華嚴經 品三十八 離世間品 · 十信行二十門Avataṃsaka Sūtra · Detachment from the World · The Twenty Gates of the Practice of the Ten Faiths

First, Be Clear What This Passage Is Answering

The bodhisattva Universal Wisdom asked two hundred sentences in one breath, and to each question the bodhisattva Samantabhadra answered with ten, which Chengguan reckons as two thousand practices; this passage is the first of those answers, twenty gates in all, ten sentences to each gate. That opening sentence, at that time the bodhisattva Samantabhadra said to the bodhisattva Universal Wisdom and to the other bodhisattvas, Chengguan places in his outline as the general address that opens the section of the telling, and only after the general address does the direct answer begin — so this sentence, short as it is, is the place where the whole of what Chengguan calls the two thousand practices takes its first step, and it does not belong to the introductory section.

In these twenty gates the sūtra text has fitted on no name of any rank or stage of its own; the word faith occurs just twice in this section — once in because the mind of faith is pure, once in believing deeply and single-mindedly — and both are faith as a state of mind, not faith as the name of a stage. Where do the names of the stages come from? Chengguan says it plainly: the separately circulating old translation was itself arranged as six rounds of question and answer, and the ancient worthies of old took the wording of that text as the basis for outlining this sūtra, and the outline of the six stages was established from it, and he has taken it over and used it. So the naming of this passage as the twenty gates of the practice of the ten faiths is an outline-name that the commentators received from the ancient worthies, and not a name the sūtra gives itself.

Someone will ask at once: when other sūtras and treatises judge the six stages, they all say that the stage of faith has not yet entered the ranks, and that the reckoning starts from the ten abodes — why does the reckoning here start from faith instead, and why is the stage of equal awakening not opened as a separate one? Chengguan’s answer is brisk: those accounts have the ranks in view, and take the ranks as the ground of what they say; this chapter has the practice in view, and therefore the practice of the ten faiths stands precisely at the beginning of practice. Someone pressed him further: if this gate speaks of relying on the mind of awakening, is that not the abode of rousing the mind? Chengguan answers harder still — this objection is especially wrong; the first gate of the second round of answers is called rousing the mind of Samantabhadra, so is that the abode of rousing the mind? And at the beginning of the ten faiths, is there then no rousing of the mind at all?

There is one general error to be cleared away before anything else. Ten is not a fixed number. Universal Wisdom asks one sentence and Samantabhadra answers with ten, which Chengguan says is answering one with ten so as to display the inexhaustible; the two hundred questions each answered with ten sentences is what leads him to reckon two thousand practices, and the twenty gates of this passage come to two hundred sentences. So the ten sentences of each gate are not ten steps of a stair, they are one single thing spread open into ten sides of the inexhaustible. Once this is seen, the twenty gates are not twenty checklists but twenty doorways.

Between gate and gate there is still a sequence. Chengguan divides the twenty gates into three: the first nine gates make clear that the practice of one’s own portion is full, the middle eight make clear that the advancing practice is complete, and the last three make clear the ultimate reach of both kinds of practice. One’s own portion is the finishing of one’s own foundation; advancing is walking upward into the realms of others and of the Buddha; the ultimate is the drawing in of the harvest. It does no harm to read at that rhythm.

Gate One · The Ten Reliances: What a Practice Has to Stand On

First the question: why should practice begin by speaking of reliance? Chengguan answers directly — reliance is that upon which the rousing of practice leans; it is by leaning upon the mind of awakening and the rest that the ten thousand practices come to stand. So the placing of reliance at the very front of the twenty gates is not a casual way of beginning.

How are the ten sentences to be read? Chengguan says that all ten are called reliances and are already the head of all practices, and that the mind of awakening is further the first among the ten, because it is the root of the ten thousand practices, and therefore it runs at the head of the two thousand. When he glosses the four words constantly does not forget and lose, he brings in a hard saying: to forget and lose the mind of awakening while cultivating roots of goodness is the work of Māra. So this sentence is the general one, and the remaining nine are the particular. Within the particular, the first four are for one’s own benefit, while vow and practice run through both self and other; the first seven are all reliance upon dharma, and the last three are reliance upon persons — companions because the wisdom is the same, and the making of offerings to the Buddhas and the reliance upon the Tathāgatas because only a Buddha is ultimate. The sixty-fascicle text that Fazang comments upon has the fruit relied upon, and he strings the ten sentences into a sequence in which each gives birth to the next, by a chain of though … if …: though there is a surpassing mind within, if there is no good friend without, the practice still cannot be completed; though one meets a good friend, if there are no roots of goodness from former lives one cannot cultivate along with him; though one has roots of goodness, if one does not obtain the dharma-gate to be practiced there is nothing to build with — and so on down to the tenth, that only a Tathāgata is the ultimate thing relied upon.

Clearing an error: do not read reliance as leaning on something and never standing up. The eighth sentence says that relying on all bodhisattvas is being of one and the same wisdom, and the tenth says that relying on the Tathāgatas is that their teaching is unbroken, as a kind father’s is — what is relied upon is the dharma and the teaching, not a patron to hide behind. Bringing it down: this gate is a checklist for oneself; if any one of the ten falls empty for long, the practice will come loose just there. Chengguan says that the surpassing benefit at the end is the great wisdom of buddhahood that becomes what all things rely upon, and he asks back, how then could one not cultivate it? — which is why he also calls this gate an exhortation to cultivate.

Gate Two · The Ten Extraordinary Perceptions: Looking at Things with Another Pair of Eyes

First the question: since the gate before has already spoken of reliance, what is this gate for? Chengguan says that the former relies upon causes and conditions so as to complete the practices, while here one relies upon surpassing perception so as to gather in roots of goodness — what is being turned over is the very source of deluded perception. Because these ten perceptions all come out beyond the perceptions of ordinary people, they receive the name extraordinary. Fazang says it more plainly still: these ten are all perceptions that go beyond what is expected, and so they are called extraordinary.

