起信論疏筆削記 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.1

Recorded by the Śramaṇa Zixuan of Changshui

"Intending to explain..." and so forth is the second [main division]: the separate explication of the doctrinal headings. It has two [parts]. First is opening the chapters. The six in the preliminary overview cover the underlying thread. How so? The actions of sages are certainly never in vain; what was the cause for the rising forth of this treatise? Therefore, it is succeeded by "the causes and conditions for the teaching's arising." Once the nominal teaching has arisen and its origin is known, the teachings of Śākya are collectively embraced by the three piṭakas; in terms of dharma and person, how is it categorized? Therefore, it is succeeded by "clarifying which piṭaka it is subsumed under." The Abhidharma Piṭaka pertains to both the Great and Small [Vehicles], and bodhisattvas have both the provisional and the real; if one does not seek by way of the meaning, one will not know the essential purport. To what extent does this treatise express the Dharma? Therefore, it is succeeded by "manifesting the limits of the teaching and its meaning." Having understood the utmost extent of the meaning expressed by the teaching, it is not yet known what kind of capacities awaken and enter through this. Therefore, it is succeeded by "the capacities accommodated by the teaching." The expressed and the accommodated having become manifest, it is not yet investigated what constitutes the essence of the expressing teaching. Therefore, it is succeeded by "the essence of the expressing teaching." Once the essence of the teaching is clarified, what is the principal theme expressed beneath the teaching? To what does the principal theme ultimately tend? Therefore, it is succeeded by "the theme and destination of what is expressed." Whenever a teaching arises, it must possess all of these. Thus the preliminary overview here is restricted to these six headings: namely, what the treatise is based on, what subsumes the treatise, what the treatise expresses, whom the treatise accommodates, what the treatise relies upon, and the theme and destination of the treatise. However, the original commentary opens its chapters by listing ten headings altogether: the first six are identical to these, but after them four more headings are listed, namely, explaining the treatise's title, the era of the treatise's composition, the date of translation, and following the text to explain it, reaching ten in this order. That the present commentary does not follow that listing is because these are doctrinal headings of a preliminary overview, and it does not wish to mix them with the separate explications of the text's meaning; therefore, the latter four are combined into the textual commentary, and on this account the preliminary overview has only six sections.

2.3

"1. Discerning the teaching..." and so forth is the second [part]: explaining the text. It has two [parts]. First is the general presentation. The "ten inquiries and explications" means that in all of the ten sections, the first sentence is an inquiry and the rest are explications.

2.4

"1. Relying on..." and so forth: listing the ten sections separately. Now, the first: "relying on what wisdom?" In the essence of initiating a treatise, nothing takes precedence over wisdom; without wisdom, one cannot initiate a treatise. Therefore, in the Buddhadharma, wisdom is the foundation. This is the productive cause of wisdom among the six causes. Because there is wisdom, there is meaning; because there is meaning, words are established. Therefore, among these ten, wisdom is demanded first.

2.5

"It means relying on..." and so forth is the explication. Now, a bodhisattva's wisdom has the provisional and the real. Real wisdom approaches principle, open and unimpeded in movement, conforming to the true essence; this is called "thoroughly according with the mind's source," the mind's source being the markless true principle. Because it accords with this principle, it is called the forbearance of non-arising, which is the fundamental wisdom. Provisional wisdom conducts affairs, establishing the Buddhadharma and perfecting sentient beings, dispensing the medicine of the Dharma in accordance with their faculties and dispositions so that they may take and practice it; this is called "skillful and wondrous eloquence that accords with capacities." That is, it accords with their capacities and desires—superior, middling, and inferior grades; hence it says "accords with capacities." Its words lack nothing and miss nothing, bending to fulfill all things without omission; hence it is named "skillful." The skillful is without marks of skill, beyond speech, discussion, thought, and reckoning; hence it is called "wondrous." When this wisdom issues forth from the mouth, it is named "eloquence." This eloquence is twofold: the fourfold and the sevenfold. The fourfold refers to the four unimpeded eloquences, namely in dharma, meaning, phrasing, and delightful speech. They are also called the four unimpeded wisdoms; it is merely that their applications differ when in the mind or in the mouth, and thus they receive the names of wisdom and eloquence, but their essence is one. As for the seven eloquences: first, swift eloquence, answering immediately without thought, speaking instantaneously; second, uninterrupted eloquence, continuous like interlocking links without exhaustion; third, rapid eloquence, clear about principle and phenomena, the mind without dark stupidity, speech and sound rapid like a hanging torrent; fourth, adapting eloquence, responding to the times and capacities without divergence; fifth, unblemished eloquence, what is spoken tallying with principle without error; sixth, eloquence rich in meaning and flavor, names, enumerations, principle, and phenomena all being immeasurable; seventh, eloquence supreme and most wondrous in all worlds. This eloquence has five virtues: first, it is deep as thunder; second, it is clear, resonant, and heard afar; third, its sound is plaintive and elegant like the kalaviṅka; fourth, it is able to make sentient beings enter into affection and reverence in their hearts; fifth, whoever hears it rejoices insatiably. Endowed with these five, it is called the most supreme. These four and seven eloquences are all acquired after realizing principle through fundamental wisdom; hence they are named subsequently acquired wisdom. The characteristics of skillfulness and wondrousness appear in the next two gates. However, holy wisdom is completely penetrating and must illuminate both principle and phenomena; lacking either one, it is not complete wisdom. Now, the treatise master's trace resides on the eighth ground, directly realizing non-arising and entering the gate of tathatā, which is fundamental real wisdom; illuminating the gate of arising and ceasing, observing each phenomenon according to its measure, knowing capacities to set up conversion, and expounding skillfully to suit faculties, which is subsequently acquired provisional wisdom. Although provisional and real wisdom differ in application, their essence is not two; relying on this one essence of complete wisdom, he established the text of the treatise. Thus the *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* praises the speaker as possessing three wisdoms of eloquence: real wisdom, essential wisdom, and resultant wisdom. The first two are the fundamental and subsequently acquired [wisdoms]; the last is the function of the subsequently acquired [wisdom], meaning that based on the essential nature, words are generated and spoken skillfully; hence it is called "resultant." What is clarified here encompasses these three wisdoms.

