金剛經纂要刊定記 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.2

Second, under "Initiation...", there are two [parts]:

On "Precepts can...": because precepts have the meaning of preventing wrongdoing and stopping evil; concentration has the meaning of tranquility and unmovingness; wisdom has the meaning of bright illumination and discernment. Only when one can prevent wrongdoing is the mind unmoving; if the mind is unmoving, wisdom is clear and distinct, and there are none among mundane and supramundane dharmas that it does not reflect and illuminate. It is like wanting the myriad images to appear in the ocean: the water must necessarily be clear; if one wants clear water, nothing surpasses the water being still; if one wants the water to be still, do not allow waves to arise. Stopping the waves is like precepts; the stillness of the water is like concentration; the clarity of the water is like wisdom; the myriad images that appear are like all dharmas. In the metaphor: if the water does not raise waves, the water is still; when the water is still, the water is clear; when the water is clear, it displays the myriad images. In the Dharma: when the mind does not raise wrongdoing, the mind is tranquil; when the mind is tranquil, it illuminates and knows the myriad dharmas. On the side of Dharma, there is only the one mind; on the side of the metaphor, there is only the one water. When Dharma and metaphor are matched against each other, the meaning is luminous. Therefore the sūtra says: "If śīla is not pure, samādhi will not appear." This is precepts assisting concentration. The *Sūtra of Complete Enlightenment* says: "The unimpeded pure wisdom of all bodhisattvas is entirely born relying on dhyāna-concentration." This is concentration giving rise to wisdom.

3.5

The commentary has seven sections under "precepts", as in the commentary.

3.6

1. The teaching master.

3.7

"Endowed with the nine titles above": because the Buddha has ten titles, and the World-Honoured One constitutes the tenth, it is said that he is endowed with the nine titles above. The ten titles are: 1. Tathāgata, 2. Arhat, 3. Samyaksambuddha, 4. Vidyācaraṇasampanna, 5. Sugata and Lokavid, 6. Anuttarapuruṣa, 7. Puruṣadamyasārathi, 8. Śāstādevamanuṣyāṇām, 9. Buddha, 10. Bhagavān (World-Honoured One).

3.8

2. The time of teaching.

3.9

"Corresponding to the initial period of the day": this means that the twelve hours of a day and night are divided into four periods in total. First is the initial period, which is the hours of yin, mao, and chen, the time when devas eat. Second is the middle period, which is the hours of si, wu, and wei, the time when humans eat according to the Dharma. Third is the afternoon period, which is the hours of shen, you, and xu, the time when spirits and ghosts eat. Fourth is the night period, which is the hours of hai, zi, and chou, the time when beasts eat. Now speaking of the hour of chen, this is the latter limit of the initial period. Both the Tang and Zhou translations say "the initial period of the day"; this, then, is the superior time. At this time, begging is not difficult, because both too early and too late are difficult to obtain [alms]. If one begs food at an improper time, when someone wishes to give, there is none, and if they do not give, they feel ashamed, which ends up afflicting others. If begging is unsuccessful, losing a meal leaves one hungry, which afflicts oneself.

3.10

3. Under "The deportment of teaching": this means that the Buddha has three robes: 1. Antarvāsas, which is five strips, called the lower-grade robe, also called the robe for walking the path, doing work, and wearing next to the body. 2. Uttarāsaṅga, which is seven strips, called the middle-grade robe, also called the robe for entering the assembly to expound the Dharma. 3. Saṅghāṭī, which is nine strips up to twenty-five strips, called the upper-grade robe, also called the field-of-merit robe. It is modeled on paddy fields, because seeing it generates merit. When entering royal cities and settlements, one wears this robe; now, because of entering the city to beg for food, he wore it.

3.11

"The bowl of the Heavenly Kings": the Sanskrit word *pātra* is translated here as vessel of appropriate measure. This was the bowl of the past Buddha Vipaśyin; after he entered nirvāṇa, the dragon king took it into his palace to make offerings to it. When Śākyamuni attained the Way, the dragon king brought it to the surface of the sea water; the Four Heavenly Kings wished to take it, and it transformed into four bowls, each obtaining one bowl to present to the Tathāgata. After the Tathāgata received them, he stacked the four bowls in his left hand and pressed them with his right hand, joining them into a single bowl. This was a dark lapis lazuli stone bowl, held and used for begging food. That the Buddha, when going out to transform beings, had to wear the robe and carry the bowl was in order to depart from the two extremes of suffering and pleasure. Householders esteem brocades, fine silks, splendid clean clothing, and precious vessels, increasing heedlessness and being overly attached to the extreme of pleasure. Non-Buddhist home-leavers practicing austerities, like the Nirgranthas, go naked and hold food in their hands, incurring scolding and ugliness, being overly attached to the extreme of suffering. The Buddha abides in the middle practice, and therefore wore the robe and held the bowl.

3.12

4. "The place of teaching": the park is the place where he dwelt, and the kingdom is the place where he transformed beings. *Zhi* means to go. Now, to carry out transformation, he therefore went out of Jetavana and entered Śrāvastī.

3.13

On "The place was broad..." and so forth: according to the *Record of the Western Regions*, the kingdom was over sixty li in circumference, and the inner city was twenty li in circumference, hence it is said that the place was broad. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: "Households were nine hundred million, hence it is said that the people were numerous."

