English (machine translation)
Translation of 勝鬘寶窟
- Language
- English
- Extent
- 211 passages, 167,688 words
- Text
- complete digital text
- Source
- pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.1744 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…
Contents
Text
1.1
Preface to the Carving of the Treasure Cave of the Śrīmālā Sūtra
1.2
To consider what is called the Great Cart of the ekayāna: it is indeed the jeweled chariot of the dharmarāja. Thus myriad virtues and precious gems adorn and expand its height and breadth; the bells and chimes of the four eloquence hang in rows at its sides; its railings are dhāraṇīs; its canopy is compassion and equanimity; its cushions are dhyāna silken mats; and its rest is the pillow of tranquility. Its flower garlands hang low, bringing the joy of turning toward and taking refuge in it as people arrive from the four quarters with lifted feet; its jeweled ropes interlace, so how could the masses suffer the faults of attachment and views? Guests crowd alongside in reverence; the white ox is fat and sleek with prajñā. Furthermore, the master of the house is abundantly wealthy and does not partial out his giving; how could the vehicle ever be deficient, since its measures are limitless? How magnificent! How grand! Yet the common populace wear crowns of ignorance and necklaces of childishness, perpetually dancing in the house of sights and tastes; harnessed to doubts and driving delusions, they speed across the wilderness of saṃsāra, ravenous for glory and fame, slumbering peacefully in mirages, glued like reflections in a mirror to their physical bodies, unaware of floating grass and kindled thatch. Without recognizing the fiery pit, how would they have leisure to discuss the jeweled chariot? Thereupon our
1.3
dharmarāja lifted the four bowls with his own hands, establishing the foundation of his teaching in the Deer Park, and finally laid his body down between the Twin Trees, bringing to the utmost his proclamations using the metaphor of the elephant. Whenever the simurgh-like voice arose in song and the golden countenance shifted its brilliance, it was never without pitying their obstinate folly and grieving over their blindness. Thereupon the preeminent ones such as Mañjuśrī and Samantabhadra assisted his transformation, and the heroes of the west and the east aided his governance. Therefore, whether through grace or enmity, all was to benefit living beings; whether meeting praise or rebuke, all was the deployment of expedient means (upāya), simply with the desire to make them cast off the crown of ignorance, sever the necklace of childishness, mount the great chariot, and race along the broad thoroughfare. Here, there was
1.4
Queen Śrīmālā, who walked within the inner palace, yet who could fathom her original ground? Gentle and pure in character, her compassion was fittingly extraordinary. When the letter arrived from Ayodhyā and the Buddha's image appeared in empty space, she relied on conditions to raise the teaching and entrusted matters to meet the capacity of beings. External demons with fox-like timidity suddenly broke away before the utterance of her orchid-like demeanor, and the siṃhanāda of the definitive meaning (nītārtha) shone down fearlessly from the Buddha's lotus-like eyes. She truly resembled that single capable person among the unruly ministers of the Zhou court; how could she not be a towering figure in the shadow and echo of the Jetavana? Her sūtra is entitled Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda-ekayāna-mahopāya-mahāvaipulya. Now, the siṃhanāda is a definitive exposition; unless one has brought its principle to the ultimate, who could attain such decisive explanation? As for ekayāna, it is solely the one buddhayāna, which is the real truth. As for the great expedient means (mahopāya), it is the preaching of various teachings, which is called skillful means. Now, being a vehicle without being a vehicle, and a vehicle with nothing to convey—this is called the ekayāna. Conveying without conveying, and a conveyance with nothing conveyed—this is true conveying. Precisely because it conveys nothing, there is nothing it does not convey; precisely because it is no vehicle, there is no vehicle it is not. If not referring to such profound subtlety, by what could one speak of mahāvaipulya? Yet the ultimate principle is deep and obscure, difficult to enter when approached, evoking vast sighs; the translated words are archaic and concise, so readers fail to advance, often lamenting in frustration. In the early Tang there was
1.5
the Great Master Jiaxiang Jizang, who was born of distinguished descent in a distant land, endowed with divine spirit in accord with the rivers and peaks, inheriting the fragrant model of Nāgārjuna and fathoming the secret import of Vulture Peak. The sharpness of his debate rivaled Kātyāyana, his clarity surpassing the autumn cicada; his store of wisdom vied with Śāriputra, his beauty compared to the spring bird. He was truly an eminent guide and brilliant standard of the Dharma gate after the Buddha's demise. Thereupon, lamenting that the subtle words had ceased and grieving that the decadent trends remained unrevived, he raised his voice in lively discourse, distinguishing the genuine from the specious in doctrinal teachings; he expressed ideas and uttered words, separating the clear from the muddy regarding their purport. He then composed a commentary in several fascicles, revealing this true explanation to make it thoroughly illuminated, and set down over a hundred thousand words, unfolding this profound meaning with radiant brilliance. Without yet speaking of those who delve deeply into it and thereupon open the golden treasury, even those who merely browse it truly catch a glimpse into the treasure cave—is this not waking up the drunken and showing them the jeweled chariot? Now, its transmission to our realm certainly crossed ten thousand folds of surging waves, and reaching the present day it has also traversed over a thousand years. While in China it has already ended up lost to oblivion, in the Land of the Mulberry it never fell into the hands of fire. Nevertheless, preserved in secret manuscript copies, it did not moisten the parched throats of students; stored in the treasuries of monastaries, how could it satisfy the longing of those who admire antiquity? Moreover, dampness and mold were a constant concern, and how could one guard against silverfish damage? I have long venerated this sūtra, my mind yearning for its profound depth; once having obtained this commentary, my chest thawed like layered ice. Considering that the way is found in village or field, why neglect the bookshops? And hearing that it is carved on tree or stone, why should one be selective about jujube or pear wood? Thereupon, regardless of my own limitations, I humbly sought to propagate it widely. Repeatedly proofreading and collating, I still feared lingering errors like the confusion between lu and yu; I nevertheless commanded the carvers, and was pleased to avoid the blunders of mistaking liao for he. What is hoped is that the men and women who open and revere it will together form a bond for the future, and that the benevolent and wise who are embraced will together ride the ekayāna. So it is said.
