妙法蓮華經玄義 辨體·一法異名

Are you safeguarding the Dharma, or only safeguarding a name? The same heavenly lord has a thousand names. If one rejoices on hearing Śakra Devānām Indra but becomes angry on hearing Śacī’s husband, or reveres Śakra while insulting Kauśika, both reverence and insult in fact fall upon the same heavenly lord.

Our attachments to the Dharma often work in just this way. Familiarity with wondrous existence makes us fear that ultimate emptiness negates us; familiarity with ultimate emptiness makes us draw all right principle toward ourselves and push false teachings onto others. A name was originally a gateway through which people could enter. Once grasped, it becomes a wall that opposing sides defend.

One Dharma having different names does not ask us to abandon discernment. Name, meaning, and substance must still be distinguished: the same name can return to a different substance, while different names and meanings can return to the same substance. What must truly be released is not difference, but the haste to decide what is true and what is false from words alone.

The four groups of similes make this plain. One person is named Goldsmith, can forge gold, and has a yellow body. One person is named Blue, can make lacquer, yet has a white body; another is named Black, can grind cinnabar, yet has a purple body. A hundred people can share a surname and name and understand the same skill while each retains a different body. The same person can also change names from place to place, pass through many offices, and master many skills without ever becoming someone else.

The last simile is closest to our daily experience. The same person may be called by different names at home, in the monastery, at work, and in study. Names change with relationships, and the responsibilities they reveal change with them, yet the person does not therefore shatter into many people. Different names can each truly have meaning without each establishing a separate substance.

When the Buddha teaches wondrous existence, ultimate emptiness, the tathāgata-garbha, and the Middle Way, he is likewise not creating four destinations outside the true mark. Sentient beings have different faculties: some must first become willing to listen, some must give rise to wholesomeness, some must cure an illness, and some enter awakening through that teaching. The teachings therefore differ, the names therefore differ, and the functions therefore differ, yet the principle with which they accord is ultimately not two.

The next time you hear an unfamiliar Dharma-name, then, you need not immediately pull it into your own camp or thrust it outside the gate. Ask first: why was this name established? What meaning does it reveal? What kind of faculty is it meant to lead, and where?

When we can listen in this way, different names no longer manufacture enemies. Wondrous existence need not fear ultimate emptiness, and ultimate emptiness need not reject the tathāgata-garbha. Each gateway preserves its own function while all point toward the indivisible one reality. Safeguarding the Dharma then changes from protecting one familiar name into ensuring that no responsive faculty loses its entrance because of our attachment to names.

1. Listing the Different Names of One Dharma

The third section, on one Dharma having different names, is further divided into four parts: first, listing the different names; second, explaining them; third, revealing the meaning through similes; and fourth, explaining it in terms of the four accommodations.

First come the different names. The substance of the true mark is only one Dharma, yet the Buddha teaches it under many names. It is also called wondrous existence, true, wholesome, wondrous form, the limit of reality, ultimate emptiness, suchness-suchness, nirvāṇa, empty-space buddha-nature, the tathāgata-garbha, the mind of the middle-real principle, the Middle Way neither existent nor nonexistent, ultimate truth, subtle and wondrous quiescent extinction, and so forth. The immeasurably many different names are all alternative designations for the true mark; the name true mark is likewise an alternative designation for all the other names.

Those who are deluded become stuck on names. Clinging to the names as different, they produce different interpretations. The sutra says, “Lacking wisdom, they doubt and regret; they will thereby be lost forever.” Lesser Vehicle treatise masters concentrate on names and marks and give rise to contentious rivalry. They malign the Dharma and denigrate people; later generations imitate them and instead become enemies of the true Dharma.

Great Vehicle students behave in the same way. Those who study wondrous existence claim that they have reached the highest point, but on hearing ultimate emptiness they malign it, neither accepting that Dharma nor tolerating those who study it. Those who study ultimate emptiness gather with their own kind and form factions, drawing right principle toward themselves and pushing false teachings onto others.

None of them understands that the heavenly lord has a thousand names. Some rejoice on hearing Śakra Devānām Indra but become angry on hearing Śacī’s husband; some revere Śakra yet slight and insult Kauśika. One fears that whatever merit they gain will not make up for the loss caused by their contempt. The true mark is the same: it is originally one Dharma, so how could one malign one of its names and believe only another?

