大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 50

English (machine translation) 50

Language: English

50.1

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

Regarding the commentary's phrase "as explained in the first dharma among the ten kinds of courageous and powerful dharmas in the chapter on the Inconceivable": the sūtra states, "Namely, the bodies of all buddhas cannot be destroyed, their lifespans cannot be severed, up to: even if the eight classes of gods and dragons exhaust their power to rain down great vajra mountains like Mount Sumeru and the Cakravāḍa iron mountains all at once everywhere throughout the trichiliocosm, they cannot cause fear in the Buddha's mind, nor can they shake even a single hair."

50.3

Regarding the commentary's phrase "possessing the great power of the limbs and joints of Nārāyaṇa": this is from the Northern recension of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], fascicle 11 (the Southern recension, fascicle 10, "Chapter on Manifesting Sickness"). Because the Buddha manifested reclining, Kāśyapa wondered and asked, "The Tathāgata is already free from the distress of sickness; for what reason does he recline leaning?" Thereupon he appraised and compared the Buddha's power, saying, "The power of ten small oxen is not equal to the power of one great ox; the power of ten great oxen is not equal to the power of one blue ox; the power of ten blue oxen is not equal to the power of one common elephant; the power of ten common elephants is not equal to the power of one wild elephant; next is a four-tusked elephant, next a white elephant of the Snow Mountains, next a Gandhamādana elephant, next a blue elephant, next a yellow elephant, next a red elephant, next a white elephant, next a mountain elephant, next an utpala elephant, next a puṇḍarīka elephant, next a champion wrestler (malla), next a bhagavanta, next an eight-armed Nārāyaṇa, and next the power of a single joint of a bodhisattva of the ten abidings—in each case, ten of the former are not equal to one of the latter." Like the previous six kinds, one therefore knows that the Buddha's power is inconceivable.

50.4

Regarding the commentary's phrase "Treatise [on the Great Perfection of Wisdom], fascicle 16: like the venomous dragon" and so forth: the treatise states, "Question: 'We already know the characteristics of śīla; what is its pāramitā?' Answer: 'Some say: A bodhisattva upholding the precepts would rather forfeit their body and life than transgress a minor precept; this is śīla-pāramitā. As explained above in the Sutra on King Sudharma, not sparing body and life in order to preserve the prohibitive precepts. For example, in a previous lifetime, the bodhisattva was once a venomous dragon of great strength; if a sentient being stood before it, one whose physical strength was weak would die at a mere glance, and one whose physical strength was strong would die upon catching its breath. This dragon once received the one-day prohibitive precepts, went forth from household life seeking quietude, and entered among the forest trees. After sitting in contemplation for a long time, it became weary and fell asleep. The nature of dragons is that when sleeping they resume the form of a snake, their body having colorful patterns in the mixed colors of the seven treasures. A hunter saw it, and exclaimed in joyful surprise, "It would be most fitting to present this rare and hard-to-obtain skin to the king of the country as clothing and adornment!" Thereupon he pressed down its head with a staff and stripped its skin with a knife. The dragon thought to itself: "My power is according to my will; overturning this kingdom would be as easy as turning over my palm. How could this petty person trap me? Now, because of upholding the precepts, I will not consider this body, and shall comply with the Buddha's words." Thereupon it restrained itself, closed its eyes and did not look, held its breath and did not breathe, feeling pity for this person. For the sake of upholding the precepts, it wholeheartedly underwent the flaying without giving rise to regret. Having lost its skin, its red flesh lay upon the ground. The day was extremely hot, and it writhed in the dirt wishing to head for a large body of water. Seeing many small insects coming to eat its body's flesh, it dared not move again for the sake of upholding the precepts. It thought to itself: "Now I give this body to these insects for the sake of the Buddha path. Now I give my flesh to fill their bodies; later, when I attain buddhahood, I will give the Dharma to benefit their minds." Having made this vow, its body dried up, its life ended, and it was immediately reborn in the second heaven, Trāyastriṃśa. The venomous dragon of that time was my present self, Śākyamuni Buddha. The hunter of that time was Devadatta and the others of the six masters. The small insects are the eighty thousand deities who attained the Way when Śākyamuni Buddha first turned the wheel of the Dharma. The bodhisattva protecting the precepts without sparing body and life, determined without regret, was like this; it is named śīla-pāramitā.'" Explanation: Although the primary topic was precepts, it directly concerns giving the skin. Also, the Bodhisattva-jātaka-sūtra contains this story, and its details are even more extensive. Previously, being a great dragon possessing great power, it would sometimes transform its body into a human. In order to sport together with dragon maidens, it went to a secluded place on Mount Veda. A garuḍa wished to devour them, intending to come to the mountains to shatter the springs and ponds and make them dry up. The dragons and dragon maidens transformed into women to take refuge with this dragon; for the garuḍa's sake, the dragon spoke the Dharma of loving-kindness, causing it to return to its original dwelling; later, for the dragons' sake, it spoke the Dharma of loving-kindness, also causing them to practice loving-kindness. Later, leaving behind noise and seeking quietude, it kept the precepts in the mountains. Exhausted after many days, it briefly lay down to rest, and then encountered the evil man; the rest is the same as the Treatise above. Regarding the commentary's phrase "and Bodhisattva-jātakanidāna-saṃgraha-sūtra, fascicle 4" and so forth: the sūtra states, "In the past, the bodhisattva fell among beasts and took the body of a deer; its flanks were golden-colored, its spine resembled lapis lazuli, its other parts were variegated with various colors difficult to name, its thighs were like mother-of-pearl, and its horns were like refined gold; its body was adorned like a treasury of the seven treasures, and the radiance of its bodily color was like the newly risen sun. The gods revered it and gave it the name 'Golden Deer.' It understood human speech well, and expounded the true Dharma to the herds of deer for their great benefit." Below, the meaning is cited in brief. It arrived beside a river where torrential waters flooded and destroyed the wooded banks; seeing a drowning man, it threw itself in to rescue him. When the man was saved, he said to the deer king, "You are my father and mother of second birth. How can I repay your virtue?" The deer king said, "I need nothing. Because my body's skin is wondrous, I am always afraid of people seeing it. You must keep silent; one who knows gratitude possesses many merits, while one who is ungrateful will immediately receive suffering retribution." This man betrayed the gratitude, returned, and reported it to the king. The king immediately ordered his chariot and had this drowning man lead them to the deer's place. The deer king was just asleep; a crow pecked its ear, and upon waking it looked out, seeing that the king's soldiers were already close. It then comforted the herd of deer, saying, "The king comes for me; do not be afraid." It went straight to the king's location, and the drowning man pointed, saying, "This is the deer king," whereupon his two hands fell off. The king saw this, dismounted, and went to the deer. The deer instead comforted the king: "Do not be afraid; I bestow fearlessness on all sentient beings." The king thereupon praised it, saying, "Although you have a beast's body, you are not truly an animal." The king said to the deer, "Since you bestow fearlessness on all sentient beings, why did you cause this drowning man's two hands to fall off?" The deer king replied, "Just as when a person violates the court's severe laws and incurs their own retribution, this man acts and receives it himself; it was not caused by me." The king then knelt upright with palms joined and said to the deer, "From this day forward, I take refuge in you forever." The deer said to the king, "If you can do so, I pray you grant this person fearlessness, thinking of him like an infant. This person will surely fall into hell, and is therefore pitiable." The king praised and revered it even more, vowing to be its disciple forever, universally bestowing fearlessness on all deer, and decreeing that within the kingdom no hunting or killing of sentient beings was permitted. It is as extensively explained there. There is also the Nine-Colored Deer Sūtra, whose narrative circumstances are identical, only that it says "nine-colored." Also, the king's consort had a night dream and feigned illness, and the king sought it for her, promising to divide half the kingdom. The drowning man, coveting gain, met the king and said he knew the deer's location, whereupon his face immediately became leprous. Later in the identification: the deer was my present self, the king was the father king, the consort was Sundarī, the crow was Ānanda, the drowning man was Devadatta, and the rest is all the same. Explanation: The golden color is identical in meaning, but not specifically the abandonment of skin; hence it says "broadly similar in general." Regarding the commentary's phrase "marks and minor characteristics": "mark" refers to the fifteenth of the thirty-two marks, the body's skin being golden-colored; "minor characteristic" refers to the sixteenth of the eighty minor characteristics, because the World-Honoured One's bodily skin is sleek, soft, luminous, fresh, and pure, untouched by dust and grime.

