注大乘入楞伽經 5

English (machine translation) 5

Language: English

5.1

"Furthermore, a collection of phrases is like footprints [...] These are the characteristics of collections of names, phrases, and syllables, which you should cultivate and study."

[The commentary says:] The phenomena of the world do not go beyond the five skandhas; here again the collections of names, phrases, and syllables are clarified in terms of the five skandhas. A collection of phrases being like footprints means: just as people in the world who lose an elephant or horse find it by tracking footprints, so those who are ignorant of dharmatā are also awakened through words. This is called a collection of phrases; the characteristics of the form skandha are apparent, so it is spoken of using 'footprints'. The four skandhas are sensation, perception, volition, and consciousness; because they have no physical form, they are spoken of using names. If one illuminates and sees that they are fundamentally tranquil, these are all dharmatā. Both are revealed by syllables, and he encourages that one should cultivate and study them. Because ancient noble ones awakened and entered through this, they gave up their entire bodies to seek half a verse.

5.3

Then the World-Honoured One repeated this in verse:
"Collections of names and collections of phrases,
And the distinctions of collections of syllables,
Are what ordinary fools conceptually grasp at,
Like an elephant drowning in deep mud."

5.4

[The commentary says:] To eradicate the mental illnesses of sentient beings, the Tathāgata used collections of names, phrases, and syllables as skillful means to teach the Dharma, like combating poison with poison. If fools still cling to names and phrases and do not awaken to the true meaning, there is no time of liberation, just like a scent-elephant drowning in mire.

5.5

"Furthermore, Mahāmati, in future times [...] they should answer them: 'This is not a proper question.'"

5.6

[The commentary says:] Because the characteristics of collections of names, phrases, and syllables were spoken of above to enable bodhisattvas to understand the true meaning, quickly attain bodhi, and reveal it to sentient beings, there is fear that those with bad reflections in future times will question the wise using the four lemmas of erroneous views—identity and difference, both and neither. They should answer them: 'The meaning I have penetrated is the true Dharma free from the four lemmas; this question of yours now is called a non-question.'

5.7

"Namely: 'Are form and impermanence different or not different? [...] I do not declare.'"

5.8

This explains the phrases used by those of evil contemplation and perverted wisdom when falsely calculating and raising improper objections. That is, whether matter and impermanence, up to knowledge and the knower, are different or not different. The wise should reply to them: "Questions such as these concern matters that cannot be declared, and the Buddha termed them [answering by] setting aside without declaring." Because those foolish people lack the wisdom gained from hearing and do not know whether existence and non-existence are perverted or correct, and in order to make them leave behind the various terrors of perverted views of annihilation and permanence, he did not declare it for them. Fascicle nineteen of the Kośa says: "Various sūtras state that there are fourteen undeclared [points]," which is precisely this meaning; it is also called answering by setting aside. The reason he did not answer is that these are meaningless statements. Knowing them does not allow one to escape saṃsāra, and not knowing them does not obstruct nirvāṇa.

5.9

"Mahāmati! What is not declared (and so on down to) such statements are termed undeclared treatises."

5.10

The phrase "did not declare it for them" means that he wished to cause non-Buddhists to reflect and understand on their own, so as to attain departure from the false view of an agent. Because non-Buddhists grasp at a self either as identical to the aggregates or distinct from the aggregates, they state that the body and life-principle are one or different, and so forth. These are all undeclared, perverted treatises.

5.11

"Mahāmati! Non-Buddhists, through delusion and confusion, teach undeclared treatises (and so on down to) because their faculties are not yet mature, he temporarily ceased speaking [of them]."

5.12

This clarifies that the Tathāgata, Arhat, and Samyaksaṃbuddha constantly teaches the Dharma and delivers sentient beings by means of the four types of explanatory statements. As for ceasing explanatory statements, the intention lies in another time; because sentient beings whose faculties are not yet mature are temporarily set aside without an answer, he does not teach the cessation of explanatory statements for those whose faculties are mature.

5.13

"Furthermore, Mahāmati! Why is it that all phenomena are unproduced? (and so on down to) Therefore I say that all phenomena are permanent."

5.14

This means that for sentient beings whose faculties are mature, the Tathāgata opens the gate of expedient means to display the true mark. In accordance with their types, he speaks of unproduced, unceasing, permanent, impermanent, and so forth. That is to say, because there is freedom from that which acts and that which is acted upon, and there is no agent, he says that all phenomena are unproduced. Because by means of verified knowledge observing phenomena of individual and common characteristics they cannot be apprehended, he says that all phenomena are devoid of intrinsic nature. Because all phenomena originally have nowhere from which they come, and in departing there is nowhere to which they go, he says that all phenomena have no coming or going. Because the substance of all phenomena is empty and devoid of the characteristic of intrinsic nature and cannot be apprehended, he says that all phenomena are unceasing. Because the characteristics of all phenomena cease as soon as they arise, being of an impermanent nature, he says that all phenomena are impermanent. Because the arising of the characteristics of all phenomena is just their non-arising, being originally without production or cessation, and the nature of impermanence is permanent, he says that all phenomena are permanent. This is termed the Tathāgata's skillful teaching of the Dharma, free from grasper and grasped, not giving rise to conceptual discrimination.

