瑜伽論記 5

English (machine translation) 5

Language: English

Above, the explanation of the essential doctrines of the compendium of sūtras is concluded. From here down, the sūtras on miscellaneous meanings are explained. The text is divided into two: first, eleven 'furthermores' citing distinct sūtras to explain them; second, gathering and holding the noble teaching through four dharmas.

5.4

The first sūtra explains that bodily and mental seclusion induces realization in accordance with reality. The second sūtra [explains] skillfully cultivating calm and insight to realize the knowable.

5.5

In the third sūtra on mutual skillfulness in samādhi, attainment, and so forth, the text is divided into three: first, citing the sūtra to indicate [the topic]; second, two 'furthermores' explaining the four lines of the sūtra; third, from 'What is abiding?' onward, distinctly explaining the fourteen phrases of the sūtra. By inverting 'equal affection' below to 'unequal affection' as one phrase, they become fourteen phrases. Under the phrase 'well-tamed', there are 'grasping by practice' and 'grasping by dharmatā' explaining the phrase in 'well-tamed'; these two are headings in the text, not explanations of the sūtra phrases. In the four lines, the first 'furthermore' pairs samādhi against [attainment] to make four lines; the name 'samādhi' designates eleven kinds; first presenting the first, the three samādhis, it pairs them against the four dharmas in attainments to make four lines.

5.6

Next, 'and thus…' below analogizes the remaining ten qualities under samādhi; of the six attainments, the remaining two are also paired one by one to form four lines. That is, among the various samādhis, emptiness, signlessness, and so on are the most sublime, and because their objective referents are transformed, they exclusively receive this designation. Among the various attainments, the bases of overcoming and the bases of totality are capable of accomplishing transformations; the cessation attainment and non-conceptual [attainment] are mindless and tranquil; hence they are singled out. In the two singled-out lines, first the cessation [attainment] is presented to mark the non-conceptual, and then the bases of totality are presented to analogize the bases of overcoming; because they are implied and briefly shown, their meaning can be understood.

5.7

In the second set of four lines, only the first two lines are made. 'One who is skilled in samādhi but not skilled in attainment' means: one who is skilled in knowing the distinctions among the names, phrases, and syllables of samādhis, but not in the attainments that can be entered. Regarding 'the distinctions of various aspects and marks, and so forth': this says that skillfulness has the three prajñās as its nature; in terms of the distinctions among the names and phrases expressive of those samādhis, there is skillfulness and lack of skillfulness, whereas attainments are differentiated according to skillfulness or lack of skillfulness in entering and emerging, as can be known by comparison. The former four lines are explained in terms of the distinct substances of samādhi and attainment, and the difference of skillfulness and unskillfulness in the functions of entering and emerging; this second set of four lines is made in terms of samādhi and attainment being identical in substance but different in meaning. The Tripiṭaka Master says: in the Western regions there is this doctrine: the designations 'samādhi' and the like are called *samādhi*, while the essential nature of samādhi is called *samāpatti*; hence the two lines are made. Regarding 'up to not having heard from the Buddhas, and so forth': regarding samādhi, not being skilled has three meanings: first, not having heard from a Buddha; second, not having heard from foremost bodhisattvas; third, not having personally realized the foremost ultimate; therefore one cannot be skilled in the teachings on absorption. The single word 'not' above carries down through the three clauses. Jing says: either the first bhūmi is called the foremost ultimate, or the tenth bhūmi is called the foremost ultimate.

5.8

Regarding 'subsumed under the conceptual substance and marks of non-concentrated stages': this refers to dispersed objects; since these are dharmas not of the same category as the concentrated stage, contemplating dispersed objects is called emerging from absorption. 'What is to be done in concentration: that is, food, drink, and so forth': these are the matters that ought to be done upon emerging from absorption; because having arrived at this time, one ought to emerge from absorption. Regarding 'the mark of the objective referent: that is, the conceptual substance. Because of taking this as an object, one can enter the various absorptions': because all tainted dharmas are called conceptual, the objective referents of absorption are called conceptual substances, since the marks have no separate nature apart from perception; or this objective referent takes the substantive marks manifested by conceptualization among the five dharmas as the marks of the objective referent. Regarding 'due to the attained absorption, not being able to know beyond this and above, etc.': this states that the lower three times do not know the higher. In the *Viniścaya* it says: 'Relying on the four dhyānas, one knows the minds of persons in the formless realm across [stages]'; this is spoken in terms of great bodhisattvas, and thus there is no contradiction. Regarding 'instigation means being able to briefly summarize the extensive meaning of phrases and sentences': this is the power of retention through hearing summarizing extensive meanings. 'What is equal affection? It means shame, conscience, affection, and so forth': this means generating twelve dharmas prior to absorption: first, shame; second, conscience; up to the twelfth, joy; using these as preparatory minds, one then attains absorption. In this, the Tripiṭaka Master says: 'equal' refers to attainments; 'affection' refers to the preparatory mind for absorption; loving the superior qualities of attainments is therefore called 'equal affection'. Jing says: shame, conscience, and so forth all accord with the correct Dharma; 'equal affection' is the correct affection for the correct principles. Ji says: having equal affection for these twelve is why it is called 'equal affection'. There are two kinds of expedients: first, proceeding to the two paths of increase and decrease; second, calming, uplifting, and equanimity, as already explained above in the thirty-two marks.

