大般涅槃經集解 32

English (machine translation) 32

Language: English

32.1

Comprehensive Reconciling Integration of the Meaning of the Four Truths; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Understanding and Delusion; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Falsehood and Actuality; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Existence and Nonexistence; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Nominal and Real; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Saṃskṛta and Asaṃskṛta; Explaining the Meaning of the Two Truths via the Opposition of Intimate and Distant; Explaining the Meaning of the Ten Truths; Distinguishing the Real Truth via True and Untrue; Distinguishing the Real Truth via Inverted and Uninverted; Distinguishing the Real Truth via Deceptive and Undeceptive; Distinguishing the Real Truth via Mahāyāna and Non-Mahāyāna; Distinguishing the Real Truth via the Buddha's Teaching and Māra's Teaching; Distinguishing the Real Truth via the Single Pure Path Without a Second; Distinguishing the Real Truth via Having Permanence and Having Bliss; Explaining that Empty Space and the Buddhadhātu Are Not Truths but Are Real; Explaining that the Four Truths Are Real in Their Proper Essence.

32.2

Sixth Part of the Chapter on Noble Conduct

32.3

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One! [...] Why does the Tathāgata proclaim that they are not expounded?"

32.4

Sengliang comments: Above, it was said that the two vehicles possess the truths without the real, because they do not recognize permanence. Now it clarifies that discerning the suffering of the three realms also has depths and shallows, corroborating and establishing the meaning above. Sengzong says: Throughout what has been expounded above on the four truths, each truth had its separate explanation, with only the truth of cessation lacking a text on reconciling integration. Now that the four truths are completed, it comprehensively reconciles the general and specific intents of the present and past two teachings.

32.5

The Buddha said: "Good son! Although they enter [the four truths], they are still not called expounded."

32.6

Sengliang comments: From here to the end of the section on the four truths is the third part, the comprehensive reconciling integration, clarifying that the myriad phenomena awakened to by the Buddha are like the grass growing on the great earth, whereas what was expounded formerly for the two vehicles was like the grass in his hand. Therefore Kāśyapa now takes this up to frame his question. He asks whether the phenomena awakened to by the Buddha, like the grass of the great earth, enter the four truths or do not enter them; if they did not enter, there ought to be five truths. The Buddha replies below that all are subsumed within the principle of the four truths. When examined thoroughly, nothing goes beyond the four truths; since the names of the four truths encompass them, how could the principle leave anything out? Hence it is said: 'all are subsumed within the four truths'. Even though it is said that they enter therein, they are still not called expounded. Why is this? If one contemplates this realm to the utmost, wisdom is born and also fully realized. The two vehicles only know all phenomena in their general marks, not having penetrated fully into their deep intent; hence the vimokṣa they produce is inferior, and their knowledge of the Dharma gates is also narrow and shallow. If their understanding is not like the Buddha's, one should know they have not exhausted the realm of objects. Because their seeing of the realm of objects is not comprehensive, looking toward these persons it can be said that their subsumption is not exhaustive; thus although spoken, it is not called expounded.

32.7

"Good son! There are two kinds of knowledge that know the noble truths [...] In that sūtra I never expounded them after all."

32.8

Sengliang comments: Arising, perishing, and accumulation are called 'aggregates' (skandha), which is also the meaning of suffering. The four truths originally spoke of suffering in its general marks for the śrāvakas; knowing it in its specific marks was not what was expounded in those sūtras. Sengzong says: If discussed according to the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, there are eight truths. Formerly only four were expounded, whereas the uncreated noble truths were not yet clarified. Now in this sūtra, not only are the uncreated not yet expounded, but the meaning of the created is also not yet fully exhausted. Why? As when speaking of the marks of the aggregates, form comprises fourteen kinds, and mind comprises conception, feeling, and karmic formations. These are the general marks, known by intermediate wisdom through coarse distinction. If distinguished according to subtle marks, then for instance with one aggregate of form, how many atoms compose it and how many karmic actions induce it; while mind arises and perishes thought by thought, with marks arising through habitual tendencies in how many kṣaṇas—this is what is known only by the eighth and ninth dwelling stages, which is why those sūtras did not distinguish it.

32.9

"Good son! Knowing the sense bases is called the gates [...] I also did not explain it in that sūtra."

