法華玄論 5

English (machine translation) 5

Language: English

5.2

Opening the gate of skillful means to reveal the true mark.

5.3

Question: How does one open the gate of skillful means to reveal the true mark?

Answer: By opening two kinds of skillful means, two kinds of the real are revealed. The two kinds of skillful means are: first, the skillful means of teaching; second, the skillful means of embodiment. The two kinds of the real are: first, the real of teaching; second, the real of embodiment.

5.5

Question: Why are only these two aspects opened?

5.6

Answer: The Buddhas of the three periods of time possess only embodiment and teaching. Within these two, there are the provisional and the real; therefore, they must be opened and revealed. Once these two are opened and revealed, the twelve divisions of scripture and the eighty thousand treasuries of Dharma can be luminously understood. As for the expression 'opening the gate of skillful means to reveal the real': some say that previously in the Deer Park, people's spiritual capacities were still mixed, and [the Buddha] extensively taught the three vehicles without yet clarifying the one principle. At that time, using the provisional, he concealed the real; thus the principle of the one vehicle was closed off by the provisional teaching. Now at the Royal City (Rājagṛha), in response to the conditions, he caters to great spiritual capacities and discloses the real. Once the real is disclosed, the previous teachings are abolished. Because the previous teachings are abolished, the gate of skillful means is opened; and once the one principle is manifest, the true mark is revealed. Therefore, it is said, 'opening the gate of skillful means to reveal the true mark.' This is the interpretation of Guangzhai (Fayun). In appraisal: Concealing the one with the three, and revealing the one while removing the three—it is not that this meaning is lacking. However, the sūtra speaks of 'opening the gate of skillful means,' not 'removing the gate of skillful means'; this is not an [accurate] explanation. Just as when worldly people open a gate, it is not removing the gate. Scrutinizing the purport of the sūtra text, it is precisely about opening and covering, having nothing to do with abolishing and establishing.

5.7

Others say: Simply designating the three as skillful means is precisely opening the gate of skillful means. Why is this so? Formerly, it was not stated that the three are skillful means, so the gate of skillful means was closed; now, designating the three as skillful means, the gate of skillful means is opened. Revealing the true mark: once the three are designated as skillful means, that reveals the one to be real. This is the explanation of Daolang of Hexi. In appraisal: This captures the sūtra's purport. Why is this so? Formerly, the three vehicles were said to be real, which used the real to close off the skillful means, so the gate of skillful means did not open. Now, clarifying that the three vehicles are skillful means, the gate of skillful means is opened. This is abolishing the reality of the three and opening the skillful means of the three; therefore, it says 'opening the gate of skillful means.'

5.8

Question: This is also abolishing and establishing; why do you say it is not?

5.9

Answer: This is merely abolishing the reality of the three and establishing that the three are skillful means. It differs from the previous [explanation] that spoke of abolishing and removing the three skillful means. Moreover, the meaning of 'opening' comes first, while the meaning of 'abolishing' comes after: one must first open up that the three are skillful means, and only then can one proceed to abolish them. Otherwise, lacking causes and conditions, they cannot be abolished.

5.10

Question: Is skillful means a gate in and of itself, or is it a gate because it leads through to the true mark?

5.11

Answer: It has both meanings. First, when a dharma-gate is called a gate, then skillful means is a gate in and of itself, just as in the *Avataṃsaka*, the various good friends have various dharma-gates, whether playing with sand or playing together, all of which are dharma-gates. It is also so now: the Tathāgata has two kinds of gates: first, the gate of skillful means; second, the gate of the real. However, each of these two gates has its opening and closing. Formerly, he did not say that the three are skillful means, so the doors of skillful means were shut; now, he says that the three are skillful means, so the gate of skillful means is opened. Formerly, he did not say that the one is the real, so the gate of the real was closed; now, he says that the one is the real, so the gate of the real is opened. Second, this dharma-gate of skillful means furthermore leads through to the true mark; hence the skillful means of the three vehicles serves as the gate to the one vehicle. The true mark is also called a gate according to two meanings: first, because it is open and unobstructed in its very essence, it is called a gate, like the non-dual dharma-gate of the *Vimalakīrti* (*Jìngmíng*), the dharmadhātu dharma-gate of the *Avataṃsaka*, and so forth; second, because it can lead through to skillful means, it serves as a gate for skillful means.

5.12

Some say: The efficacy of leading through to marks proceeds from the ultimate one; therefore, the one is the gate to skillful means. The efficacy of gradual guidance is manifested in the three; therefore, the three are the marks of the real. Saying 'not three' allows the gate of skillful means to be opened; realizing 'only one' allows the true mark to be revealed. This is the explanation in the commentary (*Zhu* by Daosheng).

