俱舍論頌疏論本 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Record of the Brief Commentary on the Abhidharmakośaśāstra

1.2

Composed by Jia Zeng, Grand Master of Right Counsel, Commissioner Bearing Credentials in Charge of Various Military Affairs, and Prefect of Jinzhou

In the past, more than nine hundred years after Śākya[muni] departed the world, the Bodhisattva Vasubandhu compiled a thousand treatises. His propagation was exceptionally far-reaching and his inspiration truly profound; yet when it comes to setting forth doctrinal approaches and analyzing technical terms—concise in expression yet vast in scope, subtle in language yet lucid in principle—this Abhidharmakośaśāstra is acclaimed as particularly masterful. Although rooted in the Vibhāṣā and primarily interpreting the Abhidharmapiṭaka, if one can fathom the imports of the faculties and realms, exhaust the origins of worldly beings and sages, discern causes and conditions across the ultimate and conventional [truths], and dispel attachments to the personal and phenomenal self, then more than half of the twelve divisions of the canon will have been pondered, and the eighty thousand Dharma gates may thereby be known. How could it merely direct one toward the Small Vehicle and exclusively specialize in teaching existence? The Great Tang Tripiṭaka Dharma Master Xuanzang personally obtained the Sanskrit text and retranslated the true scriptures. His disciple, Dharma Master Dacheng Guang, received his intimate instruction in person and first transmitted the orthodox commentary; having achieved utmost perfection, what more could be added? Nevertheless, when a treatise branches, its expositions become verbose, and when its meanings are rich, its expressions can grow burdensome; beginners setting out to study it find it difficult to accomplish both [brevity and depth]. There was the Worthy Yuanhui, whose torch of wisdom burned bright and whose pearl of precepts was clear and luminous; an exemplar for later generations, acknowledged by earlier masters. In youth he was fond of this text, and grown to adulthood he attained a singular mastery of it. Once during an interval of leisure, he came to discuss it with me. Beset at the time by mundane dust, I was weary of reading through [such extensive works], and thus requested a brief commentary, first clarifying the verse text. Gracious to fulfill my wish, he joyfully consented in silence. The venerable elders of former days, upon hearing of it, praised it profoundly. Before long, his abridgment was swiftly completed; through conciseness it is easily understood, and through its merits it can endure. Though consenting to a layman’s petition, it serves as a resource for those in training (śaikṣa); the work of a virtuous man will surely not perish. The Venerable has already stated his intent in a separate preface. Because I was the original cause of its undertaking, and wishing to proclaim it once more in recurrent appreciation of his fine intent, I have written this record. May it enable those of expansive wisdom in future rebirths to remotely realize universal discernment, and cause the assembly of past sages to feel perpetual shame at partial understanding. So it is said.

1.4

Exfounded by the Śramaṇa Yuanhui of the Middle Dayun Monastery

1.5

Now, what illuminates the darkness beneath heaven—is it not the blazing sun alone? What stirs the ten thousand things to completion—is it not the gentle wind alone? What rectifies the great teaching and delivers the times—is it not the Bodhisattva alone? Here there was a Great Being named Vasubandhu, who propagated the Way across the Five Indies and authored treatises numbering a thousand, illuminating the orthodox footsteps of our Master and unravelling the heterodox tangles of the tīrthikas; his merits cannot be detailed in full. Among his thousand works, the Abhidharmakośa is one. It encompasses the six feet and embraces the eight aggregates. Although its doctrines draw from various schools, its standard is strictly orthodoxy; hence the scholars of the Western Regions called it the Treatise of the Wise. As for its exposition of the seven branches of unmanifest form (avijñapti), it provides the brushwork for transmitting the vinaya; its discussions of the three categories of aggregates and realms provide luster for propagating the sūtras. The radiant sun of the Buddha truly resides herein.

1.6

There is Jia Zeng, Grand Master of Right Counsel and Prefect of Jinzhou. His Excellency was exceptionally endowed with rare vital force and distinctly gifted with brilliant spirit. His literary talent surpassed all within the clouds, his renown dominated all under the sun; his capacity was profound and distant, his deportment calm and serene—a true paragon and mirror for gentlemen of the official robes. Formerly serving as Vice Minister of the Ministry of Rites, having ample leisure in the department’s offices and turning his heart to the orthodox Dharma, he invited me to converse on the doctrines and thereupon requested that I compose a brief commentary. There was also Vinaya Master Huaiyuan of the Great Shengguan Monastery, whose pearl of precepts was pure and whose demeanor was refreshing; diligently devoted to the Dharma gates, he was also tireless in exhorting and guiding others. With his intent set on universal deliverance, he likewise joined in the request.

1.7

As for myself, Yuanhui, how fortunate I am to have encountered this semblance age of transformation, savoring the true teachings and frequenting fragrant chambers! Gladly would I hear [the truth] in the morning even if I were to perish in the evening; bearing his solemn charge as it arrived, I taxed my humble mediocrity to compose a verse-by-verse commentary for the time being, cutting away the superfluous branches and gathering the essential core. Where the text was verbose in the comprehensive versions, I have briefly outlined the pivotal junctures; where the meaning was essential in the sūtras and vinaya, I have thoroughly traced its origin. The verses are first cited again before being interpreted, and the prose is supported by citations accompanied by thorough commentary. Wood and stone have been pared away, rendering it plain rather than ornate. I hope that gentlemen who savor the Way and refined scholars of doctrinal study will open it without confusion and search it to readily comprehend, as if holding a phoenix mirror to examine reflections or wielding a Longquan blade to cut through things—such was my intent in writing. Given my dim understanding and lack of wit, how could it be fully adequate? I hope that scholars of discerning judgment will scrutinize and correct it.

