妙法蓮華經文句 壽量品 · 廣開近顯遠（誡信・正答長行）

We readily take lightly what always seems to be close at hand.

If someone can be seen at any time, we need not cherish that person today. If a task can be done tomorrow, we need not begin it today. If the Buddha can always be seen, cultivation too can seemingly be postponed without end.

The “Lifespan of the Tathāgata” chapter, however, says that the Buddha attained the Way in the distant past and constantly abides without extinction. At the same time, it says that he announces to beings that he will enter extinction.

This is not a matter of first telling the truth and then frightening people with a falsehood. Zhizhe says that the Buddha observes beings’ capacities, desires, practices, and understandings, then manifests a body and teaches the Dharma according to what will liberate them. Some people, seeing the Buddha constantly present, instead become arrogant, unrestrained, weary, and indolent: they neither plant wholesome roots nor agree to sever delusion. For such people, announcing extinction is precisely the teaching that can awaken them.

It turns out that “always being there” and “whether I have truly encountered him” are not the same thing.

The Dharma body, reward body, and response body are not cut off by a single manifestation of extinction. Yet if beings neither generate the wholesome nor extinguish delusion, even hearing that the three bodies do not become extinct cannot bring them into accord with the Buddha. The Buddha is difficult to encounter not because he deliberately hides, but because we must transform ourselves before we can truly see.

The announcement of extinction should therefore give rise to two states of mind: the thought that the Buddha is difficult to encounter and the mind of reverence. The thought of difficulty keeps us from treating an encounter as something assured; reverence moves us beyond merely longing for the Buddha and makes us willing to plant wholesome roots and sever the delusions of views and thought.

This is also like a crown prince’s stipend. Even what he receives as prince cannot be exhausted; still less can it be exhausted once he ascends the sovereign rank. The lifespan of buddhahood is not a long line forcibly prolonged through supernormal power. If constant life at the causal stage is already inexhaustible, how much more so the fruit of buddhahood. The distant past is therefore not meant to make us guess the largest possible number, but to break our habit of exhausting the Buddha within the single birth and extinction before our eyes.

The simile of world-realms and dust particles works in the same way. Worlds are ground into dust; all the worlds on which particles were placed and on which none were placed are then ground into dust; each particle is counted as a kalpa—yet even this cannot measure the distance since the Buddha attained the Way. When calculation can proceed no farther, the sutra brings us back to the present: throughout all that distant time, the Buddha has continually benefited beings in this land and in other lands.

The more distant the Buddha’s lifespan, the farther away from us he is not. Precisely because he is not exhausted by a single birth and extinction, he can manifest again and again according to capacities.

The next time we think “there is still tomorrow,” we might ask ourselves: Am I trusting in constant abiding, or borrowing constant abiding as a reason to delay? When I say that the Buddha is always present, does this make me more willing to practice, or does it cheapen the encounter?

Truly accepting constant abiding does not abolish the difficulty of encounter. Precisely because the Buddha does not become extinct, today’s occasion to see, hear the Dharma, and arouse the wholesome cannot be replaced by tomorrow.

I. First the Admonition to Believe, Then the Main Reply

Extensively opening the near to reveal the distant means opening the Buddha’s recent attainment so as to disclose his attainment in the distant past. The sutra text has two parts: first the assembly is admonished to believe, and second the main reply is given. What issues from the Buddha’s intent is called an admonition; the assembly’s reception without doubt is called belief. This passage has three admonitions and three requests. After the three requests the assembly requests again, and the Buddha admonishes again, making four requests and four admonitions here. The preceding Trace Gate had three requests and one admonition; together, the two portions make five admonitions and seven requests. Such earnest solemnity is used because an exceedingly extraordinary matter is about to be taught.

“sincerity” means fidelity, while “truthfulness” means examining reality. When words do not deceive beings, what they express reaches reality. What was taught in the past to the capacities of the seven skillful means accorded with those beings’ own intentions; it did not directly tell them the sincere and truthful essential purport. Now the Buddha speaks according to his own intent and reveals the most important reality, and it is therefore called “sincere and truthful.”

Having received this sincere admonition, the bodhisattvas do not dare give rise to doubt. On hearing it, they will certainly trust and accept the Buddha’s truthful words.

II. The General Outline of the Main Reply and the Near View It Breaks

The main reply has prose and verse. The prose is further divided into teaching by Dharma and teaching by parable. The teaching by Dharma is again twofold: first, the Tathāgata benefits beings in the past, present, and future; second, all that he teaches is concluded to be without falsehood.

Beings cling to the near: they see only the Buddha’s manifestation of eighty years in this life, not that he attained buddhahood in the distant past, and not that he will constantly abide without extinction in the future. The root treatise therefore uses the three periods to open away attachment to the near and disclose the distant. This benefit is not peculiar to Śākyamuni; all buddhas act in this way, so the passage finally concludes that all is real and not false. Very little text in the teaching by Dharma directly concerns the future, whereas the teaching by parable and the verse say more. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]”

The text on benefiting beings in the past is twofold. First, beginning with the “Tathāgata’s secret,” it exposes the views through which beings cling to the near. Second, beginning with “Yet, good sons,” it breaks the near and reveals the distant. The first part has three levels: it first identifies the Dharma about which beings are deluded, then the beings capable of being deluded, and finally the view that arises when they lose sight of the distant past.

“secret and hidden” means: one body is precisely the three bodies, which is called secret; the three bodies are precisely one body, which is called hidden. It can also mean that what was not taught in the past is called secret, while what the Buddha alone knows is called hidden.

“the power of supernormal penetration” is the functioning of the three bodies. “supernormal” is the naturally unmoving principle, namely the body of Dharma-nature. “penetration” is unobstructed, inconceivable wisdom, namely the reward body. “power” is functional activity freely applied, namely the response body.

The Buddha equally possesses the three bodies in the past, present, and future, but the various preceding teachings kept this secret and did not transmit it. The devas, humans, and asuras throughout the world therefore all suppose that only today, beneath the bodhi tree, did the Buddha attain these three bodies. They thus cling to the near and doubt the distant.

This portion of the Origin Gate no longer speaks separately of the two vehicles, but addresses bodhisattvas alone. Bodhisattvas can be included among the three wholesome destinies of devas, humans, and asuras. Beings in the other three evil destinies bear heavy wrongdoing, dull faculties, and little wisdom, and do not form this view that the Buddha has only now attained. Thus the Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says only that the Great Vehicle surpasses devas, humans, and asuras, without mentioning the three evil destinies.

There are three classes of bodhisattvas: bodhisattvas emerging from below, bodhisattvas coming from other worlds, and bodhisattvas who had long dwelt in the Sahā world. Those from below were transformed by the Buddha in the time of the Origin and therefore have no view of recent attainment. Those from other worlds and the former residents of Sahā are each further divided into two classes.

The first class consists of bodhisattvas born in correspondence with the Dharma body. In past lives they had already realized non-arising or had previously heard the opening of the Trace and revelation of the Origin. Even if they did not hear it then, when the recompense-body life of this period ended and they received a body of Dharma-nature, they would naturally have heard the teaching of the distant past on the ground of the Dharma body. Most bodhisattvas of this class therefore do not hold the view of recent attainment.

The second class consists of bodhisattvas who first realized the patience of non-arising in this life and those who have not yet realized it. All these bodhisattvas possess the view that the Buddha attained buddhahood only recently.

Beginning with “Yet, good sons, since I actually attained buddhahood,” the second part breaks attachment, dispels delusion, and reveals the distant Origin. This is precisely what the preceding sincere and truthful admonition was preparing to teach. The section is twofold: first it reveals the distant; then, beginning with “Since that time,” it explains the modes appropriate for benefiting beings in the past.

Revealing the distant is also twofold: first it directly reveals the distant through a teaching by Dharma, and second it uses a simile to measure and compare that teaching. Since the Buddha attained the Way exceedingly long ago, beings’ view that he attained it only recently at Gayā is broken. Opening the near to reveal the distant has roughly ten meanings, explained in detail in the Profound Meaning. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]” What is directly applied here is breaking the near to reveal the distant: it breaks the view of recent attainment, sets aside the teaching that speaks only of recent attainment, and reveals the distant past.

III. Measuring the Distant Past Through Dust-Worlds

The dust-world simile has three parts: first the simile is presented as a question, second Maitreya and the others answer, and third the simile is applied back to the Dharma so as to reveal how long ago buddhahood was attained.

Other scriptures sometimes use ineffable numbers or dust and sand as similes, already indicating an enormous number; compared with the present simile, however, those remain smaller. Merely the worlds upon which dust particles are deposited are beyond expression. How much less can all the worlds upon which no particle was deposited be fully expressed? If the worlds with and without particles cannot be expressed, how could one express the number of particles produced by grinding all those worlds into dust? How much less could one express the time since the Buddha attained the Way, which exceeds all these numbers?

Beginning with the collective reply of Maitreya and the others is the second part. The answer names three classes of people who cannot know this number: śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas cannot know it with uncontaminated wisdom; bodhisattvas abiding on the stage of non-retrogression cannot know it; Maitreya and the others themselves likewise cannot know it. The third part applies the simile back to the Buddha’s lifespan and is clear from the sutra text.

IV. The Places of Past Benefit and the Dispelling of Doubt

Beginning with “Since that time” explains the modes appropriate for benefiting beings in the past and has three levels: first, the places where beings are benefited; second, doubts arising from former manifestations are dispelled; third, beginning with “If beings come to me,” the capacities of beings are addressed and benefits are actually bestowed.

Why must the places be explained? The preceding simile expresses an exceedingly distant span of time, so beings may ask: Where has the Buddha abided throughout such a distant past? The Buddha therefore says that he has continually performed buddhawork and benefited beings in this Sahā world and in other lands.

