華嚴經 品二十七 十定品 · 第四 清淨深心行大三昧Avataṃsaka Sūtra · The Ten Samādhis · The Fourth, the Great Samādhi of the Practice of the Pure Deep Mind

The Question This Samādhi Must Answer

The question of the fourth samādhi is “What is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva’s samādhi of the practice of the pure deep mind?” — what is asked is still ‘what is it called,’ not ‘how is it cultivated to completion.’ So the whole passage that follows sets out the character of this samādhi.

The name has three joints, and each has to be read open one by one. “Pure” does not mean that the mind has been washed clean; read the text below and you will see: the purity meant is that non-clinging by which, as to the buddhas’ appearing and their nirvāṇa, “nothing whatever is obtained.” “Deep mind” is said over against a floating mind: a floating mind turns after the marks, while the deep mind offers without end and does not turn after the marks. The graph “practice” matters most of all — this samādhi is not a sitting still and not moving; from beginning to end the whole passage is doing things: offering, paying homage, asking after the Dharma, praising the buddhas, and not one of them is left out.

Here is the place where it is easiest to read wrongly. Hearing “deep mind,” a person thinks of some very deep feeling, and then this samādhi turns into a matter of the density of an emotion. But the deep mind the sūtra gives is precisely this: within the fullest offering, the marks of the buddhas are not obtained. Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu outlines this samādhi in the two parts of “the practice of the deep mind within the samādhi” and “the practice of the deep mind on rising from the samādhi,” and both parts are tied to the one graph “practice,” which proves that the eye of this samādhi lies in practice and not in feeling. Brought down to use: when you read the two graphs “deep mind” in the Huayan, look first at what business follows them, and do not begin by guessing at what mood it is.

Raising What Is Inward: What Is Known Is Buddha-Bodies Equal in Number to Sentient Beings, What Is Seen Exceeds the Number of Dust Motes

The sūtra text begins by setting up the object faced: “he knows the bodies of the buddhas to be equal in number to sentient beings, and the measureless buddhas he sees exceed in number the dust motes of asaṃkhyeya worlds.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu outlines this as ‘first, the raising of what is inward’ — before the offering is raised, the buddhas to be offered to are first raised up.

The question to ask is: why are the buddha-bodies numbered by the number of sentient beings?

Because the endlessness of the offering below must first have an endless object over against it. That the number of the buddha-bodies equals the number of sentient beings is to say that wherever there is a sentient being there is a buddha-body — the buddhas offered to are not somewhere else, they are upon the very number of the beings to be delivered. And the measure of what is seen goes one layer further: not merely asaṃkhyeya worlds, but as many as the dust motes into which that many worlds have been ground. Huayan counting has always driven “number” to the point where it fails.

One misreading has to be cleared away: this is not saying that the bodhisattva has seen a great heap of buddhas, so many that it may be boasted of. The sūtra uses the two graphs “know” and “see,” and not the graph “obtain”; and below it says outright that of the buddhas’ appearing and nirvāṇa nothing is obtained. The vastness of the measure seen is there to give weight to the “nothing obtained” that comes after — if one saw a single buddha and said nothing was obtained, the words would be light; seeing more than the number of dust motes and still obtaining nothing, the words carry weight. Brought down to use: when you read the great numbers of the Huayan, do not stop at astonishment, but read on and see which clause they are gathering force for.

Offering by Outward Things: Nine Clauses of “And Makes Offering” Laid Out to the Utmost

Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu outlines the offering in two, the first being ‘the practice of offering by outward things.’ The sūtra begins from wondrous incense and passes through wondrous flowers, jeweled canopies, supremely wondrous articles of adornment, scattered jewels, the adorning of the places where the buddhas walk, maṇi treasuries, and food and drink from the heavens, and gathers all up at the last with “as for all the manner of supremely wondrous articles of offering in all the buddha-lands, he is able by his spiritual power to gather them all in everywhere and make offering of them” — the clause “and makes offering” appearing nine times in all.

The question to ask is: what is aimed at by listing them out one clause after another like this?

What is aimed at is ‘exhausting.’ Each clause changes only the thing offered, and the pattern of the clause is never altered, so that reading down it is like handing things up one after another, until at the last clause he simply gathers in by spiritual power every article of offering in every buddha-land — by then it is no longer a matter of anything being left unoffered; even the business of ‘what else is there’ has been gathered in. Li Tongxuan’s Lun sums it up as “the offering of the ten things, incense and flowers and canopies and the rest,” which, as the rubric he sets up for this passage, is a raising of it by kinds.

