T2186 Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

Chapter 6: The Inconceivable

Chapter Six

The Inconceivable

This chapter explains the many and varied inconceivable activities of bodhisattvas, thus the title of the chapter. This is the second aspect of the [explanation of] the transformation of those of superior capacity—that is, the extensive explanation of the inconceivable. The meaning of "extensive" is as explained above; [that is, whereas the previous chapter was concerned only with Vimalakīrti, this teaching concerns the inconceivable activities of numerous buddhas and bodhisattvas]. Broadly speaking, this chapter unfolds in six parts. The first part, from the beginning up to "Where will this assembly sit?"

, describes Śāriputra's

wondering about [the absence of chairs upon which] to sit. The second, from "[The elder Vimalakīrti] knew his thoughts" up to "Five hundred gods obtained purity of the Dharma eye,

" admonishes Śāriputra for seeking when he should

not have been seeking. The third part, from "[Vimalakīrti asked] Mañjuśrī, 'Virtuous One'" up to "able to sit on the lion thrones, " describes [how Vimalakīrti gave Śāriputra] what he was seeking by borrowing chairs from [Buddha Sumeru] Lamp King. As a result of Śāriputra's praise, the fourth part, from "Śāriputra said,

'Layman, this is unprecedented!'" up to "[If I were to extensively explain this,] I would exhaust an entire kalpa and still not finish, "

extensively describes how buddhas and bodhisattvas possess the two inconceivable knowledges of the conventional and real and are able to display inconceivable manifestations. The fifth part, from "At this [time,] Mahākāśyapa" up to "Thirty-two thousand gods aroused the aspiration to achieve [perfect] awakening,

" describes how Kāśyapa lamented the severing

of his own capacity and exhorted the newly trained [bodhisattvas] to arouse the aspiration [to achieve perfect awakening]. The sixth part, from "Vimalakīrti said to Mahākāśyapa" to the end of the chapter, is Vimalakīrti's affirmative response to the above exclamation of Mahākāśyapa. All six of these levels comprise the third of the five discussions born of Vimalakīrti's emptying his room.

189

55b

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

The first part, [Śāriputra's] wondering about the chairs, can be understood. The second part, admonishing [Śāriputra] for seeking [something], itself has four sections. The first initially asks Śāriputra why he came: "Which is it, Virtuous One—have you come for the Dharma or have you come looking for a chair to sit on?" The second section is Śāriputra's answer, "I have come

for the Dharma, not for a place to sit.

" The third section, from "Vimalakīrti

said,

" is the actual admonition of Śāriputra for seeking [something]. The fourth, from "When he gave this Dharma,

" describes the benefits attained

[from this teaching]. The first two can be understood [from the text]. The third section, the actual admonition, also has two parts. The first criticizes [Śāriputra] for wondering about chairs; the second, from "Ah, Śāriputra, a seeker of the Dharma is not attached to the Buddha in their seeking, "

criticizes his [manner of] seeking the Dharma.

"Ah, Śāriputra, a seeker of the Dharma should not be concerned with life or limb, much less a chair to sit on.

" This means that a person seeking

the Dharma despises their body and exhausts their life in their quest. Śāri putra has stated that he came for the Dharma—how then can he be seeking a chair? Moreover, his five skandhas, twelve entrances (āyatanas), eighteen realms (dhātus), and three realms are all empty. What body would he wish to rest such that he was seeking a chair?

The second part, criticizing Śāriputra's [manner of] coming [and seeking] the Dharma, itself has four sections. The first is the actual illustration that within the underlying principle there is no seeking. The second, from "Why is this?"

, explains "no seeking.

" The third, from "The Dharma is called 'quiescent extinction, '" uses various illustrations to explain how [the Dharma] is devoid of perceptual attribute. The fourth, from "Therefore, " concludes

that there should be no seeking.

That the seeker of the Dharma should not be attached to the Three Jewels nor to the four truths means that within the underlying principle there are no Three Jewels on which to rely, nor are there four truths that may be contemplated. From "Why is this?" is the second section, the explanation [of no seeking], and can be understood. The third section, using various illustrations to explain [how the Dharma is devoid of perceptual attribute], and the fourth section, the conclusion, can be understood.

190

Chapter Six: The Inconceivable

"If one seeks the Dharma there should be no seeking of any of the dharmas. " This means that it is precisely seeking that is without seeking that can be called the truly wonderful seeking of the Dharma.

From "When he spoke these words" is the fourth section [of the second of the six parts of this chapter], admonishing [Śāriputra] for seeking [something], and describes the benefits that were received by the assembly at that time. From "At that time, the elder Vimalakīrti" is the third of the six major parts, describing [how Vimalakīrti gave Śāriputra] what he was seeking by borrowing chairs from [Buddha Sumeru] Lamp King. This has six sections. The first section describes how Vimalakīrti asked Mañjuśrī where there could be found wonderfully tall seats. The reason he asked his guest is that there is no place that Mañjuśrī has not been to in his extensive and limitless teaching, and so he would surely know where wonderfully tall seats could be found. Moreover, it was originally because of the guests that seats were being sought. Wanting to accord with the wishes of his guest, and contrary [to what you might expect], he thus asked [a guest where chairs might be found]. The second section, from "Mañjuśrī said,

" gives Mañjuśrī's answer. The

third section, from "Vimalakīrti manifested his supernatural powers, " describes

how Vimalakīrti borrowed the seats from [Buddha Sumeru] Lamp King. The fourth section, from "At that time that buddha,

" depicts Buddha [Sumeru]

Lamp King sending the seats. The fifth section, from "The bodhisattvas and great disciples,

" tells that the great assembly saw unprecedented things. The sixth section, from "At that time, Vimalakīrti said to Mañjuśrī, "

describes Vimalakīrti inviting the great assembly to take a seat; this itself has two parts. The first is initially inviting the great assembly; the second is separately inviting Śāriputra [to take a seat]. Śāriputra was the main person who sought a seat and so he was invited [to take a seat] separately. The first part, inviting the great assembly [to take a seat], has three further sections. The first is the invitation; the second describes how those who had supernatural powers were able to ascend the seats; the third describes how newly declared [bodhisattvas] who had recently aroused [the aspiration for awakening] were not able to ascend the seats—these can be understood. The separate invitation to Śāriputra also has four parts: the first is the invitation; the second shows Śāriputra declining because he was not able [to ascend the high seat]; the 191

55c

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

third relates how Vimalakīrti instructed [Śāriputra and the newly trained bodhisattvas] to worship [Buddha Sumeru] Lamp King; the fourth describes how the great assembly was able to ascend the seats after worshiping [Buddha Sumeru] Lamp King.

