大般若波羅蜜多經

02

At that time, the devas again thought: Although Venerable Subhuti has explained this prajnaparamita clearly in many ways so that we may easily understand it, its meaning is exceedingly profound and subtle, difficult to fathom!

Knowing the thoughts of the devas, Venerable Subhuti said to them:

– Devas! Form through consciousness is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of form through the intrinsic nature of consciousness is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The eye ayatana through the mind ayatana is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the eye ayatana through the intrinsic nature of the mind ayatana is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The form ayatana through the dharma ayatana is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the form ayatana through the intrinsic nature of the dharma ayatana is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The eye dhatu through the mind dhatu is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the eye dhatu through the intrinsic nature of the mind dhatu is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The form dhatu through the dharma dhatu is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the form dhatu through the intrinsic nature of the dharma dhatu is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The eye-consciousness dhatu through the mind-consciousness dhatu is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the eye-consciousness dhatu through the intrinsic nature of the mind-consciousness dhatu is likewise neither profound nor subtle. Eye-contact through mind-contact is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of eye-contact through the intrinsic nature of mind-contact is likewise neither profound nor subtle. Feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through feelings arising with mind-contact as condition are neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through the intrinsic nature of feelings arising with mind-contact as condition is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The perfection of generosity through prajnaparamita is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the perfection of generosity through the intrinsic nature of prajnaparamita is likewise neither profound nor subtle. Inner emptiness through the emptiness of the intrinsic nature of non-nature is neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of inner emptiness through the intrinsic nature of the emptiness of the intrinsic nature of non-nature is likewise neither profound nor subtle. The four foundations of mindfulness, and so forth in detail, through the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the four foundations of mindfulness, and so forth in detail, through the intrinsic nature of the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is likewise neither profound nor subtle. All gateways of samadhi and all gateways of dharani are neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of all gateways of samadhi and the intrinsic nature of all gateways of dharani are likewise neither profound nor subtle. Up to the knowledge of all things, the knowledge of the aspects of the paths, and the knowledge of all aspects are neither profound nor subtle; the intrinsic nature of the knowledge of all things, the intrinsic nature of the knowledge of the aspects of the paths, and the intrinsic nature of the knowledge of all aspects are likewise neither profound nor subtle.

At that time, the devas again thought: In the Dharma expounded by Venerable Subhuti, form through consciousness is not established; the eye ayatana through the mind ayatana is not established; the form ayatana through the dharma ayatana is not established; the eye dhatu through the mind dhatu is not established; the form dhatu through the dharma dhatu is not established; the eye-consciousness dhatu through the mind-consciousness dhatu is not established; eye-contact through mind-contact is not established; feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through feelings arising with mind-contact as condition are not established; the perfection of generosity through prajnaparamita is not established;

inner emptiness through the emptiness of the intrinsic nature of non-nature is not established; the four foundations of mindfulness through the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha are not established; all gateways of samadhi and all gateways of dharani are not established; the knowledge of all things, the knowledge of the aspects of the paths, and the knowledge of all aspects are not established; a stream-enterer and the fruit of stream-entry are not established, up to an arhat and the fruit of arhatship not being established; a pratyekabuddha and the enlightenment of a pratyekabuddha are not established; a bodhisattva and the bodhisattva stages are not established; a samyaksambuddha and unsurpassed, complete enlightenment are not established;

nor are written characters and spoken words established.

Knowing that the devas were contemplating the Dharma in this way, Venerable Subhuti said:

– Devas! All dharmas, such as form and so forth, up to unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, are free from written words and cannot be expressed. Therefore, with regard to prajnaparamita, there is no speaker, no listener, and no one who understands. Thus, regarding all dharmas, you should cultivate firm acceptance in accordance with what has been taught. Those who wish to abide in and realize the fruits of stream-entry, once-returning, non-returning, or arhatship must rely upon this acceptance in order to abide in and realize them. Those who wish to abide in and realize the enlightenment of a pratyekabuddha must also rely upon this acceptance in order to abide in and realize it. Those who wish to abide in and realize unsurpassed, complete enlightenment must rely upon this acceptance in order to abide in and realize it.

