大般涅槃經集解 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

7.1

Explaining the meaning of the four inversions; Explaining the meaning of the three inversions; Matching the analogy of the lapis lazuli jewel; Matching the analogy of the new and old physicians.

7.3

At that time, the World-Honoured One praised the bhikṣus: “Excellent, excellent! You are well able to cultivate the notion of non-self.”

Daosheng states: About to take away, he first grants. Zhixiu states: From here below is the fourth section, which explains superior cultivation and strips away what they cling to. It has four chapters: First, about to strip it away, he first confirms what they cling to. Second, the bhikṣus then further present various analogies, justifying themselves and faulting others. Third, the Buddha turns the analogies back upon them, showing the bhikṣus’ fault. Fourth, he explains superior cultivation for them. First promising to explain it without yet doing so, he first makes two turns to clarify that their cultivation lacks real meaning, and afterwards properly clarifies cultivation. This is the first chapter.

7.5

[Then the bhikṣus addressed the Buddha, saying…” up to: “…we well cultivate such notions.”]

7.6

Daosheng states: Having received the praise of 'excellent', they then display their other cultivations to boast. Sengliang states: Having received praise, they then mention their other notions. 'Not called noble' is an expression of self-congratulation. Zhixiu states: This is the second chapter.

7.7

[At that time, the Buddha addressed the bhikṣus, saying…” up to: “…only knowing the words without comprehending their meaning.”]

7.8

Daosheng states: The analogy of the drunkard takes not cultivating anew as delusion. They merely know the name 'non-self' taught in the past, without comprehending the contradictory meaning of cultivating anew; drunkenness has its rightful place. Sengliang states: You take being drunk as being sober; you know the name of drunkenness, but do not comprehend the meaning of being drunk versus not drunk. Sengzong states: From here below strips away the causes. There are four chapters: First, turning the drunkard analogy onto the bhikṣus. Second, broadly listing the eight inversions to show the great assembly. Those who are free from the eight inversions may be called practitioners; if they are not free from them, how can it be called cultivation? Third, concluding the eight inversions with the bhikṣus, saying: Not only do you have the light inversions, but you also have the grave inversions. Fourth, explaining the superior threefold cultivation for them to replace what they cling to. 'Not comprehending the meaning': the fruit of Buddhahood is permanent, while what is below the vajra[-like samādhi] is impermanent. Yet you unilaterally claim that cultivating permanence and bliss is drunkenness, and cultivating suffering and emptiness is sobriety? If one knows that conceiving suffering and emptiness regarding the fruit of Buddhahood and conceiving permanence and bliss regarding saṃsāra is delusion, then one truly recognizes drunkenness. Baoliang states: From here below is the second exhortation. There are four chapters clarifying the meaning: First, from here up to the physician explaining the three cultivations, he first turns the drunkard analogy onto the bhikṣus. Second, from explaining the three cultivations up to 'people do not know how to correctly cultivate the dharmas', he adduces the eight inversions to clarify both errors. Third, from 'you bhikṣus, amidst dharmas of suffering' up to 'and do not know the meaning', he adduces the four inversions to explain what is right and wrong. Fourth, clarifying both correctnesses: regarding saṃsāra as suffering and impermanent is also correct; regarding the Buddha as permanent and blissful is also correct. Zhixiu states: From here below is the third chapter.

7.9

[“What is the meaning? Like that drunkard…” up to: “…and gives rise to the notion of turning where there is no turning.”]

7.10

Sengliang states: What is the meaning of taking being drunk as not being drunk? Sengzong states: The meaning is explained below. 'Like that drunkard' turns the drunkard analogy back onto the bhikṣus. It means what the drunkard sees does not actually turn, yet he conceives the notion of turning; the fruit of Buddhahood is actually permanent, yet they conceive it as impermanent. This is great drunkenness without self-awareness, hence it says 'not comprehending the meaning'.

7.11

[“'Self' is the meaning of the Buddha…” up to: “…arrogant and haughty, wandering in saṃsāra.”]

7.12

Sengliang states: Sovereignty of knowledge and vision is the meaning of the Buddha. The body is without discursive thought, so non-transmutation is the meaning of the dharmakāya. The internal extinction of suffering is bliss, which means the meaning of nirvāṇa. That body, wisdom, and nirvāṇa are entirely free of what is non-Dharma is the meaning of purity. Fayao states: The bhikṣus themselves spoke of the inverted notions of ordinary persons; now clarifying that the ordinary person's notion of self is actually gained, while their contemplation of the notion of non-self is actually a loss. The analogy of the drunkard is suddenly reversed onto themselves. Sengzong states: This clarifies more distinctly why what came before was an inversion. 'Self' takes sovereignty as its meaning, and 'Buddha' takes awakening as its meaning; because of awakening to the myriad dharmas one is therefore sovereign. It should say 'Buddha is the meaning of self'—the phrasing is inverted. The subsequent lines follow this pattern. As for not taking 'unconditioned' as the meaning of permanence, because it includes the three unconditioned [dharmas], it is not taken. Now adducing the dharmakāya, the emphasis is on having an ontic reality (substance).

7.13

[“If you say, 'We also cultivate and amass…'” up to: “…'I shall now explain the superior threefold cultivation.'”]