Beginning with “During the interval” dispels doubts concerning former manifestations. The doubts concern cause and fruit. Earlier teachings said that the Buddha cultivated bodhisattva causes in many places and received predictions in many places, thereby causing beings to doubt about cause and fruit. These doubts are now dispelled: the mention of Dīpaṃkara Buddha dispels doubt about cause, while the statement that intermediate buddhas entered nirvāṇa dispels doubt about fruit. There is more than one such cause and fruit; all were differentiated and taught as skillful means, rather than disclosing the distant original ground directly, and this is why the passage is called the dispelling of doubt.

Someone explains that the Buddha skillfully said Dīpaṃkara Buddha was his teacher, whereas Dīpaṃkara was actually manifested by Śākyamuni. Śākyamuni, originally unborn, manifested birth; originally unextinguished, he manifested extinction. The sutra therefore again says that this buddha entered nirvāṇa.

Zhizhe says that this interpretation is incorrect and that only the preceding explanation should be adopted. Why? Dīpaṃkara Buddha’s conditions for transformation had matured, so he manifested the form of a buddha and transformed beings. Śākyamuni’s own conditions for buddhahood had not yet matured; he remained a bodhisattva and received a prediction from Dīpaṃkara. Receiving the prediction contains the meaning of fruit, while cultivating the various practices is cause. This already suffices to explain the sutra text.

The word qi (“that one”) in the sutra refers generally to one who carried out transformation in the intermediate period; it does not refer specifically to Dīpaṃkara Buddha. Moreover, benefiting beings in the intermediate period inherently included benefits through form and sound. Saying that Śākyamuni encountered Dīpaṃkara indicates the appearance of a buddha-body and thus a benefit through form. Saying that an intermediate buddha entered nirvāṇa indicates that after that buddha’s extinction Śākyamuni helped propagate his teaching and thus provided a benefit through sound. Benefits through both form and sound still belong here to the causal practices of the intermediate period.

Once there is an appearance in form and sound, birth necessarily entails death, and death is called entry into nirvāṇa. This is called fruit only within that period of manifestation; one cannot therefore say that Śākyamuni had already realized the fruit of buddhahood during the intermediate period. Why? Before the Lotus Sutra, it had not yet been taught that Śākyamuni had long ago attained buddhahood. How then could beings already have formed a doubt about his having realized the Buddha fruit in the distant past?

An older interpretation likewise holds that Dīpaṃkara Buddha was manifested by Śākyamuni, but this too is incorrect. Since scriptures before the Lotus Sutra did not say that Śākyamuni had already attained buddhahood in the past, what teaching could have first established Dīpaṃkara as his manifestation and thereby produced a doubt requiring removal now?

V. The Buddha Eye’s Observation of Capacities and the Two Past Benefits of Form and Sound

Beginning with “If beings come to me” is the third level, which directly explains the modes appropriate for benefiting beings in the past. It has two parts: first, beings’ stimulus and the Buddha’s response; second, the Buddha’s teaching and transformation according to their capacities.

“coming to me” means that beings in the past possessed gradual and sudden capacities which, from within the subtle, struck and elicited the Dharma body. “observing with the Buddha eye” means that the Buddha had long ago attained the Way and used the Buddha eye to discern beings without the slightest omission or error; he would next manifest inferior and superior response bodies to benefit them.

Beings’ wholesome capacities have two powers: first, they can elicit the flower-fruition of birth among humans and devas; second, they can elicit the fruit-fruition of the Buddha Way. Observation with the Dharma eye can know the myriad wholesome acts and the corresponding flower-fruition obtained according to their relative weight, but cannot ultimately know the fruit of knowledge of all modes that beings will finally attain. The Buddha eye completely illumines all wholesome dharmas and knows both their beginnings and their ultimate end.

This sutra consistently speaks of the Buddha eye’s observation and of knowing that all beings’ wholesome acts will finally obtain the Buddha fruit. This is precisely the original intent for which the Buddha appears in the world for one great matter.

“the faculties beginning with faith” are the five faculties of faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. The wisdom faculty is the discernment cause; the other four are conditioning causes. Both kinds of wholesome roots have sharp and dull forms and encompass gradual and sudden capacities. Sudden capacities also have sharp and dull forms, namely capacities for the perfect and distinct teachings; gradual capacities likewise have sharp and dull forms, namely capacities for the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings. In another relative comparison, Lesser Vehicle faculties are dull and Great Vehicle faculties sharp; in another comparison, Lesser Vehicle faculties are sharp and human and deva vehicle faculties are dull.

The sharp and dull wholesome roots of beings in the ten Dharma realms can all become capacities that elicit the Buddha; evil dharmas are not used because they are neither conditioning nor discernment causes. The Tathāgata completely illumines the wholesome capacities of the ten Dharma realms and, according to what will liberate them, benefits them through manifested form and spoken teaching.

Beginning with “Everywhere I declare” directly explains the Buddha’s manifestation and transformation according to capacities. It has two parts: first, benefits through form and sound; second, beings’ reception of benefit and resulting joy. Benefit through form is itself twofold: first, the originally unborn manifests birth; second, the originally unextinguished manifests entry into extinction.

Once the Buddha manifests a form, there is a corresponding name by which the referent of that form is called. Beings’ capacities may be superior or inferior, and the form manifested by the Buddha is correspondingly superior or inferior; as forms differ, names differ. “greater or lesser age” means the superiority or inferiority of the form: the superior is called the superior response and the inferior the inferior response.

Different names also indicate that the lifespans of the two manifested Buddha-bodies may be measurable or immeasurable. “everywhere,” vertically considered, means cultivating causes in different lands throughout the past; horizontally considered, it means lands in the ten directions. In vertical places there are different names for corporeal and Dharma bodies—for example, today’s response body and former buddhas such as Dīpaṃkara have different names. In horizontal lands there are likewise different names for corporeal and Dharma bodies—for example, today’s Buddha and the divided-body buddhas in the ten directions differ, just as the Flower Garland Sutra lists Śākyamuni’s many different names.

The scriptures also say that the Buddha has three bodies with different names, and the Dharma-essences called by those names differ: at times they are called Vairocana, Rocana, and Śākyamuni; the Dharma-body Buddha may also be called suchness, true mark, ultimate truth, prajñā, or Śūraṃgama. These are the different names used when the body of the Buddha Dharma realm is manifested. When bodies in the other nine Dharma realms are manifested, the names are still more immeasurable and boundless, as can be inferred from this.

“greater or lesser age” also means longer or shorter lifespan, varying with the response body manifested above. At times the lifespan is said to be twenty thousand years, as in the time of Kāśyapa Buddha; at times it is eighty thousand years, as in the time of Maitreya Buddha. Greater and lesser as transmitted in relation to one another can be understood both vertically and horizontally.

The relative greatness and smallness of the lifespans of the Dharma, reward, and response buddhas is explained in detail in the Profound Meaning. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]” The three bodies can be compared with one another in greatness and smallness. It can also be said that explaining the three separately is small and explaining them together is great; the example of the three points is the same. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]” All these manifestations of appropriate bodily forms and longer or shorter lifespans accord with what beings require for liberation.

“he also manifests and says that he will enter nirvāṇa” means that when people should be liberated through the Buddha’s extinction, he manifests extinction so that they cherish longing, look up to him, and attain liberation. This meaning appears again in the following teaching by parable.

“again, through various skillful means he teaches the subtle Dharma” is benefit through spoken teaching. Manifesting a smaller form and shorter lifespan, he gives gradual teachings, and these are called various skillful means. Manifesting a vast form and distant lifespan, he gives sudden Dharma, and this is called teaching the subtle Dharma. Although beings are initially guided by gradual Dharma, they are ultimately enabled to enter the Great Vehicle; the sutra therefore says that all are made joyful.

This joy is beings’ benefit from transformation. The Buddha bestows benefits through form and sound according to the four siddhāntas of the worldly, the individual, the counteractive, and ultimate truth, and beings receive all four benefits. A teaching that accords with capacities brings joy; one that runs against capacities brings distress. This is precisely the meaning of the later statement that all is real and not false.

VI. Benefiting Beings in the Present Through the Lion’s Vigorous Advance

Beginning with “Good sons, the Tathāgata sees all beings” describes the Tathāgata’s present benefit to beings through the samādhi of the lion’s vigorous advance. This samādhi has ten qualities.

First, distinguishing whether the faculties of other beings are mature or immature, purified or not yet purified.

Second, teaching those not yet liberated through the Tathāgata’s Dharma wheel so that they all enter the Buddha’s Dharma and discipline.

Third, vast vows pervade the ten directions, and sound does likewise: at times one sound pervades, at times hundreds of thousands of myriads of sounds all pervade, universally teaching every class of beings.

Fourth, turning the unsurpassed Dharma wheel, transforming beings and enabling them all to attain extinction; others cannot turn it, and only the Buddha can.

Fifth, manifesting home-leaving, shaving the head, and observing pure precepts, while also enabling others to delight in these practices.

Sixth, both disposition and conduct accord with the principle of emptiness.

Seventh, emitting light and manifesting entry into extinction; at times manifesting continued presence, at times manifesting disappearance; at times revealing the marks, at times concealing them.

Eighth, subduing the māra of afflictions, the māra of aggregates, the māra of death, and the māra who is a deva.

Ninth, enabling others to enter the most essential Dharma meaning and causing cessation and contemplation to increase.

Tenth, perfecting the foundation of the preceding ten wholesome deeds, namely the three wholesome acts of body and the four of speech, and so forth. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]”

This passage has two parts: first, beings’ capacities elicit the Buddha; second, the Buddha manifests and transforms according to capacities. “the Tathāgata sees” means illumination by the Buddha eye. “beings delight in Lesser Dharmas” identifies the capacities illumined by the Buddha.

