金光明經文句記 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Shi Zhili of Siming under the Song dynasty.

In the past, when my late teacher resided at Baoyun, he once lectured on this scripture. His disciples gathered in crowds, vying to record what they heard and secretly putting it into scrolls; what is more, with the brush consigned to others' hands, the far-reaching import was conversely constrained. When it came to citing sūtras and treatises as proof, the phrasing contained many errors, so that every time I approached the text, I could not help but lament. Recently, in the course of lecturing, I recalled the great meaning that he had grasped and composed this record, also drawing upon worldly books and old precedents from the Gushan Suoyin to serve as an aid, hoping that those who peruse it will not let their minds be occupied with phenomenal aspects, but will simply contemplate the benefit of the contemplation of principle. Recorded on the third day of the twelfth month in the fifth year of the Tiansheng era.

1.3

Explicating the title, in two [parts]: first, directly indicating the title. The four characters "Golden [Light Sūtra]" and so forth are that which is explicated; the two characters "Textual Commentary" are that which explicates. The explicated sūtra title is detailed in the Profound Meaning. As for "Textual Commentary" which explicates: "text" means the sūtra text; "commentary" (ju) refers to chapters and sentences (zhangju), and also pauses and punctuation. That is, using chapters and sentences to section the sūtra text, so that each of the expressed meanings has its own boundary. Therefore, Jingxi said: "Because the explication of the title explains the great meaning in detail, when coming to the sūtra text, one only roughly divides it into chapters and sections. That the title says 'Textual Commentary' is truly due to this." However, establishing these two characters is merely humble phrasing. If one examines the explication of the sūtra, the great meaning is by no means minor. Moreover, commentaries on various sūtras are all called "Textual Commentary"; this is a common designation, and therefore the sūtra title is used to distinguish and differentiate it.

1.4

Second, the title of the master who was able to expound it. Receiving the name from his dwelling place, as usually explained.

1.5

Second, entering the text, in two [parts]: first, determining the three divisions, in two [parts]: first, specifically pointing out that which was transmitted. It differs from the seven scrolls and twenty-two chapters translated by Paramārtha; therefore it points to the four fascicles and eighteen chapters. Those in the world who add the "Entrustment" [chapter] to make nineteen chapters are mistaken, because none of the translated editions have this chapter.

1.6

Second, directly judging the three divisions, in two [parts]: first, citing the judgments of various masters, in two [parts]:

1.7

First, generally presenting their differences. "Overflowing" means advancing; "contracting" means retreating. This means that the various masters, in dividing the three divisions, differed in advancing and retreating.

1.8

Second, from "North of the River" onward, directly clarifying the initial judgments, in three [parts]:

1.9

First, the masters north of the River. Because the Four Heavenly Kings and others each made vows before the Buddha to protect those who preach and listen, it is called the great vow to protect the sūtra; Elder Jalavāhana's curing illness and saving the fish, Prince Mahāsattva's abandoning his body to feed the tigress, and so forth, are great compassion receiving living beings. Although the intention of this master differs from that of Paramārtha below in terms of the new and old, their general purport is the same.

1.10

Second, the masters south of the River. They are seemingly identical with the present division of the three parts, except they are confused about the half-chapter of "Span of Life" belonging to the preface.

1.11

Third, Master Paramārtha, in two [parts]: first, judging the text. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha retranslated this sūtra during the Liang dynasty, naming it the Sūtra of the Sovereign of Golden Light, and added four chapters—namely, the Chapter on the Distinction of the Three Bodies, the Chapter on the Eradication of Karmic Obstacles, the Chapter on Dhāraṇī and Pure Grounds, and the Chapter on Fulfilling Vows Relying on Emptiness—bringing Dharmakṣema's eighteen chapters to twenty-two chapters in total, and put forth a commentary to explain it; hence it is called the "new text," and so forth. Second, from "Paramārtha" onward, clarifying the meaning. He still refutes the south of the River for placing "Bestowal of Prophecy" and "Curing Illness" entirely in the transmission division, hence he mentions "the cause and effect of the latter master and disciple," and so forth; it should properly say "the cause of the master and the effect of the disciple," so the present text seems inverted.

1.12

Second, from "The present master" onward, showing the present master's intention, in two [parts]: first, refuting the various masters in terms of principle, in two [parts]:

1.13

First, generally refuting human sentiment. It directly refutes Paramārtha, and its meaning concurrently includes the north of the River. Because these two masters judged the cause and effect of master and disciple as both residing in the main body division, their idea was that the preface division does not at all expound the path of practice and realization. Coming to the transmission division, the flavor of the Dharma has already waned and is merely trivial; therefore, he generally refutes them, saying, "This meaning is not so."

1.14

Second, from "Now, the three" onward, specifically showing the intention of the sūtra, in two [parts]: first, establishing the intention, in two [parts]:

1.15

First, clarifying that the three divisions mutually interpenetrate. "Du" means to obstruct. The three divisions together accomplish the sympathetic resonance of a single sūtra; how could their principles and meanings not mutually encompass one another? For example, the initial preface division narrates and initiates: if it were not devoid of lacking the latter two divisions, how could it be called a preface that properly penetrates? It is precisely what is initiated and narrated in the preface, and it is again what is propagated and disseminated in the transmission; otherwise, how could it be called the main exposition of a sūtra? As for the section of transmission, if it discarded the preface and main body, for the sake of what dharma would it circulate? Therefore, each of the three divisions possesses the three meanings. The terms "beginning, middle, and end" are the goodness of timing among the seven goodnesses. The Wonderful Sūtra says "good in the beginning, middle, and end"; if they were obstructed and severed, how could they be called good?

