法華玄義釋籤 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

7.1

Expounded by the Tiantai Śramaṇa Zhanran

Next, explaining the wonder of wisdom has two parts: first, explaining the contextual purpose; second, directly explaining. The first text can be seen. In the direct explanation, there are two parts: regarding the first intent, the text itself divides into six: first, listing the six chapters; second, explaining according to the chapters. In the initial numbers: first, the six of the Tripiṭaka; second, the four of the Shared; third, the three of the Separate; fourth, the three of the Three Buddhas; fifth, the four of the Perfect. The Three Buddhas reside in the fruit, and those three fruits lack persons, hence they are listed separately here. The Perfect fruit has a person, hence it naturally follows after the causes. Next, 'categories' means classification. Again there are two parts: first, listing; second, concluding. In the first text, explaining the intent of their numbers: why the five mind-stoppings up to the ten bhūmis are each made into a single number—this approach is established for that reason. Because their categories and examples are the same, they are temporarily each made into a single number; if each and every stage were made into a separate number, it would become overly cumbersome, so it is spoken of generally for now. The bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka Teaching should also be said to universally study the four gates; but in order to bring out the different meanings of their intrinsic substance, they are temporarily categorized according to the relative strength of conditions, phenomena, and principles. The Three Buddhas should be said to all be the teacher's stage, but also to distinguish the differences among the three marks according to the teachings, each is elucidated according to its meaning.

7.3

In the third [part], distinguishing their characteristics, if one considers the numbers and categories, they are truly not numerous, but within the categories there are many characteristics, and according to those characteristics there are further fewer or more distinctions; therefore it is simply made like this. In the initial distinguishing of the characteristics of worldly wisdom, the phrase 'From India' down to 'Neither-Conception' speaks of that upon which wisdom relies, up to the first dhyāna; here it simply proceeds according to the highest. 'Loyalty, filial piety', and so forth are briefly as recorded in the Zhiguan. As for being widely knowledgeable about the names of birds, beasts, plants, and trees, nothing surpasses the Erya. Even though pacifying, anointing, and dissecting [are accomplished], what they rely upon is merely worldly dhyāna. As for 'attaining the fundamental concentrations' and so forth, because employing spiritual penetrations necessarily relies upon concentrations of the form realm, arresting rivers and the like must rely upon the fundamental [concentrations]. Regarding 'arresting a river in an ear' and so forth, as stated in fascicle thirty-five of the Great Sūtra: 'The non-Buddhists came and addressed King Prasenajit, saying: “Great King! You should not disparage such great beings. Great King! Who caused this waxing and waning of the moon? Who caused the saltiness of the great sea and Mount Malaya? Was it not we brāhmaṇas? Great King! Have you not heard that the ṛṣi Agastya for twelve years kept the waters of the Ganges River inside his ear? The ṛṣi Gautama performed great supernormal transformations, for twelve years turning into Śakra's body, and causing Śakra's body to turn into a ram's body, and placing a thousand female organs upon Śakra's body. Did not the ṛṣi Jantu in a single day drink the waters of the great sea and cause the great earth to dry up? Did not the ṛṣi Vasu make three eyes for Maheśvara? Did not the ṛṣi Rāvaṇa turn the city of Kapilavastu into saline soil? Among the brāhmaṇas there are such mighty ṛṣis who can now be verified; how can you disparage such great ṛṣis?”' It is also like the ancients of this land: Zhang Kai could make mist, Luan Ba was skilled at exhaling clouds, and Ge Hong, Tao Yuanming, and others all had slight knowledge of the occult arts, but these were merely small matters. If compared to the Western Region, they are as different as heaven and earth. As for 'the dharmas are worldly dharmas' and so forth, because the concentrations are not outflow-free, they cannot sever delusions; hence it says 'unmoving'. Because they perpetually remain in the three realms of existence, it is said 'they do not transcend'. This is because deviant wisdom cannot move delusions to transcend the realms.

