維摩經疏卷第三．第六 6.72

6.72

From here below, the second part clarifies the offering in relation to the preceding Dharma; within this there are two: First, relying on the teaching that explains the principle, faithful understanding, acceptance, and upholding constitute the inferior offering. Second, from "Furthermore, in ..." onward, relying on the meaning of those words and practicing in accordance with what is taught, fully plumbing the true nature constitutes the superior offering. In the former, it first clarifies self-benefit; from "With upāya ..." onward, transforming others; "When practice is perfected, this is named ..." below concludes. Regarding the second, practicing in accordance with what is taught as the supreme offering, there is first an explanation and then a conclusion. Within the explanation there are four: 1. briefly relying on the practice of the four reliances as the Dharma-offering; 2. from "In accordance with ..." onward, briefly relying on the contemplation of the twelve links of dependent origination to clarify the Dharma-offering; 3. from "Relying on the meaning ..." onward, extensively clarifying the four reliances to present the offering; 4. from "In accordance with the Dharma ..." onward, extensively clarifying the twelve links of dependent origination to present the offering. In the first, "Furthermore, in all dharmas, practicing in accordance with what is taught" means practicing in accord with the Dharma of the four reliances. In the second, briefly clarifying the twelve links of dependent origination: the words "in accordance [with the Dharma], contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination" mean that dharmas born of causes and conditions are inherently empty in substance; contemplating in reliance on this is called "in accordance." This phrase is general; from "leaving behind wrong views" onward is specific. Within the specific there are two: first, clarifying pudgala-nairātmya; second, from "and regarding causes and conditions ..." onward, clarifying the attainment of dharma-nairātmya. In the former, "abandoning various views and attaining the forbearance of non-arising" refers to attaining the forbearance of non-arising of the first bhūmi. At the time of directly realizing this forbearance, not seeing a self, a person, or sentient beings is called pudgala-nairātmya. "And having no conflict or contention regarding causes and conditions" next clarifies dharma-nairātmya. Within this, Bright Face [states]: Cause and effect are not non-existent; because a cause can induce an effect, it is called "no conflict"; because the effect conforms to the past cause, it is termed "no contention." Or it may be said: contemplating the essential nature of causes and conditions as empty and quiescent—emptiness does not obstruct existence, which is called "no conflict"; existence does not obstruct emptiness, and so it says "no contention." Having no conflict with dharmas, having no contention with people, and being free of "mine": because dharmas and self are empty, one contemplates what was just mentioned; cause and effect are empty and quiescent in their essential nature. Being empty and quiescent, there is no self; when even the self is empty and non-existent, how could there be a "mine" that can be apprehended? Third, in re-expanding on the former four reliances, there are three sections of analysis: 1. explaining the names; 2. bringing forth the essences; 3. clarifying the sequence. First, explaining the names: "Rely on the meaning and do not rely on the phrasing": the principle that is explained is named "meaning" (artha); because one depends on it to initiate practice, it is spoken of as "relying." The teaching that explains is named "phrasing" (vyañjana); although one grasps the meaning through phrasing, nevertheless the phrasing is not the meaning. Just as by pointing a finger one sees the moon, yet upon catching sight of the moon one forgets the finger; attaining the principle, one discards the explanation; therefore, rely on the meaning and do not rely on the phrasing. "Rely on wisdom [and do not rely on consciousness]": wisdom can penetrate the principle, making decisive understanding; therefore, one must rely on it. Consciousness merely discriminates and gives rise to defiled attachment; casting it aside and not following it, therefore one does not rely on it. "Rely on the sūtras of definitive meaning and do not rely on the sūtras of non-definitive meaning": revealing the real clearly is called a sūtra of definitive meaning; depending on it to take hold of understanding, it is spoken of as "relying." Words that veil and obstruct are called sūtras of non-definitive meaning; casting them aside and not following them, it is said that one does not rely on them. Definitive and non-definitive meanings briefly have four approaches: 