淨名經關中釋抄 2.4

English (machine translation) 2.4

Language: English

2.4.1

"Regarding 'not cutting off afflictions': afflictions are empty in their nature, hence it is said they are 'not cut off'. The two vehicles cling to dharmas as afflictions having real existence; hence they cut them off and enter. Bodhisattvas awaken to the intrinsic emptiness of afflictions; hence they enter without cutting them off." "Regarding 'the seven latent defilements': greed, hostility, delusion, conceit, and doubt are five; view of identity, extreme views, and wrong views constitute the sixth, 'views'; and attachment to precepts and attachment to views constitute the seventh latent defilement of 'grasping'. The nine bonds are as [explained] previously." "Regarding 'At that time, World-Honoured One, I was silent': it should address: 'World-Honoured One, at that time I was silent'; it is simply due to the conciseness of the Sanskrit language that it is phrased thus." "Regarding 'Maudgalyāyana section': this is a Sanskrit sound. The Samayabhedoparacanacakra translates it as 'chickpea' (hudou). The Dharmaskandha says 'son of Maudgalyāyana'; here [in Chinese] it means 'son of mung bean' (lvdouzi). The new translation says 'gathering beans' (caishu). Furthermore, previously Śāriputra was foremost in wisdom and was rebuked concerning dhyāna concentration; Maudgalyāyana was foremost in dhyāna concentration and was rebuked concerning preaching the Dharma. The reason why, among the ten great disciples, these two were rebuked interchangeably is that concentration and wisdom are the gateways to the myriad practices; therefore, one must not lean one-sidedly toward concentration. If concentration is profound, wisdom will certainly be bright; if wisdom is bright, concentration will certainly be profound." "Regarding 'the Dharma has no self, etc.': the Hinayāna contemplation breaks down the self to realize non-self, realizing only the first fruit and so forth. Now, the Mahāyāna Dharma of the true mark is non-dual regarding self and non-self: since a self is not even attainable, how could a non-self be attainable? This is the true meaning of non-self in the true mark of the Dharma-nature. Realizing this non-self, one then attains the forbearance of non-arising dharmas. How could a great being of the seventh ground be identical to the Hinayāna?" "Regarding 'separating from birth and death': if there is birth in the prior limit and death in the posterior limit, then what lies in between is called 'lifespan'. Now the bodhisattva abides in the true mark of the dharmakāya; because it does not arise, there is no prior limit; because it does not cease, there is no posterior limit. Since there is neither prior nor posterior, the nature of a living being is empty." "Regarding 'extinguishing all characteristics': the Hinayāna says that existent dharmas have the four characteristics of arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing that transition into one another. Now the Mahāyāna Dharma-nature is intrinsically serene and extinguished, separated from the four characteristics." "Regarding 'separating from vitarka and vicāra': grasping at signs and giving rise to mind is said to be having vitarka and vicāra; leaving behind signs and provisional names, there is therefore no vitarka or vicāra." "Regarding 'ten thousand dharmas and ten thousand conditions': because among the ten thousand dharmas there is no fixed dharma, there is 'no dharma'. Because conditions have no fixed condition, there are 'no conditions'. For example, if the body is the bodhi-realm, being composed of many conditions, it has no dharma. Just as infant, child, youth, adult, and elder are formed by many conditions, form has no fixed form." "Regarding 'the Dharma does not belong to causes': deluded dharmas have arising and cessation, and therefore belong to causes and conditions; the true Dharma is neither arising nor ceasing, and therefore does not belong to causes and conditions." "Regarding 'unmoved by all extremes': because it leaves behind the four propositions, it is unmoved by all extremes." "Regarding 'separating from contemplative practice': the deluded consciousness conditions signs and arises; conditioning signs is called 'contemplation'. True wisdom illuminates signlessness; being signless, there is no contemplation. Furthermore, when the mind that grasps at signs conditions arising and conditions signs, it is called 'practice'. When the mind that separates from signs has no arising, because there is no arising it does not practice." "'Kāśyapa' is translated here as 'tortoise', taking the sense of brightness, because it knows the three periods of time. Or it is called 'drinking light', which also means brightness. Here the dhūta [practices] are rebuked. The Hinayāna shakes off and remains untainted and unattached with respect to the four necessities, considering few desires and contentment to be dhūta. Now, regarding the triple world, the five aggregates, bodhi, and nirvāṇa, like the prajñāpāramitā, Vimalakīrti's great matter shakes off without grasping or abiding, and calls this dhūta. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: 'This sūtra is difficult to uphold; if one can uphold it, this is called keeping the precepts and practicing dhūta.' Furthermore, the Suvikrāntacintidevaputra-paripṛcchā Sūtra says: 'Dhūta means shaking off; if one can skillfully shake off greed, anger, delusion, the triple world, and the six sense bases, I say this person can skillfully shake off. Shaking off like this, neither grasping nor discarding, neither cultivating nor attaching, I say this person is skilled in dhūta.' 'Dhūta' is translated here as 'shaking off'. Furthermore, in practice there are two kinds of dhūta: First, according to the season. As in the Brahmajāla Sūtra, traveling in the two months of spring and autumn; the meaning is that because winter and summer are extremely cold and hot, one observes the retreat, whereas in the moderate temperatures of spring and autumn, one travels as appropriate. Second, according to conduct: there are twelve. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says: 1. possessing only three robes; 2. rag robes; 3. always begging food; 4. not practicing remaining food; 5. one sitting; 6. one portion of food; 7. araṇya (translated here as 'soundless place'); 8. charnel ground; 9. under a tree; 10. sitting in the open; 11. sitting anywhere; 12. always sitting." "Regarding 'yet unable to be universal': Kāśyapa's practices among all the śrāvakas were superior in two ways. First, intentional non-universality; the bodhisattva has great compassion without conditions and thus can be universal. Next, he rebukes him separately, saying: 'Abiding in the equal Dharma, you should beg for food in succession.' He rebukes the śrāvaka dhūta: begging for food merely sustains the five aggregates with few desires; it is not like the bodhisattva firmly abiding in right contemplation to sustain the dharmakāya. The dharmakāya does not eat; the body encompasses harmony, and the dharmakāya does not receive a body of the triple world." "Regarding 'the characteristic of an empty village': a village has two types. The first is the characteristic of an external village: towns and settlements. The second is an internal village: the six sense organs. Thus the Suvarṇaprabhāsa says: 'The village of the six senses is the dwelling place of thieves.' If an external village has people, gentlemen, and ladies, it is worth viewing; if it is an empty village without people, having only robbers, tigers, wolves, corpses, and poisonous snakes, it is not joyful. If a bodhisattva's six senses possess the eight hundred virtues and twelve hundred virtues as in the Lotus Sūtra, it is like a village that has people. Now an ordinary being's six senses are empty and devoid of virtue, possessing only the poisonous snakes of the three feelings, the robbers of wrong views, and the corpses of deluded thoughts; therefore they are not joyful." "Regarding 'not abandoning the eight wrongs': if one abandons the eight wrongs and enters the eight liberations, this is the Hinayāna's food of dhyāna joy. If one does not abandon the eight wrongs and enters the eight liberations, this is the Mahāyāna's food of dhyāna joy. If one abandons the eight wrongs and enters the eightfold noble path, this is the Hinayāna's food of Dharma delight. If one does not abandon the characteristics of wrong and enters the correct Dharma, this is the Mahāyāna's food of Dharma delight. Therefore, what follows demonstrates the Mahāyāna's food of Dharma delight and dhyāna joy, rebuking Kāśyapa's two Hinayāna foods." "Regarding 'neither having afflictions, etc.': the Mahāyāna's equal food of Dharma delight is inherently pure, and therefore neither existent nor non-existent. The nature of the mind is serene and extinguished, which is the equal food of dhyāna joy; therefore concentration has neither entering nor emerging. Samsāra and nirvāṇa are equal, and therefore one abides in neither." "Regarding 'not consuming the alms of others in vain': in the Hinayāna, committing the four grave offenses is 'food of theft'. Not being diligent in the three karmas—meaning the superior faculties not sitting in meditation, the intermediate faculties not chanting and reciting, and the lower faculties not managing sangha affairs—is 'food of debt'. A person of the first fruit eats as 'food of mutual assent'. An arhat eats as 'food of one's own', because he is worthy of offerings. Now in the Mahāyāna, if one does not generate the bodhimind and abide in equal contemplation, one is not a true renunciant; therefore, all such instances are called consuming the faithful offerings of others in vain." "'Subhūti' is translated as Shanji ('Well and Auspicious'), also called Kongsheng ('Born of Emptiness'), and also called Shanxian ('Well Manifested')."

