中觀論疏 1
English (machine translation) 1
- Language
- English
Contents
1.1
Commentary on the Preface to the Madhyamaka-śāstra
1.2
Composed by Jizang
1.3
Sengrui was a man from Changle in Weijun. Leaving home in his youth, he took Master Sengxian as his teacher. He once attended lectures given by Kang Senglang of Zhongshan, frequently raising critiques and difficult objections, which that master deeply praised. At the age of twenty-four, he traveled widely through famous regions, constantly expounding and propagating the Dharma, his deportment upright and noble. One text states: "Of fragrant deportment and noble integrity, of icy, frost-like purity of character." When Kumārajīva arrived in Chang'an, [Sengrui] studied under him. Among the three thousand disciples, only eight were admitted to the inner chamber, and Sengrui was foremost among them. As the saying goes, "Among the elder [students] were Daorong and Sengrui; among the younger were Daosheng and Sengzhao." Kumārajīva sighed with praise, saying: "The transmission of my teachings rests upon Daorong, Tanying, and Sengrui!" When Kumārajīva finished translating the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, he instructed Sengrui to lecture on it. He said to Daorong: "In this polemical treatise there are seven places that refute the Abhidharma, where the phrasing is somewhat obscure. If he can manage without asking me, he may truly be called a superior talent." Daorong said: "His intellectual capacity is well endowed; he will not necessarily need to consult you." [Sengrui] then analyzed and untangled it exhaustively, and the assembly revered and admired him all the more. When the Son of Heaven Yao Xing heard of Sengrui's exemplary conduct, he asked Yao Song, the Marquis of Ancheng: "What kind of man is Sengrui?" Yao Song replied: "He is like the pine and cypress of the Ye and Wei rivers." Later, [Yao Xing] personally summoned Sengrui for an audience, and said to Yao Song: "He is indeed an exemplar for the whole world; how could he be confined only to the Ye and Wei?" Thereupon his admirable reputation spread far and wide, resounding both near and abroad. He composed prefaces to the Madhyamaka-śāstra, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, the Dhyāna-sūtra, and others, which were elegantly circulated in the world. He lived to sixty-one years of age. More than one person composed a preface to the Madhyamaka-śāstra: Tanying composed a preface to his commentary on its meaning, and Daolang of Hexi also composed a treatise preface. Yet Master Sengrui's phrasing and meaning are complete and comprehensive, his principles and particulars refined and profound. When the Preceptor of Xinghuang Temple gave lectures, he would always read it aloud, truly trusting and loving antiquity, transmitting rather than inventing. However, its prose contains subtle and obscure points, which I shall briefly explain. Regarding this single preface, it is divided into seven sections: first, general indication of the person and the teaching; second, explaining the title; third, recounting the treatise's background and origin; fourth, praising and explaining its function; fifth, discussing Piṅgala, who annotated the treatise; sixth, extensively praising the four treatises; seventh, the author's own expression of modesty. "The five hundred verses of the Madhyamaka-śāstra" indicates the teaching that was composed. "Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna" introduces the person capable of composing it. The Way does not operate in isolation; its propagation depends upon people. Therefore, the Way that was propagated is clarified first, and the person who propagated the Way is introduced after. Furthermore, titling it with the five hundred verses of the Madhyamaka-śāstra honors the teaching; [naming] Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna reveres the person. Furthermore, the first clause distinguishes it from the teachings of the two extremes; the second clause differentiates him from persons of the Hīnayāna. As for the term "Madhyamaka-śāstra," this has already been fully explained in the Profound Meaning. Now, in explaining the preface, five meanings are briefly clarified: First, this treatise determines the biased and the orthodox within the Buddha's Dharma, and decides the root origin of gains and errors; hence Nāgārjuna designated it by the name Madhyamaka-śāstra. Second, this text treats the principle of the middle and the real, deriving its name from the true principle it expounds; thus it is called Madhyamaka-śāstra. The "Chapter on Karma" states: "The meaning clarified by this treatise is free from views of annihilation and permanence; therefore it is called Madhyamaka-śāstra." Third, Nāgārjuna composed altogether three treatises: first, the extensive Akutobhayā; second, the abridged Dvādaśamukha-śāstra; and now this is an intermediate, balanced exposition, and is therefore called Madhyamaka-śāstra. Fourth, expressing meaning through phrasing: this treatise has no background account at the beginning, and leaves off surplus elaboration at the end, having only the primary text to express the meaning and principle through its words; hence it is called Madhyamaka-śāstra. Fifth, the Great Being Nāgārjuna is a person of the middle way, and this is what a person of the middle way has produced; deriving its title from the person, it is called Madhyamaka-śāstra. "Five hundred verses": having previously indicated its title, it now introduces the number of verses. There are two kinds of verses: First, the śloka, which refers to the Central Asian method of counting scripture, being a general verse. "General verse" means that regardless of whether it is prose or metrical verse, so long as the count reaches thirty-two syllables, it constitutes a verse. Second, specific verses, which refers to rhymed, concluding verses; regardless of whether they are four-, five-, six-, or