The general purport of the Flower Garland Sutra is that although the assembly is pure, others who delight in Lesser Dharmas may, on hearing something profound, give rise to doubt and regret and suffer decline and distress through the long night. The Buddha pities them and therefore remains silent for a time. Its verse also says that others who have not practiced long and whose wisdom is not yet clear rely on consciousness rather than wisdom; after hearing, they give rise to sorrow and regret and will fall into evil paths. With this in mind, the Buddha does not teach.

Because that scripture’s assembly contains no śrāvakas of the two vehicles, “those who delight in Lesser Dharmas” there refers only to those who have not practiced long. The master says that delighting in the Lesser does not refer exclusively to Lesser Vehicle people; rather, those who delight in the teaching of recent attainment are called those who delight in the Lesser.

A general explanation is now made. First, craving the twenty-five modes of existence is the capacity of humans and devas; people of this kind who come to the Buddha are called those delighting in Lesser Dharmas. Second, craving nirvāṇa and seeking only one’s own liberation is the capacity of the two vehicles; those who come to the Buddha in this way are also called those delighting in Lesser Dharmas. Third, delighting in a gradual and circuitous course toward the Buddha Way is the capacity of the three classes of bodhisattva; those who come to the Buddha in this way are likewise called those delighting in Lesser Dharmas.

“meager in qualities” means that the functioning of the two wholesome dharmas of conditioning and discernment causes is weak. A later passage compares this with small children who have not yet understood. “heavy with defilement” means that the delusions of views and thought have not yet been severed.

VII. Why Even Great Capacities Are Generally Called Those Who Delight in the Lesser

Someone asks: The Buddha, originally unborn, manifests birth and fully administers both sudden and gradual transformation. People of the seven skillful means and so forth can indeed be called those delighting in Lesser Dharmas. But when the Buddha responds with perfect and sudden Dharma, those addressed should be people who delight in the Great. Why are they all generally judged to delight in Lesser Dharmas?

The answer is that the preceding passage only gave the purport briefly; it is now explained extensively through four meanings.

First, in terms of the past: although beings once aroused the great mind, they could not be single-minded and diligent, remained largely attached to base desires, and could not transcend the world. Their attachment to base desires is therefore called delighting in Lesser Dharmas.

Second, in terms of the present: before the Buddha appeared in the world, devas and humans possessed Great Vehicle capacities, yet their minds were stained by worldly pleasures and attached to wrong views; they are therefore called those delighting in Lesser Dharmas. These two meanings are the same in intent as the poisoned children writhing on the ground in the later parable of the good physician.

Third, in terms of practice: someone may no longer delight in the base desires and Lesser Dharmas of the three realms, yet delight in the quiescent cessation of the three vehicles and thus still delight in Lesser Dharmas. Another may no longer delight in the near fruits of the three vehicles, yet delight in cultivating the One Vehicle through successive stages and differentiated, circuitous practice, unable to cultivate universally and perfectly within one mind; this too is delighting in the Lesser. The first three meanings explain delight in Lesser Dharmas through the gate of cause.

Fourth, in terms of the gate of fruit: beings delight in hearing the lesser teaching of the Buddha’s recent attainment. They wish to hear only that he left the Śākya palace and then realized bodhi, and do not wish to hear of the Way that is long, distant, great, and enduring; they are therefore called those delighting in the Lesser.

These inclinations toward the Lesser did not first appear today. Had beings already delighted in the great Dharma of the distant past, the Buddha would not have told them that he had only just attained the Way. He speaks of recent attainment precisely for those who delight in Lesser Dharmas.

VIII. Presently Manifesting Birth Without Originally Being Born, and Benefits Through Form and Sound

Beginning with “For these people he says” is the second part, transformation in the present, and has two levels: first, originally unborn yet manifesting birth; second, originally unextinguished yet manifesting entry into extinction. Manifested birth is further divided into the manifestation of birth and its benefit; the manifestation itself is again divided into birth and non-birth. Birth means that birth is displayed within manifestation; non-birth means that the Buddha did not first become born and attain the Way today.

For people who delight in Lesser Dharmas, are meager in qualities, and heavy with defilement, the Buddha says that he attained bodhi only in this life. The preceding passage said that sharp and dull capacities elicit the Dharma body; now the Buddha manifests superior and inferior response bodies. The inferior response answers dull faculties, and the superior response answers sharp faculties. Each response body has both the birth of a corporeal body and the birth of a Dharma body.

The corporeal-body birth of the inferior response means entrusting the mother’s womb through right wisdom and walking seven steps after birth, as described by Kātyāyanīputra. From entering the womb and being born until before the six years of ascetic practice is all called the birth of the corporeal body. The Dharma-body birth of the inferior response means using thirty-four thought-moments to sever afflictions together with their habits and attaining the fivefold Dharma body of precepts, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and vision of liberation.

The corporeal-body birth of the superior response is as taught in the Flower Garland Sutra, Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, and others: the Buddha abides in Lady Māyā’s womb together with bodhisattvas and constantly teaches the Great Vehicle; after birth he takes seven steps in each of the ten directions. This is called the birth of the corporeal body. The Dharma-body birth of the superior response occurs at the place of practice of quiescence: in the final vajra mind the Buddha completely severs ignorance, attains wisdom corresponding to wondrous awakening, exhaustively illumines Dharma-nature, and perfectly and universally fulfills the myriad qualities and knowledge of all modes.

“leaving home,” in terms of the inferior response, means leaving the home of fragmentary birth and death; in terms of the superior response, it means leaving the home of both fragmentary and transformational birth and death. “attaining bodhi,” in terms of the inferior response, is the uncontaminated knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising produced from the Four Truths involving activity; this is called bodhi. In terms of the superior response, it is illumining the Way of the three truths and one reality and taking knowledge of all modes as bodhi.

Beginning with “Yet since I actually attained” explains that the Buddha, at the Origin, did not in fact first become born today. Devas, humans, and asuras see the superior and inferior responses each have the birth of a corporeal body and of a Dharma body, and assume that the Buddha began attaining these today. This is not so. The Buddha obtained both corporeal and Dharma bodies in the distant past; today’s birth is not true initial birth, and is therefore said to be distant in this way. “in this way” means as long ago as expressed by the dust-world simile above.

Beginning with “Only through skillful means” answers: If the Buddha was not first born today, why manifest birth? It is to benefit those who delight in Lesser Dharmas, are meager in qualities, and heavy with defilement, enabling them to enter the Buddha Way. Thus he says that he teaches and transforms beings only through skillful means. “making this statement” means that although the Buddha is originally unborn, he manifests birth and skillfully says that he attained buddhahood today.

Other scriptures break the belief that the corporeal-body birth of the inferior response is real birth, but do not yet break the belief that its Dharma-body birth is real birth. This sutra directly breaks the belief that the Dharma-body birth of the superior response occurs only today. Why? Since the Buddha actually attained the Way as long ago as the dust-world simile expresses, the Dharma-body births of both inferior and superior responses today are broken as beginnings; these births are not initial birth, unlike in the other scriptures.

Beginning with “The scriptures expounded by the Tathāgata” is the second level, explaining benefits through the form and sound of manifested birth. First it explains form and sound, then that all is not false. “speaking” is the teaching of sound, while “displaying” is manifested form. Form and sound do not go beyond oneself and others.

Speaking of the Dharma body is speaking of one’s own body; speaking of the response body is speaking of another’s body. Saying that one encountered Dīpaṃkara Buddha is speaking of one’s own affairs; saying that Dīpaṃkara Buddha was one’s teacher is speaking of the affairs of another’s body. Displaying the primary recompense is displaying one’s own affairs; displaying the dependent land is displaying another’s affairs. Speaking according to another’s intent is speaking of another’s body; speaking according to one’s own intent is speaking of one’s own body. Displaying one’s own and another’s affairs can be understood in the same way.

“All that is spoken is real and not false” is also twofold: first non-falsehood is stated, and then the reason for non-falsehood is explained. The first level speaks of non-falsehood primarily in relation to spoken teaching; the second explains the non-falsehood of both form and sound.

Gradual and sudden capacities receive the superior and inferior forms and sounds and all obtain benefit; hence these are not false. The preceding section on benefiting beings in the past said only that all became greatly joyful, seemingly disclosing only the benefit of the worldly siddhānta. The present statement that all is real and not false means that superior and inferior form and sound precisely fit the two capacities, enabling beings to obtain the benefits of all four siddhāntas; none is false.

The Great Treatise says that each of the four siddhāntas has its own reality. The worldly siddhānta has its reality, and the counteractive and individual siddhāntas have theirs. Strictly speaking, these three are worldly realities and remain false from the standpoint of ultimate truth. Conversely, within causes and conditions there can be three worldly realities, while ultimate truth may temporarily be unusable for certain capacities.

When this provisional and real are correlated with the Trace and Origin Gates, the benefits received by gradual and sudden beings include both false and real. In the past they practiced through skillful means without yet receiving the benefit of the real Way; this was falsity on the side of cause. Clinging to the Buddha’s recent attainment and not receiving the real benefit of the distant original ground was falsity on the side of fruit. By now hearing the Trace Gate, entering true mark together, and receiving real benefit in the cause, and by hearing the distant teaching of the Origin Gate, removing attachment to the near, and receiving the real benefit of the distant fruit-ground, they obtain today the two realities of cause and fruit that counteract the two former falsehoods of cause and fruit.

For perfect and sudden beings, there had originally been one reality and one falsehood across the Trace and Origin Gates. Having attained the practice of the Middle Way was real benefit in the cause; continuing to cling to a recent fruit was falsehood on the side of fruit. Hearing the causal teaching now does not give them another new real benefit; only hearing of the distant fruit gives them real benefit on the side of fruit. Thus there was one former falsehood and one reality is received today, and all is said to be real and not false.

Someone asks: If the Great Vehicle of today and the Great Vehicle of the past both disclose true mark, should there be a difference between what earlier and later awakeners enter?