7.14

Daosheng states: Since cultivation anew is wrong, and previous cultivation was shown to be wrong, therefore only now can he refute it, saying their cultivation is wrong, and also that cultivation lacks real meaning. Sengliang states: Knowing the words and knowing the meaning is considered superior cultivation. Fayao states: Only now does the Buddha determine the past understanding to be wrong, so it lacks real meaning; the present understanding is right, and he explains the superior threefold cultivation. Sengzong states: Below, he first concludes the eight inversions with the bhikṣus, and afterwards explains superior cultivation. Zhixiu states: From here below is the fourth chapter.

7.15

[“Those who suffer deeming it bliss, those who have bliss deeming it suffering…” up to: “…such a person does not know how to correctly cultivate all dharmas.”]

7.16

Daosheng states: Fully possessing inversions is not [true] cultivation; the principle is certainly thus. Yet with this person, [the Buddha] blames the monks. Sengliang states: First he speaks of erroneous cultivation. By means of the erroneous, the correct is revealed, making four pairs. Fayao states: This explains 'lacking real meaning'. Now, when there is understanding, there is no bias; delusions are also entirely severed. The monks took bliss to be suffering, and also took suffering to be bliss. Not only did they fail to recognize bliss, but they also failed to comprehend suffering and emptiness. These are the four inversions; permanence and impermanence each have four. Sengzong states: If we provisionally divide the eight inversions, four belong to fully bound ordinary beings, and four belong to persons of the Small Vehicle. Speaking comprehensively, both ordinary beings and noble ones fully possess the eight. Since they do not distinguish the true, they in principle do not recognize the false. Yet investigating the reality, while the words here are addressed to the noble ones, the intent is directed toward ordinary beings. Why is this? Once one enters the noble stages and above, one does not depend on verbal teachings to naturally believe in permanence; the sūtra has explicit text [on this]. The suppression and praise thus far was merely for those who had not yet attained comprehension. Baoliang states: Regarding the eight inversions, broadly determined there are four levels: First, it clarifies that one person may possess all eight, or one person may possess four. If we speak of their accomplishment from beginning to end, then one person possesses eight; speaking of their manifest arising, there are only four. As for the substance and function of delusion, its nature is bewilderment; regardless of whether it arises or does not arise, it is entirely accomplished. Second, discussing their arising function: If the former four arise, then there are not the latter four mutually relying and lying latent; hence it is said that one person has only four. Third, discerning their mutual subdual: If the five faculties headed by faith are established, then the eight inversions are eternally subdued. From this it is known that the time when the latter four arise is prior to the five faculties headed by faith, adjacent to the emptiness of nominal dharmas in the four stations of mindfulness; when one has not yet accomplished the contemplation of impermanence, one gives rise to this delusion within the contemplating mind. In discussing this delusion, can it possibly involve the subtlety of thought [passions]? At that time, the delusion of the entrenchment of ignorance (avidyāvāsabhūmi) is its primary substance. Why is this? Delusions [severed by] seeing the truths are already subdued and cannot arise again. Although the delusions of thought are not impartial, yet this is an unreal mind; external delusions do not arise, so it is known to be the delusion of the entrenchment of ignorance. Fourth, discussing the path of severance: When one attains correct contemplation without bias, one must first eliminate the coarse and afterward eliminate the subtle; it cannot be like when the semblance of understanding subdues both together. Why is this? Subdual must be based on principle to suppress emotional inclinations; all that runs counter to emotional inclinations is subdued, regardless of coarse or subtle. When the true contemplation severs them, it is because mental factors are opposed to one another; therefore one treats the coarse with what is shallow.

7.17

"You monks, in the midst of dharmas that are suffering, [...] and in what is impure, you give rise to the notion of purity.

7.18

Daosheng states: Speaking in terms of their arising, taking non-self to be self is also taking non-self as self—how could that be called true cultivation? Sengliang states: Having already spoken of the characteristics of inversion, he now applies them to the monks. Having previously escaped, he now clarifies that they have not yet attained comprehension; only if one recognizes the characteristics of the self can one distinctly recognize non-self. Baoliang states: Intending to explain right and wrong, he first brings up the substance of inversion.

7.19

"The worldly also has permanence, bliss, self, and purity [...] worldly dharmas have the words but lack the meaning.

7.20

Daosheng states: Beginning to clarify the superior three cultivations, he first states that the worldly fundamentally lacks the reality of self. The self of inverted views has the words but lacks the meaning.

7.21

"The supramundane has both the words and the meaning.

7.22

Daosheng states: Because it overturns the eight inversions, it is called supramundane. Below it concludes: 'Because it is not inverted, it knows both the words and the meaning.' Sengliang states: Since the monks are not exempt from having inversions, it is because of the worldly four inversions; this means knowing the name but not knowing the meaning. Fayao states: From here on begins the explanation of the meaning of superior cultivation. First he brings up worldly inversions such as permanence and bliss, so as to reveal that the non-inverted permanence of the supramundane is the meaning of superior cultivation. Having words and meaning explains why it constitutes cultivation. Sengzong states: The Buddha points to what the monks were conceptualizing at that time. Saying that the supramundane also has them means having both words and meaning, which is why it constitutes superior cultivation. Baoliang states: Intending to explain below, he first opens two gates: first, having words but lacking meaning; second, having both words and meaning.

