by Red Pine
Tao-yuan says, “There is no dharma proclaimed that does not occur in response to some condition. But dharmas that arise due to conditions have no nature of their own and are essentially empty.”
Huai-shen says, “‘My mind is like the autumn moon / clear and bright in an emerald pool / nothing can compare / what more can I say.’ In this poem (The Collected Songs of Cold Mountain: 5), Cold Mountain basically says, ‘If we can’t find anything, then stop.’ Whoever is able to understand that form and nature are both empty and able to eliminate both existence and non-existence, and to forget both words and silence, sees that their own nature is pure. Although they talk all day, they still don’t say a word.”
Textual note: Neither Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, nor Dharmagupta includes sa-kashcid (any such) in the Buddha’s question and Subhuti’s answer. Kumarajiva also omits dharma in Subhuti’s reply. Paramartha interprets sa-kashcid as po-yu yi fa (any particular), while Hsuan-tsang and Yi-ching give po-yu shao fa (the slightest dharma).
The Buddha said, “Subhuti, what do you think? Are
all the specks of dust in the billion-world-system of
a universe many?”
The Buddha turns from this teaching to the sanctuary where this teaching was being taught, namely, the vihara outside Shravasti where both he and Subhuti were sitting. If the teaching of prajna is no teaching, what about the world in which it is taught? The Buddha begins with the smallest perceivable constituents of matter and the largest conceivable entity that they comprise.
According to one metaphysical scheme common in the Buddha’s day, all material things were said to consist of a combination of minute particles, and each of these minute particles were said to be composed of smaller particles. While the Buddha generalizes here with prithivi-rajas (dust specks), in other texts the scheme goes like this: seven paramanus, or ultimate anus—equivalent to our “atoms”—comprise one anu (molecule); seven molecules comprise one gold speck; seven gold specks comprise one water speck; seven water specks comprise one rabbit-hair speck; seven rabbit-hair specks comprise one sheep-hair speck; seven sheep-hair specks comprise one cow-hair speck; seven cow-hair specks comprise one window-dust speck; seven window-dust specks comprise one louse; seven lice comprise one bug; seven bugs comprise one barley grain; and seven barley grains comprise one fingertip. Thus, in one finger tip there are nearly two billion paramanus (atoms). And these paramanus were considered to be the ultimate, indivisible building blocks of matter and only visible to devas and those who possessed the vision of devas. According to modern science, a closer estimate would be a thousand, billion, billion, or ten to the twenty-second power. Of course, paramanus are not equivalent to what we call “atoms,” nor are loka-dhatus (worlds) the same as what we now call “planets.” Still, the relationship is essentially the same.
Sheng-yi says, “Every world is the result of karma. Without karma there is no world. The world is the result of the myriad delusions of beings in the past, and our delusions are like specks of dust. Due to the dust of our delusions, we undertake myriad actions and create the karma of our present world. The dust of beneficial delusions creates the world of devas. The dust of harmful delusions creates the world of sinners. A mixture of the two creates the world of humans. But from the point of view of prajna wisdom, the dust of our delusions arrives from nowhere and departs for nowhere. Its nature is empty. Thus, it is not the dust of delusions.”
Textual note: It is at this point that the Gilgit edition of the Sanskrit text begins. However, here it does not include tat kin manyase (what do you think) or bhavet (are).
Subhuti said, “Many, Bhagavan. The specks of dust
are many, Sugata. And how so? Because, Bhagavan,
what the Tathagata says is a speck of dust, Bhagavan,
the Tathagata says is no speck. Thus is it called
a ‘speck of dust.’ And what the Tathagata says is
a world-system, the Tathagata says is no system.
Thus is it called a ‘world-system.’”
Regardless of what we view as the smallest and biggest entities in any given universe of discourse, the existence of each depends on the existence of the other. They either compose a larger entity or are themselves composed of smaller entities. In the material realm, the existence of specks of dust depends on the existence of the universe, and the existence of the universe depends on the existence of specks of dust. Thus, neither specks of dust nor the universe is real, for neither exists as an independent, permanent entity. And thus, all material things, however great or small they may be, are empty of any self-nature, and our view of them as real is essentially false.
