大方廣佛華嚴經疏 24

English (machine translation) 24

Language: English

24.12 — 5 parts

24.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Chengguan of Da Huayan Monastery on Mount Qingliang in the Tang

24.2

Chapter Twenty-Two: The Ten Inexhaustible Treasuries (From here down corresponds to the twenty-second fascicle of the sūtra text)

First, as for the reason for its occurrence, there are five general meanings: 1. To answer the previous question on the ten treasuries at the beginning of the second assembly; 2. The previous [chapter] clarified the principal stages, whereas now practice is initiated based on the stages, the same as the "Brahmacārya Chapter"; 3. The previous was based on the distinct practices of the stages, whereas now it discerns the practice common throughout from beginning to end; 4. The previous clarified the practices that establish the stages, whereas now it discerns the purification of those practices, the same as the ten practices such as faith in the "Ten Stages"; 5. The previous clarified the fulfillment of one's own stage, whereas now it discerns the superior advancement tending toward the subsequent, the same as the "Clarifying the Dharma [Chapter]" above. According to the question, it ought to follow the ten dedications; that it is discerned here briefly has two explanations: One says: "treasury" has two meanings: regarding the meaning of containing and gathering, it comes after the ten practices; regarding the meaning of producing, it comes before the ten stages. The meaning connects both places, and the question and answer mutually illuminate each other. Another says: dedication has no separate essence of its own, but simply takes being able to dedicate the preceding practices as its essence. Now, since the ten treasuries are the superior advancement of the ten practices, they are also the superior advancement of dedication; therefore, after dedication there is no separate superior advancement. This means that mutually mentioning before and after makes the meaning complete. However, both the "Clarifying the Dharma Chapter" and the fifth dedication have the ten treasuries; as they vary according to the three ranks of worthies, they are not confused with each other. Furthermore, the former is accomplished through superior advancement, while the latter is the fruit of a single stage; here, it is generally taken as superior advancement, so their intentions differ.

24.4

Second, in explaining the name: "treasury" has the meaning of producing and accumulating, meaning that within a single treasury, its essence contains the dharmadhātu. Gathering virtues and producing functions, each is inexhaustible; relying on perfection to reveal ten is an interpretation with an attached numeral.

24.5

Third, regarding the central theme: the ten treasuries are the theme; gathering the preceding, generating the subsequent, and attaining the fruit are the purpose.

24.6

Fourth, in explaining the text, it is broadly divided into four: 1. announcing the number to reveal identity; 2. asking the names and listing the differences; 3. extensively explaining according to the names; 4. generally praising the supreme capacity. Now, in the first, the Buddhas of the three times speak it identically, revealing its supremacy to inspire compliance.

24.7

Second, from "What are [they]?" onward, the names are questioned and the distinctions enumerated. "Storehouse" is understood as explained previously. Faith and so forth paired with "storehouse" are all karmadhāraya compounds. Purity of mind is called faith; restraining and halting is called discipline. Venerating the worthy and good is shame (hrī); treating with disdain and rejecting violence and evil is modesty (apatrāpya). Taking in the teachings and widely revolving them is learning; giving up what is one's own to bestow it upon others is giving. Discerning phenomena is called wisdom; causing the mind clearly to remember is mindfulness. Holding fast to what is remembered is retention (dhāraṇā); skillfully expounding what is retained is eloquence (pratibhāna). Each has its function. However, the five consisting of mindfulness, wisdom, faith, shame, and modesty have their intrinsic essence as nature, whereas the other five establish their names from activity and function. This is according to distinguishing their marks. If considered in terms of interpenetration, they are all practices that accord with the dharmadhātu, precisely because the nature of the dharmadhātu is inherently pure, free from faults, and so forth. In accordance with their meanings, ten are spoken of. However, according to distinguishing their marks, the first nine are for one's own benefit, and the final one is for benefiting others; in a comprehensive sense, each possesses both. Faith is the root of practice, and therefore it is explained first. Relying on faith, one leaves faults behind; shame and modesty adorn it, making the practice of discipline bright and spotless—these three are practices of leaving faults behind. The remainder all advance goodness. The foremost of advancing goodness must rely on extensive learning; practicing in accordance with what is heard consists solely of merit and wisdom; mindfulness causes them to become increasingly clear; retention causes them to endure long; and eloquence is used to benefit others. The first seven are the seven noble treasures; wisdom serves as the correct guide, and hence it is distinguished last among them; the next two guard and protect them; the final one accumulates and yet is able to disperse.

