觀無量壽佛經疏妙宗鈔 3.3

Second, under "Dividing the Text," he reveals the meaning following the sūtra. Previously, he drew upon the five meanings—the title and the rest—within the sūtra to explain the general title. Although the general meaning has been made manifest, the distinct text [of the sūtra itself] is difficult to reveal clearly; therefore, one must use phrases and clauses to demarcate the sūtra text, causing its meaning to be displayed. Although the general and the distinct differ, the meaning has no two courses. Only then does one know that the profound meaning explains the title of this sūtra, and furthermore understands that the commentary's clauses do not reveal any other meaning. There are two parts: first, a general and distinct outlining. The general outline has three divisions; the distinct division sets out six chapters. Second, under "First, confirming faith," he explains following the outline, in three parts. First, the preface division has two parts: first, the preface that confirms faith, which is the common preface. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: "When the Buddha was about to enter nirvāṇa, Ānanda asked the Buddha: 'At the head of all sūtras, what words should be placed?' The Buddha answered Ānanda: 'You should say: "Thus have I heard: at one time the Buddha was at such-and-such a place, in such-and-such a land, together with such-and-such a great assembly." Not only is my Dharma like this, but the beginnings of the sūtras of all Buddhas of the three periods of time are also like this.'" Therefore, one knows that the six meanings constitute the common preface, because all sūtras share them. It is also called the preface before the sūtra, because it was entrusted to be placed [there]. It is also called the preface after the sūtra, because it was set down by the compilers. Here, speaking of "confirming faith" means causing the listeners not to doubt. Fascicle 4 of the *Upadeśa* asks: Why not directly preach prajñā, but instead speak of dwelling in Rājagṛha? The answer is: By speaking of the time, the place, and the persons, it causes people to have faith. As for "six clauses," a clause is designated simply when the expression of meaning is complete. For instance, even the single character "Buddha" is also called a clause. Second, first pointing out the six clauses. As for "'Thus' indicates faith," the second fascicle of the *Upadeśa* asks: Why do the sūtras of all Buddhas initially state "Thus"? The answer is: In the great sea of the Buddha's Dharma, faith is that which can enter, and wisdom is that which can ferry across. The meaning of "thus" is precisely faith. If a person has faith, they can enter the Buddha's Dharma; without faith, they do not enter. The non-believer says that this matter is not thus; the believer says that this matter is thus. "'I heard' distinguishes from non-Buddhists": having received it directly from the Buddha, it is therefore called "I heard." This differs from non-Buddhists, who do not receive it from the Buddha. "'At one time' explains the cessation of dispute": this refers to the time when the faculties are ripe to receive the Path, and so there is no dispute. The *Upadeśa* says: "There should not be no 'at one time.' The Buddha himself said: When one person appears in the world, many people attain joy. Who is this person? It is the Buddha, the World-Honoured One." Second, under "'Thus' and the rest," he explains the meaning following the text, in six parts: first, indicating faith. Faith is called endorsement and delight. Only when the principle is fitting and the words are good does one endorse and delight. If the principle is fitting, it is not divergent, which is called "as" (tathā); if the words are good, there is nothing wrong, which is called "so" (evam). In the Four Teachings, when speaking of principle, all are termed "thus," yet there are degrees of depth and shallowness. In the Tripiṭaka Teaching, they discuss non-divergence and being without fault solely in terms of the conventional. The Shared Teaching, although reaching principle, remains within the two truths. The Separate Teaching knows the center, but must first destroy the two [extremes]. Only the initial mind of the Perfect Teaching realizes that all phenomena are each centered and real, immediately and directly as such; speaking in accord with this, being without fault is called "thus." Therefore, when the Perfect Teaching is viewed against the Three Teachings, none of them are truly "thus." Although the object of faith in this sūtra has not yet undergone opening and discarding, the faculties that it addresses do