The bone of the ten sentences is taking down the boundary line. The first sentence takes another’s roots of goodness as one’s own roots of goodness, and Chengguan gives five reasons: that in rejoicing with another the feeling makes no this-and-that; that they are host and guest to one another and aid and profit one another; that they are of one and the same substance; that they are the very thing one practices oneself; and that self and other are each the other. The second sentence says that all roots of goodness are seeds of awakening, and he cites the Lotus as his witness — that those who lift a hand or lower a head have all already become Buddhas. The third says that all beings are vessels able to hold awakening, on the ground that even down to one cut off from goodness there is the Buddha-nature. On the fifth he cites the Viśeṣacintā: knowing detachment is what is called dharma. On the seventh, that all dharmas are the Buddha’s dharmas, he cites a saying of Mañjuśrī as witness — I do not see a single dharma that is not the Buddha’s dharma. The eighth, on the road of speech, is because it is by words that one reaches the principle while the principle is not in the words. The tenth, perceiving no difference between the Tathāgata and oneself, is because a Tathāgata is the very suchness of all dharmas.

Clearing an error: do not read extraordinary as odd or curious. It means a view that runs contrary to common feeling — common feeling draws roots of goodness, beings, vows, and dharmas all onto the side of someone else’s, and these ten perceptions strike out that line one by one. Bringing it down: Chengguan says that the surpassing benefit of this gate is that the perception that is no perception is called the skillful perception — the end of perceiving is not the adding on of another set of notions, it is no longer using self and not-self to assign everything in front of you.

Gate Three · The Ten Practices: Bringing the Perception Down into Deeds

First the question: since perception is already had, why must practice be spoken of? Chengguan answers: relying on the understanding that is surpassing perception, one builds and cultivates the great practice; perception is only upon the mind, whereas practice runs through the three activities of body, speech, and mind — to have the perception in vain and not to practice will get nothing done either. The sequence lies just there.

There is one thing about this gate that cannot go unsaid: the base text here lists only nine sentences, yet concludes with these are the ten. Chengguan, collating against the Jin translation, found that the eighty-fascicle text has dropped the third sentence here, studying well all the precepts; and having filled the ten out, he pairs them into five couples — first the transforming of those below and the seeking of what is above, second the stopping of evil and the advancing of good, third fine stillness and deep contemplation, fourth cultivating the cause and adorning the fields, fifth revering companions and serving teachers. The sixty-fascicle text that Fazang comments upon had ten sentences to begin with, and so he divides them as the first four the practice of the precepts (of which the first two are the precept that gathers in beings, the next one the precept of restraint, and the last one the precept that gathers in good), then one the practice of samādhi, then two the practice of wisdom, then one the practice of adorning Buddha-lands, and the last two the practice of requiting kindness.

Clearing an error: do not read the practice of all beings as the practice that beings perform. All ten sentences without exception are practices cultivated by the bodhisattva, named after what they take as their object — cultivated with beings as the object, hence called the practice of all beings; cultivated with the seeking of dharma as the object, hence called the practice of seeking all dharmas. Bringing it down: this gate cashes out the ten perceptions of gate two one by one. Perceive that all beings are vessels for awakening, and what it comes to in practice is bringing beings universally to ripeness; perceive that all dharmas are the Buddha’s dharmas, and what it comes to in practice is cultivating and studying them all. Only when perception and practice answer to each other has one finished walking the first two gates.

Gate Four · The Ten Good Friends: What Sort of Person Counts as a Good Teacher

First the question: why is the good friend spoken of directly after practice? Chengguan answers: once practice has arisen it must certainly lean upon good friends, and so this is made clear next. He also gives an extremely wide criterion — to make one know what one had not known and recognize what one had not recognized, so that whoever is of profit and accord to me is my good friend; and since each of these ten sentences begins with making one, all ten are named from the side of the benefit.

The order of the ten sentences is neat: first making one abide in the mind of awakening (the rousing of the mind), next making one give rise to roots of goodness and practice the pāramitās (the cultivating), next making one explain all dharmas and bring all beings to ripeness (understanding for oneself and transforming others), next making one obtain settled eloquence and not cling to any world (eloquence and detachment), next making one practice throughout all kalpas without wearying and abide in the practice of Samantabhadra, and last making one enter where all the wisdom of the Buddhas enters. Fazang’s commentary likewise makes ten stretches, with the last two as completing the universal practice and entering the Buddha’s wisdom, which agrees with this.

Clearing an error: do not read good friend as a title. None of the ten sentences of the sūtra says what a good friend is; each says only what he makes you accomplish — the criterion is in the effect, not in the standing. Nor should one therefore count as a good friend everyone who falls in with what one wants; what the ten sentences bring about is, item by item, the mind of awakening, roots of goodness, the pāramitās, and the Buddha’s wisdom, and not the following of one’s inclination. Bringing it down: take these ten sentences and look at the people around you — whoever can set you moving on these ten matters is the person this gate is speaking of; and whoever touches not one of the ten, however close, is not on this list.

Gate Five · The Ten Diligent Exertions: Where the Strength Is to Be Spent

First the question: with practice had and good friends had, why must exertion still be set up separately? Chengguan answers concisely: practice and companions are both in hand already, and diligence must be roused to move them. He also points out the crucial thing — in these ten matters one must leave the marks of body and mind behind and cultivate onward without mixture. Fazang sets the question another way: for what sense is this exertion cultivated? The answer is, in order to do these ten things that are to be done. So this gate does not ask whether one should work hard, it asks only at which ten places the work is to be spent.

The ten sentences can be seen in three stretches. The first four are one’s own lesson: teaching and transforming beings, entering deeply into the dharmas, adorning worlds, and cultivating what a bodhisattva ought to study. The middle three are the removing of obstruction: extinguishing the evil of beings, bringing to rest the suffering of the three evil destinies, and crushing all the hosts of Māra. The last three are vow and offering: vowing to be a pure eye for beings, making offerings to the Buddhas, and causing all Tathāgatas to rejoice. Fazang enters a note under the second sentence — that entering all dharmas is entering by the witness of wisdom; and under the fifth — that making beings extinguish evil is the extinguishing of the causes of their suffering.

Clearing an error: do not read exertion as being strung tight. Chengguan says one must leave the marks of body and mind behind and cultivate onward without mixture, and being strung tight is precisely having the marks of body and mind. Nor should crushing all the hosts of Māra be read as a wrestle with something outside; the sentence just before it speaks of bringing to rest the suffering of the three evil destinies, and both lie on the line of transforming and delivering. Bringing it down: of the ten sentences the one most easily skipped is the eighth — vowing to be a pure eye for all beings. Getting things done can run on a burst of energy; vowing to be another person’s eyes runs on being unwilling to shut one’s own.