Thus, devas, from the first arising of the aspiration until attaining unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, great bodhisattvas should abide in profound prajnaparamita, in which there is no speaking, no hearing, and no understanding, and constantly cultivate and study it with diligence.

XXVI. CHAPTER ON FAITHFUL ACCEPTANCE

At that time, the devas again thought: For the sake of what sentient beings does Venerable Subhuti now delight in expounding what Dharma?

Knowing the thoughts of the devas, Venerable Subhuti said:

– Devas! For sentient beings who are like illusions, magical creations, and dreams, I now delight in expounding Dharma that is like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. Why is this so?

Devas! Because in the Dharma I expound, although there are those who hear in this way, there is no one who hears, no one who understands, and nothing that is realized.

At that time, the devas asked in reply:

– Venerable One! Are the speaker, the listener, and the Dharma expounded all like illusions, magical creations, and dreams?

Subhuti replied:

– Devas! So it is, so it is. It is exactly as you have said. Sentient beings are like illusions; for persons who are like illusions, Dharma that is like an illusion is taught. Sentient beings are like magical creations; for persons who are like magical creations, Dharma that is like a magical creation is taught. Sentient beings are like dreams; for persons who are like dreams, Dharma that is like a dream is taught.

Devas! What is perceived as a self, up to the act of seeing, is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as form through consciousness is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream.

What is perceived as the eye through the mind is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as form through dharmas is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as eye-consciousness through mind-consciousness is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream.

What is perceived as eye-contact through mind-contact is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as feelings arising from eye-contact through feelings arising from mind-contact is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as the perfection of generosity through prajnaparamita is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream.

What is perceived as inner emptiness through the emptiness of the intrinsic nature of non-nature is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. What is perceived as the four foundations of mindfulness through the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream. Likewise, what is perceived as the fruit of stream-entry through the fruit of arhatship is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream.

What is perceived as the enlightenment of a pratyekabuddha and unsurpassed, complete enlightenment is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream.

At that time, the devas asked Subhuti:

– Does the Venerable One now say only that what is perceived as a self and so forth, form and so forth, up to unsurpassed, complete enlightenment is all like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream, or does he also say that what is perceived as nirvana is likewise like an illusion, a magical creation, and a dream?

Subhuti replied:

“Sons of the devas! Not only do I say that what is seen as self and so forth, form and so forth, up to unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, is like an illusion, a magical transformation, and a dream; I also say that what is seen as nirvana is likewise like an illusion, a magical transformation, and a dream.

Sons of the devas! Even if there were a Dharma more excellent than nirvana, I would say that the seeing of it is also like an illusion, a magical transformation, and a dream. Why is this? Sons of the devas! It is because illusions, magical transformations, and dreams, together with all dharmas up to and including nirvana, are all nondual and admit of no duality.”

At that time, the great sravakas, such as Sariputra, Mahamaudgalyayana, Mahakosthila, Purna Maitrayaniputra, Mahakatyayana, Mahakasyapa, and others, together with countless hundreds of thousands of great bodhisattvas, asked the Venerable Subhuti:

“Who is capable of deeply believing, accepting, and upholding the profound prajnaparamita taught in this way—so difficult to see, so difficult to understand, so quiescent, so subtle, so deeply hidden, and so supremely wondrous?”

Then Ananda, having heard their question, addressed the great sravakas and great bodhisattvas:

“There are irreversible great bodhisattvas who are capable of deeply believing, accepting, and upholding this profound prajnaparamita that has been taught—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous. There are also countless arhats who have seen the noble truths, thoroughly comprehended the deepest source of the profound dharmas, and fulfilled their aspirations; they too are capable of believing and accepting this profound prajnaparamita that has been taught—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous.

“There are also countless great bodhisattvas who, in the past, drew near to and made offerings to many hundreds of millions of Buddhas, made vast vows, and planted many roots of virtue; they too are capable of believing and accepting this profound prajnaparamita that has been taught—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous.

“There are also countless good men and good women who, in the past, made vast vows and planted roots of virtue in the presence of innumerable Buddhas, whose wisdom is penetrating, whose wholesome faculties are mature, and who have been embraced and guided by good spiritual friends; they too are capable of believing and accepting this profound prajnaparamita that has been taught—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous. Why is this?

