淨名經集解關中疏 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.1

Exposited by the Śramaṇa Daoye of Zisheng Monastery

The three preceding chapters outside the room explained the requests. The six chapters below explain gathering in. Furthermore, the previous chapters explained incapacity, revering his virtue and generating faith; this explains being capable of inquiring, hearing, awakening, and entering. The sūtra text of the six chapters takes the inquiry after illness as its principal cause. This chapter stands at the head, so it uniquely receives the name; those below receive distinct chapter titles according to their distinct meanings. Now, there are two kinds of illness: first, the real retribution of sentient beings; second, the expedient manifestation of the bodhisattva. As the chapter text explains, the major text is divided into two: first, this chapter briefly explains the two illnesses; the five chapters below broadly explain the two illnesses. 'At that time, the Buddha told Mañjuśrī: "Go to Vimalakīrti to inquire after his illness."' This chapter's receiving the command has two parts: first, commanding; second, respectfully receiving the command. This first is commanding. Zhao says: 'Mañjuśrī' in the Qin language is 'Wondrous Virtue'. The sūtra states that he previously attained buddhahood under the name 'Honored One of the Dragon Lineage'.

2.4

"Mañjuśrī addressed the Buddha, saying: 'World-Honored One, that superior man is difficult to match in dialogue.'" This second part on respectfully receiving the command has five sections: first, respectfully inquiring about the mission regarding illness; second, the great assembly acting as attendants; third, the exchange between guest and host; fourth, declaring the purpose and inquiring about the illness; fifth, the audience gaining benefit. In the first section there are three parts: first, general modesty; second, stating his superior virtue; third, revering the command to go and inquire. This is the first. Shi says: 'His words surpass me; how could they merely surpass the various worthies?' This is deeply conveying his sentiment; how could it be actual fact? Zhao says: Why must the thirty-two thousand necessarily be incapable? Why must Mañjuśrī alone be the foremost? My sense is that the ultimate persons have limitless transformations and schemes, showing varied traces of hiding and appearing; therefore, they alternately manifest as long and short in response to the feelings of beings. Who would dare decisively establish their superiority and inferiority or debate their gains and losses? Since Mañjuśrī was about to align with Zhao's mind and fulfill the mission, he first praised Jingming's virtue to generate in the assembled multitude the thought that he is difficult to encounter. That man's path is lofty and difficult to match in dialogue; he would simply receive the Buddha's holy command and go inquire after his illness.

2.5

"He deeply penetrates the true mark and is skilled at expounding the essentials of the Dharma." The second states his superior virtue, in three parts: first, the two knowledges are deep and broad; second, the fruits; third, the two benefits are fully accomplished. This first: deeply penetrating praises the real; eloquence praises the expedient. This is the first. Internally he can deeply penetrate the real principle; externally he can talk about the essential points of the Dharma. Zhao says: Because the true mark is difficult to fathom, yet he can deeply penetrate it, he is skilled. To bring forth many meanings with succinct words praises his virtue in expounding the essential purports of the Dharma.

2.6

"His eloquence is without hesitation; his wisdom is unobstructed." This praises his expedient means and wisdom; it is also internal wisdom and external eloquence. Zhao says: His admonishing eloquence responds perfectly without hesitation; his wisdom penetrates everywhere without obstruction.

2.7

"He knows all the rules and ceremonies of bodhisattvas, and enters all secret treasuries of the Buddhas." This praises the perfection of the virtues of cause and fruit. Through the cause, he knows the bodhisattva's methods of cultivation; through the fruit, he enters the secret treasuries of the Buddhas in transforming beings. The three secrets are clarified in seven-character verses. Zhao says: The secret treasuries of the Buddhas' body, speech, and mind.

2.8

"Subduing the hosts of Māras, sporting with supernormal knowledges"—this [passage] praises the perfection of the merits of benefiting both [oneself and others]. Subduing Māras benefits others, and attaining liberation benefits oneself; this is the first. Kumārajīva says: "Transforming beings through supernormal knowledges is not ultimate reality, hence it is termed 'sport'. Furthermore, although supernormal knowledges are great, for me there is no difficulty, just like playing. Furthermore, skillfully entering, arising from, and dwelling in them with unfettered ease is like playing." Sengzhao says: "Roaming in supernormal knowledges to transform people is how he entertains himself."

2.9

"His wisdom and upāya have both achieved liberation"—this is liberation through self-benefit. Sengzhao says: "Exhausting wisdom's function and carrying through the expedient path, he is therefore said to have 'achieved liberation'."

2.10

"Even so, I will respectfully accept the Buddha's holy command and go there to inquire after his illness"—this is the third [part], revering the command and going to inquire. Sengzhao says: "His virtue being like this, he is not one [I] could match; I must respectfully accept the holy command and only then proceed."

2.11

"Thereupon, the bodhisattvas, great disciples, and Śakra, Brahmā, and the Four Heavenly Kings within the assembly all had this thought: 'Now these two great beings, Mañjuśrī and Vimalakīrti, will converse together; they will surely expound the wondrous Dharma.' Instantly eight thousand bodhisattvas, five hundred śrāvakas, and hundreds of thousands of devas and humans all wished to follow them"—the attendance of the great assembly has two parts in the text: first, their thoughts; second, their going. This is the first, their thoughts. Sengzhao says: "At a superior assembly of mahāsattvas there must be a wondrous exposition, so practically all wished to go along together."

