The subtlety of the dharma of mind is, as it is written in the chapter on “The Practice of Peace” [in the Lotus Sūtra], “to cultivate and collect one’s thoughts . . . while contemplating all dharmas … without moving nor retreating.”¹²⁰ It also means “finding joy in one thought. …”¹²¹ The Sut̄ra on the Contemplation of Samantabhadra¹²² says, “The mind is in itself empty: there is no subject [which commits] sin or [does] virtuous deeds . . . in contemplating the mind [one sees that] there is no mind and that dharmas do not abide as [substantial] dharmas.”¹²³ Also, “the mind [will devote itself] purely to these dharmas.”¹²⁴ The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says, “[As in] contemplating the true marks of the body [one sees that they are all empty], so it is with contemplating the Buddha.”¹²⁵ [The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra also says] “The liberation of all Buddhas should be sought within the mental activity of sentient beings.”¹²⁶ The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says, “There is no distinction between the mind, Buddha, and sentient beings,”¹²⁷ and “by destroying the minute dust-like obstructions of the mind, the thousands of scrolls of Sūtras are revealed.”¹²⁸ This is called the subtlety of the dharma of mind.

120

An abridged form of verses from the Lotus Sūtra. See Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, who translates the entire context as follows:

If in a quiet place
One perfects and collects one’s thoughts,
Dwelling securely and unmoving
As if one were Mount Sumeru itself,
Observing that all dharmas
Have nothing whatsoever,
Being quite like empty space;
That they have nothing firm or solid,
Being unborn, unemerging,
Unmoving, unreceding,
Ever dwelling in one mark,
This is called the place of approach.
 return

121

A quote from the chapter on “The Preachers of Dharma” in the Lotus Sūtra. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 174, translates: “If any like these in the Buddha’s presence hears a single gāthā or a single phrase of the Scripture of the Blossom of the Fine Dharma, or devotes to it a single moment of rejoicing, I hereby confer on him a prophecy that he shall attain Anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.” return

122

Samantabhadra-bodhisattva-dhyānacaryādharma Sūtra. This Sūtra is considered by the T’ien-t’ai tradition to be the “closing” Sūtra of the threefold Lotus Sūtra. It contains instructions on the contemplation of the bodhisattva Samantabhadra. return

123

Katō, et al. 1975, 363, has “As one’s own mind is void of itself, sin and blessedness have no existence. In like manner all the laws are neither fixed nor going toward destruction. If one repents like this, meditating on his mind, there is no mind he can seize. The law also does not dwell in the law.” return

124

I am not sure what Chih-i intends by quoting this phrase. The context is speaking of purifying the six senses, after which the practitioner “will have joy of body and mind and freedom from evil ideas, and will devote himself to this law so that he can conform to it.” Katō, 354. return

125

From the opening section of a discourse on the non-substantial existence of the Tathāgata in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra. Boin, 238, translates the context as follows: “Then the Blessed One said to the Licchavi Vimalakirti, Son of good family, now that you have come here to see the Tathāgata, how do you see him? This having been said, Vimalakirti replied to the Blessed One: Blessed One, now that I see the Tathāgata, I see him as if there were nothing to see.” return

126

This quote is found among the questions of Mañjuśrī for Vimalakirti in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra. Boin translates, “Where is the deliverance of the Tathāgatas found? (Vimalakirti answers) It is found in the first thought activity (cittapūrvacarita) of all beings.” This translation is based on the Tibetan. Boin notes that the Chinese translations of Kumarajiva and Hsüan-tsang have “in the activity of the mind of all beings.” return

