Six Similes for One Flower

Composed by the monk Guanding.

As the great Dharma spread eastward, among all those recorded in the Monks' Histories, how many were there who understood the Buddha-vehicle by themselves, without ever having heard it lectured on? And even granting that one awakened by himself, could he also enter samādhi and attain dhāraṇī? And even granting he possessed both samādhi and wisdom, could he also propagate both aspects of the Dharma in the imperial capital? And even granting he presided over a flourishing assembly, could he also take leave of his followers and withdraw into the mountains and valleys? And even granting he shunned the world to guard what is profound, could he also be summoned to serve as preceptor to two kingdoms? And even granting he was honored by emperors, could he also lecture the sovereign himself, face to face in the Great Ultimate Hall, on the Scripture for Humane Kings on the Perfection of Wisdom? And even granting he proclaimed the Dharma from the main hall, could he also receive the ruler's own threefold homage? And even granting ten thousand chariots bowed their knees before him, and a hundred high seats and a hundred officials praised him with resounding applause that filled the hall — could he, even so, have penetrated the perfect meaning of the Lotus Sūtra in its full profundity? And even granting he grasped the sūtra's meaning, could he also, without relying on written words, pour it forth day and night in an eloquence of unhindered exposition? Only our Great Master Zhiyi possessed every one of these at once.

How fortunate I, Guanding, have been. Long ago, in Jianye, I first heard him lecture on the sūtra's text; then, in Jiangling, I was privileged to receive the Profound Meaning; and late in his life, having returned to the Tiantai mountains, I was present once more at his final teaching, by the grove where the cranes gathered at his passing. Traveling back and forth between Jing and Yang, a journey of nearly ten thousand li, piecing together what came before and after, I managed to hear it through only once. Not only did I fail to hear what I never had the chance to hear — even what I did hear, I never fully understood. The more I turned it over and pressed into it with reverent effort, the more its height and firmness struck me, and I could only regret that my connection to it had been too slight: I could not hear it a second or a third time, and had nowhere left to turn and ask. I was like a calf still longing for its mother's milk. And I could not help but think: if these words were allowed to be lost, it would be a sorrow for ages to come.

The Nirvāṇa Sūtra speaks of what a tree or a stone can preserve; this present sūtra speaks of what a field or a village can preserve. Following reverently the model of the sacred canon, I have written this down and transmitted it — the Profound Meaning and the Textual Commentary, each in ten fascicles. In places I have matched it against the sincere words of sūtra and treatise, to confirm its own depth and subtlety; in places I have set out the differing interpretations of various masters, to show where they fall short of the perfect teaching. May students of later generations know that the gate of sweet dew stands right here.

As for what is called "wondrous": the name "wondrous" signifies what is inconceivable. As for what is called "dharma": it names the dharmas of the ten realms, the ten suchnesses, and the provisional and the real. "Lotus flower" is a metaphor for the dharmas of the provisional and the real. It is truly because the wondrous dharma is difficult to understand that a metaphor, borrowed for the purpose, brings it easily to light — and since its sense is in fact manifold, let me set out briefly, in order, six meanings that together make up the whole.

First: it is for the sake of the seed-pod that the flower blooms at all — this is a metaphor for establishing the provisional for the sake of the real. The text says: "Knowing the ultimate quiescence, by the power of skillful means, though he shows various paths, in truth it is all for the sake of the buddha-vehicle." Second: the flower's opening is a metaphor for opening up the provisional, and the seed-pod's appearing within it is a metaphor for revealing the real. The text says: "He opens the gate of skillful means and shows the mark of the real truth." Third: the flower's falling away is a metaphor for setting aside the provisional, and the seed-pod's ripening is a metaphor for establishing the real. The text says: "Directly, without deviation, he casts aside skillful means, and speaks only of the unsurpassed path."

Again: the seed-pod is a metaphor for the origin, and the flower is a metaphor for the trace; from the origin the trace is let down, and the trace depends upon the origin. The text says: "In truth, since I attained buddhahood, it has been a span of time as vast as this. It is only for the sake of teaching and transforming sentient beings that I speak in this way, saying: 'In my youth I left the household and attained awakening.'" Second [of this second triad]: the flower's blooming is a metaphor for opening the trace, and the seed-pod's appearing is a metaphor for revealing the origin. The text says: "All the world takes it that I have only now, for the first time, attained the path; yet since I attained buddhahood, it has been immeasurable, boundless myriads of kalpas." Third: the flower's falling is a metaphor for setting aside the trace, and the seed-pod's ripening is a metaphor for establishing the origin. The text says: "All buddha-tathāgatas — their Dharma is entirely like this: for the sake of saving sentient beings, all of it is true and never false."

It is for this reason that he first names the wondrous dharma, and next gives the simile of the lotus flower: sweeping away attachment to the teaching of the phantom city, setting aside the lingering feeling for the thatched hut; opening the provisional gate of skillful means, showing the wondrous principle of the real truth; gathering the small practices of the many kinds of good into the one vast vehicle; and bestowing predictions of buddhahood on capacities high, middling, and low alike. He further discloses the skillful cleverness of all the sages, and reveals the hidden subtlety of the fundamental ground, so that as the path increases, birth-and-death diminishes, until one's stage draws near to great awakening. That the guidance given over this one lifetime is perfect in both phenomena and principle — this is precisely what the simile of the lotus flower is meant to convey.

As for "sūtra": in the Western lands it is called sūtra, the general name for the sacred teaching. Whether it should be translated or left untranslated is a matter explained later.

The recorder explains: this "Preface" narrates the profound sense of the sūtra. The profound sense is set forth in the heart of the text, and the heart of the text is nothing other than trace and origin. Looking up and taking in this purport, its several meanings become clear and distinct of themselves. "Wondrous Dharma Lotus Flower" narrates the name; "showing the wondrous principle of the real truth" narrates the essence; "gathering into the one vast vehicle" narrates the cardinal doctrine; "sweeping away attachment to the teaching of the phantom city" narrates the function; "guidance over one lifetime, perfected" narrates the teaching; and the six similes narrate trace and origin. The text is brief, yet its sense is complete.

Principle transcends the partial and the perfect alike, and yet, in dependence on the perfect pearl, principle comes to be spoken of; the ultimate is neither far nor near, and yet, relying on the place of treasure, the ultimate comes to be discussed. Where the ultimate merges with the perfect and the hidden, phenomena and principle are both quiescent. And if they seem not quiescent, it is truly because, intoxicated by the wine of ignorance, one wears the pearl sewn into one's own robe without ever noticing it there; lost on the path to nirvāṇa, though the road is not in fact far, one calls it long. The sagely lord, the World-Honored One, taking pity on this inverted delusion, made the four flowers rain down and the six kinds of earth-tremor occur, opening the gate of skillful means; he made the three transformations of the land occur and the thousandfold multitude spring up from the earth, manifesting the ground of the real truth — causing every being, without exception, to see and hear it fully. His disclosing of the secret and profound treasury is called "wondrous." His showing of the correct track of the provisional and the real is therefore named "dharma." His pointing to the ancient fruit of buddhahood, attained in the far distant past, is likened to the lotus-seed-pod. His bringing together of the non-dual, perfect path is compared to the flower. His voice, performing the Buddha's own work, is called the "sūtra." The very opening of this perfect exposition is termed the "prologue." What follows it in sequence, belonging to the same kind, is called a "chapter." The first among this sequence of chapters is named "Chapter One."

[Guanding] explains: speaking of the pearl narrates the name; merging with the hidden narrates the essence; the perfect pearl narrates the cardinal doctrine; both being quiescent narrates the function; the four flowers and six tremors narrate the teaching — trace and origin may be understood accordingly.

This Wondrous Dharma Lotus Flower Sūtra is the profound and secret treasury of the fundamental ground. The text says: "This dharma cannot be shown; the marks of the world are eternally abiding." It is what the tathāgatas of the three times have realized and attained. The text says: "Having known this ultimate quiescence at the seat of enlightenment, I appeared in the world on account of the one great cause and condition." Some beings first behold my body and are thereby led into the Buddha's wisdom; for those who have not yet entered it, for more than forty years, by various skillful means, I have helped reveal the truth of ultimate meaning. Now, directly and without deviation, I cast aside skillful means and speak only of the unsurpassed path.

As for what is called "wondrous": it is praise extolling the inconceivable dharma. Again, "wondrous" names the dharmas of the ten dharma-realms and the ten suchnesses — this dharma is itself the wondrous, and this wondrous is itself the dharma, without duality, without distinction; hence it is called "wondrous." Again, "wondrous" names the wondrousness of the dharma of one's own practice, the provisional and the real; hence the lotus flower is raised up to give its likeness. Again, "wondrous" means: identical with the trace and yet the origin, identical with the origin and yet the trace, identical with neither origin nor trace — or, alternatively, opening the one and setting aside the other, as will be explained. Again, "wondrous" names the gate of sweet dew of the most supreme sūtra; hence it is called "wondrous."

[Guanding] explains: that the wondrous has no essence apart from the dharma itself, and is praise bestowed upon that very essence, narrates the name of the wondrous. That the wondrous is itself the dharma-realm, and the dharma-realm is itself the wondrous, narrates the essence. The provisional and the real of one's own practice narrates the cardinal doctrine. The six similes of origin and trace narrate the function. The gate of sweet dew narrates the teaching.

Expounded by the Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai.

Explaining the Name is the first section; Clarifying the Essence, the second; Clarifying the Cardinal Doctrine, the third; Discussing the Function, the fourth; Classifying the Teachings, the fifth.

In explaining these five sections, there is a common sense and a particular sense. The common sense is what is shared; the particular sense is what differs. These five sections apply to the exposition of every sūtra alike — hence the common sense is so called. But the name explained under "Explaining the Name" differs from sūtra to sūtra, and likewise the teaching classified under "Classifying the Teachings" differs — hence the particular sense is so called. To take an analogy: every sūtra opens with the same five circumstances — this is the common sense; yet what is expounded differs, who heard it differs, the occasion and its response differ, the Buddha's dwelling-place differs, and the number of the assembled hearers differs — this is the particular sense. Again, the common is the sense of what is shared in general; the particular is the sense of what belongs to each thing individually. Applied here, the common and the particular both concern this one sūtra specifically. In its common aspect, the sevenfold common exposition is used; in its particular aspect, the five sections are each expounded separately — just as, for the sharp-witted and the dull alike, one must provide both a broad approach and a brief one. The common and particular senses across all the teachings [of the whole canon] are not discussed here; only the common and particular senses within this one sūtra are to be examined now.

As for the common aspect, a sevenfold common exposition is made: first, marking the section; second, citing proof-texts; third, showing how it arises in sequence; fourth, opening it up and combining it [with other schemes]; fifth, resolving doubts; sixth, the contemplation of mind; seventh, reconciling it with other terms.

Marking the section makes it easy to remember and hold in mind, thereby giving rise to the mind of mindfulness. Citing proof-texts relies on the Buddha's own words, thereby giving rise to the mind of faith. Showing its arising in sequence keeps it from becoming confused and disordered, thereby giving rise to the mind of concentration. Opening it up and combining it, resolving doubts, and reconciling it with other terms give rise to the mind of wisdom. The contemplation of mind is at once hearing and practice, thereby giving rise to the mind of diligence. Once these five minds are established, they become the five faculties; once the five obstructions are cleared away, they become the five powers, leading in turn to entry through the three gates of liberation. This, briefly stated, is the shared purport of these seven aspects.

As for the broad exposition of the five sections: each one broadly gives rise to the five minds and five faculties, so as to open, show, awaken to, and enter into the Buddha's own knowledge and vision.

First, the marking of the five sections, as will be explained. The marking of the name has four parts: first, establishing it; second, differentiating it; third, concluding it; fourth, giving a simile for it.

As for establishing the name: tracing back to why the sage established a name at all, it is precisely in order to open up what is profound so as to draw beginners forward, causing all who see and hear it to gain sight and hearing of it together — so that, following the path toward what is distant, they may in the end arrive at the ultimate. It is for this reason that he names the dharma with a name, and sets it forth for the sake of sentient beings.

As for differentiating it: dharmas simply have their coarse and their wondrous. Where the three truths are held apart, separated from one another, that is a coarse dharma; where the three truths are perfectly fused together, that is the wondrous dharma.

This wondrous truth is inherently present from the start. The text says: "This dharma abides in its dharma-position; the marks of the world are eternally abiding. Only I know this mark; the buddhas of the ten directions likewise know it so." Yet this is not something known even by non-retrogressing bodhisattvas, or by the two vehicles who have entered realization — how much less by the multitudes of gods and humans! Though the Buddha knows this, he does not press to speak of it quickly. The text says: "If I were to praise the buddha-vehicle, sentient beings, sunk in suffering, would slander the Dharma and fail to believe in it, and would fall into the three evil destinies."

Hence, in the first teaching he established both the fused and the unfused together, yet those of lesser capacity had no access to either at all. In the next teaching he established only the unfused, and those of great capacity made no use of it. In the next teaching he established both together, using the fused to rebuke the unfused, causing those of lesser capacity to feel ashamed of the unfused and to long for the fused. In the next teaching he again established both together, causing those of lesser capacity to lodge themselves within the fused even while still approaching by way of the unfused, and causing those of great capacity to proceed from the unfused toward the fused. Though he established the teaching in these various ways, setting it forth for the sake of sentient beings, this was still speech accommodated to others' own intentions, and not the Buddha's own original purpose — hence it is said that he did not press to speak of it quickly.

In the present sūtra, however, he directly and without deviation casts aside the unfused, and speaks only of the fused, causing the entire assembly, seated together, to share one and the same taste of the path — thereby giving full expression at last to the Tathāgata's own original purpose in appearing in the world. It is for this reason that this sūtra is established and named "wondrous."

As for the conclusion: one should know that the Avataṃsaka period is "combined," the Tripiṭaka period is "exclusive," the Vaipulya period is "contrasted," and the Prajñā period is "accompanied." This sūtra no longer has any combining, exclusiveness, contrasting, or accompanying about it — it is solely the direct, unsurpassed path, without deviation. Hence it is called the wondrous dharma.

