金剛般若經贊述

“The Buddha said to Subhuti: So it is, so it is. If, moreover, a person hears this Sutra and is neither alarmed, terrified, nor fearful, one should know that this person is truly rare.”

The Buddha said to Subhuti: So it is! So it is! If, moreover, a person hears this Sutra and is neither alarmed, terrified, nor fearful, one should know that this person is truly rare.

Commentary: The person who hears the Sutra believes and accepts it. Vasubandhu says that “alarmed” means being struck with dread. If sentient beings are alarmed by this Sutra, they do not have faith in the right path.

“Terrified” means shrinking back in fear. Only by cultivating in reliance upon prajna can one sever doubt. Because of alarm, one becomes fearful and ultimately refuses to cultivate and study.

To be free from such fear is to be neither alarmed, terrified, nor fearful. Asanga says that, for the sake of those of the sravaka vehicle, the World-Honored One taught the Dharma of existence and the Dharma of nonexistence. When sravakas hear this Sutra, they become fearful upon hearing of existence and nonexistence, and alarmed upon hearing of neither existence nor nonexistence.

When they examine it, they fear that they cannot comprehend the twofold emptiness within the principle of existence. Therefore, a separate explanation must be given: the three kinds of absence of intrinsic nature must be understood. Regarding the absence of intrinsic nature in arising and the absence of intrinsic nature in the ultimate meaning, it should be explained that fear is so called because the other-dependent nature has no naturally inherent nature; with regard to the perfectly accomplished nature, because there is no longer any attachment to persons or dharmas, there is no fear.

“Why is this, Subhuti? The Tathagata has said that the foremost paramita is not the foremost paramita; therefore it is called the foremost paramita.”

Why is this? Subhuti, the Tathagata has said that the foremost paramita is not the foremost paramita; therefore it is called the foremost paramita.

Commentary: This is praise of its supreme excellence. Vasubandhu holds that “the Tathagata has spoken of the foremost paramita” means that the Buddhas of the ten directions all speak words of praise concerning it; therefore, it is for great persons and is the ultimate meaning, clearly showing that this Sutra surpasses other sutras. “Not the foremost paramita” means that it is not something attained by others. The nonconceptual wisdom that realizes the principle of non-self is attained only by the Buddhas of the ten directions and not by others; therefore, it is called the foremost paramita. It is attained only by Buddhas. Asanga explains that “the foremost paramita” means that prajna is supreme among the other five paramitas.

“Subhuti, as for the paramita of patience, the Tathagata has said that it is not the paramita of patience.”

Subhuti, as for the paramita of patience, the Tathagata has said that it is not the paramita of patience.

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, the second and third comparisons above have now been completed. This is the fourth point of comparison, within which there are three meanings. First, because the preceding passage spoke of relinquishing one’s body and life, a doubt arose.

One might doubt as follows: attention is directed toward bodily suffering in order to relinquish the suffering body, yet the resulting merit is inferior. If so, those who accept, uphold, and expound this Dharma gate must cultivate the practices of a bodhisattva. Ascetic practices likewise bring painful results; why, then, does this Dharma gate not produce a painful result?

The meaning is this: it was previously said that the suffering involved in relinquishing one’s body and life would in return bring a painful result, and that even the merit gained through the body would remain far inferior. If so, when bodhisattvas cultivate this Dharma, why should they perform ascetic practices that likewise bring the result of a body subject to suffering, and how could they thereby obtain supreme merit?

For example, when the bodhisattva Sadaprarudita sought the prajnaparamita from the bodhisattva Dharmodgata, he had to split his bones and break open his marrow as an offering. Despite such suffering, the merit obtained was still slight. The answer intended here is that if one relinquishes the body while practicing wisdom, the merit obtained is great.

If, apart from relinquishing the body, one does not cultivate wisdom but seeks bodhi, this becomes a cause of samsara, and the merit is therefore weak and inferior. This important passage is divided into four meanings: 1. dispelling the doubt above; 2. presenting an illustrative event; 3. in the statement that “a bodhisattva should relinquish all appearances,” showing, with reference to a bodhisattva of the first bhumi, non-abiding; and 4. exhorting bodhisattvas, for the sake of bringing benefit, to benefit sentient beings and abide in the principle of the twofold emptiness.

The paramita of patience, as attained in common by the Buddhas of the ten directions, is like seeking patience through the practice of wisdom. The Tathagata says that it is “not” because it is not something attained by others; alternatively, if one does not seek the practice of wisdom, it is not called a paramita. As stated above, relinquishing one’s body and life without the practice of wisdom is not called a paramita; therefore, it is said not to be patience.

“Why is this? Subhuti, in the past, when King Kali cut my body limb from limb, at that time I had no appearance of a self, no appearance of a person, no appearance of a sentient being, and no appearance of one who lives a life. Why? In the past, when my body was dismembered joint by joint, if I had possessed the appearance of a self, the appearance of a person, the appearance of a sentient being, or the appearance of one who lives a life, I would have given rise to anger and hatred.”

Why is this? Subhuti, in the past, when King Kali cut my body limb from limb, at that time I had no appearance of a self, no appearance of a person, no appearance of a sentient being, and no appearance of one who lives a life. Why? In the past, when my body was being cut apart piece by piece, if I had possessed the appearance of a self, the appearance of a person, the appearance of a sentient being, or the appearance of one who lives a life, I would certainly have given rise to anger and hatred.

Commentary: This cites past events and has two parts: evidence from one former body and evidence from many former bodies. The first part concerns patience free from appearances and then explains the matter by presenting the contrary case, as above. King Kali is also associated with the patience of enduring suffering and numerous arduous practices.

In a former life, the Tathagata was a rishi cultivating patience in the mountains. King Kali entered the mountains to hunt together with the women of his palace. Becoming weary, the king fell into a deep sleep.

The women then went to the rishi and requested to hear the Dharma. When the king awoke and saw them gathered around the rishi, he asked the rishi, “What kind of person are you?” He also asked, “Are you an ordinary person who has become free from desire?” The rishi replied, “I am not yet free from desire.” Hearing this, the king became angry and cut the rishi’s body into many pieces. Yet the rishi remained without any appearance of a self.

Thus, the account of that occasion is cited here as evidence.

“Furthermore, I recall that for five hundred lifetimes in the past I was a rishi cultivating patience. Throughout all those lifetimes, I had no appearance of a self, no appearance of a person, no appearance of a sentient being, and no appearance of one who lives a life.”

Furthermore, I recall that for five hundred lifetimes in the past I was a rishi cultivating patience. Throughout those lifetimes, there was no appearance of a self, no appearance of a person, no appearance of a sentient being, and no appearance of one who lives a life.

Commentary: This cites as evidence the bodies in which he cultivated patience throughout many past lifetimes.

“Therefore, Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all appearances and give rise to the mind of anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

Therefore, Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all appearances and give rise to the mind of unsurpassed bodhi.

Commentary: This presents the third point, referring to a bodhisattva of the first bhumi. Having attained patience, the bodhisattva does not let the mind abide, thereby revealing the meaning of giving rise to the mind without abiding. There are five kinds of arousing the mind: 1. arousing the mind through the lineage, which pertains to the stages before the bhumis; 2. arousing the mind through faith, which pertains to the first three bhumis, where one practices generosity, upholds the precepts, and cultivates patience in a manner corresponding to the worldly path; 3. arousing the mind through illumination, which pertains to the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh bhumis and corresponds to the supramundane path.

On the fourth bhumi, one cultivates the factors of bodhi, and its contemplation resembles the summit and subsequent stages; on the fifth bhumi, one cultivates contemplation of the Four Noble Truths, as does an arhat; on the sixth bhumi, one cultivates contemplation of dependent origination, as does a pratyekabuddha; and on the seventh bhumi, one cultivates the pure contemplation of signlessness, as does a bodhisattva. 4.

Arousing the irreversible mind, which pertains to the eighth, ninth, and tenth bhumis. 5. Arousing the unsurpassed mind, which pertains to the Buddha bhumi. These are also called the five kinds of bodhi; hence, one is called the bodhi of the lineage.

Here, “arousing the mind” means arousing the mind of faith. That is, when a bodhisattva of the first bhumi contemplates the principle of true suchness without abiding, this is called giving rise to the mind without abiding.

“One should not give rise to a mind that abides in form; one should not give rise to a mind that abides in sound, odor, taste, touch, or dharmas.”

One should not give rise to a mind that abides in form; one should not give rise to a mind that abides in sound, odor, taste, touch, or dharmas.

Commentary: The mind that does not abide is explained separately. In discussing abiding, one is first instructed not to abide in appearances; next, one is instructed to abide in signlessness; then the reason is explained and a general conclusion is given. To give rise to a mind that abides in form and so forth is to abide in existence, which is attachment to self and person. One should therefore not abide, but should give rise to a non-abiding mind. To be instructed to abide in signlessness means that contemplation of signlessness is called non-abiding. One must awaken to this principle before attachment to self and person can be extinguished.

“If the mind has any abiding, then it is non-abiding.”

If the mind has any abiding, then it is non-abiding.

Commentary: This explains the reason or cause. Thus, if one abides in form and so forth and gives rise to a thought, this is not right abiding.

“Thị cố Phật thuyết Bồ Tát tâm bất ưng trụ sắc bố thí.”

“Therefore, the Buddha said that a bodhisattva should not abide in form when practicing giving.”

Commentary: This is the fourth point: the general conclusion.

“Tu Bồ Đề, Bồ Tát vị lợi ích nhứt thiết chúng sanh ưng như thị bố thí”.

“Subhuti, for the benefit of all sentient beings, a bodhisattva should practice giving in this manner.”

Commentary: The removal of doubt and clarification of the principle herein have two parts: instructing one to give without abiding, thereby dispelling doubt, and providing a separate explanation. One might question: It was said above that one should give rise to the mind without abiding; then how can one practice for the benefit of sentient beings without this being called abiding in phenomena? This passage was therefore given to dispel that doubt.

“Như Lai thuyết nhứt thiết chư tướng tức thị phi tướng”.

“The Tathagata says that all characteristics are precisely non-characteristics.”

Commentary: This reveals the underlying principle, which includes the emptiness of dharmas and the emptiness of persons.

To say that all characteristics are precisely non-characteristics means that they are illusory characteristics and possess no true characteristic, because what is illusory is fundamentally empty.

“Lại nói hết thảy chúng sanh tức là phi chúng sanh”.

“And he also says that all sentient beings are precisely non-sentient beings.”

Commentary: This reveals the emptiness of sentient beings. To speak of all sentient beings means that if one grasps sentient beings as truly existent, then “non-sentient beings” means that sentient beings do not truly exist. This should be understood in accordance with the explanation given again in the subsequent section.

The foregoing follows Vasubandhu’s explanation of one point of doubt. Here, following Asanga’s citation of the Sutra, the statement that the Tathagata speaks of the prajnaparamita of patience concerns the thirteenth abiding place, patience under suffering. This is the ninth of the abiding places that remove obstacles: freedom from the inability to endure suffering.

To eliminate the inability of others to endure means to give rise to the resolve to practice austerities; this is this prajnaparamita.

The Buddha again cited the preceding matter so that one might endure suffering and become free from the obstacle of impatience. According to the text, there are two parts: a/ Clarifying three kinds of patience in order to remove the obstacle of being unable to endure suffering; b/ “Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all characteristics.” The causes of impatience involve three kinds of suffering: 1/ The capacity for patience means realizing the selflessness of dharmas, as when the Buddha says in the Sutra that this is the prajnaparamita of patience. 2/ The characteristics of patience: when another person gives rise to malicious thoughts toward oneself, because there is no self or any such characteristic, one does not give rise to anger.

Nor does one conceive an existent notion regarding the prajnaparamita of patience, or conceive a notion of nonexistence regarding what is not paramita. Thus, when in a former life King Kali cut my body to pieces, at that time I had no characteristic of self, and so forth. 3/ The categories of patience: enduring extreme suffering continuously is patience under suffering. Thus, in a former life I endured King Kali cutting my body apart, and I also said that I recalled having been a rishi who practiced patience for five hundred lifetimes in the past.

Regarding the second point, there are three causes and conditions of impatience: 1/ Patience under the suffering of cyclic existence: because of impatience, one is made to revolve in samsara. To counteract this, one is instructed to relinquish all characteristics and give rise to the unsurpassed mind.

If one abides in form and so forth, one is tormented by the suffering of cyclic existence and therefore does not give rise to the bodhicitta. The Sutra states: “Therefore, Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all characteristics and give rise to the mind.” 2/ Patience under the suffering caused by opposition from sentient beings, as the Sutra says: “Thus, a bodhisattva acts for the benefit of all sentient beings and should practice giving in this manner.” This means that, since they are sentient beings, one should practice without any abiding place;

how, then, could one still give rise to anger toward them? 3/ Patience under suffering caused by the condition of meager enjoyment, counteracted through patience, as the Sutra says: “Subhuti, if a bodhisattva’s mind abides in dharmas while practicing giving,” meaning that if one gives while grasping at karmic recompense, one will consequently have only meager enjoyment.

If one gives without abiding in characteristics, one’s action becomes like empty space, and one obtains immeasurable merit.

“Tu Bồ Đề, Như Lai thị chân ngữ giả, thật ngữ giả, như ngữ giả, bất cuống ngữ giả, bất dị ngữ giả”.

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

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu’s explanation, this passage continues to dispel doubt. Someone might doubt: If it is said that a cause devoid of characteristics brings about a fruition devoid of characteristics, then with respect to realizing the fruition, this would be impossible; how could that cause produce the fruition? The meaning is this: Since the Dharma to be realized is already devoid of characteristics, quiescent, and without abiding, why should its cultivation still create a cause?

To eliminate this doubt, two meanings are presented here: first, it is clarified that the Buddha does not speak falsely; afterward, attachment to what is external is addressed. The author of the Treatise explains that because the Tathagata possesses knowledge in accordance with reality, he does not speak falsely. The predictions concerning a Buddha’s bodhi, the Lesser Vehicle, the Great Vehicle, and so forth are all free from error.

Since there are four objects, there are, in sequence, four kinds of speech by the Buddha. This Sutra adds “speech without deception.” Asanga says: What is indicated here? It is intended to inspire faith in the Tathagata so that one may practice patience.

Here, “truthful speech” indicates the characteristic of conventional truth; “true speech” reveals that within cultivation at the level of conventional truth there are affliction and purity. Here, the true aspect consists, on one hand, in ending afflictions and, on the other, in purity. “Speech in accordance with reality” refers to ultimate truth; “speech without contradiction” means that ultimate truth is cultivated amid the characteristics of affliction and purity, and therefore this is called truthful speech.

In brief, the meaning is this: The Buddha alone is honored throughout the three realms, is the teacher of humans and devas, the lord of the Dharma realm, and the skillful physician who saves beings in the five destinies. He cast aside the adornments of a householder, renounced the imperial throne, attained awakening, and fully accomplished all that he aspired to achieve. The Buddha is unconcerned with fame and gain and does not seek personal pleasure; why, then, would he speak falsely?

“Tu Bồ Đề, Như Lai sở đắc pháp, thử pháp vô thật vô hư”.

“Subhuti, regarding the Dharma attained by the Tathagata, this Dharma is neither real nor false.”

Commentary: This addresses attachment to what is external. “The Dharma attained by the Tathagata” means the principle he realized. “Not real” means that it is not truly existent in the way one might grasp it from the words; “not false” means that one should not abandon the words and seek it separately elsewhere. Because it is not false, one studies in accordance with the Buddha’s teachings; because it is not real, one relinquishes deluded conceptualization and realizes the truth. Since ordinary beings grasp the imagined notions of existence and nonexistence, it is “not real”; since the Buddha does not speak from deluded conceptualization, it is “not false.”

“Tu Bồ Đề, nhược Bồ Tát tâm trụư pháp nhi hành bố thí như nhơn nhập ám tắc vô sở kiến, nhược Bồ Tát tâm bất trụ pháp nhi hành bố thí như nhơn hữu mục, nhựt quang minh chiếu, kiến chủng chủng sắc.”

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva’s mind abides in dharmas while practicing giving, it is like a person entering darkness who can see nothing. If a bodhisattva’s mind does not abide in dharmas while practicing giving, it is like a person with eyes who, under the radiant light of the sun, sees all the various forms.”

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this is the third point concerning the removal of doubt. One might doubt: If sages derive their name from attaining the unconditioned, true suchness, and if that true suchness exists at all times and in all places, why should the mind not abide in it? When one attains a Buddha’s bodhi, the mind does not abide. Yet if true suchness truly exists at all times and in all places, why do some attain it while others do not? To dispel this doubt, the analogy of darkness is given. The analogy has two aspects: abiding is a cause of samsara, while non-abiding is clearly a cause of transcendence.

A verse states:

At all times and places it truly exists,

Yet in truth it is not the truth.

The ignorant abide in dharmas;

Those with wisdom realize attainment.