2.6

"Showing what dharma?" It is already known that what the treatise master relies on is not the defiled consciousness of ordinary mortals below, but is established solely relying on the two undefiled wisdoms. All his words completely accord with the true principle and tally with the times and capacities; they are definitely without fault. Then what dharma gates does he show to lead them to have faith, understand, cultivate, sever, enter, and realize? Therefore, this is queried. "It means One Mind..." and so forth is the explication. Now, the essence of the Mahāyāna Dharma is the non-dual true source of sentient beings and all Buddhas; it does not divide into distinctions of defiled and pure, true and deluded, yet it is capable of fully gathering all dharmas. Still and unmoving, its spiritual mirror is unclouded; hence it is called the "One Mind." And this essence of mind is neither true nor deluded, yet can be true and can be deluded; hence two gates are opened. A "gate" means unhindered openness, where going and coming, exiting and entering arise naturally, opening and closing without obstruction. Relying on the mind's marklessness, the gate of tathatā is established; relying on the mind possessing dharmas, the gate of arising and ceasing is established. The two gates mutually interpenetrate, opening and closing freely, both taking the One Mind as their source; hence they are called the mind as tathatā and the mind as arising and ceasing. The "three greatnesses" are the meanings shown under the two gates: the gate of tathatā shows only the greatness of essence, while the gate of arising and ceasing fully shows the three greatnesses. Thus the treatise below states: "The mark of this mind as tathatā indicates the essence of the Mahāyāna; the marks of causes and conditions of this mind as arising and ceasing can indicate the essence, attributes, and function of the Mahāyāna itself." The "four faiths" refer to faith in tathatā and the Three Jewels. The mind of faith is one, but the objects of faith are four; thus they form the four faiths. Thus the treatise below states: "First is faith in the root, namely delighting in mindfully contemplating the dharma of tathatā..." up to "constantly thinking of drawing near to and cultivating practice according with reality." The "five practices" refer to practicing the dharmas of giving, moral discipline, patience, vigor, and calming and insight, perfecting the preceding four kinds of mind of faith, causing them to form roots of non-retrogression and enter the correct path, as is explained extensively below.

2.7

As for "and so forth" (等), the characteristics of dharmas are extremely numerous. The present commentary merely lists an ascending enumeration from one to five, having no time to mention more; hence it says "and so forth." If stated fully, they are the two enlightenments, the four stages, the four marks, the four mirrors, the three subtle marks, the six coarse marks, and so forth, which cannot be cited extensively. However, although what the commentary lists is brief, no dharma is ungathered, because the single gate of arising and ceasing fully clarifies all worldly and supramundane dharmas. All these are the dharmas shown. Although all are generally called "shown," the senses of showing differ: namely, in regard to the dharmas above, they are shown to bring about faith, understanding, practice, severing, realization, and so forth. Matching this to the text, it can be seen; for this reason, the commentary generally says "shown."

2.8

"How it is demonstrated": what was listed above is merely the dharmas that are demonstrated; it is not yet known by what expedient means they are made manifest. "Skillful" means provisional skill; "means" signifies expedient means. These belong to the demonstrating wisdom of the treatise master. "One flavor of Mahāyāna" is the true principle of the One Mind; it does not differentiate distinctions such as defiled and pure, cause and effect, ordinary being and sage, emptiness and existence, and is thus called "one flavor"; it is named Mahāyāna to distinguish it from the Two Vehicles. The essence of this dharma coincides tacitly with wisdom and is free from all conceptual differentiation, hence it is called "one flavor." If demonstrated relying on verbal explanation, it is opened into two: namely, dharma and meaning. Therefore the treatise states: "Mahāyāna, generally speaking, has two kinds: first, dharma; second, meaning." It further opens dharma into two gates, and expounds meaning into three greatnesses. Therefore the treatise states: "Relying on the dharma of the One Mind there are two gates: first, the gate of the mind as tathatā; second, the gate of the mind as arising and ceasing." It also states: "What is called meaning has three kinds," and so forth, fully as cited previously.

2.9

From "From this..." onward, it concludes by pointing to the skillful means, meaning that the treatise master, by means of the single real wisdom, realizes the non-differentiating true principle of one flavor, and through the power of expedients, for the sake of sentient beings, skillfully employs expedient means to open the single flavor into multiple Dharma-gates. The multiple have no mark of multiplicity, not violating the single flavor, and are thus called "skillful." "Opening" means expounding the one into many; "demonstrating" means manifesting them so as to generate understanding.

