大般涅槃經疏 14

English (machine translation) 14

Language: English

14.1

Compiled by Master Guàndǐng of Zhāng'ān under the Sui.

14.2

Re-edited by the Tiāntái Śramaṇa Zhànrán under the Tang.

From the passage beginning with “Kāśyapa, what is a bodhisattva...” downward, this is the second [section], which jointly explains the text, divided into three parts: namely, the noble, the pure, and the infant [practices]. The first, the noble practice, is divided into two parts: first, it jointly explains the gradual and non-gradual practices; next, it praises the sūtra. In the first part, which explains the five in one, the first explanation of the noble practice has three parts: (1) jointly explaining the practice of the precepts; (2) jointly explaining the practice of concentration; and (3) jointly explaining the practice of wisdom.

14.4

The first part, explaining the precepts, is threefold: first, jointly explaining the practice of the precepts; next, jointly explaining the fruit of the precepts; and third, jointly explaining the name of the practice. In the first part, explaining the practice, there are two parts: first, explaining the gradual; next, explaining the non-gradual. The first part, explaining the gradual practice of the precepts, is twofold: (1) establishing the mind; (2) establishing the practice. Establishing the mind is twofold: (1) encountering conditions involving persons; (2) encountering conditions involving dharmas. In the first, conditions involving persons, if one proceeds from a śrāvaka, that is encountering a nurse of the sick. If one encounters the Tathāgata, that is encountering an excellent physician. Hearing the Mahāparinirvāṇa is encountering excellent medicine. Having heard it, one gives rise to faith and establishes a mind of aspiration and aversion. Seeking the unexcelled path is prajñā. Possessing the great, correct Dharma is the dharmakāya. Correct practice is liberation. The buddhas are the Buddha jewel, the unexcelled path is the Dharma jewel, and the great assembly is the Saṅgha jewel. Here it is not that there are no conditions involving dharmas, but it is named according to what is predominant. It is named 'encountering conditions involving persons', which is precisely establishing the mind. Next, regarding conditions involving dharmas, there are also the Vaipulya [teachings], which means hearing from the scrolls of the sūtras about the three virtues, the three jewels, and so forth. Loving, enjoying, and eagerly seeking them is generating aspiration. Relinquishing and leaving behind what one loves is generating aversion. Taking the Dharma as a condition, one is able to establish the mind; this is being curable. Having encountered causes and conditions, aspiration and aversion become distinct, which agitates Māra and causes him anxiety and sorrow. From the phrase 'At that time the bodhisattva went to the monastery' onward, this is the second part, establishing the practice, and the text has two parts: (1) receiving the precepts; (2) maintaining the precepts. The text on receiving has two parts: (1) taking a master; (2) receiving [the precepts], as in the text. From 'Having gone forth' onward is the second part, maintaining the precepts, and the text has two parts: namely, the teaching and the analogy. Within the analogy there are two parts: first the analogy, then the application. The initial analogy has five parts, referring to the four pārājikas, saṃghāvaśeṣas, sthūlātyayas, prāyaścittikas, and duṣkṛtas. The text of the application has six, dividing the thirty [naiḥsargika-prāyaścittikas] and ninety [prāyaścittikas] of the third category into two applications (and so forth). Alternatively, the naiḥsargika requires confession overnight, while the [pure] prāyaścittika is confessed face-to-face; for this reason it is divided into two. Regarding the rākṣasa, there are two explanations: one says it is an analogy for external bad companions; the other says it is an analogy for the internal inverted mind—all as explained in full in the fourth chapter of the Mohe zhiguan on purifying the keeping of precepts. From 'If a bodhisattva is able to...' downward is the second part, clarifying the non-gradual precepts, and the text has four parts: (1) possessing both branches and roots; (2) possessing both phenomena and principle; (3) possessing both minor and major; (4) possessing vows. First, the root refers to what is inherently unwholesome (prakṛti-sāvadyam). The preceding and subsequent retinues are the preliminary expedient and subsequent arising. These two belong to the precepts of moral restraint. Being free from all unwholesome thoughts is the concentration-concomitant precept that guards the mental ground. Guarding the correct Dharma and being mindful of the pure precepts is the path-concomitant precept. These two belong to the precepts that gather wholesome dharmas. Dedicating towards the Mahāyāna is the precept of gathering sentient beings. What is inherently unwholesome is the root, from which all the precepts branch out. Next, from 'Kāśyapa, there are furthermore two kinds of precepts' onward, this is possessing both phenomenal and principled precepts. The previous branches and roots both fall under phenomena, which ordinary people are able to practice. From 'the precept of the correct Dharma' onward, it corresponds with principle, which noble ones are able to maintain. Third, from 'Furthermore, there are two kinds' onward, this is possessing both minor and major precepts. The previous phenomena and principle are both called major; from 'ceasing the mockery and disdain of the world' onward, they are called minor; the bodhisattva maintains them fully without distinction. As for zhìzǐ, the old tradition says it sounds like bó (treading) and refers to the class of pears and persimmons. Master Guān says: this has the pronunciation dì (stem), and the Han Marquis of Guǎngchéng was named this. Moreover, the Lǐjì says, 'For a scholar, one cuts a melon and trims the stem straight, merely removing the stem.' The intention is to make clear that one must not hoard various seeds. As for 'placing yellow wooden pillows', there are two explanations: one says its interior is hollow like the reed of an organ; the other says the wood has patterns resembling yellow flowers. As for bāluósāi, Emperor Wu of Liang said: it is double-six (shuānglù), which arose in recent times. Qiāndào is jiáshí (a capture game), and the completed eight-track movement is the board game of sāi. Fourth, from 'Good son, a bodhisattva...' onward, this is possessing vows, first one's own vows, then vows for others. First, making vows for oneself has twelve: first, one vow that inwardly no thought of breaking the precepts arises; next, six vows not to accept external offerings; third, five vows not to be broken by inner sense faculties or external dusts. From 'The bodhisattva protects and maintains' downward, next are vows shared with others. The text has ten kinds: the single one of protecting and maintaining applies generally to both pure precepts and wholesome-dharma precepts, subsumed under gathering wholesome dharmas. 'Not broken' and 'not cracked' belong to both: in terms of prohibitions, they are subsumed under moral restraint; in terms of leaving faults behind, they are subsumed under wholesome dharmas. The latter five are taken for their broad, unhindered operation, all belonging to gathering sentient beings. 'Not retrogressing' means that wine taverns and royal palaces do not cause the precepts to retrogress. 'In accord with' means corresponding with principle. 'Ultimate' means complete and sufficient in all things. 'Pāramitā' means probing the depths from one side to the other. One mind of maintaining precepts endows all precepts, which is called 'one precept is all precepts'. The precepts are the dharmadhātu, gathering all dharmas; this is the perfect practice of the precepts.