As for giving a simile through the lotus flower: flowers in general have their coarse and their wondrous kinds. How so? A coarse, wild flower bears no fruit at all; or a single flower bears many fruits; or many flowers bear a single fruit; or a single flower bears a single fruit; or the fruit comes before the flower; or the flower comes before the fruit. The first is a simile for non-Buddhist paths, who cultivate a pure life in vain, gaining nothing thereby. The next is a simile for ordinary people, whose offerings to their parents bring a reward of rebirth in the Brahmā heavens. The next is a simile for śrāvakas, whose various ascetic practices bring them only to nirvāṇa. The next is a simile for pratyekabuddhas, whose single practice of withdrawal likewise brings them only to nirvāṇa. The next is a simile for stream-enterers, who cultivate the path only afterward, in a later life. The next is a simile for bodhisattvas, who first rely on conditioned cultivation before a later, true cultivation is born. All of these are coarse flowers, and are not used here as the simile. The lotus flower is remarkable in many ways: it is for the sake of the seed-pod that the flower blooms, flower and fruit both complete together — this may serve as a simile for the real that is identical with the provisional. Again, the flower opens and the seed-pod appears within it — this may serve as a simile for the provisional that is identical with the real. Again, the flower falls away and the seed-pod ripens, and the ripened pod, too, eventually falls — this may serve as a simile for what is neither the provisional nor the real. Since it is fitting in such various senses as these, the lotus flower is used as the simile for the wondrous dharma.

The essence has four parts: first, explaining the graph; second, citing parallels; third, sifting out what is not it; fourth, concluding with what is correct. The graph for "essence" is glossed as "propriety." Propriety is what is fitting: each treats his own parent as a parent, each treats his own child as a child, ruler and minister each observe due measure. Where there is no propriety, there is no fittingness. The essence of the dharma that transcends the world is likewise so: good and evil, the ordinary and the sagely, bodhisattva and buddha — none of these ever depart from the dharma-nature. It is precisely the true mark that is pointed to as the correct essence. Hence the "Lifespan" chapter says: "Not as [the three realms themselves appear], he sees the three realms — neither as identical nor as different." If a person of the three realms sees the three realms as different from how they truly are, and a person of the two vehicles sees the three realms as identical with how they truly are, and a bodhisattva sees the three realms as both identical and different, then the Buddha sees the three realms as neither identical nor different, illuminating both the identical and the different at once. It is the Buddha's own seeing that is here taken as the true mark, the correct essence.

Vajragarbha speaks of "the Buddha's most subtle wisdom" — his words differ, but his meaning is the same. His words are: "empty yet existent, not-two, not-different, not-exhausted." Emptiness here is not the emptiness of annihilation and nonexistence — hence it is said "empty yet existent." Existence is itself emptiness, and emptiness is itself existence — hence it is said "not-two." There is no middle way apart from and outside emptiness and existence — hence it is said "not-different." It pervades every place — hence it is said "not-exhausted." This, too, accords with Nāgārjuna's meaning. The Middle Treatise says: "Dharmas arisen through causes and conditions are precisely empty, precisely provisional, precisely the middle." That dharmas arisen through causes and conditions are precisely empty means this is not the emptiness of annihilation. That they are precisely provisional means "not-two." That they are precisely the middle means "not-different." That they are dharmas arisen through causes and conditions at all means they pervade every place.

Now, to speak of the essence as the true mark: identical with the provisional and yet the real, it is free of the slander of annihilation and nonexistence; identical with the real and yet the provisional, it is free of the slander of groundless establishment; the provisional and the real being identical with neither the provisional nor the real, it is free of the slander of difference; illuminating both the provisional and the real at once, pervading every place, it is free of the slander of exhaustion. This, then, gathers together the twin excellences of the two sūtras, sets forth the shared purport of the two treatises, and reveals the distant accord between the two houses — making plain the correct essence of the present sūtra.

In my own view, the dharma of the true mark refutes, horizontally, the ordinary person's four attachments, and refutes, vertically, the three kinds of sages' attainments. Its refutation of the ordinary person needs no further explanation.

As for its refutation of the sages: the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka teaching point to mere emptiness as the ultimate. This is like a crystal bead — at a first glance it seems genuine, but examined a second time, it proves false. Śāriputra says: "We, too, entered the dharma-nature together with the bodhisattvas, yet we lost the Tathāgata's immeasurable knowledge and vision." The purport of "empty yet existent" is precisely what refutes this attainment. A person of the shared teaching points to both mere emptiness and not-mere emptiness together as the ultimate. This is like a bead wrapped in colored cloth, whose light changes according to the color; fixing on the light one sees, one loses sight of the bead's own true body, and chasing after its dark or yellow hue, one falls into the two vehicles. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Persons of the śrāvaka vehicle see only emptiness, and do not see the not-empty; persons of the bodhisattva path see not only emptiness but also the not-empty." Since what each sees differs, the purport of "not-two" is precisely what refutes this attainment. A person of the distinct teaching points to not-mere-emptiness as the ultimate — utterly transcending the two extremes, like the moon beyond the clouds. But casting aside the extremes to grasp the middle is itself like abandoning one emptiness only to seek another; the purport of "not-different" is precisely what refutes this attainment. And if the middle is present there, beyond the extremes, but absent here, within them, then the correct dharma does not pervade everywhere; the purport of "not-exhausted," too, refutes this attainment.

None of these attainments is the Buddha's own most subtle wisdom, and so none accords with Vajragarbha's meaning; none is the Buddha's own realization of what is inherently present and eternally abiding, and so none accords with the "Skillful Means" chapter; none pervades every place, and so none accords with the "Lifespan" chapter. Since none of them accords with the correct essence, to what dharma do they then belong? Mere emptiness is the real teaching used to transform others; both mere and not-mere emptiness together is the real teaching used both for one's own practice and to transform others; transcending the two extremes into the middle is the provisional teaching for one's own practice. All of these belong to what other sūtras teach, and are not the essence of the present sūtra. As for the essence of the present sūtra: it takes the provisional and the real used to transform others as themselves identical with the provisional and the real of one's own practice — like the body hidden within the beggar's grimy robe, which is in truth the wealthy elder himself. It takes the provisional and the real of one's own practice and of transforming others together as themselves identical with the provisional and the real of one's own practice — like the pearl sewn within the robe's own lining, which is itself the priceless jewel. The provisional of one's own practice is itself identical with the real of one's own practice — just as, among all worldly affairs, the management of one's livelihood and trade, none of it ever runs contrary to the true mark; a single color, a single fragrance — none of it is other than the middle way. How much more so, then, that the real of one's own practice should fail to be the real!

The cardinal doctrine has three parts: first, showing it; second, sifting it out; third, concluding it. "Cardinal doctrine" means what is essential. What is meant here is the Buddha's own causes and fruits of practice, taken as the cardinal doctrine. How is this "essential"? Immeasurable good deeds — speak of the cause, and they are all gathered in; immeasurable realizations — speak of the fruit, and they are all gathered in. It is like lifting the headrope of a net: not one mesh fails to move; or like pulling one corner of a garment: not one thread fails to come along. Hence it is called the essential cardinal doctrine.

Yet among all causes and fruits, one must clearly discern the good ones: this cardinal doctrine does not even take the causes and fruits of the distinct teaching, let alone any other causes and fruits! As for other causes and fruits: in some, the three former causes are greatly different from one another while the three fruits are only slightly the same; in others, the three causes are largely the same while the three fruits are only slightly different; in others again, a single cause stands utterly apart, and a single fruit remains unfused. Where the cause does not gather in every good deed, and the fruit does not encompass every virtue, this is not the Buddha's own cause of practice, nor the fruit realized at the Buddha's own seat of enlightenment.

Again, as for sifting: whatever other sūtras teach of the causes and fruits of the Buddha's own past practice, all of it is here swept aside, since all of it belongs to skillful means, and none of it is the cardinal doctrine of the present sūtra. Taking up its true purport: the cause reaches to the very limit of the real cultivation practiced across a vast, distant span of time, and the fruit reaches to the very limit of the real realization attained across that same vast span. A cause of this kind rises, vertically, above all seven kinds of skillful means, and encompasses, horizontally, the dharmas of all ten dharma-realms. The initial cultivation of this practice of the true mark is named the Buddha's cause; what is attained at the seat of enlightenment is named the Buddha's fruit. This can only be known by wisdom — it cannot be fully set out in words. Here I have only briefly indicated such a cause and fruit, to serve as the cardinal doctrine.

The function has three parts: first, showing it; second, sifting it out; third, its benefit. "Function" means power-in-action. The three kinds of twin wisdom of the provisional and the real are all power-in-action. Within power-in-action, one may further distinguish: the twin wisdom of one's own practice, whose illumination of principle is complete and all-pervading, is named "power"; the two kinds of twin wisdom for transforming others, whose discernment of capacities reaches every capacity, is named "function." Yet the twin wisdom of one's own practice is itself the twin wisdom for transforming others, and the twin wisdom for transforming others is itself the twin wisdom of one's own practice; illuminating principle is itself discerning capacities, and discerning capacities is itself illuminating principle.

It is like Prince Sarvārthasiddha drawing his ancestral bow to its full strength — this is named "power"; and his striking through seven iron drums, piercing an iron encircling mountain-range, and penetrating down through the earth to the water-wheel beneath it — this is named "function." The various teachings of skillful means have only a feeble power-and-function, like an ordinary person's bow and arrow. Why is this? Because in the past, beings received the twin wisdom for transforming others, whose illumination of principle did not reach everywhere, whose arising of faith was not deep, and whose removal of doubt was not complete. Now, beings receive the twin wisdom of one's own practice, reaching the very limit of the Buddha's own state, giving rise to faith in the dharma-realm, increasing the perfect and wondrous path, severing the fundamental delusion, and diminishing the birth-and-death of change. Not only do the two kinds of bodhisattva — those still in a born body, and those in a born body who have attained forbearance — both benefit; the two kinds of bodhisattva in the Dharma-body, and in the Dharma-body's final stage, also both benefit. That its transforming power is so vast, and its enriching benefit so deep and far-reaching — this is precisely the power-and-function of the present sūtra.

The teaching has three parts: first, the mark of whether capacities are fused or unfused; second, the mark of whether the course of transformation has a beginning and end or not; third, the mark of whether teacher and disciple are distant or near. "Teaching" names the sage's own words directed downward to beings; "mark" means differentiating what is the same and what differs. How is this differentiated? It is like the sun at its first rising, first shining upon the high mountains: those whose good roots are deeply planted respond to this with a sudden teaching. The sudden teaching was never meant for the lesser capacities in the first place; though the lesser capacities may be present in the assembly, they are as if deaf and mute, truly because the lesser cannot bear the great, and likewise because the great is kept apart from the lesser — this is like the Avataṃsaka. In terms of the dharma reaching its conditions, where the conditions gain a great benefit, this is named the sudden mark of the teaching; in terms of the sequence of its telling, this is named the mark of the flavor of milk drawn straight from the cow.

Next the sun shines into the dark valleys, where those of shallow practice and partial illumination gain only a gradual, partial understanding suited to their own portion — this is like the Tripiṭaka teaching. The Tripiṭaka teaching was never meant for the great capacities in the first place; though the great may be present in the assembly, they present themselves toddling and babbling like beginners, and the lesser capacities fail to recognize them — this is the lesser keeping the great apart, the great hidden within the lesser. In terms of the dharma reaching its conditions, this is named the gradual mark of the teaching; in terms of the sequence of its telling, this is named the mark of the flavor of cream.

Next the sun shines upon level ground, its reflection falling upon the ten thousand waters, following each vessel's shape whether round or square, moving with each wave whether stirring or still: he shows a single buddha-land, yet causes it to appear pure or defiled differently to different eyes; he manifests a single body, yet its size appears large or small differently to different eyes; with a single voice he teaches the Dharma, yet each kind of hearer understands it differently — some with fear, some with joy, some with disgust and the wish to leave, some with their doubts cut off, and his spiritual power appears differently to each as well. Hence some see purity, others defilement; some hear praise, others blame; some smell the fragrance of the campaka flower, others do not; some have flowers cling to their bodies, others do not; some have wisdom in full measure, others do not. This is like the Vimalakīrti and the Vaipulya sūtras. In terms of the dharma reaching its conditions, this is still the gradual teaching; in terms of the sequence of its telling, this is the mark of the flavor of fresh curdled butter.

There is, moreover, this further sense: grown persons receive the benefit of its light, while infants lose the clarity of their sight; those who travel by night hide themselves away, while those engaged in their tasks rise and accomplish them. Hence the text says: "It is only for the bodhisattvas that he speaks of this true matter, and not for our sake that he speaks this truly essential teaching." Though the three kinds of persons study together, the two vehicles alone grasp at realization — this is set out in full in the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. In terms of the dharma reaching its conditions, this, too, is still the gradual teaching; in terms of the sequence of its telling, this is named the mark of the flavor of ripened butter.

There is, moreover, this further sense: the sunlight shines everywhere equally, level over the high and the low alike; when measured against the gnomon's shadow, it neither shrinks nor overflows. Whether one merely bows one's head, or utters but a small sound, or is scattered and distracted, or performs only the slightest good — all alike come to complete the buddha path. He does not let anyone attain extinction alone, but brings every being to extinction through the Tathāgata's own extinction. This is set out in full in the present sūtra. In terms of the dharma reaching its conditions, this is named the gradual-and-perfect teaching; in terms of the sequence of its telling, this is the mark of the flavor of ghee. One should know that the Avataṃsaka simile accords in meaning with the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. The similes of the three kinds of sons, the three kinds of fields, the three kinds of horses, and the like all proceed first to the bodhisattvas, next reach the two vehicles, and last make ordinary beings and sages equal, as will be explained.

Question: Since the teaching has just been distinguished by the Five Flavors, why are the last three flavors all called "gradual" together? Answer: It is precisely in terms of the gradual that the Five Flavors can be clarified at all. Moreover: if the lesser capacities never hear the greater teaching at all, the greater teaching is wholly sudden; if the greater capacities make no use of the lesser teaching at all, the lesser teaching is wholly gradual; if the greater teaching is used to refute the lesser, this is the gradual and the sudden set out side by side; if the lesser teaching is carried along in clarifying the greater, this is the gradual and the sudden mutually assisting one another; if the lesser is gathered and brought back into the greater, this is the gradual and the sudden dissolved together into one. Hence the Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings says: "The two dharmas of the gradual and the sudden, the three paths and the four fruits, were not united." Now, at this time, they are united — this is precisely that meaning.

Question: What is meant by "mutually assisting"? Answer: When the lesser hears of the greater, and feels ashamed of the lesser while longing for the greater, this is the sudden assisting the lesser. When the Buddha commands Subhūti to pass the teaching on, and the great teaching benefits the bodhisattvas through him, this is the gradual assisting the sudden.