From "Śāriputra said,

'[Layman,] this is unprecedented'" is the fourth

of the six major parts [of this chapter], in which Vimalakīrti, because of Śāriputra's praise [of his supernatural feat], extensively describes the two inconceivable knowledges of the conventional and the real that buddhas and bodhisattvas possess and how they are able to display inconceivable manifestations. This has two further sections: the first gives the brief praise given by Śāriputra; the second, from "Vimalakīrti said,

" shows Vimalakīrti's response to Śāriputra's praise, that is, the extensive description of the inconceivable manifestations [that buddhas and bodhisattvas display]. [The description of the inconceivable manifestations] has three further parts. Because [Vimalakīrti] wished to clarify the manifestations, he began by giving the essence: "Buddhas and bodhisattvas have a liberation called 'inconceivable.

'" "Liberation" refers to the two knowledges of the conventional and the real. These two knowledges both transcend the thousand fetters, and therefore [to possess these two knowledges] is called "liberation. " This

means that the buddhas and bodhisattvas having the two knowledges of the conventional and the real is the essence of the inconceivable; hence they are able to display all manner of inconceivable manifestations. The second part, from "When a bodhisattva dwells in this liberation, "

is the extensive explanation of the inconceivable manifestations. The third part, from "Śāriputra, I have now briefly explained [the power of the bodhisattva's inconceivable emancipation], " is the conclusion. Enveloping mountains and absorbing oceans, inhaling the winds [of the entire universe], and clothing himself with the flames [of the world's end], changing his voice and transforming his nature, compressing the long and expanding the short—all of these are inconceivable manifestations. There are three schools of interpretation of "inconceivable. " One says that Mount Sumeru and a mustard

seed are similar in that both are hollow and empty; hence one can be put inside the other. The second [interpretation] is that Mount Sumeru doesn't really enter into the mustard seed, it is just that the sage's supernatural power makes it appear that way to the onlooker. The third [interpretation] is that 192

Chapter Six: The Inconceivable

we don't know that [Mount Sumeru] was really put into [the mustard seed], nor do we know that it wasn't. We don't know how that is, but nonetheless it is—therefore it is called "inconceivable.

"

From "At that time, Mahākāśyapa" is the fifth of the six major parts [of this chapter], showing Kāśyapa lamenting the severing of his own capacity and exhorting the newly trained [bodhisattvas] to arouse the mind [of bodhi]. This itself is divided into three. The first has the narrator describing Kāśyapa's exclamation that his hearing of the inconceivable was unprecedented. The second, from "[Mahākāśyapa] said to Śāriputra,

" gives his actual lament.

The third, from "When Mahākāśyapa spoke these words,

" depicts the thirtytwo thousand gods arousing the aspiration [to achieve perfect awakening]. The second part, the actual lament, itself has four sections. The first shows [Mahākāśyapa exclaiming] that the śrāvakas have severed [their good roots] and are without the disposition for buddhahood; thus, they are like the blind. The second, from "Knowledgable ones,

" rejoices that bodhisattvas

[who hear of the inconceivable] are able to arouse the aspiration [for perfect awakening]. The third, from "How is it that we [have long cut off our capacity?], " describes the extreme gravity of what was lost in the two vehicles, such that they all should cry out [with such a howl] that the trimegachiliocosm shakes. The fourth section, from "All the bodhisattvas, " describes the magnitude of the benefit attained by the bodhisattvas, such that they should joyously celebrate. The reason is that if one [merely] hears of this underlying principle, one will transcend samsara and pass beyond the troubles of Māra— not to mention one who practices accordingly.

The third part [of the fifth major section], describing the benefits attained, can be understood.

From "At that time Vimalakīrti said to Mahākāśyapa" is the sixth of the six major parts of this chapter, Vimalakīrti's affirmative response to Kāśyapa's exclamation. Before Kāśyapa had said that if there are [bodhisattvas] who are able to have faith in the inconceivable, then Māra can do nothing to them. Now, however, he sees that the disturbances of Māra are actually created by bodhisattvas for the sake of [testing the resolution of] the newly trained [bodhisattvas]—why then does he say that they can do nothing? Therefore we interpret this as meaning that they are all bodhisattvas dwelling in the inconceivable liberation.

"Ordinary people are inferior"

—how could they

193

56a

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra act in such a way? This has four parts. The first explains that it is because bodhisattvas wish to transform beings that they manifest as Māra kings. The second, from "Why is that?" , explains why they appear as Māra kings. The third, from "Ordinary beings [are inferior], " shows why ordinary beings

are incapable [of acting in this way]. The fourth, from "This is called [the gate of discerning awareness and skillful means possessed by bodisattvas dwelling in the inconceivable liberation], " is the conclusion. All of this can be understood.

194

Chapter 7: Contemplating Sentient Beings

Chapter Seven

Contemplating Sentient Beings

This chapter depicts the bodhisattvas "contemplating sentient beings, " hence

the title of the chapter. The two chapters from here are concerned with the transformation of people of middling capacity, as was explained above [at the beginning of Chapter Three of the Commentary].

