金剛般若經疏論纂要

Section 8: Doubt that accepting, retaining, and expounding the Sutra does not free one from the painful fruit. The Treatise says: When the giving up of the body is discussed, it refers to the fruit of a body subject to suffering; therefore, the merit gained is inferior. If so, then according to the Dharma gate of retaining and expounding the teaching, the austerities practiced by bodhisattvas are also painful fruits. Why, then, does that Dharma not become a painful fruit?

This passage has two meanings: transcending through patience in order to eliminate the doubt, and explaining the manner of patience.

“Subhuti, the paramita of patience is said by the Tathagata not to be the paramita of patience.”

Patience that reaches the shore of awakening has already transcended the mark of suffering. How much more so when that farther shore is not a shore—then who suffers, and who practices patience?

The explanation of patience has two parts:

1. Citing as evidence the patient endurance of suffering in one lifetime

2. Demonstration

“Why is this? Subhuti, in the past, when King Kali cut my body apart, at that time I had no mark of self, no mark of person, no mark of sentient being, and no mark of a living being.”

Kali is translated into Chinese as “extremely evil.” In a former life, the Buddha was an immortal practicing cultivation in the mountains. The king led his retinue on a hunt, became weary, and fell fast asleep. When the palace women saw the immortal, they approached and made offerings to him.

Upon awakening, the king looked around and did not see his consorts, so he went in search of them and found them there. The king asked the immortal whether he had attained the four fruits, and the immortal answered each time that he had not. In anger, the king cut the immortal’s body apart, causing the heavens to erupt in fury and pour down a hailstorm.

Terrified, the king wished to repent, while the cultivating immortal had realized the patient acceptance of dharmas and harbored no anger; thus, the king was spared harm. The Treatise says that not only was there no suffering, but there was even joy, because of compassion.

“Why is this? Because in the past, when my body was being cut limb from limb, if I had possessed the mark of self, the mark of person, the mark of sentient being, or the mark of a living being, I would have given rise to anger.”

1) Citing as evidence the continuous cultivation of patience over many lifetimes:

“Subhuti, I further recall that for five hundred lifetimes in the past I was an immortal cultivating patience. Throughout those lifetimes, I had no mark of self, no mark of person, no mark of sentient being, and no mark of a living being.”

When suffering accumulates, it is borne through patience; when suffering comes layer upon layer, patience is tempered and becomes joyful. This accords solely with right concentration and compassion.

A verse says:

Free from self and the mark of anger,

There is truly no painful affliction.

Mindfulness of compassion brings peace and joy;

Austerity bears the true and proper fruit.

2) Exhorting one to relinquish marks in order to abide peacefully in patience.

The Treatise says: If bodhisattvas do not relinquish the mark of self, then upon seeing suffering and undergoing suffering they may wish to abandon the aspiration for bodhi; therefore, they are exhorted to relinquish marks. Asanga says that, in order to counteract the causes of impatience, there are three kinds of suffering: the suffering of cyclic existence, the suffering caused by the faults of sentient beings, and the suffering of deprivation with respect to necessities.

“Therefore, Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all marks when giving rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.”

If one relinquishes marks when giving rise to the aspiration, then even when encountering great suffering, one can still refrain from abandoning it. Asanga says: To relinquish all marks is to relinquish the three marks of suffering described above.

1) Counteracting the inability to endure the suffering of cyclic existence:

“One should not give rise to a mind that abides in form; one should not give rise to a mind that abides in sound, scent, taste, touch, or dharmas. One should give rise to a mind that abides nowhere. If the mind has a place in which it abides, then it does not truly abide. Therefore, the Buddha teaches that a bodhisattva’s mind should not abide in form when practicing giving.”

First, it is explained that “cyclic” refers to the truth of the origin of suffering, while “existence” refers to the truth of suffering. Asanga says: If one clings to form and so forth, one is wearied by suffering in cyclic existence, and therefore the aspiration for bodhi does not arise. The statement cited above then demonstrates that giving without abiding in marks is fully present in all six paramitas.

2) Counteracting the inability to endure the suffering of adversity:

“Subhuti, a bodhisattva should practice giving in this way for the benefit of all sentient beings. The Tathagata says that all marks are precisely non-marks; he also says that all sentient beings are non-sentient beings.”

Asanga says: Since one practices giving for the sake of sentient beings, why would one still give rise to anger toward them? It is because one is unable to conceive of there being no sentient beings. When sentient beings commit faults, weariness readily arises; therefore, the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of dharmas are revealed. In the Treatise, “all marks” refers to the marks of sentient beings, while “non-marks” means selflessness. To perceive a self within the skandhas (1) is the mark of a sentient being; “all sentient beings” is a general designation for the dharmas of the five skandhas. “Non-sentient beings” means that the skandhas are empty, and thus dharmas are selfless. The suffering of deprivation with respect to necessities is explained in the following section.

Section 9: Doubt that realizing the empty essence is not a cause. The Treatise discusses the doubt: If the realized fruit is empty, how can one nevertheless create causes with respect to that fruit?

“Subhuti, the Tathagata is one who speaks truly, speaks factually, speaks in accordance with suchness, speaks without deception, and speaks without contradiction.”

Everything spoken by the Buddha accords with reality. Since he now speaks of realizing the fruit, why should one doubt that it is necessarily so? “Speaks truly” refers to the statement that the Buddha-body is the Dharma of great bodhi, for it is true wisdom.

“Speaks factually” refers to the teachings of the Lesser Vehicle: the Dharma of the Four Truths accords with reality, for “truth” means reality. “Speaks in accordance with suchness” refers to the teaching that the Dharma of the Great Vehicle is true suchness, while the Lesser Vehicle is nonexistence. “Speaks without contradiction” refers to the Buddha’s predictions concerning events throughout the three periods of time, which remain AS SUCH, without discrepancy.

The Buddha gives these four kinds of speech because he does not deceive sentient beings; therefore, the Chen-dynasty translation adds “speaks no falsehood.”

“Subhuti, in the Dharma attained by the Tathagata, there is neither reality nor falsity.”

“There is no reality” means that the nature is said not to exist; “there is no falsity” means that, because intrinsic nature is not asserted, there is existence.

Section 10: Doubt concerning whether there is attainment or non-attainment, since suchness as existence pervades everywhere. The Treatise says: If sages obtain their designation through the unconditioned Dharma of true suchness, then since that true suchness eternally exists at all times, how can there be attainment or non-attainment? This passage has two meanings:

1. Presenting an analogy to eliminate the doubt

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva practices giving with a mind abiding in dharmas, it is like a person entering darkness who sees nothing. If a bodhisattva practices giving with a mind that does not abide in dharmas, it is like a person with clear eyes who, when the sun shines brightly, sees all forms.”

The Treatise says: An ignorant person abides in dharmas; because the mind is impure, there is no attainment. A wise person does not abide in dharmas; when sunlight dispels all darkness, brightness appears. Darkness is an analogy for true suchness, while forms are an analogy for the qualities of the virtues.

2. Praising the merit of this Sutra

“Subhuti, in a later age, if any good man or faithful woman is able to accept, retain, read, and recite this Sutra, the Buddha, through his Buddha-wisdom, will assuredly know that person and assuredly see that person; all such people will attain immeasurable merit.” Asanga says that although “reading and reciting” is spoken of here, it means “accepting and retaining”: one reads because one wishes to accept, and recites because one wishes to retain, preserve, and safeguard.

The Treatise explains that accepting and retaining mean practicing. Relying upon comprehensive retention of the Dharma, one reads, recites, and practices. Relying upon the wisdom born of hearing and extensive learning means hearing the Dharma from another, then inwardly reflecting upon it and cultivating it in order to attain wisdom.