seven-syllable lines, so long as four lines are complete, it constitutes a verse. As for "verse," in the full phonetics of foreign countries it should be pronounced jieye (geya), or called geya; here, retaining an abbreviation, it is simply called ji (verse). Ji means line or stanza. Furthermore, regarding the term ji, the Chinese books of this land also contain this sound, glossed as "exhausting the meaning" (jie), signifying that it completely exhausts the clarification of the meaning; hence it is called ji. But verses formed of concluding lines are of two kinds: first, loka verses, which are verses summarizing prose; second, gāthā verses, which are independent verses. The verses referred to in this treatise are specific verses among the two kinds of general and specific, and the latter kind among the two, namely independent verses. As for "five hundred": examining the text, there are altogether four hundred and forty-six verses; this either rounds up to the major total, or the translation was not complete, and it is called five hundred based on the original. The texts of various sūtras and treatises are of three kinds: first, prose only, such as the Śata-śāstra; second, verse only, such as this text; third, having both kinds, such as the Dvādaśamukha-śāstra and its sort. Nāgārjuna's Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā states: "Some take pleasure in prose, some in metrical verse, and some in miscellaneous decorative expressions and phrasing; as their preferences differ, I accommodate them without rejection." Treatises having three types being so, the principle of the sūtras is likewise. As for Nāgārjuna: according to Sanskrit phonetics, it should be ga-na-fu-li-cha (Nāgavṛkṣa); gana means nāga (dragon), and fulicha means vṛkṣa (tree). The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: "Tonglongmo means nāga, and fulicha is the general name for tree; its specific name is arjuna, like the pear and plum trees here." Question: What stage of person was Nāgārjuna? Answer: The traces of the sages are unfathomable; their heights and depths cannot be easily measured. We merely narrate their depth based on scriptures and biographies. Master Sengrui said: "His merits reached the tenth bhūmi, his path modeled after one in his final rebirth before Buddhahood; he was a person of consummate study." A biography states: "The sun of wisdom had already set, and this man made it shine once more. The world had long slept in darkness, and this man awakened them to study. Foreign countries erected shrines to him and served him like a Buddha. How could one know that he was not a Buddha manifesting as a bodhisattva?" Master Yuan of Mount Kuang said: "His name penetrated the stages of the Path, his virtue was equipped with the three patiences; he was also an exalted person of the ten bhūmis." According to the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, Bodhisattva Mahāmati asked: "After the World-Honoured One passes into nirvāṇa, who will uphold the Buddha's Dharma?" The Buddha answered: "Mahāmati, you should know that in the great land of South India there will be a bhikṣu of great virtue named Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna. He will preach the supreme Mahāyāna Dharma to people, be able to destroy views of existence and non-existence, abide in the initial Pramuditā-bhūmi, and be reborn in the Land of Peace and Nurture (Sukhāvatī)." Commentators explain this passage differently. The old view held that Nāgārjuna was a person of the first bhūmi. Yao Dao'an of Guannei, who studied the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, said: "This was Nāgārjuna guiding sentient beings to enter the first bhūmi, whereas in reality he was a person of the tenth bhūmi." Question: Which reliance among the [four] reliances was he? Answer: If he is said to be of the first bhūmi, he was a person of the second reliance; if he was one of consummate study, he was a person of the fourth reliance. Question: What are the four reliances? Answer: Taking one classification for the moment: in the Hīnayāna, prior to the path of seeing, those possessing afflictions are the first reliance; srotāpannas and sakṛdāgāmins are the second reliance; anāgāmins are the third reliance; and arhats are the fourth reliance. With respect to the Mahāyāna, compared to that, those at the stage of the ten dedications are the first reliance; the first bhūmi through the seventh bhūmi are the second reliance; the eighth and ninth bhūmis are the third reliance; and the tenth bhūmi is the fourth reliance. According to the Laṅkāvatāra, he was the second reliance; according to Master Sengrui, he was the fourth reliance. Because in Śākyamuni Buddha's Dharma there is no separate Bodhisattva Saṅgha, and Nāgārjuna was an ordained monastic, he is categorized according to the stages of the Hīnayāna. "His name penetrated the stages of the Path" is a general designation for the bodhisattva stages. "His virtue was equipped with the three patiences" refers to the patience of faith, the patience of compliance, and the anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti. Question: Did Nāgārjuna have other names? Answer: Yes. The Mādhyamakānugama-śāstra was composed by Vasubandhu. Calling it the Treatise in Accordance with the Middle means it extensively cites sūtras such as the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā to corroborate and explain the eight negations. The eight negations are precisely the middle way; explaining the meaning based on the text, it is called the Mādhyamakānugama-śāstra. The Mādhyamakānugama-śāstra refers to "Bodhisattva Nāgajaya (Longsheng), not Nāgārjuna"; they should now be reconciled. Because he perfected his supreme path through the dragon (nāga), he is called Nāgajaya; this merely narrates his courtesy name. The former presents both the monastic and lay aspects, so there is no conflict in meaning.