5.13

In appraisal: The phrasing seems otherwise, yet the intended meaning does not miss the point. Why is this so? Since the three are penetrated by means of the one, how could the one not be the gate to the three? Speaking the three is to penetrate the one, so the three are the gate to the one. But the one being the gate to the three—this is going from the real to meet the provisional, meaning going out the gate; speaking the three to penetrate the one—this is entering the real from the provisional, meaning entering the gate. Since gates are twofold, marks should also be likewise: speaking the three expresses the one, so the three are the marks of the one; speaking the real causes one to recognize the provisional, so the one is the mark of the three. Examining it in principle, it contains this meaning. However, the commentary's exclusive use of the one as the gate to the three, and the three as the marks of the one, is still not complete in meaning. If employed as previously stated, the principle is without fault. However, the three above are all provisional statements from a single perspective, not having exhausted the ultimate within the ring. If fully discussed, there can be three meanings: first, taking the three as skillful means and the one as the real; second, taking both three and one as skillful means, and neither three nor one as the real; third, explaining three and one as duality, neither three nor one as non-duality, both duality and non-duality as provisional, and neither duality nor non-duality as real. These three can mutually serve as gates. For example, taking the three as the gate to the one—this uses the provisional to penetrate the real; if taking the one as the gate to the three, this uses the real to meet the provisional; up to duality and non-duality, it is also likewise. Since they can mutually serve as gates, they can also mutually serve as marks; it is only that they cannot mutually serve as provisional and real.

5.14

Question: Since skillful means and the true mark can mutually serve as gates, can the true mark also serve as the gate to the true mark, and skillful means serve as the gate to skillful means?

5.15

Answer: There are four propositions: first, skillful means serves as the gate to the true mark; second, the true mark serves as the gate to skillful means—these two are as stated before; third, the true mark serves as the gate to the true mark; fourth, skillful means serves as the gate to skillful means. This is like names being the gate to meaning, and meaning being the gate to names: through the name of skillful means, the meaning of skillful means is revealed, so the name is the gate to meaning; through the meaning of skillful means, the name of skillful means is revealed, so meaning is the gate to names. The true mark is also like this. The preface to the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* states, 'Without names the real is not awakened to; hence one lodges in the middle to proclaim it.' This is precisely that matter.

5.16

Question: Can one now use the three to reveal the three, and use the one to reveal the one?

5.17

Answer: There are also four propositions: first, using the three to reveal the one; second, using the one to reveal the three; third, using the three to reveal the three; fourth, using the one to reveal the one. The first two propositions are as stated before. As for using the three to reveal the three and using the one to reveal the one: saying that the past three differed from the present one, these three were outside the one; the present one differed from the past three, this one was outside the three; therefore, the one was not the one of the three, and the three were not the three of the one. Such 'one' and 'three' were entirely attachments to views. Now, to break this defect, it is said that 'Within the one Buddha vehicle, he discriminates and teaches the three'; therefore, the three are the three of the one. 'That which you practice is the bodhisattva path'; therefore, the one is the one of the three. Since the three are the three of the one, how could the three differ from the one? Since the one is the one of the three, how could the one differ from the three? Hence this is named the meaning of the dependent arising of three and one. Using the present dependently arisen three and one to reveal the three and one of self-nature, and also using the three and one of self-nature to reveal the dependently arisen three and one, is therefore called using the three to reveal the three and using the one to reveal the one.

5.18

Question: What is meant by skillful means? Furthermore, how many gates are there?

5.19

Answer: At the beginning of the "Skillful Means Chapter", the advantages and disadvantages of skillful means are detailed; the matter is evident in that text. Now we shall explain the meaning of "gate" (gateways). In this sūtra, from beginning to end, there are briefly fifteen gates: the "Skillful Means Chapter" has two gates; the "Parable Chapter" has six gates; the "Belief and Understanding Chapter" has three gates; the "Conjured City Chapter" has two gates; the "Dharma Master Chapter" has one gate; and the "Universal Gate Chapter" has one gate. Together, these make fifteen gates. As for the two gates in the "Skillful Means Chapter": first, it says, "The gate of their wisdom is difficult to understand and difficult to enter"; thus provisional wisdom is the gate to real wisdom. Dharma Master [Dao]sheng says: "The spoken teaching is the gate." For the spoken teaching to be the gate means that it explains real wisdom, so the spoken teaching is indeed the gate to real wisdom. The *Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa* interprets it as Master Sheng does. Next, it says, "Expounding the Buddha-path through various Dharma gates"; this takes the Mahāyāna teaching as the gate. As for the six gates in the "Parable Chapter": first, it says, "That house is vast and wide, with only one gate"; this again takes the Mahāyāna teaching as the gate. Second, it says, "Emerging safely from this burning gate"; this considers the bounded realm of the three realms as the gate, just as calling the house itself the gate. Third, it says, "There is only one gate, and it is narrow and small"; this again takes the Mahāyāna teaching as the gate. Fourth, it says, "Such three carriages are now outside the gate"; this again takes the three realms as the gate. Fifth, it says, "Through the gate of the Buddha's teaching, escaping the suffering of the three realms"; this uses the Hīnayāna teaching as the gate. Sixth, it says, "At that time the elder stood outside the gate"; according to the Mahāyāna meaning, this takes the boundary of the two kinds of death as the gate. The Hīnayāna meaning explains that the Buddha has gone beyond all afflictions, and thus the active defilements and latent impressions of ignorance of the three realms have all been severed and exhausted by the Buddha of the Tripiṭaka [teachings], which is why he stands outside the gate. Furthermore, as for the three gates in the "Belief and Understanding Chapter": first, it says, "Arriving at his father's house, he stopped and stood beside the gate"; this takes the Mahāyāna principle and teaching as the gate. Second, it says, "Still outside the gate, dwelling in a grass hut"; this also broadly takes the Mahāyāna principle and teaching as the gate. Third, it says, "At that time the elder was inside his gate"; this also broadly takes the Mahāyāna principle and teaching as the gate. As for the two gates in the "Conjured City Chapter": first, the Brahmā king requests the Buddha, praying that he open the gate of nectar (amṛta); this broadly takes the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna teachings as the gate. Second, it says, "Layered gates and high towers"; this uses the Hīnayāna understanding of the three emptinesses as the gate. As for the one gate in the "Dharma Master Chapter", it is indeed "opening the gate of skillful means and demonstrating the true mark", as has already been distinguished in the text. As for the "Universal Gate Chapter" being one gate, it takes the Mahāyāna as the gate. This gate has two kinds: first, universality of supernatural powers; second, universality of preaching the Dharma. Both of these two wheels are the bodhisattva's unobstructed emptiness and openness; hence they are called "gates". Furthermore, both of these universal [functions] cause sentient beings to awaken and enter; hence they are called "gates".

