宗鏡錄 72.43

72.43

答。若以一有力者。是空無性義。無性故。能成諸法。以有空義故。一切法得成。則是一有力為主。多無力為伴。若以多有力者。則無一法而有自體能獨立者。皆假眾緣相待而成。則多有力為主。一無力為伴。所以立伴相成。自他互立。無伴則主不立。闕自則他不成。又約用。由相待故。具有力無力義。是相收及相入。二約體。由相作故。具有體無體義。是故相即及相是。經偈云。諸法無作用。亦無有體性。是故一切法。各各不相知。以他而為自。故無體性。以相待而成。故無作用。此是無力義。又因此無知無性。方有緣起。若一法有體。則不假相依。若無相依。則無諸法。若諸法不空。則無道無果。此是有力義。次緣起十門者。即緣起相由之力。謂一與多互為緣起。相由成立。故有相即相入等。此有二種。一約緣用。有有力無力。相待相依。全體相收。故有相入。二約緣體。有空不空。能作所作。全體相是。故有相即。此即入二門。復有二義。一異體相望。故有微細隱顯。謂異體相容。是微細義。異體相是。具隱顯義。二同體內具德。故有一多廣狹。謂同體相入。故有一多無礙。同體相即。故有廣狹無礙。又由以異攝同。故有帝網義。於時中。故有十世義。緣起無性。故有性相無礙義。相關互攝。故有主伴義。十緣義者。一。諸緣各異義。大緣起中諸緣相望。要須體用各別。不相雜亂。方成緣起。若雜亂者。失本緣法。緣起不成。此則諸緣各各自守一位。經頌云。多中無一性。一亦無有多。二互遍相資義。要互相遍。方成緣起。如一緣遍應多緣。各與彼多全為一故。此一即是多箇一也。此即一一各具一切。經頌云。知以一故眾。知以眾故一。三俱存無礙義。凡是一緣。要具前二。以要住自一。方能遍應。遍。應多緣。多。緣方是一故。以一不自作一。以多作一。以多不自多。以一作多。是故唯一多一自在無礙。或舉體全住。是唯一也。或舉體遍應。是多一也。或俱存。或雙泯。或總合。或全離。經頌云。諸法無所依。但從和合起。此三門。總明緣起本法竟。四異體相入義。謂法門力用。遞相依持。互形奪故。各有全力全無力義。由一有力。必不與多有力俱。是故無有一而不持多也。由多無力。必不與一無力俱。是故無有多而不入一也。多持一依亦然。五異體相即義。諸緣相望。全體形奪。有有體無體義。是故一緣是能起能成。故有體。多緣是所起所成。故無體。由一有體。必不得與多有體俱。多無體。必不得與一無體俱。是故無有不多之一。無有不一之多。六。體用雙融義。一以體無不用。故舉體全用。即有相入。無相即義。二用無不體。故舉用全體。即唯有相即。無相入義。三歸體之用不礙用。全用之體不失體。無礙雙存。亦即亦入。自在俱現。四全用之體體泯。全體之用用亡。非即非入。圓融一味。五合前四句。同一緣起。無礙雙存。六泯前五句。絕待離言。冥同性海。此上三門。於初異體門中顯義理竟。七同體相入義。謂前一緣所有多一。與彼一緣體無別故。名為同體。又由此一緣應多緣故。先明相入。謂一緣有力能持多一。多一無力依彼一緣。是故一能攝多。多便入一。八同體相即義。謂前一緣所具多一。亦有有體無體義。故亦相即。以多一無體。由本一成。多即一也。由本一有體。能持多一。全一攝多。如一有多空既爾。多。有一空亦然。九。俱融無礙義。同前六句體用雙融。此三門。於前第二同體門中辯義理竟。十同異圓滿義。以前九門。總合為一大緣起。令多種義門。同時具足。由住一遍應。故有廣狹自在門。由就體。有相即。就用。有相入。由異體相容。具微細門。由異體相即。具隱顯門。就用相入為顯。就體相即為隱。又由異體相入。帶同體相。入具帝網門。由此大緣起。即無礙法界。有託事門。顯於時中。有十世門。相關互攝。有主伴門。此圓滿門。就第三門中以辯義理竟。經頌云。菩薩善觀緣起法。於一法中解眾多。眾多法中解了一。如是理事開合緣性融通。方達一心無盡之用。華嚴演義釋云。夫緣起者。初有三門。一異體門。二同體門。三同異合明門。所有同異體者。以諸緣起門內有二義故。一不相由義。謂自具德故。如因中不待緣是。二相由義。如待緣等是也。初即同體門。後即異體門。若爾。何以初異體門中。云諸緣各別。不相雜亂。第二同體門中。云互相遍應。方成緣起。釋曰。謂要由各異。方得待緣。要由遍應。方自具德耳。所以前之二門。各生三者。一互相依持。有力無力故。二互相形奪。有體無體故。三體用雙融。無前後故。此即緣起大意。次。第一異體門者。然由相成。方各有體。二互遍相資義者。即同體門。則具多箇一。如十錢為緣。當體自是本一。應二之時。乃詺初一。以為二一。應三為三一。乃至應十為十一。故有多一。若此一緣不具多一。則資應不遍。不成緣起。此則一一各具一切者。一既有十。二三四等。亦各有十。故云。一一各具。如十錢為喻。其法界差別無盡法中。各各遍應故。隨一一各具法界差別法也。三俱存無礙義者。唯一多一自在無礙者。總明欲多常多。欲一常一。故云自在。一或舉體遍應。二或舉體全住。三或俱存者。俱存住自及遍應也。亦俱存唯一及多一也。四雙泯者。即由俱存。則相即奪故。住一即遍應。非住一也。遍應即住一非遍應也。五或總合者。合前四句為解境故。六或全離者。全離前五成行境故。四異門相入義者。遞相依持者。以是緣起一多等。非定性一多等。謂一有定性。不由於多。多有定性。不由於一。今由一無定性。假多而起。多無定性。由一而生故。由無性平等之義。方成緣起。若有一可一。此是自性一。若有多可多。此是定性多。若是定性多。多不因於一。若是定性一。一不因於多。今由多故一。此一不自一。今由一故多。此多不自多。此多則無力。此一不自一。此一則無力。無力隨有力。一多互相收故。隨一佛會。即一切佛會。一切法會。即是一法會。故此一法會。不動而常遍。不分而常多。前後互相成。如何不信。又謂前一望多中。一為持邊。一能攝多。一為依邊。一能入多。如一望多。有依有持者。有依者。即前多持。故一成也。有持者。即前一有力。為多依故。言全力者。成上持。言無力者。成上依。言常含多在已中者。一有力為持。能攝多故。言潛入已在多中者。一無力為依。便入多故。俱存雙泯者。謂一攝多。是第一句。多攝一是第二句。俱存。即第三句。謂即一攝一入時。即多攝多入故。雙泯者。即第四句。一攝一入故。則多攝多入故。便一攝一入泯。多攝多入故。即一攝一入故。則多攝多入泯。故云雙泯。對前別明二句。則有四句。亦可成六。五俱照前四。成解境故。六頓絕前五。成行境故。五異體相即義者。為能起邊。即有體。為所起邊。即無體。如云法從緣生。是法即空。意取所生空也。空。即無體義。若形奪者。以能起之緣。形對所起。奪彼所起。令無體也。由一有體。不得與多有體俱者。謂有難言。一之與多。俱有有體無體二義。云何獨言一有體耶。故今通云。由有無義不得並故。今一為能起邊。多。必是所起故。若不爾者。能所不成。緣起亦壞。是故無有不多之一者。此一是多故。無有不一之多者。此多是一故。

Answer: If one is efficacious, it is the meaning of emptiness and lack of intrinsic nature. Because of lacking intrinsic nature, it is able to bring about all phenomena. Because the meaning of emptiness exists, all phenomena can be established. Thus, one being efficacious serves as the master, and the many being inefficacious serve as the accompaniment. If the many are efficacious, then no single phenomenon possesses a substance that can stand independently; all rely on the mutual interdependence of multiple conditions to be established. Thus, the many being efficacious serve as the master, and the one being inefficacious serves as the accompaniment. For this reason, establishing an accompaniment allows them to bring each other about; self and other are mutually established. Without an accompaniment, the master is not established; lacking the self, the other is not realized. Furthermore, in terms of function: because they are mutually interdependent, they possess the aspects of efficaciousness and inefficaciousness, which are mutual containment and mutual entry. Second, in terms of substance: because they bring each other about, they possess the aspects of having substance and lacking substance; for this reason, they are mutually identical and mutually equivalent. A sūtra verse states: 'All phenomena lack activity, / Nor do they possess intrinsic substance. / Therefore all phenomena / Do not know one another.' Because it takes the other as the self, it lacks intrinsic substance; because it is established through mutual interdependence, it lacks activity. This is the meaning of inefficaciousness. Furthermore, because of this lack of knowledge