1.4
From "What is designated as the middle" onward is the second [section], explaining the title of the treatise. However, the treatise exists in two versions, extensive and abridged: the abridged only says "Madhyamaka-śāstra," while the extensive adds "Contemplation" (Mādhyamika). Yet both this extensive and abridged have their own significance. What is called the abridged refers to the meaning of principle and teaching: "middle" is the principle that is expounded, and "treatise" is the teaching that expounds it; this leaves no principle ungathered and no teaching uncollected. Question: Why is that? Answer: The middle that is expounded consists of the three kinds of middle way: the conventional truth middle, the ultimate truth middle, and the middle that is neither ultimate nor conventional. The teaching that expounds consists precisely of treating these three middles; hence no teaching is uncollected and no principle is ungathered. As for the extensive version possessing all three: "middle" is the path traversed by the Buddhas and bodhisattvas; "contemplation" refers to the mind capable of contemplating belonging to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas. When the Buddhas discern it through contemplation in their minds and proclaim it with their mouths, it is designated as a sūtra; when bodhisattvas discern it through contemplation in their minds and proclaim it with their mouths, it is labeled a treatise. Only when all three are present is the meaning complete. This has already been explained within the Introductory Section. However, the middle has three aspects: first, clarifying the middle in opposition to the bias of annihilation and permanence; this is the middle in opposition to bias. Second, the middle that exhausts bias: establishing the name "middle" in order to exhaust the sickness of bias; hence it is named the middle that exhausts bias. There is also another meaning: it is also called the middle because the sickness of bias having been exhausted, the middle is attained. Question: What is the difference among these three: the middle that exhausts bias, the middle in opposition to bias, and the absolute middle? Answer: The profound intention has already been clarified; now I briefly recount it again. The middle that exhausts bias washes away annihilation and permanence, and is therefore expediently forced into the name "middle." Although it exhausts bias, the middle remains, as a sūtra states: "Sentient beings give rise to views of two kinds: first, annihilation; second, permanence." Freedom from permanence and annihilation is called the middle way. The middle in opposition to bias refers to directly refuting the sickness of bias based on the principle that is expounded; hence it is called the middle. The absolute middle is of two kinds: First, as the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "There is lesser nirvāṇa and greater nirvāṇa. Lesser nirvāṇa refers to speaking of bliss in opposition to suffering. Greater nirvāṇa transcends both suffering and bliss, and only then is it called great bliss." This transcendence still retains a relational sense. Second, regarding this absolute nirvāṇa, one cannot speak of its suffering or bliss; not knowing how to praise it, one expediently forces upon it the name "bliss" and calls it great bliss; only this is absolute bliss. The meaning of "middle" is likewise; one must deeply understand this intention. Question: What is the difference between solitary emptiness and the absolute middle? Answer: Many do not comprehend the purport of solitary emptiness. Merely relying on the text of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: the eighteen emptinesses clarify emptiness in opposition to existence, and are called relative emptiness; being neither empty nor existent, dependent on nothing, is called solitary emptiness. I now say: that is merely a dialectical expression, but examining the intention of solitary emptiness, it is not so. Because originally and ultimately there is nothing whatsoever, and there is only the Dharma-nature of true reality, it is called solitary. This is the orthodox interpretation. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says "suchness alone remains," which also shares this meaning. Question: Why is this solitary spoken of under the name of emptiness? Answer: Because it is ultimately free from all afflictions and existing dharmas, it is called empty. The Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra states: "Because it is inexpressible, because it has no characteristics, it is called empty." The Lotus Sūtra says "ultimately returning to emptiness," and the meaning is also like this.
1.5
Regarding Master [Seng]rui's explanation of the title, there are three parts: first, explaining the name; second, the intention behind establishing the name; third, the benefit. "That it takes 'Middle' as its name illumines its reality": "illumine" has two meanings. First, "illumine" glosses as revealing; establishing this name of "Middle" reveals the reality of principle. Second, it is perhaps naming it by way of an analogy: without a lamp there is no means to illuminate and make distinct an object; without the name "Middle" there is no means to reveal the reality of principle; hence it says "illumine." "That it takes 'Treatise' as its designation exhausts its expression": "exhausts" is a name for expressing fully without remainder. For instance, the treatises of the Hīnayāna that possess grasping do not exhaust the refutation of heresy and are inadequate in discussing what is correct; being teachings with remainder, they are not called "exhausting." In contrast to this, it is designated as "exhausting." It means that since the principle discussed is exhausted, its words are also exhausted; hence it says "exhausts expression"; it does not say that being without words is designated as exhausting. Master [Seng]rui only explains "Madhyamaka-śāstra" and does not elucidate "Contemplation" (Mādhyamika), because "Middle" is principle and "Treatise" is named as teaching; since these two encompass it, he does not explain "Contemplation." From "Reality cannot be awakened to without names" onward is the second [part], the intention behind establishing the name. Now, the ultimate Way is neither middle nor non-middle, neither name nor non-name, yet establishing the name "Middle" is because, although principle is neither middle nor non-middle, in order to enable beings to attain awakening, the name "Middle" is tentatively established. As for "expression cannot be exhausted without explanation; therefore a treatise is deployed to make it clear," if questions and answers were not deployed to explain the expression, then the words proclaiming the Way would have no means to be exhausted. Because questions and answers are deployed to state and explain these expressions, the words proclaiming the Way can only then become manifest and clear. Examining it through this text, we therefore know that it is not being without words that is designated as exhausting expression. However, expression is just the treatise itself; it merely allows mutual and reciprocal explanation, hence it says that expression cannot be exhausted without explanation, and a treatise is deployed to make it clear. "Once its reality is proclaimed" is the third [part], the benefit of establishing the name. First it clarifies principle and teaching; next it recounts the attainment of benefit. "Once its reality is proclaimed" means principle is revealed. "Once its expression is clear" means teaching is clarified. From "in the bodhisattva's practice, the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa" onward distinguishes the attainment of benefit. Because principle is revealed and words are clear, by means of the teaching one awakens to principle, so that the cause is completed and the fruit established. Moreover, this is just as the Lotus Sūtra reveals only one principle and teaches only one person. "Clearly untied and released" borrows the words of Zhuang Zhou to reveal the meaning of the establishment of cause and fruit: "Rest in the timely and dwell in accord; sorrow and joy cannot enter"—this was called the untying of the Emperor's bondage. Here two meanings can be stated: first, when the bodhisattva's cause is completed and the bodhimaṇḍa shines forth, one forever departs from the joy and sorrow of samsāra, just as sorrow and joy do not enter. Second, having bondage is called binding, while being without bondage is designated as release. Having bondage refers to the extremes such as annihilation and permanence; these are designated as bondage. Since all views are silenced, it is therefore termed release.
