大般涅槃經集解 55

English (machine translation) 55

Language: English

55.1

Answering the fifth question, explaining that bodhisattvas of the ten abodes see unclearly, while Buddhas see clearly / Broadly explaining the eight realizations of great beings / Explaining the twelve dhūtas / Explaining Siṃhanāda's question on the meaning of precepts having no cause and nirvāṇa having no fruit / Broadly explaining the meaning of multiple causes and multiple fruits / Explaining the meaning of nirvāṇa having no cause yet being a fruit / Explaining the meaning of the buddhadhātu not being a fruit / Explaining the meaning of the nature-cause and the revealing cause

55.2

Chapter on Siṃhanāda, Part Two

55.3

At that time, Bodhisattva-mahāsattva Siṃhanāda said […] "all sentient beings are unable to see it."

55.4

Sengliang comments: The meaning of the question is that the buddhadhātu is heroic and fierce, like a vajra-wielding athlete; since one possesses it in one's own body, why does one not see it? This is used to prove its non-existence. / Sengzong says: He raises the fourth question to request an answer.

55.5

The Buddha said: "Good son! For example, like material forms […] through the power of samādhi they are able to achieve clarity."

55.6

Sengliang comments: Ordinary beings have no eyes and cannot distinguish what is right before them; sages have guidance and can see what is subtle and far off. The Buddha uses these two kinds of people being able to see it to prove its existence. Within this answer there are eight turns. This first turn explains that the buddhadhātu exists, but because it is covered by afflictions, the wisdom eye is not opened and they cannot see it. / Baoliang says: From here on, he next answers the fourth question. In answering this question, there are three turns explaining the meaning: first, directly explaining that because the substance of the Dharma is obstructed, it is not seen; second, borrowing the twelve conditioning links to prove that all sentient beings equally share the buddhadhātu; third, citing things to eliminate attachment. Now, from 'For example, like material forms' down, this is the first section: although the buddhadhātu exists, sentient beings are obstructed by afflictions, and therefore cannot see it. If one can destroy the three kinds of delusions, so that the afflictions of seeing the truth, contemplation, and the ground of ignorance are completely exhausted, then one sees the buddhadhātu.

55.7

"Good son! If someone sees all dharmas […] the śūraṅgama concentration is called the ultimate."

55.8

Sengliang comments: Second, it clarifies that if one sees in accordance with the middle way, one sees the buddhadhātu; if one deviates from the middle way, one does not see it—it is not that this principle is nonexistent.

55.9

"Good son! Just as the new moon, though not visible, […] one cannot say that there is no buddhadhātu."

55.10

Sengzong comments: Third, it clarifies that its principle is subtle and profound, not something grasped by ordinary consciousness; just as with the new moon, one cannot say it does not exist.

55.11

"Good son! The buddhadhātu is the so-called ten powers […] all sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu."

55.12

Sengliang comments: Saṃsāra is impermanent and designated 'all'; the Three Jewels are permanent, and therefore are not designated 'all.' Sengzong comments: Fourth, although it was clarified above that it will exist, it was not yet known what constitutes its essence. Now its essence is revealed: it lies beyond saṃsāra. Since the principle is deep and profound, if one wishes to see it, unless one breaks through the three levels of the obstruction of delusion, there is no way to behold it. The three delusions are the delusion of seeing the truths, the delusion of cultivation, and the ground of ignorance (avidyāvāsabhūmi).

55.13

"Good son! The twelve links of dependent origination are for all sentient beings […] all sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu."