not follow the biased or the Hinayana; hence, explaining "thus" solely in terms of the Perfect Teaching is definitively trustworthy. Since this clause is like this, the five clauses below are all intended in the Perfect [manner]. Thus, while the text of the common preface is common and its meaning is also common, its intention is distinct. Now, using the distinct intention to explain the common text, this is why he speaks in this way. Second, under "I heard," he distinguishes from non-Buddhists, in two parts: first, the primary explanation. "There is a presence" means presence in the Buddha. Although explaining "I heard," the intent is mostly to clarify "hearing." The next passage clarifies "I." Second, under "As for 'I'," he analyzes, in two parts: first, raising an objection. "I" means autonomy and sovereignty. Worldlings and Hinayanists cling to a self among persons and dharmas; now, conveying the perfect contemplation should conform to the two kinds of emptiness—how can one speak of an "I"? Second, under "Following the conventional," he resolves the objection, in two parts: first, resolving it directly. Although within ultimate emptiness a self cannot be found, this emptiness is immediately the conventional, and the various selves are clearly present. For now, we distinguish the marks of the self in terms of three: arbitrary calculation of a sovereign entity is called the self of view; innate sovereignty is called the self of pride; following worldly usage is the nominal self. The Venerable Ānanda, by the time of the compilation, had already broken the selves of view and pride of the identical substance; how could he have the two kinds of self within the realms? In order to transmit and transform, he therefore accords with the wondrous conventional to establish the nominal self. Second, under "Like a person," he adduces a metaphor. Knowing the principle of non-self is like using gold coins. Establishing a self following the conventional is like exchanging copper coins, grass, wood, and so forth. Third, under "'One'," he explains the cessation of dispute, in two parts: first, indicating the treatise's explanation, in two: first, explaining "one." First, he refutes in terms of the real, and next establishes following the conventional, as can be seen in the text. As for "the treatise extensively refutes identity and difference," the treatise says: "If one is identical with the object, or one is different from the object, both have flaws. The question asks: If they are identical, what flaw is there? The answer says: If they are identical, a jar has the meaning of 'one.' Wherever there is 'one,' everywhere should be a jar, and then there would be no clothes and other objects. If the flaw in 'identical' is like this, what is the flaw in 'different'? The answer: If 'one' is different from the jar, the jar is then not one. If the jar is different from 'one,' 'one' is then not a jar. If the jar unites with 'one' and the jar is named 'one,' then now that 'one' unites with the jar, why not name 'one' a jar? Therefore, one cannot say that the jar is different from 'one.'" That text is extremely extensive. Because a jar is obvious and visible, it uses the jar to illustrate time. "One" is a number, while "time" is the substance. If one definitively clings to identity or difference regarding number and substance, then delusions will multiply in confusion; one who can abandon attachment is liberated in dharmas. This merely lodges in the text of number and substance, showing the contemplation of detachment from attachment and causing one to dispel fixed calculations regarding all phenomena; thus one knows that the six matters and the various passages must all depart from the views of identity and difference. Second, explaining "time." In this land, the designation simply speaks directly of "time." In India there are two sounds: if one says *kāla*, that is real time; if one says *samaya*, that is conventional time. This is just as in this land the mind has two appellations: speaking of wisdom refers to the understanding mind, while speaking of consciousness refers to the deluded mind; hence one is told to rely on wisdom and not on consciousness. Non-Buddhists cling to time as a real cause; therefore, against them one says *samaya* to reveal that time is conventional. When the inner disciples eat according to the time, guard the signs of dawn, and so forth, they speak of *kāla* to reveal that time is real. As for the claim that *kāla* is a short time and *samaya* is a long time, if one relies on the treatise's text, both short time and long time are named *samaya*.

