止觀輔行傳弘決 7.20

7.20

The verse’s meaning entirely exhorts the king to renounce his body, kingdom, and so forth. The Dazhidulun states: “At that time, after the Dharma master spoke this verse, the king returned to the kingdom of Tianluo to King Kalmāṣapāda. Among the great assembly, he told the nine hundred and ninety-nine kings: ‘The time to meet death has arrived. Let each person chant the verses of the Benevolent Kings Sūtra of the past seven buddhas.’ The kings all chanted. Hearing this, Kalmāṣapāda asked the kings: ‘What are you chanting?’ Puming answered Kalmāṣapāda with the verse. Hearing it, Kalmāṣapāda attained the samādhi of the equality of emptiness, and the kings realized it together. Because of this, Kalmāṣapāda released all the kings.” From “sincere mind” onward, it explains the benefit of receiving empowerment and protection. “Sins of the two realms” means past and present sins. One should also explain each of the four characteristics of śīla. That of the Tripiṭaka can be known. Whenever in the shared teaching it speaks of “neither keeping nor violating,” it is called “not keeping” because one does not see any mark of keeping [the precepts]; since even the mark of keeping is absent, the mark of violation is fundamentally extinguished. Therefore the Dazhidulun states: “If one rejoices at seeing a person who keeps the precepts, and becomes angry at seeing one who breaks the precepts, such precept-keeping is called a cause and condition of sin. Only when the marks of keeping and violating are obliterated is it called ‘not seeing.’” Therefore, later in the text on morality, it says: “Corresponding with right action of the contemplation of principle and so forth.” Right action in phenomenal matters is phenomenal morality; only when this morality corresponds with the perfect principle is it called complete. The two moralities of the distinctive and the perfect can be seen by analogy with giving. After these four perfections, the concluding texts differ. After the text on the perfection of forbearance, it only says “corresponding,” without saying “explained one by one,” which is merely an abbreviation of the text; thus after the text on the perfection of vigor, it fully lists the four, such as arising-and-perishing and so on. After the text on the perfection of meditation, it only says “attains correspondence with the four contemplations”; the number is preserved while the meaning is abbreviated. Therefore, it again cites the characteristics of the five gates of dhyāna from the Dazhidulun, and fully states the four types after each and every gate. At the end of the text on prajñā, the listing of the four inversions is merely to present the three vehicles of the Tripiṭaka; the subsequent text then fully lists the four types of ten wisdoms. Although they are mutually preserved or omitted, one must know they follow a single standard. Furthermore, in giving and morality, it directly explains the characteristics of the perfections without explaining the characteristics of the obscurations; in forbearance, it first explains the obscurations in detail and only then explains the perfections; in vigor, it briefly indicates the characteristics of the obscurations, while in meditation it fully lists them—these differ because they pursue essentials according to the text. If one is to interpret the meaning, one must fully preserve both the obscurations and the perfections, as well as the four types of characteristics for each. The characteristic of concluding the attainment of benefit is as in the text. The divisions of the text below are largely the same.