仁王經疏 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Yuance of Ximing Temple.

In about to explain this chapter, there are briefly two aspects: first, explaining the chapter's title; second, directly explaining the text. Regarding explaining the chapter's title: according to the Original Commentary, states are of two kinds: first, worldly—the two vehicles and ordinary beings; second, world-transcending—from the ten faiths to the ten bhūmis. Thieves are of two kinds: first, external—robbers, wild beasts, and so on; second, internal—namely the afflictions. Protection is of two kinds: first, external—namely the ghosts and spirits of the hundred classes; second, internal—namely wisdom. Whether internal or external, all are the supernatural power of the buddhas and bodhisattvas. Now it is explained: prajñā can protect the states of humans and devas, hence it is named "Protection of the State."

3.4

Sūtra: At that time, […] prajñāpāramitā.

3.5

Exposition: The second section from here onward directly explains according to the text. Being able to protect the buddha-fruit and the practice of the ten bhūmis are both internal protections. Protecting the realms of humans and devas is external protection. The two kinds of internal protection having been explained above, the "Protection of the State Chapter" is now clarified second. According to the Original Commentary, it is divided into four: first, the practice method; second, what can protect; third, citing evidence; fourth, obtaining benefits. The practice method has three: first, admonishing to listen; second, exhorting to uphold; third, explaining protection. This corresponds to the former two, as can be understood from the sūtra. Now it is explained: it is not so. Within this one chapter, the text has three parts: first, commanding to listen and exhorting to uphold; next, from "when a state" onward, extensively explaining the method of protection; finally, from "at that time, Śākya[muni]" onward, discerning the assembly obtaining benefits. This is the first. Admonishing to listen, consenting to speak, and exhorting to uphold can be understood from the sūtra.

3.6

Sūtra: "When a state […] when the state is destroyed."

3.7

Exposition: The second section from here onward extensively explains the method of protection. Within this there are three parts: first, extensively explaining the method of protection; second, from "Great King, in the past" onward, citing the past to corroborate the present; third, from "Great King, sixteen" onward, concluding, demonstrating, and exhorting to uphold. Within the extensive explanation, it is again divided into three: first, explaining the protection of the state; second, from "Great King, not only" onward, explaining its protection of blessings; third, from "Great King, not only" onward, explaining protection against many calamities. Within protecting the state, the text has four parts: first, clarifying the time of protection; second, explaining the method of protection; third, from "your state" onward, clarifying the essence of what can protect; fourth, from "Great King" onward, revealing the calamities protected against. This is the first, clarifying the time and season of protection. In truth, the path of protecting the state applies to all times; to highlight critical times, it mentions kalpa-fires and so forth in contrast to speak of the method of protection. As for "kalpa-fires," because they damage the state, they are called kalpa-fires; it does not refer to the great fire disaster among the three disasters.

3.8

Sūtra: "One should invite a hundred buddhas, […] a hundred images of arhats."

3.9

Exposition: The second section from here onward explains the method of protection. Within this there are three parts: first, inviting the fields of merit; next, clarifying offerings; finally, revealing the time of teaching. Within the fields of merit, the text has three parts: first, the fields of merit of the noble ones; second, the audience at the lecture assembly; third, inviting masters to lecture and expound. This is the first. The actual physical bodies of the above three honored ones are difficult to assemble; in order to ensure that the field of merit is fully complete for future generations, one sets up a hundred images.

3.10

Sūtra: "A assembly of a hundred monks, […] the seven assemblies listen together."

3.11

Exposition: Second, the audience at the lecture assembly. There are three: first, the one hundred monks; second, the four great assemblies of one hundred [each]; third, the seven assemblies of one hundred [each]. Regarding the 'one hundred monks,' some say: before each and every seat there are one hundred monks. If that were so, there would be ten thousand people, and if the crowd were not full, the exposition of the Dharma could not proceed. Now, when it says 'one hundred,' it means that before each seat there is one monk who inspects and supervises the assembly of disciples; therefore it says 'one hundred.' Regarding the 'four great assemblies,' they are monks (bhikṣus), nuns (bhikṣuṇīs), laymen (upāsakas), and laywomen (upāsikās). Some say that novitiate monks (śrāmaṇeras), novitiate nuns (śrāmaṇerikās), and probationers (śikṣamāṇās) are excluded. Now it is said: they are subsumed within the assemblies of monks and nuns. Regarding the 'seven assemblies,' the three assemblies of novitiates and so forth are added onto the previous four assemblies. The seven assemblies are the transient assembly of visitors.

3.12

Question: Before each and every seat there are the six categories, all in the number of one hundred. What is the meaning of this? Explanation: It is in order to adorn the assembly for expounding the Dharma.

3.13

Question: Since the four assemblies and so on already include the monks, why is it necessary to speak separately of the one hundred monks? [Answer:] In order to show that in each assembly there must definitely be one person acting as the senior elder (sthavira); therefore it says 'one hundred.'

3.14

Question: What is the difference between the 'great assemblies' and the 'seven assemblies'? Some say: they are spoken of because their categories are different, but there is not necessarily any difference. Alternatively, it may be that the four great assemblies are all Mahāyāna assemblies, while the 'seven assemblies' are the śrāvaka assemblies.

3.15

Sūtra: Invite one hundred Dharma masters [...] to expound the prajñāpāramitā.

3.16

Exposition: Third, inviting masters to deliver the exposition.

3.17

Sūtra: One hundred lion [thrones...] make offerings to the Three Jewels.