One misreading has to be cleared away: this passage must not be read as if the buddhas needed these things. What the sūtra lays out is the endlessness of the mind that is able to offer, not the costliness of the things offered — and among them the food and drink “that flows forth from the spiritual power of the buddhas” and the articles of offering “gathered in everywhere by his spiritual power” have their origin in the power of a buddha to begin with, so that what is offered is precisely what the buddhas gave. Brought down to use: the sense of offering lies in the mind’s being everywhere and exhausting itself, not in the many and costly things; the reader need form no thought here of reaching after what is above him.

Offering by the Three Actions: Reverence and Homage, Asking After the Dharma and Praising the Buddhas — the Business Grows More Intimate

Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu outlines the second of the offerings as ‘the practice of offering by the three actions, reverence and the rest.’ The sūtra begins again with the same clause, “at the place of each and every one of those tathāgatas,” and then speaks of being reverent and paying honor, bowing his head in homage, casting his whole body upon the ground, asking after the Buddha-dharma, praising the evenness of the buddhas, extolling their merit, on to “he enters into the great compassion into which the buddhas enter, and gains that even and unobstructed power of a buddha.”

First the question: the outward things having already been offered to the full, why must another section be set up?

Because what was offered in the former section was things, while what is carried out in this one is body, speech, and mind — bowing his head in homage and casting his whole body upon the ground are of the body; asking after the Buddha-dharma and extolling merit are of speech; being reverent and paying honor and entering the buddhas’ great compassion are of the mind. The offering of things, however exhaustive, cannot stand in place of the intimacy of body and mind; and so the sūtra leads both sections with the same clause “at the place of each and every one of those tathāgatas,” showing that the object faced is the same buddha while what is brought to him is of two layers.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “praising the evenness of the buddhas” is not praising the buddhas for being fair; it is praising the evenness that the buddhas have realized. The clause following, “he gains that even and unobstructed power of a buddha,” comes directly out of this — what is praised is precisely what is gained. Brought down to use: what this section gives is a sequence — first showing reverence by things, then paying homage with the body, then asking after the Dharma with speech, and at last entering the buddhas’ great compassion with the mind. Of these four layers, if one is missing the offering is not complete.

The Deep Mind: In a Single Thought He Diligently Seeks, and Yet of the Marks of Appearing and of Nirvāṇa Nothing Whatever Is Obtained

Here the sūtra turns: “In the space of a single thought, at the place of every buddha he diligently seeks the wondrous Dharma; and yet as to the buddhas appearing in the world and entering parinirvāṇa, of marks such as these there is nothing whatever obtained.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu outlines the section before as ‘the raising of practice’ and this clause as ‘the deep mind’ — the deep mind comes out of just this turn.

First the question: having offered thus and sought thus, why is it said that of the buddhas’ appearing and nirvāṇa nothing is obtained?

Because what is offered and what is sought are business, while the appearing and the nirvāṇa are marks. Business can be carried out with the whole of the mind; marks cannot be grasped and dwelt in. A buddha appears in the world, a buddha enters upon his passing away — in the business of it this is plainly so; but if upon this one sets up a fixed mark of ‘there is a buddha appearing in the world,’ ‘there is a buddha passing away,’ then the buddha offered to becomes a thing that arises and ceases. The sūtra does not deny the business; it says only that of the marks “nothing whatever is obtained” — and the single graph “yet” cuts business and marks into two layers.

One misreading has to be cleared away: obtaining nothing is not the same as being indifferent. The clause immediately above is “diligently seeks the wondrous Dharma,” and the diligence and the not-obtaining are within one and the same thought — it is not that he lets go after he has finished seeking; it is that in the very seeking he does not dwell. Brought down to use: the place where doing is at its fullest is precisely the place where clinging most easily arises; what this clause teaches is to put the whole of one’s strength into the business, and not to stake one’s mind upon the marks.

The First Simile: The Scattered and Stirring Mind Does Not Know Its Object — a Simile for According with the Real and Being Without Thought

The sūtra sets it forth with a first simile: “It is as with a scattered and stirring mind that discerns the object it takes as its support: when the mind arises it does not know upon what object it has arisen, and when the mind ceases it does not know upon what object it has ceased.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu establishes for it the name ‘the simile of the deluded thought that does not know,’ and judges what it sets forth to be ‘according with the real and being without thought.’

