金剛經疏 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Therefore women take anger as their strength, for when they wish to demand something, they must first become angry. Kings take haughtiness and arrogance as their strength. Arhats take vīrya as their strength. The Buddhas take great compassion as their strength. Monks take kṣānti as their strength. Thus the Legacy Teaching Sūtra says: 'One who can practice kṣānti can then be called a powerful, great person.' The verse of the seven Buddhas says: 'Kṣānti is the foremost path; the Buddhas say that the unconditioned is supreme. One who has left home yet vexes others is not called a śramaṇa.' Although there are three types of kṣānti, here [the text] takes anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti. Why is this? Because one arouses practice based on the sūtra, having neither of the two grasps, [grasping at] persons or phenomena. In the text there are three [aspects]: first, capable of enduring; second, free from suffering; third, having joy. This clarifies being capable of enduring. Because anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti is fathomed only by the Buddhas, it is called 'the Tathāgata's kṣānti-pāramitā.' Because other people cannot exhaust it, it is said to be 'not a pāramitā.' Now, saying 'kṣānti-pāramitā' refers to the Tathāgata's pure wholesome roots; 'not a pāramitā' means that it is not the wholesome roots of the people of the two vehicles. If so, one arouses practice based on the sūtra; having already given rise to the supreme endurance of the unborn, how could one view oneself as weary from painful feelings? Therefore the verse says:

1.2

Able to endure ascetic practices, / because in ascetic practices there is goodness;
that merit cannot be measured: / such is the most supreme meaning.

1.3

'Able to endure ascetic practices' means that based on the sūtra one arouses ascetic practices and is able to endure them. 'Because in ascetic practices there is goodness' means that because these ascetic practices take the pure wholesome root of endurance as their essence, it says 'there is goodness.' 'That merit cannot be measured' means that that wholesome root of endurance cannot be measured by other people. 'Such is the most supreme meaning' means that it is measured only by the Tathāgata. Thus it says: 'kṣānti-pāramitā is explained as not kṣānti-pāramitā.'

1.4

From the sūtra's 'Why is this?' up to 'no jīva-saṃjñā' clarifies the absence of suffering below: first, establishing the absence of suffering; second, verifying the absence of suffering. This establishes it. The preceding clarified that there was [pain] yet one was able to endure it; this clarifies that because there is endurance, there is no suffering. Why is that? If one perceives a distinction between the self and another self, one then perceives a difference between the harmer and the harmed. At that time, I practiced in accordance with the sūtra, and having no grasping at the two selves, I did not see Kali as the harmer or my body as the harmed. Since there is no substantial entity of either harm, from whom could painful feelings arise? The Commentary Treatise says: 'Without ātma-saṃjñā, pudgala-saṃjñā, sattva-saṃjñā, or jīva-saṃjñā; having no mark, nor is it not having a mark.' Paramārtha says: 'Lacking the marks of self and so forth means lacking self-marks. Having no mark means lacking other. Nor is it not having a mark means it is not without the marks of compassion and wisdom.' Asaṅga says: 'One who is able to endure refers to comprehending dharma-nairātmya. Therefore, as the sūtra says, the Tathāgata speaks of kṣānti-pāramitā.' Note that this refers to anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti. He also says: 'How does one know the characteristics of endurance? When another gives rise to evil or the like toward oneself, one has no marks of self and so forth, does not produce thoughts of anger, nor does one produce a notion of existence regarding kṣānti-pāramitā or a notion of non-existence regarding non-pāramitā.' Note that this explanation is slightly different. Now it is clarified that regarding the perfection of endurance one does not formulate the notion of dharma, and regarding non-endurance one does not formulate the notion of non-dharma. Therefore it says: 'having no mark, nor is it not having a mark.' Although such things as these involve detrimental events, they are subsumed under the endurance of reflection on phenomena. The matter of King Kali should be explained at length here.