5.20

Question: What is meant by "opening the gate of skillful means and demonstrating the true mark"? What is the opener and the opened, the demonstrator and the demonstrated, the closer and the closed?

5.21

Answer: In the past, provisionally expounding the teaching of the three vehicles without stating that the three are skillful means—this was the closing of the three skillful means. The Buddha's provisional wisdom was that which closes, and the three gates of skillful means were that which was closed. Now, real wisdom explains that the three are skillful means, so the three gates of skillful means are opened. The Buddha's real wisdom is that which opens, and the gates of skillful means are that which is opened. As for the demonstrator and the demonstrated: although opening the gate that the three are skillful means, it thereby demonstrates that the one vehicle is the real. Real wisdom is the demonstrator, and the one vehicle is the demonstrated. Therefore real wisdom has two capacities: first, the capacity to open; second, the capacity to demonstrate. Just as a person's hand can open a door and also point out the objects inside the door: the objects inside the door are that which is pointed out (demonstrated), and the hand is that which points them out (the demonstrator).

5.22

Question: How is it that present and past are gates and non-gates?

5.23

Answer: Looking back at the past three, the Buddha has two meanings: First, speaking in terms of the teaching, he directly stated the three vehicles without saying that the three are skillful means and moreover serve as gates to the true mark; this is the meaning of the Buddha's own closing. Second, in terms of the Buddha's original intention of preaching the teaching of the three in order to penetrate the one, the three are for the Buddha indeed the gate to the one vehicle. Discussed in terms of conditions (sentient capacities), there are also two meanings: if due to the three one awakens to the one, then for the conditioned capacity the three are a gate; for those who do not awaken to the one, the three are for the conditioned capacity not a gate.

5.24

Question: Is it wisdom that demonstrates, or is it teaching that demonstrates?

5.25

Answer: Wisdom speaks, and the teaching demonstrates; opening is also like this.

5.26

Question: What are the gate based on intrinsic essence and the gate named from the other?

5.27

Answer: Just as provisional wisdom can lead into real wisdom, real wisdom is that which is penetrated into. Named from that which is penetrated, it is said that "the gate of their wisdom": wisdom is real wisdom, and gate is provisional wisdom; this provisional wisdom is termed the gate to the household of real wisdom. For example, the three gates of liberation are named from that which is penetrated: liberation is the fruit of nirvāṇa that is penetrated; the three emptinesses can lead practitioners through to attaining nirvāṇa, hence they are called gates of liberation. Furthermore, when worldly people say "gate of the Buddha", "gate of humans", and so forth, these are all gates [named] from that which is penetrated. As for deriving the name based on intrinsic essence: skillful means in its intrinsic essence is open and penetrating; hence it is called a gate. The true mark is also like this. It is like saying "bamboo gate" or "plank gate": the very substance of the gate is bamboo or planks, so it derives its name based on its intrinsic essence.

5.28

Question: This sūtra has fifteen gates; how many cities are there in all?

5.29

Answer: Five cities. The "Belief and Understanding Chapter" has four cities, and the "Conjured City Chapter" has one city. As for the four cities in the "Belief and Understanding Chapter": first, "stopping midway in a city" is a parable for descending in response to become a buddha in a particular direction; becoming a buddha is the city. Second, "fleeing and running away from me in a certain city" is a parable for turning one's back on the conversion of the Mahāyāna; the great conversion is the city. Third, "in the past, being in his native city, feeling grief and searching" is a parable for the Buddha on the ground of the dharmakāya seeking without success for the great spiritual capacity of sentient beings; the Buddha's dharmakāya is the city. Fourth, "then the impoverished son arrived at the city where his father dwelt" means that the great spiritual capacity has already been activated; the Mahāyāna principle and teaching are termed the city. Fifth, in the "Conjured City Chapter" it says, "conjuring a city", which is where [followers of] the two vehicles can rest outside the three realms; it is compared to a city.

