金剛經纂要刊定記 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.1

Recorded by the Śramaṇa Zixuan of Changshui

2.2

From "When about to explain" downward is the second [section]: Laying out the chapters to directly explain [the text].

2.3

Having received unseen assistance, the mind opened and wisdom became clear; laying out the chapters according to the meaning, he thereupon expressed the sūtra's purport. The text has two parts:

“About to” means intending to. Following the commentary of Chenwai of Chongshisi, this only opens four headings. If one followed the Dayun Commentary, it would open six headings: first, clarifying the sūtra's intent; second, clarifying the central doctrine; third, clarifying the sūtra's substance; fourth, distinguishing the time of translation; fifth, explaining the title; sixth, explaining the sūtra text. Although there are now four headings, they contain the meaning of the six headings: this second heading subsumes the second and third of that [commentary], the fourth subsumes its fifth and sixth, and the others subsume single headings, differing only slightly.

2.6

Second, directly explaining according to the headings, in two parts:

2.7

First, general discussion of the various teachings, like many medicines jointly treating one illness. Second, specific demonstration, which is like each individual medicine having its own efficacy. The first has two parts:

2.8

First, responding generally to capacities and conditions.

2.9

As for "repaying the cause": "repay" means repaying, and "cause" means the causal stage. Because when the Buddha first generated the mind at the causal stage, he sought unexcelled complete bodhi and thereupon initiated the four great vows: "Afflictions are boundless, I vow to cut them off; Dharma gates are boundless, I vow to study them; sentient beings are boundless, I vow to deliver them; the Buddha Way is unexcelled, I vow to accomplish it." Among these four, three vows were all completed and only one was not yet fulfilled: the vow to deliver sentient beings, while sentient beings are still clearly present. Now, although he has realized the fruition, he does not abandon the causal approach; he manifests a body to expound the Dharma to rescue the multitude of beings so as to repay his former vow, hence it is called "repaying the cause." Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: "I originally made a vow, wishing to make all beings equal to me without difference. As I formerly vowed, it is now fulfilled: transforming all sentient beings and causing them all to enter the Buddha Way."

2.10

As for "responding to requests": when the Buddha first attained the Way, Brahma, Indra, and others requested him to turn the wheel of the Dharma. Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: "At that time the Brahmā kings, the heavenly Indras, the four heavenly kings who protect the world, and Maheśvara, along with the rest of the heavenly hosts, their retinues in the hundreds of thousands of myriads, reverently joined their palms in obeisance and requested me to turn the wheel of the Dharma." The Tathāgata accepted the request in silence. Having accepted their request, beginning in the Deer Park and ending in the Crane Forest, for forty-nine years he expounded the various sūtras and teachings to rescue sentient beings. Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: "Then in Vārāṇasī I turned the wheel of the Dharma of the four truths," and so forth.

2.11

As for "revealing principle to deliver beings": these two are stated together in sequence, but there are general and specific aspects. In general, the Buddha expounds the Dharma with a single voice, and sentient beings understand each according to their kind. Specifically, expounding the Dharma of the four truths reveals the principle of the voidness of the person, delivering ordinary beings and non-Buddhists; expounding the six pāramitās reveals the principle of the two voids, delivering the indeterminate two vehicles and ordinary beings of sharp faculties to cause them to enter the Great Vehicle way; expounding the One Vehicle teaching reveals the principle of the dharmadhātu, delivering determinate and indeterminate two vehicles, stage-abiding bodhisattvas, and ordinary beings of the sharpest faculties, causing them to enter the ultimate Buddha Way of the One Vehicle.

2.12

From "If we consider" downward is the second [section]: Directly addressing the Buddha's intent.

2.13

As for "only for the one great matter," and so forth: the Lotus Sūtra says in full: "The Buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones, appear in the world only for the sake of the causes and conditions of one great matter. Śāriputra! What is called the Buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones, appearing in the world only for the sake of the causes and conditions of one great matter? The Buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones, appear in the world wishing to cause sentient beings to open the Buddha's knowledge and vision and make it pure... down to... wishing to cause sentient beings to enter the path of the Buddha's knowledge and vision." Following the commentary of Tianchang, it explains: "The Buddha's knowledge and vision is neither three nor five, hence it is called 'one'; it is broad and all-encompassing, hence it is called 'great'; the ceremonies of the Buddhas consist in speaking this to transform beings, hence it is called 'matter'; sentient beings having this capacity are able to evoke the Buddha, which is called 'cause'; the Buddha responding to them is called 'condition.'" "Reason" has the sense of "wherefore." It is by reason of the causes and conditions of this one great matter that the Buddha appears in the world. As for "opening, revealing, awakening, and entering": these four phrases do not go beyond two aspects: the first two phrases are the transforming agent, and the latter two phrases are what is transformed. The transforming agent has two aspects: great opening and gradual revealing, which belong to the Buddha. What is transformed also has two aspects: initial awakening and final entry, which belong to sentient beings. If one follows the explanation of the Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra: "'Opening' is opening together the two unexcelled fruitions of bodhi and nirvāṇa. 'Revealing' is specifically showing the Dharmakāya, revealing that the three vehicles have an identical essence. 'Awakening' has the sense of knowing, specifically pointing to the Saṃbhogakāya; because the two vehicles do not know it, it is spoken to make them know. 'Entering' has the sense of cause, because cultivating the cause brings realization." The commentator on the Avataṃsaka explains: "'Opening' means clearing away the obstacles of delusion. 'Revealing' means demonstrating the true principle. 'Awakening' means realizing that delusion is fundamentally empty, comprehending that the mind's substance is quiescent, right now awakening to the true principle above. 'Entering' means merging into the mind's substance." Shibi explains: "All sentient beings have the Buddha-nature: this is the great opening. Pointing it out, saying that within the mind it is clearly distinct: this is the roundabout revealing of the Buddha-nature. Newly comprehending it and definitively sealing it without doubt: this is initial awakening. All conceptual thoughts entirely gone: this is final entry." The purports of the various commentators' explanations differ; white jade and yellow gold are each supreme treasures.