1.5

The sūtra's 'Why is this? In the past when I…' up to 'would have given rise to anger and hatred' is the verification. It further clarifies the meaning of the absence of suffering. The dismemberment limb by limb was an extreme act of harm; not giving rise to anger or hatred shows that the power of endurance was fierce. Anger and hatred arise because of grasping at a self; since self-grasping is absent, from whom could anger and hatred arise? However, anger is a major affliction, while hatred is a minor entanglement. With a major affliction, one can retaliate with murderous intent; with a minor entanglement, one only inflicts painful suffering. Because anger possesses five meanings, it is called major; because hatred does not possess them, it is called minor, as explained in the treatise on mind.

1.6

The sūtra's 'Subhūti, I also recall that in the past…' up to 'no jīva-saṃjñā' clarifies that there is joy. The preceding clarified that because there is endurance, there is no suffering; this clarifies that because there is no suffering, there is joy. Why is that? Being Kṣāntivādin shows that there was loving-kindness and compassion; having no marks of self and so forth clarifies that there was no anger or hatred. Because there was no anger or hatred, there was no suffering; because there was loving-kindness and compassion, there was joy. The verse says:

1.7

Free from the marks of self and resentment, / there is truly no suffering or distress;
in suffering and joy there is compassion: / such is the fruit of ascetic practice.

1.8

Note that the first half clarifies the absence of suffering because there are no marks of self or other; the second half clarifies that there is joy because there are marks of compassion and wisdom. Due to compassion there is joy; due to wisdom there is no suffering. Because compassion and wisdom are unified, it is called 'together.'

1.9

From the sūtra's 'Therefore, Subhūti…' up to '[anuttarā samyak-]saṃbodhi-citta', below is the second [part], which further guards against faults. Indeed, if one perceives suffering and practices through suffering, the mind becomes fatigued and regresses; if one forgets suffering and practices through suffering, the mind becomes buoyant and advances. In order to prevent the practice of regression, it therefore instructs one to generate the non-abiding mind. In the text there are four [aspects]: first, showing the non-abiding mind; second, showing the non-abiding objective realm; third, showing the non-abiding obstacles; fourth, showing the non-abiding practice. This clarifies the non-abiding mind. Bodhi takes non-abiding as its essence. If one can forget marks and generate the mind, the mind then merges in identity with non-abiding. Therefore, generating the mind free from marks is itself the essence of non-abiding. Asaṅga says: 'In order to demonstrate the antidote to the suffering of saṃsāra, it is said that one should be free from all notions, and so forth.' Note that saṃsāra refers to the cycle of birth and death. If one practices giving while clinging to marks, one experiences the suffering of exhaustion within saṃsāra. Now, as an antidote, it says to be free from all marks. The verse says:

1.10

In order not to abandon the arousal of the mind, / practicing and becoming firm, / for the sake of the kṣānti-pāramitā, / one cultivates that mind capable of learning.

1.11

'In order not to abandon the arousal of the mind' has two [meanings]: first, not abandoning the bodhicitta; second, not abandoning the markless mind. Therefore it says that one should be free from all marks and generate anuttara-bodhicitta. This is the non-abandoning mind. 'Practicing' means practicing without abiding in visible forms, sounds, scents, tastes, or tangibles. 'Becoming firm' means that if one is free from marks, one's practice is firm. The treatise explains: For what purpose does one generate the mind and practice? 'For the sake of the kṣānti-pāramitā, one cultivates that mind capable of learning.' Note that 'kṣānti-pāramitā' is the Tathāgata's perfection of endurance; 'the mind capable of learning' is the mind of the prathamā bhūmi. Now, in order to seek the Tathāgata's perfection of endurance, one generates the mind and practices, seeking the mind capable of learning of the prathamā bhūmi. Alternatively, 'kṣānti-pāramitā' is the mind of the prathamā bhūmi; 'the mind capable of learning' is the mind prior to the bhūmis. Thus one cultivates the non-abiding mind prior to the bhūmis. Therefore it says, 'one cultivates that mind capable of learning.' Thus the treatise says: 'Entering the kṣānti-pāramitā of the prathamā bhūmi is called the non-abiding mind.' Note that 'non-abiding' means not abiding in phenomena or non-phenomena. Thus Asaṅga says: 'Because one does not abide in non-phenomena, nor in dharma-nairātmya.'