2. Explaining the Four Statements through Name, Meaning, and Substance

Lesser Vehicle accounts of name and substance have always been comparatively simple, so they are set aside here. What is now distinguished concerns only the four gateways belonging respectively to the Distinct and Perfect Teachings, making eight gateways in all. Four statements are then used to explain the four possible relationships among name, meaning, and substance: first, name, meaning, and substance are the same; second, name, meaning, and substance differ; third, name and meaning are the same but substance differs; and fourth, name and meaning differ but substance is the same.

In the first statement, name, meaning, and substance are the same. The first group takes wondrous existence as the name, true, wholesome, wondrous form as the meaning, and the limit of reality as the substance. The second takes ultimate emptiness as the name, suchness-suchness as the meaning, and nirvāṇa as the substance. The third takes empty-space buddha-nature as the name, the tathāgata-garbha as the meaning, and the mind of the middle-real principle as the substance. The fourth takes the Middle Way neither existent nor nonexistent as the name, ultimate truth as the meaning, and subtle and wondrous quiescent extinction as the substance. In each group the names and principles differ, yet they point in the same direction within the gateway being used and have no difference of intent. This is therefore called name, meaning, and substance being the same.

In the second statement, name, meaning, and substance differ. Wondrous existence may be taken as the name, ultimate emptiness as the meaning, and the tathāgata-garbha as the substance. Again, emptiness may be the name, the tathāgata-garbha the meaning, and the Middle Way the substance. Again, the tathāgata-garbha may be the name, the Middle Way the meaning, and wondrous existence the substance. Again, the Middle Way may be the name, wondrous existence the meaning, and emptiness the substance. In this way the four gateways are interwoven with one another, and all three—name, meaning, and substance—are different. This is therefore called name, meaning, and substance differing.

In the third statement, name and meaning are the same but substance differs. For example, when wondrous existence is the name, wondrous form the meaning, and ultimate emptiness the substance, two are the same and one differs. This is therefore called name and meaning being the same but substance differing. Again, when emptiness is the name, suchness-suchness the meaning, and wondrous existence the substance, two are likewise the same and one differs. The remaining two gateways may be understood in the same way. This is therefore called name and meaning being the same but substance differing.

In the fourth statement, name and meaning differ but substance is the same. Names such as wondrous existence are each different, and meanings such as true, wholesome form also differ, yet they all return to one substance and have no second destination. This is therefore called name and meaning differing but substance being the same. The remaining three gateways are likewise so.

In the first three statements, names and meanings cannot interpenetrate. In the first, following one name yields only the one meaning and one substance belonging to the same gateway. Although they correspond perfectly within that gateway, they have no connection with any of the other gateways. In the second, following different names discloses different meanings and different substances; name, meaning, and substance are least able to interpenetrate, which is easy to understand. In the third, since the substances do not interpenetrate, even when name and meaning are the same they ultimately cannot unite. All three statements clarify meaning through the Distinct gateways. Those who fail to grasp their intent begin to argue from precisely this point: sometimes the Lesser Vehicle encroaches on the Great, and sometimes the Great Vehicle seizes from the Lesser.

Lesser Vehicle practitioners wish to cut off birth-and-death. When they hear that ultimate emptiness is not merely emptiness, they follow their own desires, take it to be merely empty, and begin arguing from this attachment. Because they wish to cut off birth-and-death, they also adopt “nonexistent”; because they seek to cure the illness of attachment to nirvāṇa, they also adopt “not nonexistent.” When they hear that the Middle Way is neither existent nor nonexistent, they use it to support their own Lesser Vehicle understanding, taking it to be the very “neither existent nor nonexistent” found in their own texts. They therefore engage in especially frequent contention over these two gateways.

When Lesser Vehicle practitioners hear of the mind of the middle-real principle, however, it contradicts their own understanding, so they do not begin to argue. Practitioners of the Two Vehicles delight in emptiness, yet what they now hear speaks of existence. They aim to reduce the body to ashes and extinguish wisdom, yet what they now hear speaks of mind and wisdom. Because the two do not accord, they cannot appropriate this teaching and argue over it. In this way, the Lesser Vehicle encroaches upon and steals meanings from the Great Vehicle, and contention results.

