大般涅槃經義記 10

English (machine translation) 10

Language: English

10.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Shi Huiyuan of Jingying Monastery under the Sui

From here below is the second [section], explaining the ordinary being who has faith in goodness and seeks [re-]existence. This person has two meanings: first, the meaning of perpetual submergence, perpetually submerged in the three realms of existence; second, the meaning of temporarily emerging and submerging again, submerging again into the three wretched realms. In the text, it first explains the meaning of perpetual submergence; "moreover, there are those who are perpetually submerged and are not icchantikas" distinguishes the preceding and introduces what follows. From "which ones?" onward, it explains; from "this is called..." onward, it concludes. Below, it explains submerging again, having four distinct clauses: First, explaining that four wholesome [practices] obtain unwholesome retributions, which it first presents, next enumerates, and afterward summarizes and concludes. Second, explaining the meaning of emergence and submergence with reference to the person; "if one cultivates these four, it is called having submerged and emerged, and having emerged, submerging again" marks this briefly. Below, it extensively explains this, first explaining the initial submergence, next explaining his emergence, and afterward explaining his submerging again, the text of which is easily understood. Third, citing teachings to corroborate and establish it; in the verse, the first two [lines] explain submergence due to creating karma, and the latter two show submergence due to defilements. Fourth, presenting a simile to match it: first presenting the simile, and from "like the two above..." onward applying the Dharma to match it. Just as the two kinds of persons mentioned in the verse above—[those bound by] defilements and karma—are like the great fish that temporarily emerges and submerges again, therefore it says "so it is."

10.3

From here below is the third [section], explaining the ordinary being who has faith in goodness and seeks renunciation. This has two meanings: first, encountering bad companions, he temporarily emerges and submerges again; second, encountering good companions, having emerged he immediately stays. In the text there are two parts: first, generally analyzing the person; second, from "this person does not possess such five..." onward, distinguishing according to this the two meanings of regressing and staying.

10.4

Within the former part, there are four points: First, stating that "some people take delight in and are attached to the three realms of existence, which is called submerging," repeats what precedes to initiate what follows. Emerging originates from that, which is why it is repeated. Second, from "hearing" onward, emerging is distinguished in contrast to submerging. Third, from "for what reason" onward, the meaning of emerging is explained and revealed: leaving evil and generating good is called emerging; the initial question, subsequent distinction, and final conclusion are clear. Fourth, from "although this person" onward, it explains the incompleteness of emerging. Within that, it first explains the incompleteness of faith: "Although this person has faith, it is also not complete," which is an overarching formulation. Below, it distinguishes this specifically through seven repetitions: 1. Explaining incomplete faith regarding the Buddha's nirvāṇa: merely believing that nirvāṇa is permanent, blissful, self, and pure, while not believing in the Tathāgata. 2. Explaining incomplete faith regarding nirvāṇa alone: they say there are two kinds—conditioned and unconditioned; unconditioned nirvāṇa is permanent, blissful, self, and pure, while conditioned [nirvāṇa] is impermanent, non-self, blissful, and pure. 3. Explaining incomplete faith regarding buddha-nature: although believing that sentient beings possess buddha-nature, not believing that all sentient beings possess it. 4. Explaining incompleteness regarding the essence of faith: merely possessing faith, yet it is incomplete. 5. Explaining incomplete faith in terms of its arising cause: arising only from hearing, not from contemplation. 6. Explaining incomplete faith in terms of the noble path: merely believing that the path exists, but not believing in those who attain it. 7. Explaining incomplete faith in terms of the dharmic characteristics of cause and effect regarding the Three Jewels: within this, it first brings up wrong and right faith, then enumerates them, and finally distinguishes them. Below, it demonstrates incompleteness in terms of right faith: although believing in the Three Jewels, not believing in their identical essence; although believing in cause and effect, not believing in those who attain them; hence it is called incomplete. Second, it explains that incompleteness of precepts establishes incomplete faith. "The precepts are also not complete" repeats what precedes to initiate what follows, stating the incompleteness generally. Below, it distinguishes this specifically through seven repetitions: 1. Explaining incomplete precepts in terms of their arising cause: the aforementioned faith is taken as the cause of precepts. 2. Possessing only the precepts of deportment without the precept of precepts is called incomplete precepts. Unmanifest [morality] born of concentration and the path arises from the precepts of deportment; arising from precepts to produce precepts is called the precept of precepts. Within this, there is an initial question followed by a comparative explanation; it is first introduced, then enumerated, then explained, and concluded below. 3. "Possessing manifest precepts while lacking unmanifest precepts" is called incomplete precepts. Initial cultivation is called manifest; perfection is called unmanifest. Within this, it is first introduced, then enumerated, then explained, and concluded from "therefore" onward. 4. Although observing precepts of body and speech, mixed with wrong livelihood, it is called incomplete precepts. 5. "Possessing the seeking of precepts while lacking the renunciation of precepts" is called incomplete precepts. Precepts free from characteristics of renunciation are called precepts without renunciation. 6. "Possessing precepts that seek existence while lacking precepts that follow the path" is called incomplete precepts. 7. Extending faith equally to good and evil without discrimination in the mind is called incomplete precepts. Within this, it first introduces the two precepts of good and evil, then enumerates them, then explains them, and distinguishes and concludes them below.

