止觀輔行傳弘決 4
English (machine translation) 4
- Language
- English
4.1
Expounded by the śramaṇa Zhanran of Piling during the Tang dynasty
4.2
Explaining the twenty-five expedient means. First, there is a general explanation of the two kinds, the gradual and the sudden. Next, from "Now, proceeding from..." onward, there begins the specific explanation of the expedient means in the present text. In the first passage discussing the sudden expedient means in general, the explanation of the name first states that skillful dedication transforms [practices] into wonderful causes, and thus it is named "skillful." Furthermore, it broadly cites scriptural testimonies, functions, and so forth, without yet demonstrating the specific characteristics of the twenty-five in detail, and so it is called "general." As for "skillful," from the initial aspiration for awakening, the provisional and the real are non-dual; through the understanding of non-duality, one harmonizes practical deportment, making a single practice accomplish all practices; when the true understanding of the three tracks is aroused once, all are aroused. Entering the first abode of the perfect [teaching] is due entirely to this skillful ability. Next, from "The Dazhidulun states..." onward, the treatise is cited to attest to the characteristics of skillfulness. Guided by the knowledge of all modes, not resting even in the slightest good, one is able to surpass the ultimate fruition of the two vehicles. Fascicle nine of the treatise says: "Those whose small goods can produce great fruitions are like those seeking the Buddha-fruit who praise [the Buddha] with a single verse, utter a single 'Namo', burn a pinch of incense, or offer a single flower—such small practices will definitely achieve Buddhahood." Fascicle thirty-two also states: "[The question asks:] How can a bodhisattva give little? The answer states: Giving lies in the mind, not in the material gift. The bodhisattva may be poor, or may hear others say that giving is neither much nor little, or may fear that gathering much wealth injures the wealth of others and loses the good mind, or may afflict sentient beings. Making offerings to the Buddha through afflicting sentient beings is not permitted by the Buddha; therefore, one gives little and dedicates it toward bodhi." Hence we know that "skillful" is named "expedient means" because of dedication and because of the guiding power of wisdom. Therefore, the reason why the twenty-five dharmas explained below are fit to serve as the perfect expedient means is precisely because of dedication and the guidance of wisdom. The passage from "Moreover, expedient means..." onward is a re-explanation. Because it skillfully harmonizes, it is named "expedient means." If a cause is established for the sake of a fruition, when the cause is established it will definitely attain the fruition; hence the cause that attains the fruition is called "harmonizing to take the fruition." From "The Dapin states..." onward, scriptural testimony is cited for harmonization. Since it is only through immeasurable dharmas that the causes of Buddhahood are accomplished, harmonization is called expedient means. Therefore, the twenty-five dharmas below, through harmonization and attunement, can only then accomplish the cause for the first abode of the perfect [teaching] and attain the fruition of wonderful enlightenment. From "If relying upon..." onward, the gradual expedient means are explained. Question: Among the four [teachings] there is the perfect; why are these four collectively named gradual? Answer: Because one traverses the [first] three teachings first, they obtain the name gradual. However, the fourth, the perfect, is identical to the initial sudden. As a common course, these four each take the inner and outer ordinary persons as the remote and proximate expedient means; only the first and last are listed, and the intermediate ones may be understood. Next, explaining that the twenty-five dharmas in the present text are discussed as expedient means prior to the remote and proximate expedient means of the perfect teaching listed earlier: this is because they serve as expedient means for the five grades [of disciples]. Among the six identities, this is the identity in words and phrases, hence it is called "nominal." Therefore we know that the present intention is situated prior to the inner and outer ordinary persons of the four teachings, collectively serving as the remote expedient means for the four teachings. As for "ten kinds," these are the ten objects. Whether in contemplation or manifestation, entering the grades is not far, hence they are named proximate. Because the twenty-five dharmas are far removed from the truth, they are named remote. Question: The aggregates are the primary practice, while the remaining nine await manifestation; how can these be named expedient means? Answer: That all ten objects discussed here are expedient means is because they are all that which is contemplated. Only when one is able to contemplate them do they belong to the primary practice. Therefore, the first eight are only found in ordinary persons, while the latter two are named expedient means of the noble ones; hence we know that the ten objects are all proximate expedient means of the perfect practice. In the preceding three teachings, there are differences and gradations: specifically, for the bodhisattva's object, [the distinctive teaching] contemplates only two teachings, the shared contemplates only one, and the Tripiṭaka has none at all, contemplating only nine objects; people of the two vehicles in the shared [teaching] contemplate eight and a half objects, and people of the two vehicles in the Tripiṭaka contemplate all eight objects. Although it is thus in general discussion, the present intent rests on the perfect [teaching]. From "Horizontal and vertical..." onward, the functions of the contemplated objects are explained. The horizontal and vertical aspects of the ten objects are like the mutual manifestation of the ten pairs at the beginning of fascicle five. Because the objects manifest, the methods