[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [淨名經關中釋抄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778) › 2.7.3 # 淨名經關中釋抄 2.7.3 淨名經關中釋抄 2.7.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.7.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7.3) 是即二利行圓去來常益。 無礙妙辯其在茲焉　善得亦云善施者。 大士妙證。 何行不圓。 然隨門引物故各有所美。 善得迹於事施無悋。 而未能窮施之原妙通萬行。 故為淨名開以法也　亦蓋屬為唱和豈曰必然。 設大施會者。 昔父母行施邪祠法。 或殺牛羊人等祀天求福。 善德詭跡居之。 迴邪祠為正施。 而未能即事入埋行大法施。 故淨名因呵以通之也。 如俱舍。 小乘時菩薩方便行六度行。 皆以不惜財寶不惜身命為六度滿。 今大乘皆以六度之行與實相相應。 同真際等法性住大悲願。 一毫之善等施眾生同證菩提。 名法施圓滿也。 故俱舍論頌云為由悲普施。 被折身無忿。 讚歎底沙佛。 以無上菩提此皆以不惜身命圓滿故也。 金剛云。 不住色布施。 乃至割截身體無我無人。 大般若云。 檀波羅蜜清淨。 一切智清淨。 無二無別。 乃至般若清淨亦然。 此以理契實相。 功濟含生。 稱理行施隨根起願。 故名圓滿。 今淨名呵前事中六度。 令人入後實相六度也　持正法起隨喜心者。 此隨喜之喜心亦法喜之喜。 以令彼我持法皆行隨喜心也。 亦以俱持正法故同得法喜　大捨捨萬有者。 方便大士捨怨親。 亦捨無量心。 圓頓大士捨萬有。 方名捨無量。 亦以行窮實相故云捨也　離身心相起精進者。 此有二解。 一云一心非道不悟身心亡身受命名精進。 與實相理合常住實相身心相空名真精進。 有相心生即名懈怠。 故云以離身心相起也　問。 諸論皆云精進波羅蜜體以心所法善十一中進數及取隨行三業為體。 乃至檀以捨惠數及身口等隨行三耶為六度本體。 此六度大體未離五陰身心。 云何此中乃云精進之相離身心取耶。 答。 理不然也。 何者。 大乘深經須窮實相五陰名數。 佛以外道初計邪生故示陰界名數正因緣之法。 引彼二乘令除我見。 奈何解釋深妙仍懷偏小之見乎。 又佛為二乘說陰界入。 欲令悟法無我智有為無常。 亦不欲令於數法多少執計為實。 爾若執為實去道愈。 復次大乘說陰界入法。 亦欲不存法。 何者。 法若定是五陰。 不應說十二入。 若定十二入。 不應說十八界。 五八無定數。 當知數非數。 陰界無定相。 當知相非相。 陰界無定名。 當知名無名。 故上文云。 法無形相如虛空。 故法無名字言語斷故。 此皆即相為無相。 則名為無名。 是即依經非有色受相行識之求。 非有界入之求。 為真求法。 若此而推。 豈可以陰界名數中而辯六度實體耶。 若真求者。 應離身心相即實相中求也。 幸請學者熟詳其致哉　教化眾生起空等者。 若依小乘及諸論明三三昧緣四諦十六行。 摩訶衍經明三三昧因緣。 諸法實相者。 即與經文甚相符會。 何者。 大乘四諦即無生四諦。 俱以苦集等無生為諦。 不以苦集而為諦也。 若以苦集等無生為諦。 諦即實相緣。 此實相起三三昧。 即與小乘永異也。 而經文云教化眾起空等者。 實相之照權實智圓故。 即化而空。 在空者常化。 空有不二權實雙照故云也　不捨有為起無相者。 小乘滅諦滅相為無相。 大乘即相為無相。 即此無相名為實相。 故不捨有而自無也　示現受生而起無作者。 小乘以息諸求作名為無作。 大乘以體作無作故終日作而不求於無作。 此不思議實相之無作也。 乃至下不思二法門品於一解脫門即三解脫皆同。 此道會理無二也　正行善法起於淨命者。 言邪命者謂邪利活命。 若修行之人執陰求善著見起修邪心求善欲活惠命皆邪命也。 若正觀中道即法本真。 萬善自圓。 功德常淨。 既不取相求利資神。 故云淨命　解眾生縛起修行地者。 法性常寂非淺非深而經殊。 行位陳淺深者。 皆引物方便起行次第。 此雖法性之外事。 而是起行之次位也。 又云。 真理非淺非深故無修行次位也。 以惑是有為結縛。 > This means that the practice of twofold benefit is perfected, and going and coming are constant benefits. Unhindered, wondrous eloquence truly resides in this! Regarding "Shande (Śrīgupta/Sudatta) is also called Shanshi (Good Giving)": For a great being's wondrous realization, what practice is not perfected? Yet in accord with the \[different\] approaches they guide beings, each has their particular excellence. Śrīgupta's trace lay in material generosity without stinginess, but he had not yet plumbed the subtle origin of generosity to penetrate the ten thousand practices; therefore Vimalakīrti opened up the Dharma for him. It was also merely a matter of mutual responsive harmony; how could it be said to be inevitable? Regarding "setting up a great sacrificial assembly": In the past, his parents practiced heterodox sacrificial rites, sometimes slaughtering cattle, sheep, humans, and the like to sacrifice to the heavens in pursuit of good fortune. Śrīgupta disguised his traces to dwell among them, turning the heterodox sacrifices into correct giving; yet he was not yet able to enter the ultimate truth through the phenomenal and practice the great Dharma giving. Therefore Vimalakīrti took this opportunity to reprimand him in order to open up his understanding. As in the Kośa: at the stage of the Hinayāna, when a bodhisattva provisionally practices the six perfections, they all take not begrudging wealth and not begrudging life and body as the perfection of the six perfections. Now the Mahāyāna takes the practice of the six perfections corresponding with the true mark, identical with the limit of reality, equal to the Dharma-nature, and abiding in the vows of great compassion—giving even a hair's tip of good equally to sentient beings so that they may together realize bodhi—this is called the perfection of the Dharma-giving. Thus the Kośakārikā says: "Because of compassion, they gave universally; / When their bodies were dismembered, they had no wrath. / Praising the Buddha Tiṣya, / For the sake of unsurpassed bodhi..." These are all due to not begrudging body and life as their perfection. The Diamond \[Sūtra\] says: "Do not abide in form when giving," up to "when my body was cut and severed, there was no notion of self and no