1.16

Second, from "Furthermore, the faculties of the assembly" onward, the faculties of the assembly are universally benefited. As for the capacities addressed by the sūtra, their benefit may be slow or swift, and they do not necessarily all awaken and enter in the main body division; hence it is said that their fundamental natures are indeterminate. How could it be allowed that the preface division is entirely without the flavor of the Dharma, and that in the transmission the flavor of the Dharma wanes, perishes, and becomes trivial? Since that is not so, in the transmission, what harm is there in speaking of Jalavāhana's cause and Ruciraketu's effect? "Mi" means to increase. "Du" means to lead. "Li" means to encourage.

1.17

Second, from "Furthermore, the Dharma" onward, citing the sūtras. The master is Śākyamuni. In the "Devadatta Chapter," it clarifies that in past kalpas, in the body of a king, the Buddha served the sage Asita to seek the Great Vehicle Dharma; hence it is called the cause of the master. In the "Chapter on Upholding," the bestowal of prophecy on Pajāpatī, Yaśodharā, and others regarding the kalpas and lands of their buddhahood is the effect of the disciples. When ancient Dharma masters analyzed the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra, from the "Chapter on the Dharma Master" onward, everything was classified under the transmission, and this was universally accepted by people. This has an identical meaning to the southern masters' classifying the cause and effect of master and disciple under the transmission in the present text; therefore, it is said that "it poses no hindrance to the meaning." However, one must not cling to it fixedly; hence it is said, "affirming or rejecting depends on the person."

1.18

Second, from "Now" onward, dividing the present text according to meaning, in two [parts]: first, dividing the scripture, in two [parts]:

1.19

First, determining the text of the three divisions. The present division into three parts is largely identical to that of the south of the River, but the preface extends half a chapter further; therefore, citing the three masters only refutes Paramārtha.

1.20

Second, from "As for the preface" onward, showing the meaning of the three divisions, in two [parts]:

1.21

First, directly showing it. "Jiang" means about to. The main body and transmission are after the preface division; now, the preface will certainly possess the benefit of the two divisions; hence it is said, "about to have benefit." "Directly facing the capacities": "dang" has the sense of facing, that is, directly facing the causal conditions of the capacities to expound the path of eternal fruit, repentance, and praise. "Quan" is a fish trap. "Ti" is a hare snare. The fish trap and hare snare are metaphors for verbal teachings; the fish and hare are metaphors for principle and meaning. Desiring to cause the verbal teachings to flow down to the future times of the true, semblance, and final Dharma, constantly causing the multitude of sentient beings to grasp the principle and meaning; hence it is said, "not blocked from future ages."

1.22

Second, from "The sūtra says" onward, citing the sūtra.

1.23

Second, from "Those who doubt" onward, resolving difficulties, in two [parts]:

1.24

First, establishing the difficulty. Since it is called the preface division, it ought to coincide with the "Introductory Chapter"; how can it further enter into more than half a chapter of "Span of Life" in the main body?

1.25

Second, from "The various sūtras" onward, explaining and resolving it, in three [parts]:

1.26

First, citing precedents from other works. The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra takes the cause and effect of the Buddha-land as the main body; since it has no introductory chapter, the various masters take half of the chapter on "Buddha-land" as the preface division. As for the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, in the "Introductory Chapter" it says: "The Buddha, knowing that the great assembly had already gathered, addressed Śāriputra: 'If a bodhisattva wishes to know all dharmas with the wisdom of all modes, he should train in and practice the prajñāpāramitā,'" and so forth; what is spoken like this is already the main body, yet the text is in the preface division. As for the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, eternal life is the main body; since it has no introductory chapter, it takes the gathering of the assembly in the "Chapter on the Lifespan" as the preface; this is according to the northern text. In the southern text, as revised and fixed by Duke Xie, he took the text of gathering the assembly in "Lifespan" and titled it "Introductory Chapter." In these three sūtras, either the preface enters the main body or the main body enters the preface, and the various masters do not doubt it when analyzing them; how can they solely doubt the present judgment that the preface division enters into the "Span of Life"?

1.27

Second, from "This is indeed" onward, clarifying the intention of this sūtra. This indeed comes from the intention of the compilers of the sūtra in sectioning the chapters. That is to say, if the title of the "Chapter on the Span of Life" were placed after the devas and dragons gathered in Ruciraketu's chamber, it would make the text of the four Buddhas severing doubt stand in isolation; hence it is called "precipitously abrupt." "Zhan" has the phonetic spelling of chu and xian. Zhan has the appearance of a craggy mountain. If the text stands in isolation, it is like the perilous steepness of a craggy mountain, not connected. For this reason, the title "Span of Life" was placed within the preface section.

1.28

Third, from "Now, following" onward, concluding with the present intention. Although the chapter belongs to the main body, its meaning corresponds to the preface division; how could one merely follow the chapter heading and cause the meaning to be lost?

