摩訶止觀 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.1

Delivered by the Great Master Zhizhe of Tiantai under the Sui

Second, as for explaining the names of calming and contemplation: the general outline has already been explained above. By what meanings are the names 'calming' and 'contemplation' established? Briefly, there are four: first, relative; second, absolute; third, harmonizing differences; and fourth, penetrating the three virtues.

3.4

First, as for the relative: calming and contemplation each have three meanings. [For calming:] the meaning of cessation, the meaning of resting, and the meaning of calming in contrast to non-calming.

3.5

As for the meaning of cessation: all bad vitarka and vicāra, delusive thoughts, and conceptualizations are tranquilly put to rest. The Vimalakīrti says: 'What is called clinging? It is clinging to the three realms. What is called putting an end to clinging? It is when the mind has nothing to attain.' This receives its name from that which is destroyed; this is the meaning of cessation.

3.6

As for the meaning of resting: the cognitive mind conforms to the true principle, keeping mindfulness present before it, resting motionless. The Benevolent Kings Sūtra says: 'Entering the principle, prajñā is called abiding.' The Large Sūtra says: 'By means of the dharma of non-abiding, one abides in prajñāpāramitā.' This receives its name from that which is able to calm; this is the meaning of resting.

3.7

As for clarifying calming in contrast to non-calming: although the phrasing shares in the above, the meaning is completely different. How so? The above two types of calming were discussed in contrast to the flux of saṃsāra, treating cessation in terms of nirvāṇa, and treating resting in terms of prajñā when the mind's activity is outside the principle. These generally discuss relativity in terms of wisdom and severance. Now we specifically discuss relativity in terms of the true principle. Avidyā is itself dharmatā, and dharmatā is itself avidyā; avidyā is also neither calming nor non-calming, yet we call avidyā 'non-calming'; dharmatā is also neither calming nor non-calming, yet we call dharmatā 'calming'. This is to call dharmatā 'calming' in contrast to the 'non-calming' of avidyā. As a sūtra says: 'Dharmatā is neither arising nor ceasing, yet it is said that dharmatā is tranquil extinction; dharmatā is neither defiled nor pure, yet it is said that dharmatā is pure.' This is clarifying calming in contrast to non-calming.

3.8

Contemplation also has three meanings: the meaning of piercing through, the meaning of penetrating contemplation, and the meaning of contemplation in contrast to non-contemplation.

3.9

As for the meaning of piercing through: wisdom takes effect and pierces through to destroy defilements. The Great Sūtra says: 'A sharp hoe digs into the ground through boulders and gravel, straight down to the diamond.' The Lotus Sūtra says: 'Digging into a high plateau, one still sees dry earth; applying effort without cease, one gradually reaches mud.' This receives its name from that which is destroyed; this establishes the contemplation of piercing through.

3.10

As for the meaning of penetrating contemplation: contemplative wisdom penetrates through, tallying and uniting with true suchness. The Ruiying says: 'Ceasing the mind and penetrating the original source, one is therefore called a śramaṇa.' The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'When the pure mind is constantly unified, one is able to see prajñā.' This receives its name from that which is able to contemplate; therefore it establishes the contemplation of penetrating contemplation.

3.11

As for contemplation in contrast to non-contemplation: although the phrasing shares in the above, the meaning is completely different. The above two contemplations were also discussed generally in contrast to the dense confinement of saṃsāra in terms of piercing through, and in contrast to delusion, stupor, and blindness in terms of penetrating contemplation. These generally clarify contemplation in terms of the relativity of wisdom and severance. Now, specifically in terms of the true principle: avidyā is itself dharmatā, and dharmatā is itself avidyā; avidyā is neither contemplation nor non-contemplation, yet we call avidyā 'non-contemplation'; dharmatā is also neither contemplation nor non-contemplation, yet we call dharmatā 'contemplation'. As a sūtra says: 'Dharmatā is neither light nor dark, yet we call dharmatā light.' 'Ultimate emptiness is neither wisdom nor foolishness, yet we call ultimate emptiness wisdom.' This is clarifying contemplation in contrast to non-contemplation.

3.12

Therefore, calming and contemplation each receive their names from three meanings.

3.13

Second, as for clarifying calming and contemplation as absolute: this refutes the preceding three relative kinds of calming and contemplation. First it refutes them horizontally, and next it refutes them vertically.

3.14

If cessation-calming receives its name from that which is destroyed, illuminating the object is primary while removing delusion is secondary; since it receives its name from that which is abandoned, the name is established from the secondary, falling into other-nature (parabhāva). If resting-calming receives its name from that which is able to destroy, illuminating the object is primary while removing delusion is secondary; since it speaks of being able to illuminate, the name arises from wisdom, falling into self-nature (svabhāva). If it is not calming because delusive conceptualizations cease, nor calming because of abiding in the principle, but calming due to the causal condition of wisdom and severance, the name arises from their combination, falling into shared nature. If one speaks of calming as neither that which is destroyed nor that which is able to destroy, this falls into causeless nature.

