維摩義記 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.72 — 3 parts

1.1

Preface to the Printing of the Record of the Meaning of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra

I once saw in the Tiantai Monastic Controller's General Catalogue of the Canon of Teachings: "The Record of the Meaning of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra in four fascicles, composed by Huiyuan." Thereupon I considered that our ancestral Great Master Zhiyi, when commenting on the Contemplation Sūtra, largely adopted [the interpretations of the master of] Jingying [temple, Huiyuan], and regarding the Vimalakīrti Sūtra it was presumably the same. Recently a bookseller arrived carrying a case containing this Record of the Meaning, and I acquired it with great joy. Reading it, although it was not entirely as I had originally envisaged, its explanations are most exhaustive. As for its exposition of a single doctrine, it mostly raises objections first and only then resolves them, truly never forgetting the structure of the mātṛkā; the master of Jiaxiang in the Guanzhong region could not rival it. When our ancestor expounded the meanings, phenomena and principle were both rounded out, yet he took contemplation of principle as primary and phenomenal explanations were somewhat concise; therefore, would it not be fitting to read this Record first and afterwards harmonize it with the discussions of Zhiyi? However, omissions and errors are particularly numerous; may those who obtain a good edition in the future kindly correct them.

1.3

Time:

1.4

Respectfully prefaced on the day following the new moon in the tenth winter month of the renchen year of the Shōtoku era [1712], by monk Katō of Hōju on Mount Hiei.

1.5

Composed by the monk Huiyuan.

1.6

Although the holy teachings are numerous, essentially there are only two. What are these two? They are the śrāvaka piṭaka and the bodhisattva piṭaka. Teaching the dharmas of the śrāvakas is called the śrāvaka piṭaka; teaching the dharmas of the bodhisattvas is called the bodhisattva piṭaka. Within what is taught in the śrāvaka piṭaka, there are two kinds: first, the śrāvaka-śrāvaka; second, the pratyekabuddha-śrāvaka. As for the śrāvaka-śrāvaka: this person originally sought the śrāvaka path and constantly delighted in contemplating the dharma of the four noble truths, perfecting the nature of a śrāvaka. In his final existence he encounters the Buddha and desires the lesser; the Tathāgata expounds the dharma of the four noble truths for him, and he attains awakening to the Path. Because his original nature was that of a śrāvaka, now hearing the voice (śabda) again he attains awakening to the Path; therefore he is called a śrāvaka-śrāvaka. The sūtra says: "For those who seek to be śrāvakas, he expounds the four noble truths"; the discourse is based on this. As for the pratyekabuddha-śrāvaka: this person originally sought the pratyekabuddha path and constantly delighted in contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination, perfecting the nature of a pratyekabuddha. In his final existence, he encounters the Buddha expounding the twelve links of dependent origination for him, and he attains awakening to the Path. With the original nature of a pratyekabuddha, in his final existence he hears the voice and awakens to the Path; therefore he is called a pratyekabuddha-śrāvaka. The sūtra says: "For those who seek to be pratyekabuddhas, he expounds the twelve links of dependent origination"; the statement is based on this. Although these two are distinct, their anticipated lesser fruition is the same, and the locus of relying on the teaching is equal; for this reason they are alike designated śrāvakas. The teaching expounded for these two persons is called the śrāvaka piṭaka. Within what is taught in the bodhisattva piṭaka, there are also two kinds: first, gradual entry; second, sudden awakening. As for gradual entry: this person in the past practiced the Great Dharma, but midway regressed and abided in the lesser; later he returned and entered the Great. The Great arising from the lesser is termed gradual. Therefore the sūtra says: "Excepting those who previously practiced and studied the Hīnayāna, I now also cause them to enter into this dharma." This is the bodhisattva of gradual entry. As for sudden awakening: there are sentient beings who have long practiced wholesome roots concordant with the Mahāyāna; upon first seeing the Buddha now, they are immediately able to enter the Great. The Great not originating from the lesser is designated sudden. Therefore the sūtra says: "There are sentient beings who, lifetime after lifetime, have constantly received my teaching; upon first seeing my body and hearing what I expound, they immediately have faith in and accept it, entering the Tathāgata's wisdom." This is sudden awakening. The bodhisattva of gradual entry relies on the shallow to step to the distant; the bodhisattva of sudden awakening in a single leap understands the Great. Although sudden and gradual are distinct, because at that time their locus of receiving the Great is one, what is expounded for these two persons is the bodhisattva piṭaka. Although the holy teachings are numerous, they do not exceed these two. Therefore Nāgārjuna said: "After the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, Kāśyapa and Ānanda compiled the Tripiṭaka at Rājagṛha into the śrāvaka piṭaka; Mañjuśrī and Ānanda compiled the Mahāyāna at the Iron Ring Mountains into the bodhisattva piṭaka." The Bodhisattvabhūmi also says: "The Buddha expounded the sūtras on the path of escaping suffering for the practices of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas; those who compiled the sūtras compiled them into two piṭakas, taking what expounds the practice of śrāvakas as the śrāvaka piṭaka, and what expounds the practice of bodhisattvas as the bodhisattva piṭaka." The Bodhisattvabhūmi further says: "Among the twelve divisions of sūtras, only the vaipulya division is the bodhisattva piṭaka; the remaining eleven divisions are the śrāvaka piṭaka." Thus we know the holy teachings do not exceed these two. These two are also termed Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, the half-letter teaching and the full-letter teaching, and so on; although the names change, their meanings are not different. Now, this sūtra is subsumed under the bodhisattva piṭaka among the two piṭakas; it is the Dharma wheel of the sudden teaching for people of ripe faculties. The scope of the teaching is thus known.

