法華玄義釋籤 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

Next, in explaining the four siddhāntas, chapters are listed and separately explained. First, ten chapters are set out and listed, spanning the entirety of a [Buddha's] lifetime. Within this there are two [parts]: the first seven chapters generally concern the various sūtras, while the latter three chapters are solely the intent of the present sūtra. The first seven again have four [parts]: the first two directly clarify the siddhāntas; the next two, the identity and difference of names and meanings; the next two, their arising functions; and the last one, the advantages and disadvantages of self-realization and benefiting others. Regarding the first two: the first is the general name, and the next is the specific characteristics. In the next two on the identity and difference of names and meanings: in the first, the names have identity and difference, while the meanings are entirely identical; in the next, the names are entirely different, while the meanings are identical. In the next two: first, ordinary beings produce contemplation and sages produce teachings; next, it is solely the sages' speech and silence. The next one is the advantages and disadvantages of ordinary beings and sages. Next, in the latter three: the first two clarify the intent of the present sūtra, and the last one clarifies the text of the present sūtra. Within the first two: the first assesses the provisional and the real, and the next opens the provisional and the real. Having grasped this meaning, one only then knows the differences among the siddhāntas of the [Buddha's] lifetime. Although the meanings of the first seven gates extend to the present sūtra, its subtlety has not been uniquely revealed; because this specific text must be separately explained, there are the latter three. Reflect upon this, reflect upon this!

3.3

First, in explaining the names, there are three [parts]: first, broadly citing the old masters; next, citing a treatise to refute them; third, citing Nanyue's correct explanation. The first is as in the text. As for the next text, it first cites the Dichi to prove the error, and next directly refutes the error. First, in citing the four udānas of the Dichi: chapter seventeen, "Factors of Awakening", says: "All other practices and studies entirely enter the three doors of samādhi. Namely, the practices and studies of the śrāvakas have four udāna dharmas; for the sake of sentient beings, the buddhas and bodhisattvas also speak these four. That is, all conditioned things are suffering is an udāna dharma; up to nirvāṇa is quiescence is an udāna dharma. The buddhas and bodhisattvas are endowed with this dharma, and in turn transmit this dharma to sentient beings: this is called an udāna. The silent Munis of the past transmitted it to one another: this is called an udāna. Surpassing and emerging, up to fully emerging from the peak of existence: this is called an udāna." In the treatise text there is no character for "sūtra"; it is merely titled "Dichi jing", and so it is cited here as "sūtra". That the Dichi names these four as "seals" differs from the dharma seals clarified in the Da zhidu lun cited below: the Mahāyāna has one seal, while the Hīnayāna has three seals. Although this text of the Dichi is Mahāyāna, it wishes to clarify the dharmas subsumed [therein], and for bodhisattvas of initial practice to cultivate these four for the time being. The four are merely the three, with the seal of suffering additionally established to make four. Two seals seal saṃsāra, and one seal seals nirvāṇa. For saṃsāra, impermanence is the initial seal, and non-self is the latter seal; they are also called the gist. Hence one knows that these are entirely different in name and meaning from the four siddhāntas. From "A seal is..." onward, it explains the meaning of "seal"; the two texts on teaching and practice are distinct. Preaching belongs to worldly wisdom; hence it is said, "what is spoken by worldly wisdom."

3.4

Question:

3.5

Both in terms of teaching and in terms of practice it is called transmission; what difference is there?

3.6

Answer:

3.7

The teaching is the dharma that is transmitted; hence it says that buddhas and bodhisattvas are endowed with this dharma. Practice is the efficacy of being able to transmit; hence it says, passing through the silent Munis of the past—it is simply that all buddhas have the practice of transforming others and transmitting the teaching. "Surpassing..." and so forth are all to praise and explain the meaning of the gist. The phrase "peak of existence" refers to the summit of the three realms; this existence is difficult to escape, so it is called "foremost"; it resides at the utmost peak, so it is again called "foremost". Next, from "its clear text..." onward, it directly refutes. From "Like this..." onward, it refutes by analogy. From "Nanyue..." onward, it gives the correct explanation, which can be seen.

3.8

Second, in discerning the characteristics, there are two [parts]: first, citing the Great Master's explanation; next, the author's own explanation. In the first text, the four siddhāntas naturally form four sections. The first section has two: first, an explanation; next, an analysis. In the first text, the word "world" refers to the differences among the five aggregates; the realms and bases are likewise. In the next text: from "If there are no..." onward is a question; from "A person..." onward is an answer; from "Ultimate truth..." onward is a question; and under "Answer" is the answer. From "Non-Buddhists..." onward, it explains accordingly. Non-Buddhists impute erroneously; this is not called "world", nor do they comprehend differences, but merely impute a self in a general manner, considering causelessness to be spontaneity, or wrong causes to be Brahmā and so forth. The text on these four siddhāntas comes entirely from the Da zhidu lun. Under [the siddhānta for] the individual, there are three: the heading, the explanation, and the conclusion. In the explanation, there are two: first, the direct explanation; next, from "As in mixed karma..." onward, secondary and primary characteristics are established to resolve doubts. When the first text says "sometimes permitting, sometimes not permitting": "permitting" means allowing; although both are mentioned, the intent lies in permitting. Permitting is what is suitable, and suitability produces good. As for the next resolution of doubts: it was feared that this would be cited as a doubt: in the text on producing good, why is there also the destruction of evil? Within this, it first sets forth the characteristics, and next directly assesses them. When the first text says "As in mixed karma..." and so forth: the text cites two sūtras, saying: as spoken in a sūtra, because of mixed karma, one is born variegatedly in the world; and further there is the Phalguna Sūtra.