2.10

"By what it is made clear": the intent is to question the preceding skillful means, which merely unfolded those gates of meaning so that the one became many. Now, wishing to make these principles clearly visible, by what expedient means are they elucidated? "By" means through; "clear" means elucidate. "Sound" refers to voice and sound; "character" refers to written words. Sounds have no mark of sound, and characters have no mark of character, hence they are called "wondrous and good." This means that from the treatise master's unimpeded wisdom regarding the provisional and the real, sounds, names, sentences, and phonemes flow forth and are expounded; these are subsumed under the nature of undefiled goodness, unlike those of ordinary beings which belong to the indeterminate. Therefore the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "Speaking the Dharma entails neither speech nor demonstration." This is solely to guide and benefit sentient beings, without relying on written words. In the Avataṃsaka-sūtra, "Daśabhūmika Chapter," the metaphors such as drawing pictures with wind in the sky all reveal that sounds, names, sentences, and phonemes are neither existent nor nonexistent; all of these are called wondrous sounds and good characters.

2.11

"Analogy" (pi) means comparison; "metaphor" (yu) means to make clear. That is, using proximate matters as a comparison to cause profound dharmas to be understood. Thus Asaṅga said: "A metaphor has the meaning of an observed aspect; namely, harmonizing and correctly stating an observed aspect with an unobserved aspect is called a metaphor." Siṃhabhadra (Shizijue) said: "The observed aspect refers to the portion already made clear. The unobserved aspect refers to the portion not yet made clear. Using the portion made clear to elucidate the portion not yet made clear brings about equivalence of meaning." Any correct statement is called establishing a metaphor, yet there are two kinds: first, homologous; second, heterologous. As for the homologous: if in that instance it demonstrates that the homogeneous instance of the reason is definitely endowed with the property—as in, if it is produced, it is seen to be impermanent, like a pot, etc. As for the heterologous: if in that instance it states that where the probandum is absent, the reason is completely absent—as in, if it is permanent, it is seen to be non-produced, like empty space, etc. Only when free from the ten fallacies is it a correct metaphor. The homologous metaphor has five fallacies: namely, unestablished property of the probans, unestablished property of the probandum, both unestablished, absence of connection, and inverted connection. The heterologous metaphor has five fallacies: namely, non-exclusion of the property of the probandum, non-exclusion of the property of the probans, non-exclusion of both, absence of separation, and inverted separation. The thesis (pakṣa) is the dharma to be established; the reason (hetu) is the ground of the thesis; together with the preceding metaphor they are all factors of proof (sādhana). Therefore the Hetuvidyā-śāstra states: "Through the multiple statements of thesis, reason, and metaphor, that which is not yet understood by inquirers is revealed." The thesis has an essence and a basis; the basis has a qualifier (dharma) and a qualificand (dharmin). Together upon the essence and basis, it must be free from nine fallacies to be a correct thesis: namely, contradiction with perception (pratyakṣa-viruddha), contradiction with inference (anumāna-viruddha), contradiction with common consensus (loka-viruddha), contradiction with one's own doctrine (āgama-viruddha), contradiction with one's own words (svavacana-viruddha), unaccepted qualifier, unaccepted qualificand, both unaccepted, and already established by consensus (siddhasādhana). The reason has three characteristics (trairūpya): namely, presence of the reason in the thesis (pakṣadharmatva), definite presence in homogeneous instances (sapakṣe sattvam), and complete absence in heterogeneous instances (vipakṣe 'sattvam). There are two kinds of reason: the producing reason (janaka-hetu) and the illuminating reason (jñāpaka-hetu). The producing reason is like a seed producing a sprout; the illuminating reason is like a lamp illuminating an object. Each of these two reasons has three types. The three of the producing reason are: first, producing reason of words; second, producing reason of cognition; third, producing reason of meaning. The three of the illuminating reason are: first, illuminating reason of cognition; second, illuminating reason of words; third, illuminating reason of meaning; as explained in detail in that commentary. This reason factor must be free from fourteen fallacies to be a correct reason: namely, unproven to both (ubhayāsiddha), unproven to one (anyatarāsiddha), unproven basis (āśrayāsiddha), doubtful (sandigdhāsiddha), common inconclusive (sādhāraṇa-anaikāntika), uncommon inconclusive (asādhāraṇa-anaikāntika), present in part of homogeneous and all heterogeneous, present in part of heterogeneous and all homogeneous, present in part of both, counterbalanced (viruddhāvyabhicārin), contradictory to the property's own nature (dharmasvarūpaviparītasādhana), contradictory to the property's particularity (dharmaviśeṣaviparītasādhana), contradictory to the locus's own nature (dharmi-svarūpaviparītasādhana), and contradictory to the locus's particularity (dharmiviśeṣaviparītasādhana). These three factors together must be free from thirty-three fallacies, along with various deficiencies and the like; since this is not the primary focus here, they cannot be fully detailed. Although thesis, reason, and metaphor are spoken of in the present treatise, they are not like the combination of the three factors in hetuvidyā that forms an inference. Rather, in the present text, it either raises the thesis alone, or raises thesis and reason, or raises thesis and metaphor, or raises reason and metaphor. As the treatise states below: "First, dharma; second, meaning." Here, "dharma" and "meaning" are simply what hetuvidyā terms the subject (subject of debate) and predicate mentioned later as dharmin and dharma. For example, in formulating an inference: 'The One Mind is the dharmin; it definitely possesses the three greatnesses,' is the thesis. The reason is: 'Because it possesses the two marks of tathatā and arising-and-ceasing.' This merely cites the thesis and reason without adducing a metaphor. Or as it states: 'Tathatā is the dharmin; it definitely cannot be established and cannot be eliminated,' is the thesis. The reason is: 'Because all dharmas are completely real, and all are identical with suchness.' This also merely cites thesis and reason; the rest are to be understood by analogy. If setting this treatise against the five natures, the thesis in an inference should be formulated thus: 'The single tathatā-nature is the dharmin; it can definitely accord with conditions,' is the thesis. The reason is: 'Because it is the impartial basis of conditioned dharmas.' Homologous metaphor: 'Like empty space.'

