大乘法苑義林章 4.17

4.17

Fifth, questions and answers: Question: If the three nutriment [types] permeate the dispersed state of the three realms, whereas piece-nutriment belongs only to the desire realm, does an upper realm also nourish a lower piece-nutriment and the other three nutriments? Answer: It does. When one in the second dhyāna or above generates the four consciousnesses of the first dhyāna, is that not nourishing the lower three? Moreover, piece-nutriment can be so by manifestation—namely, in the case of bodhisattvas of great majestic virtue and the like; in reality it does not nourish what is lower. Question: Does what is lower nourish what is upper? Answer: It does. Because based on upper samādhi one generates contact that contacts objects, and deliberates on wondrous principles. Another explanation: this is not lower nutriment, but only provides nourishment. Otherwise, the mind of samādhi should also be called nutriment, not being a distinct gathering and benefiting. This interpretation is not so: samādhi does not impair the distinct meaning of contact and the others gathering [and nourishing], because what is expected differs. Question: Are these four kinds solely seeds, or do they also include actual manifestations? Answer: The first three are solely actual manifestations; consciousness-nutriment includes seeds. Chapter Ninety-Four states: 'Due to the power of piece-nutriment and the rest, one has physical strength and so forth, and the sense faculties and primary elements are all augmented. For this reason, foolish worldlings who cling to body and life seek after things for this purpose; when seeking, they create new karma and increase kleśas. Through these three gateways of piece, contact, and volition, they are able to accumulate the karma-kleśa consciousness of future existence. In the present life, because they are pursued by karma and kleśas, they come to have clinging, and thus can grasp coming future existence.' This intention shows precisely that through the previous three nutriments, seed-consciousness is accumulated, and future existence increases; hence we know that the first three are all solely actual manifestations. Their seeds are the cause of future existence, serving as seed-consciousness; this spans the two periods [of present and future]. The future belongs only to ordinary worldlings, not to noble ones, because karma of the total retributive effect does not belong to noble ones. Question: For all sentient beings at every single moment of thought, wherever they may be, do they definitely have [nutriment]? Answer: It is not fixed. Consciousness-nutriment is definitely present; the rest may or may not be. Question: If it is granted that all five destinies have piece-nutriment, contact-nutriment, and so on, they must generate pleasure. In the destinies of extreme suffering, the Saṃgraha says that pleasure exists; is that definitely pleasure? Answer: They generate agreeable, beneficial equanimity, not the sensations of joy or pleasure. Furthermore, the Cheng weishi lun says: 'What is said elsewhere about pleasure existing there is an adaptable provisional teaching (anuvṛtti-yukti-mukha), not the Mahāyāna doctrine.' This meaning is correct: they only generate agreeable equanimity, definitely not joy or pleasure. Question: If the three nutriments permeate the three moral natures, how can what is unwholesome provide nourishment? Answer: Just as when one commits evil actions and contacts the five wondrous desires, they also nourish and foster. Though it brings detriment in future lives, it provides nourishment in the present. Question: Among the distinct causes and effects, in accordance with the four that should be present, are all four kinds obtained in the places with the three nutriments—namely, impure nutriment and the like? Answer: The desire realm has all four; the form realm has three, excluding impure nutriment; it lacks a minor part of the fourth, because there are no buddhas. However, the formless realm entirely lacks the fourth and the first. Question: Among the three realms, in which realm is nutriment coarse? Answer: To begin with piece-nutriment: Chapter Ninety-Four says, 'Desire-realm devas, the intermediate existence, the maternal womb, and eggshells are all subtle; the other states are called coarse.' However, Chapter Fifty-Seven says that only devas are subtle and the rest are called coarse; this is said in terms of the majority, or because coarse and subtle are set relative to the five destinies; in Chapter Ninety-Four, it is set relative to each destiny itself. Moreover, full digestion versus non-digestion constitutes coarse and subtle, the others not being so. Chapter Fifty-Seven says, 'In the desire realm the three nutriments are coarse; in the form and formless realms the three nutriments are subtle.' Chapter Ninety-Four says, 'The three nutriments in the formless realm are called subtle; in other places they are called coarse. With form as support, they are easy to discern; with the formless as support, they are difficult to discern.' This intention shows that having form as a support is coarse, and having the formless as a support is subtle. Chapter Fifty-Seven takes the phenomenal aspects of the states of samādhi to be subtle because they are difficult to know, and the phenomenal aspects of the dispersed states to be coarse because they are easy to know. Each relies on one meaning, so they do not contradict each other. Chapter Ninety-Four says, 'There is also another meaning: all four nutriments that can cause already-born sentient beings to abide are called coarse, and those that can cause sentient beings seeking birth to abide are called subtle, because there is a coarse and subtle distinction between basic existence and intermediate existence.' All these should be understood accordingly; they are not essential paramārtha, so they are not related in detail. Chapter Ninety-Four says, 'No dharma whatsoever abides having arisen, nor is there a self that can eat or is eaten. It is only in terms of the principle of serving as a causal condition for the arising of unarisen dharmas—only dharmas leading dharmas—that the meaning of nutriment is spoken of. It is merely through dharma-designation that upon consciousness, a pudgala is provisionally posited; in relation to these four nutriments one speaks of an eater, conforming to the world and speaking of an eater in terms of saṃvṛti-satya, not in terms of paramārtha. If one speaks of a consciousness that abides having arisen, whose substance is a real pudgala called an eater, one should not establish consciousness as its nutrimental nature; one has never seen a pudgala turn around and be able to eat a pudgala itself,' up to extensive explanations. Hence we know that an eater is merely a provisional designation. 