1.8

About to open the treatise, it is differentiated into six sections: first, explaining the origin of the treatise; second, interpreting the central thesis of the treatise; third, clarifying the piṭaka that subsumes it; fourth, different translations; fifth, briefly explaining the chapter titles; sixth, broadly interpreting the text and meaning.

1.9

First, explaining the origin of the treatise has two parts: first, explaining the root origin; second, explaining the specific intent of its composition.

1.10

As for the root origin: since Kāśyapa concealed his form at Kukkuṭapāda and Madhyāntika begged for land from the Nāga Palace, although the broad doctrines diverged slightly, the subtle words still remained. When it came to the Venerable Upagupta, the Way was no longer carried on as under the three sages; and Mahādeva threw the true words into confusion through the five conditions. The two schools split their tradition, dispute arose in the country of Magadha, and five hundred arhats flew through the air to Kaśmīra; it was in this country that the Sarvāstivāda school arose.

1.11

At the beginning of the four hundredth year after the Buddha's nirvāṇa, in the country of Gandhāra, there was a king named Kaniṣka. This king was reverent and faithful, venerating the Buddhist scriptures; savoring the Way he forgot his fatigue, making the transmission of the lamp his duty. One day, he invited monks into his palace to offer them nourishment; when the king took the opportunity to inquire about the Way, the monks’ expositions did not agree, which the king found extremely strange. He asked the Venerable Pārśva: “The Buddha’s teachings have the same source; their principles do not lead to different destinations. Why is there divergence when the reverend ones recite and proclaim them?” The Venerable replied: “Since the inauspicious omen of the five dreams, when the extinction was manifested in the Twin Sala Grove, more than a hundred years have passed. The various schools have arisen; though their paths are myriad, their bridge leads to the same goal. Therefore the Great Sage used the analogy of breaking a golden staff, and compared it to fighting over a robe. If they fight over a robe, the robe is ultimately not torn; if one chops gold, the substance of the gold remains identical. Therefore, if one cultivates in reliance on them, all without exception will attain the sage fruits.” When the king heard these words, he thereupon asked: “Among the models established by the various schools, which is the finest? I wish to cultivate practice; may the Venerable explain it.” The Venerable replied: “Among the fine standards of the various schools, none surpasses the Sarvāstivāda. If the King wishes to cultivate practice, he ought to follow this one.” The King said: “Just now I received your gracious instruction pointing me to the Sarvāstivāda. The Tripiṭaka of this school should now be compiled in council (saṃgīti); we must summon those of virtue to deliberate on it together.”

1.12

Thereupon, speeding ten thousand li like falling stars, they gathered like clouds from the four quarters, and eminent worthies assembled completely. Because the host of ordinary people and sages was extremely vast and tumultuous, they could not all assemble together; therefore ordinary monks were screened out, leaving only the assembly of sages. The assembly of sages was still too numerous, so those still in training (śaikṣa) were screened out, leaving only those beyond training (aśaikṣa). Those beyond training were also numerous and could not all assemble together; among those beyond training, only those whose meditative concentration fulfilled the six higher knowledges (ṣaḍabhijñā), whose wisdom perfected the four special knowledges (catasraḥ pratisamvidaḥ), who inwardly mastered the Tripiṭaka, and who outwardly were well-versed in the five sciences (pañcavidyā) were fit to participate in the council; thus these alone were selected and retained. The selected assembly of sages numbered four hundred and ninety-nine. The king said: “This country is hot and damp, unsuitable for holding a council. Should we not go to Rājagṛha, to the place where Kāśyapa held the council?” The Venerable Pārśva said: “In the city of Rājagṛha there are many tīrthikas; we would have no leisure answering them, so how could we succeed in composing a treatise? The forests of Kaśmīra are lush, its springs and rocks peaceful; it is an abode of sages and worthies, where divine immortals roam and rest. Furthermore, it is surrounded on four sides by mountains and the city has only one gate; it is extremely secure and suitable for holding a council.”

1.13

Thereupon the king and the assembly of sages went from there to Kaśmīra. Having arrived in that country, because they were short by one person and had not filled the number of five hundred, they wished to summon Vasumitra. However, although Vasumitra's intellect was luminous and sharp, he had not yet become one beyond training (aśaikṣa), so the assembly wished not to accept him. Vasumitra looked upon the assembly of sages and said: “I look upon an arhat as upon spittle; having long set it aside, I did not take it. Why do you venerate this while rejecting me? If I wish to realize it, I will attain it in an instant.” Thereupon, facing the monastic assembly, he made a vow: “I shall cast this ball of thread into the air; if the thread falls back to the ground, may I immediately realize the fruit of arhatship.” Before the thread fell from the sky, the devas caught and held it, saying to Vasumitra: “Great Being, you are currently destined for the fruit of Buddhahood, next in succession to Maitreya, the singularly revered of the three realms, the reliance of the four modes of birth. Why would you abandon this great matter for such a minor fruit?” Thereupon the assembly of sages, hearing these words from the sky, prostrated to Vasumitra and elevated him to the position of elder (sthavira).

1.14

Thereupon the five hundred sages first compiled one hundred thousand verses to explain the Sūtrapiṭaka. Next they composed one hundred thousand verses to explain the Vinayapiṭaka. Afterwards they composed one hundred thousand verses to explain the Abhidharmapiṭaka, which is the Mahāvibhāṣā. Vasumitra deliberated and evaluated, and Aśvaghoṣa applied his literary brush, comprehensively explaining the Tripiṭaka to hang suspended for a thousand ages. The Dharma cloud was spread anew across distant realms, and the Buddha sun shone once more across realms of sand; such was the splendor of the transmission of the lamp! After the five hundred arhats had completed the council, they engraved stone and swore an oath that [the text] was permitted only within their own country and forbidden to foreign lands. They ordered yakṣa deities to guard the city gates and not allow it to be dispersed outward.

