大般若波羅蜜多經

07

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to the following conception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes true suchness greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the dharma realm, the nature of dharmas, the nature free from falsity, the unchanging nature, the nature of equality, the nature free from arising, the fixed order of dharmas, the abiding order of dharmas, the ultimate reality, the realm of space, and the inconceivable realm greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes true suchness to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse;

either causes the dharma realm through the inconceivable realm to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes true suchness limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; either makes the dharma realm through the inconceivable realm limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes true suchness broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the dharma realm through the inconceivable realm broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes true suchness powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

either makes the dharma realm through the inconceivable realm powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, all such conceptions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to the following conception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the Noble Truth of suffering greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the Noble Truths of the origin, cessation, and path greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the Noble Truth of suffering to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either causes the Noble Truths of the origin, cessation, and path to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes the Noble Truth of suffering limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

either makes the Noble Truths of the origin, cessation, and path limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the Noble Truth of suffering broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the Noble Truths of the origin, cessation, and path broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the Noble Truth of suffering powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes the Noble Truths of the origin, cessation, and path powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, all such conceptions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to the following conception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the four meditative absorptions greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the four meditative absorptions to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes the four meditative absorptions limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the four meditative absorptions broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the four meditative absorptions powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, all such conceptions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to the following conception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the eight liberations greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the eight liberations to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes the eight liberations limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the eight liberations broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the eight liberations powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive attainments, and the ten totalities powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, all such conceptions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to the following conception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the four foundations of mindfulness greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the four right efforts, the four bases of spiritual power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of awakening, and the eightfold Noble Path greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the four foundations of mindfulness to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes the four right efforts through the eightfold Noble Path to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

either makes the four foundations of mindfulness limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold Noble Path limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the four foundations of mindfulness broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold Noble Path broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the four foundations of mindfulness powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless;

either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold Noble Path powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, all such conceptions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the gateway to liberation of emptiness greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the gateways to liberation of signlessness and wishlessness greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the gateway to liberation of emptiness to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either causes the gateways to liberation of signlessness and wishlessness to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes the gateway to liberation of emptiness limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

either makes the gateways to liberation of signlessness and wishlessness limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the gateway to liberation of emptiness broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the gateways to liberation of signlessness and wishlessness broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the gateway to liberation of emptiness powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes the gateways to liberation of signlessness and wishlessness powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, all such notions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the five kinds of eyes greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the six superknowledges greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the five kinds of eyes to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes the six superknowledges to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes the five kinds of eyes limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the six superknowledges limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

either makes the five kinds of eyes broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the six superknowledges broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the five kinds of eyes powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes the six superknowledges powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, all such notions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the Buddha’s ten powers greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed understandings, great loving-kindness, great compassion, great sympathetic joy, great equanimity, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the Buddha’s ten powers to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes the four fearlessnesses through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

either makes the Buddha’s ten powers limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the four fearlessnesses through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes the Buddha’s ten powers broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the four fearlessnesses through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the Buddha’s ten powers powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless;

either makes the four fearlessnesses through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, all such notions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the quality of never forgetting greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the nature of constant equanimity greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either causes the quality of never forgetting to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either causes the nature of constant equanimity to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either makes the quality of never forgetting limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; either makes the nature of constant equanimity limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

either makes the quality of never forgetting broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the nature of constant equanimity broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the quality of never forgetting powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes the nature of constant equanimity powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, all such notions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes knowledge of all things greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes knowledge of the aspects of the paths and knowledge of all aspects greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes knowledge of all things to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either causes knowledge of the aspects of the paths and knowledge of all aspects to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes knowledge of all things limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

either makes knowledge of the aspects of the paths and knowledge of all aspects limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes knowledge of all things broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes knowledge of the aspects of the paths and knowledge of all aspects broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes knowledge of all things powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes knowledge of the aspects of the paths and knowledge of all aspects powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, all such notions are not concordant results of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One, if a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes all dharani gateways greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes all samadhi gateways greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes all dharani gateways to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either causes all samadhi gateways to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes all dharani gateways limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes all samadhi gateways limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

