Sanjigô

The nineteenth patriarch, the Venerable Kumāralāta, went to the kingdom of Madhyadeśa. There he met a great personage named Jayata. The latter asked him: "My parents have always had faith in the Three Jewels. Yet they are constantly afflicted by illness, and all their endeavors turn out badly. On the other hand, my neighbor, who has long led the life of a caṇḍāla, enjoys robust health and sees all his affairs prosper. Why does he have such good fortune, and what is my fault?"

The Venerable said: "What is there to doubt? Know that the retribution of good and evil deeds operates across three periods. Ordinary people, seeing only that the virtuous die young, the violent live long, the rebellious prosper and the righteous encounter misfortune, conclude that causality is empty and that good and evil are illusory. They are profoundly ignorant that effect follows cause as the shadow follows the body, without the slightest discrepancy. Even after hundreds of thousands of kalpas, [karma] does not vanish."

Upon hearing these words, Jayata immediately dispelled all his doubts.

The Venerable Kumāralāta is the nineteenth holder of the Dharma since the Tathāgata. The Buddha himself, during his lifetime, inscribed his name. Not only did he clarify and correctly transmit the Dharma of the sole Buddha Shākyamuni, but he had also fully realized the Dharma of all buddhas of the three periods. After receiving the answer to his question, the Venerable Jayata followed Kumāralāta, practiced the true Dharma of the Tathāgata, and ultimately became the twentieth patriarch. The Blessed One had moreover predicted from afar that the twentieth patriarch would be Jayata. Thus, in Buddhism, one must study and learn according to the judgments of the patriarchs, as they are. One must not mingle with the crowd of heretics of our time, who are ignorant of causality, do not understand karmic retribution, do not know the three periods, and do not distinguish good from evil.

What is called "the retribution of good and evil deeds operates across three periods" refers to these three periods: First, retribution in the present life. Second, retribution in the next life. Third, retribution in a later life. This is what is called the three periods.

When one practices the Way of the buddhas and patriarchs, from the very beginning, one must learn and clarify the principle of karmic retribution according to these three periods. Otherwise, one falls into many errors and sinks into false views. Not only does one sink into false views, but one falls into evil paths and undergoes long suffering. As long as one does not cultivate the roots of good, one loses many merits, the path of bodhi encounters long obstacles—is this not regrettable? This karma of the three periods applies equally to good and evil.

First, karma whose retribution occurs in the present life: this means that if a deed, created and developed in this life, bears its fruit of maturation in this same life, it is called karma with retribution in the present life.

Thus, when a person, whether through good or evil, creates [a deed] in this life and immediately receives its retribution in this life, it is called karma with immediate retribution.

Example of creating an evil deed and its retribution in this life: There was once a woodcutter who, having entered the mountain, was caught by snow and lost his way. Evening fell, the snow was deep, the cold freezing, he was soon to die. He then advanced and entered a dense forest, where he saw a bear. The bear was already in the forest. Its fur was blue-black, its eyes like two torches. The man, terrified, resigned himself to losing his life. In reality, it was a bodhisattva who had taken the form of a bear. Seeing his fright, it comforted him and said: "Do not be afraid.

parents can sometimes have ill intentions toward their child, but I will have none toward you."

He approached, took him in his arms, and brought him to his den. He warmed him until he regained his strength. Then he gathered various roots and fruits and invited him to eat his fill. Fearing that the cold might hinder his digestion, he held him in his arms to sleep. Thus, he cared for and nourished him for six days. On the seventh day, the sky cleared and the path reappeared. The man wished to return home. The bear, understanding this, gathered sweet fruits, satisfied his hunger, and bid him farewell. He accompanied him to the edge of the woods and said a fond goodbye.