32.10

Sengliang notes: "'Base' (āyatana) means locus; the meaning of 'gate' is that it lets consciousness pass through."

32.11

"Good son! Knowing the elements (dhātu) is called divisions [...] I also did not explain it in that sūtra."

32.12

Sengzong notes: "'Element', 'division', and 'distinction of nature' are all designations belonging to their respective positions; their categories of meaning are as explained above. The nature of mind is its capacity to know; the nature of form is its resistance."

32.13

"Good son! Knowing the marks of disintegration in form is called intermediate wisdom [...] I also did not explain it in that sūtra."

32.14

Sengzong notes: "He previously brought up the three grouped dharmas as a whole, and now reiterates it with phrasing for each individual aggregate."

32.15

"Good son! Knowing that craving as a cause and condition can give rise to the five aggregates [...] I also did not explain it in that sūtra."

32.16

Sengzong notes: "This distinguishes craving as the origin and its giving rise to the five aggregates as suffering, with respect to the approach of the four truths. What follows below is the text on cessation and the path."

32.17

"Good son! Knowing the conventional truth is called intermediate wisdom [...] I also did not explain it in that sūtra."

32.18

Sengzong notes: "He again subsumes all the Dharma approaches into the single conventional truth, which is known by superior wisdom. 'All conditioned factors are impermanent, all dharmas are without self, and nirvāṇa is quiescent cessation' are in turn subsumed under the ultimate truth. To say that impermanence and such practices give rise to authentic understanding in people merely sketches the approach of emptiness. Nirvāṇa is the locus where the former three mental factors are cured and severed; quiescent cessation without arising is the ultimate truth."

32.19

Then Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva [...] "What is the meaning of the ultimate truth?"

32.20

Sengliang notes: "Is the meaning one and the names different, or are both names and meanings different?" Sengzong says: "Above, the meaning of the four truths was narrow; now, when the two truths are explained, their principle is broad—both being the cognitive objects of wisdom. The reason the four truths are called narrow is that they are distinctions made into four within the path of conventional truth, whereas the ultimate truth now clears away the preceding four. Moreover, space and cessation not through deliberation are not subsumed within the four truths, yet when subsumed by the two truths, they fall under the conventional truth." Zhixiu says: "About to clarify the two truths, one question and two dilemmas are first posited. This is the first question on the essential nature and marks of the two truths."

32.21

"World-Honoured One! Is there the conventional truth within the ultimate truth? Is there the ultimate truth within the conventional truth?"

32.22

Daosheng notes: "In principle there are no two realities, yet there are two names. If they exist in their marks, two should not be posited; if they are devoid of marks, the two are illusory." Fayao says: "About to clarify that the two truths differ in name but are identical in reality, the reality of the ultimate truth is thus having the reality of the conventional truth, and [the conventional truth] thus has the ultimate truth. Hence it is asked whether the realities of the two truths can mutually exist, not whether the meanings of the two names can mutually exist."

32.23

"If they do exist, then they are a single truth."

32.24

Sengliang notes: "If names and meanings are both different, and existence and non-existence are simultaneous, then the two do not unite into a pair, but are constantly a single truth." Fayao says: "If a single reality has two, then the two are not distinct from that reality; if the two are not distinct from that reality, the two are one."

32.25

"If they do not exist, would that not be a false statement by the Tathāgata?"

32.26

Sengliang notes: "If there is one truth and two meanings are spoken of, then one must be false; hence it is said, 'Would that not be a false statement?'" Fayao says: "If they are mutually non-existent, then the two names lack reality; to have two names, how could that not be false?" Sengzong says: "He first sets up two checkpoints to seek out its meaning. If the conventional is within the ultimate, then the conventional becomes identical to the ultimate; if the ultimate is within the conventional, then the ultimate becomes identical to the conventional. If the ultimate is identical to the conventional, there is only a single conventional truth; if the conventional is identical to the ultimate, there is only a single ultimate truth—there should not be the teaching of two truths. If the conventional does not accommodate the ultimate and the ultimate does not accommodate the conventional, then they are as distant as Chu and Yue. If there is definitely no conventional within the ultimate, yet the Tathāgata says that form is emptiness, then this would be a false statement." Baoliang says: "The conventional truth exists because of falsity, and its essence is not different from emptiness. If there were no existence that could differ from emptiness, how could there be emptiness that differs from existence? Thus, non-existence is directly a single essence, and the names of the two truths are established. If there were an existence that could be negated, that would mean the ultimate truth is within the conventional truth. Non-existence, having nothing to negate, also has no non-existence that could differ from existence. If there were non-existence that could differ from existence, that would mean the conventional truth is within the ultimate truth. Since neither mutually exists, we know that existence is without anything that can exist, and non-existence is without anything that can be non-existent. If existence had something that could exist, and non-existence had something that could be non-existent, they would mutually exist. One understands that from the beginning all dharmas have been empty, lacking even the finest mark; they exist only for the afflicted, and are always non-existent for the enlightened. Mañjuśrī raises this question to illuminate this principle."

