淨名玄論 7
English (machine translation) 7
- Language
- English
7.1
Section Three: On the Assemblies and Locations
7.2
There are two gateways: first, explaining the locations of the assemblies; second, clarifying the pure land.
7.3
The treatise says: 'To thoroughly penetrate all teachings, one should possess three gateways: first, knowing the title; second, discerning the principal aim; third, recognizing the divisions and limits.' The first two have been set forth above; now the third will be discussed.
7.4
First, Explaining the Locations of the Assemblies
7.5
The former interpreters of Jiangnan divided the sūtra into three based on being inside or outside the room. The initial four chapters, preached outside the room, are termed the introductory section; the middle six chapters, preached inside the room, are termed the main body of the sūtra; the concluding four chapters, returning outside the room, are termed the dissemination section. The reason for this is that Vimalakīrti feigned illness in his ten-foot-square room, intending and awaiting an exchange. The preceding four chapters merely recount the Tathāgata preaching the Dharma, recounting virtues, and commissioning people to inquire about the illness; hence they are called the introduction. The middle six chapters, beginning the discourse on the wonderful Dharma inside the room, are designated as the main teaching. The concluding four chapters, the benefit to beings having been accomplished, return to the Buddha's place to seal and confirm the sūtra; hence they are called dissemination.
7.6
The Northern tradition inherits the view: This sūtra has three assemblies in total. Starting from the Buddha Land [chapter] and ending with the Bodhisattva chapter is the assembly at Āmrapālī's garden. From Inquiring about the Illness onward up to Sarvagandhasugandha is the assembly in the ten-foot-square room. From the Bodhisattva Practices chapter through the end of the entire sūtra is the reconvened assembly at Āmrapālī's garden.
7.7
Now, with a single point from the text, I will interrogate both interpretations. Where was the Upāya Chapter preached? If it was outside the room, then the circumstance contradicts the text. If it was preached inside the room, that contradicts the aforementioned interpretations. If it is said that this chapter was the intention of the compilers of the sūtra and not Vimalakīrti's own speech, since there would be no temporal circumstance, what would be compiled? Furthermore, the Upāya [chapter] directly recounts his manifesting illness and preaching the Dharma; how could it not be Vimalakīrti's words? Moreover, preaching the Dharma inside the room has two times: the single Upāya chapter is its first gathering, briefly preaching the Dharma gate. After Inquiring about the Illness, there is a reconvened assembly in the ten-foot-square room, widely proclaiming the wonderful Dharma. How could the previous preaching be taken as the introduction and the subsequent discourse as the main teaching? If it is said that this sūtra has only three assemblies, this is also not correct. Since reconvening at Āmrapālī's garden constitutes two assemblies, gathering twice in the ten-foot-square room—how could that not be two gatherings? If the initial gathering in the ten-foot-square room is not considered an assembly because it is brief, Āmrapālī's garden has only one chapter; how could it be broad? Furthermore, if preaching the cause and fruit of the pure land at Āmrapālī's garden is one gathering, why would clarifying the cause and fruit of the dharmakāya in the ten-foot-square room not be an assembly? What is explained now is that, just as the Avataṃsaka has seven locations and eight assemblies, this sūtra has two locations and four gatherings. Regarding the two locations: first, the location of Āmrapālī's garden; second, the location of the ten-foot-square room. Āmrapālī's garden is the Buddha's place; the ten-foot-square room is the bodhisattva's place. Āmrapālī's garden is the place of the renunciants; the ten-foot-square room is the place of the householder. Āmrapālī's garden is a place produced by another's karma; the ten-foot-square room is a place produced by one's own karma. 'A place produced by another's karma' means that Lady Āmrapālī built a vihāra for the Buddha, clarifying that the unprecedented room was produced by the householder's pure karma. Āmrapālī's garden is outside the city; the ten-foot-square room is inside the city. Master [Fa]xian's record states: 'They are three li apart.' As for the four assemblies: first, the assembly at Āmrapālī's garden; second, the assembly in the ten-foot-square room; third, the reconvened assembly at Āmrapālī's garden; fourth, the reassembled meeting in the ten-foot-square room. Dividing the sūtra according to this is truly appropriate.
7.8
Question: In the Avataṃsaka, without rising from the bodhimaṇḍa of quiet extinction, [the Buddha] manifests his body in seven places. In this sūtra's four assemblies, can that be so? Answer: The Avataṃsaka clarifies not rising; this sūtra clarifies rising. Both rising and not rising are inconceivable; therefore the Avataṃsaka is called the inconceivable liberation, and this sūtra is also called the inconceivable liberation. Question: That the Avataṃsaka manifests bodies in seven places without rising from the bodhimaṇḍa is indeed inconceivable. But since this sūtra goes and comes among four places, how can it be called unfathomable? Answer: Although the four assemblies of this sūtra involve going and coming, in reality there is no traversing back and forth; hence Mañjuśrī departs without going, and Vimalakīrti arrives without coming. Because he arrives without coming, there is nowhere from which he comes; because he departs without going, there is nowhere he goes. Thus: 'Welcome, Mañjuśrī! You have come with the characteristic of not coming.' Since coming is coming with the characteristic of not coming, and going is also going with the characteristic of not going, coming and going are apparent yet in reality there is no back and forth; therefore it is named inconceivable. Question: Since this sūtra has two locations and four assemblies, does it have an introduction, main body, and dissemination section, or not? Answer: Following the precedent of the Avataṃsaka, it contains both meanings; the six items can be viewed in two ways. Considering the beginning to subsume the beginning, it belongs to the first assembly; looking at the entire work, it belongs to the introductory section of the sūtra. Dissemination is also like this. From praising the Dharma and extolling persons in the Akṣobhya Buddha Chapter onward, considering the end to subsume the end, it belongs to the later assembly; looking at the major sections, it belongs to dissemination. Question: The six items merely introduce the responsive events at Āmrapālī's garden, belonging solely to the first assembly; how can they be the introductory section [of the whole]? Answer: Although the six items introduce the time and place of Āmrapālī's garden, in order to complete the whole sūtra, they may also belong to the grand introduction; dissemination is also like this.
