俱舍論疏 27

English (machine translation) 27

Language: English

27.2

Chapter Seven: Exposition of the Knowledges (Jñānanirdeśa), Part Two

[On] the treatise's: "Having thus elucidated … up to: now shall be demonstrated": the following is the second major division of this chapter, explaining the merits accomplished through knowledge. Within this, there are two: first, the unshared [qualities]; second, the shared [qualities].

27.4

[On] the treatise's: "Therein, first to be elucidated are the Buddha's unshared qualities": the following half-verse generally explains the eighteen unshared dharmas (āveṇika-dharma).

27.5

[On] the verse: "From: The treatise states … up to: therefore called unshared": this explains the name 'unshared,' which can be understood according to the text.

27.6

[On] the treatise's: "Now, what is the distinction among the Buddha's ten powers?": The following is a specific explanation. Within this, there are five: first, explaining the powers; second, fearlessness; third, mindfulness foundations; fourth, great compassion; fifth, the similarities and differences among Buddhas. Under explaining the powers, there are: first, explaining intellectual power; second, explaining physical power. The following two and a half lines of verse are the first: explaining intellectual power.

27.7

[On the phrase in] the treatise, "From 'the treatise says' up to 'having the nature of the ten knowledges'": This explains the first power. Herein there are two [parts]: first, presenting the intrinsic nature of the power; second, analysis through doctrinal categories. This [passage] presents its intrinsic nature. The Nyāyānusāra says: "On what basis is the name of this power established? The Buddha himself said in the sūtras: 'Monks, listen attentively! The Tathāgata truly knows the possible as the possible; the Tathāgata truly knows the impossible as the impossible,' and so forth at length. The knowledge that the intrinsic nature and function of all phenomena are logically certain to exist is called the knowledge of the possible. The knowledge that the intrinsic nature and function of all phenomena are logically certain not to exist is called the knowledge of the impossible. This knowledge applies to both sentient and insentient objects, and it is not in contradiction with omniscience. Fearing that in a concise explanation those of lesser ability would find it difficult to understand, the remaining nine [powers] were extracted from it. As the Bhagavān himself broadly analyzed the meaning of the possible and the impossible in the Bahudhātuka-sūtra: 'That evil conduct of body and so forth should produce undesirable results is certainly possible; that it should produce desirable results is strictly impossible,' and so forth at length." According to the above treatise passage, everything that accords with principle is called 'the possible' (sthāna), and what does not accord with principle is called 'the impossible' (asthāna). It also says: "Does not the knowledge of the possible already know the impossible, and all knowledges of the impossible also know the possible? Why bother to state both names, 'possible' and 'impossible'? Although this is indeed true in principle, stating both is done because of the wish to refute the theory of uncaused origination (ahetuvāda), hence the term 'the possible' is spoken, and because of the wish to refute the theory of improper cause (viṣamahetuvāda), hence the term 'the impossible' is spoken. There is no fault in speaking of both on the basis of a single entity of knowledge. How is it known that within the single power of the possible and impossible, the other nine powers were extracted for fear that a concise [presentation] would be difficult to comprehend? Because the others all share the meaning of this power. That is to say, truly knowing that evil conduct can produce desirable ripening and good conduct can produce undesirable ripening is strictly impossible. Contrary to this, it is certainly possible. And so forth, up to: also truly knowing that improper attention (ayoniso-manasikāra) can attain the exhaustion of the outflows is strictly impossible; contrary to this, it is certainly possible. In each of these powers, I have briefly raised a corner to reveal the possible and the impossible. If one were to exhaust the matters, the discourse would be endless; therefore they should all be named powers of the possible and impossible. Fearing that a concise [presentation] would be difficult to comprehend, separate and different names were established (thus far the treatise text)."

27.8

[On the passage in] the treatise, "The second, ripening of karma... means excluding [the knowledges of] cessation and the path": This presents the intrinsic nature of the second power. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Unobstructed knowledge that properly distinguishes such types of karma as producing such types of fruitions of ripening is called the knowledge-power of the ripening of karma. Alternatively, it is called the knowledge-power of one's own karma, meaning unobstructed knowledge that properly distinguishes such types of fruition as brought about by the power of one's own created karma and cannot be given or taken away by wives, children, and so forth; that such types of karma inevitably bring about their own fruits and cannot be traded—this is called the knowledge-power of one's own karma."

27.9

[On the passage in] the treatise, "The third, the dhyānas, vimokṣas... means excluding the knowledge of cessation": This presents the intrinsic natures of the next four powers. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the intrinsic names of the dhyānas and so forth, their attainment, preparatory application, maintenance, attachment, purification, undefiled state, alignment with deterioration, maintenance, progress, factors of penetration, and so forth, is called the knowledge-power of the dhyānas and so forth. Furthermore, the Buddha himself spoke of the characteristics of this power, saying: 'Monks, listen attentively! The Buddha truly knows the defilement, purification, and stable establishment of the dhyānas, vimokṣas, samādhis, and samāpattis,' and so forth at length. 'Defilement' refers to what can obstruct the realization of the dhyānas and so forth; 'purification' refers to the purity of these very phenomena; the abiding of these pure phenomena is called 'stable establishment.' And so forth at length: 'Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the differences in the faculties and grades of sentient beings capable of attaining superior virtues is called the knowledge-power of the faculties, higher and lower.' Although there are intermediate faculties, since they depend on the superior and inferior and are subsumed within the superior and inferior, they are not separately shown. What phenomena are designated by the word 'faculty' here? They designate faith and so forth. In the overall continuum of those whose roots of good are severed, there are also past and future wholesome phenomena such as faith. Alternatively, they designate the mental faculty and so forth. Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the differences in the inclinations of sentient beings is called the knowledge-power of various inclinations, up to the differences in inclinations of delight. Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the differences in dispositions, latencies, and phenomenal natures produced by the repeated cultivation from beginningless time in the past of sentient beings is called the knowledge-power of various realms. 'Various realms' indicates the meaning of being distinct; 'not a single realm' indicates the meaning of plurality. It should be known that here 'realm' is a different name for disposition, latency, and phenomenal nature. Since these four powers together take conditioned phenomena as their object, among the ten knowledges they encompass only nine knowledges (thus far the treatise text)."