3.15

Therefore Nāgārjuna said: 'Phenomena do not arise from themselves, nor do they arise from others, nor from both, nor without a cause; therefore they are said to be unarisen.' How could unarisen calming and contemplation establish their names from the four propositions? Establishing names from the four propositions is an arising through conditions and relativity, which can be thought and spoken; it is an arising of defilements and fetters, which can be refuted and destroyed. In an arising that fluctuates through production and cessation, what could be called resting? In an arising of delusion and inversion, what could be called penetrating contemplation?

3.16

Furthermore, in vertical refutation: if it arises from the four propositions, that is arising-arising, not calming and contemplation. If one can bring view and thought to rest and abide in the true truth, this is merely speaking of the calming and contemplation of arising and non-arising relative to arising-arising. If one enters the provisional with an empty mind, brings the dust and sand [defilements] to rest, and abides in conventional principle, this is merely speaking of the calming and contemplation of non-arising and arising relative to arising and non-arising. If one brings avidyā to rest and abides the mind in the middle principle, this is merely discussing calming and contemplation relative to non-calming at the two extremes of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. All are relative oppositions and conceivable; they generate fettering defilements and can be destroyed. They are not yet calming, let alone non-calming; they are not yet contemplation, let alone non-contemplation. Why is this? Because abandoning attachments is not exhaustive, the path of words is not cut off, and karmic retribution is not brought to an end.

3.17

Now, speaking of "calming and contemplation of absolute transcendence": it cuts off all horizontal and vertical relations, cuts off all conceived deliberations, cuts off all defilements, all karmas, all fruits, and cuts off all teachings, contemplations, realisations, and so forth. None of these arise at all, hence it is called "calming"; yet calming too cannot be apprehended. Contemplation merges with the realm of suchness; since the realm is already quiescent and extinguished, where purity itself has no purity, how could there be contemplation? When calming and contemplation do not exist to begin with, how could one, relative to non-calming and non-contemplation, speak of calming and contemplation; relative to calming and contemplation, speak of non-calming and non-contemplation; or relative to calming and non-calming, speak of neither calming nor non-calming? Hence we know that calming and non-calming are both unobtainable, and neither calming nor non-calming is also unobtainable. Once relative opposition is severed, it is not conditioned; it cannot be conceived through the four propositions, hence it is not within the path of speech, nor is it the domain of mind and consciousness. Since there are no names and characteristics, and fettering defilements do not arise, there is no birth-and-death, and it cannot be destroyed. Cessation severed, and severance ceased: hence it is called "calming of absolute transcendence"; inverted thinking is severed: hence it is called "contemplation of absolute transcendence". It is also the severing of conditioned calming and contemplation, up to the severing of the calming and contemplation of birth-and-death.

3.18

Calming and contemplation of absolute transcendence cannot be spoken of, yet if there are the conditions of the four siddhāntas, it can also be spoken of: if there are mundane conditions, it is spoken of by reconciling differences; if there are conditions for the benefit of persons, it is spoken of by connecting to the three virtues; if there are therapeutic conditions, it is spoken of relative [to defilements]; if there are supreme truth conditions, it is spoken of through absolute transcendence—spoken of as calming and contemplation. These words are neither inside, nor outside, nor in between the two, nor do they eternally exist of themselves. These words neither abide nor do they not abide. These words are not within the horizontal four propositions or the vertical four propositions, hence it is said that these words do not abide; nor are they in the absence of horizontal and vertical, hence it is said that they also do not not abide. Because these words are unobtainable, it is called "calming and contemplation of absolute transcendence", also called "inconceivable calming and contemplation", also called "calming and contemplation of non-arising", and also called "calming and contemplation of the one great matter".

3.19

Thus, such a great matter does not stand in contrast to a small matter. It is like empty space, which is not called great on account of small space. Calming and contemplation are likewise: they are not called calming and contemplation on account of folly and distraction; having nothing to be paired with, being the sole dharmadhātu, they are called "calming and contemplation of absolute transcendence". Worldly people explain the meaning of absolute transcendence according to various words, but never attain transcendence. Why? Because the ordinary mind races with thoughts, drawing diverse distinctions: awakening versus non-awakening, mind versus non-mind, the difference between ordinary person and sage; transcendence is made relative to non-transcendence, and the inconceivable is made relative to the conceivable, turning in mutual relativity so that transcendence has nowhere to settle. If one attains the meaning and forgets words, the activity of the mind also ceases; conforming to wisdom in subtle awakening, there is no further distinction, nor does one speak of awakening or non-awakening, sage or non-sage, mind or non-mind, conceivable or inconceivable, and so forth. All kinds of vain thoughts that discriminate based on principle are all called relative.

3.20

When true wisdom opens and unfolds, it severs these relatives; transcendence is itself further severed, like the fire-drill mentioned earlier, and this is called "absolute transcendence". Hence the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says: "All phenomena do not depend on one another, up to not abiding for a single thought-moment." This is precisely the meaning. If so, absolute transcendence is the realm of the sage, in which beginners have no share. Now, looking at it through the six identities, the beginner loses nothing, and the sage's realm is not profaned.