2.14

In the commentary, "Specific demonstration thereafter": nearby, it points to the single fascicle of the Diamond Sūtra; afar, it relates to the various sections of Prajñā. Because they share the same lineage, the intent is to clarify why the signless sūtra was expounded. Herein are five sections, fully listed as in the commentary. The first has three parts:

2.15

First, the heading.

2.16

As for "counteracting": prescribing medicine according to the illness has its meaning shown in the preface. As for grasping at self, there are two kinds: first, the grasping at self through the ordinary person's emotional calculation, which is grasping at the general characteristics of the five aggregates as an agent. Second, the non-Buddhist soul-self: within the aggregates or apart from the aggregates, large or small, an ethereal divine spirit whose operations are hard to conceive, all of which are calculated to be real; hence it is shown as grasping at self. Calculating all dharmas to have real substantial nature is called grasping at dharmas. Now, the Buddha expounded the Lesser Vehicle to eliminate the grasping at self. Here, expounding prajñā does this once more because the deep must include the shallow; therefore it primarily eliminates the grasping at dharmas, while concurrently clarifying the voidness of the person.

2.17

From "Due to this" downward is the second [section]: Explanation, in two parts:

2.18

First, general heading.

2.19

From grasping arise obstacles: afflictions are the root and derivative [afflictions] and so forth, which arise dependent on grasping at self, as expounded earlier under pursuing delusion. What is to be known is fundamental ignorance. Thus the Awakening of Faith says: "The meaning of ignorance is called the obstruction of wisdom, which is the obstruction of the knowable." This arises dependent on grasping at dharmas.

2.20

From "Due to affliction" downward is the second [section]: Specifically demonstrating the faults of the two obstructions, in two parts:

2.21

First, the affliction obstruction.

2.22

As for "the mind is not equal [liberated]": the mind is fundamentally pure and free, its wondrous functions of merit surpassing the sands of dust; precisely because it is covered by this obstruction it cannot manifest, hence it is said that "the mind is not liberated." "Liberation" has the sense of freedom. Not only does it cause the mind not to be liberated, it can also create karma and moisten karma: karma means good, bad, and immovable karma. Because there is a karmic cause, it inevitably incurs fruitional retribution, which is undergoing rebirth. The place of undergoing rebirth is the so-called five destinies: born and dying again, departing and coming back, hence it is called "transmigrating." The characteristics of transmigration are already as in the preface under the meaning of the silk-cord wheel. Tracing back to its source, it is grasping at self; thus we know grasping at self is the root of faults, and therefore it must be eliminated.

2.23

From "Due to the knowable" downward is the second [section]: The obstruction of the knowable.

2.24

As for "wisdom is not equal [developed]": this is the deep wisdom of the Great Vehicle, not speaking of the shallow wisdom of the Lesser Vehicle. If this wisdom arises, it illuminates and sees that the five aggregates are all empty, being nothing other than the nature of mind, with no separate dharma outside one's own mind. Now, covered by ignorance, it cannot unfold. Thus the Avataṃsaka says: "If one does not comprehend one's own mind, how can one know the correct path? Through inverted wisdom, they increase all evils."

2.25

Regarding "not penetrating", etc.: the nature and characteristics of all dharmas have distinct and common [aspects]. Distinctly, for instance, water has wetness as its nature, and movement and stillness as its characteristics, and so forth. Commonly, all dharmas together have the asaṃskṛta as their nature and the saṃskṛta as their characteristics. Because one lacks this wisdom, one cannot comprehend them. Comprehending the mind is the fundamental cognition, while comprehending nature and characteristics is the subsequently attained cognition. That these two cognitions do not become manifest is entirely due to ignorance; without eradicating ignorance, the Buddha-Dharma cannot be accomplished. Therefore it is said: "Even if one transcends the three realms, one still remains stuck in the two vehicles," and so forth. In this case, although one has left the burning house, one still halts at the conjured city and does not reach the place of jewels. If we trace back its source, it is due to attachment to dharmas; thus we know that attachment to dharmas is the fundamental root of faults and afflictions. However, these two hindrances do not operate in opposition [to each other]; they are both produced by the one mind, differing only in being subtle or coarse. The cognitive [hindrance] is subtle, while the afflictive [hindrance] is coarse; although coarse and subtle differ, they have no separate essence whatsoever, just as when a single body of water is stirred into waves, there are differences in subtlety and prominence. Within this there are also two senses: when it just begins to stir, it cannot reflect images, which corresponds to the cognitive [hindrance]; when it is fierce and surging, it capsizes boats and drowns people, which corresponds to afflictions. The correspondence between doctrine and metaphor is clearly visible. Furthermore, regarding the liberation of mind and wisdom, when examined in terms of persons, four propositions are formed: liberation of mind without liberation of wisdom applies to the two vehicles; liberation of wisdom without liberation of liberation of mind applies to the bodhisattvas of great compassion; liberation of both applies to the Buddhas; liberation of neither applies to ordinary beings.