As differentiated above, this only clarifies, in terms of what is open and manifest, the marks of the gradual and the sudden across the Five Flavors. But if the indeterminate is discussed, the sense is not so simple. Though the sudden teaching was given on the high mountain, without the Buddha ever stirring from the seat of quiescent enlightenment, he also wandered and taught at the Deer Park; though he taught the Four Noble Truths of arising and ceasing, this did not obstruct his also teaching the truth of neither arising nor ceasing; though he taught the bodhisattvas the Buddha's own state, there were also present the wisdom and severance of the two vehicles; though the five ascetics realized the fruit, this did not prevent eighty thousand gods from attaining the forbearance of non-arising. One should know that it is precisely in the sudden that the gradual is present, and precisely in the gradual that the sudden is present. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "At times he taught the profound, at times he taught the shallow." Where a question was fitting, he answered by declining to answer; where declining was fitting, he answered by questioning. Within a single occasion, a single teaching, a single thought-moment, the indeterminate is present in full. This is not the same as the old view, which fixes each teaching rigidly to a single scripture-division. It is so within every one of the flavors alike — this is the open-and-manifest indeterminate.

The secret indeterminate has a different sense. The Tathāgata, with respect to the Dharma, has attained the most complete freedom: whether in wisdom, in capacity, in time, or in place, through the three mysteries and the four gates, there is no hindrance and no obstruction whatsoever. In this assembly he teaches the sudden, while in the ten directions he teaches the gradual, or teaches the indeterminate. Those in the assembly of the sudden do not hear what is taught in the ten directions; those in the ten directions do not hear what is taught in the assembly of the sudden. Or the ten directions may teach the sudden, or teach the indeterminate, while this assembly teaches the gradual. Each remains unaware of and unable to hear the other: on this side it is open, on that side it is secret. Or he may teach the sudden to one person, and teach the gradual, or the indeterminate, to many; or he may teach the gradual to one person, and teach the sudden to many. Each remains unaware of the other, and each is, in turn, open to itself and secret to the other. Or one assembly may fall silent while the ten directions teach; or the ten directions may fall silent while one assembly teaches. Or both may fall silent, or both may teach. Each remains unaware of the other, and each is, in turn, open and secret. And even so, this still does not exhaust the Tathāgata's own freedom with respect to the Dharma. It can only be known by wisdom, and cannot be fully accounted for in words. Though it is manifold indeed, it still does not go beyond the gradual, the sudden, the indeterminate, and the secret.

Now, the Lotus Sūtra is open and manifest, not secret; it is the gradual-gathered-into-the-sudden, not simply gradual-after-gradual; it is a uniting, not a non-uniting; it is ghee, not any of the other Four Flavors; it is determinate, not indeterminate. Distinguished in this way, this sūtra differs from all other sūtras.

Again, it differs in this further way: the other teachings simply benefit beings as suited to the occasion, without explaining the Tathāgata's own intention in setting forth his transforming teaching at all. This sūtra makes clear the very origin of the Buddha's establishing of his teaching: how, with skillful means, he first planted seeds of the sudden, the gradual, the indeterminate, and the open-and-secret in beings; how, in the interval, he tempered, nurtured, and ripened them through the sudden and gradual Five Flavors; and how he then liberated them, again, through the sudden and gradual Five Flavors. Liberating together, ripening together, planting seeds together — round after round without cease, with vast and mighty force, benefiting beings across the three times: this is set out in full in the "Faith and Understanding" chapter, and is where this sūtra differs from all other sūtras.

Again, all other sūtras alike say that it was beneath the bodhi tree that the teacher's real wisdom was first brought to completion, and that it was on rising from beneath the bodhi tree that he first began to bestow provisional wisdom. This present sūtra makes clear that the teacher's provisional and real wisdom had already, long, long before the bodhi tree, been brought to completion. Other sūtras hold that disciples of the two vehicles cannot enter the real wisdom, nor can they bestow provisional wisdom on others; this present sūtra makes clear that the disciples entered the real a very long time ago, and had already, before that, understood and practiced the provisional. Again, other sūtras do not even discuss what lay before the bodhi tree — the near, recent provisional and real wisdom shared between teacher and disciple — how much less the far, distant past! This present sūtra makes clear that, before the bodhi tree, the provisional and real wisdom of teacher and disciple already stretched back across a vast span of time — a span whose full number even a bodhisattva of the next-to-last stage cannot know the worlds of, how much less its number of dust-motes! The sūtra says: "What was never taught before, all of it shall now be heard" — and it is truly for this reason that it is praised so fervently and repeatedly. One should know that this sūtra differs from all other teachings.

Second, citing proof-texts: as in Mañjuśrī's verse answering the question, which says: "I saw the Buddha Candrasūryapradīpa; the original light-sign was just like this; by this I know that the present Buddha, too, wishes to teach the Lotus Sūtra." And it was not only for the sake of the twenty thousand koṭis of buddhas in that story alone — in the chapter of Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū and the five hundred buddhas, the buddhas of the three times are all said to have taught the "Lotus." The text says: "The present Buddha emits a ray of light, helping to bring forth the meaning of the true mark," and again: "The meaning of the true mark of all dharmas has already been taught for your sake," and again: "Honored by immeasurable multitudes, he teaches the seal of the true mark." This, too, shows that the present and the ancient buddhas alike take the true mark as the essence.

The text says: "The Buddha shall rain down the rain of the Dharma, satisfying those who seek the path" — this is precisely the rain of the Dharma that gathers the three vehicles back into the one, satisfying those who seek the cause of buddhahood, and indeed gathering and satisfying every being without exception. As for the rain of the Dharma that opens the near to reveal the distant, it satisfies those who seek the fruit of buddhahood. The text says: "Whoever among those seeking the three vehicles harbors doubt and regret, the Buddha shall remove and sever it for them, exhausting it entirely, leaving nothing behind," and again: "Long after teaching the Dharma, the buddhas must in the end speak the truth" — this is precisely the severing of doubts belonging to the three vehicles, the five vehicles, the seven skillful means, the nine dharma-realms, and the like, causing faith to arise in every case. This proves the function of the sūtra.

Again, the "Tathāgata's Supernatural Power" chapter says: "To state it in essence: whatever the Tathāgata possesses, all of it — the Tathāgata's every kind of unhindered spiritual power, the Tathāgata's every secret and essential treasury, the Tathāgata's every deeply profound matter — all of it is proclaimed and openly taught in this sūtra." "Whatever the Tathāgata possesses, all of it" means that all dharmas, both provisional and real, are gathered in without exception — this proves the name of the sūtra. "Every kind of unhindered spiritual power" — its inward function is named "unhindered," its outward function is named "spiritual power" — this proves the function. "Every secret and essential treasury" — what cannot be transmitted except to a fit vessel is "secret"; the correct essence is "essential"; containing much within itself while never accumulating as a fixed possession is named a "treasury" — this proves the essence. "Every deeply profound matter" — the true mark itself is named "profound"; the cause cultivated for the sake of the true mark is named "the profound cause"; the ultimate realization of the true mark is named "the profound fruit."

Again, the "Teacher of the Dharma" chapter says: "If one hears this sūtra, this is truly the good practice of the bodhisattva path" — this is the profound cause. "Whoever seeks the buddha path, if they hear even a single phrase of the Wondrous Dharma Lotus Flower Sūtra in my presence, or even give rise to a single thought-moment of rejoicing, I shall bestow upon all of them a prediction of buddhahood. Even hearing it for a mere instant, they at once attain the profound fruit of ultimate, complete awakening." This proves the cardinal doctrine.

The reason these two texts are cited is that the former, concerning a buddha of the past, has its matter already settled, and so raises the essentials briefly to resolve doubt, while the latter, spoken by the present Buddha as his teaching draws to a close, likewise raises the essentials briefly as a final entrustment. What lies between these two — the extended teaching given directly to the assembly at hand — is therefore not cited here as proof. Were it to be cited, "opening, showing, awakening to, and entering" would be exactly the text for it: "on account of the one great cause and condition" proves the name; "the Buddha's own knowledge and vision" proves the essence; "opening, showing, awakening to, and entering" proves the cardinal doctrine; "for the sake of causing sentient beings [to enter]" proves the function; "this differs from other sūtras" proves the teaching.

Again, the "Bhaiṣajyarāja" chapter raises ten similes in praise of the teaching; here I cite six of them: vast as the ocean, lofty as a mountain, full as the moon, illuminating as the sun, sovereign as the Brahmā king, and ultimate as the Buddha. The ocean has the virtue of the abyss: the ten thousand streams return to it, and all alike become one and the same in taste, salt. The Lotus is likewise: what the Buddha has realized and attained is that the ten thousand good deeds all return to the same place, all alike riding the one buddha-vehicle. Rivers, lakes, and streams have no virtue so vast as this, nor do the other sūtras — hence the Lotus is the vastest of all.

The king of mountains is the loftiest, being formed of the four treasures, and being the pure dwelling-place of the gods. The Lotus is likewise: standing at the summit of the teaching of the Four Flavors, free of the four kinds of slander, its opening, showing, awakening to, and entering are directed to a single, pure capacity and a single, pure condition, sharing one and the same taste of the path — for it is purely for bodhisattvas, having no disciples of the śrāvaka vehicle within it. The moon can wane and can wax, and the moon grows gradually full. The Lotus is likewise: for the provisional and the real are of the same essence within it, and it gathers the gradual back into the sudden.

The lamp, the torch, the stars, and the moon all dwell together with darkness — this is a simile for how the other sūtras preserve the fruit of the two vehicles' path, standing side by side with the lesser. But the sun is able to break through darkness entirely: the Lotus breaks through the phantom city, and clears away the thatched hut. And the sun's brilliance overwhelms the stars and the moon, causing them no longer to appear: the Lotus sweeps away the trace, and clears away skillful means.

A wheel-turning king is sovereign over the four continents; Śakra is sovereign over the thirty-three heavens; Great Brahmā is sovereign over the three realms. The other sūtras are sovereign, some over the conventional truth, some over the truth of the real, some over the truth of the middle — but this is only a sovereignty held separately over each, not a great, all-encompassing sovereignty. The present sūtra, in which the three truths are perfectly fused, attains the most complete sovereignty of all — comparable to the Great Brahmā king. The other sūtras draw sentient beings out of birth-and-death, as the Tripiṭaka teaching's five kinds of Buddha's disciples do, foremost among ordinary beings; or they draw sentient beings out beyond nirvāṇa itself, as bodhisattvas stand above those beyond further learning. The present sūtra draws sentient beings out and beyond even the bodhisattvas of the skillful-means teachings, bringing them at once to become Dharma-kings, foremost of all.

Citing these various similes makes clear that the mark of the teaching is the vastest of all. By this same pattern one may know that the function, the cardinal doctrine, the essence, and the name are likewise as vast as the ocean, and that its objects of contemplation, its wisdom, and even its benefits are likewise as vast as the ocean. The mark of the teaching is like the mountain, standing above the teachings of the Four Flavors — and the function, the cardinal doctrine, the essence, the name, the objects of contemplation, the wisdom, and the benefits are likewise so. The mark of the teaching wanes and waxes to full completion, like the moon — and the function, the cardinal doctrine, the essence, the name, the objects of contemplation, the wisdom, and the benefits are likewise so. The teaching breaks through the phantom city — and the function, the cardinal doctrine, the essence, the name, the objects of contemplation, the wisdom, and the benefits are likewise so. The mark of the teaching is sovereign — the rest are likewise so. The mark of the teaching is the king among kings — the rest are likewise so. It is not only by citing the text that the teaching is proven; every other sense, too, is thereby established.

Third, showing its arising in sequence: what gives rise is called "arising"; what is given rise to is called "coming forth." There is a sequence to what comes before and after, and the coarse and the fine do not conflict with one another.

Sengzhao says: "The name has no power to summon the thing; the thing has no reality that answers to the name. Without a name and without a thing — where, then, do name and thing stand?" This is simply the sense of the markless within the truth of ultimate meaning. But speaking in terms of conventional truth, without a name there is no way to make the dharma manifest — hence the name is explained first. The name names the dharma, and the dharma is itself the essence; by seeking out the name one comes to know the essence. But the essence cannot be grasped apart from the cardinal doctrine; once the essence is grasped, one's own practice is already made complete, and from the essence the function arises, guiding and benefiting sentient beings. And since the benefits bestowed are so many, one must further differentiate the mark of the teaching.

In the "Supernatural Power" chapter, in terms of the sequence of the teaching: all dharmas are, at root, all the Buddha's own dharma. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Every conventional truth, when it is seen in the Tathāgata, is itself the truth of ultimate meaning." Sentient beings, inverted in their views, take it that these are not the Buddha's own dharma — hence the chapter now clearly points this out and shows it, and so says "all dharmas."

Wishing to teach this dharma, he first startles and moves the assembly with his spiritual power — hence it is said "every kind of unhindered spiritual power." Having witnessed this transformation and unhindered display, they awaken and thirst for it eagerly, and so become fit to be taught; the teaching sets forth the true mark — hence it is said "the secret treasury." Receiving the teaching and cultivating practice accordingly, cause and fruit are thereby present — hence it is said "the deeply profound matter." Wishing then to differentiate how these four senses agree with and differ from other sūtras, the chapter next makes clear the mark of the teaching.

The "Introduction" chapter, in terms of the sequence of practice: at first, whether from a sūtra-scroll or from a good spiritual friend, one has something one hears or sees — this is hearing the name. Having heard it, one presses on to reason out and make the essence manifest; making the essence manifest requires practice, and practice is itself cause and fruit — this is the cardinal doctrine. Practice of itself clears away delusion, and also benefits sentient beings — this is the function. Differentiating what agrees and what differs is the mark of the teaching.

"Opening, showing, awakening to, and entering," too, follow the sequence of practice: the dharma is, at root, neither opened nor closed, yet it is now called the opening of the gate of skillful means — this is hearing the name. "Showing the mark of the real truth" is the essence. Turning from one's own confusion to awakening is the causal awakening. Awakening to the fruit on the basis of this cause is the cardinal doctrine. Because one has awakened, one enters deeply, and also causes others to enter — this is the function. Differentiating what agrees and what differs is the teaching. These five senses, drawn from the "Introduction" chapter, follow and support the sequence of practice.

Fourth, opening up and combining: the five sections together explain the one sūtra, differentiated in various ways to make it easier to understand. There are, in general, three kinds of opening-up-and-combining: the fivefold, the tenfold, and the simile.

First: Explaining the Name discusses both phenomena and principle in common; Clarifying the Essence discusses principle alone; the Cardinal Doctrine and the Function discuss only phenomena; Classifying the Teachings differentiates phenomena and principle. Explaining the Name discusses both teaching and practice in common; Clarifying the Essence is neither teaching nor practice; the Cardinal Doctrine and the Function are only practice; Classifying the Teachings is only teaching. Explaining the Name discusses cause and fruit in common; Clarifying the Essence is neither cause nor fruit; the Cardinal Doctrine concerns one's own cause and fruit, the Function teaches others' cause and fruit; Classifying the Teachings differentiates the dharmas set out above. Explaining the Name discusses one's own practice and transforming others in common; the Essence is neither one's own nor others'; the Cardinal Doctrine is one's own practice, the Function is transforming others; Classifying the Teachings differentiates one's own from others'. Explaining the Name discusses speaking and silence in common; the Essence is neither speaking nor silence; the Cardinal Doctrine is silence, the Function is speech; Classifying the Teachings differentiates them, as will be explained.

