法華玄贊義決 1.5

1.5

Answer: There are two explanations. One explanation is that what is not subsumed by the limbs of existence is based on what is untainted. Therefore the Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya states: being subsumed by the mārgasatya, they are not tainted. Otherwise, how could they induce the fruit of the ten kings? The various treatises all state that the six pāramitās all induce that [fruit], and even markless practice induces that fruit. Asaṅga's Prajñāpāramitā-upadeśa states: 'because of being pervasive.' If it did not induce tainted [fruits], how could one say 'pervasive'? Furthermore, [...] they cannot directly induce, [yet] at this stage they generate karma that induces existence. The Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra says: 'For a pṛthagjana within the Dharma, if negligent, the three kinds of avidyā serve as conditions; if not negligent, avidyā is not said to be a condition.' It also says that noble beings in training (śaikṣa) do not generate karma that induces future existence, but does not say that non-nobles likewise do not generate karma. It also says that under [the contemplation of] no suffering and no suffering, avidyā and the [karmic] formations do not arise in the two stages. Since their active manifestation is permitted, why would they not generate karma? That prayoga suddenly subdues [defilements] is said in terms of the stage of fulfillment. From this we know that those who turn their minds practice through many lifetimes, and therefore achieve sudden awakening. Furthermore, the thirteenth [fascicle] of the Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya states: 'Being determinately capable of penetrating the principle of the truths in this very lifetime is called penetrating the nirvedha-bhāgīya. Those of indeterminate lineage in this stage, in order to dedicate [their practice] to supreme bodhi, as well as pratyekabuddhas, in order to seek bodhi realized by oneself without a teacher, proceed instead to other rebirths; this is called the nirvedha-bhāgīya of other rebirths.' Since it says 'proceed instead to other rebirths,' it is clear that rebirth is indeterminate. Furthermore, the Master's original intention was not to say that if rebirth and so forth are determinate, though they later turn the mind they must attain the noble fruit. Below, quoting the Suvikrāntavikrāmī-paripṛcchā, it states: 'those who have not entered the right determination of noble status (samyaktva-niyāma)' refers to those who do not undergo inconceivable transformation; since they do not undergo inconceivable transformation, it is clear that they directly pursue the Great [Vehicle], not the small noble fruit. Saying that the time of rebirth is determinate and so forth was merely describing another's [position]. Now to offer another assisting explanation: even if one is an ordinary person who, without seeking the Small [Vehicle], directly seeks the Mahāyāna, if one is of indeterminate lineage, one is also called [a person of] gradual awakening, because one is definitely unable to proceed straight through and will definitely regress midway. If it is said that without hearing the teaching of the ekayāna one might regress, but upon hearing the teaching of the ekayāna one will definitely not regress, Śāriputra and others had also formerly heard the teaching of the wondrous Dharma of the ekayāna—how did they regress? From this we know that so long as one has the lineage of the Small [Vehicle], one will definitely regress to take the Small [Vehicle], and only upon attaining noble status and then turning back will one first become non-retrogressing; therefore it is called gradual awakening. Even if there are various realms and, despite having the small lineage, it is possible not to regress, one still belongs to that category; because one has a fraction of Hīnayāna seeds that constitute the dharma of gradual awakening, one is also called gradual awakening, because of being of indeterminate lineage.