Hsieh Ling-yun says, “Separating results in specks of dust. Combining results in a world. But since it has no nature, it is neither a speck of dust, nor is it a world. To give it a name, we call it a speck of dust or a world.”
Fu Hsi says, “Dust is combined to make a world. A world is broken into specks of dust. A world represents the fruit of humans and gods. The dust is their karmic seeds. The seeds of dust aren’t real. Nor is the fruit of a world. Who knows the fruit and seed are false is one who wanders free.”
Ch’en Hsiung says, “Enlightened beings live in this world. Deluded beings also live in this world. The minds of those who are enlightened are pure. Dwelling in the world with such a mind, they purify the world. The minds of those who are deluded are covered with dust. Dwelling in the world with such a mind, they fill the world with dust. All this dust is the dust of the minds of all beings. The Buddha once told Manjushri, ‘To live in the world beyond the world, and to live in the dust beyond the dust, this is the ultimate dharma.’ This is what is meant by ‘no specks’ and ‘no systems’: beyond the dust, beyond the world.”
Meng-ts’an says, “Don’t listen to others. Think about things for yourself. Think about your own name. Then ask yourself, ‘Is this me? If it isn’t me, who is it? Since this is who I am, I may as well say it’s me.’ This is what is meant by practice. What else can you use to practice?”
Textual note: The Gilgit edition does not include bahu sugata prithivirajo bhavet (there are many specks of dust, Sugata) or tat kasya hetoh (and how so). Kumarajiva and Bodhiruci limit Subhuti’s reply to shen-to shihts’un (many, Bhagavan), while to the beginning of this, Hsuan-tsang adds, tz’u ti-wei-ch’en shen-to shih-ts’un (the specks of dust are many, Bhagavan). However, all three attribute the remaining lines to the Buddha. Also, instead of arajas (no specks) and adhatu (no systems), Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Paramartha, and Hsuan-tsang have fei wei-ch’en (no specks of dust) and fei shih-chieh (no world-systems).
The Buddha said, “Subhuti, what do you think?
Can the Tathagata, the Arhan, the Fully-Enlightened
One be seen by means of the thirty-two attributes of
a perfect person?”
If the teaching of prajna is no teaching, and the world in which it is taught is no world, what about the teacher of the teaching? The teacher here is called a maha-purusha (perfect person). Long before this term was applied to buddhas, it was the name and appellation of the being who sacrificed his body to create the world and the human race. Later, it was also applied to bodhisattvas who had cultivated various forms of renunciation for many kalpas and who had acquired, one by one, the thirty-two attributes that marked their possessor as destined for either buddhahood or universal sovereignty. Although each of these attributes was associated with a particular practice, the number was also related to the number of heavens on the slopes of Mount Sumeru where bodhisattvas are reborn as gods between their human births. All thirty-two attributes and the practices associated with each are listed in Nagarjuna’s Maha Prajnaparamita Shastra: (4).
Among the attributes associated with a “perfect person” are the marks of wheels and sauvastikas on the bottoms of the feet, webbed fingers and toes, arms that extend below the knees, a retractable penis (I assume the clitoris would also qualify as an example of this), golden-hued skin, forty teeth, deep blue eyes, a white curl be
tween the two eyebrows, dark curly hair, a soft protuberance at the top of the head, a pure resonant voice, and a halo. The Lankavatara Sutra says, “The thirty-two attributes are most wondrous and extraordinary. Such a body is as dazzling as aquamarine, and such attributes are not the result of love or desire.”
Textual note: In this and the following section, Kumarajiva does not include maha-purusha (perfect person). Also in this and the following section, neither Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Paramartha, nor Yi-ching includes the additional titles of the Tathagata.
Subhuti said, “No, indeed, Bhagavan. The Tathagata,
the Arhan, the Fully-Enlightened One cannot be seen
by means of the thirty-two attributes of a perfect
person. And why not? Because, Bhagavan, what
the Tathagata says are the thirty-two attributes of
a perfect person, Bhagavan, the Tathagata says are
no attributes. Thus are they called the ‘thirty-two
attributes of a perfect person.’”
