Tạng English · BDK English Tripiṭaka (dịch từ Hán tạng) · BDK English Tripiṭaka

T1 The Canonical Book of the Buddha’s Lengthy Discourses, Vol. III

Thông tin: BDK America — English Tripiṭaka

THE CANONICAL BOOK OF THE BUDDHA’S LENGTHY DISCOURSES - VOLUME III

THE CANONICAL BOOK OF THE BUDDHA'S LENGTHY DISCOURSES VOLUME III

Front Matters

BDK English Tripiṭaka Series THE CANONICAL BOOK OF THE BUDDHA'S LENGTHY DISCOURSES VOLUME III

(Taishō Volume 1, Number 1) Translated from the Chinese by

Shohei Ichimura BDK America, Inc. 2018

Copyright © 2018 by Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai and BDK America, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transcribed in any form or by any means —electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise— without the prior written permission of the publisher. First Printing, 2018

ISBN: 978-1-886439-68-9

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2015943478 Published by

BDK America, Inc.

1675 School Street

Moraga, California 94556

Printed in the United States of America

A Message on the Publication of the

English Tripiṭaka

The Buddhist canon is said to contain eighty-four thousand different teachings. I believe that this is because the Buddha's basic approach was to prescribe a different treatment for every spiritual ailment, much as a doctor prescribes a different medicine for every medical ailment. Thus his teachings were always appropriate for the particular suffering individual and for the time at which the teaching was given, and over the ages not one of his prescriptions has failed to relieve the suffering to which it was addressed.

Ever since the Buddha's Great Demise over twenty-five hundred years ago, his message of wisdom and compassion has spread throughout the world. Yet no one has ever attempted to translate the entire Buddhist canon into English throughout the history of Japan. It is my greatest wish to see this done and to make the translations available to the many English-speaking people who have never had the opportunity to learn about the Buddha's teachings. Of course, it would be impossible to translate all of the Buddha's eighty-four thousand teachings in a few years. I have, therefore, had one hundred thirty-nine of the scriptural texts in the prodigious Taishō edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon selected for inclusion in the First Series of this translation project. It is in the nature of this undertaking that the results are bound to be criticized. Nonetheless, I am convinced that unless someone takes it upon himself or herself to initiate this project, it will never be done. At the same time, I hope that an improved, revised edition will appear in the future.

It is most gratifying that, thanks to the efforts of more than a hundred Buddhist scholars from the East and the West, this monumental project has finally gotten off the ground. May the rays of the Wisdom of the Compassionate One reach each and every person in the world.

NUMATA Yehan

Founder of the English

August 7, 1991 Tripiṭaka Project

Editorial Foreword

In the long history of Buddhist transmission throughout East Asia, translations of Buddhist texts were often carried out as national projects supported and funded by emperors and political leaders. The BDK English Tripiṭaka project, on the other hand, began as a result of the dream and commitment of one man. In January 1982 Dr. NUMATA Yehan, founder of Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism), initiated the monumental task of translating the complete Taishō shinshū daizōkyō edition of the Chinese Tripiṭaka (Buddhist canon) into the English language. Under his leadership, a special preparatory committee was organized in April 1982. By July of the same year the Translation Committee of the English Tripiṭaka was officially convened. The initial Committee included the following members: (late) HANAYAMA Shōyū (Chairperson), (late) BANDŌ Shōjun, ISHIGAMI Zennō, (late) KAMATA Shigeo, (late) KANAOKA Shūyū, MAYEDA Sengaku, NARA Yasuaki, (late) SAYEKI Shinkō, (late) SHIOIRI Ryōtatsu, TAMARU Noriyoshi, (late) TAMURA Kwansei, (late) URYŪZU Ryūshin, and YUYAMA Akira. Assistant members of the Committee were as follows: KANAZAWA Atsushi, WATANABE Shōgo, Rolf Giebel of New Zealand, and Rudy Smet of Belgium.

After holding planning meetings on a monthly basis, the Committee selected one hundred and thirty-nine texts for the First Series of the project, estimated to be one hundred printed volumes in all. The texts selected were not limited to those originally written in India but also included works composed in China and Japan. While the publication of the First Series proceeds, the texts for the Second Series will be selected from among the remaining works; this process will continue until all the texts, in Japanese as well as in Chinese, have been published. Given the huge scope of this project, accomplishing the English translations of all the Chinese and Japanese texts in the Taishō canon may take as long as one hundred years or more. Nevertheless, as Dr. NUMATA wished, it is the sincere hope of the Committee that this project will continue until completion, even after all the present members have passed away.

vii

Publisher’s Foreword

Editorial Foreword

Dr. NUMATA passed away on May 5, 1994, at the age of ninety-seven. He entrusted his son, Mr. NUMATA Toshihide with the continuation and completion of the English Tripiṭaka project. Mr. Numata served for twenty-three years, leading the project forward with enormous progress before his sudden passing on February 16, 2017, at the age of eighty-four. The Committee previously lost its able and devoted first Chairperson, Professor HANAYAMA Shōyū, on June 16, 1995, at the age of sixty-three. In October 1995 the Committee elected Professor MAYEDA Sengaku (then Vice President of Musashino Women's College) as Chairperson, and upon the retirement of Professor Mayeda in July 2016, the torch was passed to me to serve as the third Chairperson. Despite these losses and changes we, the Editorial Committee members, have renewed our determination to carry out the noble ideals set by Dr. NUMATA. Present members of the Committee are Kenneth K. Tanaka (Chairperson), MAYEDA Sengaku, ICHISHIMA Shōshin, ISHIGAMI Zennō, KATSURA Shōryū, NARA Yasuaki, SAITŌ Akira, SHIMODA Masahiro, WATANABE Shōgo, and YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu.

The Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research was established in November 1984, in Berkeley, California, U.S.A., to assist in the publication of the translated texts. The Publication Committee was organized at the Numata Center in December 1991. In 2010, the Numata Center's operations were merged with Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai America, Inc. (BDK America), and BDK America continues to oversee the publication side of the English Tripiṭaka project in close cooperation with the Editorial Committee in Tokyo.

At the time of this writing, in February 2017, the project has completed about sixty percent of the seven thousand one hundred and eighty-five Taishō pages of texts selected for the First Series. Much work still lies ahead of us but we are committed to the completion of the remaining texts in order to realize the grand vision of Dr. Numata, shared by Mr. Numata and Professor Hanayama, to make the Buddhist canon more readily accessible to the English-speaking world. Kenneth K. Tanaka

Chairperson

Editorial Committee of

the BDK English Tripiṭaka

viii

Publisher's Foreword

On behalf of the members of the Publication Committee, I am happy to present this volume as the latest contribution to the BDK English Tripiṭaka Series. The Publication Committee members have worked to ensure that this volume, as all other volumes in the series, has gone through a rigorous process of editorial efforts. The initial translation and editing of the Buddhist scriptures found in this and other BDK English Tripiṭaka volumes are performed under the direction of the Editorial Committee in Tokyo, Japan. Both the Editorial Committee in Tokyo and the Publication Committee, headquartered in Moraga, California, are dedicated to the production of accurate and readable English translations of the Buddhist canon. In doing so, the members of both committees and associated staff work to honor the deep faith, spirit, and concern of the late Reverend Dr. Yehan Numata, who founded the BDK English Tripiṭaka Series in order to disseminate the Buddhist teachings throughout the world. The long-term goal of our project is the translation and publication of the texts in the one hundred-volume Taishō edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon, along with a number of influential extracanonical Japanese Buddhist texts. The list of texts selected for the First Series of this translation project may be found at the end of each volume in the series.

As Chair of the Publication Committee, I am deeply honored to serve as the fifth person in a post previously held by leading figures in the field of Buddhist studies, most recently by my predecessor, John R. McRae.

In conclusion, I wish to thank the members of the Publication Committee for their dedicated and expert work undertaken in the course of preparing this volume for publication: Managing Editor Marianne Dresser, Dr. Hudaya Kandahjaya, Dr. Carl Bielefeldt, Dr. Robert Sharf, and Rev. Brian Kensho Nagata, Director of the BDK English Tripiṭaka Project.

A. Charles Muller

Chairperson

Publication Committee

A Message on the Publication of the English Tripiṭaka NUMATA Yehan v

Editorial Foreword Kenneth K. Tanaka vii Publisher's Foreword A. Charles Muller ix Translator's Introduction Shohei Ichimura xiii Sutra 21. Brahmā's Net 3 Sutra 22. One Who Cultivates Virtue Sutra 23. BrāhmaṇaKūṭadanta 49 Sutra 24. Kevaddha 75 Sutra 25. A Naked BrāhmaṇaAscetic Sutra 26. Knowledge of the Three Vedas Sutra 27. The Rewards of the Life of a Śrāvaka Sutra 28. Poṭṭhapada 123 Sutra 29. Lohitya 141 Sutra 30. A Buddhist Cosmology 33 83

107

151

Notes 305

Bibliography 307 Index 311

A List of the Volumes of the BDK English Tripiṭaka (First Series) 331 xi

Translator’s Introduction

Translator's Introduction

The Textual Origin and Contents of the

Canonical Collection of Lengthy Discourses

The complex historical context in which the textual translation of the Dīrgha Āgamatook place is beyond the scope of this brief introduction. I attempt to provide here, however, an evaluation of three major features of this canonical tradition: the nature of this sutra collection and its contents, the translators and the times of translation, and the canonical legacy from the point of view of the premodern and modern contemporary Tripiṭaka Buddhist library. The Chang ahan jing(Skt. Dīrgha Āgama), or the Canonical Collection of Lengthy Discourses,is one of the four canonical collections that were upheld by the orthodox Dharmaguptaka school. Since this school descended from the Sthāvira orthodoxy that had a prominent position in the few centuries around the Third Buddhist Council, held around 250 to 236 B.C.E., 1 centuries after the

Buddha's demise, the origin of this school's canonical tradition (Āgamas) may be traced back to some scriptural matrix2 whose contents had been compiled and authenticated by the time of the Third Council.