The man knelt and said, "How could I ever repay you?" The bear replied, "I need no other reward. Only, as I have protected your life these past days, I wish that you would do the same for mine." The man respectfully promised. Carrying his wood, he descended the mountain and met two hunters. They asked him, "What beasts have you seen in the mountain?" The woodcutter answered, "I have seen no other beast, only a bear." The hunters pleaded, "Could you show him to us?" The woodcutter replied, "If you give me two-thirds [of the prey], I will show him to you." The hunters agreed. They set out together and eventually killed the bear, then divided the meat into three parts. The woodcutter tried to seize his share of meat with both hands, but, due to the force of his bad karma, both his arms fell off at once. Like a string of pearls snapping, like a lotus root being severed. The hunters, astonished and frightened, asked him what had happened. Ashamed, the woodcutter recounted the whole story.

The two hunters rebuked the woodcutter: "He had done you such a great service, how could you commit such a vile act? Strange! Why did your body not disintegrate?" Thereupon, the hunters together offered the meat to a monastery.

At that time, the monastery elder, endowed with marvelous wisdom, immediately entered samādhi to discern what kind of meat it was. He then understood that it was the flesh of a great bodhisattva, who had brought benefit and joy to all beings. Emerging from his concentration, he informed the assembly. The monks, upon hearing this news, were seized with astonishment and admiration. Together they took fragrant wood and burned the flesh. They collected the remaining bones, erected a stūpa, and paid homage to them.

Such an evil act awaits its continuity, or crosses this continuity, to then bear its fruit.

This is what is called bad karma with immediate retribution. In general, when one receives a favor, one must seek to return it; when one does a favor for others, one should not expect anything in return. If today one were to attempt to harm a person who has done one a service, one would inevitably undergo the retribution of that evil act. May beings never have the heart of this woodcutter! At the edge of the woods, when he asked how he could thank him for this favor, and at the foot of the mountain, meeting the hunters, he coveted the two shares of meat. Driven by greed, he harmed his great benefactor. May laypeople and monks alike never have this ungrateful heart! Where the force of bad karma strikes, it severs both arms faster than a sword.

Example of creating good in this life and receiving immediate good retribution: Long ago, in the land of Gandhāra, King Kaniṣka had a eunuch who constantly oversaw palace affairs. One day, going outside the city, he saw a herd of five hundred oxen entering the city. He asked the oxherd, "What are these oxen?" The other replied, "These are oxen that the

"We are going to castrate." The eunuch then reflected: "Due to my past evil actions, I have received this impotent body. I should now use my wealth to save these oxen from this fate." He therefore paid their ransom and had them all released. Due to the power of his good karma, this eunuch immediately regained his virility. Profoundly joyful and grateful, he returned to the city and stood at the palace gate. Through a messenger, he requested an audience with the king. The king had him enter and, astonished, asked him the reason. The eunuch then reported the entire affair. The king, listening, was seized with joy and wonder. He gave him rich gifts, promoted him to a high office, and put him in charge of external affairs.

Such a good act awaits its continuity, or transcends this continuity, to then bear its fruit.

It is clearly seen that, although the life of an ox does not deserve to be spared, the one who saves it receives a good fruit. How much more so, if one venerates the field of gratitude, if one venerates the field of the virtuous, and if one practices all kinds of good! This is what is called good karma with immediate retribution. There are many examples of this kind, due to good as well as evil, but it would be too long to cite them all.

Secondly, karma whose retribution occurs in the next life: this means that if an act, created and developed in this life, bears its fruit of maturation in the second life, it is called karma with retribution in the next life.

Thus, if a person creates in this life one of the five acts with immediate consequences, they will necessarily fall into hell in the next life. "Next life" designates the life that immediately follows this life. For other faults, one can also fall into hell in the next life. But as some may fall under later retribution, one does not necessarily fall into hell in the next life; they then become karma with later retribution. These five acts with immediate consequences are necessarily karma with retribution in the next life, which leads to hell. "Next life" or "second life," it is the same thing.

The five acts with immediate consequences: First, killing one's father. Second, killing one's mother. Third, killing an arhat. Fourth, shedding the blood of a buddha. Fifth, creating a schism in the harmonious community.