The body of thirty-two attributes is a buddha’s nirmana-kaya. It is his physical or incarnated body, in which he appears to teach other beings. It is, however, the result of karma and is not his real body. When the Buddha posed a similar question about his reward body in Chapter Five, Subhuti said the Buddha could not be seen because the attributes of his reward body are no attributes. But at that time Subhuti did not realize that by means of the very attributes that are no attributes the Tathagata can, in fact, be seen. Subhuti still does not understand this. However, instead of being obstructed by emptiness, he is now obstructed by the logic of prajna in which he has now become adept. But his vision is still limited to the emptiness of things; he does not yet possess the dharma eye, which sees emptiness as a raft and to which the Buddha will introduce Subhuti in Chapter Eighteen.
Ch’en Hsiung says, “Worldly people are only attached to the thirty-two attributes and do not cultivate the thirty-two practices on which they are based. When the Buddha talks about the thirty-two attributes, his meaning is the thirty-two practices and not the attributes. What has no attribute is the Buddha’s dharma-kaya, or real body.”
Wang Jih-hsiu says, “Although the Buddha appeared in a physical body with thirty-two attributes, when he entered Nirvana, they all disappeared. Thus, by means of these we cannot see the real Buddha. Whether it’s something as small as a speck of dust or as big as a world or as extraordinary as a buddha’s physical body, they all are empty illusions. They are simply names.”
Yen Ping says, “When the Buddha had ascended to the Thirty-third Heaven, Maudgalyayana asked a carpenter to carve a likeness of the Buddha. He was able to carve thirty-one attributes but was unable to carve his pure resonant voice. Once a monk asked Nan-ch’uan, ‘What is the pure resonant voice like?’ Nan-ch’uan replied, ‘Who are you planning to cheat?’”
Hsu-fa says, “These sentences about specks of dust, world-systems, and the thirty-two attributes are all meant to explain the meaning of how prajna is not prajna, or the appearance of no dharma.”
Tsung-t’ung says, “Because the Diamond Prajnaparamita transcends the concept of words or letters, it doesn’t teach anything. Because it transcends the concept of passion, there are no specks of dust. Because it transcends the concept of humans and gods, there is no world. It even transcends the concept of the Buddha’s body. Thus, there are no thirty-two attributes.” (quoted by Hsu Fa)
Textual note: The Gilgit edition does not include Subhuti’s initial response.
The Buddha said, “Furthermore, Subhuti, if a man
or woman renounced their self-existence every day as
many times as there are grains of sand in the Ganges
and renounced their self-existence in this manner for as
many kalpas as there are grains of sand in the Ganges,
Each time this sutra compares the merit of an offering, it increases the value and extent of the offering. In previous chapters, the offering consisted of the most valuable objects in the material world, namely the seven jewels. Here, the offering consists of an object even more valuable, namely, our own self. Also, time is added to space to further expand the dimensions of such an offering. The unit used here is the kalpa, the ancient Indian unit of time that begins with the creation of a world and ends with its destruction. It is a unit of time so impossible to conceive, a mayfly would more easily understand the concept of a millenium.
Again, the defining characteristic of the maha-purusha (perfect person) is renunciation. However, renunciation itself does not lead to liberation. Buddhas arise from this teaching of prajna, which is no teaching. And buddhas are buddhas because they are not attached to the concept of a self. Hence, they find no self to renounce. Whereas the previous sections of this chapter regarded the entities of the external universe, the above and following sections consider the entities of the internal world, namely the atoms and world-systems of the universe we call “the self,” namely the buddha self and the individual self.
Textual note: Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Paramartha, and Yi-ching interpret parityaja (renounce) as pu-shih (donate/give as a gift). The term’s proper meaning, however, is “to renounce, to forsake, or to sacrifice.” Neither the Gilgit nor Stein editions nor Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Paramartha, nor Yi-ching includes dine dine (every day) or the final clause beginning evan parityajan ganganadivalukasaman kalpans tan atmabhavan parityajet (and renouncing their self-existence in this manner.... in the Ganges).
and someone grasped but one four-line gatha of this
dharma teaching and made it known and explained
it to others, the body of merit produced as a result
would be immeasurably, infinitely greater.”