1.15

However, the Venerable Vasubandhu had formerly practiced the Sarvāstivāda, but later studied the Sautrāntika, taking it to be aligned with reason. Harboring an attitude of adopting and rejecting with regard to Sarvāstivāda doctrine, and wishing to determine right from wrong, he feared that master and felt apprehensive; so he went there again under an assumed name. Passing through four years, he repeatedly took his own school's [principles] to refute other schools. At that time there was an arhat who, having been cross-examined, could not answer; this was none other than Skandhila, the master of Saṃghabhadra. Finding this strange, Skandhila entered meditative absorption to observe, and knew it was Vasubandhu. He privately informed him: “Among the members of this assembly, those who have not yet abandoned desire, if they learn that the Elder is refuting them, will surely cause you harm. The Elder should quickly return to his native country.” At that time, after Vasubandhu returned to his native country, he expounded the Vibhāṣā; for each day he lectured, he composed one verse summarizing the meaning lectured on that day, engraved it on a sheet of red copper, and inscribed this verse. In this sequence, he completed six hundred verses, encompassing the Mahāvibhāṣā and fully exhausting its meaning. Placing the verses upon a fragrant elephant, he beat a drum and proclaimed: “If anyone can refute these, I shall acknowledge defeat before him.” In the end, not a single person could refute these verses. He sent a person carrying these verses to Kaśmīra. At that time, when the king of that country and the assembly of monks heard of it, they all rejoiced; adorning banners, pennants, and canopies, they came out past the borders to welcome them, and placing the verses upon a fragrant elephant, brought them into the country to read through, thinking he was propagating their own school. Skandhila, knowing this was not so, told the crowd: “These verses do not exclusively propagate our school; the insertion of the phrase 'so it is said' within the verses seems to mock us. If you do not believe it, request a prose commentary and you will know.” Thereupon the king and the assembly of monks dispatched an envoy to invite him, offering one hundred pounds of gold to express their respectful request. The author of the treatise accepted their invitation, composed a commentary on the root text in eight thousand verses, and sent it to them; it turned out just as Skandhila had said. This is the first part, explaining the root origin.

1.16

Second, explaining the intent of composing the treatise: in broad terms, there are three reasons: first, to enable sentient beings to sever defilements; second, to cause the wise to deepen their discernment of wisdom; third, to propagate and uphold the orthodox Dharma so that it may abide for a long time.

1.17

As for severing defilements, it is to enable sentient beings to escape the three existences. Sentient beings sink into transmigratory flow because their confusion has not yet been extinguished; if they wish to seek escape, they must sever the conditions of confusion. The direct cause for severing confusion is pure wisdom. This treatise directly expounds wisdom; relying on this, the author composed this treatise. Therefore, the text below states: “For what reason was that Abhidharma spoken?” Citing a verse in reply, it says: “Because sentient beings drift in the ocean of existence due to confusion, for this reason it is handed down that the Buddha expounded the Abhidharma.” Thus we know that the composition of the treatise is for the severing of defilements.

1.18

Second, concerning the generation of understanding through wisdom: this treatise is the hidden key to the four Āgamas, the mysterious gateway to the six Abhidharma texts (ṣaṭpādābhidharma), the spring and source of the characteristics of dharmas, and the great ocean of doctrinal approaches. Its text is pure and smooth as polished jade; its principles are clear and bright as the moon and blossoms. It opens the darkened minds of students and elicits the brilliant wisdom of the wise. Therefore a verse below says: "I have already briefly stated the compass / to open the poisoned-arrow entry of wisdom for the wise." Just as when the body is slightly wounded and a little poison is applied, in an instant the poisonous vapors permeate the entire body—so too with this treatise: when it opens a small entryway of wisdom, people of wisdom are able to awaken and penetrate deeply. Because it resembles an entry of poison, it is called the 'poisoned-arrow entry of wisdom'. The name 'Treatise of the Wise' arose from this.

1.19

Third, concerning widely upholding the true Dharma: ever since the blue lotus ceased to smile and the white curl concealed its radiance, false disciples have swarmed in confusion and the true Dharma has declined. The discourse on the three qualities by the followers of the Varṣā [Sāṃkhya] and the doctrine of the six categories by the grain-eating [Vaiśeṣika] have laid waste to our flower garden and muddied our clear stream. The author of the treatise, just wishing to sweep away those clouds of falsehood and make this sun of the Buddha shine bright, composed this treatise precisely for this reason. Therefore a verse below says: "The various doctrines explained above / are all to widely uphold the teachings of the World-Honoured One." Furthermore, the emergence of the teachings of the Three Baskets each has four purposes; thus the *Vibhāṣā* says: "The Sūtra Piṭaka is preached as the outpour of [the Buddha's] powers: first, to enable sentient beings to attain the discipline of higher mind (adhiśikṣā in samādhi); second, to give sentient beings diverse explanations; third, to cause sentient beings to plant roots of goodness; fourth, to cause sentient beings who have not yet entered the true Dharma to enter the true Dharma. The Vinaya Piṭaka is preached as the outpour of compassion: first, to enable sentient beings to attain the discipline of higher morality (adhiśīla); second, to teach sentient beings the various training rules (śikṣāpada); third, to cause sentient beings who have already planted roots of goodness to bring them to continuous maturation; fourth, to cause those who have already entered the true Dharma to accept and uphold the true Dharma. The Abhidharma Piṭaka is preached as the outpour of fearlessness (vaiśāradya): first, to enable sentient beings to attain the discipline of higher wisdom (adhiprajñā); second, to distinguish the specific and universal characteristics of all dharmas; third, to cause those who have already attained maturity to reach correct liberation; fourth, to cause those who have already accepted and upheld the training rules to penetrate the true nature of all dharmas."

