觀無量壽佛經疏 2
English (machine translation) 2
- Language
- English
2.1
Compiled and recorded by the śramaṇa Shandao
2.2
From here below, examining the text, its meaning is briefly explained through five gates: First, from "Thus have I heard" down to "harassed by the five sufferings, how might I see the World of Sukhāvatī?", this clarifies the introductory section. Second, from the opening line of the sun contemplation, "The Buddha told Vaidehī: 'You and sentient beings...'", down to the lowest level of the lowest grade, this clarifies the main section. Third, from "When this was said" down to the gods producing [bodhi]citta, this directly clarifies the section on obtaining benefit. Fourth, from "Ānanda addressed the Buddha" down to Vaidehī and the others rejoicing, this clarifies the dissemination section. These four meanings comprise the direct teaching in the single assembly where the Buddha was at the royal palace. Fifth, Ānanda recounting it for the great assembly at Gṛdhrakūṭa constitutes another assembly, which also has three parts: 1. From "Then the World-Honoured One walked through empty space and returned to Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa" onwards, this clarifies its introductory section. 2. From Ānanda widely recounting the aforementioned matters for the great assembly onwards, this clarifies the main section. 3. From "The entire great assembly rejoiced and put it into practice" onwards, this clarifies the dissemination section. Now, transformation must have a cause, so the preface is clarified first. The preface having arisen, the teaching to be delivered is directly set forth; next the main section is clarified. The explanation having been fully completed, wishing to transmit and uphold what was taught for latter ages, praising its excellence and encouraging study, the dissemination section is clarified last. Although above there are five different meanings, this briefly concludes the examination of the preface, the main section, and the dissemination section.
2.3
Furthermore, within the preceding preface, it is divided again into two: 1. From the single phrase "Thus have I heard", it is named the preface verifying faith. 2. From "At one time" down to "how might I see the World of Sukhāvatī?", this directly clarifies the preface of origin.
2.4
First, regarding what is called "verifying faith", there are two meanings: First, the two words "Thus [have]" generally designate the teacher of the doctrine, the person capable of speaking. Second, the two words "I heard" specifically point to Ānanda, the person capable of listening. Therefore it is said, "Thus have I heard." This doubly explains the two meanings.
2.5
Furthermore, saying "Thus" refers to the Dharma—the two gates of meditative and non-meditative [good]. "So" (shi) is a definitive word: capacities and practices will certainly yield benefit. This clarifies that what the Tathāgata spoke contains no error in its words, hence it is called "Thus" (rushi). Furthermore, saying "as" (ru) means "as sentient beings intend": following what their minds delight in, the Buddha delivers them. When capacity and teaching correspond, it is also called "right" (shi); therefore it is said, "Thus" (rushi). Furthermore, saying "Thus" is meant to clarify that regarding what the Tathāgata expounded, when expounding gradual it was as gradual, when expounding sudden it was as sudden; when expounding form it was as form, when expounding emptiness it was as emptiness; when expounding the dharma of humans it was as the dharma of humans, when expounding the dharma of gods it was as the dharma of gods; when expounding the small it was as the small, when expounding the great it was as the great; when expounding the ordinary it was as ordinary, when expounding the noble it was as noble; when expounding cause it was as cause, when expounding fruit it was as fruit; when expounding suffering it was as suffering, when expounding joy it was as joy; when expounding distant it was as distant, when expounding near it was as near; when expounding the same it was as the same, when expounding the distinct it was as distinct; when expounding the pure it was as pure, when expounding the defiled it was as defiled. In expounding all phenomena with their thousands of variations and myriad distinctions, the Tathāgata contemplates and knows them with utter lucidity. Arising practices according to their minds, their respective benefits differ. Karmic fruit is naturally so; among the assembly there is no error. This is also called "right" (shi); therefore it is said, "Thus" (rushi).
2.6
Regarding "I heard": this clarifies that Ānanda was the Buddha's attendant, constantly following behind the Buddha, of wide hearing and broad knowledge; he was personally present before the seat, able to hear and able to uphold, receiving the doctrinal purports firsthand, showing that there is no error in transmission. Therefore it says, "I heard".
2.7
Furthermore, regarding "verifying faith": this clarifies that Ānanda, having received the Buddha's teaching, transmits and maintains it for latter ages. For the sake of sentient beings [he says]: "Contemplation dharmas such as this, I heard from the Buddha; they are authenticated and can be trusted." Hence it is called the preface verifying faith. This is explained with respect to Ānanda.
2.8
Second, within the preface of origin, it is subdivided into seven: 1. From "At one time the Buddha was..." down to "...with the Dharma Prince as their leader", this clarifies the preface prior to transformation. 2. From "In the great city of Rājagṛha" down to "his complexion was harmonious and joyful", this directly clarifies the preface of origin: the circumstance of imprisoning the father. 3. From "At that time Ajātaśatru..." down to "not allowing her to come out again", this clarifies the circumstance of imprisoning the mother. 4. From "At that time Vaidehī was confined..." down to "...together as retinue", this clarifies the circumstance of loathing suffering. 5. From "I only wish that you will speak in detail for me..." down to "teach me samāpatti", this clarifies the circumstance of aspiring to the pure. 6. From "At that time the World-Honoured One smiled..." down to "the correct causes for pure karma", this clarifies the circumstance of revealing practice through non-meditative good. 7. From "The Buddha told Ānanda and the others: 'Listen attentively...'" down to "how can one obtain sight of the land of Sukhāvatī?", this directly clarifies the circumstance of presenting contemplation through meditative good. Although above there are seven different sections, this extensively concludes the examination of the preface of origin.
