大般涅槃經疏 6

English (machine translation) 6

Language: English

6.1

Composed by Master Guàndǐng of Zhāng'ān under the Sui dynasty

6.2

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

6.3

Chapter on Grief and Lamentation, Part Two

Furthermore, continuing from the preceding text: the great earth is an analogy for the Buddha-jewel, the various mountain medicinal herbs are an analogy for the Dharma-jewel, and being used for the sake of sentient beings is an analogy for the Saṅgha-jewel. Next, matching them to the text: "My Dharma is also thus" is the Buddha; "producing the ambrosia" is the Dharma; and "for the sake of sentient beings" is the Saṅgha. Third, from "What is called..." onward, this explains the "secret treasury"; first presenting others' interpretations, and next matching the text. The Dilun masters say: the ālayavijñāna, being within deluded defilements, is called the secret treasury. The Chengshi masters say: the future resultant Buddha is outside sentient beings; all sentient beings will attain the Buddha-fruit; because this principle pertains to the person, it is also inside, but because at the present time it does not yet exist, it is also outside; being outside, it is not inside, and being inside, it is not outside—hence it is called the secret treasury. The *Treatise on the Inherent Existence of Nirvāṇa* (*Niepan benyou lun*) says: "Inside the bodies of sentient beings there is a Buddha—this is not secret. Outside the body there is [a Buddha]; neither inside the body nor outside the body does [one] exist; neither not-inside nor not-outside does [one] exist—none of these is secret; that sentient beings are identically it, is therefore called secret." The previous two interpretations are refuted by this treatise (and so on). If spoken according to the past teachings: concealed, it is called secret; covered, it is called a treasury. That is, impermanence covers permanence, characteristics cover characterlessness, and the non-definitive covers the definitive, causing permanence and so forth to be concealed—this is called the secret treasury. Like the physically deformed person, like the treatises of non-Buddhists, and various other analogies expounded in detail below—this is named the secret treasury of the past teachings. The present sūtra opens it wide: like the moon dwelling in the sky, pure and clearly revealed, it is unlike the past teachings. It is only because the true Dharma is subtle, inconceivable, beyond names, and divorced from characteristics, such that sentient beings cannot comprehend it, that it is named secret; and because the dharmadhātu contains and embraces all dharmas, and its functioning cannot be exhausted, it is named a treasury. Therefore, the text below says: "Neither vertical nor horizontal, neither conjoined nor distinct—this is the meaning of secret; the three dharmas being complete without any deficiency—this is the meaning of its treasury." The text and meaning are radiant and clear—how could any other interpretation hold? The *Nirvāṇa Treatise* is cited to refute the various human teachers, and the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* is cited to refute the provisional teachings—a great wind sweeps away the mist, and the clear Milky Way shines brightly (and so on).

6.5

Now, in explaining the secret treasury, the text has three parts: first, the analogy of the three dots; second, the analogy of the three eyes; third, matching them with the three virtues. Speaking provisionally of these three passages, they proceed from phenomenon to principle: the three dots are written graphs, which pertains to verbal teaching; the three eyes are the divine eye, which pertains to cultivation and practice; the three virtues are the Buddha-master, which pertains to principle. Furthermore, they are the Buddha-seal that seals teaching and practice: whenever there is verbal expression corresponding to this, it is secret teaching; cultivation and practice corresponding to this is secret practice; realization and attainment corresponding to this is secret principle. Therefore, the explanation in terms of the three is designated principle, teaching, and practice. First, among the three dots, it says "How is it like the worldly letter *i*?" In foreign lands there are both old and new forms of the letter *i*. In the old *i*, the horizontal and vertical are discontinuous and separated from each other; using this to illustrate that: horizontally it is like a row of fire [dots], vertically it is like water droplets, each not continuing one into the other. Being neither horizontal (unlike the row of fire) nor vertical (unlike the water droplets), it should be like the character *xia* (下) written in the grass script of this land, where the fine strokes are interconnected—this is the form of the new *i*. The old *i* can serve as an analogy for the three virtues of the past teachings: the dharmakāya is inherently existent, prajñā is accomplished through cultivation, and only upon entering the [nirvāṇa] without residue is there liberation, with no further body or wisdom—like the vertical water droplets, vertical and separated from each other. Furthermore, in terms of body and wisdom, one partially attains the liberation with residue: horizontally existing at the same time, the three dharmas are distinct from each other, like the horizontal row of fire, each unrelated to the other. The new letter *i* is an analogy for the three virtues of the present teaching: the dharmakāya is identically illumination and identically sovereignty; though designated as one they are three, and because the three have no separate essences, they are not horizontal; because they are neither earlier nor later, they are not vertical. The one is identically the three, like the large dot; the three are identically the one, like the fine strokes: yet three yet one, yet one yet three, they cannot be spoken of as one or three, nor can they be conceived of as one or three, and hence are called inconceivable. What is inconceivable is neither three nor one—it is called the secret treasury, like the worldly letter *i*. This sentence is the foundation of this sūtra: to reveal this meaning, questions and answers are extensively established, resulting in the boundless expansiveness of the twenty-five chapters. If one misses this meaning, one is entirely deluded about the foundation, and where can one find the final refuge? (and so on). Next, explaining in terms of the three eyes: Maheśvara resides at the summit of the form realm and commands the great trichiliocosm; he has one face with three eyes, and three eyes upon one face, which cannot be spoken of simply as one or three, vertical or horizontal, conjoined or distinct; they are able to adorn the divine countenance, make him the lord of the world, and penetrate and illuminate the three thousand [realms]. If they were not vertical or horizontal, the adorning lord's illumination of the world is entirely accomplished. The three virtues are also thus: if vertical, horizontal, conjoined, or distinct, the secret treasury is not established; if neither vertical nor horizontal, the secret treasury is established (and so on). Next, explaining the secret treasury in terms of the three virtues: among the manifold virtues of the fruit-stage, only three are mentioned because the summary encompasses the rest. The body of the dharmakāya is neither form nor formlessness: because it is not form, it cannot be seen through shapes and characteristics; because it is not formlessness, it cannot be known through mental concepts. Although it is not form, form fills the ten directions, the vast and the minute containing each other, neither wide nor narrow; although it is not non-form, it can also be sought, and is able to arouse deep and vast wisdom in sentient beings. Therefore, it is said that the Tathāgata's form is inexhaustible and so forth—this is the virtue of the dharmakāya. Prajñā is neither knowing nor letters: because it is not knowing, it cannot be distinguished by moving thoughts; because it is not letters, it cannot be spoken or inscribed on a sash; nor is it non-knowing or non-letters: because it is not non-knowing, it is not the same as ash-like extinction; because it is not non-letters, it is not the same as one-sided emptiness. Although it is not knowing, there is nothing it does not illuminate, the three truths brightly evident throughout, the ultimate realm of the Buddha clarifying both ordinary and sage alike; although it is not letters, both the half-word and full-word teachings are complete, and all letters—mundane, supramundane, and supramundane supreme—are completely understood, the dharmadhātu flowing forth like a hanging river or a surging ocean, inexhaustible. The *Vimalakīrti Sūtra* (*Jingming*) says: "He is able to expound the Dharma with a single voice, / and sentient beings understand each according to their kind; / each thinks that the World-Honoured One speaks their own language— / this is the divine power, the unshared dharma." This is the virtue of prajñā. Liberation is neither commotion nor quiescence, neither bound nor liberated: because it is not bound, the five entanglements cannot tie it down; because it is not liberated, the ten wisdoms cannot render it empty. Being not liberated yet liberated, it is not restrained by the two extremes, as expounded in the hundred phrases on liberation; being not bound yet bound, it is bound for the sake of the dull, the foolish, the perverse, the ignorant, the icchantikas, and the non-Buddhists, and therefore there are the practice of illness and the infant-like practice; abiding in the śūraṅgama[-samādhi], it manifests good and evil, and wherever it tames sentient beings, even if base, it must bestow [teachings]—like a physician curing illness, like a lotus in water unstained and unattached—this is named the virtue of liberation. The Buddha's bodily actions are embraced by the inconceivable dharmakāya; the Buddha's verbal actions are embraced by inconceivable prajñā; the Buddha's mental actions are embraced by inconceivable liberation. Therefore, one knows that the three virtues encompass all virtues. Furthermore, the *Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra* (*Dapin*) calls them: "purity of form is purity of prajñā; purity of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is purity of prajñā." The *Lotus Sūtra* speaks of the "adornment of the Tathāgata" and also speaks of the "purity of the six sense faculties." Synthesizing the diverse statements of the various sūtras, all are gathered within the three virtues. Encompassing the general and the particular, embracing phenomena and principle, collecting the broad by means of the brief does not go beyond the three virtues; if biased toward the vertical, horizontal, conjoined, distinct, one, or different, none of these is the secret treasury. The text says: "The dharmakāya is also not [it], prajñā is also not [it], liberation is also not [it]; neither vertical nor horizontal, neither conjoined nor distinct, the three and the one mutually identical, the immeasurable within the one, the one within the immeasurable, that which is neither one nor immeasurable—this is named the secret treasury."

