Practice · DānaVolume TwoPart VIII · Dharmadhātu OfferingPaper 26 of 31

The Highest of All Offerings

中文主題：諸供養中法供養為最

Author: Shi Huijing 釋慧鏡
Date:
Version: 1.0
License: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
ID: DANA-P26
Abstract

This paper treats the doctrinal import of the passage declaring the dharma-offering supreme among all offerings in fascicle forty of the Avataṃsaka-sūtra, the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice. Its argument is threefold.

I. Introduction: Is "the Dharma-Offering Supreme" a Hierarchy, or a Convergence-Point?

After the inventory of material offering in Samantabhadra's third great vow, "vast cultivation of offerings," sets down its brush (treated in the preceding paper), the sūtra-text passes immediately into a transition: "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme." In the transmitted forms current in Chinese Buddhism, this verse reads "among all offerings, the dharma-offering IS supreme" — one character, 「為」, more than the base text of the sūtra. This single-character difference is not a mere matter of recensional collation; it is a silent interpretive inclination that the Chinese commentarial tradition, a thousand years on, brought to bear upon the doctrinal import of this sūtra — for the phrase "the dharma-offering is supreme" is all too easily read as a mutually exclusive hierarchy of the kind "material offering is low, the offering of dharma is high" (the two mutually excluding one another, partitioned into high and low).

Yet the very first sentence with which Chengguan opens his Commentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice (X0227) is a direct resistance to this very reading:

"There is dharma, and there is its likeness. What the Buddhas take as their teacher — this is what is called the Dharma. The Buddha is born from the Dharma; the Dharma is father and mother. ... Hence to revere a single dharma is to bring joy to all the Buddhas of the ten directions without exception; this is what is meant by 'the revered are few but those gladdened are many.'"1

The Dharma is what the Buddhas take as their teacher, it is the father and mother of the Buddhas — and therefore the word "supreme" in "the dharma-offering is supreme" does not, in its sense, mean "first in rank," but rather "root" in the value-axiological sense. The object revered is but one (the Dharma), yet those gladdened thereby are all the Buddhas of the ten directions; this is not a proposition contending for rank against material offering, but an account of why the Dharma is the very point upon which all offerings converge. This sentence of Chengguan's belongs to the same brushwork as the "to aspire and incline toward something is vow, to construct and cultivate is practice" that he set down at the head of his gloss on the ten great vows — first giving the Western reader, and indeed every first-time reader, a correct point of entry, lest from the very opening one fall into the defensive frame of a high-low partition.

A documentary matter must first be addressed. The base text of the Avataṃsaka on which the Japanese Taishō canon relies reads here "among all offerings, the dharma-offering supreme," with no character 「為」 (T10p0845a05); "among all offerings, the dharma-offering IS supreme" is the smoothed-out phrasing of the commentarial tradition and of later transmitted forms. Wherever the present paper quotes the base text of the sūtra directly, it adds no 「為」; only where it quotes later transmitted forms or liturgical usage does it write "IS supreme." The presence or absence of this one character seems a trifle, yet it marks precisely where the tension between the two readings lies: the base text's "supreme" is bare, while the 「為」 added by the transmitted form has, unawares, pushed the word "supreme" toward the hierarchical sense of "first in rank."

From this the thesis of the present paper is established: the doctrinal import of the passage declaring the dharma-offering supreme among all offerings, in the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice, is not a mutually exclusive hierarchy but an inclusive identification.

The seven kinds of dharma-offering are not seven wholesome deeds set side by side, but seven faces of one and the same contemplative practice, gathered into a convergence-point by the single item "non-departure from bodhicitta."

And the appearance of the four characters "thought after thought continuing" in identical wording at three textual sites is the explicit textual mechanism of the thesis of doctrine-and-Chan unity.

The paper unfolds along three axes: the second section treats the textual structure of the dharma-offering segment of fascicle forty, together with the translation-term provenance of the term "dharma-offering"; the third section treats the item-by-item unfolding of the seven kinds of dharma-offering in the commentarial tradition, with Chengguan's sentence "practice is itself conjoined with the Buddha's practice" as its pivot; the fourth section treats the gathering logic of "non-departure from bodhicitta" as the convergence-point; the fifth section treats the explicit textual anchor of doctrine-and-Chan unity, the triangular same-wording of "thought after thought continuing," and enters into dialogue with Western scholarship. This is the third paper of the Samantabhadra arena, continuing the discussion of entry-architecture already opened in Part VIII, the Huayan Dharmadhātu — the twenty-fourth paper treated the entry onto the Joyful Ground, the twenty-fifth treated the architecture of vast cultivation of offerings, and the present paper makes a deeper excavation of the dharma-offering.

II. The Structure of the Fascicle-Forty Dharma-Offering Segment and the Translation-Term Provenance of "Dharma-Offering"

In the Taishō canon, the dharma-offering segment of fascicle forty runs to only about fourteen lines (T10p0844c24–T10p0845a18). Its architecture divides into five parts: the inventory of material offering (which falls within the segment on vast cultivation of offerings, treated in the preceding paper); the transition verse "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme"; the enumeration of the seven kinds of dharma-offering; the eightfold comparison of "not amounting to a hundredth part"; and the closing frame of "thought after thought continuing." The transition verse and the enumeration of the seven read as follows:

"With offering-articles such as these one makes offering constantly. Son of good family! Among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme. Namely: the offering of cultivation in accordance with what is taught, the offering of benefiting sentient beings, the offering of embracing sentient beings, the offering of taking on the suffering of sentient beings in their place, the offering of the diligent cultivation of wholesome roots, the offering of not forsaking bodhisattva activity, the offering of not departing from bodhicitta."2

Here an observation about the literary form of the sūtra-text must be marked at the outset. In the sūtra-text itself the seven kinds of dharma-offering are merely a single long prose sentence (continuous prose); within it there are no enumeration markers of the kind "first... second...," nor any item-by-item doctrinal gloss whatsoever.

In other words, that item-by-item doctrinal unfolding found in the later commentarial tradition — "what the offering of cultivation in accordance with what is taught means, what the offering of benefiting sentient beings means" — is entirely the work of the commentators (Chengguan, Zongmi), and is not the prose of fascicle forty of the Avataṃsaka itself. The third section of this paper will treat this item-by-item unfolding, but here the boundary must first be drawn clearly: to misattribute the commentators' unfolding to the sūtra-text itself is a confusion at the level of textual stratum. Immediately after the seven items comes the comparison of "not amounting to a hundredth part":

"Son of good family! Set against the immeasurable merit of the offerings spoken of above, a single thought's merit of the dharma-offering — [those above] do not amount to a hundredth part of it, do not amount to a thousandth part, and even of a hundred-thousand-koṭi-nayuta part, a kalā-part, a counting-part, a numbering-part, an analogy-part, an upaniṣadic-part — do not amount to one. Why is this so? Because the Tathāgatas honor the Dharma; because by cultivation in accordance with what is taught the Buddhas are brought forth. If bodhisattvas practice the dharma-offering, then they accomplish the offering to the Tathāgatas — for to cultivate in this way is the true offering."3

Three points in this passage merit notice.