127

See note 106. return

128

Compared to the previous phrase from the Avataṃsaka Sūtra which is quoted verbatim, Chih-i takes liberties in paraphrasing this quote. The original reads, “These scrolls of Sūtras in the great trichiliocosm exist within one minute particle of dust. All of the minute particles of dust are also likewise. At one time there was a person who appeared in the world who achieved penetrating wisdom, completed and perfected the pure divine eyesight, and perceived these scrolls of Sūtras in a minute particle of dust. He then had the following thought, ‘How can these vast and great scrolls of Sūtras exist in a minute particle of dust, yet not benefit sentient beings? I should diligently use expedient means to destroy these minute particles of dust and benefit sentient beings.’ At that time this person used expedient means to destroy the particle of dust and extracted these scrolls of Sūtras to benefit sentient beings.” In the original sūtra the word “mind” is not used, and seems to be making quite a different point than that proposed by Chih-i. Chih-i was quoting this phrase to support his contention that the mind is subtle, and this phrase supports this concept only insofar as the Avataṃsaka Sūtra in general teaches the identity of mind and objects. In that sense the mind and the particle of dust are one, and “destroying a particle of dust” or “destroying the dust-like obstructions of the mind” to reveal the (meaning of) scrolls of Sūtras can be interpreted as meaning the same thing. A translation of Chih-i’s paraphrase which would be more consistent with the original Avataṃsaka Sūtra passage would read, “Destroying the mind and minute particles of dust, the Sūtra scrolls of the trichiliocosm appear.” return

The subtlety of the dharma of the Buddha means, as the Lotus Sūtra says, “Cease, cease, do not try to explain. My dharma is subtle and difficult to conceptualize.”¹¹⁴ The dharma of the Buddha does not go beyond the conventional and the real.¹¹⁵ [The Lotus Sūtra says,] “This dharma is exceedingly profound, subtle, difficult to see and difficult to perfect,”¹¹⁶ and “Of all types of sentient beings, none are able to know the Buddha.”¹¹⁷ This is the subtle real wisdom. [The Lotus Sūtra says,] “Also, there are none who can calculate the dharma of the Buddha.”¹¹⁸ This is the Buddha’s subtle conventional wisdom. In this way these two dharmas [of the conventional and real can be understood] “only by Buddhas who can completely exhaust all true aspects of reality.”¹¹⁹ This is called the subtle dharma of the Buddha.

113

This ambiguous compound refers, as the following statements make clear, both to the Buddha-dharma as the teaching of the Buddha, and the Buddha himself and what it means to be a Buddha, such as his good qualities and activity in the world. return

114

This well-known phrase from the chapter on “Expedient Means” in the Lotus Sūtra is quoted often by Chih-i to express the subtlety and ultimate inexpressibility of the Buddha-dharma. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 28, has “Cease, cease! No need to speak. My dharma is subtle and hard to imagine.” return

115

Another twofold categorization by Chih-i of teachings, wisdom, and reality, the details of which would involve another complete analysis of T’ien-t’ai philosophy. See Fukushima 1978/5, 10-22. In many ways the first corresponds to the conventional truth (saṃvṛtisatya) and the “real” corresponds to the supreme truth (paramārthasatya). Chih-i discusses the content of these terms in more detail in the next section. return

116

This phrase is also from the chapter on “Expedient Means.” Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 23, has “Those dharmas profound and subtle, hard to see and hard to understand…” return

117

This quote precedes the above quote in the Lotus Sūtra by a few lines. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 23, has “(Among) all varieties of living beings, none can know the Buddha.” return

118

This phrase occurs between the above two quotes in the Lotus Sūtra, T.9, 5c18. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 23, translates the context as “As to the Buddha’s strengths (bala), his sorts of fearlessness (vaiśāradya), his deliverances (vimsokṣa), and his samādhi, as well as the other dharmas of a Buddha, none can fathom them.” return

119

This quote appears immediately preceding the above quotes from the Lotus Sūtra, and is another favorite of Chih-i. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 22, has “Concerning the prime, rare, hard-to-understand dharmas, which the Buddha has perfected, only a Buddha and a Buddha can exhaust their reality.” return

Master [Hui-ssu] of Mt. Nan-yüeh¹⁰⁵ suggests three types [of dharmas], i.e., sentient beings, the Buddha, and mind.¹⁰⁶

As [the Lotus Sūtra says, the Buddha manifests himself in the world] in order to lead sentient beings to expose, point out, realize, and enter [an understanding of] the Buddha’s knowledge and insight.¹⁰⁷ If sentient beings [inherently] lack the Buddha’s knowledge and insight, how can it be exposed through discussion? It should be known that the Buddha’s knowledge and insight dwells [inherently] within sentient beings.