7.4

Next, regarding the five methods of stilling [the mind] and the four applications of mindfulness: first the five methods of stilling, and next the four applications of mindfulness. In the first part on the five methods of stilling, there are three: first, explaining the names; second, from 'The contemplating [faculty] can' down, explaining the function of stilling the mind; third, from 'Counting breaths' down, directly explaining their application as remedies. It merely lists the names corresponding to the afflictions; this is extensively as recorded in the tenth [fascicle] of the Zhiguan. Next, in the four applications of mindfulness, it also briefly omits the names, merely raising the numbers corresponding to the stages; coming below to the illuminating contemplation, the textual characteristics are somewhat more extensive. Within this there are also two: first, explaining the function; second, from 'First overturning' down, determining the stages. Namely, it takes the functions as their characteristics. As for 'The four wholesome roots above the stage of Heat', all are based on the *Vibhāṣā*, though the textual characteristics are somewhat condensed. Now I briefly bring forth the text of the treatise. Regarding the initial 'Heat', there are five: first, directly explaining the meaning of Heat; second, from 'The Venerable' down, explaining that Heat is at the beginning; third, from 'Toward the true Dharma' down, explaining the truths that are its objective support; fourth, from 'All' down, analyzing and resolving doubts; fifth, from 'Heat has' down, explaining its functions. In the first text, it is due to the contemplation of wisdom that Heat arises. The next text is clear. In the third text, there are three: first, an explanation; second, analysis; third, from 'As the Buddha [said]' down, citing proof that it must take the four truths as its objective support. In the fourth, the analysis, there are two: first, analyzing the dharmas; second, analyzing the grades. The initial phrase, 'all giving is entirely dedicated to liberation', and so forth: the *Vibhāṣā* states, 'People of the Western Region made this treatise'; the present text briefly relies on their questions, which ask: What is the purport of the wholesome root of Heat? What does it rely upon? What cause and condition? What dharma? What fruit? What retribution? What wholesome benefit? How many practices does it practice? Is it conditioned arising? Is it conditioned origination? Is it wisdom arisen from hearing? Is it wisdom arisen from thinking? Is it wisdom arisen from cultivation? Does it belong to the desire, form, or formless realm? Is it accompanied by vitarka and vicāra, or up to free of vitarka and vicāra? With what faculties is it associated? Is it of one mind or multiple minds? Is it retrogression or non-retrogression? Down to the mundane supreme dharma, it questions in the same manner. The present text lacks the characters for question and answer, and directly presents the text of the answers. The answers of the treatise are completely as in the present text, down to the wholesome root of Patience being entirely dedicated to liberation as its purport, and so forth, merely lacking the text answering 'what dharma'. It should say that it is an outflow-associated dharma, Summit is the fruit of effort of Heat, and the cause that determines nirvāṇa is its benefit; there are also those who say that not severing the wholesome roots is its benefit. It also asks: How many kinds of the dharma of Heat are there? The answer is as in the text. It also asks: How many persons are there from the desire realm to the stage of nothingness? The answer is that each has nine grades, and together with one fully bound person, there are seventy-three persons in total. Next, analyzing the grades of wholesome roots: it makes an analysis in contrast to the lower three wholesome roots. The text of the second master resembles four grades, but the intention lies only in three. Yet regarding leaping in order to take, this is because by analogy with the previous nine grades it also leaps. As for 'lies only in three', the lowest of the low and the middle of the low are just the low; the high of the middle is just the middle; the high of the high is just the high. Heat and Summit, among the lower three grades, are the lowest of the low and the middle of the low; although there are two grades, they lie only in the low. Patience takes the highest of the middle three grades; the mundane supreme takes the highest of the highest three grades. Ghoṣaka stated that the higher of the nine grades can encompass the lower, so Summit has six and Patience has eight. Because the mundane supreme is close to the real, it cannot encompass many, hence it is only the highest of the high. Since the nine grades use the higher to encompass the lower, the three grades do likewise. Thus Heat has one, down to Patience having three, and the mundane supreme likewise having only one kind; the meaning is also as before. In the fifth, on functions, where it speaks of 'two relinquishments': 'parting from realms and grounds' refers to ascending from below to above; at the time of retrogression, it refers to 'losing the higher and retrogressing to the lower'; at the time of losing or obtaining dhyāna, it is thus called 'the time of loss'.

7.5

Next, explaining the dharma of Summit has four: first, contrasting it with the wholesome roots above and below to distinguish the differences in cognitive aspects; second, from 'There are further' down, explaining the name; third, from 'How' down, explaining the contemplative aspect of the dharma of Summit; fourth, from 'Asking: For what reason' down, explaining that the dharma is called retrogression. All these texts are identical to the treatise. The treatise states: 'Some say: The wholesome roots of the desire realm are two, the lower being Heat and the higher being Summit; the wholesome roots of the form realm are two, the lower being Patience and the higher being the mundane supreme. The commentator says: One should not speak like this; one should say they are all dharmas of the form realm, abiding in the ground of concentration, the good noble practice-dharmas.' Now relying on the commentator, it thus says 'form realm'. These merely determine the four wholesome roots, contrasting their differences with the four based on distinctions such as moving. From moving to retrogressing are divided into two; from unmoving to non-retrogressing are divided into two. Although together in the form realm, because the wholesome roots differ in depth, they result in different gradations. 'Moving' means still being moved by external conditions; 'abiding' means abiding long in Heat and Summit; 'difficult' means Heat and Summit encounter difficulties; 'severing' means severing wholesome roots; 'retrogressing' means retrogressing to commit the five unpardonable offenses and the like. 'Unmoving' and so forth are the latter two wholesome roots, which can be known by analogy. Next, in explaining the name, the dharma of Summit in relation to Heat obtains the name of Summit in moving and the like; there are other masters who should say 'lower'. Furthermore, previously regarding moving and the like it was called abiding; there are other masters who call it not abiding long and perhaps having no difficulty, and so forth; if one reaches Patience, it is no longer called retrogression. Third, in clarifying the contemplation of the dharma of Summit, there are also two: first, an explanation; second, analysis. The first text first clarifies the contemplation capable of faith; next, from 'This faith' down, clarifies the objective realm that is supported. Next, from 'Question' down is the analysis: first the question, then the answer. In the answer, it first designates the two truths as superior; next, from 'Purity' down, are the cognitive aspects of the objective support. The first phrase generally raises the two truths as being without fault; the next phrase briefly raises the two aspects under Cessation, fully and collectively raising the eight aspects. From 'Capable of generating' down, clarifies the intention of generating faith. From 'If the World-Honoured One' down, it reiterates the intention of faith: because Suffering and Arising cannot be had faith in, one therefore has faith in the Path and Cessation. From 'These afflictions' down, generally raises that the aspects of Suffering and Arising cannot generate faith. From 'Those to be converted' down, reiterates that the Path and Cessation are trustworthy. There are also those who say that one should completely have faith in all four, because by knowing Suffering and Arising one can have faith in the Path and Cessation. When the treatise asks, 'Since one also has faith in the truths, why does it only speak of having faith in the Jewels?', it is because earlier the four truths were established in contrast to the Three Jewels that this question was posed. The treatise states: 'Some say: That māṇava was not devoid of faith in the truths of Suffering and Arising, but merely lacked faith in the Three Jewels; because he lacked faith, the Buddha spoke for him.' This is precisely the first text. There are also those who say it is according to the practitioner's delight, which is the text from 'merely following' onward. Fourth, in explaining that the dharma is called retrogression: first is the question, as in the text. As for the answer: because practicing at the Summit, the afflictions in one's body frequently arise this thought, fearing that once arriving at Patience they will have no further place to arise, in order to stimulate the practitioner's contemplative gateway of the dharma of Summit; therefore in the text there are two meanings: first, sorrow and distress because of retrogression into afflictions; second, fearing regression and loss, thus sorrow and distress again. From 'If capable' down, clarifies the two conditions for non-retrogression: first, external good friends and so forth; second, internal correct contemplation. The remaining text is clear.

