維摩經略疏垂裕記 7

English (machine translation) 7

Language: English

7.1

Narrated by the Śramaṇa Zhiyuan of Qiantang

Second, embodying provisionality through continuity. Jingxi says: "To reveal swiftness, youth still seems to abide." Third, embodying provisionality through relativity. Regarding "Relativity is of two kinds", Jingxi says: "Temporal vertical relativity, and simultaneous horizontal relativity; passages on relativity always possess these two relativities. Nonexistence before and existence after constitutes the vertical; relativity to the three unconditioned states constitutes the horizontal."

7.3

Second, general metaphor for the three provisionalities. Regarding "Or it is": previously this text was divided under provisionality through relativity. Now it is again given a general interpretation, hence it says 'or'.

7.4

Seventh, concluding the upholding of the Vinaya.

7.5

Second, the minds of the two monks attain purity, in two parts: first, dividing the sections; second, sequential commentary, in three parts: first, the monks praise and sigh. Jingxi says: "They could not employ the Mahāyāna common, distinct, and perfect [teachings] because investigation through the four clauses is shared by the three teachings."

7.6

Second, Upāli acquiesces and yields. Third, the monks generate the mind [for awakening]. Fourth, concluding their unfitness.

7.7

Ninth, commanding Luoyun, in two parts: first, dividing the sections and recounting the intent.

7.8

Second, from "Rāhula" onward, sequential textual interpretation, in two parts: first, commanding him to inquire after the illness. Regarding "Also called Luoyun" and so forth: the new rendering is Luohuluo, translated here as 'Holding the Sun'. 'Being pregnant' (you shen), the pronunciation of [shen] is shen, meaning bearing a child; also pronounced as the fanqie of zhi and ren.

7.9

Second, declining as unfit, in two parts: first, directly dividing the sections; second, sequential commentary, in four parts: first, directly declining as unfit; second, recounting the reasons for unfitness, in two parts: first, recounting the intent and dividing the sections; second, sequential textual interpretation, in two parts: first, the elder asks. Regarding "Becoming a wheel-turning king": there are four wheel-turning kings: gold, silver, copper, and iron wheels, ruling over four, three, two, and one world respectively. When about to ascend the throne, they first bathe and fast on a high tower, and the wheel treasure responds naturally, coming from the eastern direction; the seven treasures—ministers, army, elephants, horses, women, and jewels—are all like this, fully as explained in the "Chapter on Noble Conduct" of the Great Sūtra. Sengzhao says: "Had the Buddha not gone forth from home, he should have become a gold-wheel king, ruling over four worlds. Had Rāhula not gone forth from home, he should have become an iron-wheel king, ruling over one world." Because what he renounced was not light and what he anticipated was bound to be momentous, [the elder] asked about its benefit.

7.10

Second, Rāhula's reply. Regarding "Like the Damamūka-nidāna Sūtra up to the merit of leaving household life": fascicle seven of that sūtra states, "The causes and conditions of leaving household life yield exceedingly great merit. If one frees men, women, male slaves, and female slaves, or permits ordinary people, or oneself leaves household life to enter the Way, the merit is immeasurable. The retribution of giving yields blessings enjoyed for ten lifetimes, going back and forth between the six heavens and humans ten times; yet this still does not equal the superior merit of permitting others to leave household life and leaving household life oneself. Why is this? The blessings that are the retribution of giving have a limit, whereas the blessings of leaving household life are boundless and immeasurable." The sūtra's textual comparisons are exceedingly extensive and cannot be cited in detail. As for the "ten wisdoms," they are as recorded earlier.

7.11

Third, the direct narration of the reproach, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, sequential explanation, in five parts: first, the direct reproach. Regarding "leaving household life in bodily form and dress" and below, the text of the Commentary itself sets up four propositions. Jingxi says: One should oppose bodily form and mind to biased and perfect, and also form multiple sets of four propositions using faith and Dharma; here, it is directly meant to cause the perfect mind to leave.

7.12

Second, providing an explanation, in two parts: first, the direct explanation, in three parts: first, explaining the reproach of the esoteric practice. Jingxi says: If it is for benefiting sentient beings, it is only by practicing benefit within what is free of benefit that one attains the inconceivable emptiness. Leaving household life with an empty mind to respond to the capacities of beings causes beings to infer the principle.

7.13

Second, reproaching in terms of principle. Relying on the name of "esoteric practice," it reproaches by means of leaving household life according to principle. Only the benefit of secretly accumulating merit is called being without benefit and without merit.

7.14

Second, explaining the reproach of wisdom and severance. Jingxi says: Regarding conditioned dharmas, he also reproaches Rāhula because, although he sees biased truth, it is equivalent to the conditioned. Hence the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says "that which is empty, etc."; the intention is to point to the non-empty, which means that within the unconditioned, all dharmas are fully possessed. If it were within the true emptiness of the Hinayana, it is merely empty and does not fully possess all dharmas; hence it should not be so explained.

7.15

Third, explaining the reproach of the mind that leaves household life. Jingxi says: Regarding "it is the equal true dharmadhātu, etc.," herein he relies on this to refute ancient masters and establish the present interpretation. Within the true dharmadhātu, there is not even leaving household life outside the realm to save others; how could there be the merit of saving others through bodily form and dress? Moreover, it can also be termed reproaching on the grounds that the names are identical between Mahayana and Hinayana while their substances differ; it is also a reproach by analogy, and both earlier and later passages are like this. This is like Rāhula's esotericism within the Hinayana: even the principle of the Hinayana cannot be grasped, how much less could one speak of benefit in the equal dharmadhātu and ultimate true emptiness? Citing that true reality to verify the unconditioned, Mahayana's unconditioned fully possesses all merits; thus it is unlike the Hinayana, where whether existent or non-existent, neither can fully possess all dharmas.

