觀音義疏記 2.6

2.6

Seventh, the peril of bandits and enemies, in two parts: first, listing the headings; second, under "[Subjoining to the] canonical text", explaining them in turn, in three: first, [subjoining to the] canonical text, in two: first, directly explaining bandits and enemies, in two: first, sectioning the sūtra; second, under "[Where the] peril [occurs]", explaining the meaning, in four: first, identifying where the peril occurs, in two: first, clarifying the place; second, under "Next clarifying", clarifying the peril, in two: first, explaining "filled with"; second, under "Enemies are", explaining bandits and enemies. Second, under "Second, identifying", the people who meet with peril, in two: first, showing the four meanings; second, under "Merchants are", explaining the four meanings, in four: first, explaining the merchant-leader; second, under "Since there is", explaining the merchants; third, under "Having journeyed far", explaining the precious treasures—by means of the crowd of people and the distant road, manifesting the preciousness of the treasures carried; fourth, under "Perilous road", explaining the perilous road—explaining the peril by means of the two matters of the place and the persons. Third, under "The capacity is", clarifying that there is a capacity, in two: first, indicating the four meanings in the sūtra; second, under "Therefore", comprehensively explaining the four meanings, in two: first, clarifying that the first three assist progression, in two: first, explaining [it], in two: first, clarifying the reason for establishing the three—taking single-minded recitation of the name as the stratagem is unsurpassed, and knowing that there is virtue upon which to rely, their courage is settled; second, under "If not", clarifying that without the three there is no progress; second, under "Therefore one knows", concluding; second, under "The three meanings", clarifying that the last one is able to stimulate, in two: first, clarifying that the proclamation is due to the three; second, under "Namo", translating the Sanskrit into Chinese. Fourth, clarifying the reception of response. Second, under "Next concluding", setting forth by concluding with the oral capacity, in two: first, bringing up the sūtra; second, under "Now saying", explaining the meaning, in two: first, clarifying in terms of awe-inspiring power; second, under "Lofty and majestic", revealing in terms of the meanings of the words. Second, verifying by affairs. Third, contemplative interpretation, in three: first, retributive result; second, under "Cultivating good", unwholesome karma—cultivating good cures evil; if evil is much and good is little, evil is a bandit; if good is much and evil is little, evil is a servant-attendant; the force of ice and charcoal: the greater can extinguish the lesser; focusing mindfulness forms the capacity, so that evil melts away and good is established; third, under "Next clarifying", afflictions, in two: first, briefly clarifying the capacity, in two: first, comprehensively clarifying that the four practices meet with bandits—because the previous six [perils] fully clarified the eight kinds of stimulus and response for destroying delusions, now bandits and enemies only clarifies four practices; meeting with the bandits of afflictions will run through the four teachings and of itself subsume the eight kinds; the four practices are: first, receiving and upholding the precepts; second, hearing and studying the teachings and principles; third, investigating and cultivating correct contemplation; fourth, combining the primary and auxiliary practices; a practitioner aiming to transcend the world must first receive the precepts and guard them according to circumstances; upholding the mind and studying the teachings relies on the teachings to reveal the principle; cultivating contemplation in accord with principle uses the primary to guide the auxiliary; if not for these four, when could one hope to enter sagehood?; first, under "Merchant-leader", three phrases in [the discussion of] precepts clarify receiving, and one phrase clarifies upholding—the five dusts can kill the mind of guarding and upholding, and are named the bandits and enemies of precepts; next, under "Or the Dharma", in hearing the Dharma, master and disciple in speaking and hearing both wish to rely on the teaching to reveal the ultimate principle; that both of these are named precious treasures is because of their expression and meaning: if one gets them, one gets both; if one loses them, one loses both; it is like recognizing the finger and only then seeing the moon; therefore we know that understanding the teachings is truly not easy, how much less so the principle; yet when teacher and pupil both delight in mingling with māras, both treasures are lost; when the teacher speaks for profit and the pupil studies for fame, both of these persons come to engage in māra’s deeds; or if the teacher is angry with the disciple or the disciple resents the teacher, both persons also encounter māra’s affairs; under "Or the mind", in cultivating contemplation, if the mind-king is correct, the mental factors are also correct; the king and factors together seek the treasure of correct wisdom; the three poisons and discursive thoughts can rob this treasure, and are most truly bandits and enemies; under "Or prajñā", in the primary and auxiliary, the correct contemplation of prajñā guides the five auxiliary practices, together revealing the treasure of principle; prajñā is like knowing the gold mine, and the five perfections