English (machine translation)

Language: English
Extent: 61 passages, 15,452 words
Text: complete digital text
Source: pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.1847 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…

1 — 61 parts

Text

1.1

Composed by the monk Fazang of Chongfu Monastery.

Explaining the title; the intention of reverent devotion in the verses; the meaning within the Jewel of the Buddha; the meaning of "store" within the Jewel of the Dharma; the meaning of the greatness of function being exclusively wholesome; the meanings of enlightenment and non-enlightenment; explaining the meaning of the two marks of conforming to defilement; explaining the meaning of original enlightenment; the meaning of inherently existing and produced through cultivation; the meaning of the seven headings in "causes and conditions of arising and ceasing"; the meaning of the one heading in arising and ceasing; the meaning of the four headings in the perfuming of "defiled dharmas"; the meaning of the seven headings in the perfuming of "pure dharmas"; an outline of the text; the meaning of the four kinds of generating the [bodhi-]mind in "discriminating the orientation of aspiration"; outlining and explaining the meaning of correct practice; one meaning in "non-duality of form and mind"; explaining the meaning of ālayavijñāna possessing affliction; the meaning of merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges within the tathāgatagarbha; the meaning of arising and ceasing and un-arising and un-ceasing compositely forming ālayavijñāna; the meaning of the nine marks; the two meanings of tathatā; the meaning of the marks of pure wisdom and inconceivable [karma]; the meaning of the four mirrors in "essence and marks of enlightenment"; the passage on the mutual dependence of initial and original [enlightenment]; "ignorance and deluded mind" each having two meanings in the perfuming of defiled dharmas; the meaning of the four propositions in the pratītyasamutpāda of the pure division; the meaning of the pratītyasamutpāda of true and deluded in the "aspect of arising and ceasing"; the meaning of the dharmakāya; the four propositions on true and deluded minds and objects; the meaning of the non-obstruction of the two truths; the meaning of the two truths; the meaning of defiled and pure; the tathāgatagarbha; the meaning of the four calumnies.

1.3

First, explaining the title: because "Mahāyāna" has seven meanings, it is called the Great Vehicle. First, because its path is supreme: the treatise states, "Being supreme over the two vehicles, it is therefore called the Great Vehicle." Second, because it is capable of arriving at the great place: the treatise states, "The Buddhas are the greatest; this Mahāyāna is capable of arriving [there], therefore it is called great." Third, because it is mounted by great beings: the treatise states, "Because the Buddhas and great beings ride this." Fourth, because it is capable of accomplishing great tasks: the treatise states, "Because it can extinguish the great suffering of sentient beings and bestow great benefits, it is therefore called great." Fifth, because it is ridden by great persons—also called ridden by many beings: the treatise states, "Because it is ridden by great bodhisattvas such as Avalokiteśvara, it is therefore called great." Sixth, because it fathoms the source and bottom of dharmas: the treatise states, "Because it can exhaust the bottom of all dharmas, it is therefore called great." Seventh, because it encompasses dharmas fully: the treatise states, "As the Buddha stated in the Prajñā[pāramitā], the meanings of the Mahāyāna are immeasurable and boundless; by this reason it is called great."

1.4

Furthermore, explaining Mahāyāna has three aspects. First, discerning the name has four [points]: 1. In terms of dharmas, there are three, namely the three greatnesses and two conveyances, as explained in the treatise below. 2. In terms of practice, there are seven, as discerned in texts such as the Abhidharmasamuccaya. 3. In terms of persons and dharmas, there are seven, as stated in the Dvādaśanikāya-śāstra. 4. Discerning "great" directly: that is, taking the dharma itself as cause, with encompassing as its meaning. Further, discerning the meaning of "vehicle": borrowing a metaphor to make the name, conveyance being its function; the essence and function are mentioned together, hence it is called "Great Vehicle." Moreover, the treatise states, "Because it rides upon the great nature, it is called the Great Vehicle." The explanation says: here, the true nature is all-pervading, hence called "great"—that is, what is ridden; wondrous wisdom rides it, hence called "vehicle"—that is, the rider. This is a determinative compound (tatpuruṣa). The treatise states, "Being both vehicle and great, it is called the Great Vehicle." Here, the wisdom of the entity itself is capable of movement, hence called "vehicle"; because its nature is vast and extensive, it is called "great"; this is an appositional compound (karmadhāraya). Second, clarifying the essence and nature has two [points]: 1. Directly taking nirvikalpajñāna as the essence of the vehicle, which concurrently encompasses the tathatā upon which it relies, as well as remaining supreme practices and so forth. 2. Directly taking tathatā as the essence of the vehicle, with wisdom and so forth also concurrently encompassed, because they are all accomplished by the real. Third, functional activity has two [points]: 1. In terms of the three Buddha-natures, as the Fo xing lun states: "Self-nature is what is ridden; being brought forth is the rider; the attained fruition is the place arrived at by the vehicle." Here, "what is ridden" is a carriage (shèng); "the rider" is to ride (chéng). 2. In terms of conveying the cause to achieve the fruition, there are three: (1) conveying practice to cause it to increase; (2) conveying afflictions to cause them to be extinguished; (3) conveying the principle to cause it to be manifested. The first is the active agent, and the latter two are what is acted upon; these are the three virtues in nirvāṇa, namely prajñā, vimokṣa, and dharmakāya. In terms of texts, these are the three kinds of āśrayaparavṛtti, as the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "1. Transformation of the mind, meaning because the true nature manifests. 2. Transformation of the path, meaning because practice gradually increases. 3. Transformation of the counteractive, meaning because the obstacle of afflictions is extinguished." In this treatise, "shattering the composite consciousness" and so forth is transformation by extinction; "manifesting the dharmakāya" is transformation by manifestation; pure wisdom is transformation by increase. Other meanings may be inferred accordingly. 1. Regarding the phrase "Mahāyāna Awakening of Faith" (Dacheng qixin), there are two approaches with four meanings. First, within the approach of mind and object: 1. Mahāyāna is what gives rise, and the faithful mind is what is given rise to; hence it is called the awakening of faith of the Mahāyāna. 2. Awakening faith is what believes, and Mahāyāna is what is believed; hence it is called the awakening of faith in the Mahāyāna. Second, within the approach of essence and function: 1. Discerning in terms of subsuming function into essence: this faithful mind is accomplished by the internal perfuming of tathatā and external conditions; because it is not different from the root, because it is real, awakening of faith is precisely Mahāyāna; hence it is called "Mahāyāna Awakening of Faith." 2. Discerning directly with respect to functional activity: this faithful mind is vast and extensive, hence called "great"; from subtle to prominent, by virtue of its conveyance, it is called "vehicle." It is both the awakening of faith and the Mahāyāna; hence it is simply called "Mahāyāna Awakening of Faith."