1.20

Furthermore, according to the *Vibhāṣā*, there are seven intentions in composing a treatise: First, to benefit others: to cause sentient beings to accept and uphold the noble teachings of the Buddha without error, thereby awakening to and entering the profound nature of dharmas. It is like someone who, to benefit others, lights a great lamp in a dark place, enabling those with eyes to see various colors and forms. Second, to destroy the darkness of ignorance: just as a lamp destroys darkness and emits illumination, so too does composing a treatise destroy the darkness of ignorance and generate the light of wisdom. Third, to reveal the image of non-self (anātman): just as the surface of a mirror, when polished exceedingly well, reflects various forms, so too does a treatise distinguish the characteristics of dharmas so that the image of non-self is clearly manifested. Fourth, to cross over the river of saṃsāra: just as on a sturdy boat or raft hundreds of thousands of sentient beings rely without fear to cross to the other shore, so too on a treatise the Buddha and sentient beings rely without fear to reach the shore of nirvāṇa. Fifth, to illuminate sūtras and the like: just as a person holding a torch sees all forms without confusion, so too does a treatise illuminate the meanings of sūtras and the like without confusion. Sixth, to examine all dharmas, wholesome and otherwise: just as a gem appraiser recognizes jewels such as diamonds, so too does a treatise distinguish wholesome and other dharmas. Seventh, to show that the great masters of treatises are unshakable: just as Mount Meru rests upon the golden wheel and cannot be shaken by any violent winds, so too are the great masters of treatises, whose refutations of false treatises cannot be overthrown.

1.21

Second, concerning the clarification of the fundamental doctrine of the treatise: since the traces of the teachings divided, eighteen schools were formed, and their established doctrines were certainly not uniform. For instance, the Ekavyāvahārika, Mahāsāṃghika, Gokulika, and Lokottaravāda—these four adhere to the doctrine that all dharmas are nothing other than nominal designations (prajñapti), existing merely in conventional speech. As for the Sautrāntika school, it establishes that a small portion of all dharmas is substantially existent, while the greater portion is nominal. As for the Sarvāstivāda school, it adheres to the doctrine that all existent dharmas are real; yet their views differ, comprising four explanations in all: first, difference in state (*bhāva*); second, difference in characteristic (*lakṣaṇa*); third, difference in position (*avasthā*); and fourth, difference in relativity (*apekṣā*). As for 'difference in state', the venerable Dharmatrāta spoke thus: owing to the difference in state, there is distinction among the three times. That is to say, when passing from the future to the present, a dharma abandons its future state and acquires its present state; when flowing from the present to the past, it abandons its present state and acquires its past state. There is only a difference in state, not a difference in substance. Just as when a gold vessel is melted down to make another object, although its shape differs, its golden nature does not change. As for 'difference in characteristic', the venerable Ghoṣaka said that because characteristics differ, the three times are distinguished. That is to say, when a dharma is in the past, it is directly conjoined with past characteristics, yet it is not called separated from present and future characteristics; because the past characteristic is prominent, it is simply called past. When in the present, it is directly conjoined with present characteristics, yet it is not called separated from past and future characteristics. When in the future, it is directly conjoined with future characteristics, yet it is not called separated from past and present characteristics. Its name is given according to what is prominent, in the same manner as explained for the past. As for 'difference in position', the venerable Vasumitra said that because positions differ, the three times are distinguished. The position where its function has not yet occurred is called the future; the position where its function is currently operating is called the present; and the position where its function has ceased is called the past. In each respective position, different designations are made. It is like moving a counting-stick: when placed in the units position, it is called one; placed in the tens position [marked as hundreds], it is called a hundred; placed in the thousands position, it is called a thousand. As it passes through different positions, there are distinctions, yet the substance of the counting-stick does not change. As for 'difference in relativity', the venerable Buddhadeva said that because relativity differs, the three times are distinguished. 'Relativity' means depending upon another: viewed in relation to what comes after, it is called the past; viewed in relation to what comes before, it is called the future; viewed in relation to both before and after, it is called the present. It is like one woman who is called both daughter and mother: viewed in relation to her mother, she is called a daughter; viewed in relation to her daughter, she is called a mother.

1.22

The author of the treatise evaluates them, saying: "Because Dharmatrāta posits transformation of dharmas, he should be placed among the Sāṃkhya non-Buddhists, for the Sāṃkhya school holds that dharmas undergo transformation. As for what Ghoṣaka established, the temporal characteristics are conflated, since all three times would possess the characteristics of all three times. In what Buddhadeva established, the times are also conflated, for within the dharmas of a single time, all three times would be present: since the past time contains many moments, the earlier and later moments should be called past and future, and the middle one called the present; the future and present would likewise follow suit. Therefore, among these four, the third, Vasumitra, established the times best." According to the Sautrāntika school, past and future have no substantial reality; only the present time exists. Now, when examining the fundamental tenets upon which Vasubandhu composed this treatise, there are two kinds: First, the explicit tenet, which is the Sarvāstivāda. Hence a verse below says: "The principles settled by the Kaśmīra [masters] are well established; / I largely rely upon them to explain the Abhidharma." Since it says that he relies upon them to explain the *Abhidharmakośa*, we know that this treatise takes the Sarvāstivāda school as its explicit tenet. Second, the implicit tenet, which is the Sautrāntika. Hence a verse below says: "Because what the Sautrāntikas state does not contradict reason." Throughout this treatise, he mostly uses the Sautrāntika to refute the Sarvāstivāda; hence we know that what Vasubandhu intended in his heart takes the Sautrāntika as its tenet. Such are the differences above. The second section, clarifying the fundamental doctrine, is concluded.