are like using effort to dig it out; the bandits of the six coverings harm these two causes, turning the treasure hidden once more: this is named bandits and enemies; second, under "Applying this", clarifying stimulus through the various teachings—practitioners of the four teachings each must have the four; if they meet with bandits and enemies and single-mindedly recite the name, all four practices are accomplished; second, clarifying response by analogy—this is analogous to the previous six kinds, so it is omitted and not spoken. Second, the mental karma capacity, in two: first, listing the headings; second, under "[Subjoining to the] canonical text", explaining them in turn, in two: first, [subjoining to the] canonical text, in two: first, sectioning the sūtra; second, explaining the meaning, in two: first, directly clarifying the mental capacity, in two: first, generally indicating the sūtra text; second, under "Universally called", comprehensively explaining the meaning of the sūtra, in three: first, explaining the three poisons based on sūtras and treatises, in two: first, comprehensively explaining, in two: first, clarifying singular and compound—saying greed, anger, and delusion: these three are singular; now they are listed from the compound, hence saying lustful desire, wrathful anger, and foolish delusion; the Commentary on the Larger Text says: 'Self-love is desire; loving another is lust. Self-indignation is wrath; indignation toward another is anger. Self-confusion is foolishness; confusing another is delusion'; second, under "Some say", clarifying more or less, in two: first, the others clarify 'less'; second, under "The intention means", now clarifying 'more', in two: first, establishing that 'less' contradicts the sūtra; second, under "Now clarifying", clarifying that having more can stimulate—the quantity of poison is due to the heaviness or lightness of habituation; whether one's seeking advances or not is due to whether there is capacity or not; those without capacity, whether their poison is much or little, do not seek detachment; if they have capacity, whether the poison is much or little, all can seek detachment; the ancients did not understand and adhered to the view that having much prevents seeking; now we clarify that if one is able to be mindful, even if it is much, one still attains detachment; second, under "The Great Treatise", separately explaining, in two: first, directly and separately explaining, in three: first, greedy desire, in four: first, the Great Treatise clarifies past causes, the meaning being the same as this sūtra—the sin of slandering the sūtra traverses the various evil destinies; even if one obtains a human body, lustful desire blazes furiously without choosing between birds and beasts; if one does not seek detachment, one again sinks into the miserable destinies with no time of liberation; second, under "Not choosing", clarifying faults through present affairs—the condition of Śubhaka is briefly as in the Profound Record; Baosi was a woman of the state of Bao; King You of Zhou attacked Bao, and the people of Bao presented Si to him; the king was intensely infatuated with her; previously King You had an agreement with the feudal lords that if there were invaders, they would beat the drums and raise beacon fires, and the feudal lords would rush to aid; when infatuated with Baosi, Baosi never smiled; the king, wishing her to smile, beat the drums and raised the beacon fires; the feudal lords all arrived, but there were no invaders; Si then smiled; she also loved to hear the sound of ripping silk, so he took out silk and ripped it to suit her pleasure; when the Lord of Shen arrived with the Quanrong troops, they beat the drums and raised the beacon fires, but the feudal lords, thinking they were being deceived as before, came no more, and he was consequently defeated; third, under "Pure Abiding", two sūtras clarify worms and ghosts—each is a sentient being that, due to shared karma, assists a person's inverted confusion; the Āgama also says: 'Lust also has ghosts; when a ghost enters the mind, it causes unmeasured lustful abandonment'; fourth, under "As in the Great", the Great Sūtra clarifies much and little—if the habituated result is accomplished, the retributive result is imminent, hence saying 'ripe'; like a person whose calamity arrives and is due for the royal statute, then there are evil people who encourage and assist him in evil; the worms and ghosts are like those who assist, and hell is like the royal statute: this is the characteristic of much desire; if opposite to this, it is named the characteristic of little; second, wrathful anger, in four: first, clarifying the characteristics of anger through a metaphor; second, under "Therefore the Bequeathed", two sūtras clarify obstruction of the Path—compassion is the root of all wholesome dharmas; since anger opposes compassion, it is named robbery and named obstruction; the illuminated gate of the hundred dharmas: this is the dharma realized at the stages and abidings of the distinct and perfect [teachings] which is obstructed; the Benevolent Kings says: 'The first stage attains the illuminated gate of the hundred dharmas, the second stage attains a thousand dharmas,' etc.; the Treatise on the Daśabhūmika says: 'Entering the illuminated gate of the hundred dharmas increases wisdom, because one contemplates the meaning of various gates of Dharma'; the hundred dharmas should be understood as clarified in the Treatise on the Hundred Dharmas; third, under "Mahāsaṃnipāta", two sūtras