1.12

The sūtra's 'One should not produce a mind abiding in visible forms…' up to 'should produce a mind that abides nowhere' shows the non-abiding objective realm. Not producing a mind abiding in visible forms causes one to be free from the obstacle of repaying kindness. Not producing a mind abiding in sounds, scents, tastes, tangibles, or dharmas causes one to be free from the obstacle of karmic retributions. 'Should produce [a mind] that abides nowhere' causes one to be free from the obstacle of doubting marks. Paramārtha says: 'Here one should completely leave behind three obstacles: first, one's own body; second, repaying kindness; third, karmic retributions. Regarding one's own body: if one clings to one's own body, two views arise, namely the view of eternalism and the view of annihilationism. Due to eternalism, one does not seek the future; due to annihilationism, one does not see the future. Thus it obstructs practice. The remaining two can be understood.'

1.13

The sūtra's 'If the mind has an abiding, it is then non-abiding' shows the non-abiding obstacles. If the mind has an abiding, abiding in the previous two objective realms, it is then non-abiding, not abiding in bodhi. If this mind exists, it then becomes an obstacle. Paramārtha says: '"If the mind has an abiding" means abiding in three graspings. The three graspings are: first, the view of eternalism; second, the view of annihilationism; third, the view of existence and non-existence. In order to leave behind the view of eternalism, it does not allow abiding in phenomena. In order to leave behind the view of annihilationism, it does not allow abiding in non-phenomena. In order to leave behind the view of existence and non-existence, it immediately causes one to abide in the middle way. The former one refutes ordinary beings' grasping at parikalpita-svabhāva as existent; the next refutes ordinary beings' grasping at paratantra-svabhāva as non-existent; the latter refutes the two vehicles' grasping at pariniṣpanna-svabhāva as both existent and non-existent. If one does not leave behind these three graspings, one is not in accord with bodhi; hence it says "non-abiding."'

1.14

The sūtra's 'Therefore the Buddha explains…' up to 'practice dāna' shows the non-abiding practice. Indeed, one who ascends high must start from the low; one who wades deep must start from the shallow. Therefore, one who wishes to enter the stage of the non-abiding mind should cultivate non-abiding practice. The stage of the non-abiding mind is from the prathamā bhūmi upward; the stage of non-abiding practice is from the lineage of the path downward. Therefore the Compendium of the Mahāyāna says: 'The six pāramitās in the stage of aspiration, although mundane phenomena, are able to induce the supramundane mind.' Paramārtha says: 'The non-abiding mind is the true mind. If it corresponds with kṣānti, its stage is on the third bhūmi; if it corresponds with dāna, its stage is on the prathamā bhūmi; if it corresponds with śīla, its stage is on the second bhūmi. On the fourth bhūmi and above, vīrya, dhyāna, prajñā, upāya, vows, power, and jñāna should be understood according to their meanings. In order not to abandon this true mind, one leaves behind all marks, generates the mind, and practices.' Generally speaking, [the stages] on the bhūmis are summarized into four saṅghas, all cultivating the six perfections: first, the shameless saṅgha, referring to those who break the precepts; second, the mute-sheep saṅgha, referring to ordinary beings who uphold the precepts; third, the ashamed saṅgha, referring to people of the two vehicles; fourth, the ultimate-truth saṅgha, referring to true bodhisattvas. The first three bhūmis cultivate mundane practices; their marks are identical to ordinary beings and incapable of decisive judgment, likened to mute sheep. The next four bhūmis cultivate supramundane practices; their marks are identical to the two vehicles, no longer committing evil, likened to those who have shame. The final three bhūmis cultivate practices transcending the supramundane; this is the bodhisattva's own stage, not separating from the mixed paths, hence called ultimate truth. Wherever ordinary beings and the two vehicles exist in all pure lands, all must be judged in this way. If discussed in terms of ultimate reality, in the pure land there are no longer ordinary beings or two vehicles; therefore the Treatise on Rebirth says: 'Women, those with deficient faculties, and the seeds of the two vehicles are not born there.' Borrowing appearances, they exist; thus the Contemplation Sūtra clarifies three grades and nine ranks, so ordinary beings and the two vehicles are also reborn there. Prabhākaramitra says: 'The nirmāṇakāya Buddha's pure land has ordinary beings and the two vehicles; the saṃbhogakāya Buddha's pure land does not.' Paramārtha says: 'Ordinary beings and the two vehicles see Amitābha Buddha in an impure land; bodhisattvas see Amitābha Buddha in a pure land.' According to these two explanations, the saṃbhoga land is definitively and purely clean, while the nirmāṇa land has both defilement and purity.