2.9
First, explaining the preface prior to transformation: within this preface, there are four points.
2.10
First, regarding "at one time": this directly clarifies the time when transformation was initiated. When the Buddha is about to preach the Dharma, he first depends upon the time and place. It is only because sentient beings' awakening necessarily relies on causes and conditions; the master of transformation approaches their capacities, awaiting the time and place. Furthermore, saying "at one time" refers either to the twelve double-hours of day and night, or the four seasons of the year, and so on. These are all the times when the Tathāgata adapts to capacities to gather and transform. Regarding the "place": according to what is suitable for them, the Tathāgata preaches the Dharma. It may be in mountains and forests, in royal palaces and villages, in wildernesses and charnel grounds, in places with many or few humans and gods, in places with śrāvakas and bodhisattvas, in places with the eight classes of beings, humans, and deva kings, in places of purely ordinary beings or with one or two more, or in places of purely noble ones or with one or two more. According to the time and place, the Tathāgata contemplates and knows them without increase or decrease, conferring the Dharma according to conditions so that each benefits from what sustains them. This is like a great bell: though resonant, it must await striking before it sounds; the Great Sage extends compassion, yet must await entreaty before he preaches. Hence it is called "at one time". Furthermore, "at one time": when Ajātaśatru was instigating rebellion, where was the Buddha? Just at this one time, the Tathāgata was alone with the two assemblies on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa. This means shaping the upper by means of the lower; hence it says "at one time". Furthermore, "at one time": the Buddha and the two assemblies were at that one time on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa when they heard the causes and conditions of Ajātaśatru committing this wicked rebellion. This means shaping the lower by means of the upper; hence it says "at one time".
2.11
Second, regarding "the Buddha": this designates and defines the master of transformation, distinguishing him from other buddhas, and exclusively manifesting Śākyamuni.
2.12
Third, from "in Rājagṛha" onwards directly clarifies the places where the Tathāgata traveled to transform. There are two: 1. Traveling in the royal city and villages to transform the lay assembly. 2. Traveling on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa and other places to transform the monastic assembly. Furthermore, as for laypeople, greedy pursuit of the five desires continues constantly. Even if they generate a pure mind, it is like drawing on water. Yet because he accords with conditions to universally benefit, he does not abandon great compassion. The monastic and the lay forms are distinct; there is no way for them to dwell together. This is called dwelling by realm. Furthermore, as for monastics, they disregard body and give up life, sever desires and return to the real. Their minds are like vajra, equal to a round mirror. Yearning for the Buddha stage, they widely benefit self and others. If they do not completely detach from noisy defilement, there is no way this virtue can be verified. This is called dwelling by reliance.
2.13
Fourth, from "with a great assembly of monks" down to "...as their leaders", this clarifies the Buddha's disciples. Within this assembly, it is divided into two: first, the śrāvaka assembly; second, the bodhisattva assembly. Within the śrāvaka assembly, there are nine points: First, saying "with" means the Buddha's person encompasses the assembly, hence it is called "with". Second, general greatness. Third, greatness in appearance. Fourth, greatness in assembly. Fifth, greatness in senior age. Sixth, greatness in number. Seventh, greatness as venerable elders. Eighth, greatness in inner true virtue. Ninth, greatness in fruit and realization.
2.14
Question: "At the beginning of all sūtras, there are these śrāvakas positioned beforehand; what is the reason for this?"
2.15
Answer: "This has a special meaning. What is the special meaning? These śrāvakas were mostly non-Buddhists. As the Damamūkanidāna Sūtra says: 'Uruvilvā-Kāśyapa led five hundred disciples practicing heterodox teachings. Gayā-Kāśyapa led two hundred and fifty disciples practicing heterodox teachings. Nadī-Kāśyapa led two hundred and fifty disciples practicing heterodox teachings. In total there were one thousand. All received the Buddha's conversion and attained the path of arhats. The other two hundred and fifty were disciples of Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana, leading them together in one place, practicing heterodox teachings; they also received the Buddha's conversion and all attained the fruit of the path. These four groups were united in one place; therefore there were 1,250 people.'"
2.16
Question: "In this assembly there were also those who were not non-Buddhists; why are they generally designated in this way?"
2.17
Answer: "As explained in the sūtras, these former non-Buddhists constantly followed the World-Honoured One, never separating from him. Yet the compilers singled out their external virtues, hence there are different names. Those who were non-Buddhists were many; those who were not were few."
2.18
Question again: "It is not yet known: what was the intention in these former non-Buddhists constantly following behind the Buddha?"
2.19
Answer: "The explanation has two meanings: 1. Explained with respect to the Buddha; 2. Explained with respect to the non-Buddhists. Explained with respect to the Buddha: these non-Buddhists had long been fanned by heterodox winds, not just for a single lifetime. Though entering the true gate, residual habits still remained. Therefore, the Tathāgata kept them in awareness and did not allow them to transform others outside, fearing damage to the sprouts of sentient beings' right view and the growth of evil karma, such that in this life and future rebirths they would harvest no fruit. For this reason, he gathered them close to himself and did not permit external benefaction. This concludes the explanation with respect to the Buddha. Next, explained with respect to the non-Buddhists: the intention of Kāśyapa and the others was that they considered how through vast kalpas they had long sunk in saṃsāra, revolving through the six paths with unspeakable suffering. Due to ignorance and evil views, obstinately clinging to heterodox winds, they did not encounter a clear teacher, perpetually drifting in the ocean of suffering. Only through past conditions did they meet the Compassionate Honoured One. The moisture of the Dharma is impartial, and we received its soaking. Reflecting on the Buddha's benevolence and virtue, even shattering the body would fall utter short. As a result, they personally attended upon his spiritual presence, with no cause ever to pause even briefly. This concludes the explanation with respect to the non-Buddhists."