1.6
"Now, stagnant delusion arises from inverted views": this is the third [section], recounting the circumstances of the treatise's composition. Within the text there are two parts: first, recounting the circumstances; second, clarifying Nāgārjuna's appearance in the world to refute delusion and compose the treatise. In the first part there are two lines: first, the delusions of ordinary beings; second, the failings of sages. The delusions of ordinary beings refer to the ninety-six heterodoxies and the class of those who give rise to craving. The failings of sages refer to those who cling to the Hīnayāna and to those of the Mahāyāna who grasp. These two encompass every failing. The first refers to self-established failings; the second to delusions arising from received teachings. The delusions of ordinary beings are divided into two: first, giving rise to the causes of delusion; second, the fruits attained through delusion. The two lines on the causes of delusion apply likewise to the fruits. As for "stagnant delusion," "stagnant" means attached and stuck, which is the class of those who give rise to craving. "Delusion" means confused and errant, which is the class of those who give rise to views. Sentient beings in samsāra, as householders, give rise to craving, and as renunciants, give rise to views; thus in the Lotus Sūtra they are poisonous insects and evil spirits—within the burning house there are only these two things; furthermore, the roots of samsāra are solely craving and views, as spoken in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. "Arises from inverted views": the preceding line clarified the branches of craving and views; this line next traces their root. The reason craving and views exist is entirely that they arise due to erroneous, inverted views. As the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says, "Good and evil arise from the body; the body arises from covetousness; covetousness arises from false discrimination; false discrimination arises from inversion." Therefore, what is seen through inversion is the root of the craving and views of householders and renunciants. Moreover, since the preceding line clarified that there are craving and views, the subsequent line also has inversion and views. Inversion is just perversion; views mean false discrimination; hence just as there are two in the branches, there are also two in the root. "The three realms thereby sink and drown": this second part clarifies the fruit of failure. Giving rise to the two causes of craving and views brings about the two fruits of sinking and drowning in the three realms. Being submerged in water is drowning; sinking into earth is sinking. The Lotus Sūtra says: "Sentient beings are submerged amid such various sufferings"; using the great ocean as a metaphor for suffering, being submerged within suffering is the meaning of drowning. The three realms are impermanent, and the house collapsing and falling is the meaning of sinking. Hence, giving rise to the two causes of craving and views brings about the two fruits of impermanence and suffering. As the Lotus Sūtra says: the two causes of evil spirits and poisonous insects bring about the two fruits of the house collapsing and fire rising to burn the house. Master [Seng]rui's intention is entirely the same as that of the Lotus Sūtra and the discourse of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. "Partial awakening arises from the wisdom of aversion": this second part distinguishes the failings of sages. Because the failings of ordinary beings are heavy, they are clarified first; because the failings of sages are light, they are distinguished next; this is the sequence of heavy and light. Furthermore, the former was external delusion, while this distinguishes internal confusion; this is also the sequence of external being heavy and internal being light. Within the text there are two parts: first, directly distinguishing the failing; second, mutually elucidating and explaining attainment and failing. In the first part there are two lines: first, distinguishing the cause of the failing; second, clarifying the fruit of the failing. There are two causes of failing, and the fruits of failing are also two, corresponding to the above. As for "partial awakening," in contrast to the delusions of ordinary beings above, the sages are designated as awakened. When viewed toward the Mahāyāna, they are designated as partial; hence it says "partial awakening." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Persons of the two vehicles are called crooked in view"; it also says: "If with the mind of a śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha one says there is no giving, this is named breaking the precepts and wrong view." The Lotus Sūtra says: "one-eyed, base, and low"; "one-eyed" means that what is seen is not correct; that is, the two views of emptiness and existence are both incorrect views. Taking the palace as true birth and the twin śāla grove as true extinction is called incorrect vision. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The emptiness of the two vehicles is named mere emptiness"; hence their view of emptiness is not correct. Furthermore, the two vehicles do not possess the correct contemplation of the middle way, as spoken in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra: "They only see emptiness, but do not see non-emptiness." Therefore, not practicing the middle way and not seeing the Buddha-nature is named "partial awakening." "Arises from the wisdom of aversion": the second line traces the root of their awakening. The reason the two vehicles have partial awakening is that they loathe samsāra and delight in nirvāṇa. As the Lotus Sūtra says: "First they take their wages, and only then remove the dung." Persons of the two vehicles fear old age, sickness, and death, so they cut off greed, anger, and delusion to seek the eternal extinction of nirvāṇa; hence it is called "the wisdom of aversion." "Unyielding rectitude thereby brings about divergence": this second part clarifies the fruit attained. There are also two lines: first, recounting their deluded clinging; second, clarifying the fruit attained. As for "unyielding rectitude" (gengjie), expressions in the non-Buddhist classics vary, and various masters' explanations also differ, yet many do not grasp its essential meaning. What is clarified here as unyielding rectitude is like integrity of resolve: clinging rigidly to the Hīnayāna, they consider themselves ultimate and never turn their narrow minds to advance and seek the great Way; hence it is named unyielding rectitude. "Thereby brings about divergence": this second part clarifies the fruit attained. Since they cling rigidly to the Hīnayāna, they diverge from the great Way. The reason for this is that the Way is truly non-dual, yet they falsely claim it to be two; hence they diverge from the non-dual Way. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Arhats meander and linger with respect to the Buddha Way, and also falsely claim to have attained the Way." These are all the meaning of diverging from the Way. Furthermore, the Way is truly without arising and extinction, yet persons of the two vehicles claim that afflictions arise and by extinguishing them one attains [nirvāṇa] with remainder, and claim that the body and wisdom arise and by extinguishing them one attains [nirvāṇa] without remainder. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "Discriminatingly expounding the arising and extinction of all dharmas and the five skandhas diverges from the meaning of the great Way of non-arising." Now, as this is so for the two vehicles, it is likewise so for the Mahāyāna that grasps: in the end, saying there is delusion to be extinguished and understanding to arise is still of the lesser. "Therefore know that the Great Awakening lies in vast illumination" onward: this second part mutually explains attainment and failing. First, it adduces the great attainment to reveal the small failing. "The Great Awakening lies in vast illumination": this adduces the great attainment. In contrast to the littleness of arising and extinction in the two vehicles, comprehending that all is without arising and ultimately empty is designated as vast illumination. Moreover, the two vehicles only attain the emptiness of persons and do not attain the emptiness of dharmas, which is called small wisdom; the Mahāyāna fully attains both emptinesses, which is designated as vast illumination. Again, the two vehicles also attain both emptinesses, but only by analyzing dharmas to clarify emptiness; hence it is called small wisdom; the Mahāyāna attains the emptiness of intrinsic nature and the emptiness of specific characteristics, which is designated as vast illumination. Again, the two vehicles only attain the emptiness of persons and dharmas within the three realms, which is called small wisdom; the Mahāyāna attains the emptiness within and outside the three realms, which is designated as vast illumination. Again, the two vehicles only see emptiness and do not see non-emptiness, which is called small wisdom; the Mahāyāna sees emptiness and also non-emptiness; hence it is designated as vast illumination. As for "narrow mind," the texts say: "When one man guards the pass, ten thousand cannot advance." This is a name for being constricted and small. From "its illumination is not vast" onward: this elaborates the failings of the Hīnayāna. As for "level existence and non-existence," "level" (yi) glosses as making even; it means being unable to level and eliminate the two views of existence and non-existence. As for "unify the Way and the conventional," the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "In the dharma of the śrāvakas, it has not yet been taught that samsāra is itself nirvāṇa and sentient beings are themselves the Buddha." Therefore the two vehicles cannot unify the Way and the conventional. The Way is nirvāṇa; the conventional is samsāra. As for "whose knowing is not exhaustive cannot tread the middle path or obliterate the two extremes": walking on a mountain is step (jian); treading in water is ford (she); these are specific descriptions. Here the general meaning of walking is taken as treading. Because persons of the two vehicles do not illuminate principle to the utmost, they cannot walk the middle way. "Obliterate the two extremes": "obliterate" means extinguish; it says they cannot extinguish the two extremes. Question: It was stated earlier that unifying the Way and the conventional and leveling existence and non-existence are just obliterating the two extremes. Why say it again? Answer: Master [Seng]rui deeply saw the text's meaning. In the "Chapter on Nirvāṇa" there are two verses. The first says: "Between the world and nirvāṇa, there is not the slightest distinction. Between nirvāṇa and the world, there is not the slightest distinction." This is the meaning of unifying the Way and the conventional. The next verse says: "The actual limit of samsāra and the actual limit of nirvāṇa—between these two limits, there is not a hair's breadth of difference." Since the treatise has both texts, here both meanings are again recounted. That the Way and the conventional are not leveled, and that the two limits are not obliterated, is the sorrow of the bodhisattva.
