華嚴經 品二十六 十地品 · 第二地 離垢地Avataṃsaka Sūtra · The Ten Grounds · The Second Ground, Stainless

Why the Name Is “Stainless” and Not “Keeping the Precepts”

Among the ten grounds, the second is the ground of the precepts. Since it is the ground of the precepts, why is it not named ‘the ground of keeping the precepts’ but ‘the Stainless Ground’? This one question is the very gate through which this ground is read.

The answer lies in a single word of the sūtra. The sūtra speaks of the ten courses of good action, and crowns the first nine of them with the word “by nature,” the tenth reading “and he leaves wrong views behind” — “by his very nature he leaves all killing far behind,” “by his very nature he does not steal,” “by his very nature he speaks no falsehood,” and on to “by his very nature he leaves ill will far behind.” “Nature” here means one’s own nature, one’s own substance. It is not that one has received the precepts and thereafter holds to them without transgressing; it is that the very thing able to transgress is no longer there. Vasubandhu’s Shidi jing lun, citing the sūtra of this ground, gives as its overall heading the one line “by his own nature he has accomplished the ten courses of good action”; and Chengguan, explaining the name of the ground in accordance with the treatise, says that what is left behind on this ground is “the stain of the affliction that is able to give rise to a mistaken mind and to the breaking of the precepts” — the stain is not the deed transgressed, it is the affliction that can make a person transgress by mistake. Once the stain of affliction is left behind, the substance of the precepts is pure of itself, and so the name Stainless is established.

From this Chengguan opens out three senses: the first is the leaving behind of causes, the leaving behind of the affliction that is able to give rise to mistaken transgression; the second is the leaving behind of resultant conduct, the leaving behind of the evil deeds of breaking the precepts; the third is the leaving behind by way of counteragent, the full possession of pure precepts. Fazang’s Tanxuan ji has the same three senses, though the order in which he sets them out differs a little, and after the three senses he adds one further line — on this ground even “mistaken transgression” has already been left behind, and so there is nothing left for words to be applied to. Li Tongxuan, for his part, does not follow the treatise’s three ways of leaving behind, but judges directly that what is cured on this ground is the ten courses of good action of the very highest grade, and that the precepts of the ten courses of good action of the very highest grade are precisely the nature-precepts of the dharma-body: the substance of the precepts lies not in the particulars of conduct but in the wondrous principle of the dharma-body, whose substance is stainless from the first, and hence the name Stainless. What the three houses establish each has its own rule; here they are recorded, and no judgment is passed between them.

One common misunderstanding is to be set right: “stainless” does not mean ‘the precepts are no longer needed.’ From beginning to end the sūtra is speaking of the characteristics of the ten courses of good action, and speaking of them in more detail than on any other ground — precisely because the substance of the precepts is already pure, the characteristics of the ten courses of good action can be set out with such ease. Brought down to the ground it comes to a single sentence: the accomplishment of the precepts lies not in gritting one’s teeth and not transgressing, but in the mind able to transgress having dissolved first.

The Ten Minds for Entering the Ground: Not Ten Slogans but a Threshold

The sūtra opens not with the precepts but with the mind: a bodhisattva who has already cultivated the first ground and wishes to enter the second “ought to give rise to ten kinds of deep mind.” These ten minds are the gate for entering the ground — Vasubandhu judges them to be the “purity of what gives rise,” the aspect that gives rise to pure precepts, standing over against the “purity of the substance itself” that follows. There must first be a mind-ground such as this before the nature-precepts can be born from it.

The names of the ten minds are: the upright mind, the pliant mind, the capable mind, the tamed mind, the quiescent mind, the purely good mind, the unmixed mind, the mind without regard or attachment, the vast mind, and the great mind. These ten are not a list of virtues set side by side; they are a single line running from coarse to fine: upright is a mind that is not crooked; pliant is neither hard nor contentious; capable is able to bear the burden; tamed is having the sense-gates brought under cure; quiescent is not being agitated; purely good is being without admixture of evil; unmixed is not having some other aim mingled in; without regard or attachment is not turning back to hold onto anything; and vast and great are measure. The first eight speak of quality, the last two of measure — where the quality is not pure the precepts are a forced thing, and where the measure is not great the precepts serve only oneself.

The sūtra gathers it up in one sentence: “By means of these ten minds the bodhisattva is able to enter the second ground, the Stainless Ground.” Note the order of cause and effect here: it is not that one has these ten minds because one has entered the ground, but that one gives rise to these ten minds and thereby gets to enter the ground. Hence these ten minds can be cultivated even by someone who has not yet reached the second ground — they are precisely the place where an ordinary person can lay a hand. Brought down to the ground: ask yourself why it is hard to mend a transgression of the precepts, and it will mostly turn out to be not that the rule is hard to keep, but that one of these ten minds is missing.

The Ten Courses of Good Action (1): No Killing · No Stealing · No Sexual Misconduct

On this ground the ten courses of good action are not ten prohibitions but ten ways of “by nature leaving far behind.” Vasubandhu explains every one of them with the same framework: the leaving behind of causes, the leaving behind by way of counteragent, and the leaving behind of resultant conduct — first the cause able to transgress is cut off, then the direct counteragent is set up, and finally neither the coarse nor the fine of such conduct arises at all. Once this framework is understood, all ten branches are understood together.

