止觀輔行傳弘決 3.48

3.48

Next, in subsuming delusions, one also determines delusions in terms of the aforementioned principles; therefore, one determines the shared and distinctive differences in the substance of delusions in terms of delusion regarding the two principles of the provisional and the real. The root of delusion regarding principle is so-called ignorance, and ignorance is the foremost of causes and conditions; therefore, both shared and distinctive delusions are treated in terms of causes and conditions. First, explaining delusion regarding the provisional principle: in the twelve links of conditionality, regarding the term 'independent' (dútóu), the *Vibhāṣā* states: 'Unshared ignorance does not coexist with the underlying tendencies (anuśaya). Question: Are there also unshared restlessness (auddhatya), entanglements, and the like? Answer: No.' People say that since there is unshared ignorance, there should also be unshared restlessness and the like. [However,] while all defilements and the like completely possess ignorance, only ignorance alone has the unshared form. Therefore, in the *Lotus Sūtra*, centipedes and the like are used as metaphors for the independent [ignorance], while mangy badgers and the like are metaphors for the associated [ignorance]. These merely illustrate the difference between the two kinds of delusion; one does not find that there is further independent restlessness and the like. Regarding 'receiving what is delighted in' (受所喜樂), the character 樂 is pronounced [as a falling tone]. From 'These twelve...' onward, the twelve links of conditionality are bundled into the three paths. The twelve causes and conditions rotate and give rise to one another; therefore, the three paths also rotate and give rise to one another. Fascicle Two of the *Dazhidulun*, the *Dvādaśāṅgapratītyasamutpāda-śāstra*, the *Vibhāṣā*, the *Daśabhūmika-sūtra*, and others are all identical on this. The *Abhidharmakośa* states: 'Three are afflictions and two are karma; seven matters are also named fruition. Briefly stating fruition and briefly stating cause, from the middle one can infer both. From affliction arise affliction and karma; from karma arises matter; from matter arise matter and affliction—the principle of the links of existence is only this.' The first four lines subsume the expansive with the brief; thus the treatise states: 'It should be known that although dependent origination has twelve [links], its nature consists of two and three. "Three" refers to affliction, karma, and matter; "two" refers to cause and fruition. Within this there are again two: the first two lines directly elucidate the mutual subsumption; the latter two lines resolve an objection. The objection says: Why are past and future brief while the present is expansive? The explanation says: Because from the middle one can comparatively know [both], the present being called the middle.' Next, 'from affliction arises affliction' means that craving gives rise to grasping; 'from affliction arises karma' means that grasping gives rise to existence, and ignorance gives rise to conditioning forces; 'from karma arises matter' means that conditioning forces give rise to consciousness, and existence gives rise to birth; 'from matter arise matter and affliction' means that from matter arises matter, which is consciousness giving rise to name-and-form up to giving rise to sensation; and 'from matter arises affliction' means that sensation gives rise to craving. From 'The *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* says...' onward, the treatise is next cited to verify the characteristics of the three paths. Question: As for the three obstacles and the three paths, suffering and retribution are merely two different names, while karma and affliction are the same; why is this? Answer: Suffering is the suffering belonging to retribution. Also, retribution is suffering itself; hence we know that although the names differ, their meaning is the same. Question: Since the three names are the same, why are the two names 'obstacle' and 'path' different? Answer: Because they can obstruct the noble path, they are called obstacles; because they mutually lead through one another in turn, they are called paths. Both are designated from their faults and functions. Now, that the twelvefold wheel is made into the three paths is because 'leading through' has the same meaning as 'turning like a wheel'. Moreover, it agrees with the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*. The treatise calls them 'paths of karma'; karma must take affliction as that which can lead through, and must take future suffering as that to which it leads through. Although the text only mentions karma, in meaning the three are already complete; thus it can be cited as proof. Hence the treatise's chapter 'Ten Unwholesome Paths of Action' asks: 'Why are they called paths of karma? Answer: Mind is karma; because it courses in them, they are called paths of karma. The prior courses in the latter three; the latter courses in the former seven. The three are karma and not paths; the seven are both karma and paths.' This is a full record of the treatise's text. Those who have not seen the treatise, seeing only that it follows after the twelve links, immediately explain it as the twelve causes and conditions, which is utterly unacceptable. Now I first unpack the treatise's text, and next harmonize it with the three paths. Although the treatise's chapter is titled 'Chapter on the Paths of Action', the intention of citing it in the present text extends through to the three paths. 