3.9

Question:

3.10

How do these two sūtras connect?

3.11

Answer:

3.12

There was a person who did not believe in sin and merit and fell into the view of annihilationism; to sever that person's doubt, [the Buddha] spoke of mixed karma and so forth. If one imputes a spiritual self, one falls into the view of eternalism, as when Phalguna came to ask the Buddha: "Who experiences [it]?" If the Buddha had said that such-and-such a person experiences it, this would further increase his heterodoxy; therefore he did not speak of an experiencer or a contactor, but only spoke of no contact and no experience. Although these two persons had such doubts, their capacity lay in producing good.

3.13

Next, from "This intent..." onward, it directly assesses: secondarily, for the sake of the two persons who do not believe in sin and merit, it shatters their annihilationism and eternalism; primarily, for the sake of the two persons, it causes them to produce good roots. Therefore, within [the siddhānta for] the individual, it is not that there is no destruction of evil, but there are the secondary and the primary; hence it is said: primarily to produce good, and secondarily to destroy evil.

3.14

Third, under the therapeutic [siddhānta], there are also the heading, the explanation, and the conclusion. In the explanation, there are two: first, discerning existence and nonexistence; next, from "Therapeutic..." onward, directly explaining the characteristics. In the first text, when it says "where there are dharmas, there is therapy", and so forth: because there is the curing agent and what is cured, it is called "existence". Since in the ultimate truth there is neither agent nor object, it says "then there is none". The true nature here is merely discerned by contrast, to reveal that therapy has agent and object, that is all. Next, in the conclusion, when it says "preaching this dharma-medicine..." and so forth: generally speaking, among the four siddhāntas, there is none that is not dharma-medicine. Here it speaks from a specific perspective; because naming it from the therapeutic aspect is convenient, it temporarily makes this statement.

3.15

Next, under the ultimate truth [siddhānta], there are also the heading, the explanation, and the conclusion. In the explanation, there are two: first, establishing two different types; next, from "Inexpressible..." onward, explaining the characteristics of the two types. When the first text says "there are two", the intent is to say that when the present text speaks of the ultimate truth, from the side of the teaching-dharmas it corresponds directly to the expressible; the inexpressible corresponds to the side of internal realization, which is not the intent of the present text, and so the difference must be discerned. First, in explaining the inexpressible: first, directly setting forth the characteristics; next, citing a treatise to prove it. In the first text: because the realized dharma has no tangible proof and must be discerned through persons, it says "the dharma attained by all buddhas and so forth". The verse cited is also cited from within the section on the ultimate truth in the treatise. The first two lines clarify the function of the realized dharma, because it can transcend words and false conceptualizations. The next two lines clarify the substance of the realized dharma; the upper line directly clarifies the substance of the dharma, and the next line cites an analogy to illustrate it: just as the unproduced, unceasing dharma of nirvāṇa attained by the past buddhas is within my own body. The verse from "Speaking of all..." onward is mutually discerned with the worldly [siddhānta]; previously, clarifying the worldly was also mutually discerned with the ultimate truth, and so it is likewise here. Next, as for the expressible: it directly clarifies that in the present intent, the four phrases are all real, so there is none that is not the ultimate truth. From "The Buddha..." onward, it cites proof. "This is also our tradition clarifying the four gates entering reality" is the assessment: namely, the four phrases of all is real and so forth correspond in sequence to the four gates of existence and so forth; where above they are all called "and so forth", this is entering reality. From "Hence the Madhyamaka-śāstra..." onward, it proves the intent of entering reality, meaning that it is for the sake of sharp faculties. "The swift horse seeing the shadow of the whip" is as in the notes to the second fascicle of the Zhiguan. From "If hearing..." onward is the conclusion; it inversely uses nonexistence to conclude existence, hence saying: "How could it be the ultimate truth?"

3.16

As for the fifteen sets, there are also two [parts]: first, the direct explanation; next, from "Question..." onward, the analysis. In the first text, there are fifteen sets in total: first, phenomena and principle; second, provisional and real; third, good and evil persons; fourth, good and evil aggregates; fifth, good and evil dharmas; sixth, the three times; seventh, internal and external ordinary beings; eighth, sages of seeing and cultivation; ninth, ordinary beings and sages—neither in-training nor beyond-training is the stage of ordinary beings. Tenth to thirteenth: the four siddhāntas each constitute one set; fourteenth, taking the four siddhāntas collectively as one set; fifteenth, specifically in terms of the four truths. These fifteen sets are intended to cause people to understand that the meaning of the four siddhāntas pervades all dharmas; if one grasps this meaning, whatever object is encountered will be accomplished, and the dharmas for self-cultivation and transforming others will all be complete. Yet one must explain these fifteen sets in detail, causing them all to accord with rejoicing, producing good, destroying evil, and entering truth. Furthermore, although these fifteen sets arbitrarily bring up a single dharma, they are not without sequence. Within them there are four [parts]: the first six sets are in terms of the persons and dharmas contemplated; the next three sets from internal and external ordinary beings onward are in terms of the ordinary beings and sages who contemplate; the three and five sets are in terms of the methods applied; the fourth single set is in terms of the truths contemplated. Without the dharmas contemplated, there is nothing to constitute the contemplating persons; without the contemplating persons, there is nothing to apply the methods; without the above three, the truths cannot be constituted. Truth is what is contemplated, and its meaning encompasses the contemplating and the contemplated, persons and dharmas, delusion and awakening. Here the characteristics are briefly set forth; they cannot be recorded in full.