of contemplation are crisscrossed, and are again named horizontal and vertical; when we reach the fifth fascicle, the characteristics of the horizontal and vertical contemplations will be explained in further detail. The present intention is merely to clarify the twenty-five dharmas. First, the five categories are listed; next, their sequence of arising, which takes the first abode as the destination. Proceeding onward from the first abode is not the intention of the present text; therefore the text below says: "The virtues of entering the abode are not discussed at present." From "Just as..." onward, a simile is presented to illustrate the five categories. "Potter" (tao, pronounced da-dao [qie]): this is present-day Taoqiu City south of Puzhou. Emperor Yao once resided there, hence it was called Yao City. Therefore Yao was called Tao Tang Shi; tao means the roof/kiln where tiles are made. Here, this is used to name the person, hence it says "potter" (taoshi). If named after what is made, it should be written 匋 (tao), meaning earthenware vessels. The first illustrates possessing the conditions. From "Ceasing other [pursuits]..." onward illustrates rebuking desires. From "Although having ceased..." onward illustrates discarding hindrances. From "Although the body..." onward illustrates the five matters. From "The superior conditions..." onward illustrates the five dharmas. From "Calming and contemplation..." onward is the application, which combines the five categories and fits the simile to them. From "Worldly..." onward concludes with an exhortation. Even for shallow worldly affairs—meaning the dhyāna concentrations within the realms—one still requires the twenty-five dharmas as expedient means, hence it is said that "without conditions they cannot coalesce"; how much more so for the supramundane, perfect and sudden path? Regarding "contemplating by relying on practical matters," etc.: in the explanation, every single one of the twenty-five dharmas relies on a matter to practice contemplation, thereby producing perfect understanding. Regarding "regulating coarseness," etc.: if viewed directly from the perspective of the twenty-five dharmas, the twenty-five dharmas serve as that which regulates, and the coarse dispersion of the three karmas serves as that which is regulated. If practical matters and principle are discussed together, the twenty-five dharmas serve as that which is regulated; when understanding is generated in response to matters, that understanding serves as that which regulates. Moreover, regarding the twenty-five dharmas serving to regulate coarseness, there are also general and specific meanings. If according to the arising of the five categories, each and every one regulates coarseness and inspects dispersion—this is the general meaning. If discussed specifically, the first three regulate coarseness and the latter two inspect dispersion. From "These five dharmas..." onward, scriptural testimony is cited. The "five dharmas" are simply the five categories, showing that the practice of these five categories has authoritative basis. In the Dazhidulun's explanation of the dhyāna pāramitā, "The question asks: By what expedient means does one attain the dhyāna pāramitā? The answer: By casting away the five matters (the five desires), eliminating the five dharmas (the five hindrances), and practicing the five dharmas (the names are the same)." Possessing the conditions originates from the Chan Scripture, hence the Chan Scripture is cited as saying, and so forth. "Good teacher" is a good spiritual friend (kalyāṇamitra). As for regulating the five matters, although established by humans, because they are essential to practice, they are now utilized. These five categories comprise five in text but two in meaning, namely, practical matters and principle. Principle is again divided into two: sequential and non-sequential. The intention is solely unified in one: exclusively anticipating the right contemplation.
4.3
Next, in explaining according to the headings, first the five conditions are explained. For both the Great and Small Vehicles, the precepts are the foundation, which is why they are explained first. Although inner restraint may be strict, it necessarily relies on clothing and food; advancing in the cultivation of concentration and wisdom requires relying on quiet solitude; although the place is quiet and solitary, one relies on breaking off external entanglements; and though the four conditions are complete, guidance depends on a teacher—all fully as stated in the Meditation Sūtra. Furthermore, regarding these five conditions: the text is fivefold and the meanings are fivefold, but the intent is only in one. The intent has a proximal and a distal aspect: the proximal refers to guidance, and the distal refers to correct practice. Furthermore, each of the five texts contains two meanings, namely the phenomenal and the noumenal. Again, regarding these four chapters: the text is fourfold and the meanings are twofold, but the intent is only in one. The twofold meaning refers to original pure dedication and purification through repentance; both phenomenal and noumenal precepts possess these two. The noumenal purity of the three virtues is called original purity; contemplating phenomena as identical to the noumenon is what is called purification through repentance. Regarding the listing of the names of the precepts: they are fully given in the Dapin under 'mindfulness of precepts', and in fascicle twenty-one of the Dazhidulun, which is identical to the Xianhu jing; in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra the number is the same, with different names but identical meaning; the 'Ten Inexhaustible Treasuries' chapter of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra also lists ten precepts, but compared to this it is still incomplete. That text states: 1. the precept of benefiting sentient beings; 2. the precept of not receiving non-Buddhist precepts, receiving only the pure precepts of the Buddhas of the three periods; 3. the precept of non-attachment, because of not dedicating them to the three realms