55.14

Sengliang comments: 'Also internal' refers to right view. 'Also external' refers to wrong view. 'Equally possessing' means possessing it in the future. Sengzong comments: That they share the twelve links of dependent origination is fifth; the text uses what is near to illustrate what is far. To say that they are complete with the twelve speaks only in terms of the whole process from beginning to end; if one dies in the womb, one lacks the twelve. Yet it is said to be complete because they are accomplished [across time]. 'Also internal' means existing in the present. 'External' means that which is not yet utilized in the future; in sense it is termed external. As for 'entering the womb with five parts, the four sense faculties not yet complete,' this means that when entering the womb there are the five aggregates, and at the time when the four faculties are not yet complete, there is only name-and-form. 'Deeply habituating a single craving is called sensation': one should know that craving is part of sensation. The sūtras always consider it indeterminate (avyākṛta) because its power to induce retribution is weak. 'Craving and seeking internally and externally is grasping': greedily clinging to the internal body and craving what is outside the body; four graspings arise from this, hence it is called grasping, meaning grasping at future retribution. 'Engaging in vocal karma for internal and external matters is becoming': because of the aforementioned craving and seeking, augmented craving arises, activating the bodily and mental operations, which speaks of karma. 'Present consciousness is called future birth': this is merely a difference of lifetimes; the rest are all termed aging and death. 'Sentient beings in the form realm lack the three sensations': they lack the sensation of suffering, hence it is said they are absent. 'The three contacts' refers to painful contact. 'The three kinds of craving': like desiring fire when cold, or desiring medicine when ill, all are conditions of suffering. As for the craving that is said to be absent in the higher realms: such craving is merely the craving for equanimity, the joy of higher rebirth. 'Lacking aging and illness': there is indeed moment-to-moment aging. How could there be white hair and wrinkled skin? Nor is there death through the breakdown of the four great elements; because ordinary persons follow the path of suppressing defilements, when they later regress and fall back to be born in the desire realm, they are able to be complete with the twelve. The buddhadhātu is also like this.

55.15

"Good son! In the Snow Mountains there is a grass named forbearance […] one cannot say that there is no buddhadhātu."

55.16

Sengzong comments: The Snow Mountains are an analogy for the Buddha; the grass is an analogy for the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. Above, it explained that the obstruction of inversion prevents one from seeing the buddhadhātu; here it explains that the reason there are obstructions is due to not reading the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. Sengzong comments: In the sixth turn, although the ten powers and fearlessnesses were explained above, the fruit remains distant from humans. Baoliang comments: In the second turn, although sentient beings may at any given time be complete or incomplete, taking the whole process through the three times, it can be said that they all accomplish the twelve [links]; this clarifies that the buddhadhātu is also like this: it will definitely exist in the future.

55.17

"Good son! The buddhadhātu is both form and non-form […] it is not known by any śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas."

55.18

Sengzong comments: The seventh turn clarifies why [bodhisattvas of] the ten stages do not see it: it is because of its principle. In order to establish this meaning, an appearance is hypothetically postulated; is this not easily understood? 'Also form' means manifesting forms in the six destinies. 'Non-form' means that the principle transcends form and matter. 'Neither form nor non-form' is a dual negation. 'Also one' means that the principle is without duality. 'Not one' refers to explaining the three vehicles. The text itself provides a full explanation.

55.19

"Good son! The buddhadhātu is not aggregate, realm, or sense base […] it is accomplished by boundless virtues."

55.20

Sengliang comments: The Nirvāṇa Sūtra describes the nature in this way; if one does not read it, one will not see it. Sengzong comments: The eighth again resorts to an analogy to reveal the principle of being neither internal nor external. Because it is covered by defilements, it is not internal; because it is seen when delusions are exhausted, it is not external. Baoliang comments: The third turn eliminates attachments. All who wish to study should not attach to literal sounds. If one hears that form is the buddhadhātu, one must not say that only form is and mind is not; if one again hears that the four aggregates are the buddhadhātu, one must not say that only mind is and form is not. But the sage expounds the Dharma according to the times and following what beings need; how could one cling fixedly?

55.21

At that time, Bodhisattva-mahāsattva Siṃhanāda […] having accomplished how many dharmas does one obtain clear vision?"

55.22

Sengliang comments: This brings up the fifth section. Sengzong comments: This answers the fifth section. Kāśyapa brings up the earlier question again to request an answer.

55.23

"Good son! When a bodhisattva fully accomplishes ten dharmas […] transforms sentient beings through mahānirvāṇa."

55.24

Sengzong comments: Now, to say that one accomplishes ten dharmas does not mean this is not practice, but because it is not yet complete, one does not see. There are five layers of explanation; this first one generally explains that the differences lie in the shallowness or depth of the ten dharmas. Baoliang comments: Next, the fifth question is brought forward to request an answer. The Buddha says: when bodhisattvas correctly practice these ten dharmas, because they are not yet fully completed, their seeing is not clear; the Buddha has attained these ten dharmas to full completion, so he sees the buddhadhātu clearly. Since the Dharma for eliminating obstructions was questioned, below the Buddha gives five turns to broadly explain these ten dharmas; there is no other meaning.

