Part 1 of The Treatise on Arousing the Faith of the Great Vehicle.

TREATISE on AROUSING the FAITH of the GREAT VEHICLE in a SINGLE SCROLL.

            Created by Bodhisattva Asvaghosa, and translated in the Liang dynasty[1] by Tripitaka Dharma Master Paramartha of Western India.

[OPENING ADORATION]

            Adoration to (namo) the Utmost One In The Ten Directions,

            To the Thoroughly Knowing One Who Conquers Karma.
            To the Sovereign One Unobstructed by Form,
            To the One Who Delivers the World with Great Pity.
            To the One Who Reaches the Essence and Characteristics of the Other Bodies (i.e., the 3 bodies of Nirmanakaya, Sambhoghakaya and Dharmakaya),
            To the Ocean of the True Suchness of Dharma-nature,
            To the Immeasurable Storehouse of Meritorious Virtues, and
            To the One Equal to the Cultivation and Practice that is According to Reality.

            May the multitude of beings be directed to get rid of doubts and renounce the grasp of perverted views, because by arousing the correct faith of the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) the Buddha-seed is not cut off.

[THE FIVE PARTS]

            The Treatise says there is a Dharma able to arouse the root of faith in the Great Vehicle, and it is for this reason it must be articulated.  To articulate it, there are five parts.  What is said for the five?

            That which is first is the Part of the Causes and Conditions.

            That which is second is the Part of The Meanings Set Forth.
            That which is third is the Part of Explanations.
            That which is fourth is the Part of Faith in Mind and Cultivating Practice.
            That which is fifth is the Part of Exhorting the Benefits of Cultivation.

[ONE:] 

THE BEGINNING PART ARTICULATING THE CAUSES AND CONDITONS

            A question says, “What are there as the causes and conditions to then create this treatise?”

            The answer says, “Indeed, of the causes and conditions there are eight kinds.  What are said for the eight?

“That which is first, as the general characteristic of the causes and conditions, is because it actually designates what directs the multitude of beings to be free from all suffering and to attain the ultimate ease (i.e., nirvana) that does not seek worldly fame, benefits, or respect.

            “That which is second is because it is for the desire to expound the Tathagata’s meaning of the fundamental and to direct the various multitudes of beings to the correct understanding that does not deceive.

            “That which is third, is because it is for directing the multitude of beings with ripened good roots to the Mahayana Dharma that they do not retreat from their faith.

            “That which is fourth, is because it is for directing the multitude of beings with slight good roots to cultivate faith in the mind.

            ‘That which is fifth, is because it is for revealing the expedient means to alleviate the obstructions of evil karmic-actions[2], to well guard their mind, to keep at a distance foolish pride, and to come forth from the net of errors.

            “That which is sixth, is because it is for revealing the practice pair of quietude and contemplation (samatha and vipasyana) to control the transgressions of mind of the common people and those of the two vehicles.

            “That which is seventh, is because it is for revealing the expedient means of single-pointed recollection (smrti) to be born in front of the Buddha and necessarily be firmly settled and not backsliding from faith in the mind.

            “That which is eighth, is because it is for revealing the benefits and encouraging cultivation.

“As such, these are the categories of the causes and conditions actually used to make this treatise.”

A question says, “Possessed within the Sutras there is this Dharma.  Why should this be so seriously articulated?”

            The answer says, “Although within the Sutras there is this Dharma, in use, the roots and practice of the multitude of beings are not equal, and the conditions of their receiving and understanding are different.  It means when the Tathagata was in the world, the multitude of beings were keenly endowed, and the people with the ability to articulate the excellence of form, mind, and karmic-actions were completely of one voice in expounding the different types of understanding (i.e., liberation). Consequently, they did not need these treatises.

Supposing after the extinction of the Tathagata, perhaps there are in the multitude of beings some who are able to use their own power of listening extensively and they receive understanding (i.e., liberation); or there are in the multitude of beings some who likewise use their own power of listening a little and many of them understand (i.e., are liberated); or there are in the multitude of beings some who are without their own strength of mind and from the extensive treatises as a cause they gain understanding (i.e., liberation); and on their own, there are in the multitude of beings some who again and again use the writings of extensive treatises much as an annoyance, whose minds enjoy collecting and holding a few writings and by absorbing much meaning are able to receive understanding (i.e., liberation).