of existence; 4. the precept of abiding peacefully, because of not violating any precept; 5. the precept of non-contention, neither rejecting former regulations nor creating new ones, and not afflicting sentient beings on account of this precept; 6. the precept of non-harm, because of not afflicting sentient beings through incantations; 7. the precept of non-mixture, because of being free from the sixty-two views and contemplating only conditioned origination; 8. the precept of abandoning deviance, not putting on an appearance of keeping precepts to make others know it, manifesting signs of virtue when devoid of real virtue within; 9. the precept of non-malice, because of not slighting those who break precepts when seeing them; 10. the precept of purity, relinquishing the ten unwholesome actions and maintaining the ten wholesome actions. Among these ten kinds: the second, fourth, sixth, eighth, and tenth belong to the disciplinary vows; the third and seventh belong to non-attachment in accord with the path; the fifth and ninth belong to the basis for venturing into the provisional. The first precisely corresponds to benefiting others: since the bodhisattva originally takes beneficial activity as fundamental, therefore among these ten, benefiting sentient beings comes first. That sūtra possesses the phenomenal as well as emptiness and the provisional, yet still lacks sovereignty, and entering the middle is completely absent. When various sūtras list precepts, the treatise's ten encompass them completely; the treatise's meanings such as 'non-broken' also embrace both intrinsic and prohibited [precepts]. First, the treatise is cited to explain the intrinsic precepts, and on this basis the adventitious and original three trainings are distinguished. First, the existence or non-existence of the original three trainings is explained. What is termed 'intrinsic' is the original precepts. Not awaiting the Buddha's prohibition, their nature is intrinsically wholesome or unwholesome, and hence they are called 'intrinsic'. Together with original concentration and wisdom, they are called the original three trainings, because the original precepts serve generally as the root of the ten precepts. The ten precepts of the treatise are the adventitious three trainings. How so? The first three precepts are adventitious precepts, whose meaning embraces the original; the next one is adventitious concentration; the next six are adventitious wisdom. First, two passages from the treatise are cited, which whether eight or ten are all intrinsic precepts. What is termed 'eight' means that alcohol guards the mental ground, which is identical to the last three karmas of the mind among the ten, differing in number but identical in meaning. From 'When the Buddha does not appear' downward, the original concentration is explained. Regarding 'eight dhyānas': specifically speaking, they are the four dhyānas and four formless absorptions. If speaking generally, they are called either eight dhyānas or eight concentrations. Concentration is contrasted with the distraction of desire; dhyāna is also called stillness, so the holy teachings use them non-definitely as appropriate. Regarding 'the former physician' and so forth: in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra the former physician is an outsider, and the milk medicine is the deviant [view of] permanence and the like. From 'Conventional interpretations' downward, the explanations of earlier masters are refuted. Earlier masters posited only adventitious precepts and adventitious wisdom, not positing adventitious concentration, and thus used precepts and wisdom to challenge concentration. From 'Now we use' downward, the adventitious three trainings are explained. First, in explaining the adventitious precepts, they are first listed, and next their differing arisings are explained. In the initial listing, 'three refuges' means taking the Three Jewels of the Tripiṭaka as the three refuges. Thus the Kośa states: 'People pressed by fear / Mostly take refuge in mountains, / Parks, groves, / Solitary trees, caityas, and the like. / This refuge is not supreme, / This refuge is not noble; / Not through this refuge / Can one be liberated from all suffering. / Whoever takes refuge in the Buddha, / And takes refuge in the Dharma and the Saṅgha, / Within the four noble truths, / Can observe with wisdom. / This refuge is supreme, / This refuge is noble; / Definitely through this refuge, / One can be liberated from all suffering.' According to the intent of our school, it is simply cutting off defilements with thirty-four moments of mind that constitutes the Buddha, the four noble truths of arising and ceasing that constitute the Dharma, and those in training and beyond training that constitute the Saṅgha. If following the explanations of the Three Jewels in the Vibhāṣā and the Kośa, the meaning is slightly different. As outlined in the Shiqian and treatises, there is no leisure to discuss it now. Regarding 'five precepts': four are intrinsic and one is prohibited, so the Kośa states: 'Among prohibitions, it is solely abstaining from alcohol, / In order to protect the other disciplinary vows.' When discussing after the prohibition, a single prohibitive fault is added atop each intrinsic [offense]. Regarding 'two hundred and fifty precepts': after the regulatory teaching was fulfilled, they were called two hundred and fifty; discussing them in general from the beginning, they are simply called disciplinary vows, which is why the ten different roots are listed. The Mahāsāṃghika has four ways of receiving: namely, natural, 'come, [bhikṣu]', five-member saṅgha, and ten-member saṅgha. The Mahīśāsaka has five ways of receiving: namely, natural, 'come, [bhikṣu]', three refuges, eight weighty rules, and formal ecclesiastical act (karman). The Dharmaguptaka also has five: namely, coming, supreme [understanding], refuge, respect, and formal ecclesiastical act. There are further treatises such as the Pāsādika and the Mother of Vinaya that explain differences in receiving. The ten ways of receiving in the present text are derived