A verse says:

Cultivating and retaining through patience and hearing,

Both reveal the ten matters.

The former giving of the body cannot compare;

In the latter, giving one’s life increases merit.

“Subhuti, if a good man or faithful woman in the morning were to give away as many lives and bodies as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, at midday were again to give away as many bodies as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, and in the evening were also to give away as many lives and bodies as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, and were thus to give away lives and bodies throughout immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis of kalpas.”

A verse says:

Giving one’s life throughout such a span of time,

The merit is inconceivable.

3) The merit gained by believing in the Sutra: “If, furthermore, someone hears this Sutra and has faith without opposition, that person’s merit surpasses the former person’s. How much more so if one copies, accepts, retains, reads, and recites it, and explains it to others.”

Believing in the Sutra is inferior to accepting, retaining, and expounding it; the giving of many lives and bodies surpasses even the analogy given above.

“Subhuti, to state it briefly, this Sutra possesses boundless merit that is inconceivable and immeasurable.”

A verse says: “Merit is not an object of conceptual cognition.” Asanga says that “inconceivable” means that it can only be personally awakened to, while “immeasurable” means that it cannot be compared in terms of being greater or lesser, or more or less.

“The Tathagata expounds this for those who have set their minds upon the Great Vehicle, and expounds it for those who have set their minds upon the Supreme Vehicle.”

That Supreme Vehicle is none other than the One Buddha Vehicle.

4) Endowed with the virtue to transmit it

“If there is anyone capable of receiving and upholding, reading and reciting this scripture, and extensively explaining it to others, the Tathagata will certainly know that person and assuredly see that person. All such persons will accomplish immeasurable, incalculable, boundless, inconceivable merit. Such persons will then be able to shoulder the Tathagata’s unsurpassed path of bodhi.” That is, they will accomplish everything… Therefore, a verse says: “The perfection of unsurpassed bodhi.” Venerable Asanga said that to undertake this means to bear awakening upon one’s shoulders as one bears a heavy burden.

5) Those who delight in lesser teachings are unable to bear it

“Why is this? Subhuti, those who delight in lesser teachings and cling to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life span are unable to hear, receive and uphold, read and recite this scripture, or explain it to others.”

6) Wherever this scripture is present should be regarded as a Buddha stupa

“Subhuti, wherever this scripture is present, all devas, humans, and asuras should make offerings. Know that such a place is itself a stupa; all should reverently bow before it, circumambulate it, and make offerings of various flowers and incense.”

7) Transgressions are transformed and merit is gained

“Furthermore, Subhuti, if good men or faithful women who receive, uphold, read, and recite this scripture are held in contempt by others, the karmic transgressions committed by those persons in former lives will thereby be extinguished, and they will attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening.”

Being held in contempt is a general expression that includes being beaten, reviled, and so forth. The Sui-dynasty translation says that being treated with contempt is truly contemptible. Venerable Asanga said that this refers to whether such humiliation has an evident cause or not. It is also said that precisely because one is held in contempt, one will attain bodhi and one’s transgressions will be extinguished.

8) The exalted matter worthy of reverence

This discusses the manifestation of swiftly realizing bodhi. This passage has two points:

a) Making offerings to many Buddhas brings complete merit

“Subhuti, I recall that in the past, throughout immeasurable asamkhyeya kalpas, before the time of Dipankara Buddha, I encountered 840,000,000 countless Buddhas, all of whom I made offerings to and served without ever neglecting a single one.”

Nayuta: in numerical reckoning, one hundred koṭis constitute one laksha, ten lakshas constitute one koti, and ten kotis constitute one nayuta.

b) Upholding the scripture brings vastly greater merit

“If, furthermore, in the future age of the declining Dharma, there is someone capable of receiving, upholding, reading, and reciting this scripture, the merit thereby attained is such that, compared with it, the merit I gained by making offerings to all those Buddhas does not equal even one hundredth part, one thousandth, one ten-thousandth, or one hundred-millionth part; indeed, no numerical calculation or analogy can compare with it.”

9) Hearing this, one gives rise to doubt

“Subhuti, if good men or faithful women in the future age of the declining Dharma receive, uphold, read, and recite this scripture, the merit they attain is such that, were I to describe it fully, some who heard it would surely become mentally deranged, bewildered, doubtful, and disbelieving.”

10) General conclusion concerning its profundity

“Subhuti, know that the meaning of this scripture is inconceivable, and its resulting recompense is likewise inconceivable.”

Venerable Asanga said that this reveals the immeasurability of both the merit and its fruit.

Section 11: Abiding, cultivating, and subduing—the doubt concerning SELF: The Buddha teaches us to abide, cultivate, and subdue the mind, including not abiding in the mind. The preceding ten doubts arose from attachment and produced faults. If there is no self, then who receives the teaching, who abides, and who cultivates? Thus, such faults must be abandoned. It is also said that this removes subtle attachment.

A verse says:

While cultivating within the mind,

One still thinks, “I am a bodhisattva.”

This is an obstruction within the mind, wholly contrary to the path of non-abiding. This passage has two points:

a) First, the question is raised:

“At that time, Venerable Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying: ‘World-Honored One, if good men or faithful women set their minds upon unsurpassed bodhi, how should their minds abide, and how should they subdue their minds?’”

b) The answer has three points:

1. One who is called a bodhisattva must necessarily be without self

“The Buddha said: ‘Subhuti, if good men or faithful women set their minds upon unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, they should give rise to this thought: “I must lead all sentient beings to nirvana. Yet after all sentient beings have been led to nirvana, in truth not a single sentient being has actually been led to nirvana.”’”

2. If one retains the mark of a self, one is not a bodhisattva

“Why is this? If a bodhisattva still retains the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a life span, then that person is not a bodhisattva.”

3. Both subject and object are bodhi

“Why is this? Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma by which one sets one’s mind upon unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening.”

Section 12: The doubt that if there is a Buddha, there must have been a bodhisattva as the cause. The treatise states: If there is no bodhisattva, why did Shakyamuni Tathagata cultivate the bodhisattva practices in the presence of Dipankara Buddha? The following passage is divided into four points:

1) Stating the circumstance in which the doubt arises

“Subhuti, what do you think? Was there any dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed bodhi in the presence of Dipankara Buddha?”

King Mara-Sena invited Dipankara Buddha to enter nirvana. All the old and young people in the city went forth eagerly to welcome him. Because the road was muddy, Sumedha spread his hair upon it for the Buddha to walk across and received a prediction of future buddhahood. Therefore, this matter is raised in the question.

2) Severing the doubtful mind

“No, World-Honored One. As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has taught, there was no dharma by which the Buddha attained unsurpassed bodhi in the presence of Dipankara Buddha.”

At that time, Sumedha was entirely without attainment. Because he had abandoned all discriminations and there was no dharma to be attained, he received the prediction. If there had been a dharma, there would have been the mark of mind, which would not accord with bodhi, and the Buddha would not have given him the prediction.

3) Definitive confirmation

“The Buddha said: ‘So it is, so it is! Subhuti, in truth there was no dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening.’”

The treatise states: At that time, while cultivating the various practices, I did not attain even a single dharma called unsurpassed bodhi. The Treatise on the Scripture of the Merit of Giving cites the Buddha as saying: If one sees the Buddha, one thereby sees one’s own body. To see the body as pure is to see the Buddha as pure. To see omniscient wisdom as entirely pure, and therein to see the wisdom that perceives purity as also pure—this is to see the Buddha.

When I thus beheld Dipankara Tathagata, I attained the patient acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. Omniscient wisdom became clearly manifest before me; this itself was receiving the prediction. The words of that prediction did not reach my ears, nor were they apprehended by cognition. At that time, I myself remained unaware, for there was nothing attained.