1.6
Prefaced with reverence by the monk Dōkū on an auspicious day in the last month of winter, the sixteenth year of Genroku.
1.7
Composed by the monk Shi Jizang of the Huiri Bodhimanda.
1.8
The words of this sūtra are concise and its meaning rich; its events are far-reaching and its principles profound. Far from being merely the single sūtra of Śrīmālā, it summarizes the essential doctrine of the vaipulya. Having savored it deeply and drilled for fire over many years, gathering from ancient and modern times and searching through sūtras and treatises, I have compiled its profound text into three scrolls. If it accords slightly with the sage's intent, may its merit be bestowed on living beings; if there be errors, I pray for secret guidance.
1.9
There are five profound themes: first, explaining the title; second, narrating the origination; third, discerning the central tenet; fourth, clarifying differences in the teaching; fifth, discussing the scope of the sūtra.
1.10
Under the section explaining the title, three further divisions are opened: first, the intention behind establishing titles; second, clarifying the general and specific; third, directly explaining the title. Why titles are established for the sūtras: the ultimate principle is without name, but within the absence of names and marks, sages employ provisional names and marks to speak for the sake of living beings, wishing to make living beings realize the absence of names and marks by means of these names and marks. Just as a hanging precipice can only be climbed with the aid of a rope ladder, so the tranquil, desolate ultimate Way is truly accessed through names and marks. This is indeed the great foundation of handing down the teaching and the original intention of the multitude of sages. Furthermore, titles are established so that beings may recognize phenomena (dharmas) based on names, give rise to practice based on phenomena, and attain the fruit of liberation through practice. Nāgārjuna reprimanded the five hundred schools, saying: 'They do not know that the Buddha's intention is for the sake of liberation.' The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says: 'The scriptures expounded by the Tathāgata are all for the sake of delivering living beings.' Furthermore, titles are established because when ultimate people preach the Dharma, there is the concise and the extensive: the concise is the title's name, while the extensive is the teaching of an entire work. Expanding the concise into the extensive opens one title into a whole work; condensing the extensive into the concise rolls a whole work into one title. Furthermore, for those of sharp faculties, only a title is marked, just as Nāgārjuna entered the dragon palace in the sea and was able to awaken simply by looking at the sūtra titles; for those of dull faculties, hearing the concise title brings no understanding, and they only awaken by examining the extensive text. Furthermore, for those of dull faculties who cannot fully uphold an extensive sūtra, they concisely uphold a single title; for those of sharp faculties who are capable of upholding it extensively, the entire work is clarified. Furthermore, in order to differentiate the various scriptures from one another, each sūtra is given a distinct title; and wishing to lead living beings to understand various dharmas through the various titles, the whole work is clarified. Furthermore, to distinguish the difference between heterodox and correct teachings, internal and external, a title is placed at the head. 'Vedas' and 'Bṛhaspati' are the names of non-Buddhist scriptures, whereas 'Prajñā' and 'Nirvāṇa' are appellations of the internal teaching. It is also like the Three Fen and Five Dian, which are secular books of China, whereas the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna vehicles are the sacred teachings of India. For various conditions such as these, titles are placed at the head of the sacred teachings.
1.11
Next, in clarifying the general and specific titles: some say that what this sūtra clarifies is divided into fifteen chapters. Beginning from 'Praising the Buddha' and ending with the 'Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda' chapter, although there are fifteen chapters, they are summarized into two: the first fourteen chapters are practices for one's own benefit (svārtha), and the latter one is for the benefit of others (parārtha). Now, stating 'Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda' refers to the fifteenth, the practice of benefiting others. 'Ekayāna-mahopāya' and 'vaipulya' refer to the first fourteen chapters on one's own benefit. The reason they are not in sequence is that the final chapter indicates the person to establish virtue, and because the person is indicated first, it is mentioned before. 'Ekayāna' is the fifth chapter, 'ekayāna-mahopāya' is the first four chapters, and 'vaipulya' refers to the chapters such as 'Boundless Noble Truths'. Such an allocation is called 'specific'. What is clarified now does not agree with this interpretation: first, I question it on the basis of this sūtra; second, I use the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra as an analogy. First, to question it on the basis of this sūtra: if one says that because there is the 'Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda' chapter later, it is therefore used as the title, then in the later establishment of the sūtra's name—'I now entrust to you this Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda Sūtra'—it should also only entrust that single chapter of the sūtra. Yet since it generally entrusts the entire work later, we know that the present title 'Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda' also generally titles the single sūtra. Since 'Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda' applies generally to the entire work, the meaning of 'ekayāna-mahopāya' and the rest is likewise the same. To cite the Vimalakīrti as an analogy: the Vimalakīrti Sūtra is alternatively named Inconceivable Liberation; yet it does not designate merely the 'Inconceivable Chapter' as Inconceivable Liberation, but generally names the entire work. Thus Master Sengzhao said: 'Beginning with
1.12
