法華文句記 4

English (machine translation) 4

Language: English

4.1

Related by the Tang dynasty Tiantai Śramaṇa Zhanran

Next, properly explaining: First, within the explanation of phenomena and principle, there is first the explanation and next the rationale. In the explanation, he first explains principle, from "principle is true suchness" to "constitutes the real": Where does the reality of principle reside? It resides in mind, thought, and consciousness, so principle has no separate abiding place; it pervades phenomena, so phenomena are called provisional. Hence the Kośa says: "Accumulating and arising is called mind (citta), deliberating is called thought (manas), and discerning is called consciousness (vijñāna)." In that [teaching], it is entirely devoid of identity with principle. If in the Great Vehicle the eighth consciousness is called mind, the seventh consciousness is called thought, and the sixth consciousness is called consciousness, yet that teaching, being for the deluded, also lacks identity with principle; hence it is a one-sided, lesser teaching. Its conditioned dharmas completely lack intrinsic purity, and those who know that it is identical with the permanently abiding principle are few; hence we know that although conditioned things may focus on purity and so forth, they equally belong to phenomena, fully as clarified in the Gate of Non-duality of Phenomena and Principle. Therefore the rationale says: "Without principle there is no way to establish phenomena; phenomena have the efficacy of revealing principle." Therefore skillfully praising skillful means, who would be willing to take the conditioned mind and so forth of the three realms as that which is praised by the Tathāgata as the "Skillful Means Chapter"? If not so, for the sake of causing sentient beings [to awaken]—where does its meaning lie? How would the words "worldly characteristics" be explained? In explaining principle and teaching, first he properly explains, and next from "without teaching" below he clarifies the rationale. In the first explanation of principle, he first briefly explains, and next cites an analogy. When he first says "synthesizing the preceding phenomena and principle," this combines the preceding principle and delusion. Hence we know that from ignorance and dharma-nature up to all dharmas beyond the realms, all are what is expressed; because the name and substance of this mind, thought, and consciousness are fully endowed with all dharmas beyond the realms. Who would know that the teaching of the Lotus takes these dharmas as what is expressed? If not so, from what could the false-view King Śubhavyūha and the evil, rebellious Devadatta attain [liberation]? Next, in raising the analogy, this raises understanding to analogize delusion: at the time of understanding principle, both ultimate and conventional are truths, and understanding is attained through delusion; therefore within delusion they are provisionally called phenomena and principle. Because expressing this principle enables the teaching to be formed, looking from principle toward teaching, teaching is called provisional; and since principle resides in delusion, delusion is also called real. Therefore, the appellations of provisional and real are not obtained in only one place; when the teaching of the fruit proclaims this, the expressing [teaching] is also provisional. Hence we know that the teaching merely expresses its principle; therefore the Tathāgata praises this teaching. Were it not for the present sūtra, who would be willing to praise this teaching expressing delusion as the Skillful Means Chapter? If not so, arising from samādhi, what was praised? Next, in teaching and practice, "practices have depth and shallowness" refers to the perfect and the gradual. What are the perfect and the gradual? They refer to the seven skillful means; pointing back to the gradual-gradual, it is just the perfect-gradual. Therefore, the teaching is fixed while practice shifts; practice is provisional while teaching is real. Hence it is said: "Teaching has no advancement," how much more so when the teaching expresses the true character, and the principle of the true character has no more shallowness or depth.

4.3

Question:

4.4

If there is no shallowness or depth, should there no longer be a teaching that expresses practice?

4.5

Answer:

4.6

There are two kinds of teaching: the teaching expressing principle is non-dual, while the teaching indicating practice divides itself; it is only because practice has disparities that the teaching expressing practice has slight distinctions. Furthermore, the expressing teaching also has no advancement; it is only that the expressed practice naturally has gradations. If not so, what would the Tathāgata's skillful means pāramitā and so forth realize?

4.7

Next, regarding bond and liberation: the term “practice” is still general and still includes both compliance and non-compliance; therefore, by means of bond and liberation one distinguishes the provisional and the real, termed “bond and liberation.” Furthermore, in the past [teachings], before the grounds in all sūtras, [practices] were still contrary to principle because the provisional had not yet been opened; in this sūtra, even snapping the fingers is nothing but a cause for buddhahood, because the real has been revealed. Who would know that in this sūtra the Buddha can even term bad conduct a skillful means? The metaphor of the dead corpse pervades everything, fully explained as in the Door of the Non-duality of Cultivation and Nature. Within [the pair of] cause and effect there are three parts: first, the direct explanation; second, the reason from “without effect” downward; third, the explanatory completion from “the two contemplations” downward. As for saying in the explanatory completion that “the two contemplations are skillful means,” this is provisionally demonstrating the characteristics with reference to dharmas, borrowing the provisional to illustrate and reveal: each layer generally subsumes all the teachings; how could it be rigidly confined to the separate two contemplations? As in the [pairs of] essence and function, gradual and sudden, opening and merging, general and specific, there are also the dharmas of essence and function of all the teachings, arising function from essence, opening the gradual from the sudden, merging the gradual into the sudden, and so on. Next, regarding essence and function: it refers back to the initial dwelling as the partial effect; this effect then possesses the function of the hundred realms. As for saying “establishing all dharmas,” in the earlier [pair of] phenomenon and principle, defiled conditions were taken as all dharmas; here, it refers to the dharmas of pure conditions, fully explained as in the Door of the Non-duality of Defilement and Purity. Next, in the gradual and sudden: first, both self and other have gradual and sudden; second, activating function to transform others contains both provisional and real, which is the provisional within essence. For the sake of this provisional and real dharma that benefits others, one must explain opening and merging. As for opening and merging: the gradual itself not merging is because the two teachings of the Tripiṭaka and Common do not discard the small [vehicle]; nor does it merge into the sudden, because the bodhisattvas of the three teachings do not enter the real. Next, regarding general and specific: although the gradual in the former gradual and sudden door has the half[-word] teaching, the half was at the beginning of the gradual, while now the half pervades what follows. The siddhāntas are precisely the determination of the preceding essence and function up to general and specific, explained according to the above. Next, from “ought to use” downward, the method is concluded and shown. As for “four phrases,” they are the four such as mutual negation, fully explained as before.