5.9

In the fourth sūtra, the Sūtra on Distinguishing the Dhyānas, the text has four parts: 1. citing the sūtra to present [the topic]; 2. briefly explaining the four turnings; 3. extensively explaining the marks; 4. concluding.

5.10

Regarding 'in these four turnings, one should know that at two times there is inversion, etc.': Master Ji explains: as for the four turnings, 1. when advancing toward tainted samādhi, there is inversion; 2. when tainted absorption tends toward retrogradation, there is inversion; 3. when tainted absorption actually retrogrades and is lost, there is non-inversion; 4. when taintless absorption advances, there is non-inversion. Or, the first two, regarding advancement as retrogradation, are called inversions: first, regarding the advance of tainted absorption as retrogradation; second, regarding the advance of taintless absorption as retrogradation; thus both are called inversions.

5.11

The treatise says: regarding the second, inversion when retrograding from samādhi: when cultivating and advancing in the taintless while tending toward retrograding into the tainted, it is called an inversion. In the latter two, regarding retrogradation as retrogradation is called non-inversion: first, when tainted absorption actually retrogrades, regarding it as retrogradation; second, when taintless absorption retrogrades to the tainted, regarding it as retrogradation from tainted absorption. Under regarding retrogradation as retrogradation, the text has three 'furthermores': 1. retrograding due to relish; 2. retrograding due to conceit and depreciation; 3. retrograding due to greed and deceit.

5.12

Regarding the second non-inversion, which inverts the first non-inversion, one should know its marks: that is, when one attains taintless absorption and is about to lose tainted absorption, knowing retrogradation in accordance with reality—this is called non-inversion. The third non-inversion: knowing retrogradation when tainted absorption retrogrades.

5.13

The fourth non-inversion: knowing the retrogradation of the tainted when the taintless advances. Regarding the difference between the fourth and the prior second here: formerly, when cultivating the preparatory stages of the taintless, having not yet realized it, one regarded the absorption previously attained as retrograding; now, in the fourth, when directly attaining the taintless, the tainted does not function and this is called retrogradation; hence they differ. Jing says: the second non-inversion inverts the first non-inversion.

5.14

Regarding 'How should one know its marks?': formerly one retrograded from preparatory absorption, and later one retrogrades from fundamental absorption; hence it says 'inverts the prior'. These latter two retrogradations are both based on ordinary beings who subdue afflictions and then retrograde again. Regarding 'From relying on such... up to establishing the four turnings': this means that relying on such two non-inversions regarding flourishing and decline, the four turnings are established; hence it concludes.

5.15

In the fifth sūtra, the Sūtra on Distinguishing the Four Examined Practices, the text has three parts: 1. citing the sūtra to present [the topic]; 2. briefly revealing the marks of the examined practices; 3. extensively revealing them.

5.16

The examined practices take the fourfold pure absorptions as what is examined.

5.17

What examines is the three prajñās.

5.18

Here, one person completely cultivates four kinds. The four, such as the inferior portion, correspond respectively to the four, such as according with retrogradation; the explanation is as in the text.

5.19

In the sixth sūtra, the Sūtra on Not Experiencing Perception or Non-Perception regarding the Six Objects: regarding 'these dharmas, whether real or existent, are completely unexperienced', this means not experiencing the specific characteristics of objects. Regarding 'still less experiencing perception': one does not even experience the perception of the six objects; 'how much less non-perception': one also does not experience that non-perception. Below, 'having no mark of the eye' explains 'still less experiencing perception'; 'not experiencing specific characteristics' explains 'completely unexperienced'; 'not experiencing non-perception' explains 'how much less non-perception'. Saying 'due to revulsion and disillusionment, its power overpowers and eclipses... up to yet there being perception': this means that through repeated taintless revulsion, there is consequently no perception of things regarding the eyes and so forth, and only perceptions of the various principles of the four truths arise. 'Not experiencing non-perception': both perception and non-perception are entirely unexperienced; because of not conceptualizing any perception, neither the perception of existence nor the perception of emptiness is experienced; therefore, in the principle of cessation—tathatā—one contemplates tranquility. The intention here is to state that being separated from all conceptual marks is called 'non-perception': when non-conceptual gnosis directly realizes tathatā, the previous marks of suffering, pleasure, and so forth are also all separated from; thus perception and non-perception are entirely separated from; hence, being separated from the marks of perception is called 'non-perception'. It also says 'dwelling in the cessation attainment, and so forth': this is based on the arising of perceptions in that cessation attainment, explaining the sūtra text above: 'still less experiencing perception, how much less non-perception'.

5.20

The seventh explains the Sūtra on the Four Paths of Progress: initially, as an ordinary being, one attains fundamental dhyāna, and later, hearing the Dharma, one is able to induce the path of seeing; this is also called relying on the higher mind to cultivate that taintless higher perception. That second person relies on the threshold samādhi to attain the first fruit; desiring to abruptly sever the afflictions of cultivation of the nine stages and proceed to realize arhatship, from the first fruit they subdue the afflictions of cultivation of the desire realm; attaining the tainted fundamental absorption and so forth is called inducing the path of cultivation; because tainted retrogradation is called the path of cultivation, it is also called relying on higher perception to cultivate the higher mind.