24.8

Third, in the extensive explanation according to names, the ten storehouses constitute ten sections. Within faith there are four: questioning the names, explaining the marks, concluding the names, and distinguishing the benefits. Distinguishing the benefits occurs solely in the first, seventh, and tenth; the remaining seven sections have only three in their text. Now, in the first section, the initial questioning is evident. Within the explanation there are three divisions: first, explaining the marks of faith; next, from "If a bodhisattva..." onward, explaining the power of faith; third, from "When this bodhisattva enters the Buddha..." onward, a general conclusion of the accomplishment of faith. Now, the first: ten phrases form four [groups]. The first three are the three emptinesses, having faith that the imagined is markless—that which exists emotionally but is non-existent in principle is called empty; the empty is also markless; because it is empty and markless, there is nothing wished or sought for. The next three have faith that the other-dependent is unarisen: first, conditioned arising is without active creation; second, because it is unreal, there is neither subject nor object of discrimination; third, because it lacks essence, it has nothing to rely upon. The next three have faith that the consummate is without nature: first, it is vast and boundless; second, because it is supreme, it is unsurpassed; third, it is so deep that it cannot be traversed. The last one generally has faith that the three natures are unarisen. As distinguished in the first assembly, all ten are unarisen and equally apply to the three natures. For instance, in the contemplation of the single unarisen, one merely has faith that the other-dependent lacks the unconditioned nature of arising of the imputed self and phenomena; this then is the natureless consummate. The rest may be known by analogy with this. Second, in explaining the power of faith, there are two parts: first, directly displaying its function; next, questioning and explaining the reason. Now, the first text has ten phrases, which universally derive from the preceding ten, and the preceding ten all establish these ten. If distinguished by categories: the first two are not being daunted by superior phenomena; the next four are not being daunted by extensive and numerous phenomena—first, the sentient beings to be transformed; second, the transforming teachings; third, the place of transformation; fourth, the ultimate destination of transformation; the final four are not being daunted by vast and distant phenomena. If determining the meaning strictly according to the text, the latter ten phrases correspond inversely to the former ten: because of faith in the unarisen nature of phenomena, one is not daunted by the Buddha's teachings, for the Buddha's teachings take the unarisen as their essence; because the Buddha is difficult to surpass; because sentient beings are inexhaustible; because the dharmadhātu is boundless; because empty space has nothing to rely upon; because nirvāṇa is free from discrimination; because past causes do not make future results; because future phenomena have nothing to be wished for; because present phenomena are markless; and because entering kalpas is unobstructed since it is identical to emptiness. These ten are all deep, vast, and difficult to conceive. In the second part, questioning and explaining, the questioning first means: Why is it that, although they are deep, vast, and difficult to conceive, the bodhisattva hears them without being daunted? The explanation means: Because they have firm faith in all that is deep and vast. The text is divided into two: first, general; second, specific. Generally, saying "faith that is single-minded" means being without hesitation. "Firm" means not being destroyed by differing views. What is it that is believed? It is the Buddha's wisdom. What mark does this wisdom have? It is boundless and inexhaustible. However, it encompasses two meanings: first, it is vast without boundaries and vertically inexhaustible; second, it is free from the bias of the two extremes, identical with the inexhaustibility of the true nature. Second, from "in the ten directions..." onward, is the specific explanation. First, explaining the previous meaning: the immeasurable in the ten directions is the meaning of "boundless"; having already entered, currently entering, and yet to enter is the meaning of "inexhaustible"; saying "attaining bodhi" is the meaning of personal realization; appearing in the world and entering extinction is the meaning of responsive manifestation. Because phenomena are boundless, the Buddha's wisdom is boundless. The wisdom of a single Buddha is already inexhaustible, not to mention pervading horizontally throughout the ten directions and encompassing vertically throughout the three periods of time. If the bodhisattva has firm, unwavering faith in this vastness and distance, how could there be any faint-heartedness? Second, from "all those..." onward, explains the second meaning: hearing the profound without being daunted. That is to say, having attained, currently attaining bodhi does not increase it; yet to attain, not having attained does not decrease it. Having appeared, currently appearing does not produce it; having entered, currently entering does not extinguish it. When about to appear, there is no advancing; when about to enter, there is no retreating. Currently attaining appearance and entering is not close; being in the past and future is not far. Illumining completely the myriad phenomena yet without conceptual knowing; abruptly pacifying all marks yet without abandoning them. Because the essence of quiescent illumination is thusness transcending conceptual proliferation, it is only through worldly conventions, words, and numbers that the three periods of time are spoken of—it is not that bodhi and nirvāṇa have past, future, and present. Since the bodhisattva has firm faith in this, how could they hear the profound and be daunted? These two sections of explanatory text completely contain the aforementioned ten phrases of inconceivable phenomena, as can be seen in detail in the text. Third, the general conclusion of the accomplishment of faith. Within this, there are two: first, a single phrase generally repeating the accomplishment of faith, meaning that through clearly comprehending the Buddha's wisdom to be boundless and inexhaustible, this is declared the accomplishment of faith. Second, from "having attained this faith..." onward, displaying the benefits of accomplishing faith, which also directly reveals the marks of accomplishment. There are eleven phrases: the first seven are the solidity of the essence of practice, with the first phrase being general. Second, because the inner mind is unmixed, there is no retrogression. Third, because external conditions cannot disrupt it. Fourth, because it does not taint marks. Fifth, because there is correct wisdom; for faith without wisdom prolongs ignorance. Jingfa says: "In Sanskrit it is amūlaniketa, translated here as 'not arising from a root', meaning faith in the unarisen, because it arises without a root. The sūtra text says 'always having a root' because the translator was uncritical, the 'a-' having been omitted into the preceding phrase, thus translating 'non-existence' as 'existence', which goes against the principle." This might perhaps be so. Now, harmonizing them through principle, the two meanings do not conflict: "rootless" refers to the essence of wisdom; "root" relates to the function of wisdom. It is also like "establishing all phenomena from a foundation of non-abiding"; therefore, what has no root is precisely the root. Sixth, because it accords with and conforms to the ancient sages. Seventh, because it peacefully abides in bodhicitta. The latter four encompass inexhaustible virtues: first, protecting the nature already accomplished; second, further growing new understanding; third, according with thusness to produce good; fourth, not stagnating in existence or non-existence. Third, from "this is called..." onward, is the conclusion. Fourth, from "when the bodhisattva abides in this..." onward, distinguishes the benefits, which is easy to understand.

