維摩經疏卷第三．第六 3.16

3.16

The three clauses below reveal identity with reality in terms of the three meanings of tathatā, dharmatā, and bhūtakoṭi. What is the difference between these three? Within the true Dharma, emptiness is called 'tathatā'; existence is called 'dharmatā'; neither existence nor non-existence is called 'bhūtakoṭi.' How is the true empty? It is free from marks and free from intrinsic nature. How is it not empty? Because it is endowed with buddha-dharmas. The Awakening of Faith says: 'First, truly empty, to reveal the substance of phenomena, because it is empty of delusion. Second, truly not empty, next revealing the substance of phenomena, because it is replete with uncontaminated virtues of nature.' How is it also called neither existence nor non-existence? Existence and non-existence share the same substance, abiding in the real. It also says: dharmatā, tathatā, and bhūtakoṭi—these three are all different names for dharmatā. That which is true and unchanging is called tathatā; that which is the cause of all phenomena is called dharmatā; that which exhausts its boundaries is called bhūtakoṭi. In the first [clause], regarding "Dharma is identical with dharmatā," this directly explains in accord with its marks. All buddha-dharmas within the tathāgatagarbha are called dharmatā. The true Dharma being explained is of one substance with that; being one and not different, it is therefore said to be 'identical.' Regarding "because it enters all phenomena," this explains to reveal identity: 'entering' is like 'conforming.' Because it conforms to all phenomena, it is of the same nature. These 'all phenomena' are precisely the uncontaminated virtuous phenomena of nature, not the empirical phenomena of the five aggregates. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says: 'Dharma is identical with dharmatā because it enters the dharmadhātu.' Question: 'Since the substance of Dharma is one, how can it be called conforming or entering?' Answer: 'Although the essential substance is one, the aspects of meaning are constantly distinct. Because the meanings are distinct while the substance is identical, one can speak of conforming and entering. Below it is all the same.' Regarding "Dharma accords with tathatā," [Hui]yuan says: 'This directly explains in accord with its marks the meaning of not being different from tathatā. Although the dharmadhātu is distinct, the principle of emptiness is not different, hence it is called tathatā. The phenomenon being explained conforms to that principle of tathatā, hence it is called 'according.' This is one with tathatā; why is it said to 'accord'? The meaning is as explained above: because the aspects are distinct while the substance is identical, one can say 'accord.' The previous 'identical' and this 'accord' are merely complementary expressions.' Regarding "having nothing to accord with," this explains and completes the meaning of according: because regarding existent phenomena it has nothing to accord with, it therefore accords with tathatā. Alternatively, it not only does not accord with existence, but also does not accord with non-existence; being free from existence and free from non-existence, it therefore accords with tathatā. It also says: if there were phenomena outside of tathatā, there would be something to accord with; since all is tathatā, there is nothing to accord with. Regarding "Dharma abides in bhūtakoṭi," this directly explains in accord with its marks. Koṭi means boundary, another name for place; the point of utmost exhaustion is called bhūtakoṭi. The true Dharma being explained is precisely in bhūtakoṭi, which is called 'abiding.' The previous 'according' and this 'abiding' are also merely complementary expressions. 'Unmoved by any extremes' explains and completes the meaning of abiding: not being shaken by the two extremes of existence and non-existence, it therefore abides in bhūtakoṭi. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'Prajñāpāramitā is like a great mass of fire, untouchable on all four sides, far removed from the four propositions.' [Fa]tan says: 'Delusion outside the real is precisely an extreme and movement; since delusion is constantly true, there is no extreme that can be moved.'