4.8

Fourth, within citing proofs there are two parts: first, citing; next, concluding in praise from “that treatise” downward. The first also has two parts: first, the sūtra; next, the treatise. In the sūtra, it first cites an entire text, and next cites a single chapter. Citing an entire text is because it wishes to briefly show the pervasiveness of skillful means, fully as determined before. Citing a single chapter directly indicates the distinct essence by pointing to the textual location, fully as listed below. In citing an entire text, there is also first clarifying the intention, and next directly citing the text. Clarifying the intention first is selecting the specific from the general: each of the ten pairs is fully equipped with the flavors of the teachings; if any does not clarify phenomenon and principle up to the siddhāntas, it is truly not the Buddha's teaching; provisionally following relative comparison, it selects the specific from the general. Next, directly citing: saying “not like the triple world” in the first [pair of] phenomenon and principle means being different. Beginning from the two vehicles, both are different from the triple world, which is not sufficient to distinguish the present [teaching]; now it comes from the preceding phrase “neither like nor different” to complete this text, so it is different from the phenomenon and principle of the teachings of skillful means. In principle and teaching, principle is said to be quiescent because the two principles of truth and convention cannot be spoken. Next, in teaching, adducing the “five monks” speaks from the beginning of the gradual; one should also say: “If there are those without nature, preach for them humans and gods, up to asuras for the lowest grade of good, up to preaching for them the uncreated four truths”; hence one knows that from the standpoint of principle neither can be spoken, but from the standpoint of phenomenon both great and small can be spoken. Proving teaching and practice: if one hears it proves teaching, and good conduct proves practice. The two passages from “You all” downward both prove practice; one should extensively rely on this sūtra to clarify the characteristics of good conduct that achieves buddhahood; the words “various kinds” implicitly contain teaching and practice, because there are present and past causes and conditions. Next, proving bond and liberation from “only being separated from” downward: “only being separated from,” etc., means being separated from delusion in the small [vehicle] is termed liberation, taking delusion itself as a bond; although the small is liberated, it is not all-liberation; the liberation of the small is still termed a bond with respect to the great; hence it says “have not yet attained this realization.” Both great and small have bond and liberation; only the present is termed liberation. From “fully practicing” downward proves cause and effect: “fully practicing” is the cause, the bodhimaṇḍa is the effect. One must rely on this to clarify the difference between origin and traces effects, hence it notes “and so on.” “Buddha-eye” is essence. “Seeing the six destinies” is function. “First seeing” is sudden. “Studying the small” is gradual. The note “and so on” means the five periods are different, gathering them to enter the sudden. The “poor son” is opening. “Handing over the wealth” is merging. The “conjured city” is general. The “place of jewels” is specific. “Various kinds” is the four siddhāntas.