The [Lotus] Sūtra also [refers to the seeing] merely with “eyes engendered by one’s parents.” This refers to physical eyes. That which can see through the “inner and outer mounts Meru…” is called the “Divine Eye.”¹⁰⁸ That which has penetrating insight which sees through all visible forms without being defiled by attachment is called the “Eye of Wisdom.” That which perceives visible forms without error is the “Dharma Eye.” In this way, even though one has not yet attained the state of no outflow [of passions], nevertheless one’s sight organ is [inherently] pure. For one eyesight to include all of these eyesights is called the Buddha Eye. This text in the Lotus Sūtra clarifies that the dharma of sentient beings is subtle [because they inherently have the Buddha’s knowledge and insight].

105

Chih-i’s master, considered by the T’ien-t’ai tradition to be the second patriarch in the T’ien-t’ai lineage. For details see chapter 8 and also Paul Magnin 1979. return

106

A classification of all reality into the three aspects of sentient beings (representing phenomena in general), the Buddha (representing the state of perfection), and mind. The basis for Chih-i’s analysis here must be his experience of practicing the an-lo-hsing based on the fourteenth chapter on “The Practice of Peace” of the Lotus Sūtra under Hui-ssu. See Hurvitz, Chih-i, 108-109. Hui-ssu’s work on The Meaning of the Practice of Peace in the Lotus Sūtra (Fa hua ching an lo hsing) is extant. In this work, however, Hui-ssu emphasizes the dharma of sentient beings and their practice of Lotus Sūtra contemplation rather than the three dharmas of sentient beings, Buddha, and mind. Nevertheless there is a correspondence between this work and Chih-i’s comments in so far as they often quote the same passages from texts such as the Lotus Sūtra and the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra. This classification of reality is probably based on the verse in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra:

The mind, like an artist,
Paints the various five aggregates.
In the entire world
There is no dharma which it does not produce.
The Buddha also is like the mind,
And like the Buddha, so are sentient beings.
The mind, the Buddha, and sentient beings:
These three are not distinct.
return

Next I will interpret [the meaning of subtle] from the viewpoint of contemplating the mind. [First,] if one contemplates one’s own mind as not including the minds of sentient beings and the Buddha, this is a narrow [interpretation of] essence. [If the mind is contemplated as] including [the minds of sentient beings and the Buddha], this is a vast [interpretation of] essence. [Second,] if [one contemplates] one’s own mind as not equal to the mind of the Buddha, this is an inferior [interpretation of the] stage [of one’s attainment]. If [contemplated as] equal to the mind of the Buddha, this is an eminent [interpretation of the] stage [of one’s attainment]. [Third,] if [one contemplates] one’s own mind and the mind of sentient beings and the Buddha as not “simultaneously empty of substantive Being yet having conventional existence,” this is a short [interpretation of) function. To affirm the simultaneous emptiness and conventional existence [of reality] is a long [interpretation of] function.

Also, [to teach that] one dharma-realm penetrates all ten dharma realms and the levels of the six identities¹⁰⁴ is [an interpretation] vast in essence, eminent in stages, and long in function. With regard to the ten dharma-realms, this is manifested as the Oneness of Reality. Next, with regard to the Five Flavors, this is summarized as the Oneness of Teaching. Next, with regard to contemplating the mind, this is summarized as the Oneness of Practice. Next, with regard to the six identities, this is summarized as the Oneness of Persons. This ends the brief summary of the meaning of “subtle.”

104

The T’ien-t’ai classification of the fifty-two stages leading to Buddhahood within the Perfect Teaching in six interpenetrating levels. The six are as follows:

1. “Identity in the Principle of Reality.” All things are inherently endowed with Buddha-nature and the integrated, underlying unity of the nature of reality. This is shared by all sentient beings, even those who have not heard the Buddha-dharma.
2. “Verbal Identity.” The underlying unity of the Buddha’s verbal teachings. With regard to the stages of attainment it refers to those who have just heard the Buddha’s teachings.
3. “Identity in Contemplative Practice.” The practice of contemplation. With regard to the stages of attainment it refers to the “Five Preliminary Grades”.
4. “Identity in Outer Appearance.” The attainment of Hinayāna enlightenment which resembles true enlightenment but is not the highest Buddhahood. Concretely it refers to the severance of all the obstacles of mistaken views and attitudes in the triple world. With regard to the stages of attainment it refers to the first ten stages of Faith.
5. “Identity of Partial Realization.” The stages of attainment from the levels of the Ten Abodes to the stage just before final, ultimate enlightenment.
6. “Ultimate Identity.” The final stage of and ultimate culmination of perfect enlightenment.