2.20
Question again: "Why are these venerable elders called 'known and recognized by the assembly'?"
2.21
Answer: "Exalted virtue is called venerable (zun); advanced age is called elder (su). All ordinary and noble beings knew their inner virtues surpassed others, and recognized their outer appearance as extraordinarily distinguished; hence they are called 'known and recognized by the assembly'."
2.22
Although above there were nine different phrases, the explanation of the śrāvaka assembly is concluded.
2.23
Next, explaining the bodhisattva assembly. Within this assembly, there are seven points: 1. Marking appearance; 2. Marking number; 3. Marking stage; 4. Marking fruit; 5. Marking virtue; 6. Distinctly manifesting the exalted virtuous stage of Mañjuśrī; 7. General conclusion. Furthermore, these bodhisattvas possess immeasurable practices and vows, dwelling securely in all dharmas of merit, traveling through the ten directions, practicing skillful means. Entering the storehouse of the Buddha's Dharma, they reach the ultimate other shore. In immeasurable worlds, they manifest attainment of equal enlightenment. Their radiance shines brilliantly, universally illuminating the ten directions. Immeasurable buddha lands undergo the six kinds of shaking. According to conditions they reveal and instruct, turning the wheel of the Dharma, beating the Dharma drum, grasping the Dharma sword, sounding the Dharma thunder, raining the Dharma rain, and expounding the Dharma gift, constantly awakening all worlds with the voice of the Dharma. They rip apart the net of heterodoxy, annihilate all views, scatter all defilements, and destroy all moats of desire. Manifesting the pure and pristine, their radiance blends with the Buddha's Dharma, circulating the true transformation, pitying sentient beings. Never arrogant or heedless, they attain the dharma of equality, fully endowed with immeasurable hundreds of thousands of samādhis. In a single thought-moment, there is nowhere they do not reach. Carrying sentient beings, they love them like children. All roots of goodness are ferried to the other shore. They fully acquire the immeasurable merits of all buddhas, their wisdom open and lucid, inconceivable. Although there are seven different phrases, this concludes the explanation of the bodhisattva assembly.
2.24
Although above there were two different assemblies, this extensively clarifies the preface prior to transformation.
2.25
Second, within the circumstances of the imprisonment of the father, there are seven points: First, from “At that time, in the great city of Rājagṛha” downwards, it explains the place where the teaching was initiated in general. This explains that in ancient times, whenever the common people built houses in the city, they were burned by heavenly fire. But if it was a royal residence, no fire ever approached it. Later, the common people submitted a joint memorial to the king: “Whenever your subjects build houses, they are frequently burned by heavenly fire. Yet only the royal residences are never approached by fire. We do not know what the reason for this may be.” The king told the petitioners: “From now on, when you build houses, simply say: ‘I am now building a residence for the king.’” The petitioners followed the king’s decree, and upon returning and building their houses, they were never burned again. Because of this legend handed down, it was named Rājagṛha (King’s Residence). As for the words “great city,” this city was extremely large, with a population of nine hundred million; hence it is called “the great city of Rājagṛha.” As for “the place where the teaching was initiated,” there are two aspects: first, King Ajātaśatru aroused evil, which led to the circumstance of imprisoning his parents; through this imprisonment, [Vaidehī] grew weary of this Sahā world and vowed to be born in a world free of sorrow. Second, the Tathāgata responded to her invitation, emitting light that transformed into a tower wherein the wondrous forms [of the pure lands] appeared as reflections, and the queen consort sought rebirth in the Land of Peace and Bliss. Furthermore, with an earnest mind she requested practice, and the Buddha revealed the causes of the three blessings; the correct contemplation is the gate of meditative [good], and he further revealed the benefits of the nine grades. For these reasons, it is called the place where the teaching was initiated.
2.26
Second, from “There was a crown prince” down to “following the instruction of an evil friend,” it directly explains that in a state of confusion and delusion, King [Ajātaśatru] placed faith in and accepted the deception of an evil person. The word “crown prince” clarifies his rank. The name “Ajātaśatru” reveals his name. Moreover, “Ajātaśatru” is the correct pronunciation from the Western Regions; previously translated here, it means “Unborn Enmity” and is also called “Broken Finger.”
2.27
Question: “Why is he called ‘Unborn Enmity’ and ‘Broken Finger’?”