either makes all dharani gateways broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes all samadhi gateways broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes all dharani gateways powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes all samadhi gateways powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, none of these is a homogeneous result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One, if a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes a stream-enterer greater or smaller, or does not make a stream-enterer greater or smaller; either makes a once-returner, a non-returner, or an arhat greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes a stream-enterer to gather together or disperse, or does not cause a stream-enterer to gather together or disperse; either causes a once-returner, a non-returner, or an arhat to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes a stream-enterer limited or unlimited, or does not make a stream-enterer limited or unlimited;

either makes a once-returner, a non-returner, or an arhat limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes a stream-enterer broad or narrow, or does not make a stream-enterer broad or narrow; either makes a once-returner, a non-returner, or an arhat broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes a stream-enterer powerful or powerless, or does not make a stream-enterer powerful or powerless; either makes a once-returner, a non-returner, or an arhat powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, none of these is a homogeneous result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One, if a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes one progressing toward stream-entry or the fruit of stream-entry greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes one progressing toward once-returning, the fruit of once-returning, one progressing toward non-returning, the fruit of non-returning, one progressing toward arhatship, or the fruit of arhatship greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes one progressing toward stream-entry or the fruit of stream-entry to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

either causes one progressing toward once-returning through the fruit of arhatship to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes one progressing toward stream-entry or the fruit of stream-entry limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes one progressing toward once-returning through the fruit of arhatship limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes one progressing toward stream-entry or the fruit of stream-entry broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes one progressing toward once-returning through the fruit of arhatship broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow;

either makes one progressing toward stream-entry or the fruit of stream-entry powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes one progressing toward once-returning through the fruit of arhatship powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, none of these is a homogeneous result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One, if a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes a pratyekabuddha greater or smaller, or does not make a pratyekabuddha greater or smaller; either makes the attainment of a pratyekabuddha greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either causes a pratyekabuddha to gather together or disperse, or does not cause a pratyekabuddha to gather together or disperse; either causes the attainment of a pratyekabuddha to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; either makes a pratyekabuddha limited or unlimited, or does not make a pratyekabuddha limited or unlimited; either makes the attainment of a pratyekabuddha limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

either makes a pratyekabuddha broad or narrow, or does not make a pratyekabuddha broad or narrow; either makes the attainment of a pratyekabuddha broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes a pratyekabuddha powerful or powerless, or does not make a pratyekabuddha powerful or powerless; either makes the attainment of a pratyekabuddha powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, none of these is a homogeneous result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One, if a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes a great bodhisattva greater or smaller, or does not make a great bodhisattva greater or smaller; either makes the practices of a great bodhisattva greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes a great bodhisattva to gather together or disperse, or does not cause a great bodhisattva to gather together or disperse; either causes the practices of a great bodhisattva to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse; either makes a great bodhisattva limited or unlimited, or does not make a great bodhisattva limited or unlimited;

either makes the practices of a great bodhisattva limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; either makes a great bodhisattva broad or narrow, or does not make a great bodhisattva broad or narrow; either makes the practices of a great bodhisattva broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes a great bodhisattva powerful or powerless, or does not make a great bodhisattva powerful or powerless; either makes the practices of a great bodhisattva powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, none of these is a homogeneous result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the Tathagatas, Arhats, Perfectly Enlightened Ones greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either makes the Buddha’s supreme enlightenment greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either causes the Tathagatas, Arhats, Perfectly Enlightened Ones to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; either causes the Buddha’s supreme enlightenment to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; either makes the Tathagatas, Arhats, Perfectly Enlightened Ones limited or limitless, or does not make them limited or limitless;

either makes the Buddha’s supreme enlightenment limited or limitless, or does not make it limited or limitless; either makes the Tathagatas, Arhats, Perfectly Enlightened Ones broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the Buddha’s supreme enlightenment broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the Tathagatas, Arhats, Perfectly Enlightened Ones powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; either makes the Buddha’s supreme enlightenment powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, none of these is a corresponding result of prajnaparamita.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes all dharmas greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes all dharmas to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; either makes all dharmas limited or limitless, or does not make them limited or limitless; either makes all dharmas broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes all dharmas powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, none of these is a corresponding result of prajnaparamita.

Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes form greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes form to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; either causes feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; either makes form limited or limitless, or does not make it limited or limitless; either makes feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness limited or limitless, or does not make them limited or limitless; either makes form broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow;

either makes feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes form powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a notion of attainment cannot realize supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the eye ayatana greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the eye ayatana to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; either causes the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; either makes the eye ayatana limited or limitless, or does not make it limited or limitless; either makes the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas limited or limitless, or does not make them limited or limitless;

either makes the eye ayatana broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the eye ayatana powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a notion of attainment cannot realize supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this thought: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the form ayatana greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; either makes the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; either causes the form ayatana to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; either causes the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; either makes the form ayatana limited or limitless, or does not make it limited or limitless; either makes the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas limited or limitless, or does not make them limited or limitless;

either makes the form ayatana broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; either makes the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; either makes the form ayatana powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; either makes the sound, odor, taste, tangible-object, and dharma ayatanas powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a notion of attainment cannot realize supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva entertains this thought: “Such is prajnaparamita: with regard to the eye-dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with regard to the form-dhatu, the eye-consciousness-dhatu, eye-contact, and the feelings that arise with eye-contact as condition, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with regard to the eye-dhatu, it either causes it to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; with regard to the form-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with eye-contact as condition, it either causes them to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

with regard to the eye-dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with regard to the form-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with eye-contact as condition, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with regard to the eye-dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with regard to the form-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with eye-contact as condition, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with regard to the eye-dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot realize the fruit of unsurpassed enlightenment through a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva entertains this thought: “Such is prajnaparamita: with regard to the ear-dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with regard to the sound-dhatu, the ear-consciousness-dhatu, ear-contact, and the feelings that arise with ear-contact as condition, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with regard to the ear-dhatu, it either causes it to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; with regard to the sound-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with ear-contact as condition, it either causes them to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

with regard to the ear-dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with regard to the sound-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with ear-contact as condition, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with regard to the ear-dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with regard to the sound-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with ear-contact as condition, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with regard to the ear-dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with regard to the sound-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with ear-contact as condition, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot realize the fruit of unsurpassed enlightenment through a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva entertains this thought: “Such is prajnaparamita: with regard to the nose-dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with regard to the odor-dhatu, the nose-consciousness-dhatu, nose-contact, and the feelings that arise with nose-contact as condition, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with regard to the nose-dhatu, it either causes it to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; with regard to the odor-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with nose-contact as condition, it either causes them to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

with regard to the nose-dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with regard to the odor-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with nose-contact as condition, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with regard to the nose-dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with regard to the odor-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with nose-contact as condition, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with regard to the nose-dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with regard to the odor-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with nose-contact as condition, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot realize the fruit of unsurpassed enlightenment through a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva entertains this thought: “Such is prajnaparamita: with regard to the tongue-dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with regard to the taste-dhatu, the tongue-consciousness-dhatu, tongue-contact, and the feelings that arise with tongue-contact as condition, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with regard to the tongue-dhatu, it either causes it to gather together or disperse, or does not cause it to gather together or disperse; with regard to the taste-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with tongue-contact as condition, it either causes them to gather together or disperse, or does not cause them to gather together or disperse;

with regard to the tongue-dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with regard to the taste-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with tongue-contact as condition, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with regard to the tongue-dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with regard to the taste-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with tongue-contact as condition, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with regard to the tongue-dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with regard to the taste-dhatu through to the feelings that arise with tongue-contact as condition, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot realize the fruit of unsurpassed enlightenment through a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this perception: “Such is prajnaparamita: with respect to the body dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with respect to the tangible-object dhatu, the body-consciousness dhatu, bodily contact, and the feelings that arise conditioned by bodily contact, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with respect to the body dhatu, it either causes it to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; with respect to the tangible-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by bodily contact, it either causes them to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse;

