止觀輔行傳弘決 3.64

3.64

Fourth, explaining "gradual and sudden": first, explaining the terms. The three contemplations and three wisdoms are entered successively. "To rely on" (jie) means "due to." Entering provisionality by means of emptiness, and entering the middle by means of provisionality, is why it is called "relying on the shallow." Cultivating the two contemplations first for the sake of the middle way, and severing one's own fetters first for the sake of benefiting others, is why it is called "due to the deep." The two terms "sufficient" (zu) and "culminating" (ji) have common and distinct applications: in common, both apply throughout the beginning and the end; in distinction, culmination is at the end and sufficiency is at the beginning. The ten thousand phenomena contemplated by the initial mind are fully complete, and only when afflictions are exhausted and virtues are perfected at the end does it reach culmination. From "This also" onward explains identity and difference. The gradual supports the partial, and the sudden supports the perfect; their auxiliary meanings mutually complete each other, and the same is true of the Hinayāna and Mahāyāna, and half and full. From "Three teachings" onward is a brief explanation. From "Now further" onward is a critical differentiation, which is also an extensive explanation. Within this, it is first differentiated according to the four propositions; from "and so forth" below, it is differentiated according to the seven teachings. The principle is explicitly revealed, yet its terms are not as detailed as in the chapter on the provisional and the real. Among the first four propositions, that the first two teachings are gradual and not sudden is designated as gradual based on the intention behind instituting the teachings; it is not that the recipients of the teachings obtain this designation of gradual. That the distinctive teaching constitutes the third proposition is because its understanding is sudden while its practice is gradual. Its understanding merely knows the sudden principle, whereas its practice must pass through kalpas numerous as the sands of the Ganges. Therefore, one should know that this teaching initially relies on skillful means. Thus the term "skillful means" encompasses two meanings: first, relying on the skillful means prior to the bhūmis; second, hearing the skillful means of the exclusive middle. From "Furthermore" onward differentiates according to the four dharmas of contemplation, teaching, practice, and realization. Within this, the four dharmas are explained tentatively in terms of the two paths of teaching and realization, thereby giving each of the four dharmas a provisional and real aspect. In the first two teachings, all four dharmas are provisional; in the distinctive teaching, three are provisional while realization is real; in the perfect teaching, all four dharmas are real. As for the statement "Only this," and so forth: in terms of persons, it refutes the two vehicles; in terms of principle, it refutes the two truths. As for teaching and practice, these two explanations can be understood. As for "entering the room" and so forth: the room of compassion is liberation, the robe of forbearance is the dharma-body, and the empty seat is prajñā; contemplating the three virtues is why it is called "practice is real." In terms of the stages of the six identities, the rest can be known by analogy. Next, from "the preceding two contemplations" onward, the preceding four dharmas are differentiated by the four dharmas of teaching, practice, realization, and persons; bringing the three dharmas to bear on realization for this differentiation. Here, contemplation is subsumed into practice. When the three dharmas are compared with the teaching to differentiate provisional and real, the three dharmas and the teaching are passable at the cause but blocked at the fruit. Therefore, in the first two teachings, all four dharmas exist at the stage of the cause: receiving the provisional teaching and practicing provisional practice, one enters the causal stage and becomes a causal person. At the fruit, however, there is only the teaching of attaining Buddhahood; there is no real practitioner who comes to realize this fruit, and therefore it is absent. From "Why is this?" onward explains the meaning of absence. Because the body is reduced to ashes, practice, realization, and persons are all absent. Even if one employs the thirty-four mind-[moments], they only bring about extinction, not the marks of the fruit of Buddhahood. Furthermore, entering extinction was spoken prior to the reconciliation. When one reaches the Lotus Sutra, it turns into a causal stage; if even the two vehicles are reconciled, how much more so the three asaṃkhyeya [kalpas]! The distinctive teaching's presence and absence seem similar to the former two; however, upon reaching the first bhūmi it naturally reconciles and enters the perfect, so unlike the former it is not debased into extinction like ashes. From "Even the first bhūmi is like