華嚴一乘教義分齊章 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Fazang of the Great Jianfu Monastery under the Tang

Ninth, explaining the differences in what is signified by the various teachings: by briefly presenting ten gates of doctrinal differences, the diverse nature of what expresses them is revealed. The rest is as explained separately. (1) the underlying consciousness; (2) explaining the buddha-gotra; (3) the demarcations of the stages of practice; (4) the duration of practice; (5) the body on which practice relies; (6) the demarcations of severing delusions; (7) the turning of the mind of the two vehicles; (8) the doctrinal aspects of the buddha-fruition; (9) the realm of gathering and transforming [sentient beings]; (10) the unfolding and merging of the buddha-bodies.

2.3

First, the differences in consciousness. In Hīnayāna, there are only six consciousnesses, functionally divided into mind, mentation, and consciousness, as explained in the Hīnayāna treatises. Regarding the ālayavijñāna, they attain only its name, as spoken in the Ekottarika-āgama.

2.4

If according to the initial teaching, regarding the ālayavijñāna they attain only the single aspect of arising and ceasing. Because they are not yet able to harmonize it with ultimate truth and speak only of it being motionless and not producing the various dharmas, they establish the ālaya within the phenomenal domain of arising and ceasing in dependent origination, deriving its essence from seeds of karma and the like to give rise to the vipāka-retribution consciousness as the support for all dharmas. As an upāya to guide [beings] gradually toward ultimate truth, they state that perfuming and the like are all identical to emptiness. As the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra states: 'If a bodhisattva, internally and externally, does not see a storehouse or abiding, does not see perfuming, does not see ālaya, does not see the ālayavijñāna, does not see ādāna, does not see the ādānavijñāna—if they can know in this way, this is called a bodhisattva-bodhisattva. Up to this point, the Tathāgata establishes the secret skillfulness regarding all mind, mentation, and consciousness.' The Yogācārabhūmi also speaks in the same way. The explanation says: Since the skillfulness of mind and mentation is established precisely up to the point of not seeing [these], the characteristics of arising and ceasing established for the ālaya are all intentional, not meant to be grasped literally, thereby returning them to truth.

2.5

If according to the final teaching, regarding this ālayavijñāna, they attain the twofold aspect of the harmonization of principle and phenomena. Therefore the treatise simply says: 'The non-arising and non-ceasing combined with arising and ceasing, being neither one nor different, is called the ālayavijñāna.' Because they allow that suchness, following perfuming, combines to form this fundamental consciousness, it is unlike the previous teaching where it is born from seeds of karma and the like. Thus the Laṅkāvatāra says: 'The tathāgatagarbha is perfumed by beginningless evil habit energy, and is named the storehouse consciousness.' It also says: 'The tathāgatagarbha experiences suffering and pleasure, together with cause, whether arising or ceasing.' It also says: 'The tathāgatagarbha is named the ālayavijñāna, and it coexists with avidyā and the seven consciousnesses.' Furthermore, the Awakening of Faith says: 'The mind pure by nature, stirred by the wind of avidyā, becomes the defiled mind,' and so forth; instances like this are many. Question: 'Since suchness is spoken of as a permanent dharma, how can it be said to arise and cease in accordance with perfuming? Once arising and ceasing are admitted, how can it again be spoken of as motionless and permanent?' Answer: 'Since it is called the permanence of suchness, it is not what is called permanent in conventional language. Why? When the noble ones say that suchness is motionless, it means that when it accords with conditions to produce all dharmas, it does not lose its own nature; hence it is called permanent. This is the permanence that is not different from impermanence, called inconceivable permanence. It does not mean that it does not produce dharmas, like the stillness imagined by delusion. Thus the Śrīmālā says: "Defiled without being defiled" clarifies that it accords with conditions to produce all dharmas. "Not defiled while being defiled" clarifies that when according with conditions, it does not lose its own nature. Due to the former meaning conventional truth is established; due to the latter meaning ultimate truth is further posited.' Thus ultimate and conventional have only two meanings and do not possess two separate entities; they interpenetrate without obstruction and are free from all conceptual clingings. Therefore the treatise says: 'The cognitive obscuration is utterly blinding and dark, meaning the distinct grasping of ultimate and conventional.' This is what it means. These two meanings of suchness: in the previous initial teaching, based on the approach of the distinct characteristics of dharmas, they spoke only of the single aspect of stillness. Here in the final teaching, based on the approach of the fusion of essence and characteristics, they speak of the meaning of the non-duality of the two aspects. This meaning is explained extensively in the Commentary on the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith. Furthermore, as the Daśabhūmika-sūtra says: 'The three realms are illusory, made solely by the one mind.' The Mahāyānasaṃgraha and other texts interpret this in terms of the initial teaching as the ālayavijñānas; the Daśabhūmika-śāstra interprets it in terms of the final teaching as the true mind of the supreme truth. Moreover, regarding the verses of the Dharmasūtra, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and others explain: 'This realm,' etc., where 'realm' means cause, namely the seed-consciousness, and so forth. The Ratnagotravibhāga interprets it in terms of the final teaching, saying: 'This nature' is the tathāgatagarbha nature. Regarding 'relying on this, there are the various destinies,' as the Śrīmālā-sūtra says: 'Relying on the tathāgatagarbha there is saṃsāra, relying on the tathāgatagarbha there is nirvāṇa,' and so forth, up to extensive explanations. Therefore one should know that the two approaches are distinct. If according to the sudden teaching, all dharmas are solely the one mind of suchness; differentiated characteristics are extinguished, transcending words and terminating thought, inexpressible. Like the Dharma gate of non-duality spoken by the thirty-two bodhisattvas in the Vimalakīrti-sūtra, which is the meaning of the non-dual fusion of defilement and purity in the previous final teaching, the non-duality transcending words revealed by Vimalakīrti is this gate. Because all characteristics of defilement and purity are extinguished, there are no two dharmas that can be harmonized; therefore it cannot even be spoken of as 'non-dual.' If according to the perfect teaching, based on the nature-ocean being perfectly luminous, the dependent origination of the dharmadhātu, unobstructed and sovereign, one is all and all is one, with host and retinue harmoniously integrated, it therefore speaks of the ten minds to reveal the inexhaustible, as explained in the 'Chapter on Transcending the World' and on the ninth bhūmi. Furthermore, solely being the nature of the single dharmadhātu, when mind arises it also possesses ten virtues, as explained in the 'Chapter on the Arising of Nature.' These are stated according to the distinct teaching. If based on the common teaching, it gathers all the consciousnesses spoken of in the previous teachings. Why? Because they are its upāyas, and they flow forth from this. The rest can be inferred from this."

