止觀輔行傳弘決 6
English (machine translation) 6
- Language
- English
6.1
Related by the Śramaṇa Zhanran of Piling under the Tang
6.2
Next, explaining the refutation of the provisionality of thought [delusion]: first, listing the names of the provisionality of thought. The text says: 'It is also called the primary three poisons.' Because there are four delusions of thought, and arrogance is subsumed under delusion, it only says three. First, they are not underlying defilements that run contrary [to views]; second, they are not residual habit energies; hence they are called 'primary'. From 'tracing through the three [realms]' downward, it gives the number of items. From 'nine stages of the three realms' downward, it gives the number of grades. The desire [realm has] four, and the upper two [realms have] three each; in the upper realms there is no hatred, so in the three realms there are only ten. The six heavens, the hells, and the different continents of the desire realm are alike in being distracted stages, so they make only one. The combination of places in the four dhyānas is broadly similar in meaning. The formless [realm] has no spatial locations; its four are based on births. As for 'nine grades': when severing delusions by means of wisdom, as wisdom becomes distinctly clear, delusions are gradually eliminated—how could there be only nine? In establishing teachings and determining fruits, they are provisionally summarized as nine. Just as in determining rebirth [in the Pure Land], based on the superior and inferior qualities of practice, how could there be only nine grades? It is likewise broadly stated to accommodate ordinary beings. 'They can all...', etc., clarifies the function of the delusions. In the unsevered stage, each and every one can provide the force to moisten birth; according to whichever fruit severs them completely, birth does not arise. 'For the first fruit, seven returns' distinguishes it from [the delusions of] views. Reaching at most to seven, it definitely does not reach eight, hence called 'seven returns'. It is not that all necessarily reach up to seven; thus the third fascicle of the Laṅkāvatāra says: 'The lowest reach seven; the middling, three to five; the superior enter parinirvāṇa in that very life.' The Tattvasiddhi-śāstra says: 'Within seven lifetimes, untainted wisdom matures; just as with the method of consuming ghee, after seven days the illness is dispelled; just as the kalala and so forth transform every seven days; just as the customs of kin are limited to seven generations; just as the seven-pace snake, due to the power of the four great elements, travels up to seven paces, but due to the power of the snake's venom does not reach eight paces. The force of delusion reaches up to seven; the force of the path is not eight.' The Vibhāṣā says: 'It should say fourteen; why does it say seven? Answer: The intermediate existence and the fundamental existence do not exceed the count of seven, so it only says seven. Furthermore, because of being born in seven places: humans and the six heavens. Furthermore, because of practicing seven paths and severing seven underlying defilements. The seven underlying defilements are: first, desire-attachment; second, hatred; third, existence-attachment; fourth, arrogance; fifth, ignorance; sixth, views; seventh, doubt. Furthermore, discussing births comprehensively, one should say seven human, seven heavenly, and fourteen intermediate existences, totaling twenty-eight births. Provisionally following the former explanation, since they do not exceed seven, it only says seven.' 'Like a lamp flaring up just as it goes out' is as previously cited from the Udānavarga in the section on the self-directed [samādhi]. 'Although there is still desire...', etc.: by the power of the path-concomitant precepts, one is naturally free from sexual misconduct; with regard to another's partner or one's own wife, one never violates at all, because even with one's own wife one is free from improper times, improper places, and so forth. Insects spontaneously remain four inches away from [their] blades. Having already severed the delusion of views and attained the wisdom of the emptiness of persons, although within worldly affairs isolated [defilements] or concurrent [defilements] arise, they comprehend that phenomena arise from conditions and do not grasp at an intrinsic reality; because there is no perversity with respect to the three poisons, they are called 'primary'; although they can moisten birth, they do not incur the four destinies. From 'Unlike...' downward, it distinguishes them from the delusion of views. Views are an adhering mind, producing attachments in accordance with objects, because they can create the causes for the four destinies. Therefore, when the primary three poisons exist in the bodies of sages who are fully bound [by thought delusions], not only do they not act as causes for the four destinies, but in their arising there is also separation and combination, grasping and discarding; thus they are not like views, which give rise to attachment in an unrestrained overflow. From 'Termed thought...', downward, explains the name. Because this delusion can only be severed through repeated contemplation and thought, it is called 'thought'. From 'The Abhidharma masters...', downward, clarifies the agreements and differences between the two schools. In the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra's critique of the Abhidharma masters: first, it presents parallel challenges opposing upper-realm lust (tan) and lower-realm attachment (ai). Next, from 'If one says...', downward, it challenges on the grounds of different names sharing the same meaning, [arguing that] one should not distinguish lust and attachment based on lightness and heaviness. The phrase 'one parallel challenge' means that according to that treatise master, one should further present an objection based on hatred. Since the upper realms take light lust and name it attachment, why not take light hatred in the upper realms and name it resentment, rather than saying that resentment does not operate in the upper realms? Thus in their Abhidharma, in the 'Chapter on Mental Underlying Defilements', they also list seven underlying defilements, as listed before, only changing the first to be named 'lust'. These seven underlying defilements, when differentiated by realm and practice, number ninety-eight. The two underlying defilements of lust and hatred, when differentiated by realm and category, have five underlying defilements each, meaning that the five categories of the desire realm each have one (lust does not extend to the upper realms). Attachment, when differentiated by realm and category, has ten, meaning that the five categories of the upper two realms have five each (attachment does not extend to the lower realm). Arrogance and ignorance, when differentiated by realm and category, each have fifteen, meaning that each of the five categories in the three realms has one. There are five categories of the underlying defilement of views, namely the five sharp [views]. Differentiated by the four truths, there are twelve in total: under suffering there are all five, under accumulation and cessation there is one each, and under the path there are three, totaling twelve, and thirty-six for the three realms combined. Doubt has one under each of the four truths, making twelve in the three realms. All together they make ninety-eight. Because they explain that lust and attachment do not interpenetrate above and below, they provoked the treatise master's two parallel objections. From 'However, the Buddha at times...', downward, harmonizes them. From 'It is merely to make...', downward, explains the intention behind establishing the names. It is to make one recognize the object; why labor over bitter disputation? Adducing similes to show the root treatise and concluding with the original intention are both as found in the text.