2.12

"Able to cause..." concludes and indicates. This means that the wondrous sounds and so forth mentioned above are that which makes clear, and the purport of the dharmas and meanings is that which is made clear. Owing to the aforementioned skillful means, the principles of meaning are made clearly visible. The above two sections are precisely the characteristics of the previously mentioned skillfulness.

2.13

"Relying on what root": this questions that when a bodhisattva composes a treatise, there must be something upon which he relies; if there were no ground, it would be equivalent to empty fabrication. "The Buddha's holy words" is the pramāṇa of supreme teaching (śabdapramāṇa / āgama); "correct reason" is inference (anumāna); "certain pramāṇa" is direct perception (pratyakṣa). As for the supreme teaching: the omniscient person leaves nothing unperceived, is endowed with the five kinds of speech, and his words are necessarily sincere and true. Composing a treatise relying on this, it is definitely worthy of trust and free from falsehood; hence it is taken as the root. The phrasing "holy words" extends to the Three Vehicles, but there are things others do not know, and to distinguish this, it says "Buddha." Stating inference first is because the treatise takes sūtras as its core. Inference means observing meaning by relying on multiple characteristics. "Multiple characteristics" refers to the three characteristics of the reason; taking those as the reason, correct cognition arises with regard to the thesis being inferred, fully knowing that there is fire or impermanence, etc. Now saying "correct reason" is to exclude all erroneous reasons. If the reason is not correct, the thesis will also be flawed; for this reason it says "correct reason." Direct perception means non-differentiation. If there is correct cognition that is free from all conceptual differentiations of name, genus, and so forth regarding objects like form, operating distinctly before the senses, it is called direct perception. This has four types: first, the five sense consciousnesses; second, the mental consciousness accompanying the five; third, all self-awareness (svasaṃvedana); fourth, all meditative minds. These four types above are all direct perception. Now saying "certain pramāṇa" is because these four modes cognize objects such as form with certainty. It is also permissible that "correct reason" contains both pramāṇas, meaning that generating understanding through inference and personal self-realization are both free from error and both are correct reason. The single phrase "certain pramāṇa" points collectively to the three pramāṇas, all of which are definitive; taking this as the root, it can be trusted and followed.

2.14

"Relying on what power": this questions whether the treatise master, in relying on the sūtras to compose the treatise—wishing above to accord with the sages and below to benefit ordinary beings, flowing into future generations to crush the heterodox and establish the orthodox, causing it to remain unbroken through successive ages like an inexhaustible lamp—used his own power, or relied on the authority of another? "Taking refuge in the Three Jewels": the Three Jewels are auspicious, the supreme field of merit for all sentient beings; one who takes refuge is able to accomplish the great matter, produce all merits and wisdom, transcend saṃsāra, and attain the bliss of nirvāṇa. Therefore, after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, all compositions by any disciples take refuge in the Three Jewels to show that their study has an authority and is not of their own private authority, thus keeping free of error. Now begging for their majestic empowerment and composing it by relying on their power, when it reaches future generations, no one will fail to believe. Empowerments are of two kinds: first, manifest empowerment, which means appearing in bodily form to preach the Dharma; second, concealed empowerment, which merely increases wisdom in secret. The present case includes both. That which takes refuge and that in which refuge is taken are explained at length below.