3.14

5. "The activity of teaching": this explains the two characters "begging for food" in the sūtra. Under "Dhūta...": someone may ask, "Since the Buddha is the master of the teaching, why does he need to beg for food?" Hence the commentary explains it. *Dhūta* is translated here as shaking off, because it shakes off afflictions. Now, dhūtas consist of twelve practices: namely, always begging for alms, dwelling in an araṇya, up to sitting beneath trees, sitting in the open, sitting among graves, and so forth; here, it is one of them. If one practices this matter, one obtains great merit; the Buddha manifested this model to cause people to emulate it. Since dhūta obtains merit, heedlessness is fully clear as an error. If the World-Honoured One himself still begged for food, how could other people be indolent? Feeling ashamed and apprehensive, they naturally practice it.

3.15

"Gathering through shared activity": this is one of the four methods of gathering.

3.16

Furthermore, that the Buddha begged for food himself has ten meanings according to the Yingluo jing: First, to end suffering—meaning the blind gain sight. Second, to bestow joy—meaning that a single gaze and a single prostration produce immeasurable merit. Third, to eliminate pride—meaning that sentient beings, seeing him, do not give rise to egotistical pride. Fourth, to fulfill wishes regarding the bowl—if the rich wish to give much, the bowl remains empty; if the poor wish to give little, the bowl becomes full. Fifth, to accept offerings from ghosts and spirits. Sixth, to allow the obstructed to see the Buddha—the elderly, the sick, the impoverished, and the lowly are all able to see the Buddha. Seventh, to display the bowl offered by the heavenly kings. Eighth, to establish a standard model. Ninth, to put an end to slander. Tenth, to cause his disciples not to hoard the eight impure things. It is because of these ten meanings that he begged for food himself.

3.17

The passage beginning "The maiden Yingluo" resolves an objection. The previous citation of a sūtra raised an objection; the passage beginning "What is now [adduced]" explains and resolves it. The passage beginning "The Vimalakīrti[-nirdeśa]" merely corroborates the above meaning of begging for food yet not eating.

3.18

6. "The transforming activities being impartial" explains "and made his rounds begging in succession through that city" in the sūtra.

3.19

"Internally realizing impartiality" means seeing according to the principle.

3.20

"The mind being free of greed and pride" means not being greedy toward the rich and fine, and not being contemptuous of the poor and humble; practicing begging with impartiality, it is therefore said that his compassion shows no biased favor.

3.21

"Manifesting majestic virtue" means that when the Buddha instituted the Hīnayāna Vinaya, he did not permit entering the houses of vicious elephants, for fear that they would cause harm; nor did he permit entering the houses of courtesans and liquor sellers, for fear of generating a defiled mind. That the Buddha entered them manifests his superior majestic virtue.

3.22

"Quieting ordinary people" means out of fear that they would hate this and love that.

3.23

"Refuting the distinctions of the solitary vehicle" means that Kāśyapa abandoned the rich and begged from the poor with the intent of letting them generate merit, whereas Subhūti abandoned the poor and begged from the rich, not wishing to trouble others, and so forth. The views of the two men mutually had their rights and wrongs; the Tathāgata differed from this, harmonizing right and wrong into one continuum. Among the above five, the first is great wisdom, the second is great compassion, the third is displaying virtue, the fourth is quieting ordinary people, and the fifth is refuting the lesser [vehicle].

3.24

7. "The conclusion of the transformation." As for "Having already...," it harmonizes the meaning of the words and phrases. In reading today, one follows the text; in commenting, one follows the meaning.

3.25

The passage beginning "If broadly..." provisionally adds several words to manifest that both the text and meaning are fully unobstructed. Fan means to eat. The Analects says, "eating coarse rice."

3.26

The passage beginning "The Buddha's bitter..." resolves a latent objection. One should first object: "The previously cited Yingluonü jing says he does not eat; why does the present sūtra say he ate?" Therefore, this explains it. Some say: "When the food was about to reach his mouth, there was a deva of majestic virtue at his side who invisibly took it and brought it to other directions to perform Buddha-work; this was a manifestation of eating, not true eating." Because of this, both do not contradict each other.

3.27

The passage beginning "Baoyun..." clarifies the decorum of the meal. Among these four portions, the first two say "designated for," while the latter two do not say so, because if those living pure lives, the poor, or the sick come, one gives it to them, and if they do not come, one eats it oneself; the latter two are not like this, hence it is not said. The Twelve Dhūtas Sūtra excludes those living pure lives, because since they beg for themselves, one does not divide it with them.

3.28

The commentary's "samādhi" has three sections within it, as stated in the commentary.

3.29

The commentary's "putting away the requisites" explains "he put away his robe and bowl" in the sūtra. The two words "eating the food" are as explained before. Qiliao means completed. The necessity of putting away the requisites is because when cultivating samādhi, one must possess the five conditions, namely: dwelling in a secluded and quiet place, desisting from various involvements and affairs, and so forth. Although the Buddha is the supreme sage and devoid of all habitual propensities, truly giving rise to no anxiety or concern regarding the robe and bowl, if he did not put them away, later people who emulate him would have no way to attain samādhi. Since the Buddha is the lord of the teaching, whatever he does, people all emulate and learn from; therefore it is said that he manifested this as a model for posterity.

3.30

The commentary's "purifying the physical karma" explains the three words "having washed his feet" in the sūtra.

3.31

The passage beginning "The Āgama..." takes up the objection. Furthermore, as in the Buddha's thirty-two marks there is the mark of skin undefiled by dust, why now does he need to wash them?