6.3
Second, explaining the contemplation of the essential identity: because emptiness comprises both analysis and essential identity, they must be marked and listed. Refuting views was also like this, because it is the beginning of the Mahāyāna gateway. Now, further explaining the use of wisdom in the analytical gateway: this clarifies that their beginning and end are both analytical; it is brought in to distinguish the difference, not as the primary application. In directly explaining the method of contemplation, first it marks it. From 'Delusions of desire...', downward, provisionally gives a general heading showing that each grade has three provisionalities. First, explaining causal composition: it cites the six female desires as external conditions; taking the mind as the internal cause, the thought of desire that arises is called the produced phenomenon. As for the objects of the six desires, the Dazhidulun, in fascicle twenty-one explaining the nine contemplations of decay, states: 'These nine types can cure a practitioner's seven types of tainted desires: 1. Some people are attached to color, namely blue, yellow, red, or white. 2. Some people, even if not attached to color, are only attached to bodily form: fine skin, slender fingers, long eyes, and high brows. 3. Some people are not attached to bodily form, but are attached to deportment: advancing, halting, sitting, rising, walking, staying, bowing, lowering and raising the head, bending and extending, raising the eyebrows, glancing, approaching, and massaging; "charm and posture" refers to a beautiful countenance and graceful movement. 4. Some people are not attached to deportment, but are only attached to speech: soft, pleasant, eloquent, quick-witted, speaking appropriately to the moment, accommodating the mind and complying with the intention, capable of moving people's hearts. 5. Some people are not attached to any of these, but are only attached to smoothness: delicate skin, soft flesh, cool to the touch in hot times, warm to the touch in cold times. 6. Some people are not attached to any of the above, but are only attached to human features, whether male or female. 7. If someone, though free from attachment to the above six, still lacks understanding, they abandon the five sensual pleasures prized by the world and follow them to their death.' Here, the seventh—attachment to human desire—already subsumes the six in seeking the person to be attached to; now, setting aside the general and retaining the specific, it only mentions six. Using the nine [contemplations] to cure the seven is fully explained in the Chanmen. 'These six, down to the appearance of lust manifesting externally', is precisely those six acting against the internal mental faculty to form the produced phenomenon. Citing the case of the first fruit and the case of those beyond study is as in the text. 'Nanda's habit energy of desire' is as cited previously. 'The Lotus Sutra's thoughts of desire...', etc.: this is in order to deeply guard against the faults of desire. If thoughts do not even arise, how much less bodily intercourse? As for the marks of desire, the Kośa says: 'The six heavens experience desire through intercourse, embracing, holding hands, laughing, gazing, and lustful acts. Earth-dwellers engage in bodily intercourse; the Trāyastriṃśa heavens use wind for the deed; the Yāma gods embrace; the Tuṣita gods hold hands; the Nirmāṇarati gods gaze and smile; the Paranirmitavaśavartin gods merely gaze. Even thoughts do not arise, how much less gazing and smiling?' Furthermore, the Vibhāṣā distinguishes the lightness and heaviness of human desire across the four continents: In this continent it is the most frequent, no longer countable; in the eastern continent it reaches at most twelve times, middling or lower being perhaps ten; in the western continent it reaches up to seven or eight times, the fewest being four or five; in the northern continent it reaches at most five, the fewest being three or four. There are also those who cultivate pure conduct (brahmacarya), so those with excessive desire are inferior to animals; this continent also has people of few desires, up to and including pure conduct. Thus there are many or few, coarse or subtle, thoughts and marks. From 'If grasping...', downward, directly explains causal composition. Grasping the former six marks to internally stir the mental faculty is precisely what is produced. In [the section on] continuity, the phrase 'leading to the enactment of the deed' is said for the purpose of guarding against the enactment of the deed by restraining internal continuity, not that continuity already possesses the enacted deed. From 'Provisional and unreal...', downward, comprehensively knows it to be untrue. The word 'principles' means: when generating a mind toward an object, one already knows it to be provisional and unreal; how could one further imagine that through formal courtship and marriage one can return essence to prolong life, or that twice a month communicating with the spirits nourishes life? Even non-Buddhists of the West, seeking the absorptions of neither-conception nor non-conception and non-thought, eliminate all sensual desire of the lower realm; how much less would one grasp at such a doctrine as the correct path?
6.4
Next, directly cultivating the contemplation to investigate: in causal composition, it also first uses the four propositions as a model. From 'If from...', downward, one applies the contemplation to investigate. From 'Four propositions...', downward, severing delusions and realizing truth is concluded as the two emptinesses. 'Free from desire' is the emptiness of nature; 'free from the propositions' is the emptiness of marks. From 'Sharp faculties...', downward, concludes the difference between the two practices of sharp and dull faculties. The two practices of sharp faculties are as explained above in refuting views. A person of superior faculties, having refuted the view of existence, immediately enters truth; if not yet in resonance, they must also use the sixty-four variations. From 'Supposing one has not yet...', downward, clarifies the sixty-four variations. From 'If dull...', downward, marks continuity to show the method of contemplation, modeled on the explanation of causal composition. Next, in the two emptinesses, it says: 'the four propositions are free from desire' is the emptiness of nature; 'also free from the four' is the emptiness of marks. Previously, in refuting views, each of the three provisionalities was concluded with the two emptinesses; here, after each and every provisionality, non-arising and the two emptinesses are likewise concluded—the wording differs, but the meaning is the same. From 'The first grade...', downward, clarifies that the remaining grades also have three provisionalities, modeled on the explanation of the first grade. From 'Refuting lust...', downward, the remaining underlying defilements are also modeled in the same way. From 'The nine grades...', downward, concludes the universal refutation of non-arising.