5.15

At that time, the World-Honoured One restated the verses, saying: "Directly and with a counter-question, / distinguishing and answering by setting aside (and so on down to) / all are undeclared."

5.16

Regarding the Tathāgata's four kinds of discourse: First is answering in accordance with the question, which is called direct. For example, if asked: "Do all sentient beings undergo birth and death?", one should answer directly: "All undergo birth and death." Second is, if there is a questioner, asking back to make them answer, which is called counter-questioning. Third is extensively distinguishing for a questioner whose faculties are mature. For example, if asked: "Do all sentient beings die and then get reborn?", one should distinguish: "Those with defilements die and are reborn; those without defilements, having died, are not reborn." Fourth is setting aside the answer in order to subdue non-Buddhists. For example, if asked whether the body and defilements, or the egg and the hen, are earlier or later, one halts and does not answer. Just as the Sāṃkhya asserts existence and the Vaiśeṣika asserts non-existence, the various views of existence and non-existence held by non-Buddhists are all undeclared.

5.17

"When observing with wisdom, / their substantial nature cannot be apprehended; / because they cannot be expressed, / therefore I say they are without intrinsic nature."

5.18

This clarifies that correct wisdom observes that intrinsic nature does not exist, generally versifying the previous six gates of all phenomena being unproduced, and so on.

5.19

At that time, the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva Mahāmati (and so on down to) "the distinct characteristics of the practice of the srotāpanna."

5.20

Because fools above discriminate false phenomena and generate the lineage of the śrāvaka vehicle, and yet within the śrāvaka Dharma there are distinctions among the four fruits, Mahāmati therefore brought up the distinctions among the four fruits to inquire. "Practice" refers to causal practice; the causal practice cultivated by a srotāpanna is aimed directly at advancing toward the fruit of an arhat. Since faculties are sharp or dull, there are distinctions.

5.21

"May I and the other Bodhisattva-Mahāsattvas (and so on down to) universally cause sentient beings to all attain benefit."

5.22

The phrase "characteristics of expedient means" refers to the characteristics of the expedient means in the cultivation of the four fruits. Srotāpanna is translated here as "stream-enterer". It means that from the stage of an ordinary person, one cultivates the seven expedient means and gives rise to the eight patiences and eight knowledges, severing the eighty-eight delusions of discrimination under the four truths across the three realms. When one severs up to eighty-seven grades, it is called the approach to the first fruit; when the eighty-eight grades are exhausted, it is called the first fruit, newly entering the stream of noble persons, hence the name "stream-enterer". Sakṛdāgāmin is translated here as "once-returner". It means that having seen the path at the first fruit, one gives rise to the nine uninterrupted paths and nine liberation paths, severing the eighty-one grades of defilements of cultivation across the nine grounds of the three realms. Moreover, the nine grades of defilements of cultivation of the single ground of the desire realm together moisten seven rebirths. In the embodiment of the first fruit, severing up to the first five grades of the desire realm is called the approach to the second fruit; when the six grades are exhausted, it is called the second fruit. From this life's end, one must still go once to the heavens and come once to the human realm to sever the remaining three grades of delusions; therefore, it is called "once-returner". Anāgāmin is translated here as "non-returner". It means that within the embodiment of the second fruit, one severs the nine grades of defilements of cultivation of the desire realm: reaching the end of the eighth grade is called the approach to the third fruit; reaching the end of the ninth grade is called the third fruit. Once going to the heavens of the form realm, one does not return to take birth in the desire realm; hence it is called "non-returner". Those of the three fruits above are called "those in training". Arhat has three translations here: first, "slayer of thieves"; second, "unproduced"; third, "worthy of offerings". It means that within the embodiment of the third fruit, one severs the seventy-two grades of delusions abandoned by cultivation across the eight grounds of the upper two realms; severing up to the seventy-first grade is called the approach to the fourth fruit; when the seventy-two grades are exhausted, it is called the fourth fruit of arhat, the stage of no-more-learning. Therefore, it is merely the exhaustion of ordinary sentiments, with no separate noble understanding. Bodhisattvas attain this skillfulness to teach such śrāvaka Dharma and such bodhisattva Dharma for sentient beings, causing them to realize the selflessness of persons and phenomena, purify the obstacles of defilement and knowledge, thoroughly comprehend the characteristics of the grounds, reach the realm realized by the Tathāgata, and attain the Buddha's Dharma-body and wealth of Dharma, endlessly benefiting beings. Because there is such benefit, he requested the Tathāgata to explain the distinctions of the four fruits.

5.23

The Buddha said: "Listen attentively! I shall explain it for you (and so on down to) the distinctions are three, namely: lower, middling, and superior."

5.24

Above, he asked about the various srotāpannas and the practice of the srotāpanna. Here, the Buddha answers with the fruits of the various srotāpannas; because the expressions mutually illuminate each other, and because sharpness and dullness are not the same, there are these three.

5.25

"Mahāmati! The lower ones, among the various states of existence (and so on down to) the superior ones enter nirvāṇa right in this life."