3.21

Third, reconciling differences: such calming and contemplation of absolute transcendence is also called "inconceivable", and is also called "great". The Mahā[parinirvāṇa]-sūtra says: "'Great' means inconceivable." Various other sūtras and treatises sometimes call it "aloofness", or call it "non-abiding", "non-attachment", "unconditioned", "quiescent extinction", "non-discrimination", "dhyāna-concentration", "rejection", "elimination", "relinquishment", and so forth; all such as these are different names for "calming". Since calming is absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable, aloofness and the rest are all absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable. Other places sometimes call it "knowing and seeing", "clear consciousness", "eye awakening", "wisdom", "illuminating comprehension", "discerning penetration", and so forth; all such as these are different names for "contemplation". Since contemplation is absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable, knowing and seeing and the rest are all absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable. Why is this? Prajñā is a single dharma, but the Buddha spoke of it with various names; vimokṣa is also like this, having many names. It is also like empty space: having nothing, unmoving, unimpeded. One should know that the three virtues are just a single dharma, for which different names are established according to the categories of sentient beings. If you hear of absolute transcendence, be careful not to be terrified; if you hear of reconciling differences, be careful not to doubt and bring harm upon yourself. Furthermore, when calming and contemplation reconcile with each other, calming is also called contemplation, and is also called non-calming; contemplation is also called calming, and is also called non-contemplation; this accords with the meaning of the previous explanation of the names.

3.22

4. Connecting with the three virtues: If the different names in the various sūtras are all calming and contemplation, then the names are limitless and the meanings are also limitless; why explain calming and contemplation only through three meanings? It is solely to correspond to the three virtues that this explanation is made. Since phenomena are limitless, why correspond exclusively to the three virtues? The Dàzhìdù lùn says: "Bodhisattvas, from their initial resolve of mind, always contemplate nirvāṇa and practice the path." The Mahā[parinirvāṇa]-sūtra says: "The Buddhas and sentient beings are all placed within the secret storehouse." The secret [storehouse] is nirvāṇa, nirvāṇa is the three virtues, and the three virtues are calming and contemplation. Both self and other, beginning and end, can practice and enter [into them]; hence they are used for this correspondence. If the two words are jointly connected to the three virtues: calming is cessation, and cessation connects to vimokṣa; contemplation is wisdom, and wisdom connects to prajñā; when calming and contemplation are equal, this is called the mark of relinquishment, and the mark of relinquishment connects to the dharmakāya. Furthermore, calming is śamatha, contemplation is vipaśyanā, and because -tha and -nā are equal, it is upekṣā. The connection to the three virtues is as before.

3.23

Question: Calming and contemplation are two dharmas; how can they connect to the inconceivable three virtues?

3.24

Answer: It is precisely because they are inconceivable calming and contemplation that they are able to connect. Furthermore, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā explains the eighteen kinds of emptiness to elucidate prajñā, and explains the one hundred and eight samādhis to elucidate dhyāna. Although these are two separate explanations presented before and after, how could dhyāna be without prajñā, or prajñā without dhyāna? They are simply not two yet two, two yet not two. Not two is the dharmakāya; two is concentration and wisdom. These three dharmas have never been separated from one another. Therefore the Mahā[parinirvāṇa]-sūtra says: "Buddha-nature has five kinds of names; sometimes it is called Śūraṅgama, sometimes it is called prajñā." Now, neither calming nor contemplation is sometimes called calming, and sometimes called contemplation; this is inconceivable calming and contemplation, which connects to the inconceivable three virtues.

3.25

Furthermore, as calming and contemplation each connect to the three virtues: within calming there is contemplation, and within contemplation there is calming. Calming as bringing to rest is the good of stopping, subsumed under the gate of concentration, thus connecting to vimokṣa; calming as halting is the good of practice, subsumed under the gate of contemplation, thus connecting to prajñā; calming as non-calming is subsumed under principle, thus connecting to the dharmakāya. Its meaning can be seen. Contemplation as piercing through is the good of stopping, subsumed under the gate of concentration, thus connecting to vimokṣa; contemplation as discerning penetration is the good of practice, subsumed under the gate of contemplation, thus connecting to prajñā; contemplation as non-contemplation is subsumed under principle, thus connecting to the dharmakāya. The meaning can likewise be seen.

3.26

Furthermore, as calming and contemplation jointly connect to the three virtues: calming as bringing to rest and contemplation as piercing through both derive their names from that which is abandoned, thus connecting to vimokṣa; calming as halting and contemplation as discerning penetration both derive their names from the cognitive wisdom that discerns, thus connecting to prajñā; calming as non-calming and contemplation as non-contemplation are both named dharmatā, thus connecting to the dharmakāya.

3.27

Furthermore, as the three virtues connect to calming and contemplation: the three virtues may again jointly connect to the two words; or the three virtues may each connect to the two words. For the three virtues jointly connecting: vimokṣa connects to calming, prajñā connects to contemplation, and the dharmakāya connects to neither calming nor contemplation. For the three virtues each connecting to calming and contemplation: vimokṣa in its complete aspect possesses three kinds: expedient-pure vimokṣa connects to calming as bringing to rest; completely-pure vimokṣa connects to calming as halting; and naturally-pure vimokṣa connects to calming as non-calming. Prajñā in its complete aspect possesses three kinds: the prajñā of wisdom of the path connects to contemplation as piercing through; the prajñā of wisdom of path-modes connects to contemplation as discerning penetration; and the prajñā of wisdom of all modes connects to contemplation as non-contemplation. Complete dharmakāya also has three kinds: the form body connects to one calming and one contemplation; the teaching-gate body connects to one calming and one contemplation; and the true-reality body connects to one calming and one contemplation. Its meaning can be seen.

