維摩經略疏 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Preface to the Abridged Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra

The text of this present commentary was produced by Great Master Tiāntái at the request of Emperor Yang of the Sui, who used it as an essential guide; the imperial decree is recorded in full in the Guoqing bailu. [The Master] accordingly directed his attendants to transcribe it as he proceeded and submit it to the emperor. However, beginning with the latter part of the "Chapter on the Buddha Way," Zhāng'ān privately recorded and continued the composition to complete the initial text. Since the writing was carried out by the attendants, it inevitably contained excessive elaboration and breadth. Whenever monastics and laypeople of profound insight encountered it, they all admired and yearned for it, but would remark: "The only defect is that its text is overly voluminous." Therefore, I have taken it upon myself to excerpt and edit that record, ensuring that wherever meaning was conveyed it was preserved, and wherever words were redundant they were pruned, so that the old structure remains intact without altering the original work of the former master. Yet, reflecting upon my own ignorance and shortcomings, and fearing I might stray from his foundational standards, I once burned incense in the tomb hall to seek a sign, praying: "If I should corrupt the Great Way in the slightest, I pray you will manifest an impediment." Before twenty days had passed, the [explication of the] Buddha Way was completed; having thus avoided unseen rebuke, how could this not be unseen protection! If this should contribute to his essential teachings, it will illuminate future generations. I hope all discerning people will forgive my presumption.

1.3

Abridged by the Tiāntái Śramaṇa Zhànrán

1.4

Explanation of the Beginning of the "Chapter on the Buddha-Land"

1.5

Next, in explaining the entrance into the text, there are broadly five intentions: first, explaining that the translation of the sūtra is incomplete; second, briefly dividing the text; third, distinguishing the meaning of the buddha-land; fourth, explaining the chapter; fifth, properly entering the text. As for the first intention, among the five successive translations there are differences; we are now interpreting the Kumārajīva translation. Examining the meaning of the sūtra text, in the Western Lands it was still far more extensive. How do we know this? For instance, when the ten disciples were commanded, and likewise five hundred and even eight thousand [bodhisattvas], each declined as unable; the words of their inability did not arrive here in their entirety. Deducing from this, the scrolls of the sūtra must not have been few. Moreover, when Mañjuśrī entered the room to convey the Tathāgata's intent, his earnest solicitude was boundless, and the eight thousand bodhisattvas each explained their entrance through the gate; how could all these discussions comprise merely half a scroll? When it came to exiting the room and proceeding to the Āmrapālī Grove, where before the Tathāgata they expounded and distinguished the meaning of the buddha-land, with the lofty debates and exchanges expounded at that time, how could they have amounted to only a few sheets of sūtra text? My sense is that the living beings of Cīnasthāna possess narrow and inferior faculties, and were incapable of reading, reciting, receiving, and upholding it in its entirety; therefore, the abundant text was abridged, its essential structure was extracted to be transmitted in this land, and its meaning was preserved in brief.

1.6

Question: Since the text and words of this sūtra in the Western Lands were so vast, could it not be the Inconceivable Sūtra of one hundred thousand verses expounded by the Buddha as explained in the Dàzhìdù lùn? Answer: Some say that it is indeed that. I say now that this is not so. The Inconceivable Sūtra explained in the Dàzhìdù lùn is an alternate name for the Avataṃsaka. Therefore the treatise says: "Prajñā is of two kinds: first, that expounded in common with the two vehicles; second, that expounded not in common with the two vehicles. The uncommon teaching is like the Inconceivable Sūtra." Hence the Avataṃsaka says: "This sūtra does not enter the hands of the people of the two vehicles." The common teaching refers to the Mahāprajñā and the various vaipulya [sūtras].

1.7

Question: How could the Avataṃsaka be named "Inconceivable"? This sūtra is alternate-named "Inconceivable Liberation"; why then do you say it is not [this sūtra]? Answer: Since this sūtra has two names, how could the Avataṃsaka alone lack another designation? Furthermore, when carefully examining the Inconceivable Sūtra cited throughout the Dàzhìdù lùn, all instances refer to the Avataṃsaka. For example, when it describes the upāsikā Oṣadhī explaining the number of sentient beings saved to the bodhisattva Sudhana, this is an event heard by Sudhana upon entering the dharmadhātu as explained in the Avataṃsaka; when it cites this present sūtra, it explicitly says "expounded by Vimalakīrti."

1.8

Second, dividing the text has two parts: first, presenting past and present [interpretations]; next, explaining [the view of] our own tradition. First, regarding the various masters: Kumārajīva, Dàoshēng, and the various ancient masters did not create structural outlines at all, but commented directly following the text. Master Sēngzhào, however, said: "Beginning with the Pure Land and ending with the Dharma Offering, although what is clarified in between differs, the inconceivable is one." Thus, what precedes Ratnakūṭa's questioning is the preface, the single chapter on "Entrustment" is the dissemination, and what lies between them is entirely the main teaching. Next, Xiaoliang of Lingwei said: "Since the title of this sūtra is 'Expounded by Vimalakīrti,' everything from the 'Chapter on Expedient Means' onward constitutes the main teaching." Next, Master Kaishan divided it into four: first, the preface, ending with the "Chapter on Bodhisattvas"; second, the main teaching, namely the six chapters inside the room; third, the verification, namely the two chapters on "Bodhisattva Practice" and "Akṣobhya Buddha"; fourth, the dissemination, namely the two chapters on "Dharma Offering" and "Entrustment." As for Zhuangyan and Guangzhai, they both took the first four chapters as the preface, the six chapters inside the room as the main teaching, and the last four chapters as the dissemination. The later Sanlun masters also followed this interpretation. The Northern Dilun masters took the single "Chapter on the Buddha-Land" as the preface, the eleven chapters from the "Chapter on Expedient Means" through the "Chapter on Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" as the main teaching, and the final two chapters as the dissemination. Thus past and present differ, each with their own divisions, and those who inherit and practice them each have their own lineage. The various meditation masters, seeing that these distinctions gave rise to many disputes, did not create structural divisions, but directly explained the entry into the Path in terms of the contemplation approach.