7.23

"Why is this? Because worldly dharmas have the four inversions, they do not know the meaning.

7.24

Sengzong states: He selects having words but lacking meaning. Having the four inversions means that having four entails possessing eight.

7.25

"For what reason? There is the inversion of conception, [...] the worldly knows the words but does not know the meaning.

7.26

Sengzong states: Previously he brought up the four inversions of suffering and emptiness as the root of the four inversions of permanence and bliss. Now he again brings up the three inversions to explain the reason for the former four inversions. The inversion of conception: conception takes apprehending designations as its meaning, erroneously grasping and failing to attain the reality of dharmas; recollecting, imagining, and deducing, it gives rise to inversions from this. The inversion of mind: the sixth mental consciousness can take the principle as its object; first it is conditioned by the mind, and afterward gives rise to inversion. The inversion of view: view can examine dharmas, and through examination becomes inverted; relying on this, it gives rise to the four, and in pairing them there are eight. Baoliang states: When the mental consciousness initially grasps an object and arrives at an erroneous understanding, apprehending dharmas without attaining them is called an inversion. Afterward, when the conceiving mind discriminates again, following the mind's erroneous understanding, it is called the inversion of conception. View is the mind of the saṃskāraskandha; using conception to discriminate the two meanings of contradiction and non-contradiction, it shifts into grasping views more heavily, saying that the Buddha is impermanent—this is called the inversion of view. Not speaking of the inversion of sensation is because sensation and conception are of a similar category; based on its middling rank, it is therefore not clarified. View comes after the three, and because it emphasizes the saṃskāraskandha, it is spoken of.

7.27

"What is the meaning? Non-self is saṃsāra; self is the Tathāgata.

7.28

Daosheng states: In saṃsāra one cannot attain sovereignty; therefore it is called non-self.

7.29

"Impermanence is the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; permanence is the Tathāgata's dharmakāya.

7.30

Daosheng states: Because the two vehicles do not see permanence, they are impermanent.

7.31

"Suffering is all non-Buddhists; bliss is nirvāṇa.

7.32

Daosheng states: Because they run contrary to right view, they cannot escape suffering.

7.33

"Impurity is saṃskṛta dharmas; purity is the true Dharma possessed by the buddhas and bodhisattvas.

7.34

Daosheng states: All that arises aberrantly is saṃskṛta.

7.35

"This is called non-inversion. Because of non-inversion, [...] one should know permanence, bliss, self, and purity in this way.

7.36

Sengliang states: This directly explains the superior three cultivations. Fayao states: Having clarified that the two kinds of four inversions do not know their meaning, next clarifying that the two kinds of four non-inversions know their meaning is self-evident from the text, so no further note is made.

7.37

Then the monks said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One, [...] yet we see ourselves being abandoned as you wish to enter nirvāṇa.

7.38

Daosheng states: Having already reproached their understanding as wrong, he should then teach them to cultivate what is right; therefore they are able to request it again.

7.39

"If the Tathāgata would show mindful regard and instruct us, [...] we would dwell uprightly together and cultivate the brahma-practice.

7.40

Daosheng states: If the Buddha enters nirvāṇa and there is no longer any instruction, then even if we cultivate the brahma-practice, we will ultimately never be able to leave this poisonous body.

7.41

"We too should follow the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, and enter into nirvāṇa."

7.42

Daosheng states: They say that if the Buddha stays in the world to teach us, then we will be able to follow the Buddha in entering this nirvāṇa. Sengliang states: Above, they praised their former three cultivations and sought a determination from the Tathāgata. The Tathāgata having already decided, although the monks awakened to the fact that their former cultivation was inverted, they have not yet obtained the later cultivation for their practice; hence they request instruction and guidance, to receive it on their heads and practice it. Following the Buddha into nirvāṇa: since the cultivation was inverted, how could they abide together with this poisonous body? If the Buddha manifests extinction, they would follow the Buddha and depart. Sengzong states: Previously they requested him not to abide, retreating to preserve the former teaching. Having now received clarification, they first realized they had not yet attained comprehension. Respectfully submitting to his previous words, [they realize:] 'Since we have inversions, we must eliminate them; if you do not abide, we wish to follow the Buddha in attaining extinction.' Examining the intention of attaining extinction, it seems to still conform to the former teaching. Although they do not demand that he abide, their intention is not to let go; this is why they dare not speak openly. Clinging to the teaching, having now received clarification, their shame lies in not having yet attained comprehension. Baoliang states: This is the beginning of the third request below. Within this there are also three intentions: first, directly expressing understanding; second, requesting the Buddha to abide and teach us the superior three cultivations; third, if the Buddha does not accept our request, we should now follow the Buddha into nirvāṇa, pressing the Buddha with death. Zhixiu states: The superior cultivation having been revealed, the depth of their awakening and understanding was slight; now they again request the Buddha to abide and speak it again for them. Saying they will follow the Buddha into nirvāṇa does not mean there is another nirvāṇa to enter; because the Buddha previously said that when attaining nirvāṇa one must abandon the body, they used words of earnest principle as their request.

7.43

At that time the Buddha said to the monks: "You should not [...] and I have also entrusted it to Mahākāśyapa.