7.9
Next, Individually Explaining the Locations of the Assemblies
7.10
Five conditions must be fulfilled for an auspicious gathering to be called an assembly: first, having a location; second, having a time; third, having a teaching master; fourth, having an assembly of followers; fifth, preaching the gate of doctrine. When the five conditions harmonize and beings awaken to the Way, it is therefore called an assembly. As the Catuhśataka-ṭīkā says: 'Because the true Dharma, the speaker, and the listeners are difficult to obtain, saṃsāra is neither with an end nor without an end.' The treatise briefly clarifies three kinds: first, having the true Dharma; second, having a speaker; third, having listeners. Having these three conditions, cyclic existence cannot be endless; lacking a single one of these conditions, saṃsāra does not have an end. Now, explaining the five conditions in full makes five stages. The different places of conversion were briefly discussed above, and will be explained in detail in the section on the pure land. Regarding the time of conversion, this sūtra has both a general time and specific times. As for the general time, ancient scholars said: Vimalakīrti was preached in the thirtieth year after the Buddha's attainment of enlightenment. It is also said: preached in the twenty-sixth year. As for specific times, concerning these four assemblies, there are two differences: first, the chronological sequence of events; second, the order of compiling the Dharma. Regarding the chronological sequence of events: first, the initial assembly in the ten-foot-square room; second, the subsequent assembly at Āmrapālī's garden; third, the reassembly in the ten-foot-square room; fourth, the reconvened assembly at Āmrapālī's garden. Question: How is this known? Answer: The five hundred elders were companions of Vimalakīrti in the fortress of the Dharma; when inquiring about the Way and paying visits, they gathered without fail. Yet when Ratnarāśi had arrived, Vimalakīrti, being close by, did not come; one must know he was ill. Because of his illness, all the nearby multitude within the country came to inquire after him, whereupon he briefly preached the Dharma based on bodily illness, causing countless thousands of people to give rise to the aspiration for enlightenment—which is the Upāya Chapter. Therefore, we know that the first assembly in Vaiśālī took place first. However, at the time of the first gathering, the assembly of humans and gods was small and the benefits were not yet extensive, not yet sufficient to express his divine wisdom or fulfill the purpose of manifesting illness. But since the Buddha and Vimalakīrti shared the goal of converting beings, their two minds perceived one another. Once the householder feigned illness in Vaiśālī, the Tathāgata preached the Dharma at Āmrapālī's garden to gather the multitude for him, and therefore dispatched envoys to inquire about his illness. Only after the śrāvakas and bodhisattvas all recounted their inadequacy was there the assembly at Āmrapālī's garden. Next, he commissioned Mañjuśrī to go and prompt the exchange, widely proclaiming the wonderful Dharma, hence there was the reassembly in the ten-foot-square room. But when the work of conversion was complete, they returned to the Buddha's place, and the Tathāgata confirmed and praised them, causing them to discuss the wonderful Dharma; hence there was the reconvened gathering at Āmrapālī's garden. Deducing from chronological events, it must be like this. Second, regarding the order of compiling the Dharma: to compile a sūtra, one must first clarify 'Thus have I heard: at one time the Buddha resided in such a place with the great assembly.' If at the outset one introduced the events of Vimalakīrti, the sūtra could not be formed. The precedent of the Śrīmālā[devī-sūtra] is also like this. Therefore, the assembly at Āmrapālī's garden is clarified first. After the assembly at Āmrapālī's garden was concluded, about to initiate the dispatching of messengers to inquire about the illness, it then further introduced the initial assembly in the ten-foot-square room, praising Vimalakīrti's virtues to arouse the sincere reverence of the assembly at that time, and recounting his illness to give rise to the reason for the Tathāgata's condolence inquiry; hence next there is the single Upāya chapter, the Vaiśālī assembly. The remaining two gatherings are explained in the same way as above.
7.11
Next, Explaining the Teaching Master
7.12
In the four assemblies of this sūtra, five persons in all speak. In the initial gathering in the ten-foot square room, Vimalakīrti speaks himself. In the next assembly in the Āmrapālī grove, it is spoken by the Tathāgata. In the repeated gathering at Vaiśālī, four persons in all speak: first, Vimalakīrti speaks; second, Mañjuśrī speaks; third, the devī speaks; fourth, the various bodhisattvas speak. In the repeated assembly in the Āmrapālī grove, the Buddha and Vimalakīrti speak together. Question: The five hundred śrāvakas and eight thousand bodhisattvas all relate Vimalakīrti's words; why are they not called speakers? Answer: They all relate Vimalakīrti's past words; they are not their own speaking. If one clarifies the two speeches of past and present: two chapters of the sūtra clarify Vimalakīrti's past speech, and twelve chapters of the sūtra recount Vimalakīrti's present speech. Question: Do the two chapters, "Disciples" and "Bodhisattvas", belong to the initial assembly or to the later assembly? Are they the main text or the introductory discourse? Answer: One should view them from both perspectives. Since they are recounted in the Āmrapālī grove, they belong to the prior assembly; as the occasion for inquiring after his illness, they belong to the later gathering. Relaying Vimalakīrti's past speech, they are therefore the main text; as originating the inquiry into his illness, they may also serve as the introduction. Question: Why did the Buddha not directly dispatch Mañjuśrī to challenge him, but instead also commanded the śrāvakas and bodhisattvas? Answer: Five meanings are briefly clarified: First, to demonstrate the Tathāgata's great compassion and impartiality, he therefore commanded them all. Second, wishing to praise Vimalakīrti's virtue, to cause the congregation of that time to venerate the person and esteem the Dharma. Third, to demonstrate the sublimity of Mañjuśrī's path, causing everyone to follow along. Fourth, to demonstrate that the inconceivable liberation is exceedingly profound, beyond the fathom of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas; each recounted Vimalakīrti's past words to benefit the conditions of the present day. Fifth, to clarify the stages of cultivation: the "Upāya Chapter" refutes ordinary beings, the "Disciples Chapter" refutes śrāvakas, and the "Bodhisattvas Chapter" refutes bodhisattvas; taking from shallow to deep as the sequence, thereafter they together enter the unimpeded Dharma gate and jointly realize the inconceivable liberation. Question: Vimalakīrti and Maitreya are of equal rank in having received office; why did Maitreya suffer humiliation and