27.10

[On the passage in] the treatise, "The seventh, the paths leading to all destinies... having the ten knowledges as its nature": This explains the seventh [power]. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the causes and fruits of saṃsāra, as well as knowing the path to their cessation, is called the knowledge-power of the paths leading to all destinies. The intended meaning is to show that the Buddha can truly know the practices leading to saṃsāra and the practices leading to nirvāṇa. Within the practices leading to saṃsāra, there are those leading to the hells and up to those leading to the heavenly destinies, and within each there are further multiple kinds. The practices leading to nirvāṇa have the distinct paths of the three vehicles, and within each there are further multiple kinds. Based on a general designation, the single name 'paths leading to all destinies' is given (thus far the treatise text)."

27.11

[On the passage in] the treatise, "The eighth, mindfulness of past abodes... are all of the nature of conventional knowledge": The Nyāyānusāra says: "Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows the differences in past abodes of oneself and others is called the eighth power. Unobstructed knowledge that truly knows sentient beings' continuation of rebirth across various states of existence in future times is called the ninth power. A detailed analysis of these two is as found in the section on the six supernormal knowledges (thus far the treatise text)."

27.12

[On the passage in] the treatise, "The tenth, exhaustion of the outflows... having the ten knowledges as its nature": The Nyāyānusāra says: "In principle it must be so, because in analyzing its characteristics it states that unobstructed knowledge with respect to exhaustion and with respect to bringing about exhaustion are both called the knowledge-power of the exhaustion of outflows. Furthermore, the Buddha himself spoke of the characteristics of this power, saying: 'Monks, listen attentively! Because of the exhaustion of the Buddha's outflows, he personally manifests, penetrates, fully realizes, and experiences the undefiled liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom. He correctly knows for himself: "My births are exhausted,"' and so forth at length. These last three powers are precisely the three supernormal knowledges, because among the six supernormal knowledges these three are supreme. In the stage of non-learning they are established as the three knowledges (trividyā); in the body of the Tathāgata they are also called powers. Supernatural power and the divine ear, even if present in the Buddha's body, have no great utility; therefore they are not called powers. For instance, the divine eye can see the differences in ripening of sentient beings in good and bad destinies, and through this it can induce the arising of superior knowledge. It also correctly knows the karma that induces them; therefore the name 'knowledge of death and birth' is established. Supernatural power and the divine ear lack such great utility, and for this reason the two are not established as powers. However, the reason the power of [knowing] another's mind is not separately spoken of is that its meaning is already subsumed within the powers of faculties and so forth, because the minds and mental factors of others are contained within their faculties and so forth. Furthermore, the Bhagavān is endowed with all-knowledge, and has attained mastery also in treatises on the crafts and the like. Yet as far as the Buddha's work is concerned, it is already accomplished with these, and other knowledges have no distinct supreme utility therein; therefore, though existing, they are not separately spoken of. It is solely based on fully awakening to the ten kinds of knowables that what the Buddha ought to do is completely fulfilled. What are called the ten kinds of knowables? They are: the meaning of cause and non-cause among phenomena; the differences of karma and fruit in many scattered planes; the different grades of virtues in planes of concentration; the differences in faculties, inclinations, and realms of the sentient beings to be converted; the differences of cause and fruit between what is to be countered and the counteragents; the differences in experiences across past and future; and the differences in the expedients for dispassion and non-continuation. Merely by awakening to these, the Buddha's work is accomplished; whether others exist or not causes neither benefit nor harm; therefore only these ten obtain the name of powers. Furthermore, the Buddha contemplates... up to: by means of the tenth knowledge he contemplates the differences in the expedients for the realization of liberation by the beings to be converted." Following this, the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows, knowing the sentient beings to be converted along with the expedients for the exhaustion of outflows, is called the power of the exhaustion of outflows.

27.13

[On the passage in] the treatise, "Having analyzed the intrinsic nature... are called the eleven grounds": Below is the second [part], analysis through doctrinal categories: first, according to ground; second, according to physical basis; third, explaining the meaning of 'power'. This first [section] clarifies the distinctions according to ground. Because the five supernormal knowledges rely only on the four fundamental [dhyānas], therefore the eighth and ninth rely on the four dhyānas. The remaining text is easily understood and requires no tedious explanation.