directly from the Daśabhāṇavāra, combined with the views of the Vibhāṣā masters, which accounts for one or two points of divergence. The Daśabhāṇavāra initially mentions 'natural'; here, when it says 'The Buddha called out "Come, bhikṣu!" and he naturally attained the full precepts', it refers to the natural precepts within the person of an arhat. According to the texts of various schools, only in the Dharmaguptaka does 'come, [bhikṣu]' stand first. Moreover, it lacks the word 'natural', which is the passage on the supreme dharma regarding Kāśyapa. Below in this text, 'come, [bhikṣu]' appears independently, so we know that the first text refers to 'natural'. Regarding 'self-vowal': in the Dharmaguptaka it is called instruction, and also called supreme dharma—different names, identical intent. Regarding 'eight weighty rules': in the Daśabhāṇavāra they are called eight weighty dharmas, which are simply the eight weighty rules. Regarding 'fifth in a border region': according to the Dharmaguptaka, it simply refers to regions outside White Wood where it is difficult to find the required number of monks, allowing five people for ordination. Now, based on the chapter on karma in the Kośa quoting the Vibhāṣā masters who establish ten ways of ordination, it says: 'The eighth ordination is the fifth Vinaya master; that is, in a border region where people are few, among the five-person ordination there must be one who upholds the Vinaya to perform the karman, taking the karman master as the fifth.' Regarding 'ten monks in the central region': the Daśabhāṇavāra calls it karman, which also follows this statement. The Kośa simply speaks of a community of ten. Thus we know that the present text is not exclusive to a single school. Having known the similarities and differences, what are their characteristics? As for 'come, [bhikṣu]': the Buddha called out, 'Come, bhikṣu!', and right upon his words, beard and hair naturally fell away, the kāṣāya was on his body, and the alms bowl was in his hand, just like a monk of five years' standing who knows the Dharma. As for 'self-vowal': Kāśyapa said, 'Whoever in the world has become an arhat, in them all do I take refuge.' The commentary cites the Duolun: 'The Buddha is my teacher, I am his disciple. The Sugata is my teacher, I am his disciple. Immediately, both the fruit and the precepts were attained.' As for 'seeing the truths': upon first attaining the first fruit, one sees what was never seen before. 'Truth' means the principle of truth; previously one had not seen the truth, but now one has come to see the truth. When seeing the truths arises, both the fruit and the precepts are attained. As for the 'eight weighty rules': the World-Honoured One did not permit women to leave home and receive the precepts; at that time Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī shaved her own hair and stood leaning against the gate of the Jetavana. Ānanda interceded on her behalf, and the Buddha had Ānanda proclaim the weighty rules from afar: if she could practice them, she would attain full ordination. That is, the hundred-year homage, rebuking, formal instruction, repentance, invitation, and saṅgha assemblies. As for 'sending a messenger': a certain nun was beautiful, and due to danger from bandits, the Buddha permitted sending a messenger. When the nun's preliminary rules were completed, the messenger went into the assembly of monks, who conducted the rite for her. When the messenger returned to convey the saṅgha's command, this nun attained the precepts. It is also called twelve proclamations, because of the three motions and four proclamations. As for 'disputation': a seven-year-old novice debated with the Buddha, and the Buddha asked whether the five aggregates were identical or different, and so forth. Since his wisdom surpassed a twenty-year-old, the Buddha permitted him to receive ordination. The Kośa states: 'The Buddha asked: "Where is your home?" He answered: "In the three realms I have no home." Finding this agreeable to the holy mind, the Buddha ordered a formal ecclesiastical act to grant him full ordination.' 'Come, [bhikṣu]' is as explained before. Since 'come, [bhikṣu]' is included here, we know that the former was 'natural'. It differs from the other ordinations by relying on one's own power of wisdom, and is thus called 'natural'. Nor is it completely devoid of causes and conditions, as it takes the Buddha-Dharma as condition, and so forth. As for 'three refuges': after the Buddha crossed over the five people, the Three Jewels were complete. The Buddha conferred the three refuges, and also had the monks propagate the teaching everywhere and guide people to the Buddha's place. Later, due to loss of trust, the Buddha had the monks confer them locally everywhere. After six years had elapsed, the Buddha ceased the three refuges and instituted ordination by karman; hence there are distinctions such as ten in the central region versus five in border regions, sending a messenger, disputation, and so forth. Regarding karman: this translates as 'accomplishing the matter', and this term is widely used. The Vinaya division is not our principal school, so it is not elaborated extensively. Question: Now explaining the Mahāyāna gateway, why is it necessary to use the Hīnayāna regulations and explain the ten kinds of persons who receive the precepts? Answer: Just as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra everywhere supports the Vinaya, so it is here. The small serves as a provisional expedient. Therefore we know that for a renunciant bodhisattva, the six harmonies and ten benefits are identical to those of the śrāvaka, while the six perfections and four great vows differ from Hīnayāna practice. If a lay bodhisattva's three refuges and five precepts all tend toward bodhi, how much more so the Brahmā Net's eighty thousand dignified deportments, which support all seven assemblies and universally cover all five destinies! How could breaking the precepts be called the Buddha vehicle? Therefore, the four propositions of vehicle and precepts are set against each other to discriminate them.
