仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Composed by imperial decree by the Śramaṇa Liangbi of Qinglongsi, translator of scriptures and lecturer on treatises.

I bow my head to the Unsurpassed Awakened One,
whose essence is all-pervading and whose marks are perfectly luminous,
who manifests bodies numerous as dust and sand,
and whose great compassion is peerless.
The nectar of Dharma he proclaimed,
the pure sūtras,
skillfully rescue all living beings,
profound and immeasurable.
To those abiding in the fruit and the path of the superior fruit,
to the pratyekabuddhas, solitary like a rhinoceros horn or moving in groups,
and to all the noble and ordinary beings of the five kṣāntis,
I now pay homage with complete reverence.
May the power of compassion and wisdom of the Three Jewels
extend protection and leave none unseen.
Now, wishing to praise this true text,
I pray it will long benefit all sentient beings.

1.3

Now, the true principle is utterly quiescent, rising far beyond the realm of existence and non-existence; the mirror of wisdom is limpid and bright, penetrating deeply to the source of nature and characteristics. The ocean of virtue raises waves, sending pure streams into the worlds of dust, wherefore the great sage Śākyamuni manifested his trace in the royal palace. Arising from non-arising, his arising was without that which arises; expounding the exposition without words, his exposition was without that which is expounded. Moving yet quiescent, like the clear moon traversing the empty sky; speaking yet silent, equal to a cintāmaṇi jewel illuminating things. Therefore, when the Tathāgata in antiquity dwelt on Gṛdhrakūṭa, abiding in samādhi and giving rise to compassion, his light shone forth like gathered suns. Prasenajit and the others gathered like dew and congealed like mist; heavenly flowers fell in profusion, flattening the crags and valleys. Thus, across pure lands and defiled lands alike, the clouds of compassion spread densely; noble assemblies and ordinary assemblies alike were moistened by the Dharma rain. In expounding the protection of the state as the theme, principle and phenomena are both illuminated; embracing the beginning and the end, object and cognition are both quiescent. Revealing the five kṣāntis, the stages of practice are presented before one's eyes; speaking of the two truths, delusion and awakening are seen to be mind alone. Śakra repelled the army of Mūrdhata; Samantaprabha opened the awakening of Kalmāṣapāda; their transformations made glorious their fine virtues, their power manifesting what is inconceivable. The texts of the thirteen Dharma masters shine as clearly as the palm of one's hand; the vapors of the seven calamities are extinguished, their light shining brightly throughout the realm. Fearing that in the declining ages teachings would wither away, he forever left deep admonitions. Were it not for a great illumination casting its light, how could the dark paths be pierced? Were it not for the great sounding of the Dharma's voice, how could all desires be halted?

1.4

In the eighth reign of our August Tang, the living beings were remade; the mysterious transformation is boundless, and proper punishments bring order. Raising the fallen net and bracing the collapsing cords, driving the common people toward the grounds of blessing and longevity, guiding the blue waves toward the dwelling of the unconditioned, broadly exercising luminous virtue and gloriously magnifying the imperial will, an edict was issued commanding Tripiṭaka Master Amoghavajra to retranslate this scripture. The Tripiṭaka Master was eloquent in both languages and transmitted the teachings of the three mysteries. Expounding the esoteric depths in the Dragon Palace, his profound purport reached heaven; the sun of the Buddha shone again at noon, and the true breeze blew forever. Liangbi’s learning is isolated from the former sages, yet he remained quietly among the pure assembly; presumptuously joining the translation transmission, he unworthily served as recorder. Having the fortune to be praised at the Heavenly Court and personally receiving the virtuous voice, he now prepares this commentary and expounds it at the Southern Peach Orchard of the Daming Palace. As the imperial radiance shines intimately upon him, he cannot shrink from his post. Stealing the dark pearl from the palm leaves only increases his shame and trepidation; holding up the white jade at the vermilion steps, how could he ever match the debt he owes? Looking upward to repay the August Favor, and looking downward to examine his loyal diligence, having exhausted his humble sincerity, he hopes it may reflect the mysterious creation.

1.5

In explaining the title of the scripture, the meaning combines the general and the specific. 'Benevolent Kings protecting the state' indicates the deed of the petitioner. 'Prajñāpāramitā' clarifies the abstruse mystery of object and cognition. 'Chapter 1: Introductory' is the specific title of the first of the eight sections. Alternatively: 'Benevolent' is the foremost of the five constant virtues; 'King' presides over and crowns the three realms; 'Protecting' means rescuing the times through the power of compassion; 'State' is the walled city where one dwells. 'Prajñā' is pure wisdom, breaking through the troublesome cage of the waves of consciousness; 'pāra' is the other shore, namely the clean and pure dwelling; 'mitā' means 'to leave' and 'to arrive'. 'Sūtra' means threading together and holding. 'Introductory' means the beginning and cause; 'Chapter' means categorizing and gathering; 'Number' (dì) means sequence; 'First' is the beginning of count. Both person and Dharma are made manifest, hence it is called 'Chapter 1: Introductory to the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra of the Benevolent Kings for the Protection of the State'.