The meaning is this: Although the truth truly exists at all times and in all places, because the ignorant make their minds abide in dharmas, they do not understand detachment from clinging. They are like a person entering a dark house who does not know where he is going; therefore, they do not attain realization. This follows the old translation. Asanga explains that this illustrates the third kind of suffering, meager enjoyment, which is counteracted through patience regarding its causes and conditions.

“Subhuti, in times to come, if there are good men and good women who are able to receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, the Tathagata, through his Buddha-wisdom, will certainly know these persons and will certainly see these persons; all of them will attain immeasurable and boundless merit.”

Subhuti, in future ages, if there are good men and faithful women who are able to receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, they will be granted the Buddha’s wisdom by the Tathagata. He will certainly know these persons and see these persons, all of whom will attain immeasurable merit.

Commentary: Vasubandhu holds that, based upon the preceding passage—the fourth comparison among the three sections of the sutra—the three particular doubts have already been dispelled. From this point onward, the principal doubt is addressed by comparison, explaining which is superior and which is inferior, together with the reason. Within this discussion of superiority and inferiority, there are also the cultivation of three kinds of supreme merit and, afterward, the presentation of the comparison.

The three kinds of merit are cultivation, receiving and upholding, and reading and reciting. Asanga explains that from here onward is the fourteenth chapter, “Freedom from the State of Quiescence.” That is, among the twelve freedoms from obstacles, the tenth is freedom from deficient wisdom at the stage of accumulating provisions. This is like becoming attached to meditative concentration and being unwilling to listen, understand, and cultivate wisdom; such is deficiency in the provisions of wisdom.

One is now instructed to receive, uphold, read, and recite so that wisdom may arise and bodhi may thereby be attained. Meditative concentration belongs to merit and therefore can only assist the path. According to this passage, five meanings are manifested, corresponding to five kinds of merit in the Dharma: 1/ Being remembered and drawn near by the Buddha.

As the sutra states, those who receive, uphold, read, recite, and cultivate it are regarded by the Tathagata with Buddha-wisdom. 2/ Encompassing merit, as the sutra states: they attain and accumulate immeasurable and boundless merit. 3/ Praising the Dharma and its practice, as the sutra says, in brief, that this sutra is inconceivable. 4/ Receiving offerings from devas and others, as the sutra states: wherever this sutra is present. 5/ The eradication of offenses, as the sutra states: those who receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra may be despised by others, even to the point of presently undergoing such treatment, and so forth.

This means that receiving, upholding, reading, and reciting the sutra must be undertaken as the cause of the direct recompense of bodhi; only this constitutes a true Dharma offering. Even offering worldly wealth to the Tathagata cannot compare with it. Therefore, the Tathagata, through Buddha-wisdom, always certainly knows such persons; with the Buddha-eye, he always certainly sees them; and he always draws near to and keeps them in mind.

“Subhuti, if a good man or good woman, during the morning portion of each day, were to give away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; during the midday portion, were again to give away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; and during the latter portion of the day, were likewise to give away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges—and were thus, for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis of kalpas, to give away bodies in charity; and if, moreover, another person, upon hearing this sutra, were to believe it with a mind free from opposition, that person’s merit would surpass the former’s. How much more so for one who copies, receives, upholds, reads, and recites it, and explains it to others.”

Subhuti, if a good man or faithful woman, during the three periods of each day, were in the morning to give away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, at noon again to give away countless bodies in the same manner, and in the evening likewise to give away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges; and if, throughout immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis of kalpas, that person were thus to give away bodies in charity; and if, moreover, another person, upon hearing this sutra, believed it with a mind free from opposition, the merit of the latter would surpass that of the former giver. How much more so for one who copies, receives, upholds, reads, and recites it, and extensively explains it to others.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this presents a comparison: it first elucidates the giving of many lives and bodies, and then clearly shows that faith in the sutra yields superior merit. Giving away one’s body during the three periods of each day is posited hypothetically. “Believing with a mind free from opposition” means that if someone hears this sutra and, although not yet able to receive, uphold, read, and recite it, merely gives rise to pure faith and rejoices in its merit, that person’s merit already surpasses that of the giver described above.

Why is this so? Because although one may give up one’s life and body within samsara, one still cannot thereby awaken to the Dharma-body of bodhi. Even though faith arising in a single lifetime has not yet produced wisdom and understanding, because the thought of faith serves as a cause, hearing and understanding will increase one’s wisdom, and one will certainly attain Buddhahood.

Therefore, the merit of such a person, arising from a mind of rejoicing, is exceedingly great.

“Subhuti, to state the essential point, this sutra possesses inconceivable, immeasurable, and boundless merit. The Tathagata teaches it for those who have set forth in the Great Vehicle; he teaches it for those who have set forth in the Supreme Vehicle.”

Subhuti, to state the essential point, this sutra is inconceivable, cannot be fully extolled, and possesses boundless merit. The Tathagata teaches it for those who have aroused the mind of the Great Vehicle and for those who have aroused the mind of the Supreme Vehicle.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that from this point onward, two reasons are set forth in six further points: 1/ To reveal the rarity of hearing it, so that one gives rise to faith in the Dharma. Only those of great capacity can enter deeply into it; those of lesser capacity cannot understand it. Thus the sutra says: “To state the essential point.” 2/ To reveal the receiving and upholding of the true and wondrous Dharma.

To receive and uphold the wondrous Dharma means to bear and shoulder bodhi, as the sutra says: “Persons such as these,” and so forth. 3/ To show that such persons will certainly accomplish immeasurable merit. Wherever this sutra is present, that place is worthy of veneration, as the sutra clearly states. 4/ To show complete freedom from all obstacles, meaning that obstacles are transformed, as the sutra says: those who receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra may be despised by others, and so forth. 5/ To realize the Dharma of bodhi swiftly, as the sutra states: if, moreover, there is someone in the future, during the age of the Final Dharma. 6/ To reveal the attainment of many powers and the realization of the great and wondrous fruit,

clearly brought about by the sutra’s majestic power, as the sutra states: a good woman in the future age of the Final Dharma....

According to the words of the sutra, there are two meanings: the greatness of the merit is clearly shown, and the merit obtained through upholding and reciting is brought to perfection. “Inconceivable” means that it cannot be conceived or measured by thought. “Cannot be fully extolled” means that language cannot completely praise it.

“Taught for those of the Great Vehicle” refers to those whose nature is definitely fixed in the Great Vehicle; “taught for those of the Supreme Vehicle” refers to those whose nature is not definitely fixed in the Great Vehicle. Because there are those whose nature inclines toward the Two Vehicles, it is said that this wondrous Dharma is supremely difficult to fathom. Those of the Lesser Vehicle possess low, narrow, and inferior aspirations and cannot arouse the resolve to seek this sutra; therefore, it is said to be taught for those who have aroused the mind of the Great Vehicle.

Asanga explains that this passage praises the Dharma and its practice, in which there are three meanings: 1/ praise of the teaching; 2/ praise of the practice; 3/ those who delight in lesser teachings.

“If there is a person able to receive, uphold, read, and recite it and extensively explain it to others, the Tathagata will certainly know that person and will certainly see that person. Such a person will attain immeasurable, inexpressible, boundless, and inconceivable merit.”

If there is a person able to receive, uphold, read, and recite it and extensively explain it to others, the Tathagata will certainly know that person and assuredly see that person. Such a person will attain immeasurable merit that cannot be fully extolled, has no limit, and is inconceivable.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this shows that the merit obtained by upholding and reciting the sutra is perfected. This Dharma is taught for those of the Great Vehicle. If a person receives and upholds it, that person will certainly attain unsurpassed bodhi and inconceivable merit. Therefore, even one who gives rise to only a little faith still surpasses one who gives away many lives and bodies. Asanga explains that the praise of practitioners has three aspects: 1/ Those who receive, uphold, read, and recite the sutra are accepted and protected by all Buddhas. 2/ Such persons accomplish even greater merit. 3/ They bear and shoulder bodhi—the Buddhadharma.

“Persons such as these bear and shoulder the Tathagata’s anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

Persons such as these bear and shoulder the Tathagata’s path of unsurpassed, complete, and perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this conveys two meanings: first, although the wondrous Dharma is received and upheld, only those of great capacity who uphold and recite it are able to shoulder bodhi; second, it clearly shows that hearers of the Two Vehicles and ordinary beings cannot fully understand it. Those who receive and uphold it will necessarily realize bodhi. Although they have not yet attained it in the present, they will certainly attain it in the future; hence they are said to shoulder it. To carry means to bear a load, while to shoulder means to lift it upon one’s shoulders. Thus, to receive and uphold means to be able to shoulder and undertake the Buddha-Dharma—bodhi.

“Why is this so? Subhuti, if one delights in lesser teachings and clings to the view of self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, or the view of a life span, one will be unable to hear and receive this Sutra, read and recite it, or explain it to others.”

Why is this so? Subhuti, those who delight in lesser teachings and cling to self, person, sentient being, and life span cannot hear and understand this Sutra, receive and uphold it, read and recite it, or explain it to others.

Commentary: Vasubandhu divides this passage into two parts: “those who delight in lesser teachings” refers to followers of the Two Vehicles, while “those who cling to self,” and so forth, refers to ordinary beings. Asanga explains that the first two parts of this third major section have already been discussed.

“Subhuti, wherever this Sutra is found, all beings throughout the worlds—devas, humans, and asuras—should make offerings to it. You should know that such a place is a stupa. All should reverently pay homage to it, circumambulate it, and scatter various flowers and incense there as offerings.”

Subhuti, wherever this Sutra is found, all beings throughout the worlds—devas, humans, and asuras—should make offerings to it. You should know that such a place is a stupa. All should reverently pay homage to it, circumambulate it, and scatter flowers and incense there as offerings.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that wherever the Sutra is present, that place is worthy of reverence. Asanga says that this is the fourth heaven, and so forth, making offerings.

“Furthermore, Subhuti, if a good man or good woman who receives and upholds this Sutra and reads and recites it is despised and reviled by others, that person committed sinful karma in former lives for which he or she should have fallen into the lower realms. Because that person is despised and reviled by others in this life, the sinful karma of former lives will be extinguished, and that person will attain anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

Furthermore, Subhuti, if a good man or good woman who receives and upholds this Sutra and reads and recites it is despised and reviled by others, that person committed sins in a former life for which he or she should have fallen into the lower realms. Because that person is despised in this life, the sinful karma of the former life is extinguished, and that person will attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, this is the fourth section, concerning the transformation of obstacles. As stated in the Abhidharma treatises, there are five ways in which karma is created: 1. Acting under another’s command or discipline, without being personally attached to the deed; 2.

Acting at another’s urging or invitation, merely bowing or looking up in compliance; 3. Acting without understanding, as do infants and animals; 4. Being firmly attached from the very root, as when one knows an act is sinful yet still performs it—this mostly concerns offenses committed by monastics; 5.

Engaging in inverted discrimination, as when one acts without knowing—this mostly concerns laypeople. The first three kinds of karmic action do not necessarily lead to hell, whereas the latter two certainly lead to hell. One must personally undergo the consequences of the latter two kinds.

Yet by receiving, upholding, reading, and reciting the Sutra, one transforms the grave karma of former lives into being despised by others in this present life; all karma that would have caused descent into the lower realms is thereby extinguished. This statement expresses a middle position: if those who receive and uphold the Sutra give rise to a superior aspiration, their sins are immediately extinguished through upholding and reciting it.

Even if they are not despised by others, their grave karma is nevertheless transformed into something light. If people of inferior aspiration receive and uphold it, however, their sins are not necessarily extinguished. It is also explained that if both the time and the recompense are indeterminate, the sin is completely extinguished.

If the recompense is determinate but its time is indeterminate, an effect that would have had to be undergone in a future life is transformed into a light effect experienced in this life. For this reason, even those whose faith is slight but who receive and uphold the Sutra gain more merit than the persons described above who relinquished their lives. Asanga explains that this is the fifth section, concerning the eradication of sin, and that it contains three meanings: a.

Clarifying the method for eradicating sin; b. Demonstrating that in a later age, during the final period of the Dharma, those who receive and uphold the Sutra will gain abundant merit; c. Showing that the merit and fruit of this Sutra, and so forth, are immeasurable.

This includes two matters: the eradication of sin, and the passage beginning, “I recollect the past,” which demonstrates its awe-inspiring power. By hearing, understanding, upholding, and reciting this Sutra, one trains in non-discriminating wisdom and realizes the principle of the twofold emptiness; only when both obstacles have been completely forgotten is sin truly eradicated. Because of delusion, discrimination arises, and from it evil karma and sin are born.

If one carefully hears the Sutra and attains wisdom, discrimination is eliminated. Thus, sin arises from the mind and is, in turn, extinguished by the mind. By receiving and upholding this Sutra, one can completely eradicate sin and, even in the present life, transform grave offenses into light ones.

“Subhuti, I recall that during immeasurable asamkhya kalpas in the past, before the time of Dipankara Buddha, I encountered eight hundred and forty thousand kotis of nayutas of Buddhas. I made offerings to and served them all, never neglecting a single one.”

Subhuti, I recall that during immeasurable asamkhya kalpas in the past, before Dipankara Buddha, I encountered eight hundred and forty thousand kotis of countless Buddhas. I made offerings to and served them all, never once failing to do so.

Commentary: Swiftly attaining the Buddha-Dharma of bodhi is, according to Vasubandhu, the fifth point. It has two parts: first, the Buddha states the merit he himself acquired; afterward, he compares it with that of one who receives and upholds the Sutra. According to the teachings of the Lesser Vehicle, the number asamkhya is calculated as follows: beginning with one and proceeding to ten; ten times ten makes one hundred; ten times one hundred makes one thousand; ten times one thousand makes ten thousand; and ten thousand times one thousand makes one koti (1,000,000,000).

When the products are multiplied in this fashion through sixty stages, the result is called an asamkhya. The Mahayana, however, takes the Avatamsaka Sutra as its standard: multiplication through 120 stages produces one asamkhya. Yet one hundred myriad is one million, and one thousand myriad is one koti.

“Before Dipankara Buddha” means prior to the third asamkhya. Since the Bodhisattva encountered Dipankara Buddha at the beginning of the third asamkhya, a nayuta here refers to a number of tens of millions upon tens of millions of years in the past. Before the time of Dipankara Buddha, he encountered eight hundred and forty thousand myriads of kotis of countless Buddhas.

He performed two kinds of practice toward them: making offerings and serving them without neglect. Nevertheless, this passage merely presents a number without discussing its precise quantity, because opportunities to encounter a Buddha are exceedingly rare.

This is because the statement varies according to whether it concerns one world, two worlds, and so forth, in which Buddhas are encountered; it does not mean that during the preceding two asamkhyas only this many Buddhas were encountered. Moreover, according to tradition, during the first asamkhya kalpa, Shakyamuni Buddha encountered Buddhas as numerous as the sands of five Ganges Rivers; during the second asamkhya, Buddhas as numerous as the sands of six Ganges Rivers; and during the third asamkhya, Buddhas as numerous as the sands of seven Ganges Rivers.

Thus, during the first two asamkhyas he had already encountered countless Buddhas. Why, then, would only a single kalpa be said to contain this many? One should therefore understand that such statements must be made with reference to the particular period during which the encounters occurred.

Furthermore, the Nirvana Sutra records that during the first kalpa the Bodhisattva encountered Buddhas as numerous as the sands of five Ganges Rivers; during the second kalpa, as numerous as the sands of six Ganges Rivers; and through the fourth kalpa, as numerous as the sands of eight thousand Ganges Rivers. Since the fourth kalpa refers to bodhisattvas of the ten bhumis, one should understand that during the preceding two asamkhyas he encountered countless Buddhas.

Yet one school holds that during the first asamkhya he encountered 75,000 Buddhas; during the second asamkhya, 76,000 Buddhas; and during the third asamkhya, 77,000 Buddhas. Asanga explains that this passage reveals awe-inspiring power. Because it is lofty, sublime, and supreme, it is called awe-inspiring power.

“If, furthermore, in the future final age, someone is able to receive and uphold this Sutra and read and recite it, the merit thereby acquired will be such that the merit I gained by making offerings to all those Buddhas does not equal even one hundredth of it, nor one hundred-thousand-myriad-koti-th of it; indeed, no calculation or analogy can reach it.”

If, furthermore, in the final age of the Dharma, someone is able to receive and uphold this Sutra and read and recite it, the merit thereby acquired will be such that the merit I gained by making offerings to all those Buddhas does not equal even one hundredth of it, nor one part in hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis; indeed, no calculation or analogy can compare with it.