3.18

Exposition: Third, explaining the method of making offerings. Broadly, there are three parts: first, explaining the three items offered to the Three Jewels, namely lamps, incense, and flowers. Regarding the 'one hundred lamps' and so on: before each seat there is one lamp, one flower, and one [censer of] incense. If it were not so, there would be ten thousand flowers, and such a thing would be difficult to accomplish.

3.19

Sūtra: Three robes and assorted utensils (or: ten items) are offered to the Dharma masters.

3.20

Exposition: Second, making offerings specifically to the masters of the Dharma. Regarding the 'assorted utensils' (or: ten items), there are two interpretations here. The first is a traditional transmission, which says: the three robes are [items one through] three; the bowl is four; the sitting cloth is five; the razor is six; the knife is seven; the water filter is eight; the bowl bag is nine; and the needle case is ten. The second is that Tripiṭaka Master [Yijing] said: 'Three robes and ten items' is probably an error by the translator, who separated them into two places. Not relying on the Sanskrit text, he spoke separately of the three robes and divided the ten items, glossing shi (什) as 'sundered'—this is extreme conjectural judgment! The thirteen requisites fully cover both middling and lower ones. Regarding the thirteen requisites: 1. saṃghāṭī; 2. uttarāsaṅga; 3. antarvāsa; 4. niṣīdana; 5. nivāsana (the lower skirt); 6. pratinivāsana (the extra skirt); 7. saṃkakṣikā (the vest-cloth); 8. pratisaṃkakṣikā (the extra vest-cloth); 9. varṣāśāṭī (the rain-cloak); 10. kāyaproñchana (the body towel); 11. mukhaproñchana (the face towel); 12. keśapratigrahaṇa (spread when shaving so as to catch hair); 13. kaṇḍupratichādana (the itch-cloth covering sores). The summary verse says: 'The three robes together with the sitting cloth, / two skirts and a pair of vests, / rain-cloak, towels for body and face, / hair-cloth and sore-covering [cloth].' Although there are these two interpretations, it is still not yet clear whether the Sanskrit text of the Benevolent Kings Sūtra had the number ten (十) or the character shi (什).

3.21

Sūtra: A light morning meal and the midday meal are also provided at the proper times.

3.22

Exposition: Third, offering food and drink to the master of the Dharma; or alternatively, this may generally apply to offerings to the entire great assembly.

3.23

Sūtra: Great King, twice a day you shall lecture on this sūtra (some editions read: 'lecture on and recite this sūtra').

3.24

Exposition: Third, the time periods for lecturing on the sūtra. Lecturing requires vigor; hence, following the two meals, the lectures are likewise held at two times.

3.25

Sūtra: In your realm [...] will protect your realm.

3.26

Exposition: Third, explaining those capable of protecting. According to the Benji (Root Record), the spirits of the one hundred divisions originate from the doctrine of the Golden-Eyed Sage (Kanāda / Suvarṇākṣa). This sage commanded ghosts and spirits, which fundamentally had ten classes; unfolding these ten makes one hundred. The ten are: 1. Great spirit, who can transform all spirits. 2. Youth spirit, who is the son of Maheśvara; at night he entered the sage's gem. The rule of the sage was not to kill young boys; the sage prophesied that when he reached the age of sixteen and became a great sage, he would surely die. Since the words were not empty, this could not be avoided. Maheśvara thereupon arrested this boy permanently at the age of fourteen and took young boys as his retinue, which is why he harms the young boys of the world; if he were fifteen years old, this boy would harm them no more. 3. Mother spirit, who is the wet-nurse of the youth. 4. Brahmā spirit, who is Maheśvara; on his face are three eyes, possessing omniscience. If a lost object cannot be found, the master recites an incantation, another eye grows on the youth's face, he goes straight to retrieve the object, and once found, he loses the eye again. 5. Household-head spirit, who obstructs all vows so that good and bad undertakings do not succeed. 6. Nāga spirit, who has great greed and wrath. 7. Asura spirit, who can bind and strike humans, gods, and so forth; moreover, he has two champions, a bad champion and a good champion. 8. Sand spirit, who eats flesh, has meager merit, and whose body is like sand and earth. 9. Yakṣa spirit, who possesses great supernatural powers. 10. Rākṣasa spirit, translated as 'extremely difficult' (to be investigated).

3.27

Sūtra: Great King, in the realm [...] bandits will arise in great numbers.

3.28

Exposition: Fourth, explaining the calamities that are protected against. The text has three parts: first, explaining calamities such as ghosts; second, explaining the calamities of the three catastrophes; third, from 'all calamities' onward, distinguishing protection corresponding to the calamities. This is the first. In brief, there are eight calamities: 1. disturbances by ghosts; 2. disturbances among the myriad people; 3. bandits coming to plunder the state; 4. common people dying; 5. dispute and strife between ruler and ministers; 6. anomalies of heaven and earth; 7. lunar lodges deviating from their paths; 8. the sun and moon deviating from their paths, with bandits arising in great numbers. Calamities such as these cannot be fully recounted. Regarding the 'twenty-eight lunar lodges,' as the 'Chapter on the Adoption of the Lunar Lodges' in fascicle 10 of the Candragarbha Division of the Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra says: 'In each direction there are seven lodges; the four directions together have twenty-eight lodges. The seven lodges of the east are Kṛttikā, Rohiṇī, Mṛgaśiras, Ārdrā, Punarvasu, Puṣya, and Āśleṣā [or: Citrā, Niṣṭyā, Viśākhā, Anurādhā, Jyeṣṭhā, Mūla, Pūrvāṣāḍhā in standard Chinese lists: Jiao, Kang, Di, Fang, Xin, Wei, Ji]. The seven lodges of the south are Jing, Gui, Liu, Xing, Zhang, Yi, Zhen. The seven lodges of the west are Kui, Lou, Wei, Mao, Bi, Zui, Shen. The seven lodges of the north are Dou, Niu, Nü, Xu, Wei, Shi, Bi.' Furthermore, fascicle 10 of the Candragarbha Division is slightly different from the above; fearing verbosity, I do not recount it.

