華嚴經 品二十五 十迴向品 · 第八真如相迴向Avataṃsaka Sūtra · The Ten Dedications · The Eighth, the Dedication of the Mark of Suchness

Why this section is called “the mark of suchness”

When the ten dedications reach the eighth, the sutra opens by changing its manner of asking: the earlier sections all ask ‘what is it for a bodhisattva-mahāsattva to dedicate in such and such a way,’ while this section alone asks “what is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's dedication of the mark of suchness.” Once the manner of asking changes, the reader ought to pause: what this section has to say is not ‘how one dedicates,’ but ‘what dedication is.’

Where does the name come from? Chengguan explains it thus: roots of goodness joined with suchness make the dedication, and the name is set up from that upon which it depends, so that this name “extends in sense to both what is able and what is object” — it points at once to the mark of suchness depended upon and to the practice of roots of goodness that depends. Fazang's Tanxuan ji puts it still more plainly: the roots of goodness are themselves the mark of suchness, and being dedicated in accord with the principle, it is named the dedication of the mark of the such.

First set aside a misunderstanding. When ordinary people hear “dedication” they think of shifting merit from here to there, as though some sum were being transferred from one account to another. This section is precisely what takes that idea apart. Chengguan, distinguishing the order of the ten dedications, says: the seventh section gathers phenomena back into principle, and so is called equality; this eighth section is where phenomena have been exhausted and principle appears of itself, and so practice stands level with suchness; the ninth raises function from substance, and the tenth has function the same as substance. Fazang's determination runs along the same track. Brought down to the ground, in one sentence: by this section, dedication is not an act, it is roots of goodness showing what they were all along.

Then how are the two graphs “suchness” themselves to be understood? Chengguan sets up five gates of distinction before this passage, and the first gate explains the name: the true is the real, showing that it is not false; the such is the constant, showing that it is without alteration — this is the way the school of dharma-marks puts it. If one follows the school of dharma-nature, then the unaltering is called true and the according with conditions is called such: because it does not alter, it has the sense of ‘not one’ with conditioned dharmas; because it accords with conditions, it has the sense of ‘not other’ than conditioned dharmas. He also cites a line from the Qixin lun, “what has nothing to send away is called true, what has nothing to set up is called such,” saying that this is a sudden disclosing of the true principle purely by way of negating expression. Three ways of explaining stand side by side, each with its own transmission; here they are recorded, and no judgment is made as to which is higher.

The ten clauses of the substance of practice: what the one who dedicates must first be

The sutra, answering the question, does not first answer about suchness; it first answers about the person. “Rightly mindful and clear in understanding, his mind abiding firmly, far removed from delusion” and the string of ten clauses that follows set out the substance of this bodhisattva's practice — the roots of goodness that can be taken up and dedicated grow out of a person such as this.

Chengguan outlines it thus: the first clause is the general one, namely right mindfulness firm and bright; the nine below are the particular ones, and these divide again into three parts. The first three are right mindfulness of awakening — being far removed from delusion is the sense of “clear understanding,” and cultivating with concentrated intent is “right mindfulness”; right mindfulness is concentration and clear understanding is wisdom, and the paired working of concentration and wisdom is the source of the path; being unmoved because he accords with the principle is what is called the profound mind, and deeds cannot be damaged because conditions cannot spoil them, and this is the firm abiding of one's own portion; seeking the Buddha without turning back is the firm abiding of surpassing advance. The next four are right mindfulness of transforming beings: the first clause is the general one, since valiantly seeking to save both self and others is for the sake of the great Dharma; the three below open it out particularly — the paired working of compassion and wisdom is “clear understanding,” advancing in good and removing the outflows is “right mindfulness,” and compassion increasing with wisdom made perfect is “firm abiding.” The last three are right mindfulness of the Three Jewels: first mindfulness of the Buddha, second guarding the Dharma, third faith in the Saṅgha.

Set aside a misunderstanding: these ten clauses are not a list of ten virtues, they are a structure. Concentration and wisdom as root, firm abiding as bone, compassion and vow as direction, the Three Jewels as that to which one returns — with any one of the four layers missing, roots of goodness will not grow into something that can be dedicated. Brought down to the ground: when you ask yourself why your own practice does not move when you dedicate it, most often the fault is not that your vow was not made large enough, but that one of the parts among these ten clauses is empty.

The roots of goodness that are dedicated: ten gates of distinction, gathered back into one without a second

The sutra next says that the bodhisattva “universally contemplates with the eye of wisdom,” sees that all his roots of goodness are measureless and boundless, and sets out nine modes in which roots of goodness are gathered and cultivated — seeking out conditions, procuring implements, ordering and purifying, entering in, single-minded urging, rising up in practice, clear penetration, fine examination, revealing to others — and then lists ten kinds of distinction: gate, object, mark, matter, station, practice, name, discrimination, arising, cultivation.

Chengguan explains these ten clauses one by one: the first is that the ranging through is not of one kind, as with a single entering in — is it by way of the gate of existence? by way of the gate of emptiness? and so on without measure, which is why the girl Compassionate Practice says that the buddhas each caused her to enter this gate of universal adornment by a different gate. The second is that, according to whichever gate it is, what is taken as object differs — a buddha, a dharma, and so on. The third is that upon any one object the appearance differs. The fourth is the matter upon which the mark depends, namely form and mind and the rest. The fifth is that upon any one matter there are many kinds of station. The sixth is the ten thousand practices of giving and the rest. The seventh is the name that expresses. The eighth is discriminating and deciding. The ninth is the giving rise to many kinds of view and knowledge. The tenth is whether concentration or wisdom, and cultivation superior, middling, or inferior.

The vital point lies in how this passage closes: with all these gates and all these distinctions, the sutra gathers them up in a single clause — “all of them are established by the mind that heads toward the vehicle of the ten powers, and all alike are dedicated to the knowledge of all modes, one flavor only without a second.” Chengguan puts it well: since the original intent is such, how could there be no dedicating? The multitude of roots of goodness is a multitude of phenomenal marks; the direction of the mind is one only. Brought down to the ground: you need not first sort out and record your own good deeds by category; look first at whether they are all facing the same place.