2.6

Question: 'How is it that the one mind, in reference to the various teachings, can have such different meanings?' Answer: 'There are two meanings: first, comprehensive inclusion in terms of the Dharma; second, demarcations in terms of the faculties [of beings]. As for the first meaning: because of this profound dependent origination, the one mind possesses five doctrinal gates, and therefore the noble ones use each gate according to need to gather and transform sentient beings: (1) the gate of subsuming meaning under name, as taught in the Hīnayāna teaching; (2) the gate of subsuming principle under phenomena, as taught in the initial teaching; (3) the gate of the non-obstruction of principle and phenomena, as taught in the final teaching; (4) the gate of the exhaustion of phenomena and the manifestation of principle, as taught in the sudden teaching; (5) the gate of the nature-ocean being endowed with virtues, as taught in the perfect teaching. This means that without moving from the root it is constantly the branches, and without destroying the branches it is ever the root; thus the five meanings interpenetrate, functioning solely as the one mind. Second, explaining the demarcation of attaining the Dharma in terms of faculties: some attain the name but do not attain the meaning, as in the Hīnayāna teaching; some attain the name and attain a partial meaning, as in the initial teaching; some attain the name and attain the complete meaning, as in the final teaching; some attain the meaning without preserving the name, as in the sudden teaching; or both name and meaning are inexhaustible, as in the perfect teaching. Other doctrinal approaches are as explained in the Chapter on Vijñaptimātratā.'

2.7

Second, explaining the differences in gotra. If according to Hīnayāna, there are six kinds of gotra: retrogression, thought, protection, abiding, progress, and immobility. Within the immobile gotra there are three grades: the superior is the buddha-gotra; the middling is the pratyekabuddha-gotra; the inferior is the śrāvaka-gotra, such as Śāriputra and others. Although here it speaks of the single person of the Buddha having the buddha-gotra, it is nevertheless not the nature of great bodhi, because it does not state that the Buddha's virtues arise in great function to the end of the future, and so on. Therefore one should know that in this teaching, apart from the single person of the Buddha, all other sentient beings are not said to have the nature of great bodhi. The remaining points are as explained in the Hīnayāna treatises.

2.8

If according to the differences in gotra in the teachings of the Three Vehicles, there are briefly three explanations:

2.9

First, in terms of the initial teaching, because it establishes gotra within conditioned, impermanent dharmas, it cannot pervade all sentient beings; thus among the five gotras there is a category of sentient beings lacking the nature. Therefore the Prakaraṇāryavācā states: 'What are the five kinds of reasonings for the difference in gotra? Because differences in all realms are obtainable,' and so on, up to: 'Because it is unreasonable for those who are not destined for parinirvāṇa to be so only in the present life,' and so on, extensively. Therefore one should know that by natural law (dharmatā), from beginningless time all sentient beings have five gotras; the fifth gotra lacks the cause for supramundane virtue, and therefore is never liberated. By this reasoning, the virtues of the buddhas in benefiting and bringing joy to sentient beings never come to an end. Regarding those who possess a gotra, the Yogācārabhūmi states: 'Gotra is briefly of two kinds: (1) inherent by nature; (2) accomplished by habituation. Inherent by nature means that the six bases of bodhisattvas have such superior characteristics, transmitted successively from beginningless time and obtained by natural law; accomplished by habituation means obtained from previously habitual wholesome roots.' Here, 'nature' refers to the mental base being the most superior among the internal six bases, which gathers the innate awakening nature of comprehension within the ālayavijñāna as the natural gotra. The Liang Mahāyānasaṃgraha states: 'Perfumed by hearing combines with the nature of comprehension within the ālayavijñāna, and all noble ones take this as cause.' However, since the Yogācārabhūmi states that only those endowed with gotra can generate the mind [of bodhi], one knows that being endowed with both nature and habituation forms a single gotra; therefore these two are non-dual in dependent origination, and lacking either one, it is not accomplished. Nor can it be said that nature comes first and habituation comes later; only when reaching the stage of competence can one speak of having the natural gotra in terms of the root, and the habituated gotra in terms of cultivation. Yet there are two meanings without there being two separate entities; as the Mahāyānasaṃgraha quoted above states, 'two meanings combine to form a single cause,' so we know this is so.