7.16

Second, evaluation. Jingxi says: Regarding "asking Jingming, etc.," the sūtra only says unconditioned and without benefit. This is asking about the earlier citations of great nirvāṇa, space, Buddha-nature, and the equal dharmadhātu, for these names are inherently sufficient. Why designate them as the true esoteric practice? This also does not accord with the meaning of the unconditioned. The intent in the answer is: Rāhula was precisely speaking of the benefits of Hinayana unconditioned merit, and was also acclaimed as foremost in esoteric practice within the Hinayana. Jingming used the Mahayana to crush these two matters, making neither succeed. The Mahayana unconditioned is like a wish-fulfilling jewel; the jewel itself is all things—how could any esotericism surpass this? The term "unconditioned" has not yet reached its ultimate principle, so it is said to be provisionally stated. Hence we know that the Mahayana unconditioned is not without superior benefit. Because Rāhula had already attained the Hinayana unconditioned, he crushed him with the Mahayana unconditioned. Having already refuted the Hinayana, he then described the all-pervasiveness of the Mahayana unconditioned dharma, thereby clarifying that both the conditioned and unconditioned of the Hinayana cannot fully possess all dharmas. If it is like this, only then is it the highest grade among esoteric practices. Therefore, among the ten disciples, their practices are all taken as the basis for refuting and establishing, serving as the purport of the half and full, the deep and shallow.

7.17

Third, extensively showing the merits of leaving household life, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, sequential explanation, in two parts: first, one's own practice. Regarding "If one contemplates up to attains the true unconditioned": Jingxi says: The true unconditioned is precisely the true esoteric practice. Below, each is concluded as fully possessing all merits within the true unconditioned, each meaning secretly censuring Rāhula. Regarding "pure dhyāna separated from all views": views outside the realm are separated from only at equal enlightenment; how could the Hinayana fruit be free of them? Regarding "dwelling in nirvāṇa, etc.": Jingxi says: Therefore, this principle of unconditioned esoteric practice fully possesses the three virtues. This is the explicit text for the three virtues of innate nature; this is the Great Master's profound intent. Scholars of our school should contemplate the causes and conditions of the hundred realms and the three paths in a single thought. Regarding "In contemplation verifying the fruit up to cultivating the cause": the character guān is read in the level tone.

7.18

Second, transforming others, in two parts: first, division into sections and preliminary indication. "Pāpīyān" is translated here as "extremely evil."

7.19

Second, sequential explanation of the text, in two parts: first, subduing the hosts of Māra. Regarding "The sūtra says: subduing the hosts of Māra and delivering the five destinies, etc.": Jingxi says: It is due to subduing that one delivers; up to leaving evil, all are due to subduing Māra. As for the Commentary stating "attaining the bodhisattva path": although the text speaks of it distinctly, it must nevertheless be understood according to the perfect [teaching]; therefore, when the bodhisattva path is attained, one has already attained the Dharma-nature. The path of the initial abode therefore fully possesses the two times; having already attained the immovable, this is precisely the ultimate. The rest can be understood by analogy. Furthermore, this "immovable" should be understood as not being the immovable of the twenty-five samādhis; this borrows a distinct name established at the time of the Tripiṭaka [Buddha's] subduing of Māra. Regarding "destroying Paranirmitavaśavartin, etc.": this is the red-colored samādhi. Hence we know there cannot be sequence; therefore it cites the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra to verify and establish the measure of subduing Māra for the perfect stage in the perfect school. Moreover, the meaning of each passage applies to initial practice, serving as the beginner's cultivation for practitioners. Regarding "delivering the five destinies up to the three kinds of mind-made bodies": although the name of the five destinies outside the realm cannot be established therein, having already cited the twenty-five samādhis of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra—since the sūtra designates it as the king among samādhis, capable of delivering the delusions of the twenty-five existences and the three truths, and fully possessing the three wisdoms, three bodies, and three liberations—it still constitutes ten kinds of destroying the twenty-five existences, which is precisely ten kinds of delivering the five destinies. Regarding "capable of delivering within the realm, etc.": this directly brings out the five destinies in the two places of fragmented and transformative [samsāra]; how much more so when the subsequent clause says "purifying the five eyes." Regarding "purifying the five eyes": although the five correspond to the five, it does not mean their substances are the same; it is to clarify again the substance and function of the capacity to deliver. Regarding "destroying various evil karmas corresponds to the fleshy eye": desiring to point to the fleshy eye as being in the human realm, it explains that the eyes of the four [unfortunate] destinies do not equal those of humans and devas, and hence are what is destroyed. This is also a provisional statement. There are also nāgas and ghosts who surpass the human fleshy eye, yet it remains evil karma; judging from the standpoint of the path, it is destroyed. Regarding "various distracted minds, etc.": since distraction is called "various," it refers to the desire realm. Because the dharma of the divine eye resides in the form realm, it is only by destroying desire that one has the divine eye of the four dhyānas. It should be understood that this is judged as the separate and perfect teachings according to the doctrine. Regarding "in terms of the five powers": since power stems from the eyes, and the eyes stem from delivering the destinies, explaining the faculties and powers is also clarified by advancing and regressing according to the separate and perfect teachings, or it may fully contain the four teachings.