Vimalakīrti was able to rebuke him? Answer: It may possess three meanings: One says: A bodhisattva of the tenth bhūmi has no cognition that does not penetrate and no response that is not universal; how could it be that in meeting gods and humans he suffered humiliation from Vimalakīrti? It is solely that together they transformed beings, so apparent advantage and loss accommodated conditions. Second, although they are both of the tenth bhūmi, within the tenth bhūmi there are naturally three positions: namely, entering, abiding, and full; or perhaps Maitreya was a great being of the tenth bhūmi, while Vimalakīrti was a person of the adamantine mind. Third, Maitreya's rank resides in equal enlightenment (samyak-saṃbodhi), the honoured one of the future; Vimalakīrti was at the stage of wondrous enlightenment, an already accomplished Buddha. Question: Since five persons spoke together, why is it solely called the Vimalakīrti Sūtra? Answer: The others spoke little and Vimalakīrti spoke much; following the majority over the minority, it is called the Vimalakīrti Sūtra. Furthermore, when the Tathāgata taught the Dharma in the Āmrapālī grove, he gathered the multitude for him, dispatched messengers to inquire about the illness, and expounded the Dharma gates extensively, thereby completing his exposition. Moreover, the first assembly's canopy-joining manifesting the lands and the pressing of the earth to transform it pure briefly opened the inception of the inconceivable. In the repeated assembly at the Āmrapālī grove, the certification and praise brought the sūtra to completion, causing later generations to faithfully accept it. Thus the first assembly opened its principle and the later gathering certified its exposition; from beginning to end, they all formed the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, hence it is exclusively designated as Vimalakīrti's exposition. Question: Since the first assembly opened its principle and the later gathering certified its exposition, why are they not the introduction and the dissemination? Answer: At first, the proper exposition opened the proper exposition, so the beginning is not an introduction; the later gathering certified and completed it, yet also commanded the extensive preaching of the wondrous, so it is not dissemination. Furthermore, as for the meaning of looking at it from both sides, the previous intent has already clarified this.
7.13
Next, the explanation of the assembly of converted followers:
7.14
In the initial assembly in the ten-foot square room, there were only the near congregation of Vaiśālī and no distant congregation from other directions; only a human congregation and no heavenly congregation; only a lay congregation and no renunciant congregation; only a Dharma-listening congregation and no debate-provoking congregation. Therefore, he expounded the Dharma gates in brief, the benefit was still small, and it did not vent the great being's purpose in manifesting illness. In the initial assembly in the Āmrapālī grove, all congregations were complete: ordinary and noble, near and far, lay and renunciant, hidden and manifest, great and small. In the repeated gathering in the ten-foot square room and the repeated assembly in the Āmrapālī grove, the congregations were all the same; therefore he was able to expound the Dharma gates extensively, bringing abundant benefits and venting the intention of manifesting illness. Question: This sūtra is subsumed under the Bodhisattva Piṭaka. Furthermore, it explains the Dharma gate of inconceivable liberation, which transcends the sphere of the two vehicles; thus it should only instruct bodhisattvas. Why is there also a śrāvaka congregation? Furthermore, the Dazhidulun says, "The Buddha expounded the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation in one hundred thousand gāthās for the great bodhisattvas," which is the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. The Hīnayāna sitting in the Avataṃsaka [assembly] could neither see nor hear, because they had not planted the causes and conditions to hear this Mahāyāna. This sūtra is also called [a teaching of] inconceivable liberation; why could the śrāvakas in the assembly see and hear it? Answer: The Fahua xuanlun has already explained this fully. What remains incomplete will now be further explained. According to the meaning of the Dazhidulun, it clarifies that the Avataṃsaka was spoken for the great bodhisattvas, and the Hīnayāna did not hear it; Vimalakīrti and others were spoken universally for persons of the great and small, shallow and deep, so the two vehicles were able to hear it. Thus the Avataṃsaka clarifies inconceivable events that are profound, whereas Vimalakīrti explains inconceivable events that are shallow; although both are inconceivable, there are shallow and deep, hence there are hearing and not hearing. By analogy, although both are prajñā, some are spoken in common with the three vehicles, while some are spoken exclusively for great bodhisattvas, which even those of the ninth bhūmi do not hear, let alone the two vehicles. Question: The treatise says, "Among all sūtras, Prajñā is the greatest"; why do the three vehicles get to hear Prajñā, yet do not hear the Avataṃsaka? Answer: Although Prajñā is great, it mostly expounds the exceedingly profound principles and phenomena of upāya and real wisdom; persons of the two vehicles possess a small share, so they are able to hear it. The Avataṃsaka mostly explains real wisdom and upāya, explaining the inconceivable in terms of phenomena; then the two vehicles are utterly devoid of a share, so they are unable to hear it. Furthermore, in broadly classifying śrāvakas, there are two kinds: first, actual practitioners; second, provisional practitioners. Among the actual practitioners there are again two kinds: first, those who retreated from the great and studied the small; second, those who originally studied the Hīnayāna. As for those who retreated from the great and studied the small, regarding the beginning and end of a single teaching career, there are in all four periods: first, the great capacity is not yet ripe; second, the small faculty is already matured; third, the small attachment is about to shift and the great capacity is stirred from afar; fourth, the small attachment is directly overturned and the great capacity is directly ripe. In the beginning and end of a single teaching career, there are only these four. As for the great capacity not yet being ripe: when the Buddha first attained the Way, he expounded the Avataṃsaka Sūtra for the bodhisattvas, wishing to convert them with the great Dharma. But the small capacity was not capable, and therefore he ceased teaching. As the Lotus Sūtra says: "The elder sat on the lion throne, surrounded by attendants, with precious objects arrayed; he then dispatched a bystander to pursue and catch the impoverished son. The impoverished son was terrified, and his father thereupon released him." This refers to the events of the Avataṃsaka period. Because the great capacity was not yet ripe, although they were in the Avataṃsaka assembly, they could neither see nor hear.