1.9

Next, explaining our own tradition: if one does not create a structural outline, one will not recognize the beginnings and endings or how the Buddha's teachings follow upon one another; if one does create a structural outline, contentious grasping becomes rampant, generating gratuitous entanglements regarding the Dharma of liberation. Now, searching out the intent of the sūtra, we establish divisions in accordance with the sūtra without obstinate attachment. Although the Buddha's expositions of the Dharma derive from diverse sources, the text is inevitably complete with goodness in the beginning, middle, and end. Now, correlating these three with the preface and the other two [sections], there are still three intentions: first, properly dividing the sūtra; second, in terms of contemplation of mind; third, distinguishing [our view] from the other schools. First, as for properly dividing the sūtra: whether great or small, sūtras invariably have three sections, namely preface, main teaching, and dissemination. The preface means that when the Great Sage is about to expound the Dharma, he must first manifest an auspicious sign to reveal and initiate it as an occasion. For example, when he wished to expound the Dàpǐn, he emitted multicolored light from his limbs, signifying that he wished to expound prajñā to guide the various practices; when he wished to expound the Lotus Sūtra, he emitted light from between his brows, signifying that he wished to expound the true reality of the Middle Way; in this sūtra, he united the parasols and revealed the lands, signifying that he wished to expound the causes and fruits of the buddha-land. Since the occasions differ, they properly signify that the gates of teaching vary in accordance with capacity, awakening the sentiments of living beings so that all may believe and admire, and directing their devotion to its proper source; hence it is called the preface. Second, regarding the main teaching: when the four assemblies behold the auspicious signs, all rejoice, revere, and become capable of hearing the sagely intent; the Great Sage knows the proper time and establishes the teaching in accordance with capacity. When the assembly of the time hears the sūtra, all partake in the benefit of the Dharma; hence it is called the main teaching. Third, regarding dissemination: "flow" is likened to water pouring downward; "transmission" means being without obstruction or blockage. Out of great compassion, the Tathāgata expounds the Dharma impartially, not only for those of the present, but also wishing to reach far to those with affinity in the True, Semblance, and Final Dharma ages, so that all may partake in the moisture of the Dharma. Thus the Dharma water flows downward endlessly and all are nourished by this bounty; hence it is called dissemination. Now we divide it into three: first, from "Thus have I heard" through the seven-character verse, it contains both the common and specific prefaces. Because this fully establishes the occasion for the main teaching, it is called the preface section. Second, from the elder's son Ratnakūṭa inquiring about the causes and fruits of the buddha-land up through "Akṣobhya Buddha," there are eleven and a half chapters, all of which clarify the inconceivable liberation and the causes and fruits of the buddha-land; these are all teachings responding to capacity, from which those in the present received benefit, and all constitute the main teaching. Third, from "Dharma Offering" through "Entrustment," it clarifies the Heavenly Emperor taking a vow to propagate the sūtra, the Tathāgata endorsing it, and his exhorting and entrusting its dissemination to the future so that its transmission will never cease; these all belong to the dissemination.

1.10

Question: The title of this sūtra is 'Expounded by Vimalakīrti'; how can the main teaching now begin from the Buddha-Land [chapter]? Answer: Vimalakīrti received the Buddha's spiritual power to assist the Buddha in propagating the transformation; because his transformative guiding had merit, the sūtra took its title from him. For example, when a king decrees that a minister administer governance, if the governance has merit, the minister receives the reward; but the master of the authoritative decree belongs to the king, whereas the title denoting the merit is received by the minister. One cannot say that because the minister received the reward, the minister is the primary, and because the lord issued the decree, he is conversely secondary. It is only because Vimalakīrti obtained the Buddha's seal of confirmation that it became the main teaching; therefore it is named the sūtra expounded by Vimalakīrti.

1.11

Second, in terms of contemplation of mind: the three sections are correlated with the threefold contemplation. The expedients of the two contemplations are the meaning of the preface; gaining entry into the Middle Way is the meaning of the main teaching; and illuminating both of the two truths, with thought after thought quiescent and naturally flowing in, is the meaning of dissemination. Third, distinguishing differences: Question: Why not follow Master Kumārajīva and the various meditation masters in not dividing the structural outline? Answer: In terms of contemplative practice, one indeed should not make redundant divisions. But now, we wish to enable students to recognize the beginning and end of the text, and to realize that the sagely expedients and words are not isolated utterances, but necessarily have continuity. If there is no obstruction regarding the text, applying it to explain contemplative practice will make it all the more distinctly clear.