2.12

"Thereupon Mañjuśrī, respectfully surrounded by the hosts of bodhisattvas, great disciples, and all the devas and humans, entered the great city of Vaiśālī"—second, Mañjuśrī goes together with the assembly. Sengzhao says: "The Āmrapālī Grove was outside the city; Jingming's room was inside the city."

2.13

"At that time the elder Vimalakīrti thought to himself: 'Now Mañjuśrī is coming along with the great assembly.' He then used his supernormal power to empty his room, removing everything as well as all his attendants, leaving only a single couch on which he lay down because of his illness"—from here down is the third [section], clarifying the reciprocal interaction between guest and host. The text has four parts: 1. emptying the room and manifesting signs; 2. seeing the signs and knowing what they indicate; 3. praising the difficulty and bidding welcome; 4. relating what was praised. This is the first, Jingming manifesting the signs. Because the doctrine of this sūtra illuminates pure lands and compassionate transformation, there are three signs: first, the empty room indicates Mañjuśrī's inquiry after the illness, entering the room to reveal purity and defilement as equally lands of dharmatā; second, removing the attendants indicates that sentient beings of craving and views equally return to the formlessness of the dharmakāya; third, the single couch and manifesting illness indicates the manifestation of transformation out of great compassion. Hence the text below says: "Although knowing that all buddha-lands and sentient beings are empty, he constantly cultivates pure lands and teaches all living beings." The explanation says: The emptiness of the lands is indicated by knowing the emptiness of the room; the emptiness of sentient beings is indicated by removing the attendants; cultivating the pure land and transforming beings is indicated by manifesting illness. Sengzhao says: "The arising of the manifestation of illness occurs now; emptying the room and removing attendants initiates the origin, and the matter is verified afterward."

2.14

"When Mañjuśrī entered his house, he saw that his room was empty without anything at all, [Vimalakīrti] lying alone upon a single couch"—this is the second, seeing the signs and knowing they have an indication. Daosheng says: "One who sees them grasps their intention."

2.15

"At that time Vimalakīrti said: 'Welcome, Mañjuśrī! Coming with the mark of not coming; seeing with the mark of not seeing'"—this is the third, praising. Kumārajīva says: "In praising him by saying 'welcome,' he wished to clarify that the guest's coming achieved the encounter and the host also received him vacantly. Moreover, as for their seeing one another, departing from that Āmra Grove, [Mañjuśrī] therefore came to behold this manifestation of illness. Now, seeing the dharmakāya mahāsattva does not bring about destruction; hence it is 'good'." Sengzhao says: "Intending to make manifest the dharmakāya mahāsattva, every movement and stir of mind does not contravene the true mark. Through the mark of non-coming he comes; through the true mark of non-seeing they see each other. Being able to come without coming, and being able to see without seeing—being like this, what could be better?"

2.16

"Mañjuśrī said: 'So it is, householder. If one has already come, one does not come again; if one has already gone, one does not go again'"—this is the fourth, Mañjuśrī's concurrence, completing 'not coming and not seeing'. In the abide-in-Dharma there is fundamentally no coming; yet one must depend on the mahāsattva's response-transformation, having already come, to first awaken to non-coming. Coming and going in saṃsāra revolves without end; if one awakens to non-coming, the dharmakāya permanently abides and does not come again.

2.17

"'Why is this? One who comes has nowhere from which to come; one who goes has nowhere to go; that which can be seen can no longer be seen'"—explaining worldly deluded seeing of marks; going and coming are truly non-existent. Because there are coming and going, one can be caused to turn back and awaken. 'Gone and seen' is explained accordingly: the response-coming to the royal palace and the manifested departure at the Twin Trees are examples that can be seen.

2.18

"'Let us set this matter aside for now'"—from here down is the fourth, formally declaring the intentions to inquire after the illness: first declaring the Buddha's mind, then declaring his own feelings. The first was a secondary discussion; next he declares the intentions. Sengzhao says: "Although it is a profound and subtle discussion, the commission has not yet been declared; therefore he temporarily sets aside the discussion and inquires after the illness."

2.19

"'Householder, can this illness be endured? Does the medical treatment reduce it without it progressing to an increase? The World-Honoured One inquires after you with boundless solicitude'"—from here down, formally declaring the Buddha's mind has three clauses: can it be endured? Does it reduce? Does it not increase? As in the reply below: since the illness conditions those [sentient beings] and not me, the inquiring mind also considers that their reduction is my recovery.

2.20

"'Householder, from what cause did this illness arise? How long has it been present? How will it be extinguished?'"—from here down is the second, declaring his own feelings to inquire. The text has two parts: first inquiring into his transformed expedient illness, then inquiring into the actual illness that is transformed. The former again has three parts: 1. inquiring into the causes and conditions of the manifested illness; 2. inquiring into the empty room without attendants; 3. investigating the fundamental characteristic of the illness. The first has question and answer. This is the question. Sengzhao says: "The commission having been declared, he therefore further inquires into the origin of the illness: from what cause did the illness arise? How long ago did it arise? How can it be extinguished?"