2.26

Regarding the Commentary's "The two attachments", etc.:

2.27

Third, the conclusion: Previously, by tracing the fundamental root of all faults and afflictions, it was found to be the two attachments to self and dharmas. If the two attachments are dispelled, the two hindrances are eliminated; if the two hindrances are eliminated, all faults naturally perish. Hence, the source of faults and afflictions is precisely these two attachments. This sūtra was expounded in order to eliminate the two attachments; thus we know that this sūtra is a great and good medicine. Therefore the Heart Sūtra says: "The prajñāpāramitā is a great transcendent mantra, a great bright mantra," and so forth, up to "it can remove all suffering; it is true and not false." If one wishes to know how this sūtra eliminates the two attachments: as the sūtra says, "no notion of a self, notion of a person, notion of a sentient being, or notion of a soul," this eliminates attachment to self; "neither the notion of a dharma nor the notion of a non-dharma," this eliminates attachment to dharmas. Examples of this kind are found throughout the sūtra.

2.28

The Commentary's second [section] has two [parts]:

2.29

First, the presentation

2.30

is clear.

2.31

Second, the explanation.

2.32

"Doubt" means being hesitant and undecided regarding principle and phenomena; it is one of the afflictions among mental factors. There are two kinds: first, seeds; second, manifest activity. "Seeds" refers to what is stored in the storehouse consciousness and has not yet become manifest, called "unrisen". "Manifest activity" refers to what stirs in the mind or takes shape in speech, called "presently arisen". "To prevent" means to prevent the seeds, not allowing them to arise into manifest activity. "To sever" means to sever manifest activity, thereby naturally eliminating its root. It is like building a dike to hold back water, or pouring water to douse flames; the meaning is evident.

2.33

"Precisely the sūtra", etc., points to the sūtra. In accordance with the sūtra, after answering the three questions, it severs [doubts] sequentially, arising and resuming in an interlocking chain; thus it says, "clause by clause up to twenty-seven". The terms "prevent" and "sever" generally carry two meanings: First, where Subhūti states his doubts in the sūtra, these are manifest activities—namely, the second, eleventh, and nineteenth; the remainder, lacking words of questioning, are all seeds. Second, at that time they were all manifest activities, but with respect to later generations they are collectively called seeds. In this sense, when manifest activity is severed, seeds are prevented. Between these two meanings, the latter is more pressing; hence, regarding the twenty-seven doubts, it always says "sever" and does not say "prevent".

2.34

The Commentary's third [section] has two [parts]:

2.35

First, the presentation;

2.36

second, the explanation.

2.37

Generally speaking, karma is of three kinds: wholesome, unwholesome, and immovable. Experiencing [its retribution] occurs in three periods: present, next, and subsequent [lifetimes]. If one creates wholesome or unwholesome [karma] in this life and experiences suffering or pleasure in this life, it is called karma with retribution experienced in the present life. If one creates wholesome or unwholesome [karma] in this life and only experiences it in the next life, it is called karma with retribution experienced in the next life. If one creates wholesome or unwholesome [karma] in this life and only experiences it from the third life onward up to hundreds of thousands of lives, it is called karma with retribution experienced in subsequent lives. Nowadays, there are people who create wholesome or unwholesome karma and, seeing no retribution immediately before their eyes, doubt that cause and effect exist; this is entirely because they do not understand these three periods of retribution. Thus the Fo ming jing says: "Those who practice good meet with frustration at every turn, while those who practice evil find everything going their way, causing foolish people in the world to claim that good and evil are indistinguishable. In my sūtras I teach that there are three kinds of retribution," as recounted above.

2.38

Now, as for "transforming and extinguishing": among the three, it is only unwholesome karma that is transformed, because it goes against principle; the time [of retribution] extends to all three. Regarding the experiencing of retribution for this unwholesome karma, according to the teachings of the Hīnayāna tradition, there are determinate and indeterminate [karmas]. For example, the four pārājikas in the first section are called determinate karma, while saṃghāvaśeṣa and below are called indeterminate karma. Correlating this with time yields four propositions: time is determinate but retribution is indeterminate; retribution is determinate but time is indeterminate; both are determinate; both are indeterminate. According to what this sūtra teaches, however, it is not so: that which has not entered our Dharma is called determinate karma; if it has entered our Dharma, it is called indeterminate karma. What is meant by "indeterminate" is that it may be light or heavy, and may be experienced or not experienced.

2.39

Question: "If that is so, why is it said in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā: 'Excepting only determinate karma, which must be experienced as retribution'?"