this" onward, the shallow is cited to illustrate the deep. As for the "subsequent fruit," it should mean wondrous enlightenment. Even the first bhūmi does not exist [here], how much less wondrous enlightenment! Because the first bhūmi of the distinctive teaching can also manifest the eight aspects—being a true cause that resembles the fruit—it must be used as an illustration. To reveal the fruit by means of the cause, the cause is cited. Because our fruit becomes another's cause, it says "there is no person." The first bhūmi entering the first abodement: this is the main text; one need not doubt the passage on the path of teaching. Furthermore, the terms teaching and realization can also apply to the perfect: prior to entering the first abodement is called the path of teaching; once ignorance is broken, it is called the path of realization. When determining provisional and real, it differs from the distinctive: the meaning of the bhūmis is borrowed to explain the meaning of the perfect. Thus the Four Stations of Mindfulness states: "The distinctive teaching speaks only of severing on the path of teaching. The perfect possesses two meanings: the path of teaching speaks of severing, while the path of realization does not sever." Therefore we know that the causal person does not reach the fruit due to two reasons: first, even if the causal person severs twelve grades and loses the stage of wondrous enlightenment, they merely become the second practice of the perfect school; second, the first bhūmi immediately enters the first abodement, so how could they reach wondrous enlightenment? Thus the text says: "how much more so the subsequent fruit!" From "Furthermore, the preceding three" onward differentiates in terms of opening and reconciling. The distinctive also knows the middle; here it says they do not know it because the preceding three do not know the perfect principle. Once opened by the Lotus Sutra, all are called sudden. When it says "although not identical," it does not mean that what was practiced is opened yet still not identical; it merely judges that what that person practiced in the past is now opened to become sudden. Past practice can serve as the gradual belonging to the sudden; it is not that in the past the gradual was identical with the sudden, hence it says "not identical." If past practice were not opened, it would not even be called gradual; how could it be gradual-sudden or identical-sudden? Now if it has been opened, the gradual is identical with the sudden; hence it says "it is the bodhisattva path." Merely to distinguish it from that which is sudden from beginning to end, it is called "gradual-sudden" from the perspective of the past cause; because they enter according to original habit it is called "each vehicle"; because it accords with original habit it is called "suited to their wish"; because what they practiced is opened it is called "decisively understood." If the Dharma were still gradual, how could it be called the king of sutras? Before the king of sutras originally explained it, without having opened it, the principle was fundamentally perfect and wondrous—how could it wait for reconciliation? If after being reconciled it were still gradual, how could it be called having gained entrance? Furthermore, opening the gradual from the sudden occurred because the faculties were raw and unadapted; this is why there is talk of distinctive connection. As for the "distinctive principle," it is the "distinctive" of common and distinctive, not the distinctive of the distinctive teaching versus the perfect teaching. Moreover, the meaning of the distinctive principle applies to both the distinctive and the perfect; that the distinctive carries the path of teaching is set aside here and not discussed. From "Therefore the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]" onward cites an example to assist the explanation. If when the two vehicles had their provisionality opened they did not gain entrance, why did those who attained the fruit of the two vehicles in the Great Scripture yearn for the perfect eternity? It was only that prior to the Lotus Sutra their minds were obstructed and considered it different; that they were not obstructed in the Great Scripture was due to the merit of the Lotus Sutra; hence it is also called opening the gradual and revealing the sudden. Furthermore, the term "distinctive connection" combines two meanings: first, prior to the Lotus Sutra, there was reproof and washing away; this intention directly corresponds to connecting them with the distinctive principle, but the real was hidden within the provisional, and the teaching was not yet manifest; second, when reaching the assembly of the Lotus Sutra, reconciliation is called connection; this is the connection of guiding forward, not the connection of mutual crossing. Therefore, with these two meanings, the former differs and the latter is identical. From "Furthermore, the four types" onward pertains to the indeterminate. The first four propositions of gradual and sudden correspond