1.15

From the sūtra's 'Subhūti, a bodhisattva…' up to 'should practice dāna like this', below, there are two levels of severing doubts with respect to non-abiding: first, with respect to severing doubts [regarding others]; second, with respect to severing [doubts] through one's own practice. External converters doubt, saying: 'If there is no abiding, for whom does one practice? If one sees sentient beings for whose sake one acts, this should be called abiding in and clinging to sentient beings.' Now it is clarified that in terms of the conventional, one may speak of doing something, but in terms of the ultimate, there is nothing done. Therefore the verse says:

1.16

Practicing for the sake of sentient beings, / such a cause should be recognized;
sentient beings and their activities: / being far removed from them should also be known.

1.17

The upper half explains the conventional; the lower half explains the ultimate. The text has two levels: first, regarding the conventional; second, regarding the ultimate. This is regarding the conventional. As for 'to benefit all sentient beings, one should give dāna in this way', it explains that, regarding the conventional, there are sentient beings, so one may speak of doing something; thus it says, 'to benefit all sentient beings, one should give dāna in this way.' Why is this? Because regarding saṃvṛti-satya, the aggregates, elements, and sense bases exist. As for 'benefit', it is distinguished by the three types of giving: namely, enabling sentient beings to abandon three kinds of suffering and attain three kinds of bliss. By material giving, it causes them to abandon the suffering of poverty and attain the bliss of great wealth. By the gift of fearlessness, it causes them to abandon the suffering of terror and attain the bliss of peace and security. By the gift of the Dharma, it causes them to abandon the suffering of birth and death and attain the bliss of nirvāṇa. The reason a bodhisattva can benefit sentient beings through the three types of giving is because of the six real and the seven semblance [modes]. Thus they can benefit sentient beings. The six real [modes] mean benefiting sentient beings through the six pāramitās: by dāna making them fit vessels for good; by śīla making them observe the precepts; by kṣānti enduring adversity and malice; by vīrya assisting their wholesome tendencies; by dhyāna transforming them to enter the Dharma; by prajñā cutting away their net of doubts. As the verse says: 'Making them vessels, keeping precepts, enduring malice, assisting good, / Entering the Dharma, and cutting doubts: these are the six practices of benefiting.' The seven semblances are: first, like a mother; second, like a father; third, like a good friend; fourth, like a companion; fifth, like a capable servant; sixth, like an ācārya; seventh, like an upādhyāya. These seven each have five actions, totaling thirty-five kinds of benefiting, as explained in the Eulogy and Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra. Because a bodhisattva can possess the six real and the seven semblances and thereby benefit sentient beings, it says: 'to benefit all sentient beings, one should give dāna in this way.'

1.18

The sūtra says: 'The Tathāgata speaks of all characteristics… up to …are then not sentient beings.' This is regarding the ultimate. The intention is to explain that regarding the ultimate, one can speak of non-abiding. Why? All characteristics are the substantial entity of sentient beings; 'sentient beings' is the name of sentient beings. All characteristics are non-characteristics: their substantial entity is empty and not real. Sentient beings are not [real] beings: their name is empty and is merely a nominal designation; their substantial entity is empty. In what could one abide? Therefore the verse says:

1.19

Nominal designations and the matter of the aggregates: / The Tathāgata is free from those characteristics. / The Buddhas are without those two, / Because they see the real Dharma.