“It is because such persons do not discriminate form through consciousness by means of emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, non-arising, non-cessation, quiescence, and detachment. Nor do they discriminate emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, non-arising, non-cessation, quiescence, and detachment by means of form through consciousness.

“In the same way, they do not discriminate the eye through the mind; forms through dharmas; eye-consciousness through mind-consciousness; eye-contact through mind-contact; feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through feelings arising with mind-contact as condition; the perfection of giving through prajnaparamita; inner emptiness through the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature; the four establishments of mindfulness, and, as extensively taught, through the eighteen unique qualities of a Buddha; all gateways of samadhi; all gateways of dharani; the fruit of stream-entry through the fruit of arhatship; the enlightenment of a pratyekabuddha; all practices of great bodhisattvas; the unsurpassed, complete enlightenment of the Buddhas; the knowledge of all things;

the knowledge of the aspects of the path; the knowledge of all aspects; the conditioned realm; and the unconditioned realm, by means of emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, non-arising, non-cessation, quiescence, and detachment.

Nor do they discriminate emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, non-arising, non-cessation, quiescence, and detachment by means of the eye through the unconditioned realm.

“For this reason, such persons are all capable of believing and accepting this profound prajnaparamita that has been taught—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous.”

Then the Venerable Subhuti said to the sons of the devas:

“Sons of the devas! The profound prajnaparamita taught in this way—difficult to see, difficult to understand, quiescent, subtle, deeply hidden, and wondrous—is not an object of conceptual inquiry and transcends the sphere of conceptual inquiry. Within it, there is truly no one who believes and accepts it. Why is this? Sons of the devas! It is because herein there is no dharma that can be revealed. Since there is truly no dharma that can be revealed, no person who believes and accepts it can truly be apprehended.”

At that time, the Venerable Sariputra asked Subhuti:

“Within the teaching of the profound prajnaparamita set forth here, is not the Dharma corresponding to the Three Vehicles extensively taught—that is, the Dharma of the Sravaka Vehicle, the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, and the Supreme Vehicle? Is not the path of the bodhisattvas that embraces and guides great bodhisattvas from their initial generation of the aspiration through the Ten Bhumis extensively taught—that is, the perfection of giving through prajnaparamita; the four establishments of mindfulness through the eighteen unique qualities of a Buddha; all gateways of samadhi; and all gateways of dharani?

Are not the excellent attainments of supernormal powers that embrace and guide great bodhisattvas extensively taught? That is to say, because great bodhisattvas diligently cultivate this prajnaparamita, wherever they undergo birth through transformation, they do not lose their supernormal powers or their sovereign freedom of play, and they skillfully comprehend immeasurable Dharma gateways. They travel from one Buddha-land to another, making offerings to, revering, honoring, and praising the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones.

Whatever varieties of roots of virtue they aspire to and delight in, they are able to cultivate and quickly bring to fulfillment. In the presence of the Buddhas, they listen to the true Dharma and accept and uphold it; until they attain unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, they never forget it. They constantly abide in excellent concentration, free from distracted thought.

With this as a condition, they attain unobstructed eloquence, inexhaustible eloquence, appropriate eloquence, swift eloquence, unerring eloquence, eloquence in which every exposition is complete in meaning, and eloquence that is the most supremely wondrous in all the world. Are these not extensively taught?”

Subhuti replied:

“So it is, so it is! It is exactly as the Venerable One has said. Within this teaching of profound prajnaparamita, by taking non-apprehension as the skillful means, the Dharma corresponding to the Three Vehicles is extensively taught; and so on, up to the extensive teaching of the excellent attainments of supernormal powers that embrace and guide great bodhisattvas, and up to enabling them to attain the most supremely wondrous eloquence in all the world.

Non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding which dharmas is non-apprehension taken as the skillful means here? Regarding the self through views, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means.

Regarding form through consciousness, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding the eye through the mind, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding eye-consciousness through mind-consciousness, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means.

Regarding eye-contact through mind-contact, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through feelings arising with mind-contact as condition, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means.

“Regarding the perfection of giving through prajnaparamita, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding inner emptiness through the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. Regarding the four establishments of mindfulness through the eighteen unique qualities of a Buddha, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means. In the same way, up to the knowledge of all things, the knowledge of the aspects of the path, and the knowledge of all aspects, non-apprehension is taken as the skillful means.”

