大般若波羅蜜多經

21

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The purity or impurity of the eight liberations, and the purity or impurity of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The emptiness or non-emptiness of the eight liberations, and the emptiness or non-emptiness of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘possessing marks’ or ‘markless’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘possessing marks’ or ‘markless’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The possession of marks or marklessness of the eight liberations, and the possession of marks or marklessness of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘possessing marks’ and ‘markless’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘possessing marks’ and ‘markless’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘possessing marks’ or ‘markless’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘possessing marks’ or ‘markless’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The presence or absence of aspiration in the eight liberations, and the presence or absence of aspiration in the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘with aspiration’ and ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘with aspiration’ and ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘peaceful’ or ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘peaceful’ or ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The peacefulness or absence of peacefulness of the eight liberations, and the peacefulness or absence of peacefulness of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘peaceful’ and ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘peaceful’ and ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘peaceful’ or ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘peaceful’ or ‘not peaceful’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The seclusion or non-seclusion of the eight liberations, and the seclusion or non-seclusion of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The conditionedness or unconditionedness of the eight liberations, and the conditionedness or unconditionedness of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! The presence or absence of outflows in the eight liberations, and the presence or absence of outflows in the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately unapprehensible, because their nature has no existence. How much less could there be the designations ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the designations ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?”

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the arising or cessation of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the arising or cessation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The arising and cessation of the eight liberations, and the arising and cessation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the arising and cessation of the eight liberations, or designations for the arising and cessation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the arising or cessation of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the arising or cessation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the wholesome or unwholesome nature of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the wholesome or unwholesome nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The wholesome and unwholesome nature of the eight liberations, and the wholesome and unwholesome nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the wholesome and unwholesome nature of the eight liberations, or designations for the wholesome and unwholesome nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the wholesome or unwholesome nature of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the wholesome or unwholesome nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the culpable or blameless nature of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the culpable or blameless nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The culpable and blameless nature of the eight liberations, and the culpable and blameless nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the culpable and blameless nature of the eight liberations, or designations for the culpable and blameless nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the culpable or blameless nature of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the culpable or blameless nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the defiled or undefiled nature of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the defiled or undefiled nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The defiled and undefiled nature of the eight liberations, and the defiled and undefiled nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the defiled and undefiled nature of the eight liberations, or designations for the defiled and undefiled nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the defiled or undefiled nature of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the defiled or undefiled nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the mundane or supramundane nature of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the mundane or supramundane nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The mundane and supramundane nature of the eight liberations, and the mundane and supramundane nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the mundane and supramundane nature of the eight liberations, or designations for the mundane and supramundane nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the mundane or supramundane nature of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the mundane or supramundane nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the contaminated or purified nature of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the contaminated or purified nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! The contaminated and purified nature of the eight liberations, and the contaminated and purified nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations for the contaminated and purified nature of the eight liberations, or designations for the contaminated and purified nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the contaminated or purified nature of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the contaminated or purified nature of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the eight liberations as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! That the eight liberations belong to samsara or belong to nirvana, and that the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities belong to samsara or belong to nirvana, are ultimately ungraspable, because they are nonexistent by nature. How much less could there be designations of the eight liberations as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana, or designations of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation of the eight liberations as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities as belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very designation of the eight liberations as internal, external, or both internal and external is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation of the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities as internal, external, or both internal and external is not a great bodhisattva?

