Lecture No. 0228
Global Lamrim II
Lecture No. 0228
Lamrim Volume 1: P34-LL9-LL1
Date: 2020-06-04 ~ 2020-06-07
Topic: Follow the Bodhisattva Treatise, one would be able to understand the embedded intent of Buddha’s Teachings (I)
Very well! Now, let’s listen to the next paragraph. [4A 02:31 ~ 05:16]
However, people may say, “Well, since the one who guides us on the path is the enlightened Buddha, why do we need commentators [to compose the treatises] and translators [translating from Sanskrit or Tibetan into another language]? Are those commentators or translators better than Buddha?” Nowadays, many people would raise such a question, which is seemingly plausible. We may think that is right! Thus there are too many people claiming, “Well, you don’t need to read the commentaries. How can the Bodhisattvas who composed the treatises be better than Buddha?” When hearing this, we would find it plausible; then we don’t study the commentaries any more. However, there is a big flaw in this argument, and let me explain it here. [00.40]
Master brought up this question. Sometimes, while listening to some teachings, on and on we listened, then some doubts may arise in our mind, “Why is it so?” Sometimes, during virtuous teachers’ impartation, on and on they expounded the Dharma; they would touch upon that specific doubt we have in mind. That kind of feeling is really great, as if they have heard and clarify the question we have in mind. They seem to hear our murmurings, “Since we need to learn from the purest and the most encompassing teaching, and Buddha is the most perfect and enlightened. Then why do we need to study the commentaries? There is no need to study commentaries! Are the Bodhisattvas who composed the commentaries better than Buddha?” Therefore, when hearing this… Pay attention! When hearing this… Behold! What happens? “When hearing this, we would find it plausible; ” then, the consequence is that we will not study the commentaries. [01.35]
This may start merely as a doubt in our mind. However, if it is not solved properly, the consequence may be that we will not study commentaries. It seems to be a doubt lightly crossing our mind, but the consequence is that we might not study the commentaries on Buddha’s sutras for the rest of our life. However, with the capacity we have now, how could it be possible for us to comprehend Buddha’s intended meaning? If we do so, then the loss incurred is truly enormous! It all originated from a doubt, or a hasty answer given, but it would bring about the consequence of squandering our entire life away. We might even take a dangerous detour by thinking there is no point studying commentaries, and thus engaging in a very serious non-virtuous deed! [02.22]
Now everyone is studying Lamrim, Nan-shan Disciplines for House-holders, and the Five Great Treatises; it has become a common practice in our organization. However, there was never such established practice in Chinese Buddhist community 20 or 30 years ago. Back then, Master brought up the significance of studying commentaries, enabled us to recognize the importance of studying the commentaries in order to understand the sutras. Especially if we don’t study the commentaries composed by those great Bodhisattvas that Buddha had conferred, by no means we will be able to understand Buddha’s intended meaning. [02.48]