50.5

Regarding the commentary's phrase "slender and long refers to the measure" and so forth: this speaks directly in terms of phenomena. If explained according to the marks and minor characteristics, "slender and long" is a mark, namely the third of the thirty-two marks. Rounded and tapering is the second minor characteristic; copper-red is the first minor characteristic; being able to gather together is because it upholds the dharmadhātu, and is also the fifty-third minor characteristic. Saying "minor characteristics" refers to them generally; from this one phrase, the text is differentiated into power, color, and so forth. Also, in the Yogācāra[-bhūmi], all twenty fingers and toes being exceptionally wondrous constitutes twenty minor characteristics. "Level and equal means not uneven" is precisely the third minor characteristic, which states: "each equal without difference." "Wheel mark and so forth" is precisely the eightieth minor characteristic. The above states: the eightieth is that the World-Honoured One's hands, feet, and the front of his chest all have the virtuous mark of the auspicious joy-swirling [svastika], patterned like fine embroidery, colored like vermilion pearls, present on both the interior and exterior. "Pūrṇaghaṭa" means here "full vase." "Svastika" means here "having joy." Therefore it says: "For the term 'complete and round,' one should say 'full vase'; for the term 'turning to the right,' one should say 'having joy.'" Its turning to the right is in Sanskrit nandikāvarta. "According to the Sūtra on the Ocean of Samādhi of Contemplating the Buddha" refers to the first fascicle, "Chapter on Contemplating the Marks." In the commentary, "copper-red" is precisely a minor mark. The minor characteristic is precisely the first minor characteristic. Saying "in terms of phenomena, the nails are not stained by dust and dirt" is also the first minor characteristic. Furthermore, the first minor characteristic states: "First, the World-Honoured One's fingernails are narrow, long, thin, lustrous, bright, clean, fresh, and pure, like copper-red color"; hence it possesses both of these. Regarding the commentary's phrase "prajñāpāramitā is like a great mass of fire": this is Nāgārjuna's praise of prajñā, which will be extensively cited and explained when arriving at [the section on] Jayoṣmīya.