6.5
From "Question" onward is the critical analysis. The initial question is as in the text. In the answer, he explains how two treatises determine the grades [of defilement]. Because the paths employed differ, the grades are not the same; hence the *Abhidharma* in its account of the treatise's origin states: "Question: Why is it named *Abhidharma*? Answer: It refers to distinguishing what has not yet been distinguished. It is the path of expedients, the path of superior progress, the unobstructed path, and the path of liberation." Below, in the text of the various khandhas, it merely says: "Two paths subdue, and two paths sever." From "If from..." onward, he differentiates the differences between the two paths. Next, in refuting emotional attachments in the form realm, he first clarifies the difference in the wisdom employed. As for "worldly wisdom," it relies on the six practices of disgust and attraction in worldly dhyāna. Relying on the uncontaminated principle is called "uncontaminated wisdom." A person of double liberation attains both wisdoms; when severing defilements, they use either wisdom as they wish. From "If one initially practices..." onward, he differentiates the two obstacles of phenomenal [manifestation] and nature. For instance, when wishing to enter the first dhyāna, if one still sees phenomenal matters such as the bedding and furnishings of the desire realm's concentration, this is called an obstacle of phenomenal manifestation. If the emotional attachments of desire have not yet been eliminated, the obstacle of nature still remains; when this defilement is broken, the first dhyāna then arises. The second dhyāna is also like this: if applied and sustained thought have not yet been eliminated, the intermediate concentration does not arise; only when the defilements of the first dhyāna are broken does the second dhyāna arise. The obstacles of the third and fourth dhyānas can be understood by analogy with this explanation. In the first dhyāna, the opening passage is the manifestation of the first dhyāna. Next, from "Within it..." onward, he explains the characteristics of defilements in the first dhyāna. Next, from "Grade by grade..." onward, he explains the characteristics of the three provisionalities in the first dhyāna. From "If not..." onward, he explains the intention of refutation. From "Now using..." onward, he also explains the sixty-four rounds. Next, from "the second dhyāna" onward, where he explains causal formation, in all cases the concentration substance of the lower stage is taken as the cause; serial continuation and relativity are explained by analogy with the first dhyāna. In the third dhyāna, where it states: "This bliss is even [...] difficult," when noble persons and disciples of the Buddha cultivate this dhyāna, at each stage they possess the contemplation of the lineage of the noble ones, so relinquishing it is easy; ordinary worldlings generate craving for the various stages, so relinquishing it is difficult. From the concentration without thought up to the realm of dhyāna, where the five anāgāmins are briefly explained: if designated by stage, it is simply named the fourth dhyāna. This dhyāna has nine places: five are the abodes of noble ones, called the pure-dwelling heavens; the [heaven of] no-thought is solely for ordinary worldlings; three are open to both ordinary worldlings and noble ones. As for being born in the five [pure abodes], this is because there are five gradations in cultivating the perfumed dhyānas. In the *Dapin*, the nine concentrations broadly perfume the nine stages, but here they only perfume the stage of the fourth dhyāna. Having first cultivated and attained it, one further causes multiple moments of uncontaminated [mind] to arise continuously; from this, multiple moments of contaminated [mind] are induced; from this, multiple moments of uncontaminated [mind] arise again; in this way, subsequent moments gradually decrease, until finally there are two moments of uncontaminated [mind], then next two moments of contaminated [mind] are induced, and uninterruptedly two moments of uncontaminated [mind] arise again—this is called the completion of the perfuming preparatory application. Next, there is only one moment of uncontaminated [mind], next only one moment of contaminated [mind], and uninterruptedly one moment of uncontaminated [mind] arises again—this is called the completion of the fundamental state. Thus the *Kośa* states: "Completion is due to the intermingling of single moments." As for the "five gradations," they are inferior, medium, superior, superior-eminent, and superior-extreme. One grade has three [moments]; later grades incorporate the earlier ones, so the fifth grade combines into fifteen. In this way, the five grades, in proper sequence—three, six, nine, and so forth—result in birth in the five pure abodes. As for "sandwiched perfuming," it means uncontaminated [minds] before and after, with contaminated [mind] in between, causing the multiple moments of contamination and so forth all to become a single moment of uncontaminated [mind]; therefore it is called sandwiched perfuming. As for the "five heavens," they are the Heaven of No Affliction, No Heat, Good Appearance, Good Vision, and the Ultimate of Form. From here upward, all are without affliction and turmoil. At the start of being without affliction, it receives the name No Affliction. Because it subdues defilements, it is called No Heat. Because the fruit is easily manifested, it is called Good Appearance. Because vision is clear and penetrating, it is called Good Vision. Being supreme among forms, it is called the Ultimate of Form. The three lower dhyānas each also have three heavens; according to the Sarvāstivāda school, there are only sixteen places. In the first dhyāna, the exalted and superior place is called the Great Brahmā King, so it is not separately established. Next, in refuting the formless realm, where it says "the three kinds of form, such as resistant form," when one wishes to enter the station of boundless space from the fourth dhyāna, one must certainly employ expedients to extinguish the three kinds of form. The *Dazhidulun*, fascicles 21 and 41, states: "The three kinds of form are: 1. visible and resistant; 2. invisible and resistant; 3. invisible and non-resistant." The *Dapin* states: "In order to transcend all marks of form, one extinguishes marks of resistant form. Not conceptualizing manifold marks, one enters the station of boundless space. Transcending all form, one extinguishes visible and resistant form, extinguishes resistant form, and extinguishes invisible and resistant form. Not conceptualizing manifold marks of form, one extinguishes invisible and non-resistant form." All material phenomena are of only eleven kinds: the five sense faculties, sense objects, and a fraction of the mental datum base. That fraction is non-indicative form. The *Abhidharma* states: "1. Visible refers to color-and-shape. 