As for the tenfold scheme: Explaining the Name discusses the three tracks as a whole; the Essence, the Cardinal Doctrine, and the Function, opened up, correspond respectively to the three tracks; Classifying the Teachings differentiates the three tracks. Explaining the Name discusses the three paths as a whole; the Essence, the Cardinal Doctrine, and the Function, opened up, correspond to the three paths; Classifying the Teachings differentiates the three paths. And so on up to the tenth: Explaining the Name discusses the three virtues as a whole; the Essence, the Cardinal Doctrine, and the Function, opened up, correspond to the three virtues; Classifying the Teachings differentiates the three virtues, as will be explained.

As for the simile: it is as when the general name "the human body" is opened up, and it is found to consist of consciousness, life, and warmth, while, beyond this, the differentiation of bodies as noble or base, worthy or foolish, admits of various further gradations. The human body is a simile for the name; consciousness is a simile for the essence; life is a simile for the cardinal doctrine; warmth is a simile for the function; and the further differentiation is a simile for the mark of the teaching, as will be explained.

Fifth, resolving doubts. Question: If it is for the sake of the seed-pod that the flower blooms, then flower and fruit must always be present together — does this not fall into the view that the fruit is already present within the cause? Answer: That the fruit is present within the cause is the old physician's mistaken teaching, already refuted by the very first of the teachings — it does not even rise to the level of the coarse sense of the provisional and the real, how much less to the wondrous cause and wondrous fruit, the new physician's true-milk method!

Question: The flower is a metaphor for the provisional, and the provisional is the dharma of the small vehicle — then it should not be right to break through the thatched hut. But if the thatched hut is indeed broken through, how can the flower still serve as a metaphor for the provisional? Answer: The small vehicle is the provisional used to transform others, and so it must be broken through. What is meant here is the provisional of one's own practice — hence the flower still serves as its metaphor.

Question: Within the text, from the burning house to the physician's sons, there are in all seven similes, none of which mentions the lotus flower — why, then, is the lotus flower taken as the title? Answer: The seven similes are particular; the lotus flower is general. Raising the general gathers in the particular — hence it is placed at the head of the title.

Question: If all dharmas are the Buddha's own dharma, why sift out the provisional and take only the real as the essence? Answer: If the provisional is opened to reveal the real, then all dharmas alike are the essence; if the provisional is set aside to reveal the real, then it is as used above.

Question: Why does the cardinal doctrine make use of both cause and fruit together? Answer: Because the fruit is brought about by the cause, and the fruit is what the cause accomplishes. If one speaks in terms of what accomplishes, the cause is taken as the cardinal doctrine; if one speaks in terms of what is accomplished, the fruit is taken as the cardinal doctrine. These two senses are, at root, mutually completing one another, and neither can be taken alone. Moreover, both the trace-gate and origin-gate texts of the sūtra speak of cause and fruit together.

Question: In discussing the cardinal doctrine, the causes and fruits of transforming others are sifted out — yet in clarifying the function, both one's own and others' provisional and real are taken together. Answer: The cardinal doctrine discusses one's own practice, and so what belongs to others must be sifted out; the function is what benefits others, and so both are taken together. A further question: If the function is transforming others, should it not also dispense with the provisional and real of one's own practice? Answer: It is because one wishes both to benefit oneself and to benefit others.

By the same reasoning, should not the cardinal doctrine also be so — wishing for the cause and fruit of both one's own practice and transforming others, and therefore taking in what belongs to others as well? Answer: The cause and fruit of transforming others cannot bring one to the Buddha's own awakening — hence it is not taken. By the same reasoning, the provisional and real used for others, too, cannot bring others to the ultimate — should it, too, not be taken? Answer: What others need is precisely this benefit — hence it is taken.

Question: Both the cardinal doctrine and the function speak of wisdom and severance — how are they differentiated? Answer: For one's own practice, the virtue of wisdom is the cardinal doctrine and the virtue of severance is the function; but if one's own practice and transforming others are both considered, then wisdom and severance together are the cardinal doctrine, and wisdom and severance together, applied to transforming others, are the function.

Question: Why five sections — not four, and not six? Answer: Were they made four or six, doubt would likewise arise, and one would fall into an endless chain of questioning — this alone shows the number itself is not the point.

Question: Each sūtra has its own particular sense — how, then, can these five senses together explain every sūtra alike? Answer: If each sūtra were explained separately, one would grasp only the particular, and not the common. By discussing these five senses together now, one grasps the common without losing the particular.

Sixth, clarifying the contemplation of mind: from the marking of the section through to the resolving of doubts, all of it clarifies the contemplation of mind.

Mind is like an illusory flame — it has only a name, and is named "mind." Just when one says it exists, no form or substance is to be found; just when one says it does not exist, thoughts and considerations arise once more. Since it cannot be measured by thought as either existent or nonexistent, mind is therefore named "wondrous." The wondrous mind can serve as a track to follow, and so is called "dharma." Mind as dharma is neither cause nor fruit, yet, contemplated in accordance with principle, it is able to accomplish cause and fruit — this is named "lotus flower." Because this contemplation is accomplished through the one mind, and is also passed on to teach other minds, it is named "sūtra." Explaining the Name is now complete.

Mind, at root, has no name, and yet is not without a name either. The naming of mind neither arises nor ceases — mind is itself the true mark. The initial contemplation is the cause; the contemplation brought to completion is the fruit. Through the contemplation of mind, unwholesome thoughts fail to arise. The mind's associated mental factors and the dust of affliction — whether like the mind or different from it — are all thereby transformed and turned around. This is the contemplation of mind. The marking of the five sections is now complete.

Citing proof-texts for the contemplation of mind: the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra says: "One aggregate is called form; the remaining four aggregates are called name — mind is simply this 'name.'" The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "To be able to contemplate the nature of mind is named the supreme concentration; the supreme concentration is the concentration of ultimate meaning" — this proves that mind is the essence. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Whoever has a mind shall, without exception, attain complete awakening" — mind is the cardinal doctrine. The Sūtra of the Buddha's Final Bequest says: "Fix the mind in one place, and there is nothing that cannot be accomplished" — mind is the function. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra says: "The three realms have no separate dharma of their own — they are made by the one mind alone." Mind can make a hell, mind can make a heaven; mind can make an ordinary being, mind can make a worthy or a sage. Since discursive and reflective mind is the very root of language, and it is by mind that mind itself is differentiated — this proves that mind is the mark of the teaching.

The arising of the contemplation of mind in sequence: it is by mind that mind is contemplated; because there is a mind that contemplates, there is an object that is contemplated. Because the contemplation accords with its object, liberation is attained by way of mind. If the one mind attains liberation, this can cause every one of its mental factors likewise to attain liberation. The differentiation of the mind-king and its mental factors, of their arising together or arising separately, and so forth, is itself the mark of the teaching.

Opening up and combining, applied to the contemplation of mind: mind is the root of all dharmas — mind is itself the general. Spoken of separately, there are three kinds of mind: the mind of affliction, which is three of the twelve links; the mind of the fruit of suffering, which is seven of the links; and the mind of karma, which is two of the links. The mind of suffering is itself the Dharma-body, and is the essence of mind; the mind of affliction is itself prajñā, and is the cardinal doctrine of mind; the mind of karma is itself liberation, and is the function of mind — this is the opening of mind into three. Differentiating how mind arises through the twelve links of dependent origination, there are the graded distinctions of the six destinies; differentiating how mind ceases, there are the high and low ranks of the four kinds of sages — this is the mark of the teaching applied together with opening-up-and-combining.

Resolving doubts, applied to the contemplation of mind. Question: If the explanation in terms of phenomena already suffices, why trouble further with the contemplation of mind? Answer: The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra says: "For the faith-follower, the Buddha uses the tree as a simile; for the dharma-follower, he uses the body as a simile." It is likewise so here: for the person of the written word, the explanation is given in terms of phenomena; for the person who sits in meditation, an explanation is given through the contemplation of mind.

Again, the Śāstra makes a fourfold judgment in verse: "One who has wisdom but no broad learning does not know the true mark — like one with eyes in the midst of great darkness, who has nothing to see. One who has broad learning but no wisdom likewise does not know the true mark — like one with a lamp in the midst of great brightness, whose light illuminates nothing. One who has both broad learning and sharp wisdom — what such a person teaches ought to be received. One who has neither learning nor wisdom is called a human being in body only, an ox in understanding." Now, one should cultivate both learning and wisdom together, raising up doctrinal understanding and contemplative practice side by side — the Śata-śāstra gives the simile of the blind man and the lame man, and the Mouzi gives the principle of teaching and practice going together.

The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "It is like a poor and destitute man who, day and night, counts another's treasure, while he himself does not possess so much as half a coin" — this is the fault of one-sided learning. A passage below says: "Claiming attainment before one has attained it, claiming realization before one has realized it" — this is the fault of one-sided contemplation. Why is this? Sight and hearing, scattered and dispersed, are like a lamp in the wind, whose illumination of things is never complete. If one merely prizes what enters the ear and leaves the mouth, never bringing it to bear on curing the mind at all, one becomes, of oneself, someone who looks down on others, whose views only increase and whose faults only grow, grasping the blade and wounding oneself, dragged by one's own understanding toward an evil destiny — all this comes from failing to practice contemplation. And if a person of contemplation alone claims that mind, just as it is, is already the truth, and that he is already equal to the Buddha, never once seeking out sūtra or treatise, he falls into overweening pride — this is embracing a torch and burning oneself, dragged by one's own practice toward an evil destiny — all this comes from failing to practice learning.

If one wishes to escape destitution, one should diligently practice the three contemplations; if one wishes to escape overweening pride, one should listen and learn the six identities. That the marks of the world are eternally abiding is identity in principle. Among all the buddhas of the past, if one has heard even a single phrase, this is identity in name. Deep faith and rejoicing is identity in contemplative practice. The purification of the six sense-faculties is identity in resemblance. Abiding securely within real wisdom is identity in a portion of the truth realized. Only buddha together with buddha fully fathoms the true mark to its very limit — this is identity in the ultimate. Cultivating the mind through inward contemplation, one comes to possess the wealth of the Dharma; holding correct faith through outward learning, one is no longer troubled by overweening pride. With the eye of wisdom and clear learning both complete, the benefit is fully provided — how, then, could one fail to practice contemplation and understanding both?

Expounded by the Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai.

Seventh, reconciling with other terms. Question: Whatever the Buddha teaches, he teaches in dependence on the four siddhāntas. Do the five senses just explained accord with these? Answer: This very question shall now be addressed — first matching them against the five sections, and then explaining the four siddhāntas. The mundane siddhānta corresponds to Explaining the Name: the name covers the entire text, just as the mundane, too, stands foremost among the three remaining siddhāntas. The siddhānta of ultimate meaning corresponds to the Essence — this is the clearest of all the correspondences. The individual siddhānta corresponds to the Cardinal Doctrine: the cardinal doctrine discusses cause and fruit, and the individual siddhānta gives rise to good roots in each person — the sense is the same. The therapeutic siddhānta corresponds to the Function: the function breaks through doubt and obstruction, on a par with curing illness. As for differentiating among the siddhāntas — this corresponds to Classifying the Teachings; the mark of the teaching is explained further below.

Question: Why is the order not maintained between the two schemes? Answer: The siddhāntas are the Buddha's own wisdom; matched against sharp and dull capacities, they come to number four. A sharp-witted person, hearing the mundane, thereby understands the siddhānta of ultimate meaning — for such a person, matching only Explaining the Name and Clarifying the Essence already suffices. But if a dull-witted person has not yet awakened, he further requires the individual siddhānta to give rise to good, and the therapeutic siddhānta to break through evil, before he can finally enter the siddhānta of ultimate meaning — so that all four must be brought fully into use. The five sections of the profound meaning are intended to encompass both the sharp-witted and the dull together; the method of the four siddhāntas is devoted specifically to the dull-witted. The correspondence between them is the same, but their sequence differs.

Question: The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra is devoted specifically to explaining the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and does not touch upon the Lotus Sūtra at all — how, then, can its siddhāntas be pointed to as applying generally to these five senses? The Middle Treatise, on the other hand, extends generally to every sūtra — why is it not used instead? Answer: The Śāstra says: "The four siddhāntas encompass the eighty-four thousand teachings of the Dharma-treasury and the twelve divisions of the scriptures" — how, then, could the Lotus Sūtra fail to be included among them! As for the Middle Treatise, since it does extend generally, it is indeed fitting that it should be used as well — yet to cite the treatise in full would be broad but not deft. Here, then, I take up only the treatise's own title, and apply it to the five sections: the character "Middle" applies to the Essence, the character "Contemplation" applies to the Cardinal Doctrine, and the character "Treatise" applies to the Function.

The Yingluo Sūtra speaks of "the skillful means that refutes dharmas, the skillful means that establishes dharmas, and the skillful means that benefits sentient beings." The Middle Treatise contains investigation and refutation of attachments, and the establishing of the three jewels and the Four Noble Truths, by which the four fruits of the śramaṇa are attained — hence one knows that the character "Treatise" applies to the Function. That the principle contemplated in "the Middle" is inconceivable applies to "wondrous." That the object contemplated is the provisional and the real applies to "dharma." That the wisdom which contemplates is cause and fruit applies to "lotus flower." That contemplation is itself an exposition applies to "sūtra." The treatise's three characters, joined together with the four siddhāntas, applied to the five senses — the general application and its meaning both become clear. And if the treatise is used, further, to apply to other sūtras as well: taking up the treatise's famous verse, its first line applies to the Tripiṭaka teaching, its second line to the shared teaching, its third line to the distinct teaching, and its fourth line to the perfect teaching — the Lotus Sūtra, in turn, is what this fourth line applies to. And it is not only these two treatises that apply to these five sections — the five sections, in general, apply to every sūtra and treatise alike.

Next, the four siddhāntas are explained under ten headings: first, explaining the name; second, differentiating their marks; third, explaining how they were established; fourth, matching them against the truths; fifth, how they give rise to contemplation and to teaching; sixth, speaking and silence; seventh, whether they are attained and used; eighth, the provisional and the real; ninth, opening up to reveal; tenth, applying them through the sūtra.