1.29

Second, from "The preface has" onward, directly explicating the three divisions of the sūtra: first, explicating the preface division, in two [parts]: first, explicating the chapter title, in two [parts]: first, explicating the preface, in two [parts]:

1.30

First, indicating the three meanings. The preface division of a sūtra properly has three meanings; in various scriptures, there may be only one or two, which is an abbreviation. The present sūtra, along with great works such as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, completely possesses these three.

1.31

Second, from "Beginning end" onward, explicating the three meanings. "Xu" refers to the end of a cocoon's thread. Whenever pulling silk from a cocoon, one first pulls its end; only when the end is unwound does one see its silk. Now, having the five matters at the beginning is like the end of the silk. "Guan" is pronounced in the departing tone. "Narrating what is about to come, relating the forthcoming benefit": this means narrating the benefit of the main body and transmission that will be present at that time; hence this preface narrates the following seventeen chapters. "Initiating" (fa) means developing the faith of living beings' capacities. "Arising" (qi) means giving rise to the holy response of the teaching. This preface, by manifesting auspicious signs, startles and stirs the feelings of living beings, causing their faithful minds to be reverent and expectant, so that the teaching will certainly bring profound benefit.

1.32

Second, from "Chapter" onward, explicating "chapter," in two [parts]: first, citing the Sanskrit and translating the term. Second, from "'Chapter' means" onward, explicating the meaning based on the term, in two [parts]:

1.33

First, directly explicating. Here, text and sentences are both in the scripture. Because the teachings that are able to express all employ four dharmas—namely, sound, name, phrase, and phoneme (vyañjana). There are two types of these: during the Buddha's lifetime and after his parinirvāṇa. In terms of the Buddha's lifetime, with the marks of the Sanskrit vocal sounds of the eight voices and four eloquence, this one is real; the collections of names, phrases, and phonemes are merely established as modulations upon sound, and these three are provisional. Sound belongs to material dharmas (rūpa), while the collections of names, phrases, and phonemes belong to the third group of conditioned dharmas not associated with mind (cittaviprayukta-saṃskāra)—fourteen in the Abhidharma, seventeen in the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, and twenty-four in the Yogācāra; thus what is established in the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna schools differs. Regarding name, phrase, and phoneme, the Vijñaptimātratā says: "Names express intrinsic nature, phrases express differentiation, and phonemes are letters, being the basis of the two." If considered after the parinirvāṇa, when the holy ones compiled the scriptures, on palm leaves in that land and yellow scrolls in this land, the names, phrases, and phonemes contained therein are all established based on visible form (rūpa-dharma). Here, these two are briefly raised; fully, there should be four. "Grouping together according to category" means, for instance, using the four dharmas to jointly clarify the meaning of initiation and so forth, thus sectioning it as the "Introductory Chapter," and so on up to jointly clarifying the meaning of praising the Buddha, thus sectioning it as the "Chapter of Praise." Although the preface is being explicated now, the meaning of "chapter" runs through what follows.

1.34

Second, citing parallels. The phrasing and categories of text in the two piṭakas of Vinaya and Abhidharma likewise have the divisions of sections and aggregates (skandhas), just like the chapter categories of the sūtras. As for 'sections and aggregates', this refers to the five sections and six aggregates: first, pārājika; second, saṃghāvaśeṣa; third, prāyaścittika; fourth, pratideśanīya; fifth, duṣkṛta—these are called the five sections. Adding thullaccaya below saṃghāvaśeṣa yields the name 'six aggregates'. If one further opens durukta from duṣkṛta, they become seven aggregates. 'Pitan' (Abhidharma) is fully called Abhidharma, translated here as 'incomparable dharma', which is the Abhidharma-piṭaka. 'Aggregate' (khandha/skandha) is translated here as 'aggregate of dharmas'; it also groups dharmas of associated types together into a single section. As in the *Aṣṭagrantha-śāstra*, it mentions: first, the aggregate of karma, clarifying the three karmas; second, the aggregate of proclivities (anusaya), clarifying the one hundred and eight afflictions; third, knowledge; fourth, absorption (samādhi); fifth, faculties (indriya); sixth, great elements (mahābhūta); seventh, views (dṛṣṭi); and eighth, miscellaneous—these can be understood through reflection.

1.35

Second, from "Ru..." ('Thus') onward, interpreting the sūtra text, in two parts:

1.36

First, dividing into three prefaces. Although divided here into three, when analyzing the text below, they are simply grouped into the two prefaces: general and specific.

1.37

Second, interpreting the three prefaces, in three parts: first, interpreting the sequential preface, in two parts: first, general discussion of names and numbers, in two parts: first, explaining the differences in numbers, in two parts:

1.38

First, directly explaining the division and combination of numbers. 'Dilun masters' refers to the masters who propagated the *Daśabhūmika-śāstra*. The six items are: 1. the essence of the Dharma that was heard; 2. the person capable of upholding it; 3. the concord between hearing and upholding; 4. the lord who expounds the teaching; 5. the place relied upon; 6. the companions in hearing and upholding. Or seven, in which case [they] separate 'I' from 'heard'. Or five, in which case [they] combine 'Buddha' with 'place'.