No killing. The sūtra says “he keeps no knives or clubs, he harbors no enmity or hatred, he has a sense of shame and a sense of dread, he is fully endowed with benevolence and forbearance” — knives and clubs are the outer conditions of killing, enmity and hatred its inner cause, shame and dread together with benevolence and forbearance the inner guard; the treatise judges these four clauses to be the leaving behind of causes. Toward those that have life he “constantly gives rise to a mind of benefit and of kindly thought,” which the treatise judges to be the leaving behind by way of counteragent. And “he does not even vex sentient beings with an evil mind — how much less would he form the notion of a sentient being about another and then deliberately, with weighty intent, carry out killing and harm” is the leaving behind of resultant conduct: from a single evil thought at the finest, to weighty intent doing harm at the coarsest, none of it arises. What most needs to be seen here is the order: first the knives and clubs and the enmity are taken away, and only then can the mind of kindness stand firm; once the mind of kindness stands firm, evil thoughts do not arise of themselves. And one misunderstanding is to be set right: not killing is not simply not raising a hand — the sūtra counts “vexing sentient beings with an evil mind” as belonging here too.

No stealing. The cause lies in the sense of lack that arises from one’s own goods being insufficient, and so the place where the sūtra applies the counteragent is “constantly knowing how to stop and be content”; a further layer in is “toward others he is kind and forbearing, with no wish to encroach upon them or bring them loss,” which is the other face of the mind of giving. The leaving behind of resultant conduct is then fine to the utmost: “if a thing belongs to another, he forms the notion that it is another’s, and in the end he does not give rise to a thief’s mind toward that thing — down to a single blade of grass or a single leaf, if it is not given he does not take it, how much less the remaining articles that support life.” Not taking a single blade of grass or leaf unless it is given is a measuring rod — and the rod is this fine because what is being measured is not the size of the thing but the presence or absence of the mind.

No sexual misconduct. The sūtra’s leaving behind of causes is “content with his own wife,” and the counteragent is “does not seek the wife of another”; the objects listed as not to be transgressed against are of four kinds: the wives and concubines of others, women whom others guard, those whose betrothal has already been settled by a go-between among their kinfolk, and those who are guarded by the Dharma (such as those who have received the precepts and cultivate the pure practice). And the leaving behind of resultant conduct is “he does not even give rise to a mind of greedy defilement — how much less would he actually engage in the act! How much less by what is not the way!” — three levels of advance: the mind does not even arise, how much less the act, how much less what is not the way. The fineness of the precepts of a bodhisattva on this ground lies just here: not that he does not transgress, but that that single thought does not arise.

The Ten Courses of Good Action (2): The Four Faults of Speech

Of the ten courses of good action, four belong to speech, and the sūtra sets these out in the greatest detail. In this bodhisattva, “among the four means of gathering, kind speech is preeminent,” and that is precisely because he has left these four faults of speech behind — Chengguan and Fazang point to the same meaning: because the four faults of the mouth are left behind, kind speech is preeminent. This is one of the neatest relations of cause and effect on this ground.

No false speech. The positive aspect in the sūtra is “he constantly speaks words that are true, words that are real, and words that are timely.” Vasubandhu explains these three: words that are true are spoken in accordance with what is thought, mind and mouth not at odds; words that are real (the sūtra text of the treatise has “veracious words”) are well weighed and match the matter; words that are timely are spoken at their proper time, so as to bring no decline or vexation to oneself or another — lacking any one of the three, it does not count as truthful speech. The leaving behind of resultant conduct then reaches into dreams: “even in a dream he cannot bear to make a speech that covers something over — he has no mind to do it, how much less to transgress deliberately.” A dream is the fine, deliberate transgression the coarse; Vasubandhu explains this very passage by taking the dream as the fine aspect and the doer as the coarse aspect. Brought down to the ground: the breach in one’s speech mostly lies not in telling lies but in “covering over” — screening a thing off, letting it pass in a blur, which is exactly what the sūtra singles out by name.

No divisive speech. The sūtra sets out a whole string of clauses: no mind that would set beings at odds, no mind that would vex or harm; not taking the words of this side and speaking them to that side in order to break that side, nor taking the words of that side and speaking them to this side in order to break this side; what has not been broken apart he does not let be broken, what has already been broken apart he does not let grow; he does not delight in setting at odds, does not take pleasure in setting at odds, does not make speech that sets at odds, does not utter speech that sets at odds — and then adds the fiercest clause of all: “whether it be true or not true.” Even if the divisive words are true, he does not speak them. This one clause draws the line between divisive speech and right speech: the standard lies not in whether the words are true or false, but in whether the intent behind the speaking is to break the concord of others.

No harsh speech. The sūtra uses two long strings of names: first the casting away of seventeen kinds of evil speech (words that poison and harm, words that are coarse and rough, words that make others suffer, words that make others angry and hateful, words spoken to the face, words spoken behind the back, words that are base and evil, words that are vulgar and mean, words that are not pleasant to hear, words that displease the hearer, words of anger and rage, words that burn the heart like fire, words that knot up enmity, words that scald and vex, words that cannot be loved, words that cannot be delighted in, words that can ruin oneself and ruin others), and then the cultivating of ten kinds of good speech (words that moisten and enrich, words that are pliant, words that gladden the mind, words that are pleasant to hear, words that make the hearer rejoice, words that enter well into people’s hearts, words that are refined and well formed, words that many love, words that many take delight in, words that make body and mind leap up with gladness). Casting away and cultivating stand side by side — this is the pattern of the present branch: no harsh speech is not shutting the mouth, it is exchanging one whole language for another. Take particular note of the two items “words spoken to the face” and “words spoken behind the back”: stabbing a person to his face and speaking ill of him behind his back both belong alike to harsh speech.