5.26

"Reborn seven times" means that the nine grades of innate defilements of the single ground of the desire realm together moisten seven rebirths. The first grade moistens two rebirths, the next three grades each moisten one rebirth, the next two grades together moisten one rebirth, and the last three grades together moisten one rebirth. This clarifies that the extremely dull srotāpanna has not yet severed the defilements of the desire realm, so through seven returns among humans and devas they attain the arhat [fruit]. It is like a venomous snake biting a person: after seven steps, they die. Why not four or six? Because of its great power. Why not eight? Because of the power of the poison. By analogy, why is the srotāpanna not reborn six times? Because the power of defilements is strong. Why not eight rebirths? Because untainted karma has matured. Those of middling capacity attain the arhat fruit of nirvāṇa in three or five rebirths. Those of superior capacity attain the arhat fruit right in this one life, termed the srotāpanna who enters cessation in the present; it is not said that they pass through the intermediate two fruits.

5.27

"Mahāmati! These three kinds of persons sever three kinds of fetters (and so on down to) attain the fruit of an arhat."

5.28

This means that although the srotāpanna has three differences of sharpness and dullness, they all sever three kinds of fetters. Grasping at a self and what belongs to a self regarding the five appropriated aggregates is called identity view, which is the first fetter. Vacillating and unresolved regarding the truth of the principles, doubting between the Buddha and non-Buddhists without knowing which is correct, is the second fetter. Following along with the improper precepts and prohibitions of non-Buddhists regarding perverted views, grasping them as supreme and able to attain purity, is the third fetter. Question: Having already permanently severed all defilements to be abandoned by seeing the path, one attains the fruit of a srotāpanna; why is it only said that these three kinds of persons sever the three fetters? Answer: Because they subsume what is supreme; that is, these three kinds of fetters are most prominent in obstructing the attainment of liberation. Why is this? Due to the view of individuality (satkāyadṛṣṭi), one grasps the five aggregates as self and what belongs to self, giving rise to deep craving and pleasure; therefore, toward the mass of great suffering one does not generate revulsion, and toward supreme liberation one has no aspiration to proceed. Or there may be sentient beings who have already set out toward liberation, yet due to attachment to rules and rituals and to doubt, being perversely attached to wrong paths and doubting the correct path, they achieve perverse renunciation or improper renunciation. Furthermore, these three fetters are the cause of delusion regarding the knowable object, the cause of delusion regarding view, and the cause of delusion regarding the antidote. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra states: "Severing the three fetters is called the fruit of stream-enterer; attenuating craving, hatred, and delusion is called the fruit of once-returner; severing permanently the five lower fetters is called the fruit of non-returner; severing permanently the five higher fetters is called the fruit of arhat; causing all phenomena of origination to become phenomena of cessation is called pratyekabuddha bodhi; permanently severing the continuity of all latent tendencies is called unexcelled, complete enlightenment." These all selectively cite the essentials according to the common teaching. As for "superior and most supreme advancement attaining the arhat," it means that the fetters severed by the srotāpanna are divided into nine grades, and the wisdom that can sever the fetters is also divided into nine grades. When a beginner's wisdom is weak, it is called the lowest of the low wisdom, which can sever the highest of the high fetters; when long-cultivated wisdom is distinct, it is called the highest of the high wisdom, which can sever the lowest of the low fetters, attaining the arhat fruit of nirvāṇa.

5.29

"Mahāmati! Identity view is of two kinds (and so on down to) seeing the selflessness of persons, they immediately abandon it."

5.30

The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: "Among the ten defilements in general and particular—craving, anger, ignorance, conceit, doubt, identity view, extreme view, wrong view, view-attachment, and attachment to rules and rituals—six apply to both the innate and the conceptually arisen, because both can arise through spontaneous reflection. Doubt, wrong view, and the two attachments—these four—are purely conceptually arisen; they only arise by relying on the influence of evil companions and perverted doctrines, through one's own deliberative examination." The sūtra states that identity view is of two kinds: innate and conceptually arisen. It is just as, relying on the nature of dependent origination, the various natures of imagined attachment arise. Just as relying on the innate there is the conceptually arisen, relying on the five aggregates one gives rise to the conceptualized identity view; because that conceptualization is unreal, being neither an existing nor a non-existing phenomenon, fools arbitrarily grasp at it. It is like there being no water in a mirage, yet deer pressed by thirst falsely form the conception of water. This conceptually arisen identity view, due to the absence of wisdom, grasps at self and what belongs to self in long-standing association. The srotāpanna contemplates that although there are the five aggregates combined to form this person, therein there is no self. Causing careful contemplation, they see the selflessness of persons and immediately abandon it, severing the conceptually arisen identity view.

5.31

"Mahāmati! Innate identity view (and so on down to) craving does not arise; this is called the mark of identity view."

5.32

This means that one can universally observe that one's own body and other bodies are equal; that the skandhas of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, together with the skandha of form, possess names but lack substantial reality and have no self-nature. Observing that the form skandha is created from the four great elements and arises through their mutual causal interaction—since there is no controller among the four great elements, who could aggregate them to constitute form? The form skandha, though material, is already empty; how much more so the other four skandhas such as feeling, which lack material form—how could they not be empty! Observing in this way, one clearly sees that both existence and non-existence are false and unreal, and that the five skandhas lack substantial reality, so that the view of an existing self is immediately severed. As a rule, whoever harbors greed does so because of the view of an existing self; having abandoned the view of an existing self, from where could greed arise? Hence the Lotus Sūtra says, “The cause of all sufferings has greedy desire as its root.” Because greed does not arise, this is called the mark of severing the view of an existing self.