2.28
Answer: “These both cite past conditions, on account of which he has these names. As for those conditions: originally, the father king had no heir, and although he prayed to spirits everywhere, he ultimately could not obtain one. Suddenly, a physiognomist submitted a memorial to the king, saying: ‘Your subject knows that there is an immortal in the mountains who will soon relinquish his life; after his life ends, he will certainly become the king’s son.’ The king heard this with joy: ‘When will this person surrender his life?’ The physiognomist replied to the king: ‘Only after another three years have elapsed will his life end.’ The king said: ‘I am old in years and the state has no successor; how can I wait for three more full years?’ The king then sent an envoy into the mountains to go and entreat the immortal, saying: ‘The great king has no son and lacks a successor; he has prayed to spirits everywhere but in distress could not obtain one. A physiognomist has observed that the great immortal will soon surrender his life and become the king’s son. We beseech the great immortal to bestow grace and come early.’ The envoy received the order and entered the mountains; reaching the immortal’s dwelling, he fully related the circumstances of the king’s request. The immortal told the envoy: ‘Only after another three years have elapsed may my life end; for me to go now at the king’s command is impermissible.’ The envoy obeyed the immortal’s words, returned, and reported to the great king, detailing the immortal’s intention. The king said: ‘I am the lord of a state; all persons and things belong to me. Now I have courteously humbled myself to invite him, yet he does not comply with my will.’ The king further ordered the envoy: ‘Go again and entreat him. If entreating him fails, kill him immediately. Once his life has ended, can he not become my son?’ The envoy received the order and went to the immortal’s dwelling, relating the king’s intent in full. Although the immortal heard what the envoy said, his intention was still not to comply. The envoy, carrying out the order, then moved to kill him. The immortal said: ‘You must tell the king: my life had not yet run its course, yet the king, with mind and mouth, sent someone to kill me. If I become the king’s child, I too shall, with mind and mouth, send someone to kill the king.’ Having spoken these words, the immortal immediately met his death. Having died, he took rebirth in the royal palace. That very night, the queen consort sensed that she was pregnant; the king heard this with joy. At dawn, he summoned the physiognomist to examine the queen consort: was it a boy or a girl? Having examined her, the physiognomist reported to the king: ‘It is a boy, not a girl; this boy will bring harm to the king.’ The king said: ‘I would surrender my entire kingdom to him; even if there is harm, I have no fear.’ Hearing these words, the king harbored mingled sorrow and joy. The king said to the queen consort: ‘I have privately deliberated with you: the physiognomist said that the child will bring harm to me. On the day you are to give birth, do so from atop a high tower, directly over the courtyard, and do not let anyone catch him; if he falls to the ground, how could he fail to die? I will have no anxiety, and the secret will not leak out.’ The queen consort agreed to the king’s plan. When the time of birth came, it was done just according to the previous plan: once born, he fell to the ground, but his life was not severed; only his little finger was injured. Therefore, people outside together called him the ‘Broken-Finger Prince.’
2.29
“As for ‘Unborn Enmity’: this was because Devadatta aroused a malicious and jealous mind, and so revealed these past evil conditions before the prince. How did a jealous mind give rise to these evil conditions? Devadatta had an evil nature and was a fierce man; although he had gone forth from home, he was constantly jealous of the Buddha’s fame and material offerings. Now, the father king was the Buddha’s dānapati, and on one occasion he brought many offerings to present to the Tathāgata—namely gold, silver, the seven treasures, famous garments of superior cloth, and foods and fruits of a hundred flavors. Each and every kind filled five hundred carts. With fragrant flowers, instrumental music, and hundreds of thousands of people praising and circumambulating, they were sent to the Buddha’s assembly and given to the Buddha and the Saṃgha. When Devadatta saw this, his jealousy grew even fiercer, and he went to Śāriputra to request to learn physical supernormal powers. The Venerable said to him: ‘Worthy one, just practice the four foundations of mindfulness; there is no need to learn physical supernormal powers.’ Since his request was not granted, he went to other Venerables to seek it, up to the five hundred disciples, but none of them would teach him; all instructed him to practice the four foundations of mindfulness. His requests having failed, he finally went to Ānanda to learn. He said to Ānanda: ‘You are my younger brother; I wish to learn supernormal powers. Teach me step by step in sequence.’ Now, although Ānanda had attained the first fruit, he had not yet realized knowledge of others’ minds, and did not know that his elder brother was secretly learning supernormal powers in order to hatch an evil plot against the Buddha. Ānanda then called him to a quiet place and taught him in sequence: sitting cross-legged and upright, he first taught him to use the mind to lift the body with the visualization that it seemed to move, visualizing it leaving the ground by one fen, one inch, then one foot, one zhang, until reaching the house, making the visualization that it was empty and unobstructed, visualizing passing straight up into the sky, and then recollecting the mind to bring it down to the original seat. Next, he used the body to lift the mind: at first leaving the ground by one fen, one inch, and so forth, just as in the previous method; lifting the mind with the body, lifting the body with the mind, also in accordance [with the method], and having reached the upper sky, recollecting the body to bring it down to the original seat. Next, he visualized lifting body and mind together, again identical to the previous method, one fen, one inch, and so forth, cycling through and beginning again. Next, he visualized body and mind entering into all material, obstructive realms, making the visualization that they were unobstructed. Next, he visualized all forms such as mountains, rivers, and the great earth entering his own body, like empty space without obstruction, seeing no material characteristics. Next, he visualized his own body either becoming huge, filling empty space, sitting and lying at will, or sitting or lying down, moving the sun and moon with his hand, or making a small body entering into a speck of dust—all visualized as unobstructed. Ānanda taught him in sequence in this way. When Devadatta had received the method, he went separately to a quiet place, focused his mind single-pointedly for seven days and seven nights, and attained physical supernormal powers, completely achieving total mastery. Having attained supernormal powers, he went before the prince’s palace and displayed great miraculous transformations in mid-air: emitting fire from the upper body and water from the lower body, or emitting water from the left side and fire from the right, appearing as a huge body or a small body, sitting or lying in mid-air at will and with mastery. When the prince saw this, he asked his attendants: ‘Who is this person?’ The attendants answered the prince: ‘This is the Venerable Devadatta.’ Hearing this, the prince was overjoyed; he raised his hand and called out: ‘Why does the Venerable not come down?’ Having seen him call, Devadatta transformed into an infant and came straight onto the prince’s lap. The prince held him, kissed his mouth, and fondled him, and spat into his mouth, which the infant then swallowed. In a moment, he returned to his original form. Seeing Devadatta’s various miraculous transformations, the prince revered him all the more. Seeing that the prince’s mind was reverent, [Devadatta] then spoke of the father king’s circumstances of making offerings: five hundred of each kind, loaded onto carts and carried to the Buddha’s dwelling to present to the Buddha and the Saṃgha. The prince heard this and immediately said to the Venerable: ‘This disciple can also prepare five hundred carts of each kind to offer to the Venerable and bestow upon the Saṃgha; could it be inferior to that?’ Devadatta said: ‘This intention of the prince is excellent.’ From this time on, [Devadatta] obtained vast offerings, and his mind grew increasingly arrogant. It is like striking a vicious dog’s nose with a stick, which only increases the dog’s viciousness; this was just the same. The prince now struck the nose of Devadatta’s greedy dog-mind with the stick of material gain, causing his evil to flare up all the more. Because of this, he broke the Saṃgha and changed the Buddha’s Dharma and vinaya so that his precepts and instructions differed. Waiting for a time when the Buddha was preaching the Dharma broadly to the assembly of ordinary people and sages, he came into the assembly and demanded from the Buddha: ‘Entrust all the disciples and all the treasuries of Dharma to me. The World-Honoured One is advanced in years; you should retire to a quiet retreat and care for yourself.’ When the entire great assembly heard these words from Devadatta, they were stunned and looked at one another, profoundly astonished. At that time, the World-Honoured One spoke to Devadatta before the great assembly: ‘Even to Śāriputra, Maudgalyāyana, and others, who are great generals of the Dharma, I have not entrusted the Buddhadharma; how much less to you, a foolish man who swallows spit!’ When Devadatta heard the Buddha humiliate him before the assembly, it was like a poisoned arrow entering his heart, and he gave rise to an even more crazed malice. Using this circumstance, he went to the prince’s dwelling to hatch an evil plot together with him. When the prince saw the Venerable, he respectfully inquired: ‘The Venerable’s complexion today is haggard, unlike in the past.’ Devadatta replied: ‘My haggardness today is entirely on account of the prince.’ The prince respectfully asked: ‘What concern does the Venerable have on my account?’ Devadatta then replied: ‘Does the prince know? The World-Honoured One is old and can no longer bear his duties; he should be eliminated, and I will become the Buddha myself. The father king is old and should also be eliminated, so that the prince may take the throne himself. A new king and a new Buddha governing and transforming—would that not be delightful?’ Hearing this, the prince was extremely enraged: ‘Do not speak like this!’ [Devadatta] spoke again: ‘Prince, do not be angry. The father king has no grace or kindness toward you at all. When you were about to be born, the father king ordered the queen consort to give birth atop a hundred-foot tower directly over the courtyard, hoping that you would fall to the ground and be killed; it was solely due to the power of the prince’s merit that the life-faculty was not severed, only injuring the little finger. If you do not believe it, look at your little finger yourself—that is proof enough.’ When the prince heard these words, he questioned him again closely: ‘Is that really so?’ Devadatta answered: ‘If this were not true, would I have come purposely to utter idle talk?’ Because of these words, he placed faith in and adopted Devadatta’s plan of evil views; hence it is said: ‘following the instruction of Devadatta, the evil friend.’”
2.30
Third, from 'seized his father the king' down to 'not one was allowed to go [there],' it directly clarifies the father-king being imprisoned by his son. This clarifies that Ajātaśatru adopted Devadatta's evil scheme and abruptly abandoned the affection between father and son; not only did he fail in [repaying] boundless kindness, but the echo of his rebellion filled the roads because of this. Suddenly laying hold of the king's body is called 'seizing' (收); having taken him and not releasing him is called 'holding' (執); hence it is called 'seizing and holding.' The word 'father' distinctly displays the utmost intimacy of kinship. 'King' reveals his status. 'Bimbisāra' reveals his name. As for 'confined in a room behind sevenfold [walls],' because what was done was grave, the matter was also not light. It was impossible to detain him lightly among common people entirely without guards. But as the king's palace halls were, by principle, cut off from outsiders, only the assembly of ministers had served him for a long time. If [Ajātaśatru] did not strictly restrict them, he feared feelings might pass between them. Therefore, he caused internal and external contact to be severed, confining him within sevenfold walls.
2.31
Fourth, from 'the great consort of the state' down to 'secretly presented it to the king,' it directly clarifies the queen consort secretly offering food to the king. 'The great consort of the state' clarifies that she was the greatest. 'Queen consort' indicates her status. 'Vaidehī' reveals her name. 'Revering the great king' clarifies that when the queen consort saw that the king's person was imprisoned, the gates were extremely difficult [to pass], and news was blocked, she feared the king's physical life would be cut off. Thereupon she bathed with scented water, making her body pure; she then took ghee and honey and first smeared her body, and afterward took roasted flour and placed it on top of the ghee and honey. Then she put on clean clothes, covering it, and over the outer clothes only then put on jewel garlands according to the ordinary way of dressing, so that outsiders would not find it strange. Furthermore, she took the openings of the jewel garlands, plugged one end with wax, filled the openings with grape nectar, and when full plugged them back up. All the jewel garlands were treated in this way. When her adornment was finished, she walked slowly into the palace to see the king.