2.4.2

Because at the time of his birth the storehouses and rooms were all empty, his parents thought it was inauspicious and were about to consult a diviner. The diviner divined and said: "It is greatly auspicious and extremely good." Therefore he was called Shanxian (Well-Appeared / Subhūti). Or, some say: "Emptiness was born and an auspicious sign appeared, hence the name Well-Appeared." Yet this was precisely to symbolize his being foremost in understanding emptiness that emptiness appeared. It is just as Rāhula's six years of dwelling in the womb symbolized his being foremost in esoteric practice; Kāśyapa's golden color symbolized his adornment with the pure practice of dhūtas; and Kālodāyin, translated here as "Black Radiance", symbolized the condition of defiling pure practice as a basis for disciplinary rules. Furthermore, among the disciples, Subhūti was foremost in understanding emptiness and in non-contention. In the Hīnayāna, entering the fourth dhyāna and contemplating conditions of sentient beings so as not to contend with things is called "non-contention"; yet renouncing existence to realize emptiness, and abandoning saṃsāra to grasp nirvāṇa, have not yet escaped such contention. Now, in Vimalakīrti's Mahāyāna, dwelling in the contemplation of the middle way, there is neither defilement nor purity, neither arising nor ceasing; self and non-self are non-dual in their nature; saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are intrinsically equal. This is called true non-contention, which is why he was scolded. Furthermore, in the Hīnayāna, when entering contemplation, one conditions the absolute truth and is therefore empty; when emerging from contemplation, one conditions conventional truth and is therefore existent. Grasping emptiness while renouncing existence in this way is not the true understanding of emptiness. Now, in Vimalakīrti's Mahāyāna, form is not different from emptiness, and emptiness is not different from form; there is neither existence nor non-existence, neither grasping nor renouncing; penetrating the marks of all dharmas without obstruction, bowing down as to empty space without reliance—this is called being truly foremost in understanding emptiness. Thus he was scolded. Question: What is the non-contention samādhi of the Hīnayāna? Answer: A verse in the Kośa says: "Non-contention is conventional knowledge; / It is based on the final dhyāna and is unshakeable; / It concerns three continents, conditions the unarisen, / And pertains to objective afflictions of the desire realm." That is to say, among the ten knowledges it is the conventional eighth knowledge. In absorption, it abides in the fourth dhyāna. Among the six kinds of arhats, it is of the unshakeable nature. Among the four continents, it does not condition the northern continent, because [there] there is no "mine". It conditions only the future, because the past and present have already ceased. Among the three realms, it conditions only the desire realm, because there are objective afflictions. Furthermore, the Lotus [Sūtra] says that the ten disciples inwardly concealed bodhisattva practices and outwardly manifested as śrāvakas. That is, before the Tathāgata appeared in the world, Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana manifested as dwelling among non-Buddhists; Uruvilvā manifested as dwelling among fire-worshippers; Mahākāśyapa manifested as a pure-practicing brāhmaṇa; Rāhula and Aniruddha manifested in the royal palace experiencing the desires of the five senses. Or, Śāriputra manifested wisdom; Panthaka manifested dullness; Maudgalyāyana manifested nobility; Upāli manifested base birth; Pūrṇa manifested extensive learning; Kātyāyana manifested debate. When the Tathāgata attained the Way, he guided their respective kinds to attain the realization of śrāvakas. Now, in order to lead the lesser to enter the greater, when inquiring after [Vimalakīrti's] illness, each declined as inadequate; this was to cause those being converted to renounce the small and return to the great, gradually serving as an expedient means for conferring prophecy in the Lotus [Sūtra]. Regarding the filling of the bowl with food, some say that because Subhūti upheld the understanding of emptiness, Vimalakīrti went to subdue him with subtle existence, which is why it was manifested. Regarding "not destroying the body": The śrāvakas take the body to be suffering, and therefore destroy the body to return to tranquility. The single mark is the mark of tranquility and cessation. Bodhisattvas contemplate the body as arising from conditions, devoid of self-nature; that is, without waiting to destroy the body, it is naturally fundamentally tranquil. Regarding the "five heinous crimes": Killing one's father, killing one's mother, killing an arhat, shedding the blood of a Buddha's body, and causing schism in the Saṃgha of the Dharma wheel. The first two go against gratitude; the latter three go against virtue; hence they are called heinous. The severity of karmic bondage surpasses nothing more than these. If there is no bondage, there is no delusion; when