55.25

Bodhisattva Siṃhanāda said: "World-Honoured One! […] although they see the buddhadhātu, they do not see it clearly."

55.26

Sengliang comments: As for the ten dharmas, the first eight dharmas are simply the eight awarenesses of a great person. The latter two dharmas—praising vimokṣa and transforming through nirvāṇa—are the differences that make ten. There are five turns, of which this is the first.

55.27

"Furthermore, good son! One who has gone forth […] although they see the buddhadhātu, they do not see it clearly."

55.28

Sengliang comments: Second, it distinguishes the bliss of renunciation. Because going forth into the forest leaves behind worldly bustles, it is the correct essence of aloof detachment; the others are not. 'The bliss of serenity' means attaining dhyāna-concentration. 'The bliss of eternal cessation' means attaining the undefiled. 'The ultimate bliss' means attaining the two nirvāṇas. Sengzong comments: Second, it distinguishes the ten dharmas exclusively with respect to the approach of contemplation.

55.29

"Furthermore, good son! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva […] although they see the buddhadhātu, they do not see it clearly."

55.30

Sengliang comments: Third, following the celestial practice is called right concentration; from this we know that the four dhyānas are the celestial practice. Sengzong comments: Third, it explains the ten dharmas with respect to a monk practicing in accordance with this sūtra.

55.31

"Furthermore, good son! As for having few desires […] although they see the buddhadhātu, they do not see it clearly."

55.32

Sengliang comments: Fourth, it takes the twelve dhūtas as having few desires, progressively eliminating [attachments] through practice. Sengzong comments: Fourth, it distinguishes the ten dharmas in terms of leaving villages.

55.33

"Furthermore, good son! Because of having many desires […] although they see the buddhadhātu, they do not see it clearly."

55.34

Sengliang comments: This is the fifth turn. 'And the five kinds' refers to the joy of vimokṣa from the five desires. Sengzong comments: Fifth, it explains the ten dharmas with respect to manifesting outward signs.

55.35

"Good son! As you said, why does a bodhisattva of the ten stages […] see the buddhadhātu clearly?"

55.36

Sengzong comments: This brings up the sixth question. Now it says that with the buddha-eye one sees clearly, while bodhisattvas, using the wisdom-eye, do not see clearly. Baoliang comments: As for the words 'with what eye does a bodhisattva of the ten stages see such that it is not clear,' below this next answers the sixth question. The Buddha states that the bodhisattva has attained only four eyes, and because of using the wisdom-eye does not see clearly; the Buddha is complete with the five eyes, shining upon and fathoming the ultimate source, and therefore sees the buddhadhātu clearly. Below there are several layers of explanation. Bodhisattvas of the ten stages are still undertaking practices for bodhi, and therefore do not see clearly. That a bodhisattva of the ten stages only knows that he himself attains buddhahood, but does not know that others possess the buddhadhātu, is also an expression of incomplete meaning (neyārtha). Defilements inherently obstruct wisdom; when a bodhisattva of the ten stages has almost exhausted the eradication of delusion, how could it be that he merely knows that he himself will become a buddha, but does not know that others possess the buddhadhātu? Others' delusions also cannot obstruct my wisdom so as to make it irrational. The reason this is stated now is to distinguish the characteristics of difficulty and ease, clarifying that for one who has already become a buddha, it can be said to be easily known, whereas for one who has not yet attained the way, their traces are obscure and difficult to know; hence there is this statement.

55.37

"Good son! Because it is seen with the wisdom-eye, it cannot be clear […] if faith does not arise in the mind, it is not called seeing by hearing."

55.38

Sengliang comments: This corresponds to the sixth question regarding what eye the Buddha sees with. The initial attainment is called wisdom; its complete fulfillment in the Buddha is bodhi; the practitioner's forward progress is called practice. As for 'because of abiding in the ten stages': should go and not going is called abiding. 'Abiding in non-abiding': should not go, yet abiding, is non-abiding. It is also said: neither going nor abiding. The ten stages are in the realm of arising and ceasing, hence there is going and abiding; the Buddha neither arises nor ceases, neither goes nor abides. Sengzong comments: In this answer there are four turns. First, it clarifies that between the Buddha and bodhisattvas, seeing is clear or not clear; second, it clarifies that even up to the tenth stage it is still not clear, how much less for the rest? Although the ultimate is subtle and transcendent, beyond what ordinary consciousness can examine, if one traces the root from the traces, it can be known. Third, cultivating precepts and concentration serves as the cause, which accords with its principle. Fourth, it concludes with the principle of seeing by hearing, in order to elucidate the former tenet. This then is the first turn.

