止觀輔行傳弘決 7.30

7.30

Next, from "Further, one should..." down is the contemplation of non-self. As for "suddenly hearing praise or blame" and so forth, it is like a person carrying a vase who hears someone blame the bearer or praise the bearer, and appropriates another's words, saying that they praise or blame himself. All activities are also like this; how much more so when blaming oneself is entirely blaming another, because the body belongs to another, being made of the four great elements (and so forth). The nature of the mind is like a hand; grasping is like being smeared with glue; taking hold of objects is called "adhering according to grasping." "Cruel" (ku) means harsh. "Blazing" (he) means flourishing. "Majestic" (long) is as before. As for "like that dark room" and so forth, the Dazhidulun, scroll ninety-three, says: "Anger fundamentally does not exist; all are false and deceptive matters. Thus producing anger is like committing treason and harm, even taking life and raising grave sinful karma; because of this grave karma, one must fall into the three evil paths. Be careful not to endure great suffering and distress for nothing. For example, in a mountain there was a Buddhist monastery where there was a separate room into which ghosts regularly came; thus all the practitioners avoided this room. A guest bhikṣu arrived at dusk to seek lodging; the karmadāna assigned him to stay in this room, saying to him: 'This room has ghosts that like to come and disturb people. Can you stay here?' Relying on his own power of precepts and power of extensive learning, this guest bhikṣu was not afraid of them, thinking: 'What can this little ghost do? I can subdue him.' He immediately entered the room. At nightfall, another guest bhikṣu came seeking a place to stay; the karmadāna also had him stay in this ghost room, speaking as before, and the guest monk also spoke as the previous person had. The bhikṣu who dwelt there first closed the door, sat upright, and waited for the ghost to come. The bhikṣu who came later, the night already being dark, beat on the door seeking to enter. The first one thought it was a ghost and would not open the door for him. The latter again beat on the door with all his might, and the one inside again resisted him with all his might. The one outside prevailed, pushed open the door, and got in; the one inside struck the one outside with all his might, and the one outside also struck him with all his might. In this way they beat each other until morning; when they saw each other, they were old classmates from the past, and each apologized to the other in shame. The crowd gathered and marvelled at it. Sentient beings are also like this: the five aggregates are fundamentally devoid of person and devoid of self, yet in vain they grasp their characteristics and give rise to strife. If laid out on the ground, there is only bone and flesh, no longer person or self; at that time, who argues about this or that? Therefore the bodhisattva speaks to sentient beings, saying: 'You must be careful not to give rise to the sin of strife within what is fundamentally empty.'" As for "two ghosts fighting over a corpse" and so forth, the Dazhidulun, scroll thirteen, says: "It is like a person travelling far who lodged alone in an empty pavilion. In the night, a ghost came carrying a corpse and placed it in front of him. Another ghost came from behind and angrily scolded the previous ghost, saying: 'It is my corpse, why did you carry it here?' The previous ghost further said: 'It was originally my thing; I carried it myself.' The two ghosts fought over it, each with one hand. The previous ghost said: 'You can ask this man.' The latter ghost immediately asked: 'Whose dead body is it? Who brought it carrying it?' This man reflected: 'These two ghosts both have great strength; whether I speak the truth or falsehood, I will not escape death. I should not answer the ghost with a lie now.' He then answered the latter ghost: 'The previous ghost brought it carrying it.' The latter ghost was greatly enraged, pulled out his hands and feet, and placed them on the ground. The previous ghost felt ashamed for him, took the corpse's [limbs] to patch him, and as he patched him, they adhered. Arms, hands, feet, and so forth—his whole body was replaced. Thereupon the two ghosts together ate the body of the living person that had been replaced, each wiped his mouth, and they went their separate ways. That man reflected: 'The body born of my parents was seen with my own eyes to be eaten up; this body of mine now is entirely another's flesh. Is there a body, or is there no body?' Reflecting in this way, his mind became bewildered and did not know what to do, like a madman. When daylight came, he followed the road and went along; reaching a country ahead, he saw a Buddhist stūpa. Whenever he saw the assembly of monks, he spoke of nothing else, only asking whether his own body existed or did not exist. The bhikṣus asked: 'What kind of person are you?' He answered, saying: 'I also do not know whether I am a human or a non-human.' He then related the above matter extensively to the assembly of monks. The monks all said: 'This man knows for himself that his own body has no self; he can easily be converted.' They immediately spoke to him, saying: 'Your body fundamentally has always been without self; it is merely that the assemblage of the four great elements was reckoned as your original body; your original body is no different from now.' Then the bhikṣus ordained him as a śramaṇa; his defilements were cut off completely, and he attained arhatship." Therefore, at times one also reckons another person's body as oneself; because there is no self, at times one refers to oneself as another person. Therefore the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra says: "There was an old man who lay down at night, held both knees with his hands, and then asked, saying: 'How is it that there are these two little boys here?'" If the body possessed a self, how could he not recognise it, calling them little boys? Thus we know that perverse reckonings are all without fixed reality. From "If cultivating..." down, it concludes by establishing the differences in practice among the three vehicles. First, the śrāvaka. First, in the doctrinal explanation, saying "as if pursued