delusion is exhausted, all is real; therefore, the heinous bondages are themselves the marks of liberation. Regarding "wrong views and the other shore are fundamentally not distinct in nature": These three lines are the interpretation of Guanzhong. Taking neither wrong nor correct, neither difficulty nor distress, neither pure nor defiled as equality, one may accept the food. The interpretation of Tiantai is: By scolding Subhūti, [saying] that you of the two vehicles adhere to one-sided emptiness, which is a wrong view and not the other shore of the middle way, dwelling in the difficulty of the conjured city, it is not without difficulty. The distress of being attached to nirvāṇa and distancing oneself from the purity of the Dharma-nature results in the eight difficulties of the conjured city. What are their characteristics? Answer: The Da pin states: "Better that sentient beings fall into the hells of the three destinies than to cause sentient beings to enter the path of the two vehicles." That is, the paths of seeing, cultivation, and no-learning of the Hīnayāna are taken as the difficulty of the three evil destinies. Perpetually grasping non-self is the difficulty of this continent. Emerging from contemplation to condition conventional truth, and entering contemplation to condition the real, are the difficulty of being born before or after a Buddha. Not seeing the dharmakāya and not hearing the middle way are being born deaf and blind. Debating arising and ceasing without comprehending non-arising is worldly worldly knowledge and dialectical cleverness. Sinking into emptiness and stagnating in tranquility are the difficulty of the long-lived devas. The Mahā[parinirvāṇa] Sūtra says ten thousand kalpas, and so on; this is because [the difficulties are] the obstacle to giving rise to the great [aspiration]. Taking these as difficulties that obstruct true nirvāṇa, their calamity surpasses the eight difficulties of ordinary mortals. How could one not fear them? Statements such as having no pure field of merit and falling into slander differ between the two masters, which can be seen by analogy to this. Regarding "equal without any difference": Guanzhong takes the equal single nature as being without difference. Tiantai takes ordinary mortals stagnating in existence and the two vehicles stagnating in emptiness as: although the stagnation differs, both equally obstruct the middle way, and thus they are equal without difference. Regarding "putting down the bowl and wishing to leave": Tiantai says that Subhūti was challenged and, upon suddenly hearing this, foolishly held his understanding of emptiness and lost it; therefore Vimalakīrti conversely established it through illusion and transformation. Regarding Pūrṇa: Previously Maudgalyāyana was scolded for improper etiquette in preaching the Dharma; this section scolds the fault of mistaking faculties. Some say: The phrase "contemplating the minds of people" is the worldly siddhānta; the phrase "original root" is the therapeutic siddhānta; the phrase "practicing the Great Path" is the ultimate-meaning siddhānta. Thus the faculties are of the Mahāyāna. Question about the siddhāntas: This dharma name originates in the Laṅkā[vatāra]. The [Da zhi]du lun says that the Sanskrit word is siddhānta, translated here as "established doctrine", also called "ink", like the seal of the true mark. That seal seals the principle; this ink adheres fixedly to teaching. There are four kinds: First, the worldly siddhānta, which, in order to arouse the good roots of sentient beings, relies on worldly names and marks so that they produce joyful desire and give rise to faith. Second, the individual siddhānta, which, for those who have already planted goodness, causes it to increase according to their respective faculties and conditions. Third, the therapeutic siddhānta, which, because some sentient beings, though having planted good roots, are obstructed by heavy afflictions and have not yet attained fulfillment, gives rise to remedies. Fourth, the ultimate-meaning siddhānta, which addresses long-practicing sentient beings by subsuming the principle. Thus the first three accord with faculties, while the fourth subsumes the principle. Regarding the first three, there are also two aspects: for those who have not yet believed, to cause them to generate faith, which is the worldly; for those who already believe, to cause them to give rise to practice, which establishes the individual and therapeutic. Furthermore, giving rise to practice has two aspects: giving rise to practices that produce goodness establishes the individual; giving rise to practices that sever evil establishes the therapeutic. For this reason, the Tathāgata, within the unconditioned Dharma, accords with the principle and follows faculties to generate faith, give rise to practice, produce goodness, and sever evil, unfolding eighty-four thousand dharmas. The various differences of other teaching methods equally lead toward great bodhi. Kātyāyana is translated here as "Hard and Excess"; some say "Ornamented"; the Prajñaptipāda-śāstra says "clan of shaved hair".