5.33

“Mahāmati, as for the mark of doubt, because one clearly sees the marks in the Dharma one has realized […] this is called the mark of doubt.”

5.34

This means that because one clearly sees the marks in the four noble truths one has realized, and because one is definitively able to sever the two kinds of false conceptual views of an existing self, doubt has no basis from which to arise; nor does one give rise to the notion of a great teacher toward heavenly Māras, heterodox paths, or ordinary beings. Giving rise to pure view is called the mark of severing doubt.

5.35

“Mahāmati, why is it that a srotaāpanna does not grasp at precepts and vows […] this is called the mark of grasping at precepts and vows.”

5.36

This means that the srotaāpanna does not grasp at precepts for taking rebirth in the future; observing that wherever there is rebirth there are sufferings, they do not seek the pleasures of a rebirth destination. As for those who grasp: all foolish ordinary beings seek the pleasures of the five desires within the three realms of existence, practicing asceticism and maintaining precepts with diligence, wishing to be born there. Such was Nanda maintaining precepts for the sake of female form, which is an example of this class. The srotaāpanna does not grasp at the pleasures of the five desires in a future rebirth destination, but only seeks the non-conceptual Dharma of the supreme, undefiled truth of the four noble truths that they have realized, and by skillful means receives and maintains the practice of the correct precepts. This is called the mark of severing the grasping at precepts and vows.

5.37

“Mahāmati, because the srotaāpanna abandons the three fetters […] therefore they abandon the former, but not the greed for nirvāṇa.”

5.38

Ordinary beings are unable to abandon the three fetters and do not comprehend the selflessness of persons because, on account of the view of an existing self, they protect this self. They crave fame and profit to glorify the self, are angered by disagreeable circumstances for fear of harm to the self, and out of foolish delusion mistakenly and unreasonably reckon and calculate. They do not know that the five skandhas are completely devoid of a master that is the self; there is only the form of the physical body and the mind of false discrimination, which from beginningless time, by the power of causes and conditions, arise and perish moment by moment in unbroken succession. Like trickling water or flickering lamp flames, the temporary combination of body and mind appears as one and appears as permanent. The foolish and ordinary, failing to perceive this, grasp it as a self, and therefore give rise to the various fetters. When the srotaāpanna observes as above that the five skandhas are devoid of a master and abandons the three fetters, they leave behind greed, hatred, and delusion. Ordinary beings crave the five desires, while śrāvakas crave world-transcending nirvāṇa; hence it is said that greed is of many kinds. Lust for female form being the most intense, it is specifically stated that they abandon entanglement in lust; and because they obtain the bliss of correct absorption in samādhi, they are not yet able to sever the greed for nirvāṇa. Those of the Bodhisattva Vehicle, however, are able to abandon both kinds of greed.

5.39

“Mahāmati, what is the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin […] and enters parinirvāṇa? This is called a sakṛdāgāmin.”

5.40

Those who do not comprehend the marks of form give rise to discrimination of form. The sakṛdāgāmin observes that the various marks of form arise from false discrimination; therefore, after returning once to the realms of humans and devas, they skillfully cultivate dhyāna and wisdom, the view of self does not arise, and having reached the limit of suffering, they attain nirvāṇa. Therefore they are called a sakṛdāgāmin.

5.41

“Mahāmati, what is the fruit of the anāgāmin […] and never returns again? This is called an anāgāmin.”

5.42

The anāgāmin is also said to have “emerged from the mire of desire,” because the afflictions of the desire realm are like mire. The anāgāmin has already emerged from the desire realm and is born without exception in the form realm. Observing that the nature of form in the three periods of time is unreal, they see that wherever there is rebirth there are the sufferings and faults of existence. Afflictive latencies do not arise, and having abandoned the fetters, they no longer return to take birth in the desire realm, exhausting all defilements right in the heavenly realms of form. Therefore they are called an anāgāmin.

5.43

“Mahāmati, as for the arhat […] discrimination is permanently exhausted; this is called an arhat.”

5.44

This means that the arhat cultivates the four dhyānas and the three samādhis, comprehends the eight liberations, partially realizes the ten powers, and has already accomplished the three vidyās and the six abhijñās; the false discriminations of the various sufferings provoked by the karmic instigation of afflictions are permanently extinguished. Therefore they are called an arhat.

5.45

Mahāmati said, “World-Honoured One, there are three kinds of arhats […] manifesting birth there.”