Let me give you the simplest analogy. Speaking of learning the Five Great Treatises, some of us comprehend them very quickly, some are slower in learning. Then we will borrow the notes from those fast learners. Well! What we did not understand on the first day would become clear after reading other classmate’s notes on the next day. Is that because the notes from our classmates are better than what the virtuous teacher taught? Definitely not. Nonetheless, the notes were very helpful as they clarified what was abstruse to us, so that we got to know what the virtuous teacher tried to convey. We go through Bodhisattvas’ commentaries one round after another, so that we can gradually come closer to Buddha’s intended meaning. [03.31]
Then Master said, “There is a big flaw in this argument.” What kind of flaw is it? We will continue listening to the next paragraph. [03.42]
There is one thing we need to understand, there are two distinct differences between the Dharma that Buddha taught and the realization (pratyātmādhigama) he attained personally. It is absolutely true that his internal realization is perfectly encompassing. In terms of his internal realization, no one can surpass Buddha – certainly not Bodhisattvas, not to mention the masters of the lineage in the past! However, with respect to Buddha Dharma, there is one characteristic – the teachings given by Buddha varied according to different capacities of the audiences. For children, he gave teachings commensurate with their capacity. For adults, the Dharma Buddha taught was suitable for adults; similarly, the teachings he gave to the people living in two thousand years ago were different from the teachings we have now. Thus Buddha is the perfectly enlightened one, yet would you be able to align with the teachings given specifically to those people with certain capacities? Not necessarily. This is the first distinct difference. Since there exists a huge gap of time and space between the people living in Buddha’s time and us, bewilderments may arise under such circumstances. [04.42]
Theoretically, we should be able to understand this aspect. In reality, let’s examine this: indeed, it goes without saying that Buddha Dharma is in and of itself encompassing. This is absolutely true! Because what he said was encompassing, the audience whom he addressed in person were also perfectly endowed with the capacity to understand his teachings. Thus whatever he taught in each scripture, after hearing the session, many of the Mahayana practitioners would surely attain the level of certitude-about-the-teaching [v2 chapter 12 p.151], or they would at least cultivate the aspiration for the spirit of enlightenment. As for Theravada practitioners, they would attain the clairvoyance of purity of the Dharma-eye or arhatship. That is all because of Buddha’s perfectly encompassing qualities. What does it mean? It means that if the audiences were perfectly endowed with the capacity to understand Buddha's teachings, they would attain these benefits. What about those who are not endowed with the capacity? Unfortunately! As a saying goes, “Teaching Dharma to those who do not have the capacity to align with the teachings is equal to empty talk.” In other words, if the audience does not align with the teachings, the teachings given are the same as empty talk. Now, regrettably, we are the ones lacking the adequate capacity; it means we may not attain the benefits while studying sutras. Although we may consider ourselves having conviction or faith while studied for a while, suppose we are truly endowed with the root nature of a qualified Mahayana practitioner, may I ask, have we attained the level of certitude-about-the-teaching? Have we cultivated the aspiration for the spirit of enlightenment? As for the Theravada, to say nothing of the level of arhatship, have you attained the clairvoyance of the purity of the Dharma-eye? No! Then what does it mean? Here lies the key issue! This is not only true in theory, but also in practice; this is what we should understand. [05.56]