No frivolous speech. What the sūtra lists here is “words weighed with care, words that are timely, words that are true, words that have meaning, words that accord with the Dharma, words that follow reason, words that are skillful in taming, words decided upon after weighing them at the proper time,” and at the end it adds a clause: “he weighs even a jest with constant care — how much less would he deliberately put forth scattered and idle words.” The root sense of frivolous speech is not ornateness but being meaningless and scattered. The standard lies in the two words “weighed with care” — whether one has taken the measure of a thing before saying it. Even a joke falls within the range of that measuring: this is the fineness of the present ground.

The Ten Courses of Good Action (3): No Covetousness · No Ill Will · Leaving Wrong Views Behind

No covetousness. The sūtra is extremely spare: “toward the goods and property of others, and toward what others use and enjoy, he gives rise to no greedy mind, does not wish for them, and does not seek them.” Three levels: giving rise to no greedy mind is the ground of the intellect, not wishing is not raising a hope, not seeking is not making a pursuit. Here lies the difference between covetousness and stealing — stealing is taking, while covetousness is only a stirring within the mind, and on this ground not even that stirring stirs.

Leaving ill will behind. On the positive side the sūtra lists six minds: a mind of kindness, a mind of benefit, a mind of pity, a mind of joy, a mind that is harmonious and enriching, a mind that gathers in; on the negative side three things cast away forever: anger and hatred, enmity and harm, and scalding vexation; and at the end it comes home to conduct: “he constantly thinks to act in accord with reason, benevolently and kindly aiding and benefiting others.” The counteragent to anger is not patience but the exchanging of the mind for kindness — patience presses down, kindness turns around. This is also where the present branch differs most from what the world calls self-cultivation.

Leaving wrong views behind. The sūtra lists four aspects: “abiding on the right path, not practicing divination, not taking up evil precepts, upright both in mind and in view, without deceit and without flattery,” and closes with one clause: “he gives rise to settled faith in the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha.” The counteragent to the branch of wrong views comes to rest, of all places, upon settled faith in the three jewels — which shows that the tenth branch of the ten courses of good action is not a matter of being correct in what one knows, but of whether that in which one takes refuge is the right one. Divination and evil precepts (prohibitions not in accord with the Dharma) are named precisely because they are marks of ‘what one relies upon not being right.’ With this the ten branches have been fully set forth, and these ten branches are what Vasubandhu judges to be the “purity of the precepts of leaving behind,” which is to say the precepts of restraint among the three groups of pure precepts of later times.

Cultivating Oneself and Urging Others: Once a Dharma of Goodness Is Established It Has Two Faces

The ten courses of good action having been set forth, the sūtra makes a turn: the bodhisattva “guards and upholds the ten courses of good action in this way, constantly and without interruption,” and then gives rise to a thought — of all sentient beings that fall into the evil destinies there is not one who does so otherwise than by the ten courses of evil action, and therefore “I ought to cultivate right conduct myself, and also to urge others on, causing them to cultivate right conduct.” And a reason is appended: “if one cannot oneself practice right conduct and yet would cause others to practice it, there is no such possibility.”

This passage is the pivot of the whole ground. Cultivating oneself and urging others are not two matters set side by side but a sequence: if one does not cultivate oneself, urging others has no effect. Turned the other way about, if cultivating oneself does not turn outward into urging others, then the precepts too remain merely at restraint. After this one thought, the sūtra passes from the “purity of the precepts of leaving behind” into the “purity of the precepts of gathering in the dharmas of goodness” — this is where Vasubandhu’s outline turns. Brought down to the ground: to judge which layer one’s own keeping of the precepts has stopped at, look at whether this thought has arisen.

One and the Same Ten Courses of Good Action, Five Fruits: The Ten Courses of Good Action Leap from Human and Heavenly Goodness into the Common Cause of the Five Vehicles

What follows is the most open passage of this ground. The bodhisattva gives rise to a thought and considers the fruits of the ten courses of good action.

First the general cause is stated. “The ten courses of evil action are the cause of taking birth in the hells, among animals, and among hungry ghosts; the ten courses of good action are the cause of taking birth among humans, among gods, and on up to the Peak of Existence.” This is the worldly fruit of the ten courses of good action — reaching up to the Peak of Existence (the highest place of birth in the three realms), it is still within the three realms. If it went no further than this, the ten courses of good action would be no more than human and heavenly goodness.

Then the sūtra turns over four layers, and all four begin from the same clause: “furthermore, these ten courses of good action of the highest grade.” The ten courses of good action of the highest grade being the same, the fruits are altogether different because the measure of mind differs.

The first becomes the śrāvaka vehicle: cultivated with wisdom, yet “because the mind is narrow and inferior, because there is dread of the three realms, because great compassion is lacking, because understanding comes only after hearing the sound of another’s voice” — these four clauses of “because” are exactly the marks of a śrāvaka: small in measure of mind, afraid of the three realms, without great compassion, awakening by the voice of another.

The second becomes the pratyekabuddha vehicle: “cultivated and made pure, because one does not receive teaching from another but awakens by oneself, because great compassion and skillful means are not fully possessed, because one understands the profound dharma of causes and conditions” — the difference from the śrāvaka lies in awakening by oneself and in contemplating dependent origination, and the difference from the bodhisattva still lies in great compassion and skillful means being insufficient.