3.32

The passage beginning "Manifesting..." explains and resolves it. This has three meanings: First, to accord with worldly ways, for when an ordinary person returns from outside, there is always fear of dust and defilement, so they must wash their feet; the Buddha's acceding is also like this. Second, to express the Dharma, washing away the defilements of afflictions to reveal the attainment of the pure dharmakāya. Third, to serve as a model for posterity, as explained under the requisites.

3.33

The commentary's "properly entering samādhi" explains "he spread his seat and sat down" in the sūtra. "Sinking and agitation" and so on: Sinking refers to dullness, which can induce drowsiness and hinder the increase of samādhi. Agitation refers to restlessness; spontaneously grasping at conditions, it can induce distraction and also hinders the mind in samādhi. Furthermore, among the four postures, lying down leads to dullness, walking leads to restlessness, and standing leads to fatigue; only sitting is superior, hence one is free from sinking and agitation. Dullness and restlessness belong solely to ordinary people; as far as the Tathāgata is concerned, he has none of these things, but in bequeathing a standard model now, it is entirely for the sake of posterity. Some may say: "The sūtra only says spreading the seat; how do we know he entered samādhi?" Therefore, the subsequent explanation says that the Wei translation and others make it known that he entered samādhi.

3.34

"Spreading his seat as usual" means that in every assembly where the Tathāgata expounded prajñā, he always spread the sitting mat himself; because prajñā gives birth to all buddhas and is thus the mother of buddhas, to express reverence for prajñā, he spread the seat himself. Having already expounded eight assemblies, this corresponds to the ninth; since the decorum and standard do not change, it is said to be "as usual." Fu refers to the instep of the foot; jia refers to placing one foot upon the other; jie means the two feet do not scatter, symbolizing auspiciousness. Therefore, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitōpadeśa* says: "Seeing even a painting of the cross-legged sitting posture, / The Māra King is already terrified; / How much more so for a person who enters the Way, / Keeping the body upright without swaying!" Furthermore, for the sake of five causes and conditions of correct contemplation, one sits cross-legged: First, because through drawing in and collecting the body, light ease quickly arises, which is most supreme. Second, because through this quiet sitting one can endure for a long time without causing the body to tire quickly. Third, because this quiet sitting is an uncommon Dharma, entirely absent from non-Buddhist other doctrines. Fourth, because this quiet sitting presents a dignified and majestic appearance, causing others upon seeing it to feel utmost reverence and faith. Fifth, because this quiet sitting is mutually permitted by all buddhas and disciples of buddhas, and praised by all worthies and nobles. For the sake of these five causes and conditions of correct contemplation, one should sit cross-legged.

3.35

"Abiding with an upright body" means neither slumping nor craning upward, neither leaning to the left nor to the right.

3.36

As for "mindfulness," being mindful in accordance with principle is called mindfulness. Mindfulness is the wisdom of mindfulness, meaning freedom from sinking, agitation, being, nonbeing, and so forth. "Unmoving" means being unmoving in mindfulness.

3.37

The passage beginning "The Tang translation..." also corroborates the same meaning above.

3.38

"Correct vow" is simply mindfulness. If explained separately, a vow is an aspiration, meaning the aspiration to abide in facing-mindfulness. Mindfulness is what is vowed. However, prior to samādhi it is distinct; otherwise, it is not a correct vow. As for "abiding in facing-mindfulness": the face is the metaphor, mindfulness is the Dharma, and the two words "abiding facing" apply to both Dharma and metaphor. Now, between the Dharma and the metaphor, each lacks one item: the Dharma lacks the principle that is illuminated, and the metaphor lacks the mirror that can illuminate. When the mirror abides facing the face, the face naturally becomes clear; when mindfulness abides facing the principle, the principle naturally manifests. The omission in Dharma and metaphor is due to the text using ellipsis. Alternatively, it might not be so: as long as the contemplation of the principle is distinct, like the face beholding direct perception, the metaphor of water is also acceptable.

3.39

The passage beginning "Asaṅga..." clarifies the intention of entering samādhi. First, it takes up the objection: with what intention did he put away the requisites and enter samādhi?

3.40

The passage beginning "In this..." explains and resolves it. "In this" means in the treatise, "in the Dharma." Being able to awaken is mastery of samādhi; being able to speak is mastery of exposition. The meaning is that only through mastery of samādhi does one attain mastery of exposition, for expounding the Dharma with a distracted mind cannot be in accordance with reality; words uttered from samādhi will certainly hit the mark. Therefore, the text below says: "How should one explain it for others? Without grasping at signs, like like-suchness, unmoving." Whenever the Buddha wished to expound the Dharma across the various sūtras, he always entered samādhi first, and the intent was always like this. This too is a manifestation to serve as a model for posterity. If according to the Tathāgata, what error could there be in speech and thought? Therefore, the treatise says it displays this, and so forth.

3.41

Commentary: "However, the Great..." Second, general explanation of the preceding expressing of the Dharma, divided into two:

3.42

First, extensive distinction based on the Dayun [commentary], in three [parts]:

3.43

First, the heading.

3.44

"Great sage" refers to the Buddha. His essence pervading the Dharmadhātu is called "great"; his wisdom illuminating without obscuration is called "sage."