3.29

Sūtra: Great King [...] all calamities.

3.30

Exposition: Second, the calamities of fire, water, and wind.

3.31

Sūtra: One should also expound this sūtra, with the ritual application being as explained above (some editions read: 'lecture on and recite this sūtra').

3.32

Exposition: Third, conforming to the above method of protection.

3.33

Sūtra: Great King, not only does it protect the state [...] the ritual application being as explained above (some editions read: 'lecture on and recite this sūtra').

3.34

Exposition: Second, explaining its method of protection. The text has three parts: first, the statement; second, the explanation; third, conforming to the above method of protection, which can be known from the text.

3.35

Question: The rich and noble can arrange lectures; how can the poor and lowly accomplish this? In accordance with the various calamities mentioned below, there should be this difficulty. If one takes this objection into account, 'lecturing on and reciting this sūtra' should be taken as the correct reading.

3.36

Sūtra: Great King, not only does it protect blessings, it also protects against various calamities.

3.37

Exposition: Third, explaining protection against various calamities. Broadly, there are three parts: first, the statement; second, the explanation; third, conforming [to the above]. This is the statement.

3.38

Sūtra: If there are bitter calamities of disease [...] all immeasurable bitter calamities.

3.39

Exposition: Second, explaining the various calamities in detail. This refers to the retribution calamities of disease, fetters, shackles, and so forth; or the karmic calamities of the four grave offenses, the causes of the five inexpiable offenses, the eight difficulties, and the six destinies; and all the immeasurable calamities of bitter retribution. Regarding the 'four grave offenses,' they are the transgressions of sexual misconduct, stealing, killing living beings, and false speech.

