法界圖記叢髓錄 2.12

2.12

The Commentary on the Sixth Ground by Qingliang states: In the text of the present sūtra, ten tiers are briefly revealed to exhaustively investigate nature and characteristics so as to manifest the inexhaustible, not merely lodging in stages identically to the two vehicles. As for the ten tiers: first, the continuation of existence-factors; second, subsumption into the one mind; third, self-karma assisting production; fourth, not abandoning one another; fifth, the three paths being uninterrupted; sixth, transmigration through the three time periods; seventh, the accumulation of the three sufferings; eighth, production and cessation through cause and condition; ninth, bondage of production and cessation; tenth, conformity to the exhaustion of non-existence. Each has direct and reverse [aspects], thus making twenty; hence the sūtra below states, "Thus observing in direct and reverse order: in the reverse, conditions cease; in the direct, conditions arise (and so forth)." Regarding the three contemplations on the treatise on pratītyasamutpāda: first, contemplation of the distinction of characteristics and truths; second, contemplation of conforming with great compassion; third, contemplation of the knowledge of all aspects. The first merely contemplates the two truths: since conditioned phenomena lack a self, this is the contemplation with great compassion foremost. In the second, compassion increases in accordance with beings; this is the contemplation of the augmenting of great compassion. The third is the contemplation of thoroughly investigating all approaches to the nature and characteristics of cause and condition; hence it is the contemplation of the fulfillment of great compassion. The first is below, identical with the all-knowledge of the two vehicles; the next personally manifests the bodhisattva's knowledge of the aspects of the path; the last is above, identical with the knowledge of all forms of all Buddhas. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] states: "Regarding the twelvefold pratītyasamutpāda, by contemplating with inferior wisdom one attains the bodhi of a śrāvaka; by contemplating with middling wisdom one attains the bodhi of a pratyekabuddha; by contemplating with superior wisdom one attains the bodhi of a bodhisattva; by contemplating with supreme wisdom one attains the bodhi of a Buddha." The first two bodhis are the meaning of the first contemplation, and the remaining two each correspond to one, as can be known. Previously, in terms of [acting] for sentient beings, all three were called compassion; now, in terms of the contemplating mind, all three are wisdom contemplations. From this we know that each of the three clauses has compassion and wisdom guiding each other; fusing these three contemplations resides solely in the one mind, and profound prajñā manifests from this. The Tanxuan [ji] states: "What are the ten contemplations? First, the sequence of the factors of cause and condition (and so forth), up to tenth, conformity to the exhaustion of non-existence. Within these, each has direct contemplation and reverse contemplation, hence there are twenty gates. That is, direct contemplation of great compassion does not abide in nirvāṇa, and reverse contemplation of great wisdom does not abide in saṃsāra; hence it is called the non-abiding path (and so forth)." In the first, the sequence of the factors of cause and condition, it directly reveals that the existence-factors are selfless. Herein there are two: first, explaining that inverted clinging to a self falsely gives rise to factors of conditions; second, explaining that bewilderment regarding the principle of the truths gives rise to the sequence of conditions. Within the first there are three: first, determining selflessness; second, bewilderment producing pratītyasamutpāda; third, (and so forth). In the first there are two clauses. First, stating that receiving a body in the world is entirely due to attachment to a self raises the confused sentiment to reveal that the self is contrary to principle. If the self existed in principle, attachment to self would accord with principle and should result in leaving the world; since one is born in the world, this shows that the self is contrary to principle. Second, stating that if one is free from attachment to a self there is no birth brings forward the understanding mind to clarify that the principle is not a self. If the principle had a self, separation from the self would violate the principle and one should be born in the world; since one attains transcendence of the world, this shows that the principle is selfless. Second, explaining that bewilderment regarding this selflessness gives rise to those existence-factors; herein one first directly contemplates pratītyasamutpāda, and later reversely contemplates selflessness (and so forth). In the second, subsumption into the one mind, it states that the three realms are illusory and made only by the one mind. This single passage is cited by all treatises to substantiate consciousness-only. Now, what kind of mind is being spoken of here? How is it called "making"? We now explain this meaning. In accordance with all sacred teachings, there are multiple gates: first, consciousness-only is taught because characteristics and perception both persist; second, consciousness-only is taught because characteristics are subsumed into perception; third, mental factors are subsumed into the sovereign [mind] (and so forth); fourth, taking the branches back to the root; fifth, subsuming characteristics into the nature; sixth, transforming the real to accomplish phenomenal events; seventh, principle and phenomena are mutually fused; eighth, phenomenal events are fused and mutually enter; ninth, whole phenomena are mutually identical; tenth, unimpeded as Indra's net. Herein, the first three are explained in terms of the initial teaching; the next four are explained in terms of the final and sudden teachings; the last three are explained in terms of the distinct teaching within the round teaching. Possessing all ten gates completely is explained in terms of the shared teaching (and so forth). In the third, self-karma assisting production, these twelve factors each have two meanings: first, clarifying one's own operational characteristic; second, assisting the production of subsequent functions. That is, delusion and confusion within conditions is the