Next, to clarify the section on directly explaining the title: we now explain the single title in terms of five pairs and ten meanings. As for the five pairs and ten meanings, first is the pair of person and teaching (dharma): the title "Śrīmālā" refers to the person who is able to speak [it]; from "Siṃhanāda" onward clarifies the Dharma that is spoken; this is called the pair of person and Dharma. "Siṃhanāda" is the metaphor; "Ekayāna, Mahopāya, and Vaipulya" are the Dharma; this is called the pair of Dharma and metaphor. "Ekayāna" refers to the real substance; "Mahopāya" refers to the provisional function; this is called the pair of substance and function. From "Śrīmālā-siṃhanāda" down to "Ekayāna Mahāyāna Mahopāya" refers to the distinct title of this one sūtra; "Vaipulya" refers to the common designation of Mahāyāna sūtras; this is called the pair of the common and the distinct. From "Śrīmālā" down to "Vaipulya" refers to the principle that is expressed; "sūtra" is the teaching that expresses [it]; this is called the pair of principle and teaching. Indeed, being twofold yet non-dual, the five pairs are opened; if twofold yet non-dual, then the ten meanings are not distinct. Hence a subsequent chapter states, "there is no difference in the receiving and upholding, and no difference in the saddharma." Now we explain them in order. The Way does not operate in isolation; its propagation relies on persons. This [queen] was a Great Being of the dharmakāya who assumed female form, hid her traces in the inner palace, merged her radiance and conformed with the mundane, and, wishing to promulgate a sway-sweeping transformation, manifested the form of a royal consort. Looking up in supplication to the Buddha, she expounded the great teaching; hence it is necessary to headline the person of Śrīmālā. Furthermore, as for why a person is headlined: first, spoken by the Buddha himself; second, spoken by disciples; third, spoken by devas; fourth, spoken by ṛṣis; fifth, spoken by apparitional beings. Here, wishing to distinguish it from the Buddha's own speech, "Śrīmālā" is titled. Moreover, the headlines of various sūtras generally clarify two kinds: first, sūtras spoken by the Buddha are mostly named after the Dharma; those spoken by disciples are mostly titled after the person. If the Buddha were named after the person, then the various sections would not be distinct; now wishing to make the names of the various sections distinct, they are named after the Dharma. If disciples were named after the Dharma, it would be conflated with the Master's teaching; now wishing to distinguish the roles of master and disciple, they are named after the person. Thus, the Master takes [the name] from the Dharma wishing to clarify the difference of dharmas; the disciple takes it from the person in order to clarify the difference of persons. Yet generally clarifying naming from persons, there are altogether four kinds: first, receiving the name from the person who speaks, like this commentary on the sūtra and so forth; second, establishing the appellation from the person who is spoken of, such as the Amitābha-sūtra and so forth; third, establishing the name from the person who asks, such as the Mañjuśrī-paripṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra and so forth; fourth, establishing the name from the person for whom it is spoken, such as the Tiwei-sūtra and so forth. Here this sūtra establishes its name from the person who speaks, as explained above. Furthermore, a woman is base and defiled, and additionally burdened with the five obstructions and three obediences; yet she was able to propagate and expound the ekayāna, causing those seven years of age and above to attain buddhahood. This is indeed rarely encountered in the world; her magnificent majesty and virtue ought to be headlined, and for this reason her personal name is marked in the opening title. As for "Śrīmālā", in foreign language it is called Śrīmālā. Śrī is translated here as "Śrī" (supreme/excellent). Mālā is called "garland"; garland means a flower garland. As for speaking of "supreme": one explanation says: the foremost among garlands, hence called "Śrīmālā" (Supreme Garland). Śrīmālā's parents borrowed the wondrous garlands of the world to praise their daughter, hence naming her Śrīmālā. Moreover, when she was born, people offered flowers as head ornaments; hence the designation was established based on this event. King Prasenajit, having had no children, prayed to the deities and besought good fortune; subsequently he suddenly gave birth to a daughter. The people of the state and the court officials were all delighted, and each presented precious flowers and ornate, rare ornaments. Naming was made from this event, hence she was called Śrīmālā. A second [explanation] says: comparing the girl to a flower garland, the girl surpasses the garland, hence she is called Śrīmālā. There are altogether two superiorities: first, superiority of form; second, superiority of virtue. As for superiority of form, the girl's appearance was peerless, and flower garlands could not compare, as the worldly say that when comparing flowers to a face, the face is superior to the flowers. As for superiority of virtue, the girl was intelligent and of sharp faculties, penetrating, perceptive, and easily awakened, surpassing worldly people; hence it is called superiority of virtue. Furthermore, King Prasenajit had only this daughter; the king's cherish of her was to glorify and adorn his lineage; this daughter was clever, acute, and dearly loved, surpassing worldly treasures and carven ornaments on the body; hence she is called Śrīmālā. Although naming the child based on worldly events, it darkly harmonised with her virtues. Just as Cunda's name given by his parents explained the subtle meaning; Vimalakīrti is called Untainted Fame (Vimalakīrti); Subhūti is named Born-from-Emptiness; all are worldly namings that darkly harmonised with virtues. The Great Being was also like this: inwardly endowed with all virtues to adorn herself, like worldly flower garlands used as head ornaments; hence she is called Śrīmālā. The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra speaks of "the upāsikā Guṇamālā (Virtue-Garland)"; thus we know that she took the manifold virtues as her garland. An ancient commentary states: "It is indeed a beautiful name for a dharmakāya's shared activities, a splendid designation for gathering beings. Examining it by facts, among the four limbs the head alone is exalted; in adorning the head, the garland alone is precious. Compared to prajñā, verification and illumination hold the chief place; regarding bright radiance, it is replete with virtues and combines beauties. This borrows a metaphor to reveal the real; hence it solely headlines Śrīmālā." The meaning of this explanation clarifies that externally the metaphor has three [parts]: first, the four limbs; second, the head; third, the garland adorning the head. In applying it: the manifold practices during the causal stage are the four limbs. The impartial great wisdom of the stage of fruition is the foremost among manifold virtues, hence it is called the head. Beyond the impartial great wisdom, all the other manifold virtues of the stage of fruition adorn this wisdom, hence they are called the garland. Dharma Master Fu said: "As for Śrīmālā, it is said that the Great Being takes the triyāna as the dharmakāya, and the two vehicles crown it as head ornaments; this meaning clarifies that the understanding of the triyāna is not yet fully dignified and adornful, while the wisdom of the ekayāna is the ultimate subtlety." The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra states, "the profound mind is the flower garland." Zhu Daosheng's commentary says: "Since the garland is a head garland, it binds the hair so it is not dishevelled." Another explains the profound mind: it is the mind that deeply enters into the true nature of phenomena (dharmatā). Since the true nature of phenomena entered into is subtle and profound, the mind penetrating the principle is also dignified and adorned. The dignified and adorned wisdom takes precedence over the manifold goods, just as the garland is on the head.