32.27

"Good son! The conventional truth is none other than the ultimate truth."

32.28

Daosheng notes: "The deluded all take what they are deluded about to be real, which is called the conventional truth. Although called the conventional truth, in reality it does not deviate into difference; hence it is just the ultimate truth. The ultimate truth never changes into the conventional truth." Sengliang says: "He intends to clarify that both are false. Why? Two realities cannot be identical with each other; since they are identical with each other, this clarifies that both are non-existent." Fayao says: "The names lack two realities; there is only one. The principle of the one reality cannot be named; how could there be identity? One merely relies on 'identity' to dispel identity; the names lack two realities, yet it is not that there is a single reality that could be identified with." Sengzong says: "One answer resolves both checkpoints. Since he says 'is none other than', how could there be the fault of [being as distant as] Chu and Yue? Since their identity in principle is the same, how could there be the error of false speech? The reason he speaks of 'identity' is not that emptiness is made into form or form is made into emptiness; it is that the ultimate truth is from the beginning unobtainable. Now he clarifies that the conventional truth is unobtainable. How could that which is unobtainable be distinguished? Hence he says 'is none other than'." Baoliang says: "The afflicted pursue words and generate confusion. Now, wishing to grasp their minds and make them settle, he proclaims that the conventional truth is none other than the ultimate truth. One does not seek dharmas outside of dharmas; merely positing the word 'identity' was originally meant to explain within difference, not to propound two incompatible views."

32.29

"World-Honoured One! If that is so, then there are no two truths."

32.30

Daosheng notes: "If the conventional truth is none other than the ultimate, there is only the ultimate truth and no conventional truth." Sengliang says: "Having deeply grasped the purport of mutual identity, he questions the former teaching that positing two was an error."

32.31

The Buddha said: "Good son! There are skillful means [...] first, worldly dharmas; second, supramundane dharmas."

32.32

Daosheng notes: "The principle is as discussed: single without a second. Through skillful means, in accord with convention, they are spoken of as two." Sengliang says: "Dharmas are without names or marks, and the path of speech is cut off. How could the names of the two truths be shown to sentient beings? Skillful means merely adopt the two designations of ultimate and conventional to entice and guide the foolish and shortsighted; it does not mean that the principle is twofold." Sengzong says: "If discussed in terms of the meaning of unobtainability, then there are not two. If there is that which is obtainable and provisionally applied, then the two names arise. Thus the arising of the two names is established in relation to the sentiments of beings. Below there are six layers of explanation: first, understanding contrasted with delusion; second, the unreal contrasted with the real; third, existence contrasted with non-existence, which is what Mañjuśrī asked; fourth, the provisional contrasted with the real; fifth, the conditioned contrasted with the unconditioned; sixth, the proximate contrasted with the distant." Baoliang says: "The skillful one can speak of existence that is non-existence and non-existence that is not non-existence, thereby establishing two names to guide beings. However, since understanding and awakening differ, six layers are opened below to further distinguish its purport. Below is the first, distinguishing the two truths with respect to the two persons—ordinary and noble—clarifying that there is the existence of provisional existence, but no real existence can be found. Non-existence is the non-existence of causes and conditions; neither can non-existence be found. Those who understand in accord with these two principles are supramundane persons, termed the ultimate. If spoken of by worldly persons, when they say 'existence', they mean essential existence; when they say 'non-existence', they take it to be annihilation. Thus existence and non-existence are false and erroneous, neither according with the principle; hence for such persons all are termed conventional truth."

32.33

"Good son! What is known by supramundane persons [...] and being able to know it is called the ultimate truth."

