華嚴經探玄記 8.8

English (machine translation) 8.8

Language: English

8.8.1

In the fiftieth, giving the nails together with the flesh is also given for the sake of seeking the Dharma. Casting oneself into fire for the sake of the Dharma to a depth of seven rèn: one rèn is seven feet; seven times seven is forty-nine feet, which is the fire-pit. Enduring suffering for the sake of the Dharma is exemplified by the Valiant King: as recounted in the Pusa benxing jing, in the past there was a king named Chuzhanamili, who, to seek a single gāthā, cut a thousand oil-lamps into his body. Later, when Śakra questioned him, he made an oath revealing his intention, whereupon he was restored completely. The single gāthā he sought said: 'All that is permanent comes to an end; the exalted also fall; meetings end in separation; the living must die.' Hearing the gāthā, the king rejoiced, forgetting his suffering, and ordered the people throughout the entire state to transcribe and recite it, and so forth. Relinquishing the kingdom and so forth for the sake of the Dharma is as spoken in the 'Devadatta Chapter' of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra and elsewhere. Teaching the cessation of killing and the like is the giving of fearlessness; because it gives them their lives, it surpasses all else. The Dà zhìdù lùn states that what is valued in the world is solely one's own life; it is beyond price. The five precepts and the like, with respect to those capable of killing, are the giving of Dharma; with respect to those who would be killed, they are the giving of fearlessness. The three types of precepts are the three collections of precepts: the precepts of restraint and so forth. Rescuing [beings] from the pain of bodily mutilation is also the giving of fearlessness: the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya recounts the case of a paṇḍaka who saved five hundred cattle from mutilation, and through the power of this wholesome root, his male physical organs were fully restored, which was his present-life retribution. The character sì in the text means 'to allow freely'. As for 'endowed with the unsurpassed true dharma of a puruṣa': according to the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, regardless of male or female, one who possesses the meaning of four characteristics is named a puruṣa: namely, correcting oneself, correcting others, being able to answer questions accordingly, and thoroughly understanding the meaning of causes and conditions. If one does not possess these four kinds of characteristics and meanings, though called a male, he is not named a puruṣa. A woman who conversely possesses the above is named a puruṣa. It also says: 'Though being a woman, one who is able to have faith that her own person has the Buddha-nature is a puruṣa. If there is a male who does not know that his own person has the Buddha-nature, I say that that person is still a woman.' It also mentions the seven puruṣa-destinies, for which there are four explanations. First, according to the worldly: according to the Yogācārabhūmi, a puruṣa has seven meanings: 1. long life and enduring existence; 2. sublime and handsome form; 3. freedom from disease and few afflictions; 4. being neither a slave, nor a woman, nor a paṇḍaka; 5. keen and fierce wisdom; 6. utterances of majestic gravity; 7. having great family lineage and enterprise. One endowed with these seven phenomena is named a puruṣa, and because there are destinations [to this], it is termed a 'destiny'. Second, according to the Hīnayāna, there are also seven puruṣas, which are the seven noble ones: 1. followers by faith; 2. followers by Dharma; 3. those released through faith; 4. those attained through vision; 5. those who bodily realise; 6. those released through wisdom; 7. those released both ways. Having faith in others and attaining deliverance is called following by faith; not relying on faith from others is called following by Dharma. The three fruits of dull faculties are what is attained by following by faith; through the fruit of faith being freed from bondage, one is called released through faith. The three fruits of sharp faculties are what is reached by following by Dharma, hence called attained through vision. The meditative attainment of cessation resembles nirvāṇa; because it is united with the body, it is called bodily realised. Hindrances are of two kinds: 1. afflictive hindrances; 2. hindrances to liberation. Being freed only from afflictive hindrances is called released through wisdom; having both hindrances eradicated together is called released both ways. Third, according to the Mahāyāna Yogācāra, there are seven bhūmis, which are also what the noble puruṣas tread, and are therefore called destinies: 1. the bhūmi of gotra; 2. the bhūmi of practice with resolute intention; 3. the bhūmi of pure superior intention; 4. the