華嚴法界玄鏡 2
English (machine translation) 2
- Language
- English
2.1
Expounded by the Śramaṇa Chengguan of the Da Huayan Monastery on Qingliang Shan under the Tang
2.2
The contemplation states: Next, viewing principle from phenomena, there are also four propositions: 1. Because phenomenal dharmas and principle are not different, a single dust particle completely encompasses the nature of principle. 2. Because phenomenal dharmas and principle are not identical, it does not destroy the single dust particle. 3. Because non-identity is precisely non-difference, a single small dust particle encompasses the boundless true principle. 4. Because non-difference is precisely non-identity, while encompassing the boundless principle, the dust particle is not large. Contemplate this.
2.3
Explanation: Answering regarding phenomena in relation to principle means answering the previous [question]: why, when a single dust particle pervades principle, is it not large, and so forth. Also, the first two phrases directly clarify the characteristics of pervading principle without being large. The first phrase is that a single dust particle pervades principle; the second phrase clarifies that it is not large. Also, the third and fourth phrases directly answer the challenge of mutual contradiction: the third phrase clarifies that a single small dust particle pervades the vast principle, and the fourth phrase clarifies that although it pervades principle, the dust particle is not large. It merely clarifies that phenomena and principle are neither identical nor different, two meanings difficult to penetrate.
2.4
The Contemplation states: Question: “When the boundless nature of principle completely pervades a single dust particle, is there the nature of principle at the locus of other external phenomena, or is there no nature of principle? If there is principle outside the dust particle, then its entire essence does not pervade the single dust particle; if there is no principle outside the dust particle, then its entire essence does not pervade all phenomena. The meanings are exceedingly contradictory.”
2.5
Explanation: From here below is the second turn, which forms a question and answer in response to the previous simile of the great ocean paired both with a single wave and with all waves, mutually contemplating their equal pervasion without obstruction; now this is the question. That previous simile said: furthermore, when the great ocean completely pervades a single wave, this does not hinder its entire essence from completely pervading all waves; when a single wave completely pervades the great ocean, all waves also each completely pervade it, mutually not obstructing one another. In the text, first it directly questions, and afterwards answers. From “If outside the dust particle there is...” onward, it concludes the objection. If questioned according to the simile, one should say: when the great ocean completely pervades a single wave, is there the great ocean at the locus of other waves, or is there no great ocean? If there is an ocean outside the wave, then its entire essence does not pervade the single wave; if there is no ocean outside the wave, then its entire essence does not pervade all waves. Contrasting with the objection, the text is understandable.
2.6
The Contemplation states: Answer: “Because the one nature of principle is interfused, and because multiple phenomena are unobstructed, it is thereby completely within and completely without, unhindered and unimpeded; therefore each has four phrases.”
2.7
Explanation: Below this in the answer, the text doubly sets forth two gates: first, “because the nature of principle is interfused,” sets forth the four phrases concerning principle; “because multiple phenomena are unobstructed,” sets forth the four phrases concerning phenomena. The rest is understandable.
2.8
The Contemplation states: First, regarding the four phrases on principle: (1) Because when the entire essence of the nature of principle is within all phenomena, it does not obstruct its entire essence being at the locus of a single dust particle, therefore being without is identical to being within. (2) When its entire essence is within a single dust particle, it does not obstruct its entire essence being at the locus of other phenomena, therefore being within is identical to being without. (3) Because the non-dual nature is each completely within all, it is therefore both within and without. (4) Because the non-dual nature is not all, it is therefore neither within nor without. The first three phrases clarify that it is not different from all phenomena; this single phrase clarifies that it is not identical to all phenomena. Precisely because it is neither identical nor different, inside and outside are unobstructed.
2.9
Explanation: In this section on principle, the text first directly clarifies, and afterwards concludes with the absence of obstruction. Now first, this answers the previous: when the boundless nature of principle completely pervades a single dust particle, is there the nature of principle at the locus of other external phenomena, or is there no nature of principle? Now the second phrase directly answers, clarifying that it exists at other loci, which explains in the simile: when the great ocean completely pervades a single wave, it does not hinder its entire essence from completely pervading all waves. Its first phrase additionally clarifies that when it is within all, it is also completely in a single dust particle. Previously it was omitted and there was no question; if one were to make a question, one should say: when the nature of principle is completely within all phenomena, is it completely in a single dust particle or not? Now this clarifies that it is completely in a single dust particle, for since it pervades all, how could it exclude a single dust particle? The third phrase clarifies that it universally pervades inside and outside; this is constant principle, hence also there was no question. If questioned, one should say: does it equally pervade or not? The fourth phrase negates both, and is also not the meaning of pervasion, hence it was not made a question. Because the meaning and principle have no impediment, all four phrases are fully set forth. Afterwards, from “The first three...” onward, it concludes the non-obstruction, and also responds to the previous concluding objection that “the meanings are exceedingly contradictory.” Inside and outside are unobstructed, hence they do not contradict.