1.5

Second, within the third [section] of the verse, on the intention of reverent devotion, one verse has four lines, and its progressive divisions are four: 1. It may be taken collectively as one, namely the task to be accomplished. 2. It may be divided into two, namely the upper line being the persons for whose sake it is made, and the remaining lines being the benefits accomplished. 3. It may be separated into three, namely the first line being the persons for whose sake it is made, the middle two lines being the practices accomplished, and the final line being the virtue arrived at. 4. It may be dispersed into four, namely the first line being the persons for whose sake it is made, the second line being the faults departed from, the third line being the virtue accomplished, and the fourth line being the virtue arrived at.

1.6

Third, in the Jewel of the Buddha, it may be taken collectively as one, namely the Buddha. Or it may be taken collectively as two, namely the first verse clarifying function, and the two lines of the subsequent verse clarifying essence and marks. Or it may be three, namely two lines in the first verse clarifying the saṃbhogakāya, and the latter one line clarifying the nirmāṇakāya. Or it may be four, namely within the saṃbhoga[kāya], the upper line clarifies mind and the lower line clarifies form.

1.7

Fourth, regarding the "store of merits" within the Jewel of the Dharma, "store" has three meanings: 1. The meaning of accumulation, because it accumulates dharmas internally to propagate them. 2. The meaning of containment, because it gathers and encompasses both internal and external. 3. The meaning of giving rise, because its outflowing virtues accomplish benefit. The dharma of principle possesses these three meanings: with respect to inherent virtues, it has the first meaning; with respect to those teachings, practices, and fruitions, it has the latter two meanings. Practice and fruition again have two meanings: practice and fruition each accumulating virtues for themselves has the first meaning; further, looking toward self-nature and looking toward principle, they have the second meaning. Fruition looking toward practice and teaching has the meaning of giving rise; practice looking toward both fruition and teaching has the meaning of giving rise. The teaching looking toward the three established before possessing all three meanings may be known accordingly.

1.8

Fifth, within the section explaining the doctrine, question: Why is it that previously, when clarifying the greatness of essence, it pervaded all dharmas without distinguishing between defiled and pure, whereas its marks and function are exclusively wholesome and do not extend to the unwholesome? Answer: The principle of the greatness of essence pervades all dharmas and cannot admit distinctions. If outside tathatā there were separately an ignorance serving as the essence of the unwholesome, there would be multiple faults; let us briefly demonstrate this with two points: First, it would be identical to the non-Buddhists clinging to primordial matter (prakṛti) as permanent, because it would exist of itself and not be produced from causes. Second, sentient beings would ultimately never attain liberation, because possessing an intrinsic essence, it could not be severed; if it arose it would arise eternally, or it could also constantly not arise. Because of these faults, outside tathatā one cannot separately establish ignorance as the essence of the unwholesome, nor can unwholesome dharmas and so forth serve as the marks and function of tathatā. If they were its marks and function, there would also be multiple faults; let us briefly explain this with two points: First, the fault of confusing causes and effects, in that following wholesome causes one would obtain bitter fruits. Second, when sages realize tathatā, they would give rise to unwholesome and evil karma. Because of these faults, the unwholesome cannot serve as the marks and function of tathatā. Question: If so, then the unwholesome should not take tathatā as its essence. Answer: It is precisely because unwholesome dharmas take that tathatā as their essence that, by being contrary and non-concordant, they are named unwholesome; furthermore, because they are contrary to the real they do not depart from the real, and because they are contrary to the real they are not its function.