2.40

Answer: "It merely transforms the heavy into the light, rather than causing it not to be experienced at all; therefore there is no contradiction. As this sūtra says: 'If a person upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra and is despised by others, this person's sinful karma from past lives should cause them to fall into the evil destinies; but because they are despised by people in the present life, the sinful karma from past lives is eradicated, and they will attain anuttarā samyaksambodhi.' The words 'past lives' have two senses: first, lives prior to the previous birth are called 'past lives'; second, the time prior to upholding the sūtra is called 'past lives'. Although both apply, the latter sense is the standard one. Here, taking the karma of the three destinies, it is substituted with being despised, making the retribution indeterminate; retribution in a future birth is repaid in the present, making the time indeterminate: these are all transforming the heavy into the light. As for extinguishing the light so that it is not experienced, the sūtra has no explicit text; though the sūtra lacks explicit text, in principle it must be so. There are two senses: First, inferring the light from the heavy, meaning: since heavy karma is transformed into light, light karma ought rightly not to be experienced. Second, those who have fallen into the three destinies, upon emerging among humans, still have residual karma—namely, the sufferings of poverty and various afflictions; now, since they do not fall into the three destinies, their residual karma is necessarily spared, which is also both time and retribution being indeterminate."

2.41

The Commentary's fourth [section] has three [parts]:

2.42

First, the presentation;

2.43

second, the explanation, which has two [parts]:

2.44

first, prior to the expounding.

2.45

"For ordinary people and followers of the small [vehicle], the Buddha attained true awakening": this refers to the severing of defilements with the thirty-four mental states under the bodhi tree, the fivefold dharmakāya first being perfected, manifesting the attainment of true awakening.

2.46

"Prior to the expounding", etc., refers to the period before the twelfth year after attaining awakening, when he taught only the cause and effect of humans and devas, the four truths, and conditioned arising, and had not yet taught the prajñā of the three emptinesses.

2.47

"Lacking wondrous wisdom": "wondrous wisdom" refers to the profound, signless prajñā. This is the wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas; because prajñā had not yet been taught and the emptiness of dharmas had not yet been revealed, this wisdom was lacking.

2.48

"Giving and the like dwelling on signs": "and the like" refers to the other four, such as morality and patience; "dwelling on signs" means dwelling on the signs of self, person, sentient being, and so forth, as well as dwelling on the signs of dharma and non-dharma. Since one dwells on the signs of self, dharmas, and so forth, they become mundane causes and effects, and are therefore all tainted. This refers to ordinary beings who rely on the teachings of humans and devas, or those who linger in the two vehicles: even if they sever afflictions and realize reality, they are not without revulsion toward suffering and longing for bliss, and even if they transcend the three realms, they still fall into the stage of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; this refers to those who rely on the Hīnayāna teachings. With respect to ordinary beings, they also lack coarse wisdom; speaking comprehensively from the superior standpoint, it therefore says they "lack wondrous wisdom".

2.49

Regarding the Commentary's "Therefore, discussing...", etc.: second, having expounded it, it can serve as the cause of Buddhahood, which has two [parts]:

2.50

first, the direct explanation.

2.51

Namely, after twelve years, the teachings of the various sections of prajñā were expounded to express and reveal wondrous wisdom. Wondrous wisdom is the sixth, prajñāpāramitā. Because the dharmakāya is the wondrous principle of tathatā, originally unarisen and unceasing, yet covered by afflictions, it is called the tathāgatagarbha. If wondrous wisdom illuminates and shatters afflictions, the true principle becomes manifest and constitutes the great dharmakāya; therefore, wondrous wisdom is said to be the cause of the dharmakāya.

2.52

"The five perfections", etc.: the five perfections are giving, morality, patience, vigor, and concentration. The responsive body is the body of purple-golden color with the thirty-two marks and eighty secondary signs. This is brought about through the cumulative practice of the five pāramitās; therefore it is said that the five perfections are the cause of the responsive body.

2.53

Regarding the Commentary's "If lacking...", etc.: second, the indirect demonstration.

2.54

"Not pāramitās", etc.: although one practices giving and the rest, because there is no wisdom to guide them, they all become dwelling on signs; because of dwelling on signs, they become tainted, resulting merely in mundane wholesome causes and pleasurable fruits, and are thus not causes of Buddhahood. Therefore the Bodhisaṃbhāra-śāstra says: "Giving, morality, patience, vigor, concentration, / and whatever is beyond these five, / all through the perfection of wisdom, / are subsumed under the pāramitās."

2.55

Regarding the Commentary's "Therefore one must...", etc.: third, the conclusion.

2.56

Merit and wisdom belong to the causes: the five perfections and the sixth perfection are the adorning agents. Being complete in both is the fruit: the true body and the responsive body are what is adorned. Although the fruitional virtues of the Buddhas are limitless and boundless, to state the essentials, they do not exceed these two. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "According to the Dharma they attained, / adorned with the power of concentration and wisdom, / with this they deliver sentient beings, / and themselves realize the unsurpassed path." The general meaning is that because of the absence of prajñā, giving and the rest are prevented from being pāramitās and do not constitute causes of Buddhahood. Therefore, the two adornments of merit and wisdom are necessary to bring about the wondrous essence complete in both. The former five and the sixth mutually assist one another, because both the true and responsive fruits must be complete. It is like glue and colored pigments: pigments without glue do not adhere, and glue without pigments has no color; the sixth without the five has no characteristics, and the five without the sixth have no cause. As the sūtra says: "One should not dwell anywhere," which is cultivating wisdom; "practice giving," which is cultivating merit. Again, having no self, no person, no sentient being, and no soul is cultivating wisdom; cultivating all wholesome dharmas is cultivating merit. Examples of this kind are very numerous.

2.57

The Commentary's fifth [section] has three [parts]: First, the presentation.