Commentary: This is a comparison of the merit derived from receiving and upholding the Sutra, according to Vasubandhu's explanation. Making offerings to the Buddhas produces only merit that supports the path to bodhi; hearing, upholding, or reciting the Sutra, and thereby giving rise to clear, discerning wisdom, alone enables one to put an end to birth and death. This means that although bodhisattvas may cultivate hundreds of thousands of other practices, if they do not cultivate the perfection of wisdom, they can ultimately neither awaken to the principle and attain the Way, nor realize the Dharma of true suchness and sever the fundamental discriminations underlying birth and death. Therefore, by hearing and understanding the Sutra, they swiftly realize bodhi.

“Tu Bồ Đề, nhược thiện nam tử, thiện nữ nhơn ư hậu mạt thế hữu thọ trì, độc tụng thử Kinh, sở đắc công đức ngã nhược cụ thuyết giả, hoặc hữu nhơn văn tâm tắc cuồng loạn hồ nghi bất tín.”

Subhuti, if in the future, during the final age of the Dharma, good men and faithful women receive, uphold, read, and recite this Sutra, the merit they obtain is such that, were I to describe it fully, some who heard it would become mentally distraught, harbor doubts, and refuse to believe.

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, this is section six, within which there are

2: First, it makes clear that the awe-inspiring power is so vast that those who hear of it will not believe it, and it reveals that the subtle fruit attained is not an object of conceptual estimation. The meaning is that, since beginningless time, one has committed the karma of killing, stealing, and so forth against all sentient beings; the minds that engage in killing and stealing are hostile and harmful. Yet upon hearing or reading this Sutra even once and giving rise to the aspiration for bodhi, one forever eliminates hostility and enmity.

Toward all sentient beings, one never again harbors thoughts of killing, stealing, and so forth, but instead becomes a parent to them, becomes their friend, rescues and guides them, and offers mutual support. One always seeks ways to befriend them, treats them like family, and acts with filial devotion and righteousness. As a witness, one proves oneself a spiritual friend; by fostering thoughts of trust, one becomes a loyal minister and manifests goodness; as an enlightened ruler, one skillfully comforts and rescues them; one may even become their son or daughter, or a person of humble station, and so forth.

If one is an elder, one becomes an honored elder, like the layman Vimalakirti, extensively practicing all forms of conduct. In the future, when one becomes a Buddha, one's merit will be inexhaustible and infinite, and one will teach and transform multitudes of sentient beings. Such vast and boundless merit arises solely from hearing the Sutra.

If it were described fully, foolish and ignorant people would hear it and give rise to doubt. “Mentally distraught” means that, upon hearing the Sutra, they not only disbelieve it but instead give rise to thoughts of repudiation and slander, thereby planting the cause of mental derangement. Or, because of disbelief in this life, they experience the fruit of mental derangement in a future life.

Asanga explains that this passage reveals the abundance of merit and contains two meanings: the merit is so great that it is difficult to believe, causing those who hear of it to doubt; and its blessings are so profound that they cannot be measured.

“Tu Bồ Đề, đương tri thị Kinh nghĩa bất khả tư nghì, quả báo diệc bất khả tư nghì”.

Subhuti, you should know that the meaning of this Sutra is inconceivable, and its resulting reward is likewise inconceivable.

Commentary: This is because the Sutra clearly teaches the meaning of signlessness. Those who uphold the Sutra will attain the fruit of bodhi. The doctrine of the Sutra itself is already difficult to fathom, and its resulting reward is likewise difficult to measure.

The Sutra mentions three things that obstruct the mind and cause evil states of mind to become manifest: foolish people, the treatises of non-Buddhist paths, and women. These three things serve as coverings that obscure the mind, thereby exposing evil. To the wise, the Buddhist scriptures are like the sun and moon.

Before this Prajnaparamita Sutra is opened, it appears no different from non-Buddhist texts; but once one understands, expounds, reads, or recites it, one can eliminate hundreds of thousands of karmic offenses and obstructions belonging to sentient beings and can attain bodhi. Those who receive and uphold the Sutra obtain exceedingly great merit; even the sacrifice of many lives cannot compare with it.

“Nhỉ thời Tu Bồ Đề bạch Phật ngôn, Thế Tôn, thiện nam tử, thiện nữ nhơn, phát A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam bồ đề tâm, vân hà ưng trụ, vân hà hàng phục kỳ tâm”.

At that time, Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying, “World-Honored One, when good men and faithful women give rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed perfect enlightenment, how should their minds abide, and how should they subdue their minds?”

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this is the second cycle of the Buddha's teaching. Because they had not previously understood how to give rise to the aspiration, he taught them to give rise to it; because they had not understood how to cultivate practice, he taught them to cultivate; and because they had not been able to contain and sever the various obstructions, he taught them to subdue them. This present cycle concerns giving rise to the aspiration.

A bodhisattva might say, “I am able to give rise to the aspiration,” and even, at the third stage, after having severed obstructions, might say, “I am able to sever them.” Because of such discriminating thoughts, bodhi becomes obstructed. “Discrimination” refers to the cognitive obscurations that prevent one from abiding in the Way. This means that when one gives rise to the aspiration and cultivates practice, one should at all times employ non-discriminating wisdom to awaken to ultimate truth.

Not conceiving, “I am like this” or “I am like that,” is called the path of non-abiding—that is, abiding in neither samsara nor nirvana. If discrimination is present, realization is impossible and one is therefore obstructed. Thus, the practitioners of the Two Vehicles cling to dharmas as nirvana and are confined by their attachment to quiescence.

Ordinary beings cling to the existence of birth and are bound by samsara, unable to attain liberation. Bodhisattvas possess both wisdom and great compassion and are bound by neither extreme; hence this is called non-abiding. If one practices with attachment, one is bound by nirvana.

If one does not practice and yet remains attached, one is bound by samsara; this is therefore called abiding. What is essential is to practice all three without giving rise to attachment to self; only then can one abide in non-abiding. Alternatively, the earlier teaching was intended for beginners of sharp faculties, while the later teaching was intended for those of dull faculties who came afterward.

According to this passage, the principal section must first be presented clearly; next comes the account of the time of Dipankara Buddha, explaining the various doubts. The principal section has two parts: the question of Subhuti and the Buddha's reply. Asanga explains that this fifteenth passage concerns freedom, at the time of realizing the Way, from the agitation caused by elation.

This is the eleventh obstruction related to the place of abiding: relinquishing attachment and grasping. Hence this passage appears here. When bodhisattvas give rise to the aspiration and cultivate practice, they perceive that they have attained a superior state and consequently think, “I am able to give rise to the aspiration and cultivate practice,” and so forth.

In this way, they regard their own claim as superior and others as otherwise. Because this teaching causes them to relinquish such attachment, it is called attachment to oneself.

“Phật cáo Tu Bồ Đề, thiện nam tử, thiện nữ nhơn, phát A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề tâm giả, đương sanh như thị tâm: ngã ưng diệt độ nhứt thiết chúng sanh, diệt độ nhứt thiết chúng sanh dĩ nhi vô hữu nhứt chúng sanh thật diệt độ giả. Hà dĩ cố? Tu Bồ Đề, nhược Bồ Tát hữu ngã tướng, nhơn tướng, chúng sanh tướng, thọ giả tướng tắc phi Bồ Tát”.

The Buddha told Subhuti, “Good men and faithful women who give rise to the aspiration for unsurpassed perfect enlightenment should give rise to this thought: ‘I shall lead all sentient beings to nirvana.’ Yet after leading all sentient beings to nirvana, in truth not a single sentient being has been led to nirvana. Why is this? Subhuti, if a bodhisattva has the notion of a self, the notion of a person, the notion of a sentient being, or the notion of a living being, then that person is not a bodhisattva.”

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: Based on the Buddha’s reply here, there are two parts. First, He answers the first question, thereby indicating one aspect of the other two questions; afterward, He explains the meaning of non-abiding. The intent is that arousing the mind and cultivating practice are fundamentally for eliminating afflictions, yet the affliction of attachment to self still remains until rebirth.

One must ensure that, even when arousing the mind, one inwardly forgets the self and does not think, “I am able to cultivate,” or, “I subdue the mind.” This answers the first question; the rest should be understood accordingly. Nevertheless, according to the preceding passage, this section also contains four kinds of mind: thinking, “I should bring them to cessation,” is the foremost mind; “all sentient beings” is the vast mind; and the remaining two minds are fully set forth in the Sutra.

Asanga explains that this passage answers the preceding three questions. “One should give rise to such a mind” answers the first question. “Bring all sentient beings to cessation, yet in truth not a single sentient being is brought to cessation” answers the second question.

When liberating sentient beings, one should not give rise to the attachment that one is able to do so. It is essential that externally there be no mark of sentient beings and internally no attachment to self. Only liberating sentient beings in accord with ultimate truth constitutes cultivation.

“If a bodhisattva has the mark of a self,” and so forth, answers the third question. One must realize the principle of the twofold emptiness of persons and dharmas before the two obstructions can be eliminated; therefore, this is called subjugation. If one thinks, “I am able to…,” one has not understood.

“Why is this so? Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma by which one gives rise to anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

Why is this so? Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma by which one gives rise to unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that, because one is obstructed, one does not abide in the path. When, through non-conceptual wisdom, one realizes that self and dharmas are fundamentally empty and entirely without anything that can be possessed, one does not think, “I am able to arouse the mind.” Therefore, it is said that there is no dharma by which the mind is aroused.

“Subhuti, what do you think? When the Tathagata was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, was there any dharma by which He attained anuttara-samyak-sambodhi?”

Subhuti, what do you think? When the Tathagata was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, was there any dharma by which He attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment?

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu’s extensive explanation, six doubts are refuted. 1/ One might doubt: Since it has been said that there is no dharma called a bodhisattva, why did Shakyamuni Buddha scatter flowers as offerings before Dipankara Buddha and spread His hair over the mud? Was this the practice of a bodhisattva? 2/ “Subhuti, bodhisattvas are also thus.” One might therefore doubt: If there are no bodhisattvas, then the Buddhas also do not attain enlightenment, and sentient beings also do not enter great nirvana.

If so, what does this mean? Should bodhisattvas arouse the mind wishing to cause sentient beings to enter nirvana? These two doubts should be understood in accordance with the principal section previously set forth.

Four further doubts follow, each explained successively as it arises. Here the first doubt is refuted, in three points: a/ Refuting the denial that bodhisattvas exist. One might think that if in truth there is no dharma by which the mind of enlightenment is aroused, then there are no bodhisattvas.

Why, then, did the Tathagata cultivate bodhisattva practices in the presence of Dipankara Buddha? As the Sutra states, “The Tathagata, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha…” b/ Eliminating the denial that the Buddhas exist. The Treatise states: “If there are no bodhisattvas, then who becomes a Buddha?

Would this not mean that there are also no Buddhas?” The Treatise further states: “If there are no bodhisattvas, then there are no Buddhas.” Such a denial is directed solely toward asserting that there are no Buddhas, as the Sutra states: “The Tathagata is precisely the meaning of suchness of all dharmas.” c/ Refuting the denial that enlightenment exists. The Treatise states: “If there are no Buddhas, then there is no enlightenment that can be attained, because the Buddhas do not attain enlightenment.” As the Sutra states: “Within the unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment attained by the Tathagata, there is neither reality nor falsity.” The above three statements comprise the Buddha’s question, Venerable Subhuti’s reply, and the Buddha’s concluding affirmation.

Asanga says that this is the sixteenth section: seeking the Buddha’s instruction in order to abandon the obstruction pertaining to the twelfth abiding place, namely, abandoning the absence of instruction. It was said above that in truth there is no dharma called a bodhisattva. If so, what did the bodhisattva seek from Dipankara Buddha?

This also teaches that although there are no words, one can still seek and hear the teaching, thereby abandoning this obstruction. According to the text, there are five points: 1/ Abandoning the absence of instruction, as the Sutra states: “The Tathagata, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha…” 2/ Enlightenment cannot be expressed. The words of Dipankara Buddha are not called enlightenment, yet neither are they words contrary to suchness, as the Sutra states: “If there were a dharma attained by the Tathagata…” 3/ Explaining that the meaning of all dharmas transcends verbal expression, as the Sutra states: “The Tathagata is precisely the meaning of suchness of all dharmas.” 4/ There are words to be spoken.

Shakyamuni Buddha did not attain enlightenment in the presence of Dipankara Buddha; only later did He personally realize perfect enlightenment. To abandon this attachment, the Sutra states: “If anyone says that the Tathagata attained enlightenment…” 5/ Revealing the nonduality of true suchness, as the Sutra states: “Subhuti, the Tathagata has attainment.” The preceding passage also contains the three parts analyzed by Vasubandhu.

Regarding the first question, his meaning is that deluded attachment assumes there is something attained. When the Tathagata, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, aroused the mind and realized the principle of the twofold emptiness of persons and dharmas, all that was grasped therein was entirely without anything attainable. Nevertheless, with regard to this non-attainment, it is said that He attained enlightenment.

Thus He asked: “Was there any dharma by which enlightenment was attained?” It is as though He asked Venerable Subhuti whether, within ultimate truth, there is any dharma by which enlightenment is attained.

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

No, World-Honored One. As I understand the meaning of the Buddha’s teaching, when the Buddha was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, there was no dharma by which He attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: This is the second statement, the reply.

“The Buddha said: So it is, so it is, Subhuti. In truth there is no dharma by which the Tathagata attained anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

The Buddha said: So it is, so it is, Subhuti. In truth there is no dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: This is the third statement, in which the Buddha expresses His approval. It contains both affirmation and explanation. Because within the principle of true suchness there is nothing attained and no prediction is conferred, both are absent.

Therefore, Vimalakirti said: “If a prediction is received on the basis of arising, suchness has no arising; if a prediction is received on the basis of cessation, suchness has no cessation,” and so forth. Since no prediction is conferred within the principle of true suchness, it is only said that within ultimate truth there is no real dharma by which one can arouse the mind. It does not say that there is also no true wisdom capable of realizing that enlightenment is enlightenment.

Therefore, conventionally, enlightenment is not nonexistent. Asanga says that, at the time true suchness is realized, there is no dharma that can be attained. To say that there is no dharma by which one can arouse the mind does not mean that, on the conventional level, there are no words by which one can hear and understand.

“Subhuti, if there were a dharma by which the Tathagata attained anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, Dipankara Buddha would not have conferred a prediction upon Me, saying: ‘In a future age, you will certainly become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.’”

Subhuti, if there were a dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment, then Dipankara Buddha would not have conferred a prediction upon Me, saying: “In a future age, you will certainly become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.”

Explanation: Vasubandhu explains that this section has two parts: refutation and clarification, and confirmation in accordance with the truth. If it were said that, in the time of Dipankara Buddha, there was a Dharma by which bodhi was attained, then there would be something attained; if there were something attained, one would be attached to existence. Because of attachment to existence, one could not awaken to suchness; without awakening to suchness, one would be an ordinary person—how, then, could a prediction of buddhahood have been bestowed upon me?

Only when the mind awakens to suchness is there no attainment whatsoever with regard to the self and dharmas of the Two Vehicles. Because there is no attainment, one awakens to the true; because one accords with and awakens to the true, both attachments are completely eliminated. Only after these attachments have been utterly eliminated can one attain buddhahood.

Therefore, Dipankara Buddha bestowed a prediction upon me because he knew that I had awakened to the true, in which there is nothing attained. Asanga says: this is the second point, in which Dipankara Buddha spoke without designating bodhi and without attachment to words. His meaning is that Shakyamuni Tathagata could not have attained bodhi by clinging to Dipankara Buddha’s words as verbal expressions, for the wisdom that realizes the true has nothing attained.

If Dipankara Buddha could expound bodhi and Shakyamuni Buddha grasped it according to those words, his mind would still contain discrimination and would not yet have awakened to the true; how, then, could Dipankara Buddha have bestowed a prediction upon me? It was because I did not follow the words and cling to an attainment that I received the prediction.

“Dĩ thật vô hữu pháp đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề, thị cố Nhiên Đăng Phật dữ ngã thọ ký tác thị ngôn: nhữư lai thế đương đắc tác Phật hiệu Thích Ca Mâu Ni”.

Because in truth there was no Dharma by which unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment could be attained, Dipankara Buddha bestowed a prediction upon me, saying: “In a future life, you shall become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.”

Explanation: This is the meaning of confirmation in accordance with the truth.

“Hà dĩ cố? Như Lai giả tức chư pháp như nghĩa”.

Why is this so? Because “Tathagata” means the suchness of all dharmas.

Explanation: Vasubandhu explains that this dispels the doubt that there is no Buddha. This section has two parts: establishing the Dharma-body and precluding false statements. Some might doubt: if there is no bodhisattva, then there is no one who attains buddhahood, and consequently no Buddha.

To dispel this doubt, the existence of the Buddha is affirmed. Because sentient beings cling deludedly, they take the five skandhas to be the body. The wise clearly understand that they swiftly decay and perish and have no true existence.

Only the eternal truth remains, and because it is suchness, it is ever constant and unchanging. Being true, it is free from delusion and inversion. This truth cannot be harmed by water or fire, nor can it be destroyed by wind or brigands.