bhūmi of practicing correct conduct; 5. the bhūmi of determination; 6. the bhūmi of determined conduct; 7. the bhūmi of reaching the ultimate. The first two are prior to the bhūmis; the next one is the first bhūmi; the next one is from the second bhūmi up to the seventh; the next one is the eighth bhūmi; the next one is the ninth bhūmi; and the final one combines the tenth bhūmi and the Buddha-bhūmi, because both cause and fruition are ultimate. Fourth, according to the Yingluo benye jing and others, there are also seven stages: 1. Faith; 2. the Ten Abodes; 3. the Ten Practices; 4. the Ten Dedications; 5. the Ten Bhūmis; 6. Equal Enlightenment; 7. Wondrous Enlightenment. Praising the Buddha's appearance in the world is the giving of Dharma, just as above, the sound of the youth Samantālaṅkāra's verses in praise of the Buddha pervaded the world. Furthermore, as in the Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka Sūtra, Śākyamuni in the past was the Bodhisattva Mahākāruṇika, who traveled throughout the states proclaiming with a loud voice: 'The Tathāgata has appeared in the world! The Tathāgata's appearance in the world is extremely difficult to encounter!' and so forth. In the giving of the great earth: the Tathāgata, stūpas, bodhisattvas, spiritual friends, and parents are both fields of gratitude and fields of reverence; the noble Saṅgha and the two vehicles are both fields of virtue and fields of reverence; the remaining mendicants, poor people, and the like are both fields of compassion and fields of suffering. Because all of these can generate merit, they are called fields of merit, named by metaphor. There are also four permutations: 1. there are those that are reverence and not compassion, such as the Buddha and the like; 2. there are those that are compassion and not reverence, such as impoverished, suffering sentient beings; 3. there are those that are both compassion and reverence, such as impoverished and sick arhats; 4. there are those that are neither compassion nor reverence, excluding the remainder above. The Dà zhìdù lùn, fascicle fourteen, says: 'First, giving out of pity, which refers to the impoverished, the lowly thieves, and the various animals. Second, giving out of reverence, which refers to the Buddha and dharmakāya bodhisattvas. Third, giving out of both pity and reverence, which refers to old, sick, and impoverished arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and the like.' Question: Between the two fields of compassion and reverence, which is superior? Answer: There are three meanings. First, if viewed in terms of the object relieving their present suffering, and in terms of the mind increasing practices of great compassion as the root of practices benefiting others, then the field of compassion is superior. Therefore, in the Xiangfa jueyi jing, it even states that giving to buddhas, bodhisattvas, śrāvakas, and sentient beings is not as good as a person giving a single mouthful of food to an animal. Second, if viewed in terms of the object possessing profound gratitude and abundant virtue, and in terms of the mind receiving the Dharma and increasing wisdom as the source of practices benefiting oneself, then the field of reverence is superior. Therefore, in the Jiaoliang gongde jing, it is weighed that giving to animals brings a hundredfold reward, and so forth. Furthermore, the Shen xiyou jing states that making offerings of the seven jewels filling the four continents to the noble ones of the four fruits, and erecting an exceedingly vast stūpa after their nirvirṇa, does not equal the merit of building a Buddha-stūpa even of barley, and so on, to the extent that counting and metaphors cannot compare. Furthermore, in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Śakra says: 'It is not that I do not wish to make offerings to relics, but relics emerge from prajñā; therefore, I would rather make offerings to prajñā.' Third, if viewed in terms of both benefits being equal and both compassion and wisdom being brought forth together, then the two fields are equal. As the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa states: 'Divide one portion to give to the Tathāgata Duṣprasaha, and one portion to give to the lowliest beggar.' It is like having the notion of the Tathāgata as a field of merit without discrimination, equal to great compassion; this is what it means. Question: Given that both are within reverence, between parents as a field of gratitude and the noble Saṅgha as a field of virtue, what is their relative superiority? Answer: The Jiaoliang jing states that making offerings even to a hundred arhats does not equal making offerings to the parents of one's own physical body. Furthermore, in the Āgama sūtras, the merit of making offerings to parents is equal to the merit of making offerings to a bodhisattva bound to one last birth.