3.17

First, regarding phenomena and principle: their names encompass dharmas such as delusion, awakening, cause, and effect. Here, for the time being, in the state of delusion, for the deluded one speaks of principle within phenomena and that principle is distinct from phenomena; just hearing this dharma, joy arises in the mind, which belongs to the worldly [siddhānta]; hearing it can produce good, destroy evil, and enter truth, which then belongs to the latter three. Because the provisional and the real are distinct, hearing this brings joy again, which belongs to the worldly [siddhānta]. Wheels and so forth serve as an analogy for real dharmas, and a cart serves as an analogy for provisional designations; the five aggregates and a person together serve as an analogy for the harmony constituting a person. Speaking from the perspective of the person, it is the [siddhānta for] the individual. Since the treatise says, "sometimes speaking of a person, sometimes of no person", it is because a person can produce good. Speaking solely of real dharmas: real dharmas are empty and illusory, and can be cured through contemplation. From "Neither..." onward, it clarifies the ultimate truth; since the treatise says "the path of language is severed", it says that neither is the ultimate truth. Hence each and every siddhānta cites the treatise as proof. This pairing of provisional and real constitutes one set. Next, solely in terms of the provisional person; next, solely in terms of real dharmas. From the aggregates of external ordinary beings, the aggregates of internal ordinary beings are produced; through the aggregates of internal and external ordinary beings, the aggregates of the three realms are broken; the unoutflowing refers to the first fruit and so forth. Although the aggregates have distinctions such as internal and external, the aggregates are ultimately the realm contemplated.

3.18

Next, from "Question" onward, is a brief analysis. As for the first question: Since the designation "person" is general, why is it solely producing good that receives the designation "person"? The intended answer is: Evil is what is to be destroyed, not what is to be fostered, so it does not establish the designation of "person"; persons are able to produce good, which does not mean there are no evil persons. As for the next question: Producing good lies only in [the siddhānta for] the person; why does it cause people to destroy evil? The intended answer is: Because there are secondary and primary aspects, they obtain different names. Next, regarding the future life among the three time periods being for the person: For the person, it originally generates their past good; planting subtle good in the present can be brought forth in the future; regarding the present from the standpoint of the future, the present is called "past." If it remedies present evil, it is called the remedy (pratipakṣa), which is evident. Next, regarding the stages of ordinary persons: taking the internal function of the four wholesome roots in contrast with external ordinary persons is called the difference between internal and external. From the heat stage onward, the wholesome aggregates gradually arise, which functionally corresponds to producing good. In the comprehensive and particular [contemplations of] mindfulness, because one remedies them with impermanence and so forth, it is called the remedy. Because the supreme truth pervades the beginning and the end, it can also be generally applied within the stages of ordinary persons. Next, regarding the noble stages: the path of vision generates the good of principle; the path of cultivation remedies the evil of phenomenal affairs. Since this refers purely to noble stages, only the ultimate within the noble stages is called the supreme truth. Next, ordinary persons and noble ones together establish the negation of both, which is just the stages of internal and external ordinary persons.

3.19

Next, from "Worldly" onward, is an analysis to resolve doubts, not being counted among the fifteen rounds, because the preceding text said that within the worldly there is no supreme truth. Now it is asked: Do the siddhāntas of the person and the remedy have the supreme truth, and does the supreme truth have the [other] three? Therefore the present text states that they generate one another in turn: because of contemplating the worldly, one produces good; because of producing good, one destroys evil; because evil is destroyed, one sees the principle; within the principle, then, there is neither the worldly nor the others. Thus when good arises, evil is extinguished; if they mutually exist and do not exist, one will never see the principle. Next, regarding the four siddhāntas: individually establishing the four siddhāntas is again citing the original text of the Da zhidu lun above; since the text itself has each complete, this explanation is made. Next is treating the four siddhāntas in a comprehensive manner.

3.20

Question:

3.21

Now the four siddhāntas differ from one another; taking the worldly may well differ from what came before, but how do the lower three, each pervading the three, differ from what came before?

3.22

Answer:

3.23

Previously, each of the four siddhāntas accommodated sixteen people; now the four pervading the four only address four people. Although the characteristics of the teachings are like this, regarding people they are indeterminate—either general or specific; or one person possesses all four, or three, two, or one; or many people share one, or two, three, or four. If discussed from beginning to end in accordance with what is appropriate, who does not depend on hearing the Dharma to generate joy, produce good, destroy evil, and see the supreme truth? In all cases, faculties may be sharp or dull, and progress may jump stages or proceed in sequence. In treating the truths, what is capable of remedying belongs to persons, so the analysis is as in the text.

3.24

Third, the confirmation through explanation.