32.34

Daosheng notes: "The aggregate of the five skandhas is neither identical nor separate, and has no fixed marks. The noble ones know it according to its marks and nature; because they surpass worldly persons, it is called the ultimate." Sengliang says: "'Worldly dharmas' refers to the eight worldly dharmas; their opposite is the supramundane. What is known by the supramundane—the three provisionals and emptiness—are all the ultimate truth. Worldly persons know existence with fixed marks: as an ox is definitely an ox and cannot be a horse, they also grasp a real meaning, which is the conventional truth." Sengzong says: "This is the first layer: the combination of the five aggregates. Calling someone 'So-and-so' brings up what ordinary beings know to clarify delusion. Understanding that the aggregates lack this brings up what noble ones know to clarify understanding."

32.35

"Furthermore, good son! There may be dharmas [...] suffering, origin, cessation, and the path are called the ultimate truth."

32.36

Daosheng notes: "Taking mirages to be real when they are not real is the conventional truth; understanding their unreality is the ultimate truth." Sengliang says: "The real meaning is like suffering and origin; how could it sever delusion?" Sengzong says: "The second layer. Above, understanding and delusion were clarified through combination with the aggregates; now, saying that the objects have the unreal and the real refers to the principle of the four truths. Suffering is truly suffering and cannot be made into bliss; origin, cessation, and the path are all like this. Conventional truth takes the sense of doubly unreal, which is genuinely unobtainable. Knowing a self and sentient beings brings out unreal things. Furthermore, mentioning the aggregates, elements, and sense bases, as slight dissimilarities, these are conditionally produced dharmas. If one conceives of them as real, in principle they are unobtainable; how does this differ from the metaphor of the wheel and the like?" Baoliang says: "This second layer explains the meaning in terms of the unreal and the real. Being falsely existent, it is the conventional truth; matching the principle, it is the ultimate truth."

32.37

"Good son! Worldly dharmas are of five kinds [...] knowing them as they really are is called the ultimate truth."

32.38

Daosheng notes: "What the world is attached to is the conventional truth; knowing their reality is the ultimate." Sengliang says: "The conventional truth does not go beyond these five kinds. The first is a multitude of provisional names, containing provisional parts, provisional continuity, and provisional mutual support, as well as provisional dharmas and provisional reception, subsuming all conventional truths. The four below are particular: the aggregation of multiple characters makes names and phrases; the aggregation of multiple forms makes bondage; voice and decree make law; clothing and signs make grasping and attachment. Lacking these is the ultimate truth." Sengzong says: "The third layer. Having a mind free of inversion regarding these five dharmas and knowing as it really is that their essence is unobtainable is the ultimate truth." Baoliang says: "The third layer explains the meaning by relying on emptiness and existence. Having names and functions is the conventional truth; essential emptiness is the ultimate."

32.39

"Furthermore, good son! If burned or cut [...] being without death and without disintegration is called the ultimate truth."

32.40

Sengliang notes: "This takes the provisional name of continuity as conventional truth, and takes the real dharmas that perish moment by moment as the ultimate truth." Sengzong says: "The fourth layer explains the meaning in terms of the provisional and the real, as found in the 'Lamp Wick' chapter of the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra." Baoliang says: "The explanation is identical."

32.41

"Furthermore, good son! There are the marks of the eight sufferings [...] being free of the five flourishing aggregates is called the ultimate truth."

32.42

Daosheng notes: "Because there are many delusions, it is the conventional truth; because there are not many understandings, it is the ultimate truth." Sengliang says: "Above, suffering was said to be the ultimate truth; now it is said to be the conventional truth." Sengzong says: "The fifth layer clarifies that prior to the diamond [-like samādhi], one is not yet free of suffering, which is the conventional truth. Only the Buddha fruit is contrasted with the marks of the eight sufferings, and is therefore called the ultimate truth." Baoliang says: "The explanation is identical."

32.43

"Furthermore, good man: just as one person [… up to …] is really one though possessing many names.

32.44

Sengliang notes: "The preceding explained that both the ultimate and conventional are conventional truth; according to the conventional truth, the benefits may be more or fewer: that with more is called ultimate, and that with fewer is called conventional."

32.45

"That which is born dependent upon the union of father and mother is called conventional truth.