Gate Six · The Ten Ways the Mind Comes to Rest: Only What Is Settled in Oneself Can Settle Another

First the question: why is rest spoken of after exertion? Chengguan answers: cultivating onward has accomplished the two matters of benefiting oneself and benefiting others, and therefore the mind comes to rest — by benefiting oneself the mind of wisdom rests, and by benefiting others the mind of compassion rests. So this gate is not telling anyone to take a break; it says that when the twofold benefit is carried on together to a certain point, the mind of itself stops swaying.

The sentence-pattern of the ten is perfectly regular: every one runs he himself … and he makes others also …, and the mind comes to rest. Chengguan divides them into five stretches: the first sentence is the root of practice (the mind of awakening); the next two leave faults behind (one, the samādhi of no contention, leaving all quarrel; two, going beyond the ordinary person and the foolish lesser vehicle); the next two advance in good; the next three are the entering by witness (entering the rank, entering the dharma, entering the benefit); and the last two are the fullness of cause and the completion of fruit. Under the third stretch he distinguishes a fine matter: slander has a coarse and a fine sense — the coarse is to say that this is not what a Buddha spoke, and its fault is very great; the fine is to speak in a way that does not accord with the real, and its fault is then slight. Only by being able to enter the real by witness is there no fine slander.

Clearing an error: do not read the mind comes to rest as a calm mood. Every one of the ten sentences requires that both sides, self and other, be done before rest is spoken of — do it only for oneself and leave others out of account, and not one sentence of this gate holds. Nor should the real dharma that has no self-nature of the seventh sentence be read as sheer nothingness at all; the sixty-fascicle text has this sentence as the inexhaustible nature of all dharmas, and reading the two texts together, what is meant is two faces of one and the same thing. Bringing it down: when the mind feels unsettled, hold it against these ten sentences one by one — most often it is not that the mind is insufficiently still, it is that of the ten matters there is one where only one’s own half has been done.

Gate Seven · The Ten Ways of Bringing Beings to Accomplishment: Ten Roads for Raising People Up

First the question: since the gate before has spoken of the mind at rest in the twofold benefit, what is this gate for? Chengguan answers: above was the general speaking of the mind at rest in the twofold benefit, and here is the particular speaking of the accomplishing of the work of benefiting others. So this gate brings benefiting others down from the mind onto the methods.

How are the ten sentences used? Chengguan says there are two senses. First, these ten are used in common for bringing all beings to accomplishment — giving, the body of form, expounding the Dharma, walking the same road, being unstained and unattached, opening up the bodhisattva practice, displaying the worlds ablaze, displaying the great awesome virtue of the Buddha’s Dharma, manifesting supernatural powers, and fine and secret skillful means: the ten may be used together. Second, each of the ten accomplishes one class of beings, matched in order: the first accomplishes the stingy, greedy, and poor; the second those who presume upon their looks and are arrogant; the third those who doubt the Dharma; the fourth the perverse and stubborn; the fifth the covetous; the sixth those who delight in the two vehicles; the seventh those who take no delight in adorning Buddha-fields; the eighth those who do not aspire to the Buddha’s fruit; the ninth those whose refuge is wrong; and the tenth those of wrong and crafty cleverness. What Fazang lists is much the same as this, differing only slightly in wording.

Clearing an error: do not read he brings beings to accomplishment by the body of form as winning people over by good looks. Set alongside giving, expounding the Dharma, and walking the same road, it says that the very presence of the body is itself a means of teaching. Nor should the pairing of the ten classes in the second sense be read as a rigid table of remedy against symptom — Chengguan first says used in common and afterward each accomplishes, and the two senses stand together. Bringing it down: the most usable thing in this gate is the fourth sentence, he brings beings to accomplishment by walking the same road as they do — of the ten, nine are what you give a person, and this one alone is your walking beside him.

Gate Eight · The Ten Precepts: A Precept Is Not Only What One Does Not Do

First the question: why are the precepts spoken of only after the bringing of beings to accomplishment? Chengguan answers most smoothly: to bring beings to accomplishment one must first stop evil and do good oneself. So the precepts are not ranked at the very front but after the benefiting of others — first know for whose sake one keeps them, and then speak of what is kept.

The bounds of the ten sentences are far wider than what is usually called a precept. Chengguan says that among the ten, to forget and lose the mind of awakening, and on down to the faculties transgressing against their objects, are all called breaking the bodhisattva precepts. He cites a sentence from earlier in the sūtra as witness, that with the great mind of compassion made firm the precepts are not broken. So the first sentence, the precept of not casting away the mind of awakening, and the tenth, the precept of the restraint of the faculties, are the two ends of this gate: the innermost end is the mind and its vow, the outermost end is the six faculties. The eight sentences between run from departing from the ground of the two vehicles, contemplating what benefits beings, making beings abide in the Buddha’s Dharma, and cultivating what a bodhisattva ought to study, all the way to grasping nothing at all in any dharma, dedicating and directing roots of goodness toward awakening, not clinging to the body of a Tathāgata, and pondering the dharmas and leaving grasping behind. Both Chengguan and Fazang assign them under the three groups of pure precepts (the gathering in of restraint, the gathering in of good dharmas, and the gathering in of beings), and both say that they are gathered in according to what each fits.

Clearing an error: do not read the precept of not clinging to the body of any Tathāgata as meaning that one need not revere the Buddha. It is spoken together with pondering all dharmas and leaving grasping and attachment behind, and what it screens off is grasping, not reverence. Nor should the precepts be read as a list of prohibitions — seven of the ten sentences are things to be done. Bringing it down: the checkpoints of this gate are at the two ends. On the side of the mind, ask whether the mind of awakening is still there; on the side of the faculties, ask whether the six faculties were kept today. With both ends in place, the eight sentences between will of themselves find somewhere to take hold.

Gate Nine · The Ten Dharmas of Receiving the Prediction: How One Knows for Oneself That the Road Is Right

First the question: is the prediction not something a Buddha gives — how can it be said that one knows it oneself? Chengguan answers: since faults have been left behind and virtue completed, one examines one’s own practice and sees that it must certainly draw down the fruit to come, and therefore one knows of oneself that one has received the prediction. The sūtra text itself puts the matter beyond argument — by these a bodhisattva knows of himself that he has received the prediction.