3.25

Question:

3.26

In the Great Master's Commentary on the Vimalakīrti, he states: People of the world mostly explain treatises by means of sūtras, making people think treatises are rich and sūtras poor; now I explain sūtras by means of treatises to make them know sūtras are rich and treatises poor. Why does he here take sūtras to explain treatises?

3.27

Answer:

3.28

When it speaks of confirming through explanation, because their meanings are identical, they are cited to mutually confirm each other and make the intent of the treatises recognizable; it does not mean taking sūtras to comment on treatises. Moreover, this is a separate treatise that expounds the sūtras, so there is no harm to principle.

3.29

In this there are three parts: first, the purpose of its introduction; second, listing the sūtras; third, from "Desire and wish" onward, the direct confirmation through explanation. The first and second are as in the text. In the direct confirmation through explanation, the first two have different names but the same meaning and must be harmonized; the latter two have both names and meanings identical and are not harmonized. The first two form two parts. First, the worldly has three: first, clarifying that their names are different, which is the difference in names; second, citing proof; third, from "The Buddha's sūtras" onward, directly clarifying their mutual confirmation. The first is as in the text. Regarding the two citations of proof, although the texts resemble causes, their intent combines cause and effect. Good and evil are effects, while desire is the cause. Effects take causes as their root; the Buddha path is the effect. The original text of the Vimalakīrti says, "Walking in non-paths"; now the term "desire" is taken to pervade both shallow and profound. The essence of the path is free of desire, yet desire can serve as a cause. In the third, the confirmation through explanation, the cause necessarily attains the effect, so the cause is taken to confirm the effect.

3.30

Next, under [the siddhānta for] the person, there are four: first, the difference in names; second, from "The treatise says" onward, citing proof—the text seems to prove solely the transforming master, but its intent combines the practitioner's suitability: listening or not listening belongs to the transforming master, while suitability or unsuitability belongs to the practitioner; third, from "Like the goldsmith" onward, citing the incident—"the son of the goldsmith" and so forth are as recorded in the fifth fascicle of the Zhiguan; fourth, from "The sūtra adduces" onward, response necessarily awaits capacity, so capacity is used to explain response.

3.31

Fourth, under matching with the truths, there are two parts: first, specific; second, general. In the specific there are two: first, brief; second, extensive. In the brief, when it says "as before," it means as in the private explanation above. Next, regarding the extensive: because it did not previously differentiate the teachings, it was brief; now, because each teaching is fully present, it is extensive. As for the general, it matches each individual siddhānta equally to the four truths.

3.32

Fifth, under giving rise to contemplation and teachings, there are two parts: first, contemplation; second, teachings. In contemplation there are two: first, stating the intent; second, directly giving rise [to contemplation]. The first text means: the siddhāntas of conventional contemplation are established, and the principle is revealed through contemplation. The second text also has two: first, sequential; second, single-mind. In the sequential, the three contemplations form three parts: the first, the contemplation of emptiness, is extensive; the remaining two contemplations are brief. In the first there are two: first, the explanation; second, the conclusion. The explanation of the four siddhāntas forms four parts.

3.33

First, in the worldly there are six: first, the heading; second, from "First contemplate" onward, the object of contemplation; third, from "This dharma" onward, clarifying the reason for using the worldly: cause is internal and conditions are external, cause is intimate and conditions are distant; the separation of intimate and distant is what reveals the meaning of the worldly; fourth, from "If not" onward, directly clarifying the intent of the contemplation; fifth, from "One must" onward, encouraging joy—the character "*xun*" (𣀇) is pronounced *yi*, and also pronounced *du*; it means disgust; sixth, the conclusion, as in the text.

3.34

In [the siddhānta for] the person there are three: first, clarifying the intent of [the siddhānta for] the person; second, from "If appropriate" onward, directly clarifying the generation of good—śamatha and vipaśyanā each have three, and according to any one of them it can be accomplished; third, from "This is" onward, the conclusion.