Whether or not a Buddha appears, its intrinsic nature remains eternally so; whether it is expounded or not, its meaning does not change. Ordinary people alone, through deluded and inverted attachment, cling to the body as a body and fail to contemplate that it is frail and cannot endure. The noble ones know correctly and therefore do not cling to the body; they contemplate only the truth and can awaken to it directly.

Samsara vanishes, all deluded attachments are completely extinguished, and the truth is revealed; hence the designation “Tathagata.” This demonstrates that it is not the case that there is no Buddha.

Asanga says: this section explains the meaning of being free from verbal expression. One may ask: why is this Dharma said to involve discrimination? Because all dharmas are originally such; only through pure wisdom can one awaken to the true, not through words alone.

“Nhược hữu nhơn ngôn: Như Lai đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề thị nhơn bất thật ngữ”.

If someone says, “The Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment,” that person speaks untruthfully.

Explanation: This is the obstruction caused by false words. First, the false words of the speaker are precluded; afterward, non-attainment is established.

Since the Tathagata is suchness, how could there be verbal expression that could be called true? Therefore, if it is spoken, it is an untrue statement arising only from discrimination. Asanga says that this is the fourth point, refuting an external doubt. One might doubt that Shakyamuni Buddha did not attain bodhi in the presence of Dipankara Buddha but attained it only at a later time, for the purpose of eliminating attachment. This section also has two parts: first, the external attachment is presented; next, non-attainment is clarified. Since there is no Dharma to attain, how could one later still grasp at it? Therefore, to make such a statement is untrue. Here the sutra records the phrase “the afflictions are untrue speech,” as is also clearly stated in other texts.

“Tu Bồ Đề thật vô hữu pháp Phật đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề”.

Subhuti, in truth there is no Dharma by which the Buddha attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Explanation: This emphasizes that there is no Dharma through which bodhi is realized and attained.

“Tu Bồ Đề Như Lai sở đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề, ư thị trung vô thật vô hư.”

Subhuti, in the unsurpassed bodhi attained by the Tathagata, there is neither truth nor falsehood.

Explanation: According to Vasubandhu, this has two parts: refuting an external doubt and presenting the clearest analogy, that of the body. The refutation of the external doubt has three meanings: what is attained is neither true nor false; next, it is revealed that this Dharma is attained only by a Buddha; and finally, the matter is summarized. Asanga says that this is the fifth point: the nondual meaning of suchness.

It has three parts: suchness in reliance upon words and apart from words; next, the clarification that the Dharma-nature is a Dharma attained only by a Buddha; and finally, the general conclusion. Vasubandhu explains that some people make the disparaging claim that the Tathagata did not attain bodhi. To eliminate this doubt, it is said that the Tathagata did attain bodhi, yet it is neither true nor false.

Because it is said that the Tathagata attained bodhi, it should be regarded as not false, that is, true. Because conditioned characteristics are not true, it is said to be not true. Asanga explains that because one cannot grasp it according to the words, it is not true; yet because one should not seek it apart from the words, it is not false.

The speech of ordinary people is deluded and therefore not true; the Buddhas speak correctly, and their words should be followed, so they are not false. Ordinary people say that it is not attained, and thus their words are not true; the Buddha’s words are accurate, and thus they are not false. If one seeks apart from words, there would be no cause of bodhi, and this is called “not true.” Most importantly, it is through hearing the teaching that one awakens; this is the cause of bodhi and is therefore not false.

If one clings according to verbal expressions, one remains entangled in samsara and cannot escape. Therefore, one cannot simply take the words literally and call that accordance with the Dharma; words accord with the true only when they conform to the Dharma. One first reverently follows the Buddha’s words and practices, and afterward comprehends them at the time of personal awakening.

Therefore, the Buddha said, “All dharmas are the Buddha-Dharma.”

Explanation: This states that the Dharma is realized only by a Buddha. “All dharmas” means the truth—the fundamental essence of the myriad dharmas—and it is therefore called “all.” “They are all the Buddha-Dharma” means that it is uniquely realized only by a Buddha; no one else realizes it.

“Tu Bồ Đề sở ngôn nhứt thiết pháp giả tức phi nhứt thiết pháp, thị cố danh nhứt thiết pháp”.

Subhuti, what is called “all dharmas” is in fact not all dharmas; therefore, it is called “all dharmas.”

Explanation: This is the concluding section. “All dharmas” means that the Dharma realized by a Buddha is not all dharmas; it is not a Dharma attained by others, but a Dharma free from discriminative characteristics.

“Tu Bồ Đề thí như nhơn thân trường đại. Tu Bồ Đề ngôn: Thế Tôn, Như Lai thuyết nhơn thân trường đại tắc vi phi đại thân, thị danh đại thân.”

Subhuti, it is like a person whose body is large and tall. Subhuti said: “Blessed One, the Tathagata has said that a person’s body is large and tall, yet it is not a great body; therefore, it is called a great body.”

Explanation: Vasubandhu explains that the analogy clarifies the bodies. The elder symbolizes the reward body, which other sutras call the subtle and wondrous body. Greatness symbolizes the Dharma body.

These two kinds of bodies are attained by abandoning the two obstructions: the afflictive obstructions and the cognitive obstructions. The expression “a person with a great body” refers to the two bodies, the Dharma body and the reward body. The statement that it is not a great body means that it is not a body arising from delusive conceptual discrimination.

Asanga explains that from here through Chapter 17 is the section on realization of the path. Moreover, among the eight abodes, this is the fifth, the abode of the pure mind. Looking back over the preceding sixteen chapters, they contain four distinct abodes: faith, the stage of practice, the stage preceding the bhumis, and the cultivation of ordinary beings during one asamkhyeya kalpa.

This is the stage of the pure mind cultivated by bodhisattvas of the ten bhumis. First, it shows that when wisdom is attained upon realization of the path, bodhisattvas likewise abandon pride. To enter a bhumi means that a bodhisattva attains two kinds of wisdom: 1. the wisdom that preserves the lineage; 2. the wisdom of equality.

Upon attaining this wisdom, one is born into the family of the Tathagata and is assured of continuing the lineage of the Buddhas. This is the wisdom that preserves the lineage. The pure Dharma realm is the dwelling place of the Buddhas and is called the family of the Tathagata.

Because a bodhisattva entering a bhumi realizes it through nonconceptual wisdom, this is called birth. In this way, the bodhisattva is certain to continue the lineage of the Buddhas and is therefore said to possess the wisdom that preserves the lineage. It should be understood that bodhisattvas at the stages preceding the bhumis have not yet been born into the family of the Tathagata.

Thus, although they are children of the Buddha, they remain distant and inattentive and are not said to continue the lineage of the Buddhas. Although practitioners of the Two Vehicles are also children of the Buddha, they seek only their own benefit and are likewise incapable of continuing the lineage. The Compendium of the Mahayana states that a shravaka is like an inferior child lacking wisdom.

Although all ordinary beings are also accepted by the Buddha, protected by him, and constantly regarded with compassion, because they have not yet aroused the mind of bodhi, they too are incapable of continuing the lineage. Only bodhisattvas who enter the Buddha bhumi are personally born beyond birth and death within the true Dharma realm and are therefore capable of continuing the lineage of the Buddhas. The Treatise states: It is as though one wished during the night to be born into the household of a householder; upon being born there, one immediately possesses a body, and this is called the wondrous body.

Likewise, during the long night, bodhisattvas at the stages preceding the bhumis diligently aspire to enter this family; upon entering the first bhumi, they immediately attain the wondrous body. The wisdom of equality, moreover, has five kinds as its causal conditions: 1. equality regarding what is coarse and evil: upon entering the first bhumi, one has abandoned the female body, the eighth abode, and all three evil destinies; these are therefore collectively termed equality; 2. the equality of the selflessness of dharmas, as when one realizes the equality of the principle of the twofold emptiness;

3. the equality corresponding to cessation: because the nature of cessation is the attainment of the unconditioned Dharma of cessation through discernment, corresponding to cessation, it is called the equality corresponding to cessation; 4. the equality corresponding to a mind free of expectation: before the path of seeing, one trains in contemplating suchness, aspiring and hoping to enter the first bhumi; after realizing the true Dharma realm, one accords with the mind free of expectation that realizes equality; 5. the equality of all bodhisattvas in realizing the path, like a hundred rivers flowing by different courses yet all entering the great ocean.

Although the myriad practices differ, once bodhisattvas enter the first bhumi, they all realize the ocean of the true Dharma of suchness and attain equality; this is therefore called the great body. To explain: attainment of the wisdom that preserves the lineage is the reward body; attainment of equality is the Dharma body, the wondrous body, or the great body, as illustrated by the analogies cited above.

“Subhuti, a bodhisattva is likewise thus. If he should say, ‘I shall bring immeasurable sentient beings to cessation,’ he is not called a bodhisattva.”

Subhuti, a bodhisattva is likewise thus. If he thinks, “I must bring immeasurable sentient beings to cessation,” he is not called a bodhisattva.

Explanation: Vasubandhu says that the explanation of this doubt has three parts: 1. doubt arising concerning the fundamental principle itself. As stated above, there is no dharma that arouses the mind of bodhi; thus, there is neither a bodhisattva nor the attainment of bodhi. If there are no sentient beings to teach and transform, whom can one cause to enter nirvana?

If there is no bodhisattva, who adorns and purifies the Buddha land? 2. On this basis, the doubt is refuted by explaining that a bodhisattva does not perceive those others as sentient beings and does not perceive himself as a bodhisattva. Does the Tathagata not perceive them and therefore speak of there being no sentient beings, or is it because sentient beings truly do not exist that the Buddha does not perceive them? 3.

Some may doubt that directing the mind to abide is inverted; if so, merit must also be inverted. If it is inverted, how can it be called a wholesome dharma? As the Sutra states, if one gives in charity the seven treasures sufficient to fill a three-thousandfold great-thousand world, three doubts arise concerning this: 1. if there is no bodhisattva, then the Buddhas also cannot attain bodhi; 2. if there are no sentient beings, then there is also no one who enters nirvana; 3. if there is no bodhisattva, then there is also no adornment and purification of Buddha lands.

This passage explains the first two doubts. It means that if a bodhisattva clings to the thought, “I attain bodhi, and there are sentient beings distinct from me whom I shall deliver,” he is not called a bodhisattva, because he entertains notions of a self, a person, and so forth. If so, how can bodhi be attained, or how can sentient beings be caused to enter nirvana?

Sentient beings provisionally exist, like illusory persons. The Dharma is taught for illusory persons: sentient beings provisionally exist through the conjunction of the five skandhas, and they are enabled to attain nirvana without remainder. Since one does not cling to sentient beings as truly existent, one does not perceive any sentient beings who are brought to cessation.

Because bodhisattvas provisionally exist and seek realization, the Buddhas attain bodhi, yet they do not cling to bodhi as truly existent; nor is there any truly existent bodhisattva. Volume 13 of the Nirvana Sutra states: Because the five skandhas unite, one speaks of persons A and B. Ordinary people believe that persons A and B truly exist.

The wise know that within the skandhas there are no persons A and B, and that apart from the skandhas, even the names “A” and “B” do not exist.

“Why is this? Subhuti, there is truly no dharma called a bodhisattva. Therefore, the Buddha teaches that all dharmas are without self, without person, without sentient being, and without one who lives.”

Why is this? Subhuti, there is truly no dharma called a bodhisattva. Therefore, the Buddha teaches that all dharmas are without self, without person, without sentient being, and without one who lives.

Explanation: There is no dharma called a bodhisattva. If there were a truly existent dharma constituted by sentient beings, it could be called a bodhisattva. Since dharmas have no true existence, they likewise do not constitute a bodhisattva.

The Buddha teaches that all dharmas are without self, person, and so forth. When one realizes the truth and attains the principle of selflessness, one no longer perceives the two attachments to persons and dharmas; one is therefore a bodhisattva. Asanga says that the foregoing analogies comparing a person’s body to the wondrous body and the great body demonstrate realization of the path; this is the abandonment of pride.

At the stages preceding the bhumis, one thinks, “I am able to cultivate,” and so forth, and is obstructed from abiding in the path. From entry into the bhumis onward, one realizes the equality of the true Dharma realm and the twofold emptiness. All discriminations concerning self, dharmas, and so forth are utterly forgotten.

Because there is complete selflessness, this is called the abandonment of pride. The Treatise states: If a bodhisattva entertains a conception of sentient beings, he does not attain the wondrous body or the great body. Regarding the wondrous body, it is the body that is attained, the body accomplished through the complete transformation of the basis.

The great body is the body that encompasses the bodies of all sentient beings. What I call the transformation of the basis is the bodhi and nirvana that are attained.

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva should say, ‘I shall adorn the Buddha land,’ he is not called a bodhisattva.”

Subhuti, if a bodhisattva thinks, “I must adorn the Buddha land,” he is not called a bodhisattva.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: This passage eliminates a doubt. Some might doubt that, if there are no bodhisattvas, there can likewise be no adornment of a Buddha’s Pure Land. The meaning here is that, if one wishes to adorn and purify a Buddha-land, one must purify one’s own mind.

By hearing the sutras, cultivating wisdom, realizing the truth, and eliminating the two obstructions, the mind within becomes pure, and therefore the external environment also becomes pure. Just as a woodworm, upon seeing a clean relic, perceives it as filthy, this is solely because inner purity and impurity differ; thus the external realm also appears pure or defiled accordingly. If one wishes to adorn and purify a Buddha-land, one must first eliminate the two attachments to self and dharmas.

When discriminations concerning self and dharmas are utterly forgotten, inwardly one is endowed with adornments, while outwardly the place where one dwells possesses the seven treasures. If one says, “I must adorn it,” attachment to self has not yet been completely eliminated, and one is not called a bodhisattva. The treatise explains that wisdom comprehends the common principle of consciousness-only.

Furthermore, Vimalakirti said that because the mind is pure, the land is pure. He also said that patience, observance of the precepts, and so forth, including the ten wholesome deeds, are the pure land of a bodhisattva.

“Why is this so? The Tathagata’s teaching of adorning a Buddha-land is precisely not adornment; therefore it is called adornment.”

Why is this so? What the Tathagata calls adorning a Buddha-land is not adornment; therefore it is called adornment.

Commentary: There are two aspects to adorning a Buddha-land: absence of characteristics is true adornment, and realization of the principle makes one a true bodhisattva. When the Tathagata speaks of adornment, he means adornment without characteristics. Precisely because it is not adornment, it is true adornment.

“Subhuti, if a bodhisattva thoroughly comprehends the Dharma of non-self, the Tathagata says that this one is truly a bodhisattva.”

Subhuti, if a bodhisattva clearly understands the Dharma of non-self, the Tathagata calls that person a true bodhisattva.

Commentary: If a bodhisattva realizes that self and dharmas are EMPTY, thereby realizing the principle of non-self, that person is a true bodhisattva and this is also true adornment. If self and dharmas are apprehended as existing, that person is neither a bodhisattva nor is this adornment. Asanga says that from this point onward, everything concerns seeking the Buddha-stage.

“From this point onward” means through the end of the sutra. Among the eighteen abiding places distinguished in the analysis, the sixth is the ultimate abiding place; among the three stages, it is the third, the Buddha-stage, which has six aspects: 1/ The completely pure land, as the sutra says: “If a bodhisattva thinks, ‘I must adorn...’” 2/ Complete unsurpassed wisdom, as the sutra records: “Does the Tathagata possess the fleshly eye?” and so forth. 3/ Perfection of the bodily marks, as the sutra says: “Can the Buddha be seen by means of the physical body?” 4/ The marks of adornment, as the sutra says: “Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the various marks?” 5/ Perfect speech, as the sutra says: “Do not think that the Tathagata entertains this thought.” 6/ The fully endowed mind,

as the sutra records: “Suppose there are sentient beings in a future age...” The meaning is that because the bodhisattvas have perfected their practices throughout the preceding ten bhumis, eliminated the two attachments to persons and dharmas, and accomplished the Dharma-body of bodhi, this is called the fully purified land.

This is divided into four sections: 1/ Because the land is pure, samadhi (meditative concentration) is complete, as the sutra says: “If a bodhisattva thinks...” 2/ Because the obstructions have been eliminated, the ultimate truth is established, as the sutra records: “The Tathagata says that adornment...” 3/ Because of the two kinds of non-self, the sutra records: “If a bodhisattva thoroughly comprehends the Dharma of non-self.” 4/ Because, with respect to the two kinds of non-self, there are two kinds of perfect enlightenment, as the sutra states: “The Tathagata says that this one is truly a bodhisattva.” Why are these points revealed?

If one says, “I have accomplished it,” this is attachment to a personal self; to adorn the land is attachment to a self in dharmas. Such a person is not a bodhisattva.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the fleshly eye?” “Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the fleshly eye.”

Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the fleshly eye? Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the fleshly eye.