clarify māra-deeds—the Buddha through the samādhi of compassion could subdue the heavenly māra; thus we know that an angry mind is conquered by māra; habituating and drawing near to wrathful anger is when retribution is ripe; fourth, under "If by analogy", analogy to the above having worms and ghosts—if worms and ghosts lie dormant, this is the characteristic of little anger; third, foolish delusion, in two: first, clarifying the faults—three phrases clarify the characteristics of deviant delusion; 'as in the Great Sūtra' should say that habituating and drawing near to foolish delusion is when retribution is ripe: these are the two results of habit and retribution for deviant delusion; when the mind of delusion is habituated to completion, the retribution of hell is ripe; second, under "By analogy with the previous", analogy with worms and ghosts, much and little varying with the person; second, under "Three poisons", concluding the faults in general; second, under "Wishing to be detached", clarifying the attainment of detachment in terms of suppression and severance, in three: first, showing that through mindfulness one attains detachment; second, under "Some say", refuting error and revealing truth, in two: first, another's explanation is not extinction and detachment—because other masters did not understand constant mindfulness, they caused the three poisons to be unable to be extinguished and detached; second, under "We now say", two sūtras clarify exhaustion and purification—the sūtra directly says 'detached', so why explain it solely as suppression?; if, because of mindfulness, one could only suppress them, then focusing mindfulness on the six syllables can purify the root of poisons; even up to achieving the Buddha Path, would it also only be suppression of deviance?; third, under "Now making", directly clarifying suppression and severance, retributive results, and cultivated causes—the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka [teachings] suppress delusion in these three; the śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas of the common, distinct, and perfect [teachings], persons of the expedient land, and persons of the real reward land: these seven sever delusion; third, under "Asking about detachment", clarifying constant mindfulness through questions and answers, in two: first, raising an objection that mindfulness is not detachment from delusion; second, under "Answering that the sūtra", explaining that mindfulness is wisdom, in two: first, briefly clarifying the virtue of correct mindfulness, in two: first, the efficacy of clarifying wisdom as identical to mindfulness—the various names such as mindfulness, thought, contemplation, and wisdom have faults and virtues, biased and perfect; one must define their dharma-essence through six propositions; thus mindfulness of the perfect Middle destroys biased and inferior wisdom; wisdom of the perfect Middle destroys biased and inferior mindfulness; biased and inferior mindfulness cultivates wisdom of the perfect Middle; biased and inferior wisdom cultivates mindfulness of the perfect Middle; mindfulness of the perfect Middle is identical to wisdom of the perfect Middle; wisdom of the perfect Middle is identical to mindfulness of the perfect Middle; only by evaluating the right and wrong of dharmas with these six propositions can one understand the names and characteristics of all sūtras and treatises; the questioner was blind to this, and therefore took mindfulness to be wrong and wisdom to be right; now since this perfect text says 'constantly mindful', it reveals that this is not a mindfulness of arising and perishing in the two extremes, but correct mindfulness in the Middle that doubly precludes and doubly illuminates; realizing that the nature of afflictions is the body of Avalokiteśvara, one does not destroy afflictions and does not establish Avalokiteśvara; when destroying and establishing are both forgotten, the active and passive are obliterated: this is constantly being mindful of and revering Avalokiteśvara, being detached from the three poisons without being detached from the three poisons; if there is an Avalokiteśvara toward whom one gives rise to conditioned mindfulness, and if one sees that the three poisons must be extinguished and abandoned, this merely increases poisons, and is not detachment from poisons; second, under "If like", the fault of speaking of wisdom apart from mindfulness; second, under "Now this", elaborately clarifying the characteristics of cultivating contemplation, in two: first, discussing the four alternatives for forgetting and illuminating respectively—for this correct mindfulness, since defiled substance is obliterated, forgetting and illuminating do not obstruct each other; identical to illuminating the three truths, it is identical to forgetting the three contemplations; although in terms of the four alternatives it only forgets the three contemplations, because double negation and double affirmation are merely the Middle, one does not use mindfulness of form to forget the conventional; taking form as an analogy for all dharmas, one does not use mindfulness of non-form to forget the ultimate; it should say: one does not use mindfulness of neither form nor non-form to forget the doubly precluding Middle; one does not use mindfulness of both form and non-form to forget the doubly illuminating Middle; in terms of illuminating the three truths, it again forms four alternatives: one also uses mindfulness of form to illuminate the conventional; one also uses mindfulness of