འཕགས་པ་ཆས་ཀྱ་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད intro: 84000's introduction
The Seal of Dharma intro
- Language
- English
84000's introduction
intro.1
In this short sūtra, the Buddha addresses the nature of monastic ordination according to the perspective of the Great Vehicle and how going forth from the life of a householder can be said to have the qualities of being noble and supramundane. Following the Buddha’s teaching, the two prominent monks Śāriputra and Subhūti engage in a brief discussion on this same topic.
intro.2
The Seal of Dharma is set in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park, outside of Śrāvastī, where the Buddha is teaching a large audience of monks and bodhisattvas. The teaching unfolds as the Buddha replies to a series of questions posed by two prominent monks, Śāriputra and Subhūti. Śāriputra, renowned for his pure observance of monastic discipline, first asks how monastic ordination can be said to have the qualities of being noble and supramundane. After the Buddha replies to Śāriputra, Subhūti asks Śāriputra to explain the Buddha’s instructions. Śāriputra then explains that the Buddha’s paradoxical response—in which he states that only those who do not transcend the qualities of ordinary beings and do not attain the uncontaminated qualities have truly renounced the world—is a teaching on the Great Vehicle doctrine of emptiness. When Śāriputra finishes his explanation, the Buddha grants his approval and tells Śāriputra that this teaching constitutes a “seal” (phyag rgya, mudrā) that one may use to challenge beings who are overcome by pride that is driven by their conventional understanding of renunciation and ordination.
intro.3
Seven hundred monks attain liberation after hearing this teaching, but the controversy over its approach to renunciation and ordination leads a group of one hundred advanced monks to stand up and leave, while an even smaller group of five monks completely reject this teaching and fall into the hell realms. The Buddha takes this opportunity to point out that this understanding of “going forth” (rab tu byung ba, pravrajita) may be considered something that the entire world finds disagreeable, but it is nevertheless true. He explains that since ordinary, worldly beings are ultimately nonexistent, one should not object to this teaching simply because the entire world finds it unacceptable. The doctrine of emptiness is thus applied to the “realm of beings” (sems can gyi khams, sattvadhātu) in exactly the same way that it is applied to the “realm of phenomena” (chos kyi dbyings, dharmadhātu) to discourage any tendency toward rejecting the doctrine of emptiness simply because it does not accord with the way things appear for ordinary beings.
intro.4
To the best of our knowledge, a Sanskrit version of the sūtra is no longer extant, and it was never translated into Chinese. It is thus difficult to determine much about the history of this scripture in India and East Asia, or to evaluate its importance in Indian Buddhist traditions. The only witnesses we have of this sūtra today are the Tibetan translations that were included in the Tibetan Kangyurs.
intro.5
The colophon to the Tibetan translation mentions that it was produced by the translators Lui Wangpo and Lhai Dawa, both of whom lived during the early ninth century ce. This dating is also supported by the text’s inclusion in the early ninth-century Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) inventory of translations into Tibetan.¹ In addition to his work as a translator, Lui Wangpo was also among the first seven monks to be ordained in Tibet. We do not have much personal information regarding Lhai Dawa, but we do know he was a prolific translator who contributed to at least fourteen translations that were subsequently included in the Kangyur, including the Tibetan translation of one of the shorter versions of the Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra (Toh 120) from the Sanskrit.
intro.6
The translation presented here is based primarily on the Tibetan Degé edition, but the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and the Stok Palace manuscript editions were consulted in the case of problematic readings.