4) Explaining it by reversing the proposition

“Subhuti, if there had been any dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed bodhi, Dipankara Buddha would not have given me the prediction, saying: ‘In a future age, you will become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.’ Because in truth there was no dharma by which unsurpassed bodhi was attained, Dipankara Buddha gave me the prediction, saying: ‘In a future age, you shall become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.’”

Venerable Asanga said: If the Dharma of bodhi could be expressed as Dipankara Buddha expressed it, and I had attained complete awakening at that very time, then Dipankara Buddha would not have given the prediction that I would attain it in a future age. Because the Dharma is inexpressible, I did not attain complete awakening at that time. Therefore, the prediction stated that I would attain it in a future age.

Section 13: If there is no cause, then there is no Buddha-Dharma. This contains three points:

1) Severing the one-sided assertion that there is no Buddha. The treatise states: If there is no bodhi, then there are no Buddhas or Tathagatas. Because this repudiation arises, one may one-sidedly assert that there is no Buddha. To sever this doubt, it is said that the Tathagata is reality itself.

The following passage has two points: revealing that True Suchness is the Buddha. “Why is this? ‘Tathagata’ means the suchness of all dharmas.” Venerable Asanga said: Because suchness is pure, it is called Tathagata, just as genuine gold is so called. The Buddha is bodhi itself; therefore, it is not attained.

“If someone were to say that the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma of unsurpassed bodhi that the Buddha attained.”

First, the misunderstanding is stated. The Wei-dynasty translation says that if someone maintains that the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment, that person does not speak in accordance with reality. Next, the correct meaning is explained, as stated in the verse: “That person’s practice toward bodhi, when compared with the bodhisattva practice above, is unattainable.” Venerable Asanga says: If it is said that the Buddha, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, did not attain perfect enlightenment with respect to any dharma, yet the Blessed One subsequently attained perfect enlightenment by himself, this is said in order to abandon that attachment.

2) Concerning the statement, “If someone says,” the meaning here is the doubt that no dharma exists. The Treatise says: Someone utters a slanderous statement, saying that if there were no causal practices, the Buddha could not attain unsurpassed bodhi. In order to eliminate this doubt, it is said that the Tathagata did attain it.

This passage has two meanings: first, attachment gives rise to doubt.

“Subhuti, in the unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment attained by the Tathagata, there is neither reality nor falsity.”

The Treatise says: The absence of the characteristics of form and so forth is itself bodhi. Venerable Asanga says: In order to reveal that suchness is nondual (2), it is expressed in words. Because it is expressed in words, the Buddha’s attainment of perfect enlightenment is not without conventional worldly speech. Next, the passage explaining the elimination of doubt follows.

“Therefore, the Tathagata says that all dharmas are Buddha-dharmas. Subhuti, what is called all dharmas is precisely not all dharmas; therefore, it is called all dharmas.”

The Treatise says: All dharmas have suchness as their essence and are all Buddha-dharmas. “Precisely not” means that because form and so forth are dharmas, while suchness is the Dharma, form and so forth are precisely not the Dharma of suchness; for it is eternally without the characteristics of form and so forth. This is called suchness—the intrinsic nature of all dharmas.

3) Revealing the true Buddha and the true Dharma:

“Subhuti, it is like a person whose body is great.” Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One, the Tathagata says that a person’s great body is not a great body; therefore, it is called a great body.”

A verse says:

According to the Buddha’s Dharma-body,

The analogy is of a great body;

The body is free from every obstruction

And pervades the entire realm.

Because its merit and essence are great, it is called a great body. The body is not a body; therefore, it is regarded as a great body. The Treatise says: “Not a body” means that it has none of the characteristics; “great body” refers to the essence of suchness. Venerable Asanga says: Because it encompasses all sentient beings, it is a great body; with regard to this body, it is clearly neither self nor other.

Section 14: Because there is no person who liberates others, doubt arises concerning the adornment and purification of a land. The Treatise says: If there are no bodhisattvas, then the Buddhas also do not accomplish bodhi, do not liberate sentient beings, do not enter nirvana, and do not purify Buddha-lands. How, then, do bodhisattvas arouse the mind, wishing to lead sentient beings into nirvana, and arouse the mind to cultivate practices that adorn Buddha-lands?

The following passage has three meanings:

1) First, it explains the loss of right mindfulness.

“Subhuti, the same applies to a bodhisattva. If a bodhisattva says, ‘I should bring innumerable sentient beings to extinction,’ that one is not called a bodhisattva.”

A verse says:

Not apprehending the Dharma of suchness,

Yet arousing the mind to liberate beings

And to purify Buddha-lands—

This is an inverted mind.

2) Next, it explains that there is no person who liberates others:

“Why? Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma called a bodhisattva. If there is no dharma called a bodhisattva, how could there be an ‘I’ who liberates sentient beings?”

3) Evidence is cited for the statement above: “Therefore, the Buddha says that all dharmas are without self, without person, without sentient being, and without a life span.”

Regarding the adornment of lands, first the loss of mindfulness is explained.

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva says, ‘I must adorn a Buddha-land,’ that one is not called a bodhisattva.”

The reason is then explained:

“Why is that? What the Tathagata calls the adornment of a Buddha-land is precisely not adornment; therefore, it is called adornment.”

Explaining the accomplishment of a bodhisattva:

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva thoroughly comprehends the selflessness of dharmas, the Tathagata says that this one is truly a bodhisattva.”

The Treatise says: If one gives rise to a mind that would liberate sentient beings and adorn lands, this is inverted and one is not a bodhisattva. What kinds of mind are the mind of a bodhisattva? The Sutra speaks of a mind that DOES NOT apprehend dharmas. Venerable Asanga says that this refers to the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of dharmas.

Section 15: The doubt that the Buddhas do not see dharmas. The Treatise says: It was previously stated that a bodhisattva does not see sentient beings, does not see a self, and does not see a purified land. If this is so, then the Buddhas do not see dharmas. This passage has two meanings: by reference to the five kinds of eyes, it may be clearly understood that they see with purity.

A verse says:

Although they do not see dharmas,

It is not that they do not clearly know objects;

The Buddhas possess the five eyes

With which they see those inversions.

Regarding the five kinds of eyes, first is the physical eye:

1) The physical eye:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the physical eye?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata possesses the physical eye.”

Within the pupil is a pure material faculty that sees internal forms but is obstructed; this is called the physical eye. Because the Buddha possesses all the faculties, he also has the physical eye of a human being.

2) The divine eye:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the divine eye?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata possesses the divine eye.”

When clarity arises from the physical eye, it is the divine eye, which sees external forms despite obstructions. According to the Great Prajnaparamita, the Buddha’s physical eye can see innumerable worlds in the human realm without being obstructed internally. The Buddha’s divine eye can see devas because their forms are subtle; apart from devas, seeing all the various affairs of the human realm is called the physical eye. Venerable Vimalakirti says that only the Buddha, the Blessed One, possesses the true divine eye, which sees innumerable Buddha-lands without the two obstructions, internal and external.

3) The wisdom eye:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the wisdom eye?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata possesses the wisdom eye.”

It employs fundamental wisdom (3) to illuminate the truth.

4) The Dharma eye:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Dharma eye?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata possesses the Dharma eye.”

Subsequently attained wisdom (4) teaches the Dharma and liberates sentient beings.

5) The Buddha eye:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Buddha eye?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata possesses the Buddha eye.”

The Buddha’s complete possession of the preceding four kinds of eyes is called the Buddha eye. Alternatively, seeing the perfectly luminous Buddha-nature is called the Buddha eye. Venerable Asanga says that the five kinds of eyes are presented in order to make seeing and knowing even purer. Briefly stated, there are four kinds: form encompasses the ultimate truth and also includes conventional truth and all modes (5); therefore, one should know that it encompasses everything.