5.30

Question: Since there are five cities, how many mansions are there in all?

5.31

Answer: There are eight mansions in all. Within the burning house, there are six mansions in all, explained in terms of their meanings. First, it says there is a great mansion. Second, it says that its mansion is decayed and old. Third, at that time the master of the mansion. Fourth, it says this decayed and old mansion belongs to one person. Fifth, it says the elder's sons are inside this mansion. Sixth, it says burning the residence. Seventh, the "Conjured City Chapter" says adorning the residence. Eighth, the "Peaceful and Joyful Practice Chapter" says granting fields and residences. The first two set forth the characteristics of the three realms. The next two explain that they belong to the Buddha. The following two explain that sentient beings within them further give rise to afflictions and undergo the eight sufferings. The last two are parables for the merits of the sons who are people of the small vehicle; this shall be explained below.

5.32

Next, we discuss the meaning of the three preachings. The treatise says: "Broadly opening the three to reveal the one, severing doubt and generating faith, preached in three cycles for people of the three capacities: first the doctrinal preaching, next the parabolic preaching, and finally the preaching on causes and conditions in past lives." Thus there are preachings in three cycles.

5.33

Question: How is it preached in three cycles for people of three capacities?

5.34

Answer: Former sūtra masters said that the first cycle was preached for people of superior capacity, the second cycle was preached for people of middling capacity, and the final cycle was preached for people of inferior capacity. We evaluate this: Simply positing these names does not fit well with the text. If the three preachings were each for three capacities, and the three capacities each heard only one preaching, then they would all be of superior capacity—why speak of three grades? If one were to say that superior capacities hear one preaching, middling capacities hear two preachings, and inferior capacities hear three preachings, then one should not say that the doctrinal preaching is for superior capacities, the parabolic preaching is for middling capacities, and the past lives [preaching] is for inferior capacities. What is explained now is that the preaching of the first cycle is broadly for all three capacities, but those of superior capacity understand upon a single hearing; the preaching of the second cycle is broadly for middling and inferior [capacities], but those of middling capacity awaken only upon hearing it a second time; the preaching on causes and conditions in past lives is only for inferior capacities, and those of inferior capacity comprehend only upon hearing it thrice. Therefore the *Upadeśa* explains that Śāriputra realized the first fruit upon a single hearing, Maudgalyāyana realized the seeing of the truth only upon a second preaching, and those of inferior capacity should logically require three.

5.35

Question: How is this known to be so?

5.36

Answer: In the initial three requests, all three capacities were in doubt; therefore we know that the first preaching was for people of all three capacities. Next, in the "Parable Chapter", Śāriputra fully conveys the doubts and regrets of people of middling and inferior capacities, requesting the Buddha to resolve them; therefore we know that the parabolic preaching broadly applies to people of middling and inferior capacities. Furthermore, by being complete with the preachings of three cycles, it is fully equipped in meaning. If there were only doctrine and no parable, the momentum of the meaning would not be exhausted; if there were only parables and no doctrine, the purport would also not be complete. Therefore there must be the doctrinal preaching in the first cycle and parables in the second cycle. Although doctrine and parables are complete, they only clarify the present and have not distinguished the cultivation of causes in past lives; hence next there is the third preaching. Furthermore, the path of the one vehicle has many gates of entry: some naturally delight in hearing doctrinal preaching and enter through the gate of doctrinal preaching; some naturally delight in hearing parables and enter through the gate of parables—these are the previous two cycles; some delight in both doctrine and parables, and both gates are preached together—this is the third cycle. Therefore, before the "Conjured City" is called the gate of doctrinal preaching, and after the "Conjured City" is the gate of parables. There are also those who cannot attain awakening through any of these three gates, for whom none of them is preached, like the group of five thousand.

5.37

Question: How does this differ from the three capacities?

5.38

Answer: This does not explain that there are three preachings because of the three capacities, but merely that because what they delight in differs, the gates of teaching are not the same. Furthermore, preaching in three cycles is intended to show the characteristics of the middle way: if there were one preaching or two preachings, it would be too few; if it exceeded three preachings, it would be too many. Now, wishing to show the characteristics of the middle way as neither too many nor too few, it is preached only three times. Furthermore, the *Upadeśa* says: "As for the Dharma of the words of the buddhas, matters do not exceed three." Now, following the Buddha's model, it is preached only three times. Furthermore, the three attachments are difficult to alter, and the one vehicle is difficult to believe; hence three preachings are required. Furthermore, it demonstrates that above, one honors the great Dharma, and below, one pities sentient beings, being earnest and attentive up to three times.

5.39

Question: If so, all sūtras ought to be preached three times.

5.40

Answer: A subsequent passage states: "Among what the buddhas have preached, are now preaching, and will preach, this *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra* is the most difficult to believe and difficult to understand." Therefore three preachings are required. Furthermore, the first preaching causes seeds to be planted, the second preaching causes them to grow, and the final preaching brings them to maturity. Furthermore, the first preaching generates wisdom born of hearing, the second preaching generates wisdom born of reflection, and the final preaching generates wisdom born of cultivation.

5.41

Question: The text contains no such meaning; why forcibly contrive these far-fetched interpretations?