3.35

Third, in the remedy there are three: first, clarifying the intent of the remedy; second, directly clarifying the application of the remedy, which also can be accomplished according to any one; third, from "If applied well" onward, contrasting and distinguishing it from [the siddhānta for] the person. Fourth, in the supreme truth there are two: first, directly clarifying the supreme truth: not grasping the marks of the three siddhāntas is called "as if lost"; this is realizing the previously mentioned mark of the supreme truth; second, from "namely relying on" onward: because this is realizing the previously mentioned mark of the supreme truth, it is called "bringing forth truth." The remaining two contemplations and the single-mind are both summarized. Next, under giving rise to teachings, there are two: first, ineffable, regarding principle—principle is what was just realized by practicing contemplation, and therefore cannot be spoken; second, from "Again" onward, clarifying what can be spoken—speaking is just the teachings. In the first, the ineffable, there are two: first, general; second, from "Great Sūtra" onward, specific. In the first general text, it first cites the Da zhidu lun, whose meaning pervades the various teachings; next, from "Vimalakīrti" onward, that sūtra's meaning lies in the Perfect [Teaching]—although it has this meaning, because it does not distinguish and match it with the various teachings but directly states it is ineffable, it belongs to the general. The ten conditioned arisings of "producing and producing" and so forth are as recorded in the fifth fascicle of the Zhiguan. Next, what can be spoken has two: first, clarifying the cause of speaking, which is sentient beings formed by the ten conditioned arisings; second, directly clarifying the speaking. This again has two: first, sūtras; second, treatises. In the first, the sūtras, there are again two: first, the four teachings; second, the twelve divisions. First, regarding the four teachings: giving rise to teachings is simply turning the wheel of Dharma. This refers to the four Buddhas each turning the wheel of Dharma of their corresponding teaching according to their own capacity; it should also correspond to sudden, gradual, secret, and indeterminate, but the text is merely brief. Next, regarding the twelve divisions, there are three: first, the heading; second, the explanation; third, from "Da zhidu lun" onward, pointing to the treatise for confirmation. In the explanation, first come the four teachings, next the five periods. First, in the four teachings, the text's phrasing can be seen; a detailed discussion cannot exhaust them all. In the previous Separate Teaching, when it speaks of "upright and inverted worlds" and so forth, it is fully as in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. As for "Constant Silent Light," the Contemplation of Samantabhadra states: "There is a Buddha world named Constant Silent Light, which is the dwelling place of Vairocana." "Eyes, ears, nose, and tongue are all gates of serenity," as recorded in the second fascicle of the Zhiguan. Next, under giving rise to treatises, there are four: first, clarifying the samādhi on which they rely; second, from "Bodhisattvas" onward, the intent of composing treatises; third, from "Vasubandhu" onward, directly presenting the characteristics of the treatises; fourth, from "Also the five superknowledges" onward, clarifying what is subsumed by the treatises. In the first text, it says "mātṛkā," which is translated here as "mother of wisdom"; bodhisattvas enter this mother-of-wisdom samādhi to compose treatises that expound the sūtras and cause the Dharma to abide long; hence it is called "the dhyāna by which the correct Dharma abides long." Thus, among the nine kinds of great dhyāna in the Dichi, the eighth, the dhyāna of this world and other worlds, again has nine kinds; the seventh is composing unerring treatises, exquisite praises, and mātṛkā, which is the dhyāna for causing the correct Dharma to abide long. Next, the intent of composing treatises is evident. The Dichi explains the "Chapter on the Ten Bhūmis" of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra; below this, all four periods of [the Buddha's] lifetime have treatises expounding them, and only the Vaipulya division does not yet have a separate treatise; it can be generally expounded using Consciousness-Only, because the text of Wuxing (Asvabhāva) entirely equates it to spoiled seeds. "Five hundred arhats composing the Vibhāṣā" is as recorded in the sixth fascicle of the Zhiguan. In generally subsuming the worldly, defiled wheels of the Dharma, when it says "five superknowledges" and so forth, it clarifies ingesting elixirs for longevity and the like; Śakra resides in the desire realm, so he speaks only of the ten good deeds; Brahmā resides in the form heaven, so he speaks of leaving desire. This is temporarily based on texts of the traces; according to the Avataṃsaka and other sūtras, originally they are bodhisattvas, and so forth. "Culture, conduct, loyalty, and trustworthiness" are the four virtues of Confucius. Setting rites and music, and editing the Odes and Documents; "*yu*" (裕) means to benefit or enrich. As for "*kun*" (昆), the Erya says it means "later." People of Zhou referred to brothers as *kun-ji*, *kun* meaning elder brother and *ji* younger brother. The character *yu* (裕) is also written as 䘱. Rewarding the virtuous functionally corresponds to producing good. Punishing rebels functionally corresponds to cutting off evil. Ruler and minister joining in the Way resembles the supreme truth.

3.36

Sixth, in speaking and silence, there are two: first, clarifying silence; second, questions and answers to analyze. The first text also has two: first, clarifying the purpose of its introduction; second, the direct explanation. In the first text there are three: first, citing teachings to establish both; second, from "The sage speaks" onward, distinguishing and demonstrating; third, from "Even if" onward, clarifying the intent of silence, because the Dharma of one's own realization cannot be spoken for others. Next, in the direct speaking, it fully treats the five periods, and in each case treats how many teachings are contained in that division, annotating and explaining them using the Great Sūtra's four ineffables. The first text can be understood. Next, in the Tripiṭaka [Teaching], when it says "Kauṇḍinya" and so forth, the Mahāsaṃnipāta states: "The profound principle cannot be spoken; the supreme truth is devoid of sounds and letters"; the monk Kauṇḍinya attained true knowledge and vision regarding all dharmas. As for "the Ineffable Bodhisattva of the Mahāsaṃnipāta," the thirteenth fascicle states: "In the city of Rājagṛha, General Siṃha had a son born to him; immediately a deva came and spoke thus: Good man! You should constantly be mindful of the Dharma, guarding your mouth and being cautious in speech. Having heard this, the child no longer wept and cried, showing no infant demeanor, and for up to seven days did not blink his eyes. At that time someone said to the parents: This child is inauspicious, mute and unable to speak. The parents answered: Although this child is mute and unable to speak, his bodily marks are complete; know that this child will certainly possess blessed virtue. Therefore, they established his name as Ineffable. At the age of eight, people delighted in seeing him; by the Buddha's power, he went with his parents and kin to the jeweled hall between the desire and form realms, saw Śākyamuni, and also saw all Buddhas of the ten directions. In response to Śāriputra's questioning, he extensively manifested spiritual transformations and spoke verses in praise of the Buddha," and so on. Now I say that this ineffability is precisely tallying with principle. As for the "unobtainable" of the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, the tenth fascicle states: "Kauśika addressed the Buddha: When a bodhisattva practices prajñā, he knows that the minds of all sentient beings are unobtainable, up to the knower and the seer, form up to unsurpassed bodhi, all are unobtainable. Why is this? Because prajñā does not exist for the sake of obtaining dharmas." In each text it speaks of "truth" because what the Buddhas speak never fails to rely on the truths; since the worldly and world-transcending causes and effects are fully present within the four truths, even long stretches of casual discourse among the four truths necessarily reside within one of the truths.