Namely, names such as direction, time, separation, union, sameness, difference, long, and short emerge from the grasping mind of common mortals; therefore, long and short are both provisional and lack real substance. The present matching of short and long to the two names is presumably the Great Master's skillful harmonisation of the treatise's meaning in accord with the pedagogical setup: because when time is based on the Buddha's regulation, the duration of birth-and-death is short, while when the non-Buddhists grasp at time, the duration of birth-and-death is long. Since he modified the treatise's text, he must have intended this. Second, from 'Now we do not' onward explains the present intention. When it says 'we do not discuss,' etc., because this is not the interior of the realm [such as] the signs of Prabhāpāla, we do not discuss a real time; furthermore, because this is not refuting the non-Buddhists' grasping at time as real, we do not discuss a provisional time. Long and short are as explained before. It is simply that the capacities of sentient beings were mature and the Buddha responded by preaching the sūtra. The time when capacity and response unite as one is also the time when truth and wisdom unite as one; hence it is called 'at one time'. The text speaks only from the perspective of the response, hence it says 'preaching the sūtra'. Could there be no capacity to stimulate it, so that the Buddha preached the Dharma in vain? Therefore, when the Buddha finished preaching, Vaidehī accomplished her awakening. However, the textual meaning of 'at one time' fundamentally encompasses both the shallow and the deep; the present intention specifically lies in the perfect capacity stimulating the Buddha, which caused ordinary mortals suddenly to enter into the tolerance of dharmas [anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti]. Fourth, from 'The Buddha' onward is the teacher, in three parts: first, explaining by way of alternative names. The fourth [fascicle] of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa explains bhagavat with four meanings: first, able to destroy afflictions; second, possessing virtues; third, skillfully distinguishing, because he can distinguish the general and specific characteristics of all phenomena; fourth, good fame, because none have attained renown like the Buddha. The present text briefly presents two meanings. The new translation renders it as bhagavat, possessing six meanings: first, sovereign; second, incandescent; third, dignified and majestic; fourth, renowned; fifth, auspicious; sixth, revered. Because it contains multiple meanings it is not translated. The old translation of poguopo was an error. Second, from 'The Buddha' onward explains by way of the three awakenings. From 'The Buddha' onward gives the general indication. From 'Since he can' onward gives the specific indication. Three awakenings: in contrast to delusion one speaks of self-[awakening]; in contrast to self, one speaks of [awakening] others; in contrast to the cause, one speaks of fullness; the one equal awakening, in contrast to the three differences, is spoken of as the three awakenings. Third, from 'All' onward explains by way of transcending causes: by having all-knowledge, he differs from the deluded folly of external paths; by having unconditioned compassion, he differs from the self-deliverance of the Hinayāna; by having the three wisdoms as equal, he differs from biased bodhisattvas; by having ultimate awakening, he differs from all causal stages. That which differs is not distinct, because it is in contrast to that from which it differs. Fourfold distinction. However, in explaining the meaning of 'Buddha', the explanations such as the six identities are rather elaborate, so here it is stated briefly. Fifth, from 'Dwelling' onward discusses the dwelling place, in two parts: first, explaining dwelling, in two parts: first, harmonising 'being in' and 'dwelling'. 'Being in' is temporary and 'dwelling' is enduring; this is a preliminary distinction, so it does not exhaust the principle. What harm is there in enduring 'being in' or temporary 'dwelling'? Moreover, as for the Vulture Peak, the Tathāgata's response body was constantly present within it, so how could one say it was temporary? Second, from 'Dwelling' onward explains dwelling according to the treatise. This sūtra says 'being in' and the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā says 'dwelling'; their meaning is not different, so the treatise's meaning of dwelling is cited to explain 'being in'. This has two parts: first, listing the items. 'Four deportments' refers to walking, standing, sitting, and lying down. These physical deportments were all dwelling on the Vulture Peak, yet the dharmas by which he could dwell had four distinctions, namely the heavenly, Brahmā, noble, and Buddha [dwellings]. Second, from 'Heavenly dwelling' onward provides the explanation. The present text on the four dwellings completely adopts the treatise's explanation of the meaning of dwelling; thus one knows that all four explain cause and effect, and the dharmas by which one dwells reside precisely in the cause. That is to say, in order to embrace sentient beings, the Tathāgata manifested giving, morality, and the mind of the ten virtues—this is the Buddha dwelling in Rājagṛha by means of the dharmas of the desire heaven; manifesting the four immeasurables for the sake of beings, or manifesting the three samādhis, is dwelling in the royal city by means of the Brahmā dharmas and