仁王護國般若經疏 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.1

Spoken by Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai; recorded by his disciple Guanding.

"Contemplating emptiness" means that wondrous signless wisdom illuminates the signless realm; inner and outer are both still, and object and contemplation are both empty, hence it is called the Chapter on Contemplating Emptiness. Furthermore, ordinary persons do not recognize it, heterodox paths falsely grasp it, and the two vehicles are bogged down in it; now the bodhisattva, using the correct wisdom of prajñā, contemplates emptiness as non-empty, transcending both the ordinary and the noble, hence it is called contemplating emptiness. Moreover, ordinary persons are attached to existence, the two vehicles are attached to emptiness; the bodhisattva relinquishes existence and further contemplates emptiness. Again, contemplation is that which contemplates, and emptiness is that which is contemplated; when both that which contemplates and that which is contemplated are empty, that is the true Buddha's knowledge and vision. Therefore the lower text says: "Seeing realm and seeing wisdom is not the noble seeing." The six chapters below are called the principal teaching, divided broadly into four: the preceding three chapters clarify inner protection; the one chapter of "Protecting the State" clarifies outer protection; the "Chapter on Scattering Flowers" clarifies repaying kindness through offerings; the "Chapter on Receiving and Upholding" clarifies the characteristics of propagating the sūtra. The first text is further divided into two: first, briefly introducing the two protections; next, extensively explaining them through questions and answers. The first text has four parts: first, knowing the intent of the request; second, briefly and directly introducing [them]; third, exhorting them to generate the three wisdoms; fourth, rejoicing and making offerings. Now for the first: "At that time the Buddha addressed the great assembly" refers to the capacities receptive to the teaching. "The sixteen great kings wished to inquire about the causes and conditions for protecting their states" gives rise to the subsequent sūtra text on outer protection and serves as the basis for the "Chapter on Protecting the State." From "I shall now first for you" onward is, second, directly and briefly introducing the two protections, namely cause and fruition. The causes and conditions for protecting the Buddha fruition give rise to this chapter; the causes and conditions for protecting the practices of the daśabhūmi give rise to the "Chapter on Scattering Flowers." "The practices of the daśabhūmi" refers to protecting the cause.

3.4

Question: The king asked only about the causes and conditions for protecting the state; why did the Buddha first explain to him the causes and effects of protecting the Buddha? Answer: Human sentiments are coarse and shallow, whereas the wondrous principle is difficult to comprehend. Although the king, out of coarse sentiment, asked only for the one, the Buddha bestowed both the coarse and the wondrous. Furthermore, if he had only explained how to protect the state, the peace and happiness of the land would increase arrogance; now the Buddha speaks of supramundane causes and effects to cause him to weary of the mundane and delight in entering the real. Moreover, to request little is the etiquette of a disciple, while to bestow much is the standard for a master. Also, requesting little signifies non-greed, while bestowing much signifies non-stinginess. Furthermore, requesting little and bestowing much signifies the intention of compassionate guidance, and so forth. From "Listen attentively, listen attentively" onwards, third, is the exhortation to generate the three wisdoms: listening attentively causes the wisdom derived from hearing to arise; reflecting well on it causes the wisdom derived from reflection to arise; and practicing in accordance with the Dharma causes the wisdom derived from cultivation to arise, and so forth. From "Then King Prasenajit" onwards, fourth, is rejoicing and making offerings. The king saying "Excellent!" is an expression of faithful compliance. It was for this great matter of causes and conditions that [the Buddha] appeared in the world, explicitly causing sentient beings to open, reveal, awaken to, and enter into the Buddha's knowledge and vision. The Lotus Sūtra takes the Buddha's knowledge and vision as the great matter; the Nirvāṇa Sūtra takes the buddha-nature as the great matter; the Vimalakīrti and Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā take the inconceivable as the great matter; the Avataṃsaka Sūtra takes the dharmadhātu as the great matter. Now this Prajñā takes the causes and effects of attaining buddhahood as the great matter: although the names differ, their meaning is one. Therefore the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom states: "When the Buddha expounds prajñā, incalculable sentient beings shall carry on the lineage of the buddhas"—this is the great matter. Again, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā states: "Subhūti said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, prajñā arises for the sake of a great matter.'" Nāgārjuna explained: "Being able to destroy all great afflictions of sentient beings and being able to confer the supreme, great Dharma of all buddhas is called the great matter." Scattering flowers signifies practicing the causes; forming a canopy signifies attaining the fruit; covering the assembly signifies compassionately delivering beings and shading and nurturing all creatures, and so forth.