5.46

The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra and the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa explain: “There are four kinds of śrāvakas: first, those of definitive lineage, also called those who tend toward quiescence; second, the arrogant, who are ordinary beings who have attained the fourth dhyāna and consider themselves arhats; third, those who have retreated and subsequently aroused the mind of great awakening, also called those of indefinite lineage, such as the śrāvakas who received predictions in the Lotus assembly like Śāriputra and others, who are of this class; fourth, the responsive transformations who are not real, referring to Buddhas and bodhisattvas who manifest transformations to lead actual śrāvakas toward the Mahāyāna.” In the question posed by this sūtra, setting aside the arrogant, there are only three kinds; which one is being discussed? The Buddha told Mahāmati that the arhat who tends toward quiescence with a definitive lineage—who severs the four dwelling-places of afflictions, escapes the suffering of birth and death, and attains nirvāṇa—is the one intended, not the others. Those who retreated and then gave rise to the mind of great awakening, and those transformed by Buddhas who have previously aroused skillful, vast practices and vows to mature sentient beings, manifest birth as arhats there in order to adorn the Buddha lands and the retinues of the assemblies.

5.47

“Mahāmati, preaching various teachings in places of falsity […] because of the marks of having attained the fruits seen by one's own mind.”

5.48

This means that preaching various teachings for the sake of falsely discriminating sentient beings, the four fruits realized by severing afflictions, the dhyāna practitioners known according to reality, and the various dhyānas and samādhis are all inherently separated [from real existence]; they are merely the marks of having attained fruits falsely seen by one's own cittamatra!

5.49

“Mahāmati, if a srotaāpanna has the thought […] and the fetters would not be severed.”

5.50

This clarifies that when the first-fruit saint severs the fetters, they never give rise to the thought, ‘I am able to sever the fetters.’ If they were to give rise to this thought, there would be two faults: falling into the view of an existing self, and failing to sever the three fetters and so forth. By analogy, the remaining three fruits are also like this. Hence in the Vajracchedikā Sūtra, the Buddha asked: “Subhūti, can the srotaāpanna up to the arhat have the thought: ‘I have attained the four fruits of the srotaāpanna and so forth’?” Subhūti answered in each case: “No, World-Honoured One. If they were to have this thought, they would be clinging to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life span.” Although the provisional vehicle is said to be dim and inferior, if they did not leave behind coarse, false thoughts, they could not sever birth and death of fragmented parts either.

5.51

“Furthermore, Mahāmati, if one wishes to transcend the dhyānas, the immeasurables […] because they do not depart from mind.”

5.52

This means that if one wishes to transcend the śrāvaka dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, and the four formless absorptions of the formless realm, and attain the Tathāgata’s samādhi, one must depart from the marks of one's own mind’s false discrimination regarding the three realms. Mahāmati, the ultimate fruit of the śrāvaka takes the absorption of the cessation of perception and feeling as the culmination. If one says that this transcends cittamatra, it is not so. Why is that? Because the falsely discriminating mind is not yet extinguished.

5.53

Then the World-Honoured One spoke the verse again: / “The dhyānas and the immeasurables, / The formless samādhis, / And the cessation of perception and feeling, / Are mind-only and cannot be apprehended.”

5.54

“The dhyānas” refers to the four dhyānas. “The immeasurables” refers to kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity: the four immeasurable minds that liberate sentient beings. “The formless samādhis” refers to the four formless absorptions. “The cessation of perception and feeling” refers to the complete quiescence and cessation of feeling and perception in the four dhyānas and four formless absorptions. All are cittamatra alone; none of them exist, hence it is said, “They are mind-only and cannot be apprehended.”

5.55

“The fruits of stream-enterer and once-returner, / The non-returner and the arhat— / All such holy ones / Falsely exist reliant upon mind.”

5.56

Next, it clarifies that the four fruits also do not depart from the cittamatra of false discrimination; hence it says that all such holy ones falsely exist reliant upon mind. The Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment says, “Because there is false karma, one falsely perceives transmigration; those who detest transmigration falsely perceive nirvāṇa.”

5.57

“The meditator and the object of meditation, / Severing delusion and seeing the noble truths— / These are all false discrimination; / When fully known, one is liberated.”

5.58

The first verse clarified the Dharma that is cultivated; the second verse clarified the persons capable of realization. This third verse clarifies both subject and object together: neither departs from the cittamatra of false discrimination. If one is awakened in accordance with reality, it is for the sake of falsely conceptualized birth and death that nirvāṇa is spoken of; since the birth and death to be remedied does not exist, the remedying nirvāṇa is also dispensed with, and therefore one attains all the liberations of a bodhisattva.

5.59

“Furthermore, Mahāmati, there are two kinds of awakening-cognitions […] and the cognition that establishes based on grasping marks, discrimination, and adherence.”

5.60

Following the statement in the previous verse that “when fully known, one is liberated,” since there are instances of knowing and awakening that do not lead to liberation, the two kinds of awakening-cognitions are presented to distinguish the superior from the inferior. That is to say, observing and knowing the twofold selflessness of persons and dharmas is correct awakening-cognition. Failing to know the twofold emptiness of self in persons and dharmas, grasping marks, adhering to them, and establishing the existence of a self—such comprehension is incorrect awakening-cognition, and cannot lead to liberation.

5.61

“As for the cognition of observation, it means observing all dharmas […] you should study and cultivate such observation of dharmas. What is the cognition that establishes based on grasping marks, discrimination, and adherence? […] these are called the marks of the two kinds of awakening-cognitions.”

5.62

Ordinary beings reckon and adhere to the nature and marks of the great elements, falsely discriminating them, and through the five-part syllogism of proposition, reason, and example, establish what is unreal and false. These are called the marks of the two kinds of awakening-cognitions, incorrect and correct. The Tathāgata removes a peg with a peg: just as he previously refuted the heterodox reckonings, he also set forth the three-membered inference and the five-part syllogism.