3.37

In the critical evaluation, there are two questions and answers. The first question is understandable. Because the earlier text stated that these are all dharmas realized by the three vehicles, and since both self-benefit and benefiting others involve silence, the question had to be raised. In the answer, the four siddhāntas are fully set forth. Regarding "the venerable Pārśva defeating Aśvaghoṣa": a traditional commentary explains: "Before Aśvaghoṣa had great faith, he came to the venerable Pārśva's place and established his own thesis: 'Whoever speaks is defeated; I will cut off my head in apology.' The monk remained silent. After a long while, Aśvaghoṣa even said: 'The monk is defeated by me; thus he is silent and does not speak.' The monk was still silent. Thereupon Aśvaghoṣa went out of his gate and reflected to himself: 'Originally I established silence; he ultimately did not speak, whereas I spoke, which turns out to be my defeat.' He went back to the monk's place and sought to cut off his own head. The monk said: 'My Dharma is benevolent and compassionate; I will not cut off your head. You should shave your hair and become my disciple.'" If one follows the Fu fazang zhuan (Account of the Transmission of the Dharma Treasury), the venerable Pārśva transmitted the Dharma to Puṇyayaśas, and Yaśas defeated Aśvaghoṣa in debate, who then shaved his hair and became his disciple. Aśvaghoṣa had at first reflected in a quiet forest: 'My wisdom is extraordinary; if there are difficult questions, I can penetrate them.' Reckoning that there is truly a self, he was very arrogant and came to Yaśas's place. Yaśas said: 'All dharmas are without self.' Aśvaghoṣa said: 'I can refute all assertions; if this statement is false, I must have my head cut off.' Yaśas said: 'Within the Buddha-Dharma there are generally two truths: in conventional truth there is a self, but in the ultimate truth there is no self.' Aśvaghoṣa was still not subdued. Yaśas said: 'Consider carefully: do not utter empty words. Who is definitively the winner?' Aśvaghoṣa contemplated the two truths and only then submitted, wanting to cut off his own head. Yaśas had him shave his hair and become his disciple. If one follows the purport of the biography, it was solely by the two truths that he was refuted, not by silence. If one follows the Vibhāṣā, it says: "Once it was heard that there was a great master of debate named *Śatira (Shetiluo) who arrived in the country of Kaśmīra. At that time, in the Buddha-Footprint Forest, there was an arhat named *Bhāyīśura (Bayixiuluo), endowed with the three knowledges and thoroughly conversant with the three piṭakas. Then *Śatira heard that there was a great master of debate in that forest, so he went to his place. Having arrived, he greeted him and sat to one side. Then *Śatira said to the venerable one: 'Who will set forth the thesis first?' The answer was: 'I am the resident; I should set forth the thesis first.' *Śatira said: 'All theses have a reply.' Then *Bhāyīśura sat in silence. The disciples of *Bhāyīśura called out: 'If your master is *Śatira, he will naturally understand.' They arose from the forest and proceeded step by step. Their master reflected: 'Why did the disciples of the Śākya mendicant make this statement: "If your master is *Śatira, he will naturally understand"?' He immediately remembered to himself: 'I made the statement: "All theses have a reply." That mendicant was silent, which means my thesis had no reply; the mendicant has already won.' He immediately told his disciples: 'I am going back to him.' The disciples said: 'You have already won in the assembly; why go again?' The master said: 'I would rather lose at the side of a wise man than win at the side of fools.' He immediately went to him and spoke thus: 'You are the winner; I am the loser. You are my master; I am your disciple.'" This *Bhāyīśura truly corresponds to refutation by silence, but the names differ from the present text.

3.38

As for the next question: according to the Da zhidu lun, "The four siddhāntas subsume the eighty-four thousand Dharma treasuries and the twelve divisions of scripture." That they subsume the twelve divisions has already been explained above; what is the manner in which they subsume the eighty-four thousand? In the answer, sūtras are cited to fully set forth the numerical aspects. Since it speaks from the initial aspiration up to the relics, one knows that the four siddhāntas subsume the teachings of a single lifetime, which is why it is called eighty-four thousand. Therein, first the Bhadrakalpika Sūtra is cited, and next different explanations are cited. The first text has two parts: first citing the Bhadrakalpika Sūtra to resolve the objection, and next, from "If taking..." onward, broadly gathering the various teachings to separately match them with the four siddhāntas. In the text of the Zhiguan, they were matched with the four truths; here they are matched with the four siddhāntas because the meaning of the four siddhāntas is identical to that of the four truths, and thus it is fully as explained in matching them with the truths. The remaining variations of the eighty-four thousand have further different aspects, as in the first record of the Zhiguan. As for "transcending without limit" (du wuji): in the Bhadrakalpika Sūtra, three hundred and fifty "transcendings without limit" are listed, and then matched with the six perfections and the four divisions of afflictions to make eighty-four thousand Dharma gates; this is also in the first record of the Zhiguan. Moreover, in the Da yingluo jing, all six perfections are called "transcending without limit"; therefore, scriptures translated in the Jin and Song dynasties all translated pāramitā as "transcending without limit" (du wuji).