27.14

[On the passage in] the treatise, "Having analyzed the relying grounds... the physical body of a male Buddha": Below is the second [section], clarifying the relying physical basis. It is only the physical body of a male Buddha in Jambudvīpa, because this alone can serve as the basis for the powers. Fascicle 30 of the Vibhāṣā says: "Regarding the applications of mindfulness: the knowledge-power of various inclinations and the knowledge-power of mindfulness of past abodes are only the application of mindfulness to phenomena; the knowledge-power of death and birth is only the application of mindfulness to the body; the knowledge-power of the exhaustion of outflows, if taking the realm of the exhaustion of outflows as object, is the application of mindfulness to phenomena, and if relying on the body in which outflows are exhausted, is the four applications of mindfulness. The remaining powers are all the four applications of mindfulness. (The commentary says: The knowledge-power of various inclinations only takes non-composite objects, and the application of mindfulness to phenomena only takes inclinations as object. The knowledge-power of mindfulness of past abodes only takes composite objects, and the application of mindfulness to phenomena takes all phenomena as object. As for the knowledge-power of death and birth, if fundamental, it is only the application of mindfulness to the body; if taken together with its retinue taking the future as object, it is the application of mindfulness to phenomena with composite objects. The phrase 'application of mindfulness to the body' refers to the fundamental one. The remaining powers generally apply to both general and distinct objects, hence they apply to all four applications of mindfulness. The rest of the text is intelligible.)"

27.15

[On the passage in] the treatise, "Having analyzed the relying physical basis, why are they called powers?... hence they are called powers": Below is the third [section], explaining the meaning of 'power'. The word 'unobstructed' means that the obstruction of ignorance, which would suppress the Buddha's knowledge and cause him not to know, is overcome; hence they are called powers.

27.16

On the Śāstra's statement, "Due to these ten powers [...] how many births, and so forth": this distinguishes the two vehicles and others as not being subsumed under the powers. Regarding "like Śāriputra rejecting a person seeking deliverance": in the past, when the Buddha was in the world, there was a man at the gate of Jetavana who sought deliverance by going forth. Śāriputra and the others observed and knew that this person had not planted the wholesome roots conducive to liberation for eighty thousand kalpas, and because he lacked the causes and conditions for going forth, they rejected him and would not deliver him. The man sighed with grief and would not give up seeking deliverance. Later, the Buddha came, saw him, and ordained him; preaching the Dharma to him, the man attained the fruits [of the path]. Śāriputra and others wondered at this and questioned the Buddha. The Buddha told them, "In the past, in the country of Nagarahāra, I was sweeping and sprinkling the streets with the people of this country and adorning all manner of offerings, wishing to invite the Tathāgata Dīpaṅkara to receive offerings. At that time, this person seeking deliverance entered the city to sell firewood. Learning of this matter, he immediately made a vow: 'I will collect more firewood to obtain money for offerings.' Going into the mountains, he was eaten by worms. On the verge of death, wishing to recite that Buddha's name, he forgot and could not recall it, and simply said: 'Namo to the one in the city whom they wish to welcome!'" This is called planting wholesome roots conducive to liberation. Although he generated this wholesome root in the past, because of the great distance in time, Śāriputra and the others could not observe or know it. "Furthermore, being unable to observe and know how many births at both limits—past and future—a pigeon pursued by a hawk has, and so forth": as the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The Buddha was dwelling in the Jetavana, walking in meditation in the late afternoon. At that time a hawk was chasing a pigeon, and the pigeon flew to the Buddha's side and stayed there. As the Buddha walked past, his shadow covered the pigeon's body; the pigeon's body became tranquil, its terror was immediately dispelled, and it made no further sound. Later, when Śāriputra's shadow reached the pigeon, it began to call out, trembling with fear as before. Śāriputra addressed the Buddha, saying: 'Both the Buddha's body and mine are free of the three poisons. For what reason did the pigeon become silent and no longer afraid when the Buddha's shadow covered it, whereas when my shadow covered it, the pigeon called out and trembled with fear as before?' The Buddha said: 'Your traces of the three poisons have not been extinguished; therefore, when your shadow covers it, its fear is not dispelled. Observe this pigeon's past-life conditions: for how many lives has it been a pigeon?' Śāriputra immediately entered the samādhi of the knowledge of past lives and observed that this pigeon had come from being a pigeon, through one, two, three lives, up to eighty thousand great kalpas, constantly having the body of a pigeon; beyond that, he could see no further. Śāriputra arose from samādhi and addressed the Buddha, saying: 'This pigeon has constantly had the body of a pigeon throughout eighty thousand great kalpas; prior to that, I can no longer know.' The Buddha said: 'If you cannot completely know the past lives, try observing the future lives: when will this pigeon be freed?' Śāriputra then entered the samādhi of the knowledge born of aspiration and observed that this pigeon through one, two, three lives, up to eighty thousand great kalpas, would not be freed from the body of a pigeon; beyond that, he likewise could not know. Arising from samādhi, he addressed the Buddha, saying: 'I see that this pigeon, from one life, two lives, up to eighty thousand great kalpas, will not be freed from the body of a pigeon; beyond that, I can no longer know. I do not know the limits of the past and future, and do not understand when this pigeon will be freed.' The Buddha told Śāriputra: 'This pigeon is beyond the limits knowable by the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. Subsequently, throughout great kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges, it will have the body of a pigeon. When its retributions are finished, it will obtain escape, wandering through the five destinies, and afterwards obtain human form. Passing through five hundred lives, it will then attain sharp faculties. At that time, a Buddha will deliver immeasurable asaṃkhyeyas of sentient beings and then enter parinirvāṇa without remainder. While the remnant Dharma remains in the world, this person will become an upāsaka observing the five precepts, will hear a monk praising the Buddha's virtues, and thereupon will first generate the mind [of bodhi], aspiring to become a Buddha. Afterward, throughout three asaṃkhyeyas, he will practice the six pāramitās, become complete in the ten stages, attain a Buddha body, and having delivered immeasurable sentient beings, enter parinirvāṇa without remainder.' At that time, Śāriputra repented before the Buddha and addressed the Buddha, saying: 'With respect to a single pigeon, I cannot even know its beginning and end, how much less so with all phenomena!'"