The twenty vows dedicating toward awakening

From “taking these roots of goodness and dedicating them in this way” onward, the twenty vows are made for his own person. Chengguan divides them into three parts: the first ten vow the accomplishing of the practice of wisdom, which is the cause and fruit of awakening; the four vows from “may I obtain samādhi” onward pervade everywhere in benefiting beings, which is the cause and fruit of transforming function — first what transforming depends upon, second the time and place of transforming, third knowing the medicine to be applied, fourth recognizing what suits the illness; the six vows from “may I obtain mastery” onward adorn the buddha-lands everywhere, which is the cause and fruit of the pure land — first adorning the phenomenal land by the knowledge of spiritual powers, second adorning the land of the dharma-nature by the knowledge that enters the principle (which is also an adorning by ‘not adorning’), third adorning the Indra's-net land by the knowledge in which phenomena and principle are unobstructed, fourth delivering sentient beings by the function of the three foregoing adornings. He notes further: the first four are the cause complete, the last two the fruit fulfilled.

What makes these twenty vows worth reading vow by vow is this: they are not twenty separate wishes, they are one continuous arc that begins from the three actions of body, speech, and mind, passes through mastery of the dharmas and right mindfulness of the buddhas, and reaches at last to spiritual powers and pure lands. The first three vows speak of the action of body, of speech, of mind — action first, because action is where roots of goodness come to rest; the last two vows speak of displaying the boundless Dharma realm within a single buddha-land and of the masterful great knowledge of spiritual powers that goes everywhere to all the buddha-lands — closing upon the layer-within-layer inexhaustibility of the lands. Brought down to the ground: in making a vow one need not seek the extraordinary; seek first that the three actions be unobstructed. Once the three actions are unobstructed, the seventeen vows that follow are no longer empty talk.

Dedication to sentient beings: eight vows and the ten clauses of “so as to cause”

The sutra turns out the second passage with the single sentence “just as he dedicates in this way for himself, so likewise does he dedicate for all sentient beings.” Chengguan outlines it as three: first taking up what precedes and setting off what follows (taking up the three foregoing passages in reverse order), second the dedication properly displayed from “that is to say” onward, third the general conclusion of that for whose sake it is done, from “Sons of the Buddha” onward.

The eight clauses properly displayed Chengguan divides very finely: the first two vow the leaving of the three obstructions — and he notes in particular that the word “obstructing” takes in the afflictions as well; the next four accomplish the four knowledges; the last two conclude in the two fruits, namely awakening and nirvāṇa. He adds a further remark: awakening is not only the four knowledges, and so the sutra says “measureless.”

After the eight vows, the sutra changes to the pattern ‘so as to cause all sentient beings … therefore’ and says ten more clauses: cooling clouds letting fall the rain of Dharma, constantly meeting the field of merit, entering well the treasury of the mind of awakening, leaving the coverings and entanglements, obtaining the unobstructed knowledge of spiritual powers, obtaining a masterful body, accomplishing the knowledge of all modes, gathering in the many classes everywhere, reaching the ultimate of omniscience, being unshaken in mind. These ten clauses are the “for the sake of which” — the eight vows above say the content of the vow, these ten clauses say the intent with which the vow is made. Set aside a misunderstanding: the vow and the for-the-sake-of are not a repetition; the vow is the fruit sought, and the for-the-sake-of is why it is sought. Brought down to the ground: examine your own vows, and if you cannot say ‘why do I want this,’ then most likely that vow is no more than a wish.

Dedication upon contact with objects: seeing one lovely and delightful thing, making one lovely and delightful vow

The pattern changes in the passage that follows. The bodhisattva sees lovely and delightful lands, gardens and groves, grasses and trees, flowers and fruits, famous fragrances, fine garments, precious jewels, wealth and goods, implements of adornment, or hamlets and villages, or a sovereign's majestic virtue, or a dwelling place apart from clamor — and having seen, he contemplates, gathers goodness, dedicates, and makes thirty-one vows, every one of which says “lovely and delightful.”

Chengguan says this passage is “much the same as the making of vows over against objects in the chapter ‘Pure Practices,’” and explains why: because he sees a lovely and delightful object, a lovely and delightful goodness arises, and therefore he vows the accomplishing of lovely and delightful virtue. He also sets up two ways of reading. The horizontal one is that vows of like outflow are made over against the objects above: the first ten vows are over against lands — seeing a land, he vows that sentient beings may see the land of the dharma-nature; next come the implements of offering belonging to a land; next the pure lands of enjoyment and of transformation generally; and the rest are all matters within a land. He also explains why ten vows alone are made over against a single object — “taking one as the instance for all, there should be many in each case; not wishing to be prolix, what follows grows progressively more abbreviated.” The next three vows are over against gardens and groves, since the outflowless grove of the Dharma is where there is no fear, and dhāraṇī and samādhi are its parks. The next one vow is over against grasses and trees, contemplating well that the five vehicles are like the three grasses and two trees. The next three vows are over against flowers, since the dharmas of spiritual power and the rest are like flowers opening out. The vertical one is that stations are matched so as to display the general vow: the first seven vows are for causing those who have not yet entered the Dharma to enter it, that is, before the grounds; the seventeen vows from “may all sentient beings realize” onward are for causing those who have entered the Dharma to attain the grounds; the four vows after that are for causing those who have attained the grounds to accomplish the station of Samantabhadra; and the last three make plain the fulfilling of the fruit, namely the three virtues of cutting off, of knowledge, and of liberation. Chengguan has a confident word about these two readings — using the two foregoing explanations, the drift of the text has its warrant and the sequence is without discrepancy; this is the skillful discourse of Vajra Banner, and no forced construction of the expositor's own.