“Blessed One! Whether the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two with respect to the eight liberations; or the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres—all these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the names ‘the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘the internal, the external, or that which lies between the two’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the apprehensible or the inapprehensible with respect to the eight liberations, or the apprehensible or the inapprehensible with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres—all these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight liberations, or the names ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ with respect to the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten universal spheres is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘the liberation gateway of emptiness’ is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very names ‘the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness’ are not a great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether the liberation gateway of emptiness or the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘the liberation gateway of emptiness’ or the names ‘the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness’! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘the liberation gateway of emptiness’ is a great bodhisattva, or that the very names ‘the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness’ are a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the permanent or the impermanent with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness, or the permanent or the impermanent with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness or the name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘permanent or impermanent’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the pleasant or the painful with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness, or the pleasant or the painful with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness or the name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pleasant or painful’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether self or non-self with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness, or self or non-self with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness or the name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘self or non-self’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the pure or the impure with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness, or the pure or the impure with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness or the name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pure or impure’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the empty or the not empty with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness, or the empty or the not empty with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness, these ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness or the name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘empty or not empty’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive that causes you to say that the very name ‘possessing signs or signless’ with respect to the liberation gateway of emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘possessing signs or signless’ with respect to the liberation gateways of signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether conditioned by signs or signless, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether conditioned by signs or signless, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘conditioned by signs’ and ‘signless’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘conditioned by signs’ and ‘signless’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘conditioned by signs’ or ‘signless’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘conditioned by signs’ or ‘signless’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘wishful’ or ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘wishful’ or ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether wishful or wishless, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether wishful or wishless, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘wishful’ and ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘wishful’ and ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘wishful’ or ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘wishful’ or ‘wishless’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether quiescent or not quiescent, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether quiescent or not quiescent, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether secluded or not secluded, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether secluded or not secluded, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether conditioned or unconditioned, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether conditioned or unconditioned, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether with outflows or without outflows, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether with outflows or without outflows, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether arising or cessation, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether arising or cessation, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern when you say that the very designation ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether wholesome or unwholesome, the gateway to liberation through emptiness; and whether wholesome or unwholesome, the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness—ultimately, none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designations ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness, or the designations ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?”

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether blameworthy or blameless in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or blameworthy or blameless in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “blameworthy or blameless” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether afflicted or unafflicted in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or afflicted or unafflicted in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “afflicted or unafflicted” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether mundane or supramundane in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or mundane or supramundane in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “mundane or supramundane” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether defiled or purified in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or defiled or purified in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “defiled or purified” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether internal, external, or between the two in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or internal, external, or between the two in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “internal, external, or between the two” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the mere designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; and that the mere designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether apprehensible or inapprehensible in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or apprehensible or inapprehensible in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness, or the designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the mere designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateway of liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva, or that the mere designation “apprehensible or inapprehensible” in relation to the gateways of liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you contemplate when you say that the mere designation “dharani gateway” is not a great bodhisattva, and that the mere designation “samadhi gateway” is not a great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether it is a dharani gateway or a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the name ‘dharani gateway’ or the name ‘samadhi gateway’! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘dharani gateway’ is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘samadhi gateway’ is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the permanence or impermanence of a dharani gateway, or the permanence or impermanence of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘permanent’ and ‘impermanent’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘permanent’ and ‘impermanent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘blissful’ or ‘painful’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘blissful’ or ‘painful’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the bliss or pain of a dharani gateway, or the bliss or pain of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘blissful’ and ‘painful’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘blissful’ and ‘painful’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘blissful’ or ‘painful’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘blissful’ or ‘painful’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the self or non-self of a dharani gateway, or the self or non-self of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the purity or impurity of a dharani gateway, or the purity or impurity of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the emptiness or non-emptiness of a dharani gateway, or the emptiness or non-emptiness of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘with characteristics’ or ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with characteristics’ or ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the possession or absence of characteristics in a dharani gateway, or the possession or absence of characteristics in a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘with characteristics’ and ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘with characteristics’ and ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with characteristics’ or ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with characteristics’ or ‘without characteristics’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the presence or absence of aspiration in a dharani gateway, or the presence or absence of aspiration in a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘with aspiration’ and ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘with aspiration’ and ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the quiescence or non-quiescence of a dharani gateway, or the quiescence or non-quiescence of a samadhi gateway, ultimately it cannot be apprehended, because its nature does not exist; how much less could there be the names ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a dharani gateway, or the names ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you further say that the very name ‘separated’ or ‘not separated’ in relation to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘separated’ or ‘not separated’ in relation to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways are separated from or not separated from, and whether the samadhi gateways are separated from or not separated from, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘separated from’ and ‘not separated from’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘separated from’ and ‘not separated from’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘separated from’ or ‘not separated from’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘separated from’ or ‘not separated from’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways are conditioned or unconditioned, and whether the samadhi gateways are conditioned or unconditioned, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ in relation to the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways are with outflows or without outflows, and whether the samadhi gateways are with outflows or without outflows, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘with outflows’ and ‘without outflows’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways arise or cease, and whether the samadhi gateways arise or cease, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways are wholesome or unwholesome, and whether the samadhi gateways are wholesome or unwholesome, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the dharani gateways are culpable or blameless, and whether the samadhi gateways are culpable or blameless, ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘culpable’ and ‘blameless’ in relation to the dharani gateways, or the names ‘culpable’ and ‘blameless’ in relation to the samadhi gateways! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva?”

Fascicle 31

End