14.5

Next, from 'The bodhisattva cultivates and regulates' downward, this is the second part, jointly clarifying the fruit of the precepts. If one discusses the cause of retribution, it ought to incur the fruit of retribution, proximately evoking superior retributions of humans and devas; if one discusses the cause of habituation, it incurs the fruit of habituation, remotely evoking the eternally abiding dharmakāya. Here, being neither proximate nor remote, taking the Immovable Ground (acala-bhūmi) as the fruit, the old traditions offer three explanations: (1) one says that the eighth of the ten grounds is the Immovable Ground; (2) one says that the achievement of true understanding on the first ground is named the Immovable Ground; (3) one says that based on the Daśabhūmika Sūtra, śīla is correlated with the second ground, so what is here called 'immovable' is the second ground. Now I explain that this is not so. Above, the gradual and non-gradual practices were jointly clarified, distinguishing them as above. Now, discussing their fruit synthetically, one must grasp the realized path, and the place of the realized path is identical. Saying that the place is identical means precisely the first ground. If one were to clarify the fruit solely in terms of the gradual three trainings, then entering into principle is named 'abiding' (vihāra); abiding is immovable, so the ten abodes are the fruit of the precepts. From abiding, merits arise, which is called 'practice'; practice takes sovereign ease as its meaning, so the ten practices are the fruit of concentration. The ground can give birth and support without fear; the ground is the fruit of wisdom. This is the sense of the gradual. If one clarifies the fruit of the precepts in terms of the perfect and complete, the first abode is it. The meaning of the text is not simple, and one should synthetically distinguish them. It is precisely because the realized path of the first ground is identical [in both] that it clarifies the fruit of the precepts, which accommodates both meanings; when it comes to the explanation itself, its meaning will become apparent. The text of the explanation is fourfold: marking, analogy, explanation, and conclusion. First, marking, as in the text. Next, in the analogy, it says 'immovable' and so on because it is eternal, hence immovable; blissful, hence not falling; self, hence not retrogressing; pure, hence not dispersed (and so forth). Question: The Treatise [on the Great Prajñāpāramitā] says, 'Unmoved by the eight winds, yet when the vairambhā wind arrives, crushed like rotten grass.' What about this? Now we take ordinary times; the unmoved by the vairambhā [refers to when] the treatise takes the end of the kalpa. Third, from 'Bodhisattva' downward, the explanation has three iterations: The first iteration is in terms of the three truths. If one speaks of forms, sounds, scents, and tastes, these are wholesome fruits within conventional truth. If one speaks of the hells and so on, these are unwholesome fruits within conventional truth. Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are persons within ultimate truth. Heterodox views and deviant winds are dharmas within ultimate truth. The wholesome and unwholesome of saṃsāra, and the persons and dharmas of nirvāṇa, are none of them able to move, cause to fall, cause to retrogress, or disperse [one]; this reveals that the ground of the fruit of the precepts of the middle way is eternal, blissful, self, and pure. The next iteration is in terms of the three obstacles to reveal the three bodies. The three poisons are the affliction obstacle; the four pārājikas and slandering the Dharma are the karma obstacle; retrogressing from the precepts and returning home is the retribution obstacle. When the retribution obstacle is removed, the dharmakāya is revealed; when the karma obstacle is removed, the nirmāṇakāya is revealed; when the affliction obstacle is removed, the saṃbhogakāya is revealed. If one reaches the first ground, the three bodies manifest before one, and the three obstacles are all eliminated. The third iteration is in terms of the four virtues: unmoved by the affliction māra is the virtue of purity; not fallen by the skandha māra is the virtue of bliss; not retrogressed by the deva māra is the virtue of self; not dispersed by the death māra is the virtue of eternity. The first ground being fully endowed with eternity, bliss, self, and purity as the fruit of the precepts accommodates both meanings. Fourth, from 'Good son' downward, this is the conclusion of the noble practice of the precepts.