2.15

"For what purpose": this questions that having relied on the majestic empowerment of the Three Jewels to compose this treatise, what intention and purpose made him earnestly long to do so? "To assist in propagating the transformation": "assist" means to support and aid; "propagate" means to display and develop; "transformation" means teaching and guiding; thus it is aiding the Tathāgata, displaying the Dharma-gates, and teaching and guiding the various classes of beings. Because the Buddhas of the ten directions serve alternately as teachers and disciples, mutually supporting each other to cause the path of Dharma to prevail and sentient beings to receive transformation. Now the treatise master manifests himself as abiding in the causal stage, taking our Śākyamuni as teacher, and taking sūtras as authority to compose the treatise, hence it is said to assist the transformation. "To crush the heterodox and reveal the orthodox": when the Tathāgata was in the world, those with heterodox views were subdued by the Buddha himself; after the Buddha passed into extinction, if there were such people, no one could restrain them. Now the treatise master, to crush those heterodox followers so that heterodox teachings do not arise, establishes our correct Dharma so as to produce correct views. In the treatise below, revealing the correct meaning and countering heterodox attachments are just this. "To protect and uphold the bequeathed Dharma": the Dharma-gates preached by the Buddha are collectively called the bequeathed Dharma after his extinction. Now composing a treatise to expound them so that they do not fall to the ground is called protecting and upholding. Propagating them from one to another, lamp to lamp without cessation, extending to future kalpas, is called dwelling long in the world. "To repay the Tathāgata's kindness": the Buddha's intention in leaving behind the teachings was for them to be transmitted and propagated, delivering people from one to another to bring them to the great fruition. If one does not transmit and expound them, one opposes the Buddha's original intent, and this is called betraying his kindness. If one can manifest the wondrous gates, illuminate the great teaching, bring benefit to weary lives, and keep the great path unbroken, then this accords with the Buddha's mind and truly befits the lineage founders; this is called repaying kindness. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: 'Even if one carried the sūtras on one's head for dust-mote kalpas, / Or offered one's body as a seat throughout the trichiliocosm, / If one does not transmit the Dharma to benefit sentient beings, / In the end one can never repay his kindness. / If one transmits and upholds the treasury of the correct Dharma, / Proclaiming the teachings to deliver sentient beings, / Cultivating so that in a single thought one accords with tathatā, / This is truly one who repays the Tathāgata.'

2.16

However, the above five phrases have two explanations: first, each is stated separately, with one phrase being one intent, meaning: in order to assist the Buddha in propagating transformation, in order to crush the heterodox, in order to reveal the orthodox, and so forth; second, taking up the preceding points in consecutive progression, from the first to the fifth they depend upon each other in turn: namely, assisting the Buddha in propagating transformation is for the sake of crushing the heterodox; crushing the heterodox is for the sake of revealing the orthodox; up to repaying the Tathāgata's kindness.

2.17

"Conditioned by what?" asks what matter is the fundamental condition for the above undertaking. "To cause sentient beings" refers to all sentient beings of the three groups and the five natures. "To leave all suffering" means leaving the three sufferings and the eight sufferings, as well as the suffering of the two kinds of birth and death: samsaric death in portions and inconceivable transformation death. "To attain ultimate bliss" means attaining the bliss of realizing the Dharma of unexcelled bodhi and the tranquil bliss of unexcelled nirvāṇa. Once attained, it is attained forever, with nothing superior to it; it is distinguished from [the attainments of] humans, devas, and the two vehicles, and is therefore called "ultimate."

2.18

"Arising from what?" asks on what basis the bodhisattva's intention to compose the treatise arose. "Great compassion" is the unconditioned compassion identical in substance [with all], distinguished from [compassion based on] affectionate views; hence it is called "great." "Sympathy" means sorrowful pity, which is the subject that feels compassion. "Living beings" refers to sentient beings, which are the objective realm toward which compassion is directed. Ordinary beings are attached to birth and death and cling to permanence, bliss, self, and purity; thus they are said to be "deluded." Followers of the two vehicles love nirvāṇa and cling to the four [marks] such as impermanence, taking what is not the correct goal to be correct; thus it is called an "error." Composing the treatise for them causes them to turn from delusion to awakening, and to abandon the partial to enter the perfect.

2.19

"What benefit for their capacities?" means: since the treatise was composed for sentient beings, what benefit is obtained by those who are converted by it? The phrase "namely to cause..." below contains four benefits. "Faith" refers to the ten faiths; the wisdoms of hearing, contemplation, and cultivation refer to the three stages of worthies; "realization and entry" refers to the ten bhūmis; and the "fulfillment of causes" refers to the ultimate stage. Thus, it causes those without faith to have faith, those without understanding to understand, those without practice to practice, those without realization to realize, and those without nirvāṇa to attain nirvāṇa. Beginning with ordinary beings and ending with equal enlightenment, all who receive this conversion obtain benefit. The base commentary speaks of six benefits: faith, the three wisdoms, realization and entry, and the fulfillment of causes; they are largely the same with minor differences, and both opening and combining them are valid.