6.6

From "I now dwell peacefully..." onward is the fourth part, concluding the secret treasury by dwelling peacefully in the three dharmas. This concludes that the three virtues entering the great nirvāṇa constitutes the secret treasury. "Like the worldly letter *i*" concludes the three dots; the text abbreviates and does not conclude with the divine eyes. However, the Buddha constantly dwells peacefully in the three dharmas; that he says "I now" is simply in accord with what is appropriate for the conditions—therefore, saying "for the sake of sentient beings, it is called entering nirvāṇa" is precisely this meaning.

6.7

Third, from "At that time all the bhikṣus..." onward is the chapter on doubt and attachment. The text has three parts: first, attachment; second, request; third, doubt. Above, the Buddha reproached and deprived them; having been deprived of what they had realized, they were unable to relinquish it immediately, and therefore there is attachment. The Buddha spoke of the new *i*, but hearing it once they did not understand it; wishing to learn, they had to make a request. The two teachings, past and present, were both spoken by the Buddha; why should one be false and one be true? Therefore, there is this doubt and attachment. The text has two parts: first, recounting sorrow and suffering; second, directly stating the attachment. As for the first passage: having heard the Buddha say that dwelling peacefully in the three dharmas is called entering nirvāṇa, they did not at all contemplate the meaning of peaceful dwelling, but produced the understanding of departing from this and abiding in that—this is named sorrow and suffering (and so on). Next, from "The World-Honoured One has well spoken..." onward is stating the attachment. Others say: this recounts what they heard above of the Dharma. But above it was never spoken; they merely attached to the past teaching. Within attachment there are two: first, attachment; second, praise. Attachment also has three parts: first, attaching to the principle by way of the teaching; second, attaching to the principle by way of practice; third, directly attaching to the principle. "Has well spoken" attaches to the past teaching: "well" expresses admiration, because this teaching was well able to explain the principle. Next, "like the footprint of an elephant" attaches to the past practice: practice is superior among ways of advancing, so it is analogized by the great footprint. Practice has wisdom and severance: perception is the initial gate of wisdom, so the initial is mentioned. From "vigorously..." onward is attaching to severance: severing thought-defilements implies that one has also severed false views; therefore, speaking of the later, the earlier is unstated. "And the perception of impermanence": defilements gone, wisdom disappears. From "World-Honoured One, if divorced from impermanence..." onward directly attaches to the principle. This principle is properly centered, neither divorced nor not-divorced: if divorced from impermanence, one should not enter nirvāṇa; if not divorced from impermanence, one would still possess all defilements; because it is neither divorced nor not-divorced, it can sever all defilements. Blending with principle and tallying with reality—how could anything surpass this? Yet he reproached it as false (and so on). Another interpretation says: "if divorced," then the past teaching is wrong; "if not divorced," then the past teaching is right. Looking at the text, this is hard to see. Next, from "World-Honoured One, just as a farmer..." onward is praise, praising the three attachments above. Plowing in autumn: the dharma has two capabilities: first, weeds do not grow; second, the watered soil is fertile. Fertility praises the teaching; the death of the weeds praises severance. Furthermore, fertility praises practice, the farmer's method praises principle, autumn plowing praises teaching, the elephant's footprint praises practice, and impermanence praises principle (and so on).