14.6

From “Good son, how is it named noble practice?” downward, this is the third part, jointly explaining the name of noble practice. The text is threefold: (1) marking, (2) explaining, (3) concluding. Within the explanation there are three parts: (1) adducing both biased and perfect persons to make the joint explanation still more apparent; (2) separately adducing the two dharmas of concentration and wisdom to complete the precepts; (3) generally adducing the seven jewels of wealth and the seven factors of awakening to explain the noble person. The noble person practices the noble Dharma, and the noble Dharma completes the noble person; therefore, it is named noble practice. If their realized paths are identical, one should take the person of the first ground endowed with precepts, concentration, and wisdom, and the seven jewels of wealth and seven factors of awakening, to explain the name of noble practice. The third part, the conclusion, is as in the text.

14.7

"Furthermore, good man" begins the second section, which explains the noble practice of meditation. The text has two parts: first, explaining gradual meditation; second, explaining round meditation. The first text has two parts: first, explaining the practice; next, explaining the fruition. Master Kāishàn explained the practice of meditation as the contemplation of the four foundations of mindfulness, and all other masters followed him. This interpretation is incorrect and contains two errors that contradict the sūtra and impair its meaning. In contradicting the sūtra: the text says, "Having cultivated this contemplation, one attains the four foundations of mindfulness," and upon [attaining] the four foundations of mindfulness, one already abides in the stage of forbearance; if the noble practice of meditation were the four foundations of mindfulness, then immediately after it one should also enter the stage of forbearance. If one has not yet attained this stage of forbearance, how could it be the four foundations of mindfulness? In impairing the meaning: if we now explain the practice of meditation as employing the wisdom of the four foundations of mindfulness, then later, in explaining the practice of wisdom, one should employ the eight absorptions, and it would also follow that the practice of precepts is itself the practice of meditation—this error is no small matter (and so forth). Here it involves the doctrinal teachings of the sixteen excellences, the eight liberations, the nine contemplations, and the like; since these are not fundamental [absorptions], they all involve contemplative wisdom capable of knowing impermanence and non-self. The self is the root of all evils, hence it is specifically explained. The various masters, seeing that the contemplation of non-self is cultivated, called it the foundations of mindfulness, but in truth it is not the foundations of mindfulness. The first text is divided into two: first, the excellences; second, the liberations. The first part on the excellences has two: first, explaining the cultivation; next, explaining the realization. First, regarding the cultivation: observing this body from head to foot. Next, regarding realization, there are again two: first, the actual mark of realization; next, from "the bodhisattva" downward, explaining that this realization-dharma arises together with understanding. The first text states: "Among them, there are only thirty-six things, such as hair, body hair, nails, and teeth." Realizing these excellences opens up the storehouse of the body, fully discerning inside, outside, and in-between one's own body, each having twelve, totaling thirty-six (and so forth). The brain is above and the big toes are below, encompassing above and below as a whole. Hexi and Zhaoti both said it refers to a peach pit, that within the brain there is a bone resembling a peach or plum pit. Bian Que's Formula states: "The place of the three hairs on the big toe is called the hǎi, within which there is a vessel." Next, from "the bodhisattva single-mindedly contemplates" onward, it shows that within the absorption of the excellences, it arises together with understanding, not producing taste-attachment. Here the text is brief and only infers non-self; if fully discussed, it must encompass suffering, emptiness, and impermanence. Second, from "removing the skin and flesh" onward, it is the contemplation of the eight liberations. The text is divided into two: first, explaining cultivation; second, explaining realization. First, regarding cultivation: removing the skin and flesh is precisely the mark of cultivation. Next, from "observing only the white bones" downward is the mark of realization, which also has two: first, the actual mark of realization; next, from "again forming this thought" downward, understanding within realization is free from taste-attachment, instantly severing all desire for form. "Further increasing the realization" downward progresses through four further levels. Stating "again forming this thought" merely means that one again takes the realization as conditions to give rise to contemplation. First, stating that the three desires are eradicated is again a mark of realization. This resembles the realization of the nine contemplations, yet no text on cultivation is seen; it is the cultivation of the liberations that realizes the nine contemplations, which also has this sense. Next, from "when observing the bluish bones, seeing this great earth" onward, it again resembles the contemplation of the bases of mastery: observing the bluish bones is the mark of cultivation, and seeing this great earth onward is the mark of realization. From when the bodhisattva forms this contemplation, it is again the mark of cultivating the liberations; bluish, yellowish, and other lights issuing from between the eyebrows is again the mark of realization. From "having seen, immediately asking" onward, one takes realization as conditions to cultivate internal and external contemplation. From if another insults them to who receives the insult concludes internal contemplation. From "if hearing their insult" onward is external contemplation. From "if I do not endure" onward concludes contemplative wisdom. Thus, skillfully recognizing hindrances and nurturing the meditative mind, not giving rise to the causes of evil dharmas, one does not reap the fruits of the hells.