Thus is this treatise. Because it is for wanting to collect the infinite meanings of the Tathagata’s extensive and greatly profound Dharma, it is agreeable to articulate this treatise.

~The end of the part articulating the causes and conditions.

---

[1]  Dates 502-557.

[2] The Sanskrit term karma, (Ch. 業) literally means action or activity but in the context of Buddha Dharma it refers specifically to actions that are volitional, i.e., directly related to the complexes of identity aggregated as the Fourth Skandha.  Therefore depending on the context, it is translated herein as “karmic-activity” or “karmic-action” to distinguish this type of volitional human action and activity from non-volitional actions and activities (e.g., Ch. 作, 為) such as the heart beat or knee reflex, as well as from non-human actions and activities such as a tree falling in a storm or waves eroding a beach. 

Related posts on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle: On the title; Part One; Part Two; Part Three; Part Four; Part Five.
[This post first posted 01/03/2016 Copyright (c) A. Gregory Wonderwheel 2016.]

On the title "Arousing Faith of the Mahayana"

 

"The Treatise on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle" is most commonly known by D.T. Suzuki's rendering of the title as Discourse on The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana .  Yoshito S. Hakeda's translation shortens the title to The Awakening of Faith.  The Sanskrit title is Mahayana-Sraddhotpada-Shastra, and the Chinese title is 大乘起信論 Dàshéng Qǐxìn Lùn. (WG: Ta-ch'eng ch'i-hsin lun).

In his essay “Wonhyo's Reliance on Huiyuan in his Exposition of the Two Hindrances,” A. Charles Muller writes in Note 8:  

In rendering the title of the Dasheng qixin lun as Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith, as opposed to Hakeda's "Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna" I am following the position put forth by Sung Bae Park in Chapter Four of his book Buddhist Faith and Sudden Enlightenment. There he argues that the inner discourse of the text itself, along with the basic understanding of the meaning of mahāyāna in the East Asian Buddhist tradition does not work according to a Western theological "faith in..." subject-object construction, but according to an indigenous East Asian essence-function 體用 model. Thus, mahāyāna should not be interpreted as a noun-object, but as a modifier, which characterizes the type of faith.

 

Of course, Hakeda took his lead from D.T. Suzuki’s rendering of “The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana,” but Hakeda himself seemed to be uncomfortable with the phrase “in the Mahayana,” and he shortened his English title to just “The Awakening of Faith” dropping off the problem of “faith in what?”   I agree with Park's argument that the frame of "faith in..." becomes problematic in reference to the Buddhist idea of vehicles as the vehicles or means of faith, not the aim or ends of faith. But there is nothing inherently wrong with the rendering "faith in the Mahayana" as long as we realize that it is faith in the vehicle, not faith in the Mahayana as a dogma of faith.  

Also, Park’s argument, via Muller, has some rationale for it based on taking the Chinese title 大乘起信論 as a reordered syntax of the Sanskrit Mahayana-Sraddhot-Pada-Shastra (mahāyānaśraddhotpādaśāstra).  But the Chinese title by Paramartha places “arousing” 起 (I prefer using "arousing" to that of “awakening” which is actually another Sanskrit or Chinese word) between “Mahayana” 大乘 and “faith” 信, which means, when viewing the term “Mahayana” as a modifier, that the term Mahayana would be directly modifying the type of “arousal” not “faith.” By Park’s and Muller's logic of separating arousal and faith, the title would be “Faith of Mahayana Arousing” and not “Arousing of Mahayana Faith.”  

So the problem with the title comes from the divergence of the Sanskrit or Chinese syntax and ultimately how to read the Sanskrit. That is, the syntax of the Chinese title takes the Sanskrit as “Mahayana Sraddhotpada,” while Park’s view takes the Sanskrit as “Mahayanasraddhot Pada.”  My current preference is to agree with Park only in so far as the title does not refer to faith “in” Mahayana, but then to follow Paramartha’s Chinese rendering of “Mahayana Sraddhopada” to read Mahayana as modifying both the “arousing” as well as the “faith”, thus rendering it as “The Treatise on Mahayana’s Arousing Faith” or “The Treatise on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle.”  The treatise is not referring to an “Awakening of Mahayana Faith” (ala Park and Muller) any more than to “Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana,” (ala Suzuki and Hakeda); but refers to Mahayana’s method or way of arousing faith in the true suchness of mind. As the Treatise states, "it is the characteristic of the True Suchness of mind that exactly shows the essence of the Great Vehicle." (是心真如相即示摩訶衍體)   So the title could, if somewhat loosely, be translated with a modern ring as “Arousing Faith Mahayana Style.”