5.63

“When a bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows the marks of this cognition […] radiating light that illuminates a hundred Buddha worlds.”

5.64

If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva realizes that the false is none other than the true, knows the marks of these two kinds of awakening-cognition, comprehends the emptiness of persons and dharmas, and realizes that the self cannot be apprehended, then with non-conceptual, signless cognition, they skillfully observe at the stage of resolve and practice prior to the bhūmis; they immediately enter the first bhūmi and attain the hundred samādhi doors such as the Mahāyāna illumination, and by their superior power see a hundred Buddhas, up to their light illuminating a hundred Buddha worlds. Thus the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: “When a bodhisattva enters the first bhūmi, they realize ten times one hundred doors of illumination: first, in a single instant, they realize one hundred samādhis; second, with the pure divine eye, they see one hundred Buddha lands; third, with supernormal powers, they can shake one hundred Buddha worlds; fourth, they can travel to one hundred Buddha worlds to teach and transform sentient beings; fifth, with one body they can manifest one hundred varieties of physical forms, allowing sentient beings to see them; sixth, they can mature one hundred varieties of sentient beings to be transformed; seventh, if for benefit, they can retain their body and abide in the world for one hundred kalpas; eighth, they can know the events of one hundred kalpas in the past and future; ninth, with wisdom, they can enter one hundred doors of illumination of the Dharma with thorough penetration; tenth, with their body they can behold retinues of one hundred varieties. On the remaining bhūmis, these increase manifoldly.”

5.65

“Skillfully capable of comprehending the marks of the successively higher bhūmis […] the supreme bliss of the samādhi of one's own realm of realization.”

5.66

This means that from the second bhūmi, the Stainless, up to the Tathāgata bhūmi, all consist in accomplishing the ten inexhaustible vows within the first bhūmi. The matter is seen in sūtras such as the Avataṃsaka, and the remaining meanings are clear in the sūtra text itself.

5.67

“Furthermore, Mahāmati, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should skillfully comprehend the great elements and the forms derived from them.”

5.68

Because heterodox paths previously reckoned that there is a nature of the four great elements that creates the four great physical forms, the bodhisattva is next urged to skillfully comprehend the great elements and the forms derived from them, so as to know their lack of reality.

5.69

“How does one comprehend them? Mahāmati, […] abiding in the state of reality, they accomplish the mark of non-arising.”

5.70

Regarding 'non-arising', generally speaking there are two kinds: first, the non-arising of principle, because the pariniṣpanna-svabhāva originally does not arise; second, the non-arising of phenomena, because the marks of conditioned arising are themselves non-arising. As for 'abiding in the state of reality, they accomplish the mark of non-arising', it means that by observing that the three realms are only manifestations of one's own mind, and departing from the ātman and ātmīya, one can realize that both principle and phenomena are non-arising.

5.71

“Mahāmati, how do those great elements create form? […] forms derived from the great elements arise.”

5.72

This explains that the non-Buddhists falsely conceptualize the four great elements as producing the created forms. That is to say, their parikalpa conceptualizes the nature of moisture as the water element, which produces the internal and external water realms: internally, blood, sweat, and bodily fluids; externally, rivers, seas, and springs. They conceptualize the nature of burning and maturing as the fire element, which produces the internal and external fire realms: internally, the body's contained warmth; externally, the burning of the ten thousand things. They conceptualize the nature of blowing and motion as the wind element, which produces the internal and external wind realms: internally, the breath and motion; externally, the whistling of all sounds. They conceptualize the nature of material delimitation as the earth element, which produces the internal and external earth realms: internally, skin, flesh, sinews, and bones; externally, plains, wetlands, and hills. Through parikalpa, they conceptualize solidity, moisture, warmth, and motion as existing apart from space. Because of their grasp of erroneous truths, they do not understand that the five skandhas are empty, unreal aggregations and fundamentally devoid of svabhāva, asserting instead that they are produced through the great elements creating form. Therefore, above, the Buddha addressed the bodhisattvas, telling them that they should thoroughly understand this.

5.73

"Mahāmati! Consciousness, through clinging to various [...] takes birth in succession among the remaining destinies."

5.74

"Consciousness" refers to the deluded consciousness among the five skandhas mentioned above. It is formed through delusion regarding the true mind, having attachment to various verbalized cognitive objects as its immediate cause. Creating karma and undergoing birth, it continues uninterruptedly across the various destinies. One should know that the internal body and external objects, the four great elements and the five skandhas, are merely manifestations of the discriminating cittamatra.

5.75

"Mahāmati! The forms created by earth and the rest have the great elements as their cause [...] are the discriminations of non-Buddhists, not what I proclaim."

5.76

It is not that the four great elements serve as the causes for the great elements; rather, they are all manifested by the mind. Hence the conclusion states that these characteristics of the great elements creating form are the false vikalpa of non-Buddhists.

5.77

"Furthermore, Mahāmati! I shall now explain the essential characteristics of the five skandhas [...] not the noble ones."