First the question: to take a scattered and deluded mind for a simile — is this not setting forth the superior by means of the inferior?

A simile does not take the whole; it takes a single point. What is taken here is the “not knowing” — a scattered and stirring mind, at the moment its object arises and ceases, has never known what it was resting upon. Its non-discriminating is an inability to discriminate. The bodhisattva’s “never discriminating the marks of the Tathāgata’s appearing in the world and of his nirvāṇa” is like it in outward shape, while the ground of the two is wholly different: the one cannot, the other does not dwell. With the two graphs “according with the real” Chengguan points out the dividing line — being without thought because of according with the real, not being without thought because of dullness.

One misreading has to be cleared away: one must not take this as saying that cultivation consists in making the mind scattered and unknowing. The joining clause that immediately follows in the sūtra is “he never discriminates,” and the graph “never” is a word of decision, not a word of vagueness. Brought down to use: with every simile that sets forth the true by means of the false, one must first ask ‘which single point is being taken’ — take the wrong point, and the simile becomes an absurdity.

The Second Simile: The Heat-Haze in the Midday Sun, Five Pairs of Twofold Negation and Yet the Mark of Water Displayed

The second simile is the most amply laid out passage of this section: the heat-haze “is not born of the clouds, it is not born of a pool, it does not rest upon the land, it does not abide in water”; then “it is neither existent nor nonexistent, neither good nor evil, neither clear nor turbid”; then, inserted in the middle, “it will not serve for drinking or rinsing, nor can it be defiled”; and then it closes with “it has neither substance nor absence of substance, neither taste nor absence of taste” — and then it turns: “only because of causes and conditions does it display the mark of water and become discerned by consciousness.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu establishes for it the name ‘the simile of the heat-haze that looks like water,’ and judges what it sets forth to be ‘comprehending the false as the same as the true.’

First the question: having shut it off so completely, why must it say at the last that the mark of water is displayed?

Just because what is shut off is the nature, not the mark. The four negations shut off whence it comes; the several “neithers” shut off its own substance, its qualities, its usability; and shutting off as far as “neither having substance nor lacking substance,” it will not even allow “nonexistent” to be set up. And the last clause says, on the contrary, that it displays the mark of water and is discerned by consciousness — the displaying is a real displaying, only that what is displayed has no substance. So this simile is not saying ‘the heat-haze is false’; it is saying: it is plainly displayed, and sought for it is not obtained.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “neither existent nor nonexistent” must not be read as a kind of hedging. The sūtra uses twofold negation to shut off the setting up of either side; it is not choosing a middle between the two sides. If one sets up a thing called “neither existent nor nonexistent” and stands it there, that becomes a thing once more. Brought down to use: the Huayan’s negating predication, when it has shut off everything, always leaves one graph, “display”; whoever can only negate and cannot say what is displayed has read negating predication into a dead thing.

The Joining of the Simile: Seen from Afar It Looks Like Water and Drawn Near It Is Not There; Having Marks and Being Without Marks Are Alike Discriminations of the Mind That Forms Conceptions

The end of the simile carries its own turn: “seen from afar it looks like water and the conception of water arises, and drawn near it is not there, and the conception of water goes out of itself.” And then comes the joining: “So it is with this bodhisattva-mahāsattva: he does not obtain the marks of the Tathāgata’s appearing in the world and of his nirvāṇa. The buddhas’ having marks and likewise their being without marks are alike what the mind that forms conceptions discriminates.”

First the question: why does the joining not stop at ‘the marks of appearing and nirvāṇa are not obtained,’ but add the clause “having marks and likewise being without marks”?

Because, once ‘existent’ has been broken, a person will at once fall back and settle himself upon ‘nonexistent’ — since no buddha ever truly appeared in the world, then let there be no buddha appearing in the world. The sūtra will not allow it: having marks is a discrimination of the mind that forms conceptions, and being without marks is a discrimination of that mind as well. Both extremes come out of one source, and to break the one while keeping the other is as good as breaking nothing. This is the tightest clause of the whole section, and it is where the real sense of the two graphs “pure” lies.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “are alike what the mind that forms conceptions discriminates” is not saying that the buddhas do not exist. What the sūtra says is that the two marks, “having marks” and “being without marks,” both come out of conception; it has said nothing whatever about how the substance of a buddha stands — just as, at the moment the conception of water goes out of itself, the heat-haze is still there. Brought down to use: whenever you read words like ‘it is all discrimination,’ look first at which thing is being sent away; what is sent away here is the two marks, not the buddhas.