 

<><><>

Related posts on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle: On the title; Part One; Part Two; Part Three; Part Four; Part Five.

[This post first posted 01/03/2016 Copyright (c) A. Gregory Wonderwheel 2016.]

 

Part 5 of The Treatise on Arousing Faith in the Great Vehicle.

.

Here's my translation of the concluding section of the Treatise on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle, most commonly known by D.T. Suzuki's rendering of the title as Discourse on The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana .  Yoshito S. Hakeda's translation shortens the title to The Awakening of Faith.  The Sanskrit title is Mahayana-Sraddhotpada Shastra, and the Chinese title is 大乘起信論 Dàshéng Qǐxìn Lùn. 

 

This is from the Chinese translation attributed to Paramartha in Taisho Tripitaka Vol. 32, No. 1666. Parts One, Two, and Five are the shortest, Part Four is somewhat longer, and Part Three is the central and major Part of the Treatise, and itself is divided into three main sections.

 

Here at the end, the efficacy of the Buddha Dharma is praised and extolled.  I especially like the paragraph below that says to repudiate those who slander the teaching and have no faith does both harm to ourselves as well as to others. That they are without faith is already evidence of bearing the suffering arising as the fruits of their past karma.

 

 

[FIVE:] 

THE NEXT PART ARTICULATING AND EXHORTING

THE BENEFITS OF CULTIVATION

Thus the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) is the secret treasury of the various Buddhas that I have already generally articulated.  If there are the multitude of beings who want, from the Tathagata’s profundity in the objective realm, to be able to give birth to correct faith, distancing themselves from repudiation, to enter the Way of the Great Vehicle, they should take hold of this treatise, deliberate on it, and regularly cultivate it. Ultimately they will be able to reach the Way of the unsurpassed.

If a person hears this Dharma and afterwards does not give birth to timidity, one should know this person will certainly hand down the Buddha-seed[1], and necessarily actually will receive the sign[2] of becoming one of the various Buddhas.   

 

Making the assumption that there is a person who is able to convert the multitude of beings within a full 1,000,000,000 worlds (tri-sahasra-mahā-sahasra-loka-dhātu) and decree they practice the ten excellences, still it is not equal to having a person for the time of one meal period correctly consider this Dharma. Going beyond the virtuous merit of the former, that can not even be a metaphor.

Next in reply, if a person receives and upholds this treatise, investigates, cultivates, and practices it, if for one day and one night, then actually there will be meritorious virtues immeasurable and infinite that are not even able to be articulated.  Suppose that by order of all of the various Buddhas of the ten directions, each and every one for immeasurable and infinite asamkheya aeons praised it’s virtuous merit, likewise they are not able to exhaust it.  Because why?  Because it designates the virtuous merit of the Dharma-nature that has no existing exhaustion. This person’s virtuous merit likewise repeats like this without having limits or boundaries.

That there are the multitude of beings who slander and are not faithful to what is in this treatise is actually their being seized by retribution for wrongs from past immeasurable aeons and their receiving great suffering and vexation. For this reason the multitude of beings still should revere faith and not respond by repudiation (apavāda), since that deeply harms oneself and likewise harms other people, and cuts off every seed of the Three Treasures. 

Because every Tathagata in each and every case by depending on this Dharma attains nirvana, and because every Bodhisattva by cultivation and practice of the primary causes enters the Buddha-knowledge (buddhajnana), one should know that past bodhisattvas have already depended on this Dharma to be able to accomplish pure faith, that present bodhisattvas now depend on this Dharma to be able to accomplish pure faith, and that future bodhisattvas will depend on this Dharma to be able to accomplish pure faith.  For this reason the multitude of beings should vigorously study and cultivate it.

The deeply profound and extensive Great Meaning of the various Buddhas I have now articulated according to my ability overall to uphold it, and I return this virtuous merit, like the Dharma-nature, for the universal benefit of everyone in the realm of the multitudes of beings.