Commentary: Some might doubt: It was said above that a bodhisattva does not perceive sentient beings or a self, and that a bodhisattva does not perceive a pure Buddha-land. Why is this? Because all dharmas are EMPTY, they are not perceived; do the Buddhas themselves therefore not perceive them?

This passage is now divided into two parts: because the Buddha is capable of seeing, the five kinds of eyes are taught; and the analogy of the Ganges River and so forth demonstrates what is seen. The passage on the five kinds of eyes is divided into five parts, each consisting of a question by the Buddha and a reply by Subhuti. This section clearly concerns the fleshly eye, the physical eye of ordinary beings.

Asanga says that from this point onward comes the second topic: the purity of complete, unsurpassed knowing and seeing. It contains three points: first, because unsurpassed knowing and seeing are completely purified, it is said that the Buddha possesses the Dharma of the five kinds of eyes; next, the analogy of the Ganges River concerns the complete purity of unsurpassed wisdom, by which the Buddha knows the minds of sentient beings; and finally, the passage beginning, “If someone were to fill... with treasures,” concerns the complete freedom of merit.

The five kinds of eyes are divided into five passages, as stated above. An additional doubt arises concerning the preceding statement: through non-discriminating wisdom, one inwardly realizes the truth, and this is true adornment; yet when the truth is realized, all external characteristics are unseen. Thus, only the Buddha possesses the wisdom eye that contemplates the principle, while the other eyes do not see.

To explain this doubt, it is said that the Buddha possesses the five kinds of eyes. This is the meaning of the treatise. The treatise also says that, if one category is omitted, four kinds of eyes remain.

This is because form encompasses the ultimate truth and also conventional truth; it encompasses all varieties and everything that should be known. Form further encompasses two kinds, namely, the fruit of dharmas and the fruit of cultivation. These are the five kinds of eyes with respect to coarse objects, beginning with form.

The explanation is that the fleshly eye and divine eye possess as their nature the physical faculties, such as pure form produced by the four great elements. Because it may be matured as a result of karmic fruition, it is called the fleshly eye; this is called the fruit of dharmas. It is common to the other realms and the four dhyanas.

If it is attained by cultivating meditation and eliminating defilements, it is called the fruit of cultivation, which exists only in the realm of the fourth dhyana. Thus, all internal and external forms, on either side, in between, above, and below, can be seen completely. The treatise says: Because the ultimate truth is endowed with the power of wisdom, worldly wisdom cannot disturb it.

Therefore, the ultimate truth is included first. Inwardly, this concerns the one who teaches the Dharma. If the Dharma is expounded by a person, that person’s wisdom is called the Dharma eye.

Just as the wisdom eye is essential for contemplating the principle, so the Dharma eye knows beings’ capacities and teaches the Dharma without error; this is the teacher. The meaning is that the expressed and the expresser, the contemplation of principle and the contemplation of phenomena—by contemplating the principle, one knows beings’ capacities, as with the wisdom eye. The treatise says: With respect to everything that should be known, the effortless wisdom that knows all varieties is called the Buddha eye.

Bodhisattva Nagarjuna says that these distinctions are designated according to persons: among ordinary beings, they are called the fleshly eye and the divine eye; among those of the Two Vehicles, the wisdom eye; among bodhisattvas, the Dharma eye; and in relation to a Buddha, the Buddha eye. These eyes are likewise all unobstructed.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the divine eye?” “Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the divine eye.” “Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the wisdom eye?” “Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the wisdom eye.” “Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Dharma eye?” “Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the Dharma eye.” “Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Buddha eye?” “Yes, World-Honored One. The Tathagata possesses the Buddha eye.”

Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the divine eye? Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the divine eye. Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Dharma eye? Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the Dharma eye. Subhuti, what do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Buddha eye? Yes, World-Honored One, the Tathagata possesses the Buddha eye.

Commentary: The explanation of the preceding four kinds of eyes is clear from the discussion above.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Regarding all the grains of sand in the Ganges River, does the Buddha speak of them as sand?”

Subhuti, what do you think? The Ganges River contains a great many grains of sand; does the Buddha speak of the number of those grains of sand?

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: Above, it was stated that the Tathagata clearly possesses five kinds of eyes with which he is able to see. From this point onward, it is demonstrated that the Buddha knows the distinctions among every class of sentient beings. It also reveals that, although what is seen is devoid of any truly existent sentient being imputed through pervasive conceptual attachment who can be delivered or seen, this does not mean that conventionally designated sentient beings arising through causes and conditions cannot be seen.

Although there is no activity of grasping at an object, the capacity to apprehend can still be attained. Just as, with regard to cause and effect, the truly grasped self and dharmas cannot be found, sentient beings and lands are therefore said to be EMPTY. It is not that the Buddha has no eyes and therefore cannot see, nor is it that there are truly no sentient beings who can be seen.

Because there are falsely designated dharmas arising from inverted and deluded causes and conditions, this section is divided into five points: a/ The Buddha asks about the sands of the Ganges; b/ Subhuti replies that there are sands; c/ Using the sands of the Ganges as an analogy, the Buddha asks a question; d/ Subhuti replies that they are exceedingly numerous; e/ The Buddha explains extensively.

Asanga says that, from the foregoing, one should understand that because there is cultivation and realization within, establishment in seeing is present; and because innumerable sentient beings are taught and transformed with a pure mind, establishment in wisdom is present. Because the fleshly eye and the divine eye serve as forerunners, wisdom is generated; the Dharma eye contemplates principle, knows beings’ capacities, and teaches the Dharma according to the person.

The purity of seeing discussed above was revealed as proof. Now the purity of wisdom is revealed for the sake of teaching and transforming beings. Since some sentient beings have minds of greed and others have minds free from greed, the Buddha necessarily observes and knows them, then teaches and transforms them so that they abandon defilement and cultivate goodness.

As for the sands, does the Buddha speak of sands? Among the sands produced through causes and conditions, does the Buddha say that they are truly existent sands grasped as real? This is the meaning of the question.

“Thus it is, World-Honored One. The Tathagata speaks of them as sands.”

Thus it is, Blessed One. The Tathagata speaks of them as sands.

Commentary: This is the answer to the second question.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Suppose there were as many Ganges rivers as there are grains of sand in one Ganges, and as many grains of sand as there are in all those Ganges rivers. Would the Buddha-worlds equal in number to all those grains of sand be numerous?”

Subhuti, what do you think? Suppose there were the sands of one Ganges River and the sands of many Ganges rivers. Would the Buddha-worlds equal in number to the sands of those many Ganges rivers be numerous?

Commentary: This is the third question, using sands as an analogy for a great number. Yet only a small number is being mentioned here. Sentient beings are without limit or boundary; it is not that only this many are considered as numerous as the sands.

“Exceedingly numerous, World-Honored One.”

They are indeed exceedingly numerous, Blessed One.

Commentary: This is the fourth answer.

“The Buddha told Subhuti: Among all those lands, however many kinds of thoughts all the sentient beings possess, the Tathagata knows them all.”

The Buddha said: Subhuti, among all those lands, however many thoughts the sentient beings possess, the Tathagata certainly knows them all.

Commentary: This is the fifth point, in which the Buddha explains extensively. “However many kinds of thoughts” means the distinctions among the six consciousnesses. Because inverted thoughts and deluded thoughts are all inverted, and because they depart from true mindfulness, they are said to be inverted.

To depart from true mindfulness is to depart from the four foundations of mindfulness and thus not abide in true wisdom. The Buddha certainly knows all such thoughts. Asanga says that these many kinds of thoughts should be understood as comprising two kinds: defiled and pure, including the mind free from desire and the desirous mind.

The Tathagata knows all such minds of sentient beings and therefore instructs and exhorts them, causing them to cease evil and cultivate goodness; this is called purity of wisdom. The treatise explains that, because innumerable sentient beings are taught and transformed with a pure mind, wisdom is established.

“Why is this? The Tathagata says that all these thoughts are not thoughts; therefore they are called thoughts.”

Why is this? The Tathagata says that all these thoughts are not thoughts; therefore they are called thoughts.

Commentary: This explanation has two parts: inverted thoughts do not abide in truth, thereby revealing their deluded character. When the Tathagata speaks of abiding in various thoughts, this means that deluded thoughts are all not thoughts, for they do not abide in the true mind. To abide in the four foundations of mindfulness is right abiding, namely, abiding in the principle of suchness, which is called true abiding.

“Therefore they are called thoughts” refers to inverted and deluded thoughts. On the basis of this purity of wisdom, Asanga says that abiding in thought is precisely non-abiding in thought. If so, why, in the case of purity of seeing, is it not said that the eye is not the eye?

Because there is a single abiding place, the purity of seeing and wisdom is established; thereafter, the prior establishment of the ultimate truth is also accomplished. I say that the initially deluded mind of an ordinary being can later become true; therefore, with respect to pure wisdom, it is said that abiding in thought is not abiding in thought. Once the Buddha eye has been attained, it is perfect and complete, so there is no distinction between before and after; hence it is not said that the eye is not the eye.

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

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

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: This reveals the continuous succession of inverted thoughts. Since the past and future minds cannot be apprehended, and the present mind is a deluded discrimination and therefore cannot be apprehended, this demonstrates that the mind abides in inversion and that its cognition arises from delusion. This is Vasubandhu’s meaning. Asanga holds that the past has already gone, the future has not yet arrived, and the present is the ultimate truth.

“Subhuti, what do you think? If a person were to fill the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system with the seven precious treasures and use them for giving, would that person, by reason of these causes and conditions, obtain much merit?”

Subhuti, what do you think? If a person were to fill the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system with the seven precious treasures and give them in charity, would that person, by reason of these causes and conditions, obtain much merit?

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains: This is the second doubt in the third section of the text. One might again entertain this doubt: “Previously it was said that the mind abides in inversion. If so, merit must also be inverted.

If it is inverted, how can it be called a wholesome dharma?” This passage resolves that doubt. Although the present mind abides and acts amid inversion, its merit is not regarded as substantial merit. Because of the Buddha’s fundamental wisdom, when one practices giving, one does not cling to oneself but seeks only unsurpassed bodhi; therefore, the merit is exceedingly great.

In this section, the Buddha first asks a question, Subhuti next replies, and finally the Buddha confirms his answer. The statement about giving the seven precious treasures means that, because one wishes to study and cultivate prajnaparamita and attain Buddhahood, that person’s merit is truly great. Asanga says that this is the unsurpassed vision within the third purity of wisdom, namely, the complete mastery of merit.

For if one practices the prajnaparamita of giving, one’s merit becomes perfect and complete.

“Thus it is, World-Honored One. By reason of these causes and conditions, this person obtains exceedingly much merit.”

Thus it is, Blessed One. By reason of these causes and conditions, this person obtains exceedingly much merit.

Commentary: This is the reply to the Buddha concerning merit.

“Subhuti, if merit had real existence, the Tathagata would not say that much merit was obtained. Because merit is EMPTY, the Tathagata says that much merit is obtained.”

Subhuti, if merit had real existence, the Tathagata would not say that much merit was obtained. Because merit is EMPTY, the Buddha says that much merit is obtained.

Commentary: This is the third point concerning the Tathagata’s attainment. If merit truly existed—as stated, if it were prajna, one should practice giving—then the very essence of the practice of giving would truly exist. The Buddha could not then say that the merit was great.

Because the essential nature of the three factors is emptiness, such giving differs from giving performed with attachment to its karmic reward; therefore, the Tathagata says that its merit is great, taking this as the standard. Above, the giving of wealth, one’s body, and one’s life was compared with the acceptance and preservation of the Prajnaparamita Sutra, and was found unequal to it; if one does not relinquish attachment to characteristics, one cannot seek bodhi.

Even when one relinquishes one’s body and life, this merely aids a small number of hungry and thirsty beings and does not bring vast benefit. If one who accepts and preserves prajnaparamita attains Buddhahood, that person will certainly save many beings; therefore, the merit is greater. If one twists the meaning of the words and claims that relinquishing the body entails extreme suffering, or clings rigidly to the literal wording, then it does not equal accepting and preserving the Sutra.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Buddha be seen by means of the fully perfected form-body?”

Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Buddha be seen by means of the fully perfected form-body?

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, the preceding passage eliminated the root of doubt. From this point onward, four doubts are successively explained. This is the third major section, which eliminates doubt, showing in succession that the first major section contained three doubts: 1/ the doubt that the Buddha is the body endowed with excellent characteristics; 2/ the doubt, arising from the words “Do not say…,” that the Buddha teaches the Dharma; and 3/ the doubt, arising from the words “Furthermore, are there beings…,” that no one will believe.

One may doubt: If the name is attained on the basis of the unconditioned Dharma, why are the Buddhas called Buddhas because they have perfected the thirty-two excellent characteristics and eighty secondary marks? The explanation is that the statement above—that the Tathagata is the suchness of all dharmas—gives rise to this doubt. This question has two parts: a/ eliminating doubt concerning the form-body; b/ eliminating doubt concerning the excellent characteristics.

Part (a) again has two parts: first the Buddha asks, and then Venerable Subhuti replies. The intent of the question is: Can the Dharma-body, the true Buddha, be seen by means of the excellent characteristics of the reward-body? Furthermore, can one see the Buddha’s Dharma-body by means of the halo extending one fathom and the beautiful form-body?

Asanga says that this is the third point: the perfection of the body’s excellent characteristics. The intent of the question is this: In accordance with beings’ capacities, the Buddha possesses the form-body and excellent characteristics of the reward-body or transformation-body, while the true principle also possesses an excellent nature that is no different. The question now is whether the Dharma-body has distinct excellent characteristics by which it may be seen.

In order to enable beings inwardly to realize the perfect Dharma-body, outwardly the Buddha must be fully endowed with a body of excellent characteristics.

“No, Blessed One. The Tathagata should not be seen by means of the fully perfected form-body.”

No, Blessed One. The Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the fully perfected form-body.

Commentary: The Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the form-body.

“Why is this? The fully perfected form-body taught by the Tathagata is not the fully perfected form-body; therefore, it is called the fully perfected form-body.”

Why is this? The fully perfected form-body spoken of by the Tathagata is not the fully perfected form-body; therefore, it is called the fully perfected form-body.

Commentary: When the Buddha speaks of the fully perfected form-body, he means the body endowed with the excellent characteristics of the reward-body and transformation-body. “It is not the fully perfected form-body” means that it is not the fully perfected form-body of Dharma-nature. “Therefore, it is called the fully perfected form-body” means precisely the reward-body and transformation-body.

Asanga says that, in accordance with beings’ capacities, the Buddha manifests forms possessing the excellent characteristics of the reward-body and transformation-body; inwardly, through awakening to signlessness, he possesses the nature of the excellent characteristics of the Dharma-body. Because the form-body of Dharma-nature is inwardly realized, the excellent characteristics of the outward body are all perfectly fulfilled.

Yet these excellent bodily characteristics are not the fully perfected form-body of Dharma-nature. The Dharma-body is said to resemble empty space: although it has no form or appearance, images appear within a mirror. The Dharma-body is likewise: although it has no form or appearance, the reward-body and transformation-body appear in the mirror of wisdom.

“Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the complete perfection of all characteristics?”

Subhuti, what do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the complete perfection of all characteristics?

Commentary: This elucidates and eliminates the doubt concerning the excellent characteristics. The intent of the question is: Can the Buddha’s signless Dharma-body be seen by means of the thirty-two excellent characteristics? Asanga says that this is the fourth point, concerning the complete perfection of bodily characteristics. The intent is that the Buddha has three bodies: the Dharma-body, reward-body, and transformation-body. The reward-body and transformation-body possess the thirty-two distinct excellent characteristics, whereas the Dharma-body has no differentiated characteristics of Dharma-nature. The question now is whether the Dharma-body can be seen by means of differentiated excellent characteristics.

“No, Blessed One. The Tathagata should not be seen by means of the complete perfection of all characteristics.”

No, Blessed One. The Buddha cannot be seen by means of the complete perfection of all characteristics.

Commentary: This passage is connected with the preceding passage concerning the excellent characteristics.

“Why is this? The complete perfection of all characteristics taught by the Tathagata is not complete perfection; therefore, it is called the complete perfection of all characteristics.”

Why is this? The complete perfection of all characteristics spoken of by the Tathagata is not complete perfection; therefore, it is called the complete perfection of all characteristics.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that “the Buddha is not the complete perfection of all characteristics” refers to the thirty-two distinct characteristics. “It is not complete perfection” means that it is not the undifferentiated, fully perfected characteristics of the Dharma-body. “Therefore, it is called the complete perfection of all characteristics” refers to outward physical characteristics.

Asanga says that, although the Dharma-body has no physical appearance, it possesses the characteristic of Dharma-nature, beautiful in accordance with reality, which is called a characteristic; outwardly, the manifested adornment also possesses characteristics of form and appearance. In order to enable beings to attain the portion of perfection, inwardly one awakens to ultimate truth, the characteristic of signlessness, while outwardly one is endowed with the characteristics of form.