2.10

Question: "What is the difference between these two kinds of gotra and the gotra of practice and the gotra of nature among the six gotras in the Renwang jing and the Benye jing?" Answer: "Those sūtras generally speak in terms of stages, taking initial practice as the practice-gotra, and prolonged practice accumulated to completion as the nature-gotra. Thus they say that the practice-gotra is in the ten abodes and the nature-gotra is in the ten practices. Prior to the three ranks of the worthy, there is only the name 'wholesome destination,' not the name 'gotra.' In the Yogācārabhūmi, prolonged practice is called the practice-gotra, while looking to the source is the nature-gotra. Yet these two kinds are neither initial, nor intermediate or final; hence the sūtras say that 'through practice, nature is perfected,' while the treatises say 'practice arises based on nature.' Because these two mutually constitute dependent origination and lack dual characteristics, sūtras and treatises explain them interchangeably, and only then is the meaning fully complete. Furthermore, the sūtras speak of gotra after the generation of the mind [for awakening], whereas in the treatises, gotra is before the generation of the mind. Why is this? Because only when one arrives at the stage do the capacities become manifest; therefore, the sūtras speak of them within the stages of the three ranks of the worthy. However, those capacities must have that upon which they rely; therefore, in the treatises, they are spoken of prior to the stages. Only because capacities are manifested can they be said to exist; thus the sūtras do not contradict the treatises. Only because nature exists do capacities arise; thus the treatises do not contradict the sūtras. This is also a mutual presentation whose doctrinal import is completely harmonious."

2.11

Question: "Furthermore, by what principle is it known that gotra reaches the stage of competence?" Answer: "Because the treatise states that gotra necessarily possesses both nature and practice. Since practice already exists, one must have already cultivated practice. If one has already cultivated practice, one must have reached competence. If one did not cultivate this repeated practice in the intermediate interval from an ordinary foolish person up to competence, in what other stage would one cultivate it? For in the foolish stage one has not yet cultivated practice, whereas after attaining the stage, one possesses the second abode. Therefore, one should know that from the foolish stage, where one has not yet cultivated repeated practice, up to that competence, repeated practice is only then perfected; hence, nature and practice blend harmoniously to constitute gotra."

2.12

Question: "If nature is spoken of only waiting upon practice, then when one has not practiced in the foolish stage, is there no nature-gotra? If it is absent, it should not exist later, for what was previously absent and later exists is not a nature-gotra. If it is present, that there should be nature without practice is unreasonable, and the treatises do not state this." Answer: "Since these two are dependently originated, when there is no practice, there is also no such nature; because of this, sentient beings lacking gotra are also established. As for the claim that 'what was previously absent and later exists is not a nature-gotra,' this is also not so. Because where practice is perfected, nature must certainly have been present previously; but in the foolish stage, because one has not yet practiced, nature is not spoken of. Once practice is subsequently aroused, it is no longer called absence of practice; therefore, when practice is perfected, nature is subsequently spoken of as existing. Whichever practice one repeatedly engages in among the vehicles, at that time it is said that one originally possessed that nature."

2.13

Question: "If so, this is solely a single indeterminate gotra; how can there be the distinction of five gotras?" Answer: "It is precisely by this principle that the five gotras are established. How so? When one has cultivated the repeated practice of the six perfections and one's stage reaches competence, one completes the bodhisattva-gotra. If one practices the lesser practices and reaches the stage of forbearance, one completes the śrāvaka-gotra. Thus the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'Heat, summit, and forbearance are called the gotra stages.' The Śīlavisuddhi-sūtra says: 'If one attains the supreme worldly dharma, this is called the second stage.' Therefore, we know that the previous three wholesome roots belong to the gotra stage. If one relies on the Abhidharmakośa, it is only upon attaining the stage of wholesome roots conducive to liberation that gotra is spoken of as existing. Thus that treatise says: 'Those conducive to liberation are wholesome roots that definitely can bring about the fruition of nirvāṇa. When these wholesome roots have arisen, they cause that sentient being to be designated as having the dharma of nirvāṇa within their person.' The pratyekabuddha is known accordingly. By this, the gotras of the Three Vehicles are established. If one cultivates any one of the three practices but has not reached its fundamental stage, at that time one is established as the indeterminate gotra. If one has completely failed to cultivate any of the three practices, at that time one is established as lacking gotra. From this one should know that the gotras of the various vehicles are all spoken of in terms of practice."