'Mind is karma' refers to the volition (cetanā) of the mental ground. 'Coursing in them' refers to coursing in bodily [and verbal actions], etc. Thus we know that bodily [and verbal actions], etc., being coursed in by the mind, are called the paths of karma. Being the path of karma and karma itself being the path, they are called paths of karma. Regarding 'the prior courses...', this distinguishes the sequence of arising. Setting the sequence of enumeration in the teaching against the sequence of arising: in the textual enumeration, body and speech are placed first and the three mental ones last; in the sequence of arising, the three mental ones are first and body and speech are last. The mental ground arises first, hence it says 'the prior courses'; because they are enumerated last in the text, it says 'the latter three'. Body and speech are activated later, hence it says 'the latter courses'; because they are enumerated first in the text, it says 'the former seven'. The character 'in' (中) is merely an auxiliary phrase, meaning within these seven and three. It is also like the five aggregates, where the textual enumeration and their arising alternate between coarse and subtle, and the causes and fruitions of the four truths are also like this. However, the meaning of the treatise is: the three are karma and not paths, because they are not body and speech. Those that are both karma and paths are the two karmas of body and speech, because they are coursed in by mental karma; hence they are also called paths. Now, our text interprets the mind as that which can lead through, so it may also be called a path. Therefore, the latter three lead through to body and speech, hence it is said that they 'can lead through to the seven'. The former seven are karma and are also coursed in by the mind; therefore the treatise states that they are both karma and paths. In the present text, two meanings are further established for the former seven: first, they are what is coursed in, conforming to the meaning of the treatise; thus it is said that they are karma and also paths. Second, they are what can lead through, leading through to future lifetimes; thus they are again called paths. The three mental ones are the path of affliction; coursing in body and speech means affliction leads through to karma; karma arriving at future lifetimes means karma leads through to suffering. Therefore we know that it precisely uses the three karmas of the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* to explain the three paths. The intention in citing the treatise for proof lies in this. Regarding 'entanglement' (牽連) and so forth, fascicle forty of the *Ekottarika-āgama* says: 'The Buddha personally tended to a sick monk, and thereupon admonished the monks, saying: "For what reason did you go forth? Was it out of fear of kings and the like, or was it desiring to renounce the twelve entanglements?"' Being bound and continuous across the three periods of time, they are called entanglements. 'Twelve treatises' and so forth are all texts of the *Great Garland Sūtra* (Pusa yingluo benye jing). Rolling on without end, they are like the wheel of a cart. From 'shackled and bound' downward explains the name; from 'three periods of time' downward concludes by establishing the subsumption of dharmas. From 'If one is deluded about the real principle...' downward, next elucidates the twelve causes and conditions beyond the realms. First, distinguishing differences by contrasting with the small [vehicle]. Beyond the realms there are also the associated and independent forms, yet their substances are forever different from those within the realms: they are the associated and independent forms that obstruct the Middle Way. Also, those that join with the underlying tendencies of views and thoughts beyond the realms are called 'associated'. That which directly obstructs principle is called 'independent'. 'Associated' is like saying that prior to this, all are called wrong views. Furthermore, from the stage of virtual awakening onward, one cultivates the dhyāna of abandoning views; this is the view of identical substance beyond the realms. The five dusts of the two lands of expedience and real retribution are the thoughts beyond the realms. Such views and thoughts must have ignorance, which is called 'associated'. Next, explaining their characteristics based on the treatise: therefore the present text cites the *Ratnagotravibhāga*, where 'inversion is independent ignorance'; inversion is the associated, which are the two forms of ignorance. In 'three kinds of mind-made bodies', regarding why all three are called mind-made bodies: the *Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra* states, 'Mahāmati asked the Buddha: "What is called mind-made?" The Buddha said: "Just as the mind moves swiftly and without obstruction, so it is called mind-made."' This is