4.9

Next, regarding “specifically citing a single chapter”: first, concluding what came before and introducing what follows; from “the buddhas” downward is directly citing, which must be explained one by one so that the meaning matches the ten pairs and accords with the intention of this sūtra (and so on). First citing the two phrases “the buddhas,” etc.: the upper phrase clarifies what is known by the Buddha's wisdom, hence saying “profound,” which is principle. The lower phrase cites the door, the door being the teaching. Since what is expressed is wondrous, it says “difficult to understand.” What is known and what is expressed are not different in their principle. As for “all,” etc.: phenomenon and principle are both the object, and the object is principle. Wisdom is the subject that knows; viewed with respect to what expresses it, all are termed principle, because both are what is expressed. This directly uses the character “door,” hence the words “difficult to understand”; from “further apportioned to” downward, the śrāvakas do not know, which is termed a bond in relation to the great; this adducing of not knowing directly reveals being able to know, hence being able to know is termed liberation. Next, from “for what reason” downward explains the above difficulty in knowing, proving teaching and practice: because being able to know belongs to the Buddha, truly because receiving the teaching entails practice. Because by drawing close to the Buddha one must hear the teaching, and by fame being universally heard practice is surely complete. Next, from “accomplished” downward proves essence and function: “accomplishing the profound” is having the essence complete. “Spoken according to what is fitting” is function. One should know that the character “according to what is fitting” is omitted in the text. Next, from “I, since” downward proves cause and effect: it directly takes the character “accomplished” to prove the cause of obtaining the effect, and it is also the effect that has a cause. From “various kinds” downward proves gradual and sudden: “various kinds” proves the gradual, and “causing to abandon” proves the sudden. From “why is this” downward proves opening and merging: “skillful means” proves opening, and “fully endowed” proves merging; this is provisionally discussed in terms of one's own practice: since one's own practice is complete, benefiting others is necessarily so. From “the great matter of the buddhas” downward proves benefit: “great matter” follows the specific, and the specific must converge into the general. From “to state the essential” downward proves the four siddhāntas: taking the words “immeasurable and boundless” to prove the three siddhāntas, and “stop, stop, there is no need to speak” to prove the supreme meaning, directly pointing to the unspeakable principle. As for the characters proving “such appearance and nature,” etc.: the ten realms are phenomenon, and the true character is principle. If one takes “ultimate,” etc., the empty, middle, and so on are principle, while the provisional, etc., are phenomenon; if this text is compared to the provisional and real, etc., below, all are discussed within the essence, because the present text has already opened them. As for saying “each and every buddha is also thus”: when all buddhas reveal the real, they all adduce the five buddhas as phenomenal identity. Next, in citing the treatise, there is a slight difference from the Treatise: it has only eight pairs, lacking opening and merging, and bond and liberation. Benefit is general and specific, opening the specific to bring out the general for the sake of benefiting beings. Bond and liberation are slightly different from cause and effect, so they are not separately matched. The Treatise explains that the wisdom of all buddhas is profound as proving profundity. As for “having five”: now, being based on what is realized, they are judged to belong to principle; although separated into five, they do not go beyond realization. “Meaning” means the flavor of meaning, because the Buddha's wisdom attains realization having real meaning. “Real essence” means the principle realized; “internal realization” means one's own practice tallying with the object; “dependence” directly clarifies the principle relied upon; “unsurpassed” praises the principle realized. When reaching the effect, it exceeds the three, five, seven, and nine vehicles, and the Treatise itself turns to explain unsurpassed profundity. As for saying “great bodhi”: the Treatise uses the character “great” to explain unsurpassed, not citing bodhi to prove unsurpassed. Since the third itself has profundity of realization, earlier, regarding the present chapter, the upper phrase also proved principle and the lower phrase proved teaching. As for “āgama”: here it means incomparable dharma, which is verbal teaching. The preceding five prove principle and can give rise to teaching, termed “principle and teaching”; now principle extends to the cause, while the text of the Treatise resides in the effect; the door is teaching-wisdom, termed the wisdom-door. The single pair of bond and liberation here is absent in the text of the Treatise; if established now, it is “difficult to understand and difficult to enter,” further adding “difficult to see, difficult to perceive, and difficult to know.” Above “difficult to understand,” it says “beyond the understanding of all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas”; this is precisely the sense of liberation. Liberation must be paired with bond, so it is the same in meaning as bond and liberation. The text of the Treatise is subsumed under the meaning of āgama; the Treatise further opens eight manifestations in the meaning of āgama: namely, first from “the Buddha once drew close to” onward is the profundity of receiving, retaining, reading, and reciting. Second, the bodhi cultivated under hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of nayutas of buddhas is the profundity of cultivation. Third, from “courageous and vigorous” is the profundity of the practice of the effect. Fourth, “fame universally heard” is the fourth, the profundity of increasing merits. Now these four texts of the Treatise are combined as the provisional and real of teaching and practice. From “the Treatise on accomplishment” downward is the fifth, the profundity of the exquisite phenomenal mind; from “the Treatise on intention” downward is the sixth, unsurpassed profundity; the Treatise takes speaking the Dharma according to what is fitting as the seventh and eighth profundities; now these three of the Treatise are combined as the provisional and real of essence and function. The Treatise takes the two vehicles' not knowing as the eighth, the profundity of upholding; since the sūtra has no text, there is nothing matched now. From here onward, the Treatise further establishes the four kinds of merits of the Tathāgata: the provisional and real of cause and effect is the first, accomplishment of the initial dwelling; the provisional and real of gradual and sudden is the second, accomplishment of teaching and transformation; here one is missing, the provisional and real of opening and merging; the remainder differ from the Treatise and need not be harmonized; because the text of the Treatise adds phrases, now they are just directly matched, as in citing the text of the present chapter before. Therefore, now we further explain the present text: from proving teaching and practice, drawing close necessarily entails cultivation, and vigor necessarily entails increase. Without vigor and increase, how could there be fame universally heard? Therefore, the two forming practice are both due to hearing the teaching. Next, in proving essence and function, phenomenon is function; unsurpassed and entering attain the essence. Since it says “accomplishment,” function is trusted to derive from essence. Next, in proving cause and effect, saying that it speaks of the accomplishment of the Tathāgata's merits: merits belong to the cause, accomplishment resides in the effect; the Sūtra says “since I attained buddhahood,” verifying that the effect is attained through the cause. Next, in proving gradual and sudden, saying teaching, transforming, and speaking the Dharma: teaching and transformation generally subsume all modes of transformation, encompassing both defiance and accord; speaking the Dharma resides only in the wheel of speech, restricted to transformation through accord; one should know that all three wheels are said to be accomplished, not only bestowing the sudden. Next, in proving benefit, it explains “benefit” by self-realization and “advantage” by benefiting others; because self-realization is real, it says “accomplishing the inconceivable”; because following others is provisional, it says “words”; earlier it was said that “speaking the Dharma pertains to both self and other,” while here it says “words reside solely in others.” Next, in proving the four siddhāntas, saying “transformable”: the four siddhāntas are all named according to having capacity, hence said to be transformable. Earlier it was said that teaching and transformation pervade planting, ripening, and liberating; here “transformable” mostly resides in ripening and liberating. Now saying “untransformable” comes in contrast, meaning those without capacity for the four siddhāntas. In proving phenomenon and principle, it says accomplishing the essence of the dharmakāya that all buddhas can know; this points to the dharmakāya of the fruit-ground as principle, and naming it according to following sentient beings as phenomenon; it is also that the wondrous realm of the dharmakāya is provisionally complete in phenomenon and principle. The present intention extends to ordinary beings, whereas the text of the Treatise is restricted to the fruit; because the fruit is attained by ordinary beings, the meaning is also the same; this matches elegantly in principle with the Buddha's sūtra and the Bodhisattva's treatise, hence saying “matching with the sūtras,” etc.