1.7

Next, the explanation of its title. When it now says "Sūtra Expounded by Vimalakīrti", also named "Inconceivable Liberation", this is to establish the specific title of this division of sūtra. Why all sūtras entitle their names at the head is to reveal the dharma being elucidated. This sūtra takes inconceivable liberation as its central theme; therefore it is marked out at the beginning. However, the establishing of titles among sūtras is not uniform, having many kinds: some are named in terms of the dharma, such as the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and so forth; some take their designation from a person, such as Sarvadātā, Sudāna, and so forth; some establish their appellation according to an event or thing, such as the Sūtra of the Withered Rice Stalk, and so forth; some reveal their names according to an analogy, such as the Mahāmegha Sūtra, Ratnakaraṇḍa Sūtra, and so forth; some display both person and dharma, such as the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, and so forth; some present both event and dharma, such as that Vaipulya Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra, and so forth; some entitle both dharma and analogy, such as the Avataṃsaka Sūtra and Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra; some establish both person and event, such as the Sūtra of Śāriputra Inquiring about Illness, and so forth. Cases like these are not singular. Now this sūtra takes person and dharma as its title: "Expounded by Vimalakīrti" is the person's name; "Inconceivable Liberation" is the dharma's name. The dharma relies on the person for transmission, hence one must designate the person; the dharma is what is manifested, hence one must present the dharma. But at the head of sūtras, the listing of persons has four types: first, entitling the speaker, as in Śrīmālā and so forth; second, presenting the questioner, as in that Maitreyaparipṛcchā Sūtra and so forth; third, presenting the person spoken about, as in the Śyāmaka Sūtra, Sarvadātā, and so forth; fourth, presenting the person being converted, as in the Yuye Sūtra, Sumāgadhāvadāna, and so forth. Here, the speaker is presented. The speakers are diverse and of five types: first, spoken by the Buddha; second, spoken by holy disciples; third, spoken by devas; fourth, spoken by ṛṣis and the like; fifth, spoken by transformed manifestations. In this sūtra, it is spoken by a holy disciple in Vimalakīrti. However, in this sūtra there are three distinct assemblies: the first assembly is spoken by the Buddha; the second assembly is spoken by Vimalakīrti; the third assembly is spoken jointly by the Buddha and Vimalakīrti. Because the Buddha spoke, the text below states: "When the Buddha had expounded the sūtra, the great assembly rejoiced." Because Vimalakīrti spoke, he is presented at the beginning. Because the dharma of inconceivable liberation is entrusted to this person, he is marked out at the start. "Vimalakīrti" is a foreign word; the correct translation here is Pure Name (Jingming), and translated literally according to the meaning it is Stainless Reputation (Wugoucheng). This is truly because the person's dharmakāya is pure and wondrously transcendent over defilement; inner virtue already overflowing, his fine renown is displayed externally; resorting to the name to manifest the virtue, he is named Stainless Reputation and also called Pure Name. Furthermore, this person inwardly cherishes the true Path and is capable of limitless skillful conversion; though appearing identical to worldly dust, his mind dwells beyond entanglements; being in defilement yet without pollution, he is therefore called Pure, and also called Stainless. Stainless, pure virtue wondrously transcends clumsy speech; using a name provisionally to reveal it causes people to take refuge in it; the name that reveals his virtue is called Stainless Reputation. As for "expounded": this Vimalakīrti is filled with wisdom within and his virtue is revered by all holy ones; with immeasurable great compassion and upāya, he manifests residing in Vaiśālī, using illness as an occasion to invite inquiries so as to disseminate the dharma's conversion and promulgate virtue to benefit others; hence it is called "expounded". As for "sūtra": in foreign languages it is called sūtra; translated here it is called a thread. The speech of the holy ones can string together all dharmas like a thread stringing flowers; therefore, according to this metaphor, it is called a thread. A thread can string flowers; warp-threads (jing) can hold the weft; their functions being similar, it is also called a scripture (jing). If relying on secular glosses, "jing" means constant (chang). Persons differ between past and present, but doctrinal principles are eternally fixed; hence it is called constant. How are "scripture" and "constant" related? Explaining "scripture" by "constant": scripture has the meaning of passing through (jingli); the single dharma of the teaching passes through antiquity and traverses the present, existing eternally, which is called constant. "Also named Inconceivable Liberation" takes its name in terms of the dharma. Previously, an appellation was established with reference to the speaker; now a title is further established with reference to the dharma; hence it is called "also named". "Inconceivable Liberation" is one name; it is the first liberation gate among the immeasurable liberations attained in the tenth bhūmi. That Vimalakīrti's virtue fills the dharmadhātu; according to his manifestations of conversion, he specially abides in this gate to manifest its title; now in this sūtra he expounds what he has personally attained to cause people to aspire and seek it, which is why it is marked out at the beginning. Now this gate of inconceivable liberation is indeed the basis of the transformative function of spiritual powers; when buddhas and bodhisattvas realize and enter this gate, cognitive knowing is eternally extinguished and the mind of grasping and rejecting is destroyed; purely through the power of the liberation dharma gate they can manifest diverse transformative deeds of spiritual powers, just as a cintāmaṇi, though without conceptual discrimination, can universally rain down all kinds of things; the dharma gates attained by the buddhas and bodhisattvas are all alike in this manner. "Inconceivable" (bukesi) is an expression praising its depth: "inconceivable" (busi) refers to the mind, and "ineffable" (buyi) pertains to the mouth. The true virtue of liberation wondrously transcends worldly sentiment and delusion; mind and speech cannot reach it; therefore it is named inconceivable. There are three distinctions: First, discussed in terms of the essence. For this gate of inconceivable liberation, the true mind is the essence; the essence cuts off names and words, beyond the reach of mind and thought, hence called inconceivable. Second, stated in terms of characteristics. This liberation gate takes all virtues as its characteristics; virtue reaches to the limits of the dharmadhātu, difficult to measure or calculate, wondrously surpassing the scope of sentiment, hence called inconceivable. Third, in terms of its function. This liberation gate takes spiritual powers as its function; although its essence is wondrously quiescent, it is the nature of the function of dependent origination; when buddhas and bodhisattvas realize and enter it, they can manifest immeasurable transformative functions of spiritual powers, taking oceans into a pore, holding Sumeru within a mustard seed, diverse transformations beyond the reckoning of sentiment and conditions, hence called inconceivable. As for "liberation": this presents its essential nature of dharmas. Earlier, "inconceivable" applied universally to all virtues, and it was not known which dharma was inconceivable; to set it apart from other virtues, "liberation" is therefore revealed. However, "liberation" is also broadly pervasive, so it must be distinguished by the preceding "inconceivable". True virtue is free from entanglements, unobstructed and unhindered; hence it is called liberation. Distinctions are also threefold: First, discussed in terms of the essence. The true mind's essence is pure; by nature it transcends worldly defilement, and its own essence is without entanglement; hence it is called liberation. Second, stated in terms of characteristics. Fetters and hindrances are eternally eliminated, and pure virtue is free of entanglements; hence it is called liberation. Third, distinguished in terms of function. Its wondrous function is limitless, and what it performs is unimpeded; hence it is called liberation.