When people of middling capacity hear the [teachings in the] chapter "[Mañjuśrī's] Inquiring about the Illness,

" four doubts arise. [The first is in

regard to] the reply to [Mañjuśrī's] inquiry about [Vimalakīrti's] illness, where it was stated that bodhisattvas are not really ill but only [appear to be] ill for the sake of [teaching] beings. [Beings of] middling capacity delight in existence; they are attached to the idea that there truly are sentient beings within the underlying principle, and therefore the reason [bodhisattvas] manifest illnesses is surely for the sake of sentient beings. The second doubt arises when [beings of middling capacity] hear the bodhisattva's love for sentient beings likened to the love ordinary parents have for their own children. Although the love that ordinary parents have for their children is important, nonetheless it is one-sided. If the bodhisattvas were like this, their views of affection toward others would not yet be eliminated—how then could they transform beings impartially? The third [doubt arises in regard to] the above [discussion of how bodhisattvas should] comfort and instruct [a bodhisattva who is ill]. There it was stated that although bodhisattvas contemplate impermanence they remain in samsara, serenely accept suffering, and save beings. In the discussion [of how bodhisattvas should] discipline [their minds], it was explained that although bodhisattvas do not have the karma for taking on a body, for the sake of transforming beings they take on a body within the six paths. Although their bodies experience suffering, when they think about the sentient beings in the evil destinies they arouse a mind of great compassion. People of middling capacity give rise to doubt about whether the issue of physically remaining in samsara, serenely accepting suffering, and saving beings is only for 195

56b

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

[bodhisattvas] of the upper ranks, and not something that newly declared [bodhisattvas] are able to bear.

So too, the [fourth] doubt arises because they learned above of the bodhisattvas' many and various practices of the Middle Way, which fully completed [the discussion of how bodhisattvas] should discipline [their minds.] In principle, if what ought to be done is done, and what ought not to be done is not done, then what is not fixed? In this way, there is hesitation and wavering about entering the Way, and the mind is uneasy. It is for this reason that this chapter is given and an explanation is made.

Now, in order to remove these four doubts the text itself has four kinds [of explanations]. The first, from the beginning up to "The bodhisattva's contemplation of sentient beings is like this, " shows that bodhisattvas contemplate

sentient beings as empty, without reality, like an illusion, like a dream—this dispels the first anxious doubt about whether sentient beings truly exist. The second is from "Mañjuśrī said,

'If a bodhisattva contemplates [sentient beings] thus, how should they cultivate kindness?'" This shows that a bodhisattva's kindness is none other than a kindness that is devoid of perceptual attributes. This dispels the doubt about whether [the bodhisattva's love for sentient beings] is the same as the one-sided love ordinary parents [have for their children].

The third, from "Mañjuśrī asked further,

'What should the bodhisattva

who fears samsara rely on?'"

, extensively describes the meaning of abiding

within the merits of the Buddha. This dispels the third doubt regarding whether physically remaining within samsara, serenely accepting suffering, and saving beings is only for [bodhisattvas] of the upper ranks and not something that newly declared [bodhisattvas] are able to undertake.

The fourth, from "At that time there was a goddess in Vimalakīrti's room,

" dispels the doubt about lack of a fixed existence [of any dharmas]. The first aspect, describing the contemplation of sentient beings as empty, gives a total of thirty examples by way of explanation. These are divided into three parts: the first example of an illusion is the overall opening. The second part, the fourteen examples from "Like a knowledgeable one, " clarifies emptiness with specific teachings; they are called "specific" because they distinguish between the provisional and the true. [The first nine examples refer to the 196

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

provisional, and the five] from [the eleventh example,] "like a fifth element, "

explain true emptiness. The third part, the fifteen examples from "Like form in the formless realm,

" explains emptiness as a shared teaching—it is called

"shared" because [the examples] have the provisional and the true in common. These three parts all have two aspects: (1) the actual depiction of emptiness [by way of a metaphor], and (2) the conclusion that "[The bodhisattva's contemplation of sentient beings] is like this. " These can be understood.

The second explanation is that the bodhisattva's kindness is a kindness that is devoid of perceptual attributes; this dispels the doubt about whether [the bodhisattva's love is] the same as the one-sided love of ordinary parents [for their own children]. This is made up of the two parts of a question and answer.

"Mañjuśrī asked,

'If a bodhisattva contemplates [sentient beings] thus,

how should he cultivate kindness?'" This explains what kind of practice of kindness will apply to living beings if sentient beings are all contemplated as empty objects, without reality.

The second aspect, Vimalakīrti's answer, has three parts. The first is [Vimalakīrti's] immediate reply that when bodhisattvas are enlightened to the three emptinesses and thereby teach sentient beings, causing them to cultivate that which is devoid of perceptual attributes and ultimately to obtain the highest fruits—this is called true great kindness. The second part, from "[The bodhisattva] practices a kindness of quiescent extinction, " is an extensive explanation of the essential nature of kindness devoid of perceptual attributes. The third part is the conclusion regarding kindness devoid of perceptual attributes. Within these, however, the point of Mañjuśrī's question was explicitly answered with the three emptinesses as described above, but in his mind the purpose was to dispel the doubts about whether [the kindness of the bodhisattva] is the same as the one-sided love of ordinary parents [for their own children].

The second part, the extensive explanation of the essential nature of kindness, is also divided into four sections. The first uses the emptiness of the underlying principle in order to give examples of kindness. The second section, from "[The bodhisattva practices] the kindness of an arhat, " uses

the practitioners of the three vehicles as examples. The third, from "[The 197

56c

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

bodhisattva] practices a self-same kindness,

" takes buddhahood as an example.

The fourth, from "[The bodhisattva] practices a kindness without revulsion, "

uses the ten thousand practices of the causal stage as examples. The first section, using the underlying principle of emptiness as an example, comprises nine verses in total. The first verse, "[The bodhisattva] practices

a kindness of quiescent extinction, because there is nothing that is born or dies,

" shows that the underlying principle of emptiness is quiescent, without birth and death. This means that the kindness of tranquil extinction, without birth and death, is also like the underlying principle of emptiness. The following eight verses parallel this interpretation. "Inner" means "sense organ,

"

"outer" means [sense] "objects"; within the underlying principle of emptiness there is no coming together of sense organs and their objects. The second section, using the practitioners of the three vehicles as examples, is itself comprised of four verses. The first verse, "[The bodhisattva]

practices the kindness of an arhat, because he has destroyed the traitorous entanglements,

" shows that kindness like that of an arhat is able to destroy the traitorous entanglements; the following three verses are the same as this. The third section, using buddhahood as an example, also has four verses. The first verse is "[The bodhisattva] practices a self-same kindness, because it is attained without cause.