24.9

Second is the storehouse of discipline; the text has three parts. Within the explanation of marks, there are two: first, listing the ten names; second, following up by citing and explaining them. In the first, the ten disciplines all apply to the three collections [of precepts]; taking their prominent marks, the first is solely benefiting sentient beings, the last is the discipline of restraint, and the middle eight apply to all three. In terms of preventing faults and transgressions, all are the bodhisattva's discipline of restraint; solely for rescue and protection, they are benefiting [sentient beings]; collecting good [dharmas] is evident. In order to show that all ten apply to the three collections, explaining the last one again displays the three collections. In the second part, citing and explaining, the ten disciplines make ten sections, each first citing and then explaining. First, benefiting [sentient beings] is the bodhisattva's original intent, and is therefore explained first. Second, in "not accepting", the text has two meanings: first, not accepting heterodox discipline, such as that of chickens, dogs, and the like; second, the three collections are accomplished from the past, so that every movement does not transgress the rule. In the third, it is solely for the sake of bodhi and sentient beings, unlike the likes of Nanda. In the fourth, the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Why keep the precepts? In order to be without regret. Why be without regret? In order to have joy... up to: in order to attain Great Nirvāṇa." In the fifth, there are four points. "Non-" means not violating. First, not violating what was instituted, unlike Devadatta; second, not violating nirvāṇa, because of not grasping at marks; third, not violating the monastic code, because of keeping it completely; fourth, not violating the benefiting of beings, because of not troubling others. The sixth has two meanings: first, it is not for the sake of wishing to trouble sentient beings that one must first keep the precepts; second, it is not for the sake of wishing to accomplish pure precepts that one torments sentient beings, as in horse sacrifices and the like. In the seventh, when the precepts are correct but views are erroneous, it is called "mixed". Fixating on existence or non-existence is the mixture of annihilation and permanence. Contemplating the nature of conditions as free from both existence and non-existence is called "keeping [the precepts]". Moreover, being free from the mixture of afflictions is true renunciation. In the eighth, not displaying bizarre manifestations to demonstrate that one has virtue. This is one of the five wrong livelihoods, already seen in the chapter "Purifying Practice". Furthermore, as the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā says: first, deceitful oddity; second, courting intimacy; third, provocation; fourth, flattery and denigration; fifth, pursuing gain from gain—broadly the same as the citation above from the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa. The present text refers precisely to deceitful oddity. In the ninth, regarding "not slighting or disparaging", the Apratiṣṭhita-sūtra says: "Seeing a person who has broken the precepts, do not speak of their faults and evils; one should consider that that person will also attain the Path after a long time." Question: The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Seeing a person who has broken the precepts, one should banish, rebuke, and hold them accountable; know that this person attains immeasurable merit." Does this not contradict the Apratiṣṭhita[-sūtra]? This sūtra answers with roughly three meanings: first, this sūtra is according to one's own practice, whereas the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] is based on gathering the assembly. Second, this sūtra is according to those whose faculties are not yet mature; guarding lest their evil increase, it temporarily accepts them; the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] is according to those whose faculties are mature; with a mind of compassion to rescue them, they should be subdued. Third, that [text] is based on a compassionate mind, while this is based on slighting and disparaging; hence they are not the same. In the tenth, the explanation within is divided into two: first, explaining the discipline of restraint. The ten good deeds are the root of all precepts, and are therefore specially explained, as detailed in the second stage. Second, from "the bodhisattva holding this..." onward, simultaneously explains the two collections, because they gather the goodness of bodhi and benefit sentient beings.

24.10

Third is the storehouse of shame. Within the explanation of marks there are two: first, stating the heading; second, from "namely, that..." onward, explaining specifically. Now, the first: however, the distinct marks of shame (hrī) and modesty (apatrāpya) differ across various explanations. The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Shame is feeling ashamed before heaven; modesty is feeling ashamed before humans. Shame is not doing evil oneself; modesty is not teaching others to do it. Shame is inwardly feeling disgraced; modesty is disclosing it to others." Fascicle forty-four of the Yogācārabhūmi also says: "Inwardly generating disgrace is shame; outwardly generating disgrace is modesty." This broadly accords with the latter explanation of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]. The Cheng weishi lun says: "Relying on the power of oneself and the Dharma to venerate the worthy and good is shame; relying on the power of the world to treat with disdain and reject violence and evil is modesty." The Abhidharmakośa also agrees. If there is shamelessness and immodesty, it simply overturns the shame and modesty above; saying one is not ashamed before heaven is shamelessness. The rest may be known by analogy. If speaking of feeling disgraced as shame and modesty, that is the general mark of both. The present sūtra mostly accords with the Weishi, yet takes the lack of mutual respect as the general mark of both. In the second part, explaining specifically, there are two divisions: first, explaining the past commission of evil, which is shameless conduct; second, from "reflecting for oneself..." onward, explaining the arising of shame. In the former, there are also two: first, reflecting on one's own shamelessness; next, from "all..." onward, grieving that others are also like this. In the second, directly displaying the mark of shame: first, reflecting on one's past wrongdoing, feeling ashamed before the Buddha's knowledge and vision. Presently cultivating the mark of shame, "reflecting for oneself" is precisely inwardly feeling disgraced. From "for this reason" onward, one resolves to sever and realize. The text says that past, future, and present conduct is shameless; the words are general, but the meaning is specific. The bodhisattva reflects on past faults and pities sentient beings constantly practicing them across the three periods of time; therefore, they focus their minds on severing them, preventing what has already been subdued from arising again, and expounding it for sentient beings so that both self and other are eradicated.