6.8

Next, from “World-Honoured One, it is like an emperor…” onwards is the request. Having heard above about the new [shape of the letter] *i*, they wished and rejoiced to cultivate and learn it, [thinking:] if the Tathāgata leaves, from whom shall we receive it? Because of this, they then made the request. In the disparagement and request above, they mostly made analogies of kinship, which the Buddha rejected as unreal; now they dare not make analogies of kinship, but only make analogies of a ruler and teacher. The analogy [of a ruler] is precisely that of governing, because its meaning of instruction is broad. In all there are five analogies: the first one is an analogy requesting a ruler, and the latter four are analogies requesting a teacher. Examining the text that matches the analogies, they request to learn the new *i*. Why? The arhats have already broken the ignorance of the four residences, but fundamental ignorance is what they have not yet eliminated; since distinct afflictions are raised, we know they request the new *i*. The first, [the analogy of] the imperial pardon, makes a general request on behalf of the śrāvakas who have not yet eliminated both afflictions; the analogy of the incantation master also makes a general request on behalf of the śrāvakas who have not yet eliminated ignorance; the analogy of the fragrant elephant makes a specific request on behalf of those in training (śaikṣa) who have not yet eliminated the afflictions of thought; the analogy of malaria makes a specific request on behalf of those beyond training (aśaikṣa) who have not yet eliminated the one extreme; the analogy of the drunkard makes a general request on behalf of all ordinary beings and nobles. The first two analogies are as in the text. In the third analogy of the fragrant elephant, there is first the analogy and next the matching. In the matching, when it mentions the fifty-seven afflictions, interpreters have three explanations: Five are the five hindrances. Ten are the ten entanglements. Seven are the seven outflows. The abhidharma masters say: The four dull [afflictions] of the desire realm—greed, anger, delusion, and conceit—pervade and confuse the five practices. As for the five practices, four belong to seeing the truths and one to contemplation. Each of the five practices has four, four times five being twenty; in each of the upper two realms anger is eliminated, so each of the five practices has three, three times five being fifteen, which makes thirty for both realms; added to the twenty of the desire realm, this makes fifty. The seven underlying tendencies (anuśaya) pervading the mind, namely the seven outflows, are the root. The treatise masters say: The ten underlying tendencies of seeing the truths, confusing the four truths, make forty; the four underlying tendencies of contemplation, also confusing the four truths, four times four make sixteen; combined with seeing the truths they make fifty-six, and together with ignorance this makes fifty-seven. [Master] Xīnghuáng says: The five gate-contemplations each have three inversions, namely thought, view, and mind; three times five is fifteen, which across the three realms makes forty-five. Furthermore, the four truths each have three inversions, three times four being twelve, which added to the former makes fifty-seven (and so forth). In the analogy of drunkenness, performing the evil of the three karmas results in retribution; in the matching, taking medicine vomits out afflictions (and so forth).

6.9

Third, from “World-Honoured One, it is like a plantain tree…” onwards is doubting the teaching. If the past teaching was wrong, the Buddha should not have spoken it; if the past teaching was right, the Buddha should not reject it. If the present teaching is right, why was it not spoken earlier? If the present teaching is wrong, how can it be called real? Therefore, doubt arises. Dividing the text, there are three parts: first, explaining non-self; next, citing proof; third, explaining its function. The plantain corresponds to the aggregate of conditioning factors; the dregs of starch correspond to the aggregate of form; the *saptaparṇa* corresponds to the [other] three aggregates. Next, citing the Buddha's statement that all phenomena are without self and what belongs to self. Third, from “just as a bird's tracks in the sky” downwards, explaining the function of non-self, because the past teaching could eliminate [the delusions of] views and thoughts. Why non-self is explained is because the Buddha's past teaching explained non-self and I cultivated non-self. If there were a self, this would be impossible. Why does he say today that there is a self? Therefore, raising non-self serves as the source of doubt regarding the teaching.

6.10

Fourth, from “At that time the World-Honoured One praised the bhikṣus…” onwards is shattering attachment and eliminating doubt. The text has two parts: first praising, next shattering. As for the first text, there were three points above; why praise only non-self? Because non-self is the root of attachment, doubt, and the like. Why praise it? Because this is the natural way of worldly questions and answers. Furthermore, initially using non-self to shatter heterodoxy, they were able to accept and practice it; also, wishing to take away, he first grants it. Furthermore, attaching to the inferior stimulates the superior, which is the meaning of the four siddhāntas. Next, the Buddha's shattering has three parts: first, shattering their one-sided principle, as the lower text states, “These three kinds of cultivation have no real meaning”; second, shattering their one-sided practice, as the lower text states, “What you cultivated previously was entirely inverted”; third, shattering their one-sided teaching, as the lower text states, “The milk severed previously—these were not true words.” Each of these three points has two aspects, namely reciting their attachment and replying to shatter it. First, in shattering the one-sided principle, there is first reciting and next replying. The initial reciting has three parts: first, receiving the praise and reciting the attachment; second, making an analogy; third, concluding with praise from “World-Honoured One” downwards. Drunkenness has two faults: first, inversion and confusion; second, going against the good. In concluding with praise, the text has two parts: first, assigning the fault of drunkenness to those who do not cultivate; second, praising freedom from fault in those who cultivate well. Next, the Buddha's shattering is precisely using the reply as the shattering. In this there are two parts: first, shattering [their claim of] non-confusion as being confusion, returning drunkenness to them; next, shattering [their claim of] good cultivation as not being good cultivation, returning unwholesome cultivation to them. First, shattering confusion has four parts: first, admonishing to listen and taking up the points; second, clarifying their confusion; third, presenting non-confusion; fourth, concluding the fault and assigning it to them. In the admonition to listen, “taking up the points” means reiterating their view. “Only knowing the letters without knowing their meaning”: letters are speech, while meaning is the intended principle; a drunkard also hears words but does not understand the intent of the words. There are also those who have words without actual substance; you are also like this: hearing others speak of transmigration, [you think] others do not transmigrate; saying of yourselves that you cultivate well, in reality it is not good cultivation. Next, in [clarifying] confusion, bringing up the sun and moon directly shatters the analogy of confusion. Sentient beings: others say this directly refers to the bhikṣus while generally pointing to sentient beings. We now say this is not so. Since drunkenness is returned to them, one should know that the bhikṣus are precisely sentient beings. “Considering self to be non-self” shatters their confusion, and also shatters their attachment to impermanence and non-self as right. You take impermanence and non-self as right, but this correctness is also not real; where there is no non-self, you arbitrarily consider it non-self, like that drunkard who produces the idea of turning where there is no turning (and so forth). Third, from “Self…” onwards, presenting non-confusion is precisely permanence, bliss, self, and purity: what you reject is not wrong, but rather you reject what is right. “Buddha” has the meaning of awakening; being self-mastered, it is called “self.” “Permanence” is the dharmakāya; because it is not born from conditions, it is permanent. “Bliss” is precisely nirvāṇa; nirvāṇa having no feeling is called great bliss. “Purity” is precisely the Dharma; the Dharma is precisely unstained. What you rejected is now precisely right; that you do not know this meaning is truly due to drunkenness (and so forth). Fourth, from “You bhikṣus…” downwards, concluding and assigning is returning drunkenness back to them. The bhikṣus consider permanence to be inverted and impermanence to be non-inverted; the Buddha turns it around, saying impermanence is inverted and permanence is non-inverted. Just as the sun and moon do not turn, yet the drunkard sees them revolving—how could the sun and moon be drunk? It is solely the fault of the drunkard. Permanence, bliss, self, and purity are truly not impermanent; arbitrarily considering them impermanent is the fault of the inverted. Next, from “If you say…” onwards shatters [their claim of] good cultivation as not being good cultivation. The text has four parts: first, jointly indicating the two cultivations; next, jointly clarifying the eight inversions; third, jointly returning the faults back to them; fourth, exclusively raising superior cultivation. In the first part, “if you say” indicates that their good cultivation has no real meaning. Rejecting the good as not good, it is like the false words of a drunkard lacking truth. Next, indicating superior cultivation. In general, when contrasting them, the meaning can be broad or brief; they may differently make ten gates, eight inversions, six practices, and so forth, but now we only briefly contrast three. Next, from “the suffering considers bliss…” onwards jointly clarifies the eight inversions. If you practice the eight inversions, how can you establish yourselves and claim to cultivate well? The text says, “This person does not know how to correctly cultivate phenomena.” Third, from “You bhikṣus…” onwards jointly turns the eight inversions around and returns them back to them. The text has two parts: first, returning the four inversions of permanence and bliss back to them; afterwards, returning the four inversions of impermanence back to them. The first part also has two: first, directly returning the inversions; next, three rounds of analysis. The first is as in the text. The three rounds refer to worldly and world-transcending, existent and non-existent, inverted and non-inverted, and so forth. First, worldly and world-transcending: the supreme principle is like empty space, neither worldly nor world-transcending; being deluded about it constitutes inversion and is called worldly, while understanding it constitutes virtue and is called world-transcending; ignorance covering you, there is only inversion and no virtue. If they defend, saying: If it is inverted, how can it be called permanence, bliss, self, and purity? Next, from “worldly phenomena” downwards, existent and non-existent, hence analysing the words and meaning with respect to the world. From “the meaning is like…” downwards states that there are only the names, therefore they are not virtues and lack their meaning. Third, from “why is that” downwards, inverted and non-inverted, thus there are only four inversions and three inversions, revealing their lack of meaning. Old interpretations say: Three minds are without inversion, and the conscious mind is inverted. Others say: The conscious mind is without inversion, and the remaining three have three inversions—conception has the inversion of thought, feeling has the inversion of mind, and conditioning factors have the inversion of views. There are also general and distinct interpretations of the three inversions: generally, they exist within the four minds. In the distinct matching: the conscious mind is the inversion of mind, conception and feeling are the inversion of thought, and the mind of conditioning factors is the inversion of views. Furthermore, whenever there is a mind conditioned on an object, that is the inversion of mind; all that is imagining is the inversion of thought; all that can discriminate is the inversion of views. Furthermore, initial delusion in the mind is the inversion of mind; the mind conditioning an object to form a conception is the inversion of thought; when the conception forms a fixed attachment, that is the inversion of views. Furthermore, the inversion of views is in ordinary beings, the inversions of mind and thought are in those in training, and those beyond training have no inversions. We now ask: why are the inversions turned around and returned to the bhikṣus? These bhikṣus falsely believe their minds are exhausted, but their minds are not truly exhausted; because the uncontaminated mind is universally viewed as empty of conception, this constitutes three inversions. Each inversion possesses four, making twelve inversions, so the fault is concluded and returned to them. Question: If the worldly also has permanence, bliss, self, and purity, and the world-transcending is also like this, should one also say that the worldly also has impermanence and non-self, and the world-transcending is also like that? Answer: By analogy, the impermanence and non-self of the two vehicles are worldly; the impermanence and non-self of the Buddhas are unexcelled expedient means, which are world-transcending. Question: Having names without meaning (and so forth). Worldly and world-transcending, inverted and virtuous or non-inverted and non-virtuous, superior cultivation and inferior cultivation, should all be distinguished through the four alternatives (catuṣkoṭi). Furthermore, the worldly has only inversion and no virtue, and the world-transcending has only virtue and no inversion; the fact that inversion is non-inversion is the virtue of worldly inversion, and giving rise to expedient functions is the virtue of the world-transcending. By analogy with all the rest, all meanings are likewise. Old interpretations say: Impermanence and non-self are inferior cultivation, while permanence, bliss, self, and purity are superior cultivation. Others say: Cultivating singly is inferior, while cultivating doubly is superior. Others say: Cultivation that is neither one-sided nor circular is superior cultivation. We now ask: to whom do these various cultivations belong in differentiation (and so forth)? Those who singly practice superior cultivation are gradual persons; those who doubly practice superior cultivation are indeterminate persons; those who are neither one-sided nor circular are sudden persons (and so forth). Fourth, from “what is the meaning” onwards exclusively clarifies superior cultivation. The text has two parts: first, clarifying the superior in contrast to the inferior; second, exhorting to superior cultivation. If we discuss the inferior generally, it possesses all faults. It is only that he specifically shatters the extreme ones: saṃsāra has bondage and attachment, hence non-self; śrāvakas advance further, hence impermanent; non-Buddhists use suffering to abandon suffering, hence suffering; conditioned things have much defilement, hence impure (and so forth). Specifically raising the superior to shatter the inferior is as in the sūtra. Our comprehensive meaning now is: the initial text saying “Self is precisely the Tathāgata” simply indicates the Three Jewels subsuming all phenomena; “permanence is precisely the dharmakāya,” this indicates the three dots subsuming all phenomena; “bliss is precisely nirvāṇa,” this indicates the four virtues subsuming all phenomena; “purity is precisely the unconditioned,” this indicates the dharmadhātu subsuming all phenomena. However, these various meanings are neither vertical nor horizontal, neither one nor different, and inconceivable; therefore they attain this meaning and attain this superiority. Next, from “if you wish…” downwards exhorts to cultivate, as in the text.

6.11

Next, from "At that time the monks..." onwards, this refutes their one-sided practice; it is also called "answering the request." The text has two parts: first, repeating the request; second, answering the request and refuting their practice. The first, repeating the request, has three parts: 1. grasping the purport and praising the Buddha; 2. making the formal request on the basis of the praise; 3. concluding the request by offering their lives. The text makes this clear. From "At that time the Buddha addressed..." onwards is the answer to the request. This again has two parts: first, rebuking it as inappropriate; next, the formal answer. The first rebuke means: the Tathāgata's going and staying is not within your realm; since you cannot know the Buddha's coming and going, how could you be permitted to follow him? Therefore he says it is inappropriate. Next, answering the request has two parts: first, answering by means of a person; next, answering by means of the Dharma. You previously requested that he stay precisely because you wished to learn the Dharma; now he leaves behind both person and Dharma so that your learning is fully satisfied—what more is there to request? Answering by means of a person has three parts: 1. designating the person to whom it is entrusted; next, praising that person as being identical to the Tathāgata; 3. explaining the praise. The first two are clear from the text. The meaning within the third, the explanation, is like a king entrusting a great minister. "巡" (xún) means to travel; because the Buddha wished to travel through other lands, he entrusted Kāśyapa. From "You all should know..." onwards is answering the request by means of the Dharma. This again has two parts: first, answering the request; next, refuting the one-sided practice. Within the first answer, there are the Dharma, the simile, and the application. In the simile, from "in springtime..." onwards forms a simile for the one-sided practice. The old [commentators] say this refers to the wisdoms of hearing, reflection, and cultivation, but looking at the text, this does not fit. Now, following Master Lǎng of Héxī, we divide the text into two: first, explaining the arising of delusion and the loss of the principle; later, cultivating learning to seek the principle. The first sentence is the arising of delusion. "In springtime": at the beginning of the year, things are generated; this is a simile for the inception of delusion. Moreover, because understanding arises dependent on delusion, it says "in springtime." The two sentences "there were various people..." are the place where the jewel was lost. The old [commentators] say: the great pond is the teaching of impermanence. Master Lǎng says: it is the ocean of birth and death. The character 浴 (yù, bathe) is sometimes written 沼 (zhǎo, pond), but mostly 浴. The three sentences "boarded a boat and amused themselves..." are the conditions for losing the jewel. The old [commentators] say: because the understanding of the wisdom of hearing is shallow, it says "amused themselves." Héxī says: the mind of anger and pride is like boarding a boat; the pleasures of the five desires are like amusing themselves. Losing the vaiḍūrya jewel illustrates losing the buddhadhātu. The old [commentators] say either losing the principle or losing understanding. "Sank into the deep water": it was lost for the time being, not lost forever. The old [commentators] say: the perfect principle was concealed beneath the teaching of impermanence, and therefore it says "sank into the deep water." Furthermore, the principle of the buddhadhātu was submerged by anger, pride, and birth and death, and could not be made manifest. Next, from "At that time the people..." downwards concerns practicing understanding to seek the principle. It has two parts: first, one-sided cultivation relying on the former teaching, which is false cultivation; second, explaining the perfect cultivation of the present teaching, which is supreme cultivation. First, "competed to grab": this is one-sided cultivation of the contemplation of impermanence and suffering, and training in it. Tiles and stones injuring oneself illustrates suffering. Grass and wood being hollow and floating illustrates non-self. Sand and gravel at the bottom of the water being fragmented and dispersed illustrates impermanence. Each of them thought of themselves that none had failed to attain the principle. Next, from "joyfully took it out..." downwards illustrates the perfect cultivation of the present teaching. The old [commentators] also took this as the three wisdoms; the present interpretation does not hold this, but rather that it is still the one-sided cultivation not yet being clear and the principle not yet being ultimate, and therefore it says "only then did they realize it was not real." Taking a preliminary overview, there are four points: 1. awakening to the former being unreal; 2. causing sentient beings to awaken through the power of the buddhadhātu; 3. explaining faith and understanding; 4. explaining seeing with wisdom, which is attaining the principle. The first passage means that only after the present teaching has arisen does one awaken to the former being unreal. The old [commentators] gave two explanations: taking "joyfully" with the preceding, and "took it out" with what follows. Zhuāngyán took "joyfully took" with the preceding, and "out, not real" with what follows. Now we take them all as a single sentence. Next, from "At that time the precious jewel..." downwards, only through the power of the buddhadhātu does true cultivation begin to become clear. This means that upon hearing the present teaching expound the buddhadhātu, through the power of the buddhadhātu sentient beings are brought to awakening. "In the water": the buddhadhātu is not far away; it is right within the body of the five aggregates of birth and death. "The water became clear and pure": through the power of the buddhadhātu, sentient beings are brought to awakening. Third, from "Thereupon the great assembly..." downwards explains the initial faith and understanding; it is illustrated by seeing it without yet being able to take it. "Like the shape of the moon": the perfect principle of the middle way is ultimate and without defect. Fourth, from "At that time..." downwards is seeing with wisdom. "Calmly and slowly": dwelling in birth and death as though dwelling in nirvāṇa, hence it says "calmly and slowly." Next, from "You monks should not..." downwards applies the simile. This again has four parts: first, applying it to one-sided cultivation; next, applying it to perfect cultivation; third, from "You should further know..." downwards, reapplying it to one-sided cultivation; fourth, from "Desiring to attain the real..." downwards, reapplying it to perfect cultivation. The sūtra text here is a place to apply close attention, and so the old explanations are retained; please do not find it troublesome.

6.12

Now, to explain this section: Although the monks had heard of the new [letter] I, they had not eliminated their old attachments; thinking the Buddha was impermanent, they requested that he remain. Although they believed that the Dharma is permanent, they did not yet believe that the Buddha is permanent; although their mouths requested the new, their intent still followed the old. The Buddha rebuked their old attachment, saying: "You should not speak such words." The Buddha answered their request for the new, and therefore said: "All the correct Dharma is entrusted to Kāśyapa." Because the conditions for the Tathāgata had drawn to an end, he departed; because the capacity of Kāśyapa had arisen, it was entrusted to him. Internally identical to the Buddha's virtues, externally entrusted as a great minister to uphold the correct Dharma and teaching, he pointed directly to the perfect [letter] I as a refuge, answering what they had requested. Here, for the sake of those who learn the new [letter] I, he therefore says the Dharma is entrusted to Kāśyapa. Later in the text, for the sake of those who do not learn the new [letter] I, he therefore says Kāśyapa is impermanent and cannot bear the entrustment; each is for different conditions. Now, the first part, within answering the request by means of the Dharma, has two parts: 1. refutation by expounding the Dharma; 2. refutation by expounding a simile. Expounding the Dharma means: if you wish to learn the new [letter] I, you should transform delusion and generate faith; while false attachments still remain, the true Dharma cannot be imbued. Therefore it says: "What you previously cultivated concerning impermanence and suffering is not real." Next, within the simile, there are again two parts: the simile and its application. First, from "Like in springtime..." onwards, first sets forth the simile of negligence and losing the jewel, and next sets forth the simile of seeking and either attaining or not attaining; these are also called the simile of having skillful means and the simile of lacking skillful means. "Springtime": a time when year and things are both new and delightful, illustrating the five sense-objects and six desires as a realm of indulgence. "Various people": a general simile for the company of the negligent. "Bathing in a great pond": the great pond illustrates the river of birth and death; bathing illustrates anger, pride, love, hate, and the like; boarding a boat illustrates boarding various karmas; amusing themselves illustrates attachment to desirable karmic fruits. Losing the vaiḍūrya jewel illustrates lacking understanding: due to dissipation, wisdom and understanding are imperceptibly dimmed; therefore it is described as a "loss." Hence in this section, refuting the loss through conduct is expedient; it does not mean understanding first and losing it later, but rather that attachment to pleasure obscures understanding, which is figuratively called "loss." "Sank into the deep water": being obscured by birth and death and the aggregates. From "At that time the people..." onwards sets forth the simile of lacking skillful means and seeking understanding without attaining it. "The people": generally refers to the deluded crowd, specifically referring to the three cultivations. "All entered the water together": placing faith in the initial teaching is figuratively like entering the water. "Seeking this jewel": engaging in the inferior three cultivations. "Competed to grab tiles and stones": verifying the three [characteristics] as real. "Each claiming to have obtained it": saying they have attained extinction. The single sentence "joyfully took it out" illustrates praising the elephant's footprint above. First, well cultivating non-self, inner attachment was held in their hearts, hence it says "joyfully"; praising it before the Buddha, hence it says "took it out." This illustrates the intent of holding fast to attachments and giving rise to doubts above. "Only then did they realize it was not real" forms a simile for those with skillful means who seek understanding and attain it. This illustrates that upon hearing the present teaching refute the former principle and practice as unreal, only then did they realize that suffering, impermanence, and so forth are false, identical to tiles and gravel; therefore it says "only then did they realize it was not real." Taken altogether from above, this forms six meanings that jointly explain the text on seeking and attaining. As for the precious jewel: the jewel is fundamentally possessed, not merely of the present. Yet sentient beings, attached to pleasure, sink to the bottom of the water; investigating with clumsy contemplation, they ultimately cannot attain the jewel that is the principle itself. Through hearing the present teaching, knowing the former was not real, knowing words and knowing meanings begins from the present sūtra: this is the jewel of the name-and-word stage. "At that time the precious jewel was still in the water; by the power of the jewel, the water became completely clear and pure": this is the jewel of the contemplative practice stage. Contemplating the principle based on the teaching, the principle is what is expressed; therefore it says "was still in the water." That which expresses corresponds to that which is expressed, and that which is expressed corresponds to that which expresses; therefore it says that by the power of the jewel the water became clear and pure, and thereupon the great assembly saw the precious jewel. "Still beneath the water, just like looking up at the shape of the moon in the sky": this is the jewel of the stage of resemblance. Looking up at the moon, it vaguely resembles a jewel; resembling understanding borders on truth, hence it says "thereupon saw"; the stage of resemblance is clearly revealed. Empty space illustrates resemblance permanence; the round moon illustrates resemblance bliss; the moonlight illustrates resemblance purity; being neither above nor below, taking what is above to compare with what is below, unobstructed in freedom, illustrates resemblance self (and so on). "At that time, one person": illustrates the jewel of partial realization. Because "one" designates a person, and this person has found the entrance, it says "one person." "The power of skillful means": the perfect cultivation prior to the path. "Calmly and slowly": being at peace in birth and death, understanding it as nirvāṇa. The subtle, correct contemplation is calm, detailed, and precise without dullness; the water of the teaching is unmoving, the waves of the mind correspond with the principle, which is partially obtaining the precious jewel. This uses the six stages to reveal that a person of supreme cultivation with skillful means seeks and obtains the precious jewel, which is convenient in terms of practice. "You monks": applies the two similes of attainment and loss. This again has two parts. The reason it is applied in two turns is that the first turn applies to the gain and loss of the three cultivations, and the later turn applies to the gain and loss of the four cultivations. Applying this meaning across all phenomena, in each case there are the two kinds of cultivation, inferior and supreme. Therefore the text says: "In every place, always cultivate the thought of self, and the thoughts of permanence, bliss, and purity." How could this be only in the present sūtra? It is not confined to a single realm: wherever one touches, contemplation is accomplished. Reflect on this.

6.13

Third, from "Then the monks" onward is the section resolving doubts regarding the teachings. The text has two parts: first, restating [the past position], and second, refuting it. First, the restatement fully contains the past teachings, practice, function, and principle: "as the Buddha previously taught" is the teaching; "and practicing" is the practice; "leaving behind arrogance and so on" is the function; "entering nirvāṇa" is the principle. Since practice and principle have already been refuted, the momentum of the words supports one another, but the primary focus is on the teaching: "If the past teaching was right, the present one should not be wrong; if the present teaching is right, why was it not spoken earlier?" and so forth. In the refutation, there are two parts: first, praising and questioning, and second, answering. The answer also has two parts: first, the parable, and second, the application. The parable has four parts: 1) the parable of the disease of the four inversions, 2) the parable of the medicine of the three cultivations, 3) the parable of the disease of the three cultivations, and 4) the parable of the medicine of the four virtues. In the first, there are six points: First, the diseased person is the king: inwardly dark concerning permanence and purity, outwardly displaying the power of a self, greedily seeking pleasure—this is the diseased person. Second, the master who maintains the inversions: non-Buddhists clinging to permanence and purity are "recalcitrant," and clinging to self and pleasure are "deceitful"; he is the master of false disease. Third, faith in and acceptance of false inversions refers to generously bestowing emoluments out of faith in false arts. Fourth, exclusively using milk-medicine is the inverted medicine: white color is permanence, sweet flavor is pleasure, unctuous moisture is the self, and being called medicine is purity—this is the false medicine. Fifth, he also does not know of himself that this is false. Sixth, from "this king" onward, he also does not recognize his disease. That the king does not discern is that the diseased person does not recognize that it is a disease of inversion. Having briefly correlated these, we re-explain the text. "King" takes governing as its meaning: just as one who receives conversion also has disciples, this is compared to a king. Ignorance is darkness; clinging to pleasure is dullness; worldly wisdom is having little wisdom. The physician is compared to non-Buddhists: in truth they cannot cure disease, yet they forcibly make demands of sentient beings. The Chunqiu Zuo Zhuan says: "A heart that does not emulate virtue and righteousness is 'recalcitrant'; a mouth that does not speak of loyalty and trustworthiness is 'deceitful.'" Non-Buddhists are also like this: inwardly without true understanding, outwardly without skillful speech. "Emoluments" refers to converted sentient beings making offerings to non-Buddhists. "Exclusively using milk-medicine" generally indicates few medicines for many diseases, neither knowing the medicine nor the disease. "Not knowing the source of the disease's arising": sentient beings' three poisons and eight inversions are due to grasping at marks, and grasping at marks is conditioned by ignorance; what they do not know is not knowing the disease. Although knowing milk-medicine, this is not knowing the medicine. The Buddha provisionally speaks of the self; they mistakenly grasp at identity or difference, suddenly saying it is blue, white, yellow, or black, and so forth. "Wind, cold, and heat diseases": administering medicine misses the proper mark. Wind is compared to anger, cold to delusion, and heat to craving. That "this king does not discern" means that not only does he not know the medicine, he also does not know the disease. Next, that "there was then a skilled physician" is a parable for the medicine of the three cultivations. The text has three parts: first, explaining the skilled physician; second, the conditions for treating the disease; and third, the actual treatment of the disease. In the first passage, the skilled physician understands the eight arts: 1) curing the body, 2) curing the eyes, 3) curing the fetus, 4) curing children, 5) curing wounds, 6) curing poisons, 7) curing demonic influences, and 8) knowing the stars. Inwardly, this corresponds to the Buddha knowing the eightfold noble path and being able to cure the disease of the eight inversions, and so on. Now, discussing physicians generally, there are ten kinds: The first treats disease only by increasing it without decrease, sometimes causing death; this is the non-Buddhist of nihilistic views. Indulging in evil dharmas, once wholesome dharmas have perished, the wisdom-life also dies. The second treats disease with neither increase nor decrease; this is the non-Buddhist of eternalist views. Throwing themselves from cliffs or leaping into fires, they do not give rise to dhyāna-concentration and cannot sever the fetters. The third only decreases without increasing; this is the worldly physician: once what was treated has healed, it flares up again; this is the non-Buddhist who severs fetters. The fourth treats disease such that having healed it does not flare up, but what is treated is not all-encompassing; this is the two vehicles. The fifth, although able to be all-encompassing, lacks skillful arts; this is the bodhisattva of the six perfections. The sixth treats without pain and affliction, but cannot treat one who is certain to die; this is the shared bodhisattva. The seventh treats difficult-to-heal diseases, but cannot treat all diseases simultaneously; this is the distinct bodhisattva. The eighth can treat them simultaneously, but cannot restore them to their original state; this is the perfect ten faiths. The ninth can treat them simultaneously and restore them to their original state, but cannot make them surpass the original state; this is the perfect middle-mind. The tenth can treat them simultaneously and also make them surpass the original state; this is the perfect later-mind. The skilled physician here is the tenth physician: penetrating the double flight of the two birds of permanence and impermanence and so on constitutes the eight arts. Next, from "At this time, the old physician" onward, are the conditions for treating the disease. There are two parts: first, similarities, and second, differences. The similarities are threefold: 1) similar karmic birth, 2) similar study, and 3) similar conditions for conversion. In the first, similar karmic birth, this shows the Tathāgata being born in the royal palace, taking a consort, and fathering a son, yet sentient beings did not know to consult and accept him, but instead gave rise to arrogance, as in the text. Second, similar study: riding in a goat cart to learn writing, practicing martial arts in the rear garden, taking off the crown and sending away the horse, going to Ārāḍa [Kālāma], six years of asceticism, and so on. As for "forty-eight years," the Madhyama Āgama says: "Studying under a non-Buddhist, one must first serve him for forty-eight years, and only then is the teaching imparted." The lineage master said: From the time the Buddha appeared in the world, it was altogether some fifty years. Only from the Lotus Sūtra onward up to the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] did he first clarify the long-standing origin; the teachings of the previous three periods only clarified attaining Buddhahood in this body without a separate original body. However, the respect between master and disciple must last one's whole life, which means he was still a disciple of the non-Buddhists; hence it says forty-eight years. From the Lotus Sūtra onward, there is a separate original body; only in the remaining two years was he no longer his disciple. This explanation is too loose. Furthermore, Kāishàn says: forty refers to the four dhyānas, and eight years refers to the eight attainments. The six-fascicle [version] says "forty-eight years." Yěchéng says: each of the eight dhyānas has six practices—repelling the coarse, painful, and obstructive below, and reaching for the superior, subtle, and liberated above—making forty-eight in total. According to the Tiāntái Zhǐguān, the four views are the root: each view has three provisionalities, each provisionality has four propositions; one view has twelve propositions, and the four views together make forty-eight propositions; these are the forty-eight years of false teachings. Third, "together entering to see the king" is the similarity in conditions of conversion. However, non-Buddhists truly lack the wisdom to discern capacities, and false teachings arose first; hence it is said to be similar. Next, from "At that time the visiting physician spoke to the king" onward, are the subsequent differences. There are again two parts: first, minor differences, and second, sudden differences. In the first passage, "medical prescriptions" refers to, for example, expounding the five precepts for Trapuṣa and the three refuges for Bhalika. "Technical skills" refers to supernatural powers, as explained in the Ruìyìng. "Governing the country and curing diseases": turning false to right through the three refuges is compared to governing a country; the five precepts curing the five evils is compared to curing disease. Furthermore, the refuges and precepts are both able to overturn falsity and cure evil. At that time, when the king heard this, it was turning to the right; driving [the old physician] out of the country was abandoning the false and following the right. From "the visiting physician" onward, are the sudden differences. There are again two parts: first, sudden difference in discerning capacity, and second, sudden difference in setting forth teachings. In the first, discerning capacity, there are questions and answers, though in reality there was not an explicit twofold exchange. First, requesting a wish is solely discerning the capacity for the initial teaching. Next, that the king immediately answered is the tacit matching of faculty and conditions. "A part of the right arm": the movement and readiness of the right hand is compared to the impermanence and suffering in the initial teaching. That it "would be ready for the remaining parts of the body" is compared to subsequent capacities and teachings all being compliant; this already indicates the intention for the great capacity. Another explanation: the right arm is compared to the view of self, and the remaining parts to the various afflictions. Making this explanation is convenient for the initial teaching. When that visiting physician says, "I dare not do too much," this is re-discerning the capacity, requiring only the single capacity for the initial teaching. "Doing much harms and damages": the self gives rise to afflictions and obstructs many things; if hearing the right teaching one still grasps at a self, one will sever the head of wholesome roots. "Premature death": severing afflictions through understanding is the end of life; obscuring understanding through afflictions is called premature death. Below, "The king then replied," sentient beings receive conversion. Further transmitting what has not been heard means that the superior, middling, and inferior all attain awakening. Next, from "At that time the visiting physician" onward, is the actual dispensing of teaching. Here, raising the five flavors refers to the five gateways of contemplation: pungent is compared to impurity, bitter to non-self, salty to impermanence, sweet to emptiness, and sour to suffering, and so on. Third, from "Not long afterward" onward, is the actual curing of sentient beings giving rise again to the disease of impermanence. Previously, refuting false permanence, he taught the teaching of impermanence. Sentient beings did not understand, firmly clinging that everything is impermanent, which again became a disease. For example, a foolish person takes a deer to be a horse; a wise person tells him, "This deer is not a horse." Although knowing that a deer lacks a horse, he still grasps at non-existence as a horse. Where is there non-existence that is a horse? Therefore, the absence of a horse is the disease. Giving rise to the inversion of impermanence again has many kinds: first, asserting that the Buddha-fruit is impermanent—this disease is easy to see; second, asserting that saṃsāra is impermanent—this disease is hard to see. Why? Saṃsāra is itself true, permanent buddhadhātu; since they assert it to be impermanent, how could this not be a disease? The text says "The king again contracted a disease," which is the disease of sentient beings. The text has two parts: 1) the actual arising of the disease, and 2) faculties and conditions calling upon the Buddha. The first is as in the text. Next, from "immediately summoned this physician" onward, faculties and conditions call upon the Buddha, like sending an envoy to summon the physician. The old version says, "I am now severely ill, exhausted and in pain, on the verge of death." Fourth, from "The physician diagnosed the king's disease" onward, expounds the present medicine of the four virtues of true permanence. The text has four parts: 1) speaking to them provisionally, 2) sentient beings not accepting it, 3) the Tathāgata speaking again, and 4) sentient beings finally accepting it. The first passage again has four parts: 1) direct explanation, 2) opening the provisional, 3) revealing the real, and 4) medicine and disease countering each other. The first is the Tathāgata directly expounding permanence for them. Next, from "I previously..." onward, is opening the provisional. The old version says, "Severing milk-medicine was a great lie." The present sūtra, having been revised, merely says, "Formerly it was not true speech," clarifying that the past was provisional expediency, an explanation that was not ultimate. Third, from "If you now consume it" onward, is revealing the real, which reveals the present teaching of permanence and pleasure. Fourth, from "The king now suffers from heat" onward, is medicine and disease countering each other. Impermanence is compared to fire, which can burn the world; hence it says "suffering from heat." Now, the medicine of perfect permanence is like the flavor of milk, able to cure heat disease.

First 13 of 18 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經疏 — Classical Chinese