in meaning to two among the eight teachings; the next double set of four dharmas corresponds in meaning to opening the four within the gradual. Therefore, it is further differentiated by the indeterminate. The secret is not explained, the meaning of which can be inferred as before. As for "They need not entirely wait for" and so forth: when persons of the preceding three teachings advance according to their stages, they are definitely bodhisattvas; hence it says "they need not entirely wait for the opening of the gradual." From "The reason why" onward is the analogy. It is an analogy for hearing the terminating cause in the past and being able to arouse [awakening] according to each flavor. As for "five flavors": it broadly says that although flavors change, they can still kill a person; it does not mean that the Lotus Sutra is called the fifth flavor. The Lotus is called determinate, not indeterminate. These are the five flavors in terms of practice prior to the Lotus Sutra. Now in this text, it is merely in terms of faculties and conditions possessing indeterminate marks; thus it does not entirely follow the text prior to the Lotus Sutra. From "Sentient beings" onward applies the analogy. Regarding "lengthened and shortened": the principle, teaching, practice, and realization are successively discussed as lengthened and shortened. In the two types of five flavors regarding time and practice, they are successively discussed as lengthened and shortened depending on whether they are near or far. As for "Like a pratyekabuddha": next, the pratyekabuddha is cited to exemplify manifestation by principle. Because Hinayāna persons, when reaching an era without a Buddha, arouse awakening without having teachings and practices, it is called manifestation by principle. From "Manifestation by principle is also like this" onward draws a parallel. Practitioners of the perfect are also like this: whether prior to the Buddha's appearance or hearing the Avataṃsaka, all is designated as indeterminate, and all may be called milk. Why is this? Worldlings are entirely raw; in principle they are like milk. In terms of time, the Avataṃsaka is also called milk. Within the Avataṃsaka, when the four dharmas are again differentiated as manifestations of the five flavors: hearing the teaching is like the manifestation of milk; contemplative practice is like the manifestation of curd; resemblance is like the two kinds of clarified butter; the increased path is like clarified butter (daigo); because resemblance manifests realization, it says resemblance manifests realization. Because realization is further manifested, it says "it is also." Question: If the increased path is determinate, why is it called indeterminate? Answer: Successive increase of the path is called determinate; if one leaps and realizes, it is called indeterminate. It may also be that hearing the teaching and contemplation are both called the manifestation of milk; within the stage of resemblance, three flavors are encompassed, so prior to the seventh faith is called curd, and the eighth faith and above are called the two kinds of clarified butter. From "If the preceding three teachings" onward: regarding the stages of teaching, practice, and realization of the preceding three teachings manifesting the perfect, this is called the indeterminate entering of the three schools. Thus, an ordinary person of broad ground hearing the teaching is called teaching manifestation; the inner and outer ordinary stages are called practice manifestation; when reaching the noble stage, manifestation is called realization manifestation. As for "worthy and noble": these are the noble ones belonging to the worthy. Skillful means are the worthy; how could they again follow from the worthy? From "There is further" onward explains the indeterminate meaning again in a common manner. The name "indeterminate" is the same, but because the meaning differs, it does not "kill the person." First, it parallels the truth of emptiness (true truth): as when cultivating the non-outflow from the five stops of mindfulness, one arouses the understanding of warmth, which was not the original expectation, yet can also be called arousing of itself without being sought. When this understanding arises, it still belongs to outflows; hence it says outflows arise of themselves without being sought. Because the three delusions remain entirely present, it says it does not kill the two deaths at all. Delusion is the cause of death; speaking of the fruit within the cause is why it says this. From "If cultivating the middle way" onward, it directly clarifies the indeterminate in terms of cultivating the middle, which also does not kill the person. From the initial arousal of the mind, originally cultivating the perfect and eternal, coarse delusions depart first, which corresponds in meaning to non-outflow; this non-outflow arises of itself without being sought, but because it does not break ignorance it does not kill the person. People do not perceive this and call it gradual-sudden.