50.6

Regarding the commentary's citation "Forty-one: entering fire to seek the Dharma," this text is found in the third ground. Furthermore, the Sūtra of the Wise and the Foolish says: "Again, in the far-distant past, immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas ago, on this Jambudvīpa there was a great king named King Brahmā. He had a crown prince named Dharmakāma, who loved the true Dharma and sought it in the four directions, but having searched everywhere without finding it, he was distressed and sorrowful. Śakra transformed himself into a brahmin and came to the king's dwelling. The king invited him to take a seat and expound the wondrous Dharma for him. The brahmin said: 'It was exceedingly difficult to study it. How could I speak it lightly?' The crown prince questioned him closely. He answered: 'If you can make a great fire-pit ten fathoms deep, fill it with blazing fire, and throw yourself into it as an offering, then I will grant you the Dharma.' The crown prince followed his instruction. The host of ministers admonished and pleaded with him to have pity on them. The brahmin said: 'I am not forcing you. If you will not do this, I will not preach the Dharma.' The king knew his intention was firm, so he ordered an envoy riding an elephant that traveled eight thousand li to proclaim to all: 'After seven days from now, the crown prince will enter the fire to seek the Dharma.' Minor kings and others from far and near all gathered, weeping and dissuading him. The crown prince said to them: 'Throughout the long expanse of saṃsāra, I have lost my life countless times—among humans, slaughtering one another out of greed; in the heavens, when lifespan ended, falling into distress and sorrow over the loss of desires; in the hells, being burned by fire, boiled in cauldrons, and the like. I have endured immeasurable sufferings without ever doing so for the sake of the Dharma. Now I make an offering of this foul, putrid body for the Dharma; how could you stop me?' Just as he was about to throw himself into the fire, he first requested the preaching of the Dharma. The brahmin spoke a verse for him: / 'Always practice a mind of loving-kindness, / And eliminate thoughts of wrath and harm; / With great compassion, pity sentient beings, / Grieving for them so that tears fall like rain. / Cultivate great sympathetic joy, / Equalizing [others with] the Dharma you have attained; / Rescue and protect them with the intention of the Path: / Only then do you accord with the bodhisattva's practice.' / Having heard the Dharma preached, he threw himself into the fire-pit. Śakra and King Brahmā each took hold of one of his hands and praised him, saying: 'All living kinds depend on the crown prince for peace. Why throw yourself into the fire and bereave your parents?' The crown prince replied: 'For the sake of the unsurpassed Path, I do not spare my physical life.' No sooner had he thrown himself into the fire than the fire turned into a lotus pond, and the crown prince sat peacefully upon a lotus terrace, while the devas rained flowers until they reached the knees. King Brahmā of that time was Śuddhodana."

50.7

Regarding the commentary's words "Like crushing bones at the Fragrant City, and abandoning the body on the Snow Mountains": the latter clause is from the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, and the former clause is from the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra. The text of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra is vast; here it is briefly cited following the twenty-seventh [fascicle] of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. The sūtra says: "The Buddha told Subhūti: 'A bodhisattva mahāsattva who seeks prajñā should be like Sadāprarudita (here translated as Changti, 'Ever Weeping'), who in seeking prajñā did not spare his physical life. Hearing a voice in the sky saying, "Just travel east and do not fear toil and hardship; you will surely hear it," the bodhisattva, having heard this, had this thought: "I am told to travel east, but when and where will I hear prajñā?" He then stood weeping for seven days. A buddha appeared in the sky and spoke to him: "Five hundred yojanas east of here, there is a city named Gandhavatī (Fragrant City). There is a bodhisattva there named Dharmodgata (here translated as Fashang), who expounds the Prajñāpāramitā three times a day." With his mind wishing to go, he immediately attained immeasurable samādhi gateways. The buddhas consoled him and then suddenly disappeared. Wishing to see Dharmodgata, he reflected that he was destitute and had nothing with which to make an offering, so he resolved to sell his own body. Midway, there was a city, but because the māras obscured them, no one heard his cries offering his body for sale; only the daughter of an elder in the city heard him. Śakra transformed himself into a brahmin and said: "I do not need a person; I only need human blood and marrow to sacrifice to the heavenly deity." The bodhisattva thereupon pierced his left arm to draw blood, sliced the flesh of his right thigh, and was further about to break his bones to extract marrow. At that time, the elder's daughter saw him from afar atop a tower, came down, and asked the reason. He answered: "I wish to make an offering to Dharmodgata and seek to hear prajñā." The maiden then stopped him, promised to provide all that was needed, and went along with him. Śakra immediately restored his divine form and said: "I was only testing you. What wish do you seek?" He answered: "Grant me anuttarabodhi." Śakra said: "That is the realm of the buddhas, not within my power. What else do you seek?" He answered: "I ask that my body be restored as before." Śakra granted it, and he was completely healed as before.'" / Commentary: This is "crushing bones." As for "Fragrant City," that Gandhavatī City had seven tiers of walls. It is mentioned because he wished to go there, and also because upon arriving at that city, he sprinkled the ground with his own blood. As for "abandoning the body on the Snow Mountains," this is explained in the fourteenth chapter, the 'Chapter on Noble Practice,' of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. In the past, the World-Honoured One was practicing in the Himalayas seeking bodhi. Śakra transformed himself into a rākṣasa, came not far away, and uttered half a verse: "All conditioned phenomena are impermanent; / This is the dharma of arising and ceasing." The bodhisattva, hearing this suddenly, drew up his hair and looked up, whereupon he saw the rākṣasa. At first, he wondered how a person who could hear such a verse could have taken on such a terrifying form. Then he thought: perhaps he heard it in the presence of a past buddha. He went to ask him at once: "Where did you obtain this half-verse spoken by the one free from fear in the past? Where did you obtain this half cintāmaṇi?" The rākṣasa said: "Out of hunger I spoke reckless words." The bodhisattva pleaded: "The flavor of the meaning of what you spoke is incomplete; please finish it for me. I will be your disciple for the rest of my life, supplying what you need." He said again: "I am now suffering from hunger; I can never speak it." The bodhisattva asked: "What food do you require?" The rākṣasa answered: "What I drink is only hot human blood; what I eat is only warm human flesh. I have flown everywhere without obtaining any." The bodhisattva pleaded: "Just speak it for me. Once I have heard the verse, I will offer my body to you." The rākṣasa said again: "Who will believe you?" The bodhisattva answered: "Śakra Devendra, Mahābrahmā, and the buddhas and bodhisattvas who possess cognition of others' minds shall bear witness." Then he took off his clothes to spread them as a high seat. Once the rākṣasa sat, he spoke the remaining half-verse for him: "Arising and ceasing having been extinguished, / Quiescent extinction is bliss." The rākṣasa said again: "The verse has been spoken; now offer me your body." At that time, the bodhisattva contemplated this meaning deeply, inscribed this verse upon rocks, walls, trees, and paths, and then climbed a tree and threw himself down. Before he reached the ground, various voices resounded throughout space praising the bodhisattva, reaching up to Akaniṣṭha. Śakra restored his original form, caught him, placed him on level ground, and praised him: "Well done! Truly you are a bodhisattva, destined to attain true awakening; may you see to my deliverance!" He bowed at his feet and departed. Because of this, [the Buddha] surpassed Bodhisattva Maitreya by twelve kalpas and attained Buddhahood first. / As for "there are many such instances," it is as told in the Bodhisattvāvadāna-sūtra: King Kāñcanasāra loved the true Dharma and summoned sages and worthy ones far and wide. A brahmin answered the summons, arrived, and demanded that the king hollow out a thousand oil lamps from his own flesh. After waiting seven days and assembling all his kin, he gouged out a thousand lamps, each the size of a coin, filled them with oil, and requested the exposition of the verse of Dharma. The brahmin spoke the verse: / "All that is permanent comes to an end; / All that is high must fall; / Where there is meeting there must be parting; / Where there is birth there must be death." / Having heard this, he lit the lamps and made this vow: "May I attain bodhi and kindle the great lamp of Dharma, its bright light illuminating all!" Śakra asked: "Do you have no regrets?" He answered: "No regrets. If this is not false, let me be restored as before." When he finished speaking, he was completely healed. Fascicle 1 of the Sūtra of the Wise and the Foolish also contains this story, naming him King Kāñcanaprabhā, where he also had a thousand nails driven into his body. Fascicle 27 of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra also contains the story of selling one's body out of devotion to the Dharma, but for fear of prolixity it is not cited. In the eighty-fascicle sūtra, Bodhisattva Samantabhadra himself speaks of the causal conditions of seeking the Dharma, and in the third ground it is also said that in seeking the Dharma, one is without stinginess regarding internal and external [possessions].