An ancient worthy composed this verse:

There are five points concerning what is known by purified minds:

1. Using the Ganges River to speak of the number of its grains of sand:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Buddha speak of the sand of the Ganges River?” “Yes, Blessed One, the Tathagata speaks of that sand.”

2. Using the sand of one river to illustrate the sands of many rivers:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Suppose each grain of sand in one Ganges River were itself a Ganges River.”

3. Using the sands of many Ganges Rivers to indicate the number of worlds:

“If there were Buddha-worlds as numerous as the grains of sand in all those Ganges Rivers, would they be many?” “They would be exceedingly many, Blessed One.”

4. Referring to the sentient beings in those worlds:

“The Buddha said, ‘Subhuti, in all those lands there are sentient beings.’”

5. Referring to every mind of each sentient being:

“All those various kinds of mind are completely known by the Tathagata.”

Venerable Asanga says: “All those various kinds of mind” comprises two kinds: defiled minds and pure minds; it encompasses every mind of desire and every mind free from desire.

a) Revealing the deluded as the true, explaining “completely known”

“Why? The Tathagata says that all minds are not minds; therefore, they are called minds.”

Master Dayun said that, because all deluded minds depend upon the substance of suchness, they must therefore be clearly understood. “All minds” merely indicates them; “not mind” means that deluded consciousness is originally nonexistent; “that is called mind” means that the true mind is not lost. Compared with the explanation in the original treatise, this sutra is superior.

There is a verse:

b. Seeking the cessation of defilement to explain “not mind”

“Why is this? Subhuti, the past mind cannot be apprehended, the present mind cannot be apprehended, and the future mind cannot be apprehended.”

Master Asanga said: The past has already passed, the future has not yet arrived, and the present is the ultimate truth.

Section 16: The doubt that merit arises from an inverted mind. The treatise says: It has been stated that abiding in an inverted mind is altogether impossible. If so, merit would also be inverted; how, then, could it be called a wholesome dharma?

“Subhuti, what do you think? If someone were to fill a three-thousand-great-thousand world system with the seven treasures and give them in generosity, would that person, through such causes and conditions, gain much merit? Indeed, Blessed One, through such causes and conditions that person would gain very much merit.”

Because one gives while free from characteristics and free from inversion, one gains undefiled merit and forever leaves behind the two obstructions. Since it is not inverted, the merit gained is abundant.

“Subhuti, if merit truly existed, the Tathagata would not say that the merit was great. Because merit is nonexistent, the Buddha says that one gains great merit.”

There is a verse:

The Buddha’s wisdom is the basis
And does not diminish merit.

The treatise says: This reveals that merit is free from inversion. Since the Buddha’s wisdom is the basis, to possess merit means to grasp at characteristics, while to have no merit means to be free from characteristics.

Question: Since the nature of merit is nonexistent, merit is abundant; above it was said that the nature of the deluded mind is empty, so should delusion not also be abundant?

Answer: Merit takes the Buddha’s wisdom as its basis and accords with emptiness; therefore, when emptiness is clearly understood, merit is exceedingly abundant. The inverted mind runs contrary to emptiness; therefore, when emptiness is clearly understood, that mind ceases.

Section 17: The doubt concerning how the unconditioned can possess characteristics. The treatise says: If all Buddhas attain Buddhahood through the unconditioned Dharma, why do Buddhas accomplish excellent characteristics and therefore come to be called Buddhas? This doubt arises in relation to the Buddha’s Dharma body.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Buddha be seen by means of the perfectly endowed physical body? No, Blessed One, the Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the perfectly endowed physical body. Why? The Tathagata has said that the perfectly endowed physical body is not a perfectly endowed physical body; therefore it is called a perfectly endowed physical body.” These are the excellent secondary characteristics that conform to the bodily form. It is like an object appearing in a mirror only when an object is present.

The treatise says: The Dharma body is ultimately neither a physical body nor a bodily form. Yet there are two kinds of excellent characteristics, and these are not other than the Buddha. Because these two kinds are not separate from the Dharma body, they may be spoken of as nonexistent, and thus it is said that they are not the body; they may also be spoken of as existent, and thus it is said that they are accomplished. Because it is without characteristics, it manifests characteristics:

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the perfectly endowed characteristics? No, Blessed One, the Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the perfectly endowed characteristics. Why? The Tathagata has said that the perfectly endowed characteristics are not perfectly endowed; therefore they are called the perfectly endowed characteristics.” These are the thirty-two excellent characteristics, each as explained previously in the section on the physical body.

Section 18: The doubt concerning how one without a body can teach the Dharma. The treatise says: If the Tathagata cannot be seen through the excellent characteristics of the physical body, why is it said that the Buddha teaches the Dharma?

1) To prevent this mistaken understanding:

“Subhuti, do not say that the Tathagata entertains the thought, ‘I should teach the Dharma.’ Do not think in this way; in an empty cavern there is no one who produces the sound.”

2) Explanation of the reason:

“Why? If anyone says that the Tathagata teaches the Dharma, that person slanders the Buddha and does not understand the Buddha’s teaching.”

3) Clarification of right view

“Subhuti, in the teaching of the Dharma there is no Dharma that can be taught; therefore it is called teaching the Dharma.”

There is a verse:

Master Dayun said: If it is said that there is no teaching, this is the true teaching of the Dharma. If it is said that there is a teaching, this is not called teaching the Dharma, but slandering the Buddha.

Section 19: The doubt concerning how, if there is no Dharma, cultivation and realization are possible. The treatise says: If the Tathagata did not attain a single Dharma, how could he transcend all others in realization and supremely attain complete and perfect enlightenment? This doubt reveals that the Dharma that cannot be realized is called unsurpassed bodhi. This section has three points:

a) Attaining perfect enlightenment because there is no Dharma

“Subhuti said to the Buddha: Blessed One, is unsurpassed bodhi attained without anything being attained? The Buddha replied: So it is, so it is. Subhuti, with regard to unsurpassed bodhi, I have not attained even the slightest Dharma; therefore it is called unsurpassed bodhi.”

There is a verse:

There is not the slightest Dharma there;
That is unsurpassed bodhi.

The treatise says: In bodhi there is no Dharma whatsoever to be realized or attained; therefore it is called unsurpassed bodhi.

b) Perfect enlightenment by virtue of equality

“Furthermore, Subhuti, this Dharma is equal, with neither high nor low; therefore it is called unsurpassed complete and perfect enlightenment.”

There is a verse: “The dharmadhatu neither increases nor decreases.” The treatise says: Because this Dharma is equal, it is called unsurpassed; being unsurpassed means that it is supreme.

c) The primary cause and supportive cultivation of perfect enlightenment

“By cultivating all wholesome dharmas without self, person, sentient being, or life span, one attains unsurpassed complete and perfect enlightenment. Subhuti, as for what are called wholesome dharmas, the Tathagata says that they are not wholesome dharmas; therefore they are called wholesome dharmas.”

Absence of self and so forth is the revealing cause, namely the right path. Cultivating all wholesome dharmas is the contributing cause, namely the auxiliary path, whereby unsurpassed complete and perfect enlightenment is attained. “What are called wholesome dharmas” is merely a designation; hence they are “not,” and so forth.

The treatise says: The Dharma of bodhi is undefiled, and therefore it is called “not a wholesome dharma.” Precisely because it is undefiled, it is called a wholesome dharma.

Section 20: The doubt that, since the teaching is morally indeterminate, it cannot be a cause. The treatise says: If cultivating wholesome dharmas leads to the attainment of unsurpassed bodhi, then the teaching of Dharma cannot lead to the attainment of bodhi, because it is a morally indeterminate dharma.