1.7
Second, refuting delusions to compose the treatise also has two divisions: first, showing that great compassion is inwardly abundant; second, showing specifically the refutation of delusions to compose the treatise. The first is loving-kindness and compassion; the second explains wisdom; these are the two karmas of merit and wisdom of a bodhisattva. Moreover, the first is knowing the disease and discerning the medicine; the second is administering medicine in accordance with the disease. Again, the first is the mind of compassion; the second clarifies the acts of compassion. Question: Why is it that, saying "being and non-being were not leveled, and the two bounds were not obliterated", he explains only these two phrases? Answer: Being and non-being are the root of all views and the basis that obstructs the middle way; hence they are spoken of especially. "The two bounds were not obliterated" refers to ruining the purity of the one path. Furthermore, the former describes what can obstruct, and the latter clarifies what is obstructed; again, the former is the delusion of ordinary beings, and the latter is the confusion of sages; again, the former is outer delusion, and the latter is inner confusion. The words are concise, but their coverage is exhaustive. Regarding "the sorrow of the bodhisattva": having seen ordinary beings deluded, the six destinies in turmoil, and the sages confused, the three vehicles taking divergent paths, he aroused unconditioned great compassion for this reason; thus it is called "sorrow". From "Therefore Nāgārjuna..." onward is the second part, refuting delusions to compose the treatise. This also has two divisions: first, refuting inner delusions; second, refuting outer delusions. It is also first refuting the confusion of sages, and second refuting the delusion of ordinary beings. Question: In the first section, why did he first narrate the delusion of ordinary beings and then clarify the confusion of sages, whereas now he first refutes the confusion of sages and then refutes the delusion of ordinary beings? Answer: There is the text and there is the principle. As for the principle: previously, following the order in which confusions arise, ordinary beings came first and sages came second, the heavy came first and the light came second. Here, following the order of primary and secondary: this treatise primarily refutes the inner and secondarily refutes the outer. It also primarily refutes the errors of clinging to the two vehicles first, and secondarily cleanses the ninety-six heterodox systems later. Regarding the text: in the earlier passage, the confusion of sages was narrated at the end; continuing from the sages, he refutes the sages, and so immediately eliminates the confusion of sages. "Leveled them by means of the middle way": "level" (zhe) means to equalize. Equalizing means that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are non-dual, and sentient beings and the Buddha are equal—this is the middle way. Furthermore, taking the principle of the middle way, he leveled the two bounds to make them equal; thus it says "leveled them by means of the middle way". "Causing those pursuing confusion to look upon its profound intent and undergo a complete transformation": "confused" means deluded; "pursuing" means the principle. This refers to those who are deluded about the principle, namely those who cling to the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of the Mahāyāna with attainment. The "profound intent" is precisely this treatise. Relying on the profoundly mysterious words of this treatise, they thereby alter the attachments of the two vehicles and turn back the bodhisattvas with attainment to return together to non-duality; therefore it is called "a complete transformation". If one adheres to the two vehicles without returning to the one path, or clings to a one-sided Mahāyāna without realizing equality, all of these are clutching the pointing finger and forgetting the moon; it cannot be called a complete transformation. Now, turning from the small to enter the great, turning from attainment to realize non-attainment is like obtaining the moon by means of the finger; hence it is called "transformation". "Subsuming them within imminent transformation" is second, refuting outer confusions. "Subsuming" means gathering and examining. "Imminent transformation": as Master Zhao said: "Is the Way far away? Touch things and it is true. Is the Sage far away? Embody it and it is spiritual." The preface to the Dvādaśamukha-śāstra also holds this meaning; hence it says: "Realizing the Great Awakening in the realm of dreams, abiding in the hundred transformations, whither would one return?" This is just like the treatise text clarifying that all dharmas are unarisen; hence it says "imminent transformation". "Causing guests of profound awakening to lose their inquiries in morning clarity": this relies on criticizing Zhuangzi of China to reproach the outer paths of India. This is truly because in this land there were no other outer paths, and Laozi and Zhuangzi were taken as the ultimate; therefore he reproached them. "Inquiries" refers to words that ask about the good way. "Lose" means to discard. As for "morning clarity", Guo Xiang said: "Abandoning death and life, discarding the inner and the outer, open and unobstructed, acting upon seeing the catalyst; hence it is called morning clarity." He also said: "Morning" means dawn; "clarity" means thorough penetration. He also said: penetrating to the principle in a single morning; hence it is called "morning clarity". He also said: penetrating the principle before the morning has passed. "Before the morning has passed" means not taking a long time, still just penetrating in a single morning; hence it is called morning clarity. Now it is clarified that once one awakens to this treatise, knowing that all dharmas are true reality and unarisen, one must forget the matters of question and answer and morning clarity; hence it says "to lose their inquiries in morning clarity". If one no longer inquires of Laozi and Zhuangzi, how could one still accept and follow the six masters, the eighteen omniscient beings, and the ninety-six heterodox systems?