50.8

Regarding the commentary's "The Abhidharmakośabhāṣya states that formerly an emasculated person saved five hundred cattle and suffered bodily disfigurement..." and so forth, it is entirely identical to fascicle 1 of the Record of the Western Regions. It says: This is the kingdom of Quzhi, formerly called Kucha. Outside the west gate of the great city, on the left and right of the road, Buddhas' statues are each erected, more than ninety feet high, where once every five years a great assembly is held. Crossing the river to the northwest, one reaches the Āścarya-saṅghārāma, translated into the language of the Tang as "Extraordinary." Tradition says: Formerly, the previous king of this country revered the Three Jewels. Wishing to travel abroad to pay homage to the sacred traces, he ordered his younger maternal brother to oversee the affairs of state left behind. Having received the order, his brother secretly castrated himself to prevent any suspicion before it sprouted. Sealing it in a golden casket, he presented it to the king. The king asked, "What does this mean?" He replied, "Only on the day your carriage returns may it be opened." It was then entrusted to the officers to be guarded along with the army. When the king returned, indeed someone plotting harm reported to the king, "The one the king ordered to oversee the state has committed debauchery in the inner palace." The king heard this, grew furious, and wished to inflict severe punishment. The brother said, "I dare not flee punishment; I only pray that you open the golden casket." The king then opened and inspected it, and found it to be the severed genitals. He asked, "What extraordinary thing is this? What does it explain?" He replied, "Formerly, when the king traveled abroad and ordered me to oversee the affairs left behind, I feared slanderous disaster, so I castrated myself to vindicate myself. Today the verification has indeed appeared; pray deign to perceive it." The king deeply revered this extraordinary act; his affection grew all the greater, and the brother entered and exited the inner court without hindrance. The king ordered his brother to ride behind him, and he subsequently encountered a man driving five hundred cattle, intending to geld them. Seeing this, he reflected and, sympathizing with their kind, his grief deepened: "That my own body is now impaired—how could it not be past karma?" He immediately used treasures to ransom this herd of cattle. Through the power of his benevolence, his male form gradually became complete. Because his form was restored, he subsequently did not enter the palace. The king thought it strange and questioned him, whereupon he related the story from beginning to end. The king considered it extraordinary and thereupon built a saṅghārāma. He commemorated the noble deed to transmit its renown to future generations, and from this it gained its name. Regarding the commentary's "Four: Practicing in accordance with the teaching," below this other sūtras state: "Good man, if a man or a woman is endowed with four dharmas, they are called a 'real person' (puruṣa); if a man lacks these four dharmas, he cannot be called a 'real person.' Why? Although his body is that of a man, his conduct is like that of a beast. The Tathāgata tames both men and women; therefore the Buddha is named 'Tamer of Men' (puruṣadamya-sārathi)." Regarding the commentary's "Also, the Chapter on the Four Marks," this refers to the Southern text; in the Northern text it is the "Chapter on the Tathāgata-nature," corresponding to fascicle 4. As for the "four marks": first, rectifying oneself; second, rectifying others; third, being able to answer according to questions; fourth, having a good understanding of the meaning of causes and conditions, as cited earlier. The meaning is: "rectifying oneself" means clearly believing that the Three Jewels are permanently abiding and unchanging, preferring to cut off one's own tongue with a sharp knife rather than ever saying that the Tathāgata, the Dharma, or the Saṅgha are impermanent. "Second, rectifying others" means that, adapting to the capacity of the recipient to receive the Dharma, when wisdom is small, one can speak of impermanence and so forth; when wisdom is great and capable of transformation, one can then speak fully of permanence, impermanence, and so forth. "Third, being able to answer according to questions" means having a good understanding of the Tathāgata's intention in prohibiting and permitting, and speaking according to what is asked. For example, if someone asks, "How can one gain the name of a great giver without bestowing a single coin?" the Buddha says, "Not consuming liquor and meat, yet bestowing liquor and meat; not adorning with fragrances and flowers, yet bestowing fragrances and flowers; without spending a single bit, the name of giving spreads far and wide." Kāśyapa thereupon said, "One who eats meat should not accept alms." He then expounded in detail the prohibition against meat, and that formerly permitting three kinds of meat was merely to gradually lessen their greed. "Fourth, having a good understanding of the meaning of causes and conditions" means knowing for what causes and conditions the Buddha initially did not teach the profound Dharma and did not extensively establish precepts, but only taught them later. Knowing they were not yet capable of hearing it, he did not teach it earlier; since there were not yet transgressions, he did not extensively establish rules, amending them only according to the faults committed. However, these four marks take sentient beings' hearing of the Great Nirvāṇa as their virtuous capacity to reveal; generally speaking, they are all for benefiting others. If explained separately, the first is self-benefit, since one's own practice is not deviant, it is named "rectifying"; the latter three benefit others, causing them to leave behind deviant faults, hence they are named "rectifying others." This one is precisely the substance of the practice of benefiting others. The latter two are the virtues of transformation: being able to answer according to questions indicates mastery over the activities of the Dharma, skillfully answering as asked; the fourth penetrates root capacities, possessing good knowledge of the causes and conditions for bestowing teachings in accord with capacity. The above explains them in terms of the capacity to reveal. If explained in terms of the four things revealed, the sūtra states: "Furthermore, rectifying oneself means obtaining this Great Parinirvāṇa. Rectifying others means my explaining to the bhikṣus that the Tathāgata permanently abides and is unchanging. Answering according to questions means that, because of your questions, Kāśyapa, I am able to expound these profound and subtle principles extensively for bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, upāsakas, and upāsikās. The meaning of causes and conditions means that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not understand such profound meanings, and do not hear that the three dots of the letter 'I' form liberation, nirvāṇa, and mahāprajñā to constitute the secret store. Now, here, I elucidate and differentiate it, opening the wisdom eye for all śrāvakas..." and so forth. The rest is extensive, as in that sūtra. Here, it merely adopts the point that knowing these four matters constitutes a 'real person.'"