3.45

"Manifested traces" refers to the manifested traces of transformation. "What is expressed": whatever the buddhas do is never haphazard, but always uses external phenomena to express the internal body and mind. For instance, when expounding the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra, his entire body emitted light, within the light flowers appeared, and when the flowers withered, buddhas were seen. Thereupon Ānanda questioned the Buddha, and the Buddha expounded it for him. Just as in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, which speaks of "buddhas and bodhisattvas speaking of the heavens, clouds, Mount Sumeru, the great ocean, and so forth," all have something expressed. In all these cases, external phenomena serve as what can express, and the Dharma serves as what is expressed; since it is not in vain, it is said to be "must."

3.46

Commentary: "Expressing original enlightenment..." Second, the explanation, in two [parts]:

3.47

First, expressing the general preface.

3.48

The Buddha of original enlightenment corresponds to the transformation Buddha: the five aggregates altogether correspond to the city of Śrāvastī; the transformation body Buddha being in the city of Śrāvastī expresses the Buddha of original enlightenment being within the city of the five aggregates. Since within the city people and things are both present, within the aggregates form and mind are also complete. Awakening to māras and so forth corresponds to being victorious in battle. The Sanskrit māra is translated here as "killer," because it can kill the practitioner's life of wisdom. There are four kinds: first, the heavenly māra, namely the lord of the desire realm; second, the affliction-māra; third, the aggregates-māra; and fourth, the death-māra. Now, speaking of awakening to emptiness is as the Heart Sūtra says: "contemplating the five aggregates as all empty, there is no ignorance... down to no exhaustion of aging and death." Contemplating the five aggregates as empty destroys the aggregates-māra; no exhaustion of ignorance destroys the affliction-māra; down to no aging and death destroys the death-māra. If other supramundane dharmas are already empty, how much more so the heavenly māra!

3.49

"Illuminating the mind-consciousness as possessing virtues" corresponds to Anāthapiṇḍada. Above, being deluded about the father of original enlightenment is called "orphaned" (gu); below, concealing the son of wondrous functioning is called "solitary" (du). Now, illuminating that nature originally possesses merits numerous as grains of sand without any lack is precisely Anāthapiṇḍada. Seeking the Dharma and so forth corresponds to the meaning of a bhikṣu as a mendicant. Externally, one begs for food to sustain the body; internally, one seeks the Dharma to nourish the spirit.

3.50

The passage beginning "The awakened mind..." is the second, expressing the specific preface.

3.51

"The awakened mind..." and so forth corresponds to entering the great city of Śrāvastī. One should say: once the awakened mind is aroused, how could it abandon defiling worldly toil? When the Tathāgata appears in the world, how could he abandon the multitude of beings? Intending to contemplate everywhere, he enters the storehouse of consciousness; intending to teach and transform, he enters the royal city. Apart from cities and towns, whom would one teach and transform? Apart from the mind-consciousness, what thing would one contemplate?

3.52

"The mind and mental factors..." and so forth corresponds to "having begged in succession in that city." Begging for food does not discriminate between the rich and the poor; how could contemplation select between the mental factors and the primary mind?

3.53

The two lines beginning "Promptly [transforming] delusion..." correspond to begging and obtaining food. Externally transforming people leads to obtaining food; internally contemplating phenomena gives rise to joy.

3.54

The two lines beginning "Joy in the Dharma..." correspond to returning to his original place and eating the meal. Food can sustain the body, and the Dharma can benefit the mind. Contemplating provisional conditions corresponds to putting on the robe and holding the bowl; forgetting conditions to accord with the true corresponds to putting away the robe and bowl. Since begging for food requires the robe and bowl, contemplation requires relying on conditions; since entering samādhi requires putting away requisites, tallying with principle requires forgetting discursive thoughts.

3.55

The two lines beginning "Contemplative illumination..." correspond to washing the feet. If one wishes to sit peacefully, one must wash away the dust on the feet; if one wishes to return to the source, one must sweep away mental thoughts.

3.56

The two lines beginning "Returning to the origin..." correspond to spreading the seat and sitting down. The emptiness of dharmas is the spreading of the seat; the stillness of the mind is the sitting down. Only after the seat is spread is it fit for one to sit; only after dharmas are empty can the mind attain stillness.

3.57

The two lines beginning "Mind being still..." correspond to the main teaching of the Dharma. This means that only when peacefully seated can one expound the sūtra; only when the mind is still can wondrous wisdom be manifested.

3.58

Commentary: "Wishing to discuss..." Third, the conclusion.

3.59

The passage beginning "Zisheng..." is the second, citing Zisheng to briefly clarify. This is Master Daoye's commentary. Here it is extracted and utilized; the text is not taken in its entirety. Within this, there are two [parts]:

3.60

1. Directly clarifying.

3.61

That there are two bodies generally refers to both sentient beings and buddhas: the provisional is the physical body, and the true is the dharmakāya.

3.62

"The five aggregates..." and so forth means that clothing covers the outside and food sustains the inside; although birth is due to parents, sustenance must rely on clothing and food.

3.63

Regarding "the dharmakāya, and so on": it is not generated by a generative cause (janaka-hetu), but only clarified by a revelatory cause (jñāpaka-hetu). Hence the physical body takes food as its life, whereas the dharmakāya takes wisdom as its life. "Preserving the spurious" means grasping at delusion and conforming to sensory dust; "abandoning the real" means being confused about the principle and turning one's back on awakening. These are both inversions. "Nourishing the real" means awakening to the principle and conforming to awakening; "discarding the spurious" means penetrating delusion and turning one's back on sensory dust.