"

Because buddhahood is without a teacher it is [a state that] is self-same and attained without cause. This means that because [the bodhisattva's] kindness is devoid of perceptual attributes it is without cause and thus like uncaused buddhahood. The following three verses can be understood in line with this. The fourth section, using the ten thousand practices of the causal stage as examples, is further made up of eleven verses. The first verse is "[The bodhisattva] practices a kindness without revulsion, because of contemplating emptiness and no-self.

" Bodhisattvas contemplate emptiness and no-self and

transform beings without revulsion; their kindness is also like this. The [meaning of the] following verses can also be inferred in line with this. "Thus is the kindness of a bodhisattva" is the third part [of Vimalakīrti's answer], the conclusion.

Again, one understanding has it that all of these refer to [the bodhisattva] causing others to attain freedom. This means that a bodhisattva's kindness is called a kindness of quiescent extinction because it causes people to attain 198

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

the underlying principle of quiescent extinction.

"Because there is nothing that

is born.

" The reason a bodhisattva's kindness is called "quiescent extinction" is because it makes people attain the underlying principle of the unborn tranquil extinction—therefore it is called quiescent extinction. The following verses are all similar to this and there is no difference in how you divide them. Another understanding has it that [the verse] says simply that the bodhisattva's kindness is quiescent and extinct. The reason that it is called quiescent extinction is because the kindness [of bodhisattvas] has nothing that is born. The next [three] questions and answers are given in order to explain compassion, joy, and equanimity, respectively; they can be understood. From "Mañjuśrī asked further,

'What should the bodhisattva who fears

samsara rely on?'" is the third [explanation], and explains the meaning of abiding within the merits of the Buddha. This removes the third [doubt] about whether physically remaining in samsara, serenely accepting suffering, and saving beings is only for [bodhisattvas] of the upper ranks and not something that newly declared [bodhisattvas] can undertake. This shows that even if they are newly declared bodhisattvas, because they dwell within the power of the Buddha's merits how could they be unable to bear [physically remaining in samsara, enduring suffering, and saving beings]? In all there are twelve questions and answers that deal with this, and they can all be understood if you investigate the text.

"The body is the basis.

" This is to say that good and evil necessarily

arise dependant upon the body of the five skandhas.

"Desire" refers to the

skandhaof will (samskāra),

"discrimination" refers to [the skandhaof] the

feeling (vedanā) mind,

"confused thinking" refers to the [skandha of] the

perceiving mind (saṃjñā), and "non-abiding" refers to the conscious mind (vijñāna). There is no mind prior to consciousness; therefore it says that consciousness is non-abiding. Perception has consciousness as its basis but prior to consciousness there is no mind, so what then could be the basis? Hence it says that "non-abiding is without basis.

" "Mañjuśrī, all dharmas are established on the non-abiding [basis]. " This means that [all things] are born in

order, dependent on consciousness, up to and including the body. Another way of looking at it is that non-abiding refers to the underlying principle of emptiness, and that all dharmas have the underlying principle of emptiness as their basis.

199

57a

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

From "At that time [there was a goddess] in Vimalakīrti's [room]" removes the fourth doubt about the lack of a fixed existence [of any dharma]. This initially unfolds in three parts. In the first [part] the narrator describes how the goddess manifested herself and scattered flowers over the assembly, and thereupon began a discussion. The second part, from "At that time the goddess asked,

" presents the actual discussion between the goddess and Śāriputra, revealing the attributes of non-fixed existence, the underlying principle of the Middle Way. The third, from "At that time Vimalakīrti, " gives Vimalakīrti's praise of the goddess's virtues and completes [the discussion of] the attributes of non-fixed existence.

However, the goddess is none other than a mahāsattvaof the Dharma body. She manifested as a goddess because she wanted to transform beings by having a discussion about a woman's body. She scattered the flowers because she wished to thereby begin the discussion. Because of the goddess's supernatural powers the flowers adhered [to the the disciples] but did not stick [to the bodhisattvas]. She wanted to curb the discriminating and biased attachments of the newly declared [bodhisattvas] and the [followers of the] two vehicles with the practices of the nondiscriminating Middle Way of the mahāsattva.

From "At that time the goddess asked" is the second part, the actual discussion. Although there are many questions and answers, they all arise in sequence with each other and here we can put them in seven groups. The first is the discussion occasioned by the flowers adhering [to the disciples] but not [to the bodhisattvas]. The second, from "Śāriputra asked, 'Goddess,

have you stayed in this room long?'"

, uses the question of whether she has

been in the room a long or short time to further the discussion. The third, from "Śāriputra said,

'Excellent, excellent!'"

, bases the argument on the

question of [the goddess's] attainment. The fourth, from "Śāriputra asked the goddess,

'Which of the three vehicles do you pursue?'"

, bases the discussion

on the question of which [vehicle the goddess] pursues. The fifth, from "Why don't you change your female body?"

, creates the discussion about the question

of transforming one's body. The sixth, from "Śāriputra asked the goddess, 'When you die here, where will you be born?'"

, uses the question of [the goddess's future] rebirth to construct the argument. The seventh, from "Śāriputra asked the goddess,

'How long will it be before you attain [perfect] bodhi?'" ,

200

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

uses the question of the fruits attained to further the discussion. Although there are many questions and answers within these seven levels of exchange, all of them have [the nature of] non-fixed existence as their main point. That is to say, it is clear that this completes and concludes the [discussion of that which is] "devoid of perceptual attributes" mentioned above. The first group [of questions and answers], that is, the discussion born of the scattering of the flowers, itself has three parts. The first is the goddess asking Śāriputra why he tried to remove the flowers. The second is Śāriputra's answer that they were contrary to the Dharma of a home-departed one and so he wished to remove them. The third part is the goddess scolding Śāriputra—this constitutes four parts. The first is the simple chastising [of Śāriputra, telling him] not to say that the flowers are contrary to the Dharma. The second part explains that "These flowers are without discrimination—it is you, Virtuous One, who gives rise to discrimination.