1.13
Question: What is the difference between a flower and a garland? Answer: The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra states, "May all sentient beings attain the Buddha-flower samādhi, with the wondrous garland of the seven factors of awakening bound upon their heads." Thus, a flower and a garland should be two things. If it is as Vimalakīrti says, "the profound mind is the flower garland", then taking flowers as a garland, they should be one thing.
1.14
Next, discussing the stage of Śrīmālā: the old explanations all say she is a dharmakāya bodhisattva, but their interpretations of the dharmakāya differ. If relying on the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, the sixth stage (bhūmi) is the physical body (māṃsakāya), and from the seventh stage onward is the dharmakāya. The commentaries on the Vimalakīrti by Kumārajīva and Sengzhao generally hold this meaning as well. Someone says: relying on the Daśabhūmika-sūtra and the meaning of this sūtra, before the seventh stage is the form body, and from the eighth stage onward is the dharmakāya; then Śrīmālā should be a dharmakāya of the eighth stage or above. Moreover, like the devatā in the Vimalakīrti whose debate subdued Śāriputra, old [masters] mostly say she is a dharmakāya of the eighth stage. Now Śrīmālā's magnificent discourse is not ashamed before this; hence we know she is a dharmakāya of the eighth stage. Relying on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa explaining the Avalokiteśvara chapter: "Knowing the dharmadhātu means knowing dharmatā. Dharmatā means the tathatā-dharmakāya." Then upon the first stage one immediately attains the dharmakāya. Furthermore, in explaining the purification of the six sense faculties, bodhisattvas before the stages receive a physical body. Hence the sūtra states, "Although they have not yet attained the wondrous essence of the outflow-free dharmatā," then we know that upon ascending the stages, one immediately realises the dharmakāya. The intention of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and other texts is also like this. If relying on the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, her name is the upāsikā Guṇamālā; her rank is settled and immovable in the tenth stage, yet for the sake of sentient beings she manifestedly received a female body. Becoming a queen consort, she wished to be a maternal exemplar to the four seas and a model of virtue to the six palaces, first guiding them with worldly etiquette, and later leading them into the Buddha's wisdom; that is what among the five births is called the body of superior birth. As for "Siṃhanāda" (Lion's Roar): Śrīmālā is her old name; Siṃhanāda is her new title. Śrīmālā praises the person; Siṃhanāda extols her speech. In foreign language it is called hari; here it is called lion. The Book of Han says lions are yellow; yet in reality they should possess five colours, but people only see the yellow ones. Its size is also not exceedingly large, but by its might and ferocity it can subdue all beasts, being the king among beasts. Dharma Master Fu cited the Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā-sūtra to explain that the lion's roar has many meanings, briefly explaining three kinds: first, practicing as spoken; second, fearless speech; third, definitive speech. What is spoken is as what is practiced; what is practiced is as what is spoken; there is no empty speech; hence it is called the lion's roar. Second, as for fearless speech: the worldly say that when a lesser sage meets a great sage, his energy and spirit are completely depleted. Yet Śrīmālā, directly before the Buddha and facing the superior assembly, gave free rein to her eloquence to expound the wondrous Dharma without any fear. Hence the Vimalakīrti states, "Expounding the Dharma without fear like a lion's roar." Furthermore, fearlessness has two [aspects]: first, not fearing others; second, being able to cause others to fear. The king of beasts roaring is also like this: first, he does not fear the hundred beasts; second, he causes the hundred beasts to fear. The Great Being expounding the Dharma is also the same in meaning. Not fearing others: superior persons approach the seat, yet her propagation of the Way is vast and untroubled—this means not fearing others. Being able to cause non-Buddhists to be startled and ashamed, and heavenly Māras to be terrified—this means causing others to fear. The lion's roar being called definitive speech: this borrows the nature of the lion as a metaphor. Just as when a lion crosses a river, it looks straight ahead and crosses; if it were crooked, it would turn back. The bodhisattva expounding the teaching is also the same in meaning: relying on the ultimate principle, she speaks the ultimate teaching; if it were not ultimate, she would not speak it. Hence the text below states, "The lion's roar is an exclusively definitive declaration." An exclusively definitive declaration is still definitive speech. Moreover, when a bodhisattva preaches the Dharma, she can propagate the Great Way above and benefit sentient beings below; there is no falsehood that is not crushed, and no correctness that is not made manifest. Hence the text below states, "Definitively proclaiming the definitive meaning of the ekayāna, and able to crush and subdue evil persons of unrighteous dharma." For this reason it is called the lion's roar. Furthermore, the lion's roar has eleven meanings, which will be fully explained later. Next, clarifying the ekayāna. From "Mahopāya" onward clarifies the Dharma that is spoken. The ultimate Way is non-dual, hence called "one" (eka); its application is unimpeded, designated as the "vehicle" (yāna). Relying on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, this Mahāyāna sūtra has seventeen kinds of names; the fourteenth is named the Ekayāna-sūtra, because this dharma gate reveals the ultimate essence of the Tathāgata's anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi and refutes the non-ultimateness of the two vehicles; here, based on the ultimate fruit and virtue, it is called the ekayāna. The meaning of the next chapter is also the same. Thus, generally discussing the meaning of "one", there are altogether ten kinds, which have been fully explained in the Commentary on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Now we briefly state the essential tenets: first, it is named "one" in contrast to the former three. As the Lotus Sūtra states: "For the śrāvakas, he preached the four truths; for the pratyekabuddhas, he preached the twelve links of dependent origination; for the bodhisattvas, he preached the six pāramitās." In contrast to those three, "one" is clarified. Hence it is said, "There is only one principle, there are not three principles; he teaches only one person, he does not teach three persons." Furthermore, it is clarified as "one" in contrast to two. As the Lotus Sūtra states: "Only this one matter is true; the other two are not real."