4.10

Fifth, as for "concluding to form the three kinds of provisional and real": this concludes and forms the tally of numbers, hence the provisional and the real are combined to make their sum. Whether in displaying or converging, the dharmas neither increase nor decrease. If this text were absent, the preceding explanation of the provisional and real would remain undistinguished, merely listing the ten names and briefly explaining them, nothing more. Therefore, now confronting the teachings, the provisional and the real are distinguished. The text is naturally threefold: first, within concluding to form the three kinds, there are again two parts: first general, and next specific, bundling the general to form the specific. Within the general, there are again two parts: first the general within the general, and next the specific within the general. First, in the general within the general, from the opening indication down to "is also like this": although the indication states that all four teachings have ten, they actually form twenty for each of the four teachings, or thirty, or one hundred and sixty. As for the statement "twenty," this is because there are ten for oneself and ten for others. Because oneself pervades others without any separate dharma, one turns back to use one's own ten to pervade and benefit others; therefore the text merely lists ten. As for thirty, the reason for adding the words "or say" is to indicate indefiniteness; hence, when oneself and others are one, there may be no base number, since it points to oneself and others. Now, the reason they are still divided into one pair of oneself and others is: first, based on the teaching, because the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra contains this single tier of the two truths of oneself and others; second, based on principle, because having subsumed single oneself and single others into the combination of oneself and others, losing those single designations, they form a single pair on their own; or [there is] merely a single ten, using the ten reals in oneself that combine the provisional into the real to confront the ten provisionals in others that combine the real into the provisional, only when completely combined forming the ten pairs of the provisional and real. If it is twenty, it is simply because the ten pairs of oneself and others are maintained alongside each other. One should know that the four teachings have either eighty, one hundred and twenty, or one hundred and sixty; grasping these, they jointly form a single inconceivable provisional and real—namely, the provisional within the essence confronting the real; were it not so, it would not be the Lotus. Next, in the specific explanation below "furthermore, in the corresponding teaching," the statement that the four kinds are for one's own practice [means]: what was previously called general was because each of the tens pervades oneself and others, etc.; what is now called specific is because within the ten they are divided into four, two, and four. Thus one knows that directly dividing the ten to make oneself and others without confronting the various teachings holds true for teaching after teaching. Furthermore, one may also take the first five as oneself and the latter five as others, confronting each other as oneself and others. Fearing that within a single teaching oneself and others would still generally confront oneself and others, now by dividing the ten to form the three meanings, it becomes entirely specific; hence it is so. Therefore, the four teachings have only forty, each possessing oneself and others. Hence one knows that the present sūtra belongs solely to transforming others within the perfect [teaching]; only one's own practice and transforming others can be called skillful means. Next, in the specific conclusion, the words "whether general or specific" point to the preceding general and specific of the corresponding teaching. Now, taking the four teachings as a whole to confront oneself and others, the three teachings are for others and only the perfect is for oneself; hence it says "specific." The previous general and specific designations of oneself and others had their meaning extend to the other teachings; bundling the general and specific specifically, oneself resides solely in the present chapter, being the display, opening, and so forth of the skillful means of the house of the perfect, and so on. Next, concluding to form the four propositions concludes the preceding specific conclusion of oneself and others to form the four propositions.

4.11

Question:

4.12

The previously established four propositions each universally subsumed all; why now divide the provisional and the real, each clarifying an opposition to make the proposition, so that none are established?