Yet the characteristics of form are not the characteristic of signlessness; therefore, this is called the complete perfection of all characteristics.

“Subhuti, do not think that the Tathagata has this thought: ‘I have a Dharma to teach.’”

Subhuti, do not suppose that the Tathagata thinks: “I am teaching the Dharma.”

Commentary: Vasubandhu considers this the third point in the elimination of doubt. Someone may doubt: If the Tathagata cannot be seen through the perfection of the form-body, and cannot be seen through the perfection of characteristics, why does the Tathagata teach the Dharma? To eliminate this doubt, there are two parts: first, the Buddha exhorts one not to entertain the doubt; afterward, one who says this slanders the Buddha; and finally, there is a concluding summary.

The Buddha tells Subhuti: Do not suppose that the Tathagata’s Dharma-body forms the thought, “I ought to teach the Dharma.” The Buddha’s Dharma-body is originally without thought and without teaching. Asanga says that this is the fifth point: the perfection of speech. This means that the reward-body and transformation-body speak teachings according to beings’ capacities, whereas the Dharma-body is quiescent, without teaching and without form.

Inwardly, one awakens to the wordless principle; outwardly, one is able to teach it to others. Because the intent is to convey this meaning, it is called the perfection of speech.

“Do not think in this way. Why? If anyone says that the Tathagata has a Dharma to teach, that person slanders the Buddha, because that person is unable to understand what I teach.”

Do not think in this way. Why is this? If anyone maintains that the Tathagata teaches the Dharma, that person slanders the Buddha and is unable to understand the meaning of what the Tathagata teaches.

Commentary: If the Dharma-body possessed a Dharma to teach, this would be a slander against the Buddha-Dharma. Since it is utterly quiescent and without words, one may ask: If so, why was it previously said that the responsive transformation-body is not the true Buddha and does not teach the Dharma? The answer is that this is a comprehensive contemplation returning to the source. The essential point is that only through inward awakening to the true teaching can one outwardly teach. Therefore, to say that the Dharma-body does not teach is itself the true teaching.

Question: Why does the Lankavatara Sutra record that the Dharma-body teaches the Dharma that transcends characteristics and words, the reward-body teaches the Dharma of the ten bhumis and the six paramitas, and the transformation-body teaches the Dharma of the Three Vehicles? Should it not be that the Dharma-body also teaches the Dharma?

Answer: Teaching is of two kinds: 1/ the initiated teaching, meaning that there is a Dharma to be taught; 2/ the uninitiated teaching, meaning that there is neither Dharma nor teaching. The former refers only to the reward body and transformation body; the latter refers to the Dharma body. The former passage speaks on the basis of teaching through non-teaching, while this passage relies on there being a Dharma to teach; therefore, they do not contradict each other.

Why does the Dharma body teach without teaching? Because sentient beings awaken to the principle and thereby clearly understand everything; this is called the teaching of the Dharma body. Just as hearing the Dharma taught and comprehending it thoroughly is called teaching, so whether someone speaks or does not speak, if it enables another to understand completely, it is called teaching the Dharma.

“Tu Bồ Đề, thuyết pháp giả vô pháp khả thuyết, thị danh thuyết pháp.”

Subhuti, in the teaching of the Dharma, there is no Dharma that can be taught; this is called teaching the Dharma.

Commentary: This discusses the teaching of the Dharma. “Teaching the Dharma” is a general reference to the work of expounding the Dharma. “There is no Dharma that can be taught” means that, with regard to ultimate truth, not even the slightest dharma is taught. Teaching after realizing that what is grasped through imaginary construction is empty and nonexistent—this is called teaching the Dharma. If one clings to suchness as truly nonexistent and therefore untaught, that is not teaching the Dharma. Asanga says that the reward body and transformation body teach the Dharma, while the Dharma body does not teach. If one claims that the Dharma body teaches in the same way as the reward body and transformation body, one thereby slanders the Buddhadharma.

“Nhỉ thời huệ mạng Tu Bồ Đề bạch Phật ngôn: Thế Tôn, phả hữu chúng sanh ư vị lai thế văn thuyết thị pháp, sanh tín tâm phủ?”

At that time, the venerable Subhuti addressed the Buddha: “World-Honored One, will there be sentient beings in future ages who, upon hearing this Dharma taught, will give rise to a mind of faith?”

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, this is the third point of doubt. The doubt is this: If it is said that although the Buddhas teach, there is no place where Dharma is taught, and that inseparability from the Dharma body is also emptiness, will anyone be able to believe in such a profound Dharma realm? To resolve this doubt, the Venerable Subhuti first asks, and the Buddha then answers. Asanga says that the sixth complete mind is further divided into six kinds: 1/ the foundation of mindfulness; 2/ perfect awakening; 3/ bestowing the benefit and happiness of the Dharma; 4/ preserving the Dharma body; 5/ not abiding in samsara or nirvana; 6/ purity in walking and standing.

The meaning of the question is this: While the Tathagata was in the world, he compassionately and impartially taught the Dharma to sentient beings. They could hear and understand it, give rise to mindful and reasonable reflection, practice in accordance with the Dharma, follow the Dharma, and attain Buddhahood. Five hundred years after the Tathagata’s parinirvana, when evil sentient beings hear this sutra, will any of them be able to give rise to faith and mindfulness as people did when the Buddha was in the world?

The Buddha answers: Yes, there will. To reveal that there will be sentient beings capable of reflection, this is called the foundation of mindfulness.

“Phật ngôn, Tu Bồ Đề, bỉ phi chúng sanh, phi bất chúng sanh.”

The Buddha said: “Subhuti, they are not sentient beings, nor are they not sentient beings.”

Commentary: “They are not sentient beings” means that they are not icchantikas (7), sentient beings who lack Buddha-nature. “Nor are they not sentient beings” means that they are sentient beings who, upon hearing the prajnaparamita, give rise to the resolve to attain Buddhahood. Asanga says that “they are not sentient beings” refers to ultimate truth, while “nor are they not sentient beings” refers to conventional truth. The phrase “sentient beings, sentient beings” reveals that ultimate truth is not shared in common or correspondingly applicable.

“Hà dĩ cố Tu Bồ Đề, chúng sanh chúng sanh giả, Như Lai thuyết phi chúng sanh, thị danh chúng sanh.”

Why is this? Subhuti, those who are called “sentient beings, sentient beings,” the Tathagata says are not sentient beings; therefore, they are called sentient beings.

Commentary: In the two occurrences of “sentient beings,” the first refers to ordinary sentient beings, while the second refers to sentient beings who give rise to the bodhicitta and undertake cultivation. “The Tathagata says they are not sentient beings” means that they are not icchantika sentient beings who lack Buddha-nature. “They are called sentient beings” means sentient beings who have given rise to the bodhicitta. The meaning above is that those who give rise to faithful mindfulness toward this sutra are sentient beings who give rise to the resolve, cultivate, and attain Buddhahood; they are not sentient beings devoid of the spiritual nature.

“Tu Bồ Đề, bạch Phật ngôn, Thế Tôn: Phật đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề vị vô sở đắc da?”

Subhuti addressed the Buddha: “World-Honored One, when the Buddha attained unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, was there nothing whatsoever attained?”

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this major section dispels the fourth doubt, successively explaining the second point of doubt. Within it, there are generally two aspects. The thought is: If the Buddha did not attain any dharma called unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, how could he, apart from attainment, attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening?

This passage has two parts: first, the Venerable Subhuti asks; afterward, the Buddha extensively explains its meaning. “Was there nothing whatsoever attained?” is a direct question, not an expression of uncertainty. He asks the Buddha directly whether the Tathagata attained nothing whatsoever.

The Buddha therefore immediately confirms it. If it were an uncertain question, how could there be either attainment or non-attainment, and how could the Buddha confirm it? The question here means: With regard to the principle of suchness, did the Buddha attain unsurpassed bodhi?

Asanga says that this is the second complete mind, namely perfect awakening: the realizing subject and the realized object contemplate and clearly illuminate the true characteristic. The Sutra Explaining the Profound Meaning states: “Bodhi and the complete eradication accomplished by bodhi—this is called bodhi.” The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom says that both wisdom and the locus of wisdom are called prajna.

Because they enable sentient beings to sever the two kinds of obstruction and reach bodhi, this passage appears. Perfect awakening here has five meanings: 1/ the term A Nậu đa la means unsurpassed awakening, namely the bodhi of the Dharma body; 2/ from here onward… it reveals unsurpassed, complete bodhi, meaning perfect awakening, namely the bodhi of the reward body. Through the subsequent realization of the selflessness of persons, the two kinds of unsurpassed awakening described above are accomplished, as the sutra states.

“Phật ngôn như thị, như thị, Tu Bồ Đề, ngã ư A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề, nãi chí vô hữu thiểu pháp khả đắc, thị danh A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề.”

The Buddha said: “So it is, so it is, Subhuti. With regard to unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, the Tathagata did not attain even the slightest dharma; therefore, it is called unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening.”

Commentary: This concerns the true Dharma. It means that, with regard to ultimate truth, there is not even the slightest dharma that can be grasped or attained in accordance with one’s attachments; this is called bodhi.

“Phục thứ Tu Bồ Đề, thị pháp bình đẳng vô hữu cao hạ, thị danh A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam BồĐề”.

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

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this is the third point, which extensively discusses the meaning of bodhi. It has three aspects: 1/ neither increase nor decrease; 2/ demonstrating the absence of differentiation; 3/ cultivating every good quality. Afterward, it clearly sets forth the completeness of skillful means.

“This Dharma is equal” means that the principle of suchness neither increases nor decreases. “Having neither high nor low” means that conditioned dharmas still involve grasping and relinquishing, taking and rejecting. Bodhisattvas on the ten bhumis attain superior undefiled qualities but relinquish inferior states.

In the unconditioned Dharma, there is neither superiority nor inferiority to be taken or rejected; therefore, it is said to have neither high nor low. Asanga says that this reveals unsurpassed, complete, perfect awakening, meaning perfect and universal knowledge. “This Dharma is equal” means that all Buddhas equally attain bodhi; therefore, their wisdom has neither superiority nor inferiority.

“Having neither high nor low” means that the various transformation bodies manifested by the Buddhas are comparable with one another, and even their lifespans are likewise the same. When I speak of equality, this refers to the Dharma body; high and low are distinguished with reference to the reward body and transformation body. This applies to all reward bodies of the Buddhas, and likewise when the reward body is compared with the transformation body.

“Because there is no self, no person, no sentient being, and no life-span.”

Because there is no self, no person, no sentient being, and no life-span.

Commentary: According to Vasubandhu, this reveals the absence of differentiation. Since all Buddhas are free from attachment to self and attachment to dharmas, the Dharma-body is equal and without such distinctions as superior or inferior. Asanga says that the passage below completes both of the preceding two sections: first, it establishes the Dharma-body of unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment; next, it establishes the Reward-body of perfect enlightenment.

“By cultivating all wholesome dharmas, one attains anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.”

By cultivating all wholesome dharmas, one attains unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this is the third point: the means are clearly and fully set forth. Going deeply into the details, it shows that one must draw near to good spiritual friends, listen and understand, then contemplate in accordance with the Dharma in order to practice. By fully practicing goodness in accordance with the Dharma, one realizes suchness and accomplishes unsurpassed bodhi.

Asanga says that this establishes unsurpassed bodhi. This means that the preceding teaching of no-self eliminates attachment to EXISTENCE, while the present teaching on cultivating goodness destroys attachment to EMPTINESS. Because self and person are EMPTY, the mind’s discriminations are all delusive; yet, conventionally, there is still existence, and therefore wholesome dharmas remain.

If one studies only existence and takes it as not empty, that delusive attachment leads to obscurity. If one studies only EMPTINESS and takes it as devoid of existence, true wisdom lacks a cause and therefore does not arise. Extinguish delusive thoughts at the gate of emptiness and awaken the true mind within one’s own home.

Only by contemplating both EXISTENCE and EMPTINESS is the Middle Way accomplished.

“Subhuti, as for what is called wholesome dharmas, the Tathagata says that they are not wholesome dharmas; therefore they are called wholesome dharmas.”

Subhuti, as for those things called wholesome dharmas, the Tathagata says that they are not wholesome dharmas; therefore they are wholesome dharmas.

Commentary: “Those things called wholesome dharmas” means the wholesome dharmas of bodhi that are sought, or the unconditioned by following the unconditioned Dharma. To say that they are “not wholesome dharmas” means that they are not conditioned dharmas of arising and ceasing, which are unwholesome dharmas; they are called wholesome dharmas because they are supramundane dharmas.

“Subhuti, suppose that within a trichiliocosm there were heaps of the seven treasures as great as all the kings of mountains, Mount Sumeru, and someone took them and gave them in charity.”

Subhuti, suppose that within a trichiliocosm someone gathered together the seven treasures into heaps as great as all the Mount Sumerus and gave them in charity…

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that from this point onward the second doubt is dispelled. The doubt is this: if the perfection of all wholesome dharmas leads to bodhi, then teaching the Dharma cannot lead to great bodhi. Why?

Because the Dharma that is taught is morally indeterminate. This proposition is therefore raised as a question. Words and sentences may clearly explain the meaning of the teaching, yet their nature is morally indeterminate; how, then, can hearing them give rise to goodness?

This is a doubt held by followers of the Lesser Vehicle. To dispel it, the merit is first stated, and then compared with the merit of receiving and retaining the teaching. Asanga says that this is the third aspect of a fully endowed mind, clarifying the benefit of the Dharma.

It has two parts: first, the great benefit of the Dharma is stated; afterward comes the passage, “You should not think that…” which clearly concerns benefiting sentient beings. First, the giving of wealth is presented; next, it is compared with receiving and retaining the teaching in order to reveal the resulting merit and benefit.

“If someone were to receive and retain this Prajnaparamita Sutra, even so little as a four-line verse, recite it, and explain it to others, the former merit would not equal even one hundredth part of this merit, nor one part in a hundred thousand myriad kotis, to the point that no calculation or analogy could reach it.”

If someone were to receive and retain this Prajnaparamita Sutra, even so little as a four-line verse, read and recite it, and explain it to others, the merit of the former person would not equal even one hundredth part of this merit, nor one part in a hundred thousand myriad kotis; even calculations and analogies could not compare with it.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this compares giving with receiving and retaining the Sutra. This Sutra speaks only in brief; other texts differ. Vasubandhu says: Although prajna is said to be morally indeterminate, it can lead to bodhi.

Because one remains apart from what is taught as Dharma, great bodhi cannot be attained, yet this Dharma itself serves as a cause of bodhi. Moreover, to say that it is morally indeterminate is incorrect: your dharma is morally indeterminate, whereas my Dharma is wholesome. Therefore, this passage is explained according to the essential doctrine: the Buddha’s words are wholesome.

Furthermore, in the Great Vehicle’s ultimate truth, the Buddha, sounds, words, and sentences are all wholesome. Thus, once this Sutra is received and retained, it becomes a vast cause of bodhi and therefore surpasses every act of giving precious jewels. This dispels the foregoing doubt, as expressed by the statement that one hundred parts do not equal one part.

The commentators set forth four kinds of superior comparison: 1. superiority in number; 2. superiority in power; 3. superiority beyond analogy; and 4. superiority in cause.

1. To explain superiority in number: it means making a comparison by means of numbers. The Lesser Vehicle has sixty-two numerical units, while the Avatamsaka Sutra has one hundred and twenty numerical units.

Here there are fifty numerical units; thus it speaks of one, ten, one hundred, one thousand, ten thousand, and so forth. These are comparative numbers, and with respect to the fruits of birth and death they can certainly be understood. If one receives and retains this Sutra, however, the resulting merit will naturally culminate in Buddhahood.

It cannot be compared by means of these numbers and is therefore called superiority in number. 2. Superiority in power, also called superiority in quality, means that giving and so forth produce the wholesome worldly fruits of the human and heavenly realms, as we know. But the power arising from receiving and retaining this Sutra cannot be fully reckoned. 3.

Superiority beyond analogy means superiority with respect to examples. Worldly merit can be illustrated by that which admits of analogy, but the supreme fruit attained through the cause of receiving and retaining this Sutra has no analogy by which it can be illustrated. 4. Superiority in cause means superiority with respect to time.

Worldly merit may be compared in terms of greater or lesser duration, but the fruit attained here extends throughout the end of future time, without temporal limit, and therefore cannot be compared. As stated above, the author of the treatise sets forth these four categories; thus, following Asanga’s intent, the designations of number, power, analogy, time, and so forth are established here. This comparison demonstrates that receiving and retaining the Sutra is exceedingly beneficial, thereby establishing the Dharma’s great benefit.

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

Subhuti, what do you think? You should not suppose that the Tathagata thinks, “I must liberate sentient beings.”