55.39

"Good son! If there are good sons or good daughters […] how should one contemplate to know it?"

55.40

Sengliang comments: The six questions and answers are the second approach of contemplation. Sengzong comments: From here down is the second turn. Baoliang comments: From here down is the second major section of Siṃhanāda. The above six questions and six answers have already established the nature of cause and fruit, causing beings to recognize cause and fruit and to cultivate virtues and accumulate karma. If they are not yet able to comprehend this profound principle and their faithful mind is not established, it exhorts them to base themselves on the response Buddha and rely on the cause and fruit of the teachings of the twelve divisions of the canon, generating faith through concrete matters. In all, five gates are opened; from here down is the first: contemplating the fruit.

55.41

"Good son! All sentient beings truly cannot know […] first, seeing with the eye; second, seeing by hearing."

55.42

Sengliang comments: First contemplating the nature of the fruit; this contemplation is coarse. Baoliang comments: Although the Buddha exhorted them to contemplate, ordinary understanding could not fathom it; hence Siṃhanāda asks, clarifying that all sentient beings truly cannot infer and know the mental characteristics of the Tathāgata, so how can they come to know them? The Buddha says they should rely on two dharmas: first, seeing the Tathāgata's bodily karma with the eye; second, hearing the teachings expounded by the Buddha. Only by relying on these two matters can one come to know the mental characteristics of the Tathāgata. If one sees the Tathāgata's bodily karma, possessed of the thirty-two marks, active in the world: is it for sentient beings, or is it for gain and sustenance? If one sees that his expounding of the Dharma is entirely for beings and never for himself, one knows that this person is worthy of honour and respect, and that it is definitely not done for the retribution of saṃsāra. If this ultimate wonder had not come to respond, how could sentient beings obtain such a body dwelling in the world to relieve suffering? It must surely be worthy of faith. Since the fruit is like this, there must be a wondrous cause; therefore, he exhorts people to rely on the twelve divisions of the canon and, with respect to the response Buddha, contemplate the mental functions of the Tathāgata, so that they can faithfully know the nature of cause and fruit. The text has ten distinctions, and the meaning of the matter is self-evident.

55.43

"If one sees all the bodily karma of the Tathāgata […] for whose sake is the body received—this is called seeing with the eye."

55.44

Sengliang comments: Regarding "how [the Tathāgata] receives a body": there are two kinds [of receiving a body], being autonomous and not autonomous; this is to know that the Tathāgata is autonomous. Regarding "for what reason he receives a body": this is to know that the Tathāgata receives it for the sake of sentient beings. Regarding "for whose sake he receives a body": among those [beings] there are equals and unequals; this explains that the Tathāgata treats sentient beings equally. Sengliang says: Regarding "how he receives this body": one may know the way of sympathetic resonance, yet fail to know the reason why it is so; it means that he receives a body out of a heart of great compassion.

55.45

"If one observes how the Tathāgata expounds the Dharma […] one should rely on these two kinds of conditions."

55.46

Sengliang comments: "Not destroying afflictions" refers to the ultimate truth. "Not failing to destroy [afflictions]" refers to the conventional truth. In both the ultimate and conventional truths, "neither destroying nor failing to destroy" is both the ultimate truth and the conventional truth. Why is that? It is because they cannot entirely destroy [them]. The five persons are able to destroy and not fail to destroy; all expound the Middle Way of the ultimate and conventional [truths] without claiming themselves to be teachers. It may also refer to the Middle Way within the conventional truth. Regarding "how to know the first two kinds": this is the second approach of contemplation, which contemplates the contributory causes. When the causes are perfected, it is termed "seeing with the eye." Furthermore, if the cause of hearing and seeing is not perfected, even though one recognizes the Buddha, it is not termed "seeing with the eye," nor is it "hearing and seeing." The "two kinds" refer to being subtle on the outside and coarse on the inside, or subtle on the inside and coarse on the outside, in which good and evil are difficult to discern.