The Great Vehicle’s seizure from the Lesser takes another form. Great Vehicle students see that the gateway of the emptiness of persons shared with the Three Vehicles and the gateway neither empty nor existent bear the same names as those of the Two Vehicles. Failing to see their profound intent, they assign these two gateways to deceptive marks and schools of unreal principle. They retain only wondrous existence and the gateway both empty and existent, claiming that these alone are Dharmas of perfect permanence. When they yield two gateways to the Lesser Vehicle but do not yield the other two, the contention can still be contained to some degree.

But if they understand that emptiness is not merely emptiness and that neither existent nor nonexistent precisely blocks the two extremes, the Great Vehicle will seize all four gateways, and the Lesser Vehicle will struggle bitterly over two of them. Moreover, when the four Great Vehicle gateways do not interpenetrate in name and meaning, each gateway contends against and devours the others. How much more, then, when a Lesser Vehicle jackal encroaches upon a lion—how could the lion not turn and devour it?

The first three statements all give rise to contention and are not the proper substance adopted by this sutra. In the fourth, name and meaning differ but substance is the same. One Dharma-substance has many principles and many functions. The four gateways take various different names in accord with conditions; precisely because the Dharma-substance interpenetrates, it can respond perfectly through the many names. Since the Dharma-substance is the same, differences of name and of the meaning revealed no longer produce contention.

What is this like? A brief explanation follows. The Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings says, “Immeasurable meanings arise from one Dharma; that one Dharma is what is called the true mark.” The mark of the true mark is no-mark yet not without marks, and not without marks yet no-mark; it is therefore called the true mark. This name is established from its being truly indestructible.

Because this true mark is the Dharma realized by all buddhas, it is also called wondrous existence. Although wondrous existence cannot be seen, all buddhas can see it, so it is called true, wholesome, wondrous form. Because the true mark is not an existence falling into either extreme, it is called ultimate emptiness. Because the principle of emptiness is limpid and is neither one nor different, it is called suchness-suchness. Because the true mark is quiescent and extinct, it is called nirvāṇa. Because it is awakened to and understood without changing, it is called empty-space buddha-nature. Because it contains and receives much, it is called the tathāgata-garbha. Because it is quiescent, illuminating, and numinously aware, it is called the mind of the middle-real principle. Because it neither relies on existence nor attaches to nonexistence, it is called the Middle Way. Because it is highest and no Dharma surpasses it, it is called ultimate truth.

All these different names are called the true mark, and every reason for their difference is a function of the true mark. Because its substance is perfect, name and revealed meaning are not separated. This is precisely the proper substance of the present sutra.

From another direction, since all dharmas are different names of the true mark, they take the true mark as their substance. The true mark can likewise be a different name for all dharmas, while all dharmas themselves serve as the substance. Because wondrous existence is indestructible, it can also be called the true mark. Because all buddhas can see it, it is called true, wholesome, wondrous form. Because it is unmixed with anything else, it is called ultimate emptiness. Because it is neither two nor differentiated, it is called suchness-suchness. Because it is awakened to and understood without changing, it is called buddha-nature. Because it fully contains all dharmas, it is called the tathāgata-garbha. Because it is quiescently extinct yet numinously aware, it is called the mind of the middle-real principle. Because it blocks and leaves behind every extreme, it is called the Middle Way. Because it is unsurpassed and nothing exceeds it, it is called ultimate truth. Taking any single Dharma itself as the substance, one establishes names according to its functions; the remaining cases may all be inferred in the same way.

The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says, “The Dharma of liberation has many names; the hundred statements of liberation are only one liberation.” The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says, “If one contemplates the Buddha in accordance with Dharma, prajñā and nirvāṇa—these three are one mark and in truth have no difference.” If one grasps this intent, one knows that the many names can all be called the true mark, can all be called prajñā, and can all be called liberation. The three Dharmas of true mark, prajñā, and liberation are also names of all dharmas, and all dharmas are also the substance of these three Dharmas. The remaining cases may be inferred accordingly.

3. Revealing the Meaning through Four Groups of Similes

The simile for the first statement is a person named Goldsmith who can forge gold and whose body is yellow. His name, skill, and body all point in the same direction, illustrating that name, meaning, and substance are the same.

The second statement has two similes. One person is named Blue, can make lacquer, yet has a pure white body. Another is named Black, can grind cinnabar, yet has a purple body. There can be immeasurable hundreds of thousands of people like these, each with different names, skills, and bodies. They illustrate that name, meaning, and substance differ.