the noble dharmas, and so forth. These are all the Tathāgata dwelling according to the minds of others. If it is according to his own mind, he dwells in the royal city by means of everything from the Śūraṅgama to the unshared [qualities]. Therefore, the Samantabhadra Contemplation Sūtra says: 'Śākyamuni is named Vairocana, and this Buddha's dwelling place is named Constantly Quiescent Light.' Since Śākya and [Vairo]cana are different names, the royal city and Quiescent Light are ultimately non-dual; hence it says this Buddha's dwelling place is named Constantly Quiescent Light. What realm is this present dwelling? Furthermore, one should know that if one divides the agent and object by person and dharma, then from giving and morality up to the Śūraṅgama are all the dharmas dwelt in, and the Buddha is the one who dwells. If one takes the royal city as the place dwelt in, then both the person and the dharmas above are called the ones who dwell. Furthermore, relying on the sūtra text's merely saying 'the Buddha dwelt,' the treatise should have explained it solely in terms of the Śūraṅgama; as for why it explained the previous three, Jingxi offers two explanations: first, proceeding from the general to approach the specific, from the broad to the narrow; second, taking the superior to subsume the inferior: when the Buddha dwells in the royal city, he must subsume the desire realm, form realm, and the three vehicles. Since the Buddha's dwelling is superior, there is no dharma in which he does not dwell; it is not that he does not dwell in the bad, but to guide beings, it speaks provisionally from the good. And within the good, regarding worldly good, it briefly points to the dispersed and concentrated to encompass all good, hence saying 'heavenly and Brahmā'; regarding the supramundane, it briefly points to the lesser and greater to subsume all dharmas, hence saying 'noble and Buddha'. Others, failing to understand the mental dharmas by which one dwells, say only that his physical body dwelt in Rājagṛha, etc., thereby debasing the ultimate sage to dwell identically to common mortals. Furthermore, common mortals and sages each have their own dharmas by which they dwell. Take, for instance, a monk practicing morality, concentration, and wisdom: he dwells in the monastery rooms by means of the heavenly, Brahmā, and noble dwellings. If he breaks the precepts, he dwells in the monastery rooms by means of the hells. If there is one capable of practicing the threefold contemplation in a single mind, the place he dwells is precisely emptiness, provisionality, and the middle. How could the Śūraṅgama not be the dharma by which he dwells? If this is so even for the initial mind, how could the fruition-Buddha be discussed solely in terms of bodily dwelling? Second, from 'Rājagṛha' onward explains the place, in two parts: first, explaining the city and mountain separately, in two parts: first, explaining the city, in two parts: first, translating the Sanskrit name. It is also called Magadha, translated here as 'non-harming'. This refers to the law of this country not executing punishment; those who commit capital offenses are sent to be placed in the cold forest [śītavana]. Second, from 'The Commentary' onward provides the explanation, in three parts: first, explained in terms of the governance of the various kings; second, from 'Furthermore, formerly' onward, explained in terms of moving residence to avoid fire; third, from 'Furthermore' onward, explained in terms of obtaining the place out of fear of punishment. Second, from 'Gṛdhra[kūṭa]' onward explains the mountain, in two parts: first, translating the name. Second, from 'The various sages' onward provides the explanation, in three parts: first, explained in terms of the sacred spirits relying upon it; second, from 'Also named' onward, explained in terms of the mountain's shape resembling a vulture; third, from 'Furthermore, the mountain' onward, explained in terms of vulture birds roosting and hiding there. Second, from 'However, the dharma' onward gives a general indication of the dharma and response [bodies]. Not mentioning the reward [body] is because the reward [body] can merge with the dharma [body] and can also project the response [body]. Since it speaks of the dharma and response [bodies], the reward [body] is included within them.

The three bodies are wonderfully merged; provisionally distinguished in speech, their substance is eternally identical. Sixth, from "together with the great" down, listing those who heard together, in two: first, indicating the section and explaining the order; second, from "Śrāvakas" down, explaining in sequence, in two: first, the assembly of śrāvakas, in two: first, dividing the sections and showing the summary; second, from "together" down, explaining following the text, in four: first, explaining "together" (yu). "Together" means the sense of sharedness, explained by the sevenfold oneness. Only because of the seven kinds of oneness is the sense of sharedness fulfilled. If judged by time, it already belongs to the stage of raw curds, but provisionally it is explained from the root. The seven in the Tripiṭaka are: sharing the same time of evoking the Buddha; sharing the same place at the Deer Park; sharing the same prātimokṣa precepts; sharing the same mind of all-knowledge; sharing the same undefiled right view; sharing the same thirty-seven factors of awakening; and sharing the same residual liberation. Those who were united in these seven in the past now hear together