“Subhuti, suppose that among all the lofty Mount Sumerus in a three-thousand-great-thousand world system, someone were to amass seven treasures equal to them and give them in generosity. If another person were to accept and uphold this Prajnaparamita Sutra, even as little as a four-line verse, recite it, and explain it to others, the merit of the former act of generosity would not equal one hundredth of the latter merit, nor one hundred-thousand-million-billionth of it, to the point that no numerical calculation or analogy could compare with it.”

There is a verse:

The treatise says: Although apart from what is taught, the Dharma cannot enable one to attain great bodhi, this Dharma can nevertheless be the cause of bodhi. It further says: Your dharma is morally indeterminate, whereas my Dharma is determinate; therefore it surpasses even the giving of innumerable seven treasures.

Section 21: The doubt concerning how sentient beings can be liberated if all dharmas are equal. The treatise says: If the Dharma is equal, with neither high nor low, how does the Tathagata liberate sentient beings?

“Subhuti, what do you think? You should not say that the Tathagata entertains the thought, ‘I should liberate sentient beings.’ Subhuti, do not think in this way.”

Clarification of right view:

“Why? In truth, there are no sentient beings whom the Tathagata liberates.” There is a verse:

In the equal and true dharmadhatu,
The Buddha does not liberate sentient beings.
Through provisional names the various skandhas are established,
Yet they do not depart from the nature of the dharmadhatu.

The treatise says: Sentient beings, provisionally designated together with the five skandhas, are not separate from the dharmadhatu. Explanation by the contrary:

“If there were sentient beings whom the Buddha liberated, then the Tathagata would still possess the characteristics of self, person, sentient being, and life span.”

The Treatise states: If the Tathagata had such a thought, then there would be sentient beings within the five skandhas to be liberated; this would be the error of attachment to characteristics. Venerable Asanga said that one should understand the Tathagata's radiance in this way. Therefore, if there is a conception of sentient beings, there remains attachment to a self.

d) Gradually Sweeping Away All Traces

“Subhuti, when the Tathagata speaks of a self, it is no self, yet ordinary people take it to be a self. Subhuti, those whom the Tathagata calls ordinary people are not ordinary people.”

Section 22: Using characteristics for comparison gives rise to doubt concerning the true Buddha. The Treatise states: Although the Tathagata cannot be seen through the perfection of characteristics, one may take the perfection of visible characteristics and, by comparing it with wisdom, think that the Dharma-body of the Tathagata can thereby be known. The following passage has five points:

1) Using Characteristics to Represent the Buddha

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Tathagata be contemplated by means of the thirty-two characteristics?”

2) Answering by Knowing the Root from the Sprout

“Subhuti replied, ‘Yes, indeed, yes, indeed. The Tathagata may be contemplated by means of the thirty-two characteristics.’”

Master Dayun said: Previously, he awakened to the form-body, but now he is confused about the Dharma-body. This means that the Dharma-body gives rise to the body endowed with characteristics, and through these characteristics one knows that the Buddha realized the characteristicless Dharma-body.

3) The Difficulty of Distinguishing the Ordinary from the Noble

“The Buddha said: ‘Subhuti, if the Tathagata could be contemplated by means of the thirty-two characteristics, then a wheel-turning sage king would be the Tathagata.’”

A verse states:

Not through the form-body’s characteristics

Can the true Tathagata be known by comparison.

Only the Dharma-body is that of all Buddhas;

The Buddha is not a wheel-turning king.

4) Understanding That the Buddha Is Not Seen Through Characteristics

“Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying, ‘World-Honored One, as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has taught, the Tathagata should not be contemplated by means of the thirty-two characteristics.’”

5) Seeing and Hearing Are Inadequate

“At that time, the World-Honored One immediately spoke this verse:

If one sees me through form,

Or seeks me through sound,

That person practices a deviant path

And cannot see the Tathagata.

The Wei-dynasty version adds the following after this verse:

The wondrous essence of the Tathagata

Is the Dharma-body of all Buddhas.

The Dharma-body cannot be seen;

Conscious knowing cannot discern it.

Those who merely see form and hear sound

Are people who do not know the Buddha,

For the Dharma-body of true suchness

Is not an object discriminated by consciousness.

Venerable Asanga said: Because the Dharma of true suchness cannot be known through spoken words, it can only be known through personal realization. The passage concerning the thirty-two characteristics eliminates the doubt that the fruit of Buddhahood is unrelated to meritorious characteristics, a doubt arising from the previous erroneous comparison of characteristics with the Dharma-body. Furthermore, upon hearing that seeing through form or seeking through sound is deviant, one might think: The fruit of Buddhahood is exclusively unconditioned and without characteristics.

If so, cultivating merit as a cause would produce only a fruit endowed with characteristics. A fruit endowed with characteristics would not be the fruit of Buddhahood. Since the fruit of Buddhahood is not attained through the perfection of characteristics, it would ultimately have no relation to meritorious characteristics.

The Treatise states: Some may give rise to this thought: If great bodhi is attained without relying upon merit, then bodhisattvas would lose all their merit and its resulting rewards.

Section 23: The following passage has four points:

1) The Thought That Characteristics Are Destroyed

“Subhuti, if you think that the Tathagata did not attain unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment through the perfection of characteristics—Subhuti, do not think that the Tathagata did not attain unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment through the perfection of characteristics.”

The Avatamsaka Sutra states:

The form-body is not the Buddha,

And sound is likewise so;

Yet without departing from form and sound,

One sees the Buddha’s spiritual powers.

Dharma Master Sengzhao said: Because one does not incline exclusively toward form and sound, they are said to be not the Buddha; but it is not that bodily characteristics are wholly denied, and therefore they are also affirmed. Master Dayun said: To say that the Tathagata does not make use of the perfection of characteristics is the view of annihilation; the Buddha therefore taught that one should not think in this way.

2) The Error of Destroying Characteristics

“Subhuti, if you think that one who gives rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment teaches the annihilation of all dharmas, do not think in this way, for destroying characteristics falls into annihilationism.” Annihilation is the error of impairment, the error of the annihilationist view—an attachment to one extreme.

3) Meritorious Characteristics Are Not Lost

“Why? One who gives rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed, complete bodhi does not teach the annihilation of dharmas.”

Venerable Asanga said that not teaching the annihilation of dharmas means abiding in and penetrating the suchness of dharmas. Without eliminating the reflected appearances of the dharmas of birth and death, one freely comes and goes within nirvana to benefit sentient beings. Here, attachment to the extreme of quiescence is obstructed, thereby revealing non-abiding in nirvana.

A verse states:

“When merit is not lost, its cause and resulting reward are superior.”

The Treatise states: Although true bodhi is not attained by relying upon merit, merit and its resulting rewards are not lost, because they can bring to perfection the adornment of wisdom, which is the adornment of merit.

4) The Cause Is Not Lost

“Subhuti, suppose a bodhisattva were to give in charity enough of the seven treasures to fill worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. If another person knew that all dharmas are without self and thereby attained patience, the merit attained by this bodhisattva would surpass that attained by the former bodhisattva.”

The Treatise states: Some may give rise to this thought: Bodhisattvas who attain supramundane wisdom lose their merit and its resulting rewards. This passage therefore removes that obstruction.

A verse states:

“Having attained supreme patience, one does not lose them, because the fruit attained is undefiled.”

There are two kinds of selflessness: the selflessness of persons and the selflessness of dharmas. Because it is not received, it is not lost:

a) Stating the Correct Principle as Proof

“Subhuti, this is because bodhisattvas do not receive merit.”