2.10
The Contemplation states: Next, regarding the four phrases on phenomena: (1) When a single phenomenon completely encompasses principle, it does not obstruct all phenomenal events from also completely encompassing it; therefore being within is identical to being without. (2) When all phenomenal events each encompass principle, it does not obstruct a single dust particle from also completely encompassing it; therefore being without is identical to being within. (3) Because all phenomenal events simultaneously and individually encompass it, it is therefore completely within and also completely without, without any hindrance or obstruction. (4) Because all phenomenal events are each not destroyed, viewed from one to another, they are neither within nor without. Contemplate this.
2.11
Explanation: These four phrases regarding phenomena were not present in the earlier question, but now are brought out implicitly. In the earlier simile, however, they were present; the simile said: when a single wave completely encompasses the great ocean, all waves also each completely encompass it, mutually not obstructing one another. First, it brings up a single wave to view it in relation to the ocean; hence these are the four phrases concerning phenomena. Therefore earlier it stated: “because multiple phenomena are unobstructed.” If one were to make a separate question, one should ask: when a single phenomenon pervades principle, do other phenomena also pervade principle or not? If they also pervade, then principle would have multiple layers; if they do not pervade, then multiple phenomena would not accord with principle. Therefore now it answers: multiple phenomena accord with principle, and pervade identically with principle, so there are no multiple layers. Why is this? Because principle is non-dual; simply, when phenomena are identical with principle, they have no boundaries or limits, hence they are called “pervading.” Within this, the first phrase: the pervasion of one phenomenon does not obstruct the pervasion of multiple phenomena; the second phrase: the pervasion of multiple phenomena does not obstruct the pervasion of one phenomenon; the third phrase: all phenomena simultaneously pervade; the fourth phrase: the characteristics of the one and the many are distinct. Question: When principle is viewed in relation to phenomena, being in one phenomenon is being within, and being in multiple phenomena is being without. Now when phenomena are viewed in relation to principle, what is considered inside and outside? Answer: It also takes one phenomenon as within, and multiple phenomena as without. If so, how does this differ from the previous gate of principle viewed in relation to phenomena? Answer: The previous gate first brought up principle pervading phenomena, named “principle viewed in relation to phenomena.” The present gate first brings up phenomena pervading principle, named “phenomena viewed in relation to principle,” hence they are divided into two gates. The original intent only asked: when multiple phenomena pervade principle, does one phenomenon pervade or not? The previous gate answered it. Furthermore, it asked: when one phenomenon pervades principle, do multiple phenomena pervade or not? Therefore it uses this gate to answer it. Generally, all take phenomena as inside and outside, so in the previous gate there was only a single layer of questioning—namely the first phrase: one phenomenon completely pervades principle, hence it is within; this does not obstruct each and every one also pervading principle, hence it is immediately without. Because the one and the many are both identical to principle, it is said to completely pervade; it is not that there are multiple principles that pervade along with phenomena. Therefore the fourth phrase states: “viewed from one to another, they are neither within nor without.” Previously concerning principle, the fourth merely took the nature as not being all, so it is naturally neither within nor without. Now here regarding phenomena viewed in relation to principle, principle has no inside or outside; how could there be neither identical nor different? Therefore it says: since their characteristics are not destroyed, it is necessary that within one phenomenon it is not all, and within all phenomena it is not one, only then completing the fourth; hence it must be that “viewed from one to another, they are neither within nor without.” The explanation of the first pair of mutual pervasion is finished.
2.12
The Contemplation states: 3. The gate of phenomena being established based on principle: this means that phenomena have no separate essence; they must rely on true principle to be established, because all pratītyasamutpāda lacks self-nature, and because it is through the principle of naturelessness that phenomena are formed. Just as a wave takes up water to form movement, water in relation to the wave is able to establish it. That all phenomena come to exist based on the tathāgatagarbha should be known to be also like this. Contemplate this.
2.13
Explanation: From here below is the second pair of mutual establishment. However, the subsequent eight gates all first state their names, and afterwards explain below the word “means”; below, no further distinctions are sorted out. In this pair, first it clarifies principle viewed in relation to phenomena, namely the third gate: first it directly explains; afterwards, from “because all...” onward, it sets forth the reason. There are two reasons: first, due to naturelessness; second, due to tathatā according with conditions. The text has three parts: first, clarifying establishment through naturelessness. The Madhyamakaśāstra says: “Because the meaning of emptiness exists, all phenomena are able to be established. If the meaning of emptiness did not exist, everything would not be established.” The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: “If all phenomena were not empty, there would be no Path and no fruition.” Second, from “Just as a wave...” onward is the simile. The simile has two meanings: (1) above, it illustrates naturelessness: because water does not abide by the self-nature of water, it can form waves; (2) below, it illustrates establishment through tathatā according with conditions: that is, if there were no water, there would be no waves; if there were no tathatā, based on what phenomenon could they be established? Third, from “based on the tathāgatagarbha...” onward matches the above simile of tathatā according with conditions; that is, the Śrīmālā-sūtra says: “Based on the tathāgatagarbha there is saṃsāra; based on the tathāgatagarbha there is nirvāṇa.” This means that if there were no tathatā, what would unite with delusion to become saṃsāra? Because all phenomena are separated from the true mind and lack self-essence, the tathāgatagarbha is precisely the tathatā of the gate of saṃsāra. Therefore in the “Clarifying Questions” chapter, Mañjuśrī raises the challenge: “The mind-nature is one; why is there seen to be diverse distinctions?” Jñānaprabha answers: “The dharmatā is originally unarisen; it manifests and there is arising.” This is the answer of tathatā according with conditions.