14.8

From "the bodhisattva at that time" onward is the second part, explaining the fruition of meditation. Here, it explains the simultaneous cultivation of meditation and wisdom cultivated by those who are doubly liberated; hence it says that having cultivated this contemplation, one attains the four foundations of mindfulness. The foundations of mindfulness can sever defilements and enter the stages, and the stage is precisely the stage of forbearance. The text has a designation and an explanation. Formerly it was said: the fifth stage, where the dhyānapāramitā is fully developed, is the stage of forbearance. We now clarify that this is not so. If one discusses the fruition of meditation separately according to the distinct and round [teachings], it has already been explained as above; if round and distinct are discussed together, it is still the first stage. Forbearing from greed and desire up to hunger and thirst is forbearance of dharmas; forbearing from mosquitoes and gadflies up to beatings is forbearance of sentient beings. Physical and mental suffering and distress is the overall conclusion.

14.9

From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" downward is the second part, explaining the practice of round meditation. Others said that this is an analysis of breaking the precepts. It should have followed the practice of precepts, yet its being stated here has three explanations: first, one said the compiler of the sūtra made an error; second, one said it is intended to harmonize the two stages so that they have no different substance—the former being called 'immovable' and this one being called 'forbearance,' which are just a single stage; third, one said that merely upholding the precepts cannot see the capacities [of others] and one must not commit killing, whereas meditation can see capacities and one may engage in acts of breaking precepts. This interpretation is not correct. Here it is precisely the intention of explaining round meditation. Question: This text states, "When one has not yet entered the immovable stage, may one break the precepts or not?" Why then do you say it is round meditation? Answer: If it were not the round precepts, how could one uphold them by breaking them? Since upholding and breaking are spontaneous and free, the same applies to meditation by analogy. Being tranquil right in the midst of distraction, not rising from round meditation while carrying out killing, it remains round meditation. Since the precepts can already be understood, right within the precepts there is meditation, without needing further redundant text; therefore, pointing to this is called the practice of round meditation. Question: Previously, after explaining the round precepts, the fruition of precepts was explained; now, only after explaining the fruition of meditation is round meditation explained—why is this? Answer: The sequence being variable all the more reveals round meditation. The text consists of three rounds of questions and answers: the first round is brief, the next round is extensive, and the third is Mañjuśrī's recounting of events. When events diverge from the principle yet accord with it, one should not incur an evil fruition—this is the question, and the Buddha's answer is as in the text.

14.10

"Furthermore, there are noble practices" begins the third section, which explains the noble practice of wisdom. The text has two parts: first, explaining the practice of wisdom; second, explaining the fruition of wisdom. Regarding the practice of wisdom, the text has two parts: first, explaining the practice of wisdom; second, explaining the name of the practice of wisdom. First, explaining the practice of wisdom again has two: first, explaining gradual wisdom; second, explaining round wisdom. Gradual wisdom has three: first, explaining the wisdom of the four truths; second, explaining the wisdom of the two truths; third, explaining the wisdom of the one real truth. Others say: this is a meaning of opening and combining: within ultimate emptiness it is spoken of as one truth; next, opening the one into two, and again opening the two into four, one may also open four into sixteen and up to immeasurable. If one combines the immeasurable into sixteen, combines sixteen into four, and combines two into one, one enters emptiness. We now clarify that although there are gathering, dispersing, opening, and combining, the names and meanings are not the same, and the capacities they address are all different, involving a great deal. For the present, speaking broadly, in response to Tripiṭaka capacities, the wisdom of the four truths is taught; in response to shared capacities, the wisdom of the two truths is taught; in response to distinct capacities, the wisdom of the one real truth is taught. The meaning becomes clear in response to capacities, and the meaning of gradual progression is also established (and so forth). Formerly, some took the object to be the four truths, some took cognition to be the four truths, or regarded suffering, accumulation, cessation, and the path as all being objects, where in relation to the object, cognition is spoken of, and cognition is itself the truth. The object can generate cognition, causing cognition to have no real existence; cognition can illuminate the object, realizing that the object is originally non-existent. Object and cognition complete each other; hence they are called the four truths. Master Xīnghuáng said: "The so-called noble truths are simply the buddhadhātu and nirvāṇa; they are neither object nor cognition, neither contaminated nor uncontaminated, neither cause nor fruition, neither mundane nor supramundane; hence they are named noble truths." If we follow the various masters, each clings to a single view, and their explanations of the text are improper. The meanings of the four truths are many; how could one interpret them in a single way? Now the text lists three kinds of four truths: if it says "suffering has the mark of oppression" onward, it is the constructed four truths. If it says "understanding that suffering is without suffering, yet there is the real truth" onward, it is the unproduced four noble truths. If it is from "suffering has immeasurable marks" onward, it is the immeasurable four noble truths. These three kinds of four truths are all contemplation objects of the bodhisattva. The bodhisattva abiding in the Great Vehicle and the great parinirvāṇa is precisely the wisdom of the unconstructed four truths. Discussing the capable and the cognitive together, all four kinds are complete. Regarding the first, there are three parts: first, brief; second, extensive; third, conclusion. The brief also has six: first, indicating and listing; second, explaining the names; third, explaining the function; fourth, explaining the essence; fifth, explaining the establishment; sixth, further expanding the essence. The first is as in the text. Second, explaining the names: suffering is explained by oppression. The body is the root of suffering and the gathering of all sufferings; hence it is oppression. Accumulation can produce and grow; it is simply that the cause can produce the fruit. Cessation has the mark of quiescence; saṃsāra is exhausted. The path is named the Great Vehicle cause, conveying one toward the fruit. If it is said that the four truths are the meaning of the Tripiṭaka, why is it said that the path has the mark of the Great Vehicle? If we take it broadly in relation to the Tripiṭaka, the Tripiṭaka bodhisattva path is supreme, so it is also called the Great Vehicle. Third, explaining the function: suffering being the apparent mark clarifies its function. Suffering is karmic retribution; karmic retribution is manifest. Accumulation is the causal mark; the causal mark is subtle and hidden, hence it is called the transforming mark. The Abhidharma masters say: seeing the manifest, one knows the subtle; progressing from the subtle to the manifest is precisely the transforming mark. Worldly suffering is always based on present events and does not require continuity; hence it is called the apparent mark. Accumulation is karmic power; its function necessarily continues, with two minds transforming; hence it is called the transforming mark. Cessation is the mark of eradication: eradicating that which is to be eradicated, namely eradicating suffering and accumulation. The path is that which can eradicate. Next, from "suffering has three marks" downward, the fourth explains the essence. Accumulation is the twenty-five states of existence. The Abhidharma masters say: habitual continuity without interruption is called accumulation. The Treatise masters say: summoning and gathering is accumulation; this accumulation can habitually continue the twenty-five states of existence and can summon the fruits of the twenty-five states of existence. From "furthermore, contaminated" downward, the fifth clarifies the establishment: based on the two causes and fruitions, contaminated and uncontaminated, these four truths are established. From "furthermore, the eight marks" downward, the sixth further clarifies the marks of the four truths, which is expanding the essence. Stating that the ten powers and so forth are the path: Master Zhuāngyán said: "The fruition stage is not the path; the path is only the cause. Stating the ten powers refers to partially cultivating the ten powers and fearlessnesses within the cause." Master Kāishàn said: "The path pervades both cause and fruition; in the fruition stage, bodhi is the path and nirvāṇa is cessation, with no different essence, but conceptually spoken of as two."