by an enemy" and so forth: the four inversions are like enemies; pressing upon the mind is like being pursued; the body is like an enemy country; contemplation is like rebelling and escaping. Not leaving the five aggregates, one practices within them; only upon reaching the path of seeing is there a way out. From "The roe deer hears..." down is the metaphor. Although people of the three vehicles contemplate distinctions of truths, conditions, and perfections, speaking generally, they all contemplate the stations of mindfulness. Although they share the stations of mindfulness, their own practice and conversion of others, possessing compassion or lacking compassion, and past merit are different; therefore they are divided into three distinctions, and therefore after this the three vehicles are divided. In the first text's metaphor: the śrāvaka's contemplation of dharma is compared to a roe deer; birth, aging, illness, and death are like the "hunting cordon"; the five desires of the three realms are like "water and grass"; not having leisure to look or listen is like "having no time to drink or eat"; hoping to leave the two bondages is like the aim of "escaping and becoming free." Next, among the practical characteristics of the pratyekabuddha: the pratyekabuddha's contemplation of dharma is compared to a "deer"; the wisdom contemplating causes and conditions is like "breaking through the cordon"; cutting off fetters and eroding residual habits is like "briefly escaping distress"; his own wisdom is like "running swiftly"; pitying others is like "looking back." Compassion and wisdom are practiced concurrently, so it is called "alongside." Group-dwelling and expounding the Dharma is called "plaintive crying"; merely praising escaping suffering is called "sobbing and choking"—this is the deer calling "you-you." The character yan ("choking") should be written ye, meaning food and drink do not go down. The mind of compassion pitying creatures is like being unable to eat food. Self-disgust with remainder is called "grief"; also pitying other people is called "longing"; having formerly shared that suffering is called the "original herd"; wishing to depart yet abiding in mindfulness, fearing it will not be of permanent benefit, is called "though hesitating." Saying "hesitating" is the appearance of not advancing. Possessing a little compassion, appearing to remain in birth and death, while the matter of benefiting creatures is slight, is called "what benefit?"; having spoken and entering parinirvāṇa is called "swallowing one's breath"; the teaching and Dharma not remaining is called "holding back one's voice." Ru means to swallow. Although pitying, yet departing, is like advancing holding back grief. From "himself emerging..." down, the metaphor is matched; the text is abridged. "Lamenting" (dao) means grieving and pitying. Next, clarifying the bodhisattva, the text of the metaphor can be understood. Next, in matching the metaphor, the textual characteristics are all the benefits of phenomenal assistance; therefore, phenomena and principle must be practiced in conjunction. Therefore, the lower text below "If completely lacking..." further explains the intention of practicing in conjunction. If one does not see this, how can one advance? In the previous śrāvaka [section], first came doctrine, next metaphor. In the subsequent pratyekabuddha [section], first came metaphor, next matching. The matching texts of these two are both abridged, without detailed step-by-step matching; therefore, the metaphor was supported by text and explained in detail. Now in the bodhisattva [section], the text matching the metaphor is sufficient, so it is matched directly without separate explanation. The "great elephant" matches the bodhisattva. From "impermanence down to water and fire" matches "though hearing the cordon close in." From "further arousing compassion down to departing alone" matches "not enduring to depart alone." From "patiently enduring birth and death" matches "knowing oneself to have great strength" and so forth. From "with wisdom down to both secure" matches "causing the herd to be secure." Phenomenal perfections are "merit"; the fivefold [dharmakāya] is the "dharma body"; the path of suppression is "wisdom life"; successive stages are "growth." Three asaṃkhyeya kalpas are the great elephant. From "if a small elephant calf" onward is depreciation and praise. The small not reaching the great is depreciation; the initial mind being praiseworthy is praise. At the beginning of the first asaṃkhyeya kalpa one is called a small bodhisattva; although not yet free from regression, he is truly different from ordinary persons and the Hinayana, so he can be praised. Next, in citing proof, "neither abiding nor untamed" and so forth: because the phenomenal perfections and vows of the initial-mind bodhisattva differ from ordinary persons, he is called "neither abiding nor untamed"; because they differ from the two vehicles, he is called "neither abiding nor tamed." The three lines from "though knowing" onward follow this pattern. Yet he does not realise verification, so all say "though." Merely taking the path of suppression as non-self and so forth, he is not the same as the two types of bodhisattvas of the shared and distinctive [teachings]. From "frequently cultivating" down concludes the completion of practice. A "wolf" (lang) is a beast, resembling a dog yet a wolf. The wisdom of the three vehicles within this Tripiṭaka [teaching] equally contemplates impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self; to make the practices of the three vehicles different, they can all be phenomenal wisdom aiding the path. From "one's own practice" down, one directly requests empowerment. Receiving conformity and concluding benefits are both as in the text. From "if completely" down clarifies the intention of practicing in conjunction: first rebuking the loss, next explaining the gain. As for "the Buddha's seal," seal means confirmation; confirmation means matching. When phenomena and principle match each other, they accord with the noble mind, being secretly sealed by the nobles so that obstacles are removed and principle becomes apparent. When one is already replete with all faults and also confused about the contemplation of principle, confirmation is impossible.