1.15
Question: In contrasting with two and contrasting with three, the statements seem contradictory; how are they reconciled? Answer: This is still a single meaning and there is no contradiction. Three is the common explanation; two is the specific discourse. Three being the common explanation: the one among the three is the ekayāna, and because of those two vehicles they are called three. Speaking of two vehicles: it only clarifies that the two among the three are not real, while the one among the three is real.
1.16
Question: How do we know that among the three, only the one is real, while the remaining two are not true? Answer: Because the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says, "There is only the single buddhayāna." When preaching the Dharma for sentient beings, there is no other vehicle, neither two nor three—the "two" referring to pratyekabuddhas and the "three" to śrāvakas. Thus we know that the one among the three is the buddhayāna. Now we present an analogy to show this: It is like a person who holds only a single fruit in his hand, but for the sake of his sons says there are three fruits. This is speaking of three with respect to one; hence the three are upāya. One may also say that there is only a single fruit, and on that single fruit one speaks of having the other two; hence the two are upāya and the one is real. Why is this? There is only a single fruit and there are no three fruits, yet speaking of three makes the three an upāya. There is only a single fruit and there are no other two, yet speaking of having an other two makes the two an upāya. Formulating it against the two or against the three is similarly analogous; it is still a single meaning. This is fully explained in detail in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra.
1.17
Second, refuting the three to clarify the one: Formerly, adapting to the conditions of the three [capacities], the provisional teaching of three [vehicles] was spoken, but people of the triyāna clung to them as fixed and real; now, in order to refute this, the one is clarified. Third, converging the three to return to the one: As the text below says, "within the ekayāna the various vehicles are opened up"; now they are converged to return to the one, and for this reason it says "one". Fourth, originally being without distinction, for which reason it says "one": As the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says, "All dharmas from their origin / are ever characterized by quietude and extinction." The Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa says, "Persons of the triyāna share the same tathatā-dharmakāya"; for this reason it says "one". Fifth, the three are precisely the one: Those of penetrating insight realize that the three are precisely the single mark. Sixth, concealing the three to clarify the one: Sentient beings who are transformed always have both conditions—the three and the one; therefore, the Tathāgata possesses both teachings—the three and the one—like two birds flying together, never parting from each other. Formerly, for the sake of the conditions of the three, he concealed the one to expound the three; now, for the sake of the condition of the one, he conceals the three to clarify the one. Seventh, neither three nor one, praised as one: As the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says, "Within the tathatā of all dharmas, not only is there no triyāna, there is not even a single bodhisattvayāna." Thus we know that in terms of the principle there has never been three or one; being neither one nor three, it is praised as one. As for the term "mahopāya": According to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, the thirteenth title is "Sūtra of the Great Skillful Means of All Buddhas". Vasubandhu explains, "Having achieved mahābodhi based on this Dharma-gate, for the sake of sentient beings he preaches all good dharmas such as those of humans, devas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas." The meaning of this is to clarify that the ekayāna of mahābodhi is the real, and preaching the four vehicles for the sake of sentient beings is the great skillful means. Relying on this text provides the correct interpretation. The reason these two titles are designated here is that ekayāna is the essence and upāya is the function; ekayāna is the real and the triyāna is the provisional. Intending to clarify arising function from essence and converging the provisional to return to the real, thereby wrapping up the Buddhist teaching from beginning to end, these two are therefore clarified. Some say: Ekayāna clarifies the essence of what is taught; "mahopāya" clarifies that the meaning of transforming beings through this Dharma reaches the utmost of skillfulness, hence it is called upāya. If interpreted broadly, there are five kinds of upāya: First, upāya of advancing towards, such as the seven upāyas prior to the darśanamārga; second, skillfulness termed upāya, such as the ten pāramitās; third, skillful provisional upāya, such as speaking of three where there are no three; fourth, active operation upāya, where all actions undertaken are skillfully applied and operated, hence termed upāya, such as the twelve skillful upāyas taught in the Bodhisattvabhūmi; fifth, demonstrating that this ekayāna is skillfully accomplished beyond marks, hence termed upāya, and being the ultimate among upāyas it is termed "great"—this is using the ekayāna as upāya. Still others say: What is discussed here is its fourth, the active operation upāya; furthermore, the preceding four chapters gradually increase towards the fruit, so they can also be described as upāya of advancing towards. Still others say: A vehicle has three meanings: nature, following, and attainment. Among the fifteen chapters, the first four and the last two are the