2.20

However, the meanings of the above ten causes are continuous; if they are not analyzed and clarified, how can confusion be avoided? Now a nearby metaphor will be used so that there is no perplexity. It is like constructing a great mansion: first there must be understanding (the understanding for beginning the construction corresponds to the two wisdoms); next, listing what is to be built (the halls, side rooms, and courtyards correspond to the One Mind, the two gates, the three greatnesses, and so forth); third, clarifying its structure (the layout, orientation, and proportions correspond to distinguishing the three greatnesses, and so forth); fourth, the tools capable of construction (axes, hatchets, ink-lines, and rulers correspond to wonderful sounds, good words, and so forth); fifth, having standards to rely upon (relying on plumb lines and master carpenters corresponds to the three means of valid cognition, and so forth); sixth, relying collaterally on unseen aid (the spirit tablets of ancestors correspond to the empowering assistance of the Three Jewels); seventh, securing those revered above (parents and elders correspond to repaying the Buddha's kindness); eighth, sheltering descendants below (sons, daughters, and descendants correspond to [aiding] sentient beings); ninth, having deep affection and care (having gratitude and love corresponds to great compassion and sympathy for living beings); and tenth, each finding their proper peace (according with their stability and convenience corresponds to faith, understanding, entry, and realization). As correlated above, they are distinctly different; thus the ten texts do not confound one another.
Furthermore, among these ten, there are causes and conditions, universal and specific aspects. Universally, causes and conditions are not separated, meaning that these ten sections are collectively the reasons, conditions, and arising for composing the treatise. Specifically, the ninth is the cause, the eighth is the condition, the first six are what assists the causes and conditions, and the seventh and tenth are the fruits of the causes and conditions.
Moreover, these ten do not go beyond compassion and wisdom: the first is wisdom, the ninth is compassion; the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh are the marks of wisdom; and the eighth and tenth are the marks of compassion.
Now, within the treatise's text there are inherently eight kinds of causes and conditions, which have similarities and differences with these. As for the similarity, both the commentary and treatise texts do not go beyond the two kinds: compassion and wisdom. As for the difference, the treatise simply and directly recounts [the author's] own intention, which is to benefit beings for the sake of the Dharma; the commentary, however, fully describes the treatise master's transformative wisdom and skillful means, wonderful provisional expounding, reception of power to protect the Dharma, repaying [the Buddha] above and converting [beings] below. Question: Why does the treatise not fully describe these? Answer: The commentary describes the intention of another, and therefore can present it fully. The treatise master recounts his own [mind], merely clarifying what he undertakes. If it were the same as the commentary, it would become self-praise; hence it is not fully described.

2.21

Second, "what is subsumed under the various piṭakas": because the three and the two are not merely one, it says "various"; because all are capable of containing and subsuming, they are called "piṭakas" (baskets/treasuries). This clarifies which piṭaka this treatise belongs to among the three or the two. "The three piṭakas" are the sūtras, vinaya, and śāstras; these are established according to the predominance of what is expressed among the trainings in moral discipline, concentration, and wisdom. That in which the expression of concentration is predominant is called the Sūtra-piṭaka; that in which the expression of moral discipline is predominant is called the Vinaya-piṭaka; and that in which the expression of wisdom is predominant is called the Śāstra-piṭaka (Abhidharma-piṭaka). Saying "predominant" means that each individual piṭaka also penetrates the other two. First, the Sūtra-piṭaka: in Sanskrit, *yuktisūtra*, or *sūtra*, *sūtram*; here translated as "concordant scripture" (qijing), meaning that it accords with the expressed dharmas and meanings, and accords with the minds and capacities of those to be converted. "Jing" means to thread through, preventing the explained meanings and principles from being scattered and lost, and holding together the capacities of beings to be converted so that they do not fall. Therefore the *Buddhity-upadeśa* states: "Threading through and holding together the meanings to be explained and the beings to be influenced." Thus the concordant scripture is itself the piṭaka; this is a karmadhāraya compound. Second, the Vinaya-piṭaka: in Sanskrit, *vinaya*, also called *vini* or *vinaya*; translated by its meaning as "rules" (lǜ), as it clarifies the rules, standards, and measures for observing and violating precepts. It is analogous to the statutory regulations of this land, taking this category. "Lǜ" means law; ancient translations rendered it as "taming and subduing," meaning training the three karmic actions and subduing faults and transgressions. Training applies to both cessation and action; subduing clarifies solely the cessation of evil. Alternatively, it is translated as "extinction," meaning that the evils of body, speech, and mind burn the practitioner just like a blazing fire, and the precepts can extinguish them. Or it is called "coolness," because it can calm the blazing aspect of evil. These are all names derived from the practices expressed. The piṭaka of taming and subduing is a tatpuruṣa compound. Third, the Śāstra-piṭaka: in Sanskrit, *abhidharma*; here translated as "facing the Dharma" (duifa). "Dharma" is the objective realm faced, namely unconditioned nirvāṇa and the four noble truths. "Facing" is the cognizing mind that faces it, namely the two wisdoms of principle and measure. When these two face that [realm], they wondrously exhaust the source of principle and discern the marks of dharmas, pointing to them clearly as if right before one's eyes; hence it is called "facing the Dharma." This is the piṭaka of facing the Dharma, a tatpuruṣa compound. Since this treatise belongs to that and is definitely neither sūtra nor vinaya, it is said to be subsumed under the Abhidharma-piṭaka.

2.22

As the *Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra* says: "All definitive scriptures cyclicly examine and analyze the mātṛkā." According to this, what is subsumed under the Abhidharma-piṭaka is also spoken by the Buddha. Since this treatise was composed by a bodhisattva after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, how can it also enter the Abhidharma-piṭaka? Answer: The Dharma spoken by the Buddha is of three kinds: first, spoken by the Buddha himself; second, spoken through his empowerment of others; third, spoken through prophecy. The present [treatise] is of the latter kind. Thus the *Māyā-sūtra* states: "The Buddha prophesied that Aśvaghoṣa would light the torch of the true Dharma, destroy the banner of false views, and skillfully explain the essentials of the Dharma." Having received a prophecy, it is identical to the Buddha's words; therefore it is subsumed here. Question: If you say it enters the Śāstra-piṭaka because of a prophecy, could it be that all bodhisattvas who composed treatises after the Buddha's extinction had prophecies? Because of this objection, I now provide an alternative explanation: although discourses and discussions were spoken by the Buddha, they all belong to the Sūtra-piṭaka, because all twelve divisions are called sūtras. Those composed by bodhisattvas are only called treatises; they either take those sūtras as their source or comment on them, so their subsumption here is also not contradictory.