7.44

Daosheng states: The reason for entrusting it to a śrāvaka is to clarify that one must possess combined understanding, and only then attain the path. Kāśyapa went forth before the Buddha, taking the buddhas of the ten directions as his teachers. When the Buddha attained the path, he became the Buddha's disciple; foremost in ascetic practices and having accomplished profound understanding, he could certainly guide and instruct later learners, so it was entrusted to him. Sengliang states: This answers the words requesting instruction. The bequeathed Dharma that teaches you is now left behind. Sengzong states: Previously they requested him to abide with words of inversion; now he clarifies that there is someone entrusted, so why worry that inversions will not be eliminated? Baoliang states: This is the third exhortation. Within this there are three intentions: First, he rejects the intention of their first request, saying: just cultivate superior cultivation; what benefit is there in following extinction? Second, he points out the person to rely upon: since Kāśyapa is the place of reliance, it is no different from when the Buddha is in the world; why worry that there is no basis for wishing to cultivate superior cultivation? Someone explains: this Kāśyapa is precisely the one of the thirty-four questions. We say this should not be so; he is simply the senior elder among the śrāvakas. Hence the six-fascicle [version] says: 'Because of the śrāvaka vehicle, he cannot circulate it, but it is not that he cannot at all. Being the Buddha's great disciple, he did not come at that time.' Thus we know he was originally a person who embodied permanence.

7.45

"You should know that the notions of impermanence and suffering that you previously cultivated and amassed are not real.

7.46

Sengliang states: The entire treasury of sūtras is entrusted to the monk Kāśyapa, so that they may know the former was wrong and the latter is right. Fayao states: Intending to set forth a parable to make them clearly know that their former understanding was certainly wrong, and to encourage them to learn what is spoken now, he first admonishes and instructs them.

7.47

"Just as in springtime,

7.48

Sengliang states: Spring is the beginning of agriculture. The teaching of impermanence is the beginning of learning. Fayao states: The time when flora blooms and flourishes, gladdening the feelings, is used as a parable for the time when the listeners' capacities are aroused. Hearing the Dharma in season, there are none who are not gladdened and enlightened. Sengzong states: The parable has three intentions: first, it clarifies the parable of attaining understanding in the presence of a past buddha; next, it clarifies the parable of losing understanding; finally, it clarifies the parable of responding anew to the present Buddha and hearing permanence to arouse understanding. Sentient beings have roots of goodness; meeting a past buddha, response and resonance intersect, and the sprouts of goodness unfold, comparing to that harmonious and seasonable time. Zhixiu states: The purport of the parable has two parts. The former, from the beginning up to 'then knew it was not real', reveals that the learners originally had the understanding of the ultimate cultivation of the future fruit, but being benefited by the Buddha's partial teaching, they sought it and could not find it. The latter, from 'at that time the precious gem' up to the end of the parable, clarifies that today's teaching reveals the purport of ultimate cultivation, showing that those who seek beneath the former partial teaching will ultimately be able to attain it therein. Opening these two intentions, he admonishes learners to beware of that former loss and aspire to this later attainment. In the former parable there are two intentions: the first, up to 'submerged in deep water', directly reveals that the jewel of ultimate cultivation was submerged in the water of partial teaching. When spring arrives, plants and trees sprout; this compares to the arousal of the resonance and the issuance of teaching, where the good mind flourishes.

7.49

"there were various people

7.50

Sengliang states: The five people including Kaundinya, those who were meant to hear it. Sengzong states: These should be ordinary beings before the stages of abiding. Baoliang states: Broadly a parable for the persons of the three vehicles.

7.51

"bathing in a great pool.

7.52

Sengliang states: Receiving and adhering to the scriptural teachings to wash away wrong delusions is compared to bathing in a great pool. Sengzong states: This is a general metaphor for the Buddhadharma of the three periods of time. In the pool there is water, and the water comes out of the pool; this means that within the Buddhadharma there are principle and teaching, and principle and teaching come forth from the Buddhadharma. Baoliang states: Śākyamuni's appearance in the world, from the Deer Park to the Twin Trees, is generally compared to the pool.

7.53

[They] boarded a boat to amuse themselves.

7.54

Sengliang states: Seeking principle by relying on the scriptures, they initially use [wisdom arising from] hearing and contemplation. Since they do not penetrate deeply into principle, they are like a boat floating on the water. Why is this? Sentient beings originally held the conception of the four inversions, deeming all phenomena to be permanent; the Buddha, wishing to cut this off, taught that everything is impermanent, his intent being directed at the three realms. Erroneously extending this to the dharmakāya, they clung to the teaching and missed the intent. The meaning of being superficial and shallow, without real efficacy, is compared to play. The Record of Jingyi notes that Sengzong stated: 'To amuse themselves' means that upon hearing the teaching of permanence, it is not that they did not have a slight understanding that brought joy to the mind. The Record of Falian notes that Sengzong stated: The myriad goods are the boat, and sweet bliss is the play.

7.55

[And they] lost a beryl gem.

