法華玄義釋籤 2
English (machine translation) 2
- Language
- English
2.1
Composed by Zhanran, Śramaṇa of Tiantai
2.2
From the first text's 'how so?' down to 'the characteristics of the emergence of the flavor of milk': this text takes the Avataṃsaka's preaching of the great without yet travelling to the Deer Park and designates it as sudden. This is the sudden section, not the sudden teaching, because within that section it also contains the Separate [Teaching]; those who fail to see this immediately claim that the Avataṃsaka is more sudden than the Lotus Sūtra, which is an error. The explanations below should follow this standard. The first text cites the simile; below 'having thickly planted,' it matches the simile via stimulus and response, generally taking both the Separate and Perfect as 'thick.' Below 'preaching suddenly,' it clarifies the intention behind preaching suddenly; it is truly because the reason for preaching suddenly given below is the mutual alienation. The phrase 'the great is alienated from the small' means that the people of the small [vehicle] had not yet turned, being alienated by the great. Below 'this is like the Avataṃsaka,' it concludes the Avataṃsaka's simile to identify it with the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], which is why it says 'like.' Below, it follows the same pattern. From 'in terms of the Dharma' onward, it clarifies the mutual response of faculty and stimulus and the obtaining of benefits to conclude the name of the section. Below 'in terms of preaching,' it concludes the preaching, its sequence being identical with the simile of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra].
2.3
Next is the illumination of the dark valleys, which also first raises the Avataṃsaka's simile. Below 'shallow practice,' it also adduces stimulus and response to match the simile, down to the text of the Lotus Sūtra, where each has concluding similes, identification with the Dharma, and the obtaining of benefits. Concluding the names and concluding the sequence of preaching, if one examines the intention of the initial sudden teaching to compare it with the four flavors below, it can be understood through comparison. Only in the Tripiṭaka Teaching is the concluding of the section name placed in front; the remaining texts may lack the intention of the preaching and so forth, which can be seen by examining them. 'Although the great is in the assembly,' and so forth, means that the great persons manifest traces and conceal themselves among the small: 'duotuo' is the appearance of learning to walk, and 'pohuo' is the sound of practicing speech, manifesting the initial practice and initial teaching of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching]; yet those of actual practice in the Tripiṭaka take it to be real, which is why it says 'did not recognize.'
2.4
From 'the reflection approaching the ten thousand waters' to 'vaipulya': arriving at vaipulya, all four teachings are preached in full; because they are not yet blended, the views differ.
2.5
Question:
2.6
In the Avataṃsaka and the Deer Park, the great and small were completely unblended; why is it that as soon as vaipulya is preached, they are in the same assembly and hear together?
2.7
Answer:
2.8
If considered in terms of the secret [teaching], it horizontally covers everyone, being pervasive at all times; if discussing the vertical in terms of the horizontal, concealment and manifestation depend on the faculties. The Buddha's fundamental intention lay in the great, so following the fundamental it was placed first; however, due to a portion of gradual faculties, the sage's compassion was prevented from flowing smoothly: previously he specialized in the great, and next he specialized again in the small. Now, although in the same assembly, the great and small are still separated; it is merely that the small is rebuked by the great in order to form curd, and this serves as the sequence. Hence we know that for those who initial received [the teachings], they still mutually did not know each other; thus there are these various similes whose intentions differ. 'The reflection approaching the ten thousand waters' is a simile for the manifestation of bodies being different; 'following the vessels whether square or round' is a simile for showing lands being different; 'following the waves in motion and stillness' is a simile for the preaching of the Dharma being different. From 'showing one Buddha land' to 'not shared' matches the similes. From 'hence seeing that there are' onward, it clarifies that the faculties and views differ, corresponding to the three previous characteristics: first, seeing it as pure like the Brahmā King, and seeing it as defiled like Śāriputra. Opening those three characteristics, it generally quotes sūtra passages, and in addition clarifies the reprimand of the small in terms of the six sense faculties. 'Seeing that there are pure and defiled' corresponds to the previous manifestation of lands, which is the eye faculty. One should also add seeing the excellence and inferiority of the physical forms; since seeing the land has already been raised, the body must match the land, so the text is not made redundant. 'Hearing that there are praises and censures' is the ear faculty. 'Smelling that there is campaka' is the nose faculty. 'Flowers clinging to the body' is the body faculty. 'Wisdom having variety' is the mind faculty. It only lacks the tongue faculty, as praise and censure encompass it. If speaking of the body, one should say: like Mount Sumeru, which is the gigantic body; sitting initially at the Buddha-tree, which is the slender body. Within each sense faculty, there is one praise and one censure, which can be seen by examining them. Moreover, the Buddha praising Mañjuśrī and Vimalakīrti is praise; the śrāvakas and bodhisattvas being rebuked is censure. Such examples are so numerous that they cannot all be recorded. In accordance with the purity of one's mind, the Buddha land is pure; those who enter this room do not smell other fragrances; for those whose residual defilements are exhausted, flowers do not cling. The śrāvaka has variety, while his unobstructed wisdom does not have variety—this is precisely the intention of praise and censure. Worldly people, when classifying the Laṅkāvatāra, either identify it with the Avataṃsaka or identify it with the Lotus Sūtra; as fully recorded in the Zhiguan, it has already cited passages from the Laṅkāvatāra in two places and classified it under vaipulya, because the text of that sūtra fully possesses the four teachings and contains reprimands. Here the intention of the preaching is missing; it should say that vaipulya fundamentally rebukes the small and criticizes the biased, while the perfect has no interruption. It also lacks the reason for the preaching; it should say that it is truly because the small had not yet completely turned, causing the five hundred to hear the great and become reprimanded.