3.64

"Multitudes of beings..." and below cites the aforementioned inverted ones.

3.65

"I then..." and below indicates the manifestation of entering the city to beg for food in order to express the Dharma. The intention is to cause them to seek prajñā to illuminate and consummate the dharmakāya; hence it is called "drawing forth the real."

3.66

"Therefore relying on..." and below entirely concludes the intention of expressing the Dharma: it means that manifesting the begging for food was intended for expounding the Dharma.

3.67

From "The Commentary [cites] the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]..." onward is the second part: adducing textual evidence. It only provides evidence for the meaning of Dharma as food.

3.68

In the Main Body of the Commentary, there are two parts. First, demarcating the section headings.

3.69

The single fascicle of the sūtra text was commented upon by two treatises, and both Dayun and Qinglong ran the two treatises in parallel. Now we do not do this. Why? Because Asaṅga correlates the text with the eighteen abodes (aṣṭādaśa-sthitayaḥ), whereas Vasubandhu resolves the twenty-seven doubts; since their points of purport are different, their topical divisions are also dissimilar. Sometimes within a single doubt there are four or five abodes, or within a single abode there are two or three doubts. Abruptly joining, abruptly parting, linked before and carrying along behind, because of this the text becomes intertwined. The principle is not necessarily profoundly abstruse, but students find it difficult to understand on account of this. Now that we explain them separately, hopefully they will not interfere with each other, so that those who transmit and lecture upon it will expend little effort and reap great gains. Within the first part, there are three:

3.70

First, directly presenting the seven topics (arthapada).

3.71

Regarding the "seven topics": after the treatise states the verse of refuge and veneration, it immediately says that it establishes the seven kinds of topics, and thereby this Prajñāpāramitā is fully established. "Topics" (arthapada) is chosen in contrast to mere textual phrases (padavyañjana). Since a single meaning constitutes a topic, this sūtra contains seven topics in total. The names of the seven topics are present in the Commentary itself; among them, the first six demonstrate the consummation of what the bodhisattva undertakes, and the seventh demonstrates the establishment of this Dharma gate. Indeed, the text of these seven topics fully encompasses the teaching, principle, practice, and fruit. Among them, the first, second, third, and fourth are practice; the fifth is principle; the sixth is fruit; and the seventh is teaching. Up to this point an overarching division is made, recorded solely relying on Asaṅga's terminology.

3.72

In the Commentary, regarding "1. Non-interruption of the lineage": this does not refer to ordinary beings, the two vehicles, or bodhisattvas of the provisional teachings; its intention is to clarify the non-interruption of the Buddha-lineage (buddha-gotra).

3.73

"Regarding 'protecting'..." points to the sūtra. This is the explanation. It means entrusting the Great [Vehicle] to the Small, and charging the Great to transform the Small; being transmitted turn by turn in this manner, how could there ever be interruption? Just as when human parents entrust matters to their children and grandchildren, and so on. This was Subhūti's original intention; therefore he praised the Buddha with this matter, giving rise to the opening of the inquiry.

3.74

In the Commentary, regarding "2. The marks of giving rise to practice": since one wishes for the lineage to be uninterrupted, one must give rise to the marks of cultivation and practice. "Regarding 'stating'..." points to the sūtra. In fact, listening intently is also subsumed herein.

3.75

In the Commentary, regarding "3. The abodes where practice abides": since there is that which can give rise [to practice], there must be that which is given rise to. The names and meanings of the eighteen abodes will be extensively explained below.

3.76

"From the Buddha..." points to the sūtra. "This is signless..." explains the name and meaning. This is the signlessness of signs, not an exclusive, absolute signlessness. Glimpsing the abstruse nature of practice to accord with the fundamental tenet, it therefore designates it as signless.

3.77

In the Commentary, regarding "4. Antidotes": deviant practice is non-correct practice; whatever does not accord with the Buddha path is entirely called deviant practice. "Common" has the meaning of not being solitary. "View" refers to the sentiment of conceptual discrimination. "Correct practice" refers to correct practice that is free from views, not pristine correct practice.

3.78

Regarding the "two kinds of antidotes": applying correct practice to counter deviant practice is the first antidote. Applying non-discriminative knowledge (nirvikalpa-jñāna) to counter discriminative views is the second antidote. However, deviant practice is entirely countered, whereas in that which is common [to both], one only counters the view, not the correct practice—just as when sifting sand to select gold, one discards the sand and does not discard the gold. Now in the sūtra there are only the antidotes (the countering agents), without the objects to be countered. For example, in the first abode, not liberating sentient beings is deviant practice, while liberating sentient beings is the antidote. When liberating sentient beings, viewing that there are sentient beings as the objects to be liberated, and viewing oneself as the liberating agent, is discriminative view; liberating them while realizing there is no liberation is the antidote. In principle these are indeed simultaneous, but conceptually they are distinguished as prior and subsequent. Since the first abode is like this, the rest may be inferred by analogy. Therefore the treatise says: "When practicing in the various abodes, there are two kinds of antidotes."