5.42

Answer: The Buddha's intention is profound and far-reaching, not confined to a single matter. For example, when the *Upadeśa* explains a single sentence of text, there are several tens of "furthermores".

5.43

Next, the sequence is clarified.

5.44

Question: What is the sequence of the three preachings?

5.45

Answer: The doctrinal preaching is the basis of the parabolic preaching, so it is first; the parable returns to borrowing phenomena to illustrate the preceding doctrine, so it is second; the causes and conditions in past lives clarify the beginning and end of doctrine and parable, so it is third.

5.46

Next, the general and specific are clarified. Each single cycle contains all three preachings. For example, in the doctrinal preaching, saying "like the udumbara flower" is the parabolic preaching; "in the past, under twenty billion buddhas, what I taught and transformed" is the preaching on causes and conditions in past lives. As for the three preachings within the parable: before the parabolic preaching, saying "Did I not say before that all are transformed bodhisattvas?" is the doctrinal preaching. Furthermore, explaining the thirty sons and the elder being the father—is this not having already formed affinities in past lives? The preaching on causes and conditions in past lives also possesses all three: before the "Conjured City" is doctrinal preaching, and after the "Conjured City" is parabolic preaching. Therefore we know that each individual preaching contains all three; it is merely that we make this broad classification. Furthermore, discussed according to what is predominant, three preachings are distinguished.

5.47

Next is the clarification of unfolding and combining. Combining the three rounds, there are two purports: the first round is called 'teaching by citing proof and drawing parallels', and the latter two rounds are called 'direct teaching'. Regarding 'teaching by citing proof and drawing parallels': by extensively citing the four buddhas as proof, it explains that Śākyamuni is parallel to them; the latter two rounds no longer cite proof and draw parallels, but directly expound parables and past causes and conditions. Because demolishing the three and revealing the one runs counter to sentient grasping and is initially difficult to believe, one must first extensively cite the buddhas as proof, and only then explain that Śākyamuni is parallel to them. Once citing proof and drawing parallels is completed, the latter two rounds need only teach directly. Furthermore, in the first round the persons are extensive and the teaching is concise. 'Persons are extensive' means explaining the five buddhas. 'Teaching is concise' means it is only one round of teaching. Next, in the latter two rounds, the teaching is extensive and the persons are concise. 'Teaching is extensive' refers to two rounds of teaching. 'Persons are concise' means only explaining one buddha, Śākyamuni; because the teaching of Śākyamuni below serves as the basis for making parables, we know that the parable teaching only explains the teaching of Śākyamuni. Past causes and conditions also only explain Śākyamuni establishing connections, not mentioning other buddhas as masters and disciples, so it is the teaching of Śākyamuni. Furthermore, the first round is called 'distinct teaching', meaning it distinctly explains the teachings of the five buddhas; the latter two rounds are called 'general teaching', meaning the parables can penetrate generally across the five buddhas, and the 'Conjured City' is also like this. Furthermore, the first two rounds are called teaching the present, while the next one round is called teaching past dharmas. Furthermore, the first two rounds explain the fruit, while the latter one round distinguishes the cause.

5.48

Next is the clarification of quantity.

5.49

Question: Are there only three teachings, or are there further teachings?

5.50

Answer: Broadly distinguished, there are only three teachings; but if discussed in detail, the meanings of the teachings are numerous. First, there are three rounds taught by the Buddha himself; next, there are three teachings of receptive understanding by persons of the three capacities, making six teachings in total. In the Buddha's three rounds of teaching, the three prose sections and three verse sections make six teachings, and the receptive understandings are also like this, so briefly speaking there are twelve teachings. Within the Buddha's first round of teaching, the prose explains the teachings of the five buddhas, and the subsequent verse also praises the five buddhas, together making ten teachings. In the second round, the prose parable teaching and the joining of the parable make two, and the verses are also like this, again making four teachings. In the third round, having prose and verse makes two teachings, each possessing doctrine and parable, making four teachings, which added to the preceding makes eighteen teachings. If we add the preceding brief opening of the three and revealing of the one, which each have prose and verse, that makes twenty teachings. The receptive understanding of the person of superior capacity has prose and verse, making two teachings; the person of middling capacity has prose and verse, again two teachings, each having doctrine and parable, making four teachings, which added to the preceding makes six teachings. The person of inferior capacity's receptive understanding has prose and verse, again two teachings, each having doctrine and parable, making four teachings, totaling ten teachings. Master and disciples together explain the meaning of opening the three and revealing the one, briefly setting forth thirty teachings. Within this, the meanings taught are not limited to this.

5.51

Next is the clarification of delusion and hindrance.

5.52

Question: By what delusion and hindrance do persons of the three capacities fail to understand the one vehicle?