10.5

Third, it explains that their hearing is not complete. "Faith and precepts being incomplete, hearing is also incomplete" repeats what precedes to initiate what follows, stating the incompleteness generally. Below, it distinguishes this specifically through four repetitions: 1. Explaining incomplete hearing with respect to the twelve divisions of scripture: "believing only in six divisions, not believing in six divisions." Even though it says six divisions, discussing it according to the true principle, whatever is not believed among the twelve is called incomplete. 2. "Although receiving six divisions, unable to recite them or explain them for others" is called incomplete hearing. 3. "Although receiving six divisions, doing so only for the sake of debate or overcoming others," etc., is called incomplete hearing. 4. Drawing near to friends, hearing the Dharma, contemplating, practicing in accordance with the teaching up to liberation: lacking these is called incomplete hearing. Within this, it first presents complete hearing; from "this person lacks" onward, it contrasts it to reveal incomplete hearing. In the former part, first stating "I say hearing is complete" introduces it generally. From "how" onward is the distinction: first a question, then the explanation. Within that, it first explains drawing near to good friends; from "these teachers, regarding this person" onward explains hearing the true Dharma; from "having attained wisdom, being able to contemplate well" onward is fixing mindfulness and contemplating; from "having attained the correct meaning, body and mind are tranquil" explains practicing in accordance with the teaching. Within this are six clauses whose order is clear. Below, contrasting with the preceding meaning, it explains incomplete hearing, whose characteristics are also recognizable.

10.6

Fourth, it explains that their giving is not complete. "Lacking these three, giving is also not complete" repeats what precedes to initiate what follows, stating the incompleteness generally. Below, it distinguishes this specifically through three repetitions: 1. Explaining incompleteness with respect to the two givings of material goods and the Dharma: "material giving seeks existence, while giving of Dharma is not exhausted," hence it is called incomplete. It is first introduced, then enumerated, then explained, and concluded below. 2. Revealing incompleteness with respect to the two givings of ordinary beings and noble ones: within this, it is first introduced, then enumerated and explained, then distinguished, and concluded below. 3. Explaining incomplete giving with respect to the recipients of the Dharma: if they receive what they themselves believe in, they make offerings; if they receive what they do not believe in, they do not make offerings; hence it is called incomplete.

10.7

Fifth, it explains that their wisdom is not complete. "Lacking the above four, wisdom is also not complete" repeats what precedes to initiate what follows, stating the incompleteness generally. Below, it distinguishes this specifically through five repetitions: 1. "Unable to distinguish between the permanence and impermanence of the Tathāgata" is called incomplete wisdom. 2. "Unable to distinguish when it is proclaimed in this sūtra that the Tathāgata is liberation itself, etc.," is called incomplete wisdom. 3. "Unable to distinguish when it is proclaimed in this sūtra that brahma-conduct is the Tathāgata itself, etc.," is called incomplete wisdom. 4. "Unable to distinguish that the nature is the Tathāgata itself, and that the Tathāgata is the unshared dharmas, etc.," is called incomplete wisdom. 5. "Unable to distinguish the four noble truths, etc.," is called incomplete wisdom.

10.8

The above is the first part, which generally distinguishes these persons; below, with respect to these persons, it distinguishes regression and reveals abiding. "Incompleteness has two kinds" repeats what precedes to open what follows: lacking the above five factors of faith and the rest. "Increasing evil and increasing good" lists the two names. Below, it distinguishes their characteristics, first explaining increasing evil, emerging temporarily and submerging again. Within this, it first explains the practices that increase evil; from "who are they" downward identifies the persons who increase evil; from "like a large fish" downward presents a simile to repeat it. In the former part, there is an initial question, subsequent distinction, and final conclusion. Within the distinction there are two parts: 1. The causes of increasing evil; from "because the three karmas are impure, therefore increasing" downward explains experiencing evil results. Within the causes there are three: First, it explains that the person is foolish, arrogant, and conceited. "This person does not see their own incompleteness" is foolishness. "Claiming that they are complete," etc., is arrogance and conceit. Second, from "therefore drawing near" onward, drawing near to bad friends, therefore evil dharmas increase. Within this, it first explains drawing near to bad friends; from "having drawn near" downward explains hearing wrong teachings; from "having heard, delighting" downward is generating attachment following what was heard; from "giving rise to arrogance" downward is practicing evil dharmas, giving rise to the defilement of arrogance, and largely committing karma. Third, from "due to negligence" onward, drawing near to householders, therefore evil dharmas increase. First drawing near to householders, next delighting in hearing talk of household affairs and departing from the homeless Dharma; from "by this cause" downward directly explains the increase of evil; "by this cause and condition evil dharmas increase" explains giving rise to defilements; "impurity of body and so forth" explains creating evil karma; the above are the causes of increasing evil. Experiencing the result is clear. The preceding is the practice of increasing evil; below it identifies the persons. "Who are they?" is the inquiry. "Namely Devadatta," etc., distinguishes in response to the question. Within this, the four assemblies are enumerated in order.