2.14
The Contemplation states: 4. The gate of phenomena being able to manifest principle: this means that because phenomena take up principle, phenomena are illusory and principle is real. Because phenomena are illusory, the principle entirely within phenomena stands forth and is revealed, just as because the characteristics of a wave are illusory, they cause the essence of the water to be revealed. One should know that the principle in this is also like this. Contemplate this.
2.15
Explanation: This fourth gate is phenomena viewed in relation to principle. The text contains the doctrine, the simile, and the application. Now it is explained. However, it follows upon the previous gate to be established: meaning that without the third, there would be phenomena detached from principle; how could the present fourth gate be able to manifest principle? Just as detached from water there are no waves, when waves arise water is manifested; since they are established by taking up principle, they can manifest principle, because phenomena, following conditions, lack self-nature. How much more so when phenomena are established from the principle of naturelessness—phenomena must lack self-nature; therefore, lacking self-nature through following conditions is precisely the thoroughly established nature. The verse of the Yāma [heaven] says: “Distinguishing these aggregates, their nature is originally empty and tranquil; because it is empty, it cannot be annihilated; this is the meaning of non-arising.” It is due to the phenomena of the aggregates that the nature of emptiness is manifested; the nature of emptiness is the true principle of non-arising. Also, the Sumeru verse says: “Completely knowing that all phenomena have no self-nature whatsoever—understanding the dharmatā like this, one then sees Rocana.” “All phenomena” are phenomena. “Having no [self-nature] whatsoever” is true principle.
2.16
The Contemplation states: 5. The gate of principle subduing phenomena: this means that since phenomena are established by taking up principle, the characteristics of phenomena are consequently entirely eliminated, and only the one true principle is equally manifested, because outside of true principle not the slightest phenomenon can be found. Just as water subdues waves so that waves are without exception eliminated, here water remaining has already destroyed waves to make them vanish entirely.
2.17
Explanation: From here below is the third pair of mutual impairment. “Mutual impairment” means that in their mutual overriding both are obliterated. Now in this fifth [gate], principle is viewed in relation to phenomena, hence principle subdues phenomena. The text has the doctrine and the simile; it also takes up the third to establish this fifth: because entirely taking principle as phenomena, phenomena are fundamentally eliminated. First it directly explains; afterwards, from “because outside of true...” onward, it sets forth its reason. Because outside of the real there are no phenomena, it subdues phenomena; just as taking water as waves, waves are purely wetness, and waves are themselves illusory. Therefore the “Manifestation” chapter states: “Even if all sentient beings in a single thought-moment all attained true awakening, it would not be different from not attaining true awakening. Why is this? Because bodhi is without characteristics and without non-characteristics.” When each and every thing is without characteristics, this principle is manifested, and both sentient beings and Buddhas are obliterated.
2.18
The Contemplation states: 6. The gate of phenomena being able to conceal principle: this means that true principle accords with conditions to form all phenomenal events. But since these phenomenal events run counter to principle, they consequently cause phenomena to be manifest and principle to be unmanifest. Just as water forms waves, motion is manifest and stillness is concealed. A sūtra states: “The dharmakāya transmigrates through the five destinies and is named ‘sentient beings.’” Therefore when sentient beings are manifest, the dharmakāya is unmanifest.
2.19
The commentary says: This is phenomena viewed from principle. The text is divided into three parts: first, the direct explanation, which is also established by the third gate; since principle is taken in its entirety to form phenomena, and phenomena possess form and characteristics while principle has no form or characteristics, phenomena cover principle. However, because these phenomenal dharmas run counter to principle, it is concealed. Some editions say "既匝於理" (surround principle), which is not as good as "違" (run counter to). Second, the illustration through metaphor, taking stillness as water, so that the meaning of concealment is clear. Third, from "The sūtra says" onward, citing proof; this is the *Fashen jing*, which will be explained further below. Caishou also says, "Whatever is spoken of in the world is all conceptual discrimination; not a single dharma has ever entered into the dharmatā," because phenomena conceal principle.