For details see Chappell, Tien-t’ai Buddhism, 160—161, and Hurvitz, Chih-i, 363—368. These six identities are also discussed in detail in the Mo ho chih kuan. See Donner 1976, 163—172.

[A correct understanding of] the causes [of Buddhahood] has three meanings. First, one dharma-realm contains the other nine dharma-realms. This is called being “vast in essence.” Second, the nine dharma-realms [from that of hell to bodhisattva] are integrated with the Buddha realm. This is called “eminence in stages.” Third, the ten dharma-realms [of reality] are simultaneously empty of substantial Being yet conventionally existent.⁹³ This is called “long in function.” Though these [three aspects of reality] are an integrated unity, they are called threefold; though they are threefold, they are called a unity. They are not different,⁹⁴ nor are they [completely and in all ways] the same⁹⁵ nor are they [a monistic] Oneness.⁹⁶ Therefore it [reality] is called “subtle.”

[A correct understanding on the resultant essence [of Buddhahood] has three meanings. First, the essence [of true reality] pervades all places. This is called “vast in essence.” Second, [the Buddha] has already attained Buddhahood for an eternity.⁹⁷ This is called “eminence in stages.” Third, from the beginning [the Buddha] has manifested himself⁹⁸ in the past, present and future in order to benefit sentient beings. This is called “long in function.”

[The Lotus Sūtra] differs from other Sūtras with regard to these six meanings of the causes and result [of Buddhahood], and is therefore “subtle.”⁹⁹

93

A direct translation of this important phrase in T’ien-t’ai philosophy would read, “identically empty, identically conventional, identically middle,” or “empty-as-is, conventional-as-is, Middle-as-is.” It is one way in which Chih-i summarizes his concept of the threefold truth, which is the simultaneous affirmation of the emptiness (non-substantiality) of all dharmas, their conventional or temporary existence, and the identity and synonymous meaning of these two as the Middle Way. Thus, as Chih-i proceeds to outline in the forthcoming sections, the correct understanding of reality (or the “ten dharma realms,” or all phenomena, or the objective world), and it’s “subtleness” is to understand it as simultaneously empty of eternal, unchanging, substantial Being (svabhāba), yet conventionally or provisionally existent. return

94

For they are all fundamentally empty and partake in the same nature of reality. return

95

Lit, “horizontal”. Chih-i sometimes uses the phrase “neither vertical nor horizontal” to mean that there are no vertical levels of superiority or inferiority with regard to reality and to illustrate the concept of “neither one nor different” or “neither unity nor differentiation.” In other words, all of reality is one in that it is empty and partakes in the fundamentally same nature of reality. On the other hand, there are differences of conventional existence, so the “oneness” of reality is not a homogenous, monistic “horizontal” sameness. This is illustrated in various ways, such as with the Sanskrit vowel, or the Siddham which is “neither horizontal nor vertical.” Another analogy utilized is the three eyes of Maheśvara which are arranged in a triangular formation. In the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, T. 12, 616b11—17, these two analogies are used to illustrate the unity and differentiation of liberation, the Tathagata’s Dharma-body, and prajn͂ā-wisdom. return

96

They are differentiated as conventional existence. return

97

This is the phrase used in the Lotus Sūtra to describe the Buddha’s attainment of enlightenment eon’s ago in the incalculable past. See the chapter on “The life-span of the Tathāgata” in the Lotus Sūtra. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 239 has “In this way, since my attainment of Buddhahood it has been a very great interval of time. My life span is incalculable asaṃkhyakalpas, ever enduring, never perishing.” return