Thus, if a person creates in this life one of the five acts with immediate consequences, they will necessarily fall into hell in the next life. Some create all five acts together, like the monk Huashang at the time of the buddha Kāśyapa. Others create only one, like King Ajātaśatru at the time of the buddha Shākyamuni: he killed his father. Others still create three, like Ajita at the time of the buddha Shākyamuni: he killed his father, killed his mother, and killed an arhat. This Ajita created them while he was a layperson; later, he was not permitted to enter the monastic orders.

Devadatta, as a monk, created three acts with immediate consequences: creating a schism in the community, shedding the blood [of the Buddha], and killing an arhat. He is also called Devadatta. This name translates as "Heavenly Mūri." "Creating a schism" means: He took five hundred ignorant novices and, on Mount Gayāśīrṣa, established five heterodox practices, thus breaking the Dharma community. Śāriputra, disgusted, put them into a deep sleep. Maudgalyāyana gathered the community to bring it back. Devadatta, waking up, vowed to avenge this favor. He lifted a rock thirty cubits high and fifteen wide and threw it at the Buddha. The mountain god stopped the rock with his hand, but a fragment wounded the Buddha's foot, and blood flowed.

If one follows this account, the schism precedes the shedding of blood. According to other accounts, the order between the schism and the shedding of blood is not clear. Furthermore, he struck at

the nun Utpalavarṇā with his fist. This nun was an arhat. That is why it is said that he committed three acts with immediate consequences.

Regarding the fault of schism, there is schism in the community of karma and schism in the community of Dharma. Schism in the community of karma can occur in the three continents, except the northern continent. It exists from the time of the Buddha until the end of the Dharma. Schism in the community of Dharma exists only during the lifetime of the Tathāgata. In other periods, it exists only in the southern continent, not in the three continents. This fault is the most serious. For having committed these three acts with immediate consequences, Devadatta fell into the Avīci hell in the next life. Thus, some commit all five acts together, others only one. A case like Devadatta committed three. All must fall into the Avīci hell. Those who commit only one will undergo the retribution of a lifespan of one kalpa in the Avīci hell. As for one who commits all five acts together, will they receive the five retributions simultaneously during one kalpa, or successively?

An ancient master said: "According to the Āgama and the Nirvāṇa, [they are] in the same kalpa, but the intensity of the fire differs."

Others say: "Only, the suffering increases."

Now, Devadatta having committed three acts, his fault must be triple that of one who commits only one. However, at the moment of his death, he uttered the name [of the Buddha] and his evil mind softened a little. It is only regretted that he did not completely utter "Homage to the Buddha." In Avīci, he took refuge from afar in the Buddha Shākyamuni. He was close to cultivating the roots of good. There are still four [instances of] Devadatta in the Avīci hell.

The monk Kokālika, at the time when a thousand Śākya left worldly life, was one of them. When Devadatta and Kokālika went out together through the city gate, the two horses they were riding suddenly fell, the two men fell from their mounts and their crowns fell. The witnesses all said: "These two cannot benefit the Dharma of the Buddha."

This monk Kokālika is also called Kokālika. In this life, he slandered Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana by falsely accusing them of a pārājika fault. The Buddha personally reprimanded him insistently, but he did not stop. Brahmā descended to reprimand him, but he did not stop. For having slandered the two Venerables, he was to fall [into hell] in the next life. Moreover, he did not encounter the conditions to cultivate the roots of good.

A monk of the four dhyāna, at the moment of his death, slandered the Buddha; the intermediate being of the four dhyāna disappeared and he fell into the Avīci hell. This is called karma with retribution in the next life.

Why are these five acts called "with immediate consequences"? There are five reasons. First, the maturation is immediate. That is why it is called "immediate." Having left this body, one immediately receives the next body. That is why it is called "immediate." Second, the suffering is uninterrupted. That is why it is called "immediate." The fault of the five acts causes rebirth in the Avīci hell; during one kalpa, the suffering continues without any interval of pleasure. Due to the effect, this name is given to karma with immediate consequences. Third, the duration is uninterrupted, that is why it is called "immediate." The fault of the five acts causes rebirth in the Avīci hell.