2.20
The Contemplation says: Seven, the gate of true principle being identical to phenomena. This means that whatever is true principle is never outside phenomena, because it is the principle of the selflessness of dharmas, phenomena must rely on principle, and principle is empty and devoid of [independent] essence. Therefore, only when this principle in its entirety is completely phenomena is it true principle. It is like water being identical to waves: there is no movement that is not wetness, and thus water itself is waves. Reflect on this.
2.21
The commentary says: Below is the fourth pair, mutual identity. Earlier, concealment and annulment were explained: phenomena conceal principle yet principle does not perish; principle annuls phenomena yet phenomena still remain. Although it is said that the annulment of phenomena is complete, the meaning lies in the phenomenal characteristics being empty, not in the non-existence of those phenomena. Now, mutual identity is explained: abandoning oneself to identify with the other, each is solely the other. In this seventh gate, principle is viewed from phenomena, and there are also the Dharma and a metaphor. In the Dharma, first there is a brief explanation; then, from "because it is the selflessness of dharmas" onward, the reason is given. If it were merely emptiness, existing outside of phenomena, then it would not be identical to phenomena. Now, since identical dharmas are the principle of selflessness, what principle could there be apart from phenomena? Therefore, principle is empty and devoid of [independent] essence; it takes the original emptiness and quiescence of phenomenal dharmas in their entirety to be true principle. In the metaphor, there is no movement that is not wetness: by phenomena being identical to principle, it intends to clarify that wetness is taken in its entirety to be movement, and thus principle is identical to phenomena.
2.22
The Contemplation says: Eight, the gate of phenomenal dharmas being identical to principle. This means that phenomenal dharmas of dependent origination are necessarily devoid of svabhāva; because they are devoid of svabhāva, in their entire substance they are identical to the true. Therefore, it is said that sentient beings are identical to Suchness, without waiting to be extinguished. It is like the moving characteristics of waves, which in their entire substance are identical to water; therefore, they have no different characteristics.
2.23
The commentary says: Phenomena are viewed from principle, also with the Dharma and a metaphor. The *Madhyamakaśāstra* says: "If dharmas arise from conditions, they are devoid of svabhāva. If they are devoid of svabhāva, how can there be these dharmas?" That which is devoid of svabhāva is true principle, so phenomena are identical to principle. Thus, stating that sentient beings are identical to Suchness tacitly cites the *Vimalakīrti*. The "Maitreya Chapter" of the *Vimalakīrti* says: "All sentient beings are identical to Suchness." It also says: "If Maitreya attains parinirvāṇa, all sentient beings should also attain parinirvāṇa. Why is this? All sentient beings are the characteristic of True Suchness and do not undergo further extinction." The myriad phenomena of the cosmos are imprinted by the single Dharma; encountering phenomena is [encountering] the true; without destroying conventional designations, the true characteristic is expounded. Citing the metaphor can be understood [from this]. This means that the eighth [gate], the quiescence and extinction of sentient beings, is itself the dharmakāya; the seventh [gate], the dharmakāya adapting to conditions, is called sentient beings. Sentient beings and the dharmakāya are one in essence and different in name; from the beginning they have never moved or been still, nor have they been concealed or manifest. Because their names are different, there is mutual identity and mutual concealment and annulment; because they are of one essence, they are able to be mutually identical and mutually concealed or manifest. Due to this mutual identity, the two truths of the ultimate and the conventional never contradict each other. A verse of the Yāma [heaven] says: "Like gold and the color of gold, / In mutual relation they have no distinction; / So it is with dharmas and non-dharmas, / In essence and nature they have no difference." Because principle is identical to phenomena, although empty it is not annihilated; because phenomena are identical to principle, although existent they are not permanent. Because principle is identical to phenomena, there is no Suchness outside of wisdom to be entered by wisdom; because phenomena are identical to principle, there is no wisdom outside of Suchness that can realize Suchness.
2.24
The Contemplation says: Nine, the gate of true principle not being phenomena. This means that the principle that is identical to phenomena is not phenomena, because the true and the false are different, the real is not the unreal, and that which is relied upon is not that which relies. It is like the water identical to waves not being the waves, because movement and wetness are different.
2.25
The commentary says: Below is the fifth pair, mutual negation, which is the meaning of dual preservation; if both are not preserved, there would be nothing to mutually establish, mutually identify, conceal or annul each other, and so forth. This gate means that the dharmakāya, which adapts to conditions and is not existent, is constantly manifested without being different from phenomena. The subsequent gate means that sentient beings, who are quiescently extinguished and not non-existent, are constantly established without being different from the true. That is, in this gate, principle viewed from phenomena has three pairs: first, it is true; second, it is real; third, it is that which is relied upon. This brings to light that the tenth gate is false, is unreal, and is that which relies.
2.26
The Contemplation says: Ten, the gate of phenomenal dharmas not being principle. This means that phenomena, which are entirely principle, are constantly not principle, because nature and characteristics are different, and that which relies is not that which is relied upon. Therefore, though their entire essence is completely principle, the phenomenal characteristics are vividly distinct. It is like waves, which are entirely water, constantly not being water, because the meaning of movement is not wetness.