The ten sentences are ten threads of self-examination: rousing the mind of awakening with a surpassing intent, never wearying of the bodhisattva practices nor casting them away, abiding throughout all kalpas carrying out the bodhisattva practice, cultivating all the Buddha’s dharmas, single-hearted deep faith toward the Buddha’s teaching, cultivating all roots of goodness and bringing them to accomplishment, setting all beings within the Buddha’s awakening, being joined with good friends without a second mind, giving rise toward good friends to the perception of a Tathāgata, and constantly and diligently guarding the original vow of awakening. Chengguan marks the character of the cultivating in each — the first is that the principle is seen deeply and compassion is keen, so that the rousing of the mind is surpassing and the fruit is beyond doubt; if it is only that one wearies of suffering on another’s account, that does not count as surpassing, and the prediction is not yet settled either. The second is cultivating without wearying, the third cultivating over long time, the fourth cultivating with nothing left out, the fifth cultivating in accord with the principle. He also says that let any one of these ten sentences be present, and one knows of oneself that the prediction is had.

Clearing an error: do not read this gate as the ceremony of receiving a prediction or the marks of it. Chengguan says it clearly: what is distinguished here is the practice by which the prediction is had, not a display of how the marks of receiving the prediction differ; for an account of the marks, the Yogācārabhūmi has its own text elsewhere. Nor should one measure it by the ranks — Chengguan says that this gate is complete crosswise within the ten faiths, whereas elsewhere the account differs by the upright ladder of ranks; Fazang too says that these ten, taken in the round teaching, run through all the ranks, and that taken from where they begin, they lie within the ten faiths. Bringing it down: pick any one of the ten threads and press it to the end — take the eighth, for instance: toward a good friend are you truly joined without a second mind, or have you kept a portion in reserve? Whichever one you can answer is the handle you have at this moment.

Gate Ten · The Ten Enterings into the Bodhisattvas: Getting Inside Another’s Practice

First the question: the nine gates of one’s own portion being finished, where does the advancing begin? Chengguan answers: the practice of one’s own portion being complete, one therefore advances, going on to enter into the places that are entered. From this gate onward, eight gates make up the practice of advancing, and of these the first five are the ones whose names are entering. He first defines the word entering as having two senses — one, the sense of obtaining by witness; two, the sense of reaching by contemplation; entering the stage of cause may run through witness, while reaching through into the stage of fruit is only a reaching and not yet a witnessing.

What this gate enters is the bodhisattvas, that is, it enters the cause. Why enter the bodhisattvas? Chengguan says: what they cultivate is what I cultivate, and each aids and profits the other as fellow travelers. What the ten sentences enter are: original vows, practice, gathering, the pāramitās, accomplishment, vows of every difference, resolutions of every kind, the adorning of Buddha-lands, mastery of supernatural power, and the displaying of the taking of birth. Fazang’s commentary likewise matches them sentence by sentence, saying that entering is still witnessing and obtaining, and takes the seventh sentence as the entering by witness into the true nature. Two of the ten are the easiest to slide past. The gathering of the third sentence is not a gathering of people: Fazang glosses it as entering the eighty-four thousand gatherings of dharma and the rest — what is entered is the whole class of the dharma, and eighty-four thousand is raising up how many they are, not a count. Nor is the accomplishment of the fifth sentence something brought to completion as a thing: Fazang glosses it as entering because practice and stage are full and round, and so it is called complete — practice and stage are called complete only when they have come to their fullness, so this sentence enters a fullness, not a finished thing. The separately circulating text renders this gate as not seeking out each other’s shortcomings, and Chengguan expressly attaches this variant name.

Clearing an error: do not read entering the bodhisattvas as getting inside the mind of some particular bodhisattva. What is entered is practice — the ten sentences list vows, practices, perfections, accomplishments, Buddha-lands, and supernatural power throughout, and not one of them is a person. Bringing it down: this gate pushes another’s roots of goodness are my roots of goodness from gate two out of perception and into witness. Gate one, relying on all bodhisattvas, said only of one and the same wisdom; only here are the ten things in which they are the same set out one by one. The closing sentence of the sūtra says that by these a bodhisattva enters universally into all the bodhisattvas of the three times — not confined to the fellow travelers of one’s own age.

Gate Eleven · The Ten Enterings into the Tathāgatas: Getting Inside the Buddha’s Fruit

First the question: having entered the bodhisattvas, why must one still enter the Tathāgatas? Chengguan answers very briefly: this is entering the fruit; and the reason one must enter is that one is certain to enter it by witness. He also cites a sentence from earlier as a foil, that one then adorns oneself with the Buddha’s virtues. So this gate and the one before are a pair — the former enters the cause, this one enters the fruit.

All ten sentences are headed by the two words boundless: boundless accomplishing of right awakening, boundless turning of the wheel of the Dharma, boundless dharmas of skillful means, boundless sounds and voices of every difference, boundless taming of beings, boundless mastery of supernatural power, boundless bodies of every difference, boundless samādhis, boundless powers and fearlessnesses, and boundless displaying of nirvāṇa. The sixty-fascicle text that Fazang comments upon has entering deeply into the Tathāgatas, and he divides it as the first sentence showing the accomplishing of awakening, the middle eight gathering and transforming by the three wheels of body, speech, and mind (the first four being the activity of speech, the next two the activity of body, and the last two the activity of mind), and the last sentence showing the entering into nirvāṇa; and he says that the Buddhas of the three times likewise perform the same working, and so it is said that they enter it in common too. He further points out that being able to obtain this dharma while still within the stage of faith is precisely the character of the practice of Samantabhadra in the round teaching.

Clearing an error: do not read he enters into the boundless displaying of nirvāṇa as the Buddha really passing away. It stands head and tail with he enters into the boundless accomplishing of right awakening, and accomplishing and passing away are listed alike among the things entered, both of them displayings. Nor should this gate be read as meaning that one at the stage of faith is already the equal of a Buddha — Chengguan says it distinctly, that reaching through into the fruit is only a reaching and not yet a witnessing. Bringing it down: what this gate teaches is the range of one’s sight. The first ten gates were all making one’s own practice solid; this gate suddenly lifts the eyes to the Buddha’s fruit — not to tell you to reach it now, but to let you know where the practice you cultivate finally runs through to.