The simile for the third statement is a hundred people who share the same surname and personal name and all understand the same skill, yet whose bodies are each different. This illustrates that name and meaning are the same but substance differs.

The simile for the fourth statement is one person who encounters warfare and family calamity, changes surnames wherever he goes, and changes personal names from place to place, like Zhang Yi and Fan Li. He also passes through many official posts and bears many offices in a single body. If named for his many skills, he may be called a master of calligraphy, painting, goldwork, ironwork, and so forth. If named for a civil office, he may be called Rulin or Zhongsan. If named for a military office, he may be called Xiongqu or Cifei.

His changing names according to place illustrates different names. His being designated according to his skills illustrates different revealed meanings. Yet the substance throughout is only the same one person; he has not become someone else.

The sutra further says that one strongman of the royal house can equal a thousand men. This does not necessarily mean that his physical strength can truly match that of a thousand people. He is called one man equal to a thousand because his many skills enable him to surpass a thousand. He possesses the full range of many skills, with no skill he does not understand; he has passed through many posts, with no office he has not held.

Thus, the same person may also be called an indestructible person, a person of wondrous skill, a person endowed with bodily vigor, a person free of faults, a universally accomplished person, a person able to defeat enemies, a person of superior clan, a person rich in wealth and skill, a knowledgeable person, a middle-common faithful-upright person, or a canopy person. This group of names illustrates the fourth statement. Since the similes make the meaning perfectly clear, one can know that the first three statements express the Distinct intent and the last expresses the Perfect intent.

4. Explaining the Origin of Many Names through the Four Accommodations

Someone asks: since the true mark is only one Dharma, why are its names and revealed meanings so numerous?

The answer is that this accords with the many differences among sentient beings’ faculties, variously accommodating their desires, what is fitting for them, what counteracts their afflictions, and what brings them to awakening.

For example, in the world, those who study numerical Abhidharma approaches abandon the Great Vehicle; those who cultivate Mahāyāna cast aside the Lesser Vehicle; those who train in emptiness detest existence; and those versed in the Dilun criticize masters of the Madhyamaka. Because they originally do not wish to listen, they take no joy even when they hear. They have no intention of accepting in faith, their afflictions do not cease, and the mind of the path does not arise. Each becomes habituated exclusively to their own texts until this forms a disposition, yet this very disposition also becomes a root and condition for hearing the Dharma in the future.

At the appropriate time, the Tathāgata observes with the buddha-eye the faculties of faith and the rest in sentient beings, then uses various words to teach the Dharma through skillful means in accordance with what is appropriate for them.

For those whose disposition corresponds to the gateway of existence, the Buddha teaches wondrous existence and true, wholesome, wondrous form. Without opposing their disposition, he enables faith, discipline, patience, and vigor to arise in them. Their view attached to emptiness is swept away, and they can awaken, enter, and accord with the true mark.

For those whose disposition corresponds to the gateway of emptiness, the Buddha teaches ultimate emptiness, suchness-suchness, nirvāṇa, and so forth. They listen truthfully and receive truthfully, countering unwholesome Dharmas with wholesome Dharmas and taking signlessness as supreme.

For those whose disposition corresponds to the gateway both empty and existent, the Buddha teaches empty-space buddha-nature, the tathāgata-garbha, and the mind of the middle-real principle. They gladly give rise to wholesome Dharmas, leave error behind, and purify their minds.

For those whose disposition corresponds to the gateway neither empty nor existent, the Buddha teaches the Middle Way neither existent nor nonexistent, blocking the two extremes. He teaches neither coming nor going, neither annihilation nor permanence, neither one nor different, and so forth. They long to hear and rejoice as though receiving water when thirsty. Accepting in faith, delighting in it, and cultivating it, they give rise to many wholesome Dharmas; every attached view is dispelled, every unwholesome Dharma is exhausted, and the principle of ultimate truth opens forth in sudden clarity.

Because there are these four kinds of faculties, there are four gateways of different teachings. Because the teachings differ, the names differ; because their functions differ, the meanings they reveal differ. Yet the principle entered through awakening is not different, and the Dharma-substance is ultimately only one.

Guṇavarman therefore said, “The treatises each have different points of entry; the principle accorded with in practice is not two. Partial attachments produce right and wrong; those who understand have no contentious dispute.” Thus, although the four accommodations give voice to different teachings, they are ultimately only different names of the one true mark.