2.27
The commentary says: In this tenth gate, phenomena are viewed from principle, having only two pairs: first, clarifying that phenomena are characteristics, which implicitly reveals that in the ninth [gate] principle is nature, making four pairs in all; second, that which relies and that which is relied upon are not different from the previous gate; the text can be understood accordingly. If based on this pair, the two truths stand opposed: regarding the truths they are always naturally two; the seventh and eighth gates, regarding understanding, are always naturally one; the fifth and sixth are two yet not two; the third and fourth are not two yet two; and through the first pair, the preceding meanings are all enabled to be mutually established.
2.28
The Contemplation says: The above ten meanings are of the same pratītyasamutpāda. Viewed from principle looking at phenomena, there are establishment and destruction, identity and detachment; viewed from phenomena looking at principle, there are manifestation and concealment, oneness and difference. In reverse and direct order there is mastery, unhindered and unimpeded, arising simultaneously and suddenly. Reflecting deeply on this causes the contemplation to appear clearly; this is called the contemplation of the perfect interfusion and non-obstruction of principle and phenomena.
2.29
The commentary says: The third part is the concluding exhortation, which has two parts: first, concluding the preceding meanings; second, exhorting practice to accomplish the contemplation. In the first part, there is first a general statement: if a single meaning is missing, it is not true pratītyasamutpāda. Then, from "Viewed from principle" onward, it separately gathers the ten gates to form eight words; however, gates one, three, five, seven, and nine view phenomena from principle, while gates two, four, six, eight, and ten view principle from phenomena. First, regarding principle viewed from phenomena: having "establishment" is the third gate, of establishing phenomena based on principle; having "destruction" is the fifth gate, of true principle annulling phenomena; having "identity" is the seventh gate, of true principle being identical to phenomena; having "detachment" is the ninth gate, of true principle not being phenomena. In phenomena viewed from principle: having "manifestation" is the fourth gate, of phenomena being able to manifest principle; having "concealment" is the sixth gate, of phenomena being able to conceal principle; having "oneness" is the eighth gate, of phenomenal dharmas being identical to principle; having "difference" is the tenth gate, of phenomenal dharmas not being principle. Now, establishment, destruction, and so forth are spoken of in terms of function: saying there is "establishment" means principle can establish phenomena, not that principle establishes itself. The other seven are also like this; thus, each and every gate contains the meaning of the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena, hence it says "Viewed from principle looking at phenomena," and so on. The reason mutual pervasion is not brought together here has three meanings: first, it is the general characteristic, and the subsequent eight [gates] are accomplished based on this mutual pervasion; second, mutual pervasion has no distinct or different characteristic, unlike the distinctions of establishment, destruction, concealment, manifestation, and so forth; third, it is broadly identical with mutual identity and subsumed by mutual identity. Stating "In reverse and direct order there is mastery" means: principle and phenomena looking at each other each have two direct and two reverse [aspects]; three (establishment) and seven (identity) are principle direct toward phenomena; four (manifestation) and eight (identity) are phenomena direct toward principle; five (annulment) and nine (negation) are principle reverse toward phenomena; six (concealment) and ten (negation) are phenomena reverse toward principle. The words "mutual pervasion" are also direct; wishing to establish, it establishes; wishing to destroy, it destroys; wishing to manifest, it manifests; wishing to conceal, it conceals, and so forth; hence it is called "mastery." Establishment does not obstruct destruction, destruction does not obstruct establishment, and so forth, hence it is called "unimpeded." The very time of establishment is the time of destruction, and so on, hence it says "simultaneously." The five pairs have no before or after, hence it says "arising suddenly." Furthermore, in the above four pairs, principle viewed from phenomena has only establishment and so forth, and not manifestation and so forth; phenomena viewed from principle has only manifestation and so forth, and not establishment and so forth. Because phenomena are established from principle, it may be granted to say "establishment." Because principle is not newly existent, one can only speak of "manifestation." Since established phenomena must cease, one can say "destruction." True principle is permanently abiding, so one can only speak of "concealment." Because principle has no form or characteristics, it can only be identical to phenomena. Because phenomena have ten thousand distinctions, they can merge with principle, so one can say "oneness." Principle is detached from all characteristics, so it says "detached from phenomena." Phenomena have distinctions, so it says "different characteristics." Above, differentiated according to meaning, there are these differences. Collecting them together, they only form five pairs. Among the five, the first four clarify that principle and phenomena are not detached, while the last one clarifies that