notion of a person." The Great Prajñā says: "The purity of the dānapāramitā is the purity of sarvajñā (all-knowledge); they are non-dual and without distinction," and so on up to "the purity of prajñā is also like this." This is to tally with the true mark through principle, its efficacy saving sentient beings, performing generosity in accordance with principle and giving rise to vows in accordance with capacities; therefore it is called perfection. Now Vimalakīrti reprimands the former phenomenal six perfections to lead one into the latter true-mark six perfections. Regarding "upholding the correct Dharma gives rise to the mind of rejoicing": This rejoicing of "rejoicing" is also the joy of Dharma joy, because it causes both oneself and others who uphold the Dharma to practice the mind of rejoicing. It is also because together they uphold the correct Dharma that they equally obtain Dharma joy. Regarding "great equanimity relinquishes the myriad existences": An expedient great being relinquishes enmity and friendship, and also relinquishes the immeasurable minds. A perfect and sudden great being relinquishes the myriad existences; only then is it called the immeasurable of equanimity. It is also called relinquishment because practice has plumbed the true mark. Regarding "leaving behind the marks of body and mind gives rise to vigor": There are two explanations of this. One says: with single-mindedness, where there is no path, one does not awaken; losing body and receiving life is called vigor; harmonizing with the principle of the true mark, constantly abiding in the true mark where the marks of body and mind are empty, is called true vigor. If a mind with marks arises, that is called indolence; therefore it says that it arises by leaving behind the marks of body and mind. Question: The treatises all say that the substance of the perfection of vigor takes the mental factor of vigor among the eleven wholesome mental factors, as well as taking the three activities that accompany it, as its substance; up to generosity taking the mental factor of non-greed and the three activities of body, speech, and so forth that accompany it as the fundamental substance of the six perfections. These general substances of the six perfections have not left the body and mind of the five aggregates. Why does it say here that the mark of vigor is taken by leaving body and mind? Answer: In principle it is not so. Why? Deep sūtras of the Mahāyāna must plumb the true mark, not the nominal enumerations of the five aggregates. Because non-Buddhists initially clung to heterodox origins, the Buddha revealed the dharmas of correct causes and conditions through the nominal enumerations of the aggregates and realms, guiding the two vehicles to eliminate the view of self. Why, in explaining what is profound and wondrous, would one still harbor a biased and lesser view? Moreover, the Buddha taught the aggregates, realms, and bases for the two vehicles, intending to make them realize the wisdom that dharmas are without self and that the conditioned is impermanent; he also did not intend for them to cling to the quantity of enumerated dharmas as real. If they cling to them as real, they depart farther from the Path. Furthermore, when the Mahāyāna speaks of the dharmas of the aggregates, realms, and bases, it also intends not to preserve dharmas. Why? If dharmas were definitely five aggregates, he should not have taught the twelve bases. If definitely twelve bases, he should not have taught the eighteen realms. Five and eight are not fixed numbers; you should know that number is non-number. The aggregates and realms have no fixed marks; you should know that mark is non-mark. The aggregates and realms have no fixed names; you should know that name is non-name. Therefore the text above says: "Dharma has no shape or mark, like empty space; Dharma has no name or word, because speech is severed." These are all regarding marks as markless, and names as nameless. Thus, according to the sūtra, seeking