 
~The one scroll of the Treatise on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle~

---

[1]  This recapitulates the continuity of the Buddha-seed as stated in the opening Adoration for assuring that the Buddha-seed is not cut off..

[2] The sign (vyākaraṇa) is the prediction of future Buddhahood.


Related posts on Arousing Faith of the Great Vehicle: On the title; Part One; Part Two; Part Three; Part Four; Part Five.

[This post first posted 12/21/2015 and updated 01/03/2016 Copyright (c) A. Gregory Wonderwheel 2015.]

Zen Samadhi

Two lines from Hakuin Ekaku Zenji's "Ode to Sitting Meditation" (J. Zazen Wasan) read,

As to the zen-samadhi of the Mahayana,
There is just too much to praise.

What is Zen-samadhi?

In the Mahayana, meditation practice is technically called zen-samadhi (in Sanskrit, dhyana-samadhi), or the samadhi of meditation. In practical language it is simply called sitting zen (J. zazen) or sitting meditation. Zen-samadhi is the primary solution to the Buddhist question of the spiritual search. The historical Buddha realized enlightenment by sitting zen-samadhi, and as taught in the Parable of the Wayward Son in the True Dharma of the White Lotus Sutra, though Buddha preached and taught many truths, principles, and doctrines they all amounted to the skillful means of a wealthy father (Buddha) who wanted to return his lost and poor son (all beings) to his true inheritance to be gained by zen-samadhi. Thus all the words of Buddhism amount only to various means of convincing us to sit and meditate like Buddha did to realize enlightenment for oneself.

The difficulty of translating the Sanskrit term samadhi adequately into English is one reason the word has been used without translation and incorporated into English dictionaries. It is commonly, though erroneously, translated as “concentration”. Among the problems with the term “concentration” is that it is weighted too much on the “one pointedness” aspect of attention training which is only the beginning step of initial samadhi practice, and it creates the false impression that the whole of samadhi is the act of concentrating on a single object. A better translation would be “focus” in the sense that when awareness is concentrated on the focal point of awareness itself, rather than on a single object, then everything else (i.e., all things or ''dharmas'') comes into focus.

In the way that a camera or one’s eye does not reach out to things to bring them into focus and clarity but makes an inner adjustment of the focal point, so too, does the practice of zen-samadhi make an inner adjustment of the focal point of awareness. This inner adjustment is sometimes called “turning the light around” to draw attention to the fact that zen-samadhi does not reach out to focus on objects but turns inward to be aware of themeless or objectless awareness itself. Whether one is practicing zazen as “only minding doing sitting” (J. shikantaza) or as inquiry into “the source of speech” (Ch. huatou) with koans, the common denominator that makes them both zazen is that the zen-samadhi in the practice is not a concentration on an object but a themeless or formless focus on the focal point of awareness itself without the externalization of an object of form or thought used to act as a mediated object of awareness. Though “just sitting” zazen may start with concentration techniques such as focused breath counting or breath awareness and “koan inquiry” zazen may start with focused awareness of the focal point of the koan (e.g., a huatou such as “What is it?” or “Who hears?” or “Mu”) neither method of zazen becomes real zen-samadhi until the awareness is “turned around” from reaching out to objects to “focus” on the true suchness of awareness itself.

Another acceptable translation is “contemplation” in the sense of considering, observing, or noticing with steady attention. In Christian terminology contemplation can mean the state of mystical awareness of God’s being or the Godhead, which in Buddhist terminology would mean the direct awareness of the ground of being, that is, the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata.

From the etymological root of samadhi meaning “putting together,” “to join,” and “to combine,” other valid translations of samadhi are “union”, “unification”, and “absorbtion” in which all discriminations are joined or combined into a realization of the great non-dual harmony of true suchness.