10.9

Below, it explains that those who increase good, having emerged, immediately abide. Within this there are four points: 1. Practices that increase good; 2. Identifying the persons; 3. Explaining the meaning of abiding; 4. Citing teachings to verify and establish it. In the first section, it first explains drawing near to friends. "Because of drawing near to good friends, delighting in inquiring about what has not been heard" explains hearing the true Dharma. "Having received it, contemplating it" explains being able to contemplate. From "having contemplated well, being able to act in accordance with the Dharma" downward explains practicing according to the Dharma. "Because of abiding in accordance with the Dharma, good dharmas increase" concludes the increase of good. "Because good dharmas increase, they ultimately never submerge again; this is called abiding" concludes the meaning of abiding. Next it identifies the persons. "Who are they?" is the question. "Namely Śāriputra," etc., distinguishes in response to the question. Within this, the four assemblies are enumerated in order. Śāriputra and the others are arhats who travel on both water and land; why are they spoken of here as abiding? Someone explains: Śāriputra and the others traveled on both water and land in past sūtras, while in the present sūtra they are merely called abiding. This meaning is not correct. Why is it not correct? In the present sūtra, it is precisely bodhisattvas who should be proclaimed as abiding in the Mahāyāna; why proclaim śrāvakas as abiding? Furthermore, how could persons of the four fruits in the Hīnayāna, who in the Mahāyāna have not yet reached the head of the worthy ones, already be called abiding in the Mahāyāna? It is simply that Śāriputra and the others possessed all practices in the Hīnayāna, and therefore those persons could be called abiding, could also be called surveying the directions, and could even be called traveling on both. Now speaking of these persons refers to their original causal stage as abiding, not that they are only called abiding after attaining the fruit. Truly because these people had already realized the noble fruit, demonstrating the meaning of abiding clearly, it points directly to them. From "such persons as these" downward generally concludes them as abiding. Next it explains the meaning of abiding, first asking, then distinguishing. Within the distinction, first is the doctrine, next the simile, and finally the application. First, saying "delighting in seeing the good light" means abiding because of progressing in good. From "by this condition" downward means abiding because of not regressing. The simile and application are clear. In citing proof below, the first two verses concern abiding in the Hīnayāna. "If a person discriminates" explains cultivating correct understanding. "With an utmost mind seeking the fruit" demonstrates what they aspire to. "If able to reproach existence" explains what they revile. "Is called abiding" generally concludes. The subsequent four verses concern abiding in the Mahāyāna. Within this, the first two are abiding due to past good; the latter two explain abiding due to present cultivation. Within them, it explains "drawing near to friends, hearing the Dharma, contemplating, and practicing" as the initial cause within practice, and subsequently explains attaining the fruit.

10.10

From here, the fourth part explains persons who practice the fivefold calming of the mind. These possess two meanings: 1. Meeting bad friends, temporarily emerging and submerging again; 2. Encountering good friends, having emerged, immediately abiding. However, in the present text, it generally introduces the persons, briefly omitting the distinction between the two meanings of regression and abiding. Within this are four clauses: 1. Repeating what precedes to initiate what follows, generally presenting their faults. "Wisdom is not complete" repeats what precedes. The preceding explained the incompleteness of the five practices of faith and the rest; here it repeats based on the last one, which is why it specifically mentions only the incompleteness of wisdom. "There are five matters in all" presents the faults. Sensual desire, ill will, ignorance, attachment to a self, and discursive thought are these five matters. 2. From "this person knows" downward, to cure the preceding faults, they draw near to good friends. 3. From "in this way" downward, good friends observe the faults and preach antidotes for them. For those with much ignorance, they preach causes and conditions; the text is brief and does not distinguish it. Since it is identical with the twelve links they preach, it is briefly omitted. Regarding "attachment to a self, analyzing the eighteen realms," in the Za xin lun it speaks of contemplating the six realms, namely earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness. The aforementioned first virtue also agrees with that explanation. Here, contemplating the eighteen [realms] can all shatter the self; this meaning is extensively explained as in the chapter on the five crossings. 4. It explains that this person, having heard, receives and practices.

10.11

From here, the fifth part next explains persons of the specific mindfulness foundations. These persons also possess the two meanings of regression and abiding; the text briefly omits distinguishing them. Within this, first saying "having practiced, next attains the four mindfulness foundations" repeats what precedes to initiate what follows. "Body, feeling, mind, and dharmas" lists their four names. Contemplating the form aggregate separately is the mindfulness foundation of the body; contemplating the feeling aggregate separately is the mindfulness foundation of feeling; the consciousness aggregate is the mind; and perception and mental formations are dharmas; hence they are called specific. This meaning is extensively explained as in the chapter on the factors of the path.

10.12

"Next, again contemplating the twelve links" refers to the sixth, the contemplation through mindfulness of general characteristics. Other sūtras and treatises explain general mindfulness in terms of the five aggregates, generally contemplating the five conditions as empty and non-self, which is the mindfulness of dharmas. Here it is explained in terms of the twelve links: contemplating all twelve links as empty and non-self is also the contemplation through mindfulness of dharmas having general characteristics. With respect to all dharmas, one can engage in the contemplation of general mindfulness; it is not limited to the five aggregates. This [stage] also has the two aspects of falling back and remaining, which the text omits and does not state.

10.13

From here below is the seventh, explaining the person of the warmth mind. The four minds of warmth and so forth are explained as in the separate chapter; here they should be discussed fully. Within the person of the warmth mind, there are three aspects: first, meeting bad friends, emerging and then falling back; second, meeting good friends, standing firm without retrogressing; third, learning to contemplate the four truths, which is called 'contemplating the directions.' In the text, it first reiterates what came before to introduce what follows; from "Kāśyapa said" downward, the questions and answers elaborate it broadly. From "such people will ultimately not sever" downward, it differentiates the distinctions between falling back, remaining, and so forth with respect to them. The first section can be understood.