2.4.3

[The text] does not fully explain the reason. Regarding 'with a mind [subject to] arising and ceasing, expounding the teaching of the true mark': conditioned phenomena are shifted by the four marks; this is called arising and ceasing. Phenomena that arise and cease are produced from causes and conditions. That conditioned phenomena lack self-nature in their substance is called the true mark. Furthermore, the Lesser Vehicle, because of grasping at arising, has the four meanings of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self. Because of grasping at cessation, it has the meaning of quiescent extinction. The former four are revulsion; the latter one is rejoicing. Now the Great Vehicle awakens to non-arising and non-ceasing; therefore this is the meaning of the true mark. Yet Kātyāyana spoke of conditioned arising and impermanence, which was using the Lesser Vehicle's teaching of the true mark. Regarding 'impermanence is itself the true mark': permanence and impermanence being non-dual is itself the true mark. Speaking of permanence apart from permanence—the four meanings below arising and ceasing should be understood by analogy with this. Regarding 'the meaning of suffering is itself the true mark': the Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā states, 'Knowing that suffering is unarisen is the noble truth of suffering.' The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra states, 'Ordinary people have suffering but no truth; those of the two vehicles have suffering and have the truth; bodhisattvas understand suffering as without suffering.' Yet the ultimate truth is in all cases the meaning of the true mark. Because these five meanings of the Great and Lesser [Vehicles] are difficult to understand, [the master] briefly resorts to a metaphor: it is like a mother nursing an infant; seeing it cry unceasingly, she frightens it, saying, 'A ghost is coming!' When [the child] is under one year old, hearing of the ghost it is not frightened; this is an analogy for ordinary people hearing of the impermanence of the five aggregates and their minds not being revulsed. From two or three years old onward, hearing of the ghost it is immediately frightened; this is an analogy for the two vehicles hearing of impermanence and the like, and their minds feeling revulsion and seeking detachment. When it reaches the age of fifteen, hearing it said that a ghost is coming, it fully understands that ghosts originally do not exist, and it was merely provisional speech because the child was crying; this is an analogy for bodhisattvas fully understanding that the aggregates are unarisen, suffering and so forth are merely the Tathāgata's provisional names and skillful means to guide beings, and this is the true meaning. 'Aniruddha' in the Qin language means 'as desired' (ruyi); it also means 'without poverty', or 'non-extinction'. In the past he once offered a single meal to a pratyekabuddha, and for ninety-one kalpas he continuously received the retribution of having things as desired in the heavens; hence he is called 'As Desired'. Because he was constantly free from poverty and lack, he is called 'Without Poverty'. Because his roots of goodness were never extinguished, he is called 'Non-Extinction'. It is also said that because he entered a Buddhist stūpa and trimmed a lamp to provide light, for ninety-one kalpas his roots of goodness were never extinguished, and now he has obtained the retribution of the divine eye; hence he is called 'Non-Extinction'. Regarding 'the five superknowledges' and so forth: if a śrāvaka relies on the four dhyāna concentrations to give rise to superknowledges, having marks produced by merit, and sees and knows, why should the unconditioned of non-Buddhists and the like not have seeing? If a śrāvaka relies on wisdom to sever afflictions, this is called analytical cessation, the unconditioned, and there should be no seeing. The divine eye of the Great Vehicle sees form directly in the middle; it completely contemplates the three truths, jointly contemplating the provisional and the ultimate; being quiescent it yet illuminates, and so it does not have this difficulty, as is naturally clarified in the text below. The Great and Lesser [Vehicles] follow different paths and have this immense difference; yet some people distinguish the Great and Lesser in terms of quantity based on seeing near and far—is that not an error? Furthermore, because the Buddha's mind is never non-quiescent, its illumination leaves nothing unseen; wisdom is not separate from concentration, being quiescent it yet illuminates, and so its seeing is non-dual. 'Upāli' in the Qin language means 'head' (shangshou); it also means 'closely taking'. Because he originally served close to the eight Śākya princes, handling affairs and managing takings and givings, he is called 'close attendant' or 'closely taking'. 