1.20

I observe: The first two lines concern non-abiding regarding the ultimate. The latter two lines verify the intention of non-abiding. 'Without those two' means without name and substantial entity. The rest can be seen [from this]. Asaṅga says: 'Because sentient beings are not nonexistent, when encountering conflict with sentient beings weariness arises; therefore pudgala-nairātmya, dharma-nairātmya, and so forth are revealed.' I observe: This is precisely non-abiding regarding the ultimate. Paramārtha says: 'Nominal designations are of two kinds: first, general names, namely the names of the six destinies; second, particular names, namely the names given by parents. If separated from the six sense faculties and six consciousnesses, these two names cannot be found; therefore names are nominal. If separated from name-and-form, faculties and consciousnesses cannot be found either. If separated from the four great elements, form cannot be found either. Not to be found means the object does not exist. Because the object does not exist, consciousness does not exist. Because consciousness does not exist, both the name and substantial entity of sentient beings do not exist at all. The nonexistence of name-and-form is the nonexistence of parikalpita-svabhāva. The nonexistence of consciousness is the nonexistence of paratantra-svabhāva. Since both are empty, what is there to liberate?' Therefore it is said that regarding the ultimate, there is nothing done.

1.21

The sūtra says: 'Subhūti, the Tathāgata is a speaker of the true… up to …a speaker of the unvarying.' Previously, non-abiding was explained regarding transforming others; here, non-abiding is explained regarding one's own realization. The doubt says: 'If the path does not abide, it should not serve as the cause for the fruit. If it abides in the fruit, how could it still be called non-abiding?' Now it is explained that although the path does not abide, it can serve as a cause. This is what those who have realized the ultimate can fathom, not what those outside the principle can reach; one can only rely on my words, taking faith in and relying on the holy teaching to cultivate practice. The text has two levels: first, encouraging faith; second, guarding against errors. This is encouraging faith. The five types of speech are to reveal four intentions: 'speaker of the true' expresses true wisdom; 'speaker of suchness' expresses tathatā; 'speaker of the real' expresses the principle of the four noble truths; 'speaker of the non-deceitful' prophesies matters of the three periods of time; and 'speaker of the unvarying' is a single phrase comprehensively confirming that the previous four can never be overturned. Therefore the verse says:

1.22

Although the fruit does not abide in the path, / Yet the path can serve as a cause. / Because the Buddhas speak the real, / That wisdom is of four kinds.

1.23

Now, the first two lines explain that cause and fruit are both non-abiding. As for the fruit, being free from characteristics, it does not abide in the cause; as for the cause, being free from characteristics, it does not abide in the fruit. Although neither abides, cause and fruit succeed one another; this is abiding within non-abiding. Question: 'Is the abiding of non-abiding not an abiding?' Answer: 'Regarding the conventional, cause and fruit exist, so one may discuss having abiding or not abiding; regarding the ultimate, there is no cause and fruit, so one cannot discuss having abiding or not abiding.' Therefore Asaṅga says: 'It is due to saṃvṛti-satya that there are cause, fruit, and bodhi.' The next two lines generally indicate the five speeches. The verse says:

1.24

Real wisdom and the Hīnayāna, / Teaching the Mahāyāna Dharma, / And all prophesies, / Because they are not spoken in vain.