2. Resistant has ten kinds, namely the five sense faculties and the [five] sense objects. If one speaks of invisible and resistant, one should only speak of the five faculties and four sense objects. 3. Invisible and non-resistant refers to a fraction of the mental datum base." Fascicle 21 of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* states: "The destruction of visible form by the eye is called transcending form. The destruction of the five faculties and sense objects is called transcending the resistant. The destruction of what remains of the two kinds and of non-informative form is called transcending differentiated marks. These three forms are all in the form realm. Wishing to enter the formless realm, one therefore extinguishes these three." Here, one should also mention the eight forms and so on within the liberations, bases of mastery, and totality bases. Although non-indicative form is not what is transcended by the contemplation of emptiness in the present text, when one attains the contemplation of emptiness, one will definitely be separated from indicative and non-indicative form. Furthermore, among visible and resistant forms, one should also explain the meaning of the three kinds of resistance; but since this is not the primary intention at present, it is not discussed. The expedients for extinguishing form are detailed in the *Chanmen*: one first visualizes this body as like an earthen steamer, a cage, or a net, until it gradually becomes empty. Fascicle 19 of the *Dazhidulun* states: "Like a bird in a jar: when the jar breaks, it escapes." Question: In the formless realm, is there definitively form, or is it definitively formless? This is fully detailed in the *Xiqian*. Furthermore, I once heard that there was a monk who attained the formless concentration; rising from concentration, he grasped at empty space. Another asked: "What are you seeking?" He replied: "I am looking for my body." A bystander said to him: "Your body is on the bed." When attaining concentration here, he still did not see his body; thus, being born in that realm, according to Hīnayāna concentrations it is determined to be formless. In the Mahāyāna, as it says in the debate in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*: "The form of the formless realm is not something known by the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas." For now, we rely on the Hīnayāna. From "At that time..." onward, one correctly cultivates contemplation to enter the station of boundless space and the station of boundless consciousness. Next, in the station of nothingness, he first refutes an old error, as in the *Chanmen*: "Question: Does that station of nothingness take a slight amount of consciousness and take it as an object to enter concentration? What about this? Answer: It is not so. One should say that at all times one solely takes the station of nothingness as an object. When it is said that there is a slight amount of consciousness, it is merely that the mental faculty confronts the mental datum of nothingness and generates a thought of a slight consciousness; it does not take a slight consciousness as an object to enter concentration." Because of this, the present text proceeds to refute possessing anything, being of use, and so on. From "Prior station of consciousness..." onward, he next explains that the station of neither-perception-nor-non-perception relies on the eight noble lineages. Here the text is abridged; it should say that the station of boundless space is like a sickness, the stations of boundless consciousness and nothingness are as in the text, and the station of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is like a thorn. The reason it is not stated now is that it provisionally relies on the contaminated state. Regarding this as ultimate, it is called a "superior concentration." In general, relying on contemplation of the noble lineages, one employs the four such as sickness and the four such as impermanence; the first four are antidotes, and the latter four take the truths as objects. Therefore, using these eight to take the formless realm as object, there are general and specific aspects. In general, one uses all eight contemplations to contemplate the four aggregates of that realm as a combination lacking real essence. Specifically, the first four remedy the phenomenal aspects of the four aggregates: feeling is like a sickness, perception is like a boil, formations are like an ulcer, and consciousness is like a thorn. One remedies the principle of the four aggregates with impermanence and so forth: impermanence contemplates consciousness, suffering contemplates feeling, emptiness contemplates perception, and non-self contemplates formations. Possessing these eight, the mind easily generates disgust, is quickly able to relinquish them, and cultivates the uncontaminated state. Question: The four dhyānas merely use the three—suffering, coarseness, and hindrance—as expedients; why must the four stations, such as boundless space, use eight? Answer: The concentration of the station of boundless space is subtle; if the eight faults are not spoken of, the faults are difficult to recognize. Ordinary worldlings also exist who rely on the six practices, but they do not match the noble lineages in relinquishing them swiftly. From "Abhidharma..." onward, he explains the name "neither-perception." He cites the text in an abridged manner. The *Lishi* states: "It is not like the four forms and the three formless states, hence it is called 'neither-perception'; it is not the heaven of no-thought and the concentration of non-mentation, hence it is called 'nor-non-perception'." The text cites the *Vibhāṣā*, yet still does not fully speak of the four dhyānas. Master commentators do not even permit citing the heaven of no-thought of the form realm, much less citing the four dhyānas in general. Since it is the text of a treatise, adopting it is not in error; the commentators' explanation of the meaning is also not entirely wrong. Our school preserves both, so there is no refutation; viewing the preceding three formless states as progressively relinquishing faults serves to explain the name. Thus