'Head' is said because at the time he first went forth together with the eight Śākya princes, the Tathāgata delivered him first, making him the senior elder. Regarding 'conduct according to the vinaya', there are two kinds: first, originally not transgressing; second, when transgressing, being able to repent. This is Upāli's vinaya conduct. Now Vimalakīrti takes the original purity of the true nature of the dharmakāya, the deluded fundamental wisdom regaining awakening, as vinaya conduct. Therefore the sūtra states, 'Only the Buddha alone abides in the precepts; all other persons are called defilers of the precepts.' Furthermore, the lower text states, 'This is complete fulfillment,' clarifying that the Dharma-nature śīla of this sūtra completely fulfills the myriad practices in a single mind—how could it be said to be fulfilled merely by the two hundred and fifty [precepts]? Regarding 'redoubling': the Lesser Vehicle's method of repentance requires seeing the accumulation of offenses deeply and giving rise to a heavy mind of repentance, and so forth, calling it extinction. Therefore both Guanzhong and Tiantai state: turning against the real and falsely transgressing is like the defilement of offense; with sincere resolve repenting and fearing is again called redoubling. Now I offer an explanation: the self-nature of offense is neither arisen nor destroyed. Formerly the two persons committed offenses; [where there is] non-arising they saw arising, which is called the initial transgression. Now Upāli has them repent; [where there is] non-destruction he speaks of destruction, which is called redoubling. If offenses originally do not arise, now in repenting there is also no destruction; that is to eliminate destruction. The Samantabhadra Contemplation Sūtra states: 'If one wishes to repent, one should seek the true mark.' The true mark is precisely awakening to the fact that offenses and the mind are both non-extinguished. Calling this upholding the vinaya—is it not marvelous? The 'ninth liberation' is the severing of afflictions of cultivation. Each of the nine stages has nine unhindered paths and nine liberations. Now in the stage of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the ninth liberation obtains the mind upholding the stage of no-more-learning. How much more so is the mind-nature of sentient beings originally pure! If delusive thoughts are like defilement, since they are delusive thoughts, seeing defilement makes it clear that defilement is not defilement; grasping at a self and being inverted is also like this. It is just like diseased eyes seeing flowers [in the sky]; when the disease is cured, one immediately knows that the substance of the flowers was originally non-existent. Therefore Master Sengzhao said, 'Being a monk and [seeking] truth clarifies that the real is not the truth.' Regarding 'arising and ceasing without abiding': an offense cannot be accomplished in a single thought. If accumulated thoughts accomplish an offense, then the thoughts themselves arise and cease without abiding for a kṣaṇa; how could it be an offense? Furthermore, if thoughts are not accumulated, then a single thought has no cause; if thoughts abide and accumulate, they are not conditioned phenomena. Furthermore, even if a single thought accomplishes it by itself, the offense does not abide for a kṣaṇa; how could it be repented and then extinguished? Regarding 'this is called upholding the vinaya': this Dharma-nature śīla is the self-nature of the dharmakāya; the bodhisattva mahāsattvas uphold it in this way. 'Rāhula' here is translated as 'obstacle' (fuzhang); this also signifies being foremost in esoteric conduct. Regarding 'relinquishing the position of a wheel-turning king': when a wheel-turning king governs the world, the entire country practices the ten virtues; how could one abandon the myriad virtues to value merely solitary virtue? Regarding 'the benefits of the merit of going forth': some say it refers to the benefits of shaving the hair. As the Great Compassion Sūtra states: 'As long as one is of the nature of a śramaṇa, a śramaṇa of defiled conduct, in the form of a śramaṇa, wearing the kāṣāya, under Maitreya Buddha and even down to Rocana Buddha, one will enter nirvāṇa without remainder.' Tiantai says that Rāhula expounds the benefits of the ten knowledges, the three clearances, and so forth obtained through the four fruits. Regarding 'without benefit and without merit': upon humble reflection, going forth has roughly three distinctions: first, abandoning attachments, desires, and family is called going forth; second, severing view and cultivation [afflictions] to exit the prison of the triple realm is called going forth; third, deeply awakening to the Great Vehicle, where birth-and-death and nirvāṇa are neither bound nor liberated, contaminated and uncontaminated are neither defiled nor pure, without taking or relinquishing, without attainment or realization, fully understanding that the Dharma realm is like an illusion, and awakening to the true nature's lack of dependence—this is called the ultimate true going forth of the Great Vehicle. Therefore the sūtra states, 'Because there is nothing to be attained, one attains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.' This is the Great Being Vimalakīrti's going forth without benefit and without merit. How could Rāhula's abandoning the faults of the triple realm and obtaining the merit of nirvāṇa be called the true going forth? Regarding 'provisional name':

2.4.4