Then Sariputra asked Subhuti:

“For what reason, within this teaching of profound prajnaparamita, is non-apprehension taken as the skillful means in extensively teaching the Dharma corresponding to the Three Vehicles?

“For what reason, within this teaching of prajnaparamita, is non-apprehension taken as the skillful means, up to the extensive teaching of the excellent attainments of supernormal powers that embrace and guide great bodhisattvas, and up to enabling them to attain the most supremely wondrous eloquence in all the world?”

Subhuti replied:

– Śāriputra! Because of inner emptiness through to the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature, in this profound teaching of prajnaparamita, non-attainment is employed as skillful means to extensively expound the teachings corresponding to the Three Vehicles.

Śāriputra! Because of inner emptiness through to the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature, in this profound teaching of prajnaparamita, non-attainment is employed as skillful means to extensively expound the extraordinary qualities of the supernormal powers that sustain the great bodhisattvas, even enabling them to attain the most sublime eloquence in all the worlds.

XXVII. CHAPTER ON SCATTERING FLOWERS

01

At that time, Śakra, Lord of the Gods, the assemblies of the Four Great Heavenly Kings in this trichiliocosm, and all the gods up to those of the Akaniṣṭha Heaven thought: “Now the Venerable Subhūti, through the Buddha’s awesome power, is showering a great rain of Dharma upon all sentient beings. Would it not be excellent if we were now to conjure exquisite celestial incense and flowers and reverently scatter them as offerings to Śākyamuni Tathāgata, the assemblies of great bodhisattvas, the Sangha of bhikṣus, and the Venerable Subhūti, and also scatter them as offerings to profound prajnaparamita?”

Having thought thus, Śakra and the celestial assemblies each conjured exquisite celestial incense and flowers as offerings and reverently scattered them over Śākyamuni Tathāgata, the assemblies of great bodhisattvas, the Sangha of bhikṣus, the Venerable Subhūti, and profound prajnaparamita. At that moment, flowers filled the Buddha’s entire trichiliocosm. Through the Buddha’s supernormal power, these flowers joined together to form a flower-canopy suspended in midair, wondrously adorned and extending throughout the entire trichiliocosm.

When Subhūti saw this, he thought: “The flowers scattered here have never before been seen among the gods. These marvelous flowers were certainly not produced by grass, trees, water, or earth. The gods must have manifested them from their minds because they wished to make offerings.”

Śakra, knowing Subhūti’s thought, said to him:

– The flowers scattered here were indeed not produced by grass, trees, water, or earth; yet neither were they truly manifested from the mind. They are merely an illusory appearance.

Subhūti then said to Śakra, Lord of the Gods:

– Kauśika! You say that these flowers were indeed not produced by grass, trees, water, or earth and were indeed not manifested from the mind. Since they are not arisen dharmas, they cannot be called flowers.

Śakra then asked Subhūti:

– Venerable sir! Is it only these flowers that are unborn, or are other dharmas also so?

Subhūti replied:

– Not only are these flowers unborn, but all other dharmas are likewise unborn. Why is this said?

Kauśika! Form is also unborn; since it is unborn, it is not form. Feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are also unborn; since they are unborn, they are not feeling, perception, formations, or consciousness. The same applies to the eye through to the mind; forms through to mental objects; eye-consciousness through to mind-consciousness; eye-contact through to mind-contact; and feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through to feelings arising with mind-contact as condition.

Kauśika! The perfection of generosity is also unborn; since it is unborn, it is not the perfection of generosity. The perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita are also unborn; since they are unborn, they are not the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, or prajnaparamita. The same applies to inner emptiness through to the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature; the four establishments of mindfulness through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha; and likewise all-knowledge, knowledge of the aspects of the path, and knowledge of all aspects.

Śakra then thought to himself: “The Venerable Subhūti possesses profound wisdom. Without contradicting conventional designations, he expounds the Dharma-nature.”

Knowing Śakra’s thought, the Buddha said to him:

– Kauśika! It is exactly as you have thought. The Venerable Subhūti possesses profound wisdom and, without contradicting conventional designations, expounds the Dharma-nature.