2.14

Question: "If the absence of practice in the foolish stage means there is no nature, even if practice is subsequently aroused, how could it come to exist?" Answer: "Having practice is not the stage of lacking practice; therefore, having practice is constantly and eternally existing, while lacking practice is of itself eternally non-existent. One does not turn the lack of practice into practice, nor does one turn the lack of nature into nature, because of the distinction in stages. As the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says regarding those among the three types of people who definitely die, which is an analogy for the icchantika having no Buddha-nature: 'Good sons! If an icchantika meets good friends, buddhas, and bodhisattvas, and hears profound Dharma taught, or even if they do not meet them, in either case they cannot be free from the mind of an icchantika. Why is this? Because they have severed the wholesome roots. An icchantika can also attain the mind of anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi. Why is this? If they can generate the mind of awakening, they are no longer designated as having the nature of an icchantika. Good sons! For what reason is it said that an icchantika attains anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi? Icchantikas truly do not attain anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, like those whose life-span has ended,' and so forth, up to extensive explanations. One should know that here, existence and non-existence before and after the stages are constantly fixed, and do not depend on one another."

2.15

Second, according to the final teaching: because gotra is established within the nature of suchness, it pervades all sentient beings and all possess the nature. Thus the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'White stone has the nature of silver; yellow stone has the nature of gold; water is of a wet nature; fire is of a hot nature; all sentient beings have the nature of nirvāṇa, because there is no deluded consciousness that cannot return to its own true nature.' As a sūtra states: 'Sentient beings are likewise: all possess a mind. All who possess a mind will definitely attain anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi. By this principle, I constantly proclaim that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature.'"

2.16

Question: "As someone might object: 'If all who possess a mind attain awakening, the Buddha also possesses a mind and should also attain it. If it is said that although the Buddha possesses a mind, he no longer will attain it, then sentient beings lacking gotra, although possessing this mind, also will not attain it.'" Answer: "The sūtra has already made its own distinction to eliminate ambiguity; it merely says that sentient beings have minds, not that the Buddha does. Because taking rebirth in various places is termed 'sentient beings,' they are not the same as the Buddha."

2.17

Question: "If all possess the nature, how is the one lacking gotra among the five gotras established?" Answer: "The treatises provide their own explanation. Thus the Ratnagotravibhāga says: 'It is definitively stated that the icchantika has no nature of nirvāṇa and does not enter nirvāṇa. What is the meaning of this? It is because [the Buddha] wished to show the cause of slandering the Mahāyāna. What does this clarify? In order to turn around the mind that slanders the Mahāyāna, this was spoken relying on [an extent of] immeasurable time, because they truly possess the pure Buddha-nature.' Furthermore, the Foxing lun says: 'Question: "If so, why did the Buddha say that sentient beings do not abide in the gotra and are eternally without parinirvāṇa?" Answer: "If one has turned one's back on the Mahāyāna, this dharma is the cause of an icchantika. It was in order to cause sentient beings to abandon this dharma [that he said this]. If one falls into the causes of an icchantika, one transmigrates without cessation in the long night [of saṃsāra]. By this principle, the sūtra speaks thus. If one relies on reason, all sentient beings originally possess the pure Buddha-nature; that they should not attain parinirvāṇa is impossible. Therefore, Buddha-nature is definitively originally possessed, being free from existence and free from non-existence."' Explanation: Furthermore, the earlier text of this treatise extensively refutes the absence of gotra, up to its concluding text, which says: 'Third is the error of being identical with the non-Buddhists: what originally exists definitely exists, and what originally does not exist definitely does not exist; what exists cannot be destroyed, and what does not exist cannot be produced. Faults such as these arise from your mistaken attachment to the doctrine of the absence of gotra,' and so forth, up to extensive explanations."

2.18

Question: "In the previous initial teaching, it was definitively stated that there are sentient beings lacking gotra. In this final teaching, all without exception possess the nature. How are these reconciled?" Answer: "The treatises also provide their own explanation. Thus the second fascicle of the Foxing lun says: 'For what reason do other sūtras say that icchantika sentient beings definitively lack the nature of parinirvāṇa? If so, the two sūtras directly contradict each other. How can the two explanations be reconciled? One is definitive and one is non-definitive; therefore they do not contradict each other.' Explanation: In the Hīnayāna, only the single person of the Buddha possesses Buddha-nature, and all other persons are not spoken of as possessing it. In the initial teaching of the Three Vehicles, because it gradually diverges from the Hīnayāna, it says that many persons possess it, but has not yet completely diverged from it; hence it grants that one portion lacks the gotra. Therefore, in the treatises, this is judged to be an expedient and non-definitive teaching."