1.39

Second, concurrently showing the propriety of the assembly. The central doctrine of the eternal lifespan strictly expounded in this sūtra was in Ruciraketu's chamber; hence the devas, nāgas, and bodhisattvas assembled there to listen. When the expounding concluded, the four Buddhas disappeared, and by principle the assembly properly dispersed. The preface expounded at Gṛdhrakūṭa and the golden drum in the dream were different in both time and place, and so neither of them was heard [by that assembly]. In terms of hearing the eternal lifespan, they count as having heard it together; but not having partaken in the dream and so forth, they do not count as having heard it together. Because the time and place of expounding this sūtra were not fixed, the assembly of common auditors is not arranged in the sequential order seen in other sūtras. If we look at Yijing's new translation, the *Suvarṇaprabhāsottama Sūtra*, the list of the assembly of common auditors is no different from other sūtras. The Great Master had prophetic foreknowledge that the Sanskrit manuscript would arrive; hence the note 'and so on'.

1.40

Second, from "This..." onward, establishing the various names, in two parts:

1.41

First, listing and explaining the different names. There are six names in all, each having its name marked in the upper phrase and its meaning explained in the lower phrase. 'Meaning of stamping and confirming': because phrases such as 'Thus' are like worldly tallies and seals; seeing this at the head, one knows it is a Buddhist sūtra. Therefore, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* states: 'Not only is my Dharma thus; the beginning of the sūtras of the Buddhas of the three periods is also so.' 'Serving as the source for general names': because what was spoken from the golden mouth always has 'Thus' placed at the start; hence they are generally named 'sūtra'. 'Preface after the sūtra': because at the time of compilation, it came after the expounding of the sūtra. 'Preface before the sūtra': because the Buddha's bequeathal instructed it to be placed at the head of the sūtra. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* states: 'When the Buddha was about to enter nirvāṇa, Ānanda asked the Buddha: "What words should be placed at the head of all sūtras?" The Buddha answered Ānanda: "You should say: 'Thus have I heard: at one time the Buddha was in such-and-such a place, in such-and-such a country, together with such-and-such a great assembly.'"' 'Preface that refutes heresy': because all non-Buddhist scriptures place the two syllables *a* and *oṃ* at their head. The word *a* means nonexistence, and the word *oṃ* means existence; taking what they grasp as these two as the root, it reveals that within their texts they do not go beyond existence and nonexistence. Therefore, 'Thus' (*ru-shi*) is established to refute their heretical attachments as not thus and not right. 'Preface that verifies faith': the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* states: 'Why not expound prajñā directly, instead of saying "dwelling in Rājagṛha"? Answer: expounding the time, place, and persons causes people to have faith.'

1.42

Second, from "Tiantai..." onward, concluding by subsuming them under the four siddhāntas. 'Master of Tiantai': Zhang'an, in contrast to those previous explanations, therefore called Zhizhe the 'Master of Tiantai'. 'Four siddhāntas': *xi* is the Chinese sound, with the meaning of universality. *Tan* (dāna) is a Sanskrit word, translated here as bestowal. The Buddhas and sages constantly bestow universally upon sentient beings the four kinds of benefit—joy, producing goodness, destroying evil, and entering principle; this is the general characteristic of stimulus and response. That this sequential preface was ordered by the golden mouth to be placed [at the head] is indeed the response. Reaching all conditions of capacity after his extinction is indeed the stimulus. But as for one preface having six names and meanings, what is the intent? Now, if we gather them under the four siddhāntas, then each and every name and meaning has that to which it belongs. Thus the first two names are the worldly benefit bestowed upon sentient beings; the third and fourth names belong to the individual; the fifth, refuting heresy, is the therapeutic method; and the sixth, faith in principle, belongs to the ultimate truth. Since these four have not yet been evaluated in terms of depth and shallowness, they correspond to each of the four teachings possessing all four.

1.43

Second, from "Previous interpretations..." onward, directly interpreting the sūtra text, in two parts: first, interpreting the five meanings based on the sūtra; second, clarifying the intention behind lacking [the mention of] common auditors. This is because the text is divided according to the six items of the Dilun masters; if based on the five items, the current text has only four. As for the first, there are five parts: first, interpreting the essence of the Dharma, in two parts: first, previous interpretations, in two parts:

1.44

First, citing the interpretations of various masters, in four parts: first, the previous interpretations; second, Master Zhao; third, Paramārtha; fourth, Nāgārjuna. The textual meanings of these four are all apparent; only upon classifying them with the four siddhāntas are their depth and shallowness determined.

1.45

Second, from "This..." onward, evaluating with the four siddhāntas. We now clarify that whether the sacred Dharma is much or little, whether general or specific, none is not stimulus and response, and stimulus and response do not go beyond the four siddhāntas. The previous evaluation of the six kinds of names and meanings of the sequential preface was general and manifold; the current evaluation of the stimulus and response of each of the six items is specific and singular. Thus the two characters *ru-shi* ('thus') have different interpretations by various masters. Now the Master of Tiantai uses the four siddhāntas to harmonize and interpret them, each capturing one intent of the Tathāgata's stimulus and response—how could this be like worldly disputes asserting one to be right and the others wrong? Although the two characters in the previous interpretations correspond to text and principle, they do not distinguish between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; their language is general and all-inclusive, and moreover lacks the characteristics of the three benefits such as producing goodness; they only obtain the benefit of transmission and reception without error, and therefore belong to the worldly [siddhānta]. Although Master Zhao has statements about harmonizing with principle, he also does not differentiate between the ultimate and the conventional; he only produces the goodness of faith, compliance, and relying on instruction, and therefore belongs to the individual [siddhānta]. Paramārtha also does not distinguish between text and principle, but his discussion of certainty abandons the evils of increase and decrease, and thus constitutes the therapeutic [siddhānta]. Although Nāgārjuna's faith and compliance are the same as Master Zhao's, in stating that 'one who has faith says that this matter is thus', this can manifest the meaning of the three truths: 'this matter' is the conventional truth, 'thus' is the ultimate truth, and 'is' is the middle truth. This skillfully demonstrates the three truths in a single phrase and corresponds to the ultimate truth [siddhānta]. The note 'and so on' directs one to discriminate as above.