7.15
Next, regarding the small faculty already being matured: on the day at the place of enlightenment, they were not yet capable of the great conversion; at the time in the Deer Park, they only then received the small Dharma; hence he secretly dispatched two men to lure him, only then obtaining him. Third, as for the small attachment being about to shift and the great capacity being stirred from afar: this means using the various vaipulya teachings such as Prajñā and Vimalakīrti to explicitly instruct bodhisattvas and secretly convert the two vehicles, causing them to temper and train their small minds and yearn for the Great Path. Because the small attachment was about to shift and the great capacity was stirred from afar, while in the assembly of Prajñā and Vimalakīrti, they were therefore able to see and hear, but had not yet comprehended. Fourth, as for the small attachment being directly overturned and the great capacity being directly ripe: this is the Lotus opening the door of upāya and revealing the real meaning. Because the small attachment was already overturned, the door of upāya was suitable to be opened; the great capacity having matured, the real meaning was then made manifest. Therefore, in the Lotus assembly, they were also able to see and hear, and moreover had faith and understanding. Question: The great capacity was not yet ripe, so in the Avataṃsaka assembly there was no small congregation. Why does the eighth assembly list five hundred śrāvakas? Answer: The first seven assemblies were mostly spoken by the Buddha when he first attained the Way beneath the Bodhi tree; at this time there was not yet a small congregation, so the seven assemblies do not list them. The eighth assembly was spoken at a later time; later, the Jeta Grove monastery had already been established, and at this time there could be śrāvakas, which is why they are listed. Lecturers who claim that the seven locations and eight assemblies were all spoken upon first attaining the Way miss this meaning. Question: The Avataṃsaka purely converts bodhisattvas and does not teach śrāvakas, and the great capacity was not yet matured; why were they listed as present in the assembly? Answer: The Avataṃsaka demonstrates that the bodhisattva Dharma is different from the two-vehicle Dharma; therefore, with regard to the Jeta Grove, it clarifies that the two conditions are different: the bodhisattvas see the great Dharma being expounded in a pure land, while the śrāvakas themselves see a defiled place where they hear and receive the Hīnayāna, just as humans see water while hungry ghosts see fire. It was not that he wished to convert the two vehicles that they were listed in the assembly. Furthermore, the two vehicles seeing defilement and the bodhisattvas beholding purity causes the bodhisattvas to deeply despise the Hīnayāna and advance their great practice; this is merely converting the bodhisattvas. Question: Why were the śrāvakas unable to see and hear the bodhisattva Dharma? Answer: The Dazhidulun says: "Just as a person having the five sense faculties is therefore able to see and hear, if one lacks the five sense faculties one cannot see and hear." Possessing the bodhisattva's five faculties, one is therefore able to see and hear the bodhisattva's realm. The two vehicles lack the bodhisattva's five faculties, so they are unable to see and hear the bodhisattva's realm. Question: If so, why does the "Chapter on Entering the Dharmadhātu" clarify that Śāriputra and his six thousand attendants were able to see Mañjuśrī? Answer: Speaking in terms of the event, relying on the Buddha's power, they saw; relying on their own power, they did not see. Furthermore, the earlier part clarifies that being initially deluded, they did not see; the later part shows that being ultimately enlightened, they were able to see. As with the impoverished son in the Lotus, there are three times in all: first, seeing the father from afar; next, avoiding the father and leaving; later, returning to his father's place. The first signifies that he will realize the One Vehicle; the next, turning his back on the great and grasping the small; the later, returning to realize the One Vehicle and jointly entering the Dharmadhātu. Question: Among the seven locations and eight assemblies, why is it only with regard to the "Dharmadhātu Chapter" that it clarifies that the two vehicles initially did not see or hear, and in the end saw and heard? Answer: According to the events: the seven assemblies were spoken at the time of first attaining the Way; the great capacity of the two vehicles was not yet mature, so there were not yet śrāvakas. Since the "Dharmadhātu" was spoken at a later time, the small attachment had gradually shifted and the great capacity was stirred from afar; therefore, being in the assembly, they were moreover able to see and hear. Furthermore, raising the two vehicles brings out the Dharmadhātu and demonstrates the bodhisattvas' entering the Dharmadhātu. Moreover, it is to clarify that the Dharmadhātu is neither great nor small, yet both great and small are complete; it is neither seen and heard nor unseen and unheard, yet seeing and hearing, and not seeing and hearing, are both complete. Question: The two sūtras, Prajñā and Vimalakīrti, both belong to the phase where the small attachment is about to shift and the great capacity is stirred from afar, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and secretly converting the two vehicles; what difference is there? Answer: In Prajñā, the Buddha himself explicitly teaches and secretly converts; in Vimalakīrti, a bodhisattva explicitly teaches and secretly converts. Teaching the great and converting the small does not go beyond the Buddha and bodhisattvas. Furthermore, in Prajñā, small persons are made to speak the great, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and secretly converting the two vehicles; in Vimalakīrti, a great person speaks the great, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and secretly converting the two vehicles. Therefore there is a difference. The above has provided this explanation with regard to actual-practice śrāvakas.