8.8.2

Question: Both being fields of gratitude, how do masters/monks compare in superiority to parents? Answer: The Śāriputraparipṛcchā Sūtra states that for laypersons, the kindness of parents is great, and that of masters and monks is second; for renunciants, the kindness of masters and monks is great, and that of parents is second. This is because a master's power of instruction toward a layperson is inferior, whereas for a renunciant it is the reverse. Furthermore, masters and monks give birth to the dharmakāya, and the dharmakāya is inexhaustible across accumulated kalpas; parents give birth to the physical body, whose kindness extends to seven lifetimes. Question: Both being fields of merit, how does offering to a designated group compare in superiority? Answer: As the Brahma Net Sūtra states, specially inviting five hundred arhats is not as good as inviting a single ordinary monk in regular monastic turn. Question: Giving involves three components—first, the field; second, the material object; third, the mind. How do these three compare in superiority? Answer: There are four permutations. First, there are cases where the field is inferior while the mind and so forth are superior, as when King Kaniṣka paid homage to and praised the Nirgrantha stūpa, whereupon the stūpa collapsed. Second, the field is superior while the mind and object are inferior, as when the child offered dirt into the Buddha's alms-bowl: because it was in play, his mind was slight, yet because the field was superior, he was able to become an Iron-Wheel-Turning King. Third, the field and mind are superior while the material object is inferior, as in fascicle nine of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa where an old female servant offered dark indigo water to the Buddha, thereby obtaining the merit of rebirth among humans and gods fifteen times, and later attaining the nirvāṇa of a pratyekabuddha. Someone doubted that the Buddha spoke falsely, so the Buddha covered his face with his tongue to resolve their doubt, mentioning how the tiny seed of a nyagrodha tree grows into a vast tree, and so forth. Fourth, all three components are superior, as when the dragon girl offered the precious gem and swiftly realized buddhahood. Now, regarding the bodhisattva in this passage: as for the giving mind, its compassion and wisdom are equal to empty space; regarding the given objects, their varieties and types exhaust the dharmadhātu; enumerating the fields of giving, ordinary beings and sages exhaust the ten directions. Therefore, here the nature of the three components is completely exhausted and fathomlessly deep; the three components are distinct, superior, and peerless; the three components are vast and universally pervasive without limit; the three components are mutually interpenetrating and completely unimpeded. Furthermore, the Abhidharmakośa raises the question: regarding making gifts to a caitya-stūpa, since here there is no one who can make use of it, how is merit generated? Answer: Meritorious actions are of two kinds. First, belonging to the class of relinquishment: if by relinquishing an object this meritorious action comes to be produced. Second, belonging to the class of utilization: if by utilizing the relinquished object this meritorious action is produced. If one gives to a caitya, there is merit belonging to the class of relinquishment, but no merit belonging to the class of utilization. 'Class' carries the sense of cause. Question: If there is no utilization, how can there be merit? Answer: If merit necessarily required benefiting others to be accomplished, then cultivating the samādhi of benevolence, right view, and so forth should all be devoid of merit. Just as in the contemplation of a mind of benevolence and so forth, although there is no one who can utilize it or be benefited, immeasurable merit is produced, arising from one's own mind. Now in this text, previously giving to the Buddha and constructing halls generates merit through utilization; later giving to stūpas generates merit through relinquishment. 'Śarīra' is correctly pronounced śarīra, which here is translated as 'body', referring to the Tathāgata's whole body or relic fragments. 'Stūpa' is correctly pronounced stūpa; corruptly called toupo, and further corruptly shortened to just ta; this is translated as 'the place of returning to the lineage'. According to the Dīrgha Āgama, four kinds of persons should have stūpas erected for them: first, buddhas; second, pratyekabuddhas; third, śrāvakas; fourth, wheel-turning kings. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha cites the Dvādaśāṅgapratītyasamutpāda Sūtra stating that eight kinds of persons should have stūpas erected: first, tathāgatas—stūpas with eight tiers of dew-receiving basins or more are buddha stūpas; second, bodhisattvas, with seven basins; third, pratyekabuddhas, with six basins; fourth, arhats, with five basins; fifth, anāgāmins, with four basins; sixth, sakṛdāgāmins, with three basins; seventh, srotaāpannas, with two basins; eighth, wheel-turning kings, with one basin, which if seen one must not bow to, because it is not the stūpa of a noble one. Furthermore, according to the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, ordinary monks may also have stūpas erected: that is, Vinaya-holding masters of Dharma, duty-managing bhikṣus, and bhikṣus of virtuous reputation should have stūpas erected. Since they are not noble ones, they have no dew-receiving basins at all, and [the stūpas] must still be placed in secluded spots; if one violates this, an offense is incurred. Relying on these texts, nowadays there are those who build stūpas for their masters with wide arrays of dew-receiving basins; not only do the living incur an offense, but it also encumbers the deceased, which is deeply lamentable. Furthermore, generally discussing the construction of stūpas, there are six intentions: first, to manifest the superiority of the person; second, to cause others to generate pure faith; third, to provide a focus for their minds; fourth, to enable offerings to generate merit; fifth, to complete the practice of repaying kindness; sixth, to produce merit and eliminate offenses. Question: Constructing a buddha stūpa attains how much merit? Answer: There are two aspects: first, immediately attaining brahma-merit. According to the Kośa, attaining brahma-merit has seven causes: first, constructing a caitya where none had been built on that ground; second, establishing a saṅghārāma; third, reconciling a sangha that has been dispersed; fourth, cultivating the four immeasurables; fifth, acting on behalf of parents or the Buddha's command; sixth, renouncing the household oneself and teaching others to renounce the household; seventh, erecting a Dharma banner. If a person performs any one among the above seven karmic acts, they will receive the retribution of joy and bliss for one kalpa like the gods of the Brahmā realm of radiance. As for the quantity of that brahma-merit, it uses the shared karma of sentient beings that induces one great trichiliocosm as the measure of one brahma-merit. Second, distantly exhausting the bounds of suffering to attain liberation from saṃsāra. Therefore, the Anuttarāśraya Sūtra states that making offerings to the Buddha's relics even the size of a mustard seed will entirely attain ultimate liberation from the suffering of saṃsāra. The Mahākaruṇā Sūtra says the same. Giving servants to relieve others' toil, and relinquishing one's own body to serve them as an attendant, constitutes the sixtieth gate; this is the embracing method of shared activity. This is using one's own body as a canopy and shade to shelter and protect the Tathāgata, accomplishing filial offering. Moreover, giving one's body to sentient beings as a servant is to personally substitute for their hardship and labor. Furthermore, offering one's own body to serve all buddhas is the practice of repaying kindness, and so forth. Regarding giving realms and royal thrones: Question: If an evil person begs for this royal throne wishing to harm sentient beings, how could it be given to them? Answer: When a bodhisattva sees this, they will not give it to them either. As the Yogācāra[bhūmi] states in fascicle forty-nine: 'If someone brings supreme harassment to sentient beings and practices violent and evil karma, and comes seeking the royal throne, one ultimately does not give it to them.' Regarding giving adorned great cities: the preceding generally referred to giving realms. Here it specifically refers to giving the seat of royal rule, the great city where one resides, distinguishing it from other smaller cities. Precious women are attendants; this does not mean two items given together. Question: Are these precious women and so forth illusory transformations, or are they actual karmic retributions? Answer: They are actual karmic retributions. The sūtra says: 'All are the retributions of the bodhisattva's pure karma used for giving.' Furthermore, in the 'Dharmadhātu Chapter' below, they all share past vows based on identical roots of good, like the maiden Sudharmā and others; hence it says: 'If you can accept me as your kin, I willingly undergo this suffering.' Again, it is like the flower-selling maiden and others; therefore, giving them never generates vexation. Question: The Yogācāra says: 'If there are sentient beings who come seeking various given items that can induce frivolous pleasure and induce meaninglessness, one should not give them.' Now, since these precious women generate greed and attachment in them, why give them? Answer: Because there are three reasons here, they are therefore given.