2.21

"Vimalakīrti said: 'From ignorance there is craving, and thus my illness arose. Because all sentient beings are ill, therefore I am ill. If all sentient beings' illnesses are extinguished, then my illness will be extinguished'"—this is the second, the reply. First he answers both together, then after the two questions he answers the first question. The previous text had three parts: Dharma, metaphor, and application. The Dharma has the proposition and explanation. Sengzhao says: "Answering how long it has been: what illness does a bodhisattva have? It is out of pity for them that the illness arose. Sentient beings' illness takes ignorance and craving as its root; a bodhisattva's illness takes great compassion as its source. Indeed, sublime origins do not arise [of themselves]; this arises due to compassion. Therefore the arising of the compassionate illness emerges from ignorance and craving, yet ignorance and craving have no beginning, and none know their source. The duration of my illness shares the same root with them. This clarifies the beginning of compassion; one need not speak solely in terms of oneself." Daorong says: "Because sentient beings are ignorant, they have craving; because of craving, they have grasping; because of grasping, they have a body; having a body, they have illness. Because they are ill, my illness arose. Vimalakīrti having initially come long ago, we therefore know his compassion is not recent. 'When their illness is extinguished, then my illness will be extinguished' clarifies that the arising of the illness is not limited [to himself] but equals sentient beings. Newly trained bodhisattvas cannot long dwell in saṃsāra and take on illness for the sake of all; therefore it clarifies that the mahāsattva dwells extensively in illness: tracing back to the prior limit, it begins with generating the mind [for bodhi]; searching forward to the subsequent limit, it is extinguished together with sentient beings. When new trainees hear this, their narrow minds will broaden of themselves; thus merely speaking of the illness's arising and extinguishing makes great compassion self-evident."

2.22

"'Why is this? A bodhisattva enters saṃsāra for the sake of sentient beings; where there is saṃsāra, there is illness. If sentient beings are able to be freed from illness, then the bodhisattva will have no more illness'"—this is the explanation. Sengzhao says: "The dharmakāya is without birth, how much less could it have a physical form? Since it has no form, from what cause could illness arise? Yet taking birth for their sake, he cannot be without form; having a form, he cannot be without affliction. Therefore, in accordance with the duration [of their illness], he shares the same illness with them. If they are freed from illness, the bodhisattva will have no more illness."

2.23

"'For example, just as an elder has only an only son, and if that son falls ill, the parents are also ill; if the son's illness is cured, the parents are also cured'"—this is the second, the metaphor.

2.24

"'The bodhisattva is just like this: he loves all sentient beings as his own children. If sentient beings are ill, then the bodhisattva is ill; if sentient beings' illness is cured, the bodhisattva is also cured'"—this is the third, the application. Both can be seen in the text.

2.25

"'You also asked: "From what cause did this illness arise?" The bodhisattva's illness arises from great compassion'"—second, answering back to the first question. Sengzhao says: "The bodhisattva's illness takes great compassion as its root, arising due to it. This answers the first question."

2.26

"Mañjuśrī said: 'Householder, for what reason does this room have no attendants?'"—from here down inquires into the empty room without attendants. Having a body, one must rely on provisions for life; having an illness, it is reasonable to have attendants. Why are both three? This is the first inquiry.

2.27

"Vimalakīrti said: 'All buddha-lands are also empty'"—this first answers the emptiness of the room. When sentient beings are deluded, there are the three realms; the emptiness of the room illustrates this.

2.28

"He also asked: 'By means of what are they empty?'"—Sengzhao says: "Emptiness is empty through having no things; by means of what is a buddha-land empty? He is about to discern the meaning of ultimate emptiness."

2.29

"[Vimalakīrti] replied: 'They are empty through emptiness'"—Sengzhao says: "Being arises from the mind; the mind arises because of being. When right and wrong are extinguished, deluded marks reside nowhere; therefore through the wisdom of emptiness one empties being, and being is of itself empty. Could it be that one must clear it away only after which it becomes empty?" Daosheng says: "The upper 'emptiness' is the wisdom of emptiness; the lower 'emptiness' is the principle of emptiness."

2.30

"He also asked: 'How does emptiness use emptiness?'"—Daosheng says: "If the principle is indeed empty, why use the wisdom of emptiness only after which it is empty?" Sengzhao says: "The upper 'emptiness' is emptiness of dharmas; the lower 'emptiness' is emptiness of wisdom. The fundamental nature of all dharmas is of itself empty; why rely on the emptiness of wisdom only after which they are empty?"

2.31

"[Vimalakīrti] replied: 'Because it is empty through non-conceptual emptiness, it is empty'"—Sengzhao says: "The arising of wisdom emerges from conceptual discrimination; yet all dharmas are without marks, so when wisdom is non-conceptual, that is the emptiness of wisdom. All dharmas being without marks is the emptiness of dharmas. When wisdom does not discriminate dharmas, there is the emptiness of wisdom. Could there be a separate wisdom relied upon to empty dharmas?"

2.32

"He also asked: 'Can emptiness be conceptualized?'"—Sengzhao says: "Asking: can the emptiness of wisdom and the emptiness of dharmas be conceptualized?"

2.33

"[Vimalakīrti] replied: 'Conceptualization is also empty.' Sengzhao says: "The previous words were merely conceptualizing non-conceptualization. If one can conceptually discriminate without a mind of discrimination, although discriminating all day long, one has never discriminated."

2.34

"He also asked: 'Where should emptiness be sought?'"—Sengzhao says: "Above, he illuminated emptiness by relying on right wisdom; fearing that some might suppose the meaning of emptiness lies in the correct and not in the erroneous, he therefore asks where the meaning of emptiness lies, so as to clarify that the erroneous and the correct are not different."