1.6

In intending to explain this scripture, four portals are briefly opened: first, recounting the intent behind the scripture's arising; second, clarifying the main theme and essence of the scripture; third, what is subsumed and who is addressed; fourth, properly explaining the text itself. Recounting the intent behind the scripture's arising is subdivided into two portals: first, clarifying the intent behind the scripture's arising; second, the date of translation. The first part is further divided into two: first, general; second, specific. When the buddhas appear, capacities and conditions respond and convene; the occasions and assemblies of the various scriptures each address those for whom it is fitting to hear. Now, in expounding this scripture, the two protections are extensively set forth. The fourteen kings and others include both noble and ordinary beings; all nurture the common folk and plant bodhisattva deeds. Therefore, the scripture states: 'Prasenajit and the other sixteen kings, seeing the rare marks, all had this thought: "The World-Honoured One with great loving-kindness benefits and brings joy to all universally. How are we kings to protect our states? The Tathāgata with great compassion rescues and benefits equally." The Buddha said: "Good sons! I will now first expound for the bodhisattvas the protection of the Buddha fruit and the protection of the practice of the ten bhūmis,"' extensively clarifying the internal protection. Furthermore, the 'Chapter on Protecting the State' says: 'When all lands are about to fall into chaos, there will be various disasters and calamities, and bandits will come to ruin them,' extensively clarifying the external protection. Fully setting forth the two protections so that benefit and joy never cease—for this reason, this scripture was spoken.

1.7

Next, to explain the specific, there are briefly six portals: first, clarifying the mother of the buddhas; second, clarifying superior virtues; third, clarifying cultivation and practice; fourth, clarifying the stages; fifth, clarifying the shared exposition; sixth, clarifying the fruit of buddhahood. That which gives birth to the buddhas must be the mother of wisdom; the mother gives birth to buddhas whose fine virtues are peerless; these fine virtues are manifested externally, and cultivation and practice are received from them; the gradual progress of cultivation and practice has stages of shallow and deep; it was not spoken by one buddha alone, but spoken identically by all buddhas; because it is accomplished from the cause, the perfection of the fruit is distinguished. Having these six portals constitutes the intent of speaking the scripture. This is like a person in the worldly realm born of a loving mother: from the initial descent of the spirit to birth and upbringing, fostering virtues and establishing conduct from youth to adulthood, guided by teachers and friends to establish oneself and make a name. Recounting the origin of the scripture, the general meaning is like this.

1.8

First, clarifying the mother of the buddhas: all buddhas are born from prajñā, and prajñā is the mother of all buddhas. The 'Chapter on the Inconceivable' states: 'This prajñāpāramitā is the mother of all buddhas and the mother of all bodhisattvas, the birthplace of unshared virtues and spiritual powers.' Furthermore, the 'Chapter on Receiving and Holding' states: 'Great King! Prajñāpāramitā can give birth to all buddha dharmas, all bodhisattva liberation dharmas, all supreme dharmas of kings, and all dharmas of transcendence for sentient beings.' The Buddha is born from the mother, and in turn reveals that the power of the mother's virtue can protect the state; therefore, this scripture was spoken.

1.9

Second, clarifying the superior virtues: the prajñā that is expressed can give birth to all buddhas; how could there be any comparison to the teaching that expresses it? The 'Chapter on Contemplating the Tathāgata' states: 'If someone were to fill with the seven treasures three-thousand great thousand worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, and give them in charity so that all sentient beings of the great thousand worlds attain the fruit of arhatship, it would not equal someone who, in regard to this scripture, gives rise to even a single thought of pure faith, not to mention one who can receive, hold, read, recite, and understand a single phrase.' Furthermore, the 'Chapter on the Two Truths' states: 'If someone can give rise to a single thought of pure faith in this scripture, that person will transcend the suffering and difficulties of birth and death for a hundred kalpas, a thousand kalpas, a hundred thousand myriads of kalpas; how much more so the merit obtained from copying, receiving, holding, reading, reciting, and explaining it for the liberation of others—it will be equal to and no different from that of all buddhas of the ten directions.' Revealing the superior virtues of the scripture shows that the Dharma is rare to hear; sacrificing one's whole body is still light, while half a verse is heavy; it is the correct cause of transcendence spoken identically by all buddhas. If not through this scripture, there is no way to attain liberation; to cause beings to give rise to liberation, this scripture was spoken.

1.10

Third, clarifying cultivation and practice: the suffering fruit of the three realms of existence revolves through long kalpas; even if one gives rise to revulsion and aspiration, birth and death blaze fiercely. The various non-Buddhists starve themselves or cast themselves off cliffs; though enduring great toil, they exert their efforts in vain. The Tathāgata, pitying the world, manifested his traces in the royal palace, and riding on great wisdom and compassion, expounded without error, briefly opening the five kṣāntis into the fourteen kṣāntis. The 'Chapter on Bodhisattva Practice' states: 'Good sons! These fourteen kṣāntis are practiced by all bodhisattvas of the past and present in the worlds of the ten directions, and are revealed by all buddhas; the future buddhas and bodhisattva-mahāsattvas will also do likewise. If a buddha or bodhisattva does not attain all-knowledge through this portal, there is no such possibility. Why is this? Because all buddhas and bodhisattvas have no other path. Good sons! If someone hears of these—abiding kṣānti, practicing kṣānti, dedication kṣānti, joy kṣānti, freedom-from-defilement kṣānti, radiance-emitting kṣānti, flaming-wisdom kṣānti, hard-to-conquer kṣānti, face-to-face kṣānti, going-far kṣānti, immovability kṣānti, good-wisdom kṣānti, Dharma-cloud kṣānti, and correct-awakening kṣānti—and can give rise to a single thought of pure faith, that person will transcend all sufferings and difficulties for a hundred kalpas, a thousand kalpas, and limitless, boundless Ganges-sands of kalpas, will not be born in the evil destinies, and will before long attain anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi.' Fully setting forth superior practices among the various kṣāntis to enable escape from the bonds of suffering—for this reason, this scripture was spoken.