5.21

The third practitioner is called 'one who attains both.' Regarding the statement 'because śamatha and vipaśyanā operate in mutual intermixture': when this person was an ordinary being, they first subdued the cultivated afflictions of the desire realm and were able to produce the first root absorption. Later, relying on the threshold concentration, they entered the direct realization of the truths and attained the third fruition. Their gaining entry into the root dhyāna is called 'further leading forth the superior mind and wisdom,' and it also 'leads forth the path of cultivation.' Hence, the conclusion below states: 'Because the second and third lead forth the path of cultivation.' As for the fourth practitioner: having first attained a contaminated dhyāna, later, through hearing the Dharma, they are able to enter the path of seeing and realize the third fruition, which is called 'leading forth the path of cultivation.' In this way, on the border [of this attainment], they sever the remaining afflictions of cultivation and also lead forth the path to realize arhatship, because they lead forth the path of the non-learner. Hence, the conclusion below states: 'Because the fourth path of practice leads forth both.' Reasonably, this person also relies on the superior mind to lead forth superior wisdom; however, they are not like the first person who only leads forth the path of seeing, because they lead forth all three paths together, and for this reason constitute a distinct fourth type.

5.22

Eighth: in the explanation of the Sūtra on the Four Pure Excellences, there are three parts: first, indicating the Sūtra on the Pure Excellences; second, explaining the meaning of pure excellence; third, explaining the characteristics of pure excellence.

5.23

Regarding the phrase 'what is acquired, what is realized, and the morality and so forth led forth': 'what is acquired' refers to complete dharmas; 'what is realized' refers to dharmas that are assimilated; 'the morality and so forth led forth' refers to generating vigorous effort so that what is not yet complete is made complete.

5.24

The four pure excellences are: 1. morality; 2. samādhi; 3. view; 4. liberation. Here, the terms 'acquisition', 'realization', and 'morality and so forth led forth' all apply equally across the four pure excellences.

5.25

'Completion' and 'assimilation' are restated and explained. 'Generating vigorous effort so that what is not yet complete is made complete' constitutes the essence of the morality, concentration, view, and liberation led forth, and is therefore not restated and explained. Furthermore, 'what is acquired' is morality, 'what is realized' is concentration and view, and 'what is led forth' is liberation. 'Morality and so forth' means that the 'and so forth' comprises concentration, view, and liberation. Furthermore, 'what is acquired' is morality, 'what is realized' is concentration, and 'what is led forth' is wisdom and liberation, which briefly omits the knowledge and vision of liberation; alternatively, both wisdom and the knowledge and vision may be called right view, fully encompassing the five aggregates. Regarding the 'seven how-are-theys' below: the first one is morality; as for the two each for concentration, view, and liberation, they are explained and matched as appropriate. Although one abides in the four phrases and six factors of endowed morality as explained extensively in the Śrāvakabhūmi, the two kinds—morality and concentration—are called 'complete' at the stage of ordinary beings and are 'assimilated' upon attaining the noble stage. Concentration contains two aspects: 1. When separating from desire, the first six mental applications have not yet attained the root, so they are not yet called 'complete'; when one attains the fruition of ultimate preparatory application, one attains the root concentration and it is called 'complete.' 2. Attaining the lower three dhyānas is not yet called 'complete'; only when one attains the fourth dhyāna is it called 'complete.' Liberation is in the stage of the learner; not yet complete, it is called 'complete' in the stage of the non-learner. Liberation at all times is called 'assimilated liberation.' The analytical cessations obtained through the obstacle to concentration and the obstacle to things are called 'liberation.'

5.26

Ninth: in the explanation of the Sūtra on the Five Marks Reflected upon by a Bhikṣu Practicing Purification of Mind, regarding the phrase 'evil and unwholesome thoughts of sensual desire and so forth': the seven kinds of investigation and reflection—unwholesome thoughts of sensual desire, ill-will, harm, relatives, country, immortality, and former pleasures—all constitute the substance of the obstacles. Regarding 'there are briefly three kinds of persons and so forth': this generally marks the three grades of discursive thought, which differentiate into five, and are explained individually below. The first, the practitioner of soft discursive thought, brings about the cessation of the seven kinds of thought by reflecting on the marks of the truths such as cause and effect. Based on middling discursive thought, there are two kinds: 1. seeing the faults of discursive thought; 2. bringing about the cessation of the seven thoughts through unmindful reflection. Based on superior discursive thought, there are also two kinds: 1. not bringing about the cessation of all at once at the beginning, but necessarily subduing them gradually by skillful means; 2. if still unable to subdue them, then giving rise to aversion and dread, bringing about the cessation of the seven thoughts through extensive reflection.

5.27

Tenth: in the explanation of the Sūtra on Clearing Away Dust, the text has three parts: first, citing the sūtra to raise the question; second, explaining the metaphor of the three purifications; third, presenting the dharmas to match it.