7.16
Now, explaining next with respect to the provisional śrāvakas, who inwardly conceal the bodhisattva [nature] and outwardly manifest as śrāvakas, there are two meanings: first, to praise the Great Path; second, to guide those of lesser practice. The Avataṃsaka was originally a teaching of the bodhisattva Dharma; yet when the two vehicles were in the assembly, they were like the blind and the deaf, which embodied the two aforementioned meanings: first, wishing to make manifest that the bodhisattva path is supreme and the practice of the two vehicles is inferior, causing bodhisattvas to advance and seek the Great Path and not regress to seek the Hinayana; second, causing persons of the Hinayana to deeply despise their own inferiority, abandon the small, and seek the great. Thus Śāriputra and his six thousand attendants, relying on the Buddha's spiritual power, were able to see Mañjuśrī and inquire about and receive the Great Dharma, which is precisely this event. Next, when it came to the assembly of the Vimalakīrti and the Prajñā, they directly disparaged the Hinayana and praised the Great Path themselves, causing bodhisattvas not to regress from the great to seek the small, and causing those of the Hinayana to abandon the small and seek the great. Prior to that, they shared the confusion with sentient beings; when it came to the Lotus Sūtra, their faculties were led together to enlightenment. All these are the upāya of the Great Beings to benefit sentient beings. Question: The inconceivable liberation is precisely the two cognitions, and the two cognitions are still prajñā. Why is it that when the two vehicles heard of the inconceivable liberation, it was like speaking of various colours and forms before a blind person, yet when they heard the Prajñā, they were able to grasp and understand it? Answer: The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā explains real wisdom, which the two vehicles know in a slight portion, but as for upāya, they have no part whatsoever; this sūtra's explanation of the two cognitions is likewise so. However, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā mostly clarifies real wisdom and rarely displays supernormal powers; this sūtra mostly displays supernormal powers and rarely clarifies real wisdom. Therefore, between these two sūtras, there is confusion and understanding. Above, the explanation of the assembly of the two vehicles is concluded.
7.17
Now, next, clarifying for the bodhisattva assembly.
7.18
Question: Since the Avataṃsaka has already finished explaining the Great Dharma for the bodhisattvas, whom does this sūtra transform again? Answer: The ripening of the bodhisattvas' faculties on the path has earlier and later stages; the Avataṃsaka was for their earliest maturation, while the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti transformed those of subsequent ripening. Furthermore, the Dazhidulun states, "The Avataṃsaka was spoken for wise bodhisattvas"; thus one knows that the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti universally transform both the small and the great. Moreover, although they had already attained understanding in the Avataṃsaka assembly, in the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti they advanced further in awakening.
7.19
Next, with respect to bodhisattvas and śrāvakas, two kinds of fourfold propositions are established. First, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and not secretly transforming the two vehicles: this is precisely the Avataṃsaka teaching. When the Buddha first attained the Way, the great faculties were already mature, so in the assembly of explicit teaching there was no assembly of the two vehicles; furthermore, because their great faculties were not yet ready, he did not secretly transform the two vehicles. Second, explicitly teaching the two vehicles and not secretly transforming bodhisattvas: this is the teaching of the three vehicles. Because the small faculties were already mature, he explicitly taught them; since bodhisattvas are great vessels, they did not need Hinayana transformation. Third, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and secretly transforming the two vehicles: this refers to such sūtras as the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti. Because the great faculties of bodhisattvas were already mature, he explicitly taught them; because the small attachments of the two vehicles were due to shift and their great faculties were stirred from afar, he secretly transformed them—commanding them to explain [the Dharma] and entrusting them with the wealth is precisely this event. Fourth, explicitly teaching bodhisattvas and explicitly teaching the two vehicles: this is the teaching of the Lotus Sūtra. Bodhisattvas hearing this Dharma had their nets of doubt entirely eliminated, which refers to explicitly teaching bodhisattvas; the twelve hundred arhats all being destined to become Buddhas refers to explicitly teaching the two vehicles.
7.20
Next, regarding the fourfold propositions of opening and concealing. First, directly revealing the real and tangentially opening the provisional: this refers to the Avataṃsaka explaining the Great Dharma gate for all bodhisattvas, which is called directly revealing the real; it also caused the bodhisattvas to tangentially recognize the Hinayana teachings, which is called tangentially opening the provisional. Thus the "Bhadraśrī Chapter" says: "Sometimes showing the Hinayana gate of the śrāvakas, sometimes displaying the middle vehicle gate of the pratyekabuddhas, sometimes preaching the unsurpassed Great Vehicle gate." The "Tathāgatotpattisaṃbhava Chapter" also extensively clarifies that he first transforms bodhisattvas and next reaches the two vehicles, just as when the sun rises it first illuminates the high mountains and later reaches the plains; reaching the plains is entirely a tangential opening of the small provisional. Second, directly concealing the real and directly closing the provisional: this is the teaching gate of the Deer Park. Preaching the teaching of the three vehicles, he therefore concealed the real nonduality of the one vehicle; stating that it is provisional, he therefore closed the provisional gate. Third, directly revealing the real and tangentially closing the provisional: this is the teaching of the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti. Preaching the bodhisattva practice, he therefore directly revealed the real; not yet clarifying that the three vehicles are provisional, he therefore tangentially closed the provisional. Regarding the fourfold propositions of opening and concealing, the fourth proposition can be seen. Question: Since he had not yet opened the provisional gate, how could he have already revealed the real? Answer: There are two ways of revealing the real: first, in contrast to opening the provisional gate of the three vehicles, revealing the one vehicle as the real; second, by contrasting the great and the small, revealing the real. The great open vehicle is the ultimate real; the Hinayana is a partial real. In contrast to the partial real, he clarifies the ultimate real. Question: What text proves that the Prajñā had not yet opened the provisional, but had already revealed the real? Answer: The "Adhimukti Chapter" of the Lotus Sūtra states: "All the secret treasuries possessed by the Buddhas / Were expounded in their true reality solely for the bodhisattvas, / And not preached to us in their genuine essence"—this refers precisely to the events during the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā period. Question: If so, within the Tripiṭaka he also praised the Buddha as supreme in contrast to the middle and lower vehicles; why is this not called revealing the real? Answer: In the Tripiṭaka teaching, he extensively clarified the Dharma of the two vehicles and minimally clarified the bodhisattva Dharma; because it follows the majority, it is not called revealing the real meaning. Furthermore, although the Buddha vehicle was clarified in the Tripiṭaka, it was still an expounding in concealment—truly born in the royal palace, attaining Buddhahood from the status of an ordinary being. From the Prajñā onwards, he directly preached the Great Dharma and reached the Hinayana tangentially, and also clarified that the Buddha vehicle was already fully complete; therefore, it is directly revealing the real and tangentially closing the provisional. Question: What is the difference between clarifying the real in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā and the real of the one vehicle in the Lotus Sūtra? Answer: The ancients said that the Mahāyāna is inferior while the one vehicle is superior. Now I say this is not so. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā clarifies the great in contrast to the small; the Lotus Sūtra eliminates the small and reveals the great. The great is not two. Just as the elder's entrusting of the wealth and his bestowing of the household estate differ in their two periods, the seven treasures of the burning house are nevertheless one and the same. In the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, bodhisattvas attain Buddhahood while the two vehicles have not yet attained Buddhahood; in the Lotus Sūtra, both bodhisattvas and the two vehicles attain Buddhahood, yet the Buddha vehicle is nondual. Question: If so, how can the Mahāyānasaṃgraha say: "There are three kinds of vehicles: first, the Hinayana; second, the Mahāyāna; third, the one vehicle; and the one vehicle is the most supreme"? Answer: The Lotus Sūtra directly clarifies that the persons capable of riding the vehicle all become Buddhas, and takes this to be supreme; it does not say that the Dharma that is ridden has superiority or inferiority.