1.11

Fourth, clarifying the stages: bodhi and nirvāṇa are that which is sought and realized; one must cultivate myriad practices, passing through asaṃkhyeya kalpas, gradually awakening and realizing from shallow to deep. The 'Chapter on Receiving and Holding' states: 'How do good sons clearly understand and expound for others in regard to this scripture? The Buddha said: "Great King! Listen attentively now. From the kṣānti of practice up to the vajra-like samādhi, practicing the thirteen contemplation portals in accordance with the Dharma, all serve as the support and establishment for Dharma masters."' Therefore, the thirteen portals extensively clarify cultivation and eradication; if a single virtue is lacking, there is no way to return to the source. Do not think that applying little effort in a single portal will allow one to fully realize anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi. Fully clarifying cultivation and eradication—for this reason, this scripture was spoken.

1.12

Fifth, clarifying the shared exposition: the buddhas bring benefit and joy in accordance with what is fitting for beings' capacities; when fathoming the ultimate principle, there is no divergent teaching in the essential purport. The 'Chapter on the Two Truths' states: 'Great King! All buddhas speak prajñāpāramitā, and I now speak prajñāpāramitā without any difference. You in the great assembly, who receive, hold, read, recite, and practice according to what is spoken, are thereby receiving and holding the Dharma of all buddhas.' Although the buddhas' manifested traces in speech and silence may differ, when it comes to prajñā, they all speak it identically.

1.13

Sixth, clarifying the fruit of buddhahood: bodhisattvas adorn themselves with myriad practices over many kalpas; when the causes are complete and the fruit is perfected, it is called the ultimate stage, non-characteristic and without characteristics, eternally transcending arising and ceasing. The 'Chapter on Receiving and Holding' states: 'Good sons! When the vajra-samādhi manifests before one, one is still unable to equal the unequalled'—this is the cause of virtual awakening. 'When in the stage of liberation, of one characteristic, without characteristics, without arising and without ceasing, identical with the true limit, equal to the dharmatā, filling the storehouse of merits and abiding in the stage of the Tathāgata'—this reveals the fruit of buddhahood. Is it not that the bodhi and nirvāṇa of the fruit stage are motionless and continuous from the productive and revealing causes? This is not necessarily so. As stated below, the thirteen Dharma masters attain true liberation by cutting off the affliction obstacle that perpetuates rebirth, and attain great bodhi by cutting off the cognitive obstacle that hinders comprehension. When reaching that scripture, it says: 'From the initial kṣānti of practice up to the vajra-like samādhi, all are called suppressing all afflictions.' This should be extensively distinguished. It is from this that the Great Awakened One manifests transformations to benefit sentient beings; the arising of this scripture surely lies in this.

1.14

Regarding the clarification of the eras of translation: from the time the star of the Zhou hid its brilliance and the sun of the Han opened the ford, up through the Wei dynasty, this sūtra was still lacking. From the beginning of the Jin dynasty down to our present Great Tang, it has been translated and transmitted four times in total. First, in the third year of the Taishi era of the Jin dynasty, there was the Tripiṭaka Master Dharmarakṣa (translated into Jin as Fahu) from the Yuezhi kingdom, who translated it in one fascicle entitled "Benevolent Kings' Prajñā". Second, in the third year of the Hongshi era of the Later Qin, the Tripiṭaka Master Kumārajīva (translated into Qin as Tongshou) translated it at the Ximing Pavilion in the Xiaoyao Garden of Chang'an into two fascicles entitled "Benevolent Kings' Prajñāpāramitā for Protecting the State". Third, in the third year of the Chengsheng era of the Liang dynasty, there was the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha (translated into Liang as Zhendi) from the country of Ujjayinī in Western India, who translated it at Baoyin Temple in Hongfu into one fascicle entitled "Benevolent Kings' Prajñā", together with a commentary in six fascicles. However, when the Jin version was first translated, regional idioms still caused discrepancies. The translation made in the Liang dynasty remained concealed and did not circulate. The translation made during the Qin circulated throughout the realm; from antiquity, virtuous figures of high renown composed numerous commentaries and treatises on it, and its hundred seats succeeded one another in exalting the protection of the state. Looking back to our Great Tang, Emperor Suzong revived the transformative rule of Yao, reformed abuses, and rescued [the realm] from devastation. Deeply concerned for the common people, he cleansed his mind in abstinence and invited the abhiseka Tripiṭaka Master named Amogha (translated into Tang as Bukong) from the Lion Kingdom of Southern India to translate and transmit various sūtras in order to pacify the altars of the soil and grain. Before this vow was fully accomplished, the imperial carriage ascended to heaven. Our present Baoying Emperor reconstructed heaven and earth, renewing ritual and music; with luminous understanding reaching everywhere, he reverently carried on the previous instructions and repeatedly reiterated the imperial invitation. On the second day of the fourth month in the year yisi, the first year of the Yongtai era, an imperial decree stated: "The Tathāgata's sublime purport spreads beneficence to living beings, and the precious sūtra of the Benevolent Kings accords high honour to protecting the state. The translations of previous dynasties were not yet fully harmonized in their principle; it is hoped that, based on the Sanskrit folios, another translation be produced, so that the words of the palm leaves may never be omitted or abridged, and the teachings from the golden mouth may be rendered even more detailed and clear. Let the monk Huaigan and others be requested to translate it at the Palace Bodhimaṇḍa, thereby dedicating merit to previous generations, extending bounty to sentient beings, permanently clearing away bandits and rebels, and bringing harmonious peace to the realm, transmitting it across vast kalpas so that its rescue and protection may be truly profound." Thereupon, by imperial decree, the Military Overseer and Kaifu Yu Chao'en was tasked with jointly supervising the affair at the Southern Peach Garden. Commencing on the first day of the month and concluding on the full moon, at the Abhiseka Bodhimaṇḍa in the Chengming Hall, the Emperor held the old sūtra and collated it against the new version. An imperial decree stated: "The new sūtra and the old sūtra correspond and harmonize extremely well; the text and meaning of the newly translated version are somewhat more complete." Thus the golden words secretly matched the sacred mind, and the sun of the Buddha was reborn in the Phoenix Pool. The chronological succession of translation and transmission is surely found in this. This concludes the entire first gateway on the genesis of the sūtra.