The answer is that immediate entry at the outset, later gradual entry, and even dismantling the grass hut and entering the Middle Way together do not enter two different realities. Entry alone is gradual or sudden, and therefore two teachings are distinguished. For example, in entering the true truth, dull people rely on analysis of dharmas, contemplation of impermanence, and so forth, while sharp people enter through contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas in their very substance. The Tripiṭaka and shared teachings are thereby distinguished, but the true truth entered is not itself divided in two.

IX. Six Statements of Non-Falsehood in Illumining Principle

Beginning with “Why is this? The Tathāgata knows and sees the marks of the three realms as they really are” is the second part, which generally explains why benefiting beings is not false. It first explains the benefit of manifested form and then the benefit of spoken teaching. Six statements here show that the response body is not apart from the Dharma body. The Dharma body originally has no form and neither arises nor ceases. Beings, however, possess capacities of arising and ceasing that elicit the Dharma body. Through the power of his original vows, the Tathāgata responds to beings by likewise manifesting arising and ceasing. This view of arising and ceasing comes from beings, and the six statements are therefore explained through the three realms.

This passage is also twofold: first, non-falsehood through illumining truth; second, beginning with “because beings,” non-falsehood through according with capacities. When one can penetrate truth and accord with capacities, establishing teachings and transforming beings, the result cannot be false.

The first statement, “knowing and seeing as it really is,” is real wisdom illumining the reality of the three realms in accordance with truth itself. In reality there are no marks of the causes of the three realms.

The second statement, “there is no birth and death,” means that there is no suffering of fragmentary or transformational birth and death. The accumulation of afflictions is called retreat, while the manifestation of impermanent recompense is called emergence; neither exists in reality.

The third statement means that there is also no person abiding in the world of birth and death and no person entering the extinction of nirvāṇa. Both the world and extinction are quiescent, and therefore there is no one in the world or entering extinction.

The fourth statement means neither the one-sided reality of extinction nor the one-sided falsehood of birth and death; it therefore says neither real nor false.

The fifth statement means neither the one-sided suchness that transcends the world nor the one-sided difference of the world; it therefore says neither such nor different. The preceding four paired negations all disclose the Middle Way.

If the two sides are only doubly negated but the final statement becomes fixed on one side, the Middle Way still has not been disclosed. For example, one might say neither born nor dead but end by concluding “born”; say both born and dead but end by concluding “dead”; say both retreat and emergence but end by concluding “retreat”; say neither retreat nor emergence but end by concluding “emergence”; say neither false nor real but end by concluding “real”; or say both false and real but end by concluding “false.” All such conclusions that fall to one side must now be negated. The meaning of the Middle Way appears only when single, compound, and all other formulations are likewise not grasped.

The sixth statement, “not seeing the three realms as beings in the three realms see them,” means that the Buddha does not see the three realms as the two classes of beings there do. The Buddha alone exhaustively and truly sees the reality of the three realms, inwardly perfecting the functioning of real wisdom. This is speech according to the Buddha’s own intent and also concerns the affairs of his own body. The Large Prajñāpāramitā therefore says that in ultimate truth there is no differentiation.

On the other hand, the Tathāgata uses provisional wisdom to know and see the marks of the three realms according to the measure of beings, manifesting in accord with how beings in the three realms see. Although in true knowing and seeing there are originally not two kinds of birth and death, the Tathāgata manifests bodies of both and speaks of both according to beings’ intent. Although there is originally no retreat or emergence, he speaks of retreat and emergence. Although there is originally no one in the world or entering extinction, he manifests birth in the world and entry into nirvāṇa and speaks of persons abiding in the world and attaining extinction. Although there is originally no one-sided reality, he speaks of the reality of nirvāṇa; although no one-sided falsehood, he speaks of the falsehood of the three realms; although no difference among the three periods, he speaks of differences among them; although no one-sided suchness of true truth, he speaks of suchness.

These teachings see the three realms in accord with the way beings there see them. They are all words spoken according to beings’ intentions and are called speaking and displaying the affairs of another’s body. The Tathāgata’s real and provisional wisdoms clearly examine true and conventional truth, so the two benefits of manifested form and spoken teaching are both real and not false.

X. Nature, Desire, Conduct, Recollective Thought, and Non-Falsehood in According with Capacities

Beginning with “because beings” is the second level, explaining non-falsehood in according with capacities. It first states the stimulus of beings’ capacities and then the Buddha’s teaching according to those capacities.

Beings’ faculties may be sharp or dull, and what they receive may be gradual or sudden; their natures, desires, conduct, and wisdom also have many differences. The Buddha wishes to enable each to increase wholesome roots and therefore establishes teachings concerning himself and others, instructing them through unfailing causes and conditions and similes.

Gradual and sudden natures each have many differences, and the individual siddhānta is required here because it specifically causes wholesome roots to grow. Yet wholesome roots themselves belong to nature, and habitual desires in turn form nature. Why then does the sutra speak first of nature and afterward of desire?

The explanation is that the nature carried from the past can generate present desire. It is also like affliction giving rise to the five aggregates and the five aggregates again giving rise to affliction; neither can be declared absolutely first or later. Nature and desire are the same: repeated habitual desire is required to form nature.

“desire” means the many different desires of gradual and sudden capacities; the worldly siddhānta is required here.

“conduct” means acting and cultivating various practices in accordance with desire. The individual siddhānta is required here. Many attachments may also arise in practice and create obstructions, so the counteractive siddhānta is required as well.

“recollective thought” is the semblant understanding produced by wisdom. Understanding arises from practice yet remains a skillful means; it is not yet in accord with truth and has not reached where the path of words is cut off, and therefore remains a contemplation through conceptual recollection. While gradual and sudden beings abide in the inner and outer ordinary stages, they first possess various wholesome roots and desires; desire leads to practice, and practice produces semblant understanding. Ultimate truth is required here: based on the understanding already obtained through recollective thought, the Buddha teaches further so that they clearly awaken to ultimate truth.

Even when a bodhisattva of the first ground wishes to cultivate the second ground, that bodhisattva recollectively conceives the domain of the second ground; this too is called conceptual recollection. When genuine understanding of the second ground arises, contemplative recollection is removed and verbal dharmas cease. Proceeding upward level by level, only at buddhahood does one ultimately leave every recollective thought and attain constant quiescent illumination.

Beginning with “wishing to cause them to generate” is the second part, actual teaching according to capacity. For the various gradual and sudden capacities, the Buddha administers spoken teachings concerning himself and others so as to cause various wholesome roots to arise. He therefore also displays various forms and affairs of self and other, speaks various verbal teachings of self and other, and uses various causes and conditions and similes.

For gradual capacities, the Buddha teaches with various causes and conditions and similes within each of the four gates of the Tripiṭaka teaching; every gate has many different methods. For example, he teaches the patience of suffering to the indolent and the patience of impermanence to the arrogant. The four gates of the shared teaching are the same.

For sudden capacities, such as those of the distinct and perfect teachings, there are likewise four gates and many different methods. The thirty-two bodhisattvas each teach entry into the Dharma gate of nonduality, while the Flower Garland Sutra lists many classes and forms of practice. All these are teachings delivered through numerous similes and expressions established for diverse capacities.

“The buddhawork performed has never been suspended even briefly” concludes that benefits through form and sound are all not false. The various manifested forms and spoken teachings concerning self and other above are all intended to bring beings into the Buddha’s knowing and seeing, not merely to accomplish the lesser affairs of humans, devas, or the two vehicles; hence they are called buddhawork.

If only one person attained extinction and everyone else could not, some buddhawork would be abandoned. Once abandoned, other beings would not obtain real benefit. How then could all be called real and not false?

Someone may pursue the point: In the past the Buddha said that while seated at the place of practice he had not obtained a single dharma; none of the seven skillful means was ultimate extinction, and the two nirvāṇas were only the empty fist displayed as a skillful means. On this account, the past was only false and did not yet reveal that everything was real. How then can all be said to be real?

The answer is that the seven provisional means of the past could be called false only if they never ultimately enabled beings to enter the one reality. The Buddha first used provisional means to lead beings out, but there is no one whom provisional means led out who does not finally enter reality. Thus one knows that the skillful means that appeared false in the past existed precisely for the final reality. This is the meaning of all being real and not false and buddhawork never being suspended.

XI. The Origin Is Truly Without Extinction, Yet the Three Bodies Announce Extinction

Beginning with “In this way, since I attained buddhahood, an exceedingly long time has passed” explains that although the Buddha originally does not become extinct, he manifests entry into extinction. It has two parts: first, originally unextinguished yet manifesting extinction; second, beginning with “The Tathāgata uses this skillful means,” the benefit brought by manifested extinction.

The first part is also twofold: first, the Origin’s actual non-extinction; second, beginning with “Yet now,” the announcement of entry into extinction within manifestation.

Beginning with “Since I attained buddhahood” states that the Buddha fruit constantly abides; because it constantly abides, it does not become extinct. The sutra entrusts to these few words the revelation of the mighty tendency of the future, constantly abiding and benefiting beings.

Beginning with “The lifespan I accomplished while originally practicing the bodhisattva path” uses lifespan on the causal ground to compare and reveal lifespan on the fruit-ground, thereby clarifying constant abiding. Earlier people used this passage to prove that the Buddha’s lifespan remains impermanent. They said that in the past the Buddha had already passed kalpas numbering more than the sands of the Ganges and would continue for twice the preceding number, but that this merely prolonged life through supernormal power and remained impermanent in the end.

Such a reading grasps the wording one-sidedly and greatly misses the purport. The sutra uses cause to illustrate fruit; the lifespan of the Buddha fruit is not something countable. The sutra’s verse says that the lifespan of numberless kalpas was obtained through long cultivation of karma; it is not life prolonged through supernormal power.