50.9

Regarding the commentary's "Although one is a woman..." and below, this is also from the end of fascicle 9 of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]. After having previously expounded the faults of women in detail, it states: "Good man, for this reason, all good men and good women who listen to this Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra should always reproach the female characteristic and seek to become male. Why? This Mahāyāna scripture possesses the characteristics of a real person (puruṣa), namely, the Buddha-nature. If a person does not know this Buddha-nature, they do not possess the male characteristics. Why? Because they cannot know themselves that they have the Buddha-nature. If there is someone who cannot know the Buddha-nature, I say that such persons are called women. If someone can know themselves that they have the Buddha-nature, I say that this person possesses the characteristics of a real person. If there is a woman who can know that her own body definitely has the Buddha-nature, you should know that such a person is indeed a man." Explanation: This passage proves that those who uphold the doctrine of the five natures are not real persons at all. If one is endowed with the four virtues, without distinguishing between man and woman, one is indeed a real person. Regarding the commentary's "However, there are generally many explanations of the seven real persons," the commentary sets forth five of them. First, relying on the Yogācārabhūmi, the seven real persons are the eight ripenings excluding the fruit of wealth and status, because it belongs to the external. The meaning of the eight ripenings corresponds to fascicle 36 of the Yogācārabhūmi; this was already fully cited at the beginning of this "Transference" [chapter], and was also briefly presented in the "Pure Practice" chapter. Regarding the commentary's "Relying on the seven sages and saints of the Hīnayāna," it is as in the "Chapter on the Sages and Saints" of the Abhidharmakośa. The "Transcending the World" [chapter] also presents the seven good cognitions, as already cited in the "Brahmacārya" chapter.