There were three or four general councils during Buddhism's early centuries. The First Council was held at Rājagṛha (present-day Rājgīr, Bihar) immediately after Śākyamuni's passing (485 or 486 B.C.E.) in order to assure the oral preservation of the core teachings Śākyamuni Buddha taught directly to his disciples. The Second Council was held at Vaiśālī (Vesālī) a century later to settle some controversies on the Vinaya rules and disciplines set forth by Śākyamuni as the moral and spiritual codes for Buddhist monks and their communities. This council contributed to the ascertainment of legality on the nature of Vinaya codes, despite some challenges and disputes raised by changing historical and social contexts. At that time, it is said that some elder monks still remembered how some of the first-generation disciples had upheld the discipline while remaining active in daily life. xiii

Translator's Introduction

Though our knowledge of it is confined to Theravāda documents, 3 the Third

Council was held under the auspices of the Mauryan Buddhist ruler Aśoka in the seventeenth year of his reign (251 B.C.E.) at the capital city Pāṭaliputra (Patna, Bihar). Although this council failed in its intended goal of preventing schism from sectarian movements, the Third Council was pivotal to the subsequent history of the Buddhist canonical tradition for two reasons. First, since the Buddha's teaching and organization evolved in various forms during the initial two and a half centuries of its development, Buddhist leaders were compelled to reexamine their canonical traditions and establish an authenticated standard to prevent sectarian diversion and doctrinal variation. Second, it was during this council that Buddhist scriptures were formally classified into the threefold categories of Sutra (teaching), Vinaya (discipline), and Abhidharma (doctrine), i.e., the threefold canonical baskets (Skt. Tripiṭaka; Pāli Tipiṭaka). From that time on, the Tripiṭaka served as the basic categorization of Buddhist literature. The last general conference was held in Kāśmīra under the auspices of King Kaniṣka, the Kuṣāṇa ruler (known in China as Great Yüeji), toward the end of the first century C.E., and it centered on the Hinayana orthodoxy, the Sthāvira-Sarvāstivāda school. Though the historical veracity of this conference is not conclusive, the likelihood of its occurrence can be argued based on the detailed Abhidharma discussions recorded in the Mahāvibhāṣā-śāstra, 4 and especially

in the epilogue left by its translator Xuanzang, as well as the historical fact of the massive Hindu reaction which spurred efforts to compile their literary legacy in the early second century C.E.

5 In any case, after the Fourth Council meeting

in Kāśmīra, Kuṣāṇa monks began to reach the continent of China during the Late Han period.

The Synopsis between the Sanskrit Dīrgha

Āgamaand the Pāli Dīgha Nikāya

The Canonical Collection of Lengthy Discourseswas one of the four Āgamas essential to the Sutra-piṭakathat was preserved by the Dharmaguptaka school. To explain the nature of this Āgama, it is best to show the synopsis between the content of the DīrghaĀgamaand that of the Dīgha Nikāya (DN), upheld by the Thera vāda school as part of the fivefold sutta-piṭaka.The Theravāda school prospered in Sri Lanka, and its descendants in Southeast Asia (Burma, Thailand, and Indochina) preserved the fivefold Nikāyas through the Pāli canonical language. xiv

Translator's Introduction

The Dharmaguptaka school, one of the descendants of the Sthāvira-Sarvāstivāda school that prospered in Northern India, inherited the Dīrgha Āgamaas part of their Sutra-piṭakathrough the canonical language of Sanskrit or, more precisely, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit.

The fourfold Āgamas that constitute the Sutra-piṭakaof the Hinayana orthodoxy were preserved throughout the medieval period as part of the Mahayana Tripiṭaka corpus through the Chinese versions since the fifth century C.E. The following is a chart of the synopsis between the four Dharmaguptaka Āgamas originally in Sanskrit and the five Nikāyas (Pāli suttacollections) preserved by the Theravāda school.

Four Sanskrit Āgamas (Dharmaguptaka) (Theravāda)

1. Dīrgha Āgama(Lengthy Five Pāli Nikāyas

1. Dīgha Nikāya(Lengthy Discourses)

Discourses)

2. Madhyama Āgama(Middle-length Discourses) Discourses) 3. SaṃyuktaĀgama(Mixed 2. Majjhima Nikāya (Middle-length 3. Saṃyutta Nikāya(Mixed Discourses)

Discourses)

4. Ekottarika Āgama(Gradually 4. Aṅguttara Nikāya(Increasing Each Increased Discourses) by a Doctrine)

5. Khuddaka Nikāya(Short

Dis courses)

As can be inferred from this table, the Sanskrit Dīrgha Āgamaand the Pāli Dīgha Nikāyahave many synoptic parallels in their respective content, namely, between the thirty sutras of the Chang ahan jingand the thirty-four suttantas of the Pāli Dīgha Nikāya.

7 There are twenty-seven sutras that are identified with the twentyseven suttantas, but differences in their respective ordering and arrangement of scriptures must be recognized. Seven suttantas8 are omitted in the Chang ahan jing,but this includes a sutra that is not found in the Dīgha Nikāya.Because of this close synoptic correlations, it is reasonable to assume that the Sanskrit Dīrgha Āgamaand the Pāli Dīgha Nikāyahad a common canonical matrix that could have been determined as standard during the Third Buddhist Council. The Chang ahan jingis unique in two ways. First, the editors of the Āgama in organizing the sutras set forth four major sections, reflecting their major concerns: xv

Translator's Introduction

(1) the centrality of Śākyamuni Buddha as the primary subject, (2) the importance of the Dharma and doctrine, (3) the resultant practice, discipline, and advanced spiritual states, and (4) a record of the cosmological origins of the world. Second, the "Sutra on Buddhist Cosmology,

" which is totally absent in the Dīgha Nikāya of the Pāli canon, was added as the last text in the collection in order to present the Buddha's teaching more effectively and attractively to a non-Buddhist Hindu audience. According to some scholars, the underlying principle of the Chang ahan jingreflects a conciliatory impulse that was intended to bridge the original Buddha's teaching (the ninefold or twelvefold categories of discourses) on the one hand, and early Maha yana Buddhist teaching and scriptures on the other. 9

The correlations between the two scriptural traditions, the sutras of the Chang ahan jingand the suttantas of the Pāli Dīgha Nikāya,are presented below. In addition, the corresponding texts are noted at the beginning of each sutra in this translation.

Four Sutras on the Subject of Śakyamuni Buddha 1. The Great Origin (Daban jing) DN 14: Mahāpadāna Suttanta 2. Last Journey and Sojourns, DN 16: Mahāpariṇibbāna Suttanta Parts 1, 2, 3

3. A Great Treasury Councilor 4. Janavasabha's Exhortation DN 19: Mahāgovinda Suttanta DN 18: Janavasabha Suttanta

Fifteen Sutras on the Subject of Dharma and Doctrine 5. Lesser Causality 6. Universal Ruler (Cakravartin)'s DN 27: Aggañña Suttanta DN 26: Cakkavatti-sīhanāda Suttanta

Practice

7. Pāyāsi['s Dialogue] 8. Sandhāna 9. Numerically Assembled Doctrines 10. Ten Progressively Classified DN 23: Pāyāsi Suttanta DN 25: Udumbarika-sīhanāda Suttanta

DN 33: Saṅgīti Suttanta

DN 34: Dasuttara-Suttanta

Doctrines

11. Gradual Increase of Doctrines No Parallel in DN by One

12. Doctrines in Groups of Three 13. Greater Causality 14. Indra's Question on Causality No Parallel in DN DN 15: Mahānidāna Suttanta

DN 21: Sakkapañha Suttanta

xvi

Translator's Introduction 15. Anupiya Episode 16. Kalyāṇa-jātika 17. Purity 18. Happiness Caused by Oneself 19. Great Assembly DN 24: Pāṭika Suttanta DN 31: Sīṇgālovāda Suttanta DN 29: Pāsādika Suttanta DN 28: Saṃpasānīya Suttanta DN 20: Mahāsamaya Suttanta Ten Sutras on the Subject of Practice and Resulting Spiritual States 20. Ambaṭṭha 21. Brahmā's [Net] 22. One Who Cultivates Virtues 23. BrāhmaṇaKūṭadanta 24. Kevaddha 25. A Naked BrāhmaṇaAscetic 26. Knowledge of Three Vedas 27. The Rewards of the Life of a Śramaṇa 28. Poṭṭhapāda 29. Lohitya DN 3: Ambaṭṭha Suttanta DN 1: Brahmajāla Suttanta DN 4: Soṇadaṇḍa Suttanta DN 5: Kūṭadanta Suttanta DN 11: Kevaṭṭa Suttanta DN 8: Kassapa-sīhanāda Suttanta DN 13: Tevijja Suttanta DN 2: Sāmañña-phala Suttanta DN 9: Poṭṭhapāda Suttanta DN 12: Lohicca Suttanta Sutra 30 on the Subject of Cosmology (No Parallel in DN) A 1. The Land of Jambudvīpa 2. The Land of Uttarakuru 3. The Universal Ruler (Cakravartin) B 4. The Worlds of the Hells 5. Dragons and Birds C 6. The AsuraDemigods 7. The Four Guardian Gods of Heaven 8. The Trāyastriṃśa Heavens D 9. Three Kinds of Disasters 10. The AsuraDemigods 11. Three Kinds of Medium-length Eons (Kalpas) Translators and

Historical Times

The translator of the Chang ahan jingwas the śramaṇaBuddhayaśas, a native of Kāśmīra who moved to Khotan in Central Asia, where he resided for some xvii

Translator's Introduction

time before he was invited to Chang'an specifically to engage in scriptural translation. There are two stories of how Buddhayaśas was invited to Chang'an and what contribution his translation was to accomplish.

Fifth-century China was divided into northern and southern political regions separated by the Yangzi River. In the north were Louyang and Chang'an, which were the two major government seats of the Han and Tang dynasties, as well as several other political and cultural centers. Since the north was dominated by the descendants of the five racially foreign regimes, resulting in the short-lived Sixteen States period, Buddhism had a fair chance to develop its influence despite competition from indigenous Confucian and Daoist traditions. Two centuries from the initial introduction of Buddhism to China during the Late Han period, Chinese Buddhists began to be aware that they needed more scriptural sources for deeper understanding as well as for consolidating their communities through Buddhist ethical and moral practice.

According to one story, Buddhayaśas was invited to the capital by the ruler of the Late Qin, Yaoxing (r. 394-415 C.E.), with the assistance of Kumārajīva, his religious counselor. Kumārajīva (344-413) was a scholar-monk from the country of Kuccha in Eastern Turkestan. Born to Indian and Central Asian parents, he excelled in training in Buddhist studies in Kāśmīra and acquired linguistic skill in Chinese. He had been brought to Liangzhou as the captive of Fujian's general, Lüguang, and was subsequently invited to Chang'an in 401 to serve as Yao xing's religious counselor and lead the government's Buddhist translation project. Buddhayaśas had been Kumārajīva's teacher on the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya (the Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya,the subject of Abhidharma treatises) more than two decades previously.