meaning of following the vehicle; the fifth is the meaning of attainment; and the remaining seven clarify the meaning of nature. The meaning of following is skillfulness in advancing towards; the meaning of nature is skillfulness in cultivation and accomplishment; the meaning of attainment is skillfulness in integrating, benefiting, and functioning—hence it is called upāya. Now I say: If that were so, then upāya would encompass all fifteen chapters, so what further need would there be for ekayāna? Furthermore, the chapter on ekayāna clarifies that the vehicle is the fruit, which could be the attainment of the vehicle; the tathāgatagarbha could be the nature of the vehicle; but how could the dharmakāya and so forth be the nature of the vehicle? What is clarified now is that, just as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa has two titles and thus two meanings, since the Ekayāna-sūtra is anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, the Mahopāya-sūtra is the teaching of the four vehicles. This brings up both the provisional and the real, elucidates both essence and function, without adding or subtracting meaning; therefore, having authentic textual authority, it should properly be relied upon and used. As for "mahāvaipulya": Above was clarified the specific; now next is explained the general. Just as in the Mahāvaipulya-buddhāvataṃsaka, and also as in the Mahāvaipulya-mahāsaṃnipāta, we thus know that vaipulya is a general title for Mahāyāna sūtras. The reason a general [name] is necessary is that people might suspect what was spoken by Śrīmālā does not belong to the category of vaipulya; therefore it is now clarified that what was spoken by Śrīmālā is precisely vaipulya. As for vaipulya: According to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, the third title is "correct, great, and broad" (fāng dà guǎng), meaning that the unimpeded Mahāyāna gate complies with the faculties of sentient beings to maintain and accomplish them. The meaning of this generally clarifies that the Mahāyāna gate is unimpeded, hence it is called vaipulya. As for specific explanations: Being correct in principle is called fāng (correct); richness in text is called guǎng (broad). Furthermore, because the ekayāna encompasses all virtues, it is called guǎng; because it is free from deviation and falsity, it is called fāng. An ancient commentary states: True understanding free from bias is fāng; principle encompassing the boundless is guǎng. As for the term "sūtra": From above until now, the principle expressed has been clarified; now the teaching that expresses the principle is clarified, which is the pair of principle and teaching. Just as in the explanation of knowing the Dharma and knowing the meaning among the seven excellences in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra: knowing the Dharma refers to the twelve divisions of sūtras, and knowing the meaning refers to the meaning clarified by the twelve divisions of sūtras, which is clear proof of principle and teaching. As for the term "sūtra": In India it is named sūtra. In this land, translations according to meaning have not been single; translators mostly used the two names "thread" (xiàn) and "root/origin" (běn) to translate sūtra. If based on the Fenbie gongde lun and the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya, and verified by present-day Indian monks naming the thread for sewing robes sūtra, then "thread" translates sūtra. If based on the Renwang jing and what Tripiṭaka Master [Bodhi]ruci said, then "root" translates sūtra. Both "thread" and "root" have textual evidence, but examining regional dialects, it is difficult to determine one exclusively. As for "thread": Just as thread in the worldly realm has the function of threading together and holding in place, the teachings of the Buddhas also have the capacity of threading dharmas and marks together and holding people; being largely identical with thread, the name is established from the metaphor. As for "root": Because the teaching can reveal the principle, teaching is the root of principle; because the teaching can give rise to practice, teaching is the root of practice; now practice constitutes the sūtra. As for "thread and root": Translators adapted to local linguistic convenience, and therefore substituted the term "classic/sūtra" (jīng) for "thread and root". This is like the Vinaya-piṭaka, which is properly translated as "extinction" (miè); if translated according to the primary name, one should say the "Four-Part Extinction", "Ten-Recitation Extinction", and so forth. But translators, seeing that worldly penal codes of this land that determine crimes are named lǜ (statutes/regulations), accordingly called the Buddhist teaching determining crimes lǜ as well; hence they are named Four-Part Vinaya, Ten-Recitation Vinaya, and so forth. This is also like that: If translated according to the primary name as thread or root, one should say the Nirvāṇa Thread, Lotus Thread, and so forth. It was also because translators saw that this land's previously transmitted national rites and world-instructing teachings were called the Five Classics (wǔjīng), and therefore the world-instructing teachings of the Buddha-Dharma were also called jīng (classics/sūtras); hence they said Nirvāṇa-sūtra and so forth. Having substituted the name in accordance with worldly custom, one also explains its meaning in accordance with worldly custom: in worldly terms, jīng means constant; though former worthies and later sages [differ], their exemplary teachings for past and present remain constantly so, hence it is called constant. The Buddha-Dharma is also like this: though the Buddhas of the three periods depart or remain in accordance with spiritual resonance, their exemplary teachings for past and present cannot be altered.