3.5

From "At that time the great king again arose, made obeisance" onwards is the second part, the detailed explanation through questions and answers. The text has two parts: first the questions, then the answers. The first section has two parts: first, clarifying the paying of respect; from "said to the Buddha" onwards, second, formally asking the question. Within the question there are two: first, asking about protecting the fruit; second, asking about protecting the causes. From "The Buddha said: A bodhisattva transforming the four kinds of birth" onwards is the second part, the Buddha's answer. The text broadly divides into three: first, this chapter clarifies the practice of benefiting oneself, answering the first question; next, the "Chapter on Transformation" clarifies the practice of benefiting others, answering the second question; finally, the "Chapter on the Two Truths" clarifies that on which the two protections rely. Regarding the answer to the first question, the text has two parts: first, formally explaining the contemplation of emptiness; later, from "When the Buddha expounded the Dharma" onwards, the assembly of the time obtaining benefit. The first section has two parts: first, formally explaining; later, summarizing. Within the explanation are two: first, setting forth the gist and formally explaining; later, re-explaining through questions and answers. The first text has two: first, the formal explanation; second, concluding the practice. The first again has two: first, the objective realm to be transformed; second, the wisdom capable of transforming. First, "four kinds of birth" refers to the objective realm to be transformed. Heavenly beings and hell-dwellers are born through transformation; ghosts have two kinds of birth, from the womb and through transformation; as for animals, birds and dragons encompass all four kinds of birth; among humans there are also four kinds. At that time humans were born from the womb; the sons of Viśākhā were born from thirty-two eggs; the monks Great Mountain and Small Mountain were born from crane eggs; the courtesan Āmrapālī was born from moisture. At the beginning of the kalpa, all humans were born through transformation, and so forth. From "does not contemplate form as suchness" onwards, second, clarifies the wisdom capable of transforming. The text has three parts: first, in terms of dharmas; second, explanation; third, conclusion. First, in terms of five dharmas: first, the five aggregates; second, sentient beings; third, the fruit of buddhahood; fourth, the bodhisattva; fifth, the true and the deluded. The five aggregates are what is relied upon; sentient beings are what relies. The Buddha is the fruit; the bodhisattva is the cause. The five aggregates and sentient beings are deluded; the Buddha and bodhisattvas are true. Now, first, the five aggregates are existent, and suchness is empty: if one sees form and sees suchness, one cannot avoid [the views of] annihilation and permanence—suchness is annihilation, while form is permanence. If one contemplates the cessation of form and only then [finds] suchness, this is the view of the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. If one realizes that form is itself suchness, this is the view of the shared [teaching]. If suchness is itself form, this is the view of the distinctive [teaching]. If one knows that all dharmatā is truly empty and without arising or ceasing, identical with the limit of reality, equal to the nature of phenomena, without duality and without distinction, this is the view of the perfect [teaching]. Now, saying "does not contemplate form as suchness" and so forth is the view of the perfect [teaching]. "Sentient beings, self, and person as suchness": the five aggregates arising together in assembly is called "sentient beings"; "self" means grasping the internal five aggregates as the conventionally designated person. "Permanence, bliss, self, and purity as suchness": the previous five aggregates and sentient beings are inverted dharmas, not permanent, blissful, self, or pure; now the fruit of buddhahood attains non-inverted dharmas, which are permanent, blissful, self, and pure. Though there are differences according to the exhaustion of afflictions, their nature is ever without distinction, like ice and water; hence it is called "suchness". From "one who knows, one who sees, and one who possesses life-span" onwards clarifies the bodhisattva. There are three: first, the stages; second, the persons; third, the practices. Regarding the stages, the ten faiths are called "knowing"; the ten understandings and ten practices are called "seeing"; from the [ten] dedications up to the bhūmis is called "one who possesses life-span"; although there are three distinctions, they are of a single suchness. "Bodhisattva as suchness" is, second, clarifying the suchness of the person. From "the six perfections" onwards is, third, clarifying the suchness of the practice.

3.6

Question: The Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "All sentient beings are suchness; all dharmas are also suchness; all the noble and worthy ones are also suchness; even unto Maitreya, it is also suchness." How does this differ from the present [text]? Answer: That is true emptiness; this is wondrous existence.

3.7

Question: What are true emptiness and wondrous existence? Answer: Activity being identical to stillness is true emptiness. Stillness being identical to activity is wondrous existence. Because of true emptiness, it is not permanent; because of wondrous existence, it is not annihilated. True emptiness does not abide in saṃsāra; wondrous existence does not abide in nirvāṇa. Because of wondrous existence, one can give rise to great compassion (karuṇā); because of true emptiness, one can generate great loving-kindness (maitrī).

3.8

Question: The Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says "all are suchness", whereas this [text] says "does not contemplate form as suchness"; why is that? Answer: If one one-sidedly contemplates all as suchness, it is still [the view of] annihilation; if one does not contemplate suchness, it is still [the view of] permanence. The Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa speaks of suchness to cause one to leave behind the view of permanence; this [text] speaks of non-contemplation to cause one to leave behind the view of annihilation. Once the two views are abandoned, the Middle Way becomes clear of itself, and so forth.

3.9

"The two truths as suchness" clarifies the true and the deluded. The worldly truth is deluded, and the supramundane is true. From "Therefore all dharmatā" onwards is the second part, explanation. The text has three parts: first, explanation; second, reconciliation; third, citing an analogy. Now for the first. All dharmatā is true existence; true emptiness is true emptiness. Because of true emptiness, it does not come; because of true existence, it does not go. Not going, there is no cessation; not coming, there is no arising. With no cessation and no arising, who is ordinary and who is noble? Since there is neither noble nor ordinary, who discusses contemplating or not contemplating? From "identical with the limit of reality" onwards is, second, reconciliation. The limit of reality is still true emptiness, and dharmatā is still wondrous existence; a single color or a single scent is entirely like this, hence it is said to be "identical and equal". "Like empty space" is, third, citing an analogy. In empty space, how could there be the five aggregates, sentient beings, bodhisattvas, all buddhas, the worldly truth, the ultimate truth, arising, ceasing, going, or coming? Fearing that the benighted would not understand, he therefore cited this analogy, and so forth. From "Therefore the aggregates, realms, and bases" onwards is the third part, conclusion. "Non-self" concludes the suchness of the aggregates, realms, bases, sentient beings, and so forth; "sign of non-existence" concludes the suchness of the buddhas, bodhisattvas, one who knows, one who sees, one who possesses life-span, and so forth. From "This is the bodhisattva's..." onwards is the second part, concluding the practice. The Vajracchedikā states: "All worthy and noble ones are distinguished by unconditioned dharmas"—this is identical with this text, and so forth.