2.9
'There is another meaning' means that the simile of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra only speaks of the flat earth; now, separating that flat earth, it uses it as a simile for vaipulya, prajñā, and the Lotus Sūtra: vaipulya is like mealtime, prajñā is like late morning, and the Lotus Sūtra is like midday. Adding two meanings to that meaning, it therefore says 'there is another.' The phrase 'the great persons receive its light and function,' and so forth, means that the great persons, the bodhisattvas, receive the prajñā light and the functions of all dharmas; since the people of the two vehicles do not possess this function, they are therefore likened to a seven-day-old infant who, if gazing at the solar disk, causes its eyes to lose their sight, hence called 'losing.' The darkness and realization of outsiders is likened to walking at night; the bodhisattva's benefiting of others is likened to engaging in tasks. 'Tasks' means labor and work. Therefore, below 'the text says,' it cites the self-narration of the śrāvakas of faith and understanding to match the infant losing its eyesight: the brilliance of all-knowledge is obscured by the light of prajñā, and fundamental ignorance remains entirely intact, which in meaning is like losing. Below 'although the three people all learn,' it is the intention of the preaching. It still lacks the reason for the preaching; it should also say that it is truly because the small had gradually become broad and unobstructed, causing them to be inspired to preach.
2.10
Next, regarding "gnomon" (tugui) and the like in the metaphor for the Lotus [Sūtra]: A gui is an accumulation of earth; hence the character is written with doubled "earth" (土), which is called gui. For example, Dharma Master Yan Guan of the Song dynasty and the Grand Astrologer He Chengtian debated whether this land is peripheral or central. Guan then cited the Duke of Zhou's method of measuring shadows, using a one-foot-two-inch earthen gnomon to measure the sun's shadow: on the day of the summer solstice, there was still a remaining shadow [here], whereas on this day in India there was no remaining shadow. Therefore Dharma Master Hui said, "Like the sun directly at noon, nowhere is it not south"; this points to the central region where there is no remaining shadow. According to this calculation, an inch of shadow on the ground corresponds to ten thousand li in the heavens. As for "whether lowering the head or offering slight goodness," this summarizes all kinds of scattered minds and minor good deeds, none of which fail to be opened up to constitute the causes of buddhahood; using this to match the metaphor, all alike enter into the single reality, and therefore there is neither excess nor shortfall. "Do not cause..." and below explains the intent. It also lacks an explanation of the cause, which should say: truly because the capacity for the great was already mature and the assembly was free of branches and leaves, it brought about the opening of all buddhas' knowledge and vision. As for "in terms of the Dharma accommodating capacities, it is called the gradual-perfect teaching," this text's phrasing is abbreviated; stated in full, it should say that following the gradual [teaching] of the Deer Park, it converges the gradual back to the perfect, hence it is called gradual-perfect. People failing to see this then claim that the Lotus is gradual-perfect and the Avataṃsaka is sudden-perfect, not knowing that within the Avataṃsaka collection there is the Separate [Teaching], and even that the two expedient teachings within the Prajñā are both opened out from the one vehicle of the Lotus; hence it is said, "Within the one Buddha vehicle, discrimination is used to speak of three." Therefore the Commentary states: "Opened out from the one Buddha vehicle, it carries the two and carries the three." Now the Lotus collection lacks those two and three, and therefore it says, "There are neither two nor three." Moreover, the above concludes that the Avataṃsaka includes [the Separate Teaching], whereas this sūtra no longer combines, solely [presents], contrasts, or carries; this is not difficult to see—how can one persist in delusion? Furthermore, in all the sections of the present text, every single division first treats the four teachings to assess the crude and the subtle: the former three are crude and the latter one is subtle. Next, it treats the five flavors to determine the crude and the subtle: the former four flavors are crude and sarpir-maṇḍa is subtle. Failing entirely to investigate the context, directly seizing upon a single phrase to claim that the Lotus is inferior to the Avataṃsaka—how great an error! How great an error! As for "in terms of the sequence of preaching, it is called the aspect of the flavor of sarpir-maṇḍa," this passage on the successive generation of the five flavor teachings is at the end of Chapter Thirteen, "Noble Practices," where the Buddha, having finished confirming Bodhisattva Amalarbha-rāja, says: Just as from a cow comes milk and so on up to sarpir-maṇḍa, it is like how from the Buddha come the twelve divisions of scriptures and so on up to nirvāṇa.
2.11
Question:
2.12
That sūtra itself uses sarpir-maṇḍa to illustrate nirvāṇa; how can it now be used to illustrate the Lotus?