3.40

Question: Can lecturing upon and reading this sūtra protect against the karmas of the four grave offenses or not? If it can protect against them, then one should not lose the precepts; if one has already lost the precepts, how can it protect them? Explanation: The various schools differ. If we rely on the Hīnayāna, it itself has two accounts, just as the fifteenth fascicle of the Kośa relates the explanations of three masters. First, in the Sarvāstivāda school, the prātimokṣa vows are relinquished due to five conditions. Its verse says: "One relinquishes the discipline of the prātimokṣa / through what has been relinquished, end of life, / and the simultaneous emergence of two genders, / cutting off roots of virtue, and the passing of a night." When one commits a fundamental pārājika, one does not relinquish the renunciant precepts. Why is this? It is not the case that because one commits [a transgression on] one side, the entire code of discipline must be relinquished everywhere. However, there are two designations: keeping and breaking the precepts. Just as someone with wealth, when in debt to another, is named both "a wealthy person" and "a debtor." If one discloses and repents of what was violated so as to eliminate it, one is called "possessing the śīla" and is not called "violating the precepts," just as once a debt is repaid, one is solely called "a wealthy person." Second, the Sautrāntika masters say that the discipline of renunciation and the bhikṣu prātimokṣa vows are relinquished due to six conditions, namely adding to the previous five the commission of a grave offense. Third, the Dharmaguptaka school says that the prātimokṣa vows are relinquished due to seven conditions, namely adding to the previous six the disappearance of the saddharma. The Sautrāntikas challenged the Sarvāstivādins: If so, on what grounds did the Bhagavān say that one who commits the four grave offenses is not called a bhikṣu, is not called a śramaṇa, is not a son of the Śākyan, destroys the bhikṣu nature, harms the śramaṇa nature, harbors destruction and falls, and established the name of parājaya (defeat)? The Sarvāstivādins replied: This was spoken with intentional meaning based on the bhikṣu in the ultimate sense. When the saddharma disappears, one does not newly obtain them, but does not relinquish the old precepts. These are explained extensively in that text. Now relying on the Mahāyāna, the various teachings differ. If we rely on the Yogācārabhūmi, one who commits a grave offense loses the precepts, because it does not speak of a method of protection. The fortieth fascicle says: "In brief, through two conditions one relinquishes the bodhisattva's pure precept discipline: first, abandoning the great vow for unexcelled, complete, and perfect enlightenment; second, actively engaging in the upper grade of entanglement and committing an offense of parājaya. If bodhisattvas, even when changing bodies and traversing realms across the ten directions, in each place of rebirth do not relinquish the bodhisattva's pure precept discipline, it is because these bodhisattvas do not abandon the great vow for unexcelled enlightenment, nor do they actively engage in the upper grade of entanglement and commit offenses of parājaya." Furthermore, the fifty-third fascicle says: "Question: Through how many causes and conditions, having taken the bhikṣu discipline, is it in turn relinquished? Answer: Either because of abandoning the training precepts, or because of committing a fundamental offense, or because of the loss of physical gender and the emergence of two genders, or because of the cutting off of roots of virtue, or because of relinquishing the group-congruence, having taken the bhikṣu discipline, it is in turn relinquished. If the saddharma is destroyed and the saddharma submerged, although there is no newly taking the bhikṣu discipline, one should know that what was previously taken and obtained is not relinquished." If we rely on the Meditation on Samantabhadra Sūtra, it says: "If a śrāvaka ruins and breaks the three refuges as well as the five precepts, eight precepts, bhikṣu precepts, bhikṣuṇī precepts, śrāmaṇera precepts, śrāmaṇerikā precepts, śikṣamāṇā precepts, and the various comportments, through foolishness, unwholesomeness, and evil and deviant minds, committing many offenses against the precepts and comportments; if he desires to eliminate them so that there is no fault, and become a bhikṣu again, possessing the qualities of a śramaṇa, he should diligently cultivate and recite the vaipulya scriptures, contemplating the most profound emptiness of the ultimate truth, causing this wisdom of emptiness to correspond with his mind. One should know that in thought-moment after thought-moment, all the defilements of this person's transgressions will be eliminated forever without remainder. This is called possessing all the qualities and precepts of a śramaṇa, possessing all the comportments." According to the vaipulya scriptures and this sūtra text, they can also be regenerated. Thus, the first fascicle of the Great Vaipulya Dhāraṇī Sūtra says: "If [one violates] the twenty-four precepts of a bodhisattva, the ten precepts of a śrāmaṇera, the śikṣamāṇā and śrāmaṇerikā precepts, the bhikṣu precepts, or the bhikṣuṇī precepts—if one violates each and every one of such precepts, one should single-mindedly repent. If they are not regenerated, there is no such possibility, except if one is not sincere; if one has committed the five heinous sins and one's body suffers from white leprosy, if it is not eliminated and cured, there is no such possibility." Furthermore, the fourth fascicle says: "If there is a bhikṣu who ruins the four grave prohibitions, who with utmost sincerity is mindful of this Dhāraṇī Sūtra and recites it one thousand four hundred times; having recited it one thousand four hundred times, he then repents, requesting one bhikṣu to serve as a witness, and confesses his sins before the sacred image—having thus sequentially undergone eighty-seven days of diligent repentance, if these roots of the precepts are not regenerated, it is ultimately impossible. If that person can diligently repent for eighty-seven days, and does not become firm in anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, it is likewise impossible." If we rely on the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], it is both relinquished and not relinquished: because of losing the power of taking [the precepts], it is called relinquished, and because of not losing the scripture of taking [the precepts], it is called not relinquished, just like a scorched seed having substance but lacking power. Thus the thirty-first fascicle of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Good son! In the scriptures I have spoken thus: 'If there is a bhikṣu who has committed the four grave offenses, he is not called a bhikṣu, he is called a ruined bhikṣu, he has already lost the bhikṣu status, and can no longer generate the sprout of roots of virtue. Just as a scorched seed does not produce fruit, and just as a tāla palm whose crown is broken does not produce fruit, a bhikṣu who commits a grave offense is likewise.' Hearing this teaching, my disciples failed to understand my meaning, and proclaimed: 'The Tathāgata says that when bhikṣus have committed the grave prohibitions, they lose the bhikṣu precepts.' Good son! In the scriptures, I explained to Cunda four kinds of bhikṣus: first, those who have ultimately reached the path; second, those who take pleasure in the path; third, those who receive the path; fourth, those who defile the path. Those who commit the four grave offenses are precisely those who defile the path. Hearing this teaching, my disciples failed to understand my meaning, and proclaimed: 'The Tathāgata says that when a bhikṣu has committed the four grave offenses, he does not lose the prohibitive precepts.'" Thus for the various schools, a tetralemma should be formulated: first, entirely not relinquished, like the Sarvāstivāda; second, entirely relinquished, like the Sautrāntika school and the Yogācāra and so forth; third, both relinquished and not relinquished, like the Nirvāṇa Sūtra and so forth; fourth, neither relinquished nor not relinquished, like the vaipulya scriptures and the Meditation on Samantabhadra Sūtra and so forth. If upon repenting they are not relinquished, and without repenting they are relinquished, this forms the second proposition and the fourth proposition. Why? Generally speaking of the tetralemma, there are two kinds: first, distinct substances, as in the Vibhāṣā and so forth, where the third and fourth form propositions from distinct phenomena; second, the questioned substance, where the third and fourth affirm and negate a single phenomenon. In terms of positive expression, it forms the third proposition; in terms of negative expression, it forms the fourth proposition. From this, the methods of the Nirvāṇa and the vaipulya are identical yet distinct. Now relying on the vaipulya and this sūtra text, the various meanings of the four grave offenses and five heinous sins can be established. As for the five heinous sins, they are also called anantarya karmas, namely: killing one's father, killing one's mother, causing a schism in the Sangha, killing an arhat, and shedding the blood of a Buddha.