Explaining the name: "siddhānta" is an Indian word. One view holds that it has no translation, on the same pattern as "sūtra," whose sense is too manifold to render in a single word; another view holds that it may be translated as "doctrine," "accomplishment," "seal," "reality," "attainment," or "the ultimate," and so on, without anyone knowing for certain which is correct. The "Chapter on the Factors of Awakening" in the Bodhisattva-bhūmi says: "All conditioned phenomena are impermanent; all conditioned phenomena are suffering; all dharmas are without self; nirvāṇa is quiescent extinction — these are named the four udānas." This is translated as "seal," and also as "doctrine." "Seal" means what is fixed and settled, incapable of being altered. That buddhas and bodhisattvas possess this dharma and, moreover, use it to transmit their teaching — this explains "seal" in terms of teaching. That the sūtra states, "What worldly wisdom teaches as existence or nonexistence are not two — this dharma is fixed and settled," and that it has been transmitted, passing down through the silent, quiescent sages of the past one after another — this explains "seal" in terms of practice. That the sūtra speaks of what is "surpassing," "springing forth," up to "transcending even the peak of existence," "the most supreme," "that to which the multitude together turn in reverence," "what the world does not possess" — this explains the sense of "doctrine." Yet that passage is explaining, clearly and definitively, the udāna itself — how, then, can various masters take "doctrine" and "seal" as translations for the four siddhāntas as a whole? Since this is already mistaken, the other translations, too, can hardly be trusted. Master Nanyue, following the precedent of "Mahāparinirvāṇa," where Sanskrit and Chinese are both retained together, holds that "siddh-" is kept as the Chinese sound and "-ānta" as the Sanskrit word — "siddh-" meaning "universal" and "-ānta" translated as "bestowal." The Buddha universally bestows these four dharmas upon sentient beings — hence it is called "siddhānta."

Second, differentiating their marks: the mundane is like a chariot — it is because wheel, spokes, axle, and rim are combined together that there is a chariot; there is no separate chariot apart from these. It is because the five aggregates are combined together that there is a person; there is no separate person apart from these. Yet if there were no person at all, the Buddha, who is one who speaks the truth, how could he say: "I see sentient beings in the six destinies"? One should therefore know that there is a person. Objection: "Person," then, exists only in terms of the mundane, and not in terms of ultimate meaning; only ultimate meaning can be real, and nothing else ought to be real. Answer: Each is real in its own way. Suchness and the dharma-nature and the like do not exist in terms of the mundane, but do exist in terms of ultimate meaning. "Person" and the like do not exist in terms of ultimate meaning, but do exist in terms of the mundane. That there are the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, with every name and mark held distinctly apart from every other — this is named the mundane.

Those outside the Buddha's teaching, confused about this mundane reality and failing to penetrate the marks of dharmas, either suppose the mundane world exists without any cause or condition at all, or suppose it exists through some false cause or condition. The great sage, according with what sentient beings wish and are glad to hear, differentiates and teaches for them the dharma of the mundane established through correct causes and conditions, causing them to attain right view regarding the world — this is named the mark of the mundane siddhānta.

Second, the individual siddhānta: the great sage observes each person's mind and teaches the Dharma accordingly, since each person's mind differs from every other's — within a single matter, one person may accept the teaching while another does not. For instance, because of mixed karma, one is born amid mixed circumstances in the world, and experiences mixed contact and mixed sensation. Yet there is also the Sūtra to Bhagunna, which teaches that there is no person who experiences contact, and no person who experiences sensation. This was taught for the sake of two people who doubted the next life, disbelieved in karmic retribution and merit, and had fallen into the extremes of annihilationism and eternalism — hence this teaching was given. Its intent, in the background, is to break through attachment, but its direct aim is to give rise to faith, to increase good roots, and to bestow wholesome dharmas. Hence it is named the individual siddhānta.

Third, the therapeutic siddhānta: a dharma taught as an antidote exists as such an antidote, but does not exist as an inherent nature. As an antidote: for one with much greed and desire, he teaches the contemplation of impurity; for one with much anger and hatred, he teaches the cultivation of loving-kindness; for one with much delusion, he teaches the contemplation of dependent origination. Treating these evil ailments, he teaches these dharma-medicines, bestowing them universally on sentient beings — hence it is named the mark of the therapeutic siddhānta.

Fourth, the siddhānta of ultimate meaning: this has two kinds — first, what cannot be spoken; second, what can be spoken. What cannot be spoken is precisely the true dharma attained by all buddhas, pratyekabuddhas, and arhats. A verse is cited: "Where discourse comes entirely to an end, and mental activity likewise ceases, there is neither arising nor ceasing — the dharma is like nirvāṇa." Where activity is spoken of, this is named the mundane; where the domain beyond activity is spoken of, this is named ultimate meaning. Second, as for what can be spoken: that all things are real, that all things are unreal, that all things are both real and unreal, that all things are neither real nor unreal — all of these alike are named the true mark of all dharmas. The Buddha, in sūtra after sūtra of this kind, teaches the mark of the siddhānta of ultimate meaning — and this, too, is our own school's sense of the four gates by which one enters the real. Hence the Middle Treatise says: "For the person advancing on the path, the four propositions are taught — like a swift horse who enters the correct road at the very sight of the shadow of the whip." But if, on hearing the four propositions, one's mind gives rise to grasping and attachment, all of it becomes mere idle speculation — how could this be ultimate meaning at all?

In my own view, here are fifteen further formulations to make these marks easier to understand. According with whatever is spoken, whether phenomenal or principial, and the hearer's being made glad by it — this is the mundane; the arising of a good mind not previously present — this is the individual; the removal of a newly-arisen evil — this is the therapeutic; attaining awakening to the sagely path — this is ultimate meaning. Speaking of both the provisional and the real together is the mundane. The Śāstra: "It is because of wheel, spokes, axle, and rim that there is a chariot; it is because the five aggregates are combined that there is a person." Speaking of the provisional person alone is the individual. The Śāstra: "At times it is said there is a person; at times it is said there is no person." Speaking of the real dharma alone is the therapeutic. The Śāstra: "As an antidote it exists; as an inherent nature it does not." Negating both the provisional and the real together is ultimate meaning. The Śāstra: "The path of speech is cut off, and mental activity, too, comes to an end," and so on.

That, through the combining of causes and conditions, there is the distinction between a good person and an evil person — this is the mundane. That good conditions combine to produce a good person — this is the individual. That evil conditions combine to produce an evil person — this is the therapeutic. That both good and evil are together negated — this is ultimate meaning. That the real dharmas of the five aggregates are held distinctly apart from one another — this is the mundane. That good five aggregates give rise to further good five aggregates — this is the individual. That good five aggregates are used to break through evil five aggregates — this is the therapeutic. That the five aggregates are taintless — this is ultimate meaning.

That good dharmas and evil dharmas differ — this is the mundane. That present good dharmas are said to give rise to later good dharmas — this is the individual. That present good dharmas are used to break through present evil dharmas — this is the therapeutic. That a dharma is neither good nor evil — this is ultimate meaning. Question: Since "person" encompasses both good and evil alike, how can it be said that giving rise to good is specifically the individual siddhānta? Answer: Good karma is what the person rides upon, causing his good to arise — hence it is called the individual siddhānta.

Question: If the individual siddhānta gives rise to good, it ought simply to give rise to good — why does it also sever evil? Answer: For the individual siddhānta, giving rise to good is the original, principal sense, and severing evil is the secondary, incidental sense; for the therapeutic siddhānta, treating and severing evil is the original, principal sense, and giving rise to good is the secondary, incidental sense, and so on. That the three time-periods are held distinctly apart — this is the mundane. The future is the individual. The present is the therapeutic. What is beyond the three time-periods is ultimate meaning.

That the four good roots and the distinction between the ordinary practitioner within and outside the path are held apart — this is the mundane. Warmth and summit are the individual. The general and specific applications of mindfulness are the therapeutic. The supreme worldly dharma, drawing near to the real, is ultimate meaning. That the path of vision and the path of cultivation differ — this is the mundane. The path of vision is the individual. The path of cultivation is the therapeutic. The path beyond further learning is ultimate meaning. What is neither in training nor beyond training is the mundane. Seeing through training is the individual. Cultivating through training is the therapeutic. Being beyond training is ultimate meaning.

Within the mundane siddhānta there is the individual; within the individual there is the therapeutic; within the therapeutic there is ultimate meaning; within ultimate meaning there are none of the other three siddhāntas, and so on. Within a single siddhānta, all four siddhāntas are present in general. The Śāstra says: "That the aggregates, sense-fields, and elements are held distinctly apart is the mundane; that causes and conditions combine to produce a person is the individual; that the correct mundane view breaks through the false mundane view is the therapeutic; that, hearing the correct mundane view, one attains awakening and enters the path is ultimate meaning."

That the individual siddhānta itself has all four: that mixed karmic causes and conditions produce mixed contact and mixed sensation is the mundane; that, within a single matter, one accepts the teaching is the individual; that one does not accept it is the therapeutic; that there is no person who experiences contact, and no person who experiences sensation, is ultimate meaning. That the therapeutic siddhānta itself has all four: that the Buddha's three kinds of dharma treat the illnesses of people's minds, medicine differing according to illness, is the mundane; that a person is treated is the individual; that it is matched against the illness is the therapeutic; that as an inherent nature it does not exist is ultimate meaning.

That the siddhānta of ultimate meaning itself has all four: that all things are real, and so on through the four propositions, is the mundane; that the dharma attained in the minds of buddhas and pratyekabuddhas is surely a principled good is the individual; that every discourse, every view, and every attachment can be refuted, that nothing else can penetrate through while ultimate meaning alone can penetrate through, is the therapeutic; that the path of speech is cut off, and the dharma is like nirvāṇa, is ultimate meaning.

Again, taken in general: that the four siddhāntas differ from one another is, in general, the mundane siddhānta; that all four universally transform sentient beings is, in general, the individual; that all four break through what is false is, in general, the therapeutic; that hearing any single one of them enables awakening to the path is, in general, ultimate meaning. Taken specifically: in terms of the truths of suffering and its arising, the mundane is clarified; in terms of the path truth as what treats, the individual is clarified; in terms of the path truth as what is treated, the therapeutic is clarified; in terms of the truth of cessation, ultimate meaning is clarified.

Question: If the explanation of these marks according to the Śāstra already suffices, what need is there for so many further explanations? Answer: The Śāstra says: "The four siddhāntas encompass the eighty-four thousand teachings of the Dharma-treasury" — what fault, then, is there in differentiating them, in my own view, through these fifteen further formulations?

Third, explaining how they were established: the four siddhāntas were taught by Nāgārjuna; the four "accordings" were taught by the Buddha in the Meditation Sūtra. Now, using the sūtra to establish the treatise's terms, the sense becomes still clearer. These are: according with desire and aspiration, according with what is fitting, according with the antidote, and according with ultimate meaning. "Desire and aspiration" takes its name from the cause; "the mundane" establishes its designation from the result. The Śāstra says: "All good and evil have desire as their root." The Vimalakīrti Sūtra says: "First he draws them in with the hook of desire, and only afterward causes them to enter the buddha path." The Buddha's sūtra raises up the mark of the cause being cultivated; the treatise clarifies the mark of the result being attained. Raising up "according with desire and aspiration" establishes the sense of the mundane siddhānta. "According with what is fitting" means according with whatever dharma is fitting for the practitioner. That the individual siddhānta is the teaching-master discerning capacities, examining what is and is not fitting — the Śāstra says: "Within a single matter, at times he permits it and at times he does not; where it is fitting to permit it, he permits it, and where it is not fitting, he does not permit it" — as when a goldsmith's son is taught to count the breath, while a washerman's son is taught the contemplation of impurity. The sūtra raises up what the practitioner himself can bear and finds fitting; the treatise clarifies the teaching-master's own discernment — together these establish the sense. As for the remaining two, the naming and sense in sūtra and treatise are the same, and so on.

Fourth, matching them against the truths: matched directly against a single set of the Four Noble Truths, it is as explained above. Matched broadly against the four kinds of the Four Noble Truths, each of the four kinds is matched, one by one, against the four siddhāntas. Matched again as a whole: the Four Noble Truths of arising-and-ceasing are matched against the mundane; the Four Noble Truths of non-arising are matched against the individual; the Four Noble Truths of immeasurability are matched against the therapeutic; the Four Noble Truths of the uncreated are matched against ultimate meaning.

Fifth, how they give rise to contemplation and to teaching. A principle as subtle and hidden as this cannot be made clear without contemplation; and contemplation that accords with principle cannot arise without the siddhāntas. When cultivating the contemplation of entering emptiness from the provisional, one first contemplates the dharma of correct causes and conditions. Since this dharma is held distinctly apart as inward or outward, near or distant, if one lacks earnest diligence and eager aspiration, what one practices will not be accomplished — one must, without fail, apply oneself diligently morning and night, with delight and without ever growing weary. This is precisely how the mundane siddhānta gives rise to the initial contemplation. If one wishes to contemplate entering emptiness from the provisional, one must recognize what is fitting for the individual. If contemplation itself is fitting, one uses the three factors of investigation, diligence, and joy to arouse it. If calming is fitting, one uses the three factors of tranquility, letting-go, and concentration to arouse it. Mindfulness pervades both, and this is "according with what is fitting" — the good mind is thereby brought forth. If there is the affliction of sinking or of restlessness, one must make use of the therapeutic siddhānta.

When the mind sinks, mindfulness, investigation, diligence, and joy treat it. When the mind is restless, mindfulness, letting-go, tranquility, and concentration treat it. If the individual siddhānta is used well, good roots grow strong; if the therapeutic siddhānta is used well, afflictions grow thin. Among the seven factors of awakening, relying on whichever one factor, one may suddenly feel as if something were lost — one then relies on and refines this very factor further, and true clarity is thereby brought forth, and ultimate meaning is seen. This is the use of the four siddhāntas to give rise to the contemplation of entering emptiness from the provisional, accomplishing the wisdom that knows all things and bringing forth the wisdom-eye. If one contemplates entering the provisional from emptiness, skillfully using the four siddhāntas, one attains the wisdom of the paths, and the dharma-eye likewise arises. If one cultivates the contemplation of the middle way as ultimate meaning, skillfully using the four siddhāntas, one attains the wisdom knowing all modes, and the buddha-eye likewise arises. If it is the threefold contemplation in a single mind, the skillful use of the siddhāntas is likewise so.