5.28

From the line 'Just as with raw gold within the nature of gold' down: giving rise to the mind and going forth is called the 'initial purification'; in the stage of the path of accumulation, attaining dhyāna and so forth is using purification to enter the noble stage. This is the 'subsequent purification.' Therefore, the treatise says that one is not constrained by conditioned practices: relying on the faculty of wisdom, one subdues [afflictions] so that the gotra becomes manifest, and by completely eradicating the defilements, it is established as 'purification.'

5.29

Eleventh: in the explanation of the Sūtra on Reflecting on the Three Marks, the three marks are: 1. calming; 2. uplifting; 3. equanimity. If one exclusively cultivates calming and uplifting during the preparatory application for concentration, one does not correctly examine dependent origination and so forth; because one does not examine, the mind is not correctly concentrated, one cannot directly realize [the truths], and one cannot exhaust all taints. To become an arhat, one frequently reflects on equanimity, and then reflects on dependent origination, until the path of exhausting taints is fully completed.

5.30

The above eleven sections have individually cited sūtras to explain them. Next, in the passage 'Furthermore, through four correct dharmas, one upholds the noble teaching,' there are three parts: 1. indication; 2. distinction; 3. explanation.

5.31

'Seclusion' is the place for entering concentration; 'cultivation' is the concentration and wisdom cultivated; 'the fruition of cultivation' refers to the unconditioned and conditioned fruitions that are the acquired liberation and the severance of the two obstacles. From 'How is it that having cultivated śamatha' down explains this third part. 'Grasping at all existents' is grasping at dharmas, grasping that all existents are real; bringing about the cessation of this grasping at dharmas is called the 'cessation-realm.' The three realms spoken of here differ from what is explained below in the Viniścaya. There, it is also said that the complete severance of the afflictions of seeing is called the 'severance-realm,' the complete severance of the afflictions of cultivation is called the 'realm of detachment,' and the complete cessation of all other contaminated dharmas is called the 'cessation-realm.' In the minor treatises, it is said that the severance of eight fetters is called the 'severance-realm,' the severance of the fetter of attachment is called the 'realm of detachment,' and the cessation of the remaining contaminated entities is called the 'cessation-realm.' Regarding 'freedom from dispute': the general intention is to explain that because the Buddha and his disciples have identical views, the meanings they teach are identical, their words and phrases do not differ, and they mutually conform without dispute; this causes the Buddha's Dharma to abide long and the places of benefit and joy to be extensive, which is called 'equally pervasive and moistening.' It is not like non-Buddhists who give rise to views and establish doctrines with different words and divergent phrases. When it says 'whether the meaning, phrase, or syllable,' it does not mention 'name,' because citing the first and last subsumes what is in the middle. Regarding 'the first phrase': that is, the preceding phrase, down to 'one then uses this phrase to ask the second [person] and so forth': this briefly explains equal pervasiveness regarding the phrase. What is transmitted by Jing, Tai, Bei, and Ji is largely identical. For instance, when Venerable Ānanda, among five hundred bhikṣus, used this initial phrase to ask one monk, and again used this initial phrase to ask a second monk, and so on up to five hundred, they all replied, 'It is so, it is so.' Only then is it called the master and disciples' meanings and phrases having no discrepancy, being equally pervasive, and mutually conforming. The text below shows by contrast: 'If one were to ask the first person based on the aggregates and so forth': if one were to ask the first person based on the impermanence of the aggregates, and going to the second person, next ask about the impermanence of the dhatus, this could not be called 'equally asking and pervasively moistening with respect to the first phrase.'

5.32

Now, based on the broader treatise citing the sūtra: Ānanda went to ask the Elder about the meaning of attaining liberation. The Elder replied that by cultivating two dharmas, one attains the fruition of liberation from the three realms. Ānanda next asked the Elder's five hundred disciples, who answered separately without contradicting the Elder. He went to ask the Tathāgata, and the Tathāgata answered in the same manner as the Elder understood: because of severing all conditioned formations, it is called the 'severance-realm'; because of detaching from all conditioned formations, it is called the 'realm of detachment'; because of extinguishing all conditioned formations, it is called the 'cessation-realm.' This is detailed in that treatise. This Elder and his disciples held views identical to the Tathāgata's answer to Ānanda's question, being equally pervasive, and the teachings and meanings conforming without the slightest discrepancy; therefore it is called 'freedom from dispute.'

5.33

Among the four realms and states of the stage of non-samāhita: next is the second, explaining the non-concentrated states. The Commentary states that it reverses the preceding and is easy to understand: in essence, it consists of the entire desire realm and all dispersed dharmas in the upper two realms. However, observing the meaning of this treatise, among the twelve indeterminacies, the seventh consists of the first five mental applications of the upper realms, the ninth and tenth are the seven mental applications of the upper realms, and the eighth consists of the defiled dharmas of the upper realms. Thus, this stage does not merely reverse the preceding stage, but also encompasses all dispersed dharmas of the upper two realms.

5.34

The text is divided into two: first, raising the question to indicate [the topics]; second, following with individual explanations.