The Treatise states: The resulting reward obtained through merit is conditioned and contaminated, and is therefore blameworthy. Venerable Asanga said: This reveals non-attachment to birth and death; thus, even while remaining within birth and death, one does not receive merit.

b) Raising the Question and Explaining It

“Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying, ‘World-Honored One, how is it that bodhisattvas do not receive merit?’ ‘Subhuti, although bodhisattvas create merit, they should not greedily cling to it. Therefore, it is said that they do not receive merit.’”

Section 24: The doubt that the manifested body receives merit. The Treatise states: If bodhisattvas do not receive merit, how can they possess merit for sentient beings to make use of?

“Subhuti, if anyone says that the Tathagata comes or goes, sits or lies down, that person does not understand the meaning of the Buddha’s teaching.”

A verse states: “That merit must be repaid through teaching and transforming sentient beings; it is the spontaneous activity manifested by the Buddhas throughout the ten directions.”

Only then is there correct seeing:

“Why? The Tathagata comes from nowhere and goes nowhere; therefore, he is called the Tathagata.”

A verse states:

Coming and going belong to the Buddha’s manifested body;

The Tathagata is ever unmoving.

Master Dayun said: When the minds of sentient beings are like clear water, they see the Buddha come—yet he comes from nowhere. When their minds are turbid, they see the Buddha enter nirvana between the twin sala trees and say that the Buddha has gone—yet he goes to no destination.

Dharma Master Sengzhao said: When one understands with the utmost subtlety that the essence of suchness has no fixed location, then, when conditions converge, it manifests in response to beings—yet it comes from nowhere; when conditions cease, it becomes hidden—yet it goes nowhere.

Section 25: The doubt that the Dharma-body and manifested body are different. According to the foregoing, the Dharma-body cannot be known by means of the manifested body. The Dharma-body neither comes nor goes, sits nor lies down, and thus seems different from the manifested Buddha. Yet in connection with the thought of annihilation, it was further revealed that meritorious characteristics are not lost, which implies that the true body and manifested body are one; therefore, doubt arises. This passage uses worlds and their minute particles, explaining that in reality they are neither one nor different, in order to eliminate this doubt.

With reference to worlds and minute particles, the refutation of oneness and difference has five points:

1) Using the Subtle as a Skillful Means to Break Down the Coarse Form

“Subhuti, suppose a good man or good woman were to grind a trichiliocosm into minute particles. What do you think? Would the number of those minute particles be great?”

“Extremely great, World-Honored One.”

A verse states:

Within all Dharma-realms,

There is neither oneness nor difference.

The Treatise states: With respect to the Dharma-realm of true suchness, the Buddha-Tathagatas neither abide in one place nor abide in a different place. To express this meaning, the sutra speaks of grinding worlds into minute particles.

A verse states:

“Worlds are made into minute particles;

This is merely an analogy for that meaning.”

Master Asanga said that, in order to refute name-and-form and the body, the realm, minute particles, and comparison are discussed; therein, the extremely minute is taken as an expedient means for refuting coarse form. “Minute particles” is spoken of according to the Mahayana schools: as though with one forceful slap, imagined form is dispersed down to the most minute particles; form, reduced to its smallest degree, is dust. This is unlike the real particles posited by the Hinayana schools.

2) The inconceivable expedient for refuting minute particles

“Why? If those minute particles truly existed, the Buddha would not call them minute particles. Why is this? The multitude of minute particles spoken of by the Buddha is not a multitude of minute particles; therefore, it is called a multitude of minute particles.”

The Treatise says: Dust ground into powder has no location; and the particles gathered together do not constitute some other location. Thus, within the Dharma realm, the Buddha neither abides in one place nor abides in another place. Furthermore, if particles of dust truly existed, the world would certainly know this by itself; what need would there be for the Buddha to speak of them? It is only because their form and substance are not known that the Buddha speaks of them.

Master Asanga said: The Blessed One’s statement that they are not such means that the substance of this aggregation cannot be established. If it were otherwise, even if the Buddha did not speak of it, we ourselves would know of the aggregation.

3) The inconceivable expedient for refuting the world

“Blessed One, the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system spoken of by the Tathagata is not a world-system.”

The Fundamental Treatise says that one should understand the meaning of refuting the world-system as unreal. Master Asanga said that this refutes the nominal body of the world-system—the world of sentient beings.

4) Relying entirely upon the realm of particles to refute combination

“Why? If the world-system truly existed, it would be the characteristic of a single composite whole. The Tathagata says that the characteristic of a single composite whole is not the characteristic of a single composite whole; therefore, it is called the characteristic of a single composite whole.”

The Treatise says: If there truly were one world-system, the Tathagata would not speak of three thousand worlds.

Master Dayun said: If there truly were one world-system, each and every part would necessarily be combined; yet they are not combined, because there are many distinctions. Since the Buddha has now spoken of a three-thousand-great-thousand world-system, it is clearly not necessarily one. Therefore, by relying upon the three thousand worlds, he refutes the notion of a single realm.

Master Asanga said: When either the world-system or the realm of minute particles is spoken of, there are two kinds of grasping: grasping at unity and grasping at differentiation. Master Dayun said that this clearly means that the multitude of minute particles and all classes of sentient beings are both called a world. “The characteristic of a single composite whole” means grasping; because it is grasped as one, it is said to be combined. Within this unity there are two kinds of grasping:

a) Grasping at unity means taking the world-system, in its combination, to be one.

b) Grasping at differentiation means that the minute particles are exceedingly numerous and infinitesimally small; this is called differentiation.

It is not the characteristic of a single composite whole, for in the ultimate truth both are unreal.

5) The Buddha does not affirm existence through deluded attachment

“Subhuti, the characteristic of a single composite whole is ineffable; only ordinary people greedily cling to such a thing.”

The Treatise says: Because no entity can be grasped within those aggregates, deluded discrimination is spoken of as deluded attachment. If something truly existed, apprehending it would be right view.

Master Asanga said: In conventional truth, it is regarded as grasping; in ultimate truth, it is ineffable. Only childish ordinary people grasp it in this way.

Master Dayun said: They view the five skandhas as being combined. This is the object of greedy attachment; because they are deluded regarding dharmas, afflictions arise.

2) According to the Treatise on Calming and Contemplation, the refutation of self and dharmas has two parts: eliminating attachment to self,

a) Resolving the mistaken point

“Subhuti, suppose someone says that the Buddha teaches attachment to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a lifespan. Subhuti, what do you think? Does that person understand the meaning of what the Tathagata teaches?”

“Blessed One, that person does not understand the meaning of what the Tathagata teaches.”

b) Being caught in the words

“Why? The Blessed One teaches that attachment to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a lifespan is not attachment to a self, a person, a sentient being, or a lifespan; therefore, it is called the view of a self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, and the view of one who has a lifespan.”

The Treatise says: Attachment to self is deluded discrimination, which the Buddha teaches should not be grasped.

Master Asanga said: This reveals SUCHNESS as free from discrimination. Why does it reveal SUCHNESS? Because non-Buddhist schools speak of a self, the Tathagata calls this attachment to self and therefore establishes the selflessness of persons. Moreover, because he speaks of the existence of the view of self, he establishes the selflessness of dharmas. When contemplating in this way, the bodhisattva enters the corresponding samadhi and no longer discriminates. This very contemplation is the expedient means of entry.

Eliminating attachment to dharmas has two aspects:

a) Eliminating discrimination

“Subhuti, those who give rise to the mind of unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment should thus know all dharmas, should thus believe and understand them, and should not give rise to attachment to characteristics.”

Master Asanga said: This indicates who is free from discrimination, toward which dharmas there is no discrimination, and toward which expedient means there is no discrimination. It reveals the higher mind and higher wisdom, through which one sees, knows, and clearly understands what is free from discrimination. Herein, through reliance upon samatha (calming meditation), one can know; through reliance upon vipasyana (insight meditation), one can see. Samadhi—meditative contemplation—which relies upon these two, is supreme, for samadhi is the sovereign, clear knowing that internally conditioned objects are mere images; hence it is called supreme understanding. What is non-discrimination? This passage reveals non-discrimination.