3.39

Regarding the seventh section, on "Possessing Application and Not Possessing Application": "possessing" refers to self-realization; "application" refers to benefiting others. There are two parts within it: first stating, next explaining. In the explanation, there are again two: first citing the ultimate fruit, next citing persons on the causal stage. Among persons on the causal stage, there are two: first stating and listing the four propositions, next explaining. In the explanation, ordinary persons and the four teachings differ: first, the two teachings—Tripiṭaka and Shared—each divide into the two vehicles and bodhisattvas to explain them separately. First, among the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka Teaching, first are the śrāvakas, next the pratyekabuddhas. First, among the śrāvakas, there are two: first explaining possessing realization but being unable to apply it; next, from "Even if..." onward, explaining that applying it inappropriately is equivalent to being unable to apply it. The first text is understandable. The next text fully explains the aspect of being unable to apply the four siddhāntas. Only because one can accord with capacities is it called being able to apply; śrāvakas, even if they wish to benefit others, cannot apply them because they miss the capacity, hence it says "even if". Therein, it first cites Pūrṇa to generally clarify missing the capacity. Next, from "as Pūrṇa..." onward, treating the four siddhāntas, each first introduces and concludes with the inability to apply. The first text says, "as Pūrṇa spent ninety days converting non-Buddhists," as in the sixth record of the Zhiguan. Śāriputra missing the capacity is as in the seventh record of the Zhiguan. Kāśina is as in the ninth record of the Zhiguan. Regarding "as Śāriputra did not liberate Fukuzō (Puṇyavardhana)": the treatise says, "In a past life, this bhikṣu was a fish seven hundred yojanas long. Having heard the Dharma in the past, although fallen among fish, his past seed still remained. At that time, a merchant leader led merchants into the sea to gather jewels; suddenly seeing a swift current with the ship heading toward a white mountain, and also seeing three suns appear together, he informed the sea captain. The captain said: 'Alas, these are not three suns: two are the fish's eyes, and one is the sun in the sky; the white mountain is the fish's teeth; we will surely enter the fish's belly.' The people in the ship each called upon what they venerated; among them was an upāsaka who called 'Namo Buddha'. Hearing the Buddha's name, the fish thought to itself: 'This is a disciple of the Buddha; I was formerly a disciple of the Buddha too.' It bore death and closed its mouth, and the water receded. The fish consequently lost its life, and the wind blew its corpse onto the shore. Its consciousness was reborn and encountered the Buddha; Śāriputra and the five hundred [arhats] were all unable to liberate him, but the Buddha liberated him and he attained the fruit. The Buddha had him walk along the seashore, where he saw a mountain of bones seven thousand yojanas high, the north of the mountain unilluminated by the sun. Returning, he reported to the Buddha. The Buddha said: 'These are the bones of your own body.'"

3.40

Question:

3.41

"The fish's body was seven hundred yojanas long, yet the mountain of bones seen was seven thousand yojanas high; why was the body small while the mountain of bones was large?"

3.42

Answer:

3.43

"It may perhaps be a scribal error; it should be seventy [yojanas]."

3.44

Regarding "great physician" and so forth: Śāriputra was the great physician, and the five hundred were minor physicians. Regarding "pratyekabuddhas are also like this": based on principle, since they do not know capacities, it is clear that they cannot apply the four; although they have practice in groups, it is merely a compassionate mind. As Śāriputra said, "I do not know capacities; I merely preach the Dharma out of pity," this can be understood by analogy with the śrāvakas.

3.45

Next, explaining that the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka Teaching have not yet attained the truth of cessation, which is called not yet attaining the one, but can fully apply the four. From "Why is this?" onward explains it. Not cutting off afflictions, they are called "ill guides". Bodhisattvas of the Shared Teaching on the sixth bhūmi who are not yet skillful are equal to arhats; although they also preach the Dharma, they cannot accord with capacities, hence they are called "not yet skillful". Since the Separate Teaching's ten directions of dedication already advance in cultivating the Middle Way, their application of the similitude Middle Way surpasses that of the preceding; from ascending the bhūmis onward, their true and responsive [bodies operate] spontaneously.