Since the self is not real, what merit can there be from such an offering? Throughout this sutra, the Buddha repeatedly points out that making offerings of what we hold most dear to those whom we most venerate cannot compare to making an offering of this teaching to other deluded beings. But not only is this teaching of prajna no teaching, and the world in which it is taught no world, and the teacher who teaches it no teacher, the self who makes an offering of this teaching is no self. Such understanding as this gives birth to the bodhisattva’s infinite body of merit, which is the sanbhoga-kaya, the selfless no-body that each bodhisattva acquires upon practicing this teaching. The attainment of such a body of merit contrasts sharply with Subhuti’s practice of self-renunciation, whereby he had freed himself of desires and was waiting for the fires of nirvana to consume his physical body, after which he would receive no further body. Meanwhile, the bodhisattva’s body of merit is not limited by time or space and appears wherever there are beings in need of liberation.
Asanga says, “This fruit excels more suffering. How rare its peerless meaning. Such perfection can’t be measured, nor can other truths compare.” (24) Vasubandhu comments, “As a result of the merit from giving jewels one obtains the future enjoyment of a body. But one’s body of merit will be greater if one can renounce such a limitless body. Such a body, however, is still prone to suffering, and how much more so if one uses it in one’s practice of charity.”
Fu Hsi says, “Whatever the sutra means by a four-line gatha cannot be separated from the body.”
Hui-neng says, “Nothing is valued more in the world than individual life. Over the course of countless kalpas, bodhisattvas give their lives to other beings for the sake of the Dharma. And although their merit is great, it doesn’t compare to the merit from holding onto a single gatha of this sutra. If one offers up one’s life over the course of many kalpas but doesn’t understand the meaning of emptiness and doesn’t drive falsehood from one’s mind, one is basically an ordinary being. But once a person keeps this sutra in mind, the concepts of self and being suddenly disappear, illusions vanish, and all at once one becomes a buddha.”
Textual note: Neither Kumarajiva, Bodhiruci, Paramartha, Dharmagupta, nor Yi-ching includes deshaya (make known). The Gilgit edition does not have sanprakashaya (
explain), for which Paramartha substitutes kung-ching (venerate). Hsuan-tsang has his usual longer list of meritorious practices. Kumarajiva does not include nidana . . . prasunuyat (produced as a result) or aprameyan asankhyeyan (immeasurably, infinitely), nor does the Stein edition.
Chapter Fourteen: By the force of this dharma, the venerable Subhuti was moved to tears. Wiping his eyes, he said to the Buddha, “How remarkable, Bhagavan, how most remarkable, Sugata, is this dharma teaching that the Bhagavan speaks for the benefit of those beings who seek the foremost of paths, for the benefit of those who seek the best of paths, and from which my own awareness is born. Bhagavan, I have never heard such a teaching as this! They shall be the most remarkably blessed of bodhisattvas, Bhagavan, who hear what is said in this sutra and give birth to a perception of its truth. And how so? Bhagavan, a perception of its truth is no perception of its truth. Thus does the Tathagata speak of a perception of its truth as a ‘perception of its truth.’
“Hearing such a dharma teaching as this, Bhagavan, it is not remarkable that I should trust and believe it. But in the future, Bhagavan, in the final epoch, in the final period, in the final five hundred years of the dharma-ending age, Bhagavan, those beings who grasp this dharma teaching and memorize it, recite it, master it, and explain it in detail to others, they shall be most remarkably blessed. Moreover, Bhagavan, they shall not create the perception of a self, nor shall they create the perception of a being, the perception of a life, or the perception of a soul. They shall create neither a perception nor no perception. And why not? Bhagavan, the perception of a self is no perception, and the perception of a being, a life, or a soul is also no perception. And why not? Because buddhas and bhagavans are free of all perceptions.”