we know that explaining "neither-perception" based on the same realm is not without its meaning; this is the intention behind not refuting the commentators. Where it says "the *Dazhidulun* says that it is always contaminated," in Hīnayāna sūtras and treatises the single stage of neither-perception is entirely contaminated alone. Thus the *Vibhāṣā* states: "What is the meaning of contamination (āsrava)? Answer: Abiding is the meaning of contamination, because ordinary worldlings reaching here are detained and abide. Soaking is the meaning of contamination, because reaching the summit of the three realms of existence, they are constantly soaked. Flowing out is the meaning of contamination, because when nearing the end of the three realms of existence, they flow back down again. The meanings of holding, intoxication, remaining internal, and negligence are all meanings of contamination." Interpreting in accordance with the first meaning, the summit of existence exclusively receives the name "contamination." The treatise states: "Why is it that neither-perception and the desire realm lack the uncontaminated state? Answer: It is not because they are suitable vessels; uncontaminated phenomena abide in the middle way. Furthermore, the stage of desire is unfixed, while neither-perception is dull and ignorant; the noble Dharma is contrary to these, so both places lack it." According to the *Dazhidulun* and the *Tattvasiddhi*, neither-perception equally lacks it, whereas the desire realm possesses it. From "This concentration..." onward, he explains that neither-perception is endowed with defilements. "Subtle phenomena" refers to the fact that this stage still has four aggregates, two bases, and three realms. The "ten kinds" mentioned are feeling up to wisdom: feeling means what consciousness feels, perception means what consciousness perceives, formations mean dharma-formations, contact means mental contact, volition means dharma-volition, desire means the desire to enter concentration, resolve means superior resolve in dharmas, mindfulness means mindfulness of samādhi, concentration means the mind abiding in accord with dharma, and the faculty of wisdom and power of wisdom. These ten dharmas, along with attachment to the formless, ignorance, restlessness, conceit, and the various formations not associated with mind, come together through the causes and conditions of suffering and its origin to enable birth there; wishing to enter the concentration of cessation, one must first extinguish these. From "One should know..." onward, he explains the intention of applying contemplation. Since one knows that this stage is endowed with subtle afflictions, it possesses the three provisionalities; one employs contemplation to refute them and cause entry into non-arising. Because afflictions are exhausted, it is called phenomenal non-arising; because the principle of the truth of the real is plumbed, it is called principle non-arising. Therefore, one does not abide in the contaminated state due to the stage. From "If one uses..." onward, he next distinguishes the different names received by the two wisdoms. From "This is called..." onward, he concludes the universality. This is the universal refutation of the provisionality of emotional attachment.
6.6
Part three, explaining the stages of refuting provisionality, begins by explaining the stages of the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. First, setting forth the different schools: other than the Chengshi lun, they all belong to different schools; the various Abhidharma works all explain that the path of vision lies in the fifteen minds. Next, in the direct explanation, he first explains the śrāvaka. Regarding "taking the path of cultivation until exhausted," etc.: if explaining the "clan-to-clan" (kulaṃkula), one must first differentiate how the nine grades of desire[-realm] defilements can moisten seven births, and how much is severed corresponding to the height of the fruits. That is, the highest-highest can moisten two births; the highest-middle, highest-lowest, and middle-highest each moisten one birth; the middle-middle and middle-lowest together moisten one birth; and the lowest three grades together moisten one birth. Regarding how much is severed, the Kośa says: "Severing three or four grades of desire, one is a three-birth or two-birth kulaṃkula; severing up to five, one is an aspirant to the second [fruit]; severing six, one attains the once-returner fruit." Explanation: If one severs the upper three grades, one eliminates four births; with three births remaining moistened by the [other] six grades, one is called a three-birth kulaṃkula. Advancing to sever the middle-highest, one eliminates another birth, making five eliminated in total; with two births remaining, one is called a two-birth kulaṃkula. Severing further the middle-middle, one has not yet eliminated an entire birth, so one is merely called an aspirant to the second [fruit]. Severing further the middle-lowest, together with the preceding middle-middle, this makes six births eliminated; the remaining lower three grades moisten only one birth, so one is called a once-returner. Question: For what reason is there no one who severs one grade, two grades, or five grades called a kulaṃkula? Answer: It is impossible that someone who has severed two grades passes away without reaching the third, nor does someone who has severed five grades pass away without reaching the severance of the sixth. This is because when a noble one generates great application, it is impossible that they pass away without exhausting the severance of a major grade of defilement. A "major grade" means three grades. Dividing three yields nine; hence three is called "major." If one severs up to two, one must reach three, which is the severance of the first major grade. If one severs up to five, one must reach six, which is the second major grade. Furthermore, no single grade can obstruct the fruit; therefore, severing five must reach six. This doctrine of sequential severance is the same as the present text. Question: If no one passes away without severing a major grade, why does someone who severs eight pass away without reaching nine? Answer: Severing the ninth has two meanings, and therefore differs from [the other] three grades: first, attaining the fruit; second, transcending the realm. Because the ninth single grade has the power to obstruct the fruit and to transcend the realm, one who severs up to eight may pass away. The sixth only attains the fruit and lacks the meaning of transcending the