3.46

Eighth, explaining the provisional and the real: first stating, next explaining. In the explanation, there are two: first the main explanation, next the critical evaluation. In the main explanation, there are two: first pointing back to the previous correlation with the truths, not yet classifying the provisional and the real, hence calling it "general course". Next, in the main explanation, there are two: first the four teachings, next the five flavors. The first text itself has four: first, in the Tripiṭaka Teaching, there are again four: first citing the treatise to make an overall classification; stating that "the commentary says that the sūtras mostly preach three siddhāntas" and so forth—this is stated in contrast between the great and the small, pointing to the Tripiṭaka sūtras as the "sūtras", and prajñā as the ultimate truth, each having its own meaning. Next, from "Tripiṭaka" onward shows the essence of the teaching and contemplation. It is not that there is no empty principle, but it is not identity-with-emptiness; hence it merely says "scant". Third, from "as for the bodhisattva of the Tripiṭaka Teaching" onward, provisionally granting their own teaching to discuss three and four. Stating "explaining four based on three siddhāntas": not only is there no ultimate truth of the Middle Way, there is also no ultimate truth of the truth of reality; it merely establishes the name of ultimate truth based on leaning toward the real to subdue afflictions, hence saying "explaining four based on three". Furthermore, explaining four means being able to preach four for others, hence saying "explaining four"; in their own practice they only attain three. Fourth, from "even so" onward, definitively classifying it as belonging to the provisional. Next, in the Shared Teaching, there are also four: first establishing the name in comparison with the preceding. Next, from "therefore" onward, citing the treatise to prove skillfulness, provisionally explaining the ultimate truth based on identity-with-emptiness. Third, from "as for the Buddha" onward, classifying attainment within its own teaching. Fourth, from "and based on" onward, definitively classifying it as belonging to the provisional. Next, in the Separate Teaching, there are three: first comparing with the preceding, next from "and yet" onward looking to what follows, third from "the teaching path" onward definitively classifying it as belonging to the provisional. Next, in the Perfect Teaching, there are two: first also comparing with the preceding, next from "therefore the four siddhāntas" onward definitively classifying it as wonderful; next, in terms of the five flavors, it is understandable.

3.47

Next, in the critical evaluation, there are five rounds of questions and answers. In the first question, it says: Although bodhisattvas attain four, this is also discussing four based on three, as before. In the answer: since the Shared Teaching has no Middle Way, it properly lacks the ultimate truth. As for the bodhisattva of the Tripiṭaka Teaching not cutting off afflictions: if looking at the Shared Teaching from the perspective of the two vehicles, they similarly attain four. The statement that from realization there are four and from teaching there is the provisional, rather than saying from teaching there are three, is because both the teaching path and realization path speak of four, but their provisional and real natures differ; hence it does not say three. As for taking the stages before the bhūmis as the teaching path: since there is the phrase "if taking", one should know that from the first bhūmi onward there is still the meaning of the teaching path, fully as in the third record of the Zhiguan.

3.48

Ninth, "Opening and Revealing" has two parts: first, posing the heading; next, explaining it. The explanation has two parts: first, the proper opening; next, the critical examination. In the first part, the proper opening has two parts: first, clarifying the intention behind applying and opening; next, directly discussing the opening based on the preceding four periods in order to converge them into the Lotus Sūtra. The first text also has three parts: first, generally clarifying that all phenomena are originally real; next, from "great compassion" downward, applying the provisional; third, from "now opening" downward, revealing the real. Regarding the first text: since phenomena are originally subtle and coarseness arises only from the sentiments of living beings, one knows that merely by opening their sentiments, principle naturally returns to its origin. In applying the provisional there are two parts: first, the proper application; next, from "The Immeasurable Meanings" downward, citing proof; third, from "now opening" downward, the proper opening. In the opening there are also two parts: first, generally opening based on phenomena to clarify the original intention of applying the transformation; next, from "eliminating and extinguishing" downward, drawing upon the two vehicles' difficulty in opening to clarify the characteristics of opening—since coarseness is itself subtlety, the conjured city is itself the treasure site. Next, from "if milk" downward, directly clarifying the opening based on the four periods also has two parts: first, the proper opening; next, from "Correct and Equal" downward, clarifying the scope of opening. Although the four siddhāntas of the Separate Teaching within the milk and the two clarified-butter [periods] have the ultimate truth, they are all framed according to the teaching path; hence it says: "only resolving the four provisional of [milk], the twelve provisional of raw clarified butter, and the eight provisional of cooked clarified butter—all can enter subtlety." In resolving the provisional within raw and cooked clarified butter, the citation of proof only says: "the twelve hundred arhats and completely resolving the voice-hearer Dharma"—this is because the preceding proof for the milk teaching had already cited bodhisattvas, and the meaning of bodhisattvas being identical, it is not cited again to avoid redundant text. Since it says that bodhisattvas also remove the net of doubts, it is verified that bodhisattvas must also converge the three [vehicles]. From "Correct and Equal and Wisdom" to "is present here": within the scope of opening, the Avataṃsaka should also be mentioned, but its absence in the text is an abbreviation. This verifies that the perfect teaching of those three collections is no different from the perfection of the Lotus Sūtra; to classify suddenness as uniquely residing in the Avataṃsaka is surely a falsely spawned extraneous growth! Furthermore, phenomena are originally subtle, separated only within the sentiments of living beings; if, when the Lotus Sūtra has already opened [them], one instead demotes it to gradual, turns the subtlety of the real realm of the ten suchnesses back into coarseness, debases the knowledge and vision of the Buddha into belonging to bodhisattvas, renders the noble explanation of the ten similes of the Medicine King praising the teaching entirely hollow, reduces the evaluations across the three periods in the "Teacher of the Dharma" chapter to sheer unreality, and treats the assembly of emanated Buddhas and the treasure stūpa springing up into the empty sky as vainly troubling their coming attendance—all to prove this gradual teaching—the marks of identity and difference cannot be fully discussed! Our lineage's doctrinal approach is entirely sufficient to be investigated and scrutinized; how could one uniquely and eccentrically dismiss this subtle sūtra?

First 48 of 64 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

法華玄義釋籤 — Classical Chinese