Master Dayun said: The preceding expedient means is the wisdom of preparatory practice; the present non-discrimination is fundamental wisdom, namely, realizing true suchness beyond attachment to apprehender and apprehended, and therefore being free from discrimination.

b) Revealing the originally quiescent nature

“Subhuti, what the Tathagata calls the characteristics of dharmas are precisely not the characteristics of dharmas; therefore, they are called the characteristics of dharmas.”

Master Asanga said: This reveals that the characteristics of dharmas possess the meanings of uniqueness and correspondence, as mentioned above.

Section 26: The doubt that the Dharma taught by the transformation body brings no merit. This doubt arises from hearing that the true body and the transformation body are neither one nor different. The idea is this: if they are not one, the transformation is merely illusory; if they are not different, it is implicitly reduced to the one. The Dharma body is identical with the transformation body, which truly has no intrinsic nature. If so, then teaching the Dharma, receiving and retaining it, and explaining it, as previously discussed, would bring no merit.

1) The merit of teaching the Dharma

“Subhuti, suppose someone were to give in charity the seven kinds of precious substances filling the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system. If a good man or faithful woman who has given rise to the bodhi mind receives and retains this Sutra—even as few as four lines of verse, and so forth—receives and retains it, reads and recites it, and expounds it to others, that person’s merit would surpass that of the giver.”

A verse says: “Although manifested through the transformation body, merit is not nonexistent; its merit is inexhaustible.”

The Treatise says: Although the Buddhas spontaneously create transformation bodies, the transformation bodies of the Buddhas possess immeasurable and inexhaustible merit through teaching the Dharma.

2) Teaching the Dharma without defilement

“How should it be expounded to others? Without attachment to characteristics, abiding unmoved in suchness.”

Master Asanga said: Because teaching the Dharma without defilement brings so many benefits, the Dharma should certainly be taught. Teaching the Dharma in this way is undefiled. “How should it be expounded,” and so forth, indicates that words are ineffable. If it is done otherwise, the teaching of the Dharma becomes defiled because of inverted views. Furthermore, when teaching the Dharma, not seeking the faith and reverence of others, and so forth, is also teaching the Dharma without defilement.

Master Dayun said: If one teaches the Dharma in accord with the true characteristic of dharmas, with a mind free from arising and ceasing, this accords with true suchness; therefore, it is called SUCHNESS UPON SUCHNESS. Moreover, the mind is SUCHNESS and its object is SUCHNESS; therefore, it is called SUCHNESS UPON SUCHNESS. “Unmoved” means undefiled.

Section 27: The doubt that, since the Buddha has entered quiescence, how can he teach the Dharma?

The Treatise says: Since all Buddhas and Tathagatas constantly teach the Dharma for sentient beings, why is it said that the Tathagata enters nirvana?

“Why? All conditioned dharmas are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow; like dew or a flash of lightning, and so forth. They should be contemplated in this way.”

The explanation of the preceding passage has three aspects:

1) Explanation according to the two versions

“The Wei-dynasty version sets forth nine similes in the sutra, as follows: All conditioned dharmas are like stars, blurred vision, a lamp, an illusion, dew, a bubble, a dream, a flash of lightning, and a cloud; they should be contemplated in this way.

Within this there are two aspects. According to the method of eliminating doubts, a verse says: ‘Not conditioned, yet not apart from the conditioned; the Buddhas enter nirvana. The nine similes concern conditioned dharmas; wondrous wisdom contemplates them correctly.’

The Treatise says that the Buddhas attain nirvana, while their transformation bodies expound the Dharma; thus they are not conditioned, yet are not apart from the conditioned. Why do Buddhas manifest in the world but not abide in conditioned dharmas? Because wondrous wisdom contemplates conditioned dharmas in accordance with reality and sees that, like the nine similes, they are false and deceptive.

Moreover, Venerable Asanga explains their characteristics. He holds that the preceding verse reveals four characteristics of conditioned phenomena, namely:

1) The characteristic of intrinsic nature: this is the characteristic of seeing

2) Taking consciousness as the substance: the root of birth and death; stars are a simile for seeing

Venerable Asanga says: when ignorance obscures the interior, there is outward light; when wisdom illuminates the interior, there is no outward light. Diseased eyes are a simile for characteristics. The Treatise says: just as eyes veiled by clouds see forms as blurred, and so forth, contemplation of conditioned dharmas is likewise so, because the seeing is inverted.

Venerable Asanga says: views of person, dharmas, and self are like eyes veiled by clouds, because of attachment to the meaning of EMPTINESS. A lamp is a simile for consciousness: as a lamp relies upon its wick and oil to burn continuously without being extinguished, consciousness relies upon craving and continues through birth and death without cease.

2) Attachment to the characteristic of flavor

The Treatise says that an illusion is a simile for the basis upon which things abide, because every distinction in the insentient world is without any truly existent substance. Venerable Asanga says: being caught in the flavor of objects, one becomes inverted. Venerable Dayun says: an illusion conjures a citadel to deceive people; consciousness transforms itself into mountains and rivers that are unreal.

3) Accordance with erroneous characteristics. One’s own body and what one experiences and uses are erroneous. Contemplating this impermanence is called accordance.

It is also explained that according with the body and its experiences and uses is itself erroneous. Dew is a simile for the body. The Treatise says that the body is also like morning dew, existing only for a very brief time. A bubble is a simile for feeling, indicating that experiences and enjoyments quickly dissolve, no differently from bubbles on water, because the three dharmas of feeling, perception, and causes are unstable.

Venerable Asanga says that manifest accordance is suffering, because feeling is like a bubble on water.

The Sutra on the Simile of Merit records: contemplate feeling as a bubble on water—perhaps newly arisen and not yet formed, perhaps just arisen, or perhaps temporarily present before dissolving and vanishing.

4) Accordance with freedom from characteristics

Venerable Asanga says that by according with the selflessness of persons and dharmas, one becomes free from characteristics. This passage has three meanings:

a) A dream is a simile for the past, for past formations, on account of the foundations of mindfulness, are like a dream.

The Treatise says: one should contemplate the past, whose accumulated conditions have brought things into being, as being like what occurs in a dream, merely thinking of that nature.

The Sutra on the Simile of Merit records: contemplate the agent as being like the sights and sounds that appear in a dream, which exist because of the perfuming of discriminating thought.

Although there is no agent, all manner of scenes nevertheless appear distinctly before the eyes. Likewise, since beginningless time, sentient beings have been formed through the perfuming of all kinds of afflictions and wholesome and unwholesome karma. Although there is no self that can act, immeasurable events of birth and death nevertheless manifest.

b) A flash of lightning is a simile for the present, which does not remain even for the briefest instant or kshana.

The Sutra on the Simile of Merit records: contemplate the mind as being like a flash of lightning, perishing as soon as it arises.

c) A cloud is a simile for the future, as when alaya-consciousness remains in the state of seeds and, together with all dharmas, constitutes their fundamental seeds.

Venerable Asanga says that those coarse and inferior seeds are like empty space, drawing forth the manifest mind like clouds. He says: thus one should understand that through cultivation in the three times, selflessness is attained; this reveals accordance with freedom from characteristics.

Venerable Dayun says: the past and future have no form, while the present does not remain; thus the three times are EMPTY, which is the realization of selflessness.

B—According to the sutras, these are merely similes for false and deceptive things. Their general meaning is this: the Buddha says that all dharmas are EMPTY, and doubt consequently arises: if so, why do we now perceive various realms? It is because those realms are like illusions. Although illusory dharmas are nonexistent, they are nevertheless distinctly perceived.