2.13
Answer:
2.14
The doctrinal meaning of our lineage maintains that the two texts share the same flavor, yet the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] is still inferior. Why? The Lotus opening the provisional is like having already broken the main enemy host; the remaining capacities arriving there are like remnants, presenting no difficulty. Hence the Lotus is regarded as the great harvest, and the Nirvāṇa is regarded as the gleaning. If this were not so, the Nirvāṇa should not point back from afar to the eight thousand śrāvakas receiving their predictions in the Lotus and seeing the Tathāgata nature, which is like the autumn harvest and winter storage with nothing more to be done.
2.15
Next, in citing similarities, there are two parts: first, a general conclusion of the similarities; second, citing the text to explain them individually. First, as for saying "one should know that the metaphor of the Avataṃsaka shares the same meaning as the Nirvāṇa," the Avataṃsaka's metaphors of the sunrise and so on share the same meaning as the Nirvāṇa's five flavors, differing only in being expansive or concise; hence it expansively opens the level ground to make three metaphors, illustrating the three flavors. Next, in citing text to substantiate the similarity, as for saying "three sons, three fields, three horses," and so on: The Nirvāṇa states: "Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha: 'The Tathāgata pities all sentient beings: those untamed he can tame; those unliberated he can liberate. Sunakkhatta was the son of the Buddha when he was a bodhisattva; he severed the fetters of the desire realm and attained the four dhyānas. Why did the Tathāgata predict that he is an icchantika, an incurable person who will dwell in hell for an eon? Why did he not first expound the true Dharma for him and afterward for the bodhisattvas? If he cannot save the monk Sunakkhatta, how can he be called one who possesses great compassion and great expedients?' The Buddha said: 'Good son! Suppose a person has only three sons: the first has faith and obedience, respecting father and mother; of keen faculties and wisdom, he fully understands worldly affairs. The second son has neither faith nor obedience and does not respect father and mother; yet of keen faculties and wisdom, he fully understands worldly affairs. The third son does not respect father and mother, has neither faith nor obedience, and is of dull faculties and without wisdom. When the parents instruct, whom should they instruct first?' Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha: 'They should first instruct the first, next the second, and last the third; and though those two sons lack faith, obedience, and respect, out of loving thought they instruct them next. The Tathāgata is also like this: the three sons illustrate first the bodhisattvas, next the śrāvakas, and last the icchantikas. Just as with the subtle and profound meanings in the sūtras, I have already expounded them first for the bodhisattvas, the shallow and accessible meanings for the śrāvakas, and worldly meanings for the icchantikas. Although there is no benefit now, it creates causes for future lives. Good son! Suppose there are three fields: the first has convenient irrigation channels and is free of sand, saline soil, tiles, stones, and thorns; sowing one yields a hundred. The second, though free of sand, saline soil, tiles, stones, and thorns, has perilous and difficult irrigation channels; the harvest is reduced by half. The third has perilous and difficult irrigation channels, with much sand and saline soil; sowing one yields one. Again, there are three vessels: the first is intact, the second leaks, and the third is broken. When putting them to use, which vessel is used first? Again, there are three sick persons: the first is easy to cure, the second is difficult to cure, and the third is incurable. If a physician treats them, which does he treat first? Again, there are three horses: the first is well-trained, robust, and of great strength; the second is untrained but of great strength; the third is untrained, emaciated, and old. When a king goes forth, which horse does he ride first?' The application of the metaphors is as before. 'Good son! Just as a great lion, when killing a fragrant elephant, exerts its full strength, and even when killing a hare also exerts its full strength, the Tathāgata is also like this: for the bodhisattvas and the icchantikas, his efficacy and function are not two.'" Therefore in the present text, first preaching the Avataṃsaka is like first acting for the bodhisattvas; next in the Deer Park is like acting for the śrāvakas; from the Vaipulya onward both great and small are universally accommodated, up to the Nirvāṇa, which is called impartiality. Hence the Nirvāṇa says, "efficacy and function are not two." Although the sūtra text lists multiple kinds of three metaphors, the intent of the metaphors is not different; they are merely listed repeatedly. The sun's light is without partiality: the high is illuminated first, and reaching the level ground afterward does not mean it ceases to illuminate the high; speaking from the sequence, it is called the level ground. The Nirvāṇa is also like this: the Buddha's wisdom is without bias; great capacities are accommodated first, and it reaches the icchantikas afterward; speaking comprehensively of before and after, it is called impartiality. In the third section, the evaluation, first, as for the question, "Since there are five flavors, why are they alike called gradual?": it asks, regarding the previous teaching-aspects of the five flavors, since the flavors are five, why are the middle three flavors all named gradual? The intent of the answer is that solely because of gradual entry there is the middle; adding the before and after, there can be five.