non-form to illuminate the ultimate; one also uses mindfulness of neither form nor non-form to illuminate the doubly precluding Middle; one also uses mindfulness of both form and non-form to illuminate the doubly illuminating Middle; one should know that only one who is skilled in forgetting the provisional is skilled in illuminating the provisional; only one who is skilled in forgetting emptiness is skilled in illuminating emptiness; only one who is skilled in forgetting double negation illuminates double negation; only one who is skilled in forgetting double affirmation illuminates double affirmation; there is no need to use emptiness to forget the provisional, or to use the provisional to forget emptiness; double negation and double affirmation are both likewise; discussing mindfulness in terms of the perfect [teaching], the dharmadhātu lacks no virtue, hence one can formulate the four alternatives and expound them with ease; all day long forgetting the four, all day long illuminating the four: only this is constant mindfulness of Avalokiteśvara; second, under "Or sequentially", there are various sets of four alternatives for gradual and sudden—gradually negating mindfulness is the four alternatives of forgetting; gradually discussing mindfulness is the four alternatives of illuminating; forgetting and illuminating originally seek detachment from the three poisons, hence sequential detachment also has four alternatives; if one grasps the meaning of the three contemplations of the distinct teaching, the various propositions will be apparent; why?; as when illuminating emptiness, one must forget emptiness in order to dispatch attachment; when forgetting and illuminating are accomplished, one must be detached from view and thought [delusion]; therefore this contemplation of emptiness has forgetting, illuminating, and detachment; next contemplating the provisional, and afterwards contemplating the Middle, both must discuss the three of forgetting, illuminating, and detachment; if forgetting, illuminating, and detachment are not sequential, this is the perfect contemplation, like the four alternatives above; second, under "Next in terms of", contemplative interpretation, in two: first, the previous seven kinds refer to what was said above—from the retributive result up to the common bodhisattva, none can destroy the arising of unproduced [karma]; although distinct persons destroy it, it is in their later minds; now following the initial mind, it refers to the above as before; second, under "Now only", the latter three kinds will be explained, in two: first, elaborately showing the adverse and conformable [aspects] of the three poisons, in two: first, doubly indicating them in terms of beyond the realms; second, under "Now taking", extensively explaining according to the characteristics of dharmas, in two: first, respectively showing the adverse and conformable, in two: first, explaining conformably in terms of afflictions; first clarifying poisonous harm, in two: first, the three poisons of the two vehicles, in two: first, clarifying the characteristics of the poisons, in two: first, combinedly clarifying the three poisons; second, under "Expanding the three", expanding to form the eighty thousand—since there are the three poisons, one must discuss the equal parts; the four parts each possess twenty-one thousand, and therefore they form eighty-four thousand; as it is within the realms, so it is beyond the realms; why?; because the Mahāyāna says all dharmas are unperishing; saying that one severs delusions only means transforming the defiled into the undefiled, entering the provisional and entering the Middle; the eighty-four thousand transform in accord with contemplation, and at the stage of fruition are named the eighty-four thousand pāramitās; second, under "Vimalakīrti", citing a sūtra as verification—in the 'Contemplating Sentient Beings' chapter, the heavenly maiden scattered heavenly flowers over the bodhisattvas and great disciples; when the flowers reached the bodhisattvas, they immediately all fell down; when they reached the great disciples, they clung to them and did not fall; all the disciples used their spiritual power to remove the flowers, but could not make them go; at that time the heavenly maiden asked Śāriputra, 'Why remove the flowers?'; he replied, 'These flowers are not in accordance with the Dharma, therefore I remove them'; the goddess said, 'Do not say that these flowers are not in accordance with the Dharma; why?; these flowers make no distinction; you yourself give rise to discriminative thoughts,' and so forth, up to, 'Because residual habituations are not exhausted, the flowers cling to your body; when residual habituations are exhausted, the flowers do not cling'; that commentary explains: 'When the flowers reach the bodhisattvas and all fall down, this signifies that the bodhisattvas dwell in inconceivable liberation, are born in the real reward land, and have already detached from distinct delusions; the wondrous five desires cannot move them, so the flowers do not cling to their bodies and all fall down of themselves; when they reach the great disciples and cling without falling, this is because the two vehicles have only severed the five desires within the realms, so the worldly five desires cannot move them; but because distinct delusions have not been eliminated, they are defiled by the superior, wondrous forms and sounds beyond the realms; therefore she scolded them, saying that because residual habituations are not exhausted, the flowers cling to the body.'