勝鬘寶窟 2.37

2.37

Eighth, the section on subsuming persons. Question: Do the human and heavenly vehicles enter the ekayāna or not? Answer: Some say that the assemblies of humans and devas do not enter the ekayāna, for whenever 'entering' is discussed, it means directing toward [liberation]. Cultivating human and heavenly causes attains human and heavenly fruits; because causes have already brought about their effects, therefore they do not enter. Question: If so, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who dedicate [their merits] may enter the ekayāna, but those who do not dedicate [them] and enter nirvāṇa without remainder should not enter the ekayāna. Answer: When they later turn their minds, the perfumed seeds of the two vehicles are still present; therefore they enter the ekayāna. Question: If so, how could the human and heavenly seeds not be present? Answer: This is indeterminate. Humans and devas may cut off their roots of goodness, and so they are not said to enter. Furthermore, the essence of the two vehicles is supramundane dharma; although they have not yet turned their minds, in terms of the principle they do enter the ekayāna. Question: If so, when explaining the five good dharmas, should one not subsume the good deeds of ordinary beings into the bodhisattva? Answer: In explaining the bodhisattva through subsuming good deeds, the intention is that whatever good there is, all is practiced; therefore it universally subsumes the ten good deeds of ordinary beings. Now, in explaining the meaning of the ekayāna, it distinguishes supramundane causes and effects; therefore it only subsumes the two vehicles into the ekayāna. Humans and devas are mundane causes and effects, so they do not enter the ekayāna. What is now clarified is that just as there are [cases where] the two vehicles do not enter the ekayāna, so it is with humans and devas. As the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa says: 'The good roots of humans and devas as well as determinate śrāvakas do not attain buddhahood; therefore they must give rise to the bodhicitta before they can attain buddhahood.' Yet now it is said that sentient beings of all five vehicles attain [buddhahood] because the human, heavenly, and two vehicles are taken as distant conditions for the bodhicitta; relying on the human, heavenly, and two vehicles, they encounter buddhas and bodhisattvas and generate the bodhicitta, and only then enter the ekayāna and become buddhas. Moreover, it is said that the five vehicles attain buddhahood because persons of the five vehicles emerge from the ekayāna; therefore the five vehicles together return to the ekayāna. Furthermore, because the five vehicles equally possess the buddhadhātu, they equally enter the ekayāna. As the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa says: 'The reason why the two vehicles are given predictions is that the dharmakāya of persons of the three vehicles is equal. That Sadāparibhūta gave predictions to evil persons was likewise to show that sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu.' Although they equally possess the buddhadhātu, they must give rise to the bodhicitta before they can become buddhas; those who do not give rise to it cannot become buddhas. Within this chapter there are two divisions: first, the Buddha commands [her] to speak; second, she receives the command and speaks. The reason [the Buddha] commands [her] to speak is that her previous excellent exposition on accepting the saddharma deeply accorded with the holy mind and the Tathāgata praised and related it, thereby encouraging her to speak on the ekayāna. Furthermore, the ekayāna is the virtue of the buddha-fruit, and fearing that Śrīmālā would not dare to proclaim it, he commanded her to speak. Also, her previous requests were many, and she did not dare to request further to speak anything more; she had to be commanded before speaking. In 'Speak further,' having already spoken of the cause, she is now to speak further of the fruit, hence it says 'speak further.' Question: He should have commanded her to speak on the ekayāna; why then does he say to speak further on accepting the saddharma? Answer: Because acceptance is itself the ekayāna, he commands her to speak using the former name. Having already spoken previously, why speak further now? Because acceptance has two meanings: although the former clarified emerging forth, it did not distinguish gathering back in; hence it says 'speak further.' Moreover, the preceding text already spoke of the vastness of the virtuous practice of acceptance; now he wishes to make her speak of this practice and virtue to reveal its difference from the two vehicles; hence it says 'speak further.' The acceptance spoken of is indeed that which is spoken in common by all buddhas of the ten directions and the three periods of time; hence it says 'speak further of what is spoken by the buddhas.' The reason for clarifying this common speech is to prevent doubt and cause living beings to believe and accept it. 'What is spoken by the buddhas, the acceptance of the saddharma' brings up the teaching to be spoken, commanding her to speak it. Question: Why does it not say what the buddhas have realized, but says what they have spoken? Answer: The Buddha's Dharma has two divisions: first, the division of realization; second, the division of exposition. Free from marks and equal, corresponding to personal realization—this is its division of realization; relying on words to manifest virtues—this is its division of exposition. The division of realization transcends words, whereas the division of exposition can be manifested; therefore it now brings up the division of exposition to encourage her proclamation; hence it says, 'Speak of what is spoken by the buddhas, the acceptance of the saddharma.' From 'Śrīmālā said to the Buddha' downward is the second part: receiving the command and speaking. Question: When she previously spoke on acceptance, she spoke relying on the Buddha's power; now that she does not rely on it, how can she speak? Answer: Now she also relies on his power, but the meaning of relying on his power is different. In the previous praise of the Buddha, being illuminated