principle and phenomena are not identical; neither identical nor detached is precisely the characteristic of pratītyasamutpāda. Furthermore, among the five pairs there are three meanings in total: the pair of establishment and manifestation is the meaning of principle and phenomena mutually producing each other; the two pairs of annulment-concealment and non-identity are the meaning of principle and phenomena running counter to each other; the two pairs of mutual pervasion and mutual identity are the meaning of principle and phenomena not obstructing each other. Furthermore, due to mutual pervasion there is mutual production; due to mutual production there is mutual identity; due to running counter to each other there is non-identity. Moreover, if there were no non-identity, there would be nothing to be identical, and so on up to mutual pervasion. Because of mutual pervasion, the four pairs are all established; therefore it is said that true emptiness and marvelous existence each have four meanings. Principle viewed from phenomena has the four meanings of true emptiness: first, the meaning of abandoning oneself to establish the other, which is the gate of establishing phenomena based on principle; second, the meaning of annihilating the other to manifest oneself, which is the gate of true principle annulling phenomena; third, the meaning of both self and other being preserved, which is the gate of true principle not being phenomena; fourth, the meaning of both self and other being annihilated, which is the gate of true principle being identical to phenomena. Due to their mutual identity, they can mutually annihilate each other. Furthermore, from the first and the third there is the gate of principle pervading phenomena, because by preserving itself its entire substance establishes the other, thereby pervading the other. Next, phenomena viewed from principle has the four meanings of marvelous existence: first, the meaning of manifesting the other while exhausting oneself, which is the gate of phenomena being able to manifest principle; second, the meaning of manifesting oneself while concealing the other, which is the gate of phenomena being able to conceal principle; third, the meaning of both self and other being preserved, which is the gate of phenomenal dharmas not being principle; fourth, the meaning of both self and other being annihilated, which is the gate of phenomenal dharmas being identical to principle. Furthermore, from the first and the third there is the gate of phenomena being identical to and pervading principle, because by preserving itself it can manifest the other, thereby pervading the other. Therefore, regarding existence, preservation, and demise being unhindered in true emptiness, and concealment and manifestation having mastery, they are in reverse and direct order with mastery, unhindered and unimpeded. Second, from "Reflecting deeply" onward, it exhorts practice to accomplish the contemplation. Learning without reflecting is equivalent to gaining nothing; realizing and reaching it in one's mind, one turns an ordinary person into a sage.
2.30
The Contemplation says: The third contemplation of all-pervading and total inclusion.
2.31
The commentary says: This is the dharmadhātu of the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon.
2.32
The Contemplation says: Phenomena, interfused as principle [is], pervade and subsume without obstruction, interpenetrating with mastery; ten gates are briefly explained.
2.33
The commentary says: This contemplation has three parts: first, generally stating and listing the number; second, separately revealing the contemplation's characteristics; third, concluding with an exhortation to practice. Now this is the first part, which is the meaning of the general title, through the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon. If one regards phenomena alone, they obstruct one another; if one regards principle alone, there is nothing that can obstruct. Now, by principle interfusing phenomena, phenomena are unobstructed; hence it says "Phenomena, interfused as principle [is]." However, principle contains the ten thousand existences and has nothing comparable as a metaphor; it is roughly like empty space. Within empty space, two meanings are briefly taken: first, universally pervading all places of form and non-form, which is the meaning of "all-pervading"; second, principle contains without having anything outside it, as not a single dharma extends beyond empty space, which is the meaning of "total inclusion." Principle is also like space, possessing these two meanings, for there is nowhere it does not pervade, and nothing it does not contain; phenomena being identical to principle, even a minute dust particle is able to contain and pervade; hence it says "Phenomena, interfused as principle [is], pervade and subsume without obstruction." "Subsume" is the meaning of total inclusion. "Non-obstruction" has two meanings: first, pervading does not obstruct subsuming; second, subsuming does not obstruct pervading; therefore, phenomenon after phenomenon can subsume and can pervade, equally unhindered, and their interpenetrating with mastery also pervades the ten gates.
2.34
The Contemplation states: First is the gate of principle conforming to phenomena: because phenomenal dharmas are illusory, their characteristics are entirely exhausted; because the nature of principle is real, its essence is entirely manifest. This means that phenomena have no separate phenomena—principle in its entirety constitutes phenomena. Therefore, although bodhisattvas look upon phenomena, this is precisely contemplating principle; yet these phenomena are said not to be identical with principle.