realm; therefore, severing five must reach six. Between the second and third grades, neither of the two meanings exists at all; severing two must reach three, without doubt in principle. In the present text, the words "transcending severance" refer to the person of "minor transcendence" below. Originally in the stage of an ordinary person, having not yet attained the form[-realm] dhyāna, or practicing desire-realm dhyāna without having severed desire[-realm] defilements, this person reaches the sixteenth mind and leaps over to sever five grades, being called a kulaṃkula, because these five grades are treated the same as four grades. In accordance with the quantity of grades originally severed, one receives names such as kulaṃkula, "one seed" (ekabīcika), and aspirant or fruit of the non-learner. However, what the Great Master uses is entirely based on the old Vibhāṣā; if one wishes to know it, inspect that text further. Furthermore, with kulaṃkulas, there are two distinct types: human and deva. "Deva" refers to the desire devas; being born in two or three clans, one realizes perfect extinction. "Human" refers to the human realm; being born in three or two clans or three or two continents, one realizes perfect extinction. If a deva [kulaṃkula] has three [births], they are born as a deva three times and as a human twice; if a deva has two [births], they are born as a deva twice and as a human once. For human [kulaṃkulas] born three or two [times], it may be understood in reverse. Therefore, a deva kulaṃkula first attains the path of vision among humans, and whether leaping or sequentially, advances to sever three or four [grades], and subsequently is born in three or two places among the devas. Among humans, it is the reverse of this. A deva kulaṃkula, in their final birth among the devas, severs the remaining fetters, which is called attaining perfect extinction. Human kulaṃkulas are explained corresponding to this. Regarding "the six kinds of anāgāmin stages are included therein": the Dazhidulun, scroll thirty-three, states: "The five anāgāmins are: the intermediate, birth, with practice, without practice, and upstream. There are also six kinds: the five as above, plus the present [life]. There are also seven kinds: the six as above, plus the formless." The Kośa does not establish parinirvāṇa in the present [life], but only takes parinirvāṇa in the formless together with the five to make six. The verse says: / "Here, attaining parinirvāṇa in the intermediate, upon birth, with practice, / without practice, and the upstream: if mixed in cultivation, / one is able to go to the ultimate of form. / Transcending fully, transcending half, or dying in all [realms], / the rest can go to the peak of existence. / Those who traverse the formless are four; / abiding here, they enter parinirvāṇa." / Explanation: The non-returners are five. First, the intermediate: dying in the desire realm, one enters parinirvāṇa in the intermediate existence (antarābhava) of the form realm. Second, parinirvāṇa upon birth: having been born into the form realm, one enters parinirvāṇa. Third, with practice: having been born into the form realm, one enters parinirvāṇa only after long practice; there is only diligent cultivation and no path of rapid advance. Fourth, without practice: having been born into the form realm, without undergoing long practice, one enters parinirvāṇa through effortless practice; both the paths of diligent cultivation and rapid advance are absent. Fifth, the upstream: within the form realm, one must sequentially pass through the places of the four dhyāna heavens before entering parinirvāṇa. The upstream is again twofold: first, mixed cultivation, namely those who delight in wisdom; second, unmixed cultivation, namely those who delight in concentration. Those with mixed cultivation go to the ultimate of form (Akaniṣṭha); those without mixed cultivation go to the peak of existence (bhavāgra). In the verse, the word "rest" refers to unmixed cultivation. Furthermore, there are three kinds: first, the full transcender: in the desire realm, having completely mixed cultivation in the four dhyānas, encountering conditions causes him to regress; dying from the Retinue of Brahmā, he is born in the ultimate of form, leaping over all the intermediate heavens, and is therefore called a full transcender. Second, the half transcender: having died from the Retinue of Brahmā, he sequentially receives birth in the fourteen intermediate heavenly places, or leaps over one, two, or up to thirteen, and only then is born into the heaven of the ultimate of form; all these are called half transcenders. Because they are not full transcenders, they all receive the name "half." Those who are completely unable to transcend are said to "die in all [realms]." Those without mixed cultivation are born into the formless realm, and are only unable to be born into the five pure abodes. Dying from Great Fruit (Bṛhatphala), they are born into the three formless [heavens], and subsequently born into the peak of existence, whereupon they enter parinirvāṇa. Therefore, even if this anāgāmin is born into the formless, he still belongs to what is subsumed under form. If, dying in the desire realm, one is born into a formless heaven, one is subsumed under the formless. Furthermore, there are nine kinds, because the intermediate, birth, and upstream each have three kinds, as quoted in the Shiqian. Among these six or nine, before entering parinirvāṇa, they may also be subsumed under aspirants to arhatship, because when in the form realm, they may possess diligent cultivation or rapid advance. Regarding "the ninth unhindered," etc.: from severing the nine defilements, there is each one unhindered [path] and one liberation [path]; severing is called "unhindered," and realizing is called "liberation." In the Abhidharma, two are added as before. From "three realms" down, it concludes with realizing non-arising. Regarding "exhaustion and non-arising": the Abhidharma states: "The knowledge of exhaustion means: I know suffering, up to knowing the path. The knowledge of non-arising means saying: Having known suffering, I will not know it again, up to: having cultivated the path, I will not cultivate it again. It also says: My outflows have been exhausted and will not arise again. It also says: Severance through worldly knowledge and uncontaminated knowledge. It also says: Liberated by wisdom and doubly liberated." The names of the two knowledges are derived from these. Their differentiated characteristics, etc., are extensive as in the various treatises.