Birth-and-death and nirvāṇa are both provisional names. Therefore the lower text states, 'I and nirvāṇa—both of these are empty.' In what way are they empty? They are empty merely because they are names. Regarding 'emerging from the mire': ordinary people take the five desires as the mire; the two vehicles take grasping at realization as the mire. 'The four graspings' are the four clingings. It is also said that they mean not clinging to the triple realm or to nirvāṇa. 'Ānanda' here is translated as 'Joy'. On the night the Buddha attained the Way, Ānanda was born; because joy arose, his royal father named him thus. Furthermore, because of roots of goodness in past lives, those who saw him rejoiced; hence the name. Regarding 'do not slander the Tathāgata': the Lesser Vehicle claims that the Buddha has a body born of karma, which achieved the Way in this present body. The Great Vehicle takes awakening to the fact that the body is originally without a body as the dharmakāya, and manifesting a body in response to beings as the trace body. That is, manifesting sickness in response to beings is not actual sickness. Now grasping at it as incurred by actual karma—is that not slandering? What the various teachings say about the golden spear, the horse barley, and the like is explained by analogy with this. Regarding 'that is the dharmakāya': the Lesser Vehicle takes the sixteen-foot body as the body of birth and death, and the fivefold Dharma body as the dharmakāya. The Great Vehicle takes form as not separate from emptiness; the sixteen-foot body is the real itself. The real is the permanently abiding Dharma-nature, not born of volitional karma. To be identical with the aggregates is to be identical with emptiness and to transcend the triple realm. Emptiness is purity; what contamination could exist? The four marks flow and move; arising and ceasing have no self-nature; being identical with shifting is being non-shifting; hence it is called unconditioned. 'The categories' are the categories of the four marks of the conditioned. [Master Hui]yuan said: 'Not [born of] desire and thought' means severing the obstacle of afflictions. 'Transcending the triple realm' means leaving behind the retribution of portion and limitation. 'Uncontaminated' means breaking through the obstacle to the known. 'Unconditioned' means leaving behind the retribution of change. Chongfu said: 'Not born of desire and thought' means not born of volitional karma, because birth is sovereign; this is the self. 'Transcending the triple realm': the triple realm is suffering; transcending the suffering of the triple realm is bliss. 'Uncontaminated': the defilement of the contaminated; uncontaminated is purity. 'Unconditioned': conditioned dharmas are impermanent; the Buddha's body being unconditioned is permanence. Regarding 'as the layman says': the Buddha's body is truly permanent as analyzed above; this reveals the ultimate. Not being born into the five turbidities yet manifesting sickness to benefit beings: this opens the provisional. Not speaking and not manifesting leads to grasping at the sick body as real; hearing that sickness is a response clarifies that the body is not 'I'—thus there is this opening of the provisional. Yet if the body is not my own, it exists solely for the sake of beings; having a body for the sake of beings, the body is not a [mere] body, but is the dharmakāya. This also reveals the ultimate. The sūtra text being like this, the principle is also crystal clear. Yet those who are confused go so far as to say that only when reaching the Lotus Sūtra does one speak of opening the provisional and revealing the ultimate, and only upon arriving at the Nirvāṇa Sūtra does one begin to distinguish the present body as the dharmakāya—is this not a mistaken view of the sūtra texts? Furthermore, the Lotus Sūtra also states that for the sake of the five turbidities it opens the One Vehicle into the three vehicles; this sūtra also, for the sake of the five turbidities, displays the dharmakāya as a sick body. What difference is there between knowing the three to be provisional and understanding the sickness to be a response? What difference is there between awakening to the three as the one and realizing the response to be the real? Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra also states, 'My present body is the permanent body, the dharmakāya.' This sūtra also states, 'The Buddha's body is the dharmakāya.' It also states, 'The Buddha's body is unconditioned and does not fall into categories.' How could one distinguish the unconditioned apart from this sixteen-foot body? Yet those who cling to the teachings and miss the intent, when reaching the Lotus Sūtra, grasp at the one and fix upon the one, saying other sūtras are not the one; arriving at the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, [hearing that] the retribution Buddha is permanent, they immediately say other teachings are not permanent. How could the non-dual Dharma gate not be the one, and true-mark prajñā not be permanent? Thus we know that when tracing the origin and reaching the ultimate, the principle cannot be different. According to capacities, they mutually illuminate; the teachings cannot be single. Names and teachings are not fixed; the bright principle originally has no name. As for the name of the nameless, how could one cling to the name and confine one's view?

Linked texts (1)

淨名經關中釋抄 — Classical Chinese