5.35

Regarding the reason for establishing the distinctions of these twelve kinds in detail in chapter sixty-three of the Viniścaya: based on the first indeterminate stage, in steadying the mind one should correctly apprehend the marks, namely the blue-bruised mark and so forth. This means that because the nature of the five consciousnesses is indeterminate, they race toward sensory objects, and greed and so forth arise; to bring them to cessation, one contemplates the blue-bruised mark and so forth to steady the mind.

5.36

Based on this meaning, there are two theories in the Western Region:

5.37

One says: the five consciousnesses are exclusively contaminated and of indeterminate nature, because according to the sūtra there is no indeterminate mind among the eighteen unshared dharmas of the Tathāgata, and the treatises also state that the fifteen dhatus are exclusively contaminated. Therefore, we know that the Tathāgata does not possess the five consciousnesses; his kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna is either the sixth consciousness or the seventh consciousness.

5.38

The second says: the five consciousnesses also extend to the uncontaminated, because the Tathāgata's five consciousnesses are constantly in concentration.

5.39

Regarding the statement that the Tathāgata has no indeterminate mind: the Avataṃsaka states, 'The eye faculty enters absorption, while the ear faculty arises from samādhi,' and so on. The treatises state that the fifteen dhatus are contaminated and inherently indeterminate based on the two vehicles and ordinary beings, not based on other stages. Among them, some say that the embodiment of kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna becomes manifest during the bodhisattva's path of cultivation.

5.40

Some say that it only arises initially at the stage of Buddhahood, as explained in the tenth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi and the fourth fascicle of the Buddhabhūmi. Alternatively, because some lack pliancy, they are not stages of concentration, referring to the minds and mental factors bound to the desire realm. Chapter sixty-three says: 'Relying on this, in order to attain mental application, one should diligently cultivate.' The intended meaning of these words is that in order to attain the mental application of the upper realms, one should diligently cultivate wholesome minds of the desire realm; or, feeling aversion toward the desire realm's dispersed stage lacking pliancy, one diligently cultivates in order to attain the mental application of the upper realm's stage of pliancy. The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi has two opinions: One opinion holds that the desire realm lacks pliancy, taking this text as proof; and that the statement 'the eleven wholesome [factors] pervade all stages' means they co-occur throughout the three stages of having investigation and reflection, and so forth. Another opinion holds that the desire realm also has pliancy, and its preparatory applications for concentration also attain the concentrated stage, because they also slightly possess the meaning of being harmonized and facile; except for the preparatory application for concentration, the remaining minds of the desire realm all lack pliancy and are called indeterminate stages, not that it is entirely absent; and saying that the eleven wholesome factors pervade all stages refers to all nine stages. The remaining ten indeterminate stages are as explained in chapter sixty-three.

5.41

Among the stages with mind and without mind: the first pair of concentrated and dispersed has been clarified above.

5.42

Below, the latter pair—possessing mind and unconditioned—is explained. The text is divided into two: first, raising the question to indicate the five gates; second, explaining them individually.

5.43

In the establishment of stages, it is differentiated solely based on the first five stages, and the establishment of stages is not based on the others. The Tripiṭaka Master explains: speaking in terms of reality, among the seventeen stages, the stage associated with the five groups of consciousness, the mental stage, the stage with investigation and with reflection, the stage without investigation and with reflection only, the two stages of hearing and thinking, and the stage with mind—these seven stages belong to the stage with mind. The mindless stage and the stage without remainder—these two stages belong exclusively to the mindless stage. The stage of samāhita, the stage of non-samāhita, the stage without investigation and without reflection, the stage arisen from cultivation, the three stages of śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas, and the stage with remainder—

5.44

these eight stages extend across both stages, with mind and without mind. Although this is the case, the author of the treatise, based on brevity, differentiates the presence and absence of mind with respect to the five stages. Jing further explains: because these five stages have already been explained above, the differentiation of possessing mind and lacking mind is made with respect to these five; since the rest have not yet been explained, they are not compared and analyzed. Although the samāhita and non-samāhita stages were also explained earlier, because the investigation and reflection of these two stages are already subsumed within the three stages of having investigation and reflection and so forth, they are not discussed separately.

5.45

Ji says: merely differentiating having mind and lacking mind based on the essence of the stages—where the five consciousnesses and the mental stage have [mind] and are called 'with mind', and without [mind] are called 'without mind'—leaves the characteristics still not apparent. One would not yet know where across the nine stages the meaning is established. By presenting the essential nature of the stages and differentiating having mind and lacking mind among the three characteristics of the stage with investigation and so forth, one then knows the difference between the two states across the nine stages, and also knows which of the concentrated and non-concentrated stages has mind and which lacks mind. Therefore, there is no further need to differentiate having mind and lacking mind based on the concentrated and non-concentrated stages; nor do the practices of the three wisdoms, the three vehicles, the six stages, having remainder, or lacking remainder, go beyond the preceding gates.

5.46

In these fourth and fifth sections, the distinction between having mind and lacking mind is examined, yet it is not based on the differences of having or lacking mind in the physical embodiment; hence having mind and lacking mind is distinguished relying only on the five stages. In the stage with investigation and with reflection, mindless sleep and mindless fainting are not called the 'mindless stage' because sleep and fainting are not invariably mindless; whereas in the stage without investigation and without reflection, the attainment of non-conception and so forth are invariably mindless. Furthermore, sleep and fainting are called 'stages with mind' with reference to the principal consciousness, while the attainment of non-conception and so forth are called 'mindless stages' with reference to the guest consciousness, being spoken of by way of elliptical brevity.