The third becomes the vast practice of a bodhisattva: “because the mind is vast and measureless, because pity and compassion are fully possessed, because they are embraced by skillful means, because great vows are given rise to, because sentient beings are not forsaken, because the great wisdom of the buddhas is sought after, because the grounds of a bodhisattva are purified, because all the perfections are purely cultivated” — eight clauses of “because,” standing exactly over against the “great compassion is lacking” and “not fully possessed” of the two former vehicles.

The fourth becomes all the dharmas of a buddha: “because they are pure in every mode, and on up to because the ten powers and the four fearlessnesses are realized, all the dharmas of a buddha are brought to accomplishment.” With this the ten courses of good action run straight through to the fruit of buddhahood.

The four layers set forth, the bodhisattva draws his own conclusion: “therefore I now practice the ten courses of good action equally, and ought to cause all of this to be fully possessed and pure.” The verses gather this passage into a single line: “the paths of the pratyekabuddha, the śrāvaka, and the buddha-vehicle are all accomplished by means of the ten courses of good action.” This is the most essential eye of the present ground: dharmas of goodness in themselves have no higher and lower; the higher and lower lie in the mind that raises them. One and the same act of not killing may purchase no more than a birth among humans or gods, or may run straight through to the ground of a buddha.

The Fruits of the Ten Courses of Evil Action: The Three Evil Destinies, and the Residual Fruits Among Humans

The bodhisattva gives rise to a further thought and counts out one by one the fruits of the ten courses of evil action. First he judges their weight in general: “those of the highest grade are the cause of the hells, those of the middling grade the cause of the animals, those of the lowest grade the cause of the hungry ghosts” — one and the same evil deed, and the place of falling differs according to whether the mind was fierce or faint.

Then branch by branch he states the residual fruits “if born among humans,” two of each: killing gains a short life and much illness; stealing gains poverty and holding property in common without being able to dispose of it freely; sexual misconduct gains a wife who is not chaste and good and not gaining the retinue one would wish for; false speech gains being much slandered and being deceived by others; divisive speech gains a retinue that falls apart and kinfolk who are corrupt and evil; harsh speech gains constantly hearing evil sounds and speech much given to disputes; frivolous speech gains that what one says no one accepts and that one’s words are not clear; covetousness gains a mind that does not know contentment and many desires that are never satisfied; ill will gains that others constantly search out one’s strengths and faults and that one is constantly vexed and harmed by others; wrong views gain being born into a family of wrong views and a mind that is crooked and fawning.

There is one thing in these ten pairs of residual fruits worth looking at closely: every fruit is of the same kind as the deed that made it. He who deceives others is deceived; he who breaks up another’s retinue has a retinue that falls apart; he who speaks to others words not pleasant to hear constantly hears evil sounds; the covetous gain a mind that does not know contentment — between deed and fruit there is no allotted quota of punishment, but the look of one and the same mind carried onward. The sūtra concludes: the ten courses of evil action “can bring forth these measureless and boundless masses of great suffering.” And so what the bodhisattva of this ground gives rise to upon contemplating the fruits is not fear but the vow of the passage that follows.

Taking the Ten Courses of Good Action as a Park of Dharma

Having contemplated the mass of suffering, the bodhisattva makes a vow: “I ought to leave the ten courses of evil action far behind and take the ten courses of good action as a park of Dharma, loving it and abiding in it at ease; I shall dwell within it myself and also urge others on, causing them to dwell within it.”

The two words “park of Dharma” are the eye of this passage. In most people’s minds the precepts are a wall, something that fences one in and forbids going out; the bodhisattva of this ground sees them as a garden — a place to roam and rest in, a place of ease and joy, and so it is said “loving it and abiding in it at ease.” Only when the keeping of the precepts has reached the point of no longer feeling like a bond but feeling like ease are the precepts truly the purity of one’s own substance. And the closing clause, “also urging others on, causing them to dwell within it,” once more brings out the two faces of self and other: a park is not for one person to live in alone.

The Ten Thoughts of Benefiting Others: From Vowing That They Abide in Right View to Vowing That They Abide in Vast Wisdom

From here the sūtra enters upon the “purity of the precepts of benefiting sentient beings.” First it lists the ten minds of a bodhisattva toward sentient beings: a mind of benefit, a mind of ease and joy, a mind of kindness, a mind of compassion, a mind of pity, a mind that gathers in, a mind that guards and protects, a mind that takes them as himself, a mind of a teacher, and a mind of a great teacher — “a mind that takes them as himself” is seeing sentient beings as his own self, and “a mind of a teacher” and “a mind of a great teacher” are the taking up of the charge of teaching and guiding. The ten minds arise together, and then come one “he thinks in this way” and nine instances of “he thinks further in this way,” ten thoughts in all. Every one of these thoughts has the same pattern: first see where the sickness of sentient beings lies, then vow to cause them to abide somewhere. These ten thoughts are the concrete unfolding of the great compassion of this ground; let us look at them one by one.

First, seeing sentient beings “fallen into the dense thickets of wrong views, evil understanding, evil desires, and evil destinies,” he vows to cause them to abide in right view and to walk the road of what is real. The sickness lies in view.

Second, seeing sentient beings “discriminating between others and self, breaking one another down, quarreling and hating, blazing without cease,” he vows to cause them to abide in unsurpassed great kindness. The sickness lies in the strife of self and other — and the counteragent is not making peace between them but great kindness.

Third, seeing sentient beings “grasping greedily and never satisfied, seeking wealth and profit alone, keeping themselves alive by a wrong livelihood,” he vows to cause them to abide in right livelihood with the deeds of body, speech, and mind made pure. The sickness lies in the manner of making a living.