2.16
From "Furthermore, if..." onward, it further distinguishes the gradual and the sudden with five propositions. Temporarily speaking in terms of the successive generation of the five flavors across a single lifetime, then gradual and sudden are strictly differentiated; if distinguished horizontally within each respective collection, then gradual and sudden interpenetrate. Although they are said to interpenetrate, each has its specific meaning; hence one must further distinguish them using five propositions. The first two propositions are understandable, yet still maintain brevity; temporarily contrasting the great and the small, one may make this statement. If contrasting them with the gradualness of the Separate Teaching within its own teaching, one should say that within the sudden it includes the gradual, and the gradual does not hinder the sudden; this is temporarily to establish five propositions to reveal the five flavors. If one says that within the gradual there is the sudden, then it would be identical to the subsequent proposition for the Vaipulya; hence it is omitted and not listed, temporarily speaking of a single direction. The first proposition is the Avataṃsaka. The second proposition is the Deer Park. The third proposition is the Vaipulya. If breaking the small with the great, it is fully as in the "Disciples" chapter, using the three teachings to scold the small, speaking provisionally from the perspective of seasoning and maturing the Hīnayāna. There is also scolding the biased with the perfect, as in the "Bodhisattva" chapter; and there is the initial entry into small practices within the gradual, as in seeing the land become defiled again and obtaining the purity of the Dharma eye, and preaching impermanence for the lay assembly outside the chamber. Contrasting the small with the great, it is said to be "displayed together." "Displayed" (chen) means arrayed. "Mutually assisting" is the Prajñā. The meaning of mutual assistance will be evaluated further later. As for "If converging..." and so on, it is the Lotus. The first proposition sets it out briefly; the next proposition cites proof. In the beginning, "gathering together" (he) is simply another name for converging (hui). In the subsequent citation of proof, citing the lack of gathering together to prove the gathering together is like the Commentary stating that opening is the preface to gathering together: since the Immeasurable Meanings reiterates the preface to the prior opening, before long they must be gathered together. Just as with a reckoner, what is placed down must be cleared away; those gathered together at the present time are further concluded in the present text with the intent of the Lotus.
2.17
Next, from "Question" downward, it evaluates the Prajñā in the middle, which is understandable. The intent of the answer is that the meaning combines with the Vaipulya: in the Vaipulya, the great assists the small; in the Prajñā assembly, hearing the empowerment of the two persons to speak for the bodhisattvas is called the small assisting the great. One may also say that the sudden assists the gradual; either presentation is acceptable.
2.18
Next, explaining the indeterminate has three parts: first, concluding the preceding to introduce the following; second, from "Although..." downward, explaining the characteristics; third, from "Within each flavor..." downward, concluding. As for the first text: to contrast with the secret, the phrase "manifest" must be placed; hence one knows that, spoken broadly, the manifest encompasses both gradual and sudden. Now, after the meaning of the five flavors, wishing to explain specifically that the indeterminate is also manifest, it is initially placed at the head to govern the indeterminate. Its characteristics differ from the gradual and sudden; therefore it says, "Not so."
2.19
As for "Although suddenly preached on the high mountain..." and so on, this is the main explanation. It also has three parts: first, the main explanation; second, from "the Great Sūtra" downward, citing proof; third, from "at one time" downward, refuting the ancients. In the first text: this refers to the Avataṃsaka's ascending and roaming without moving and without leaving; this refers to the beginning of the gradual following the sudden, not moving from the sudden while enacting the gradual conversion. Here the ancients had many differing explanations: some said the original Śākyamuni did not move while the transformation body ascended to heaven; some said the dharma body did not move while the transformational function ascended to heaven; some said ascending and going by not going and yet going, going and yet not going. Master Zang of recent times had four explanations: First, in terms of place: within one place are all places; thus the heavenly palace was originally beneath the king of trees, but previously this heavenly palace location had not been utilized. Second, in terms of the Buddha: the Buddha beneath the king of trees pervades all places; thus the Buddha beneath the king of trees was originally in the heavenly palace, and previously that heavenly palace Buddha had simply not been utilized. Third, in terms of time: the time beneath the king of trees is precisely the time in the heavenly palace. Fourth, in terms of the dharma realm: meaning lack of intrinsic nature. This is not necessarily completely so. In the former three meanings, why does he not discuss capacities but only speak in terms of the Buddha? In the latter, in terms of the dharma realm, why does he only speak of lack of intrinsic nature, and not speak of lack of otherness or even lack of causelessness? Transforming without deliberation, sympathetic resonance connects: responding without response, evoking without evoke—what need is there to discuss time, place, body, land, nature, and so forth? "Although turning [the wheel of] the four truths" refers to the Deer Park; this indicates that although enacting the gradual conversion, it does not depart from the sudden. These two flavors being so, the other flavors follow this. "Although for the bodhisattvas" refers to the Vaipulya and the Prajñā; in those two periods both have small fruits, newly attained and previously attained, as normally explained. "Although five persons realize the fruit, it does not hinder eighty thousand devas from obtaining the patience of non-arising": this again refers to the beginning of the gradual in contrast to the Prajñā. The former text was in terms of teachings; here it is in terms of persons: the fruits attained are different, and the Dharmas realized are indeterminate. One should cite the Da zhidu lun's meaning of the manifest and secret wheels of the Dharma to explain the intent here. Thus the Da zhidu lun, fascicle sixty-five, says: "In Jambudvīpa, one sees the turning of the second wheel of the Dharma. At the first turning of the wheel of the Dharma, eighty thousand devas attained the patience of non-arising, and Ājñāta-Kauṇḍinya attained the first fruit. Now turning the wheel of the Dharma, immeasurable devas attain the patience of non-arising; the present turning is similar to the first turning."
2.20
Question:
2.21
The first turning was few and the present turning is many; how can the great illustrate the small and be called similar?