2.19

Question: "If according to the final teaching all sentient beings will attain buddhahood, then although sentient beings are numerous, there must also be an end to them. If it is so, then the one who is the last to attain buddhahood would have no one to convert; because there is no one to convert, their practice of benefiting others would be lacking; if their practice of benefiting others is lacking, it is unreasonable for them to attain buddhahood, and it would also cause the buddhas' merits of benefiting others to be cut off and come to an end. If all will attain buddhahood without remainder, but one says that sentient beings will never end, there is then the fault of self-contradiction, because those who never end would never attain buddhahood. Furthermore, if a single buddha saves immeasurable people, does this diminish the realm of sentient beings or not? If it gradually diminishes, it must have an end, for having diminution without an end is unreasonable; if there is no diminution, then there is no nirvanic liberation, for having liberation without diminution is unreasonable. Based on such principles, texts like the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra have on this account established [the category of] sentient beings who lack the nature, thereby avoiding the above faults. What is the meaning of this?"
Answer: "If one maintains that because sentient beings possess the nature, all are made to attain buddhahood, and thus says there is an end, this immediately gives rise to the view of decrease regarding the realm of sentient beings. When the realm of sentient beings decreases, the realm of buddhas must increase; thus one immediately gives rise to the view of increase regarding the realm of buddhas. Such increase and decrease are not right view, and therefore there is neither increase nor decrease. The sūtra says: 'Śāriputra! What is called a great wrong view is to see the realm of sentient beings increase and to see the realm of sentient beings decrease,' and so on at length. Even if, to avoid this view, one posits this portion of sentient beings lacking the nature so that there is neither increase nor decrease, one still cannot escape the views of increase and decrease. Why is this? Because seeing those who possess the nature all attain buddhahood, one immediately gives rise to the view of annihilation and the view of decrease; and seeing those lacking the nature never attain buddhahood, one immediately gives rise to the view of permanence and the view of increase. This is because they do not comprehend the realm of sentient beings. Therefore the sūtra says: 'All foolish common mortals, because they do not truly know the single dharma realm and cannot truly see the single dharma realm, give rise to wrong views, thinking that the realm of sentient beings increases or that the realm of sentient beings decreases.'
Furthermore, the Mañjuśrī-prajñā-sūtra says: 'Suppose a single buddha were to abide in the world for an eon, or more than an eon. Just as in a single buddha-world, there are further immeasurable and boundless buddhas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; if each and every such buddha, for an eon or more than an eon, were to preach the Dharma day and night without ceasing for an instant, each delivering immeasurable Ganges-sands of sentient beings into nirvāṇa, the realm of sentient beings would nevertheless neither increase nor decrease; and this is also true throughout the buddha-worlds of the ten directions. Each and every buddha preaches the Dharma and transforms them, each delivering immeasurable Ganges-sands of sentient beings into nirvāṇa, yet the realm of sentient beings neither increases nor decreases. Why is this? Because a determinate mark of sentient beings cannot be found.'
This means that the realm of sentient beings is like empty space: suppose beings of immeasurable, superior supernormal powers were each to fly through empty space for immeasurable eons seeking the boundary of space—it could never be reached. It is not that because it cannot be reached, one cannot be said to travel; nor is it that by traveling, one causes it to have a boundary. One should know that the principle here is also like this: it is not that because they will attain it, they are caused to have an end; nor is it that because there is no end, one says there are those who do not attain it. Therefore, all these objections are fully resolved.
Furthermore, if to establish that the buddhas' merits of benefiting others are never cut off, one posits a portion of sentient beings lacking the nature, this would cause those buddhas to have only the merits of benefiting others through transformation, and it would also cut off their merits of enjoying [the Dharma] for the sake of others, because there would be no bodhisattvas realizing the stages. Moreover, in transforming others, there would also only be coarse [elimination], cutting off the subtle, because not a single person would attain the untaintedness of the Two Vehicles. Furthermore, from now on, not a single one among all buddhas would be able to teach doctrines such as the Three Vehicles, because there would be no capacity to attain the holy [fruition], which would cut off the buddhas' great compassion of identical substance. Moreover, if one resolutely thinks that because all possess the nature, all must come to an end, and fearing that the last buddha would lack the practice of benefiting others, one posits a portion that determinately lacks the nature, then that latter buddha would ultimately be unfulfilled in the practice of benefiting others, because among those he transforms, not a single sentient being would attain a holy fruit. Between the two benefits of buddhas and bodhisattvas, benefiting others is supreme; how could it be that one causes not a single person to attain a holy fruit, yet attains buddhahood in one's own person? Furthermore, all originally made the universal vow: 'May all sentient beings attain bodhi.' Therefore, causing them to attain it ensures that the original vow is not in vain. And because the realm of sentient beings cannot be exhausted, the original vow is never cut off. If it were not so, it would contravene the original vow, the practice and vow would be in vain, and attaining buddhahood through vain practice is unreasonable. Therefore, although they wish to avoid the above faults by establishing the lack of nature, without realizing it, those faults fall right back upon their own position. Hence, the lack of nature is not the definitive, ultimate meaning."