7.20

Question: In terms of the factors of awakening, why are the three, four, seven, and eight not listed? Why do the five faculties come after the powers? Answer: In the fruition stage of the separate and perfect teachings, each of the seven categories among these dharmas stands independently as a gate. Why use the mutual generation of causal dharmas to pose an objection?

7.21

Question: If the eyes are not divided according to teachings, why are the powers divided? And within the division, is there still a determination between provisional and real? Answer: This also accomplishes the substance and function of the eyes. If the five eyes are purified, the faculties and powers are necessarily complete. In a provisional reading, the text appears to show mutually generative characteristics, but none are not accomplished through the subduing of Māra; hence, subduing Māra is taken as the fundamental. The textual marks below are both fundamental and generative; how could they merely stand independently, generating one another and grounding one another in succession?

7.22

Second, destroying the non-Buddhists.

7.23

Fourth, concluding on the true leaving of household life. Jingxi says: Regarding "thus one mind fully possesses the ten thousand practices": because taking together the preceding oneself and others, all are one mind, the preceding four categories must be of the same substance.

7.24

Fifth, encouraging the sons of elders to leave household life, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, sequential explanation, in four parts: first, encouraging them to leave household life. Jingxi says: Regarding "now being able to meet and hear, etc.": the sons of elders were hearing the merits of leaving household life in the Mahayana for the first time, and had never been moistened by faith in the Buddhadharma. Hence we know that having heard merely means hearing what was just spoken; those who have not heard are like the three hundred million people.

7.25

Second, declining due to obstacles. Third, reiterating the encouragement. Jingxi says: Regarding the four propositions, one should, as before, fully discriminate multiple sets of four propositions to judge the mind. If not so, how would it differ from the Hinayana? Hence it says each has the Mahayana, etc. Regarding "each has, etc.": since it says roots of goodness, they are past seeds, not that Jingming only now began to encourage their generating the mind. Regarding "the bodhisattva precept category arises in accordance with the mind": this does not mean that generating the mind immediately possesses the precept essence. It is said merely by contrasting the Mahayana with the Hinayana; however, in the Mahayana it also depends on conditions being complete. For householders, conditions being complete means parents fully give permission, because it does not impede filial support. But the Hinayana teaching takes form and non-form-mind as the precept essence. Although the bodhisattva also uses body and speech as aids, the predominant factor lies in the mind, which is called the precept according with the mind. Though Mahayana and Hinayana differ, the superior grade is entirely the mind. But the great Vinaya takes the four universal vows as its foundation, establishing mind, conditions, and objects—the three clusters—mutually supporting one another. Therefore, Jingming says that this is leaving household life; this means fully possessing the four generations of the aspiration [for awakening].

7.26

Fourth, concluding on being incapable.

7.27

Tenth, commanding Ānanda, in two parts: first, division into sections and narrating the intent; second, from "namely" and below, sequential explanation of the text, in two parts: first, commanding him to inquire after the illness. Jingxi says: As for "named on account of three causes and conditions," these three meanings can also establish the four siddhāntas: original vow is the mundane; parents are the individual-adapted; arising good from seeing and the primary meaning.

7.28

Second, declining as incapable, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, from "First, receiving" and below, sequential explanation, in four parts: first, directly declining as incapable; second, stating the reasons for being incapable. Regarding "clarifying the physically born body as the true Buddha": this directly refers to the body born in the royal palace as being the true Buddha. Hunger, thirst, cold, heat, etc., are the nine afflictions. Xian says: 1. the metal spear; 2. the horse barley; 3. the cold wind; 4. the fever disease; 5. shedding blood; 6. Ciñcā-māṇavikā's slander; 7. begging for food and returning with an empty bowl; 8. harm by a brahmin; 9. back pain. From "this is then" and below, Jingxi says: Clarifying the purport of the Vaipulya. If spoken from the fundamental, it properly accords with the texts of the half and full [teachings]. If it is an actual practitioner, one should merely rely on the present presentation of both paths; that is precisely the teaching's intent.

7.29

Third, the direct narration of receiving the reproach, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, sequential explanation, in three parts: first, examining and asking about the intent of begging, in two parts: first, Jingming's question. Regarding "the time for piṇḍapāta has not yet arrived": it is not yet the mealtime. Piṇḍapāta is as recorded earlier. Second, Ānanda's reply.

7.30

Second, the direct reproach, in two parts: first, division into sections; second, sequential explanation, in four parts: first, reiterating the stopping of Ānanda's two slanders. Jingxi says: Regarding speaking of it as existing: illness is a fruit of suffering; a fruit necessarily stems from a cause. Regarding "the body has a slight illness": this single statement alone incurred both slanders.

7.31

Second, revealing the vajra body, in two parts: first, citing the text and directly explaining it. Regarding "Why it is compared to a vajra": Jingxi says: Because the three virtues are fully possessed, the three meanings of vajra are used to illustrate the three virtues. Since the three are precisely one, he points to the two virtues in terms of the dharmakāya. Regarding "all evils" and below: the five entrenchments are all eliminated, which is precisely the inconceivable liberation. However, liberation and prajñā should each fully possess three, namely the three liberations and three wisdoms. The case of the dharmakāya can be known by analogy; hence the text is abbreviated.