1.8

Question: This dharma is called liberation; between the two liberations of mind and wisdom, which gate subsumes it? Explanation: It combines and communicates with both. In essence it is mind liberation; in function it is wisdom liberation. The mind of true consciousness being free from defilement is called liberation, so the essence is mind; wisdom's function being unconditioned is called liberation, so the function is wisdom. Because the function is wisdom, in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] it is said that wisdom liberation opens out to five paths; one clearly knows that its universal function is entirely wisdom liberation.

1.9

Another question: As for this liberation, between conditioned and unconditioned liberations, which liberation subsumes it? The meaning also combines both. In essence it is unconditioned, free from defilement and quiescent; in function it is conditioned, with wondrous functions arising in profusion; this brings forth its common designation.

1.10

"The Chapter on the Buddha Land" is arranged at the beginning. Chapters established in the various sūtras generally fall into three types: First, named after the broad [portion], such as the "Chapter on the Bodhisattva Practice" and the like. The opening of that chapter is not about bodhisattva practice, but following its broad subsequent [content], it is named "Bodhisattva Practice." Second, named after the brief [portion]. As below in the text, in the "Chapter on Contemplating Sentient Beings," only a brief passage of text at the very beginning contemplates sentient beings, while the remainder does not; subsuming the broad under the brief, it is named "Contemplating Sentient Beings." Third, named directly according to the phenomenon [treated], such as the "Chapter on the Disciples" and the like below in the text. Now, the phrase "Buddha Land" is named after the broad [portion]; if named from the brief beginning, it should be called the "Introductory Chapter." As for the term "Buddha Land": "Buddha" is explained below. It marks the person to distinguish the place; hence "Buddha" is raised. "Land" (guo) is like a place; sūtras also call it "earth" (tu), and also designate it as "realm" (jie). Settling the body is called "earth"; gathering the people is termed "state/land" (guo); distinguishing differences among countries and earths is termed "realm." If one speaks of its "earth," wherever there is a body, it exists. If one speaks of its "land/state," it exists where there is a ruling king, and does not exist where there is no king. Here, it is manifested in terms of the Tathāgata as ruling king; hence it is called "Buddha Land." This land is actually cohabited with sentient beings; the Buddha, having plumbed the reality of the land, is the master of transformation, so it is mentioned specifically. The dharmakāya is equal and truly has no dwelling place; demonstrating transformation in a direction, it is therefore called a "Buddha Land." Furthermore, although the body and the land are equal, in accordance with their doctrinal aspects, body and land are ever distinct; hence, using the body of the equal dharma gate, it still relies on the land of the equal dharma gate. Just like the ten marks of the ocean, it is also due to mutual dependence that it is called a "Buddha Land." "Chapter" means a distinct section. What is explained in the preceding chapter differs from what is explained in the subsequent chapter, and what is explained in the subsequent chapter differs from what is explained in the preceding chapter; hence it is called a distinct section. Alternatively, "chapter" (pin) means a category (pinlei): doctrinal categories that follow one another are called a "chapter." Throughout this sūtra, there are fourteen distinct chapters from beginning to end; this chapter establishes the beginning, so it is called "First." From beginning to end, this sūtra is differentiated according to four perspectives: first, differentiation according to location; second, differentiation according to assembly; third, differentiation according to meaning; fourth, differentiation according to text. Concerning differentiation according to location: this is discussed based on the order of this single exposition. The distinct locations are only two: first, the Āmrapālī Grove; second, Vimalakīrti's house. If extended generally to what Vimalakīrti taught throughout his life, the distinct locations would be numerous. Concerning differentiation according to assembly: this is discussed based on the order of this single exposition. The distinct assemblies are three: first, the Āmrapālī assembly; second, Vimalakīrti's room; third, the reassembled Āmrapālī [gathering]. If extended generally to what Vimalakīrti taught throughout his life, the distinct assemblies would be immeasurable. Concerning differentiation according to meaning: the central purport of this sūtra returns to the meaning of inconceivable liberation. This dharma of inconceivable liberation is a single gate of meaning within the dharmadhātu. Although the gate is distinct as one, its wondrous purport is open and all-harmonizing, with no meaning it does not subsume; because it subsumes everything, all dharmas enter into it. Although the dharmas it gathers are numerous, essentially there are only two kinds: first, the principle-dharma; second, the practice-dharma. "Principle" refers to tathatā; as it varies according to exposition, its gates are manifold. Therefore, in the text below, it sometimes proclaims tathatā, dharmatā, and the reality-limit as the principle-dharma, or expounds the three emptynesses, or expounds the two truths, or the two non-selves, the gate of non-duality, and