50.10

Regarding the Commentary's passage from "Among the practices of giving, briefly listing the various fields" onward: The text of the Commentary has three parts: first, briefly explaining according to difficulties; second, distinguishing the various fields; third, summarizing the intent of the sūtra. Now to the first. As for "other persons," this refers to the *Acintyaprabhāvanirdeśa-sūtra*, where Samantabhadra Bodhisattva says: "Furthermore, for the sake of safeguarding samādhi, when a bodhisattva practices the giving of Dharma in accordance with truth, he does not discriminate among fields of merit—whether foe or friend, good or evil, keeping the precepts or breaking the precepts, wealthy or poor. Furthermore, he contemplates: 'Although giving to the wealthy has no utility, nevertheless I myself should cultivate the practice of giving.'" Explanation: Those who possess wealth are "other persons." Regarding the Commentary's passage from "Among them, the stūpa of the Buddha" onward: The second part, distinguishing the various fields, has four [aspects]: First, generally establishing five fields, namely: gratitude, veneration, virtue, compassion, and suffering. Second, from "If the field of veneration is sick" onward, distinguishing their overlapping inclusion. Regarding "the fourteenth chapter of the *Upadeśa*" (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*), the treatise states: "Furthermore, by three causal conditions is dāna produced: first, purity of faithful mind; second, material wealth; third, the field of merit. The mind has three kinds: either of compassion, or of veneration, or of both compassion and veneration. Giving to the poor, base, and to various animals is giving out of compassion. Giving to the Buddha and the various dharmakāya bodhisattvas and so forth is giving out of veneration. If one gives to the aged, sick, and poor arhats and pratyekabuddhas, that is giving out of both veneration and compassion." Explanation: The treatise has only these three propositions; here, there is that which is neither of veneration nor of compassion, which corresponds to the above "other persons." Third, "comprehensively subsuming them into two" means that the field of compassion subsumes suffering, and the field of veneration subsumes gratitude and virtue. Fourth, from "However, these two fields" onward, revealing their relative superiority and inferiority. Within this there are two: first, discerning the two fields comparatively; second, explaining solely in terms of the field of veneration. In the former, there are three: first, in terms of wisdom; second, in terms of the object; third, in terms of compassion—which also constitutes the third in terms of the mind. Second, in terms of the object: first harmonizing mind and object, hence it states "guiding the mind by principle." Now to the first: fulfilling the above guiding of the mind by principle, the mind is non-dual; how much less should there be discrimination in regard to the object? This refers to the chapter on the elder's son Shan-de (Sudatta) in the first fascicle of the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa*, where the elder's son in his father's house organized a great gathering of giving, making offerings to all śramaṇas, brahmins, non-Buddhists, the poor, base, solitary, and beggars, lasting for seven days. At that time, Vimalakīrti entered the assembly and rebuked him, saying: "You should hold an assembly of Dharma-giving; what use is this assembly of material giving?" He asked: "What is meant by an assembly of Dharma-giving?" He replied: "An assembly of Dharma-giving has neither prior nor posterior; it makes offerings to all sentient beings at one time. This is called an assembly of Dharma-giving." Afterwards, he broadly expounded the giving of Dharma for him. The elder's son gave rise to the aspiration, took off a necklace from his body worth a hundred thousand, and offered it to him, but he refused to take it. Upon being requested again, he accepted it and divided it into two portions: one portion was given to the lowliest beggar in this assembly, and he took one portion to offer to that Tathāgata Duṣprasaha. The entire assembly saw the Tathāgata Duṣprasaha in the radiant realm, and also saw the necklace transform above that Buddha into a four-pillared jeweled platform, clearly adorned on four sides without obstructing one another. When Vimalakīrti had manifested these spiritual transformations, he spoke these words again: "If a donor with an equal mind gives to a lowliest beggar, just as if it were the mark of the Tathāgata's field of merit, without discrimination, equal to great compassion, not seeking karmic recompense—this is called having complete Dharma-giving." Explanation: Since it says "without discrimination," this is guiding the mind by principle. "Equal to great compassion" is also compassion of identical substance. Moreover, saying that when the donor gives with an equal mind, this is guiding the mind by principle. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "If one considers purely the object" onward: The second is that in terms of the object, veneration is superior. As for the *Sūtra on Weighing Merits*, the sūtra states: "Giving to an animal gains a hundredfold blessing; giving to a non-Buddhist gains a thousandfold blessing," and so forth, which was already cited earlier. Furthermore, the *Atyadbhuta-sūtra* states: "To make offerings with the seven jewels and the like, filling the four continents, to the noble persons of the four fruits, and to extensively build stūpas and shrines after their extinction, is not equal to the merit of building a Buddha stūpa of roasted barley and the like, even up to calculation and metaphor being incomparable." Explanation: This means that even the four fruits do not equal the Buddha, clarifying that the field of veneration is superior. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "If in terms of the mind" onward: The third is spoken in terms of the compassionate mind. However, the *Tanxuan ji* cites from the *Sūtra on Resolving Doubts Concerning the Semblance Dharma*: "Even giving to Buddhas, bodhisattvas, śrāvakas, and sentient beings is not equal to someone giving a mouthful of food to an animal," and so forth. This is an apocryphal sūtra, hence the Commentary does not cite it. It only adopts "directly drawing forth compassion," because compassion is the root of the bodhisattva, and compassion is the essence of the bodhisattva. If there is no great compassion, one is not a bodhisattva; hence the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* also states "equal to great compassion." Therefore, from "veneration has a strong field but a weak compassionate mind" onward, this is Dharma Master Kumārajīva's explanation of the words "equal to great compassion" in the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa*. But Master Daorui did not accept it; simply because the mind is equal, "equal" is just the aforementioned ultimate truth. Now adopting the mutual fulfillment of the latter two, hence it says "each has its excellence." Regarding the Commentary's passage from "If they are equally fields of veneration" onward: The second only discusses superiority and inferiority within veneration, because the fields of gratitude and virtue are both fields of veneration. Within this there are three: First, distinguishing veneration and gratitude. Second, from "If they are equally gratitude" onward, distinguishing between the monastic and the secular within gratitude. As for the *Sūtra of Śāriputra's Questions*, the sūtra is only in one fascicle. "It asks: 'Why did the Tathāgata say that the debt of gratitude to parents is great and cannot be repaid, yet also said that the debt of gratitude to masters and the Saṃgha is immeasurable? Which is paramount?' The Buddha said: 'For householders, filially serving parents at their knees cannot repay their giving birth, raising, and nurturing. Because the debt of birth and upbringing is deep, it is called great. If one studies under a master and develops knowledge and vision, this debt of gratitude is great. For monastics, renouncing the household of their parents and of saṃsāra, entering the Dharma-gate and receiving the subtle and marvelous Dharma is the power of the master. Giving birth to and nurturing the dharmakāya, bringing forth the wealth of merit, and nourishing the life of wisdom—its function cannot be greater. Looking back to one's birth [parents], they come second.'" Explanation: If based on the meaning of the sūtra, the earlier part of the Commentary accords with the earlier intent, each having its own weight. Comparing the two, monasticism is superior, hence stating "or in terms of producing the physical body" and so forth; thus the superiority and inferiority may be known, which accords with the later intent of the sūtra. Third, from "Equally being fields of virtue" onward, distinguishing between the universal and the particular within the field of virtue. Citing the *Brahmajāla-sūtra*, namely the Bodhisattva Precepts: "If a disciple of the Buddha, whether monastic bodhisattva, householder bodhisattva, or any dānapati, when inviting the Saṃgha as a field of merit to make vows, should enter the monastery and inquire of the administrator. If one wishes to invite them in order now, one obtains the Saṃgha of the worthy and noble ones of the ten directions. Yet if worldly people specially invite five hundred arhats and the Saṃgha of bodhisattvas, it does not equal one ordinary monk invited in the Saṃgha's sequence. If one invites specially, this is a non-Buddhist practice. The seven Buddhas have no practice of special invitation; it does not accord with filial piety. If one intentionally invites specially, one commits an offense of light defilement." Regarding the Commentary's "Also, due to the agent, the wealth, and the field" and so forth: The *Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya* states: "Due to differences in the agent, the wealth, and the field, the fruits of giving differ." This is in terms of the approach of discrimination, possessing superiority and inferiority in all three wheels. The agent refers to a heavy mind, a light mind, and so forth; wealth refers to good items, bad items, and so forth; the field refers to veneration, compassion, and so forth. Regarding the Commentary's passage from "However, now in this context" onward: The third concludes and indicates the purport of the sūtra. The three matters are the three wheels; broadness is in terms of phenomena, and depth is in terms of principle. Harmonization has two meanings: first, harmonizing the above phenomena and principle; second, using principle to harmonize phenomena, layer upon layer without end.