First, the two sides of the comparison are "the immeasurable merit of the offerings spoken of above" and "a single thought's merit of the dharma-offering" — what is weighed is "a single thought," a point to which the fourth section will return when it treats the convergence-point.

Second, the reason given after "why is this so" is not "dharma is more precious than matter," but "the Tathāgatas honor the Dharma" and "by cultivation in accordance with what is taught the Buddhas are brought forth" — the reason still falls upon the value-axiological standing of the Dharma, not upon a high-low comparison between matter and dharma.

Third, "analogy-part" and "upaniṣadic-part" (諭分, 優婆尼沙陀分) are the character-forms of the base text; the commentarial tradition uniformly reads them as 喻分 and 優波尼沙陀分. Where the present paper quotes the base text it retains the base-text character-forms, and the reading current in the commentarial tradition is set out separately in a footnote.4

The term "dharma-offering" did not arise out of nowhere; it has a clear translation-term provenance, and that provenance does not run directly back to an Indian original. Consider first the upstream. Nāgārjuna's Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, in fascicle eleven, already has the question-and-answer on whether material giving or dharma-giving is superior:

"Question: of material giving and dharma-giving, which is superior? Answer: as the Buddha has said, 'of the two kinds of giving, dharma-giving is superior.' Why so? The fruit-recompense of material giving lies within the desire-realm; the fruit-recompense of dharma-giving may lie within the three realms, or may go beyond the three realms. ... Material giving has measure; dharma-giving is measureless. Material giving has an end; dharma-giving is without end — just as adding firewood to a fire, its brightness grows ever greater. ... From dharma-giving can be brought forth material giving, and the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the Buddhas. ... Stated briefly, it is the eighty-four thousand dharma-treasuries; stated at length, it is measureless."5

What this passage of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa furnishes is the doctrinal logic of "dharma-giving is superior" — adding firewood to a fire, its brightness grows ever greater — but it must be noted that nowhere in the one hundred fascicles of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa is there an enumeration of "seven kinds of dharma-giving," nor the formulaic verse "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme." Where the present paper cites the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa as a cross-treatise upstream anchor, it cites only the structures the treatise actually possesses (the ninefold comparison of fascicle eleven, the pure dharma-giving of fascicle forty-nine, the subjects of dharma-giving in fascicle thirty-three); it does not fabricate a "sevenfold" correspondence that does not exist. Consider next the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra (the Larger Prajñāpāramitā). Its "Chapter on the Four Means of Embracing" divides dharma-giving into two kinds, worldly and world-transcending:

"Subhūti! Dharma-giving is of two kinds: first, worldly; second, world-transcending.

What is worldly dharma-giving? The expounding and displaying of worldly dharmas — namely the contemplation of impurity, mindfulness of the in-and-out breath, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless concentrations. ... What are the bodhisattva's world-transcending [dharmas]? ... Namely the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of awakening, the eightfold noble path, the three gates of liberation, the eight liberations, the nine successive concentrations, the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen distinctive attributes..."6

This worldly / world-transcending bipartition is the Prajñāpāramitā upstream of the seven items of fascicle forty: already at the Prajñāpāramitā stage, dharma-giving is a category with an internal structure, not a single wholesome deed. As for the Diamond Sūtra, a lexical caution must be entered. Nowhere in the Diamond Sūtra do the terms "dharma-giving" or "dharma-offering" occur; its five comparative passages uniformly use verbal phrases such as "to expound for others," "to expound widely for people," "to copy out, receive and uphold, read and recite, and explain for others." The passage on Mount Sumeru:

"If someone took, as an act of giving, a heap of the seven treasures equal to all the kings of Mount Sumeru in the great trichiliocosm; and if another person, taking from this Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra even so much as a four-line verse, received and upheld, read and recited, and expounded it for others — the former's merit would not amount to a hundredth part, nor to a part in a hundred-thousand-myriad-koṭi, nor even to a part such as counting or analogy can reach."7

This is precisely the Prajñāpāramitā forerunner of the eightfold comparison of "not amounting to a hundredth part" in fascicle forty. But "to expound for others" is not equivalent to the "dharma-offering" of fascicle forty of the Avataṃsaka — this equation cannot be drawn directly. The standardization of "dharma-offering" as a translation term was completed only gradually across the three stages of the Prajñāpāramitā literature, the Upadeśa, and the Huayan; and the explicit formula "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme" — searched throughout the three principal Prajñāpāramitā translations, the Diamond Sūtra, the Larger Prajñāpāramitā, and the great Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra — registers no hit.

It is a translation-term creation by the Jin-Tang Huayan translation bureau (the Tripiṭaka master Prajñā presiding from 795 to 798 CE) after its integration of the Prajñāpāramitā literature with the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, and not the direct translation of some single Indian original. To set out this translation-term provenance clearly is to forestall the reader's mistaking this formula for an Indian inheritance.

III. The Commentarial Unfolding of the Seven Kinds of Dharma-Offering: Chengguan's "Practice as Conjoined with Buddha-Practice" Pivot

Chengguan's gloss on the dharma-offering segment is not, in the Commentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice, a single continuous passage; it is divided across two places. The first is in the section "clarifying the cultivation of the true offering," within his treatment of the Mañjuśrī chapter — it contains the item-by-item doctrinal unfolding of the seven kinds of dharma-offering, the value-axiological center-sentence "what the Buddhas take as their teacher, namely the Dharma," and the sentence that serves as the doctrinal ground, "practice is itself conjoined with the Buddha's practice and is also the dharmakāya" — the core doctrinal content is here. The second is in the section "weighing and comparing to reveal its excellence," within the segment on vast cultivation of offerings — it contains the collation against the Sanskrit text of the "not amounting to a hundredth part" comparison, and the threefold unfolding of how material offering and dharma-offering converge — but in this second place Chengguan himself states: "the Mañjuśrī chapter has already explained at length the supremacy of the dharma-offering" (X05p0193c01). To cite Chengguan's gloss on the dharma-offering, therefore, one must set both places side by side for it to be complete. The pivot between the two places is this sentence:

"Son of good family! The Tathāgata comes forth out of cultivation. Below, [the commentary] glosses the separate clauses.