2.23

"The two piṭakas" are established in relation to persons. That which, among the three piṭakas, expresses and demonstrates the principles, practices, and fruits of the Mahāyāna is called the Bodhisattva-piṭaka; that which expresses and demonstrates the principles, practices, and fruits of the Hīnayāna is called the Śrāvaka-piṭaka. Therefore the *Mahāyānasūtrālaṅkāra* and the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* state that due to the difference between the superior and inferior vehicles, there are the Śrāvaka- and Bodhisattva-piṭakas. However, when speaking in terms of persons, persons have three vehicles, which should properly be divided into three piṭakas. Because pratyekabuddhas mostly do not rely on teaching and appear in eras without a buddha—or, if appearing in an era with a buddha, are subsumed under the śrāvakas because their principle and fruit among the four dharmas are identical—for this reason only two kinds of piṭakas are established. If based on the differences in teaching and practice, they may also be expanded into three piṭakas. Thus the *Vimaladattā-paripṛcchā-sūtra* and the *Mahāyānāvatāra-śāstra* state that according to specific meanings they are expanded into three piṭakas. Now, relying on treatises such as the *Alaṅkāra*, according to their common meaning they are combined into two piṭakas. Expanding or combining simply follows either perspective. Furthermore, each of the three piṭakas contains the two piṭakas, and each of the two piṭakas contains the three piṭakas; this twofold and threefold division is made solely in relation to persons and dharmas, as explained in detail in the *Commentary on the Yuanjue jing*. As for being subsumed under the Bodhisattva-piṭaka: because it is Mahāyāna and does not express the Hīnayāna, it is subsumed here.

2.24

Third, "the delimitation of teaching and doctrine" has two parts: first, a general identification and specific listing. Teaching is the expresser, and doctrine is the expressed. Showing the expressing teaching by means of the expressed doctrine allows one to know the delimitation reached by this teaching. As for the thoroughness or limitedness of the expressed dharmas: "thorough" refers to the final, sudden, and perfect teachings of the Mahāyāna, because the capacities they encompass are broad and the doctrines they express are profound; "limited" refers to the Hīnayāna and the initial teaching of the Mahāyāna, because the dharmas they express are shallow and the capacities they encompass are narrow. Furthermore, the profound necessarily encompasses the shallow, hence called "thorough"; the shallow does not reach the profound, hence called "limited." Moreover, a single sūtra can contain many teachings, hence called "thorough"; a single sūtra expresses only one teaching, hence called "limited." As for dividing teachings by their doctrine: because various masters mostly divided teachings according to chronological periods, there were points of inadequacy that invited disputes, the account of which is clarified elsewhere. Now, dividing by doctrine is free from error; here, doctrine is that which divides, and teaching is that which is divided. Knowing the depth of the teaching is due to whether the expressed doctrine is immediate or far-reaching.

2.25

Second, "specific explanations following the listing" has two parts: first, a general account of the various teachings, in five sections; here is the first.

2.26

"The Hīnayāna" (Small Vehicle): because it conveys small faculties to a small fruit, like a goat-cart or a deer-cart, which can only pull light loads and cannot reach distant places, it is called "small." The phrase "only explains..." below explains its characteristics, directly distinguishing the principle it expresses. "Only" is like "solely" or "exclusively." As for "selflessness" (emptiness of the self): what this teaching clarifies is that all functioning depends on the power of causes and conditions with no master or controller within; hence it is the emptiness of the self. Even if it "slightly explains": the *Āgama-sūtras* say, "There is no this old age and death; there is no someone whose old age and death it is." Saying "there is no this old age and death" is precisely the meaning of the emptiness of dharmas. Although there is this statement, because it is not even one part in a hundred, it is called "slightly explained." It merely states it and does not explain it further; hence it is not distinct, because it is not the main intention of the teaching. Now, viewed in contrast with the clear and definitive meaning of the Mahāyāna, it is called "only [explaining selflessness]," just as a river with little water is also called waterless. The phrase "only relying on..." below indicates the fundamental basis relied upon. "The six consciousnesses" are the first six consciousnesses. The three schools of that teaching explain this differently: the Sautrāntikas hold that there are no distinct mental factors; the Sarvāstivādins hold that there are distinct mental factors; and according to Dharmatrāta (Gao Tian / Jue Tian), there is only one mental consciousness that operates according to the six sense organs, with no distinct six consciousnesses. As for "establishing through the three poisons": the afflictions of greed, anger, and delusion harm living beings most deeply and can damage the dharmakāya and the life of wisdom, hence receiving the designation of "poisons." If these three are taken as that which perfumes, and the present physical and mental states are what is perfumed, producing karma and receiving rebirth to transmigrate in the three realms, this is the root of defilement. If the three [wholesome roots] such as non-greed are taken as that which perfumes, and the present physical and mental states are what is perfumed, cutting off afflictions and escaping the three realms, this is the root of purity. Defilement and purity depend on the presence or absence of these three; beyond this, there is no other basis relied upon, hence it says "only." The phrase "not exhausting..." below concludes that it is non-definitive. Not understanding that the tathāgatagarbha-mind inherently possesses uncontaminated virtues, it does not exhaust the source of pure dharmas; not realizing that fundamental non-enlightenment is the cause of contaminated dharmas, it does not exhaust the source of defiled dharmas. This teaching does not even express the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, let alone avidyā and dharmatā. Therefore it says "not exhausting," and so forth. As for "having many disputes": the twenty sects formed their own lineages and did not agree with one another, like a group of blind men touching an elephant, disputing in confusion over right and wrong; hence it says "disputes." If they had exhausted the source, how could it be seen like this?