The Naming: Having Entered It He Rises from It, and Having Risen from It He Does Not Lose It

Here the sūtra names this samādhi: “This samādhi is named: the practice of the pure deep mind.” And at once it gives the most pivotal formulaic sentence of this samādhi — “As for this samādhi, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, having entered it, rises from it, and having risen from it, does not lose what he has gained.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu takes this sentence for a boundary and judges what follows it to be ‘the practice of the deep mind on rising from the samādhi.’

First the question: it being named a samādhi, why must it speak of “rising”?

Because the skill of this samādhi lies not only in being able to enter, but still more in not losing after rising. In the concentrations of the world the realm arises together with the concentration, and when one comes out of the concentration the realm perishes; what is gained in this samādhi — the buddhas seen, the Dharma heard — is still there after one has come out. Three phrases, six graphs, drawn into one line: having entered it he rises from it, which is not to be sunk in the samādhi; having risen from it he does not lose it, which is not to come out empty.

One misreading has to be cleared away: not losing does not mean that the realm of the concentration is still there before one’s eyes. The simile below says it plainly — at waking, “the realms within the dream are no longer there,” and yet the recollection is not forgotten; what is not lost is the holding in memory, not the mark of the realm. Brought down to use: to test whether a stretch of study has come down to solid ground, look at what is left after one comes out of it; if the moment one leaves the seat one is no different from before one cultivated, then one has entered and been unable to rise, or risen and already lost.

The Third Simile: Awakening Out of Sleep and Recalling the Things One Dreamed

The sense of rising from the samādhi is made clear by one simile: “It is as when a person awakens out of sleep and recalls the things he dreamed: though at waking the realms within the dream are no longer there, he is yet able to call them to mind, and in his mind they are not forgotten and lost.” Li Tongxuan’s Lun outlines this section as ‘the part of the simile in which entering the samādhi is like recalling without forgetting the realms seen within a dream, and speaking of them well for others.’

First the question: taking a dream for a simile — is it saying that what is seen within the samādhi is the same as an empty dream?

The simile still takes only a single point — it takes ‘the realm gone and the recollection remaining.’ After the dream is over, of the mountains and rivers and persons within the dream not one is left, and yet the man plainly remembers what he dreamed; memory does not perish because the realm has perished. With this the sūtra sets forth the holding in memory without forgetting, after rising from the samādhi, of the buddhas seen and the Dharma heard; and what it takes is precisely this drop between the two.

One misreading has to be cleared away: one must not take the two graphs “like a dream” and turn them about to say that the buddhas seen within the samādhi are unreal. The sūtra never sets forth the buddhas seen by means of the dream; it sets forth “rising from the concentration” only by means of “awakening out of sleep” — the vehicle of the simile and its subject answer to one another item by item: sleep answers to the concentration, waking to the rising, and recalling the things dreamed to recalling the Dharma seen. Brought down to use: in reading a simile, first align the two sides item by item, and do not force together the parts that do not align — this is the method for reading every simile in the piece, and the first two similes are the same.

The Joining of the Simile: Seeing the Buddhas and Hearing the Dharma, Rising from the Concentration, Holding It in Memory Without Forgetting

The joining clause is: “So it is with the bodhisattva-mahāsattva: he enters the samādhi, sees the buddhas and hears the Dharma, and rising from the concentration he holds it in memory without forgetting.”

First the question: it was said just above that “he does not obtain the marks of the Tathāgata’s appearing in the world and of his nirvāṇa,” and here it says “sees the buddhas and hears the Dharma” — do the two sayings contradict one another?

