止觀輔行傳弘決 2.6

2.6

Next, in explaining the constant walking [samādhi], first the section is opened. This sūtra was preached because of the Bodhisattva Bhadrapāla; the Dazhidulun and various sūtras name him Bhadrapāla, differing only in whether the phonetic syllables are light or heavy; he is a lay bodhisattva. Next, from 'this method' onward, its source sūtra is clarified. As for 'the three powers', it is because one cannot accomplish it entirely [on one's own]. Because conditions harmoniously unite and there is an accord between stimulus and response, three powers are required. That sūtra says: 'Whichever directional Buddha one wishes to see, one sees him immediately. Why? Because this samādhi is accomplished by the Buddha's power.' There being three things for seeing the Buddha standing in samādhi: the supportive power of that Buddha, the supportive power of the samādhi, and the supportive power of one's own original merits—it is by using these three things that one sees the Buddha. As for 'being able in samādhi to see the Buddhas of the ten directions', it is by these three powers that one sees the Buddhas in samādhi. Therefore, this sūtra is also named the Sūtra of the Samādhi of the Present Standing Buddhas. Attaining these three powers, one can see all Buddhas. In the sūtra it says: 'Question: From where does one attain this samādhi? Answer: One attains it from mindfulness of the Buddha. If a person does not practice mindfulness of the Buddha and praise the Buddha's form, they will forever lose the causes and conditions for benefit and joy in this present life and future lives.' As for its classification, it belongs to the Vaipulya; its capacity extends to all four categories of persons; the two vehicles are reproached, but they are not the primary intent of this text. Therefore, the bodhisattvas of the four teachings also practice it in common. Here, the intent lies in the perfect [teaching]; thus the calming and contemplation intentionally lodges in the physical body of the Buddha in order to accomplish the threefold contemplation. In the verse, where it clarifies 'dwelling place', this refers to conformity with the samādhi. Since conformity is not uniform, the samādhis are not equal. The sūtra says: 'Sometimes it is explained as conforming with the three grounds such as having deliberation and reflection; sometimes it is explained as conforming with the five feeling roots such as joy and pleasure; sometimes it is explained as conforming with various factors [of absorption]; sometimes it is explained as conforming with what is bound to the realms; sometimes it is explained as what is not bound to the realms, and so forth.' When helping mindfulness-of-Buddha samādhi to conform with the dharmas of such dwelling places as these, one must distinguish their depths; hence it says, 'one must discuss.' The text explains the sūtra's meaning: thus, taking it generally, although it speaks of various different signs such as having deliberation, because of mindfulness of the Buddha it is completely different from the fundamental [dhyānas]. In 'physical permissions and prohibitions', where it says 'avoiding foolish people', etc., it refers to coming and going with bad spiritual friends and old associates, because they can arouse wholesome roots not in others [but unwholesome ones]. Thus the Ratnakūṭa Sūtra says: 'There are four dharmas that one should quickly run away from and abandon: first, gain and offerings; second, evil friends; third, bad crowds; fourth, co-residents who laugh, get angry, or fight—one should keep more than a hundred yojanas away.' Because they like to torment others, they are called 'foolish people'. Because one's native place and relatives involve many entanglements, one must quickly stay far away from them. As for 'must not hope for... to individual invitations', the sūtra says: 'Exclusively subsisting on almsfood, much will be accomplished.' The Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā states ten benefits of almsfood: first, one's livelihood belongs to oneself and does not belong to others; second, one causes those who offer me food to dwell in the Three Jewels before one receives it; third, one constantly arouses compassion; fourth, one complies with the Buddha's teaching; fifth, one is easily satisfied and easily nourished; sixth, it destroys arrogance; seventh, there are no wholesome roots of looking at the crown [of the Buddha?]; eighth, seeing me beg for food, other good people emulate me; ninth, one has no involvements with men, women, young, or old; tenth, begging in succession gives rise to an equal mind. As in Vimalakīrti, where Kāśyapa abandoned