2.22
Answer:
2.23
The Buddhas have two kinds of wheels of the Dharma: the first is manifest, and the second is secret. At the initial turning, śrāvakas saw eighty thousand [gods] and one person [attain realization], while the bodhisattvas saw immeasurable asaṃkhyas of persons attain the two vehicles, immeasurable asaṃkhyas of persons attain the forbearance of the non-arising [of dharmas], immeasurable asaṃkhyas of persons give rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed bodhi and practice the six pāramitās, and asaṃkhyas of persons attain from the first bhūmi up to the tenth bhūmi, become destined to only one more birth, and sit at the place of awakening—this is called secret. Thus we know that the initial seeing of eighty thousand and one person belongs to what is subsumed under the manifest; the secret is explained next. Moreover, Da zhidu lun 31 says: 'If one wishes to have a single voice pervade worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions, one should learn the perfection of wisdom.' The treatise asks: 'If so, what is the difference between this and the Buddha's single voice?' It answers: 'It is limited and unlimited.' It asks: 'If so, why do people of Jambudvīpa come to the Buddha's side to hear the Dharma?' It answers: 'The Buddha has two kinds of sounds: the first is secret, as explained above; the second is not secret, requiring one to come to the Buddha's side.' This is based on distinct explanations. When discussed in terms of the fundamental substance, the two meanings are simultaneous; therefore, in the present text, they are explained as mutually identical.
2.24
Next, in quoting the Great Sūtra as verification, where it says 'sometimes preaching the profound, sometimes preaching the shallow, and so on, is called indeterminate,' this is because they mutually know each other. If it were secret, then as the text below says, they would not mutually know each other, which is why it is called secret. Both the indeterminate and the secret do not go beyond hearing different things while listening together; hence they are said to be identical. Here too, the shallow and profound share the same seat, which is why the word 'sometimes' is used. 'Should ask' refers to initiating a point of questioning; 'should check' refers to setting aside what was asked; because initiating and setting aside share the same seat, this constitutes the indeterminate.
2.25
In the third [section], showing the characteristics and refuting the ancients: first, the characteristics are shown; next, the ancients are refuted. In showing the characteristics, where it says 'at one time' and so forth, it proceeds from the broad to the narrow. 'Time' refers to one of the five flavors, or to a single scripture and single assembly; 'preaching' refers to a single phrase or word; 'thought-moment' refers to the span of a single kṣaṇa. Fully detailed as in the earlier text on the characteristics of the indeterminate teaching, this manifests the unshared power of the Tathāgata.
2.26
Question:
2.27
What is the difference between this and the fear, joy, and so forth in the Vaipulya?
2.28
Answer:
2.29
The indeterminate pervades the previous four flavors. If one speaks directly of the Vaipulya, it consists merely of reproach. Since [the Tathāgata] caused beings to take different paths by means of his bodies and lands, it precisely corresponds to the indeterminate; the same is true of the Prajñāpāramitā. One can see this by reflecting upon it.
2.30
Next, in refuting the ancients, where it says 'unlike the old interpretations that exclusively classified a single text': as in the doctrinal classification in the tenth fascicle, which says 'the North and South universally used gradual, sudden, and indeterminate,' the indeterminate referred to the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra and the Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra. Therefore, in the doctrinal classification of our school, each and every flavor contains the indeterminate; hence it is not like the old views that exclusively pointed to those two sūtras. As for 'each and every flavor': within the milk [flavor], the indeterminate is distinguished in terms of the contrast between the Perfect and Separate [teachings]; within the curd [flavor], although there are no two distinct teaching gates, the indeterminate is distinguished in contrast to the eighty thousand; within the raw and clarified butter [flavors], its meaning can be seen in terms of the contrast between three and four [teachings]. Next, from 'this is' onward is the secret [teaching], which consists of four parts: first, concluding the preceding and introducing the subsequent; second, from 'the Tathāgata' onward, briefly praising; third, from 'this assembly' onward, explaining the characteristics; fourth, from 'although again' onward, concluding with praise. The first passage is clear.
2.31
Next, in the brief praise, where it says 'whether wisdom or capacity' and so forth: wisdom refers to the Great Sage's expedient strategy; capacity refers to the differing gradations [of beings]. Without choosing time or place, the secrets of his body, speech, and mind are unhindered and sovereign in accord with any of the four gates; suiting the time and matching the occasion, none are deployed in vain.
2.32
Third, in directly explaining the characteristics, three methods are temporarily employed to bring out the characteristics. Why? Because when these three methods are paired with the secret, the text and meaning of the four teachings of conversion method become fully complete, spontaneously subsuming the four [teachings of conversion content] such as the Tripiṭaka. Within this there are again two parts: first, the contrast in terms of the three kinds of preaching; next, the contrast between preaching and silence. In the first, the three preachings, there are two: first, the contrast in terms of the ten directions; next, from 'or for the sake of' onward, the contrast among multiple persons within a single direction; as it is for a single direction, so it is for the ten directions. Each of the two passages first directly explains, and next concludes from 'each' onward. Next, in the contrast between preaching and silence, it should also possess both differing meanings of the ten directions and the persons; that there is no contrast of persons is an abbreviation of the text. As for 'both silent and both preaching,' the principle should rightfully be like this. The preceding contrast of the three methods, following this, should also say 'both sudden, both gradual, both indeterminate'; that the text lacks this is also an abbreviation. Since it says that both being silent and both preaching without mutually knowing each other is called secret, what prevents both being sudden without mutually knowing each other? From 'each' onward is also a conclusion. As for 'they do not mutually know each other,' the previous text only says 'here and there,' which should also be stated reciprocally; giving one example serves for the rest, proving that the indeterminate and the secret differ only by mutually knowing and not mutually knowing. Here the manifest also applies in principle to the remaining seven, because the secret does not go beyond these seven. Hence the earlier text spoke of manifest gradual and sudden, as well as manifest indeterminate; therefore all seven carry the sense of manifest.