27.17

On the Śāstra's statement, "Such Buddhas, with respect to the knowable": the next single line of verse is the second part, explaining physical strength.

27.18

"The Śāstra says [...] immeasurable mental power": this explains the strength of the Buddha's body. Nārāyaṇa is the name of a deity, translated here as "human lineage". There are three different explanations: The first says: the Buddha's strength is equal to the strength of Nārāyaṇa. The second says: each and every bodily joint is equal to the strength of Nārāyaṇa. The third says: the physical strength is boundless, for if it were not so, it would be unable to support immeasurable mental power.

27.19

On the Śāstra's statement, "The Great Awakened One [...] strength has superiority and inferiority": this clarifies the superiority and inferiority of strength among the three persons: the Great Awakened One, the Pratyekabuddha, and the Cakravartin. The joints of the Great Awakened One are interconnected like a coiled dragon; the joints of the Pratyekabuddha are interconnected like an unbroken chain; the joints of the Cakravartin are interconnected by hooking together.

27.20

On the Śāstra's statement, "What is the measure of the strength of Nārāyaṇa?": this is a question.

27.21

"The Śāstra says: 'Increasing ten times by ten [...] ten times each preceding one'": this is the answer. There are seven tiers of comparison: first, an ordinary elephant; second, a fragrant elephant; third, mahānagna (this is the name of a deity, translated here as 'form of the great road'); fourth, praskandin (also the name of a deity; 'pra' is translated as superior, and 'skandin' is translated as aggregate); fifth, varaṅga (also the name of a deity, translated here as excellent limb); sixth, cāṇūra (also the name of a deity, translated here as grasper); seventh, Nārāyaṇa (as explained previously). Across these seven tiers, each subsequent strength is ten times greater than the preceding one.

27.22

On the Śāstra's statement, "Some say the preceding six [...] make up a Nārāyaṇa": this recounts a different view. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Other masters say: this measure is equal to the strength of a thousand of the heavenly elephant-king Airāvaṇa. What is the measure of the strength of this elephant-king? When the Trāyastriṃśa devas are about to sport in the pleasure parks, the elephant-king, knowing this, manifests many heads with various adornments and goes to the celestial palaces. The celestial retinues number many thousands; having mounted him, they soar into space as easily as holding birch leaves, quickly arriving at the pleasure parks to enjoy themselves at will. The might and strength of the great heavenly elephant-king are like this; a thousand times this strength equals that of Nārāyaṇa" (this concludes the text of the treatise).

27.23

On the Śāstra's statement, "Among what has been said, only the [explanation of] 'many' is reasonable": the author of the treatise evaluates [the opinions], and the Nyāyānusāra agrees.

27.24

On the Śāstra's statement, "Such physical strength [...] exists separately apart from the seven": this clarifies the intrinsic nature of the strength. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 30, presents five explanations. The first says: when the four great elements are without imbalance, their superior increase is called physical strength, and their weakness is called physical debility. The second says: an increase of earth is called physical strength, and an increase of water is called physical debility. The third explanation says: an increase of heaviness is called physical strength, and an increase of lightness is called physical debility. The fourth says: apart from the seven derived tangible objects, there is a separate derived tangible object called physical strength and physical debility. The fifth, the evaluation [by the Vibhāṣā's compiler], says: one should state that the four great elements as well as derived tangibles are both the intrinsic nature of physical strength and physical debility. That is, if they are harmonious, both are called physical strength; if they are not harmonious, both are called physical debility. The Kośa's first explanation is not the fifth explanation of the Vibhāṣā. It could also correspond to the first two explanations of the Vibhāṣā concerning differences in the great elements, which are precisely the increase without imbalance, the increase of earth, and so on. Its subsequent explanation corresponds to the fourth. The Nyāyānusāra gives four interpretations. The first says: such physical strength has the tangible sensory base (spraṣṭavyāyatana) as its nature; this should generally be a distinction among various tangibles. This agrees with the Vibhāṣā's evaluator. The distinction among tangibles is precisely another name for the harmony of the four great elements and derived tangibles. The second says: it is solely a distinction of the great elements. This agrees with the former explanation in the Kośa. The third says: it is a derived tangible existing apart from the seven. This agrees with the latter explanation in the Kośa. The fourth says: strength is heaviness, and debility is lightness. This agrees with the third explanation of the Vibhāṣā. The Nyāyānusāra takes the Vibhāṣā's evaluator as correct, whereas the Kośa's intent is different. The treatise masters' intents being such, they cannot be reconciled.

27.25

On the Śāstra's statement, "What is the distinction among the Buddha's four grounds of fearlessness?": the following half-line of verse is the second part, explaining the grounds of fearlessness.