1.23

Third, concerning the classification within the Piṭakas: there are three kinds of Piṭakas: 1. The Sūtra Piṭaka, translated here as "thread" (*xian*) or called *jing*; it primarily expounds concentration (samādhi). 2. The Vinaya Piṭaka, called "regulation" (*tiaofu*); it primarily expounds morality (śīla). 3. The Abhidharma Piṭaka, called here "facing the Dharma" (*duifa*); it primarily expounds wisdom (prajñā). Among these three, this treatise is subsumed under the Abhidharma Piṭaka. Question: "Is it subsumed solely under this one Piṭaka, or does it also extend to the other two?" Answer: "*Nyāyānusāra*, fascicle one, states: 'All question-and-answer investigations into ultimate principles contained in the Sūtras and Vinayas are all subsumed here under the Abhidharma Piṭaka.'"

1.24

Fourth, concerning the differences in translation: the translations of this treatise occurred in two periods in all: first during the Chen dynasty, and later during the Tang dynasty. During the Chen dynasty, Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha translated it in Lingnan into twenty-two fascicles. During the Great Tang, the Tripiṭaka Master [Xuanzang], in the Yonghui era, translated it at Ci'en Monastery into thirty fascicles. The differences in translation were not without cause: because the earlier translator was not proficient in both languages, this resulted in errors and discrepancies in the doctrine of the treatise. For example, regarding unconditioned dharmas being causes and results, the earlier translation stated that they are not; and regarding present dharmas having no non-possession (aprāpti), the former translation rendered it as having it. The Tripiṭaka Master of the Great Tang was well versed in the languages of both regions; his translations of the meaning contained no errors, and the composition of his text was flawless. This enabled seekers harbor doubts to find white jade in the green mountains, and waiting guests seeking resolution to obtain the black pearl from the Red Waters. Thus this treatise has translations from two periods.

1.25

Fifth, briefly explaining the title of the chapter: *Abhi* is translated here as "facing" (*dui*); *dharma* is translated here as "teaching" or "phenomenon" (*fa*); *kośa* is translated here as "treasury" (*zang*). That is, undefiled wisdom is called "facing" (*dui*). "Facing" has two meanings: first, facing towards, which means facing towards nirvāṇa; second, directly observing, which means directly observing the Four Truths. Dharmas are of two kinds: first, the ultimate dharma, which is nirvāṇa; second, phenomenal dharmas, which pervade the Four Noble Truths. In explaining the name *dharma*: first, it serves as a model that gives rise to understanding; second, it maintains its own specific nature. Hence it is called *dharma*. As for "Abhidharma" (*duifa*), undefiled wisdom is called "facing", while the Four Truths and nirvāṇa are called "dharma". This undefiled wisdom is called Abhidharma because it is the "facing of the dharma", so it is called *duifa*; this is a tatpuruṣa compound (*依主釋*). According to Master Guang, both "facing" and "dharma" apply to both the subject and the object, as will be explained below. "Treasury" (*kośa*) has two meanings: first, containing; second, basis. As for "containing", it is like a chest or casket. Because this treatise contains all the ultimate statements of the *Jñānaprasthāna* and other treatises, it is called a "treasury". The *Jñānaprasthāna* and other texts are called Abhidharma, while the *Kośa* is called a "treasury" and is not itself the primary Abhidharma; but now, this treatise being named the *Abhidharmakośa* means it is the "treasury of the Abhidharma", which is a tatpuruṣa compound. As for "basis", the *Nyāyānusāra* explains: "'Treasury' may mean basis, like a sheath for a sword." Because this treatise was composed by drawing upon the meanings and statements of those treatises, on account of the Abhidharma being its treasury, it is called the *Abhidharmakośa*. Master Guang explains: "A scabbard is called a sword-case because it is the basis of the sword; speaking of the sword, it is called 'having a treasury'. Taking the name of the scabbard's treasury, because it possesses a treasury, it is called a sword-case." That *Jñānaprasthāna* and the others are the basis of this treatise. Why is this so? Because this treatise was composed by citing their doctrines and statements. Those texts, such as the *Jñānaprasthāna*, are called Abhidharma; because they are what this treatise relies upon, they are also a treasury. Now, that this *Abhidharmakośaśāstra* is called the *Abhidharmakośa* means that it fully adopts the name *Abhidharmakośa* from the root treatise; because it possesses the treasury of the Abhidharma, it is called the *Abhidharmakośa*, which is a bahuvrīhi compound (*有財釋*). Master Bao says: "'Treasury' may mean basis, like a sheath for a sword." This passage from the *Nyāyānusāra* merely explains the meaning of "treasury" and does not yet distinguish the bahuvrīhi compound. The lower text of the *Nyāyānusāra*, stating that it is called *Abhidharmakośa* because it possesses the treasury of Abhidharma, is where it actually explains the bahuvrīhi compound. For Master Guang to explain that the sword is called a treasury and treat this as a bahuvrīhi compound is an extreme error. In explaining the title *Abhidharmakośa*, there is no karmadhāraya compound (*持業釋*), because the author Vasubandhu did not wish to claim the credit for himself, but attributed the capacity to the original texts.

1.26

Sixth, extensively explaining the meaning of the text: within this there are two parts: first, separately explaining the chapter titles; second, directly explaining according to the text.

1.27

Within separately explaining the chapter titles, it is again divided into two: first, directly explaining the chapter titles; second, clarifying the sequence of the chapters.