32.46

Daosheng notes: "The proximate and distant in affairs constitute conventional truth; grasping the real constitutes the supreme meaning [ultimate truth]."

32.47

"That which is born of the union of the twelve links of dependent origination is called the supreme meaning truth [ultimate truth]."

32.48

Daosheng notes: "When one understands, one sees it; hence it is called the supreme meaning. Those who are confused by it take it as conventional truth." Sengliang notes: "Knowing that [birth] comes from parents yields little benefit and is called conventional; knowing the twelve links of dependent origination yields great benefit and is called ultimate." Sengzong notes: "The sixth layer takes proximity and distance to establish the names. The twelve links of dependent origination are proximate because they establish the present fruit based on past ignorance, karmic formations, and so forth, whereas the parents are made its external conditions, and thus are distant. Investigating the purport of this text, originally explaining the meaning of the emptiness and existence of the two truths encompasses dharmas broadly. Now the explanations of these six layers all clearly illuminate this mutually dependent relationship within affairs; the ultimate destination of the purport rests in the third line." Baoliang notes: "The explanation is the same."

32.49

Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva-mahāsattva [… up to …] what is the meaning of what is called 'the truth of reality'?

32.50

Daosheng notes: "With regard to the preceding explanation being unclear, it seemed as if the truth of reality were entirely distinct from the four truths; therefore he asks again." Sengliang notes: "He asks about the one truth that subsumes the above six truths, which is called the truth of reality. Because previously the two vehicles were said to have the truths of suffering and origination but not reality, it seemed as though the two vehicles were not subsumed by the truth of reality; hence this is clarified." Fayao notes: "Previously it was said that the truth of reality of the two vehicles is possessed by bodhisattvas; now he asks about the principle by which bodhisattvas attain the truth of reality." Sengzong notes: "This is the third [section] illuminating the sphere of wisdom: distinguishing the truth of reality. Above, harmonizing the four truths, it was said that the śrāvakas have suffering and the truth of suffering but lack reality, while bodhisattvas understand suffering, are free from suffering, and possess reality. If one understands the principle and possesses reality, is there still some further object that is their known sphere? Therefore this question was posed."

32.51

The Buddha said: "Good man, that which is called the truth of reality is named the true Dharma.

32.52

Daosheng notes: "Permanence, bliss, self, and purity are called the true Dharma; when the four truths possess them, it is called the real meaning."

32.53

"Good man, if a dharma is not true, it is not called the truth of reality [… up to …] this is called the meaning of the truth of reality."

32.54

Daosheng notes: "Although the two vehicles have the four truths, because they lack reality, their delusions become the empty delusions of the eight inversions. Even if they attain understanding, it is not the Mahāyāna. If one embodies the true four truths, then there is no affliction." Sengliang notes: "The Buddha explains reality by means of seven meanings: the true Dharma is because its essence is permanent and immutable; being non-inverted is because both sphere and wisdom are real; being non-false is because the words are free from falsehood; the Mahāyāna is because it definitively exhausts suffering; spoken by the Buddha is because what is uttered is unerring; the single path is because there is no other cause; permanence and bliss are because within the fruit there is nothing higher. This indicates that the real dharma has nothing that is not real." Fayao notes: "Permanence, bliss, self, and purity are the true Dharma; when a bodhisattva embodies them, there is no inversion. His understanding is correct and true, resolute and unchanging, and may be called real. His wisdom leaves nothing unexamined, and his insight leaves nothing unrecognised; the meaning of examining and recognising can be called 'truth'. Therefore the bodhisattva's understanding is called the true Dharma. Being without inversion and without falsehood is called the Mahāyāna, the single path of purity. Endowed with these manifold meanings, it is called the truth of reality." Sengzong notes: "This truth of reality illuminates the principle broadly. Why? The previous two truths merely subsumed the explications, not yet subsuming the purport that forgets the explication. Now the truth of reality distinguishes meaning by directly accessing the essence; the place where explication is forgotten is also real. Thus, from delusion below to understanding above, how could there be a single principle that is not exhausted? Regarding the text, although there are eight lines, their meaning does not exceed six: first, it clarifies that the practitioner of the Buddha-fruit is real; second and third, the two lines on 'inversion' and 'falsehood' clarify the meaning through understanding and delusion; fourth and fifth, clarify reality with respect to the teaching; sixth, clarifies the reality of the cause; seventh, clarifies the reality of the fruit. What is not encompassed by the six lines now is all subsumed again under the reality of the sphere. The first and seventh lines differ in that the former is based on the person and the latter on the Dharma. 'Inversion' and 'falsehood' are spoken with respect to the heavier aspects. 'Falsehood' is spoken with respect to the lighter aspects, from not yet escaping the delusion of marks down through the diamond-like mind." Baoliang notes: "The distinguishing of reality has seven layers. The first clarifies the reality of the essence of the fruit: regarding 'true Dharma', if a dharma is not true, it is not called real. Hence we know that the marvelous essence of the spiritual consciousness is not born of spurious causes. Its principle and marks are empty and tranquil, transcending the realm of speech. Only this single dharma can be called true and real. Second, reality is distinguished with respect to the sphere. Third, reality is determined by correct wisdom, while erroneous understanding is unreal. Fourth, clarifies that the Mahāyāna is real while the Small Vehicle is unreal. Fifth, clarifies the reality of the teaching: what was explicated in past teachings was not necessarily completely real; only what is spoken by the Buddha was beneficial at the time, and therefore real, whereas the teachings of Māra confound the real and can cause practitioners to enter saṃsāra, and hence are called unreal. Sixth, 'the single path is pure' clarifies the reality of the cause: the single path is the single cause; if there were a different cause, it would be unreal. Seventh, 'permanence, self, bliss, and purity' clarifies the reality of the fruit. How does this differ from the first line? That one clarified the essence of the fruit, speaking with reference to the time of attaining the fruit; this clarifies that what the Buddha's disciples practice will definitively attain these four dharmas, and so speaks of the fruit within the cause. In this lies the difference."