" This means that the flowers are empty, without

mind—hence they are essentially [in need] neither of removal nor nonremoval. That Śāriputra says that they are contrary to the Dharma is, on the other hand, [an example of] discrimination. The third part, from "If one who has left home within the Buddha-Dharma [discriminates], " reveals what it

means to be in accord with the Dharma and contrary to the Dharma. The fourth part, from "See the bodhisattvas,

" explains why the flowers adhere

[to some but] not [to others].

What is being said is that [the flowers] adhere because there is discrimination in the mind; if there is no discrimination [the flowers] do not stick. Again, if there is fear in the mind they adhere, and if there is no fear they do not. Further, if the latent entanglements are not yet done away with [the flowers] will adhere, but if the latent entanglements are exhausted, they will not. This can all be understood. Now, although they are called bodhisattvas, those below the seventh level have not yet exhausted the latent entanglements. Why then are only the [followers of the] two vehicles made light of? Although bodhisattvas [below the seventh level] have not yet exhausted the latent entanglements, nonetheless, from the day they begin their practice they establish the intent to cut off all latent karmic impressions. Wishing to transform beings, they neither fear samsara nor [do they fear] physically remaining in the world—therefore it says that they have exhausted [the latent karmic 57b

201

57c

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

impressions]. To discuss this in terms of reality, [the latent karmic residue has] not yet [been] exhausted. But those of the two vehicles fear samsara and are not able to transform beings. They wish only to cut off the actual afflictions and not latent karmic impressions. Therefore [only those of the two vehicles] are made light of.

From "Śāriputra said,

'Goddess, have you been in this room [long]?'"

is the second discussion, born of the question of how long [the goddess] has been in the room. This has nine further levels. The first is Śāriputra asking the goddess if she has been in the room a long or short time. On being chastised by the goddess with an eloquence like that of Vimalakīrti, [Śāriputra] thought that she must have been in the room a long time and had frequently been perfumed by the echoing breezes of Vimalakīrti's [discourses]—therefore, she was able [to speak as eloquently] as he. So he asked this question. The second level is the goddess's reply [to Śāriputra]: "I have been in this room as many years as the liberation of the elder" has been realized—there are no attributes such as "long time" or "short time" that [apply to her being] in the room. The third level is Śāriputra's coy reply, "[How] long have you

been here?"

, wondering how many months and years had passed since [his] liberation of emptiness.

The fourth level is the goddess chastising [Śāriputra], asking whether the elder's realization of the liberation of emptiness has the attribute of lengthy duration. The fifth is the narrator's describing Śāriputra's silence. The sixth is the goddess's asking Śāriputra why he is silent. [Śāriputra] has been called an "elder" because of his long years [in the monastic community]. Among the ten disciples [Śāriputra] was foremost in discerning awareness, therefore she says,

"great knowledge.

" Since the Virtuous One [Śāriputra] was already

complete in the two meanings, why did he remain silent and not respond? The seventh level is Śāriputra's reply that liberation is devoid of perceptual attributes and cannot be spoken of; thus he remains silent. The eighth level is the goddess again chastising Śāriputra. Śāriputra knows only the wordless liberation and does not yet know equality. The reason he is scolded here is that within the underlying principle speaking is non-speaking and non-speaking is speaking—all dharmas are like this. Therefore, [the goddess] says,

"Language and words all have the attribute of liberation. " "Liberation

is not internal" refers to the six sense organs; "nor is it external" refers to 202

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

the six sense objects; "not in between" refers to the six consciousnesses. It can also be said that "internal" refers to samsara, nirvana is "external, " and

the factors of the Way are "in between.

" It can also be that in "neither internal

nor external,

" "internal" refers to the teacher's own body,

"external" refers

to the Dharma that is taught, and "in between" refers to the sounds of their voices. All three locations are empty—what problem is there that would cause him not to answer?

The ninth is Śāriputra's asking if it is like this, then why was liberation in the past considered only to be the elimination of desire, anger, and delusion? The goddess answered that it was only for the spiritually arrogant who believe in existence that the Buddha taught liberation as the elimination of mental afflictions. For those who do not believe in existence and are not spiritually arrogant, the Buddha taught that mental afflictions are none other than liberation. From "Śāriputra said,

'Excellent, excellent!'" is the third discussion,

based on the question of [the goddess's] attainment. Having heard the goddess's eloquent explanation of emptiness as related above, [Śāriputra thought] that she surely must have personally experienced the ultimate fruits, and so he asked her,

"Goddess, what have you attained, and through what realization [are you so eloquent]?" Her answer itself has two parts. The first is the actual answer, telling him that she does not exist and therefore has neither attainment nor realization. The second part is the interpretation. That is to say, if you think that you personally have attainments, then you will surely look down on others who do not have attainments. This would be to already have spiritual arrogance with regard to the Buddha-Dharma; therefore she has neither attainment nor realization. From "Śāriputra asked the goddess, ['Which of the three vehicles do you pursue?']" is the fourth discussion, occasioned by [Śāriputra's] question about which of the three vehicles the goddess follows. Again, on hearing that [the goddess] is without attainment and without realization, [Śāriputra thinks that she] must surely be an ordinary person who is slowly working her way through the practice stages. Therefore he asks which of the three fruits she seeks. Another interpretation has it that, as with the above question and answer, [Śāriputra thinks that the goddess] must surely be a Mahayana [practitioner], and hence [Śāriputra] asks the question. Therefore he is again scolded.

203

58a

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

The answer has two parts. The first is the answer in terms of the manifestation, explaining that because of her transformation [of sentient beings] through the three vehicles, she too is of the three vehicles. What has Śāri putra already decided to cause him to ask this question? Again, why has he completely made up his mind and decided that she must be a Mahayana [practitioner]? The second part, from "Śāriputra, it is like a person entering a campaka grove,

" gives the answer based on the source; this unfolds in two parts. The first begins with the Great [Vehicle] and omits the Small [Vehicle], and then concludes with the Great [Vehicle]. The second, from "Śāri putra, I have been in this room [twelve years],

" begins by asserting that there is no [teaching of

the] Small [Vehicle of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas] and [that while she has been in Vimalakīrti's room the goddess has heard only of the] Great [Vehicle]; this also concludes without the Small [Vehicle]. Another interpretation has it that it is for people that the Great [Vehicle] is taught, and from "[Śāriputra,] I have been in this room [twelve years]" is the second part, describing first the lack [of any teachings of the] Small [Vehicle] and then concluding with [the Dharma of the] Great [Vehicle]. "I have

been in this room twelve years and from the beginning have not heard the Dharma of the śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas taught.