1.46

Second, from "Now we..." onward, the present interpretation, in two parts: first, in terms of the teachings; second, contemplation of the mind. These two interpretations expound the dual excellence of the two intents—teaching and contemplation—far surpassing the other schools; its merit stems from this. The first text is divided into two:

1.47

First, general. Clarifying 'thus' (*ru*) in terms of expounding and transmitting, and clarifying 'is' (*shi*) in terms of understanding and receiving. Since this is a general interpretation, running down through the specific interpretations it must encompass the four teachings; therefore we know that the characteristics of phenomena are that which is expounded by the four, the Buddha is the lord who proclaims the four teachings, Ānanda is the person who hears and upholds the four, and in terms of their respective stations, all four are vast like an ocean.

1.48

Second, specific interpretation, in three parts: first, sequentially clarifying refutation and establishment, in four parts. That is, each of the four teachings refutes the preceding 'not thus and not right', and only then establishes the meaning of 'thus' (*ru-shi*) of its own teaching.

1.49

First, refuting heresy and establishing the correct. Refuting the heresy of non-Buddhists and revealing the correctness of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching], in two parts:

1.50

First, refuting heresy. Calling *a* and *oṃ* auspicious: the *Śata-śāstra* explains that when a non-Buddhist asked an internal disciple, 'What Dharma does the Buddha expound?', he replied, 'Briefly stated, there are two kinds: stopping evil and practicing good.' The non-Buddhist said, 'Your sūtras have a fault, because expounding evil at the beginning is inauspicious. The sūtras and dharmas of my master expound auspiciousness at the beginning.' As in the *Bṛhaspati-sūtra* and others, all speak of auspiciousness at the beginning; because the beginning is auspicious, the middle and end are also auspicious; hence it is said that *a* and *oṃ* are called auspicious. 'Text contradicts...', etc.: using the correct to refute the heretical as not thus and not right. At the beginning of the scripture they mark auspiciousness, yet what is expounded within the text is solely heretical views; this text contradicts principle, so it is not 'thus'. Heretical views are inauspicious; how can they be called *a* and *oṃ*? This principle diverges from the text, so it is not 'right'. Therefore the *Śata-śāstra* refutes this, saying: 'Whether auspicious or inauspicious, this is the air of heretical views.'

1.51

Second, from "The text is thus..." onward, establishing the correct. In the Tripiṭaka Teaching, text and principle correspond to each other: speaking of impermanence and arising and ceasing corresponds to the principle of impermanence and arising and ceasing, which is called 'thus'; this principle corresponds to the text, which is called 'right'.

1.52

Second, from "Now we say..." onward, refuting difference and establishing identity, in two parts:

1.53

First, refuting difference. Wishing to reveal the principle of the Mahāyāna, [the author] first censures the fault of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching]. The conventional [truth] of real existence serves as that which can express, but does not identify with the ultimate truth, and therefore is not 'thus'; the ultimate [truth] that is expressed does not contain the principle of the middle, and being shallow, it is therefore not 'right'.

1.54

Second, from "Mo..." (Mahāyāna) onward, clarifying identity. The Shared Teaching discusses illusory existence, which in its very essence is empty; being non-different is called 'thus'. The ultimate [truth] that is identical with emptiness can contain the Middle Way, unlike the analytic emptiness of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching] which is definitively shallow; hence the principle is called 'right'. The Shared Teaching necessarily connects to the Distinct and Perfect teachings; hence the text marks it as 'Mahāyāna'.

1.55

Third, from "Now we say the three..." onward, refuting shallowness and clarifying depth, in two parts:

1.56

First, refuting shallowness. Wishing to clarify the principle of the Distinct [Teaching], [the author] first censures the fault of the Shared [Teaching]. In the Shared Teaching, the three vehicles together hear of identity with emptiness, yet dull bodhisattvas share the understanding of the two vehicles; those of sharp faculties hearing of emptiness not only [understand] the emptiness of existence, but can also empty emptiness. Since they have these separate understandings, looking toward the Distinct [Teaching], it is not 'thus'; of the two realizations of emptiness and middle, the realization of emptiness is particularly inferior, and compared to the middle, it is not 'right'.

1.57

Second, clarifying depth. The Distinct Teaching is not open to the practice and study of the two vehicles. Although it broadly encompasses an assembly as numerous as dust motes, they are exclusively of bodhisattva faculties, all hearing of the Buddha-nature and cultivating and entering it progressively. Since they do not have disparate understandings, it can be called 'thus'; because none fail to realize the middle, it is called 'right'.