Gate Twelve · The Ten Enterings into the Practice of Beings: Being Able to Read What People Are Doing

First the question: the two gates before entered those who do the transforming — what is this gate for? Chengguan answers: the two gates before entered those who transform, and this gate makes clear the entering into the mind and practice of those who are transformed. So the three gates are one set — entering the bodhisattvas, entering the Tathāgatas, entering beings — walking through the upper, the middle, and the lower.

The ten sentences begin from time and end at timing. The first three enter the past, future, and present practice of beings; the next two enter good practice and not-good practice; the next four enter mind-practice, faculty-practice, resolution-practice, and the practice of afflictions and habit-energies; and the last one enters the practice of what is the time and what is not the time for teaching and taming. Under the last sentence Chengguan sets down a very weighty saying — the time and what is not the time speak of ripe and not yet ripe; one who does not know the time is no great master of the Dharma. He also points out that the questioning formula of the compilers has dropped the word practice here, and that practice is of many kinds, as may be known from the text. Fazang’s commentary likewise matches them sentence by sentence, and on the last sentence puts out two readings: those whose faculties are not ripe must be waited for until the time, and those already ripe need not be waited for; or else, that the time is waiting until it is ripe and then taming, and not the time is opening and awakening by skillful means without waiting.

Clearing an error: do not read he enters into the not-good practice of all beings as going along with their evil. What is entered is the knowing of it, not the flowing along with it; and the ten sentences and the ten classes of beings in gate seven set each other off exactly. Bringing it down: the most serviceable thing in this gate is the last sentence. However accurately you read a person, if the timing is wrong it comes to nothing — that saying of Chengguan’s, one who does not know the time is no great master of the Dharma, is not a turn of phrase, it is a criterion.

Gate Thirteen · The Ten Enterings into Worlds: There Is No Kind of World He Cannot Enter

First the question: having entered beings, why enter worlds as well? Chengguan answers: a world, with regard to a Buddha, is the environing reward, and with regard to beings it is the place of transforming. So what this gate makes clear is the place where the delivering is done.

The ten sentences make five pairs: defiled and pure, small and great, the worlds within a mote of dust and the fine and minute worlds, turned over and turned up, having a Buddha and having no Buddha. The first four pairs concern the coarseness or fineness and the posture of the realm, and the last pair carries the most weight — a bodhisattva enters not only the worlds that have a Buddha but the worlds that have no Buddha. Chengguan further glosses the two words enters universally in the closing sentence as having two meanings: one, that nothing falls outside these ten kinds; two, that the entering is all at once and not one after another. Fazang’s commentary divides them much the same way, saying that the first two are with regard to defilement and purity, the next four with regard to coarseness and fineness, the next two with regard to posture (the fallen facing downward, the upturned facing upward), and the last two with regard to the presence or absence of a Buddha.

Clearing an error: do not read he enters into the worlds within a single mote of dust as shrinking oneself down. It is listed as a separate sentence from he enters into fine and minute worlds; the former says that within one mote there are worlds, the latter says that the world itself is fine and minute — they are two matters. Nor should he enters into worlds that are turned over and worlds that are turned up be read as descriptions of direction and passed over; the turning over and turning up of worlds is common language in the Huayan account of the net of fields, and here it is only their kinds that are being listed. Bringing it down: the use of this gate is in the last pair. What really tests a practice is not what you can do where there is a Buddha’s Dharma, but whether you still do it when you have come to a place where there is none.

Gate Fourteen · The Ten Enterings into Kalpas: Time Too Is Something One Can Enter

First the question: having entered worlds, why enter kalpas as well? Chengguan answers: this is the time of the delivering. He also says that from this gate onward, three gates all complete the sense of knowing all in a single thought stated above, and there is nothing further to them.

The ten sentences fall in two halves. The first five enter directly: past kalpas, future kalpas, present kalpas, countable kalpas, uncountable kalpas. The latter five enter by mutual identity: countable are the very uncountable, uncountable are the very countable, all kalpas are the very absence of kalpas, the absence of kalpas is the very whole of all kalpas, all kalpas are the very single thought. Chengguan says this entering by mutual identity has two senses: one, that those kalpas are of themselves each the other, so that wisdom entering one enters the rest; two, that because those kalpas gather in one another and enter one another, entering only the one that gathers is entering at the same time those that it gathers. He further points out that this sense has already been stated above in the Chapter on the Merit of Rousing the Mind. Fazang’s commentary divides them the same way, saying that among the latter five, the first is the gathering of the many by the few, the second the gathering of the few by the many, the third the drawing of event into principle, the fourth the raising of event out of principle, and the fifth the mutual identity of two events; and that the last sentence, all kalpas are the very single thought, runs through both the gate of conditioned arising by mutual dependence and the gate of the fusion and penetration of dharma-nature.

Clearing an error: do not read he enters into all kalpas that are the very single thought as meaning that time is an illusion and need not be reckoned with. The first five sentences plainly enter past, present, and future and the countable and the uncountable — one enters their difference first, and only then is their identity spoken of. Bringing it down: this gate takes the pressure off one who has roused a long-range mind. Gate nine said he abides throughout all kalpas carrying out the bodhisattva practice, which sounds like a life sentence; only at this gate is it said that that length and this present single thought are not held apart.

Gate Fifteen · The Ten Ways of Speaking of the Three Times: How the Three Times Speak Through One Another

First the question: the gate before has already spoken of kalpas, and this gate speaks of the three times — is that not a repetition? Chengguan answers: the former gate is kalpas and this gate is ages, differing in length but alike being divisions of time, and both are the sense of the ten ages being separately established by their mutual separation. So the former gate speaks of the measure of time, and this gate speaks of the character of time.

