大般若波羅蜜多經
Chinese title:大般若波羅蜜多經
Save your scripture progress
Create a free account to save scriptures, track progress, and continue your daily learning path.
06
Furthermore, Subhuti! As for what is called a great bodhisattva, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha?
– No, Blessed One!
Furthermore, Subhuti! As for what is called a great bodhisattva, what do you think? Is the true suchness of great loving-kindness a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of great loving-kindness a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of great loving-kindness?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of great loving-kindness present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of great loving-kindness?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity?
– No, Blessed One!
Furthermore, Subhuti! As for what is called a great bodhisattva, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great person a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great person a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great person?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great person present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great person?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics?
– No, Blessed One!
Furthermore, Subhuti! As for what is called a great bodhisattva, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the nature of perpetual equanimity a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the nature of perpetual equanimity a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the nature of perpetual equanimity?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the nature of perpetual equanimity present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the nature of perpetual equanimity?
– No, Blessed One!
Furthermore, Subhuti! As for what is called a great bodhisattva, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects present within a great bodhisattva?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena?
– No, Blessed One!
– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects?
– No, Blessed One!
At that time, the Buddha said to the Venerable Subhuti: What meaning do you discern that leads you to say that the true suchness of form is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of form is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is not a great bodhisattva; that there is no great bodhisattva within the true suchness of form; that there is no great bodhisattva within the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness; that the true suchness of form is not present within a great bodhisattva;
that the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is not present within a great bodhisattva; that there is no great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of form; and that there is no great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness?
The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether form or feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of form and the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of form is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of form is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is a great bodhisattva;
that there is a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of form; that there is a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness; that the true suchness of form is present within a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness is present within a great bodhisattva; that there is a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of form; or that there is a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye ayatana;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Since the eye ayatana and the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas are ultimately ungraspable because their nature has no existence, how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye ayatana or the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye ayatana itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye ayatana is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye ayatana; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the form ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the form ayatana;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the form ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Since the form ayatana and the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas are ultimately ungraspable because their nature has no existence, how much less could there be the true suchness of the form ayatana or the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the form ayatana itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form ayatana is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the form ayatana; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the form ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus;
that apart from the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Since the eye dhatu and the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus are ultimately ungraspable because their nature has no existence, how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye dhatu or the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye dhatu is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the form dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the form dhatu;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the form dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Since the form dhatu and the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus are ultimately ungraspable because their nature has no existence, how much less could there be the true suchness of the form dhatu or the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the form dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form dhatu is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the form dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the form dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma dhatus there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether the eye-consciousness dhatu or the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature has no existence; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu or the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the eye-consciousness dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness dhatus there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of eye-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of eye-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of eye-contact there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of eye-contact; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact;
that apart from the true suchness of eye-contact there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether eye-contact or ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature has no existence; how much less could there be the true suchness of eye-contact or the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of eye-contact is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of eye-contact is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of eye-contact there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of eye-contact; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact; that apart from the true suchness of eye-contact there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition; that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition or the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature has no existence; how much less could there be the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition or the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition!
Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition; that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva?
Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the earth dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the earth dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the earth dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the earth dhatu;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the earth dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?
Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether the earth element or the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the earth element or the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the earth element itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the earth element is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the earth element there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the earth element; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element; that apart from the true suchness of the earth element there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness element there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the causal condition itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the causal condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the causal condition there is no great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the causal condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, or the predominant condition; that apart from the true suchness of the causal condition there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition there is no great bodhisattva?”
Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether the causal condition or the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, or the predominant condition, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the causal condition or the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition!
Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the causal condition itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the causal condition is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the causal condition there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition there is a great bodhisattva;
that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the causal condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition; that apart from the true suchness of the causal condition there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the objective condition, and the predominant condition there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas; or that apart from the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is no great bodhisattva?”
Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Dependently arisen dharmas ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas! Since this true suchness does not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas; or that apart from the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of ignorance itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of volitional formations, consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense bases, contact, feeling, craving, grasping, existence, birth, and aging-and-death itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ignorance is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ignorance there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death there is no great bodhisattva;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of ignorance; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death; that apart from the true suchness of ignorance there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death there is no great bodhisattva?”
Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether ignorance or volitional formations through aging-and-death, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of ignorance and the true suchness of volitional formations through the true suchness of aging-and-death! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of ignorance itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ignorance is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of ignorance there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of ignorance; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death; that apart from the true suchness of ignorance there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of volitional formations through aging-and-death there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the perfection of generosity itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, vigor, meditation, and prajnaparamita itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfection of generosity is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, vigor, meditation, and prajnaparamita is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is no great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, vigor, meditation, and prajnaparamita there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the perfection of generosity; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, vigor, meditation, and prajnaparamita; that apart from the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, vigor, meditation, and prajnaparamita there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the perfection of generosity or the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of the perfection of generosity and the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita!
Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the perfection of generosity itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfection of generosity is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is a great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the perfection of generosity; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita; that apart from the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of internal emptiness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of external emptiness, internal-and-external emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, the emptiness of ultimate meaning, the emptiness of the conditioned, the emptiness of the unconditioned, ultimate emptiness, boundless emptiness, the emptiness of dispersion, the emptiness of nonchange, the emptiness of original nature, the emptiness of intrinsic characteristics, the emptiness of common characteristics, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of the unapprehensible, the emptiness of nonexistence, the emptiness of self-nature,
and the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of internal emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of internal emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of internal emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature;
that apart from the true suchness of internal emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether internal emptiness or external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of internal emptiness and the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of internal emptiness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of internal emptiness is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of internal emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of internal emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature; that apart from the true suchness of internal emptiness there is a great bodhisattva;
or that apart from the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four right efforts, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of awakening, and the eightfold noble path itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness there is no great bodhisattva;
that within the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path; that apart from the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the four establishments of mindfulness or the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness and the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path; that apart from the true suchness of the four establishments of mindfulness there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! In consideration of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin of suffering, cessation, and the path itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin of suffering, cessation, and the path is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin of suffering, cessation, and the path there is no great bodhisattva;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the noble truth of suffering; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the noble truths of the origin of suffering, cessation, and the path; that apart from the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin of suffering, cessation, and the path there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the noble truth of suffering or the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering or the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path; that apart from the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the four dhyanas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four dhyanas is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four dhyanas;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions; that apart from the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the four dhyanas or the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the four dhyanas or the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the four dhyanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four dhyanas is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four dhyanas; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions; that apart from the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless absorptions there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight liberations there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities there is no great bodhisattva;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eight liberations; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities; that apart from the true suchness of the eight liberations there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the eight liberations or the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eight liberations or the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eight liberations itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight liberations there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eight liberations; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities; that apart from the true suchness of the eight liberations there is a great bodhisattva;
or that apart from the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities there is a great bodhisattva?”
“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is no great bodhisattva;
that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness; that apart from the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is no great bodhisattva?”
The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the gateway to liberation through emptiness or the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness or the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness itself is a great bodhisattva;
that what is other than the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness;
that apart from the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is a great bodhisattva?”
Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the very suchness of the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that the very suchness of the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the suchness of the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the suchness of the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that within the suchness of the dharani gateways there is no great bodhisattva; that within the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no suchness of the dharani gateways; that within a great bodhisattva there is no suchness of the samadhi gateways; that apart from the suchness of the dharani gateways there is no great bodhisattva;
and that apart from the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is no great bodhisattva?
The Venerable Subhuti said to the Buddha: Blessed One! Whether the dharani gateways or the samadhi gateways, ultimately they cannot be apprehended at all, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the suchness of the dharani gateways and the suchness of the samadhi gateways! Since these kinds of suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the very suchness of the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva; that the very suchness of the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the suchness of the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the suchness of the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva; that within the suchness of the dharani gateways there is a great bodhisattva;
that within the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the suchness of the dharani gateways; that within a great bodhisattva there is the suchness of the samadhi gateways; that apart from the suchness of the dharani gateways there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is a great bodhisattva?
Fascicle 16
End
The version you're viewing was faithfully rendered by Inti AI in keeping with the tradition. Switch to the other language tab to read a human translation.
Translations belong to the translator/source credited above. The bilingual compilation, presentation, and AI translations compiled by Inti are © Inti Foundation. Please attribute when quoting; do not bulk-copy or use commercially without permission.