2.20

Question: "Generally speaking, gotra must be conditioned; how does this teaching take tathatā as gotra?"
Answer: "Because when tathatā accords with conditions and unites with defilement to form the root consciousness, within that very reality there is the taintless innate enlightenment, which inwardly perfumes sentient beings to serve as the cause for reversing the flow [of saṃsāra], and this can be taken as possessing gotra. The Liang Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains this as the nature of understanding within the ālaya. In the Awakening of Faith, it is the innate enlightenment among the two aspects of the ālaya. Moreover, in that treatise, the tathāgatagarbha is replete with the untainted and constantly perfumes sentient beings to serve as the cause of pure dharmas. Furthermore, regarding what the Ratnagotravibhāga calls 'and that nature of tathatā', its text says: 'As the Saḍāyatana-sūtra says: "The six sense faculties are thus, from beginningless time, because their substance is the ultimate nature of all dharmas."' Explanation: Because tathatā pervades all dharmas, here non-sentient things are excluded; therefore, within the category of sentient beings of the six āyatanas, one takes that ultimate principle of tathatā as the prakṛti-gotra. This shares the same name as what is stated in the Yogācārabhūmi. But that text pertains to the initial teaching, explaining according to the coarse marks of matching principle to phenomena; hence it explains gotra in the midst of phenomena. The Bodhisattvabhūmi says: 'I have already briefly explained the coarse marks of gotra.' This is what it refers to. In the Ratnagotravibhāga, it pertains to this final teaching, explaining according to the profound and subtle marks of matching phenomena to principle; hence it clarifies the prakṛti-gotra in terms of tathatā. Therefore the Buddhagotra-śāstra says: 'The naturally pure mind is called the truth of the path.' Also, the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says: 'Buddha-nature is named the emptiness of the supreme meaning; the emptiness of the supreme meaning is named wisdom.' These all explain the prakṛti-gotra in terms of innate enlightenment and intrinsic wisdom. Its samudānīta-gotra is also formed from tathatā; hence the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: 'The perfuming of extensive hearing flows from the most pure dharma realm,' and so forth. Furthermore, in the Awakening of Faith, the two greatnesses of substance and characteristic of tathatā serve as the cause of internal perfuming, while the greatness of function of tathatā serves as the condition of external perfuming; because it unites with the defiled dharmas of ignorance, the three greatnesses are therefore spoken of as internal and external perfuming; by the force of perfuming, when ignorance is exhausted, it secretly accords without duality, being solely the one tathatā."

2.21

Third, clarifying it according to the sudden teaching: it is solely the one tathatā, free from the characteristics of verbal expression, which is named gotra, and it does not divide the distinction between prakṛti and samudānīta, because all dharmas are devoid of dual characteristics. Therefore the Sarvadharmāpravṛtti-nirdeśa-sūtra says: 'How is this matter named gotra? Mañjuśrī! All sentient beings are of a single characteristic, ultimately unborn, free from all names, since oneness and difference cannot be found; this is named gotra.' One should determine it by this. The explanation according to the Three Vehicles above is concluded.

2.22

Third, according to the One Vehicle, there are two explanations: First, it includes the gotras clarified in the preceding teachings, all being complete and functioning as host and companion to form the tenets, because it is the common teaching and includes upāya. Second, based on the distinct teaching, gotra is extremely profound, cause and fruition are non-dual, it pervades the dependent and proper [rewards], exhausts the three realms, encompasses all dharma-gates such as principle, phenomena, understanding, and practice, and is originally fulfilled and already accomplished. Therefore the Great Sūtra says: 'The bodhisattva gotra is extremely profound, vast, and great, equal to the dharma realm and empty space.' This is what it refers to. If manifested according to specific gates, within the five stages, the six definitive meanings in each and every stage are named gotra. This dharma is also named the fruition characteristic, because cause and fruition share the same substance and are solely of one nature. It is as the sūtra extensively explains. The rest may be inferred accordingly.

2.23

Question: "Why are there different distinctions of gotra according to the various teachings?"
Answer: "Here there are also two meanings: first, distinguishing the implicit and explicit mutual inclusion according to the Dharma; second, clarifying the scope of realizing the Dharma according to the capacities [of beings]. As for the first meaning: because the dependent origination of this gotra is unobstructed and possesses five doctrinal gates, each of the teachings expounds one gate to include and transform [beings] according to their capacity, and their meanings do not contradict one another. What are the five? First, the gate of non-existence according to attachment, as taught in the Hīnayāna; second, the gate of deficiency and fullness according to phenomena, as taught in the initial teaching; third, the gate of principle pervading sentient beings, as taught in the final teaching; fourth, the gate of cutting off characteristics and transcending words, as taught in the sudden teaching; fifth, the gate of nature being endowed with myriad virtues, as taught in the perfect teaching. Although there are five meanings, gotra is perfectly interfused, comprehensively gathering and including [all] according to each, with the implicit and explicit reaching the same result. Second, clarifying the scope of realizing the Dharma: either all completely lack it with the sole exception of the one buddha, as taught in the Hīnayāna; or all completely possess it with the sole exception of grass, trees, and the like, as taught in the final teaching; or it both exists and does not exist, as taught in the initial teaching, because it admits a portion that lacks the nature; or it neither exists nor does not exist, as taught in the sudden teaching, because it is free from characteristics; or it is endowed with the preceding four, as taught in the context of the upāya of the One Vehicle; or the cause immediately embodies the fruition, pervading the three realms, as taught in the perfect teaching. The rest may be inferred accordingly."

2.24

Third, regarding the distinctions of practice and stages, within the various teachings they are all briefly demonstrated through three meanings: first, clarifying the characteristics of the stages; second, clarifying non-retrogression; third, clarifying the characteristics of practice.

2.25

As for the first, according to the Hīnayāna, there are four stages: namely, upāya, seeing, cultivation, and the ultimate. It also speaks of the twelve abodes of the Hīnayāna as the ultimate, and speaks of the nine grounds and eleven grounds of the three realms, as extensively explained in the Hīnayāna treatises. Second, regarding non-retrogression: here, through cultivation, when one reaches the stage of patience (kṣānti), one attains non-retrogression. The characteristics of practice are also as explained in those treatises. Question: "Why are the characteristics of the Hīnayāna stages of practice not extensively demonstrated?"
Answer: "The intention here is to demonstrate the differences in teachings through the distinctions in meaning; and since the Hīnayāna differs from the Mahāyāna, there is no doubt in principle, so it need not be discussed."