1.28

As for directly explaining the chapter titles: the meanings of clan/lineage (*gotra*), bearing/maintaining (*dhāraṇa*), and intrinsic nature (*svabhāva*) are called *dhātu* ("realm"); this chapter explains them extensively, and is therefore called "Analysis" (*vibhaṅga*). Question: "This chapter also explains the aggregates (*skandha*) and sense bases (*āyatana*); why is it titled after realms (*dhātu*)?" Answer: "Because this chapter extensively analyzes the eighteen realms through twenty-two gates, it is titled after realms. The aggregates and sense bases are not treated in this manner, and therefore the chapter is not titled after them."

1.29

Second, explaining the sequence of the chapters: throughout these verses, there are eight chapters in total: 1. "Chapter on the Dhātus", 2. "Chapter on the Indriyas", 3. "Chapter on the World", 4. "Chapter on Karma", 5. "Chapter on the Anuśayas", 6. "Chapter on the Āryas", 7. "Chapter on Jñāna", and 8. "Chapter on Samādhi". The chapter "Refutation of the Self" has no separate primary verses, and therefore is not discussed here. The first two chapters generally explain the contaminated and the uncontaminated, while the subsequent six chapters explain the contaminated and uncontaminated in particular. The general is the foundation, and therefore is stated first; explaining the particular relies on the general, and therefore is stated afterward. Within the general explanation, the first, the "Chapter on the Dhātus", clarifies the essence of all phenomena, and the "Chapter on the Indriyas" clarifies the functions of all phenomena. The essence is the foundation, so it is stated first; function arises relying on essence, so indriyas are clarified next. Within the six chapters explaining the particulars, the first three chapters specifically explain the contaminated, and the latter three chapters specifically explain the uncontaminated. What is contaminated is to be reviled, so it is stated first; after reviling it, one is caused to rejoice in the uncontaminated, so that is stated afterward. Within the specific explanation of the contaminated, the "Chapter on the World" clarifies the fruition, the "Chapter on Karma" clarifies the cause, and the "Chapter on the Anuśayas" clarifies the condition. Fruition is coarse and easy to revile, so it is clarified first; fruition does not arise alone, but necessarily depends on causes, so karma is clarified next; causes do not arise alone, but necessarily wait on conditions, so the anuśayas are clarified last. Within the specific explanation of the uncontaminated, the "Chapter on the Āryas" clarifies the fruition, the "Chapter on Jñāna" clarifies the cause, and the "Chapter on Samādhi" clarifies the condition. The marks of fruition are easy to rejoice in, so it is stated first; fruition necessarily depends on causes, so jñāna is clarified next; jñāna necessarily waits on conditions, so samādhi is clarified last.

1.30

From here, the second part, direct explanation following the text: in preparing to explain these verses, [the text] is divided briefly into three sections: 1. the introductory section, 2. the main body, and 3. the dissemination section. Whenever sages compose a treatise, there must be an occasion; therefore, the introductory section is clarified first. The introductory section being concluded, there must be something expounded; therefore, the main body is clarified next. Once the central tenets are revealed, one encourages living beings to cultivate and study; therefore, there is the dissemination section at the end.

1.31

The first three verses are the introductory section; the next six hundred verses are the main body; the final four verses are the dissemination section.

1.32

Within the introductory section, the text is divided into two passages: first, there are four lines of verse directly setting forth the introductory section, and afterward there are eight lines explaining particular difficulties.

1.33

First, as for the four lines directly setting forth the introductory section, the verse states:

1.34

"He for whom all darkness of every kind has been destroyed, / who pulls sentient beings out from the mire of saṃsāra, / I pay homage to such a Teacher of reality. / I shall now expound the Abhidharmakośaśāstra."

1.35

Explanation: These four lines directly clarify the introductory section. Within this introductory section, there is again a division into two passages: 1. the preface of homage, and 2. the preface of inception. That is, the first three lines are the preface of homage, and the fourth line is the preface of inception.

1.36

Regarding the first three lines, the first two lines clarify the Buddha's three virtues, and the third line points to those virtues in paying homage.

1.37

The opening word 'He' indicates the object of homage, and the subsequent thirteen characters clarify the Buddha's three virtues. 'He' refers to the Buddhas; hence the treatise says: "What is indicated by the word 'he' is the Buddha, the World-Honoured One." Among the subsequent thirteen characters, the first six characters clarify the virtue of benefiting oneself, and the latter seven characters clarify the virtue of benefiting others. 'All darkness of every kind has been destroyed' is the virtue of benefiting oneself. Darkness is of two kinds: first, the darkness of every kind; second, all darkness. The darkness of every kind is called non-defiled ignorance; all darkness is defiled ignorance. These two kinds of ignorance can conceal real meaning and obstruct true seeing, and are therefore called darkness (the external object is called real meaning; the internal mind is called true seeing). 'Every kind' means that the classes of non-defiled ignorance are boundless, hence called every kind. Obstructing all phenomena such that one cannot realize them is non-defiled ignorance; thus its varieties are manifold. Non-defiled ignorance has inferior prajñā as its essence; within the framework of the three natures, it is subsumed under good and neutral. Its essence is not an affliction, hence it is called non-defiled. Failing to realize objects is called ignorance. Ignorance being itself non-defiled is called non-defiled ignorance—a karmadhāraya compound. It is also called latent impressions (vāsanā); it is the trace formed through repeatedly accustoming oneself to afflictions; being the trace of habituation, it is called latent impressions. Only the Buddha has severed it forever, whereas the two vehicles still possess it. Hence the treatise says: "Although the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have destroyed all darkness, because their defiled non-wisdom is conclusively severed, it is not of every kind. Why is that? Because with regard to the Buddha's teachings of extremely distant times and places, as well as the boundless distinctions among various meanings and categories, non-defiled ignorance is not yet severed." Explanation: 'The Buddha's teachings' means the phenomena known by the Buddha, namely extremely distant times and the like. Beyond eighty thousand kalpas is called an extremely distant time; beyond the trichiliocosm is called an extremely distant place. 'All darkness' is defiled ignorance. 'All' refers to all objects, namely the objects of the four truths and the five categories abandoned by the path of cultivation; the five categories are not one, hence called all objects. 'Darkness' is precisely all afflictions abandoned through seeing and cultivation; because these afflictions veil and obstruct all objects, they are called darkness. Defiled ignorance has avidyā as its essence; afflictions are impure, hence called defiled. Failing to realize objects is called ignorance. Ignorance being itself defiled is called defiled ignorance—a karmadhāraya compound. When the verse says 'destroyed', destruction has two forms: 1. cessation through deliberation (pratisaṃkhyānirodha), and 2. cessation not through deliberation (apratisaṃkhyānirodha). The destruction of the darkness of every kind is cessation not through deliberation; because the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, has severed the darkness of every kind and realized unarisen dharmas, it is called cessation not through deliberation. What is meant here by 'realized' is that, in the state where superior conditions for non-defiled ignorance are lacking, obtaining cessation not through deliberation is called 'realization'. Through severing this darkness, he attains all-knowledge, being able to know all varieties of dharmas; thus the virtue of wisdom is perfected. 'All darkness has been destroyed' is precisely cessation through deliberation; because the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, has severed the darkness of afflictions and realized unarisen dharmas, it is called cessation through deliberation, because the virtue of abandonment is perfected. The word 'destroyed' in the verse applies to both cessations. The virtue of wisdom has the wisdom within the Buddha's person as its essence; the virtue of abandonment has the cessation through deliberation realized by the Buddha as its essence. Cessation is called abandonment because it is manifested through severance.