It is certain that this duration of one kalpa is uninterrupted. That is why it is called "immediate." Fourth, the lifespan is uninterrupted. That is why it is called "immediate." The fault of the five acts causes rebirth in the Avīci hell. During one kalpa, life does not cease. Due to the effect, this name of "immediate" is given. Fifth, the bodies do not obstruct each other. That is why it is called "immediate."

The fault of the five acts causes rebirth in the Avīci hell. The Avīci hell measures eighty-four thousand yojana in length and the same in width. If a single person enters it, their body fills it completely. If all beings enter it, their bodies also fill it completely. They do not obstruct each other. Due to the effect, this is called "immediate."

Third, karma whose retribution occurs in a later life: this means that if an act, created and developed in this life, bears its fruit in the third life, or the fourth life, or even beyond, even after hundreds of thousands of kalpas, it is called karma with delayed retribution.

Thus, when a person, in this life, creates good or evil, but the sensation of this good or bad karma does not occur until the third life, the fourth life, or even after hundreds or thousands of lives, it is called karma with delayed retribution. The merits accumulated by bodhisattvas over three asaṃkhyeya kalpas mostly fall under this karma with delayed retribution. If one is unaware of this principle, many practitioners harbor doubts, like the venerable Jayata when he was a layperson. Had he not met the venerable Kumāralāta, his doubt would have been difficult to dispel. If the practitioner thinks that good done, evil is immediately annihilated, or that evil done, good is quickly destroyed…

Once in the country of Śrāvastī there were two men: one constantly practiced good, the other constantly committed evil. The one who practiced good acts, throughout his entire life, did only good and never evil. The one who committed evil acts, throughout his entire life, did only evil and never good.

At the moment of his death, the one who had practiced good acts, due to the force of a bad karma with delayed retribution, suddenly saw the intermediate being of the hells appear before him. He then thought: "Throughout my entire life, I have done only good, never evil. I should be reborn in heaven. Why does this intermediate being appear before me?" He then said to himself: "I must certainly possess a bad karma with delayed retribution that is now ripening; that is why this intermediate being of the hells appears."

He then recalled all the good acts he had practiced during his life and felt profound joy. Due to this excellent thought of good that arose in his mind, the intermediate being of the hells immediately disappeared, and the intermediate being of the heavens suddenly appeared. He then died and was reborn in heaven.

This man who had constantly practiced good not only thought that he certainly possessed a karma with delayed retribution that he had to undergo, but he also thought further: "The good acts practiced throughout my life will also certainly bear fruit later." This is the "profound joy." Because this recollection was sincere, the intermediate being of the hells disappeared immediately, the intermediate being of the heavens appeared immediately, and upon his death he was reborn in heaven.

If this man had been evil, at the moment of his death, seeing the intermediate being of the hells appear, he would have thought: "The good acts I practiced during my life are without merit; if there truly were good and evil, how could I see the intermediate being of the hells?" At that moment, he would have denied causality and slandered the Three Jewels. If he had acted thus, he would have died and fallen into hell. Because he did not act thus, he was reborn in heaven. This principle must be clearly understood.

At the moment of his death, the one who had committed evil acts, due to the force of a good karma with delayed retribution, suddenly saw the intermediate being of the heavens appear before him. He then thought: "Throughout my entire life, I have done only evil, never good. I should be reborn in hell. Why does this intermediate being appear before me?"

Why does the intermediate being of the heavens appear before me?” He then developed a false view, denying good and evil and their maturing fruits. Due to the force of this false view, the intermediate being of the heavens immediately vanished, and the intermediate being of the hells suddenly appeared. He then died and was reborn in hell.

This man, during his life, constantly did only evil, never practicing a single good deed. Moreover, at the moment of his death, seeing the intermediate being of the heavens appear, ignorant of karma with ultimate retribution, he thought: “Although I have done evil all my life, I am going to be reborn in heaven. I therefore understand that there is neither good nor evil.” Due to the force of this false view that denies good and evil, the intermediate being of the heavens immediately vanished, the intermediate being of the hells quickly appeared, and upon his death he fell into hell. It is because of the false view that the intermediate being of the heavens vanished.