4.13

Answer:

4.14

Although borrowing those four propositions to express the present intent, dividing the four teachings apart from the present opposing propositions has three meanings: First, confronting the third [proposition] in the Treatise, although it includes all teachings exhaustively, it cannot yet serve as the opening title of the present chapter. Second, after being opened, it returns to be identical with the preceding text, perfectly blending everything. Third, since the present third proposition has already included the teachings exhaustively, merely by the provisional and real being mutually identical within this third proposition, it naturally gathers in the remaining three propositions. Borrowing that "everything" indeed has good reason.

4.15

If one takes the four propositions to generally pervade the various teachings, ponder it and speak of it. Third, concluding to form the three kinds of explanations of the chapter: these are the three—the dharma-function and so forth—in the initial text; hence, taking these three, each is passed through the five flavors to conclude the chapter's name. Thus one knows that the preceding explanation was spoken briefly based on the corresponding section confronting the teachings. Therefore, when our school reveals the wondrous, it must preserve the five flavors to complete the wondrous. Thus each single explanation pervades the five periods, causing the dharma-function and the gate to arrive at the Lotus, and opening them all to form the dharma-function of identical essence, the gate of the great cart; the preceding two both form the third meaning. First, regarding the dharma-function, there are again three parts: first, directly clarifying the five periods; next, below "the Tathāgata," clarifying the intent of the five periods; third, below "therefore explaining," concluding to form the explanation of the chapter's name. First, directly clarifying has again two parts: first, clarifying the intent of appearing in the world to display the provisional; next, directly clarifying the five periods. The first text has again two parts: first, clarifying the original intent of entering the real—what was attained at the place of the Way is the real, and because it was attained through cultivating the Path, it is the provisional. Therefore, citing the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, both texts are attested, which is principle and valid cognition. Next, below "although the Buddha," clarifying the intent of displaying the provisional: it is to receive the lesser and for those of dull faculties. "Zhěn" (traces) means the tracks of a moving cart; being the beginning of initial movement, it says "fā" (depart). Next, in the five periods, the words "setting aside this matter" mean that "setting aside" is speaking solely [of the perfect]. Therefore, coming to the Avataṃsaka, it additionally speaks of the distinct [teaching]. Although the treatise master in that section belongs to the perfect teaching, according to the intent of the five periods, he uses the distinct to assist the perfect; the lower two are also like this. This concerns the three kinds of dharma-function in the preceding four periods not being able to reach the real, and hence merely forming the first meaning in explaining the chapter. If one reaches the Lotus, even if termed "dharma-function," it also forms the secret and wondrous dharma-function; that is, it can be used to explain the chapter of the present sūtra. Then the name "outside the square," which formerly pervaded the four, now no longer has the three.

4.16

Next, regarding the gate, there are four parts: first, also directly establishing the five periods; next, below "from beginning to end," clarifying the intent of the five periods; third, below "explaining the chapter, it says," concluding to form the explanation of the chapter; fourth, below "the previous one," distinguishing the difference from the preceding section. The first text also first clarifies the intent of appearing in the world to display the provisional, and next directly clarifies the five periods. The first text clarifies one's own realization: viewed from the perspective of teaching, it is provisional and real, hence it says "one's own realization is also ineffable." Next, within the milk teaching, not saying "additionally distinct" but directly saying "distinct" is in accordance with the meaning of the gate. Therefore, the preceding explanation of the dharma-function pervaded four, but now it resides only in three. Thus now, explaining the gate with respect to the five flavors, all follow that which can provide access; therefore milk has one, curd has one, raw curd has three, cooked curd has two, and ghee sets it aside. Fourth, distinguishing the difference: although, like the preceding dharma-function, it also clarifies the five periods, this clarifies that which can provide access reaching that which is accessed, and hence can be distinguished. As for "the previous turn," etc.: first, regarding method, it clarified that the Tathāgata can know and can employ skillful means—dharma is being able to know, and function is being able to employ; sentient beings do not know that these are the Buddha's skillful means, but now they are all opened to cause sentient beings to know. This turn clarifies causing sentient beings to comply with and accord with skillful means, meaning complying with the real via the gate. Yet they also do not know that skillful means are themselves the real that is complied with; now this is also opened. Furthermore, both preceding chapters have the two intents of capacity and response; however, the former is mostly spoken from the perspective of response, hence tentatively saying "the Tathāgata," while the latter is mostly spoken from the perspective of capacity, hence saying "practitioner." Therefore, words of diligent praise are all derived from the Buddha.

4.17

Below "furthermore," third, explaining in terms of the secret and wondrous: because it is wondrous, it is identical; wishing to connect with the previous four periods taking the perfect as identical and the three as non-identical, it further confronts the non-identical to explain the identical. In this there are again four parts: also first clarifying the intent of transformation; next, running through the five flavors; third, below "the upper two," distinguishing the difference from the above; fourth, below "the above explanation," concluding the chapter's name. First, as for the intent of transformation: the main thrust is the same as before, and the five flavors can be seen. As for distinguishing the difference: although the five flavors are the same, what is confronted is different. Although within the various flavors there are identical and non-identical, for the Buddha they are always identical, while sentient beings depart from them of themselves. Furthermore, whenever the five flavors explain, it can only be called appraisal; to form the present chapter, they must further be opened. Although this follows the preceding three meanings in explaining the chapter, the first two meanings, having reached the fifth flavor, have already completed the opening; although the third belongs to opening, it now again pervades the previous ones; the previous four are also said not to be what is presently used, and for the present they also form the coarse that is confronted; the perfect and that which is entered are alone the true and real. Although the latter explanation again confronts the five periods, simply know that ghee is nothing other than secret and wondrous; both opening and appraisal are entirely contained within it.