3.10

From "said to the Buddha" onwards is the second part, the re-explanation through questions and answers. The text has two parts: first, clarifying the teaching of the three prajñās; second, clarifying the generation of contemplation in reliance on the teaching. Now for the first. The three prajñās constitute three distinctions; the first clarifies the prajñā of dharmatā, with first a question, then an answer. Above it said "does not contemplate form as suchness"; the intention of the question now is: if it is said that this is the bodhisattva's practice of transforming the ten stages so that all dharmas are empty, what kind of sentient beings does the bodhisattva transform? From "Great King, the form of dharmatā" onwards is the second part, the answer. The text has two parts: first, clarifying that in the real there is no transformation; second, clarifying that in the conventional there is transformation. The first text has four parts: first, the realm; second, the contemplation; third, the query; fourth, the explanation. Now for the first. The five aggregates are the realm of the bodhisattva prior to the bhūmis; permanence, bliss, self, and purity are the realm of the bodhisattva on the bhūmis, and so forth. From "not abiding in form" onwards is, second, clarifying the contemplation. Some say: not abiding in form refutes abiding in form; not abiding in non-form refutes abiding in emptiness; not abiding in neither form nor non-form refutes both abiding in emptiness and abiding in existence. Again, not abiding in form refutes abiding in the form aggregate; not abiding in non-form refutes abiding in the other four aggregates; not abiding in neither form nor non-form refutes abiding in all five aggregates. Again, not abiding in form refutes abiding in physical dharmas; not abiding in non-form refutes abiding in mental dharmas; not abiding in neither form nor non-form refutes abiding in dharmas that are neither physical nor mental. Again, not abiding in form is not abiding in existence; not abiding in non-form is not abiding in emptiness; not abiding in neither form nor non-form is not abiding in the emptiness of emptiness. Hence the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says: "The illness of emptiness is also empty." Our present explanation is: fully stated, it should be: not abiding in form, not abiding in non-form, not abiding in both form and non-form, and not abiding in neither form nor non-form; here, the third phrase is omitted, along with the two characters "non-form" in the fourth phrase. Because form is itself emptiness, one does not abide in form. Because emptiness is itself form, one does not abide in non-form. Because form and emptiness are non-dual and yet dual, one does not abide in both form and non-form. Because form and emptiness are dual and yet non-dual, one does not abide in neither form nor non-form. The next four aggregates follow this example. Regarding "not non-abiding": above it spoke of "not abiding"; now it speaks of "not non-abiding", which simply takes non-abiding as abiding, abiding in having nowhere to abide. The Vajracchedikā also states: "One should give rise to that mind which abides nowhere." "Why is this?" is, third, the intent of the query. It asks: why speak of abiding and then also speak of not abiding? From "It is not the suchness of form" onwards is, fourth, the explanation. It is not the suchness of form, therefore one cannot definitively speak of abiding in form. It is not the suchness of non-form, therefore one cannot definitively speak of abiding in non-form.

3.11

From "Because of the worldly truth" onwards, second, clarifies that in the conventional there is transformation. The text has four parts: first, clarifying that because of two conditions one sees that there are sentient beings to be transformed; second, concluding the above meaning that there are no sentient beings; third, clarifying that both heterodox and orthodox views are views; fourth, concluding the orthodox view. Now for the first. As for "worldly truth", there are three kinds of truths: first, the truth of form; second, the truth of mind; third, the truth of emptiness. "Three designations" refers to designation of dharmas, designation of receipt, and designation of names. The three designations here are not those explained in the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, because here there is no Tripiṭaka teaching. "Termed seeing sentient beings": because of the worldly truth and the three designations, there are sentient beings to be transformed. "Because the nature of all beings is real": second, concluding the above meaning of the ultimate truth that there are no sentient beings. All sentient beings are themselves the mark of nirvāṇa and do not undergo further cessation; hence it is called "real". From "even unto all buddhas" onwards, third, clarifies that both heterodox and orthodox views are views. "Three vehicles" refers to śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. "Seven worthies" refers to the seven expedient stages. "Eight noble ones" refers to the four fruits and four directions. Regarding the "sixty-two views", commentators differ; tentatively following the Great Treatise, four propositions are constructed upon each of the five aggregates: regarding the form aggregate, it says that in the past, form, the soul, and the world are permanent—this is true, the rest is false; the other three propositions such as impermanence are likewise, and the remaining aggregates are also like this, making twenty. In the present, having limits, not having limits, and so forth, applied over the five aggregates, makes twenty. After death, going as such, not going as such, and so forth, also makes twenty, making sixty. Soul and body being one, and soul and body being different, makes sixty-two views, and so forth. From "Great King, if one designates seeing by name" onwards, fourth, concludes the orthodox view. If one knows that all dharmas possess only conventional names, this is designated as "seeing"; it is not the same as worldly people seeing all dharmas, and so forth.