2.32
Question: 'The ministers received an order not allowing them to see the king. It is not clear why the gatekeepers did not restrict the queen consort, but let her enter: what is the meaning of this?'
2.33
Answer: 'The ministers were of different bodies and were also outsiders; [Ajātaśatru] feared feelings might pass between them, which brought about the strict imposition of severe restrictions. Moreover, as for the queen consort, her person was a woman, and her mind had no divergent schemes. Having heavy karmic connections from past lives with the king and being husband and wife for a long time, they were different bodies with a single mind, which caused people to have no external suspicion. Therefore, she was able to enter and see the king.'
2.34
Fifth, from 'at that time the great king ate the roasted flour' down to 'confer upon me the eight precepts,' it directly clarifies the father-king requesting the Dharma on account of his confinement. This clarifies that after the queen consort saw the king, she scraped off the ghee and roasted flour from her body, balled it up, and gave it to the king. The king took it and immediately ate it. When eating the roasted flour was finished, the queen consort sought and obtained pure water inside the palace and gave it to the king to rinse his mouth. When rinsing the mouth was finished, he could not let time pass in vain with his mind having nothing to rely upon. Therefore, he devoutly joined his palms, turned his face toward Gṛdhrakūṭa, paid homage to the Tathāgata, and requested divine protection. This clarifies the physical karma of respect, and it also applies to mental karma. From 'and spoke these words' downward, it directly clarifies the vocal karma of requesting, and it also applies to mental karma. In saying 'the great Maudgalyāyana is my close friend,' there are two meanings. When Maudgalyāyana was in worldly life he was the king's special relative; once he went forth, he became the household preceptor, coming and going through the palace halls entirely without obstacle. In worldly life he was a relative, and having gone forth he was called a friend; hence he is called 'close friend.' In saying 'I pray that you arise compassion and confer upon me the eight precepts,' this clarifies that the father-king's feeling of reverence for the Dharma was deep, valuing others above himself. If he had not encountered the calamity of imprisonment, inviting the Buddha and the Saṅgha would not have been difficult. Now that he was imprisoned, there was no way to bring about their coming. Therefore, he only requested Maudgalyāyana to confer the eight precepts upon him.
2.35
Question: 'The father-king paid homage from afar, first bowing to the World-Honoured One. But when receiving the precepts, he invited Maudgalyāyana. What is the meaning of this?'
2.36
Answer: 'Among ordinary beings and sages, none is more supremely revered than the Buddha; in pouring out his mind to make a vow, he therefore first bowed to the Great Master. Precepts are a minor occasion; therefore, he only invited Maudgalyāyana to come and confer them. The king's intention was to value obtaining the precepts, which complete the meaning; why trouble the World-Honoured One to come out of his way?'
2.37
Question: 'The Tathāgata's precept-dharmas are indeed immeasurable. Why did the father-king request only the eight precepts and not request the others?'
2.38
Answer: 'The other precepts are slightly broader and their duration is long; he feared that in the interval he might lose mindfulness and wander in saṃsāra. As for the eight precepts, as explained in other Buddhist sūtras, they are the precepts of the monastic life upheld by householders. In upholding these precepts, the mind is extremely meticulous and extremely urgent. Why is that? The duration is rather brief, limited only to one day and one night, and upon performing the ritual they are relinquished. How is it known that the mental application and practice of these precepts are meticulous? As clearly revealed in the text of the precepts, it says: "Disciple of the Buddha, from this morning until tomorrow morning, for one day and one night, just as all Buddhas do not take life, are you able to uphold this?" The answer is: "I am able to uphold it." The second says: "Disciple of the Buddha, from this morning until tomorrow morning, for one day and one night, just as all Buddhas do not steal, do not engage in unchaste conduct, do not speak falsely, do not drink alcohol, must not apply rouge or powder to the body, must not sing, dance, perform, or go to watch and listen, and must not mount high, broad, and large beds—these above eight are precepts and not fasting. Must not eat past midday—this one is fasting and not a precept." All these precepts cite all the Buddhas as witness. Why? Only Buddha and Buddha have both active defilements and residual tendencies exhausted. Except for Buddhas, evil tendencies and the like still remain. Therefore, they are not cited as witness. From this, it is known that the mental application and arising of practice for these precepts are extremely meticulous and urgent. Moreover, regarding these precepts, the Buddha explained that there are eight kinds of superior qualities. If a person completely upholds them for one day and one night without violation, the merit obtained exceeds the realms of humans, devas, and the two vehicles. As broadly explained in the sūtras, because there is such benefit, it caused the father-king to receive them day after day.'
2.39
Sixth, from 'at that time the great Maudgalyāyana' down to 'expounded the Dharma for the king,' it clarifies that on account of his request, the father-king received the sacred Dharma. This clarifies that Maudgalyāyana obtained the knowledge of others' minds, knew from afar the father-king's intention in requesting, and immediately manifested spiritual powers, arriving at the king's place in the snap of a finger. Furthermore, fearing people would not recognize the mark of spiritual powers, [the sūtra] therefore uses a swift falcon as an analogy. Yet Maudgalyāyana's power of supernatural penetration could circle the four continents hundreds of thousands of times in the space of a single thought; how could he be of the same class as a falcon? Comparisons such as this are indeed numerous and cannot be fully cited, as broadly explained in the Damamūka-nidāna Sūtra. In saying 'day after day conferred the eight precepts upon the king like this,' this clarifies that the father-king prolonging his life caused Maudgalyāyana to come repeatedly to confer the precepts.
