states: 'Sons of the Buddha! What is the bodhisattva's dwelling of consecration? This bodhisattva accomplishes ten kinds of jñāna. What are the ten? Namely: shaking immeasurable worlds; second, illuminating; third, sustaining; fourth, visiting; fifth, adorning and purifying—the above four are all identical with the first line; sixth, explaining to immeasurable sentient beings; seventh, observing immeasurable sentient beings; eighth, knowing the faculties of immeasurable sentient beings; ninth, causing immeasurable sentient beings to enter; and tenth, causing immeasurable sentient beings to be subdued.' Now fearlessness is used to run through these ten lines.

86.20

Regarding the tenth, the maiden Maitrāyaṇī, 'placed in the dwelling of consecration': this is because from the previous contemplation of emptiness she attained the mind of non-arising as the foremost leader, and the Dharma water of all Buddhas consecrates her crown. Regarding the Commentary's 'In the Prajñā[-sūtras] it says: Understanding form is prajñā', etc., this is the intent of the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā*, systematically going through all dharmas. First, taking the five aggregates, it says: 'Understanding form is prajñā; all dharmas tend toward form. Form itself cannot be apprehended; how could there be tending or non-tending?' Systematically going through all dharmas like this is the same. According to the meaning of the *Prajñā[-sūtra]*, it seems that the nature of all dharmas is not different from the nature of form; therefore all tend toward form. Form cannot be apprehended, as the nature of dharmas is empty. Since there is no destination, how could there be a goer? According to Zhiyi's interpretation, 'all dharmas tend toward form' is the provisional contemplation; 'form itself cannot be apprehended' is the contemplation of emptiness; and 'how could there be tending or non-tending' is the contemplation of the middle way. Now, the intent of the Commentary requires only the first line, taking the nature of form as the support of all dharmas; because the nature universally gathers [them], all tend toward form. Thus within a single form all dharmas are fully present—this is the purport of the non-obstruction between phenomena and phenomena, so according with any single dharma gathers the dharmadhātu. Hence, within each and every object of the resultant support all adornments are fully present; adornment thus belongs to the fruit, and naming the cause after the fruit, it is called universal adornment. The second meaning is that the cause itself is adorned. Regarding the line 'The mention of thirty-six', this merely explains the symbolic meaning. If explained in terms of the actual facts, it is as in the passage on Devaśreṣṭhin. Regarding the Commentary's 'Moreover, that was general and this is specific', this means that in the *Daśabhūmika-sūtra* it only says 'immeasurable hundreds of thousands of asaṃkhyeyas of dhāraṇī-doors, and likewise for vimokṣa-doors and samādhi-doors.' Even where they are enumerated, only ten are listed. Here there are one hundred and eighteen doors of dhāraṇī, hence it is called specific. Regarding the Commentary's line beginning 'Employing the above three eyes', it explains this name.

First 20 of 24 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese