三彌勒經疏 1.6

1.6

第二、教宗體者，有二：初總辨宗體、後別顯經宗。云總辨，即二家說。謂江南諸師多作是說，約所詮義辨宗體，云宗即體、體即宗，宗體無別故。今唐世諸師云：教名為經、義名為宗，故宗體不同。此說各有得失。謂若如初說者，法義二無礙境應同故。謂論云「法無礙，緣名等；義無礙，緣所詮」故。若如後說者，契經體性應非義故。若爾者，便違論文及義故。初義義中生解究竟門，後義教義中令差別門故，亦名共得。然則今辨教宗體，自有二門：一教義別性，即宗體不同，謂教名體、義名宗。二文義同用門，即宗體無異。謂義亦教教，以宗體無異故。《對法論》云「法所緣者，謂名句文身」，宗即體故。舊中□□云「顯體分即所詮十義」，體即宗，以《瑜伽論》云「經體有二：一文、二義」。次後別顯經宗者，三說。一云：此經以三昧為宗，謂願生兜率得見彌勒，自非三昧不成就故。一云：不然。若雖修定，而若無觀心，都無所就故，應說以觀心為宗。故經下文云「若作是觀名為正觀，若他觀者名為耶觀。」又若不許，便違題目云觀義故。一云：前說皆未悉理，謂定非欲界因故、觀非正所求故，應說即以依正因果為宗。後說為勝，然此中三說。一云：唯以眾生生天見聖因果為宗，謂人生天，天得不退轉，是經大意故。一云：正顯彌勒生兜率令益眾生，乃見經本意故。一云：即以菩薩及眾生依正因果為宗，謂經云「是名兜率陀天十善報應勝妙福處」者，即顯菩薩因果也。又下云「佛諸弟子修行六□即生彼天」者，顯眾生因果。然題目中觀□眾生因之、生言表菩薩果者，影略互顯也。《上生經》辨宗已意。次辨二經宗者，有二說：一云廣辨依正報及欲生修因，以《下生經》為宗；廣顯國土并佛神德，及以眾生見佛因緣，《成佛經》為宗。今云不然，謂依正二報、眾生見佛，二經皆同故。應說二經皆以彌勒七相教化眾生，隨其所應，今得自棄之果為宗。

Second, concerning the central theme and doctrinal essence of the teaching, there are two parts: first, a general analysis of the central theme and doctrinal essence; second, specifically revealing the central theme of the sūtra. Regarding the general analysis, there are the explanations of two traditions. That is, the masters of Jiangnan mostly made this statement, analyzing the central theme and doctrinal essence in terms of the signified meaning: saying that the central theme is the doctrinal essence and the doctrinal essence is the central theme, because the central theme and doctrinal essence are not distinct. The various masters of the present Tang era say: the teaching is called the sūtra, and the meaning is called the central theme; hence the central theme and doctrinal essence are not the same. Each of these explanations has its strengths and weaknesses. If it is as the first explanation says, then the cognitive objects of the two unimpeded knowledges of phenomena and meaning would have to be identical, because the treatise says: "Unimpeded knowledge of phenomena has names and the like as its object; unimpeded knowledge of meaning has the signified as its object." If it is as the latter explanation says, then the nature of the essence of the sūtra would have to not be meaning. If so, it would contradict both the text of the treatise and the meaning. The first explanation is the gate of giving rise to definitive understanding within the meaning, and the latter explanation is the gate of causing distinctions within teaching and meaning; therefore they can also be termed jointly correct. However, now in analyzing the central theme and doctrinal essence of the teaching, there are naturally two approaches: first, the distinct natures of teaching and meaning, in which the central theme and doctrinal essence are different—namely, the teaching is called the doctrinal essence and the meaning is called the central theme; second, the approach of the shared application of text and meaning, in which the central theme and doctrinal essence are not distinct—namely, the meaning is also the teaching of the teaching, because the central theme and doctrinal essence are not distinct. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says: "The objective condition of phenomena refers to collections of names, phrases, and phonemes"; because the central theme is the doctrinal essence. An old [...] says: "The section revealing the doctrinal essence is precisely the ten signified meanings"; the doctrinal essence is the central theme, because the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra says: "The essence of a sūtra has two: first, text; second, meaning." Next, concerning specifically revealing the central theme of the sūtra, there are three explanations. One says: This sūtra takes samādhi as its central theme; meaning that if one wishes to be born in Tuṣita and see Maitreya, it cannot be accomplished without samādhi. Another says: That is not so. Even if one cultivates concentration, if one lacks a contemplating mind, nothing at all will be accomplished; hence one should say it takes the contemplating mind as its central theme. Therefore, the lower text of the sūtra says: "If one performs such a contemplation, it is called correct contemplation; if one performs other contemplations, it is called wrong contemplation." Furthermore, if this is not accepted, it contradicts the meaning of "contemplation" in the title. Another says: The previous explanations have not fully grasped the principle. Concentration is not a cause for the desire realm, and contemplation is not the primary object sought; hence one should say it takes circumstantial and primary causes and fruits as its central theme. The latter explanation is superior. However, within this there are three explanations. One says: It takes solely sentient beings' cause and fruit of taking birth in heaven and seeing the noble one as its central theme, meaning that humans are born in heaven and in heaven attain avaivartika, which is the general intention of the sūtra. Another says: It directly reveals Maitreya's birth in Tuṣita to benefit sentient beings, which truly shows the original intention of the sūtra. Another says: It takes the circumstantial and primary causes and fruits of both the bodhisattva and sentient beings as its central theme. That is, when the sūtra says "This is called the supreme, wondrous place of blessing from the retribution of the ten virtuous actions in the Tuṣita heaven," it directly reveals the bodhisattva's cause and fruit. Moreover, below it says "The Buddha's disciples who practice the six [...] are immediately born in that heaven," which reveals sentient beings' cause and fruit. However, in the title, "contemplation" [...] sentient beings' cause, and the word "ascent" expresses the bodhisattva's fruit; they mutually reveal each other through implicit correspondence. The determination of the central theme of the Ascent Sūtra is complete. Next, in determining the central themes of the other two sūtras, there are two explanations: One says that extensively analyzing the circumstantial and primary fruitions and the causes cultivated for desiring birth is the central theme of the Descent Sūtra; extensively displaying the land, the Buddha's spiritual virtues, and sentient beings' causes and conditions for seeing the Buddha is the central theme of the Attainment of Buddhahood Sūtra. Now we say this is not so, because both circumstantial and primary fruitions and sentient beings seeing the Buddha are shared by both sūtras. One should say that both sūtras take Maitreya teaching and transforming sentient beings through the seven aspects, according with their capacities, to obtain the fruit of abandoning oneself, as their central theme.