Brought down to the ground: this passage is the easiest place in the whole section to lay hold of. When you see something good, the thing to do is not to press down the gladness, but to change the object of that gladness — vowing that all sentient beings may also come by this good thing, and come by it in its ultimate form.

The benefit accomplished by the dedication: roots of goodness cultivated until they give light

After the thirty-one vows, the sutra says that when the bodhisattva cultivates roots of goodness such as these he “obtains the light of wisdom,” is gathered in by the good friend, the sun of the Tathāgata's wisdom brightly illumines his mind and forever extinguishes the gloom of delusion, and so on to “he exhausts the very source of the bodhisattvas' roots of goodness, and with wisdom enters deep into the ocean of great skillful means.”

Chengguan gathers these ten clauses into five pairs: first, by the cause the condition is met — because knowledge is bright within, the friend gathers him in from without; second, by the condition the cause is met — receiving the illumination of wisdom from without, delusion's gloom is extinguished within, and this is the benefit of removing obstruction; third, by diligent cultivation he enters the deeds of the three wisdoms, and this is the benefit of study; fourth, having studied above he realizes knowledge and his own goodness fills out everywhere, and this is the benefit of entering realization; fifth, exhausting the source of goodness and merit and entering the ocean of true knowledge, this is the benefit of accomplishing the two adornments. He also points out where this passage stands within the flow of the text — this benefit “is the very root of directing toward the true limit, since by knowledge one exhaustively enters.” That is to say: the long passage of dedication apart from marks that follows is not a sudden change of key; it is because the knowledge here has become deep enough to enter the true limit exhaustively that the words that follow can be said at all.

The fourteen clauses of the dedication apart from marks: first establishing “the practice that accords with suchness”

From “Sons of the Buddha! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva takes roots of goodness such as these and dedicates them in this way” onward, the text turns to the dedication apart from marks. Chengguan says that this passage differs slightly from the foregoing dedications: the earlier ones mostly gather marks back into nature and only seldom raise marks from nature, while here what is mostly displayed is the unobstructedness of nature and marks taken as the mark of suchness; and he notices one detail — the opening lines of the earlier passages all say “at this time,” while here the word for time is not used, because there is no need to stand over against the foregoing passage in order to accomplish unobstructedness.

This passage first makes the matter plain directly, and divides into two: first making plain the practice that accords with suchness, afterwards making plain the benefit of according with suchness. The practice that accords with suchness divides again into two: first with respect to mind — the paired working of calming and contemplation, attached neither to existence nor to non-existence; afterwards with respect to practice — the paired course of the provisional and the real, going against neither nature nor marks. Within the part on mind, the two clauses “he is not attached to the world and does not grasp at sentient beings” are the statement, and the two clauses “his mind is pure and has nothing it depends upon” are the explanation (the upper clause being that nothing is grasped, the lower that the grasper is left behind); from “he does not forsake the masterful wisdom of any buddha” onward, his not going against is made plain — first not going against the cause, second not going against the Dharma, third not going against the fruit; and the reason he does not go against is that he is not attached to non-existence. Within the part on practice, “although he cultivates right deeds well, he knows that the nature of deeds is empty” establishes the thesis, taking unobstructedness as the thesis; “he understands that all dharmas are like an illusory transformation” is the like simile, for the mark of an illusion exists while its substance is void; and the clauses that follow bring out the reasons one by one — first because dharmas are without nature, second because contemplation is without attachment (these two accord with the suchness that is empty), third because he knows things as they truly are (this accords with the suchness that is not empty), fourth that knowing the marks of the dharmas do not go against one another is the conclusion establishing that there is no going against, and fifth that “he dwells together with the bodhisattvas” is the conclusion establishing what is done, since he is able horizontally to enter one path and vertically to enter one gate.

The ten clauses on the benefit of according with suchness Chengguan gathers into five pairs, saying that they cause four minds to grow ever firmer: first, settling the profound dharma above and purifying sentient beings below, which is the vast mind; second, the two selves not arising and worldly views thereby cut off, which is the unmistaken mind; third, being unstained toward objects and diligently cultivating what transcends the world, and fourth, not depending upon the world with the right path alone made firm — these two pairs are the first mind, since the nirvāṇa of no abiding is first; fifth, deluded views thereby quieted and the substance understood to be the same as the real, which is the constant mind, since constancy is not forsaking the compassion of one substance.

Set aside a misunderstanding: being apart from marks is not doing nothing. Within these fourteen clauses stand “he diligently cultivates every world-transcending dharma,” “he is well able to gather in sentient beings,” “he practices their path” — what is left behind is grasping attachment, not practice.

The extended discourse over against suchness (one): the sense of pervading fullness — first making “pervading” clear

What follows is the main body of the whole section: a hundred clauses of ‘just as suchness is such and such; so too is the dedication of roots of goodness, such and such.’ Chengguan first accounts for why this simile has to be drawn: people have faith in the virtues of suchness but are confused about the virtue of dedication, and so the virtues of suchness are used to liken the virtue of dedication. He also marks out the structure of each gate: within the hundred gates each has two clauses, the upper being the virtue of suchness that is the same, the lower being the virtue of dedication that is able to be the same.

For the first group of ten gates Chengguan matches the sense of “pervading fullness.” Gate one speaks of pervading: suchness pervades all places and is without bound, and so too is the dedication of roots of goodness. Chengguan explains this gate as “displaying that it is within conditions, and therefore there is nothing it does not pervade” — suchness is not some thing hiding outside phenomena, it is right there within dependent arising, and so there is nowhere it does not pervade; and since dedication is of one substance with it, there is nowhere it does not reach. Only when this one clause has been established do the ninety-nine gates that follow have a place to stand.