and lack of intrinsic nature, conditioned origination comes to be. If a single phenomenon possessed an intrinsic substance, it would not rely on mutual dependence; if there were no mutual dependence, there would be no phenomena; if phenomena were not empty, there would be neither path nor fruition. This is the meaning of efficaciousness. Next, the ten approaches to conditioned origination refer to the power of mutual reliance in conditioned origination, meaning that one and many mutually serve as conditioned origination and are established by relying on one another; hence there are mutual identity, mutual entry, and so forth. This has two aspects: First, in terms of the function of conditions: there are efficaciousness and inefficaciousness, mutual interdependence and reliance, and complete mutual containment; hence there is mutual entry. Second, in terms of the substance of conditions: there are emptiness and non-emptiness, what produces and what is produced, and complete mutual equivalence; hence there is mutual identity. These two approaches of identity and entry further contain two meanings: First, viewed in terms of different substances, there are subtlety, concealment, and manifestation. That is, mutual containment of different substances is the meaning of subtlety; mutual equivalence of different substances possesses the meaning of concealment and manifestation. Second, possessing virtues within the identical substance, there are one, many, broad, and narrow. That is, mutual entry of the identical substance yields unobstructedness between one and many; mutual identity of the identical substance yields unobstructedness between broad and narrow. Furthermore, because differences subsume identity, there is the meaning of Indra's net. In terms of time, there is the meaning of the ten periods of time. Conditioned origination lacks intrinsic nature, hence there is the unobstructedness of nature and characteristics. Interconnection and mutual subsumption yield the meaning of master and accompaniment. The ten meanings of conditions are: 1. The meaning that all conditions are distinct: In the great conditioned origination, when all conditions are viewed in relation to each other, their substances and functions must be distinct and not jumbled together for conditioned origination to be established. If they are jumbled together, the original causal phenomenon is lost, and conditioned origination cannot be established. This means that each condition maintains its own position. A sūtra verse states: 'In the many there is no singular nature; / Nor in the one are there many.' 2. The meaning of mutual pervasion and mutual assistance: They must mutually pervade one another for conditioned origination to be established. Just as one condition pervades and corresponds to many conditions, becoming completely one with each of those many, this one is itself the many ones. This is each one possessing all. A sūtra verse states: 'Know that by means of one there is the multitude; / Know that by means of the multitude there is one.' 3. The meaning of co-presence without obstruction: Any single condition must possess the previous two, because it must abide in its own oneness before it can pervade and correspond, and only by pervading and corresponding to many conditions do the many conditions become one. Because the one does not make itself one, it is made one by the many; because the many do not make themselves many, they are made many by the one. Therefore, the single one and the multiple ones are unimpeded and free. Or, taking the entire substance to abide completely is the single one; or, taking the entire substance to pervade and correspond is the multiple ones; or both co-exist; or both are negated; or they are combined; or they are completely separated. A sūtra verse states: 'All phenomena have nothing they rely on; / They merely arise from combination.' These three approaches conclude the general explanation of the fundamental phenomena of conditioned origination. 4. The meaning of mutual entry among different substances: The forces and functions of the teachings mutually rely on and sustain each other, mutually defining and eclipsing one another; thus, each has the aspects of being completely efficacious and completely inefficacious. Because the one is efficacious, it definitely cannot coexist with the many being efficacious; therefore, there is no one that does not uphold the many. Because the many are inefficacious, they definitely cannot coexist with the one being inefficacious; therefore, there are no many that do not enter the one. The same applies to the many upholding and the one relying. 