翻譯名義集 5.115

5.115

In tracing the general designation "mind-made body" (manomayakāya), "mind" (manas) means intentional reflection (cetanā/manaskāra); this reveals the cultivating cause belonging to the [Land of] Common Abode. "Made" (or "born", samutpanna) means receiving birth; this manifests the resultant retribution in the [Land of] Expedient Means. Thus it is said: in bliss one takes the intent of emptiness; in samādhi one takes the intent of the provisional; in self-nature one takes the intent of the middle. Furthermore, "mind" means "according to wish" (rddhi). Hence the Wei translation of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra states: "Going swiftly according to wish, arriving instantly as thought occurs, without any obstacle, it is named the body according to wish (rddhimayakāya)." Furthermore, "mind" means mental recollection. Hence the Tang translation of the Mahāyāna-laṅkāvatāra-sūtra (in seven fascicles) says: The Buddha told Mahāmati, "A mind-made body is, by way of analogy, like the movement of the mind, swift and unimpeded; thus it is named 'mind-made body.'" This derives the designation of "mind-made body" from an analogy. That sūtra explains this general name through two meanings. First it says: "Mahāmati! It is, for example, like the mind recollecting various things previously seen hundreds of thousands of yojanas away; thought succeeding thought, it arrives there swiftly, without its body or mountains, rivers, rocks, and walls being able to obstruct it. The mind-made body is likewise." Next it says: "Through the power of the illusion-like samādhi, supernatural transformations are sovereign, all marks are adorned, and because one recollects the original vows to accomplish [the liberation of] sentient beings, just as the mind moves, one is born among all assemblies of noble ones." The Fuxing explains: "The first refers to recollecting places; the second refers to recollecting vows. As both meanings are birth through mental recollection, it is called 'mind-made.'" However, regarding this general name, earlier masters explained: "Having been born in the [Land of] Expedient Means, one recollects the mundane realm previously seen in the Common Abode, perfumed and cultivated by wisdom and vows, and consciously comes to be born, transforming beings through supernatural powers." I now say that this explanation contradicts the text and misses its purport. As for contradicting the text, the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "Because the three kinds of mind-made bodies cannot be severed, one is born in the [Land with] Residue, receiving a dharmatā-body." Thus the ancestral master explained the name from the lower giving rise to the higher; earlier masters understood the meaning from the higher descending to the lower. Discussing it inverted in this way contradicts the text. As for missing its purport, in the sūtra recollecting what was previously seen was originally an analogical passage; earlier worthies were confused by it and took it as a doctrine. Therefore we know that the old explanation was not good at [clarifying] the general name. Now, Zhiyi's commentary refers to it as the "mind-made body" because it relies on the Song translation of the Laṅkāvatāra (the Laṅkāvatāra-ratna-sūtra in four fascicles). In the notes by Jingxi [Zhanran], it is named the "mind-produced body" because it conforms to the Tang translation of the Laṅkāvatāra. Although the names in the two sūtras differ, their meaning comes down to the same principle. Because later translations of the sūtra took the sense of "accomplishment" (siddhi), it was called "mind-produced body." Hence the author of the notes says: "Both 'produced' and 'made' are stated from the perspective of the effect." In that case, the character "mind" accords with the cause, while the character "born/produced" follows the effect. Thus we know that this name establishes both cause and effect. Next, regarding distinguishing the specific names: first, the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra states: "First, the mind-made body of the dharma of bliss. This is intended to approximate the two vehicles' intent of entering the bliss of nirvāṇa. Second, the mind-made body of samādhi. This approximates the shared teaching's stepping into the provisional to transform beings by means of supernatural samādhis. Third, the mind-made body of self-nature. This approximates the distinct teaching's intent of cultivating the self-nature of the middle way." Now I explain: the first is named "bliss" because the older sūtra states: "Abiding peacefully in the ocean of mind, the waves of consciousness do not arise"; therefore Zhiyi established it as the dharma of bliss. This is using the meaning of the sūtra to establish the name. The second is named the "mind-made body of samādhi" because the older sūtra states: "Attaining the illusion-like samādhi, endowed with the power of immeasurable marks and complete adornments, one enters buddha-lands accordingly"; therefore Zhiyi established it as the mind-made [body] of samādhi. Yet in our school all three truths receive the name of samādhi; since this passage explains it in terms of supernatural powers, it corresponds to the samādhi of the conventional truth. As the Shiqian states: "If in the presence of good spiritual friends one obtains only the samādhi of the conventional truth, merely breaking ignorance (ajñāna), this is called avidyā." This samādhi here is the same as in that passage. The third is called "self-nature" because the older sūtra states: "Awakening to the conditions of all buddha-dharmas, one spontaneously attains the marks of joy"; therefore Zhiyi established it as the mind-made [body] of self-nature, because the middle way of the distinct teaching is the self-nature of all dharmas. The Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "If one does not see the middle, one does not see the self-nature of all dharmas." However, this Profound Meaning does not employ the explanation of being "receptive to guidance" (jie). It is expounded solely in terms