1.9

Sixth, in explaining original enlightenment and original non-enlightenment, each has three gates: 1. unfolding meanings; 2. origin and arising; 3. composite integration. As for the first: original enlightenment has three meanings: 1. the meaning of having no non-enlightenment; 2. the meaning of having original enlightenment; 3. the meaning of having no original enlightenment. Non-enlightenment also has three meanings: 1. the meaning of having no original enlightenment; 2. the meaning of having non-enlightenment; 3. the meaning of extinguishing non-enlightenment. Second, regarding origin and arising: because there is no non-enlightenment, there can be original enlightenment; because there is original enlightenment, non-enlightenment can be formed; because non-enlightenment is formed, it is called having no original enlightenment; because there is no original enlightenment, there can be non-enlightenment; because there is non-enlightenment, there can be the extinction of nature, hence it is called extinguishing non-enlightenment. Furthermore, because within non-enlightenment there is the meaning of having no original enlightenment, there can be the meaning of original enlightenment. Furthermore, because within original enlightenment there is the meaning of having no non-enlightenment, there can be the meaning of extinguishing non-enlightenment. Furthermore, because within original enlightenment there is the meaning of original enlightenment, within non-enlightenment there can be the meaning of having no original enlightenment. Moreover, the above meanings originate mutually, each being non-dual, together forming three propositions. Furthermore, relying on original enlightenment, non-enlightenment can be formed; when non-enlightenment can know names and meanings, initial enlightenment can be formed. Because initial enlightenment is formed, non-enlightenment is extinguished; because non-enlightenment is extinguished, initial enlightenment is identical to original enlightenment; because it is identical to original enlightenment, there is no initial enlightenment; because there is no initial enlightenment, there is no non-enlightenment; because there is no non-enlightenment, there is no aspect of arising and ceasing—there is solely the one aspect of tathatā. Therefore, one should know that upon arriving at the source of the mind, it is purely tathatā, without arising and ceasing; because there is no arising and ceasing, one cannot even speak of tathatā, so how could there be the distinction of the three bodies? It is only in accordance with the defiled capacities of sentient beings that the three bodies and so forth are spoken of.

1.10

Seventh, regarding producing the two marks by conforming to defilement, question: Conforming to what defilement produces these marks? Answer: There are three [explanations] of this: 1. The mark of pure wisdom arises from perfuming by the power of the dharma of ignorance within one's own mind, while inconceivable karma manifests forms and transformative functions in accordance with the defiled capacities of sentient beings. 2. Both of these arise in conformity with one's own defilement, because only by severing one's own defilement is one able to initiate function; the mark of inconceivable karma is also like this, conforming to one's own defilement. 3. Both conform to the defilement of others: that is, the various bodhisattvas cultivating the ten thousand practices and attaining the Buddha fruit and so forth are all matters that exist in conformity with the ignorance of sentient beings. If one sets aside defiled capacities, there is neither cultivation nor attainment, but the mark of a single taste.

1.11

Eighth, Question: Since original enlightenment is tathatā, why is it called enlightenment? Answer: Whenever enlightenment is spoken of, it has two meanings: first, the meaning of awareness and inspection, meaning that defilement is incapable of defiling it, which is the meaning of severing hindrances; second, the meaning of illuminating awareness, meaning that its own essence visibly illuminates all dharmas, which is the meaning of discerning comprehension. But defilement is originally and inherently separate from it, while virtues have never separately manifested; thus its meaning is fundamentally inherently possessed, and therefore it is called original enlightenment. Furthermore, by these two meanings, it eliminates the two hindrances and manifests the two fruitions, both being accomplishments of its nature. Initial enlightenment also contains two meanings identical to the previous ones; it differs only in the arising of initial enlightenment, but when defilement is exhausted, initial enlightenment is not different from original enlightenment. Why is this? Because of two meanings: first, because it arises from nothing other than original enlightenment, being formed in accordance with defilement, having no separate nature; second, because when enlightenment reaches the source of the mind, it is identical with original enlightenment, without the difference of initial enlightenment. Therefore, there is only one enlightenment possessing both meanings. Furthermore, when exhaustively examining this meaning, there are also not two characteristics: that is, the departure of defilement and the manifestation of virtue—manifestation is precisely the departure of defilement, and thus there is only the one true enlightenment. Furthermore, because defilement is originally and inherently separate by nature, there is no defilement to depart from; because virtue is fundamentally and inherently displayed by nature, there is no virtue to be manifested. Therefore, that true enlightenment is free of enlightenment. For this reason, it is far removed from the subject of enlightenment and that which is enlightened; yet there is no enlightenment that it does not display. Because it is enlightened to all, it is called Buddha.

1.12

Ninth, the aspect of tathatā is explained in terms of the fundamental meaning; therefore the text states: “All sentient beings originally abide constantly and enter into nirvāṇa.” The meaning of initial enlightenment is explained solely in terms of that which is produced through practice, because initial enlightenment takes what was originally absent and now exists as its meaning. The meaning of original enlightenment is explained in terms of what is originally possessed in relation to what is produced through practice, because original enlightenment is spoken of in contrast to initial enlightenment, as should be known according to the text. “The characteristic of the purity of wisdom” and so forth are explained in terms of what is produced through practice in relation to what is originally possessed; therefore the text states: “Original enlightenment, conforming to defilement, produces two characteristics.”

1.13

Question: How do the purity of wisdom and initial enlightenment differ? Answer: In fact, they are not different, because initial enlightenment is simply original enlightenment functioning in accordance with defilement. Now, because their counterparts are different, they are said to have differences. As for the “differing characteristics”: original enlightenment, in terms of defilement, forms the purity of wisdom; remedying defilement and returning to the source, as the counterpart to the source, is called initial enlightenment. Furthermore, since original enlightenment forms the initial and there is no other dharma, in accordance with this meaning it is collectively termed originally possessed. Leaving aside the aspect of tathatā, this is speaking of the origin solely within the pratītyasamutpāda of arising and ceasing. Furthermore, because it is only when initial enlightenment accords with the origin that it is named original enlightenment, and apart from initial enlightenment nothing is accomplished, in accordance with this meaning it is collectively termed produced through practice. Furthermore, because the origin acts as initial enlightenment, the origin is described as originally possessed through production by practice. These identical meanings constitute a single pratītyasamutpāda, like a round jewel: whichever single gate is raised, there is none that is not completely subsumed.