1. the approach of Dharma-seal versus non-seal; 2. the approach of explaining the permanent versus the impermanent; 3. the approach of the explicit versus the esoteric; 4. the approach of concise phrasing versus expansive discourse. As for the approach of Dharma-seal versus non-seal: the Dharma-seals are three: (1) all conditioned things are impermanent; (2) nirvāṇa is quiescent; (3) all dharmas are without self. If any teaching is sealed by the seal of these three principles, it is called definitive; that which contradicts the three Dharma-seals is not a definitive sūtra. By this reasoning, none of the three baskets, the two vehicles, and the twelvefold scriptures are not definitive, because they abandon afflictions, karma, and suffering. The teachings of the non-Buddhists are not definitive sūtras, because they cannot forever leave behind delusions, karma, and suffering. As for the permanent versus the impermanent: as the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Furthermore, the śrāvaka vehicle is called non-definitive; the unexcelled Mahāyāna is called definitive. If it is said that the Tathāgata is impermanent and mutable, it is called non-definitive; if it is said that the Tathāgata is eternally abiding and immutable, it is called definitive." The intent of this sūtra is: if in a sūtra it is said that the Buddha is the eternally abiding and immutable dharmakāya, this is called definitive; that which is contrary to this is called non-definitive; this shows that the Hīnayāna explanation of the Buddha as non-eternal is non-definitive. As for the approach of the explicit versus the esoteric: the Saṃdhinirmocana states: "In the past, during the second period, the World-Honoured One, solely for those who set out to practice the Mahāyāna, relying on the fact that all dharmas lack intrinsic nature, turned the wheel of the True Dharma with an esoteric aspect. Although it was even more wondrous, it was also surpassable and not yet definitive." That is, teaching that all natures are empty—the teaching of the three non-natures—is called non-definitive. The Vijñaptimātratā states: "Therefore, the Buddha with esoteric intent stated that all dharmas lack intrinsic nature, not that there is a complete absence of nature; this is called definitive." As for the approach of concise phrasing versus expansive discourse: although it is a clear teaching of the Mahāyāna, when it is at first only briefly stated, discussing the principle incompletely and not fully exhausting what is clarified, it is called non-definitive. This treats definitive and non-definitive based on whether the spoken meaning is expansive or concise, not on whether the principle explained is ultimate or not ultimate. Herein, the first approach makes sentient beings abandon the heterodox and return to the orthodox, which is called definitive and non-definitive: all Buddhist sūtras are called definitive, while what non-Buddhists teach is called non-definitive. The second approach makes them abandon the small and return to the great: all Mahāyāna is called definitive, while all Hīnayāna teachings are called non-definitive. The third approach makes them abandon the concealed and return to the explicit: all clear verbal teachings of the Mahāyāna are called definitive; even though it is Mahāyāna preaching, if it is esoteric, it is called non-definitive. The fourth approach makes it concise or expansive in accordance with the Dharma: all sūtras of verse summaries whose words are concise and non-exhaustive are called non-definitive; sūtras that are not verse summaries, whose words are expansive and exhaustive, are spoken of as definitive. With these four approaches the meaning is largely encompassed; one should reflect extensively according to what is appropriate. Now in this sūtra all four meanings are present: in the Chapter on Upāya, Vimalakīrti speaks of the five impermanent dharmas—this is the approach of the Dharma-seal; as in the Chapter on the Disciples, Vimalakīrti instructs Ānanda: "The Buddha's body is asaṃskṛta and does not fall within enumerations"—this is the approach of permanence; in the Chapter on the Buddha Land, Ratnakūṭa praises the Buddha's preaching that dharmas are neither existent nor non-existent, arising through causes and conditions, being empty yet eternally existent—this is the explicit approach; in this sūtra, prose is extensive while verses are few—this is the approach of expansive discourse. Since the four meanings are complete, it is a definitive teaching that can be relied upon and accepted. "Rely on the Dharma and do not rely on the person": undertaking practice by taking recourse in the Dharma is called relying on the Dharma; obtaining the Dharma and relinquishing the person is called not relying on the person. Question: As for relying on the Dharma and not relying on the person, does it mean no person whatsoever can be relied upon, or are there also those who can be relied upon? Answer: They can be relied upon. Setting person against Dharma makes four propositions: 1. The Dharma may be relied upon, referring to the Mahāyāna Dharma, while the person may not be relied upon, referring to a Hīnayāna person. 