1.8
From "Vast and magnificent..." onward is the fourth part, praising the functional power of the treatise. It also has three divisions: first, praise through revealing the Way and benefiting beings; next, praise through contrasting the great against the small, also called praise by subordinating the small and elevating the great; third, praise in rejoicing at this fortunate encounter. "Vast and magnificent" (dangdang): the Book of Documents says, "The king's way is vast and magnificent, without partiality or partisanship." This indeed obliterates both inner and outer delusions and pacifies the two views of the ordinary and the sage, returning together to the Great Way; hence it is called "vast and magnificent". "Vast and magnificent" is an appearance of broadness and vastness. "Leveling the easy road upon the subtle steps": before Nāgārjuna appeared, empty words and the true teaching flourished side by side, and perilous paths vied with the easy road for passage. Therefore, when the treatise master appeared in the world, he once again smoothed the easy road; hence it says "leveling". Once the easy road was smoothed, then the stages of the bodhisattva's cause and the enlightenment site's fruit could be scaled; hence it says "upon the subtle steps". "Opening the profound gate within the universe": the former was his transforming reaching one region; this clarifies his proclaiming it afar to the six directions. The "profound gate": Laozi says, "Mystery upon mystery, the gate of all marvels." He borrows these words to designate the present treatise. Heaven, earth, above, and below are called "yu"; past, present, and future are called "zhou"; hence it says "opening the profound gate within the universe". "Fanning the gracious wind upon the old branches": the former two lines clarify the revelation of the Way; the present two lines clarify the benefit to beings. "Old branches": "old" (chen) is a name for the decayed and aged. The Mao Commentary on the Book of Songs says, "Cut down its twigs and branches"; a "branch" (mei) is a small bough. "Gracious wind" refers to the spring wind. By fanning the wind of wisdom of this treatise, he causes the sort of ordinary beings to attain benefit. "Shedding sweet dew upon the withered trunks": the former line explains benefiting the ordinary; this passage clarifies benefiting the sage. The former line benefits outer paths; the latter line benefits the Hīnayāna. Again, the former line benefits the Hīnayāna; the latter line benefits bodhisattvas—it possesses all these meanings. "Now, the construction of the Cypress Beam Terrace arose": second, praise through contrasting the great against the small. It also has two divisions: first, the metaphor; second, the application. "Cypress Beam" was the name of a terrace of Emperor Wu of the Han. Outer texts have two traditions explaining this: one says that cypress wood was used for the beams, hence it is called Cypress Beam. When this terrace was first completed, the fragrance of the cypress wood drifted for tens of li. Emperor Yuan contrasted the Cypress Beam Terrace with the Cane Cottage; examining it by this, it should be beams of cypress wood. Another says: the beams were a hundred (bai) in number, hence it is called the Hundred-Beam Terrace. "A thatched and narrow, crude hut": ci ("thatched") means "ordered"; selecting and ordering thatch, hence it is called ci. Ze ("narrow") means that Bian Que's lodge in Chang'an had only one side; hence it is called ze. "Crude" is also the meaning of cramped. Furthermore, the great Cypress Beam Terrace is precisely the great mansion of the Elder in the Lotus Sūtra; the thatched and narrow, crude hut is like the grass hut outside the gate. Master Sengrui's single statement embraces both outer and inner affairs. From "beholding this treatise..." onward is the second part, applying the metaphor. "Despised and perverse" comes from the Analects. "Despised" is like vile; "perverse" is contrary and rebellious. "How fortunate is the Red County of this region!": third, praise in rejoicing at this fortunate encounter, also in two lines. "Fortunate" means a fortunate encounter. "This region": region is called territory; "this" is said in contrast to "that". "That" is collectively called India; subdivided, India has five regions, then sixteen great states, five hundred middle states, and ten thousand small states. "This region" is collectively called the Red County. The Hetu says: To the east of Mount Kunlun, the land is five thousand li square; it is called the Divine Continent and also named the Red County. Yu marked out the land and divided the boundaries within the Red County to make the Nine Provinces, and thus cast nine tripods to stabilize the Nine Provinces. Thus we know that the Red County is the collective name for the Nine Provinces. "Suddenly able to transplant Vulture Peak to serve as its anchor": the Red County had only the Five Sacred Mountains as its anchors, but now it is hypothesized that Vulture Peak was transplanted to anchor the Red County, a metaphor for this treatise transforming the Nine Provinces. "The perilous sentiments of this frontier then received the remaining wisdom of the flowing light": second, reiterating the matter to apply the above metaphor. The Mao Commentary on the Book of Songs says, "Inwardly having the intention to assist the Duke and advance the worthy; outwardly having no private, corrupt, or perilous mind." The Commentary on the Rites says, "Standing lopsidedly is called slanted; hence it says: 'Weary without baring oneself, standing without being slanted.'" "Perilous" means a biased and precarious mind. "The remaining wisdom of the flowing light": the light of the right contemplation of the middle way flows to this land, bestowing benefit upon perilous persons. Why are they called "sentiments of the frontier"? First, designating this land as a frontier land, while that land is called the Middle Country. In the past, Master Hecheng and Dharma Master Yan debated the biased and central nature of this land versus India. Master Yan, being skilled in foreign calendars and calculations, said: "In the month of upright yang, at precise noon there is no shadow; thus we know that India is the upright country." Master Hecheng, though skilled in the calendars and calculations of this land, could not refute him; thus we know that that is the Middle Country and this is called frontier sentiments. Moreover, that land has Buddhas appearing, hence it is called the Middle Country; this land has no Buddhas appearing, hence it is called frontier sentiments. Furthermore, the four reliances and the like appear in that land, hence it is called the upright country; they do not appear in this land, hence it is termed frontier sentiments. Furthermore, wheel-turning sage kings always appear in that land, hence it is the Middle Country; here there are only scattered-grain rulers, hence it is called frontier sentiments. "Remaining light": Nāgārjuna composed the treatise primarily to benefit that land and secondarily to transform this country; hence it is named remaining light. "From now on, the worthy who discuss the Way may at last discuss reality with one another": the Analects says "From now on"; he makes use of this matter. Master Sengrui said: "Before Kumārajīva crossed over, since the lecture halls had been chanting and reciting, the concept-matching (geyi) method was roundabout and deviated from the source, and the Six Schools were biased and did not directly touch [reality]. The texts of the two treatises, the Madhyamaka and the Śata-śāstra, had not yet arrived here, and there was no comprehensive discernment—who could correct them? This is truly why past masters broke off their writings with deep laments, wishing to resolve their questions with Maitreya. From now on, since the two treatises, the Madhyamaka and the Śata-śāstra, have been transmitted to this land, the worthy who discuss the Way may at last discuss reality with one another." Thus we know that this treatise determines the biased and the upright in the Buddha-Dharma, and decides the root source of errors and gains.