Śakra then addressed the Buddha:

– Blessed One! With respect to which dharmas does the Venerable Subhūti expound the Dharma-nature without contradicting conventional designations?

The Buddha replied:

– Kauśika! Form is merely a conventional designation. The Venerable Subhūti expounds the Dharma-nature of form without contradicting the conventional designation of form. Feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are merely conventional designations. The Venerable Subhūti expounds the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness without contradicting their conventional designations. Why is this? Because the Dharma-nature of form and the others is neither contrary nor concordant, what Subhūti has taught is likewise neither contrary nor concordant. The same applies to the eye through to the mind; forms through to mental objects; eye-consciousness through to mind-consciousness; eye-contact through to mind-contact; and feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through to feelings arising with mind-contact as condition.

Kauśika! The perfection of generosity is merely a conventional designation. The Venerable Subhūti expounds the Dharma-nature of the perfection of generosity without contradicting its conventional designation.

The perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita are merely conventional designations. The Venerable Subhūti expounds the Dharma-nature of the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita without contradicting their conventional designations. Why is this?

Because the Dharma-nature of the perfection of generosity and the others is neither contrary nor concordant, what Subhūti has taught is likewise neither contrary nor concordant. The same applies to inner emptiness through to the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature; the four establishments of mindfulness, and, extensively, through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha; likewise the fruit of stream-entry through to arhatship, a pratyekabuddha’s awakening, and unsurpassed complete enlightenment; all-knowledge, knowledge of the aspects of the path, and knowledge of all aspects; and stream-enterers through to arhats, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Tathagatas.

Kauśika! With respect to dharmas such as these, the Venerable Subhūti expounds the Dharma-nature without contradicting conventional designations.

The Venerable Subhūti then said to Śakra, Lord of the Gods:

– Kauśika! So it is, so it is. It is just as the Buddha has said: all dharmas whatsoever are entirely conventional designations. Kauśika! Having understood that all dharmas are merely conventional designations, great bodhisattvas should train in prajnaparamita.

Kauśika! When great bodhisattvas train in this way, they do not train in form, nor do they train in feeling, perception, formations, or consciousness. Why? Kauśika! It is because therein these great bodhisattvas do not perceive any form in which to train, nor do they perceive any feeling, perception, formations, or consciousness in which to train. The same applies to the eye through to the mind; forms through to mental objects; eye-consciousness through to mind-consciousness; eye-contact through to mind-contact; and feelings arising with eye-contact as condition through to feelings arising with mind-contact as condition.

Kauśika! When great bodhisattvas train in this way, they do not train in the perfection of generosity, nor do they train in the perfections of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, or prajnaparamita. Why?

Kauśika! It is because therein these great bodhisattvas do not perceive any perfection of generosity in which to train, nor do they perceive any perfection of ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, or prajnaparamita in which to train. The same applies to inner emptiness through to the emptiness of the absence of intrinsic nature; the four establishments of mindfulness, and, extensively, through to the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha; likewise the fruit of stream-entry through to arhatship, a pratyekabuddha’s awakening, and unsurpassed complete enlightenment; all-knowledge, knowledge of the aspects of the path, and knowledge of all aspects.

Śakra then asked Subhūti:

– For what reason do great bodhisattvas not perceive form, and so forth, through to knowledge of all aspects?

Subhūti replied:

– Kausika! Form is empty, and so on through the knowledge of all aspects, which is empty. Kausika! For this reason, great bodhisattvas do not perceive form, and so on through not perceiving the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! Because great bodhisattvas do not perceive form, they do not train in form; and so on through not perceiving the knowledge of all aspects, they do not train in the knowledge of all aspects. Why is this?

Kausika! The emptiness of form cannot perceive the emptiness of form, and so on through the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, which cannot perceive the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects. Nor can the emptiness of form train in the emptiness of form, and so on through the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, which cannot train in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! If a great bodhisattva does not train in emptiness, then that great bodhisattva is training in emptiness. Why? Because it is nondual. Kausika! Great bodhisattvas’ not training in the emptiness of form is itself training in the emptiness of form, because it is nondual. And so on through their not training in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, which is itself training in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, because it is nondual.