5. The meaning of mutual identity among different substances: When all conditions are viewed in relation to each other, their entire substances define and eclipse each other, having the aspects of having substance and lacking substance. Therefore, the one condition is that which can give rise to and establish, hence it has substance; the many conditions are that which is arisen and established, hence they lack substance. Because the one has substance, it definitely cannot coexist with the many having substance; because the many lack substance, they definitely cannot coexist with the one lacking substance. Therefore, there is no one that is not many, and there are no many that are not one. 6. The meaning of substance and function harmoniously fusing: First, because substance is never without function, when the entire substance becomes function, there is mutual entry but no mutual identity. Second, because function is never without substance, when the entire function becomes substance, there is only mutual identity and no mutual entry. Third, the function returning to substance does not obstruct function, and the substance that is entirely function does not lose substance; unobstructedly both are preserved, both identical and entering, freely appearing together. Fourth, the substance that is entirely function has its substance obliterated, and the function that is entirely substance has its function extinguished; neither identical nor entering, perfectly fused in a single taste. Fifth, combining the previous four propositions into the same conditioned origination, unobstructedly both are preserved. Sixth, obliterating the previous five propositions, utterly beyond duality and speech, implicitly identical to the ocean of nature. These three approaches conclude the exposition of principles within the initial approach of different substances. 7. The meaning of mutual entry within the identical substance: The multiple ones possessed by the preceding single condition have no distinct substance from that single condition, and thus it is called the identical substance. Furthermore, because this single condition responds to many conditions, mutual entry is explained first: the single condition is efficacious and can uphold the multiple ones, while the multiple ones are inefficacious and rely on that single condition. Therefore, the one can subsume the many, and the many enter the one. 8. The meaning of mutual identity within the identical substance: The multiple ones possessed by the preceding single condition also have the aspects of having substance and lacking substance, and thus are also mutually identical. Because the multiple ones lack substance and are established by the fundamental one, the many are identical to the one. Because the fundamental one has substance and can uphold the multiple ones, the complete one subsumes the many. Just as the one exists while the many are empty, so it is when the many exist while the one is empty. 9. The meaning of complete fusion without obstruction: Identical to the previous six propositions on the harmonious fusion of substance and function. These three approaches conclude the explanation of principles within the second approach of the identical substance. 10. The meaning of the consummation of identity and difference: The preceding nine approaches are combined into one great conditioned origination, causing multiple doctrinal approaches to be simultaneously complete. Because of abiding in one and pervading all, there is the approach of the freedom of broad and narrow. In terms of substance, there is mutual identity; in terms of function, there is mutual entry. Because different substances mutually contain one another, it possesses the approach of subtlety; because different substances are mutually identical, it possesses the approach of concealment and manifestation. In terms of function, mutual entry is manifestation; in terms of substance, mutual identity is concealment. Furthermore, because different substances mutually enter, entailing the aspect of the identical substance, entry possesses the approach of Indra's net. Because this great conditioned origination is the unobstructed dharmadhātu, it possesses