so forth. "Practice" refers to cause and effect: "cause" refers to the cause of the dharmakāya and pure land, while "effect" refers to the fruition of the dharmakāya and pure land; hence the text below reveals them fully. What is the manner of their revelation? People often make a rough division: the first two assemblies specifically clarify the cause and effect of the Tathāgata's pure land, while the third assembly specifically clarifies the cause and effect of the Tathāgata's dharmakāya. But upon careful examination, they penetrate each other. What is this meaning? As in the first [assembly], the merging of the canopies and the manifestation of transformations reveal the Tathāgata's inconceivable power, which is the fruition of the dharmakāya; Ratnakūṭa's praise, generating the resolve, and making vows are the cause of the dharmakāya. Ratnakūṭa also subsequently reveals the cause and effect of the pure land. In the second assembly, from the beginning through to the entry into the gate of non-duality, it broadly clarifies the cause and effect of the Tathāgata's dharmakāya. The single "Sarvagandhasugandha" Chapter reveals the cause and effect of the Tathāgata's pure land: its beginning clarifies the fruition, and practicing the ten and practicing the eight are the cause of the pure land. In the third assembly, the "Bodhisattva Practice" Chapter jointly clarifies the cause of both the dharmakāya and pure land, and the "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" Chapter jointly clarifies the fruition of both the dharmakāya and pure land. There, seeing Śākyamuni and Akṣobhya Buddha is the fruition of the dharmakāya; manifesting the Abhirati world is the fruition of the pure land. Therefore, the Buddha says below, "If a bodhisattva wishes to obtain a pure Buddha land, he should learn the path traversed by Akṣobhya Buddha," and the text below further says, "May all sentient beings obtain a pure land like that of Akṣobhya Buddha." One clearly knows that that text also reveals the pure land. All of these use phenomena as a vehicle to reveal the inconceivable dharma; though what they distinguish is manifold, none fails to become the single dharma gate of inconceivable liberation. This inconceivable dharma is manifestly realized in two types of persons: namely, the Buddhas and the bodhisattvas. Based on this single teaching, it is revealed provisionally with respect to Vimalakīrti and Śākyamuni. Therefore, in the text below, the first assembly is revealed using Śākyamuni as a vehicle, and the latter two assemblies are revealed using Vimalakīrti as a vehicle. However, the inconceivable virtues are accomplished within; internal virtues being difficult to manifest, they are revealed using the marks of function as a vehicle. What are the marks of revelation? In the first assembly below, causing the canopies to manifest transformations and pressing the earth to make it pure reveal the inconceivable marks of the Tathāgata. In the second assembly, borrowing thrones from the King of Lamps and fetching food from Sarvagandhasugandha reveal the inconceivable marks of Vimalakīrti. In the third assembly, holding the great assembly in his palm and proceeding to the Āmrapālī [Grove], and receiving the distant Abhirati and placing it in this land, reveals the inconceivable marks of Vimalakīrti. This is the third, differentiation according to meaning.

1.11

Next, the fourth perspective is differentiation according to text. In a detailed division, the text has eight divisions, but when classified together, there are only three. Concerning the eight: within the three assemblies, each has a prologue and a main body, which makes six divisions. The words "Thus have I heard" at the beginning of the sūtra constitute the general prologue verifying faith for the entire work, taken separately as one. From "The Buddha said to Śāriputra: 'Do you see Abhirati and Akṣobhya or not?'" onward clarifies the meaning of the propagation of the entire work, taken separately as one. Together with the rest, eight are spoken of. As for being classified into three: these eight divisions, when summarized in essential terms, are only the prologue, the main body, and the propagation. Within this, there are five stages of inclusion and exclusion: First, taking specifically Vimalakīrti's current exposition as the main body. Then from the beginning down to his lying alone on a single bed, all serves as the prologue. From "Welcome, Mañjuśrī; you come without the mark of coming" onward is its main body. From "The Buddha said to Śāriputra: 'Do you see Abhirati and Akṣobhya or not?'" onward is its propagation.

1.12

Question: How can the first assembly serve as a prologue? [Answer:] Because in the first assembly the great assembly gathered like clouds, and afterwards an instruction was issued ordering them to go inquire about his illness, it can therefore serve as a prologue. The second single chapter manifests illness as the occasion, and after the "Chapter on the Disciples" [the teaching] is elicited due to suffering; therefore, it can serve as a prologue. What has been traditionally transmitted from ancient times mostly relies on this classification.

1.13

Second, taking all the teachings expounded by Vimalakīrti throughout his life as the main body. Then from the beginning down to his expedient manifestation of having an illness in his body, all serves as the prologue. From "Because of his illness, the king and great ministers all went to inquire about his illness" onward is all the main body. It directly reveals the inconceivable dharma expounded by Vimalakīrti throughout his life to cause people to learn it. The propagation is as before.