3.28

If one believes that the three virtues are absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable, then once the meaning of their connection is clear, one must believe that calming and contemplation are absolutely transcendent, great, and inconceivable. If one believes that the completion of the three dharmas of nirvāṇa is called the secret storehouse, one also believes that the completion of the three calmings is called great quiescent concentration and is called the secret storehouse; one also believes that the completion of the three contemplations is called great wisdom and is called the secret storehouse; and one also believes that the completion of the three dharmas of neither calming nor contemplation is called the secret storehouse. If one believes that the three virtues are neither vertical nor horizontal, neither parallel nor separate, like the three dots [of the letter i] or the three eyes [of Maheśvara], one also believes that the three calmings and three contemplations are neither vertical nor horizontal, neither parallel nor separate.

3.29

Yet the various sūtras, adapting to circumstances, single out one dharma to indicate the outset of the principle. For example, the Śūraṅgama[-samādhi-sūtra] singles out the aspect of calming; calming contains all dharmas without diminution, and is also called the secret storehouse. The [Dà]zhìdù [lùn] and the Lotus [Sūtra] single out the aspect of contemplation; contemplation contains all dharmas without diminution. The [Mahāpari]nirvāṇa[-sūtra] presents the completion of the three dharmas, yet the dharmas are not manifold, and it is also called the secret storehouse. Calming and contemplation are likewise: whether opened or combined, when opened they are not manifold, and when combined they are not diminished; each and every one is the dharmadhātu, embracing all dharmas, and all are named the secret storehouse. If singling out one aspect is already like this, how much more so when presenting them completely? Since calming and contemplation connecting to the three virtues are like this, their connection to the various different names, such as aloofness, knowing and seeing, and so forth, is also like this. Furthermore, connecting to the various threefold designations, namely the three bodhis, the three Buddha-natures, the three jewels, and so forth, all threefold dharmas are also like this.

3.30

Question: How are the meanings of the terms vertical and horizontal? How are the meanings of the terms neither vertical nor horizontal?

3.31

Answer: The various Hīnayāna masters say: "When prajñā and sarvākārajñatā are already perfected, karmic retribution still remains; vimokṣa is not yet complete, and the body still consumes gross food; being moreover accompanied by impermanence, one is superior and two are inferior, like a fire running across a river [in the character chuān]." They also say: "First there is the body with marks and signs; next one obtains the prajñā of sarvākārajñatā; later, upon extinguishing body and wisdom, one only then completes vimokṣa." Since there is the sense of superior and inferior, before and after, this is compared to the vertically arranged three dots of the water radical. When entering the concentration of cessation, there is body without wisdom; when an arhat is in the formless realm, there is wisdom without body; when entering remainderless [nirvāṇa], there is only solitary vimokṣa. These meanings are mutually unrelated to each other: set side by side they are horizontal, stacked upon each other they are vertical, and differentiated they are disparate.

3.32

The Mahāyāna masters say: 'The dharmakāya is the true substance; whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, it is fundamentally self-existent and does not merely happen to be now. The cognitive cause, which is prajñā, and the condition free of burden, which is vimokṣa—these two must come to be, separated by lives and straddling lifetimes, stretching across the pure and the defiled. This means the letter is vertical.' They also say: 'The three virtues have no before or after, but are fully complete in one single substance; when substance is subordinated to meaning, there are three distinctions. Thus substance is horizontal, while meaning is vertical.' They also say: 'Substance and meaning are both not distinct, but there is the difference between hidden and manifest. Since both are not distinct, it does not avoid being horizontal; since hidden and manifest differ, it does not avoid being vertical.' With such varied explanations, how could they accord with the sūtras?

3.33

Now I explain that the three virtues are all inconceivable: how could they suddenly be vertical? They are all inconceivable: how could they suddenly be horizontal? They are all inconceivable: how could they suddenly be one? They are all inconceivable: how could they suddenly be different? This is explained in terms of the treasury of principle. The body is eternal, wisdom is perfect, and severance is complete; all are the Buddha-Dharma without superiority or inferiority, and therefore they are not vertical. The three virtues are darkly fused, being together the one single dharmadhātu; outside of the dharmadhātu, where else could there be another dharma? Therefore they are not horizontal. Because they can be variously established, they are not one; because they return together to the ultimate truth, they are not different. This is an explanation in terms of the causal practice. Being one and yet three, they are not horizontal; being three and yet one, they are not vertical. Not three and yet three, they are not one; not one and yet one, they are not different. This is an explanation in terms of the function of the letter. The meaning of the true letter 'i' is like this.

3.34

Question: What is the meaning of the three virtues and the four virtues?