2.33
If so, what prevents the Lotus Sūtra and all the other teachings in the ten directions and in a single assembly from also mutually serving as manifest and secret, so that one would say the Lotus Sūtra is manifest and not secret?
2.34
Answer:
2.35
In the ten directions it is possible to have [such differences], but in a single assembly there is definitely none. As for 'possible to have': what prevents other directions from not yet being suitable for opening the provisional and discarding the proximate, so that those there do not know this here? If initial aspirants in the assembly of the Lotus Sūtra here, as well as humans and gods who have been opened, how could they fully know whether the worlds of the ten directions are opened or not opened? Yet having already heard that the transformation conferred in the origin section of the Lotus Sūtra is not limited to a single lifetime, even if they do not see it directly, they can infer and know the marks of opening and not opening, which in principle amounts to knowing. How much more so when the emanated bodies in the realm of shared dwelling and the springing forth from the earth in the Land of Eternally Quiescent Light have been witnessed, all have faith that the single path is without deviation! This is unlike the Avataṃsaka Sūtra's statement that they are retinue, and the Mahāsaṃnipāta has no mention of emanated bodies, while the Prajñāpāramitā merely states that those who ask are given added preaching and their names are identical; hence we know that this sūtra is different from other sūtras. The difference between the manifest and secret intentions can be understood by contemplating it.
2.36
Fourth, from 'although again' onward is concluding with praise, which has three parts: first, citing what is broad to praise; next, from 'it can only be' onward, granting that realization aligns with principle and thus can be known, while verbal explanations depend on phenomena and thus cannot be fully distinguished; hence we know that by realizing the one and illuminating the ultimate, one briefly grasps the great principle, but since words cannot be applied repeatedly, how could they suddenly be complete? From 'although again' onward, examining verbal explanations in order to follow the intention, the intention does not go beyond the gradual and so forth.
2.37
Next, clarifying the present sūtra consists of two parts: first, generally clarifying that the teaching is manifestly superior; next, clarifying that it is superior in terms of the traces. In the first text, where it says 'the present Lotus Sūtra is manifest,' and so forth: it is contrasted with not being secret, hence it is said to be manifest. Among the seven manifest teachings, speaking comprehensively and exclusively, it is none of the seven. Speaking specifically and inclusively, it is merely not the former six. Why? Although the Perfect Teaching is present among the seven, because it is accompanied by and combined [with others], it is therefore different; this is stated in terms of the texts. The Perfect within those seven and the Perfect of the Lotus Sūtra are not different in their substance, hence it only excludes six; this is stated in terms of the teaching. Next, where it says 'it is gradual-sudden and not gradual-gradual': this is fully as classified before. The present Lotus Sūtra is the sudden after the gradual, meaning opening the gradual to reveal the sudden, hence called 'gradual-sudden'; it is not the gradual within the gradual prior to the Lotus Sūtra. Why? Previously the raw and clarified butter were both classified as gradual, and within these two sūtras there is also the perfect-sudden; the Perfect of the present Lotus Sūtra is not different from the perfect-sudden of those two sūtras, but it is not like the three within the Vaipulya or the two within the Prajñāpāramitā; these two and three are called the gradual within the gradual, and the Lotus Sūtra differs from them, which is why it says 'not gradual-gradual.' People who do not see this immediately claim that the Lotus Sūtra is gradual-sudden while the Avataṃsaka Sūtra is sudden-sudden, which is probably incorrect. As for 'it is unified' and so forth: it is the Perfect that opens the provisional, hence called 'unified,' unlike the Perfect within the various other texts, hence called 'not non-unified.' 'Unified' is merely another name for 'converged'; this already corresponds to excluding the provisional by means of the four teachings such as the Tripiṭaka, so it does not again say 'it is the Perfect and not the three.' Having already known that it is not the manifest prior to the Lotus Sūtra, one then understands that the Lotus Sūtra is entirely none of the seven teachings; this is an exclusion made in contrast to the eight teachings. From 'such' onward reveals the traces, which can be understood.