55.47

Bodhisattva Siṃhanāda said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One! […] Relying solely on these two, it cannot be known."

55.48

Sengliang comments: The third approach concerns conditions. When the cause is perfected, it is termed seeing with the eye and also hearing and seeing. If the cause is not perfected, even though one recognizes the Buddha, it is not termed seeing with the eye, nor is it hearing and seeing. The "two kinds" refer to being subtle on the outside and coarse on the inside, or subtle on the inside and coarse on the outside, where good and evil are difficult to discern. Baoliang says: The second passage contemplates the cause with reference to the practices of the Buddha's disciples. The Buddha is solely the ultimate fruit and has no cause that can be contemplated. If one does not bring forward the practices of the disciples, there would be no means of verification. If the Buddha-fruit were not genuine, how could those who believe the Buddha's words all attain true understanding? Therefore, one knows that his principle is definitely worthy of trust. Now, Siṃhanāda first brings forward the earlier āmrāta-fruit metaphor of the four classes of persons for verification: if someone is both ripe inside and out, or both raw inside and out, this is also easy to distinguish; as for the remaining two persons—ripe outside and raw inside, or raw outside and ripe inside—how are these two persons to be known? The Buddha states that these are indeed difficult to know. Although said to be difficult to know, they should be verified by means of four dharmas, and one will surely know their reality. If we discuss these four dharmas, they are precisely cohabitation and wisdom. Dividing cohabitation into two and wisdom into two, they thus form four propositions. If one employs these four dharmas, then one will know who upholds the precepts and who breaks the precepts.

55.49

"The Buddha said: 'Excellent, excellent, good man! […] Only then can one know who upholds the precepts and who breaks the precepts.'"

55.50

Sengzong comments: Even the four kinds of ordinary and near people cannot be known; how much less could the Tathāgata be fathomed?

55.51

"'Good man! There are two kinds of precepts, and those who uphold them are also of two kinds […] whether it is for material gain or for ultimate upholding.'"

55.52

Sengliang comments: Upholding the restrictive precepts on account of causes and conditions is done either for one's own liberation or for [rebirth among] humans and gods. If it is not done for the ultimate, it is not ultimate upholding. Sengzong says: This is the third turn. Only one who cultivates the ultimate precepts is able to see. Baoliang says: Below, he wishes to use this ultimate and non-ultimate to verify the perfection and non-perfection of precepts. If one upholds the precepts ultimately, it is termed seeing with the eye and hearing and seeing; if one does not uphold the precepts ultimately, it is also not termed seeing with the eye or hearing and seeing. Those from the establishment of the five faculties headed by faith onward all belong to the category of ultimate upholding of precepts. If from the initial single faith onward, one ultimately enters the inner ordinary being [stages], continuing uninterrupted without abandonment up to achieving Buddhahood, this is also termed ultimate precepts.

55.53

"'Good man! The precepts of the Tathāgata have no causes or conditions […] this is complete upholding of precepts, ultimate upholding of precepts.'"

55.54

Sengliang comments: By nature not doing evil and naturally obtaining the precepts is ultimate precepts. Not giving rise to anger or obstruction is also by nature not doing evil.

55.55

"'Good man! Once in the past, together with Śāriputra […] anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi.'"

55.56

Sengliang comments: This provides verification that in the causal stage there was no evil, and the fruit possessed this power. Baoliang says: This proves that the Tathāgata's upholding of precepts is supreme.

55.57

"'Furthermore, there are two kinds: first, for the sake of material gain […] and the Tathāgata as one who upholds the precepts.'"

55.58

Sengliang comments: A reiteration of the explanation. [Upholding them] for the True Dharma is ultimate.

55.59

"'Furthermore, there are two kinds: first, by nature being able to uphold them […] and the Tathāgata is also termed hearing and seeing.'"

55.60

Sengliang comments: That is, precepts free of causes and conditions. Having cultivated and practiced for vast eons, the evil mind is extinguished forever, and goodness has become one's nature.

55.61

"'Furthermore, there are two kinds: first, the śrāvaka precepts […] able to see the buddhadhātu and the Tathāgata's nirvāṇa.'"

55.62

Sengliang comments: Śrāvakas loathe saṃsāra, and their practice conflicts with nirvāṇa; it is not seeing the Dharma.