10 Because he had once been Kumārajīva's teacher,

Buddha yaśas was reverentially nicknamed the "red-bearded professor" or the "senior doctrinal professor" (Vaibhāṣika) in Chang'an.

It is said that, in part, Kumārajīva needed Buddhayaśas' help in collaborating on completing the translation of the Daśabhūmika-sutra(Sutra on the Ten Stages of the Bodhisattva Career), and that the ruler Yaoxing also requested the śramaṇa in 410 C.E. to translate both the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya (Dharmaguptaka-vinaya; Sifen lü; Vinaya in Four Divisions) and the Dīrgha Āgamaof the same school. The Vinaya translation was completed 412 C.E. The next year, 413, Buddha yaśas began to translate the Dīrgha Āgamawith Zhu Fonian, a śramaṇaof Liang zhou, as co-translator, and the translation was completed that same year. xviii

Translator's Introduction

As for the reasons the Chang ahan jingoriginally belonged to the Dharma guptaka school, we have four indirect proofs. First, the editorial point of view of the Chang ahan jingitself coincides with the Dharmaguptaka tradition in which the principle of the centrality of the Buddha is emphasized in terms of veneration for Śākyamuni as founder of the religion. Second, the text displays a great emphasis on the merit to be accrued by the cult worship of the sacred relics enshrined in stupas (commemorative towers). Third, the text's translator, Buddhayaśas, who also translated the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya,was a bhikṣuaffiliated with the Dharma guptaka school. Finally, the Vinaya text, especially its fifty-fourth chapter, refers to seven sutras that were included in the Chang ahan jing, including the "Sutra on Buddhist Cosmology" that is not found in the Pāli Dīgha Nikāya. 11

The second story comes from the introduction to the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya, which gives a somewhat different version. Zhi Faling, a Chinese śramaṇa,traveled to the Central Asia on the instructions of his master, Huiyüen, to search for Vinaya texts, and happened to meet Buddhayaśas in Khotan, where he was already renowned as a Mahayana Tripiṭaka master. With due respect, Faling requested him to visit Chang'an and accompanied him there, transporting Uighur textual sources. Faling's master Huiyüen was a close friend of Kumarajīva, and is known to have organized the Lotus Association at Lushan in the Pure Land sectarian faith, whose adherents devoted their lives to the ideal of rebirth in the Pure Land. There was a growing concern among Chinese Buddhists at the time to consolidate their growing communities and regulate the conduct of their followers, and so there was a need for the Vinaya-piṭaka.As requested, Buddhayaśas immediately began to translate the Dharmaguptaka-vinayawith the assistance of three hundred monks and scholars involved in the project. Zhi Faling is said to have had his own disciple, Huibian, participate in the sessions as he had excellent knowledge of Central Asian languages. The fact that active pursuit of Vinaya texts was the major trend of the time can be attested by the independent case of the monk Faxian's (339-420) risky journey to India in search of Vinaya texts. 12

Buddhayaśas did not extend his stay in Chang'an upon completion of the translation project and soon returned to Kāśmīra. Kumārajīva likely suffered an illness (Huangshi, thirteenth year) soon after completing the translation of the Satyasiddhi-śāstra (Cheng shi lun; Treatise on the Establishment of Truth) and passed away in 413 (Huangshi, fifteenth year). Yaoxing abdicated his rule in the seventeenth year of Huangshi (415 C.E.). Buddhayaśas is said to have sent the xix

Translator's Introduction

Xukongyun pusa jing (Ākāśagarbha-sūtra; Sutra on Ākāśagarbha Bodhisattva) as a gift to the sangha of Liangzhou through a traveling messenger. In fact, the translation of this text ascribed to him is recorded in the Chu sanzang ji ji (Collection of the Tripiṭaka Textual Records) (Taishō vol. 13, no. 405) compiled by Sengyou (445-518).

The Significance of the Text in the

New Taishō Tripitaka Edition

The Chang ahan jingis placed at the very beginning of the first volume of the Taishō shinshū daizōkyō (Taishō New Tripiṭaka Edition) compiled by Japanese Buddhists from 1924-1934 (Taishō 13 to Shōwa 9). This may represent an entirely different reorganization of the Buddhist canon from all of the preceding Tripiṭaka editions. The format of the preceding editions were based on the classification order of Mahayana first, Hinayana second, each of which was again divided into the order of Sutra, Vinaya, and Abhidharma texts. The historical legacy of the Chang ahan jingshould be examined as to what the text is meant to represent in the modern Taishō edition.

The earliest reliable catalogue of Buddhist texts was due to the work of Dao'an (314-385), author of the Zhongjing mulu(Comprehensive Record of the Textual Catalogues), and Sengyou, author of the Chu sanzang ji ji. Of the two, Dao'an's catalogues formed the core foundation of Sengyou's enlarged record of textual catalogues. These two sets of catalogues thus mark the reliable beginning of all subsequent Chinese Tripiṭaka editions.

By the turn of the fifth century, Buddhist communities in Chang'an began to exercise their own choices in the history of Buddhist affairs. This change was a natural development, because Buddhist leaders were more or less trained in Confucian academism or Daoist philosophical training. Dao'an was invited to Chang'an to serve as the religious counselor of Fujian (Yaoxing's predecessor) from the capital of a southern state. Dao'an profoundly regretted that the Buddhist communities in China had not been properly equipped with the Tripiṭaka divisions of Sutra, Vinaya, and Abhidharma. He actively promoted study on the Mahayana Wisdom sutras, especially the Prajñāpāramitā sutras, and he recruited talented young Buddhist converts to engage in exploration of their philosophical and spiritual meaning. It is within this historical circumstance that Kumārajīva was xx

Translator's Introduction

invited to Chang'an in 401 by Yaoxing (Fujian's successor) as his religious counselor. Sengzhao (374-414), a young Buddhist convert from a Daoist background, became Kumārajīva's dedicated disciple and quickly proved himself to be an excellent scholar-monk among the Chang'an academic community. His monograph, the Zhao lun, was praised as exhibiting superb comprehension of prajñāinsight and the philosophy of emptiness (śūnyatā),second only to that of his master. Sengzhao's introduction to the Chang ahan jingreflects Dao'an's cherished objective. At the outset he calls attention to the Tripiṭaka canonical tradition: The great teaching consisted of three [basic] divisions. For regulating physical and verbal behavior there is the collection of injunctive disciplines (Vinaya). For guiding human conduct by distinguishing good and bad there is the collection of doctrinal scriptures (Sutra). For differentiating subtle and delicate subject matter, there is the collection of analytical characteristics of the mental and conscious elements (Abhidharma). Thus, there came to be the three baskets of scriptures (Tripiṭaka).

Buddhayaśas' translation of the Chang ahan jingwas perhaps partial fulfillment of the goal sought by Dao'an. Following Dao'an's and Sengyou's catalogues, a series of records of Buddhist textual catalogues was compiled in the Gezhong qinding zhongjing mulu (Buddhist Canonical Textual Cataloguesor Complete Buddhist Tripiṭaka Library,literally, "Great Textual Storehouse"). During the sixth century, the four catalogues came to exist under the auspices of four different regimes. Unlike Dao'an's and Seng you's catalogues, which placed the texts by the translators' names in chronological order, these state-supported enterprises adopted the new order of classification by placing the Maha yana Tripiṭaka catalogues first, followed by those of the Hinayana Tripi ṭaka. The short-lived Sui dynasty (which dissolved at the unification of north and south into an empire in 589), twice supported the compilation of the entire inclusive catalogues of the Tripiṭaka library: first, the Sui Kaihuang lidai sanbao ji (Sui Kaihuang Record of the Threefold Buddhist Treasuresof the Successive Dynasties) in 598, followed by its revised edition, the Renshou zhongjing mulu (Renshou Record of Textual Catalogues) in 602, which streamlined the preexistent catalogues and scrutinized the authenticity of each text. The Renshou zhongjing mulubecame the basic model of all subsequent Buddhist Tripiṭaka libraries. xxi

Translator's Introduction

The filing of the catalogues of the Tripiṭaka library reached its apex during the Tang period. The dynastic enterprises successfully compiled seven major editions together with their respective records of catalogues. Any record of catalogues is supposed to provide not only the basic principles of textual classification and those texts already catalogued as authentic, but also include new translations and new discoveries as well as exclude suspicious and fraudulent texts. For instance, the Kaiyuan shijiao lu(Kaiyuan Record of Buddhist Textual Catalogues), compiled in 731, is said to have represented the best model format, so that all subsequent editions followed it in recording catalogues of hand-copied texts as well as printed texts. The classification order, however, was unchanged from the Sui-era Renshou zhongjing muluof 602, following the format of: (1) Mahayana sutras, (2) Mahayana Vinaya texts, (3) Mahayana Abhi dharma texts, (4) Hinayana sutras, (5) Hinayana Vinaya texts, (6) Hinayana Abhidharma texts, and (7) works written by the "wise and saints.

" We know, therefore, that the

Renshou zhongjing mulumodel and that of Kaiyuan shijiao lu together became the standard format of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka library as a whole, of which very little had changed until the modern Taishō Tripiṭaka edition. This extremely conservative nature developed due to two reasons. First, toward the end of Tang dynasty the dissemination of the complete Tripiṭaka library was based on hand-copied texts made under government supervision. Second, from the Northern Song period on, the dissemination of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka was based on printed texts, for which printing blocks had to be carved, a laborious and expensive process. In the Northern Song, for instance, a 972 decree stipulated the production of the entire set of textual woodcut prints and the carving of one hundred and thirty thousand woodblocks by the year 983. The dissemination of the Buddhist scriptures was under government supervision for centuries but gradually transferred to a number of Buddhist temples. While the main task of carving woodblocks was still carried out by dynastic enterprises, private temple versions began to appear and the distribution of texts was soon widely localized and even spread beyond the Chinese border. This was roughly the history of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka library through the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Jing periods. The Taishō Tripiṭaka edition shows a striking innovation, especially in the change of classification order that follows the general historical development of Buddhism. The method of detailed examination of textual contents for the xxii

Translator's Introduction

sake of new classifications also developed more precision due to modern scholarship. First, the Taishō Tripiṭaka editors changed the order by placing the Hina yana Sutra-piṭakabefore the Mahayana texts. They set the Hinayana canon of the four Āgamas and individual texts bearing their strains in the first two volumes, under the Āgama section. Second, they created a new classification under the name of "original causality" to collect those texts in which the bodhisattva ideal and career is germinated in reference to early Mahayana history. Third, the remaining Mahayana sutras are classified, more or less, similarly to those of preceding editions, but each is assigned to different volumes by specifying type or class:

1. Prajñā section: Taishō Tripiṭaka vols. 5-8;

2. Lotus and Huayan section: vol. 9 (both groups) and vol. 10 (Huayan only); 3. Ratnakūṭa and Nirvana section: vol. 11 (Ratnakūṭa only) and vol. 12 (both groups);

4. Mahāsaṃnipāta-sutra (Great Collection Sutra) section: vol. 13; 5. Sutra collection (Hinayana and Mahayana) section: vols. 14-17; 6. Esoteric sutras section: vols. 18-21.