2.27

As for the Mahāyāna: it conveys those of great faculties to the great fruit. Like an ox-cart drawing heavy burdens, it can reach far distances; hence it is called the Great Vehicle (Mahāyāna). Although the following four teachings differ in provisional and ultimate status, because they are collectively contrasted with the Hīnayāna, they are all generically named the Mahāyāna. "Initially dividing into two teachings" tentatively marks two names. Here, the two teachings each explain one meaning—namely, emptiness and marks; it does not mean that one teaching has two names. "Only expounding..." clarifies the principle that is expressed; namely, the various Prajñā[-pāramitā scriptures], which clarify that mind and objects, defilement and purity, and so forth, are all empty. Beginning with form and mind and ending with all-inclusive knowledge, none is not like an illusion; hence it says "all are empty." The Prajñā[-pāramitā] says: "There is no form, no feeling, perception, karmic formations, or consciousness... up to no wisdom and no attainment." Furthermore, a sūtra says: "If there were a dharma surpassing nirvāṇa, I would still declare it to be like a dream or an illusion." "Not exhausting..." judges this to be non-definitive. The principle of the Mahāyāna is neither empty nor existent, yet empty and existent. Since it only expounds emptiness, one should know it does not exhaust [the truth]. Therefore, the Mahābherīhāraka-sūtra says: "All emptiness sūtras are teachings with remainder." The Madhyamaka-śāstra says: "Emptiness is the initial gateway to the Mahāyāna;" hence it is called "initial." It also says: "Because there is the principle of emptiness, all dharmas can be established." "Only expounding..." refers to the differentiated teaching. "All marks of dharmas" clarifies the dharmas that are expressed. Now, all [dharmas] do not exceed the five categories and one hundred dharmas: first, mental dharmas, of which there are eight; second, mental concomitant dharmas, of which there are fifty-one; third, form dharmas, of which there are eleven; fourth, conditioned dharmas non-concomitant [with mind], of which there are twenty-four; fifth, unconditioned dharmas, of which there are six. Even if one says that the unconditioned tathatā is the nature of all dharmas, it still falls under the enumeration of marks of dharmas; hence it says "only expounds existence." "Not attaining Buddhahood..." judges this to be non-definitive. That is, among the five natures, the two vehicles of fixed nature, the icchantika devoid of nature, and two-thirds of those of indeterminate nature definitely will not attain Buddhahood. Since not all attain it, it is termed "differentiated."

2.28

As for "the two teachings of final and real": this marks their names. This is only one teaching, which, in contrast to the preceding two, is assigned two names; it is not that there are two distinct teachings as in the preceding case. "Expounding that the Tathāgata..." sequentially clarifies dependent arising, which is the gate of arising and ceasing. Therefore, the treatise below says: "Mind as arising and ceasing: relying on the tathāgatagarbha there is the mind of arising and ceasing; what is called the non-arising and non-ceasing combining with arising and ceasing, being neither identical nor different, is named the ālayavijñāna," and so forth. This is what was referred to earlier as: "Without changing its nature, it depends and arises." "Dependent arising..." reversely clarifies the nature of conditions, which is the gate of tathatā. Therefore, the treatise says: "Mind as tathatā: this is the essence of the dharma-gate of the great universal mark of the one dharmadhātu; that is to say, the nature of the mind does not arise and does not cease... up to all dharmas being ineffable and unthinkable; hence it is named tathatā." This is what was referred to earlier as: "Without abandoning conditions, it is immediately real." Thus, from the root arise the branches, hence it says "according with conditions"; the branches are identical to the root, hence it says "devoid of [independent] nature." It is like casting gold into a vessel: the vessel is immediately gold.

2.29

"Those of fixed nature, etc.": all sentient beings across the three groups and five natures possess the mind of the tathāgatagarbha, and all altogether attain Buddhahood. Therefore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "All who possess mind are bound to become Buddhas." The Yuanjue jing says: "Those with nature and those devoid of nature equally realize the Buddha-path." The above has all clarified the dharma that is expressed. "Only then exhausting..." judges this to be the definitive meaning. Expressing the dharma and exhausting its source, it is therefore called "reaching the ultimate." In contrast to the preceding [teachings] which did not exhaust it, reaching the final end of what was initial, it is named the final teaching. Not being the same as [mere] marks of dharmas, it is called "the real principle." The differentiated teaching is non-definitive, thus belonging to the provisional; this [teaching] is the definitive meaning, hence it is called the real teaching.

First 29 of 38 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

起信論疏筆削記 — Classical Chinese