1.18
Second, the section on the conditions for the preaching of the sūtra. Question: The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra praises the bodhisattvas, saying, "Those who see or hear them never fail to receive benefit, and all that they undertake is never in vain." Now, since Śrīmālā is a great being of the dharmakāya who manifests her form in response to resonance and expounds the teaching in accordance with capacities—as Sengzhao said, "The dharmakāya has no image, yet forms when beings resonate; dark expedience is without premeditation, yet its movements accord with events"—now for what great causes and conditions was this sūtra expounded? Answer: The intentions are manifold, but we may briefly explain two. First, for the men and women of seven years of age and older in the kingdom of Ayodhyā, who in past lives formed a Mahāyāna kinship with Śrīmālā: wishing now to bring their good roots to maturation, she used the occasion of respectfully inviting the Buddha to give rise to vows and practices, and even expounded this sūtra by relying on the Buddha's supernatural power. Second, generally for all people who study the Mahāyāna: to enable those who receive the teaching to recognize the fifteen articles of meaning of the Mahāyāna Dharma, so that no doubt remains unextinguished and no understanding fails to arise, leaving only a path of advance with no way of regression, ultimately achieving Buddhahood through the ekayāna. Therefore, the sixteenth title says that this sūtra severs all doubts and is of definitive meaning (nītārtha), which is its clear proof. Question: On what basis is it known that there are these two intentions, general and specific? Answer: The Buddha manifested his image in the empty sky within the kingdom of Ayodhyā, and Śrīmālā expounded this teaching facing the Buddha. After the Buddha departed, Śrīmālā and the king each transformed all the people of the country, causing all those aged seven and above to study the Mahāyāna Dharma; therefore one should know there was a specific purpose. When the Buddha returned to Śrāvastī, he commanded Ānanda and Śakra to broadly propagate this teaching in the heavens and the human realm; therefore one should know there was a general purpose.
1.19
Next is the section clarifying the central theme. Within this there are two parts: first, directly clarifying the central theme; second, clarifying similarities and differences. Although this sūtra has fifteen chapters, unifying their import, it takes the ekayāna as its central theme. That this is so is due to two meanings in general: First, whenever one wishes to discern the central theme of a sūtra, one should look to its title. If unfolded, it has fifteen chapters; if rolled up, it returns to the ekayāna. Therefore, the ekayāna is taken as the sūtra's theme. Second, as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says: "The buddhas of the three periods of time briefly explain five vehicles, and expansively, eighty thousand treasuries of Dharma." Although there are differences between expansive and brief, the intent is only to reveal the one principle and instruct the one person. Thus the "Parable Chapter" says: "Whatever is preached is all for the sake of anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, all for the sake of transforming bodhisattvas." Now, by means of parables, this meaning will again be clarified. To "again clarify this meaning" means to clarify again that there is only one principle, only the instruction of the one person. Hence we know that whether teachings or parables, whether speech or silence, whatever is done is done to clarify the ekayāna. Since the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka is like this, so too is this sūtra. Question: If so, one teaching would suffice; why trouble with two sūtras? Answer: The single Dharma of prajñā has five periods; how could two expositions hinder the ekayāna that is without duality? Furthermore, although the ultimate Path is one, there are many gates when rotating the method to preach the Dharma, just like altering the flavors of food to suit an ill person. Moreover, expansiveness, brevity, presence, and absence are mutually presented: this sūtra expounds briefly, while the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka explains expansively. Here there are the words of "two deaths" and "five entrenchments," which the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka lacks; there it has the three assemblies and various kinds of the provisional and the real, which this teaching lacks. Other differences of presence and absence are many and cannot be fully recounted. If considered from the standpoint of the difference in audiences, the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka was spoken for those who turn from the Small to enter the Great; hence the chapter "Emerging from the Earth" says: "Excepting those who previously practiced and learned the Small Vehicle, such people I now also cause to hear this sūtra and enter the Buddha's wisdom"—this is clear evidence. This sūtra was spoken for bodhisattvas of direct progress. The country of Ayodhyā means the "Unborn Country"; in this country, non-arising is constantly spoken of, and there are constantly people learning the Mahāyāna who practice the contemplation of non-arising. Therefore, it directly expounds the ekayāna for them to cause them to attain buddhahood. Question: If so, it should only preach the teaching of the ekayāna; why does the text also distinguish the three vehicles? Answer: It is to cause people of the ekayāna to recognize the provisional and the real: recognizing the provisional, there is no road of regression; understanding the real, they advance directly without turning back. Furthermore, recognizing the provisional allows them to transform others; understanding the real accomplishes their own practice. Furthermore, this distinguishes the three in order to integrate the three; it does not preach the three for three kinds of capacities.