" This means that there

is no [Dharma] of the Small [Vehicle taught by Vimalakīrti]. From "I have only heard of the bodhisattva's [great kindness and great compassion]" describes the Great [Vehicle Dharma taught by Vimalakīrti]. Another interpretation has it that from "I have been in this room [twelve years]" up to "Dharma of the buddhas" explains only that within the room there is just the great and not the small, and that from "This room always manifests eight unprecedented and rare dharmas" clarifies the [nature of the Dharma as] great through the eight unprecedented things. Another interpretation understands it as four pairs, but we won't use that here. From "Śāriputra, this room always manifests [eight unprecedented and rare dharmas]" concludes with the lack of the Small [Vehicle Dharma in Vimalakīrti's room]. Another interpretation says that throughout and in the conclusion there is only the [Dharma] of the Great [Vehicle] and none who take delight in the Small [Vehicle]. Therefore the house is great and described in five levels. However, when asked whether she had been in the house a long or short time, [the goddess] definitely did not answer by stating the number 204

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

of years but said only,

"[as long] as the elder's liberation,

" and [she] did not

allow [Śāriputra's] conceptions. What does it mean that she now herself says she has been [in Vimalakīrti's room] for twelve years? In interpreting this, we can say that first she wished to remove his conceptions and so did not state the number of years. Now, however, because she had already explained the nature of the undetermined by saying "[as long] as the elder's liberation, "

she gives the real answer. Why, then, did she say that she had been in the house for twelve years? She said that she had been in the house for twelve years because she wished to negate the two vehicles' attachment to the matter of "twelve years" as real. Another interpretation is that it might be the case that Vimalakīrti has actually been in the room for twelve years. From "Śāriputra said,

'Why do you not change your female body?'" is

the fifth discussion, occasioned by the question of [the goddess changing her] body. [Śāriputra] is now hearing about her manifestations within the three vehicles, but the source is none other than the Great [Vehicle]. Surely [the goddess] has accumulated unfathomable virtue and in fact should not have received a female body. Hence he asks why she does not transform her female body. This has three further parts: the first is the question and answer about the original nature of her body; the second, from "At that time the goddess [used her supernatural power and changed Śāriputra to be like a goddess], " is the question and answer about the transformed body; the third part, from "At that time the goddess withdrew her supernatural power, " is another

question and answer about [the goddess] returning to her original body. The first part, the question and answer about the original nature of her body, itself has two parts. The first is Śāriputra's question; the second is the goddess's answer. The answer has four parts. The first is the direct answer that shows that ultimate truth is originally without the perceptual attributes of male or female. Therefore [the goddess said],

"I have been looking for

[the attribute] of a female body but have not found it—what is there to transform?" The second part is an example that throws the question back to Śāriputra. The third is Śāriputra's reply to her example. The fourth is the goddess bringing [her original statement] together with the example and showing that all dharmas are empty and lacking in anything that could be transformed. From "At that time [the goddess used her supernatural power and changed Śāriputra to be like a goddess]" is the second part, the question and answer 205

58b

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

about the transformed body; this has four further parts. The first is the narrator describing the transformation of the two bodies. The second is [the goddess] asking Śāriputra,

"Why don't you transform your female body?" The third

is Śāriputra's reply,

"I do not know how you have now transformed me into

a female body"; how, then, could he change back into a male [body]? It could also be said that this is not a transformation of a real dharma—emptiness is without anything that can be transformed. The fourth part is the goddess's responding instruction to Śāriputra. This has three lines. In the first [the goddess] tells Śāriputra that because [his female body] is already nonexistent he is not able to transform it; all female [bodies] are also empty and thus not able to transform. The second line says that all [females] are empty and thus not female although they manifest female [bodies]. The third cites the Buddha's words as the summary proof.

From "At that time the goddess withdrew [her supernatural power]" is the third part, more questions and answers about [the goddess] returning to her original body; the import of this is fourfold. The first is the narrator describing the goddess's body returning to its original [female attribute]. The second is the goddess asking Śāriputra where the physical form of a female exists. The third is Śāriputra's answer that [the physical form of a female] is primordially unborn and undying; therefore it neither exists nor does not exist. The fourth is the goddess using the emptiness of the underlying principle to conclude that, [as with the physical form of a female,] the various dharmas are all empty and unborn; she then cites the Buddha's words as proof. This can be understood.

From "Śāriputra asked the goddess" is the sixth discussion, occasioned by the question of where [the goddess] will be born. Those present who saw her perfect mastery of supernatural powers greatly revered her in their hearts and assumed that she was close to the ultimate [reward], and that after her death she would surely be born in a place of beauty and marvel. Therefore [Śāriputra] asked,

"After you die [here], where will you be born?"

Śāriputra's question is about a buddha's birth being for the sake of transforming [beings] but without actual birth or extinction—how is it that the goddess does not pass away or be reborn? The goddess replied that sentient beings are all like the Buddha in not passing away or being reborn—how could the Buddha be alone in this? Another interpretation says that Śāri putra 206

Chapter Seven: Contemplating Sentient Beings

understands the gist [of what the goddess] is saying, that if, like the Buddha's birth, [the goddess's birth] is for the sake of transforming [beings], then she is without passing away and rebirth. Therefore, the goddess responds accordingly, saying that, like the Buddha, no sentient beings are born or extinguished—how could she be alone in this? From "Śāriputra asked the goddess,

'Will it be long before you attain

[supreme and perfect] bodhi?'" is the seventh discussion, born of [Śāriputra's] question [to the goddess about her] attainment of the ultimate fruit. When in the sixth [discussion], above, [Śāriputra] heard [the goddess] say that she too has a birth like that [of a buddha], he thought that she must be a very evolved practitioner and not far from attaining bodhi. Hence he arrived at this question. This itself has three parts. The first explains non-attainment with regard to nonexistence. The second, from "Śāriputra said, 'What about

the buddhas who are now [attaining bodhi],

'" explains non-attainment with

regard to existence. The third, from "The goddess said, [Śāriputra, have you attained arhatship?]"