1.12

Question: Why not adopt Master Sēngzhào's commentary in its entirety? Answer: His assigning of "Dharma Offering" to the main teaching is incorrect.

1.13

Question: Why not follow Lingwei? Answer: Taking the "Buddha-Land" [chapter] as the preface is not correct in principle. Why? The Buddha is the King of the Dharma and King of the Path; when he proclaims something in the trichiliocosm, how could that not be the main teaching? Moreover, what Ratnakūṭa requested and what the Buddha answered responded to this capacity and affinity by clarifying the causes and fruits of the buddha-land, and the assembly at that time heard the sūtra and obtained great and small benefits; how could it be relegated to the preface? Furthermore, Vimalakīrti's assisting the Buddha in propagation was precisely to support and fulfill the Buddha's teaching; how could the disciple's auxiliary exposition be the main teaching, while the Great Master's exposition is conversely the preface?

1.14

Question: Why not agree with Kaishan? Answer: Sūtras whether great or small invariably have three sections; why should this sūtra alone be divided into four? Question: Why not agree with Zhuangyan, Guangzhai, and the Sanlun masters? Answer: In taking the "Buddha-Land" [chapter] as the preface, their flaw is the same as before. Furthermore, in assigning "Bodhisattva Practice" and "Akṣobhya Buddha" to the dissemination, I fear this is not so. Why? Vimalakīrti held the great assembly in his palm and returned to the Āmrapālī Grove to receive the Buddha's confirmation; only then did what was expounded inside the room become established as a sūtra. Moreover, the Buddha again addressed Vimalakīrti to distinguish the causes and fruits of the buddha-land, summarizing the beginning and end of the sūtra so that its central aim was made clear, and the assembly received benefits exceeding those in the room. This is the main teaching; how could it be called dissemination?

1.15

Question: Why not follow the Northern Mahāyāna masters? Answer: In taking the "Buddha-Land" [chapter] as the preface, their flaw is the same as before.

1.16

Third, explaining the meaning of the buddha-land: this explains that the elder's son Ratnakūṭa inquired about the causes and fruits of the buddha-land, and the World-Honoured One answered in full. When Śāriputra gave rise to doubt, the Buddha used his spiritual power to manifest the aspect of the pure land, at which time the entire great assembly attained the benefit of the Mahāyāna. When it reverted to an impure land, the assembly seeking the śrāvaka [vehicle] attained the Hinayana path. The title is designated on the basis of this; hence it is called "Buddha-Land." Since this sūtra takes the buddha-land as its central aim, one must clearly understand the meaning of the buddha-land. Here it is briefly divided into eight layers: first, explaining the buddha-land generally; second, explaining the buddha-land specifically; third, explaining the cultivation of the causes of the buddha-land; fourth, explaining the differences in seeing the buddha-land; fifth, explaining rebirth; sixth, explaining the preaching of the teaching; seventh, in terms of contemplation of mind; eighth, applying the meaning of the buddha-land to comprehensively explain this sūtra.

1.17

First, as for explaining the buddha-lands in general: the earlier explanation of the universal assembly and the various vaipulya [texts] mostly elucidated the direct retribution. Now, because Ratnakūṭa offers parasols and the Tathāgata joins the parasols to manifest lands, it signifies the wish to explain circumstantial retribution. Why so? Once direct retribution has been made clear, one must broadly explain circumstantial [retribution]. Just as when speaking of a king and his subjects, one must know of the lands and governance that are their upright undertakings. As for the term "buddha-land" (fóguó): because it is the domain where a buddha dwells, it is called a "buddha-land." By analogy, in the kingdom of a king, although subjects and ministers dwell together [in it], it receives its designation from the king and is called the kingdom of such-and-such a king. Here, although the Buddha dwells together with those who have karmic affinity, it receives its name from the Buddha and is called such-and-such a buddha-land. That upon which the Buddha's body relies is called a buddha-land (fótǔ); the realm within which the Buddha resides is called a buddha-world (fó shìjiè); and the myriads of differing realms in which the Buddha stays are also called kṣetras. However, lands have both phenomenal and ultimate aspects: the phenomenal is the domain of the response body; the ultimate is the realm illuminated by the ultimate wisdom. Yet ultimate reality is vacant and tranquil; originally there is no distinction between realm and wisdom—how could there be a division between grasper and grasped? It is merely in accordance with capacities and responding to beings that we speak of true and response [bodies], and thus clarify phenomena and principle. However, without the original, there is nothing by which to project the traces, hence there are response forms and response lands; without the traces, there is nothing by which to manifest the original, hence beings are guided to return together to the true land of the dharmakāya. Therefore the text states, "Although he knows all buddha-lands to be eternally tranquil like empty space, he nonetheless manifests all manner of pure buddha-lands." Thus the response accords with ordinary beings and sages, manifesting actual territorial borders. Since the retributions of ordinary beings and sages differ greatly in rank, the manifested purity and defilement are also like this. Therefore the Yingluo [jing] states, "He generates responses for all sentient beings, and responses for all lands." Or, some explain it thus: "Response lands are induced by the accumulated karma of sentient beings; hence the text states, 'The categories of sentient beings are the pure lands of bodhisattvas.' Sages, out of compassion, come to manifest birth here; hence the Lotus [Sūtra] states, 'And born in the decaying, ancient burning house of the three realms, in order to cross over sentient beings from birth, old age, sickness, and death.'" Some say, "The dharmakāya of all buddhas is like a clear mirror; all physical images fully appear within it. That is to say, all lands are manifest responses from the original land of the dharmakāya; because the land derives from the Buddha's body, it is called a buddha-land." Hence the Lotus [Sūtra] states, "Now these three realms are all my possession, and the sentient beings within them are all my children." Now, examining these statements in detail: if one says that the response land manifests from the dharmakāya, that is self-production; if from sentient beings, that is production from other; if sentient beings in relation to the Buddha, that is joint production; if apart from sentient beings and apart from the Buddha, that is having a land without a cause. All fall into substantialist views, which must be refuted. One should know that whether lands are pure or defiled, they are all ineffable; that they can be spoken of due to causes and conditions means that according to the siddhāntas responding to capacities, they can all be spoken of.