2. The person may be relied upon, referring to a Mahāyāna person, namely a bodhisattva of the four reliances, while the Dharma is not relied upon, referring to the Hīnayāna Dharma. 3. Both person and Dharma may be relied upon, referring to Mahāyāna persons and Dharma. 4. Neither person nor Dharma may be relied upon, referring to the persons and Dharma of the two vehicles. Setting phrasing against meaning also forms four propositions, which can be understood following the preceding. 2. Explaining the essence: "Meaning" is precisely the principle, having tathatā as its essence. "Wisdom" is the realizing wisdom, having the two wisdoms of mūla-jñāna and pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna as its essence. The teaching has sound, names, sentences, and phonemes as its essence. The essence of the Dharma has the six pāramitās as its essence. 3. Clarifying the sequence: "Meaning" is precisely the principle, which is realized by wisdom, and therefore is clarified first. "Wisdom" is realizing wisdom; because wisdom arises relying on the principle, it is clarified next. The teaching of sūtras of definitive meaning is expounded on the basis of wisdom, and therefore is discussed next. "Dharma" is what is explained, which is the practice-dharma, and therefore is clarified last. Fourth, in expanding on the twelve links of dependent origination above: in the text, it first explains, and from "Making such ..." onward concludes to show the benefit. Within the explanation there are two: first general, then specific. In the general, "in accordance with the characteristics of dharmas, having no entry and no return": dharmas are the dharmas of causes and conditions; above, conforming to causes and conditions, one knew that dharmas do not arise; now, conforming to causes and conditions, one knows that dharmas are inexhaustible. Dharmas exist through conditions and cease through conditions: their existence does not come from the future; their cessation does not go into the past; hence it says "having no entry and no return." In the specific explanation below: "ignorance is ultimately extinguished," etc.: broadly contemplating causes and conditions has both reverse and direct [modes]. The difference between reverse and direct has three types: 1. Distinction in terms of phenomena: from the beginning moving to the end, tracing causes and proceeding toward effects, is called direct; from the end moving to the beginning, tracing effects and seeking causes, is called reverse. 2. Distinction in terms of the arising and ceasing of causes and conditions: contemplating the arising of the twelve links is called direct; their dissipation and cessation is reverse. 3. Distinction in terms of principle: contemplating the twelve links as nominal existence is direct, conforming to the existence of dharmas; lacking intrinsic nature and being empty and quiescent is reverse, running contrary to existence. Among the three, the first two are known in common by Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; the last one belongs solely to Mahāyāna. What is clarified here corresponds in meaning to the latter approach; that is, the reverse contemplation. Ignorance has ceased in the past, does not arise in the future, and does not abide in the present; because the three times are empty, it is non-ceasing; therefore it is inexhaustible. Furthermore, it says: ignorance arises from conditions—arising, it is non-arising; it ceases from conditions—ceasing, it is non-ceasing. Neither arising nor ceasing, ignorance is ultimately extinguished. Ignorance having ceased, even old age [and death] will likewise be inexhaustible. The specific contemplation above having finished, below concludes to reveal the benefit: "Making such a contemplation": of the twelve links of dependent origination, practicing the aforementioned direct contemplation, dharmas fundamentally do not arise and have nothing to cease; this is called the mark of inexhaustibility. When there is no dharma that can be exhausted, that is indeed ultimate extinction. "No longer giving rise to views" directly clarifies the benefit of contemplation: all [views of] annihilation, permanence, existence, non-existence, and so forth no longer arise. The above specifically clarifies the offering of practice; "this is named the supreme Dharma-offering" concludes by praising it in general. All of the above together constitutes the first part, Candracattra inquiring of the Tathāgata, and his preaching for him.