3.35

Answer: Broadly speaking of the three virtues, each and every one possesses eternity, bliss, self, and purity. The Great Sūtra says: 'What all Buddhas take as their teacher is none other than the Dharma. Because the Dharma is eternal, all Buddhas are also eternal.' The Dharma is the dharmakāya; the Buddhas are prajñā and vimokṣa; hence this is made as a general interpretation. The Great Sūtra says: 'Because of extinguishing this form, one obtains eternal form; feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are also like this.' Thus the dharmakāya possesses eternity, bliss, self, and purity; the other two virtues are also like this. If relying on one categorization: transforming 'form' into the dharmakāya, the dharmakāya is 'eternal' and 'blissful'; transforming 'consciousness' and perception into prajñā, prajñā is 'pure'; transforming 'feeling' and formations into vimokṣa, vimokṣa is 'self'. Furthermore, relying on the smṛtyupasthānas: transforming 'consciousness' into 'eternity', transforming 'feeling' into 'bliss', transforming 'perception' and 'formations' into 'self', and transforming 'form' into 'purity'. Thus the general and specific each have two interpretations: relying on the perfect [teaching] is the sudden meaning; relying on the distinctive [teaching] is the gradual meaning (and so forth).

3.36

Question: The three obstructions as well as the three paths all obstruct the three virtues. If the three obstructions are opened up and penetrated to the ultimate, should the three paths and four inversions also be opened up and penetrated to the ultimate?

3.37

Answer: By analogy. How so? There are three kinds of karma: defiled karma, undefiled karma, and neither-defiled-nor-undefiled karma. These induce three retributions: fragmented [samsāra], expedient, and real retribution. Retribution stems from three kinds of afflictions: seizing on marks, dust-and-sand, and avidyā. Moreover, in terms of the three retributions, each opens into the three paths. In terms of the three afflictions, each opens into the four inversions.

3.38

Third, regarding the explanation of the substance and characteristics of calming and contemplation: having understood the great purport, expansive as before, and the names, far-reaching as just described, one must recognize that the principle of the substance is profound and mysterious. We roughly draw upon four ideas to reveal the substance: first, the doctrinal characteristics; second, eye and wisdom; third, the realm; fourth, attainment and loss. Principle is manifested by relying on teaching; since the teachings are numerous, we use 'characteristics' to reveal it. The gateways to entering the principle are not the same, so we use 'eye and wisdom' to reveal it. Truths possess provisional and real, so we use the 'realm' to reveal it. People experience divergence and convergence, so we use 'attainment and loss' to reveal it. The Lotus Commentary uses four unities to illuminate reality; now using four headings to reveal the substance may be regarded as analogous to that.

3.39

As for revealing through doctrinal characteristics: the names and teachings of calming and contemplation apply generally across ordinary beings and sages; one must not pursue a common name to seek a distinctive substance, and so we use characteristics to distinguish it.

3.40

If for an ordinary person, what is cured by goodness through cessation is the characteristic of calming; what is produced by goodness through action is the characteristic of contemplation. Furthermore, the four dhyānas and the four immeasurables are the characteristics of calming; the six practices are the characteristics of contemplation. These all fail to escape birth and death, and thus take the defiled as their characteristic. Therefore the Great Treatise says: 'Except for Mount Malaya, nowhere else produces sandalwood; except for the wisdom of the three vehicles, nowhere else has true wisdom.' Hence these are not what is discussed now.

3.41

If for the two vehicles, using the nine notions, the ten notions, the eight liberations, and the nine successive absorptions—these are mostly phenomenal dhyāna, which in a preliminary sense are the characteristics of calming; the wisdom of the four truths with production is the characteristic of contemplation. Although this calming and contemplation transcends birth and death, it is a clumsy salvation, extinguishing form to enter emptiness. This emptiness may also be called 'calming', and may also be called 'neither calming nor non-calming', but it cannot be called 'contemplation'. Why? Because the body is reduced to ashes and wisdom is extinguished, it is not called contemplation. It is merely the analysis of dharmas taking the undefiled as its characteristic, which is not what is discussed now.

3.42

Skillful-salvation calming has three kinds: first, calming of realizing the true; second, calming of conforming to conditions through expedients; third, calming of ceasing discrimination of the two extremes. First, the calming of realizing the true: all dharmas arise from conditions, and cause and conditions are empty and without master; ceasing the mind and reaching the fundamental source, one is therefore called a śramaṇa. Knowing that the provisional combination of causes and conditions is illusory and devoid of real nature is called 'realizing'. When discursive clinging and false thoughts obtain emptiness, they cease; emptiness is the true, and so it is called 'calming of realizing the true'.

3.43

Second, the calming of conforming to conditions through expedients: if the three vehicles together use the ineffable path to sever afflictions and enter the true, the true does not differ; it is merely said that with afflictions and habit energies, there is exhaustion and non-exhaustion. If the two vehicles realize the true, they do not need the expedient calming; when a bodhisattva enters the provisional, it is precisely what should be practiced and used. Knowing that emptiness is not [mere] emptiness is called 'expedient'; distinguishing medicine and sickness is called 'conforming to conditions'; resting the mind in worldly truth is called 'calming'. A sūtra says: 'Moving or resting, the mind is always unified.' This also can verify this meaning.