6.7
Next, in explaining the stages of the shared [teaching], the sutra is first cited to set out the correct determination. Regarding the phrase "shared with the śrāvakas" and so forth: in the shared teaching, the [practitioners of the] two vehicles and [bodhisattvas] prior to the seventh stage are shared with bodhisattvas, which is termed "shared with the śrāvakas." If so, then since the eighth stage and above surpass the stages of the two vehicles, why are they also termed "shared with bodhisattvas"? The answer is: the later [stages] are named from the initial [ones], establishing the designation from the root. This is not like the distinctive and perfect [teachings], which are distinct from beginning to end. Although there are the two vehicles within the Tripiṭaka teaching, the bodhisattva's practice is far-reaching, subduing defilements from beginning to end, eternally distinct from the two vehicles; hence they are not termed "shared." Yet as they do not hear the distinctive principle, they are also not unshared. Question: Thought [defilements] are exhausted at the seventh stage; why is the sixth stage termed "shared with the śrāvakas"? The eighth is named the pratyekabuddha stage; why is the seventh stage termed "shared with the pratyekabuddhas"? Answer: The shared stages are flexible and accommodating, fully as discriminated below. From "Regarding what is said" downward, this is a brief explanation. The main point here is: in the stages shared by the three vehicles, why do the various teachings determine higher and lower distinctions in the stages of severing defilements? Why are the three vehicles' order of severing defilements, their wisdom, and their practices different? And though different, how do they traverse the shared stages? It is because of this that they obtain the designation "shared." From "Dry Wisdom" downward is the correct explanation. First, within the explanation of the śrāvakas, the five methods of stilling the mind and four stations of mindfulness are briefly as cited in the text of the Profound Meaning and the Expository Notes. Both, looking toward the Tripiṭaka, establish the internal and external ordinary stages. If we discuss the contemplation practice, though skillful and unskillful differ, what is to prevent the general and specific characteristics from being slightly the same? Because the water of principle is not yet present, it is called "dry"; because there is a slight understanding of principle, it is called "nature." "Patience" means cause. "Seeing" refers to seeing the truths. The defilements of desire are somewhat lightened, hence called "thin." The defilements of desire are completely eliminated, hence called "free." The work of wisdom and severing is finished, hence called "accomplished." Under "third, using the distinctive designations to name the shared stages": first, the old traditions of setting up prefaces are refuted, which explained that the stages of severing views and thought were all different. From "Now, examining..." downward, their view that the stages of severing views are disparate is first generally refuted, [showing that] they simply did not understand the meaning of the shared teaching. From "Why?" downward, they are specifically rebuked. In the shared stages, the severing of views differs across two stages; furthermore, the severing of views should not entail entering and emerging from meditative contemplation. From "Human masters..." downward: human masters, failing to understand, shifted the blame onto the sutras; hence they are now broken down by saying that they do not understand the intention of the sutras. From "Now we say..." downward, this is briefly indicated. From "Distinctive views..." downward, this is briefly explained. From "However, the designations..." downward, this is a determination. From "By analogy..." downward, an analogy is adduced. These sixteen minds belong to the same single stage, yet two paths are still determined for them; what is to prevent the severing of views from differing across two stages? Question: In the shared teaching itself, the stages of severing views are intrinsically divided into two stages; why must one refute others, establish the borrowing of the distinctive on one's own, and establish that the stages of severing views are still the same as the shared teaching? Answer: Merely because they are the same as the shared [teaching], they can be named "shared." Although the shared spans two stages, the time of severing is still brief. Because they are shared by the three vehicles, though brief, it is also long; therefore, it must be divided into the third and fourth stages. Or at times, borrowing from the distinctive, the distinctive views are even longer, yet there are two meanings: if spoken of in terms of principle, it extends up to the Buddha stage; if spoken of in terms of the pedagogical path, it refers to the third and fourth stages. Although the two meanings are each distinct, their senses of "view" are both long. Because the distinctive is long, borrowing the pedagogical path to determine the severing of views in two stages has no error. If one relies on the shared meaning, it says one does not emerge from meditative contemplation; if one relies on the distinctive meaning, it simply says stage by stage can each break views. This is the difference. Because the distinctive is long, the latter two turns both generally use the four stages as stages of severing views. Many people fail to see this, thinking the shared meaning is sufficient, and asking why one must borrow the distinctive. This is the Great Master's comprehensive elucidation of the sutras and treatises. Those with this determination belong to "using the distinctive designations to name the shared stages." Why? If it definitely belonged to the shared, one should not establish stages of subduing prior to the stages; if it definitely belonged to the distinctive, the practices and dedications should not belong to the four wholesome roots, and the joint severing of the defilement of views up to the fourth stage would also be likewise. Therefore, the northern formula was established to show later students, making the disparate doctrines of past and present clearly discernable. From "borrowing the distinctive" downward correctly clarifies borrowing stages. First, borrowing the distinctive teaching from beginning to end to name the shared. Prior to the stages of the shared teaching, there are no stages that can be discussed; hence, borrowing the internal and external ordinary stages of the distinctive teaching, they are simply named the first and second stages of the shared teaching. After the stages of the shared teaching, there are also no further stages; hence, using only the Dharma Cloud and Buddha stages of the distinctive teaching, they name the ninth and tenth stages of the shared teaching. Because it is flexible and unfixed, there is the word "perhaps." Since the Dapin states that the tenth stage is like a buddha, one should know that this is using distinctive names to name the shared. Thus the seventh chapter, the "Gāthā Chapter" of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, states: "The Far-Reaching, Good Wisdom, and Dharma Cloud stages are the Buddha-gotra; the others are all the gotras of the two vehicles." This is also using distinctive names to name the shared stages. If these were distinctive stages, could those prior to the Far-Reaching belong to the two vehicles? The recent interpretations of stages, where defilements are subdued prior to the stages, are precisely an example of this. From "If borrowing..." downward, next, purely borrowing the distinctive