7.6

Next, in explaining the stage of forbearance (kṣānti): the present text generally speaks of 'thirty-two minds,' which is this. Some editions read 'forty-two minds,' which is an error; the four truths above and below each have sixteen aspects, hence thirty-two. The present text follows an abbreviated presentation. It merely discusses reduction at once according to objects in general terms; next, reducing by one object until two aspects and one object remain is in all cases termed 'intermediate forbearance'; when only one aspect and one object remain, only then is it termed 'highest forbearance.' Regarding the statement that 'one only produces two moments of mind contemplating a single aspect': the Vibhāṣā states, 'Reducing until, after the forbearance of the dharma of suffering, the mind attains right determination; those four minds have the same single aspect and single object, which is called supreme forbearance, just like in the worldly supreme dharmas where the two minds of the forbearance of the dharma of suffering and the cognition of the dharma of suffering share the same object.' Now, relying further on the Abhidharmakośa, we shall briefly set it forth. The treatise states: 'From this arises the stage of heat,' which means that after having perfected the general contemplation of mindfulness, the name 'heat' arises; the noble path is like fire capable of burning the fuel of afflictions, and being the prior portent of the noble fire, it is therefore named 'heat'; having contemplated the four truths and cultivated the sixteen aspects is called the stage of heat. Because the duration of this wholesome root is long, one can fully contemplate the four truths and fully cultivate the sixteen aspects, contemplating impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self, up to path, correct, practice, and deliverance. Next, in distinguishing the stage of the summit: from this, the wholesome root of the summit has inferior, intermediate, and superior degrees; upon reaching completion, there is a wholesome root named the 'summit,' which also contemplates the four truths and cultivates the sixteen aspects, the same as the preceding stage of heat. The two wholesome states of heat and summit are both termed 'unstable wholesome roots,' because they can backslide and be shaken. Among the unstable wholesome roots, the summit is the supreme, being like the crown of a person's head, and is therefore called the dharma of the summit. The stage of forbearance is advance, and the stage of heat is retreat; this summit is the boundary between advance and retreat, just like the peak of a mountain, and is therefore called the summit. The verse states: 'These two wholesome roots are both initially of dharmas and later of all four'; when the two wholesome roots of heat and summit are initially established, they are both exclusively mindfulness of dharmas; later, when they progress and advance, they extend to all four applications of mindfulness. 'Initially established' refers to heat: initially treading the tracks of the four noble truths across the eight truths and sixteen aspects is called initial establishment; that is, in the path of seeing there is only mindfulness of dharmas, and because the stages of heat and summit accord with the path of seeing, their initial establishment is therefore exclusively mindfulness of dharmas. Because the subsequent stage of advancement is somewhat more relaxed, one is therefore able to cultivate all four applications of mindfulness. That forbearance is exclusively mindfulness of dharmas means: from the summit a wholesome root arises, named 'forbearance of dharmas.' It approves the four truths and is most excellent. Moreover, because there is no backsliding, it is called the dharma of forbearance. Both the initial establishment of forbearance and its subsequent advancement are mindfulness of dharmas; because it is close to the path of seeing, therefore both beginning and end are mindfulness of dharmas. The verse states: 'Inferior and intermediate forbearance are the same as the summit'; this wholesome root has inferior, intermediate, and superior degrees; the inferior and intermediate stages are the same as the stages of heat and summit, fully contemplating the four truths and sixteen aspects, whereas superior forbearance contemplates only the suffering of the desire realm. The verse states: 'One aspect, one thought-instant'; superior forbearance is only one aspect and one thought-instant under suffering, which is named superior forbearance. The inferior grade completely contemplates the sixteen truths, while the intermediate grade reduces objects. What are termed 'objects' refers to the eight truths above and below, which are called objects because they are what is perceived; each has sixteen aspects, so the thirty-two are called aspects because they are the aspects that actively perceive. It should be understood that there are seven rounds of reducing objects and twenty-four rounds of reducing aspects: that is, four aspects contemplate the suffering of the desire realm, up to four aspects contemplate the path of the desire realm, and up to three aspects contemplate the path of the higher realms—this is called one round reducing one aspect. In this way, under each and every truth there are three aspects whose names differ from the object, named after the aspect; therefore, three times eight is twenty-four rounds of reducing aspects. Under each and every truth there is one aspect whose name is identical with the object, and it is reduced along with the object; being named after the object, this is simply called reducing objects. Thus, across the four truths of the higher realms, while retaining suffering in the lower realm, only three objects are reduced; the four above and three below are called the seven rounds. Both objects and aspects are reduced from the end backwards, which results in suffering in the desire realm being retained at the very end. In all, there are thirty-one rounds of reducing objects and reducing aspects; subsequently, there is only one aspect and two thought-instants of mind contemplating the suffering of the desire realm, which is called the completion of intermediate forbearance; there is only one aspect and one thought-instant of mind contemplating the suffering of the desire realm, which is called the accomplishment of superior forbearance. In this intermediate forbearance stage, before the truth of the path is reduced, although aspects are reduced, because the path has not yet been reduced, one can still fully contemplate the four kinds of truths. When the verse states 'Inferior and intermediate forbearance are the same as the summit,' it is said with reference to this. If during this intermediate forbearance the truth of the path is reduced, one cultivates only twelve aspects; having reduced that path, the mind has no admiration for it, and therefore the four aspects under that path also do not arise or attain [possession]. By this principle, when the truth of cessation is reduced, one cultivates only eight aspects, because the four aspects under each of cessation and the path are eliminated; when the truth of origination is reduced, one cultivates only four aspects. Therefore, in intermediate forbearance, one fully cultivates sixteen, twelve, eight, and four aspects; in superior forbearance, one also cultivates four aspects, for although one gives rise to only one aspect and one thought-instant of mind to contemplate suffering, by giving rise to the possession capable of acquiring them, one cultivates the four aspects under that suffering.