1.14

Question: How can the first assembly serve as the prologue? [Answer:] This meaning is similar to the previous one. Because in the first assembly the great assembly gathered like clouds, and the Tathāgata issued an instruction ordering them to go inquire about his illness, broadly revealing what Vimalakīrti expounded throughout his life, it can therefore serve as a prologue. The beginning of the second chapter lists the persons and praises their virtues to give rise to what is expounded subsequently; hence it is also called a prologue.

1.15

Third, taking comprehensively all the dharmas expounded by both the Buddha and Vimalakīrti as the main body. Then from the beginning to the end of the verses, it is viewed as the prologue. After Ratnakūṭa's request is its main body, directly revealing what was expounded to cause people to learn it. The propagation is as before. Fourth, taking comprehensively the inconceivable virtues of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas as the main body. Then from the beginning down to outshining the great assemblies that had arrived is classified as the prologue. From "In the city of Vaiśālī there was an elder's son named Ratnakūṭa" onward is all the main body, because it reveals the virtues of inconceivable liberation. The propagation is as above. Fifth, distinguishing the three parts in relation to the individual sūtras of the three assemblies. Then the initial "Thus have I heard" serves as the general prologue verifying faith for the entire work. From "At one time the Buddha was in Vaiśālī" onward are the individual sūtras of the three assemblies. The single text on propagation is fully as classified before. This is largely similar to the Avataṃsaka: in that sūtra, the initial "Thus have I heard" is the general prologue verifying faith for the entire work. From "At one time the Buddha was in Magadha" onward are the individual sūtras of the eight assemblies. The single text on propagation did not arrive from the foreign country. The sectional division of this sūtra is roughly the same as that one; we now follow this final classification to divide and explain the text.

1.16

Within explaining the general prologue that verifies faith, there is differentiation according to three perspectives: first, explaining the reason for having "Thus have I heard"; second, explaining the intent behind establishing "Thus have I heard"; third, directly explaining the words "Thus have I heard." Concerning the reason for its existence: for what cause and condition do the heads of all sūtras have the words "Thus have I heard"? Because Ānanda established them. For what cause and condition did the monk Ānanda establish them? Because the Buddha taught him to do so. Why did the Buddha teach him? Because Ānanda requested it. For what cause and condition did the monk Ānanda make the request? Because Aniruddha instructed him to do so. For what cause and condition did he instruct him? Because he saw Ānanda grieved and distressed. Why was the monk Ānanda grieved and distressed? Because he saw the Tathāgata enter parinirvāṇa. When the Buddha was about to pass into extinction, lying with his head to the north in the Sala Grove of Twin Trees, Ānanda at that time, because the Buddha was about to pass into extinction, wailed, wept, and was unable to contain himself behind the Buddha's rope bed. Aniruddha saw his weeping and awakened Ānanda: "You are the transmitter of the Dharma; why do you not question the Buddha about affairs of future generations? What benefit is there in mere grieving?" Ānanda replied: "My mind is now submerged in an ocean of grief. What could I know to ask?" Aniruddha then instructed Ānanda to question the Buddha on four matters: First, asking: after the World-Honoured One passes into extinction, who shall the monks take as teacher? Second, asking: after the Buddha passes into extinction, what shall the monks dwell relying upon? Third, asking: how shall we dwell together with monks of bad nature? Fourth, asking: what words should be placed at the head of all sūtras? Ānanda received this instruction, his mind slightly revived, and receiving the instruction he questioned the Buddha; the Buddha answered according to his questions. As for who all monks should take as teacher: they should take the prātimokṣa as teacher; even if I were to remain in the world, it would be no different from this. The mokṣa is the precepts, that which monks learn; therefore it is said to be the teacher. As for what the monks should dwell relying upon: they should rely upon the four smṛtyupasthānas. What are the four smṛtyupasthānas? Namely, a monk contemplates the internal body and cultivates contemplation of the body, diligent and single-minded, eliminating worldly greed and sorrow. So too he contemplates the external body and the internal-and-external body; and so it is with feelings, mind, and dharmas. These are called the dwelling places relied upon by monks. Therefore the sūtra says: "If one dwells in the four smṛtyupasthānas, it is called one's own domain, and one is not bound by Māra. If one pursues the five desires, it is called Māra's domain, and one is bound by Māra." As for how to deal with monks of bad nature: discipline them with brahmadanda. If their minds are subdued, expound the Sūtra on Abandoning Existence and Non-existence for them. Brahmadanda is remaining silent and not speaking with them. As for what words should be placed at the head of all sūtras: together, one should place "Thus have I heard: the Buddha was in such-and-such a place, in such-and-such a grove..." and so forth. Because the Buddha instructed it to be placed, these words exist.

1.17

Next, second, explaining the intention in establishing [them]. Why did the Buddha originally teach the placement of the words "Thus have I heard"? It was to give rise to faith in sentient beings. How do the words "thus" generate faith? In saying "thus," Ānanda demonstrates his own faith and compliance with the Buddha's words, stating that what the Buddha said conforms to [reality], and stating that what the Buddha said is correct, so as to cause other sentient beings to generate faith along with him. How does "I heard" generate faith? Ānanda himself was a deficient person; if he said that this Dharma was spoken by himself, many people would not believe it. Because he said this Dharma was heard from the Buddha, all people take refuge and believe. What significance does faith have that it should be generated? Faith is the initial gate for entering the Dharma, the foremost head for gathering the Dharma; whenever entering the Buddha-Dharma, one must first arouse faith. Therefore, in the Avataṃsaka [Sūtra], it says that faith is like hands: just as a person who has hands arrives at a place of rare treasures and gathers them as he pleases, but if he has no hands he gets nothing in vain, the case is also the same for one who enters the Buddha-Dharma. Possessing the hands of the faithful mind, one gathers the treasures of the path-Dharma as one pleases; if one lacks the faithful mind, one gains nothing in vain. Because faith has this vital importance, it is generated for its sake.