3.12

From "said to the Buddha" below is the second [section], clarifying observational prajñā. The text has two parts: first the question, then the answer. The gist of the question is: Since existent phenomena are not the Great Vehicle, how does one illuminate [them]? This objection arises from the preceding text, "[one does] not not see all phenomena." From "Great King, the Mahāyāna" below is the second [part], the answer. The text has two parts: first brief, then detailed. The gist of the first answer is: The seeing of the Great Vehicle is seeing that phenomena are non-phenomena, because form and other phenomena are empty. From "If phenomena are not non-phenomena" below is the second [part], elaborating the answer and explanation. The text has two parts: first directly elaborating the explanation, second clarifying that the wisdom capable of contemplating doubly illuminates both emptiness and existence. The first text has two parts: first clarifying the emptiness of phenomena and the emptiness of nature, next examining phenomena in sequence to clarify emptiness. As for the first: Saying "if phenomena are not non-phenomena" is called the emptiness of phenomena. "The nature of phenomena is empty": if their nature were originally not empty, one could not cause them to become empty. Because their nature is fundamentally empty in itself, all phenomena are empty. From "form, feeling, perception, compositional factors" below is the second [part], examining phenomena in sequence to clarify emptiness. The text has two parts: first directly clarifying, then explaining and completing the meaning of emptiness. First, emptiness is clarified with reference to six gates. The *Dà zhìdù lùn* says: "The emptiness of the five aggregates is the emptiness of retributive fruition; the emptiness of the twelve sense bases is the emptiness of experiencing; the emptiness of the eighteen elements is the emptiness of distinct natures. These three kinds are spoken because the illnesses [of beings] differ: for those who doubt mental concomitants, the five aggregates are taught; for those who doubt physical form, the twelve sense bases are taught; for those who doubt form, mind, and the like, the eighteen elements are taught." The "six great elements" are called all-pervading emptiness. The *Āgama*s state: "The six kings disputed over which was greatest. Earth said, 'I can carry'; water said, '[I can] float and moisten'; fire said, '[I can] burn and illuminate'; wind said, '[I can] generate and move'; space said, '[I can] contain'; consciousness said, 'Without me, form would perish.'" Although the [other] five are great, consciousness is primary; hence it says that the four great elements surround space, and consciousness resides within them. The four noble truths are the emptiness of objects, and conditioned arising is the emptiness of principles, and so forth. From "These phenomena" below is the second [part], explaining and completing the meaning of emptiness. The text has two parts: first with respect to the aggregate of consciousness, next by analogy to the [other] four aggregates and all phenomena. The first text has four parts: 1. stating the main thesis, 2. explaining by category, 3. questioning and examining, 4. explaining and resolving. As for the first: phenomena of form are empty because they possess five aspects. "Instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing": the masters of the Lesser Vehicle either say that arising is before, enduring is next, and ceasing is after; or they say arising and enduring are simultaneous. Neither avoids difficulty. Why? If one says arising is before, enduring next, and ceasing after, then at the time of arising there is no enduring, because arising is prior. If there is no enduring, how can there be arising? For previously there is no enduring, and enduring belongs to this arising; if arising cannot endure, then there is no arising. If prior to enduring there is no arising, then there is also no enduring, because there is no cause. If before arising there were enduring, then arising and enduring would be simultaneous. If enduring only exists after arising has ceased, then enduring is not possessed by arising. This is the fault of positing difference. If arising and enduring are simultaneous, then cause and effect would be of one body, and birth and death would share the same characteristic; this is the error of positing oneness. Now, saying "instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing" differs from both explanations, because the substance of all phenomena shifts and flows from moment to moment without a temporary stop; it is also that the time of arising is itself the time of enduring and the time of ceasing, like a swift flame passing over a blade's point, or a coursing steed passing a blade without stop, coming without any temporary stay. Therefore the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* says: "You right now are also arising, also aging, and also ceasing." "Instantly existent, instantly empty": the nature of form is empty in itself, not empty because form is destroyed. From "ksana by ksana" below is the second, explaining by category, clarifying that every thought-moment is empty, identical to the five above. A kṣaṇa is an extremely short time. "Why is that?" is the third, questioning and examining. The intention is: arising and ceasing are mutually contradictory; how can one say "instantly arising, instantly enduring, instantly ceasing," and so on? From "ninety ksanas" below is the fourth, explaining and resolving. Ninety small kṣaṇas make one large thought-moment; within one thought-moment, one kṣaṇa further has nine hundred arisings and ceasings; therefore at the time of arising there are already enduring and ceasing. Furthermore, ninety kṣaṇas make one thought-moment; one kṣaṇa within one thought-moment undergoes nine hundred arisings and ceasings; one thought-moment has ninety kṣaṇas, bringing together eighty-one thousand arisings and ceasings. Arising and ceasing subsume kṣaṇas, and kṣaṇas subsume a single thought-moment; thus mental phenomena cannot be apprehended. This clarifies the emptiness of mind. If one divides the various sense organs by the four great elements, the sense organs cannot be apprehended; if one divides the four great elements by the four subtle elements, the four great elements cannot be apprehended; if one divides the four subtle elements by coarse subtle elements, the four subtle elements cannot be apprehended; if one divides coarse subtle elements by atomic particles, coarse subtle elements cannot be apprehended. Reducing form down to atomic particles, and fathoming the mind to the limit of arising and ceasing—when form is exhausted and mind is fathomed, there is sudden openness without abiding. The abiding of non-abiding cannot be named; one forcibly terms it emptiness: this protects the buddha-fruit of the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. If one sees that form is the emptiness of form, and sees that mind is the emptiness of mind, without attainment and without abiding, this protects the buddha-fruit of the shared [teaching]. If one sees that the two phenomena of form and mind are both one and different, vast as the dharmadhātu, ultimate as empty space, fitting like a box and lid, this protects the buddha-fruit of the distinctive [teaching]. If one sees that the two phenomena of form and mind are originally empty and quiescent, unmoving, non-abiding, unborn, and unceasing, this protects the buddha-fruit of the perfect [teaching]. From "even form" below is the second [part], explaining by category the four aggregates and all phenomena: they too are instantly arising, instantly ceasing, instantly existent, and instantly empty.