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this is an indirect and subtle passage within the third section concerning doubt. In the successive intricacies of this passage there are four meanings, which should be understood through to the end of the section. The doubt is this: if the Dharma is equal, without high or low, why is the Tathagata said to liberate sentient beings?

To eliminate this doubt, there are two points: first, one is exhorted to relinquish the doubt; next, the meaning is explained at length. Regarding the two bodies—the Reward-body and the Transformation-body—they benefit sentient beings in accordance with their capacities, and distinctions of high and low may be considered; hence, sentient beings are liberated. Yet the Dharma-body, the suchness that is quiescent and inconceivable, does not deliberate, “How should I liberate sentient beings?” Liberation is so called only because wisdom brings awakening.

Furthermore, the Transformation-body appears responsively in accordance with capacities and clearly seems to contemplate the liberation of sentient beings. The Reward-body has contemplated this over the long course of time without discrimination; how, then, could it give rise to a thought? It is like a mani jewel that pours down rain according to people’s wishes.

Ordinary beings remain attached to the thought, “I should liberate them,” whereas the Buddhas have completely forgotten all discrimination and therefore do not entertain the thought that they must liberate anyone. They merely teach in whatever ways accord with beings’ capacities. Therefore, it is reiterated that you should not conceive such a thought.

Furthermore, in ultimate truth nothing whatsoever is attained, just as there are no sentient beings who can be liberated. Asanga says that this clarifies the sentient beings who are liberated; his explanation of the Sutra’s general meaning does not differ.

“Subhuti, do not entertain such a thought. Why? Because in truth there are no sentient beings whom the Tathagata liberates.”

Subhuti, do not think in this way. Why? Because in truth there are no sentient beings whom the Tathagata liberates.

Commentary: The meaning is complete in itself. First, the mind is presented through an analogy in order to reveal the true principle; next, it is said that there is no actual liberation, because the self is provisionally designated and not ultimately real. In ultimate truth there are no sentient beings whom the Tathagata can liberate, although from the conventional perspective sentient beings may be liberated.

“Nhược hữu chúng sanh Như Lai độ giả, Như Lai tắc hữu ngã, nhơn, chúng sanh, thọ giả”.

If there were sentient beings whom the Tathagata delivered, then the Tathagata would have the marks of a self, a person, a sentient being, and a lifespan.

Commentary: The matter of delivering sentient beings has two meanings: a/ in truth, there are no sentient beings to be delivered; b/ the self spoken of is not real. Although the Buddha skillfully speaks of sentient beings truly existing and of their being truly delivered, if attachment to a self has not yet been relinquished, one is not called a Buddha.

“Tu Bồ Đề Như Lai thuyết hữu ngã giả tắc phi hữu ngã nhi phàm phu chi nhơn dĩ vi hữu ngã”.

Subhuti, when the Tathagata speaks of the existence of a self, it is not the existence of a self, yet ordinary people take it to be the existence of a self.

Commentary: The self is not real. Although the self is not real, ordinary people falsely grasp it; next, it is made clear that even “ordinary person” is not real, but is merely a provisional designation. When the Tathagata speaks of a self, it is a provisional statement based on the conjunction of causes and conditions; there is no truly existing self, nor is there attachment to a truly existing self.

Ordinary people believe that a self exists and are therefore caught in attachment. This means that the Buddha speaks of a self in order to dispel fear of no-self. Thus, at the outset of cultivation, one necessarily relies upon the self; afterward, one gradually realizes that the marks of a real self disperse of themselves.

If no-self is spoken of, there is only cultivation; the self itself is EMPTINESS.

“Tu Bồ Đề, phàm phu giả Như Lai thuyết tắc phi phàm phu”.

Subhuti, the ordinary people of whom the Tathagata speaks are not ordinary people.

Commentary: This says that “ordinary person” is likewise not real, but is merely a provisional designation. Those who have not yet abandoned greed and anger are provisionally called ordinary people; they are not truly ordinary people in the literal sense of the words.

“Tu Bồ Đề, ư ý vân hà khả dĩ tam thập nhị tướng quán Như Lai phủ?”

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

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this is the third doubt to be successively resolved, and it is divided into three passages. Someone may doubt: although contemplation of the marks is successfully accomplished, one still cannot see the Tathagata, because those are not the marks of the Buddha. Since the Tathagata’s Dharma body is the substance, and the Tathagata’s Dharma body is accomplished through marks that are seen, by analogy one might conclude that the Tathagata’s Dharma body is accomplished through meritorious marks.

The doubt is that the two bodies—the reward body and the transformation body—take the Dharma body as their substance. Moreover, since the reward body and transformation body possess excellent marks, one might infer from the outer to the inner that the Dharma body must also possess excellent marks. It is like looking at a person’s face and thereby knowing that person’s state of mind.

This passage is divided into five sections: 1/ the Buddha asks; 2/ Venerable Subhuti does not answer directly; 3/ the Tathagata refutes him with a question; 4/ Venerable Subhuti gives the proper answer; 5/ a verse is presented to establish the meaning.

The question means: Can the Dharma body of the Tathagata be seen by means of the thirty-two marks of the reward body and transformation body? Asanga says that this is the fourth fully endowed mind, encompassing the Dharma body: wishing to enable sentient beings to be purified through contemplation of the principle of the Dharma body, which outwardly possesses all excellent marks. The Dharma body of the Tathagata cannot be contemplated by means of physical marks.

This passage has three meanings: a/ presenting the question and answer; b/ presenting a verse and explaining it extensively; c/ explaining an external doubt. The question-and-answer section has four parts, as already stated. However, according to other texts, Venerable Subhuti does answer directly, and the Tathagata does not challenge him with a question.

“Tu Bồ Đề ngôn, như thị như thị, dĩ tam thập nhị tướng quán Như Lai. Phật ngôn, Tu Bồ Đề nhược dĩ tam thập nhị tướng quán Như Lai giả, chuyển luân Thánh Vương tắc thị Như Lai. Tu Bồ Đề bạch Phật ngôn, Thế Tôn: như ngã giải Phật sở thuyết nghĩa, bất ưng dĩ tam thập nhị tướng quán Như Lai.”

Subhuti said: “So it is, so it is. The Tathagata is contemplated by means of the thirty-two marks.” The Buddha said: “Subhuti, if the Tathagata could be contemplated by means of the thirty-two marks, would a wheel-turning sage king then be the Tathagata?” Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying: “World-Honored One, as I understand the meaning of the Buddha’s teaching, one should not contemplate the Tathagata by means of the thirty-two marks.”

Commentary: One should not contemplate the Tathagata by means of the thirty-two excellent marks.

“Nhỉ thời Thế Tôn nhi thuyết kệ ngôn: nhược dĩ sắc kiến ngã, dĩ âm thanh cầu ngã, thị nhơn hành tà đạo, bất năng kiến Như Lai. Bỉ Như Lai diệu thể tức pháp thân chư Phật, pháp thể bất khả kiến, bỉ thức bất khả tri.”

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

Commentary: This verse summarizes the meaning presented above. It makes clear that one should not contemplate the Tathagata’s Dharma body by means of form or sound. If one clings to form and sound, one cannot awaken to the truth; one follows a deviant path and cannot see the Buddha-Dharma.

The verse then makes clear that the wondrous essence of the Dharma body transcends thought and reflection; therefore, ordinary people cannot see it, nor can it be known through discriminating consciousness. The Nirvana Sutra records: rely on the Dharma, not on the person; rely on sutras of definitive meaning, not on sutras whose meaning is not yet definitive; rely on the meaning, not on the words; rely on wisdom, not on consciousness.

Asanga says that the first half of the verse makes clear how the Tathagata should not and cannot be seen, while the latter half reveals why he cannot be seen and the causes and conditions for not seeing him. Why can he not be seen? Because such seeing belongs to conventional reality.

Through what causes and conditions can he not be seen? Because Dharma has the mark of suchness and therefore cannot be known through words, but can only be directly realized. Thus it is stated, and thus the treatise explains.

“Tu Bồ Đề, nhữ nhược tác thị niệm, Như Lai bất dĩ cụ túc tướng cố, đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề.”

Subhuti, if you should think that the Tathagata did not attain anuttara-samyak-sambodhi by virtue of possessing the complete marks—

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this still belongs to the third passage explaining the doubt. The doubt is this: if great bodhi is not attained by relying upon merit, then bodhisattvas have neither merit nor karmic reward. The doubt may be expressed as follows: It can be said that someone who gives in charity the seven treasures in an amount as great as Mount Sumeru does not equal someone who receives and upholds even as few as four lines of verse from this sutra.

Thus, merit does not yield the fruit of bodhi. On this basis, merit is EMPTINESS, karmic reward is also EMPTINESS, and the Dharma body is the principle of emptiness. To dispel this doubt, there are three meanings: a/ excellent marks are not nonexistent; b/ the passage beginning “If you should think...” makes clear that cause and effect are not lost; c/ the passage beginning “If a bodhisattva were to take the complete...” compares merit.

Part (a) has two aspects: recounting the doubter’s mental object and admonishing one not to entertain a wrong thought. The doubter’s mental object is this: since Dharma is taken to be the Buddha, there are no bodily marks of either the reward body or the transformation body. Asanga says that this encompasses the Dharma body, and that the text explains an external objection.

The author of the treatise says that, although the Tathagata cannot be seen through the complete marks, the complete marks should nevertheless be taken as the cause for attaining anuttara-samyak-sambodhi. To relinquish this attachment, it is made clear that the substance of the complete marks is not bodhi, nor can the complete marks be taken as its cause, because marks have the nature of form. Within this are two divisions: opposing the ordinary mind and admonishing one to eliminate deluded thoughts.

As the account states, the Tathagata’s Dharma body takes the complete marks as its cause and is therefore attained. Thus, the words “cannot” should be omitted. Upon examination, both the version that can dispel the doubt and the Buddha’s own words are entirely without the word “cannot.”

“Tu Bồ Đề mạc tác thị niệm, Như Lai bất dĩ cụ túc tướng cố, đắc A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề.”

Subhuti, do not think in this way, that the Tathagata cannot attain anuttara-samyak-sambodhi by means of the complete marks.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: Do not think in this way. The Tathagata cannot attain bodhi by means of the complete characteristics, because the reward body and transformation body possess the complete characteristics. Asanga says: “Do not think in this way” is an exhortation not to give rise to the thought described above—that the Dharma body is attained by taking characteristics as its cause. Why? Because the Buddha cannot attain bodhi by taking the complete characteristics as its cause. The treatise explains that, because characteristics belong to the nature of form, wisdom must be taken as the cause by which bodhi is attained, rather than characteristics, for characteristics are form.

“Tu Bo De nhu nhuoc tac thi niem: phat A Nau da la tam mieu tam Bo De tam gia, thuyet chu phap doan diet tuong.”

Subhuti, if you should think that one who gives rise to the mind of unsurpassed bodhi teaches that all dharmas bear the characteristic of annihilation,

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: This concerns the fact that cause and effect are not lost. Some may think that great bodhi is attained without relying upon merit; if so, merit is NONEXISTENT, and its recompense is also NONEXISTENT. Thus, one who gives rise to the mind of bodhi would hold that all dharmas are annihilated, because there would be neither the cause nor the effect of merit.

“Mac tac thi niem.”

Do not think in this way.

Commentary: This is an exhortation not to think in this way.

“Ha di co? Phat A nau da la tam mieu tam Bo De tam gia, u phap bat thuyet doan diet tuong.”

Why? Because one who gives rise to the mind of unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment does not teach, with regard to dharmas, the characteristic of annihilation.

Commentary: This explains the reason. Because the bodhisattvas know cause and know effect, they are free from the views of annihilationism and eternalism. They merely do not cling to the cause and effect of merit as truly existent; it is not that there are no causes and conditions and that cause and effect are merely provisionally designated.

They merely conceal the functioning of conditions; it is not that conditions have no efficacy. Asanga says that from this point onward, if the fully endowed mind is understood, the fifth abiding place is neither abiding in samsara nor in nirvana. Within this there are two aspects: not abandoning samsara and, when a bodhisattva has fully perfected the mind, demonstrating that nirvana is not abandoned.

Not abandoning samsara means not abiding in nirvana; not abandoning nirvana means not dwelling in samsara. The preceding passage is intended to bring this about. “With regard to dharmas, one does not teach the characteristic of annihilation” means that when bodhisattvas first give rise to the mind, they understand cause and effect and remain far removed from attachment to annihilationism and eternalism; therefore, they do not teach annihilation.

Although they attain nirvana, they return to abide in samsara and do not cut themselves off from samsara. To annihilate samsara would be like the Two Vehicles abiding in nirvana; therefore, it is said that they do not teach the characteristic of annihilation.

“Tu Bo De, nhuoc Bo Tat di man hang ha sa dang the gioi that bao tri dung bo thi.”

Subhuti, suppose a bodhisattva were to give in charity the seven treasures filling worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this section compares merit. It first makes the comparison and then explains the reason. The opening portion first presents the act of giving and then compares the blessings. Asanga says that this discusses not abandoning nirvana.

“Nhuoc phuc huu nhon tri nhut thiet phap vo nga dac thanh u nhan, thu Bo Tat thang tien Bo Tat, so dac cong duc.”

And suppose another person knew that all dharmas are without self and thereby attained acceptance; this bodhisattva would surpass the former bodhisattva in the merit attained.

Commentary: Merit is used to make the comparison. Because this person understands that the non-self of persons and dharmas is EMPTY and thereby attains acceptance, this person’s merit surpasses the merit of the one who performs that act of giving. As for “attaining acceptance,” acceptance is of three kinds: 1/ Acceptance of the originally unborn nature,

as when contemplating the imagined nature and seeing that both persons and dharmas are originally nonexistent. 2/ Acceptance of natural non-arising: contemplating the dependent nature and seeing that it provisionally relies upon causes and conditions and does not arise naturally of itself. 3/ Acceptance of the non-arising of afflictive suffering: contemplating the dharma of true suchness and seeing that afflictive suffering is originally unborn.

“Tu Bo De, di chu Bo Tat bat tho phuoc duc co.”

Subhuti, this is because the bodhisattvas do not receive merit.

Commentary: This section explains the reason and has two points: first, the Buddha gives a brief explanation; next, Venerable Subhuti asks a question; and afterward, the Buddha answers. “Because they do not receive merit” means that when bodhisattvas create merit, they do not cling to forms and seek only liberation; therefore, it is said that they do not receive it.

“Tu Bo De bach Phat ngon, The Ton van ha Bo Tat bat tho phuoc duc?”

Subhuti said to the Buddha: “World-Honored One, how is it that bodhisattvas do not receive merit?”

Commentary: This is Venerable Subhuti’s question to the Buddha.

“Tu Bo De, Bo Tat so tac phuoc duc bat ung tham truoc, thi co thuyet bat tho phuoc duc.”

Subhuti, bodhisattvas should not greedily cling to the merit they create; therefore, it is said that they do not receive merit.

Commentary: The Buddha answers the preceding question. Because bodhisattvas create merit without greedily clinging to forms, it is said that they do not receive it.

“Tu Bo De nhuoc huu nhon ngon: Nhu Lai nhuoc lai, nhuoc khu, nhuoc toa, nhuoc ngoa, thi nhon bat giai nga so thuyet nghia. Ha di co? Nhu Lai gia, vo so tung lai diec vo so khu, co danh Nhu Lai.”

Subhuti, if anyone says that the Tathagata comes or goes, sits or lies down, that person does not understand the meaning of what I teach. Why? The Tathagata comes from nowhere and goes nowhere; therefore, he is called the Tathagata.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that, within this third major section of the sutra, this passage answers a doubt. Someone may ask: If the bodhisattvas do not receive merit, how can they enjoy and employ merit for the sake of sentient beings? The meaning is that Buddha Sakyamuni relinquished the fifth portion of his lifespan and thereby left merit for sentient beings of future generations.

It should therefore be known that bodhisattvas also receive merit; how, then, can it be said that they do not receive it? The merit received by bodhisattvas in this way is immeasurable. On this basis, the doubt is explained through four points: a/ It clarifies that the reward body and transformation body outwardly benefit sentient beings and therefore also receive merit, whereas the Dharma body neither comes nor goes and thus does not receive merit. b/ The reduction of worlds to minute particles demonstrates that the Dharma body is one,

although transformation bodies are many. c/ The passage concerning someone who claims that the Buddha teaches a self and so forth demonstrates that persons and dharmas are not real. d/ The passage concerning someone filling worlds with the seven treasures demonstrates that transformation bodies possess immeasurable merit.

“Comes” means that the Buddha comes to attain the Way; “goes” means that the Buddha enters nirvana; “sits” refers to when the Buddha teaches the Dharma for the benefit of sentient beings; and “lies down” refers to when the Buddha announces that he is about to pass into extinction. The transformation body has such characteristics, but the Dharma body does not; therefore, it is said that the Buddha comes from nowhere and goes nowhere.