10.14

Within the broad explanation, there are three parts: first, distinguishing the specific from the general to reveal its boundary; second, explaining the name and discerning the essence; third, clarifying the number of persons who attain it. In the first part, Kāśyapa first asks to raise the matter. In his question, he clings to the general to reject the specific: "All sentient beings have the dharma of warmth" establishes the general to reject the specific. Kāśyapa previously heard that warmth is only attained after contemplating causes and conditions; therefore, he establishes the general to reject its specificity. From "Why is that?" downward, he discerns the general to refute the specific, first inquiring and then discerning. "Just as the Buddha said, the harmony of three things is called a sentient being" generally cites the past teaching; "lifespan, warmth, and consciousness" specifically cites the past teaching. This refers to the fire element as warmth; among the four great elements, because the fire element sustains it, the body does not decay. Because this function is powerful, it is specifically mentioned. "Warmth" is form, "consciousness" is mind, and "lifespan" is neither form nor mind. The three groups compose life; therefore, in the past it was said that their combination is a sentient being. "If one follows this meaning, all [beings] already possess it" explains that warmth is broad and general. "Why do you say that it arises dependent upon good friends?" queries and refutes the specific meaning. Below, the Buddha answers, clarifying that what is spoken of now is restricted and not general. He explains it in four turns: First, discerning and explaining in terms of persons. "As you ask, up to icchantikas all have it" reveals the general as distinct from the specific. "What I speak of now necessarily depends on expedient means" distinguishes the specific from the general. From "By this meaning" downward, he concludes that it is not what was spoken of previously. From "Therefore" downward, he concludes that they do not possess it equally. Second, discerning and explaining in terms of realms. "Such a dharma of warmth is a dharma of the form realm" reveals the specific and not the general. From "If one says that all sentient beings have it" downward, he refutes the general to establish the specific. From "The desire realm lacks it" downward, he concludes that they do not possess it equally. Third, discerning and explaining in terms of internal and external paths. "Although the form realm has it, not all have it" reveals the specific and not the general. The explanation from "Why?" downward shows that internal [practitioners] have it while external ones lack it, so not all have it. From "By this" downward concludes it. Fourth, discerning and explaining in terms of internal versus external with respect to objects. "All external paths contemplate the six practices" distinguishes the external from the internal. External paths sever fetters by clinging to the higher and reviling the lower. For instance, in severing the fetters of desire, they first contemplate all tainted things of the desire realm as suffering, coarse, or as an obstacle, and contemplate the ground of the first dhyāna as calm, subtle, or as escape; these are called the six practices. When first contemplating, they contemplate all six practices together; when ultimately accomplished, they contemplate only one practice for the higher and one for the lower, not contemplating all six completely. "My disciples are fully endowed with the sixteen" reveals the internal as distinct from the external. The sixteen are: under suffering there are four—suffering, impermanence, emptiness, and non-self; under accumulation there are four—cause, accumulation, origination, and condition; under cessation there are four—cessation, calm, subtle, and escape; under the path there are four—path, correct, practice, and conveyance. From "These sixteen" downward, he concludes that they do not possess it equally.

10.15

From here below is the second, explaining the name and discerning the essence. Kāśyapa first asks: "As for this dharma called warmth, why is it called 'warmth'?" asks about the meaning of the name. "Is it warm by intrinsic nature, or warm due to another?" asks about its essential nature. In the Buddha's answer below, he first answers the later question and then turns back to answer the first question. Divided finely, there are four parts: first, in response to the later question above, discerning and determining the essence of warmth; second, from "Kāśyapa" downward, the question and answer clarify it again; third, from "As you ask" downward, in response to the first question above, explaining the meaning of the name; fourth, from "Kāśyapa said" downward, the question and answer clarify it again. In the first part, being warm by nature and not due to another means that the essence of warmth is wisdom, not that there is another simultaneous essence of warmth dependent on which it is called warmth. Question: Below it says that warmth is the fire-sign of the noble path; this then depends on another, so why say it is not warmth due to another? Explanation: The dharma of warmth takes wisdom as its essence; the essence of wisdom is called warmth because of the other noble fire, but it is not called warmth only because of another warmth, so it is said not to be due to another.

10.16

In the second section, Kāśyapa first asks. How does the question arise? Because the Buddha just said that its intrinsic nature is warmth without bringing forth its nature, he therefore asks in order to bring it forth. What is the manner of the question? Kāśyapa previously heard that because Aśvajit lacked faith, he lacked the dharma of warmth; suspecting that warmth is faith, he therefore asks again. The Tathāgata previously said that Aśvajit lacked warmth, citing that past general statement of the Tathāgata. From "Why is that?" downward, he cites the Buddha's explanatory words. From "Because of lacking faith, it is absent; one should know" downward, he clings to faith as warmth based on those past words. Below, the Buddha answers. "Faith is not warmth" overturns what he clung to. From "Why is that?" downward, he explains and reconciles the past words: because of faith, warmth arises; since Aśvajit lacked faith, the dharma of warmth did not arise, so it was said to be absent. "Warmth is wisdom" directly brings forth the essence of warmth. The explanation from "Why?" downward: "Because of contemplating the four truths" generally proves that warmth is wisdom by reference to the four truths. From "Therefore it is called" downward proves that warmth is wisdom by reference to the specific practices. Because it is the contemplation of the truths, it is called the sixteen aspects; because it is practice, it is wisdom.