4.4
From "inherent precepts" onward, there is an analysis of the presence or absence of the unmanifest in the three trainings. First, regarding the unmanifest of the precepts: because inherent precepts are not received [in a ritual], they lack the unmanifest. From "if one receives the precepts" onward, it explains that once received, the precepts possess the unmanifest; hence, upon the inherent offense there is added the violation of the unmanifest. In precepts such as leaving home, the unmanifest is separately engendered; therefore, keeping them brings merit equal to empty space, while breaking them depends directly on each single branch and each single object. Adducing keeping [them] encourages receiving [them]; adding offense blocks violating [them]. How much more so, when after an infraction the Dharma purifies and one returns to the original purity! Thus it is said: "Though the campaka flower withers, it still excels other flowers; monks who have broken the precepts still excel the non-Buddhists." From "as in felling grass" onward, the characteristics of the similarities and differences between proscriptive and inherent [precepts] are briefly brought forth. For instance, harming grass and beasts both involve the offense of violating a prohibition; performing the prāyaścittika repentance extinguishes both proscriptions, but regarding harming a beast, the inherent fault still remains. Hence the treatise is cited to explain that the compensation of life still persists. Question: If the inherent offense is not extinguished, why must one repent? Answer: Having escaped violating the prohibition, the mind of keeping [precepts] continues uninterrupted; even if in the fruit position one broadly compensates, it becomes a cause for benefiting beings—how could it be the same as violating [the prohibition] and plunging straight into the three destinies? "Compensation" means to return, to pay back. From "therefore the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya" onward, it cites evidence. Regarding "boundary offenses": this refers to the four inherent pārājikas, and when one who previously received the five, ten, or even the bhikṣu precepts commits murder, steals five [māṣas], engages in sexual misconduct in the proper orifices of males and females across the three destinies (or, for a layperson, with someone not one's own wife or in an improper orifice, and so forth), or falsely claims superhuman dharmas to a human being. Once these four have been committed, if one who had the five or ten had proceeded to full ordination, or as a bhikṣu renounced [the precepts], returning again creates an obstruction; they are people on the outer boundary of the Buddha-Dharma, hence called "boundary offenses." It is a grave prohibition where reception is in vain; therefore, the question is ordered to be posed. The phrase "such offenses" explains the intention of the boundary prohibitions. If one who previously had never received [precepts] is, after committing [them], still obstructed from the five and eight precepts, how much more so the complete precepts? How much more so one who received the five [precepts] and so forth and committed the four pārājikas? This accords with the Fangdeng tuoluoni jing and the Xukongzang pusa jing in explaining the meaning of boundary offenses. The Dazhidulun also explains that committing [offenses] among the five, eight, or ten gravely obstructs the complete precepts; therefore, the master of the Nanshan commentary relied upon it and adopted it. Although the Xiangbu school's treatment of the internal differs from this, Nanshan has textual authority to rely upon, and the Great Master Zhizhe adopted it according to the teachings. If monastics or laypeople who have committed [offenses] can repent, and further desire to advance and seek the pure precepts, it is fully stated in scriptures such as the Fangdeng zhancha jing. The upper fascicle of the Zhancha jing says: "In future eras, householders and renunciants who wish to seek pure precepts but, having committed grave offenses, cannot receive them, should practice the repentance ritual." This is fully in the sutra text. Therefore, one should know that the purity of the inherent precepts is the cause for all precepts. Formerly it was called "manifest and unmanifest"; the Satyasiddhi-śāstra calls it "instruction and non-instruction"; newly it is called "informative and uninformative." "Manifest" refers to doing; "instruction" refers to instructing; "informative" refers to expressing. The terms differ but the meaning is the same; there is no contradiction between them. Once the unmanifest arises, lacking causes for abandonment or loss, it continuously arises without interruption to the end of one's physical form. Just as when first receiving, after the formal proclamation has been made, even if one enters other mental states, one is still said to have obtained the precepts. Thus the Satyasiddhi-śāstra says: "If a person enters an unwholesome mind, an indeterminate mind, or a state of no-mind, they are still called one who keeps the precepts." The Vinaya commentary says: "The four minds and three natures are constantly present from beginning to end; the three natures plus no-mind make four (and so forth)." A broad analysis of the similarities, differences, and characteristics of the manifest and unmanifest cannot be exhausted here; it is fully detailed in the subcommentaries and commentaries.
4.5
From "the Hīnayāna" onward, it examines the three aggregates in terms of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, explaining the differences in the unmanifest. The Hīnayāna sutras and treatises collectively establish three aggregates: form, mind, and neither-form-nor-mind. As for "the mind is inexhaustible" and so forth, the intention is to explain that the nature of mind constitutes the precept-essence. If the Hīnayāna precept-essence belongs to the third aggregate, this provisionally follows the Sautrāntika. In the Sarvāstivāda school, they still use form as the unmanifest precept-essence. However, in the Mahāyāna, although the nature of mind is taken as the precept-essence, when the unmanifest arises, it also arises by relying upon the manifest precepts of body and speech; though relying upon body and speech, the essence is necessarily in the mind. If one begins with the small and later takes the great, everything transforms into the inexhaustible precept-essence. If one first receives the great and only later leaves home, wishing to be numbered among the great bhikṣus without losing the bodhisattva dharma, one then further receives the monastic rules. However, one only engenders purity of body and speech in all respects; the unmanifest precept-essence that guards against wrongdoing in the monastic rules does not arise again. Therefore, in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], the five groups and seven aggregates of offenses are all the monastic rules for renunciant bodhisattvas. Moreover, if one begins with the small and later takes the great, one opens the small rains-retreats to complete the great rains-retreats; if one first receives the great and later receives the monastic rules, when in the small one relies on the small, and when in the great one relies on the great. Although the principle is like this, regions differ: the monastic community in this land does not differentiate between small and great, but the Western regions are not like this—they remain permanently separated throughout. However, when the Four Reliances appear in the world, they must broadly propagate both small and great, but whether they are universally applied or restricted depends on the capacities of beings. The detailed analysis of the unmanifest of the path and concentration is found in the treatises (and so forth). From "therefore the sutra says" onward, it cites evidence that the path and concentration further take the monastic rules as their root.