It is like the moon in the sky shining upon the surface of water: when the water is clear, the moon appears distinctly; when the water is turbid, the moon disappears from view. The moon itself neither comes nor goes; its appearance and disappearance are due to the water’s clarity or turbidity. The Dharma body is originally pure; it is only because of the mind that it is seen as coming and going.

The Tathagata says that the Dharma body originally does not come; yet because sentient beings turn toward the Buddha, they see it as coming. This explains coming without coming, just as one fixes the gaze upon a distant object as a point of support to discern its shape, although the whole object is obscured. The Dharma body originally does not perish; yet because sentient beings obscure the Buddha, although there is no going, they see it as going.

It is also like launching a boat to drift eastward, only to encounter a wind that drives it westward. This is going without going. Asanga says that the fully endowed mind constitutes the sixth pure practice and abiding.

Within it are three kinds: 1/ Practice and abiding in deportment. 2/ Practice and abiding in freedom after eliminating the body of name and form. 3/ Practice and abiding without defilement. The transformation body displays such modes of deportment as walking and standing, whereas the Dharma body does not. “Practice” means coming and going; “abiding” means sitting or lying down.

The Dharma body has no modes of deportment; therefore, it is said neither to go nor to come.

“Tu Bồ Đề, nhược thiện nam tử, thiện nữ nhơn dĩ tam thiên đại thiên thế giới toái vi vi trần, ư ý vân hà? Thị vi trần chúng ninh vi đa phủ?”

Subhuti, suppose a good man or good woman were to grind a three-thousand-great-thousand world-system into minute particles. What do you think? Would those minute particles be numerous?

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this passage teaches that the Dharma body is one, while transformation bodies are many. It contains two points: a) minute particles are used as an analogy, and b) the world-system is used as an analogy. First the Buddha asks, and then Venerable Subhuti replies.

Yet this analogy contains two meanings: 1) particles are combined to form a world, just as the fingers are closed to form a fist; 2) worlds are ground into particles, just as a fist is opened into separate fingers. The former is the analogy of combination; the latter is the analogy of separation. In the analogy of combination, the particles represent the many afflictions: particles are gathered to form one world, representing the severance of many afflictions to realize one Dharma body.

In the analogy of separation, the world represents the Dharma body: the world is dispersed into many particles, just as innumerable transformation bodies arise in reliance upon the one Dharma body. The present question concerns their multitude, but does not combine these two meanings. Asanga says that this passage refutes attachment to name and form and to a body that moves and acts freely.

It contains two points. First, it clarifies two kinds of skillful means, in response to those who might hold that one enters the corresponding samadhi of non-discrimination. The two kinds of skillful means are: the skillful means of deconstructing the form-body and the skillful means of deconstructing the name-body.

The former is a subtle skillful means; the latter is an imperceptible skillful means. This means that, when a world is successively analyzed down to its ultimate, most minute particles, are those particles numerous?

“Thậm đa Thế Tôn. Hà dĩ cố? Nhược thị vi trần chúng thật hữu giả, Phật tắc bất thuyết thị vi trần chúng. Sở dĩ giả hà? Phật thuyết vi trần chúng tắc phi vi trần chúng, thị danh vi trần chúng.”

They are exceedingly numerous, World-Honored One. Why? If this multitude of minute particles truly existed, the Buddha would not speak of a multitude of minute particles. Why is that? 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.

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that minute particles are merely borrowed as an analogy; this does not assert that they truly exist, as the Vaisheshika school maintains. The Buddha’s speaking of a multitude of minute particles means that particles are borrowed as an analogy for transformation bodies. They are therefore not particles in the sense of the non-Buddhist doctrine that particles truly exist. Asanga says that this merely refutes attachment to a single composite entity. Therefore, through careful contemplation and analysis down to the point beyond which further analysis is impossible, the term “minute particle” is provisionally used, although no such particle truly exists.

“Thế Tôn, Như Lai sở thuyết tam thiên đại thiên thế giới tắc phi thế giới, thị danh thế giới.”

World-Honored One, the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system spoken of by the Tathagata is not a world-system; therefore it is called a world-system.

Commentary: The world-system is used as an analogy for the Dharma body. The Tathagata’s speaking of a world-system means that a world-system is borrowed as an analogy; it is therefore not a world-system. This differs from the non-Buddhist doctrine that a world-system is formed from a multitude of ultimate, minute particles. Non-Buddhists maintain that two ultimate particles give rise to a third, and that this process continues in the same manner. Asanga says that this is the skillful means of deconstructing the name-body. “World-system” means a worldly realm inhabited by sentient beings; there, only the name-body is designated as a name.

“Hà dĩ cố? Nhược thế giới thật hữu giả tắc thị nhứt hiệp tướng?”

Why? If a world-system truly existed, it would be the characteristic of a single composite entity.

Commentary: A world-system is provisionally formed by the combination of a single composite entity and is therefore not real. If one holds that a world-system exists, then this is not non-attachment; only non-attachment is right view and therefore not false. Because it is not real, yet is grasped as real, it is called the characteristic of a single composite entity. “The characteristic of a single composite entity” means attachment to self: one regards this single body, which is an aggregation of all five skandhas, as a self, and it is therefore called the characteristic of a single composite entity.

“Như Lai thuyết nhứt hiệp tướng tắc phi nhứt hiệp tướng thị danh nhứt hiệp tướng.”

The single composite characteristic spoken of by the Tathagata is not a single composite characteristic; therefore it is called a single composite characteristic.

Commentary: This passage explains EMPTINESS. With regard to the provisional combination of causes and conditions and the harmonious aggregation of the skandhas described above, the Buddha merely provisionally speaks of a single composite characteristic. It is not the single composite characteristic to which beings cling. That which is not a single composite characteristic is not the single composite characteristic conceived through attachment. The provisional expression “single composite characteristic” merely means EMPTINESS, thereby clarifying that the world-system also has no true existence.

“Nhứt hiệp tướng giả tắc thị bất khả thuyết, đản phàm phu chi nhơn tham trước kỳ sự”.

A single composite characteristic is ineffable; it exists only because ordinary people greedily cling to such a thing.

Commentary: This explains the grasping of the provisional as real. The Buddha provisionally speaks of a single composite characteristic, but ordinary people give rise to attachment toward it and regard it as real.

“Tu Bồ Đề, nhược nhơn ngôn: Phật thuyết ngã kiến, nhơn kiến, chúng sanh kiến, thọ giả kiến. Tu Bồ Đề, ư ý vân hà? Thị nhơn giải ngã sở thuyết nghĩa phủ?”

Subhuti, suppose someone were to say: “The Buddha teaches the view of self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, and the view of a living being.” Subhuti, what do you think? Does that person understand the meaning of what I teach?

Commentary: Vasubandhu holds that this passage clearly teaches the unreality of SELF. It contains two points: first, it clarifies non-self; afterward, it teaches that for one who gives rise to the bodhi-mind, dharmas are EMPTY. First, the Buddha presents the objection of others, asking whether they understand; next, Venerable Subhuti replies that they do not understand.

Some followers of the Lesser Vehicle hold that there must be an attainment and that the mind does not contemplate NON-BEING (EMPTINESS). Since they speak of an attainment and the Buddha speaks of the view of self and so forth, they take this as proof that a real self exists and that the mind does not take NON-BEING as its object. The meaning of what is grasped would consequently become existence, causing those attached to it to claim that someone might say such things.

Asanga says that from this point onward, one enters the corresponding samadhi of non-discrimination. First, the passage clarifies that entering by means of non-discrimination is a skillful means; afterward, in speaking of giving rise to the bodhi-mind, it shows which persons and dharmas are not to be discriminated.

“Phất dã, Thế Tôn, thị nhơn bất giải Như Lai sở thuyết nghĩa. Hà dĩ cố? Thế Tôn thuyết ngã kiến, nhơn kiến, chúng sanh kiến, thọ giả kiến tức phi ngã kiến, nhơn kiến, chúng sanh kiến, thọ giả kiến, thị danh ngã kiến, nhơn kiến, chúng sanh kiến, thọ giả kiến.”

No, World-Honored One. That person does not understand the meaning taught by the Tathagata. Why? The view of self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, and the view of a living being spoken of by the World-Honored One are not the view of self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, or the view of a living being; therefore they are called the view of self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, and the view of a living being.

Commentary: All dharmas are originally devoid of self and person, but sentient beings deludedly cling to them as truly existing. The Buddha therefore refutes this attachment. Teaching according to their capacities so that they may understand, he speaks of a self and a person as provisional dharmas.

This does not mean that he teaches them as entities that truly exist; rather, his provisional teaching enables the mind to relinquish its unreal attachments. The Mahayana gives rise to the mind in accordance with non-attainment. To clarify that these things are not regarded as real, it is said: the World-Honored One provisionally teaches self and person according to the capacities of those who hear and understand.

Since these are unlike the real entities imagined by those who cling to them, it is said that there is no view of self, person, sentient being, and so forth. Therefore they are called the view of self and so forth, provisionally taught by the Tathagata.

“Tu Bồ Đề, phát A Nậu đa la tam miệu tam Bồ Đề tâm giả, ư nhứt thiết pháp ưng như thị tri, như thị kiến, như thị tín giải, bất sanh pháp tướng.”

Subhuti, those who give rise to the mind of anuttara-samyak-sambodhi should thus know all dharmas, thus see them, and thus believe and understand them, without giving rise to attachment to the characteristics of dharmas.

Commentary: All dharmas are EMPTY. First, one is urged to investigate and understand this; afterward comes the summary. It is said that when a person who has generated the aspiration has awakened to true suchness and no longer perceives or clings to dharmas, this is called right wisdom.

Venerable Asanga holds that one who generates the bodhicitta manifests a mind free from discrimination. With respect to all dharmas, whatever dharma appears, one makes no discrimination. It should be understood that this manifests the superior mind and superior wisdom, which excel in comprehending non-discrimination.

Of these, wisdom relying upon shamatha (Sammatha)—meditative concentration—should be known, while wisdom relying upon vipashyana (Vipassana)—insight meditation—should be seen. These two dharmas, founded upon samadhi (sammadhi: tam ma de), should be understood more fully in order to attain mastery. Understanding the internal faculties and conditions together with their reflected images is called resolute understanding, meaning that knowing and understanding are one; non-discriminating wisdom accords with consciousness.

Here it is said that reliance upon calming and insight meditation is distinct. The former is explained in terms of preparatory practice: before cultivating calming meditation, one should give rise to wisdom, and this is called knowing; when wishing to cultivate insight meditation, one should generate wisdom, and this is called seeing.

“Tu Bo De, so ngon phap tuong da, Nhu Lai thuyet tuc phi phap tuong, thi danh phap tuong.”

Subhuti, as for what is called the characteristic of dharmas, the Tathagata teaches that it is not the characteristic of dharmas; therefore it is called the characteristic of dharmas.

Commentary: What is called the characteristic of dharmas means that the expression “characteristic of dharmas” is provisionally employed. “It is not the characteristic of dharmas” means that one does not cling to dharmas as possessing real characteristics.

“Tu Bo De, nhuoc huu nhon di man vo luong a tang ky the gioi that bao tri dung bo thi. Nhuoc huu thien nam tu thien nu nhon phat Bo De tam gia, tri u thu Kinh nai chi tu cu ke dang, tho tri doc tung vi nhon dien thuyet ky phuoc thang bi”.

Subhuti, suppose someone were to fill immeasurable asamkhya worlds with the seven treasures and give them as alms. If a good man or good woman who has generated the aspiration for bodhi should receive and uphold this Sutra, even so little as a four-line verse, recite it, and explain it to others, that person’s merit would surpass that of the former donor.

Commentary: Vasubandhu holds that this is the fourth passage and also the fourth section of the Sutra. First, merit is compared; afterward, teaching while free from characteristics is elucidated. It is said that the Dharma-body does not receive merit, whereas the transformation body possesses immeasurable merit. Because the transformation body possesses immeasurable merit, it is able to teach others. A person who generates the aspiration to seek buddhahood, constantly upholds the Sutra, and expounds it for others therefore acquires more merit than one who gives the seven treasures as alms.

“Van ha vi nhon dien thuyet bat thu u tuong, nhu nhu bat dong.”

Why is this so? Because one who expounds it does not grasp at characteristics but remains in suchness, unmoving.

Commentary: This speaks of teaching while free from characteristics. Just as the transformation body teaches the Dharma without grasping at characteristics, because it is free from discriminative attachment, it does not regard itself as a transformation body; therefore it acquires abundant merit. In the phrase “in suchness, unmoving,” the latter “suchness” refers to true suchness, while the former “such” serves as an analogy.

When the transformation body teaches the Dharma, it does not grasp at the characteristics of conditioned phenomena; it is just like true suchness, quiescent and unmoving. Venerable Asanga says that this passage constitutes the sixth pure abiding, namely, abiding in undefiled practice. The undefiled is further divided into two kinds: 1/ Undefiled teaching of the Dharma.

As explained above, one who upholds and expounds this Sutra surpasses one who gives the seven treasures as alms. Because the benefit is so great, one resolves to expound it, yet one’s mind remains undefiled. 2/ Undefiled transmigration. As stated in the nine analogies(8), this reveals that it cannot be expressed in words; there is no dharma that can be taught, yet the Dharma should be taught in this way.

If it is taught otherwise, the teaching is defiled because it is distorted. Furthermore, when teaching the Dharma in this manner, one does not hope to gain people’s faith, reverence, and so forth; this too is undefiled teaching of the Dharma.

“Ha di co? Nhut thiet huu vi phap nhu mong huyen bao anh, nhu lo diec nhu dien, ung tac nhu thi quan”.

Why is this so? Because all conditioned dharmas are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, or a shadow; like dew or a flash of lightning. They should be contemplated in this way.

Commentary: Vasubandhu holds that this explains a doubt arising in the fourth major passage. The doubt is this: If all Buddhas, the Tathagatas, constantly teach the Dharma for sentient beings, why does the Buddha enter nirvana? To dispel this doubt, the nine analogies are established, as stated in the prophetic exposition. Venerable Asanga holds that this is the category of undefiled transmigration.

“Phat thuyet thi Kinh di, truong lao Tu Bo De, cap chu ty kheo, ty kheo ni, uu ba tac, uu ba di, nhut thiet the gian thien, nhon, a tu la van Phat so thuyet giai dai hoan hy tin tho phung hanh.”

When the Buddha had finished teaching this Sutra, the elder Subhuti, together with the bhikshus, bhikshunis, male lay devotees, female Buddhist disciples, and all the devas, humans, and asuras of the world, having heard what the Buddha taught, rejoiced exceedingly, faithfully accepted it, and respectfully put it into practice. Commentary: This is the third major passage: joyfully applying and cultivating the Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra.

Notes

7. The icchantika class: extremely evil persons who are incapable of cultivating the path to buddhahood. They hold mistaken views and wrong beliefs, especially disbelief in the principle of cause and effect, and thus may fall into evil and painful realms.

8. Nine analogies: These nine analogies from the Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra occur in a verse near the end of the Sutra. One contemplates conditioned dharmas as dreams and illusions and therefore does not cling to them.

The extensive sutras and treatises present nine analogies, saying that all conditioned dharmas are like a star, a diseased eye, a lamp, an illusion, dew, a bubble, a dream, a flash of lightning, and a drifting cloud. One/ A star is very useful before the sun appears, but becomes useless when the sun rises. Before the sun of right contemplation appears, the deluded mind is useful.

When the sun of right contemplation is revealed, delusive thoughts cease. Two/ A diseased eye: just as an obstructed eye cannot see clearly before it and, because of the blurred halo, supposes that something has been apprehended, so the eye of wisdom, being obstructed, fails to recognize that the six sense objects are unreal and falsely perceives the six sense objects. Three/ A lamp: oil, wick, and lamp must be combined before it can function.

Because of the faculties, their objects, craving, and feeling, consciousness arises. Since the lamp exists through combination, it possesses nothing in itself; dharmas are likewise. The lamp changes and perishes thought after thought, and consciousness does likewise.

Four/ An illusion: just as an illusionist produces all manner of things, none of which are real, so through the illusion of sentient beings’ karma, many lands are perceived, yet they too are unreal. Five/ Dew: morning dew upon the tips of grass endures only briefly; the human body is likewise. Six/ A bubble: when rainwater collects, bubbles form, and upon seeing them, children imagine that they are pearls and keep chasing after them.

Sentient beings’ attachment to feelings is likewise. Seven/ A dream: events of the past are like things seen in a dream the previous night; all are empty, and especially upon opening one’s eyes, everything dissolves and vanishes. Eight/ A flash of lightning: when the sky churns and dark clouds gather until all is gloomy, lightning suddenly blazes forth and immediately disappears; present dharmas are likewise.

Nine/ A drifting cloud: just as clouds suddenly gather in a clear sky and then immediately disperse, future dharmas are likewise, suddenly appearing and suddenly vanishing.