the rich and went to the poor, and Subhūti abandoned the poor and went to the rich, externally they displayed biased traces to show receiving reproaches. In various Vinaya and śāstra texts, the method of alms-begging is not to be satisfied with one place; to generate merit for others, it directs going to up to seven houses, which complies with the dharma of having few desires and does not harm the donors. As for 'not accepting individual invitations', it universally enables the ten directions to receive the benefit of equal offerings. It also accords with the Buddha's teaching and having few desires, and enables the donors to attain equal merit. Thus the Upāsakaśīla Sūtra says: 'The Buddha told the Mother of Mṛgāra: "Even if one invites the Buddha and five hundred arhats, it still cannot be called inviting a monastic field of merit. If among the saṅgha one invites a single semblance-monk who is extremely wicked, one attains immeasurable merit. Though an evil person, he can also speak to others of morality, concentration, wisdom, and the three bodhis; having cause and having effect, he does not disparage the Three Jewels, and holds up the Tathāgata's unsurpassable victorious banner. The victorious banner is the kāṣāya robe."' For this reason, one does not accept individual invitations. The Vinaya permits many contingencies, whereas the Fanwang [sūtra] only prohibits them. Although the Vinaya section allows the regular monastic practice, now, upon entering samādhi, everything is prohibited; all the more so in this Great Vehicle, one should comply with the Fanwang. The Dazhidulun says: 'Eating among the saṅgha gives rise to conditions for the outflows; if one accepts a sequential invitation, it obstructs cultivating samādhi.' The treatise says: 'If one who accepts an invitation receives an inviting place, he thinks, "I am a person of meritorious virtue." If he does not get one, he gives rise to resentment and hatred, thinking that the other is ignorant—"They should have invited me but did not, and invited those they should not have invited"—or he becomes self-disparaging and vexed. If one enters the assembly to eat, one must follow the communal rules and manage monastic affairs; one's mind will be scattered, obstructing and neglecting the path of transcendence. Therefore, it causes one to beg for food.' As for 'purifying the bodhimaṇḍa', maṇḍa is also used in worldly conventions to mean a sacrificial altar for spirits; here, the place where offerings are made to the Buddha is called a bodhimaṇḍa. As for 'fragrant food', it is also written as culinary dishes and vegetables. Non-grain food is called yáo; it also means bean fruits. As for 'bathing and washing', etc., washing the hands is called guàn; washing the head is called mù; washing the body is called yù; washing the feet is called xǐ (pronounced xiǎn). As for 'left and right', etc., exiting by the left and entering by the right; exit proceeds from impurity, and entry proceeds from purity. As for 'internal and external vinaya', physical and verbal deportment is external, while the intention-ground's deportment is internal; this means that both the Great and Lesser Vehicles have remote-preparatory offenses that arise from the intention-ground, as well as the last three of the ten good and evil [deeds]. When people in the world say, 'The Lesser Vehicle restrains body and mouth, while the Great Vehicle restrains the intention,' it is not necessarily entirely so. One should know that regarding the two vehicles, Great and Lesser, when affixing offenses both proceed from body and mouth, while in the aspect of remote preparation both guard against intention. Therefore, one knows that regarding the two vehicles, Great and Lesser, when it comes to restraining prohibitions, both guard the intention-ground, while if one produces actions, it solely restrains the intention. This means that in cultivating concentration and wisdom, both Great and Lesser are like this. Anything besides this, such as other mental dharmas and the repentance of minor infractions, are all supplemented with body and mouth, joining palms and speaking it out; or some are merely mental, like repenting of a minor duṣkṛta; or in the Great Vehicle, contemplating the principle to repent of grave offenses is still supplemented by body and mouth. Moreover, the Lesser Vehicle is external and the Great Vehicle is internal; if one is merely skilled in deportment but unversed in obstacles, one is also not qualified for the status of a master. As for 'looking upon the place where one hears the samādhi as viewing the World-Honoured One', etc., this also comes from that sūtra. Furthermore, the