27.26

"The Śāstra says [...] like the seventh power": based on the powers, it derives the intrinsic nature of the grounds of fearlessness, which can be understood according to the text. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 31, says: "First is the fearlessness regarding full awakening. As a sūtra says: 'I am the fully awakened one regarding all phenomena. If there should be any śramaṇa, brāhmaṇa, deva, Māra, Brahmā, or anyone in the world who, in accordance with the Dharma, raises objections or reminds me that I am not fully awakened regarding such phenomena, there is no such possibility. Even if there were, I correctly see no ground for it; therefore, I attain security, fearlessness, and absence of dread. Proclaiming myself to hold the exalted position of the Great Sage, among the great assembly I roar the true lion's roar and turn the great wheel of Brahmā, which cannot be turned by any śramaṇa, brāhmaṇa, deva, Māra, Brahmā, or anyone in the world.' Second is the fearlessness regarding the perpetual exhaustion of all outflows. As a sūtra says: 'I have attained the perpetual exhaustion of all outflows. If there should be any śramaṇa, brāhmaṇa, deva, Māra, Brahmā, or anyone in the world who, in accordance with the Dharma, raises objections or reminds me that such outflows have not been perpetually exhausted, there is no such possibility. Even if there were,' up to detailed explanations. Third is the fearlessness regarding the exposition of obstructive dharmas. As a sūtra says: 'I explain to my disciples that obstructive dharmas, if defiled by them, will necessarily be obstructions. If there should be any śramaṇa, brāhmaṇa, deva, Māra, Brahmā, or anyone in the world who, in accordance with the Dharma, raises objections or reminds me that having these obstructive dharmas will deeply not be an obstruction, there is no such possibility,' up to detailed explanations. Fourth is the fearlessness regarding the exposition of the path to deliverance. As a sūtra says: 'I explain to my disciples that the path to deliverance, if cultivated, will necessarily lead out of suffering. If there should be any śramaṇa, brāhmaṇa, deva, Māra, Brahmā, or anyone in the world who, in accordance with the Dharma, raises objections or reminds me that cultivating such a path cannot lead out of suffering, there is no such possibility. Even if there were, I correctly see no ground for it; therefore, I attain security, fearlessness, and absence of dread,'" up to detailed explanations. It also says: "Thus, regarding the ten powers and four grounds of fearlessness spoken of, because each power subsumes the four grounds of fearlessness and each ground of fearlessness subsumes the ten powers, there are forty powers and forty grounds of fearlessness. However, that the first power, the tenth power, the third power, and the second power were previously said to be the grounds of fearlessness was stated in terms of their salient characteristics." The Nyāyānusāra states regarding their establishment: "For what reason are the grounds of fearlessness of the Buddhas only four? It is merely by this measure that the Buddha, the World-Honoured One's perfection of both his own and others' virtues is shown to be completely consummate. That is, the first ground of fearlessness reveals the perfection of the Buddha, the World-Honoured One's own wisdom; the second ground of fearlessness reveals the perfection of the Buddha, the World-Honoured One's own eradication; these two reveal the fulfillment of the Buddha's virtues of self-benefit. In order to reveal the World-Honoured One's perfection of virtues in benefiting others, the latter two grounds of fearlessness are further spoken of: the third ground of fearlessness averts going on wrong paths, and the fourth ground of fearlessness causes one to advance along the right path. That is, the Buddha everywhere explains obstructive dharmas to his disciples so that they may eradicate them, which is precisely the expedient means for cultivating the virtue of eradication. Furthermore, everywhere he explains the path to deliverance to his disciples so that they may practice correctly, which is precisely the expedient means for cultivating the virtue of wisdom. These two reveal the fulfillment of the Buddha's virtues of benefiting others. Merely by these four, corresponding to each case, the perfection of wisdom and eradication for both oneself and others is shown to reach consummation; therefore, only four kinds are established" (this concludes the text of the treatise).

27.27

On the Śāstra's 'How is it that regarding knowledge... their essence is just knowledge': this explains fearlessness. It is simply freedom from fright, not knowledge itself; but because it is accomplished through knowledge, it is termed knowledge. The Nyāyānusāra is also in agreement, stating: 'In principle it must indeed be so. Yet, in order to show that fearlessness takes knowledge as its immediate proximate cause, the essence of fearlessness is identified in terms of knowledge. Now, fearlessness means not being timid or frightened; because one possesses knowledge, one is not timid or frightened of others, and therefore knowledge can serve as the causal nature of fearlessness. Only the four wonderful knowledges of the Buddha are the causes of the four fearlessnesses: the Tathāgatas' wonderful knowledge of all dharmas and all aspects is the cause of the first fearlessness; the Tathāgatas' wonderful knowledge of the abandonment of all defilements together with residual traces is the cause of the second; and the Tathāgatas' wonderful knowledge of what harms and what benefits the assembly of disciples is the cause of the latter two fearlessnesses (the Śāstra passage cited above matches this Śāstra's text). Or alternatively, the essence of fearlessness is itself the four wonderful knowledges. Timidity is called fear; this means having no clear realization regarding dharmas, harbor fear and terror, and thus this fear arises. There is a proximate counteragent capable of opposing fear, and hence it is called fearlessness. [Objection:] Is it not the case that absence of knowledge is not the essence of fear? How then can one say that the essence of knowledge is itself fearlessness? (The author notes: The meaning of the objection here is: since fear is not itself non-knowledge, how can the essence of fearlessness be knowledge?) This criticism is not correct. Knowledge acts as a proximate counteragent to multiple phenomena, just as it is with freedom from doubt. That is, just as knowledge can serve as the proximate counteragent to non-knowledge, it also possesses the power of being the proximate counteragent to fright and fear; hence it receives the name "knowledge" and is also called "fearlessness." Just as it counteracts non-knowledge and is also able to counteract doubt—and thus receives the name "knowledge" and is also called "decisiveness"—so too, although the non-knowledge to be counteracted is not itself doubt, knowledge and freedom from doubt are two names with one essence. In this way, although non-knowledge is distinct from fear, the name "fearlessness" directly designates the essence of knowledge, because a single wholesome dharma can cut off multiple unwholesome dharmas. Some say: non-knowledge also encompasses the essence of fear, and therefore one should not raise an objection here. Question: What distinction is there between power and fearlessness? Answer: There is no distinction between them, as their essence is equally knowledge. However, based on different meanings regarding the essence of knowledge, one is named "power," and again according to a different meaning the name "fearlessness" is established: the cause of not yielding is called power, and the cause of not being timid or frightened is called fearlessness (and there are many such explanations),' as fully stated in that treatise.