50.11

Regarding the Commentary's "Meanings are mostly like this, inverting and repeating previous words": This is one of the five losses of the original, as explained in the first assembly.

50.12

As for the commentary's "Sudāna": here [in Chinese] it means "well-loved" or "dearly loved." The sūtra is only one fascicle, but narrates matters in great detail; I will now quote it briefly. Ānanda inquired, and the Buddha said: "Incalculable kalpas in the past, there was a great kingdom named Yebo, whose king was named Shipa. Having no son, he prayed to the spirits, and subsequently had a son. Inside and outside the court there was great rejoicing, and he was named Sudāna. When he was fifteen or sixteen years old, there was no skill or art he had not mastered. He took a consort named Manyuan, and had a son and a daughter. The prince broadly practiced generous giving. He gave away the king's rival-conquering, lotus-treading white elephant to his enemy country. The great ministers were angry and fearful, and reported it to the king. They banished the prince to Mount Dandaka. When the prince left the city gates, he gave away everything with no discrimination regarding chariots and horses, and even went begging for others. The prince carried the son on his back and his consort held the daughter, reaching that mountain. In the mountain there was an ascetic named Aranta. The prince thereupon asked the ascetic, 'Where can one dwell?' He replied, 'The mountain is a land of merit; there is nowhere that will not do.' They then built a thatched hut and dwelt there. There was a brahmin with twelve deformities from the kingdom of Kuru, who only took a wife at the age of forty. His wife made him seek male and female slaves. Hearing that the prince was fond of giving, he came six thousand li to the mountain to beg. First encountering a hunter who wished to kill him, [the brahmin] said, 'The king sent me to welcome back the prince.' The hunter then released him. Seeing the prince, he begged for his children; the prince bound them himself to give them to him. Their mother was not present. The mother's eye twitched and her left hand itched; fearing that her children were not well, she rushed back and asked three times, but the prince did not answer. When she asked again, he then replied, 'I have already given them away.' His wife fainted away for a long time before reviving, and wept aloud. The prince said: 'Do you remember that in the past, at the time of Dīpaṃkara Buddha, I was a brahmin youth and you were a girl selling flowers? I bought five flowers from you with five hundred gold coins; you deposited two flowers to be offered above to the Buddha, making a vow to become my wife. At that time I made an agreement with you not to oppose my wishes, and you replied that you would agree. Why do you now disturb my mind of good giving?' Śakra, knowing his mind was resolute, transformed again into a brahmin, also with twelve deformities, and approached him to beg for his wife; the prince gave her away immediately. [The brahmin] then came back and deposited her with the prince. The prince questioned him in astonishment, and only then did he reply, 'I am the King of the Gods; I came intentionally to test you.' He then resumed his divine form and bade them make vows. The wife made three vows: first, she vowed that her sold children would return to their native country; second, she vowed that her children would not suffer hunger and hardship; third, she vowed that she and the prince would soon return to their native country. Śakra said, 'It shall be as you wish.' The prince made a vow, saying: 'May all sentient beings obtain deliverance from the sufferings of birth, old age, sickness, and death.' Śakra praised him, saying: 'Great indeed is this vow, beyond what I am capable of! What further vow do you seek?' He made another vow, saying: 'Now, for the time being, I vow to attain great wealth and constantly practice giving. I also vow that the king and great ministers will all long to see me.' Śakra said, 'As you wish.' The brahmin took the children back, but his wife was angry: 'What use is royal stock? Go seek other slaves!' He then went to a foreign country to sell the children. Led on by Śakra, there were no buyers, so he came to their native country. The people of the country recognized them and reported it to the king. The king wished to embrace them, but they cried and refused to approach. When he questioned the man selling them, he first said: 'For the boy, one thousand silver coins and one hundred bullocks; for the girl, two thousand silver coins and two hundred cows.' The king asked, 'Why is the female valued and the male despised?' He replied: 'The women of the king's inner palace have no blood relation to the king; they come from humble origins yet enjoy honor and favor. The king has only one son, whom you drove into the deep mountains without even caring for him. By this it is clear that the female is valued and the male is despised.' The king thereupon sent people to pursue the prince and bring him back, entrusted him with the treasury to give away at will, and he subsequently attained Buddhahood. The father was Śuddhodana, the mother was Māyā, the consort was Gopā, the son was Rāhula, the daughter was the present Luofu Chenglimu, the brahmin was Devadatta, and the wife was Ciñcā-māṇavikā. The ascetic on the mountain was Maudgalyāyana, and the hunter was Ānanda." As for the commentary's "King Śubhavyūha": it is as in the Mahālaṃkāra-śāstra. As for the commentary's "Also, the Bodhisattva-jātaka-sūtra speaks of King Sarvaṃdada giving away his two sons": the sūtra has three fascicles; this is now in the second half of the first fascicle to the first half of the second fascicle. Its origin story is completely similar to Sudāna's, except that the former gave one son and one daughter, whereas this one gave two sons who were both male, and additionally had his eyes begged for, and briefly omits the king inviting him back; the rest is mostly identical. I will quote it briefly again. King Sarvaṃdada was fond of giving; he gave away the king's white elephant that walked on lotuses and was able in strength to rival countries. The people of the country and the great ministers were all terrified, and furthermore feared that enemy nations would come to invade, so they had the prince banished to the Snow Mountains. In the mountains he gave his two sons to an ugly brahmin. The brahmin sold them, reaching their native country, and the grandfather king was startled and sighed. Later, Śakra transformed into a brahmin to beg for his wife; the prince gave her away. [The brahmin] then said: 'Your wife is upright and