Dazhidulun, fascicle 49, says: 'A bodhisattva attains bodhi because of the master; how could he not respect him? How could there be superior wisdom and noble brilliance without respecting the master? If one does not respect the master, one loses great benefit, just as with a well without a rope, water cannot be drawn. A person with conceit is like water not staying on a mountain ridge. If one relies on a good master, the three trainings grow, just as a tree with roots will grow branches and leaves. Therefore, the Buddha taught that one should revere the master like the Buddha.' The treatise asks: 'If one cannot even revere a good master, how could one revere an evil master, yet you command revering the master? Answer: Do not follow worldly ways, clinging to the good and staying away from the evil. If he can explain and disclose the deep prajñā, then revere him completely without considering his other evils. One does not discard gold because the bag smells foul. Just like walking a perilous path at night with a wicked person holding a torch, one does not refuse to accept the light because the person is wicked. The bodhisattva is also like this: attaining the light of wisdom, he takes no account of his faults. Just as the voice in space told Sadāprarudita: "Toward your master, do not consider his faults."' Furthermore, what does the master's virtue or vice have to do with me? I seek the benefit of the Dharma, not his evils. Just as clay, wood, and the like possess no merit, yet because of conceiving the thought of the Buddha one gains immeasurable merit, how much more so toward a person! Moreover, regarding the master as the Buddha is like contemplating all dharmas as ultimately empty; viewing all sentient beings, one sees them as the Buddha, how much more so one's master! The Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā says: 'Seeking wisdom from another without sparing physical life, one must therefore revere the master. Whether the master holds one in contempt or treats one with love and respect, one's mind does not differ. One does not seek gain through the master. If the master has shortcomings, one should conceal them; if the master's faults become manifest, expediently cover them; if the master has virtues, praise and circulate them. Why? Because the practitioner of samādhi protects his mind well, fearing that if he disdains the master, the samādhi will not be accomplished.' Therefore the text below says: 'If one gives rise to evil toward the master, seeking this samādhi will in the end be difficult to attain.' However, one who acts as a master should indeed be without fault; here, explaining that ordinary masters cannot be completely good, it admonishes students not to see deficiencies and strengths, etc. As for 'one should slice...', etc., it presents the grave to illustrate the light. 'Flesh' is the skin, and 'the rest' refers to the environmental rewards outside the body. 'Servant' is a slave. In ancient times, men and women who committed offenses were made into male and female slaves. As for 'needing external protection', etc., being neither hungry nor satiated is like both cherishing and spurring. As for 'fellow practitioners being like crossing a precipice together', if one is lost, all perish; fellow practitioners should be like this. As for 'must make vows', etc., binding oneself through vows, one resolves one's mind on the samādhi. As for 'giving rise to great faith', etc., believing that among all dharmas there is none that is not the Buddha-dharma, it is therefore unshakable. Practicing vigor for the sake of this Dharma is called 'great vigor'; being undefiled toward dharmas is 'refined' (jīng), and in thought after thought pursuing it is 'advance' (jìn). All-aspect wisdom guides all practices; hence 'none can match it'. As for 'always being with a good master', etc., seeking a master must aim at complete goodness; serving a master must forget the master's faults. For the sake of the samādhi one must protect one's mind; fearing that one will vainly waste time, it causes one to select in advance. Furthermore, what is called 'good' means being well-versed in the marks of pass and blockage in samādhi, leading the practitioner so that his time is not spent in vain. As for 'lying down and going out', someone said: just calling lying down 'going out', what is wrong with that? However, that captures only lying down while lacking 'going out'; going out is not necessarily lying down, but when lying down one necessarily goes out, so they must be explained separately. The sūtra text only says sleeping; the treatise says: 'There are four dharmas that can