7.32

Question: Now it is said that all five dwellings are eliminated; how do these correspond to the three liberations? Answer: The perfectly integrated three liberations all eliminate the five dwellings. If matching them specifically, there is nonetheless an intended meaning: liberation of the true nature eliminates fundamental ignorance; liberation of real wisdom eliminates [the afflictions of] view and thought; liberation of expedient means eliminates [afflictions like] dust and sand. Gathering the specific into the general and selecting the general through the specific—one should grasp the meaning so as not to lose the perfect intent.

7.33

Regarding "from mahā to the myriad goods": this merely refers to the three wisdoms guiding merit. Moving from cause to fruit, it is therefore said to covertly merge into the ultimate and perfect culmination of the middle way. Regarding "thus ... is distinctly evident": the three lines of the sūtra text tally with the three virtues, distinctly evident to view. That is, the essence of the vajra is the dharmakāya; that all evils are already severed is liberation; and that all goods universally gather is wisdom (prajñā). Each possessing three makes nine, yet nine is merely three; the three and one are mutually integrated and interpenetrate without obstruction—how could such a subtle essence have illness? Regarding "then there is no fruit of suffering": since there are no causes of suffering of the five dwellings, then there are no fruits of suffering of the two kinds of death. Previously it stated that all five dwellings are eliminated; here it states that there is no fruit of suffering; these merely reveal the meaning mutually. However, resolving evil should be understood in terms of the five dwellings, while resolving illness should be understood in terms of the fruit of suffering. Regarding "this refutes the Tripiṭaka..." etc.: the reward body is the body born in the royal palace. Wisdom and severing are the severing of [afflictions of] view and thought through the thirty-four mental states under the tree. Thus, the dharmakāya would first possess wisdom and severing and only afterwards be obtained, being both sequential and separated, and unable to avoid illness and distress. Jingxi states: "Fully as explained in the Cessation and Contemplation, the vertical and horizontal three virtues exist in three aspects each for both the small and great [vehicles]." Here, Jingxi refers to the chapter on Essence and Characteristics. Regarding "the Mahāyāna teachings on the dharmakāya, wisdom, and severing": Jingxi says: "Surpassing the shared teaching, it directly presents the distinct and perfect [teachings]."

7.34

Second, from "yet formerly..." downward, refuting the ancient [commentators] and revealing the present [teaching]. Regarding "the four periods and five periods": The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra explains that ancient commentators classifying the teachings all regarded the Avataṃsaka Sūtra as sudden, while in the gradual [teachings] there were three periods, four periods, five periods, and so forth. Daoxian states: "Master Ji of Huqiu divided them into three periods. Before the twelfth year, seeing that there is attainment of the path was named the teaching of having characteristics; after the twelfth year up to the Lotus Sūtra, explaining that seeing emptiness attains the path was named the teaching of signlessness; and lastly, in the Twin Trees, explaining the Buddha-nature of all sentient beings and that icchantikas become buddhas was named the teaching of eternal presence. Master Zong'ai posited four periods: three as before, with an additional one after signlessness and before eternal presence, pointing to the Lotus Sūtra's converging of the three into the one, named the teaching of identical return. The two masters Dinglin Rou and Ci explained five periods: four not differing from before, while after signlessness and before identical return, pointing to the Vimalakīrti, Viśeṣacintā, and other Vaipulya sūtras as the teaching of praise, blame, suppression, and exaltation." Regarding "is still the eighty-year-old Buddha": ancient commentators placed Prajñā before Vaipulya, still taking it to be the same as the Tripiṭaka Buddha being impermanent at eighty. Regarding "seven hundred asaṃkhyeyas": Daoxian says: "The lower fascicle of the Śūraṅgamasamādhi Sūtra states: 'Dṛḍhamati addressed the Buddha, saying: "World-Honoured One! How long is the Buddha's life span? When will he enter extinction?" The Buddha told Dṛḍhamati: "To the east, fifty-two thousand buddha lands away from here, there is a country named Alaṃkāra. The buddha's name is Prabhāvyūha-īśvararāja, fully possessing the ten epithets, and he is currently expounding the Dharma. As is that buddha's life span, so too is mine." He asked again: "How long is that buddha's life span?" The Buddha said: "Go and ask him yourself; he will answer you himself." Dṛḍhamati, relying on the Buddha's spiritual power, [went and the other buddha] even answered, saying: "As is Śākyamuni's life span, so is mine. If you wish to know, my life span is seven hundred asaṃkhyeya kalpas, and Śākyamuni's is also like this."'" The ancient commentators meant that now, explaining the essence of the vajra, it is identical to this superior response body of seven hundred [asaṃkhyeyas], not the eternal presence of the dharmakāya. Regarding "and do not accept what is now explained": Jingxi says: "What is posited by the advocates of the four periods and five periods does not accept that the preceding four periods or three periods possess the principle of eternal presence, and therefore they do not accept the present explanation. The present explanation reveals the glorious, and the glorious is the great; thus it conflicts with their interpretation."

7.35

Third, concluding the two reproaches, in two [parts]: first, dividing the section; second, following the text to explain, in two: first, concluding the slander of detraction. Regarding the concluding mention of devas of great majesty: Jingxi says that speaking generally, all devas possess majesty and virtue, and all are without illness. Regarding "the pure lands of other regions" etc.: pointing for now to the Land of Peace and Sustenance (Sukhāvatī), where even down to ten recitations, or a single recitation at the point of death, all can attain rebirth; hence it is called a minor good.