7.7

Question:

7.8

In the stage of superior forbearance, those three aspects are reduced; why then does one cultivate those reduced aspects?

7.9

Answer:

7.10

Although those aspects are reduced, because the truth is not reduced and because of the mind of admiration, one is still able to cultivate those reduced aspects. Cultivating the reduced aspects in the stage of intermediate forbearance can be understood by analogy. Retaining one aspect under suffering out of the thirty-two is in preparation for entering the path of seeing, and therefore it must be retained. The remaining thirty-one are gradually eliminated in the sequence described in the text.

7.11

Question:

7.12

Which aspect is retained as the one aspect under suffering?

7.13

Answer:

7.14

Practitioners entering the path of seeing are of two kinds: the first are the sharp, who are practitioners of views. Practitioners of views are of two kinds: if they cling to self, they retain the aspect of non-self; if they cling to what belongs to self, they retain the aspect of emptiness. The second are the dull, who are practitioners of craving; practitioners of craving are also of two kinds: those with abundant pride retain the aspect of impermanence; those with abundant indolence retain the aspect of suffering.

7.15

The verse states: 'Worldly supreme dharmas are likewise'; immediately following upon superior forbearance, the supreme arises, solely taking as object one aspect and one thought-instant of mind under suffering, the same as the preceding superior forbearance, and hence it says 'are likewise.' Being tainted, it is called 'worldly'; being the most excellent among them, it is said to be 'supreme'; because it acts as a cause of the same kind to induce the path of seeing to arise, it is therefore called 'most excellent.' All have wisdom as their essence; all are of the nature of the five aggregates, with meditation-concomitant morality being called the form aggregate, and the remaining four aggregates being understandable. As for the term 'forbearance of the dharma of suffering': in sixteen thought-instants, starting from the truth of suffering, one forbearance and one cognition arise in succession, until reaching the truth of the path, where the initial arising of one forbearance is called the fifteen minds, and the subsequent arising of one cognition is called the completion of the sixteen minds, which is the first fruit. Within this there are three parts: first the dharma, second the analogy, and third the analysis. The first text is as just stated. Next is the analogy; within the analogy, first is the analogy, and second the application. In the analogy, where it says 'Just as a person wishing to go from his own country,' etc.: the three realms are one's own country, and nirvāṇa is another country. Why is this? Residing for a long time in the three realms is one's own, while just arriving in nirvāṇa is another. The sixteen methods of contemplation are 'great wealth and property,' and going alone with a single aspect is why it says 'cannot carry them away.' Intermediate forbearance is like copper coins, superior forbearance is like gold, and the worldly supreme dharmas are like a priceless jewel; entering the true untainted realm with one aspect and one thought-instant is like carrying it away. Third, from 'Question' onward is the analysis: first the question, then the answer. Next, from 'As for the worldly supreme dharmas' onward praises the supreme meaning: first establishing complete supremacy, and next, from 'also partial' onward distinguishing differences in the grounds for obtaining the name; first two approaches are established, and then explained. In the explanation, first the partial is explained, and then the complete. In the first text, 'inseparable from seeing the truths': the sixteenth mind is seeing the truths, and the remaining fifteen minds are its retinue; arising in uninterrupted succession, it is said to be 'inseparable'; this is the stage of severing delusions, and therefore the power of wisdom is particularly dominant. From seeing the truths onward up to the third fruit, when the contemplation of dhyāna is accomplished, one is born in the five pure abodes; these five heavens are inhabited purely by noble ones, and therefore it says 'do not take birth in the same place as ordinary beings.' Upon reaching the fourth fruit and attaining the cognition of exhaustion, the defiling hindrances of the delusions of thought within the realms are eternally severed; these subsequent fruits are all due to the efficacy of seeing the truths, and therefore seeing the truths is the most supreme. Next, from 'three samādhis' onward, an illustration is cited for explanation. Just as when the mind of the worldly supreme dharmas attains the three samādhis, turning away from and detesting everything, it does not even grasp at untainted dharmas, and hence it says 'repudiates.' 'How much less should tainted ones be completely superior?' concludes the worldly supreme dharmas above. 'Partial supremacy' means that it cannot completely surpass the dharma of seeing the truths, but only partially surpasses those dharmas of heat, the summit, and so forth; hence the worldly supreme dharmas are also termed partially supreme. 'Except entering' is the superior place. Furthermore, it is said to be completely supreme: named from its function, these worldly supreme dharmas not only surpass the dharmas of heat, the summit, and so forth, but also surpass the dharmas of seeing the truths and so on. 'And so on' includes the wisdom and practices of the path of cultivation, up to the arhat; the efficacy of being able to initiate them lies in the worldly supreme dharmas, hence it is called 'completely supreme.' Therefore, from 'Or it is said' onward explains complete supremacy based on the strength of functional efficacy, not that what is realized is also superior. As for 'Question: Is there a distinction in meaning among the preceding stages?': previously, by terms such as 'most excellent' and 'attaining the wondrous fruit,' the worldly supreme dharmas were explained in general terms; now, wishing to make distinctions, the question is first raised. The answer is as in the text. These practices such as the contemplation of impurity and ānāpāna all precede the worldly supreme dharmas; therefore, the worldly supreme dharmas are superior and foremost in relation to them, and the same holds for the grounds upon which they rely. Next, from 'Furthermore, relying on the threshold [concentration] as the foremost' onward analyzes the relying grounds: from the threshold up to the four dhyānas are six grounds; Venerable Ghoṣa says there may be seven, adding the desire realm. Relying on a body of the desire realm, there are six heavens and three human [continents], excluding the northern continent; for the first three wholesome roots, dying and being reborn across the three continents, one also continues to take birth in the six heavens. The fourth wholesome root can also initially arise in the heavens; it is only in male and female bodies, and not other ṣaṇḍhas. The verse states: 'Noble ones abandon it by losing the ground; ordinary beings by the end of life. Heat inevitably reaches nirvāṇa; the summit never severs wholesome roots; forbearance does not fall into evil destinies; the supreme enters into the severance of rebirth.' Detailed explanations are as in the treatise.

7.16

Next, explaining the first fruit: 'eight forbearances and eight cognitions' refers to one dharma forbearance and one dharma cognition, and one subsequent forbearance and one subsequent cognition under each and every truth; thus under the four truths there are eight forbearances and eight cognitions. These are the sixteen untainted minds that completely sever views under the four truths. Next, explaining the three fruits: 'pondering' refers to thoughtful reflection, repeatedly reflecting upon the previously attained untainted principle of the true truth; or reflecting upon whichever truth among the four truths, or reflecting exclusively upon the truth of cessation; severing the different grades across the three realms, one attains the latter three fruits, completely exhausting the six grades, nine grades, and all three realms. Within the nine grounds, each and every one has nine grades of the delusions of thought, and each and every grade employs one [path of] uninterruptedness and one [path of] liberation; speaking from the perspective of one ground, the remaining grounds are analogous, which is why it only says nine. Next, for the pratyekabuddhas, suffering and origination are taken as the general, and the twelve links of dependent origination as the specific; their reverse and forward orders are fully detailed as in the second fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. Together with the preceding four fruits, they are explained extensively as in the 'Chapter on the Sages and Nobles' of the Abhidharmakośa. Next, regarding the bodhisattva of the three asaṃkhyeya kalpas, it is fully detailed as in the third fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan.