1.15

Second, clarifying the central doctrine and substance of the sūtra. This is subdivided into two sections: first, clarifying the central doctrine of the sūtra; second, clarifying the substance of the sūtra. Under the first, clarifying the central doctrine of the sūtra, there are again two parts: first, clarifying the various teachings; second, clarifying this sūtra. As for clarifying the various teachings: generally, the central doctrine of each sūtra is established in accordance with that sūtra; since what is heard differs, it is not of a single rut. For instance, the Vimalakīrti Sūtra takes the inconceivable as its doctrine; the Lotus Sūtra takes the One Vehicle as its doctrine; the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra takes the tathāgatagarbha as its doctrine; the Nirvāṇa Sūtra takes the Buddha-nature as its doctrine. These doctrines of the various sūtras are established in terms of relative contrast. If one speaks of the ultimate principle, the pure dharmadhātu cuts off the path of language; so what doctrine could be taken as doctrine? In the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, remedying the fault of mental estimation that establishes doctrines, the sūtra verse therefore says: "According to whatever doctrine one establishes, / there are immediately many conflated meanings. / Viewing equally the estimations of one's own mind, / spoken explanations cannot be grasped." Hence we know that establishing doctrines is entirely mental estimation; if no doctrine arises, then doctrine still arises. Therefore, in the pure dharmadhātu there is neither doctrine nor non-doctrine; in accord with this, what more is there to say? Now, relying on the verbal teachings with unerring aspiration, in order to make known the purport of the various doctrines, they are raised up and assessed. Although non-Buddhist paths are many, their doctrines are only the self and dharmas, which are not needed here, as detailed in other texts. Now, judging by the texts, the teaching is of three kinds: When the Buddha appeared in the world, he first turned the wheel of the Dharma and spoke the Āgamas and so forth, largely clarifying the doctrine of existence; next, he spoke the signless teaching of the Mahāyāna Prajñā Sūtras and so forth, largely clarifying the doctrine of emptiness; later, he spoke the Mahāyāna Sandhinirmocana and so forth, the doctrine of neither empty nor existent, which is not empty and not existent. Because the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, has mastery over the Dharma, he taught according to beings' capacities, and so these differences exist. Since the Twin Trees obscured their radiance, sectarian attachments have vigorously arisen. At first, the Hīnayāna sects initiated disputes at the Kukkuṭārāma, and within four hundred years divided into twenty sects; the root and branches, earlier and later, are distinguished as usual. In that period, the sages who transmitted the Dharma mostly understood the teaching of existence. Next, the bodhisattvas Aśvaghoṣa, Nāgārjuna, and others composed the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa and so forth, mostly understanding the Mahāyāna signless teaching of emptiness. Later, the bodhisattvas Maitreya, Asaṅga, and others composed the Yogācārabhūmi and so forth, mostly understanding the Mahāyāna teaching of neither empty nor existent. Thus, after the Buddha's passing away, just as when the Buddha was present, first came existence, next emptiness, and later neither-empty-nor-existent; although they clarified emptiness and existence, the sages did not contradict one another. Therefore, in the transmission of the Mahāyāna Dharma over a thousand years, there was never any divergent interpretation. But after a thousand years, the two masters of the schools of emptiness and existence, the two great bodhisattvas Bhāviveka and Dharmapāla, each relying on the Mahāyāna definitive teachings, clarified emptiness and existence with differing views. According to the Record of the Western Regions, these two bodhisattvas did not directly confront one another to debate their merits. When speaking of emptiness and existence, this refers to parikalpita-svabhāva, paratantra-svabhāva, and pariniṣpanna-svabhāva. Among the three natures, that the parikalpita nature is empty in substance is accepted by both schools; the substance of pariniṣpanna-svabhāva transcends designation, as will be fully explained below under the two truths. It is solely with regard to paratantra that emptiness and existence are debated, and this meaning is set forth in full. The text is divided into two: first, relying on the sacred teachings; second, relying on ancient masters. Under relying on the sacred teachings, first emptiness and existence are clarified, and then the two truths are clarified. As for clarifying emptiness and existence, the Yogācārabhūmi and Vijñaptimātratā texts both have explicit passages, as established and settled in the Vajra Commentary of our temple's Eastern Cloister. Now, relying on the tenth fascicle of the Broad Śataka Śāstra, an outline is briefly presented. Within it are three parts: first, clarifying the masters' doctrines; next, raising objections; and finally, stating the correct doctrine. First, regarding the masters' doctrines, these again are three: first, the Yogācāra followers establish that paratantra is existent; second, Bodhisattva Bhāviveka establishes that paratantra is empty; third, Bodhisattva Dharmapāla refutes both attachments and establishes the Middle Way. For the Broad Śataka Śāstra, Āryadeva composed the root text and Dharmapāla composed the commentary; therefore, the third is the correct doctrine of the arbiter. Second, raising objections: the text is again divided into two: 1. clarifying the establishment of doctrines; 2. clarifying the cross-examinations. Clarifying the establishment of doctrines: First, the Yogācāra master presents the doctrine of existence, saying: "The substance of dharmas grasped by conceptual discrimination is non-existent, while the substance of dharmas arisen from causes and conditions is existent. Dependent on this, defilements and latent propensities are activated, binding the world to transmigrate through the three realms of existence; or by cultivating preparatory practice, one realizes the emptiness of selflessness, attains the three bodhis, and is liberated from the suffering of saṃsāra." To substantiate this meaning, he cites a sūtra verse as an argument, which says: "The parikalpita nature is non-existent; / the paratantra nature is existent. / Through false discrimination, things are destroyed, / falling into the two extremes of increase and decrease." Bhāviveka explains: "Names are parikalpita, while meanings are paratantra. Names are non-existent because they do not exist in the meaning; meanings are existent because they are not non-existent according to worldly conventions. One cannot cite this to prove that paratantra exists." Second, the cross-examinations briefly cite four passages. First, the Yogācāra master challenges Bhāviveka's explanation; within this text there are three points: First, a general rejection: "This explanation is not correct, because the meaning is contradictory." Next, he raises four objections: 1. The objection that meaning corresponds to name in being non-existent: If a name is non-existent because it does not exist in the meaning, then the meaning is also non-existent in the name—how could it be existent? 