大般若波羅蜜多經

22

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “afflicted” or “unafflicted” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “afflicted” or “unafflicted” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether afflicted or unafflicted, a dharani gateway; whether afflicted or unafflicted, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “afflicted” and “unafflicted” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “afflicted” and “unafflicted” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “afflicted” or “unafflicted” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “afflicted” or “unafflicted” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “worldly” or “supramundane” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “worldly” or “supramundane” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether worldly or supramundane, a dharani gateway; whether worldly or supramundane, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “worldly” and “supramundane” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “worldly” and “supramundane” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “worldly” or “supramundane” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “worldly” or “supramundane” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “defiled” or “purified” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “defiled” or “purified” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether defiled or purified, a dharani gateway; whether defiled or purified, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “defiled” and “purified” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “defiled” and “purified” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “defiled” or “purified” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “defiled” or “purified” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “belonging to samsara” or “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “belonging to samsara” or “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana, a dharani gateway; whether belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “belonging to samsara” and “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “belonging to samsara” and “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “belonging to samsara” or “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “belonging to samsara” or “belonging to nirvana” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “internal,” “external,” or “between the two” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “internal,” “external,” or “between the two” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether internal, external, or between the two, a dharani gateway; whether internal, external, or between the two, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “internal,” “external,” and “between the two” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “internal,” “external,” and “between the two” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “internal,” “external,” or “between the two” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “internal,” “external,” or “between the two” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “apprehensible” or “inapprehensible” with respect to a dharani gateway is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “apprehensible” or “inapprehensible” with respect to a samadhi gateway is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether apprehensible or inapprehensible, a dharani gateway; whether apprehensible or inapprehensible, a samadhi gateway—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “apprehensible” and “inapprehensible” with respect to a dharani gateway, or the names “apprehensible” and “inapprehensible” with respect to a samadhi gateway! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “apprehensible” or “inapprehensible” with respect to a dharani gateway is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “apprehensible” or “inapprehensible” with respect to a samadhi gateway is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you discern that leads you to say that the very name of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very names of the Ground of Stainlessness, the Ground of Luminosity, the Ground of Blazing Wisdom, the Ground Most Difficult to Conquer, the Ground of Manifest Presence, the Ground of Far-Reaching, the Ground of Immovability, the Ground of Excellent Wisdom, and the Ground of the Dharma Cloud are not great bodhisattvas?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether the Ground of Utmost Joy or the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name of the Ground of Utmost Joy or the names of the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very names of the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud are great bodhisattvas?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “permanent” or “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “permanent” or “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?

Blessed One! Whether permanent or impermanent, the Ground of Utmost Joy; whether permanent or impermanent, the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud—ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names “permanent” and “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names “permanent” and “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name “permanent” or “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name “permanent” or “impermanent” with respect to the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?

Subhuti! What meaning do you further discern that leads you to say that the very name “pleasant” or “painful” with respect to the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name “pleasant” or “painful” with respect to the Ground of Stainlessness through to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?