with respect to the body dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with respect to the tangible-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by bodily contact, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with respect to the body dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with respect to the tangible-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by bodily contact, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with respect to the body dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with respect to the tangible-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by bodily contact, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attachment to attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because it is not by entertaining a perception of attainment that one can attain the fruit of unsurpassed awakening.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this perception: “Such is prajnaparamita: with respect to the mind dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with respect to the mental-object dhatu, the mind-consciousness dhatu, mental contact, and the feelings that arise conditioned by mental contact, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with respect to the mind dhatu, it either causes it to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; with respect to the mental-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by mental contact, it either causes them to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse;

with respect to the mind dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with respect to the mental-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by mental contact, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with respect to the mind dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with respect to the mental-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by mental contact, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with respect to the mind dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with respect to the mental-object dhatu, through to the feelings that arise conditioned by mental contact, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attachment to attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because it is not by entertaining a perception of attainment that one can attain the fruit of unsurpassed awakening.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this perception: “Such is prajnaparamita: with respect to the earth dhatu, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with respect to the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with respect to the earth dhatu, it either causes it to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse; with respect to the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus, it either causes them to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; with respect to the earth dhatu, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

with respect to the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with respect to the earth dhatu, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; with respect to the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with respect to the earth dhatu, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

with respect to the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness dhatus, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attachment to attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because it is not by entertaining a perception of attainment that one can attain the fruit of unsurpassed awakening.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva gives rise to this perception: “Such is prajnaparamita: with respect to ignorance, it either makes it greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; with respect to volitional formations, consciousness, name-and-form, the six ayatanas, contact, feeling, craving, clinging, becoming, birth, aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and distress, it either makes them greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; with respect to ignorance, it either causes it to gather or disperse, or does not cause it to gather or disperse;

with respect to volitional formations, through to aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and distress, it either causes them to gather or disperse, or does not cause them to gather or disperse; with respect to ignorance, it either makes it limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; with respect to volitional formations, through to aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and distress, it either makes them limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; with respect to ignorance, it either makes it broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow;

with respect to volitional formations, through to aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and distress, it either makes them broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; with respect to ignorance, it either makes it powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; with respect to volitional formations, through to aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and distress, it either makes them powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless”—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have great attachment to attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because it is not by entertaining a perception of attainment that one can attain the fruit of unsurpassed awakening.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a bodhisattva-mahasattva gives rise to this perception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the perfection of generosity greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; it either makes the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditation, and prajnaparamita greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the perfection of generosity to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause it to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the perfection of pure ethical discipline through prajnaparamita to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed;

it either makes the perfection of generosity limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; it either makes the perfection of pure ethical discipline through prajnaparamita limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the perfection of generosity broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; it either makes the perfection of pure ethical discipline through prajnaparamita broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the perfection of generosity powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

it either makes the perfection of pure ethical discipline through prajnaparamita powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, that bodhisattva-mahasattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot attain unsurpassed perfect awakening by means of a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a bodhisattva-mahasattva gives rise to this perception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes inner emptiness greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; it either makes outer emptiness, inner-and-outer emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, ultimate emptiness, the emptiness of the conditioned, the emptiness of the unconditioned, ultimate emptiness, boundless emptiness, the emptiness of dispersion, the emptiness of nonchange, the emptiness of intrinsic nature, the emptiness of individual characteristics, the emptiness of common characteristics, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of the unapprehensible, the emptiness of nonexistence, the emptiness of self-nature,

and the emptiness of the self-nature of nonexistence greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes inner emptiness to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause it to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes outer emptiness through the emptiness of the self-nature of nonexistence to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either makes inner emptiness limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; it either makes outer emptiness through the emptiness of the self-nature of nonexistence limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes inner emptiness broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow;

it either makes outer emptiness through the emptiness of the self-nature of nonexistence broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes inner emptiness powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; it either makes outer emptiness through the emptiness of the self-nature of nonexistence powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, that bodhisattva-mahasattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot attain unsurpassed perfect awakening by means of a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a bodhisattva-mahasattva gives rise to this perception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes suchness greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; it either makes the dharma-dhatu, the nature of dharmas, the nature free from falsity, the unchanging nature, the nature of equality, the nature free from arising, the fixed order of dharmas, the abiding order of dharmas, the true limit, the realm of space, and the inconceivable realm greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes suchness to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause it to be gathered together or dispersed;