7.56

Note: One edition has 'pearl'. Sengliang states: The intent of the scripture is not one-sided, and its principle is complete and precious; this is compared to a jewel, also called a pearl. Taking it one-sidedly diverges from the middle, which is compared to losing it. Fayao states: The intent of the words is the pearl; failing to comprehend what is expressed is the loss. Sengzong states: The external metaphor is that because of play they lost the pearl; the internal correspondence is that because their understanding was not yet deep, their feelings rushed after the five desires, losing their original understanding, which is like losing the pearl. If one speaks of the loss: in the past, conceiving permanence diverged from understanding, which already entailed loss; but calling it a loss only now upon hearing the teaching of impermanence is because the past designation of permanence equally had the sense of loss, yet did not reveal the teaching of impermanence. Once the understanding of impermanence arose, it obstructed the view of permanence, and the sense of loss first became evident. Baoliang states: As for the understanding of the middle path, failing to attain what ought to be attained is termed 'loss'.

7.57

[Which] sank into deep water.

7.58

Daosheng states: Permanence and impermanence: the principle originally does not lean to one side; when the words encompass both, they are precious, and one must attain them. Because the two vehicles practiced haphazardly, their deviation constitutes the loss. Once they deviated, it remained hidden forever; this is called 'sinking deep'. Sengliang states: Being covered by the provisional teaching is compared to being in deep water. Fayao states: Permanence and impermanence: the principle must stand in contrast. But when the past teaching of impermanence had not yet clearly defined its scope, it was erroneously extended to the Buddha's permanence; thus the principle of permanence was hidden within the teaching of impermanence, which is the pearl sinking into the water. Principle must be realized in both aspects; there should be no one-sidedness. How could the water of impermanence not be deep? Sengzong states: The pearl of complete understanding was hidden and obscured, and practitioners were unable to see it; this is called 'deep'. The teaching of impermanence sealed all phenomena; seeking the understanding of permanence directly under those words, there was no principle by which it could be found; this is called 'sinking'. Baoliang states: The principle of the middle path is hidden beneath today's teaching of nirvāṇa, hence it is said to sink in the water; it is not a metaphor based on waters to the east or west.

7.59

At that time, all the people went into the water together to search for this jewel.

7.60

Sengliang states: This refers to the wisdom of cultivation. Seeking the principle ever more deeply, wishing thereby to eliminate delusions, is compared to entering the water to search for the jewel. Fayao states: This refers to the wisdom of contemplation. Investigating the teaching ever more deeply is the meaning of entering the water. Having lost the intent, one should seek it; reasoning indicates it must be so, without expressing its underlying purpose. Sengzong states: Previously, there was a loss within the principle; now there is also a search within the principle. Why? The understanding of permanence is a superior practice within the principle; how could people not have the wish to seek what is superior? Baoliang states: Attaining contemplation from hearing is metaphorically expressed as 'entering'.

7.61

Vying with each other, they grabbed tiles, stones, grass, wood, sand, and pebbles, each claiming to have found the beryl pearl.

7.62

Sengliang states: Using the wisdom of impermanence and so forth, they claimed to have attained the three fruits. Baoliang states: Relying on the former scriptures, they attained the understanding of the two wisdoms of hearing and contemplation, and claimed it was the true principle.

7.63

Rejoicing, they brought them out, only to realize they were not genuine.

7.64

Sengliang states: When the arhats emerge from the three realms, they realize on their own that it is not ultimate. Fayao states: Originally they took the principle of impermanence to be the ultimate intent of the true words; now, hearing the teaching of permanence, they first realize that it has its proper scope. Clearly distinguished, they no longer cling to it within the teaching of impermanence; this is 'bringing them out, only to realize they were not genuine'. Sengzong states: 'Rejoicing' pertains to what went before. Generating an understanding based on the one-sided teaching and taking it to be the true principle is like crying out that one has found the pearl. Preserving joy in their hearts is what is termed 'rejoicing'. As for 'bringing them out, only to realize they were not genuine': once the teaching of permanence is proclaimed, explaining the two paths, they are no longer deluded by impermanence, knowing that what they previously attained was not the peak of principle. Baoliang states: Riding upon the understanding of impermanence, they come to ascend to the stages of warmth and summit; with the faculty of faith perfected, they have decisive faith that the Buddha is permanent. At that time, looking back at the past teaching, they first realize it was a provisional expression, like taking the treasure out of the water and realizing it is not genuine. Zhixiu states: Attaining cultivated wisdom and leaving behind the teaching is compared to 'bringing them out'. Leaving the meditative observation as conditions cease, knowing that future rebirth is not yet entirely exhausted, is compared to 'only to realize they were not genuine'. In what Daohui compiled, it says: 'Rejoicing'. As for 'holding': in the past they took it to be the principle, preserving it is 'holding'. 'Emerging, only to realize they were not genuine' refers to the time when nirvāṇa is taught. Having entered the present teaching of permanence, in relation to the past teaching of impermanence, this is 'emerging'.

7.65

At that time, the precious pearl was still in the water.

7.66

Daosheng states: For those who have not attained it, it remains in the water. Sengliang states: They realize on their own that saṃsāra is not yet exhausted, but do not know that the Buddha-fruit is permanent; hence it was obscured by the past words. Fayao states: The explanation originally expresses the intent so that people may attain it. Since people have not yet attained it, it remains within the water of the explanation. Sengzong states: Once the teaching of permanence has arisen, they know that their past practice was not the peak of principle; yet the jewel of faith gained through contemplation and cultivation is not yet employed by their minds, remaining beneath principle and teaching. Baoliang states: They come to know that the scriptural teachings of the past were all expressions of the understanding of permanence, but because sentient beings had heavy delusions, it could not be taught directly.