the approach of relying on phenomena. Manifested within time, it has the approach of the ten periods of time. Interconnected and mutually subsuming, it has the approach of master and accompaniment. This approach of consummation concludes the explanation of principles within the third approach. A sūtra verse states: 'Bodhisattvas skillfully contemplate the Dharma of conditioned origination; / In a single phenomenon, they understand the multitude, / And in the multitude of phenomena, they comprehend the one.' When the opening and closing of principle and phenomena and the nature of conditions are harmoniously understood in this way, one finally reaches the inexhaustible function of the one mind. The Huayan Yanyi explains: 'Regarding conditioned origination, there are initially three approaches: 1. The approach of different substances; 2. The approach of the identical substance; 3. The approach of jointly clarifying identity and difference. The reason there are identical and different substances is that within all approaches of conditioned origination there are two meanings: First, the meaning of not relying on one another, which means possessing virtues by oneself, just as within causes not relying on conditions is such. Second, the meaning of relying on one another, just as relying on conditions is such. The former is the approach of the identical substance; the latter is the approach of different substances.' If so, why is it that in the initial approach of different substances it is said that all conditions are distinct and not jumbled together, whereas in the second approach of the identical substance it is said that they mutually pervade and correspond, only then establishing conditioned origination? The explanation states: It is only by being distinct that they can rely on conditions; it is only by pervading and corresponding that they possess virtues by themselves. The reason each of the preceding two approaches gives rise to three is: 1. Mutually relying on and upholding, due to efficaciousness and inefficaciousness; 2. Mutually defining and eclipsing, due to having substance and lacking substance; 3. Substance and function harmoniously fusing, due to having no sequence. This is the general idea of conditioned origination. Next, regarding the first approach of different substances: It is only through mutual establishment that each has substance. Regarding the second, the meaning of mutual pervasion and mutual assistance, this is the approach of the identical substance, which possesses multiple ones. Take the analogy of ten coins as conditions: in its own substance, the coin is originally one; when corresponding to two, the first one is then designated as the two-one; when corresponding to three, it is the three-one, and so on up to corresponding to ten, where it is the ten-one. Hence there are multiple ones. If this single condition did not possess multiple ones, then assistance and correspondence would not be pervasive, and conditioned origination would not be established. As for each one possessing all: since one has ten, two, three, four, and so forth also each have ten; hence it is said, 'Each one possesses all.' As in the analogy of the ten coins, among the inexhaustible distinct phenomena of the dharmadhātu, each pervades and corresponds; therefore, each one possesses the distinct phenomena of the dharmadhātu. As for the third, the meaning of co-presence without obstruction: the single one and multiple ones being unimpeded and free generally explains that desiring many, it is constantly many; desiring one, it is constantly one—hence it is called free. 1. Either the entire substance pervades and corresponds; 2. Or the entire substance completely abides; 3. Or both co-exist, meaning both abiding in itself and pervading and corresponding co-exist, and both the single one and the multiple ones also co-exist; 4. Both are negated, because by co-existing, they mutually identify with and eclipse each other: abiding in one is pervading and corresponding, not abiding in one; pervading and corresponding is abiding in one, not pervading and corresponding; 5. Or they are combined, combining the previous four propositions to form the sphere of understanding; 6. Or they are completely separated, completely separating from the previous five to form the sphere of practice. Regarding the fourth, the meaning of mutual entry among different approaches: Mutually relying