Gate two speaks of having the true as its nature, which Chengguan explains as “making plain that it does not alter”; gate three speaks of constantly guarding its own nature without change, which Chengguan explains as “making plain that according with conditions is precisely not altering,” which is why the sutra uses the four graphs “constantly guards its own nature.” Gate four shows its nature (having the naturelessness of all dharmas as its nature) and gate five shows its mark (marklessness as its mark) — Chengguan says these first five gates are “throughout set forth with respect to suchness itself,” all spoken of suchness in its own right. Gates six and seven then “are spoken over against knowledge, and are therefore the object of knowledge”: attaining it, one in the end does not turn back; and it is the place where all the buddhas walk. Gate eight most needs attention, which Chengguan explains as “displaying that suchness, being no object, is the object” — one must forget the object to accord with the object that is suchness, since the original nature of suchness is not something established; gate nine is “precisely suchness established,” and gate ten is “precisely the sense of the constancy of the such.”

Within this one group, substance, non-alteration, according with conditions, nature, mark, the object of knowledge, the object that is no object, establishment, and constancy follow in good order. Brought down to the ground: in reading these hundred clauses do not seize on the meaning clause by clause; look first at how every ten clauses change the angle.

The extended discourse over against suchness (two): the sense of the most surpassing — so great that nothing can be set beside it

For the second group of ten gates Chengguan matches the sense of “the most surpassing,” and himself adduces two of them as evidence: “none can measure it” and “nothing can be set beside it.”

Gate eleven speaks of none being able to measure, and the virtue of dedication is then “equal to the realm of empty space, exhausting the minds of sentient beings, none can measure it” — note that the sutra lays the measuring rod upon the minds of sentient beings: it is not that it is great up to some number, but that wherever there is a mind that could measure, it is already beyond. Gate twelve speaks of filling all things, which Chengguan explains most finely: what is called filling is that whether form or mind, whether great or small, and so on down to the finest mote and the briefest instant, all are perfectly full, and not full by portions; because suchness cannot be divided, and to divide it would be an excess of many. He also strings this gate together with several later ones — precisely because this is so, gate forty says that it is not apart from the dharmas and that the dharmas, according with suchness, pervade a single mote, and only so does the fruit of the station come to have the sentence “within a single pore it is able to contain all the lands everywhere.” Gate fourteen speaks of nothing being able to be set beside it, and Chengguan explains it in one stroke: because the dharma-nature does not stand alongside the true — it is not that there is nothing that can match it, but that there is simply no second thing that could be placed beside it for comparison.

As for the rest — gate thirteen, constantly abiding and inexhaustible; gate fifteen, substance and nature firm; gate sixteen, unable to be broken (Chengguan says gates fifteen and sixteen “are both a matter of not being damaged,” differing only as persons and delusions differ); gate seventeen, illumination as substance (which Chengguan explains as “quiescent and yet constantly illumining, knowledge being precisely the function of suchness”); gate eighteen, nowhere it is not; gate nineteen, pervading all times; gate twenty, its nature constantly pure — taking the ten gates together, they say one and the same thing: surpassing is not a surpassing arrived at by comparison.

The extended discourse over against suchness (three): the sense of the surpassing outflow — the teaching and the eye that flow out from the principle

For the third group Chengguan matches the sense of “the surpassing outflow,” himself adducing the two gates “unobstructed with regard to the dharmas” and “the eye of the multitude of dharmas.”

Gate twenty-one speaks of being unobstructed with regard to the dharmas, and dedication is then “moving through all things everywhere and unobstructed.” What is called the surpassing outflow is that the teaching which flows out from suchness is the most surpassing; the teaching being unobstructed, practice too is unobstructed. Gate twenty-two speaks of being the eye of the multitude of dharmas, and dedication is then “able to act as an eye for all sentient beings.” Here Chengguan sets up a question and answer: since gate seventeen has already said that illumination is its substance, how should there be no eye that illumines and beholds? And further, it is by seeing suchness that the Dharma-eye is accomplished. He also cites a line from the Da bore as evidence — the buddhas of the three times all take the emptiness of nature as the buddha-eye. This one question and answer breaks open a point: the eye is not an organ added on, it is the illumination upon the substance falling upon an object.

Gate twenty-five says that suchness “has not a single thing,” and dedication then “knows that within its nature there is not a single thing”; gate twenty-six says that “the nature is not brought forth to view,” and dedication is then “its substance is subtle and hard to see” — these two gates standing beside “the eye of the multitude of dharmas” are just where the tension of this group lies: the very thing that can act as an eye is itself invisible. Gate thirty speaks of being without root, which Chengguan explains as “because there is nothing depended upon before it, that is, because non-abiding is the root” — non-abiding as root is an old saying that Huayan and Prajñā hold in common, and here it is brought out by the thirtieth gate.

The extended discourse over against suchness (four): the sense of being taken in by nothing — carried off by nothing whatever

For the fourth group Chengguan matches the sense of “being taken in by nothing,” himself adducing such gates as “without attachment” and “without abiding.”

Gate thirty-two says that substance and nature are without attachment, and dedication is then “ultimately far removed from every attachment”; gate thirty-five says that substance and nature are without abiding, and dedication is then “no birth-and-death is the place where it dwells.” What is called being taken in by nothing is that it is not gathered in or possessed by anything else. Suchness belongs to no dharma whatever, and therefore the dedication of roots of goodness belongs to no place whatever — this is precisely the enlargement of the earlier “not attached to the world and not grasping at sentient beings.”

Gate thirty-seven says that substance and nature abide securely, and dedication is then “it abides securely in the true.” Chengguan has an important explanation here: what is called abiding securely is that it is because of having no abiding that one abides securely in the true. Non-abiding and abiding securely are not two things — only by reading this gate together with gate thirty-five will one avoid reading “non-abiding” as a drifting instability. Gate thirty-eight says that it is in mutual accord with all dharmas, and dedication is then “in mutual accord with the hearing and cultivating of the bodhisattvas”; gate forty says that it is not apart from the dharmas, and dedication is then “to the end of the future it does not forsake the world” — not being taken in does not amount to having nothing to do with. This group puts “apart from” and “not apart from” into one and the same set, and the reader may not take only one half.