There is only the dharma, no likeness. Among the nine clauses, the first glosses cultivation. The Buddha comes forth out of cultivation; cultivation is itself conjoined with the Buddha's practice, and is also the dharmakāya — therefore the capacity to cultivate is the true offering. This clause being fully furnished, the remaining eight are treated briefly in the text."8

This sentence unlocks the internal structure of the seven items. Chengguan says that among the seven items the commentary gives a full doctrinal gloss only to the first, "cultivation in accordance with what is taught" ("the first glosses cultivation"), and that the remaining items are "treated briefly in the text" — not because the commentator is sparing his effort, but because each of the remaining items is an unfolding of "cultivation in accordance with what is taught." "The Buddha comes forth out of cultivation; cultivation is itself conjoined with the Buddha's practice, and is also the dharmakāya": cultivation is not a means for inclining toward the Buddha; cultivation itself is conjoined with the Buddha's activity, is itself the dharmakāya. Once this sentence stands firm, the remaining six items need not each be argued anew — they are different facets of one and the same thing. Zongmi, in the Subcommentary, supplies a finer doctrinal warrant for the first item, "cultivation in accordance with what is taught":

"Subcommentary: where, in the separate clarification of what is compared, it speaks of the offering of cultivation in accordance with what is taught — the Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says: 'One who can practice what is spoken is upright; if one does not practice, what is there to speak of? If one speaks but does not cultivate, one is not called a wise person.' Hence only by cultivating in accordance with what is taught does one attain the Buddha-dharma; it is not by spoken words that purity can be had. And again, as the Sūtra of the Great Dharma-Verses says: 'Though one recite a thousand words, if one does not practice them, what benefit is there? Better to hear but one and diligently cultivate it, attaining the benefit. ... Though one recite a thousand words, if they hold neither compassion nor wisdom, better to listen to but one, benefiting both self and other.'"9

"Cultivation in accordance with what is taught" is the first and the pivotal item of the dharma-offering because it fixes once and for all the relation between "speaking" and "practicing": to recite a thousand words and not practice them is inferior to hearing but one and diligently cultivating it. The "dharma" of the dharma-offering is not the dharma recited and stated, but the dharma carried out in accordance with what is taught. Among the seven items, one calls for special handling: "the offering of taking on the suffering of sentient beings in their place." In the enumeration of the "ten true offerings" in the Mañjuśrī chapter of fascicle thirty-eight of the Avataṃsaka (treated in detail in the fourth section), a forerunner can be found for six of the seven items of fascicle forty; only the item "taking on the suffering of sentient beings in their place" has no counterpart in fascicle thirty-eight.

In other words, "the offering of taking on the suffering of sentient beings in their place" is an item specially inserted, in this redaction of the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice, upon the basis of Mañjuśrī's "ten true offerings" — it is a distinctive added stroke of Samantabhadra's upon Mañjuśrī's existing framework, an insertion of the sūtra-text of fascicle forty itself, not a gloss appended later by the commentators. It marks out an axis of great compassion within the dharma-offering: the exchange of self and other, the taking-on of sentient beings' suffering in their place. Here a sentence of clarification must be entered, to forestall misreading: the exchange of self and other here is an architectural axis of the cultivation of great compassion (parātma-parivartana, in the terms of the Bodhisattvabhūmi), and its operational meaning is contemplative — placing oneself in the position of the other so as to dissolve the self-other distinction — rather than juridical.

It is not the structure of substitution-under-penalty, not "bearing the blame" in the sense of redeeming another's guilt, and bears no relation to any theology of vicarious atonement. Zongmi states most directly why the seven items are "seven faces of one contemplative practice":

"I would also say that these seven dharma-practices are but the mind that is set forth. Where the sūtra says 'cultivation in accordance with what is taught,' it means: the contemplative practice spoken of above, practiced just so — this is called cultivation in accordance with what is taught. Where it says 'benefiting sentient beings' and the rest, it means: in the very moment of cultivating the contemplative practice, each [of these] corresponds with this mind of benefiting and the rest — and this is what is called the true dharma-offering."10

"But the mind that is set forth" — the seven dharma-practices are but seven names set forth by one and the same mind. "In the very moment of cultivating the contemplative practice, each corresponds with this mind of benefiting and the rest": it is not that one first cultivates "the offering of benefiting sentient beings," then cultivates "the offering of embracing sentient beings," completing seven deeds in succession; rather, in the very moment that one and the same contemplative practice is underway, this mind corresponds simultaneously with the seven minds — benefiting, embracing, taking-on-suffering, and the rest.

The seven items are of one substance, a point that is decisive when the fourth section treats the convergence-point. (In passing: Fazang's handling, in the Treatise Establishing the Three Jewels within the Chapter on the Manifestation of Dharma of the Avataṃsaka, of the "three offering-gates" and its treatment of "the dharma-giving that accords with true principle" was already introduced in the preceding paper's treatment of vast cultivation of offerings; the present section's unfolding, by Chengguan and Zongmi, of the convergence of material offering and dharma-offering may be read as a further extension of that framework.)

IV. Non-Departure from Bodhicitta: The Convergence-Point of the Seven Faces and the "Single Thought" Comparison

The seven items being of one substance, what then is that point which gathers the seven faces? The sūtra's answer is the seventh item: "the offering of not departing from bodhicitta." And of this convergence-point logic, the sole explicit articulation in the Avataṃsaka itself lies in the Mañjuśrī chapter of fascicle thirty-eight. Mañjuśrī, opening to Sudhana the "ten true offerings" (the internal forerunner of the seven items of fascicle forty), says, in the key passage:

"If sentient beings make offering to the Dharma, this is truly to accomplish the offering to the Tathāgatas, because the Tathāgatas honor the Dharma. ... If one does not exhort [others] to cultivate all wholesome dharmas, neither does one benefit and bring ease to all sentient beings; if one forsakes the works the bodhisattva cultivates, this too cannot benefit and bring ease to sentient beings; ... if one for even a moment departs from and forsakes bodhicitta, this too cannot benefit and bring ease to sentient beings. Why is this so? Son of good family! It is for the sake of benefiting and bringing ease to sentient beings that the bodhisattva diligently seeks supreme perfect awakening; if there were no sentient beings, no bodhisattva would attain perfect awakening."11

"If there were no sentient beings, no bodhisattva would attain perfect awakening" — this is the sole explicit statement the Avataṃsaka gives, internal to itself, of "why bodhicitta is the convergence-point of the seven items." Its logic is a chain of collapse: depart for a moment from bodhicitta, and the work of benefiting and bringing ease to sentient beings collapses; yet the bodhisattva's very diligence in seeking supreme awakening is, from the first, for the sake of benefiting sentient beings; and were there no sentient beings to serve as its object, no bodhisattva could attain perfect awakening at all. Bodhicitta is therefore not an eighth item added alongside the seven, but the axis upon which the remaining six, the moment they depart from it, fail entirely. The fourth section's treatment of the convergence-point must take this passage of the sūtra-text itself as its anchor, and cannot rest on the commentary alone. Zongmi, in the Subcommentary, follows the sūtra-text and tightens this logic:

"As for the offering of not departing from bodhicitta: this is named the constant non-forsaking of the great mind of awakening. In the Chapter on Leaving the World there are ten dharmas by which wholesome roots are lost and forsaken — namely, to forsake bodhicitta, [whereupon] whatever wholesome [deeds] one cultivates are taken hold of by Māra. ... If there were no sentient beings, no bodhisattva would attain perfect awakening. Son of good family! You should understand the dharma-offering in this way; then you accomplish the offering to the Tathāgatas — it is not by worldly wealth, treasures, food, and drink that offering is named."12

"To forsake bodhicitta, whereupon whatever wholesome deeds one cultivates are taken hold of by Māra" — once one departs from the convergence-point that is bodhicitta, the wholesome deeds cultivated under the remaining items not only fail to constitute a dharma-offering but are taken hold of by Māra. The convergence-point is not the item highest in standing among the seven, but the condition that makes the remaining six "constitute a dharma-offering." Return now to the "single thought" comparison set aside in the second section. Chengguan, citing a collation against the Sanskrit text, reconstructs the logic of the comparison:

"Hence the Sanskrit text says: 'Furthermore, son of good family! In a single thought of each and every most excellent offering, and the dharma-offering, and the offering of cultivation, down to the offering of not departing from bodhicitta — by each and every such offering to the Tathāgata one has already attained the most excellent wholesome roots; set against the augmenting and accumulating of past offerings, those wholesome roots do not amount to a hundredth part,' and so on. The meaning here is this: the contemplative practice spoken of above is named the most excellent offering and the dharma-offering. Of these two categories, the wholesome roots of a single thought are what is weighed, and past offerings are that against which it is weighed."13

The key lies in the sentence "the contemplative practice spoken of above is named the most excellent offering and the dharma-offering": Chengguan states plainly that the whole contemplative practice treated above is called both "the most excellent offering" and "the dharma-offering" — these two names refer to one and the same thing, namely contemplative practice. And what is weighed is the "single thought's wholesome root" of this contemplative practice; what serves as the standard against which it is weighed is "past [accumulated] offerings." The true sense of the comparison is therefore not "the category of material-offering things" set against "the category of dharma-offering things," but "a single thought of contemplative practice" set against "the immeasurable accumulation of past offerings."

From this the core doctrinal anchor of the present paper can be given. The conclusion Chengguan finally draws from the threefold convergence in the second place is this:

"Moreover, the dharma-offering pervades the cultivation of the ten dharma-practices, and the most excellent cultivation pervades the myriad practices; offering grounded in contemplation is precisely cultivation. Hence in the Lotus, Gladly-Seen's burning of his body is named a dharma-offering; in the Vimalakīrti, the teaching to Sudatta to practice giving — giving equally, all at once, with nothing before and nothing after — is named a dharma-offering. Thus, if material giving can accord with the dharma, all of it is dharma-offering; how much more so profound contemplation — how could that not be a dharma-offering? The wise should ponder this."14

"Thus, if material giving can accord with the dharma, all of it is dharma-offering" — this sentence redraws the dividing line. The dividing line lies not in the material substance of what is offered (the seven treasures, body and life, profound contemplation), but in whether the offering "accords with the dharma." Gladly-Seen's burning of his body is a dharma-offering; the elder Sudatta's giving of material wealth, so long as it is "given equally, all at once, with nothing before and nothing after," according with the dharma, is equally a dharma-offering. "According with the dharma" is a synonymous variation upon "cultivation is itself conjoined with the Buddha's practice." The true sense of "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme" is therefore inclusive identification — whatever offering can accord with the dharma is gathered into the category of the dharma-offering — and not a mutually exclusive hierarchy that sets material offering and dharma-offering in opposition and adjudicates their high and low. Chengguan even pushes the point to its limit with a rhetorical question: "This most excellent offering is the very contemplative practice before. If this most excellent [offering] did not reach as far as the dharma, how could it be inexhaustible?"15

If "the most excellent offering" were truly inferior to "the dharma-offering," a thing of a lower order, by what would it too be "inexhaustible"? Precisely because the most excellent offering is the dharma-offering, is the contemplative practice spoken of before, it is inexhaustible just as the dharma-offering is. Zongmi, glossing the assembly of Sudatta's dharma-giving in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, states this inclusion still more bluntly: with compassion and wisdom flowing together, with delivering yet no delivering, giving yet no giving — "if one can be thus, material giving is itself dharma-giving."16

The reading the present paper rejects must be explicitly marked: to read material offering and dharma-offering as a binary opposition, partitioned into high and low, is a reading that over-simplifies the question. What the two patriarchal masters Chengguan and Zongmi do, again and again, in the Commentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice and the Subcommentary, is precisely to converge material offering and dharma-offering into one substance upon the single point of "according with the dharma." The present paper adopts throughout the reading of inclusive identification.

V. The Explicit Textual Anchor of Doctrine-and-Chan Unity: The Triangular Same-Wording of 念念相續 and Dialogue with Western Scholarship

This inclusive architecture of the dharma-offering attains, in the recollection-of-the-Buddha passage of fascicle four of Zongmi's Subcommentary, an explicit anchor reaching across into another tradition. (In passing: the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, in fascicle thirty-three, in enumerating the subjects of dharma-giving, already places side by side the great bodhisattvas Universally-Auspicious — that is, Samantabhadra — Avalokiteśvara, Mañjuśrī, and others; the doctrine of the dharma-offering already had, in its Prajñāpāramitā upstream, a framework of juxtaposition, and what the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice does is to give this framework a systematic Samantabhadra-style ordering.) Opening the gate of recollection of the Buddha in fascicle four, Zongmi says:

"Now, the single gate of recollection of the Buddha is the vital ford of cultivation, the key to gathering the mind; and so I will briefly clarify the meaning of recollection of the Buddha."17

The two words "gathering the mind" (攝心) are worth pausing over. This is no neutral phrase — "gathering the mind" is the signature vocabulary of the early Chan lineage of Daoxin's Essentials of the Method of Entering the Way and Pacifying the Mind and Hongren's Treatise on the Supreme Vehicle. That Zongmi, within the commentarial context of the dharma-offering, opens the gate of recollection of the Buddha and in his very first sentence positions it with "the key to gathering the mind" — this usage is itself a trace of sediment. Zongmi then divides recollection of the Buddha into four kinds — recollection by name, by contemplating the image, by contemplative visualization, and by the true character — from the shallow to the deep. And for the first kind, "recollection by name," Zongmi directly cites, as his warrant, the entire one-practice samādhi (一行三昧, yīxíngsānmèi) passage of the Mañjuśrī-Inquiry Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra:

"As for recollection by name: as the Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says — 'There is, furthermore, a one-practice samādhi; if a son or daughter of good family cultivates this samādhi, they swiftly attain the Buddha's awakening. One who wishes to enter this samādhi should dwell in a quiet, open place, cast off the scattered mind, not grasp at appearances, bind the mind to one Buddha and exclusively recite the name; facing the direction in which that Buddha is, sitting upright and rightly oriented, able with respect to one Buddha to continue thought after thought — then within that recollection one is able to see the Buddhas of past, future, and present. To recollect the merit of one Buddha is measureless and boundless, not two with the merit of all Buddhas; and thus one knows fully the dharma-realm of the Buddhas numerous as the Ganges' sands, the mark in which there is no difference.'"18

This is the explicit textual anchor, at the level of the text, of the thesis of doctrine-and-Chan unity.