4.6
Second, explaining the marks of maintaining [the precepts]: first phenomenally, and next in principle. In the first, phenomenal aspect, there are ten [precepts] in the text and seven meanings, the intention lying in authentic practice. As for the seven meanings, the first four are one each, and the latter six form three—namely, the three contemplations. Alternatively, there are two meanings, because the four and the six differ. The first four simply discuss phenomenal matters; the latter six rely on principle so that their meaning corresponds to phenomenal matters, the intention being to compare and decide so that one knows shallow and deep. First, explaining 'unbroken' (buque): this is maintaining the four major prohibitions (pārājikas). From 'If violated' downward, maintaining is shown by means of violation. As for 'losing the monk's Dharma,' having committed a major [violation], one is no longer fit for the Sangha's functions. The Great Sūtra says: 'A monk who commits a major [violation] can no longer sprout the seeds of good roots, like a felled tāla palm tree, and so forth.' As for 'unshattered' (bupo), impairment is called 'shattering'; it is still superior to 'broken,' and therefore one remains within the count of monks who can generate good. From 'If violated' downward, maintaining is shown by means of violation. As for 'unpierced' (buchuan), though not shattered or broken, it is as if pierced, which can easily be mended. From 'If there is' downward, maintaining is shown by means of violation. As for 'unmixed' (buzai), this is phenomenal concentration. One who has phenomenal concentration spontaneously maintains [the precepts]. From 'Though maintaining' downward, maintaining is shown by means of violation. Fascicle 29 of the Great Sūtra says: 'If there is a bodhisattva who, although not engaging in union with a woman, banters, jokes, and laughs with her, such a bodhisattva accomplishes the dharma of desire, shatters the pure precepts, defiles the brahma-conduct, and causes the precepts to become mixed and impure, and cannot be called endowed with pure precepts. Again, there is a bodhisattva who claims his precepts are pure, who, although not physically uniting with a woman or bantering with her, hears the tinkling of her bracelets outside the wall—this is called a bodhisattva accomplishing the dharma of desire, and up to cannot be called endowed with pure precepts. Furthermore, he claims his precepts are pure, and up to does not hear the tinkling of bracelets and so forth, yet if he sees a man following a woman or sees a woman following a man, such a bodhisattva up to cannot be called endowed with pure precepts. And up to: for the sake of heavenly pleasures, extensively explained as in the first phrase.' As in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, there are four limits in maintaining precepts: First, the limit of thieves, such as flattery to surpass others, wrong livelihood for fame and profit, etc. Second, the limit of transgression, fearing the three bad paths, etc. Third, the limit of merit, desiring heavenly pleasures, etc. Fourth, the limit of the Path, meaning for the sake of liberation. Except for liberation, maintaining precepts in the first three ways and limiting them to a certain number of days—at such times, places, components, and so forth—it is feared will not arouse the [unmanifest] precept. From 'Applying the middle path' downward is also called opening the provisional. Having attained the middle, one uses this middle wisdom to fuse all dharmas, so that a single cessation and a single action are nothing other than the dharma-dhātu; hence it is called the Great Vehicle's śikṣākaraṇīya. This is called 'training'; specifically it lies in the fifth [category], and generally it relates to all categories [of precepts]. Now they are all opened to become the Mahāyāna; therefore, the Great Sūtra and the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā both point to the categories of precepts, saying: 'Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas maintain these prohibitions; one should know that precepts have no great or small, but depend on the intention of the recipient.' Thus, when the middle path universally enters emptiness, provisionality, and phenomenal vinaya, only then can it be called complete maintenance of the precepts. As for 'the five limbs of the Nirvāṇa,' etc.: in its Holy Practice, it first explains the five limbs of one's own practice, and afterward lists the ten precepts of wishing for others. When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva maintains each limb, he vows that sentient beings shall attain the ten, including prohibitions. As for the five limbs: First, the precept of complete and pure bodily and verbal actions, which means the four major prohibitions. Second, the remaining pure precepts of the preceding and succeeding attendants: thullaccayas are the preceding attendants. This refers to causal thullaccayas, as they serve as preliminary expedients to major offences; the thirteen saṅghāvaśeṣas are listed after the major [offences] as succeeding attendants. What is called 'remaining' is as explained later. Third, the pure precept of awareness free from evil thoughts: this is the concentration-concomitant precept, which is unmixed. Fourth, the pure precept of mindfulness that protects right mindfulness: this is the path-concomitant precept of the four stations of mindfulness. Fifth, the precept of dedicating toward complete unsurpassable awakening: maintained by buddhas and bodhisattvas, not something ordinary people or followers of the Hinayana can maintain. The ten precepts for protecting others are: 1. prohibitions; 2. pure precepts; 3. good precepts; 4. unbroken precepts; 5. unsevered precepts; 6. Mahāyāna precepts; 7. non-retrogressing precepts; 8. compliant precepts; 9. ultimate precepts; 10. precepts complete with all pāramitās. Here also, the ten vows correspond to practice; therefore, the ten precepts of the Great Sūtra accord in meaning with the treatise, and the five limbs merely differ from the ten precepts for wishing for others in terms of expansion and contraction. Thus, one simply turns one's own practice into vows for others; therefore, the text of the Profound Meaning comprehensively correlates the treatise's ten with the sūtra's ten and the five limbs, fully as harmonised between similarities and differences in the Notes on the Profound