1.18

Second, as for explaining the buddha-lands in particular: the differentiated characteristics of the buddhas' benefiting of beings are measureless and boundless. Now, they are briefly stated as four: 1. Defiled and pure lands, where ordinary beings and sages dwell together; 2. [Lands with] remainder, where persons of expedient means dwell; 3. [Lands of] karmic retribution, inhabited purely by the dharmakāya, which is the unhindered land of Indra's net; 4. [The land of] eternal tranquil light, which is where the marvelously enlightened dwell. The first two are response [lands], meaning they are inhabited by response buddhas; the third is both response and retribution, meaning it is inhabited by retribution buddhas; the last one is solely truly pure, neither response nor retribution, meaning it is inhabited by the dharmakāya. Regarding "defiled and pure": the nine realms are intermingled together. Why? The six realms are base and defiled, hence called "defiled"; the three vehicles behold the truth, hence called "pure." Because the three and the six dwell together, it is called "defiled and pure"; it is also called the "land where ordinary beings and sages dwell together." Within the defiled and pure land, both ordinary beings and sages each have two types. The two types of ordinary beings are: first, evil sentient beings, which are the four evil destinies; second, good sentient beings, which are humans and gods. The two types of sages are: first, the real, and second, the provisional. The real sages are those of the four fruits and pratyekabuddhas, the sixth stage of the shared teaching, the ten abodes of the distinct teaching, and the final mind of the ten faiths of the complete teaching; though their shared afflictions are severed, their retribution bodies still remain. The second, provisional sages, are persons of the three vehicles of the [land with] remainder of expedient means who possess bodies of the biased-true dharma-nature and, wishing to benefit those with karmic affinity, vow to be born in cohabitation; or if great beings of the dharmakāya of true retribution and tranquil light, as well as marvelously enlightened buddhas, respond by being born in cohabitation to benefit those with karmic affinity, all are provisional. Such sages dwell together with ordinary beings, hence it is called "cohabitation of ordinary beings and sages." Dwelling together with the four evil destinies, it is called a "defiled land." Second, as for explaining the pure land of cohabitation: although the karmic retribution of the Land of Immeasurable Life is supremely excellent and difficult to compare by analogy, it is nonetheless defiled and pure, with ordinary beings and sages dwelling together. Why so? Although it lacks the four destinies, it has humans and gods. How is this known? Those born in that land are not necessarily all persons who have attained the Path. Hence the sūtra states, "Those who have committed grave sins, if at the time of death they repent and are mindful of the Buddha, their karmic hindrances will be transformed, and they will immediately attain rebirth." If only sages were born there, how could ordinary beings vow to be born in that land? Therefore we know that although they are fully endowed with the defilement of afflictions, if the power of their vows upholds their minds, they can also dwell there. The provisional and real sages born there may be understood by analogy with the previous [explanation]. Merely because it lacks the four evil destinies, it is called "pure." Citing this serves as an example for the rest. Lands of cohabitation are not uniform in their superiority and inferiority; although defilement and purity are of many types, such as the lands inhabited when receiving predictions for disciples in the Lotus Sūtra, if summarized and clarified, they all belong to the land of the cohabitation of ordinary beings and sages.

1.19

Question: In what sūtra or treatise does the name "defiled and pure land" appear? Answer: The Si-yi jing states, "The Buddha Sūryaprabhāsa commanded a Brahmā heaven [king] to come to this land, saying: 'You should travel to that world using ten dharmas; the Sahā land is named the defiled and pure world.'" Defiled is precisely the ordinary, and pure is precisely the sage.

1.20

Question: That circumstantial and direct retribution in a defiled land are both defiled as induced by the ten unwholesome actions is plausible; but since the karmic cause of the ten wholesome actions for a pure land is the same, how could circumstantial and direct retribution differ so drastically? Answer: Although the name "wholesome" for the cause practiced in both places is the same, the cultivation of the wholesome for a pure land is subtle, exquisite, and superior; therefore the circumstantial and direct retribution obtained by those ordinary beings and sages is not the same as in a defiled land.