24.11

Fourth is the treasury of conscience (apatrāpya). The explanation of its characteristics has three parts: first, reflecting on one's own lack of conscience and cultivating the practice of conscience. Hence it says, "I ought not to commit such acts again," which is the practice of conscience. Second, from "Furthermore, it is considered..." onward, grieving over sentient beings' lack of conscience and their ignorance of suffering and its origin; thus it says "without knowledge and without vision." Third, from "In a woman's..." onward, cultivating the practice of conscience in regard to the world and vowing to benefit oneself and others. Herein, first is the object of conscience; from "those with wisdom..." onward, shame arises in consideration of others, which is external shame. The former refers to persons in the causal stage, and the latter to the Buddhas. From "For this reason..." onward, one resolves to sever [defilements] and realize [the fruit]. As for the "impure dharmas," being born from lust is impurity of seed. Being inside a woman's womb is impurity of dwelling place. Becoming a body of defilement is its self-characteristic and self-nature. Culminating in white hair implicitly contains ultimate impurity. Furthermore, the defiled bodily form is internal filth and impurity. Being in the womb and receiving birth involves the impurity of contact with suffering. Being born from lust is base impurity. If viewed in relation to nirvāṇa, the triple realm is entirely impure; the five appropriated aggregates in their essence are the impurity of contrariety and destruction; and the previously mentioned afflictions are also impure. As for "deceiving the Buddhas of the three times," this is because it violates the original four universal vows to sever defilements. The rest of the text is easy to understand.