The extended discourse over against suchness (five): the sense of no difference of class — whichever class of dharma it falls upon, it is the same one

For the fifth group Chengguan matches the sense of “no difference of class,” himself adducing the two gates “ultimately inexhaustible” and “without alteration.”

Gate forty-one says that within all dharmas it is ultimately inexhaustible, and dedication is then “its dedication toward sentient beings is without exhaustion.” Chengguan's explanation of this gate has two layers: first, that although it is within the dharmas, the dharmas are exhausted while its substance is constant; second, that being precisely within the dharmas, it is taken from and yet cannot be exhausted — like the empty space within a mustard seed, which, small as the seed is, cannot be taken out to the end. This small simile shifts “inexhaustible” from an inexhaustibility of quantity to an inexhaustibility of kind: it is not that there is so much it cannot be counted, but that it is simply not the sort of thing that can be taken to exhaustion.

Gate forty-nine says it is without alteration, and dedication is then “it has pity and keeps sentient beings in mind, and its mind is without alteration” — this gate brings “no difference of class” down upon the mind of compassion: only what does not alter toward anyone is a true absence of difference. Gate forty-four says it is of one substance and nature with all dharmas, and dedication is then “of one substance and nature with the buddhas of the three times”; gate forty-five says it is not forsaken by nor forsakes any dharma, and dedication is then “it holds and sustains all the dharmas of the world and beyond the world.” Worldly dharmas and world-transcending dharmas are gathered in together here precisely because there is no difference of class. Brought down to the ground: what is called the mind of equality is not forcing different things to be seen as the same, it is seeing that they stood upon one substance and nature from the start.

The extended discourse over against suchness (six): the sense of neither defiled nor pure — not even “pure” is set up

For the sixth group Chengguan matches the sense of “neither defiled nor pure,” himself adducing the two gates “without discrimination” and “substance and nature unborn.”

Gate fifty-eight says it is without discrimination, and dedication is then “toward all the worlds it does not discriminate”; gate sixty says substance and nature are unborn, and dedication is then “by skillful means it manifests the taking of birth, and yet in truth nothing is born.” The sense of neither defiled nor pure is that upon suchness there is originally no defilement to be removed and no purity to be gained — once defilement and purity can be told apart, one has fallen into discrimination.

Several other gates within this group deserve separate mention. Gate fifty-one says the nature is constantly awake, which Chengguan explains as “because it is able to perfume from within and give rise to weariness and to seeking” — awakening is not a beam of light coming from outside, it is the substance and nature perfuming from within, and only so can a person come to feel weariness of the world and longing for what is beyond it. Gate fifty-two says it cannot be lost or damaged, which Chengguan explains as “because, being within birth-and-death, it is stained and yet not stained” — to be within birth-and-death and yet never lost is the very courage of this group. Gate fifty-three, able greatly to illumine, Chengguan says is the sense of the light of great knowledge illumining the Dharma realm everywhere; gate fifty-four, that cannot be spoken, Chengguan marks directly as “the suchness apart from words.” That illumining and being apart from words stand within one group is no contradiction: what is illumined is it, and what cannot be spoken is also it.

The extended discourse over against suchness (seven): the sense of no difference of dharma — every stretch within time is the whole of it

For the seventh group Chengguan matches the sense of “no difference of dharma,” himself adducing the two gates “nowhere it is not” and “dwelling in dharmas that are and are not.”

Gate sixty-one says there is nowhere it is not, and dedication is then “within the buddha-lands of the ten directions and the three times it manifests spiritual powers everywhere, and there is nowhere it is not.” Chengguan takes particular care to distinguish it from gate one: gate one says that pervading everything is precisely being without bound, while this gate is that it is wholly within each and every dharma — the former speaks of breadth, the latter of wholeness. These are the two layers in Huayan's reading of “pervading,” and they may not be run together.

The middle stretch of this group is the six divisions of time: night, day, the half-month and the month, the year, the eons of formation and destruction, and the end of the future, gate joined to gate. Chengguan gives one general explanation: in day and night and so on to the end of the future, one thought and the long eon each gathers suchness in and each depends upon suchness, and therefore thought and eon are able to gather each other in and enter each other. That is to say: it is not because time itself has some spiritual power that times can take each other in; it is because every stretch of time is wholly within suchness. Gate sixty-three is especially worth looking at — suchness pervades the day, and dedication is then to cause all the sentient beings who are in the daytime to see the spiritual transformations of the buddhas, to set forth the wheel that does not turn back, to be apart from stain and pure, with nothing passed by in vain: of what is done in the daytime, not one thing may be let pass in vain. Gate seventy says it dwells in dharmas that are and are not, which Chengguan explains as “since in the principle there is no deluded reckoning, being and non-being are constantly real.”

The extended discourse over against suchness (eight): the sense of neither increasing nor decreasing — purity and equality are not added on

For the eighth group Chengguan matches the sense of “neither increasing nor decreasing,” himself adducing the two gates “substance and nature pure” and “substance and nature equal.”

Gate seventy-one says substance and nature are pure, and dedication is then “able by skillful means to gather the dharmas that aid the path, and to purify every bodhisattva practice.” Note the difference of level within this pair: the purity of suchness is pure from the start, while the purity of practice must “gather the dharmas that aid the path” and only then purify — and this is just where the sense of neither increasing nor decreasing lies: the substance does not increase, while the marks of practice must be cultivated. Gate seventy-five says substance and nature are equal, and dedication is then “it obtains the equal knowledge of the knowledge of all, illumines and understands all dharmas, and is far removed from the various films of delusion.”