4.18

Sixth, clarifying the discrimination of illuminating the truths has again two parts: first, clarifying the reason for its coming; next, below "if general," directly clarifying the illumination of the truths. As for the intent of the first text: since the preceding "oneself and others," etc., both spoke of the provisional and real, they took their names merely from wisdom; now, in order to distinguish that which is illuminated, it clarifies it again. The preceding clarification of employing wisdom was not without illuminating the object; wishing to make it easy to understand, it clarifies anew that which is illuminated. Next, directly clarifying is threefold: first, the general explanation, where the names are general while the teachings are distinct. If one bundles the four into two: within each single teaching, the four are taken as two, just as the provisional and real within oneself are bundled into one real, and the provisional and real within others are bundled into one provisional; hence they merely form two. Next, below "if by corresponding section," the specific explanation: the dharmas are distinct and the teachings are distinct, which can be known by following the preceding. In this, following the preceding text of the specific conclusion, one should merely take the four—phenomenon, principle, etc.—as one's own realization; now saying "siddhānta" is feared to be a textual error, because siddhāntas belong to the subsequent oneself and others. Next, below "furthermore, the Tripiṭaka," it immediately bundles the four in summary, clarifying that the former had distinct teachings with both summary and distinct dharmas, while the present has summary teachings with distinct dharmas. This has again three tiers: in the first, taking the Tripiṭaka as others; next, taking the two teachings as others; third, taking the three teachings as others; and ultimately taking the perfect as oneself. Because others are unfixed, oneself and others follow suit, also advancing and retreating unfixedly. In the first tier, taking the common and distinct as oneself and others is still oneself and others of specific characteristics, because others is solely the Tripiṭaka. In the next tier, since it takes the common and Tripiṭaka as others, it merely takes the distinct as oneself and others. In the third tier, since it takes all three as others, oneself and others no longer have separate essences; one can only take the three to confront the perfect, hence it says "bundling the three teachings," etc. However, in the first tier, that both the common and distinct teachings face both ways is because the common possesses the uncommon and hence is identical with the distinct, while the distinct is based on the common meaning and hence is identical with the Tripiṭaka; the distinct follows the path of teaching and hence is others, yet possesses the path of realization and hence is identical with oneself. As for "regarding the various sūtras":

4.19

Question:

4.20

Now regarding the various sūtras, the five flavors are also listed; how does this differ from before?

4.21

Answer:

4.22

Previously, running through the three—the dharma-function and so forth—by means of the five periods merely accomplished that each of the five periods has the three, the dharma-function and so forth, causing one to know that all three tiers are wondrous in the Lotus. Hence, running through the various sūtras by means of the five flavors, confronting text with text to distinguish the coarse and the wondrous, then the preceding six gates must all employ the five flavors, causing all teachings to be nothing other than the three, method and so forth, not lacking the separate distinction between coarse and wondrous, as well as all being wondrous. How much more so running the ten pairs of the various sūtras completely through the five flavors! Because the doorways are distinct, this reproof is unnecessary. Just as section by section in the Profound Meaning has the five flavors, if these five were absent, then in the present single section and single phrase, the textual section would not differ from before; therefore, it is clarified everywhere.

4.23

In this [section], it first explains the greater or lesser extent to which the teachings are present across the five periods; next, from "Furthermore" onward, it re-examines self and other in terms of greater and lesser extent, concluding the explanation of the chapter. As for the first text: because it is now directly explaining the flavors of the teaching, it details them previously, so that it is known that the understanding fully expresses the five flavors. First, milk comprises five [points]: first, half and full; second, regarding the period; third, regarding the dharma; fourth, regarding persons—wherein the difference between birth and dharma is further distinguished; fifth, citing the present sūtra to determine the character of the flavor. The [other] four flavors are also like this; however, the three flavors such as curd and so forth all lack [an explicit discussion of] persons. The text implies the meaning completely: in curd, it should say that regarding persons it is only the two vehicles, and bodhisattvas do not use it; in the Correct and Equal, it should say that regarding persons, it provisionally confronts the small with the great, rebuking the biased to enter the perfect; in Prajñā, it should say that regarding persons, it brings along the small to illuminate the great, guiding the small to return to the great; in the Lotus [period], regarding persons, it is broadly explained later, namely from the text "This is truly my son" onward. The phrase "never before preached" means that, speaking generally, the teachings and the rest were not opened prior to this; speaking specifically, the three of teaching, practice, and principle may perhaps have already been harmonized previously, but opening persons was nonexistent in prior teachings. Therefore, what was nonexistent in prior teachings is made the chapter's theme; hence one knows that without the skillful means of identical substance, there would be no way to bestow, open, and so forth. Next, regarding determining by greater or lesser extent: having previously detailed the persons, periods, dharmas, and so forth to discuss the differing intentions behind the advent of the five periods, here it further briefly gathers the preceding periods, dharmas, and so forth, solely regarding persons—where great and small, sharp and dull, all enter the real. If those persons enter, none of the rest fail to return, which is why it is explained again. From "The text says" onward, it cites evidence to conclude the chapter's name. As for "and so forth": there should be a repeated explanation, [stating that] the preceding skillful means are all not the present intention; since the intention does not differ from the preceding, it is not explained again.