1.58

Fourth, from "Now we say departing..." onward, refuting departure and establishing the middle, in two parts:

1.59

First, refuting departure. Wishing to clarify the principle of the Perfect [Teaching], [the author] first censures the fault of the Distinct [Teaching]. Although the Distinct [Teaching] speaks of the middle, the middle is exclusively the Buddha realm; although it creates and transforms the causes and effects of the nine realms through transformation, the nine are not inherent in nature, and one must rely on the Middle Way to progressively cut them off completely before achieving the Buddha realm. The Buddha is different from the nine, and therefore it is not called 'thus'; the first contemplation emerges from the conventional, the next contemplation emerges from the ultimate, and upon reaching the third contemplation, one simultaneously emerges from both truths to then realize the Middle Way; because the middle is not identical to the extremes, it is not the meaning of 'right'.

1.60

Second, from "Written words..." onward, clarifying the middle. As for the written words that can express, their nature is fundamentally free of departure and not different from principle, and therefore they are called 'thus'; whether solely empty or solely existent, whether solely form or solely mind, each and every one is the middle and none is not the Buddha-Dharma, and therefore they are called 'right'. The text is thus and the principle is right; the meaning is definitively consummated.

1.61

Second, from "First refuting..." onward, concluding with the four teachings. Question: In the previous interpretation of the four teachings, the ultimate of the Shared [Teaching] containing the middle was termed 'deep principle'; now in concluding the four teachings, the Distinct Teaching is said to 'refute shallowness and clarify depth'. Could it be that both the ultimate and the middle of the Shared Teaching are shallow? Answer: Although the principle of the Shared [Teaching] is deep, in order to gather the two vehicles and dull bodhisattvas, it also includes the shallow principle. Now, in concluding with the Distinct Teaching, it is exclusively the bodhisattva Dharma and speaks solely of the deep principle; therefore, using what is solely deep to refute what includes the shallow does not conflict with the meaning listed and explained earlier.

1.62

Third, from "This sūtra..." onward, showing that this text possesses all four.

1.63

Second, contemplation of the mind. Contemplating the aggregates and so forth with the perfect threefold contemplation, the mind of cultivated evil is precisely inherent evil; this is termed the evil dharma realm, which excludes no dharma whatsoever. Its essence is the three virtues, also termed the three truths. Illuminating in accordance with the truths, the contemplation and its object are not distinct, and therefore it is called "thusness." As for "the object is precisely the correct contemplation," the object is original enlightenment, which arises to become initial enlightenment; although new and old are distinguished, the essence of enlightenment is not different, and therefore it can be called "the object is precisely the correct contemplation"—only then is this meaning established. If this were not so, how could the four propositions such as "the object illuminates the object" be established? When the sūtra says "and so forth," if one contemplates an obstinate object, forgets the mind in bias and inferiority, or provisionally posits true thusness, these are all termed mistaken contemplations. Although the present correct contemplation is not discussed in terms of actual practice, if a practitioner wishes to integrate phenomena into principle, cultivating immediately upon hearing, they must distinguish the ten objects within the mind being contemplated: the object of the aggregates is always present, while the remaining nine await arousal. In the contemplation that can contemplate, one must recognise the ten vehicles [of contemplation]: those of superior capacity cultivate one, those of middling capacity cultivate up to seven, and those of inferior capacity employ all seven. If one does not yet understand the Great Calming and Contemplation oneself, one should rely on teachers and friends to inquire about each and every point, clearly recognising medicine and illness before cultivating it; do not suppose that practicing one phrase is sufficient. The interpretations of contemplation below should be understood according to this.

1.64

Second, from "I have heard" down, explaining the retention of hearing, in two parts: first, old explanations, which has three:

1.65

First, the older masters. Because non-Buddhists held the view of self, they mostly took their own minds as their teachers; because Ānanda took the Buddha as his teacher, he proclaimed, "I have heard."

1.66

Second, Paramārtha. "I" am able to accept and uphold the Dharma taught by the Buddha, hence it has the meaning of a vessel. Setting aside the three kinds of non-vessels reveals the completion of the three wisdoms. Although he did not yet distinguish the wisdoms of the four teachings, his explanation of "I have heard" far surpasses the older explanations.

1.67

Third, the Treatise (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa). That [treatise] explains that auditory consciousness arises from four conditions: first, space; second, the faculty; third, the object; and fourth, mental application. Here it says that being unimpaired is the faculty, the audible place is the object, and listening attentively is mental application; only the condition of space is missing. Below it says, "the harmonious combination of causes and conditions," which in meaning can encompass it. Thus, only when the four conditions combine harmoniously is auditory consciousness produced. Not saying "the ear hears" but saying "I have heard" is because the self is the master of the ear. The new [translation] states that auditory consciousness is produced from nine conditions, which is fully set forth in the Vijñaptimātratā.

1.68

Second, from "The Master's explanation" down, the present explanation, in two parts: first, explaining according to the teachings, in two parts: first, explaining "I" and "heard" separately, in two parts:

1.69

First, clarifying the four kinds of "I." These four propositions of "self-self" and so forth are established by analogy with the four propositions of "arising-arising" and so forth in the Great Sūtra (*Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra). Now, the self is a provisional designation, existing in dependence upon the aggregates. Since the dharmas of the aggregates have the four [propositions] of "arising-arising" and so forth, how could the self, which accords with actual dharmas, not be so? As the explanation of "arising-arising" says, "great arising brings forth small arising"—this is arising and ceasing bringing forth arising and ceasing; grasping dharmas of arising and ceasing forms a self of arising and ceasing, and thus by analogy with "arising-arising" it constitutes "self-self." Although this is a contemplation of emptiness, it is not realizing emptiness through analysis of phenomena, so the Tripiṭaka Teaching corresponds to the first proposition. Furthermore, one should know that sentient beings are intrinsically thus with respect to provisional and actual arising and ceasing without being aware of it; now, receiving this teaching, they contemplate according to what is fundamental. How could it be only this teaching? The three below are all like this. In the Shared Teaching, actual dharmas arise precisely as non-arising, so the self within the aggregates is precisely non-self; thus it belongs to the second proposition. A person of the Distinct Teaching knows that the aggregates are unarisen yet arise; therefore, they contemplate the self from non-self. Because this teaching fundamentally knows the true self, yet because views and arrogance are strong, one first contemplates non-self, next refutes non-self, establishes the self, and later enters the true self; therefore, this teaching corresponds to the third proposition. A person of the Perfect Teaching realizes directly that the present provisional and actual are non-arising and non-arising, grasping the permanently abiding aggregates to form the true self. Since the self is identical to the Middle, both truths converge into it; thus it says, "the meaning of the true self in which self and non-self are non-dual"; therefore, this teaching corresponds to the fourth proposition. Since teachings fundamentally address capacities, the four meanings of "self" are matched with the four dispositions, so that later expositors may distinguish them as above; thus the note says "and so forth."

1.70

Second, clarifying the four kinds of "heard." The self is the master of hearing, and hearing is the function of the self; the master is the provisional person, and the function is the actual dharma. If one understands the meaning of "arising," the meaning of "hearing" becomes apparent of itself. However, "arising" is a general discussion of dependent origination, while "hearing" pertains specifically to speaking and listening, so they are not without slight differences. Arising from the causes and conditions of hearing there is further hearing, hence it is called "heard-heard." Since it is produced from conditions, it ultimately reverts to destruction; this is hearing of arising and ceasing. Hearing lacks the four natures and right where it is there is no hearing, hence it is called "heard-unheard"; this is hearing of non-arising. Although in the absolute truth there is no hearing, within conventional truth there is hearing, hence it is called "unheard-heard"; this is hearing of the immeasurable. The two truths are identical to the Middle, hence it is called "unheard"; the Middle is also unattainable, so it is again called "unheard." Over forty-nine years not a single word was spoken; how could there be a middle or an extreme that could be heard? This is hearing of the unconditioned. The meaning of the note is the same as before.

1.71

Second, from "there are four" down, explaining "I have heard" together, in three parts:

1.72

First, the four abilities of the hearer. In the Tripiṭaka Teaching, Ānanda in one single person had four virtues, and therefore received four names. "Keeper of the Canon" comes from the Āgamas; the other three come from the *Saddharmasmṛtyupasthāna-sūtra*. Now, expanding the lesser names to correspond to the four teachings, the meanings match the names. Ānanda is Sanskrit; in Chinese it is translated as "Joy." He was born on the night the Buddha attained awakening, and the entire country rejoiced, so he was named after that. Establishing a name based on conditions accords with the dharmas of arising and ceasing; for transmitting and upholding the Tripiṭaka, this name is appropriate. What is taught in the Shared Teaching takes phenomena as identical to principle, differing from the views of ordinary worldly people; the name "Worthy" is appropriate. The Distinct Teaching speaks extensively of Buddha-dharmas as numerous as dust and sand, mastering and overseeing much; the name "Keeper of the Canon" is appropriate. The Perfect Teaching from beginning to end explains the principle of the dharma realm, which is both profound and vast; the name "Ocean" is appropriate.

1.73

Second, from "Joy" down, able to receive from four Buddhas, in four parts:

1.74

First, the Tripiṭaka. This teaching analyzes dharmas, and its emptiness does not contain the Middle; therefore, the Buddha's body seen is only the sixteen-foot [body].

1.75

Second, from "Worthy Ā[nanda]" down, the Shared Teaching. Since its contemplation realizes [emptiness through] dharmas, it reveals two kinds of emptiness, called "mere [emptiness]" and "not-mere [emptiness]." Bodhisattvas of dull capacity, together with the persons of the two vehicles, see only mere emptiness; lacking the reality of the Middle, it is not the source of form and mind. Therefore, the Buddha originally made a vow to have no residual habit-energies, and his manifested body and wisdom ultimately revert to ashes and extinction; because form has determinate limits, it is called the sixteen-foot [body]. If it is a bodhisattva of sharp capacity, who receives the integration of the Distinct and Perfect teachings and understands not-mere emptiness, emptiness is the essence of original enlightenment and the Middle reality; it is wondrous form and mind attained at the Buddha stage, and all of his bodies and wisdom match the essence and are boundless, hence named the "revered and extraordinary," meaning honored and uniquely wondrous, and also called the reward body. It is just one Buddha body, but because of sharp and dull capacities two kinds of appearance are seen, hence it is called the "conjoined body." The Buddha body of the Shared Teaching must be distinguished in this way. One should realize that when one of dull capacity sees the Buddha, even if he were ten li or even a hundred billion [li] high, because it relies on mere emptiness, it is still not the revered and extraordinary body, since it has determinate limits. If a person of sharp capacity sees a body of sixteen feet or eight feet, since it relies on the Middle Way, it also lacks determinate limits; therefore, in the verse below praising the thirty-two marks of King Suvarṇaprabhāsa, the *Textual Commentary* explains that it properly praises the revered and extraordinary [body].