10.17

In the third section, he first reiterates the phrasing of the question, and below explains that because it is the fire-sign of the noble path, it is called warmth. Within this, first is the dharma, next the metaphor, and afterward the application.

10.18

In the fourth section, Kāśyapa first asks, clarifying that warmth is an existent thing and should not be able to serve as a sign for the noble path. "Is an existent dharma" means it is a dharma of the three realms of existence. "Is conditioned" means it acts as a cause for existent fruits. "Is the retribution of dharmas, obtaining the five aggregates of the form realm, and is therefore called existent" reveals the cause through the fruit, clarifying that its essence is a dharma of the three realms of existence. "Because it is causes and conditions, it is called conditioned" means it can act as a cause for the five aggregates of the form realm, producing those aggregates, so it is called conditioned. "How can it serve as a sign of the untainted path?" concludes by querying the Buddha's words. "The Buddha answered: It is so, just as you say" confirms that the preceding warmth mind is conditioned and an existent dharma. From "Such warmth" downward overturns the preceding [claim] that it cannot serve as a sign for the path. Within this, first is the dharma, next the metaphor, afterward the application, and from "Therefore" downward concludes it. In the dharma, it clarifies that although warmth is an existent, it can still destroy existence, so it serves as a sign of the path. In the metaphor, "like a person" compares to the practitioner. "Horse" compares to the warmth mind. A person advances by relying on practice, hence it is called "riding." Craving and clinging to the warmth mind is called "also loving." Detesting all realms of existence and exerting effort to cultivate the warmth mind is called "also urging on." In the application, first saying "the warmth mind is also like this" applies to the horse above; "taking rebirth because of love" applies to "also loving" above; "engaging in contemplative practice because of disgust" applies to "also urging on" above. Question: Does this warmth love itself, or is there another dharma that craves and clings to this warmth? If warmth loves itself, the horse should love itself, not the person loving the horse; if there is another dharma that craves and clings to this warmth, the mind of craving and clinging can of itself take rebirth, having nothing to do with warmth—on what basis does citing this establish that warmth is conditioned? Explanation: The craving defilements of savoring dhyāna in the higher realms crave and cling to the warmth mind; it is not that warmth loves itself. However, because that warmth mind is moistened by craving, it receives a body in the higher realm; thus it is called conditioned. Another question: As for urging on, does warmth urge itself on, or is there another dharma that urges on the warmth mind? If warmth urges itself on, the horse should whip itself; if there is another dharma that urges on the warmth mind, that which can urge on could perhaps serve as a sign for that noble path. Since the warmth mind is not the urging on, how can it serve as a sign for that noble path? Explanation: The mind of expedient means prior to warmth loathes and fears birth and death and cultivates the arising of the warmth mind; this is called urging on, not that warmth urges itself on. Because that urges on warmth, causing warmth to head toward nobility, it is therefore called serving as a sign of the noble path. The concluding text can be understood.

10.19

The above was the second, explaining the name and discerning the essence; next is clarifying the number of persons who attain it. "Persons who attain the dharma of warmth are of seventy-three kinds" generally introduces the topic. Next, he discerns their characteristics. There is a person who from the beginning has never severed defilements; this is a fully bound person. When first cultivating and entering warmth, that constitutes one. Question: The warmth mind must arise based on the threshold dhyāna; when that dhyāna arises, defilements should be severed, so how can there be a fully bound person entering warmth? Explanation: It is not necessarily the case that all minds of threshold concentration sever defilements. There is a person who cultivates concentration and first attains an abiding mind; this is threshold dhyāna. Because he has not yet engaged in the contemplation of the six practices based on this concentration, he does not sever the fetters; cultivating the arising of the dharma of warmth based on this abiding mind is called being fully bound. Relying on threshold dhyāna to engage in the contemplation of the six practices to sever the fetters of the desire realm, beginning from the first grade up to the ninth grade, there are nine persons; together with the previous one, this makes ten. Advancing to cultivate conventional knowledge to sever the fetters from the first dhyāna up to the stage of nothingness, within each ground there are nine grades, making sixty-three; together with the previous ones, they total seventy-three persons. In the single ground of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, there is nothing higher to aspire to and conventional knowledge does not sever [its fetters], so it is not discussed. In the text, first saying "the desire realm possesses ten" introduces it generally with respect to desire. "This person is fully endowed with defilements" is the first among the ten; "severing one to nine" again constitutes nine persons, together with the previous making ten. "From the desire realm and the first dhyāna up to nothingness it is also like this" clarifies the distinctions among the subsequent sixty-three kinds of persons. From "These are called" downward concludes it.

10.20

The above was the second, broadly discerning their characteristics; below, with respect to those persons, it differentiates their distinctions of falling back, remaining, contemplating the directions, and so forth. "Such persons are then no longer able to sever roots of goodness," and so forth, clarifies the aspect of remaining. As in the Miśrakābhidharmahrdaya, [those at the stage of] warmth and so forth merely do not eradicate roots of goodness to become icchantikas, yet they still commit the five heinous acts and transgress the four grave prohibitions. Here, up to the five heinous acts and the four graves, they also do not commit any of them; because they do not commit them, they remain. From "this person is two" downward clarifies the meaning of their falling back and contemplating the directions. First introducing, next listing, and afterward discerning can be understood.