98

This phrase can be interpreted in many ways. An alternate paraphrase is “(The historical Buddha) was manifested conventionally on the basis (of his eternal Buddhahood).” means “original” and “basis” as well as “beginning” and refers to the ground or basis of the original, eternal Buddha. Thus in the T’ien-t’ai tradition the last half of the Lotus Sūtra is called the because it deals with the eternal Buddha. The first half , on the other hand, refers to the “trace” or manifestation of the eternal Buddha in this conventional, finite world, and his salvific activity with regard to sentient beings. Thus in the T’ien-t’ai tradition the first half of the Lotus Sūtra is called the for it deals with the activity of the historical Buddha in this world. For a discussion of this issue and its historical background, see Alicia Matsunaga, The Buddhist Philosophy of Assimilation, Tokyo: Sophia University, 1969, especially pp. 104—120. return

99

In short, the Lotus Sūtra deserves to called subtle it teaches the integrated unity and simultaneous emptiness and conventional existence of all reality, and especially of the eternality of the Buddha. return

Of all the present and past interpretations [of miao and the Lotus Sūtra, that of Fa-yün is the best. If we consider the interpretation of Mahāyāna in southern China, many have followed [the interpretations of] Seng-chao and Kumārajīva. Seng-chao and Kumārajīva often follow the interpretations of the Shared Teaching. Fa-yün’s interpretation of miao is much more advanced. Now I will first criticize Fa-yün, and the rest will be swept away by the blast.⁵⁹

Here are four criticisms concerning [Fa-yün’s comments on] the vastness and narrowness of [teachings concerning] the essence of the causes [of Buddhahood]:

If one says that the past [teachings concerning] the essence of the causes [of Buddhahood] were narrow and thus “crude,” then what does one mean by “past”? If one means the Tripiṭaka teachings, this criticism is just, but if by the past one refers to all teachings previous to that of the Lotus Sūtra, then this criticism is inappropriate. Why?

Because the Prajn͂āpāramitā [Sūtras] teach that “All dharmas are included in the Mahāyāna.”⁶⁰ Therefore there is no need for other vehicles. The Viśeṣacinta-brahmanpariprcchā Sūtra clarifies that “The universal practice of all bodhisattvas is to understand the dharmamarks [the characteristics of reality].⁶¹ In the Avataṃsaka Sūtra one enters the dharmadhātu without moving from the Jeta Grove.⁶² The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra says, “To know all dharmas in a single thought: this is to sit on the seat of enlightenment [bodhimaṇḍa].⁶³

Such are the past [teachings concerning the] causes [of Buddhahood]. There is nothing they leave out. How can one call them narrow? If [Fa-yün] says that this present [teaching of the Lotus Sūtra] is vast in [it’s teaching concerning] essence, then how can he say that [the Lotus Sūtra] is complete in it’s clarification of causes and conditions [for attaining Buddhahood], but incomplete in it’s lack of clarification of the complete cause [for attaining buddhahood]?⁶⁴

How, also, can [Fa-yün] say that [the Lotus Sūtra teaches] a finite Buddha⁶⁵ when [the Lotus Sūtra says] that [the Buddha’s life] previously exceeded [in length of years the number of the sands of the Ganges River, and his next life is twice the above number.⁶⁶ If one is already endowed with the causes of transiency, then how can one attain the result of eternity? If both the causes and results are those of transiency, then how can these transient people perceive their [eternal] Buddha-nature?

Since [Fa-yün’s interpretation is that] this [Lotus Sūtra] does not contain the complete meaning [nirvāṇa], therefore [Fa-yün’s interpretation of the] essence [of Buddhahood] does not include [the perfect teaching of] the Oneness of Practice. Since [Fa-yün says that the words of the Lotus Sūtra] are not completely perfect words, [Fayün’s interpretation of] essence does not include [the perfect teaching of] the Oneness of Teaching. Since [Fa-yün says that the Lotus Sūtra] does not [teach the doctrine of] eternal abiding, [Fa-yün’s interpretation of] essence does not include [the perfect teaching of] the Oneness of Persons. Since [Fa-yün says that in the Lotus Sūtra] the Buddha-nature is not perceived, [Fa-yün’s interpretation of] essence does not include [the perfect teaching of] the Oneness of Reality. ⁶⁷

One should know that this [interpretation of] causes [by Fa-yün] is narrow even among the narrow. To be narrow means that it is crude. [The teaching concerning] the essence [of Buddhahood] in the past was already vast; it is actually the past [teachings]⁶⁸ which are subtle. Through this single criticism one can already know [the difference between] crude and subtle [interpretations]; step by step I will make further criticisms.