1.25

'Real wisdom' refers to the speaker of the true. 'Hīnayāna' refers to the speaker of the real. 'Mahāyāna' refers to the speaker of suchness. 'All prophesies' refers to the speaker of the non-deceitful. 'Because they are not spoken in vain' refers to the speaker of the unvarying. Asaṅga says: ''Speaker of the true' is to reveal the characteristics of conventional truth. 'Speaker of the real' is to reveal that in cultivating conventional truth, there are defilements and purity. 'Speaker of suchness' is for the characteristics of paramārtha-satya. 'Speaker of the unvarying' is to reveal that in cultivating paramārtha-satya, there are defilements and purity.' I observe: The former two speeches explain that the conventional is spoken of as real; the latter two speeches explain that the ultimate is spoken of as not in vain. Paramārtha says: ''Speaker of the true' refers to the Tathāgata's own vow. The own vow is twofold: first, explaining that with the wheel of Dharma turned by the Tathāgata, no brāhmaṇa, māra, or anyone else in the whole world can overturn what I have spoken; second, explaining that the Tathāgata established the ten epithets, and no brāhmaṇa, māra, or anyone else in the whole world can destroy these names. Because he speaks the truth, he is called speaker of the true. 'Speaker of the real' refers to teaching the four noble truths and the three doors of liberation in terms of the Hīnayāna: all dharmas are devoid of own-nature and empty; because they are empty, they are signless; because they are signless, they are wishless. This is spoken only in terms of the emptiness of the person. Although there are three names, they are completely identical in one essence; because this speaks of the real, he is called speaker of the real. 'Speaker of suchness' refers to teaching the three natures and three non-natures in terms of the Mahāyāna, which is the tathatā of dharma-emptiness, namely the three doors of liberation. These three doors can remove the three hindrances. Therefore the Foxing lun (Treatise on Buddha-nature) says: 'Knowing parikalpita-svabhāva and penetrating the door of liberation of emptiness can remove flesh defilements. Knowing paratantra-svabhāva and penetrating the door of liberation of wishlessness can remove skin defilements. Knowing pariniṣpanna-svabhāva and penetrating the door of liberation of signlessness can remove heart defilements.' The first is the hindrance to liberation; next is the hindrance to dhyāna; last is the hindrance to all-knowledge. Being free from these three hindrances and awakening to tathatā, speaking of tathatā, he is therefore called speaker of suchness. 'Speaker of the non-deceitful' means prophesying matters of the three periods of time without any error, unlike other people who have attachments or non-attachments. These four speeches all derive their names from their objects.'

1.26

The sūtra says: 'Subhūti, in the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata, this Dharma is neither real nor false.' This guards against error. Having previously brought forward speech to encourage faith, there might be fear that clinging to speech would cause one to miss the path. In order to guard against that, it is now remedied. 'This Dharma' refers directly to the Dharma of the Tathāgata's verbal teachings. This Dharma is what is penetrated by the Buddha's dharma-pratisaṃvid; it is what is spoken by the Buddha's nirukti-pratisaṃvid; because it corresponds with the Buddha, it is the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata. Now, the path resides in wordlessness; clinging to words means missing the path, which is why this Dharma is not real. However, words can point to the path, and apart from words one does not see the path; which is why this Dharma is not false. Because words can point to the path, the metaphor of pointing at the moon is made; and because the path resides in wordlessness, the parable of abandoning the raft is made. The verse says:

1.27

In accordance with that real wisdom, / It is said to be neither real nor false. / Like attaining realization upon hearing sounds, / It is spoken thus as an antidote.