14.11

From "Good son" onwards is the second [section], which explains the four truths in detail, divided into four chapters. The truth of suffering also has three [parts]: first, a brief [account of] the eight sufferings; second, a detailed [account of] the eight sufferings; third, harmonisation and integration. In the first brief [account], the eight sufferings naturally make eight chapters. First, birth: when consciousness first alights, there is only the physical faculty without the six sense-faculties yet complete; that is, the initial alighting in the womb. "Reaching the end" means exhausting the single lifespan, hence it says "reaching the end". "Increasing and growing" means the growth of the six parts. "Emerging from the womb" is the time of birth. "Kinds" refers to the growth of teeth, hair, and aging after emerging from the womb. "Decaying and breaking down" has two explanations: one says that in old age, years and illness increase and healthy appearance decays and breaks down; the other says that from birth to prime is increase and growth, and from prime to old age is decaying and breaking down. The suffering of illness should include all four great elements; that only three are mentioned is because the earth element's shifts and movements are not like wind and fire, so it is omitted. Miscellaneous and adventitious illnesses subsume the earth element. For death, [the ending of] merit and life has three alternatives: one says that losing only wealth and possessions while bodily life remains is the exhaustion of merit; possessing wealth while losing life is the exhaustion of life; the exhaustion of both is understandable. The first alternative is not the meaning of death (and so forth). Héxī says: life should originally last a thousand years, but one only attains a hundred; because merit is exhausted, life also ends along with it, so it is called "exhaustion of merit, not exhaustion of life". "Exhaustion of life, not exhaustion of merit" means that one's karmic merit was originally long and should not yet be exhausted, but simply because life has ended one can no longer remain; hence it is called "exhaustion of life, not exhaustion of merit". The exhaustion of both is understandable. I personally suggest: there are two meanings whereby their respective exhaustions differ: first, because the two past causes differ from each other; second, because spending wealth or killing harms merit and life in the present differently from each other. "Cutting off the life-faculty through heedlessness and breaking the precepts": the opposite of this is called non-heedlessness. For one who keeps the precepts and abandons life, it is straightforwardly called "destroying life". Another explanation says: this is not abandoning life, but simply committing sin, whereupon one is called a "corpse", no longer having roots of goodness and the life of wisdom. Slandering the Dharma and being an icchantika are called heedlessness; breaking the four grave prohibitions is called breaking the precepts. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth [sufferings] are as in the text. As for these eight sufferings, the first seven have distinct essences, while the last one summarises the seven without having a distinct essence. Now, relying on the text of the sūtra, the flourishing of the five aggregates is their distinct essence. The flourishing of good and bad aggregates is the essence of suffering, whereas the flourishing of aggregates of expedient means is not the essence of suffering (and so forth). Next, from "Kāśyapa, the root of birth" below is the second [part], explaining the eight sufferings in detail; the text naturally divides into eight. First, the suffering of birth has three [parts]: first, explaining that birth is the root of suffering; second, explaining that birth and death are interrelated; third, explaining that birth has many faults and perils. First, it explains that the suffering of birth is the root of the other seven sufferings. Furthermore, setting aside this one suffering, the arising of the other six sufferings also has it as their root. From "Sentient beings in the world" below is the second [part], that birth and death are interrelated, comprising a teaching of the Dharma and an analogy. In the teaching of the Dharma there are two: first, explaining the greedy attachment of worldlings; next, explaining the bodhisattva's revulsion and detachment. In the analogy there are two: first the analogy, then the application. In the first analogy there are two: first making the analogy of revulsion and detachment, next making the analogy of greedy attachment. The first text has four [points]: first, that birth is delightful; second, that death is repulsive; third, that birth and death are interrelated; fourth, explaining that the bodhisattva renounces both. The first exchange has six [steps]; in reality there is no question and answer between people, but the object of birth and the bodhisattva's contemplative wisdom examine each other, artificially staged as host and guest. The woman allegorises the fruit of birth, deluding worldlings into generating attachment and lust, likened to a woman. The bodhisattva's wisdom contemplates the initial arising of birth, hence it says "entering the house". Her being upright and beautiful, delighting everyone, and wearing a necklace allegorises that the station of the fruit of birth has much glory and splendour. The host allegorises the bodhisattva examining and demanding; the woman's reply allegorises the fruit of birth confronting wisdom. Next, from "Again outside the gate" below, the second [point] explains that death is repulsive; the back-and-forth has six [steps]. Death comes after birth, hence it says "outside the gate". The fruit of death deceives people, hence it is likened to a woman. Her ugliness means that the object of death destroys the fruit [of birth]. Causing all matters to become base and vile, and death and birth to contradict each other, hence it says "chapped and split". The blood and breath are already exhausted, hence it says "pale as mugwort". The host holding a knife has two explanations. Yěchéng says: diligent and intense revulsion is likened to holding a knife. Zhāotí takes wisdom as the knife; if death does not depart, one cultivates wisdom to sever it. Third, from "The host asked, saying" below, birth and death are interrelated. Birth precedes death and is the elder sister; death follows birth and is the younger sister; they are never separated from each other, hence it says "together". From "Going back inside and asking the goddess" onwards, the bodhisattva examines birth and knows it is joined with death. From "The host then said" below, the fourth [point] explains that the bodhisattva renounces both. The text has three [parts]: first, renouncing both; second, both departing. An old [commentary] says: since it is before the adamantine mind, it says "returned to where they lived". Third, the bodhisattva rejoices.

14.12

From "At that time the two women" below is the second [part], making an analogy for greedy attachment; the back-and-forth has four [steps]: first, explaining that they together went to a worldling; since a worldling lacks goodness, it says "a poor house". From "The poor man" below, the second shows the worldling's greedy attachment. From "The Goddess of Merit said" below, the third is the object of birth examining and yielding to the worldling's mind. From "The poor man replied, saying" below, the fourth is the worldling's mind responding to the object: since he delights in birth, he consequently accepts death. From "Bodhisattva Kāśyapa" below is the application of the analogy: first applying it to the bodhisattva's revulsion, then to the worldling's greed.

14.13

From "Furthermore, Kāśyapa, just as a brahmin" below is the third [part], explaining the faults and perils of birth, with five analogies in total. The first analogy is shallow goodness. Furthermore, the four brahmins' pure conduct allegorises a bodhisattva initially wishing to cultivate the ultimately pure path of prajñā. The illusory boy's shallow and weak understanding and practice, being pressed by hunger, means being pressed by the suffering of the three evil destinies. The fruit in the dung allegorises the fruit of birth in heaven amid suffering and impermanence. From "A wise person" below, the second is deep practice rebuking [it]. From "Having heard this, the boy" below, the third is shallow practice feeling ashamed, saying that he does not crave heavenly bliss, but wishes to cultivate the path therein and abandon it. From "The wise person said to him" below, the fourth is the bodhisattva urging him to abandon it. From "Good son" below is the application; it applies only to the latter two, not the former two. From "Furthermore" below is the second analogy. The person allegorises the Buddha; the crossroads allegorises initially receiving a physical body in the four modes of birth; the vessel allegorises the scriptural teachings; being filled with food and drink allegorises the Buddha teaching the five precepts and ten virtuous actions to invite the fruits of gods and humans. Saying that he was selling it allegorises using this to transform sentient beings. Coming from afar allegorises coming from the evil destinies; hunger, emptiness, and emaciation allegorise severe suffering. Asking allegorises: is this truly so? The reply of the food's owner allegorises the Buddha's reply. That there is only a single poison and one cannot escape impermanence means death and extinction. Inquiring further once more: if it is impermanent, why does the Tathāgata cause people to cultivate it? Hence he says, "Why sell it?" The Buddha answers back: through deep wisdom one makes them abandon it, while for foolish, shallow worldlings one initially gathers them in with it. The third and fourth analogies are clear. From "Just like a precipitous cliff" below is the fifth analogy. The fruit of birth and death being covered with grass allegorises the nominally designated self and the continuum of permanence within birth and death. Having much nectar allegorises false and illusory pleasure; the deep pit allegorises the three evil destinies; slipping of the foot allegorises the cutting off of the life-faculty.