Fourth, the Taishō Tripiṭaka editors also placed the Vinaya- and Abhi dharmapiṭakas after the Sutra-piṭakain the order of Hinayana first, then Mahayana: 1. Vinaya section: vols. 22-23 (all Hinayana) and vol. 24 (both Hinayana and Mahayana);

2. Sutra expository treatise section: vols. 25-26 (partial Abhidharma); 3. Abhidharma section: vols. 27-29;

4. Madhyamaka-Yōgācāra section: vol. 30 (Madhyamaka only), vol. 31 (partially Yogācāra), and vol. 32 (Yogācāra only); 5. Collected logical treatises section: vol. 32.

From here, the Taishō Tripiṭaka places texts written as commentaries on sutras and treatises (śāstras),

13 sectarian documents and writings, and so forth

up to the one-hundredth volume, but for the purpose of evaluating the legacy of the Chang ahan jing, these can be excluded from consideration. Modern scholarship focuses on the fundamental spirituality of Śākyamuni Buddha, because his spiritual insight and evangelical life were the foundation of all the doctrines and practices that developed in the later history of Buddhism. xxiii

Translator's Introduction

In medieval China, every Tripiṭaka library started with the class of Wisdom texts (Prajñāpāramitā sutras) under the Mahayana category, beginning with the massive, six hundred-fascicle Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sutra(Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) translated by Xuanzang. In contrast, the Hinayana Āgamas, which are supposed to comprise the original, earliest sources and present Śākyamuni's life and teaching as closely as possible to his original time and social context, were all buried amid thousands of files of textual catalogues or among the books and fascicles in the Hinayana section. Finally, after many centuries, the Taishō edition restored the proper place for the Hinayana Āgamas by moving this text to the very beginning of the collection.

In his preface to the Chang ahan jing, Sengzhao defines Ahan(Āgama) as "the authority to which the laws return" (fa-gui). The "authority to which laws return" means, in all probability, the profound collection of all that is good upheld by the secluded cloister of contemplative recollection (dhāraṇī). These are made into the collection of sutras as the source of authority. It was in this sense that Chang'an's Buddhist communities, by the turn of the fifth century, were motivated to have the Prajñāparāmitā texts translated rapidly, within a decade, and to also have the earliest canonical Sutra-piṭakatranslated along with the Vinaya texts. Most of all, this active motivation arose from the critical study of textual records of translation and visually corroborated reliable textual collections. Modern Buddhist studies began in the mid-nineteenth century, based on the method of text criticism and aided by scholars' knowledge of Pāli, Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan, and it has successfully promoted Buddhist studies throughout the world. It benefited contemporary Japanese Buddhists in publishing the Taishō Tripiṭaka library and its catalogue, with some success in reforming and improving the longstanding Tripiṭaka traditions. Nearly three quarters of a century after publication of the Taishō shinshū daizōkyō, Dr. Yehan Numata and his associates established the project to put the entire corpus of texts collected in the Taishō Tripiṭaka into English translation, with the global cooperation of Buddhist scholars. When this massive project is completed, there will be a new demand to build another edifice of the Buddhist Tripiṭaka library for the sake of Buddhist and human communities worldwide. Once again, the Chang ahan jingwill be highlighted as representing the earliest phase of Buddhism that marked its beginning.

xxiv

Translator's Introduction

Epilogue

I would like to make a few points regarding the way in which this translation has been accomplished. First, since the original Sanskrit text is no longer extant, I relied almost exclusively on the Pāli Dīgha Nikāyaand its English translation, especially that rendered by the founding members of the Pali Text Society, as the sole corroborative references for the Chinese text.

14 For instance, it is extremely

difficult to identify from Chinese transliteration what a given proper name or proper noun might be in the Sanskrit original. Second, I preferred a straightforward style of narration to the Chinese idiomatic definitive style. As a cognate language of Sanskrit, though to a lesser degree, Pāli has an intricate case system to specify the contextual relationships between things that are referred to by words through case indicatives, whereas Chinese expression often relies on word order alone, without case indicative changes. Hence, in my English presentation of the Chang ahan jing,I have relied on the English version of the Dīgha Nikāyapresented in scholarly translations of the text. This English version of the Chang ahan jing may thus appear to be more like a translation made from the Pāli Dīgha Nikāya than a directly rendered English version vis-à-vis the Chinese original. As English is not my native language, I did not consider that presenting the textual contents only through a grammatically learned second language would be successful. This is the final volume of the translation, containing sutras 21-30. Volume I (published in 2015) includes the Preface by Shi Sengzhao and contains sutras 1-10; Volume II (published in 2016) contains sutras 11-20.

I looked for a model narrative format to translate foundational Buddhist texts, such as the Chang ahan jing. After searching for a feasible format among various samples of translations of Buddhist texts, I finally decided that it was best to follow the traditions established by the Pali Text Society in dealing with ancient Buddhist literature by means of modern languages. I am, however, obliged to assert that this translation has been produced totally based on my own understanding of Buddhism accrued through my lifelong study and practice of the religion. Śākyamuni's religion began with a dialectical insight underling the fourfold truths of the life process. While engaged in final revision of this translation, I personally encountered the messengers of old age, illness, and death, and my attention was drawn to these messagers more acutely because of my engagement in rereading the draft translation. It is my hope that readers of this text will xxv

Translator's Introduction realize the fundamental wisdom of Buddhist spirituality in regard to these serious matters. May the reader discover from this text his or her successful pathway toward liberation. xxvi

THE CANONICAL BOOK OF THE BUDDHA'S LENGTHY DISCOURSES VOLUME III

Sutra 21

88b12

Brahmā's Net

(Dīgha Nikāya 1: Brahmājāla Suttanta)

Thus have I heard. Once, when the Buddha was visiting the communities of the country of Magadha, accompanied by one thousand two hundred and fifty disciples (bhikṣus), he stopped at the king's pavilion in the bamboo forest for an overnight stay. A brāhmaṇaascetic called Suppiya, accompanied by his student Brahmadatta, always followed the Buddha on his travels. The teacher Suppiya denigrated the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in various ways, but his student Brahmadatta praised the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in innumerable ways. Thus, teacher and student, having different minds, were in opposition to each other. Why did they behave in this way? It was because they differed in their customs, views, and manner of making known their views. On this occasion, a number of bhikṣus, having completed almsrounds, gathered in the lecture hall and began to talk [about current events]: It is marvelous, indeed marvelous, that the World-honored One commands great supernormal powers and is endowed with the meritorious virtue of knowing what sentient beings wish for and their destinies. Yet this brāhmaṇaascetic Suppiya and his student Brahmadatta always follow the Tathāgata and the assembly of his disciples. Suppiya denigrates the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha of the bhikṣus in innumerable ways, while Brahmadatta praises the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in innumerable ways. Thus, teacher and student are of different minds and oppose one another. Why is this so? It is because they have different customs, views, and ways of making their views known.

While this was going on, the World-honored One, meditating in seclusion, heard what the bhikṣus were saying through a supernormal power of hearing exceeding the capacity of ordinary people. The World-honored One stood up from his seat, proceeded to the lecture hall, sat down before the group of 3

88c

bhikṣus, and though he already knew what they were discussing, deliberately asked them,

"O bhikṣus, why have you gathered in this hall? What are you discussing?"

The bhikṣus replied to the Buddha:

Having returned from almsrounds we gathered in this hall to discuss a topic of [current] concern: "It is marvelous, indeed marvelous, that the World-honored One commands great supernormal powers and is endowed with the meritorious virtue of knowing what sentient beings wish for and their destinies. Yet the brāhmaṇaascetic Suppiya and his student Brahma datta always follow the Tathāgata and the assembly of disciples. While Suppiya denigrates the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in innumerable ways, Brahmadatta praises the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha in innumerable ways. Teacher and student are of different minds and oppose one another. Why are they different? They have different customs and views and also differ in their manner of making their views known. " We have

been engaged in discussion about this matter, sir.

The World-honored One said to the bhikṣus:

Even if the person in question deliberately denigrates the Tathāgata, the Dharma, and the Sangha, you should neither become angry nor have ill intent against him. Why? If you become angry and have ill intent because he has denigrated the Tathāgata, Dharma, and Sangha, you will have become entrapped and fallen into a pit. To avoid this danger you should never generate ill intent against him. And if he were to praise the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, you should not feel delight or gratification. Why? If you were delighted or gratified, you would have become entrapped and fallen into a pit again. To avoid this danger you should never be swayed by such sweet words. Why? When a person either denigrates or praises something, his words are brought about only by lesser factors of conduct or moral discipline. An ordinary person, with little learning, cannot reach a deeper level of understanding. He takes whatever he observes externally as real and, because of this, praises it.

What do "lesser factors of conduct or moral discipline" mean? An ordinary person, with little learning, cannot understand any deeper meaning. 4

Sutra 21

He takes whatever he observes externally as real. Because of this, he praises it. He may praise me: "The śramaṇaGautama has discarded the sword and cane (i.e., weapons), removed any intent to harm life, and extinguished every action that injures life, extending compassion in good conscience to all sentient beings. " What these words praise are only lesser

factors of conduct or moral discipline. An ordinary person, with little learning, praises the Buddha because of these external factors. A person may again praise me: "The śramaṇaGautama has removed any intention to commit theft, extinguished every desire to take what is not given, and is totally free from any thought of theft. " Or he may offer

this kind of praise: "The śramaṇaGautama has abandoned carnal desire and adheres to the genuine practice of austerity, upholds the precepts, avoids dissolute behavior, and maintains pure and genuine conduct. " Or

[he may offer this praise:] "The śramaṇaGautama has abandoned and eradicated false speech; whenever he speaks he does so with utmost sincerity. Whatever he says is true and factual, and he never deceives the people of the world.