Meaning. From 'Bundling the preceding' downward determines the stages. Since they were explained in terms of phenomena to delineate the single mind, these ten precepts are differentiated and correlated with the distinct stages of ordinary and noble, Great and Small. When it is said that an ordinary person entering concentration can maintain the unmixed precept, this is tentatively based on the Sarvāstivāda school; according to other schools, with other minds it can also be maintained by those in the stages of practice and dedication praised by the wise and acting with autonomy. Based on this discussion, the ten abodes maintain [precepts] according with the path and free from attachment, while the ten faiths only maintain the various vinaya precepts. When it says that [the precepts] according with concentration and fully complete are not what bodhisattvas of the six pāramitās or the shared teaching can maintain, this is a provisional distinction stating that this completeness can only be maintained by people of great capacities; persons of the distinctive teaching have a share in it, so they are not excluded. In terms of principle, it is also not something people in the practice and dedication stages of the distinctive teaching can maintain; only from the first bhūmi onward can it be maintained. From 'The preceding determination' downward discusses maintaining precepts in terms of contemplation of principle. First concluding what came before to introduce what follows; from 'First bundling' downward is the direct explanation. In this text there are ten [precepts] and two meanings, the intention being to convert phenomena so as to practice correct contemplation. As for the two meanings, they refer to the object and the contemplation. The four and the six are as in the preceding phenomenal section; here the three contemplations and the threefold-in-one are non-dual. Yet the preceding ten precepts were not devoid of contemplation of principle; the latter six were precisely that, but because they were split and correlated with stages, they belonged to phenomenal marks. Furthermore, the vinaya and the unmixed [precepts] were not yet fused in their respective shares; hence, the ten precepts are now further fully explained within a single thought-moment of the mind, neither confounding them with the supreme peak nor departing from the ordinary mind. The preceding four precepts serve collectively as the object of contemplation; contemplating them with the six [contemplations], phenomenon and principle are mutually identical. One should know that not a single category of the precepts may be deficient. When worldly people disdain phenomena and wish to esteem deep principle, this proves that their contemplation is isolated, hollow, and rootless; once the object of contemplation is deficient, contemplation has nowhere to proceed. Therefore, the present text still contemplates the single thought arising through conditioned origination as the cause of good and evil; thereby it can also shatter [attachments to] unbroken up to unmixed—how much more so if one merely contemplates the heavy bodily and verbal karmas and the light duṣkṛtas? It even contemplates this mind as identical to the dharma-nature—how could it merely contemplate the causes of good and evil? Therefore, the intention of the present text is different from others. Next, under 'Contemplating good and evil,' in 'Contemplating the precepts as identical to emptiness,' the Vajracchedikā is cited for explanation. From 'Therefore we know' downward briefly sets forth the sūtra's meaning. Although this is briefly set forth, it is not yet known what dharma and non-dharma are. From 'Now it says' downward explains dharma and non-dharma. That is, shattering views is called 'all being empty.' Why? Although the views of a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life span are shattered, regarding provisional non-existence and real existence, one still views them as existent; this is called 'dharma.' If one views them as non-existent, and up to views them as neither existent nor non-existent, these are all called 'non-dharma.' Generating views based on these is still called attachment; therefore, they must be relinquished. If one does not generate the four views, there are no sixty-two views; hence it says 'preventing the sixty-two views of existence and non-existence.' As for the sixteen views and knowledge in the Dapin, these four—self, person, etc.—are also subsumed within those sixteen views, and the sixteen are also fully subsumed by these four. Regarding these four views, Asanga's treatise says: 'Self has the meaning of conceiving within; person has the meaning of conceiving without; sentient being has the meaning of continuing the past; life span has the function of proceeding toward the future.' If according to the Dazhidulun's explanation of the sixteen views and knowledge, it says: 'Self means conceiving a self and what belongs to a self, as either identical to or separate from the aggregates, realms, and bases. Person means supposing within the aggregates, realms, and bases: "I am an agent; actions encompass good and evil, and there is none who is not an agent." Sentient being means conceiving the arising of a self within the conjunction of the aggregates, realms, and bases. Life span means conceiving a single lifespan's retribution, whether long or short, within the aggregates, realms, and bases.' This is largely identical with Asanga. Both treatises take the dharmas of aggregates, realms, and bases as what is grasped; the present text universally takes the four propositions of provisional and real as what is grasped, taking the ability to conceive existence and so forth as self and person; herein lies the slight difference. Thus, it is explained closely in terms of the precept according with the path, in order to accord with the sūtra's text refuting the self. Since the sūtra's intention is far-reaching, what is grasped is also general; how could dharma and non-dharma merely be provisional and real? However, the conceiver merely forms the sixty-two views and nothing more. If discussed generally, dharma means the Mahāyāna, and non-dharma means the Hīnayāna. Even to the Mahāyāna one should not be attached, how much less to the Hīnayāna? Moreover, dharma means Great and Small, and non-dharma means provisional and real. Again, dharma means the Mahāyāna is existent, and non-dharma means the Mahāyāna