1.14

Tenth, cause and condition have three meanings: first, the pure mind is the cause, and avidyā is the condition; second, the deluded objects are the condition, and the fundamental consciousness is the cause. These two are as in the commentary. Third, the former cause and condition serve as the cause, and the latter cause and condition serve as the condition; because they are originally interpenetrated into the one mind, this should be deduced accordingly. Cause and condition here merely mean the basis whence things arise, not different from the arising and ceasing that are accomplished. The aspect where that mind combines with avidyā is precisely cause and condition, with no other separate dharma. That is, gathering and accumulating these dharmas forms what is named a sentient being; thus the true mind is the essence of a sentient being, while the five minds and consciousness are the characteristics of a sentient being. Therefore, there is only the one mind. “Mind” (manas) has the meaning of basis: the first three are the basis of root and branch, meaning that because the branches rely on the root, the root is named mind (manas); the last two are the basis of coarse and subtle, meaning that because the coarse relies on the subtle, the subtle is named mind (manas). The coarse consciousness no longer has the meaning of being relied upon; therefore it is not named mind (manas), but since it only has discernment, it is simply named consciousness. That “the triple realm is only mind” means that root and branch are mutually penetrating, fully possessing the pure mind, the five minds, consciousness, and so forth. That they “all arise from mind” means they arise from the non-associated mind. That “deluded thoughts arise” means they arise from the associated mind, because the associated mind takes the object of the manifesting consciousness among the three subtle marks as its object; there are no objects outside mind that can be distinguished, and therefore it is said that it “distinguishes its own mind.” When one illuminates the object as being only mind, the mind never grasps mind itself, which means that the grasping mind is exhausted; therefore it is said that “mind does not see mind.” The consciousness of “avidyā's arising” is when the true mind combines with avidyā, being able to grasp its self-nature as pure; therefore “only a Buddha exhaustively comprehends it,” whereas those on the stages realize one part, which is why it says they “partially know it.” Coarse afflictions arise based on subtle afflictions, and subtle afflictions have nothing further on which to rely; thus it is said that they arise suddenly. This is identical to “beginningless avidyā” in the sūtras, because no defiled dharma begins prior to avidyā.

1.15

Question: Avidyā stirs tathatā to form the defiled mind; why is it that for the defiled mind, with avidyā as condition, coarse and subtle are distinguished according to stage, whereas the true mind is its cause, yet superior and inferior are not discussed? Answer: Because defiled dharmas have differences, whereas the true mind has only a single flavor.

1.16

“Fundamental wisdom” has two classes: first, wisdom in accordance with principle produced through practice; second, the original enlightenment wisdom of tathatā. Mundane wisdom also has two: first, wisdom in accordance with measure produced through practice; second, the wisdom of original enlightenment conforming to defilement. Because the defiled mind is agitated and moving, conflicting with the unmoving, impartial wisdom of original enlightenment, it is called the “hindrance of affliction.” Furthermore, because avidyā fails to comprehend that movement is itself stillness, one cannot know distinctively amidst movement; this is the “hindrance to wisdom.”

1.17

Eleventh, in the “characteristics of arising and ceasing,” avidyā has two meanings: first, general, being able to form the two minds; second, specific, being able to form the subtle mind. Therefore it is said that because avidyā ceases, objects cease, and also that because avidyā ceases, the non-associated mind ceases. Objects also have two meanings: first, general, being that which is formed; second, specific, being able to give rise to the three coarse minds. Therefore avidyā has general ability and specific ability, and objects have general objecthood and specific ability; thus objects are both active and passive, while avidyā is only active and not passive.

1.18

Twelfth, among the four perfumings, defiled perfuming is also twofold: first, general; second, specific. In the former, avidyā perfuming the real so that there is a deluded mind is the mark of karma. That “unenlightened thought arises” is the mark of the perceiver. That it “manifests deluded objects” is the “mark of objects,” which belongs to the three subtle marks. That which “causes its thought” refers to the first two among the six coarse marks; “attachment” refers to the next two; the last two are as in the text of the treatise. In the specific: “increasing thought” refers to the first two of the six coarse marks; “grasping” refers to the next two; the last two are the “fruits of karma,” which are not discussed here. If so, why does the earlier text state that six marks are produced with objects as condition? The explanation states: The former was based on a general discussion, whereas this is based on specific analysis, since the last two are functions transformed from the deluded mind, not directly produced from objects. In the perfuming by the deluded mind, the karmic consciousness generally unites the three subtle marks. That it is termed perfuming from the outset means it perfumes fundamental avidyā, confusing and stirring the subtle; relying on this subtle stirring karma, one undergoes the suffering of the karma of transformation. Therefore the sūtra says: “The ground of the abiding of avidyā serves as the condition, and undefiled karma serves as the cause,” yielding the retribution of transformation—this is what it means. In the consciousness of phenomena, the three coarse marks are also fully present: perfuming branch avidyā, it coarsely stirs and creates karma, undergoing the suffering of fragmented [birth and death]. Fundamental avidyā confuses the nature of principle and perfumes tathatā, forming the three marks such as karma. Branch avidyā confuses objects and perfumes the fundamental consciousness, giving rise to the consciousness of phenomena. In pure perfuming, both tathatā and the deluded, defiled dharmic mind each have the active perfumer and that which is perfumed, mutually serving as active and passive; among defiled dharmas, tathatā has no meaning of an active perfumer. In the perfuming by the consciousness of phenomena, there are four inferiorities: first, the actively perfuming consciousness is itself shallow and slight; second, viewed toward the tathatā that is perfumed, it is still far distant; third, it is unaware of the existence of manas and ālayavijñāna; fourth, it is unaware of the marks of dharma-attachment. Therefore, it cannot swiftly attain bodhi. The perfuming of the mind (manas) has four superiorities, reversing the previous inferiorities, meaning that the active perfumer is profound and thick, penetrating through the five minds; the remaining three can be known, and therefore, viewed toward great bodhi, it is swiftly attained. These two perfumings are tathatā internally perfuming the deluded mind so that it has this aversion and seeking, which in turn perfumes tathatā to form superior practices.