58

Since the Shared Teaching emphasizes emptiness, Chih-i is here criticizing Seng-chao and Kumārajīva, and indirectly the Sanlun scholars, for a single-minded emphasis on the emptiness doctrine. return

59

Since Fa-yün is the most eminent interpreter of the Lotus Sūtra, Chih-i concentrates on him and considers a thorough criticism of Fa-yün to include all other interpreters of the Lotus Sūtra. return

60

I could not locate the exact quote, but see the Ta Chih tu lun, T. 25, 389c16, “By riding on the Great Vehicle one attains all wisdom and turns the Dharma-wheel.” At this point Chih-i is introducing the Four Categories of Oneness, that teaching, practice, persons, and reality are all one integrated unity. This first quote supports the category of “The Oneness of Teachings.” return

61

The Viśeṣacinta-brahmanpariprcchā Sūtra, T. 15, 33-62, is a Mahāyāna text translated by Kumārajīva in A.D. 402. It emphasizes the non-duality of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, the unity of all dharmas, and the positive aspects of reality. This quote is found among ten verses on the “universal practice” of the bodhisattvas. The closest verse to the phrase quoted by Chih-i is: “To clearly understand all dharmas, without doubting that there is no differentiation between the Path and the anti-path, and the mind of passion; this is the universal practice of the Boddhisattva.” This quote by Chih-i illustrates the second category of the “Oneness of Practice.” return

62

The Shakusen kōgi refers to the forty-fifth chuan of the old translation of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, see T. 9, 683c19-684. This is the early section of the famous “Chapter on Entering the Dharmadhātu” where it is emphasized that one does not physically, or any other way, actually go some other place in order to enter the dharmadhātu, that it is not necessary to leave the Jeta grove where Śākyamuni is preaching to reach the realm of perfection, that the realm of the Buddha and the realm of ordinary man, nirvāṇa and saṃsāra, are one. This illustrates the third category of the “Oneness of Persons.” return

63

This is the last phrase in “Vimalakirti’s Homily on the Seat of Enlightenment.” The original passage in Kumarajiva’s translation, T. 14, 543a4-5, is slightly different, which Boin, 98, translates as follows: “It is the seat of the complete penetration of all dharmas in a single instant of thought because it fully achieves omniscience” This quote illustrates the fourth category of the “Oneness of Reality.” return

64

The Buddha-nature. Chih-i classifies the Buddha-nature into three categories, or three types of causes for attaining Buddhahood: the “direct cause,” that all beings are inherently endowed with the principle or nature of the Tathāgata. This corresponds to the role of the objective realm in the attainment of Buddhahood. The “complete cause,” the wisdom which illumines or realizes the inherent Buddha-nature. This corresponds to the role of wisdom in the attainment of Buddhahood. The “conditional causes,” the conditions, the practice of the Buddhist path, which bring about the realization of wisdom. This corresponds to the role of practice in the attainment of Buddhahood. In other words, Chih-i criticizes Fa-yün for inconsistency in claiming that the teachings of the Lotus Sūtra are “vast.” Fa-yün classifies the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, which clearly teaches the doctrine of the universal Buddha-nature, as superior to the Lotus Sūtra, which does not clearly teach the Buddha-nature as such. How, then, can he say that the teaching of the cause of Buddhahood in the Lotus Sūtra is “vast”? To be consistent, Chih-i is pointing out, Fa-yün must then admit that the teaching of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra is “more vast” and thus superior to that of the Lotus Sūtra. return