3.41

Question: Can these five heinous karmas be protected against or not? If they can be protected against, should they not be non-fixed karmas? If they cannot be protected against, it contradicts this text. Explanation: The various schools differ. In the Sarvāstivāda school, they are karmas that are determinately experienced, and there is no method of protection, fully as in the various treatises. Relying on the Sautrāntika school (to be verified). Now relying on the Mahāyāna, the various teachings differ. If there are no superior conditions, one is immediately born in hell; if there are superior conditions, there are themselves two accounts. First, relying on the Sūtra on Making Images, although experienced, it is light. Thus that sūtra says: "Due to the condition of making images, the fruition of the three evil destinies is briefly experienced and quickly escaped without suffering pain, like an arrow shot through a forest passing through without stopping." The Contemplation of Amitāyus says: "Even those with the five heinous offenses can also be born in the Western [Pure Land]." The two translations of the Amitāyus Sūtra from the two directions say: "They are not permitted to be born there." Relying on the "Chapter on Pure Conduct" in the twentieth fascicle of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, King Ajātaśatru generated the bodhicitta and did not enter hell. Thus that sūtra says: "At that time, the World-Honoured One praised King Ajātaśatru: 'Excellent, excellent! If there is someone who can generate the bodhicitta, you should know that this person adorns the great assembly of the Buddha. Great King! Formerly, in the presence of Vipaśyin Buddha, you first generated the mind for unexcelled, complete, and perfect enlightenment; from that time until my appearance in the world, in the interim you have never fallen into hell to suffer pain. Great King, you should know that the mind of enlightenment has even such immeasurable fruition as this. Great King! From now on, you should always diligently cultivate the mind of enlightenment.'" Furthermore, an earlier text says: "Because King Ajātaśatru generated the great mind, all his grave sins particularly became slight and subtle." It also says: "King Ajātaśatru addressed Jīvaka, saying: 'Before dying, I have already attained a heavenly body, relinquishing a short lifespan and obtaining a long lifespan.'" These are explained extensively in that text. As for the eight conditions with no leisure, relying on the five hundred sixty-eighth fascicle of the Great Prajñā, it says: "Heavenly King, you should know that bodhisattvas are never born in places of no leisure. These bodhisattvas have no evil karma that casts them into the hell realm, no broken precepts that cast them into the animal realm, no jealousy that casts them into the hungry ghost realm; they are not born with deviant views, always encounter good friends, do not lack any sensory faculties, and become vessels for the Buddha's teachings; they are not born in border regions, being dull of faculty and foolish, not knowing good and evil; they are not born among the long-lived devas, being unable to benefit others; because of not seeing the Buddha, they are not born in worlds without a Buddha. The birthplace of a bodhisattva will always be complete with the Three Jewels." It is fully as spoken there. The older Devarāja-prajñā also agrees with this account. Furthermore, the "Chapter on the Eight Difficulties" in the Ekottarika-āgama says: "Bhikṣus, you should know that there are eight periods of not hearing [the Dharma]. What are the eight? First, hell; second, animals; third, hungry ghosts; fourth, the long-lived devas; fifth, being born in a border region, slandering the worthy and noble, and committing evil deeds; sixth, being born in the central region but incomplete in the six sense faculties, not distinguishing good and evil; seventh, although born in the central region with complete six sense faculties, having deviant views in one's consciousness; eighth, being born in the central region with complete six sense faculties, but no Buddha appears in the world and neither is the Dharma preached." It is fully explained like that. Relying on this Āgama to examine the Great Prajñā, the count of eight should be understood.

3.42

Question: What are called the "long-lived devas"? Answer: Relying on the thirty-second fascicle of the Prajñāpāramitopadeśa, the long-lived devas are those of neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization, with a lifespan of eighty thousand great kalpas. Alternatively, some say: all formless concentrations are generally called "long-lived devas" because they lack form and cannot be converted; they are incapable of attaining the path, and are always the abode of ordinary beings. Alternatively, from the first dhyāna to the fourth dhyāna, excluding the Śuddhāvāsa heavens, all are called "long-lived devas" because their attachment to relish and deviant views prevents them from receiving the path, up to the point that while attached to relish there, a wholesome mind is difficult to arise. Furthermore, a lower passage in that text says: "In the formless realm there is no form, and because the Dharma cannot be preached, [bodhisattvas] are not born therein. Although in the form realm there is a material body to which the Dharma can be preached, yet because they are deeply attached to the relish of dhyāna, they cannot greatly benefit sentient beings; therefore, [bodhisattvas] are not born therein." Some say: Uttarakuru is taken as one count, excluding the border region (to be verified).

3.43

"Conducting the matters of the six destinies" means creating the karma of the six destinies. "All immeasurable suffering and difficulties" summarizes all the difficulties.

3.44

Sūtra: If one lectures upon this sūtra, the Dharma ritual is as explained above (one version has "lectures upon and reads this sūtra").

3.45

Commentary: Third, an explanation by analogy.

3.46

Sūtra: Formerly, Great King (down to) desired to destroy their country.