2. The objection that name corresponds to meaning in being existent: Furthermore, since the verbal designation established for that meaning arises from causes and conditions, it ought to be existent like the meaning. 3. The objection regarding the conceptual grasping of name and meaning: If the nature of the signifier falsely grasped is non-existent, how could the nature of the signified falsely grasped be existent? 4. The objection regarding paratantra of name and meaning: A name has the capacity to signify in accord with worldly convention, yet you do not accept it as paratantra-svabhāva; meaning is also conventionally said to have a capacity in accord with worldly convention, so why do you not accept it as parikalpita-svabhāva? Finally, the general conclusion: "The signifier and the signified conventionally established according to worldly truth ought both to be non-existent or both to be existent; how could the sūtra state that one is existent and one is non-existent? Therefore, what you say does not accord with the meaning of the sūtra. One should believe that parikalpita-svabhāva is non-existent, because it is established by worldly false sentiment; paratantra-svabhāva arises from causes and conditions and is not made by false sentiment, so one should believe it is existent." Second objection: Bodhisattva Bhāviveka, to prove his own position, cites a sūtra verse: "Through the establishment of these various names, / those various dharmas are signified. / They are all non-existent in their own nature, / because the dharmatā is entirely thus." The Yogācāra master objects: "The intention of the sūtra is not to say that the name is non-existent in the meaning; it only says that the dharmatā of the signified is non-existent, explaining that all dharmatā cannot be signified. What is signified by words and speech is always the common characteristic, whereas the specific characteristics of all dharmas entirely cut off words and speech; specific characteristics are not non-existent, and common characteristics are not existent. Here it is briefly stated that the nature of the signified is non-existent, but this does not mean that the nature of the signifier is truly existent. Therefore, the verse only says 'they are non-existent'; otherwise, it should have said 'this nature is non-existent.'" Third objection: Bodhisattva Bhāviveka, to prove that paratantra is non-existent, further cites a summary verse spoken in a sūtra: "There is no dharma whatsoever that arises, / nor is there any dharma that ceases. / Viewing all dharmas with pure vision, / they are neither existent nor non-existent." The Yogācāra master objects: "This also cannot prove that paratantra-svabhāva is non-existent in its nature. Why is that? The intention of this verse is to clarify that the intrinsic nature and particularities of the parikalpita nature, both signifier and signified, are in their substance empty, without arising and without ceasing. When, through pure vision free from attachment, one views the various worldly things, that which arises from causes and conditions is neither non-existent nor existent. Therefore, this does not prove that paratantra is non-existent." Fourth objection: Bodhisattva Bhāviveka cites a sūtra to substantiate that paratantra is empty in nature. The sūtra verse says: "All dharmas arise from conditions; / conditions and dharmas are both non-existent. / One who is able to know this correctly / is said to comprehend dependent origination. / If a dharma arises from conditions, / this dharma has no nature whatsoever; / this dharma does not arise from conditions." The Yogācāra followers harmonize this sūtra, saying: "These two sūtras say that dharmas arisen from conditions are without intrinsic nature, yet they do not contradict each other, because they arise from conditions. There are two kinds of dharmas arisen from conditions: first, parikalpita; second, paratantra. The intention here is to clarify that the intrinsic nature of parikalpita is non-existent; it does not speak of paratantra. If one were to say that paratantra is entirely devoid of intrinsic nature, one would then repudiate both defiled and pure dharmas as non-existent; this is called the ruinous grasping of emptiness, which harms both oneself and others." Bodhisattva Bhāviveka, seeing the various cross-examinations by the Yogācāra master, then censured him, saying: "Who can ward off such false discriminations? When one attains right view, they will naturally be eliminated." Third, regarding the statement of the correct doctrine in the treatise, Dharmapāla evaluates: "Such positions, varying according to differing views, divide the sacred words into multiple factions, mutually raising disputes and each clinging to one extreme. Since they cannot eliminate the defilement of bad views, how could they tally with the pure, sublime purport of the Mahāyāna spoken by the buddhas, the World-Honoured Ones? Not yet having converged with the true principle and following their own attached sentiments, affirming themselves and repudiating others, they are deeply to be dreaded. One should abandon attachment to the two extremes of emptiness and existence, and awaken to the non-dual Middle Way of the Mahāyāna." Clarifying the two truths: The treatise says: "However, the signless, profound Dharma gate of the two truths spoken by the Buddha is most difficult to fathom. Today, encouraging myself, I shall briefly distinguish the main direction based on the definitive sūtras to put an end to all disputes. Saṃvṛti-satya refers to the worldly and transmundane dharmas such as form and mind that arise from conditions; directly realized apart from explanation, they can be indirectly expressed; direct realization comes first, and only afterward does explanation arise. This saṃvṛti-satya is both existent and empty, formed through provisional aggregation like various illusory events, arising from discrimination like the creations of a dream; having signs that can be spoken of, it is called saṃvṛti-satya. Paramārtha-satya refers to that which is known by the noble ones, beyond the reach of both conceptual discrimination and verbal designations; directly realized within oneself without depending on other conditions, signless and cutting off words, it is called paramārtha-satya. When the Dharma gate of the two truths is briefly explained in this way, those who follow the right Dharma are in accord without dispute. All those with great aspiration who generate broad vows, wishing to benefit and bring joy to sentient beings to the end of future time, should correctly cut off the defilements of false views, and should marvelously awaken and enter into the true emptiness of the Sugata. In order to fulfill their quests, they should diligently practice and learn."