7.21
Next, explaining the fifth section: the gate of teaching.
7.22
Above, the teachings have already been briefly clarified, but purely to make evident and complete the meaning of the conditions; therefore, it must now be further analysed. The theories of the four tenets and five periods classifying the sūtras in the north and south have already been treated in detail in the Fahua xuanlun. Now, relying on this sūtra's "Dharmapūjā Chapter" to clarify the meaning of the two treasuries, where it says "sealed by the dhāraṇī subsumed in the bodhisattva Dharma-treasury", one thereby knows that the Hinayana is subsumed in the śrāvaka treasury. Now I will first universally clarify the teaching of the two treasuries, and next distinctly clarify the meaning of the two treasuries preached in the four assemblies.
7.23
There are three pairs: first, the śrāvaka piṭaka, and second, the bodhisattva piṭaka, which are designated according to persons. Second, the Mahāyāna piṭaka and the Hīnayāna piṭaka, which are named according to the teaching (dharma). Third, the half-letter and full-letter [teachings], which are designated with reference to their meaning. These three [pairs] nevertheless share the same meaning. One cannot say that the half and the full [letters] pertain only to the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] whereas the former two run through from beginning to end, for the Great Sūtra says: "I preached these half-letters for the sake of the śrāvakas"—which is still the śrāvaka piṭaka.
Question: Preaching what Dharma gate is called the śrāvaka piṭaka?
Answer: Preaching the teachings of the two vehicles is in all cases called the śrāvaka piṭaka.
Question: Since it preaches the teachings of the two vehicles, it ought to be called the two-vehicle piṭaka; why is it called the śrāvaka piṭaka?
Answer: Because in establishing the intention behind the two piṭakas, one merely takes the Great and the Small as opposites, taking the meaning of the Small as the śrāvaka piṭaka and the meaning of the Great as the bodhisattva piṭaka. Pratyekabuddhas are also Hīnayāna, hence it is called the śrāvaka piṭaka. Moreover, speaking from the predominant case, śrāvakas receive the śrāvaka teaching at both stages of cause and result, whereas pratyekabuddhas as persons in the causal stage rely on the teaching, but as persons in the fruitional stage awaken to the Path spontaneously; therefore it is solely called the śrāvaka piṭaka, and not the pratyekabuddha piṭaka. Thus the Bodhisattvabhūmi (*Dichi) says: "Preaching the dharmas of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas is called the śrāvaka piṭaka."
Question: The śrāvaka piṭaka does not only preach the dharmas of the two vehicles, but also preaches the bodhisattva dharma; why does it belong to the śrāvaka piṭaka?
Answer: When the Hīnayāna dharma speaks of the bodhisattva, it belongs to the śrāvaka piṭaka. If the bodhisattva dharma is spoken of by means of the Mahāyāna, it then belongs to the bodhisattva piṭaka. In the Hīnayāna dharma, explaining how a bodhisattva attains sagehood from ordinary worldling status, the teaching is not yet perfect and the principle is not complete; hence it is called the śrāvaka piṭaka. In the Mahāyāna dharma, explaining that the bodhisattva's teaching is perfect and the principle complete, it is called the bodhisattva piṭaka. Moreover, in the Hīnayāna dharma, it mostly explains the dharma of the two vehicles and only slightly preaches the bodhisattva dharma. As the Dazhidulun says: "Within the Tripiṭaka, various dharmas are broadly preached for the śrāvakas, but the bodhisattva practice is not preached; one only hears the Benmo jing of the Madhyama Āgama bestowing a prophecy upon Maitreya, yet it also does not preach the bodhisattva practice." Hence we know that the bodhisattva dharma explained there is minimal. Subordinating the minority to the majority, it is called the śrāvaka piṭaka, not the bodhisattva piṭaka.
Question: For people of the Small Vehicle, one should only preach the dharma of the two vehicles; why must one preach the bodhisattva dharma?
Answer: The Buddha opened the teaching of the three vehicles for the sake of the two vehicles. As the Lotus Sūtra says: "Because the two cannot be converted by the One Vehicle, [the Buddha] analytically preaches three in the One Buddha Vehicle"; hence within the Small Vehicle it explains that there are three vehicles.
Question: Since the dharma of the three vehicles is preached for people of the two vehicles, why is the bodhisattva practice not preached?
Answer: People of the two vehicles do not desire to practice the bodhisattva path, so there is no need to preach the practice. Merely knowing that in principle there are three ultimate destinations, [the Buddha] just briefly explains the Buddha Vehicle.
Question: Since the bodhisattva cause is not preached, why bestow a prophecy on Maitreya explaining his attainment of the Buddha fruit?