Of the ten sentences the first nine are particular and the last is general. Within the particular the three times have three each, and so nine ages are made. Chengguan glosses sentence by sentence where they do not run even: the future is a dharma that goes on arising, and so the future of the future is called having no exhausting; the past has already arisen, and so the past of the past is not called having no exhausting. The present of the present is visible as the event itself, and set against the present of the past and of the future it is therefore called even. Then he breaks the readings of the ancients. The ancients said that the nine ages are only a way of speaking, and that in fact there are only five ages, as when five days are set against one another: the first three are the three ages of the past, the last three the three ages of the future, and the middle three the three ages of the present. Chengguan says that this reading, pressed forward, has no substance of nine ages, and drawn back, exceeds the number of three ages — and then how could a single thought be complete with nine ages? His own right sense is this: one need not let the nine ages be conditionally arisen by mutual dependence upon one another; let only the three times be conditionally arisen by mutual dependence, and the nine ages are made — the past being caused by the present and the future, then within the past there are the present and the future, and the present and the future being each caused by the other two ages, it is the same, and so each of the three times has three. He cites the Zhongguan as witness, if a dharma comes forth from what causes it, that dharma is not other than its cause, and says further that when the Zhonglun broke the grasping at time, three within one was a fault; here, where the working that is free of fault is made clear, three within one is a virtue — making medicine out of the disease, and is that not excellent? At the last he draws the nine into ten: as for the single thought, it is the gathering of the branches back to the root, without departing from a single thought, of the nine ages set against one another; and thereby, fusing nine by one, though nine they are constantly one, and fusing one by nine, though one it is constantly nine. The Yanyi chao assigns the four grounds that follow this passage to the four teachings, and further puts out four tiers of the fusing and penetrating of time — mutually effaced and both exhausted, mutually granted and both kept, mutually followed and gathering each other, and mutually being and identical with each other. Fazang’s commentary is briefer here, putting out one question and answer at the places where the future speaks of no exhausting and the present speaks of evenness, and referring the remaining sense to the chapter on the ten ages.

Clearing an error: do not read in the present age he speaks of evenness as meaning that the three times are of equal length. Chengguan says it clearly: it is because the present of the present is visible as the event itself, and it is called even as set against the present of the past and the present of the future. Nor should the nine ages be read as a cutting of time into pieces — quite the reverse; the nine ages say that the three times cause one another and cannot stand alone. Bringing it down: this is the deepest section of the passage, but its use is entirely plain. You suppose that the past is already fixed dead and the future has not yet begun; this gate says that within the past are your present and your future, and that in the single thought of this moment the three times are all present.

Gate Sixteen · The Ten Ways of Knowing the Three Times: Knowing What Is Held Inside the Three Times

First the question: having spoken of the three times, why must one also know the three times? Chengguan answers most distinctly: the two sections before made clear the time that lies upon dharmas, and this section distinguishes the dharmas that lie within time — that is, the dharmas by which beings are delivered, put into use according as they are set up, and they are the dharmas known in the text above. He also attaches the names in the parallel translations: the Jin scripture calls this gate the three world-spheres, and the Dushi jing calls it entering into the three places, both taking the events within them.

How are the ten sentences divided? Chengguan judges them by the established and the unestablished: the first seven know the established truths (setting-up, speech, discussion, rule and standard, designation, institution and ordinance, borrowed names), the eighth, he knows that they have no exhausting, runs through both sides — completing above that the events of what is established have no ending, and giving birth below to the nature of the unestablished that can nowhere be ended — and the last two, he knows that they are of themselves quiescent and he knows that all is empty, know the unestablished. In the sixty-fascicle text that Fazang comments upon this gate is entering the three world-spheres, and he puts out three readings: the first reading matches the sentences one by one to the dharmas that are established; the second divides the ten sentences into three stretches, the world-sphere of sense and principle, the world-sphere of speech, and the world-sphere of true character; and the last divides them into the world-sphere of the vessel, the world-sphere of beings, and the world-sphere of upright awakened wisdom. Having put out the three readings, he settles his own choice among them: though there are three readings, the first reading accords with the text.

Clearing an error: do not read he knows the many kinds of setting-up as knowing a heap of terms. To set up is to lay down and establish; speech, rule and standard, designation, and institution and ordinance are all orders that people have set up; and to know that they are set up is precisely so as not to be bound by them, which is why at the end it comes down to quiescence and emptiness. Nor should the first seven sentences be discarded on that account — if one did not know those set-up things through and through, the emptiness of the last two sentences would have nothing to be empty of. Bringing it down: what this gate teaches is a way of seeing that illumines both sides. The rules of the world must be understood perfectly clearly, and at the same time known to be things that were set up; lacking the first half is being out of touch with people, and lacking the second is being eaten by the rules.

Gate Seventeen · The Ten Minds That Do Not Weary: The Mind That Does Not Get Tired

First the question: why do the eight gates of advancing close with this one? Chengguan answers: since those to be transformed are boundless, that one neither wearies nor slackens in seeking the Dharma and in delivering is by reason of the gate before, in which it was already known that the afflictions have nowhere to arise. So this gate is not urging anyone to grit the teeth and hold on; it says that once that is known, weariness has of itself no root.

Chengguan divides the ten sentences into three stretches: the first four seek what is above (making offerings to the Buddhas, drawing near to good friends, seeking all dharmas, hearing the true Dharma); the next four transform those below (proclaiming the true Dharma, teaching and taming beings, setting beings within the Buddha’s awakening, passing through kalpas beyond telling and beyond telling in each single world carrying out the bodhisattva practice); and the last two run through both matters — journeying through all worlds is for drawing near to Buddhas and transforming beings, and contemplating and pondering all the Buddha’s dharmas is for the dharma of practice of the twofold benefit. Fazang’s commentary makes a division close to this, saying that the first four are the practice of one’s own benefit, the next three the gathering in of beings, the next one a further making clear of the breadth of one’s own practice, the next one a further distinguishing of the breadth of the transforming of others, and the last one making clear that the two practices are brought to fullness and the Buddha’s fruit is brought forth.

Clearing an error: do not read not wearying as not resting. What the ten sentences do not weary of is, item by item, making offerings to Buddhas, hearing the Dharma, expounding the Dharma, and transforming beings; not one sentence is speaking of bodily strength. Nor should the eighth sentence, passing through kalpas beyond telling and beyond telling carrying out the bodhisattva practice, be read as a hard punishment — it comes directly after all kalpas are the very single thought in gate fourteen, and that length has already been accounted for. Bringing it down: when weariness rises, do not first ask yourself whether you can still hold out; first take a look by way of gate sixteen — Chengguan says that the reason slackening does not arise is that one knows the afflictions have nowhere to arise. Loosen the way of seeing, and the strength comes back of itself.