ten stages to name the shared ten stages means that, on both sides, prior to the stages is generally the subduing of defilements. Although the shared has no stages, since defilements are not yet severed, one does not enter the stages. Regarding "fourth, using the distinctive designations to name the stages of the shared bodhisattva": this is purely in terms of the bodhisattva, hence cultivating contemplation and severing views are not fixed. From "Such as..." downward, briefly using the stages where bodhisattvas sever views, it rejects the former old masters' doctrine of severing views at the third and fourth stages. From "Thinning means..." onward are the bodhisattva's stages of severing thought [defilements]. From "The old say..." downward, it reiterates the old masters' view that the sixth and seventh stages are the stages of severing thought. From "Only at the sixth stage..." downward is our school's objection. First, objecting to the sixth stage: at the sixth stage, one is free from desire, but merely free from the defilements of desire; how can one immediately say that this is equal to an arhat? Next, conceding, it says that even conceding that it includes the third fruit and the practice toward the fourth fruit, with one remaining grade it is still called "approaching [the fruit]"; how could it again be equal to an arhat? From "If at the seventh stage..." downward, next, objecting to the seventh stage: if the exhaustion of the final grade is called the seventh, this would then be acceptable. Since the preceding sixth stage is merely called "freeing," you wish to subsume the approach into the fruit. The first grade of the first dhyāna would also belong to "already accomplished"; but having severed only the first grade, it is truly not yet accomplished, and hence it also cannot be equal to an arhat. From "If we now..." downward, now elucidating this, we do not take the designations of the shared ten stages, but merely use the ten perfections to match the fruits, which is convenient. Because the doctrine of the distinctive teaching mostly matches the ten perfections to the ten stages, we also rely on this to elucidate our present intention. Establishing this intention is also out of concern that later people will not understand how sutras and treatises match the fruits as higher or lower, and will not recognize the intention of using the distinctive teaching to name the shared. Next, from "All these..." downward, he modestly defers and attributes merit. Next, regarding the "Question": since the meaning of borrowing for the stages shared by the three vehicles is already established, establishing the bodhisattva separately might lack authentic proof. Next, regarding the intention of the answer: the sutras and treatises each have two explicit texts, both intending to speak exclusively of the bodhisattva's wisdom and severing. First, citing the Dazhidulun's "three places scorching the wick": the intention is to cite "dry wisdom" as being separately in the bodhisattva's stage of severing defilements. If shared with the two vehicles, it is not named the "initial flame," because the initial flame is precisely the stage of severing. Since the treatise separately establishes the bodhisattva, it takes the first stage as the stage of severing. Thus Chapter 78 of the Dazhidulun, "The Lamp-Wick Chapter," states: "There are two kinds of ten stages: first, the bodhisattva's first stage is the initial flame; second, the śrāvaka's stage of seeing is the initial flame. If it is exclusively the bodhisattva stage, then the Joyful Stage is the initial flame." Since the treatise's text takes the bodhisattva's first stage as the initial flame, we now take it to make a comparison and explanation. If even in the shared path of subduing it can be taken as the bodhisattva's initial flame, now merely stepping back to take the shared stage of severing as the exclusive bodhisattva's initial flame, what objection could there be? Therefore, we know that this text separately determines the shared teaching bodhisattva's stages. The text below naturally has the exclusive bodhisattva stages, which are the distinctive bodhisattva stages. The "three kinds of bodhisattvas" mentioned refers to people of medium faculties among the bodhisattvas of the shared stages, who also sever at the third and fourth stages like the two vehicles. From "Furthermore, the Dapin..." downward, it next cites the Dapin to make a comparison and explanation. The tenth Buddha stage is still named "bodhisattva"; how much more could the preceding stages lack bodhisattvas? Hence it says: "How could there be no middle and beginning?" Regarding "neighboring the ultimate": because the distinctive Buddha stage surpasses the ten stages, now borrowing the distinctive designations, it says the tenth stage neighbors the ultimate. From "If there were none..." downward, it again cites the Dapin, where from the first stage onward, all speak of the bodhisattva cultivating and purifying the karmic activities of the stages. Thus the Dapin says: "The first has ten, the second has eight, the third five, the fourth has ten, the fifth twelve, the sixth six, the seventh twenty, the eighth five, the ninth twelve, and the tenth is Buddha (now briefly versified)." That text lists and explains them one by one in detail; you should know that this also exclusively sets apart the bodhisattva. Next, citing the Dazhidulun, in the bodhisattva's case it separately receives the designation "patience," up to designations such as "sporting in supernormal powers"; thus we know these designations belong separately to the bodhisattva. The designations of patience in the Dapin are also like this. From "Such as..." downward, this directly elucidates our present intention. Relying on what was cited above, one can still separately set apart the bodhisattva stages. Following this to borrow the distinctive to name the shared, separately matching them to the bodhisattva, what fault is there? Next, regarding the "Question": in severing the nine grades of desire, why are two fruits instituted? The intention of the answer is: the sage institutes fruit names to rest the weary. Defilements in the realm of distraction are heavy, termed "many difficulties"; fearing that practitioners might retreat because of difficulties, two fruit names are instituted. Next, regarding the "Question": dhyāna in general is to counter distraction; since distraction in desire is manifold, many remedies should be instituted. The intention of the answer is: dhyāna is established according to the plane; concentration and distraction are mutually opposed, so how could many dhyānas be instituted in [the realm of] desire? Next, regarding the intention of the "Question": earlier, the designation "patience" was separately established for bodhisattvas; before the sixth and seventh stages, all wisdom and severing are identical with the two vehicles, so why does the bodhisattva separately receive the appellation "patience"? In the answer there are three reasons why the bodhisattva is called "patience." First, citing the analogy of the fifteen and sixteen minds: as in the fifteen minds, although there are already seven wisdoms and eight patiences, one has not yet entered the fruit stage; hence the path, compared to patience, is still termed a cause. Although the bodhisattva severs the views and thought of the various planes, because latent habit-energies are not yet exhausted and the stages are not yet completed, it is merely named "patience." The remaining two intentions are readily apparent.
First 7 of 45 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 止觀輔行傳弘決 — Classical Chinese