24.12.1

Fifth is the treasury of hearing. The explanation of its characteristics has two parts: first, explaining the dharmas that are known; and second, from "a bodhisattva-mahāsattva..." onward, revealing the purpose of extensive hearing. In the first part, it designates the name "treasury of hearing." Explaining it as "knowing" is because hearing is the foundation; in reality, it is just knowing much. The text also divides into two: first, setting forth the headings; and second, taking them up and explaining them. In the first part, although there are ten clauses, their meaning is subsumed into seven. The first four clauses are merely conditioned arising, meaning: 1. conditioned arising; 2. the five contaminated aggregates; 3. the five uncontaminated aggregates; 4. the conditioned; 5. the unconditioned; 6. the karmically determinate; and 7. the indeterminate. Second, from "What are..." onward, it takes them up and explains them, which constitutes seven sections. First, within conditioned arising, based on the two gates of producing and projecting, it expands into four tiers of inquiry and explanation: among the twelve links, the first two are the projecting causes, the next five are the projected results, the next three are the producing causes, and the last two are the produced results; hence there are four. However, relying on the fourth fascicle of the Samuccaya-vyākhyā, it states: "The twelve links of existence all possess the meanings of 'this existing, that exists,' and so forth." Therefore, that treatise explains the characteristics of the links: "Characteristics mean conditioned arising without agency, conditioned arising that is impermanent, and conditioned arising through potency. 'This existing, that exists' reveals the meaning of conditioned arising without agency; solely because the conditions exist can the resultant dharmas exist, not that the conditions have any real functional agency capable of producing the resultant dharmas. 'From the arising of this, that arises' reveals the meaning of impermanent conditioned arising; it is not with unproduced dharmas as causes that any dharma arises and is established. 'Ignorance conditions formations' and so forth reveals the meaning of conditioned arising through potency; although all dharmas are without agency and impermanent, yet it is not the case that following any single dharma something is produced. All results arise due to the distinctions in the functions of dharmas." Now, in this sūtra, wishing to reveal the absence of intrinsic nature in conditioned arising, it adduces the first two gates and the one gate of potency. In the Sixth Stage this is elaborated extensively, spoken in terms of predominance within the two gates, the earlier and later alternately adduced. The first seven are accepted as sharing the causal station, hence they are called projecting and projected; the last five require viewing cause and effect against one another, so they are called producing and produced. Because of this, within the projecting and projected, it merely says "this existing, that exists." The later text then says "this arising, that arises"; arising is being produced. Therefore, the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "In the causal state there are the projecting and projected; in the resultant state there are the producing and produced." However, the text has two contemplations, defiled and purified: first, within the projecting, it clarifies the defiled contemplation, hence saying, "Because ignorance exists, formations exist." Second, in terms of the projected, it also connects the active and passive correlatives to clarify the purified contemplation, hence saying, "Because consciousness does not exist, name-and-form does not exist." For consciousness connects to the projecting and has two kinds of karma: first, maintaining all karma-bonds of sentient beings, meaning that it arises and ceases together with the habit-energy projected by formations; second, acting as a condition for name-and-form, meaning that due to consciousness entering the mother's womb, name-and-form develops and grows. Now saying that consciousness does not exist means that it is not perfumed by karma and does not maintain karma-bonds, and therefore does not enter the womb to cause name-and-form to grow; hence it says, "Because consciousness does not exist, name-and-form does not exist." Third, producing and produced are correlated to clarify the defiled contemplation, hence saying, "Because craving arises, suffering arises." Suffering is the future result, and craving is the producing cause. There are three producing causes, but adducing the first subsumes the subsequent ones; below, clarifying the purified contemplation, adducing the subsequent subsumes the first, which is simply a skillful formulation of mutual implication. Fourth, producing and produced are also correlated to clarify the purified contemplation, meaning that when the cause is destroyed, the result perishes. The latter three gates all view the active and passive against each other; why are ignorance and formations viewed against each other solely in terms of the projecting? The answer is: wishing to reveal that all twelve links possess the two gates of non-agency and impermanence, they are clarified sequentially in the first station. Were it not so, one would suppose that only by viewing the four stations against one another could one obtain "this existing, that exists." The three gates below, wishing to show that the four stations are different, view the active and passive against each other. Furthermore, to reveal that within the projecting links there are either two or three, the first two are treated as a separate section. This is the wondrous skill of the speaker! Second, the five contaminated aggregates. "Aggregate" (skandha) has the meaning of accumulation. The first fascicle of the Samuccaya-vyākhyā says: "It has the meaning of concealing results and of a heavy burden, and it is designated by the name 'world' (loka): 'lo' (world) has the meaning of concealment, concealing the supreme truth. It also has the meaning of being destructible, being shifted by the three periods of time. 'Ka' means falling into falsity; dharmas that conceal precisely fall into falsity, so 'world' is falling into falsity." However, the aggregates of form and the rest also pertain to the meaning of uncontaminated and supramundane; wishing to disparage them, it merely adduces one portion. How is this known? One should know three things: 1. Know their characteristics, meaning that form has alteration and obstruction as its characteristic; sensation has reception as its meaning; perception grasps images; formations mean flux; and consciousness has discernment [as its characteristic]. 2. Know their arising and ceasing, meaning that arising comes from nowhere, and ceasing goes nowhere. 3. Know their non-arising and non-ceasing, meaning that dharmas are fundamentally unarisen, and now they do not cease. Therefore, Bodhisattva Balavan said: "Discerning these aggregates, their nature is fundamentally empty and quiescent; being empty, they cannot be destroyed—this is the meaning of non-arising." How much more so knowing that all dharmas converge in the aggregates, and the aggregates are the unobstructed dharmadhātu—only then is it called genuine extensive hearing! However, as for the nature of the aggregates, their natures are all in flux, and their names are established according to what is predominant. Formations, as a single category, although designating a general name, receive a specific name. Furthermore, it is because they subsume many dharmas. Third, the five uncontaminated aggregates, also called the five unappropriated aggregates. However, uncontaminated aggregates are also of two kinds: 1. Still retaining their original names, they are also called form and the rest, but because they are not associated with contamination, they are called uncontaminated. 2. Established by name from what has been transformed, namely the five-part dharmakāya, as in the present text. Wishing to reveal that virtues such as morality are desirable, it designates them as supramundane from the standpoint of the ultimate fruit. In principle, there are also worldly morality and the rest; morality, concentration, and wisdom have been explained repeatedly above. Liberation means freedom from bondage; it is named knowledge and vision of liberation because, through freedom from bonds, one contemplates, seeks, and comprehends objects with mastery. Fascicle 88 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The aggregate of morality gathers all precepts, harmonizing them into an aggregate." "Aggregate" (saṅgha) is precisely skandha. The others are to be understood accordingly. However, it is precisely transforming the previous five aggregates that forms these five parts: transforming the aggregate of form forms the body of morality, because both manifest and unmanifest morality belong to the aggregate of form; transforming the aggregate of sensation forms the body of concentration, for concentration is called correct reception (samāpatti), entering the four dhyānas and emerging from the four sensations; transforming perception forms wisdom, for "all that has marks is empty and false" and seeing marks as non-marks is seeing the dharmakāya; transforming formations forms liberation, for practices such as non-greed are called mental liberation, and permanently severing ignorance is wisdom-liberation. Furthermore, transforming consciousness forms the knowledge and vision of liberation: if associated with wrong reception and false perception, consciousness discerns various objects relying on the sense faculties; if associated with correct reception and wisdom, it is direct perception that knows as it truly is. The 'Contemplation of Emptiness' chapter of the Renwang jing says: "Contemplating form, consciousness, sensation, perception, and formations, one attains the forbearance of morality, the forbearance of knowledge and vision, the forbearance of concentration, the forbearance of wisdom, and the forbearance of liberation."