2.38
Next, in terms of the path of transformation, there are two parts: first, directly distinguishing the difference; next, pointing to the scriptural teaching as authentic verification. The first text consists of five parts: first, repeatedly citing other sūtras for comparative distinction. Next, from 'this sūtra' onward directly clarifies the intention of the present sūtra, briefly pointing to Great Pervasive [Excellence] as the head within the traces; although relying on the gradual and indeterminate, it did not take the other teachings as the seed, hence it says 'skillfully made.' After forming the connection, they regressed from the Great and lost their initial state; therefore, he further planted the seed of harmonizing within the seven teachings, again saying 'skillfully made.' Thus, in the interim they received the nourishing and taming of the seven teachings; being ripened due to being harmonized is called 'harmonized and ripened'; they were harmonized but not yet truly ripened, so the effect is spoken of within the cause, which is why it is so stated. Next, from 'further with' onward clarifies that in the present life he further tamed them with the seven teachings to bring them to the Lotus Sūtra for liberation, hence it says 'liberated.' As for 'jointly liberated' and so forth: this is spoken in terms of multiple persons; for that one it is seeding, for this one it is ripening; the reciprocal application can be understood, which is why it says 'jointly' and 'successive rounds without cessation'; this concludes the marks of the beginning, the interim, the present, and so forth. Therefore, it further quotes the 'Springing Forth [from the Earth],' to help reveal the text of the traces, hence saying 'great power and majesty' and so forth. In this text of the 'Springing Forth Chapter' on benefiting beings across the three periods of time: 'great power and majesty' is the future, 'lion-like exertion' is the present, and 'unhindered supernormal powers' is the past. Here the future text is briefly cited to generally encompass the three periods of time; therefore, times, seasons, and thought-moments each possess the three marks of seeding and so forth. Next, pointing to 'Faith and Understanding': in the 'Faith and Understanding' chapter it says, 'Moreover, on another day, through a window,' which refers to the dharma body stage having discerned their capacities for a long time. Hence this single phrase combines the characteristics of benefiting beings across the three periods of time. Furthermore, 'Faith and Understanding' fully comprehends the five flavors of the single generation, thus one knows that the five flavors across the three periods of time are all like this. In meaning it must also combine with the text of endorsement; because within the endorsement it first directly narrates what was understood, and next clarifies what understanding did not reach, so that the ten dharma realms and seven expedients all obtain the benefit of the five flavors, which is precisely its meaning. Other teachings do not have this, so it is different from them. Next, from 'Moreover, the various sūtras' onward is the origin section, consisting of five parts: first, directly clarifying the remote antiquity of the origin ground; second, from 'the one destined to only one more birth' onward, citing those who do not know to reveal remote antiquity; third, from 'the sūtra says' onward, citing the 'Lifespan' chapter as verification that they only knew because they heard it; fourth, from 'earnestly' onward, citing the praise in the trace section to verify that remote antiquity is difficult to hear; fifth, from 'one should know' onward, concluding. The first part also has two: first, directly clarifying; next, from 'the various sūtras do not even' onward, broadly citing various sūtras to illustrate the marks of remote antiquity. The first also has two: first, the master; next, the disciples. In the first, the master, there are two: first, citing past sūtras, where personal realization was real and transforming others was provisional. Next, from 'the present sūtra' onward clarifies that in the present sūtra, the real and provisional of the single substance have long since been fulfilled; in the traces, the ink-points of three thousand realms were already considered long, while in the present origin section there are dust-motes of fifty billion worlds, hence called 'long, long ago.' Moreover, a single stage is already long, how much more so when looking across stage after stage, hence called 'long, long ago.' Next, from 'the various sūtras' onward, in the disciples, it also first cites the past where the two vehicles still abided in the lesser fruit, hence saying 'do not enter'; how could they transform others? Therefore they did not deploy the provisional.
2.39
Next, explaining the present sūtra: [disciples] such as Pūrṇa had already entered into the real, and because he was foremost in explaining the Dharma, he first understood and practiced the provisional. Next, in the comparison, he also first cites the past; not speaking of one or two segments before the Bodhi tree, he therefore says "near of the near". When viewed from the perspective of the present, those one or two segments before then are still near—how much more so when lacking the near within the far in the interval? Hence he says "near of the near". Next, contrasting and bringing forth the present sūtra: saying "far of the far" simply means long, long ago. Moreover, as for the difference, in terms of duration of time it is long ago or recent, and in terms of the places traversed it is far or near; the traces of transformation after achieving [awakening] are the places traversed. Both have these two meanings, so they are spoken of interchangeably. Next, regarding the persons who do not know, where it says "the [bodhisattva] of the subsequent rank counts the worlds and does not know": as in the "Life Span" chapter, where five hundred billion nayutas of asaṃkhyeyas of trichiliocosms are completely ground into dust, and having passed that many worlds, one speck of dust is then dropped. The number of dust specks is already great; how much more so the worlds where dust has or has not been dropped—how could they ever be counted? The worlds where dust has or has not been dropped are already unknowable; how much more so the dust within those worlds—how could it ever be counted? Furthermore, taking one speck of dust as one kalpa, the number of billions of asaṃkhyeyas since the Buddha achieved the Way exceeds even this. Before the traces were revealed, Maitreya did not know; even after the traces were revealed, the power of wisdom of the [bodhisattva] of the subsequent rank could not know the number of worlds, so how could he know the dust? Therefore, opening the traces and revealing the origin, all enter the first dwelling, and are thus said to become buddhas. In the origin gate, with the traces revealed, they have no doubt about the fruit; thus all make the vow seeking this real fruit, hence saying: "May I in future ages also explain a life span such as this."
2.40
Third, regarding citing proofs: even the near trace gate can still be taken as the past; how much more so before Gayā? Those who have already been opened naturally belong to one side; if based on those who have not yet been opened and united, from the regression from the great onward and the arising of the small thereafter, all are called the past.