" Or [he may offer this praise:] "The śramaṇaGautama has abandoned and eradicated duplicitous speech; he never harms anyone by repeating to them another's words, [or vice versa]. If two people are in a dispute he tries to reconcile them, and when they are reconciled he is even more greatly pleased. If he wishes to say something to either party, he does so with both of them together before him. He knows the right time for whatever he does.

" Or [he may offer this praise:] "The śramaṇa

Gautama has abandoned and eradicated harsh speech. When spoken, harsh words may hurt the feelings of listeners and give rise to enmity in those to whom such speech is directed. Since harsh words can aggravate feelings of affliction or malice, he never utters them. He always uses good words, pleasing the one to whom they are directed. Thus he endears himself to all members of the sangha, who never tire of listening to his words. Such is the nature of whatever he says.

" Or [he may offer this praise:] "The

śramaṇaGautama has abandoned and eradicated flattery. He speaks when it is the right time; he utters words that correspond to facts, words that benefit others, words that are in compliance with the Dharma, words that are in compliance with the rules of Vinaya discipline, and words that forbid evil. Such is the nature of whatever he says. "

89a

Or [he may offer this praise:] "The śramaṇaGautama has abandoned the use of intoxicants and distanced himself from them. He uses no perfumes or flowers as ornaments, he does not attend theatrical entertainments involving song and dance, he does not use a high, wide couch [for a bed], nor does he partake of food other than at the proper time each day. He neither accepts nor keeps money in gold and silver coins, nor does he marry or live with a woman, or keep a servant or maid, or an elephant, horse, boar, sheep, hen, dog, or any other bird or animal. He does not keep an army, whether a division of elephants, or cavalry, chariots, or foot soldiers, nor does he own rice fields or residential houses, or plant the five kinds of crops for harvest. He does not threaten others with his hands and fists, nor does he cheat others by using rigged scales for weights and quantities, engage in usury, or haggle over the price [for goods]. He does not neglect repayment after receiving a request for payment of a debt, nor does he conspire against anyone. He never acts at an improper time and he nurtures his health to lengthen his life span and takes only the proper amount of food for his needs. Wherever he goes his robe and almsbowl accompany him, just as a bird's feathers never leave it when it flies. " All

these are lesser factors of moral discipline. An ordinary person, with little learning, praises the Buddha for such externally observable things. [Such an ordinary person may also praise the Tathāgata in regard to these minor points:] "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having received charity from their devotees, actively seek more and more in order to store up extra goods, knowing no limit or contentment in regard to clothing, food, and drink. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in this behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having received charity from their devotees, engage in various means of livelihood as well as planting crops, thus inviting evil spirits. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having received charity from their devotees, use expedient means to acquire various material goods such as ivory and other precious items, high and comfortable beds, embroidered cloth, carpets, bamboo floor mats, and cushions. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

Sutra 21

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having received charity from their devotees, vainly seek to improve their appearance [to impress their devotees], using various measures such as applying thyme-seed oil to the body, bathing in scented water, wearing scented powder on the body, applying fragrant hair oil, wearing a flower garland, using blue eye shadow and applying makeup to their faces, wearing a shiny clasp ring and string on their garments, examining their appearance in a mirror, donning a pair of multicolored shoes and a white upper garment, holding a canopy over their heads, carrying a fly whisk, and decorating their carriages with banners. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, [having received charity from their devotees,] engage in various games and amusements such as chess, checkers played on boards of eight or ten squares, and gambling in as many as a hundred thousand ways. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in idle talk that obstructs religious pursuits, such as gossiping about royal affairs or various battles or the uses of cavalry, or how well certain bureaucrats and ministers ride their horses when they go on excursions, going to and from parks and pleasure gardens; or they talk about the daily activities of women, such as when they are lying down, sitting, and walking; or [they talk] about clothing, food, and drink, or the behavior of relatives, or the activities of sea divers and their collections of treasures from the ocean. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, seek wrong livelihood through innumerable devices, such as engaging in flattery or slander, thereby seeking to take advantage of one another. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in disputes wherever they may be, whether in a pleasure grove, a bathing pond, or pavilion, accusing each other as to who is right or wrong. They say,

'I know the text and rules but you have little

knowledge of them. I am on the right course but yours is a deviation. Your 7

89b

argument is confused, asserting too late what should have been stated earlier, while giving out too early what should have been saved for later. I am able to tolerate you but you cannot tolerate me. Whatever you say is neither true nor real. Whenever you feel some doubt about your position, come and ask me about it. I surely can answer all your questions. ' The

śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, seek greater [rewards or benefits] by contriving various measures. For instance, they may carry an official communication or private message on behalf of a king or a minister, or a brāhmaṇaor a householder, going from place to place while traveling about. They may carry letters for clients, delivering them to their designated recipients, and convey the replies to their clients. Or they may even give instruction about how to conduct the business of mail delivery for their own sake or for others. The śramaṇa Gautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, are engaged solely in learning the ins and outs of military strategy, warfare, and conflict; or learning about armaments such as swords, canes, bows and arrows; or learning how to make domestic animals, such as roosters, dogs, boars, or goats, fight; or how to stage fights between men and women; or how to perform various skills, such as making the sound of a multitude [of soldiers] by blowing conch shells, beating drums, singing, dancing, brandishing streamers; and all sorts of other activities. The śramaṇa Gautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, are engaged in ignoble ways of life (lit., "animalistic behavior"), learning false paths [that obstruct the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, such as fortune-telling for male or female clients for material gain. Interpreting auspicious or ominous signs, they predict whether their clients will be handsome or ugly and make similar predictions regarding animals [for their clients in the husbandry business]. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in ignoble ways of life by learning false paths that obstruct [the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, 8

Sutra 21

such as performing magical incantations to invoke the presence of ghostly spirits or to drive them away, or to cause them to linger with various repugnant spells. Thus, through many strategies, they may threaten people and cause them to feel extreme fear, or draw people together or disperse them, or torment them, or bring them pleasure. They may use incantations to calm a pregnant woman, providing a [magical] garment for the safety of her fetus, or to change a human being into a donkey, or to cause someone to become totally deaf and dumb. Displaying a multitude of techniques, they may be seen facing the sun or moon, holding it in both hands, and performing various ascetic feats to solicit material gain. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in ignoble ways of life by learning false paths that obstruct [the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, such as chanting magical spells for curing illness or applying evil spells or good spells, or giving medical treatment, acupuncture, moxa cautery, or medicines to treat various illnesses [in order to obtain material gain]. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior. "Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in ignoble ways of life by learning false paths that obstruct [the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, such as casting magical spells for water or fire, or to summon a ghostly spirit, or to assure victory in a political or military campaign, or for elephants, or bodily limbs, or a talisman to ensure the safety of a residence, or for recovery from burns, or to effect a cure from rat bites. They may intone a written incantation to discern the life or death of the concerned person, or to decipher dreams, or they may read palms (chiromancy) and facial features (physiognomy), or chant astronomical texts or the alphabetical characters. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in ignoble ways of life by learning false paths that obstruct [the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, such as observing the weather and the cycle of the seasons in order to predict whether or not it will rain, whether the price of crops will go up or down, whether there will be an epidemic, whether a fearful event will 9

89c

take place, or whether there will be peace and safety. Or they may predict earthquakes or the appearance of a comet, a solar or lunar eclipse, or a stellar eclipse, or the nonappearance of such an eclipse, in order to determine whether it is a good or bad omen. The śramaṇaGautama has never engaged in such behavior.

"Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having subsisted on charity from their devotees, engage in ignoble ways of life by learning false paths that obstruct [the authentic path of religion] and taking up wrong livelihoods, such as asserting that this country is superior to that country, or that that is not like this, or that another country is superior to this country, or that this is not like that. Observing good or bad omens, they predict the fortunes and fates of those countries with which they are concerned. The śramaṇa Gautama has never engaged in such behavior.

O bhikṣus, all of the foregoing are invariably lesser moral virtues and factors. An ordinary person, with little learning, praises the Buddha on account of such [observable] virtues.

The Buddha said to the bhikṣus:

There is, however, a greater insight (i.e., the Dharma), most profound and subtle, and far more radiant. Only wise and saintly disciples can praise the Tathāgata by referring to this greater insight. What is this greater insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant, on account of which the wise and saintly disciples alone can praise the Tathāgata? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas have conjectured, in relation to the initial eon (kalpa) of the past and the final eon of the future, innumerable varieties of views as freely as they may wish, but all the theories they have thus advanced, without exception, fall into sixty-two variations. All these philosophical views, insofar as they are speculative in regard to the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future, no matter how numerous and obsessively formulated, never exceed sixty-two variations. Why are these philosophical views formulated in regard to the initial eon and the final eon, no matter how numerous and obsessively speculative, invariably limited to sixty-two variations, never exceeding that number? [Moreover,] regardless of the innumerable varieties of views advanced by śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, insofar as these views are speculative and 10

Sutra 21

asserted in relation to the initial eon of the world, all these theories can be classified exhaustively into eighteen variations. Any philosophical views, insofar as they are conjectured in regard to the initial eon of the past, no matter how numerous and obsessively formulated, are invariably limited to eighteen variations and never exceed that number. Why are these philosophical views formulated in regard to the initial eon, no matter how numerous and obsessively conjectured and asserted, invariably limited to eighteen variations, never exceeding that number?

Many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, while speculating about the initial eon of the past, propose an eternalist view (śāśvata-vāda), asserting that "the self and the world are permanent.

" Any theory that asserts this eternalist

view falls within four variations and does not exceed those four. Why is the eternalist view proposed by those śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas concerning the initial eon of the past, namely, that "the self and the world are permanent, "

limited to four variations without exceeding that number? Again, a śramaṇaor brāhmaṇa, having entered mental concentration by various means, recollects with a concentrated mind the twenty evolving and devolving eons. He then asserts his theory: "The self and the world are permanent. This theory is true while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered the state of mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind recollected twenty evolving and devolving eons. The sentient beings of the world have neither increased nor decreased throughout those eons. They always assembled together and never dispersed. Because of this, I know that the self and the world are permanent. This theory alone is true while the rest is false.

" This is the first variation.

