勝鬘寶窟 3.25

3.25

"World-Honoured One, the cessation of suffering is not by way of destroying phenomena": this is the second [part], which explains in detail that the cessation of suffering is known definitively. The text has two parts: first, setting aside what is incorrect; second, clarifying what is correct. "Not by way of destroying phenomena" and so on sets aside what is incorrect. For the two vehicles, the attainment of cessation is called cessation through destroying phenomena. In former teachings, using the reduction of the body to ashes and the extinction of consciousness is cessation through destroying phenomena. Now, however, it is wondrous existence eternally abiding, free of encumbrance and pellucidly serene, and is not identical to that cessation. Question: If the Hīnayāna's cessation of the suffering and accumulation of karmic rebirth is already cessation through destroying phenomena, why is the Mahāyāna's cessation of the suffering and accumulation of transformational birth not cessation through destroying phenomena? Answer: Having realized that the causes and effects of transformational birth are fundamentally unproduced, that which is now devoid of cessation is merely spoken of as cessation. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā states: "If phenomena existed beforehand and were absent thereafter, all buddhas and bodhisattvas would incur transgression." This is its proof. The Buddhagotra-śāstra states: "Destroying the truths of the three realms, one attains [nirvāṇa] with residue; destroying the affective afflictions of the four kinds of saṃsāra, one attains [nirvāṇa] without residue." These are all cessation through destroying phenomena, identical in intention to the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā. / "What is called cessation of suffering": this is the second, clarifying what is correct. "Beginningless": the cessation as principle is fundamentally present; it is not produced by productive causes, and is therefore called "unconditioned (asamskṛta)". If it were produced and conditioned by a productive cause, it would be fundamentally non-existent and only presently existing, which is called "arising". Since it is not fundamentally non-existent and only presently existing, it is "without arising". If it were fundamentally non-existent and presently existing, then having existed it would revert to non-existence, which is called "extinction and ending". Since it is not fundamentally non-existent and presently existing, it does not revert to non-existence after having existed; therefore it is "without end". Because there is an end, it would be impermanent; now, being free from ending, it is eternally abiding. "Purity of intrinsic nature": when it has not yet become manifest, it is called purity of nature; when it is manifest, it is purity through expedient means; hence it is called "purity of intrinsic nature". "Free from all storehouses of afflictions": when fundamentally concealed, though there are delusions, they cannot defile it; when manifest, there are no delusions to be defiled by. Hence it says "free from the storehouse of afflictions". Some say: "Beginningless and unconditioned" shows that cessation as principle differs from the path, which has a beginning in arising and an end in action. "Without arising and without end" shows that cessation as principle differs from suffering, which has a beginning in arising and an end in exhaustion. "By nature eternally free from ending" clarifies the preceding "without arising and without end," and is thus free from ending. Being without arising, it is eternally abiding. Because its intrinsic nature is pure, it is free from all storehouses of afflictions. Above, cessation was clarified in contrast to suffering; here, cessation is clarified in contrast to accumulation: because its intrinsic nature is pure, it does not cause afflictions to cease by means of an antidote. This explanation clarifies cessation in contrast to the [other] three truths; hence the truth of cessation differs from the three truths. / "World-Honoured One, exceeding the sands of the Gaṅgā": as for the differing interpretations of this one section, there are altogether two accounts. First, the old explanation says: Although the storehouse and the body have been mentioned above, both were to establish the noble truths. This passage corresponds to the 'Chapter on the Dharmakāya', and below, not being separated from the storehouse of afflictions is the 'Chapter on the Tathāgatagarbha'. Question: According to the order in which the names are established subsequently, tathāgatagarbha comes first and dharmakāya later; why is dharmakāya clarified first now, and tathāgatagarbha later? Answer: Above, the sequence of storehouse and body has already been discussed; here, the essence of the body and the storehouse is directly discussed, so they do not contradict each other. Question: Why not follow the order of the chapter titles now with the storehouse first and the body later, but instead the body first and the storehouse later? Answer: A truth is a fruit, and the dharmakāya is also a fruit. Desiring to connect to the fruit, following the fruit of cessation, it clarifies the fruit of the dharmakāya, and then turns to clarify that this fruit fundamentally stems from the storehouse; therefore it next clarifies the storehouse. Thus, the previous chapter having storehouse first and body later is one kind of sequence; here, having body first and storehouse later is again another kind of sequence. / Second, Master Min of