1.16

Question: According to this explanation, Dharmapāla loses his doctrine. In the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra, Bodhisattva Dharmapāla states that paratantra and pariniṣpanna are existent; why does he here, in explaining paramārtha-satya as signless and cutting off words, describe it as empty? Answer: That text, relying on the Sandhinirmocana, investigates nature and characteristics to their depths, and says the two natures are existent; this text, relying on the Prajñā, transcends words and cuts off signs, and so here says it is empty. Principle and teaching are obvious; what fault is there in this?

1.17

Having clarified the explanation relying on the teaching, next, relying on ancient masters, the three natures are contrasted to establish the three non-natures, briefly citing two texts. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha, relying on the Treatise on the Three Non-Natures, completely dispels the three natures to establish the three non-natures: 1. dispelling parikalpita to establish the signless nature of discrimination; 2. dispelling paratantra to establish the non-arising nature; 3. dispelling pariniṣpanna to establish the natureless nature of the real. What is dispelled here is that, with regard to the one true principle, because the three natures are dispelled, the three non-natures are established, as fully explained in that text. Tripiṭaka Master Ci'en, relying on the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi Śāstra, establishes the three non-natures based directly upon the three natures, as the treatise verse says: "Relying directly on these three natures, / those three non-natures are established." 1. Relying on parikalpita, the character-non-nature is established; 2. relying on paratantra, the non-spontaneous nature is established; 3. relying on pariniṣpanna, the non-nature of self and dharmas is established. The first, parikalpita, is existent in sentiment but non-existent in principle; paratantra and pariniṣpanna are existent in principle but non-existent in sentiment, as fully explained in that text.

1.18

Question: What is the distinction between what is established by these two accounts of the three natures? Answer: The former, by refuting the three, establishes the three naturelessnesses; the latter merely relies on the three to establish the three naturelessnesses. The former is emptiness and the latter is existence—this is the distinction between the two. If one carefully examines the ultimate principle, they actually do not refute one another. For example, regarding establishing the three natures with respect to the form aggregate: the arbitrary clinging to a self and phenomena upon the form aggregate is the parikalpita; the conditioned form aggregate itself is the paratantra; and the true suchness that is the nature of form is the pariniṣpanna. If one says that the three natures are all existent or all empty, both are completely without error; one need only understand the meaning in one's mind and not become attached to words. To say they are all existent means: the parikalpita is falsely existent, the paratantra is dependently existent, and the pariniṣpanna is truly existent. To say they are all empty means: the parikalpita is empty in substance, the paratantra is empty in intrinsic nature, and the pariniṣpanna is empty in the ultimate sense. The sages and noble ones fully comprehend such meaning. Do not say that the statements of the two bodhisattvas above and the two tripiṭaka masters below contradict one another. As for speaking of emptiness or existence, it is for those who at that time took delight in hearing of emptiness or existence that they could generate practice and realization. Because ordinary fools have since beginningless time been perfumed with the clinging to existence and emptiness, and their sickness was deep, the Buddha gave these teachings to eradicate it. All the bodhisattvas and others, respectfully following the noble words, addressed the faults of clinging and views in their respective times and widely propagated the teaching relying on valid scriptural testimony. May you examine this carefully and not give rise to the sickness again. The aforementioned three natures and naturelessness, and the two truths as existence and emptiness, are all the central theme of this sūtra, as will be understood when we come to the text. This clarifies the various scriptural explanations.

1.19

Regarding clarifying this sūtra: its title says prajñā, and this itself is taken as the central theme. The "Chapter on Contemplating the Tathāgata" separately explains three kinds: ultimate reality, contemplative illumination, and letters. Tripiṭaka Master Ci'en further adds two kinds: objective realm and retinue, which together with the previous three make five dharmas, because they are the nature of prajñā, the characteristic of prajñā, the cause of prajñā, the objective realm of prajñā, and the companion of prajñā. One opinion holds: Contemplative illumination is the central theme of this sūtra, because the sūtra explains that the five kṣāntis are wisdom. The emptiness of persons and the emptiness of phenomena, fundamental and subsequent [cognitions], and distant and proximate preliminary practices are all the central theme of the sūtra, because there is nothing that is not subsumed within the fourteen kṣāntis. Another opinion holds: Ultimate reality is the central theme of this sūtra, because the sūtra itself says: "Because the dharmatā of all phenomena is ultimate reality, there is no coming, no going, no arising, no cessation, and so forth." Another opinion holds: These two combined constitute the central theme of the sūtra; although the names nature and characteristics differ, substance and function are not separate, because in the cause they may be complete or lacking, but in the fruit they must both be present. Furthermore, these two are precisely what is properly sought, because both cause and fruit are cultivated and realized. Moreover, these two are the true body; establishing them together as the central theme accords with the meaning.