2.35

"[Vimalakīrti] replied: 'It should be sought within the sixty-two views.' Daosheng says: "Seeking again, what could be sought that would not be so?" [Vimalakīrti] replied: 'It should be sought within the sixty-two views of the buddhas' liberation.' Sengzhao says: "Relinquishing false views is called liberation; that all are liberation is called false views. Thus, between liberation and falsity, which serves as the source? Being sourceless, they are merely one. Therefore, in seeking false views, one should root them in liberation."

2.36

"He also asked: 'Where should the buddhas' liberation be sought?'"—Daosheng says: "Where else should it be sought?"

2.37

"[Vimalakīrti] replied: 'It should be sought within the mental activities of all sentient beings'"—Sengzhao says: "Sentient beings' mental activities are precisely that from which liberation arises. Moreover, the erroneous and the correct share the same root; bondage and liberation are a single gate. Tracing back to their true nature, there has never been any difference. Therefore the buddhas' liberation should be sought within sentient beings' mental activities."

2.38

"'And as to what you, Benevolent One, asked: "Why are there no attendants?"'"—this is the second part, answering the absence of attendants, repeating the question.

2.39

"'All Māras and all tīrthikas are my attendants'"—this second part of the reply first specifies the persons. Sengzhao says: "Worldly attendants merely revere oneself, obey orders, and serve what is needed; they are called attendants. A bodhisattva's attendants take those who disdain oneself, disobey orders, and oppose the Way, harmonizing them with the Mahāyāna to suitably obey and attend upon the dharmakāya; they are called attendants. Therefore the hosts of Māras and divergent paths are foremost among those who attend." Tiantai says: "Māras are attached to the afflictions of feeling; tīrthikas cling to the afflictions of view. Dhyāna meditation again loves wisdom; wisdom destroys views. Since love and views accord with the true dharmakāya, they are attendants."

2.40

"'Why is this? The Māras delight in saṃsāra, but the bodhisattva does not abandon saṃsāra; the tīrthikas delight in all views, but the bodhisattva does not waver amidst all views'"—from here down is the explanation. Kumārajīva says: "This means he does not see them as having distinct marks." Sengzhao says: "Māras delight in attachment to the five desires and do not seek to transcend the world, hence they are bound to saṃsāra. Divergent students, although seeking transcendence, cling to their own path, hence they are bound to false views. The mahāsattva contemplates saṃsāra as identical with nirvāṇa and does not abandon it; he contemplates false views as identical with right views and thus can remain unmoving. Not wavering and not abandoning, he can therefore take them directly as attendants."

2.41

Mañjuśrī said: "Householder, what characteristics does this illness have?" Below, this is the third [part], inquiring about the characteristics of the illness with reference to the dharmakāya. As for why there is this repeated inquiry, [Dao]rong says: "There are two gates for entering the Buddha-dharma: the first is great compassion, and the second is wisdom. Proceeding from the shallow to the deep, because propagating it has [levels of] shallowness, he first spoke of great compassion and afterwards spoke of the true mark." In the text, the questions and answers are threefold, and this is the first. [Seng]zhao says: "Having known the origin of the arising of the illness, [he now asks about] the characteristics of the illness that has arisen. The four hundred and four illnesses each have distinct characteristics; what characteristic does the illness of great compassion have? Intending to clarify that one who responds to beings to manifest illness without [a substantial] great compassion, though manifesting illness all day long, is all day long devoid of characteristics."

2.42

Vimalakīrti said: "My illness is formless and cannot be seen." [Seng]zhao says: "Great compassion is objectless (anālambana). Being objectless, it is devoid of marks. Manifesting illness by means of this, the illness is likewise devoid of marks. Therefore, he says: 'My illness is formless and cannot be seen.'"

2.43

He asked again: "Is this illness conjoined with the body, or is it conjoined with the mind?" Second, he inquires with reference to body and mind. [Seng]zhao says: "Some, hearing that the illness cannot be seen, might suppose that because mental illness is formless, it cannot be seen; or they might suppose that because physical illness is subtle, it cannot be seen. For this reason, the question arises: with what thing in the body or mind is the illness conjoined, such that you say it cannot be seen?"

2.44

He replied: "It is not conjoined with the body, because the body's marks are separated [from it]. Nor is it conjoined with the mind, because the mind's conjunction is like an illusion." [Seng]zhao says: "The marks of the body are separated, so there is no body; the mind is like an illusion, so there is no mind. Since body and mind are both absent, with what could the illness be conjoined? Since there is no conjunction, there is no illness. Because there is no illness, it cannot be seen."

2.45

He asked again: "Earth element, water element, fire element, wind element—among these four great elements, which great element's illness is it?" Third, he inquires with reference to the four [elements]. [Seng]zhao says: "The birth of the body is constituted by the four great elements. Above, he broadly investigated conjunction with the body; here, he specifically investigates the four great elements, thoroughly probing their origin."

2.46

He replied: "This illness is not the earth element, nor is it separate from the earth element. The water, fire, and wind elements are also like this. Yet the illnesses of sentient beings arise from the four great elements; because they have illness, I therefore have illness." This is the reply. [Seng]zhao says: "The four great elements are fundamentally free from illness and also do not exist [as real entities]. Yet the illusory illnesses of sentient beings arise from the four great elements. Therefore, with an illusory illness, I respond to their ill bodies. Tracing back to their origin, both others and myself lack reality; wishing to examine its characteristics, what could it correspond to?"