self-characteristic of ignorance; serving as a cause for formations is karma assisting production. In the fourth, not abandoning one another, the preceding can give rise to the subsequent, and without the subsequent there is no preceding; the subsequent arises relying on the preceding, and without the preceding there is no subsequent; because they do not separate from one another, each lacks self-nature, and pratītyasamutpāda lacking self-nature manifests before us like an illusion. In the fifth, the three paths being uninterrupted, as Bodhisattva Śuddhamati's Treatise on the Twelve Conditions states: "Affliction comprises the first, eighth, and ninth; karma comprises the second and tenth; the remaining seven are said to be suffering; the three completely subsume the twelve. From the three, two are born; from the two, seven are born; from the seven, three are born again; therefore it turns like a wheel. All worldly phenomena are merely cause and effect without a person; solely from empty phenomena, empty phenomena are born in turn." Explanation: This explains the mutual generation of the three paths, revealing the two kinds of selflessness. In the sixth, distinguishing the preceding and succeeding periods, among these twelve factors, the first two are that which induces, the next five are that which is induced, the next three are that which produces, and the last two are that which is produced (and so forth). One [way], relying on this sūtra, opens that which induces and that which is induced into the preceding and middle periods, and combines that which produces and that which is produced into the succeeding period; because inducing is remote it is opened, and because producing is proximate it is combined. In the seventh, distinguishing the three sufferings, there are two gates: first, the gate of actual principle pervading generally (and so forth); second, the gate of manifesting according to the increase of characteristics, as this sūtra says. That is, because the initial five factors manifest the characteristic of flux, they are called the suffering of conditioned existence; contact and feeling produce suffering upon encounter, hence they are called the suffering of suffering; the remainder are the suffering of change, which means that only the destruction of pleasure is called the suffering of change. Since the factor of aging and death has no pleasure to destroy, why is it called the suffering of change? There are two explanations: first, the destruction of pleasure is suffering, said with respect to that which is destroyed; second, because destruction itself is suffering, it is called the suffering of change. This factor of aging and death can destroy birth, hence it belongs to the suffering of change. In the eighth, production through cause and condition, in terms of actual principle, ignorance has no meaning of being a cause and condition with respect to formations; yet it is said that cause and condition produce formations because of two meanings: first, its own seed is the cause and ignorance is the condition; because they are spoken of together, it is called cause and condition. However, concealing that direct seed and manifesting this superior condition, it is called the cause and condition of ignorance. Second, merely that its augmenting condition, when viewed against its own augmenting result, is still a direct cause; hence ignorance is said to be the cause and condition for formations. The rest are also like this. Intending to clarify that results do not arise on their own but must follow causes and conditions, and that causes and conditions deprive one another of exclusivity and each lack self-nature, it is therefore said that production through cause and condition actually reveals non-production. This is still the direct contemplation and reverse contemplation both dissolving into neither production nor non-production, as can be known (and so forth). Within this profound contemplation, subsuming the subsequent three gates forms four propositions: first, not produced from self; second, not produced from other; third, not produced from both; fourth, not produced without a cause. Explanations of these four propositions vary across treatises, and there are briefly five explanations: First, explained in terms of refuting non-Buddhists: because phenomena are not produced from the unmanifest (pradhāna) or self-nature (svabhāva), it is said they are not produced from self; because they are not produced from Brahmā, Īśvara, and so forth, it is said they are not produced from other; because they are also not produced from the aggregation of subtle particles and primary elements, it is said they are not produced from both; because they also do not arise spontaneously without a cause, it is said they are not produced without a cause. Second, explained in terms of refuting the two vehicles: first, because phenomena do not definitely arise from their own homogeneous causes, it is said they are not produced from self; second, because they do not definitely arise from fruitional causes, it is said they are not produced from other; third, also because they are not produced from those simultaneous causes, it is said they are not produced from both; fourth, in the Hīnayāna it is conceded that prior to the factor of ignorance, improper reflection arises relying on unreality, seemingly as if without a cause; now this is also not so, hence it is free from [arising] without a cause. Third, in terms of phenomena manifesting emptiness: first, a result does not arise of itself, termed not produced from self; second, since self is not established, against what could an other be identified? Moreover, others individually fail to establish themselves as self, so how could there be production from other? Hence it is said they are not produced from other; third, since cause and effect of self and other are each unestablished, it is said they are not produced from both; fourth, apart from causes and conditions there is no separate resultant phenomenon, hence it is said they are not produced without a cause. The above three tiers are as explained in the Prajñāpradīpa-śāstra, the Madhyamaka-śāstra, and so forth. Fourth, in terms of cause and condition depriving one another of exclusivity, the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "Because one's own seed exists, it is not from other; because it depends on multiple conditions, it is not made