5.78

From here below, he again refutes the five skandhas as all being empty and lacking svabhāva characteristics; it is not solely the form skandha and the four great elements that are unreal.

5.79

"The noble ones only state that they are produced like an illusion [...] these are called the svabhāva characteristics of the skandhas."

5.80

This means that although the noble ones perceive the five skandhas, they thoroughly realize that they are unreal and merely nominal designations, free from difference or non-difference, like an illusion or a dream. Thus the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra* states: "When a bodhisattva mahāsattva practices the perfection of wisdom, he knows as it truly is that form is like a mass of foam, its nature not solid; he knows as it truly is that feeling is like a floating bubble, deceptive, unstable, quickly arising and quickly perishing; he knows as it truly is that perception is like a mirage, where water cannot be found, yet due to false thirst and desire this perception arises; he knows as it truly is that formations are like a plantain tree, where, if stripped leaf by leaf, nothing substantial can be found; he knows as it truly is that consciousness is like an illusory creation, nominally designated through the confluence of conditions, appearing to exist in form but lacking reality; therefore the five skandhas have no separate existence." Not understanding the realm realized by the Tathāgata, perceiving skandha dharmas to exist, and clinging to discriminations that constantly appear before oneself—this is called parikalpa regarding the svabhāva characteristics of the skandhas.

5.81

"Mahāmati! Such discrimination you should abandon [...] like the great earth universally benefiting all sentient beings."

5.82

"Tranquil dharmas" refers to the dharmatā of all phenomena, which from the very beginning has never had the characteristic of arising. The rest of the meaning is as in the text.

5.83

"Furthermore, Mahāmati! There are four kinds of nirvāṇa."

5.84

Above, he explained awakened wisdom in order to reveal the superiority and inferiority of generated virtues. Here, he explains nirvāṇa to discern the correctness or error of revealed virtues. These are called the fruitional virtues of the twofold parāvṛtti of bodhi and nirvāṇa.

5.85

"What are the four? They are the nirvāṇa of the non-nature of all phenomena's svabhāva [...] are not what I proclaim."

5.86

Non-Buddhists conceptualize that the substantial essence of all phenomena exists, which is called "svabhāva", and later eliminate it as nonexistent, which is called "non-nature", taking the unmanifest principle (pradhāna) as nirvāṇa. Furthermore, they conceptualize that the characteristics of all phenomena exist, which is called "the nature of manifold characteristics", and later contemplate them as nonexistent, which is called "non-nature", taking the spiritual self (puruṣa) as nirvāṇa. Moreover, they generally conceptualize that both nature and characteristics exist, which is called "the nature of self-characteristics", and likewise later contemplate them as nonexistent, which is called "non-nature", taking false awareness as nirvāṇa. The above three kinds specifically present the views of non-Buddhists. Furthermore, severing the continuity in the five skandhas and the six destinies and taking the selflessness of persons as nirvāṇa is the nirvāṇa of the two vehicles. Because they perceive the five skandhas to exist, they are also like the non-Buddhists. Hence the *Śūraṅgama Sūtra* states that those śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who fall into fixed natures all "deviate far from perfect penetration and turn their backs on the city of nirvāṇa."

5.87

"Mahāmati! What I proclaim is that the cessation of the consciousness that discriminates jñeya is called nirvāṇa."

5.88

Previously it was said that realizing the realm of self-cognized wisdom and transforming the underlying ālayavijñāna is great nirvāṇa. Furthermore, it said: "When the svabhāva-vāsanā of all consciousnesses, the ālayavijñāna, the manovijñāna, and the habit energy of views have been transformed, I and all Buddhas call it nirvāṇa." Here again, it specifically says that the cessation of the consciousness that discriminates cognitive objects (jñeya) is called nirvāṇa. Leaving aside the difference between general and specific designations, both mean that the habit-seeds and active manifestations of all consciousnesses are extinguished together. This can be seen in the following question and answer.

5.89

Mahāmati said, "World-Honoured One! Do you not establish eight kinds of consciousness? [...] the seven consciousnesses are able to arise."

5.90

The Tathāgata said: "The cessation of discriminating consciousness is called nirvāṇa." Mahāmati doubted that this differed from the previous explanation, so he asked: "Do you not establish eight kinds of consciousness? Why then do you speak solely of the cessation of the consciousness of jñeya, and not of the cessation of all remaining seven consciousnesses?" The Buddha told Mahāmati: "Because that manovijñāna pervades the three natures, gives rise to afflictions, and creates karma, serving as the cause for all the consciousnesses and conditioning external objects, the remaining seven kinds of consciousness arise in dependence upon it. If the manovijñāna ceases, then the remaining consciousnesses will not arise."

5.91

"Mahāmati! The manovijñāna discriminates cognitive objects [...] deliberates and follows along, having no separate substantial characteristic."

5.92

This means that when the sixth consciousness cognizes objects and generates conceptual clinging, it gives rise to the three habit energies, perfuming and augmenting the ālayavijñāna; thereby, the seventh manas-consciousness together with it grasps at an ātman and ātmīya, perpetually deliberating, continuously following along, having no separate substantial characteristic.

5.93

"With the storehouse consciousness as cause and as objective condition [...] the mental aggregates arise, reciprocally serving as causes."