10.21

From here below is the eighth, explaining the person of the peak dharma. This person also possesses the three aspects of falling back, remaining, and contemplating the directions, which the text omits and does not differentiate. In the text, first saying "contemplating the directions is peak" continues from before to raise what follows. The limit of falling back is called 'peak.' Previously one learned to contemplate the directions; when that contemplation increases, it is called 'peak.' "Although it is the five aggregates" discerns its essence: the concentration-concomitant non-informative [form] associated with this is the form aggregate, the mental monarch is the consciousness aggregate, the feeling caitta is the feeling aggregate, the perception caitta is the perception aggregate, and the remaining mental factors are the volition aggregate. "It also takes the four truths as object, hence it is called contemplating the directions" explains the meaning of contemplating the directions. Contemplating the truths is the same as before, which is why it says "also"; it can also be the same as what follows.

10.22

From here below is the ninth, explaining the person of the patience dharma. This person possesses the two aspects of remaining and contemplating the directions, which the text omits and does not differentiate. In the text, first saying "next to peak one attains patience" continues from before to raise what follows; abiding peacefully is called 'patience.' "It is also the nature of the five aggregates, and also takes the four truths as object" explains the meaning of contemplating the directions.

10.23

From here below, the tenth [section] clarifies the supreme worldly dharmas. This person also possesses [both the qualities of] abiding and observing the directions, though the text is concise and does not discuss [them]. "Next, he obtains the supreme [worldly dharmas]": this takes up what precedes and introduces what follows; the utmost culmination within the mundane is called the supreme worldly dharmas. Next, in discerning their nature, the scripture texts differ. Some scriptures say that the nature is the five aggregates, the meaning of which is explained as above. Other scriptures say that the nature is the five faculties, namely faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, and so on. Wisdom is the principal master, and the rest accompany and assist it. "Also observing the four truths" discerns the meaning of observing the directions. The supreme worldly dharmas comprise only a single thought-moment; other treatises proclaim that beneath the truth of suffering they observe only a single aspect. For what reason is it now said that they observe the four truths? It is explained: Contemplation of the truths has two kinds: first, cultivation through practice arising in the present; second, cultivation through attainment accomplished in the future. In the present cultivation of the supreme worldly dharmas, one observes only a single aspect; but in the future, by virtue of collateral association with the four truths, illumination increases. It is now called observing the four truths in terms of cultivation through attainment.

10.24

Below, the eleventh [section] clarifies the person of the fifteen mental states of seeing the truths. In severing the defilements [abandoned through] seeing the truths, there are sixteen mental states: eight tolerances and eight knowledges. As for the eight tolerances: contemplating the four truths of desire has four dharma-tolerances; contemplating the four truths of the upper [realms] has four subsequent tolerances. As for the eight knowledges: contemplating the four truths of desire has four dharma-knowledges; contemplating the four truths of the upper [realms] has four subsequent knowledges. Among these sixteen, the first fifteen mental states are called the path of seeing, which is now discerned in sequence. This person has only the single meaning of observing the directions; the meaning of abiding is not discussed because it is revealed by extending through what follows. In the text, it first clarifies the dharma-tolerance of suffering. "This person progressively obtains the dharma-tolerance of suffering": this takes up what precedes and introduces what follows. "The nature of tolerance is wisdom": this discerns its essence. Why was it said earlier in all cases that it is the five aggregates, whereas here it uniquely subsumes wisdom? In actual principle, they are similar, but because on the path of seeing the perception of dharmas is clear and the function of wisdom is intensified, it is spoken of specifically. "Observing one truth" clarifies the meaning of observing the directions. Beneath the truth of suffering, one directly observes a single aspect: if a person of craving-conduct, they may contemplate the aspect of suffering or the aspect of impermanence; if a person of view-conduct, they may contemplate the aspect of emptiness or the aspect of non-self. Question: Earlier, in the supreme worldly dharmas presently observing a single aspect, it was called observing the four truths in terms of future cultivation through attainment; why is this dharma-tolerance of suffering not so, but said to observe only one? Explanation: There is a reason. The supreme worldly dharmas are still within the broad and expansive limits of the mundane, so their collateral cultivation in future lifetimes is broad and extensive, and hence they are said to observe the four. The mental states such as the tolerance of suffering belong to an acute and swift path; their collateral cultivation is narrow and meager, and in the future they only attain increased illumination with respect to the four aspects of the identical truth, without reaching the other truths; hence it is said to observe only one. "Up to [the defilements] abandoned through seeing": this adduces the remaining tolerances and knowledges.

10.25

Below, the twelfth [section] clarifies the srotāpanna. That sixteenth mental state, the subsequent knowledge of the path, is the essence of the srotāpanna. This person has only the single meaning of observing the directions. In the text there are three parts: first, a brief presentation; second, an adducing and discriminating explanation; third, a conclusion matching dharma to metaphor. In the first part, the words "obtaining the fruit of the srotāpanna" present what is attained. The words "this is called the fourth, universally observing the directions" match the dharma to the metaphor. In the preceding [stages of] warmth and so forth, although they trained in observing the directions, it was not yet accomplished; in the mental states such as the tolerance of suffering, the observation of the directions was accomplished, but not yet pervasive; arriving at this, it is pervasive, and therefore it is called universally observing. "The directions are the four truths": this discerns what is observed.