3.13

From "because prajñāpāramitā is empty" below is the second [part], clarifying that the wisdom capable of contemplating doubly illuminates both emptiness and existence. The text has two parts: first clarifying contemplation and illumination, next clarifying gain and loss. The first further has two parts: 1. illuminating emptiness, 2. illuminating existence. The first is signless; the latter has signs. "Signless" means that not only is there nothing illuminated, but there is also nothing capable of illuminating; it illuminates that which has nothing illuminated. In the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra*, this is named real prajñā. "Having signs" engages and distinguishes the ordinary and the noble throughout immeasurable doors of teaching; in the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra*, this is named conforming prajñā. Within the text on illuminating emptiness, there are further two divisions: first clarifying the characteristics of illumination, because within the wisdom of prajñā there is not the slightest real phenomenon, and thus it illuminates the emptiness of all phenomena. "Not seeing conditions" means that the twelve links of conditioned arising are empty. "Not seeing the truths" means that the phenomena of the four truths are empty. "Up to all phenomena are empty" means that the six great elements and other phenomena are empty. Speaking of "not seeing": because one contemplates all phenomena as empty, it is called "not seeing"; it does not mean that failure to illuminate is called "not seeing." Thus the sūtra says: "Neither seeing nor [non-]seeing is called all real phenomena," and so on. From "internal emptiness" below is the second [division], clarifying the delimitation of emptiness. Delimitations are of twelve kinds; the *Dà zhìdù lùn* has eighteen emptinesses. The treatise asks: "If few, there should be only one emptiness; if many, there should be immeasurable. Why are there eighteen?" Nāgārjuna replies: "If brief, the matter is not comprehensive; if expanded, the matter is cumbersome and difficult to comprehend. It is like taking medicine: if too little, the illness is not cured; if too much, the disease worsens. Expounding emptiness now is also like this: if spoken briefly, it cannot destroy wrong views; if spoken extensively, it borders on superfluous expansion. This sūtra treats illnesses according to the occasion; neither too much nor too little, there are only twelve." "Internal emptiness" means that within the six internal sense bases there is no spiritual self. "External emptiness" means that within the six external dusts there is no "mine." "Internal and external emptiness" means contemplating sense organs and sense objects together, lacking both self and "mine." "Emptiness of the conditioned" means that the conjunction of form and mind produces aggregates, elements, and sense bases, which are all nonexistent. "Emptiness of the unconditioned" is the emptiness of space, cessation through deliberation, and cessation without deliberation. "Emptiness of the beginningless": non-Buddhists take the primal darkness as the beginning; destroying this view is called the emptiness of the beginningless. "Emptiness of nature": all phenomena are originally nonexistent, but the deluded impute existence, even clinging to the claim that the Tathāgata-nature and the like are definitely existent; to destroy this view, it is called the emptiness of nature. Thus the sūtra says: "The eye is empty, without self and without 'mine.' Why is that? Because its nature is naturally so. Up to the mind, it is also like this." The *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* also says: "Contemplate the eye as unborn and without self-nature; consciousness is empty, quiescent, and nonexistent." "Emptiness of the ultimate truth": originally conventional truth is empty, and conventional truth does not exist; this is also empty. "Emptiness of prajñāpāramitā": the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* says, "The great emptiness is the emptiness of prajñā"; the *Dà zhìdù lùn* says, "The ten directions all being empty is called great emptiness." "Emptiness of cause": the six pāramitās and the like are empty. "Emptiness of fruition": bodhi and nirvāṇa are empty. "Emptiness of emptiness": the *Dà zhìdù lùn* says, "Using the various emptinesses to destroy internal and external phenomena, and then using this emptiness to destroy the various emptinesses, is called the emptiness of emptiness. Furthermore, using emptiness to destroy existence, those who grasp existence speak of emptiness; if they cling to emptiness as correct, one must use this emptiness of emptiness to destroy it." From "merely because of the aggregation of phenomena, there is existence" below is the second [part], clarifying the illumination of existence. The text has three parts: first clarifying existence through the gate of the three designations, as explained above. From "because of the aggregation of causes, there is existence" below is the second, clarifying existence through the gate of the four truths. The aggregation of causes is the cause of birth and death, which is the truth of origin. The aggregation of fruition is the fruit of birth and death, which is the truth of suffering. The ten practices are the truth of the path; from the ten faiths up to the ten stages, each has ten kinds of practice gates. The buddha-fruit is nirvāṇa, which is the truth of cessation. "Up to all existence in the six destinies": the third clarifies existence with reference to the six destinies, the twenty-five realms of existence, and so forth.