Gate seventy-two says substance and nature are bright and clean, and Chengguan explains it graph by graph: the nature being awake is “bright,” being apart from thought is “clean” — bright is awakening, clean is being apart from thought, each graph coming to rest in its own place, and the two are no mere synonym doubled. Gate seventy-four says it is without I and mine, and dedication is then “with a pure mind that is without I and without mine it fills the buddha-lands of the ten directions”; gate seventy-six says it goes beyond number and measure, and dedication then dwells together with the treasury of the dharma of great power of the vehicle of omniscience that goes beyond number and measure, and raises up a vast cloud of Dharma pervading the ten directions. To be without self and yet able to fill the ten directions — this is the most rewarding line in the group: precisely because no self is added in, there is room for the ten directions.

The extended discourse over against suchness (nine): the sense of mastery of knowledge — great enough to be the sphere of a buddha

For the ninth group Chengguan matches the sense of “mastery of knowledge,” himself adducing the two gates “pervading all dharmas” (gate eighty-three, “substance and nature broad and wide, pervading all dharmas”) and “the sphere of the buddhas.”

Gate eighty-seven says suchness is the sphere of the buddhas, and dedication is then “it causes all sentient beings to fulfill every sphere of great knowledge, and extinguishes the sphere of affliction, causing all to be pure.” What is called mastery of knowledge is knowledge attaining mastery over its object — the object being the sphere of a buddha, knowledge reaches everywhere. Gate eighty-three says substance and nature are broad and wide and pervade all dharmas, and dedication is then “its pure mindfulness is unobstructed, and it gathers in everywhere all the broad and wide Dharma-gates.”

Gate eighty-nine most needs opening out: suchness is “neither something that can be cultivated nor something that cannot be cultivated,” and dedication is then “it forsakes every deluded thought and grasping, and does not discriminate between cultivating and not cultivating.” Chengguan explains it in two strokes: that it is not something that can be cultivated is because there is nothing to be attained; that it is not something that cannot be cultivated is because it is the sphere of the sages. This gate answers directly the doubt a reader most easily falls into — if suchness is there from the start, then what is there to cultivate? The answer does not lie in choosing one of the two, but in laying down the very pair of discriminations ‘cultivating and not cultivating.’ Gate eighty-six says substance and nature do not stir, and dedication is then “it abides securely in the perfect practices and vows of Samantabhadra, and is ultimately unstirred” — that not stirring is raised together with the practices and vows of Samantabhadra shows that the not stirring here is not a not acting. Gate ninety says it is without falling back or forsaking, and dedication is then “it constantly sees the buddhas, gives rise to the mind of awakening, adorns itself with the great vow, and forever is without falling back or forsaking.”

The extended discourse over against suchness (ten): the sense of mastery of deeds — coming to rest upon the ground where sentient beings are

For the tenth group Chengguan matches the sense of “mastery of deeds,” himself adducing the two gates “dwelling upon all grounds” and “accomplishing all the buddhas and bodhisattvas.”

Gate ninety-three says suchness dwells upon all grounds, and dedication is then “it causes all sentient beings to forsake the ground of the world, to dwell upon the ground of wisdom, and to adorn themselves with the practice of Samantabhadra”; gate ninety-nine says suchness accomplishes all the buddhas and bodhisattvas, and dedication is then “it gives rise to every great vow and skillful means, and accomplishes the vast wisdom of the buddhas.” What is called mastery of deeds is the doing of deeds within the world and yet unobstructed — and so these last ten gates come to rest, clause by clause, upon sentient beings.

Gate ninety-five speaks of forsaking the outflows. Here Chengguan leaves the one and only Sanskrit sound in the whole section: according to the Sanskrit text it says anāsrava, which here means outflowless; and he explains that graph “forsake” — what is now called forsaking is because the nature forsakes from the start, like the substance of the mind being apart from thought. It is not that there were outflows first and afterwards they were forsaken; there was never anything to forsake.

Gate ninety-six is the longest, and it draws out Chengguan's longest piece of analysis: within suchness “there is not the least dharma able to damage and disorder it so as to make any part of it not awake.” He raises a difficulty against himself: if suchness pervades what has no feeling, does it not then have a part that is not awake? And he sets two positions over against each other — the sutras have the saying that “buddha-nature excludes tiles and stones,” while the treatises have the determination that “among things without feeling it is called dharma-nature; among things with feeling it is called buddha-nature.” His way of resolving it is to speak on three levels: taking nature as following conditions, then what has feeling and what has not differ, and their natures too are diverse; effacing conditions and following nature, then awake and not awake are from the first cut off from the hundred negations and beyond the four propositions of speech; and if the two natures are mutually fused, then there is nothing that is not awake. He also cites the Qixin lun, “because the nature of form is precisely the nature of knowledge it is called the knowledge-body; because the nature of knowledge is precisely the nature of form it is called the dharma-body pervading all places,” as evidence. This passage is the most profound place in the whole section, and what Chengguan sets up is a threefold way of reading, not a single conclusion.

Gate ninety-seven says “in the past not a beginning, in the future not an end, in the present not an alteration,” and Chengguan explains: the past is the first limit and is therefore named beginning; the future is the end and is therefore called the not-yet; the present seems to exist and yet the division between its not-yet and its already has no moment of abiding, and is therefore named alteration; now it is made plain that although suchness pervades within the three times, its substance is cut off from the marks of beginning, middle, and end within the three times, and therefore all three clauses say “not.” Dedication is likewise — although for sentient beings it raises vows newly and newly, it causes them forever to leave the marks of birth-and-death within the three times, and only that is called pure. He also records that the Jin version reads here “in the past not the same, in the future not the old, in the present not other,” and that the Jin version takes the following gate, “within the three times it does not discriminate,” into this one, so that the hundred falls one short and explanations differ in confusion. The difference of joining and dividing here between the eighty-fascicle and the sixty-fascicle texts has been fully discussed by the ancients; here it is recorded, and no judgment is made as to which is higher.

Gate one hundred comes to rest upon “ultimately pure, not keeping company with any of the afflictions,” and dedication is then “able to extinguish the afflictions of all sentient beings, and to perfect all pure wisdom.” Chengguan has a word about this last gate: therefore the last clause says ultimately pure, whose sense is the same as the fruit — the hundred gates, having walked this far, have walked onto the ground of the fruit.