Fourth, seeing sentient beings “constantly following after the three poisons” and not understanding how to set their will upon getting out, he vows to cause the great fire of the afflictions to be extinguished and them to be set down in the cool place of nirvāṇa. The sickness lies in the afflictions themselves; fire and coolness stand over against each other to make the simile.

Fifth, seeing sentient beings covered over by “the heavy darkness of delusion and the thick film of false views,” entering dense thickets of shadow and losing the light of wisdom, he vows to cause them to gain “the unobstructed and pure eye of wisdom, to know all dharmas as they really are, and not to follow after the teaching of another.” The sickness lies in ignorance, and what is given is an eye — Chengguan explains that this eye has two capacities: seeing things as they really are, and, by seeing what is real, not following after another.

Sixth, seeing sentient beings “within the perilous road of birth and death,” about to fall into the three evil destinies, entering the net of evil views, lost in the dense thicket of delusion and following after wrong paths; “it is as when a blind man has no guide: what is not the road out they take for the road out,” entering the realm of Māra and gathered in by evil brigands — he vows to draw them out of perils and difficulties and cause them to abide in the fearless city of omniscience. This thought takes the perilous road for its frame and the blind man without a guide for its simile. Chengguan divides and explains: the clause “it is as when a blind man” shows the lack of the eye of right wisdom, and the clause “has no guide” shows the lack of the condition of a good friend — one inner, one outer, and both lost, hence the peril.

Seventh, seeing sentient beings “drowned by the waves of a great torrent of water,” fallen into the flood of desire, the flood of existence, the flood of ignorance, and the flood of views; swept in the eddies of birth and death, drifting in the river of craving, dashed along with no leisure to look and examine; pursued by the thought of desire, the thought of hatred, and the thought of harm; the rākṣasa of the view of self seizing hold of them, dwelling upon the highland mound of conceit and settling in the village of the six sense-fields, with none good at rescuing them and none able to ferry them across — he vows to give rise to a mind of great compassion, to bring them relief with every kind of root of goodness, and to cause them to abide on the jewel island of omniscient wisdom. This is the longest simile of this ground. Chengguan reads the force of this water in five aspects: its depth (the four floods complete), its current (the eddies of birth and death), its name (the river of craving), its sweeping away (dashed along with no leisure to look and examine), and its breadth (the three thoughts pursuing everywhere); and within the water he sets up four difficulties: the grasping of the view of self, turning back and re-entering the thoughts of desire, being caught in the midst of enjoyment, and the mounting up of conceit. His explanation of the clause “the highland mound of conceit” is especially fine: conceit makes the mind high, and so it is figured as a high plain and mound — up above, the rain of Dharma does not stay on it; down below, the water of one’s nature is not seen. The harm of conceit lies not in haughtiness but in dryness.

Eighth, seeing sentient beings “dwelling in the prison of the world, with much suffering and vexation, constantly harboring love and hate and giving rise of themselves to sorrow and fear,” bound by the heavy fetters of greedy desire, with the dense thicket of ignorance as their covering, and within the three realms unable to get out by themselves — he vows to cause them to leave the three modes of existence forever and to abide in the unobstructed great nirvāṇa. Chengguan takes the bondage of the three realms to be like a prison, and a prison has five faults that follow upon it: the matter of suffering, the exhausting of one’s means, parting from what one loves, the bondage of existence, and obstruction. The simile of the prison and the torrent before it complement each other: the one flows crosswise, the other shuts in.

Ninth, seeing sentient beings “grasping at a self and not seeking to get out of the cave-dwelling of the aggregates,” resting upon the empty village of the six sense-fields, giving rise to the conduct of the four inversions, afflicted by the poisonous snakes of the four great elements and slain by the enemy brigands of the five aggregates — he vows to cause them to abide in the most excellent place where there is nothing to be attached to, which is the unsurpassed nirvāṇa in which all obstructions are extinguished. This thought lays down four similes at once: the aggregates are like a cave-dwelling (dwelt in and not gone out of), the six sense-fields like an empty village (seeming to have a master and in fact empty), the four great elements like poisonous snakes (constantly following the body and afflicting it), the five aggregates like enemy brigands (close to the body and doing it harm). Chengguan judges the first three clauses to be “losing the path, hence far from the joy of the highest truth,” and the latter three to be “losing cessation, hence fully possessed of every suffering.”

Tenth, seeing sentient beings “narrow and inferior in mind, not walking the highest road of omniscience, and though wishing to get out, taking delight only in the vehicle of the śrāvaka and of the pratyekabuddha,” he vows to cause them to abide in the vast dharma of a buddha and in vast wisdom. What the former nine thoughts would transform is the wrong and the suffering; what this one thought would transform is ‘being already on the right path yet small in mind’ — and so it is placed last.

Precepts and Compassion Are Root to Each Other

The ten thoughts set forth, the sūtra concludes with one line: “a bodhisattva who guards and upholds the precepts in this way is well able to make the mind of kindness and compassion grow.”

This one line is not to be passed over lightly. It strings all the foregoing passages into a single line of reasoning: restraint (the ten courses of good action), gathering in goodness (contemplating the fruits and considering them), and benefiting beings (the ten thoughts) are not three layers stacked one upon another but three faces of one and the same thing — and this is exactly how Chengguan reads it: guarding and upholding the precepts is the foregoing restraint and gathering in of goodness, and being well able to make the mind of kindness and compassion grow is the precept of benefiting beings. Precepts and compassion are root to each other: without precepts compassion has no strength, and without compassion the precepts have nowhere to come home to. Brought down to the ground: to test whether one’s own keeping of the precepts is alive, see whether it has grown compassion toward people; to test whether one’s own compassion is real, see whether it has come down into conduct that does not vex or harm others.