How the siddhāntas give rise to teaching: the Śāstra says: "The Buddha ever delights in silence, and does not delight in teaching the Dharma." The Vimalakīrti Sūtra likewise discusses closing the mouth. This present sūtra says: "It cannot be proclaimed in words." The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Arising-from-arising cannot be spoken, down to non-arising-from-non-arising, which cannot be spoken," and also says: "And yet it can be spoken — the dharma of the twelve links of dependent origination serves as the cause of arising." As for how it can indeed be spoken through the twelve links: from ignorance through to becoming, these twelve links come to constitute sentient beings, who possess four kinds of root-capacity able to move the Tathāgata to teach four kinds of dharma. If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links have a lower grade of desire and aspiration, able to give rise to worldly good within the three realms, breaking through delusion by the clumsy method, analyzing dharmas to enter emptiness — for beings possessing these causes and conditions, the Tathāgata turns the Dharma-wheel of the Four Noble Truths of arising-and-ceasing, and gives rise to the Tripiṭaka teaching. If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links have a middling grade of desire and aspiration, able to give rise to principled good within the three realms, breaking through delusion by the skillful method, embodying dharmas to enter emptiness — for beings possessing these causes and conditions, the Tathāgata turns the Dharma-wheel of the Four Noble Truths of non-arising, and gives rise to the shared teaching.

If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links have an upper grade of desire and aspiration, able to give rise to worldly good beyond the three realms, breaking through delusion stage by separate stage, entering the middle in sequence — for beings possessing these causes and conditions, the Tathāgata turns the Dharma-wheel of the Four Noble Truths of immeasurability, and gives rise to the distinct teaching. If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links have the very highest grade of desire and aspiration, able to give rise to principled good beyond the three realms, breaking through one delusion and thereby breaking through every delusion at once, entering the middle perfectly and suddenly — for beings possessing these causes and conditions, the Tathāgata turns the Dharma-wheel of the Four Noble Truths of the uncreated, and gives rise to the perfect teaching.

Moreover, within each single teaching, there are, in each case, twelve divisions of scripture, likewise given rise to through the siddhāntas. If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links delight in hearing of the mundane matter of correct causes and conditions, the Tathāgata directly teaches the provisional and real dharmas of the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields — this is named sūtra in the narrow sense. Or he uses verses of four, five, six, seven, eight, or nine syllables to restate in verse the mundane matter of the aggregates and sense-fields — this is named geya. Or he directly foretells sentient beings' future affairs, down to predicting that a dove or a sparrow will attain buddhahood — this is named vyākaraṇa. Or he gives a verse arising on its own, teaching the mundane matter of the aggregates and sense-fields — this is named gāthā. Or, without anyone asking, he speaks of mundane matters of his own accord — this is named udāna. Or, in terms of unwholesome mundane matters, he establishes a prohibition — this is named nidāna.

Or he uses a parable to teach mundane matters — this is named avadāna. Or he speaks of former mundane matters from the past — this is named itivṛttaka. Or he speaks of former matters of past births — this is named jātaka. Or he speaks of vast mundane matters — this is named vaipulya. Or he speaks of unprecedented mundane matters — this is named adbhuta-dharma. Or he answers questions raised about mundane matters — this is named upadeśa. This is the mundane siddhānta giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture for the sake of delighting sentient beings — at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, giving rise to sentient beings' good; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, breaking through sentient beings' evil; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, causing sentient beings to awaken. This is named the four siddhāntas giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the Tripiṭaka teaching.

If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links delight in hearing of emptiness, he directly teaches that the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements are, without exception, identical with emptiness. Or he uses verses of four through nine syllables to restate in verse that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are identical with emptiness. Or he says that whoever can penetrate that the aggregates, sense-fields, and elements are identical with emptiness shall at once receive a prediction of buddhahood. Or he speaks, arising on his own, that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are identical with emptiness. Or, without being asked, he speaks of his own accord that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are identical with emptiness. Or he speaks of knowing that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are identical with emptiness, in the form of a prohibition. Or he raises up such images as the illusory and the conjured to illustrate that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are identical with emptiness. Or he speaks of former ages and lands as identical with emptiness. Or he speaks of the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields of former births as identical with emptiness. Or he speaks of this very emptiness as vast. Or he speaks of the aggregates, sense-fields, and elements as identical with emptiness in a way never before heard. Or he answers questions raised about the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields as identical with emptiness. This is the mundane siddhānta according with desire and aspiration, giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the shared teaching — at times, through twelve kinds of teaching on emptiness, giving rise to good; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching on emptiness, breaking through evil; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching on emptiness, causing awakening to principle. This is the four siddhāntas giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the shared teaching.

If there are sentient beings constituted by the twelve links who delight in hearing of every mundane realm, every aggregate, element, and sense-field, and of the mundane realms that cannot be spoken, the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields that cannot be spoken, and the like, the Tathāgata directly teaches every correct mundane realm and its aggregates and sense-fields, every inverted mundane realm and its aggregates and sense-fields, every upright mundane realm and its aggregates and sense-fields, every overturned mundane realm and its aggregates and sense-fields, every defiled land, every pure land, every land of ordinary beings, every land of sages — such various mundane realms as these, mundane realms beyond speaking, various aggregates, sense-fields, and elements, aggregates, sense-fields, and elements beyond speaking, and so on. Or he composes verses of four through nine syllables to restate them, or verses arising on their own; or whoever can know the lands, aggregates, sense-fields, and elements at once receives a prediction of becoming a buddha; or whoever can know them thereby possesses the precepts in full; or he teaches through parable; or he speaks of former lands; or he speaks of former births; or he speaks of vast matters; or he speaks of matters never heard before; or he speaks through discursive argument. Such twelve kinds of teaching as these delight their desire and aspiration — at times giving rise to their good, at times breaking through their evil, at times causing them to awaken and enter. This is named the four siddhāntas giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the distinct teaching.

If the sentient beings constituted by the twelve links delight in hearing that the lands beyond speaking, and the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields beyond speaking, are all suchness and the true mark, he directly teaches that every land, both its dependent and its principal aspects, is itself the eternally quiescent light; that every aggregate and sense-field is itself bodhi, and that apart from this there is no bodhi; that a single color, a single fragrance, is nothing other than the middle way, and that apart from this there is no separate middle way; that eye, ear, nose, and tongue are all themselves the gate of quiescence, and that apart from this there is no separate gate of quiescence. Or he composes a verse to restate it, or a verse arising on its own, or speaks of his own accord without being asked, or whoever knows it receives a prediction, or whoever knows it possesses the precepts in full, or he teaches through parable, or points to former mundane realms, or points to former births, or speaks of vastness, or speaks of what has never been heard, or engages in discursive argument. This is the mundane siddhānta responding to desire and aspiration, giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the perfect teaching — at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, giving rise to wondrous good; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, suddenly breaking through evil; at times, through twelve kinds of teaching, suddenly gathering into principle. This is the four siddhāntas giving rise to the twelve divisions of scripture of the perfect teaching.

Moreover: using the two sets of four siddhāntas belonging to the distinct and perfect teachings together to teach the twelve divisions of scripture gives rise to the Avataṃsaka teaching. Using only a single set of the four siddhāntas to teach the twelve divisions of scripture gives rise to the Tripiṭaka teaching. Using four sets of the four siddhāntas together to teach the twelve divisions of scripture gives rise to the Vaipulya teaching. Using three sets of the four siddhāntas together to teach the twelve divisions of scripture gives rise to the Prajñā teaching. Using only a single set of the four siddhāntas to teach the twelve divisions of scripture gives rise to the Lotus teaching. The Śāstra says: "The four siddhāntas encompass the twelve divisions of scripture" — this is precisely its meaning.

The Bodhisattva-bhūmi says: "A bodhisattva enters the mātṛkā, and composes an unerring treatise, doing so for the sake of causing the correct Dharma to abide long through this concentration." A bodhisattva abiding in this concentration observes that, after the Buddha's passing from the world, sentient beings' capacities and conditions differ, and composes treatises to make the sūtras accessible. Vasubandhu used two sets of the four siddhāntas to compose the Daśabhūmika-śāstra, making the Avataṃsaka accessible. Śāriputra used the first set of the four siddhāntas to compose the Abhidharma, and the five hundred arhats composed the Mahāvibhāṣā, making the Tripiṭaka teaching accessible, showing the sense of attaining the path through existence. Harivarman likewise used the first set of the four siddhāntas to compose the Satyasiddhi-śāstra, making the Tripiṭaka teaching accessible, showing the sense of attaining the path through emptiness. Kātyāyana likewise used the first set of the four siddhāntas to compose the Piṭaka-śāstra, making the Tripiṭaka teaching accessible, showing the sense of attaining the path through both emptiness and existence.

Nāgārjuna used all four sets of the four siddhāntas to compose the Middle Treatise: three sets directly make the Mahāyāna accessible, and one set makes the Tripiṭaka teaching accessible in a secondary way. Maitreya used two sets of the four siddhāntas to compose the Bodhisattva-bhūmi, making the Avataṃsaka accessible. Asaṅga likewise used two sets of the four siddhāntas to compose the Compendium of the Mahāyāna. Nāgārjuna used three sets of the four siddhāntas to compose the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra, making the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra accessible. Vasubandhu used a single set of the four siddhāntas to make the Lotus Sūtra accessible. It is handed down among people that Vasubandhu and Nāgārjuna each composed a treatise on the Nirvāṇa Sūtra as well, not yet arrived in this land — the pattern may be inferred by the same example. Again, the various treatises of the five-power immortals, Śakra's treatise on goodness, and Great Brahmā's treatise on the departure from desire all likewise use the first set of the siddhāntas alone, in the sense of a skillful means offering benefit.

The Confucian Analects and Documents say: "Culture, conduct, sincerity, and trustworthiness; settling the rites and editing the Odes; bequeathing abundance to one's descendants" — this is the mundane. "A ruler employs men through virtue, and reward extends across the age" — this is the individual. "When they rebel, one campaigns against them; in punishment, no offense is too small to address" — this is the therapeutic. "Government resting in clarity and quiet, the Way according with Heaven's own mind, the sovereign of men without superior" — this is the worldly siddhānta of ultimate meaning.

Sixth, the arising of sagely speaking and sagely silence: the Sī Yì Fàntiān Suǒ Wèn Jīng says: "The Buddha told the bhikṣus: You should practice two things — either sagely speaking of the Dharma, or sagely silence." Sagely speaking is as differentiated above. As for sagely silence: the four kinds of the Four Noble Truths are, every one of them, dharmas realized by the sages of the three vehicles, not known by ordinary people below them, and therefore cannot be spoken; were one to try to speak of them regardless, it would be like setting up a candle for a blind man — of what benefit could this be to one without sight? Hence they cannot be spoken, and this is named sagely silence. Where the Avataṃsaka Sūtra counts worlds as inexpressible, inexpressible, this clarifies that principle, at its very limit, is inexpressible, inexpressible. In terms of the two sets of the Four Noble Truths of immeasurability and of the uncreated — the dharma of "non-arising-arising" and "non-arising-non-arising" — this clarifies what cannot be spoken. That it cannot be spoken is named sagely silence. As for the Tripiṭaka teaching: the bhikṣu Ājñāta-Kauṇḍinya, the very first to attain the true knowledge and vision, was quiescent, without sound or word. Śāriputra says: "I have heard that, within liberation, there is nothing that can be spoken." This, in terms of the Four Noble Truths of arising-and-ceasing, is the dharma of "arising-arising," and clarifies what cannot be spoken. That it cannot be spoken is named sagely silence.

Vimalakīrti closes his mouth; in the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra, the bodhisattva Wordless cannot be known by wisdom, cannot be discerned by consciousness — the path of speech is cut off, mental activity too comes to an end, there is neither arising nor ceasing, and the dharma is like nirvāṇa. This, in terms of all four sets of the Four Noble Truths together, clarifies what cannot be spoken. That it cannot be spoken is named sagely silence. As for the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, every single phrase is, without exception, unattainable. What is unattainable cannot be attained by the body, cannot be attained by the mind, cannot be attained by the mouth. This, in terms of three sets of the Four Noble Truths — the dharmas of arising, non-arising, non-arising-arising, and non-arising-non-arising — clarifies what is unattainable. Because it is unattainable, it cannot be spoken. That it cannot be spoken is named sagely silence. This present sūtra makes clear: "Stop, stop — there is no need to speak; my Dharma is wondrous and hard to conceive," and: "This Dharma cannot be shown; the marks of speech are themselves quiescent and extinct" — it cannot be proclaimed in words, and is not something that thought and discrimination can understand. This, in terms of the Four Noble Truths of the uncreated, the dharma of non-arising-non-arising, clarifies what cannot be spoken. Because it cannot be spoken, it is named sagely silence.

Question: Sagely speaking of the Dharma is for the sake of the joy of others; sagely silence is named for the sake of one's own joy. If it is silence, does it then fail to benefit others? Answer: Though it is directly for one's own joy, it also benefits others in a secondary way. If a person is weary of the written word and does not delight in speech, then, for the sake of delighting this very person, there is sagely silence. As in the Vinaya: for the sake of bestowing merit on others by receiving an offering, the sage remains silent. As with the Elder Pārśva, confronting and refuting Aśvaghoṣa, he therefore remained silent. As when the Buddha sat cross-legged in correct mindfulness, body and mind unmoving, causing immeasurable numbers of people to attain awakening to the traces of the path — he therefore remained silent. All of this is the four siddhāntas giving rise to this very silence, benefiting every being — how, then, could it be said to be without benefit!

Question: The Śāstra says: "The four siddhāntas encompass the eighty-four thousand teachings of the Dharma-treasury" — what is the mark of this? Answer: The Bhadrakalpika Sūtra says: "From the Buddha's first arousing of the resolve down to the distribution of his relics, there are, in all, three hundred fifty dharma-gates, and each single gate has its own six pāramitās, amounting together to two thousand one hundred pāramitās. Using these pāramitās to counter and break through the four divisions of affliction, they amount together to eight thousand four hundred. Multiplying this by ten yields, in all, eighty-four thousand." If this is framed as the name "eighty-four thousand teachings of the Dharma-treasury," it is encompassed by the mundane siddhānta. If framed as "eighty-four thousand gates of the dust of affliction," it is encompassed by the individual siddhānta; "eighty-four thousand samādhis" and "eighty-four thousand dhāraṇī-gates" are likewise so. If framed as "eighty-four thousand antidotes" or "eighty-four thousand gates of emptiness," it is encompassed by the therapeutic siddhānta. If framed as "eighty-four thousand pāramitās" or "eighty-four thousand crossings beyond limit," it is encompassed by the siddhānta of ultimate meaning.

There is also another account: the buddha-ground has three hundred fifty dharma-gates, and each gate has ten wholesome deeds, amounting together to three thousand five hundred wholesome deeds. Treating the four divisions of affliction, this becomes fourteen thousand; treating, further, the six sense-faculties, this becomes eighty-four thousand.