of the former three teachings, which accords with the doctrinal purport. Truly, because the name of "intentional reflection" is established from the biased teachings, owing to lacking the efficacy of illuminating nature, there are practices of distinct cultivation; therefore the perfect teaching has no such intent. The Fuxing states: "The text of the Profound Meaning does not speak of subsuming into the three because its contemplation is superior, so it is set aside for now and not discussed. Moreover, the name 'mind-made' is properly located in the instructional path." Second, the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa states: "First, the mind-made body of the correct reception of samādhi; this is likely the shared teaching, together entering the joy of the quiescent concentration of true emptiness. Thus the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra states: 'Because the śrāvakas' power of concentration is excessive, they do not see the buddha-nature.' Second, the mind-made body of awakening to dharmatā; this is likely the distinct teaching. Although the bodhisattva realizes biased truth, he awakens to and knows there is the dharmatā of the middle way. Third, the non-active mind-made body; this is likely the perfect teaching. The bodhisattva contemplates the four noble truths of non-action in the middle way, perfectly subduing avidyā." Now I explain: the first is named samādhi; since our ancestral master explained it in terms of the quiescent concentration of true emptiness, this belongs to the samādhi of the ultimate truth. Because in this concentration the mind is quiescent and unmoving, it is called "correct reception" (samāpatti). In terms of stage sequence, as the author of the notes states: "If in terms of the shared teaching, it is above the seventh stage, or up to the ninth stage. This first name is entirely established in accordance with the sūtra (the sūtra is quoted below)." The second is named "awakening to dharmatā"; "awakening" means understanding, and "dharmatā" is the principle of the exclusive middle. In terms of stages, as the text of the Notes states: "Speaking of self-nature, the distinct abodes correspond to the shared, and should encompass the ten practices. This single name is also established in accordance with the sūtra." The third is named "non-active"; the middle of the perfect [teaching] accords with the nature, where the marks of cultivated virtue vanish; hence it is called "non-active." In terms of stages, as the author of the notes states: "Since the perfect teaching speaks of subduing avidyā, one knows it means the seven faiths." Now, regarding this commentary text, if analyzed in terms of primary teachings and receptive guidance: this uses the single primary of the shared teaching to explain the first name, and furthermore uses the two receptive guidances of the distinct and perfect to resolve the latter two meanings. Looking at the text of the Profound Meaning, initially it lacks the Tripiṭaka [teaching], and at the end it adds the perfect teaching. That this text initially lacks the Tripiṭaka accords with the doctrinal purport. Because the lands beyond the realms are not expounded in the small vehicle, discussing mind-made [bodies] does not employ the Tripiṭaka. Adding the perfect at the end conforms to the meaning of the stages, because through the similitude understanding of the distinct and perfect, where true cultivation has not yet arisen, all are called "intentional reflection." However, though the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa clarifies the mind-made body by citing the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, when it comes to explaining the meaning, it entirely uses the Laṅkāvatāra. One should know that the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra has only the general name, not specific designations. Third, the Fuxing-ji states: "First, the mind-produced body of entering the joy of samādhi, also called correct reception; that is, the third, fourth, and fifth stages, because the mind is quiescent and unmoving. Second, the mind-produced body of awakening to the self-nature of dharmas; that is, in the eighth stage, because one enters buddha-lands universally, taking dharmas as self-nature. Third, the non-active mind-produced body of kinds arising together, meaning comprehending the dharmas realized by the Buddha." Now I explain: since the first name refers to the third stage and beyond of the shared teaching, its name and meaning are largely the same as the former two texts. As the Tang translation of the sūtra states: "In the third, fourth, and fifth stages, entering into samādhi, free from various thoughts, quiescent and unmoving, the waves of the evolving consciousnesses do not arise in the ocean of mind, and one understands that the objects appearing to the mind are all non-existent; this is named the mind-produced body of entering the joy of samādhi (the Song and Wei translations name it the mind-made body of the correct reception of the joy of samādhi)." Second, the name "mind-produced body of awakening to the self-nature of dharmas" has a different name but the same meaning as the second in the Miaoxuan. In the text of the Notes, since it refers to entering the provisional in the eighth stage, it takes awakening to and comprehending illusion-like dharmas, unimpeded and sovereign, as awakening to the self-nature of dharmas. Hence the Tang translation of the sūtra states: "Namely, in the eighth stage, one understands that dharmas are like illusions, entirely without marks. Relying on the transformation of mind, abiding in illusion-like concentration and other samādhis, one is capable of manifesting immeasurable, sovereign supernatural powers. Like a blossoming flower, swift and according to wish, like an illusion, like a dream, like a shadow, like an image, neither created nor what is created, yet resembling what is created. Fully adorned with all physical forms, universally entering buddha-lands, understanding the nature of all dharmas; this is named the mind-produced