Seeing the Buddhas · Making Offerings · Receiving the Ten Courses of Good Action Again: The Pliancy of the Fruit of the Ground

The substance of the precepts having been accomplished, the fruit is spoken of. The first is the fruit of seeing the buddhas: a bodhisattva abiding on this Stainless Ground, “by the power of his vows, gets to see many buddhas” — counting from many hundreds of buddhas up to many hundreds of thousands of koṭis of nayutas of buddhas. Note the four words “by the power of his vows”: on the first ground the number of buddhas seen is few, on this ground the number increases, and what increases is not spiritual power but the power of vows.

After seeing the buddhas there are three matters. The first is making offerings: “with a vast mind and a deep mind, he honors and reveres them, serves them and makes offerings to them,” and robes, food and drink, bedding, medicine, and all the articles that support life he offers up entirely, and makes offerings to the whole assembly of monks as well, and “with these roots of goodness he dedicates and directs everything toward anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi” — the offerings do not stop at merit but are without exception dedicated and directed toward awakening. The second is receiving the ten courses of good action again: “in the presence of the buddhas, with a mind of reverence, he receives and puts into practice the dharma of the ten courses of good action once again; and in accordance with what he has received, on up to the attaining of awakening, he never in the end forgets or loses it.” On this ground the nature-precepts are already accomplished; why then receive them again from the buddhas? Precisely because it is the ground of the precepts, the receiving is done again in the presence of the buddhas — what is received is not a prohibition but the goodness of learning from a buddha; and this receiving is held all the way to awakening, without loss along the way. The third is the purity that is refined out: “through measureless hundreds of thousands of koṭis of nayutas of kalpas, because he has left far behind the stains of stinginess, envy, and the breaking of the precepts, he is fully satisfied in the purity of giving and of keeping the precepts.” Stinginess and envy are the stains of the perfection of giving of the first ground, and the breaking of the precepts is the stain of the perfection of the precepts of this ground; both stains being left behind, giving and the precepts are pure together.

True Gold Placed in Alum: What This Ground Removes Is the Stain of the Substance Itself

Then comes the simile that gives this ground its name: “it is as when true gold is placed in alum and refined according to the method: it leaves every stain behind and turns brighter and purer still. So it is with a bodhisattva who abides on this Stainless Ground.”

This simile must be looked at together with the first ground before its depth is seen. The simile of the first ground is a goldsmith refining gold, putting it into the fire again and again — what the fire removes is the coarse stain outside the gold; the simile of this ground adds alum to the fire, and what the alum removes is the dimness within the body of the gold, so that after the refining it is not merely pure but “brighter and purer still.” Vasubandhu explains it most plainly: on the first ground the gold is refined by fire alone, and what is removed is the coarse stain of outward greed and the like; now on this ground it is further placed in alum and boiled, and what is removed is the stain upon the brightness of the substance itself, and so the meaning of the purity of the nature-precepts is stated. Chengguan takes this up and says: on the first ground the fire refines so as to remove the outer stain, while on this ground the alum takes in as well the purifying and brightening of the inner substance, and hence it is called wholly pure.

And so the two words “stainless” only here come down to earth: it is not the washing away of deeds transgressed, but the removing of that dimness of substance which makes a person able to transgress. Simile and name of the ground become one at this point.

Kind Speech and Keeping the Precepts Are Preeminent

At the end of the fruit the sūtra appends a clause of pattern: “in this bodhisattva, among the four means of gathering, kind speech is preeminent; among the ten perfections, keeping the precepts is preeminent; it is not that he does not practice the rest, but he practices them according to his strength and according to his share.”

Each of the ten perfections is preeminent on its own ground, and on the second ground what is preeminent is the precepts — which follows of itself; that kind speech should be preeminent takes one turn before it becomes clear — Chengguan and Fazang point to the same thing: on this ground the four faults of speech (false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, frivolous speech) have been left behind, and so among the four means of gathering kind speech is the most excellent. This is the power of gathering in beings opened directly out of the conduct of the precepts. And the clause “it is not that he does not practice the rest, but he practices them according to his strength and according to his share” is especially to be kept in mind: that each ground has its own preeminence does not mean that each ground lets the others fall away. Fazang here discusses four senses of the practices of the grounds, and one of these senses is precisely that “each and every ground fully possesses the ten perfections” — taken in respect of the particular, each has its own preeminence; taken in respect of actual practice, every ground possesses them all.

The Fruit of the Ground: A Wheel-Turning Sage King and Vigor in the Homeless Life

At the last the fruit of recompense and the fruit of vow-wisdom are stated. One who remains in the household “mostly becomes a wheel-turning sage king, a great lord of the Dharma, fully possessed of the seven treasures and having the power of sovereignty” — able to remove from all sentient beings the stains of stinginess, greed, and the breaking of the precepts, and by skillful means to cause them to abide in the ten courses of good action; and he becomes a great lord of giving, supplying all around without end. The position of a wheel-turning king is here not a display of the reward of merit but the form taken by a bodhisattva of the ground of the precepts in transforming others — what he removes is exactly the two stains he has himself already left behind.

The deeds of the four means of gathering that he does (giving, kind speech, benefiting, working alongside) are all such that he is “never apart from the recollection of the Buddha, never apart from the recollection of the Dharma, never apart from the recollection of the Saṅgha, and on up to never being apart from the recollection of the full possession of all modes and of the wisdom of omniscience” — this is the same pattern as on the first ground: the higher the position, the less the cord tied to the Buddha is let go.