2.58

"The two fruits, the true and the responsive": Various sūtras and treatises all speak of three bodies; here only two are explained because they have already subsumed them together. As for the three bodies, they are the dharma, reward, and transformation [bodies]. As taught in the provisional teachings: the dharmakāya is principle, untainted and asaṃskṛta; the saṃbhogakāya is wisdom, formed by the transformation of consciousness, saṃskṛta and untainted, and although it realizes principle, wisdom is yet not principle, like the sun resting in the sky. Thus principle and wisdom are divided into two. The nirmāṇakāya is a shadow and naturally must be different; hence it is said that the Buddha has three bodies. Here speaking of two is because the dharma and reward are combined: since wisdom is precisely principle, like the radiance being the jewel itself, they are collectively spoken of as the true body. As the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "The Buddha's body is asaṃskṛta and does not fall into categories"; how could one say the reward essence is saṃskṛta! Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "If someone says the Tathāgata is identical with the saṃskṛta, upon death they will enter hell." Therefore here we do not speak of three, but only of two. Thus the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The Buddha has two bodies: first, the true body; second, the responsive body." It also says the birth body and the responsive body are both transformation bodies.

2.59

Question: "The dharma, reward, and transformation [bodies] are all the Buddha's body; since dharma and reward are not differentiated, why is the transformation essence spoken of separately?"

2.60

Answer: "Dharma and reward are both real, which is why they are discussed together; the transformation essence is purely illusory, which is why it ought properly to be separate."

2.61

As for the commentary's "not having heard" and so forth: Second, the explanation. This means that prior to the twelve years, people of the Hīnayāna took only the golden body with the thirty-two marks to be the true Buddha, not knowing that there is yet another true Buddha; hence it says, "they speak only of the physical marks." As for "not knowing" and so forth: Because they had not yet penetrated the śūnyatā of phenomena (dharma-śūnyatā), they did not know that these marks are merely reflected images appearing within the true body. Therefore the *Vijñaptimātratā* says: "The Great Perfect Mirror Wisdom can manifest and produce reflections of bodies, lands, and wisdom." Since it says they are reflections, one knows they are not real. Therefore Maitreya's verse says: "The responsive and transformative [bodies] are not the true Buddha, / nor are they the speaker of the Dharma."

2.62

As for "not as it truly is" and so forth: If one knows that the true body is real and the responsive body is illusory, and further understands that marks are themselves without marks—which is termed the true body—and that being without marks is itself marks—which is termed the responsive body—to see thus is called "seeing as it truly is." Therefore the *Avataṃsaka* says: "Seeing reality in the real, / and seeing unreality in the unreal: / one who understands the characteristics of phenomena thus / is called a Buddha." If it is not thus, it is called "not seeing as it truly is."

2.63

As for the commentary's "therefore this" and so forth: Third, the conclusion.

2.64

As for "elucidating the two fruits": As the sūtra says: "The Tathāgata's speaking of thirty-two marks is precisely non-marks"—this elucidates the true body. "These are called thirty-two marks"—this elucidates the responsive body. Furthermore, it says: "It is not the complete physical body"—this elucidates the true body. "It is called the complete physical body"—this elucidates the responsive body. The rest are understood by analogy to this.

2.65

As for "the two causes" and so forth: The true body is realized through the preceding cause of wisdom, and the responsive body is realized through the preceding cause of merit. In the preceding passage it says, "therefore one must have the two adornments of merit and wisdom," etc., which is explaining the cause in terms of the fruit. Now it says, "therefore this elucidates," etc., which is explaining the fruit in view of the cause. Speaking in this way aims to cause sentient beings to cultivate the two kinds of causes and realize the two kinds of fruits. Now, the preceding five approaches follow one another in succession: the *Prajñā Sūtra* was originally spoken to eliminate the two attachments, hence there is the first; though the two attachments are dispelled, the two doubts still remain, hence there is the second; even granted that there are no doubts, how to deal with past karma? Hence there is the third; once evil karma is eradicated, the uncontaminated cause is accomplished, hence there is the fourth; once the cause is distinct, how far could the realization of the fruit be? Hence there is the fifth. From this, the great purport of the entire sūtra culminates in these five tiers.

2.66

As for the commentary's "clarifying the sūtra's central doctrine and substance": The central doctrine is the signified; the substance is the signifier. Now, first, "central doctrine" (zong) means veneration, importance—that which is prized by mind and speech. Now, speech originates from the mind. Thus Master Zhao says: "When the sentiments prize emptiness, at every word they submit to non-existence." The "Preface to the Mao Odes" says: "Emotions are stirred within and take form in speech." The rest are all analogous to this. The text has two parts. First, an overview of the various teachings.