Seventh, clarifying attainment and use: the four siddhāntas are attained in their entirety, to the utmost degree, and used with subtle skill by the Tathāgata alone. From the stages below him downward, attainment and use differ, and there are, in general, four possibilities: neither attaining nor using; attaining but not using; not attaining yet using; and both attaining and using. Ordinary beings and non-Buddhists, caught in the flow of suffering and its arising, cannot even know the very names of the four siddhāntas — how, then, could their attainment even be discussed? Since they do not attain them at all, how could they possibly use them! As for the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka teaching who diligently practice for themselves — knowing suffering, severing its arising, cultivating the path, realizing cessation, and entering the real — this, too, may be named attainment. But since they do not save sentient beings, they cannot use them.

Were they to try to use them regardless, they would misjudge the capacity of their hearer and fail to fit it — hence Vimalakīrti rebukes Pūrṇamaitrāyaṇīputra, saying: "Not knowing a person's own root-capacity, one ought not to teach the Dharma for him — do not place impure food into a jeweled vessel." As when Pūrṇa spent ninety days converting non-Buddhists, only to be mocked and ridiculed in return! Yet when Mañjuśrī went briefly in his place, both teacher and disciples all submitted. This shows a failure to know their desire and aspiration — an inability to use the mundane siddhānta. As when Śāriputra taught two disciples, and their good roots failed to arise, giving rise instead to further false doubt — this is an inability to use the individual siddhānta. As when five hundred arhats taught the Four Noble Truths to Kāṣṭhila, and it was of no benefit at all, yet when the Buddha taught him the contemplation of impurity, he at once broke through his evil — this is an inability to use the therapeutic siddhānta. As when Śāriputra could not save Puṇyavardhana — the great physician could not treat him, and lesser physicians folded their hands, and five hundred of them together could not save him, yet when the Buddha saved him, he at once attained arhatship — this is an inability to use the siddhānta of ultimate meaning. Pratyekabuddhas are likewise so. This is named attaining but not using.

Next, clarifying the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching: though they know suffering, its arising, and the cultivation of the path, they only suppress their bound afflictions and have not yet realized cessation, and so attain only three of the siddhāntas. Though they have not attained the one siddhānta of ultimate meaning, they are nonetheless able to use all four. Why is this? It is like an ailing guide who is nonetheless fully equipped with a boat and raft: though he himself remains on this shore, he ferries others across to the far shore, ever taking the transformation of others as his own task, saving others before he himself is saved — this is named not attaining yet using. The two vehicles of the shared teaching, though their embodying-dharmas gate is skillful, attain but do not use, the same as the Tripiṭaka teaching. Bodhisattvas of the shared teaching, from the initial mind up through the sixth ground, both attain and use, though their use is not yet skillful; from the seventh ground, entering the provisional, their use becomes excellent. As for the ten abodes of the distinct teaching, they attain only the two siddhānta-sets belonging to the analytical and embodying-dharmas gates, but are not yet able to use them; only at the ten practices are they finally able to use them; at the ten dedications, advancing further, they attain the siddhāntas in resemblance, and are likewise able to use them in resemblance; upon ascending to the grounds, they attain them in a portion of the truth, and likewise use them in a portion of the truth. The perfect teaching's disciples of the five ranks are not yet able to attain or use them; at the purification of the six sense-faculties, they attain and use them in resemblance; at the initial abiding, they attain and use them in a portion of the truth; only the Buddha attains them and uses them to the very ultimate.

Eighth, clarifying the provisional and real aspects of the four siddhāntas: that each of the four sets of the Four Noble Truths differentiates its own four siddhāntas is only the general account. The Śāstra says: "Most sūtras speak mostly of the three lower siddhāntas, and do not speak of ultimate meaning" — this refers to the Tripiṭaka teaching. The Tripiṭaka teaching speaks mostly of the marks of arising-and-ceasing through causes and conditions, extinguishing form to grasp emptiness, and speaks little of ultimate meaning. As for the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching, only three siddhāntas are clarified in terms of the four; as for the Buddha himself, all four are fully present. Even so, this remains, in the end, the clumsy method, a provisional accommodation to lesser capacities. As for the shared teaching's Four Noble Truths clarifying the four siddhāntas, since embodying dharmas is itself the real, its gate is skillful. The Śāstra says: "Wishing now to teach the siddhānta of ultimate meaning, I therefore teach the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra." As for both buddhas and bodhisattvas, all four are attained; yet since it is in terms of the expedient truth of the real that the siddhāntas are clarified, this still belongs to the provisional. As for the distinct teaching's Four Noble Truths clarifying the four siddhāntas, in terms of the middle way, this sense is indeed deep; and yet it remains held apart, stage by separate stage, its particular marks not yet fused together — the path of its teaching is provisional, and this, therefore, is not wondrous. Now, the perfect teaching's Four Noble Truths clarify the four siddhāntas with marks perfectly fused together — this is the most real of all teachings. Hence its four siddhāntas are real, are wondrous.

If this distinction of provisional and real is applied in terms of the Five-Flavor teachings: the milk teaching has four provisional and four real siddhāntas; the cream teaching has only four provisional; the fresh-curdled-butter teaching has twelve provisional and four real; the ripened-butter teaching has eight provisional and four real; the Nirvāṇa Sūtra has twelve provisional and four real; and the Lotus, alone, has all four kinds entirely real, and so on.

Question: Though bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching attain the four siddhāntas, measured against the shared teaching they only amount to three siddhāntas. What, then, of the shared teaching measured against the distinct teaching? Answer: There are two senses here. Taken on its own terms, the shared teaching attains all four; measured against the distinct teaching, it attains only three. Question: Is the distinct teaching, measured against the perfect, likewise so? Answer: It is not the same case, since the realization-path of the perfect and the distinct teachings is the same.

A further objection: The Tripiṭaka and shared teachings both realize the truth of the real — should they not, then, both equally attain all four? Answer: Though the Tripiṭaka teaching's truth of the real is the same as the shared teaching's, its bodhisattvas do not sever affliction, and so it lacks one; the perfect and distinct teachings both sever affliction, and so both attain all four. Again, a further objection: If the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings, though nominally four, are really only three and thus provisional, then the distinct teaching, being four and not three, ought not to be provisional either? Answer: For the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings, both the path of the teaching and the path of realization are provisional, and so they have only three, not four. For the distinct teaching, the path of the teaching is provisional while the path of realization is real — followed from realization, it has four; followed from teaching, it is provisional. Again, a further objection: If the path of realization has four, should not the path of teaching then have three? Answer: If one takes what lies before the grounds as the path of teaching, the matter should indeed be as the question supposes, and so on.

Ninth, opening the provisional to reveal the real: there is not a single dharma among all dharmas that is not wondrous — a single color, a single fragrance, none of it other than the middle way; it is only that sentient beings' own feelings hold them apart from the wondrous. The great compassion accords with beings and does not contend against the world — hence the various differences between the provisional and the real are clarified. Thus the Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings says: "For more than forty years, the three vehicles' dharmas, the four fruits, and the two paths were not united," and: "Now I open the gate of skillful means and show the mark of the real truth," and: "It is solely on account of the one great cause and condition that I speak only of the unsurpassed path," and: "Opening the Buddha's own knowledge and vision, I cause everyone, without exception, to be able to enter the ultimate true mark." The removal and extinguishing of the phantom city is precisely the resolving of the coarse; the arrival of everyone together at the place of treasure is precisely the entering of the wondrous.

As for the milk teaching's four wondrous siddhāntas, they are no different from the wondrous of the present sūtra. It is only its four provisional siddhāntas that are resolved and brought into the wondrous of the present sūtra. Hence the text says: "The bodhisattvas, hearing this Dharma, have had the net of their doubt entirely removed" — this is precisely this sense. Resolving the cream teaching's four provisional siddhāntas, the fresh-curdled-butter teaching's twelve provisional siddhāntas, and the ripened-butter teaching's eight provisional siddhāntas — all of these are able to enter the wondrous. Hence the text says: "The twelve hundred arhats shall all, likewise, become buddhas," and again: "Resolving and making plain the dharma of the śrāvakas, this is the king of all sūtras; having heard it and reflected upon it with care, one draws near to the unsurpassed path." What the Vaipulya and Prajñā teachings themselves discuss as wondrous is likewise no different from the wondrous of the present sūtra. The meaning of opening the provisional to reveal the real lies precisely here.

Question: Is it the case that, in resolving the various provisional siddhāntas, they all alike become the wondrous siddhānta of ultimate meaning? Answer: Resolving the provisional into the wondrous proceeds with complete freedom and without obstruction. Suppose, then, that the wondrous siddhānta of ultimate meaning is not held apart from the other three, and the three are not held apart from the one — the one and the three move freely together. Let me, for now, give a single account of this. If the various provisional mundane siddhāntas are resolved into the wondrous mundane siddhānta, this corresponds to the wondrous of Explaining the Name — this, too, is the names of the nine dharma-realms' natures and marks and the ten suchnesses alike becoming the nature and marks of the buddha-dharma-realm, gathering in every name at once. It is also like recognizing an inborn kinship, settling that father and son are indeed father and son, and bestowing on him, once again, the name "child," saying: "I am truly your father, and you are truly my son." If the various provisional siddhāntas of ultimate meaning are resolved into the wondrous siddhānta of ultimate meaning, this corresponds to the wondrous of the sūtra's essence — this is precisely "opening the Buddha's own knowledge and vision, showing the mark of the real truth," leading everyone to the place of treasure.

If the various provisional individual siddhāntas are resolved into the wondrous individual siddhānta, this corresponds to the wondrous of the cardinal doctrine — as this present sūtra says: "He bestows on each of his sons alike the one great cart." If the various provisional therapeutic siddhāntas are resolved and brought into the wondrous therapeutic siddhānta, this corresponds to the wondrous of the function — the text says: "With this precious pearl, he exchanges it for whatever is needed," and again: "This fine medicine is now left here — take it and use it, and have no fear that you will not recover." The sūtra says: "Directly, without deviation, he casts aside skillful means, and speaks only of the unsurpassed path" — stirring their attachments and giving rise to doubt, the Buddha shall remove and sever it for them, exhausting it entirely, leaving nothing behind. And again: "I have already attained the extinction of all outflows, and hearing this, my grief and vexation, too, are removed." As for differentiating the various provisional four siddhāntas' agreements and differences, once resolved and brought into this sūtra's own wondrous siddhānta, their agreements and differences are no longer seen at all — "what was never taught before, all of it shall now be heard" is precisely this wondrousness beyond agreement and difference, corresponding to the wondrous of the mark of the teaching. This is exactly as the text says: "Though he shows various paths, in truth it is all for the sake of the one vehicle" — though the various agreements and differences are differentiated, it is in order to reveal what is beyond agreement and difference, teaching a dharma beyond all differentiation.

Tenth, applying them through the sūtra. Question: Since the four siddhāntas are now used to explicate this sūtra, what passage of this sūtra itself makes the four siddhāntas clear? Answer: This sense is present everywhere throughout the text, and cannot be cited exhaustively. Let me briefly cite two passages here, one from the trace gate and one from the origin gate. The "Skillful Means" chapter says: "Knowing sentient beings' every activity, what their deep minds are thinking of, the karma they have habituated in the past, their desires, natures, and diligent effort, and the sharpness or dullness of their faculties, he teaches with skillful means suited to each, through various causes and conditions, parables, and forms of speech." How could this not be precisely the language of the four siddhāntas? "Desires" is precisely desire and aspiration, the mundane siddhānta; "natures" is the nature of wisdom, the individual siddhānta; "diligent effort" is precisely the breaking through of evil, the therapeutic siddhānta; and the "sharpness or dullness of faculties" is precisely how two different people come to different awakenings, which is precisely the siddhānta of ultimate meaning.

Again, the "Lifespan" chapter says: "The Tathāgata sees clearly, and is never mistaken. Because sentient beings have various natures, various desires, various activities, and various discriminating thoughts, wishing to cause various good roots to arise in them, he teaches through various causes and conditions, parables, and forms of speech, teaching the Dharma in various ways — and the buddha-work he performs has never once ceased." "Various natures" is precisely the individual; "various desires" is precisely the mundane; "various activities" is precisely the therapeutic; and "various discriminating thoughts" is precisely the reasoning that turns away from false discriminating thought and comes to see ultimate meaning. In these two passages, the explicit text and the four senses are both fully present, and both speak of teaching the Dharma for the sake of sentient beings — how could this not be clear proof that the four siddhāntas are what establish the teaching!

Second, the detailed exposition of the five sections in turn. First, Explaining the Name has four parts: first, judging the common and the particular; second, fixing the order of "wondrous" and "dharma"; third, presenting the interpretations of earlier masters; fourth, giving the correct interpretation. "Wondrous Dharma Lotus Flower" is a name differing from every other scripture — this is the particular; that it is alike called a "sūtra" — this is the common. The establishing of these two names is, in general, understood in terms of three senses: teaching, practice, and principle. Since the teaching follows from its occasion, the teaching is particular; since it follows from being spoken at all, the teaching is common. Since practice follows from what is able to accord with principle, practice is particular; since it follows from what is accorded with, practice is common. Since principle follows from the name, it is particular; since the name follows from principle, it is common. This is the brief statement, now complete.

Now, the teaching, at root, responds to capacities, and capacities and what suits them differ from one another, and so scripture after scripture differs from every other. Yet the golden mouth's Sanskrit voice is, in common, alike the Buddha's own speech. Hence there are these two names, the common and the particular. In terms of practice: the true Dharma-jewel of nirvāṇa is entered by sentient beings through various gates. As when five hundred bhikṣus each spoke of the cause of their own awakening in the body, and the Buddha said: none of it was other than correct teaching; or as when thirty-two bodhisattvas each entered the gate of non-duality, and Mañjuśrī praised each as good. The Śāstra makes clear that mindfulness of breathing is, in every case, the Mahāyāna, since it, too, is unattainable as any fixed thing. One should know that, followed from practice, they are particular; but what is accorded with is the same. Guṇavarman says: "The various treatises each have their own different starting-points, yet the principle of cultivating practice is not two," and so on. In terms of principle: principle itself is not two, though its names are not one. The Prajñāpāramitā-śāstra says: "Prajñā is a single dharma, yet the Buddha speaks of it under various names." The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Liberation, too, is likewise so" — having many names, just as Śakra, lord of the gods, has a thousand different names. Since the names differ, they are particular; since the principle is one, they are common.

Now, calling this present sūtra "the wondrous dharma" and, alike, "a sūtra" is precisely the common and particular of the teaching. "He bestows on each of his sons alike the one great cart," riding this jeweled vehicle directly to the seat of enlightenment, is precisely the common and particular of practice. Speaking, variously, of the true mark, the Buddha's own knowledge and vision, the great vehicle's own household estate, the one real matter, the place of treasure, the pearl sewn in the robe, and equal, great wisdom — this is precisely the common and particular of principle. It is in terms of these three senses that these two names are established.