is non-existent, and up to neither existent nor non-existent; all such are called views of a self, a person, etc., and therefore still belong to the sixty-two. Thus it is said that generating attachment to the Great Vehicle still requires refutation by impermanence, illusory transformation, and so forth. Although the general meaning is like this, for now we follow the specific. In 'praised by the wise,' it says that one knows the mind to be non-mind and dharmas to be non-dharmas; this also accords with the immediate intention of the Prajñā: 'mind' refers to the mind of provisional designation that is able to conceive, and 'dharmas' refers to the real dharmas of the five aggregates that are conceived. And up to: if one conceives provisional and real, neither existent nor non-existent, all are shattered to enter emptiness; hence it says 'knowing mind to be non-mind, and dharmas to be non-dharmas.' Knowing that emptiness is not empty, hence it says 'and not lingering forever in non-mind and non-dharmas.' Emerging from emptiness into provisionality is still emerging into the provisionality of this mind and dharmas; hence it says 'establishing mind and establishing dharmas within the non-existent through the expedients of the path-species [wisdom].' Establishing the provisional and real mind and dharmas of the three realms is precisely entering the provisionality of craving and views. Once the provisional is established, one prescribes medicine according to the sickness, which is called 'uprooting.' If discussed in terms of one's own practice, 'uprooting' is as the Great Sūtra says: 'Vow to be a master of the mind, not to make the mind one's master. If you wish to attain non-retrogressing bodhi, you should make this vow.' Vimalakīrti says: 'The disciples' afflictions are turned according to one's will.' Transforming others is also like this; because of autonomy, it is wise and praised; therefore we know the two precepts are one substance without difference. 'According with such concentration' concludes the name 'according with concentration'; 'there is none not complete' concludes the name 'complete'; therefore we know the two names are also not vastly different. In the texts for each of the three contemplations and objects, there is first an explanation, followed by a conclusion in terms of calming and contemplation. From 'Therefore the Brahmā Net' downward cites evidence that maintaining precepts through the contemplation of principle is called calming and contemplation. Therefore, we should know that using the simultaneous mutual identity of the light of the ultimate truth and quiet illumination serves as the precept-essence of preventing [evil] and skillfully complying [with the good]. Filial compliance (xiao) means preserving (xu): the way of serving parents should always be preserved in the mind; because it is in the mind, one can comply with their facial expressions, hence it is called compliance (shun). Here it is also like this: contemplating the inconceivable principle, it is constantly illuminating the mind and skillfully compliant with principle; because of compliance, one contemplates the three truths; because of filiality, one stops the three delusions. Maintaining precepts like this is not even equivalent to maintaining precepts when emerging into provisionality in the distinctive teaching—how could it be mentioned in the same breath as the practice of filiality by the Son of Heaven or the common people? The Chengui says: 'Now, filiality must first pacify the state; when the state is pacified, the family is pacified; when the family is pacified, filiality can be practiced, etc.' Such things do not even reach human and heavenly [goodness], how much less the prevention [of evil] and skillful compliance in the Great and Small Vehicles? As for 'the root master and I both recite': reciting from memory without a text is called recitation. Vairocana and Śākyamuni, having realised the precept-essence, receive the teaching with principles transcended, preaching without preaching; hence it is called 'recitation.' As for 'extensively explained in the Daśabhūmika,' vibhāṣā is translated here as 'extensive explanation.' Attaining the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas is called 'free from self and what belongs to a self'; and being free from the ideation of obtaining anything among dharmas is called 'free from conceptual proliferation' (niṣprapañca). Designating such dharmas as the 'supreme śīla,' we know it also designates precepts in terms of principle. As for 'Vimalakīrti says,' etc., the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti cites: At that time, two monks suspected they had committed the two pārājikas of sexual misconduct and killing. These two monks lived together in an araṇya; one went elsewhere, and one slept in the open. A courtesan gathering firewood stealthily engaged in impurity [with him]; the companion monk returned, saw it, and pursued her; the woman fled, fell into a pit, and died. The sleeping one suspected he had committed sexual misconduct; the pursuing one suspected he had committed killing. Not daring to ask the Buddha, they went to speak to Upāli. Upāli explained according to the Vinaya: if they committed a root offence, he told them to train and repent; if they committed an expedient offence, he told them to repent a thullaccaya; if originally without mind, he told them no repentance was needed. The Great Being (Vimalakīrti) rebuked him, saying: 'I consider that śrāvakas should not preach the Dharma without examining people's capacities. These two monks aroused the great aspiration long ago; why instruct them with the small? The nature of that sin is neither inside, outside, nor in between; just as their mind is so, so is the defilement of sin.' This is the essential contemplation of the repentance of non-arising. Such a one is called 'skillfully understanding and upholding the Vinaya.' Now this is also called the supreme śīla. In the supreme śīla, there is neither maintaining nor violating. Violation is necessarily unarisen; how could unarising necessitate violation? Therefore, we should know that examining through the four propositions the nature of neither maintaining nor violating is called truly upholding the Vinaya; why must one examine violation alone to be called skillfully understanding?
First 6 of 41 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 止觀輔行傳弘決 — Classical Chinese