1.21

Second, as for explaining the land with remainder: it is where the two vehicles and the three kinds of bodhisattvas who have realized the path of expedient means dwell. Why so? If, practicing the two contemplations, they completely sever the shared afflictions, but the sand-grain separate afflictions and ignorance have not yet been severed, they cast off the body of fragmentary [saṃsāra] and are born outside the realms, receiving a body of dharma-nature; thus, having the land inhabited by [those undergoing] transformational [saṃsāra], it is called "with remainder" and also called "expedient means"—the dwelling place of practitioners of expedient means. Therefore, of the seven kinds of birth and death in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, this is the fourth, "birth and death of expedient means."

1.22

Question: In what sūtra or treatise does the name "land with remainder" appear? Answer: The Lotus [Sūtra] says, "In another land I become a buddha with a different name. Although this person generates the notion of having attained extinction, in that land they seek the Buddha's wisdom"—this is precisely its meaning. The Dàzhìdù lùn says, "When the two vehicles enter extinction, although they are not born in the three realms, outside the realms there are pure lands where they receive bodies of dharma-nature."

1.23

Third, as for explaining the land of karmic retribution: that is precisely Indra's net. The Lotus Treasury World is inhabited purely by dharmakāya bodhisattvas; because they contemplate the single true reality, destroy ignorance, and manifest the dharma-nature, they attain true karmic retribution; yet because their ignorance is not yet exhausted, moistening uncontaminated karma, they receive retribution bodies of dharma-nature. The pure land of circumstantial retribution where retribution bodies dwell is called the land of karmic retribution. Because it is the karmic retribution obtained by contemplating the true reality and generating the true uncontaminated [wisdom], it is called "real." Because their cultivated causes have no fixed nature and form and mind are unhindered, it is also called the "unhindered land of real retribution." As for "unhindered": it means that one world subsumes all worlds, and all worlds are also like this; this is called the ocean of worlds, and also called the inexhaustible treasury of worlds. When one enters this world at the first bhūmi of the distinct teaching, there are seven kinds of purity: 1. Purity of identical essence, like one being all and all being one; 2. Purity of sovereign mastery, with all lands equally pure; 3. Purity of adornment, with all buddha-lands adorned with spiritual superknowledges; 4. Purity of enjoyment, being free from all afflictions and accomplishing the pure path; 5. Purity of dwelling place, with beings of great wisdom completely filling that place; 6. Purity of cause, entering the wondrously equal realm of the buddha-lands; 7. Purity of fruition, manifesting in accordance with what is fitting for beings. The first five are the fulfillment of essence, possessing essence, characteristics, and function; the sixth is the perfection of the cause; the seventh is the fulfillment of the fruition. When born there at the initial abode, one completely achieves these seven kinds of purity.

1.24

Question: In what sūtra or treatise does this appear? Answer: The Renwang [jing] says, "The three ranks of worthy ones and the ten ranks of sages dwell in karmic retribution"; one should know that this is taking karmic retribution as a land. The Lotus [Sūtra] says, "The Sahā world was flat and even, with those bodhisattvas all dwelling within it." The Dàzhìdù lùn says, "The Buddha of the dharma-nature body expounds the Dharma for dharmakāya bodhisattvas; in that land there are no names of śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas." The Avataṃsaka explains the world of Indra's net, and the Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains the world of the Flower King; all elucidate the unhindered characteristics of the land of karmic retribution.

1.25

Fourth, as for explaining the land of tranquil light: the principle of the suchness dharma-realm illuminated by the ultimate wisdom of marvelous enlightenment is designated as a land. But the dharma-nature of the Mahāyāna is precisely the true tranquil nature of wisdom, not like the biased-true principle of the two vehicles. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] states, "The emptiness of the primary meaning is named wisdom," and this sūtra states, "If one knows that the nature of ignorance is itself illumination." All such cases convey the meaning of eternal tranquil light. Because it is the dwelling place of inconceivable ultimate wisdom, it is called "tranquil light"; it is also called the "dharma-nature land." Yet true suchness and buddha-nature are neither body nor land, yet are spoken of as body and land; apart from the body there is no land, and apart from the land there is no body. The naming of a land is one dharma with two meanings. Therefore the Jingang bore lun states: "Wisdom gathers through consciousness alone; / Acquiring a pure land in this manner, / It is not physical, but the primary essence; / It is not an adornment, but the adornment."

1.26

Question: In what sūtra or treatise does this appear? Answer: The Renwang [jing] says, "Only the Buddha alone dwells in the pure land." This sūtra says, "When the mind is pure, the buddha-land is pure"; the culmination of the pure mind culminates in the Buddha. The Samantabhadra Contemplation [Sūtra] says, "Śākyamuni is named Vairocana, pervading all places; the dwelling place of that Buddha is named eternal tranquil light."

1.27

Question: The scattered explanations in sūtras and treatises may indeed be as stated above, but we do not see the four lands presented together in a single place. Answer: Translations of sūtras and treatises to this [land] were inherently not numerous, and those who study and read them are not fully familiar with everything; why must there be no text in which the four lands appear together? Exactly as in this sūtra when answering the elder's son, that is precisely its meaning. The text states: "In accordance with the sentient beings to be transformed, he takes a buddha-land; in accordance with the sentient beings to be disciplined, he takes a buddha-land; in accordance with the land through which sentient beings should enter the Buddha's wisdom, [he takes a buddha-land]; in accordance with the land through which sentient beings should arouse bodhisattva roots, [he takes a buddha-land]." If matched with the four lands, they correspond perfectly. Since the names are different, the Buddha's intent is difficult to fathom. Below, in matching the text, it will be explained separately.