32.55

Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One, [… up to …] and the buddhadhātu are without distinction."

32.56

Daosheng notes: "Previously it was said that the four truths possessing reality are called the truth of reality. Yet the Tathāgata, space, and the buddhadhātu are all real; this means that the reality of the four truths combines with them to make three. If among the three there is something unreal, they must be distinguished." Sengliang notes: "Mañjuśrī takes permanence as reality. Permanent dharmas are three: in terms of the fruit, it is said to be the Tathāgata; in terms of the cause, it is said to be the buddhadhātu; in other terms, it is said to be space. These three, being permanent and without distinction, can be considered real. Other dharmas are not real." Fayao notes: "Having already clarified the principle by which a bodhisattva attains the truth of reality, it seemed equal to the Buddha; therefore he raises this question, intending to show that the Tathāgata is distinct from the bodhisattva in that [the bodhisattva] has both reality and truth, while the Tathāgata has only reality and no truth. Why? 'Truth' refers to illumination, examination, and determination. In the Tathāgata, the principle is exhausted and the path is complete; illumination ceases and examination is set aside, serenely resting in eternal peace; hence there is no name of 'truth'. Because it is permanently abiding and immutable, it possesses the designation of 'real'. There is also another meaning: 'truth' is a name that determines things. The Tathāgata is supremely tranquil, transcending names and categories, and cannot be determined by names. Therefore, below, he goes through the four truths to explain the meaning of the Tathāgata having no truth. From this level down, the principle has not yet been exhausted; if the principle were exhausted and its essence complete, brightly illuminating and examining things, it could be determined by names." Sengzong notes: "Mañjuśrī grasps the understanding of the six lines below to formulate the objection. 'That is the Tathāgata' is the phrasing of the understanding that unifies the three dharmas. The reason he forms this understanding is that, although earlier they were said to share reality, it seemed as if they were distinct yet one with the fruit-essence; hence they must be sorted out." Baoliang notes: "From here down is the examination of the above seven gates. Regarding the explanation of the first chapter, there are five stages: first, distinguishing difference; second, explaining the difference; third, concluding with the real; fourth, dispelling remedies; fifth, returning to seize suffering to conclude the line. The intention of the question is: are only the three dharmas of space and so forth the truth of reality, such that outside of these three dharmas there is no other distinct truth of reality?"

32.57

The Buddha said to Mañjuśrī: "There is suffering, there is truth [… up to …] the buddhadhātu is neither suffering nor truth, but is real."