7.17

Next, regarding 'The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas of the Shared Teaching [regard] total characteristics in a single gate,' and so forth: 'total' means merely practicing the contemplation of suffering and accumulation. 'Distinct' means contemplating the seven links of suffering and contemplating the five links of accumulation. Because it is for their own practice, they rely only on a single gate; because bodhisattvas are for others, they engage all four gates. However, before the seventh bhūmi, in terms of their own practice, they also use only one gate, though as an expedient for entering provisionality, they must also practice [all four] comprehensively. Regarding the statement that the Buddha of the Tripiṭaka Teaching 'simultaneously employs the eight patiences and eight knowledges,' and so forth: the evaluation of similarities and differences is fully treated in the third fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. That the Buddha of the Shared Teaching is spoken of as only 'severing residual habits' is because when he was a bodhisattva, he retained residual habits to moisten rebirth, so that when he reached the foot of the Bodhi tree he merely severed the remaining residual habits. The Buddha of the Separate Teaching again has two parts: first, the correct explanation, and next, resolving doubts under 'Or it is said.' Someone has raised the doubt that at the stage of equal enlightenment, one grade has already been severed. This understanding is incorrect. Explaining decisively according to the text, from the first bhūmi at the beginning to wondrous enlightenment at the end, in all cases one enters the stage by severing delusion; hence, by severing one grade one enters the first bhūmi, and by severing the final grade one enters wondrous enlightenment. The stages of the Perfect Teaching are fully set forth in the seventh fascicle of Zhiguan and under the section on the wondrousness of stages, where the additional practice of the five repentances and so forth constitutes the wisdom prior to entering the grade.

7.18

Next, the illumination of objects by wisdom is explained in three parts: first, presenting the intention; second, evaluating distinctions; third, the correct explanation. The first part refutes calculations of inherent nature to establish the inconceivable, and it also has two parts: first, explaining the refutation of calculations; second, explaining the establishment of Dharma. In the first part, it first establishes the calculations of inherent nature, and next, it briefly omits the refutation, merely noting 'and so forth.' In the first part, 'the four phrases falling into inherent nature' is as explained in the third fascicle of Zhiguan and the Profound Meaning of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, and so forth. If one is free from the faults of inherent nature, all are ineffable, hence it says 'as in the separate record.' Next, it explains that for the sake of others, according to their capacities, the conditions of the four siddhāntas are universally established and four explanations can be given, as in the fifth fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. Next, in the evaluation of distinctions, the initial question—'Wisdom being able to illuminate objects is as commonly discussed, but can objects also illuminate wisdom?'—is asked to manifest the inconceivable. In the reply, there are three parts: first, the correct reply; second, citing proof; third, presenting analogies. In the first part, the reply is still based on the inconceivable, so that they can illuminate each other. Why? Since wisdom is mind and the object is also mind—since both are mind and both are the dharma realm—what objection can there be to mind and mind illuminating each other? Thus the Benevolent Kings Sūtra is cited to substantiate mutual illumination. Where wisdom is, is the object; one should know that both object and wisdom are called prajñā, and therefore both object and the object's illumination can be called the true mark. Next, in the analogy, the mirror's face is as in the text: the ground producing the sprout is like the object producing wisdom, and the sprout producing the ground is like wisdom illuminating the object. This analogy is still partial and does not yet capture the essence of object and wisdom being one and mutually illuminating and activating each other; therefore, it cannot be fully expressed, and fearing it might hinder subsequent meanings, it is set aside for now. Next, in directly explaining wisdom illuminating objects, the previously classified wisdoms are taken to illuminate the aforementioned objects. Among the previous classes of wisdom, the Tripiṭaka Teaching has seven, the Shared Teaching has five, and the Separate and Perfect Teachings each have four. As for the text stating 'Seven wisdoms illuminate the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles,' the Tripiṭaka Teaching has four: first, the five methods for stilling the mind and the four applications of mindfulness; second, the four wholesome roots; third, the four fruits; fourth, pratyekabuddhas. The Shared Teaching has three: namely, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas who enter emptiness. That the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka and Shared Teachings and the wisdom of the forty minds of the Separate Teaching are all said to 'belong to both' is because their upward seeking is not yet ultimate, so they still belong to bodhisattvas. That the ten bhūmis are also said to 'belong to both' distinguishes two meanings in terms of the teaching path and the realization path; furthermore, these two meanings refer to sequential and non-sequential. Moreover, these two meanings again contain the two meanings of seeking above and converting below. 