1.28

Question: This sūtra does not yet reveal the provisional to manifest the real; how can it explain that the two vehicles are born in the land with remainder? Answer: The sūtra states, "The Buddha expounds the Dharma with a single voice, and sentient beings understand according to their kinds." What is to prevent the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of the shared teaching from both attaining horizontal understanding, while the two teachings, distinct and complete, are unobstructed both horizontally and vertically?

1.29

Question: The Avataṃsaka explains ten kinds of buddha-lands; are they completely subsumed by these four, or not? Answer: How could they subsume only ten? Even someone says that sūtras explain twenty-seven grades of buddha-lands, and the Land of Immeasurable Life is merely the sixth. When examining the text in relation to the four, none are not completely subsumed.

1.30

Question: If so, why not rely on the ten and the twenty-seven? Answer: In a provisional sense there are texts, but if one wishes to correlate them with the four teachings, the underlying intent is difficult to discern.

1.31

Third, explaining the causes for cultivating a buddha-land: This sūtra not only explains the land of circumstantial reward in terms of the fruition of primary reward, but also explains circumstantial causes in terms of primary causes. Circumstantial causes are precisely the causes for a buddha-land; hence, in answering Ratnakūṭa, the Buddha explained circumstantial causes horizontally in terms of seventeen primary causes, and vertically in terms of thirteen primary causes. Since lands are fourfold, four causes must be explained. At first glance, it is explained that the causes of the vows and practices of the bodhisattvas of the four teachings evoke the four fruits of Buddhahood, and circumstantial causes evoke the four lands. If one investigates closely in detail, there is not without slight difficulty; now we still distinguish them according to four meanings: First, bodhisattvas cultivate the causes of vows and practices of the three provisional and one real [teachings] to mature sentient beings. If the four kinds of sentient beings have not severed, or have not completely severed, the conditioning-originated accumulations within the realms, when the bodhisattvas attain Buddhahood within the realms, the four kinds of sentient beings come to be born in the land of common residence, cultivating the four kinds of causes of vows and practices. Second, bodhisattvas cultivate the four practices, both provisional and real, to mature the four [kinds of] sentient beings. When the four kinds of sentient beings complete the expedient contemplation and exhaust defilements within the realms, when the bodhisattvas attain Buddhahood in the land with remainder, the four kinds of sentient beings are reborn together in that land, cultivating the causes of both the separate and perfect teachings. Third, bodhisattvas cultivate the causes of vows and practices of the separate and perfect teachings to mature two kinds of sentient beings. When these two kinds of sentient beings are able to sever fundamental ignorance, and the bodhisattvas attain Buddhahood in the retribution land, the sentient beings of the separate and perfect [teachings] complete the untainted cause of true reality and come to be born in that land, cultivating the perfect cause together. Fourth, one cultivates the cause of vows and practices of perfect severance; when the cause is culminated and the fruit fulfilled, one attains the stage of marvelous enlightenment and abides in [the Land of] Eternal Silent Light. Sentient beings endowed with the perfect [capacity], if they cultivate the perfect cause and their vows and practices reach perfect culmination, also dwell in Silent Light. The buddhas of the ten directions are as tranquil and clear as empty space, without increase or decrease; in order to mature sentient beings, they give rise to the causes of the four lands, leading the four [kinds of] sentient beings to dwell together in the buddha-lands, cultivating the causes of vows and practices to achieve the fruit of bodhi, abiding together in Silent Light to the utmost limits of future time. This is as explained in the 'Lifespan' chapter of the Lotus Sūtra.

1.32

Fourth, explaining the differences in seeing the buddha-land: This sūtra states: 'Just as when the devas eat from the same precious vessel, the color of the rice differs according to their merit.' In the ultimate analysis, buddha-lands are all like empty space; how could there be differing perceptions? If, while not seeing characteristics, there are nonetheless things that can be seen, there are fully ten sets [of differences]; they will be distinguished below when explaining the color of the rice.

1.33

Question: The sūtra states, 'When the devas eat from the same precious vessel, the color of the rice differs according to their merit.' Is this seeing differently a single substance, or seeing as one different substances? Answer: One should frame this as four propositions. 1. Different substances seen differently: for example, Sahā and Sukhāvatī; this land is seen as impure, and that land is seen as pure. 2. Different substances seen as one: although the substances of Sahā and Sukhāvatī differ in impurity and purity, when bodhisattvas of the separate and perfect teachings see them with the divine eye, they are simply one [land] with remainder. 3. A single substance seen differently: as seen by Śāriputra and the Śikhin [Brahmā], within a single [land] with remainder they see the difference of purity and impurity of the land of common residence. 4. A single substance seen as one: this refers to arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and the three kinds of mind-made [bodies]. These five kinds of persons have exhausted defilements within the realms and are born together in [the land] with remainder; what they see is without difference.

1.34

Question: Why explain a single substance in terms of [the land] with remainder? Answer: The three vehicles equally give rise to true uncontaminated [insight] through the wordless path, and the land they evoke shares one and the same dharmic characteristic; therefore it is called 'single'.