14.14

The second, contemplating old age, and the third, contemplating illness, can be understood from the two texts. However, birth definitely precedes death, whereas illness does not necessarily follow old age. That the present text puts old age first and illness later is because if one falls ill when young, there is still hope of recovery, but if one falls ill in old age, it precipitates death, and the illness is like collapsing further when already about to crumble; hence illness is explained after old age. The text explains the suffering of illness yet says "body and mind are at peace"; there are two explanations: one says that peace itself is illness, like large and small granaries. When father and son are separated for ten years and then manage to meet, rejoicing during the day and dying after nightfall, this peace is illness.

14.15

Fourth, contemplating the suffering of death also has two [parts]: first, directly contemplating death; next, from "Death" below, lamenting it. In the first text: what is the suffering of death? If the breath has not yet ceased, one is still alive and not dead; if the breath has already ceased, one no longer feels suffering. If one receives hell, that is already the next body and does not concern the suffering of death. This matter is difficult to know. It is like interrogating cessation: is it cessation when not yet ceased, or is it cessation when already ceased? Moving forward or backward is difficult to determine; it resembles "originally existing, now non-existent; originally non-existent, now existing" (and so forth). Here we simply take the state of breath about to cease but not yet ceased as the suffering of death. As for the claim that the bodhisattva is not completely exempt from death, yet it says "except only the bodhisattva who abides in nirvāṇa", there are three explanations: first, calling the Buddha a bodhisattva; second, that the adamantine-mind bodhisattva turns once and becomes a Buddha; third, that although a first-stage bodhisattva is not yet exempt from birth and death, because his aspiration seeks nirvāṇa he is not disordered by birth and death. Now we explain: the first explanation refers to a response-body bodhisattva, which does not accord with the sūtra. Next, as for the single turn of the adamantine mind, this is precisely death, so why would it be excluded? In the last explanation, although the bodhisattva is not disordered by it, he is not exempt from death, so why would he be excluded? The one who is excluded is the bodhisattva of the round teaching, for whom afflictions are themselves bodhi and birth-and-death is itself nirvāṇa, and cannot be extinguished again. Birth-and-death is neither birth-and-death nor nirvāṇa; if birth-and-death cannot even subject itself to birth-and-death, how could birth-and-death subject non-birth-and-death to birth-and-death? Such a bodhisattva is precisely the one excluded, not harmed by birth and death. The text says: "Just as diamond rain can shatter everything." Can this rain also shatter diamond? If it cannot shatter it, the meaning of sharpness is not established; if it can be shattered, the meaning of firmness is not established (and so forth). Death injures everything like diamond rain, and only the bodhisattva is not harmed by it, which is again likened to diamond. You should know that shattered and dispersed diamond cannot harm a rock-solid diamond; thus the bodhisattva is not killed by death. As for the māra poisonous snake: Héxī says it is the venom of a black snake; touching a person's clothes brings immediate death, and if other persons touch these clothes, they also die. As for the agada star: this star appears in the eighth month; if someone obtains the mantra of this star, it can neutralise its poison. Next, from "Death" below, there are ten sentences lamenting it that are most sorrowful; if divided, they form twenty sentences. Falling ill in a dangerous and difficult place, its suffering is the heaviest. "Having no provisions" refers to wholesome dharmas. "The destination is far away": its road is endless. "Without companions": the solitary soul departs alone with no one following along. In the twelve divisions of the day, there is constantly no rest; walking day and night with neither before nor after, hence it is "boundless". Like a pit of ten thousand fathoms, hence it says "deep and fathomless". Because the interior is dark, the exterior is unilluminated, hence it has "no lamp or light". Death is a dead end where all roads are blocked, hence it says "entering without gates or doors". Another says: death also does not enter through the six faculties, hence it has "no gates or doors". It must have a place from which it comes, hence it says "and yet having a location". At that time one is dazed and bewildered, hence it says "though having no locus of pain". But skilled physicians fold their hands, hence it says "incurable". Worthies and sages cannot stop it, hence it says "departing without obstruction", and once reached, there is no escape. When newly dead, the corpse is composed and not mutilated by punishment, hence it says "nothing broken or destroyed". Yet relatives and friends weep bitterly, hence it says "those who see it are grieved and pained". Furthermore, it is not devoured by tigers, wolves, birds, or beasts, hence it says "not an evil form". There is no one who does not fear death, hence it says "causing people to be terrified". This is after the body of the aggregates, hence it says "spread out beside the body". Yet one does not perceive whether it is good or bad, hence it says "not conscious of oneself". If one relies on this meaning, the intermediate existence when life has ceased constitutes the suffering of death.