2.41
Fourth, regarding citing the praises of the trace gate: at the beginning of the "Expedient Means" chapter, although it praises nearby the provisional and real of the five buddhas, the intent is actually to secretly praise the remoteness of the master and disciples.
2.42
Fifth, from "One should know" onward concludes that it is entirely distinct. The initial setting forth of the five chapters within the seven rounds of collective explanation is concluded.
2.43
Next, the second [part], citing teachings to verify the five chapters, again has two: first, citing two passages to generally verify the five chapters; next, citing the "Bhaiṣajyarāja" [chapter] to specifically verify the characteristics of the teaching. The first text again has two: first, directly citing the two passages; next, from "The reason why" onward, clarifying the intent of citing the two passages. The first text has two: first, clarifying the "Introductory Chapter"; next, clarifying the "Supernatural Powers" [chapter]. The first text itself has four: first, within verifying the name, there are two: first, verifying the proper name; next, from "How could it only be" onward, briefly citing agreements. The first text means: Maitreya initially posed a covert objection out of concealed doubt, and Mañjuśrī consequently offered a covert explanation to address the concealed doubt. The objection said: "The fourfold assembly gazes upward in admiration at you, benevolent one, and me; for what reason has the World-Honoured One emitted this radiance?" Mañjuśrī explained, saying: "I see..." and so forth. Next, where it says "How could it only be" in citing agreements: how could it only be that, as Mañjuśrī cited, the twenty thousand Candrasūryapradīpas were identical? Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū and the five buddhas also had entirely identical names.
2.44
Question:
2.45
That Mahābhijñā has the identical name can be seen in the text; in the chapter on the five buddhas, we have not heard of their identity.
2.46
Answer:
2.47
Since Śākyamuni named it the Lotus, and the remaining four buddhas all say "likewise using", we therefore know they are identical. Furthermore, the wonderful Dharma is simply the single substance of provisional and real; the four buddhas all say, "In order to cause sentient beings to attain the knowledge of all modes and to open, display, awaken to, and enter the Buddha's knowledge and vision," so the commentary below explains: "To open, display, awaken to, and enter is precisely that text." The identity of name and identity of meaning—their intent lies here.
2.48
Next, regarding the text verifying the substance of the sūtra, it cites three passages in total. Citing the present text is also Mañjuśrī's resolution of doubt regarding the substance within his resolution of the concealed doubt. "Present" refers to the text of the present Buddha; the remaining two are both texts of Candrasūryapradīpa, and are thus called "ancient".
2.49
Next, the text verifying the principal theme has two: first, citing; next, from "That is" onward, explaining. The first text is also Mañjuśrī's text resolving the concealed doubt. Next, in the explanation, it first takes the trace and next takes the origin. The trace gate treats the disciple's cause, and the origin gate treats the Buddha's fruit. The master is not without cause, and the disciples have fruit; they are merely mentioned interchangeably.
2.50
Next, from "The text says" onward verifies the function, which also has two: first, citing; next, explaining. The first text has two: first, directly verifying by citing the text resolving the concealed doubt; next, assisting and completing it by citing the text in the "Expedient Means" chapter that briefly opens the provisional—that is, making the end of conversion long-lasting. Next, in the explanation, the previously cited sūtra text only says "three vehicles"; because the meaning of the three vehicles contains [more], it is now explained. Whether five or seven, it is merely a difference of opening and combining. "Five" opens humans and devas; "seven" opens bodhisattvas; "nine" combines bodhisattvas and further opens the four destinies. If one does not open humans, devas, and the four destinies, one will not exhaust doubts regarding the nine dharma realms above the Buddha dharma realm.
2.51
Question:
2.52
If so, why does the sūtra not speak of it?
2.53
Answer:
2.54
The convergence of the other destinies into the real is sometimes present in various sūtras, but for the two vehicles it is completely absent. Therefore, combining bodhisattvas to contrast with the two vehicles is spoken from the perspective of what is difficult. The explanation, based on exhausting the principle, must discuss nine, so as to cut off these doubts and give rise to faith in the one vehicle.
2.55
Next, citing the "Supernatural Powers" chapter: first setting out the sūtra, next explaining. The word "all" means that the provisional and real mutually encompass each other; because they mutually encompass each other, it is wonderful. Internal function is unhindered; thus dispelling doubts, being universally pervasive in every direction, is precisely "unhindered supernatural power". Fully containing the three thousand and comprehensively encompassing the three virtues, it is therefore called the "treasury". Before this they were not fit vessels, so this essential was not conferred. "Profound matters": cause and fruit are called "matters", and the real mark is called "profound". The cause and fruit belonging to the real mark are called "profound matters"; if not this cause and fruit, then it is not the principal theme of the present sūtra. Next, citing the "Dharma Teacher" chapter again is merely to assist and complete the two passages. It is not that there are no other passages; the reason it only cites the text on the principal theme to assist the explanation is that the sage's intent in bequeathing teachings lies in practice, hence name, substance, and function. The teaching takes the principal theme as paramount, and cultivation and practice do not go beyond cause and fruit.
First 55 of 94 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 法華玄義釋籤 — Classical Chinese