3.47

Commentary: From here down, second, is the citing of the past as a precedent for the present. The text falls into two parts: first, citing Śakra to verify [the protection of] the states above; second, from "Great King, in the past there was" down, citing King Samantaprabha (Puming) to verify [the protection of] the bodies above. In the former, there are three parts: first, clarifying the calamity; next, clarifying the protection of the Dharma; and finally, indicating the locus of the teaching. This is the first. According to the 'Chapter on King Māndhātṛ' in the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra (Xianyu jing): 'At that time the World-Honoured One saw that the monks were greedy for fine adornments, attached to fame and profit, hoarded surpluses, and accumulated without satiety. He said that in the distant past there was a great king named Gusalivīsi (the Nirvāṇa Sūtra calls him King Supratiṣṭhita). At that time, a blister suddenly grew on the crown of the king's head, shaped like a cocoon, pure, clear and transparent, and without pain. Later it grew larger and larger, until it was like a gourd. They then slit it open to see, and obtained a male child, extremely handsome, with dark-blue hair and a purplish-golden body. They immediately summoned a diviner of marks, who divined and knew that he possessed virtue and would surely become a sagely king governing the four domains. Therefore, they gave him a name, calling him Māndhātṛ (in the Jin [language], "Crown-Born"). As the years passed and he grew up, his heroic virtue became conspicuous. When the king died, the vassal kings all went together to Māndhātṛ and reported: "The Great King has passed away; we pray that you will succeed to the state's throne." Māndhātṛ replied: "If the five blessings dictate that I should be king, it is required that now the Four Heavenly Kings and the Venerable Śakra come to welcome and bestow it upon me; only then will I ascend the throne." When he had finished making his vow, the Four Heavenly Kings immediately descended, each holding a precious vase filled with scented water, and poured it upon the crown of his head. At that time the Heavenly Emperor Śakra also held a jewelled crown and came to place it upon him. In Jambudvīpa he amused himself with the five desires for eighty-four thousand years. A yakṣa sprang up and invited him to travel through Eastern Pūrvavideha for eight hundred million years, and again invited him to Western Aparagodānīya for one billion four hundred million years, Northern Uttarakuru for one billion eight hundred million years, and the realm of the Four Heavenly Kings for one billion four hundred million years. In his mind, he again thought that he wished to ascend to Trāyastriṃśa Heaven. Five hundred seers assisted his chariot and drove an elephant, ascending together to the heavens. While they had not yet arrived, he beheld the heavenly city from afar, named Sudarśana ("Fair to Behold"), which had one thousand two hundred gates. The devas were terrified and closed all the gates, putting on triple iron bars. Māndhātṛ's troops advanced straight ahead without hindrance. The king immediately blew his conch, drew his bow, and twanged the bowstring, and the one thousand two hundred gates opened by themselves at once. Śakra shortly came out and met with him, then invited him into his palace and shared his seat with him. The king enjoyed the pleasures of the five desires in heaven throughout the reigns of thirty-six Śakras. The last Śakra was Kāśyapa Bodhisattva. At that time, the asura king went up to heaven with his army to fight with Śakra; Śakra was defeated and withdrew his army into the city. Māndhātṛ came out again, blew his conch, and twanged his bow, and the asuras immediately departed. Māndhātṛ thought to himself: "I am such that I have no equal; what is the point of sharing a seat with Śakra now? It would be better to kill him and reign supreme alone, which would be delightful." As soon as this evil thought arose, he immediately fell. King Māndhātṛ governed the four domains for four billion years without satiety, and died due to greed. Therefore, monks! Profit and offerings are truly a great peril.' It is extensively explained as in that text. The twelfth fascicle of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'At that time Śakra received, held, read, recited, and explained the Mahāyāna scriptures for others; through the power of these causes and conditions, he possessed great majestic virtue. Because Māndhātṛ gave rise to an evil mind toward this Śakra, he immediately fell back to Jambudvīpa. Separated from the humans and devas he held dear, he suffered great anguish, further contracted a malignant disease, and thereupon died. That Śakra at that time was Kāśyapa Buddha. The wheel-turning king was my own person.' It is extensively explained as in that text. For fear of being tedious, I will not detail the similarities and differences with the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra.

3.48

Sūtra: At that time, the Deva-Emperor Śakra […] Māndhātṛ thereupon withdrew.

3.49

Commentary: Second, clarifying the protection of the Dharma according to the sūtra. This can be known from the text.

3.50

Sūtra: As spoken in the Sūtra on the Eradication of Sins.

3.51

Commentary: Third, indicating the locus of the teaching (this sūtra is simply the Nirvāṇa Sūtra; or perhaps it has not yet been translated).

3.52

Sūtra: Great King, in the past there was […] Crown Prince Kalmāṣapāda (Spot-Foot).