5.53

Answer: Speaking generally, the annihilation and permanence of the two vehicles hinder the middle way of the one vehicle. Distinguishing them specifically, there are two kinds of delusion: the first is view of annihilation, and the second is ignorance. As for the view of annihilation: the two vehicles realize emptiness and regard it as the marvelous ultimate. As for ignorance: they do not recognize the tathāgata's three and one, provisional and real. However, the view of annihilation and ignorance are still of one substance, and are merely differentiated in terms of meaning. Clinging to and grasping the meaning of emptiness is called the view of annihilation; not recognizing the provisional and real is called ignorance; and it is also due to ignorance that they cling and grasp. This delusion is not the ninety-eight latent afflictions. Why is this? Arhats have already cut off the ninety-eight latent afflictions, yet still do not recognize the provisional and real; hence we know this belongs to the affliction of ignorance. Later I saw the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa* say: 'Because persons free from affliction possess defiled pride, they do not know the one vehicle and that the dharmakāya is eternally abiding.' This defiled pride is precisely ignorance. Yet in terms of this delusion there are three grades of difference: for the inferior capacity it is heavy, for the middling capacity it is secondary, and for the superior capacity it is light; therefore, three grades are distinguished.

5.54

Question: If from the outset one studies the two vehicles—as the *Vibhāṣā* and *Explanatory Treatise* (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*) say: 'For pratyekabuddhas, the slowest takes a hundred kalpas, and the fastest takes four lifetimes; for śrāvakas, the slowest takes sixty kalpas, and the fastest takes three lifetimes'—since the lesser vehicle hinders the great, those who practiced the lesser for a long time should be of dull capacity, those who practiced the lesser for a short time should be of sharp capacity, and between the two should be middling capacity.

5.55

Answer: This meaning must be discussed by weighing both sides. If the mind of the two vehicles is a delusion that can hinder the Mahāyāna, it should be as questioned. Then those who practiced the deeds of the two vehicles for long kalpas would have arisen delusion for a long time, and this grasping would be difficult to break, so they should be of inferior capacity; those who practiced the deeds of the two vehicles for a short time would have arisen delusion for a brief period, and this grasping would be easy to overturn, so they should be of superior capacity; and between the two should be middling capacity. However, Śāriputra practiced the lesser deeds for a long time, so his capacity was sharp, and hence he is called of superior capacity; practicing the lesser for a short time is called inferior capacity; and between the two is designated middling capacity. Furthermore, Śāriputra exhausted the source of the lesser, so he easily awakened to the great, while other people were not so; therefore Śāriputra is called of sharp capacity. Furthermore, the two vehicles can be integrated into the bodhisattva path, so those whose practice of the two vehicles was long are profound in their practice regarding the bodhisattva [path]. Some say: there are four propositions: (1) delusion is light and capacity is sharp; (2) delusion is heavy and capacity is sharp; (3) delusion is light and capacity is dull; (4) delusion is heavy and capacity is dull. If delusion is light and capacity is sharp, upon first hearing one awakens; if the middling and inferior two persons, upon hearing a second time they awaken; as for the fourth person, only upon hearing three times does he awaken. This meaning will be extensively explained below under the five defilements.

5.56

Next is the clarification of shifting capacities.

5.57

Question: Do the three capacities of superior, middling, and inferior have the meaning of progressing and advancing?

5.58

Answer: Some say that in the first round of doctrinal teaching, those of superior capacity hear and immediately awaken, those of middling capacity shift to become superior capacity, and those of inferior capacity advance to become middling capacity; in the second round of teaching, those of middling capacity awaken along with those of superior capacity, and those of inferior capacity shift to become superior capacity; in the third round of teaching, those of inferior capacity awaken along with those of superior capacity. Some say: distinguishing the superior, middling, and inferior capacities in terms of the three vehicles, bodhisattvas are of superior capacity, pratyekabuddhas are of middling capacity, and śrāvakas are of inferior capacity. Within śrāvakas there are inherently superior, middling, and inferior capacities, and it is in terms of these three capacities that there is the teaching of three rounds. Although they attain awakening, there are still distinctions of sharp and dull. Just as a knife chopping an object: that which cuts through in one chop is superior, that which cuts through in two chops is middling, and that which cuts through in three chops is inferior; although both cut through, there is a distinction of sharp and dull. Although they attain awakening earlier or later, there is also a distinction of sharp and dull. Evaluation: The latter view grasps the purport of the sūtra. How is this known? When persons of superior capacity attain awakening, middling and inferior have not yet awakened; how could they have already shifted their capacities?

5.59

Question: In the present [system], is there the meaning of shifting capacities?

5.60

Answer: Abhidharma is the lesser vehicle and still has shifting capacities; Mahāyāna doctrine holds no fixed nature, so how could they not shift? Encountering bad conditions, one shifts from sharp to dull; encountering good conditions, one shifts from dull to sharp.

5.61

Next is the clarification of great and small.

5.62

Question: In the three rounds of teaching the Dharma, at what time do bodhisattvas attain awakening?