Gate Eighteen · The Ten Wisdoms of Difference: Only One Who Can Tell Things Apart Can Teach

First the question: the last three gates make clear the ultimate reach of both practices — why is the wisdom of difference spoken of first? Chengguan answers: what this gate makes clear is that the wisdom of difference which is held reaches its ultimate. He cites a sentence from earlier to set it off, that one then, by the power of wisdom and eloquence, guides and draws them according to the minds of beings. So this gate gathers all the objects transformed in the seventeen gates before into one wisdom that is able to tell things apart.

What the ten sentences know are: beings, the faculties, deeds and their fruits, the taking of birth, worlds, the dharma-realm, the Buddhas, the dharmas, the three times, and all the roads of speech — ten things, each making one kind of wisdom of difference. Reading it against gate twelve makes it clearest: there what is entered is the practice of beings, and here what is known is the difference among beings; there it is entering, and here it is knowing. In the sixty-fascicle text that Fazang comments upon this gate is the wisdom that cannot be broken, and he glosses the name as knowing in accord with dharma, with nothing further altered, and therefore called unbreakable; and he divides the ten sentences into four classes: knowing beings and the rest is with regard to the defiled dharmas, knowing the three jewels and the rest with regard to the pure dharmas, knowing worlds and the rest with regard to what is both defiled and pure, and knowing the dharma-realm with regard to what is neither defiled nor pure. Note that the two texts differ in the items of this gate — nine of the ten answer to one another: the sixty-fascicle text has knowing the Saṅgha and the eighty-fascicle text does not, the eighty putting out instead knowing deeds and their fruits; as for knowing the three times, both texts have it, and it is not that the eighty put the three times in the place of the Saṅgha.

Clearing an error: do not read the wisdom of difference as a discriminating mind. A discriminating mind takes and rejects according to feeling; the wisdom of difference knows their differences as they really are, and the last sentence, the wisdom that knows the differences among all the roads of speech, is precisely being able to say different things to different people. Nor should it be read as wide learning — what the ten sentences know are kinds, not quantities. Bringing it down: this gate is the working capital of teaching. Gate twelve said that one who does not know the time is no great master of the Dharma, and this gate adds another line: one who does not know differences will transform no one either.

Gate Nineteen · The Ten Dhāraṇīs: Only What Is Held Fast Does Not Leak Away

First the question: since there is the wisdom that is held, why is the dhāraṇī spoken of as well? Chengguan answers: this is the ultimate of the holding that holds. So it and the gate before are a pair — the former is what is held, this one is what does the holding. He cites a sentence from earlier to set it off, that one cultivates the perfections and the surpassing liberation and the rest.

Chengguan puts out two divisions of the ten sentences. First: the first sentence is the holding of what is heard; the next four are the holding of the sense; the next four make clear at length the use of the holding of what is heard; and the last gathers up the holding of the sense above. Second: the first four hold, in order, the teaching, the practice, the principle, and the fruit; the next two further display the holding of practice, since they are concentration and wisdom; the next one holds the principle, since it is inconceivable; the next two further display the holding of the teaching; and the last further displays the fruit. Fazang’s commentary first distinguishes the substance, citing the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom for concentration and wisdom as the substance and the Treatise on the Buddha-Ground and the Yogācārabhūmi for heightened mindfulness and wisdom as the nature, saying that by wisdom one illumines the dharma and by mindfulness one remembers and holds it; and he further cites the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom for the straight rendering holding, able to hold good dharmas of every kind so that they are not scattered and lost, like a whole vessel holding water, or else rendered screening, able to screen off the unwholesome minds and not let them arise. He says besides that the four dhāraṇīs of dharma, sense, spell, and forbearance set up in the Yogācārabhūmi and the rest cannot be gathered together with these ten, because the classes are not the same.

Clearing an error: do not read the dhāraṇī as having a good memory. Of the ten sentences only the first is the holding of what is heard without forgetting; the other nine are contemplating, knowing, illumining, hearing the Dharma without scattering, understanding sounds and speech, setting forth the dharmas of the Buddhas of the three times, setting forth the boundless dharmas of the Buddhas, being able to hear all the dharmas spoken by Buddhas beyond telling, and abiding in the powers and the fearlessnesses of a Tathāgata — what is held is the use of the dharma, not the quantity of the text. Bringing it down: that simile of Fazang’s, the whole vessel holding water, is the most usable for examining oneself. It is not that the water must be much, but that the vessel must be whole; let any one of the ten sentences be cracked, and everything cultivated in the eighteen gates before will leak away from just there.

Gate Twenty · Speaking of the Ten Buddhas: At the Last, a Word on What a Buddha Is

First the question: why do the twenty gates close with the speaking of Buddhas? Chengguan answers: above, both the holding and what is held are the Buddha’s dharmas, and here is the ultimate of knowing the lord of the Dharma. He adds one more sentence of the greatest importance — because at the fullness of the mind of the ten faiths one obtains buddhahood. Fazang’s commentary is of the same sense, saying that at the fullness of faith the obtaining of the Buddha’s fruit is made clear, and therefore it is made clear at this place; and to one who asked, if the Buddha’s fruit is already obtained at the fullness of faith, why is it not made clear again at the fullness of the stage of understanding, he answers: because it was already made clear at the beginning of the stage of faith, and the stage of understanding may be known by comparison with this place.

The ten Buddhas are: the Buddha who accomplishes right awakening, the Buddha of the vow, the Buddha of the fruit of deeds, the Buddha who upholds and sustains, the Buddha of nirvāṇa, the Buddha of the dharma-realm, the Buddha of mind, the Buddha of samādhi, the Buddha of original nature, and the Buddha who accords with what is delighted in. Chengguan says that these ten Buddhas are entirely the same in name and sense as the ten ways of seeing the Buddha in the text that follows, and that with the ten bodies spoken of earlier the names have both sameness and difference while the sense is not different at all; and thereupon he matches them one by one — the Buddha who accomplishes right awakening is the body of awakening; the Buddha of the vow is wholly the same as before; the Buddha of the fruit of deeds is the body adorned with the marks and signs; the Buddha who upholds and sustains is the body of the power that upholds; the Buddha of nirvāṇa is the transformation body (because a transformation must display a passing away); the Buddha of the dharma-realm is the dharma body (because it is the true and undefiled realm); the Buddha of mind is the body of awesome force (because it depends upon mind-only, and though light too can gather and subdue, subduing by mind is the most excellent, as a mind of kindness subdues Māra); the Buddha of samādhi is the body of merit (because he is constantly within concentration, and concentration is the utmost of merit); the Buddha of original nature is the body of wisdom spoken of before (because he penetrates the original nature, and the great mirror wisdom and the wisdom of evenness are both originally there); and the Buddha who accords with what is delighted in is the body born of intent; and he attaches its parallel rendering, that the Jin scripture has the Buddha who is as one wishes. At the last he distinguishes why the naming differs: a Buddha is named from the awakening within, while a body is mostly named from the mark.