It is not a retrospective interpretive judgment, but Zongmi, at the very site of his commentary on the dharma-offering, drawing in with his own hand the entire one-practice samādhi passage of the Mañjuśrī-Inquiry Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. And what connects this anchor with the dharma-offering is the four characters "thought after thought continuing." These four characters appear in identical wording at three sites, forming a triangle — a triangular same-wording, the three-occurrence verbatim alignment of 念念相續. The first is in the segment on vast cultivation of offerings: the sūtra-text's "thought after thought continuing without interruption," with Zongmi's subcommentary, "if not by the power of Samantabhadra's contemplative practice, how could one attain thought after thought without interruption?" (this falls within the territory of the preceding paper). The second is in the closing of the dharma-offering segment:

"Sūtra-text: This offering of mine is likewise without exhaustion — thought after thought continuing, without interruption. Subcommentary: this most excellent offering is the very contemplative practice before."19

The third is the passage from the Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra cited in the recollection-of-the-Buddha passage of fascicle four quoted above: "able with respect to one Buddha to continue thought after thought." With one and the same four-character wording, Zongmi converges three things — Samantabhadra's vast contemplative practice, the vast and most excellent offering (that is, the dharma-offering), and Mañjuśrī's one-practice samādhi — into three faces of one and the same contemplative practice. "Thought after thought continuing" is therefore not a vague epithet of cultivation; in Zongmi's hand it is a precise seam: the operational surface of the dharma-offering is, in fascicle four of the Subcommentary and in the one-practice samādhi of the Mañjuśrī-Inquiry Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, one and the same wording. Here a collational caution must be added.

The four characters "thought after thought continuing" do not, throughout the Chan-lineage literature, always bear a positive sense. In Huineng's Platform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch's Dharma-Jewel, the same four characters bear, to the contrary, a negative sense: "thought after thought continuing without break — this is called bondage."20

This citation is a single, isolated philological caution, and no inference about the overall position of the Platform Sūtra lineage may be drawn from it — Huineng elsewhere in the Platform Sūtra still takes "thought after thought continuing" in a positive sense. To mark out this reverse usage is only to make clear this: that Zongmi, in fascicle four of the Subcommentary, uses "thought after thought continuing" as a positive echo is a return to the source in Daoxin, and back to the Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and not a simple continuation of the customary usage of the Southern lineage of Huineng. This subtle difference of orientation is precisely the textual signature of Zongmi's program of doctrine-and-Chan unity. Zongmi's program is not an isolated operation at the single site of the Subcommentary; it has a lifelong background. The Preface to the Collected Writings of the Sources of Chan sets out a chain of four equivalences:

"If one suddenly awakens to one's own mind, originally pure, originally without affliction, the uncontaminated nature of wisdom of itself fully present — this mind is itself the Buddha, ultimately without difference. To cultivate in reliance upon this is the supreme-vehicle Chan, also named the pure Chan of the Tathāgata, also named the one-practice samādhi, also named the samādhi of suchness. This is the root of all samādhis. If one can cultivate it thought after thought, one naturally, gradually attains a hundred thousand samādhis. What has been transmitted in succession under Bodhidharma's gate is this Chan."21

The supreme-vehicle Chan, the pure Chan of the Tathāgata, the one-practice samādhi, the samādhi of suchness — the four names point to one matter. The preface to the Preface also has a sentence that fixes once and for all the relation of doctrine and Chan: "The two lineages of Chan and the Teaching alike issue from the Buddha. Chan is the Buddha's mind; the Teaching is the Buddha's mouth. ... [I would] cause the students of the two houses to know that for one Buddha there is no second way, that the four rivers are of no different taste."22

It should be noted that the present paper cites the Preface only to serve as background positioning for the one-practice samādhi anchor of fascicle four of the Subcommentary; the entire taxonomic system of the Preface, classifying the lineages by five doctrines and five houses, the present paper does not unfold — a full treatment of that system is reserved for the chapter, after the "precepts" gate of the Six Practice Gates, that treats the meeting of precepts and Chan.

What is to be made clear here is only this one point: the echo of "thought after thought continuing" in the recollection-of-the-Buddha passage of fascicle four of the Subcommentary is not a locution Zongmi picked up at random, but a fully self-aware operation upon a sediment of vocabulary running across six generations and some two hundred years — from the Mañjuśrī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, to the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna, to Daoxin, to Hongren, to Huineng, to Shenhui, to Zongmi. Daoxin's "to recollect the Buddha is itself to recollect the mind; to seek the mind is itself to seek the Buddha" and "mind after mind continuing, suddenly settling into stillness," in the Essentials of the Method of Entering the Way and Pacifying the Mind, are precisely one link in the midstream of this sediment.

What follows enters into dialogue with three groups of studies in Western scholarship. The first group concerns the reading of one-practice samādhi. John McRae's The Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch'an Buddhism (1986) and Bernard Faure's The Will to Orthodoxy (1997) read one-practice samādhi chiefly as the history of a practice-method of the Northern and Southern Chan lineages — traced within the lineage-polemics of Daoxin, Hongren, Shenxiu, Shenhui, and Huineng.

It must be conceded that McRae's textual-critical establishment of the lineage-history of Daoxin, Hongren, and the Northern School is the standard scholarly reference, and this genealogical labor is a secondary-scholarship foundation to which the present paper must pay homage.

Yet it must be pointed out: at the concrete textual site that is fascicle four of the Subcommentary, Zongmi does not use one-practice samādhi as a practice-method label internal to a lineage-polemic, but as the doctrinal execution-architecture of the dharma-offering. The practice-method-history framework of McRae and Faure, accurate as it is regarding the genealogy of practice, underestimates the architectural function of one-practice samādhi within the commentarial tradition. The second group concerns the reading of doctrine-and-Chan unity. Peter N. Gregory's Tsung-mi and the Sinification of Buddhism (1991) reads Zongmi's doctrine-and-Chan unity as a systematic doctrine-classifying harmonization — using the hierarchizing framework of the five doctrines and five houses to place the various Chan lineages within the hierarchy of the Huayan framework.

It must be conceded that Gregory's book is the foundational work of Western Zongmi studies, and its classificatory framework of the five doctrines and five houses the present paper too must inherit.