Why? When the Buddha cultivated the perfect cause and ascended to the first abode, he had already obtained constant lifespan. Constant lifespan cannot be calculated by number; if lifespan on the causal ground already exceeds the preceding number of particles, how much more the Buddha fruit? Why abandon the Buddha fruit that the sutra intends to illustrate and instead cling casually to the causal ground used as the comparison? Even that causal lifespan is already constant rather than impermanent.

It is like the stipend received by a crown prince: it is already inexhaustible, so how could his resources be exhausted after he ascends the highest sovereign rank? The clear wording stands here; why wrench its meaning and cause later students to doubt and misunderstand?

Beginning with “Yet now it is not a real extinction” is the second level, announcing entry into extinction within manifestation. The Dharma, reward, and response bodies all possess the meaning of originally not becoming extinct yet skillfully announcing extinction.

First, the Dharma body is originally unextinguished yet announces extinction. The Vimalakīrti Sūtra says that dharmas are originally unborn and now therefore have nothing that can be extinguished; this expresses the Dharma body’s original non-extinction. It also says that this is the meaning of quiescent extinction, which is the announcement of extinction to beings. Why? Those who already understand do not need quiescent extinction announced for them; it is taught only to those who do not yet understand.

If one says “illumining yet quiescent,” this is the announcement of extinction; if one says “quiescent yet illumining,” this is the announcement of birth. Although the Dharma body is originally neither born nor extinguished, birth and extinction can be discussed in relation to beings’ delusion and awakening. When the deluded mind grasps, afflictions arise and wisdom is extinguished; when the understanding mind remains unstained, wisdom arises and afflictions are extinguished.

Extinguishing delusion and generating understanding is impermanent birth and extinction; when understanding arises and delusion is extinguished, this can also be called quiescent extinction. All these births and extinctions are distinguished in terms of delusion and understanding with respect to Dharma-nature. Without the two conditions of delusion and understanding, such birth and extinction would not be taught.

Second, the reward body is originally unextinguished yet announces extinction. Who possesses wisdom and who possesses affliction, such that wisdom is said to destroy affliction? Light and darkness cannot mutually remove one another; this indicates the reward body’s non-extinction. Beings who have not understood may hear this and suppose that they are already buddhas in their present state, become arrogant and unrestrained, and cease cultivating the Way. The Buddha therefore also announces that the Way can extinguish delusion: when affliction is present wisdom is absent, and when wisdom is present affliction is absent. Is this not wisdom extinguishing affliction?

Third, the response body is originally unextinguished yet announces extinction. The response body is the functioning of the Dharma and reward bodies. Since the essence does not become extinct, how could its functioning be exhausted? Thus the response body is originally unextinguished. Yet if beings constantly see the Buddha, they become arrogant and heedless, and the Buddha therefore announces that he will enter extinction that very night.

This can be explained further through the relation of the Dharma and reward bodies. The Dharma body is directly said to be unextinguished in essence; the reward body must rely upon the Dharma body to be called unextinguished. If one investigates through principle whether wisdom can destroy affliction, one may ask: Does wisdom destroy affliction only after reaching it, or before reaching it? Does wisdom destroy it together with other conditions, or alone? Such investigation finds no substantial act of destruction; this is the meaning of wisdom not extinguishing affliction. In terms of phenomena, however, affliction is absent when wisdom is present, and wisdom can be said to extinguish affliction.

To say that the response body does not become extinct relies on the Dharma and reward bodies. Since Dharma and reward constantly abide, responsive transformation continues without interruption. So long as beings are not exhausted, the Buddha’s responsive transformation does not enter extinction. Distinguished separately, the Dharma body is neither born nor extinguished in essence; the reward body realizes that no substantial dharma can be born or extinguished; the response body is said to be unborn and unextinguished through continuity from before to after. “[The remainder is abbreviated.]”

XII. The Harm and Benefit of Manifested Extinction, and the Final Conclusion

Beginning with “through this skillful means he teaches and transforms” is the second part, explaining how manifested extinction benefits beings. It has two levels: first, if the Buddha never manifests extinction, beings are harmed; second, beginning with the skillful statement “Monks, you should know,” beings benefit when the Buddha announces extinction.

The harm of non-extinction is also twofold: first it is stated briefly, then explained extensively. Briefly: the people described above who delight in Lesser Dharmas see the Buddha constantly present and do not plant wholesome roots, becoming poor and lowly. They cannot generate the two wholesome dharmas of conditioning and discernment causes and therefore receive no benefit; the delusions of views and thought also cannot be severed, and these two evils remain, causing harm.

Attachment to the five desires is the delusion of thought; entering the net of recollective thought and false views is the delusion of views. Because these beings’ defilements are heavy, the Buddha must announce extinction. If he does not, the two evils arise and are not extinguished, while the two wholesome qualities are damaged and do not arise.

When extinction is manifested according to the four siddhāntas, the two evils are extinguished and the two wholesome qualities arise. To extinguish the two evils, the counteractive and ultimate-truth siddhāntas are used: ultimate truth extinguishes evil that has not yet arisen, while the counteractive extinguishes evil that has arisen. The worldly and individual siddhāntas generate the two wholesome qualities: the worldly causes unarisen good to arise, and the individual causes arisen good to increase.

It can also be said that the worldly siddhānta extinguishes arisen evil while the counteractive siddhānta extinguishes unarisen evil. For example, cultivating meditation and thereby extinguishing the evil of the five aggregates in the desire realm is the worldly siddhānta extinguishing arisen evil. The individual siddhānta increases arisen good, and the ultimate-truth siddhānta generates the unarisen unconditioned good.

Beginning with “if they see” extensively explains the harm of non-extinction. If beings see the Buddha constantly abiding in the world, they become arrogant and unrestrained, which is harm; they cannot generate reverence, which is absence of benefit. “arrogance and license” increases the delusion of views, while “weariness and indolence” increases the delusion of thought. Inability to form the thought that the Buddha is difficult to encounter prevents the understanding that sees truth; inability to revere prevents reflective cultivation of the Way. For these reasons it is appropriate for the Buddha to manifest entry into extinction.

Beings who see or hear that the Dharma, reward, and response bodies do not become extinct may all become arrogant and unrestrained. First, one who hears that the Dharma body does not become extinct may say that the suchness of beings and Maitreya’s suchness are one without duality, and that complete equality is truth. From this arise arrogance and overweening pride. The person may further say that all afflictions were originally unborn and now have nothing that can be extinguished, so why cultivate the Way, and may therefore indulge heedlessly. For such people the Buddha declares that this is the meaning of quiescent extinction, causing them to extinguish delusion and realize.

Second, beings hear that the mark of all beings is precisely the mark of bodhi, the mark of bodhi precisely the mark of affliction, and light and darkness do not mutually remove one another. They again become arrogant and unrestrained, cease cultivating good, and fall into indolence and heedlessness. For them the Buddha declares that the wisdom of the reward body can extinguish affliction. The power of ignorance is great, and only the Buddha’s bodhi-wisdom can extinguish it.

Third, the response body is originally unextinguished yet manifests entry into extinction; the meaning is comparatively easy to understand.

If the Buddha taught only that dharmas were originally unborn and are now unextinguished, beings would still have to know that only extinguishing delusion is truly called quiescent extinction. The sutra also says that wisdom does not extinguish affliction; yet darkness is absent when light appears, and beings plainly possess afflictions now. How could they say that they already possess wisdom? One should know that wisdom can indeed extinguish obstructions and delusion.

When beings hear the Buddha announce extinction in this way, they form the thought that the Dharma, reward, and response bodies are difficult to encounter and arouse a mind of reverence.

Beginning with “Therefore the Tathāgata uses skillful means” directly explains the benefit of announcing extinction and has three levels: first, praising how difficult the Buddha is to encounter; second, explaining why he is difficult to encounter; third, saying that the buddhas of all three bodies are difficult to encounter.

Beings delight in Lesser Dharmas and are deeply obstructed by the delusions of views and thought. Even after hearing that the three bodies do not become extinct, they refuse to cultivate the Way and therefore find it difficult to accord and meet with the three bodies.

Next the difficulty of encounter is explained. Beings of meager qualities may pass hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of kalpas, sometimes seeing a buddha and sometimes not. If they can see the Dharma, reward, and response bodies, they have much good and little evil, and the Buddha need not announce extinction for them; such people are as though they constantly see the Buddha present on Vulture Peak. If they cannot see him, their obstructions are heavy and their good slight, so the Buddha tells them that the three bodies are difficult to encounter.

Beings who hear this think: Although the three bodies are originally neither born nor extinguished, I must still generate wholesome dharmas and extinguish delusion before I can realize and see them myself. This is not easy and is therefore called difficult to encounter.

“cherishing longing and thirsting for the Buddha” shows that the Buddha’s manifested extinction does not harm beings. Extinguishing the delusions of views and thought is called absence of harm; planting wholesome roots is called benefit.

Beginning with “Again, good sons” is the second major part of the teaching by Dharma. It concludes the Buddha’s benefit to beings in the past, present, and future, through which they all receive real benefit. The conclusion has three points. First, when buddhas appear amid the five turbidities, they necessarily teach the three vehicles first and afterward return them to the One, and teach recent attainment first and afterward reveal distant attainment. Second, all this is done to transform beings. Third, every teaching of skillful means and reality is without falsehood.

The “Lifespan of the Tathāgata” chapter places two apparently contrary things together: the Buddha attained the Way in an exceedingly distant past and his lifespan constantly abides without extinction, yet he also manifests birth everywhere and repeatedly announces that he will enter nirvāṇa. If only the first statement is retained, manifested birth and the announcement of extinction appear false; if only the second is seen, distant constant abiding seems no more than an exalted claim that can never be brought to bear.