24.12.2

"—this is what it means. What is the difference between [liberation-]knowledge-and-vision and wisdom? The fourth fascicle of the Buddhabhūmi-[sūtra-]śāstra contains three explanations in all. To state one briefly: untainted pure morality is called the aggregate of morality; untainted concentration and wisdom are called the aggregates of concentration and wisdom; the superior resolution (adhimukti) of the non-learner (aśaikṣa) is called the aggregate of liberation; and the right view of the non-learner is called the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation. The first three are causes, and the last two are fruits. These five are individually said to have four dharmas as their intrinsic nature: concentration, wisdom, superior resolution, and unmanifest form (avijñapti-rūpa). Yet these five components of the dharmakāya do not veil the ultimate truth, are not altered by characteristics, and do not fall into delusion; hence they are called "supramundane." The Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā says: "Because they can counter the three realms, are devoid of inversion, devoid of proliferation (prapañca), and devoid of conceptual discrimination, this is the meaning of 'supramundane.'" Question: If the five ungrasped aggregates are conditioned and untainted, why say they are not altered by characteristics? Answer: Because of differences in the teachings. What came before was explained by the provisional and Hinayana teachings. If determined by the real teaching, they are said to be neither conditioned nor unconditioned, because they are identical with the true nature; they merely manifest in the semblance of the characteristics of aggregates, and so are designated by the name "aggregates." The "Cunda" chapter of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Skillfully concealing the Tathāgata's conditioned characteristics, one should say that the Tathāgata is identical with the unconditioned, not to mention that each and every one perfectly interpenetrates. Knowing thus is called 'having heard much.'" Fourth, conditioned [dharmas]. Fascicle one hundred of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Having arising and cessation and being bound to causes and conditions is called 'conditioned.'" The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Because of having apprehension (upalabdhi), it is called 'conditioned.'" The two treatises differ in terms of mind and object. Here four things are briefly mentioned: the three realms are the bases [upon which beings rely], and sentient beings are those who rely [upon them]. However, the bases become differentiated according to the mind; hence the treatise says, "The realm to which desire belongs is called the desire realm," and so on. Fifth, unconditioned [dharmas]. "Conditioned" (wei) means "made" (zuo)—that is, the aforementioned arising and cessation; now, space and so forth are tranquil, vast, serene, and ever-abiding, devoid of that making; hence they are called "unconditioned." The Yogācārabhūmi says: "Devoid of arising and cessation and not bound to causes and conditions is called 'unconditioned.'" The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Because of having nothing apprehended (anupalabdhi), it is called 'unconditioned.'" The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "Because it does not fall into numbers." Thus, the general designations in the various treatises do not differ in their main import; yet, their enumerations vary in opening and combining. The Hinayana mostly speaks of three kinds, which are the first and the third and fourth here. Among the various Mahāyāna treatises, the Karatalaratna speaks of four, by adding tathatā. In the treatises of the Dharma-character school (Faxiang), six are sometimes spoken of, further adding the unshakeable (āniñjya) and the cessation of ideation and feeling (saṃjñā-vedayita-nirodha); that is, because defilement-hindrances are eliminated within analytical cessation, it is called analytical cessation, and because meditative hindrances are eliminated, the latter two are further added. Or they are expanded into eight, by unfolding three natures within tathatā—namely, the tathatā of wholesome dharmas and so forth—intending gradually to extend this tathatā to pervade all dharmas. This sūtra speaks of six, unfolding nirvāṇa out of analytical cessation because the two paths are distinct; it further adds pratītyasamutpāda, to reveal that there is not a single phenomenon that is not identical with the real; and it omits the two meditative cessations, because they are not yet ultimate. "Space" is that which is revealed by freedom from all obstructions and the absence of material things. Second, "nirvāṇa." Ancient [masters] offered two explanations. One says: because its nature is quiescent and extinct, this is the naturally pure nirvāṇa; fascicle thirty-four of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra agrees with this, this [nirvāṇa] differing from analytical cessation only in being unmanifest versus manifest. Another says: it is the fruit of natural purity; this is after the path of liberation (vimukti-mārga), whereas analytical cessation is within the uninterrupted path (ānantarya-mārga). However, since non-analytical cessation in the Mahāyāna is defined in terms of natural purity, and the dharmatā is spoken of below, this latter interpretation is correct. Third, "cessation through analysis" (pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha). "Analysis" (saṃkhyā) means the mental factor of wisdom; because wisdom serves as the condition to discern defilements, it can reveal the principle of cessation; hence the Tang Tripiṭaka Master [Xuanzang] translated it as "cessation through discernment" (ze mie), meaning that the cessation obtained by the power of discernment is called analytical cessation. However, this term "cessation" has two senses: first, the principle's nature is quiescent and extinct—this takes its name from what is revealed; second, because the principle is revealed through the destruction of defilements, the principle is called cessation—this takes its name from what reveals it. Fourth, "cessation not through analysis" (apratisaṃkhyā-nirodha). It is not obtained through the destruction of defilements by the mental factor of wisdom, but is revealed simply through natural purity and the deficiency of conditions. Fifth, "pratītyasamutpāda." It has both specific and general [senses]. The specific refers to the twelve links of dependent origination; therefore, the Vibhajyavādins, the Mahāsāṃghika, the Ekavyāvahārika, the Gokulika, the Mahīśāsaka, and the Lokottaravāda all establish the twelve links of dependent origination as unconditioned. Their view is that because their sequential functioning as conditions is eternally unconfused, they are said to be permanent. Whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, this dharma is naturally so; hence it is called unconditioned. Thus fascicle thirty-two of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The Śrāvaka teachings also speak of dharmatā and the reality limit (bhūtakoṭi)." Hence in the Saṃyuktāgama it is said that a monk asked the Buddha: "Were the twelve links of dependent origination made by the Buddha, or were they made by someone else?" The Buddha told the monk: "I did not make the twelve links of dependent origination, nor were they made by someone else. Whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, all dharmas are just as they are; the marks of dharmas and the station of dharmas (dharmasthititā) eternally exist, namely, 'because this exists, that exists,' and so forth." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra also says they are unconditioned. Master [Hui]yuan said: "Discussing the dharma in terms of persons, transmigration through the three times is conditioned. Setting aside persons and discussing the dharma, the characteristics of dharmas are eternally fixed; therefore it is called unconditioned." Looking at the intention of the present sūtra, pratītyasamutpāda is devoid of intrinsic nature; therefore it is called unconditioned. The Larger Prajñāpāramitā says: "The bodhisattva contemplates the twelve links of dependent origination as being inexhaustible like space." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "The twelve links of dependent origination are Buddha-nature." Although only the twelve links of dependent origination are cited, all dharmas of the aggregates and realms are already subsumed. Sixth, "the abiding of dharmatā." This is tathatā. Because it is not deluded or inverted, it is called tathatā. Moreover, "real" and "thus-as-always" selects out the false and selects out phenomena; in all stations, it is eternally like its nature. Saying that it "abides" is due to its freedom from alteration and change. Being the nature of all dharmas is the sense of according with conditions. Saying again that it "abides" is the sense of being unchanging—phenomena, in being immediately false and immediately true, are all thus. If based on the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, dharmatā and the abiding of dharma each constitute one meaning (and so forth), which would make seven dharmas. Now, the Hinayana speaks of three: space is taken as external space, and moreover they posit all three as truly existent. If explained according to the Mahāyāna, not only does the number increase, but the meaning is also different. In the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra, they are established on the basis of two meanings: first, because they are transformed by the mind alone; second, they are nominally posited based on dharmatā. That is, all these meanings are merely the one tathatā, hypothetically established according to different senses: first, the meaning of marklessness; second, the meaning of being what is realized; third, the meaning of the exhaustion of defilements; fourth, the meaning of natural purity; fifth, the meaning of according with conditions; sixth, the meaning that according with conditions is immediately unchanging. Here, dharmatā is simply tathatā.