1.20

Question: Why are the objective realm, companions, and letters not taken as the central theme? Answer: These two are the root, whereas those three are branches. Furthermore, the objective realm, the companions, and that which expresses them must accompany these two if they exist; why should they be separately established?

1.21

Question: The sūtra clarifies the two truths; why are they not taken as the central theme? Answer: Former masters have already clarified this; taking them as the central theme is without fault. Furthermore, this cognitive realization completely encompasses phenomena and principle; since this subsumes that, they are not separate.

1.22

Clarifying the central theme of the sūtra is concluded.

1.23

Second is clarifying the substance of the sūtra. There are two parts within this: first, the substance; second, the nature. Clarifying the substance of all teachings has both general and specific [explanations]. First, as for the general explanation, fascicle 81 of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "The substance of a sūtra has two aspects: first, the text; second, the meaning. The text is that which is relied upon, and the meaning is that which relies upon it, because through the expressing text, the meaning can be revealed." Second, as for the specific explanation, the aforementioned two are further divided into five: three for text and two for meaning. Regarding the three for text: First, concealing the nominal to discuss the real, taking sound as the substance. The Abhidharmakośa says: "Some say the Buddha's teaching has speech as its intrinsic nature; they say the aggregates of Dharma are all subsumed under the aggregate of form, because the intrinsic nature of speech is sound, and what is spoken by the Buddha's mind is heard by others." The Abhidharmasamuccaya speaks of sound induced by accomplishment, but does not say that names and so forth are induced by accomplishment. The Cheng Weishi Lun says: "If names, phrases, and syllables were real entities apart from sound, they should, like form and so forth, not be real expressers; therefore it is said that the Buddha's teaching takes sound as its substance." Second, concealing the real to discuss the nominal, taking names and so forth as the substance. The Abhidharmakośa says: "Some say the Buddha's teaching has names as its intrinsic nature; they say the aggregates of Dharma are all subsumed under the aggregate of conditioned formations, because the intrinsic nature of names is non-associated formations." It is essential that there be names for it to be called a teaching; therefore the substance of the Buddha's teaching is names. This means that as phrases and syllables are lined up in order, laid out in order, and joined in order, the Buddha's teaching is said to take names and so forth as its substance. Third, discussing the nominal and the real together, taking nature and function as the substance. The Daśabhūmikavyākhyāna says: "Both speaker and listener achieve culmination through two things: first, sound; second, correct syllables, syllables being that upon which they rely, as they subsume names and phrases." That is, these two constitute four dharmas, because the functions of sound, names, phrases, and syllables are each distinct. Names express intrinsic nature, phrases express differentiation, and syllables—namely letters—are that upon which the two rely. Although these three have no separate substance apart from sound, their nominal and real aspects are different and they are not identical with sound. Because the objective realms of the two unhindered cognitions of dharma and discourse are distinct—dharma takes names and so forth as its object, while discourse takes sound as its object—the Buddha's teaching is said to take nature and function as its substance. Regarding the two for meaning: First, subsuming the objective realm into the mind, taking consciousness-only as the substance. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says that the three realms are only mind. Below, this sūtra says: "From the first moment, there is an ineffable consciousness that gives rise to the two dharmas of form and mind of all sattvas." The Awakening of Faith says: "Apart from mind and thought, there are no characteristics of any objective realm." The treatises say that mind, mental factors, form, non-associated formations, and the unconditioned natures are all not separate from consciousness. Consciousness has distinctions: the true teaching of the speaker and the semblance dharma of the hearer flow equally from the pure dharmadhātu. If considered in terms of the root, it is the mind of the speaker; if taken in terms of the branch, it is the consciousness of the hearer. How is this known to be so? Vasubandhu's verse in the Viṃśikā says: "Through their mutual predominant power, / the two consciousnesses become determinate." This means that due to distinctions in the consciousness of one continuity, distinct consciousnesses are caused to arise in another continuity, mutually acting as predominant conditions for one another; therefore, the Buddha's teaching is said to take consciousness-only as its substance. Second, subsuming characteristics into the nature, taking true suchness as the substance. Therefore the sūtra says: "All phenomena are also such, and even Maitreya is also such." Below, this sūtra says: "All the sounds, speech, letters, chapters, and phrases spoken in the sūtras and so forth are all such, and none are not ultimate reality." Therefore the Buddha's teaching is said to take true suchness as its substance. Regarding the above five kinds, general and specific, shallow and deep, in terms of principle, whichever door is raised subsumes the others and they do not contradict one another.

1.24

Next, clarifying the nature: subsuming characteristics into the nature refers to the pariniṣpanna. The previous four approaches apply to both the paratantra and the pariniṣpanna. If derived from the hearer's defiled mind transforming, or from the speaker's defiled text and meaning, they belong solely to the paratantra; if transformed by an uncontaminated mind or spoken uncontaminatedly, they are subsumed under correct cognition and apply to the pariniṣpanna, because uncontaminated conditioned [dharmas] apply to both natures.

