華嚴經疏 1.7.1

1.7.1

Regarding the second [part], the direct exposition, the Treatise divides it into four sections: first, the section on initiating revulsion practice; second, the section on revulsion practice; third, the section on revulsion; and fourth, the section on the fruit of revulsion. In this ground, one cultivates dhyāna to feel revulsion for and suppress the afflictions; hence it is called the 'Revulsion Ground'. When first entering the mind of the ground, cultivating to initiate that revulsion is called 'revulsion practice'. The prayoga leading to the ground, which initiates that revulsion practice, is called 'the section on initiating revulsion practice'. What is initiated at the beginning of the ground is called 'the section on revulsion practice'. Dwelling properly in the ground and cultivating the eight dhyānas and so forth is called 'the section on revulsion'. Because the ground is perfected, it is called 'the section on the fruit of revulsion'. Furthermore, explaining these four sections, in their proper sequence they are just the prayogamārga, ānantaryamārga, vimuktimārga, and viśeṣamārga, as can be understood. In the first section, there are three [parts]: first, summarizing the preceding and introducing what follows; second, directly explaining the ten minds from 'What are [the ten]...' onwards; third, summarizing the practice and entering the ground from 'A bodhisattva, with these...' onwards. Among the ten minds, the first two form a pair. The first is the mind free of faults: based on the preceding pure precepts, one gives rise to this profound mindfulness to advance toward the pure mind of dhyāna. The second is the mind of established goodness: relying on the Dharma of the Mahāyāna in which one dwells, the mind is firm and immovable; hence it is called 'fervent'. The next three form a pair. Among them, the first two are free of faults, and the latter one produces practice. In freedom from faults, the first feels revulsion toward future desires; hence it is called 'the revulsive mind'. The second renounces present desires; hence it is called 'the mind free from desire'. The future has not yet arisen, so one can only feel revulsion in advance; the present is relinquished face-to-face, which the Treatise calls 'non-greed'. In producing practice, not abandoning what has been cultivated in one's own portion of the preceding ground, one advances to initiate the practices of special progress for this ground; hence it is called 'the non-retrogressing mind'. The next three form a pair. Among them, the first is free of faults, and the latter two accomplish goodness. In freedom from faults, this prayoga profoundly suppresses the afflictions to be abandoned in the third ground, not allowing those defilements to become faults. The Treatise explains: 'The afflictions of one's own ground cannot destroy it; hence it is called the firm mind.' Master Huiyuan explained the preceding two grounds as 'one's own ground', and Master Bian explained the four dhyānas and four formless [attainments] as 'one's own ground'; both, I fear, are inappropriate. In the latter two accomplishing goodness, the first accomplishes the essence of goodness, and the latter accomplishes the function of goodness. Because the essence is accomplished, entering and emerging [from samādhi] are unhindered; this is called 'the brightly radiant mind', meaning the utmost of purity. Samāpatti is translated here as 'equipoise' (dengzhi); this is the name for entering meditative absorption. Because the function is accomplished later, taking rebirth is unhindered; even though reborn in lower grounds, one does not lose the function of meditative absorption. Due to this mellow solidity, it is called 'unsatisfied'. These two kinds of mind are completely and definitively perfected in the fulfillment of the ground below. Below it says: 'Being able to enter and emerge from dhyānas' is the accomplishment of the brightly radiant mind. 'Not taking rebirth through the power of dhyāna liberation' is this very mellow and solid mind. The Treatise below says: 'Because that mellow and solid mind is manifested and perfected here.' The final two minds form a pair. The first is free of faults, which the Treatise calls 'arising dependent on that'—that is, arising dependent on the desire realm. Because of great wisdom, it is not defiled by afflictions; hence it is called 'the supreme mind'. The latter one benefits sentient beings: gathering and transforming them through great compassion, it does not sever the realms of existence; hence it is called 'the great mind'. The prayoga section is finished. In the second, the section on revulsion practice, the Treatise divides it into three: first, explaining revulsion and detachment from the conditioned, called the practice of guarding against afflictions; second, abandoning the narrow and inferior mind, called the practice of guarding against the Hīnayāna; third, seeking the vast above, called the practice of gathering through expedient means. Furthermore, because one gathers and initiates practices such as entering dhyāna