24.12.3

However, the dharmatā-tathatā is also a provisional designation: to ward off nihilistic denial it is said to exist; to ward off grasping at existence it is said to be empty; to prevent it from being thought illusory it is said to be real; because the noumenon is not deluded or inverted it is named tathatā; being the nature of all dharmas it is named dharmatā—there is no real entity apart from form and mind. Now, one who is of great learning does not merely know its name; one should know it in this way. Sixth, regarding designated dharmas (vyākaraṇa-dharma), some explain: because they are able to incur desirable or undesirable retributions, they are called designated (vyākaraṇa). This is a general explanation. Where vyākaraṇa is distinguished elsewhere, it refers to the wholesome and the unwholesome. Here, only the wholesome is raised; it should be said that wholesome dharmas that conform to principle may be recorded [or designated]. Below, the essences of the designated dharmas are presented: there are eleven phrases, which in meaning are subsumed under just five: The Four Noble Truths, as already distinguished above in this chapter. The four fruits of the ascetic (śramaṇa), as in the "Chapter on Pure Conduct". The four analytical knowledges (pratisaṃvid), as in the Ninth Stage. The thirty-seven factors [of enlightenment], as in the Fourth Stage. The four fearlessnesses (vaiśāradya) will now be explained briefly: because one has no cowardice in the face of external challenges, they are called fearlessnesses. The Yogācārabhūmi says: "Regarding these slanders and challenges, the Tathāgata sees no truly existent causal marks whatsoever; by this reason and condition he is able to understand inherently, remaining serene and fearless." The fearlessnesses are four: first, fearlessness of all-knowledge (sarvajñāna); second, fearlessness regarding the destruction of contaminations (āsravakṣaya); third, [fearlessness regarding] the obstructive dharmas; fourth, [fearlessness regarding] the path leading out of suffering. Each of these four sections has a challenge and an answer: First, the external challenge states: If the Buddha is omniscient, when monks come from other lands, why is it necessary to ask them, 'Are you dwelling in comfort?' Saying he is omniscient means there is nothing he does not know; now asking others, how contradictory! The Buddha proclaimed of himself: 'I am an omniscient person; it is only to gather in those who come, following the conventional manners of teacher and pupil among worldly beings.' Second, some challenge: If the Buddha says of himself that his contaminations are forever destroyed, why did he address Rāhula with loving words and scold Devadatta? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha saw correctly that it had no basis, remaining secure and without cowardice, proclaiming his virtuous title: 'My contaminations are truly destroyed; it is only to subdue them according to their capacities.' Third, some challenge: If the Buddha said that desire can obstruct the path, why do stream-enterers (srotāpanna) and once-returners (sakṛdāgāmin) still have love for wives and children? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha's mind was without fear or dread; he proclaimed his virtuous title: 'I say that desire can obstruct the path, but it obstructs non-returners (anāgāmin) and arhats, not the first two fruits.' Fourth, some challenge: If the Buddha said that the noble paths can end suffering, why do arhats suffer the pain of ulcers bursting and snakebites? Regarding this challenge, the Buddha's mind was without fear or dread, proclaiming his virtuous title: 'I say that the noble path truly can end the limit of suffering, but I speak of the future, not the present.' Among the four, the first one is free from the cognitive obscurations (jñeyāvaraṇa); the second is free from the affliction obscurations (kleśāvaraṇa); the third concerns the obstacles to the path of departure; the fourth is the path of departure itself. The first two are for one's own benefit; the latter two are for the benefit of others. As to why he praises these four himself: the first is for bodhisattvas; the second is for śrāvakas; the latter two are for both in common. The Dazhidulun, scroll 28, the Yogācārabhūmi, scroll 50, and the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā, scroll 14, distinguish their marks at length. Seventh, the undesignated [or undeclared] (avyākṛta) dharmas are divided into two: first, inquiring into the name; second, from "namely, the world" below, distinguishing the marks. Now, the first: Undesignated has two meanings: first, being neither wholesome nor unwholesome, unable to incur desirable or undesirable retribution, it is called undesignated. This may explain other texts. Here, it precisely refers to false conjectures and unreasonable questions that cannot be recorded [or answered]; hence they are called undesignated, not in contrast to wholesome and unwholesome. Therefore, the Kośa, scroll 19, says: "Various sūtras speak of the fourteen undeclared matters," which is precisely this meaning. They are also called 'set-aside declarations' (sthāpanīya-vyākaraṇa); 'declaration' means answering, and because they should not be answered. Why are they not answered? It is because these are meaningless words: knowing them does not free one from birth and death; not knowing them does not obstruct nirvāṇa. The designated matters mentioned earlier are the opposite of this. The Dazhidulun, scroll 3, says: "Why are the fourteen challenges not answered? Because these matters have no reality. That dharmas are permanent—there is no such principle; to speak of annihilation is also like this. As if someone were to ask: 'Milking a cow's horn, how many pints of milk do you get?' Can this be called a question? Furthermore, the world is endless like a cartwheel. Furthermore, there is no benefit and there is harm, falling into evil views, obscuring the true reality of the Four Truths and all dharmas. Furthermore, humans are incapable of knowing. Furthermore, [the Buddha] speaks in accord with the Dharma." Scroll 17 says: "There was a monk who contemplated the fourteen challenges and could not understand them; he took leave of the Buddha to no longer be a disciple. The Buddha said: 'I teach the Dharma to save those subject to old age, sickness, and death. These are matters of dispute, like a poisoned arrow; they should not be pursued.'" The Laṅkāvatāra also says: "These are all worldly debates, not what I teach." As for the fourteen, these are the four tetralemmas (catuṣkoṭi) mentioned earlier here, where the fourth tetralemma is simply combined into two, namely, whether the body and the soul are one, or the body and the soul are different. Now, various sūtras and treatises mostly speak of the fourteen challenges, though their characteristics may be the same or different; they will not be harmonized in detail. When this sūtra discusses them fully, they do not go beyond the two attachments to self and dharmas. The text is divided into five sections: First, there are four tetralemmas, clarifying the undeclared with respect to the self. Second, from "past" below, horizontally discussing the quantity of ordinary beings and noble ones with respect to the three periods of time. Third, from "what kind" below, vertically discussing the beginning and end with respect to ordinary beings and noble ones. Fourth, from "from whence does the world" below, inquiring into where the three worlds come from. Fifth, from "which" below, distinguishing the undeclared with respect to the limits of birth and death. Now, regarding the first, although there are sixteen phrases, their faults do not go beyond the two views of annihilation and permanence. As for "the world," according to the Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, it extends across the three worlds, namely, the world of sentient beings, the world of the five aggregates, and the receptacle world. The meaning of this text here primarily reveals the world of sentient beings, and secondarily clarifies the world of the five aggregates, because sentient beings are the general, primary provisional entities, which non-Buddhists impute to be the self. Regarding the views such as having an end: the first four phrases on having an end pertain to future times; the four phrases on permanence and so forth pertain to past times. The existence or non-existence of the Tathāgata arises based on nirvāṇa. Therefore, the Madhyamakaśāstra, "Chapter on Erroneous Views," says: "Did I exist in past times, or did I not exist? Views such as the permanence of the world all depend on past times. Will I act in future times, or will I not act? Views such as having an end all depend on future times." The "Chapter on Nirvāṇa" says: "The existence, non-existence, etc., of the Tathāgata after extinction arises based on nirvāṇa. The four phrases on the existence and non-existence of the self and sentient beings are spoken in relation to the present." Having known the basis for the arising of views, next they are individually explained according to the text, which forms four sections. In the first four phrases, saying "having an end" refers to non-Buddhists holding the view of annihilation, who impute that the self will no longer act in future lifetimes, ending along with this body. "Without an end" means that the self will act further in future lifetimes.

First 14 of 25 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經疏 — Classical Chinese