After we listened to these two paragraphs, let me ask you a question. Master said, “There is one thing we need to understand …”; may I ask what does this “one thing” refer to? Do you have the answer? That’s correct! Master said, “There is one thing we need to understand, there are two distinctive differences between the Dharma that Buddha taught and the realization (pratyātmādhigama) he attained personally.” In the very beginning of this paragraph, Master analyzed this point from two aspects; namely, the Buddha Dharma and Buddha’s good qualities of internal realization; this is very clear and obvious. Speaking of the good qualities of Buddha’s internal realization, what phrase did Master use to describe these qualities? Have you noticed those words? “It is absolutely true that his internal realization is perfectly encompassing.” And then Master said, “In terms of his internal realization, no one can surpass Buddha.” Then Master continued explaining one characteristic of Buddha Dharma. He said, “The teachings given by Buddha varied according to different capacities of the audiences.” [06.59]
The teachings vary with children, adults, the people living two thousand years ago, and to the people in our times, it is a different approach. Do you have any doubts? Is there any difference between the teachings given to the people living in two thousand years ago and the teachings given to the people living now in terms of alignment? How do we comprehend this question? Everyone can give it some thought! [07.25]
While reading sutras, take for example the Diamond Sutra, the Lotus Sutra, or the Array of Stalks Sutra, and many more scriptures, mentioning how the audiences, such as monks, nuns, male lay practitioners, and female lay practitioners would attain the benefits after listening to Buddha’s teaching. Wow! Some attendees attained purity of the Dharma-eye, or arhatship, or even cultivated the aspiration of anuttara samyak sambodhi, and such and such sublime benefits, so on and so forth. However, what about us? Having read some sutras once, or even many times, we just could not make out what Buddha was talking about. [08.04]
Master said, “Here lies the key issue!” What is the key issue? Why is that we are not like the people mentioned in the sutras – like those disciples listening to the teaching in Buddha’s presence and attaining such state of enlightenment? We can’t even understand what Buddha was talking about. Since we cannot understand what Buddha taught while reading the sutras, what should we do? You must be baffled by this, right? It is said that by reciting the Diamond Sutra one can become enlightened, which did happen to the Sixth Patriarch and some others. However, though we have chanted the Diamond Sutra for quite a long time, we are not enlightened. We learn and learn so much so that sometimes we have no idea where we are heading. Without the guidance from a virtuous teacher, pointing out the accurate stages of the path for us, by no means we are able to understand Buddha’s intended meaning by merely reciting the sutras on our own. [08.55]