65

“Causes for transiency, or finitude.” return

66

See the chapter on “The Life-span of the Tathāgata” in the Lotus Sūtra. The phrase “twice the above number” appears. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 239, translates the context as follows: “In this way, since my attainment of Buddhahood it has been a very great interval of time. My life-span is incalculable asaṃkhyakalpas, ever enduring, never perishing. O good men! The life-span I achieved in my former treading of the bodhisattva path even now is not exhausted, for it is twice the above number.” return

67

Chih-i’s presentation of Fa-yün’s position does not exactly match Fayün’s actual presentation in the Fa hua i chi.  return

68

Exemplified by the texts Chih-i has quoted above such as the Pañcaviṃśati-sāhasrikā-prajn͂āpāramitā Sūtra, Viśeṣacinta-brahmanpariprcchā Sūtra, Avataṃsaka Sūtra, and Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra. return

[I] will clarify in detail [the meaning of] the dharma of the Buddha.

How can there be any dharma [reality] distinct from the Buddha? [There cannot be any.] All of the hundred realms and thousand suchnesses are the objective realm of the Buddha.²⁴³ This reality is ultimately understood only by Buddhas. It is analogous to the fact that a large box must have a correspondingly large cover.²⁴⁴ This vast and great Buddhahood and objective realm²⁴⁵ is illuminated by means of unlimited Buddha-wisdom. For [the Buddha] to reach to the own basis mind” [of this reality] is called “the dharma in accordance with his own mind.”²⁴⁶ If one is illuminated concerning the nature and characteristics of the nine [other] realms from beginning to end without omitting a thread or mustard seed, this is called “the dharma in accordance with other minds.²⁴⁷ On the basis of these two dharmas²⁴⁸ the phenomenal traces [of the Buddha] “hang down”; “sometimes to manifest his [the Buddha’s] own body, sometimes to manifest another body, sometimes to preach his own words, sometimes to preach the words of another.”²⁴⁹

[The Buddha’s] “own mind”²⁵⁰ and the “mind of others”²⁵¹ are beyond conceptual understanding. [The Buddha’s] “own body”²⁵² and the “bodies of others”²⁵³ are extremely subtle and ultimately quiescent. [Ultimately] all of them are neither tentative nor real,²⁵⁴ yet one can propose a [tentative] correspondence of the nine realms as tentative and the one [Buddha] realm as real. However, within the dharma of the Buddha there is no loss nor decrease.²⁵⁵ The dharma of all Buddhas is truly subtle!

These matters should be known [as explained above], so I will not go into a troublesome and detailed explanation. The chapter on “Expedient Means” [in the Lotus Sūtra] clarifies this matter further.

243

Another famous phrase of Chih-i which succinctly expresses his concept of the integrated nature of reality. return

244

In other words, the vastness of reality, of the objective realm, is such that only a vast and comprehensive wisdom can comprehend it. return

245

Or “vast and great realm of the Buddha.” Since the two (Buddha and objective realm) are integrated, either phrase ultimately means the same thing. return

246

In other words, for the Buddha to penetrate to the basis of reality is for him to completely understand all Buddha-wisdom, exhaustively know the underlying principle of reality, which is the Buddha-realm. return

247

This terminology is borrowed from the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, T. 12, 820b2ff, where the Buddha explains that he has preached the twelvefold Sūtras at times directly on the basis of his own “mind” or understanding, at times in accord with the “mind” or understanding of his listeners, and at times a combination of these two. (See Yamamoto Ill, 868ff) Here Chih-i’s point is somewhat different. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra is speaking of different methods of teaching; Chih-i is tentatively making a distinction between the two kinds of wisdom: the wisdom which knows the Buddha realm (real wisdom ) and the wisdom which knows the other nine realms, the world of objective reality (tentative wisdom ). Of course, as Chih-i has just pointed out, the first nine realms are included in the Buddha realm and all of them together are the constituent parts of an integrated reality. return

248

That in accordance with the Buddha’s own mind and that in accordance with the mind of others (in the other nine realms); or, real and tentative wisdom. return

249

A paraphrase of a section in the chapter on “The Lifespan of the Tathāgata” in the Lotus Sūtra. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 239 translates: “O good men! The scriptural canon preached by the Thus Come One is all for the purpose of conveying living beings to deliverance. At times he speaks of his own body, at times of another’s body, at times he shows his own body, at times another’s body, at times his own affairs, at times another’s affairs. Everything he says is true , not vanity.” return