8.8.3

First, the bodhisattva gives only after observing that it is beneficial and free from defilement; if there is any fault of defilement, he does not give. Second, since this woman is in reality a fellow-practicing associate of the bodhisattva, she will not cause the recipient to generate greed or defilement from the gift. Third, this woman is able to benefit the other by means of Dharma gates; therefore, he gives her. If the reverse of the above three conditions were the case, he should not give. In the Mahāyānasaṃgraha: beneficial and defiled; not beneficial and not defiled; defiled and not beneficial—these three the bodhisattva does not practice. Beneficial and undefiled, the bodhisattva does practice. The Yogācārabhūmi refers to the first three, while this text is based on the latter one; thus they do not contradict each other. Giving wives, concubines, sons, and daughters: this should also be discussed together. As for Sudāna, it is translated here as 'Well-beloved' or 'Good-beloved'. As the Crown Prince Sūtra explains in detail, giving away his wife, children, and so on. King Vyūharāja means the giving of his wife, children, and so on as spoken of in the Sūtra of the Great King Vyūha. Furthermore, in the Bodhisattvāvadāna Sūtra, Prince Sarvadāna gave the prince's great war elephant to the people of an enemy kingdom; the king and ministers were all enraged and banished the prince to the Snow Mountains. In the mountains, after he had given away his two sons, the king of the gods transformed himself and came to beg for his wife; having obtained her, he returned her in trust to the prince. Later, he also begged for his eyes. The prince was about to gouge them out, but the beggar stopped him, saying: 'For now I return them to you in trust. When I need them I will take them; you may not give them to anyone else.' The prince said: 'How can I now accept two things entrusted to me?'—it is as fully related there. Question: Are the wife, children, and so on given here real karmic fruits, or are they magical creations? And as for that beggar, is he also real, or is he a magical creation? Answer: There are three interpretations here. First, from the superior grade, both are real and given. Like King Sarvadāna: he gave his sons to a brāhmaṇa, and the brāhmaṇa whipped them and led them away. Reaching beneath a tree, he wished to beat them again; a tree spirit raised his hand against the brāhmaṇa, and the brāhmaṇa immediately fell down. The spirit wished to take his life, seize the prince, and send him back. The prince said to the spirit: 'Please do not harm him. If I were to return again, I would cause my father the king's practice of dāna to be incomplete, and I would be an unfilial son.' The spirit then released him. The explanation says: following this, the wife and children are also fellow bodhisattva practitioners; since they must even relinquish their own lives, how could they turn back out of dread of suffering? Second, from the middling grade, there is an alternation between real and magical creation in the practice of giving. As in the Damamūkanidāna Sūtra: when the Buddha was formerly a king, Vaiśravaṇa spoke like a yakṣa, demanding the king's wife and child to eat. Having eaten them, he spoke a verse for him, saying: 'All conditioned things are impermanent; all who are born have suffering. The five aggregates are empty and formless; there is neither self nor what belongs to self.' Having spoken this verse, he resumed his original form, and the wife and child were still there. In this case, the wife and child were real, and the beggar was a magical creation. In the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra, it is mostly bodhisattvas abiding in inconceivable liberation who, in order to train other lesser bodhisattvas and advance their stages of practice, make themselves into such beggars, wishing to completely destroy these bodhisattvas' attachment to wife and children; thus, in their presence, they manifest eating them. Furthermore, in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, when King Viśvantara gave his son to the brāhmaṇa, it was a matter of distressing another. This son was magically created, and therefore there was no distress. The explanation says: here the beggar was real, and the son was magically created. Because the bodhisattva used upāya to fulfill the brāhmaṇa's wish and extinguish his grudge, he made this magical creation. Again, it is like a bodhisattva transforming into a beautiful woman and giving herself to someone with lustful attachment, in order to train and cause him to be free from desire, and so on. Third, from the inferior grade, both are real and not given. The thirty-ninth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi says: with regard to his own wife, children, slaves, servants, relatives, and kin, if the bodhisattva has not first instructed them with proper words so that they are delighted, he will never forcibly compel them to suffer grief and distress by giving them to those who come begging. Even if he has first instructed them with gentle words so that they are delighted and develop a willing desire, he does not give them to enemies, bad friends, yakṣas, rākṣasas, or those of violent deeds; nor does he give delicate wives, children, or youths of noble clans to those who come begging to make them into slaves. The explanation says: this is spoken based on those of dull faculties and initial motivation. Furthermore, if both were magically created, then neither would have any meaningful benefit; hence there is no such proposition. Giving houses and dwellings causes the assembly to obtain the joy of a dwelling place. Giving gardens and groves causes them to obtain the joy of recreation. Instituting a great assembly of giving refers to an unimpeded great assembly, where all kinds of things are given—meaning not limited by material things, not restricted by time, not barring the assembly, giving equally to all without before or after; as below, where a great assembly is instituted at the place of the Fragrant Tusk Grove, and so on. The Sanskrit name is pañcavārṣika, which is translated here as 'unimpeded great assembly'. Giving all requisites for living is the seventieth gate. Because the various gates cannot be exhausted if explained individually, at the end he sums them up collectively into all requisites for living to complete the great giving. The above has seventy gates according to the great gates. If one explains them in finer detail, the varieties among the things given, according to Master Guangtong, number one hundred and twenty. Next, in full, there are eighty-four thousand. How so? Among the one hundred and twenty matters, each contains the ten wholesome karmas in practicing giving, thus making one thousand two hundred; multiplied by the seven methods of giving, this makes eight thousand four hundred; and each individual practice is equipped with the ten dedications, thus making eighty-four thousand gates of the practice of giving. As for the seven methods of giving, according to phenomenal marks there are six, and entering the principle adds one more, making seven. The six according to phenomenal marks: the mind has three kinds, namely the joy of the three times, and so on; the matter has three kinds, namely the giver, the recipient, and the material wealth, and so on. Entering the principle has one: namely contemplating the principle that the three matters are empty and solitary. Another explanation: multiplying them by the seven noble treasures also works. Just as one practice of giving has eighty-four thousand, each of the remaining practices is also like this. If one were to explain the active aspects in dispersed detail, they would be immeasurably inexpressible.

Linked texts (1)

華嚴經探玄記 — Classical Chinese