2.47

At that time, Mañjuśrī asked Vimalakīrti, saying: "How should a bodhisattva comfort and console a sick bodhisattva?" This is the second [section], inquiring about the actual illness of those to be converted; the text has two parts. First, he asks about comforting and consoling; second, he asks about subduing. Why are there these two questions? [Seng]zhao says: "With skilled consolations outwardly and skilled subduing inwardly, one can then traverse birth and death, sharing illness with the multitude of beings." [Seng]rui says: "The illness of ordinary persons is tormented by grief and suffering, causing unrest. Being ill, sorrow and grief arise; being pressed by illness, suffering, anguish, and a grieving mind arise. Outward distress requires hearing the Dharma to [comfort] the sorrowful and anguished mind; inward urgency should contemplate emptiness to subdue oneself." [Seng]zhao says: "Comforting a sick person should have originated from Mañjuśrī, but he instead asks Jingming because the assembled crowd had focused their minds upon [Vimalakīrti], and also to take testimony from the sick person is indeed the means to examine the meeting of consolation. Intending to elucidate the Great Vehicle's path without realization to comfort the newly assembled bodhisattvas who manifest illness, he therefore raises this question."

2.48

Vimalakīrti said: "Speak of the body being impermanent, but do not speak of revulsion and detachment from the body. Speak of the body having suffering, but do not speak of delighting in nirvāṇa. Speak of the body being devoid of self, yet speak of teaching and guiding sentient beings. Speak of the body being empty and tranquil, but do not speak of ultimate extinguishment." These two [parts contain] the reply, whose text is in four parts: first, consoling with reference to principle; second, consoling with reference to generating great compassion; third, consoling with reference to seeking the great fruit; fourth, concluding the initial enumeration of the four [aspects] such as impermanence. [Seng]zhao says: "The method of consolation should speak to the sick person of the body being impermanent to remove their greed and attachment; it should not speak of revulsion and detachment, causing them to grasp realization. Those who do not contemplate impermanence and do not feel revulsion are ordinary persons; those who contemplate impermanence and feel revulsion are the two vehicles; those who contemplate impermanence but do not feel revulsion are bodhisattvas. Therefore, one should console beginner students, causing them to settle their minds, abide in illness to rescue the multitude of beings, neither reviling birth and death nor delighting in nirvāṇa. This is the mahāsattva's method of consolation." Regarding 'Speak of the body having suffering,' etc., [Seng]zhao says: "Although seeing suffering, one does not delight in the bliss of nirvāṇa; although knowing selflessness, one does not lack teaching and guiding on account of sentient beings being empty; although seeing the body's emptiness, one does not seize the ultimate path of nirvāṇa. Hence, one can peacefully abide in birth and death, sharing illness with sentient beings. Therefore, the comforter proclaims what should be practiced, and does not proclaim what should not be practiced."

2.49

"Speak of repenting past transgressions, but do not speak of entering into the past." This is the second, consoling with reference to great compassion; the text is in three parts. This first part encourages repenting past faults: illness originates from past transgressions; one may only reproach oneself, but must not, on account of illness, abandon great compassion to enter into the past. [Seng]zhao says: "He instructs the sick bodhisattva to repent past offenses. Though the Dharma is bound to the person, he does not say that transgressions have a permanent continuity coming from the future to the present, or from the present entering the past."

2.50

"Through one's own illness, take pity on their illnesses." This is the second, extending oneself to arouse compassion to console oneself. [Dao]sheng says: "I possess wisdom, yet still suffer from illness; how much more so those who have not attained it! Extending oneself to pity others is the vessel of aid and salvation; how could one personally fear death?"

2.51

"One should recognize the suffering of past lives over countless kalpas; one should be mindful of benefiting all sentient beings." This is the third, recalling the past and being mindful of benefiting [others] to console oneself. [Seng]zhao says: "One should reflect that past lives experienced immeasurable suffering; how could the present suffering of a moment be worth grieving over? One must only exert oneself through illness to rescue them from that suffering." [Dao]sheng says: "Being mindful of desiring to benefit all sentient beings, as one enters birth and death, one must not have fear."

2.52

"Recall the merits cultivated, and be mindful of pure livelihood." This is the third, consoling with reference to seeking the great fruit; the text is in three parts. First, relying on merit to seek the great fruit, without improperly surviving by wrong livelihood. [Seng]zhao says: "Fearing that novice bodhisattvas might be disturbed by illness, he therefore encourages them to recall their cultivated merit to gladden their minds." [Dao]sheng says: "If one has merit, wherever one is born will surely be superior; what is there to fear?"

2.53

"Do not give rise to grief and distress; constantly generate vigor." This is the second, putting an end to grief to advance on the path. [Dao]sheng says: "Due to illness, laxity arrives; when laxity arises, grief is consoled. Diligence and awareness of life constantly fear not arriving; how could there still be room for affliction?"

2.54

"One should act as a king of physicians to treat all illnesses." This is the third, encouraging them to seek the great fruit to broadly rescue [others]. [Seng]zhao says: "One should become a great king of Dharma-physicians to heal the illnesses of the multitude of beings; is one's own illness worthy of grief?"

2.55

"A bodhisattva should thus comfort and console a sick bodhisattva, causing them to rejoice." This is the fourth, concluding with rejoicing.