derived from a simile; hence those generated bodies are likened to the movement of the mind. That sūtra explains the general name with two meanings. First it says: just as someone who, remembering what was previously seen a hundred thousand yojanas away, rapidly arrives there with thought continuing thought. Next it says: through the power of illusory samādhi, remembering their original vows, they are born among the various noble ones. The first speaks of remembering the place, and the second speaks of remembering the vows; both meanings are generated from the mind's remembrance, hence called mind-made. Now our mountain school holds that because they are produced by intention (zuòyì), they are called mind-made. The sūtra says 'remembering', and remembering is intention; therefore the meaning is identical. Next, the fourth fascicle explains the three distinct names. First, the 'Chapter on Impermanence' states: Mind-made bodies are of three kinds: First, the mind-made body enjoying the bliss of samādhi, also called correct reception, which corresponds to the mind being tranquil and unmoving in the third, fourth, and fifth bhūmis. Second, the mind-made body awakening to the self-nature of dharmas, which corresponds to entering universally into buddha-lands in the eighth bhūmi, hence taking dharmas as self-nature. Third, the mind-made body spontaneously produced along with its kind, non-active, which refers to comprehending the dharma realized by buddhas. Both 'made' and 'produced' are spoken from fruition. This vertically determines the sequential stages according to the shared teaching and the distinctive teaching's adoption [of shared practitioners]. In our school's *Xuan[yi]*, it is consistently said that they belong to the previous three teachings because the meaning is explained by running through the various teachings. Since it says the eighth bhūmi is awakening to the self-nature of dharmas, we verify that although the first text says the fifth bhūmi, it also encompasses up to the seventh bhūmi, which is the stage of entering emptiness. The eighth bhūmi corresponds to the stage of entering provisionality. When 'spontaneously produced along with its kind' says 'comprehending the dharma realized by buddhas', this is entering the middle. Belonging to the kind of buddhas, they have not necessarily realized it themselves. If adopted into the distinctive [teaching], prior to the seventh bhūmi they enter the ten abodes of the distinctive teaching; from the eighth bhūmi onward they are adopted into the ten practices. Knowing the dharma realized by buddhas is entering the dedication of merit; neither is the path of realization, hence they are called mind-made. Still using the original names and including those not adopted, these stages are together concluded; thus all are called bhūmis. The mind-made body enjoying the bliss of samādhi still subsumes persons of the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka [teaching], let alone the two vehicles of the shared [teaching]! When our school's *Xuan[yi]* determines the stages of the mind-made bodies in the *Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra*, it subsumes the superior by means of the inferior, hence pointing to the two vehicles and the like to subsume the shared and distinctive. In contrast to the stages of the distinctive [teaching], it does not yet subsume the path of realization; therefore it determines the stages only from before the bhūmis. Thus we know that the present determination accords with the intention of the sūtra, differing only in that the sūtra text does not yet subsume the stages of the distinctive [teaching]. Regarding 'five kinds', this is merely in terms of expansion and contraction. The names are only three, but in meaning they expand into five. Within the correct reception of samādhi, the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka are expanded out; within awakening to dharmas, the ten practices of the distinctive teaching are expanded out. If making seven kinds, the two vehicles of the two teachings are each expanded into two, while the ten abodes of the distinctive teaching still correspond in meaning to entering emptiness in the shared teaching. Therefore the text below says 'there are generally many kinds'. If discussing the nine persons born into [the Land of] Expedience, then taking the stage of purity of the six sense faculties of the perfect teaching and subsuming it into the three kinds of mind-made bodies should also be understood, because none of them have yet severed ignorance nor been born into [the Land of] Real Retribution. That the *Xuan[yi]* text does not say they are subsumed into the three is because their contemplation is superior, so they are set aside for the moment. Furthermore, the name 'mind-made' is properly suited to the doctrinal path. Regarding 'the causes of the three minds shifting...', the causes shift and fruitions alter, moving from lower to higher. From 'bundling these...' onward, they are bundled into the three paths according to the treatise. From 'These ten...' onward, similarities and differences are distinguished. From 'These delusions...' downward concludes by establishing the subsumption of dharmas. All are as in the text.