Essentially, samadhi is the inherent state of steady or unperturbed awareness of one’s true nature. In the Platform Sutra Huineng describes zen-samadhi (i.e., the samadhi of meditation) in this way:

Learned and virtuous ones, what is called zen-samadhi (dhyana-samadhi)? Outwardly, to be free from characteristics is doing zen. Inwardly, to not be perturbed is doing samadhi. Outwardly, if one attaches to characteristics, inwardly, the heart-mind is immediately perturbed. Outwardly, if one is free from characteristics, the heart-mind is immediately not perturbed. The root nature by itself is pure, by itself is samadhi. Only by seeing conditions and thinking about conditions is one immediately perturbed. If someone sees various conditions and the heart-mind is not perturbed, this is real samadhi. Learned and virtuous ones, outwardly, to be free from characteristics is immediately zen. Inwardly, to not be perturbed is immediately samadhi. Outwardly, zen, inwardly, samadhi, this is doing zen-samadhi.

The Parable of the Lamp

In the Zen lineage of the Mahayana, the Three Trainings (or Threefold Learning, i.e., sila, samadhi, and prajna) are presented in the Parable of the Lamp using the ancient form of a lamp made up of a dish of oil with a lighted wick resting at the edge. The resting place of the table (or floor) is the body, the dish is the conscious mind, the oil is sila (moral conduct), the wick is samadhi (unperturbed contemplation), and the flame is prajna (intuitive wisdom). That which is called a "lamp" does not exist without all of the parts present and functioning. If there is no oil, then the wick is dry and the flame won't stay lit. If there is no wick, then there is nothing for the flame to be centered upon and anchored to. If there is no flame, then it is not actually a lamp but just a bowl of oil with a piece of string in it. The wick of samadhi does not become a true wick until it is lit with the flame of prajna, and the flame has no ability to combust until it has a wick through which to draw oil.

Of course metaphors can only be taken so far, but in line with this mutual identity of wick and flame, that is, the physical lamp and it's light, Huineng taught in Chapter 4 of the Platform Sutra that samadhi and prajna are essentially not different:

"Learned and virtuous ones, In this Dharma door of ours samadhi and prajna are considered to be the root. Great assembly, do not be confused. The words “samadhi” and “prajna” are different, but samadhi and prajna are one substance and are not two. Samadhi is the substance of prajna; prajna is the function of samadhi. Immediately at the time of prajna, samadhi is in prajna. Immediately at the time of samadhi, prajna is in samadhi. If one knows this meaning, then samadhi and prajna are equally learned. You various people who study the Way, do not say, 'First samadhi, then comes prajna,' or 'First prajna, then comes samadhi,' to separate them. Those with this view make the Dharma have the characteristic of duality."

3/11/10 ADDENDUM:

Having begun with Hakuin's mention of zen-samadhi and then gone back to Huineng speaking about zen-samadhi, let us go further back to Bodhidharma, the man who brought the Ekayana Zen lineage to China. In the treatise titled "Great Master Dharma's Discourse on the Nature of Awakening" (達磨大師悟性論) Bodhidharma discusses zazen and zen-samadhi in what appears to be a direct foundation for Huineng's teaching. Here's the passage:

If a person knows that the six roots (i.e., 6 sense organs) are not real and the five accumulations (skandhas) are provisional names and that always to go seeking it in the body is necessarily to dwell without samadhi, then one should know that such a person expounds the words of the Buddha. A sutra says, "A home in the cave of the five accumulations is called the courtyard of zen. When the inner illumination is opened and unbound, then the gate of the Great Vehicle could not be brighter!"
` Not recollecting all things (sarvadharma), therefore, is called doing zen-samadhi. If someone understands these words, then walking, standing, sitting, and lying down are all zen-samadhi. Knowing the mind is empty is called the act of seeing Buddha. What is considered the reason? For all Buddhas in the 10 directions, in every consideration there is no mind. Not seeing in the mind, is called the act of seeing Buddha.
To unstingily renounce the body is called Great Charity (Skt. mahadana). The samadhi of detaching from the various activities is called Great Sitting Meditation (J. dai zazen). Because why? Worldly people are singly directed toward activities, and the Small Vehicle is singly directed toward samadhi. Namely, to pass beyond the worldly people and the sitting meditation (zazen) of the Small Vehicle is called the Great Sitting Meditation. If those who act with this realization, in all the various appearances, do not seek to release themselves and, in all the various illnesses, do not cure their own errors, then this is entirely the power of Great Zen-Samadhi.

So, as taught by Bodhidharma, Huineng, and Hakuin, the realization of zen is zen-samadhi. Everything that zen teachers have to say is nothing more than the great tapestry of brocade used to guide students to the realization of zen-samadhi.

###