1.35

Question: When this sūtra says, 'Just as the devas eat from the same precious vessel, they see the color of the rice as different,' is the difference because unobstructed form is seen with obstruction, or because obstructed form is seen with obstruction? Answer: One should frame this as four propositions. 1. Obstructed form seen with obstruction: namely, the difference between the two lands of defilement/purity and remainder. 2. Obstructed form seen without obstruction: namely, dharmakāya bodhisattvas, with their unobstructed divine eye, see that defilement, purity, and remainder are all completely unobstructed. 3. Unobstructed form seen with obstruction: namely, the two kinds of sentient beings in defilement/purity and remainder within Indra's Net see with obstruction. 4. Unobstructed form seen without obstruction: namely, the three ranks of worthies and ten stages of sages dwelling in the fruition-retribution land see without obstruction.

1.36

Question: When this sūtra states, 'Eating from the same precious vessel, they see the color of the rice as different,' is the difference seen with physical substance, or without physical substance? Answer: One should also make four propositions. 1. In defilement/purity, remainder, and true retribution, all see difference with physical substance. 2. Seeing form that has physical obstruction as having no physical obstruction: this is when bodhisattvas, relying on the Buddha's wisdom, see all three lands as Silent Light. 3. Seeing form without physical obstruction as having physical obstruction: namely, sentient beings of the three lands see differing substances within Eternal Silent Light. 4. Seeing form without physical obstruction as having no physical obstruction: this is when the buddhas' minds are pure and the land is pure, seeing the Land of Eternal Silent Light as the equal dharmadhātu of suchness. Being without shape and without substance, twelve differences have been briefly set forth; fully deduced, they are immeasurable. Although they are immeasurable, they are all like empty space; therefore Vimalakīrti's empty room symbolizes that the buddha-lands of the ten directions are all entirely empty.

1.37

Fifth, explaining rebirth: it is divided into two: first, general; second, particular. First, explaining coming and going generally in terms of the four lands: it is also called 'coming to be born', as fully [explained] in the Dàpǐn. Going from here to there is called 'going to be born' (rebirth), and coming from there to here is called 'coming to be born'. The two lands are also like this, differing only in being horizontal or vertical. The Land of Eternal Silent Light transcends the name 'birth'; there is no going or coming. There is responsive coming to the three lands, but no responsive going. Second, explaining rebirth particularly in terms of the four lands: there are four: 1. Explaining rebirth in the defiled and pure lands: there are impure and pure. If taking birth in an impure land, by means of the delusions of views and thoughts—where delusion moistens bad karma, one is born in the four bad destinies; where delusion moistens good karma, one is born as a human or deva. If explaining the rebirth of sages of the three vehicles: [those at] the first fruit have severed [the delusions of] views but not severed desire-realm thoughts; the nine grades moisten birth, with seven returns among humans and devas. [Those at] the second fruit have three grades moistening birth, with one coming and going in the desire realm. [Those at] the third fruit have the thought delusions of the two realms moistening rebirth into the two realms. Those from the sixth ground of the shared [teaching] onwards, the ten abodes of the separate [teaching], and the five grades of the perfect [teaching] up to entering faith, have not yet exhausted the shared delusions and are all analogous to the third fruit; it can be known that these are all real comings to be born in the land of common residence. If they come to be born provisionally: sages of the three vehicles who have exhausted delusions within the realms either come by vow from the expedient land, or come responsively from fruition retribution or Silent Light. Next, explaining ordinary beings really born in the pure land: there are no four bad destinies; merely by delusions of views and thoughts moistening the good, they come to be born as humans or devas. Sages born provisionally or really can be known by analogy with the above. 2. Rebirth in the land with remainder: the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka, the three vehicles of the shared teaching, the ten practices of the separate teaching, and the final mind of the faith [stages] of the perfect [teaching], forever departing the three realms, are all really reborn [there]. Therefore the Śrīmālā sūtra states: 'Inconceivable transformation-death cannot be severed by the two vehicles or by the three kinds of mind-made [bodies] of bodhisattvas of great power'; hence they are born in [the land with] remainder and receive a body of dharma-nature.

1.38

Question: What are the three kinds of mind-made bodies? Answer: 1. Samādhi-attainment: this is likely the joy of entering the tranquil concentration of true emptiness shared in the shared teaching; hence the Nirvāṇa Sūtra states, 'Because the concentration power of śrāvakas is excessive, they do not see the Buddha-nature.' 2. Awakening to the self-nature of dharmas: this is likely bodhisattvas of the separate teaching, who, although realizing biased truth, awaken and know that there is the dharma-nature of the Middle Way. 3. Inaction: this is likely bodhisattvas of the perfect teaching who contemplate the Middle Way of the four noble truths of inaction and perfectly subdue fundamental ignorance. All are called 'mind-made' because, before launching true cultivation, there is still deliberate intent; with fundamental ignorance as condition and untainted karma as cause, in that other land they receive a body of dharma-nature.

1.39

Question: As the Laṅkāvatāra explains the three kinds of mind-made bodies, they all pertain to the ten grounds and should be born in the retribution land. Why say [the land] with remainder? Answer: If judging the three mind-made bodies in terms of the ten grounds of the separate [teaching], they are born in the retribution land. If judging in terms of the ten grounds of the shared [teaching], it agrees precisely with the explanation above that when bodhisattvas of the three teachings exhaust delusions within the realms, they are born together in [the land] with remainder. If, in true retribution and Silent Light, they shatter fundamental ignorance and manifest the dharmakāya, then they should be born in [the land with] remainder.