3.53

Commentary: Second, citing King Samantaprabha to verify the protection of the person above. The text falls into two parts: first, clarifying the calamity; later, from "that Samantaprabha" down, distinguishing the capacity to protect against the calamity. This is the first part. Within it there are three parts: first, clarifying the causes and conditions of Kalmāṣapāda; next, receiving the teaching of a heterodox master; and finally, the actual undertaking of the calamity. This is the first part. As for 'Kalmāṣapāda', the explanation has three aspects. First, as explained in the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra, he was therefore named King Kalmāṣapāda; in Chinese, Bozu ("mottled feet"), also called Banzu ("spotted feet"). King Bharata led the four kinds of troops into the mountains to hunt. He encountered a tigress-lion whose lustful desire was intense, which forced the king to engage in sexual intercourse; the king was frightened and complied. The lioness conceived, and when her days were fulfilled, she gave birth to a male child. His whole body resembled a human, except that his feet were spotted like a lion's. Carrying him in her mouth, she returned him to the king; the king took him as his child and named him Kalmāṣapāda. In the second explanation: the causes and conditions of Kalmāṣapāda's flying and eating humans are also as in the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra. King Kalmāṣapāda used to make offerings daily to a seer, constantly serving pure food unmixed with fish or meat. It happened that one day the seer did not come, and a celestial spirit transformed into the appearance of a seer, deceitfully entered the king's quarters, and demanded fish and meat to eat. The original seer returned the next day on schedule, and the king served meat; the seer became angry, wondering why he was being tested, and caused the king constantly to eat human flesh for the next twelve years. When the seer finished speaking, he flew back into the mountains. Later, the kitchen supervisor forgot and failed to prepare [meat]. With no other plan at the moment, he went outside to seek meat, and saw a dead child lying on the ground, plump and pale. Thinking that this would meet the emergency, he removed the head and feet, prepared the food, and offered it to the king. Eating it, the king found it very delicious, and asked its origin; the cook answered truthfully. The king said: 'From now on, always use this meat.' The cook feared the king, so he specifically captured children and killed them for food, offering them to the king day after day. When the people of the state lost their children, they went everywhere searching, and saw the cook dragging another's child, tying him up. The people reported this to the king, and the king said: 'It was my command.' Hearing this, the people all said: 'This king is our great enemy!' Waiting until the king went to the pool to bathe, an ambush seized him. Once seized, the king addressed the people: 'I beg you for one pardon; hereafter I will kill no more.' The people would not permit it, so the king made a vow: 'May all the good deeds I have cultivated up to now be redirected to make me today transform into a rākṣasa who flies and eats humans!' Having spoken, he immediately flew off and cried out in the sky: 'From now on, I will in turn eat your beloved wives and children!' Hearing this, the people hid and fled. Many rākṣasas attached themselves to him as his retinue; his followers gradually grew, and the harm he caused became wider. Later the rākṣasas said to Kalmāṣapāda: 'We are the king's retinue; the king should now seize a thousand kings for our sake and hold a great feast.' Kalmāṣapāda agreed, and went to capture them one by one. Having captured nine hundred and ninety-nine kings, only one king was missing, and he could not hold the feast. The kings each said: 'Today we have nowhere to turn. If King Sutasoma is captured, he possesses great skillful means and can save our lives.' Having made this plan, they said to Kalmāṣapāda: 'You wish to hold a feast; King Sutasoma has an exalted reputation and virtue. If you can bring him, your royal feast will be complete.' Then the rākṣasa king flew off to seize him. It happened that King Sutasoma came out of the city toward the garden and entered a pool wishing to bathe. On the road he saw a mendicant begging from him; the king said: 'Wait until I return from bathing, and I will give alms to you, seeker of the Way.' Just as the king entered the pool, the rākṣasa king flew down from the sky, seized King Sutasoma, and placed him in his original mountain. King Sutasoma wept with sorrow and grief. King Kalmāṣapāda said: 'I have heard that your reputation and virtue make you the foremost man; why do you weep like a common child?' Sutasoma said: 'I do not cherish my physical life or begrudge my lifespan. This morning when going out I saw a mendicant and promised him an alms; encountering you bringing me here, I feared violating my sincerity and trustworthiness. It is for this reason that I grieve. I pray that the king will release me for seven days to give alms to the seeker of the Way.' Kalmāṣapāda granted it. Sutasoma quickly returned and gave alms to the seeker of the Way for seven days. At that time, a brāhmaṇa, seeing that Sutasoma intended to return to face death and fearing he would yearn for his state, recited a verse for the king. The verse is identical to this sūtra's, eight lines being similar, with only one line, "Devas, dragons, humans, and ghosts perish therein," differing from this sūtra. Hearing the verse, Sutasoma contemplated its meaning with joy, immediately installed his crown prince to take his place as king, and bade farewell to go to his death. On that day, Kalmāṣapāda watched for him from afar and saw Sutasoma coming, his countenance joyful. Kalmāṣapāda was surprised and asked: 'You are coming to your death now; why are you joyful?' Sutasoma replied: 'The Great King's grace was generous, granting me seven days to give alms to the seeker of the Way. Moreover, I heard the wondrous Dharma and my mind became open and liberated. My vow being fulfilled, though I come to face death, my mind is joyful and free from sorrow.' Kalmāṣapāda asked: 'What Dharma did you hear? Try speaking it for me.' Sutasoma then proclaimed for him the wondrous Dharma of the eight verses he had heard, and further explained for him the retribution for the sin of killing living beings. Hearing this, Kalmāṣapāda immediately released the kings, each returning to his own state. King Sutasoma then commanded his troops to escort Kalmāṣapāda back, settling him in his own state and restoring his former royal throne. King Sutasoma was Śākyamuni Buddha; King Kalmāṣapāda was Aṅgulimāla. Third, clarifying that various sūtras speak of Kalmāṣapāda differently: as explained in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, King Kalmāṣapāda is named King Hariṇapāda ("Deer-Foot"); because he was definitely like a spotted deer, he was named Deer-Foot; he was also named King Two-Wings; it only says that Deer-Foot wished to eat one hundred kings. As explained in the Samantaprabha-rāja-sūtra, King Kalmāṣapāda was named King Hequn; entering the mountains, he saw a great tree spirit and promised to offer one hundred kings. King Samantaprabha proclaimed four verses for King Hequn; hearing the verses, King Hequn released Samantaprabha and the ninety-nine kings. This Benevolent Kings Sūtra and the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra properly speak of one thousand kings. However, these various sūtras originally refer to one and the same manifestation; it is merely that due to differences in what people saw and heard, distinctions were made.

3.54

Sūtra: That Kalmāṣapāda granted him one day.

3.55

Commentary: Second, granting a leave of one day. According to the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra, he granted him seven days.

3.56

Sūtra: At that time King Samantaprabha […] ended the verses.

3.57

Commentary: From here down, third, being able to protect according to the time. The text falls into two parts: first, being able to protect by relying on what was taught by the seven buddhas; later, from "the first Dharma master" down, clarifying the cause of the ability to protect by relying on and according with particular principles. This is the first. Question: How could eight hundred billion verses be spoken in one day? Answer: Through the unseen empowerment of the Tathāgata, he was therefore able to speak them. As for the greater or lesser number of verses, this will be reconciled later.

3.58

Sūtra: The first Dharma master spoke verses for the king.