7.36

Second, concluding the slander of superimposition. Regarding "how could one take him as a teacher": ning means 'how could'. Since he is an evil person, how could he be worthy of being revered as a teacher?

7.37

Fourth, citing the text to explain and counter-refute, in two [parts]: first, stating the topic; second, from "one should know" downward, following the text to explain, in two: first, the main explanation, in four: first, explaining the virtue of severing of the dharmakāya; second, explaining the virtue of wisdom of the dharmakāya; third, re-explaining the virtue of severing. Regarding the "two kinds of three outflows": the afflictions of the desire realm, excluding ignorance, are called the outflow of desire; the afflictions of the upper two realms, excluding ignorance, are called the outflow of existence; ignorance in the three realms is called the outflow of ignorance. The three outflows beyond the realms can be known by standard analogy. 'Outflow' has two meanings: first, leaking away from principle; second, falling down into saṃsāra. Fourth, re-explaining the virtue of wisdom.

7.38

Second, the general conclusion.

7.39

Third, Ānanda's shame and remorse, in two [parts]: first, dividing the section; second, following the text to explain, in two: first, the actual shame and remorse; second, the voice in the air comforting and instructing. Regarding "as explained in the Contemplation of Samantabhadra": that sūtra states, "Śākyamuni is named Vairocana, pervading all places." The reason this is cited is that the Great Master intended to show that the voice in the air was Śākyamuni's dharmakāya, not another buddha. Jingxi says: "Question: Which buddha's dharmakāya is this? Answer: All Tathāgatas of the ten directions share one single dharmakāya; how could one speak of whose dharmakāya it is? Yet, non-distinct while distinct, responding to beings through sound, as conditions differ the sounds are distinct; thus it is the body of Śākyamuni's dharmakāya."

7.40

Question: The dharmakāya has no sound; how can there be a sound? Answer: The principle has none, while the response has it.

7.41

Question: Since it is called the dharmakāya, how can you now call it the response? Answer: Being formless is called dharma; the sound is the response; the response is itself the dharmakāya—why seek any difference? Therefore it is said: 'My present body is precisely the dharmakāya.' The voice in the air in the Lotus Sūtra may be understood by analogy.

7.42

Regarding "the five turbidities": Kumārajīva says: "In a major kalpa there are small kalpas with many evil occurrences; these are collectively termed the kalpa turbidity. When good people are gone and there are purely evil sentient beings, this is the sentient being turbidity. Afflictions other than wrong views, such as the three poisons when exceedingly heavy, which do not conform to principle and can obstruct the noble path, inevitably causing one to enter evil destinies—such fetters are the affliction turbidity. Excluding the four views, taking solely wrong view, slandering that there is no cause and effect, sin or merit, noble path or nirvāṇa—this is termed the view turbidity. Generally, when a declining kalpa decreases to one hundred twenty years or below, down to three years, all is called the life-span turbidity. When Śākyamuni appeared in the world, it was during a time when life span was one hundred twenty years." This relies on Kumārajīva's explanation. The Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra explains it fully. Regarding "in order to transform the brāhmaṇa": Jingxi says that this clarifies the intention of manifesting illness. In the Ruguang Jing (Sūtra of Milk Light), seven holy ones together transform the stingy brāhmaṇa: first, the mother cow; second, the calf; third, the milker; fourth, Ānanda; fifth, Jingming; sixth, the Tathāgata; and seventh, the voice in the air. This brāhmaṇa never gave throughout his life, and had iron netting around his house so that not even flying birds could pass. When Ānanda came to his gate, Jingming reproached him in order to manifest the Tathāgata's eternally abiding dharmakāya. As Ānanda was about to leave, encouraged by the voice in the air, this brāhmaṇa's mind of giving seemed to open up, yet he chose from the herd one that would not allow herself to be milked, telling him to milk her himself. Ānanda said, 'I am a great bhikṣu and should not touch milk.' The Buddha then transformed himself into a young brāhmaṇa who casually stood nearby; seeing him, the brāhmaṇa had him milk her. As soon as he touched the cow's body, she experienced immeasurable pleasure. Thereupon the mother cow spoke a verse: 'If you milk the two on the right, / You should leave the two on the left. / If you milk the two on the left, / You should leave the two on the right. / If you milk all to offer to the World-Honoured One, / The calf will have to be nourished.' Having heard this, the calf spoke another verse: 'I originally did not practice giving, / And have now come to the animal destiny. / Milk all to offer to the World-Honoured One; / I will feed on water and grass myself.' Thereupon the brāhmaṇa was astonished and filled with admiration: 'Even animals are like this; why should I be stingy?' Because of this, he generated the aspiration and gave up all his wealth in great charity; he then followed Ānanda to where the Tathāgata was. The Buddha expounded the Dharma for him and conferred a prediction that he would become a buddha named Milk Light (Ruguang). This encouragement by the voice in the air was replete with both the provisional and the real; thus a single comfort benefited two people. Regarding "there is no need for shame and remorse": those with faculties for the great will naturally know it as great; if those of lesser faculties hear of it, what harm is there in illness? They originally knew it was a body born of parents in a palace; since the cause is not permanent, how could the fruit differ? Furthermore, the real practitioners in this assembly did not yet know it; since it was grounded in transforming the stingy together, what shame could there be?