Over here, we can understand what it means by having the capacity to align with the teachings and lacking the capacity to align with the teachings. Otherwise, our discussion might be stuck at, “Ah! What does it mean by having the capacity to align with the teachings? I am completely clueless as to if I am endowed with the capacity! What should I do?” Then it depends on whether we can understand the sutras, or whether we can attain the commensurate stage of realizations attained by those who had the capacity to align with the teaching, as mentioned in the sutras. Can we achieve? If not, then we do not understand what Buddha had taught in the section we have discussed. [09.28]
【全球广论 II 讲次: 0228】
讲次 0228
标题 依菩萨释论，方能趣入佛陀密意（一）
音档 4A 02:31 ~ 05:16
日期 2020-06-04 ~ 2020-06-07
广论段落 P2-L9 ~ P2-L10 由是菩提道次引导分四……引导学徒之次第。
手抄页/行 第1册 P98-L8 ~ P99-LL3 ( 2016 南普陀版：第1册 P98-L8 ~ P99-LL3 )
手抄段落 不过这个地方……我们要了解的
00:00
好！我们接着听下一段。
不过这个地方大家会说：“欸，那么引导我们的佛最圆满，何必还要你来造、他译了呢？难道你还比佛强吗？”现在很多人提出这个问题，这个话听起来，是呀，我们想，对呀！所以现在有太多的人说：“啊，你不要去看那个论，难道造论的菩萨还强得过佛吗？”我们一听觉得对，然后你就不去看论了。这里边却是有个大问题，这个我们在这里解释一下。 00:40
师父提出了这个问题。有的时候在听法，听着、听着心里出现一个疑问：“那是为什么呢？”有的时候善知识讲着、讲着，讲就讲到那个疑问，那种感觉非常好，好像他听到了你的疑问。像这里我们的心里嘀咕这个问题，说：“既然是说要得到最清净圆满的教法，那佛就最圆满了，为什么还要学论啊？就不用学论了！造论的菩萨还强得过佛吗？”然后我们一听，注意！我们一听，看！发生什么事了？ “我们一听觉得对”，然后产生一种结果，就是不去看论了。 01:35
这只是心里的一个问题，但是它没有被正确地解决的话，导致的结果就是不去看论。看起来轻轻滑过的一个问题，但它导致的结果，可能这一辈子都不去读诵诠释佛经的论典。可是靠自力怎么能够趣入佛陀的密意呢？这样的损失实在太过巨大！可它的源头却是一个疑问，乃至是一个轻率的回答，就能使一生空过，甚至走上觉得学论没有用这样的一个险途，造了很大的恶业！ 02:22
现在大家学《广论》、学《南山律》，还有学五大论已经有点蔚然成风，可是二、三十年前应该汉地还没有这样的一个风气。那个时候师父就提出这样的观点，让我们认识到学论对了解佛经的重要性，尤其是不去看佛所授记的大菩萨写的论的话，是没法了解佛陀的密意。 02:48
举个最简单的例子，现在我们学五大论，有的学得很快，有的学得有点慢，那我们就会拿学得好的同学的笔记看。欸！第一天不明白，结果看了一下他的笔记，第二天就明白了。同班同学的那个笔记能超过善知识讲的吗？肯定不行，但是它却给自己一个最大的帮忙，就是把不明白的地方弄明白了，这样才能明白善知识的意思。我们经过一轮、一轮地学习，学习菩萨解释的那些论典，会慢慢地靠近佛陀的密意。 03:31
然后师父说：这里边有个大问题。什么样的问题？接下来可以听下一段。 03:42
佛，说的法跟他内证的内容，有两个绝不一样的地方，这一点我们要认识。他内证的是完全圆满的，千真万确，所以就内证这一点来说，没有一个人能比得过佛。菩萨当然不如，祖师更不如！但是他讲的法却有一个特质，是对不同的根性说的。他对小孩子，就讲小孩子的法；对大人，对大人的法；然后对两千多年以前的人讲的法；对我们现在是另外一种法。佛自己是最圆满的，可是他讲出来的法所对的根性，跟你相应不相应？不一定相应，这第一点。不但在时间、空间，都有一大段的距离，在这种状态当中，这个里边就有问题了。 04:42
理论上面我们应该了解，实际上呢，我们也看一下：是，佛说的法是绝对圆满，千真万确。因为说得圆满，所以他对机也圆满，所以凡是讲到哪里，每一部经典上面，那个当机众听完了以后，大乘的，一定是很多人证无生法忍，最起码的发菩提心；小乘的，得法眼净、证阿罗汉，这个是佛真正圆满的结果。表示什么？那当机就有这样的功效。假定不当机的话呢？对不起！所以“佛法不应机，等同闲言语”，如果不应机的话，那就是说空话一样的。现在，我们不幸的是不应机，你看上去不一定有效，尽管你说你有了信心去看，有信心是有信心，你看是看了半天，如果你大乘根性，请问你得了无生法忍吗？你发了菩提心吗？小乘的，不要说罗汉果，你得了法眼净吗？没有。那么表示什么？这个问题就在这个地方嘛！这事实也是这样，这个我们要了解的。 05:56
看了这两段，我提一个问题。师父说：“这一点我们要认识”，请问这一点是指什么？有想到吗？对！师父说：“佛，说的法跟他内证的内容，有两个绝不一样的地方，这一点我们要认识。”这一小段一开头就把佛说的法，和佛陀内证的功德分开来谈，这一点非常地明晰。接着讲佛陀内证的功德，有八个字，看得到吧？ “完全圆满，千真万确。”接着师父说：内证这一点，没有一个人比得过佛。接着他说的法有什么样的特质呢？师父说：是对不同的根性说的。 06:59
说对小孩、对大人，后面又有一个说对两千年前的人这样讲，对我们现在的人是另一种讲法，你对这点有疑问吗？两千年前讲的和现在讲的在对机上会有差别吗？我们怎么去会通这个问题呢？大家可以想想哦！ 07:25
我们在看佛经的时候，比如读《金刚经》、读《妙法莲华经》，有的读《华严经》，读很多经典，我们都看到过那上面讲比丘、比丘尼、优婆塞、优婆夷，这些听法众都是这样，说：哎呀！证得法眼净、证得阿罗汉果，然后还有发阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心，还有怎样、怎样的胜利。但是我们看了一遍佛经之后，甚至是看很多遍之后，就是看不懂佛陀在讲什么。 08:04
师父说：问题就在这个地方！什么问题呢？为什么我们不会像经典上的那些人一样——佛在说法的时候他面前的那些弟子那样，获得那样的证悟力？我们甚至听不懂佛陀在讲什么。那听不懂佛陀在讲什么的我们，又看到了经典的时候，要怎么办呢？你们在心里困惑过吧？说念《金刚经》开悟，六祖开悟了、有一些人开悟了，我们《金刚经》念了很久也开悟不了，甚至学着、学着也不知道学到哪边去了，如果没有一个善知识沿着正确的次第引导自己的话，我们很难透过读诵佛经就了解佛陀的密意。 08:55
从这个地方可以理解一下什么叫当机、什么叫不当机；不然我们就是在讨论：“啊！什么应机？我是什么机也不知道啊！那怎么办呢？”那就看看能不能看懂佛经，能不能证得在佛经上当时应机的那些有情他们所证得的那些果位，我们能不能达到？如果达不到的话，佛说的那段法就是没听懂了。 09:28