Zhizhe’s answer does not choose between the two sides. He first has the assembly accept the Tathāgata’s truthful words, then unfolds how the Buddha benefits beings through the Dharma body, reward body, and response body in terms of the past, the present, and “not becoming extinct yet manifesting extinction.” The distant past does not cancel the births and extinctions before us. Precisely because the Buddha is originally not exhausted by one birth and one extinction, he can manifest birth and extinction according to what beings require. The question thus shifts from “Does the Buddha ultimately undergo birth and extinction, or not?” to “What kind of being requires what mode of the Buddha’s manifestation in order to benefit?”

I. If the Buddha Is to Speak the Truth, Why Does He First Admonish the Assembly Repeatedly to Believe?

The Buddha admonishes the assembly three times to believe and understand; after requesting three times, the assembly requests once again. This repetition is not ceremonial padding. Beings have long seen only Śākyamuni leave the palace and attain buddhahood while seated at the place of practice. Recent attainment has become a boundary around their understanding of the Buddha’s body, lifespan, and teachings. To say now that the Buddha actually attained the Way immeasurably long ago is not merely to add a larger number to a familiar story; it unsettles the very point from which they judge the Buddha’s body, lifespan, and spoken Dharma.

Hence the admonition comes first and the reply afterward. The admonition tells the assembly that what follows is not ordinary speech to be accepted or rejected through their old views. Belief, moreover, is not uncomprehending assent; it is the refusal to let what has been seen recently decide in advance that the distant account is impossible.

The root treatise explains sincerity and truthfulness separately: sincerity means not deceiving, and truthfulness means examined reality. In the past, the Buddha spoke in accord with what beings could accept; today he directly discloses the essential purport. The two are not one falsehood and one truth. If an accommodating teaching ultimately leads someone into the real, it is not false merely because it did not state everything at that earlier moment. Yet to hear this relation, the assembly must first relinquish the suspicion that anything less than a complete disclosure all at once is deception. The admonition to believe thereby prepares the way for the later declaration that all is real and not false.

The three admonitions and four requests also show Dharma and capacity waiting upon one another. The Buddha does not speak on his own when no one has requested, nor does the assembly request once and assume that its preparation to receive the Dharma is complete. The Buddha admonishes solemnly, and the assembly again declares its willingness to believe and accept. Between each admonition and request, the distant teaching that must be borne gradually finds a place to land.

II. Where, Exactly, Is the Secret in the “Secret Power of Supernormal Penetration”?

The devas, humans, and asuras of the world believe that Śākyamuni only now attained the fruit of buddhahood beneath the bodhi tree. What they have lost is not merely a date, but the Dharma of the three bodies. The root treatise states directly: “one body is precisely the three bodies” is called secret; “the three bodies are precisely one body” is called hidden. It also says that what was not taught before is called secret, while what the Buddha alone knows is called hidden.

The Dharma body is the naturally unmoving principle, the reward body is unobstructed and inconceivable wisdom, and the response body is the power of unhindered application. The three do not cut one buddha into three pieces. Without the Dharma body, wisdom and responsive activity lose their basis; without the reward body, principle does not illuminate itself; without the response body, principle and wisdom cannot become benefits that beings can see and hear in the present. To speak of three bodies is to see unmoving principle, illuminating wisdom, and free activity together. To speak of one body is to keep the three from becoming three buddhas isolated from one another.

Attachment to the near is deep because beings infer everything backward from the response body’s single visible birth. Seeing Śākyamuni leave home and attain the Way in this life, they assume that the Dharma, reward, and response bodies all began today as well. The single manifested life of the response body then conceals the distant basis of all three.

Nor are bodhisattvas as a whole free of this doubt. The bodhisattvas emerging from below were transformed in the distant Origin and therefore do not cling to recent attainment. Among bodhisattvas from other worlds and those who formerly dwelt in Sahā, those who had already realized non-arising in the past or had heard of the distant attainment also largely avoid the near view. Those who first attained the patience of non-arising in this life, or have not yet attained it, may still think that the Buddha attained buddhahood only today. The distinction among the “beings capable of being deluded” thus rests on their history of receiving the Dharma rather than on a generic identity. Being called a bodhisattva does not automatically remove doubt about the Buddha’s lifespan; whether one has received the teaching of the distant past is decisive here.

The secret is therefore not deliberate concealment. The Buddha did not speak in the past because beings had not yet reached the mode in which they could bear it; he reveals it now because they must know that the response body before their eyes does not exhaust the Buddha. At its deepest, the “power of supernormal penetration” is not an extraordinary ability, but the ability of the Dharma, reward, and response bodies to benefit beings throughout the three periods without being exhausted by any single manifestation.

III. Why Grind Immeasurable Worlds into Dust?

After saying that he attained buddhahood in the distant past, the Buddha measures by comparison through worlds and dust particles. Incalculable worlds are first ground into dust. Traveling east through a vast number of lands, one particle is deposited; after all the particles are exhausted, every land passed—whether a particle was deposited there or not—is again ground into dust, and each particle is counted as one kalpa. Even so, the time since the Buddha attained the Way exceeds this number.

This simile does not turn the distant past into an answer that can finally be calculated. It instead makes each calculation generate something still more incalculable: the lands where particles were placed are beyond number, and the lands where none were placed are more numerous still; the lands cannot be counted, and the particles into which those lands are ground cannot be counted; even when each particle becomes a kalpa, the Buddha’s lifespan exceeds them. When calculation reaches its end, the view of recent attainment loses its footing as well.

When the sutra first asks Maitreya and the others whether they can know the number, the reply is not simply “too many.” Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas cannot know it with their uncontaminated wisdom; bodhisattvas abiding on the stage of non-retrogression cannot know it; Maitreya and the others likewise cannot know it. These three answers make unknowability more than an insufficiency in ordinary arithmetic. They say that so long as the Buddha’s lifespan is treated as an object that existing mental power can exhaust, even profound wisdom cannot reach it.

Yet immeasurability does not make the lifespan irrelevant to beings. As soon as the simile is complete, the Buddha says that throughout that distant time he has constantly taught and transformed in the Sahā world and in other lands. The distant past does not push the Buddha into an inaccessible past; it shows instead that every buddhawork beings see in any one period is only one place within a long history of benefiting them. The distance measured by dust particles must finally land in “continually guiding and benefiting beings here and elsewhere,” lest immeasurability become empty talk.

IV. Why Does the Buddha Eye See More Than the Good and Evil of a Single Moment?

Where has the Buddha benefited beings throughout the distant past? The root treatise first speaks of Sahā and other lands, then dispels doubts arising from intermediate causes and fruits such as Dīpaṃkara Buddha, and finally comes to the Buddha eye’s observation of capacities. This sequence turns the question “Where has he abided for so long?” into “How does he truly benefit beings in each place?”

Concerning Dīpaṃkara Buddha, someone says that he was actually manifested by Śākyamuni. The root treatise does not accept this interpretation. Dīpaṃkara’s transforming conditions had matured, so he manifested the body of a buddha and taught; Śākyamuni’s conditions had not yet matured, so he remained a bodhisattva, received a prediction from that buddha, and continued to practice. Receiving a prediction carries the meaning of fruit, while practice carries the meaning of cause. These causes and fruits already explain the passage; there is no need to move buddhahood backward into an intermediate period of bodhisattva practice.

This distinction safeguards something important: buddhahood in the distant past does not permit every former identity to be rewritten at will. If earlier scriptures say that a bodhisattva received a prediction and practiced, that causal sequence must first be understood as stated. What the Lifespan chapter opens in the distant past breaks the comprehensive attachment to attainment only today; it does not make every buddha of the past a manifestation of Śākyamuni.

The Buddha eye sees both the beginning and the end of a wholesome deed. Beings’ wholesome capacities possess two powers: one elicits the flower-fruition of birth among humans and devas, while the other elicits the fruit-fruition of the Buddha Way. The flower opens first and the fruit ripens later. If one sees only present degrees of weight, one may know how the flower will bloom without knowing the final fruit. The Buddha eye completely illumines the myriad wholesome acts and knows how each wholesome root proceeds from present faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom all the way to the Buddha Way.

The root treatise therefore takes only wholesome dharmas as capacities; it does not make evil dharmas into conditioning or discernment causes. That the Buddha illumines the ten Dharma realms does not mean that good and evil are equivalent in eliciting him. What he responds to for the sake of liberation is the wholesome capacity that beings already possess or can develop. The five faculties beginning with faith each have sharp and dull forms; sharp and dull are in turn relative across Great and Lesser, gradual and sudden, human and deva, and cannot be fixed permanently so that one class is always sharp and another always dull.

The Buddha eye sees the beginnings and ends of wholesome roots. The response body therefore manifests as superior or inferior according to capacity, with different names and longer or shorter lifespans; the spoken teaching likewise gives gradual skillful means or a subtle Dharma according to capacity. The flower-fruition and fruit-fruition simile does not divide benefits into two unconnected lists. It says that the Buddha not only enables a present wholesome act to yield a temporary good result, but knows how to guide it until it bears the fruit of the Buddha Way.

V. Why Does “Delighting in Lesser Dharmas” Include People with Great Capacities?

In benefiting beings through the lion’s vigorous advance in the present, the root treatise first lists ten qualities: distinguishing whether others’ faculties are mature, enabling those not yet liberated to enter the Buddha’s Dharma and discipline, teaching all classes through one sound or many, turning the unsurpassed wheel, manifesting home-leaving and precept observance, making nature and conduct accord with emptiness, emitting light and manifesting extinction while revealing or concealing the marks, subduing the four māras, bringing people into what is essential while increasing cessation and contemplation, and finally perfecting the wholesome acts of body and speech. The lion’s vigorous advance is not merely a name for boldness. Only when knowledge of capacities, teaching, manifestation, subduing māras, and enabling entry are unfolded one by one does the full picture of present benefit appear.