, explains non-attainment with regard to both existence and nonexistence.

The first part also has four parts. The first is Śāriputra's question. The second is the goddess's answer that she will attain bodhiwhen Śāriputra once again becomes an ordinary person. The third is "Śāriputra said, 'That I become

an ordinary person is impossible.

'" The fourth is "The goddess said,

'My

attaining of [supreme and perfect] bodhiis likewise impossible. '" Bodhiis

empty, therefore it is "without any place of abiding. " Likewise, the practitioner

is also empty and so there is no one who can attain [bodhi]. From "Śāriputra said, ['What about the buddhas who attain bodhi?']" is the second part, explaining non-attainment with regard to existence. This has exactly one question and answer.

The question is that if there is no one who attains [bodhi], then what can be said about the many buddhas who have already attained [bodhi] and those who will attain it? The answer is that all of this is explained within conventional cause and condition; it is not that bodhihas a past, future, or present, or that [bodhi] really has the attribute of attainment. From "The goddess said, ['Śāriputra, have you attained arhatship?']" explains non-attainment with regard to emptiness and existence; this has three parts. The first is the goddess asking Śāriputra if he has attained arhatship. 207

58c

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra The second is Śāriputra's answer,

"There is nothing that is attained, and therefore I have attained it. " With regard to emptiness, there is no attainment— attainment is taught with regard to the conventional. The third is the goddess's response accordingly, that the many buddhas and bodhisattvas are also like this—with regard to emptiness there is no attainment, but with regard to the conventional there is attainment. There is no real attainment. From "At that time Vimalakīrti [said to Śāriputra]" is the third part [of the fourth explanation that removes the fourth doubt]; this gives Vimalakīrti's praise of the goddess's virtues and is the summary conclusion of [the discussion of] the meaning of the absence of perceptual attributes. This has three further parts. The first is the praise of [the goddess's] past actions; the second, from "She already is able to disport,

" is the praise of her present

virtues; the third, from "Because of her original vows, " is praise of her current

unbounded benefiting of beings. This can all be understood. 208

Chapter 8: The Way of the Buddha

Chapter Eight

The Way of the Buddha

This chapter describes how bodhisattvas cultivate the wrong [path] and thereby thoroughly penetrate the way of the Buddha; hence the title of the chapter. This is the second [chapter] that deals with the transformation of [people of] middling capacity, as explained above [at the beginning of the third chapter of this Commentary]. When those of middling capacity hear in the earlier [chapter ] "The Inconceivable" that most of the Māra kings in the worlds of the ten directions are bodhisattvas who, dwelling in inconceivable liberation, use their skillful means to manifest as Māra kings and teach and transform sentient beings, they have doubts. The way of the Tathāgata should only spread what is right by means of what is right. It should not use what is wrong to master what is right. How is it, then, that [bodhisattvas] become Māra kings and thereby master the way of a buddha? This chapter is given in order to explain this.

This is unpacked in three parts. The first, from the beginning up to "This is thorough penetration of the way of the Buddha,

" is the initial explanation

that within their hearts [bodhisattvas cultivate] great compassion devoid of perceptual attributes, yet externally they manifest the practices of the wrong [path] and, in accordance with beings' spiritual capacities, use their skillful means to save them—this is called the bodhisattva's thorough penetration of the way of the Buddha. This dispels the doubt about the inappropriateness of using what is wrong in order to penetrate what is right. The second part, from "At this, Vimalakīrti asked Mañjuśrī, 'What is

the seed of the Tathāgata?'"

, is a demonstration that the defilements are the

seed of the Tathāgata.

The third part, from "At that time there was a bodhisattva in the assembly named Universally Manifested Form Body,

" describes Vimalakīrti's numerous

and varied manifestations of the inconceivable; this concludes the [discussion of how] practicing what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right. 209

59a

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

The first part itself is made up of two exchanges of questions and answers. The first exchange establishes the name [of the chapter]; the actual two, the question and answer, can be understood. The latter exchange actually explains how practicing what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right. This also has the two [parts of a] question and answer, and there are four divisions within the answer. The first is the initial three lines that clarify how practicing what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right from the standpoint of evil fruits. The second division, from "manifests greed and desire, " describes

how practicing what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right from the standpoint of of evil causes. The third, from "manifests flattery and deception, "

clarifies how practicing what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right with regard to various standpoints. The fourth is the one line that concludes this part,

"Mañjuśrī, [if the bodhisattva is able to practice the wrong path in this manner, this is to penetrate the way of the Buddha]. "

"[The bodhisattva] cultivates the [deeds that lead to the hell of the] five interminable sufferings, yet there is no worry or anxiety. " This means that

[the bodhisattva] enables others to attain the fruit of non-worry and nonanxiety. The following lines are similar and can be interpreted thus. One interpretation understands it to only refer to [the bodhisattva's] own mind: although [the bodhisattva] manifests [the deeds that lead to the hell of the five] interminable sufferings externally, within his mind there is no worry or anxiety. The following lines also have the same [meaning]. The second division, from the standpoint of [evil] causes, is further divided into two parts; the first concerns the three poisons, and the latter concerns the six obstacles. This shows that although [the bodhisattva] manifests the three poisons and six obstacles, he is not in opposition to the three virtues and the six perfections. The third and fourth divisions can be understood. From "At this, Vimalakīrti [asked Mañjuśrī,

'What is the seed of the

Tathāgata?']" is the second part, a demonstration that the defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata. One interpretation takes it that the reason this is explained again is that sentient beings, having heard earlier that the practice of what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right, will have further doubts. [They will think that] it is like this only because of [the bodhisattva's] wish to transform beings, but in fact it is not so—the correct argument is that buddhahood is achieved solely through virtue. So it is now shown that virtue 210

Chapter Eight: The Way of the Buddha

arises from evil; there is no virtue that arises by itself. Therefore it says that the defilements are the seed of the Buddha—how could virtue alone [be the seed]? This has two parts: the first is the actual statement that defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata; the second, from "Kāśyapa exclaimed, 'Excellent, [excellent, Mañjuśrī!]'"

