華嚴五十要問答 2.16

2.16

Third, explaining their demarcations in relation to the three natures. Thus the verse in the treatise states: "Names and referents are mutual guests; the bodhisattva should thoroughly investigate them. One should contemplate the two as mere measure, and the two as conventional designations; from this arises true cognition, free from the three kinds of conceptual discrimination regarding dust [i.e., external objects]. If one sees that they do not exist, one can enter into the three non-natures." The first verse-and-a-half explains the contemplation of signlessness (ānimitta); the next single line, "If one sees that they do not exist," explains the contemplation of non-arising (anutpāda); the third [line], "one can enter into the three non-natures," this single line explains the contemplation of naturelessness (niḥsvabhāvatā), as is extensively expounded in the treatise. What are the aspects of this contemplation? Relying on the paratantra-svabhāva one dispels the parikalpita-svabhāva; relying on that tathatā one dispels the paratantra-svabhāva. How can they be dispelled? Because name and referent have nothing existent, the discriminating [cognition] also cannot be existent. Why is this? If the discriminated name and referent were existent, the discriminating [cognition] that takes this name and referent as cognitive object could be said to be existent. Because name and referent have nothing existent, the causal conditions for discrimination are definitely non-existent, and thus the substance of the discriminating [cognition] also has nothing existent. Here, since discrimination is non-existent, conventional designation is also unobtainable, and thus one enters the non-arising nature of the paratantra[-svabhāva]. When the bodhisattva sees that this existence and non-existence have nothing existent, they enter the three non-natures and the unestablished truth. Among these three natures, the parikalpita-svabhāva is real and yet empty; the paratantra-svabhāva is conventional, neither real nor empty; the single pariniṣpanna-svabhāva is real and not empty. If the contemplation of the four thorough investigations enters the parikalpita-svabhāva, the discriminated objective dust is both empty and real. Thus the commentary on the treatise states: "If a bodhisattva sees that names and referents are mutual guests, they enter a parikalpita-svabhāva that is different from name and referent. Why is this? Because the contemplation of signlessness is not yet fully perfected. It is only different from the time prior to contemplation, hence it is called 'different'." Although they know non-existence here, they have not yet eradicated the view of reality; therefore, the contemplation of thorough investigation also remains within reality. If they see that the self-nature of names and referents is a conventional designation whose substance is mere conceptual discrimination, they then accomplish the contemplation of the signlessness of conceptual discrimination and only then attain culmination; at that time, everything known by thorough investigation is emptiness. If the contemplation of thorough investigation and so forth remains in the paratantra-svabhāva, it is neither real nor empty, and can also be conventional; this is because, in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, its similitude is explained with reference to the eight metaphors. The contemplation of the four thorough investigations does not enter the non-natures. Why is this? Because it is the initial expedient means of the contemplator. If one attains the four true cognitions, one only then enters the non-natures; hence it is known.