1.38

'Who pulls sentient beings out from the mire of saṃsāra' praises the virtue of benefiting others. All sentient beings are submerged in the mire of saṃsāra without rescue; the World-Honoured One takes pity, reaches out the hand of the appropriate true Dharma teachings according to their capacities, and pulls them out to save them. This is the virtue of benevolence, having great compassion as its essence. As for 'sentient beings' (sattva), it is because they undergo manifold births and deaths. As for 'mire', it has the vipāka-fruit of contaminated karma and afflictions as its essence. Afflictions are like water, and karma-vipāka is like earth; through their mingling together, they become the mire of saṃsāra.

1.39

'I pay homage to such a Teacher of reality' points to those virtues in paying homage; bowing the head to touch the feet is called paying homage. As he possesses the aforementioned virtues of benefiting oneself and others, it says 'such'. That is, 'such' refers to the preceding three virtues. 'Teacher of reality' reveals the virtue of benefiting others; because benefiting beings is supreme, he is singled out for reverence. Because the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, can skillfully preach the true teachings of reality and deliver sentient beings, he is called the Teacher of reality. The preface of homage above is concluded.

1.40

'I shall now expound the Abhidharmakośaśāstra' is the preface of inception, intended to introduce the beginning of the treatise. Instructing and admonishing disciples is why it is called a treatise (śāstra). Instructing is teaching, causing people to cultivate good. Admonishing is exhorting, causing people to sever evil. Severing evil and cultivating good is therefore called instructing and admonishing. The Abhidharmakośa will be explained immediately next. As for 'I shall now expound', the provisional person of the five skandhas is designated 'I'; the words 'shall expound' distinguish what is about to be explained from what is already being directly expounded.

1.41

From here, the second part, explaining particular difficulties. This is again divided into three: 1. explaining Abhidharma, 2. explaining Kośa, and 3. clarifying the intent of exposition and the person who expounds. First, explaining Abhidharma, the verse says:

1.42

"Pure prajñā along with its attendants is called Abhidharma, / as well as the various prajñās and treatises that are capable of attaining this."

1.43

Explanation: 'Pure prajñā along with its attendants is called Abhidharma' clarifies the ultimate Abhidharma. 'Pure prajñā' refers to uncontaminated wisdom. Being free from fetters is called pure; discernment is called prajñā. The retinue of pure prajñā is called its attendants. The mind associated with prajñā, mental factors such as feeling and conception, the four characteristics and acquisition, and the non-revelatory [morality] conforming to the path—these various phenomena are the retinue of prajñā; because they operate in accompaniment with prajñā, they are called attendants. Pure prajñā along with its attendants like this thoroughly subsumes the five skandhas, and is called the ultimate Abhidharma. Among these five skandhas, the form skandha is the morality conforming to the path; the feeling and conception skandhas are the mental factors of feeling and conception among the attendants; the saṃskāra skandha consists of the other mental factors besides feeling and conception, along with the four characteristics and acquisition; the consciousness skandha is the mind associated with prajñā. As for 'ultimate', uncontaminated is called supreme (paramā), and real entity is called truth (artha); being supreme is itself truth, hence 'ultimate' (paramārtha). The ultimate being itself Abhidharma is called ultimate Abhidharma—a karmadhāraya compound.