3.44

Third, the calming of ceasing discrimination of the two extremes: the flux of birth and death and the clinging realization of nirvāṇa are both one-sided practices and one-sided applications, not according with the middle way. Now, knowing that the worldly is not worldly, the worldly extreme is quieted; also not attaining the non-worldly, the empty extreme is quieted; this is called 'calming of ceasing the two extremes'.

3.45

Although the names of these three calmings are not seen in the sūtras or treatises, they reflect the three contemplations, and their names are established according to their meanings. The Expository Treatise says: 'A bodhisattva, in accordance with the scriptures and teachings, devises names for them, which is called the gift of the Dharma.' Establishing names is without fault. If one can search the sūtras and find the names, they will covertly tally with this meaning. Examining these three calmings in comparison with the previous explanation of the names, their names are vaguely similar, but their characteristics are different.

3.46

As for what is similar: the calming of ceasing resembles realizing the true; the calming of resting resembles conforming to conditions through expedients; the calming of non-calming resembles ceasing the two extremes.

3.47

Their characteristics, however, are distinct: namely, the characteristics of the three truths. The former three constitute the next three, and the latter one is replete with the former three. Why is this?

3.48

As in the calming of realizing the true: understanding that causes and conditions are provisional designations, empty and without master, so that flowing evil ceases—this is the meaning of ceasing; resting the mind on principle is precisely understanding causes and conditions—this is the meaning of resting; this principle is the true, and the true is the fundamental source, which fundamentally is not a matter of calming or not calming—this is non-calming calming. These three meanings together constitute the characteristic of the calming of realizing the true.

3.49

As for the expedient calming: illuminating the provisional with mastery so that scattered ignorance ceases—this is the meaning of ceasing. Resting the mind on the provisional principle, just as Vimalakīrti entered samādhi to contemplate the faculties of the bhikṣus and distinguish medicine and sickness—this is the meaning of resting. The provisional principle does not stir—this is non-calming calming. These three meanings together constitute the characteristic of the calming of conforming to conditions through expedients.

3.50

When ceasing the two extremes: the two characteristics of birth and death and of nirvāṇa both cease—this is the meaning of ceasing. Entering the prajñā of principle is called abiding, focusing the mind on the middle way—this is the meaning of resting. This principle of true reality is neither calming nor non-calming—this is the meaning of non-calming calming. These three meanings together constitute the characteristic of the calming of ceasing the two extremes. Therefore, they are entirely different from the former, and are also not what is used now.

3.51

Next, explaining the characteristics of contemplation. Contemplation has three: entering emptiness from the provisional is called the 'contemplation of the two truths'; entering the provisional from emptiness is called the 'contemplation of equality'; taking the two contemplations as the expedient path to attain entry into the middle way, illuminating both truths simultaneously, mind-moment after mind-moment extinguished and quiescent, naturally flowing into the ocean of sarvajñā, is called the 'contemplation of the middle way, the supreme truth'. These names come from the Yingluo jing.

3.52

What is called the 'two truths': contemplating the provisional is the vehicle for entering emptiness; emptiness is understood by means of the vehicle; discussing the means and the object together, it is called the 'contemplation of the two truths'. Furthermore, on the day one realizes emptiness, one not only sees emptiness, but also recognizes the provisional. Just as when clouds are removed and obstacles parted, above is displayed and below is clear. Through the manifestation of the true and the provisional, one obtains this contemplation of the two truths. Now, understanding the true by way of the provisional, why would it not be the contemplation of the two truths?

3.53

Furthermore, the worldly is what is refuted, and the true is what is employed. If based on what is refuted, it should be called the 'contemplation of worldly truth'; if based on what is employed, it should be called the 'contemplation of true truth'. Discussing refutation and employment together, it is called the 'contemplation of the two truths'. Moreover, distinguishing it, there are three kinds: first, in terms of teaching, there is the contemplation of the two truths following sentiment; in terms of practice, there is the contemplation of the two truths following sentiment and wisdom; in terms of realization, there is the contemplation of the two truths following wisdom. Although the efficacy of the initial contemplation has not yet tallied with the true, it may be discussed as the contemplation of the two truths in terms of following teaching and following practice.

3.54

Question: In the initial contemplation, refutation and employment together receive the name; the second contemplation also involves refutation and employment, so should it also be called two truths?

3.55

Answer: The former has already received the name of two truths; although the latter involves refutation and employment, it receives the name of equality from what is superior.

3.56

Question: The third contemplation also involves refutation and employment, so why does it not also receive its name from what is superior?

3.57

Answer: Because the previous two contemplations had obstructions, they further refuted and further employed; the third contemplation has no obstructions and receives its name solely from its employment, so they cannot be treated as of one pattern.

3.58

Question: Since the first two contemplations both contemplate the two truths, should they also both enter the two truths?

3.59

Answer: Initially, to refute sickness one contemplates the provisional, and to employ the true one contemplates the true; hence one contemplates both. One is employed and one is not employed, and therefore one does not enter both.

3.60

Question: Both the true and the middle can be called truths. But the worldly inside and outside the realms is not principle; how can it be called a truth?