'Such is the general summary; fine sorting (and so forth)': the character shuo is pronounced shu, meaning to arrange or sort out. Here it means placement, corresponding like arranging. For instance, from the five methods for stilling the mind onward, broadly there are seven, but speaking in detail, the five methods for stilling the mind individually focus on five different objects: for curing greed, one focuses only on the ten suchnesses of what is lovable in the six destinies; for curing hatred, one focuses only on the ten suchnesses of what is repulsive in the six destinies; the other three are explained by analogy. The four applications of mindfulness focus only on the impermanence of the six destinies in one's own body, mind, and aggregates. From heat and summit onward to the worldly foremost dharmas, one either encompasses higher and lower universally, or abandons the higher to focus on the lower. The four fruits focus only on the śrāvaka dharma realm, and pratyekabuddhas focus only on the pratyekabuddha dharma realm; one should also distinguish differences in what the four fruits illuminate, and pratyekabuddhas are further distinguished into those who have heard the Dharma and those who have not, and so forth; the rest may be understood by analogy. In this way, all seven wisdoms seek clumsy deliverance, hence it says 'general summary.' The six perfections, treated in detail, can be understood by analogy with this. Next, in illuminating dependent origination and the four noble truths, using the wisdom of a given teaching to illuminate the truths of that same teaching is the most evident textual presentation. Next, in illuminating the seven twofold truths, when it says 'eight wisdoms illuminate the manifested middle,' this tentatively refers to the four of the Separate illuminating the Separate, and the four of the Perfect illuminating the Perfect. If one discusses mutual penetration, one should use the true [truth] of the Shared to illuminate the true of the Shared as well as both true [truths] of the Perfect and Separate, and the conventional of the Separate to illuminate the true of the Perfect; if one connects to the Shared Teaching, it must be at the noble stage; if one connects to the Separate, it connects only to the worthy stage; because the worthy stage belongs to the teaching [path], it is stated thus. Hence it says 'it can be grasped by reflection.' Next, in illuminating the five threefold truths, regarding the statement 'the previous seven wisdoms illuminate the two truths devoid of the middle': since the previous two truths of the Tripiṭaka Teaching lack the middle way, they do not constitute the three truths. Now, using twenty wisdoms to illuminate the three truths, one cannot discard the seven and neglect them entirely, so they are readily listed. Although the Shared lacks the middle, because it contains the middle, it can be either two or three, and tentatively following two as the second phrase, it is said to 'belong to the true.' Next, 'using eight wisdoms to illuminate the manifested middle' speaks generally of the beginning and end of the teaching itself, hence it says 'provisional and middle.' If one discusses the two connections, one should say the true of the Shared illuminates the middle of the Separate, the true of the Shared illuminates the middle of the Perfect, and the conventional of the Separate illuminates the middle of the Perfect, each corresponding to its fundamental wisdom and fundamental object to unite into the three truths; here it is directly concluded against the four lines of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, hence it says 'identically empty,' and so on. Next, explaining 'illuminating the one ultimate': here too, the distinct is set aside to follow the shared; it is not only shared across the four siddhāntas, but also shared across the four fourfold truths, hence it says 'arising and ceasing,' and so on. First it lists the four ultimates, and next pairs them with the four teachings. The phrase 'the preceding and subsequent ultimates (and so forth)' means that the text merely distinguishes differences among the four ultimates, and one should further classify and evaluate whether the various ultimates are crude or wondrous, the opening of the provisional, and so on. Next, explaining 'illuminating the truthless': first it generally introduces the intention, and next directly explains illuminating the object. The first part also tentatively sets aside the distinct to preserve the shared, as explained before (and so forth). Next, under 'the previous truthlessness,' it evaluates; next, under 'if we proceed,' it opens the aforementioned wisdoms. Discussing opening generally, it is not that awakening is not needed, but here, in explaining truthlessness, it rejects the truthlessness of the Shared. In following the truthlessness of the Separate, the Separate is further taken in terms of realization to guard against verbal views, so it is necessary to speak of awakening. Truthlessness is close to realization, hence it must be mentioned. Extending to using this single truthlessness to universally open all the preceding wisdoms so that they enter this truthlessness together and collectively accomplish true wisdom—this is precisely the primary intention of the present sūtra. One should know that all twenty are empty fists; yet although they are empty fists, the expedients of gradual inducement are not in vain, and all the more so when they are opened, the provisional is identical to the real. Now, speaking from the superior, it is called 'neither of the two,' so that the provisional is identical to neither-provisional-nor-real.