1.18

Next, the third section: properly explaining the words "Thus have I heard." First, explaining "thus": within this, first we settle it with reference to the person, and afterward properly explain how it is settled. Traditionally, it has been explained with reference to Ānanda: as for the word "thus" (ru), what Ānanda transmitted conformed (ru) to the Buddha's words, and was therefore called "thus" (ru). In order to exclude a mere similarity of "likeness" (ru), he also said "is" (shi). Just as worldly people say that this thing resembles that one and may be called "like" (ru), it does not prevent its substance from not being it, so that it cannot be said to be "is" (shi). Now when saying "thus" (ru), it is not the same as that "likeness," so "is" (shi) must be made evident. If one thoroughly investigates these words, they actually refer to the Buddha, not to Ānanda. How is this known? As Nāgārjuna explained: "'Thus' (rushi) is an expression of faithful compliance. One who faithfully complies says 'this matter is thus'; one who does not believe says 'this matter is not thus.'" Ānanda faithfully complied with the Buddha's words, and therefore designated the Buddha's words as "thus" (ru), stating that what the Buddha said was "right" (shi). It is not that Ānanda himself believed his own words, stating that what he himself said was "thus" and "right." Therefore, at the beginning of the Wēnshì Jīng (Sūtra on the Bathhouse), Ānanda said: "I from the Buddha heard regarding this." Thus one knows that designating what the Buddha said as "thus" means stating that what the Buddha said was "right." It is only that regional idioms differ: that Wēnshì Jīng followed the language of this region [China], and therefore first said "I from the Buddha heard," and afterward brought out what was heard—the dharma of "thus." Most other sūtras follow the language of foreign countries, first raising "thus" and then saying "have I heard." Determining it is roughly like this. How is it explained? In saying "thus," Ānanda states that the Dharma spoken by the Buddha conformed (ru) to the prior events, and was therefore called "thus" (ru). When explaining principle, it conforms to principle; when explaining phenomena, it conforms to phenomena; when explaining causes, it conforms to causes; when explaining effects, it conforms to effects. All such words that conform to the Dharma are constant principles, and are therefore called "right" (shi). Because words contrary to this are called wrong, words conforming to the Dharma may be called "right." This is the explanation in terms of the Dharma. If discussed in terms of the person: Ānanda states that the Dharma spoken by the Buddha does not alter from what past Buddhas have spoken, and is therefore called "thus" (ru). As what the Buddhas speak is correct and not heterodox, he also says "right" (shi). Based on the Nirvāṇa Sūtra's explanation of the meaning of Tathāgata, there is also this characteristic. In saying "I heard": facing those future sentient beings, Ānanda expresses his own receiving and taking in of the teaching, and therefore says "I heard." Hearing is in fact the ear; how can one say "I"? The distinctions among the sense faculties are all instruments used by the "I"; therefore, with reference to the master, it is said "I heard." Within phenomena there is no person; where is there a master, that one speaks of referring to a master in saying "I heard"? The explanation is: although within phenomena there is no determinate master, there is nonetheless a conventional designation that directs and governs sentient beings, and therefore one may refer to it to proclaim "I heard." Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "For example, four divisions of troops are deployed to form an army. Although there is no determinate master, one may still say 'our army is valiant; our army conquers that one.' This is also like that; therefore one may say 'I.'"

1.19

Question: Ānanda is a noble one who has attained the principle; for what reason does he speak of "I" in common with ordinary people? The explanation is: although Ānanda also says "I," it is not the same as ordinary people. How is it not the same? Speaking of "I" has three [forms]: 1. Speaking of "I" with a view-mind: this refers to ordinary people whose view of self has not yet perished, who state and speak of having a self from within the mind of self-view. 2. Speaking of "I" with an arrogant mind: this refers to learners (śaikṣa) whose underlying tendency of views has perished but whose underlying tendency of conceit still remains, who state and speak of having a self from within the mind of self-conceit. 3. Proclaiming and speaking of having a self in accord with worldly usage: this refers to non-learners (aśaikṣa) whose underlying tendency of views has long been removed and whose underlying tendency of conceit is also exhausted, who say "I" simply in accord with worldly usage. When Ānanda took part in the recitation-council of the Dharma, he was established in the stage of a non-learner, and was simply saying "I" in accord with worldly usage; it was neither [from] views nor [from] conceit, and therefore not the same as ordinary people.

1.20

Question: Non-self is the ultimate truth, and having a self is conventional truth; non-self is superior, and having a self is inferior. Why not follow the superior and proclaim non-self, rather than resort to the inferior and speak of "I"? [Answer:] The method for transforming sentient beings must be like this. If one did not say "I," by what means could one demarcate and distinguish this and that so as to let people know and understand? Therefore one must say "I." For this reason, even the Buddha, when facing sentient beings, also regularly spoke of "I."