5.47

Furthermore, relying on the method of conforming to the provisional principle, lack of mind is distinguished: the Sarvāstivādins say that fainting and sleep have mind. However, the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī also distinguishes the stage with mind by relying on five meanings, and establishes the mindless stage through seven kinds of causes. Having mind is distinguished relying solely on the essential nature of the stages; lacking mind is established relying on this third [point], arising and non-arising. There it speaks of seven causes, while here it speaks of eight causes: here sense-bases and sense-objects are differentiated, whereas there they are combined under 'deficiency of conditions'. These eight causes and conditions are not all possessed by a single dharma; in general they speak of all dharmas that arise and do not arise. As for 'deficiency of attention' (manaskāra): if the various minds and mental factors simultaneously uniquely lacked attention, they could not arise; alternatively, if there were no attention in the preceding thought-moment, the subsequent mind would not arise. Master Jing evaluates this, saying: The latter interpretation should be correct. If one takes simultaneous attention, then there would be no time when minds and mental factors do not arise, because attention is constantly present within the mental conglomerate. Since eight causes are spoken of here, whereby the mind either arises or does not arise, one must know that it necessarily requires preceding attention for the subsequent mind to arise. If there is no attention desiring to apprehend visible form and so forth, the subsequent mind will not arise. There are naturally cases where there is no prior attention, yet it arises upon confronting an object, just as one attending to visible form suddenly hears a sound, etc.; but it is spoken of as arising from attention according to the majority. As explained in fascicle sixty-three: regarding the state of mindless sleep, the Sthaviravāda says that sleep is of two kinds: first, mental sleep, which induces mental dharmas; second, physical sleep, where during sleep there is nourished materiality. In the Mahāyāna, sleep encompasses both having mind and lacking mind. In the establishment according to the ultimate truth, it is said that in nirvāṇa without remainder the ālaya[-vijñāna] is permanently eradicated; if so, does the realm of sentient beings increase or decrease?

5.48

It is explained: In various sūtras and treatises, it is always said that the realm of sentient beings neither increases nor decreases, because sentient beings have existed from beginningless time and are not newly existent; thus there is no increase, yet they are limitless. When [practitioners of] the two vehicles of fixed gotra enter [nirvāṇa] without remainder, they fall outside the category of living beings, so in principle there is also decrease; but following the majority, it is said that there is no decrease, just like a single drop in the ocean.

5.49

However, in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra and elsewhere, Śreṇika asks: 'Does the body precede afflictions, or do afflictions precede [the body]? If the body precedes, why is it said that only because of afflictions can there be a body? If afflictions precede, by whom were they made, and where do they abide?' The Buddha answered Śreṇika: 'Although afflictions and the body are simultaneous and neither precedes nor follows, only on account of afflictions can there be a body, and never because of a body can there be afflictions.' Although the non-Buddhist posed the challenge in terms of a first beginning, the Buddha answered him in terms of beginninglessness; therefore one knows there is no increase.

5.50

Furthermore, relying on the Anuttarāśraya-sūtra, it is said that the realm of sentient beings is the tathāgatagarbha; because it is shared by all sentient beings and is unconditioned, based on this meaning it is said that the realm of sentient beings neither increases nor decreases. The intention of that sūtra is that the real gives rise to the false to establish the realm of sentient beings; hence it says tathatā is called the realm of sentient beings. Although [practitioners of] the two vehicles enter [nirvāṇa] without remainder and all aggregates are eradicated, the substance of this realm eternally remains and is not annihilated; based on this meaning it is said that sentient beings neither increase nor decrease.

5.51

If the Mahīśāsaka says: 'Sentient beings are prior and afflictions are posterior'—if so, being without a cause, how could there be sentient beings?

5.52

It is explained: Just as with the forbearance of the category of suffering, where initially there is no homogeneous cause (sabhāga-hetu), how can it arise? If that can arise without its own cause, this should likewise be so.

5.53

Now in this text, those of fixed gotra are permanently eradicated and ultimately do not attain Buddhahood; while the Nirvāṇa Sūtra and elsewhere say none fail to attain Buddhahood. The establishment of doctrinal scope each has its basis. The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: 'The śrāvakas, having passed through many kalpas in the nirvāṇa realm, indulge in the wine of samādhi and remain intoxicated for a long time; later they awaken from it and generate the great aspiration.' Ancient masters used this to prove that none ultimately enter nirvāṇa without remainder and are permanently eradicated. Ji says: Relying on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, this refers to transformed śrāvakas, and is not truly so.

5.54

The stage arisen from hearing: The preceding nine stages distinguish the objects of the three vehicles. The following six stages distinguish the practices of the three vehicles: the first three are common practices, because all three vehicles are able to cultivate the three wisdoms; the latter three are distinct practices, because according to their capacities and in accordance with the Dharma they accomplish their own vehicles. Furthermore, the first three are practices of provisional means, while the latter three are fundamental practices. Furthermore, the first three are practices to be trained in, while the latter three are practices to be accomplished.