Clearing an error: do not read the ten Buddhas as ten different Buddhas. The ten sentences open out ten senses within one Buddha — accomplishing, vowing, deeds, upholding, passing away, the realm, mind, concentration, nature, and delight. Nor should at the fullness of the mind of the ten faiths one obtains buddhahood be read as meaning that at the stage of faith one is already the equal of a Buddha; what Chengguan says is that at the moment of the fullness of the mind one obtains the sight of the ultimate of the lord of the Dharma, and gate eleven had long since judged clearly that reaching through into the fruit is only a reaching and not yet a witnessing. Bringing it down: having walked the twenty gates to this place, look back at gate one — there it said he takes all Tathāgatas as what he relies upon, and here it speaks of ten kinds of Buddha. From relying on the Buddha at the start to knowing the Buddha at the end, everything cultivated in the eighteen gates between is the process of coming to see clearly what that relied-upon thing is.

Lineage

The outline of this passage has its source of old. In setting out the outline of the six stages Chengguan says expressly: the separately circulating Dushi jing was made as six rounds of question and answer, and in each round there is first the question, next the answer, and afterward the quaking of the earth and the showing of auspicious signs so as to display the benefit and attest to it; and the ancient worthies of old all took the wording of that text and used it to outline this sūtra, dividing it into six stretches, of which the first twenty sentences ask about the practice of the ten faiths, and thereafter in order about the ten abodes, the ten practices, the ten dedications, the ten grounds, and the fullness of the cause and the completion of the fruit. He further points out that although the sentences of the fourth stretch are thirty, because the one sentence unobstructed function is an empty sentence of general marking, there are in fact twenty-nine. Fazang’s commentary is likewise of the same account, and cites the words of the request in the Dushi jing as witness, saying that since it says from the beginning through to the end, and since at the very last the accomplishing of buddhahood is made clear as the end, one may know that the practice of faith at the very first is the beginning. The two masters judge alike as to the source from which the outline of the six stages comes.

As to the division into three, the two masters correspond as well, though their way of counting differs. Chengguan counts by gates, making the first nine gates the fullness of the practice of one’s own portion, the next eight the completeness of the advancing practice, and the last three the ultimate reach of both practices; Fazang counts by sentences, making the first ninety sentences, the next eighty, and the last thirty. For the opening gate of the third division Chengguan follows the eighty-fascicle text and has the wisdom of difference, while Fazang follows the sixty-fascicle text and has the ten wisdoms that cannot be broken — the difference in the outline-names has its source in the difference of the base texts.

In the gloss upon the gates one by one the judgments of the two houses differ here and there. In the gloss on gate one, Chengguan divides the ten sentences by four tiers, self-benefit and self-and-other, reliance upon dharma and reliance upon persons, while Fazang strings the ten sentences through with the sequence of mutual generation in the pattern though … if …; the forms are wholly different and do not attack each other. On the number of sentences in gate three, Chengguan judges from the Jin text that the eighty-fascicle has dropped the third sentence and fills it out into five couples, while Fazang follows the ten sentences of the sixty-fascicle and divides them into the five stretches of the practice of the precepts, of samādhi, of wisdom, of adorning Buddha-lands, and of requiting kindness. On the three sentences of entering by witness in gate six, Chengguan has entering the rank, entering the dharma, and entering the benefit, while Fazang has witnessing the rank, witnessing the dharma, and witnessing the way. On the division of gate sixteen, Chengguan makes the two divisions of the established and the unestablished and assigns seven, one, and two, while Fazang puts out three readings and takes the first for himself. On the division of gate nineteen, Chengguan makes the four stretches of the holding of what is heard, the holding of the sense, the use, and the gathering up, while Fazang makes the ten holdings of teaching, principle, wisdom, concentration, the speech of other regions, the three times, eloquence, the faculty of hearing, and the fruit. On the drawing together of gate twenty, Chengguan matches the ten Buddhas one by one to the ten bodies spoken of before, while Fazang only glosses the ten names briefly and refers the matter to a separate chapter. All of these divergences are settled accounts of the ancient worthies, and are recorded without being judged.

Li Tongxuan’s treatise has no gloss upon this passage gate by gate. He outlines this chapter at large into ten stretches, and in the section of the direct telling to which this passage belongs he states of himself: in this one stretch the bodhisattva Samantabhadra has two thousand answers, and the dharmas he answers with have ten dharmas apiece, and the text of each is complete of itself and needs no troublesome explanation — only practice as it is told. Among the senses he sets up at the level of the chapter, the one that touches this passage most nearly is the section on the lord of the telling: he asks why this chapter still has the bodhisattva Samantabhadra do the telling, and answers that these two thousand dharma-gates are the constant practice that Samantabhadra practices, and so Samantabhadra is still made to tell of himself and practice of himself, so that those who hear the Dharma may model themselves upon him and practice the practice of Samantabhadra.

The separately circulating Dushipin jing was translated by Dharmarakṣa of the Western Jin, and in it the twenty gates of this passage each have verses attached, while the eighty-fascicle and the sixty-fascicle texts have none — the repeated verses of this chapter are in the very last stretch. It was precisely upon the wording of this separately circulating text that the ancient worthies of old outlined the six stages of this chapter, and so for this chapter that translation is not only a collating witness but the very source from which the outline came.

Reading straight on, what follows this passage is the second round of answers in twenty gates, beginning from he rouses ten kinds of mind of Samantabhadra, making clear the dharma of practice of the ten abodes; and what precedes it are the five sections of the introduction, the samādhi, the prompting, the rising, and the request. Chengguan says that this sūtra tells of the six stages three times over from beginning to end, and that this is the second time and is with regard to practice — because the practice of Samantabhadra runs through all six stages. So although the twenty gates are named from the ten faiths, one need not, in reading, first put oneself into some one compartment; since Chengguan has already made clear that the intent of this sūtra takes the practice within the ranks and does not take the ranks, practice is the true subject of this passage.