Kausika! If a great bodhisattva uses nonduality as skillful means to train in the emptiness of form, and so on through using nonduality as skillful means to train in the emptiness of the knowledge of all aspects, that great bodhisattva can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the perfection of generosity, and so on through the perfection of prajna; can use nonduality as skillful means to train in inner emptiness, and so on through the emptiness of the absence of self-nature; can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the four foundations of mindfulness, and, to speak extensively, through the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha; and likewise, can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the fruit of stream-entry, and so on through the fruit of arhatship;

can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the enlightenment of a pratyekabuddha, and so on through unsurpassed complete perfect enlightenment; and can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the knowledge of all things, the knowledge of the aspects of the paths, and the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! If a great bodhisattva can use nonduality as skillful means to train in the perfection of generosity, and so on through the knowledge of all aspects, that great bodhisattva can use nonduality as skillful means to train in immeasurable, innumerable, boundless, inconceivable, pure Buddha-Dharmas.

Kausika! If a great bodhisattva can train in immeasurable, innumerable, boundless, inconceivable, pure Buddha-Dharmas, that great bodhisattva does not train for the increase of form, nor does that bodhisattva train for the decrease of form; and so on through not training for the increase of the knowledge of all aspects, nor training for the decrease of the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! If a great bodhisattva does not train for the increase of form, nor for the decrease of form, and so on through not training for the increase of the knowledge of all aspects, nor for the decrease of the knowledge of all aspects, that great bodhisattva does not train to apprehend form, nor does that bodhisattva train to destroy form; and so on through not training to apprehend the knowledge of all aspects, nor training to destroy the knowledge of all aspects.

At that time, the Venerable Shariputra asked Subhuti:

– When great bodhisattvas train in this way, do they not train to apprehend form, nor train to destroy form; and so on through not training to apprehend the knowledge of all aspects, nor training to destroy the knowledge of all aspects?

Subhuti replied:

– So it is, so it is, Shariputra! When great bodhisattvas train in this way, they do not train to apprehend form, nor do they train to destroy form; and so on through not training to apprehend the knowledge of all aspects, nor training to destroy the knowledge of all aspects.

Shariputra then asked Subhuti:

– For what reason do great bodhisattvas not train to apprehend form, nor train to destroy form; and so on through not training to apprehend the knowledge of all aspects, nor training to destroy the knowledge of all aspects?

Subhuti replied:

– Great bodhisattvas do not perceive any form that could be apprehended or destroyed, nor do they perceive anyone who could apprehend or destroy form; and so on through not perceiving any knowledge of all aspects that could be apprehended or destroyed, nor perceiving anyone who could apprehend or destroy the knowledge of all aspects. Why is this? Shariputra! From form through all dharmas, whether subject or object, internal or external, all are empty.

Shariputra! If a great bodhisattva, with respect to all dharmas, perceives nothing that could be apprehended or destroyed, nor anyone who could apprehend or destroy them, and trains in the perfection of prajna, that great bodhisattva can attain the knowledge of all knowledge.

Shariputra then asked Subhuti:

– Can great bodhisattvas who train in the perfection of prajna in this way attain the knowledge of all knowledge?

Subhuti replied:

– Shariputra! Great bodhisattvas who train in the perfection of prajna in this way can attain the knowledge of all knowledge. With respect to all dharmas, they employ skillful means neither to apprehend nor to destroy them.

Shariputra said:

– If a great bodhisattva, with respect to all dharmas, employs skillful means neither to apprehend nor to destroy them, how can that bodhisattva attain the knowledge of all knowledge?

Subhuti replied:

– Shariputra! When this great bodhisattva practices the perfection of prajna, that bodhisattva does not perceive form as arising or ceasing, as accepted or rejected, as defiled or purified, or as increasing or decreasing; and so on through not perceiving the knowledge of all aspects as arising or ceasing, as accepted or rejected, as defiled or purified, or as increasing or decreasing. Why? Because form through the knowledge of all aspects are all devoid of inherent existence and cannot be apprehended.

Thus, Shariputra! When great bodhisattvas practice the perfection of prajna, they do not perceive any dharma as arising or ceasing, as accepted or rejected, as defiled or purified, or as increasing or decreasing. By employing neither anything to be learned nor anything to be attained as skillful means, they train in the perfection of prajna and can attain the knowledge of all knowledge.