On the basis of this assertion, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas conjectured that the self and the world are permanent. This theory is limited to four variations, however, and does not exceed that number. Again, a śramaṇaor brāhmaṇa, having entered mental concentration through various means, recollects with a concentrated mind forty evolving and devolving eons and asserts his theory: "The self and the world are permanent. This theory is true while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind recollected forty evolving and devolving eons. The sentient beings in the world neither increased nor decreased; they always assembled together 90a

90b

and never dispersed. Because of this, I know that the self and the world are permanent, and this theory alone is true while the rest is false. " This

is the second variation. Thus, on the foregoing assertion concerning the initial eon, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas conjectured that the self and the world are permanent. But this theory is limited to four variations and does not exceed that number.

Again, a śramaṇaor brāhmaṇa, having entered mental concentration through various means, recollects with a concentrated mind eighty evolving and devolving eons and asserts his theory: "The self and the world are permanent. This theory is true while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind recollected eighty evolving and devolving eons. The sentient beings of the world neither increased nor decreased; they always assembled together and never dispersed. Because of this I know that the self and the world are permanent, and this theory alone is true while the rest is false. "

This is the third variation. Thus, on the foregoing assertion concerning the initial eon, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas conjectured that the self and the world are permanent. But this theory is limited to four variations and does not exceed that number.

Again, a śramaṇaor brāhmaṇawith a rationally skeptical mind examines the case carefully and investigates the theories in various ways through his knowledge of logic and sophistry. He says that these theories require examination. Based on his own view and on the rhetoric of reason, he theorizes: "The self and the world are permanent, and this theory has four variations.

" Similar śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas have conjectured in relation to the initial eon that the self and the world are permanent. On account of there being four variations of the [eternalist] view, this theory does not go beyond them. Originally each śramaṇaor brāhmaṇaspeculated about the initial eon and theorized that the self and the world are permanent. In this manner, all the theories previously advanced fall into four variations and do not exceed that number.

The Tathāgata alone, however, knows the basis of the views held by the eternalists, to which they are attached, and from which they receive [theoretical] retribution. The Tathāgata's knowledge goes beyond these variations because he knows the very basis of these eternalist views but 12

Sutra 21

does not become attached to such views. Since he is not attached to such a view, he is in a state of quiescence and cessation (i.e., free from conceptualization). He knows the arising of sensation (vedanā), its dissolution (bhaṅga), its taste (āsvāda), its danger (ādīnara), and the method of transcending it (niḥsaraṇa). Thus he is liberated [from eternalist speculation] because of his nonattachment (anupādāya-vimukti) [to the basis of that view] through the very insight of seeing things universally as they really are (yathābhuccaṃ samā). Therefore he is called the Tathāgata. This is the great insight, most profound and subtle, and far more radiant. In reference to this insight wise and saintly disciples can properly praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are. Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant, in reference to which wise and saintly disciples can [properly] praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are. What is this insight?

Many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas propose an eternalist view in their speculations on the initial eon of the past and assert that "the self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent.

" On the basis of this

theory, other śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas speculated about the initial eon of the past and asserted that the self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent. But this theory essentially coincides with the four variations and does not go beyond them. At the beginning, when this eon began to evolve, the remaining sentient beings, having exhausted their merits, life spans, and predispositional forces, died in Ābhāsvara Heaven (the highest attainable in the second dhyāna) and were reborn in the vast empty space of Brahmā Heaven. They became fond of that abode and wished to be born there again together with other sentient beings. In this way, the [first generation] of sentient beings there already conceived an attachment to that abode. As other sentient beings ended their life in Ābhāsvara Heaven and were reborn in the vast, empty space of Brahmā Heaven, those who were already there thought to themselves,

"I am Brahmā, the

great Brahmā. By nature I exist and there is no one who can create me. I am omniscient and control a thousand worlds in which I am the absolutely free presider and the noblest and most honorable, for I have the miraculous power of changing forms. I alone have been here before as father of all 13

90c

sentient beings prior to their appearance, because they appeared here after I did, and those beings are ones whom I created.

Those who came after the first generation thought to themselves, "He

is the great Brahmā, he has created himself and no one else could create him. He is omniscient and controls a thousand worlds where he is the absolutely free and most honorable presider, for he has the miraculous power of changing forms. He alone has been here before us as the father of all sentient beings prior to our appearance. We came to be born after him and were created by him.

" Some of the gods of Brahmā Heaven, having ended their life spans and exhausted all their predispositions, were then born in the human world and gradually grew to adolescence. They shaved their hair and beards, donned the three robes, and renounced domestic life to take up religious practice. Having entered mental concentration, some came to know with a concentrated mind their original nature and asserted,

"That great Brahmā created himself; no one else could create him. He is omniscient and controls a thousand worlds where he is the absolutely free and most honorable presider. He has the miraculous power of changing forms and is the father of all sentient beings. He is the one that is permanent and, as Brahmā, he created us, we human beings who are impermanent, subject to change, and mortal, unable to exist forever. "

Because of this, they asserted,

"The self and the world are in part permanent

and in part impermanent. This theory is true while the rest is false. " This

is called the first view. On the basis of this theory, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed their own theories concerning the initial eon. But this "in part permanent and in part impermanent" theory is identical with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them. Again, some sentient beings in Brahmā Heaven enjoyed amusements (lit.,

"played and laughed") and wanted a leisurely life. They played games and sought amusement frequently, enjoying their [heavenly] lives. In pursuit of that life, they eventually fell into exhaustion and lost consciousness, and their life spans came to an end. Being reborn in the human world, they gradually grew to adolescence and shaved their hair and beards, donned the three robes, and renounced domestic life for a life of religious practice. Entering mental concentration, some of them came to know their origin with a concentrated mind and said,

"Some sentient beings (i.e., the

Sutra 21

gods of Brahmā Heaven) are not born in the human world as often as we are, nor do they pursue fun and amusement, and so they remain forever in that heaven, without any change at all. On the other hand, we often seek fun and engage in the pursuit of amusement, and so we are subject to change and the law of impermanence.

" Because of this, they asserted,

"The self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent. This theory is true while the rest is false.

" This is the second variation.

On the basis of this view, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed theories about the initial eon and asserted that "the self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent.

" Yet this theory is essentially identical

with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them. Again, some sentient beings [in Brahmā Heaven] engaged in meditation or mutual reflection and, while doing so, lost consciousness. Ending their lives in this manner, they were born in the human world. Growing to adolescence, they shaved their hair and beards, donned the three robes, and renounced domestic life for religious practice. Entering mental concentration, some of them came to know their origin with a concentrated mind and said,

"Some sentient beings (i.e., the gods of Brahmā Heaven) do not meditate or mutually reflect upon each other and so do not lose consciousness. They therefore remain [in that heaven], unchanged at all times. [Unlike them,] we looked at each other often and in doing so we lost consciousness. This was due to the impermanence of all things and in compliance with the law of change. Because of this, we know that the self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent. This theory alone is true while the rest is false.

" This is the third variation. On the

basis of this view, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed theories about the initial eon and asserted,

"The self and the world are in part permanent

and in part impermanent.

" But this theory is identical with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them. Again, a śramaṇaor brāhmaṇawith a rationally skeptical mind examines the case carefully and investigates the theories in various ways through his knowledge of logic and sophistry. He asserts, "The self and the world

are in part permanent and in part impermanent. This theory alone is true while the rest is false.

" This is the fourth variation. On the basis of this view, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed theories concerning the 15

91a

initial eon of the past and asserted,

"The self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent. " But this theory is identical with the

others within the four variations and does not go beyond them. Thus, in relation to the initial eon, some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed theories that the self and the world are in part permanent and in part impermanent, and this view is limited to four variations and does not go beyond them. Only the Tathāgata, however, knows the very basis of the [common] view to which those who espouse the foregoing four theories hold fast, to which they become attached, and from which they receive its [theoretical] retribution. The Tathāgata's knowledge goes beyond the confines of these variations because he knows the very basis of the eternalist view but he does not become attached to such a view. Since he is not attached to this view, he is in a state of quiescence and cessation (i.e., free from conceptualization). He knows the causal concatenation of sensation and its cessation, its gratification and danger, and the method of transcending it. Thus he is liberated [from eternalist speculation] because of his nonattachment [to the basis of that view] through the very insight of seeing things universally as they really are. Therefore he is called the Tathāgata. This is the great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. In reference to this insight, wise and saintly disciples can properly praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are. Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant, in reference to which wise and saintly disciples can [properly] praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are. What is this insight? Many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed a speculative view of the initial eon of the past and asserted, "The self and

the world are limited and limitless.

" Other śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas, relying

on this view, speculated further about the initial eon of the past and asserted that the self and the world are limited and limitless. [Again,] this theory is essentially identical with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them.

For instance, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas, having entered mental concentration through various means, observed the world with a concentrated mind and formulated the thought that there is a limit to this world. They asserted the theory,

"This world has a limit, and this alone is true

Sutra 21

while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind intuited the limit of this world. Therefore this world is limited. This theory alone is true while the rest is false.

" This is the first variation. Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having relied on this view, speculated about the initial eon of the past and proposed the same theory that the self and the world are limited, but this theory is essentially identical with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them.

Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas, having entered mental concentration through various means, observed the world with a concentrated mind and formulated the thought that this world is limitless; thus they asserted the theory "This world is limitless, and this alone is true while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind intuited no limit to this world. Therefore this world is limitless. This alone is true while the rest is false. " This is the second variation. Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having relied on this view, speculated about the initial eon of the past and proposed similar theories that the self and the world are limitless. But these theories are essentially identical with the others within the four variations and do not range beyond them. Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas, having entered mental concentration through various means, observed the world with a concentrated mind and formulated the thought that the world is limited vertically in the upward direction but has no limit in all four horizontal directions, and thus they asserted,

"The world is both limited and limitless. This alone is true while the rest is false. Why? Because I entered mental concentration through various means and with a concentrated mind intuited that this world has a limit in the upward direction but has no limit in all four horizontal directions. Therefore [the self and] this world are both limited and limitless. This theory alone is true while the rest is false. " This is the third

variation. Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, having relied on this view, speculated about the initial eon of the past and proposed theories that [the self and] the world are both limited and limitless. But these theories are essentially identical with the others within the four variations and do not range beyond them.

91b

Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas examined the case carefully with a rationally skeptical mind and investigated the theories in various ways through their knowledge of logic and sophistry. They said, "The self and

the world are neither limited nor limitless. This alone is true and the rest is false.

" This is the fourth variation. On the basis of this theory, [however,] other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas proposed similar theories about the initial eon and asserted,

"The self and the world are both limited and limitless. "

Yet these theories are identical with the others within the four variations and do not range beyond them.