1.21

The above explains the general preface certifying faith. Next below is the explanation of the distinct sūtras of the three assemblies. Up to the end of this chapter is the first assembly; from the "Chapter on Upāya" downward is the second assembly; from the "Chapter on the Bodhisattva Practices" downward is the third assembly. How do the three assemblies differ? There are three kinds of differences: 1. Differences in the prefaces. In the first assembly, the assembly of the Buddha gathering like clouds serves as the preface. In the second assembly, Vimalakīrti manifesting illness serves as the preface. In the third assembly, Vimalakīrti leading the assembly to the mango [grove] serves as the preface. 2. Differences in the Dharma explained. The doctrinal meanings of the Dharma are manifold and difficult to discuss exhaustively; roughly divided, they are only cause and effect. The differences in cause are twofold: first, distinguished by person. The preceding two assemblies, in order to transform sentient beings of the Sahā defiled land, exclusively teach seeking purity, and their practices and deeds exclusively seek the pure land. The latter one assembly, in order to transform the bodhisattvas of the Gandhahastin (Zhongxiang) Pure Land, exclusively teaches according with defilement, neither exhausting the conditioned nor abiding in the unconditioned. Second, distinguished by constant Dharma. In the first assembly, the essential nature of dharmas is directly brought forth without distinguishing the characteristics of cultivation. In the latter two assemblies, the completed characteristics of cultivation are explained: within them, the former assembly teaches cultivation tending toward quiescence, breaking down and abandoning existence and nonexistence to enter non-duality; in the third assembly, function arises from quiescence, and neither exhausting the conditioned nor abiding in the unconditioned is its function. The differences in cause are like this; what about the differences in effect? First discussed with reference to the body, and afterward explained with reference to the land. Regarding the body: the first assembly explains the effect of the response body (nirmāṇakāya), which is revealed below through Ratnakūṭa's praise, [such as] initially [sitting] at the Buddha tree and subduing Māra with power, all of which are the response [body]. The second assembly explains the effect of the reward body (sambhogakāya), proclaiming that the Buddha's body is born from immeasurable merits. The third assembly explains the effect of the dharmakāya, as the text below says: "Contemplating the true mark of one's own body, one contemplates the Buddha likewise. I contemplate the Tathāgata: the prior limit does not come, the latter limit does not go," and so forth. In detail they actually interconnect, but a rough division is provisionally like this. If discussing their lands: the first assembly resorts to Śākyamuni to reveal the pure land; the second resorts to Gandhottama (Xiangji) Tathāgata to discern purity; the third assembly resorts to Akṣobhya Tathāgata to manifest purity. The first resorts to Śākyamuni to reveal purity right within defilement, explaining the essence of the pure land; the second resorts to Gandhottama Tathāgata to reveal purity outside of defilement, explaining the characteristics of the pure land; the third resorts to Akṣobhya Tathāgata, taking [his land] and placing it here to reveal purity according with defilement, explaining the function of the pure land. The differences in Dharma are like this; when examined in detail they interconnect and are not entirely one-sided. 3. Differences in benefit. Among the three assemblies, the persons who obtain benefit differ. Within the first assembly, there is first the preface and then the main body; preface and main body are not fixed, and there are two interpretations of advancing and retreating. First, taking only what the Tathāgata speaks as the main body: then from the beginning up through the verses is comprehensively judged as the preface, and after the verses is the main body, properly speaking of the cause and effect of the pure land on account of the request. Within the preface there are two parts: 1. The Buddha's assembly gathering like clouds. 2. From "In Vaiśālī there was an elder's son named Ratnakūṭa" downward, manifesting signs to initiate [the teaching]. Within the canopy the Buddha lands of the ten directions are universally manifested, initiating the causes and effects of the pure land spoken afterward. Second, comprehensively gathering the supernatural transformations and inconceivable merits manifested by the Tathāgata all as the main body: then from the beginning up through eclipsing the great assembly is judged as the preface, and from Ratnakūṭa and others offering the canopies onward is all the main body, directly revealing the Tathāgata's merit of inconceivable liberation. Based on the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra, everything after the section praising the Buddha is considered the main body; this should also be the case here.

