大乘法苑義林章 4.49

4.49

The commentary states: 'The eater' consists in the six sense bases. Because the six sense bases are capable of experiencing sensory objects, one now contemplates that the six sense bases lack an actual [entity] capable of experiencing them, emptying their imagined nature; hence this is called 'internal emptiness'. 'The eaten' is the emptiness of the six sense objects. Because one clings to the six sense objects as real objects of experience, one now contemplates that the six sense objects lack reality, emptying their imagined nature; hence this is called 'external emptiness'. 'Its support' is the emptiness of the supportive sense bases. Because they are not the internal sense faculties, they are not internal; because they are unlike the external receptacle world, they are not external. Being internal and yet not internal, they are clung to as real. Now contemplating them as empty and dispelling their imagined nature, it is therefore called 'internal-and-external emptiness'. 'That upon which the body rests and abides' is 'great emptiness'. The receptacle world possesses great and superior utility; being that upon which fire and water rest, as well as being that upon which many sentient beings rely, it is called 'great'. Because it is the dwelling place of great sentient beings, it is called 'great superior utility'. Being that upon which fire and water rest, and where many sentient beings abide, it is called 'existence'. Now contemplating it as empty, it is thus named 'great emptiness'. 'That which can see' is 'the emptiness of emptiness', which is the discerning wisdom itself. Because formerly one contemplated its object as empty and emptied its imagined nature, one clung to the discerning wisdom as existent. Now contemplating that the discerning wisdom is also empty, it is thus named 'the emptiness of emptiness'. 'This reality' is 'the emptiness of the ultimate'. The principle of tathatā is the object of superior wisdom; being the meaning of the superior, it is called 'the ultimate' (paramārtha). Alternatively, the true principle transcends phenomenal convention, hence it is called 'the ultimate'. Because the imagined nature obstructs the principle, one now contemplates the imagined nature as empty, revealing the true principle. In terms of what is revealed, it is named 'the emptiness of the ultimate'. 'Emptiness of the two truths sought' refers to the emptiness of the conditioned and the emptiness of the unconditioned. Because one clings to all conditioned phenomena as real, one now contemplates them as empty, and hence it is called 'emptiness of the conditioned'. Because one clings to the three unconditioned, the nine unconditioned, and so forth as real, one now contemplates them as empty, dispelling their imagined nature; hence it is called 'emptiness of the unconditioned', which is tathatā itself. Another explanation: The bodhisattva, in order to seek all-knowledge, in order to seek nirvāṇa, and in order to seek bodhi, empties the imagined nature of the conditioned. In order to seek true emptiness and unconditioned form, one speaks of the emptiness of the conditioned and unconditioned. 'In order to constantly benefit sentient beings' is 'ultimate emptiness'. Because one contemplates sentient beings as ultimately empty and does not see any distinction between self and other among sentient beings, one is able to constantly benefit them. 'Not abandoning saṃsāra' is 'the emptiness of the boundless'. Because wisdom contemplates the principle and dispels the imagined nature, and because compassion extensively transforms sentient beings—and sentient beings are boundless—it is called 'the emptiness of the boundless'. 'So that good qualities are inexhaustible' is 'the emptiness of dispersal', also called 'the emptiness of non-dispersal'. The provisions of merit and wisdom accumulated by a bodhisattva are without interruption or exhaustion to the end of future time, hence it is named 'the emptiness of non-dispersal'. 'For the purity of the lineage' is 'the emptiness of original nature'. Phenomena are originally free from conditions, yet obscured by afflictions. Now contemplating emptiness removes afflictions and reveals the lineage of the original nature; hence it is named 'the emptiness of original nature'. 'In order to seek the marks and signs' is 'the emptiness of marks'. Because it is the contemplation of the marks and signs, it is named 'the emptiness of marks'. 'In order to purify all buddha-dharmas' is 'the emptiness of all dharmas'. Because one conceptually constructs all of the Three Jewels, one now contemplates to dispel attachments and purify all buddha-dharmas, hence it is named 'the emptiness of all dharmas'. Furthermore, all dharmas are also realized as empty, not only the buddha-dharmas. 'Pudgalas and dharmas' is 'the emptiness of non-nature'. The two attachments to self and dharmas are in substance devoid of self-nature, hence called 'empty'. 'Both lacking real nature' is 'the emptiness of non-nature'. Through the non-nature of self and dharmas, the nature of what is attained is illuminated; clinging to non-existence as existence would again become an ailment. Now contemplating that that which is unobtained is also empty, it is thus named 'the emptiness of the unobtained'. Regarding the eighteen emptinesses: within the previous seventeen emptinesses, 'non-nature' is split into two, adding the emptiness of self-nature and the emptiness of the self-nature of dharma-grasping. There are also three explanations: first, being general, it is called 'sentient beings'; being specific, it is called 'dharmas'. Second, being the root, it is called 'dharmas'; being the branch, it is called 'sentient beings'. Third, being substance, it is called 'dharmas'; being function, it is called 'sentient beings'. Again, by virtue of substance and function, they are named 'dharmas' and 'sentient beings'. Regarding the nineteen emptinesses: from the previous seventeen, 'the unobtained' is removed, and three emptinesses are added separately: first, the emptiness of the cognitive object, where the cognitive objects of all consciousnesses are all empty; second, the emptiness of the predominant, where the cognitive object emptiness and the predominant conditions are all entirely empty; third, the emptiness of mutual absence. The previously mentioned emptinesses were said to be mutual absence emptiness, such as the absence of a horse in an ox, and so forth. Now contemplating all as empty, it is named 'the emptiness of mutual absence'. Regarding the twenty emptinesses: from the previous nineteen emptinesses, removing the latter three emptinesses and taking 'the unobtained' from the seventeen emptinesses to make eighteen emptinesses. Within these, 'dispersal' is split into two: the emptiness of dispersal and the emptiness of non-dispersal. The two vehicles cling to dharmas as existent; their emptiness is thus the emptiness of dispersal. Another explanation: the undefiled is called 'the emptiness of non-dispersal', and the defiled is called 'the emptiness of dispersal'. Furthermore, the emptiness of marks is split into two emptinesses: the emptiness of marks has thirty-two marks individually, hence called 'the emptiness of specific marks'; the eighty minor characteristics are held in common, hence called 'the emptiness of common marks'. Now, the consciousness-only contemplation, among the sixteen, has fourteen completely and one partially. Dharmas in full and dharmas in part are named 'sentient beings', distinct from only what is real. Question: Is it that whenever one speaks of the emptiness of sentient beings, it is necessarily consciousness-only? Answer: It may be that whatever is consciousness-only necessarily entails the emptiness of sentient beings, but there are instances of the emptiness of sentient beings that are not necessarily the consciousness-only contemplation, namely the emptiness of sentient beings of the two vehicles.