1.19

Thirteenth, within the deluded mind's perfuming in pure perfuming, regarding the first, “perfuming by the discriminating consciousness of phenomena,” there are three explanations: First, those people of the two vehicles only become aware of the afflictions within the consciousness of phenomena in order to sever them, and therefore generate the mind and cultivate practice; cultivation of practice is precisely named perfuming. Second, because they only become aware of these afflictions and have not yet severed them, it still constitutes perfuming. Third, generating the mind and cultivating practice while carrying the afflictions within this consciousness is named perfuming; however, because they are coarse, they fall into the stage of the two vehicles. Furthermore, the first is solely perfuming by practice; the second is solely perfuming by consciousness; the third is perfuming by both. Because they carry these delusions, which make their practice inferior, they enter the path of the two vehicles. If one carries the subtle delusions within the five minds and cultivates superior wisdom, one enters the stages of the bodhisattvas. The three explanations for the mind (manas) are modeled on this, but in all cases the latter explanation is superior. In “perfuming of essence and characteristics,” “possessing undefiled dharmas” generally adduces the essence and characteristics of dharmas. “Equipped with inconceivable functions” clarifies that it possesses the function of internal perfuming. “Serving as the nature of the objective realm” means that this tathatā not only internally perfumes the deluded mind through the preceding clause to make it “loathe and seek,” but also serves as the contemplative realm for that loathing and seeking mind. Furthermore, explaining the “greatness of function” as the external good realm, this essence and characteristic also universally pervades therein, thereby causing the greatness of function to possess perfuming. Furthermore, it is explained that because it pervades the deluded mind, it internally perfumes it; and because it pervades all external realms, it also perfumes sentient beings, just as approaching a general view acts to split wood, and so forth. Within the differentiated conditions in functional perfuming: in terms of the ripeness or unripeness of capacity, there are distant and near conditions; in terms of the four immeasurables, there are conditions of practice; in terms of the three voids, there are conditions of receptive conformity. Another explanation states that the first is benefiting others, and the second is self-benefit. Yet another states that the first is in terms of practices such as giving and morality, and the second is in terms of the practice of contemplating principle. In impartial conditions, there are six: first, impartial persons, as in the treatise's “Buddhas and bodhisattvas”; second, impartial vows, as in the treatise's “all wishing to deliver them”; third, impartial mind, as in the treatise's “self-essence perfuming, etc.”; fourth, explaining impartial practice, as in the treatise's “by the power of the wisdom of identical essence,” meaning knowing that self and other are of the same essence, and the wisdom that knows identity is named wisdom of identical essence; fifth, impartial benefit, as in the treatise's “seeing, hearing, etc.”; sixth, causing capacities of impartiality to see the characteristic of impartiality, as in the treatise's “seeing the Buddha based on samādhi.” As for “differentiated” and impartial: first, in terms of the mind of Buddhas and bodhisattvas in gathering sentient beings, compassionately benefiting without enmity or affinity is called impartial, while manifesting differently according to capacity is called differentiated; second, the multiple gates of the nirmāṇakāya are called differentiated, while the saṃbhogakāya matching nature is called impartial; third, what is seen by a scattered mind is called differentiated, while what is seen by a concentrated mind is called impartial.

1.20

Fourteenth: brief outline of the text. From here down is a brief outline of the text. From the aspect of arising and ceasing down to this point, the explanation of subsuming all dharmas has been completed above. From here down, the four perfumings and so forth explain the production of all dharmas, within which there are two [parts]: first, general; second, specific. Within the specific [part], first the defiled and pure are explained, and then both their being exhaustible and inexhaustible are distinguished. Within the former [part], there are two: first, defilement; second, purity. Within defilement, there are two: first, general; second, specific. Within purity, there are also two: first, general; second, specific. Within the specific [part], there are two: first, the perfuming of essence and function is specifically explained; second, the concordant and non-concordant are both explained. Within the former [part], there are two: first, the perfuming of essence and characteristics; second, the perfuming of function. With respect to the concordant and non-concordant, there are two: first, discerning the not yet concordant; second, explaining the already concordant. The explanation of pure perfuming above is now complete; the initial defiled perfuming and subsequent pure perfuming are now complete. With respect to the exhaustible and inexhaustible, there are two: first, explaining that defiled dharmas have an exhaustion; second, explaining that pure dharmas have no end. Above, first the defiled and pure perfumings were specifically explained, and then both their being exhaustible and inexhaustible were distinguished; together, this completes the major section of specific explanations. The first general and subsequent specific together complete the four perfumings. Above, first the aspect of arising and ceasing subsuming all dharmas was explained, and then the four perfumings producing all dharmas were explained; together, this fully completes the major section explaining the dharmas of arising and ceasing.