The capacities seen by the Buddha eye are described by the sutra as delighting in Lesser Dharmas, meager in qualities, and heavy with defilement. The root treatise first presents three kinds of delight in the Lesser: humans and devas who crave the twenty-five modes of existence, the two vehicles who crave nirvāṇa and seek only their own liberation, and the three classes of bodhisattva who delight in a gradual and circuitous path to buddhahood. Here “Lesser” does not assign an identity solely by the name of a vehicle; it asks whether present delight stops at sensual pleasure, personal liberation, circuitous cultivation, or recent attainment.

Yet those with great capacities for the perfect and sudden may also elicit the Buddha. Why then are they still generally called those who delight in the Lesser? The root treatise poses and answers this question through four meanings. In the past they had aroused the great mind but could not be single-minded and diligent, remaining attached to base desires. In the present they possess great capacities yet are stained by worldly pleasure and attached to wrong views. In practice they may have left worldly desire yet delight in quiescent cessation, or accept only differentiated and circuitous cultivation rather than universally cultivating within one mind. At the gate of fruit, they may prefer hearing that Śākyamuni only recently attained the Way and refuse to hear of the great and distant duration.

The four meanings do not erase a great capacity and turn it into a lesser faculty. They show that what a capacity can receive and what a person presently delights in are not always equal. Someone can possess a great capacity yet remain pulled by present pleasure; can aspire to buddhahood yet accept only a circuitous path or a teaching of recent attainment. In the parable of the good physician, the poisoned children writhe upon the ground: they are alive and bound to their father as children, yet remain controlled by the poison. The Buddha speaks of recent attainment to such people not because recent attainment exhausts the Buddha’s reality, but because he first administers aid where they can receive it.

Meager qualities are the weak functioning of the two wholesome causes, conditioning and discernment; heavy defilement is the failure to remove the delusions of views and thought. Neither phrase is merely a rebuke. Precisely because wholesome roots are weak and defilements heavy, the Buddha must manifest a corresponding body, lifespan, and teaching. To press the distant reality upon such people without adaptation, causing doubt, regret, and retreat, would not be called benefiting beings.

VI. If the Buddha Is Originally Unborn, Why Manifest Two Kinds of Birth?

For those who delight in Lesser Dharmas, are meager in qualities, and are heavy with defilement, the Buddha says that he left home and only then attained bodhi. The root treatise immediately distinguishes this birth carefully: superior and inferior responses each have the birth of a corporeal body and the birth of a Dharma body. The inferior response manifests entering the womb, birth, seven steps, and ascetic practice, and calls the fivefold Dharma body attained by severing delusion its Dharma-body birth. The superior response manifests teaching the Great Vehicle while in the womb and taking seven steps in each of the ten directions, then at the place of practice completely severs ignorance and perfects wisdom; this is its Dharma-body birth.

The more finely these are distinguished, the clearer it becomes that “not being born” does not deny everything before our eyes. The Buddha truly manifests different modes of entering the womb, leaving home, and attaining the Way for different capacities; these differences are not meaningless phantoms. The inferior response answers dull faculties, the superior response sharp faculties. Leaving home can mean leaving the home of fragmentary birth and death or leaving the home of both kinds of birth and death. Bodhi can be explained through the knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising or through knowledge of all modes. Every manifestation has a capacity it addresses and a benefit it gives.

What is broken is only the claim “first obtained only today.” Devas, humans, and asuras see both superior and inferior responses possess the birth of a corporeal body and of a Dharma body, and therefore assume that buddhahood too began on that day. Buddhahood in the distant past shows that today’s birth is not the first fundamental birth. The Buddha was already complete long ago and manifests again now in order to lead those who delight in the Lesser into the Buddha Way.

Thus not being born and manifesting birth do not cancel one another. If not being born cancels manifest birth, beings lose the Buddha they can see, hear, and follow. If manifest birth cancels not being born, the Buddha is exhausted by a single life of eighty years. Zhizhe states the two together: from the standpoint of the original ground, the Buddha did not begin today; from the standpoint of benefiting beings, he truly speaks this way and manifests this body for this assembly.

Benefits through form and sound unfold from this point. “Displaying” is manifested form; “speaking” is spoken teaching. Both form and sound concern one’s own body, another’s body, one’s own affairs, and another’s affairs. The Buddha speaks of Dharma and response bodies, speaks of Dīpaṃkara as teacher, displays a primary recompense and dependent land, and speaks either according to his own intent or according to the minds of beings. None of these changes of story is aimless. Whenever form and sound accord with capacities and enable beings to receive the four benefits of the worldly, individual, counteractive, and ultimate-truth siddhāntas, all is called real and not false.

VII. Since Skillful Means Include What Is Provisional and What Is Real, How Can Everything Be Real?

The root treatise does not evade the difficulty with the single statement “skillful means too are real.” It distinguishes the causal and fruitional benefits that different beings obtain in the Trace Gate and Origin Gate.

For gradual and sudden capacities, following skillful means in the past without yet entering reality was falsity on the side of cause; attachment to the Buddha’s recent attainment without receiving the benefit of the distant fruit-ground was falsity on the side of fruit. Today, by hearing the Trace Gate and entering true mark together, they receive real benefit in the cause; by hearing the Origin Gate and relinquishing attachment to the near, they receive the real benefit of the distant fruit-ground. The two former falsehoods become two realities today.

For perfect and sudden beings who have already attained practice of the Middle Way, the cause was already real; only the fruit remained false through attachment to recent attainment. Hearing the causal gate again today does not give them a second new causal reality. Only hearing the distant fruit supplies reality on the side of fruit. Not everyone can therefore be written into one story of “first wholly false, then wholly real.” The root treatise’s differentiation according to capacity is itself what makes the teaching unfailing in its accord with capacities.

The six statements on the Tathāgata’s knowing and seeing of the three realms take non-falsehood still deeper. The Dharma body originally has no form and no arising or extinction. Beings possess capacities of arising and extinction, so the Tathāgata accords with their arising and extinction through the power of his vows. With real wisdom the Buddha sees that in reality there are not two kinds of birth and death, no retreat or emergence, no one in the world or entering extinction, and no falling into the extremes of real and false or suchness and difference. This is non-falsehood in illumining principle.

With provisional wisdom the Buddha also knows in accordance with the measure of beings: although there are originally not two kinds of birth and death, he displays two; although there is originally no retreat or emergence, he speaks of them; although there is originally no abiding in the world or entering extinction, he displays both; although there is originally no one-sided reality or falsehood, he speaks of nirvāṇa as real and the three realms as false according to capacities. This is non-falsehood in according with capacities. Real wisdom is not deceived by provisional wisdom, nor does real wisdom cancel provisional wisdom. Precisely because the Buddha sees reality as it is, he knows when to speak in accord with the ways beings see.

Nature, desire, conduct, and recollective thought further differentiate this accord with capacities. A disposition gives rise to desires, while repeatedly indulged desires also form a disposition. Conduct arises from desire, and attachment and obstruction may arise within conduct. The semblant understanding produced by cultivation still bears conceptual recollection and must be brought to clear awakening through ultimate truth. From the inner and outer ordinary stages through advancement from ground to ground, and until buddhahood, there are corresponding objects of desire, conduct, and recollection.

The Buddha’s use of various causes and conditions, similes, and expressions is therefore not gratuitous complication. The indolent and the arrogant require different teachings; gradual and sudden capacities differ; each of the thirty-two bodhisattvas speaks of entering the Dharma gate of nonduality according to what each delights in. If the differences among beings are erased until only one teaching remains, that teaching cannot enable them all to enter the Buddha’s knowing and seeing.

“The buddhawork performed has never been suspended even briefly” closes this passage. A skillful means would truly be false if it led someone outward and then never enabled entry into reality. The provisional inducement enables emergence, and after emerging one ultimately enters reality; none of the Buddha’s skillful means ends in abandonment halfway. “All is real and not false” does not mean that every statement at every moment discloses the whole truth at once. It means that no statement departs from the direction of bringing beings to buddhahood.

VIII. If the Three Bodies Do Not Become Extinct, What Does Announcing Extinction Actually Change?

The sutra says that the lifespan accomplished while the Buddha practiced the bodhisattva path is not yet exhausted and moreover exceeds the preceding number twofold. Earlier people cite this to say that the Buddha merely prolongs his life through supernormal power and remains impermanent. The root treatise rebuts them by comparing fruit through cause: if the constant lifespan gained on the causal ground cannot be exhausted, how much less can the fruit of buddhahood be exhausted? If even the crown prince’s stipend is inexhaustible, how much more after he ascends the sovereign rank. The simile directs one toward the fruit being compared; one cannot abandon the fruit and cling instead to the causal term used for comparison.

Having established that the Origin is truly without extinction, the root treatise does not stop; it explains in turn how the Dharma body, reward body, and response body announce extinction.

The Dharma body is originally neither born nor extinguished. Yet in relation to beings’ delusion and awakening, one may say that when deluded, afflictions arise and wisdom is extinguished, while when awakened, wisdom arises and afflictions are extinguished. Those who already understand need not hear extinction announced. For those who have not understood, it is necessary to speak of extinguishing delusion and generating understanding, so that they do not mistake “originally unborn” for “no need to cultivate.”

If reward-body wisdom is investigated in principle, no substantial wisdom can be found colliding with and destroying a substantial affliction, just as light and darkness do not mutually remove one another. Yet in the phenomena of cultivation and realization, when wisdom is present affliction is absent, and it is necessary to say that the Way extinguishes delusion. If beings hear only that they do not mutually remove one another, they may presume that they are already buddhas, become arrogant, and cease cultivating. Wisdom must therefore be announced as able to extinguish affliction.

The response body is the functioning of Dharma and reward. Since the essence is not extinguished, its functioning cannot be exhausted. So long as beings are not exhausted, responsive functioning does not end. Yet if beings constantly see the Buddha present, they may become arrogant, unrestrained, weary, and indolent, supposing the Buddha can always be seen; they cease to generate the thought that he is difficult to encounter and the mind of reverence. For these capacities the response body must announce that it will enter extinction that very night.