Another doubt arises: since illusory dharmas and persons are nonexistent, why is there craving and attachment? Therefore they are said to be like flowers seen in the sky; a thirsty deer rushes about seeking water.

Another doubt arises: a thirsty deer never obtains water at all. How, then, can a covetous person obtain and enjoy things? Therefore they are said to be like a dream. Whatever is seen in a dream appears also to be experienced and enjoyed.

Another doubt arises: when one sees wholesome and unwholesome deeds in a dream, upon awakening there is no karmic retribution; when one dreams of attaining honor and nobility, upon awakening there is no fear. They are said to be like echoes and reflections. Although entirely without substance, just as a bright mirror faces forms and empty space, or a deep valley responds to sounds with echoes, every upward glance and downward inclination of a beautiful face corresponds exactly, without confusion and certainly without discrepancy.

Another doubt arises: if suffering is wholly unreal, what can bodhisattvas take as the basis for benefiting beings? Therefore it is said to be like a transformation, meaning a magical transformation. Although one knows it to be unreal, a transformed form nevertheless appears.

C—In summary, in the Qin-dynasty translation, the principle expressed by dream, illusion, bubble, and shadow is wholly indistinct. The two similes of dew and lightning, which illustrate impermanence, are also sufficient to reveal awakening to true emptiness without attachment to characteristics. Contemplating the arising and cessation of dharmas awakens one to cultivation; this is the essential efficacy of demolishing characteristics and skillfully reveals contemplation that relinquishes subjective sentiments.

The Wei-dynasty translation contains nine similes, which the Qin version abbreviates. This is because stars and lamps can be included within the arising of clouds. Fearing that the three kinds of EMPTINESS would be difficult to realize because they lie concealed within thought, it preserves the translation’s wondrous meaning at this point.

III. Part Three: Circulation

“When the Buddha had finished expounding the sutra, the elder Subhuti, the bhikshus, bhikshunis, upasakas, upasikas, and all the devas, humans, and asuras in the world, having heard what the Buddha taught, were filled with joy, faithfully accepted it, and reverently practiced it.”

Upasaka is translated into Chinese as “male lay attendant,” namely, a male Buddhist disciple who has taken refuge in the Three Jewels and undertaken the Five Precepts.

Upasika is translated as “female lay attendant” (as above), one who draws near to and assists the bhikshus and bhikshunis.

Asura is translated into Chinese as “non-deva,” being neither a deva nor a human.

“All were filled with joy” means that each and every one of them was exceedingly joyful—truly joyful beyond measure.

The Sutra of Questions Asked by Manjusri records that the phrase “joyfully received and practiced it” has three meanings. They are:

1) The speaker is pure, not being tainted by attachment to offerings and gain

2) The Dharma is pure, because the substance of dharmas is known as it truly is

3) The fruit attained is pure.

Venerable Asanga says: if one hears Dharma with such a meaning yet remains unaware with regard to the Mahayana, I think that the Buddhas of the past cultivated in stone caves, ultimately without cause.

Venerable Vasubandhu says that the Buddhas possess rare dharanis (6), and the meanings of their profound words and phrases cannot be praised exhaustively. Having heard them from the Venerable One and expounded them extensively, may the merit of this be dedicated universally to all sentient beings.

Venerable Dayun says: the great Sage thus completed his exposition of the sutra’s wondrous principle; the two kinds of EMPTINESS were perfected, and the fourfold assembly reverently practiced it.

Dharma Master Zhao says: all who heard it together awakened to the boundless joy of Dharma. Fu Wan and Zun Shi forever revered it without relinquishing it.

Sisheng says: the profound Prajnaparamita Sutra is the mother of the Buddhas of the three times. Hearing a four-line verse from the sutra enables one to escape the causes leading to evil destinies. If one accepts and upholds it with purity for even a single thought-moment, one will certainly receive a prediction of bodhi; how, then, could devas, humans, and beings of other kinds fail to practice it with utmost sincerity?

End of the second fascicle

Notes:

(1) The aggregates: there are five—form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness (see also note 14 in the preceding first fascicle).

(2) Dharma-gate of nonduality: The Dharma-gate of nonduality means suchness and equality, without any distinction between this and that. When a bodhisattva awakens to and enters the principle of equality, this is to enter the Dharma-gate of nonduality. The principle of nonduality is the standard of the Buddhist path and is therefore called Dharma; because the noble ones enter through it, it is called a gate. The Dharma-gate of nonduality transcends all Dharma-gates and enables one to behold the noble path directly.

(3) Fundamental wisdom: Also called nonconceptual wisdom, right wisdom, true wisdom, or wisdom in accordance with principle, and is contrasted with subsequently attained wisdom. The true wisdom that clearly comprehends ultimate truth without discriminating between subject and object is called true wisdom. Because this wisdom is the foundation from which all the virtues of great compassion arise, it is called fundamental wisdom.

(4) Subsequently attained wisdom: Profound and subtle true wisdom accords inwardly with true suchness. Since thoughts arise without discrimination, it is called nonconceptual wisdom or fundamental wisdom. The wisdom that subsequently distinguishes all the diverse characteristics is called discriminating wisdom, or subsequently attained wisdom. It is also called conventional wisdom, wisdom in accordance with measure, and so forth. When the Buddha brings forth the mind of great compassion to save sentient beings, this is subsequently attained wisdom.

(5) All varieties, or wisdom of all varieties: One of the three wisdoms. It refers to the capacity, by means of a single kind of wisdom, to know the Dharmas of all Buddhas and also to know the causal dispositions of all sentient beings. The three wisdoms are clearly set forth in the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom as follows:

i) Wisdom of all phenomena: The wisdom of shravakas and pratyekabuddhas, which knows the common characteristics of all phenomena; that common characteristic is characteristic.

ii) Wisdom of the varieties of paths: The wisdom of bodhisattvas, which knows all the different kinds of paths and Dharmas.

iii) Wisdom of all varieties: The Buddha’s perfect, luminous, and discerning wisdom, which thoroughly comprehends the general and particular characteristics of every kind of Dharma and path of transformation, thereby eliminating doubts and delusions.

(6) Complete retention: The Sanskrit term Dharani is translated as “complete retention,” meaning the power of mindfulness and wisdom capable of encompassing and retaining immeasurable Buddha-Dharma without forgetting or losing it. There are four kinds of complete retention:

1. Complete Retention of Dharma

2. Complete Retention of Meaning

3. Complete Retention of Mantras

4. Complete Retention of Patience

A mantra has the power to preserve wholesome Dharmas so they are not lost and to prevent unwholesome Dharmas from arising. Dharanis contain formulas of wondrous knowledge, comprising sounds and rhythms with symbolic content. A Dharani may represent the essence of a teaching; it may also represent a state of consciousness so that, by reciting and retaining it, the practitioner may attain that state of consciousness. Dharanis are generally longer than mantras. Dharanis play an important role in the Vajrayana and Shingon traditions. A Dharani is an expression of an aspect of the realization of a Buddha or bodhisattva.

The function of Dharanis or mantras is regarded as an expedient means for eliminating all afflictive obstructions and attaining meditative concentration. A Dharani is the mind-seal of the Buddha and possesses an inconceivable empowering spiritual power. The practice and recitation of mantras constitute one of the three elements of the correspondence of the three mysteries: retaining mantras—mantras—complete retention (the mystery of body, the mystery of speech, and the mystery of mind), signifying grasping, sustaining, and preventing.

It means grasping wholesome Dharmas so they are not lost, and sustaining them so they do not dissipate or disappear. It means preventing unwholesome Dharmas from arising and preventing the commission of evil deeds. It prevents our minds from wandering toward evil and, thereby, gives us greater strength to perform wholesome deeds.