If the Dharma-substance is only one, why speak of twelve names? Do more names make confusion more likely? The discussion of one Dharma having different names begins precisely from this doubt. It does not first remove all the names and retain only one supposedly safest designation. Instead, it separates three layers—the name, the meaning revealed by the name, and the substance to which it returns—and then explains step by step how many names can point to one substance and how people can seize those many names in contention with one another.

Names Are Entrances; Only Attachment Turns Them into Borders

The true mark may be called wondrous existence, ultimate emptiness, the tathāgata-garbha, or the Middle Way. Different names do not originally mean that the Dharmas being discussed necessarily exclude one another. The Buddha establishes many names in response to sentient beings. Their function is to enable responsive faculties to hear, accept in faith, cure their illnesses, and enter awakening.

The problem begins with “clinging to different names and forming different interpretations.” Those who study wondrous existence hear ultimate emptiness and assume that the other side is negating them. Those who study ultimate emptiness draw all right principle toward themselves and push the remaining teachings into falsehood. A name thereby changes from an entrance into a camp, and cultivation changes from understanding Dharma-meaning into defending a label.

The simile of the heavenly lord’s thousand names brings this displacement into sharp focus. The same heavenly lord is called Śakra Devānām Indra, Śacī’s husband, Śakra, and Kauśika. If one rejoices on hearing the first name, becomes angry on hearing the second, reveres the third, and insults the fourth, both reverence and insult in fact fall upon the same person. Trusting one name of the true mark while maligning another contains the same contradiction.

What Do Name, Meaning, and Substance Each Ask?

“Name” is the designation established. “Meaning” is the principle and function revealed by that name. “Substance” is the Dharma-substance to which they finally return. Only after distinguishing the three can one see that what appears the same is not necessarily truly the same, and that what appears different is not necessarily severed from everything else.

The first statement is that name, meaning, and substance are the same. Within each gateway, designation, principle, and Dharma-substance correspond: wondrous existence, true, wholesome, wondrous form, and the limit of reality form one group; ultimate emptiness, suchness-suchness, and nirvāṇa form another. This correspondence remains limited to its own gateway and has not yet explained how it communicates with the others.

The second statement is that name, meaning, and substance differ. Wondrous existence can be the name, ultimate emptiness the meaning, and the tathāgata-garbha the substance; emptiness, the tathāgata-garbha, and the Middle Way can form another group. Name, meaning, and substance are displaced across the gateways; all three differ, and interpenetration is most difficult.

The third statement is that name and meaning are the same but substance differs. A hundred people may share the same surname and personal name and understand the same skill, yet each has a different body. The name and capability can be the same while the substance that bears them remains different.

The fourth statement is that name and meaning differ but substance is the same. Different designations continue to reveal different principles, yet they all return to one substance. Each name displays a particular function, so the differences among names and meanings become adaptive uses that together disclose one substance.

Why Can the Same Name Produce Contention While Different Names Do Not?

The common difficulty shown by the first three statements is that interpenetration stops within a single gateway, or that even within one gateway name, meaning, and substance remain separate. When people look only at names, they easily claim identical wording as their own and thrust different wording outside the gate.

Lesser Vehicle practitioners emphasize cutting off birth-and-death. Even when they hear that ultimate emptiness is not merely emptiness, they follow their own desire and interpret it as merely empty. When they hear “neither existent nor nonexistent,” they again assume it is only the “neither existent nor nonexistent” of their own texts. When they encounter the mind of the middle-real principle, however, it contradicts their understanding and cannot readily be appropriated. Contention begins when some names are seized while their profound intent is concealed.

Great Vehicle students can act in the opposite direction. Seeing that the names emptiness of persons and neither empty nor existent are shared with the Two Vehicles, they push both gateways entirely into schools of unreal principle. They retain only wondrous existence and both empty and existent and claim these as their own exclusive Dharmas of perfect permanence. If they then see that emptiness is not merely emptiness and that neither existent nor nonexistent is meant to block the two extremes, they seize back both gateways they had previously yielded.

The same name thus becomes a reason to seize, while a different name becomes a reason to exclude; even the four gateways can devour one another. This is the actual contention produced by the first three statements. The fourth looks instead to the Dharma-substance to which different names and meanings return: those with the same name can have different substances, while those with different names can share one substance.