3.61

Answer: The Dichi explains two dharmatās: first, the phenomenal dharmatā, because nature has distinctions; second, the real dharmatā, because nature is truly real. These are alternative names for the two truths. Since both can be called dharmatā, why could they not both be called truths?

3.62

Question: If so, can both be called nirvāṇa?

3.63

Answer: The sūtra says: 'A poor man finding a treasure' up to 'a monkey getting wine.' Furthermore, the concentration of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is worldly nirvāṇa. That is precisely this meaning.

3.64

Question: If so, are both undefiled?

3.65

Answer: A treatise says: 'Mundane right view, supramundane right view.'

3.66

Question: If so, are both non-arising?

3.67

Answer: A sūtra says: 'Different marks mutually lack each other.'

3.68

Question: In entering emptiness from the provisional, must one refute the provisional to enter emptiness?

3.69

Answer: As a general rule there should be four propositions: entering without refuting, entering by refuting, refuting without entering, and neither refuting nor entering, up to thirty-six propositions, as explained later.

3.70

Regarding entering the provisional from emptiness being called the 'contemplation of equality': if one enters emptiness, there is not even emptiness to be had, so what provisionality could there be to enter? One should know that this contemplation is for the sake of transforming sentient beings. Knowing that the true is not [ultimately] true, one employs expedient means to emerge into the provisional. Therefore it is said that from emptiness one distinguishes medicines and illnesses without error, which is why it is called 'entering the provisional'. 'Equality' is named so in comparison to the former [contemplation]. The former contemplation destroyed the illness of the provisional without employing provisional dharmas, employing only true dharmas; destroying the one and not destroying the other was not yet equality. The latter contemplation destroys the illness of emptiness and returns to employing provisional dharmas. Destruction and employment are thereby equalised, and viewed across different times, it is therefore called 'equality'.

3.71

Now this should be illustrated by an analogy: it is like a blind person whose eyes are first opened, seeing space and seeing form. Although they see form, they cannot distinguish the varieties of herbs and trees, roots and stems, branches and leaves, or kinds of medicines and poisons. When one enters emptiness from the provisional following wisdom, one likewise sees the two truths but cannot employ the provisional. If, after their eyes are opened, a person can see space and see form, they instantly recognise the kinds, thoroughly comprehend causes and conditions, and recognise and make use of both the coarse and subtle, medicine and food, benefiting others. This is an analogy for entering the provisional from emptiness: [knowing] both the true as true and the conventional [as conventional], one precisely employs the provisional; because it is for transforming sentient beings, it is called 'entering the provisional'. That it is also called equality has the same sense as explained above.

3.72

Regarding the 'contemplation of the supreme meaning of the middle way': the former contemplation made provisionality empty, which empties saṃsāra; the latter contemplation made emptiness empty, which empties nirvāṇa. Simultaneously shutting off both extremes is called the 'contemplation of dual emptiness', which serves as the path of expedients to attain union with the middle way. Therefore it is said: 'Thought after thought ceases, flowing into the ocean of sarvajñā.' Furthermore, the first contemplation employs emptiness, and the latter contemplation employs the provisional; this is the expedient of dual preservation. When entering the middle way, one is able to illuminate both truths simultaneously. Therefore a sūtra says: 'If the mind is in concentration, it can know the characteristics of the arising and perishing of phenomena in the world.' That the preceding two contemplations serve as two kinds of expedients has this meaning.

3.73

Question: The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says, 'When concentration is in excess or wisdom is in excess, in neither case does one see the Buddha-nature.' What is the meaning of this?

3.74

Answer: In the graduated three contemplations, the two vehicles and bodhisattvas of the shared teaching possess a portion of the first contemplation; this belongs to an excess of concentration and a deficiency of wisdom, so they do not see the Buddha-nature. Bodhisattvas of the distinctive teaching possess a portion of the second contemplation; this belongs to an excess of wisdom and a deficiency of concentration, so they also do not see the Buddha-nature. With the two contemplations as expedients, they are able to enter the third contemplation, and then they see the Buddha-nature.

3.75

Question: The sūtra states, 'Bodhisattvas of the ten abodes, by means of the wisdom eye, see [it] indistinctly.' It is not that they do not see it at all. The first contemplation is the stage of the wisdom eye, and the second contemplation is the stage of the Dharma eye; why then do you say that with both eyes they do not see it at all?

3.76

Answer: Those graduated eyes are biased toward concentration or biased toward wisdom, which the Buddha rebuked; one cannot say that they see. What is spoken of as seeing with the wisdom eye shares only the name; it is actually the stage of the ten abodes of the perfect teaching. When the three contemplations are present before one and one enters into the principle of the three truths, it is called 'abiding'; calling this 'abiding' is merely [another name for] the wisdom eye. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: 'May we attain, like the World-Honoured One, the wisdom eye, supremely pure.' With such a wisdom eye, one sees partially but not yet completely; therefore it is said, 'like seeing shapes at night, or geese in the sky.' It is not that the wisdom eye of the two vehicles attains this name. Therefore in the Lotus Sūtra: 'It is as if a person digs on a dry plateau, seeing only dry earth; persevering without cessation, they next see moist earth; gradually they reach mud, and afterward they obtain water.' The dry earth is an analogy for the first contemplation; the moist earth is an analogy for the second contemplation; the mud is an analogy for the third contemplation; the water is an analogy for the contemplation of the perfect and sudden. Moreover, as an analogy for the teachings: the Tripiṭaka teaching does not expound the middle way, like dry earth; the shared teaching is like moist earth; the distinctive teaching is like mud; the perfect teaching expounds the middle way, like water. What is not expounded by the two teachings, and what is not reached by the two practices—how could a wisdom eye biased toward emptiness see the nature? For it to see the nature is impossible.