10.26

In the extensive explanation, Kāśyapa first initiates questions, and the Tathāgata then answers. From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: Having first attained the path, he is called a srotāpanna..." onward, questions and answers re-elucidate difficult points in the preceding meaning. In the former part, Kāśyapa raises four questions in full: First, he asks about how many defilements the srotāpanna severs. "Just as the Buddha previously said, what is severed by the srotāpanna is like water forty li in breadth and length, while what remains is like a single drop": this adduces the Buddha's former words. "Why does it say here that he severs three fetters?": this adduces the greater to challenge the lesser. The Tathāgata previously stated in the "Chapter on Manifesting Illness" that severing the three fetters yields the srotāpanna; hence he now challenges it. Below, three names are listed. "Regarding what is not a cause as a cause" is the attachment to rules and vows. The crow and chicken vows and the like are not the true causes of cessation, yet one falsely considers them to be causes; therefore it is called regarding what is not a cause as a cause. The other two can be understood. Second, he asks about the meaning of the srotāpanna's universal observation of the directions. Third, he asks about the name: "Due to what causes and conditions is he called a srotāpanna?" Fourth, he asks about the meaning of the metaphor of the srotāpanna as a makara fish. Below, the Buddha explains them in sequence according to the questions.

10.27

In explaining the first question, the text has three distinct sections: first, a direct explanation based on its own characteristics; second, from "these three counteract..." downward, discussing it in terms of remedies; third, from "there are sentient beings..." downward, explaining it according to adaptation to conversion. Within the first section, two approaches are first introduced: the grave [fetters] form one approach, and also subsuming all that is severed by the srotāpanna forms the second approach. Below, it explains them extensively, first explaining the first, the grave ones. Therein, it first presents a metaphor: "Like a king traveling..." and so forth adduces the metaphorical event. From "Why..." downward, it explains: because they are grave, they are specifically spoken of. "These three are likewise": this applies [the metaphor] to reveal the dharma. "Like the king of humans in the world": because they are grave, they are specifically spoken of. From "Due to what condition..." downward, it explains: first asking, then explaining. "Those that all sentient beings constantly give rise to": they are grave because they are frequently practiced, just as an illness that erupts repeatedly is called a grave illness. "Subtle and difficult to recognize": they are grave because they are sunken and hidden, just as an illness difficult to diagnose is called a grave illness. "These three are difficult to sever": they are grave because their strength is formidable. This explains the first approach. "Capable of serving as the cause of all afflictions": this explains the second approach above. How are they capable of serving as the cause of all afflictions? Among the ten underlying tendencies, the five views and doubt are exhausted at the time of the path of seeing, and are given the designation of being severed; craving, anger, ignorance, and conceit are not exhausted through seeing, and are not given the appellation of being severed. Among those severed, there are three roots and three derivatives: the view of identity is the root, and the extreme view is the derivative; attachment to rules and vows is the root, and attachment to views is the derivative; the underlying tendency of doubt is the root, and wrong view is the derivative. For this reason, the three fetters are proclaimed to be the cause of all.

10.28

From here below, the second [section] explains it in terms of remedies. Because these three fetters are the great enemies of the three practices of morality, concentration, and wisdom, they are spoken of specifically. This meaning is as stated in that *Vibhāṣā*. The view of identity is the great enemy of the training in morality. Because one sees the spirit as eternal and its suffering and joy as unchanging, one does not fear karmic retribution and gives free rein to one's passions to commit sins; partially from this meaning, it is spoken of as the enemy of morality. Attachment to rules and vows is the enemy of concentration, because clinging to vows as the path obstructs the cultivation of meditative concentration and the path of detachment from desire. People grasp mundane, scattered wholesome [practices] of the desire realm as the path, which obstructs the cultivation of the concentration dharmas of the higher grounds. Doubt is the enemy of wisdom, because harboring doubt toward the Dharma obstructs correct knowledge.

10.29

From here below, the third [section] explains it according to adaptation to conversion. "There are sentient beings who, upon hearing that a srotāpanna severs immeasurable fetters, would give rise to a mind of regression"; therefore, he only spoke of three.

10.30

Next is the answer to the second [question]. It first repeats the words of the question, and below provides an explanation in response. "Observing and obtaining four things": this summarizes by presentation, then lists them, and below distinguishes them. The explanation of the first can be understood. In explaining the second, "fully able to reproach inner and outer afflictions": among the ten underlying tendencies, those arising from delusion regarding principle are called inner afflictions, while those arising in relation to phenomena are called outer afflictions. The latter two can be understood.