Question: The masters who establish teachings differ from one another, and the teachings they set forth likewise differ — how, then, can it be said that the golden mouth's Sanskrit voice is, in common, named the common aspect of the teaching? Answer: There are two senses here — first, within a single stage; second, spanning across stages. Within a single stage: as when a Tripiṭaka-teaching buddha responds to various conditions and teaches various doctrines, since the conditions differ, the teaching is particular, but since the master is one, the teaching is common. In dependence on this teaching and this practice, there is what is able to accord and what is accorded with — various names and various principles, though principle itself has no variety. The sūtra says: "He at once takes off his necklace and puts on a coarse and grimy robe, saying: 'Work diligently, and do not go elsewhere again — I shall, moreover, raise your wages, and give you oil to anoint your feet.'" This is spoken with body, speech, practice, and principle all divided evenly together, and admits of no other interpretation. The shared, distinct, and perfect teachings, and teaching, practice, and principle within each single stage, are likewise so. This sense is easy to understand, though the underlying principle is hard to fuse together fully, and so on.

Second, spanning across stages: where, indeed, are there separately four masters of the Four Teachings, each with his own body, each with his own mouth, each with his own speech? He only conceals his body adorned with immeasurable merit and virtue, manifesting instead as a sixteen-foot form of purple-gold radiance; he does not speak of the sweet, mild flavor of the eternal and blissful, but speaks instead of the salty, sour, impermanent, and pungent; casting aside a king's own robes and ornaments, he takes up a vessel for carrying dung — this is called skillful means. Yet if the gate of skillful means is opened and the mark of the real truth is shown, then this very body is the perfect, eternal body, and this very dharma is the perfect dharma. This very practice, this very principle — all of it is precisely the real. Thus, in common, it is a single voice's teaching, and yet lesser and greater capacities differ within it. What is able to accord with it varies in length; what is accorded with is only one. Carried to its limit, its various names are, in name, one and the same ultimate; being only the one ultimate, it answers to every one of its many names. Discoursing on the common and particular of teaching, practice, and principle in this way — their marks are hard to understand, though their principle is easy to make clear, and so on.

Second, fixing the order of "wondrous" and "dharma": if one follows what is convenient for the sense, one ought first to clarify the dharma, and only afterward discuss its wondrousness — as the text below says, "My dharma is wondrous and hard to conceive." But if one follows what is convenient for the name, one ought to put "wondrous" first and "dharma" second — just as, wishing to praise someone, one calls him a "good person": if there were truly no person to speak of at all, what would there be to call good? One must, of necessity, put the person first and the praise second. Now, the title follows what is convenient for the name, and so puts "wondrous" before "dharma"; the exposition follows what is convenient for the sense, and so puts "dharma" before "wondrous." Though the order differs in each case, the two do not actually conflict with one another, and so on.

Third, presenting the interpretations of earlier masters. There are very many earlier interpretations; here I present, in brief, four schools. Daochang Guan says: "Responding to beings, he teaches three vehicles; the three are not the true reality, and in the end all return to the one, which is called unsurpassed — and it is because it is unsurpassed that it is wondrous." He cites the sūtra: "This vehicle is subtle and wondrous, purest and foremost — among all things in the world, there is nothing that surpasses it." And again: "Lodging its words beyond all images, its essence utterly transcends the fine and the coarse alike — hence it is called wondrous." He also cites the sūtra: "This dharma cannot be shown; the marks of speech are themselves quiescent and extinct."

Ji of Kuaiji says: "'Wondrous' is a term expressing sameness. In the past, the three causes proceeded toward different ends, and the three fruits were distinctly different from one another — hence they could not be called wondrous." A northern master says: "Principle itself is not threefold; the three teachings are the coarse, and the purport of what is not threefold is the wondrous." This sense is the same as Ji's, though its wording is weaker.

Guangzhai's Yun says: "The wondrous is the dharma of the one vehicle's cause and fruit. Set against the past teachings, whose cause and fruit each have their own three coarse aspects, the present teaching's cause and fruit each have their own three wondrous aspects. As for the past cause and fruit being coarse: the essence of the cause is narrow, the stage of the cause is low, and the function of the cause is short. Śrāvakas cultivate the Four Noble Truths, pratyekabuddhas cultivate the twelve links of dependent origination, and bodhisattvas cultivate the six pāramitās — the three causes are different from one another, and cannot be gathered together into one, and so the essence of the cause is narrow. In the past, practice within the ninth unobstructed path was named 'bodhisattva' — this suppresses the path of affliction without severing it, and has not yet gone beyond the three realms, and so the stage of the cause is called low. The ninth unobstructed path only suppresses the four abodes of affliction, and does not suppress ignorance, and so its function is called short. These are the three senses in which the past cause is coarse.

"As for the past fruit being coarse: its essence is narrow, its stage is low, and its function is short. Whether with remainder or without remainder, the full array of virtues is not complete, and so its essence is called narrow. Its stage remains at the phantom city, not yet going beyond the birth-and-death of change, and so its stage is called low. The ninth liberation only removes the four abodes of affliction, and does not break through ignorance; moreover, its eighty-year lifespan does not, looking backward, exceed the sands of the Ganges in number, nor does it, looking forward, double any higher number — hence its function is called short. These are the three senses in which the past fruit is coarse.

"As for the present cause's essence being broad, its stage being high, and its function being long: gathering the three vehicles into one, drawing together the ten thousand good deeds, its essence is called broad. Not confined within the three realms, its unobstructed practice goes beyond the three realms, practicing the bodhisattva path, and so its stage is called high. Its unobstructed suppression of affliction is not confined to the four abodes, but advances to suppress ignorance as well, and so its function is called long. These are the three senses in which the present cause is wondrous. As for the present fruit's three senses being wondrous: its essence is broad, its stage is high, and its function is long. Its essence possesses the ten thousand virtues in full, with every good deed universally gathered in, and so its essence is called broad. Its stage reaches the place of treasure, and so its stage is called high. Severing the five abodes of affliction, extending its lifespan through spiritual power, and benefiting sentient beings, its function is called long. These are the three senses in which the present fruit is wondrous. This, then, is precisely the wondrousness of the one vehicle's dharma of cause and fruit."

Ancient and modern interpreters alike, the world takes Guangzhai's interpretation as the most excellent. Observing how the southern tradition explains the Mahāyāna, it mostly follows Sengzhao and Kumārajīva; and Sengzhao and Kumārajīva both largely accord with the shared teaching's own sense. How, then, could Guangzhai's explanation of "wondrous" possibly be so far off? Let me now first raise objections against Guangzhai, and the rest will follow suit as the wind bends the grass, and so on.

As for the four objections to the narrowness or broadness of the essence of the cause: if it is said that the essence of the past cause is narrow and therefore coarse, what exactly does "past" refer to? If it refers to the Tripiṭaka teaching and the like, this may be granted. But if everything before the Lotus Sūtra is called "past," this ought not to be so. Why? The Prajñāpāramitā sūtras say: "All dharmas are entirely the Mahāyāna — there is nothing they do not carry and convey." The Sī Yì Sūtra makes clear that "understanding the marks of all dharmas is the bodhisattva's universal practice." The Avataṃsaka says: "Entering the dharma-realm, without ever stirring from the Jeta Grove." The Vimalakīrti says: "To know all dharmas in a single thought-moment is itself to sit at the seat of enlightenment." If the past cause is like this, leaving nothing ungathered, how can it be called narrow? And if it is said that the present cause's essence is broad, then why does it suddenly say that the Lotus clarifies the one vehicle as the complete teaching, but does not clarify buddha-nature and so is incomplete? And why, further, does it say that the Lotus clarifies the revealing cause as full, but does not clarify the correct cause and so is not full? And why, further, does it say that, reckoned backward, it does not exceed the sands of the Ganges, and reckoned forward, it does not double any higher number, and is thus still an impermanent cause? And if the cause is impermanent, how can the fruit be eternal? If cause and fruit are both impermanent, how can such an impermanent person see buddha-nature at all? Since it is not the complete meaning, the essence fails to gather in the oneness of practice. Since it is not the full teaching, the essence fails to gather in the oneness of the teaching. Since it is not eternally abiding, the essence fails to gather in the oneness of the person. Since it does not see buddha-nature, the essence fails to gather in the oneness of principle. One should know that the present cause, narrow within the narrow, is narrow and therefore coarse; while the past essence, being already broad, is, after all, wondrous. From this single objection alone, coarse and wondrous are already known — how much more so once the later objections are made in full.

As for the four objections to the height or lowness of the stage of the cause: the Prajñāpāramitā is the unsurpassed bright mantra, the mantra unequaled and beyond compare. Persons of the highest capacity ought to seek the highest dharma — hence, in terms of the teaching, the cause is not low. The Śāstra says: "Bodhisattvas, having gone beyond the three realms, receive a dharma-nature body and practice the bodhisattva conduct" — hence, in terms of the stage, the cause is not low. The Vimalakīrti praises the bodhisattvas' virtue as drawing near to the unequaled, unsurpassed freedom and wisdom of the buddhas; those in the ten directions who act as demon-kings all abide in the inconceivable liberation — hence, in terms of the person, the cause is not low. The Vimalakīrti says: "Though he has already accomplished the buddha path and turned the Dharma-wheel, he still practices the bodhisattva path"; and again: "There is not one of the buddhas' own secret treasuries that he fails to enter" — hence, in terms of the principle seen, the cause is not low. Given a cause and stage such as this, all four of its onenesses are high — how, then, can it be called coarse? And if it is said that the present cause's stage is high, then why does its teaching suddenly turn out to belong only to the fourth period? Why does its stage suddenly turn out to abide within the unobstructed path merely suppressing ignorance? Why does its person suddenly turn out to be a body still subject to birth-and-death, not a dharma-nature body? Why does its principle suddenly turn out to be impermanent, not seeing buddha-nature? One should know that the present cause is entirely lacking all four onenesses, and its stage is low and therefore coarse; while the past cause possesses all four onenesses in full, and is high and therefore wondrous.

As for the four objections to the length or shortness of the function of the cause: the Śāstra says, "Everywhere it teaches the samādhi that breaks through ignorance" — this is the teaching's function being long. Not to know this matter is named ignorance. The Buddha's wisdom knowing all modes knows all dharmas — clarity and ignorance are not two. If one knows that ignorance is unattainable, then there is likewise no ignorance either — this is entering the gate of non-duality. This, then, is the practice's function being long. Again, one day's practice of prajñā is like the sun illuminating the world, surpassing a firefly's glow. If a person enters a forest of campaka flowers, he no longer smells any other fragrance — who, then, could still delight in the merits of the two vehicles? His seat requires no bowing, flowers do not cling to his body — all such people belong to the class of the irreversible. This, then, is the person's function being long. Form is boundless, and so prajñā, too, is boundless; sensation, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness are boundless, and so prajñā, too, is boundless. This, then, is the principle's function being long. One should know that the past teaching, practice, person, and principle are all four long, and it is because they are long that they are wondrous. If it is said that the present cause's function is long, then why does it, further, say that the Lotus is a teaching that conceals its own true mark, so that its teaching is short; that its practice conceals the true mark, so that its practice is short; that concealing the true mark, it does not clarify buddha-nature, so that its principle is short? Since all four onenesses are lacking, the present is short and therefore coarse; since the past function is already long, being long, it is therefore wondrous.

As for the four objections to the narrowness or broadness of the essence of the fruit: if the essence of the past fruit, being with remainder or without remainder, is held to lack the full array of virtues, and thus to be narrow, and thus coarse — how could this possibly be so? The Prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the buddhas, protected by buddhas in all ten directions. The Vimalakīrti says: "Never before have I heard this profound sūtra of the true mark" — one should know from this that the essence of the past fruit already possesses the full array of virtues. And if it is said that the present fruit's essence is broad, it ought to possess fullness and completeness — why, then, does it also say that it is both full and not full, both complete and not complete? Why, further, does it say that the buddha-fruit is impermanent, and likewise without self, without bliss, without purity, and the rest? If the full array of virtues is thus lacking, where, then, does its breadth lie? If its essence were truly broad, the Dharma-body ought to pervade every place — why, then, does it also say that his lifespan is a mere eighty years, or that, after seven hundred asaṃkhyeya kalpas, his ashes are extinguished and he enters extinction, going from here without arriving there? If its essence is said to be broad, it ought to possess the five eyes and see buddha-nature. One should know that the present fruit lacks all four onenesses, and is narrow and therefore coarse; measuring the present against the past, the past, after all, is wondrous.

As for the four objections to the height or lowness of the stage of the fruit: if the present fruit's stage were truly high, why does its established teaching rank no higher than the fifth teaching? Why does its practice fail to go beyond impermanence? Why does its person fail to go beyond the birth-and-death of change? Why does its principle fail to exhaust the secret treasury? One should know that the present fruit's stage lacks all four onenesses, and is entirely low, entirely coarse; the past fruit's stage possesses all four onenesses in full, and is entirely high, entirely wondrous.

As for the four objections to the length or shortness of the function of the fruit: if the present fruit's function were truly long, why does its teaching not clarify eternal abiding? Why does its practice not suddenly break through ignorance? Why is its person not identical with Vairocana? Why is its principle not identical with the secret treasury? One should know that the present fruit possesses no wondrous dharma at all — how could this be anything but coarse, and so on? And as for saying, further, that it "extends its lifespan through spiritual power" — what spiritual power is this? If it is the spiritual power of deliberate intention, it is the same as that of non-Buddhists; if it is the taintless spiritual power, it is the same as that of the small vehicle; if it is the spiritual power of the true mark, then it is neither an extending nor a non-extending, being able both to extend and not to extend. If it is able to extend, why does it extend only the lifespan, and not extend the eye so that it might see buddha-nature? Why does it not extend the tongue so that it might speak of eternal abiding? Since the eye does not see nature, one knows this is not the spiritual power of the true mark — if this is not coarse, what is? The first objection already showed it to be coarse; the later objections only come to confirm this again and again.

Guangzhai takes the six categories of cause and fruit to judge the coarse and the wondrous, and further uses the four onenesses to judge, specifically, the wondrous. Here, objecting that what he calls coarse in fact possesses all four onenesses in full, the past turns out not to be coarse after all; and objecting that what he calls wondrous is entirely lacking all four onenesses, the present turns out not to be wondrous after all. For each single category, four objections have been raised, six categories times four making twenty-four in all. Using his own spear against his own shield, so that he strikes against himself by his own contradiction — the count is neither more nor less than this, and rightly amounts to just so many.