1.21

From here down, the second part explains the greatness of meaning revealed within the aspect of arising and ceasing, within which there are two: first, explaining the two greatnesses of "essence and characteristics"; second, separately explaining the "greatness of function." Within the former [part], there are two: first, a single sentence generally subsumes and indicates the names of the two greatnesses; below, the meanings of the two greatnesses are separately explained. Within the explanation, the "greatness of essence" is explained first; from "ultimately eternal and constant" down, the "greatness of characteristics" is explained. Within the explanation of the greatness of characteristics, there are two: first, a direct explanation; second, questions and answers. Within the explanation of the greatness of function, there are two: first, a general discernment; second, from "this function has two [aspects]" down, a specific explanation. Within the explanation, there are two: first, separately clarifying the responsive [body] and the reward [body]; second, from "moreover, ordinary beings" down, a re-evaluation and distinction. Within the former [part], there are two: first, the responsive; second, the reward. With respect to the re-evaluation and distinction, there are two: first, explaining the responsive body, which means according to ordinary beings seeing the coarse, namely the signs of the six destinies; the two vehicles seeing the subtle requires no mention. Second, explaining the "reward body," [in] two [parts]: first, revealing the coarse and subtle with respect to the persons; second, questions and answers resolving doubts. Within the former [part], there are two: first, explaining that those before the bhūmis see the coarse; second, from "if one attains the pure mind" down, those on the bhūmis see the subtle. Within the questions and answers, there are two: first, the question; second, the answer. The explanation of the greatness of meaning revealed above is now complete.

1.22

From here down, returning the dharmas to merge into the essence is explained. Above, first the characteristics of the dharmas of arising and ceasing were presented; second, their capacity to reveal meaning was explained; third, function was returned to merge into the essence. The three meanings being different, the general explanation of the aspect of arising and ceasing is now complete. First the aspect of tathatā was explained, and then the aspect of arising and ceasing was revealed; the two aspects being different, the general explanation revealing the correct meaning is now complete.

1.23

Fifteenth: In "Distinguishing the Aspiration to the Path," discussing the aspiration in general, there are four stages in all: 1. Abandoning the heterodox and approaching the orthodox aspiration, whose stage is on the level of ordinary beings; this treatise does not discuss it. 2. Abandoning retrogression and attaining determination aspiration, whose stage is at the fulfillment of the ten faiths, entering the beginning of the ten abodes; this is the aspiration of the perfection of faith in the treatise. 3. Abandoning the unripened and attaining the ripened aspiration, whose stage is in the ten dedications; because of desiring to enter the first bhūmi, through the superior progress of preparatory application, one deeply gives rise to the aspiration; this is the aspiration of understanding and practice. 4. Abandoning inference and attaining realization aspiration, whose stage is on the first bhūmi and above.

1.24

Question: In the stage of retrogression, is there not unripened and ripened? Why are two aspirations not established? Answer: Because the stage is extremely inferior, the characteristics are not differentiated.

1.25

Question: When non-retrogression is compared to realization, is it not inferior? Why are there two aspirations? Answer: Because the stage is superior, the characteristics of thorough ripening are manifest.

1.26

Question: If so, those on the bhūmis are even more superior; why are two aspirations not established? Answer: Because the stage is supremely superior, that which is realized is without distinction.

1.27

Question: Could it be that when about to enter the stage of non-retrogression, one does not employ the power of generating practice through superior conditions? Why is an aspiration not further established? Answer: First, the stage of one capable of giving rise to aspiration is inferior and cannot initiate preparatory application; second, the stage approached is not yet superior and does not require preparatory application; therefore [an additional aspiration] is not established.

1.28

Question: If so, why is there an aspiration further within the stage of preparatory application when about to enter the stage of realization? Answer: It is simply because one's capacity to enter is superior, and that which is realized is difficult to attain.

1.29

Sixteenth: Calming the mind within "Cultivating Śamatha" has two parts: first, calming the internally conceiving and deliberating mind; second, from "one also must not follow the mind" down, calming the mind that externally conditions objects. Within the former [part], there are three: first, bringing up thoughts to cause their elimination; second, stopping the thoughts capable of eliminating; third, according with the "essence of dharmas." Within the first [part], there are two: first, specifically stopping the thoughts of the ten totalities (kṛtsnāyatana); second, from "all thoughts" down, generally stopping all differentiated thoughts. As for the capable of eliminating, there are two explanations: 1. Because the conditioned objects to be eliminated cease, the conditions capable of eliminating also terminate. 2. First eliminating thoughts of existence, and then "also dispatching the thought of elimination" means eliminating the thought of non-existence, because thoughts of existence and non-existence are both conceptions. In the passage below on according with the essence of dharmas, "because all dharmas are without thought" means without the thought of existence. "Thought to thought, not arising," and so forth means because from beginningless time they have never arisen and so forth. Second, calming the mind of external objects has two within it: first, stopping external false conditions; second, from "is right mindfulness" down, indicating internal true contemplation. Within the former [part], there are two: first, citing errors to forbid them generally; second, from "if the mind races" down, indicating the expedient means of contemplation. Why is it so? An external question asks: Since the mind is not permitted to condition external objects, nor is the mind permitted to eliminate the mind, one does not know: when the mind races and scatters, how does one remedy it? The explanation says: Gather it and cause it to abide in right mindfulness. What then is right mindfulness? The explanation says: Mind only without objects is it; therefore one is not permitted to condition external objects. If so, and one does not condition external objects at all, conditioning the internal mind should be permissible? The explanation says: That also is not permissible; hence it says that further, this mind has no self-characteristic to be apprehended. Therefore at this time, contemplating that the mind has no point of reliance and that discrimination also ceases and is extinguished accomplishes the practice of śamatha and cultivates the tathatā-samādhi.