3.79

In the Commentary, regarding "5. Non-loss": "meaning by..." and below clarifies the intention. "Free from increase and decrease": grasping at existence is increase; grasping at non-existence is decrease. Previously falling into these two, one would lose the Middle Way; now, being free from both, one attains non-loss. For example, in the sūtra, "is not Buddha-dharma" is the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya) which prevents the extreme of reification (samāropa); "is called Buddha-dharma" is the conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya) which prevents the extreme of deprecation (apavāda). The rest of the occurrences of "is not" and "is called" all follow this pattern. The treatise concludes at the very end: "Because the bodhisattva is free from these two extremes, with respect to those antidotes he never again incurs loss; hence it is called 'non-loss.'"

3.80

In the Commentary, regarding "6. The stages": "meaning by..." and below is the explanation. Leaving the deviant bias of the two extremes aside without discussion, the Middle Way is indeed the great path to bodhi; therefore within this the stages are distinguished and established. For instance, in traveling to the imperial capital, there are differences among three roads: the two sides are both wrong, whereas the middle path is the correct one; only within the correct road can one discuss distance, proximity, slowness, speed, and so on. It is also like this with respect to phenomena; therefore the sūtra says: "All worthies and nobles are distinguished by means of asaṃskṛta phenomena."

3.81

"Practice based on faith..." and below divides the stages. Among the eighteen abodes, the first sixteen abodes are the stage of practice based on faith (śraddhācarita-bhūmi). This corresponds to the three [levels of] worthies. Because they give rise to practice based on faith, it is called "practice based on faith"; it is also called "faith-understanding" (adhimukti), because they give rise to understanding based on faith. The seventeenth abode is the stage of the pure mind (śuddhādhyāśaya-bhūmi). This corresponds to the first bhūmi, because one is free from the cognitive obstacles of conceptual discrimination and directly realizes tathatā. The eighteenth abode, from the second bhūmi onward up to the Buddha stage, is generally called the Tathāgata stage. Furthermore, because various authors clarify the stages either extensively or concisely—the extensive being fifty-two stages, the concise utterly obliterating them to nothing—now we balance the extensive and concise, removing the extremes, and expound the three grounds and five stages.

3.82

In the Commentary, regarding "7. Establishing the name": "meaning by..." and below is the explanation. It means establishing the name "vajra" with reference to three kinds of phenomena: 1. Naming it vajra with reference to the essence and function of prajñā; this is like the vajra being hard and sharp. 2. Naming it vajra with reference to the breadth and narrowness of the stages; this is like the shape of a vajra pestle. Because practice based on faith lasts one asaṃkhyeya [kalpa], the pure mind is only a single kṣaṇa, and the Buddha stage lasts two asaṃkhyeya [kalpas], it is like the vajra pestle being broad at the beginning and end and narrow in the middle. 3. Naming it vajra with reference to the written words; this is like a drawn image. Because the sūtra text explaining the stage of practice based on faith takes over seven sheets of paper, the Buddha stage takes over three sheets of text, and the stage of the pure mind takes five lines of sūtra text, like that drawn image it is also broad at the beginning and end and narrow in the middle. Furthermore, these three are successively accomplished in both the tenor and the vehicle of the metaphor. In the metaphor, fundamentally it is the hard and sharp vajra; through fabrication it forms the pestle, and through painting it forms the image. In the tenor, fundamentally it is prajñā of essence and function; through cultivation it forms the stages, and through explanation it forms the written words. Furthermore, among each of the three items of the tenor and vehicle, one item is real and the remaining two are conventional. In the metaphor, the hard and sharp vajra is real, while the pestle shape and the drawn image are conventional. In the tenor, prajñā of essence and function is real, while the stages and written words are conventional. Because the beginnings and ends of these three items resemble one another, the name "vajra" is established. However, the first is the Buddha's original intention, while the other two are the intentions of the bodhisattva and past masters.

3.83

"Due to the previous six..." and so forth: among them, the first five are hard and sharp, and the sixth is broad and narrow; within the broad and narrow, both the signifier and the signified are contained.

3.84

In the Commentary, from "The latter four..." onward is the second part: generally indicating the latter four. One should first ask: "Within the third phrase, the sūtra text is fully exhausted; how then are the latter four correlated and subsumed?" Therefore it says this. It means that within each and every abode the antidotes are expounded; in the place of the antidotes, non-loss of the Middle Way is revealed; within non-loss, the stages are established; and within the Middle Way of the previous six, the name is established, and so forth.

3.85

In the Commentary, from "Eighteen..." onward is the third part: extensively explaining the third [topic], in three parts:

3.86

First, directly discerning the eighteen abodes. The Commentary fully lists the names of the eighteen abodes, briefly explains their meanings, concurrently clarifies the antidotes to the twelve kinds of hindrances, and points to the sūtra text to make known to which topical division they belong. However, for the sūtra text of each abode, the Commentary only briefly marks three or five characters; because the textual phrasing at the beginning and end of the sūtra's original divisions is somewhat repetitive, fearing that the words might be conflated, it does not mark the very first characters, but only takes the distinctive text that follows. Nor does it conclude where it extends to, its intention being brevity. Below, following the text, we will briefly narrate the beginnings and endings to demarcate the preceding from the following.

3.87

In the first [abode], "generating the mind" means generating the four kinds of mind, such as the vast, the supreme, and so forth. The sūtra text goes from "The Buddha told Subhūti: 'Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should thus subdue their minds..." up to "...if a bodhisattva has the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a lived life, they are not a bodhisattva." Because a Mahāyāna bodhisattva at the very beginning naturally ought to generate this mind, it occupies the first place among the eighteen abodes.