generate samādhi: first, for three months never sleeping, except for excretion, eating, and sitting up; second, for three months not giving rise to the mind of self even for the snap of a fingers; third, for three months walking without resting; fourth, for three months also explaining the Dharma without seeking offerings and gain.' Now, this text follows convenience and has no fixed sequence: taking the second, 'mind of self', as conceptual desire; the first, 'sleep', as lying down and going out; and combining the exception for excretion, etc., with the third and fourth. Regarding the verse 'approaching good spiritual friends', etc., the treatise asks again: 'By what dharma can this samādhi jewel be attained? Answer: Approaching good spiritual friends.' That single verse is it. The verse possesses four meanings: first, spiritual friends; second, vigor; third, wisdom; fourth, the power of faith. There are also auxiliary cultivation methods for the samādhi, numbering fifty dharmas (and so forth). Next, under 'verbal speech and silence', first, from 'ninety days' down to 'mindfully contemplating Amitābha without resting', it teaches using the three karmas. Next, from 'or reciting and chanting' down, it teaches the method of mindfulness. Although it speaks of sequential and simultaneous mental operation, in thought after thought do not let one be lacking; hence it says 'continuously'. Next, from 'if reciting' down, it resolves doubts. It is completely as explained before, and here it also adds the master of the dharma-gate. From 'to summarize' down, it concludes by exhorting the three karmas. 'Step by step' is physical karma, 'voice by voice' is verbal karma, and 'thought after thought' is mental karma. Next, in the mental calming and contemplation, it first contemplates the thirty-two marks as the object of contemplation. As for 'Buddha-field', in full it should be kṣetra, translated here as field; that is, the land ruled by a single Buddha. Or it is called a marked kṣetra, because a pillar marks the kṣetra, marking the place of residence. As for 'for three months constantly contemplating', that sūtra says: 'When a bodhisattva enters this samādhi, he immediately sees Amitābha Buddha. He then asks that Buddha: "By what causes and conditions does one attain rebirth in that land?" The Buddha immediately answers: "Good son! Because of cultivating the mindfulness-of-Buddha samādhi without forgetting it, one attains rebirth in my land, up to the thirty-two marks," etc.' Now, the text's 'how to contemplate' is the bodhisattva's question upon seeing the Buddha in samādhi. From 'contemplate the thirty-two marks' down to 'the mark of the thousand-spoke wheel' is the Buddha's answering text in the Samādhi [Sūtra]. Making me attain these marks as well through the thirty-two marks in reverse and direct conditions is the text of making vows upon seeing the Buddha in the Samādhi [Sūtra]. Seeing the physical body with marks and signs, the body radiates light pervading the realms of the ten directions, like a mass of molten gold. Like Mount Sumeru in the great ocean illuminated by the sun's brilliance. The practitioner at that time eliminates other thoughts, namely mountains, forests, and so on; there is only the Buddha's bodily marks, like a reddish-gold image within vaiḍūrya. Next, from 'again contemplate' down, it directly clarifies cultivating the threefold contemplation upon the object. First, in the emptiness contemplation, the first text briefly explains examining one's own body and mind, and the samādhi Buddha. From whom are the Buddha's physical form and mind obtained? The first two lines directly examine. Next, from 'the Buddha does not use' down, by examining oneself one immediately knows that mind and Buddha are unobtainable; how could it be due to my form and mind that I see the Buddha's form and mind? Here four phrases are listed. First, 'the Buddha is not obtained with the mind' means not obtaining the Buddha's mind with my mind. 'Not obtained with the body' means not obtaining the Buddha's body with my body. The two cross-combined phrases, 'not using the mind to obtain the Buddha's form', etc., merely omit the word 'my'. From 'Why?' down, it explains. The Buddha's form and mind are signless and unobtainable; my form and mind are also like this. Body and mouth are form, and wisdom is mind; that form and mind exist is truly due to the existence of a self; because the self is non-existent, it is called 'dharmas are fundamentally non-existent'. Refuting this fundamental non-existence is called 'destroying the fundamental'; ending this destruction as well is called 'cutting off the fundamental'.