5.55

Hearing refers to the wisdom arisen from hearing, because hearing takes the teaching as its condition; the various dharmas accomplished taking this as a cause are called 'arisen from hearing'. Thus that wisdom and its associated dharmas, together with the objects of hearing—whether words or meanings—and the fruitions obtained, constitute the essence of this stage. Where it was said earlier under attention that hearing conditions only dharmas, it is because it seldom conditions meanings.

5.56

The text of this stage is divided into three parts: first, concluding the preceding, inquiring into what follows, and marking the opening of the treatise; second, questioning and listing the names of the five fields of knowledge; third, explaining them individually in turn.

5.57

Regarding 'If briefly spoken, with respect to the five fields of knowledge... up to reading, reciting, and recollecting': this reveals the wisdom arisen from hearing produced in relation to the teachings of the five fields of knowledge. In this context, the Tripiṭaka Master offers two explanations: one says that this listening and so forth is innately acquired wisdom, whose meaning is the same as the innately acquired mind that receives and upholds the teachings in the Hīnayāna treatises; the other says that wisdom arisen from hearing associated with the six consciousnesses constitutes its nature; wisdom has three grades: the lower is called innately acquired, while both the middle and upper grades are called wisdom arisen from hearing.

5.58

Ji gives two further explanations:

5.59

One says: When preceded by the wisdom of reflective discernment, listening, and later mental reception, reading, reciting, recollecting, and so forth in the mental stage only then constitute wisdom arisen from hearing; the initial wisdom of discernment of the five consciousnesses together with listening, and the concurrent mental consciousness listening, reading, and reciting, are innately acquired wisdom, because they are not distinct.

5.60

The second says: Being preceded by the wisdom of reflective discernment is innately acquired wisdom; listening, receiving, reading, reciting, and recollecting are all wisdom arisen from hearing. Although the simultaneous five consciousnesses are not the primary wisdom arisen from hearing, because they are induced by the provisional wisdom arisen from hearing of the mental stage, the distinct mind accomplished on the basis of hearing is also wisdom arisen from hearing. Even in the mental stage, if reception, reading, reciting, and so forth are indistinct, they are all innately acquired wisdom.

5.61

Furthermore, regarding 'in the meanings based upon the collections of words, phrases, and syllables, understanding without error': this means that within the meanings of the five fields of knowledge, preceded by the wisdom of reflective discernment, the wisdom arisen from hearing is produced. In the Sarvāstivāda, wisdom arisen from hearing exclusively relies on the teaching; wisdom arisen from reflection either relies on the teaching or is divorced from the teaching; wisdom arisen from cultivation is exclusively divorced from the teaching, like three men learning to swim, etc. The Kośa refutes this, saying: 'If wisdom arisen from reflection relies on the teaching, it would not differ from wisdom arisen from hearing; if reflection is divorced from the teaching, it would not differ from wisdom arisen from cultivation; how then to distinguish them?' That treatise explains: 'Although hearing and reflection both rely on the teaching, hearing does not discriminate while reflection can discriminate, hence there is a difference; wisdom arisen from cultivation is divorced from the teaching.' Now in the Mahāyāna, all three wisdoms take the Dharma teachings [as object], yet they differ in whether they discriminate or do not discriminate; because prior to absorption one hears and reflects on the Dharma teachings, subsequently wisdom arisen from cultivation enters absorption and takes both dharmas and meanings as objects.

5.62

In the third part, individually explaining the five fields of knowledge, it first distinguishes the field of inner knowledge. The text has two parts: first, setting forth the four gates; second, explaining them individually in turn.

5.63

Regarding the four gates: First, positing of topics: the positing and establishment of topics encompassed by the Tripiṭaka; 'topics' refers to the meanings of the topics, meaning the differences of meaning in the sūtras, vinaya, and śāstras. Furthermore, because it is the fundamental topic on which the meanings discussed in all treatises rely, it is given the name 'topic'. Second, positing distinctions of conceptual designations: this refers to the expressive names; because names, phrases, and syllables all arise from conception, names are called conceptual designations. Furthermore, in the Western Regions, names are mostly called conceptual designations. Moreover, names and so forth lack intrinsic substance and are conventionally established following sound; according to conceptual understanding they are designated as expressive, hence names and so forth are called conceptual designations. Third, conceptual designations of the meanings of the holy teachings: the meanings expressed by the holy teachings can encompass the holy teachings. Fourth, the characteristics of what should be known by means of the Buddha's teaching: from two items expressed by the Buddha's teaching increasing up to ten items expressed by the Buddha's teaching, these are called conceptual designations of what should be known by means of the Buddha's teaching. The third encompasses the teachings by means of the principle, and the fourth reveals the principle by means of the teachings.

5.64

Sūtra means here 'concordant'. Vinaya means 'taming'. Mātṛkā means 'matrix'; collecting the meanings of the various sūtras and clarifying them through debate and discussion, it generates the specific meanings expressed by the sūtras, hence it is called 'matrix'; these are what were formerly called xiuduoluo, bini, and modelejia.