The outlining of the hundred gates: four sayings of the ancients recorded together

How this hundred is to be divided has never been read in only one way. Chengguan set out the sayings of his predecessors in full: Dharma Master Ying divides it ten by ten, matching in order the suchness within the ten stations — first the station of Foremost in Worthiness, second the ten abodes, third the ten practices, fourth the ten dedications, fifth the ground of the purified mind, sixth the ground of the traces of practice, seventh the ground of decision, eighth the ultimate ground, ninth the ground of equal awakening, tenth the ground of buddhahood; further, various worthies each divide it into ten gates, and Xianshou (Fazang) allows none of them; Master Yuan divides it into three, the first ten matched to what is before the grounds, the next eighty-eight clauses to what is upon the grounds, and the last two clauses to the suchness within the ground of buddhahood. Chengguan raises his own difficulty against Master Yuan's division: why should the ground of buddhahood lack the virtues of suchness set out above? Take gate two, “having the true as its nature” — why should it not run through all the stations?

His own way of taking it is “for now to outline it ten by ten, matching it to the ten suchnesses of the ten grounds,” and within each group he adduces one or two gates as warrant; at the end he adds the line “as for the remaining senses among them, they may be taken by class.” He also explains why he dares to divide and yet does not cling to his division: in truth the virtues of the hundred gates must all be run through by one suchness, and how should the virtue of what is able to be such be without differing marks? Differing marks being hard to see, he divides for the time being within what is undivided, and there is no fault in it either.

Fazang's Tanxuan ji has another track: within this passage, first suchness is explained, second the mark of suchness is displayed, third dedication is explained, and therefore it is named the dedication of the mark of the such; further, first the substance of suchness is set forth, second its mark, third its function, which are precisely the three greatnesses of suchness. Li Tongxuan for his part does not follow the outlining of gates at all and sets up the substance otherwise: the eighth, the dedication of the mark of suchness, takes the perfection of the vow as its substance, this station being the same as the eighth ground where knowledge is in the ascendant, since by the vow the deeds of knowledge are drawn forth and great compassion accomplished. The four sayings each have their own warrant; here they are recorded, and no judgment is made as to which is higher.

The benefit accomplished by the dedication: the ten equalities

The hundred gates finished, the sutra draws back to the benefit: when the bodhisattva dedicates in this way, he obtains the equality of all buddha-lands, of all sentient beings, of all bodhisattvas, of all buddhas, of all dharmas, of all worlds, of all bodhisattva practice, of all times, of all deeds and their fruits, and of all the masterful spiritual powers of the buddhas.

The pattern of the ten clauses is uniform: first it says what equality is obtained, then with “because … therefore” it gives the reason for that equality. Obtaining the equality of buddha-lands is because he adorns and purifies all worlds everywhere; obtaining the equality of the buddhas is because he contemplates that the substance of the buddhas is without a second; obtaining the equality of deeds and their fruits is because toward all the roots of goodness of the world and beyond the world he is without stain of attachment and all of them reach the ultimate. Set aside a misunderstanding: equality is not the smoothing away of differences, it is seeing one substance and nature upon the differences — the sutra says “because he knows everywhere that the nature of the dharmas is without alteration,” and since the nature does not alter, dharma is equal to dharma, and this is no hindrance to each of their marks being distinct. This is exactly where the two groups of the hundred gates, “no difference of class” and “neither increasing nor decreasing,” come down to earth.

The fruit of the station: what the one who abides in this dedication obtains

From “when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abides within this dedication” onward is the fruit of the station. Chengguan outlines it as: first taking up the cause obtained, afterwards properly displaying what is obtained; the text has ten clauses, the first general and the rest particular. He also explains two turns of phrase within the particular clauses: the particular clauses all say “measureless,” because they are the same as the vastness and inexhaustibility of suchness; and eight of them all say “obtains a buddha's,” because what is realized is the same as what a buddha realizes and because the work of a buddha is done.

Among the ten clauses, the first of the nine particular ones is “by skillful means he teaches and brings to accomplishment measureless bodhisattvas, and at all times has never rested” — transforming others without rest is the first item of the fruit of the station; and the eight below it form one series of parallels: he obtains the measureless perfect body of a buddha, one body filling and pervading all worlds; the measureless perfect voice, one sound awakening all sentient beings; the measureless perfect power, within a single pore able to contain all lands everywhere; the measureless perfect spiritual powers, placing sentient beings within a single mote of dust; the measureless perfect liberation, upon the body of a single sentient being manifesting the spheres of all the buddhas and accomplishing equal right awakening; the measureless perfect samādhi, within a single samādhi manifesting everywhere all samādhis; the measureless perfect eloquence, speaking a single phrase of the Dharma to the end of the future and yet not to be exhausted; the measureless perfect sentient beings, furnished with the ten powers of a buddha, to the end of the realm of sentient beings manifesting the accomplishing of right awakening. The one and the all take each other in here to the very end — one body, one sound, one pore, one mote, one sentient being, one samādhi, one phrase of the Dharma. This is not the fruit of the station suddenly enlarging; it is the ground-of-fruit redemption of that earlier gate, “filling all things,” a line Chengguan had already drawn when he explained gate twelve.

At the end the sutra concludes the whole section with a single sentence: this is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's dedication of all roots of goodness in accord with the mark of suchness. In the sixty-fascicle text this sentence reads “dedication according with the mark of the such,” and the sentence concluding the name reads “this is named the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's eighth dedication of the mark of the such” — the difference of naming between the two texts is recorded together without adjudication.

The twenty-nine verses

The prose finished, the bodhisattva Vajra Banner, sustained by the Buddha's majestic power, universally contemplated the ten directions and spoke the verses. Chengguan determines that these twenty-nine verses divide into four: the first six are verses on the following of marks, of which the first two are verses on the substance of the practice dedicated and the latter four verses on the practice of dedicating; the next sixteen are verses on the dedication apart from marks, of which the first nine are verses on the extended discourse over against suchness and the latter seven verses turning back to make the Dharma plain directly, “the bodhisattva abides within this inconceivable” and the rest; the six verses from “those sons of the Buddha” onward are verses on the benefit accomplished by the dedication; and the last one verse concludes the intent of the dedication.