by the Buddha's light was the empowerment of the Buddha's body, which is why she was able to praise him. In the previous [discourse on] acceptance, receiving the empowerment of the Buddha's mind was why she was able to speak. Now, this address by the Buddha is the empowerment of speech; hence she is able to proclaim it. In 'Excellent, World-Honoured One! Yes, indeed, I shall receive your instruction,' Śrīmālā originally had the mind to speak the Great Dharma; now hearing the Buddha's address, it accorded with her original intention, hence she says 'Excellent.' Furthermore, speaking the Great Dharma will surely benefit the masses of sentient beings below, so she again says 'Excellent.' Expressing respectful consent to the command is why she says 'yes' (wei). According with principle and matching the capacity is why she says 'indeed' (ran); 'ran' means acceptable. From 'She then said to the Buddha' downward, having received the instruction, she speaks directly. The text has two parts: first, she briefly explains the ekayāna; from 'as the World-Honoured One spoke of the six sense bases' downward, second, she extensively explains the ekayāna. The former being brief and the latter extensive is the constant rule of explaining doctrine. In the brief part, clarifying emerging from the one into the many manifests the root of the vehicle; in the extensive part, clarifying that all vehicles together return to the ekayāna clarifies the oneness of the vehicle, which is the meaning of gathering back in. Question: This chapter clarifies entering the ekayāna; it should only speak of entering, so why does it clarify emerging forth? Answer: The vehicle possesses both meanings of emerging forth and gathering back in; therefore Śrīmālā speaks of both gates. Moreover, about to clarify subsuming the many into the one, one must first distinguish generating the many from the one; because the many are generated from the one, one can only then subsume the many into the one. The Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra is also like this: thus, about to speak of the ekayāna, it first spoke the Anantanirdeśa-sūtra. The Anantanirdeśa-sūtra generates the many from the one, whereas the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka subsumes the many into the one. Furthermore, the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka itself possesses both meanings: 'within the one buddhayāna, discriminatingly expounding three' is the meaning of emerging forth; 'I devise this upāya to cause them to enter the Buddha's wisdom' is the meaning of gathering back in. Now it is also like this. Question: Acceptance precisely clarifies emerging forth; why did it first clarify gathering back in and later distinguish emerging forth? The ekayāna precisely clarifies gathering back in; why does it first clarify emerging forth and later clarify gathering back in? Answer: In acceptance, wishing to subsume the three vows into the single vow, it first clarified gathering back in. Moreover, not having attained realization, she universally made a single vow; hence it first clarified gathering back in. In the ekayāna, as explained above, about to clarify subsuming the many into the one, one must first clarify emerging forth. The text has two parts: first, a general statement; second, an explanation. 'Acceptance of the saddharma is the Mahāyāna' is the general statement. The acceptance of the saddharma and the Mahāyāna are one in substance but different in meaning. Realization free from deviation is called acceptance of the saddharma; this very saddharma is what is ridden by all buddhas and great beings, hence it is called the Great Vehicle (Mahāyāna). Therefore, this acceptance of the saddharma is precisely the Mahāyāna. Question: Why does Śrīmālā change 'acceptance' to 'Mahāyāna'? Answer: Now wishing to destroy the two to return to the one, and subsume the small to enter the great, she must change the name to Mahāyāna. From 'Why is this?' downward is the second part: the explanation. The text again has three parts: first a question, next an explanation, and finally a conclusion. 'Why is this?' is the question. However, this does not mean suspecting that the acceptance of the saddharma is not the Mahāyāna; it is asked because one does not yet recognize the meaning of Mahāyāna. The meaning of the question is: although one knows that acceptance is the Mahāyāna, by what meaning is it called the Mahāyāna? From 'The Mahāyāna...' downward is the second part: the explanation. The text has two parts: first, a brief explanation in terms of dharma; second, an extensive explanation in terms of similes. The brief explanation says: Mahāyāna is called the Great Vehicle. 'Great Vehicle' means that it can give birth to the two vehicles, hence it is called great. Śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha are explained as above. There are two further meanings for the name śrāvaka: first, hearing the Dharma from another, one immediately awakens and attains understanding, hence named 'voice-hearer' (śrāvaka). Second, explained in terms of the Dharma-gate observed: as the Daśabhūmika-śāstra says, self and sentient beings are merely names, hence called 'sound/voice'; awakening to the meaning is called 'hearing'. Pratyekabuddha is fully explained in the commentary on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, Avalokiteśvara Chapter. In 'mundane and supramundane,' within the two vehicles, before the path of seeing is called mundane; from seeing the truths upward is called supramundane. Furthermore, between the two, mundane wholesome dharmas are called mundane, such as the dharmas of the six sense bases and so forth spoken of below; undefiled wholesome dharmas are called supramundane, such as the four wisdoms and nirvāṇa below. Now, wishing to show that all wholesome dharmas in both of those emerge from the Great, she therefore speaks of the mundane and supramundane. Some say: from the Mahāyāna emerge four vehicles; śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha are the two vehicles; the mundane refers to the human and heavenly vehicles; the supramundane refers to the bodhisattva vehicle. We now take the former explanation as correct.