3.77

These three contemplations and the preceding three contemplations seem prima facie similar in name, but their meaning and characteristics are different. As for their similarity: the former is penetration, contemplating all falsities, which resembles entering emptiness from the provisional. The former contemplation of reaching penetration reaches principle and harmonises with principle, reaches phenomena and harmonises with phenomena, which resembles the contemplation of equality in entering the provisional. The former non-contemplation contemplation resembles the middle way.

3.78

As for how their characteristics differ: the former has the characteristic of a single truth, while the present has the characteristic of the three truths. Furthermore, the former three contemplations generally constitute the latter three, and the latter three possess the former three. Why is this? As in entering emptiness from the provisional, piercing the boulders of the four entrenchments—is this not the meaning of penetration? The emptiness that is entered is itself principle; wisdom can reveal principle, which is the meaning of reaching penetration through contemplation; this principle of emptiness is itself the meaning of non-contemplation contemplation. These three meanings together constitute the characteristics of the contemplation of entering emptiness.

3.79

Entering the provisional from emptiness also possesses three meanings. Why is this? Recognising provisionally designated dharmas and shattering the obstruction of ignorance is the meaning of penetration. Illuminating the principle of provisional designations and making distinctions without error is the meaning of reaching penetration through contemplation. The provisional principle being ever so is the meaning of non-contemplation contemplation. These three meanings together constitute the characteristics of the contemplation of the provisional.

3.80

The contemplation of the middle way also possesses three meanings: emptying both extremes is the meaning of penetration; directly entering the middle way is the meaning of reaching penetration through contemplation; the dharmatā of the middle way is the meaning of non-contemplation contemplation. These three meanings together constitute the characteristics of the contemplation of the middle way.

3.81

This explains the characteristics of the three calmings and three contemplations according to the Mahāyāna; as the meanings follow the characteristics, each is distinctly differentiated. If one discusses the three contemplations, there are the provisional and the real, the shallow and the deep; if one discusses the three wisdoms, there are the superior and the inferior, the earlier and the later; if one discusses the three kinds of persons, there are various stages, greater and lesser. This is a graduated differentiation, not what is applied here.

3.82

Regarding the characteristics of the perfect and sudden calming and contemplation: when calming takes the truths as its object, a single truth is threefold; when the truths are bound to calming, a single calming is threefold. It is like three marks in a single thought-moment: although it is a single thought-moment, there are three marks. Calming and truth are also like this: the dharma that is calmed is, though one, threefold; the mind capable of calming is, though three, one. When contemplation contemplates the realm, a single realm is threefold; when the realm arouses contemplation, a single contemplation is threefold. Like the three eyes on the face of Maheśvara: though there are three eyes, they are a single face. The realm of contemplation is also like this: contemplating three is just one, arousing one is just three, inconceivable. It is neither provisional nor real, neither superior nor inferior, neither earlier nor later, neither combined nor separate, neither large nor small. Therefore the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'Dharmas that arise from causes and conditions are identical to emptiness, identical to the provisional, and identical to the middle.' Furthermore, as the Diamond Prajñā says: 'Like a person with eyes when the sun shines brightly, seeing various forms.' If the eyes alone could see, the sun would not be needed; if there were no forms, even with the sun and eyes, nothing would be seen. These three dharmas are not at different times and not separate from one another. The eyes are an analogy for calming; the sun is an analogy for contemplation; forms are an analogy for the realm. These three dharmas are neither earlier nor later, spoken of as three at one and the same time. Discussing the one within the three is likewise so. If one understands this meaning, one understands the characteristics of calming and contemplation in the perfect and sudden teaching.

3.83

Why only three-in-one and one-in-three? All the preceding meanings are comprehensively present in a single mind. What are their characteristics? Realising that the inversions of avidyā are themselves the truth of true reality is called 'calming by realising the true'. Such true reality is omnipresent; following conditions and engaging realms, keeping the mind pacified and unmoving is called 'calming by expedients following conditions'. The calming and resting of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, stillness and distraction, is called 'calming by resting the two extremes'. Realising that all provisionalities are entirely empty, and that emptiness is itself true reality, is called 'contemplation of entering emptiness'. Reaching this emptiness, contemplation merges with the middle way, and one can know the characteristics of the arising and perishing of worldly dharmas and see them as they truly are; this is called 'contemplation of entering the provisional'. Such wisdom of emptiness is identical to the middle way, without duality or distinction; this is called 'contemplation of the middle way'.

First 83 of 247 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

摩訶止觀 — Classical Chinese