At that time, Sakra, lord of the devas, asked Shariputra:

– Venerable Sir! Where should great bodhisattvas seek the perfection of prajna in which they are to train?

Shariputra replied:

– Kausika! Great bodhisattvas should seek the perfection of prajna in the Dharma taught by Subhuti.

Sakra, lord of the devas, then asked Subhuti:

– Was it through the sustaining power of the Venerable Sir’s spiritual might that Shariputra spoke those words?

Subhuti said:

– Kausika! It was not through the sustaining power of my spiritual might that Shariputra spoke those words.

Sakra, lord of the devas, said:

– Then whose spiritual might provided that sustaining power?

Subhuti replied:

– The Buddha’s spiritual might provided the sustaining power.

Sakra, lord of the devas, said:

– Venerable Sir! All dharmas are without any support, so why do you say that the Buddha’s spiritual might provides sustaining support?

Subhuti replied:

– Kausika! So it is, so it is. It is exactly as you say: since all dharmas are without support, the Tathagata is neither a support nor without support. Yet, in conformity with worldly convention, it is provisionally said that there is sustaining support.

Kausika! The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. True suchness and the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. Dharma-nature and the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. The Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. True suchness and the Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance. Dharma-nature and the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from non-reliance.

Kausika! The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within non-reliance, nor can non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of non-reliance, nor can the true suchness of non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of non-reliance, nor can the Dharma-nature of non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within non-reliance, nor can non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within non-reliance, nor can non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature.

The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of non-reliance, nor can the true suchness of non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of non-reliance, nor can the Dharma-nature of non-reliance be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature.

Kausika! The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from form; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of form; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of form; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from form; the Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from form; the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of form; the Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of form; the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

Kausika! The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within form, nor can form be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of form, nor can the true suchness of form be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of form, nor can the Dharma-nature of form be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within form, nor can form be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness. The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness.

The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within form, nor can form be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature.

The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of form, nor can the true suchness of form be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness. The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can the true suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness.

The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of form, nor can the Dharma-nature of form be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, nor can the Dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature.

Kausika! And so on, the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects.

The Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects.

The Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata’s true suchness can be apprehended as not separate from the true suchness of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all things; the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature can be apprehended as not separate from the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all things, nor can the knowledge of all things be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of the knowledge of all things, nor can the true suchness of the knowledge of all things be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the true suchness of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the true suchness of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all things, nor can the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all things be apprehended within the Tathagata. The Tathagata cannot be apprehended within the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the Dharma-nature of the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the Tathagata.

The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all things, nor can the knowledge of all things be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness. The Tathagata’s true suchness cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the Tathagata’s true suchness.

The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all things, nor can the knowledge of all things be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature. The Tathagata’s Dharma-nature cannot be apprehended within the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the knowledge of all path-aspects and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the Tathagata’s Dharma-nature.

Neither the suchness of the Tathagata can be apprehended within the suchness of all-knowledge, nor can the suchness of all-knowledge be apprehended within the suchness of the Tathagata. Neither the suchness of the Tathagata can be apprehended within the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the suchness of the Tathagata.

Neither the dharma-nature of the Tathagata can be apprehended within the dharma-nature of all-knowledge, nor can the dharma-nature of all-knowledge be apprehended within the dharma-nature of the Tathagata. Neither the dharma-nature of the Tathagata can be apprehended within the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects, nor can the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects be apprehended within the dharma-nature of the Tathagata.

Kausika! The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

Kausika! The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of form; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of form; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness.

Kausika! In this manner, extending through to the Tathagata, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of all-knowledge; likewise, he is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The suchness of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the suchness of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects. The dharma-nature of the Tathagata is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of all-knowledge; likewise, it is neither conjoined nor unconjoined with separation from the dharma-nature of the knowledge of paths and the knowledge of all aspects.

Kausika! What Sariputra has said is that, with regard to all dharmas, there is neither identity—that is, nonduality—nor separation, neither conjunction nor non-conjunction. Sustained by the Tathagata’s spiritual power, he took that which has no basis of support as his basis of support.

Fascicle 426

End