“Blessed One! Whether the pleasure or pain of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the pleasure or pain of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘pleasure’ and ‘pain’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘pleasure’ and ‘pain’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pleasure’ or ‘pain’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pleasure’ or ‘pain’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the self or non-self of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the self or non-self of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the purity or impurity of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the purity or impurity of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the emptiness or non-emptiness of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the emptiness or non-emptiness of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘signless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘signless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether having characteristics or being signless in the Ground of Utmost Joy, or having characteristics or being signless in the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘having characteristics’ and ‘signless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘having characteristics’ and ‘signless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘signless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘signless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether having aspiration or being wishless in the Ground of Utmost Joy, or having aspiration or being wishless in the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘having aspiration’ and ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘having aspiration’ and ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘wishless’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the quiescence or non-quiescence of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the quiescence or non-quiescence of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘quiescent’ and ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the seclusion or non-seclusion of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the seclusion or non-seclusion of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘secluded’ and ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘secluded’ or ‘not secluded’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the conditioned or unconditioned of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the conditioned or unconditioned of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy, or the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ of the Ground of Utmost Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the qualities of the Ground of Perfect Joy are conditioned or unconditioned; or whether the qualities of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud are conditioned or unconditioned, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘conditioned’ and ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the arising or cessation of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the arising or cessation of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the wholesome or unwholesome qualities of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the wholesome or unwholesome qualities of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘wholesome’ and ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the culpable or blameless qualities of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the culpable or blameless qualities of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘culpable’ and ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘culpable’ and ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the qualities with afflictions or without afflictions of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the qualities with afflictions or without afflictions of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘with afflictions’ and ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘with afflictions’ and ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the mundane or supramundane qualities of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the mundane or supramundane qualities of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘mundane’ and ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘mundane’ and ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘defiled’ or ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘defiled’ or ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the defiled or pure qualities of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the defiled or pure qualities of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘defiled’ and ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘defiled’ and ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘defiled’ or ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘defiled’ or ‘pure’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘belonging to samsara’ or ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘belonging to samsara’ or ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the qualities belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana of the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the qualities belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘belonging to samsara’ and ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy, or the names ‘belonging to samsara’ and ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘belonging to samsara’ or ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘belonging to samsara’ or ‘belonging to nirvana’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further perceive when you say that the very name ‘internal,’ ‘external,’ or ‘between the two’ in relation to the Ground of Perfect Joy is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘internal,’ ‘external,’ or ‘between the two’ in relation to the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Great Joy; or the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names of the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Great Joy, and the names of the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name of the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Great Joy is a great bodhisattva; or that the very name of the inner, the outer, or that which lies between the two of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘apprehensible’ or ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Great Joy is not a great bodhisattva; and that the very name ‘apprehensible’ or ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the apprehensible or the inapprehensible of the Ground of Great Joy; or the apprehensible or the inapprehensible of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘apprehensible’ and ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Great Joy, and the names ‘apprehensible’ and ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘apprehensible’ or ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Great Joy is a great bodhisattva; or that the very name ‘apprehensible’ or ‘inapprehensible’ of the Ground of Stainlessness through the Ground of the Dharma Cloud is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you contemplate when you say that the very name of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said, “World-Honored One! Whether the five kinds of eyes or the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the name ‘five kinds of eyes’ or the name ‘six superknowledges’! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the permanent or the impermanent of the five kinds of eyes, or the permanent or the impermanent of the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘permanent’ and ‘impermanent’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘permanent’ and ‘impermanent’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘permanent’ or ‘impermanent’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘pleasant’ or ‘painful’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pleasant’ or ‘painful’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the pleasant or the painful of the five kinds of eyes, or the pleasant or the painful of the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘pleasant’ and ‘painful’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘pleasant’ and ‘painful’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pleasant’ or ‘painful’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pleasant’ or ‘painful’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the self or the non-self of the five kinds of eyes, or the self or the non-self of the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the pure or the impure of the five kinds of eyes, or the pure or the impure of the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether the empty or the not empty of the five kinds of eyes, or the empty or the not empty of the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘characterless’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘characterless’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“World-Honored One! Whether having characteristics or characterless with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or having characteristics or characterless with respect to the six superknowledges—ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘having characteristics’ and ‘characterless’ of the five kinds of eyes, and the names ‘having characteristics’ and ‘characterless’ of the six superknowledges! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘characterless’ of the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘having characteristics’ or ‘characterless’ of the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘aspirationless’ of the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘having aspiration’ or ‘aspirationless’ of the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are associated with aspiration or without aspiration, and whether the six supernatural powers are associated with aspiration or without aspiration, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘associated with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘associated with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the six supernatural powers!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘associated with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘associated with aspiration’ or ‘without aspiration’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are quiescent or not quiescent, and whether the six supernatural powers are quiescent or not quiescent, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘quiescent’ or ‘not quiescent’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are detached or not detached, and whether the six supernatural powers are detached or not detached, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘detached’ or ‘not detached’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are conditioned or unconditioned, and whether the six supernatural powers are conditioned or unconditioned, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘conditioned’ or ‘unconditioned’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are with outflows or without outflows, and whether the six supernatural powers are with outflows or without outflows, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with outflows’ or ‘without outflows’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes arise or cease, and whether the six supernatural powers arise or cease, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘arising’ or ‘cessation’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are wholesome or unwholesome, and whether the six supernatural powers are wholesome or unwholesome, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘wholesome’ or ‘unwholesome’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are culpable or blameless, and whether the six supernatural powers are culpable or blameless, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘culpable’ or ‘blameless’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are with afflictions or without afflictions, and whether the six supernatural powers are with afflictions or without afflictions, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes, or the names ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the six supernatural powers! Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘with afflictions’ or ‘without afflictions’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you further contemplate when you say that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ with respect to the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘mundane’ or ‘supramundane’ with respect to the six supernatural powers is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are worldly or supramundane, and whether the six superknowledges are worldly or supramundane, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘worldly or supramundane’ for the five kinds of eyes, or the designation ‘worldly or supramundane’ for the six superknowledges! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘worldly or supramundane’ for the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘worldly or supramundane’ for the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are defiled or purified, and whether the six superknowledges are defiled or purified, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the five kinds of eyes, or the designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the six superknowledges! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘defiled or purified’ for the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes belong to samsara or to nirvana, and whether the six superknowledges belong to samsara or to nirvana, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the five kinds of eyes, or the designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the six superknowledges! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘belonging to samsara or belonging to nirvana’ for the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are internal, external, or between the two, and whether the six superknowledges are internal, external, or between the two, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the five kinds of eyes, or the designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the six superknowledges! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘internal, external, or between the two’ for the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the five kinds of eyes is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the six superknowledges is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the five kinds of eyes are apprehensible or inapprehensible, and whether the six superknowledges are apprehensible or inapprehensible, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the five kinds of eyes, or the designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the six superknowledges! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the five kinds of eyes is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘apprehensible or inapprehensible’ for the six superknowledges is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘the Buddha’s ten powers’ is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha’ is not a great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti replied: “Blessed One! Whether the Buddha’s ten powers, or the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘the Buddha’s ten powers,’ or the designation ‘the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha’! Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘the Buddha’s ten powers’ is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha’ is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the Buddha’s ten powers is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the Buddha’s ten powers are permanent or impermanent, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are permanent or impermanent, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the Buddha’s ten powers, or the designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the Buddha’s ten powers is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘permanent or impermanent’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the Buddha’s ten powers is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the Buddha’s ten powers are pleasant or painful, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are pleasant or painful, ultimately they cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the Buddha’s ten powers, or the designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these designations do not exist, how could it be said that the very designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the Buddha’s ten powers is a great bodhisattva, or that the very designation ‘pleasant or painful’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive when you say that the very designation ‘self or non-self’ for the Buddha’s ten powers is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very designation ‘self or non-self’ for the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the ten powers of a Buddha are self or non-self, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are self or non-self, ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the ten powers of a Buddha, or the names ‘self’ and ‘non-self’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘self’ or ‘non-self’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive that leads you to say that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the ten powers of a Buddha are pure or impure, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are pure or impure, ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the ten powers of a Buddha, or the names ‘pure’ and ‘impure’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘pure’ or ‘impure’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive that leads you to say that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the ten powers of a Buddha are empty or not empty, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are empty or not empty, ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the ten powers of a Buddha, or the names ‘empty’ and ‘not empty’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘empty’ or ‘not empty’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

“Subhuti! What meaning do you perceive that leads you to say that the very name ‘having marks’ or ‘markless’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva, and that the very name ‘having marks’ or ‘markless’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is not a great bodhisattva?”

“Blessed One! Whether the ten powers of a Buddha have marks or are markless, and whether the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha have marks or are markless, ultimately none of these can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist. How much less could there be the names ‘having marks’ and ‘markless’ of the ten powers of a Buddha, or the names ‘having marks’ and ‘markless’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha!

Since these names do not exist, how could it be said that the very name ‘having marks’ or ‘markless’ of the ten powers of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva, or that the very name ‘having marks’ or ‘markless’ of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is a great bodhisattva?”

Fascicle 32

End