Yet it must be pointed out: at the concrete textual site that is fascicle four of the Subcommentary, what Zongmi does is not merely to classify — he is pointing out a bridge at the execution-level: the doctrine that the very mind is the Buddha (belonging to Chan) and the doctrine of the dharma-offering (belonging to the Teaching, to Samantabhadra's practice) share one and the same operational surface, namely the moment of "faith-and-understanding — cultivation — non-departure from bodhicitta." Gregory's framework captures the higher-order meta-architecture (the five-tier doctrine-classification), but underestimates this concrete execution-level bridging function. The triangular same-wording of "thought after thought continuing" is not ranked within the framework of the five doctrines and five houses; it is identical at the level of the operational wording. The third group concerns the framework of dharma-giving in India.

Reiko Ohnuma's Head, Eyes, Flesh, and Blood: Giving Away the Body in Indian Buddhist Literature (Columbia, 2007) points out that the record of dharma-giving (dharmadāna) in Indian Mahāyāna shifts with the literature — at times it is exalted, at times it is overturned by narrative literature's preference for the giving-away of the body; and there is no single Indian original that establishes a hierarchy of "dharma-giving is highest."

It must be conceded that Ohnuma's finding — that the Indian documentary record is in constant flux — is an honest scholarly judgment, and the present paper cannot assume that Indian dharma-giving possesses a unified hierarchy.

Yet it must be pointed out: the Chinese architecture of the dharma-offering (fascicle forty, Chengguan, Zongmi, the three together) differs doctrinally and decisively from the fluctuating Indian discourse of dharma-giving — it is not a simple translation of the Indian concept of dharma-giving, but a convergence-point architecture, within which the dharma-offering is the entry-architecture of the bodhisattva path. Ohnuma's record of Indian variability in fact reinforces the present paper's argument: the Chinese architecture of the dharma-offering is not transmitting an Indian hierarchy, but using the vocabulary of dharma-giving to construct a certain new doctrinal architecture. It should be noted that Ohnuma is the Western scholar cited for the fourth time in this volume, each time citing a different finding: the cult of the text in P21, humility-as-offering in P22, the self-immolation narrative in P23, and here the documentary variability of Indian dharmadāna discourse.

The four citations are not redundant; each invokes a distinct argumentative load.

VI. Conclusion: The Full Close of the Samantabhadra Arena's Third Paper and the Trajectory of What Follows

With this, the third paper of the Samantabhadra arena — the deeper excavation of the dharma-offering — comes to its full close. The twenty-fifth paper, treating the architecture of vast cultivation of offerings (Samantabhadra arena #1), opened the dimension of material offering of Part VIII, the Huayan Dharmadhātu; the present paper sets out from its seam-sentence, "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme" (Samantabhadra arena #2, entering the gate of the dharma-offering, and #3, the deeper excavation of the dharma-offering), and unfolds three axes: the convergence-point architecture of the seven kinds of dharma-offering, the gathering by "non-departure from bodhicitta," and the explicit textual anchor of doctrine-and-Chan unity in the triangular same-wording of "thought after thought continuing." The dharma-offering is not another kind of thing contending for rank against material offering; it is the very category into which all offerings that can accord with the dharma converge — its dividing line lies in "according with the dharma," its gathering-point in "non-departure from bodhicitta," and its operational surface in the "thought after thought continuing" that is identical in wording with one-practice samādhi.

The next paper (P27) enters Sudhana's pilgrimage of fifty-three teachers — the opening through Mañjuśrī's introduction, terminating at Samantabhadra's arena, with the fifty-three good friends as the trajectory of entry into the dharmadhātu.

The paper after that (P28) enters the closing of the Chapter on Entry into the Dharma-Realm, treating the doctrinal conclusion of the dharma-realm of interpenetration without end. Among the five papers of Part VIII, the Huayan Dharmadhātu, the three axes of Samantabhadra, Sudhana, and the dharma-realm have, with this, each taken its place.

References

Primary Buddhist Sources

Prajñā, trans. Mahāvaipulya-buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra (forty-fascicle recension), fascicle 38 and fascicle 40, "Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice on Entering the Inconceivable Realm of Liberation" (〈入不思議解脫境界普賢行願品〉). Taishō vol. 10, No. 293.

Kumārajīva, trans. Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, "Chapter on the Original Acts of Bhaiṣajyarāja Bodhisattva" (〈藥王菩薩本事品〉). Taishō vol. 9, No. 262. (Cited via Xingyuanpin shuchao.)

Kumārajīva, trans. Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa-sūtra, "Bodhisattvas Chapter" (〈菩薩品〉), the dharma-giving assembly of Sudatta. Taishō vol. 14, No. 475. (Cited via Xingyuanpin shuchao.)

Kumārajīva, trans. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra (大品般若), "Chapter on the Four Means of Embracing" (〈四攝品〉). Taishō vol. 8, No. 223.

Kumārajīva, trans. Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (Diamond Sūtra). Taishō vol. 8, No. 235.

Saṅghapāla, trans. Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經). Taishō vol. 8, No. 232.

Nāgārjuna (attrib.), trans. Kumārajīva. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa (Dazhidulun 大智度論), fascicles 11, 33, and 49. Taishō vol. 25, No. 1509.

Fahai, comp. Platform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch's Dharma-Jewel (六祖大師法寶壇經). Taishō vol. 48, No. 2008.

Zongmi. Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu 禪源諸詮集都序 (Preface to the Collected Writings on the Sources of Chan), fascicle 1a. Taishō vol. 48, No. 2015.

Chengguan. Xingyuanpin shu 華嚴經行願品疏 (Commentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice), fascicles 9–10. Manji 續藏 vol. 5, No. 227.

Chengguan (separate-circulating commentary) and Zongmi (subcommentary). Xingyuanpin shuchao 華嚴經行願品疏鈔 (Subcommentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice), fascicles 3–4. Manji 續藏 vol. 5, No. 229.

Modern Scholarship

Faure, Bernard. The Will to Orthodoxy: A Critical Genealogy of Northern Chan Buddhism. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997.

Gregory, Peter N. Tsung-mi and the Sinification of Buddhism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991.

McRae, John R. The Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch'an Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1986.

Ohnuma, Reiko. Head, Eyes, Flesh, and Blood: Giving Away the Body in Indian Buddhist Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

Lamotte, Étienne. Le Traité de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra). Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1944–1980. (Cited for the discussion of T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗ attribution.)

Sūtra & Śāstra Index

Short TitleFull TitleTaishō / Manji No.Author / Translator
XingyuanpinMahāvaipulya-buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra (40-fascicle), fascicles 38 and 40T0293《大方廣佛華嚴經》(四十華嚴)Gaṇḍavyūha (40-fascicle, including the Ten Vows)T10, No. 293Prajñā (Tang, 798 CE)Closes with Samantabhadra's Ten Great Vows — the textual locus of NIAN Part VII.View on CBETA online reader ↗Prajñā
Bhaiṣajyarāja chapterSaddharmapuṇḍarīka, fascicle 6T0262《妙法蓮華經》Saddharma-puṇḍarīkaT9, No. 262Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 406 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Kumārajīva
Bodhisattvas chapterVimalakīrti-nirdeśa, fascicle 1T0475《維摩詰所說經》Vimalakīrti-nirdeśaT14, No. 475Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 406 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Kumārajīva
Four-Embracing chapterMahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra (大品般若)T0223《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtraT8, No. 223View on CBETA online reader ↗Kumārajīva
VajracchedikāDiamond SūtraT0235《金剛般若波羅蜜經》Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 235Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 402 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Kumārajīva
MañjuśrīparipṛcchāMañjuśrīparipṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtraT0232《文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā / Saptaśatikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 232Mandrasena (Liang, early 6th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Saṅghapāla
DazhidulunMahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, fascicles 11, 33, 49T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Nāgārjuna attrib. / Kumārajīva trans.
Platform SūtraPlatform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch's Dharma-JewelT2008《六祖大師法寶壇經》T48, No. 2008Compiled by Fahai et al. (early Song redaction; original ca. 8th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Fahai (comp.)
Chanyuan duxuPreface to the Collected Writings on the Sources of Chan, fascicle 1aT2015《宗鏡錄》T48, No. 2015Yongming Yanshou (Wuyue–Northern Song, ca. 961 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗Zongmi
Xingyuanpin shuCommentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of PracticeX0227Chengguan
Xingyuanpin shuchaoSubcommentary on the Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of PracticeX0229Chengguan (separate-circulating commentary) and Zongmi (subcommentary)

Cross-References

Volume One (NIAN): Paper 12 on the Śūraṅgama's reverse-giving register (cross-reference); Paper 30 on the manas-transformation (an oblique resonance with Zongmi's vocabulary of anchixin "settling the mind" and jiyuan "binding to a condition" as heart-ground lexical sediment).

Volume Two (DĀNA): Paper 11 From Giving to Pāramitā (T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗ threefold emptiness of giving, cross-reference); Papers 12–13 on the threefold emptiness (DĀNA territory, cross-link only); Paper 15 The Diamond Sūtra on Giving (T0235《金剛般若波羅蜜經》Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 235Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 402 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗ five-fold comparative as the prajñā prelude to the "hundredfold-not-equal-one" formula, cross-reference); Paper 21 Dharma-Offering in the Dharma-Teacher Chapter (substitution-move, cross-reference); Paper 22 Sadāparibhūta — The Offering of Reverence (axiomatic-move, cross-reference); Paper 23 Bhaiṣajyarāja's Self-Offering (transformation-move, cross-reference); Paper 24 The Joy of the First Ground (entry-threshold, cross-reference); Paper 25 Samantabhadra's Vow of Vast Offerings (the immediate prior paper, whose closing transition verse "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme" is the very passage on which the present paper performs its deep-dive).

Part VIII Forward Pointers: Paper 27 on Sudhana's pilgrimage of fifty-three teachers (Mañjuśrī's introduction at the opening, terminating at Samantabhadra's arena); Paper 28 on the closing of "Entry into the Dharmadhātu" (the doctrinal resolution of mutual interpenetration without obstruction).

Volume Three (SĪLA) Forward Pointer: Zongmi's full systematic harmonization program in the Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu (the five-doctrine and five-school classification framework) is the principal terrain of the volume-three paper on the contact between śīla and Chan; the present paper draws only the minimal contextual background necessary for anchoring the one-practice samādhi citation.

This paper is published under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Sūtra and śāstra quotations follow the CBETA Taishō and Manji 續藏 editions.

CBETA collation: All sūtra and śāstra quotes in this paper have been collated against the CBETA Taishō and Manji 續藏 canons. GitHub: github.com/pointing-at-the-moon/six-practice-gates

Footnotes

  1. Chengguan, Commentary on the Avataṃsaka-sūtra's Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏): "There is dharma, and there is its likeness. What the Buddhas take as their teacher — this is what is called the Dharma. The Buddha is born from the Dharma; the Dharma is father and mother. ... Hence to revere a single dharma is to bring joy to all the Buddhas of the ten directions without exception." Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0227, p. 0187a19–24. This is Chengguan's dedicated commentary on fascicle 40 of the forty-fascicle Avataṃsaka translated by Prajñā; it is not the same textual stratum as the Commentary on the Avataṃsaka-sūtra (T1735《大方廣佛華嚴經疏》T35, No. 1735View on CBETA online reader ↗) or the Yanyi chao (T1736《大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔》T36, No. 1736View on CBETA online reader ↗). ↩

  2. Avataṃsaka-sūtra (40-fascicle, 大方廣佛華嚴經), fascicle 40, "Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice on Entering the Inconceivable Liberation-Realm": "With offering-articles such as these one makes offering constantly. Son of good family! Among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme. Namely: the offering of cultivation in accordance with what is taught ... the offering of not departing from bodhicitta." Taishō vol. 10, No. T0293《大方廣佛華嚴經》(四十華嚴)Gaṇḍavyūha (40-fascicle, including the Ten Vows)T10, No. 293Prajñā (Tang, 798 CE)Closes with Samantabhadra's Ten Great Vows — the textual locus of NIAN Part VII.View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0845a04–08. Note: the base text reads 法供養最 ("the dharma-offering supreme"), with no character 「為」 (no copula); the liturgical and commentarial form 法供養為最 adds the copula. ↩

  3. Ibid., T0293《大方廣佛華嚴經》(四十華嚴)Gaṇḍavyūha (40-fascicle, including the Ten Vows)T10, No. 293Prajñā (Tang, 798 CE)Closes with Samantabhadra's Ten Great Vows — the textual locus of NIAN Part VII.View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0845a08–13. ↩

  4. The character-forms 諭分 (yufen) and 優婆尼沙陀 (youposhatuo) are the base-text forms of the Taishō canon (T10p0845a10–11); the commentarial tradition (notably X0227) uniformly reads these as 喻分 (yufen) and 優波尼沙陀 (youposhatuo). The present paper retains the base-text forms in direct quotation. The eight-tier graded count runs: one-hundredth part, one-thousandth part, hundred-thousand-koṭi-nayuta part, kalā-part, counting-part, numbering-part, analogy-part, and upaniṣadic-part — the last term deriving, in this comparative-fraction context, from the Sanskrit numerical hierarchy. ↩

  5. Nāgārjuna (attrib.), Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa (大智度論), trans. Kumārajīva, fascicle 11: "Question: of material giving and dharma-giving, which is superior? ... Stated briefly, it is the eighty-four thousand dharma-treasuries; stated at length, it is measureless." Taishō vol. 25, No. T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0144c09–28 (abridged citation). Nowhere in the hundred fascicles of T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗ is there an enumeration of "seven kinds of dharma-giving" or the formula "among all offerings, the dharma-offering is supreme." ↩