He also gives rise to the thoughts of being foremost: “among all sentient beings I ought to be the foremost, the best, the surpassing, the excellent, the sublime, the high, the unsurpassed, and on up to the one on whom they rely for the wisdom of omniscience.” These clauses are not to be misread as striving to win — the last clause, “the one on whom they rely for the wisdom of omniscience,” is where they come to rest: the reason for being foremost and best is to be able to serve as that on which sentient beings rely.

If he forsakes the household and leaves home, practicing with vigor, then “in the space of a single thought he gains a thousand samādhis, gets to see a thousand buddhas, knows the spiritual power of a thousand buddhas, is able to shake a thousand worlds, and on up to being able to manifest a thousand bodies, and in each single body able to manifest a thousand bodhisattvas as his retinue” — on the first ground it is a hundred, on this ground a thousand, widening ground by ground. And the turn at the very end is the fruit of vow-wisdom: “if by the sovereign power of a bodhisattva’s surpassing vows he manifests freely, then he surpasses this number — a hundred kalpas, a thousand kalpas, and on up to a hundred thousand koṭis of nayutas of kalpas could not reckon and know it.” Numbers can be reckoned; vows cannot — the measure of a bodhisattva is in the end determined not by spiritual power but by vows.

The Matching of the Verses

The prose having been spoken, Vajragarbha restates the meaning in verse. The meaning of the verses is already fully present in the prose; here they only match what has been said in place, without teaching it over again.

The first verse, “upright and pliant and capable … by these ten minds one enters the second ground,” restates the ten kinds of deep mind. The next two verses, “abiding on this ground he perfects the merit of the precepts … and practices in accordance with the teaching without heedlessness,” restate the ten courses of good action of the precepts of restraint (where the line “false speech, harsh speech, divisive speech, and meaningless words” takes in the four faults of speech in four words, and “leaves the perilous and crooked behind, casts away arrogance and is utterly pliant and gentle” takes in as well the uprightness of mind belonging to the leaving behind of wrong views).

Next, the verse “in the hells and among animals they undergo every kind of suffering, and hungry ghosts burn with fierce flames breaking out from their bodies — all of this is brought on by the offenses they have done; I ought to leave those behind and abide in the dharma that is real” restates the fruits of the ten courses of evil action; the verse “among humans one gets to take birth as one wishes, and on up to the joy of the meditations in the Heaven of the Peak; the paths of the pratyekabuddha, the śrāvaka, and the buddha-vehicle are all accomplished by means of the ten courses of good action” restates the ten courses of good action as the cause running through humans and gods and the three vehicles; the verse “contemplating in this way without heedlessness, he keeps the pure precepts himself and teaches others to guard them; and seeing again the host of beings undergoing every kind of suffering, he turns and increases the mind of great compassion still further” restates cultivating oneself and urging others and the turning outward into great compassion — these three verses are the verses of the precepts of gathering in the dharmas of goodness.

The four verses that follow restate the ten thoughts of the precepts of gathering in sentient beings, taking their essentials and matching them in place: “the foolish and ordinary, by wrong understanding, do not understand rightly … I ought to cause them to remove the three poisons” answers to the foregoing thoughts of wrong views, of quarreling, of greedy grasping, and of the three poisons; “wrapped and covered by the great darkness of delusion … I ought to cause them to crush the brigand Māra” answers to the two thoughts of the thick film of delusion and of the perilous road of birth and death; the single verse “swept along by the four floods, their minds sunk and drowning, the three realms as though ablaze and their suffering measureless, reckoning the aggregates to be a house with a self inside it — in order to ferry them across I diligently practice the path” takes in three thoughts by itself — the four floods being the thought of the torrent, the three realms as though ablaze the thought of the prison of the world, and reckoning the aggregates to be a house the thought of the cave-dwelling of the aggregates; “even when they seek to get out, their minds are low and inferior … I would cause them to abide in the Great Vehicle” answers to the last thought, of the narrow and inferior mind.

The four verses below that restate the fruit of the position: “a bodhisattva abiding on this ground gathers merit, sees measureless buddhas and makes offerings to them all, and cultivating for koṭis of kalpas his roots of goodness grow brighter still, as when one refines true gold with a fine medicine” restates the seeing of the buddhas and the simile of refining gold with alum (the verse puts “a fine medicine” in place of the alum); “a son of the Buddha abiding on this ground becomes a wheel-turning king, teaching and transforming sentient beings everywhere to practice the ten courses of good action” restates the fruit of recompense as a wheel-turning king; “wishing to cast away the position of a king and his wealth and treasures … he obtains a thousand samādhis and sees a thousand buddhas” restates leaving home and practicing with vigor; “all the various powers of spiritual penetration a bodhisattva of this ground is able to manifest; and what is done by the power of his vows surpasses even these, measurelessly and freely liberating the host of beings” restates the surpassing of number belonging to the fruit of vow-wisdom.

The last verse, “the one who benefits all the world, the most excellent practice of a bodhisattva that he cultivates — such is the merit of the second ground, which I have now finished setting forth for the sons of the Buddha,” concludes and praises what has been expounded. Chengguan, going by the eighty-fascicle text, judges these verses repeating the meaning to be fifteen verses divided into three — ten verses restating the practice of the position, four restating the fruit of the position, and one concluding and praising; Fazang, going by the sixty-fascicle text, judges them to be twenty-six verses divided into six, and Li Tongxuan, going by the sixty-fascicle text, judges them to be forty-two lines of verse divided into five. The scriptural text they rely upon and the way of counting the verses differ, and both are here recorded.