7.43

Fourth, concluding their unfitness. Second, next commanding the five hundred. Jingxi says: speaking of their respective bodily causes, as in the previous ten instances, merely described the bodily causes of the partial teaching; relying on the present reproach, these become the true cause of eternal presence.

7.44

Bodhisattva Chapter

7.45

Third, the Bodhisattva Chapter subduing the self-nature and the gathering of conditions, in two [parts]: first, narrating the intent and dividing the sections; second, explaining according to the sections, in three: first, directly explaining the purpose of this chapter's occurrence, in two: first, generally explaining the purpose of its occurrence. Regarding "inconceivable circumstantial and direct [rewards]": the realm of Still and Quenching Light is the circumstantial reward, and the dharmakāya is the direct reward. Leaving aside the body there is no land, and leaving aside the land there is no body; hence it is called inconceivable. Sentient beings originally possess it, but being deluded do not know it. The initial abode realizes it partially; wondrous enlightenment realizes it definitively. To cause them to attain these two, it is therefore said, "desiring to cause sentient beings..." and so forth. Regarding "yet having the affliction of self-nature": because ignorance is not yet exhausted, they are still reproached. Either instructing the lower in contrast to the higher, reproaching the biased with the perfect; or urging on their perfect practice to cause them to advance to higher stages, the meaning of which is as explained below. From "this clarifies" downward: for the time being, concluding and revealing the text's purport in terms of using the perfect to reproach the biased, reproaching the biased direct reward and revealing the perfect circumstantial reward.

7.46

Second, specifically clarifying the purpose of its occurrence, in three [parts]: first, opening the sections to distinguish differences. Regarding "yet the meaning is different": the meaning differs from what preceded, as will naturally be seen according to the sections. If examining the overarching purport, the previous five together accomplish the subduing of the small [vehicle], while these five together accomplish the reproach of the biased.

7.47

Second, directly explaining according to the sections, in five: first, to reveal Jingming's inconceivable, superior wisdom. Regarding "none do not submit": mi means 'none'. Regarding "only the remaining four meanings": these are the four sections below.

7.48

Second, to turn the expedient teaching gates, in two: first, indicating the topic; second, from "first turning" downward, directly explaining, in two: first, turning the teaching; second, first narrating the intent. Regarding "bodhisattvas of dull faculties": bodhisattvas of the three teachings are collectively called those of dull faculties.

7.49

Second, from "there are three" downward, directly explaining, in three: first, listing the sections.

7.50

Second, directly explaining, in three: first, turning the expedients of the Tripiṭaka. Regarding "identical with the five flavors of the śrāvakas": they enter the perfect only upon reaching the Lotus Sūtra; hence those of sharp faculties, upon being reproached, awaken to the perfect and do not receive the later flavors, which is why they are called sharp.

7.51

Second, transforming the expedients within the Prajñāpāramitā. Regarding 'From the night the Buddha attained the Way' and so forth, Jingxi says: In this *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*, it is clearly explained that the Prajñāpāramitā has the manifest and the secret, the fixed and the non-fixed. In terms of manifest sequence, it resides only in the third [period]; within that specific text, the provisional and vertical are non-fixed. Moreover, it had not yet been made clear that now [one] vertically discusses them comprehensively in order to clarify the secret teaching, so from after the attainment of the Way throughout the middle period it was constantly expounded; hence it is now applied to reach the Vaipulya. Therefore, within the Vaipulya, using the great to reproach the small, the great principle precisely corresponds to the Prajñāpāramitā from beginning to end. Thus, because the benefits in the Common and Distinct [teachings] differ, they all come down to the present and must await reproach. As for 'bodhisattvas hearing it separately,' this was not in the Deer Park expounding it to the two vehicles; arriving at the Vaipulya assembly, they hear the small in the presence of the great; yet it is not the secret Prajñāpāramitā, for this is still non-fixed when discussed in terms of location. 'Location' refers to the mutual perspective of the ten directions. Furthermore, this is also called discussing the non-fixed in terms of practice through the five flavors.

7.52

Third, transforming the expedients within the Avataṃsaka. Jingxi says: Regarding 'receiving the Avataṃsaka' and so forth: having been unable to obtain benefit in that assembly, and coming to the Deer Park where covert benefit was entirely absent, they arrive in this assembly to await a distinct reproach.

7.53

Third, from 'Furthermore' onward, critical examination, in eight [parts]. First, examining whether reproach is used or not, in two: first, directly examining and showing, in three: first, establishing the thesis. Regarding 'the four flavors' and so forth, Jingxi says: Explaining the previous text on the manifest and secret five flavors, within the five flavors he discerns the intention of reproach, making clear whether the four expedients and the real, such as milk, must be reproached or not reproached. From 'Why is this?' onward, it explains the reason for reproach, fearing that the intention of reproach might be lost. 'Clinging to the teaching' and so forth refers to people who have not grasped the intent. From 'Although they are equal' onward refers to people who have grasped the intent. From 'If one receives' onward, those who lose the intent must be reproached, while those who grasp the intent are not reproached.

7.54

Second, the query. Jingxi says: It questions the preceding intention of reproach and non-reproach.

7.55

Third, the answer and explanation. 'Both the teaching and the person are discarded': since it is not the real, whether one grasps the intent or does not grasp it, both must be reproached.