2.26

If relying on the initial teaching, it is also revealed through three aspects. First, regarding the characteristics of the stages, here there are two [categories]. First, in order to guide the two vehicles who are foolish regarding phenomena to turn their minds, it institutes the teaching of turning the mind. It also merely has the four stages of seeing, cultivation, and so on, as well as the nine grounds, etc., whose names are identical to the Hīnayāna. Or, five stages are established: that is, within the seven upāyas prior to the path of seeing, the first three types are differentiated as the stage of accumulation, because they are distant upāyas; the latter four wholesome roots are the stage of application, because they are proximate upāyas. The remaining names are the same as before. Furthermore, it is also taught as the ten stages of dry wisdom and so on, where the ninth is called the bodhisattva stage and the tenth the buddha stage, because it wishes to guide the two vehicles, looking up at their own deficiency, to gradually cultivate until reaching the buddha fruit. Furthermore, that buddha realm is not outside the ten stages, but is together within the stages, in order to guide them; the upāya is the same as theirs, because practitioners of the two vehicles attain the noble fruit in their present body, and hence it is not placed afterwards. In addition, the characteristics of these stages, the characteristics of practice, and so on are fully explained in the "Śrāvaka" and "Viniścaya" [portions] of the Yogācārabhūmi and in the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā. Question: "Why are the characteristics of the śrāvaka's stages of practice explained in the Yogācārabhūmi and elsewhere not identical to those of the Abhidharma and so forth?" Answer: "That their characteristics are not identical has two intended meanings: first, to reveal that the people of the Hīnayāna are foolish regarding phenomena, having been taught in an un-definitive manner; second, for the sake of an upāya to gradually guide them toward the Mahāyāna. Therefore, the dharmas such as the stages of practice explained therein are all upāyas oriented toward the Great [Vehicle], and hence are not identical." Since these are neither the Hīnayāna who are foolish regarding phenomena nor bodhisattvas, one knows they are the śrāvaka vehicle within that Three Vehicles teaching.

2.27

Second, regarding the revelation of the characteristics of the stages for those who advance directly: that [teaching] explains the distinctions of the bodhisattva's ten stages, and furthermore, using the ten stages to account for seeing, cultivation, and the stages prior to the bhūmis, takes this as the meaning of the twelve abodes of the Mahāyāna. Why? In order to mirror and resemble the Hīnayāna. Furthermore, prior to those stages there are forty minds, because those ten faiths also constitute a stage; this is also to resemble the four upāyas prior to the path in the Hīnayāna. Therefore, the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Just as prior to the path of the srotāpanna there are four stages, namely heat, summit, patience, and the highest worldly dharma, so too are the four stages prior to the bodhisattva stages: namely, the ten faiths, the ten understandings, the ten practices, and the ten dedications." Moreover, also in order to resemble the teaching of turning the mind, it takes the four stages of faith and so forth as the stage of accumulation, separately establishes the four wholesome roots after the ten dedications as the stage of application, and seeing and so on are identical to before. Question: "Why do the names and numbers established in this teaching mostly mirror and resemble the Hīnayāna and so forth?" Answer: "In order to adapt as an upāya, mirroring them to guide them, it possesses an exalted upāya. If it were entirely different from them, it would be difficult to believe and accept. If it were entirely identical to them, it could not be called 'guiding.'" Question: "If it is guiding the two vehicles, what need is there to resemble them? And if it is for those who advance directly, why rely on resembling that small [vehicle]?" Answer: "Because of two intentions, it also somewhat resembles the small: first, because the capacity of those who advance directly in the initial teaching is crude and shallow, they cannot fully receive the profound dharmas of the Mahāyāna, and therefore the dharmas of stages and so forth shown to them also resemble the Hīnayāna, while their doctrinal principles remain distinct; second, whenever the Mahāyāna is explained by resembling the Hīnayāna, it always applies to two meanings: first, to guide the small, and second, for shallow capacities. For this reason, this is called the initial teaching." As for what kind of meanings this refers to, as the Yogācārabhūmi says: "What are the characteristics of an already accomplished individual (pudgala)? It refers to the fact that because śrāvakas have previously habituated wholesome dharmas, when they abide in the inferior grade of maturation, at that time they have inferior desire and inferior application, still go to the miserable destinies, do not realize the fruit of the śramaṇa in the present life, and do not attain parinirvāṇa in the present life. When they abide in the middling grade of maturation, at that time they have middling desire and middling application, do not go to the miserable destinies, realize the fruit of the śramaṇa in the present life, but do not attain parinirvāṇa in the present life. When they abide in the superior grade of maturation, at that time they have superior desire and superior application, do not go to the miserable destinies, realize the fruit of the śramaṇa in the present life, and attain parinirvāṇa in that very present life. As is said of the śrāvaka, so it is with the pratyekabuddha. Why? Because their path is of the same lineage (gotra) as that of the śrāvaka." And so on, fully explained. In the bodhisattva stages, in order to resemble the two vehicles, it also establishes these three kinds of accomplishment. Thus that treatise says: "If bodhisattvas abide in the stage of adhimukticaryā, it is called inferior accomplishment; abiding in the stage of pure and superior aspiration, it is called middling maturation; abiding in the stage of entering certainty and culmination, it is called superior accomplishment. If a bodhisattva abides in inferior maturation, they still go to the miserable destinies; this exhausts the first immeasurable great eon." And so on, fully explained. The remaining two great eons are matched with the two accomplishments. Passages such as these are numerous; they all possess the above meaning, as can be known by inference.