3.14

From "Good sons, if there is a bodhisattva" below is the second [part], clarifying gain and loss. The text has two parts: first clarifying that wrong contemplation is loss, second clarifying that right contemplation is gain. As for the first: If a bodhisattva arouses the mind to practice and study prajñā, and sees that there are phenomena, beings, a self, a person, a knower, or a seer, they are no different from worldly ordinary people. From "not moving with respect to all phenomena" below is the second [part], clarifying right contemplation. The text has two parts: 1. clarifying practice, 2. clarifying stages. As for the first: Saying "unmoving" means that form itself is empty, not that form is analyzed [into emptiness]. "Not arriving": the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra* says, "The phenomenon of sameness cannot be reached by any noble ones. Subhūti addressed the Buddha: 'It may be that other noble ones do not arrive, but why does the Buddha not arrive?' The Buddha said, 'Even the Buddha does not arrive. Why is that? The Buddha is sameness; sameness is the Buddha; because the Buddha and sameness are non-dual, he does not arrive.'" "Unceasing": emptiness is itself form. "Signless": both form being empty and emptiness being form are signless. "Without signlessness": signlessness is also nonexistent. Below, the other phenomena are treated analogously.

3.15

From "This is the first bhūmi" onwards is the second [section], clarifying the stages. The text has two [parts]: first, it clarifies right contemplation; later, it indicates the place where it was preached. The first text has three [parts]: first, the stage; second, the name; third, the function. Now this is the first. "A single thought-moment" refers to [the transition] from the tenth dedication, where within a single thought-moment of prajñā wisdom there is the first bhūmi, at which time the eighty-four thousand pāramitās are fully possessed. According to the Bhadrakalpika Sūtra, beginning with the pāramitā of brilliant radiance and ending with the pāramitā of the distribution of relics, there are altogether three hundred and fifty gates of merit; cultivating the six pāramitās for each of them yields two thousand one hundred; taking these two thousand one hundred against the ten phenomena—namely the four great elements and the six decays—and also against the ten good [actions], each having two thousand one hundred, yields twenty-one thousand; then taking these twenty-one thousand against the four [types of] sentient beings—those with an excess of greed, an excess of anger, an excess of delusion, and those in whom the three poisons are equal—each has twenty-one thousand, and combining them makes eighty-four thousand, and so forth. From "namely conveyance is termed" onwards is the second, clarifying right contemplation in terms of name. Some manuscripts read "namely that which is able to transport is named Mahāyāna"; "conveyance" and "transport" have the same meaning. In terms of substance, it is prajñā; in terms of function, it is the Mahāyāna. From "namely destroying makes the diamond" onwards is the third, in terms of function. Being able to destroy defilements like a diamond crushing objects refers to the final single thought-moment of the tenth bhūmi. Being able to depart from distraction is why it is "named samādhi". Within this, a single practice possesses immeasurable gates. From "As in the Guangzan [prajñāpāramitā]" onwards is the second, indicating the place where it was preached.

3.16

From "Great King, this sūtra" onwards is the third [section], praising the prajñā of written words. The text has five [parts]: first, clarifying that many buddhas jointly preach it; second, presenting analogies; third, measuring [merit]; fourth, presenting comparisons; fifth, clarifying the characteristics of faith and understanding. Now this is the first. The Commentary states: "A single graph is called a graph (akṣara); two graphs are called a name (nāma). Two graphs that are not combined cannot constitute a name; only if they are spoken in combination do they become a name. Four graphs and so forth are named a phrase (pada); that which is explained beneath a phrase is named an expression (vyañjana)." From "in the Gaṅgā" onwards is the second, presenting analogies. A billion Mount Sumerus, a billion suns and moons, iron enclosing mountains, and great oceans constitute a great chiliocosm. Like the sands in the river, where each grain of sand is a world, filling them with the seven precious jewels to bestow upon sentient beings, as well as attaining the four fruits. Herein there is the intention of the two gifts of material wealth and Dharma, but the text appears implicit, and so forth. From "is not equal to" onwards is the third, measuring [merit]. A single thought of faith arising in an undefiled mind surpasses the previous two gifts. "How much more so understanding a single phrase" is the fourth, presenting a comparison. Faith merely does not slander; understanding is able to benefit others; thus faith is shallow and understanding is deep. This is said with respect to those of dull faculties. If it is as the Lotus Sūtra says, "Even you, Śāriputra, were able to gain entry into this sūtra through faith," this is precisely faith being understanding, spoken with respect to those of sharp faculties. From "phrases and non-phrases" onwards is the fifth, clarifying the characteristics of faith and understanding. The text has three [parts]: first, clarifying that the words are empty; second, clarifying that both words and meaning are empty; third, clarifying that both persons and dharmas are empty. Now this is the first. "Phrase" is existence; "non-phrase" is non-existence; "neither-phrase-nor-non-phrase" is neither existence nor non-existence. Neither existence [means] it is not the preceding existent phrase; neither non-existence [means] it is not the preceding non-existent phrase. Furthermore, a phrase is precisely written words; a non-phrase is the nature of written words being detached [from them]; neither-phrase-nor-non-phrase is not the preceding views of written words and detachment from nature, and so forth. "Prajñā is not a phrase, and a phrase is not prajñā" is the second, clarifying that both words and meaning are empty. Prajñā not being a phrase is the emptiness of meaning; a phrase not being prajñā is the emptiness of words. Because being precisely words it is not prajñā, and being precisely prajñā it is not words; apart from words there is no prajñā, and apart from prajñā there are no words; within words there is no prajñā, and within prajñā there are no words; seeking each in the other like this cannot be attained, therefore they are inherently empty. Furthermore, words and prajñā—sought in self, other, both, or apart from them—cannot be attained; therefore they are empty. From "Prajñā is also not a bodhisattva" onwards is the third, clarifying that both persons and dharmas are empty. In the text, it should also clarify the emptiness of persons, but it is merely because the text is abbreviated. This divides into two: first, discerning the emptiness of dharmas in terms of causal stages; second, discerning the emptiness of dharmas in terms of the fruition stage. The first text has three [parts]: now this is the first, stating the premise. Prajñā is a dharma; a bodhisattva is a person. Seeking a bodhisattva within prajñā cannot be attained; this is precisely the emptiness of dharmas. "Why is this?" is the second, raising the question. From "the ten bhūmis" onwards is the third, explaining. If in terms of the shared teaching, it explains the beginning, abiding, and end of the ten bhūmis traversed in common by the three vehicles. If in terms of the distinctive teaching, it clarifies the beginning, abiding, and end of the bodhisattva's ten bhūmis. From "nor is it sarvajña" onwards is the second, discerning the emptiness of dharmas in terms of the fruit. In Sanskrit it is sarvajña, translated here as sarvākārajñatā; sarvākārajñatā is precisely the buddha fruit. The buddha fruit is also empty; hence it says "nor is it sarvajña". Mahāyāna is the vehicle; since the person who rides is already empty, the dharma that is ridden is also empty, and so forth.