2.35
The Explanation states: The ten gates below arise successively from one another. Now, principle and phenomena conforming to each other largely corresponds to the preceding gate of mutual pervasion. It serves as the general sense, capable of establishing the eight below; these two still combine the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena. Because these two exist, the meaning of the non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon is attained, so they are subsumed under phenomenon and phenomenon. However, some editions read: 'Principle manifests according to phenomena, and phenomena pervade according to principle.' At first glance, the explanatory text mostly contains the meanings of pervasion and manifestation, but upon closer examination, this becomes limited; if there were only pervasion and manifestation, the remaining meanings would be lacking. The two characters 'pervade and manifest' are absent in most editions; where they are absent, the meaning is broader, so we now rely on the editions without them. Now, 'principle conforming to phenomena' means conforming to the manifestation of phenomena, conforming to the limitedness of phenomena, conforming to the differentiations of phenomena, and conforming to the greatness, smallness, oneness, and multiplicity of phenomena. Therefore, in the subsequent gate, phenomena conforming to principle not only conform to principle's pervasion, but also conform to principle's lack of characteristics and non-obstruction, being neither internal nor external, and so forth. Furthermore, if 'pervade and manifest' were present, it would also resemble the mutual pervasion of principle and phenomena in the contemplation of the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena; therefore, the absence of 'pervade and manifest' is correct in terms of meaning. All ten gates first state the name and then explain it. Here, in the first gate, 'principle conforming to phenomena', it first directly explains: since phenomena are illusory and principle is real, and the essence of principle manifests, true principle conforms to the illusoriness of phenomena, taking the illusory name as the real essence; the illusory is itself the real, and this is called having no separate phenomena. Next, from 'Therefore, bodhisattvas…' onward, it verifies this through the practitioner: because one sees phenomena as real, therefore seeing phenomena is precisely seeing principle. Finally, from 'yet these phenomena are said…' onward, it is because characteristics are not destroyed; if characteristics were destroyed, to what would principle conform? Thus true principle conforms to the greatness and smallness of phenomenal characteristics.
2.36
The Contemplation states: Second is the gate of phenomena conforming to principle: all phenomenal dharmas are not different from principle, so phenomena follow principle in being completely all-pervading, thereby causing a single dust particle to pervade the dharmadhātu everywhere. When the entire essence of the dharmadhātu pervades all dharmas, this single fine dust particle, just like the nature of principle, is entirely within all dharmas. As with a single fine dust particle, so it is with all phenomenal dharmas.
2.37
The Explanation states: According to the initial explanatory text, it seems to clarify only the meaning of pervasion. Pervasion is an alternative designation for principle, because its characteristics have no boundaries. Since a single fine dust particle is, in its entire essence, completely within all dharmas, it is also indivisible like principle. In the text, it first presents the reason: because it is not different from principle, and because of the first gate where principle conforms to phenomena, this gate then attains phenomena entirely conforming to principle. Speaking of 'completely all-pervading': being without parts, it is complete; its essence being omnipresent, it is all-pervading. Next, from 'thereby causing…' onward, it specifically demonstrates the characteristics of pervasion, meaning pervasion throughout the dharmadhātu of principle. From 'When the entire essence of the dharmadhātu…' onward, it clarifies the universal pervasion of phenomena: because the dust particle conforms to principle, it pervades all phenomena. Next, from 'As with a single fine dust particle…' onward, it takes the fine dust particle as an example for all phenomena, which means that phenomenon and phenomenon are all all-pervading; this, then, is the layer upon layer of non-obstruction between phenomenon and phenomenon.
2.38
The Contemplation states: Third is the gate of the non-obstruction of phenomena containing principle and phenomena: all phenomenal dharmas are not identical with principle, so while preserving its original single phenomenon, it can broadly contain [others]. For example, a single fine dust particle is not large in its characteristic, yet it can contain and integrate the boundless dharmadhātu. Since lands and other dharmas are not separate from the dharmadhātu, they all manifest together within a single dust particle. As with a single dust particle, so it is with all dharmas. Because these phenomena and principle are mutually resonant and unobstructed, neither identical nor different, there are four propositions in total: 1. one within one; 2. one within all; 3. all within one; 4. all within all. Each has its reason; contemplate this.
2.39
The Explanation states: The text has three parts: first, the direct explanation; second, concluding with the analogy; third, mutual resonance and unobstructedness. Now, regarding the first: because the preceding single phenomenon contains principle, and all other phenomena are not different in essence from the principle that is contained, they are all within the single phenomenon in accordance with the principle that is contained. As for saying 'not identical with principle', in the previous gate it was not different from principle and, identical with principle, it pervaded. In this gate, it also contains in conformity with principle, so it is likewise not different. Because the characteristic of the one is not destroyed, there can be that which contains; in contrast to the preceding 'not different', it is therefore said to be 'not identical'. Below, in the section on universal and restricted, it reveals that the second [gate] also does not destroy characteristics. From 'For example, a single fine dust particle…' onward, it brings out the characteristics of a phenomenon containing. Second, from 'As with a single dust particle…' onward, it concludes with the analogy. Third, from 'Because these phenomena and principle…' onward, is the mutual resonance and unobstructedness. In terms of the gate of broad containment, there are these four propositions; here, that which contains and that which is contained do not go beyond the one and the many, intertwining to form four. On the side of that which contains, all possess the meanings of being neither identical with nor different from principle: because of being not identical, it has an essence that serves as that which contains; because of being not different, it has a function that is able to contain. On the side of that which is contained, it is considered solely in terms of the meaning of being not different from principle. For instance, in the first, 'one within one': because the prior 'one' does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the subsequent 'one', it can then contain the subsequent 'one'. And because the subsequent 'one' is not different from the principle of the prior 'one', it is within the prior 'one' in accordance with the principle that is contained, because apart from principle there are no phenomena. Second, 'one within all': because the 'all' does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'one' below, it can contain the 'one' below. Because the 'one' below is not different from the principle of the 'all' above, it is within the 'all' above in accordance with the principle of its own 'one' below. Third, 'all within one': because the 'one' does not destroy characteristics, it can serve as that which contains, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'all' below, it can contain all; because the 'all' that is contained is not different from the principle of the 'one' above, it is within the 'one' above in accordance with the principle of its own 'all'. Fourth, 'all within all': because the 'all' above does not destroy characteristics, it has an essence that can contain, and because it is not different from the principle of the 'all' below, it contains the 'all' below; because the 'all' below is not different from the principle of the 'all' above, it is within the 'all' above in accordance with the principle of the 'all' below. Therefore it concludes: 'Each has its reason.' The preceding second gate is the meaning of broad pervasion, and this third gate is the meaning of total inclusion; the general title of this contemplation is already complete in them. The seven gates below are none of them separate from these two meanings of broad pervasion and total inclusion.