1.25

Question: Among the eighteen dhātus, fifteen are defiled; how can sound and so forth also be subsumed under the uncontaminated? The intrinsic nature of names, phrases, and syllables is indeterminate; how can they be said to apply to uncontaminated goodness? Answer: According to the Sarvāstivāda school, the fifteen dhātus are strictly defiled, and names and so forth are indeterminate. Now in the Mahāyāna school, the sound, names, phrases, and syllables of the Tathāgata's preaching of the Dharma are truly good and uncontaminated. For bodhisattvas of the ten bhūmis, the nature is determined according to their consciousness: if they speak or listen to the teaching with an uncontaminated mind, following the consciousness that transforms it, it is defiled goodness; if they speak or listen to the teaching with a defiled mind, following the consciousness that transforms it, it is defiled indeterminate. For the two vehicles, speaking and listening are solely defiled speech, because they lack the uncontaminated cognition of speaking and listening. The presence or absence of archetype and image reflected in various minds is distinguished as usual. The second section is concluded.

1.26

Third, that which subsumes it and those who are addressed: within this there are two: first, discerning that which subsumes it; second, clarifying those who are addressed. That which subsumes it has five: first, piṭaka; second, division; third, vehicle; fourth, period; fifth, assembly. Regarding that which is subsumed under the piṭakas: according to the Yogācārabhūmi, there are two piṭakas: first, the Bodhisattvapiṭaka; second, the Śrāvakapiṭaka. The teachings for pratyekabuddhas are few and are included within the śrāvakas; named after the majority, it is called the Śrāvakapiṭaka. Alternatively, three piṭakas are spoken of: first, the Vinaya; second, the Sūtra; third, the Abhidharma, which respectively express the trainings of discipline, concentration, and wisdom. Alternatively, six piṭakas are spoken of: because the bodhisattva and śrāvaka each have three. Since pratyekabuddhas have no separate vinaya and so forth, there are no three piṭakas that could make nine. This sūtra is subsumed under the Bodhisattvapiṭaka among the two and six piṭakas, and under the Sūtrapiṭaka among the three piṭakas. Although among the twelve divisions there is the upadeśa, and the "Chapter on Entrustment" widely clarifies various admonitions, in meaning it truly runs through them, while in text it is solely a sūtra.

1.27

Second, regarding that which is subsumed under the divisions: the meaning of the twelve divisions is fully detailed in a separate chapter; here we merely list their names and briefly match them to the sūtra. First, sūtra. This has general and specific [meanings]: generally, all twelve are called sūtras; specifically, it refers to the meanings that should be expressed in prose, which this sūtra possesses completely. Second, geya. What has already been spoken in prose is restated in verse; this refers to the seven-syllable verses in the "Chapter on the Bodhisattva Practices"—although the Buddha spoke in prose, the king praised in verse by repeating the prose, which is precisely restating in verse; furthermore, the five-syllable verses in the "Chapter on Upholding" are this. Third, vyākaraṇa. This has three marks: first, predicting a great being's future attainment of buddhahood; second, predicting that a disciple will die here and be born there; third, predicting and explaining the meaning of phenomena; now, in this sūtra, it can apply to the third. Fourth, gāthā. This refers to what was not spoken before but is clarified directly in verse, such as the two sets of verses in five-syllable and four-syllable lines in the "Chapter on the Two Truths" and the "Chapter on Protecting the State." Fifth, udāna. This refers to speaking spontaneously without waiting for questions upon observing the faculties of beings, in order to make the Dharma endure long and reveal the Buddha's deep compassion, such as when the "Chapter on Contemplating the Tathāgata" says: "Good sons! I shall now first explain for all bodhisattva-mahāsattvas the practices for protecting the fruit of buddhahood and protecting the ten bhūmis," and so forth. Sixth, nidāna. This has three marks: first, establishing precepts due to transgressions; second, speaking Dharma due to circumstances; third, speaking Dharma due to requests. Now this sūtra applies to the second and third, because in the "Chapter on Entrustment" admonitions are spoken due to circumstances, and throughout the text teachings are spoken due to requests. Seventh, avadāna. This refers to using parables and analogies to explain the Dharma that is spoken, such as when the sūtra below says: "Even if worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges were filled with the seven treasures and used to give alms to sattvas of the great chiliocosm so that they attained the fruit of arhatship," and so forth. Eighth, itivṛttaka. This refers to speaking of disciples and teachings of the past, excluding oneself. That is, the "Chapter on the Bodhisattva Practices" states that King Prasenajit was a bodhisattva of the fourth bhūmi, as well as the events of Samantaprabha, King Kalmāṣapāda, and others protecting their states below. Ninth, jātaka. This speaks of the Buddha himself in past lives in various places, whether dying or being born, practicing the bodhisattva path. That is, he himself says that he was a bodhisattva of the eighth bhūmi, and below, Mūrdhata wishing to destroy Śakra; the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "At that time, Mūrdhata was precisely my own person," clarifying the Buddha's causes. Tenth, vaipulya. This has two marks: first, explaining the practice of the bodhisattva path; second, because the dharmas are vast, numerous, extremely lofty, and great; this sūtra possesses both. Eleventh, adbhutadharma. This explains the common virtues of the eight assemblies and other supreme, extraordinary, and astonishing matters, such as when the sūtra below says: "If a person hears of the fourteen kṣāntis, they will not be born in the evil destinies and will attain bodhi," and so forth. Furthermore, Kalmāṣapāda heard the Dharma and realized the samādhi of emptiness, and there is the supernatural manifestation of scattering flowers in the "Chapter on the Inconceivable." Twelfth, upadeśa. This refers to the thorough investigation and study of the classical scriptures. Mātṛkā: all definitive sūtras may be called mātṛkā. Now, in this sūtra, following the preceding and initiating what follows, inquiring into nature and characteristics, and speaking in a thorough and investigated manner, it is an upadeśa sūtra; thus it possesses all twelve.

First 27 of 264 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 — Classical Chinese