body of awakening to the self-nature of dharmas (the Song translation names it the mind-made body of awakening to the nature of the self-nature of dharmas; the Wei translation names it the mind-made body of truly awakening to the marks of all dharmas)." Third, regarding the name "mind-produced body of non-active practice of kinds arising together": "kinds" (bīja/species) takes capable of producing as its meaning; "classes" (samāna) establishes its name from streams of category. Because contemplation of the middle way is capable of producing the buddha-realm, this causal stage belongs to the same category as the effect; hence it is called "kinds arising together" (in the sūtra it is also named the noble-class body). As for "non-active," in the distinct ten dedications one comprehends the dharmas realized by the Buddha, hence it is called "non-active." Thus the Tang translation of the sūtra states: "Comprehending the self-realized dharma-marks of all dharmas, this is named the mind-produced body of non-active practice of kinds arising together (both the Song and Wei translations are identical with this name)." However, although the third name is established differently across the three texts, they equally correspond to the contemplation of the middle, and its meaning is also identical with the second name in the Vimalakīrti. Yet Master Jingxi himself, determining the text of the Notes, said: "This vertically judges the stages in terms of the shared teaching and the distinct receptive guidance." Therefore we know that the Fuxing uses the single primary of the shared, and the distinct receptive guidance. Question: "Generally, those who write subcommentaries originally support the commentary. For what reason does this subcommentary, in explaining the mind-made body, only use the shared teaching to vertically discuss the stages, differing from the meaning of Zhiyi's two commentaries?" Answer: "According to what the Notes indicate, we therefore know that the present judgment agrees with the sūtra's intent; that the sūtra text does not subsume the distinct stages is where it differs. Thus we know that Jingxi's difference from Zhiyi was in order to accord with the root sūtra." Question: "If, according to the sūtra's determination of stages, it lies solely in the shared, for what reason did Zhiyi explain it using the four teachings?" Answer: "Simply because the meaning of 'mind-made' covers nine kinds of persons (the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka teaching, the three vehicles of the shared teaching, the thirty minds of the distinct teaching, and the ten faiths of the perfect teaching). Therefore our ancestral master explained it in accordance with the meaning, varying according to the occasion." Question: "The Tiantai's sudden awakening rendered the characteristics of dharmas completely luminous; within the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, why does he say 'likely' (kongshi)? In the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra, why does he say 'intended to approximate' (yuni)?" Answer: "The Notes on the Vimalakīrti states that all speaking of 'likely' is out of reverence for the sacred scriptures and to show non-attachment. The three levels are implicitly contained in the sūtra text, [yet without specifying] which teaching it belongs to; therefore, since the names established are general, their interpretive meaning is difficult to restrict. Whether explaining by the biased and perfect, or expounding in terms of primary teachings and receptive guidance, not clinging stubbornly to them, he therefore says 'intended to approximate.'" Question: "The lesser teaching does not discuss beyond the realms, and the two vehicles speak only of non-arising; when did they ever intentionally desire to be born in [the Land of] Expedient Means?" Answer: "Although the land of dharmatā was not heard of in the past, the body of transformation must be received subsequently. Why? Aspiring with one's mind to head toward the result, holding to the resolve to cultivate the cause. Desiring to leave the quarter of afflictions, vowing to enter the realm of nirvāṇa. Not having eliminated taking and discarding, there is still death and birth. Can such a state of mind escape intentional reflection? People do not understand this, and instead say it is determined in terms of the Mahāyāna, which is a great error." Question: "'At that time, passing beyond the level of mind, one abides in the activity of wisdom.' Thus the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra clarifies that the [Land of] True Retribution is born of wisdom; why then does the Vimalakīrti determine that up to the tenth stage it still allows for 'mind-made'?" Answer: "The Notes on the Vimalakīrti states: 'First, it is merely that not having reached the ultimate is called mind; second, bringing along the instructional path to humble it, it is spoken of as mind.'" Question: "The Ratnagotravibhāga states: 'The two vehicles generate three kinds of mind-skandhas in the undefiled realm.' I do not yet know how the mind-made [body] and the mind-skandhas are the same or different?" Answer: "The Shiqian explains: 'The two vehicles are one among those three. Now speaking generally, it says three kinds; it does not mean that the two vehicles possess all three completely. Speaking of mind-skandhas: because the skandhas are born of mind, they are named mind-skandhas; again, intentional reflection generating skandhas is named mind-skandhas; again, mind itself is the skandhas, named mind-skandhas. The former two explanations derive their name from the cause, while the latter explanation establishes its title from the effect.' Since Jingxi says that the two vehicles are one among those three, this corresponds to the intent of the dharma of bliss. Therefore, although the names in the sūtras and treatises differ slightly, their meanings are truly largely the same." In the past, during the course of lecturing, I briefly related the main outline; now appending it to this collection, I print it to assist future scholars.