3.17

From "Great King, if a bodhisattva" onwards is the second [major section], generating contemplation relying on the teaching. The text has two [parts]: first, clarifying wrong contemplation; second, clarifying right contemplation. Now this is the first. "Seeing the object" means seeing the prajñā of dharmatā. "Seeing the wisdom" means seeing the prajñā of contemplative illumination. "Seeing the preaching and seeing the receiving" means seeing the prajñā of written words. Holding such views is the deluded discrimination of an ordinary person, not a noble view. Furthermore, seeing the object refers to seeing dust-objects; seeing the wisdom refers to seeing consciousness; seeing the preaching and seeing the receiving refers to seeing persons. Deluded attachment is starkly apparent, which is not a noble view. From "Seeing the three realms" onwards is the second, clarifying right contemplation. The text has two [parts]: first, clarifying the characteristics of emptiness in terms of defiled and pure causes and effects; second, discerning the characteristics of emptiness in terms of the absence of hearing and preaching. The first text has two [parts]: first, clarifying that birth and death are empty; later, discerning that the buddha fruit is empty. The former further has two [parts]: first, directly clarifying that birth and death are empty; later, explaining the reason for their emptiness. The first text has two [parts]: first, clarifying that active defilements are empty; second, clarifying that residual habit-energies are empty. The first text has two [parts]: first, clarifying birth and death of fragmented portions; later, clarifying birth and death of transformation. The first further has three [parts]: now this is the first, clarifying that the fruit is empty. "Three realms" is the vessel world; "sentient beings" is the world of nominal designations; "retribution" is the world of the five aggregates; this refers to the dependent and proper [retributions] of the three realms. From "the six consciousnesses arising" onwards is the second, clarifying that karma is empty. Through the six consciousnesses grasping the six dust-objects, arising with all defilements and greedily attaching to the five desires, mutually rolling on immeasurably, amassing and storing, it is named a storehouse; because it lacks self-nature, it is named empty, and so forth. From "the three realms are empty" onwards is the third, clarifying that defilements are empty. The root of the three realms is a single thought of foolish mind, darkened before preceding objects, which is called ignorance. Having this ignorance, the three realms are produced. Ignorance is like the earth able to produce all things, hence it is called the root. From "the three stages and nine births" onwards is the second, clarifying that the birth and death of transformation is empty. Some say: the three stages are, first, the stage of seeing, from the ten dedications to the third bhūmi; second, the stage of cultivation, from the fourth bhūmi to the seventh bhūmi; third, the stage of culmination, from the eighth bhūmi to the tenth bhūmi. This is the intention of the distinctive connecting to the shared. "Nine births and extinctions" means each of the preceding three stages has a beginning, abiding, and end, called the nine births and extinctions. Furthermore, within the three realms of the birth and death of transformation, each has three kinds of mind-made bodies. The three realms are named the three stages; each has the birth and extinction of three kinds of mind-made bodies, named the nine births and extinctions. From the first bhūmi to the fifth bhūmi is named the mind-made body enjoying samādhi; the sixth and seventh bhūmis are named the mind-made body awakening to the self-nature of dharmas; from the eighth bhūmi and above is named the mind-made body of unconditioned action. These are the mind-made bodies of the shared and distinctive teachings. "Remaining habits of ignorance": above clarified the active defilements of the five entrenchments; this is the second, clarifying that residual habit-energies are empty.