27.28

On the Śāstra's 'How are the differences in characteristics of the Buddha's three applications of mindfulness?': the subsequent half-verse, thirdly, clarifies the applications of mindfulness.

27.29

From the Śāstra's 'The treatise says' down to 'the first application of mindfulness': this explains the first.

27.30

From the Śāstra's 'The assembly of disciples' down to 'the second application of mindfulness': this explains the second.

27.31

From the Śāstra's 'The assembly of disciples' down to 'the third application of mindfulness': this explains the third.

27.32

On the Śāstra's 'These three all take mindfulness and discernment as their essence': this identifies the essence of the three applications of mindfulness. Vibhāṣā 188 states: 'Question: When the Buddha teaches the Dharma, if everyone receives it with reverence, then there should not be three applications of mindfulness. If there are those who do not receive it with reverence, would the World-Honoured One not be raining the rain of the true Dharma on what is not a field and not a suitable vessel? In that case, the Buddha's teaching of the Dharma would be in vain. Answer: When the World-Honoured One teaches the Dharma to humans, he wishes to bring about understanding in humans. If humans should fail to understand, there are also devas capable of understanding it. Thus there are three applications of mindfulness, and yet the Buddha's teaching of the Dharma is not in vain. Why is that? Because humans do not understand, there are three applications of mindfulness; and because devas are able to understand, he is not raining the rain of the Dharma on what is not a field and not a suitable vessel.' The Nyāyānusāra states: 'That is, because he abides in correct mindfulness and correct knowing, he gives rise to neither joy nor distress toward the three objects (the quotation from the treatise ends here).'

27.33

On the Śāstra's 'Do all the great śrāvakas... unshared Buddha-dharmas?': this is a question. Since this also occurs among śrāvakas, why is it called unshared?

27.34

On the Śāstra's 'Because only the Buddha abandons it together with residual traces': this is the answer.

27.35

On the Śāstra's 'Or because the disciples... it is not extraordinary': this is the second explanation. That is, all disciples originally follow and belong to the Tathāgata; they do not follow and belong to the śrāvakas. That [the Buddha] gives rise to neither joy nor sorrow when they are compliant, rebellious, or both toward the Tathāgata may be called extraordinary. Since they originally do not belong to the śrāvakas, that [the śrāvakas] do not give rise to joy or sorrow when they are compliant, rebellious, or both toward the śrāvakas is not extraordinary.

27.36

On the Śāstra's 'Therefore it obtains the name "unshared" only in the Buddha': this summarizes and concludes the name.

27.37

On the Śāstra's 'How are the distinctions in characteristics of the great compassion of the Buddhas?': the following one verse, fourthly, clarifies the distinctions of great compassion.

27.38

From the Śāstra's 'The treatise says' down to 'just like ordinary compassion': within this passage there are three parts: first, identifying the essence; second, explaining the name; third, clarifying the difference from ordinary compassion. This is the first, identifying the essence of great compassion. Because it takes all sentient beings universally as its objective referent, it is not anāsrava knowledge; it is conventional knowledge.

27.39

On the Śāstra's 'Based on what meaning is this name "great compassion" established?': this is the second part, explaining the name. Within it there are two: first, the question; second, the answer. This is the question.

27.40

On the Śāstra's 'It is established with the name "great" based on five meanings': this indicates the five meanings.

27.41

On the Śāstra's 'First, by provisions... because it is accomplished': this is the first meaning.

27.42

On the Śāstra's 'Second, by aspect... because it acts with the aspect': this is the second meaning.

27.43

On the Śāstra's 'Third, by objective referent... because it takes as its objective referent': this is the third meaning.

27.44

On the Śāstra's 'Fourth, by impartiality... because it brings about benefit and happiness': this is the fourth meaning.

27.45

On the Śāstra's 'Fifth, by supreme grade... because [none] can equal this': this is the fifth meaning.

27.46

On the Śāstra's 'This is different from ordinary compassion due to eight causes': from here down is the third part, clarifying that the difference from ordinary compassion is due to eight causes.

27.47

On the Śāstra's 'First, by intrinsic nature... because the pitying is different': because great compassion has non-delusion as its nature, while ordinary compassion has non-hatred as its nature. The rest of the text is easily understood.

27.48

On the Śāstra's 'Having distinguished the virtues of the Buddha': the following one verse, fifthly, clarifies the similarities and differences among Buddhas.

