觀無量壽經義疏 1.3.2

1.3.2

How are they not the same? As Nāgārjuna explains, there are three types of stating "I": First, stating "I" with a view-tainted mind, meaning ordinary people whose view-afflictions have not yet been abandoned, and who proclaim an "I" within a mind possessed of the view of self. Second, stating "I" with a proud mind, meaning trainees who, although they have eliminated view-afflictions, still retain the affliction of conceit, and proclaim an "I" within a mind of self-conceit. Third, stating "I" in conformity with worldly convention, meaning those beyond training whose views and conceits have already been eliminated, and who proclaim an "I" in conformity with worldly convention. Now, when Ānanda compiled the Dharma, he was established in the state beyond training, with views and conceit already eliminated, and proclaimed an "I" in conformity with worldly convention; therefore he was not like an ordinary person. Question: The principle of selflessness is refined and supreme; why does Ānanda not now base himself on what is supreme and proclaim selflessness, rather than conforming to the worldly to proclaim an "I"? [Answer:] To transform sentient beings who cling to a self, the teaching must be like this. If one did not say "I," how could one distinguish one from another and enable people to recognize them? For this reason, even the Buddhas, when transforming people, also speak of "I" themselves. From "at one time" onwards, although the meaning has a dual aspect, in contrast to the preceding strictly verifying-faith preface, from here down it is explained strictly in terms of the initiating preface. Within this, according to place, it is divided into two, with five distinct textual units. Speaking of the two places: first, the preface of initiating transformation from a different place: while the Buddha was at Gṛdhrakūṭa, he initiated in advance his later transformation in the royal palace. Second, the preface of the Buddha disappearing from Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa and descending in person to gather and transform [them]. This is broadly similar to the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra. Such instances are not unique among the sūtras. As for the five distinct textual units: first, stating "at one time" clarifies the time when the transformation was initiated. Second, clarifying "the Buddha" indicates the lord of the transformation. Third, from "in Rājagṛha" clarifies the place where the transformation was initiated. Fourth, from "together with a great" distinguishes and lists the assembly of followers. Fifth, from "at that time, in the great city of Rājagṛha" downwards clarifies the events initiating the transformation. Regarding the first, "at one time," there are divergent interpretations by others, all of which are refuted as usual. Now we discuss it correctly: the period of transformation is designated as "time." Among the Buddha's numerous times of transformation in a single lifetime, in order to differentiate it from other times, it therefore says "one." It is similar to the words in the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra], "At one time I was in Kāśi," "At one time I was in Rājagṛha," "At one time I was on the banks of the Ganges," and "At one time I was in the charnel ground"; one should not interpret it differently. "Buddha" is as explained before. In the third [unit], regarding the place, "in the city of Rājagṛha" is stated in a broad and general sense. In ancient times, kings frequently dwelt in this city, hence it is named the City of the Royal Residence (Rājagṛha). "Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa" points specifically to the particular place; here translated, it means Divine Vulture Mountain. Many immortals and spirits dwell on this mountain, and vulture birds also live on it, so the mountain is called Divine Vulture Mountain. It is also translated as Vulture Peak Mountain, because vultures dwell on the peak of this mountain, hence the name Vulture Peak Mountain. Moreover, the peak of this mountain resembles a vulture's head, hence the name Vulture Peak Mountain. Staying in the place of wandering and transforming is designated as "residing"; the Dharma body is impartial and truly has no fixed abode, but to show transformation appropriately in a specific place, it simply says "residing." For what reason was he in this specific place? This meaning is as explained in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa: it was to reveal the supreme Dharma that he resided here. Because among all cities Rājagṛha is the most supreme, and among the five mountains Gṛdhrakūṭa is the finest, it was used to signify the Dharma. In the fourth [unit], regarding the assembly, first the śrāvakas are listed and then the bodhisattvas are displayed; most sūtras are like this. Why is that? There are three meanings in explanation: First, distinguishing between near and far. Because all śrāvakas constantly follow the Tathāgata, they are clarified after the Buddha, listed first according to proximity; bodhisattvas are not like this, which is why they are discussed later. Why are śrāvakas especially close to the Tathāgata? There are two meanings in explanation: First, because the śrāvakas' wisdom and understanding are slight and inferior, and they are not yet thoroughly conversant with the Dharma of the Path, although they have attained the noble fruit, their deportment in moving and pausing constantly requires the Buddha's instruction; therefore they mostly stay close to the Buddha. For this reason, even up to the Twin Trees the Tathāgata constantly laid down precepts for them, as in the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] where he prohibited the śrāvakas from eating meat, and so forth; whereas bodhisattvas are deeply conversant with the Dharma of the Path and do not rely on the Buddha's instruction, so they do not stay close to the Buddha. Second, because the śrāvakas are currently delivered by the Buddha, crossing beyond the ordinary to become noble ones and bearing deep gratitude, they constantly follow the Buddha to attend upon and make offerings to him; whereas bodhisattvas wander and transform in response to conditions without fixed abode, so they do not stay close to the Buddha. This is the first: distinguishing between near and far. Second, distinguishing by outer appearance. The śrāvakas' deportment is strict and orderly, revered by the world together, hence they are listed first; the bodhisattvas' appearance and conduct are not fixed as they respond to transformation, hence they are displayed after. As the sūtra says: "Mañjuśrī spent one summer retreat in three places, and Kāśyapa reprimanded and punished him"—this is just such an affair. Third, distinguishing in terms of virtue. As Nāgārjuna said, teachings are of two kinds: First, the esoteric teaching. The bodhisattvas' virtue is venerable, so in principle they should come first; the śrāvakas' virtue is inferior, so by rule they must come after. Second, the explicit teaching. The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are identical to the Buddha in the exhaustion of outflows, hence they are listed first; bodhisattvas manifest as ordinary beings in accordance with transformation and do not sever all outflows. If people heard that bodhisattvas were placed above arhats, many would be astonished and perplexed, hence they are listed after. Now, following the explicit teaching, the śrāvakas are listed first and the bodhisattvas are displayed after. In the śrāvaka assembly, first stating "with" (yu) means accompanying them in person, which is called "with." "Great bhikṣus" designates and lists their assembly. "Great" in foreign languages is mahā; this translation has three meanings: first, "numerous," as a gathering of many people is called a "great assembly"; second, "superior," excelling other paths; third, "great," being broadly endowed with lofty virtues. "Bhikṣu" is the foreign language; the semantic translation in this land fully contains five meanings: first, "terrifier of Māra": when on the verge of leaving home, he causes Māra to tremble in fear, hence called "terrifier of Māra." When a bhikṣu leaves home, why does it concern Māra's affairs so as to give rise to terror? Māra's nature is jealous and deceitful, fearing that others will surpass him, and therefore gives rise to fear. Moreover, he fears that the bhikṣu will transform others to leave home together with him and empty his realm; therefore he is terrified. As the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] says. This single meaning is designated in terms of the initial stage. Second, he is called "mendicant." Having already left home, he stores nothing up and begs for food to sustain his life; therefore he is called a "mendicant." Third, he is called "one of pure livelihood." Begging with right livelihood and staying free from wrong livelihood, he is therefore called "pure livelihood." These two names are established in terms of the intermediate stage. Fourth, he is called "purely observing precepts." He vigorously observes precepts without any transgression. Fifth, he is called "destroyer of evil." Because he observes the precepts, he destroys and departs from all evils. These last two meanings are designated on the basis of the final stage. An assembly that is not singular is called a "multitude" (saṅgha). Saying "one thousand two hundred and fifty people" together lists their number. These one thousand two hundred and fifty bhikṣus are listed in most sūtras. Why is that?