7.56

Second, from 'Explaining this' onward, showing the import of the text. Regarding 'both the dharma and the illness are reproached' and so forth: 'dharma' is grasping the intent, 'illness' is not grasping it; the Perfect Teaching possesses both intents, as in the text.

7.57

Second, examining whether the essence and benefit pervade what preceded. Regarding 'The answer is as asked': at the Deer Park, there was a shared inclusion of the two vehicles, but it was secret and not manifest.

7.58

Third, examining the reproaching of the person while retaining the dharma. Jingxi says: Regarding 'bodhisattvas of expedients': within the expedient teachings, one further distinguishes reproach and non-reproach with respect to person and dharma, in order to preserve the teaching of the Vaipulya.

7.59

Fourth, examining the provisional stagnation of the Avataṃsaka. Jingxi says: Regarding 'if one clings to reaching the ocean': the Great Master precisely took the perfect and sudden teaching to be the original purport of the *Avataṃsaka Sūtra*; therefore, that teaching is not like the two curds. The two curds still have the two intents of distant and near, and thus both attain the distant; in the treatise it is solely sudden, so it says that this is the overture to the *Lotus Sūtra*.

7.60

Fifth, examining whether the Nirvāṇa pervades what preceded. Jingxi says: Regarding the question which also says 'reaching this intention': since it pervades the beginning and the end, it should also possess the four. Among the four, regarding expedients and reality, there are those reproached and not reproached; why is this not brought forth? The answer is: 'Although there is this intention, clear text has not been seen.' The question cites the Buddha's answer to Kāśyapa; this is precisely the text. The reason it says there is none is merely that it is not as clear as the text of the *Avataṃsaka*, which moreover is the clear text of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*; hence it is also said that there is a text. From 'If one wishes' onward, it infers through principle that different names have the same meaning, taking this as the intended answer.

7.61

Sixth, examining the Prajñāpāramitā and the Avataṃsaka. Jingxi says: Regarding 'the night the Way was attained' and so forth: although the previous answer said that different names share the same meaning, and both the Avataṃsaka and Prajñāpāramitā involve the Vaipulya, one does not know whether there are different texts called 'different names,' or whether differences are established within the same text. The answer is divided into two. If it is unshared, it is a different text; if it is shared, it is the same text. If so, it is still discussing identical or different texts by looking at teaching from teaching.

7.62

Seventh, examining the different names of the Nirvāṇa. In the question, it first cites the verse. Next, from 'If so' onward is the direct question and answer. Jingxi says: The intent makes clear: how could it only be that different names have the same meaning? In terms of texts, there can also be identity and difference. The texts differ but the principle is equal, so nothing is lost in meaning; how much more so when it is merely different names?

7.63

Eighth, examining whether the Vaipulya pervades what preceded. Jingxi says: Regarding 'Question: from Jingming' and so forth: there should also properly be the Vaipulya's raw curd pervading milk and sour milk. If it exists, why is it not expounded? The answer is: although the text is such, it should fully correspond to the tenth roll of the *Fahua Xuanwen*. Now if one again wishes to argue that it exists in principle, at the Deer Park it secretly expounded reproach in principle. Furthermore, why would the four within the *Avataṃsaka* need to be discussed again? That is also an analogous case. Since everything pervades the beginning and the end, how could the Vaipulya not pervade the beginning? By this standard, having questioned what precedes, one should also question what follows; that the text omits it is due to brevity. If so, the teaching of a single voice is not without small attainments, but it merely misses the dull-witted; traversing the five periods, it therefore does not fully use what was cited in the *Xuanwen*.

7.64

Second, transforming contemplation. Jingxi says: Regarding 'transforming contemplation' and so forth: in comparison to the teachings, it is merely the distinction between faith and dharma. Manifest, secret, and sequence are entirely the same as the teachings; following the previous meanings, one awaits reproach according to contemplation. It merely adds 'killing a person' to indicate the non-fixed, using it to reveal the characteristics of practice; this constitutes the distinction. Hence it cites 'killing a person' from the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* as proof. The text has two [parts]: first, directly explaining, in two: first, clarifying that the current faculties are mature and capable of hearing, in two: first, directly clarifying the transformation of contemplation, in two: first, directly clarifying the obtaining of benefit. 'Since they are of sharp faculties': in their respective teachings, compared to those who practice by faith, they are called sharp faculties. Regarding 'hearing the Tripiṭaka' and so forth: those called 'practitioners of dharma' do not entirely refrain from hearing; they hear little and reflect much, hence receiving the name. The *Prajñāpāramitā* resides in the Common, while the *Avataṃsaka* is based on the Distinct. 'Yet not having seen the correct path': receiving the previous three teachings, they have not seen the perfect principle. From 'If they hear' onward, it directly shows transforming contemplation. 'Entering the gate of non-duality': entering the perfect from the partial, the stages encompass both shallow and profound, because the stages of contemplative practice, resemblance, and partial realization are all named 'entering the gate of non-duality'; according to the current intention of reproach, it takes solely partial realization.

7.65

Second, from 'Furthermore' onward, revealing the stages through the flavors, in two: first, revealing the stages. Regarding 'at the previous three places' and so forth: since the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching do not sever delusions, though the shallow and profound differ, it is only called milk. For persons of the Common teaching, the matching of stages according to flavor can be known. If the middle way is brought forth, it resides only in the Distinct teaching; if discussing the path of realization, how could it rely on reproach? Now, following the intent of the text, it is spoken according to the path of teaching; hence it resides in ghee, and having encountered reproach and received benefit, it is only then called 'killing a person.'

