The characteristics of the Buddha include the manifestation of correct universal knowledge. The Buddha’s wisdom is universal and he knows all appearances.²²⁸ This is taught in all of the Sūtras. If one utilizes this teaching to interpret the simile of the teachings of the Five Flavors [the results are as follows]:

First, the “milk” teaching expounds the nature and characteristics²²⁹ of both the bodhisattva and Buddha realms, at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of conventional existence, at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of the middle . Although the teaching of the middle is supreme, this [”milk”] teaching [of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra] still partially contains expedient means and thus is not completely supreme.

Second, the “cream” teaching clarifies only the characteristics and natures of those of the two vehicles, and though it attains [the doctrine of] “sameness” as emptiness through analysis [of dharmas],²³⁰ it does not clarify the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of emptiness, let alone the others [of conventional existence and the middle]. Therefore it is not supreme.

Third, the “curds” teaching clarifies characteristics and nature in four ways, at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms of] emptiness [gained through] analysis, at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of emptiness, at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of conventional existence, and at times expounding the “sameness” [of reality in terms] of the integration of the middle. Only the Buddha with his characteristics and nature fully attains [perfect insight into] the integration of reality as simultaneously empty [of substantial Being] and yet conventionally existent. However, this [”curds” teaching] contains three types of expedient means [i.e., the first three types]. Therefore it is not supreme.

Fourth, the “butter” teaching clarifies three types of characteristics and nature, i.e. at times expounding the integration of emptiness, at times expounding the integration of conventional existence, and at times expounding the integration of the middle. Only the Buddha with his characteristics and nature fully attains [perfect insight into] the integration of reality as simultaneously empty [of substantial Being] and yet conventionally existent. However, this [”butter” teaching] still contains two types of expedient means. Therefore it is not supreme.

Fifth, this Lotus Sūtra [the “ghee” teaching] clarifies that the nine [suchlike characteristics of] appearance, nature, and so forth are all [characterized as] an integrated reality simultaneously empty of substantial Being yet conventionally existent. [As the Lotus Sūtra says,] “You are my true son. I am your true father.”²³¹ Each visible form and each taste in itself is the dharma of the Buddha, and there are no other dharmas.” Therefore it should be known that the Buddha realm is supreme.

228

Or “all characteristics of reality.” return

229

In this section I have translated the character as “characteristics” rather than “appearances” as in the first of the ten suchlikes. In this section the compound [Chinese characters] refers to the ten suchlike characteristics in general and thus “characteristics and nature” makes for a more readable, though admittedly inconsistent, English translation. return

230

Chih-i criticizes the Abhidharmic understanding of emptiness as an emptiness which is achieved by analyzing or “breaking down” dharmas to show that they have no substantial Being. To Chih-i this is an inferior understanding of emptiness, and all things should be understood as empty just as they are. return

231

This statement is by the father of the poor son in the chapter on “Faith and Understanding,” where he finally reveals to everyone the true relationship of he and his son. It illustrates the integrated relationship between the Buddha and sentient beings, and the integrated nature of all of reality. Hurvitz, Lotus Sūtra, 88, translates the context as follows: “When facing his end, the old man commanded his son to gather his kinsmen, as well as kings, great ministers, kṣatriyas, and householders, who were all to gather together. Then he himself proclaimed to them: ‘Sirs! Know that this is my son, by me. Having forsaken me in such-and-such a city and run off, he suffered loneliness and hardship for more than fifty years. His original name was so-and-so. My own name is thus-and-so. Formerly, in my native city, affected by grief, I sought him. Some time ago, I suddenly encountered him by accident and got him back. He is really my son. I am really his father. Now all the treasure I have belongs to my son. What was formerly paid out and taken in, my son knows it all.’ ” return