1.76

Third, from "Canon" down, the Distinct Teaching. At the very initial mind of this teaching, one hears of the mere Middle; although the Middle does not possess the environments and beings of the nine realms, it is not without the wondrous form and wondrous mind of the Buddha realm; therefore, the Buddha seen is exclusively the revered and extraordinary body without determinate limits. This is because from beginning to end this teaching is not practiced or realized in common with the two vehicles and bodhisattvas abiding in emptiness.

1.77

Fourth, from "Ocean" down, the Perfect Teaching. In what this teaching expounds, worldly characteristics are permanently abiding, so all dharmas are nothing other than the Middle Way. Although like persons of the Distinct Teaching they see the revered and extraordinary body, that [teaching] combines distinct cultivation, whereas here all are inherently possessed by nature; hence the dragon girl says, "The wondrous, pure Dharma body / Possesses the thirty-two marks." Wishing to manifest complete inherent nature, it is designated the Dharma body specifically on account of its superior nature. Therefore, people of this teaching contemplate the suffering and bliss of inherent virtue and give rise to granting and removing; they take poisons and harms that are identical to principle as what is subdued and eradicated; the three causes of cultivated virtue are called the practice of inherent virtue; and the reward and manifestation bodies are immediately called the Dharma body. This is because they wish to efface cultivation through inherent nature: suffering is then immediately removed without removal; poison is immediately eradicated without eradication; practice is immediately cultivated without cultivation; and the Buddha is immediately realized without realization. Ānanda transmitted these unconditioned four truths, which are taught without teaching; therefore, he personally received them from the Dharma-body Buddha.

1.78

Third, from "this" down, the division having four kinds of capacities. Question: Above the four teachings were clarified; why does it now only mention the teaching and listening of the three vehicles? Answer: Because among the three vehicles, the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas must be discussed in terms of the Tripiṭaka and Shared teachings, whereas clarifying bodhisattvas must cover all four teachings. The three vehicles are a general discussion, while the four teachings are a specific distinction; since the listeners are of the three vehicles, the speaker must be of the four Buddhas; since there are different understandings of a single sound, there are also different sights of a single body. The previous clarification of the "conjoined body" had its intention here.

1.79

Second, from "contemplation" down, explaining according to the contemplation of mind. The fourfold meanings of "I" and "heard" above are distinguished with respect to the practitioner's contemplation of mind. "Aspiring to what is above" and so forth refers to the contemplation of the six practices in defiled dhyāna. Aspiring to what is above as pure, wondrous, and free, while detesting what is below as suffering, coarse, and obstructive, discusses the higher and lower levels mutually with respect to the nine stages. "Self-self" and "heard-heard" are conventional objects of arising and ceasing within the Tripiṭaka; previously they were contemplated to enter principle according to the three vehicles' knowledge and understanding of arising and ceasing, but now, with respect to ordinary beings who cultivate without knowing, they only constitute worldly dhyāna. Since they are conventional objects, whether known or unknown, dharmas are fundamentally of arising and ceasing, and thus correspond to the proposition of "arising-arising." When our school explains it, whether from the perspective of the capacities being converted or from the contemplation that can contemplate, the two contemplations of analysis and embodiment differ conventionally but are identical in the absolute. Previously, based on conventional difference, analytical contemplation was individually matched with the first proposition; now, based on absolute identity, analytical and embodied contemplations are together matched with the next proposition, and the latter two contemplations do not differ from the previous matching. Furthermore, previously according to the teachings, the four propositions of "I have heard" could be matched with four persons; now, discussing the practice of contemplation, one must illuminate them with respect to one single person in a single thought-moment; hence the *Explanatory Commentary* (*Shīqiān*) says that with the threefold contemplation in a single mind, within a single thought-moment one sees the four kinds of four truths, and it even possesses the four destinies—how could it lack worldly dhyāna? Therefore, the explanation must proceed in sequence, because characteristics are distinguished according to persons; but cultivation has no before and after, solely constituting the perfect contemplation.

1.80

Third, from "at one time" down, clarifying harmony and union, in two parts: first, old explanations, in two parts:

1.81

First, Master Zhao. "Qi" means to open. "Yun" means that the juncture of time is auspicious and good. "Hui" means to unite, which is the time when capacity and response harmoniously unite.

1.82

Second, from "the Tripiṭaka [master]" down, Paramārtha, in two parts:

1.83

First, narrating his established meaning. This explanation, like Zhao's, explains "one" as "union," but discusses the mind of capacity responding without high or low. If one says that when the minds of sentient beings are neither high nor low but even and balanced, that is precisely the time of uniting as one with the Buddha; therefore, he says that an even time is precisely "at one time." Second, from "privately" down, Zhang'an's supplementary explanation. Saying "privately I consider" refers to Master Ding personally adding this explanation when recording this *Textual Commentary* after the Great Master passed away. Because the matter was not openly declared, he said "privately." He probably worried that later people would not understand Paramārtha's meaning of "high and low," so he explained it for them. "High" refers to an arrogant mind relying on itself and slighting others, unable to practice the Buddha's Path and Dharma, hence called "arrogant mind not practicing." "Low" refers to indulging in and clinging to the five desires, confused and unable to renounce them; how could one receive the Path? These two minds are the greatest obstacles to the Path; wishing to cause people today neither to indulge nor be arrogant, cultivating an even time, they will evoke the sage.

First 83 of 247 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

金光明經文句記 — Classical Chinese