, is Kāśyapa's expression of complete agreement.

The first part has two exchanges of questions and answers, which itself has two parts: the first question and answer is the actual explanation that defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata; the subsequent exchange further clarifies what it means that defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata. The first exchange has three parts: (1) the question, (2) the answer, and (3) the conclusion. [The first part deals with the question.] The reason [Vimalakīrti] asked Mañjuśrī was because of the doubts beings would have, thinking that Vimalakīrti's practice of what is wrong would not lead to the penetration of what is right. Therefore [Mañjuśrī] was made to explain it to Vimalakīrti. The second part is [Mañjuśrī's] answer: "Having a body is the seed. "

This means that a body [that lives] within the three existences is the seed. "The five hindrances" are desire, anger, dullness, agitation, and doubt. "The

six entrances" are the six sense organs.

"The seven consciousnesses" are the

three dhyānas [of the form realm], the three empty [regions of the formless realm], and the deities and humans of the desire realm added together to make seven. The fourth dhyāna[of the form realm] is a state of concentration devoid of perceptual attributes, and the [state of neither thinking] nor not thinking [in the formless realm] is the state of concentration characterized by cessation [of all mental activity] (nirodha-samāpatti), so they are not included. The three lower destinies [below the formless realm, that is, the realm of form, and the two destinies of deities and humans in the desire realm] can be seen and known.

"The eight heterodox [dharmas]" oppose the

eightfold right [dharmas of the eightfold noble path]. The "nine afflictions" refer to dislike of one's virtuous friends, affection for one's enemies, and dislike of oneself through the three worlds [of past, present, and future], for a total of nine afflictions.

From "To summarize [this]" is the third part, the conclusion. From "Why is this?" is the second exchange of a question and answer, further clarifying what it means that the defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata; this has the two parts of the question and the answer. The question is 211

59b

Expository Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sutra

not elaborated; it simply asks why it is that defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata. The answer has three further parts. The first gives a doctrinal explanation, explaining a one-sided extreme of non-attainment. This describes how those of the two vehicles fear and avoid the defilements; because they only see the unconditioned and enter the stage of certainty, they are not able to finally arouse [the aspiration for] the great way of [highest and perfect] bodhi. Hence it says that defilements are the seed of the Tathāgata. For this reason as well, one interpretation is the opposite, i.e., that this part explains attainment. The second part [of the answer] is from "For example, it is like the dry lands of a high plateau.

" This gives a metaphor in order to explain both

extremes of attainment and non-attainment. This explains that because those of the two vehicles have a one-sided belief in the stage of certainty, they fear and avoid the mental afflictions and are not able to generate the seed of bodhi. Because ordinary people are not yet established in the two supports, if they encounter the [right] conditions they are able to generate the mind that is the seed of the Tathāgata.

From "Thus you should know" is the third part, the conclusion. It has a doctrinal explanation as well as a metaphor; this can be understood. From "At that time, Mahākāśyapa exclaimed,

'Excellent, [excellent,

Mañjuśrī!]'" is the second part, Kāśyapa's praise and description of Mañjuśrī's teaching. [Kāśyapa] again laments his own cutting off the capacity [for awakening, as he did at the beginning of Chapter Six]. This also has three parts. The first is his summary praise of [Mañjuśrī's] teaching as not false. The second, from "The field of troubling defilements, " is the actual

expression [of Mañjuśrī's] earlier words. The third, from "Therefore, Mañjuśrī,

" is the conclusion. These can be understood.

"Respond" is to say that ordinary people will surely attain the fruits of buddhahood—they are able to respond to the Buddha's benevolence. Therefore it says that [ordinary people] "respond" [to the Buddha-Dharma]. Those of the two vehicles are not like this, and so they do not "respond. "

From "At that time there was a bodhisattva in the assembly [named Universally Manifested Form Body]" is the third part of this chapter, describing Vimalakīrti's numerous and varied manifestations of the inconceivable; this concludes the [discussion of how the] practice of what is wrong leads to penetration of what is right. This is unpacked in two divisions. The first is the 212

Chapter Eight: The Way of the Buddha

question posed by Bodhisattva Universally Manifested [Form Body]; the second is Vimalakīrti's reply in verse. This, [the third part of this chapter, is also] the fourth of the five discussions born of [Vimalakīrti's] emptying his room. The first division is the question of Bodhisattva Universally Manifested [Form Body]. The Virtuous One wore the white robes of a layman, yet his room was small and narrow and there was nothing in it. Where were his father, mother, relatives, and all the requisite furnishings? If we look deeper into this question, there is an inner purpose. The essence of Vimalakīrti is inconceivable, yet within the path of response manifestations he appears the same as a layman.

Fearing that the confused will see his appearance but not understand [that it is merely a manifestation] along the path [in response to the needs of sentient beings], this question was asked.

Vimalakīrti's answer, the second division [of the third part of this chapter], has a total of forty-two verses divided into three parts. The first part consists of the twelve verses from "The perfection of discerning awareness is the bodhisattva's mother" up to "His victory banner flies over the seat of enlightenment. " This part describes how, with regard to his essence, the bodhisattva is solely related to the many and various factors of the path and is without [actual] kinsfolk [or retinue] in the world.

The second is the twenty-seven verses from "Although [the bodhisattva] knows that there is neither origination nor extinction. " This part describes

how, with regard to his manifestations, although there is neither [origination nor extinction, nonetheless] great beings make their existence appear through their inconceivable skill. It is exactly through their inconceivable [skills] that they negate the confusion of those people.

The three verses from "In this way, innumerable paths [are traveled without restriction]" comprise the third part, together concluding [the discussion] of the essence and manifestation [of the bodhisattva]. There are some who divide these verses and interpret them in detail, but here I simply understand them according to the text.

The "seven purities" are: (1) purity of morality, (2) purity of mind, (3) purity of views, (4) purity in overcoming doubts, (5) purity in discrimination, (6) purity of practice, and (7) purity of nirvana. The "seven treasures" are faith, morality, learning, renunciation, awareness, conscience, and shame. 213

59c