1.20
Second, concerning the section on similarities and differences: Some say: "This sūtra also takes the ekayāna as its central theme; between the two gates of object and wisdom, the meaning of the vehicle is the object. For example, just as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka integrates the three into the one, and the three and the one are the object of the two wisdoms, so now it is clarified that the five are integrated into the one, and the one is the object of real wisdom." We now say this meaning is not entirely so. If the three and the one are the meaning of what is contemplated, then they are called the object; yet the wisdom capable of illuminating is also the vehicle. Thus the text below says: "The ekayāna is bodhi," and bodhi is wisdom; the Mahāyāna pervades both object and wisdom. Some say: "Between the two gates of cause and effect, the meaning of the vehicle is the cause, since the cause can advance toward the fruit." We now say this meaning is not entirely so. The vehicle possesses both cause and effect, as well as being neither cause nor effect. As below, integrating the two vehicles back to the ekayāna takes the meaning of cause and effect as the vehicle. If the three vehicles and four wisdoms are taken as the vehicle, that is the meaning of advancing from cause to fruit. Being freely unfettered, sporting in joy—this is self-conveyance and is called the vehicle. The Buddha himself abides in the Mahāyāna and turns back to cross over others with this Dharma; this is crossing over others and is called the vehicle. Thus cause and effect are both conveyances, and so both cause and effect are the vehicle. The vehicle that is neither cause nor effect means that being neither cause nor effect, words are forgotten and thoughts are severed; hence it is called the Mahāyāna. The Mañjuśrīdaśavandanā-sūtra says: "The buddhas have the mark of space, / and space is also without marks; / because they are free from all cause and effect, / I pay homage to that which has nothing to be contemplated." Question: Being neither cause nor effect, how is it called conveyance? Answer: Comprehending that it is not cause and effect causes one to emerge from the four propositions and transcend the hundred negations; therefore it is true conveyance. Hence, being neither cause nor effect is the essence of the vehicle, while cause and effect are its function. Dharma Master Yao of the south of the river said: "This sūtra takes three meanings as its central theme: discussing the fetters of understanding and delusion, it distinguishes the eight truths. The truths are what is understood by understanding, and what is deluded by delusion. Next, distinguishing the root of understanding and delusion, it clarifies that the intrinsically pure is originally without defilement. Afterward, it integrates the two back to the ekayāna. As for these three meanings: taking the noble truths as the sphere of understanding and delusion is the first meaning; the intrinsically pure nature being the root of understanding and delusion is the second meaning; the ekayāna clarifying the elimination of delusions and the cultivation of practice to attain the ultimate fruit is the third meaning. Although the ancients did not see the three meanings of the vehicle, the first is the object of the vehicle, the next is the nature of the vehicle, and the last is the attainment of the vehicle." We also do not agree with this explanation. If three meanings are taken, the nature of the vehicle, the object of the vehicle, and the attainment of the vehicle—these three fully subsume the meaning of the vehicle. The ancients did not see the treatises clarify these three meanings, which is why they did not speak of them. We now clarify that this sūtra has fifteen chapters, all of which obtain the sūtra's title and all of which obtain the essence of the vehicle. But examining the title to determine the theme, it is correct to take the ekayāna as primary.
1.21
Next is the section distinguishing the classifications of the teaching. There are two parts: first, clarifying the intention behind establishing the teaching; next, clarifying the differences among the gates of teaching. A treatise says: "Nirvāṇa is the true Dharma-jewel; sentient beings enter it relying on various gates." Although the gates are not the same, two kinds are explained in broad terms: First, relying on concrete phenomena to receive awakening, as in the Fragrance Accumulation Buddha-land, where fragrance is used for buddha-deeds. Second, by means of wordlessness to ascend to holiness, as in the Silent and Desolate World, where externally there is no indication or preaching and internally no consciousness or thought. [Third,] by means of regional speech to transform ordinary beings, as in the Sahā realm, where forms are manifested according to beings and teachings are expounded to suit their capacities. Although teachings are myriad and diverse, examining their overarching principle, they are all the forced use of names and marks within what is without name or mark, wishing to cause sentient beings to awaken to wordlessness by means of words. But practitioners who grasp at marks, hearing that the ultimate principle is wordless and the teaching has words, [think that] the wordless principle cannot have words and the teaching with words cannot lack words; thus principle and teaching are permanently severed, giving rise to two views. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: "Those who possess duality have neither Path nor fruit." The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Luminosity and ignorance: fools consider them two." Hence the chapter below says: "Tenaciously clinging to erroneous assertions and rebelling against the correct teaching is called the rotten seed of the heterodox." Therefore, one should not give rise to the two views of principle and teaching. What is clarified here is that the principle that is expressed is beyond words, and the words expressing the principle are ever extinguished; thus, though words fill the ten directions, not a single name or letter is uttered. As the goddess rebuked Śāriputra: "You only know that liberation is wordless, but have not awakened to words themselves being liberation." Since it is said that words themselves are liberation, liberation should also be words. If words themselves are liberation, though there are words, there are no words; if liberation is words, though there are no words, there are words. Since speaking is not speaking, there is no fixed presence of words; since not speaking is speaking, there is no fixed absence of words. Therefore, it is neither speech nor absence of speech, neither principle nor teaching; being called the mind without reliance, one then recognizes the intent of principle and teaching. As the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka says: "By countless upāyas I guide sentient beings, causing them to leave all attachments." The Sūtra on Resolving Doubts in the Semblance Dharma says: "From my first appearance in the world until nirvāṇa, I have not spoken a single word nor crossed over a single person." The Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra says: "A bodhisattva who understands all dharma-gates swiftly attains bodhi: namely, having a mind without attachment to all dharmas." Master Sengzhao said: "As for its treatises, words are without fixation, and refutation is without clinging; expansive and baseless, yet matters do not lose truth; serene and without reliance, principle spontaneously accords with the profound." My teacher, the Venerable Lang, whenever he ascended the high seat to instruct his disciples, constantly said: "Speech takes non-abiding as its source; mind takes non-attainment as its master. Therefore, profound sūtras and eminent masters awaken the multitude of beings, causing their minds to have nothing to attach to. Why is this so? Because attachment is the root of entanglements and the origin of all suffering; it is due to clinging and attachment." The buddhas of the three periods of time display sūtras and expound treatises all to cause sentient beings' minds to have no attachment. The reason they cause them to be without attachment is that attachment is the root of entanglements and the origin of all suffering. Because of clinging and attachment, determinate discrimination arises; because of determinate discrimination, afflictions arise; through the condition of afflictions, karma is immediately produced; through the condition of karma, the suffering of birth, old age, sickness, and death is experienced. Those who possess attainments have not studied the Buddha-Dharma, and from beginningless time have spontaneously given rise to minds of attachment regarding dharmas; now, hearing the Buddha-Dharma, they again give rise to attachment—this is to produce attachment on top of attachment. With the mind of attachment solid and the roots of suffering growing deeper, there is no way to be liberated. One must cause those who propagate the sūtras to benefit people, and those who practice the Path to cultivate themselves, not to give rise to minds of attachment. This relates the broad intent of expounding the teaching.
First 21 of 218 passages. Read on