Answer: A śrāvaka must rely on a master to awaken to the Path, so it must be explained that there are Buddhas of the three periods of time; hence the prophecy was bestowed upon Maitreya.
Question: How many types of persons are there among śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas?
Answer: From beginning to end, there are six kinds of persons in all. First, original-vehicle śrāvakas: at first they generate the śrāvaka aspiration, and in the end they realize the śrāvaka fruit. Second, non-original-vehicle śrāvakas, divided into two types: those who were originally pratyekabuddhas, generated the pratyekabuddha aspiration, and practiced the pratyekabuddha practice, but midway encountered a Buddha, attained the Path through his teaching, and were renamed śrāvakas—Kāśyapa is an example of this. Third, those who were originally bodhisattvas, but regressed and adopted the śrāvaka [path]—the likes of Śāriputra are such. Pratyekabuddhas also have three [types]: First, original-vehicle pratyekabuddhas: as a cause they receive teaching, while in the fruit they are spontaneous. Second, non-original-vehicle pratyekabuddhas, of whom there are two types: one who was originally a śrāvaka, but encounters an era without a Buddha and therefore becomes a pratyekabuddha; the other who was originally a bodhisattva, encounters an era without a Buddha, regresses to adopt the Small Vehicle, and is also called a pratyekabuddha. Thus the Dazhidulun says: "A bodhisattva realizes the four truths and becomes a pratyekabuddha."
Explaining the bodhisattva piṭaka, there are also three kinds of persons: First, straight-proceeding bodhisattvas, who generate the bodhicitta and practice the bodhisattva conduct. Second, those who turn from the Small and enter the Great, of whom there are two kinds: those who were originally śrāvakas, who changed from the Small to become Great and are therefore called bodhisattvas; and those who were originally pratyekabuddhas, the principle of which is likewise. However, for these two kinds of persons, there are again two sorts: those who were originally of the two vehicles, who changed from the Small to seek the Great, as explained before; and those who were originally bodhisattvas, who regressed from the Great to become Small, and now return to abandoning the Small to seek the Great, like Śāriputra and others. Among the śrāvakas there are also such persons, who were originally of the Small Vehicle, abandoned the Small to seek the Great, and afterwards regressed again from the Great to adopt the Small.
Question: Is there someone who was originally of the Small Vehicle, abandoned the Small to seek the Great, regressed again from the Great to adopt the Small, and afterwards returned to abandoning the Small to seek the Great? Is there such a person?
Answer: Śāriputra is precisely such a person. Although it is said that he was originally of the Small Vehicle and had already attained warmth and summit, he subsequently abandoned the Small to seek the Great, practiced the bodhisattva path for sixty kalpas, and then, encountering the beggar who asked for his eye, returned to abandoning the Great to adopt the Small; now, hearing the Lotus Sūtra, he returns to abandoning the Small to seek the Great. In the śrāvaka dharma there should also be such cases.
Question: Why is a Buddha piṭaka not established?
Answer: There are two meanings in general. First, establishing the bodhisattva piṭaka contrasts the Great and the Small; within the bodhisattva piṭaka there is the Buddha-dharma, which is itself the Buddha piṭaka. Second, to show that bodhisattvas receive teachings, the bodhisattva piṭaka is universally established. Within the śrāvaka piṭaka there are also pratyekabuddhas; to show that śrāvakas receive teachings, it is universally named the śrāvaka piṭaka.
Question: If so, while the bodhisattva makes advancement and could thus establish a vehicle, the Buddha has already ceased seeking; why establish a Buddha Vehicle?
Answer: The name is established based on the reception of teaching, hence it universally relies on the two kinds of persons. It is also to distinguish the superiority and inferiority of the three grades that the three vehicles are established.
Question: Throughout the śrāvaka piṭaka, is there depth and shallowness? Is it likewise for the bodhisattva [piṭaka]?
Answer: Speaking in terms of principle, there should be depth and shallowness. As the Pañcaviṃśati (*Dapin) says: "For newly-resolved bodhisattvas, it explains arising and ceasing as like an illusion, and non-arising and non-ceasing as not like an illusion. For long-practicing persons, it explains all things as like an illusion." Thus we know there is depth and shallowness. The śrāvaka piṭaka is also like this: merely preaching the emptiness of persons is shallow, while fully preaching the two emptinesses is profound.
Question: If so, both piṭakas have depth and shallowness, and both possess definitive and non-definitive meanings. Why was the Small Vehicle in the past considered non-definitive, while the Great Vehicle was considered definitive?
Answer: The Great and the Small are contrasted: the Small is taken as non-definitive, and the Great Vehicle as definitive.
Question: Preaching for beginners that arising and ceasing are like an illusion is non-definitive. Then within a single sūtra, the explanation of the bodhisattva dharma contains the non-definitive; how can one say it is entirely definitive?
Answer: Fully distinguishing the definitive and the non-definitive within a single sūtra is precisely what makes it a definitive sūtra.
Question: The Great Sūtra says: "Those who have acquisition are called the two vehicles; those without acquisition are called bodhisattvas." If so, a Mahāyāna with acquisition should also belong to the śrāvaka piṭaka.
Answer: That is also acceptable. Such acquisition, whether Great or Small, is all called the Mahāyāna piṭaka. "Having acquisition" and "without acquisition" refer to gain and loss in receiving the teaching. In now establishing the two piṭakas, it correctly describes the Buddha's preaching the teaching of non-acquisition for the Great Vehicle, and preaching the teaching of acquisition for the Small Vehicle.
Question: The explanation of the meaning in the two piṭakas, the Great and the Small, is already exhaustive; why establish a miscellaneous piṭaka (saṃyukta-piṭaka) in addition?