They do not. What is sent away is the “marks” of appearing and nirvāṇa — that discrimination which sets a buddha inside a frame of arising and ceasing; what is kept is the seeing and the hearing within the samādhi. Obtaining nothing and yet seeing plainly is just as the heat-haze is without substance while the mark of water is displayed. If, because nothing is obtained, one were to say that nothing at all is seen, that would be pushing negating predication too far, and the sūtra itself will not allow it.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “holds it in memory without forgetting” is not a matter of a good memory. What is held in memory is the Dharma, not a quantity of sentences; the text that comes next is the opening up and making clear to the assemblies, from which one may know that what is held is that clarity which can be spoken out. Brought down to use: here concentration and wisdom are joined at the seam — if what is seen within the concentration cannot be carried out beyond the concentration and cannot be spoken to others, the skill of this samādhi has not been accomplished.

Benefiting Others: Opening Up and Making Clear to the Assemblies, Adorning the Buddha-Lands, Comprehending the Sense and Bent

From here the sūtra turns to the use: “And with this Dharma he opens up and makes clear to the great assemblies gathered in every place of awakening, he adorns the lands of all the buddhas, he comes to comprehend clearly the measureless senses and bents, and all the Dharma-gates likewise become pure.” Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu judges here, within the joining, that “above, it makes clear the practice of offering that benefits oneself; here, it makes clear the practice of opening and expounding that benefits others.”

First the question: why, after the holding in memory, is the first business the opening up and making clear to the assemblies?

Because the head and the tail of this samādhi complete one another just here. The opening of the whole section is the offering to measureless buddhas — that is the practice that benefits oneself; and this is the opening and expounding to the assemblies — that is the practice that benefits others. Between them stand a “nothing obtained” and a “not lost”: just because nothing is obtained of the marks, what is expounded does not become the view of one school; just because, having risen, he has not lost it, what is expounded has something real to be said.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “he adorns the lands of all the buddhas” is not another business of going off to decorate lands; it is one thing with two faces together with the opening up and making clear to the assemblies — where the Dharma reaches, there the land is adorned. And the two clauses “he comes to comprehend clearly the measureless senses and bents” and “all the Dharma-gates likewise become pure” speak of the clarity and purity of the one who is able to expound, and do not boast of his breadth. Brought down to use: to study and not be able to share it with others leaves the latter half of this samādhi with nothing to rest on; and before sharing it with others, one should first ask oneself whether what one holds is clear and whether it is pure.

The Concluding Benefit: He Kindles the Torch of Great Wisdom and Makes the Seed of the Buddhas Grow

The sūtra concludes the benefit in four clauses: “He kindles the torch of great wisdom, makes the seed of the buddhas grow, is complete in being without fear, is unexhausted in eloquence, and reveals and expounds the profound treasury of the Dharma.”

First the question: why are these clauses tied on after the benefiting of others, and not tied on within the samādhi?

Because they are all of them things that can be seen only after they have been spoken out. Wisdom is like a torch, and it is kindled in order to give light to others; the growing of the seed of the buddhas grows within the continuum of those who hear the Dharma; being without fear and eloquence are tested only at the moment the mouth is opened and the expounding begins — of these four matters not one is a mark of enjoyment for oneself. The last clause, “reveals and expounds the profound treasury of the Dharma,” gathers all up and returns to speech, answering head to tail with “with this Dharma he opens up and makes clear to the great assemblies gathered in every place of awakening.”

One misreading has to be cleared away: “makes the seed of the buddhas grow” is not a matter of raising the number of a few more practitioners; it is the making of the lineage of the buddhas to be unbroken. The sūtra uses the one graph “grow,” which carries the sense of continuous increase, not the sense of contriving. Brought down to use: when you read the concluding clauses of benefit in the Huayan, look whether what they conclude is one’s own realization or the transforming of others — this whole section belongs to the transforming of others, from which one may know that the final bent of the fourth samādhi does not lie in the beauty of a realm of concentration.

The Concluding Name: The Skillful Wisdom of the Fourth Samādhi

The last sentence: “This is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva’s skillful wisdom of the fourth great samādhi of the practice of the pure deep mind.” It clasps the opening question head to tail, and it is the fixed pattern common to every section of the ten samādhis — opening with “what is” as the question, closing with ‘this is …’ or ‘this is named … the skillful wisdom’ as the answer (the tenth samādhi closes in a different form; see the apparatus).

It is worth noticing that the concluding name has two things more than the name at the asking. First, at the asking it was named “the samādhi of the practice of the pure deep mind,” and at the concluding it is “the great samādhi of the practice of the pure deep mind,” with the one graph “great” added. Second, the close is tied off with the three graphs “skillful wisdom.” These three graphs are where the whole discourse of the ten samādhis comes to rest: what is accomplished is not the realm of the concentration itself, but that wisdom which is free and at ease within the concentration.