3.18

From "diamond bodhisattva" onwards is the second, explaining the reason for emptiness. Because this bodhisattva attains the samādhi exhausting principle, the one kind of birth and death, defilements, karma, and so forth are all empty. What is called "delusion" refers to the deluded and false mind creating the karma of birth and death; failing to reach the source of the mind is named delusion, which is precisely defilement. "Fruit" is precisely proper retribution. The fruit has birth and extinction, therefore it can be called empty. That "there is the emptiness of the fruit" is because the dependent retribution of the three realms is empty. Furthermore, the emptiness of the fruit refers to the birth and death of transformation being empty. The emptiness of the cause refers to the karma and defilements of the three realms being empty. As for "samādhi exhausting principle", it means that when a bodhisattva attains this samādhi, they penetrate the principle and exhaust the source, reaching the very end of the root of ignorance; hence it is named the samādhi exhausting principle, and so forth.

3.19

From "sarvajña" onwards is the second, clarifying that the buddha fruit is empty. The text has three [parts]: now this is the first, clarifying that wisdom and severance are empty. "Sarvajña is also empty" is the emptiness of wisdom. "The emptiness of the fruit of extinction" is the emptiness of severance. "Or already empty before" is the emptiness of fundamental cause buddha-nature. Buddha-nature is fundamentally empty of itself, not made empty by deduction; hence it says "or already empty before". From "The Buddha attains the three unconditioned [dharmas]" onwards is the second, clarifying that the unconditioned is empty. "Extinction through deliberation" refers to the contemplation of mind; when the Buddha rightly contemplates the mind, extinguishing defilements, it is named extinction through deliberation. "Extinction not through deliberation" refers to the fundamental cause buddha-nature, whose nature is fundamentally pure of itself, without the defiling stains of afflictions, extinguishing delusions without toiling in contemplative practice. "Space" is that in which non-form appears. From "sarvajña" onwards is the third, concluding on the emptiness of the fruit, and so forth.

3.20

From "Good sons" onwards is the second, clarifying the characteristics of emptiness in terms of the absence of hearing and preaching. In the text, the Dharma, the analogy, and their combination can be seen. Hearing and preaching being like space: the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā says, "Hearing is like an illusory person hearing; preaching is like an illusory person preaching; therefore there is no hearing or preaching." Vimalakīrti says, "In preaching the Dharma, there is no preaching and no demonstration; those who hear the Dharma have no hearing and no attainment." "Dharmas are identical with the dharmatā": Vimalakīrti says, "Dharmas are identical with the dharmatā, because they enter all dharmas." Taking this as a parallel for all, they are therefore all thus.

3.21

From "Great King, a bodhisattva" onwards is the second, general conclusion. First, it concludes on the substance that is able to protect. From "protects prajñā" onwards, second, it concludes on the function that is able to protect, and so forth.

3.22

From "The Buddha having spoken" onwards is the second, clarifying the assembly at that time attaining benefit. The text has two [parts]: first, the time; next, the benefit. "The Dharma-eye becoming pure" refers to seeing the middle dharma at the first bhūmi and above, not the Dharma-eye in the Hīnayāna. "Stage of nature" refers to the ten bhūmis traversed in common by the three vehicles, omitting nine and mentioning one. "Stage of faith" is precisely the four indestructible faiths, namely the bodhisattvas of the ten faiths. "Great emptiness and great practice" means that from the first bhūmi of the distinctive teaching and the first abode of the perfect teaching and above, all are named great emptiness and great practice, and so forth.

3.23

Question: When the Buddha preaches prajñā, why are the benefits attained different? Answer: The Lotus Sūtra says, "Growing from the same earth and moistened by the same rain, their roots and stalks, large and small, are naturally distinct; according to their seed-nature, each attains growth." Now in preaching prajñā it is also like this: although a single Dharma is preached, the benefits attained are naturally distinct.

3.24

Chapter 3: Bodhisattvas Teaching and Transforming

3.25

Among the first three chapters that clarify internal protection, this is the second, explaining the protection of the practices of the ten grounds—that is, clarifying benefiting others, answering the second question. Regarding the "Chapter on Teaching and Transforming": A bodhisattva takes benefiting beings as their virtue, teaching sentient beings to abandon all evil, and transforming sentient beings so that they cultivate all good. Furthermore, the Buddha takes this Dharma to teach and transform sentient beings so that they can become bodhisattvas; hence it is called the Chapter on Teaching and Transforming. Furthermore, it is because he uses this Dharma to transform the kings, causing them to recognize prajñā, and so forth. The text of the chapter has two parts: first, posing the questions; second, the Buddha's answer. This is the first. The text has two points of purport: first, repeating the mention of the bodhisattvas who protect the practices of the ten grounds in the previous chapter, who are precisely the persons capable of protecting. Next, when it says "What practice can be practiced?" and so forth, these are properly the words of the question: first, asking about the bodhisattva's practice for self-benefit; second, asking about the practice of benefiting others; third, asking about the characteristics of the sentient beings to be transformed, and so forth. Furthermore, the first question asks upon what one relies to cultivate self-benefit, so he answers it with the five patiences. The next asks upon what stages one relies to practice benefiting others, so he answers it with the practices of the ten grounds. The last asks what characteristics of sentient beings can be transformed, so he [answers that one] regards illusory beings with an illusory body and teaches and transforms them. Furthermore, while the teaching of this sūtra pertains both to self and others, it takes speaking with respect to others as primary; hence the text contains much on the practice of benefiting others, and therefore the translator also titled it "Teaching and Transforming".

First 25 of 32 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

仁王護國般若經疏 — Classical Chinese