27.49

From the Śāstra's 'The treatise says' down to 'because they are equally consummated': in the prose commentary there are three sections: first, clarifying similarities; second, distinguishing differences; third, recounting virtues. This is the first.

27.50

On the Śāstra's 'Due to lifespan, caste... the duration of the Dharma's abiding, and so forth': the second section distinguishes differences. The text has five parts: first, a general explanation of differences. The specific explanations are four: first, by lifespan; second, by physical size; third, by caste; fourth, the word 'and so forth'. In explaining these four textual points, there are again four kinds, which can be understood from the text.

27.51

On the Śāstra's 'That there are such differences... because of differences in the suitability of capacities': this recounts the causes of the differences.

27.52

On the Śāstra's 'Those with wisdom... give rise to profound love and reverence': from here down is the third section, recounting virtues and encouraging reverence to cause the aspiration for bodhi to arise.

27.53

On the Śāstra's 'What are the three?': this asks about the three virtues.

27.54

On the Śāstra's 'First, consummate virtue of cause... third, consummate virtue of benevolence': this enumerates the three names.

27.55

On the Śāstra's 'The first, consummate virtue of cause... because of cultivating without arrogance': this expands the first consummate virtue of cause into four, as can be understood from the text.

27.56

On the Śāstra's 'Next, consummate virtue of fruit... consummate virtue of physical form': the second expands the consummate virtue of fruit into four, namely: knowledge, abandonment, sovereignty, and physical form.

27.57

On the Śāstra's 'Consummate virtue of knowledge... effortless knowledge': this further expands the consummate virtue of knowledge within the consummate virtue of fruit into four: first, teacherless knowledge, meaning that at the time of attaining Buddhahood there is no teacher; second, knowledge of all things (sarvajñatā), meaning that taking the ultimate principle of common characteristics as its objective referent reaches the utmost limit; third, knowledge of all modes (sarvākārajñatā), knowing the distinct dharmas in all their varieties; fourth, effortless knowledge, because when the knowledge of all things and knowledge of all modes arise, they do not require application (prayoga).

27.58

On the Śāstra's 'Consummate virtue of abandonment... abandonment together with residual traces': this expands the second consummate virtue of abandonment within the consummate virtue of fruit into four: first, abandonment shared with the two vehicles, because those beyond training in the three vehicles equally abandon all defilements. This distinguishes it from bodhisattvas. Second, abandonment of all obstacles to concentration, which sets it apart from bodhisattvas and the two vehicles, because bodhisattvas and the two vehicles cannot attain the immeasurable samādhis. Third, ultimate abandonment, indicating non-retrogression. Fourth, abandonment together with residual traces, clarifying the exhaustion of the two forms of ignorance.

27.59

On the Śāstra's 'Consummate virtue of sovereignty... extraordinary sovereignty': this expands the third consummate virtue of sovereignty within the consummate virtue of fruit into four; these four clarify four distinct kinds of inconceivable supernatural powers (ṛddhipāda).

27.60

On the Śāstra's 'Consummate virtue of sovereignty... definitely able to subdue': this further expands the consummate virtue of sovereignty into four. The previous four clarify supernatural transformations, while the latter four clarify subduing living beings.

27.61

On the Śāstra's 'Consummate virtue of physical form... surpassing hundreds of thousands of suns': this expands the fourth consummate virtue of physical form within the consummate virtue of fruit into four.

27.62

On the Śāstra's 'The latter consummate virtue of benevolence... happy destinies and the three vehicles': this expands the third consummate virtue of benevolence within the consummate virtue of fruit into four. There are two kinds of fourfold divisions: first, liberating from the three wretched destinies counts as three, and liberating from saṃsāra is the fourth; second, establishing in the happy destinies is one, and establishing in the three vehicles constitutes the remaining three.

27.63

On the Śāstra's 'In summary, the consummate virtues of the Tathāgata are such': this concludes the general explanation of the three virtues above.

27.64

On the Śāstra's 'If analyzed individually... only then could it be exhausted': this praises how extensive the specific explanations are.

27.65

On the Śāstra's 'This shows... like a great mountain of jewels': this universally praises the virtues of the Buddha.

27.66

On the Śāstra's 'There are fools... unable to believe and revere': this clarifies that the foolish do not have faithful understanding.

27.67

On the Śāstra's 'Those with wisdom... penetrates to the marrow of their bones': this clarifies the deep faith of the wise.

27.68

On the Śāstra's 'Due to a single thought... ultimate fruit': this clarifies the benefits of faith.

27.69

On the Śāstra's 'As the Bhagavat... later will certainly attain nirvāṇa': this cites a verse as scriptural proof.

27.70

On the Śāstra's 'Having explained the Tathāgata's... shared virtues': the following one verse forms the second major section, clarifying shared virtues. Within it there are two: first, shared with āryas; second, shared also with ordinary worldlings.

27.71

From the Śāstra's 'The treatise says' down to 'according to their appropriate application': this enumerates the shared virtues mentioned above.

27.72

On the Śāstra's 'The first three categories... also shared with ordinary worldlings': this lists the two kinds of sharing: first, shared only with noble persons; second, shared also with ordinary worldlings. The Nyāyānusāra states: 'Although all virtues within the Buddha's person are pure, supremely distinguished, and masterfully unhindered in their aspects, differing from the virtues of śrāvakas and others, they are nonetheless spoken of as shared because they are of the same type (the quotation from the treatise ends here).'