beautiful, and I fear she may be robbed by bandits. I will deposit her with you for now; I will surely take her later.' Having heard this, the prince silently accepted it. [Śakra] again transformed into a brahmin and begged for his eyes from him. As the prince was about to gouge them out, [the brahmin] stopped him again, saying: 'I have no use for them now; I will deposit them with you for now; I will surely take them later.' The prince said, 'How can I accept two kinds of entrustments?' Śakra, knowing his mind was resolute, restored his divine form and said: 'Both the wife and the eyes are my property. Now I deposit them with you for the time being; do not give them away to others again.' He flew into the air and left, raining down flowers and praising that he would surely realize bodhi. As for the commentary's "However, whether what is given is illusory or real" and so forth: this is the second part, distinguishing the categories. When it mentions "such as Vaiśravaṇa in the Sūtra of the Wise and the Foolish," this refers to the first fascicle. Because Brahmā requested the Buddha to preach the Dharma, the Buddha declined: "Sentient beings are obscured by defilements; it is better to pass quickly into extinction." Brahmā then cited past causes to urge the Buddha: In the past, through countless kalpas, for the sake of sentient beings you sought the Dharma, down to a single verse, giving away your body, mind, wife, and children. Why do you not recall the past, but instead wish to abandon sentient beings? Long ago in the past, in Jambudvīpa, there was a great king named Xiuloupo, who governed the eighty-four thousand small kingdoms of this world. At first he gave with material wealth, but later considered giving with the solid and real Dharma, so he recruited someone who could preach. King Vaiśravaṇa, seeing this, wished to go and test him. He transformed his body into a yakṣa, whose appearance was dark blue-black, eyes red as blood, hooked fangs protruding, and hair all standing on end. Arriving at the palace gate, he said, "I can preach the Dharma." The king invited him into the palace, wishing to ask him to preach the Dharma. He said: "Only after you first give me your beloved consort and your beloved son to eat will I give you the Dharma." The king immediately gave him his beloved consort and the most outstanding among his sons. After the yakṣa finished eating, he spoke a verse for the king: "All conditioned things are impermanent; all that are born have suffering. The five aggregates are empty and without characteristics; there is neither self nor what belongs to a self." Hearing this, the king was delighted, wrote it down, and distributed it without any regret. Vaiśravaṇa then restored his original form and praised him: "Extraordinary! Your consort and son are still alive as before." The king was the Buddha. If in the past for the sake of the Dharma he was even thus, why would he now quickly pass into extinction? Explanation: in this case, the wife and child were real, while the beggar was illusory. As for the commentary's "This refutes the bodhisattva's attachment": as the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa states, "In the worlds of the ten directions, those who act as Māra kings are mostly bodhisattvas abiding in inconceivable liberation who manifest as Māra kings through the power of upāya." Hence it says it refutes the bodhisattva's attachment. Under "Second, the beggar is real," the Mahāyānasaṃgraha is cited, which is in the eleventh fascicle. The Liang translation of the treatise says: "Or they manifest various jātakas, and by oppressing others and oppressing adversaries, they cause them to have minds of mutual love, benefit, and peace and happiness." The commentary on the treatise states: "In order to transform sentient beings with wrong views who do not believe in cause and effect, causing them to attain the true Dharma, abandon evil, and cultivate good, they therefore manifest various jātakas. As when King Visvantara gave his children to the brahmin, this was not oppressing others; these children were magically created. Why? Because a bodhisattva does not oppress this person to generate peace and happiness for that person. Furthermore, just as Bodhisattva Bhaiṣajyagarbha caused King Mecha and King Videha to oppress each other—this also was magically created—afterwards he caused them all to have minds of mutual love, benefit, and peace and happiness. What benefit is there in a bodhisattva practicing such deeds? The treatise states: 'Generating faith in others is foremost; subsequently their roots of goodness mature within the noble path of the triyāna: this is called the bodhisattva's profound distinct regulation.'" Third, that both are illusory can be known. Under fourth, that both are real, regarding "the second: those whose faculties are mature": as when King Sarvaṃdada gave his children to the brahmin, the brahmin whipped them and carried them away. Coming beneath a tree, he wished to beat them again; the tree spirit pointed its hand at the brahmin, and the brahmin immediately collapsed. The spirit wished to end his life and seize the princes to send them back. The prince addressed the spirit: "Please do not harm him. If I return again, I will cause my father the king's practice of giving to be incomplete, and will thus be an unfilial son." The spirit then released him. This is the wife and child acting as companions in practice. When one must still sacrifice one's own body and life, how could one decline due to suffering and retreat? As for "the places where giving is practiced life after life": this refers to the matter of the past causes of the Śākya maiden Gopā in fascicle seventy-five. At that time, the maiden Miaode wished to serve the prince; the prince made an agreement, saying that he feared she would be an obstacle to cultivating the bodhisattva path. That girl's intention was: "I have no lustful mind; I ask you to be my master." In the verses spoken to the prince, there was a verse saying: "Though for immeasurable kalpas I should bear upon my head / the vast and great Vajra Mountain, / if you are able to take me into your care, / I am willing to endure this suffering. / In the immeasurable sea of birth and death, / give away my flesh and body. / Where you attain the position of Dharma King, / may you cause me to do likewise. / If you are able to take me into your care / and be my master, / in the places where giving is practiced life after life, / may you constantly give me away." Explanation: these are all persons whose faculties are mature.

First 12 of 21 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 — Classical Chinese