How Does the Fourth Statement Reveal the Sutra’s Proper Substance?

Because the true mark is indestructible, a name can be established from this. Because all buddhas realize this Dharma, it is called wondrous existence. Because all buddhas can see wondrous existence although it cannot be seen, it is called true, wholesome, wondrous form. Because the true mark does not fall into the existence of either extreme, it is called ultimate emptiness. Because the principle of emptiness is limpid, neither one nor different, it is called suchness-suchness. Because the true mark is quiescent and extinct, it is called nirvāṇa.

Because it is awakened to and understood without changing, it is called empty-space buddha-nature. Because it contains and receives much, it is called the tathāgata-garbha. Because it is quiescent, illuminating, and numinously aware, it is called the mind of the middle-real principle. Because it neither relies on existence nor attaches to nonexistence, it is called the Middle Way. Because it is highest and unsurpassed, it is called ultimate truth. These names are all established from different functions of the same true mark, while the Dharma-substance to which they return remains one.

The fourth statement therefore preserves different names and different meanings. Ultimate emptiness reveals not falling into the existence of either extreme; the tathāgata-garbha reveals containing and receiving much; the Middle Way reveals relying neither on existence nor on nonexistence. Each reveals something distinct, yet all return to one ultimate Dharma-substance. The many names enable the many functions of the same Dharma-substance to be heard by different faculties.

Mutually Serving as Name and Substance Is a Bidirectional Relation

The first direction says that all dharmas are different names of the true mark and take the true mark as their substance. The second reverses the relation: the true mark can also be a different name for all dharmas, while all dharmas themselves serve as the substance. Only when both directions are viewed together is the full meaning of “mutually serving as name and substance” present.

This bidirectional relation between the true mark and all dharmas enables the true mark to appear in all dharmas as their very substance. Because wondrous existence is indestructible, it is named the true mark; because all buddhas can see it, it is named true, wholesome, wondrous form; because it is unmixed with anything else, it is named ultimate emptiness; because it fully contains all dharmas, it is named the tathāgata-garbha. One may take any single Dharma itself as the substance and establish a designation according to the function it reveals; the Dharma receives its name according to function in its very substance.

Although liberation has many names, there is still only one liberation. Although Buddha, prajñā, and nirvāṇa are three names, what they reveal is one mark. True mark, prajñā, and liberation can also become names for all dharmas, while all dharmas can become the substance of the three Dharmas. This bidirectional relation keeps one substance from leaving the many names and the many names from leaving the Dharma-substance immediately present.

How Do the Four Groups of Similes Make an Abstract Relation Visible?

The first simile is a person named Goldsmith. He can forge gold and his body is also yellow. The person’s name, skill, and bodily color point in the same direction, revealing the first statement.

The second simile first gives a person named Blue who can make lacquer yet has a pure white body, then another named Black who can grind cinnabar yet has a purple body. Name, skill, and body all differ, revealing the second statement.

The third simile gives a hundred people who share the same surname and personal name and all understand the same skill, yet whose bodies are each different. The same name and skill cannot turn a hundred people into one body, revealing the third statement.

The fourth simile uses only one person. Encountering warfare and family calamity, he changes surnames and names wherever he goes, passes through many official posts, and masters many skills. Changing names according to place reveals different names; being designated according to his abilities reveals different meanings; the one who undergoes them all remains the same person throughout, revealing the same substance.

Zhang Yi and Fan Li illustrate changing names from place to place; masters of calligraphy, painting, goldwork, and ironwork illustrate designations according to skill; Rulin, Zhongsan, Xiongqu, and Cifei illustrate names derived from civil and military offices. The royal strongman who is one man equal to a thousand is so called because he masters many skills and can surpass a thousand. The same person may receive many designations from skill, office, clan, wealth, capability, and knowledge, while the substance remains one throughout.

The first three similes each reveal one kind of noninterpenetration. The fourth uses one person with many names, skills, and offices to reveal sameness within difference. The treatise therefore explicitly judges the first three statements to express the Distinct intent and the last to express the Perfect intent. The Perfect lies in not losing one substance amid the many names.

The Four Accommodations Bring One Substance’s Many Names into the Lives of Sentient Beings

If the true mark is one Dharma, why are its names and meanings so profuse? The answer lies in the differences among sentient beings’ faculties. Because the Buddha accommodates their desires, what is fitting for them, what counteracts their afflictions, and what brings them to awakening, the four gateways have different teachings.