4.24

Next, origin and traces: this is not yet the chapter's primary intention, but because there are skillful means in both origin and traces, it is explained by lodging [the meaning] here. The name "skillful means" is identical, but distant and near are eternally distinct; although they are eternally distinct, they do not exceed the ten pairs, for how could what was truly attained in the origin ever depart from self and other, cause and effect? Therefore, "when I originally practiced the bodhisattva path" and "my true realization" are precisely principle and phenomena, up to cause and effect; "since attaining buddhahood" is precisely essence and function, up to the siddhāntas. In this, the two texts on master and disciple each have two [parts]: both first clarify the three of self, other, and so forth, and next conclude with the four propositions. As for the two texts regarding the master: the first text shows that origin and traces each possess the provisional and the real; next, bundling the origin as real and bundling the traces as provisional, the coarse and wondrous in the traces are both coarse compared to the origin, while the coarse and wondrous in the origin are both wondrous compared to the traces. Therefore, now it only points to the ancient realization and names it "self"; thus within the ancient realization there is not an absence of transforming others, which is why intermediate [times] and today, even if there is discarding the three, are also called "other." People of the world do not see this and merely take the dharmakāya as the origin. What teaching lacks that? But their defect is not knowing the parents' age, which is why revealing the true realization is the origin. Next, bundling: outside of this one ancient realization, all are called "other"; therefore, within self and other, merely bundling origin and traces attains the names "provisional" and "real." Third, concluding with the four propositions. As for concluding with the four propositions: in matching them, one should say that provisional and real in the origin are both real, and provisional and real in the traces are both provisional; taking the real in the origin against the provisional in the traces is called the third proposition. The inconceivable one is because origin and traces both attain double negation. "And so forth" means to match them as just shown. Next, the disciple's traces and origin, contrasted with each other, each possess the provisional and real, also establishing the two names from origin and traces. Speaking generally, in the origin, the intermediate [stages], and down to the present day, every stage without exception possesses the four propositions. "Also possessing the four propositions, and so forth": as in the preceding regarding the master, it differs only in being the disciple, hence it says "also possessing." Although master and disciple both have four, if one minutely determines origin and traces within master and disciple, then the four propositions in the origin are all origin, and the four propositions in the traces are all traces. If one uses the names of origin and traces to make the four propositions, one should say that origin and traces are both origin, traces and origin are both traces, and origin and traces each have origin and traces, both being inconceivable; through reflection this can be seen. Furthermore, one should determine it with only two propositions, which are the first two propositions, fully as in the ten wonders of the origin section in the text of the *Profound Meaning*, down to greater or lesser, broad and narrow, which can be understood by analogy. Next, from "If proceeding from the Buddha's traces" onward concludes the explanation of the chapter. Master and disciple descend into traces from the origin; based on the original intention of transformation, both already attain the designation of the Skillful Means Chapter—how much more so when master and disciple guide [beings] to enter the perfect cause, could it not be called the Skillful Means Chapter? Someone asks: "What does the present Skillful Means Chapter take as its essence?" Others answer; someone says: "It takes subsequent-attainment wisdom as essence," citing the *Vijñaptimātra* statement that the last five pāramitās are all subsequent-attainment wisdom. "I now take fundamental wisdom as essence." Now I say: regarding what is called essence, does one take that upon which it relies, or the immediate essence of function? If taking that upon which it relies, then what is provisional yet real is the essence; if taking the immediate essence, then what is real yet provisional is the essence. How could these two meanings—fundamental and subsequent-attainment—ever be separated even for an instant? Furthermore, if one only speaks of the five, then subsequent-attainment has no essence; how much more so when dividing origin and traces, only the single ancient realization is the fundamental, and all the rest are subsequent-attainment.