Jiangnan and others hold that from this passage onward, it clarifies how the doctrine of emptiness conceals and covers, establishing the preceding 'Chapter on the Tathāgatagarbha' and 'Chapter on the Dharmakāya'. The body and storehouse were raised above to clarify that the noble truths are profound, and were thus included within the 'Chapter on the Noble Truths'. Now it clarifies why it was not taught in the past: because sentient beings had a grave sickness regarding permanence and self, at the outset of appearing in the world, the Buddha had to teach suffering and emptiness to dismantle beings' [attachment to] permanence and self, and could not early on clarify the profound principle; this is the doctrine of emptiness concealing the principle. Furthermore, the teaching of emptiness concealed true wisdom; hence it is called the doctrine of emptiness concealing the truth. This is roughly similar to the metaphor of rubbing milk [on the sore] in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. Their commentary states: "Exceeding the sands of the Gaṅgā" refers to the afflictions of the five entrenchments exceeding in number the sands of the Gaṅgā; the principle of the dharmakāya lies concealed within the multiple delusions, so it says "neither separated nor detached". Mixed indistinctly with the conscious delusions, it is not yet differentiated, so it says "not different". The two vehicles cannot conceive of it, so it is called "inconceivable". Because it is the true nature of great awakening, it is called "buddhadharmas". When the revealing causes are fulfilled, afflictions are severed, and the true nature becomes manifest, this is the accomplishment of the dharmakāya. / Now, our view also differs from this account, for three reasons: first, herein there is no text on the doctrine of emptiness concealing [the truth]; second, in this passage there is also no statement about impermanence concealing [the truth]; third, this text actually clarifies that the dharmakāya is neither separated nor detached, and one should not explain it in terms of the buddha-nature. What is now clarified is as stated above. Above, the essence and marks of the truths have been completely clarified; now secondly, the essence of the dharmakāya is clarified. Furthermore, if one examines the intention of the text over the long run, both of these still belong to the text explaining the truth of cessation. But in explaining the essence of the truth of cessation there are three parts: first, directly clarifying the essence of the truth of cessation; next, clarifying the dharmakāya in reference to the truth of cessation; next, clarifying the tathāgatagarbha in reference to the dharmakāya. The reason for this is that it seeks to show that the truth of cessation, the dharmakāya, and the tathāgatagarbha are one in essence but different in meaning. In reference to the meaning of the cessation of suffering, it is called the truth of cessation; the very meaning of this suffering emerging from entanglement is called the dharmakāya; this very dharmakāya being concealed by afflictions is called the tathāgatagarbha. Therefore, within the essence of the truth of cessation, these three dharmas are clarified. / Moreover, the reason these three dharmas are clarified in reference to the truth of cessation is that when the suffering of persons of the two vehicles ceases, it is like empty space, having neither dharmakāya nor tathāgatagarbha. In contrast to this meaning, the body and the storehouse are clarified in reference to the cessation of suffering. Furthermore, it is also to clarify four dharmas in contrast to the two vehicles: first, the two vehicles clarify cessation through destroying phenomena, whereas here it is clarified as non-destruction; second, the two vehicles only cease karmic rebirth and do not cease transformational birth, whereas here all are ceased together; third, in contrast to the two vehicles' truth of cessation having no dharmakāya, here the dharmakāya is clarified; fourth, in contrast to the two vehicles' truth of cessation having no tathāgatagarbha, here it is clarified as existing. For this reason, these four dharmas are clarified within the truth of cessation. / Question: Why does this chapter clarify that the Hīnayāna cessation lacks the four, while the Mahāyāna cessation possesses the four? Answer: The truth of cessation is the ultimate, supreme stage of the Mahāyāna; therefore one must clarify the distinction between the Great and the Small. / Below, discriminating its marks: these are the distinctions of meaning within the one essence of all buddhas, not separate essences at present; hence it says "not separated". Furthermore, in contrast to the five aggregates of saṃsāra forming a body where the entities are individually distinct, it says "not separated". The essence is truly eternally abiding and cannot be changed or lost through causes and conditions; hence it says "not detached". In contrast to sentient beings' five aggregates forming a body that changes and sheds before and after, being unchanging from beginning to end is called "not different". In contrast to the differences among the ten periods of a sentient being's body, it says "not different". Subtly transcending ordinary comprehension, it is called "inconceivable". / "Accomplished with the buddhadharmas, it is called the Tathāgata's dharmakāya": the above explained the essence of the dharmakāya; this directly explains the name of the dharmakāya. Because it is accomplished with all buddhadharmas, it is called the dharmakāya.