today. However, regarding this gate of contemplation, the Buddha entered the inner palace of Vaidehī with Ānanda and Maudgalyāyana to proclaim it, and the great assembly had not yet heard it. Only when returning to the Vulture Peak and Ānanda recounted it in full did they come to hear it together. Second, from "the meaning of great" down, explaining "great" (mahā). What is called "great" in Chinese is mahā in Sanskrit, which contains three meanings: great, many, and superior; therefore, one must explain it in terms of these three original meanings. They are what great men take refuge in, because the measure of their virtue is great. The Brahma King took Kaundinya as master, and Śakra took Kāśyapa as master, etc.; they were thoroughly versed in inner and outer scriptures, because their understanding was extensive (many). Surpassing the ninety-five [heretical sects], because their knowledge and vision were superior. All have doubt-free liberation, hence the ultimate among the Hinayana. Though only "great" is marked, the meaning necessarily possesses all three. Third, explaining bhikṣu, in two: first, listing the six meanings. Three for the cause and three for the fruit, each directly matching. Second, from "the Commentary" down, explaining the three according to the essentials. If the three causes are accomplished, the three fruits will naturally be achieved. Furthermore, wishing practitioners to emulate their cultivation of the cause, he explains the three causes. Among the three, the first is "beggar" (mendicant). Here, he adduces Śāriputra's answer to the pure-eyed beggar on the meaning: one must abandon food [procured from] looking up, down, or to the cardinal and intermediate directions, and constantly practice begging for food to live a pure life, hence he is called a mendicant; reaching the fruit, it fulfills the virtue of being worthy of offerings (arhat). Second, "frightener of Māra". Māra lords over birth-and-death; remaining at home and indulging in desires increases birth-and-death; renouncing the home-life and leaving defilement advances toward non-arising. Therefore, the Māra King hears of it and gives rise to terror. If one indulges in desires and breaks the precepts, Māra rejoices again. Diligently cultivating the three trainings, as a fruit one realizes non-arising. Third, "destroyer of evil". The two kinds of afflictions—views and thoughts—total ninety-eight, called evil and called thieves. Cultivating contemplation to examine them thoroughly is called destroying evil; realizing wisdom to cut them off completely is called slaying the thieves. Fourth, from "saṃgha" down, explaining saṃgha, in three: first, explaining the general name; second, from "one who has" down, explaining the particular characteristics; third, from "now these" down, clarifying what is accepted and rejected. Karmic acts generally include ordinary monks, so he takes those who have shame. The two types of monks here are those with shame and genuine [realization]. The Commentary says: "Among these, two kinds of saṃgha can join in the hundred and one karmic acts, and hear together to certify faith." They still exclude learners; the former three are completely disqualified. Second, from "one thousand two hundred" down, listing the number, in two: first, indicating the persons and combining the number, in two: first, combining one thousand; second, from "Śāri[putra]" down, combining two hundred and fifty. Second, from "Kāśyapa" down, the reason for constantly following. Second, the assembly of bodhisattvas, in two: first, sectioning the four texts; second, from "India" down, explaining the two meanings, in two: first, explaining the stage; second, from "Mañjuśrī" down, translating the names. Second, the launching preface, in three: first, comparatively clarifying the differences, in two: first, broadly citing the distinctions. Emitting light, as in the Lotus Sūtra emitting the light between the brows, illuminating the eighteen thousand lands of the east. Shaking the earth, as in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā where the World-Honoured One uses spiritual powers to shake the great thousandfold lands in six ways. Smiling, as in the Sūtra of Requiting Kindness where the Tathāgata smiles delightfully. Entering dhyāna, as in the Golden Light Sūtra where the Tathāgata roams in the immeasurable, exceedingly deep dharma-nature. Proclaiming his own title and stage, as in the Brahma Net Sūtra: "I am now Rocana, seated upon the lotus pedestal." Exhorting people to ask questions, as in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, universally announcing to sentient beings: "The Great Awakened World-Honoured One is about to enter nirvāṇa; if you have any doubts, you may all ask now, as a final inquiry." However, the initiating events in various sūtras may combine these; here, one aspect of each is cited to clarify the characteristics of launching. Second, from "the present sūtra" down, directly revealing the present sūtra, in two: first, directly revealing; second, from "for what reason" down, resolving doubts. Second, from "within this" down, overall sectioning and brief explanation, in two: first, dividing into sections; second, from "question: Bimbisāra" down, explaining, in two: first, question and answer resolving doubts, in two: first, question: Bimbisāra and Vaidehī both requested disciples; in attending to Bimbisāra's request, why send only Maudgalyāyana and Pūrṇa, while in attending to Vaidehī's, why did the Tathāgata go in person? Answer: Bimbisāra, the father