Answer: Sūtras and treatises differ. Some take the Small Vehicle as the Tripiṭaka and the Mahāyāna as the miscellaneous piṭaka. The Small Vehicle clarifies the difference of three practices as three sections, hence it is called the Tripiṭaka; the Mahāyāna does not separately open the three practices into three sections, so it is called the miscellaneous piṭaka. As the preface to the Saṃyukta Āgama says: "The Mahāyāna Vaipulya is the miscellaneous piṭaka." Or, some explain five piṭakas: the Tripiṭaka, the miscellaneous piṭaka, and the bodhisattva piṭaka. The Dazhidulun says: "Outside the Mahāyāna and the Tripiṭaka, if there are further sūtras, they are the miscellaneous piṭaka." If so, separately clarifying the three practices is the Tripiṭaka, while promiscuously clarifying the three practices is the miscellaneous piṭaka. The miscellaneous piṭaka is still within the meaning of the Small Vehicle. Someone says: There is also a Mahāyāna miscellaneous piṭaka, because the Mahāyāna also has the three practices as a Tripiṭaka, as stated at the beginning of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. Thus we know that promiscuously clarifying the three practices is the Mahāyāna miscellaneous piṭaka. As fully explained in the compilation of the Dharma-piṭaka in the Dazhidulun.
7.24
Next, specifically explaining the Dharma gates of the four assemblies.
7.25
Question: Although this sūtra is subsumed under the Bodhisattva-piṭaka, the Bodhisattva Dharma-piṭaka contains immeasurable Dharma gates; what Dharma do the present four assemblies specifically elucidate? Answer: Now, I shall first show the characteristics of the Dharma gates, and afterward distinguish what is elucidated across the four assemblies. Broadly determined, Dharma gates are of three kinds: first, the teaching that can express; second, the principle that is expressed; third, the completion of cause-and-effect practice by relying on the teaching to awaken to the principle. These three subsume the piṭaka of the three practices, leaving no meaning unexhausted. It is not only Mahāyāna sūtras that distinguish these three; Mahāyāna treatises also elucidate three. For instance, the three characters "Zhong Guan Lun" (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) are themselves these three meanings. Master Sengrui's preface states: "When its reality has been proclaimed and its words have been clarified, then regarding the practices of a bodhisattva and the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa, there are none who are not brightly and completely enlightened." "Its reality has been proclaimed" refers to the middle reality, meaning the principle of the middle reality. "Its words have been clarified" refers to the teachings being made manifest, which is the "treatise" (lun). "The practices of a bodhisattva and the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa" refers to the completion of cause-and-effect practice, which is the meaning of "contemplation" (guan). The ten principles of supreme characteristics in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha also elucidate merely three: namely, peerless object, peerless practice, and peerless fruit. These three are merely subsumed by two gates; elucidating these two gates is also explaining the teaching as having both. Therefore, we know that the Bodhisattva Dharma-piṭaka distinguishes only three dharmas. What is elucidated in the present four assemblies also distinguishes three dharmas: namely, the inconceivable object, the inconceivable cognition, and the inconceivable teaching. Although in general there are three, when speaking in terms of particulars, ten are stated according to their meanings; I shall first explain them sequentially from one gate. Although there are four assemblies, they together elucidate the one Dharma gate of inconceivable liberation. This single Dharma gate subsumes all dharmas. Just as the various spiritual friends in the Avataṃsaka each speak of one gate, and yet it truly subsumes all gates, so Vimalakīrti is one spiritual friend who speaks of the Dharma gate of inconceivable liberation. Question: Since the four assemblies together elucidate the inconceivable, what difference is there? Sengzhao said: "Although the texts differ, the inconceivable is one." It is merely that the traces lodged are not the same, so the approaches each differ. If speaking in terms of persons: in the first assembly, the Buddha elucidates the inconceivable; in the next two assemblies, Vimalakīrti distinguishes the inconceivable; in the later assembly in Āmrapālī's grove, the Buddha and Vimalakīrti together distinguish the inconceivable, where the Buddha first briefly opens its tenet, next Vimalakīrti broadly distinguishes its purport, and afterward the Tathāgata confirms it and has him speak again. Next, regarding differences in dharmas: the first assembly shows two inconceivables: first, gathering the parasols to manifest the lands, where the parasols are not broad yet cover the eight limits, and the lands are not narrow yet appear within the parasols, like a small mirror illuminating and manifesting all under heaven. Next, pressing the earth to transform it into purity, where the manifested land is coarse or sublime according with conditions, and the retribution land is sensed according to karma—both are inconceivable. These two elucidate the inconceivable trace. The vows and practices for a pure land among them are the inconceivable root. The next assembly also elucidates two inconceivables: first, it universally elucidates all upāya, manifesting all forms and speaking all teachings, which cannot be measured by the two vehicles and those of lower ranks—this is called the inconceivable of spiritual penetrations. Next, it specifically elucidates the upāya of manifesting illness, speaking of the faults of saṃsāra and praising the virtues of the dharmakāya, specifically showing one body and specifically speaking one teaching—this is called the specific inconceivable. The third assembly also elucidates two inconceivables: first, it elucidates the two cognitions of provisional and real, the six pāramitās, the four immeasurables, and the Dharma gate of nonduality—this is called the inconceivable root. Borrowing the thrones and requesting the meal is called the inconceivable trace. The Dharma gate of nonduality is taken as the root of principle; the two cognitions of provisional and real, the six pāramitās, and the four immeasurables are taken as the root of practice. Within the trace, two traces are also elucidated: the room accommodating the thrones is called the great entering the small; requesting the meal from the Fragrant Land is using the small to satisfy the great. Furthermore, borrowing the thrones was a silent resonance, and requesting the meal was dispatching an emanation—both are inconceivable. Astounding the great assembly with the palm and holding Abhirati with the hand are called the inconceivable trace. Among these, distinguishing the bodhisattva's practice and the two bodies of root and trace is the inconceivable root; combined with the preceding, there are three propositions. Borrowing the thrones is the great entering the small; requesting the meal is the small satisfying the great; moving Abhirati with the hand to enter Sahā is neither the great entering the great nor the small entering the small, which are insufficient to elucidate it, and thus this one proposition is omitted.
First 25 of 40 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 淨名玄論 — Classical Chinese