The announcement does not alter the essence of the three bodies; it alters the manner in which beings encounter them. If the Buddha did not announce extinction, those delighting in Lesser Dharmas would not plant wholesome roots, and the two delusions of views and thought would not be severed. When two wholesome qualities do not arise and two evils are not extinguished, there is harm. The Buddha manifests extinction according to the four siddhāntas so that unarisen and arisen good may arise and increase, and unarisen and arisen evil may be prevented and removed; this is benefit.

“difficult to encounter” does not hide the Buddha far away and leave beings only with loss. Beings who hear that the three bodies are neither born nor extinguished still must generate the wholesome and extinguish delusion before they can realize and see them; only then do they know that encounter is not cheap. When they cherish longing, thirst for the Buddha, extinguish the delusions of views and thought, and plant wholesome roots, manifested extinction causes no harm but makes them genuinely proceed toward the Buddha.

IX. If the Near Is Taught Before the Distant, Why Is It All Still Not False?

At the close of the teaching by Dharma, only three points are gathered: buddhas appearing amid the five turbidities first teach the three vehicles and afterward return them to the One, first teach recent attainment and afterward reveal distant attainment; every sequence is for transforming beings; therefore all is not false.

These three points fasten the entire passage together again. Without first teaching three and near, those delighting in Lesser Dharmas, meager in qualities, and heavy with defilement would have no place to begin. If the teaching remained forever at three and near, they could not enter One and distant. The earlier teaching is real because it can actually become the entrance to the later one; the later teaching is real because it completes the buddhawork toward which the earlier teaching was always directed.

Near and distant are therefore not two biographies of the Buddha that refute one another. Recent manifested birth, home-leaving, attainment of the Way, and announcement of extinction are benefits in form and sound displayed by the response body according to capacities. Distant constant abiding shows that these manifestations are not the only beginning and ending of the Buddha’s life. Only when the near is not erased by the distant, and the distant is no longer concealed by the near, is this called opening the near to reveal the distant.

The parable of the good physician is about to begin from this point. The teaching by Dharma has already explained that because the children’s minds are deranged by poison, the father must devise a method by which they can take the medicine; the Buddha is originally not extinguished, yet announces extinction so that the arrogant and unrestrained will form the thought that he is difficult to encounter. The simile does not open a new doctrine, but turns the already stated non-falsehood of benefiting beings into the visible scene of father, children, medicine, illness, and longing.

What is finally broken is not merely the thought that “the Buddha had only eighty years.” The deeper attachment to the near is beings’ taking what presently meets their eyes as everything the Buddha can do, and taking the speech they can presently bear as the whole of reality. The admonition to believe first loosens that boundary; the dust-world simile makes the distant past immeasurable; the Buddha eye sees the beginnings and ends of every wholesome root; and the three bodies’ manifested birth and announcement of extinction return the distant past to present teaching. The distance of the Buddha’s lifespan does not finally ask beings to gaze upon an enormous number. It asks them to trust that no skillful means will abandon them outside reality.

Through the Eye of the Wenjuji

The Wenjuji first identifies the renewed request after the three as a fourth request and connects the number of requests and admonitions in this chapter to the preceding text. It also observes that little is said explicitly of the future in the Dharma teaching, where it is specifically lodged in the words “constantly abides without extinction” 〔T34n1719 0333a13–0333a25〕. This is the Mirror’s organization of the outline and textual proportions; it does not replace the root treatise’s own enumeration of requests, admonitions, and benefits in the three periods.

For the secret of the three bodies, the Mirror explicitly says that both explanations in the root treatise have their respective purports: one stresses the mutual identity of the three bodies as Dharma-essences, while the other stresses the relation between past and present; it then develops the power of supernormal penetration in terms of different teaching lords 〔0333a25–0333b04〕. The root treatise itself states that one body is three and three bodies are one. The Mirror’s further distinctions may illuminate this only here and cannot be poured anonymously back into the root text.

In the simile of dust-worlds, the Mirror notes that this portion of the present sutra lacks the two characters xiadian (“place a dot below”), and separately records Tanfu’s dream-inspired recovery of “one particle, one kalpa” and a lifespan passage from the Golden Light Sutra 〔0333b23–0333b29〕. It further explains the place of benefit through the undestroyed original land and constant presence on Vulture Peak 〔0333b29–0333c04〕. The words combined by the Mirror, however, are not a continuous passage in the received sutra, so they can only be understood as the Mirror’s composite citation and cannot be substituted for the root sutra’s exact wording.

Regarding the ancient interpretation of Dīpaṃkara, the Mirror labels the claim that Śākyamuni manifested as Dīpaṃkara an “intention of equality,” then explains the intermediate causes and fruits through the bodhisattva’s prediction, propagation of the teaching, and end of life 〔0333c11–0333c17〕. Its function is to clarify why the root treatise does not accept the ancient interpretation, not to fabricate a second answer for the root treatise.

In the passage on the Buddha eye’s observation of capacities, the Mirror proceeds from the distant Buddha eye’s exhaustive illumination of their roots, distinguishes the same names but different essences of the five faculties, and poses an additional question about how the ultimately perfected Buddha fruit can still be called a capacity 〔0333c20–0334a13〕. For different names and ages, it unfolds the ten realms, four noble states, and superior and inferior responses, then refers back to the Wonder of Lifespan in the Profound Meaning 〔0334a14–0334b22〕. These detailed judgments all belong to the Mirror. The root treatise’s body retains only its own sequence of Buddha eye, sharp and dull faculties, superior and inferior responses, and the lifespans of the three bodies.

For the ten qualities of the lion’s vigorous advance, the Mirror says expressly that the first nine are evident and develops only the tenth as the three karmas, three mysteries, and highest ten wholesome deeds 〔0334b27–0334c05〕. On delighting in Lesser Dharmas, it identifies the “master” in the root treatise as Nanyue, gives an overall judgment that the first three of the four meanings concern cause and the fourth concerns fruit, and adds a question about why those in the later age all hear while the Buddha’s contemporaries were selectively taught 〔0334c18–0335a08〕. The person’s identity, overall judgment, and added question must all be attributed to the Wenjuji; the four meanings themselves are explicitly listed one by one in the root treatise.

On the superior and inferior responses, the Mirror reaffirms that each response has a corporeal-body birth and a Dharma-body birth, and distinguishes what displaying and speaking cover in one’s own and another’s bodies and affairs 〔0335a10–0335b04〕. It then rearranges the provisional and real aspects of the four siddhāntas according to different capacities and concludes, in answering the question about the true mark disclosed in past and present, that the principle entered is not different, while those entering and their sequence are 〔0335b08–0335c10〕. The latter conclusion can help one read the root treatise’s question and answer, but the Mirror’s rearranged table cannot be made into an explicit table in the root text.

For the six statements of knowing and seeing, the Mirror takes today’s response body as precisely the Dharma body attained in the distant past, then cites the Treatise on the Lotus Sutra on the realm of beings, the realm of nirvāṇa, and tathāgata-garbha 〔0335c10–0336c11〕. Nature, desire, conduct, and recollective thought are read as capacities for the four siddhāntas; the Mirror continues with the lack of temporal priority between body and affliction, recollective thought from ground to ground, and an added question about why the first ground is named 〔0336c11–0337a10〕. None of these citations or new questions is direct statement in the root treatise.

Below the passage on teaching in accord with capacities, the Mirror further uses the patience stage of the Abhidharmakośa and the nondual Dharma gate of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra to unfold the various gates for gradual and sudden capacities. It explains “provisional emergence” as receiving provisional teaching and emerging, then says that humans and devas emerge from evil destinies and the three vehicles emerge from the three realms so that all may be led from skillful means into reality 〔0337a13–0337a27〕. The root treatise already speaks of patience of suffering, patience of impermanence, the thirty-two bodhisattvas, and none provisionally led out failing to enter reality; the detailed items of the patience stage and the phonetic and classificatory explanation of provisional emergence belong only to the Mirror’s supplement.

On the earlier impermanence interpretation, the Mirror first restates in full the ancient calculation of kalpas exceeding the sands of the Ganges, twice the preceding number, and life extended through supernormal power, then follows the root treatise in comparing the lifespan of the Buddha fruit through the lifespan of the bodhisattva cause. It further glosses huilie (“twisting around”) as wrenching and contrary, saying that this abandons permanence and takes impermanence 〔0337a28–0337b20〕. The sound and gloss illuminate the force of the root treatise’s rejection but cannot be turned back into a further ancient thesis not recorded by the root treatise.

For not becoming extinct yet announcing extinction, the Mirror crosses the fascicle boundary and marks the meaning as applying to all three bodies. It then uses the Sutra of the Garland of Bodhisattvas’ Primary Karmas to explain illumination-quiescence and quiescence-illumination, uses the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra to explain in detail the difficulty of wisdom destroying affliction, and finally gathers the response body’s continuity without birth and extinction together with the mutual interfusion of the three bodies 〔0337b28–0338b21〕. The stage-correlations of equal awakening and wondrous awakening, and the four statements of mutual interfusion, are Mirror explanations. The root treatise’s own boundary reaches only the non-extinction, announcement of extinction, and reason for each of the three bodies.

At the end, on the harm and benefit of non-extinction, the Mirror first differentiates arisen and unarisen good and evil according to the four siddhāntas, then explains arrogance, difficulty of encounter, and reverence in relation to the three bodies. Its final focus is that seeing one body is not apart from the three bodies, and therefore reverence arises from difficulty of encounter 〔0338b21–0339a13〕. For the root treatise’s three closing points—first three and then One, first near and then distant, for the transformation of beings, and all without falsehood—the Mirror gives only a concentrated outline and no further detailed explanation 〔0333a04–0333a05〕. The Mirror stops here, leaving the root treatise’s own conclusion as the final statement.