55.63

"Bodhisattva Siṃhanāda said: 'World-Honoured One! […] Why is this? Because such is the dharmatā.'"

55.64

Sengliang comments: This explains the meaning of "ultimate," and also clarifies that dharmas arising from precepts all the way to nirvāṇa are all instances of contributory causes. This is called tracing back the causes. There are eleven layers of mutual explanation.

55.65

"Bodhisattva Siṃhanāda said: 'World-Honoured One! […] how can it be called self, bliss, and purity?'"

55.66

Sengliang comments: The above expounded the generative cause and the revealing cause succeeding one another from upholding precepts to nirvāṇa, but had not yet discerned from what cause nirvāṇa exists; hence he raises the question. Sengzong says: The intention of the challenge is to make precepts, being without a cause, permanent, and nirvāṇa, having a cause, impermanent. Baoliang says: Since precepts beforehand have no cause, they should be permanent; while nirvāṇa has liberation as its cause, so it should be impermanent.

55.67

"The Buddha said: 'Excellent, excellent, good man! […] Listen attentively, listen attentively, I shall expound it for you.'"

55.68

Sengliang comments: Intending to answer the challenge, he first brings forward past events to verify the attainment of principle and its prior cessation.

55.69

"'Precepts also have causes: their cause is listening to the True Dharma […] first, listening to the Dharma; second, reflecting on its meaning.'"

55.70

Baoliang comments: Precepts are saṃskṛta; they arise from listening to the Dharma, which serves as their generative cause.

55.71

"'Good man! Faith […] is both a cause and a cause of a cause, and both a fruit and a fruit of a fruit.'"

55.72

Sengliang comments: "Both a cause": listening to the Dharma is the cause of faith. "A cause of a cause": faith is further the cause of listening to the Dharma. Now, acting as a cause for a cause is called a cause of a cause. "Both a fruit": faith is the fruit of listening to the Dharma. "A fruit of a fruit": listening to the Dharma is the fruit of faith. Mutually generating each other with the fruit, both are cause and fruit; hence they are called saṃskṛta.

55.73

"'Good man! Just as a Nirgrantha props up a stand to hold a water jar, they serve mutually as cause and effect and cannot be separated.'"

55.74

Sengliang comments: Faith and listening to the Dharma serve mutually as cause and effect and cannot be separated; this points to and relies on these two as the cause of a cause and the fruit of a fruit.

55.75

"'Good man! Just as with ignorance as condition there are volitional formations […] is both a cause and a cause of a cause, and both a fruit and a fruit of a fruit.'"

55.76

Sengliang comments: He borrows this to reveal the meaning of mutual cause and fruit. Ignorance is the cause and volitional formations are the fruit; naturally, after volitional formations, minor afflictions arise again, which are described as ignorance. This clarifies that subtle and gross, preceding and succeeding, mutually give rise to one another and alternately act as cause and effect; it also obtains the meaning of repeated causes and repeated fruits.

55.77

"'Good man! Arising can give rise to dharmas […] arising-arising does not give rise to itself, but relies on arising to arise.'"

55.78

Sengliang comments: He borrows the Abhidharma school's doctrine to lodge and clarify the purport of repeated causes and repeated fruits. Minor arising gives rise only to a single dharma, while major arising gives rise to eight dharmas; thus minor arising and major arising are further cause and effect to each other, also having the meaning of repeated causes and repeated fruits. "Cannot give rise to itself" means that the three entities of major arising cannot give rise to themselves. "Arising through arising-arising" means that minor arising comes to give rise to their entities. "Arising-arising does not give rise to itself" means that the arising that gives rise to major arising does not give rise to itself, but also relies on major arising to arise.

55.79

"'Therefore, the two arisings are both cause and the cause of a cause […] faith and listening to the Dharma are also like this.'"

55.80

Sengliang comments: He adduces two aspects of a single matter to serve as an analogical explanation.

55.81

"'Good man! This is a fruit and not a cause […] is called a fruit, and afflictions are called faults of faults.'"