7.67

Due to the power of the pearl, the water became completely clear and pure.

7.68

Daosheng states: The intent of the words having appeared, it no longer confuses traces; this is the power of the pearl. Sengliang states: Principle cannot be covered; names and teachings naturally distinguish themselves, like the metaphor of the letter *i*; hence it is said to become clear and pure. Sengzong states: The pearl illustrates the pearl of understanding, which is a transparent object; the water becomes clear because of it. The superior wisdom of contemplation and cultivation is the knowledge that illuminates principle; exploring the teaching, it is not turbid. Baoliang states: Having faith in permanence, they definitely know that the principle of the one-sided teaching is not real. Although the principle is not real, they never confound each other, but merely assist the understanding directed toward permanence; hence it is said to become clear and pure. Zhixiu states: Because this intent exists, it is able to evoke what is taught today, establishing that the past teaching was also an expression of the ultimate; how could this not be the power of the pearl making the water clear and pure? In what Daohui compiled, it says: Deluded feelings confuse the teaching, which is compared to turbid water. If it were truly impermanent, their delusion could endure. Since principle is not a one-sided teaching, erroneous feelings can be quelled; once quelled, names and teachings are manifest, which is compared to clear water.

7.69

Thereupon, the great assembly saw that the precious pearl was still beneath the water,

7.70

Sengliang states: Believing that the Buddha is permanent, yet when they begged him to stay, he would not, because he is unconstrained. Clinging to past teachings and giving rise to doubt, they then sought adjudication from the Buddha; this is the intent of this metaphor. Fayao states: Once the principle of permanence is revealed, they first know that the past intent lay in permanence, compared to it still being beneath the water. Sengzong states: Having only the wisdom of hearing, they are not yet able to enter into principle, like not having entered the water; not having cultivated superior wisdom, it is not called attaining the pearl. It is not that they lack the wisdom of hearing, which is metaphorically called seeing it from afar. Baoliang states: Having attained understanding through faith, they know entirely that the intent of permanence is ubiquitous beneath the teachings of the past.

7.71

just like looking up at the form of the moon in the empty sky.

7.72

Sengliang states: The complete teaching of superior cultivation taught by the Buddha is to be looked up to, which is compared to the moon in the sky. Sengzong states: The mind of contemplation and cultivation rests in the middle path without leaning to either side.

7.73

At that time, there was a wise person in the assembly who, by the power of skillful means, calmly and slowly entered the water and immediately obtained the pearl.

7.74

Daosheng states: Practicing in accordance with the teaching is compared to entering the water calmly and slowly. The essential point lies in cultivating the four dharmas of self, permanence, and so forth, yet in truth does not abandon the meaning of skillful means. Only after cultivating permanence does one understand impermanence; when its principle first comes to reside within oneself, this is called 'wise'. Sengliang states: This is a metaphor for renouncing the past and cultivating the present. Fayao states: The 'wise person' refers to a bodhisattva. Cultivating without confounding it with impermanence, one only then attains permanence, compared to entering the water and obtaining the pearl. Because cultivation finds its proper place and does not churn up turbidity, it is 'calm and slow'. The Record of Jingyi notes that Sengzong stated: Those who are deluded are many and those who awaken are few; being precious and revered, it therefore speaks of 'one person'. Using good skillful means to engage gently with the savor of principle, the teaching is not confused or turbid, because the wisdom of superior cultivation resides in oneself. Just as entering the water calmly and slowly does not disturb the water, one therefore obtains the pearl. The Record of Jingyi notes that Sengzong stated: One person illustrates a bodhisattva. Not clinging to annihilation or permanence, and calmly grasping the middle, is compared to 'calm and slow'. In what Daohui compiled, it says: Gathering the mind in principle is called 'calm and slow'.

7.75

You monks should not be like this, [… up to …] namely, the notion of self, and the notions of permanence, bliss, and purity.

7.76

Sengliang states: This briefly joins the metaphor, reiterating the admonition to them.

7.77

At that time, the monks said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One, [… up to …] attaining entry into nirvāṇa—what is the meaning of this?'

7.78

Daosheng states: If the past teaching of non-self in truth also expressed the self, why did the verbal teachings exclusively teach non-self so that one could be free from self, without teaching self, only to teach it now? Sengliang states: If the present cultivation is correct, what was the meaning of teaching it everywhere in the past? Fayao states: If possessing a self is true and non-self is not real, why was it not taught in the past, so that fortunately we would not have had the inversion of erroneously grasping it? These two teachings are like spear and shield; what is their purport? Sengzong states: This is the section on taking away the fruit, the fourth passage. The first took away the fruit; the second took away the cause; the third used the metaphor of the precious pearl to establish that what they cultivated was empty and unreal; this fourth passage explains and harmonizes the two teachings so that they do not conflict. Baoliang states: This is the seventh passage, harmonizing the two teachings. Since the 'Chapter on Grief and Lamentation', the monks have petitioned three times and the World-Honoured One has admonished three times, yet the assembly harbored only a single doubt; thus we know that from the beginning of the scroll up to here is not yet the primary exposition, but clearly serves as an overall exhortation and inquiry. This doubt arose from within the third exhortation. If its principle is so luminous, why was it not taught first in the past?