through skillfulness, it is called the practice of gathering through expedient means. In the first, there are twenty phrases: the first ten phrases explain the contemplation of impermanence, and the latter ten explain that there is no savior, showing faults in terms of persons. In the first [group of ten], first, a single phrase is general: 'the real characteristic' means that conditioned phenomena are truly impermanent in principle; hence it is called 'the real characteristic'. What the Treatise calls 'the activity of life does not abide': the continuity of conditioned phenomena is called 'life', and their flowing transition is called 'activity'; this very non-abiding is called 'impermanence'. In the specific [phrases], there are two parts: first, 'How is this impermanent?', which asks about those conditioned phenomena that are impermanent; second, 'What is impermanence?', which asks about the meaning of impermanence in those phenomena. In the former, the sūtra has six phrases: the first four pertain to internal, primary retribution, and the latter two pertain to external, environmental retribution. In the former [four], the first pertains to the impermanence of suffering. The Treatise explains: 'Depending on the power of the transformation of the body, three sufferings arise.' The flowing transition of internal retribution is called 'the time of the body's transformation'; the transformation can give rise to suffering, and the transformation is described as 'power'. Since suffering arises dependent on transformation, it is called 'depending on'. Moreover, because it is suffering, its nature is impermanent. Second, the impermanence of non-self: the Treatise's sūtra text lacks this, which means that exceeding adverse conditions impairs life; being without self-mastery, it is non-self; non-self is impermanence. Third, the impermanence of impurity: depending on the power of good or bad food and drink, it causes one's bodily form and complexion to become impure; there is increase and decrease, and increase and decrease are uncertain; this is impermanence. Fourth, the impermanence of not lasting: the Treatise's sūtra text calls it 'impermanence'; this uses coarse impermanence to reveal subtle impermanence. That is, 'depending on the power of not guarding against evils': treading on precipices or ingesting poison is called 'not guarding'; depending on this power, one's body meets premature death. In the latter two pertaining to environmental retribution, the first pertains to the world, and the latter pertains to wealth. In the first, 'depending on the power of the world's formation': because of depending on the power of formation, there is this destruction; hence it is called 'the impermanence of destruction and ruin'. In the latter, because of the power of wealth having no fixed owner and not abiding in one place, it is called 'the characteristic of being untrustworthy'. In the second, 'What is impermanence?', it clarifies the meaning of impermanence. Impermanence may be taken in the sense of arising, ceasing, and transmigration, which applies to both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, as explained elsewhere. Or impermanence may be taken in the sense of non-arising and non-ceasing, which belongs only to the Mahāyāna, as explained in the Vimalakīrti[-nirdeśa]. Or two kinds may be stated, as in this text. Or three kinds may be stated: first, the impermanence of non-existence, regarding the parikalpita-svabhāva; second, the impermanence of arising and ceasing, regarding the paratantra-svabhāva; third, the impermanence of separation and non-separation, regarding the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva: when entangled, it is called 'not separated from defilement'; when emerging from obstructions and separated, it is called 'separated from defilement'; regarding this variability, it is called impermanence. This is fully explained in the Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra, the Buddha-Nature Treatise, and so forth. The above two [approaches] are both taught in the Mahāyāna definitive teaching. 'Short-duration impermanence': because arising and ceasing moment by moment do not pause for an instant. What is here called 'neither arising nor ceasing' means that because it does not definitely arise, it swiftly ceases, and because it does not definitely cease, it arises again; therefore, regarding both being indeterminate, it is also called 'neither arising nor ceasing'. Second, the impermanence of the lack of real establishment of self-nature: because phenomena across the three times lack self-nature, not coming from the prior limit is called 'non-arising'; not going to the posterior limit is called 'non-transitioning'; and it does not abide in the present. Here the three times are explained according to the gateway of continuity. If explained according to the gateway of arising and ceasing, one should say the future is called 'coming' and the past is called 'going'. Because these two gateways exist, it does not contradict other texts. Second, [those] without a savior.