止觀輔行傳弘決 2.17

2.17

Next, in explaining the destruction of obstacles, phenomena and principle are fully as explained in the fourth [section on] repentance and purification; only when equipped with both phenomena and principle does one repent the three paths. The text saying 'and so on' cites evidence for phenomena and principle. The Ākāśagarbha-dhāraṇī-sūtra says: 'If a great monk focuses his mind on the Vaipulya, he recites the dhāraṇī one thousand four hundred times for one repentance, and in this manner practices the path for eighty-seven days in sequence. A nun does forty-nine times for one repentance and practices the path for ninety-seven days. A novice monk or novice nun, a layman or laywoman does four hundred times for one repentance and practices the path for forty-seven days. If bodhisattvas, they do eight hundred times for one repentance and practice the path for sixty-seven days.' In the sūtra, corresponding to each assembly there is a short dhāraṇī. Since the initial text set a period of seven days, and further speaks of practicing the path for eighty-seven days and so forth, this refers to eighty periods of seven up to sixty periods of seven; the ritual procedures are fully as in the seven-day practice, only the dhāraṇī is different. The assemblies of nuns all require the great monks for their livelihood (ordination); repentances such as these all concern pārājika offenses. Once having committed this offense, one is a dead person in the Buddhadharma; now, the pure essence of the precepts is reborn. If the method of repentance succeeds, there is no sin that is not eradicated; therefore it says: 'If it were not reborn, there is no such possibility.' However, the teachings of the Hīnayāna do not permit repentance [for pārājika]; although it is said to be reborn, one is not fit for monastic duties. When a novice has committed it, once repentance succeeds he can advance to full ordination; what the Mahāyāna permits can be carried out in practice. If one were to allow great monks [to do so], it would invite fraud and deceit; moreover, the Baoliang strictly prohibits [it] and there is no text permitting [them] to make up the quorum; one should believe that the division between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna has distinct rules of prohibition. In the Hīnayāna there is no teaching of repenting grave [offenses], and it still constitutes a grave offense not being eradicated; why use the Mahāyāna teaching of repenting pārājika to make up the quorum of the Hīnayāna Saṅgha? Having repented according to the Mahāyāna, one internally advances along one's own path; why mix them up and confuse contemporary sentiments? 'The purification of the eye and so forth' means that only upon reaching the six sense faculties is it called the purification of the resemblance painful path. 'Seeing the Buddhas of the ten directions on the seventh day': that sūtra has different signs for each day. The preceding purification of the painful path has its stage at the six sense faculties; non-retrogression here has its stage at the first abidance, where destroying ignorance is called the purification of afflictions. 'When the three obstacles are removed, the tree of causes and conditions is destroyed' and so forth: the Vibhāṣā says: 'The past two branches are the roots, the present five branches are the trunk, the present three branches are the flowers, and the future two branches are the fruits. Having flowers and fruits refers to ordinary beings; having no flowers but having fruits refers to trainees (śaikṣa); having neither flowers nor fruits refers to remainderless [nirvāṇa].' By reasoned deduction, it should also be said that having few flowers and having fruits refers to trainees, while having no flowers and having fruits refers to with-remainder [nirvāṇa]. This is explained according to the realms within the Tripiṭaka and shared [teachings]. If according to the Ratnagotravibhāga, only when the four matters of condition, characteristic, arising, and destruction are entirely absent is it called eternal destruction—meaning conditions as roots, characteristics as trunk, arising as flowers, and destruction as fruits; these are precisely the two kinds of twelve links outside the realms. 'It is also the house of the five aggregates being empty' and so forth: the various teachings differ, and the emptiness of the aggregates is also different (and so forth); for now we set aside the distinctive to preserve the perfect. Vimalakīrti says: 'Not contemplating form, not contemplating the suchness of form.' Form provisionally enters emptiness, which negates both emptiness and provisionality to reveal the Middle Way. The [other] four aggregates are also like this. The Dapin says: 'Purity of form up to purity of consciousness.' The 'Diamond Body Chapter' of the Great Sūtra says: 'The Tathāgata's body is neither the aggregates, realms, and entrances, nor is it separate from the aggregates, realms, and entrances; it neither increases nor decreases,' and so forth; all of these are contemplating the aggregates as ultimately empty. Therefore we know that both cause and fruit elucidate the emptiness of the aggregates.