250

This tentatively corresponds to the “real.” return

251

This tentatively corresponds to the “tentative.” return

252

This tentatively corresponds to the “real.” return

253

This tentatively corresponds to the “tentative.” return

254

They ultimately correspond to the middle, which is beyond the duality of tentative and real. return

255

Nothing is “taken away” from the Buddha or the Buddha realm by conventionally “separating” the nine other realms from the realm of the Buddha. return

[A] verse on the shared morality of the Seven Buddhas says, “Do not perform any evil deeds, but practice only good deeds. Then one’s mind will spontaneously become pure. This is the teaching of all the Buddhas.”²⁴² The appearances, nature [and so forth] of those in the four evil destinies is the referent of “evil deeds.” The appearances, nature [and so forth] of men and gods are the referent of “good deeds.” “One’s mind will spontaneously become pure” refers to the pure mind which has analyzed [reality as lacking in self-]essence. This refers to the appearances, nature [and so forth] of those of the two vehicles.

The appearances, nature [and so forth] of bodhisattvas is that of a “pure mind,” which enters conventional existence [for the purpose of saving sentient beings]. The appearances, nature [and so forth] of the Buddha realm is that of a “pure mind,” which understands the middle [way].

If one were to explain these ten [suchlike characteristics of] appearances, nature [and so forth] with reference to all the Sūtras, Sāstras, and vinaya, then [one should know that this Perfect Teaching of the supremacy of Buddhahood and the integrated nature of reality as simultaneously empty of substantial Being yet conventionally existent] completely penetrates the Tripiṭaka, Shared, and Distinct Teachings and contains all dharmas without obstruction.

242

According to Chan-jan in the Fa hua hsüan i shih ch’ien [
Annotations on “The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra], this type of saying occurs often in the Āgama (Bukkyō taikei I, 611). See, for example, Ekottarāgama, T. 2, 551a13-14, which contains the verses:

Do not perform any evil.
Practice all good deeds.
Spontaneously one’s mind will become pure.
This is the teaching of all the Buddhas.
 return

[T]he hundred dharma realms and thousand suchlike characteristics are very numerous and interpenetrating, but through [examining] verses in the Sūtras and Sastras we can organize them so that they are easily understood.

The Mūlamadhyamakakārika verse [24:18] says, “All things which arise through conditioned co-arising I explain as emptiness. Again, it is a conventional designation. Again, it is the meaning of the middle way.”²³⁴ The appearance, nature [and so forth] of those of the six destinies [from hell to heaven] are the “things which arise through conditioned co-arising.” The appearance, nature [and so forth] of those of the two vehicles and the bodhisattva of the Shared Teaching are the referent for “I explain as emptiness.” The appearances, nature [and so forth] of the bodhisattva of the six pāramitā [i.e., the Tripiṭaka bodhisattva] and of the Distinct Teaching are the referent of “Again, it is a conventional designation.”²³⁵ The appearances, nature [and so forth] of the Buddha realm is the referent for “Again, it is the meaning of the middle way.”

The essentials, when organized [in this way in this verse], appear to be concise, but if the many teachings given previously are understood, they should be perceived as [fitting together] in this way.

234

From the Mūlamadhyamakakārika, T. 30, 33b11-12. return

235. Because they return to this world of conventional existence for the purpose of saving sentient beings.

[O]ther Sūtras clarify the nine [suchlike characteristics of] nature, appearances [and so forth], but do not go so far as to expound that the nature, appearances [and so forth] of the Buddha are [characterized as] an integrated reality simultaneously empty of substantial Being yet conventionally existent. It is this Lotus Sūtra which reveals [the true meaning and purpose of] all expedient means and leads all to attain and enter [the one final goal of Buddhahood]. In their discussion of [suchlike] appearances, nature [and so forth], they do not mention “integrated reality as simultaneously empty yet conventionally existent.” The Tathāgata emphatically praises this Lotus Sūtra as the most supreme, because this meaning is implicit here.