7.19

Fifth, explaining the evaluation has two parts: first, evaluating; second, concluding. The first again has three parts: first, evaluating in terms of wisdom; second, evaluating in terms of the four phrases of knowing and seeing; third, in terms of the five eyes. The first part again has two parts: first, a preliminary brief evaluation; second, explanation. The explanation again has two parts: first, explaining that the twelve are crude; next, under 'Separate Teaching,' explaining that the latter eight are wondrous. Therein are two parts: first, generally explaining the eight wondrous; next, under 'Furthermore, the Separate,' evaluating distinctions. The first again has three parts: first, directly explaining that the Separate is wondrous; second, under 'The common approach,' refuting former masters; third, under 'Now we explain,' revealing the correct view. Regarding 'Now we explain the ten faiths' to 'the eight turns being wondrous': this tentatively takes knowing as superior to the Buddha of the Tripiṭaka Teaching, and as a preliminary view looking forward all eight turns are wondrous; yet because they still carry the teaching path, they must be further evaluated. Within the evaluation are two parts: first, comparative evaluation; second, dual explanation. First, it says that the four turns of the Separate Teaching have three crude and one wondrous. Now, relying on the masters of the Daśabhūmikā to preserve the teaching path, the ten bhūmis are still crude, to say nothing of the ten faiths. If one tentatively proceeds from ascending the bhūmis as the path of realization, then there are two crude and one wondrous. The fruit at the head of wondrous enlightenment is fundamentally the true person, and therefore it is wondrous. Furthermore, it is also permissible that wondrous enlightenment is provisional and therefore crude, while the ten bhūmis are real and therefore wondrous; hence it says that the middle way is what can be revealed at the head of the fruit. Next, the explanation again has two parts: first, explaining the Separate; second, explaining the Perfect. In first explaining the Separate, there are again three parts: first, directly evaluating the Separate as three crude and one wondrous; second, under 'Class,' citing the Tripiṭaka and Shared to analogize the Separate and Perfect; third, under 'Now the Separate,' showing that the analogy for the Separate is established. In the first part, the phrase 'Initial practitioners,' and so forth, means looking up with faith to the principle of the middle, and seeing the middle upon ascending the bhūmis, which realized state is wondrous. 'Like hanging a mountain by a lotus fiber': Fascicle 16 of the Great Sūtra says, 'If someone could hang Mount Sumeru with a fiber from inside a lotus, would that be conceivable or not? No, World-Honoured One! The Buddha said: A bodhisattva being able to weigh saṃsāra in a single thought is inconceivable.' Here it explains that the perfect principle is difficult to comprehend, and one merely looks up in faith; borrowing that analogy, it is like a person hearing it said that a mountain can be hung by a lotus fiber and merely believing it. Like hearing that saṃsāra possesses an inconceivable principle and merely looking up in faith without being able to unite single-mindedly, it is just like seeking the Tripiṭaka, and therefore not the perfect meaning. The rest is as in the text.

