[The understanding of twelvefold conditioned co-arising in the Shared Teaching is that] the essential mark of ignorance is that of inherently lacking substantial Being.⁴³⁸ The deluded conceptualization of the confluence of causes and conditions [leads one to imagine or interpret the existence of] objects as substantial Being, like a magician’s illusion, so that wisdom [of true knowledge] cannot be realized.

A Sūtra says, “If there is a dharma which [supposedly] transcends nirvāṇa, I say that this [also] is an illusion or trick.”⁴³⁹ The Mūlamadhyamakakārika clarifies that this teaching is for those of sharp faculties.⁴⁴⁰ The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra illustrates this with the [analogy] of the rich man teaching grammar [vyākaraṇa].⁴⁴¹ The Pañcaviṃśati-sāhasrikā-prajn͂āpāramitā Sūtra calls it “truly and skillfully saving” [sentient beings].”⁴⁴² This Lotus Sūtra calls them “small trees.”⁴⁴³ This is a skillful [understanding] of objects.

438

Lit. “original selfness (svabhāba) does not exist.” More simply, “all is empty.” return

439

This is a quote from the Pañcaviṃśati-sāhasrikā-prajn͂āpāramitā Sūtra discussed in the Ta chih tu dun. The context is expounding on the emptiness of all things, so that even the six pāramitā are like an illusion or dream, that is, they are no substantial Being. The section concludes with the statement that “I teach that nirvāṇa is also like an illusion and like a dream. If there were a dharma more superior to nirvāṇa [implying that there is not], I would teach that this also is like an illusion and like a dream. Therefore, all you divine beings, these illusions and dreams are non-dual and non-distinct with nirvāṇa.” return

440

This passage has already been quoted and discussed above. return

441

One of the six major subjects in the Vedic tradition. This refers to the same analogy as in note 436. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra explains this analogy as follows: “This rich man represents the Tathāgata. His one son represents all sentient beings. The Tathāgata views all sentient beings with equanimity as if (each one was) his only son. His teaching of the one son refers to the śrāvaka disciples. The incomplete teaching [”alphabet”] represents the nine-fold [Hinayāna] scriptures. Grammar represents the vast Mahāyāna scriptures. Since the śrāvakas do not have the ability [lit. “power of wisdom” to understand more profound subjects], the Tathāgata teaches them the incomplete ninefold scriptures, and does not teach the ‘grammar’ of the vast Mahāyāna scriptures.” return

442

Yāthātmyāvatāraṇakuśalaiḥ. Quoted and discussed in the Ta chih tu lun [Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom]. This refers to the activity of the bodhisattva which is skillful in saving sentient beings because it is in accordance with the way things truly are, as empty of substantial Being, in contrast to the clumsy efforts of the followers of Hinayāna. The Ta Chih tu lun comments on this phrase as follows: “There is the dharma of the heretics which, though it saves sentient beings, does not really save them, because there various mistaken views remain like chains. Although those of the two vehicles have the means of salvation, they are not able to save [others] because they are not omniscient [sarvajña] nor have the mind [capable of utilizing] expedient means. It is only the bodhisattva who is able to truly and skillfully save [sentient beings].” return

443

This refers to the parable of the plants in the Chapter on Medicinal Herbs. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 107, translates the context as follows:

Also, the Buddha’s sons
Who devote their thoughts exclusively to the Buddha Path,
Who constantly practice good will and compassion,
Who know that they themselves shall become Buddhas
Decidedly and without any doubt—
These are called “small trees.”

Chih-i’s commentary on this section in the Fa hua wen chü [Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra] also identifies this fourth category of “small trees” with the Shared Teaching. return