2.40
Question: 'Since the eight precepts are said to be superior, receiving them once is sufficient. Why was it necessary to receive them day after day?' Answer: 'Mountains do not weary of height; the sea does not weary of depth; knives do not weary of sharpness; the sun does not weary of brightness; humans do not weary of goodness; sins do not weary of being eliminated; the worthy do not weary of virtue; Buddhas do not weary of sanctity. The king's intention was that, having been imprisoned, he received no further edicts. Thought after thought, he feared that someone would summon and kill him. For this reason, day and night he poured out his mind and looked up in reliance on the eight precepts, wishing to accumulate good and increase height to provide for future karma.'
2.41
In saying 'the World-Honoured One also dispatched Pūrṇa to expound the Dharma for the king,' this clarifies that the World-Honoured One's compassionate intent was profound; he took pity on the king's person suddenly encountering imprisonment and feared that he would give rise to distress and exhaustion. Pūrṇa was the foremost among the sacred disciples in expounding the Dharma, skillful in expedient means to open the human mind. For this reason, the Tathāgata dispatched him to expound the Dharma for the king in order to eliminate distress and affliction.
2.42
Seventh, from 'during this time' down to 'his countenance was harmonious and joyful,' it directly clarifies that because the father-king ate food and heard the Dharma, he did not die for many days. This directly clarifies that the queen consort offered food for a long time to eliminate hunger and thirst. The two sages also internally supported him with the precept-dharma and skillfully opened the king's mind. Food could prolong life, and the precept-dharma nourished his spirit; sorrow was lost and distress was forgotten, causing his facial appearance to be harmonious and joyful.
2.43
Although the preceding has seven different phrases, the broad clarification of the conditions for imprisoning the father is concluded.
2.44
Third, within the conditions for imprisoning the mother, there are eight.
2.45
First, from 'at that time Ajātaśatru' down to 'is he still alive?' it directly clarifies asking for news of the father. This clarifies that the number of days King Ajātaśatru had imprisoned his father was already many; human contact was completely severed, and water and food were cut off, so having exceeded fourteen days, his life should have ended. Having formed this thought, he went to the palace gate and asked the gatekeeper: 'Is the father-king still alive now?'
2.46
Question: 'If a person eats only one meal of rice, his limit reaches seven days and then he dies. The father-king had already passed twenty-one days; by calculation his life should have ended without doubt. Why did King Ajātaśatru not ask directly: "Gatekeeper, has the father-king died by now?" Why did he raise doubt and ask if he was still alive: what is the meaning of this?'
2.47
Answer: 'This was King Ajātaśatru's covert asking. As sovereign of the myriad realms, his actions could not be careless. The father-king was his natural kin, so it was unacceptable to speak of and ask about death. He feared it would be considered a fault at that time and turn into criticism and blame. Only by marking death in his inner mind while asking with his mouth whether he was alive did he wish to stop the voice of evil rebellion forever.'
2.48
Second, from 'at that time the gatekeeper addressed [the king]' down to 'he could not be restrained,' it directly clarifies the gatekeeper answering fully according to the facts. This clarifies that Ajātaśatru previously asked whether the father-king was alive, and now next the gatekeeper replied. From 'he addressed the great king, "The great consort of the state..."' downward, it directly clarifies the queen consort secretly offering food to the king. Once the king obtained food, food could prolong life. Although many days had passed, the father's life still remained. This was the queen consort's intention, not the fault of the gatekeeper.
2.49
Question: 'When the queen consort offered food, she smeared roasted flour on her body, secretly concealed it under her clothes, and came and went without anyone seeing. Why did the gatekeeper fully reveal the matter of the queen consort offering food?'
2.50
Answer: 'Anything private and secret cannot be practiced for long; even if cleverly and securely hidden, the matter will still be exposed. The father-king being imprisoned inside the palace, the queen consort came and went day after day; if she did not secretly carry roasted flour food, there would be no way for the king's life to be preserved. When it is now said to be "secret," this speaks of the queen consort's intention from the perspective of the gatekeeper. The queen consort thought it was secret and outsiders did not know, not anticipating that the gatekeeper was completely aware of it. Now that the matter was exhausted and there was no way to hide it from each other, he therefore told the king everything in full.'
2.51
From 'the śramaṇa Maudgalyāyana' downward, it directly clarifies the two sages soaring through the air coming and going, not using the gate road, coming and going day after day to expound the Dharma for the king. 'The great king should know: when the queen consort brought in food, previously she did not receive the king's order, so we did not dare to forbid her. The two sages rode through the air; this also was not subject to gate control.'