2.67

In this land, past and present, there are three kinds of teachings; as their shallowness and depth differ, what they hold as central also diverges. First, the Confucian teaching: its master is the King of Propagating Culture, namely Kong Qiu. It takes as its central doctrine the five constants: benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and trustworthiness. Its intent is to cultivate the person and be cautious in conduct, govern the state and manage the family, and spread one's fame to later generations. Second, the Daoist teaching: its master is the Emperor of the Dark Origin, namely Lao Dan. It takes spontaneity (ziran) as its central doctrine; spontaneity melts away right and wrong, levels birth and death, and ultimately returns to nothingness. Third, the Buddhist teaching: its master is Śākya[muni]. It takes cause and condition as its central doctrine; its intent is to cause one to recognize delusion and break through perplexity, realize truth, and activate function. Therefore the commentary says, "cause and condition are the central doctrine." Now, the entire teachings of the Buddha's lifetime universally take cause and condition as central; although there are differences in shallowness and depth—such as Hīnayāna arising and ceasing, and Mahāyāna naturelessness—speaking in comprehensive terms, they are all cause and condition. However, there are two kinds: first, the mundane; second, the supramundane. The mundane has two: first, internal; second, external. The external further has two: first, where a seed is the cause, and water, earth, human labor, time, and so forth are conditions, and the sprout is able to grow; again, where a lump of clay is the cause, and the wheel, cord, potter, and so forth are conditions, and the vessel is able to be completed. Second, the internal: ignorance is the cause, and the factor of volitional formation is the condition, giving rise to the five factors such as consciousness, as well as the two factors of birth and aging-and-death. The former two are the vessel world, and the latter is the world of sentient beings. Hence we know that the formation of this mundane world of the three realms is due solely to the two words "cause" and "condition." Second, the supramundane has three kinds: first, original enlightenment's internal perfuming is the cause, and the teacher's instruction's external perfuming is the condition, whereby initial enlightenment comes to arise; second, initial enlightenment is the cause, and the five pāramitās such as giving are conditions, whereby the fruit of Buddhahood is accomplished; third, great compassion is the cause, and sentient beings are the condition, whereby response and transformation flourish. Thus we know that all pure and sublime matters of the supramundane do not go beyond the two words "cause" and "condition." Therefore the *Lotus Sūtra* says: "The Buddha-seeds arise from conditions; / for this reason I preach the Single Vehicle." The *Madhyamaka-śāstra* says: "Never has there been a single phenomenon / that does not arise from causes and conditions." It also says: "I say these causes and conditions / are able to extinguish all conceptual proliferation." However, comprehensively gathering all mundane and supramundane phenomena: the meanings of existence, śūnyatā, conventional designation, and the middle—although varying in shallowness and depth—all fall under cause and condition.

2.68

Speaking of "existence": it has arising and ceasing. This means that phenomena arise when conditions assemble, and cease when conditions disperse. As the monk Aśvajit spoke in verse for Śāriputra: "All phenomena arise from conditions; / when conditions disperse, phenomena cease. / Such ceasing and arising / the Śramaṇa has declared." As for "śūnyatā": since they belong to causes and conditions, one knows they lack intrinsic substance; lacking intrinsic substance is the meaning of śūnyatā. Therefore the *Madhyamaka-śāstra* says: "Whatever phenomenon is produced by causes and conditions, / that I declare to be precisely śūnyatā." As for "conventional designation": like an image in a mirror or the moon in water, although unreal, when conditions assemble, they cannot but appear. Therefore the *Vimalakīrti* says: "This body is like a shadow, / appearing from karma and conditions."

2.69

As for "the middle": Because it is conventional, it is not empty; because it is empty, it is not conventional. Being neither empty nor conventional, and being simultaneously empty and conventional, is called the meaning of the middle. Therefore the *Vimalakīrti* says: "The Dharma spoken is neither existent nor non-existent; / by causes and conditions all phenomena arise." Furthermore, as the *Madhyamaka-śāstra* comprehensively clarifies the four meanings including existence, saying: "Whatever phenomenon is produced by causes and conditions, / that I declare to be precisely śūnyatā; / it is also termed conventional designation, / and is also the meaning of the middle way." Thus the meanings of emptiness, existence, the middle, conventional designation, and so forth spoken in the teachings of the three vehicles do not go beyond cause and condition. Therefore it says that the Buddhist teachings universally take cause and condition as their central doctrine.

2.70

As for the commentary's "distinctly revealing" and so forth: What is termed the distinct within the universal—what is held as central varies depending on the sūtra. For instance: the dharma-dhātu in the *Avataṃsaka*, the Single Vehicle in the *Lotus Sūtra*, the inconceivable, tathatā, buddha-nature, etc., in the *Vimalakīrti*. The text has three parts.

2.71

First, directly establishing [it] with respect to phenomena.

2.72

Now, the types of prajñā are explained differently across various traditions. According to what the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says, there are three kinds: first, literary [prajñā], which is the teaching that is the signifier; second, contemplative [prajñā], which is the wisdom that is the cognizing subject; third, ultimate-reality [prajñā], which is the object-realm cognized. Later, Kumārajīva expanded these into five kinds: namely, within contemplative [prajñā] he opened up the retinue, which is the accompanying five aggregates and wholesome roots such as heat; within ultimate-reality [prajñā] he opened up the objective realm, which is the realm of conventional truth. Among these five, only contemplative [prajñā] is an appositional compound (karmadhāraya), while the rest are all dependent determinative compounds (tatpuruṣa). Dayun explained them so that all five are karmadhāraya, stating: because the nature of letters is empty, it is prajñā; because the retinue and objective realm are identical with letters; and ultimate reality is the dharmakāya. The *Awakening of Faith* says: "In reliance on this dharmakāya it is named original enlightenment." However, although there are three and although there are five, the three are correct. Why so? Because all that is illuminated by prajñā is ultimate reality, not tathatā alone. Therefore the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: "Illuminating the emptiness of form and so forth is called real nature." The true principle of the emptiness of nature is free from distortion and is not deceptive; to see emptiness within emptiness is also called distortion, and to be unattached to emptiness is the true dharma. Form and so forth are deceptive and delude human eyes. Hence we know that simply in terms of being non-distorted and free from deception, it is ultimate reality; thus both the ultimate and conventional truths together constitute a single ultimate reality. Wholesome roots such as heat and the rest of the retinue have the nature of wisdom; since their corresponding and concomitant [factors] are all contemplative, we know that contemplative [prajñā] subsumes the retinue. Therefore, although speaking of three, they already subsume the five; since this accords with the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*, it must tally with the profound sūtra. Hence the three are correct. Now, when various masters establish the central doctrine, some take it to be contemplative [prajñā], and some take it to be ultimate-reality [prajñā] alone; neither of these hits the mark. Moreover, what is signified in this sūtra is, in every case, detachment from marks; how could it be contemplative [prajñā] alone? Furthermore, teaching and transforming sentient beings to sever doubts and break attachments—how could that be ultimate-reality [prajñā] alone? For this reason, the present commentary adopts both together as the central doctrine.