A Mirror-Reading with Consciousness-Only: The Stainless Ground Is the Abode of Higher Morality

In the line of consciousness-only there is a stricter set of terms for this ground, and only after reading them together is the full weight of this ground seen.

First, the placing of the precepts. The Cheng weishi lun matches the ten excellent practices to the ten grounds, and what is matched to the second ground is śīla — “second, the Stainless Ground, in which pure śīla is fully possessed.” The two words “fully possessed” answer to this ground’s “by nature leaving far behind”: it is not holding to them without transgressing, but full possession of purity.

Second, the precision of the stain that is left behind. The Section of Ascertainment of the Yuqie shidi lun, explaining the name of this ground, points out that what is left behind is “subtle breaking of the precepts” — what is removed on this ground is mistaken transgression so fine as to be nearly imperceptible. This is exactly the stain of what Chengguan calls “able to give rise to a mistaken mind,” and exactly what Fazang calls “on this ground even mistaken transgression is left behind.” The same treatise further sets up two kinds of delusion for this ground, that is, the obstructions to be cut off — the teaching that each ground cuts off its obstructions comes down, on this ground, upon mistaken transgression and upon the destinies of action.

Third, the matching of the abodes. The Bodhisattva Ground of the Yuqie matches twelve abodes to the ten grounds, and this ground answers to the “abode of higher morality,” and directly names and cites the sūtra: if it were to be expounded at length, it is as stated in the Stainless Ground of the Sūtra of the Ten Grounds. When Chengguan composed the Yanyi chao he cited that treatise’s four clauses on the abode of higher morality — purity of intent, full possession of the nature-precepts, leaving behind the stain of breaking the precepts, and thorough knowledge and penetration of the causes and fruits of all courses of action — in order to explain the name of this ground. The ancient worthies were already reading the two together in this way; it is not something begun by people of today.

Fourth, the pairing of the sense of the ground. The line of commentary on the She dacheng lun matches ten senses to the ten grounds, and this ground answers to the “sense of the most excellent,” while the first ground answers to the sense of universal pervasion. That the precepts should be matched to the most excellent is precisely because they are the most excellent place upon which all dharmas of goodness rest.

Looking at both mirrors together: what the Stainless Ground of Huayan states is ‘the stain being left behind, the precepts are pure of themselves and kindness and compassion grow of themselves’; what the abode of higher morality of consciousness-only states is ‘what is cut off is the delusion of subtle mistaken transgression, and what is accomplished is the excellent practice of pure śīla’ — the one speaks of the look of the state, the other of the graduations of cutting off and realizing, and both speak of one and the same ground.

Lineage

The text of this ground opens out two great currents below it.

The first is the current of the study of the precepts. Vasubandhu judges the pure precepts of this ground to be two purities, and the purity of the substance itself opens further into three precepts — the purity of the precepts of leaving behind, the purity of the precepts of gathering in the dharmas of goodness, and the purity of the precepts of benefiting sentient beings. These three precepts are the ground in treatise for what later times call the three groups of pure precepts (the precepts of restraint, the precepts of gathering in the dharmas of goodness, the precepts of benefiting sentient beings); and the actual scriptural text of the three groups is precisely the passage of the ten courses of good action, the passage of considering the ten courses of good action of the highest grade, and the passage of the ten thoughts of benefiting others of this ground. That the precepts of a bodhisattva do not stop at the halting of evil but must also cultivate goodness and benefit beings has its root here. The three rules Vasubandhu sets up in explaining the ten courses of good action — the leaving behind of causes, the leaving behind by way of counteragent, and the leaving behind of resultant conduct — likewise became the common pattern for explaining the characteristics of the precepts in later times.

The second is the current of the stages of practice in consciousness-only. The abode of higher morality of the Bodhisattva Ground of the Yuqie, the subtle breaking of the precepts and the two delusions of the Section of Ascertainment, the full possession of pure śīla together with the obstruction of wrong conduct and the most excellent suchness of the Cheng weishi lun, and the sense of the most excellent of the line of commentary on the She dacheng lun — all of these are established in reliance upon this ground.

The Huayan house, for its part, has another reading: Li Tongxuan takes what is cured on this ground to be the precepts of the ten courses of good action of the very highest grade, and judges that these precepts of the ten courses of good action of the very highest grade are precisely the nature-precepts of the dharma-body, with the substance of the precepts coming home to the wondrous principle of the dharma-body; hence the good friend who represents this ground in symbol dwells within the place of awakening, gains the gate of liberation of the roaming everywhere with the joy of quiescent meditation, and shows that the nature-precepts pervade everywhere and that his practice is coextensive with the Dharma realm, so that he dwells constantly in the world and yet is not defiled by its dust. Fazang, on this ground, discusses the four senses of the practices of the grounds — displaying their differences in respect of the particular, distinguishing the excellent as surpassing the inferior, taking them in respect of actual practice, and taking them in respect of the practice that realizes the principle: the rule by which both the graded array and perfect interfusion are set forth, and an instance of it is already to be seen in the coexistence on this ground of preeminence and full possession.

The text of a single ground becomes on one face a standard source for the study of the precepts, on another a graduation of the stages of practice, and on yet another the basis for the Huayan discourse on the nature-precepts — the second ground, Stainless, is just the place from which these three roads issue together.