'Furthermore, the three nutriments serve as causes that can produce three sufferings: first, the suffering of the inequality of the primary elements; second, the suffering of seeking out desires; third, the suffering of unsatisfied seeking. Because the three—piece, contact, and volition—serve as causes, one should contemplate piece-nutriment as like the flesh of a son, not becoming greedily attached to it; one should contemplate contact agreeable to pleasure as like a flayed cow, being gnawed by various worms and producing much suffering; one should contemplate volition associated with the mind as like a great fire. Having cultivated these contemplations, one should not be tormented by the three sufferings, but abide calmly. The three nutriments serve as conditions producing the internal suffering of consciousness; hence one should contemplate consciousness-nutriment as like being pierced by three hundred spears,' up to extensive explanations. 'If one does not carefully contemplate this, one will be defiled by joy and craving. If defiled by these two, two faults arise: first, in future lives; second, in the present life,' up to extensive explanations as in Chapter Ninety-Four. Question: If anāsrava dharmas rupture existence and are therefore said to be non-nutriment, why does the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra say, 'Sustained by the joy and pleasure of the vast taste of the Dharma, this is called nutriment'? Answer: Fascicle 1 of the Buddhabhūmi says, 'Nutriment can nourish sentient beings of the three realms of existence.' Since this severs existence, it should not be called nutriment; yet because it is a cause of sustenance, it is also called nutriment. Just as sāsrava dharmas, though obstructing the anāsrava, sustain the sāsrava and obtain the name of nutriment, anāsrava is also like this: though severing the sāsrava, it sustains the anāsrava; how could it not be nutriment? That is, the subsequent anāsrava [wisdom] of buddhas and bodhisattvas can expound and experience the taste of the Mahāyāna Dharma, generating great joy and pleasure. Moreover, the fundamental wisdom experiences the taste of tathatā and generates great joy and pleasure, being able to support the body so that it is not broken and interrupted, nourishing wholesome dharmas; hence it is called nutriment; it does not serve as nutriment for [ordinary] sentient beings. Only when the mind of great compassion with supernormal powers transforms objects to nourish sentient beings is it also proximately called nutriment; hence there is no contradiction. Question: Why is sāsrava contact the substance of nutriment, whereas among anāsrava dharmas, joy and pleasure serve as nutriment? Answer: Because sāsrava contact is superior in inducing joy and pleasure, while anāsrava joy and pleasure are superior in counteracting grief and suffering, each is established as nutriment because of differences in the counteragent. Furthermore, anāsrava sensation experiences an increase in the taste of the Dharma and is spoken of as nutriment, just as when sāsrava contact produces an increase in joy it is established with the name of nutriment; hence it does not contradict principle, each according to its predominance. Question: The Buddhabhūmi-sūtra speaks of one nutriment: sustained by the joy and pleasure of the vast taste of the Dharma. The Lotus Sūtra speaks of two nutriments: first, the joy of the Dharma; second, the delight of dhyāna. Various places speak of four—namely piece, contact, volition, and consciousness. The Saṃgraha speaks of four: impure support, and so forth. The Āgamas speak of nine: four mundane and five supramundane. The mundane nutriments are piece, contact, and so on. The supramundane nutriments are: first, dhyāna; second, aspiration; third, mindfulness; fourth, the eight liberations; fifth, the nutriment of joy. The Buddhabhūmi and the Lotus Sūtra speak only of anāsrava nutriment nourishing the anāsrava, not of the sāsrava. The Buddhabhūmi-sūtra speaks only of the nutriment caused by hearing the true Dharma, not of the delight of dhyāna. The Lotus Sūtra speaks broadly of nourishment caused by samādhi and prajñā, and therefore speaks of two nutriments, because these two are superior among the categories of merit and prajñā; mindfulness, aspiration, and liberation are not predominant, so they are omitted and not stated. The four spoken of in various places are mundane nutriments. The four such as impure [support] are based on distinctions among persons. Those who speak of nine nutriments combine the two teachings of sāsrava and anāsrava. The nourishment of anāsrava dharmas shatters sāsrava nutriment, possessing five kinds. Therefore the Āgama says: 'Always mindfully abandon the four kinds of mundane nutriments together, and seek the five kinds of supramundane nutriments.' Among sāsrava dharmas, piece and the others are superior; among anāsrava dharmas, samādhi and the others are superior. Each is established according to what is superior, so there is no contradiction either.