2.73

As for "neither one nor two": If one wishes to say they are one, substance and function are distinct. If one wishes to say they are two, stillness and illumination are constantly together. Hence they are neither one nor two.

2.74

As for the commentary's "because [they are] identical" and so forth: Second, explaining and establishing [it] with respect to the metaphor, thereby showing that taking both together is correct.

2.75

Furthermore, one diamond, which can be hard and can be sharp, was originally adduced to serve as a metaphor for the two kinds of prajñā: contemplative and ultimate-reality. If one took contemplative [prajñā] alone, the meaning of "hard" would be missing; if one took ultimate-reality [prajñā] alone, the meaning of "sharp" would be missing. Moreover, both using "precisely" explains and establishes the characteristic of non-duality. Because while illuminating it is constantly still, principle is not outside wisdom; because while still it is constantly illuminating, wisdom is not outside principle. Since apart from principle there is no wisdom, and apart from wisdom there is no principle, it is like a diamond being both hard and sharp.

2.76

As for the commentary's "the myriad practices" and so forth: Third, concluding and revealing with respect to practice, meaning that these must be possessed within a bodhisattva's practice.

2.77

If one is obscured regarding ultimate reality, it is difficult to forget vikalpa; one then abides in marks and falls into the contaminated. If one is obscured regarding contemplative illumination, one lacks wisdom's function; one then stagnates in one-sided emptiness, becoming the same as the two vehicles. Therefore, one must practice both matters concurrently to tally with the middle way. This is just like the meaning of the profound practice previously [discussed]. For this reason, in the *Awakening of Faith*, calming and insight (śamatha-vipaśyanā) are explained together; within the *Lotus Sūtra*, there is the adornment of concentration and wisdom; the *Avataṃsaka* clarifies that the two matters of concentration and wisdom are what bodhisattvas rely upon; the *Nirvāṇa* reveals that when concentration and wisdom are unequal, one does not see buddha-nature. As spoken in the various teachings, ignorance and wrong views arise from this. Therefore the *Avataṃsaka Commentary* says: "The myriad practices are cultivated simultaneously while forgetting illumination, / and the sudden and gradual are entered concurrently without obstruction"—all share this meaning.

2.78

The second part, substance, is divided into three.

2.79

First, indicating and establishing [it], which can be understood.

2.80

As for "literary" and so forth: Second, direct explanation.

2.81

Someone asked: "When the various masters set forth the substance of the teaching, they all take sounds, names, phrases, and phonemes, or comprehensively take the phenomena that are signified; why do you now take literary [prajñā] alone?" For this reason, the commentary says: "Literary [prajñā] contains sounds, names, phrases, and phonemes," which clarifies that it possesses the four phenomena. "Sound" is speech and voice. The three—names, phrases, and phonemes—are variations and expressions upon sound: names express the self-nature of phenomena, phrases express the distinctions among phenomena, and phonemes are characters/letters, which serve as the support for the two.

2.82

Question: "Among the four phenomena, phonemes (letters) reside at the very end; how can they subsume phenomena such as sounds?"

2.83

Answer: "That they can subsume them has two meanings. First, the phonemes (letters) that can manifest exist in three loci: manifested upon the mind, they are the realm of the mental consciousness; manifested upon sounds, they are the realm of the ear consciousness; manifested upon forms, they are the realm of the eye consciousness. Now, taking the first, they are therefore able to subsume them. Second, where there is sound, there are not necessarily names, phrases, and phonemes; where there are phonemes, there must be sounds, names, and phrases. The earlier does not necessarily have the later, but the later must have the earlier, just as a sprout must have a root, but a root does not necessarily have a sprout. By this meaning, they therefore subsume sounds and the rest. As for 'the nature of letters is empty' and so forth: This clarifies subsuming the principle that is the signified. This means that in reliance on prajñā, letters are manifested; letters are originally empty, which is precisely prajñā; there is no separate substance of letters. There are two meanings: first, their substance belongs to conditioned arising and lacks self-substance; second, there is not a separate phenomenon that serves as the substance of letters. These both intend to reveal that prajñā is the substance of letters. It is just like melting gold to form an image: the image is precisely gold."

2.84

As for the commentary's "therefore all" and so forth: Third, general conclusion.