10.31

Next is the answer to the third [question]. It first cites the correct explanation; from "Kāśyapa said..." downward, question and answer re-elucidate it; from "these srotāpannas are in general of two kinds..." downward, it takes the occasion to discern the difference between sharp and dull faculties of the srotāpanna. In the former part, it first cites, and then provides an explanation in response. The meaning of the name srotā[panna] fully should have three [senses]: first, practicing the undefiled; second, going against the stream; third, repaying debts—repaying the debts of the three wretched realms. The text only explains it in terms of the first two: "*Srotā* means undefiled, *panna* means practice" is the first meaning; "*Srotā* means stream..." and so forth is the second meaning. "*Srotā* means stream": this explains the meaning of *srotā*; below, it explains *panna*: *panna* means going against. It first adduces the two streams, listing the names "with the stream" and "against the stream." From "by going against the stream..." downward, it directly reveals *panna*. In the re-elucidation below, Kāśyapa first asks: "If it is according to this meaning, for what reason are those from the sakṛdāgāmin up to the arhat not called srotāpannas?": this holds to the general to challenge the specific. If it is according to the above, where practicing the undefiled and going against the stream of saṃsāra is the meaning of being a srotāpanna, then the sakṛdāgāmin and so forth equally possess this meaning; why then are they not all called srotāpannas, but instead the initial fruit is exclusively called a srotāpanna? The Buddha's answer has two parts: first, directly addressing the preceding question, he specifically clarifies that the single name of the srotāpanna has both a general and an exclusive [sense]; from "second, these persons are also called srotāpannas..." downward, he takes the occasion to discern that the names of all the noble and worthy have both a general and an exclusive [sense]. In the former part, he first clarifies that the name of the srotāpanna is general; from "all sentient beings have two kinds of names..." downward, he manifests its exclusive meaning. Within the general, "a srotāpanna up to all buddhas are also called srotāpannas" directly reveals the general meaning. "If from the sakṛdāgāmin up to all buddhas there were no srotāpanna, how could they be named from sakṛdāgāmin up to buddha?": this reversely explains the general meaning. What does this mean? If a sakṛdāgāmin did not practice the undefiled and did not go against saṃsāra, how could he be called "attenuated"? Up to: if all buddhas did not practice the undefiled and did not go against saṃsāra, how could they be called "awakened"? Within the exclusive [meaning], it clarifies that only the person of the initial fruit is named a srotāpanna, while the rest are not entitled to it. Therein, it first distinguishes the noble from the ordinary. "Names given at birth are of two kinds" presents this generally, listing the names "guest" and "original." Below, it turns to discerning their differences. "Ordinary persons have mundane names" reveals the difference between ordinary and noble. "Having already attained the path, he is additionally established with the name srotāpanna" discerns the difference between noble and ordinary. From "by virtue of having attained it first..." downward, it distinguishes the initial from what follows. "By virtue of having attained it first, he is called a srotāpanna" reveals the difference of the initial from what follows; "by virtue of having attained it later, he is called a sakṛdāgāmin" clarifies the difference of what follows from the initial. The above directly discerns the general and exclusive meanings of the single name srotāpanna; next, it broadly discusses the general and exclusive meanings of all noble names. The text only manifests the general and does not display the exclusive. There are four distinct clauses: First, the statement "these persons are also called from srotāpanna up to buddha" clarifies that the initial fruit possesses all names. Second, from "streams are of two kinds..." downward, it clarifies that the remaining worthy and noble possess all names. In order to clarify that all other noble beings are entitled to the name srotāpanna, two streams must be established, first adduced and then listed. Conditioned qualities are called "liberation," and unconditioned qualities are spoken of as "nirvāṇa." "All noble persons possess both of these, and are also called srotā[pannas]": this distinguishes in terms of persons. Possessing the preceding two streams, they go against saṃsāra; therefore, all are called srotāpannas. Not only are all entitled to be called srotāpanna, but they are also called sakṛdāgāmin up to being called buddha. Third, from "a srotāpanna is called a bodhisattva..." downward, it relies on the first section above to explain that the person of the initial fruit possesses all names. Therein, it only explains the names buddha and bodhisattva; the rest can be known by analogy, being concise and not distinguished. "A srotāpanna is also called a bodhisattva" briefly presents it; from "Why..." downward, it explains. A bodhisattva is called an "awakening sentient being" (bodhisattva); because of seeking the path, he is called an awakening sentient being. Therefore, it is now explained to clarify that in the Hīnayāna, the path of bodhi is precisely the arhat. Knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising: the srotāpanna seeks these, hence is called a bodhisattva. "A srotāpanna is also called awakened (buddha)" briefly presents it; from "Why..." downward, it explains. "Correctly awakening to the path of seeing and severing afflictions" means correctly contemplating the principle of the truths and severing afflictions. "Awakening to cause and effect" means being able to awaken to and know the fruit of suffering and the cause of origination, and the fruit of cessation and the cause of the path. "Correctly awakening to shared paths and unshared paths": the noble practices contemplated are shared with respect to the aggregates, but unshared with respect to the truths; beneath the four truths, the practice meanings are each distinct, hence called unshared; beneath the former three truths, each and every practice is common to the five aggregates, hence called shared. Because this meaning is present, the srotāpanna is entitled to be called a buddha. Fourth, from "sakṛdāgāmin..." downward, it relies on the second [section] above to explain that the remaining worthy and noble possess all names. Therein, it specifically clarifies that the worthy and noble of the Hīnayāna possess both names of buddha and bodhisattva, while the Mahāyāna possessing Hīnayāna names is omitted and not distinguished. Therefore, the text now says: "The sakṛdāgāmin up to the arhat are also like this," being just like the srotāpanna in being named buddha and bodhisattva.

First 31 of 236 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經義記 — Classical Chinese