2.56

Mañjuśrī said: "Householder, how should a sick bodhisattva subdue their mind?" This is the first, asking about the method of internal subduing. The five aggregates afflict the body, but this can only be temporarily consoled; for ultimate eternal bliss, one must reside in this body [...]. This encourages cultivating the contemplation of non-seeking to subdue [the mind] internally. The five aggregates afflict the body. [Seng]zhao says: "Above, he asked about the proclamation of consolation; now he asks about the method of subduing the mind. When there are skilled consolations outwardly and skilled subduing inwardly, one can traverse birth and death, sharing illness with the multitude of beings, fully experiencing bitterness and hardship without considering it suffering. This is the reason Jingming dwelt in illness. Intending to show beginners the path of dwelling in illness, he therefore raised this question."

2.57

Vimalakīrti said: "A sick bodhisattva should think: 'Now, this illness of mine has all arisen from the delusive marks, inversions, and afflictions of previous lives. There is no real entity; who is the one experiencing the illness?'" This is the second, the reply. The text has three parts: first, elucidating the correct wisdom of prajñā contemplating emptiness; next, elucidating the upāya of great compassion engaging with existence; third, elucidating the equality of both emptiness and existence in quietude and illumination. The first text again has three parts: first, elucidating the emptiness of self; second, elucidating the emptiness of phenomena (dharmas); third, elucidating the emptiness of emptiness. In the first part, there are three: first, examining the unreality and reality of illness; second, knowing it originates from attachment to self; third, eliminating the self to return to truth. In the first of examining illness, there are two: first, examining arising from delusion; second, awakening to the provisional combination of effects. This is the first. [Seng]zhao says: "The method of dwelling in illness requires first knowing the root of the illness. Knowing the arising of the illness, it is entirely due to the delusive marks and inversions of previous lives. Because of inversion, there are afflictions; once afflictions have arisen, one cannot be without a body. Having a body, one cannot be without affliction. Tracing back to its origin, it is unreal and deceptive. Since the root is unreal, who is the one experiencing the illness? This clarifies the beginner practitioner's first practice of the contemplation of selflessness."

2.58

"Why is this? Because the four great elements combine, it is provisionally called a 'body.' The four great elements have no master, and the body is also devoid of self." Second, awakening to the provisional aggregation of effects, recognizing selflessness. The harmony of the four great elements is merely provisionally named 'body.' Since the four great elements have no master, whence could a self of the body arise? For example, a single grain of sand has no oil; a heap of sand is also [the same]. 'Master' and 'self' are merely different names for one thing.

2.59

"Furthermore, the arising of this illness is entirely due to attachment to self. Therefore, toward a self, one should not give rise to grasping." Second, investigating its source: it is due to attachment to self.

2.60

"Having known the root of the illness, one eliminates the notion of a self and the notion of a sentient being." Third, directly demolishing the self. [Seng]zhao says: "The root of the illness is the aforementioned false thoughts. Due to false thoughts, one sees a self and sentient beings. If one awakens to the error of false thoughts, then there is neither self nor sentient beings."

2.61

"One should give rise to the notion of dharmas." This clarifies the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas. The text has three parts: first, indicating dharmas; second, distinguishing the marks of dharmas; third, extinguishing the notion of dharmas. This is the first. [Seng]zhao says: "The notion of a self is a grave affliction, so one removes the notion of self and generates the notion of dharmas. The notion of dharmas is an illness with respect to emptiness, but a medicine with respect to the self. Seeking balance between the lowly and the elevated, one provisionally adopts this as a beginning."

2.62

"One should think: 'It is merely through these dharmas coming together that this body is formed; when arising, it is only dharmas arising, and when ceasing, it is only dharmas ceasing.'" This is the second, distinguishing that there are only dharmas and no self, with two parts: first, examining through the arising and ceasing of cause and effect; second, through dharmas mutually not knowing one another. This is the first. [Seng]zhao says: "The dharmas of the five aggregates provisionally combine into my body; arising is only dharmas, and ceasing is only the collective ceasing of dharmas, with no separate true ruler governing their arising and ceasing. Having removed the notion of self, one only sees dependently arisen dharmas, and thus does not grasp at the marks of dharmas."

2.63

"Furthermore, these dharmas mutually do not know each other; when arising, they do not say 'I arise,' and when ceasing, they do not say 'I cease.'" This examines dharmas mutually not knowing one another. [Seng]zhao says: "The ten thousand things are varied and intricate, yet who causes their gathering and dispersal? When conditions combine, they arise; when conditions disperse, they separate. Gathering and dispersing have no prior [intent]; hence dharmas do not know each other."

2.64

"In order to extinguish the notion of dharmas, that sick bodhisattva should think: 'This notion of dharmas is also an inversion; inversion is a great affliction, and I should abandon it.'"

2.65

"Because of grasping at marks, merits have boundaries; because of realizing marklessness, emptiness is boundless."

2.66

"Practicing the arhat's kindness, because it destroys the thieves of fetters." The arhat [...] thieves, attains the patience of non-arising, and the thieves naturally perish.

2.67

"Practicing the bodhisattva's kindness, because it pacifies sentient beings." Having attained non-arising, one practices kindness without conditions and is able to benefit all.

2.68

"Practicing the Tathāgata's kindness, because it attains the mark of thusness." Having [...] the dharmakāya, where the marks of going and coming are as thusness; now awakening to the mark of thusness is called the Tathāgata's kindness.

2.69

"Practicing the Buddha's kindness, because it awakens sentient beings." Once one's own person has attained non-arising, one is surely able to awaken those who are not yet awakened.