Thus the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas formulated their theories about the initial eon and asserted that the self and the world are both limited and limitless, yet all of this falls within the four variations without exceeding that number. Only the Tathāgata, however, knows the very basis of the [common] view to which those who espouse the foregoing four theories hold fast, to which they are attached, and from which they receive [theoretical] retribution. The Tathāgata's knowledge exceeds these variations because he knows the very basis of their views but does not become attached to such a view. Since he is not attached to this view, he is in a state of quiescence and cessation (i.e., free from conceptualization). He knows the causal concatenation of sensation and its cessation, its gratification and danger, and the method of transcending it. Thus he is liberated [from eternalist speculation] because of his nonattachment [to the basis of that view] through the very insight of seeing things universally as they really are. Therefore he is called the Tathāgata. This is the great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. In reference to this insight, wise and saintly disciples can properly praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are.

Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant, in reference to which wise and saintly disciples can properly praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are. What is this insight? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas raise inconsistent questions and reply with inconsistent answers. When one asks an incongruent question of another, the latter replies to the former with an incongruent answer. Within the four variations of this view, each theory is essentially identical and does not go beyond the limit of those variations. On 18

Sutra 21

the basis of this view, śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas raise incongruent questions and reply with incongruent answers while speculating about the initial eon of the past. Any of their theories is identical with the others within the four variations and does not go beyond them.

For instance, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas formulate a theory and assert,

"I have neither seen nor known whether there is a resulting effect for good or bad [conduct, respectively]. Since I have neither seen nor known [such an effect], I raise this question [in formulating the theory]: 'Are there causal effects for good and bad [conduct], respectively?' In this world there are śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas who are learned and erudite, sagacious and knowledgeable, who are always delighted to stay in a secluded place, who are excellent in speech and precise in debate, and so [these śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas] are honored in this world. With their wisdom they can analyze a multiplicity of worldly views [into some type of a system]. [They say, however,] 'If I am asked a question that involves profound meanings, I may not be able to give an answer. I feel ashamed before the questioner and I am afraid. [So] I give my answer in a certain manner that I regard as my refuge, my island, my shelter, and my ultimate path. ' Whenever someone like that asks me a [profound] question, I answer in the following manner: (1) 'This fact is like this. ' (2) 'This fact is identical (i.e.,

true).

' (3) 'This fact is different.

' (4) 'This fact is not different.

' (5) 'This

fact is neither different nor not different.

'" This is the first question-andanswer variation. Based on these responses, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas may also reply with incongruent answers to incongruent questions. These [theoretical] answers are identical with the others within the four variations, however, and do not range beyond them.

Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas formulate a theory and assert: "I have neither seen nor known [personally] whether or not there is an afterlife. Many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas are able to see things at remote distances through their supernormal vision and power of reading others' minds. Even when they are approached by other people they do not see them. That kind of person should be able to know whether or not there is an afterlife. I myself have neither seen nor known [personally] whether or not there is an afterlife. If I were to express my view [in either the affirmative or the negative], I am afraid that my answer is bound to be false. 91c

92a

Therefore, I regard ['non-assertion'] as my refuge, my island, my shelter, and my ultimate path. If such a person were to ask me a [profound] question, I would answer in the following manner: (1) 'This fact is like this. ' (2) 'This

fact is identical (i.e., true).

' (3) 'This fact is different.

' (4) 'This fact is not

different.

' (5) 'This fact is neither different nor not different. '" This is the

second question-and-answer variation. Based on these responses, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas may reply with an incongruent answer when the question is incongruent. But these [theoretical] answers are identical with the others within the four variations and do not range beyond them. Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas formulate a theory and assert: "I have neither seen nor known what is good and what is not good. I do not know nor have I encountered a theory that asserts 'This is good' or 'This is bad.

' Because I do not know either one, I feel desire [for a certain thing]; because of this desire, I feel anger. Whenever there is desire and anger I am bound to have a sensation [about a certain thing]. I wish to annihilate this sensation. Therefore, I have renounced domestic life for religious practice.

" [In this case,] such a person is very much afraid of incurring sensation and regards [the absence of sensation] as a refuge, an island, a shelter, and an ultimate path, saying, "If someone asks me a question [about what is good and what is bad], I shall reply to him in the following manner: (1) 'This fact is like this. ' (2) 'This fact is identical (i.e., true).

' (3) 'This fact is different.

' (4) 'This fact is not different.

' (5) 'This

fact is neither different nor not different. '" This is the third question-andanswer variation. Based on these responses, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas may reply with an incongruent answer when the question is incongruent. Yet these [theoretical] answers are identical with the others within the four variations and do not range beyond them. Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas are unintelligent and stupid. If someone questions them, they reply according to someone else's answer, namely, (1) "This fact is like this. " (2) "This fact is identical (i.e., true). "

(3) "This fact is different.

" (4) "This fact is not different.

" (5) "This fact

is neither different nor not different. " This is the fourth question-andanswer variation. Based on these responses, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas may reply with an incongruent answer when the question is incongruent. 20

Sutra 21

Their [theoretical] answers are identical with the others within the four variations, however, and do not range beyond them.

Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas raise inconsistent questions and reply with inconsistent answers in regard to the initial eon of the past. These theoretical answers are limited to the four variations, are [essentially] identical, and do not exceed that limit. Only the Tathāgata knows the very basis of the [common] answers to which the foregoing four theorists hold fast, to which they are attached, and from which they [theoretically] receive retribution. The Tathāgata's knowledge exceeds these variations because he knows the very basis of their views but does not become attached to such a view. Since he is not attached to this view, he is in a state of quiescence and cessation (i.e., free from conceptualization). He knows the causal concatenation of sensation and its cessation, its gratification and danger, and the method of transcending it. Thus he is liberated [from eternalist speculation] because of his nonattachment [to the basis of that view] through the very insight of seeing things universally as they really are. Therefore he is called the Tathāgata. This is the great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. In reference to this insight, wise and saintly disciples can properly praise the Tathāgata for the universal insight that sees things as they really are.

"This world has arisen without a

cause.

" This view is confined to two variations. When they propose that "this world has arisen without a cause,

" this theory is confined to two

variations and does not exceed that number. But why should the theory that "the world has arisen without a cause" be confined to two variations without exceeding that number?

Some sentient beings (here,

"some gods,

" devas) have no thought or

knowledge. No sooner do they give rise to a thought than they come to the end of their life span. Once born in this human world, they gradually grow into adolescence, shave their hair and beards, don the three robes, 21

92b

and renounce domestic life for religious practice. Some of them, entering into mental concentration, recognize with a concentrated mind the origin of their birth and say,

"I did not exist originally but now I have suddenly

appeared. This world was nonexistent originally but now it exists. This theory is true, while the rest is false.

" This is the first variation. On the

basis of this view, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate about the initial eon of the past and assert that the world exists without a cause. This theory is identical with the other of the two variations. Again, some śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas, with a rationally skeptical mind, examine the case carefully and investigate the theory in various ways through their knowledge of logic and sophistry. They assert, "This world exists without cause. This theory alone is true while the rest is false. " This is the second

variation. On the basis of this theory, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas propose a theory concerning the initial eon of the past and assert, "This world exists

without cause.

" This theory is identical with the other variation and does not go beyond it. So while the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas thus formulate their theory concerning the initial eon of the past, asserting that this world exists without cause, the theory is limited to two variations and does not exceed that number. Only the Tathāgata knows the very basis of the [common] view, and so on, just as has been repeatedly stated. Other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas conjecture theories about the initial eon of the past in innumerable and obsessive ways. But all the theories thus asserted can be classified exhaustively into eighteen kinds of views. Whatever these views may be, insofar as they are speculative concerning the initial eon of the past, no matter how numerous and obsessively formulated, they will invariably be classified into eighteen variations without exceeding that number. Again, the Buddha alone knows the very basis of those theories, and so on, just as has been repeatedly stated. Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. What is this insight? While some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas form innumerable speculations about the final eon of the future, as freely as they may wish, all the theories thus asserted can be classified exhaustively into forty-four kinds of views. Whatever those views may be, insofar as they are speculative concerning the final eon of the future, no matter how numerous and obsessively theorized, they can all invariably be classified 22

Sutra 21

into forty-four types of views without exceeding that number. Why should the theories of those śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate about the final eon of the future without limit be exhaustively classified into fortyfour variations without exceeding that number? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate in regard to the final eon of the future and form the theory that individual consciousness exists after death, thus asserting the existence of individual consciousness in the world after death. Any theory that asserts the existence of consciousness in the world after death falls into sixteen variations without exceeding that number. Why should the theories of those śramaṇaand brāhmaṇas who speculate about the final eon of the future and assert that consciousness exists in the world after death be confined to sixteen variations without exceeding that number?

Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculatively form this view: "After my death a consciousness that has a form (i.e., a self with form and consciousness) will exist. This theory alone is true while the rest is false. "

This is called the first view. Based on this view, other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate in regard to the final eon of the future hold this theory of the existence of consciousness, asserting that consciousness will exist in the world after their death. This theory belongs to the sixteen variations and does not range beyond them. Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert,

"After my death there will be

a formless consciousness (i.e., a self without form but with consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert,

"After my death there

will be a consciousness with both form and formlessness (i.e., a self with consciousness and with both form and nonform). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert,

"After my death there

will be a consciousness that has neither form nor formlessness (i.e., a self with consciousness but with neither form nor nonform). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert,

"After my death there

will be a consciousness with a limit [or end] (i.e., a self having an end). This alone is true while the rest is false.