on and sustaining means that because these are conditioned origination's one and many, they are not a one and many with fixed natures. If the one had a fixed nature, it would not depend on the many; if the many had a fixed nature, they would not depend on the one. Now, because the one has no fixed nature, it arises provisionally through the many; because the many have no fixed nature, they are born through the one. It is through the meaning of equality in lacking nature that conditioned origination is established. If there were a one that could be one, this would be a one with intrinsic nature; if there were many that could be many, this would be many with fixed nature. If they were many with fixed nature, the many would not depend on the one; if it were a one with fixed nature, the one would not depend on the many. Now, because of the many there is one, this one is not one by itself; because of the one there are many, these many are not many by themselves. These many are then inefficacious, and this one is not one by itself; this one is then inefficacious. The inefficacious follows the efficacious, and the one and many mutually subsume each other. Therefore, any single assembly of the Buddha is all assemblies of the Buddha; all Dharma assemblies are a single Dharma assembly. Hence, this single Dharma assembly does not move yet is constantly pervasive, is not divided yet is constantly manifold. The earlier and the later mutually establish each other; how could one not believe this? Furthermore, regarding the former one viewed against the many: on the side of upholding, the one can subsume the many; on the side of relying, the one can enter the many. As with one viewed against the many, there are relying and upholding: having reliance means that the many uphold, so that the one is established; having upholding means that the one is efficacious, serving as the reliance for the many. Speaking of complete efficacy establishes upholding above; speaking of inefficaciousness establishes reliance above. Speaking of constantly containing the many within oneself means that the one is efficacious as an upholder, being able to subsume the many; speaking of secretly entering oneself into the many means that the one is inefficacious as a relying factor, thereby entering the many. Co-presence and double negation mean that the one subsuming the many is the first proposition; the many subsuming the one is the second proposition; co-presence is the third proposition, meaning that when the one subsumes and the one enters, the many also subsume and the many enter; double negation is the fourth proposition: because the one subsumes and enters, the many subsume and enter, so the one subsuming and entering is negated; because the many subsume and enter, the one subsumes and enters, so the many subsuming and entering are negated—hence called double negation. Contrasted with the previous two distinct propositions, there are four propositions, which can also form six: 5. Both illuminating the previous four, forming the sphere of understanding; 6. Suddenly cutting off the previous five, forming the sphere of practice. Regarding the fifth, the meaning of mutual identity among different substances: On the side of what can give rise, there is substance; on the side of what is given rise to, there is no substance. Just as it is said, 'Phenomena arise from conditions; these phenomena are empty,' the intended meaning is that what is produced is empty. Emptiness is the meaning of lacking substance. If they define and eclipse each other, the condition that can give rise faces what is produced and eclipses that which is produced, causing it to lack substance. The statement that because the one has substance, it cannot coexist with the many having substance addresses an objection: 'Both one and many have the two aspects of having substance and lacking substance; why speak solely of the one having substance?' Therefore, this is now resolved by explaining: Because the meanings of existing and lacking cannot coexist simultaneously, now the one is on the side of what can give rise, and the many must be what is given rise to. If it were not so, what can produce and what is produced would not be established, and conditioned origination would also be ruined. Therefore, 'there is no one that is not many' means that this one is the many; 'there are no many that are not one' means that these many are the one.