5.63

Answer: Provisionally distinguishing them: bodhisattvas are of superior capacity, pratyekabuddhas are of middling capacity, and śrāvakas are of inferior capacity. If so, both bodhisattvas and pratyekabuddhas surpass śrāvakas, so hearing the first round they both awaken. Discussing further: sharp-capacity pratyekabuddhas surpass śrāvakas and can be called of superior capacity. The *Explanatory Treatise* says: 'Dull-capacity pratyekabuddhas do not equal Śāriputra.' If so, they can be equated with the inferior capacity, awakening only at the three rounds of teaching. Bodhisattvas are not fixed: those of initial resolve and those of long practice are all bodhisattvas. Now, discussing generally: if bodhisattvas have capacities equal to the three grades of śrāvakas, they should awaken throughout the three rounds; sharp-capacity bodhisattvas who are of the same grade as Śāriputra awaken immediately upon hearing the first round; the middling and inferior two grades are also like this. However, bodhisattvas' grasping at difference and delusion are light, and moreover they lack the delusion of clinging to their own [attainment] as ultimate; therefore, sharp and dull bodhisattvas all awaken upon hearing the first round. How is this known? Below, in Śāriputra receiving prophecy, humans, devas, and the eight classes know that all receive prophecy. Therefore, although ordinary persons are of dull capacity, their delusion is light, and although Śāriputra is of sharp capacity, his delusion is heavy; thus both attain awakening in the first round.

5.64

Question: Why do bodhisattvas have no receptive understanding?

5.65

Answer: Some say bodhisattvas also have receptive understanding, but the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra* mostly does not exhaustively record it. Thus the 'Skillful Means' chapter says: 'When bodhisattvas hear this Dharma, / The net of doubts is completely eliminated'—this is the proof. Some say: śrāvakas have the illness of grasping at difference and also have the delusion of clinging to their own [attainment], so [the sūtra] directly demolishes them; therefore they have receptive understanding. Bodhisattvas do not have the illness of clinging to their own [attainment]; even if they had the notion that the great differs from the small or that the small differs from the great, believing that bodhisattvas themselves become buddhas while the two vehicles do not become buddhas, once they hear the Lotus they immediately receive and awaken to it. However, demolishing the three and returning to the one is directly for the two vehicles and secondarily for bodhisattvas; therefore it does not relate the bodhisattvas' receptive understanding.

5.66

Question: Since śrāvakas hear the sūtra and receive prophecy, why do bodhisattvas who hear the sūtra not receive prophecy?

5.67

Answer: By the statement on receptive understanding, the prophecy can be known by parallel. Moreover, the 'Devadatta' chapter confers prophecy on the nāga maiden, the 'Joyful Acceptance' chapter says: 'Those who hear even a single phrase or single verse of the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra* are all conferred prophecy', and below in the 'Life Span' chapter bodhisattvas naturally receive prophecy.

5.68

Next is reconciling the two sūtras.

5.69

Question: The *Śrīmālādevī-sūtra* says: 'In their initial practice of the three vehicles, they are not foolish regarding the Dharma and know for themselves that they will attain awakening.' Why does this sūtra explain that arhats of the three capacities initially give rise to doubts and only later attain awakening?

5.70

Answer: Past scripture masters said that there is the phenomenal and there is the principle. As for the principle, at the initial undertaking of the three vehicles they already know they will become buddhas, and there is genuinely no initial doubt and final awakening; they merely conform to ordinary beings in order to guide external ordinary beings prior to the initial undertaking, causing them to believe in the one vehicle and realize they will certainly become buddhas—hence they merely display initial doubt and final awakening. Discussing it within the teaching, it is explained that after the two vehicles attain the fruit, while in the mind of discursive contemplation, they deduce the principle: since the principle is one, the teaching should not be three; if the teaching is definitively three, how could the principle be one? Therefore, throughout the day they are restless and bewildered, having nowhere to rest their minds. Thus Dharma Master Yao said: 'Hesitating between principle and teaching, they doubt whether they have suffered a loss or not. If one questions the teaching by means of the principle, there is the sense of gain; if one questions the principle by means of the teaching, there is the sense of loss. Therefore they hesitate and produce doubts about gain and loss. However, there are three types of faculties: If those of superior and sharp faculties have more sentiment of questioning the teaching by the principle and less sentiment of questioning the principle by the teaching, then upon first hearing the doctrinal explanation it accords with their minds and they immediately comprehend, as in the case of Śāriputra and his kind. Those who have less sentiment of questioning the teaching by the principle and more sentiment of questioning the principle by the teaching, though they hear both the doctrinal and parabolic explanations, it runs contrary to their original minds; therefore they only awaken upon the third hearing, as in the case of Pūrṇa and his kind. If those of middling faculties are situated between the sharp and the dull, and the mutual questioning of principle and teaching in their minds is exactly balanced, they do not awaken upon hearing the doctrinal explanation, but immediately understand upon hearing the parabolic explanation, as in the case of Subhūti and his kind.'

Evaluation: If they had already known the common destination in principle, while within the teaching there were still delusion and awakening, then the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra would be a real teaching and the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra would be an expedient teaching. If so, what the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra clarifies as the 'one' would also be not definitive, and one should not adopt the intention of the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra to interpret the five hundred yojanas. Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra states that 'arhats reach the place of arousing the mind [for bodhi] after twenty thousand kalpas'—this too would be a non-definitive teaching. Why so? Since at the initial undertaking they already know the common destination, by what causes and conditions would it take passing through twenty thousand kalpas before they first arouse the mind? If so, the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] must be not definitive. If the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra is definitive, then the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra must be not definitive. Furthermore, if at the initial undertaking they already know the common destination, how could they again realize the arhat fruit? Realization means realizing because one considers it ultimate; since they already know it is not the ultimate, how could they realize it? Moreover, according to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, clarifying the realization of the nature-dharmakāya does not differ from the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra; one should not interpret them in terms of definitive and non-definitive, nor principle and teaching.