55.82

Sengliang comments: The above explained that precepts and so forth are causes and fruits, their essence being saṃskṛta. Now it clarifies that nirvāṇa is a fruit, neither a cause nor saṃskṛta. Because it is not saṃskṛta, it does not exist from a cause. Regarding "because it is the supreme fruit": people seek freedom from suffering, taking freedom from suffering as supreme. Regarding "because it is the fruit of the śramaṇa": it severs saṃsāra. Regarding "faults of faults": all refer to suffering dharmas. Afflictions are faults, and because they further produce suffering, they are "faults of faults." Sengzong says: He previously answered that the two dharmas of precepts and faith serve mutually as cause and effect and are therefore impermanent. Now he clarifies that nirvāṇa is the fruit of the revealing cause, which is why it is permanent. Regarding "is the supreme fruit": this explains why it is superior. Baoliang says: Having determined that precepts also have a cause, we know that precepts are not permanent and do not have an immutable status. Nirvāṇa can only be called a fruit and no longer acts as a cause for anything else; hence it is a fruit and not a cause.

55.83

"'Good man! Nirvāṇa is without cause, yet its essence is fruit […] because it has no cause, it is called nirvāṇa.'"

55.84

Sengliang comments: Saṃskṛta dharmas are both cause and fruit, and are therefore suffering; nirvāṇa is a fruit without a cause, and is therefore not suffering. Sengzong says: It is without a generative cause. Baoliang says: "Its essence is fruit" refers to the fruit of the revealing cause.

55.85

"Bodhisattva Siṃhanāda said: 'As the Buddha has spoken […] having a time of non-existence, it is therefore called nirvāṇa.'"

55.86

Sengliang comments: The intent of the challenge is that because it does not take unwholesome states as its cause, it is said to have "no cause," not that it is entirely without cause; hence he takes "having a time of non-existence" from among the six kinds of non-existence.

55.87

"The Buddha said: 'Good man! What you have now spoken […] Why is it called a cause? Because it is a revealing cause.'"

55.88

Sengliang comments: What he brought forward are all common characteristics of the saṃskṛta, which, when contrasted with the true self of nirvāṇa, cannot be equated with non-self. "For this reason, it is a cause" refers to the two causes above. "It is a fruit" refers to the two fruits above. Nirvāṇa is fruit and not cause; buddhadhātu is cause and not fruit. If nirvāṇa is only a fruit and not suffering, then buddhadhātu is also only a cause and should not be suffering. "Not the fruit of the śramaṇa" means it is not those two fruits, but not that it is not other fruits that are suffering. "It is a revealing cause" means it is not those two causes, clarifying that it is a revealing cause and not a generative cause. Baoliang says: One should know that the essence of nirvāṇa is ultimately without cause, just like non-self and the lack of what belongs to self. Although he cites the initial proposition to answer, he immediately dismisses it afterward, clarifying that nirvāṇa is unlike worldly dharmas, which is why it is permanent. Regarding "is a cause and not a fruit": this again refers to the primary cause buddhadhātu. The primary cause resides solely in the causal stage and cannot be termed a fruit. Regarding "because it is not produced from causes": since the primary cause buddhadhātu is not produced from good or evil causes, its single function is immutable; reaching Buddhahood it is unmoved, reaching Buddhahood it is unperturbed; hence it is not a dharma produced from causes. Since its essence is not produced from causes, it is also not the fruit of calming the mind. Regarding "because it is a revealing cause": not only is the contributory cause a revealing cause, but the primary cause is also a revealing cause. Why is this? If sentient beings did not have a mind of weariness [of saṃsāra] and seeking joy, they could not produce even a single moment of goodness. Because they possess this understanding, the fruit can mature; therefore, the primary cause also distantly serves as a revealing cause for the Buddha.

55.89

"'Good man! There are two kinds of causes […] earth, water, and manure are termed revealing causes.'"

55.90

Daosheng comments: Both are conditioned processes; they are merely spoken of in relative terms. Baoliang says: This broadly explains the meaning of all contributory and primary causes: as long as its power toward the fruit is strong, it is a generative cause; that which is weak belongs to the revealing cause.

55.91

"'Furthermore, there is the generative cause, namely the six pāramitās [producing] anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi.'"

55.92

Daosheng comments: Below this, it clarifies that these are all non-conditioned phenomena, yet the meanings of generative and revealing causes become clear through this. Bodhi is accomplished through the six pāramitās, hence it is called 'generative.' Baoliang comments: Because the six pāramitās have strong efficacy in taking hold of bodhi, they are called generative causes.

55.93

"Furthermore, there is a revealing cause, which refers to buddhadhātu [leading to] anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi."