1.40

3. Explaining coming to be born in the fruition-retribution land: If in [the lands of] common residence and remainder one encroaches upon and eliminates fundamental ignorance, [practitioners of] the grounds and abodes of the separate and perfect [teachings] can all be reborn [there]. 4. The Land of Eternal Silent Light: If it is ultimate Silent Light, that is non-birth; in non-birth, how could there be going, coming, or birth? If it is Silent Light according to incremental division: with the lower extinction-patience, the ten grounds have two births; with the intermediate extinction-patience, equal enlightenment has one birth. Or it is said that the first abode of the perfect teaching partially shatters fundamental ignorance and sees the principle of Buddha-nature, so it can also attain partial birth, and so on up to equal enlightenment, all having this meaning; however, because they are bound by the fruit-retribution of the transformation-death of fundamental ignorance, they are said to 'dwell in retribution'. In marvelous enlightenment it is eradicated forever, hence it is said that 'one person dwells in the pure land.' Regarding the preceding forty-one stages: in terms of fruition-retribution, it is called being born into fruition-retribution; in terms of partially seeing true principle, it is called Eternal Silent Light.

1.41

Question: In the common residence of fragmented [lifespans], one must exhaust [delusions of] views and thoughts and abandon the body before being born into [the land with] remainder. In [the land with] remainder, should one likewise exhaust the distinct [delusions of] views and thoughts and abandon the transformational body before being born into the retribution land? Answer: It is not so. Although defilements of fragmented physical obstruction are exhausted, one must abandon retribution. In the land with remainder, according to the shattering of distinct delusions, the causes shift and the fruits transform—this is called true retribution.

1.42

Question: Is birth received in true retribution, but not in Silent Light? Answer: Since it is called 'eternally silent', how could birth be received? If there is birth, there is flux; how could it be called 'eternally silent'?

1.43

Question: Why did you state above that one is born in Eternal Silent Light? Answer: If one speaks of birth on the side of the fruition-retribution land, when wisdom is launched and truth is seen, truth is precisely non-birth; that is 'birth that is non-birth'.

1.44

Question: If it is 'birth that is non-birth', should one also say 'permanence that is non-permanent'?

1.45

Answer: It is just as you have compared. Why? Ultimate silent light is non-birth and non-birth; the forty-one stages partially dwelling in Silent Light is precisely 'birth that is non-birth' and 'permanence that is non-permanent'.

1.46

Sixth, explaining differences in expounding the teachings in the four lands, which is fourfold: 1. Differences in expounding the teachings in the defiled and pure lands: Since common residence of ordinary and sage has both pure and impure [aspects]—as for the impure, the five defilements present heavy obstructions while faculties are sharp or dull; sharp [faculties] evoke the sudden teaching, just as the rising sun first illuminates the high mountains; for dull faculties whose obstructions are heavy, one unfolds the expedients of the Tripiṭaka, vaipulya, and the Dàpǐn to harmonize and subdue them, and only in the Lotus Sūtra and Nirvāṇa Sūtra do they first hear the perfect teaching, see the Buddha-nature, and open the secret treasury. As for the pure, like the Land of Radiant Flower, although it is not an evil world, [the Buddha] vows to expound the three vehicles; here too there can be sudden and gradual teachings.

1.47

Question: If gradual teachings can also be unfolded in a pure land, why was the bodhisattva Gandhahastin astonished? Answer: Because they are expounded according to original vows.

1.48

2. Differences in expounding the teachings in the land with remainder: Those who have completely severed shared defilements can all attain rebirth, yet there are sharp and dull [faculties]. The two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings are both dull; hence the Dàzhìdù lùn explains that the dharma-nature body of an arhat is dull, because their path to Buddhahood is circuitous. The alternate grading of sharp and dull among the shared, separate, and perfect teachings can be known; the Tathāgata in that land only expounds the One Vehicle. Although there is no unfolding of the three, within the One Vehicle there is nonetheless the provisional and separate to accommodate both capacities. If explaining opening and revealing: although there are no Tripiṭaka or shared teachings, he opens the separate provisional [teaching] and reveals the reality of the perfect [teaching]. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra explains that arhats born there, seeking the Buddha's wisdom, get to hear this sūtra and attain extinction only by means of the Buddha vehicle. 3. Explaining differences in expounding the teachings in the fruition-retribution land: Since all have shattered fundamental ignorance, those reborn there share the same capacity and nature; practicing the great straight path, they no longer make detours; the Buddha in that land expounds only the single perfect [teaching]. 4. Explaining differences in expounding the teachings in the Land of Eternal Silent Light: If it is ultimate Silent Light, there is neither preaching nor demonstration. Yet when speaking of expounding, the dharmakāya, free of conditioned objects, invisibly assists all; expounding without expounding is precisely the dharmakāya expounding the Dharma. If explaining Eternal Silent Light in terms of fruition-retribution, distinguishing the difference between the two kinds of expounding the Dharma: expounding the four noble truths of inaction pertains to the fruition-retribution land; expounding the single real truth pertains to Eternal Silent Light. The lower two lands can be known by analogy with this.

First 48 of 152 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

維摩經略疏 — Classical Chinese