Some say: As for 'the initial undertaking of the three vehicles', this refers to persons of the three vehicles who first generate faith in the Great Vehicle; hence it is called 'initial undertaking'. This interpretation presents no contradiction between the two scriptures, the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra and the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra: the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra is based on first generating faith in the Great Vehicle, hence they know of themselves that they will become buddhas; the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra concerns the three vehicles not yet having faith in the one vehicle, which is why they give rise to doubt. Some say: When the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra says 'the initial undertaking of the three vehicles is not foolish regarding phenomena, and knows of itself', this is based on those of sharp faculties who awaken immediately—hearing the three they immediately comprehend the one, receiving the small they immediately awaken to the great. When the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says 'arhats still doubt', this is based on dull-rooted persons who hearing the three cling to the three, and receiving the small abide in the small. Therefore the two scriptures do not contradict each other.

5.71

Question: For sharp faculties, none surpass Śāriputra; what other persons of sharp faculties could there be who awakened immediately?

5.72

Answer: What the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra clarifies regarding the three faculties of Śāriputra and the others mostly refers to those who inwardly conceal bodhisattva practices and outwardly manifest as śrāvakas to guide small practices.

5.73

Question: How is it known that hearing the small leads to immediately awakening to the great?

5.74

Answer: There are four propositions in principle: first, hearing the three and awakening to the three; second, hearing the one and awakening to the one—these two are easy to understand. Third, hearing the one and awakening to the three, as in hearing the great nirvāṇa teaching and becoming an arhat. Fourth, hearing the three and awakening to the one, which is precisely the initial undertaking.

5.75

Question: Does the text of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra contain hearing the one and awakening to the three?

5.76

Answer: The chapter on the 'Past Deeds of King Subhavyūha' says, 'Eighty-four thousand people parted from dust, cast off defilement, and attained the purity of the Dharma eye.' This meaning should actually apply to both the Great and Small [Vehicles], yet in various scriptures it is mostly taken as the Small Vehicle. Some say: The Śrīmālādevī-sūtra concerns persons of skillful means, hence they know of themselves that they will become buddhas; the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra is based on persons of real practice, hence they do not know of themselves. Thus the two scriptures do not contradict each other either. Some say: This matter cannot be conceived or explained. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says in explaining the 'Chapter on Definite Attainment', 'Among the five inconceivables, the Buddha is the most inconceivable. Whether śrāvakas become buddhas or do not become buddhas, only a buddha can understand. Commentators may only discuss other matters; it is only upon attaining buddhahood that this is fully comprehended.' Since Nāgārjuna weighed it and said that it is clearly understood only upon attaining buddhahood, how could ordinary beings wish to decide it exclusively? Later this meaning will be discussed further.

5.77

Next, clarifying the sense in which pratyekabuddhas have no expression of understanding.

5.78

Question: Why is there no expression of understanding by pratyekabuddhas in the assembly of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra? Furthermore, since the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra directly unites the three vehicles, why is there no assembly of pratyekabuddhas?

5.79

Answer: The various differing explanations of scripture masters are all unclear; now it will be briefly explained to make it easy to understand. The Buddha opened the three vehicles for persons of three faculties; those of middling faculties despise śrāvakas following a teacher, yet also fear the length and distance of the Buddha Path, and therefore they appear in an era without a buddha and become pratyekabuddhas. Hence there are no pratyekabuddhas in the assembly of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra.

5.80

Question: If so, why do other scriptures also explain that there are pratyekabuddhas?

5.81

Answer: Generally speaking, there are four kinds of pratyekabuddhas. The first are pratyekabuddhas of the original vehicle: this refers to those who originally aroused the mind of a pratyekabuddha and later attained the fruit of a pratyekabuddha. However, these persons have traversed many kalpas, and the *Upadeśa* and other treatises briefly mention two: one of the slowest is a hundred kalpas—one of a hundred kalpas is a great pratyekabuddha, which the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya terms the rhinoceros-horn metaphor of a hundred kalpas; the second of the swiftest is four lifetimes, while between them the amount is indeterminate. These two kinds of persons attain the fruit of a pratyekabuddha and definitely do not encounter a buddha. Therefore the Avataṃsaka states: 'When the bodhisattva descends from the Tuṣita Heaven, he emits light that illuminates them; if they perceive it, they abandon their lifespans and enter [nirvāṇa] without remainder; if they do not perceive it, they are moved to a world without a buddha in another direction.' The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra's metaphor of the comet has the same meaning. The Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'If no buddha appears in the world, and the Buddhadharma has already perished, the wisdom of the various pratyekabuddhas arises from seclusion.' If this is so, how could there be pratyekabuddhas in the assembly of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra?

First 81 of 198 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

法華玄論 — Classical Chinese