1.30

Seventeenth: In "the non-duality of matter and mind," "mind" is based on the greatness of essence. "Wisdom" concerns the greatness of characteristics. "Dharmakāya" pervasive to essence and characteristics. Because of their mutual containment and integration, whichever is stated is acceptable. Since they serve as the root for function, they are able to manifest matter. However, function can respond to the capacities of beings; hence it was said above: "that which is produced by the illusion of defiled karma."

1.31

Eighteenth: Question: Among the three subtle marks and six coarse marks, why is manas not mentioned? Answer: Because the meaning would be inconvenient. How so? Because fundamental ignorance stirs that tathatā and forms the three subtle marks, which are called the ālayavijñāna. Manas does not have this meaning, so it is not discussed. Moreover, because of "conditions of objects," stirring that ocean of mind gives rise to the six coarse marks, which are called the manovijñāna. Manas does not have this meaning of arising from external objects, so it is not discussed. Although it is not mentioned, the meaning is already present. How is this known? The Yogācārabhūmi says: "When the ālayavijñāna arises, it must be concordant with two consciousnesses." Therefore, in speaking of the ālayavijñāna of the three subtle marks, grasping concordant with manas is already present. Moreover, for the manovijñāna to be able to condition external objects, it must internally rely on manas; therefore, in speaking of the manovijñāna of the six coarse marks, it already has manas as its supporting faculty. Therefore, although not mentioned, in reality it exists.

1.32

Question: It was said above that fundamental ignorance arises—in which consciousness does it arise? Answer: It arises in the ālayavijñāna.

1.33

Question: Other treatises state that the self-nature of the ālayavijñāna is anivṛtāvyākṛta, exclusively concordant with neutral sensation (upekṣāvedanā), and therefore capable of receiving perfuming. If it gives rise to defilement, it would be defiled; how could it be capable of receiving perfuming? Answer: Other treatises speak according to the teachings in terms of coarse characteristics; in reality, however, with respect to the aspect of this consciousness being deluded about markless tathatā, there is the fundamental ignorance ground (avidyāvāsabhūmi). If this were not so, it would constantly condition the paramārthasatya, meaning that a single sentient being would be half-deluded and half-awakened—namely, the sixth and seventh [consciousnesses] would be deluded, while the eighth consciousness would be awakened. Furthermore, if on the Buddha-stage it is concordant with ādarśajñāna, one knows that on the ordinary stage it must be concordant with avidyā. Why? Because it contradicts the above. If one claims that on the ordinary stage, the avidyā of other consciousnesses is concordant with it, and thus it is not intrinsic to the fundamental consciousness itself, then likewise on the Buddha-stage ādarśajñāna would not arise from the fundamental consciousness; since it does arise on the Buddha-stage, one knows that on the ordinary stage it gives rise to ignorance, so there is no doubt. Furthermore, if it were entirely without defilement, it could not constitute an avyākṛta dharma. Why? If it were without defilement, it would be entirely pure and could not be called avyākṛta. Therefore, what is entirely pure is called wholesome; what is entirely defiled is called unwholesome. Because defilement and purity are not two, being neither defiled nor pure is called an avyākṛta dharma. It is precisely because purity pertains to the true component and defilement pertains to the false component, and the two components are non-dual, that it is called the composite, avyākṛta ālayavijñāna. If in this stage there were no subtle defilement, by what would one distinguish the pure to form anivṛtāvyākṛta? Since avyākṛta is not pure, one knows that subtle defilement exists. Speaking strictly in truth, only tathatā is the essence; therefore, ālayavijñāna is differentiated merely as a stage. It is spoken of provisionally to guide śrāvakas who turn their minds [to the Mahāyāna]. Moreover, the manovijñāna giving rise to delusion in relation to karma has three meanings: 1. It gives rise to the avidyā of the path of seeing, creating karma in relation to conditions; 2. It gives rise to the defilements of the path of cultivation, nurturing unripened karma with craving and seeking to make it ripen; 3. It gives rise again to views and craving, leading ripened karma to take rebirth in unbroken continuity without discordance. Within the continuing consciousness in the Awakening of Faith, only the latter two meanings are present; one should know this by reference to the treatise.