7.20

Next, evaluating in terms of knowing and seeing has two parts: first, listing the four phrases; second, explaining them. In the explanation, it first explains knowing and seeing in terms of the four teachings, and next subsumes them under the Buddha's wisdom. The first part again has two parts: first, briefly listing the Tripiṭaka and the Perfect; second, the correct explanation. In the explanation, the Tripiṭaka and Perfect are as in the text. In the Shared Teaching, ordinary beings bound to the worldly plane are also taken as neither knowing nor seeing; the dry wisdom and nature stages are taken as knowing but not seeing; those who manifest habit energy are taken as seeing but not knowing; and from the stage of seeing onward, they both know and see. In the Separate Teaching, neither knowing nor seeing is the same as the preceding ordinary beings; prior to the bhūmis, they know but do not see; those who manifest habit energy see but do not know; and from ascending the bhūmis onward, they both know and see. Next, subsuming them under the Buddha's wisdom has four parts: first, briefly presenting; second, citing the sūtra to explain under 'As the sūtra states'; third, praising under 'Expedients'; fourth, concluding and returning under 'Like this.' In the first part, the various objects are originally the single entity of the Tathāgata's provisional and real; for the sake of sentient beings, they were tentatively distinguished according to capacity. Now speaking again from the origin, it says 'investigating to the ultimate.' Next, in citing the sūtra to explain: since it says 'expedients,' it therefore belongs to the provisional; since it says 'complete,' it is therefore not a different entity; since it says 'profound and far-reaching,' it therefore belongs to the real; and further stating 'vast and great,' this is identical to the provisional. In the praise under 'Expedients,' there are three parts: first, direct praise, where stating 'complete,' and so forth, means that complete provisionality discusses the provisional as identical to the real, and vast and great reality discusses the real as identical to the provisional. Next, the concluding praise under 'The abyss of objects': because the real object is deep as an abyss, it is vertically ultimate; because the provisional object is boundless, it is horizontally pervasive; the waters of the horizontal and vertical are difficult to fathom, and therefore wisdom cannot measure them. Third, under 'Only the Buddhas,' it cites the wisdom of the fruit to praise. In the fourth part, concluding and returning has two parts: first, concluding and returning to eyes and wisdom; second, evaluation. The first part has three: first, explaining eyes and wisdom; second, under 'knowledge of all aspects,' explaining what is known and seen by eyes and wisdom; third, under 'this knowing,' explaining their mutual identity.

7.21

Regarding the third [section], "in terms of the five eyes": with respect to the phrase "explaining the preceding rationale for what follows," previously wisdom and knowing were explained; next, the four propositions on knowing and seeing were distinguished to reveal the eyes. The eye is simply seeing, and wisdom is simply knowing, hence it says "for those who have not yet understood." The explanation has three parts: first, directly explaining the five eyes; second, in terms of the teachings; third, the general conclusion. First, the five eyes are detailed in the third fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. Now, regarding the words "open and shut" under the physical eye: not understanding cause and conditions, coarse matter, and so forth is "shut"; understanding them is "open." In the heavenly eye, regarding the words "power of vow-wisdom": vow-wisdom refers to the surpassing samādhi; the surpassing samādhi is as explained in the ninth fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. "Śāriputra's improper teaching" is as explained in the fifth fascicle of the Notes on Zhiguan. "Pūrṇa's defiled vessel": "Pūrṇa" is translated as "Full Wish" (Manyuan); as the Vimalakīrti says, "Do not place foul food in a precious vessel; do not compare sunlight to a firefly," and so forth. Regarding "breaking obstacles and penetrating unknowing": "penetrating" refers to supernormal powers; the dust-and-sand unknowing obstructs the path of converting others; now this delusion is destroyed, hence it says "breaking obstacles and penetrating unknowing." That the two vehicles and others do not know is detailed in the "Expedient Devices" chapter. The commentary says: "The power of faith refers to the five grades; firmness refers to the six sense faculties." This is removing knowing in order to reveal not knowing. The parts in terms of the teachings and the conclusion can be known.

First 21 of 54 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

法華玄義釋籤 — Classical Chinese