1.28

The upper half establishes the thesis; the lower half explains the thesis. Because the Tathāgata's verbal teachings accord with actual wisdom, they are not false. Because the realization of the principle is free from words, they are not real. As for 'Realization obtained according to heard sound is counteracted by speaking thus': it means that at the time of listening to the Dharma, one is free from the two graspings. To destroy attachment to words as being the path or not being the path, it says, 'counteracted by speaking thus.' Therefore, Asaṅga states: 'The Dharma rightly awakened to by the Tathāgata, and his teaching of it, is neither real nor false therein. "Not real" because, as expressed in words, its nature does not exist'—commentary: the substance of words is empty and its own-nature is void—'"Not false" because it does not not exist in the manner of the own-nature expressed in words'—commentary: although words are empty, the principle revealed [by them] exists in its own-nature. Paramārtha states: '"Neither real nor false" has in general three meanings. First, the explicit and implicit. Second, reaching and not reaching. Third, revealing the real fact. As for the first meaning: taking the principle relying on explicit text is not false; taking the principle relying on implicit text is not real. As for the next meaning: following words can reach the path, and so it is not false; because the place of the path is free from words, it is not real. As for the latter meaning: to say "not real" is actually not real; to say "not false" is actually not false. Since both false and real are actual, this reveals [...] the words of truth. However, the Tathāgata's teaching of the Dharma has both the real and the false. According to the four intentions and four reliances [...] the *Mahāyāna-sūtrālaṃkāra* says: First, the intention of equality. As when it is said, "The past Vipaśyin Buddha [...] is me," and so forth—commentary: this is spoken in reference to the equality of cause and fruit of the dharmakāya. Second, the intention of an alternative meaning. As when it is said, "All dharmas are without own-nature, unborn," and so forth—commentary: previously, for the two vehicles, he taught the pudgala-nairātmya; now, for bodhisattvas, he teaches dharma-nairātmya. Yet the previous teaching of pudgala-nairātmya had its intention in the alternative meaning of dharma-nairātmya. Third, the intention of another time. As when it is said, "If someone aspires to see Amitābha, all attain rebirth [there]"—this is spoken in this way because the rebirth is attained at another time, and so forth. Fourth, the intention of another inclination. When that person has such wholesome roots, the Tathāgata either praises or [...] their small [...] Therefore, it is said in this way, and so forth. Now, regarding these four [...] intentions, the matters may be real or false, but together with [...] intention, they are called intentions. Setting up [...] is to destroy eight obstacles. The intention of equality destroys the obstacle of looking down on the Buddha. Someone might say: "He was [...] like that, produced and extinguished. Arising entails extinguishing. The Buddha is the same as me," thus giving rise to slight and pride. To destroy this [...], the intention of equality [states]: "The past Vipaśyin Buddha was indeed my body; how could I be like your arising and extinguishing?" Setting up the intention of an alternative meaning destroys the obstacle of looking down on the Dharma. Someone might say: "Even infants can see form and hear sounds; what difficulty is there in understanding the meaning of human thought and phenomena?" To destroy this obstacle, the three non-natures of dharmas are taught, which are realized only upon entering the [bodhisattva] grounds. Setting up the intention of another time destroys the obstacle of indolence. Someone, hearing that one is reborn in a pure land only after cultivating practices over a long time, gives rise to indolence upon hearing this. To destroy this obstacle, it is said that [...] rebirth without regression. Setting up the intention of another inclination destroys the latter five obstacles: First, it destroys the obstacle of few desires. [...] already not holding the precepts; hence one must disparage giving and praise the precepts. Second, it destroys the obstacle of lustful conduct: that is, being lustful for [...] realms, praising the pure land. Third, it destroys the obstacle of proud conduct: that is, clinging to one's own land as supreme; hence one must [...] wonderful pure land. Fourth, it destroys the obstacle of remorseful conduct: that is, [regarding Devadatta who] pushed down a mountain to crush the Buddha, not seeing foul [...] giving rise to affliction; hence it must be taught that committing harmful acts against the Buddha leads to rebirth in good destinies, the text [...] the Buddha's deeds; here it should be explained at length. Fifth, to destroy the obstacle of indefinite [capacity]: there are those who cling to the idea that the two vehicles are not definitively to become Buddhas. To destroy this obstacle, prediction and the One Vehicle must be taught. Among these five, all first [...] praise and then disparage; hence they are called intentions of inclination. As for the four reliances, the *Mahāyāna-sūtrālaṃkāra* calls them four sections. First, the section of causing [entry]: teaching the śrāvakas to enter the Dharma meaning so as to prevent them from fearing the existence of form and so forth—commentary: causing them to realize pudgala-nairātmya. Second, the section of characteristics: with regard to the three natures such as parikalpita, being without substance, without arising, and possessing intrinsically pure own-nature, explaining all dharmas—commentary: causing bodhisattvas to realize dharma-nairātmya. Third, the section of counteraction: relying on severing all faults to counteract obstacles—commentary: universally for the former two kinds of persons; for the Hīnayāna, teaching [...] doors to cause them to be free from four analogies; for the Mahāyāna, teaching suchness to cause them to be free from eight analogies. Fourth, the section of secrets: relying on [...] profound words and indirect words to attain the meaning—commentary: to defeat non-Buddhists [...] un-firm, firm understanding, dwelling well in inversion [...] for [...] un-firm refers originally to afflictions; now it denotes [...] being able to be firm amidst the un-firm means not departing [...] means understanding. Inversion refers to permanence, bliss [...] then becomes a noble one. Truly, because the name 'dwelling well' extends [...] If one clings to the analogy, one is called ordinary; if one understands the analogy, one becomes a noble one [...] Afflicted by afflictions: the name 'affliction' denotes person and phenomena [...] afflicted by afflictions, thus not departing from saṃsāra. The bodhisattva, for [...] characteristic, calls it enjoyment. Because of enjoying the bliss of Dharma. Therefore Paramārtha says [...] not grasping real existence. This true non-reliance clings to the false [...] because of seeing. The mind has abiding and attachment; because of abiding and attachment, one cannot attain non-[...] pervasive and non-pervasive. And when it says 'darkness,' there are three: first, darkness; second, [...] darkness can be destroyed by sunlight; the great darkness [...] refers to a person born blind; one who once had eyes belongs to the great [...] skin, flesh, and mental crust: worldly delusion can temporarily [...]; hence, only like darkness [...] destroyed; hence, like the great darkness of mental delusion. Relying on the bodhisattva ascending the grounds, only then can they remove [...] darkness. If the bodhisattva's mind has an abiding, then they fall into the ten notions and cannot realize the seventeen empties [...] blindness and darkness. The ten notions and seventeen empties are as explained in the *Madhyāntavibhāga*.