1.44

'As well as the various prajñās and treatises that are capable of attaining this' clarifies conventional Abhidharma. The word 'various' in the verse applies to both places: first to the various prajñās, and second to the various treatises. Prajñās and treatises are not single, hence called 'various'. These various prajñās and treatises are contaminated dharmas, and are called conventional. 'This' refers to uncontaminated pure prajñā. It is by means of those various prajñās and treatises that one is able to attain this uncontaminated pure prajñā; hence 'capable of attaining this'. Not only is pure prajñā along with its attendants called Abhidharma, but also the various prajñās and treatises capable of attaining this are called Abhidharma; hence it says 'as well as'. Regarding 'the various prajñās', prajñā is of four kinds: 1. innate prajñā, because it is obtained at birth; 2. prajñā arisen from hearing, because it is accomplished through hearing teachings; 3. prajñā arisen from reflection, because it arises through reflection; and 4. prajñā arisen from cultivation, because it is born from samādhi—samādhi is called cultivation; nothing surpasses samādhi in perfuming and cultivating the mind to accomplish virtues, so it alone is named cultivation. Regarding 'the various treatises', this refers to the six pada treatises and others: 1. Śāriputra composed the Saṅgītiparyāya; 2. Mahāmaudgalyāyana composed the Dharmaskandha; 3. Kātyāyana composed the Prajñaptiśāstra. The above three treatises were composed during the Buddha's lifetime. Within one hundred years after the Buddha's nirvāṇa, Devaśarman composed the Vijñānakāya. At the beginning of the third century, the venerable Vasumitra composed the Prakaraṇapāda and also the Dhātukāya. At the end of the third century, Kātyāyanīputra composed the Jñānaprasthāna. The scope of doctrines in the previous six pada treatises was somewhat smaller, whereas the Dharma teachings in the single treatise Jñānaprasthāna were the most extensive. Later treatise masters referred to the six as the feet (padas) and the Jñānaprasthāna as the body. Later treatise masters mostly took the Jñānaprasthāna as their authority, and the Mahāvibhāṣā was composed based upon it. Uncontaminated pure prajñā is the real Abhidharma; contaminated prajñā and treatises are not the real Abhidharma. They are called Abhidharma because they serve as provisions for the uncontaminated; hence they are also called Abhidharma. Thus the treatise says: "Because these various prajñās and treatises are its provisions, they too receive the name Abhidharma." As for 'provisions', first one relies on the treatise teachings, next comes innate [prajñā], after innate [prajñā] arises prajñā from hearing, after prajñā from hearing next arises prajñā from reflection, after prajñā from reflection only then arises prajñā from cultivation, and after prajñā from cultivation arises uncontaminated prajñā; thus the various prajñās and treatises are provisions for pure prajñā.

1.45

Explaining the name "Dharma" (法): it is called "dharma" because it can uphold its own nature. For example, regarding material phenomena (rūpa-dharma), resistance and change are their nature; because they can uphold this nature, they are called material phenomena. Briefly raising this one example, the other phenomena follow suit. There are two kinds of Dharma: first, the ultimate Dharma (paramārtha-dharma); second, the Dharma of phenomenal characteristics (dharmalakṣaṇa-dharma). The ultimate Dharma refers to nirvāṇa: it is good and permanent, and therefore called ultimate; having real substance, it is also called an entity (artha); the ultimate is itself the entity, and the ultimate entity is itself Dharma, hence called the ultimate Dharma, which is an appositional compound (karmadhāraya). The second, the Dharma of phenomenal characteristics, extends through the four noble truths. A "characteristic" (lakṣaṇa) means a nature and an appearance: viewed from the perspective of its own substance it is called a nature, and viewed from the perspective of other conditioning conditions it is called a characteristic. Because these four truths are phenomenal characteristics of Dharma, they are called the Dharma of phenomenal characteristics. The phenomenal characteristics are themselves Dharma, which is an appositional compound. "Abhi-" (對) has two meanings: first, facing toward (facing facing); that is, untainted wisdom faces toward nirvāṇa. Second, directly contemplating; that is, untainted wisdom directly contemplates the four truths. The earlier "facing toward" pairs cause with fruit: the cause is untainted wisdom, and the fruit is nirvāṇa. The latter "directly contemplating" pairs mind with object: the mind is untainted wisdom, and the object is the four truths. Untainted pure wisdom is merely that which faces, because it is that which confronts, but it is not the Dharma, because it is not that which is confronted. The term "Abhidharma" (對法) means the confrontation of Dharma, which is a genitive tatpuruṣa compound. Master Guang says: "That which confronts is superior in confronting, so it is tentatively given the name 'confrontation' (abhi-); speaking from reality, it is also called Dharma, because it upholds its own nature. The Dharma that is confronted is superior in being Dharma, so it is tentatively established with the name 'Dharma'; speaking from reality, it is also called 'confrontation' (abhi-), because it is that which is confronted." Therefore, Abhidharma extends to both the active and the objective, with six kinds in total: 1. essential Abhidharma, referring to pure wisdom; 2. concomitant Abhidharma, referring to the retinue of pure wisdom; 3. expedient Abhidharma, referring to the four tainted wisdoms; 4. provision Abhidharma, referring to the treatises and teachings; 5. objective Abhidharma, referring to the four truths; 6. fruition Abhidharma, referring to nirvāṇa. The first four are called Abhidharma as that which confronts; the latter two are called Abhidharma as that which is confronted. For both that which confronts and that which is confronted, there are three interpretations each. First, as for that which confronts having three interpretations: 1. That which confronts is called "abhi-", and that which is confronted is called "dharma"; because it is the confrontation of Dharma, it is called Abhidharma, a genitive tatpuruṣa compound. 2. That which confronts is not itself Abhidharma, but that which is confronted is called Abhidharma; that which confronts is called Abhidharma because it possesses Abhidharma, a bahuvrīhi compound. 3. That which confronts is called "abhi-" because it is that which confronts, and is also called Dharma because it upholds its own nature; confrontation is itself Dharma, hence called Abhidharma, an appositional compound (karmadhāraya). In the case of that which is confronted, there are also three interpretations, which can be understood in parallel with that which confronts. According to Master Bao, only that which confronts is called Abhidharma, and in explaining the name Abhidharma, it is solely a genitive tatpuruṣa compound. This explanation is very fine, matching the treatise wonderfully.

First 45 of 206 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

俱舍論頌疏論本 — Classical Chinese