One misreading has to be cleared away: “skillful” must not be read as cleverness of technique. What has been spoken of all along this section — offering at its very fullest while nothing is obtained of the marks, both extremes shut off while the displaying is not obstructed, entering and being able to rise and after rising not losing, the practice that benefits oneself turned into the expounding that benefits others — to come and go among these several layers without obstruction is what is called skillful. Brought down to use: read the section through and then look back at the name of the samādhi, and the five graphs “the practice of the pure deep mind” are no longer the description of a state of mind, but another name for this wisdom.

Lineage

The explanations of the ancient masters upon this passage survive in two tracks. Chengguan’s Huayan jing shu judges of this samādhi that “within it the explanation divides into two,” first making clear the practice of the deep mind within the samādhi and afterward the practice of the deep mind on rising from the samādhi; within the samādhi it divides again into the raising of practice and the deep mind, and within the raising of practice it opens the practice of offering by outward things and the practice of offering by the three actions, while within the deep mind there is first the exposition in terms of dharma and afterward the setting forth by simile, and for the setting forth by simile the names of two similes are established — the simile of the deluded thought that does not know, setting forth his according with the real and being without thought, and the simile of the heat-haze that looks like water, setting forth his comprehending the false as the same as the true — closing with “the text may be understood as it stands”; the practice of the deep mind on rising from the samādhi is then divided into the three joints of dharma, simile, and joining, and within the joining he judges that “above, it makes clear the practice of offering that benefits oneself; here, it makes clear the practice of opening and expounding that benefits others.” The present piece expounds by following that outline.

Li Tongxuan’s Xin Huayan jing lun explains it otherwise, under three gates: explaining the name, explaining the substance and function, and explaining the sense by following the text. Explaining the name, he says that the bodhisattva has already cultivated the principle-wisdom of emptiness and marklessness and, with skillful wisdom, makes offering with a deep mind in added practice, and that in whatever he offers his mind is not ruined, and it is for this that the name is established. Explaining the substance and function, he says that the fundamental wisdom of the dharma-body is the substance, and that raising up the skillful wisdom of means and setting up the offering is the function. Following the text, he outlines at length in four parts — one part in which the name of the samādhi is again raised, one part on offering with the ten things to buddhas equal in number to sentient beings, one part on the simile of the heat-haze in the midday sun, and one part on the simile of recalling without forgetting as in a dream and speaking of it well for others. At the end he further admonishes the one who would enter contemplation to enter first the concentration without thinking and without mind and to gain the principle of the dharma-body, and only then to raise the mind of offering within the fundamental wisdom and the wisdom of means, saying that if he cultivates only the markless dharma-body of emptiness he will be unable to raise up the function of wisdom, and that if he only gives rise to conceptions all along and does not see the markless dharma-body, then it is purely conditioned doing.

The frames of the two masters’ outlines differ: Chengguan takes for his frame the two parts, within the samādhi and on rising from it, and both similes belong alike to the setting forth by simile of the deep mind within the samādhi; Li Tongxuan takes four parts for his frame, so that the simile of the heat-haze and the simile of the dream are each a part of its own, and the one simile of the scattered and stirring mind is not set apart. Further, Chengguan writes the heat-haze with one graph and the base text with another; and Li Tongxuan sums up the offerings as “the ten things,” while in the base text the clause “and makes offering” appears nine times. The four matters are recorded side by side without adjudication, each kept as it stands.

The Yanyi chao has no separate text of explanation upon this passage, and the gap is marked in accordance with fact. What Fazang’s Tanxuan ji and Zhiyan’s Souxuan ji comment upon is the sixty-fascicle Avataṃsaka, and the sixty has no Chapter on the Ten Samādhis, so there is no corresponding text to record. The Jin translation, the sixty-fascicle Avataṃsaka, having no such chapter, this passage has no parallel translation to be collated; the forty-fascicle Avataṃsaka preserves only the last chapter and likewise does not touch it. In the Huayan school’s treatises — the Wujiao zhang, the Shixuan men, the Fajie xuanjing, the Huanyuan guan — no text directly citing this passage is found, and there is no lineage to be attached; all of this alike is marked as it stands.

Two tracks stand side by side, each according to its own outline — and the record of this passage stops at what is actually the case.