1.9
"It is said that in the various countries of India..." is fifth, narrating the commentators on the treatise. This also divides into two parts: first, praising this treatise for being esteemed by various lands; second, separately recounting the commentators. This text says "It is said" to relate [the accounts of] two people: first, what Master Kumārajīva said, hence it says "It is said"; second, in the seventh year of the Hongshi era of the Qin, a kṣatriya of India sailed by boat to Chang'an, and hearing that Kumārajīva's three thousand disciples understood the Mahāyāna teaching, tested and verified them with the two treatises, the Madhyamaka-śāstra and Śata-śāstra. Kumārajīva analyzed and unraveled them for him, whereupon the kṣatriya bowed his head in receipt, endlessly marveling. He then said, "Bhadra-ācārya, you ought to illuminate and shine in India with this brilliance; why conceal this maṇi-jewel away in an outlying borderland?" He also said, "For Xihe's phoenix-drawn reins to conceal their light in a land of the sightless is truly regrettable. For the jewel that shines by night to hawk its treasure to rustic peasants is truly pitiful." This kṣatriya recounted Indian treatise masters reprimanding various Hīnayāna followers, and in praise of Kumārajīva said, "When I was in India, I heard various treatise masters deeply wonder that the Hīnayāna scholars of Jibin praised their own master, comparing him to the shining of the bright moon. Their master was Kumāralāta, who composed the Rīchū-lùn (*Sūryodaya-śāstra). Since Mitrāni's time, there have been few to match him, yet Indian treatise masters scolded [them], saying this was a biased understanding and minor talent, not deserving of this metaphor. But if applied to Master Kumārajīva of the country of Kuci, he would have no cause for shame. Why? Kumārajīva is worthy of comparison to the shining of the bright moon without shame, because he skillfully understands the Madhyamaka-śāstra and Śata-śāstra." "None among those who dare to study the Mahāyāna in India do not savor this treatise": "dare" means certainly, decidedly. "Throat and collar" refer to essential points of doctrine: the throat is essential inside and the collar is essential outside, so they are borrowed as a metaphor. "Those who have dipped their brushes to elucidate and explain it are likewise not few": this reveals that the commentators on the treatise were not just a single master. Master Tanying said, "There were several dozen schools." [Master Dao]lang of Hexi said, "There were seventy schools." As for "brush", the ancients used rooster wing feathers to make pens, hence it is called a brush. Piṅgala is not Vasubandhu: the Fu fazang jing says, "Vasubandhu skillfully understood the meanings of all sūtras, but Piṅgala's commentary on this treatise contains errors and discrepancies." Hence we know he is not [Vasubandhu]. "Where it contains discrepancies, omissions, verbosity, and repetition": briefly, the prose commentary on the verses has four faults: first, the prose commentary contradicts the meaning of the verse; second, the explanation of the verse is insufficient, which is called an omission; third, a few words could clarify the text, yet the prose is repetitive and verbose; fourth, having already explained it in a previous section, it needlessly repeats it later, hence called repetition. Dharma Master Tanying, in his Commentary on the Madhyamaka-śāstra, recounts Piṅgala's faults in four places: first, regarding the verse establishing the four conditions in the "Examination of Causes and Conditions", he says, "This verse was posed as an inquiry; it was merely where Piṅgala overplayed his ingenuity." Second, regarding the explanation of the four conditions having extensive and brief forms, Master Tanying says, "It was merely that Piṅgala was eager to draw analogies but deficient in examining the text." Third, regarding the explanation of the verse in the "Examination of Karma", which says "Though empty, it is not annihilated", Piṅgala says, "'Empty' means there is nothing that can be annihilated"; this is not an explanation. Fourth, regarding the prose commentary in the "Examination of Erroneous Views", he says, "The tangled strings here merely add to the clamor; Nāgārjuna himself had verses to explain it." Now the text says "The Dharma Master edited and supplemented it": the Dharma Master is Kumārajīva. He trimmed its verbosity and repetition, and supplemented its discrepancies and omissions. "Conveying the principle of the sūtra to the utmost": "sūtra" refers to the Madhyamaka-śāstra; foreign countries designate treatises as sūtras. The Fu fazang jing says, "Āryadeva composed the Śata-śāstra-sūtra"; the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says, "Kātyāyana composed the Jñānaprasthāna-sūtra." Hence we know treatises are designated sūtras; he conveyed the principle of the treatise to the utmost. "Though in literary form and phrasing it was not yet completely flawless": as Master Tanying recounted in four places.
First 9 of 48 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 中觀論疏 — Classical Chinese