5.94

Furthermore, because the fundamental consciousness serves as cause and transforms into the sense faculties, body, seeds, and receptacle world as objective conditions, it is said: "Clinging to the cognitive objects manifested by one's own mind, the mental aggregates arise." This means that from seeds active manifestations arise, and from active manifestations seeds are generated; active manifestations and seeds lack svabhāva, like a sheaf of reeds, mutually serving as cause. Hence it is said: "reciprocally serving as causes."

5.95

"Mahāmati! Just as ocean waves [...] therefore, when the manovijñāna ceases, the seven consciousnesses also cease."

5.96

Just as waves in the ocean mutually push and pull each other, they are also mutually generated. Visible forms, sounds, scents, tastes, and tangibles are the winds of the cognitive objects manifested by one's own mind, which blow upon and stir the consciousnesses to arise and cease from thought-moment to thought-moment in the same manner. Therefore it is said that when the manovijñāna ceases, the remaining seven consciousnesses also cease.

5.97

At that time, the World-Honoured One reiterated this in verse:
"I do not through svabhāva,
Or through characteristics, construct."

5.98

This verses the above four kinds of nirvāṇa of the non-Buddhists, meaning that I do not regard the cessation of svabhāva, or of created characteristics, or the unmanifest principle and so forth, as nirvāṇa.

5.99

"The cessation of the consciousness that discriminates objects—
Such is proclaimed as nirvāṇa."

5.100

This verses the cessation of the consciousness that falsely perceives cognitive objects as being the Tathāgata's nirvāṇa.

5.101

"The manovijñāna is the cause for the mind,
The mind is the object of the manas;
Due to cause and objective condition,
The consciousnesses arise in dependence."

5.102

This verses the eight consciousnesses reciprocally serving as causes for one another.

5.103

"Just as when a great torrent is exhausted,
Waves then do not arise;
So when the manovijñāna ceases,
The manifold consciousnesses do not arise."

5.104

Just as when the flow is exhausted there are no waves, this serves as an analogy for the cessation of the manovijñāna, whereby the remaining seven consciousnesses also do not arise. This verses the analogy and its doctrinal application above. Question: Previously it was said that the non-Buddhists state that the cessation of the continuous consciousness grasping objects is the cessation of the beginningless continuous consciousness. It was also said that the śrāvakas falsely conceptualize the future cessation of faculties and objects as nirvāṇa, since when faculties and objects cease, consciousness also does not arise. Now it is said that when the manovijñāna ceases, the manifold consciousnesses do not arise; how does this differ from those non-Buddhists and the two vehicles? Answer: The non-Buddhists see that at the destruction of the body and the end of life, the six consciousnesses do not grasp objects, not knowing that this is merely because deluded conditions have separated; they conceptualize that the cessation of the continuous six consciousnesses is the cessation of the beginningless continuous consciousness, falling into the annihilation view. Although for the two vehicles future faculties and objects cease, for the continuous six consciousnesses only the active manifestations cease, while the habit-seeds have not actually ceased. Here, it means that when the continuity of the manifold habit-seeds of the manovijñāna within the ālayavijñāna is forever extinguished, the remaining seven consciousnesses also cease accordingly; therefore, it is not the same.

5.105

"Furthermore, Mahāmati! I shall now explain [...] and will no longer grasp at the falsely conceptualized characteristics."

5.106

Because it was stated above that the cessation of the consciousness of discriminating jñeya through parikalpa is called nirvāṇa, here he directly explains the particular and general characteristics of extinguishing the parikalpa consciousness, in order to enable all bodhisattvas to understand that it is unreal, transcend all parikalpa to reach the Tathāgata's realm, realize that the dharmas and views of non-Buddhists do not arise, be free from subject-object discrimination, and no longer falsely conceptualize within pratītyasamutpāda.

5.107

"Mahāmati! What are the differentiated characteristics of parikalpita-svabhāva? [...] the differentiated characteristics of parikalpita-svabhāva."

5.108

He asks and enumerates the names of the twelve kinds of false discriminations, the meanings of which are explained below.

5.109

"What is verbal discrimination? [...] This is called verbal discrimination."

5.110

Clinging to various sounds, words, and phrases, taking them to possess real nature, is called verbal discrimination.

5.111

"What is discrimination of what is expressed? [...] This is called discrimination of what is expressed."

5.112

Conceptualizing that the five dharmas and three svabhāvas exist is called discrimination of what is expressed.

5.113

"What is discrimination of characteristics? [...] This is called discrimination of characteristics."

5.114

Conceptualizing the existence of the characteristics of the four great elements is called discrimination of characteristics.

5.115

"What is discrimination of wealth? [...] This is called discrimination of wealth."

5.116

Conceptualizing that wealth and gain exist and clinging to them with stinginess and greed is called discrimination of wealth.

5.117

"What is discrimination of svabhāva? [...] This is called discrimination of svabhāva."

5.118

Such as conceptualizing the natures of the four great elements, saying that the nature of earth is solid, the nature of water is moist, the nature of fire is hot, and the nature of wind is moving, down to the absolute and conventional having distinct svabhāvas—this is called discrimination of svabhāva.

Linked texts (1)

注大乘入楞伽經 — Classical Chinese