3.88

In the second, the sūtra goes from "Furthermore, Subhūti, in phenomena one should practice generosity without abiding in anything..." up to "...Subhūti, a bodhisattva should only abide as taught, not abiding..." and so forth. "And so forth" has two meanings: first, it equates to the rest of the text, as quoted above; second, it equates to the rest of the meanings, meaning it equates to the remaining five [pāramitās] such as morality and so on. Although this points to the sūtra, it concurrently explains the meaning: the pāramitā is that which is to be conformed with, and morality and the rest are that which can conform; since subject and object both unite, it is called "corresponding." Consequently, merely practicing generosity, morality, and so on without being able to be free from signs, or practicing freedom from signs without practicing generosity, morality, and so on—these are all non-corresponding practices. Only when one is free from signs directly in the practice of generosity, morality, and so on, and practices generosity, morality, and so on in the place of freedom from signs, can it truly be called corresponding practice.

3.89

In the third, the sūtra goes from "Subhūti, what do you think? Can the Tathāgata be seen by physical marks?" up to "...if one sees that all marks are non-marks, then one sees the Tathāgata."

3.90

Question: "The physical body is a sign; why should one seek it free from signs?"

3.91

Answer: "The marks of the physical body are shadows; the signless dharmakāya is the substance. If one wishes to attain the physical body with marks, one must see the signless essence of Dharma. Without having seen the essence of Dharma, one cannot manifest marks; therefore it first causes one to see marks as non-marks, and only then does one attain the body of physical marks. Here the meaning lies outside the words; therefore the treatise formulated the division with this meaning."

3.92

In the fourth, regarding "spoken explanation": the sūtra goes from "Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying: 'World-Honoured One!..." up to "...even Dharma should be cast aside, how much more so non-Dharma." Question: "The dharmakāya is not spoken explanation; why is spoken explanation taken as the dharmakāya?" Therefore the Commentary explains: "Because principle is revealed through speech." This has two meanings: 1. Revealing the dharmakāya through spoken explanation, while the dharmakāya is not spoken explanation. 2. The detachment inherent in written words is itself the dharmakāya; there is no separate dharmakāya.

3.93

Regarding "the mark of knowledge": the sūtra goes from "Subhūti, what do you think? Did the Tathāgata attain anuttarasamyaksambodhi?..." up to "...all worthies and nobles are distinguished by means of asaṃskṛta phenomena." Thus it takes signless, asaṃskṛta phenomena as the mark of knowledge. Therefore the Awakening of Faith says: "Because the mark of knowledge has nothing that can be seen."

3.94

Regarding "the mark of merit": the sūtra goes from "Subhūti, what do you think? If a person filled a trichiliocosm with the seven treasures in order to practice generosity..." up to "...Subhūti, what is called Buddha-dharma is not Buddha-dharma." This means that by upholding and expounding this sūtra one obtains outflow-free merit, which brings about the sublime physical body; this is called the mark of merit. However, it is the mark of merit of the dharmakāya; the mark of merit is not the dharmakāya. This is a genitive compound (tatpuruṣa).

3.95

Regarding "5. In..." and below, the text has three parts:

3.96

First, directly presenting this text. The sūtra goes from "Subhūti, what do you think? Can a srotāpanna think: 'I have attained the fruit of a srotāpanna'?..." up to "...one who delights in the practice of araṇā."

3.97

"Attaining the superior": because the four fruits of the Hīnayāna are superior to the four directions of practice, superiority is manifested in contrast to inferiority. This uses the small to illustrate the great. If even a petty person has no fault, how could a noble man have an error? It is by being free from conceit that one comes to realize the fruit. Therefore the sūtras all say: "I do not have this thought: 'I have attained the fruit of a stream-enterer,' and so forth."

3.98

From "From this point on..." down: second, generally relating the latter section.

3.99

As for "The intention clarifies..." and so forth: this narrates the intention of the sequence. First it was asked: "Why do the previous four abidings not speak of abandoning hindrances?" Hence this is stated. The meaning is that whenever one wishes to cultivate and advance, one must first generate the mind [for bodhi]; having generated the mind, one then cultivates practice; hence there are the first and the second. Generating the mind and cultivating practice originally seeks the Buddha-fruit. Within the Buddha-fruit there are only two bodies; between the coarse and the subtle, the form [body] comes first and the Dharma [body] after; hence there are the third and the fourth. When cultivating superior practice previously, it was feared that conceit might hinder entry into the noble stages; thus the small fruits were spoken of to illustrate the Mahāyāna. Now, having abandoned hindrances, one enters the stages of the ten dedications; hence it is only from the fifth [abiding] onward that abandoning hindrances is spoken of. However, for each of these twelve hindrances, upon reaching each abiding one must step back to the preceding to discern the intention of what follows. As in saying: although one has attained freedom from conceit, one is still of little learning, hence in the sixth abiding the hindrance of little learning is remedied; the others are all modeled on this. Because these hindrances are all before the [bhumis] (bhūmi) and can hinder the path of seeing, but are not on the bhūmis, it is said that when hindrances are exhausted, one enters the path of realization. However, the hindrance is what is remedied, its text lying outside the sūtra; the abiding is the remedy itself, being the exact text of the sūtra. If one explains them in correlation, the principle becomes clear.