1.34

Nineteenth: Concerning the merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges within the tathāgatagarbha, they are explained through three gates: first, the gate of establishment; second, the gate of demarcating scope; third, the gate of belonging to fruition. In the first, establishment, there are specifically four meanings: 1. The meaning based upon tathatā, which means that based upon the meaning of tathatā, these virtues are spoken of, not that there are separate matters. The treatise states: "Because they are all spoken of based upon the meaning of tathatā." 2. The meaning of counterposing defilement, which means counterposing the faults of defilements numerous as the sands of the Ganges, displaying by counterposition such merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges, as analyzed in the treatise. 3. The meaning of serving as cause, which means being able to internally perfume sentient beings, causing them to generate loathing and seeking, to initiate practice, and so forth; the treatise states: "The inherent virtues numerous as the sands of the Ganges internally perfume sentient beings," and so forth. 4. The meaning of supporting and sustaining, which means that because they serve as support for the merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges of the Buddha-fruition, these virtues are spoken of; the treatise states: "Because it is counterposed to initial enlightenment, original enlightenment is spoken of." Second, the gate of showing the scope of the meaning: The inherent virtues numerous as the sands of the Ganges are all spoken of within tathatā in the aspect of arising and ceasing, and are not analyzed in the aspect of tathatā of unchanging self-nature. Why is this? Because that [aspect of tathatā] is beyond all duality. However, among the four meanings, the first two pertain to the defiled state prior to attaining the Path; the last one pertains to the pure state after attaining the Path; the middle one pertains to the defiled-pure state during the attainment of the Path. Furthermore, the first is the non-distinction of distinctions, while the latter three are the distinctions of non-distinction. Furthermore, the first two are the Buddha-nature residing in self-nature; the next one is the Buddha-nature brought forth; the last one is the Buddha-nature of attained fruition. Third, attributing the cause to the fruition: Because the first meaning exists in the cause, the meaning of dharmakāya can exist in the fruition. Because the meaning of counterposing defilement exists in the cause, there is now vimokṣa in the stage of fruition. Because the meaning of internal perfuming serving as cause exists in the cause, the meaning of the great wisdom of prajñā is now accomplished in the stage of fruition. Because the cause possesses the previous three meanings, there are now the meanings of the three virtues of prajñā, vimokṣa, and dharmakāya in the stage of fruition. Because the fourth meaning exists, the elucidating cause can now have elucidated fruit-dharmas in the stage of fruition. Furthermore, due to this meaning, the merits in the stage of fruition are now accomplished. Therefore, by the previous three meanings, the three virtues are individually accomplished; by the latter one meaning, the immeasurable merits of the Buddha-fruition are universally subsumed. Therefore, due to these meanings, in the minds of sentient beings in the causal stage there are definitely merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges; they are briefly revealed like this.

1.35

Twentieth: The meaning of un-arising and un-ceasing combining with arising and ceasing to form the ālayavijñāna. It is explained through two gates: first, the gate of distinguishing characteristics; second, the gate of harmonious subsumption. In the former, there are two gates: first, un-arising and un-ceasing; second, arising and ceasing. Within the former there are also two: first, the coarse; second, the subtle. Within arising and ceasing there are also two: first, the coarse; second, the subtle. In un-arising and un-ceasing, the coarse is the aspect of tathatā: because the mark of movement is exhausted, the meaning of un-arising and un-ceasing is coarsely prominent, which is the mark that counteracts and destroys the distinctions of all dharmas; this is precisely the unchanging meaning of tathatā. Second, the subtle is the gate of tathatā conforming to defilement: because it does not counteract the mark of movement, the meaning of its own un-arising and un-ceasing gradually conceals itself; therefore, it is called subtle. This is precisely the meaning of the tathāgatagarbha within the aspect of arising and ceasing, and is also the meaning of original enlightenment. Therefore, tathatā has two meanings with respect to conditioned dharmas: first, the meaning of mutually conflicting; second, the meaning of mutually according. Its own essence also has two meanings: first, the unchanging meaning; second, the meaning of conforming to defilement. Therefore, the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra states: "Quiescence and cessation is called the One Mind, and the One Mind is called the tathāgatagarbha." It refers to these two. Second, within arising and ceasing: the coarse is the seven consciousnesses, because their marks of arising and ceasing conforming to objects are coarsely prominent; in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra it is called "arising and ceasing of characteristics." Second, the subtle is that "the wind of avidyā moves" the pure mind to form this arising and ceasing, and the mark of this basic consciousness is gradually concealed and difficult to know; therefore, it is called subtle. In the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra it is called "the arising and ceasing of the continuous flow." The treatise states: "In distinguishing the marks of arising and ceasing there are two kinds: first, coarse; second, subtle," and so forth. Therefore, arising and ceasing conditioned phenomena have two meanings with respect to tathatā: first, the meaning of mutually conflicting, because the marks of arising and ceasing are coarse; second, the meaning of mutually according, because the marks of arising and ceasing are minute and gradually become identical with the real. The treatise states: "Conformingly contemplating conventional truth, one then enters the ultimate truth." This is the meaning of these two gates. The gates of meaning also have two meanings with respect to themselves: first, the characteristics are manifest; second, their nature is non-existent. The sūtra states: "All dharmas do not arise; I speak of the meaning of momentariness," and so forth. The second major section, the gate of harmonious subsumption, has three levels: 1. Tathatā has two meanings whose essence is identical while their meanings differ: because its entire essence is unchanging, and its whole essence conforms to conditions, they are non-dual. 2. The coarse and subtle within arising and ceasing interpenetrate: its whole essence is entirely coarse and also entirely subtle; therefore, they melt together without being two dharmas. 3. Because the entire essence of the real conforms to conditions, it manifests this coarse and subtle arising and ceasing. Therefore, if one considers only the coarse arising and ceasing, it causes the real to be concealed; if one considers only the subtle arising and ceasing, it causes the real to manifest. As for the subtle un-arising and un-ceasing: if one considers only the coarse un-arising and un-ceasing, it causes both to be completely extinguished, and only the one tathatā is equally manifest; if one considers only the subtle un-arising and un-ceasing, it causes the subtle arising and ceasing to gradually abide as subtle defilement. The remaining meanings should be understood accordingly.

First 35 of 62 passages. Read on

English (machine translation)

Contents

Text