2.28

Second, regarding the stage of non-retrogression: according to the Fo xing lun, the śrāvaka reaches the patience regarding suffering, the pratyekabuddha reaches the highest worldly dharma, and the bodhisattva reaches the ten dedications; only then are they all non-retrogressing. One should know that the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas here are not foolish regarding phenomena; therefore, they are all persons of the Three Vehicles within this initial teaching. One may also say that before the bodhisattva stages, it is generally spoken of as retrogressing, because they still fall into the various miserable destinies, as the Yogācārabhūmi says: "If bodhisattvas abide in the stage of adhimukticaryā, they still go to the miserable destinies, and this exhausts the first immeasurable great eon," and so forth.

2.29

Third, regarding the differentiation of the characteristics of practice within the stages: as the Yogācārabhūmi says: "When a bodhisattva abiding in adhimukticaryā operates, what is their practice and what are their characteristics? At times, they are endowed with sharp intelligence, able to receive and hold phenomena, and capable of awakening to their principles; at another time, they cannot do so. At times, they are endowed with mindfulness; at another time, they form errors. Regarding sentient beings, they are not yet able to know the upāyas of taming; regarding their own buddha-dharmas, they also do not yet know the skillful means to bring them about in accordance with reality. When preaching the Dharma, instructing, and admonishing for others, they proceed with effort; because they proceed with effort, they cannot know in accordance with reality. At times, it is cast in vain, like shooting in the dark, sometimes hitting and sometimes missing, succeeding according to desire. At another time, having already generated the mind for great bodhi, they later retrogress and abandon it: out of internal aspiration they wish to make themselves happy, and out of deliberative consideration they wish to make others happy. At another time, upon hearing the exceedingly deep and vast teaching of the Dharma, they give rise to fright, hesitation, and doubt. Such types as these are called abiding in adhimukticaryā." In explanation: this is the characteristic of practice of the second abode among the twelve abodes; the characteristic of practice of its first abode of lineage is even more inferior, and the characteristics of practice above the bhūmis are all as explained therein.

2.30

If relying on the final teaching, it also explains the distinctions of the bodhisattva's ten stages, yet does not explain them using names such as seeing and cultivation. Furthermore, prior to the stages there are only the three ranks of the worthy, because faith is merely practice and not a stage, as non-retrogression has not yet been attained. The Benye jing says: "Before ascending to the abodes there are these ten minds; it does not say they are stages." It also says: "Starting from the ordinary person's stage, encountering the correct teaching of the buddhas and bodhisattvas, one gives rise to a single thought of faith and generates the bodhi mind; at that time this person is called a bodhisattva with the characteristics of faith prior to the abodes, also called a bodhisattva in provisional designation, or a nominal bodhisattva. That person briefly cultivates the ten minds, namely faith, vigor, and so forth," as fully explained therein. Furthermore, the Renwang jing says: "Prior to practice-patience, a bodhisattva practicing the ten virtues has progress and retrogression, just like a light feather following the wind east or west," and so forth. Practicing here for ten thousand eons, one enters the stage of the ten abodes, and only then attains non-retrogression. At the beginning of the ten abodes, one already does not retrogress and fall into the lower stages of the two vehicles, much less the miserable destinies and the ordinary person's stage. Even if the Benye jing says that at the sixth mind of the ten abodes there is retrogression, the Awakening of Faith explains that passage as a manifestation of retrogression, in order to spur on the minds of the remiss, whereas in reality, once a bodhisattva enters the abode of generating the mind, they immediately attain non-retrogression.

2.31

As for their characteristics of practice, the Awakening of Faith says: "In the initial stage of the three ranks of the worthy, one partially attains sight of the dharmakāya, is able to manifest the eight aspects of attaining the path in the worlds of the ten directions, and benefits sentient beings. Furthermore, by the power of vows one takes birth with mastery, not bound by karma. Moreover, relying on samādhi, one also partially attains sight of the saṃbhogakāya Buddha. One's cultivations all accord with the true nature: that is, knowing that the essence of the dharmatā is free of parsimony, one accords with it in practicing dānapāramitā," and so forth, as fully explained therein. Furthermore, in the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, the ten faiths are called ordinary bodhisattvas, the ten understandings are called noble bodhisattvas, and so forth; the stages of practice on the bhūmis should be understood as doubling those prior. Therefore, one should know that the differences in the aspects of shallowness and depth between the stages of practice here and those of the preceding initial teaching are manifest. Question: "Does this teaching not also generally guide the two vehicles? Why are the stages of practice not explained to resemble the Hīnayāna?" Answer: "All these subsequent teachings are profound and supreme, and the two vehicles they guide also have fully matured, highly elevated capacities; hence there is no need to resemble them."

First 31 of 58 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

華嚴一乘教義分齊章 — Classical Chinese