55.94

Sengzong comments: Here there are three pairs in contrast. Speaking generally, they are solely revealing causes; they are designated as generative causes because of their strong efficacy in producing the fruit. A generative [cause] can produce what was non-existent to make it exist; a revealing [cause] reveals what already exists. In terms of the text, it is slightly out of sequence; deducing the meaning, the third pair ought to be the second. The first pair takes the six pāramitās prior to the stages and pairs them against the buddhadhātu. Although buddhadhātu is the direct cause (pradhāna-hetu), in terms of the power to produce the fruit, without the pāramitās such as giving (dāna), one cannot obtain the fruit; since it is stronger than [mere] revealing, it is conceptually spoken of as 'generative.' Sengliang comments: Because the direct cause, the buddhadhātu, has inferior efficacy in grasping the fruit, it can only serve as a revealing cause.

55.95

"Furthermore, there is a revealing cause, which refers to the six pāramitās [leading to] buddhadhātu."

55.96

Sengzong comments: This refers to what is below the ninth stage; its efficacy toward the fruit is weak, so it is [termed] 'revealing.' Baoliang comments: The six pāramitās in the causal stage are distant from the fruit of buddhahood, so they can only serve as a revealing cause for samyaksaṃbodhi.

55.97

"Furthermore, there is a generative cause, which refers to the Śūraṅgama Samādhi [leading to] anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi."

55.98

Sengzong comments: This refers to the tenth stage. Baoliang comments: The power of the vajra-like mind is strong and quickly generates the fruit of buddhahood; therefore it is called a direct cause.

55.99

"Furthermore, there is a revealing cause, which refers to the Eightfold Noble Path [leading to] anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi."

55.100

Sengzong comments: The Eightfold Noble Path is a one-sided practice; because its efficacy is weak, it is [termed] 'revealing.' Baoliang comments: The practice of the Two Vehicles is distant, so it can only serve as a revealing cause.

55.101

"Furthermore, there is a generative cause, namely the mind of faith [leading to] the six pāramitās."

55.102

Sengliang comments: What was originally absent now coming to be is 'generation.' What was originally present now being seen is 'revealing.' For example, regarding the impermanent as permanent is generative; regarding the impermanent as impermanent is revealing. Sengzong comments: This refers to entering the stages up to the third stage. Compared to the Eightfold Noble Path, its efficacy is stronger, hence it is called 'generative.' How is it known to be the third stage? Because one abides in the stage of patient acceptance through faith (adhimukti-kṣānti-bhūmi); now it says 'the mind of faith [and] the six pāramitās.' Baoliang comments: The practice of the Great Vehicle is close, hence it is called 'generative.'

55.103

Siṃhanāda said: "World-Honoured One! As the Buddha has spoken [...] how can it be seen? Buddhadhātu is also like this."

55.104

Sengliang comments: The third contemplative approach generally contemplates cause and fruit. It also distinguishes between seeing and hearing: resolving is 'seeing,' and not yet resolving is 'hearing.' Baoliang comments: Third is the combined contemplation of cause and fruit. Siṃhanāda raises the hundred negations to clarify: how can the Tathāgata be seen?

55.105

The Buddha said: "Good son! The Buddha's bodies are of two kinds [...] therefore it is said that all sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu."

55.106

Sengliang comments: 'Expedient manifestation is called seeing'—because of manifestation, both forms and sounds are called 'seeing.' The body of liberation is also called 'seeing through hearing,' and the rest are all like this. Sengzong comments: The fourth turns back to comprehend the principle and the prior thesis. Baoliang comments: The Buddha again exhorts faith based on the two matters of seeing with the eye and seeing through hearing. The 'permanent' one refers to the dharmakāya; the 'impermanent' one refers to the responsive body (nirmāṇakāya). The 'visible' refers to the Buddha and tenth-stage bodhisattvas. The 'invisible' refers to all sentient beings. The tenth stage and the Buddha may be called 'seeing with the eye'; those from the ninth stage downward solely rely on faith, so they belong to 'seeing through hearing.' The Buddha sees the buddhadhātu distinctly and clearly, so it is said to be 'like form'; from the tenth stage down, they do not see it clearly, so it is said to be 'not form.'

55.107

Collected Commentaries on the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Fascicle 55

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經集解 — Classical Chinese