3.100

From "Now one should..." down: third, individually concluding the remedies. According to the Pañcaskandhaka-śāstra, conceit has two kinds: seven and nine, which differ only in being expanded or combined; this is spoken with respect to people entering the Path. As for the seven, the treatise says: 1. Conceit (māna): thinking oneself superior to an inferior, or thinking oneself equal to an equal. 2. Overweening conceit (atimāna): thinking oneself superior to an equal, or thinking oneself equal to a superior. 3. Conceit beyond conceit (mānātimāna): conceiving oneself to be superior to one who is superior to oneself. 4. Erroneous conceit (mithyāmāna): conceiving oneself to have virtues when one actually has no virtues. 5. 'I'-conceit (asmimāna): conceiving 'I' and 'mine' regarding the five aggregates. 6. Exaggerated conceit (adhimāna): conceiving oneself to have attained what is not yet attained among the superior and wonderful dharmas. 7. Inferiority conceit (ūnamāna): conceiving oneself to be only slightly inferior to those who are greatly superior. Those to be abandoned now are precisely the fifth and the sixth, because one realizes the selflessness of persons and because one grasps one's own fruit.

3.101

The sixth: the sūtra runs from "The Buddha told Subhūti, 'What do you think? Formerly, when the Tathāgata was with Dīpaṃkara Buddha..." down to "...there was actually nothing attained." How is it that abandoning hindrances brings about the attainment of the abiding? The commentary next says: from "Abandoning the..." down is the hindrance to be abandoned. From "Not abandoning..." down concludes the meaning of the abiding. Therein, the upper phrase establishes the abiding, and the lower phrase abandons the hindrance. If one departs from the Buddha's era, it is not called an abiding-place; lacking a Buddha preaching the Dharma, it is then of little learning and becomes a hindrance. If one does not depart from the Buddha's era, it constitutes an abiding-place; constantly meeting the Buddha preaching the Dharma, one is then endowed with much learning and abandons the hindrance. However, whenever one cultivates practice, wisdom is the root; wishing to obtain wisdom, one must have much learning; hence relying on the Buddha to abide abandons the hindrance of little learning. Therefore a sūtra says: "Much learning increases wisdom; diligent learning is the foremost method."

3.102

Question: "If that is so, according to the present sūtra saying, 'in the Dharma there was actually nothing attained,' how does this constitute much learning?"

3.103

Answer: "This is hearing without hearing, attaining without attaining. Attaining without attainment is true attainment; hearing without hearing is real hearing. Thus this abiding is accomplished."

3.104

The seventh: the sūtra runs from "Subhūti, what do you think? Does a bodhisattva adorn Buddha-lands?" down to "...should produce a mind without any abiding." From "Abandoning the small..." down is the hindrance to be abandoned. Clinging to conditions is simply making a thought; it is essentially one meaning.

3.105

As for "Conditioning shapes..." and so forth: the meaning is that if one grasps the marks of form, sound, and so on as a land, there are boundaries and limits, hence it is called 'small,' because it does not equal the dharmakāya. If one does not grasp marks, vikalpa does not arise, mind and object are both forgotten, so what boundaries or limits could there ultimately be? Thus it is called 'great.'

3.106

From "Tallying with the Dharma..." down: explains the reason. The intention is to cause one to forget preconceptions and adorn the land of dharmatā, and not to cause thoughts to arise, thereby adorning the land of dharmalakṣaṇa. Therefore the sūtra says: "One should not produce a mind abiding in form... one should produce a mind without any abiding." The gāthā explains: "Wisdom practices the penetration of consciousness-only; / Thus one grasps the pure land. / It is not of shape, the foremost substance; / It is not an adornment—such is the intention of adornment."

3.107

The eighth: the sūtra runs from "Subhūti, what do you think? Suppose a person had a body like Sumeru, the king of mountains..." down to "...this is named a great body."

3.108

"Maturation": this means that through teaching and transforming, one causes sentient beings to generate roots and mature their faculties so that they have awakening and realization. From "Abandoning the renunciation..." down: the hindrance to be abandoned. If one abandons sentient beings, one cannot teach and transform them; therefore, causing one to abandon this hindrance accomplishes the abiding. From "If one sees large and small..." down: explains the reason through the converse. The meaning is that being able to deliver beings is entirely because one does not see large or small. Therefore the sūtra says: "The Buddha spoke of non-body; this is named a great body." How could large and small remain? If one sees large and small, there are high and low, close and distant, hatred and love. Since the mind is not equal, how could it be called great compassion? Even if one transforms beings, it only creates affection and views: those who are hated are cast away, and one then abandons sentient beings; how could there be maturation? If one uses the mind in the opposite manner, no being is left behind, and whether slow or swift, all can be matured.

3.109

The ninth: the sūtra runs from "Subhūti, as many grains of sand as there are in the Ganges..." down to "...the Tathāgata has nothing preached." From "Abandoning the delight..." down: the hindrance to be abandoned. Following non-Buddhist treatises is precisely distraction; if one can merely stay far from them, the abiding is accomplished. That is, the writings of Confucianism and Mohism—aside from the Buddha's teaching, all are non-Buddhist treatises. Because matters of non-Buddhist treatises are the source of fame and gain, if one seeks fame, how could the mind be free from distraction? Furthermore, obtaining it brings joy, losing it brings suffering; suffering brings grief, joy brings excess. Due to these karmic entanglements, one sinks for lifetimes; tracing back to the origin, it is all due to following non-Buddhist treatises.

First 109 of 215 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

金剛經纂要刊定記 — Classical Chinese