27.73

On the Śāstra's 'Among the first three categories, first let us explain non-contention': from here down clarifies what is shared only with noble persons. Within this there are four topics: first, the concentration of non-contention (araṇā-samādhi); second, knowledge resulting from resolve (praṇidhijñāna); third, unhindered comprehension (pratisaṃvid); fourth, the distinctions of their attainment. This one verse clarifies the concentration of non-contention.

27.74

From the Śāstra's 'The treatise says' down to 'give rise to greed, hatred, and so forth': this clarifies the noble persons' intention in giving rise to the knowledge of non-contention. The Nyāyānusāra states: 'An arhat, recollecting having received various kinds of bodies over many past lifetimes and having provoked defilements in oneself and others, through this mental continuity experienced undesirable results. Thereupon he considers: "If defiled bodies, being the object of focus, still incur painful fruits when defilements arise, how much more so a body separated from defilement and endowed with superior virtues!" Having reflected thus, he generates knowledge of such a character, and through this skillful means causes other sentient beings not to give rise to greed, hatred, and so forth by taking his own body as an objective condition. This knowledge has conventional knowledge alone as its intrinsic nature; because it takes as its object the future cultivation-abandoned defilements of others, it is not an anāsrava knowledge operating with this aspect. If the essence of non-contention is subsumed under knowledge, how can one speak of cultivating the concentration of non-contention? There is no contradiction here: within a single associated category there are multiple virtues, and it is named according to any one of them. It is like a mountain containing various kinds of things, where one selects any single item to designate the name of the mountain. In principle, non-contention is subsumed under knowledge; it protects the mental continuum of others against the future arising of defilement, and only with skillful means preceding it can the matter be accomplished (the quotation from the treatise ends here).'

27.75

On the Śāstra's 'This practice can pacify... receives the name "non-contention"': this explains the name. However, all forms of contention are three in total, because of the distinctions of skandha, speech, and defilement. Contention of skandhas refers to death; contention of speech refers to quarreling; contention of defilement refers to the one hundred and eight defilements. Because the power of this conventional knowledge can pacify the contention of defilements, it receives the name "non-contention".

27.76

On the Śāstra's 'This practice takes only conventional knowledge as its nature': this relates that it is not of the sixteen aspects of anāsrava.

27.77

On the Śāstra's 'The fourth dhyāna... because it is supreme': this describes the level upon which it is based.

27.78

On the Śāstra's 'The unshakeable fruit of arhatship... the defilements of another's person': this describes the disposition and the fruit. Those who fall back and those still in training cannot even protect themselves against the fault of arising defilements, so how could they pacify the defilements in the persons of others?

27.79

On the Śāstra's 'This relies only on the human body of the three continents': this describes the physical support on which it relies.

27.80

On the Śāstra's statement: "Because it takes the desire realm and future [states] as its object ... because its object is apprehended generally": this explains that the afflictions prevented are only those deluded with respect to concrete facts.

27.81

On the Śāstra's statement: "Having analyzed non-contentiousness, knowledge resulting from resolve is to be analyzed next": the following half-verse is the second [section], explaining knowledge resulting from resolve (praṇidhijñāna).

27.82

On "The Śāstra says ... therefore it is called knowledge resulting from resolve": this explains the name. This is the knowledge belonging to resolve (praṇidhi); hence it is called "knowledge resulting from resolve."

27.83

On the Śāstra's statement: "The intrinsic nature of this knowledge ... because it takes [all phenomena] as its object": this clarifies its similarities with and differences from the absorption of non-contentiousness.

27.84

On the Śāstra's statement: "The Vaibhāṣikas say ... just as a farmer": this explains that the formless [realm] is known through inferential knowledge. The words "observing their causal practices and their flowing outflows" mean that one first employs other knowledge to carefully observe their preceding causes and their subsequent flowing outflows; when this knowledge arises, it induces true knowledge resulting from resolve. Or, observing the mind at the time of death and rebirth in the desire and form [realms], one infers and knows where one is reborn and whence one came. Just as a farmer knows the subsequent sprout when seeing the seed, and knows the preceding seed when seeing the sprout. The Nyāyānusāra says: "If so, why is it called 'knowledge resulting from resolve'? For trainees and ordinary persons can also know [such things]. This is not so; because what is known is either definite or indefinite. It is traditionally said: when the great śrāvakas predict future events, some are definite and some are indefinite. The definite ones are [known by] knowledge resulting from resolve; the indefinite ones are not [known by] knowledge resulting from resolve. One explanation is: knowledge resulting from resolve truly knows the future, meaning that one first gives rise to inferential knowledge to observe the past and present worlds, and by inferring and estimating the future, it induces the arising of knowledge resulting from resolve, and only then can one truly see it; precisely by this means is one able to know the formless [realm]. That is, one first observes their causal practices and flowing outflows, an inferential knowledge arises, which induces true knowledge resulting from resolve. Or, observing the mind at the time of death and rebirth in the desire and form [realms], one infers and knows where one is reborn and whence one came, and this induces the arising of knowledge resulting from resolve, so that one can truly know it. A second explanation says: or, there is no fault even if it is known by inferential knowledge, because the object of direct realization and inferential knowledge must be the same. If it were not known by inference, how could it be directly realized? If that were so, one could not say that knowledge resulting from resolve has the power to universally take the three realms and the three times as its object." According to this, it takes the three realms and the three times as its object.

First 84 of 206 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

俱舍論疏 — Classical Chinese