it either causes the dharma-dhatu through the inconceivable realm to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either makes suchness limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; it either makes the dharma-dhatu through the inconceivable realm limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes suchness broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; it either makes the dharma-dhatu through the inconceivable realm broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes suchness powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless;

it either makes the dharma-dhatu through the inconceivable realm powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, that bodhisattva-mahasattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot attain unsurpassed perfect awakening by means of a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a bodhisattva-mahasattva gives rise to this perception: “Such prajnaparamita either makes the Noble Truth of suffering greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; it either makes the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, its cessation, and the path greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the Noble Truth of suffering to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause it to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, its cessation, and the path to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either makes the Noble Truth of suffering limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited;

it either makes the Noble Truth of suffering broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; it either makes the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, its cessation, and the path broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the Noble Truth of suffering powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless; it either makes the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, its cessation, and the path powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless,” then, Blessed One, that bodhisattva-mahasattva is said to have a great notion of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one cannot attain unsurpassed perfect awakening by means of a perception involving attainment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva forms this conception: Such prajnaparamita either makes the four dhyanas greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless concentrations greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the four dhyanas to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the four immeasurables and the four formless concentrations to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either makes the four dhyanas limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

it either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless concentrations limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the four dhyanas broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless concentrations broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the four dhyanas powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; it either makes the four immeasurables and the four formless concentrations powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great apprehension of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a conception of attainment cannot realize the fruit of supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva forms this conception: Such prajnaparamita either makes the eight liberations greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive concentrations, and the ten totalities greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the eight liberations to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive concentrations, and the ten totalities to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed;

it either makes the eight liberations limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive concentrations, and the ten totalities limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the eight liberations broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive concentrations, and the ten totalities broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the eight liberations powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great apprehension of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a conception of attainment cannot realize the fruit of supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva forms this conception: Such prajnaparamita either makes the four foundations of mindfulness greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either makes the four right efforts, the four bases of spiritual power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of enlightenment, and the eightfold noble path greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the four foundations of mindfulness to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed;

it either makes the four foundations of mindfulness limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the four foundations of mindfulness broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the four foundations of mindfulness powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless;

it either makes the four right efforts through the eightfold noble path powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great apprehension of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a conception of attainment cannot realize the fruit of supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva forms this conception: Such prajnaparamita either makes the gateway to liberation through emptiness greater or smaller, or does not make it greater or smaller; it either makes the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the gateway to liberation through emptiness to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause it to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed;

it either makes the gateway to liberation through emptiness limited or unlimited, or does not make it limited or unlimited; it either makes the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the gateway to liberation through emptiness broad or narrow, or does not make it broad or narrow; it either makes the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the gateway to liberation through emptiness powerful or powerless, or does not make it powerful or powerless—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great apprehension of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a conception of attainment cannot realize the fruit of supreme enlightenment.

Furthermore, Blessed One! If a great bodhisattva forms this conception: Such prajnaparamita either makes the five kinds of eyes greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either makes the six superknowledges greater or smaller, or does not make them greater or smaller; it either causes the five kinds of eyes to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either causes the six superknowledges to be gathered together or dispersed, or does not cause them to be gathered together or dispersed; it either makes the five kinds of eyes limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited; it either makes the six superknowledges limited or unlimited, or does not make them limited or unlimited;

it either makes the five kinds of eyes broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the six superknowledges broad or narrow, or does not make them broad or narrow; it either makes the five kinds of eyes powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless; it either makes the six superknowledges powerful or powerless, or does not make them powerful or powerless—then, Blessed One, that great bodhisattva is said to have a great apprehension of attainment and is not practicing prajnaparamita.

Why? Because one who entertains a conception of attainment cannot realize the fruit of supreme enlightenment.

Fascicle 178

End