2.70

"Practicing natural kindness, because it is attained without cause." The dharmakāya is truly eternal, covered by delusive confusion; eliminating delusion to cultivate the cause is not an essential cultivation of reality.

2.71

"Practicing bodhi's kindness, because it is equal in one taste." Bodhi is markless, and foes and kin are equal, hence it is 'of one taste.'"

2.72

"Practicing peerless kindness, because it severs all cravings." Having realized the dharmakāya, one is transcendent and singularly realized, separated from craving and attachment.

2.73

"Practicing the kindness of great compassion, because it guides by means of the Great Vehicle." Now awakening to non-arising and ferrying sentient beings beyond suffering is called the Great Vehicle.

2.74

"Practicing tireless kindness, because it contemplates emptiness and selflessness." Having eliminated other and self, weariness and fatigue are perpetually severed; delighting in aiding people, one never rests.

2.75

"Practicing the kindness of Dharma-giving, because there is no begrudging abandonment." Now awakening to true emptiness is called Dharma-giving; because principle encompasses practical virtues, there is no begrudging abandonment.

2.76

"Practicing the kindness of maintaining precepts, because it transforms those who break prohibitions." Awakening to the empty dharmakāya, the śīla is naturally pure; compassion and vows being fulfilled, one can transform those who break prohibitions.

2.77

"Practicing the kindness of forbearance, because it protects both other and self." Truly seeing non-arising, other and self naturally cease; who speaks of insult from another, and what is my forbearance?

2.78

"Practicing the kindness of vigor, because it bears the burden of sentient beings." If there is a self, one tires of transforming people; with non-arising, one shoulders beings without wearying.

2.79

"Practicing the benevolence of dhyāna meditation, because one does not ingest its flavor." Focusing the mind to abide in dhyāna takes the joy of dhyāna as flavor. Awakening to the mind's non-arising, flavor is no flavor.

2.80

"Practicing the benevolence of wisdom, because there is no time one does not know." The correct contemplation of non-arising completely understands the origin and forgets elimination. Because in confronting illnesses everything is medicine, one knows all times.

2.81

"Practicing the benevolence of upāya, because one manifests everything." Having already realized the signless dharmakāya, one is therefore able to manifest forms in accordance with things.

2.82

"Practicing the benevolence without concealment, because the direct mind is pure." The correct contemplation of the Middle Way is far removed from the two extremes of distortion and concealment in principle. Hence it is said to be the direct mind.

2.83

"Practicing the benevolence of the profound mind, because there is no mixed practice." The correct contemplation of non-arising solely undertakes the practice of the Buddhas, yet does not depart from the two vehicles.

2.84

"Practicing the benevolence without deceit, because there is no falsehood." Contemplating emptiness and seeing the true, it matches the principle without falsehood.

2.85

"Practicing the benevolence of peace and bliss, because it causes [beings] to attain the bliss of Buddhahood." The correct contemplation of non-arising is certain to attain the fruit of Buddhahood. [Kumāra]jīva says: "The Sanskrit text says 'abiding in the bliss of nirvāṇa'."

2.86

"A bodhisattva's benevolence is like this." This is the conclusion. Although the names of the benevolences above are different, they all emerge from the correct contemplation. The sūtra says: "Although prajñā is empty, the single mind is replete with the myriad practices." This means that explaining the emptiness of phenomena causes awakening to the myriad practices; attaining the bliss of bodhi is called the bodhisattva's benevolence.

2.87

Mañjuśrī asked again: "What is compassion?" He replied: "Whatever merit a bodhisattva produces is shared with all sentient beings." The second [part] asks and answers about compassion. Sengzhao says: "Pitying their protracted suffering, he does not calculate the merits accumulated by his own person, but vows to share them with all—putting others first and oneself last is the practice of great compassion."

2.88

"What is sympathetic joy?" He replied: "Whenever there is benefit, to rejoice without regret." The third [part] asks and answers about sympathetic joy. Sengzhao says: "Having personally attained the benefit of the Dharma, one rejoices together with the assembly. When both the other and oneself obtain the delight of the Dharma, it is called joy." "What is equanimity?" He replied: "Having no expectations regarding the blessings and merit one produces." The fourth [part] asks and answers about equanimity. Sengzhao says: "From the austere practices of great compassion, grief is born. From the joyful practices of benevolence and sympathetic joy, pleasure is born. Once grief and pleasure are displayed, attachment and aversion arise subtly. Therefore, the practitioner relinquishes the practices of suffering and pleasure, contemplating sentient beings with impartiality. In the correct equanimity of the Mahāyāna, both practice and retribution are forgotten, and hence there is no expectation. The three equals are all signless and objectless, proceeding together with benevolence; since the practice of benevolence is complete, by analogy one may know [these as well]."

2.89

Mañjuśrī asked again: "In the fears of saṃsāra, what should a bodhisattva rely upon?" These are the third [series of] six exchanges of question and answer. Originally, the accumulation of goodness could be increased; furthermore, because the bodhisattva practices emptiness to transform things and deliver people, this question is to make the vast vows firm. The text of the four vast vows is divided into four. These first two exchanges correspond to 'Sentient beings are boundless, I vow to deliver them.' Sengzhao says: "Saṃsāra is fearful, and of fears there is none greater. What does the mahāsattva of compassionate illness rely upon so that he is able to dwell forever in saṃsāra without considering it fearful?"