1.29

The sūtra says: 'Subhūti, in future ages...' up to 'receive, uphold, read, and recite...' From the initial [analogy of the sands of] the Gaṅgā above down to here, the main general meaning was to clarify the scripture [...]. From here to the later question, the doctrinal intent is to reveal cultivation and practice. Cultivation and practice has two layers: first, [...] cultivation; second, praising the karma to encourage cultivation. There are four folds: first, teaching the cause; second, indicating the fruit; third, citing the inferior; fourth, displaying the superior. This is teaching the cause. Being able [to practice] regarding this sūtra is the locus of cultivation. To receive, uphold, read, and recite are the activities of cultivation. Cultivation is of two kinds: first, the text; second, the meaning. The text has three kinds: first, receiving; second, upholding; third, reading and reciting. The meaning also has three: first, listening to it from another; second, inwardly contemplating it oneself; third, practicing as taught. Through this meaning, two virtues are further accomplished: first, for the speaker, being able to benefit others; second, for the practitioner, being able to benefit oneself. Through benefiting oneself and benefiting others, one can reveal the Dharma. There are two kinds, and there are three kinds of Dharma of persons. The two: first, revealing the expressing, which refers to the twelve divisions of scriptures, namely the words; second, revealing the expressed, which refers to the path and the fruit, namely the meaning of cultivation. As for the three persons: first, one who can uphold; second, one who can speak; third, one who can practice. The one who can practice achieves self-benefit and matures one's own wholesome roots; the one who can speak achieves other-benefit and matures others' wholesome roots; the one who can uphold benefits both self and others, because by remembering and upholding it oneself, one explains it to others. However, in terms of both text and meaning, together there are ten kinds of correct practice: first, copying; second, making offerings; third, circulating; fourth, attentively listening; fifth, reading oneself; sixth, remembering and upholding; seventh, reciting oneself; eighth, explaining extensively; ninth, contemplating; tenth, [practicing].

Linked texts (1)

金剛經疏 — Classical Chinese