Partial habituation can cause people to lose benefit. Some will listen only to texts already familiar to them and refuse to hear another gateway. Even when they hear it, they take no joy, cannot accept it in faith, cannot extinguish afflictions, and do not give rise to the mind of the path. These partial habituations in turn become roots and conditions for hearing Dharma in the future. The Buddha therefore observes their faculties of faith and the rest and, at the appropriate time, teaches them in responsive words.

Those with an existence disposition hear wondrous existence and true, wholesome, wondrous form and, without opposition or resistance, can give rise to faith, discipline, patience, and vigor, sweep away views of emptiness, and enter awakening. Those with an emptiness disposition hear ultimate emptiness, suchness-suchness, and nirvāṇa, counter evil with good, and take signlessness as supreme. Those with a disposition both empty and existent hear empty-space buddha-nature, the tathāgata-garbha, and the mind of the middle-real principle and gladly give rise to wholesomeness. Those with a disposition neither empty nor existent hear the Middle Way blocking the two extremes and, amid neither coming nor going, neither annihilation nor permanence, neither one nor different, remove attached views so that the principle of ultimate truth shines forth.

Because the four faculties differ, the teachings differ; because the teachings differ, the names differ; because the functions differ, the meanings also differ. The principle entered through awakening is not different, and the Dharma-substance is ultimately one. At this point, one Dharma having different names advances beyond a classification of names and marks to reveal how the Buddha enables different sentient beings to enter the same true mark, each through the appropriate gateway.

Through the Eye of the Shiqian

Zhanran first judges the passage to contain four great intents, then divides listing the different names into the intent of the passage, the list of names, and the refutation of attachments. The twelve names are not scattered: the first three belong to the gateway of existence, the next three to the gateway of emptiness, the next three to the gateway both empty and existent, and the final three to the gateway neither empty nor existent. Each gateway takes its three items respectively as name, meaning, and substance.

The Mirror summarizes the four statements with the judgment “the first three belong to the Distinct, the last to the Perfect.” In the first three, either correspondence remains within the single gateway, all three items differ, or name and meaning are the same while substance differs. The point of the fourth is that the substances of the four gateways are the same and interpenetrating, so differences of name and meaning do not produce contention. The Mirror then unfolds the fourth statement twice: first, the many names and meanings are all names of the true mark; second, the true mark and all dharmas mutually serve as name and substance.

When the explanation reaches the final group of names, Zhanran notes that the extant text explains only the Middle Way and ultimate truth and lacks an independent sentence for subtle and wondrous quiescent extinction. The omission does not compromise the sameness of substance among the many names. The Mirror preserves a judgment that a sentence is missing, while the treatise master’s extant explanation still ends with ultimate truth. The fourth simile is further divided into presenting historical affairs, citing the strongman, and revealing the Perfect through one person’s many skills and offices.

The received text joins one group of names as “middle-common faithful-upright person.” Because the entire passage requires twelve names but the extant text appears to have only eleven, Zhanran proposes dividing this into “middle-common person” and “faithful-upright person.” This is the Mirror’s textual reading; the extant wording of the treatise master remains “middle-common faithful-upright person,” while the ancient master separately observes the problem in the count.

The answer concerning the four accommodations is also divided into five layers. Unwillingness to hear, lack of intent to accept in faith, failure to extinguish afflictions, and failure to give rise to the mind of the path correspond in sequence to losing the four benefits of desire, the individually adapted, counteraction, and ultimate meaning. In the existence gateway, not opposing or resisting, faith, discipline, patience, and vigor, sweeping away views of emptiness, and awakening into the true mark reveal the four corresponding benefits in sequence. For the remaining three gateways, Zhanran concludes, “Since it is so for the existence gateway, the remaining three may be known,” leaving their four benefits together to be inferred by analogy.

Looking back through this Mirror, the twelve names, four statements, four similes, and four accommodations are not four parallel sets of information. The twelve names supply the material through which the four statements discern interpenetration and separation; the four similes make that interpenetration and separation visible; and the four accommodations explain why the many names are established in response to faculties. The entire passage continually answers one matter: how different names and meanings do not depart from the one reality, and how they respond to faculties so that people receive benefit.