The verses match the prose point for point and do not teach again, and only a few places say something the verses alone have, which must be looked at separately. The tenth verse presses the six divisions of time in the prose into four lines — in the night he abides accordingly, in the day too he abides, in the half-month and the month too he abides accordingly, whether year or eon he abides within them all, as suchness is thus so too is the practice; the prose sets six gates side by side, while the verse is read straight through in one breath, and the mutual taking-in of times is here at its most striking. The fourteenth verse uses “as” four times over — as is the mark of suchness so too are the deeds, as is the nature of suchness so too are the deeds, as the nature of suchness is originally true so too are the deeds, the same as suchness; this one verse compresses the pattern of the hundred gates of the prose into a single verse, and is the eye of the whole set of verses. The twenty-second verse says that the bodhisattva contemplates that the mind is not outside, nor can it be found within either, that knowing the nature of his mind has nothing at all, self and dharmas are both left behind and forever quiescent — the passage apart from marks in the prose says “he does not raise the mind that grasps at I and mine,” while the verse sweeps away both the outside and the inside of the mind directly. The seventeenth verse, “he awakens to the true dharma of the Dharma King, and within it is without attachment and without bondage,” and the eighteenth, “to say that the marks of all dharmas are markless — to know marks in this way is to know the Dharma,” are the opening of the latter seven verses that turn back to make the Dharma plain directly.

The verses of this passage in the sixty-fascicle text are in five-graph lines and in the eighty-fascicle text in seven-graph lines, and the pattern and the number of verses each form their own system; the two texts are recorded together without adjudication.

Lineage

Three lines open out downward from this section.

The first is the line of the study of suchness. Chengguan sets up five gates of distinction in this passage, and the second gate, “making plain the kinds,” lists one by one the divisions of suchness as the ancients transmitted them: or one flavor only, without distinction; or divided into two, namely the suchness of the emptiness of person and the suchness of the emptiness of dharmas, and again the established and the unestablished two, and again the empty and the not-empty two; or divided into three, set forth by way of the three natures, as in the Yuqie and the rest; or divided into seven, namely turning, true mark, consciousness-only, the established, wrong practice, purity, right practice — the first four being in order the substance and nature of the four truths, as the Xianyang says; or divided into ten, to be made plain in the ten grounds; or a hundred gates, ten by ten inexhaustible, as the present sutra sets forth. And he lays down a determination: all that has been listed above is one sense among them, and even to say that it runs through all dharmas is still only one sense. This section of the eighty-fascicle Avataṃsaka opens it into a hundred gates, and Chengguan says “all that has been listed above is one sense among them” — the coordinates of the several divisions are here set in order by him once and for all. The third gate, “setting forth virtue and function,” cites the three greatnesses of the Qixin lun — the greatness of substance, of mark, and of function — and from this draws out one sense: going against the true is named evil, and when it accords with suchness it is extinguished; according with the true is good, and when it is called suchness it is great; yet although going against and according differ, apart from suchness there would be nothing to go against, and therefore evil too has suchness as its substance. The ground on which goodness is able to be dedicated to suchness lies right here.

The second is the line of the ten suchnesses of the ten grounds. Chengguan says of suchness that it is “divided into ten, to be made plain in the ten grounds,” and he outlines this hundred gates precisely “so as to match them to the ten suchnesses of the ten grounds” — pervading fullness, the most surpassing, the surpassing outflow, being taken in by nothing, no difference of class, neither defiled nor pure, no difference of dharma, neither increasing nor decreasing, mastery of knowledge, mastery of deeds. These ten senses are the bone of the chapter “The Ten Grounds,” and yet at the station of the ten dedications they appear once beforehand in the form of a hundred gates. Chengguan says “before the grounds one cultivates them throughout, at equal awakening one is equal to them everywhere, and as a Tathāgata one realizes them exhaustively” — and by this the relation of the dedications to the grounds can be seen: it is not that one finishes the dedications and then cultivates the grounds; at the station of the dedications one has already walked once through the ten senses of the grounds, upon suchness.

The third is the line of the Huayan discourse of perfect fusion. Chengguan, explaining the hundred gates, says that if one comes together with this sutra, then within the hundred gates whether substance or mark, whether function or both, in truth each and every one of them runs through substance and the rest, and therefore they become a hundred gates fusing principle and phenomena, so that layer upon layer without end they are like Indra's net; and he says further that the ten suchnesses each contain all, ten by ten making a hundred, in order to display that the virtues of suchness are measureless and boundless, that before the grounds one cultivates them throughout, at equal awakening one is equal to them everywhere, and as a Tathāgata one realizes them exhaustively. The simile of the layer-upon-layer of Indra's net is here no mere figure of speech; it is the way these hundred clauses of the sutra are themselves to be read. Zhiyan's Kongmu zhang gathers the whole chapter in with the three senses of dedication — dedicating to the true limit, dedicating to unsurpassed awakening, dedicating to sentient beings; and in this section the passage following marks is over against awakening and sentient beings, the passage apart from marks over against the true limit, so that the three senses are complete. Li Tongxuan for his part sets out along another road: if one does not dedicate without limit by the great vow, the great compassion, and the great wisdom, but relies only upon uncontrived suchness to purify the afflictions, then one is the same as those of the two vehicles who delight in quiescence, and one is born only in a pure land of a single quarter and does not enter the true gate of the Dharma realm.

The text of this one section is on one side a general catalogue for the study of suchness, on another the forerunner of the ten suchnesses of the ten grounds, and on yet another the very warrant of the Huayan discourse of Indra's net — the eighth, the dedication of the mark of suchness, is just where these three roads come out together.