  6. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra (摩訶般若波羅蜜經), "Chapter on the Four Means of Embracing," trans. Kumārajīva: "Subhūti! Dharma-giving is of two kinds: first, worldly; second, world-transcending ..." Taishō vol. 8, No. T0223《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtraT8, No. 223View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0394a11–c08 (abridged citation). ↩

  7. Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (金剛般若波羅蜜經), trans. Kumārajīva: "If someone took, as an act of giving, a heap of the seven treasures equal to all the kings of Mount Sumeru in the great trichiliocosm ... the former's merit would not amount to a hundredth part." Taishō vol. 8, No. T0235《金剛般若波羅蜜經》Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 235Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 402 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0751c29–0752a04. Nowhere in the Diamond Sūtra do the terms 法施 (dharma-giving) or 法供養 (dharma-offering) occur; its comparative passages uniformly use verbal phrases such as "to expound for others." ↩

  8. Chengguan, Commentary on the Avataṃsaka-sūtra's Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏): "Son of good family! The Tathāgata comes forth out of cultivation ... This clause being fully furnished, the remaining eight are treated briefly in the text." Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0227, p. 0186c24–0187b03. ↩

  9. Zongmi, Subcommentary on the Avataṃsaka-sūtra's Chapter of Samantabhadra's Vows of Practice (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏鈔): "Subcommentary: where, in the separate clarification of what is compared, it speaks of the offering of cultivation in accordance with what is taught — the Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says ..." Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0229, p. 0272a08–22 (abridged citation). The "Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom" cited within Zongmi's subcommentary is the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa (T1509《大智度論》Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa-śāstraT25, No. 1509Kumārajīva (Later Qin, 405 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗); the "Sūtra of the Great Dharma-Verses" is a verse-anthology text. ↩

  10. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shuchao, X0229, p. 0273c01–04. ↩

  11. Avataṃsaka-sūtra (40-fascicle, 大方廣佛華嚴經), fascicle 38: "If sentient beings make offering to the Dharma, this is truly to accomplish the offering to the Tathāgatas ... if there were no sentient beings, no bodhisattva would attain perfect awakening." Taishō vol. 10, No. T0293《大方廣佛華嚴經》(四十華嚴)Gaṇḍavyūha (40-fascicle, including the Ten Vows)T10, No. 293Prajñā (Tang, 798 CE)Closes with Samantabhadra's Ten Great Vows — the textual locus of NIAN Part VII.View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0837c29–0838a14 (abridged citation). This is the Mañjuśrī chapter, the ten-true-offering forerunner to the sevenfold dharma-offering of fascicle 40 — not the Mañjuśrī-Inquiry Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (T0232《文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā / Saptaśatikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 232Mandrasena (Liang, early 6th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗), which appears in §V as the locus classicus of one-practice samādhi. ↩

  12. Zongmi, Xingyuanpin shuchao (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏鈔): "As for the offering of not departing from bodhicitta: this is named the constant non-forsaking of the great mind of awakening ..." Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0229, p. 0272b12–19 (abridged citation). ↩

  13. Chengguan, Xingyuanpin shu (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏): "Hence the Sanskrit text says: 'Furthermore, son of good family! In a single thought of each and every most excellent offering ...'" Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0227, p. 0193b23–0193c11 (abridged citation). The "Sanskrit text" (梵本) Chengguan cites here refers to a Sanskrit collation copy used at Prajñā's translation bureau in the late eighth century; it should not be equated with the modern critically reconstructed Bhadracarīpraṇidhāna (Watanabe 1912). The two are not interchangeable. ↩

  14. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shu, X0227, p. 0193c11–16. ↩

  15. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shu, X0227, p. 0193c20–22. ↩

  16. Zongmi, Xingyuanpin shuchao (大方廣佛華嚴經行願品疏鈔): glossing the assembly of Sudatta's dharma-giving in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra — with compassion and wisdom flowing together, delivering yet no delivering, giving yet no giving — "if one can be thus, material giving is itself dharma-giving." Manji 續藏 (X), vol. 5, No. X0229, p. 0273b04–12 (abridged citation). ↩

  17. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shuchao, X0229, p. 0280c05–07. ↩

  18. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shuchao, X0229, p. 0280c09–16. The passage cited is the one-practice samādhi segment of the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經, T0232《文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā / Saptaśatikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 232Mandrasena (Liang, early 6th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, trans. Saṅghapāla), whose locus classicus is at Taishō vol. 8, No. T0232《文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經》Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā / Saptaśatikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 232Mandrasena (Liang, early 6th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0731a24–b08. ↩

  19. Ibid., Xingyuanpin shuchao, X0229, p. 0274b12–14. ↩

  20. Platform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch's Dharma-Jewel (六祖大師法寶壇經), comp. Fahai: "thought after thought continuing without break — this is called bondage." Taishō vol. 48, No. T2008《六祖大師法寶壇經》T48, No. 2008Compiled by Fahai et al. (early Song redaction; original ca. 8th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0353a16. Note: Huineng elsewhere in T2008《六祖大師法寶壇經》T48, No. 2008Compiled by Fahai et al. (early Song redaction; original ca. 8th c. CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗ (e.g. T48p0352c25) still takes "thought after thought continuing" in a positive sense; the negative valence at T48p0353a16 is context-specific — the binding force of an unawakened mind's continuous thought-stream. This citation is a single, isolated philological caution; one must not generalize it into "the Platform Sūtra rejects 念念相續" or "Southern Chan as a whole opposes the continuous-thought frame." 21: ↩

  21. Zongmi, Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu 禪源諸詮集都序 (Preface to the Collected Writings on the Sources of Chan), fascicle 1a: "If one suddenly awakens that one's own mind is originally pure, that there are fundamentally no defilements, that the unconditioned wisdom-nature is itself complete — this mind is itself Buddha, in the end without difference. To practice in accord with this is the supreme vehicle of Chan, also called the Tathāgata's pure Chan, also called one-practice samādhi, also called tathatā-samādhi. This is the root of all samādhis. If one can practice thought after thought, one naturally and gradually attains a hundred thousand samādhis. What has been transmitted through generation after generation under Bodhidharma's gate is precisely this Chan." Taishō vol. 48, No. T2015《宗鏡錄》T48, No. 2015Yongming Yanshou (Wuyue–Northern Song, ca. 961 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0399b17–22. ↩ ↩2

  22. Ibid., Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu, preface section: "The two lineages of Chan and Doctrine alike emerge from the Buddha. Chan is the Buddha's mind; Doctrine is the Buddha's mouth. ... [This will enable] students of both houses to know that there is one Buddha and no second path, that the four rivers have no different flavor, [so that] words may return to harmony, and the broken pact may be no more." Taishō vol. 48, No. T2015《宗鏡錄》T48, No. 2015Yongming Yanshou (Wuyue–Northern Song, ca. 961 CE)View on CBETA online reader ↗, p. 0397b07–16 (abridged citation). ↩

Source on GitHub ↗