1.22

The preface comprises three [parts]: first, explaining the Buddha as the teaching master; second, from "with a great [assembly of] bhikṣus" onward, identifying his disciples and assembly; third, from "at that time the Buddha and an immeasurable assembly" onward, collectively explaining what the cloud-like gathering of the Buddha and the assembly was for. The first [part] contains three [points]: first, the phrase "at one time" explains the time of the Buddha's teaching; second, "the Buddha" designates and lists the teaching master; third, from "in Vaiśālī" onward reveals his place of teaching. In explaining "at one time," we first set forth differing views, next point out their errors, and finally establish the correct interpretation. What are the differing views? Traditionally handed down of old, it was said that the time when the Buddha spoke and the time when Ānanda heard were without before or after; to exclude hearsay and validate the preceding "thus have I heard," it therefore says "at one time." Such are the differing views. Next, to point out the errors: first through factual verification, and then by citing textual evidence. What is the factual verification? As the sūtras say: "Ānanda was born on the night the Buddha attained the Way." According to the Hīnayāna, after the Buddha attained the Way, he expounded the sūtras after only six or seven days had elapsed; Ānanda was then still an infant in arms and did not personally attend the assembly. Twenty years after the Buddha attained the Way, he first went forth from the household life; thirty years [after the enlightenment], he became his attendant. Most of the sūtras expounded prior to this were not personally heard by him. Though not personally heard, the sūtras he compiled also say "at one time"; thus we clearly know that "at one time" is not an expression meant to exclude hearsay. Furthermore, in the Hīnayāna it cannot be maintained that Ānanda was an expedient manifestation; on what grounds, then, could it be claimed that the expounding and hearing occurred at the same time? People might counter-challenge: How is it known that Ānanda was born on the night the Buddha attained the Way, so as to refute my position? To substantiate this point, one must know the cause and condition for giving Ānanda his name. Ānanda is a foreign word; here it is translated as "Joy." The name "Joy" was established through three causes and conditions: First, past causes and conditions. As it is said in the sūtra: "When Śākya in the past was practicing the bodhisattva path, he was a potter named Daguang. He encountered the Buddha Śākyamuni of a past age, whose father was named Śuddhodana, mother was named Māyā, and attendant disciple was named Ānanda, with lands and retinues no different from those of today. He thereupon made a vow: 'May I in the future, when I attain the Buddha Way, be just like this present Buddha.' Owing to this fundamental vow, he has now attained Buddhahood, and therefore his present attendant is likewise named Ānanda." Second, present causes and conditions. The monk Ānanda had a handsome appearance; among worldly people, whoever saw him was filled with joy, and therefore he was named Joy. Hence in the sūtras Ānanda is praised: "His face is like the full moon, his eyes like blue lotuses, and the ocean of the Buddha's Dharma waters enters Ānanda's heart." Third, the cause and condition of his parents naming him. He was given the name Joy because he was born at a joyful time. What was the joyful time? It was the night the Tathāgata attained the Way. At nineteen, the Tathāgata leaped over the city walls and went forth from the household life. Having gone forth, he practiced meditation for five years and starved himself for six years, his body becoming extremely emaciated. His royal father constantly sent people to watch over him, and knowing he was extremely weak and exhausted, always feared he would not survive. Later, the bodhisattva knew that starvation was not the Way, accepted the milk gruel, and wished to attain correct awakening. Māra thought: "If the Buddha Way is accomplished, it will empty my realm. While the Way is not yet accomplished, I must ruin his resolve." Thereupon, rallying eighteen hundred million of his retinue and bearing various implements of suffering, he came to terrify the bodhisattva. At that time, the bodhisattva entered the samādhi of supreme loving-kindness, causing Māra's retinue to tumble down headlong. Having been subdued, Māra thought: "The bodhisattva's power is great; he cannot be overcome by me. I should torment his father." He then went to Śuddhodana's palace and proclaimed: "Prince Siddhārtha died last night." Upon hearing this, the king fell from his couch, and only after a long while regained consciousness, lamenting even more bitterly. He reflected that if his son had remained at home, he would have become a wheel-turning king; what could have been expected of his going forth, only to end in empty vain? Shortly thereafter, because the Buddha Way was accomplished, the Bodhi tree deity brought heavenly flowers to congratulate the royal father. When the Buddha attained Buddhahood, the heavens rained down wonderful flowers as an offering, which is why [the deity] brought them to congratulate the king. At that time, [the deity] likewise went to Śuddhodana's palace and proclaimed: "Great King, you should know: last night, when the morning star appeared, Prince Deva-of-the-Earth subdued the hosts of Māra's army and attained Buddhahood, realizing the Way." The king then became doubtful: "Just now a deity said my son died. Now another deity says my son attained the Way. Which is to be believed?" The Bodhi deity said: "My words are to be believed. The former was Māra, who merely sought to torment you. I am the Bodhi tree deity; because the Buddha attained the Way beneath my tree, I come to congratulate you." The king then thought: "If my son had remained at home, he would have been a wheel-turning king; today, having gone forth, he has become the great king of the Dharma wheel—in neither case is there any loss." Having previously heard of his death, he now suddenly heard he was alive: this was one layer of great joy. Then hearing that the Way was accomplished: this was a second layer of great joy. Shortly thereafter, the king's younger brother Droṇodana had Ānanda born to him that night, and carrying him in his arms at dawn, went to the king, saying: "Last night, your younger brother had this boy born to him." The king replied: "My son has attained the Way, and you have also borne a son. All celebrations have gathered together; let him be named Joy." By this verification, we know for certain that Ānanda was born on the night [the Buddha] attained the Way. Since Ānanda was born on the night [the Buddha] attained the Way, on what grounds could it be said that the expounding and hearing occurred at the same time? Such is the factual verification. Next, textual evidence: When the Buddha first attained the Way, in the Ṛṣipatana Deer Park in Vārāṇasī, he turned the Dharma of the four truths for the five bhikṣus, which is called the Dharmacakrapravartana Sūtra. After the Buddha's extinction, the monk Ānanda first compiled this sūtra. About to compile this sūtra, he first ascended the high seat and recited a verse, saying of himself: / "When the Buddha first turned the wheel of the Dharma, / at that time I did not see it; / thus I heard it by transmission: / The Buddha wandered to Vārāṇasī, / and for the assembly of five bhikṣus, / turned the Dharma wheel of the four truths." / In that sūtra, he states that he himself heard it by transmission, yet it also says "at one time"; thus we clearly know that "at one time" is not an expression meant to exclude hearsay. Such is the refutation of the error. Next, to reveal the correct meaning: The phrase "at one time" is explained in relation to the Buddha. The period of teaching is referred to as "time." During the Buddha's lifetime, the times of teaching were manifold; to distinguish it from other times, it is therefore called "one." The phrase "at one time" occurs abundantly in the sūtras. As the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "At one time, I was in the country of Kāśi. At one time, I was on the banks of the Ganges. At one time, I was in the Śītavana charnel ground. At one time, I was in Rājagṛha." Instances such as these are not singular. The present "at one time" is similar to those. How do we know that "at one time" modifies what follows rather than belonging to what precedes? We know this based on the Daśabhūmika Sūtra. At the beginning of the "Chapter on the Ten Bhūmis" in the large version of the Avataṃsaka, it says: "At that time (尔时), the Buddha was among the gods." In Nāgārjuna's separate transmission, "that" (尔) was changed to "one" (一). The expression "at that time" cannot complete what precedes; if "that" is changed to "one," how could it not belong to what follows?

First 22 of 77 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

維摩義記 — Classical Chinese

維摩義記 1

Contents

Linked texts (1)