neither form, sensation, perception, volition, nor consciousness, and seeking neither realms nor bases, is the true seeking of Dharma. Inferring from this, how could one discern the real substance of the six perfections from within the nominal enumerations of the aggregates and realms? If one truly seeks, one should leave the marks of body and mind and seek within the true mark itself. I hope scholars will examine this implication thoroughly! Regarding "transforming sentient beings gives rise to emptiness, etc.": If one relies on the Hinayāna and the treatises, they explain the three samādhis as taking the sixteen aspects of the four truths as their objects. The Mahāyāna sūtras explain that the cause and condition of the three samādhis is the true mark of all dharmas; this accords very well with the sūtra text. Why? The four truths of the Mahāyāna are the non-arising four truths; they both take the non-arising of suffering, accumulation, and so forth as the truths, not taking suffering and accumulation \[themselves\] as the truths. If one takes the non-arising of suffering, accumulation, and so forth as the truth, the truth is the true mark. Giving rise to the three samādhis taking this true mark as an object is forever different from the Hinayāna. Yet the sūtra text says "transforming sentient beings gives rise to emptiness, etc." because the illumination of the true mark perfects both provisional and ultimate wisdom. Thus, transforming is itself emptiness, and those who abide in emptiness constantly transform; emptiness and existence are non-dual, and provisional and ultimate are doubly illuminated, hence it is said thus. Regarding "not relinquishing the conditioned gives rise to the markless": The Hinayāna's truth of cessation extinguishes marks to make the markless. The Mahāyāna takes marks themselves to be markless. This very marklessness is called the true mark. Therefore, without relinquishing existence, it is spontaneously non-existent. Regarding "manifesting rebirth while giving rise to the wishless": The Hinayāna takes resting all seeking and doing as the wishless. The Mahāyāna takes the essence of doing to be non-doing; therefore, throughout the whole day it acts without seeking non-doing. This is the wishless of the inconceivable true mark. Down to the "Inconceivable Non-Dual Dharma Gate Chapter", in one gate of liberation the three liberations are identical. This path tallies with the principle and has no duality. Regarding "correctly practicing wholesome dharmas gives rise to pure livelihood": Wrong livelihood refers to living on improper gain. If a practitioner clings to the aggregates to seek the good, attaches to views to give rise to cultivation, or with a wrong mind seeks the good wishing to sustain the life of wisdom, these are all wrong livelihood. If one correctly contemplates the middle way, that is the fundamentally real of the dharmas; the myriad goods are spontaneously perfected, and merit is constantly pure. Since one does not grasp at marks to seek gain to nourish the spirit, it is called pure livelihood. Regarding "untying the bonds of sentient beings gives rise to the stages of cultivation": The Dharma-nature is constantly tranquil, neither shallow nor deep; yet the sūtras differ. When stages of practice are laid out as shallow or deep, they are all expedient means to guide beings in the sequence of generating practice. Although this is an external matter regarding the Dharma-nature, it is the sequence and stages of generating practice. It is also said: because the true principle is neither shallow nor deep, there are no stages of cultivation; it is because delusions are conditioned entanglements > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.7.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7.2) - [Next: 2.7.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7.4) - [Up: 2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778~en-mt.2.7.3) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2778.2.7.3) · Pramāṇa