14.16

Fifth, contemplating the suffering of separation from what is loved: arising from the conditions of separation, this is the suffering of change (vipariṇāma-duḥkhatā). When discussing the suffering of change, speaking of the cause in terms of the result, one points to pleasant feeling as its essence. Here it is also like this: one directly points to affectionate love as the suffering of separation. In the text, when it explains 'relinquishing the body that one loves,' if [taken as] when life is severed being the suffering of death, that would already belong to a former life. Here, taking the separation from the body one loves, the relatives one loves, and one's supporting environment (yibao) and so forth—this is the suffering of separation from the loved. The *Upadeśa* (*Dàzhìdù lùn*) says: 'It is easy to part from others, but difficult to part from relatives. It is easy to part from relatives, but difficult to part from parents. It is easy to part from parents, but difficult to part from one's own body. It is easy to part from one's own body, but difficult to part from one's own mind.' Mūrdhata (Crown-Born) was moisture-born; speaking truly, a human next to a deva is like a beggar beside a king—why then say that the two kings were alike? However, because Mūrdhata was an apparition (nirmāṇa), he was able to resemble the deva; if considered according to real karmic recompense, he would not have measured up. Because the heavenly king has a long lifespan, his blinking is infrequent; because the human king has a short lifespan, his blinking is frequent. The golden wheel is exceedingly heavy, and others cannot lift it; by the power of the king's virtue, where it should be heavy, it becomes light. As for 'yak-tail whisk' (máowěi), ancient people read this as *mángwěi* (䰒尾). That is not so. The short is written simply with 'hair' (máo 毛); the long with the radical biāo 髟 above and lèi 類 below, just as a person of many skills is called a 'distinguished gentleman' (máoshì 髦士), taking it in the sense of eminent virtue. When Liú Xiàobiāo called Rèn Fǎng 'the preeminent hero (máojié) within the seas,' it was this character. Formerly, the Pearl of the King of Wèi illuminated twelve carriages; how much more would Mūrdhata's pearl not illuminate a yojana? Here it says it was as large as the hub of a chariot wheel. Furthermore, the sūtra speaks of it being 'in his belt'; this lies in the power of its virtue, not its size. As for 'treasure woman,' only one who can bear a thousand sons is called a treasure woman. The *Fǎxiǎn zhuàn* says: 'The queen consort gave birth to a mass of flesh like a melon, having a thousand segments, with each segment containing one son; this was it.' The *Upadeśa* says: 'Gopā was a treasure woman, but was infertile.' Since the two texts differ, how are they to be harmonized? Each was what was valued at that time (and so forth).

14.17

Sixth, contemplating the suffering of association with what is hated: since it arises from the conditions of coming together, this arising is itself suffering; the object in front oppresses the mind, and the mind registers the oppression of the object with grief and distress, therefore it is called the suffering of association with what is hated.

14.18

Seventh, contemplating the suffering of not getting what one seeks: still referring to the previous [pairs of] separation from the loved and association with the hated, one seeks association with the loved but is separated; one seeks distant separation from the hated but is brought together. When these two seekings are frustrated, that is the suffering of not getting what one seeks.

14.19

Eighth, concluding the above seven sufferings collectively: they are precisely the suffering of the five grasping aggregates, which, as explained before, definitely have a distinct essence (and so forth).

14.20

From 'At that time, Kāśyapa...' onward, the third section is reconciling the truth of suffering: in the past, sūtras such as the *Āgamas* all said that among the three feelings there is pleasant feeling; now it is said that the five aggregates are all suffering and have no meaning of pleasure whatsoever; the present and past meanings contradict each other. Master Kāishàn divided the four rounds of questions and answers here into four sections; Master Guān divided them into two, regarding the latter three sub-sections merely as raising objections. Now, first the question, then the answer. Regarding the initial question, there are three parts: first, a general rejection; second, raising five objections; third, the conclusion. First, receiving the intent and respectfully stating the objection. From 'Why is this so?' onward, raising the objections: the first and fourth questions together are based on the conditions for pleasure; the second question is distinctively based on the essence of pleasure; the third and fifth questions together are based on the cause of pleasure. First, regarding being based on the conditions for pleasure: formerly in the *Āgama*, the Buddha told Mahānāma, 'If form were definitely suffering, one should not seek form. If form were definitely pleasure, one should not weary of form. But now you simply object that there is no pleasure, [which implies] one should not seek form.' If one seeks red and yellow, one should know there is pleasure; on what grounds today do you say entirely that there is no pleasure? Now he fully cites the six sense-bases corresponding to the six sense-objects as the conditions for pleasure. From 'As the Buddha said in a verse...' onward is the fifth [objection], again based on the cause of pleasure. It shares with the third [objection] the citation of the cause of pleasure, yet also differs: the former cited wholesome deeds as the cause of pleasure, speaking only of mundane wholesomeness; here he fully cites the supramundane wholesomeness of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas as the cause of pleasure. Regarding the five verses, there are four parts: the first two verses explain the wholesomeness of śrāvakas as the cause of pleasure; the next one verse explains the wholesomeness of bodhisattvas as the cause of pleasure; the third single verse re-concludes the Hīnayāna; the fourth single verse re-concludes the Mahāyāna, explaining that what the bodhisattva ultimately attains is not identical to the Buddha's ultimate attainment, but is a partial ultimate. From 'World-Honoured One, as in the various sūtras...' onward, third, concluding the objection: 'the various sūtras' refers to the past teaching; 'as the Buddha now preaches' therefore points to this teaching having no pleasure, but only suffering.

First 20 of 23 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經疏 — Classical Chinese