32.58

Sengliang notes: "If one takes immutability as reality, there is that which is permanent and immutable, and that which is impermanent and immutable. Though the permanent and impermanent differ, their real meaning does not differ; everything is real. 'Neither suffering nor truth' explains the meaning of reality. On the stage of training there is investigation and seeking, hence there is truth and non-truth; the aśaikṣa is without seeking, hence it is not truth." Fayao notes: "Ordinary persons have suffering but no truth; the two vehicles have suffering and have truth; bodhisattvas have truth and have reality; the Tathāgata has reality and no truth." Sengzong notes: "From here down there are five layers of clarification: first, reviewing the four truths to clarify that the Tathāgata is not the same; second, explaining why they are not the same; third, resolving people's doubts—the doubt being that while it may well be distinct from the four truths, must these three dharmas not have distinct essences? Now it clarifies that the three dharmas have a single essence and are therefore permanent, establishing the meaning of their not being the same; fourth, concluding with negation; fifth, concluding with a general explanation." Baoliang notes: "This is the first stage, distinguishing difference. Going through the four truths, each in its own essence is real. Although each in its own essence is real, it is not the reality of the three dharmas above; hence it says below, 'the Tathāgata is neither suffering nor truth, but is real,' meaning that the reality of the ultimate fruit is not the reality of the four truths."

32.59

"Mañjuśrī, that which is called suffering [… up to …] space and the buddhadhātu are also like this.

32.60

Fayao notes: "The principle of suffering is truly so, can be determined by name, and is examined as the truth of reality. It also means that a bodhisattva, distinguishing suffering and attaining the real, takes it as the truth of reality. The meaning of the three truths below is also the same. That the Tathāgata is not a truth has been explained in full above, and so is not explained line by line." Sengzong notes: "The second layer explains the reason, saying that it is an impermanent, fluctuating, severed, and destructible dharma." Baoliang notes: "The second stage explains the difference. Why is the Tathāgata's reality not the reality of the four truths? Suffering is a dharma that can be severed, whereas the Tathāgata's reality cannot be severed; therefore they are not the same."

32.61

"Furthermore, good man: that which is called origination [… up to …] space and the buddhadhātu are also like this.

32.62

Sengzong notes: "Origination can cause the future five aggregates to unite, and its essence is fluctuating."

32.63

"Good man, that which is called cessation is named the cessation of afflictions [… up to …] space and the buddhadhātu are also like this."

32.64

Daosheng states: Examining it according to name, it applies only to the extinction of fetters, not extending to what is non-extinct. When fetters are extinguished and harms removed, the principle ought to be realized and known; this is what is termed a 'truth.' 'Truth' has the meaning of being genuinely real; hence it is merely called 'real,' not the 'real truth' spoken of earlier. Sengliang states: The truth of cessation is explained by the absence of afflictions and the absence of dharmas being cessation; it does not pertain to the stages of learning as being permanent or impermanent. Because cessation is realized by wisdom, it is called a dharma to be realized. The nature of the Tathāgata, up to: is not called realization. That it is known is due to wisdom; its designation is not non-existent. Being able to sever afflictions, its realization is not non-existent. Non-existence cannot sever fetters; it is solely the nature of the fruit, not pertaining to the stages of learning as not permanent and not impermanent. Wisdom does not realize itself; it is not a dharma to be realized. Fayao states: Cessation is of two kinds: first, the extinction of fetters; second, nirvāṇa. The existence of wholesome [dharmas] is also called cessation; the cessation of the existence of wholesome [dharmas] is precisely the Tathāgata. Now it speaks of the extinction of fetters and does not speak of the cessation of the existence of wholesome [dharmas]; therefore what is called cessation refers only to afflictions. The extinction of fetters for the two vehicles has not yet reached the ultimate; because that [state] can be taken away, it is impermanent. All fetters of the Buddha are extinguished; this is the ultimate cessation, and there is nothing to replace it, so it is permanent. Although it is permanent cessation, its essence is entirely nothing more than the extinction of fetters; it is not the Tathāgata's unconditioned essence. Therefore one may proceed to designate it by the name 'cessation,' calling it the 'truth [of cessation].' That there is no arising or ceasing may be called real; this is the meaning of the real truth. Furthermore, explained with respect to bodhisattvas, it is the real truth. Sengzong states: When the two vehicles extinguish the three minds, although it is unconditioned, it is not yet ultimate, and there is further progression to be sought; therefore it is called impermanent. The point of severance reached by all Buddhas is fully complete right here, with no further progression; therefore it is permanent. Now the Tathāgata is not called cessation; being neither permanent nor impermanent, he is not the two kinds of cessation. Being called 'realized and known,' he is not called the dharma realized by the two kinds. Baoliang states: Because its essence is devoid of things, it is permanent; yet because there are complete and incomplete [realizations], it is called impermanent. That the nature of the Tathāgata is not called cessation clarifies that the Tathāgata's cessation is not a cessation subsequent to having been able to extinguish afflictions, nor is it the permanence of severed non-existence, nor again is it something to be realized and attained. That it is permanently abiding and unchanging means that since this is the cessation of severing and extinguishing, not the stillness of true permanence, it is simply that its nature does not undergo change; therefore it is said to be permanently abiding.