5.65

In the distinctions of conceptual designations, there are four uddānas: the first uddāna has twelve gates; the second uddāna has fourteen gates; the third uddāna has nine gates; the fourth uddāna has ten gates.

5.66

'Phrases, namely the six internal sense-bases and so forth': Expressing the self-nature of dharmas is called a name; expressing the differences among dharmas is called a phrase. Here it expresses the differences among dharmas, and is therefore called a phrase. Because the broader subsumes the narrower, names are included within it. Phrases are of five kinds, such as intermediate and so forth: if produced of eight syllables, it is an intermediate phrase; this means four phrases of thirty-two syllables make a śloka. Texts of sūtras and treatises mostly rely on this count; regardless of prose or verse, so long as it reaches thirty-two syllables, it was formerly called a shoulu. Those produced of six syllables or more are initial phrases; those of twenty-six syllables or fewer are final phrases; if fewer than six syllables, it is a short phrase; if exceeding twenty-six syllables, it is a long phrase.

5.67

Limitless spheres: Because they are located in the ten directions and the temporal periods of the three times, they are all called 'limitless'.

5.68

Among the four assemblies, it explains only the male four assemblies, without upāsikās. Moreover, upāsikās are subsumed under śukla; but because of their taking morality among the assembly as their nature, they are separately set apart. The thirty-seven factors of awakening, the four fruits of asceticism, the absence of dispute, knowledge resulting from resolve, the six supernatural powers, and so forth are as explained in the Śrāvakabhūmi. The five Mahāyāna topics, the four thorough searches, knowledge according with reality, the three natures, and the three non-natures are as explained in the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī. The four realities, the five kinds of Mahāyāna, the five limitlesses, the inconceivable, majestic virtue, superior resolve, and so forth are as explained in the Bodhisattvabhūmi. The fourteen gates of dharmas below the spheres of the six internal sense-bases are called dharmas of the Śrāvakabhūmi.

5.69

Below the five Mahāyāna topics, there are fourteen gates of qualities which are Mahāyāna dharmas. As for the distinction between emptiness of the person and selflessness of the person, and emptiness of dharmas and selflessness of dharmas: emptiness refers to the self-nature that is emptied, while selflessness refers to the absence of its function and differentiated meanings. Furthermore, emptiness refers to the principle of the two emptinesses, while selflessness refers to what is grasped; or reversing this explanation, thus the two are distinguished.

5.70

Contemplative practice of the middle way: as stated in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, Madhyāntavibhāga, and elsewhere, it is neither exclusively empty nor exclusively non-empty, leaving behind superimposition and deprecation, subtly according with the middle path.

5.71

The self-nature of great awakening of five aspects: the eighth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā says it refers to the substance of the fundamental transformation obtained by surpassing the two vehicles.

5.72

Capacities: namely, the ten masteries: (1) over lifespan, (2) over mind, (3) over requisites, (4) over karma, (5) over birth, (6) over aspiration, (7) over superior resolve, (8) over supernatural power, (9) over knowledge, and (10) over dharma.

5.73

Expedient means: namely, the four kinds of manifestations: (1) manifesting bodhisattva practice to transform those whose faculties are not yet mature; (2) manifesting a Tathāgata to transform those whose faculties are already mature; (3) manifesting the gathering of śrāvakas; (4) manifesting the taming of pratyekabuddhas.

5.74

Activity: there are two kinds: (1) temporary: teaching and transforming beings not yet liberated and turning the Tathāgata's wheel without resting; (2) ultimate: performing beneficial actions for sentient beings through the Buddha's inconceivable virtues, revolving unceasingly.

5.75

Regarding "return", that treatise terms it cessation, which is returning to nirvāṇa, and therefore this also has two aspects: first, temporary, in which the Buddha temporarily manifests entering parinirvāṇa for the sake of already liberated sentient beings; second, ultimate, referring to the perpetual cessation of the afflictions, traces (vāsanā), and suffering. Among the five types of the Great Vehicle, the eighth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā states: The "seed" corresponds to the chapter on Gotra in the Bodhisattvabhūmi. "Entry" corresponds to the chapter on Aspiration (bodhicittotpāda). "Sequence" corresponds to the chapter on Abodes (vihāra). "Correct practice" corresponds to the remaining chapters. The "fruit of correct practice" corresponds to the two chapters on Great Awakening (mahābodhi) and Establishment. Initial aspiration refers to the mind of awakening (bodhicitta); having the seed and being compassionate toward sentient beings constitutes entry into awakening; the pāramitās are the sequence of the stages; gathering sentient beings is the mental activity of the Great Vehicle; perfecting oneself and others in succession is the fruit of correct practice, because the fruit of the twofold benefit fulfills the Buddha's virtues.

5.76

Furthermore, the "initial" refers to the seed; "aspiration" refers to entry; "compassion toward sentient beings" refers to the sequential pāramitās; "gathering sentient beings" refers to correct practice; and "perfecting oneself and others in succession" refers to the fruit of correct practice. This explains the present text in accordance with matching the chapters of the Bodhisattvabhūmi.

First 76 of 520 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

瑜伽論記 — Classical Chinese