7.66

Second, from 'If they hear' onward, clarifying the benefit. If discussing the receipt of benefit, it actually pervades the shallow and profound; here, clarifying the outbreak of the poison resides only in partial realization: thus the revealing cause is like the poison, and fundamental ignorance is like the person.

7.67

Second, from 'Thus' onward, concluding and showing the intention. Regarding 'hammer and anvil' and so forth: Jingming is like the hammer, and Maitreya and the others are like the anvil, instruments for maturing the capacities and conditions of the Mahāyāna. Regarding 'all are moistened' and so forth: because they recount hearing the reproach, each is moistened with the perfect benefit; those who practice by faith transform teaching, and those who practice by dharma transform contemplation.

7.68

Second, clarifying that hearing it again now makes the benefit broad. Jingxi says: Re-clarifying the present and past, the benefit of teaching and contemplation is definitely not in vain, thereby accomplishing benefit.

7.69

Second, critical examination, in two: first, examining real benefit. Regarding 'Question: reproaching the bodhisattvas' and so forth, Jingxi says: The question asks whether the words of reproach by the Great Being all intend the perfect, yet could the bodhisattvas all receive the perfect benefit? The answer cites the *Analects*. 'The three hundred poems': that is the current *Mao Poetry*, which has three hundred and five pieces; here it gives the full round number. 'One phrase' refers to 'having no depraved thoughts.' 'Bi' (covers) is like 'corresponds to.' Although the poems are as numerous as three hundred and as broad as the six principles, solely the one phrase 'having no depraved thoughts' is used to correspond to the principle of the three hundred pieces. Just so, although the four capacities are broad, raising the single universal benefit of the perfect corresponds to them. Within the Vaipulya, even if they have not yet entered the perfect, they secretly receive the perfect benefit, and through the reproving they are enabled to reach the *Lotus Sūtra*. Regarding 'receiving provisional and real teachings' and so forth: the real is the Perfect Teaching. Those who do not grasp the intent generate views based on words, and are therefore reproached; the illness is reproached, not the dharma.

7.70

Second, examining provisional benefit. Regarding 'still lingering in expedients': 'lingering' (zhi) should be 'carrying' (dai); it is a textual error.

7.71

Question: Earlier it was said that all obtain the benefit of the single path; why does it say here, 'How could they fail to obtain the benefit of expedients?' Answer: Manifestly there may be expedients; secretly there is only the single path. Based on the Buddha's intent, as the secret of secrets they enter the perfect.

7.72

Third, in order to support and accomplish the teaching of the Buddha-land. Jingxi says: Regarding 'tallying with and accomplishing' and so forth, it concurrently brings forth various intentions. This uses the initial text on the Tathāgata's response regarding the pure land. If seeing an empty room, one enters the stage of self-benefit. If seeing the King of Lamps and Gandhakūṭa, one then enters the stage of benefiting others. Next, from 'therefore in accordance with' onward, it clarifies that when those who were reproached accomplish their own pure land practices and enter the stage of non-arising, they also attain rebirth in the land of common residence and so forth. Third, from 'Furthermore, in accordance with merit and wisdom' onward, it shows that when those who were reproached accomplish their pure land practices, the sentient beings they gather come to be born in their land. Next, from 'This is' onward, it summarizes the previous intentions. Therefore we know that when the Tathāgata clarifies the pure land practice, it was originally intended to fully possess the meanings of all the texts above.

7.73

Fourth, in order to subdue bodhisattvas abiding in expedient practices to serve as an overture for entering the later flavors, in two: first, clarifying the overture of the three sūtras. Regarding 'reproaching milk to become sour milk': as when the land reverts to defilement in the 'Buddha-land' chapter and they attain the pure Dharma-eye, and in the 'Expedient Means' chapter expounding impermanence and rapid decay for kings and householders, these are all reproaching the milk of ordinary beings to make the sour milk of the two vehicles. Regarding 'reaching the Lotus Sūtra to become ripened curd,' Jingxi says: Question: The texts of our school all state that upon reaching the *Lotus Sūtra* they all become ghee; why does it say here that they only become ripened curd? Answer: The teaching's purport is not otherwise; people themselves advance or retreat. Moreover, the manifest teaching indicates that when people of the two vehicles arrive at the *Lotus Sūtra* they all become ghee, whereas for the bodhisattvas there is nowhere they do not enter. The same holds true for identity and difference in Prajñāpāramitā. The five thousand rising and leaving, the three transformations and removals, and the words on gleaning—these truly stem from multiple intentions; such ripened curd is precisely named ghee. Therefore, after the *Lotus Sūtra* the Prajñāpāramitā was expounded again, truly because there still remained the name of raw curd. These are all entering the dharmadhātu in Nirvāṇa; the Buddha's provisional arrangements for conversion completed the work of a single period, and while there are slight differences before and after, in general substance there is no conflict. Still setting aside the words transmitted and expounded in other lands, why must it be entirely at the assembly on Vulture Peak? If not fully entering the dharmadhātu were to cause the text of the *Lotus Sūtra* not to be the ultimate, then since there were those among earlier teachings who attained entry, those texts should be perfectly integrated.

First 73 of 235 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

維摩經略疏垂裕記 — Classical Chinese