2.90

Vimalakīrti said: "Within the fears of saṃsāra, a bodhisattva should rely on the power of the Tathāgata's merit." The second [passage] is the reply. Sengzhao says: "The fears of saṃsāra are difficult for the two vehicles; unless one relies on the power of the Tathāgata's merit, who could dwell in it?" [Kumāra]jīva says: "It is also taking mindfulness as reliance, and taking the pursuit of the goal as reliance." Another explanation: "The above saying that the bodhisattva's practice is accomplished is entirely established by the majestic spiritual power of the Buddhas."

2.91

Mañjuśrī asked again: "If a bodhisattva wishes to rely on the power of the Tathāgata's merit, wherein should he abide?" This is the second question.

2.92

He replied: "If a bodhisattva wishes to rely on the power of the Tathāgata's merit, he should abide in delivering all sentient beings." The second [passage] is the reply. Sengzhao says: "Abiding in transforming all, his mind is vast. When his mind is made vast, wherever he goes presents no difficulty. This is what is meant by abiding in the power of the Buddha's merit." Another explanation: "Abiding in the mind of great compassion, the Buddhas protect and remain mindful of him."

2.93

He asked again: "If he wishes to deliver sentient beings, what should he eliminate?" This is the second [question].

2.94

He replied: "If he wishes to deliver sentient beings, he should eliminate their afflictions." The second [passage] is the reply. These two clarify 'Afflictions are boundless, I vow to cut them off.' In the great task of rescuing beings, cutting off delusion comes first. Once the causes of delusion are eliminated, saṃsāra is naturally crossed over.

2.95

He asked again: "If he wishes to eliminate afflictions, what should he practice?" This is the question.

2.96

He replied: "He should practice right mindfulness." This is the reply. These three correspond to 'The good dharmas are boundless, I vow to learn them.' [Dao]sheng says: "Now, afflictions arise merely from deluded feelings. One should immediately contemplate the principle of dharmas, and sequentially dispel them. Yet at the start of contemplation, the seeing of the principle is not yet clear, and the mind does not abide in the principle; one must rely on the power of mindfulness, and only then can one attain contemplation." Another explanation: "Beginning with right mindfulness, one ultimately perfects the myriad goods." Another explanation: "When the myriad goods are uncorrupted, they are all right mindfulness."

2.97

He asked again: "How does one practice right mindfulness?" This is the question.

2.98

He replied: "One should practice the non-arising and non-ceasing." This is the reply. The two exchanges below correspond to 'The supreme Buddha Way, I vow to accomplish.' When the unwholesome is eternally extinguished and the wholesome dharmas are perfected, the Buddha Way is accomplished. Sengzhao says: "Right mindfulness means the correct mind. Being mindful of dharmas, one examines their goodness and badness: what is good increases and is not extinguished; what is bad is extinguished and does not arise."

2.99

He asked again: "What dharmas do not arise, and what dharmas do not cease?" He replied: "The unwholesome does not arise, and wholesome dharmas do not cease." The question and answer accomplish the above, as can be seen.

2.100

He asked again: "What is the root of wholesome and unwholesome?" These are the fourth [series of] six exchanges of question and answer, exhausting the primal delusion of the source of afflictions, realizing that delusion is itself empty of self-nature. This is not like the two vehicles cutting off delusion to witness emptiness. Delusion sequentially matches the afflictions of the five entrenchments; the principle is also like this. Following the text is also good for this question. Sengzhao says: "Having understood that the good can arise and the bad can be eliminated, intending to relinquish both to seek the fundamental, he traces back to their root." [Dao]sheng says: "The good and the bad alternate as each other's roots without ever being controlled. One must seek their great origin and contemplate it, and only then will they be controlled."

2.101

He replied: "The body is the root." This is the reply. Sengzhao says: "Actions good and bad do not arise apart from the body." [Dao]sheng says: "The reason one acts with goodness and badness is for the sake of the body." It is also said: "This is the entrenchment of afflictions of the unified ground of views."

2.102

He asked again: "What is the root of the body?" He replied: "Desire and craving are the root." This is the second exchange. Sengzhao says: "Craving is the root of birth, nurturing the various fetters. All who possess a body invariably stem from it." It is also said: "This is the entrenchment of desire-craving."

2.103

He asked again: "What is the root of desire and craving?" He replied: "False discrimination is the root." This is the third exchange. Sengzhao says: "Dharmas lack fine and foul; false discrimination considers this fine and this foul. Once fine and foul take form, greed and desire are born." It is also said: "This is the entrenchment of form-craving."

2.104

He asked again: "What is the root of false discrimination?" He replied: "Inverted notions are the root." This is the fourth exchange. Sengzhao says: "Dharmas are fundamentally non-existent; inverted notions take them to be existent. Once taken to be existent, one then accommodates their fine and foul, which is called discrimination." It is also said: "This is the entrenchment of existence-craving."

2.105

He asked again: "What is the root of inverted notions?" He replied: "Non-abiding is the root." This is the fifth exchange. The entrenchment of ignorance is fabricated by the deluded mind, having no distinct support to abide in, hence named 'non-abiding'. Sengzhao says: "The mind is like water: when still, it reflects; when agitated, it has no clarity. Murky with folly and craving, fanned by perverse winds, surging and tossing, it has never abided for an instant. Using this to contemplate dharmas, what abiding would it not arrive at? It is like facing a surging spring and demanding its original appearance—this has never been possible. The arising of inverted notions is rooted in non-abiding; the meaning lies here."

First 105 of 553 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

淨名經集解關中疏 — Classical Chinese