3.59

Commentary: Second, clarifying the ability to protect by relying on and according with particular principles. The text falls into two parts: first, the actual exposition of the protective Dharma; later, from "at that time" down, hearing the Dharma and obtaining benefit. In the former, there are two parts: first, the prose instigation; later, presenting the verses to explain correctly. This means that among the one hundred seats, the first Dharma master is about to speak eight verses. That the Damamūka-nidāna-sūtra says a seeker of the Way spoke them is due to the differences among translators.

3.60

Sūtra: The burning of the kalpa reaches its end […] what permanence is there in a state?

3.61

Explanation: Second, the direct explanation of the Dharma of protection. There are eight lines of verse expounding four principles, which are divided into four parts: the first two verses expound the principle of impermanence; the second two verses expound the principle of suffering; the third two verses expound the principle of emptiness; and the fourth two verses expound the principle of non-self. This is the first.
Within this there are three parts: first, one verse determines the impermanence of the destruction of the receptacle world during the eon; next, half a verse explains the impermanence of one lifetime of the inner body; and finally, half a verse compares the superior to highlight the inferior.
As for "When the burning of the eon reaches its end": when the fire disaster first arises, it begins from the wind wheel and extends up to the First Dhyāna; hence it is said to "reach its end."
As for "Heaven and earth are thoroughly ablaze": qian is heaven, and qian means vigorous; the movements of heaven never cease, hence it is called qian. Kun is earth, and kun means compliant; the earth accords with the four seasons, giving birth to and nurturing the myriad things, hence it is called kun. Heaven and earth are both burned through, hence it is called "thoroughly ablaze."
As for "Mount Sumeru and the vast oceans": mountain and waters are paired together, both becoming ashes and cinders.
Next, there is half a verse: devas and nāgas wither and die, all due to karma. According to the Sūtra of the Wise and the Foolish, devas, nāgas, humans, and ghosts perish within it.
As for "When the two primal forces must perish, what reliance is there on a kingdom?": this compares the superior to highlight the inferior. Just as stated above, the receptacle world and sentient beings—the two primal forces of heaven and earth—must suffer destruction and demise; how much more so will a kingdom not be annihilated!

3.62

Sūtra: Birth, old age, sickness, and death [… through to …] what reliance is there on a kingdom?

3.63

Explanation: The second two verses explain the characteristics of the various sufferings. The text is divided into two parts: first, one and a half verses directly explain the various sufferings; second, half a verse compares the superior to highlight the inferior.
Within the former there are three parts: first, two lines explain that the four sufferings continue unbroken; next, two lines generally display three sufferings—namely, the suffering of meeting the hated, the suffering of separation from the loved, and the suffering of not getting what is sought—which all go against one's wishes, or are harms caused by worry and sorrow; and finally, two lines explain the suffering of the five clinging aggregates.
The various desires are the truth of origin (samudaya-satya); grave calamities are suffering (duḥkha-satya). Such suffering and origin are like ulcers and warts. Such suffering and origin are not separated from one's own body and do not transcend the three realms; hence it is said "nothing outside."
As for "The three realms are all suffering; what joy is there in a kingdom?": this compares the superior to highlight the inferior. It means that both the superior and inferior within the three realms are all entirely suffering; how much more so could their kingdom be relied upon as non-suffering?

3.64

Sūtra: Existence originally is non-existence [… through to …] kingdoms are also like this.

3.65

Explanation: Third, two verses explain emptiness. The text is divided into two parts: first, one verse explains the emptiness of dharmas. The first line explains the imagined nature (parikalpita-svabhāva). The following three lines explain the emptiness of other-dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva), meaning that upon the other-dependent, there is no imagined nature.
As for "Sentient beings, wriggling and squirming, all dwell as illusions": the second verse explains the emptiness of sentient beings (pudgala-nairātmya).
As for "Sound and echo are both empty; kingdoms are also like this": this makes a comparison using the superior and the inferior. It means that both sound and echo are as spoken, lacking real substantial nature; just as sound and echo are unreal and therefore empty, kingdoms are likewise so, because they are dharmas formed through causes and conditions, and are therefore also spoken of as empty.

3.66

Sūtra: The conscious spirit has no form [… through to …] how could there be a kingdom?

3.67

Explanation: Fourth, two verses reveal the principle of non-self. Within this, the first two lines explain that the conscious mind is non-self, relying provisionally on the four great elements; the next two lines explain that the conscious mind falsely imagines the four great elements to be "mine"; the next line explains that the form body is non-self; the next line explains that the form body is not an abode belonging to a self; and the final two lines invoke the aforementioned non-self to analogize the non-self of kingdoms.
Another explanation: the first one and a half verses explain that the body is non-self, and the two lines below take up non-self to say that kingdoms are also non-existent. In the former, the first verse explains that the mind is suffering in order to foreshadow non-self. Within it, the first half directly explains that the mental spirit has no form. This explains that the mental spirit has no physical form or segments, provisionally calling the four snakes "self," relying on them unpeacefully, which is why it is suffering. The four great elements that are relied upon contradict each other, and by metaphor are called snakes. Below, it explains that fools treasure them as a chariot of joy. From the half verse below onward, impermanence is used to reveal non-self. "Form has no permanent master" explains that form is impermanent. "The spirit has no permanent home" explains that the spirit is impermanent. Below, it takes this up to compare it to a kingdom: "form and spirit shall part" takes up the latter half-verse from the preceding section; "how could there be a kingdom?" compares it to show that a kingdom is also non-existent.

First 67 of 569 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

仁王經疏 — Classical Chinese