2.40
The Contemplation states: Fourth is the gate of the non-obstruction of the universal and the restricted: because all phenomenal dharmas are not identical with, and thus not different from, principle, this phenomenal dharma is caused, without leaving one place, to pervade entirely within all dust particles of the ten directions. Because being not different is being not identical, it entirely pervades the ten directions without moving from its single position; being immediately far and immediately near, immediately pervading and immediately abiding, unhindered and unimpeded.
2.41
The Explanation states: This gate re-explains the second [gate]. In the second, all pervade; now, without destroying characteristics, there is the meaning of not pervading: pervading is the universal, and not pervading is the restricted. In the text, because it is not identical with principle, it is restricted; because it is not different, it is universal. From 'being immediately far…' onward, it concludes that pervading is the universal, and abiding is the restricted.
2.42
The Contemplation states: Fifth is the gate of the non-obstruction of the broad and the narrow: because all phenomenal dharmas are not identical with, and thus not different from, principle, without destroying a single dust particle it can broadly contain the oceans of lands in the ten directions. Because being not different is being not identical, it broadly contains the dharmadhātu of the ten directions while the fine dust particle does not become large. Thus, the phenomenon of a single dust particle is immediately broad and immediately narrow, immediately great and immediately small, unhindered and unimpeded.
2.43
The Explanation states: This re-explains the third gate. The third clarified containing in conformity with principle; now, because it has the meaning of being not identical with principle, without destroying the characteristic of narrowness it can broadly contain. In the text, because of being not identical, it is narrow; because of being not different, it is broad. First clarifying that being not identical is being not different, it therefore clarifies not destroying [characteristics]. The clause below 'broadly contains' is the reverse of the above. From 'Thus, the phenomenon of a single dust particle…' onward, it concludes.
2.44
The Contemplation states: Sixth is the gate of the non-obstruction of pervasion and containment: viewing this single dust particle in relation to all, because universal pervasion is precisely broad containment, at the very time it pervades within all, it in turn gathers that all back so that it abides entirely within its own one. Furthermore, because broad containment is precisely universal pervasion, this causes this single dust particle in turn to pervade within all the differentiated dharmas inside itself. Therefore, when this single dust particle pervades others by itself, others immediately pervade itself; capable of containing and capable of entering, simultaneous pervasion and gathering are unobstructed. Contemplate this.
2.45
The Explanation states: This gate directly combines the preceding fourth and fifth gates, and also combines the second and third, because the fourth and fifth gates explain the second and third. Because broad containment and universal pervasion are not separate from one another, in the name, 'pervasion' is universal pervasion, and 'containment' is broad containment. In the explanatory text, it first presents the topic, next explains it, and finally concludes. Now, regarding the first: viewing the one in relation to the many has the meaning of pervasion and containment, because since that many exists, it can be pervaded, and this one can contain. If one views the many in relation to the one, then there is no pervasion and containment, because regarding the one that is viewed, one cannot speak of pervasion, and when the many that views contains the one, it cannot be called broad containment. Next, from 'because universal pervasion…' onward, the explanation has two pairs: first, pervasion is containment, which is only one pervasion and one containment; later, from 'Furthermore, because…' onward, containment is pervasion, which is also one containment and one pervasion. In the first part, 'pervasion is containment': when the one pervades the many, it gathers the many that is pervaded back inside my one, just as when a single mirror pervades nine mirrors, it gathers the nine mirrors back inside the single mirror. In the latter part, 'containment is pervasion', the principle is stated conversely to the above, meaning that when a single mirror contains many mirrors, the single mirror that can contain turns back and pervades within the reflections of the many mirrors that are contained; therefore it says 'in turn pervades within all the differentiated dharmas inside itself.' From 'Therefore…' onward is the conclusion, which can be understood.
First 45 of 59 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 華嚴法界玄鏡 — Classical Chinese