7.79

The Buddha told the monks: 'Excellent, excellent! [… up to …] You inquire into this meaning in order to cut off your own doubts.'

7.80

Sengliang states: Asking well and opportunely, they are able to examine the origin to determine the present, so as to cut off their own doubts. Fayao states: Below, the metaphor of the visiting physician and the old physician is cited to clarify that the ancient and present teachings do not differ in their intent. In the past, praising non-self was only directed at the three realms, merely eliminating the self of the three realms, not disparaging the Buddha-self. But because they did not understand the intent of the words, they erroneously extended it to the Buddha and thought he too lacked a self. Now, he disparages the erroneous cultivation of non-self, not the non-self of saṃsāra. Although praising and disparaging differ, their intent is truly the same, not like spear and shield. Sengzong states: Being able to question based on the two teachings, their doubts are therefore cut off. Now, explaining the two teachings, there is no delusion of clinging to the past. Once provisional and real are distinguished, doubts and entanglements are severed. Mingjun notes: Below, within this chapter, this is the fifth passage, which harmonizes. What is called harmonizing clarifies why permanence was not taught in the past and why it is taught today; it does not mean taking the past one-sided teaching of impermanence and conflating it with the present complete teaching. Therefore, in the metaphor below it says: 'This milk medicine, whether taken or not taken, is in both cases the physician's instruction.' It does not say that salty, bitter, pungent, and sour flavors are themselves the milk medicine. Thus we know that what is called harmonizing is merely the intent behind teaching and not teaching.

7.81

For example, there was a king who was dull-witted and had little wisdom.

7.82

Daosheng comments: Those who receive transformation must possess the capacity for understanding. One whose defilements are heavy takes precedence over those whose defilements are light, and thus he is the king. Because his defilements are heavy, his wisdom is scant.

7.83

"There was a physician whose character was also stubborn and foolish."

7.84

Daosheng comments: Although his defilements were heavy, his severance of good [roots] was still light. Here, taking the middle case, when one fool instructs another, there must still be a teacher.

7.85

"Yet the king, without discriminating, rewarded him with generous stipends."

7.86

Daosheng comments: Deviant instruction aligned with his inclinations, so he would not alter his allegiance.

7.87

"In treating all illnesses, he used milk medicine exclusively [up to] whether this physician knew whether milk was fine or vile, good or bad."

7.88

Sengliang comments: 'Milk medicine' refers to teaching the six truths or twenty-five truths, all using the view of self (ātmadṛṣṭi) as the doctrine to support worldly sentiments; hence it is compared to milk. As for 'the origin where the illness arose': if it arose from the dharmakāya, one should use the self as medicine; if it arose from saṃsāra, then this is not medicine. This illustrates that he did not recognize the source of illness. Furthermore, 'not understanding well' means not knowing the teaching of the true self. Sengzong says: The parable has five distinct parts. The first clarifies the period before the Buddha appeared in the world, when non-Buddhists transformed the world. The second clarifies his initial manifestation of birth in the royal palace. The third clarifies their entering together to see the king, when [the king] gradually wished to receive transformation. The fourth clarifies his manifestation of achieving Buddhahood and expediently expounding the partial teaching. The fifth clarifies his revealing the real and manifesting the permanent. 'Country' broadly symbolizes that which is transformed by a single Buddha. The one who attained awakening first represents the king. The physician represents the non-Buddhists. The wind arising suddenly and violently represents anger. The congealing nature of coldness represents delusion. The turbid and troubled nature of heat represents craving. This illustrates not recognizing illness. Taking milk exclusively illustrates not recognizing medicine. What Huilang relates says: This parable has two senses. First, from the beginning up to 'in treating all illnesses, none failed to be cured', it is called the ancient parable, which refers to the parable before the present assembly. Later, from 'not long thereafter' onwards, it is called the present parable, which serves as a metaphor for the present time. The former clarifies that because there was the illness of clinging to permanence, [permanence] could not be expounded for them; the latter clarifies that once the illness of permanence was eliminated, they conversely took impermanence as an affliction, and therefore permanence was expounded for them.

7.89

"There was another wise physician, skilled in the eight arts, adept at curing all illnesses, knowledgeable in all formulas and medicines, who came from a distant land."

7.90

Sengliang comments: This is the second parable. The conditions for awakening having matured, the bodhisattva appears in the world and is able to cure saṃsāra; this is compared to the physician. The 'eight arts' symbolize the eradication of the eight inversions. The dharmakāya is distant from ordinary people, so it is figuratively said that he 'came from a distant land'. Fayao says: The eight arts refer to the four counterparts such as a mind of loving-kindness, the three poisons, and their equal division. 'Adept at curing all illnesses' means knowing the faculties of sentient beings. 'Knowledgeable in all formulas and medicines' means understanding the characteristics of phenomena well. The dharmakāya is far removed and beyond reach, which is compared to 'coming from a distant land'.

7.91

"At that time, the former physician did not know to consult and receive [instruction], but on the contrary gave rise to an arrogant and contemptuous mind."