Thus, the practitioner must absolutely not have false views. One must study until the form is established: what is a false view, what is a correct view?

Denying causality, slandering the Dharma of the Buddha, denying the three times as well as liberation, all these belong to false views. One must clearly understand that our present life is unique, without a second or third. Would it not be regrettable to fall vainly into false views and needlessly undergo the retribution of evil deeds? Thinking, while doing evil, that it is not evil, and, through erroneous reflection, considering that evil bears no fruit, does not prevent the bad retribution from occurring.

The dignitary Haoyue asked the old master Changsha Jingcen: “An ancient said: ‘When one has realized, karmic obstacles are originally empty; when one has not realized, one must pay past debts.’ But then, why did masters like the venerable Siṃha and the second patriarch have to pay their debts?” Changsha said: “Venerable, you do not know ‘originally empty.’” The other asked: “What is ‘originally empty’?” Changsha said: “Karmic obstacles are.” The other asked: “What are karmic obstacles?” Changsha said: “‘Originally empty’ is.” Haoyue remained speechless. Changsha then offered him a stanza: “Conditioned existence is not originally existence. Conditioned annihilation is also not non-existence. The meaning of ‘nirvāṇa and payment of debts’ Does not differ in the slightest from a single nature.”

Changsha Jingcen is the principal disciple of master Nanquan. He has long had the reputation of having studied extensively. Sometimes, he has correct words, but in the present exchange, he is completely incapable of understanding. He does not grasp the words of Yongjia, and then he does not understand the benevolent teaching of Kumāralāta. It is as if he had never even dreamed of the words of the Buddha. If the Way of the buddhas and patriarchs were not transmitted everywhere, who would venerate you?

“Karmic obstacles” refers to one of the three obstacles. The three obstacles are: karmic obstacles, obstacles of retribution, and obstacles of afflictions. Karmic obstacles refer to the five acts with immediate consequences. Even if Haoyue’s question does not have this intention, that is how it has been spoken of until now. Haoyue’s question, relying on the principle of the non-annihilation of karma, asks about the arrival of karma with ultimate retribution. Changsha’s error is that, when asked “What is ‘originally empty’?” he answers “Karmic obstacles are” – this is a great deviant view. In what way would karmic obstacles be “originally empty”? If one does not create them, they are not karmic obstacles. If one creates them, they are not “originally empty.” To create is precisely not to create. To say that the very essence

karmic obstacles, without being modified, is empty, is already the view of heretics. If one considers that "karmic obstacles are originally empty" and creates actions carelessly, beings will have no chance of liberation. Without the hope of liberation, buddhas could not appear in the world. Without the appearance of buddhas, patriarchs could not come from the West. Without patriarchs coming from the West, there would be no Nanquan. Without Nanquan, who would have changed your study eye? Moreover, when asked "What are karmic obstacles?" he still answers "'Originally empty' it is"; even if it resembles an old answer to tie a horse, I think it is because you, with your small talent of non-realization, find yourself facing a dignitary of long study, that you utter such extravagant words.

Later, in his stanza, he says: "The meaning of 'nirvāṇa and repayment of debts' / Does not differ in the slightest from a single nature." What is this "single nature" you speak of? Among the three natures, which one would it be? I think you do not know nature. What does "the meaning of nirvāṇa and repayment of debts" mean? Which nirvāṇa are you talking about? Would it be the nirvāṇa of śrāvakas? That of pratyekabuddhas? That of buddhas? Even if it were one of them, it would not correspond to the meaning of "repayment of debts." Your way is in no way the Way of buddhas and patriarchs. You should buy new straw sandals and set out wandering again. Why doubt that the venerable Siṃha, the second patriarch, and others were killed by evil men? Not being in their last body, not being bodies without being intermediate, why should they not have had to undergo karma with ultimate retribution? If a karma with ultimate retribution that they had to undergo had ripened, it would not be the subject of