2.52
Third, from 'At that time Ajātaśatru, having heard these words' down to 'wished to kill his mother', clearly explains the king's wrath. This explains that after King Ajātaśatru heard the gatekeepers' explanation, he immediately conceived evil wrath in his mind against the lady and uttered evil words with his mouth. Furthermore, he gave rise to the rebellious acts of the three karmas and the evils of the three karmas. Cursing one's father and mother as bandits is called verbal karma of rebellion. Cursing the monks is called verbal karma of evil. Grasping a sword to kill one's mother is called physical karma of rebellion. What is done by body and speech takes mind as its master; thus it is called mental karma of rebellion. Moreover, the preceding expedients are evil, and the subsequent actual deed is rebellion. The words from 'My mother is a bandit' downward clearly explain the evil words proceeding from his mouth. Why does he curse his mother as a bandit? She is a companion of bandits. Ajātaśatru's original intent was directed in resentment against his father, regretting that he did not pass away sooner. The mother, however, secretly brought rations to him and thereby kept him from dying. Therefore he cursed her, saying, 'My mother is a bandit, a companion of bandits!' The words from 'The monks are evil men' downward explain that Ajātaśatru was enraged that his mother brought food, and further hearing that the monks came and went to the king, this caused his wrathful mind to flare up all the more. Thus he said: 'What incantations do they possess that they have kept the wicked king from dying for so many days?' The words from 'He then grasped a sharp sword' downward explain that the king's wrath was intense, and his rebellion extended to his mother. How painful it was! Grasping her by the hair, he raised his sword; her physical life was poised on an instant. The loving mother joined her palms, bent her body, lowered her head, and yielded to her son's hand. At that time, hot sweat poured all over the lady's body, and her mind swooned. Alas, how sorrowful! In an instant, she met with such distress and tribulation.
2.53
Fourth, from 'At that time there was a minister named Candraprabha' down to 'retreated backward' clearly explains that the two ministers earnestly remonstrated, but he would not listen. This explains that the two ministers were assistants of the state and the guiding principles of government, hoping to gain renown throughout the myriad nations and be emulated in the eight quarters. Suddenly they saw King Ajātaśatru initiate outrageous rebellion, grasping a sword intending to kill his mother. Unable to bear witnessing such an evil deed, they then, together with Jīva, risked his wrath to offer remonstrance. The word 'time' refers to the time when King Ajātaśatru was about to kill his mother. The words 'there was a chief minister' make manifest his rank. The words 'named Candraprabha' make manifest his name. The words 'intelligent and of great wisdom' make manifest his virtues. The words 'and together with Jīva' [indicate that] Jīva was also a son of the father-king, the child of the Mango Maiden. Suddenly seeing his elder brother initiate rebellion against their mother, he joined with Candraprabha in remonstrating. The words 'saluted the king' [mean that] whenever one wishes to advise and remonstrate with a superior, the rule is that one must perform a prostration to express bodily reverence. Now these two ministers did likewise: first offering bodily reverence to arouse the king's mind, and only after folding their hands and bowing their bodies did they state their original purpose. Furthermore, 'saying, Great King' explains that Candraprabha, about to state his words, hoped King Ajātaśatru would open his mind to listen and take them in. For this reason, he had first to say: 'We have heard the Veda treatises state', which explains his extensive citation of the written records of past emperors in ancient and modern texts and histories. The ancients said: 'If one's words do not concern the classics, the gentleman feels ashamed.' Now, since this matter of remonstrance is not trivial, how could it be empty talk or wild speech? The words 'since the beginning of the kalpa' make manifest the time. The words 'there have been wicked kings' generalise about those who are insolent, tyrannical, and rebellious. The words 'out of greed for the kingdom' explain that out of improper greed, they usurped the father's throne. The words 'murdered their fathers' explain that, once having conceived evil against their fathers, they could not allow them to remain for long and therefore had to cut short their lives. The words 'eighteen thousand' explain that the king's current act of killing his father is of the same kind as theirs. The words 'never yet have we heard of an unprincipled one who harmed his mother' explain that from antiquity to the present day, killing one's father to seize the throne is well recorded in the historical records, but killing one's mother out of greed for the kingdom is nowhere recorded. If we speak of the time since the beginning of the kalpa, wicked kings greedy for their kingdoms only killed their fathers and did not harm their loving mothers; this cites the past to distinguish it from the present. The Great King now, greedy for the kingdom, kills his father; the father indeed has a throne that can be coveted, which can be seen as similar to the past; but the mother has no throne to be sought, yet you unjustly inflict rebellious harm upon her. Hence, this sets the present apart from the past. The words 'For the king now to commit this act of killing his mother' means 'defiling the kṣatriya caste'. The kṣatriyas are the foremost of the four castes, the seed of kings, succeeding generation after generation; how could they be like ordinary commoners? The words 'We cannot bear to hear of it' mean that seeing the king initiate evil brings injury and dishonour to his clan, and the evil reputation spreads abroad, so that our noble expectations feel shame and disgrace without measure. The words 'is a caṇḍāla' refer to the lowest of the four castes. These are people whose nature harbours cruelty and wickedness, who are unfamiliar with benevolence and righteousness; though they wear human skin, their conduct is the same as birds and beasts. The king dwells in a superior clan, a lord presiding over myriad foundations; now having initiated evil and inflicted harm on one who showed him kindness, how is he any different from that lowest caste? The words 'you should not dwell here' have two meanings: First, the king now commits evil and disregards the manners and propriety of the court; how could the capital and sacred realm allow a caṇḍāla to be its ruler? This carries the intent of banishing him from the palace city. Second, though the king remains in the realm, he brings disgrace to our clan; it would be better to exile him far away to another land, a place where he will forever be unheard of. Therefore it says, 'You should not dwell here.' The words 'At that time, when the two chief ministers had spoken these words' downward explain that the two ministers remonstrated directly with extremely harsh words, citing ancient and modern examples extensively in hopes of opening and awakening the king's mind. The words 'pressed their hands on their swords' mean that the ministers pressed their hands upon their own swords.
First 53 of 113 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 觀無量壽佛經疏 — Classical Chinese