7.92

Sengliang comments: Seeing him dwelling in the royal palace and enjoying the pleasures of the five desires, sentient beings did not recognize him and gave rise to the notion of an ordinary person. At that time, the non-Buddhists claimed of themselves that they were omniscient people, scorning Gautama.

7.93

"At that time, the wise physician immediately attached himself to him [up to] 'I only pray that you will proclaim and expound it for me.'"

7.94

Sengliang comments: When wishing to eliminate [a doctrine], one must first receive it; therefore he received their teachings such as the practices of the four dhyānas and the four formless attainments. Fayao says: Visiting that master's door, he might have consulted and received the inversion of permanence. Sengzong says: The *Vimalakīrti Sūtra* states, 'With no mind, no thought, and no practice of reception, he completely subdued all the non-Buddhists.' This is the embrace of shared action among the four means of embracing (saṃgrahavastu).

7.95

"The former physician replied: 'If you can now [up to] I will run errands and serve you according to my ability.'"

7.96

Daosheng comments: Achieving Buddhahood lasted forty-eight years in total. Bending one's pride for a single day makes one a disciple for a lifetime. Sengliang says: He required that he be a disciple for his entire life. Fayao says: From the night of attaining the Way to the night of nirvāṇa, the interval was forty-eight years in all. At that time, of the six masters, not one was subdued and transformed; they contested debates and vied with the Buddha. The relationship of master and disciple had not been severed; accommodating his intentions and waiting for the right moment is compared to running errands and serving. Another explanation of the forty-eight years refers to the four dhyānas and the eight dhyānas.

7.97

"At that time, the former physician then took the visiting physician and entered together to see the king."

7.98

Sengliang comments: For the bodhisattva, receiving transformation is the country. By showing that he received his arts and knew they were not the Way, he caused the master, disciples, and the whole world to recognize the error; as they drew nearer to their share of awakening, there is the sense of entering the country to see the king, which serves as the metaphor. Fayao says: What was taught by the deviant master could also be transformed through the Dharma, which constitutes seeing [the king] together. Sengzong says: This is the third parable. Before attaining Buddhahood, he gradually wished to turn away from deviance but had not yet completely reached the correct. Both sides shared trust, so it is figuratively said that they 'entered together'. Huilang says: At that time, there were five hundred merchants who attained liberation. Before they attained liberation, if they encountered non-Buddhists, they would receive deviant teachings, but if they met the Buddha, they would be liberated; since the capacities for the two were not yet determined, it is said that they 'entered together'.

7.99

"At that time, the visiting physician immediately explained to the king various medical formulas and other arts."

7.100

Daosheng comments: The five precepts and ten good deeds are also medical formulas. Truly abandoning the lower while seeming to be born in the upper serves as the arts.

7.101

"'Great King, you should know that you must distinguish well [up to] this method is like this and can cure illness.'"

7.102

Daosheng comments: Eliminating disorder through concentration is called governing the country. Removing fetters through wisdom is called curing illness.

7.103

"At that time, having heard these words, the king [up to] thereafter respected the visiting physician twice as much."

7.104

Sengliang comments: This is the third parable. He caused people to recognize the deviant, and only then revealed the correct. Bathing, receiving massage, taking grass and going to the tree, he then entered meditative concentration, subdued Māra, and attained Buddhahood. Calming the body and obtaining concentration at that time is compared to governing the country. Wisdom's ability to sever fetters is compared to curing illness. Fayao says: All the preceding concerned events before attaining Buddhahood; from this point on, it is a metaphor for events after attaining Buddhahood. Supernatural powers and the like are the arts and skills; the three refuges and five precepts are the formulas and medicines. Using the precepts to prohibit wrongdoing and concentration to quiet disorder constitutes governing the country. Sengzong says: Explaining the faults and perils of saṃsāra to make them turn away from it serves as the medical formulas. Causing them to cultivate morality and concentration serves as the arts. Using the five precepts and ten good deeds to be born in a pure land is governing the country. Using impurity to stop greed, loving-kindness and compassion to stop anger, and conditioned arising to stop delusion is curing illness. Once the Buddha-way was achieved, deviant thoughts were extinguished, which is compared to driving him out.

7.105

"At that time, the visiting physician had this thought: [up to] 'If you truly cherish me, I would ask for one wish.'"

7.106

Sengliang comments: This is the fourth parable. 'Now is precisely the time' refers to the time when the five people were to awaken. 'Cherish me' means responding to the principle in hidden accord, so that there is no error. 'I would ask for one wish': delusion arises from signs, and when emptiness is contemplated, it is extinguished. The principle of emptiness is non-dual; hence it is called 'one'. Fayao says: The Buddha's sole wish is transformation. But the fulfillment of transformation depends on sentient beings, so it is figuratively said that he 'asks'. Tanji says: 'One wish' symbolizes the one gate of emptiness. Sengzong says: The fourth parable. The time arrived to expound the four truths and eradicate the deviant self. As for the 'one wish', regarding what the World-Honoured One ought to expound—the permanent and the impermanent, the great and the small—at this time he could not yet expound both together, so it is called 'one'. At that time, he was precisely in the three seven-day periods of contemplation, knowing that sentient beings possessed the principle of following transformation, so the wish could be fulfilled.

First 106 of 164 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經集解 — Classical Chinese