of the nation, wished to hear the precepts, which could be transmitted by sending someone; Vaidehī, the mother of the nation, had her capacity in wondrous contemplation, which required the Buddha to personally disclose. The titles of father and mother are derived from King Ajātaśatru. Second, from "Bimbisāra" down, translating the names in advance. Third, from "the first section" down, explaining the sūtra according to the sections. First, directly clarifying the murder of the father, in two: first, dividing the sections; second, from "first, at that time" down, explaining in sequence, in four: first, being imprisoned by his son, in two: first, explaining following the sūtra text, in two: first, master and disciple manifesting events, in two: first, explaining the time, place, and indicating the persons. The sūtra says "At that time", which refers to the time when the Buddha was on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, not far from the city. Previously, Ajātaśatru was translated as "unborn enemy"; now his meaning is explained: while in the womb, he had the signs of enmity and harm, and the diviner foretold it, hence he was named after it. Second, from "following along" down, clarifying following an evil friend to commit treason, in five: first, explaining the evil friend's name and clan; second, from "for the sake of gain" down, explaining the evil friend's schemes and arts, in two: first, learning arts from another: being Ānanda's own younger brother, he knew how to obtain the method of spiritual penetrations; not yet having attained spiritual penetrations himself, Ānanda did not know his mind, and therefore transmitted it to him; second, from "thinking in his mind" down, enticing someone into complicity: creating elephants, horses, and jewels, using matters of a wheel-turning sage king to deceive Ajātaśatru; manifesting hugging and holding, wishing him to give rise to affection; third, from "telling the king" down, clarifying the evil friend's words directly instructing him to commit treason: "I will kill Śākyamuni to become the new Buddha; you kill Bimbisāra to become the new king. With a new king and a new Buddha transforming the world together, would that not be delightful?"; fourth, from "following along" down, clarifying the crown prince committing treason: Ajātaśatru accepted the instruction and then carried out the murder and treason.

Fifth, from "Devadatta" down, clarifying the evil friend committing treason. Devadatta himself accomplished three unpardonable offenses, and further taught Ajātaśatru to accomplish the murder of his father and to prepare the harm of his mother. Because of practicing himself and teaching others the five unpardonable sins, he sank alive into Avīci. Second, from "Bimbisāra" down, the past causes of father and son. Because the slain sage gave rise to an evil thought, he immediately came to become his son, already harboring the enmity of harming his father within the womb. Second, from "like this" down, concluding on provisional manifestations. Devadatta, Ajātaśatru, Bimbisāra, and Vaidehī were all great provisional manifestations, displaying defiance and displaying obedience to benefit sentient beings. Second, the queen offers food. Third, the sage preaches the Dharma for him, in two: first, explaining Maudgalyāyana conferring the precepts, in two: first, explaining his swift arrival. Because he served a pratyekabuddha in a past life, he now obtained spiritual penetrations and swiftly arrived at the king's place. Second, from "conferring the eight" down, explaining the marks of the precepts. First, separating fragrant clothes and ascending high beds to make eight precepts, fasting is outside the eight. Next, combining fragrant clothes and high beds into seven, with not eating past noon as the eighth, then fasting is within the eight. The Dharma has no increase or decrease; the numbers merely have expansion and contraction; all are called the eightfold feast precepts. Second, from "Pūrṇa" down, explaining Pūrṇa preaching the Dharma. Fourth, from "Bimbisāra" down, Dharma-food prolongs life. Second, from "next, harming" down, clarifying the desire to harm the mother, in two: first, dividing into sections; second, from "first, Ajā[taśatru]" down, explaining in sequence, in four: first, imprisoned by her son, in three: first, desiring to harm the mother, in three: first, the king asks whether he is still alive; second, from "the gatekeeper" down, answering with facts; third, the king hears and becomes furious, in two: first, parsing the sūtra text; second, from "should kill" down, resolving difficulties. Second, from "at the beginning of the kalpa" down, the two ministers remonstrate, in three: first, explaining the words of admonition; second, from "with hand" down, explaining the marks of admonition; third, from "frightened" down, clarifying compliance with the admonition. Third, from "ordering to say" down, ordering her imprisonment. Second, from "Vaidehī" down, requesting the Buddha due to imprisonment, in two: first, dividing into sections; second, from "Vaidehī" down, explaining in sequence, in two: first, requesting persons. One was the gate teacher, one was the Buddha's attendant; having previously constantly given instructions, she specifically requested these two. Being in the deep palace, she therefore requested both, not daring to favor just one. Desiring to convey her intent to request the Buddha to proclaim the causes for rebirth in the Pure Land—this was her intent in requesting these persons.