92c

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that has no limit (i.e., a self with no limit or end). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that has both a limit and no limit (i.e., a self with consciousness that also has both a limit and no limit). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that has neither a limit nor no limit (i.e., a self with consciousness that also has neither a limit nor no limit). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that is one-sidedly happy (i.e., a self with a onesidedly happy consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that one-sidedly suffers (i.e., a self with a onesidedly suffering consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a consciousness that both is happy and suffers (i.e., a self with a consciousness that is happy and that suffers). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there be a consciousness that neither is happy nor suffers (i.e., a self with a consciousness that neither is happy nor suffers). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a singular consciousness (yi xiang; ekatta-saṃjñī ātmā,i.e., a self with a unified consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death, there will be a multiple consciousness (re gan xiang; nānatta-saṃjñī ātmā,i.e., a self with equivocal or multiple consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert, "After my death there will be a small consciousness (shaoxiang; parītta-saṃjñin,i.e., a self with a small separate consciousness). "

Sutra 21

Some other śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert,

"After my death there

will be an immeasurable consciousness (i.e., a self with an immeasurable consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

The foregoing groups of śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas all formulate theories in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there will be consciousness after death, but all their theories fall into sixteen variations without exceeding that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of their theories, and so on, just as has been repeated before. Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. What is this insight? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas formulate various theories in regard to the final eon of the future and assert that there will be no consciousness in the world after death. Any theories that speculate about the final eon of the future can be classified exhaustively into eight variations without exceeding that number. Why should the theories of those śramaṇaand brāhmaṇas who speculate about the final eon of the future, asserting that there is no consciousness in the world after death, be confined to only eight variations? Why don't they exceed that number? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculatively form this view: "After my death there will be no consciousness other than a form [of a self] (i.e., a self with a form but no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

A second group of śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas asserts, "After my death

there will be neither consciousness nor a form [of a self] (i.e., a self with no form and no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A third group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness other than [a self] that has both form and formlessness (rūpī ca arūpī ca ātmā asaṃjñī,i.e, a self with form and nonform and no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

A fourth group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness other than a self that has neither form nor formlessness (n '

eva rūpī nārūpī

ca ātmā asaṃjñī,i.e., a self that does not have form, nonform, or consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A fifth group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness other than a self with a limit [or end] (i.e., a self that has an end or limit but no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

93a

A sixth group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness

[other than a self] with no limit or end (i.e, a self with no end or limit and no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A seventh group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness

[other than a self] with both an end and no end (i.e., a self with both an end and no end, and no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

An eighth group asserts,

"After my death there will be no consciousness

[other than a self] with neither an end nor no end (i.e., a self with neither an end nor no end, and no consciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false.

The foregoing are the eight variations of the theories with which śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there will be no consciousness in the world after death. All the theories fall into these eight variations and do not exceed that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, just as has been repeated before.

Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. What is this insight? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate about the final eon of the future and frame a theory of "neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness, " asserting that there will be neither

consciousness nor nonconsciousness in the world after death. These theories too can be classified exhaustively into eight variations without exceeding that number. On what basis can the speculative theories about the final eon of the future be classified exhaustively into eight variations without exceeding that number? On what basis can the theories of those śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there is neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness in the world after death, be confined to only eight variations? Why don't they exceed that number?

Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculatively form this view, "After

the end of my life there will be [a self] with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness (i.e., a self with a form but with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness). This alone is true while the rest is false. "

Sutra 21

A second group of śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas asserts, "After my death

there will be [a self] with no form and neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A third group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with both a form and no form and with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A fourth group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with neither form nor no form and with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A fifth group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with an end (i.e., a limit) but with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A sixth group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with no end (i.e., no limit) and with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

A seventh group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with both an end and no end and with neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness. This alone is true while the rest is false. "

An eighth group asserts,

"After my death, there will be [a self] with neither an end nor no end and with neither consciousness nor non consciousness (n '

eva antavā-anantavā ātmā n

eva saṃjñi-nāsaṃjñi). This

alone is true while the rest is false. "

These are the eight variations of speculative theories held by śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there will be neither consciousness nor nonconsciousness in the world after death. They all form eight variations and do not exceed that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, just as has been stated repeatedly. Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. What is this insight? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate in regard to the final eon of the future and form a theory of annihilationism, asserting that living beings are completely destroyed after their deaths [or after the dissolution of their bodies], without remainder. This kind of theory can be classified into seven variations without exceeding that number. On 27

93b

what basis can the theories of the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there is no self after death, be classified into seven variations and not exceed that number? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculatively form this view, "My body

consists of four material principles and six cognitive faculties, and it was born of my father and mother, reared initially by milk, and later sustained by food and clothing and physically protected. The result, however, is subject to change and will eventually be destroyed and obliterated. As it is like this, it is called annihilation.

" This is the first theory of annihilationism. A second group of śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas asserts, "This may not be

total annihilation [of a sentient being]. Only when one reaches the heaven in the realm of desire (kāmadhātu) is the body totally annihilated after death. "

A third group asserts,

"This may not be total annihilation [of a sentient being]. The body that takes shape in the realm of form (rūpadhātu) is endowed with all cognitive faculties. Only when these faculties are destroyed and obliterated after one's death can the dissolution of faculties be regarded as total annihilation.

A fourth group asserts,

"This may not be total annihilation [of a sentient being]. Only when one reaches the formless realm (arūpyadhātu) of infinite space can it be regarded as total annihilation. "

A fifth group asserts,

"This may not be total annihilation [of a sentient being]. Only when one reaches the formless realm of infinite consciousness can it be regarded as total annihilation. "

A sixth group asserts,

"This may not be total annihilation [of a sentient being]. Only when one reaches the formless realm of nothingness can it be regarded as total annihilation.

A seventh group asserts,

"This may not be total annihilation [of a sentient being]. Only when one reaches the formless realm, namely, the realm of neither thought nor nonthought, can it be regarded as total annihilation. "

These are the seven variations of the theories held by those śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate in regard to the final eon of the future, asserting that there is total destruction and obliteration of living beings after their death. The theories all fall into seven variations and do not exceed that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, as has been stated repeatedly. 28

Sutra 21

Again, there is another great insight, most profound and subtle and far more radiant. What is this insight? Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate about the final eon of the future assert a theory of nirvana and hold that living beings should acquire nirvana in their present lives. This kind of theory can be classified into five variations without exceeding that number. On what basis, however, do the śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who speculate about the final eon of the future assert that living beings should acquire nirvana in their present lives? How can this theory be classified into five variations and not exceed that number?

Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculatively form this view, "Since

I am able to enjoy all five senses as freely as I wish, I regard this as the realization of nirvana in this present life.

" This is the first variation.

A second group of śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas asserts,

"I think that this

is the nirvana acquired in the present life and I cannot deny this subtle state. You may not understand this as I alone have experienced it. If you forsake all evil desires and all that is not good, even though there may be awareness of an object (you jia; vitarka) and the act of examining (you guan; vicāra), you will acquire the sense of joy (prīti) and bliss (sukha) that removes the cause of birth. You will enter the first meditative state of absorption (dhyāna). This may be regarded as nirvana acquired in the present life.

" This is the second variation.

A third group asserts,

"I think that this is the nirvana acquired in the

present life and I cannot deny this subtle state. You may not understand it as I alone have experienced it. If you eliminate awareness of an object and the subjective act of examination, with increasing tranquility or selfconfidence (Pāli saṃpasādana) and continual application of mental concentration, you will proceed to the second meditative state of absorption. According to my experience, this may be regarded as nirvana acquired in the present life.

" This is the third variation.

A fourth group asserts,

"I think that this is the nirvana acquired in the

present life and I cannot deny this state of subtlety. You may not understand it as I alone have experienced it. If you eliminate defiled affectations and forsake the feeling of delight while remaining mindful of the blissful state and experience it in the body, which the wise and saintly disciples commend, you will then enter the third meditative state of absorption. According to 93c

my experience, this may be regarded as nirvana acquired in the present life.

" This is the fourth variation.

A fifth group asserts,

"I think that this is the nirvana acquired in this

present life and I cannot deny this subtle state. You may not understand it as I alone have experienced it. If you eradicate feelings of happiness and suffering and remove sorrow and joy, as I have done, you will realize the state of equanimity in which neither suffering nor pleasure is experienced, and thus enter the fourth meditative state of absorption, which is primary nirvana.

" This is the fifth variation.

When śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas speculate in regard to the final eon of the future and assert these views of nirvana that may be acquired in the present life, their theories can be classified into five variations without exceeding that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, just as has been stated repeatedly. Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas obsessively assert innumerable speculative views about the final eon of the future, but the various theories they advance about the final eon of the future can invariably be classified into forty-four variations without exceeding that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, just as has been stated repeatedly.

Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas obsessively assert innumerable views about the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future, but the various theories they advance about the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future can be classified exhaustively into sixty-two variations without exceeding that number. Once again, only the Buddha knows the very basis of these theories, and so on, just as has been stated repeatedly. Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, speculating about the initial eon of the past, assert a theory of eternalism and hold that the self and the world are permanent. On the basis of this theory, these śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas acquire knowledge, namely, heretical notions of belief, desire, learning, [causal] conditions, sensation, view, concentration, and acknowledgment. They then acquire knowledge from these [heretical notions], namely, the notion of sensation and so on, up to the notion of nirvana as well. Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, speculating about the initial eon of the past, assert a theory of eternalism and hold that the self and the world 30

Sutra 21

are permanent. Since these theories are invariably occasioned by the contact of the senses [with their respective objects], it is impossible to advance any of these theories apart from the fact of sense contact. This holds true even with the theory of nirvana acquired in the present life. Some śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas assert innumerable views about the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future. Whatever theories they advance concerning the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future are invariably accomplished within these sixty-two variations. Therefore, whatever speculative view one may assert as a theory is confined to these sixty-two variations [and can never be accomplished outside these variations]. This state of affairs can be compared to the situation of a skillful fisherman who casts a fine-meshed net over a small pond and covers it entirely. It should be understood that whatever creatures exist within that small pond will invariably be trapped in the net and cannot escape from it; they are all contained within it and cannot go beyond it. The śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas are also like this. All the various speculative theories they hold concerning the initial eon of the past and the final eon of the future are invariably confined within the fine-meshed net of these sixty-two variations and may equal but never go beyond them.

If a bhikṣuacquires insight into the causal concatenation of the six senses and contact with their objects (i.e., sensation, its cessation, its gratification, its danger, and the method of its transcendence), universally as they really are, this would be his highest achievement, [precisely] because this insight goes beyond the theories contained within the sixty-two variations. The Tathāgata has directly experienced in the present life that the cause of birth and death has been exhausted. The only reason he continues to appear in this world is because of his [resolution] to help gods and humans realize the goal of nirvana. Without this [great] resolution, there would be no one in this world on whom gods and humans can rely as their refuge. Such a state of affairs can be compared to the tālatree: if the top is chopped off, the tree never revives. In case of the Buddha, too, because he has already terminated the cause of life and birth, once he enters nirvana he will never again return to this world.

The time this discourse was completed must have been the right time for the Buddha, because the entire earth quaked three times in six different ways. 31

94a

Nguồn: BDK America — English Tripiṭaka (bdkamerica.org).