2.85

The meaning of inclusion is as explained above. Because both subject and object are comprehensively subsumed, it is said that 'in principle, nothing is left unexhausted.' Thus, the words fully encompass the signifier, while prajñā fully encompasses the signified; since both expression and import are complete, it is said that they together constitute the essence of the teaching.

2.86

The commentary's section [beginning with] 'Differentiating the locations and assemblies' has two parts; the first contains two [subdivisions]:

2.87

First, generally indicating the large collection.

2.88

From 'This sūtra' downward is the second, specifically revealing this sūtra. The general [meaning] is easy to understand.

2.89

The commentary's section [beginning with] 'Specifically clarifying' has three parts:

2.90

First, directly clarifying the chronological order of the translations in this eastern land, which has two parts:

2.91

First, broadly discerning the various translations.

2.92

[Bodhi]ruci: In the second year of Tianping, he translated it at Luoyang into fourteen sheets, titled Jingang banruo. Paramārtha: In the first year of Taikang, he translated it in Jinling Commandery into fourteen sheets, titled Jingang duange. [Dharma]gupta: In the tenth year of Kaihuang, he translated it at Luoyang into sixteen sheets, titled Jingang duange. Xuanzang: In the twenty-second year of Zhenguan, he translated it at Yuhua Palace into eighteen sheets, titled Nengduan jingang. Yijing: In the second year of Zhengsheng, he translated it at Foshouji Monastery into twelve sheets, titled Nengduan jingang.

2.93

The commentary from 'What is now...' downward is the second, precisely indicating that which is transmitted.

2.94

The commentary from 'In India...' downward is the second, proceeding to discern the similarities and differences among Western commentaries.

2.95

Regarding 'transmitted to Vasubandhu': Some say that because Vasubandhu had long practiced the Hīnayāna and had only recently turned to the Great Teaching, it was necessary to cleanse his emotional attachments; thus it was transmitted to him to sever doubts and attachments and make clear the stages of practice, as can be seen in the main text.

2.96

The commentary from 'The present division...' downward is the third, showing the differences in the bases for the present outline division, which has two parts:

2.97

First, directly clarifying the basis for the division and explanation.

2.98

Regarding 'combining with Asaṅga': This reveals that this commentary primarily relies on Vasubandhu and secondarily utilizes Asaṅga. The meanings of the remaining treatises and various commentaries can be seen where the title is opened.

2.99

The commentary from 'The title says...' downward is the second, concluding by establishing the title.

2.100

The reason why it is not like the Jingming jishu (Collected Commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa), which fully records the names and meanings of the four sages, is just as He Yan in his Jijie Lunyu (Collected Explanations of the Analects) selected from the commentaries of Kong Anguo, Ma Rong, and others, adopting what was appropriate and cutting what was inappropriate. The present commentary is also like this: either taking both because each has principle, or combining them to form a single meaning; hence both are preserved.

2.101

The commentary's section [beginning with] 'Explaining the meaning of the general text' has two parts:

2.102

First, the title, which has two parts:

2.103

First, explaining the signified, which has three parts:

2.104

First, explaining 'vajra', which has two parts:

2.105

First, translating the name and showing its characteristics.

2.106

From 'In Sanskrit...' downward: The new [transcription] says fanzuoluo (vajra). What is held by the strongman is as the sūtra explains. The vajra-holding deity, in Sanskrit called nuojianna (nagna), translated here as the naked deity, is this strongman. 'Hardest among metals': The word metal generally applies to the five [metals]; because this is the most refined and hard, the word 'hard' (gang) is applied. Furthermore, it is not an object of the human world, hence it is said that Śakra Devānām Indra possesses it. It is a supreme jewel of the heavens, hence it is said that those of meager merit can hardly see it. The Zhenglilun (Nyāyānusāra) says: 'Śakra possesses a jewel named vajra, which cannot be seen by sentient beings of meager merit.'

2.107

The commentary from 'Utterly hard...' downward is the second, discerning the meaning in terms of the Dharma, which has two parts:

2.108

First, citing sūtras and treatises to generally manifest the two meanings, which has three parts:

2.109

First, generally marking and briefly discerning.

2.110

Because it possesses superior capacity, it is said to be 'utterly hard and utterly sharp', which serves as a metaphor for prajñā. From 'No object...' downward explains the characteristics of being utterly hard, and so on. One then knows that if there were a single object that could destroy it, it would not be utterly hard; and if there were a single object it could not shatter, it would not be utterly sharp. Just as silver and iron, though hard, melt when encountering fire, and knives and swords, though sharp, chip when striking stone, they are not utterly hard or sharp. To distinguish it from other hard and sharp things, the word 'utterly' is added.

2.111

The commentary from 'The Nirvāṇa...' downward is the second, citing teachings to explain in detail.

2.112

From 'The Nirvāṇa...' downward cites a sūtra. From 'Asaṅga...' downward cites a treatise. 'Difficult to destroy' is the meaning of hardness. 'Able to sever' is the meaning of sharpness. Regarding 'subtle and firm': 'Subtle' sets apart what is coarse to reveal what is exquisite; 'firm' sets apart what can be destroyed, establishing the meaning of solid durability. The cause of jñāna is indeed prajñā: prajñā is the cause of jñāna, and jñāna is the fruit of prajñā. This is spoken in terms of contemplative prajñā. Because it is subtle, it can penetrate afflictions and cause them to be eliminated.

First 112 of 265 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

金剛經纂要刊定記 — Classical Chinese