32.65

"Good son, the path can sever afflictions (and so on down to) empty space and the buddhadhātu are also like this."

32.66

Daosheng states: The name of the path lies in its function of leading through; it does not extend to what is functionless. When not ultimate, it advances and is impermanent; when ultimate, it is permanent. Sengliang states: The path is the cause of cessation; hence it is called 'able to sever.' Being uncontaminated and non-retrogressing, it is explained as permanent. Its essence is arising and ceasing, impermanent, and conditioned; hence it is called a dharma to be cultivated. 'The Tathāgata is not the path,' up to: 'is not a dharma to be cultivated.' The Tathāgata does not pertain to the stages of learning and is not the cause of cessation; hence he is not the path. Although able to eliminate fetters, he is not the conditioned path, neither permanent nor impermanent, and also not a dharma to be cultivated. Fayao states: The name of the path arises from striving forward and using effort to eliminate and extinguish. The Tathāgata has no such thing; therefore he is not the path. Sengzong states: As for 'also permanent and impermanent,' it means that the two vehicles alter their conduct and turn again toward Buddhahood, which is called impermanent. Bodhisattvas fundamentally face Buddhahood themselves without altering their conduct; hence it is permanent. The Tathāgata is not the path; that he can sever afflictions means he can realize severance for the path of liberation. Being neither permanent nor impermanent, he is not the two kinds of paths. Baoliang states: From the scriptural teachings of the four periods there has never been this teaching; now with the definitive meaning of the Mahāyāna its purport is first determined, enabling us to know that the conscious spirit takes the true and the conventional as its substance. Once uncontaminated liberation is lodged within this karmic retribution, after it is aroused and once attained, its understanding permanently abides. While on the side of its function in conventional truth it may naturally pass away, discussing it in terms of the ultimate truth, it is constantly applied and does not decay; this also does not concern the permanence of continuous succession. The sūtra states: 'Fundamentally attained and not lost, it receives its name from what is superior.' Now examining this purport, it is definitely not a dharma of preceding arising and subsequent cessation. The text below must state: Afflictions are also permanent and impermanent; from after afflictions arise, if one has not yet attained the antidotal path, they permanently obstruct the practitioner. Although there is this statement, afflictions from beginning to end are remedied by the power of the path, and ultimately fall into the category of impermanence. But the truth of the path from beginning to end has no other dharma that can again remedy it; therefore from beginning to end it constitutes permanence. It is precisely because the clear understanding accumulated through the ten stages is fully complete that it accomplishes the ultimate fruit. When understanding is not yet complete, it is called the cause; if complete, it is called the fruit.

32.67

"Furthermore, good son, as for what is called real (and so on down to) the buddhadhātu is precisely the real."

32.68

Sengzong states: The third tier explains why it is permanent: it is thus because the three dharmas are not different. Baoliang states: The third stage concludes with the real.

32.69

"Mañjuśrī! There is suffering, there is the cause of suffering (and so on down to) empty space and the buddhadhātu are also like this."

32.70

Fayao states: Clarifying that the four truths are now complete, it therefore concludes the meaning spoken of above that the Tathāgata is not a truth but is real. Sengzong states: The fourth tier concludes with negation. Baoliang states: The fourth stage clarifies that the four truths are called real because they are antidotes. The Tathāgata as he truly is is not an antidote, and therefore is the real of the truly real.

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經集解 — Classical Chinese