by self; because it lacks active function, it is not produced from both; because it possesses efficacy, it is not without a cause." In all pratītyasamutpāda, two paired propositions are already profoundly deep, not to mention the total of four propositions; therefore, pratītyasamutpāda is most extremely profound. Fifth, in terms of the unimpeded gate of pratītyasamutpāda, simply when causes and conditions produce a result, cause and condition viewed against each other each have two meanings: first, completely efficacious; second, completely powerless. That is, viewing the cause with respect to the result, it has complete non-production, while the condition definitely completely produces; hence it is said the cause does not produce, because the condition produces. Second, the condition viewed with respect to the result is also completely non-producing, while the cause definitely produces; hence it is said the condition does not produce, because its own cause produces. Third, the two efficacies do not coexist, hence they are not produced from both. Fourth, the two powerlessnesses also do not coexist, hence they are not produced without a cause. This gate has two meanings: First, based on the meaning of having and not having efficacy, they are caused to mutually enter. That is, when the cause is efficacious, the condition must be powerless; therefore, because the cause is efficacious it can subsume the other, and because the condition is powerless it can enter the other, synthesizing that condition's efficacy and taking it wholly back into the causal efficacy, termed not produced from other. Although it is said not to be from other, conversely it manifests production from self. The causal efficacy returning to the condition being not from self is also like this; ponder this conversely. Because the two efficacies and the two powerlessnesses each do not coexist, there is no non-mutual entering between them; because one efficacy and one powerlessness return to each other, they perpetually enter each other. Because the augmenting condition is broad without obstructing one another, there are no phenomena among all phenomena that do not enter one another. The "Chapter on the Ten Clarifications" states: "A bodhisattva skillfully contemplates the dharmas of pratītyasamutpāda, understanding multiple dharmas within a single dharma, and thoroughly understanding a single dharma within multiple dharmas." This is truly due to this gate. Second, based on the meaning of the substance having emptiness and non-emptiness, there is mutual identity. That is, not only does causal efficacy return to condition to clarify their mutual entering, but the causal substance also, due to the condition, reveals that the causal nature is empty and subsumed into identity with the condition. Why so? Because if there were no condition, there would be no cause. Since producing a result is called a cause, if without condition the result is not produced, at that time it is not called a cause. Clearly know that this cause synthesizes and returns to that condition, being not produced from self. Therefore, the condition has the meaning of being existent, and nothing cannot be subsumed; the cause has the meaning of being empty, and nothing does not undergo subsumption. Because the cause undergoes subsumption, it abandons itself to be identical with the condition; because the condition can subsume, it subsumes the cause to be identical with itself. The remaining [cases of] cause subsuming condition and condition undergoing [subsumption] should all be understood by inference accordingly. By this meaning, all phenomena are mutually identical without obstruction. The text above states: "Knowing one is many, many is one," and so forth, which are all this meaning. Therefore, the inexhaustible great dharma of pratītyasamutpāda is unimpeded and sovereign, all opening and manifesting from this gate. In the ninth, the explanation of the bondage of cause and condition, production and bondage through cause and condition means that this pratītyasamutpāda mutually binds and abides, so that it cannot be production; because of this bondage, it is further not cessation. Sealing this phenomenal essence with the single word 'bondage' departs from all conceptual discriminations; yet being pratītyasamutpāda, the characteristic of bondage is also departed from; hence it is manifested lodged in words, so it is said to be an 'explanation of bondage' in order to clarify that this bondage exists only in the explanation. This gate manifests the phenomenal characteristics of pratītyasamutpāda approaching the exhaustion of principle-nature, about to reveal the supreme subtlety; hence the treatise states: "Conforming to the contemplation of conventional truth, one immediately enters the ultimate truth"—this is this gate. In the tenth, the exhaustion of non-existence, it clarifies that these empty characteristics of the existence-factors having been exhausted, conforming to non-existence thoroughly reaches the ultimate truth. This reveals not destroying the conventional while constantly being the real; hence it is said that formations arising from the cause and condition of ignorance is conformity to non-existence. Question: Ignorance producing formations conforms to existence; why then say it conforms to non-existence? Answer: Availing oneself of the sequence of the preceding gates up to this point reveals that at the very time when that ignorance produces formations, it conforms to non-production and enters principle (and so forth). Why does the sūtra say conforming to non-existence, while the treatise calls it conforming to existence? Explanation: The sūtra's intention explains by returning conditions to principle, whereas the treatise's intention explains by taking nature in accordance with characteristics; each manifests a distinct intention, and hence they speak this way (and so forth). First, the array of existence-factors; second, subsumption into the one mind; third, power and function mutually producing; fourth, preceding and succeeding mutually belonging; fifth, circular revolution of the three paths; sixth, cause and effect of the three periods; seventh, faults of the three sufferings; eighth, having no nature from cause; ninth, appearing as existent yet as if non-existent; tenth, dissolving into identity and equality. Matching and concluding the preceding ten, they are clearly visible in the text.