4.25

Next, the direct explanation of the sūtra text. As for the phrase "or up to after the verses": the ninth [fascicle of the] commentary states that according to Nányuè's intention, only up to after the verses is the main body; if relying on the northern masters, the four faiths after the verses, because of hearing the sūtra, are determined to belong to the main preaching. This division has no flaw, so both are preserved. "If not," and so forth, relates the intention of lodging in words; "although," and so forth, relates the intention of severing words. The two wisdoms of all buddhas are as explained before. "And so forth" is fully as in the three kinds and the ten pairs. Now praising all buddhas and Śākyamuni serves as a prelude for the five buddhas below, because all buddhas encompasses the four buddhas. From "The radiance above shines" to "in this" indicates that both possess the five periods, directly manifesting that the two wisdoms of the five buddhas are not different; this and that viewed against each other is called "horizontal," while present and past viewed against each other is called "vertical." "This" represents Śākyamuni; "other" represents the four buddhas—which represents the identical path of the five buddhas. "At that time" refers to the time of the five omens and so forth. From "The Buddha always" onward is the question; from "This has" onward is the answer, the answer being complete with the four siddhāntas. Because past and present differ, and because there are entering and emerging, this is the mundane [siddhānta]. The phrase "must first enter [the samādhi of] Immeasurable Meanings," and so forth, accords with the intention of making the preface. A single samādhi's meaning encompasses both directions, both constituting the mundane [siddhānta]. In the individual [siddhānta], it says "experiencing," and so forth: "experiencing" means engaging matters and facing objects; "dharma conditions" means inwardly taking true reality as the condition; entering and emerging in accord with principle only then generates the goodness of beings, which is the individual [siddhānta]. Samādhi counteracts the evil of distraction, so one must first enter samādhi, which is the counteractive [siddhānta]. Regarding the benefits to self and other, both attain the true character, which is the supreme truth [siddhānta]. Both saying "pity" is an alternate name for compassion. The method for pitying beings must rely on the four siddhāntas; these are the four siddhāntas of the inconceivable great stimulus and response. Therefore the four dharmas are all named "calmly and attentively rising." The phrase "settling this" means inwardly settling the four dharmas, only then rising to transform others. Someone asks: "How does addressing Śāriputra here differ from the *Large Perfection of Wisdom*?" Now I answer: why only the *Large Perfection of Wisdom*? From the four *Āgamas* down to this sūtra, ever since Śāriputra went forth, addresses occur everywhere, each being different: in the four *Āgamas*, he was addressed to set in motion the wheel of the dharma of arising and cessation; in the Correct and Equal, addressed to rebuke; in Prajñā, addressed to bestow empowerment; in the present sūtra, addressed to open [the provisional]. The root *Treatise* says: "Addressing Śāriputra and not the other śrāvakas is because his wisdom is profound. Not addressing the bodhisattvas has five [reasons]: first, because of the deeds performed for the śrāvakas; second, to direct towards great bodhi; third, to make them free of cowardice; fourth, to give rise to the good thoughts of other people; fifth, to cause them not to give rise to the thought that what was to be done has already been accomplished. One should know that these five intentions also differ from other sūtras; the preceding explicit teachings did not say that śrāvakas can enter the buddha-wisdom." As for "the ten kinds as in the Profound Meaning": in the ninth fascicle of the text of the *Profound Meaning*, in explaining function, there are ten each for origin and traces. The ten in the traces are: discarding, harmonizing, opening, concealing, and breaking the three to reveal the one; abiding in the three to reveal the one; abiding in the three to use the one; abiding in the one to use the two; abiding in the one to reveal the one; and abiding in neither-three-nor-one to reveal the one. In the ten in the origin, one merely substitutes the origin for the one and traces for the three, which can be stated accordingly; therefore he first addresses him to stir the assembly. "This is the sūtra compiler," and so forth: thus one knows that the four characters "addressed Śāriputra" belong entirely to the sūtra compiler, and one should know that the sūtra compiler followed brevity. If after "addressed Śāriputra" he had further added "Śāriputra," it would be redundant. As for "the treatise corresponds with the present meaning": citing this text of the *Treatise* also possesses the four siddhāntas: the initial text is the mundane, because movement and non-movement differ; from "wisdom in accordance with reality" onward is the individual, to generate beings' goodness, because it arises from contemplation; from "manifesting the Tathāgata" onward is the counteractive power, because it can eliminate evil; from "Tathāgata" onward is the supreme truth, because it is not separate from samādhi, hence the text itself explains it as the supreme truth. Furthermore, using the four siddhāntas generally explains sovereignty; if so, the four siddhāntas generally explain the preceding two—namely sovereignty and unhinderedness—each of which possesses the four siddhāntas. As for "cross-legged," and so forth: the text is in the *Vibhāṣā*, and is now recorded in full. In the twenty-second Miscellaneous Chapter, it asks: "All postures are fully capable of cultivation; why only sit cross-legged?" Some say: "It is the practice of past buddhas numerous as the sands of the Ganges, practiced by later generations"—the present first text is this. Some say: "Because it makes people respectful and is not a worldly deportment"—the present second text is this. Furthermore, it says: "Because it can generate the mind of three bodhis"—the present fourth text is this. Furthermore, it says: "Because it can defeat Māra's army"—the present half of the third text is this. Furthermore, it says: "It pleases humans and devas and is not shared with outsiders"—the present half of the third text is this. Now, to complete the four siddhāntas, the fourth and fifth are combined into one counteractive [siddhānta]; in the treatise, the counteractive is placed after the supreme truth. From "I privately consider" onward, my personal judgment of the preceding text saying "the intention of possessing the four siddhāntas" directs that it be pointed out as just done, along with explaining the four intentions.

First 25 of 174 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

法華文句記 — Classical Chinese